Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09/06/2000_Regular
CITY OF ROCHESTER COUNCIL AGENDA COUNCILIBOARD CHAMBERS GOVERNMENT CENTER 151 4T" STREET SE MEETING NO. 17 REGULAR PAGE (1-2) A) OPEN COMMENT PERIOD B) CALL TO ORDER C) LETTERS AND PETITIONS co � I WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2000 7:00 P.M. (3-4) D) CONSENT AGENDA/ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS 1) Approval of Minutes (5-6) 2) Rework & Update Main Water Service in Basement of Terminal Bldg. (7-8) 3) Request to Advertise for Bids for New Ten Unit T-Hangar and Advertise for Bids for Grading and T-Hangar Site Preparation (9-10) 4) Change Order #4 with Alvin E. Benike for Terminal Building Improvements (11-12) 5) Change Order #1 with Road Constructors, Inc. for Entrance Road Improvements, Entrance Road Signage Improvements and Parking Lot Expansion (13-14) 6) Professional Services Agreement with McGhie & Betts, Inc. for Plans and Specs for T-Hangar Site Preparation and Building (15-16) 7) State Aid Agreement to Perform a Wildlife Hazard Assessment for the Rochester International Airport (17-18) 8) Consideration of Public Utility Board Action (19-20) 9) Licenses, Bonds & Miscellaneous Activities (21-22) 10) Approval of On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License/The Wright Stuff Restaurant and Lounge (23-24) 11) Approval of Accounts Payable (25-28) 12) Promotional Appointment(Police Sergeant/Police Department (29-30) 13) Resolution Supporting the LMC Building Quality Communities (31-32) 14) Amendment to South Broadway Partners Development Agreement (33-34) 15) Amendment to Bishop Trust Development Agreement (35-36) 16) Vacation of Alley Lying South of 3rd Street SW Between 19t' and 20"' Avenue SW (37-38) 17) Development Agreement/Autumn Wood RV Park/Galen Youngkrantz Council Agenda Wednesday, September6, 2000 Page 2 (3940) 18) Owner Contract/Basic Construction in Century Hills Townhomes Third Subdivision (41-42) 19) Owner Contract/Sanitary Sewer, Watermain & Hydrants to Serve Goodin Co. Building (43-44) 20) Owner Contract/Basic Construction to Serve Weatherstone CIC #166 (45-46) 21) Owner Contract/Watermain & Hydrants to Serve The Willows (47-48) 22) Owner Contract/Watermain to Serve the Autumn Woods RV Park (49-50) 23) Owner Contract/Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve Weatherstone Townhomes (51-52) 24) Owner Contract/Watermain & Hydrants to Serve the Quarry Ridge Apartments (53-54) 25) Owner Contract/Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the Crown Apartments (55-56) 26) Stormwater Management Agreements (57-62) 27) Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the Crocus Hills Area (63-64) 28) Award of Contract/Construct Fox Valley Drive SW from Baihley Heights Area to Fox Croft Area (65-66) 29) Award of Contract/Reconstruction of 48th Street SW from 110 Avenue to Scenic Oaks Plus 11t' Avenue South (67-68) 30) Supplemental Agreement #1/Reconstruction of 7t' Avenue SE from 6th Street SE to 12�h Street SE (69-70) 31) Passenger Loading Zone at 712 - 15t Street NW E) HEARINGS (71-72) 1} Public Hearing to Obtain Public Comment or Recommendations as to Whether Road Constructors is a Reliable or Responsible Bidder for Purposes of the Wellner Drive Street Construction Project (73-90) 2) Type III, Phase 1 (#00-03) Appeal of the Type III, Phase 1 (#00-17) Variance Denial (91-126) 3) General Development Plan/The Grand Reserve at Cascade Lake (127-138) 4) Land Use Plan Amendment by Del American, Inc./Amend Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan to Amend the Land Use Designation for Approx. 44.16 Acres from "Low Density Residential' to "Medium Density Residential' (139-146) 5) Zoning District Amendment by Del American, Inc./Rezone Property from R-1 District to R-3 District on Approx. 41.47 Acres and Amend Approx. 2.69 Acres from R-1 District to B-5 District (147-174) 6) General Development Plan by Arcon Development, Inc. to be Known as Boulder Ridge Council Agenda Wednesday, September 6, 2000 Page 3 (175-182) 7) Zoning District Amendment by Arcon Development, Inc. to Rezone Approx. 40.59 Acres from R-1 to R-2 District to Allow for Townhomes (183-206) 8) General Development Plan by MOG, LLC to be Known as Hart Farms (207-228) 9) Type III, Phase III, Restricted Development Final Plan by South Broadway Partners, LLC/Manufactured Home Park to be Located in M-1 Zoning District (229-246) 10) Amendment to General Development Plan Known as Valley Side Estates by Freedom Development and Consulting, LLC (247-256) 11) Final Plat to be Known as River Place (257-262) 12) Final Plat to be Known as Replat of Lots 11-16, and 21, Block 2, Pinewood Meadows First Addition CIC 162 (263-274) 13) Type III, Phase I, Final Plat to be Known as Southern Woods Third Addition (275-284) 14) Final Plat to be Known as Weatherstone (285-292) 15) Final Plat to be Known as Century Hills Townhomes Third Subdivision CIC 168 (293-302) 16) Type III, Phase I, Final Plat to be Known as Lincolnshire North Fourth Subdivision (303-308) 17) Vacation Petition by J and C Gardens, LLC to Vacate Public Sanitary Sewer Easement to Allow for Construction of Multi -family Residential Development (309-324) 18) Rochester City Lines/Route Changes (325-326) 19) Applications for Year 2001 State Transit Assistance (327-328) 20) Establishment of Development District #17 and TIF District #17-1 for Diamond Ridge Single Family Housing Project (329-330) 21) Establishment of Development District #18 and TIF District #18-1 for Valley Side Estates Single Family Housing Project (331-332) 22) Establishment of Development District #19 and TIF District #19-1 for Kingsbury Hills Single Family Housing Project F) REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (333-334) 1) City Administrator - Multifamily Housing Revenue Bond Issuance for Weatherstone Townhomes Project (335-336) 2) City Administrator - Development Assistance Agreement with DeWitz Construction for Single Family Home Construction in Diamond Ridge 17'hSubdivision (337-338) 3) City Administrator- Development Assistance Agreement with Lumber One, Avon Inc. for Single Family Home Construction in Valley Side Estates Sub. Council Agenda Wednesday, September 6, 2000 Page 4 (339-340) 4) City Administrator- Development Assistance Agreement with Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises, Inc. for Single Family Home Construction in Kingsbury Hills (341-342) G) RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES H) TABLED ITEMS (343-344) 1) Award of ContractlConstruct Wellner Drive NE from 31st Street NE to Rocky Creek Drive 1) OTHER BUSINESS J) ADJOURNMENT REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. OPEN COMMENT PERIOD CITY ADMINISTRATOR A A DESCRIPTION: OPEN COMMENT PERIOD PREPARED BY: 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 fast 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. NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 3 DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY ADMINISTRATOR D-1-31 I DESCRIPTION: PREPARED By: Ar?ROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS T. SPAETH 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. Rework & Update Main Water Service in Basement of Terminal Bldg. D-3. Request to Advertise for Bids for New Ten Unit T-Hangar and Advertise for Bids for Grading and T- Hangar Site Preparation D-4. Change Order #4 with Alvin E. Benike for Terminal Building Improvements D-5. Change Order #1 with Road Constructors, Inc. for Entrance Road Improvements, Entrance Road Signage Improvements and Parking Lot Expansion D-6. Professional Services Agreement with McGhie & Betts, Inc. for Plans and Specs for T-Hangar Site Preparation and Building D-7. State Aid Agreement to Perform a Wildlife Hazard Assessment for the Rochester International Airport D-8. Consideration of Public Utility Board Action D-9. Licenses, Bonds & Miscellaneous Activities D-10. Approval of On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License/The Wright Stuff Restaurant and Lounge D-11. Approval of Accounts Payable D-12. Promotional Appointment/Police SergeantTolice Department D-13. Resolution Supporting the LMC Building Quality Communities D-14. Amendment to South Broadway Partners Development Agreement D-15. D-16. Amendment to Bishop Trust Development Agreement Vacation of Alley Lying South of 3 Street SW Between 19th and 20th Avenue SW D-17. Development Agreement/Autumn Wood RV Park/Galen Youngkrantz D-18. Owner Contract/Basic Construction in Century Hills Townhomes Third Subdivision D-19. Owner Contract/Sanitary Sewer, Watermain & Hydrants to Serve Goodin Co. Building D-20. Owner Contract/Basic Construction to Serve Weatherstone CIC #166 D-21. Owner Contract/Watermain & Hydrants to Serve The Willows D-22. Owner Contract/Watermain to Serve the Autumn Woods RV Park D-23. Owner Contract/Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve Weatherstone Townhomes D-24, Owner Contract/Watermain & Hydrants to Serve the Quarry Ridge Apartments D-25. Owner Contract/Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the Crown Apartments NCIL ACTION: Moron by. Second by: to: 4 Request for Council Action Approval of Consent Agenda Items September 6, 2000 Page 2 D-26. Stormwater Management Agreements D-27. Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the Crocus Hills Area D-28. Award of Contract/Construct Fox Valley Drive SW from Baihley Heights Area to Fox Croft Area �'D-29. Award of Contract/Reconstruction of 48`h Street SW from 11u' Avenue to Scenic Oaks Plus 11 th Avenue South D-30. Supplemental Agreement # 1/Reconstruction of 7�' Avenue SE from 6 h Street SE to 12`h Street SE D-31. Passenger Loading Zone at 712 - 1" Street NW COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve consent agenda items. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: Consent ORIGINATING DEPT: Rochester International Airport ITEM NO. t) „ a I DESCRIPTION: Re -work and update main water service in the basement of the PREPARED By: Terminal Building. Steven W. Legve The Rochester Airport Commission recommends and requests Council authorization to: Enter into an agreement with Rochester Plumbing and Heating to re -work and update main water service in the basement of the Terminal Building. Problems with the restrooms flushing properly were discovered during the current remodeling project in the Terminal Building. Re -work and updates will include larger pipe size to increase volume and possibly a boost pump if still required after volume is increased. Agreement will be not to exceed $24,000.00 Project Funding: Airport will seek 60% State participation with 40% Local COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Resolution authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the agreement with Rochester Plumbing and Heating. 4CiILACTION: Motiaby: Smondby: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 r. AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Consent Rochester International Airport P . 3 I' )ESCRIPTION: Request to advertise for bids for a new ten unit T- hangar and advertise PREPARED BY: for bids for the grading and T-hangar site preparation. Steven W. Legve The Rochester Airport Commission recommends and requests Council authorization to: 1. Advertise for bids for a new steel ten unit T-hangar to be constructed at the Rochester International Airport. (J6919) 2. Advertise for bids for grading and site preparation to include bituminous paving for a new T-hangar site. (J6915) Funding for the T-hangar building: 80% Mn/Dot State Hangar Loan Program 20% Local (T-hangar Account) Funding for the grading and site prep: 60% State 40% Local COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Resolution authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids. ML ACTION: Motion by: __ Second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING a / DATE: 9,6 /00 r AGENDA SECTION: Consent ORIGINATING DEPT: Rochester International Airport ITEM NO. D „ DESCRIPTION: Change Order #4 with Alvin E. Benike Inc. for Terminal Building PREPARED BY: improvements. Steven W. Legve The Rochester Airport Commission recommends and requests Council authorization to: Execute Change Order #4 with Alvin E. Benike Inc. for Terminal Building improvements. (.16942) The total of one add item and two credit items results in a credit of $14,686.00 A copy of the change order is attached. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Resolution authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Change Order #4 documents. 4CIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 Consent I DESCRIPTION: Rochester International Airport Inc. for entrance improvements, entrance road signage improvements, and parking lot expansion. The Rochester Airport Commission recommends and requests Council authorization to: 1>r 60 Steven W. Legve Execute Change Order #1 with Road Constructors, Inc. for Terminal Building entrance road improvements, entrance road signage improvements, and parking lot expansion. (J6967) The total of the five credit items and one add item results in a credit of $45,126.80 A copy of the change order is attached. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Resolution authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Change Order # 1 documents. 4CIL ACTION: Motion Second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING (�j / DATE: 96 /00✓/ IT A SLG I IUN: Consent Rochester International Airport I D , (O ESCRIPTION: Professional Services Agreement with McGhie & Betts, Inca for plans PREPARED BY: and specs for T-Hangar site prep and building. Steven W. Legve The Rochester Airport Commission recommends and requests Council authorization to: 1. Enter into a Professional Services Agreement with McGhie & Betts for plans and specifications for T- hangar site preparation, paving and engineering. (J6915) Agreement not to exceed $13,507.80 2. Enter into a Professional Services Agreement with McGhie & Betts for T-hangar building plans, specifications and engineering. (J6919) Agreement not to exceed $19,985.88 These projects are in the current CIP. Project Funding: 60% State 40% Local COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Re. ` ".on authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the professional services agreements. CO IL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 157-/ DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Consent Rochester Intemational Airport a . 7 I DESCRIPTION: State Aid Agreement to perform a Wildlife Hazard Assessment for the PREPARED BY: Rochester International Airport. Steven W. Legve The Rochester Airport Commission recommends and requests Council authorization to: Accept the State Aid Agreement for 60% funding to perform a Wildlife Hazard Assessment for the Rochester Intemational Airport. The Federal Aviation Administration has recently mandated that a Wildlife Hazard Assessment must be completed at most commercial service airports to include the Rochester International Airport. (J6969) Funding: Not to Exceed $15,896.61 60% State 40% Local COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: P—lution authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the State Aid Agreement. C 4CIL ACTION: motion by: second by: to: Meeting REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Dete 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION CONSENT CONSENT ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. NO. kaVte*r Public li+ilih'ec� ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: Consideration of Public Utility Board Action Kathy Wilson The Rochester Public Utility Board has approved the following on August 29, 2000 and requests the Common Council's favorable consideration: to approve a resolution to approve a purchase order agreement with DB Riley for professional technical assistance engineering services for Silver Lake Plant Units 1 and 2 per quotation 00-N-116. The amount of the purchase order agreement not to exceed $72,000.00. GENERAL MANAGER: ^OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: Agenda Item # 3 SUBJECT: PREPARED BY: ITEM DESCRIPTION: FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 8/29/00 Proposal for Technical Assistance Services Wally Schlink, Manager of Power Production Silver Lake Power Plant Units 1 & 2 are coal-fired boilers manufactured by Riley in 1949 and 1953 respectively. Due to the demand for electrical energy and the low price of coal, these units are being operated at a much higher capacity factor than in the past. In addition, stringent environmental regulations have caused a change in the fuel supply to a lower sulfir coal to meet S02 limits. The combination of these issues have caused the units to be out of compliance with the federal and state regulations that determine allowable visible emissions from the units. Non-compliance with our permit limits subjects RPU to enforcement action, which may include fines or other punitive actions. Staff has instituted a program of operating procedure and engineering upgrades to bring the units into operating compliance. An integral component of this program will be returning the boilers to design conditions so that they may be operated within the proper environmental parameters. Staff has contacted DB Riley, the original equipment manufacture of the units, and has asked them to put together a program that would assist us in improving the operating performance of the units, maximize the combustion process and minimize any instances of excess opacity due to incomplete combustion. DB Riley has responded with a seven step program which staff has reviewed and agree satisfies our criteria requirements for Technical Assistance. The details are included in the attached proposal. The restoration of the units to design parameters will require a high degree of engineering, field expertise and experience in the specific design parameters of these units. Staff feels that it is in the best interest of the utility to enter into a technical assistance services agreement with the OEM that can provide the experience and resources to fulfil all the requirements of the project and has a proven track record of successful projects. The proposal, which contains the agreement for technical services, the description of services and the billing rates, is attached. UTILITY BOARD ACTION REOUESTED: It is recommended the Board request the Common Council to approve a Purchase Order agreement with DB Riley to provide professional technical assistance engineering services per the attached proposal. The estimate of fees for the services is not to exceed $72,000.00 �evCew8 %-2.q-(50 G�t[ 8 ca Ge eral Manager Date REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 19 DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY CLERK D _ 1 4 DESCRIPTION: LICENSES, BONDS & MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES PREPARED BY: DONNAJSCHOTT 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 — TEMPORARY Honors Choirs of SE Minnesota Assisi Heights Suite #920 1001 14"i St NW Rochester Mn 55901 Raffle 11/18/00 AT Holy Spirit Church 5455 50`b Ave NW Rochester Mn 55901 TEMPORARY ON SALE LIQUOR St. John's Home School Association 424 West Center St. Rochester, Mn. 55902 Dinner Theatre Fund Raiser for St. John's School 10/13, 14. & 15, 2000 Order of AHEPHA 703 W Center St Rochester Mn 559092 Octoberfest at Mayo Civic Center 10/13/00 30 Civic Center Dr. SE Rochester Mn 55904 SIDEWALKS — CEMENT Ralph Capelle DBA Rosewood Building & Remodeling 809 Territorial Rd Spring Valley, Mn 55975 NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: pLICENSES, BONDS AND MISCELLANEOUS CITY ACTIVITIES PAGE 2 SEPTEMBER 6, 2000 SOUND AMPLIFICATION The Rochester Public Schools 334 16`h St SE Rochester, Mn. 55904 Annual Pep Rally (Welcome Back party) 8/30/200 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM Soldiers Field Veterans Memorial Park (Prior Approvals: M Evans, M Marcoux, D Hanson, J McConnell,) Labor Activist for Janezich Rally & March 8/31/00 Mayo Civic Center to Peace Plaza Rochester Mn 55904 (Prior Aprovals: D Hanson, M Marcoux, D Senjem, J McConnell, J Hunziker) MISCELLANEOUS CITY ACTIVITIES Labor Activist for Janezich Rally & March 8/31/00 Mayo Civic Center to Peace Plaza Rochester Mn 55904 Knights of Columbus Marathon for Non -Public Education Silver Lake Shelter — Bike Paths to Bear Creek Shelter 10/7/00 9:00 AM to 1:00 PM Rochester, Mn. 55904 ' Rochester Track Club Running Event 11/4/00 10:00 AM to 12:00 PM Willow Creek School to Pinewood Rd and Bear Creek Juvenile Diabetes Foundation Walk 9/16/00 8:00 AM to 12:00 PM Silver Lake Park & Bike Path Plummer Neighborhood Block Party Children's Bicycle Parade 9/10/00 Plummer Circle & Plummer Lane SW Rochester Mn 5902 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve or disapprove the above licenses and permits. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY CLERK D-9 i i E DESCRIPTION: ADDENDUM LICENSES, BONDS & MISCELLANEOUS PREPARED 131 ACTIVITIES DONNAJSCHOTT The following ADDENDUM 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 — TEMPORARY ARC of SE MN 903 W Center St Rochester, Mn 55902 Raffle 10/24/00 AT Gloria Day Lutheran Church 1212 12th Ave NW Rochester, Mn. 55901 (Please Waive 45 Day Waiting Period) MASTER INSTALLER Randy Holtan 5124 Nicklaus Dr NW Rochester Mn 55901 SOUND AMPLIFICATION Rochester Area Habitat for Humanity PO Box 456 Rochester, Mn. 55903 Volunteer Appreciation Picnic 9/16/00 4:30 PM to 7:30 PM Slatterly Park Gospel Band Rochester, Mn. 55901 COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: LICENSES, BONDS AND MISCELLANEOUS CITY ACTIVITIES PAGE 2 SEPTEMBER 6, 2000 MISCELLANEOUS CITY ACTIVITIES Pace Dairy Foods Employees 2700 Valley High Dr. NW Rochester, Mn.55901 Cancer Walk 10/1/00 9:00 AM to 12:00 PM Valley High Dr NW to Douglas Trail COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve or disapprove the above ADDENDUM licenses and permits. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING a DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: Consent Agenda ORIGINATING DEPT: City Clerk . �SCRIPTION: Approval for On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License -The Wright Stuff EPREPAR ED BY:Restaurant and Lounge herr Deann Stowers, owner of The Wright Stuff Restaurant and Lounge located at the Rochester International Airport, is requesting approval for On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor and Sunday Liquor Licenses. The business currently holds an On -Sale Wine/Beer license. Approval is pending receipt of the required insurance certificates and departmental approvals. COUNCIL ACTION REOUESTED A motion to approve the application for On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor and Sunday Liquor Licenses pending receipt of the required insurance certificates and departmental approvals. • CIL ACTION: motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 12 DATE: 9/6/00 J AGENDA SECTION: Consent Agenda ORIGINATING DEPT: Finance Department ITEM NO. b _ I DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: Approval of Accounts Payable Dale Martinson Respectfully request a motion to approve payment of Accounts Payable (submitted separately) in the amount of $2,223,071.61. Less: Any exceptions �UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Consent Human Resources D - / A A DESCRIPTION: PROMOTIONAL APPOINTMENT - Police Sergeant -Police Department PREPARED BY: L. Gilsrud � The recent retirement of Sergeant Wayne Berg has created a vacancy for the position of Police Sergeant. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Section 9.00 of the Rochester Home Rules Charter states that the Mayor appoints all members of the Rochester Police Department. Pursuant to the authority, the Mayor has promoted Police Officer Michael Sadauslds to the position of Police Sergeant effective September 1, 2000. This information is given to the Council so members are aware of the appointment. t NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: ROCHESTER ROGER PETERSON Chief of Police Rochester Police Department 101 4th St. S.E. Rochester, MN 55904-3761 August 28, 2000 Mr. Robert Moore, Chairman Rochester Police Civil Service Commission .: 201 SE 4s' Street Rochester, MN 55904 Dear Chairman Moore: We are requesting that the Civil Service Commision provide the Mayor with a list of the top three candidates from the Police Sergeant's eligibility list for selection and appointment. This Sergeant's position is due to the retirement of Sgt. Berg. It is our desire that this appointment would be effective September 1, 2000. Thank you for your prompt assistance in this matter. Sincerely, Roger Peterson, Chief An Egaat Opportunity Empfnyer AROCHESTER W�AMERICA CITI' POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION BOB MOORE JOY FOGARTY MICHELLE LEAK August 25, 2000 Honorable Mayor Canfield City Hall Rochester, Minnesota 55904 Dear Mayor Canfield, Because of the retirement of Sergeant Wayne Berg, we respectfully request that you make one (1) appointment to the position of Police Sergeant from the following list of three (3) names which stand highest on the Police Sergeant Eligibility Roster of qualified candidates: 1. Michael Sadauskis 2. Robert Miller 3. Elisa Umpierre Police Chief Roger Peterson requests this appointment be effective September 1, 2000. Respectfully Submitted, Joy Fogarty Secretary Police Civil Service Commission An Egw(Opportunity Emp(nyn AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT EM DESCRIPTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: Mayor's Office Resolution Supporting the LMC Building Quality Communitie MEETING aR ' DATE: 9/7/00 ITEM NO. D-13 PREPARED BY: Mayor Canfield The City of Rochester has been invited to express its support and participate in the Building Quality Communities initiative which was launched by the League of Minnesota Cities at the June 2000 Annual Conference. The program is a two-year effort to change how legislators, the media and citizens look at local government. It is recommended that the Council authorize a Resolution declaring Rochester's commitment to join the "Minnesota Cities: Building Quality Communities" statewide educational effort and designating Sue Norris, Assistant to the Mayor as the city's key contact for this effort. "UNCILACTION: motion eY ssconabr. N Minnesota Cities: Building Quality Communities CITY RESOLUTION Pass this resolution at a city council meeting to make your city a participant of the Building Quality Communities effort. Whereas, the top values and priorities of citizens include safety, family, job opportunities, health, the well-being of children, and recreational opportunities; and Whereas, many of the services cities provide directly enhance those citizen priorities, and Whereas, the connection between city services and how they benefit citizen priorities and concerns is not always understood by citizens; and Whereas, it is one of the responsibilities of city officials to ensure legislators, media and citizens understand their governments through open and frequent communication using various avenues and means; and Whereas, it is important to encourage citizens to actively participate in city go vernment, to share their views, and to work in partnership with city officials to ensure that the needs of the community are met, and Whereas, partnerships developed between citizens and city officials can result in greater understanding of the connection between Minnesota's high quality of life and the services provided by Minnesota cities, as well as in greater trust by citizens in the efforts of their city government; Now therefore be it resolved that the city of hereby declares its commitment to join in the "Minnesota Cities. Building Quality Communities -statewide educational effort in cooperation with our fellow members of the League of Minnesota Cities We hereby designate (insert name & title of BOC contact) as the city of s key contact for this effort, and will inform the League of Minnesota Cities of this designation. For more information and resources, visit the League's BQC Web site: www.Imnc.org/becihome.htm REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 31 ' 916/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D - I*� 4 DESCRIPTION: Amendment to South Broadway Partners Development PREPARED BY: Agreement wl R. Freese The City and South Broadway Partners entered into a Development Agreement on September 9, 1999 for property located east of TH 63 South between 401n and 48" Streets SE. The Development Agreement provided for different obligations on the part of both the Owner and the City. There are two sections of the Agreement that need to be revised due to circumstances beyond the control of either the Owner or the City. The parties to the Development Agreement both assumed that MnDOT would complete the TH 63 Preliminary Design and Layout Plan by the end of 1999. The current schedule to complete the TH 63 Preliminary Design and Layout Plan has been extended to December 2000. This delay in the completion of the TH 63 project has affected the applicability of the dates in the original agreement. The Development Agreement requires that the Owner execute a Stormwater Management Agreement for the property by 711/2000. The Owner, the City and MnDOT have done reached a final decision on the issues of stormwater management in the area of the property. Therefore this date should be revised to 711/2001. The Development Agreement requires that the Owner execute a Contribution Agreement for the property by 71112000. The Contribution Agreement is intended to address street construction, utility connections and availability charges attributable to the development of the property. The City has not provided to the Owner a Contribution Agreement at this time. Therefore this date should be revised to 11/1/2000. Public Works staff recommends that the Development Agreement be amended to reflect the new date of 711/2001 for execution of a Stormwater Management Agreement and 11/1/00 for execution of a Contribution Agreement, COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Amendment to the Development Agreement with South Broadway Partners to reflect the new date of 7/1/2001 for execution of a Stormwater Management Agreement and 11/1/00 for execution of a Contribution Agreement. INCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: AGENDA SECTION: CONSENTAGENDA M DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION to Bishop Trust ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works MEETING 33 / DATE: 9/6/00 ITEM NO, D' 19r PREPARED BY. R. Freese The City and David Bishop entered into a Development Agreement on September 9, 1999 for property located east of TH 63 South between 40'^ and 48" Streets SE, The Development Agreement provided for different obligations on the part of both the Owner and the City. There are two sections of the Agreement that need to be revised due to circumstances beyond the control of either the Owner or the City. The parties to the Development Agreement both assumed that MnDOT would complete the TH 63 Preliminary Design and Layout Plan by the end of 1999. The current schedule to complete the TH 63 Preliminary Design and Layout Plan has been extended to December 2000. This delay in the completion of the TH 63 project has affected the applicability of the dates in the original agreement. The Development Agreement requires that the Owner execute a Stormwater Management Agreement for the property by 7/1/2000. The Owner, the City and MnDOT have done reached a final decision on the issues of stormwater management in the area of the property. Therefore this date should be revised to 7/1/2001. The Development Agreement requires that the Owner execute a Contribution Agreement for the property by 7/112000. The contribution Agreement is intended to address street construction, utility connections and availability charges attributable to the development of the property. The City has not provided to the Owner a Contribution Agreement at this time. Therefore this date should be revised to 1111/2000. Public Works staff recommends that the Development Agreement be amended to reflect the new date of 7/1/2001 for execution of a Stormwater Management Agreement and 11/1100 for execution of a Contribution Agreement. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Amendment to the Development Agreement with David Bishop to reflect the new date of 7/1/2001 for execution of a Stormwater Management Agreement and 11/1/00 for execution of a Contribution Agreement, NCIL ACTION: Motion Second by: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 35 ' DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D — / jp 4 DESCRIPTION: Vacation of an Alley — lying South of 31 Street SW between 191h PREPARED BY: � and 20`h Avenue SW M. Nigbur"?4r+ The Public Works Department has been approached about the possible vacation of an existing unconstructed Alley lying between 19' and 20' Avenues South of 3rd Street SW. The current right of way has many encroachments that would impede any future construction within the alley. In 1999 a vacation request was forwarded to this office for the East/West portion of this alley. However only a portion was vacated due to requirements to maintain access through the remaining alley. Residents of the area are now requesting the remaining portion of the alley in its entirety. Several owners have signed a petition form. Based on this petition Staff would recommend the City initiate the vacation of the remaining alley between 19'h and 201 Avenues lying South of 3rd Street SW. TM FT� AIIey Vacated 1939 Alley Requested I I 3 for Vacation a 4 F7TP ssrex COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adoption of a resolution initiating the vacation process with the planning commission for the Alley lying in Block 7 of Highland Addition. NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 3� r DATE: 916/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works n 0�i 1 A DESCRIPTION: Development Agreement — Autumn Wood RV Park — Galen PREPARED BY: AA Youngkrantz M. Nigbur A The Owners of the Autumn Woods RV Park, located along 11" Avenue SW, and City Staff have had discussions relating to impacts of the project on the surrounding infrastructure. Based on the discussions, the content for a development agreement has been decided and a document has been created. The major items covered in the agreement include the following: • Construction of pedestrian facilities. • Traffic improvement including: controlled access along 11" Avenue, payment of Substandard street charge and dedication of right of way for roadway and pedestrian facilities. • Payment of development/connection related charges including WAC, Substandard Roadway, and watermain connection. Staff recommends the Council approve the Development Agreement. The developers have executed the agreement. a / itum Woods RV Park PYcperty COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Development Agreement for the Youngkrantz Property. NCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 13 1 ' 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works > IS M DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Basic Construction in Century Hills PREPARED BY: Townhomes Third Subdivision (J9667) M. Baker Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • Payne Company (Owner) & Jech Excavating (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9667 consisting of "Basic Construction in Century Hills Townhomes Third Subdivision". Tl( Y �. W � -1 1 4 15 L / COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9667 "Basic Construction in Century Hills Townhomes Third Subdivision" 1NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING �J DATE: /6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D��q A DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Sanitary Sewer, Watermain & Hydrants to PREPARED BY: Serve the Goodin Co. Building (J9731) M. Baker AJ:?7 Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • The Goodin Company (Owner) & Olaf Anderson & Son Construction Company (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9731 consisting of "Sanitary Sewer, Watermain & Hydrants to Serve the Goodin Co. Building located on part of Lot 15, Block 1, Replat of part of Lots 5 & 6, Block 1, Hendrick's Subdivision". i 1 ' [ � �iRli2' yyyyyyF'+ IM a� A -1'9th StNV V- I l I I L __J COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9731 "Sanitary Sewer, Watermain & Hydrants to Serve the Goodin Co. Building located on part of Lot 15, Block 1, Replat of part of Lots 5 & 6, Block 1, Hendrick's Subdivision" INCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 3 DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D • AAV�-� A DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Basic Construction to Serve Weatherstone PREPARED CIC #166 (J9689) M. Bak Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • Weatherstone Development of Rochester LLC (Owner) & Road Constructors Inc (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9689 consisting of "Basic Construction to Serve Weatherstone CIC #166". i i i COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9689 "Basic Construction to Serve Weatherstone CIC #166" INCIL ACTION: motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING l DATE: 9/6/00 i AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works p —Al JM DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Watermain &Hydrants to Serve The Willows PREPARED BY: (J9709) M. Baker ' Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • J & C Gardens LLC (Owner) & Fraser Construction (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9709 consisting of "Watermain & Hydrants to Serve The Willows". n ��ns gill 111minnn NOW COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9709 "Watermain & Hydrants to Serve The Willows" INCIL ACTION: motion by: Second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING ' DATE: V600 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENTAGENDA Public Works ro '- Z DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Watermain to Serve the Autumn Woods RVJ- V1PREPARED BY: Park (J9701) M. Baker Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • Galen Youngkrantz & Patricia Youngkrantz (Owner) & Mick's Backhoe Service (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9701 consisting of "Watermain to Serve the Autumn Woods RV Park". COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9701 "Watermain to Serve the Autumn Woods RV Park" NCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING q DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works A 3 M DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the PREPARED BY: Weatherstone Townhomes (J9732) M. Baker Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • Shelter Corporation (Owner) & Belair Corporation (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9732 consisting of "Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the Weatherstone Townhomes". COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9732 "Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the Weatherstone Townhomes" 1NCIL ACTION: Motion by: second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 5! DATE: 916/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENTAGENDA Public Works M DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Watermain & Hydrants to Serve the Quarry PREPARED BY: Ridge Apartments (J9736) M. Baker Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • Rochester Leased Housing Associates V, LP (Owner) & Rochester Sand & Gravel, a Division of Mathy Construction Co. (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9736 consisting of "Watermain & Hydrants to Serve the Quarry Ridge Apartments (Lots 1 & 2, Block 1, Hindermann Fitzgerald Subdivision)". I , F_ — f---- i - _ L1 La 1 a 1 �' l FE r � TIL ----, -T--1 17rr COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9736 "Watermain & Hydrants to Serve the Quarry Ridge Apartments (Lots 1 & 2, Block 1, Hindermann Fitzgerald Subdivision)" 1NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEFT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D �a VI DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the PREPARED BY: Crown Apartments (J9727) M. Baker t, Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: • RC Properties (Owner) & Rochester Construction Company Inc (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner Contract J9727 consisting of "Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the Crown Apartments (Lot 1, Block 1, Crown Subdivision)". r ti ._ IVYY v / I Y/ + I , i \ I 1 i i 1 i COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9727 "Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the Crown Apartments (Lot 1, Block 1, Crown Subdivision)" 1 NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 515' DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D--R(s IM DESCRIPTION: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS PREPARED BY: M. Baker( L The Department of Public Works has received requests on two (2) different properties, to voluntarily participate in the City's Regional Stormwater Management Plan. This department has reviewed the information for these properties and has determined that there is support for participation. Owners of the following properties have requested voluntary participation in the City's Plan, with the applicable participation fee as follows: • Papa John's (SDP#00-51) (Part of Lots 6, 7, 8, & 9, Block 1, Rolling Greens Fifth Addition) $7,318.06 • A. B. Systems (Part of Lot 1, Block 2, Green Meadows 1" @ 1544 Greenview Dr SW) $1,980.29 The Owners of these properties have already provided payment for their respective charges. These funds will be deposited upon acceptance by the Council for the properties to participate in the City's Plan. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution accepting voluntary participation by the above noted properties, in the City's Regional Stormwater Management Plan. JNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 15� , DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT Public Works VI DESCRIPTION: Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve the PREPARED BY: Crocus Hills Area, J9738 /%1_1 J. Loehr i This is the Feasibility Report for the construction of sanitary sewer and watermain to serve the Crocus Hills Area in a project described as follows: Project No. M088, J9738 "Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve the Crocus Hills Area." The estimated construction costs and expense of this project are as follows: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain $ 196,145 Trunk Watermain 60,480 Service Connections 10,800 Sub -Total $ 267,425 Engineering/Interest/Contingencies 66,856 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 334,281 The Crocus Hills Area sewer and water extension project is included in the proposed 2001 Capital Budget. Therefore, the project will be designed in 2000 with construction in 2001. The project funding is proposed from sewer and water connection charges (Utility Connection Agreements), Sales Tax revenue (per Lot Cap), and Water Availability Charges. At the City Council meeting of May 15, 2000 the City Council authorized staff to negotiate an Engineering Service agreement for the project. Staff from the Department of Public Works has negotiated an Engineering Service Agreement with WHKS & Co. for the design of the project. WHKS is familiar with the project area and is capable of performing the desired level of design related engineering services for the project. The Department of Public Works recommends that WHKS be retained to provide the design services for this project. Compensation for the design services shall be a "Lump Sum" amount of $32,091.00. The Crocus Hills Area is currently within the City of Rochester. Therefore, an Orderly Annexation Agreement is not required for this Area. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adopt a resolution accepting the Feasibility Report. 2. Adopt a resolution establishing a Project Hearing for October 2, 2000. 3. Adopt a resolution authorizing the execution of a Design Services Agreement with WHKS & Co. INCIL ACTION: Motion Second to: 0 F I Sanity °pN CO1% siv Project M088, J9738 Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve the Crocus Hills Area BAIHLV HILLS DR SW F fi' REPORT ON THE FEASIBILITY OF PROPOSED 5q LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO SERVE THE CROCUS HILLS AREA. August 30, 2000 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota A petition for sanitary sewer and watermain to serve the Crocus Hills Area was forwarded by the City Council at their meeting of May 15, 2000 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 5 of 10 property owners of lots containing a single-family residential dwelling. This represents 50.0 percent of the lots within the Crocus Hills Area that are eligible to participate in the City of Rochester, Water Quality Protection Program adopted by the City Council on December 21, 1999. The Crocus Hills Area petition includes one lot that previously connected to the public sewer and water systems. This property owner paid sanitary sewer and watermain connection charges consistent with the City of Rochester connection charge policies. This property owner is considered a petitioner for the project and included with the 5 petitioners. Feasibilitv 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 development that currently lacks public sanitary sewer and watermain. A majority of 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. 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 existing single-family residential dwellings to connect 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), sales tax revenue appropriated to the City of Rochester, Water Quality Protection Program and sales tax supported Water Availability Charges. The proposed project consists of the installation of an 8-inch sanitary sewer line and an 8-inch watermain to serve the Crocus Hills Area. Public sanitary sewer is available on the north side of Salem Road S.W. and within Salem Meadow Town homes development. Sanitary sewer will be extended from these locations to serve the Area. The extension of trunk line sanitary sewer is not required. The Crocus Hills Area lies within the high-level water service area. The extension of 800 feet of trunk watermain from 23rd Avenue SW (lying east of Crocus Hills) and 600 feet of trunk watermain from Foxcroft Subdivision (lying west of Crocus Hills) is required to serve the domestic and fire protection needs of the Area. The estimated construction costs and expenses of the project made without completed plans or survey are as follows: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain $ 245,181 Trunk Watermain $54 per foot x 1400 feet $ 75,600 Sewer Service Connection Stub -Outs $750 per service x 9 services $ 6,750 Water Service Connection Stub -out $750 per service x 9 services $ 6,750 Estimated Cost of the Project $ 334,281 The estimated proiect costs are proposed to be funded as follows Utility Connection Agreements $ 174,780 Sales Tax (Rate Cap and per Lot Cap) $ 70,401 Trunk Watermain sales tax Supported Water Availability Charges $ 75,600 Sales Tax (Sewer Service Connection Stub -Out Allowances) 9 services x $750/serv. $ 6,750 Sales Tax (Water Service Stub -Out Allowances) 9 services x $750/serv. $ 6,750 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Funding Required for Construction of Project $ 334,281 Estimated additional sales tax revenue required for work on private property Of the 10 lots within the project area 9 lots are eligible for Allowances through the Water Quality Protection Program as follows: Sewer Service Lateral 9 lots x $1,000 per lot $ 9,000 Water Service Lateral 9 lots x $1,000 per lot $ 9,000 Well Closure 9 lots x $1,100 per lot $ 9,000 Septic Closure 9 lots x $ 500 per lot $ 4,500 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Allowances $ 31,500 For Work on Private Property Estimated sales tax revenue required for construction of Project and Allowances Estimated Amount Sales Tax Revenue for Construction of the Project $ 83,901 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Allowances $ 31,500 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Construction of the Project and $ 115,401 Allowances for Work on Private Property We recommend that the necessary funding to construct sanitary sewer, waternain and service connections in the Crocus Hills 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. Submitted for your consideration: Ja s M Loehr, ter uality Protection Program Project Manager BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Project No: M0088 J No: 9738 Date (Orig.) 8/30/2000 Description: Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the Crocus Hills Area Project Contract Final Budget Cost Cost Construction Sanitary Sewer & Watermain $ 196,145 Trunk Watermain Service Connections Engineering/I nterest/Contingency Total Construction & Expense Cost Distribution Anticipated Utility Connection Agreements Water Availability Charges Sales Tax Funding TOTAL Make Initial Disbursement from P. I. R. Fund 60,480 10,800 66,856 $ 334,281 $ 174,780 75,600 83,901 $ 334,281 A 11ftin REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: IT��yIINO. REPORTS and RECOMMENDATIONS Public Works %CCU/D D- P DESCRIPTION: Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve the PREPARED BY: Crocus Hills Area, J9738 J. Loehr This is the Feasibility Report for the construction of sanitary sewer and watermain to serve the Crocus Hills Area in a project described as follows: Project No. M088, J9738 "Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve the Crocus Hills Area." The estimated construction costs and expense of this project are as follows: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain $ 196,145 Trunk Watermain 60,480 Service Connections 10,800 Sub -Total $ 267,425 Engineering/Interest/Contingencies 66,856 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 334,281 Tf1 I feasibility" of providing public sanitary sewerartdwatermain to the Crtrcr�s Hitis A t ttepen e i ion the property owners dedicating easements to the City,. without cosh, (eggrdiess of euhether trhe ` 'p, . eqy owner.cboa s- participate iff1ha,Water-Qua tyr Protection Program " The Crocus Hills Area sewer and water extension project is included in the proposed 2001 Capital Budget. Therefore, the project will be designed in 2000 with construction in 2001. The project funding is proposed from sewer and water connection charges (Utility Connection Agreements), Sales Tax revenue (per Lot Cap), and Water Availability Charges. At the City Council meeting of May 15, 2000 the City Council authorized staff to negotiate an Engineering Service agreement for the project. Staff from the Department of Public Works has negotiated an Engineering Service Agreement with WHKS & Co. for the design of the project. WHKS is familiar with the project area and is capable of performing the desired level of design related engineering services for the project. The Department of Public Works recommends that WHKS be retained to provide the design services for this project. Compensation for the design services shall be a "Lump Sum" amount of $32,091.00. The Crocus Hills Area is currently within the City of Rochester. Therefore, an Orderly Annexation Agreement is not required for this Area. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adopt a resolution accepting the Feasibility Report. 2. Adopt a resolution establishing a Project Hearing for October 2, 2000. 3. Adopt a resolution authorizing the execution of a Design Services Agreement with WHKS & Co. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: Watennain co pow _ sw Project W88, J9738 Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve the Crocus Hills Area It REPORT ON THE FEASIBILITY OF PROPOSED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 0 TO SERVE THE CROCUS HILLS AREA. August 30, 2000 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota A petition for sanitary sewer and watermain to serve the Crocus Hills Area was forwarded by the City Council at their meeting of May 15, 2000 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 5 of 10 property owners of lots containing a single-family residential dwelling. This represents 50.0 percent of the lots within the Crocus Hills Area that are eligible to participate in the City of Rochester, Water Quality Protection Program adopted by the City Council on December 21, 1999. The Crocus Hills Area petition includes one lot that previously connected to the public sewer and water systems. This property owner paid sanitary sewer and watermain connection charges consistent with the City of Rochester connection charge policies. This property owner is considered a petitioner for the project and included with the 5 petitioners. 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 development that currently lacks public sanitary sewer and watermain. A majority of 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. 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 existing single-family residential dwellings to connect 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), sales tax revenue appropriated to the City of Rochester, Water Quality Protection Program and sales tax supported Water Availability Charges. The proposed project consists of the installation of an 8-inch sanitary sewer line and an 8-inch watermain to serve the Crocus Hills Area. Public sanitary sewer is available on the north side of Salem Road S.W. and within Salem Meadow Town homes development. Sanitary sewer will be extended from these locations to serve the Area. The extension of trunk line sanitary sewer is not required. The Crocus Hills Area lies within the high-level water service area. The extension of 800 feet of trunk watermain from 23rd Avenue SW (lying east of Crocus Hills) and 600 feet of trunk watermain from Foxcroft Subdivision (lying west of Crocus Hills) is required to serve the domestic and fire protection needs of the Area. The estimated construction costs and expenses of the project made without completed plans or survey are as follows: 0 Sanitary Sewer and Watermain $ 245,181 Trunk Watermain $54 per foot x 1400 feet $ 75,600 Sewer Service Connection Stub -Outs $750 per service x 9 services $ 6,750 Water Service Connection Stub -out $750 per service x 9 services $ 6,750 Estimated Cost of the Project $ 334,281 The estimated project costs are proposed to be funded as follows: Utility Connection Agreements $ 174,780 Sales Tax (Rate Cap and per Lot Cap) $ 70,401 Trunk Watermain sales tax Supported Water Availability Charges $ 75,600 Sales Tax (Sewer Service Connection Stub -Out Allowances) 9 services x $750/serv. $ 6,750 Sales Tax (Water Service Stub -Out Allowances) 9 services x $750/serv. $ 6,750 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Funding Required for Construction of Project $ 334,281 Estimated additional sales tax revenue required for work on private property Of the 10 lots within the project area 9 lots are eligible for Allowances through the Water Quality Protection Program as follows: Sewer Service Lateral 9 lots x $1,000 per lot $ 9,000 Water Service Lateral 9 lots x $1,000 per lot $ 9,000 Well Closure 9 lots x $1,100 per lot $ 9,000 Septic Closure 9 lots x $ 500 per lot $ 4,500 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Allowances $ 31,500 For Work on Private Property Estimated sales tax revenue required for construction of Project and Allowances Estimated Amount Sales Tax Revenue for Construction of the Project $ 83,901 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Allowances $ 31,500 Estimated Amount of Sales Tax Revenue Required for Construction of the Project and $ 115,401 Allowances for Work on Private Property 5,004er lot. In the event that the project costs exceed the estimated costs contained in this.. We recommend that the necessary funding to construct sanitary sewer, watermain and service connections in the Crocus Hills 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. Submitted for your consideration: Loehr, ility Protection Program r BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Project No: M0088 J No: 9738 Date (Orig.) 8/30/2000 Description: Sanitary Sewer & Watermain to Serve the Crocus Hills Area Project Contract Final Budget Cost Cost Construction Sanitary Sewer & Watermain $ 196,145 Trunk Watermain 60.480 Service Connections Engineering/Interest/Contingency Total Construction & Expense Cost Distribution Anticipated Utility Connection Agreements Water Availability Charges Sales Tax Funding TOTAL Make Initial Disbursement from P. I. R. Fund $ 334,281 $ 174,780 $ 334,281 6 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 63 09/06/00 it(:I IUN: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC WORKS V -P S 'RIPTION: Award of Contract: PREPARED BY: " Construct Fox Valley Drive SW from Baihley Heights area to R. Kelm =nv r`rMf r_Larcl% Bids were received and opened after 11:00 a.m., August 30, 2000 for the following local improvement project: Proiect Number: M023 (J-9651) Project Name: Construct Fox Valley Drive SW from Baihley Heights area to Fox Croft area The followina bids were received: Total Bid 1. Rochester Sand & Gravel $410,388.14 2. Elcor Construction $474,731.20 3. Road Constructors $477,953.22 Engineers Estimate $436,016.75 Project Background: This project will involve the placement of concrete curb/gutter, bituminous roadway construction, storm sewer improvements, utilities and associated restoration. The street project, engineering and construction, will be funded with Special Assessments, Municipal State Aid funds and Water Utility Funds. The project is included in the 2000-2005 Capital Improvement Program budget (item #10, page 30). Project Action: The Public Works Department recommends the City Council proceed with an award to the low bidder. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopted a resolution awarding the contract, " Construct Fox Valley Drive SW from Baihley Heights area to Fox Croft area " (J-9651) to Rochester Sand & Gravel. NCIL ACTION: Motion Second by: to; i SAP 159-145-01 City Project No. M023 Q9651) Construct Fox Valley Drive SW from Baihley Heights area to Fox Croft area oiD swp,iga.,i�sq 8iA 00NE9! Po%YILLEY DNVEe.' EEGNS.AP.1M14601 STA. 1 00.00 Po% VALLEY DRIVE S.W. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 657 ' 09/06/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC WORKS DESCRIPTION: Award of Contract: PREPARED BY: "Reconstruction of 48th Street SW from 11th Ave to Scenic Oaks R. Kelrg '� plus 11th Ave South" (J-9545 / J-2270 kk. Bids were received and opened after 11:00 a.m., August 30, 2000 for the following local improvement project: Project Name & Number: SAP 159-154-02 City Project No. 6311-3-00 (J2270) Reconstruct 11th Ave SW from Lone Pines Dr SW to 60th St SW S.A.P.159-155-01 City Project No. 6748-3-99, (J9545) Reconstruct 48th Street SW from 11th Avenue SW to West Line of Scenic Oaks Subdivision The following bids were received: Total Bid 1. Holm Brothers Construction $ 1,358,998.73 2. Road Constructors $ 1,614,279.20 3. Fraser Construction $ 1,728,270.45 4. Ames Construction $ 1,774,014.12 Engineers Estimate $ 2,445,035.80 Project Background: The two projects have been combined and will be awarded as one construction project, due to location and type of construction. The Street Reconstruction project, engineering and construction will be funded with Municipal State Aid Funds and Water Utility Funds. The project is included in the 2000-2005 Capital Improvement Program budget (item 7, page 30). Project Action: The Public Works Department recommends the City Council proceed with an award to the low bidder. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopted a resolution awarding the contract, " Reconstruction of 48th Street SW from 11 th Ave to Scenic Oaks plus 11 th Ave South " (J-9545 / J-2270) to Holm Brothers Construction. I NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: N/ SAP 159-154-02 City Project No. 6311-3-00 (J2270) Reconstruct llth Ave SW from Lone Pines Dr SW to 60th St SW S.A.P.159-155-01 City Project No. 6248-3-99, (J9545) Reconstruct 48th Street SW from 11th Avenue SW to West Line of Scenic Oaks Subdivision � it low,� ��► ■ ME� bI1N1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE �7 11> 9/6100 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works (. 3p M DESCRIPTION: Supplemental Agreement #1; Project 6307-2-99 (J9523) PREPARED BY Reconstruction of 7th Ave. S.E. from 6th St.S.E. to 12th St. S.E. M. Easley The plans provided for the reconstruction of 7" Avenue S.E., including the installation of sanitary sewer mains along the length of the project. Soil borings indicating the presence of solid rock above the sanitary sewer elevation were inadvertently left off the plans. It has therefore, become necessary to excavate the rock to install gravity flow sewer pipes at the proper line and grade. The Engineer has prepared Supplemental Agreement #1; Project 6307-2-99 (J9523) in the amount of $30,176.00 to cover the cost of : 1. Equipment rental for a backhoe with hydraulic rock hammer. 2. Labor costs associated with extra work during rock excavation. Public Works has reviewed the costs associated with this work and find the equipment and labor costs consistent with industry standards. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution authorizing payment of Supplemental Agreement #1; In the amount of $30.176.00; Project 6307-2-99 (J9523) 7' Avenue S.E. JNCIL ACTION: Mation by: Second to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 0 11 9-6-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO, CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D - 31 A DESCRIPTION: Passenger Loading Zone @ 712 1st Street NW PREPARED BY: r, D. Rossman'`� The City has received a request for a passenger -loading zone for the Hoffman Madsen Music Studio operated by Mr. Duane Madsen at 712 1" Street NW. Their business hours are 8:00 am to 9:00 pm Monday thru Friday. The onstreet parking is often filled with vehicles, and their clients end up walking a distance. A passenger loading zone would make it much safer for the children who are being dropped off and picked up for lessons. First Street in this area is a local street with a pavement width of 30 feet and a R/W of 75 feet. The traffic volumes are around 1,800 vehicles per day. There is an alternating parking restriction on First Street. Staff has reviewed the request and recommends its approval. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the prepared resolution adding paragraph (27.3) of Section E "Passenger Loading Zones" of the Comprehensive Traffic And Parking Resolution Book; to read: (27.3) First Street NW, in the 700 block, on the south side of the street, in front of the premise known as Hoffman Madsen Music Studio at 712 11' Street NW, 15 minute limit, from 8:00 am to 9:00 pm, Monday Thru Friday. I NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 09/06/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC WORKS DESCRIPTION: Award of Contract:" Concrete Curb & Gutter on 10th Avenue PREPARED BY: SE from 16'/2 Street SE to 19th St SE " (J9639) R. Kel Bids were received and opened after 11:00 a.m., September 1, 2000 for the following local improvement project: Project Number 6310-2-00, (J9639) Project Name "Concrete Curb & Gutter on 10th Avenue SE from 16 1/2 Street SE to 19h St SE". The following bids were received: Total Bid 1. Rochester Sand & Gravel $ 143,535.01 2. Road Constructors $ 148,510.80 3. Elcor Construction $ 165,922.95 Engineers Estimate $ 145,404.50 Project Background: The project hearing and assessment hearing was held at the June 5, 2000 City Council meeting. The Council authorized the project to proceed. The project, engineering and construction will be funded with Special Assessments and General Street Resurfacing funds (J-8308 & J-2201). This project will involve the placement of concrete curb/gutter, reclaiming bituminous street, and associated storm sewer. Project Action: The Public Works Department recommends the City Council proceed with an award to the low bidder. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopted a resolution awarding the contract, "Concrete Curb & Gutter on 10th Avenue SE from 16 Y2 Street SE to 19th St SE" (J9639) to Rochester Sand & Gravel. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: Consent Agenda ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works ITEM 5. ONDESCRIPTION: Real Estate — Right of Way Agreement Wellner Drive NE PREPARED BY: �y y M. Nigbur^65- The City currently has an agreement to extend Wellner Drive to link with Rocky Creek Drive. One of obligations of the Developer was to attempt to acquire the needed land rights for the project from Rocky Creek Mobil Home Park. The Developer has met his obligation and would like to transfer the agreement he made with the affected land owner to the City to allow the project to proceed. Staff would agree to accept the right of way obligations as part of the project costs. These project costs, including the right of way, engineering, and construction costs, will be assessed back to the developers on a prorated area basis pursuant to the previously executed and approved development agreements with B & C Properties, Hexum/Ragan, and Premier Bank. 7717 V%Ilnw Drive Edenacn Rocky Creek ' Drhe 1 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Right of Way Assignment Agreement with B & C Properties. COUNCIL ACTION: motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 916/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM 0. Consent Agenda Public Works .5 '-3 DESCRIPTION: Real Estate — Right of Way settlement for 16" Avenue NW — PREPARED BY: Mattison Property. M. Nigbur;*W The City and one of the owners of property abutting the 16th Avenue Project have reached a settlement on the acquisition of a part of the needed right of way of 16tb Avenue NW. The settlement amount is $61,000. Though this amount is more than our appraised value we are able to avoid the costs associated with the condemnation of the property. This right of way Settlement Agreement does not address or resolve the driveway access issues raised by Mr. Mattison, Battery Patrol, U-haul, and Dan/Barb Prow. It is the understanding of the parties that the driveway access issue is to be resolved as previously directed by the City Council. L--L(J 7th Street NW 16th Avenue NW Area Civic Center Drive COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Settlement Agreement with Gary Mattison in the amount of $61,000. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/06/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works I ESCRIPTION: ADVERTISE FOR BIDS: PREPARED BY.1 "Extension of Sanitary Sewer to serve undeveloped property. D. Nelson along 2n" St SW" (J9700) This is a request for a resolution to advertise for bids for the following project: Project Number M070, (J9700) Project Name "Extension of Sanitary Sewer to serve undeveloped property along 2n" St SW" (J9700) Project Background: The project funding is included in item #3, page 46 of the 2000 - 2005 Capital Improvement Program. The Council authorized Engineering Services for Design at the June 19, 2000 City Council meeting. This project will extend the 12" sanitary sewer line west from 2" St NW to undeveloped properties along 2"" St SW and connect to the existing sanitary sewer system at the east side of Avalon Cove development. This will allow the City to abandon the sanitary sewer line running east west across the future Cascade lake area. Work will consist of approximately 3300 linear feet of new sanitary sewer and will be integrated with sanitary sewer across developing properties. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: A resolution should be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids and conduct a bid opening on October 11, 2000 at 11:00 AM. Note to City Clerk; Advertise 3 times in the Post Bulletin and Construction Bulletin beginning September 15, 2000. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: AGENDA SECTION: CONSENTAGENDA r REQUEST FOR COUNCIL. ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/19/00 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works n EM DESCRIPTION: Engineering Services Contract for Design Services for Extension of Sanitary Sewer to serve undeveloped property along 2nd St ITEM NO. D-i6, PREPARED BY: D. Nelson rl This is a proposal by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates to provide engineering services for the following local improvement project: "Extension of Sanitary Sewer from 2nd St NW to serve Undeveloped Property along 2nd St SW" Project No. M070, J-9700 Bonestroo & Associates are recommended for this work since they provided the engineering design services for public improvement project along 23 d Ave NW to construct a storm water pond and utility extension. Therefore, Bonestroo & Associates are familiar with the project and the needs of the area. This project will extend the 12" sanitary sewer line west from 2nd St NW to undeveloped properties along 2"d St SW and connect to the existing sanitary sewer system at the east side of Avalon Cove development. This will allow the City to abandon the sanitary sewer line running east west across the future Cascade lake area. Work will consist of approximately 3300 linear feet of new sanitary sewer and will be integrated with sanitary sewer across developing properties. The negotiated professional fees are as follows: Preliminary Analysis $ 4,580 Final Design $11,160 Misc Expenses $ 2,070 Total: $17,810 Project funding is included in item #3, page 46 of the 2000 - 2005 Capital Improvement Program. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Engineering Service Agreement with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates for the extension of sanitary sewer to serve undeveloped property along 2"d St SW. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion Second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: M NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS City Administration f . f ESCRIPTION Public Hearing to obtain public comment or recommendations as to ]PRSEP PARED BYwhether Road Constructurs is a reliable or responsible bidder for purpose of the aeth Wellner Drive street construction project At the August 21, 2000 Council meeting, the Rochester Common Council scheduled a public hearing to be held on September 6, 2000 for the purpose of obtaining public comments or recommendations as to whether Road Constructors is a reliable or responsible bidder for purpose of the Wellner Drive street construction project. Section 12.06 of the Rochester Home Rule Charter states that public contracts must be awarded "to the lowest reliable and responsible bidder." At the August 21, 2000 meeting, the issue of awarding a contract for the construction of Wellner Drive NE from 31" Street NE to Rocky Creek Drive NE came before the Council. At that meeting, several citizens addressed the Council and indicated they felt that Road Constructors acted negligently while working on a different public construction project, which resulted in sewer backups at a number of residences. There'were also concerns expressed as to Road Constructors' failure to communicate with affected property owners and City officials concerning these sewer backups. Based upon those concerns the Council tabled the award of a contract for the Wellner Drive project and scheduled said public hearing. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Hold the public hearing. After closing the hearing, instruct the City Attorney to prepare draft Findings of Fact, �lusions of Law and Order for the Counncil's consideration at its next meeting. r o� (2�0 CIL ACTION: mouen by: Second by: to: Scherr, Judy From: HornbergR@aol.com Wednesday, September 06, 2000 5:01 PM J jscherr@ci.rochester.mn.us Subject: City counsil meeting 916/00 To whom it may concern! My name is Rueben Hornberg and I reside at 4140 13'th Ave NW. I would like following made public record at this evening's city council meeting regarding damages to my home, due to what I believe was negligence on behalf of Road Constructors. On the evening of 5/31/00 and the morning of 6/1/00 my basement was flooded with water from the sewer line backing -up. Although we did receive a significant amount of rainfall, I did not believe it was an amount that should flood the sewer lines. I then filed a claim with the City. The insurance company representing the city did an investigation and promptly (within 5 working days) responded to my claim. The was denied and stated the reason was due to the fact man hole covers were left off by Road Constructors. The claim was denied. I then filed a claim against Road Constructors. It took 6 weeks to respond, and there response in 2 sentences was Claim Denied. Over that 6 week period I never received a call or had anyone stop to ask questions regarding my claim. I feel that Road Constructors has not acted in a professional and responsible Manner, and as a concerned citizen of the community I do feel that they should be doing work in this or any other community! Respectfully, Rueben Hornberg REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDASECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING DEPARTMENT rE ., a 4 DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: . yt,e III, Phase I (#00-03) Appeal of the Type III, Phase I (#00-17) Variance Denial Randy Klement August 22, 2000 Rochester Zoning Board oiAppeals Recommendation: On August 2, 2000, the Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals denied the variance request of the applicant, Steven Sween, for the property located at 1805 SE 2"d Avenue, Rochester. The property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential) zoning district. The applicant had requested the following: 1) a variance of twenty-two (22') feet to the rear yard setback along the west lot line from the required twenty-five (25') feet to three (3') feet. 2) a variance of two (2') feet to the required setback for a garage with doors on a wall facing a street along the east lot line from the required twenty (20') feet to eighteen (18') feet. The variances requested by the applicant was for the construction of a 22' x 32' addition to the west side of the existing 22' x 28' single family detached dwelling on the property and to relocate the existing 24' x 28' detached garage ten (10') feet to the north. The Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals denied the variance request based on staff findings. Council Action Requested: Approve or deny the variance appeal by the applicant based on the original staff report and attachments submitted to the Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals at their August 2, 2000 meeting. Attachments: 1. Copy of Variance Resolution and minutes of the August 2"d Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, to be signed by the Zoning Board of Appeals Chairperson at their September 6, 2000 meeting. 2. Copy of Staff Report and all attachments submitted to the Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals, dated July 27, 2000. Distribution: �pQ 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 3. City Attorney 4. Planning Department File 5. Applicant: This item will be considered by the Council sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September iNCIL ACTION: Mouon by: second by: to: 11 11 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS City of Rochester, Minnesota VARIANCE RESOLUTION DENIAL Variance Request #00-17(Steven Sween) WHEREAS, an application has been filed on behalf of the owners of the premises known as: GOLDEN HILL ADDITION E50FT LOT 4 BLK 17, asking the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Rochester to grant a variance to the provisions of Paragraph Section 62.222 and 62.274(2), of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual to allow for the construction of an addition to the existing single family dwelling and the placement of a garage that will not meet thr setback requirements. WHEREAS, the matter of such variance has been reviewed by the Zoning Administrator who has submitted a report to the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Council/Board Chambers, 151 4th Street SE, Rochester, MN, at 7:00 p.m. on August 2, at which hearing all interested persons were given the opportunity to be heard. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Rochester as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONDITIONS: The premises at 1805 2nd Street SE, is located in the R-1(Mixed Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Bluhm made a motion to deny Variance Request #00-17 by Steven Sween, with following staff findings. Mr. Staver seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0. FINDINGS: EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES: There does not appear to be exceptional circumstances or conditions that apply to the applicant's property that may not apply generally to other properties in the same zoning district. The applicant could construct an addition to the nort side of the existing home that would not expand on the existing encroachment along the west property line under a Type I Design Modification of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. Under a Type I Design Modification, the zoning administrator. Applicant (Certified Copy) 1s DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS — VARIANCE Filed in the office of the City Clerk this _day of 2000. DENIAL DO NOT RECORD Y Page 3 w City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals Hearing Date: August 2, 2000 Type Ill, Phase I. Variance Request #00-17 by Steven Sween to allow for the construction of an addition to the existing single family dwelling that will not meet the setback requirements. Also the applicant is Proposing to relocate the Residential) Zoning District. Mr. Klement presented the staff report dated July 27, 2000. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Ellis opened the public hearing. The applicant, Steven Sween of 1805 2nd Avenue SE, addressed the Board. He stated that with the limited space where the garage is located, he would like to move the garage 10 feet to the north to make room for the addition. Mr. Ellis asked if the chimney was a typical bump out or gas. Mr. Sween replied that it was a bump out and that his brother-in-law had put it in place so that he could use it in the future. Mr. Sween also stated that he contacted the neighbor behind him and she had no concerns with the garage being close to her. Mr. Ellis asked if he would redo the driveway. Mr. Sween replied yes. Mr. Ellis asked if that would affect the curb cut. Mr. Klement stated that any change in the curb cut would need approval from City Public Works. With no one else wishing to be heard, Mr. Ellis closed the public hearing. Discussion ensued towards the findings. Mr. Staver asked staff if they suggest that the structure could be constructed in such e manner that it would conform and was that the idea under exceptional circumstances. Mr. Klement explained that there could be a design modification and that they could add on to something if it is non -conforming as long as they do not encroach further into or expand on that non -conformity. Mr. Klement gave an example to the Board. He explained that if part of a house was within 15 feet of the rear lot line and there was a void there, the section could be filled in Page 4 City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals Hearing Date: August 2, 2000 and that new section could be 15 feet from the property line under the design modification. Mr. Bluhm asked if the line on the second street side would be all right. Mr. Klement replied yes. Mr. Bluhm asked if the west side was the only problem. Mr. Klement replied yes. Mr. Ellis asked why a variance is needed on the garage, if the line has been maintained. Mr. Klement explained the garage is being re -located to a different area and treated as a new structure. He also stated that it would be the most appropriate thing to do, since the variance is being requested for the other setback. Mr. Ellis asked if there was anything that the Board needed to act on regarding Mike Nigburs comment on the pedestrian facilities agreement. Mr. Klement replied no but that a sidewalk could be put in at sometime. Mr. Klement stated that the reason for the design was that the applicant had gotten a loan for everything that was approved and that he was not aware it would be considered the rear yard. There was also an issue that the parcel of the applicant and the parcel of the property owner to the west were zoned commercial, the applicant and the other property owner had them rezoned back to residential. Mr. Ellis asked if there were any comments on exceptional circumstances. Mr. Bluhm asked if to make it conforming would he have to keep the west line the same as the existing structure. Mr. Klement replied that it would be allowed under the Type I Design Modification. Mr. Staver asked, if the structure were 22' x 28' it, would it be okay. Mr. Bluhm replied that it would have to be 20' x 22'. Mr. Klement stated that it would have to be at 22 feet and it could not expand anymore to the west. Mr. Ellis asked the Board if there were any questions or comments on the staff findings for exceptional circumstances. 1,07 1 X Page 5 V City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals Hearing Date: August 2, 2000 Mr. Ellis commented on the garage being the same distance as he is proposing to go to in the rear yard. He asked if that would be considered an exceptional circumstance. Mr. Klement explained that the garage could encroach into the rear yard. Mr. Bluhm asked if the garage on the site plan was conforming. Mr. Klement replied yes, except for the setback, which needs to be 20 feet. Mr. Ellis stated that, if the applicant moved the garage, he should make it conforming. Mr. Klement replied yes, and move it back 2 feet. Mr. Staver asked if that would be 10 feet to the north and 2 feet to the west. Mr. Klement replied yes. Mr. Staver asked how the change would affect the plans of the applicant. Mr. Sween stated that it would add more of a cost. Mr. Ellis stated that the Board is having a hard time coming up with a reason to grant the variance. Mr. Bluhm stated that he would agree with the staff findings. r. Page 6 City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals Hearing Date: August 2, 2000 applicant could construct an addition on the north side of the existing home that would not expand to the existing nonconformity. ABSENCE OF DETRIMENT: The granting of this variance request does not appear to be materially detriment to the public welfare. However, the granting of this variance request may be detrimental to the adjacent property owner to the west and would be detrimental to the intent and purpose of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. MINIMUM VARIANCE: The minimum variances that would be necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship would be a variance to the required minimum rear yard setback and a variance to the minimum required setback for a garage with doors on a wall facing.a street. This finding would not pertain in the case of denials ovr ; TO: Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Randy Klement, Planner �. DATE: July 27, 2000 RE: Variance (Type III, Phase 1), #00-17 Planning Department Review: APPLICANT: LOCATION OF PROPERTY: ZONING: REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS ANALYSIS: Steven Sween 1805 SE 2"a Avenue Rochester, MN 55904 CH FST . of .. ...t,L{,'F r 2:. x GR't TEO.AUGUST" P ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-a232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELLISEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 East 50 feet of Lot 4, Block 17, Golden Hill Addition R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential Zoning District) Attached The applicant is proposing to construct a 22' x 32' addition to the west side of the existing22' x 28' single family -detached dwelling.on the property.._The -applicant is also - - proposing to relocate the existing 24' x 28' detached garage ten (10') feet to the north. According to Section 62.222 - R-I Site Appearance Standards for a single family detached dwelling of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual: the minimum required front yard is twenty-five (25') feet; the minimum required side yard least width is six (6') feet; the minimum required sum of side yards is sixteen (16') feet; and the minimum required rear yard is twenty-five (25') feet. According to Section 63.112(2), Special Yard and Setback Requirements — Side Street Side Yard of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual: "The side street side yard shall have a depth equal to % of the required front yard in the applicable zoning district". iwYlwwwr ram... AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER According to Section 63.110(1) — Application of Yard and Setback Requirements of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual: "On a corner lot, one frontage shall be designated as the front lot line and all other frontages shall be designated as a side street lot line". According to Section 62.274(2) — Location of Accessory Buildings on Comer Lots of the City of Rochester Zonin¢ Ordinance and Land Development Manual: Garages with doors providing access for vehicles or recreational vehicles on a wall facing a street shall be setback a minimum of 20 feet from the lot line separating the lot from the street right-of- way. The applicant's property is a comer lot that is bordered by 18`h Street SE on the north side and 2° Avenue SE on the east side. The north side of the property is the most conforming and designated as the front yard and the east side of the lot along 2nd Avenue SE is designated as the side street side yard. Both the front and side street side yards meet the setback requirements of the zoning ordinance. The south side of the property is designated as the interior side yard and the west side of the property is designated as the rear yard. The five (5') foot setback on the south side does not meet the minimum side yard least width of six (6') feet and the fourteen (14') foot setback on the west side does not meet the required minimum rear yard setback of twenty-five (25') feet. The existing garage has doors facing 2nd Avenue SE and is setback eighteen (18') feet from the lot line and does not meet the required setback of twenty (20') feet. Both the existing house and garage are considered nonconforming structures which is defined in the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual as: "A structure which does not comply with the height, setback, density or floor area ratio requirements of the district in which it is located". The applicant's proposed addition will encroach to within two (2') feet of rear lot line on the west side of the property. Also, relocating the existing garage will result in the garage encroaching two (2') feet into the minimum required setback of twenty (20') feet for a garage with doors on a wall facing a street. The variance requested includes the following: 1) a variance of twenty-two (22') feet to the rear yard setback along the west lot line from the required twenty-five (251) feet to three (3') feet. 2) a variance of two (21) feet to the required setback for a garage with doors on a wall facing a street along the east lot line from the required twenty (20') feet to eighteen (18') feet. i The Planning staff suggested findings are: EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES: There does not appear to be exceptional circumstances or conditions that apply to the applicant's property that may not apply generally to other properties in the same zoning district. The applicant could construct an addition to the north side of the existing home that would not expand on the existing encroachment along the west property line under a Type I Design Modification of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. Under a Type I Design Modification, the zoning administrator may permit "the encroachment of an addition to an existing structure or building into a required yard when a portion of the existing structure already encroaches into that yard and the proposed addition or alteration will not exceed the existing encroachment". REASONABLE USE: The granting of this variance request would not appear to be necessary to allow for the reasonable use of the applicant's property. The applicant could construct an addition on the north side of the existing home that would not expand to the existing nonconformity. ABSENCE OF DETRIMENT: The granting of this variance request does not appear to be materially detrimental to the public welfare. However, the granting of this variance request may be detrimental to the adjacent property owner to the west and would be detrimental to the intent and purpose of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. MINIMUM VARIANCE: The minimum variances that would be necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship would be a variance to the required minimum rear yard setback and a variance to the minimum required setback for a garage with doors on a wall facing a street. This finding would not pertain in the case of denial. Attachments: 1. Copy of Application 2. Copy of Applicant's Existing and Proposed Site Plan 3. Copy of Site Location Map 4. Copy of Referral Agency Comments 5. Copy of Findings for a Variance Reviewed by it Ww 0 u v) � as��Q 0 k KQ 2 Z O 2 wp p w� r— emu, N u x w N a'� W z w z 0 J LI) Fm prr I-- Cor I I/ 3'S �33?11S HJ8 I, I Fz• I I I z I , 1&z Wr 00 rZ i Lni a 14 0 W 4— p ce Q Z �- Lo O ;t WZ� O Wl hwy 1u`ny �Ln Z 0 in LU ul W 7 Z LLt Q Z O J Ltf N w <T �s f.- 1 W J � L 1 (ARENA DR 5 16 ST SE Location Variance #00-17 Sween 1805 2 Ave SE E -- ROCHESiER OIMSTEO _ _. _.. _.__-.-_-•-- - -- PUNNING DEPARTMENT ROCHESTER Minnesota 7/26/00 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 a Variance #00-17 on Steven Sween (1805 2Id Ave SE) property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: The Owner shall execute a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement drafted by the City, to address the Owner's obligations related to future pedestrian facilities along the frontages of t18th Ave SE & 2"d St SE. CATEMPVAR00-17.doc According to Section 60.417 in the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual, in taking action on a variance request, the Board of Appeals shall make findings supporting the decision based on the following guidelines: 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. 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 w n1 M 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. 4) In granting a variance, the zoning administrator or the Board may impose such reasonable and appropriate conditions and safeguards as may be necessary to accomplish, to the extent possible under the circumstances, the purposes of the regulations or provisions which are to be varied or modified and to reduce or minimize potentially injurious effects of the variance upon adjoining properties, the character of the neighborhood, and the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. A variance and any conditions and safeguards which were made a part of the terms under which the variance was granted are binding upon the applicant and any subsequent purchaser, heir, or assign of the property, and any violation of variance or its conditions and safeguards shall be a violation of this ordinance and punishable as such. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9-6-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING 6, ,5 A DESCRIPTION: General Development Plan #155 The Grand Reserve at Cascade PREPARED BY: Lake, Mitzi A. Baker, August 24, 2000 NOTE: The Variance requested concurrent with the GDP was approved by the City Planning and Zoning Commission. The City Council will not take action on the Variance. City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this item on August 9, 2000 and recommends approval subject five conditions and modifications. Burke moved to approve GDP 155 with staff suggested findings and conditions and modifications, Brede seconded the motion, which carried 6-2 (Werven and Staver voting nay) 1. Pedestrian facilities are required along rd St. SW and 2P Ave. SW. 2. Parkland dedication for this development shall be met via a combination of land and cash in lieu of land as outlined in the July 20, 2000 memo from Rochester Park and Recreation. 3. This property shall be platted. Controlled access will need to be provided along 2nd St. SW and 2PAvenue SW. 4. The wet sedimentation ponds on the north and west sides of the development be reconfigured so that more of the pond area is located on the development property and less on the park property. The applicant will need to work with the City Public Works Department and Park Department on this Issue. 'he turning radius of all curbed corners will need to be verified that fire apparatus can be accommodated. 6. The private roadways must be posted "No Parking —Fire Lane" so that there will be the minimum 20 foot clear width for emergency vehicles. Council Action Needed: 1. If the Council wishes to proceed with the General Development, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution, with findings, for Council approval. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated May 3, 2000 r`1k 2. Minutes of August 9, 2000 CPZC Meeting ry Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Administrator 3. City Attorney 4. Planning Department File 5. Planning Department, GIS Division 6. McGhie & Betts, Inc. 7. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on WEDNESDAY September 6, 2000 in the Council ! Board -rhnmbers in the Government Center at 151 4th Street SF. INCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: FA ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission GISiADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELUSEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 5071287-2275 DATE: August 3, 2000 RE: General Development Plan #155 to be known as The Grand Reserve at Cascade Lake and Variance #00-16 Planning Department Review., Petitioner: Del American, Inc. 474 South Northlake Boulevard, Suite 120 Altomonte Springs, FI 32701 Property Owner: City of Rochester C/O City Administration 401 City Hall Rochester, MN 55904 Western Walls, Inc. 604 1 f Ave. NW, Suite 100 Rochester, MN 55901 Consultant: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Location of Property: The property is located along the north side of 2nd St. SW/Country Club Road and west of 23 d Ave. SW. Proposed Use: The General Development Plan includes approximately 44.16 acres of land and proposes a multi -family townhome style development with a small commercial component. The applicant is also requesting approval to amend the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan and Zoning Map. Those applications are being considered concurrent with this GDP. Land Use Plan: The Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan designates this property as suitable for "low density residential' types of development. The applicant has AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 U!� General Development Plan i August 3, 2000 also filed a petition to amend the Land Use Plan to designate this property for "medium density residential" uses. That application is being considered concurrent with this GDP. Zoning: The property is currently zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family). An application to re -zone this property to the R-3 District is being considered concurrent with this GDP. Streets: The GDP proposes to take access from 2'" St. SW and 23p1 Ave. SW. Roadways within the development are proposed to be private. Note: Any private or public roadways included when the area is platted will need confirmation of roadway designation through the Planning Department - GIS Division. Sidewalks: Pedestrian facilities will be required along 2n' St. SW and 23 ° Ave. SW and will also be constructed along the lake, in the future. Drainage: A storm sewer pipe system will be designed for the site that will collect surface storm drainage and direct this drainage into the wet sedimentation basins proposed in several locations on the site. Detention ponds will not be needed within the development. Detailed grading and drainage plans will also be required when the property is platted or developed. Wetlands: A Wetland delineation has been carried out for the property. No Wetlands exist, based on the on -site surveys conducted several years ago. Public Utilities: Services are, or will be, available to serve this property. Parkland Dedication: Parkland dedication requirements for this development will need to be satisfied through a combination of land dedication of 50' corridor along the lake (2.5 acres) and cash in lieu of land. The stormwater ponds on the west and north sides of the development need to be reconfigured such that more of the pond area is located on the development property and less on the park property. Environmental Review: In accordance with the Minnesota Rules, 4410.4300 subp.19, Item D, the proposed development of this property would require preparation of a Mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet since the total number of attached units exceeds 375. i Page 3 General Development Plan August 3, 2000 Referral Comments: Report Attachments: Summary: 1. Planning Dept, Transportation Division 2. Rochester Public Works 3. Rochester Park & Recreation 4. Olmsted County Public Works 5. RPU Water Division 6. Rochester Fire Department 7. Olmsted County SWCD 8. Planning Department - GIS Division 1. Copy of General Development Plan 2. Referral Comments (8) 3. Proposed General Development Plan Narrative This General Development Plan (GDP) proposes a multi -family townhome style development on approximately 44.16 acres of land located along the north side of 2nd St. SW, west of the Shorewood development and east of the Mayo surface parking facility. The proposed project will consist of 388 units (9.36 units/acre) if a portion of the site is used for a new fire station. If the new fire station is not used, approximately 414 units (9.98 units/acre)are proposed. Access to the property will be limited to one access to 2"d St. SW and one access to 23 d Ave. SW. A fire station is being considered for a portion of this property, in the southwest corner. If a fire station were constructed at this location, the station would have direct access to 2"d St. SW. This development proposes private interior roadways to serve the dwellings. The plan also proposes 2.69 acres being developed with residential commercial uses. This area is shown in the northwest corner of the intersection of 2"d St. SW and 23rd Avenue SW. This application also includes a request for a variance to modify the front yard setback for the dwelling units, as established from a private roadway. Please see the attached development report from McGhie & Betts, Inc. for more detail regarding the proposed development of this property. Criteria & Staff Suggested Findings: Paragraph 61.215 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual lists the Criteria for approval of a general development plan (see attached section from the newly adopted regulations, which became affective May 15, 1999). Criteria A. The proposed land uses are generally in accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and zoning map, or that the means for reconciling any differences have been addressed. A GDP may be processed simultaneously with a rezoning or plan amendment request. A Land Use Plan amendment and Zoning District amendment are being considered concurrent with this GDP. if the amendments are approved, the land uses within the GDP would be consistent with the land use designation and zoning for the property. i Page 4 General Development Plan August 3, 2000 Criteria B. The proposed development, including its lot sizes, density, access and circulation are compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use of adjacent property. If the Land Use Plan amendment and Zoning District amendment, being considered concurrent with this application, are approved, the density will be consistent with permissible uses of the property. A Variance request is also being considered concurrent with this application to permit the setbacks from the private roadways to be measured from the edge of pavement and not from an imaginary right-of-way line as required by the LDM. Criteria C. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing Plans. A Land Use Plan amendment and Zoning District amendment are being considered concurrent with this GDP. If the amendments are approve, the land uses and densities within the GDP would be consistent with the land use designation and zoning for the property. The policies and goals found in Chapters 2 and 3 of the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan encourage developing a range of densities and development styles. This development will help to further the goals and policies of the Land Use Plan and also those found within Chapter 3 of the Housing Plan. Criteria D. The proposed plan makes provisions for planned capital improvements and streets reflected in the City of Rochester's current 6-Year Capital Improvement Program, adopted Thoroughfare Plan, the ROCOG Long -Range Transportation Plan, Official Maps, and any other public facilities plans adopted by the City. Street system improvements required to accommodate proposed land uses and projected background traffic are compatible with the existing uses and uses shown in the adopted Land Use Plan for the subject and adjacent properties. A Development Agreement has been executed between the developer and City for the development of this property. The Development Agreement outlines requirements for installation of turn lanes from r' St. SW, contribution toward a future traffic signal on td St. SW and reservation of land for 23'd Ave. SW. This development makes accommodations for construction of a trunkmain sanitary sewer through the site. The City has hired an engineer to design relocation of the existing trunkmain that dissects the future Lake. Access to the site as proposed should provide adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. With the connection of this development to 231d Ave, and the future extension of 2P Ave as a collector street south of 2nd St into the Orchard Hills and Foxcroft area, we would expect a traffic signal to be warranted at some point in the future as development occurs and volumes on the intersecting legs of 2P Ave continue to grow. This location would be consistent with general guidelines on the signal spacing needed to maintain adequate traffic flow along the a St SW corridor, being approximately % mile west of the TH 52 Frontage Road, and Yz mile east of the next logical signal location to the west, which would be the entrance to the Wimbledon Hills area. Signals will typically not be Improved for Page 5 0 • ]V� General Development Plan August 3, 2000 installation until in can be demonstrated that warrants are met or will be met within a year of installation. Thus, while no signal is programmed for installation, we expect that development will create the conditions that warrant the installation of a signal in the future. To facilitate left and right turning traffic on and off of 2nd St in the future at unsignalized access locations, it is likely that conversion of 2"d St into a five lane section, with a center two-way left turn lane, similar to that found east of 23nd Avenue, will be needed at some time in the future. This is based in part on the expectation that the daily traffic on fd St will grow from a current level of approximately 8500 vehicles per day to approximately 15,000-16,000 vehicles per day over the next 20 years. The applicant should consult with the City and County Public Works Department to determine if any additional right of way to facilitate this conversion will be needed or whether it can be accomplished within the existing right of way of 2nd St SW. Criteria E. On and off -site public facilities are adequate, or will be adequate if the development is phased in, to serve the properties under consideration and will provide access to adjoining land in a manner that will allow development of those adjoining lands in accord with this ordinance. Street system adequacy shall be based on the street system's ability to safely accommodate trips from existing and planned land uses on the existing and proposed street system without creating safety hazards, generating auto stacking that blocks driveways or intersections, or disrupting traffic flow on any street, as identified in the traffic impact report, if required by Section 61.523(C). Capacity from improvements in the first 3 years of the 6-year CIP shall be included in the assessment of adequacy. Access to this property will be from 2"d St. SW and 23 °Ave. SW A Development Agreement has been executed between the developer and City for the development of this property. The Development Agreement outlines requirements far installation of turn lanes from rd St. SW, contribution toward a future traffic signal on 2"d St. SW and reservation of land for 23'd Ave. SW. The order of magnitude in terms of trip generation for the proposed Grand Reserve development is approximately 2800 vehicles per day. This value is arrived at by comparing the trip generation of a standard townhouse development (3200 trips per day for 400 units) which typically assumes a negligible percentage of transit or walking trips, with the trip generation of a low rise apartment (2600 trips per day for 400 units) which typically will assume a higher percentage of transit or walking trips along with a lower dwelling unit size. Given the proximity of this development to the St Mary's area and the presence of convenient transit service to downtown, we would expect the trip generation to trend towards the lower level typical of an apartment type complex. The overall trip generation of -2800 ADT compares with a projected level of 1550 ADT if the property was developed with single family dwellings at 3+ units per acre. Access to the site as proposed should provide adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. With the connection of this development to 23'd Page 6 lj/j General Development Plan UI/LrJ August 3, 2000 Ave, and the future extension of 23 d Ave as a collector street south of tad St into the Orchard Hills and Foxcroft area, we would expect a traffic signal to be warranted at some point in the future as development occurs and volumes on the intersecting legs of 23`d Ave continue to grow. This location would be consistent with general guidelines on the signal spacing needed to maintain adequate traffic flow along the tad St SW corridor, being approximately Yz mile west of the TH 52 Frontage Road, and Y2 mile east of the next logical signal location to the west, which would be the entrance to the Wimbledon Hills area. Signals will typically not be improved for installation until in can be demonstrated that warrants are met or will be met within a year of installation. Thus, while no signal is programmed for installation, we expect that development will create the conditions that warrant the installation of a signal in the future. To facilitate left and right turning traffic on and off of tad St in the future at unsignalized access locations, it is likely that conversion of tad St into a five lane section, with a center two-way left turn lane, similar to that found east of 2P Avenue, will be needed at some time in the future. This is based in part on the expectation that the daily traffic on tad St will grow from a current level of approximately 8600 vehicles per day to approximately 15,000-16,000 vehicles per day over the next 20 years. The applicant should consult with the City and County Public Works Department to determine if any additional right of way to facilitate this conversion will be needed or whether it can be accomplished within the existing right of way of tad St SW. 2. Utilities are now available to directly serve the area of the proposed land use, or that the City of Rochester is planning for the extension of utilities to serve the area of the proposed development and such utilities are in the first three years of the City's current 6-Year Capital Improvements Program, or that other arrangements (contractual, development agreement, performance bond, etc.) have been made to ensure that adequate utilities will be available concurrently with development. If needed utilities will not be available concurrent with the proposed development, the applicant for the development approval shall stipulate to a condition that no development will occur and no further development permit will be issued until concurrency has been evidenced. Services are, or will be available to serve this property. This development makes accommodations for construction of a trunkmain sanitary sewer through the site. The City has hired an engineer to design relocation of the existing trunkmain that dissects the future Lake. Watermain will need to be constructed through the development to connect to two segments of watermain with the first phase of development in order to obtain the fire flows necessary for this type of development. 3. The adequacy of other public facilities shall be based on the level of service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing plan for development. Pedestrian facilities will be required along fd St. SW and 2P Ave. SW. A trail system will also be constructed within the future City parkland along the future Lake. Pedestrian trail connections from within the development to the City trails are proposed on the GDP. r� Page 7 f l General Development Plan August 3, 2000 Criteria F. The drainage, erosion, and construction in the area can be handled through normal engineering and construction practices, or that, at the time of land subdivision, a more detailed investigation of these matters will be provided to solve unusual problems that have been identified. A storm sewer pipe system will be designed for the site that will collect surface storm drainage and direct this drainage into the wet sedimentation basins proposed in several locations on the site. Detention ponds will not be needed within the development. Detailed grading and drainage plans will also be required when the property is platted or developed. Criteria G. The lot, block, and street layout for all development and the lot density for residential development are consistent with the subdivision design standards contained in Section 64.100 and compatible with existing and planned development of adjacent parcels. This development proposes private roadways. A Variance petition is being considered concurrent with the GDP review to permit the setbacks from the private roadways to be modified. Detailed site plans (Site Development Plans) will need to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to development of the property. Access streets and roadways will need to be in accordance with the fire codes, RCO 31 and the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. The turning radius of all curbed corners will need to be verified that fire apparatus can be accommodated. Variance Request: Section 61.301 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual allows for the concurrent review of multiple applications. This GDP application also incorporates a request for a variance. The applicant is requesting a variance to Section 63.110 (5a) of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. This Section addresses establishing the front lot line on private roadways (see attached) and would require that the front lot line from the internal roadways within this development be established as follows: a) In the case of an access roadway, a line parallel to the edge of the roadway at a distance from the roadway equal to one foot for every five feet of roadway surface width. This additional setback is primarily intended to provide adequate space for snow storage and to increase space between buildings. Please see the attached Variance summary from McGhie & Betts, Inc. for the applicant's explanation for this request, which includes their suggested findings. The applicant is requesting a Variance to reduce the front yard setback from the standards of the private roadway by 4.8 feet. Criteria for Variance: Section 60.417 of the LDM states that in taking action on a variance required, the approval authority shall make findings supporting the decision based on specific guidelines, which are attached to this report. Page 6 0 General Development Plan August 3, 2000 Staff suggests the following findings to the criteria of Section 60,416: a) There are no extraordinary conditions or circumstances which are peculiar to the property which do not apply to other lands developed with private roadways; b) The variance would not be necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property; c) Granting the Variance probably would not be detrimental to the public welfare or materially injurious to other property. Snow storage would need to be addressed by the applicant, however; d) The variance request is not necessary to provide reasonable economic use of the property. Recommendation: Variance: Based on the above recommended findings, staff does not recommend approval of the Variance to Section 63.110 (5,a) reduce the front yard setback from the standards of the private roadway by 4.8 feet. If the Commission disagrees with staff recommendation, findings to the criteria of Section 60.416 will need to be made in support of approving the Variance request. GDP: Staff recommends the following conditions or modifications to assure compliance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual and applicable criteria: 1. Pedestrian facilities are required along 2"d St. SW and 23'd Ave. SW. Z Parkland dedication for this development shall be met via a combination of land and cash in lieu of land as outlined in the July 20, 2000 memo from Rochester Park and Recreation. 3. This property shall be platted. Controlled access will need to be provided along 2"d St. SW and 23 d Avenue SW. 4. The wet sedimentation ponds on the north and west sides of the development be reconfigured so that more of the pond area is located on the development property and less on the park properly. The applicant will need to work with the City Public Works Department and Park Department on this issue. S. The turning radius of all curbed corners will need to be verified that fire apparatus can be accommodated. 6. The private roadways must be posted "No Parking —Fire Lane" so that there will be the minimum 20 foot clear width for emergency vehicles. NOTE: Prior to development of this property, Site Development Plans will need to be submitted to the City and approved. This GDP review did not include detailed site plan review for compliance with all regulations applicable to permit issuance (i.e. lighting, recreation space, landscape areas, signage, etc). tot Page 9 General Development Plan August 3, 2000 Criteria for Approval of a General Development Plan In approving a General Development Plan, the Council shall make each of the following findings: A. The proposed land uses are generally in accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and zoning map, or that the means for reconciling any differences have been addressed. A GDP may be processed simultaneously with a rezoning or plan amendment request. B. The proposed development, including its lot sizes, density, access and circulation are compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use of adjacent property. C. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing Plans. D. The proposed plan makes provisions for planned capital improvements and streets reflected in the City of Rochester's current 6-Year Capital Improvement Program, adopted Thoroughfare Plan, the ROCOG Long -Range Transportation Plan, Official Maps, and any other public facilities plans adopted by the City. Street system improvements required to accommodate proposed land uses and projected background traffic are compatible with the existing uses and uses shown in the adopted Land Use Plan for the subject and adjacent properties. E. On and off -site public facilities are adequate, or will be adequate if the development is phased in, to serve the properties under consideration and will provide access to adjoining land in a manner that will allow development of those adjoining lands in accord with this ordinance. Street system adequacy shall be based on the street system's ability to safely accommodate trips from existing and planned land uses on the existing and proposed street system without creating safety hazards, generating auto stacking that blocks driveways or intersections, or disrupting traffic flow on any street, as identified in the traffic impact report, if required by Section 61.523(C). Capacity from improvements in the first 3 years of the 6-year GIP shall be included in the assessment of adequacy. 2. Utilities are now available to directly serve the area of the proposed land use, or that the City of Rochester is planning for the extension of utilities to serve the area of the proposed development and such utilities are in the first three years of the City's current 6-Year Capital Improvements Program, or that other arrangements (contractual, development agreement, performance bond, etc.) have been made to ensure that adequate utilities will be available concurrently with development. If needed utilities will not be available concurrent with the proposed development, the applicant for the development approval shall stipulate to a condition that no development will occur and no further development permit will be issued until concurrency has been evidenced. 3. The adequacy of other public facilities shall be based on the level of service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing plan for development. The drainage, erosion, and construction in the area can be handled through normal engineering and construction practices, or that, at the time of land subdivision, a more detailed investigation of these matters will be provided to solve unusual problems that have been identified. Page 10 • 0 General Development Plan August 3,2000 G. The lot, block, and street layout for all development and the lot density for residential development are consistent with the subdivision design standards contained in Section 64.100 and compatible with existing and planned development of adjacent parcels. 60.400 MODIFYING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS 60.410 VARIANCE: The opportunity to vary the literal provisions of the ordinance is provided for as required in Chapter 462.357 (sub. 6) of the Laws of Minnesota by the creation of the variance procedure. When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships unique to an individual property under consideration, and not mere inconvenience, would result from strict enforcement of the literal provisions of this ordinance, application may be made to vary or modify any regulation or provision of the ordinance, subject to the findings in paragraph 60.417, so that the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done. A variance is one remedy available where the zoning administrator has determined that no zoning certificate or development permit may be issued without varying or modifying the regulations or provisions of the ordinance. 60.411 Filing for a Variance: An application for a variance shall be submitted to the zoning administrator and shall include the appropriate application form completed in full, a legal description of the property, a site plan, a statement on the nature of the variance requested, and such other information as may be pertinent or required for appropriate action by the reviewing body. A fee, as established in Article 60.175, shall accompany the application submittal. 60.412 Procedure: Variance requests shall be considered under the Type III Review Procedure, with the Phase I Hearing Process used. The Board of Appeals shall be the hearing body. 60.413 Notice: Notice for a variance shall be sent to all owners of property who have land within 500 feet of, and to at least 50 property owners closest to, the parcel for which the proposed variance is being requested. 60.414 Decision: The Board of Appeals shall render a formal decision on an application within 21 days of the close of the public hearing on the application. The decision shall include findings of fact and conclusions based thereon, and shall include any conditions or terms to which issuance of the variance is subject. 60.415 Appeal: The procedure for appeal of a decision by the Board on a variance request shall be as set forth in Article 60.700. 60.416 Order: Within five (5) days following a decision by the Board the zoning administrator shall reduce the decision of the Board to written form, and a copy of the order shall be served upon the petitioner by first class mail. A copy of the order shall be flied with the County Recorder, and the cost of recording shall be paid by the applicant. The decision regarding a variance shall not become effective until the written order has been served upon the applicant. Approval of a variance request shall allow the zoning administrator to proceed with the processing of any permits or certificates required for development approval. 103 D(� Page 11 • • General Development Plan August 3, 2000 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. 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. 4) In granting a variance, the zoning administrator or the Board may impose such reasonable and appropriate conditions and safeguards as may be necessary to accomplish, to the extent possible under the circumstances, the purposes of the regulations or provisions which are to be varied or modified and to reduce or minimize potentially injurious effects of the variance upon adjoining properties, the character of the neighborhood, and the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. A variance and any conditions and safeguards which were made a part of the terms under which the variance was granted are binding upon the applicant and any subsequent purchaser, heir, or assign of the property, and any violation of a variance or its conditions and safeguards shall be a violation of this ordinance and punishable as such. Page 12 General Development Plan August 3, 2000 63.110 APPLICATION OF YARD AND SETBACK REQUIREMETNS 6) Establishing the Front Lot Line on Private Roadways: Where a development utilizes private roadways to provide access to individual buildings within the development, the front lot line shall be considered to be: a) In the case of an access roadway, a line parallel to the edge of the roadway at a distance from the roadway equal to one foot for every five feet of roadway surface width; b) In the case of a limited access roadway, a line established at the edge of the roadway surface; c) In the case of a common driveway, the lot line if one is established or the centerline of the driveway. In the case where a building is bounded on two or more sides by an access roadway or limited access roadway, one side shall be considered a front yard and the remaining side shall be considered a side street yard. TRANSPORTATION STA. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REVIEW DATABASE - 1998 AUGUST 2000 City GDP # 155 The order of magnitude in terms of trip generation for the proposed Grand Grand Reserve Reserve development is approximately 2800 vehicles per day. This value is arrived at by comparing the trip generation of a standard townhouse development (3200 trips per day for 400 units) which typically assumes a negligible percentage of transit or walking trips, with the trip generation of a low rise apartment (2600 trips per day for 400 units) which typically will assume a higher percentage of transit or walking trips along with a lower dwelling unit size. Given the proximity of this development to the St Mary's area and the presence of convenient transit service to downtown, we would expect the trip generation to trend towards the lower level typical of an apartment type complex. The overall trip generation of —2800 ADT compares with a projected level of 1550 ADT if the property was developed with single family dwellings at 3+ units per acre Access to the site as proposed should provide adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. With the connection of this development to 23r1 Ave, and the future extension of 23`d Ave as a collector street south of tad St into the Orchard Hills and Foxcroft area, we would expect a traffic signal to be warranted at some point in the future as development occurs and volumes on the intersecting legs of 23`d Ave continue to grow. This location would be consistent with general guidelines on the signal spacing needed to maintain adequate traffic flow along the tad St SW corridor, being approximately %: mile west of the TH 52 Frontage Road, and''/: mile east of the next logical signal location to the west, which would be the entrance to the Wimbledon Hills area. Signals will typically not be improved for installation until in can be demonstrated that warrants are met or will be met within a year of installation. Thus, while no signal is programmed for installation, we expect that development will create the conditions that warrant the installation of a signal in the future. To facilitate left and right turning traffic on and off of 2vd St in the future at unsignalized access locations, it is likely that conversion of tad St into a five lane section, with a center two-way left turn lane, similar to that found east of 23`d Avenue, will be needed at some time in the future. This is based in part on the expectation that the daily traffic on 2nd St will grow from a current level of approximately 8500 vehicles per day to approximately 15,000-16,000 vehicles per day over the next 20 years. The applicant should consult with the City and County Public Works Department to determine if any additional right of way to facilitate this conversion will be needed or whether it can be accomplished within the existing right of way of tad St SW. GDP # 156 Traffic accessing the proposed Boulder Ridge development will be distributed to Boulder Ridge Bandel Road, the future Overland Drive and 25d' Ave NW. ROCOG is c in the midst of a Thoroughfare Plan subarea study which is ev a impact e expanded urban growth area in Northwest on the existing and future , s stem serving this area n the preliminary results of this study, the prof es suggest Bandel Road may need to be develo arteria ndard in the future, and Overland Drive may to be developed as a mu d,ane or or low intensity arterial to handle projected traffic volumes. In order to facilitate safe ingress into the developmentrightturn lanes be PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 507/285-8231 August 3, 2000 Jennifer Garness Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 Dear Jennifer: The Public Works Department has reviewed General Development Plan #155 by Del American Inc. to be known as The Grand Reserve at Cascade Lake and Variance #00- 16 and has the following comments: • Access control shall be shown along CSAH 34 (2"d St SNq. • Right turn lane will be required at access opening. • 10 foot easement will be required for bike path along CSAH 34. Five lane facility will be needed in the future with center lane being a dual left turn lane. Sincerely, Michael Sheehan County Engineer MTS:ss t: \engi ndoclpl anzo n e. doc AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Building Maintenance Surveying and Mapping Engineering Highway Maintenance Parks & Agriculture Solid Waste Administration 0 0 A ROCHESTER Minnesota 7/26/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur 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 application for General Development Plan #155,on the The Grand Reserve (Del American. Inc.) property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. A Development Agreement has been executed for this property. Charges/fees applicable for the development of the property are addressed in the Development Agreement with the exception of the following: • Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division. CATEMP%GDP155.doc DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: ROCHESTER PARK AND ktCREATION MEMORANDUM July 20, 2000 Jennifer Garness Planning Denny Stotz The Grand Reserve at Cascade Lake GDP # 155 DEPARTMENT 16q Parkland dedication for the proposed 388-414 unit development is described accurately in the general development report. The dedication for the development will be 6.13 - 6.54 acres depending on the number of dwelling units. Dedication will be met via a combination of dedication of 50' corridor along the lake (2.6 acres) and the balance of the dedication in the form of cash. The fair market value for the land has been established at $35,000 per acre. The estimated cash dedication due is $123,550 - $137,900, The final determination of cash dedication is dependent an the exact number of dwelling units in the development . Payment of dedication is due prior to recordation of the final plat. The aTlicant, Del American, has agreed that the Park Department can continue to use the 2 Street SW soccer fields through November 2000. The applicant and City have staff have agreed to coordinate grading and landscape plans. The stormwater ponds on the west and north sides of the development should be reconfigured such that more of the pond area is located on the development property and less on the park property. <<d rpu we pledge, we deliver July 18, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: General Development Plan #155 by Del American to be known as The Grand Reserve at Cascade Lake, townhome style multi -family residential development with a residential -commercial component and Variance #00-16 for building setbacks from private roads. Dear Ms. Gamess: Our review of the referenced general development plan 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. The Main Level Water System is available for connection at the southeast corner of the site on the west side of 23`d Ave. SW and at the south west comer of the site on the south side of 2"d St. SW. RPU will reimburse the owner for the necessary 2"d St. water main crossing construction costs. 3. To obtain the fire flows necessary for this type of development the water system must be constructed through this development to connect into both these locations within the first phase of construction. 4. Individual water meters/services will be required for this type of development. 5. 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, 06-4rt p lkL Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention McGhie & Betts, Inc. Del American, Inc. Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 NMW � IUCAON ROCHESTER DAVID A. KAPLER, Chief Rochester Fire Department 201 4th Street SE, Room 10 Rochester, MN 55904-3726 (507) 285-8072 FAX #(507) 285-8256 DATE: July 27, 2000 TO: Jennifer Garness, Planning FROM: Lyle Felsch, Deputy Chief SUBJECT: General Development Plan #155, Del American Properties, The Grand Reserve located along the north side of 2nd Street SW, west of Shorewood development and 23 rd Avenue SW and east of the Mayo Parking lot. This project is within the 4 minute fire response standard of the Rochester Fire Department and is adding 414 residential dwelling units on 44.16 acres, to the city's fire protection area. With that regard the fire code 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. None were shown on this plan. The fire flow required for this development is 3500GPM at 20 PSI. This flow can be reduced by 50% if all buildings in this project are provided with automatic fire sprinklers. 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 • Emergency vehicle access roadways appear to be the minimum 20 foot clear width and must be posted "No Parking — Fire Lane" throughout the development. Also, there does not appear to be sufficient off-street parking for visitors. This will exacerbate maintenance of clear unobstructed 20 foot emergency vehicle access, especially during winter with snow accumulation at the curb. • Some of the drives accessing individual buildings do appear to be in excess of 150 feet, but will not require an emergency turn -around at the end of each drive. • The turning radius at the main entrance and on the two "round -about" intersections shown on the plan appear to be too tight and must be increased to accommodate fire apparatus, the islands removed entirely or reduced in size. • The turning radius of all curbed corners must be at least 28' and be able to accommodate a vehicle with 245 inch wheel base on a 20 foot wide surface. 3. All street, directional and fire lane signs must be in place prior to occupancy of any 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. Number size must be a minimum 4" p- high on contrasting background when located on the building and 3" high if located on a rural mail box at the public road fronting the property. Reflective numbers are recommended. This residential development appears very concentrated and from a fire safety perspective would benefit from the inclusion of residential fire sprinklers. Should the developer chose to install sprinklers through out the project, a reductions may be allowed in the number and location of hydrants as well as other benefits which may be allowed by the Building Code. The close proximity of a possible future fire station location will favorably impact this project, however sufficient access for emergency vehicles is necessary. C: Del American, Inc. 474 South Northlake Blvd, suite 1020, Altamonte Springs, FI. 32701 McGhie & Betts Inc. 1648, 3r° Ave. SE, Rochester, Mn. 55904 Donn Richardson, RPU Water Division David Kapler, Chief / Rochester Minnesota Land Surveying Urban - Land Planning Consulting - Civil Engineering Geotechnical Engineering Construction Material Testing Landscape Architecture r� U 1648 Third Avenue S.E. W�Qchester, MN 55904 Tel. 507.289.3919 Fax. 507.289.7333 113 VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE GRAND RESERVE AT CASCADE LAKE IN PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33 CASCADE TOWNSHIP ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA SUPPLEMENT TO THE APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE Request Del American Inc., (applicant) is proposing an attached residential development on a portion of the Southeast Quarter of Section 33, Cascade Township. This project is a multi -family residential project of 388 to 414 units utilizing an internal private roadway system. In order to provide an orderly and effective site design, a variance is needed to reduce the front yard setback from standards of the private roadway by 4.8 feet. (1) The variance would be to Section 63.110 (5,a) of the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual, which governs setbacks to private access and driveways. In response to the criteria for granting a variance, as listed in Section 60.417 of the Land Development Manual and Zoning Ordinance, we offer the following findings: (1a)The extraordinary conditions that are unique to this site are: (1) The property is surrounded by Cascade Lake on the west and north, 2nd Street SW on the south, and 23 d Avenue SW on the east thus compressing the site to reduce the buildable area. The site also will contain several wet sedimentation basins, a fire station site, and will be surrounded by public parkland back. This site is unique from this stand point and is basically an infill project that in order to effectively design the site for attached housing using private roadways, the setback to the units will need to be measured 25 feet from the back of the curb instead of an imaginary line at 4.8 feet, (lb) The variance is necessary to permit reasonable use of the property for a compact attached residential development that better utilizes the site to a density more consistent with the density of an R-3 zone. (lc) The granting of this variance will not be materially detrimental to the public. The proposed use is consistent with the criteria of the Zoning Ordinance and land use. The reduced setback is internal and does not affect the setbacks or bufferyards along the perimeter of the property. The density will not be unusual if the variance is approved. e-mail. mcghiebetts.com Established 1946 (ld) The variance is the minimum request necessary to provide reasonable economic use of the site. The variance will not increase the density but will allow a more effective site design with greater open space area. Page 11 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 property and compatible with adjacent properties 2b) Proposed R-3: Uses within the R-3 district would be appropriate on the subject property and would be compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood. The amendment to R-3 would be consistent with the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, if the Land Use Plan Amendment being considered concurrently Is approved, and would not be considered spot zoning. Proposed B-5: Rezoning Z69 acres to the B-5 would he 4pproprfatt on the subject property and would be compatible with adjacent properties at►d tha rteigllborhq+e41 The amendment would be consistent with the Rochester Urban Service Anea.land: Use Plan, with or without a land use plan amendment, and would not be cpnslde{e spot zoning. Ms. Mitzi Baker presented the staff report, dated August 3, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. She indicated that the Commission would need to make separate motions on the general development plan and variance. Ms. Baker explained that the roadways would be privately owned and maintained. Ms. Baker explained that some of the land included in the general development plan has been used for soccer fields, land that Western Walls Corporation has owned, land that the City of Rochester has owned, and some land that the City of Rochester would like to maintain for access to the future lake and for trailways along the lake front. Ms. Baker explained that Rochester Public Works and City Administration has worked very closely with the developer to come up with an agreement on how the land could be developed. Ms. Baker stated that most uses within the B-5 zoning district require a conditional use permit that would be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Ms. Baker explained that the applicant is asking to have a reduction in the front yard setback from the standard that applies to a private roadway. She explained that the setbacks are established by drawing in an imaginary right-of-way line by taking the width of the roadway and, Page 12 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 for every 5 feet of pavement, 1 foot on each side is added to establish where it would be. She indicated that the imaginary right-of-way line is where the setbacks are drawn from. The applicant is asking for a variance so that they do not have to establish the imaginary right-of- way line. Ms. Baker stated that the roadways would exceed the minimum 20 foot width. The roadways will be 24 feet in width. Ms. Baker stated that staffs findings do not support approval of the variance. She explained that they found it difficult to show that the development is uniquely different than other townhome style developments that have private roadways. Ms. Baker stated that the extra space is for snow storage and also to provide separation between buildings for additional light, space, and air movement. Mr. Stover stated that the Fire Department indicated that they were concerned that there doesn't appear to be adequate off-street parking. Ms. Baker responded that staff took a preliminary look at the parking for the area. They found that they are within the range required by the ordinance. She explained that the applicant will need to go through a more detailed site development review, in which they will have to submit very detailed plans that include the dimension setbacks and parking calculations. Mr. Werven stated that the development would create a need for a traffic signal on 2"e Street in the future. He questioned why the signal wouldn't be placed there immediately. Mr. Nigbur responded that there are certain criteria that need to be made before a signal could be placed in a location. He explained that it is a joint decision made by the City and County. Mr. Werven asked if the Mayo parking lot is included in the count. Mr. Nigbur responded that he believed they were. Discussion ensued regarding what prompts a signal to be placed in a certain location. Mr. Quinn stated that there would be an added lane for right turns into the development. He asked if one is proposed for exiting going west out of the development. Mr. Nigbur responded that, as they go west out of the development, they would merge into the current traffic. He indicated that the Transportation Planner has shown that there are adequate gaps for additional traffic to merge in. Mr. Quinn asked if they could move the access further down 23'd Avenue. Mr. Nigbur responded that they established a minimum space between the intersection and the first roadway into the development (185 feet). The developer could have decided to push it back further north. However, it is not required. Ms. Schultze asked how staff determines what the appropriate percentage of pond area should be located on the development property and on the park property. Page 13 0 • + City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date. August 9, 2000 jj 111 Ms. Baker responded that Condition Number 4, listed in the staff report, addresses her question. She explained that the applicant needs to adjust the ponds so that more of it is on the private property. Mr. Nigbur stated that Rochester Public Works, Park and Recreation, and Administration are working together very closely on the layout. He indicated that they would determine what the percentage would be. Ms. Schultze asked what kind of criteria is being made with regard to storm water retention and what is on private property and public property. Mr. Nigbur responded that the City has agreed to take more of the shore on the westerly side of the property. The City does not plan on taking as much on the north side. He explained that it is a negotiation between the City and the developer as far as the overall needs. However, Rochester Public Works is requiring the developer to provide water quality before it gets to Cascade Lake. Mr. Burke stated that the developer is dedicating a 50 foot strip to parkland. He indicated that there is an additional 100 foot strip that the developer is not getting credit for parkland dedication. Mr. Nigbur responded that the 50 foot dedication is being used as the park dedication requirement. The remaining 100 feet that is being provided is dealing with the land swap of the soccer fields for the additional 100 foot area and fire station site. The developer will still have a cash burden above and beyond the 2.6 acres. Mr. Ralph Sanjurjo, representative of Del American, Inc., addressed the Commission. He explained that Del American is a multi -family developer who primarily has projects in Florida. However, they recently had a project in the City of Woodbury. He explained that that project is very similar to what they are currently proposing. Mr. Tointon, of McGhie and Betts, addressed the Commission. His presentation notes are on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. He indicated that they are in agreement with the staff -suggested conditions. Mr. Tointon stated that he drew up findings in support of the variance request, which is on page 100 of the staff report. He encouraged the Commission to approve the variance with those findings. Ms. Petersson asked if sprinkler systems would be placed in the buildings. Mr. Tointon responded that they are required by Code to have sprinkler systems in most of the units, due to the size of the unit. He is unsure if the developer will put in sprinkler systems in the units that are not required by Code. Mr. Sanjurjo stated that they did not need to put fire sprinklers in the units in Woodbury. However, if they are required in this development, they would comply. Mr. Sanjurjo handed out brochures of what the development looked like in the City of Woodbury Page 14 l City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 Mr. Sanjurjo referred to a letter from Stewart Management, who they contract with to provide snow management. Mr. Sanjurjo explained that the extra footage gained by the variance would help with capacity for snow removal and to create a separation between the buildings. He showed pictures of a similar street plan. Ms. Petersson asked if there would be parking on the street. Ms. Baker responded that the street would be signed "no parking fire lane. Mr. Burke asked if there is adequate parking in front of each of the garage stalls. Mr. Sanjurjo responded that the one -bedroom units have a one -car garage and the two bedroom units have a two -car garage. Due to tandem parking spaces, each unit has approximately 3.5 spaces per unit. Ms. Petersson asked where cars would park for garage sales. Ms. Baker responded that, when staff looks at the overall parking requirements, they look at the general need for most days in the year. She explained that it is difficult to plan for other events, as they do not want to overbuild the roadways and parking stalls. Mr. Sanjurjo stated that, the intent of the ordinance is to primarily provide snow storage in the additional space between the road and building, the majority of the plan is tandem parking spaces in that area. Ms. Schultze stated that many of the buildings are grouped around interior courtyards. She questioned if the courtyards are the public spaces being used. Mr. Sanjurjo stated that they are used like backyards. There will be playground equipment, clubhouse facility, walkways, and offices for on site management. Ms. Schultze asked if they are stating that it is a hardship not to be able to get the maximum use of the courtyard. Mr. Sanjurjo responded yes. Mr. Burke asked if curb and gutter is being proposed. He also asked if snow would be pushed over the curb. Mr. Sanjurjo responded that curb and gutter is planned. After snow builds up on the curb, it would be stockpiled in the side end locations. Mr. Bob DeWitz, President of Western Walls, addressed the Commission. He indicated that they have been working on the property since February 2000. He indicated that the condemnation of the lakeshore has been in the courts since June of 1997. Mr. DeWitz stated that, if the variance is not approved, it will create a hardship because the backyards will be shorter. He indicated that houses used to be setback 25 feet. Currently, the setback with a garage is 20 feet from the sidewalk. ri Page 15 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 Ms. Schultze asked what setback the developer used in the City of Woodbury. Ms. Sanjurjo responded 20 feet from the curb. He indicated that they did not need to request a variance. Mr. Werven asked if sidewalks would be placed in the development. Mr. Sanjurjo responded no. He explained that they are using the village concept and have not found a need for sidewalks in the past. Mr. Nigbur stated that there would be sidewalks at the entrance and around the boundaries of the development, so there is no need for sidewalks inside the development. Mr. Werven asked who would enforce no parking on the street. Mr. Nigbur responded that the City could ticket the vehicle. Mr. Sanjuro stated that management would warn people and tow vehicles. With no one else wishing to be heard, Ms. Petersson closed the public hearing. Ms. Schultze stated that it is hard to consider whether or not the proposed layout is better than another, as they do not have a layout showing it as a 24 foot setback. Mr. Staver stated that he agreed with Ms. Schultze. He indicated that the hardship would be driven by the design of the plan. He indicated that it could be mitigated by a revised plan. Mr. Burke stated that the applicant could meet the standards and build a 20 foot roadway. He questioned if that would be worse for pedestrians and traffic. Ms. Schultze questioned why, in negotiations, there was not more discussion regarding getting more pathways and sidewalks. Mr. Nigbur responded that they looked at the development with regard to pedestrian facilities. He indicated that their perspectives would not have changed in the negotiation process. Mr. Burke moved to approve Variance Request #0016, based.on theta site indicated by the appllcarit as *011 as addressing specific p>jro IeMs t' ptN Brede seconded the motion., Mr. Werven stated that the plan could be revised to meet the standards by having fewer units. He indicated that the plan looked cluttered and unsafe due to the number of units. Therefore, there is not a strong argument for a hardship. Mr. Brede stated that he supports the variance. He explained that there is a benefit of having additional space in back of the building. He indicated that he does not see snow removal as an issue. Ms. Schultze asked what the findings would be for the variance. Pag City 16 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 Mr. Burke stated that the motion was with McGhie & Betts proposed findings on page 100 of the staff report. Ms. Schultze stated that she would vote for the variance, but not based on the findings prepared by McGhie and Betts. She stated that, if they allow a variance saying that compression of a site means a variance should be approved, it suggests that any time a site is bound by other things, they could do a variance that allows them to do different kinds of densities and setbacks. Mr. Burke stated that he would like to approve the variance based upon the fact that the applicant could meet all of the necessary requirements by going to the minimum road width. By extending a wider road width, the applicant has made a more attractive and non conforming situation. Ms. Schultze stated that the extraordinary circumstance could be that "Based upon the layout of the property, they are setting up their own extraordinary conditions. If there is support of the courtyard concept, it is its own extraordinary circumstance. The setback requirement could be changed to support a better courtyard space. The motion carried 6 2 with Mr. Werven and Mr, 5taverrotln' ra 111 Mr. Burke moved to approve General Development Plan #155 to pe krlovlri0,as ii�i IIl� R - Reserve at Cascade Lake, with staff -suggested findingS;and conc�f#,�+� seconded the motion, FINDING" As t f i u ;.+ ✓ q.- y T .. .:. � 'iav _� v✓y��i'���° � fray '��' M : .ni"'f �F " �M'�x�@ a y, Criteria A ' A Land Ilse f Ian amendsifi, tsnt andiohiitg -'rnnatele�nd'wnthwii��nn4'siii*6.ikir Y2r�b.�li fixn �mnn�ine•. %n �N ��ti5" * MTMe Criteria C. A Lanai Use considered land ul£ a u� $,Q, y.. -.. _ r-..Fr .t y.a.. ,Ths pojic, Serviice`Ar* deveiopmei policies of+ Page 17 City Planning and Zoning Conunission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 U1 Housing Plan. Criteria D. A Development Agreement has been executed between the developer and City for the development of this property. The Development Agreement outlines requirements for installation of turn lanes from 2nd St. SW, contribution toward a future traffic signal on 26d St. SW and reservation of land for 23'd Ave. SW. This development makes accommodations for construction of at trunkmain sanitary sewer through the site. The City has hired:an engineer to design, relocation of the exisbn9 trunkmain that dissects the future. Leil7. Access to the site as proposed should provide adequate capagity tq'"serve -. the proposed development With the cgnnection of this devefopfnent#o 23rd`. Ave, and the future extension of 28 Ave as a collector streQ south"f;Z""! St into the Orchard Hills and FoxcrOft Brea, wre would elipeca traitip signal to 6e warranted at some pointIn the suture as deveipQrnerit;cecuts rid volumes on the Intercepting legs of'° Ave cgntini #q.gri,'fiiis tocatipil', warrant the installation of a signal In40 1future, a To f clUtate left and ri m: to ping i<r p grl �d aff of e i f unsl naiized access 1645 tEoarts >is ikelty fhs 94�1 iht� �� 4. ,: five lane action, wit" a center tWa 1,M iefit'turrt ar�� i� y t i , east of 23 Avenue will be need@d et st�ilf}^yt, contribution torirard a future traffic signal on'2 Str SYil Oi 'A atervation of land foi'2"� Ave; Slfij} r,' 0�2ng ge18 • • /Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes riDate: August 9, 2000 The order of magnitude in terms of trip generation for the proposed Grand Reserve development is approximately 2800 vehicles per day. This value Is arrived at by comparing the trip generation of a standard townhouse ` development (3200 trips per day for 400 units) which typically assumes a negligible percentage of transit or walking trips, with the trip`generation of a low rise apartment (2600 trips per day for 400 units) which typically will assume a higher percentage of transit, or walking trips along with a lower, dwelling unit size. Given the proximity of this development to the St Mary's area and the presence of convenient transit service to downtown, we`in ould expect the trip generation to trend towards the lower tevei ttiprcat o� an apartment type. complex: The overall trip $eneratlon of -2ti00 ADT ,,.'= 5 compares with a projected level of 1550 ADT if the propertywa$ tleveioped ' with single family dwelflngs at 3+:unite pelr.�acre r`' a;' Access to the site as proposed should provide adQyuate capacity tp aerwe the proposed development With the connelFtion of this davetgretttlgw,23"' Ave, and the future extension of 23r4 Ave a§ a colleotorstreet aogtll fd "a ;. St Into the Orchard frills and Foxcroft area, we would exact. fraffic;signal to be warranted at some point in the future. 'as 4eve7oorrierttcura acid volumes on the intersecting legs of 26 rive contiltlie�o ro1�t f 1 jacation would be consistent with general guloolin+ee n the al a e l�trl oe ec), to mainE`aln ode eats irafflc sow eion the 2 Si SXAi c Clo approximately' mile weft of Xhe 7rJ ;> Fro n a figa ari a mRli the next logical sl nal location to the west- wapld >?!1� na 1 a �. < t.p t a the Winiblejgp tO 1. #e0 Si>lnais wiU t)rpl atiy g t �� , . installation uriLl let cad j e de% nstratgd tha met within a year of Installation. Thus, while o slgnrjt ` pt installation, we a xpect that oovepme lont w7 crea ; hero g warrant the irtstaliatipn To facnItate left eito right iurnjp traffiSPOAn of unslpliaiized aecess ilooa�tonfi,,is lik�l tha�cb�rvarsl�inaQ ; ,x�h�� �� , flue 3an8 $ectTo with`centaV'r Iprte ' east of 23� �1vgne, vie `p� 1�eRdq� a snmi,ii P.:.: wxY 1�t d �p y Ya bj hvs x from a current level �o a _ roximatel Q H. approximately,t��Qililrllt(i vehlCies pel' #lat+e�lel��111�'�Q,yea�r�$The �; applicant shout�l conspttw)th the Crity and Coy�#y � "°�f r�"��,`:�$ A�� Departmontib deterrri PO ff any addtttopai rH 0 litate thin convert] /nverswill bg needed or whether tit cart bb accoiniisheil withtin they B}.isting.nght `.. x.s , w7?R `��4s. K' bµal' f1wt;zw Ix ,� +b. rvfces are, or Mile 1i)ate to sense th pFo T cte3elo�r>aep� S` xt 5 s8vr 1 e7 e v ^y+ - Li r i �. u makes accpmrr Qdallons`fot rtsrti{Jujct ogi c)f a n rlltary, sower, AYH 11 Y t fgd lhrou h the sit@ ;tl �i has h ? VVV/ n' Iv 1<i�i� o tton �f existing #runkmell tp�ssers tie fur ��g l� fit t��gji t r. ✓, a .: �w 4 AY T' Waiermain wIU neecftq hp constriopme,](tr'R of to two segments Vyatermatn with the first p` rase o(douelOpmept to obtain the fire, fio s necessa' f W. Page 19 • • �/f 2 I'll City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes h J Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 3. Pedestrian facilities will be required along 2"d St. SW and 23`d Ave. Sw. A trail system will also be constructed within the future City parkland along the future Lake. Pedestrian trail connections from within the development to the City trails are proposed on the GDP. Criteria F. A storm sewer pipe system will be designed for the site tha will collectf.;`: surface storm drainage and direct this drainage into the wet sefllmentation basins proposed in several locations on the site. Retention ponds 'ill' nat be needed within the development~ r rt L. Detailed grading and drainage plans will also be required men tJ# 7 > property is platted or deyelopetM. ;,' n ,� Criteria G. This de velopmentproposes private roadways A Variance petitl�it s tA�ping cons, dared a4gai!rrgg0 �►i h thei GOP review to permits the sett3 s t r t ' `A 1. Pedestrian 2. Parklaiidd 3. This St. 4. The 5. The tuirnir can # l3'ac 6. The nrlval need to be verified that'fi ill be platted CorltrQlled AC¢ess.:a Ms. Schultze stated that there is an easterly access to get to 23rd Avenue based on lining up with the Sherwood Road. She strongly supports that there be another easterly access further north on the property. Page 20 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 Mr. Nigbur explained that 23rd Avenue stops to the north of the development. Therefore, to provide another access further to the north would require construction of the roadway. He indicated that there is no intent to make a through roadway. Ms. Schultze retracted her suggestion. Mr. Staver expressed concerns regarding the design. The concerns included snow removal, emergency vehicle turnaround, and lack of sidewalks. The design appears to be too cluttered and dense. Ms. Schultze stated she approves of this type of development on 2"d Street due to the general approach of more distributed smaller scale with green and parking around it. The motion carried 6-2, with Mr. Werven and Mr. Staver voting nay. The Commission took a break. Ms. Petersson stated that the Commission needs to revisit the motion and findings for Variance Request #00- 16. Ms. Baker explained that a motion needs to be made from the Commission to reconsider the findings for Variance #00-16. Ms. Schultze then stated that one of the findings needed to be modified to address the courtyard issue. In a discussion with Ms. Schultze, it was decided that the modification modifies each of the other findings by McGhie and Betts. Therefore, the Commission needs to restate each finding. Ms. Schultze moved to reconsider Variance Request #00-16, seconded by Mr. Quinn. The motion carried 8-0. Ms. Schultze stated that she was under the impression that she was replacing the extraordinary conditions that had been written by McGhie and Betts with the statement that their approach to the design itself was an extraordinary circumstance. Mr. Burke replied that he agreed with Ms. Schultze. Ms. Schultze suggested the following findings: Exceptional Circumstances: The applicant's approach to the design itself is an extraordinary circumstance. Reasonable Use: The variance is necessary to permit reasonable use of the property, based on the design layout/courtyard approach. Absence of Detriment: The variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare because snow removal is provided. Minimum Variance: The minimum request necessary to provide reasonable economical use of the property, based on the layout. Mr. Burke moved to approve Variance Request #00-16 with Ms. Schultze's suggested-7 i Page 21 City Planning and Zoning Comm ssion Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 findings, seconded by Mr. FINDINGS: Exceptional Circumstances: The applicant's approach to the design itself is an extraordinary circumstance. Reasonable Use: The variance is necessary to permit reasonable use of the property, based on the design layout/courtyard approach: Absence of Detriment: The variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare because snow removal is provided. Minimum Variance: The minimum request necessary to provitle reasonable e>rOnQrli�s%;»seaf the property, based on the layout. Mr. Staver stated that he does not agree with Ms. Schultze's reasonable use finding. The applicant could meet the setbacks through a different design. The motion carried&2, with Mr. Stavier and Mr. Werven voting nay. Mr. Brent Svenby presented thelipff reports, dated A�st 4, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the RochestNImsted a�g Department. Mr. Svenby indicated that the followshould be added to the general development plan conditions. "8. A public pedestrian co ection from the ptklic roadway to Outlot C in Bendel North First Subdivision may required at the time the operty is developed." Mr. Svenby indicated th a talked with the consultant and tha a is in agreement with the added condition. Ms. Schultze;tated that the plan did not delineate the townhome area inN tail. She questioned if it was th eneral practice. Mr. Xenby stated that the townhome would eventually need to go through a perfo ance r dential application process. He explained that they would then look at the setbac s, which is based on the building design. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 7' MEETING 1t DATE: 9-6-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING E 4 0 DESCRIPTION: Land Use Plan Amendment #00-07 by Del American Inc. The PREPARED BY: applicant is requesting to amend the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan to Mitzi A. Baker, amend the land use designation for approximately 44.16 acres of land from the "low Senior Planner density residential" designation to the "medium density residential" designation. The property is located along the north side of 2nd St. SW/Country Club Road, west of the Shorewood development and 23`d Ave. and east of the Mao parking lot. August 24, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 9, 2000. Burke moved to recommend approval of Land Use Plan Amendment #00-07 by Del American, Inc., with staff suggested findings. McGowan seconded the motion. The motion carried 8-0. Council Action Needed., 9. The Council shall hold a public hearing. The Council may approve or deny this petition. The Council's decision must be supported by findings based on the criteria listed in the Land Use Plan (as included in the staff report). f the Council wishes to proceed with the land use plan amendment as petitioned, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated August 3, 2000 2. Minutes of August 9, 2000 CPZC Meetings Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Administrator 3. City Attorney: Legal Description attached 4. Planning Department File 5. McGhie & Betts, Inc. 6. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m, on WEDNESDAY September 6, 2000 in the Council I Board Chamber at the Rochester - Olmsted Government Center Building JCIL ACTION: __._.� By: Seconded By: Action: Minutes of the Neighborhood Informational Meeting for The Grand Reserve at Cascade Lake at 2nd Street S.W. and 23rd Avenue S.W. on July 31, 2000, 7:00 P.M. at Shorewood Senior Housing Complex In Attendance: See attached attendance list. Purpose: The purpose of the meeting was to introduce the proposed multifamily and commercial project to the neighborhood attendees and to answer questions and document concerns or issues that may need further investigation or response. General Discussion: Mr. Tointon of McGhie & Betts, Inc., made a brief presentation on the proposed project and the development process that the project must follow to obtain approval. Mr. Tointon described the project as 388 to 414 multifamily units and a small commercial area in the southeast corner of the site. Alternatively a fire station may be located in the southwest corner of the site on approximately 1.75 acres. This will reduce the number of potential units to 388. Vehicular access to 2nd Street S.W., additional traffic improvements, such as, right turn lane, sharing in the cost of a traffic signal at 23rd Avenue S.W., and dedication of land for additional right of way for extension of 23rd Avenue S.W. were also discussed. Pedestrian access through and around the site to the parkland area was noted as shown on the General Development Plan. It was also noted that the developer has applied for a zone change from R-1 to the R-3 for the multifamily and to a B-5 (low intensity commercial) for the commercial area. It was stated that there are no specific plans for development of the commercial area at this time. Mr, Tointon further explained that the project is proposed as two phases with Phase One starting in May of 2001. After approval of the zone changes, land use plan amendments, general development plan, and variance request for front -yard setback, a site plan will need to be completed and submitted to city staff review. This plan will provide more specific information, such as, setback criteria, landscaping, site capacity calculations, lighting, signage, and bufferyard information in a more detailed manner. It was noted that the first public hearing on the project will be August 9, 2000, before the City Planning and Zoning Commission. This meeting will be held at the Government Center and the Council meeting would probably be the September 6, 2000. Questions(Comments by Attendees: Question 1. How far to the north will 23rd Avenue S.W. be extended? Response 1. At this time the City has not determined how far north the road will be extended. This will probably not be known until the park plan is completed. Question 2. Will there be on -site management of the facility? Reponse 2. Yes there will be on -site management. (3r Question 3. What are the plans for B-5 commercial area? Response 3. At this time there are no definite plans for the commercial area. It is scheduled to be constructed in phase two. The B-5 zone allows for offices, personal services, medical facilities, personal care etc. Question 4. When is decision on Fire Station location to be made? Response 4. Although we are not certain it should be within the next 60 days. (Marcoux commented that it would be soon as the budgeting process starts in August) Question 5. The area south of 2nd Street S.W. on 23rd Avenue S.W. has a surface drainage problem. During heavy rains the street and ditch area overflows into rear yard and lawns. Will there be any reconstruction to correct this problem? Response 5. At this time the Del Amercian project will not be working south of 2nd Street (Ms. Marcoux responded that the city is aware of the problem and will be addressing the drainage issues through a future reconstruction project). Question 6. Where will the access to the commercial property be located? Response 6. The access to the commercial area will be to 23rd Avenue. There will not be any direct access to 2nd Street S. W. Question 7. How many acres are in the parkland area along the project? Response 7. There are approximately 16 acres. (PLEASE NOTE THAT IT IS APPROXIMATELY 8 ACRES.) Question B. What do the exterior of the units look like? Response 8. We do not have the complete plans from the architect as yet but should have them before the Planning Commission meeting. Question 9. What are the speed limits on 2nd Street S.W.? Response 9. I believe at this time there are three signed speed limits. They are 30, 35, and 45 mph. Question 10. Are you concerned about water pressure on the site? Response 10. Rochester Public Utilities is requiring the developer to connect to the inplace watermain at the southeast and southwest comers of the site and connect the two mains. With this connection inplace they have determined water supply to be 2600 gallons per minute with adequate pressure for domestic use. There were several comments about traffic movement to and from the site. It was again noted that there will be a signal at 23rd Avenue S.W. The developer will contribute to the cost of the signal as well as construction of a right turn lane on 2nd Street at the main entrance to the site. Pedestrian access along 2nd Street was questioned. At this time there will be a biketrail along the north side and a sidewalk on the southerly side of 2nd Street. Plans are not available from the County Engineer for the proposed improvements on 2ntl Street SW. ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission GIs/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING FROM: Mitzi 507/285-8224i A. Baker, Senior Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELL/SEPTIC 507/285-8345 DATE: August 3, 2000 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Land Use Plan Amendment #00-07 by Del American Inc. The applicant is requesting to amend the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan to amend the land use designation for approximately 44.16 acres of land from the "low density residential' designation to the "medium density residential' designation. The property is located along the north side of 2nd St. SW/Country Club Road, west of the Shorewood development and 23rd Ave. and east of the Mayo parking lot. Planning Department Review: Petitioner: Del American, Inc. 474 South Northlake Boulevard, Suite 120 Altomonte Springs, FI 32701 Property Owner: City of Rochester C/O City Administration 401 City Hall Rochester, MN 55904 Western Walls, Inc. 604 1111 Ave. NW, Suite 100 Rochester, MN 55901 Consultant: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Location of Property: The property is located along the north side of 2^d St. SW/Country Club Road and west of 23 d Ave. SW. Requested Action: The applicant requests to amend the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan to designate 44.16 acres of land for "medium density" uses. The property is currently designated for "low density residential" uses. A zoning district amendment and General Development Plan area being considered concurrent with this application. �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 • • 2 LUPA 00-07 j August 3, 2000 Existing Land Use: The eastern portion of this property has been the location of soccer fields and a parking lot. A majority of the property is undeveloped land that has been filled and included in a mining operation. Proposed Land Use: The applicant has filed a Zoning District Amendment and General Development Plan for this property. These petitions are being considered concurrent with this request. The applicant is proposing a multi- family, townhome style, development with a small neighborhood commercial component. Adjacent Land Use and Property to the west is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Zoning: Family) district and is the location of the Mayo surface parking facility. Property to the north is zoned R-1 and is the location of on -going mining and the future Cascade Lake. Property to the south, across 2nd St., is zoned PUD and B-4 (General Commerical) and includes the indoor tennis club. Property to the east is zoned B-4 (General Commerical) and R-3 (Medium Density Residential) and includes the Shorewood retail and senior housing development. Transportation Access: Access to this property will be from 2nd St. SW, also known as County Road 34 and Country Club Road. The property will also have access to 23r° Ave. SW. Access to the site will provide adequate capacity to serve this development. It is expected a traffic signal may be warranted in the future, at the intersection of 23rd Avenue SW and 2nd Street SW, as development occurs. This location is consistent with general guidelines on signal spacing needed to maintain adequate traffic flow along the 2nd Street SW corridor. A Development Agreement has been executed between the developer and City for the development of this property. The Development Agreement outlines requirements for installation of turn lanes from 2nd Street SW, contribution toward a future traffic signal on 201 Street SW and reservation of land for 23`d Avenue SW. Wetlands: A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and is on file with the Planning Department No wetlands exist after on -site surveys conducted several years ago. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was held on July 31, 2000, 7:00 p.m. at the Shorewood Senior Housing Complex. A summary of the minutes is attached. /J [� Page 3 • • L✓+Y1 LUPA 00-07 August 3, 2000 Referral Comments: Report Attachments: Analysis: 1. Planning Department - Transportation 2. Planning Department - John Hanford 3. Rochester Public Utilities - Water Division 1. Location Map 2. Land Use Plan Map 3. Referral Comments (3) 4. Neighborhood Meeting Summary The Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan identifies location criteria for "medium density residential" types of uses as follows: a) Having level to fairly rolling terrain, outside flood prone or poorly drained areas, or areas with steep slopes. b) In close proximity to commercial areas, employment centers, recreation areas, or other facilities that serve smaller households. c) Having good access by means of collector, arterial, and expressway streets and transit systems to employment center, commercial areas, and community facilities. d) Buffered from the adverse influences of commercial, industrial, and other incompatible activities. Staff Suggested Findings: a) The property has fairly level terrain. A conditional use permit was approved in the mid 1990's to allow for this site to be elevated through the placement of fill. b) This site is in close proximity to existing commercial areas, employment centers, and recreation areas. c) This property will have access to rd St. SW, which is designated as an existing arterial road on the Thoroughfare Plan. Access will also be available from 23r° Ave. SW. This site will have good vehicular and pedestrian access. d) Other uses and activities existing and planned adjacent to this property include the indoor tennis club to the south, 23r°Ave. and the Shorewood retail and senior housing to the east, existing excavation operations and future park and lake to the north, and an existing parking facility and future park area to the west. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above suggested findings, staff recommends approval to amend the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan to designate 44.16 acres of land for "medium density residential" types of uses, as petitioned by the applicant. i Page 8 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 to serve the property. The applicant will be responsible for the construction and maintenance of the private lift station, as well , the abandonment and removal of the lift station when connectio a public gravity trunk main sewer is available. 3. T e is a storm water detention pond shown on th outhern portion of the p erty. According to the ,Development Agr ment the applicant wi1L voiunta participate In the Cities Regional _ rm Water Manaaernent Plan Criteria F. Public Works will need t10 , ' w railing a property in more:(istap hertg Start to be sized t9 se ti isoria t , Criteria G. The lotr block a , sl�naiitar apppart0 `i use and the posedot►ing forlh[s pre: . af1Y ay WI{1ir15 1MIN Me IIRIlC119 E9'.lY IEBB{.. r -r 9, The a conditions pia f 16o the approval of the 1357 Ave. and east of the Mayo parking lot. Ms. Mitzi Baker presented the staff reports, dated August 3, 2000, to the Commission. The staff reports are on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. She indicated to the Commission that three separate motions would need to be made with regard to the zone change, land use plan amendment, and general development plan. Ms. Baker stated that the general development plan includes a potential fire station site. They City may acquire the property. Page 9 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 Mr. Quinn asked where the ingress and egress to 2nd Street line up with the cross street. Mr. Nigbur responded that it would be the west tennis club entrance. Mr. Quinn asked when the City would decide whether or not to locate the fire station on the property. Mr. Nigbur responded that they have 18 months to make a decision, based on the Development Agreement. Mr. Nigbur stated that the fire station on 2nd Street would be relocated. Mr. Quinn stated that 2"d Street would become a 5 lane road beyond 23 d Avenue. He asked when the construction would begin. Mr. Nigbur responded that, since it is a county road, he is unsure when it will occur. He indicated that it would probably occur prior to the MnDOT highway corridor project. Mr. Tointon, of McGhie and Betts, addressed the Commission. His presentation notes are on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Ms. Schultze asked for a copy of the attendance list for the neighborhood meeting. Mr. Tointon handed her the attendance list. He indicated that there were 8 people in attendance. Mr. Quinn stated that a bike trail on the north side of the road is being proposed. He stated that there was discussion regarding a bike trail on the south side of 2nd Street. He questioned if that would still be provided. Mr. Nigbur responded that they are different projects. They received a DNR grant for the south side of 2"d Street. A future signal is proposed for 23`d Avenue crossing. Ms. Schultze asked if the lake edge is rectilinear or curvilinear. Mr. Nigbur responded that the lake edge is currently approved in a mining application. The lake edge will stay there, until the City decides to modify it according to the park plans. As part of the overall Cascade Lake development, the DNR will require them to do some wetlands, mitigation and shoreland modifications. At that time, they will modify the lake edge to be more curvilinear. Mr. Werven asked if the Mayo parking lot would be located there indefinitely. Mr. Nigbur responded no. He indicated that it is placed there by a conditional use permit. Mayo has indicated to the City that they plan on using it for approximately 10 to 15 years. Mr. Neumann stated that the City has a letter from Mayo indicating that, if and when they decide to move out of there, they would be the party they would contact. He indicated that the City has contacted them to let them know that they would like to acquire the property to make the continued link around the lake. With no one else wishing to be heard, Ms. Petersson closed the public hearing. Page 10 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 Mr. Burke moved to approve Land Use Plan Amendment #00-07 by Del American, Inc. with staff -suggested findings. Ms. McGowan seconded the motion. The motion carried S-0. FINDINGS: 13� a) The property has fairly level terrain. A conditional use permit was approved in the mid 1990's to allow for this site to be elevated through the placement of OIL b) This site is in close proximity to existing commercial areas,, employment centers, and recreation areas. c) This property will have access to 2' St. SW, which la designated as ah exisfir arterial road on the Thoroughfare Plan. Access Will also ba available from 2 Aria: SW, This site will have good Yehacu#ar apd pedestrian access' d) Other users and activities existing and planned adgacaat to thleftropa[tIyj . clude Indoor tennis club to the south, 23"i`Me. and the fiprewood retag and ow�lt�et . housing to the east, existing excavation operations and future park and tape tts the north, and an existing parking faclilty and futurq park area to the, iIIIF.Burlcem4lledtodlprovehn' Istric#Amiapd90 nl�eptii0-7Q#y e s oeiyltlr, ' w staff sueted.f,din�s: Nisclsowan seeonde the motion e ` ti +�arti d FINDINGS6 r ^` r= { ,y `y 1. 1'rouosel R 3a l'irg Rochester UrDap Sert+/ce free L'alydl?"ai ajjgn*i� properry as apprg ate fair "low 8dnslt r *Wegtfal�'',t ,s Plan amen;1men( .Is Ibeetng Ij *< 7I{ tYse Pin amend--ven f 0 119Y►+ &W ifla arj�' " PR ��r#iil. 1 9 Y Tom( S Y RrF d 1 4. Rezpnl #�%� W4t► t1a�` RQ 2 and 3 of the Ropheeter ikban Ser,r%e Area end 11a�k1f s developing a range of di h4rdevelopttrgf►If s i Wan-. furthe��4als anii po7rares t'ound �v/tri� Cpspt� � otf�ie f�fou�lpg ��; _, • .� rpm" ;+. Pro osed 8 S Re=zollipg 2 h9 a Qf this' pfoRy thg=i T Commeria cacsten>:aturre f aPaf S a • x w x es• i e �ornn# 4rg8s K�d fXf dyke. ,;��',x' �' 1' iti A?}/* •:5. i.'� ,?i. �,y s.j.91a' yF'i! ��/f, 2a) Proaosed R.3r l/ses within the 14.Eorling district wolr►p� by apgW tfla Property and compatible with adjacent prcjgeirtlea Pro osed B-5 uses within the &S,, Yoni'n ' District would be a ro _ ate.orJ t)io Page 11 City Planning and Zoning Comrmssion Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 property an properties 2b) Proposed R-3: Uses within the R-3 district would be appropriate on the subject property and would be compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood. The amendment to R-3 would be consistent with the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, if the Land Use Plan Amendment being considered concurrently is approved, and would not be considered spot zoning. Proposed B-5t Rezoning 2.69 acres to the B-5 would be appropriate on the subject property and would be compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood. The amendment would be consistent with the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, with or without a land use plan amendment, and would not be considered spot zoning. Ms. Mitzi Baker presented the stthQ report, report is on file at the Rochester-O sted Commission would need to make se rat< variance. ' Ms. Baker explained that the lgust 3, 2000, to the Commission. The staff Department. She indicated that the on the general development plan and privately owned and maintained. Ms. Baker explained that some of the land inclucrOo in the general development plan has been used for soccer fields, land th�tWestern Walls Co ration has owned, land that the City of Rochester has owned, and some land that the City o ochester would like to maintain for access to the future lake and for trailways along the lakfront. Ms. Baker explained t. t Rochester Public Works and Citty ministration has worked very closely with the deve open to come up with an agreement on w the land could be developed. Ms. Baker statod"that most uses within the B-5 zoning district req�e a conditional use permit that would bereviewed by the Planning Commission. \ Ms. Bakef,-6xplained that the applicant is asking to have a reduction in thq front yard setback from th >standard that applies to a private roadway. She explained that OV setbacks are establlAhed by drawing in an imaginary right-of-way line by taking the width X the roadway and, PAF REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING q / DATE: 9-6-00 �� AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNG IN M DESCRIPTION: Zoning District Amendment # 00.10 by Del American Inc. The PREPARED BY: applicant is also requesting to re -zone the property from the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) Mitzi A. Baker, district to the R-3 (Medium Density Residential) district on approximately 41.47 acres and Senior Planner to amend approximately 2.69 acres from the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) district to the B-5 (Residential Commercial) district. The property is located along the north side of 2nd St. SW/Country Club Road, west of the Shorewood development and 23rd Ave. and east of the Mayo parking lot. August 24, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 9, 2000, to consider this petition. Motion by Burke, seconded by McGowan to recommend approval of Zoning District Amendment #00-10, with the finding suggested by Staff. Motion carried 8-0. Planning Staff Recommendation: See attached staff report dated August 3, 2000. Council Action Needed: Council should direct the City Attorney to prepare findings of fact reflecting the Councils decision on this zone change. If the Council approves this 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 to amend the Zoning for the property. Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Administrator 3. City Attorney: Legal Description attached 4. Planning Department File 5. McGhie & Betts, Inc. 6. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on WEDNESDAY September 6, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. ^^"NCIL ACTION: Dn By: Seconded By: Action: asvCl'oiieini�'ra • . Qo�i��•�o`�r�1 ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 wELUSEPTIC 507/285-8345 DATE: August 3, 2000 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Zoning District Amendment # 00-10 by Del American Inc. The applicant is also requesting to re -zone the property from the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) district to the R-3 (Medium Density Residential) district on approximately 41.47 acres and to amend approximately 2.69 acres from the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) district to the B-5 (Residential Commercial) district. The property is located along the north side of 2nd St. SW/Country Club Road, west of the Shorewood development and 23'd Ave. and east of the Mayo parking lot. Piannina Department Review. Petitioner: Del American, Inc. 474 South Northlake Boulevard, Suite 120 Altomonte Springs, FI 32701 Property Owner: City of Rochester C/O City Administration 401 City Hall Rochester, MN 55904 Western Walls, Inc. 604 11"Ave. NW, Suite 100 Rochester, MN 55901 Consultant: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Location of Property: The property is located along the north side of 26d St. SW/Country Club Road and west of 23rd Ave. SW. Requested Action: The applicant requests 41.47 acres be rezoned from R-1 (Mixed Single Family) to the R-3 (Medium Density Residential) district and 2.69 acres be rezoned from R-1 to B-5 (Residential Commercial). Existing Land Use: The property is currently undeveloped. �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITYIAFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 August 3, 2000 Proposed Land Use: The applicant has also filed a Land Use Plan amendment and a General Development Plan that are being considered concurrent with this application. Adjacent Land Use and Property to the west is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Zoning: Family) district and is the location of the Mayo surface parking facility. Property to the north is zoned R-1 and is the location of on -going mining and the future Cascade Lake. Property to the south, across 2nd St., is zoned PUD and B-4 (General Commercial) and includes the indoor tennis club. Property to the east is zoned B-4 (General Commercial) and R-3 (Medium Density Residential) and includes the Shorewood retail and senior housing development. Transportation Access: Access to this property will be from 2n4 St. SW, also known as County Road 34 and Country Club Road. The property will also have access to 23rtl Ave. SW. Access to the site will provide adequate capacity to serve this development. It is expected a traffic signal may be warranted in the future, at the intersection of 231 Avenue SW and 2nd Street SW, as development occurs. This location is consistent with general guidelines on signal spacing needed to maintain adequate traffic flow along the 2nd Street SW corridor. A Development Agreement has been executed between the developer and City for the development of this property. The Development Agreement outlines requirements for installation of turn lanes from 2nd St. SW, contribution toward a future traffic signal on 2nd St. SW and reservation of land for 23`d Ave. SW. Wetlands: A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and is on file with the Planning Department. No wetlands exist after on -site surveys conducted several years ago. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was held on July 31, 2000, 7:00 p.m. at the Shorewood Senior Housing Complex. A summary of the minutes is attached. Referral Comments: 1. Planning Department — Transportation 2. Planning Department - John Harford 3. Olmsted County SWCD Report Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Area Zoning Map 3. Referral Comments 4. Neighborhood Meeting Summary lqs �l Page 3 • • �11 August3,2000 Analysis for Zoning District Amendment: 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. Proposed R-3: The Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan designates this property as appropriate for `low density residential' types of uses. A Land Use Plan amendment is being considered concurrent with this application. If the Land Use Plan amendment from `low density residential' to "medium density residential" is approved, rezoning 41.47 acres of land to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) would be consistent with the "medium density residential' land use designation. Rezoning this property would help further the policies and goals found in Chapters 2 and 3 of the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, which encourage developing a range of densities and development styles.. This will also help to further goals and policies found within Chapter 3 of the Housing Plan. Proposed B-5: Re -zoning Z69 acres of this property to the B-5 (Residential Commercial) is consistent with the current and proposed land use designation for this property. In addition, re -zoning a portion of this property for Residential Commercial uses provides for a mix of land uses that can result in reducing the need for travel, thus reducing energy costs. 2) The criteria of this subdivision also apply to those amendments to the zoning map riled by formal petition. However, an amendment must satisfy a0 of the following criteria: 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 Proposed R-3: Uses within the R-3 Zoning District would be appropriate on the property and compatible with adjacent properties. Proposed B-5. Uses within the B-5 Zoning District would be appropriate on the property and compatible with adjacent properties 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). f Page 4 August 3, 2000 Proposed R-3: Uses within the R-3 district would be appropriate on the subject property and would be compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood. The amendment to R-3 would be consistent with the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, If the Land Use Plan Amendment being considered concurrently is approved, and would not be considered spot zoning. Proposed S-5: Rezoning Z69 acres to the B-5 would be appropriate on the subject property and would be compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood. The amendment would be consistent with the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, with or without a land use plan amendment, and would not be considered spot zoning. Staff Recommendation: Based on the findings above, staff recommends approval to rezone 41.47 from R-1 (Mixed Single Family) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) and to rezone 2.69 acres from R-1 (Mixed Single Family) to B-5 (Residential Commercial). REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 7 DATE 9-6-00 AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS TING DEPT: ITEM NO. PLANNING e _ 6 ii DESCRIPTION: General Development Plan #156 by Arcon Development Inc. to be Known as Boulder Ridge and Zoning District Amendment #00-11. The applicant is proposing to develop approximately 115 acres into a single family residential development consisting of both single family detached homes and townhomes. The development also proposes public and private roadways and public open space. The�aroperty is located along the east side of Bandel Road NW, north of the Bandel Hills 3` and 71h Subdivisions, August 25, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: On August 9, 2000 the City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this General Development Plan. tEPARED BY: Brent Svenby, Planner A� Andy Masterpole, McGhie & Betts, Inc., addressed the Commission. He stated they would like the second bullet under condition number 1 changed. Otherwise, they were in agreement with the conditions suggested by staff. The Commission reviewed this proposal according to the criteria listed in Paragraph 61.215 of the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. Ms. Schultze made a motion to approve General Development Plan #156, to be known as Boulder Ridge, with staff - suggested conditions and findings as amended above. Ms. McGowan seconded the motion. The motion carried 8- 0. Conditions: The GDP be revised to: • Identify the pedestrian corridors as outlets. These outlots will need to be dedicated to the City at the time of platting. Sidewalks within these outlots shall be installed by the developer and also graded and sodded. • The right-of-way to Bandel Road should be consistent with what was required with the Bandel North Subdivision. • Show the right-of-way for the road segment connecting to 24'h Ave. NW as 56 feet. • Have 24'h Avenue extended as the through street, with the access to the City property east of this development being via a private drive or a street that intersects perpendicular with 24'h Ave. NW. • Re -label the area currently shown for `public open space/park" sites in the NE portion of the development. These areas shall be labeled as "private open space". The revised GDP shall be filed with the Planning Department. 2. Storm water management must be provided for this development. Any on -site stormwater facilities serving 50 developable acres or less will remain private and execution of long term maintenance and ownership agreement will be required. 3. When platted, controlled access must be provided along the entire length of Bandel Road NW, with the exception of the approved roadway access location. Controlled access is also required within 150 feet from the intersection with Bandel road NW. In addition, 60 feet of right of way shall be dedicated for Bandel Road and a total of 120 feet for Overland Drive NW. 4. A right turn lane will be required at the time of development at the entrance from Bandel Road NW. A contribution to the construction of right turn lanes on Overland Drive when it is constructed at the access to the north and south sections of the development will be required as part of the development agreement. cued on page 2 COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: I Page 2 RCA August 25, 2000 A 5. Prior to the submittal of a final plat on the property, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agree with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to; storm water management; substandard street reconstruction charges & Traffic Improvement District (T1D) charges; pedestrian facilities; contributions for public infrastructure, including contribution obligations toward traffic improvements in the area attributable to the development and long term maintenance and ownership of the landscape island shown on the GDP within the cul-de-sac. 6. A Wetland Delineation report must be submitted to the City and the necessary permits obtained prior to platting. 7. Parkland dedication requirements for this development be in the form of cash in lieu of land. 8. A public pedestrian connection from the public roadway to be required at the time the property is developed. Planning Staff Recommendation: See attached staff report dated August 4, 2000, Council Action Needed: Outlot C in Bendel North First Subdivision may 1. The Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the general development plan. The Council must make findings based on the criteria listed in Paragraph 61.215. 2. If the Council wishes to proceed with the general development plan as proposed, it should instruct the ^ Attorney to prepare a resolution for Council approval. Attachments., 1. Staff Report dated August 4, 2000 2. Minutes of the August 9, 2000 CPZC Meeting Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Attorney 3. Planning Department File 4. Planning Department GIS Division 5. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 6, 2000 in the Council/Board Chambers in the Government Center at 151 4th Street SE. 6. McGhie & Betts, Inc. Aft Am y�i�i+eD��imA� fii::rr����uoh� _�fcacr:M AInt oo-mi%! ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission MAPPINGEBBING/ HOUSING/HRA FROM: Brent Svenby, Planner BUILDING CODE WELUSEPTIC DATE: August 4, 2000 FAX RE: General Development Plan #156 to be known as Boulder Ridge Planning Department Review: Applicant: Arcon Development Inc. 7625 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 Consultants: McGhie & Betts, Inc 1648 Third Avenue SE Rochester, MN 55904 Size and Location: The area includes approximately 110 acres of land located along the east side of Bendel Road NW, north the Bendel Hills 3rd and 7" Subdivisions. The site is essentially two separate areas. The southern area consists of 70 acres with the northern area consisting of 40 acres. Existing Land Use: The site is presently undeveloped and is presently in row crop production. There is also a farmstead located on the site along Bendel Road NW. Proposed Use: The Plan proposes a townhome development in the western portion of the 70 acre parcel and in the southern portion of the 40 acres parcel. Single family detached development over the remainder of the property. Land Use Plan: This property is within the boundaries of the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan. The Land Use Designation for this property is "Low Density residential". Zoning: The annexation has been approved by the City, but has not been approved by the State. Upon approval of the annexation, the property will be zoned R-1 507/285-8232 507/285-8224 5071285-8213 5071285-8345 507/287-2275 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER /^ Page 2 General Development Plan August 4,2000 (Mixed Single Family). An application to portions of this property to the R-2 District is being considered concurrent with this GDP. Streets: The plan proposes access to Bendel Road, 25'h Avenue NW, 24'h Avenue NW, and the future Overland Drive. The development will also have access to the north, to Bendel North First, and the east, connecting with the property own by the City. The plan also allows for a connection to the property to the east in the NE corner. Both public and private roads are proposed within the development. The private roadways serve the proposed townhome development. Sidewalks: Sidewalk/trails will be required along both sides of all public roadways and along the east side of Bendel Road NW. Pedestrian facilities will also be required along both frontages of Overall Drive NW. Two 30' wide mid -block pedestrian corridors are shown on the plan. Drainage: The General Development Plan identifies existing topography. The southern 70 acres consist of rolling topography with a series of gently slopes. Elevations on this portion range from a high of 1140' 1 the north central part to 1064' in the northeast part of the site. Elevations on the northern most 40 acres range from1156' on the north to 1060' on the south. Detailed grading and drainage plans will be required when the property is platted or developed. Wetlands: Minnesota Statutes now require that all developments be reviewed for the presence of wetlands or hydric soils. According the GDP narrative, one wetland has been identifies and delineated in the SW comer of the property. A wetland delineation report will need to filed with the City and necessary permits obtained. Public Utilities: Sanitary sewer and water lines will need to be extended from their present ends to accommodate this development. Currently water service is limited to the site. Eventually the entire property is scheduled to be serviceable from the Northwest High Level Water System, which will be available at the northwest corner, and at the northern roadway connection with the completion of the planned improvements in the area. Specific routing of sanitary sewer lines will be reviewed further during the platting stages. Parkland Dedication: The Park and Recreation Department recommends i Page 3 3 General Development Plan l/ August 4, 2000 that the parkland dedication requirements for this development be in the form of cash in lieu of land. The plan indicates two public open space/park site in the NE corner of the development. The Park Department recommends that these parcels remain private and that the plan text be changed to "private open space". Environmental Review: An EAW has been completed for this property and the City adopted a resolution approving the EAW with a negative declaration. The resolution was adopted on July 17, 2000, Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Public Works 2. Planning Dept. Transportation Division 3. John Harford, Planning Dept. & Wetlands LGU 4. Olmsted County SWCD 5. RPU Water Division 6. Park and Recreation Department 7. Fire Department 8. RPU Operations Division 9. Planning Department Addressing Division 10. Qwest 11. Mn/DOT Report Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Reduced Copy of General Development Plan Maps 3. Referral Comments (7) 4. Proposed General Development Plan Narrative Summary: This GDP includes approximately 110 acres of land to be developed with low density residential development consisting of single family detached homes and townhomes. The applicant has filed a petition to rezone the portions of the property proposed of townhomes. Both private and public roadways are proposed for the development. The private roads are proposed to serve the townhome areas, while public roads are proposed to serve the detached single family portion of the development. The plan does show the proposed alignment of the future Overland Drive NW. This roadway may need to be developed as a multilane collector or low intensity arterial to handle projected traffic volumes. According the GDP narrative, one wetland has been identifies and delineated in the SW corner of the property. A wetland delineation report will need to filed with the City and necessary permits obtained. Staff Suggested Findings and Recommendation: Paragraph 61.215 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual lists the criteria for approval of a general development plan (see attached section from the newly adopted regulations, which became affective May 15, 1999). Criteria A. The proposed land uses are generally in accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and zoning map, or that the means for reconciling any differences have iqPage 4 ��' General Development Plan August 4, 2000 been addressed. A GDP may be processed simultaneously with a rezoning or plan amendment request. This GDP proposes a low density residential development, which is consistent with the land use designation for the property. The proposed R- 2 (Low Density Residential) zoning for the townhome development portion of the development is also consistent with the land use designation for the property. Criteria B. The proposed development, including its lot sizes, density, access and circulation are compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use of adjacent property. The density of the proposed development is consistent with a low density residential land use designation and the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts. At the time of platting, lot boundaries will need to be reviewed further for compliance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual, IT appears as though some lots may not meet the minimum width at the building tine (60' wide at the 25'setback line). The proposed vehicular systems provide for the connection to adjacent properties and allows for future connections to undeveloped property. A 10' trail will be required along the west side of Bendel Road NW. Pedestrian corridors are also identified on the plan. Criteria C. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing Plans The development density Is consistent with a low density residential land use designation of the Land Use Plan. The GDP promotes the development of mixed densities and housing styles. Additionally, the GDP is consistent with the Housing Plan and the standards for the physical and social environmental of residential neighborhoods. Criteria D. The proposed plan makes provisions for planned capital improvements and streets reflected in the City of Rochester's current 6-Year Capital Improvement Program, adopted Thoroughfare Plan, the ROCOG Long -Range Transportation Plan, Official Maps, and any other public facilities plans adopted by the City. Street system improvements required to accommodate proposed land uses and projected background traffic are compatible with the existing uses and uses shown in the adopted Land Use Plan for the subject and adjacent properties. The GDP identifies the future collector roadway (Overland Drive) that will extend from Bendel Road NW to 18'h Avenue NW. Bendel Road NW may need to be developed to an arterial street standard in the future. Appropriate right-of-way will need to be dedicated for these roadways to allow for future improvements to the transportation system serving this area. In order to facilitate safe ingress into the development right turn lanes should be provided at time of development at the entrance from Bandel Road, and a contribution to the construction of right turn lanes on Overland Drive when it is constructed at the access to the north and south sections of the development should be provided as part of the development agreement. Page 5 General Development Plan August 4, 2000 The distance from the south property line of the site to 55th St is approximately''/: mile. It has been found in other neighborhoods that when major local street corridors reach this length concerns with travel speeds on the corridor begin to surface. if such problems are of concern in the Cascade Ridge neighborhood, staff would be willing to work with the neighborhood in an effort to identify possible actions or improvements that could be taken in an effort to address these problems. Typically the approach to these issues is to start with some background data collection, including a speed study and traffic counting. if the perceived problems are validated by the data collected in the field, low and high cost options for addressing can be discussed with the neighborhood. At this time the policy on costs associated with improvements addressing neighborhood traffic problems will be a shared cost between the neighborhood and the city. Criteria E. On and off -site public facilities are adequate, or will be adequate if the development is phased in, to serve the properties under consideration and will provide access to adjoining land in a manner that will allow development of those adjoining lands in accord with this ordinance. Street system adequacy shall be based on the street system's ability to safely accommodate trips from existing and planned land uses on the existing and proposed street system without creating safety hazards, generating auto stacking that blocks driveways or intersections, or disrupting traffic flow on any street, as identified in the traffic impact report, if required by Section 61.523(C). Capacity from improvements in the first 3 years of the 6-year CIP shall be included in the assessment of adequacy. Traffic accessing the proposed Boulder Ridge development will be distributed to Bandel Road, the future Overland Drive and 25'h Ave NW. ROCOG is currently in the midst of a Thoroughfare Plan subarea study which is evaluating the impact of the expanded urban growth area in Northwest Rochester on the existing and future street system serving this area. Based on the preliminary results of this study, the projected traffic volumes suggest Bendel Road may need to be developed to an arterial street standard in the future, and Overland Drive may need to be developed as a multilane collector or low intensity arterial to handle projected trafhc volumes. In order to facilitate safe ingress into the development right turn lanes should be provided at time of development at the entrance from Bandel Road, and a contribution to the construction of right turn lanes on Overland Drive when it is constructed at the access to the north and south sections of the development should be provided as part of the development agreement. 25`4 Avenue is developed as a major local street and the Thoroughfare Plan defines these corridors as suitable for handling up to a volume of approximately 3000 local area vehicles per day. Based on existing peak hour counts at the intersection of 25'h Ave and 55`h St, the estimated volume of traffic on 25`h Ave north of 55'6 St is approximately 2100 vehicles per day, which would be consistent with existing development in the primary travel shed of 25`h Ave, which we would estimate to currently contain 200 housing units. (6,5' / Page 6 /f _ General Development Plan August 4, 2000 In the opinion of staff, approximately 90 single family units from the southerly part of Boulder Ridge will primarily access 55t8 St via 25t^ Ave once the development Is completed. This would contribute approximately 900 additional trips per day to 25f° Ave, which would result in an overall ADT (Average Daily Traffic) on 25t" Ave immediately north of 55M St of approximately 3000 trips per day. We expect at some point in the future, when development along the south side of 55th St Is completed, when Boulder Ridge is developed, and when other developments in the area such as the Volunteers of America project are completed, that the intersection of 25fb Ave and 55s' St will meet warrants for a signal. Installation of a signal at this location, based on the preliminary results of the Circle Drive Traffic Management Study, appears consistent with the goal of maintaining average travel speeds of about 40-45 mph and progressive traffic flow on 55t8 St, and thus we would expect that when warrants are met a signal would be considered for installation at this location. The distance from the south property line of the site to 55' St is approximately % mile. It has been found in other neighborhoods that when major local street corridors reach this length concerns with travel speeds on the corridor begin to surface. If such problems are of concern In the Cascade Ridge neighborhood, staff would be willing to work with the neighborhood in an effort to identify possible actions or improvements that could be taken in an effort to address these problems. Typically the approach to these issues is to start with some background data collection, including a speed study and traffic counting. If the perceived problems are validated by the data collected in the field, low and high cost options for addressing can be discussed with the neighborhood. At this time the policy on costs associated with improvements addressing neighborhood traffic problems will be a shared cost between the neighborhood and the city. 2. Utilities are now available to directly serve the area of the proposed land use, or that the City of Rochester is planning for the extension of utilities to serve the area of the proposed development and such utilities are in the first three years of the City's current 6-Year Capital Improvements Program, or that other arrangements (contractual, development agreement, performance bond, etc.) have been made to ensure that adequate utilities will be available concurrently with development. If needed utilities will not be available concurrent with the proposed development, the applicant for the development approval shall stipulate to a condition that no development will occur and no further development permit will be issued until concurrency has been evidenced. Sanitary sewer and water lines will need to be extended from their present ends to accommodate this development. Currently water service is limited to the site. Eventually the entire property is scheduled to be serviceable from the Northwest High Level Water System, which will be available at the northwest corner, and at the northern roadway connection with the completion of the planned improvements in the area. Specific routing of sanitary sewer lines will be reviewed further during the platting stages. The City is currently working on completing plans to extend the Northwest High Level Water System to this development and the development to the north. 3. The adequacy of other public facilities shall be based on the level of service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing plan for development. Page 7 General Development Plan August 4, 2000 The GDP proposes one storm water detention pond on the property. The location, size and design of these facilities will need to be approved by the City. Detailed construction plans will need to be approved for all infrastructure improvements. Pedestrian facilities will be required along both sides of an public roadways and a 10' wide bituminous path along the east side of Bendel Road NW. A 40 acres parklschooi site is located south and east of this site. Park dedication requirements for this development should be met via cash dedication in lieu of land. Criteria F. The drainage, erosion, and construction in the area can be handled through normal engineering and construction practices, or that, at the time of land subdivision, a more detailed investigation of these matters will be provided to solve unusual problems that have been identified. Storm water management must be provided for the development. Detailed grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted to the City for review and approval. The plan identifies one detention pond in the western portion of the development. Criteria G. The lot, block, and street layout for all development and the lot density for residential development are consistent with the subdivision design standards contained in Section 64.100 and compatible with existing and planned development of adjacent parcels. At the time of platting, lot lines will need to be reviewed further for compliance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. It appears as though some lots may not meet the minimum width at the building line (60' wide at the 25'setback fine). Proposed roadways provide connections to adjacent properties and allow for the continued growth and development of those properties. The proposed densities are compatible with existing and planned development of adjacent properties. Recommendation: Based on the above criteria Staff would recommend approval of this General Development Plan subject to the following conditions or modifications in order to assure compliance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual: 1. The GDP be revised to: • Identify the pedestrian corridors as outlets. These outlets will need to be dedicated to the City at the time of platting. Sidewalks within these outlets shall be installed by the developer and also graded and sodded. • Show 60 feet of right-of-way being dedicated for Bendel Road NW and 120 feet for Overland Drive NW. • Show the right-of-way for the road segment connecting to 14h Ave. NW as 56 feet. Page 8 General Development Plan August 4, 2000 • Have 24fh Avenue extended as the through street, with the access to the City property east of this development being via a private drive or a street that intersects perpendicular with 24`h Ave. NW. • Re -label the area currently shown for "public open space/park" sites in the NE portion of the development. These areas shall be labeled as "private open space". The revised GDP shall be filed with the Planning Department. 2. Storm water management must be provided for this development. Any on -site stormwater facilities serving 50 developable acres or less will remain private and execution of long term maintenance and ownership agreement will be required. 3. When platted, controlled access must be provided along the entire length of Bandel Road NW, with the exception of the approved roadway access location. Controlled access is also required within 150 feet from the intersection with Bendel road NW. In addition, 60 feet of right of way shall be dedicated for Bandel Road and a total of 120 feet for Overland Drive NW. 4. A right turn lane will be required at the time of development at the entrance from Bandel Road NW. A contribution to the construction of right turn lanes on Overland Drive when it is constructed at the access to the north and south sections of the development will be required as part of the development agreement. 5. Prior to the submittal of a final plat on the property, 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; substandard street reconstruction charges ti Traffic Improvement District (TID) charges; pedestrian facilities; contributions for public infrastructure, including contribution obligations toward traffic Improvements in the area attributable to the development and long term maintenance and ownership of the landscape island shown on the GDP within the cul-de-sac. 6. A Wetland Delineation report must be submitted to the City and the necessary permits obtained prior to platting. 7. Parkland dedication requirements for this development be in the form of cash in lieu of land.. 0 0 - ROCHESTER M Minnesota 7/26/00 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 application for General Development Plan #won the Boulder Ridge (Arcon Development) property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: Storm Water Management must be provided for this development. On -site detention is proposed in the text for the GDP plan. Any on -site stormwater facilities serving 50 developable acres or less will remain private, and execution of a long term maintenance & ownership agreement will be required. All required private stormwater facilities must be constructed concurrent with the initial stages of development, and the general location of ponds should be shown.. 2. Controlled access must be provided along the right-of-way of Bendel Rd NW, with the exception of the approved new road access. Additional access control is required within 150 feet from the intersection with Bendel Rd 3. Developer agrees to dedicate the needed right of way for 65t' street NW, estimated to be 120.00 feet total (60 feet each side of centerline). In addition, the Developer shall dedicate 60 feet of ROW for Bandel Rd. The required right-of-way shall be reserved with the first phase of this development. Dedication shall be outlined in the Development Agreement, 4. The ROW for the road segment connecting to 20 Ave NW should be 56 R vs. 50 fit as shown. 5. Pedestrian facilities will be required along both sides of all new public roads abutting this property, and along all the east side of Bandel Rd NW, as indicated on the GDP plan. Pedestrian facilities are also required along both frontages of Overland Dr (65t° St extension). A pedestrian facilities easement will be required along the frontage of Bandel Rd , for the required pedestrian path. 6. The pedestrian corridors indicated on the GDP plan should be platted as Outlots, and dedicated to the City. C:\TEMPIGDP156 7-26.doc 16D ROCHESTER Minnesota 7/26/00 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 landscape island within the cul-de-sac shall be revised and approved separate from this application. 8. Specific routing of sanitary sewer lines will be reviewed further during the platting stages. 9. Execution of a City -Owner Contract will be required prior to construction of public infrastructure. 10. Prior to Final Plat submittal, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, substandard street reconstruction charges & Traffic Improvement District charges, stormwater management, park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 11. 24"Ave NW should be extended as the through street, with the access to the park property east of this development being via a private drive, or street that intersects perpendicular with 24d Ave. 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. -e A proportional share of the costs to reconstruct Bandel Road NW, and proportional contribution to the NW TID. Sanitary Sewer & Water Connection Charges for the frontage along Bandel Road. Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division. C:ITEMPIGDP156 7-26.doc TRANSPORTATION STArr f 6 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REVIEW DATABASE- 1998 ll Jurisdiction I Application I Comments AUGUST 2000 City GDP # 156 Traffic accessing the proposed Boulder Ridge development will be distributed to Boulder Ridge Bandel Road, the future Overland Drive and 25" Ave NW. ROCOG is currently in the midst of a Thoroughfare Plan subarea study which is evaluating the impact of the expanded urban growth area in Northwest Rochester on the existing and future street system serving this area. Based on the preliminary results of this study, the projected traffic volumes suggest Bandel Road may need to be developed to an arterial street standard in the future, and Overland Drive may need to be developed as a multilane collector or low intensity arterial to handle projected traffic volumes. In order to facilitate safe ingress into the development right turn lanes should be provided at time of development at the entrance from Bandel Road, and a contribution to the construction of right turn lanes on Overland Drive when it is constricted at the access to the north and south sections of the development should be provided as part of the development agreement. 25'" Avenue is developed as a major local street and the Thoroughfare Plan defines these corridors as suitable for handling up to a volume of approximately 3000 local area vehicles per day. Based on existing peak hour counts at the intersection of 25" Ave and 55`n St, the estimated volume of traffic on 25`" Ave north of 55" St is approximately 2100 vehicles per day, which would be consistent with existing development in the primary travel shed of 25"Ave, which we would estimate to currently contain 200 housing units. In the opinion of staff, approximately 90 single family units from the southerly part of Boulder Ridge will primarily access 55'" St via 25" Ave once the development is completed. This would contribute approximately 900 additional trips per day to 25 " Ave, which would result in an overall ADT (Average Daily Traffic) on 25'h Ave immediately north of 550' St of approximately 3000 trips per day. We expect at some point in the future, when development along the south side of 55'" St is completed, when Boulder Ridge is developed, and when other developments in the area such as the Volunteers of America project are completed, that the intersection of 25"Ave and 55" St will meet warrants for a signal. Installation of a signal at this location, based on the preliminary results of the Circle Drive Traffic Management Study, appears consistent with the goal of maintaining average travel speeds of about 40-45 mph and progressive traffic flow on 55" St, and thus we would expect that when warrants are met a signal would be considered for installation at this location. The distance from the south property line of the site to 55" St is approximately 'A mile. It has been found in other neighborhoods that when major local street corridors reach this length concerns with travel speeds on the corridor begin to surface. If such problems are of concern in the Cascade Ridge neighborhood, staff would be willing to work with the neighborhood in an effort to identify possible actions or improvements that could be taken in an effort to address these problems. Typically the approach to these issues is to start with some background data collection, including a speed study and traffic counting. If the perceived problems are validated by the data collected in the field, low and high cost options for addressing can be discussed with the neighborhood. At this time the policy on STAP • 1� 1'ln� DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REVIEW DATABASE - 1998 Jurisdiction I Application I Cnmmpntc costs associated with improvements addressing neighborhood traffic problems will be a shared cost between the neighborhood and the ci . City GDP #15I Consistent with the Long Range Bicycle Facility Plan accommodation should be Hart Farms provided for development of a trail facility along the frontage on 18th Ave. Applicant should check work with Public Works Departments of City and County to determine location of trail — whether it will fit within existing right of way or whether easement needs to be provided on east side of lots backing up to 18" Ave City Fin Plat 0-15 No comment Pinewood Hills First rplu we pUye, we deliver July 18, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: General Development Plan #156 by Arcon Development, Inc. to be known as Boulder Ridge and Zoning District Amendment #00-11. Dear Ms. Gamess: Our review of the referenced general development plan 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. Depending on the finished site grades the southern portion of this property could be temporarily served from the main level water system that is currently available at the north end of 25th Ave. NW, however the pressures and fire flows will be limited. This entire property is scheduled to be serviceable from the Northwest High Level Water System, which will be available at the northwest comer and at the northern roadway connection with the completion of the planned improvements in the area. 3. Coordination with the connections to adjacent properties and internal networking of the water system 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 yours, 06-J4 R Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention McGhie & Betts, Inc. Arcon Development, Inc. Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 I / ROCHESTER PARK AND CREATION DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: July 20, 2000 TO: Jennifer Gayness Planning Department FROM: Denny Stotz 9- SUBJECT: Boulder Ridge General Development Plan The development will have parkland dedication requirements of ± 11.0 acres. The Park Department recommends that the entire dedication be in the form of cash in lieu of land. The general development report indicates that no parkland is to be dedicated. The plan indicates two public open space/park parcels in the NE corner of the development. The Park Department recommends that these parcels remain private and that the plan text be changed to "private open space". If the ped corridors are approved, the sidewalks should be installed by the developer and the corridors graded and sodded by the developer. The corridors should not be used as drainage ways. The walks or at least signage indicting the location of the walks should be installed prior to sale of any adjacent lots. M-cGhie r9iCai-� Betts, Inc. Rochester Minnesota August 2, 2000 Mr. Brent Svenby Consolidated Planning & Zoning Department Land Surveying 2122 SE Campus Dr. Urban -Land Planning Rochester, MN 55904 Consul' Consulting -Civil Engineering Re: Boulder Ridge Neighborhood Meeting Geotechrtical Engineering Dear Mr. Svenby: Construction Material Testing In accordance with Section 60.605 (B) of the amended zoning ordinance, we are submitting, on behalf of the applicant, Arcon Development, a copy of the minutes of Landscape Architecture the Neighborhood Informational Meeting which was held on July 31, 2000, 6:30 P.M. at the Calvary Evangelical Free Church, in Rochester, Minnesota. • An attendance list is enclosed for your reference. It is noted that the minutes generally document the discussion, comments and questions. However, because of the nature of this project, we have attempted to document all of the questions and comments of the attendees. If you have any questions, please contact me. Very truly yours, McGhie & Betts, Inc Andrew J. Masterpole, ASLA AJM/bd attachment Pc Mr. Larry Frank 1648 Third Avenue S.E. cheater, MN 55904 If Tel. 507.289.3919 Fax. 507.289.7333 e-mail. mcghiebetts.com Established 1946 UP Minutes of the Neighborhood Meeting Informational Meeting For Boulder Ridge In Section 9 & 10 of Cascade Township, Rochester, Minnesota On July 31, 2000, 6:30 P.M. at Calvary Evangelical Free Church In Attendance: See attached attendance list. Purpose: The purpose of the meeting was to introduce the proposed project to the neighborhood and to answer questions and document concerns or issues that may need further investigation or consideration. General Discussion: Mr. Andy Masterpole of McGhie & Betts, Inc., and Larry Frank of Arcon Development, made a brief presentation on the proposed project. The presenters explained the types of housing; density; public parkland space and trail system; storm water management; vehicular and pedestrian circulation; phasing; and sale price ranges of lots and homes. The development process was also reviewed and it was noted that the developer has made an application for a General Development Plan and zone change. Specific plats and plans will be completed on a phase - by -phase basis and submitted to the City for review and approval. Attendees were informed that public hearings are scheduled at the Planning and Zoning Commission on August 9, 2000, and at the Common Council on September 6, 2000. It was noted that the City Planning and Zoning Staff and City Clerk would be responsible to notify the affected neighbors of these meetings in accordance with the Land Development Manual and Zoning Ordinance. Ouestions and Answers: Q. What will happen to the ridge that runs along the north central part of the site? A. The proposed road follows that ridgeline so the grading would be minimized. Q. Does Arcon Development have certain standards for the home plans that the builders submit? A. Yes, Arcon requires covenants that add to the aesthetic appeal of the homes such as steeper roof pitches, shutters, overhangs, front doors with side lights, combination brick, etc. Q. What is the general square footage of the homes? A. It depends on the lot size and shape. Arcon tries to match the house with the lot. They do have minimum square footage for different house styles. Q. Where will the water supply come from to serve this development? A. It will come from the high Ievel tower on the west side of Highway 52. • 10 Q. Will Bandel Road be upgraded? A. Yes, the timing of the upgrade is unknown at this time, but will probably be tied to the construction of the 65"' Street extension. Q. Will all the roads in the development be built at once? A. No, they will be built as the project is phased. Q. Will there be a lot of dust generated by this development? A. Probably, but NDPS Permits require that black din be laid after a certain amount of grading. Seeding and mulching is also required and the City watches erosion control closely. Q. Where will the run off go once the project is built? A. The exact location of all of the storm water detention ponds is not known at this point. One pond will be located along Bandel Road and the townhome area will drain into that. The location of the other ponds will be determined after a preliminary drainage analysis is completed. Q. When will the 25"Avenue NW connection to Bandel Hills Subdivision be completed? A. It will be a couple of years before that phase of the development is completed and that road connection is made. Q. What will happen to the power poles and existing trees along the property line (in the backyards of houses along 62nd Street NW)? A. The power poles will probably come out once the connection to the north from 25ih Avenue NW is made. Arcon typically tries to keep as many existing trees as possible, especially ones along property lines. Q. Do you know who the builders will be? A. No, Arcon is in the process of interviewing builders now for their Summit Pointe Project. I(A Paget] City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 O>e Mr. Brent Svenby presented the staff reports, dated August 4, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Svenby indicated that the following condition should be added to the general development plan conditions. "13. A public pedestrian connection from the public roadway to Outlot C in Bandel North First Subdivision may be required at the time the property is developed." Mr. Svenby indicated that he talked with the consultant and that he is in agreement with the added condition. Ms. Schultze stated that the plan did not delineate the townhome area in detail. She questioned if it was the general practice. Mr. Svenby stated that the townhome would eventually need to go through a performance residential application process. He explained that they would then look at the setbacks, which is based on the building design. Ms. Baker stated that the ordinance requires the applicant to identify in words or numbers what intensity or density is proposed. It does not specify that the buildings need to be shown. She explained that some developers choose to show it on their plans, but it is not required. Mr. Burke questioned if the detail would be provided at the preliminary or final plat stage. Ms. Baker responded that a plat does not show each individual building lot being platted. Staff would be the only people that see where the building would be placed. She indicated that the ordinance spells out what the setbacks and bufferyards need to be. Ms. Schultze stated that she was under the impression that the general development was to show the roadways and connections. Ms. Baker responded that roadways are being showed on the plan. Mr. Andy Masterpole, of McGhie and Betts, addressed the Commission. He indicated that Larry Frank, of Arcon Development, was present to answer any questions. Mr. Masterpole stated that the entire site is in annexation process. They are currently waiting for the State of Minnesota to make final approval. When the property is annexed, it will be zoned R-1. Page 22 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 Mr. Masterpole stated that he had a plan available that addresses the layout of the townhomes. He stated that they are not required to show the layout of the units and believe that it offers more flexibility to the developer to not show them in case they came up with a different style later. Mr. Masterpole made the following comments: 1. There are 172 lots on 75 acres. 2. The density would be 2.3 units per acre. 3. The main access will be off Bandel Road. 4. There would be a 10 foot wide bike trail on the east side of Bendel Road. 5. There will be two 30 foot wide pedestrian corridors. 6. They propose a retention pond to handle the runoff from the townhome area. 7. City services will be available. Mr. Masterpole stated that the applicant agrees with staff -suggested conditions. However, along Bendel Road there is a development with a 50 foot right-of-way with a 10 foot trail within the right-of-way. He stated that Mr. Nigbur suggested that Condition Number 1 (the second bullet) listed in the staff report be changed to state "The right-of-way to Bandel Road should be consistent with what was required with the Bandel North Subdivision." Mr. Brede asked if the intersection of Bandel Road and Overland Drive will be an intersection or overpass. Mr. Masterpole responded that it would be an intersection. Mr. Svehby stated that staff agrees with Mr. Masterpole's change to Condition Number 1 (the second bullet) as stated above. With no one else wishing to be heard, Ms. Petersson closed the public hearing. Mee ,:.f6eNze moxed to to>_:g ri D e# pittt'�`3 DeYsi4Peivl►i"4ta#f�i�4gsssirti�tnx '1!!e, NiinNwetlI:?+anbt 1 The motloe oari ted t)-D; FINDINGS: r a)..ha proposed zonip pf the proper rta`ti� (Itnr tie ii�e'�s oonsitenE Jib lam+ a ��:nr h, 8aals of the Coin ihenslir$1a �hpwst iP�ar? prompt#s the d8�901,01M, 9 ;ql RF�11�i p w isin�tie�t��ll47r���gn�4 �s, } ��ent�� ousi ff1. P t, R- �{ r thatw..,e"l,p++�e�^� tf'y �,.�, A:.. Ti 2a) The permitted uses allowed withinthe R 2 zop$ig d1std0t*9id4 aPpfoPrl 3lt� the sub) ivaperbf srtd o nrrpatiblia with adj,aelitr Pr tt �It. f 2b}Uthlrthe stsrotwould e p�p 4riQIl be compatibly with aid acent properties and t'n Tit gbtiolrhgod 1; gn llnw3 r F 2ispohsistaintv✓)t .1tQ`itochbeterttF an Serylce;4(re�Lah :Us ,P)a` a IdI 110 Page 23 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 not be considered spot zoning. Ms. Schultze moved to approve General Development Plan #156 to be known as Boulder Ridge, with staff -suggested conditions and findings as amended above; Ms. McGowan seconded the motion. The motion carried 8-6, FINDINGS' z' t Criteria A This GDP proposes a low density residential developmept, which is� consistent with the land use designation for the property; Ttas proposed i3 2 (Low Density Residential) zoning for the towahoma devglopmai poltiotl;. of .the development is also consistent with.+the land use designation for the' RroRafjyG j Criteria B. The denslor, of the proposed developmenITis consistgq �v luw de residen0il and use deslg tatiq and the `the tirrienf platitn�� Jgt bgnffda�e� 1+v)i) naiad to � rpe>!v@1 �t"f4t�" �' �Z � 4 a ,4 v ya d .➢ . compilaiace with l a 4alaaster �cling'Dldjnartcie ttitd tt, ` +r�iv„�!m",��1t Manual,. ,1T appears as thoufgh rR�e lotg tn�� not o'hrt)�tUi,�ti�/.�dttt, The proposed behicular etistems provide for the^d4lt�fec�i+bni �kg �dlacsrtt _ properties and allows fob future ponnecti�ti� io ut►geYelq�gr� T�Rf#!ay. A 1tt'tra will be are tyi s atpn t and`al edes r an corri f� ��y�iM�.pi irlterla', This ciwtldfottje�tt:#1>a� T :tQft1 use d9SiRTJt ILPTIlhe "of ►nl> diapgftl eo�e4n$ esr. ' t�ltt with tije �busirl ltan ark i� sear environmatltraalilaftiai Ia st .. ` r'3-as'e+•`v.4u f rite Cria D, 'T GDP ldeniifias � u - rya �%l►aTAN" tivej hhat 1 R gXt�f1 ftl{t Bae d HY t 1 van a adel Road Yit rpa need to ba diavtPii Ieit ateN li p# star the suture, =,1 '. ±4Rpio date rl -R a t #�� c tie dvalcate� r these roadways c futur rove H ah s steRn erv}� t i ' tT. /Yti r <k^Fzz Fri order tR failtate se a res into 4 cta h ene�"" should tie proVtdn at ttno ciIo at Overland firiye whenIt t o is ati led at the $ u a Ylo air+ #_ ` `fhg dfs#.'nce front the'sau� pr"gr li[f��I� ����� M ; �PRroM�ii��l>i ✓��n411e. t�w��a Ott #o rid lri +s) x�n+�`1`� eI� mma ar local sire co �r). ors reedit this ten"t .c n .. . _ ._ _ .'_ ' Page 24 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 M on the corridor begin to surface. If such problems are of concern in the Cascade Ridge neighborhood, staff would be willing to work with the neighborhood in an effort to identify possible actions or improvements that could be taken in an effort to address these problems. Typically the approach to these issues is to start with some background data collection, Including a speed study and traffic counting, if the perceived problems dra validated by the data collected in the field, tow and high cost options "for ' addressing can be discussed with the neighborhood. At thi timp the policy on costs associated with improvements addressing."nei l�6orho0st tra fic problems will be a shared cost between the neighborhood and the c(ty: Criteria E. vU 9. Traffic accessing the proposed Boulder Ridge development tyli distributed to Bandei load, the future flverlanct11►e and a 'Avsl1Aft Ro�QG is c�rrentiK in the midst Qj a Tp�rqu��1[�re�R,i�� ��4area� �tq�r -which is evaivati the impact ofthe e�Pantletl ur�ar} ��������;a, Northlue; [tochr°ti !+ ail #ire at�te 1re4.8aseo>rli prelirp)na�1 vnMe , me' nnasti'A3tirttil: Rnn-ii mau nand fn fid � SYtieiirl #Sls 'n.nd' u ,�� h... as a muiurane couector or tolnr mtenstttr arterjj titip Iltallrgte p�[o ept tl,t ltc "`✓91u/11].�( �iri ,t - R y Vy Y"'y4 ' a' °t1 Y ! d� �,� L�d { * � Y,`s.'r In orderto fa 11 'td a i` se i ,to the deve140 _.. " girrRt� 1 ST eveto" Anent a . st�.uz fl n �Yoar a ut c s s Sepon ��aa 'No � of � Y 5"' Avenue ix d reloped ae a YnVo14ca! $ ?a� �l�fal „i . ilmfinaAthasec"e`rrldol a iil at, &.1 rhandlit�raiai�, Jrf. iiinn f +� , le 1 Page 25 t City Planning and Zoning Conunission Minutes 1 Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 Installation of a signal at this location, based on the preliminary results of the Circle Drive Traffic Management Study, appears consistent with the goal of maintaining average travel speeds of about 40-45 mph and progressive traffic flow on 55th St, and thus we would expect that when warrants are met a signal would be considered for installation at this location. The distance from the south property line of the site'to wa, S.t is approximately 14 mile. it has been found.in. other netghborhootls that whep. major local street corridors reach this length concerns with travel speeds' an the corridor beglq,to surface. if such pro,' , lams are of cOr Cerh lrtae ' 2. Sanithry sewer and water lines A aq 1:e 3: Till - toi A criteria,. Stg Page 26 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9,2000 CONDITIONS: I. The GDP,b • 'Ide ded sha • The Witt a shin At the time of platting, lot lines will need to be reviewed further for compliance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. It appears as though some lots may not meet the minimum width at the building line (60' wide at the 25' setback line). Proposed roadways provide connections to ad acentproperties16d diloiW for the continued growth and d6el6jimiik ro' iei'.Ih i" pert 0 existing an 6d development proposed densitlei are compatible with planned of adlic.ent properties. 9,fevisediol 4 :. " 41fu thanarfaarlan t'-nrrli i%0& Aim its a fieI 9, SlQrM.,Y'qtq 4. WrIg'' 1�I Page 27 •'w`City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 cul-de-sac. 6. A Wetland Delineation report must be submitted to the City and the necessary permits obtained prior to platting. 7. Parkland dedication requirements'for this development bei in the form of cash in lieu of land. 8. A public pedestrian connection from the publyc roadway to Outlot C in Bandel North First Subdivision may be required at the time the property is developed Ms. Theresa party presented the staff report, dated August 3, 2000, to A, Commission. The staff report is o ile at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. t% Ms. Fogarty indicateXthat the consultant has worked with the Park hd Recreation Department have agreed to chang Condition Number 8 {second bullet) to initiated that a 3.8 acre public park in the south centra ortion of the property with a minimu7bf 100' of street frontage. Discussion ensued regardid\PlannDepartme 'access is located, listed in Condition Number 4 of the staff report. VV Mr. Tointon, of McGhie and d the Ccynmission. His presentation notes are on file at the Rochester-Olmsteartme Mr. Tointon stated that the 3, posed on the west side of the development. The Park and Recreation Deled that the access point be changed to a 100 foot width. Mr. Tointon stated that Condition Nurriber 4 of th tall report needs to reflect 3.8 acres for the park instead of 4.0. Ms. Schultze stated t/sndentence of Conditi Number 4 should bestated as follows: "The proposed be increased in size to least 3.8 acres with a minimum of 100 foot strhe southwest corner access. With no one elseAishing to be heard, Ms. Petersson closed the p%, ilic hearing. Farms Prop6rty, with Brede seabrided thel i REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING % DATE: 9-6-6=00 r AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING E w 7 d DESCRIPTION: Zoning District Amendment #00.11 by Arcon Development, Inc., to PREPARED BY: rezone approximately 40.59 acres from the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) to the R-2 (Low Brent Svenby, Density Residential) district to allow for the townhomes. The property is located along the Plonner east side of Bandel Road NW, north of the Bandei Hills 3rd and 71h Subdivisions. August 25, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing an August 9, 2000, to consider a zone change request to rezone approximately 40.59 acres from the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) district to the R-2 (Low Density Residential) district. The applicant also submitted a general development plan which is being reviewed currently with this proposal. 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. Schultze made a motion to approve Zoning District Amendment #00.11 by Acron Development, Inc. with staff - suggested findings. Ms. McGowan seconded the motion. The motion carried a-0. Planning Staff Recommendation: See attached staff report dated Augst 4, 2000. Council Action Needed: 'he Council may approve or deny this petition. The Council's decision must be supported by findings based on the criteria list 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 August 4, 2000 2. Minutes of the August 9, 2000 CPZC Meeting Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Attorney: Legal Description attached 3. Planning Department File 4. Planning Department — GIS 5. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, Septemeber 6, 2000 in the Council / Board Chamber at the Rochester — Olmsted Government Center Building 6. McGhie & Betts, Inc. CPz'.� rn,%tn,�cs �,... GDP„�t�+� �ri•w•• t� I NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Seconded by: to: ZONE �,HANGE d-- R-1 to R— \\23.09 ACRES ZONED R-1 'F¢= I i 1AIi3lTm Z SCALE 1" = 500' DESCRIPTI❑M SEE ATTACHED 2R ARCON DEVELOPMENT, INC. EDINA, MINNESOTA 55439 CansLLt6p E�gNeerA Matl' 164E 3rd AVE. S.E. Rochester, Bef...S,tnC. Land Surve tors news W 55904 507-2E9-3919 SCALE, V = 500' DRavR BYJJJ DArE' 06/27/00 ACCK AD.. 1204/9630 CARD AV. i 9630EX01 TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission pp..grJ...r., ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GIS+ADDRESSING/ 5071285-8232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 FROM: Brent Svenby, Planner BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELL/SEPTIC 507/285-8345 DATE: August 4, 2000 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Zoning District Amendment #00-11 by Arcon Development to amend the zoning district for 40.59 acres of land located east of Bandel Road NW, north of the Bendel Hills 3rd and 7 h Subdivisions. The applicant is proposing to change the zoning designation from the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) District to the R-2 (Low Density Residential) District. Planning Department Review: Petitioner/Owner: Consultant: Arcon Development Inc. 7625 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Location of Property: The property is located east of Bandel Road. The total area being petitioned for rezoning is 40.59 acres. 23.09 acres located along the east side of Bendel Road NW, north of the Harvest Hill Baptist Church, and south of Bandel North First Subdivision. The remaining 17.50 acres is located north the 40 acres owned the City of Rochester. Requested Action: The petitioner is requesting that approximately 40.59 acres be zoned R-2 (Low Density Residential) district. Existing Land Use: The site is presently undeveloped and is presently in row crop production. There is also a farmstead located on the site along Bandel Road NW. Proposed Land Use: The applicant has submitted a General Development Plan for this site which is being reviewed concurrently with this petition. The applicant would like to develop the areas petitioned for the R-2 zoning district with �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER J l,D Page 2 XU Zone Change 00-11 August 4, 2000 townhomes. The accompanying General Development Plan for this site indicates the proposed roadway patterns throughout to the property, lot layouts, and drainage patterns. A neighborhood meeting was held on July 31, 2000 to discuss this project with area residents and landowners. Adjacent Land Use and North: To the north is the recently platted Zoning: subdivision, Bandel North First Subdivision. This development is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family) on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. Also to the north, are some rural subdivisions zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) on the Olmsted County Zoning Map. South: To the south of this proposed development is the Bendel Hills Subdivisions. This development is zoned R-1 on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. The Harvest View Baptist Church is also to the south and is zoned A-4 (Agricultural -Urban Expansion) on the Olmsted County Zoning Map. East: The City of Rochester owns 40 acres which is zoned R-1. Eventually a school and city park will be developed on the 40 acres. The property to the east is zoned A-4 (Agricultural — Urban Expansion District) on the Olmsted County Zoning Map. West: Across Bendel Road is a mixture of land zoned M-1 (Mixed Commercial — Industrial) in the City and 1 (Industrial) in the County. Transportation Access: The plan proposes access to Bendel Road, 251h Avenue NW, 24"' Avenue NW, and the future Overland Drive. Based on the preliminary results of this study, the projected traffic volumes suggest Bendel Road may need to be developed to an arterial street standard in the future, and Overland Drive may need to be developed as a multilane collector or low intensity arterial to handle projected traffic volumes. 25`h Avenue is developed as a major local street and is suitable for handling up to a volume of approximately 3000 local area vehicles per day. It is expected at some point in the future, when development along the south side of 551h St is completed, when Boulder Ridge is developed, and when other developments in the area such as the Volunteers of America project are completed, that the intersection of 25`h Ave and 55`h St will meet warrants for a signal. Wetlands: According the GDP narrative, one wetland has been identifies and delineated in the SW corner of the property. A wetland delineation report will need to Page 3 f Zone Change 00-11 11 August 4, 2000 filed with the City and necessary permits obtained. Referral Comments: 1. Planning Department — Transportation 2. Planning Department— Wetlands 3. RPU Water Division 4. RPU Operations Division 5. Rochester Public Works Department 6. MnDOT Report Attachments: 1. Zoning Map 2. Proposed General Development Plan Map 3. Referral Comments (3) Analvsis and Staff Suaaested Findinos: The Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan indicates this property as being designated for "Low Density Residential" types of uses. According to the accompanying GDP, the applicant is proposing to use the site for single family detached housing and townhomes Under the provisions of Paragraph 60.336 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 riled 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. The proposed zoning of the property to the R-2 (Low Density Residential) district is consistent with the land use plan and would serve to better further the policies and goals of the Comprehensive Plan and Housing Plan. Rezoning the property promotes the development of mixed densities and styles of housing. In addition, it is in the public interest to rezone the property to encourage development of housing that will help meet the needs of the community. 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: 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 l U Page 4 Zone Change 00-11 August 4, 2000 The permitted uses allowed within the R-2 zoning district would be appropriate on the subject property and compatible with adjacent properties. 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). Uses within the R-2 district would be appropriate on the subject property and would be compatible with adjacent properties and the neighborhood. The amendment to R-2 is consistent with the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan and would not be considered spot zoning. Staff Recommendation: The ability to consider the Zone Change and General Development Plan concurrently allows the City to consider this development proposal as a package. Based upon the accompanying General Development Plan for this site and the findings above, Staff recommends approval to rezone 40.59 acres from the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) to R-2 (low Density Residential). Planning 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. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 04-06-� AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING S 8 DESCRIPTION: General Development Plan #157 by MOG, LLC to be known as Hart PREPARED BY: ms. The applicant is proposing to develop approximately 80 acres into a single family Theresa Fogarty, residential development with a density of approximately 3 units per acre. The Planner development also proposes public roadways and public open space. The property is located along the west side of 18'" Avenue SW (Co, Road 147), August 28, 2000 Note: Staff recommends adding the following condition: 1. At the time of platting, mid -block connection may be required to be consistent with the LDM, Section 64.227 Trail Thoroughfares and Sidewalks. On August 16, 2000 a REVISED GDP was submitted to the Planning Department. Revisions include providing a 10' wide pedestrian facilities easement along 181" Avenue SW, a 3.8 acre public park in the south central portion of the property with a minimum 100' of street frontage and the 7 acre Open Space and 30' wide access to the Open Space in the northwest corner of the GDP was labeled as an Outiot. City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: On August 9, 2000, the City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this General Development Plan. At the meeting, the applicants representative addressed the Commission and informed the Commission that they agree with the conditions and that condition #4 and #8 should be changed to reflect the discussion with the City Park Department. ity Park Department has accepted I approved a 3.8 acre public park in the south portion of the property with a minimum of street frontage. The Commission reviewed this proposal according to the criteria listed in Paragraph 61.215 of the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. Ms. Schultze moved to approve General Development Plan #157 to be known as Hart Farms Property, with staff - suggested findings and conditions, as amended above. Mr. Brede seconded the motion. The motion carried 8-0. Conditions: 1. Storm water management must be provided for this development. Any ponds serving 50 developable acres or less will remain private, and execution of long term maintenance and ownership agreements will be required. All required private storm water facilities must be constructed concurrent with the initial stages of development. 2. The property shall be platted. When platted, dedication of a 50' ROW along 18f8 Avenue SW with controlled access, as shown on the GDP, along 18" Avenue SW and the westerly lot lines along Hart Drive SW, lying easterly 191" Avenue SW shall be provided. Also during the platting process, 19'" Avenue SW shall be changed to a 'Named Drive SW% 3. A right turn lane will be required from 18'" Avenue SW (CR 147) to Hart Drive SW. The Developer is responsible for all costs associated with development of the right turn lane. • COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: Page 2 RCA August 26010 r. 4. Park dedication requirement shall be met through a combination of land and cash. The proposed park site should be increased in size to at least 3.8 acres with a minimum 100' street frontage at the southwest corner access. Prior to deeding the park property to the City, the applicant shall remove all buildings, foundations, slabs, footings, remove and seal all wells and septic systems, remove all gravel roads, remove all dead, dying or diseased trees and stumps. The Open Space and the 30 foot wide access to the Open Space in the northwest corner of the GDP property shall be platted as an Outiot and dedicated to the City. The applicant is responsible for grading and turf establishment of the 30' access, including removal of all downed trees and construction debris. 5. A 10' wide bituminous path is required along the west ROW of 181 Avenue SW. A pedestrian facilities easement will be required along 18'" Avenue SW for this pedestrian path. 6. At the time of platting, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Rochester that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to; storm water management park dedication; traffic improvements; pedestrian facilities; contributions for public infrastructure, including contribution obligations toward traffic improvements in the area attributable to this project. 7. Easements for the extension of of( -site utilities, and for the construction of off -site stormwater detention facilities will be required prior to Final Plat submittal. 8. A Revised GDP be submitted to the Planning Department reflecting the following changes: • A 10' wide pedestrian facilities easement along 181 Avenue SW • A 3.8 acre public park /n the south central portion of the property with a minimum of 100' of street front+ The 7 acre Open Space and 30' wide access to the Open Space in the northwest corner of the GDP be la as an Outiot. Planning Staff Recommendation: See attached staff report dated August 3, 2000. Council Action Needed: 1. The Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the general development plan. The Council must make findings based on the criteria listed in Paragraph 61.215. 2. If the Council wishes to proceed with the general development plan as proposed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution for Council approval. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated August 3, 2000, 2. Reduced copy of Revised GDP, submitted August 16, 2000 3. Minutes of August 9, 2000 CPZC Meeting Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Administrator 3. City Attorney 4. Planning Department File 6. McGhie & Betts, Inc. 5. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday. September 6 2000 in the Council / Board Chambers in the Government Center at 151 4th Street SE. O zw �r/ ama uxno� r_Fj snki;l • aTr=rrl eYi Yr> r+l m U 1 1 w W If4 Y� � � ��' -_i �.. I'J' .i ; � I. .}' 1 •�� TT11r�, i I �W "czi .\ �; - __- ^.�..,_�_. �.( � •p � i � 1. 1 �i .FYI _ � � I. lig lil, I I I 7 \44.NN I - 1 !i bw td A,1 MO2id SWHVq L11VH � W v n o 8 - J wprJo�l;, loIi����\�I���� r ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/285-8232 PLANNING GISIADDRESSING/ MAPPING HOUSINGMRA TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission BUILDING CODE r WELL/SEPTIC FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner FAX DATE: August 3, 2000 RE: General Development Plan #157 to be known as Hart Farms Property Planning Department Review., Applicant/Owner: Consultants: MOG, LLC Merle Groteboer 140 Elton Hills Drive NW Rochester, MN 55901 McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Size and Location: The area includes approximately 80 acres of land located along the west side of,18" Avenue SW (Co. Road 147), north of 401" Street SW, across from 3611 Street SW. Existing Land Use: This property is currently a vacant farmstead with a housing unit and four outbuildings, some sheds and silos. 507/285-8232 507/285-8224 507/285-8213 507/285-8345 507/287-2275 Proposed Use: The Plan proposes to develop approximately 73 acres of the 80 acres into a single family residential development with a density of approximately 3 units per acre. The development proposes several public roadways, 7 acres of open space in the NW corner and a 3.3 acre public park in the south central portion of the property. Land Use Plan: This property is located within the boundaries of the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan. The land use designation for this area is "low density residential' use. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 • • `IV�b General Development Plan 00-157 Hart Farms August 3, 2000 Zoning: The City Council approved annexation of this property at their July 5, 2000 meeting. Upon MN Planning / Office of Strategic Long Range Planning approval for this annexation, the property will be zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential) district on the Rochester zoning map. Prior to annexation, the property was zoned A-2 (Agricultural Protection) District on the Olmsted County zoning map. Streets: The GDP proposes one public roadway access to 181" Avenue SW (Hart Drive SW), which will be opposite of 361 Avenue in Bamber Ridge. Hart Drive SW will serve as a major local street. There are six public road accesses provided to Hart Drive SW. The Plan also proposes two cul-de-sac accesses to Hart Drive SW and two cul-de-sac accesses on the public roadway west of the proposed 19' Avenue SW. Due to the unknown design of 19t' Avenue SW, it is suggested that 19"1 Avenue SW be changed to a "Named Drive SW", eliminating any problems in the future. If Hart Drive SW roadway alignment varies during the platting process, the roadway type will need to change. A right turn lane will be required from 18'" Avenue SW (County Road 147) to Hart Drive SW. The Developer is responsible for all costs associated with the construction of the right turn lane. A 50' ROW for 18' Avenue SW will be requested to be dedicated at the time of platting. Controlled access must be dedicated, as shown on the proposed GDP along 180 Avenue SW and the westerly lot lines abutting Hart Drive SW lying easterly of 19"1 Avenue SW, when the platting of the GDP occurs. Sidewalks: Sidewalks will be required along both sides of all public roadways. A 10' wide bituminous path will be required along the west ROW of 18th Avenue SW. A pedestrian facilities easement will be required along 18' Avenue SW for the pedestrian path. Drainage: The General Development Plan Identifies existing topography. The topography is moderately rolling with elevations east to west from 181 Avenue SW from 1246' to a low point of 1208' in a defined drainageway, which crosses the site from south to north, and rising again to the highest elevation on the site in the west central area at 1252'. The topography Page 3 General Development Plan 00-157 Hart Farms August 3, 2000 Drainage (continued): drops gradually again to the west to an elevation of 1230'. There is a steeply sloping wooded ravine in the northwest corner, which will remain undeveloped. Elevations in this portion of the site range from 1240' to 1180' in the northwest corner. Detailed grading and drainage plans will be required when the property is platted. Wetlands: Minnesota Statutes now require that all developments be reviewed for the presence of wetlands or hydric soils. According to the Soils Survey, hydric soils do not exist on this property. McGhie & Betts Environmental Services, Inc., conducted an on -site investigation and found no evidence that wetlands exist on this site. Public Utilities: This area is within the Willow Heights High Level Water Service Area, available on the east side of 181h Avenue SW at the northeast comer of the property. The watermains in the cul-de-sacs will need to be looped. Specific routing of sanitary sewer and water lines will be reviewed during the platting process. Parkland Dedication: Parkland dedication requirements for this development should be met though a combination of cash and land. The proposed park site should be increased in size to at least 4.0 acres, preferred to occur directly north of the 30' access located on the SW comer of the park site. The 4.0 acre park shall have a minimum of 100' of street frontage. The Open Space and the 30' wide access to the Open Space located in the NW corner of the GDP, should be platted as on Outlot and dedicated to the City. The applicant shall be responsible for grading and turf establishment of the 30' access, including removal of all downed trees and construction debris. Environmental Review: Since the development is not conveying 80 or more acres to a more intensive land use (only 73 acres is being developed, with 7 acres remaining as Open Space) an EAW is not required for this development. • 0 Page 4 110 General Development Plan 00-157 Hart Farms August 3,2000 Referral Comments: 1. Planning Dept. Transportation Division 2. Rochester Public Works 3. John Harford, Planning Dept. & Wetlands RGU 4. Rochester Park & Recreation 5. RPU Water Division 6. Olmsted County SWC❑ 7. Rochester Fire Dept. 8. Planning Dept. GIS Division 9. Olmsted County Public Works Report Attachments: 1. Reduced Copy of General Development Plan Map 2. Area Map 3. Referral Comments (9) 4. Proposed General Development Plan Narrative Summate: This GDP includes approximately 80 acres of land for development of single family residential lots with a density of approximately 3 units per acre. Several public roads are proposed to serve this development. The GDP also proposes to dedicate parkland located in the south central portion of this development and 7 acres of open space with a 30' wide access located in the NW corner. Phasing will begin from 181 Avenue SW to the west, with the Open Space located in the NW corner being completed last. Staff Suggested Findings and Recommendation: Paragraph 61.215 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual lists the criteria for approval of a general development plan (see attached section from the newly adopted regulations, which became affective May 15, 1999. Criteria A. The proposed land uses are generally in accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and zoning map, or that the means for reconciling any differences have been addressed. A GDP may be processed simultaneously with a rezoning or plan amendment request. This GDP proposes low density residential development, within the R-1 zoning district. This is consistent with the land use designation for the property. Criteria B. The proposed development, including its lot sizes, density, access and circulation are compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use of adjacent property. The density and tot sizes for the development appear consistent with the Land Use Plan and the future rezoning of the property once the annexation is approved by the MN Planning / Office of Strategic Long Range Planning. The proposed vehicular systems provide for the connection to adjacent properties. Pages Rl General Development Plan 00-157 Hart Farms August 3, 2000 Criteria C. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing Plans. The development density is consistent with a Low Density Residential land use designation of the Land Use Plan. The GDP is consistent with the Housing Plan and the standards for the physical and social environments of residential neighborhoods. Criteria D. The proposed plan makes provisions for planned capital improvements and streets reflected in the City of Rochester's current 6-Year Capital Improvement Program, adopted Thoroughfare Plan, the ROCOG Long -Range Transportation Plan, Official Maps, and any other public facilities plans adopted by the City. Street system improvements required to accommodate proposed land uses and projected background traffic are compatible with the existing uses and uses shown in the adopted Land Use Plan for the subject and adjacent properties, in order to be consistent with the Long Range Bicycle Facility Plan , accommodations are needed for a 10' wide bituminous path along the westerly ROW of 18w Avenue SW. A pedestrian facilities easement will be required along 18th Avenue SW outside of the ROW. A right turn lane will be required from 181 Avenue SW (Co. Rd 147) to Hart Drive SW. Criteria E. On and off -site public facilities are adequate, or will be adequate if the development is phased in, to serve the properties under consideration and will provide access to adjoining land in a manner that will allow development of those adjoining lands in accord with this ordinance. 1. Street system adequacy shall be based on the street system's ability to safely accommodate trips from existing and planned land uses on the existing and proposed street system without creating safety hazards, generating auto stacking that blocks driveways or intersections, or disrupting traffic flow on any street, as identified in the traffic impact report, if required by Section 61.523(C). Capacity from improvements in the first 3 years of the 6-year CIP shall be included in the assessment of adequacy. In order to be consistent with the Long Range Bicycle Facility Plan , accommodations are needed for a 10' wide bituminous path along the westerly ROW of le Avenue SW. A pedestrian facilities easement will be required along 18tb Avenue SW outside of the ROW. A secondary access will need to be provided before the City authorizes any construction that would be projected to generate traffic In excess of 1200 average daily trips through the one access to le Avenue SW. r�Page 6 General Development Plan 00-157 Hart Farms August 3, 2000 2. Utilities are now available to directly serve the area of the proposed land use, or that the City of Rochester is planning for the extension of utilities to serve the area of the proposed development and such utilities are in the first three years of the City's current 6-Year Capital Improvements Program, or that other arrangements (contractual, development agreement, performance bond, etc.) have been made to ensure that adequate utilities will be available concurrently with development. If needed utilities will not be available concurrent with the proposed development, the applicant for the development approval shall stipulate to a condition that no development will occur and no further development permit will be issued until concurrency has been evidenced. The area is within the Willow Heights High Level Water Service Area, available on the east side of 18t1 Avenue SW at the northeast corner of the property. Water and sewer will need to be extended to serve this development and will need to be extended through the sites as the property develops. Easements for the extension of off site utilities, and for the construction of off -site stormwater detention facilities will be required prior to Final Plat submittal. 3. The adequacy of other public facilities shall be based on the level of service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing plan for development. Detailed construction plans will need to be approved for all infrastructure improvements. A 10' wide bituminous path will be required along the westerly ROW of 18fb Avenue SW. Criteria F. The drainage, erosion, and construction in the area can be handled through normal engineering and construction practices, or that, at the time of land subdivision, a more detailed investigation of these matters will be provided to solve unusual problems that have been identified. Storm Water Management must be provided for this development. Detailed grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the submittal of final plats for the property. Detailed construction plans will need to be approved for all Infrastructure improvements. Criteria G. The lot, block, and street layout for all development and the lot density for residential development are consistent with the subdivision design standards contained in Section 64.100 and compatible with existing and planned development of adjacent parcels. The lot, block layout and lot density for the development appear to be consistent with the Subdivision Design Standards. Specific lot and block layouts will be reviewed at the time the property Is platted. The proposed densities are compatible with existing and planned development of other parcels in the area. Page 7 General development Plan 00-157 Hart Farms August 3, 2000 Recommendation; Based on the above criteria, staff would recommend that the following conditions should be imposed in order to assure compliance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual: 1. Storm water management must be provided for this development. Any ponds serving 50 developable acres or less will remain private, and execution of long term maintenance and ownership agreements will be required. All required private stormwater facilities must be constructed concurrent with the initial stages of development. 2. The property shall be platted. When platted, dedication of a 50' ROW along 181h Avenue SW with controlled access, as shown on the GDP, along 181" Avenue SW and the westerly lot lines along Hart Drive SW. lying easterly of 19'" Avenue SW shall be provided. Also during the platting process, 191^ Avenue SW shall be changed to a "Named Drive SW". 3. A right turn lane will be required from 18' Avenue SW (CR 147) to Hart Drive SW. The Developer is responsible for ail costs associated with development of the right turn lane. 4. Park dedication requirement shall be met through a combination of land and cash. The proposed park site should be increased in size to at least4.0 acres, preferred to occur directly north of the 30' access located on the SW corner of the park site and have a minimum 100' of street frontage. Prior to deeding the park property to the City, the applicant shall remove all buildings, foundations, slabs, footing, remove and seal all wells and septic systems, remove all gravel roads, remove all dead, dying or diseased trees and stumps The Open Space and the 30 foot wide access to the Open Space in the northwest corner of the GDP property shall be platted as an Outlot and dedicated to the City. The applicant is responsible for grading and turf establishment of the 30' access, including removal of all downed trees and construction debris. 5. A 10' wide bituminous path is required along the west ROW of 181b Avenue SW. A pedestrian facilities easement will be required along 18m Avenue SW for this pedestrian path. 6. At the time of platting, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Rochester that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to; storm water management; park dedication; traffic improvements; pedestrian facilities; contributions for public infrastructure, including contribution obligations toward traffic improvements in the area attributable to this project. 7. Easements for the extension of off site utilities, and for the construction of off -site stormwater detention facilities will be required prior to Final Plat submittal. 8. A Revised GDP be submitted to the Planning Department reflecting the following changes: A 10' wide pedestrian facilities along 181 Avenue SW A 4 acre public park in the south central portion of the property with a minimum of 100' of street frontage • The 7 acre Open Space and 30' wide access to the Open Space in the northwest corner of the GDP be labeled as an Outlot. 0 Page 8 0 0 t General Development Plan 00-157 Hart Farms August 3,2000 NOTE: • At the time of platting, temporary turn -a -rounds maybe required. • Prior to development, the property owner will need to execute a City Owner Contract for construction of the public roadways and utilities. l TRANSPORTATION S,,,, . DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REVIEW DA pa lo> costs associated with improvements addressing neighborhood traffic problems will be a shared cost between the neighborhood and the ci . City GDP #157 Consistent with the Long Range Bicycle Facility Plan accommodation should be Hart Farms provided for development of a trail facility along the frontage on 18" Ave, Applicantshould check work with Public Works Departments of City and County to determine location of trail — whether it will fit within existing right of way or whether easement needs to be provided on east side of lots backing u to 18 h Ave City Fin Plat 0-15 No comment Pinewood Hills First ROCHESTER Minnesota 7/26/00 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 General Development Plan #157Lon the Hart Farms (MOG, LLC)-property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. Storm Water Management must be provided for this development. A Voluntary Stormwater Management Fee will apply to all areas of this proposed development that do not drain to the proposed detention facility. 2. Controlled access must be provided as shown on the proposed GDP plan, along the right-of-way of 181h Ave SW, with the exception of the approved new road access across from 36" St SW. Additional controlled access is required as indicated on the plan, along the frontage of the new access road and westerly lot lines of the proposed lots abutting Hart Drive SW lying east of 19a' Ave SW. 3. The Developer shall dedicate 50 feet of ROW for 18a' Ave SW. 4. Easements for the extension of off site utilities, and for the construction of off site stormwater detention facilities will be required prior to Final Plat submittal. 5. Pedestrian facilities (concrete sidewalk) will be required along both sides of all new public roads abutting this property, and a 10 foot wide bituminous path is required along the west ROW of 18a' Ave SW. A pedestrian facilities easement will be required along 18'h Ave SW for the required pedestrian path. 6. The 30 foot wide access to the Open Space in the northwest corner of the GDP property should be platted as an Outlot and dedicated to the City. 7. Specific routing of sanitary sewer and water lines will be reviewed further during the platting stages. 8. Execution of a City -Owner Contract will be required prior to construction of public infrastructure. C:ITEMPVGDP157.doc ROCHESTER 197 Minnesota 7/26/00 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 10. Prior to Final Plat submittal, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but not limited to, substandard street reconstruction charges & Traffic Improvement District charges, 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 (rates are subject to annual review and change): 4o Sanitary Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) @ $2677.50 per developable acre (An up -front contribution of $100,000.00 is required as recommended in the feasibility report). •:• Water Availability Charge (WAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre. A Substandard Street Reconstruction Charge and contribution to the SW TID, will be required for 180'Ave SW. Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division. C:ITEMP\GDP157.doc 129 i ROCHESTER PARK AND mr-CREATION DEPARTMENT DATE: July 20, 2000 TO: Jennifer Garness Planning FROM: Denny Stotz Pr MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: General Development Plan #157 The Hart Farms The development will have a dedication requirement of t 6.0 acres. The Park Department recommends that the dedication be met via a combination of land and cash. The proposed park site should be increased in size to at least 4.0 acres. It is preferred that the additional dedication occur directly north of the 30' access located on the SW corner of the park site. The 4.0 acre park should have a minimum of 100' of street frontage. Prior to deeding the park property, the applicant should be required to: a. remove all buildings, foundations, slabs, footings b. remove and seal all wells and septic systems c. remove all gravel roads d. remove all dead, dying or diseased trees and stumps The general development report states that no pedestrian access is planned for the 7.0 acre open space parcel located in the NW corner of the project. The site plan does indicate a 30' access however. The access should remain if the parcel is to become public. The applicant should be responsible for grading and turf establishment on the access. Prior to deeding the parcel the applicant should be required to remove all downed trees and construction debris. i TV we pledge, we deliver July 18, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: General Development Plan #1157 by MOG, LLC to be known as Hart Farms. Dear Ms. Gayness: Our review of the referenced general development plan 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. This area is within the Willow Heights High Level Water Service Area, which is available on the east side of 181h Ave SW at the northeast comer of the property. 3. The water mains in the cul-de-sacs will need to be looped. 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 yours, (• o-- - 0644ft Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention McGhie & Betts, Inc. MOG, LLC Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 507/285-8231 July 19, 2000 Jennifer Garness Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 Dear Jennifer: The Public Works Department has reviewed General Development Plan #157 to be known as Hart Farms and has the following comments: • $175 will be required for street sign and $50 per stop sign. Right turn lane will be required from 181h Ave SW (Co. Rd 147) to Hart Drive SW. • Access control shall be shown along Co: Rd 147. • 10 foot easement will be needed for bike trail. Sincerely, `& Michael Sheehan County Engineer MTS:ss t:%e ng indoclplanzone. doc ...yea. Administration AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Building Maintenance Surveying and Mapping Engineering Highway Maintenance Parks & Agriculture Solid Waste M cGhie 1314.111"o 116etts, Inc. Rochester Minnesota 29F � 1 TV Ms. Mitzi Baker Senior Planner Consolidated Planning Department 2122 SE Campus Dr. Rochester, MN 55904 Land Surveying Re: "Hart Farms" General Development Plan Urban - Land Planning Dear Ms. Baker: Consulting - Civil Engineering I am writing on behalf of our client, MOG, LLC, to inform you that a neighborhood Geotechnical Engineering meeting for this project will not be held. According to Mr. Groteboer, he has met individually with several neighbors at his office in the Bambridge Subdivision. They Construction Material Testing have reviewed the proposed plan and seem very supportive of the project. Landscape architecture Mr. Groteboer will continue to informally offer the neighbors an opportunity to review the plan and ask questions prior to the Planning Commission review. Mr. Grotoboer is also arranging a meeting with Mr. Peters who owns the land to the north • of the project site where the shared detention facility will be located. In accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, the neighborhood meeting is voluntary. If you have any questions, concerns, or suggested modifications to the plan, we would appreciate notification prior to the staff report being issued so we can have an opportunity to address any issues you may have with the project. It should be noted that I will be in charge of Hart Farms and the Del American project so please be sure to address all verbal and written comments to me. Mr. Masterpole will be handling the Boulder Ridge project. Once again, do not hesitate to contact us with any questions or concerns. Yours very truly, McGHIE & BETTS, INC. William E. Tointon WET/bd Pc Mr. Merl Groteboer 1648 Third Avenue S.E. Mr. Andy Masterpole MN 55904 #hester, Mr. Mike Nigbur Tel. 507.289.3919 Fax. 507.289.7333 e-mail. mcghiebetts.com Established 1946 Page 27 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 cul-de-sac. 6. A Wetland Delineation replIv must permits obtained prior to pla 7. Parkland dedication requ' ents this of land. - 8. A public pedes nconnection from the p First Subdiv' n may be required at the ti mitted to the City and the necessary development be in the form of cash in lieu u roadway to Outiot G in Bandel North meth opertyis developed General Development Plan #157 by MOG, LLC to be known as Hart Farms The applicant is proposing to develop approximately 80 acres into a single family residential development with a density of approximately 3 units per. acre. The development also Y proposes public roadways and public open space. The property is located along the �! westside of 18"' Avenue SW fCo. Rd. 147), north of 40` Street SW. across from 36 Street SW. Ms. Theresa Fogarty presented the staff report, dated August 3, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Ms. Fogarty indicated that the consultant has worked with the Park and Recreation Department have agreed to change Condition Number 8 (second bullet) to indicated that a 3.8 acre public park in the south central portion of the property with a minimum of 100' of street frontage. Discussion ensued regarding where the 30' access is located, listed in Condition Number 4 of the staff report. Mr. Tointon, of McGhie and Betts, addressed the Commission. His presentation notes are on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Tointon stated that the 30 foot access is proposed on the west side of the development. The Park and Recreation Department requested that the access point be changed to a 100 foot width. Mr. Tointon stated that Condition Number 4 of the staff report needs to reflect 3.8 acres for the park instead of 4.0. Ms. Schultze stated that the second sentence of Condition Number 4 should be stated as follows: "The proposed park site should be increased in size to at least 3.8 acres with a minimum of 100 foot street frontage at the southwest corner access." With no one else wishing to be heard, Ms. Petersson closed the public hearing. Ms. Schultze moved to approve General `Development Plan #157.t6 be Known as"Hart Farms Property, with staff -suggested findings and conditions ,as ameno, above. 14r. Brede seconded the motion. The motion carried4-0. Page 28• • City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes d Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 FINDINGS: Criteria A. This GDP proposes low density residential development, within the R-j. zoning district. This is consistent with the land use designation for tho_, property. Criteria B. .The density and lot sizes for the development appedr cons3ateri Mylt Land Use plan and the future rezoning' of the propert �ptt me the apna�4�fi I* approved by !de MN Planning f Oifice of 5tra>te�11� ; ��� Rangy p�a>lahig, The proposed vghlcular systems:provwe ,orthe copitect(ep to ed�ttt properties; = Criteria C. The development density 1s consistent with a Lowien;;ttr Resldentiat laud use designation of the Land Use.Plan. The 60J." webtisistardvutthlf 4# R rasiden#tai, neig)Orhoods. w < fi xK F n �s „ u ) J as h 5- Criteria A in order tQ be 0orisistent with the Lorid Ran a $}q r #t f accommodatlonsateneeded.tprtQ'vi►yiieyitttit`ia'��ii�a required along 18 Avenue S#ai ogtsid� A r 'ht turn lane, til be ne' ulred from 1i3 Avenue t• to ad. Grlte�ts � � . _ � �. xs, F � �a,L M, ..�`• 7� x ', ` v .•. � Y' 4Y'��°`, •x is `t�64'� s-fin $1�b �j��i�',�^ � `tali i, in;vrder isf be eos►'€%te� � the 1"0�'�����eh°a��'� sccpmmodatiorw&,a +� neerietl $or a � mid od ath alon Yrt ��°' westeri 1Rt3W '� k ie �lvdhd6 ,@ � 3�. p „4 fh��. .t .`•'. :r e�_: E u <iykr x: 's �a.; ...:p''t'y J#seconda�ec+�.esa'mill:niaediwii_eiiovlddi�b';B'forectSaia+�l�r�m'l4ra'' lan'u+i. °_ .Aye tiirYe 4o,$, subrriittel,, ,: 3 .: e.. 3, Detalled`sapstructlun p9arls will need to b@ improvements.. (� Page 29 �j ity Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 A O' wide bituminous path will be required along the westerly ROW of 181h ' Avenue'SW Criteria F. Storm Water Management must be' proyided'16r this develoPmerit Detailed grading and drainage plans will need to be sugmitted to the City for: ; revlew and approval prior to the submittal of final plats for tti+;ropett, Detailed construction plans will need to be approved toot all infras#ructurra +rnprovernenis, ` Criteria G The lot, block layout and lo`density far the dgvsloPinent appeaF{oilg consistent with the Subdivision Design $tanslards 5peclfio iilt'ar if bloi t layoUts will be reviewed at.ttia time the property Is plafteg. Tire<T1ptased� densities aro eom�atlble vyith existir anydlanoed deyJwapleef o?jer, parcels lglte prey , y x> }�; i /+/� CONDiTIftlVt �Y� f a yKy r Ax it yaS yd Sj @p E¢ i ` �. Storirlatermanagmrabs"�pr��idis�[tTiii,sie1t?l serviln 51) deVeibPabte acfas or fgas wilt reifieirie�pn ale T maipfenancearldriiersjlps9leornen�213`-y �'b�a +j��j _yy� r �lli� stormwater facilities must tie constructed coticl�rr00 wTt fhe In tial h a ee of r develo merit. ✓', t r t^M YF•2.. 5 .F A5`'Ha Y)�ww.i4w... 2 +The property s#iap;bP Platted 3ll(lipp platt#Istietiicag a �tplila"Ibtlg i Avenue wIthcis t��ITar# as �hRYi► f Pf'x a1o�i t ii d � and firs„ rgest r f lines 1Rtira Dv �gilrg easteir1yif9 �A�iriue5iif snau ne provl�de! Also r> tfla pia i � ' °rN iO A fiijg'S�s i�rliq� fi clierr a fp i`iVaitied Drive S w � . is `%' a `u. sx3s' + x w"- '"" v, q ".v*z ��5. ffiM .,n. , NW. x�?+iy'y E!r ►fin u, i(nagat,sw>, no, mt t Aga y, 4 ,Park dedic�atiart ra i3r@1 p�It idi� iP 11i$t th yl ��Co t n e pro used PR Alti3 rRVAI iii��A!�Sjreas�a �)z8 t ®` i�e���) f M1 4. w'wr f 4Y I 64L.y +y tt iilpo,atWeatiq�itae the sopv� Coto Ve for to � the park propery fb thg City; the a an itaji to `pig ) p1 i&13rt ' undo#le slabs fttb�lti�, refnp'�� =se�i �� tls sp��tic .. m���;lfri:ivgl r' ' f tt�. v x• ,;.. r . EE y i• c s 5't" „ n rT Il 937 _ a . -- ' '� _"��'' •§�' L2*y,�' dr'l... �'. Thy QReli a anal fire 8 Q©VO I me corner of the GDP property shall elate an i;3u£, yetilietTity The apppilcant is responsible for grading aril tt ssfalshrit �' acce"ss, inr ludin$ removal Qf yp down trees arld co�s#li d .�, - � +3 i t .. - y 5 ♦'Y r Kd3i ra A-10' wide biturPinoy pt'!ir sl alnn� t w l i. ► ides rian:facilitlesas+lmer>x�+tAlite to utrei a oa ':�i8 ianLu S1111 f # i 5. " le Page 30 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes i Hearing Date: August 4, 2000 pedestrian path. 6. At the time of platting, the applicant shall enter into a Development Al the City of Rochester that outlines; the obligations of the applicant rei' g P ', traffie mpfgver IimfterJj to; storm water mono ement; ark dedication pedestrian facilities; contribuEioas for public Infrastructure;, Ii ricJudirt gbligatiojis toward. traffic improvements in the area attributableA #hi f' _ 7. 'Easements for the extensloh of off site utiilties, and forthe co>nstriactl stormwater detention facilities will be required pripf td iFinai Plat s,06v 8.. A Revised GDP be submitted3o the Planning Department refiectlgp th • A 10',wide pedestrian facllittgAvenue • The 7 acre 0000' Space ;and 301 wide access to the Qp if,I corner of the te'gi=+lre late�ed es;as3lQutio� OTHER BUSINESS: 1. Arn+ dmentto Mr. Svenby staTS4&t the Rochester Public Works Department hayAuested that Official Street Map Number T&ke amended to include additional right -of-. gay for the TH 63 corridor south improvements. Mr. Svenby referred to a me mor um, dated August 1)00, from Mike Nigbur of Rochester Public Works, which is on file at the Chester-Olms Planning Department. Mr. ;05 Mr. Quinn asked if the road to the east Highway is an existing roadway, which is shown on page 230 of the.staff report. Mr. Nigbur responded no. He ipd Gated that the purpose of t roadway Mr. Nigbur explained 6fined what they thought they would ne hree years ago, based on a general study of thg; rea. However, they have found that amend is need to be made. 2. No discussion Xms were brought forward. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING a DATE: 9-6-00" O AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ORIGINATING DEPT: PLANNING M DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase III Restricted Development #00.20 Final Plan by South _.-adway Partners L.L.C. The applicant is requesting approval of a manufactured home park to be located in the M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial) zoning district. This plan includes Phase II of the development. Phase I of the development was approved last year, Phase II consists of 41 lots for manufactured homes and private roadways. The property is located, east of St. Bridget Road (CSAH 20) and north of 45'" Street SE (CR 101). August 24, 2000 City Plannino and Zoning Commission Recommendation: ITEM NO. Q(� so PREPARED BY: Brent Svenby, Planner Z� The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 9, 2000 to consider this restricted development final plan for phase II. Todd Hawkinson, Yaggy Colby Associates, addressed the Commission. He made comments with regards to some of the comments received from the referral agencies. The Planning Commission reviewed this request according to the applicable criteria and standards in the LDM. The Commission found that this request is consistent with those criteria, subject to the following modifications or conditions: Conditions: The applicant obtains the required licenses for manufactured home parks under Minnesota Statutes 327.15 and Chapter 4630 of the Rules of the Department of Health prior to the issuance of permits for development. Dutlot B of The Gardens be re -platted and the easements for the public facilities (sanitary sewer, electric, telephone, etc..) within the property must be provided. At the time of replatting, rear lot line utility easements shall be provided. The water main on Daisy Ave. SE and Daffodil Ave. SE shall be interconnected. 4. Each manufactured home lot shall have a stand with a surface graded for positive drainage away from the stand. The stand shall be either a paved slab, or compacted gravel or crushed stone with a total depth of at least four (4) inches. The stand should conform in size to the perimeter dimensions of the walls of the manufactured home and be used as the area for the properly engineered support system for the manufactured home on the site. A permanent foundation can supplant the required stand. The remainder of the manufactured home lot shall be graded for drainage. All graded areas shall be planted with grass to prevent erosion. 5. The applicant must operate the manufacture home park in accordance to Section 62.262 (1) (17) & (18). 6. At the time of platting, easements of temporary turn turn -a -rounds be provided at the end of Daffodil Avenue SE and Daisy Avenue SE. 7. All roadways less than 28 feet wide must be posted "No Parking — Fire Lane" on both sides of the street with signs located in accordance with Public Works Department specifications. ......JNCIL ACTION: motion by: second to: Page 2 R�O CA August 24, 2 CO Mr. Brede made a motion to approve Restricted Development Final Plan #00-20 by South Broadway Partners LLC, with the staff -suggested findings and conditions. Mr. Burke seconded the motion. Th motion carried 8-0. Council Action Needed: 1. 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. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated August 3, 2000 2. Minutes of August 9, 2000 CPZC Meeting 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 Wednesday, September 6, 2000 in the Council/Board Chambers in the Government Center at 151 4th Street SE. 6. Yaggy Colby Associates i r 60 ST SW <S ST SW % ( 48 ST SE SW T HWY 52 The Gardens 45 ST SE I , CO! W . • 1 3i:} 131 ' I:s ie off:y SS3:)Jv 19'9901 .. V=)1l�jvdd V NVId 311S MIVNIMIRld YIDS/NNiw'aals3rooa 1N3lNdOl3A3O SN341lV!D 3H1 a WN ° I =- _1 I I I I S N @@Q I � I $a 0 .1........ V) z w r) LLJ - Q 0 V) LLJ z E w L u.J _' U 0 ce s3a 7 5 ° 133HS"ll C s t s� ?g r�gFi V1OS3NNIW 53FUOM e r $ II 3SVHd S €$ ?"siid € a SNRAYO 3H1 in CS 5 o y 6 A 6 Ra a $ NYld ••5 ��?� �e!;lp d1053NNIW H:)ON e 1A 1 •VF- •� s� i i§'l ;�esg9i it 3SYHd SN3(]VD 3H1 63 g 9t i g 8 NVId 101"Id.11ip $ S �4 3 �a3j Fj V1053NNIN ' . HDO-4 • 8S3 1 g�s�(E93 11 3SVHd 31 I si[?Sa 1 SN3o2IVJ 3Hl € it da ; s i at cauxrr of /Li .- TO: City Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Brent Svenby, Planner DATE: August 3, 2000 .Ot :p0CH......R..Ill.1.1 •' "'k R'fG TEO:AUGUST` ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 507/2B5-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELL/SEPTIC 507/285-8345 RE: Type III, Phase III Restricted Development Final Plan #00-20 by South 5071287-2275 Broadway Partners L.L.C. The applicant is requesting approval of a manufactured home park to be located in the M-1 (Mixed Commercial -industrial) zoning district. This plan includes Phase II of the development. Phase I was approved last year. Phase II consists of 41 lots for manufactured homes and private roadways. The property is located east of St. Bridget Road (CSAH 20) and north of 45`h Street SE (CR 101). Planning Department Review Applicant: South Broadway Partners L.L.0 1002 North Broadway Rochester, MN 55906 Architect: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 3rd Avenue SE Rochester, MN 55904 Property Location and Size: The applicant is proposing developing the second phase of a manufactured home park. The total park acreage will be approximately 78.5 acres of land located east of St. Bridget Road, north of 45 h Street SE. The density of the development is approximately 4.5 units per acre. Zoning: The Property is zoned M-1 (Mixed Commercial - Industrial) district. Adjacent Land Use: North: undeveloped land zoned B-4 (General Commercial) in the City of Rochester. South: Across 45`h Street SE is vacant land in the County zoned A-4 (Agricultural -Urban Expansion). East: Seneca Spray fields zoned A-4 (Agricultural- 777�.x..,... Urban Expansion) in Olmsted County. �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY!AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Phase IT Final Plan 08/03/00 • / �/ Page 2 West: Platted lots zoned M-1 (Mixed Commercial - Industrial) in the City of Rochester. Summary of Proposal: The applicant is proposing to develop phase II of a manufactured home park consisting of 41 single wide manufactured homes. All of the roadways within the development will be private. The roadways are proposed to be designed with a 21 foot paved driving surface and a T wide pedestrian path. The total width of the roadway, including the path and curb is 28 feet. Phase I of the development consisted of 95 lots (26 lots for single -wide and 69 lots for double -wide) which is currently under construction. Phase I also includes construction of the storm shelter/office, mailboxes, bus shelters and a 4.19 acre public park. Public Utilities: Utilities are currently being installed in Phase I of the development and will be available to serve this property. Referral Agency Comments: 1. RPU Water Division 2. RPU Operation Division 3. MnDOT 4. Rochester Public Works 5. Olmsted County Public Works Dept. 6. Planning Dept. — Wetlands LGU 7. Planning Dept. - Transportation 8. Olmsted County SWCD 9. Rochester Fire Department 10. Olmsted County Planning Dept. Attachments: Referral Comments (6) LDM Excerpts Location Map Approved Preliminary Plan Final Site Plan Phase II Explanation of Application and review procedures: The applicant is proposing to develop a manufactured home park in the M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial) zoning district. Since manufactured home parks are not permitted in the M-1 zoning district, the applicant has proposed the development by proceeding through the Restricted Development provisions. Phase tl Final Plan V/Aa /00 Page ' Pagege 3 3 The Restricted Development provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual (Section 62.700) recognize that certain land uses which are generally not allowed within a given zoning district can, if regulated, "serve both the public interest and allow a more equitable balancing of private interests than that achieved by strict adherence to standards zoning regulations". This application requires a two step review process, consisting of a preliminary plan and a final plan. The final plan phase follows the Type 111, Phase III, procedure with a review before the Planning Commission and a hearing before the Council. Analysis: The preliminary plan for the manufactured home park was approved by the Council on August 16, 1999. The approval of the preliminary plat was subject to nine (9) conditions. The conditions as listed below: Grading and drainage plans for this project must be approved by Public Works prior to final approval of the project. Controlled access must be shown along the entire west side of the plan, except at the two access locations shown. 3. A Traffic Design Analysis must be prepared, submitted and approved prior to the approval of the Final Plan. 4. Storm Water Management facilities must be constructed prior to the development of phase I. 5. Water mains must be located within 20' minimum utility easement. The RPU Water Division must approve all utility easement locations on the Final Plan. 6. Utilities must be extended to the North, East and South property lines as determined by the City. The Fire Prevention Bureau must approve fire hydrant spacing. The property must be platted and the easements for any public facilities within the property must be provided. The property owner/applicant is responsible for identifying any wetlands on the property that may exist and for securing the proper permits prior to disturbing any wetlands that may be located on the property. 9. Parkland dedication requirements for this development must be met as specified in the attached memo from the Rochester Park and recreation Department dated August 12, 1999. In evaluating the final development plan phase the criteria included in Section 62.708 2) of the LDM shall be considered (see attached). Phase II Final Plan 08/03J00 Page 4 The Planning Staff would suggest the following findings in regard to the proposed request: (A) Public Facility Design: Public Utilities are being installed in Phase I of the development and will need to be extended to serve this phase. Prior to the submittal of a replat for this phase, construction plans will need to be approved. (B) Geologic Hazards: Wetlands do not exist in this phase of development. A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and is on file with the Planning Department. (C) Access Effect: Access to phase 11 will be from phase 1. (D) Pedestrian Circulation: All of the roadways in the development will be private with a pedestrian path provided on one side of the roadway. There will also be a pedestrian trail along the perimeter of the development. (E) Foundation and Site Planning: The applicant has shown that bufferyard meeting requirements of "D" type bufferyard along the eastern edge of the development will be provided. (F) Site Status: The entire development will be private except the public parkland within the development. The developer will be responsible for any maintenance and ownership for the development except for the public park. (G) Screening and Bufferyards: The applicant has provided the necessary bufferyard along the east property boundary. (H) Final Building Design: Staff used the setback requirements of Section 62.262 (1) (c) (3) & (4) of the LDM when reviewing this proposal. The proposed building placements meet the lot development standards. (1) Internal Circulation Areas: Off-street parking requirements for this development are met with the current design of the development. (J) Ordinance Requirements: It appears that the development meets the ordinance requirements. Staff Recommendation: Staff has reviewed this request for the Final Plan for Phase II and would recommend approval of Phase 11 of the manufactured home park with the following conditions/modifications: 1. The applicant obtains the required licenses for manufactured home parks under Minnesota Statutes 327.15 and Chapter 4630 of the Rules of the Department of Health prior to the issuance of permits for this development. 2. Outlot B of The Gardens be re -platted and the easements for the public facilities (sanitary sewer, water, electric, telephone, etc..) within the property must be provided. Phase II Final Plan 0 Page 5"0"00 3. At the time of replatting, rear lot line utility easements shall be provided. The water main on Daisy Ave. SE and Daffodil Ave. SE shall be interconnected. 4. Each manufactured home lot shall have a stand with a surface graded for positive drainage away from the stand. The stand shall be either a paved slab, or compacted gravel or crushed stone with a total depth of at least four (4) inches. The stand should conform in size to the perimeter dimensions of the walls of the manufactured home and be used as the area for the properly engineered support system for the manufactured home on the site. A permanent foundation can supplant the required stand. The remainder of the manufactured home lot shall be graded for drainage. All graded areas shall be planted with grass to prevent erosion. 5. The applicant must operate the manufacture home park in accordance to Section 62.262 (1) (17) & (18). 6. At the time of platting, easements of temporary turn turn -a -rounds be provided at the end of Daffodil Avenue SE and Daisy Avenue SE. 7. All roadways less than 28 feet wide must be posted "No Parking — Fire Lane" on both sides of the street with signs located in accordance with Public Works Department specifications. Phase 11 Final Plan 08/03/00 Page 6 LAND DEVELOMENT MANAUL EXCERPTS 62.700 RESTRICTED DEVELOPMENT Certain mixtures of land uses which are not allowed within a given zoning district on a permitted or conditional basis can, if regulated, serve both the public interest and allow a more equitable balancing of private interests than that achieved by strict adherence to standard zoning regulations. The regulations of this article recognize and provide encouragement for innovation and experimentation in the development of land that would otherwise not be possible under the zoning district regulations established by this ordinance. 62.701 Approval Procedures for Restricted Developments: All types of Restricted Development are identified as Type I, 11 or III uses in Sections 62.720 through 62.760, and are processed according to the Type I, 11 or III Review Procedures accordingly. For Type III Restricted Developments, a two step review process consisting of a Preliminary Development Plan and a Final Development Plan shall be utilized. The Preliminary Development Plan shall be reviewed under the Type III Review Procedure, with a Phase II Hearing Process utilized. The Final Development Plan shall be reviewed under the Type III Review Procedure, with a Phase III Hearing Process utilized. 62.707 Standards for Approval, Final Development Plan: The Council shall grant final approval to a Type III Restricted Development if it finds (a) the development satisfies the Preliminary Development Plan Standards for Approval listed in Section 62.706; (b) the development satisfies the applicable criteria listed in Paragraph 62.708(2), or a modification for any unmet criteria has been granted as provided in Section 62.712; and (c) there is an executed development agreement which identifies, and commits the developer to complete, those aspects of the site plan specified by the Council. 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: 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: 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. Phase II Final Plan 08/03/00 L/ 7 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 terms 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 of Approved Type III Restricted Development: Following Council approval of a final development plan, the zoning administrator may issue a zoning certificate for the development consistent with the approved plan. Except for issues addressed by a development agreement, the procedure for handling changes to an approved plan shall be the same as for conditional uses, which is identified in Paragraph 61.148. i El a ROCHESTER Minnesota 7/26/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur jai DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 Public Works has reviewed the requested Restricted Development Final Plan #00-20 by South Broadway Partners LLC (The Gardens Ph ID. The following are Public Works Comments on the proposal: 1. A Development Agreement has been executed for this property. 2. Provisions should be made for pedestrians to access the 10 foot bituminous path on the east side of the parcel, without crossing lots; i.e. a common pedestrian way, or a culvert across the drainage way, etc. 3. The ROW dedication for 451h St and 40"' St shall be revised to be consistent with the approved Development Agreement. Charges/fees applicable to the development of the subject property are address in the Development Agreement, with the exception of: 4- Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division: r �2a -w so a PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 507/285-8231 July 20, 2000 Jennifer Garness Planning Department Dear Jennifer: The Public Works Department has reviewed Type III, Phase III Restricted Development #00-20 Final Plan by South Broadway Partners L.L.C. and has the following comments: Interchange at 40"St and 48th St South with T.H. 63 are scheduled for November, 2002. Sincerely,., , Michael Sheehan County Engineer MTS:ss t:Wngi ndoclplanzone.doc Administration AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Building Maintenance Surveying and Mapping Engineering Highway Maintenance Parks 8 Agriculture Solid Waste r puu ive �le�lge, we �lehver July 18, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Type III, Phase III, Restricted Development Final Plan #00-20 by South Broadway Partners LLC for the approval of a manufactured home park to be located in the M-1 zoning district to be known as The Gardens Phase II. Dear Ms. Garness: Our review of the referenced Restricted Development Request is complete and our comments follow: 1. According to our hydraulic computer modeling to meet the minimum required flow for fire protection in this phase the water main on Daisy Ave. SE and Daffodil Ave. SE must be interconnected. This water main can extend between these two streets on the alignment of Peony St. SE and can be sized at either 6" or 8". 2. The static pressures in this area will vary from approximately 41 PSI at the north end to approximately 33 PSI at the south end of this phase. 3. Individual water meters must be located within 24" of the outside edge of the homes with an adjacent access panel according to both the RPU Water Service Rules and Regulations and the City of Rochester Department of Public Works Standard Detail Plate #6-11. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yours, R IML Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Bureau Todd Hawkinson, Yaggy Colby Associates South Broadway Partners Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 f U s � rve pCed're, we deliver 507/280-1579 July 6, 2000 TO: Jennifer Gamess, Planning Department Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department FROM: Michael J. Engle, Supv. of Distribution Design Rochester Public Utilities SUBJECT: Type III, Phase III Restricted Development #00-20 Final Plan by South Broadway Partners L.L.C. The applicant is requesting approval of a manufactured home park to be located in the M-1 (Mixed Commercial Industrial) zoning district. This plan includes Phase II of the development. Phase I of the development was approved last year. Phase II consists of 41 lots for the manufactured homes and private roadways. The property is located east of St. Bridget Road (CSAH 20) and north of 45m Street SE (CR 101). RPU's Operations Division has reviewed this restricted development final plan and has the following comments. Rear lot line utility easements will be needed for the installation of electrical distribution facilities. �Sincerely, Michael J. Engle ks Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, MN 55906-2813 telephone 507.280.1540 facsimile 507.280.1542 website www.rpu.org Page 2 City Planning and Zoning Comm scion Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 an asked if the State of Minnesota has a regulation that, if properties are completely by the City, the property could automatically be annexed into the City. Ms. Fogarty ted that the statutes allow the City to annex a property04 is surrounded 100 percent. There it allows the City to initiate the proceedings to ex that property into the City. The propertie at are not in the orderly annexation agr ent, between the City and Cascade Township, willV to the Minnesota Planning Offi or final approval. Ms. Schultze stated that there's�e two uses proposed to be located in the Ho Zone. Therefore, she questioned why it wbgr 4,1h the staff report for Site #3, which is #4, #5, and #6 have an industrial use. in the Holding Zone. Ms. Fogarty explained that the cur t use Zloll< ot match the existing zoning in the City. Ms. McGowan moved to pprove Annexation Pb 'tion #00-11 initiated by the City Council Mr. Quinn seconded a motion. The motion cam 8-0. Ms. Schultze ed what concerns the person in the audNienNbpwanted to discuss. Ms. Pe sson responded that the person submitted a letter expres ' her concerns, which wa cluded in the packet. PUBLIC HEARINGS: in the M-1 (Mixed Commercial -Industrial) zoning district. This plan includes Phase 11 of the development. Phase I of the development was approved last year. Phase II consists of 41 lots for manufactured homes and private roadways. The property is located east of St. Bridget Road (CSAH 201 and north of 45 Street BE (CR 101). Mr. Brent Svenby presented the staff report, dated August 3, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Mr. Svenby reviewed the history of the development. Ms. Schultze stated that, in the past, when the roadways have been less than 28 feet wide, they have requested that there be no parking only on one side. Therefore, she questioned why Condition Number 7, listed in the staff report, requests that both sides of the street be posted as "No Parking". Mr. Svenby responded that a pedestrian sidewalk is being proposed on the road surface. He indicated that it would also allow for adequate room for emergency response vehicles. Ms. Schultze asked what all the roadway widths would be in the development. Mr. Svenby responded 28 feet. He indicated that the main loop through the development is a wider surface. He indicated that the applicant could address the width of the loop. age 3 ity Planning and Zoning Comrnission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 Mr. Todd Hawkinson, of Yaggy Colby Associations, addressed the Commission. He stated that Garden Court is 32 feet wide. Mr. Hawkinson made the following comments with regard to Mike Nigbur's letter dated July 26, 2000: Comment No. 2: There is a 10-foot path planned. The provisions would be made through the future top lot at some point. Comment No. 3: The right-of-way dedication would be revised to be consistent with the Development Agreement signed in 1999. Mr. Hawkinson made the following comment with regard to Donn Richardson's letter dated July 6, 2000: Comment No. 1: They have drawn the crosstie on Peony Street in their construction plans. Ms. Schultze asked if he agrees with all of the staff -suggested conditions. Mr. Hawkinson responded yes. Mr. Werven asked why Phase I and Phase II are not connected. Mr. Hawkinson responded that they are not connected so that it slows traffic and also because there are homes at the ends of the streets. Mr. Werven stated that he thought that, when they looked at revising the ordinance for manufactured homes, they had the homes facing the street. Mr. Svenby responded that the application is being reviewed as a restricted development, since it is in the M-1 Zoning District. Mr. Nigbur explained that it was discussed, but it was not adopted that way. Mr. Schultze asked for staffs recommendation on the hammerheads not connecting to through streets. Mr. Svenby responded that the hammerheads act as cul-de-sacs and distribute traffic evenly throughout the development. Mr. Brede asked what percentage of the homes in the first phase has been sold. Mr. Hawkinson responded that he is unsure. However, the owners do receive calls consistently. With no one else wishing to be heard, Ms. Petersson closed the public hearing. Mr. Brede moved to approve Type III, Phase III Restricted Development#0, 20€ SQ�tj► Broadway Partners LLC with staff suggested findings and conilmothw=. Aif, 8glk s> seconded the motion. The motion carried 8-0. i Page 4 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 FINDINGS: (A) Public Facility Design: Public Utilities are being installed in Phase I of the development and will need to be extended to serve this phase. Prior to the submittal of a replat for this phase, construction plans will need to be approved. (B) Geologic Hazards: Wetlands do not exist in this phase of development. A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and is on file with the Planning Department. (C) Access Effect: Access to phase II will be from phase I. (D) Pedestrian Circulation: All of the roadways in the development will be private with a pedestrian path provided on one side of the roadway. There will also be a pedestrian trail along the perimeter of the development. (E) Foundation and Site Planning: The applicant has shown that a bufferyard m�eting ; requirements of "D" type bufferyard along the eastern edge of the de.vdloplme Will be provided. (F) Site Status: The entire development will bq.prlvate except the public-parklandllvlthln the development. The developer will be respOrlsibli for anyrnainteharldy and ownership for the developool it except for a ptibllc park. (G) Screening and But along the east prof (H) Final (3) & ndarlr,. _ J liv L _J_ s, t • �.� •. .y�Y �a�tluPi • • �. t. The applicant obtains the required licenses for manpfacttlf d horpe P. atr)Ss POW Minnesota Statutes 327.1 and Cho ter 40Q of the T Idles ofthe O V 01(w+4 ill itil prior to the issuance of permits fox fits gave bent R Ne h ) 2. Dutlot B of The Gardens be re platted anti tt)e easern601 Wr tIN 1N l facil t s (sanitary sewer, water,)electric, telephone, etc.) within the ptopli«rtli rrtit fi� ptovidiad, 3. At the time of replatting, rear lot line utility easempke shall* provldetl. The watei main on Daisy Ave. SE and Daffodil Ave. SE shall pe tntereonnectod,' Pag City 5 City Planning and Zoning Comm ssion Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 4. Each manufactured home lot shall have a stand with a surface graded for positive drainage away from the stand. The stand shall be either a paved slab, or compacted gravel or crushed stone with a total depth of at least four (4) inches. The stand should conform in size to the perimeter dimensions of the walls of the manufactured home and be used as the area for the properly engineered support system for the manufactured home on the site. A permanent foundation can supplant the required stand. The remainder of the manufactured home lot shall be graded for drainage. All graded areas shall be planted with grass to prevent erosion. 5. The applicant must operate the manufacture home park in accordance to Section 62.262 (1) (17) & (18). 6. At the time of platting, easements of temporary turn turn -a -rounds be prgvlded;et'the end of Daffodil Avenue SE and Daisy Avenue SE. 7. All roadways less than 28 feet wide must be posted "No Parking Fire Lane on both sides of the street with signs located in accordance with Public Works Department` specifications. Mr. Brent Svenby sented the staff report, dated August 3, 2000, t e Commission. The staff report is on file a e Rochester -Olmsted Planning Departm . He suggested striking Condition Number 2 fro a staff -suggested conditions liste the staff report. The applicant submitted a revised plan sh ng parkland in the northern rtion of the property being labeled as private and they removed th ulb at the westerly eDerof the roadway. Mr. Svenby stated that there is a Mr. Burke asked how the amendment between the City and developer. the average traffic trips. Mr. Svenby responded that, once the evelopment is to the 1,200 trip threshold, they would need to provide a secondary acce Discussion ensued regardIn hen a secondary access is n ed and who decides when it is needed. Mr. Werven asked h�* many 2 and 4 unit buildings are being propos Mr. Svenby resp6nded between 72 to 74 total units. He explained that the aweloper would need to go t ugh a performance residential application process before any o e units were built. Mr. Wpfven asked what generates a trip study. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 9-6-0 *117 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING C.. 10 I DESCRIPTION: Amendment to General Development Plan (GDP) #150, known as PREPARED BY: _...,y Side Estates by Freedom Development And Consulting LLC. The amendment Brent Svenby, proposes to modify the type of development proposed in the northern portion of the GDP, Planner including slight modifications to roadway alignments and identification of townhome style development. The property is located east of 40th Avenue SE, south of Highway 14. August 25, 2000 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: On August 9, 2000 the City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this General Development Plan. Dave Bell, Freedom Development & Consulting, addressed the Commission. He reviewed project and stated he is in agreement with the condition. The Commission reviewed this proposal according to the criteria listed in Paragraph 61.215 of the Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. Ms. Schultze made a motion to approve the amendment to General Development Plan #150, known as Valley Side Estates, with staff -suggested findings and 1 condition, striking condition number 2 listed in the staff report. Mr. Werven seconded the motion. The motion carried 8-0. Condition: 1. The nine conditions placed on the approval of the original GDP still apply to the General Development Plan. ring Staff Recommendation: See attached staff report dated August 3, 2000. Council Action Needed: 1. The Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the amendment to the general development plan. The Council must make findings based on the criteria listed in Paragraph 61.215. 2. If the Council wishes to proceed with the amendment to the general development plan as proposed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution for Council approval. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated August 3, 2000 2. Minutes of August 9, 2000 CPZC Meeting fl Distribution: 2. City Administrator 3. City Attorney 4. Planning Department File 5. Planning Department GIS Division 6. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 6, 2000 in the Council/Board Chambers in the Government Center at 151 4th Street SE. i edom Development & Consulting. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: AYI GDP Amendment #150 Freedom Development 850' Notification Distance Ward 4 Stobough 07/26/00 Eastwood Golf Course moil 5 III NE EN e I rasa NW '.�a}saLP 8 ",W+::"...:1 D°9aS9=9 C\2 S31tl1S3 3QIS A3llV/� ^''"""°''"'""'''� 0"i1°" G Q ll I .3N7 S,.i.731fN�NY YNN 11 . 6'J fr e!lI,1 jg5ll3l3!l37��i�i EI LI ' IN 9!i! Ili, i19 see TO: FROM DATE: RE: City Planning and Zoning Commission Brent Svenby, Planner August 3, 2000 ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION! 507/285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/2a5-8232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELUSEPTIC 5071285-8345 FAX 5071287-2275 Amendment to General Development Plan #150 to be known as Valley Side Estates Planning Department Review: Applicant: Freedom Development & Consulting LLC PO Box 1643 St. Cloud, MN 56302 Consultants: Brown Herkenhoff, Inc. 118 12v' Avenue North St. Cloud, MN 56303 Size and Location: The proposed amendment area is the northern portion of the GDP. The approved GDP indicates this area being developed as patio townhomes. The proposed amendment is to change this area from patio homes to 4 and 2 unit townhomes. The proposed amendment area is approximately 12.45 acres. The property is located along the east side of 40'h Avenue SE, east of Eastwood Hills Second Subdivision. Existing Land Use: The site is presently undeveloped. Proposed Use: The applicant is proposing to amend the GDP to allow 4 and 2 unit townhomes to be developed in the northern portion of the GDP. The remaining areas of the GDP are not changing. Land Use Plan: This property is identified for "Low Density Residential" uses on the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan Map. Zoning: The property is zoned R-2 (Low Density Residential) district on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. "M�MMM AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITWAFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER /t0211 Page • • - General Development Plan 1 August 3, 2000 Streets: The approved GDP shows two cul-de-sacs in the westerly direction while the proposed amendment has a loop roadway. The bulb on the westerly end of the roadway will need to be removed. Sidewalks: Sidewalk will be required along both sides of all public roadways including a 10' bituminous path along the east side of 401" Avenue SE. Drainage: The property generally drains to the south. The approved GDP indicates a detention pond in the southern portion of the property. According to the Development Agreement the applicant will voluntarily participate in the City's Regional Storm Water Management Plan for those areas that do not drain to the permanent onsite stormwater ponds. Detailed grading and drainage plans will be required when the property is platted or developed. Wetlands: According to the Olmsted County Soil Survey, no hydric soils exist on the site. The Wetland LGU Representative had stated that the previous review of this property that it should be investigated for wetlands because of the underlying glacial till and the concentrated flow of water through the property. The applicant did provide information indicating that wetlands are not present on the site. Public Utilities: Sanitary sewer and water lines will need to be extended from their present ends in 401" Avenue SE (County Road 144) to accommodate this development. Parkland Dedication: The proposed amendment area indicates two separate park areas, which should be identified as being private park or open space. The applicant will be dedicating Outlot C to the City for parkland dedication requirements. Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Public Works 2. John Harford, Planning Dept. & Wetlands LGU 3. Planning Department — Transportation 4. RPU Water Division 5. RPU Operations Division 6. Park and Recreation Department 7. Fire Department Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (4) 2. Location Map 3. Approved GDP 4. Proposed Amendment to GDP Page 3 0 0 �]�S General Development Plan August 3, 2000 Summary: This amendment to the GDP only includes the northern portion of the property. The approved GDP indicates the northern portion of the property being developed with approximately 50 patio homes. The applicant has filed an amendment to the GDP removing the patio homes and showing the area being developed with 2 and 4-unit buildings. The development of these buildings will need to be reviewed as a performance residential development or a multi- family residential development when this portion of the development is proposed. The applicant has an approval preliminary plat for the proposed amendment area. A revised preliminary plat will need to be submitted and reviewed for this portion of the property. The applicant and the City have executed a Development Agreement for this property. The major items covered in the agreement include the following: D Construction of pedestrian facilities ➢ Stormwater pond construction ➢ Private sanitary sewer lift station managementloperation D Extension of public sewer and watemain D Right of way dedication D Controlled access dedication D Payment of other development related charges including SAC, WAG, Park dedication, Substandard Roadway, Transportation Improvement District and participation in the City's Storm Water Management Plan. Staff Suggested Findings and Recommendation: Paragraph 61,215 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual lists the criteria for approval of a general development plan (see attached section from the newly adopted regulations, which became affective May 15, 1999). Criteria A. The proposed land uses are generally in accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and zoning map, or that the means for reconciling any differences have been addressed. A GDP may be processed simultaneously with a rezoning or plan amendment request. This GDP proposes a low density residential development, which is consistent with the land use designation on the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan and uses are permitted in the R-2 (Low Density Residential) zoning district. Criteria B. The proposed development, including its lot sizes, density, access and circulation are compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use of adjacent property. The density of the proposed development Is consistent with a low density residential land use designation. The proposed vehicular systems provide for the connection to adjacent properties. A 10' trail will be required along the east side of 4e Avenue SE. Criteria C. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing Plans. The development density is consistent with the low density residential land use designation of the Land Use Plan and is generally consistent with the Housing Plan by providing different densities and styles of housing. nn' Page / General Development Plan August 3, 2000 Criteria D. The proposed plan makes provisions for planned capital improvements and streets reflected in the City of Rochester's current 6-Year Capital Improvement Program, adopted Thoroughfare Plan, the ROCOG Long -Range Transportation Plan, Official Maps, and any other public facilities plans adopted by the City. Street system improvements required to accommodate proposed land uses and projected background traffic are compatible with the existing uses and uses shown in the adopted Land Use Plan for the subject and adjacent properties. Access to the site will be provided from 40s' Ave. SE and Eastwood Road. The adopted Thoroughfare Plan designates 40fb Ave. SE as a collector roadway. A contribution will be required for the future reconstruction of 40s' Ave. SE to a collector standard. Current City policy for substandard street requires a contribution of $30.00 per foot of frontage. The City may create a Transportation Improvement District in the area, which may result in a capacity component being added to the substandard street reconstruction charge. Criteria E. On and off -site public facilities are adequate, or will be adequate if the development is phased in, to serve the properties under consideration and will provide access to adjoining land in a manner that will allow development of those adjoining lands in accord with this ordinance. Street system adequacy shall be based on the street system's ability to safely accommodate trips from existing and planned land uses on the existing and proposed street system without creating safety hazards, generating auto stacking that blocks driveways or intersections, or disrupting traffic flow on any street, as identified in the traffic impact report, if required by Section 61.523(C). Capacity from improvements in the first 3 years of the 6-year CIP shall be included in the assessment of adequacy. Improvements to 40fh Ave. SE and Eastwood Road will be needed as a result of the proposed development. The applicant has entered Into a Development Agreement with the City that outlines the developer's responsibility for improvements. An access permit will be required from the Olmsted County Public Works Department for any accesses onto 40r" Avenue SE. According to the County Engineer adequate sight distance for operating speeds on 40e Ave. SE and right turn lanes will be required at the time of development. 2. Utilities are now available to directly serve the area of the proposed land use, or that the City of Rochester is planning for the extension of utilities to serve the area of the proposed development and such utilities are in the first three years of the City's current 6-Year Capital Improvements Program, or that other arrangements (contractual, development agreement, performance bond, etc.) have been made to ensure that adequate utilities will be available concurrently with development. If needed utilities will not be available concurrent with the proposed development, the applicant for the development approval shall stipulate to a condition that no development will occur and no further development permit will be issued until concurrenty has been evidenced. Utilities will need to be extended to serve this development. The Southeast High Level Water System is available approximately 200 feet north of the northwest corner of this property. Pressure reducing valves or a pressure Page 5 • General Development Plan August 3, 2000 reducing station will need to be installed for areas below a finished site elevation of 1080. The applicant is proposing to install a private lift station to serve the property. The applicant will be responsible for the construction and maintenance of the private lift station, as well as, the abandonment and removal of the lift station when connection to a public gravity trunk main sewer is available. The adequacy of other public facilities shall be based on the level of service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing plan for development. There is a storm water detention pond shown on the southern portion of the property. According to the Development Agreement the applicant will voluntarily participate in the City's Regional Storm Water Management Plan for those area that do not drain to the permanent onsite stormwater ponds. Sidewalk will be required on both sides of all new public roadways and a 10' bituminous path will be required along the east side of 40Th Avenue SE instead of a sidewalk. Criteria F. The drainage, erosion, and construction in the area can be handled through normal engineering and construction practices, or that, at the time of land subdivision, a more detailed investigation of these matters will be provided to solve unusual problems that have been identified. Public Works will need to review grading and drainage plans for this property in more detail at the platting stage. The detention pond will need to be sized to serve as a regional facility. Criteria G. The lot, block, and street layout for all development and the lot density for residential development are consistent with the subdivision design standards contained in Section 64.100 and compatible with existing and planned development of adjacent parcels. The lot, block and density appear to be generally consistent with the land use and the proposed zoning for this property. The proposed roadways provide connections to adjacent properties and allow for the continued growth and development of those properties. The bulb on the westerly end of the roadway must be removed to allow better traffic management. The driveway widths will be limited to 32 feet. Recommendation: Based on the above criteria Staff would recommend approval of this Amendment General Development Plan subject to the following conditions or modifications in order to assure compliance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual: 1. The nine conditions placed on the approval of the original GDP still apply to the General Development Plan. 2. The GDP be revised to include to following revisions: The parkland in the amendment area be labeled as `private park or open space" ➢ The bulb on the westerly end of the roadway be removed. a37 ROCHESTER PARK AND krCREATION DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: July 3, 2000 TO: Jennifer Garness Planning SUBJECT: Ammendment to GDP #150 Valley Side Estates The modified northern portion of the development indicates two separate "park" areas. Assuming that these areas are to remain private and for the use of and maintained by the Villas portion of the development, they should be identified as being "private park or open space". N:\PARK\DSTOTZ\2000\DEDICATION\SE 2895\VALLEY VIEW EST GDP II.DOC 0 ROCHESTER Minnesota 7/14/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur a3� 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 General Development Plan #150,on the Freedom Development & Consulting (Valley View Estates) property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: Note: New comments are shown in BOLD, while comments that are no longer applicable are indicated with STRIKETHROUGH, Storm Water Management must be addressed for this development. The GDP plan indicates stormwater detention for the proposed development via a detention pond along the south property line. A regional stormwater pond is identified on this property. The owner should participate in the City's Regional Stormwater Management Plan by sizing & constructing the detention pond to serve as a regional facility. 2. Controlled access must be provided along the entire length of 40"' Ave SE, with the exception of the street access that is approved through the GDP. Additional controlled access for private driveways will be required within 150 feet from the right-of-way intersection of Valley View Lane and 40'h Ave SE, and along the entire west lot line of Lot 20, located east of the detention pond as shown on the GDP plan. 3. Dedication of 60 feet of right-of-way for 40'h Ave SE, will be required, as shown on the GDP plan. The developer shall be required to grade the west side of the property to match the ROW grade prepared by the City for 40`h Ave SE. 4. Pedestrian facilities, constructed concurrent with the development, will be required along both sides of all new public roads, and along all the east side of 40'h Ave SE. A 10 foot bituminous bike path may be required along the east side of 40"' Ave SE instead of a concrete sidewalk. The location of the pedestrian walkway indicated on the GDP plan should be located toward the proposed easterly right of way line of 40" Ave SE. C:\TEMRGDP150 revised 7-12.doc ado ROCHESTER Minnesota 7/ 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 A contribution will be required for future reconstruction of 4V, Ave SE. Current City policy for substandard streets requires a contribution of $30.00 per foot of frontage. The City may create a Transportation Improvement District in the area which may result in a capacity component being added to the substandard street reconstruction charge. Reconstruction of the public road along the south property line, to City standards, will be required at the owner's expense, concurrent with this development. 6. Sanitary sewer & water service lines will be required to be extended to the adjacent property lines. 7. Easements will be required for off -site utilities, if applicable. 8. Specific routing of sanitary sewer lines will be reviewed further during the platting stages. 9. Execution of a City / Owner Contract will be required prior to construction of public infrastructure. 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. The Development Agreement shall also outline the developer's responsibility for construction and maintenance of the proposed private lift station, as well as, the owners financial responsibility for abandonment and removal of the lift station when connection to public gravity trunk main sewer is available. 11. In addition to SAC, WAC & Substandard Street Fees, the owner will be required to provide payment to the City for the future removal of the private lift station, and costs associated with the physical connection to gravity trunk main. The property may also be responsible for additional contribution for C:VTEMPIGDP150 revised 7-12.doc i ROCHESTER Minnesota 7/14/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur aqr DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 Water Tower and Sewer Trunk Main Sewer projects to serve this property, if the project area charges exceed the current SAC & WAC rates. 12. The westerly North / South leg of Valley View Lane, and the westerly leg of the loop street to serve the "patio homes" should line up directly across from each other, or be separated by 200 feet. 13. There must be an unobstructed overland emergency overflow from the low point to the pond. 14. The maximum driveway width is 32' (single or shared). 15. Public sidewalks must meet City standards with adequate grass boulevards. 16. The bulb at the westerly end of Trumpeter Drive should be removed. The following charges/fees are applicable for the development of the property (rates are subject to annual review and change): •:• Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre. -a Water Availability Charge (WAC) @ $1605.50 per developable acre. 4• Substandard Street Contribution for future reconstruction of 40th Ave SE @ $30.00 per foot of frontage. :• Contribution for future removal of the proposed private lift station and physical connection to gravity trunk main. Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division. C:VTEMP%GDP150 revised 7-12.doc 5 *�".' Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes ring Date: August 9, 2000 4. Each manufactured home lot shall have a stand with a surface graded for positive drains way from the stand. The stand shall be either a paved slab, or compacted gravel or c ed stone with a total depth of at least four (4) inches. The stand should confor ' size to the perimeter dimensions o�e walls of the manufactured home and be use the area for the properly engjn eyed support system for the manufactured home o e site. A permanen�.$66-dation can supplant the required stand. The remainder of th anufactureai2 ome lot shall be graded for drainage. All graded areas shall be planted grasCto prevent erosion. 5. The applicant must operate t e'manu ure home park in accordance to Section. 62.262 (1) (17) & (18), 6. At the time of pla g, easements of temporary t turn -a -rounds be proVlded'at tha end of Daffodi enue SE and Daisy Avenue SE. 7. All road ys less than 28 feet wide must be posted "No ,Parkin a Lane" on both side f the street with signs located in accordance with Public Works partmerrt s cifications. Mr. Brent Svenby presented the staff report, dated August 3, 2000, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. He suggested striking Condition Number 2 from the staff -suggested conditions listed in the staff report. The applicant submitted a revised plan showing parkland in the northern portion of the property being labeled as private and they removed the bulb at the westerly end of the roadway. Mr. Svenby stated that there is a Development Agreement between the City and developer. Mr. Burke asked how the amendment would change the average traffic trips. Mr. Svenby responded that, once the development gets to the 1,200 trip threshold, they would need to provide a secondary access. Discussion ensued regarding when a secondary access is needed and who decides when it is needed. Mr. Werven asked how many 2 and 4 unit buildings are being proposed. Mr. Svenby responded between 72 to 74 total units. He explained that the developer would need to go through a performance residential application process before any of the units were built. Mr. Werven asked what generates a trip study. i Page 6 311 City Planning and Zoning Cotrunission Minutes VA(- Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 Mr. Svenby responded that they are required to do a study when they submit a general development plan. He indicated that the Transportation Division stated that there are adequate facilities in place to handle the increase. Mr. Dave Bell, of Freedom Development & Consulting LLC, addressed the Commission. He made the following comments: 1. They are working with the First Homes Program on part of their subdivision. 2. They have made an application for a tax credit project for the rental portion of the project. 3. They have been working with the Rochester Area Foundation and Greater Minnesota Housing Fund to have the townhomes eligible for their programs. 4. The Development Agreement states that a secondary access would need to be provided once they have 120 units within the subdivision. 5. The amendment would provide more green space, since the units are back to back. Mr. Bell showed a photograph of what the units would look like. He also indicated that there would be a homeowner's association, underground water sprinklers, and double car garages. Mr. Bell stated that the applicant is in agreement will the staff -suggested conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Werven asked if the units would be a private ownership and how much they would sell for. Mr. Bell responded yes. He indicated that the homes would cost $115,000 and up. Mr. Quinn asked how much the home ownership fee would be. Mr. Bell responded $65.00. He explained what the fees would be used for. Discussion ensued regarding what the patio and decks would look like. Mr. Brede asked if the bus service extends to that area. A person from the audience stated that there currently are bus services in that area. Ms. Linda Ganske, of 4220 Eastwood Road SE, Rochester, MN, addressed the Commission. She asked when someone would analyze the need for an upgrade to the Highway 14 entrance. Mr. Nigbur stated that MnDOT is currently planning on doing some upgrades on Highway 14 within the next few years. It will include a west of southbound turn lane. He explained that improvements on 40'' Avenue would take place within the next several years. Mr. Darrell Jensen, Director of the Community Housing Partnership, addressed the Commission. He encouraged the Commission to support the proposed amendment. Mr. Hugh Cocker, of 4140 Highway 14 E, Rochester, MN, addressed the Commission. He asked what the bufferyard requirements would be between his property and the development. Mr. Svenby stated that the developer would need to go through a performance residential application process to layout the site plan for the townhomes. At that time, staff would look at the bufferyard requirements. r r (/1` 0Page 7 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 With no one else wishing to be heard, Ms. Petersson closed the public hearing. Ms. Schultze moved to approve the Amendment to General Development Plan #150 to known as Valley Side Estates with staff -suggested findings and conditions, striking condition number 2 listed in the staff report. Mr. Werven seconded the motion. The motion carried S-0. FINDINGS: Criteria A. This GDP proposes a low density residential development, which Is consistent with the land use designation on the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan and uses are permitted in the R-2 (Low Density Residential) zoning district. Criteria a.., The density of the proposed deveioprnent 111 consistent wtth:g low de �. residential land use des#Onation, The proposed vehicular systerpe p> ivie for the connectiop to adjacent prof ernes %i tA' trail will be requlrOO!lorig the east side of 4llrAvoh4 0E' Criteria C. The development density is cons15te use designation of the Land Use Pia Housing Plan by providing different, 'i r street requires a contribut)ian 1. lnl�rovement:4Rt° Ave IIR resutt of therosed de�eloj Anbninan�.ii'Wk ti H Page 8 City Planning and Zoning Conunission Minutes Hearing Date: August 9, 2000 to serve the property. The applicant will be responsible for the construction and maintenance of the private lift station, as well as, the abandonment and removal of the lift station when connection to a public gravity trunk main sewer is available. 3. There is a storm water detention pond shown on the southern portion of the property. According to the Development Agreement the appllcant will voluntarily participate in the City's Regional Storm Water Maoigelnent PI for those area that do not: drain to the permanent onsite stotntwatar pona Sidewalk will be required on: both sides of all Holy pubtii4roat�y An . it le bituminous path wilt be required along the east side of 41Z Avenue Si instead ofa sidRrv#lk: Criterla F. Public Works will need to review grading and drainaega plarff iort9� property In more tletaii at the plattna stage. "Meisferlb pit ae$ #o be Sized to s.,elr'!rAid as wreolonal lac11 ter. .. Cntena a, -The lot, t�llock anp density appear tq be #lenerail cork" a use and #ie propoeetl'toninq for tide orgge ye ttg. dwe ,, providke+Qn#taadjacqag#"P!oPettieatm1„ inu growth and dov opment.of those RroPertias Tho h:41�r o ttlally sferhr: wilmited to =100 . '1. x a4s' Ms. Mitzi Baker presented the stdff reports, dated Awgust 3, 2000, to the Commission. The staff reports are on file at the Ro ster-Olmsted Planning DwZrtment. She indicated to the Commission that three s arate motions would need to be a with regard to the zone change, land use plaaodnendment, and general development p Ms. Baker state at the general development plan includes a potential fiNktation site. They City may acq,610fe the property. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION i MEETING DATE 9-6-00 AGLNUA SLCTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PLANNING L -11 M DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #00- 41 to be known as River Place. .EPARED BY: Brent Svenby Di-..-- l_ �, August 30, 2000 PlanningDepartment Review: The Planning Staff has reviewed the submitted final plat. The developer has executed a Development Agreement with the City for the final plat. Staff would recommend approval of the final plat with the following conditions/modifications: 1. The plat be revised to dedicate: ➢ Controlled access along 3rd Avenue NW except for the approved access locations approved during the Incentive Development process. ➢ A 10' wide utility easement along the northern edge of the property. 2. The applicant agrees to parkland dedication requirements of cash in lieu of land dedication in the amount of $23,540. Payment is due prior to the recording of final plat. Council Action Needed. 1. If the Council wishes to proceed a resolution approving the plat can be adopted. EnCIOSures: (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. Recordingrrreasurer/Auditor's Statement 3. Recording Fee 4. Title Opinion 5. 1 Original Plat Mylar 6. 3 Mylar Copies of Plat Attachment: 1. Staff Report dated August 30, 2000. Distribution: 1. City Attorney 2. Planning Department File 3. Planning Department —GIS 4. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 6, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. 5. Yaggy Colby Associates JNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: i s ,jg i fi xq .67 iti ictWEST $ y 0{'39*23 RNER.-PARK— W"� ! N 255.42 ° 3RD VE NW K EiT Oi O 7\\ ....................... -----��-- z n Lam tv— O O O mo .2 "I m o O XC ZU= V! R i'I a' lit t ilia;:g jt r i /^T' a4 f : ! 1 1i ���� � F .-f .r=ii �_ ; L. �§ �! s YYi., s aPt : � a yi' ii it [� is itt aY� i jti rf;axo•t�i �_ it �f a s :ti3 ti ii a 77 t.j.'?(ririsit ( 4 j t fd r rg i• it�r��r ; ib ::Y3F!ia kIM f r gg Ftt�' 3f= rr 3� rfgri�€r `t •ttr a� A` MIN 9 gi f a•;1 xa$t It i1?ri S}.stagi f >t� yP r r + r¢ Ufa l":i IOf f1 r er 1121:ir 1 ' Sr yr u. t J.3tP t ir•pT}ri t xr a t: rtl, u� ji aaN �Wi, Cc: Y A O C m -v D m TO: Rochester Common Council FROM: Brent Svenby, Planner DATE: August 30, 2000 RE: Final Plat #00-41 to be known as River Place Planning Department Review: Applicant/Owner: Deer Haven LLC W229 S3854 Milky Way Road Waukasha, WI 53186 Surveyors/Engineers: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 tp>tibjiH/liy� 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 507/285-8213 WELLISEPTIC 5071265-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 Referral Comments: 1. Planning Department - Wetland LGU 2. Planning Department —Addressing 3. Planning Department - Transportation 4. RPU Operations Division 5. RPU Water Division 6. Rochester Public works Department 7. Rochester Park & Rec. 8. Rochester Fire Department 9. MnDOT Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (6 Letters) 2. Location Map 3. Copy of Final Plat Plat Data: Location of Property: The property is located west of the Zumbro River, south of Elton Hills Drive NW and east of 3rd Avenue NW. Zoning: The property is zoned B-1 (Restricted Commercial) district on the City Zoning Map. This area is exempt from the shoreland provisions of the zoning ordinance (Sec. 62.1001). `�Y AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 River Place August 30, 2000 Proposed Development: The applicant received approval to build a 6&unit apartment building. The project was approved through the Incentive Development process and was approved on May 1, 2000 by the Council. Streets: The Plat dedicates the right-of-way for one existing roadway, 3" Avenue NW. Controlled access is needed along 3rd Avenue NW except for the two access points approved during the Incentive Development process. The applicant will need to work with the Planning Department GIS Addressing staff with roadway designation of the private roadway. Sidewalks: Sidewalk is required along the easterly side of 3 d Avenue NW. Drainage: According to the development agreement, the applicant will construct the needed storm water management facilities for the project on the property that is owned by the City just north of the site. The grading and plan has been approved for this property. 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 on this site. Public Utilities: Sewer and water services will need to be extended to the property. Electric power to this site is provided by RPU. Spillover Parking: Spillover parking for this development was reviewed at the time the project was approved through the Incentive Development process. Parkland Dedication: The City Park and Recreation Department recommends that parkland dedication requirements be satisfied by cash in lieu of land in the amount of $23,540. Payment is due prior to the recording of the final plat documents. General Development Plan: This property is not included within an approved General Development Plan. The City Council approved an Incentive Development Plan for this property at their May 1, 2000 meeting. a51 ' Page 3 River Place August 30, 2000 Preliminary Plat: There is no preliminary plat for this property. Since no new right-of-way is being dedicated, a preliminary plat is not necessary. Planning Staff and Recommendation: The developer has executed a Development Agreement with the City for this property. Staff has reviewed the submitted final plat and would then recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat be revised to dedicate: ➢ Controlled access along 3rd Avenue NW except for the approved access locations approved during the Incentive Development process. ➢ A 10' wide utility easement along the northern edge of the property. 2. The applicant agrees to parkland dedication requirements of cash in lieu of land dedication in the amount of $23,540. Payment is due prior to the recording of final plat. rpu urm peedye, we deliver 507/280-1579 August 28, 2000 TO: Jennifer Garness, Planning Department Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department FROM: Michael J. Engle, Supv. of Distribution Design Rochester Public Utilities SUBJECT: Type III, Phase I, Final Plat #00-41 to be known as River Place. The plat proposes to subdivide approximately 4.72 acres of land into one lot for a multi- family residential development. The property is located along the east side of 3rd Avenue NW, south of Elton Hills Drive NW and west of the Zumbro River. RPU's Operations Division requests that a 10' wide utility easement be granted for the existing cast/west overhead power line located at the north edge of this property. Sincerely, Aactll 9�L Michael J. Engle ks Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, MN 55906-2813 telephone 507.280.1540 facsimile 507.280.1542 website www.rpu.org A ROCHESTER Minnesota 8/29/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 41' 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 Final Plat #00-41.on the River Place property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal. 1. A Development Agreement has been executed for this property. 2. Execution of a City -Owner Contract is required prior to installing public utilities to serve this property. 3. Controlled access is required along the entire frontage of V Ave NW with the exception of the approved access location(s). Charges/fees applicable for the development of the property are addressed in the Development Agreement. CATEMP1FP800-41.doc • ROCHESTER PARK AND CREATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE Q95 ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 23, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning RE: River Place NW Acreage of plat.......................................................... Number of dwelling units ............................................. Dwelling unit density ................................................... Densityfactor.............................................:.............. Dedication............................................................... Fair market value of land ............................................. 4.72 a 68 units 16 units/a .0158 1.07 acres $22,000 The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: Cash in lieu of land in the amount of $23,540 (1.o7acres x$22,000/acre)with payment due prior to recordation of the final plat. Applicant: Deer Have LLC W229 83854 Milky Way Rd Waukesha, W1531W N:\PARK\DSTOT2\2000\DEDICATION\NW 2898\RIVER PLACE FINAL.DOC i (7b TRANSPORTATION STAFF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS Jurisdiction I Application 11 DATABASE - 1998 Comments City Fin Plat 0-41 Consistent with proposed site development plan for the property the final plat River Place should indicate controlled access and designated access openings along the frontage on 3`d Ave NW City Final Plat 0-02 No comment Southern woods 3`d City Fin Plat 99-23 Plat should indicate controlled access and designated access openings consistent Pinewood with proposed Performance Residential Development along the north side of Meadows 1" Pinewood Road County Fin Plat 00-01 No comment Bear Meadow City Fin Plat 00-17 Plat should indicate controlled access along 40E Ave SE except for public road Valley Side openings. Street along south side of plat area is incorrectly labeled as CR 144 — this is a township road. City Fin Plat 00-17 Plat should indicate controlled access along frontage of 40 Ave except at public Valley View street openings and along Eagle Drive consistent with access openings established on General Development Plan. The road along the south side of the property is incorrectly labeled as CR 144. CR 144 designation follows 40'" Ave SE and then Eastwood Road west of 40's Ave. City Fin Plat 0-34 Plat should indicated controlled access along the frontage of 50 Ave consistent Weatherstone with general development plan for Weatherstone City Fin Plat 0-9 No comment Weatherstone CIC City Fin Plat 0-36 No comment Northern Hts 3rd Townhome City GDP # 155 The order of magnitude in terms of trip generation for the proposed Grand Grand Reserve Reserve development is approximately 2800 vehicles per day. This value is arrived at by comparing the trip generation of a standard townhouse development (3200 trips per day for 400 units) which typically assumes a negligible percentage of transit or walking trips, with the trip generation of a low rise apartment (2600 trips per day for 400 units) which typically will assume a higher percentage of transit or walking trips along with a lower dwelling unit size. Given the proximity of this development to the St Mary's area and the presence of convenient transit service to downtown, we would expect the trip generation to trend towards the lower level typical of an apartment type complex. The overall trip generation of —2800 ADT compares with a projected level of 1550 ADT if the property was developed with single family dwellings at 3+ units per acre Access to the site as proposed should provide adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. With the connection of this development to 23 d Ave, and the future extension of 23" Ave as a collector street south of 2°d St into the Orchard Hills and Foxcroft area, we would expect a traffic signal to be warranted at some point in the future as development occurs and volumes on the intersecting legs of 23`d Ave continue to grow. This location would be consistent with general guidelines on the signal spacing needed to maintain adequate traffic flow along the 2ad St S W corridor, being approximately % mile west of the TH 52 Frontage Road, and %, mile east of the next logical signal location to the west, which would be the entrance to the Wimbledon Hills area. Signals will typically not be improved for installation until in can be demonstrated that warrants are met or will be met within a year of installation. Thus, while no signal is programmed for installation, we expect that development will create the conditions that warrant the installation of a signal in the future. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING / a.F_nn AGENDASECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING A DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #99-23 Pinewood Meadows First Addition CIC IPREPARE A 162 Replat of Lots 11-16 and 21, Block 2. August 30, 2000 Staff Recommendation: 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 or modifications: 1. The Plat shall be revised to: a) reflect the right-of-way, lots and easements already platted and to distinguish the boundaries of the re -plat different from the existing recorded plat and b) label controlled access along the south side of Pinewood Rd. and provide controlled access along the north side of Pinewood Rd. except for those locations approved for driveways consistent with the approved Performance Residential Development permit for those units. Council Action Needed: 1. if the Council wishes to proceed a resolution approving the plat can be adopted. Attachment. 1. Staff Report dated August 30, 2000 Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2. City Attorney 3. Planning Department File 4. Planning Department GIS Division 5. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on WEDNESDAY September 6, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. 6. GGG Engineering F NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: m ► 1,1 9 es §�i �y p sloe s!�$ s1 Ple �iG S • i i�ii �tii►€ 6iSit, , �ti t 4 tl! tl. �CCti{ ,4 1 .i,i�$I { '_ �� !, •i .i9s.ae; � t+! +Tl =s1 i•r�e i'd;tl !'� t 1 ! p 1 aT � , rr s ii�e t{ !�s ei 117�. 7•�8 ap�Ssll�i seQQ.3 1 � f} � °aid i�tlii,�l=�liii7t.3�ii�! �{,7; I'i • Hi!!' l ! t} il { ! • ! ill I •1 it {� `� fliji is ! e !r( i 7 f•tt $ ll{!il�r}�� �� 1•�f i!1 } � lil ! 111 ��i�Ei �— #i.,�sl� fl itltt },;;� m O N MC131iv1dNn H O n ` I• 6CKf $! M Z e rn m ys• _� ♦ �' N{ it f, __! / j(�q/ yQ' ,q■ I I e w iaei K � � • / / �� / ry r it � � � i / wj M — — ',f:U'Z99 — — — 3.9f.LZ.1I)a , as ansanv ma k / it �W � eu wz %s' NOISWOB iSM-4 d �� S 3O13dN30H0 NOISV\,Ce C.._- C^ 30HOS f �•-� :i� ii JO 10:49 FAX 507 287 2275 ROCH-OLM PLANNING DEPT. 4 CITY CLERK 4 002 GGG E-Jz Engineering Surveying & Planning 14070 Hwy 52 SE Chatfield, MN 55923 Phone: 507-867-1666 Fax: 507-867-1665 September 1, 2000 Brent Svenby Consolidated Planning 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 RE: Pinewood Meadow First Addition Replat Dear Brent, We would like to request that you withdrawl our application for replatting Lots 11, 12,13,14,15,16 and 21, Block 2 in Pinewood Meadow First. It was discovered that the decks on the proposed units would encroach beyond the platted boundaries for lots 1-10 and 17-20. We are resubmitting the replat to include the changes. We will now be replatting lots 1 thru 21 in Block 2. The revised Performance Site Plan will be delivered on Tuesday, September 5. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to call anytime. Mark Welch Design Engineer TO: Rochester Common Council ti !N! llli V !q� ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 5071285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-8232 FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Planner MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 DATE: August 30, 2000 BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELUSEPTIC 5071285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 RE: Final Plat #99-23 Re -Plat of Pinewood Meadows First Addition CIC #162 Planning Department Review. Applicantlowner: Surveyors/Engineers: Report Attachments: Summary Information: Shoenfelders Southstar LLC 1662 Greenview Drive SW Rochester, MN 55902 GGG Engineering 14070 Hwy 52 SE Chatfield, MN 55923 1. Referral Comments 2. Location Map 3. Copy of Final Plat This property is located adjacent to Pinewood Road SE, east of 23rd Ave. SE and is currently platted as Pinewood Meadows First Addition CIC 162. This application proposes to re -plat Lots 11-16 and 21, Block 2 to accommodate a larger townhome building. The utilities, grading, access and parkland were reviewed in 1999, when the original final plat was approved. Planning Staff and Recommendation: 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 or modifications: The Plat shall be revised to: a) reflect the right-of-way, lots and easements already platted and to distinguish the boundaries of the re -plat different from the existing recorded plat and b) label controlled access along the south side of Pinewood Rd. and provide controlled access along the north side of Pinewood Rd. except for those locations approved for driveways consistent with the approved Performance Residential Development permit for those units. �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITWAFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER TRANSPORTATION S' DEVELOPMENT APPL-_.-TIONS REVIEW DATABASE- 1998 Jurisdiction I Aoolication I City Fin Plat 041 Consistent with proposed site development plan for the property the Final plat River Place should indicate controlled access and designated access openings along the frontage on 3rd Ave NW City Final Plat 0-02 No comment Southern woods 3`d City Fin Plat 99-23 Plat should indicate controlled access and designated access openings consistent Pinewood with proposed Performance Residential Development along the north side of Meadows 1" Pinewood Road -County Fin Plat 00-01 No comment Bear Meadow City Fin Plat 00-17 Plat should indicate controlled access along 40 Ave SE except for public road Valley Side openings. Street along south side of plat area is incorrectly labeled as CR 144 — this is a township road. City Fin Plat 00-17 Plat should indicate controlled access along frontage of 40 Ave except at public Valley View street openings and along Eagle Drive consistent with access openings established on General Development Plan. The road along the south side of the property is incorrectly labeled as CR 144. CR 144 designation follows 40'" Ave SE and then Eastwood Road west of 40" Ave. City Fin Plat 0-34 Plat should indicated controlled access along the frontage of 50 Ave consistent Weatherstone with general development plan for Weatherstone City Fin Plat 0-9 No comment Weatherstone CIC City Fin Plat 0-36 No comment Norther His 3'd Townhome City GDP # 155 The order of magnitude in terms of trip generation for the proposed Grand Grand Reserve Reserve development is approximately 2800 vehicles per day. This value is arrived at by comparing the trip generation of a standard townhouse development (3200 trips per day for 400 units) which typically assumes a negligible percentage of transit or walking trips, with the trip generation of a low rise apartment (2600 trips per day for 400 units) which typically will assume a higher percentage of transit or walking trips along with a lower dwelling unit size. Given the proximity of this development to the St Mary's area and the presence of convenient transit service to downtown, we would expect the trip generation to trend towards the lower level typical of an apartment type complex. The overall trip generation of —2800 ADT compares with a projected level of 1550 ADT if the property was developed with single family dwellings at 3+ units per acre Access to the site as proposed should provide adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. With the connection of this development to 23`d Ave, and the future extension of 23`d Ave as a collector street south of 2"d St into the Orchard Hills and Foxcroft area, we would expect a traffic signal to be warranted at some point in the future as development occurs and volumes on the intersecting legs of 23`d Ave continue to grow. This location would be consistent with general guidelines on the signal spacing needed to maintain adequate traffic flow along the 2°d St SW corridor, being approximately %: mile west of the TH 52 Frontage Road, and %, mile east of the next logical signal location to the west, which would be the entrance to the Wimbledon Hills area. Signals will typically not be improved for installation until in can be demonstrated that warrants are met or will be met within a year of installation. Thus, while no signal is programmed for installation, we expect that development will create the conditions that warrant the installation of a signal in the future. I OCHESTE$, Minnesota 8/28/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur Al 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 #99-23 on the ReRlat of Lots 11 — 16 & 21, Block 2, Pinewood Meadows First Addition CIC#162 property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: A Development Agreement has been executed for this property. Charges/fees that are applicable to the development of the property have been addressed in the Development Agreement, with the exception of: •:• Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division: .11 C:VTEMP\FP#99-23 Replat.doc a S � PIU we pledge, rve deliver 507/280-1579 August 28, 2000 TO: Jennifer Garness, Planning Department Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department FROM: Michael J. Engle, Supv. of Distribution Design Rochester Public Utilities SUBJECT: Type III, Phase I Final Plat #99-23 to be known as Replat of Lots 11-16, and 21, Block 2 Pinewood Meadows First Addition CIC 162. The plat proposes to replat lots in the Pinewood Meadows First Addition to allow for larger townhomes. The property is located along the south side of Pinewood Road SE, east of 23`d Avenue SE, and north of Pinestar Lane SE. Any existing RPU electric facilities that may need to be relocated as a result of this replat will need to be relocated at the developer's expense. Sincerely, Michael J. Engle ks Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, MN 55906-2813 telephone 507.280.1540 facsimile 507.280.1542 website www.rpu.org 11 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING A 3 / DATE: 09-06-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING 6 -(2) M DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase I Final Plat i100.22 to be known as Southern Woods PREPARED BY: ..,.rd Addition. The plat proposes to replat Outlet D of Southern Woods First Addition into Theresa Fogarty, 24 lots for single family residential development and one outlot. The plat also dedicates the Planner / q right-of-way for new public roadways. The property is located south of Southern Woods �J Place SW and east of 110 Avenue SW (County Road 147 August 30, 2000 Planning Department Review: See attached staff report, dated August 30, 2000, with the following recommended conditions or modifications: 1. The Final Plat shaft be revised as follows: a. Add the directional of "SVr to "Southern Lane ". 2. This Plat does not include the dedication of right-of-way consistent with the approved General Development Plan (Outlot A). The applicant shall plat and dedicate the proposed streets (as depicted on the GDP) to the City of Rochester in the future or when the City formally requests dedicated of the right-cf- way, whichever comes first. :ouncii 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 r 4. Recording Fee 5. Title Opinion 6/y 6. 1 Original Plat Mylar 7. 2 Mylar Copies of Plat Distribution: J 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 Wednesday. September 6, 2000 in the Council Chambers at the Rochester / Olmsted County Government Center. 7. GGG Engineering COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: ��q i EXHIBIT A 48th v I � 11 th Avenue SW IN 1 VVJTY M\A P drGENERAL DEVELOPMENT -PLAN SOUTHERIN WOODS SUBDIVISION SECTIONS 25� ROCHESTER TOWNSHIP —wt A."': . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f;[U G E�;= XSM 3,af,*O.00N ___________-iii _________\__ ____________om� n_w� _______ nm l cr FSf rz Go nU�t {qI x l�o 2p �cr. W .�-I p�gC p� '-I U W N ...-.el Z 4 IE U 1 (Sj 1 NORTH °1 _ ____________ �_________� �a ,wm - - w w lum 22.14� a 1 ! SOUTHWOOD `s 1 a _ m.. _S am d/{5 SOUTHWOOD LANE SW m i 1)IUVE SA Y of coW N ��_ e`1 iif _N _ti !. V �- - l �___L I / � 3 11 CV `` J6.♦ 1 I -vt i� Co #Ib.w ---- dG w I 1 1 pP / � / I I^ Do to r/ yy I/ P 7 fcv p`\\\ t` ``• '�'' �'' ' y C1I ` \ �� $4, PH PE CAE \fit ' 2 I _ Z e r J 1 I� i 1 1 I _ L'� 6'--� a O-553UJV 0311081NO0- o Qom'' °'i"011MP""+sa3 1 r _ ,93'909 3.59,90.00N UvT Qvou umnoo) 'M'S anrtanv HLTT w � C .r U (s n w env b LEgtR NORTH 3 22.14' 22 ,)MOD rE sw we. a be - a6 �c M O W3 w 9 a.oa U.LLSO3 L• oe7 t aE. } M e B a P P4 I)i d TO: Rochester Common Council FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner'A DATE: August 30, 2000 Ihti��rI�M . /P I . 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 5071287-2275 RE: Type III, Phase I Final Plat #00-22 to be known as Southern Woods Third Addition. The plat proposes to replat Outlot D of Southern Woods First Addition into 24 lots for single family residential development and one outlot. The plat also dedicates the right-of-way for new public roadways. The property is located south of Southern Woods Place SW and east of IVh Avenue SW (County Road 147) Plannina Department Review. Applicant/Owner: Randy Reynolds Jerry Schultz 3552 West River Parkway NW Rochester, MN 55901 Surveyors/Engineers: GGG, Inc. 14970 Highway 52 SE Chatfield, MN 55923 Referral Comments: Park and Rec. Department Rochester Public Works Department Planning Department - Addressing staff Rochester Fire Department Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments ( 4 letters) 2. Copy of Final Plat 3. Southern Woods Approved General Development Plan 4. Vicinity Map 7y� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER ma.li. Page 2�I Final Plat 00-22 1 Southern Woods Third Addition August 30, 2000 Plan Data: Location of Property: The property is located south of Southern Woods Place SW, and east of 111b Avenue SE (County Road 147) . Existing Zoning: The property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential) district on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. Proposed Development: This development consists of 28.19 acres being subdivided into 24 lots for single family residential development, one outlet, and also proposes to dedicate right-of-way for new public roadways. Roadways: This plat proposes to dedicate right-of-way for four new roadways. The first roadway is a cul-de-sac named "Southwood Lane SW". This roadway is designed with a 50' right- of-way with a 40.67' roadway. The second roadway labeled as "Southwood Drive SW" is designed with a 60' right-of-way. The third roadway labeled as "Southern Place SW" is designed with a 60' right-of-way. The fourth roadway labeled as "Southern Lane", east of the intersection, is designed with a 50' right-of-way. The directional "SW" will need to be added. Pedestrian Facilities: Pedestrian facilities are required along both sides of all roadways, and along 11"1 Avenue SW. A Development Agreement has been executed for this property. Drainage: The topography is some what steep, with 1180' along the southern boundary of this plat to 1110' to the northern boundary of this plat. The plat identifies slopes greater than 15% on Lots 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14, Block 2 and Lots 1, 2, and 3, Black 1. The Plat is designed with storm sewer collection pipes that will convey storm water into an existing stormwater pond in Southern Woods. Grading and drainage plans have been approved by the City Public Works Department. Wetlands: The Soil Survey and National Wetland Indicator maps were reviewed for the presence of wetlands. This portion of the site was shown not to have wetlands. 910 Page 3 Final Plat 00-22 Southern Woods Third Addition August 30, 2000 Public Utilities: Sanitary sewer and water lines will be extended from their present ends to accommodate this development. 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 29 spillover parking stalls. It appears as though the additional parking can be accommodated on the roadways and most likely within private driveways, as well. Parkland Dedication: The Park & Recreation Department stated that dedication requirements for this plat have been met via the previous dedication calculation when Southern Woods 131 was approved. General Development Plan: Preliminary Plat. This property is included within the Southern Wood General Development Plan. This plat does not dedicate ROW consistent with the approved GDP. These streets are located in Outlot "A" of this plat, The developer's intention is to plat and dedicate the proposed streets (as depicted on the GDP) to the City of Rochester when they are ready to develop lots along the proposed streets, or when the City formally requests dedication of the streets, whichever comes first. A preliminary plat for this property was approved by the City Council on May 24, 2000 with the following conditions: 1. The Plat shalt be revised. a. Changing the designation of "Woodview Lane" and add the directional of "SW". b. Changing the designation of "Woodview Drive" and add the directional of "SW". c. Changing the designation of "Southern Way Place" to "Southern Place SW". d. Changing the designation of "Southern Way Place" (east of the intersection with "Woodview") to "Southern Lane SW". 2. This plat does not include the dedication of right-of-way consistent with the approved General Development Plan (Outlot A). The applicant shall plat and dedicate the proposed streets (as depicted on the GDP) to the City of Rochester in the future or when the City formally requests dedication of the right-of-way, whichever comes first. 3. A revised City/ Owner Contract for Southern Woods First and Second Subdivisions must be executed prior to approval of this preliminary plat. 4. Stormwater Management must be provided for this Plat. r Page 4 Final Plat 00-22 Southern Woods Third Addition August 30, 2000 Staff Recommendation The Planning Staff has reviewed the submitted final plat and finds that it is consistent with the approved preliminary plat. The staff would recommend approval subject to the following conditions / modifications: 1. The Plat shall be revised as follows: a. Add the directional of "SW" to "Southern Lane". Z This plat does not include the dedication of right-of-way consistent with the approved General Development Plan (Outlot A). The applicant shall plat and dedicate the proposed streets (as depicted on the GDP) to the City of Rochester in the future or when the City formally requests dedication of the right-of-way, whichever comes rrst. n s' a (� roaAeeter ROCHESTER PARK AND IICREATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6166 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 23, 2000 TO: Suzanne LaPalm Planning RE: Final Plat #00-22 Southern Woods 3`d (Replat of Outlot D Southern Woods 1°t) The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: The applicant has12.0 acres of parkland dedication credits as a result of the May 2, 2000 dedication of Outlot B Southern Woods 1'. Dedication requirements for this plat have been met via the previous dedication calculated when Southern Woods 1s` was approved. No additional dedication is required. Applicant Southern Woods Development LLC 3552 West River Parkway N:\PARK\DSTOTZ\2000\DEDICATION\SW 2591\SOUTHERN WOODS 3RD.DOC i ROCHESTER Minnesota 8/28/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur 913 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4ffi 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 #00-22 on the Southern Woods Third Addition property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: A Development Agreement has been executed for this property. Charges/fees that are applicable to the development of the property have been addressed in the Development Agreement, with the exception of: ❖ Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division: 4 Street Name Signs 1 Dead End Sign 2 Stop Signs C:%TE MP\FP#00-22. doc REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING ��Lj 9-6-00 AGENDASECTION: PUBLIC HEARING ORIGINATING DEPT: PLANNING ITEM NO. G � 4 4 DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #00-34 to be known as Weatherstone. PREPARED BY: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner August 30, 2000 Staff Recommendation: 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 or modifications: 1. Parkland dedication for this plat be met via deferred dedication of land, per the August 9, 2000 memo from Rochester Park and Recreation. 2. This Plat shall be revised to dedicate controlled access along the entire frontage of 50"h Ave. NW. 3. Prior to recording the final plat documents (mylars), a Contribution Agreement for 50fh Ave. NW shall be executed for this property. Council Action Needed: 1. If the Council wishes to proceed a resolution approving the plat can be adopted. Attachment. 1. Staff Report dated August 30, 2000 Distribution: 1. City Clerk 2, City Attorney 3. Planning Department File 4. Planning Department GIS Division 5. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on WEDNESDAY September 6, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. 6. Loucks Associates 1NCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: 1: �Qet a a 4 a Y i 4 TO: Rochester Common Council FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Planner DATE: August 30, 2000 '•v OVA 7ED:AUGUST•-•� ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 ADMINISTRATION/ 5071285-8232 PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ 507/285-B232 MAPPING HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 5071285-8213 WELUSEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 5071287-2275 RE: Final Plat #00-34 to be known as Weatherstone Subdivision. Planninq Department Review: Applicant/Owner: Weatherstone Townhomes, Limited Partnership 900 2nd Ave. S., Suite 880 MPLS, MN 55402 Surveyors/Engineers: Loucks Associates 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 MPLS, MN 55369-5592 Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Public Works 2. Rochester Park & Rec. 3. Olmsted County SWCD Report Attachments: f. Referral Comments (3 Letters) 2. Location Map 3. Copy of Final Plat Plat Data: Location of Property: This plat is located west of 50d' Ave. NW, north of the Douglas Trail. Zoning: This property is zoned R-2 (Low Density Residential) Proposed Development: The developer is proposing a townhome style multi- family rental development. Streets: There are no new roadways being dedicated with this Plat. Internal roadways will be private. Drainage: Detailed grading and drainage plans have been reviewed and approved by the City. �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 August 3D, 2000 a�q , 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. A replacement plan will be required for any Wetlands that are proposed for filling. Public Utilities: Utilities are available, or will be extended to serve this property. Spillover Parking: Parkland Dedication: General Development Plan Preliminary Plat: Parking requirements for have been reviewed for the multi -family development. Parking will be provided consistent with Ordinance requirements. Rochester Park and Recreation recommends that parkland dedication for this development be met via deferred dedication of land. This property is included in the approved GDP known as Weatherstone. There is no preliminary plat for this property. No new right-of-way is being dedicated with this Plat and there is not a need to provide connections through this plat to adjacent properties. Planning Staff and Recommendation: The Planning Staff has reviewed the submitted final plat. At this time, the Plat needs to be revised to dedicate right-of-way needed for Bandel Road NW. Staff recommends that this Plat be tabled to a future meeting, to allow the applicant to file a revised Plat that includes right-of-way needed for Bendel Road. If the Council does not wish to table this Plat, staff would recommend the following conditions: 1. Parkland dedication for this plat be met via deferred dedication of land, per the August 9, 2000 memo from Rochester Park and Recreation. 2. This Plat shall be revised to dedicate controlled access along the entire frontage of 501" Ave. NW. 3. Prior to recording the final plat documents (mylars), a Contribution Agreement for 500, Ave. NW shall be executed for this property. Ago ROCHESTER Minnesota 8/28/00 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 application for Final Plat #00-34.on the _Weatherstone (Shelter Group) property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. A Development Agreement has been executed for this property. 2. A Contribution Agreement for 50th Ave NW must be executed for this property. Charges/fees applicable for the development of this property are included in the Development Agreement, with the exception of:: -e Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division. 1 Stop Sign 1 Dead End Sign 6 Street name Signs C:ITEMP%FP#00-34.doc ROCHESTER PARK AND Kt_CREATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 9, 2000 TO: Jennifer Gamess Planning RE: Weatherstone Final Plat #00-34 Acreageof plat.......................................................... 11.1 a Number of dwelling units ............................................. 100 units Dwelling unit density ................................................... 9.01 units/a Density factor............................................................ .0178 Dedication............................................................... 1.78 a The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via deferred dedication of land. Land to be dedicated is identified as the 9.6 acre park on the GDP. Dedication to occur when either park area is platted or Park Department is ready to begin development of the park. Applicant: Weatherstone Townhomes, Limited Partnership 9W Second Ave South Suite 880 Mpls, MN 55402 ®.Shelter Corporation 900 Second Avenue South Suite 80 OWN � nneapo Minne 55402 (612) 341-7800 Fax (612) 332-8284 August 22, 2000 Mitzi Baker Rochester — Olmsted Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, Minnesota 55904-4744 Dear Ms. Baker, Per our telephone conversation, the 100 unit Weatherstone Townhome rental housing community will remain affordable rental housing for at least thirty years and be owned by the Weatherstone Townhomes Limited Partnership. Shelter Corporation will be retained as the property manager. Shelter Corporation currently manages over 5,000 rental units nationally and, is experienced with the ongoing maintenance of all aspect of the rental properties. The various financing documents require that all of the property remains properly maintained for at least the term of the debt which is thirty-seven years. Specifically as it relates to the Weatherstone Townhome project, Shelter Corporation is responsible for all of the long term maintenance of common lands and facilities including the following major items: ➢ There will be a lawn and landscape maintenance contract for all green space. ➢ There will be a snow removal contract for all roadways. ➢ The ongoing maintenance of the roadways and utilities will be incorporated into a capital budget. All maintenance will be completed by independent contractors. ➢ The ongoing maintenance of all the housing units and the laundry facility will also be included in the capital budget The day to day maintenance will be completed by onsite employees. Major maintenance items will be contracted out Thank you again for your cooperation. Please call me at 612-341-7800 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jay Jensen ` �— Senior Vice President l rpu we pledge, we defwer 507/280-1579 August 28, 2000 TO: Jennifer Gamess, Planning Department Consolidated Planning Dept. FROM: Michael J. Engle, Supv. Of Distribution Design Rochester Public Utilities SUBJECT: REVISED: Type III, Phase I Final Plat #00-34 to be known as Weatherstone. The plat proposes to subdivide approximately 11.11 acres of land into two lots for a rental townhome development. The plat also dedicates right-of-way for 50s' Avenue NW. The property is located west side of 50th Avenue NW, north of the Douglas Trail. This plat was revised to add access control along 50rh Avenue, a utility and drainage easement along 50rh Avenue, and also to modify the easements throughout the plat. RPU's Operations Division has reviewed this final plat and has no objection as it is outside our service area at this time. However, we do intend to serve the total area in the future. Sincerely, Michael J. Engle ks c: W. Lorber T. Adkins, City Attorney Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, MN 55906-2813 telephone 507.280.1540 facsimile 507.280.1542 website www.rpu.org REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 995r DATE 9-6-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING 5 M DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #00- 02 to be known as Century HMIs PREPARED BY- Townhomes Third Subdivision CIC 168. Brent Svenby, August 31, 2000 Planning Department Review: The Planning Staff has reviewed the submitted final plat. The developer has executed a Development Agreement with the City for the final plat. Staff would recommend approval of the final plat with the following conditions/modifications: 1. The plat be revised to dedicate controlled access along Century Hills Drive NE. 2. The developer agrees that this subdivision will have an impact upon the City's needs for that parkland and deferred dedication of Outlot A as shown on the preliminary plat will fulfill the dedication obligation of this plat. 3. A Temporary turnaround shall be provided at the easterly end of 2151 Street NE. Prior to the recording of the final plat documents, the applicant shall execute the easement for the turnaround with the City Public Works Department. 4. Prior to the recording of the final plat documents, the care and maintenance agreements for the common areas shall be reviewed and approved by the City. Council Action Needed., 1. 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/Treasurer/Auditor's Statement 3. Recording Fee 4. Title Opinion 5. 1 Original Plat Mylar 6. 3 Mylar Copies of Plat Attachment: 1. Staff Report dated August 31, 2000. Distribution: 1. CityAttomey 2. Planning Department File 3. Planning Department —GIS 4. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 6, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. i. Yaggy Colby Associates t,.uuNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: r>_»■ : tm \\( \ 2 , | q ( co | § S � V) \ ) _ §� �! V)k / ! 00 r | 2:u / L ._ , & O LU /\ , � \\� �/ a \ z /C4 q . \ fto. ! | [ All |� ; : + �\ z \ # � I | \ j � � \ § � MIIN ■,Ik | !w )/ \ � /10G rE fNA1 l�.caw�! llovgr o� pvni �w ;O``=��rylp�=Hgryo! , ROC HESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 CAMPUS DR SE ROCHESTER MN 55904-4744 TO: Rochester Common Council ADMINISTRATION/ PLANNING GIS/ADDRESSING/ FROM: Brent Svenby, Planner MAPPING HOUSING/HRA DATE: August 31, 2000 BUILDING CODE WELL/SEPTIC FAX RE: Final Plat #00-02 to be known as Century Hills Townhomes Third CIC 168 Planninq Department Review: ApplicantlOwner: Surveyors/Engineers: Referral Comments: Report Attachments: Plat Data: Roger Payne 1700 Northwood Drive NE Rochester, MN 55906 Yaggy Colby Associates 717 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 1. Planning Department - Wetland LGU 2. Planning Department —Addressing 3. RPU Water Division 4. RPU Operations Division 5. Rochester Public works Department 6. Rochester Park & Rec. 7. Olmsted County SWCD 8. Rochester Fire Department 9. MnDOT 1. Referral Comments (5 Letters) 2. Copy of GDP 3. Copy of Final Plat Location of Property: The property is located south of Viola Road (CSAH 2), east of Century Hills Drive NE. Zoning: The property is zoned RAX (Mixed Single Family Extra) district on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. Proposed Development: This development consists of 4.49 acres of land to be subdivided into 20 lots for townhomes and 1 lot that 5071285-8232 5D7/285-8232 507/285-8224 507/285-8213 507/285-8345 507/287-2275 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNI rWAFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER .rew, Page 2 Century Hills Townhomes Third CIC 168 August 31, 2000 will be commonly owned. The applicant does have an approved Performance Residential Development plan for this property. Streets: The Plat dedicates the right-of-way for one new roadway (21" Street NE). The townhome development will be served by private roadways, The applicant will need to work with the Planning Department GIS Addressing staff with roadway designation of the private roadways. Sidewalks: A 5 foot sidewalk will be required along 2161 Street NE and Century Hills Drive NE. A 10 foot bike path is required along CASH 2 (Viola Road). Drainage: The grading and plan has been approved for this property. 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 on this site. Public Utilities: Water and sewer services are installed within the proposed right-of-way of 21 °S Street NE. Spillover Parking: Spillover parking for this development was reviewed at the time the project was approved through the Performance Residential Plan process. Parkland Dedication: The City Park and Recreation Department recommends that parkland dedication requirements be satisfied by the deferred dedication of the 5.9 acre Outlot A as shown on the preliminary plat. This dedication of 5.9 acres will meet the dedication requirements of this plat plus the deferred dedication requirements for Century Hills 1s° 2ne P, CIC 154 and CIC 158. General Development Plan: The plat is consistent with the approved General Development Plan for this property. The GDP was recently amended in April of 2000. Preliminary Plat. A preliminary plat for this property was approved by the City Council on March 20. 2000 with the following conditions: 1. Storm water management must be provided for this development. 2. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City that outlines the obligations of the applicant relating to, but no limited to, stormwater management, ash All D Page 3 Century Hills Townhames Third CIC 168 August 31, 2000 park dedication, traffic improvements, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, and contributions for public infrastructure. 3. A temporary turnaround must be provided at the east end of 2131 Street NE. 4. Pedestrian facilities along the east side of Century Hills Drive and the south side of Viola Road must be constructed concurrent with this development. The pedestrian facility along the south side of Viola Road must be a 10 foot bituminous path and designed to accommodate an east/west pedestrian crossing of Century Hills Drive at the normal stop bar location. 5. The final plat documents must dedicate controlled access along Viola Road (CSAH 2) and Century Hills Drive. 6. The developer agrees that this subdivision will have an impact upon the City's needs for parkland and that dedication of Outlot A will fulfill the dedication obligation of this plat 7. The development agreement for this plat shall include requirements and agreements for the developer to construct the secondary access to East Circle Drive concurrent with the development of this property. Plannin_q Staff and Recommendation: The developer has executed a Development Agreement with the City for this property. Staff has reviewed the submitted final plat and would then recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat be revised to dedicate controlled access along Century Hills Drive NE. 2. The developer agrees that this subdivision will have an impact upon the City's needs for parkland and that deferred dedication of Outlot A as shown on the preliminary plat will fulfill the dedication obligation of this plat. 3. A Temporary turnaround shall be provided at the easterly and of 21" Street NE. Prior to the recording of the final plat documents, the applicant shall execute the easement for the turnaround with the City Public Works Department. 4. Prior to the recording of the final plat documents, the care and maintenance agreements for the common areas shall be reviewed and approved by the City. 0 ROCHESTER Minnesota 8/28/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested Final Plat 00-02 on Century Hills Townhomes Third Subdivisi, A DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 for a Company) property. The following are the Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. A Development Agreement has been executed for this property. 2. A temporary turn -around, and associated easement, will be required at the eastern end of 2151 St NE. 3. The 10 foot bituminous pedestrian path, and the 5 foot concrete sidewalk along the east side of Century Hills Drive shall be designed to accommodate a east / west pedestrian crossing of Century Hills Drive at the normal stop bar location. Charges & fees for this Development are addressed in the Development Agreement for this property with the exception of : •:• Traffic Signs as determined by the City of Rochester Traffic Division. C:\TEMP\FP#00-02.doc Ipark 8 ecreation DATE: August21, 2000 TO: Jennifer Garness Planning ROCHESTER PARK AND RI 2EATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM RE: Century Hills Townhomes 3rd CIC 168 Final Plat #00-02 Number of dwelling units ............................................. Densityfactor............................................................ Dedication............................................................... 20 units .0244 .49 acres The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: Deferred land dedication of the 5.9 acre Outlot A. The dedication of this outlot will meet dedication requirement for this plat plus meet the deferred dedication requirements for Century Hills 1It 2nd 3rd, CIC 154 and CIC 158. Applicant: Payne Company 1700 Northwood Drive NE N;\PARK\DSTOTZ\2000\DEDICATION\NE 2596\CENTURY HILLS TOWN 3RD CIC 169.DOC REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING p7g3 / DATE: 09-06-00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING 9-016 M DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase 1, Final Plat #99.31 to be known as Lincolnshire North PREPARED BY: .,rrth Subdivision. The Plat will subdivide approximately 7.45 acres of land into 24 lots for Theresa Fogarty, single family development and will also dedicate right-of-way for two roadways. The Planner property is located north-west of Lincolnshire North Third Subdivision, west of the current west end of 4811 Street NW and east of West Circle Drive. August 30, 2000 Planning Department Review: See attached staff report dated August 30, 2000 with the following recommended conditions or modifications: 1. The final plat be revised: a) correcting the 10' offset dimension arrow for the 20' Utility Easement between Lots 2 d 3, Block 2, as stated by the Rochester Public Utility Department, Water Division in the attached memo, dated August 17, 2000. Z The applicant shall provide a temporary turn -around at the west end of "Nottingham Drive NW" and easement documents for the turn -around must be executed with the City Public Works Department prior to recording the final plat documents. 3. Parkland dedication requirements for this Plat shall be met via cash payment in lieu of land in the amount of $7,670, as specified in the attached memo Council Action Needed: '. 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 Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 3. City Attorney 4. Planning Department File 5. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday. September 6, 2000 in the Council Chambers at the Rochester / Olmsted County Government Center. 6. Yaggy Colby Associates 1NCiIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: r L) moo� E * >"U� u *o Fm7i 7�,o�,,i -:D c U- z LLJ Lr) z -j C) v- ; " -U 7 -j z '06 m A' LLJ r LLJ EL O z S z A01 m L j 04 L7 yy �P l Donn L Tl N' F 00'961 TC.SZJl* MiiV" d N n m r VIM TO: Rochester Common Council FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner DATE: August 30, 2000 -�.s iOiai�iii;� 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 507/285-8224 BUILDING CODE 507/285-8213 WELUSEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287.2275 RE: Type III, Phase 1, Final Plat #99-31 to be known as Lincolnshire North Fourth Subdivision. The Plat will subdivide approximately 7.45 acres of land into 24 lots for single family development and will also dedicate right of way for two roadways. The property is located north-west of Lincolnshire North Third Subdivision, west of the current west end of 481h Street NW and east of West Circle Drive. Planning Department Review: Applicants/Owners: Michael Younge Development, Inc. 1765 Greenview Drive SW Rochester, MN 55902 Surveyors I Engineers: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 Third Avenue SE Rochester, MN 55904 Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Public Works 2. Rochester Park & Recreation 3. Rochester Public Utilities - Water Division 4. Planning Department, John Harford, Wetlands Representative 5. Rochester Fire Department 6. Olmsted SWCD Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (6) 2. Copy of Final Plat 3. Copy of Arboretum General Development Plan Plat Data: Location of Property: The property is located north-west of Lincolnshire North Third Subdivision, west of the current west end of 48'h Street NW and east of West Circle Drive. Existing Zoning: The property is part of the Arboretum Special District (SD-1). 7y��� `-� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 Final Plat 99-31 Lincolnshire North Fourth August 30, 2000 Proposed Development: Roadways: aq� This development consists of 7.45 acres of land to be subdivided into 24 lots for single family dwellings. This plat proposes to dedicate right-of-way for two roadways. The first roadway would be "Nottingham Drive NW" extending toward West Circle Drive. This roadway is designated a Collector road and is designed with a 66' right-of-way and a 36' roadway. A temporary turn -around is required at the end of "Nottingham Drive NW" and easement documents for the turn -around shall be executed with the Public Works Department. The second roadway is labeled "Liverpool Place NW'. This roadway is designed with a 60' right-of-way and 32' roadway. Wetlands: Minnesota Statutes require that all developments be reviewed for the presence of wetlands or hydric soils. There are no wetlands present in this portion of the plat. A wetland related application has been approved by the City. This plan incorporates the approved wetland plan. Public Utilities: Final utility plans have been approved. The 10' offset dimension arrow for the 20' Utility Easement between Lots 2 & 3, Block 2 is incorrectly shown. Pedestrian Facilities: A Development Agreement, which includes pedestrian facilities, has been executed for this development. In accordance with City policy, sidewalk is required along both sides of the roadways being platted. Drainage: The topography on the property is relatively flat. The property generally drains to the north. Spillover Parking: As per Section 63.426 of the LDM, all residential development must provide spillover parking for service vehicles and visitors. This development requirement 29 spillover parking stalls. It appears as though the additional parking can be accommodated on the roadways and most likely within private driveways, as well. Parkland Dedication: There is no parkland included within the boundaries of this plat. The Park and Recreation Department recommends that the dedication requirements be met via cash in lieu of land in the amount of $7,670. A Development Agreement, which includes the Parkland Dedication, has been executed for this development. General Development Plan: This property is included within the Arboretum General Development Plan which was most recently amended in 1997. The roadway alignments and lots are generally consistent with the approved GDP. Page 3 Final Plat 99-31 Lincolnshire North Fourth August 30, 2000 Preliminary Plat: A preliminary plat for this area was approved by the Council on September 8 , 1999. The approval of the preliminary plat was subject to eight conditions, as listed below: 1. Storm water management must be provided for this development. Any ponds serving less than 50 developable acres are considered private. Consistent with previous Council action and as shown on the GDP, this area is planned to be public. 2. Prior to Final Plat submittal, the applicant must obtain approval from the LGU to disturb Wetlands within this Plat or the Plat must be revised to avoid disturbance of the Wetlands. 3. The roadway names "37'" Lane NW, 38t6 Lane NW and 49'8" be changed to named roadways, consistent with the LDM Roadway Naming Standards. in addition, the applicant or consultant shall coordinate with Staff to determine if the roadway name for 48'^ Street NW must be changed prior to submittal of a Final Plat application (this was also a condition of Lincolnshire North 3`" Subdivision, Preliminary Plat). 4. The Applicant shall provide a temporary turn -a -round at the west end of "48t8 Street NW' and easement documents for the turn -a -round must be executed with the City Public Works Department. 5. The construction plans shall be reviewed for conformance to City standards for the property elevations to serve the abutting property. 6. The Plat shall be revised: 1) so that Outlot A is a minimum of 30 feet in width and 2) to move the 20' utility easement currently shown between Lots 6 & 7 to the east, either between Lots 7 & 8 or Lots 8&9. 7. Parkland dedication requirements for this Plat shall be met via cash payment in lieu of land in the amount of $13,000 as specified in the attached memo from the Rochester Park and Recreation Department, dated July 23, 1999. B. Prior to submittal of the Final Plat application for this property, the Applicant shall submit a Wetland Replacement Plan and secure the appropriate permits from the Wetland LGU to allow for this development to proceed. Staff Recommendation: The Planning Staff has reviewed this final plat in accordance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual, Section 61.225 and would recommend approval, subject to the following condition or modifications: 1. The final plat be revised: a) correcting the 10' offset dimension arrow for the 20, Utility Easement between Lots 2 & 3, Block 2, as stated by the Rochester Public Utility Department, Water Division in the attached memo, dated August 17, 2000. 2. The applicant shall provide a temporary turn -around at the west end of 'Nottingham Drive NW" and easement documents for the turn -around must be executed with the City Public Works Department prior to recording the final plat. 3. Parkland dedication requirements for this Plat shall be met via cash payment in lieu of land in the amount of $7,670, as specified in the attached memo from the Rochester Park and Recreation Department, dated August 21, 2000. i Page 4 Final Plat 99-31 Lincolnshire North Fourth August 30, 2000 REMINDER TO APPLICANT. • Prior to development, the property owner will need to execute a City/ Owner Contract for construction of all public infrastructure and utilities to serve this subdivision. • "Nottingham Drive NW" is designated a Collector road. The driveway spacing standards (Section 64.143) of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual apply to this Subdivision. 0 0 SOD ROCHESTER Minnesota 8/28/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4th 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 Final Plat #99-31 on the Lincolnshire North 4th property. The following are the Public Works comments on the proposal: 1. A Development Agreement has been executed on this property. 2. A temporary turn -around and associated easement is required at the west end of Nottingham 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 1 Stop Sign 2 Street Name Signs 1 Dead End Sign FA CATEMP1FP#99-31.doc ROCHESTER PARK AND R&REATION DEPA MENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 65904-3769 I TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 21, 2000 TO: Jennifer Garness Planning RE: Final Plat #99-31 Lincolnshire North 4th Acreage of plat.. Number of dwelling units ............................................. Dwelling unit density ................................................... Densityfactor............................................................ Dedication............................................................... Fair market value of land ............................................. 7.45 acres 24 units 3.22 units/acre .0244 .59 acres $13,000 The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: Cash in lieu of land in the amount of $7,670 payable 12 months from approval of plat. Applicant: Michael Youngs Development 1755 Greenview Drive SW \\CITY_OF_ROCHESTER\CITYHALL\PARK\DSTOTZ\2000\DEDICATION\NW 2 8 98 \LINCOLNSHIRE N 4TH.DOC 3�r u we pledge, we deliver August 17, 2000 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Final Plat #99-31 to be known as Lincolnshire North Fourth Subdivision. Dear Ms. Gayness: Our review of the referenced final plat is complete and our comments follow: 1. The 10' offset dimension arrow for the 20' Utility Easement between Lots 2 & 3, Block 2 is incorrectly shown. 2. The final utility plans have been approved. Please contact us at 507-280-1600 if you have questions. Very truly yourwv� s,06'm 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 i REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING (5 DATE: 09- 6-0 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING G � 1 7 M DESCRIPTION: Vacation Petition #00-09 by J and C Gardens, LLC to vacate a public PREPARED BY: iitary sewer easement to allow for the construction of a multi -family residential Theresa Fogarty, development. The property is located along the east side of 111h Avenue SE, north of Planner Pinewood Road SE and south of the future alignment of 20" Street SE. August 28, 2000 Planning Department Recommendation: See attached staff report dated August 28, 2000. Staff is recommending approval contingent upon: 1. The new utility easements shall be dedicated through the platting process of the Willows Final Plat. 2. The existing 50' power line easement remains completely intact. 3. The applicant is responsible for any costs relating to the relocation of the existing utilities. ouncii 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. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated August 28, 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 Wednesday, September 6, 2000, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE. 6. GGG Engineering JNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: Page 2 of 2 ✓✓ 111 Easement Vacation Petition 00-09 August 28, 2000 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this vacation petition contingent upon: 1. The new utility easements shall be dedicated through the platting process of the Willows Final Plat. 2. The existing 50' power line easement remains completely intact. 3. The applicant is responsible for any costs relating to the relocation of the existing utilities. �� n 3 a i FUTURE 20TH STREET SE I ex-O I. 1'k c�t�-iy14 e. I�C I I Z RII < d i i Cc).�-------------v Z oa I JI D r S coI N m 3 i; ;o I i D • • ROCHESTER Minnesota 8/28/00 TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester. MN 55904 FROM: Michael J. Nigbur sol 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 Vacation #00-09 by J & C Gardens LLC on The Willows property. The following are Public Works comments on the proposal: Public Works has no objection to the requested vacation, provided the final plat of The Willows is recorded, and new easements are dedicated on the plat. C:ITE M P\VAC#00-09. DOC 3a� rpu we pCedye, we dffiver 507/280-1579 August 17, 2000 TO: Jennifer Gamess, Planning Department Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department FROM: Michael J. Engle, Supv. of Distribution Design Rochester Public Utilities SUBJECT: Vacation Petition #00-09 by J and C Gardens, LLC to vacate a public sanitary sewer easement to allow for the construction of a multi -family residential development. The property is located along the east side of llu Avenue SE, north of Pinewood Road SE, and south of future alignment of 20'h Street SE. RPU's Operations Division has no objection to the vacation of the sanitary sewer easement as long as the existing 50' power line easement remains completely intact. Sincerely, C-�Iey Michael J. Engle ks Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, MN 55906-2813 telephone 507.280.1540 facsimile 507.280.1542 website www.rpu.org REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING s-s-oo DATE: AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Works Lr —18 M ROCHESTER CITY LINES/ ROUTE CHANGES PREPARED BY: A KNAUER JIX This is a public hearing to consider various bus route changes as operated by Rochester City Lines. The proposed changes effect Routes 9, 10, 11, 12 Direct, 17 and 23. If approved the changes would go into effect on October 2, 2000 with the exception of Route 23 (which is a Saturday route) and would be implemented on September 30, 2000. Exhibit "A" provides a summary of the changes. Proposed Changes Route 9 would be revised to serve only areas west of Highway 52 including Sunset Terrace and Northgate Subdivision. (The area east of Highway 52 currently served by Route 9 would be served throughout the day by Route 10.) Service would also be added to Industrial Drive and 32nd Avenue (north of 191" Street NW). The route would operate between the described areas and downtown. (Service from Sunset Terrace/ Northgate going north to IBM and the Walmart areas is provided under proposed changes to the Route 12 Direct.) The neighborhood was surveyed in March 2000. A total of 1,211 householdswere surveyed with 401 (33%) responding. One hundred- twentyeight comments were received including 46 in favor of the change and 8 opposed. The remainder of the comments had to do with other aspects of service. Fifty percent of the trips identified were destined downtown. IBM and Apache each accounted for 8% of the destinations. Exhibit "B" includes a map and proposed timetable. Route 10 which is currently a peak hour express route would be revised to provide all day service from 41' Street NW through the Elton Hills area on the same streets currently served via existing Route 9 with the exception of areas south of 19'" Street NW at which point the proposed Route 10 would travel on 16'" Ave / 16 Yz Avenue NW to 14'" Street NW (via JM) to 11" Avenue NW/SW to 2"d Street SW to downtown. Exhibit "C" includes a map and timetable. Route 11 will have minor time adjustments during midday. (From 9:10 a.m. through 3:10 p.m. buses will arrive downtown at 10 minutes after instead of 40 minutes after the hour.) A revised timetable is provided on Exhibit "D". Route 12 Direct which currently serves the Park and Ride lot at Walmart North would be rerouted on the outbound in the morning and inbound in the afternoon to serve IBM, Mayo Family Medicine Northwest, Mayo Support Services on West Circle Drive and Walmart. No changes would be made to the express service from the Walmart Park and Ride. This route would operate 11 trips per day. Seven of the trips are currently deadheaded. This will provide northbound service to the Northgate/ Sunset Terrace noted under the Route 9 changes. Exhibit E provides a map and timetable. C"� �NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: RCA continued t6O Route 17 which currently serves Sunnydale, Eastwood Hills, County Road 11 and Marion Roac would be revised to serve Rose Harbor Addition via Harbor Drive, Rose Drive, Sunrise Avenue SE 15" Street SE, 241" Avenue SE to Marion Road then inbound on the current route. Service would be deleted along County Road 11 and the south portion of Marion Road. The service was originally established as a demonstration route in May, 1998 with funding from MNDOT. The funding expired on June 30, 2000. It was hoped that the route could support itself or that a sponsor could be found. Exhibit F-1 provides a summary of ridership and costs through July 2000. The route has a 32% farebox return ratio. Comparatively at approximately 1200 passengers per month the route falls between Route 16 (Century High ) which serves over 900 and Route 14 (Willow Heights) which serves 1300 passengers per month. City routes serving more dense areas carry 5,000 to 15,000 passengers per month. The deficit per day on Route 17 averages $135.00. The change will result in a majority of the route's mileage within the City limits. The question of jurisdiction and funding is the major factor in revising the route. A survey of Rose Harbor residents was conducted in June in anticipation of this revision. Eighty-six surveys were sent out with 30 being returned. Twenty-two residents were in favor of the new route with 10 opposed. The revised route will serve the new Rose Harbor Estates currently being developed and Valley Side Subdivision. Exhibits F-2 and F-3 provide a map and timetable for the revised route. Route 23 which is a Saturday route would be revised to serve the Walmart South/ Kohls shopping area on South Broadway. Service on Route 23 to Apache Mall would be deleted. Apache Mall would still be served via Route 24. A map of the proposed change is provided on Exhibit G. REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION Adopt the prepared resolution approving the proposed bus route changes described per Exhibits B-G. M § §§) cl \§k\ k� \\_ z ®|2� §2 �!® | !(§2 [ §� k k \)§\ j (k\§ }\ \k\ . ■ k| ` ` & {& ` 7 § 00 / k( "k .` �\` .° § §22° ® ` § \[ � �§_§; \ /§\�� )R(\ \\�(§)9 \) w 2§�;.§gd |_»� !a!§�w -Z! ! �! ¥`-.`. ° o - § 23®w�� o »° /U�w \k//§�� �} \ \�e\\§� §k §/®,-w§ 22 \\ EElt;w | �]) E�§/k|( (( /�\ )m!)||& k}|; B\)|§)! §; (§! ` \� \ i!| |_,. �| 55H A \§ W- EXHIBIT B-1 Ii 8�31-00 Proposed Bus Route 9: Valleyhigh Drive NW 0 3000 Feet LEGEND Bus Route Path [Reverses AM/ PM] 3C3 ROUTE 9 MORNING EXHIBIT B-2 m3 p b p N L E R L ip 0 D 9 C Q1 J D id N S N Cl d p 2 O1 L F U Q m i W d' Q U::E 2 f- a 5 Q m L . `O 5:46 5:48 5:53 5:56 6:00 6:03 6:04 6:06 6:09 6:13 6:20 6:23 6:26 6:30 6:40 6:15 6:18 6:23 6:26 6:30 6:33 6:34 6:36 6:39 6:43 6:50 6:53 6:56 7:00 7:10 6:45 6:48 6:53 6:56 7:00 7:03 7:04 7:06 7:09 7:13 7:20 7:23 7:26 7:30 7:40 7:15 7:18 7:23 7:26 7:30 7:33 7:34 7:36 7:39 7:43 7:50 7:53 7:56 8:00 8:10 7:45 7:48 7:53 7:66 8:00 8:03 8:04 8:06 8:09 8:13 8:20 8:23 8:26 8:30 8:40 8:15 8:18 8:23 8:26 8:30 8:33 8:34 8:36 8:39 8:43 8:50 8:53 8:56 9:00 9:10 8:45 8:48 8:53 8:66 9:00 9:03 9:04 9:06 9:09 9:13 9:20 9:23 9:26 9:30 9:40 9:45 9:48 9:53 9:56 10:00 10:03 10:04 10:06 10:09 10:13 10:20 10:23 10:26 10:30 10:40 10:45 10:48 10:53 10:56 11:00 11:03 11:04 11:06 11:09 11:13 11:20 11:23 11:26 11:30 11:40 11:45 11:48 11:53 11:56 12:00 12:03 12:04 12:06 12:09 12:13 12:20 12:23 12:26 12:30 12:40 ROUTE 9 AFTERNOON 3 12 O M-� Rr mL rn NO U iU 2U m C M- O N O N L L i = V X E 0 C L n7 N C d �o viOi= and -Oi2 Qm 2F�- U �2Q j w ¢ m FaU L �2 m a �_ 12:45 12:48 12:53 12:56 12:59 1:06 1:15 1:18 1:19 1:20 1:23 1:26 1:29 1:36 1:40 1:45 1:48 1:53 1:56 1:59 2:06 2:15 2:18 2:19 2:20 2:23 2:26 2:29 2:35 2:40 2:45 2:48 2:53 2:56 2:59 3:06 3:15 3:18 3:19 3:20 3:23 3:26 3:29 3:35 3:40 3:15 3:18 3:23 3:26 3:29 3:36 3:45 3:48 3:49 3:50 3:53 3:56 3:59 4:05 4:10 3:45 3:48 3:53 3:56 3:59 4:06 4:15 4:18 4:19 4:20 4:23 4:26 4:29 4:35 4:40 4:15 4:18 4:23 4:26 4:29 4:36 4:45 4:48 4:49 4:50 4:53 4:56 4:59 5:05 5:10 4:45 4:48 4:53 4:56 4:59 5:06 6:15 5:18 5:19 5:20 6:23 5:26 5:29 6:36 5:40 5:15 6:18 5:23 5:26 5:29 5:36 5:45 6:48 5:49 6:50 5:53 5:56 5:59 6:05 6:10 5:45 6:48 5:53 5:56 5:59 6:06 6:15 6:18 6:19 Request 6:15 6:18 6:23 6:26 6:29 Request 20 hours ne ft9e ROUTE #10 EXHIBIT C-2 i .>e — 3 W Z N 0 ?Z lei C A 3 z; A A O A V a 3 Za O .+0 N C L tA.l CO L 1 O j C A { 4 m O N C 0.0 01 C O ---- 5:30 5:37 5:39 5:42 5:47 5:50 -- 6:00 6:07 6:09 6:14 6:19 6:25 -- 6:17 6:24 6:26 6:31 6:36 6:40 6:38 6:45 6:52 6:54 6:59 7:05 7:10 7:13 7:15 7:22 7:24 7:29 7:35 7:40 -- 7:28 7:35 7:37 7:42 7:47 7:53 7:38 7:45 7:52 7:54 7:59 8:05 8:10 8:10 8:15 8:22 8:24 8:29 8:35 8:40 8:38 8:45 8:52 8:54 8:59 9:05 9:10 9:38 9:45 9:52 9:54 9:59 10:05 10:10 10:38 10:45 10:52 10:54 10:59 11:05 11:10 11: 3 8 11:45 11: 52 11: 54 11: 5 9 12: 0 5 12:10 12:38 12:45 12:52 12:54 12:59 1:05 1:10 1:38 1:45 1:52 1:54 1:59 2:05 2:10 2:38 2:45 2:52 2:54 2:59 3:05 3:10 138 3:45 3:52 3:54 3:59 4:05 4:10 4:38 4:45 4:52 4:54 4:59 5:05 5:10 5:38 5:45 5:52 5:54 5:59 6:05 6:10 9 c C o w Z z A 3 LL y 0 z 3 3� A c q 0 N C a Q w N a Z >. m o E �" o rn o L« ci T N N A A A 6:15 6:18 6:23 6:27 6:29 6:36 6:38 7:15 7:18 7:23 7:27 7:29 7:36 7:38 8:15 8:18 8:23 8:27 8:29 8:36 8:38 9:15 9:18 9:23 9:27 9:29 9:36 9:38 10:15 10:18 10:23 10:27 10:29 10:36 10:38 11:15 11:18 11:23 11:27 11:29 11:36 11:38 12:15 12:18 12:23 12:27 12:29 12:36 12:38 1:15 1:18 1:23 1:27 1:29 1:36 1:38 2:15 2:18 2:23 2:27 2:29 2:36 2:38 3:15 3:18 3:23 3:27 3:29 3:36 3:38 3:45 3:48 3:53 3:57 3:59 4:06 4:08 4:13 4:16 4:23 4:27 4:29 4:36 4:38 4:45 4:48 4:53 4:57 4:59 5:06 5:08 5:05 5:08 5:13 5:17 6:19 5:26 5:28 5:15 5:18 5:23 6:27 5:29 5:36 5:38 5:55 5:58 6:02 6:06 6:08 Request 6:15 6:18 6:23 6:27 6:29 Request m.t.l0.d.. 0 EXHIBIT D-1 0 48th St NW < w m -- N 41st St N z 41 st St NW D TARGET West m SUMMIT r River *�++ w SQUARE Pkwy Z 31st St .< a j. HoIY 29 St I Cross Rush C71 y Hours N Only � eta o� Valhal a Cren1w-8 CL 14th St NW m zD-4 z 7th St NW �� ith St NNW N = ZD� MAYO D CLINIC cn IQ 2nd St SW Route 11 EXHIBIT D-2 To Downtown m 5� ? m z as 3 > N a o r rn z� s c zm 0— Y � Q N ; N QCn In ? 0 > M Q l0 N 30 (0 C E g° g o 5 t K E`- Lc > 3 � N m M N� M Go r- @ 0 0 6:04 6:07 6:12 6:17 6:22 6:27 6:30 6:40 6:34 6:37 6:42 6:47 6:52 6:57 7:00 7:10 7:02 7:05 7:10 7:14 7:17 7:24 7:29 7:40 7:34 7:37 7:42 7:47 7:52 7:57 8:00 8:10 8:04 8:07 8:12 8:17 8:22 8:27 8:30 8:40 8:34 8:37 8:42 8:47 8:52 8:57 9:00 9:10 9:08 9:11 9:15 9:18 9:22 9730 9:40 9:38 9:41 9:45 9:48 9:52 — 10:00 10:10 10:38 10:41 10:45 10:48 10:52 — 11:00 11:10 11:38 11:41 11:45 11:48 11:52 -- 12:00 12:10 12:38 12:41 12:45 12:48 12:52 — 1:00 1:10 1:38 1:41 1:45 1:48 1:52 — 2:00 2:10 2:38 2:41 2:45 2:48 2:52 3:00 3:10 3:08 3:11 3:15 3:18 3:22 3:26 3:30 3:40 3:38 3:41 3:45 3:48 3:52 3:56 4:00 4:10 4:08 4:11 4:15 4:18 4:22 4:26 4:30 4:40 4:38 4:41 4:45 4:48 4:52 4:56 5:00 5:10 5:08 5:11 5:15 5:18 5:22 5:26 5:30 5:40 From Downtown N 0 z o „Z �m o pca 0c dy_ c (v z� rn > c m a0 $ > in Q> in ¢ (u 0 >U Nc co v C\lM m- 2LL m 7:12 7:19 7:21 7:24 7:27 7:31 7:34 7:37 7:42 7:49 7:51 7:54 7:57 8:01 8:04 8:07 8:12 8:19 8:21 8:24 8:27 8:31 8:34 8:37 9:12 9:19 — 9:22 9:26 9:30 9:38 9:41 10:12 10:19 — 10:22 10:26 10:30 10:38 10:41 11:12 11:19 — 11:22 11:26 11:30 11:38 11:41 12:12 12:19 — 12:22 12:26 12:30 12:38 12:41 1:12 1:19 — 1:22 1:26 1:30 1:38 1:41 2:12 2:19 -- 2:22 2:26 2:30 2:38 2:41 2:42 2:49 -- 2:52 2:56 3:00 3:08 3:11 3:12 3:19 3:22 3:25 3:28 3:32 3:38 3:41 3:42 3:49 3:52 3:55 3:58 4:02 4:08 4:11 4:12 4:19 4:22 4:25 4:28 4:32 4:38 4:41 4:42 4:49 4:52 4:55 4:58 5:02 5:08 5:11 5:15 5:22 5:25 5:28 5:31 5:35 5:41 5:44 5:45 5:52 5:55 5:58 6:01 6:05 6:11 6:14 6:15 6:22 6:25 6:28 Request 3tq i ROUTE 12 DIRECT EXHIBIT E-2 c �z o Z o ) Z Z a o. c w 0 p wa' i� o c .` 3 Jm ''>a zu m au W P .- x� as mmf ku 3z �xp Qmo 5:30 6:33 5:35 5:37 5:40 5:44 5:45 5:48 5:62 5:55 6:10 6:20 6:25 6:00 6:03 6:05 6:07 6:10 6:14 6:15 6:18 6:22 6:25 6:40 6:60 6:55 6:20 6:23 6:25 6:27 6.30 6:34 6:35 6:38 6:42 6:45 7:00 7:10 7:15 6:45 6:48 6:50 6:52 6:55 6:59 7:00 7:03 7:08 7:11 7:15 7:18 7:20 7:22 7:25 7:29 7:30 7:33 7:38 7:41 Pequ..t 8:15 8:18 8:20 8:22 8:25 8:29 8:30 8:33 8:38 8:41 R.qu..t a c ? 3 0 z ✓ q q v1 L LL % v J _ - c O > z 'A u0 � 2 mA 0 �o Om E0 mmO Q u ZOu � QQ mc 3:10 3:15 3:30 3:35 3:38 3:42 3:45 3:46 3:50 3:52 3:54 3:56 4:00 3:40 3:45 4:00 4:05 4:08 4:12 4:15 4:16 4:20 4:22 4:24 4:26 4:30 4:10 4:15 4:30 4:35 4:38 4:42 4:45 4:46 4:50 4:52 4:54 4:56 5:00 4:40 4:45 5:00 5:05 5:08 5:12 5:15 5:16 5:20 5:22 5:24 5:26 5:30 5:10 6:15 5:30 5:35 5:38 5:42 5:45 5:46 6:50 5:52 5:44 5:56 6:00 nowi2d 3aa J-XR12(-V' W c� ti Q h J ti m W o � q cWi ' w q F- h- o w ¢ w z x LL U ti Ox U A x O O W 2 x n vy W W w m W 1 W 4 2 4 0 f• P 01 m co t0 m O O 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O tit O N N Q Q r O m O O Q tO r 0 L1 O LL M m O r r M O N N O tT M m tN O O ui n� Q m r M M M t0 M t0 tO m t0 V cV N O O N t0 N W m N n t-J V N 0 0 0 r m m N O MO m 144. m M M m Q M 0I O r ao r O M M V. f� C r N M m m N n V t0 M M�� m m N m m O t0 r t0 Q M m M m m tl1 Q N N m M m N N N N N N N N N t7 N N N N O t0 to fR 4`l '9 f9 f9 fN f9 V3 W hR Vi b9 69 m GA IA FA tfI 43 N f9 lA V3 V3 Vl F9 N m w w O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o o 0 O O O o O o O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O O o 0 0 O O O O O O o 0 M 0 0 It 0 0 0 -Itw N wV t0 c0 0 a 0 0 0 0 cV a N N 0 0 0 0 V to to A O N N m m O M N m m r N m m N N m N Q Q O Q N w m O Q Q m CO N Q O m 0 1 N N M M N M N N N N M N N m r 69� f9 fA t9 ffl Vd -i f91 c: wz 1: -: b9 lR y}ty m cr! 60 W rn tirrrnrnmtnm 0l N N Q Q O cD t0 to Uj O O tcj m Q Q V r QtO tDmm nmm tf} fA V! 69 lA b3 fA fA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O �t N m O t0 O M m O O M M t` t00 tm0 � O� O O O GMO N N m m m m t• m t� n� m to W !A V3 V! Vi fR to L0 (R fR fR mQ� tnmMtn QQo nmarom�m�oo0o� COOOMOOO O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O Q O O m s Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m Q Q N Q N 0 t0 Q Q f� tD m N r N r r r N O O O t0 N 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t0 t0 t0 N N N 0 0 0 0 0] tV N O ui O 11"1 u) to O N N N O N O O M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m m CO Co m m m M m m 0) M m M M M 0) 0f tnrn�rnrn0ao0 0rnrnrntn0rnrntn0rn0 o aUi -� Q CO O Z❑ 2 Q 2 Q to O Z O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m M O N N O M m O O_ Q m N N m !n m Q V Q M sF Q M m h. N fA fA f9 Yi Ni Vf N N Fg W c0 m N t0 m O � t0 N t0 m Q m m N N N to O N N m 0� r r r r r r m p N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m Q O m m 0 0 0 t0 fD � m t` n tp r r O O O O O O O t0 m 0 0 0 0 0 n r r r r r r r cl M O N N O M N N N N N N N Q n r m O W D OO 0 D O OO O o Q lL Q N O y N owb> w 0 a U `m 0 O = 9 O rn y LU Z v m y 4 T N y d EL K c rn u LL O 0 N a C a n N N 7 w aaac)x0 sa n LL F— x LLJ ar LL. CD 0 0 LO R 9 3�a z O to to in N z cor V' LO O w y a co co OD vQ � covLO V� Cl) ❑ Ll. � m N v v v v X=0❑ coo1, vLO OLL w U w ❑ Yw' a my Ixv� O ai a ww co a z M m m Z w to n v LO 7 > w N Q cn y w m IT wU Ir cmoti ITLO 7 J � a a M vN Zw ccoon z QzQ w J LU CD z o � Y{ 0 T LO z LO N wz r=�vu� 4 FW- a- JOB Q REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING g_p6_00 DATE S AGENDA SECTIONE PUBLIC HEARINGS ORIGINATING DEPT: PUBLIC WORKS ITEM NO. e--14 I APPLICATIONS FOR YEAR 2001 STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE PREPARED BY: A KNAUER This is a public hearing to consider two separate applications for operating assistance from the State of Minnesota for 2001 regular route and dial -a -ride services. Exhibit "A" provides a summary of funding sources for each program. The applications are subject to negotiation with the State and the Council's budget deliberations. Regular Route The application for regular route requests $895,610 in State operating funds. It's projected that program revenues (fares and advertising) will cover approximately 40% of total expenses. The application provides for increased wages and the addition of 3.25 driver positions. Dial -A -Ride The application for dial -a -ride requests $220,437 in State operating assistance funds. The application provides for the approximately the same service levels as in 2000. REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION (1) Adopt the prepared resolution authorizing submission of the an application to the State of Minnesota for 2001 transit assistance for regular route operations and the signing of any subsequent grant contract with MNDOT by the Mayor and City Clerk. (2) Adopt the prepared resolution authorizing submission of the an application to the State of Minnesota for 2001 transit assistance for dial -a -ride operations and the of any subsequent grant contract with MNDOT by the Mayor and City Clerk. �signing UY" ( ICIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: 3xig REVISED 8/30/00 EXHIBIT A TABLE IV. 2001 PROPOSED FUNDING SOURCES REGULAR ZIPS ROUTE ❑IAL-A-RIDE TOTALS FED $337,824 $0 $337,824 STATE $ 895,610 $ 220,437 $ 1,116,047 CITY $188,471 $0 $188,471 COUNTY $56,747 $56,747 ROCOG $35,700 $35,700 OTHER $7,500 $7,500 PROGRAM REVENUES $ 950,000 $ 54,450 $1,004,450 TOTAL $2,407,605 $339,134 $2,746,739 CYOO STATE $ 861,163.60 $206,956.75 $1,068,120 STATE FLS $ 1,071,039.00 $ 220,436.45 mmufflom $1,291,476 NOTE: THE STATE SHARE IS SPECULATIVE AT THIS TIME AND SUBJECT TO NEGOTIATION AFTER ALL REQUESTS ARE IN. REVENUE NOTES RR POS IS DEFICIT ONLY EXP $2,189,242-REV$950,000 INCLUDES ADV REV OF $23,000 DAR POS IS DEFICIT ONLY EXP$ 325, 525-$ 54, 4 50-$ 3, 600 LESS FARES AND FUEL TAX REFUND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 3;J DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDASECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS CITY ADMINISTRATOR G -20 A DESCRIPTION: Establishment of Development District # 17 and Tax Increment PREPARED BY: Financing District # 17-1 for the Diamond Ridge Single Family Housing Project T.SPAETH As part of "First Homes" program, the City has agreed to provide tax increment financing assistance for the purpose of providing a number of affordable owner occupied single family dwelling units in the City. One of the developments selected for participation in the "First Homes" program is the Diamond Ridge 17`s Subdivision, in which 25 lots are slected for participation. The City is proposing to provide $10,000 per lot x 25 lots=$250,000 structured as an " up front payment' TIF project as recently agreed to by the Council for single family TIF projects participating in the First Homes program. The developer (DeWitt Construction) will be reimbursed the said amount at the time the home is sold to the eligible homebuyer. The proposed tax increment financing district is set up wherein eleigible homebuyer will be required to meet required income limitations such that the TIF district will be a "qualified" TIF district, and therefore not subject to any LGA / HACA penalty or local contribution. COUNCIL ACTION REOUESTED: Adopt the resolution approving the Development District # 17 and Tax Increment Financing District Plan # 17-1 NOTE TO COUNCIL: The Development District and Tax Increment Financing Plan document has been sent separately to the Council. The Plans for proposed TIF Districts # 18-1 (Valley View Estates) and # 19-1 (Kingsbury Hills) are identical to this Plan, and therefore I did not send a separate copy of those Plans to the Council. 4 NCIL ACTION: Motion by Second by. to: Z---v4to- Yj .:e TI F A, h7 W -fir. a , C it y s;4e a-,e- 1.9 /, � A'tL '4"&a . 01�4 A�� 8/22/00 Draft DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT By and Between THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA And WESTERN WALLS, INC., AND DEWITZ CONSTRUCTION, INC., both Minnesota Corporations This document drafted by: BRIGGS AND MORGAN (JOM) Professional Association 2200 First National Bank Building 332 Minnesota Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Tel: (651) 223-6600 Fax: (651) 223-6450 1200124,1 TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE I - Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Section 1.1. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ARTICLE II - Representations, Warranties and Covenants . . . . 3 Section 2.1. Representations, Warranties and Covenants by the City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Section 2.2. Representations, Warranties and Covenants by the Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ARTICLE III - Completion of Improvements; Reimbursement of Certain Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Section 3.1. Completion of Improvements by the Company . 6 Section 3.2. Reimbursement by City of Certain Costs . . . 6 Section 3.3. Release and Indemnification Covenants . . . 6 ARTICLE IV - Events of Default . . . . . . . . . 8 Section 4.1. Events of Default Defined . . . . . . . . . 8 Section 4.2. Remedies on Default . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Section 4.3. No Remedy Exclusive . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Section 4.4. No Additional waiver Implied by One Waiver . 9 ARTICLE V - Additional Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Section 5.1. Titles of Articles and Sections . . . . . 10 Section 5.2. Notices and Demands . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Section 5.3. Counterparts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Section 5.4. Law Governing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 ARTICLE VI - Termination of Agreement; Expiration; Limitation on Assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Section 6.1. The City's Option to Terminate; Expiration 11 Section 6.2. Effect of Termination or Expiration . . . 11 Section 6.3. No Third Party Beneficiaries . . . . . . . 11 Section 6.4 Limitations on Transfer of Property and Assignment of Agreement . . . . . . . . . 11 EXHIBIT A - LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY . . . . A-1 1200124.1 •1 �*• DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is dated as of September 6, 2000; is by and between the City of Rochester, Minnesota, and Western Walls, Inc., and DeWitz Construction, Inc., both Minnesota corporations; and provides as follows: tRawlisidtAm Definitions Section 1.1. Definitions. As used in this Agreement, the following terms have the following respective meanings: "Agreement" means this Development Assistance Agreement, as the same may be amended. "City" means the City of Rochester, Minnesota. "Company" means Western Walls, Inc., and DeWitz Construction, Inc., both Minnesota corporations, or permitted successors or assigns. "Development Costs" means those costs incurred and paid by the Company in the actual construction of the Homes. "Development Property" means the real property described in Exhibit A of this Agreement, being the property comprising the TIF District, more particularly the lots for the 25 Homes. "Event of Default" means an event of default defined in Section 4.1 of this Agreement. "Home" a detached single-family, owner -occupied home comprising part of the Improvements. "Homeowner" means the person (s) /family to which the Company initially sells a completed Home. "Improvements" means the 25 single-family, owner -occupied Homes to be constructed by the Company on the 25 lots comprising the Development Property and all public improvements and private improvements (street, sidewalk, sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, other utility and other site improvements) to be completed by the Company on or adjacent to the Development Property in connection with and necessary for the Improvements, and, in the case of such public improvements, directly related to the Homes and providing necessary access and utilities thereto. 1200124.1 "Party" means either the Company or the City. 1 "Parties" means the Company and the City. "Tax Increments" means those tax increments generated by the 04i Improvements which the City shall be entitled to receive and retain, and which the City shall have actually received, from Olmsted County from time to time from the TIF District pursuant to the TIF Act; provided that the term "Tax Increments" shall specifically not include any amounts of tax increment generated by the TIF District which pursuant to the applicable terms of the TIF Act (as it may exist or be amended from time to time) may be required to be paid to or reserved for the State of Minnesota, Olmsted County, or any other entity or official. "Term" means the period beginning on the date of this Agreement and ending (1) on the date upon which the TIF District terminates pursuant to the terms of the TIF Act, (2) on such date (if any) as the City shall have terminated the TIF District, or (3) on such date (if any) as the City shall have terminated this Agreement pursuant to its terms, whichever shall occur earliest. "TIF Act" means the Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act, that is, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.179, as the same may be amended or supplemented. "TIF District" means the City's Tax Increment Financing District No. 17-1 within its Development District No. 17. "Unavoidable Delays" means any delay outside the control of the Party claiming its occurrence which is the direct result of strikes, other labor troubles, unusually severe or prolonged bad weather, unavailability of materials, Acts of God, fire or other casualty to the Improvements, litigation (including without limitation bankruptcy proceedings) and which directly results in delays; or acts of any federal, state or local governmental unit which directly result in delays. 1200124.1 2 • ARTICLE II Representations Warranties and Covenants Section 2.1. Representations Warranties and Covenants by the City. The City represents and warrants that it is authorized to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement. The City is entering into this Agreement to achieve housing purposes, and hence the assistance provided pursuant hereto is not a "business subsidy" because it constitutes "assistance for housing" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.993, Subdivision 3(7). Section 2.2. Representations Warranties and Covenants by the Company. The Company represents and warrants that: (a) Each corporation which constitutes the Company is a corporation duly organized and in good standing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, is not in violation of any provisions of its Articles of Incorporation, By-laws or other organizational documents or the laws of the State of Minnesota and is authorized to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement. (b) The execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby and the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement are not prevented or limited by and will not conflict with or result in a breach of any provision or requirement applicable to the Company or of any provision of any evidence of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Company is now a party or by which it is bound. (c) The Company will cause the construction of the Improvements upon the Development Property to occur in accordance in all material respects with this Agreement and all local, state and federal laws and regulations (including without limitation environmental, zoning, building code and public health laws and regulations). (d) The Company has received no notice or communication from any local, state or federal official or body that any activities of the Company respecting the Development Property contemplated by this Agreement, including the construction of the Improvements on the Development Property, may be or will be in violation of any law or regulation. (e) The Company will obtain in a timely manner all required permits, licenses and approvals and will meet all requirements of all applicable local, state and federal laws 12oai24A 3 and regulations which must be obtained or met before the Improvements may be lawfully constructed and completed. (f) The Company represents that, due in part to the significant income limitations which will apply to the purchasers of the Homes, the construction of the Improvements on the Development Property within the reasonably foreseeable future is conditioned on the assistance and benefit to the Company provided for in this Agreement. (g) The City and the Company acknowledge that the TIF District has been established as a single-family "qualified housing district," within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.1399, Subdivision 1(c)(2) (Laws of Minnesota for 2000, Chapter 490, Article 11, Section 11, which provides that such a "qualified housing district" must be "A housing district for a single-family homeownership project or projects, if 95 percent or more of the homes receiving assistance from tax increment from the district are purchased by qualified purchasers. A qualified purchaser means the first purchaser of a home after the tax increment assistance is provided whose income is at or below 70 percent of the median gross income for a family of the same size as the purchaser. Median gross income is the greater of (i) area median gross income, or (ii) the statewide median gross income, as determined by the secretary of Housing and Urban Development." For 2000, 70. of the $66,500 applicable median income (Olmsted County) for a family of four is $46,550, which, when adjusted for family (or household) sizes of one through eight based on the respective conversion factors below, results in the following income limitations for any Homes actually purchased and closed on in 2000 by the eligible initial buyer - occupants thereof Household Size Conversion Factor 4 5 6 / e 1.00 1.08 1.16 1.24 1.32 Income $32,585 $37,240 $41,895 $46,550 $50,274 $53,998 $57,722 $61,446 Limit The Company covenants to abide by the aforesaid restrictions and agrees not to take or suffer to be taken any actions with respect to the Improvements which individually or 1200124.1 in the aggregate would cause the TIF District not to qualify as such a "qualified housing district" under the TIF Act. In order to assure compliance with the foregoing 95% rule, the Company covenants that at a minimum each of the first 24 Homes shall be purchased by initial buyers -occupants that, at the time of their purchase of and closing on their Home, meet the above -referenced income limitations, as the same may be adjusted from year to year; and if the 25" Home is sold to Homeowners that do not meet the applicable income limitations, no Development Costs shall be payable hereunder respecting that Home. Upon each sale of a Home to a qualified buyer, the City shall pay the Company the $10,000 reimbursement of Development Costs for that Home, subject to the conditions that the Company shall have provided the City with verification of the eligible income of the buyers, which shall include at a minimum the verification of income respecting the buyer's participation in the "First Homes" program of the Rochester Area Foundation (and other sponsoring entities), and the Home shall be purchased by buyers who the Company demonstrates to be participating in said First Homes program. The Company shall also certify to the City that it has spent at least $10,000 in constructing the Home. (h) The Company further acknowledges and agrees: (i) The eligible Homeowners must be natural persons who are purchasing their Homes for their own occupancy. * Mp+- a /•�''�yy,�,lftr►t (ii) The Homeowners must " ome of wF,� j+ buyer eaning that not with' e c ase of the Home owne a con Mary residence. (i) The Company reasonably believes that it has available to it or will be able to obtain sufficient financing to enable the Company to complete the Improvements in conformance with this Agreement. (j) The Company represents that Robert DeWitz is the President of both Western Walls, Inc., and DeWitz Construction, Inc., and that 100°s of the shares of stock in each corporation is owned by Robert Dewitz in combination with one or more of his children. The Company has requested that both Western Walls and DeWitz Construction execute this Agreement as "Company" hereunder because those two corporations intend to work cooperatively with one another in the completion and marketing of the Improvements. Accordingly, it is agreed that both corporations shall be bound by the obligations of the Company hereunder, but that the discharge of any such obligation by one or the other of those corporations shall be sufficient and that the City shall be entitled to rely on information or certifications provided by either one of them under the terms of this Agreement. 1200124.1 5 ARTICLE III Completion of Improvements Reimbursement of Certain Costs Section 3.1. Completion of Improvements by the Company. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Company shall have commenced the Improvements by November 1, 2000, and shall have substantially completed the Improvements by November 1, 2003. Section 3.2. Reimbursement by City of Certain Costs. The Company hereby represents to the City that the Company will incur and pay significant Development Costs per Home. The City hereby agrees to reimburse the Company for $10,000 of the Company's Development Costs per Home, subject to the following conditions: (a) No Event of Default shall have occurred and be at the time continuing. (b) As conditions to such reimbursement of Development Costs pursuant to this Agreement, the Company shall have complied with the requirements of Sections 2.2(g) and (h) and submitted such written proofs and other documentation (e.g., sworn construction statement) as may be reasonably satisfactory to the City of the exact nature and amount of the particular Development Costs (Home construction costs) for the particular Home. (c) The actual reimbursement of Development Costs for a Home shall occur at the time of sale of the Home to the eligible Homeowner (or the City may agree to deposit the $10,000 into suitable escrow for such purposes). (d) Prior to the payment of each $10,000 reimbursement amount per Home, the Company shall have demonstrated to the reasonable satisfaction of the City that the $10,000 amount shall in that same amount actually reduce the purchase price of the Home paid by the initial Homeowner. Section 3.3. Release and Indemnification Covenants. (a) The Company releases from and covenants and agrees that the City and the governing body members, officers, agents, including its independent contractors, consultants and legal counsel, servants and employees thereof (hereinafter, for purposes of this Section, collectively the "Indemnified Parties") shall not be liable for and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties against any loss or damage to property or any injury to or death of any person occurring at, about or in connection with the Improvements, or the Company's undertaking and completion thereof, or resulting from any defect therein, except to the extent such loss, 1200124.1 6 �• damage or death is caused by the negligence or other wrongful acts of the Indemnified Parties. (b) Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or negligence of the Indemnified Parties, the Company agrees to protect and defend the Indemnified Parties, now and forever, and further agrees to hold the aforesaid harmless from any claim, demand, suit, action or other proceeding whatsoever by any person or entity whatsoever arising or purportedly arising from this Agreement, or the transactions contemplated hereby or the acquisition, construction, installation, ownership, and operation of the Improvements, provided, that this indemnification shall not apply to the warranties made or obligations undertaken by the City in this Agreement. (c) All covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the City contained herein shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the City and not of any governing body member, officer, agent or employee of the City. (d) This Agreement shall not create nor be construed to create any partnership, joint venture, agency, or employment relationship between the Parties. lzoo12a1 7 ARTICLE IV Events of Default Section 4.1. Events of Default Defined. The following are Events of Default under this Agreement: (a) There shall have occurred a failure in the observance or performance in any material respect of any covenant, condition, obligation or agreement to be observed or performed under this Agreement. (b) The filing of a petition in bankruptcy by or against the Company under the United States Bankruptcy Code; or failure by the Company within 90 days to have discharged any execution, garnishment or attachment of such consequence as would impair the ability of the Company to carry on its operations respecting the Improvements; or the assignment by the Company for the benefit of creditors; or the entry by the Company into an agreement of composition with creditors or the failure generally by the Company to pay its debts as they become due. An Event of Default shall also include any occurrence which would with the passage of time or giving of notice become an Event of Default as defined hereinabove. Section 4.2. Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default occurs, in addition to all other remedies available to the City at law or in equity, the City (1) may without notice suspend its performance under this Agreement until it receives assurances from the Company, deemed adequate by the City, that the Company has cured its default and will continue its performance under this Agreement, and (2) may, after provision of 60 days written notice to the Company of the Event of Default, but only if the Event of Default has not been cured within said 60 days, or if the Event of Default cannot be cured within 60 days, the Company does not provide assurances to the City reasonably satisfactory to the City that the Event of Default will be cured as soon as reasonably possible, terminate this Agreement, without further obligation whatsoever hereunder to the Company. Without limitation of any other remedy hereunder, if the Event of Default is a violation by the Company of its obligations under Section 2.2(g) or (h), the Company shall, upon request made by the City in writing, repay all assistance theretofore provided to the Company under this Agreement. Upon the occurrence of any Event of Default, the Company shall reimburse the City for all expenses and liabilities resulting therefrom, including without limitation all reasonable attorney or consultant fees. Section 4.3. No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to the either Party is intended to be exclusive of 1200124.1 8 any other available remedy or remed remedy shall be cumulative and shall remedy given under this Agreement or law or in equity. No delay or omiss power accruing upon any default sha power or shall be construed to be a right and power may be exercised from may be deemed expedient. ies, but each and every such be in addition to every other now or hereafter existing at ion to exercise any right or 11 impair any such right or waiver thereof, but any such time to time and as often as Section 4.4. No Additional Waiver Implied by One waiver. If any agreement contained in this Agreement should be breached by either Party and thereafter waived by the other Party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent breach hereunder. 120Q124.1 ARTICLE V Additional Provisions Section 5.1. Titles of Articles and Sections. Any titles of the several parts, Articles and Sections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregarded in construing or interpreting any of the provisions hereof. Section 5.2. Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, a notice, demand or other communication under the Agreement by either Party to the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if sent by first class mail, postage prepaid, or delivered personally or telecopied; and, (a) in the case of the Company, to DeWitz Construction, Inc., 604 111h Avenue NW, Rochester, Minnesota 55901, Attention: Robert DeWitz; and (b) in the case of the City, to the City of Rochester, Minnesota, at the Rochester City Hall, 201 4t° Street SE, Rochester, Minnesota 55904-3742, Attention: City Administrator. or at such other address with respect to either such Party as that Party may, from time to time, designate in writing and forward to the other as provided in this Section. Section 5.3. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original hereof. Section 5.4. Law Governing. The Parties agree that this Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 1200124.1 10 •I ARTICLE VI Termination of Agreement; Expiration; Limitation on Assignments. Section 6.1. The City's Option to Terminate; Expiration. As provided and under the conditions specified in Section 4.2, the City may terminate this Agreement if an Event of Default shall have occurred hereunder and be continuing. Nothing in that or in this Section shall affect the City's right, should the City not so elect to terminate this Agreement and as recourse against the Company, to insist on performance hereunder by the Company. Otherwise, this Agreement shall expire at the end of the Term. Section 6.2. Effect of Termination or Expiration. No termination or expiration of this Agreement pursuant to the terms hereof shall terminate (i) any rights or remedies of the City arising hereunder due to an Event of Default occurring prior to such termination or expiration or (ii) the provisions of Section 3.3 hereof. Section 6.3. No Third Party Beneficiaries. There shall, as against the City, be no third party beneficiaries to this Agreement. More specifically, the City enters into this Agreement, and intends that the consummation of the City obligations contemplated hereby shall be, for the sole and exclusive benefit of the Company, and notwithstanding the fact that any other "persons" may ultimately participate in or have an interest in the Improvements, the City does not intend that any party other than the Company shall have, as alleged third party beneficiary or otherwise, any rights or interests hereunder as against the City, and no such other party shall have standing to complain of the City's exercise of, or alleged failure to exercise, its rights and obligations, or of the City's performance or alleged lack thereof, under this Agreement. Section 6.4. Limitations on Transfer of Property and Assignment of Agreement. The Company covenants and agrees that prior to the completion of each Home, except only by way of security for the purpose of obtaining financing necessary to enable the Company to complete the Improvements and except for any sale agreements between the Company and the initial Homeowner of that Home, the Company (except as so authorized) has not made or created and will not make or create or suffer to be made or created any total or partial sale, assignment, conveyance, or lease, or any trust or power, or any transfer in any other mode or form, of or with respect to this Agreement or the Development Property or any part thereof or any interest therein, or any contract or agreement to do any of the same, without the prior written approval of the City (which approval the City may withhold in its discretion). 1200124A 11 The City shall be entitled to require, except as otherwise provided in the Agreement, as conditions to any such approval that: 0&0 (a) Any proposed transferee shall have the qualifications and financial responsibility, in the reasonable judgment of the City, necessary and adequate to fulfill the obligations undertaken in this Agreement by the Company; (b) Any proposed transferee, by instrument in writing satisfactory to the City, shall, for itself and its successors and assigns, and expressly for the benefit of the City, have expressly assumed all of the obligations of the Company under this Agreement and agreed to be subject to all the conditions and restrictions to which the Company is subject unless the Company agrees to continue to fulfill those obligations, in which case the preceding provisions of this Section 5.5(b)(ii) shall not apply; and (c) There shall be submitted to the City for review and prior written approval all instruments and other legal documents involved in effecting the transfer of any such interest in this Agreement or the Development Property. 1200124.1 12 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Company have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives. CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA LZU Its Mayor By Its City Clerk (SEAL) (Execution of this Development Assistance Agreement by Western Walls, Inc., and DeWitz Construction, Inc., appears on the following page.] 1200124.1 13 Western Walls, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation By Its President BY. DeWitz Construction, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation By Its President BY. [Execution Page to Development Assistance Agreement between the City of Rochester, Minnesota, and the above -named corporations.] 1200124.1 14 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY The Development Property consists of the following 25 Lots in the current plat of Diamond Ridge Seventeen Subdivision in the City of Rochester, Minnesota: 1200124.1 A-1 -� X � �, ':;t� -'�/ e-e'j Development District No. 17 of the City of Rochester, Minnesota Including the Development Program for the Development District and Tax Increment Financing District and Plan No. 17-1 September 6, 2000 This document was drafted by 1196388.1 Briggs and Morgan Professional Association (JOM) 2200 First National Bank Building 332 Minnesota Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Tel: (651) 223-6600 Fax: (651) 223-6450 Section I. Development District No. 17 and Its Development Program Section 1.1. Definitions. The terms defined below, for purposes of this Development District and Development Program and for purposes of any Tax Increment Financing Districts and Plans which may be now or hereafter established and approved within the Development District, shall have the following respective meanings, unless the context specifically requires otherwise. The term "development" includes redevelopment, and the term "developing" includes redeveloping. "City" means the City of Rochester, Minnesota. "Council" means the Common Council of the City, its governing body. "Company" means DeWitz Construction, Inc., or other builder/developer of the Project, or applicable portions thereof. "County" means Olmsted County, Minnesota. "Development District" means Development District No. 17 of the City established hereby, as the same may be amended. "Development Program" means the Development Program adopted herein for the Development District, as the same may be amended. "Enabling Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 through 469.134, as the same may be amended or supplemented. "Project" means 25 single-family owner -occupied homes expected to be completed in Tax Increment Financing District No. 17-1, including the necessary acquisition and improvement of their lots and installation of necessary and allocable public and on -site utilities, streets and sidewalks. "State" means the State of Minnesota. "Tax Increment District" means any tax increment financing district established pursuant to the Tax Increment Act now or in the future within the Development District, and as the same may be amended. "Tax Increment Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.179, as the same may be amended. 1196388.1 1-1 W "Tax Increment Plans" means the respective tax increment financing plans adopted pursuant to the Tax Increment Act for the Tax Increment Districts, respectively, as the same may be amended. 11TIF District" and "District" mean Tax Increment Financing District No. 17-1 within the Development District. Section 1.2. Enabling Act• Statutory Authority. Pursuant to the Enabling Act, the City is authorized to exercise municipal development district powers. It is the intention of the City, notwithstanding the enumeration of specific goals and objectives in the Development Program, that the City shall have and enjoy with respect to the Development District the full range of powers and duties conferred upon the City pursuant to the Enabling Act, the Tax Increment Act, and such other legal authority as the City may have or enjoy from time to time. Section 1.3. Statement and Finding of Public Puroose. The City finds that there is a need for development within the City and the Development District to provide employment opportunities, to improve the local tax base, and to improve the general economy of the City and the State. The sound development of the economic security of the people in the City depends upon proper development of marginal and other property, which includes property that meets any one of a number of conditions, including properties whose values are too low to pay for the public services required or rendered and properties whose lack of use or improper use has resulted in stagnant or unproductive land that could otherwise contribute to the public health, safety, and welfare. The City finds that in many cases such property cannot be developed without public participation and assistance in forms including property acquisition and/or write -down, proper planning, the financing of land assembly in the work of clearance or development, and the making or financing of various other public and private improvements necessary for development. In cases where the development of marginal and other property cannot be done by private enterprise alone, the City believes it to be in the public interest to consider the exercise of its powers, to advance and spend public money, and to provide the means and impetus for such development. The City finds that in certain cases property within the Development District would or may not be available for development without the specific financial aid to be sought, that the Development Program will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the Development District by private enterprise, and that the Development Program conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole. 1196388.1 1-2 The City also finds that the welfare of the City and the State requires the active promotion, retention, attraction, encouragement, and development of economically sound industry and commerce through governmental action for the purpose of preventing the emergence of blighted and marginal lands and areas of chronic unemployment. It shall also be the policy of the City to facilitate and encourage such action as may be necessary to prevent the economic deterioration of such areas to the point where the process can be reversed only by total redevelopment. Through the use of the powers conferred on the City pursuant to the Enabling Act, promoting economic development may prevent the occurrence of conditions requiring redevelopment and prevent the emergence of blight, marginal land, and substantial and persistent unemployment. Section 1.4. Statement of Objectives. The City seeks to achieve one or more of the following objectives with respect to such property within the Development District as the City may determine and in such circumstances and upon such terms as the City may deem appropriate or necessary: (a) To promote and secure the prompt development of property within the Development District in a manner consistent with the Land Use Plan for the Rochester Urban Service Area. (b) To secure the prompt development of property in the Development District in order to (i) realize return on presently existing public investment in public utilities, streets, and other infrastructures, (ii) prevent the emergence of blight or blighting factors and (iii) promote retention and expansion of the City's property tax base. (c) To assist such prompt development through the acquisition or write -down of certain interests in property within the Development District which is not now in productive use or in its highest and best use, to make or defray the cost of soil corrections or other site improvements on said property, and to construct or reimburse for the construction of public improvements and other facilities on or for the benefit of said property, thereby promoting and securing the development of other land within the Development District. (d) Through the implementation of this Development Program, (1) to provide an impetus for residential development desirable or necessary to accommodate increased population within the City and (2) to help achieve affordable housing goals, including through payment or reimbursement of certain costs of the housing developments. 1196388.1 1-3 (e) To promote and secure additional employment opportunities within the city, and the diversification thereof, and to prevent the loss of existing employment opportunities, thereby preventing the loss of valuable human resources. (f) To provide funding for an ongoing development strategy and to prioritize the use of available resources. (g) To implement and revise from time to time, as may be deemed necessary or desirable, a consolidated and unified Development Program and to finance the associated development costs on a area -wide basis. (h) To employ any of the powers of the City for the benefit of the Development District in such cases and upon such terms as the City may deem appropriate. (i) To construct or acquire facilities deemed desirable for the development of the Development District. (j) To promote redevelopment of blighted or marginal property. Section I.S. Boundaries of the Development District. The property within the City which is hereby designated as and which shall initially constitute the Development District is the property shown on Exhibit II-B-2 attached to Section II hereof. The City finds that the Development District, together with the objectives which the City seeks to accomplish or encourage with respect to such property, constitutes a development district" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.125, Subdivision 9. Section 1.6. Property Acquisition. The City may write down or acquire such property, or appropriate interests therein, within the Development District as the City may deem to be necessary or desirable to assist in the implementation of the Development Program. Section 1.7. Estimated Development Costs. The Development Program shall include the estimated public improvement and development costs described in this Section. These costs are anticipated to be made or incurred within the Development District and financed in whole or in part by tax increment or other available revenues of the City. The tax increment to be generated by Tax Increment Financing District No. 17-1 is expected to be applied in direct or indirect-, aid of the development activities described in this Section and in Section 2.5. 1196388.1 1-4 The land within Tax Increment Financing District No. 17-1 is expected to be developed into approximately 25 single-family OW owner -occupied homes, including related improvements and infrastructures (collectively, the "Project"). The development of the Project is intended to further, among other things, affordable housing goals. To meet affordable housing goals and to remain consistent with applicable income limitations, the City anticipates that the single-family homes to be constructed, including the related land, would have a sales price/market value upon completion of approximately $120,000. In order to meet the affordability objectives, the City anticipates providing the tax increment assistance in the form of payment or reimbursement of eligible housing development costs. The Project costs include the following Home Construction Costs $250,000 Contingencies 100,000 Interest on Indebtedness (Borrowing) 200,000 Administrative Expenses 50,000 Total Project/Development Costs and Maximum Bonded Indebtedness $600,000 If bonding is required to finance the applicable portions of the foregoing costs, as is anticipated, the reasonable and customary expenses for that bonding, such as capitalized interest, interest on the debt, bond discount, and fiscal and legal fees, would be added to the estimates listed above. Tax increment bonding and indebtedness may include traditional general obligation or revenue bonding, including interest -bearing "pay-as-you-go" financing, external general obligation bonding and internal, interest -bearing City -financed borrowing. Actual bonding amounts and requirements may vary depending on bond issue structure and then -prevailing interest rates. The City intends to pay from available tax increment such qualifying administrative costs (including allocable City expenses) as may be permitted by but subject to the applicable limitations provided in the Tax Increment Act, which limit currently is 106 of the total tax increments. The Council hereby finds that the Development Program, as provided pursuant hereto, constitutes a "development program" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.125, Subdivision 3. 1196388.1 1-5 MSection II. Tax Increment Financing District and Plan No. 17-1 (Diamond Ridge/First Homes Housing Project) Section 2.1. Statement of Objectives. The objectives which the City seeks to achieve through the implementation of this Tax Increment District (herein sometimes referred to as the "TIF District" or the "District") and Plan are set out in the Development Program for the Development District, as provided in Section I above. Section 2.2. Development Program. The development program which the City seeks to further through the implementation of this TIF District and Plan is the Development Program, as provided in Section I above. Section 2.3. Parcels to be Included in Tax Increment Financing District No. 17-1. This TIF District shall consist of the property described in the attached Exhibit II -A. Attached hereto as Exhibits II-B-1 and II-B-2 are maps which depict the TIF District and the Development District, respectively. Section 2.4. Parcels in Acquisition. The City may write down or acquire real property, or interest therein, within this TIF District or elsewhere within the Development District at the time or times as the City may determine to be necessary or desirable to assist or implement development within the Development District or the TIF District. Section 2.5. Development Activity Anticipates for aax Increment Financing District No. 17-1. The City anticipates entering into suitable development agreement(s) with DeWitz Construction, Inc., or other builder/developer of the Project, or applicable portions thereof. The City anticipates assisting the Company with its costs associated with the Project. In consideration of the needed development, the City also anticipates contributing assistance of the kind described in Section 1.7 above to defray public development and improvement costs expected to be incurred in assisting the Project. Section 2.6. Estimated Public Improvement Costs. The estimated public improvement costs and the amount of bonded indebtedness (including interest thereon) to be incurred within and for the benefit of the Development District are set forth in the Development Program, including without limitation Section 1.7 above, but shall also include all other public costs provided in the Development Program. General obligation and/or revenue tax increment obligations, with interest in the 56 to 9% range, in addition to the direct use of tax increments, or other borrowing or available funds (including without limitation interest -bearing 1196388.1 2-1 City short-term or long-term loans, inter -fund transfers (both in and out) and other assistance) may be used as required to finance such costs. Additional sources of revenue derived from the City's activities within the Development District under the Enabling Act may also be used as permitted by law, if available. Section 2.7. Estimated Net Tax Capacity. The City estimates that upon completion of the Project the captured net tax capacity of the TIF District will be $37,075. This estimate is based on estimates that the original net tax capacity of the TIF District will be approximately $75 (it of the $300 market value per lot times the 25 lots) and that the total tax capacity of the TIF District upon completion of all 25 homes comprising the Project (assuming that each would have a $120,000 market value) will be approximately $37,150. All tax capacities have been calculated using the applicable class rates of 1.00% of the first $76,000 of market value of each lot/home and 1.65% of the remainder. Section 2.8. Type of Tax Increment District. This Tax Increment District is, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 11, a "housing district" because the Project to be assisted with the tax increment consists of housing units intended for purchase by persons or families meeting the income criteria described in Section 2.12 below. Such tax increment assistance as may hereafter be approved by the Council shall be used solely to finance the Project, as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subdivision 4d, and the Project shall be required to meet the applicable income and other limitations and requirements provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1761 and Section 273.1399, Subdivision i(c)(2) (Laws of Minnesota for 2000, Chapter 490, Article 11, Section 1, relating to a "qualified housing district" for single-family homeownership). Section 2.9. Duration of Tax Increment District. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subdivision 1(e), no tax increment will be paid from this TIF District after 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment. Assuming first increment from this TIF District in 2002, the final increment year would be 2027. Section 2.10. Impact on Taxing Jurisdictions. The impact of this TIF District on the affected taxing jurisdictions is reflected in the City's anticipated need to utilize the tax increments generated from this TIF District during the period described in Section 2.9 above for the purposes of financing the public costs referenced in Section 2.6 above, as the same may be amended, following which period the increased assessed valuations will inure to the benefit of such taxing jurisdictions. 1196388.1 2-2 For the payable capacity rates and jurisdictions are s Taxing Turisdiction City of Rochester Olmsted County I.S.D. No. 535 2000 property taxes, the respective tax net tax capacities of these taxing et out in the following table: Tax Capacitv Rate 30.840t 46.645 60.084 137.5691 On the assumption that the estimated of this TIF District would be available to jurisdictions without creation of this TIF of this tax increment financing on the tax taxing jurisdictions is relatively small, on a percentage basis the marginal effect and by comparing the estimated $37,075 of to the foregoing tax capacities of each of respectively. Tax Capacitv $60,109,708 81,527,140 70,640,770 captured tax capacity the above taxing District, the impact capacities of those as shown by comparing on tax capacity rates captured tax capacity those jurisdictions, On the alternate assumption, which has been found to be the case, that none of the estimated captured tax capacity would be available to these taxing jurisdictions without the creation of this TIF District, during the period of this District's existence, there would be no effect on the above tax capacities, but upon the expiration or earlier termination of this TIP District, each taxing jurisdiction's tax capacity would be increased by the captured tax capacity, as it may be adjusted over that time period. Section 2.11. Reasonable Expectations. As required by the Tax Increment Act, in establishing this TIF District, the determination has been made that the anticipated development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that therefore the use of tax increment financing is deemed necessary. In making this determination, and in making the other determinations required by the Tax Increment Act or the Enabling Act, reliance has been placed upon representations of the Company (including its application to the City for tax increment financing assistance) and upon various written reports, studies, and analyses prepared by City staff or consultants (which reports are hereby incorporated herein to the same extent as though set forth in full herein) and on the expense of developing the subject property without public assistance and the perceived unlikelihood of the Company locating this Project in the City without the assistance. 1196389.1 2-3 Section 2.12. Certain Limitations; Qualified Housing District (Single -Family Homeownership)'. The City acknowledges that this Tax Increment District is subject to the limitations provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1763 ("Restrictions on Pooling; Five -Year Limit"), as amended, which provisions generally require that at least 80a of the tax increment from the Tax Increment District be spent on "activities" within the Tax Increment District; that such eligible expenditures may be in the form of direct payment, payment on certain bonds or similar obligations, or payment on development agreements or similar contracts; that the activity must have been completed and paid for or the agreements entered into or the bonds issued prior to five years after the certification of the Tax Increment District; that beginning with the sixth year after certification at least 80% of the increment that remains after paying such eligible expenses must not be used for a purpose other than to pay or to reserve for payment on or defeasance of any such outstanding bonds or contractual obligations; and when all of said bonds or contractual obligations have been paid (or sufficient funds have been reserved to discharge or defease the same), the Tax Increment District shall be decertified. As provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1763, Subdivision 2(b), any other "housing project," as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 11, would be deemed to be an "activity" within this Tax Increment District notwithstanding the fact that it might be located elsewhere. In addition, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1761, there are various income limitations and requirements which must be complied with for "housing" tax increment districts such as this District. In general, 951; of owner -occupied housing units must be initially purchased and occupied by individuals whose family income is less than or equal to the income requirements for qualified mortgage bond projects under Section 143(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, being generally equal to or less than 115% of the applicable median family income for households of three or more persons and 100% of that median income for 1 and 2 person households. However, this TIF District shall also be a "qualified housing district," within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.1399, Subdivision 1(c)(2) (Laws of Minnesota for 2000, Chapter 490, Article 11, Section 11, which provides that such a "qualified housing district" includes "A housing district for a single-family homeownership project or projects, if 95 percent or more of the homes receiving assistance from tax increment from the district are purchased by qualified purchasers. A qualified purchaser means the first purchaser of a home after the tax increment assistance is provided whose income is at or below 70 percent of the median gross income for a family of the same size 1196388.1 2-4 M as the purchaser. Median gross income is the greater of (i) area median gross income, or (ii) the statewide median gross income, as determined by the secretary of Housing and Urban Development." The City is mindful of the stipulation in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 11, that a project does not qualify as a "housing" tax increment financing district if the fair market value of the improvements which are constructed for commercial uses or for uses other than the applicable housing purposes consists of more than 20% of the total fair market value of the planned improvements in the applicable development plan or agreement. In addition, and as indicated in the map published in connection with advertising the initial Council public hearing on this District, tax increments from this District are intended for such uses within this Tax Increment District and/or the Development District. As may be permitted by and subject to the requirements of the Enabling Act and the Tax Increment Act, the City may amend this Tax Increment Plan and District to facilitate other housing or other eligible goals of the Development Program, as now in existence or as may be identified from time to time. Section 2.13. No Qualifying Local Contribution or LGA/HACA Reduction. Since this Tax Increment District is a "qualified housing district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.1399, Subdivision 1(c)(2) [Laws of Minnesota for 2000, Chapter 490, Article 11, Section 11, no LGA/HACA "penalty" or reduction applies, and no election is made to make any qualifying local contribution respecting this Tax Increment District. Section 2.14. Tax Increment Accounts. Consistent with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 5, requiring that "tax increment received with respect to any district shall be segregated by the authority in a special account or accounts on its official books and records or as otherwise established by resolution of the authority to be held by a trustee or trustees for the benefit of holders of the bonds," the City will account for all increment from the TIF District in one or more City accounts and subaccounts, including the ability where deemed appropriate to establish one or more accounts for the proper accounting and implementation of the TIF District and the portion of the Project to be financed directly or indirectly with tax increment. The right to make appropriate transfers in and out of such accounts is hereby reserved, along with the right to make both external and internal interest -bearing borrowings, whether long term or short term, including transfers from other City funds to cash flow tax increment obligations and other legitimate expenditures. 1196388.1 2-5 EXHIBIT II -A Tax Increment Financing District No. 17-1 of the City of Rochester, Minnesota This TIF District consists of the following 25 Lots (and their assigned parcel numbers), all located in the Diamond Ridge seventeen Subdivision in the City of Rochester, Minnesota. This TIF District and the larger Development District are depicted on the maps attached hereto as Exhibits II-B-1 and II-B-2, respectively. The properties comprising this TIF District are described as follows: 1196388.1 4W *40 EXHIBIT II-B-1 Map of Tax Increment Financing District No. 17-1 Within Development District No. 17 of the City of Rochester, Minnesota. 1196388.1 EXHIBIT II-B-2 Map of Development District No. 17 of the City of Rochester, Minnesota. 1196388.1 N Z--'F EXHIBIT II-C Summary of Estimated Fiscal and Economic Implications of Tax Increment Financing District No. 17-1 of the City of Rochester, Minnesota 1. Current Market Value/Estimated Original Net Tax Capacity: $7,500/$75 2. Market Value/Tax Capacity Upon Completion: $3,000,000 3. Captured Tax Capacity: $37,075 4. Estimated Original Local Tax Rate: 137.569% (Pay 2000) 5. Estimated Annual Increment: $51,000 6. Number of Increment Years: 20' (Payable 2002 through 2027 Assumed) 7. Estimated Maximum Total Increment (5 x 6): $1,326,000 8. Use of Property: 25 new single-family, owner -occupied homes 9. Total Current Development Program/TIF Plan Budget: $600,000 1196388.1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 3 DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDASECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS CITY ADMINISTRATOR fo � aZ I N DESCRIPTION: Establishment of Development District # 18 and Tax Increment PREPARED BY: Financing District # 18-1 for the Valley Side Estates Single Family Housing Project T.SPAETH As part of "First Homes" program, the City has agreed to provide tax increment financing assistance for the purpose of providing a number of affordable owner occupied single family dwelling units in the City. One of the developments selected for participation in the "First Homes" program is the Valley Side Estates Subdivision, in which 50 lots are selected for participation. The City is proposing to provide $10,000 per lot x 50 lots=$500,000 structured as an " up front payment" TIF project as recently agreed to by the Council for single family TIF projects participating in the First Homes program. The developer (Lumber One) will be reimbursed the said amount at the time the home is sold to the eligible homebuyer. The proposed tax increment financing district is set up wherein eligible homebuyer will be required to meet required income limitations such that the TIF district will be a "qualified" TIF district, and therefore not subject to any LGA / HACA penalty or local contribution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the resolution approving the Development District # 18 and Tax Increment Financing District Plan # 18-1 I yv �Uf �J INCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: Aso ::" I OR REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 3?j� � DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS CITY ADMINISTRATOR 6 .0 2� II DESCRIPTION: Establishment of Development District # 19 and Tax Increment PREPARED BY: Financing District # 19-1 for the Kingsbury Hills Single Family Housing Project T.SPAETH As part of "First Homes" program, the City has agreed to provide tax increment financing assistance for the purpose of providing a number of affordable owner occupied single family dwelling units in the City. One of the developments selected for participation in the "First Homes" program is the Kingsbury Hills Subdivision, in which 50 lots are selected for participation. However, in this phase of the development, the City is proposing to provide tax increment assistance for 25 homes. The TIF Plan will be amended in the future to include the remaining 25 lots at such time the 2nd phase of development is proposed. The City is proposing to provide $10,000 per lot x 25 lots=$250,000 structured as an" upfront payment" TIF project as recently agreed to by the Council for single family TIF projects participating in the First Homes program. The developer (Bigelow Enterprises) will be reimbursed the said amount at the time the home is sold to the eligible homebuyer. The proposed tax increment financing district is set up wherein eligible homebuyer will be required to meet required income limitations such that the TIF district will be a "qualified" TIF district, and therefore not subject to any LGA / HACA penalty or local contribution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the resolution approving the Development District # 19 and Tax Increment Financing District Plan # 19-1 NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: q3a REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 333' DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDASECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS CITY ADMINISTRATOR F A DESCRIPTION: MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVEUE BOND ISSUANCE FOR PREPARED BY: WEATHERSTONE TOWNHOMES PROJECT T.SPAETH Weatherstone Townhomes, Limited Partnership is proposing a 100 unit townhome rental housing facility with approximately 40 two bedroom townhomes and 60 three bedrom townhomes to be located along the west side of 50d' Avenue NW and 61" Street NW. The Council had previously approved a preliminary bond issuance on December 6, 1999 and held a public hearing on February 23, 2000 to adopt a Resolution accepting the Housing Program for this project. At this time, the developer is requesting approval of the permanent bond issuance of multifamily housing revenue bonds in the amount of $7,450,000. These bonds are an obligation of Weatherstone Townhomes, LLC and not of the City of Rochester. The Series "A' (Tax Exempt) bonds will be issued in the amount of $5,600,000. The Series "B" (Taxable) bonds will be issued in the amount of $1,450,000, and the Series "C" (Tax Exempt) bonds will be issued in the amount of $400,000. These Series "C" bonds are subordinate to the Series "A" and `B" bonds. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of Resolution for Multifamily Housing Revenue Bond issuance of $7,450,000 to Weatherstone Townhomes Limited Partnership. NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 33s " DATE: 9/6/00 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Reports & Recommendations: CITY ADMINISTRATOR tF A M DESCRIPTION: Development Assistance Agreement with DeWitt Construction for the PREPARED BY: single family home construction in Diamond Ridge 17th Subdivision T.SPAETH A Development Assistance Agreement between the City of Rochester and DeWitz Construction has been prepared for the construction of owner occupied single family dwellings on 25 lots located in Diamond Ridge 17th Subdivision. The Council previously approved establishment of a tax increment financing district in this subdivision. The major points within the Development Agreement are as follows: _Responsibilities of the Builder: The builder is responsible for the construction of 25 single family owner occupied homes on the 25 lots within the TIF district. Commencing of construction activities is to take place by November 1, 2000 and be substantially completed by November 1, 2003. The homes must be sold to an eligible homebuyer that meets both the "First Homes" eligibility requirements, along with the City's income eligibility requirements to ensure that the TIF district remains a "qualified" housing district not subject to an LGA / HACA penalty. City's Responsibility: The Council has agreed to provide a total of $250,000 in assistance. The assistance is to be provided "up front", and by that I mean that the City will pay DeWitz Construction $ 10,000 / lot (total $250,000) at the time that DeWitz Construction sells the completed home to an eligible homebuyer. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Council authorization for the execution of a Development Agreement with DeWitz Construction, Inc. by the Mayor & City Clerk for the Diamond Ridge Seventeenth Tax Increment Financing project NOTE TO COUNCIL: A copy of the Development Assistance Agreement has been sent spearately to the Council. The Development Assistance Agreements for the Valley Side Estates and Kingsbury Hills TIF projects are essentially the same, and therefore I did not send the Council a copy of those separate Development Assistance Agreements. k0- NCIL ACTION: Motion by. Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 307� Reports & Recommendations: CITY ADMINISTRATOR I DESCRIPTION: Development Assistance Agreement with Lumber One, Avon Inc. for the single family home construction in Valley Side Estates Subdivision DATE: 9/6/00 ITEM NO. F- 3 PREPARED BY: T.SPAETH A Development Assistance Agreement between the City of Rochester and Lumber One has been prepared for the construction of owner occupied single family dwellings on 50 lots located in Valley Side Estates Subdivision. The Council previously approved establishment of a tax increment financing district in this subdivision. The major points within the Development Agreement are as follows: Responsibilities of the Builder: The builder is responsible for the construction of 50 single family owner occupied homes on the 50 lots within the TIF district. Commencing of construction activities is to take place by November 1, 2000 and be substantially completed by November 1, 2003. The homes must be sold to an eligible homebuyer that meets both the "First Homes" eligibility requirements, along with the City's income eligibility requirements to ensure that the TIF district remains a "qualified" housing district not subject to an LGA / HACA penalty. City's Responsibility: The Council has agreed to provide a total of $500,000 in assistance. The assistance is to be provided "up front", and by that I mean that the City will pay Lumber One $ 10,000 / lot (total $500,000) at the time that Lumber One sells the completed home to an eligible homebuyer. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Council authorization for the execution of a Development Agreement with Lumber One, Avon Inc. by the Mayor & City Clerk for the Valley Side EstatesTax Increment Financing project E VCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 33� DATE: 9/6/00 Reports & Recommendations: ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY ADMINISTRATOR A DESCRIPTION: Development Assistance Agreement with Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. for the single family home construction in Kingsbury Hills ITEM NO. ' q PREPARED BY: T.SPAETH A Development Assistance Agreement between the City of Rochester and Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises, Inc. has been prepared for the construction of owner occupied single family dwellings on 25 lots located in Kingsbury Hills Subdivision. The Council previously approved establishment of a tax increment financing district in this subdivision. The major points within the Development Agreement are as follows: Responsibilities of the Builder: The builder is responsible for the construction of 25 single family owner occupied homes on the 25 lots within the TIF district. Commencing of construction activities is to take place by November 1, 2000 and be substantially completed by November 1, 2003. The homes must be sold to an eligible homebuyer that meets both the "First Homes" eligibility requirements, along with the City's income eligibility requirements to ensure that the TIF district remains a "qualified" housing district not subject to an LGA / BACA penalty. City's Responsibility: The Council has agreed to provide a total of $250,000 in assistance. The assistance is to be provided "up front", and by that I mean that the City will pay Bigelow Enterprises $ 10,000 / lot (total $250,000) at the time that Bigelow Enterprises sells the completed home to an eligible homebuyer. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Council authorization for the execution of a Development Agreement with Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises, Inc. by the Mayor & City Clerk for the Kingsbury Hills Tax Increment Financing project NCILACTION: motion by: second REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 3q / DATE: 9/6/00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: q/b /CO �,Af12 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING ❑EPT: ITEM NO. TABLED PUBLIC WORKS �{ — A DESCRIPTION: Award of Contract: PREPARED BY: "Construct Wellner Drive NE from 31st St NE to Rocky Creek Dr" Kelm (J-9546). ,R. Bids were received and opened after 11:00 a.m., August 16, 2000 for the following local improvement project: Project Number 9820-99,(J9546) Project Name Construct Wellner Drive NE from 31st St NE to Rocky Creek Dr The following bids were received: Total Bid 1. Road Constructors $ 339,543.40 2. Elcor Construction $ 371,445.10 3. Rochester Sand & Gravel $ 389,979.53 Engineers Estimate $ 316,835.00 Project Background: The project was authorized for bidding at the July 17, 2000, City Council meeting. The project, engineering and construction will be funded with Special Assessments and General Street Reconstruction Funds. This project will involve the placement of concrete curb/gutter, bituminous street construction, storm sewer, and sidewalk. Project Recommendation: The Public Works Department recommends the City Council proceed with an award to the low bidder. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopted a resolution awarding the contract, " Construct Wellner Drive NE from 31st St NE to Rocky Creek Dr " (J9546) to Road Constructors. t NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: