HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/07/2004_Regular•
0
CITY OF ROCHESTER
COUNCIL AGENDA
COD CHAMBERS G O r
GOVERNMENT CENTER
151 4TH STREET SE
MEETING NO: 16' JULY 7, 2004
REGULAR 7:00 P.M.
PLEDGE CF ALL.EGUNCE
PAGE
1-2 A) OPEN COMMENT PERIOD
B)
CALL TO ORDER
C)
LETTERS AND PETITIONS
3-4 D)
CONSENT
AGENDA/ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS
1)
Approval of Minutes
5-6
2)
Licenses, Bonds & Miscellaneous Activities
7-8
3)
Approval of Accounts Payable
9-10
4)
Fire Safety/Sprinkler Demonstration House
11-14
5)
Promotional Appointment — Motor Operator — Rochester Fire
Department
15-18
6)
Promotional Appointment — Motor Operator — Rochester Fire
Department
19-20
7)
FY 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program — Application
and Acceptance of Funds
21-22
8)
Permission to Accept Law Enforcement Grant Funds from Marshall
Fields
23-24
9)
Advertisement for Bids: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve the
South Frontage Road of TH 14 East, J7726
25-26
10)
Reconsider Residential Permit Parking Times, 8 % Avenue NW 200
Block
27-28
11)
Advertise for Bids: (J4001) Rocky Creek Stabilization in the Vicinity
of Cheval Lane NE
29-30
12)
Amended Development Agreement — Bandel North 2"d & 3'd — Big De
Development Company, Inc.
31-32
13)
Revocable Permit: Independent School District #535
33-34
14)
Pedestrian Facilities Agreement and Easement donation — a part of
Lot 1, Block 1, J L Replat
35-36
15)
Emergency Repair Project: (J6521) Emergency Storm Sewer
Reconstruction in 6 h St SW from S. Broadway to 15t Ave SW
• Council Agenda
Wednesday, July 7, 2004
Page 2 of 3
37-38 16)
Owner Contract — Sanitary Sewer Relocation in 1st St NW to
accommodate the 1st Ave NW Pedestrian Subway crossing aka Mayo
Clinic Project #21302 — J5144
39-40 17)
Owner Contract — Sanitary Sewer & Watermain Extension to
Northern Reserve along CSAH 22, and construction of Regional
Storm Water Pond ZR-A4.4 — J9832
41-42 18)
Contribution Agreement — Redeemer Evangelical Lutheran Church
U.A.C., Inc.
43-44 19)
Revocable Permit: Mayo Clinic Rochester — Eisenberg Tunnel
Project -1st Avenue NW and 1st Street NW Right of Way
45-46 20)
Development Agreement — Whispering Oaks — Forbrook Bigelow
Development LLC
47-48 21)
Advertise for Bids, Traffic Signal 5e Street NW at Chateau Road
NW, J6004
49-50 22)
Establish No Parking; George Gibbs Dr SW
51-52 23)
Supplemental Agreement #6: Project #J2269 HWY 63 South/48th St.
•
and St. Bridget's Road
53-54 24)
Establish One -Way Street; Harvest Moon Boulevard NW
E) HEARINGS
55-56 1)
Continued Hearing on Land Use Plan Amendment #04-02 by Marilyn
Kastler to change from low density residential to commercial on property
located on 48th Street S.W., west of TH63 and east of the Southern
Woods Development.
57-58 2)
Continued Hearing on Zoning District Amendment #04-06 by Marilyn
Kastler to change the zoning from R-1 to B4 on property located on 48th
Street S.W., west of TH63 and east of the Southern Woods Development.
59-60 3)
Continued Hearing on General Development Plan #233 to be known as
Waterfront Business Park by Marilyn Kastler
61-70 4)
Final Plat #03-42 to be known as Century Hills Eighth Subdivision by
Payne Company
71-80 5)
Final Plat #04-23 to be known as Weidner Subdivision by Bruce Weidner
81-84 6)
Utility Vacation Petition #04-09 by 19th Street Business Park West, LLC to
vacate a part of the utility easement located along the south side of 191h
Street N.W., east of West Circle Drive and west of 32n° Avenue N.W.
85-90 7)
Annexation Petition #04-10 by Roger Carlsen and Mike Coats to annex
land located along the north side of 19th Street N.W. and east of 50th
Avenue N.W.
11
0
0
Council Agenda
Wednesday, July 7, 2004
Page 3 of 3
91-94 8) Consider an Amendment to the 2004 CDBG Action Plan to Reallocate Up
to $44,300 of Olmsted County HRA Flood Homes Activity for Emergency
Rental Housing Payments Due to Loss of Section 8 Assistance Due to
Reduction of Federal Funding.
F) REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
95-114 1) Establishment of the Traffic Improvement District Program and
Policies
115-118 2) Initiate Amendment to GDP #123 Southern Woods to Identify
Access
G) RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
119-120
H) TABLED ITEMS
1) OTHER BUSINESS
J) ADJOURNMENT
r
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE: 7/7/04
AGENDASECTION:
OPEN COMMENT PERIOD
Ah
ORIGINATING DEPT:
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
ITEM NO.
A
_1W 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 first to present at the next Council meeting.
• Citizens may only use this forum to address the Council on a maximum of one time per month.
• Matters currently under negotiation, litigation or related to personnel will not be discussed in this fonun.
• Questions posed by a speaker will generally be responded to in writing.
•
mot` lore � �7
jdlh
NCIL ACTION: Motion by. Second b) to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING
DATE: 7n104
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
D-1-24
I DESCRIPTION: APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
PREPARED BY:
G. NEUMANN
This RCA lists all the items which have been included in the consent agenda for this meeting. The Council can approve
the items with a single motion to approve. The Council President will allow the Councilmembers an opportunity t
whether there are any
of these items which you wish to have removed from the consent agenda approval and to have
discussed and acted upon separately by the Council.
The consent agenda for this meeting consists of the following RCAs:
1)
Approval of Minutes
2)
Licenses, Bonds & Miscellaneous Activities
3)
Approval of Accounts Payable
a
Fire Safety/Sprinkler Demonstration House
5)
Promotional Appointment— Motor Operator— Rochester Fire Department
6)
Promotional Appointment— Motor Operator— Rochester Fin: Department
7)
FY 2004 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program — Application and
Acceptance of Funds
8)
Permission to Accept Law Enforcement Grant Funds from Marshall Fields
9)
.
Advertisement for Bids: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve the South
Frontage Road of TH 14 East, J7726
10)
Reconsider Residential Permit Parking Times, 8 Yi Avenue NW 200 Block
11)
Advertise for Bids: (J4001) Rocky Creek Stabilization in the Vicinity of Cheval
Lane NE
12)
Amended Development Agreement — Bendel North 2nd & 3`d — Big .De
Development Company, Inc.
13)
Revocable Permit: Independent School District #535
14)
Pedestrian Facilities Agreement and Easement donation — a part of Lot 1, Block 1,
J L Replat
15)
Emergency Repair Project: (J6521) Emergency Storm Sewer Reconstruction in
6t" St SW from S. Broadway to 1st Ave SW
16)
Owner Contract — Sanitary Sewer Relocation in 1st St NW to accommodate the 1st
Ave NW Pedestrian Subway crossing aka Mayo Clinic Project #21302 — J5144
17)
Owner Contract — Sanitary Sewer & Watermain Extension to Northern Reserve
along CSAH 22, and construction of Regional Storm Water Pond ZR-A4.4 —
J9832
18)
Contribution Agreement — Redeemer Evangelical Lutheran Church U.A.C., Inc.
19)
Supplemental Agreement #6: Project #J2269 HWY 63 South/48th St. and St.
Bridget's Road
20)
Revocable Permit: Mayo Clinic Rochester — Eisenberg Tunnel Project — 1st
Avenue NW and 1st Street NW Right of Way
COUNCIL ACTION:
Motion by: Second by: to:
TZ
Request for Council Action •
Page 2
July 7, 2004
21) Development Agreement —Whispering Oaks — Forbrook Bigelow Development LLC
22) Advertise for Bids, Traffic Signal 55"' Street NW at Chateau Road NW, J6004
23) Establish No Parking; George Gibbs Dr SW
24) Establish One -Way Street; Harvest Moon Boulevard NW
COUNCIL ACTION REOUESTED:
Motion to approve consent agenda items
•
is
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING
DATE: 7/7/04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA
CITY CLERK
_ ; L.
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.
BEER —TEMPORARY ON SALE 3.2%
Olmsted County Fair
PO Box 6607
Rochester, Mn. 55903
County Fair 8/1/04 thru 8/8/04
GAMBLING — TEMPORARY OFF -SITE PREMISE
Lourdes Foundation (Circus World Bingo)
621 W Center St
Rochester, Mn. 55902
Pull tabs at Ohnsted County Fair
Olmsted County Fairgrounds Beer Tent 8/2/04 thru 8/7/04
•
GAMBLING
—TEMPORARY
Bear Creek Longbeards
1005 Golfers Ct SE
Rochester, Mn. 55904
Raffle 1/22/05 AT
Kahler Hotel
20 2"d Ave SW
SEWER & DRAINS
Wenzel Mechanical, Inc.
1710 Alexander Rd.
Eagan, W. 55121
�NCIL
ACTION: Motion by: second by: to:
() LICENSES, BONDS AND MISCELLNEOUS CITY ACTIVITIES
PAGE 2
JULY 7, 2004
SOUND AMPLIFICATION
Gay -Lesbian Community Services
190126`h Ave NW
Rochester, Mo. 55901
Annual Pridefest 7117/04 8:00 am to 5:00 PM
Central Park
Julie Hammes
231016`s Ave NW
Rochester, Mn. 55901
Summer Party with Band Bosman Bros 7/10/04 2:00 PM to 7:00 PM
Olmsted County Fair
PO Box 6607
Rochester, Mn. 55903
County Fair 8/1/04 thru 8/8104
0
•
0
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE:
07-07-04
AGENDASECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO:
Letters and Petitions
City Clerk
D-2
I' DESCRIPTION: ADDENDUM to Licenses, Bonds, Miscellaneous Activities
PREPARED BY:
Judy Scherr
The following additional licenses and submitted for your approval.
DANCE —TEMPORARY
Benito Olgvin and Guadalype Flores — dance at Graham Arena for Latin Community — July 11, 2004 — 7:00 PM
to 1:00 AM
MASTER INSTALLER
Brian Holsten, Forest Lake, Minnesota
SOUND AMPLIFICATION PERMIT
First Church, Mobile Home Court, Park Lane (Marion Road) - Kutzky Park - July 10, 2004
OUTDOOR DINING PERMIT - RENEWAL
Jaspers Alsatian Bistro, 14 Historic Third Street SW
GAMBLING - TEMPORARY OFF -SITE
American Legion Post #92 at Bear Creek Park, Highway 14 and Marion Road -
Pull tabs on August 22, 2004
GAMBLING - TEMPORARY
Church of the Resurrection, 1600 11t" Avenue S.E. — Pull tabs —August 8, 2004
COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE: 7/7104
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
Consent Agenda
Finance Department
_A
DESCRIPTION:
PREPARApproval
of Accounts Payable
Dale Ma
Respectfully request a motion to approve the following cash disbursements:
Investment purchases of $11,494,575.97
Accounts payable of $1,910,127.46
Total disbursements $13,404,703.43
(Detailed listing of disbursements submitted separately.)
•
NCIL ACTION: Mouon by Second by. to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 1 DATE: 7/7/07 1
AGENDA SECTION:
Aft Cosent
ORIGINATING DEPT:
Fire
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION: Fire Safety / Sprinkler Demonstration House
PREPARED BY:
Jeff Leland
Fire Safety / Sprinkler Demonstration House specifications were sent to the 2 companies in the United States
who manufacture Fire Safety / Sprinkler Demonstration Houses to obtain bids for the manufacture of a vehicle
for the Rochester Fire department.
Bids were opened on July 1, 2004 with one vendor responding to our request.
• Mobile Concepts by Scotty - $55,422.
The Fire Department recommends the City accept the bid of $55,422 from Mobile Concepts by Scotty.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Approval of the bid with Mobile Concepts by Scotty for the purchase of a Fire Safety / Sprinkler
Demonstration House and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute any and all documents necessary
• in furtherance of this agreement.
/ O
do0 fC `.tc.�
-
r
NCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to:
Page 1 of 1
Spaeth, Terry
From: Leland, Jeff
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 3:34
To: Spaeth, Terry
Cc: Kapler, David; Felsch, Lyle
Subject: RE: RCA on Fire Safety House
We have a grant from FEMA to cover 70% of the cost. Our share
(30%) will be partially covered by the sale of the old Fire safety house to Owatonna for $10, 000. If my math is
correct, the city share of the Fire Safety house will be $16,626 (less the 10,000 from OWT) _ $6,626. I believe
Steve K indicated that would be covered by funds remaining from 2003. Hope this helps.
Rochester Fire Department
Jeff Leland
Administrative Services Manager
jleland @ cl. rochester. mm us
nao me ro your aaaress 000K...
----Original Message—
From: Spaeth, Terry
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 2:57 PM
To: Leland, Jeff
Subject: RCA on Fire Safety House
Click here to visit our website
Rochester Fire Dept.
201 4th St. S.E.
Rochester, MN 55904
tel: 507-285-8953
fax: 507-280-4721
mobile: 507-208-6034
Jeff, could you indicate to me what the funding source for the demo house is? I would like to indicate that
to the Council.
Thanks.
Terry A. Spaeth, AICP
Administrative Assistant
City of Rochester
Room 266, City Hall
Rochester, MN. 55904
Phone: (507) 285-8082 Fax: (507) 287-7979
E-Mail: tspaeth@ci.rochester.mn.us
E
•
7r1 i7nnA
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE: 7/7/04
AGENDA SECTION:
Organizational / Consent
ORIGINATING DEPT:
Human Resources
ITEM NO.
b
M DESCRIPTION: Promotional Appointment - Motor Operator -
PREPARED BY:
Rochester Fire Department
Linda ilsrud
The termination of Tom Roetzler, Motor Operator, effective April 26, 2004 created a
vacancy for the position of Motor Operator.
The Fire Civil Service Commission has submitted the list of eligible candidates for the
position of Motor Operator from the established eligibility roster and recommends the
appointment of one of the two candidate to the position of Motor Operator.
•
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Promotional appointment of Firefighter Rod Steggerda to the position of Motor Operator in
the Rochester Fire Department effective July 8, 2004.
NCIL ACTION: Motion by. Second by: to:
11
Yv
ALLABIERICA MY
V,4f
June 30, 2004
ROCHESTER
./%/�i.rc✓�e�ata
FIRE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
NORB RYAN JOE POWERS JOHN WITHERS
Honorable Council Members
City Council
City Hall
Rochester, MN 55904
Dear Council Members:
l
F S'i
v
r�k�Il�G.a1 �.� J•c•`
The termination of Tom Roetzler, Motor Operator, effective April 26, 2004 created a
vacancy for the position of Motor Operator.
We respectfully request that you make one (1) appointment to the position of
Motor Operator from the following list of qualified candidates
Rod Steggerda
2. Jeff Drew
Fire Chief David Kapler desires to have the appointment effective July 8, 2004.
Respectfully Submitted,
Joe Powers
Secretary
Fire Civil Service Commission
•
•
An EqualOpportunity Employer
0
r.
June 30, 2004
TO: Fire Civil Service Commission
FROM: Fire Chief David Kapler bAL
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO PROMOTE
no nana ro roach or...,
DAVID A. KAPLER
Fire Chief
• Due to the recent termination of Motor Operator Tom Roetzler, and the. -retirement
of Steve Richardt in May, there exists two vacancies in the Motor Operator ranks.
I would likelto request the promotion bf two firefighters from the recently certified
Motor Operator Eligibility Roster for appointment as soon as possible. Thank you.
201 4th Street SE, Room 10 • Rochester, MN 55904-3726 • (507) 285-8072 • FAX (507) 280-4721
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING
DATE: 7/7/04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
Organizational / Consent
Human Resources
M DESCRIPTION: Promotional Appointment - Motor Operator -
Rochester Fire Department
PREPARED BY:
Linda Gi srud
The retirement of Steve Richardt, Motor Operator, effective May 31, 2004 created a
vacancy for the position of Motor Operator.
The Fire Civil Service Commission has submitted the list of eligible candidates for the
position of Motor Operator from the established eligibility roster and recommends the
appointment of the candidate to the position of Motor Operator.
•
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Promotional appointment of Firefighter Jeff Drew to the position of Motor Operator in the
Rochester Fire Department effective July 8, 2004.
NCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to:
\`Q
h1ftd
ALL-AMERICA CRY
Vv
June 30, 2004
ROCHESTER
.�i,�csze�atez
FIRE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
NORB RYAN JOE POWERS JOHN WITHERS
Honorable Council Members
City Council
City Hall
Rochester, MN 55904
Dear Council Members:
Ill L• \l bl :I h•'
The retirement of Steve Richardt, Motor Operator, effective May 31, 2004 created a
vacancy for the position of Motor Operator.
We respectfully request that you make one (1) appointment to the position of
Motor Operator from the following list of qualified candidates
1. Jeff Drew
Fire Chief David Kapler desires to have the appointment effective July 8, 2004.
Respectfully Submitted,
Joe Powers
Secretary
Fire Civil Service Commission
•
•
An EqualOpportunity Employer
`1 /
•
June 30, 2004
TO: Fire Civil Service Commission
FROM: Fire Chief David Kapler WL
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO PROMOTE
The hand to reach for....
DAVID A. KAPLER
Fire Chief
Due to the recent termination of Motor Operator Tom Roetzler, and the retirement
Isof Steve Richardt in May, there exists two vacancies in the Motor Operator ranks.
I would likeito request the promotion of two firefighters from the recently certified
Motor Operator Eligibility Roster for appointment as soon as possible. Thank you.
201 4th Street SE, Room 10 • Rochester, MN 55904-3726 • (507) 285-8072 • FAX (507) 280-4721
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE: 717/04
NDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO.
Consent Agenda POLICE b_`"]
ITEM DESCRIPTION: FY 2004 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT PREPARED BY:
PROGRAM Application and Acceptance of Funds Roger Peterson
The Local Law Enforcement Block grant (LLEBG) Program is administered by the Programs Office of the
Bureau of Justice Assistance. Each year since 1996, Congress has appropriated funds to continue the program.
The purpose of the LLEBG Program is to provide units of government with funds to underwrite projects to
reduce crime and improve public safety.
The Police Department is eligible to receive a Local Law Enforcement Block Grant in the amount of $17,916.
This amount is less than last years amount of approximately $39,500. The Department of Justice has awarded
the City this amount, pending final review of use for these funds. The purpose of the grant program is local
crime prevention activities. Some of the local requirements for the receipt of the grant area as follows:
The City as the grantee is to establish an Advisory Board to make a recommendation for the proposed use of
funds. The Advisory Board is required to have representatives from at least the following: local law
enforcement agency, local prosecutor's office, local court system, local public school, local non-profit group
involved in crime prevention. The Advisory Board members for the grant are:
• Chairman — Roger Peterson, Chief of Police
Local Prosecutor — Dave Goslee, Deputy City Attorney
Local Law Enforcement Representative — Gary Mulleneaux, Police Communications Manager
Local Public School System Representative — Liz Jacobson, Dpt of Teaching, Families & Learning
Local Court System — Chuck Kjos, Ohnsted County Court Administrator
Local Non -Profit Group — Don Dallman, Rochester Ohnsted County Safety Council
The City is also required to hold a public hearing to discuss the proposed uses of the funds
It is respectfully requested the City match for postage and printing for neighborhood programs in addition to the
local cash requirement for the grant which has typically been approximately 10% of the federal funding. It is
also respectfully requested that the cash match be authorized from the Contingency Account.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Approval to apply for and acceptanceta FY 2004 DOJ Local Law Enforcement Block Grant. Approval of the
cash match from the contingency account.
COUNCIL ACTION: Mosonby. Second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING 1
DATE: 7-7-2004
AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO.
isConsent Agenda Police t 8
ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY:
Permission to accept law enforcement grant funds from Marshall Fields Steven Johnston
Marshall Field's has awarded $1,300 to the Rochester Police Department through its Community Law
Enforcement Grant Program for the purpose of purchasing digital camera equipment for the Investigations
Division. There are no other costs associated with this grant.
. COUNCIL ACTION REOUESTED:
The Police Department requests a resolution to accept the $1,300 grant for the stated purpose.
COUNCIL ACTION: MoBon
Second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE:
0/
7/7/04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
c Works
M DESCRIPTION: Advertisement for Bids: Sanitary Sewer and Watermain to Serve
PREPARED BY:
the South Frontage Road of TH 14 East, J7726
J. Loehr
-Al
This is a request for a resolution to advertise for bids. The bids will be received until 11:00 AM at the
office of the City Clerk on August 3, 2004 and considered by the City Council on August 16, 2004 for the
following project:
Project No. M4-11. J7726
"Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Extension to Serve the South Frontage Road of TH 14 East from
the Knights of Columbus Easterly to the Hundred Acre Woods Development."
The project is proposed to be funded from Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Connection Charges (Utility
Connection Agreements), future charges to undeveloped land that is located adjacent to the project,
Sales Tax Revenue appropriated to the Water Quality Protection Program, and since the south frontage
road of TH 14 East has only one frontage that can be charged for sanitary sewer and watermain,'/: of
the sewer and watermain cost along TH 14 is proposed to be funded from previously collected Water
Availability Charges and Sewer Availability Charges.
• COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
A resolution should be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids and conduct a bid
opening on August 3, 2004 at 11:00 AM.
Note to City Clerk:
Advertise 3 times in the Post Bulletin and Construction Bulletin beginning July 9, 2004.
Attachments: Notice of Bids
Project Location Map
NCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 0i
DATE: 7-7-04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
ift CONSENT AGENDA
Public Works
h I
1 V
M DESCRIPTION: Reconsider Residential Permit Parking Times, 8 1/2 Avenue NW
PREPARED BY:
200 Block
D. Kramer
At the June 21, 2004 meeting, the city council approved amendments to RCO 138A pertaining to
Residential Permit Parking Zones, along with changing the effective times in zones where the current
effective time is only one or two hours at a time.
One of the time changes was in Zone 8, on 81/2 Ave NW, from 2nd St to 3'd St. Because of a
miscommunication, the city council approved an effective time of
7:00 AM to 3:00 PM Monday through Friday,
when it was Councilmember Marcoux's intent that the effective time be
7:00 AM to 3:00 PM School Days.
City Attorney Terry Adkins indicates to correct this, the council can reconsider their action.
The effective time of 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM School Days would be consistent with the revised ordinance.
The current effective time is 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM, School Days. A resident indicated in a phone
conversation that their parking problem is due to Lourdes High School students, not downtown
employees.
•
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Reconsider the city council's June 21, 2004 action to amend the Comprehensive Traffic and Parking
Resolution, Section L — Residential Permit Parking, Zone 8, paragraph 2, which was approved as
follows (to be effective September 1, 2004):
8 1/2 Ave NW, from 2nd St to Td St, both sides, from 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM, Monday through Friday
To instead be approved as:
81/2 Ave NW, from 2nd St to 3`d St, both sides, from 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM, School Days Only.
IFUNCIL ACTION: Mahon by: Second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING
DATE:
07/07/04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA
Public Works
EM DESCRIPTION: ADVERTISE FOR BIDS: (J4001)
PREPARED BY: /
Rocky Creek Stabilization in the vicinity of Cheval Lane NE
[R. .tL Im/ p
This is a request for a resolution to advertise for bids for the following project:
Proiect:
City Project No: SW-M201 (J4001)
Rocky Creek Stabilization in the vicinity of Cheval Lane NE
Protect Background
Residents have reported significant localized channel erosion associated with the Rocky Creek between East River
Road and the west line of River Court II Addition. Preliminary evaluation of selected sections of this stream section
has been made in the past Significant erosion has occurred and is continuing at an accelerating rate. The
proposed project will address the erosion in the noted segment of Rocky Creek between East River Road.and the
west line of the subdivision.
This project is included in the 2004-2009 Capital Improvement Program (item 12, page 60), funded by Storm
Water Utility funds
13
i
Llm;
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
A resolution should be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids and conduct a bid opening
on August 11, 2004 at 11:00 AM.
Note to City Clerk:
Advertise 3 times in the Post Bulletin and Construction Bulletin beginning July 9, 2004.
Attachments: Notice of Bids
UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE: 7/7/04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
Consent Agenda
Public Works
M DESCRIPTION: Amended Development Agreement — Bandel North 2 no & 3rd —
PR PARED BY:
Big De Development Company, Inc.
LuT M. NigburA%/4
The Owners of the Big De Development, LLC and the City Staff have had discussions relating to
amending the existing Development Agreement. The purpose of the amended agreement is to clarify
certain terms of the existing agreement. The Owners also own land not included in the existing
agreement that they would like to develop. The amended development agreement shall replace and
supercede the terms and conditions of the existing development agreement.
Staff recommends the Council approve the Amended Development Agreement. The Owners have
executed the Amended Development Agreement.
1
4 r r ;
1!
C
` Bandel Road O+edand Drive
—
® - Area Added to Agreement
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Bendel North 2"d & 3rd Amended Development
Agreement with Big De Development Company, LLC.
NCIL ACTION: Motion by-. Second Dy: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE: 7/7104
AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA Public Works _ L3
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Revocable Permit: Independent School District #535 PREPARED BY:
M. Nigbur
Independent School District #535 has requested a Revocable Permit to allow the placement of storm
sewer across City owned property to address a drainage problem at Churchill School. Independent
School District #535 will pay for the construction, repair and maintenance of the new storm sewer. The
storm sewer must be at a minimum depth of four feet and cannot have any manholes where it is located
through the baseball field on City property.
Staff has reviewed the request and would recommend in favor of granting a Revocable Permit. The
owners have executed a Revocable Permit which includes the standard language for revocation and
liability protection for the City.
COUNCIL
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Revocable Permit with Independent School District
#535 to allow the placement of storm sewer across City owned property.
ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION /
MEETING
DATE: 7/ 04
AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA Public Works tl�— 14
EM DESCRIPTION: Pedestrian Facilities Agreement and Easement donation — a part PREPARED BY:
of Lot 1, Block 1, J L Replat I( M. Nigbur
Staff would offer the following Pedestrian Facility Agreement for consideration by the Council:
• Daniel and Theresa Penz are the Owners of part of Lot 1, Block 1, J L Replat. The Owners
have requested that a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement be approved to address their
obligations for providing pedestrian facilities along the frontage of the Property abutting 31ti
Avenue SE.
• The Owners have also addressed their obligations for the additional right of way along 3nd
Avenue SE with the execution of an Easement donating 7 feet of the subject property for right
of way purposes.
-T-
I
COUNCIL
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement
with Daniel and Theresa Penz and to accept the donated 7 feet of right of way alonq 3 d Avenue SE.
COUNCIL ACTION: Motion
Second
0
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
i
MEETING
DATE: 071 /04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA
Public Works
b— is
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Emergency Repair Project: (J6521)
PREPARED BY:
Emergency Storm Sewer Reconstruction in 6th St SW from S. Broadway
R. Kelm
to 1 at Ave SW
This is a request for a resolution to adopt the following emergency repair project:
Project:
City Project No: 6206-3-04 (J6521)
Emergency Storm Sewer Reconstruction in 6th St SW from S. Broadway to 1st Ave SW
ProiectBackground
After the heavy rains in the beginning of June, a storm sewer pipe in the middle of 6"' Street SW
between S. Broadway and Is' Ave SW collapsed, creating a large hole in the street. Maintenance crews
temporarily patched the street until further review of the cause could be completed.
In the middle of June the stone and sanitary utilities in the street were televised to determine the cause
of the collapse. The storm sewer line was observed to be a deteriorated Gay pipe laying 10ft deep
cutting diagonally across the entire length of the block. The sanitary sewer crosses directly below and
was found to be in good enough condition to be repaired by a slip lining process.
This is a request to conduct an emergency storm sewer replacement, and street restoration project for
that block of 6'" Street SW between Broadway and 1 at Avenue SW.
This project will be funded by Storm Water Utility Funds.
W W Y
1ii
Se(T
C
kProject Location
17
*
�. SOLME - FIELD " ".; ,
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
. 1. Adopt a resolution accepting the project.
COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by. Second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE:
3'1'
7/7/04
AGENDA ECTION: NGCONSENTAGENDA ORIGINAPublioWorks IEPT: ITEZ�,` ((, I
DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Sanitary Sewer Relocation in 1" St NW to
accommodate the 1$' Ave NW Pedestrian Subway crossing, aka
Mayo Clinic Project #21302 — J5144
Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council:
BARED BY:
M. Baker
Mayo Clinic Rochester (Owner) & Knutson Construction, Inc. (Contractor) are requesting a City / Owner
Contract J5144, consisting of "Sanitary Sewer Relocation in Vt St NW to accommodate the 1 w Ave NW
Pedestrian Subway crossing, aka Mayo Clinic Project #21302".
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J5144
"Sanitary Sewer Relocation in 1't St NW to accommodate the 1a Ave NW Pedestrian Subway crossing,
aka Mayo Clinic Project #21302".
SPNCIL ACTION: Mobon by: second
to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
5.
7/7/04
DATE
AGENDA SECTION:
Ilk CONSENT AGENDA
ORIGINATING DEPT:
Public Works
DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — Sanitary Sewer & Watermaln Extension to
Northern Reserve along CSAH 22, and construction of Regional
Storm Water Pond ZR-A4.4 — J9832
Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council:
BARED BY:
M. Baker
ABBCO Construction Co. (Owner &Contractor) is requesting a City / Owner Contract J9832, consisting OP
"Sanitary Sewer & Watermain Extension to Northern Reserve along CSAH 22, and construction of
Regional Storm Water Pond ZR-A4.4".
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J9832
"Sanitary Sewer & Watennain Extension to Northern Reserve along CSAH 22, and construction of
Regional Storm Water Pond ZR-A4.4".
4rNCIL ACTION: Movon
Second
to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING Al /
DATE: 7/7/04
AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA Public Works
EM DESCRIPTION: Contribution Agreement— Redeemer Evangelical Lutheran PREPARED BY:
Church U.A.C., Inc. � M. Baker
Staff would offer the following Contribution Agreement for consideration by the Council:
Redeemer Evangelical Lutheran Church U.A.C., Inc., is the Owner of real property described as Lots
5 & 6, Block 1, Hanson's Subdivision of Lot 60 Auditor's Plat'A', Olmsted County, Minnesota,
together with Lots 66, 67, 68, & 69, Auditor's Plat'A', Olmsted County, Minnesota. The Owner has
applied for an Incentive Development Plan application #03-66, to construct a building and parking lot
expansion on the Property. The Owner has requested that a Contribution Agreement be approved to
address its obligations regarding future improvements to 9t' St SE, 61i Ave SE, & 7`" Ave SE,
including Pedestrian Facilities along said roadways. An Agreement has been drafted by the City
and executed by the Owner.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Contribution Agreement with
Redeemer Evangelical Lutheran Church U.A.C., Inc, for Lots 5 & 6, Block 1, Hanson's Subdivision of
Lot 60 Auditor's Plat'A', Olmsted County, Minnesota, together with Lots 66, 67, 68, & 69, Auditor's Plat
'A', Olmsted County, Minnesota
ACTION: Motion by. Second by. to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE:
A
717/04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA
Public Works
D -
M DESCRIPTION: Revocable Permit: Mayo Clinic Rochester- Eisenberg Tunnel
Project —1st Avenue NW and I" Street NW Right of Way.
p PARED BY:
M. Nigbur 1*zli
Mayo Clinic Rochester has requested a Revocable Permit for the construction of a pedestrian tunnel
within the right of way of 1 B' Avenue NW and 16` Street NW connecting the Eisenberg Building at
Methodist Hospital with The Eisenberg Staff Parking Ramp. The ramp will be constructed at Mayo
Clinic's expense.
Staff has reviewed the request and would recommend in favor of granting a Revocable Permit. The
owners have executed a Revocable Permit which includes the standard language for revocation and
liability protection for the City.
zs
1E
Proposed Site Access and Tunnel Area
1st Street NW
a
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the revocable permit with Mayo Clinic Rochester to allow
the placement of a pedestrian tunnel within the right of way of 16` Avenue NW and 1 t Street NW.
UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by. to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE:
AGENDA Consent Agenda ORIGINATING blip Works ITEM0.077�\
NEW
ITEM DESCRIPTION• Development Agreement —Whispering Oaks - Forbrook Bigelow p PARED BY:
Development, LLC
I M. Nigbur7Hyl
The Owners of the Forbrook Bigelow Development, LLC and the City Staff have had discussions
relating to impacts on the public infrastructure resulting from the development of the Property.
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:
• Storm Water Management
• Dedication of ROW
• Owner's payment of the development related charges including Storm Water Management,
Sanitary Sewer Availability, Water Availability, and Substandard Street & Transportation
Improvement District Charges.
Staff recommends the Council approve the Development Agreement. The Owners have executed
the Development Agreement.
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Whispering Oaks Development Agreement with
Forbrook Bigelow Development, LLC.
ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING
DATE:
A1-
7-7-04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA
Public Works
—2,)
M DESCRIPTION: Advertise for Bids, Traffic Signal 55 Street NW at Chateau Rd
p PARED BY:
NW, J6004luf
D. Kramer
In 2003 the city entered into an agreement with Olmsted County for construction of a traffic signal at
55th St NW & Chateau Rd, along with realigning Chateau Rd to the east to line up with the existing
Northwest Plaza entrance, and connection of Villa Rd NW between Chateau Rd NW and Longboat Rd
NW. The agreement requires the city to construct these improvements in 2004.
The overall project is broken into three components, based on funding source:
J6004, the traffic signal and associated pavement modifications on 55St NW (CSAH 22) is
included in the 2004 CIP, p. 40, item 6. The cost split is 50% city, 50% county, after first using
remaining Northwest Plaza developer funds that were paid for future traffic signals (currently
held by Olmsted County). The city's $250,000 funding comes from Municipal State -Aid.
J7222, realign Chateau Rd NW from Villa Rd to 55t' St, and connect Villa Rd NW to Longboat
Rd. This is included in the 2004 CIP, p. 32, item 8, with the city's $350,000 funding from tax
levy.
J7225, Northwest Plaza driveway improvements (south of the 55"' St ROW at this intersection).
This is work on private property, not included in the city's CIP. This work is included in the
project at the request of the Northwest Plaza developer, and to facilitate coordinated
construction. This portion of the work will not be awarded unless the developer enters into an
agreement to reimburse the city for these costs.
• a
�ESroNgLN
v00
MLLA 0
�EIC LN NW CONNECTION
Rrh IW
;11r PEAJ LNNW CHATEAU RO
REALIGNMENT
NEW TRAFFIC
SIGNAL
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Authorize advertising for bids to install traffic signal and construct street improvements, 550' Street NW
at Chateau Rd NW, J6004, J7222, and J7225.
NCIL ACTION: Motion by Second by. to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE
7- }/
7-7-04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA
Public Works
D 2Z
M DESCRIPTION:
PREPARED BY:
Establish No Parking; George Gibbs Dr SW
F D. Kramer
A short "No Parking" zone has been posted on George Gibbs Drive SW for some time. Public works
maintenance crews have indicated the purpose of the No Parking zone is to prevent vehicles from
parking over a sanitary sewer manhole, to allow emergency access to the manhole for sewer cleaning.
was unable to locate any previous city council resolution establishing this No Parking zone.
I� �y
7srsw
Veterans Memorial
•0
No Parkin Zon
�'
�o�
o`�
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Add paragraph 324 to Section B 'No Parking" of the Comprehensive Traffic and Parking Resolution, to
read as follows:
324 George Gibbs Dr SW, from 175 feet to 210 feet, more or less, south of 7th St SW, on the
east side near the sanitary sewer manhole, at all times.
NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE:
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
CONSENT AGENDA
Public Works
_Z
M DESCRIPTION: Supplemental Agreement #6: Project # J2269
PR PARED BY:
HWY 63 South / 48'" St. and St. Bridgets Road
M. Easley <<
The Minnesota Department of Transportation contracted for improvements to Hwy 63 South, in
Rochester, in 2003, and work continues. Improvements provide for the construction of an
interchange at 48th St. S.W. and associated ramps and frontage roads. Work also provides for
improvements to both 48v' St. S.W. and St. Bridget's Road, sections of which are City owned
and maintained roadways. MNDOT and The City of Rochester have entered into a Municipal
Cost Share Agreement for improvements to City owned facilities within the project limits of the
HWY 63 contract.
In recent months, lands bordered by HWY 63, 48"' St. S.E. and St. Bridget's Road have
continued to move forward through the development processes of the City. Whereas, the
Developer has requested certain changes of MNDOT and the City in the design and
construction of City roadways and utilities adjacent to the development. The Department of
Public Works has reviewed these changes and concur that the changes provide for better
conveyance of water and flow of traffic to and from the proposed development.
MNDOT has provided an Estimate of Cost to the City for the extra work associated with these
alterations, and The City of Rochester has entered into a Development Agreement with the
• Developer for reimbursement of City costs associated with Supplemental Agreement #6,
Project # J2269, HWY 63 South.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Adopt a resolution authorizing payment of an additional $60,866.24 to MNDOT as part of the
Municipal Cost Share Agreement. Project # J2269 HWY 63 South.
NCIL ACTION: Motion by. Second by to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE:
53'
7-7-04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
CONSENTAGENDA I Public Works
DESCRIPTION:
Establish One -Way street; Harvest Moon Boulevard NW
ITEM NO.
,T
PARED BY:
D. Kramer,
Harvest Moon Blvd NW has been constructed based on an approved design that is only wide enough
for one-way traffic. This street was platted with Harvestview subdivision.
The Harvestview final plat was approved by the city council April 21, 2003 with no condition or
accompanying resolution that Harvest Moon Blvd be a one-way street.
55STNW
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
57
IZ
Add paragraph 15 to Section G "One-way Streets and Alleys" of the Comprehensive Traffic and Parking
Resolution, to read as follows:
15 Harvest Moon Blvd NW, between 56tb St NW and Harvest Lake Dr NW, one-way
northbound.
-ACTION: Motion by Second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING
DATE: 7-7-04
AGENDA SECTION:
CONTINUED - PUBLIC HEARINGS
ORIGINATING DEPT:
PLANNING
ITEM
OP
DESCRIPTION: Land Use Plan Amendment #04-02, by Marilyn Kastler. The Applicant
PREPARED BY:
proposing to develop approximately 23.90 acres with commercial uses. The
Mitzi A. Baker,
development will require amending floodplain boundaries and filling a portion of the
Senior Planner
pond on the property. The applicant has petitioned to change the land use designation
for this property from "low density residential" to "commercial". A Zoning District
Amendment and General Development Plan are being considered concurrent with this
application. The property is located south of 48w Street SW, west of TH 63 and east of
the Southern Woods Development.
June 30, 2004
On June 21, 2004, the City Council continued this item to July 7, 2004 to provide additional time for the applicant to negotiate
access to 48'h Street.
Staff anticipates receiving a written waiver from the applicant to permit this application to be continued to August Z
2004.
City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 25, 2004 to consider this application. Ms. Wiesner moved to
recommend approval of Land Use Plan Amendment #04-02 by Marilyn Kastler based on the future conditions as
proposed by the developer and with the staff -recommended findings. Mr. Burke seconded the motion. The motion
failed 4-4, with Mr. Ohly abstaining.
Council Action Needed.
f. 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).
2. If the Council should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution supported by findings
of fact and conclusions of law.
Distribution: /
1. City Clerk
2. City Administrator
1. City Attorney: Legal Description attached
2. Planning Department File
3. GGG, Inc.
4. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on WEDNESDAY July 7, 2004 in the Council / Board
Chamber at the Rochester - Olmsted Government Center Building
ACTION:
oNCIL
n By: Seconded By: Action:
Kvenvold, Steve
From: Wheeler, Phil
Wednesday, July 07, 2004 11:42 AM
o: Adkins, Terry; Kvenvold, Steve
Cc: Spaeth, Terry
Subject: RE: Item F2
That works for me. We will talk to Geoff Griffin about what we would like to see in the
finsihed product. By the way, Geoff assured me earlier today that he will have the
extension letter from Ms. Kastler by tonight's meeting. - Phil
-----Original Message -----
From; Adkins, Terry[mailto:tadkins@ci.rochester.mn.us]
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 11:20 AM
To: Wheeler, Phil; Kvenvold, Steve
Cc: Spaeth, Terry
Subject: RE: Item F2
The whole idea of our meeting last week was to give Penz some leverage in talking to
Reynolds and Schulz about reaching a negotiated settlement. The leverage was the staff's
unanimous recommendation to the Council to initiate an amendment to the GDP which would
result in the City deciding, rather than Reynolds deciding, where to place the road
through the Reynolds GDP. We wanted Penz to go back to Reynolds and say, "we had better
agree as to how to resolve this matter on our own rather than let the Council and the
Planning staff resolve it for us."
Apparently, that strategy worked as we now have, at least preliminarily, some agreement
between the parties. The worst step we could take is to follow through on our not -so -
subtle threat to initiate an amendment to the GDP. We would give Reynolds et al every
reason to believe nothing has been gained by a negotiated settlement.
Instead, it would be preferable to table F-2 and give everyone time to "massage" the
negotiated settlement so as to make everyone happy.
I call it my, "don't worry, be happy" strategy.
Terry
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING
DATE: 7-7-04
CONTINUED - PUBLIC BEAM NGS
PLANNING
=M utbUHIPTIUN: Zoning District Amendment 404-06 by Marilyn Kastler. The
Applicant is proposing to develop approximately 23.90 acres with commercial uses.
The applicant has petitioned to change the land use designation for this property from
R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential) to B-4 (General Commercial). A Land Use Plan
amendment and General Development Plan are being considered concurrent with this
petition. The property is located south of 48ei Street SW, west of TH 63 and east of the
Southern Woods Development.
Mitzi A. Baker,
Senior Planner
June 30, 2004
On June 21, 2004, the City Council continued this item to July 7, 2004 to provide additional time for the applicant to negotiate
access to 48"' Street.
Staff anticipates receiving a written waiver from the applicant to permit this application to be, continued to August 2,
2004.
City Planning and Zonlna Commission Recommendation:
The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on May 26, 2004, to consider this petition.
Ms. Wiesner moved to recommend approval of Zoning District Amendment #04-06 by Marilyn Kastler
th the staff -recommended findings. Mr. Burke seconded the motion. The motion failed 4-4, with
low Ohly abstaining.
Council Action Needed:
The 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 Administrator 1�ZpY
2. City Attorney: Legal Description attached
3. Planning Department File
4. GGG Inc.
5. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday July 7, 2004 in the CouncilBoard
Chambers at the Government Center,151 4th Street SE.
CIL ACTION:
n By: Seconded By: Action:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING
DATE 7 7 04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM 1L0.
CONTINUED - PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLACING
M DESCRIPTION: General Development Plan #233 to be known as Waterfront
PREPARED BY:
Business Park by Marilyn Kastler. The Applicant is proposing to develop approximately
Mitzi A. Baker,
23.90 acres with commercial uses. The development will require amending floodplain
Senior Planner
boundaries and filling a portion of the pond on the property. A Land Use Plan
Amendment and Zoning District Amendment are being considered concurrent with this
application. The property is located south of 481h Street SW, west of TH 63 and east of
the Southern Woods Development.
June 30, 2004
On June 21, 2004, the City Council continued this item to July 7, 2004 to provide additional time for the applicant to negotiate
access to 48fh Street.
Staff anticipates receiving a written waiver from the applicant to permit this application to be continued to August 2,
200.4.
City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation:
The Commission held a public hearing to consider this item on May 26, 2004.
Ms. Wiesner moved to recommend approval of General Development Plan #233 to be known as
Waterfront Business Park by Marilyn Kastler with the staff -recommended findings and conditions. Mr.
Burke seconded the motion. The motion failed 4-4,with Mr. Ohly abstaining.
•
Council Action Needed:
1. The Council could either approve or deny the GDP. The Council instruct the City Attorney to
prepare findings supporting the decision. If the Council wishes to approve the GDP, the Council
should instruct the CityAttorney to prepare findings and a resolution.
Distribution:
1. City Administrator
2. City Attorney
3. Planning Department File
4. GGG, Inc.
5. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on WEDNESDAY July 7, 2004 in the Council / Board Chambers in
the Government Center at 151 4th Street BE.
CONCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING
DATE: 7-7-04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEM NO.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING
E / /
M DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #03-42 by Payne Company to be known as Century
PREPARED BY:
,,Is Eight Subdivision
Brent Svenby,
Planner
June 30, 2004
Plannino Department Review. -
See attached staff report dated June 30, 2004 recommending approval subject to the following modifications/conditions:
1. Parkland Dedication shall be met via the deferred land dedication as specified in the June 25, 2004
memorandum from Rochester Park and Recreation.
2. Prior to recording the final plat documents, the E911 Addressing and GIS Impact fees shall be paid as
specified in the attached memorandum from the Planning Department GIS/Addressing staff dated June 22,
2004.
3. The Owner shall dedicate, prior to the recording of the final plat, a temporary drainage and access easement
over the portion of the temporary stormwater facilities in which no easements have been dedicated.
4. The final plat documents shall not be recorded until the City has determined that the applicant has
complied with the terms of the City -Owner Contract for J5123.
/tio Ci,.d�. oeiGays .A, -TA,
ouncil Action Needed:
1. A resolution approving the plat can be adopted.
Distribution:
1. City Administrator
2. City Attorney
3. Planning Department File
4. Applicant This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday. July 7, 2004 in the Council
Chambers at the Rochester / Olmsted County Government Center.
5. Yaggy Colby Associates
COUNCIL ACTION: motion by. Second by. to:
LJ
z
0
0
m
D
F-
U
w
V)
J
J_
D
f--
Z
W
U
Q311tlldNn
� J
�s".gn_a�ak
9"xxgqz��#9?aa9q�53qq�a"RgA�oES`=O565"":5"._e
§48eS]GAS
ni.
Awn
S13--
tl
Rx
Ftl:
as®a
R'RR's
tltl
R'9iaS
SA9®R^q7'Jq
S..x�eC%�7�==Ete3�g4�as.e
a
__
�q
qn..
Egg
a
%aa
$
g
g
aaa
��
tlx
9
o
x�
�
R
a
II
aaa
malsIIIIIIII
bh
S9
asaaa:,:k{q
31 a'e-§SE§gg$-a
's's§:aa
M'Me"�CFg
s
sH
_ is
-ss
h
A§:tea§E��AYi<enbMAA
is
aR
naaae
w
F'sax
He_.
xpr�
as
FA
�_•.+...�.
-
FF.7AFFFF
FR
�'Xa�RAk
RR9x::
x:.n
9
aaa
i
Md
Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department
2122 Campus Drive SE — Suite 100
Rochester, MN 55904-4744
(507)285-8232
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council Members and Honorable Mayor Brede
FROM: Brent Svenby, Planner
DATE: July 7, 2004
RE: Item E-4
ITEM E-4 (Final Plat #03-42 Century Hills 8`° Subdivision)
The 41" condition should be removed. According to the Public Works Department, the owner has
complied with the terms of the City -Owner Contract for J5123.
1
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 • Rochester, MN 55904.4744
couxry or www.olmstedcounty.com/planning
Rochester Common Council
Brent Svenby, Planner
June 30, 2004
Final Plat #03-42 to be known as Century Hills Eight Subdivision.
Planning Department Review:
AppiicanVOwner:
Engineer:
Referral Comments:
Report Attachments:
Plat Data:
Location of Property:
Zoning:
Proposed Development:
Roadways:
Payne Company
1700 Northwoods Drive NE
Rochester, MN 55906
Yaggy Colby Associates
717 Third Avenue SE
Rochester, MN 55904
Rochester Public Works
Rochester Fire Department
Planning Dept. —Wetlands
RPU —Water
RPU —Operation Division
Rochester Park Department
Planning — GIS Division
MnDOT
1. Referral Comments (4 Letters)
2. Copy of Final Plat
3. Copy of the GDP
The property is located east of East Circle Drive and
is part of the Century Hills Development. The plat
allows for the continuation of.Century Valley Road NE
and Century Hills Drive NE.
The property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family)
district on the City of Rochester Zoning Map.
This development is subdividing approximately 24.09
acres of land into 51 lots for single family
development.
This plat proposes to dedicate right-of-way for four
roadways including the continuation of Century Hills
BUILDING CODE 507/285-8345 • GIS/ADDRESSINGIMAPPING 5071285-8232 • HOUSINGMRA 5071285-8224
PLANNING/ZONING 5071285-8232 • WELL/SEPTIC 507/285-8345
FAX 5071287-2275
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
Page 2
June 30, 2004
Drive NE and Century Valley Road NE.
Pedestrian Facilities:
Pedestrian facilities (concrete sidewalk) are required
at the Owner's expense, along both sides of all new
•
public roadways within this Subdivision.
Wetlands:
The Soil Survey and National Wetland Indicator maps
were reviewed for the presence of wetlands. No
hydric soils exist on this site according to the Soil
Survey. However, due to the location in the
landscape, the property owner should examine the
site for wetlands.
Public Utilities:
Public infrastructure plans have been approved for
the development.
Spillover Parking:
The spillover parking requirements for this
development would be 62 parking spaces. The
proposed roadways, as well as individual driveways,
should be adequate to accommodate the required
spillover spaces.
Parkland Dedication:
The Rochester Park and Recreation Department
recommends that the parkland dedication
requirements for this plat be met via the deferred land
dedication with the dedication to occur when the
neighborhood park site located approximately 1,400
feet south of the plat and identified on the revised
GDP as "future neighborhood park" is accessible via
public street or when the City wishes to begin
development of the park. •
General Development Plan:
The plat is consistent with the approved General
Development Plan known as Century Hills General
Development Plan.
Preliminary Plat.
The Preliminary Plat for this property was approved by the City Council February 2, 2004 subject
to the following conditions/modifications:
1. Dedication of parkland shag be met via: the deferred land dedication with the dedication to
occur when the neighborhood pads site located 1,400 feet south of the plat and identified on
the approved GDP as "Yuture neighborhood park" is accessible via public street or when the
City wishes to begin development of the park.
2. Pedestrian facilities (concrete sidewalk) shall be required, at the Owner's expense, along
entire frontages of both sides of all new public roads within this Subdivision.
3. Due to the location of the property hydric soils maybe located on the property. The property
owner is responsible for identifying wetlands on the property and submitting the information as
part of the platting process.
•
Page 3 �S
June 30, 2004
4. Stormwater Management must be provided for this development. A Stormwater
Management fee will apply to any areas of the Property that do not drain to an existing
privately constructed permanent detention facility built to serve this property.
•
5. The plat shall be revised to provide access to the detention pond
necessary easements dedicated. if the detention pond is going to be a public pond, the
access shall be provided via an outlot with a minimum of 30 feet in width. If the pond is going
to be a private pond, the access shall be provided via an easement with a minimum of 30 feet
in width. The City Engineer shall approve the location of outlot or easement.
6. Prior to the submittal of the final plat the roadways labeled, as Streets A-D shall be given
names that have been approved by the GIS/Addressing staff.
7. The applicant shall provide surety that guarantees the site will be fully restored after the
completion of the excavation activity. Said surety must be provided prior to commencement
of grading activities on the property.
Staff Review and Recommendation:
Staff has reviewed this final plat for compliance with the applicable regulations and
recommends approval subject to the following conditlons/modiflcations.
1. Parkland Dedication shall be met via the deferred land dedication as specified in
the June 25, 2004 memorandum from Rochester Park and Recreation.
• 2. Prior to recording the final plat documents, the E911 Addressing and GiS Impact
fees shall be paid as specified In the attached memorandum from the Planning
Department GIS/Addressing staff dated June 22, 2004.
3. The Owner shall dedicate, prior to the recording of the final plat, a temporary
drainage and access easement over the portion of the temporaryStormwater
facilities in which no easements have been dedicated.
4. The final plat documents shall not be recorded until the City has determined that
the applicant has complied with the terms of the City -Owner Contract for J5123.
0
L-4
u
1 M.,Yl
Now
12 //,/,) / 9141—
ROCHESTER
H414-0�
TO: Consolidated Planning Department
2122 Campus Drive SE
Rochester, MN 55904
FROM: Mark E. Baker
DATE: 6/30/04
0
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS
201 4'h Street SE Roam 108
Rochester, MN 55904-3740
507-287-7800
FAX — 507-281-6216
The Department of Public Works has reviewed the application for Final Plat #03-42 for the
proposed Century Hills Eighth Subdivision. The following are Public Works comments on this
request:
1. A Development Agreement and a City -Owner Contract have been executed for this
Property, and development is subject to the terms of the Agreement and Contract.
2. Temporary and permanent access and drainage easements have been dedicated for a
portion of the proposed stormwater features proposed for this Subdivision.
Dedication of a temporary drainage and access easement is required over the
remainder of the temporary stormwater facilities prior to recording the Final Plat.
• 3. The Plat shall not be recorded until it has been determined by the City that the
applicant has complied with the terms of the City -Owner Contract for 15123,
specifically related to the construction of Century Valley Rd NE and Century Hills
Dr NE
•
Development charges and fees applicable to the development of this property are addressed in the
Development Agreement and City -Owner Contract that have been executed for this Property,
with the exception of
❖ Traffic Signs as determined by the City Engineer
C:\Documents and Settings\plajgam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK3\FP03-42 Century Hills 8th Subd.doc
"I..
park &
recreation
ROCHESTER PARK AND k"CREATION DEPARTMENT
201 FOURTH STREET SE
ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55904-3769
TELE 507-281-6160 •
FAX 507-281-6165
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 25, 2004
TO: Jennifer Gayness
Planning
RE: Century Hills 8'h
Preliminary Plat 03-42
Acreageof plat.......................................................... 24.09 a
Number of dwelling units ............................................. 51 units
Densityfactor............................................................ .0244
Dedication............................................................... 1.24 a
Fair market value of land .............................................
The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements
be met via: Deferred land dedication with dedication to occur when the neighborhood
park site located 1,400' south of the proposed plat and identified on the revised GDP as
'future neighborhood park' is accessible via public street or when the City wishes to begin
development of the park.
•
C:\nocuments and Settings\plajgarn\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi les\OWACENTURY HILLS 800C
PrA
•
•
•
Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department
GIS/Addressing Division
2122 Campus Drive SE
Rochester. MN 55904-4744
Phone: (507) 285-8232
Fax: (507) 257-2275
FINAL PLAT REFERRAL RESPONSE
DATE: June 22, 2004
TO: Jennifer Garness
FROM: Randy Growden
GIS/Addressing Staff
Rochester -Olmsted County
Planning Department
CC: Pam Hameister, Wendy Von Wald; Peter Oetliker
RE: CENTURY HILLS EIGHTH
FINAL PLAT #03-42
UPON REVIEW OF THIS PLAT THE FOLLOWING FEES ARE REQUIRED TO BE
PAID BEFORE THE PLAT IS RECORDED. THIS APPLIES TO ALL PLATS
RECORDED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2004.
E911 ADDRESSING FEE: $2040.00 (51 LOTS/ADDRESSES)
GIS IMPACT FEE: $810.00 (51 LOTS/OUTLOTS)
Notes: 1. Additional E911 Addressing fees may be required upon Site Plan review.
2. Final Plats must be legally recorded before request for address Applications are
submitted to, E911 Addressing Staff-Rochester/01msted Cnnnty Planning nent_
A review of the final plat has turned up the following ADDRESS or ROADWAY related issues:
1. Upon review of CENTURY HILLS EIGHTH SUBDIVISION the GIS / Addressing staff has
found no issues to bring forth at this time.
�q
c:ldocuments and settings\plajgarnVowl settingAtemporary int=et files\olk3lcenturyhillseighttdp#03-42.doc
AO
The hand to reach roc..
DAVID A. KAPLER
Fire Chief
DATE: June 23, 2004
TO: Jennifer Gayness, Planning
FROM: R. Vance Swisher, Fire Protection Specialist
SUBJ: Final Plat #03-42 to be known as Century Hills Eight Subdivision by Payne Company
With regard to the above noted project plan, the fire department has the following requirements:
1. An adequate water supply shall be provided for fire protection inclpding hydrants properly located .
and installed in accordance with the specifications of the Water Division. Hydrants shall be in place
prior to commencing building construction.
a) The minimum fire flow for this residential development area shall be no less than 1,000 gpm at 20
psi.
2. Streets and roadways shall be as provided in accordance with the fire code, RCO 31 and the Zoning
Ordinance and Land Development Manual. Emergency vehicle access roadways shall be
serviceable prior to and during building construction.
a) Minimum street width shall `not be less than 20 feet clear drivable width. •
b) Streets less than 32 feet in width shall be posted "No Parking" on one side of the street. Streets
less than 26 feet in width shall be posed "No Parking" on both sides of the street.
c) Minimum cul-de-sac diameter shall not be less than 70 feet in diameter
d) Cul-de-sacs less than 96 feet in diameter shall be posted "No Parking".
3. All street, directional and fire lane signs must be in place prior to occupancy of any 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"
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.
c: Donn Richardson — RPU Water (e-mail only)
Mark Baker— Rochester Public Works (e-mail only)
Payne Company
Yaggy Colby Associates (e-mail only)
0
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE: 07-07-04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEF
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING
EM DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #04-23 to be known as Weidner Subdivision by Bruce
PREPARED BY:
eidner. This Plat proposed to subdivide approximately 45,677 square feet into 2 lots.
Theresa Fogarty,
The property is located along the north side of 37th Street NW, west of Hollywood Video
. Planner
and east of Super American. The property is zoned B-4 General Commercial) and there
already exists commercial development on the lots.
June 30, 2004
Planning Department Review. -
See attached staff report dated June 30, 2004, recommending approval with the following conditions:
1. Prior to recording the final plat:
a. The final plat shall be revised as follows: Provide a public utility easement, at a
width determined by Rochester Public Utilities - Water Division, for the existing
water main the runs along the south side of both lots.
b. The owner shall submit a site plan to the Building Safety Department for review of the existing buildings
meeting the provisions of the MN State Building Code. Depending on the location of the buildings,
additional information may be required regarding the fire resistive rating of the walls parallel to the new
property line and openings in those walls.
2. A GIS Impact Fee and E911 Addressing Fee shall be assessed and must be paid prior to recording the final
plat, per the June 23, 2004 memorandum from Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department - GIS Division.
3. Execution of a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement is required prior to recording the Final Plat, addressing the
Owner's obligation for future pedestrian facilities along the frontage of 371h Street NW.
Council Action Needed;
1. H the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a
resolution with findings supporting their decision.
Attachments:
1. Staff report, dated June 30, 2004.
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, July 7, 2004 in the Council
Chambers at the Rochester / Olmsted County Government Center.
6. McGhie & Betts, Inc.
OUNCIL ACTION: Motion ny Second by: to:
M ,4t,£ZA0 N
z
w ; �
�.
� x Icy R w F
o Z
JK Gyp
oaa
—wm uvw m V �tYy@ ` C U L N Z
U a
W
q
3 4ZACAO S
3
• .auc.w x
o<�
Or
!
9
RoCRESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMINT
2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 00
IIl1'1lTL I/ll��
— Ilo..•�A,.��rAf
TO: Rochester Common Council
FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner
DATE: June 30, 2004
RE: Final Plat #04-23 to be known as Weidner Subdivision by Bruce
Weidner. This Plat proposed to subdivide approximately 45,677
square feet into 2 lots. The property is located along the north
side of 37t' Street NW, west of Hollywood Video and east of Super
American. The property is zoned B-4 General Commercial) and
there already exists commercial development on the lots.
Planning Department Review:
Applicant/Owner: Bruce Weidner
5612 Park Place
Edina, MN 55424
Surveyors/Engineers: McGhie & Betts •
1648 Third Avenue SE
Rochester, MN 55901
Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Public Works Department
2. Planning Department —Addressing
3. Rochester Public Utilities — Water Division
4. Rochester Building Safety
Report Attachments: 1. Referral Comments (4 Letters)
2. Copy of Final Plat
3. Location Map
Plat Data:
Zoning: The property is zoned B-4 (General Commercial)
district on the City of Rochester Zoning Map.
Proposed Development: The Plat proposes to subdivide approximately 45,677
square feet into 2 lots.
Roadways: There are no new roadways being dedicated with this
plat.
BUILDING CODE 507/285-8345 • GIS/ADDRESSINGIMAPPING 5o7/285-8232 . HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224
.•_.PLANNING20NING 5071285-8232 • WELLISEPTIC 507/285-8345
FAX 507/287-2275
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
ion..
•
Page 2 ,y
Final Plat #04.23
Weidner Subdivision
June 30,2004
Pedestrian Facilities: Execution of a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement is
required prior to recording the Final Plat addressing
the Owner's obligation for future pedestrian facilities
along the frontage of 37u Street NW.
Wetlands: Minnesota Statutes now require that all developments
be reviewed for the presence of wetlands or hydric
soils. The Soils Survey does not indicate hydric soils
within this Plat.
Drainage: Any additional development or redevelopment of either
parcel may require a Site Plan review and Grading and
Drainage Plan review.
Public Utilities: A public utility easement is required for the existing
water main that runs along the south side of both lots.
Spillover Parking: Parking for the development of each lot will be
determined at the time of Site Plan Development
Review.
Parkland Dedication: The property will not be used for residential
development, therefore there are no parkland
• dedication requirements.
Preliminary Plat.
According to Section 61.221 of the Land Development Manual "A subdivision in which all
proposed lots front on a platted or dedicated street right-of-way and no major changes to the right-
of-way are proposed may be exempted from the requirements of this paragraph (Land
Subdivision Permit).
Planning Staff Review and Recommendation:
Due to related charges and development items related to the subdivision of this property being
previously met and paid, a Development Agreement is not required. The Planning Staff has
reviewed the submitted final plat in accordance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land
Development Manual, Section 61.225 and would recommend approval with the following
condition:
f. Prior to recording the final plat:
a. The final plat shall be revised as follows: Provide a public utility easement, at a
width determined by Rochester Public Utilities — Water Division, for the existing
water main the runs along the south side of both lots.
b. The owner shall submit a site plan to the Building Safety Department for review
of the existing buildings meeting the provisions of the MN State Building Code.
Depending on the location of the buildings, additional information may be
• required regarding the fire resistive rating of the walls parallel to the new
property line and openings In those walls.
le
qqq Page 3
` Final Plat #04-23
Y Weidner Subdivision
June 30, 2004
2. A GIS Impact Fee and E911 Addressing Fee shall be assessed and must be paid •
prior to recording the final plat, per the June 23, 2004 memorandum from
Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department - G1S Division.
3. Execution of a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement is required prior to recording the
Final Plat, addressing the Owner's obligation for future pedestrian facilities along
the frontage of 37 h Street NW.
•
0
•
ROCHESTER
M;a
TO: Consolidated Planning Department
2122 Campus Drive SE
Rochester, MN 55904
FROM: Mark E. Baker
DATE: 6/27/04
11
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 application for Final Plat #04-23 for the
proposed Weidner Subdivision. The following are Public Works comments on this request:
1. Proposed Lots 1 & 2 both have existing development. Any additional development
or redevelopment of either parcel may review Site Plan review and Grading &
Drainage Plan review.
2. Execution of a Pedestrian Facilities Agreement is required prior to recording the
Final Plat to address the Owner's obligation for future pedestrian facilities along the
frontage of 37th St NW.
C:\Documents and Settings\plajgam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK3\FP04-23 Weidner Subdivision.doc
-110XID '"A
Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department
GIS/Addressing Division
2122 Campus Drive SE
Rochester, MN 55904-4744
Phone: (507) 285-8232
Fax: (507) 287-2275
FINAL PLAT REFERRAL RESPONSE
DATE: June 23, 2004
TO: Jennifer Gamess
FROM: Randy Growden
GIS/Addressing Staff
Rochester -Olmsted County
Planning Department
CC: Pam Hameister, Wendy Von Wald; McGhie and Betts
Inc.
RE: WEIDNER SUBDIVISION
UPON REVIEW OF THIS PLAT THE FOLLOWING FEES ARE REQUIRED TO BE
PAID BEFORE THE PLAT IS RECORDED. THIS APPLIES TO ALL PLATS
ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2004.
.E911 ADDRESSING FEE: $ .00 ( LOTS/ADDRESSES)
GIS IMPACT FEE: $320.00 (2 LOTS/OUTLOTS)
Notes: 1. Additional E911 Addressing fees may be required upon Site Plan review.
2. Final Plats must be legally recorded before request for address Applications are
A review of the final plat has turned up the following ADDRESS or ROADWAY related issues:
NOTE: E911 ADDRESSING FEES ARE NOT REQUIRED FOR THIS PLAT DUE TO
PRE EXISTING ADDRESSING.
•
•
0
•
a !
i r
we pAd
ge, we de<iver
June 22, 2004
Rochester -Olmsted
CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2122 Campus Drive SE
Rochester, MN 55904-7996
REFERENCE: Final Plat #04-23 by Bruce Weidner to be known as Weidner Subdivision.
Dear Ms. Gamess:
Our review of the referenced final plat is complete and our comments follow:
1. A public utility easement is required for the existing water main that runs along the south
side of both lots.
Please contact us at 507-280-1500 if you have questions.
Very truly y-(ou!r��s,����%���
• �9'Wl ��wbw�c�
Donn Richardson
Water
C: Doug Rovang, RPU
Mike Engle, RPU
Mark Baker, City Public Works
Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention
Bruce Weidner
• McGhie & Betts, Inc.
Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2913
telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542
Memo
To: Jennifer Gamess
From: Ron Boose r� j
Date: June 25, 2004
Subject: Final Plat #04-23, Weidner subdivision
CC: Bruce Weidner
McGhie & Betts, Inc.
The proposed subdivision indicates that the newly created lots are already
developed. The Minnesota State Building Code. contains numerous
provisions regulating the distance buildings may be placed from a property
line. There are also several variables involved in establishing that distance •
such as the fire resistive rating of the walls parallel to the property line,
openings in those walls, and the occupancy classification of the building. An
accurate site plan indicating the position of all existing buildings will be
necessary to determine if this subdivision will create a violation of the State
Building Code. Depending upon the location of the buildings, further
information may be required regarding the fire resistive rating of the walls
parallel to the new property line and openings in those walls.
The site plan should be submitted to either Randy Johnson or Brad Finseth
in the Building Safety Department for review.
0
r
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
i
MEETING
DATE: 07-07-04
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
ITEMAIC.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING
6.
M DESCRIPTION: Utility Vacation Petition #04-09, 19 Street Business Park West,
PREPARED BY:
C to vacate a part of the utility easement located on the north side of Lot 1,
Theresa Fogarty,
Block 1, 19`hStreet Business Park. The property is located along the south side of
Planner
19`h Street NW, east of West Circle Drive and west of 32nd Avenue NW.
June 30, 2004
Planning Department Recommendation:
See attached staff report dated June 30, 2004.
Staff is recommending approval of the vacation request, as submitted.
Council Action Needed:
1. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney
to prepare a resolution to approve a portion of the vacation petition as recommended by
staff.
Attachments:
1. Staff Report dated June 30, 2004.
Distribution:
1. City Administrator
2. City Clerk
3. City Attorney: Copy of legal description is attached
4. Planning Department File
S. Applicant: This item will be considered by the Council sometime after 7:00 p.m. on WEDNESDAY,
July 7, 2004 in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE.]
6. GGG Engineering61Uti"r
NCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by. to:
I .-•�...y u�yyu u...L,y uWU 14WU L
I
I •
I
I
6L'tiL L, .29,10.00S
6
I aaw I 40" / m / .ow9 C 0
pnm I .uyi / o / 6zw V- .
1 1 <j / V<li =Wyk f
W I OWV I pWZ <j 6+
O
J 7J
Z W W I
W Q _ _ _ _ _
xi NC.±
W > —I�<< ter.<a< c Y.
N < J W
a >00a3 W
N 0.005 — — — — a_ o 'o J— y ,o0•ob—HLf10S— — LO
N .
p p LB'LL
" N. d d a .
• l0'09. d }y
M,9£,94.005 o F N
00 ^„' z co-00
V) I I CID
LJ
I 6
I F
c z
-47
S
CV dd 0
3 I Y F
pp-
zN
•n n
I
I .J do ti o0
I
w E- a
I a z r
$m a^ �.
�e u J
I o ooror HLaoH� •
•sue
,86'49 ,t9•BOL
,08'*Ll M 0£,6Z.00S rrgT TV T.TITn
i
TO:
FROM:
ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 • Rochester, MN 55904-4744
OONTV OF
Rochester City Council
www. olmstedcounty. com/plann in g
Theresa Fogarty, Planner
June 30, 2004
,
Ii�iii�►O��i�►t
hpfl+�
I -
RE: Utility Vacation Petition #04-09,19d' Street Business Park West, LLC to
vacate a part of the utility easement located on the north side of Lot 1,
Block 1,19thStreet Business Park. The property is located along the south
side of 19th Street NW, east of West Circle Drive and west of 32nd Avenue
NW.
Planning Department Review:
Petitioner(s): 19th Street Business Park West, LLC
3131 East River Road NE
Rochester, MN 65906
Architect/ Engineer:
GGG, Inc.
14070 Hwy 52 East
Chatfield, MN 55923
Reason to Vacate:
This easement was for a hydrant that has been
moved to the east. A new easement has been
recorded (Document #A-1002615) for the new location
of the hydrant. The new recorded easement is
located east of the 30' egress/ingress easement for
19th Street NW.
Referral Comments:
No objections received from referral agencies.
Report Attachments:
1. Vacation Site Map
2. Location Map
Staff Recommendation:
Upon review of this request and the referral agencies having no objections, staff
recommends approval of vacating the 27' wide public utility easement located on the north
side of Lot 1, Block 1, 19th Street Business Park.
BUILDING CODE 507/285-8345 • GIS/ADDRESSING/MAPPING 507/285-8232 • HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224
PLANNINWONING 507/285-8232 • WELL/SEPTIC 507/285.8345
FAX 507/287-2275
...wN. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
r]
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
(100,i
MEETING
DATE: 07-07-04
16:
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
M NO.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING
M DESCRIPTION: Annexation Petition #04-10 by Roger Carlsen to annex approximately
FPREPARI—EDBY:
74 acres of land located along the north side of 19thStreet NW and east of 50th Avenue
eresa Fogarty,
NW. The property is located in a part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29 Cascade
Planner
Township.
June 28, 2004
City Planning and Zoning Commisslon Recommendation:
The City Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this annexation request on June 23, 2004. The Commission found
that this property is adjacent to the city limits and can be served by city services upon completion of the City of Rochester
utility project #M1-07, J9751. The City Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this annexation
request on June 23, 2004 as a Consent Agenda Item.
Planning Department Recommendation:
See attached staff report, dated June 14, 2004.
Minnesota Statutes now specify that the property taxes payable in the year an annexation is effective shall be paid to the
Township. For the five years following the annexation, the City must make a cash payment to the Township equaling 90%,
70%, 50%, 30% and 10% of the Townships share of the taxes in the year the property was annexed. The Township Taxes
on this property is $47.39.
kk � i '9-' S 5£+l Rkk �h .. } W^ FNt3i .€` fv/ # Y j {Ps} Y - tl i 32ke' Y—' 2 Y 'n I✓. L... fi,
tt!'G'%rk 5i AR �iPA'X'4ss � � �- %fi � s.A �4"Sr ib'V k .I S � tii_ Y BAN•"+ '�" i ryy!ff }£. € W.� Y5 � ''� 'V St i
/�/+ I/� ��Jfp '3'� RCkY q i 0.YeT ;N WIL {'gyp: k{T '5k 3• R }'L i N.S��
S kfl
g f
� -�'�!� i,� �y :ixia'� k.",�•� �.,
iq
#'��,-)
�,. 2,x' s''�'s+"*,Kz.s's.�lt r�'�:y� '"`FL' �r rf� xi' } #'� :+• ;t
L a 3 ��y +2i"X'� � � t'Yn!}y
; o louul'n` j"th hearin tl tGte CotTnCII ttr ''
,glib f WIS�es roceetltas �etl oped,atshotlld TTo
t ns# c tee# a � c Pre ar�an or t ce�#4 ti adnp#ed am#I a�1111] edAo the
�NlN=
„,partinelttatl'AduIstratianflllnlclpax8r� dry djtstmesvA y'aun
'. 1 1} .:e f +is"L�YA..' JE'ix'ii. � N' �i;"�n'N+a"`yt.h✓'"YY^�i...�'•S�iF�����:i}i'...SL �§ �.� y} e"' �F } Vi4 �:. ?Kf Vi r i
Attachments
1. Staff report, dated June 14, 2004.
Distribution:
1. City Administrator
2. City Clerk
3. City Attorney. Legal Description Attached
4. City Finance Director: Tax Information Attached
5. Planning Department File
6. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, July 7, 2004 in the Council Chambers at
the Rochester / Olmsted County Government Center.
7. McGhie & Betts, Inc.
NCILACTION: Motion by.- Second by: to:
ANNEXATION EXHIBIT
DESCRIPTION: SEE ATTACHED
G CITY LIMITS
E. 50'
1274.82
;.w X, P*'
.4
•
I
i SE 1 NW 1/, I •
AREA TO BE NINEJ® N
;S54A REB� ST INW
697.41 Bg J
SE COR NB
SEC. ]5-107-14 �
I�
Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad I z
_
h
x
x
z77 W
7:77
T
REVISED 105120104
SCALE 1 ` = Boo'
FOR
WEST 19 DEVELOPMENT, LLC
B.Ur4
w °° °"•'
SCALES
1• = 800'
DRAWN BY:
MMM
4410 19TH STREET N.W.
`"°'�o=.�;'u�
DAT£
O5/19/Oa
ROCHESTER,MN
559a1ACCr.
NO. 1112H /2653
Codd No2653ANNE2
FR£NO.r BK. PG.
11
ROCtIESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 • Rochester, MN 55904-4744
COUNTY OF www.almstedcounty.com/planning
TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner
DATE: June 14, 2004
RE: Annexation Petition #04-1.0 by Roger Carlsen to annex approximately
16.74 acres of land located along the north side of 19th Street NW and east
of 50th Avenue NW. The property is located in apart of the Northwest
Quarter of Section 29 Cascade Township.
Planning Department Review:
ApplicantslOwners:
Roger Carlson
4410 NW 19' Street
Rochester, MN 55901
ArchitectlEngineer:
McGhie & Betts, Inc.
1648 Third Avenue SE
•
Rochester, MN 55904
Existing Land Use:
This property is currently undeveloped land.
Existing Zoning:
The property is zoned A-4 (Agricultural Urban Expansion)
District on the Olmsted County zoning map.
Future Zoning:
Upon annexation, the property will be zoned R-1 (Mixed Single
Family Residential) district on the Rochester Zoning Map.
Land Use Plan:
This property is designated for "low density residential" uses
on the Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan.
Adjacency to the Municipal
The property is adjacent to the city limits along its
Limits:
northeastern boundary.
Sewer & Water: This area is within the Northwest High Level System Area,
which will be made available at the southeast corner of this
property with the completion of the City of Rochester utility
project #M1-07, J9751. It is anticipated that the water main
will be extended from that location, west to 50u' Avenue NW
with the future extension of le Street NW.
Utilities: Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 414.033 (subd. 13), a
municipality must notify a petitioner that the cost of electric
utility service may change if the land is annexed to the
municipality. A notice has been provided to the applicant.
BUILDING CODE 507/285-8345 - GISIADDRESSINGWAPPING 5071285-8232 • HOUSING/HRA 5071285-8224
PLANNING/ZONING 507/285-8232 • WELL/SEPTIC 507/285-8345
FAX 507/287-2275
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
Page 2 ;
Annexation #04-10 Roger Carlson
June 14, 2004
Townboard Review: Minnesota State Statutes require that the Townboard
members receive a written notice, by certified mail, 30 days
prior to the public hearing. The City Council will hold a public
hearing on this item on July 7, 2004. The City Clerk has sent
the certfied 30 day notice.
Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Public Utilities - Water Division
Report Attachments:
Staff Recommendation:
1. Annexation / Location Map
2. Referral Comments (1 letter)
This property is adjacent to the City limits and can be served by city services upon completion of the City of
Rochester utility project #M1-07, J9751. The Planning staff recommends that the City proceed to adopt an
ordinance annexing the property according to Minnesota Statutes 414.033, Subdivision 2(3).
•
•
E
roe pCedge, we deliver
June 8, 2004
Rochester -Olmsted
CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2122 Campus Drive SE
Rochester, MN 55904-7996
REFERENCE: Annexation Petition #04-10 by Roger Carlsen to annex 16.74 acres of land located
along the north side of 19"' St. NW and east of 50h Ave. NW.
Dear Ms. Gamess:
Our review of the referenced petition is complete and our comments follow:
1. This area is within the Northwest High Level Water System Area, which will be made available at
the southeast comer of this property with the completion of the City of Rochester utility project
#Ml-07, 19751. It is anticipated that the water main will be extended from that location, west to 50th
Ave NW with the future extension of 190'Street NW.
Please contact us at 507-280-1500 if you have questions.
• Very truly yours,
06-JA R
Donn Richardson
Water
i
ti
C: Doug Rovang, RPU
Mike Engle, RPU
Mark Baker, City Public Works
Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention
Roger Carlsen
Mike Coats
• McGhie & Betts, Inc.
Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813
telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
i
DATE: 07-07-04
.aacwuh x, wrv: URIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO.
HEARINGS CITY ADMINISTRATION L'_
Kmend the 2004 Action Plan for the City of Rochester's Community I Theresa Fogarty,
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program CDBG Administrator
June 30, 2004
The City of Rochester allocated, to the Olmsted County HRA, $44,300 of 2004 CDBG funding to
assist with the cost of improvements for properties known as the Flood Properties.
Due to a reduction of federal funding by the Department of Housing and Urban Development to the
Olmsted County HRA in the Section 8 Assistance Program, and the possibility of 48 households
losing their Section 8 Assistance, the Olmsted County HRA is requesting to reallocate up to $44,300
of the 2004 CDBG Flood Home Activity funding into an activity assisting a portion of the 48
households on the Section 8 Assistance Program that will be affected by the federal fund cuts..
Staff is recommending that the City of Rochester reallocate up to $44,300 of the Olmsted County
HRA Flood Homes Activity as follows:
2004 Olmsted County HRA Section 8 Program. The Olmsted County HRA proposes to use
up to $44,300 of CDBG funding to provide emergency rental housing payments in the form
of a grant to households in the position of losing their Section 8 Assistance due to the
reduction of federal funding by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the
Section 8 Program administered by the Olmsted County HRA. Emergency rental housing
payments for each household may not exceed a period of three months. All households
receiving CDBG assistance must reside within the City of Rochester, MN.
Attachments:
1. Memorandum from Rochester -Olmsted PI a ning
Distribution:
1. City Administrator
2. City Clerk
3. CDBG File
/iP
Department, dated June 17, 2004.
ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to:
ROCHESTER — OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2122 CAMPUS DRIVE SE, SUITE 100, ROCHESTER, MN, 55904-4744 •
PH: (507) 285-8232 FAX: (507) 287-2275
To: Mayor and Common Council
From: Phil Wheeler, AICP, Planning Director
Gary Lueders, Housing Division Supervisor
Date: June 17, 2004
Re: Funding to Avoid Termination of Section 8 Assistance to 48 Households
Due to changes in HUD practice with regard to administrative costs and rent assistance
levels, the Olmsted County Housing and Redevelopment Authority is compelled to
eliminate housing assistance payments to 48 households now receiving assistance. The
changes were instituted by HUD in April and were made retroactive to January 1. The
effect is to reduce HUD funding for rent assistance and associated administrative costs
by $170,000 in 2004. While the changes remain in effect for 2005, the normal attrition in
Section 8 units will enable us to restore housing assistance to 48 households (possibly
the same households) in January.
In response to this challenge, the OCHRA has notified the 48 tenants, their landlords,
and the other agencies that provide support services that the tenants will lose Section 8
assistance effective August 1, 2004. We needed to make that notification by June 1 in
order to limit the number of tenants affected.
After discussing several options, the OCHRA decided to proceed with a last in, first out" •
process for identifying the tenants who would be affected. The characteristics of the 48
households who will be affected is shown in the table below.
Profile of the Households Facing Cuts in Section 8 Housing Assistance
Attribute
Count
Percentage
Total number of household residents
170
100%
Age distribution:
Under 5
51
30%
6-10
21
12%
11-17
28
17%
Adults 18-30
28
16%
31-60
37
22%
61+
5
3%
Total households
48
100%
with children present
39
81%
with only one adult
33
69%
with female household head
37
79%
with disabled household head
12
26%
with surname indicating limited English proficiency
27
57%
with earned income (average earned income = $11,578)
16
33%
With income from benefits (average = $7,955)
42
88%
with income (average = $10,820, per capita = $3,055")
48
100%
According to the 2000 US Census, Olmsted County per capita income in 1999 was $24,939 and
median household income was $51,316.
•
[IF7jWilli t
• There is no doubt that the loss of housing assistance would have a devastating impact
on these households. In an effort to avoid that impact, the County Board has authorized
us to seek alternative funding sources to cover the shortfall and has allocated $34,000
(equivalent to one of the five months) for this purpose from its contingency fund. The
OCHRA has also re -allocated $34,000 of mortgage assistance funds, equivalent to a
second month. Given the long history of City of Rochester support for affordable
housing, we are hopeful that the City can also allocate $34,000, equivalent to a third
month. We will seek other funding for the remaining 40% of the shortfall.
Rochester has established two important goals through its comprehensive plans:
providing for affordable housing and integrating affordable housing in the community.
Section 8 assistance is particularly effective in meeting these goals, because it locates
low income tenants in existing privately owned (usually market rate) rental housing.
While Section 8 assistance does not directly increase the supply of rental housing, it
does make rental housing units affordable to the families it serves. By using existing
units, it effectively integrates low income tenants throughout the community. Especially
in periods of relatively high vacancy rates, Section 8 assistance is a reasonable and
effective way to meet affordable housing needs.
If the Council supports this initiative, the earlier a commitment can be made the better.
Each day of uncertainty increases the likelihood that.some of the households will be
required to move. If the Council supports the funding but is unable to allocate funding
from its general revenues, we would suggest reallocating CDBG funds from the 2004
• allocation for improvements to the flood homes. (This will delay needed improvements,
but the CHIP reorganization now going on will result in rent revenues becoming available
for flood home improvements.) Reallocating CDBG funds requires a public hearing by
the Council.
•
Page 2 of 2
I
14
.4 �OZ5
•
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
AGENUA stc I IUN: - ORIGINATING 1
dook REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS I Administration
DESCRIPTION: ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TRAFFIC
DISTRICT PROGRAM AND POLICIES
MEETING
DATE: 7/
S KVENVOLD
qS.
On June 14, 2004, the City Council, meeting as a Committee of the Whole, considered the
recommendations presented by the Transportation Funding Task Force. The Council considered the
following policy questions relating to this matter and made the following recommendations for official
adoption:
1: The City should consider the usage of up to 50% of the City's Municipal State Aid funds for
usage on TID and interchange TID projects.
2. Any available federal funds or other non -City public funds would first be used to reduce the
public expenses associated with a TID or interchange TID project.
3. The cost share for a TID project should be 75% developer funding, 25% public funding.
4. The City will require a funding commitment from 60% of the benefited property owners of a TID
project prior to awarding a contract to accomplish the work.
5. The method for allocating costs of a TID project, whether it be based upon gross area, net
• area, trip generation or some combination of each, will be determined individually for each TID.
6. Properties in the area of an interchange project will be assessed the equivalent cost of a
signalized expressway intersection, with the amount of the assessment being determined by
the proximity to the interchange.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Request a motion adopting the proposed resolutions establishing the Traffic Improvement District
program and establisbhIrig the policy on the use of contribution agreements to,improve substandard
streets. � -71, y/o y�I...
ACTION: Motion by. Second by. t.;
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING
TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the United States faces a significant problem in maintaining existing public
infrastructure (streets, roads, highways, bridges, pedestrian walkways, bike paths). In
September, 2003, the American Society of Civil Engineers estimated that $1.6 trillion dollars
were needed nationwide over a five-year time period to bring public infrastructure up to an
acceptable state of repair and maintenance. This figure had increased by $300 billion since
2001 because of large growth and increased development; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Rochester also faces a significant problem in maintaining its
existing public infrastructure. The City has over 300 miles of local streets for which it is
responsible for maintenance and repair. This network of local streets has been growing by eight
to ten miles per year during the past five years. Currently, the City faces a backlog of unfunded
street maintenance needs totaling about $26,500,000. The City's Public Works Director
estimates that $210,000,000 will be needed to maintain the existing street system and the new
streets added by new development over the next 20 years; and,
WHEREAS, the City's Public Works Director projects that over the next 40 years, there •
could be over $175,000,000 (or approximately 80 miles) in arterial and collector road
construction and reconstruction needed to support new growth; and,
WHEREAS, the City's infrastructure deficit is compounded by new development, its
impact upon adjacent public streets and the City's future financial and engineering plans to
improve the capacity of the adjacent public streets. The Minnesota Court of Appeals has
recognized the fact that subdivision development places a great burden on municipal services
including city streets. Middlemist v City of Plymouth, 387 N.W.2d 190, 193 (Minn. Ct. App.
1986). The City does not have the financial resources to upgrade or improve the available public
infrastructure for each and ever new development proposed to be located somewhere within the
City's boundaries; and,
WHEREAS, the lack of adequate street and road facilities to handle the vehicular traffic
generated by new development results in enormous societal costs in the form of environmental
Pollution, energy consumption, increased energy costs, decreased economic productivity and a
general decline in a citizen's quality of life as a person spends more and more time trying to get
from here to there. In addition, emergency services suffer as traffic congestion and accessibility
problems reduce response times; and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota law addressing a city's ability to regulate development and
subdivision activities is found in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462; and,
A
a?
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. 1a, states that "[t]o protect and
�aromote the public health, safety, and general welfare, to provide for the orderly, economic, and
fe development of land, ... and to facilitate adequate provision for transportation, water,
sewage, storm drainage ... and other public services and facilities, a municipality may by
ordinance adopt subdivision regulations establishing standards, requirements, and procedures
for the review and approval or disapproval of subdivisions;" and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. 2a, states that "[t]he standards
and requirements in the regulations may address without limitation: the size, location, grading,
and improvement of lots, structures, public areas, streets, roads, trails, walkways, curbs and
gutters, water supply, storm drainage, lighting, sewers, electricity, gas, and other utilities; ... and
the protection and conservation of flood plains, shore lands, soils, water, vegetation, energy, air
quality, and geologic and ecologic features;" and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. 2a states that "[t]he regulations
may permit the municipality to condition its approval on the cdnstruction and installation of'
sewers, streets, electric, gas, drainage, and water facilities, and similar utilities and
improvements;" and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. 2a states that "[t]he regulations
may permit the municipality to condition its approval on compliance with other requirements
reasonably related to the provisions of the regulations and to execute development contracts
embodying the terms and conditions of approval;" and,
• WHEREAS, in response to and as authorized by the above -cited provisions of the
Minnesota Statutes, the City of Rochester has adopted subdivision regulations. They can be
found in Chapters 60-65 of the Rochester Code of Ordinances (commonly referred to as the
"Land Development Manual'); and,
WHEREAS, to facilitate the adequate provision of public facilities and services as
authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. la, the City adopted adequate public
facilities standards as part of its adoption of the City's subdivision regulations. These standards
are found in Sections 64.130 — 64.139 of the Rochester Code of Ordinances (R.C.O.). The City
adopted these standards in May, 1999. A copy of these standards is attached, identified as
Exhibit #A and incorporated herein; and,
WHEREAS, adequate public facilities standards have been recognized as one of the
most effective forms of growth management (Gary Pivo, Growth Management Planning &
Research Clearinahouse Local Government Planning Tools, (Aug. 1992)). Adequate public
facilities standards have been judicially approved in cases across the nation and in Minnesota
(Matter of Golden v. Planning Board of Town of Ramapo, 30 N.Y.2d 359, 334 N.Y.S.2d 138,
285 N.E.2d 291, app. dismissed, 409 U.S. 1003 (1972); Woodbury Place Partners v. Town of
Woodbury, 492 N.W.2d 258 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 2929 (1993);
Freundshuh v. City of Blaine, 385 N.W.2d 6 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986); Larsen v. County of
Washington, 387 N.W.2d 902 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986); Ganpay v. Town of Hanover, 351 A.2d
0
64 (N.H. 1976); White, S. Mark. Ade uate Public Facilities Ordinances and Trans ortation •
Management (American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service Report No. 465,
1996); and,
WHEREAS, the purpose of Adequate Public Facilities standards is:
1 • To economize on the costs of municipal facilities and services to carefully
phase residential development with efficient provision of public
improvements;
2. To establish and maintain municipal control over the eventual character
Of development;
3. To establish and maintain a desirable degree of balance among the
various uses of the land; and
4• To establish and maintain essential quality of community services and
facilities; and,
WHEREAS, by these adequate public facilities standards, the City seeks to regulate the
timing and sequencing of development so that the provision of adequate public facilities required
to accommodate the development growth occurs concurrently with the development growth. Put
another way, these adequate public facilities standards require development be timed and
sequenced in a manner consistent with the capacity of public facilities. The City's goal is to
insure that public facilities are capable of supporting and servicing the proposed development's •
physical area and designated intensity; and,
WHEREAS, in addition to the adequate public facilities standards listed in R.C.O. §§
64.130 — 64.139, the City's subdivision regulations also include adequate public facilities
standards within the criteria provided for the City review of particular subdivision processes.
Thus, a general development plan cannot be approved unless on and off -site public facilities are
adequate, or will be adequate if the development is phased in, to serve the properties under
consideration (see R.C.O. §61.215(5)). And, a preliminary plat (land subdivision) cannot be
approved unless the proposed land subdivision takes into account the City's six -year Long -
Range Capital Improvements Program (see R.C.O. §61.225(F)); and,
WHEREAS, the City's subdivision regulations allow the City to impose a condition on its
approval of a proposed development where the condition is needed to insure compliance with
the subdivision regulations (see R.C.O. §61.226); and,
WHEREAS, since the May, 1999, implementation of the City's adequate public facilities
standards as part of the City's subdivision regulations, there have been developments submitted
to the City for approval where the public facilities were inadequate. In these cases, one of three
consequences occurred in the processing of the development applications; and,
WHEREAS
consequence #1 of the existence of inadequate public facilities is city
approval of the p o�po ed development, but with a very restrictive condition attached to the City's
•
•approval. That condition restricts all development until such time as the Common Council
eternvines there are adequate public facilities to accommodate the proposed development; and,
WHEREAS, one example of consequence #1 is the following condition of approval placed
upon the General Development Plan #180 (Prairie Crossing):
Because on and off site public facilities are currently inadequate to handle
the proposed development, the development must be phased -in in a
ments
manner consistent with the City's planned infrastructure improve.
Specifically, there are no plans for sanitary sewer to serve the property
within the first three years of the City's current six -year Capital Improvement
Program. Further, no other arrangements have been made to ensure that
adequate utilities will not be available concurrent with the proposed
development. Additionally, there are no plans to reconstruct 65°i Street
N•W., or Bendel Road to handle the additional traffic that this development
will generate. As such, no development will occur and no further
development permit will be issued until the Council determines public
facilities are adequate to accommodate this development; and,
WHEREAS, consequence #2 of the existence of inadequate public facilities is the City
approval of the proposed development, but with a condition restricting the amount and extent of
lopment to coincide with the level of adequate public facilities that currently exists or may
r in the future; and,
WHEREAS, one example of consequence #2 is the following condition of approval placed
upon General Development Plan #142 (Weatherstone):
The development shall be phased so that 50'h N.W., north of 55°i Street
N-W., does not exceed approximately 3,000 average daily trips before it is
upgraded; and,
WHEREAS, consequence #3 of the existence of inadequate public facilities is the
execution of development contracts (commonly referred to as development agreements) as
specifically authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. 2a. By these
development agreements, the developer and the City voluntarily agree as to how much each
entity should pay to bring the appropriate public facilities up to a level adequate to accommodate
the proposed development; and,
WHEREAS, the decision to enter into development agreements is completely voluntary
and optional on each developer's part. Some developers have been willing to live with the
adequate public facilities' conditions of approval found in consequences #1 and #2. Other
developers, however, have chosen to help make inadequate public facilities adequate so as tc
allow their proposed developments proceed as scheduled. To keep their developments on
0
schedule, some developers have decided to follow consequence #3; and, •
WHEREAS, recently, there have been developers who have expressed an interest in
development agreements for their proposed developments (consequence #3), but have also
expressed concern about the amount of their financial contributions towards the improvement of
the public facilities. They have indicated an interest in knowing in advance the scope and extent
of the current public facilities, the scope and extent of improvements needed to those public
facilities in order to accommodate future development and the costs associated with making
public facilities adequate; and,
WHEREAS, in response to the developers' call for more information on adequate public
facilities and the costs that might be associated with development agreements, the City of
Rochester Common Council wishes to establish Transportation Improvement Districts ("TID") in
areas of the City where new development is likely to occur. The purpose of a TID is to designate
a geographic area of the City with existing substandard streets that would need to be improved
or replaced if new development were to occur within that area. For each TID, there would be
notice and information to a developer as to the costs that are at stake and the manner in which
the City believes the costs should be divided between the City and the developer should the
developer voluntarily enter into a development agreement for that development. The TID seeks
to equitably distribute the transportation improvement costs created by new development
between those property owners who benefit from the transportation improvements and the City;
and,
WHEREAS, the recently=concluded Transportation Funding Task Force, which met to •
discuss the City's growth -related transportation funding needs, supports the City's creation of a
TID. Among the Task Force's 28 recommendations to the Common Council was a
recommendation to create a TID as a tool to fund a portion of the growth in the City's street
system attributable to new development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of
Rochester that the City establish the TID program as follows:
1. For purposes of this resolution, the term "development" means any man-made
change to improved or unimproved real estate including a change in use or the
creation of a subdivision. The term "developer" means any person engaging in
any development activity for which city approval is sought.
2. By an additional resolution, the Council may establish a TID for any geographic
area of the City experiencing or anticipating new growth and substandard streets.
The Council's determination of those areas experiencing or anticipating new
growth will be based upon its review of the City's urban service boundaries and all
other relevant factors that might reveal development trends over the next 40 to 50
years. The TID will be established after reviewing the growth areas containing
substandard streets, the transportation system needs of the area based upon its
land use plan and zoning classifications, and the amount of each area's vacant •
•
•
0
developable acreage.
3. In creating a TID, the Council will consider the following factors:
A. The transportation system improvements necessitated by current or
anticipated development in a particular geographic area of the City.
B. The particular geographic area of the City that would be served by the TID
improvements.
C. The total costs for the necessary transportation improvements.
D. The amount of the costs of the necessary transportation improvements to
serve a particular geographic area that should be allocated to the
development and to the City.
E. The method of cost allocation that should be used to establish a
proportional and equitable distribution of the transportation improvement
project costs.
4. The additional resolution will establish a cost allocation for each TID. The cost
allocation will be calculated as 75% of the costs of all the transportation projects
within the TID. These costs will include, but will not be limited to, the costs of
design and construction engineering services, acquisition of right-of-way and
construction. The cost allocation will be made up of two cost components.
A. A Substandard Street Reconstruction Cost ("SSRC"); and,
B. A Substandard Street Capacity Cost ("SSCC").
The above two items will be added together based on the proposed street section
cost for the transportation improvements needed in the TO area to establish the
TID cost allocation.
5. An additional resolution will establish a cost allocation for each Interchange TID.
The Interchange TID cost allocation will be calculated as a portion of the cost of
the interchange that would equal the cost of a signalized expressway intersection
that would be necessary to serve properties in the district. The City will assume
the balance of the interchange project cost. Distance/proximity increments may be
used to apportion the Interchange TO cost allocation with property closer to the
interchange assuming a greater amount of the cost allocation. These costs will
include, but will not be limited to, the costs of design and construction engineering
services, acquisition of right-of-way and construction. The Interchange TO will be
made up of two cost components:
col
\O0
A. A Substandard Street Reconstruction Cost ("SSRC"); and, •
B. A Substandard Street Capacity Cost ("SSCC").
The above two items will be added together based on the proposed street section
cost for the transportation improvements needed in the TO area to establish the
TO cost allocation.
6. A. When the proposed TO serves an area zoned for low density residential
uses, the SSRC and the SSCC are divided by the gross or net developable
acres in the TO area. The result is a cost per acre that is the basis for the
TO substandard street reconstruction and capacity cost allocation.
B. When the proposed TO serves an area not zoned for low density
residential uses, the SSRC and the SSCC are calculated differently. The
SSRC is divided by the gross or net developable acres in the TO area. The
SSCC is divided by the gross vehicle trips or the p.m. peak hour vehicle
trips generated from the acres in the TID area. The result is a SSRC per
acres and a SSCC per trip that is the basis for the TO substandard street
reconstruction and capacity cost allocation.
C. The City Council may, from time to time, elect to modify the basis for the
TID cost allocation from net or gross developable acres to trips or vice versa •
if the Council determines that the alternative basis for the TO cost
allocation represents a more proportional or equitable distribution of costs.
7. A. For each TO area, 50% of the SSRC for the reconstruction of a roadway up
to a 40-foot wide rural section street or the equivalent 36-foot wide urban
street will be allocated to the City. Fifty percent of the SSRC equal to 50%
of the cost of reconstructing a 40-foot wide rural section street or its
equivalent urban section will be allocated to the developer.
B. For each TO area, none of the SSCC for the construction of additional
roadway and intersection capacity will be allocated to the City. The SSCC
equal to 100% of the cost to construct additional roadway capacity up to a
maximum 52-foot roadway width will be allocated to the developer.
Additionally, the SSCC equal to 100% of the cost to construct additional
intersection capacity regardless of the intersection width will be allocated to
the developer.
8. The applicable development agreement will provide the details as to when these
cost allocations are assumed by each party. The time for payment set forth in the
development agreement is related to the timing of the impacts of construction of
the development. In all cases the cost allocations must be assumed within three
to five years of the development agreement's execution. •
lb)
9. Revenue collected within a specific TID must be spent only within that TID.
Revenue collected in excess of that ultimately needed in the respective TID must
be refunded to the property owners in the TID at the time the TID is dissolved (It is
the City's understanding that cost allocations will ultimately be bome by individual
property owners).
10. The City may, from time to time, secure new or one-time revenue such as federal
transportation funds or local option sales taxes for certain transportation projects
within any particular TID or Interchange TID. The City will use these new revenues
to reduce the City's cost allocation of that TID or Interchange TID. If after reducing
the City's cost allocation to zero, the City will apply any remaining revenue to
reduce the TID or Interchange TID cost allocations. In those cases where the
State or County contributes to the funding of certain projects within any particular
TID or Interchange TID, the City will use these State and County funds to reduce'
the overall project cost for that TID or Interchange TID project before calculating
the TID or Interchange TID cost allocation.
11. The City Council may from time to time elect to use Municipal State Aid System
(MSAS) funds for TID or Interchange TID projects. In any given fiscal year the
Council's use of WAS funds for TID or Interchange TID project(s) shall be limited
to not more than 50% of that year's available MSAS construction account
• allocation. In no case shall an individual TID or Interchange TID project be funded
with more than 50% MSAS funds.
12. Prior to the award of a contract to construct a proposed TID or Interchange TID
improvement, and by way of a contribution agreement executed by benefiting
property owners, the City may require an initial, upfront commitment of at least
60% of the cost of a particular transportation project in a TID or Interchange TID.
13. The City Council may, from time to time, review and revise by resolution the TID
cost allocation for any specific TID if the Council determines that prior TID cost
allocation established by the City are inadequate to fund the remaining projects
within the specific TID. Revised TID cost allocations will not apply to fully executed
development agreements that address TID cost allocation.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City will not involuntarily impose any of the
charges, fees, costs or costs allocations described in the TID program. Instead, any reference
to or mention of any charge, fee, cost or costs allocation occurs solely for the use by potential
developers and City staff in responding to proposed developments involving inadequate public
facilities that might be made adequate by way of voluntary development agreements.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this policy becomes effective as of July 8, 2004.
0
st
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
APPROVED THIS DAY OF
(Seal of the City of
Rochester, Minnesota)
Res20001Re501UTID
DAY OF
2004.
PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL
MAYOR OF SAID CITY
0.
0
•
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING POLICY ON
USE OF CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENTS TO IMPROVE SUBSTANDARD STREETS
WHEREAS, the United States faces a significant problem in maintaining existing public
infrastructure (streets, roads, highways, bridges, pedestrian walkways, bike paths). In
September, 2003, the American Society of Civil Engineers estimated that $1.6 trillion dollars
were needed nationwide over a five-year time period to bring public infrastructure up to an
acceptable state of repair and maintenance. This figure had increased by $300 billion since
2001 because of large growth and increased development; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Rochester also faces a significant problem in maintaining its
existing public infrastructure. The City has over 300 miles of. local streets for which it is
responsible for maintenance and repair. This network of local streets has been growing by eight
to ten miles per year during the past five years. Currently, the City faces a backlog of unfunded
street maintenance needs totaling about $26,500,000. The City's Public Works Director
estimates that $210,000,000 will be needed to maintain the existing street system and the new
streets added by new development over the next 20 years; and,
WHEREAS, the City's Public Works Director projects that over the next 40 years, there
iuld be over $175,000,000 (or approximately 80 miles) in arterial and collector road
nstruction and reconstruction needed to support new growth; and,
WHEREAS, the City's infrastructure deficit is compounded by new development, its
impact upon adjacent public streets and the City's future financial and engineering plans to
improve the capacity of the adjacent public streets. The Minnesota Court of Appeals has
recognized the fact that subdivision development places a great burden on municipal services
including city streets. Middlemist v. City of Plymouth, 387 N.W.2d 190, 193 (Minn. Ct. App.
1986). The City does not have the financial resources to upgrade or improve the available public
infrastructure for each and every new development proposed to be located somewhere within
the City's boundaries; and,
WHEREAS, the lack of adequate street and road facilities to handle the vehicular traffic
generated by new development results in enormous societal costs in the form of environmental
pollution, energy consumption, increased energy costs, decreased economic productivity and a
general decline in a citizen's quality of life as a person spends more and more time trying to get
from here to there. In addition, emergency services suffer as traffic congestion and accessibility
problems reduce response times; and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota law addressing a cty's ability to regulate development and
subdivision activities is found in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462; and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. 1a, states that "[t]o protect and
&mote the public health, safety, and general welfare, to provide for the orderly, economic, and
safe development of land, ... and to facilitate adequate provision for transportation, water,
sewage, storm drainage ... and other public services and facilities, a municipality may by •
ordinance adopt subdivision regulations establishing standards, requirements, and procedures
for the review and approval or disapproval of subdivisions;" and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. 2a, states that "[t]he standards
and requirements in the regulations may address without limitation: the size, location, grading,
and improvement of lots, structures, public areas, streets, roads, trails, walkways, curbs and
gutters, water supply, storm drainage, lighting, sewers, electricity, gas, and other utilities; ... and
the protection and conservation of flood plains, shore lands, soils, water, vegetation, energy, air
quality, and geologic and ecologic features;" and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. 2a states that "[t]he regulations
may permit the municipality to condition its approval on the construction and installation of
sewers, streets, electric, gas, drainage, and water facilities, and similar utilities and
improvements;" and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. 2a states that "[t]he regulations
may permit the municipality to condition its approval on compliance with other requirements
reasonably related to the provisions of the regulations and to execute development contracts
embodying the terms and conditions of approval;" and,
WHEREAS, in response to and as authorized by the above -cited provisions of the
Minnesota Statutes, the City of Rochester has adopted subdivision regulations. They can be is
in Chapters 60-65 of the Rochester Code of Ordinances (commonly referred to as the
"Land Development Manual'); and,
WHEREAS, to facilitate the adequate provision of public facilities and services as
authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. la, the City adopted adequate public
facilities standards as part of its adoption of the City's subdivision regulations. These standards
are found in Sections 64.130 — 64.139 of the Rochester Code of Ordinances (R.C.O.). The City
adopted these standards in May, 1999. A copy of these standards is attached, identified as
Exhibit #A and incorporated herein; and,
WHEREAS, adequate public facilities standards have been recognized as one of the
most effective forms of growth management (Gary Pivo, Growth Management Planning &
Research Clearinghouse Local Government Planning Tools, (Aug. 1992)). Adequate public
facilities standards have been judicially approved in cases across the nation and in Minnesota
(Matter of Golden v. Planning Board of Town of Ramapo, 30 N.Y.2d 359, 334 N.Y.S.2d 138,
285 N.E.2d 291, app. dismissed, 409 U.S. 1003 (1972); Woodbury Place Partners v. Town of
Woodbury, 492 N.W.2d 258 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 2929 (1993);
Freundshuh v. City of Blaine, 385 N.W.2d 6 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986); Larsen v. County of
Washington, 387 N.W.2d 902 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986); Garipav v. Town of Hanover, 351 A.2d
64 (N.H. 1976); White, S. Mark. Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances and Transportation
Management (American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service Report No. 465,
1996); and, •
1r
•
WHEREAS, the purpose of Adequate Public Facilities standards is:
1. To economize on the costs of municipal facilities and services to carefully
phase residential, commercial and industrial development with efficient
provision of public improvements;
2. To establish and maintain municipal control over the eventual character
of development;
3. To establish and maintain a desirable degree of balance among the
various uses of the land; and
4. To establish and maintain essential quality of community services and
facilities; and,
WHEREAS, by these adequate public facilities standards, the City seeks to regulate the
timing and sequencing of development so that the provision of adequate public facilities required
to accommodate the development growth occurs concurrently with the development growth. Put
another way, these adequate public facilities standards require development be timed and
sequenced in a manner consistent with the capacity of public facilities. The City's goal is, to
insure that public facilities are capable of supporting and servicing the proposed development's
physical area and designated intensity; and,
WHEREAS, in addition to the adequate public facilities standards listed in R.C.O. §§
K130 — 64.139, the City's subdivision regulations also include adequate public facilities
andards within the criteria provided for the City review of particular subdivision processes.
Thus, a general development plan cannot be approved unless on and off -site public facilities are
adequate, or will be adequate if the development is phased in, to serve the properties under
consideration (see R.C.O. §61.215(5)). And, a preliminary plat (land subdivision) cannot be
approved unless the proposed land subdivision takes into account the City's six -year Long -
Range Capital Improvements Program (see R.C.O. §61.225(F)); and,
WHEREAS, the City s subdivision regulations allow the City to impose a condition on its
approval of a proposed development where the condition is needed to insure compliance with
the subdivision regulations (see R.C.O. §61.226); and,
WHEREAS, since the May, 1999, implementation of the City's adequate public facilities
standards as part of the City's subdivision regulations, there have been developments submitted
to the City for approval where the public facilities were inadequate. In these cases, one of three
consequences occurred in the processing of the development applications; and,
WHEREAS, consequence #1 of the existence of inadequate public facilities is City
approval of the proposed development, but with a very restrictive condition attached to the City's
approval. That condition restricts all development until such time as the Common Council
determines there are adequate public facilities to accommodate the proposed development; and,
0
WHEREAS, one example of consequence #1 is the following condition of approval placed is
the General Development Plan #180 (Prairie Crossing):
Because on and off site public facilities are currently inadequate to handle
the proposed development, the development must be phased -in in a
manner consistent with the City's planned infrastructure improvements.
Specifically, there are no plans for sanitary sewer to serve the property
within the first three years of the City's current six -year Capital Improvement
Program. Further, no other arrangements have been made to ensure that
adequate utilities will not be available concurrent with the proposed
development. Additionally, there are no plans to reconstruct 651' Street
N.W., or Bandel Road to handle the additional traffic that this development
will generate. As such, no development will occur and no further
development permit will be issued until the Council determines public
facilities are adequate to accommodate this development; and,
WHEREAS, consequence #2 of the existence of inadequate public facilities is the City
approval of the proposed development, but with a condition restricting the amount and extent of
development to coincide with the level of adequate public facilities that currently exists or may
occur in the future; and,
WHEREAS, one example of consequence #2 is the following condition of approval placed
upon General Development Plan #142 (Weatherstone): •
The development shall be phased so that 50"' N.W., north of 55t' Street
N.W., does not exceed approximately 3,000 average daily trips before it is
upgraded; and,
WHEREAS, consequence #3 of the existence of inadequate public facilities is the
execution of development contracts (commonly referred to as development agreements) as
specifically authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, subd. 2a. By these
development agreements, the developer and the City voluntarily agree as to how much each
entity should pay to bring the appropriate public facilities up to a level adequate to accommodate
the proposed development; and,
WHEREAS, the decision to enter into development agreements is completely voluntary
and optional on each developer's part. Some developers have been willing to live with the
adequate public facilities' conditions of approval found in consequences #1 and #2. Other
developers, however, have chosen to help make inadequate public facilities adequate so as to
allow their proposed developments proceed as scheduled. To keep their developments on
schedule, some developers have decided to follow consequence #3; and,
WHEREAS, recently, there have been developers who have expressed an interest in
development agreements for their proposed developments (consequence #3), but have also
expressed concern about the amount of their financial contributions towards the improvement of •
the public facilities. They have indicated an interest in knowing in advance the scope and extent
l
di
of the current public facilities, the scope and extent of improvements needed to those public
Wcilities in order to accommodate future development and the costs associated with making
ublic facilities adequate; and,
WHEREAS, in response to the developers' call for more information on adequate public
facilities and the costs that might be associated with development agreements, the City of
Rochester Common Council wishes to establish a policy on the Use of Contribution Agreements
to Improve Substandard Streets ("UCASS"). The purpose of the UCASS policy is to address
inadequate existing township or county roads abutting proposed subdivisions and the manner in
which the roads can be made adequate should a developer and the City enter into a
development agreement. This policy seeks to equitably distribute the transportation
improvement costs created by new development between those property owners who benefit
from the transportation improvements and the City. The UCASS policy differs from the TID
policy by the types of streets covered.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of,
Rochester that the City establish the UCASS policy as follows:
1. The policy on the Use of Contribution Agreements for the Improvement to
Substandard Streets only applies to substandard streets. A "substandard street"
includes the following:
A. A roadway whose cross-section does not meet any of the minimum
• requirements #1 through #4 or #5 through #8:
(1) Two, 12-foot travel lanes;
(2) Two, six-foot paved shoulders;
(3) Separated walkway or bike path along one side of the roadway; and
(4) A three -to -one maximum in -slope.
M
(5) Two, 12-foot travel lanes;
(6) One, eight -foot parking lane;
(7) Concrete curb and gutter;
(8) Separated walkway or bike path along one side of roadway.
B. A roadway that does not meet a minimum 40 miles per hour design speed
criteria as applied to vertical curves, horizontal curves and intersection sight
distances.
C. Notwithstanding anything in this definition to the contrary, the following
roadways are considered to be substandard as of the date of this
resolution:
0
(1) 55t' Street N.W., from CSAH 22 to 50 h Avenue N.W.
(2) 19"' Street N.W., from Valleyhigh Drive N.W., to CSAH 22.
(3) 55"' Street N.W., from Highway 52 to County Road 133 (West River •
Road).
(4) 11t' Avenue S.W., from 48t' Street S.W., to 60"' Street S.W.
(5) 60"' Street S.W., from 11"' Avenue S.W., to Highway 63.
(6) 48t' Street S.W., from 11t' Avenue S.W., to Scenic Oaks Drive S.W.
2. This policy applies to any portion of a subdivision's frontage that abuts any
substandard city street, township road, County State Aid Highway or State Trunk
Highway.
3. Any substandard roadway that is reconstructed or otherwise improved pursuant to
this policy will remain "substandard" until such time as each undeveloped or
redeveloped parcel with frontage on the roadway has paid special assessments or
entered into a Contribution or Development Agreement.
4. If a developer and the City are willing to enter into a Contribution Agreement to
Improve Substandard Streets, the Agreement must include the following:
A. The name of the property owner and that of the subdivision or development.
B. The legal description of the property.
C. The frontage dimension that abuts the substandard street. •
D. The developable frontage dimension that abuts the substandard street.
E. The following contribution rates (used for calculating the property owner's
equitable share of the cost for the roadway and stone drainage
improvements):
(1) $80.00 per developable front foot for residential zoning.
(2) $100.00 per developable front foot for commercial zoning.
(3) $120.00 per developable front foot for industrial zoning.
The above contribution rates are subject to an annual adjustment on August
1 reflective of changes in the ENR Construction Cost Index for Minneapolis,
or as otherwise amended by the City Council.
F. The following contribution rates (used for calculating the property owner's
equitable share of the cost for the walkway or bike path improvements if
designated on the official ROCOG Bikeway Plan):
(1) $40.00 per developable front foot if the path is not graded.
(2) $25.00 per developable front foot if path is graded. •
• The above contribution rates are subject to an annual adjustment on August
1 reflective of changes in the ENR Construction Cost Index for Minneapolis.
G. Any provision for the contribution of in -kind services or materials in lieu of
monetary contributions for improvements consistent with the final plan.
H. Any one or a combination of the following payment options:
(1) Lump sum payment within 30 days of execution of the Contribution
Agreement.
(2) Up to two uniform annual payments with annual adjustment reflective
of changes in ENR Construction Cost Index in Minneapolis.
(3) Payment for up to two years on a per lot sold basis with annual
adjustment in per lot cost reflective of changes in ENR Construction
Cost Index for Minneapolis.
All options require final and complete payments to occur within two years of
the date of the execution of the Contribution Agreement.
5. The City will assign a project number (J Number) to each roadway improvement
project at the time the first contribution agreement for the roadway is executed.
The contributed funds will be credited to that J Number and will only be used for
• that project.
6. The City will reconstruct the roadway section within three years of the date when
all of the following events occurs:
A. 100% of the road right-of-way is annexed and within the City's jurisdictional
control either by easement or dedication.
B. 60% of the abutting frontage along the roadway has a city approved
General Development Plan or contribution agreement.
C. The City Council determines that sufficient funds are available to complete
the project.
7. This policy applies to all general development plans, meets and bounds surveys,
site development plans, certificates of survey and all other types of land
subdivisions that abut a substandard street.
8. This policy does not apply to plats filed before January 1, 1999, but does apply to
all plats filed on or after that date except as noted in paragraph 10 of this policy.
The contribution amount will be prorated to reflect the respective portion of the
general development plan included in the plat. For example, if 60% of the general
IS development plan has been previously platted and the developer now files a plat
1�a
for the remaining 40% of the general development plan, then the contribution
amount would be only 40% of the total contribution and the 60% would not be
required to be paid by that developer unless a re -plat was subsequently filed with
the City.
9. This policy would apply to areas that are re -platted if the re -plat increases the
density of the development. The contribution amount will be prorated to reflect the
respective portion of the re -platted area as compared to the entire general
development plan area. For example, if 10% of the general development plan is to
be re -platted, then the contribution amount would be 10% of the total contribution
required to be paid by that developer for the entire general development plan.
10. This policy applies to those portions of a general development plan that has been
previously approved by the City Council for land outside of the City's boundaries
on the date this policy became effective, unless land within a portion of the general
development plan is annexed, platted and recorded prior to January 10, 2001.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City will not involuntarily impose any of the
contributions, charges, fees or costs described in the UCASS program. Instead, these
contributions, charges, fees and costs are solely for the use of potential developers and City
staff in responding to proposed developments involving inadequate public facilities that might
be made adequate by way of voluntary development agreements.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this policy becomes effective as of July 8, 2004. •
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that by the adoption of this resolution the City Council
does rescind and invalidate any previously adopted policy addressing substandard street
improvements occurring by way of contribution agreements.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
APPROVED THIS DAY OF
DAY OF
2004.
PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCI
MAYOR OF SAID CITY
•
eal of the City of
ochester, Minnesota)
ResMDO%RewluUCASS
•
is
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING
DATE- 7-7_OA
AGENDA SECTION:
ORIGINATING DEPT:
REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS
PLANNING
EM DESCRIPTION: Initiate Amendment To GDP #123 Southern Woods, to Identify
!PR!PAREtDB
A
Access
July 1, 2004
Consideration of General Development Plan #233, Waterfront Business Park, raised the need for access to the parcel from
48 Street through property included in the Southern Woods GDP (#123).
At the time the Southern Woods GDP was considered the existing Floodway and pond located south of the commercial
parcel in Southern Woods were deemed a significant hindrance to future development to the degree that the need to provide
access to that part of the Kastler property was not anticipated. At that time, the Kastlers did not suggest otherwise, and the
Southern Woods GDP was approved without an access from 481h Street to the Kastler property (Waterfront GDP #233).
It appears conditions have changed. There -is now a proposal to develop the existing pond via filling the water body, and a
proposal to remove the site from the Floodway designation.
Section 61.217 addresses amendments to General Development Plans. The following applies in this case:
61.217
2) Major Amendments: All other changes to an approved General Development Plan, whether initiated by the Common
Council or the owner of property subject to the proposed changes in the General Development Plan, shall be processed
as a Type III, Phase II application pursuant to Section 62.215. For any changes proposed by the Common Council, the
owner of property subject to the General Development Plan shall be notified by the City a minimum of 30 days in advance
of any hearings or actions which amend an approved General Development Plan.
stdering changed conditions, and the need to provide access to the northern portion (pond area) of the Kastler property,
ity should initiate an amendment to the Southern Woods GDP #123, to identify an access through the commercial
property to the proposed Waterfront GDP. Attached are excerpts from the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land
Development Manual that support requirements for access to adjacent properties. An amendment, if approved, should be
contingent upon successful amendments to the Floodplain designation on the Kastler property such that the pond area is
developable, once filled.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Initiate an amendment to the Southern Woods GDP #123, to identify an access extending south from
48th Street, through the property already zoned B-4 (General Commercial) to the proposed Waterfront
Development/Kastler property.
Distribution:
1. City Administrator
2. City Attorney
3. Planning Department File
4. GGG
5. Randy Reynolds
6. Jerry Schultz
7. Rick Penz
This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on July 7, 2004 in the Council ! Board Chambers in the Government Center at 151
4th Street SE.
UNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by. to:
Page 2 ���
RCA
July 1, 2004
Ordinance references regarding connectivity and requirements to provide access (and utilities) to other properties:
61.215 Criteria for approval of a GDP: 0
#2 - "access and circulation are compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use of adjacent property'
#4 - "makes provisions for..... and streets reflected in .... adopted Thoroughfare Plan, ROCOG Long Range Transportation Plan,
Official Maps, and other public facilities plans..."
#5 - "On and off -site public facilities are adequate, or will be adequate ....to serve the properties under consideration and will
provide access to adjoining land in a manner that will allow development of those adjoining lands..."
#7 - '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.
64.124 Connectivity: Local streets shall be designed to discourage through traffic, minimize the length of streets, provide safe access to
residences with minimal need for steep driveways and maintain connectivity between and through adjacent residential neighborhoods
and to neighborhood commercial areas for autos, pedestrians, emergency vehicles, school buses, and other service vehicles.
64.128 Street Extensions - "Where necessary to give access to or permit the reasonable future subdivision of adjacent land, right-of-
ways and improvements shall be extended to the boundary of the development."
64.136 Dedications Required: Development plans, construction plans, land subdivisions and site development plans shall
identify needed right-of-way or easement locations necessary for the provision of utilities, drainage and vehicular or
pedestrian circulation within the development and connecting to adjacent development which meet specified levels of service
called for in adopted City plans and regulations. Easements shall be granted and right-of-way dedicated to the public by the
applicant as part of the development approval process or through separate instrument, which shall be in a form approved by
the City Attorney. Where feasible, subdivisions shall be designed so that access to a development is not solely dependent on
a roadway or driveway that intersects with an expressway as designated on the Thoroughfare Plan;
•
•
•
•
L
REVISED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SOOTMN ROODS SUBOM3ION
SECTIONS 2e,35 ROCRESTER MWNSR7p
([YUMiC,?uf'Hn}Y M aru�Trta wex s —. � G iA
(MIgI A SOVTi(AN MJp'JS MPO MOIT1p, weypq( le 04 rsrop pq{ Mmel, gmMN Cwn1A Ygnmla ____ fuenPn( f1Y
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE: 717104
AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO.
RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE G
M DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY:
SOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES TERRYYAQKINS
G. 1. RESOLUTIONS **ii
G. 2. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES, as appropriate.
G. 3, SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES (for adoption).
raAn Ordinance Amending And Reenacting Section 38.125 Of The Rochester Code Of
ordinances, Relating To The Suspension Or Revocation Of A Rental Registration Certificate.
b) An Ordinance Rezoning Approximately 1.12 Acres Of Property From The R-3 Zoning District To
The B-1 Zoning District, And Amending Ordinance No. 2785, Known As The Zoning Ordinance
And Land Development Manual Of The City Of Rochester, Minnesota. Said property is located
on the South side of Valleyhigh Road NW and on the West side of Superior Drive NW.
04'9 c) An Ordinance Rezoning Approximately 39.54 Acres Of Property From The I Zoning District To
The R-1 Zoning District, And Amending Ordinance No. 2785, Known As The Zoning Ordinance
And Land Development Manual Of The City Of Rochester, Minnesota. Said property is located
Weft of Marion Road SE, North of 30t' Street SE, and Northeast of Pinewood Road SE.
• d) An Ordinance Annexing To The City of Rochester Approximately 34.9 Acres of Land Located In
A Part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 107 North, Range 14 West, Olmsted
County, Minnesota. Said property is located East of Highway 63, South of 48"' Street NE, and
North of Northland Place NE.
e) T An Ordinance Annexing To the City Of Rochester Approximately 39.67 Acres of Land Located
In The West Half Of The East Half Of The Northwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 107
North, Range 14 West, Olmsted County, Minnesota. Said Property is located on the North side
of Valleyhigh Road NW, East of 50"' Avenue NW, and West of West Circle Drive.
f) An Ordinance Amending And Reenacting Section 63.126 Of The Rochester Code Of
Ordinances, Relating To The Placement Of Fences, Walls Or Hedges.
G.4. MISCELLANEOUS
'19NCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: