Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06/05/2006_Regular
CITY OF ROCHESTER COUNCIL AGENDA 1 COUNCILIBOARD CHAMBERS o&_ 1 GOVERNMENT CENTER 151 4TH STREET SE MEETING NO. 14 REGULAR IVLEDSE OF ALLFCIANCE PA ;I. 1-2 A) OPEN COMMENT PERIOD B) CALL TO ORDER JUNE 5, 2006 7:00 P.M. C) LETTERS AND PETITIONS 3-6 1) Sewer and Water to Serve Leitzen Property in Section 22, High Forest Township 7-8 D) CONSENT AGENDAIORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS 1) Approval of Minutes 9-14 2) Appointments to the Civic Music Board 15-18 3) Change Order #1 with Rochester Sand and Gravel for the Street and Utility Construction Project 19-22 4) Change Order #2 for 2005 Airfield Runway and Electrical Improvements Project 23-24 5) Change in Location for Certain Voting Precincts in the City of Rochester 25-28 6) Licenses, Bonds and Miscellaneous City Activities 29-30 7) Street Closings, Meters Bagged Rochesterfest 2006 31-32 8) Rochesterfest Activities 33-34 9) Approval of Accounts Payable 35-36 10) Acceptance of Three Donations to the Rochester Fire Department Public Education Safety Fund (42230.59560) 37-38 11) Execute NEOGOV Service and Escrow Agreements 39-40 12) Advertise Bids for Communications Center Consoles 41-42 13) Modifications of Armored Vehicle by Sole Source Vendor 43-44 14) City Ordinance Revisions 45-48 15) Consideration of Public Utility Board Action 49-50 16) Construct/Expand the Civic Center North Parking Lot 51-52 17) Advertise for Bids (J7749) 15t Avenue SW from West Center Street to 2nd Street SW 53-54 18) Establish No Parking Zone on Wood Lake Drive SE 55-62 19) Service Agreement: Minnesota Conservation Corps and Rochester Public Works 63-66 20) Supplemental Agreement #7 Value Engineering Gravity Interceptor Phase I, J7712 67-68 21) Engineering Services: Design storm Water Ponds NW p 3.3 Project J 6555 69-70 22) ROC 52 City Release for Future Claims or Liability 71-72 23) Developmental Agreement — Maine Street Development First Supplemental Amendment 73-74 24) Revocable Permit: Awning on building at 14 First Street SW 75-76 25) Real Estate — Settlement for Right of Way Acquisition for Kings Run Sewer Project (J-7708) 77-78 26) Revocable Permit — Part of Lot 1, Block 1, Vision Real Estate Replat 79-80 27) Real Estate — Property Acquisition for the Hadley Valley Trunk Sanitary Sewer (J-7744) 81-82 28) Real Estate: Parcel Conveyance from Verna Badger Revocable Trust to the City 83-84 29) Revocable Permit: American Engineering Testing, Inc. Monitoring Well 85-86 30) Development Agreement — Pebble Creek Development 87-88 31) Feasibility Report and Request for Hearing for (J7749) Reconstruction of 15t Avenue SW — Center Street to 2nd Street SW 89-90 32) Interim Development Agreement— Onyx Waste Services Midwest, Inc. 91-92 33) Approve local share to install gates at 7t�' St NW railroad crossing, J6336 93-94 34) Revocable Permit: Hanson & Younge LLC — Temporary Sedimentation Basin 95-96 35) Real Estate — 20th Street SE Extension (J-2208) 97-98 36) Substitute AUAR Update for 201h St SE Connection EAW 99-100 37) Owner Contract — Public Improvements to Serve Bamber Valley Estates Third — J5210 101-102 38) Owner Contract— Public Improvements to Serve The Wilds —J5155 103-104 39) Speed Zone Study, Vicinity of 3`d Avenue SE Bridge Over Zumbro River 105-106 40) Establish No -Parking Zone, 3`d Avenue NW, from W Center St to 2"d St NW 41) Letter of Understanding with IUOE Local #49, Parks and Recreation for Central Pension Fund (CPF) Deduction from Earnings 42) Construction Engineering Services: Intersection Improvements TH 14 East/CSAH 22 (J-7245) 43) Storm Water Permit Application 44) Special District Development Agreement Amendment — Pebble Creek Development 45) Rochester Downtown Alliance — Miscellaneous Street and South Amplification Device Permits E) HEARINGS 107-118 1) Special District #16 known as Harvestview II by Joel Bigelow and Sons Enterprises, Inc., for property located along the north side of 551h Street N.W., south of the Douglas Trail and west of Harvest Moon Boulevard N.W. 119-134 2) Amendment to General Development Plan #241 known as Harvestview II by Joel Bigelow and Sons Enterprises, Inc. 135-158 3) Preliminary Plat #06-09 by Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises, Inc. to be known as Harvestview Second and approval of a Substantial Land Alteration Permit 159-168 4) Final Plat #06-11 by HRB Properties to be known as the HRB Subdivision 169-186 5) Final Plat #06-12 by Roger Carlsen to be known as Bamber Valley Estates Third 187-200 6) Final Plat #06-13 by Dave Reiland Building Construction LLC to be known as Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes 201-204 7) Vacation Petition #06-05 by Maine Street Investors of Rochester, LLC, The Gardens Manufactured Home Community, LLC and Maine Street Development Company of Rochester, LLC to vacate public utility and drainage easements on property located south of 401h Street, east of TH63 and east and west of St. Bridget Road S.E. 205-206 8) Consider an Expansion of Residential Permit Parking Zone 6 on 71h Street S.W. between 71h Avenue S.W. and 81h Avenue S.W. 207-208 9) Consider the Proposed Charter Amendment Relating to the Establishment of Compensation of Elected Officials. F) REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 209-210 1) Sound Amplification Requests 211-226 2) Decision on the need for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) in response to the citizens' petition to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) with regard to the Willow Heights 5th Addition G) RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 227-228 H) TABLED ITEMS 229-250 1) Substantial Land Alteration for Preliminary Plat #06-02 by North American Realty known as Willow Heights 5th Addition 1) OTHER BUSINESS J) ADJOURNMENT REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. OPEN COMMENT PERIOD CITY ADMINISTRATOR A I i EM DESCRIPTION: OPEN COMMENT PERIOD PREPARED BY: S. KM OLD This agenda section is primarily for the purpose of allowing citizens to address the City Council on a topic of their choice. The following guidelines apply: • This section of the agenda may not be used as a forum to continue discussion on an agenda item which has already been held as a public hearing. • This agenda section is limited to 15 minutes and each speaker is limited to 4 minutes. • Any speakers not having the opportunity to be heard will be first to present at the next Council meeting. • Citizens may only use this forum to address the Council on a maximum of one time per month. • Matters currently under negotiation, litigation or related to personnel will not be discussed in this forum. • Questions posed by a speaker will generally be responded to in writing. %,OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6,/5/06 AGENDASECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Letters and Petitions City Clerk L - ITEM DESCRIPTION: Request for Sewer and Water to Serve Leitzen Property in Section 22, PREPARED BY: High Forest Township. Judy Scherr A request has been received from Gary Leitzen asking the City to prepare a feasibility report to determine if City sewer and water can serve his property in Section 22, High Forest Township, south of the Airport and north of TH 63. COUNCIL ACTION REOUESTED A motion to adopt the prepared resolution referring the request for sewer and water service to the Public Works Department for a feasibility study. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by. Second by: to: I Gary Leitzen 6165 —10t' St. SW Rochester, MN 55902 507-254-8682 May 9, 2006 City Clerk of Rochester Attn: Judy Scharr 201 41h Street, Room 135 Rochester, MN 55904 RE: Request for a feasibility study Dear Ms. Scharr, This letter is a request to the City of Rochester to prepare a feasibility report to determine whether city sewer and water can serve my property located in Section 22 of High Forest Township. The property is located south of the airport and north of Truck Highway 63. Attached is a map showing the area. If you have questions please call me at 507-254-8682. Sincerely, l Gary Lei en Storing Perishable Foods k� Follow these guidelines for storing perishable foods in the refrigerator or freezer. j. • Raw meat and poultry should be wrapped securely so juices do not leak and contaminate other foods or surfaces. It's-11 WI best to leave meat and poultry in the store wrapping unless the wrap is torn. Use plastic bags over commercial packag- ing, Store on bottom shelf to prevent dripping. • Eggs should be stored in their carton in the regrigerator, not in the door. • Arrange items in the refrigerator or freezer to allow air to circulate freely. az a. T-104-105-H HIGH FOREST PLAT (WndswnonJ R-14-W I: T-1 See Peg 0 FSM 6 No" Publlaho Ltd. 54 OLMSTED CO.. MN Farm 6 r REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/06 CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY ADMINISTRATOR ITEM DESCRIPTION: APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS D-1-40 PREPARED BY: G. NELJMANN This RCA lists all the items which have been included in the consent agenda for this meeting. The Council can approve all of the items with a single motion to approve. The Council President will allow the Councilmembers an opportunity to state whether there are any of these items which you wish to have removed from the consent agenda approval and to have them discussed and acted upon separately by the Council. The consent agenda for this meeting consists of the following RCAs: 1) Approval of Minutes 2) Appointments to the Civic Music Board 3) Change Order #1 with Rochester Sand and Gravel for the Street and Utility Construction Project 4) Change Order #2 for 2005 Airfield Runway and Electrical Improvements Project 5) Change in Location for Certain Voting Precincts in the City of Rochester 6) Licenses, Bonds and Miscellaneous City Activities 7) Street Closings, Meters Bagged Rochesterfest 2006 8) Rochesterfest Activities 9) Approval of Accounts Payable 10) Acceptance of Three Donations to the Rochester Fire Department Public Education Safety Fund (42230.59560) 11) Execute NEOGOV Service and Escrow Agreements 12) Advertise Bids for Communications Center Consoles 13) Modifications of Armored Vehicle by Sole Source Vendor 14) City Ordinance Revisions 15) Consideration of Public Utility Board Action 16) Construct/Expand the Civic Center North Parking Lot 17) Advertise for Bids (J7749) 15t Avenue SW from West Center Street to 2nd Street SW 18) Establish No Parking Zone on Wood Lake Drive SE 19) Service Agreement: Minnesota Conservation Corps and Rochester Public Works 20) Supplemental Agreement #7 Value Engineering Gravity Interceptor Phase I, J7712 21) Engineering Services: Design storm Water Ponds NW p 3.3 Project J 6555 22) ROC 52 City Release for Future Claims or Liability 23) Developmental Agreement — Maine Street Development First Supplemental Amendment 24) Revocable Permit: Awning on building at 14 First Street SW 25) Real Estate — Settlement for Right of Way Acquisition for Kings Run Sewer Project (J-7708) 26) Revocable Permit — Part of Lot 1, Block 1, Vision Real Estate Replat COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: I Page 2 June 5, 2006 27) Real Estate — Property Acquisition for the Hadley Valley Trunk Sanitary Sewer (J- 7744) 28) Real Estate: Parcel Conveyance from Verna Badger Revocable Trust to the City 29) Revocable Permit: American Engineering Testing, Inc. Monitoring Well 30) Development Agreement— Pebble Creek Development 31) Feasibility Report and Request for Hearing for (J7749) Reconstruction of 15' Avenue SW — Center Street to 2"d Street SW 32) Interim Development Agreement — Onyx Waste Services Midwest, Inc. 33) Approve local share to install gates at 7"' St NW railroad crossing, J6336 34) Revocable Permit: Hanson & Younge LLC —Temporary Sedimentation Basin 35) Real Estate — 20"' Street SE Extension (J-2208) 36) Substitute AUAR Update for 20"' St SE Connection EAW 37) Owner Contract — Public Improvements to Serve Bamber Valley Estates Third — J5210 38) Owner Contract — Public Improvements to Serve The Wilds — J5155 39) Speed Zone Study, Vicinity of 3'd Avenue SE Bridge Over Zumbro River 40) Establish No -Parking Zone, 3`d Avenue NW, from W Center St to 2"d St NW COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve consent agenda items REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING �f DATE: 6/5/06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Organizational Business Mayor's Office j a ITEM DESCRIPTION: Appointments to the Civic Music Board PREPARED BY: Mayor Brede I hereby submit for your approval the following appointments to the: Rochester Civic Music Board Scott Hoss - will fill the unexpired term of Christina Tatting. His term will expire December, 2008. 913 8t' Ave SW Jennifer Seisler — will fill the unexpired term of Nikki McDonald. Her term will expire December 2008. 616 5v' Ave SW PERSONAL INFORMATION Name J �055 Ward Address 01 13 S� Zip Code S-5203 Phone (H) Ui2 343 2' 3115 (B) Z° E5 I! I (FAX) E-mail 5 1nU cluni la d.Cc9rr� f R h t, q I f w riliS Ynylut bp4l[,- _�41-1- (tiu.nj lure How long have you been a resident o oc es e . L0 �X ,�.5 Are you or any of your family members presently employed by the City of Rochester or serving on any of the City's advisory boards? Yes_ No � If yes, explain: EXPERIENCE AND EDUCATION Name of Employer. �wnlA� 3 PA Occupation: A--�f' Education: 2. A'.ZIgWPM��. Willia,r YV1i�GncL( 1�w Community Service/Activities: Please list major responsibilities that you have had or currently have in a community project or organization or in your occupation: Civic/Professional Organization Memberships: r n Ar FiS.SpCA ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Please indicate why you are interested in being appointed to an advisory board, and why you feel you are qualified to serve on the advisory boards) previously indicated. In'iG feS� in (�mun�t-� inV'C IVGi'1''6(l� 2tn.l,L yYlµ&�G . u What do you believe you could contribute if appointed to an advisory board? T Kxy%. 8A2ru� � . SFuI� dnd q ltYt y�ca� SIu EIS: J_ tam tAJ_ 4i � vp�_ivuova� 6r4iU,41in&,-n irtd� 1� • /j How do you believe you would benefit if appointed to a Board or Commission? t'.a utiC I am NOT available for Board/Commission meetings on the following evenings (circle): Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday CONFLICT OF INTEREST Conflict of interest may arise by the participation in any activity, recommended action, or decision from which you receive or could potentially receive direct or indirect personal financial gain, or other personal interest. A conflict of interest may also occur if you hold a private or other public position in addition to your City advisory board which may interfere with your discharge of your City responsibilities. In accordance with these definitions, do you have any legal or equitable interest in any business, however organized, which in the course of your participation in a City advisory board, could give rise to a conflict of interest? Yes_ No —�— If yes, please provide details on a separate sheet of paper. Do you own any real property located in Rochester, other than your residence, in which you have a legal or equitable interest which, in the course of your participation in a City advisory board, could give rise to a conflict of interest? Yes _ No _ If yes, please provide details on a separate sheet of paper. As a Board, Commission or Committee member, what issue(s) might cause conflict between civic responsibility and personal/professional interests? - bGlr,,ran A C.{ F A uL '411 NL'a) a d/lurnr,_ 'IOC As required by City ordinance, if appointed to a City advisory board, you must complete a disclosure statement and file it with the City Clerk. You may attach a resume if you desire. The selection process will vary according to the number of applicants and vacancies, and may not include interviews with all candidates. Thank you for your interest in serving on an advisory board for the City of Rochester. 5 Z,6lo — Date Signature PERSONAL INFORMATION name J e m 1-Cf r Phone (H) oD —l'3q IV; e r _ Ward.—q�� Zip Code= (FAX) How long have you been a resident of Rochester? ` t �S• Are you or any of your family members presently employed by the City of Rochester or serving on any of the City's advisory boards? Yes_ No Y If yes, explain: EXPERIENCE AND EDUCATION Name of Employer. +�— Occupation: Community Service/Activities: rub AR i'6 ` hl Peet -wo Please list major responsibilities that you have had or currently have in a community project or organization or in your occupation: hail o� (,f Prw i' NOT` - �l,nar -e aeil'2ra( �t Yc�z UCH eL+ t'Ciet r�t- oaC'c+ o �C- >r,-ren(454L' Q&4tnt r �fcre. ri ct +iQ/PAofssional Organization Memberships: I ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Please indicate why you are interested in being appointed to an advisory board, and why you feel you are qualified to serve on the advisory bo rd(s) previo�iy md' ate . Q.n ��rj ert+o�! iIJe rltLeSiN cxv�� VIa It -v VVL vl�! R Uers' e —�6-6t- wck(A life be fe t�vo u� e�c� also tsar What do you believe you could contribute if appointed to an advisory board? f� r I r, I r , rt r' -e r 0 41 +UO3 -e Ge-VL L� 0- y-eXr e 5h r h How do you believe you would benefit if appointed to a Board or Commission. It �U 5E1�15C o� �` yi";6 ✓in ��C��b�' hit it � r1it b'V1 I.C,Yt r`�i . J I am NOT available for Board/Commission meetings on the following evenings (circle): Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday CONFLICT OF INTEREST Conflict of interest may arise by the participation in any activity, recommended action, or decision from which you receive or could potentially receive direct or indirect personal financial gain, or other personal interest. A conflict of interest may also occur if you hold a private or other public position in addition to your City advisory board which may interfere with your discharge of your City responsibilities. In accordance with these definitions, do you have any legal or equitable interest in any business, however organized, which in the course of your participation in a City advisory board, could give rise to a conflict of interest? Yes_ No �K If yes, please provide details on a separate sheet of paper. Do you own any real property located in Rochester, other than your residence, in which you have a legal or equitable interest which, in the course of your participation in a City advisory board, could give rise to a conflict of interest? Yes _ No 'A If yes, please provide details on a separate sheet of paber. As a Board, Commission or Committee member, what issue(s) might cause conflict between civic responsibility and personal/professional interests? nave ij,at I'm aware 0�, As required by City ordinance, if appointed to a City advisory board, you must complete a disclosure statement and file it with the City Clerk. You may attach a resume if you desire. The selection process will vary according to the number of applicants and vacancies, and may not include interviews with all candidates. Thank you for your interest in serving on an advisory board for the City of Rochester. Date I 5 nature jv K REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 06/05/06 -ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Consent Rochester International Airport (1 3 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Change Order 41 with Rochester Sand & Gravel for the street and PREPARED BY: utility construction project. Steven W. Legve The Rochester Airport Commission recommends and requests Council authorization to: Execute Change Order #1 with Rochester Sand & Gravel for the street and utility construction project. This Change Order allows for the lowering of existing FAA cables in the work area and also for the removal of the existing individual drain traps to allow for the proper operation of the new flammable liquid waste traps. City Project 45218. Change Order #1 will increase the contract amount by $17,310.77 New Contract Amount: $280,495.97 Funding: 100% Local COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Resolution authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute Change Order #1 with Rochester Sand & Gravel. COUNCIL ACTION: motion by. second by to: 05/16/2006 09:49 FA% 5072523475 ROCH.SAND&GRAVEL a MCGHIE & BETTS Z003/003 CHANGE ORDER Change Order No. 1 Rochester International City Project No. NM 49 J: 3218 Airport Sponsor- City of Rochester Sponsor Address Date Prepared: Amount of Contract .y� , p(/ 2010 St SE 09116me $" Rochester MN 55904 Canter Contrac;WsAddress COMPLETION DATES Rochester Sand & Gravel 4105 East River Road Rochester, MN 559(1$ contract August 1, 2006 Revised: N!A Changes Ordered Lwres 6W L.F. FAA cable S8.041L F. s $4.800.00 F&I 150 LF, 4' Split Conduit @ $16.401i..F. a $Z460.00 Remove & Replace Floor Drains in Hangar'A' &'B', Coco plane = S7,792.84 General Co for Markup (16%) = $2,2577.93 Total = $17,31037 Reason Tar Change Order FAA requree a mi imurn of 3' of cover over eAWRg cables and 0hat ihey be placed In conduit under paved areas. FAA without lowering V* tablet. Site graft far street relocation would not comply with requirements MN Plumbing Code requires that fl a flsmmabie waste trap is iis>alled, the eAsQng floor drains can not have individual taps at each drain location, Thus new drain fb&lres are required to meet code. An aquitable adjustment for the uested is esl ablished as follow: CONTRACT PRICE CONTRACT TIME NotChWVed Not Changed x Increased by 517.310.77 Dollars Increased by ,_Dollars Decreased by Dollars decreased by —Dollars The foregoing is in accordance with your contract dated and the aforementioned change, and the work affected is su iect to all contract sd labors and covenants. SUBMITTED: ACCe7_ PUBLIC AGENCY: City of Rochester, MN (Contractor) By trojcal-/''A5RA--Iin'otn (Title) (Date) BY Mme) (Date) 5 EER: McGhke & In gy � Sl 0Co pate 60/Z0 mvd Si13M3IHMW EECL6BZL05 GZ:80 L00Z/91/50 05/03/2006 07:24 RU 5072523476 ROGH. SAND&GRA TL MCGHIE & BETTS Q001/001 May. 2. 2006 1: 31 PM No. 0741 P. 1 BLITZ CONSTRUCTION 10843 50 AVE SW STEWARTVILLE, MN 55976 Fax Note 7871 TPost-ii" o pages COJDepi. f i P/J anm,x ��� CO. Phma X Fe%AFax !Z 6 • /G UC� L9 ST �Y Irr'J YT7i)r �• /f' C�C'�L7.3 -4,� .2ccti CcIp/e, 4�161c/ 7 L 2ccL. Cayce. .s'C,4 e7/0 s/::P /; - Zo h afv r 74 o. i )bL 7t 05/16/2006 06:47 FAI 5072523476 MAY-15-200, 01:43P FROM: ROCH.SAND&GRAVEL + MCGHIE & BEM 12 003/003 TO:5072523477 0.2.2 IS S 1 �' Ir 0), j �, I: r��4 [(�fj f s 10843 50* Avenue SW • Stewartville, MN 85278 - (507) 533-8088 ATTN: Brian Schumacher EXTRA IN HANGER'S A&8 REPLACING C FLMR DIIAIN'S AND 2 VENT PIPE'S install 2 —12' round & 4 —12" square drains + 2 vents out roof $3,547-84 i Saw cuffing concrete $800.00 Jackhammer,removal & backfib $2.450.00 Concrete replacement $1000.00 TOTAL $7,792.84 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING f q DATE: 06/05/06 GENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Consent Rochester International Airport i ITEM DESCRIPTION: Change Order 42 for 2005 Airfield Runway and Electrical PREPARED BY: Improvements Project. Steven W. Legve The Rochester Airport Commission recommends and requests Council authorization to: Execute Change Order #2 for 2005 Airfield Runway and Electrical Improvements with Premier Electric. This change order involves the repair of several runway panels that deteriorated over the winter season. The net effect of this change order is a payment to Premier Electric of $20,452.50. With this payment we are still under the original Federal Grant amount. AIP Project #3-27-0084-20-04, State Project #5501-137, City Project #6971. Funding: 95% Federal 5% Local COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Resolution authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute Change Order #2 and all associated documents with Premier Electrical Corp.. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion ny Sewnd by: to: SENT' BY: 5-25- b ; 9:11AM 1 ITrAltK tLt41KlUAL" [1orL7104Lr8 LI 4 CHANGE ORDER Change Order No 2 Rochester International AIP 3-27-008420-04 MN Project No. 6501.131 Airport Sponsor— City of Rochester Sponsor Address Date Prepared: Amount of Contract 201 4" St. SE 0 IMS $20,482.50 Rochester, MN 85404 Contractor Contractor's Address COMPLETION DATES Premier Electric Corporation 440189 Ave North Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 Contract:: NIA Revised: NIA Changes Ordered Necessary runway rehabilitation on Runway 31 Reason for Change Order Several panels in runway have deteriorated over the winter and required rehabilitation I An equitable acQuatment for the changes requested is established as follow: CONTRACT PRICE CONTRACT TIME Nat Changed x Not Changed x Increased by 4 2.50 Dollars Increased by _Dollars Decreased by _Dollars Decreased by _Dollars The foregoing is in accordance with your contract and the aforementioned change, and the work affected thereby is subod to all contract stipulations and caveriants, _ SUBMITTED; ACCEPT D� Premier Etectriq Corp. PUBLIC AGENCY: City of Rochester, MN (Contrector) tr By By "a) (Date) (Title) (Date) LNGiNEER: ACSG.Inc. Byaj/' ine Approved: Feileral Aviation Administration (Distnct Airport Engineer) (Date) StAT tsy: b-LO- t3 ; y; 11Aa i MAIM CLCLIKIUAL- "L10F1i1174z6F Of 4 PREMIER a l PREMIER ELECTRICAL CORPORATION ~ • Electrical Installations 4401 - 85TH AVENUE NORTH y - . Limited Energy BROOKLYN PARK, MN 55443-1937 �r • Service Department Phone.1763) 424-ffi51 INVOICE 105022XO525 Fax:0631424-6M BILL TO: CITY OF ROCHESTER JOB: 105022 201 - 4TH STREET S.E. ROCHESTER INT'L AIRPORT ROCHESTER, MN 55904 AIP 3-27-1084-20 04 DATE: May 25 2006 MN PROJECT NO, 5501-137 5-25- 6 ; 9:12AN ; FF±XJER ELECCRICALy 05/15l2tle6 86:52 5513225999 Moftb ■ ola M. %whaw Jft Rmg C w Nqwj PAOW. a oROM 21B7297542;# 4/ 4 R6K 02182 6/T2 ' �iOmlfllo. !BI# . 3m 3,00 0" 9,730.Co 10.M C raw 71,N owom --K.aI�0 Tllf�y A YMrq tllllp OlTJS � �N 11/KN'wry ell W XWbmbYieu:G Mqe ppdtlR :7500ppy�11 �.�tOdltl,'Sl913 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 0� DATE: 6/5/06 AGENDA SECTION: Consent Agenda City Clerk DEPT: s ITEM DESCRIPTION: Change in Location for Certain Voting Precincts in the City of PREPARED 6Y: Rochester Judy Scherr The following election polling place locations need to be changed to accommodate increasing numbers of voters due to newly/future annexed lands in areas of the City (2500+ people in Marion Township in the next three years alone), additional space to accommodate two new voting machines (scanner and HAVA equipment) in each precinct, additional parking, and the loss of a building formerly used as a voting precinct. M.S. 204B.16, subd. 3 requires the governing board to approve polling place changes no later than 90 days prior to an election or no later than June 14'h this year. Olmsted County is required to notify registered voters in each precinct, via nonforwardable mail notice, of the change of location at least 25 days before the next election. There should be minimal or no need to change voting precinct locations in the future until after the federal census in 2010. Redistricting of ward boundaries will occur in 2011 with the first federal/state elections scheduled in 2012. 1st Ward lst Precinct lst Ward 5t11 Precinct 2°d Ward 41h Precinct 4th Ward 5th and 7th Precincts 4th Ward 6th Precinct Current Location New Location Name Change Only — from First Baptist Church to Studio Academy 415 161h Street SW Pinewood School 1900 Pinewood Rd. SE Olm. Co. Historical Society 1195 West Circle Drive SW Knights of Columbus Hall 2030 Highway 14 East Longfellow School 1615 Marion Road SE Ascension Evan. Lutheran Church 2207 llth Avenue SE Autumn Ridge Church 3611 Salem Road SW UCR Regional Sports Center 851 30`h Avenue SE Christ Lutheran Church 2904 201h Street SE COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: RCA —Voting Precinct Changes June 5, 2006 5th Ward lst Precinct 6th Ward 3Id Precinct Washington School 120011 th Avenue NW Gage East School 930 40th Street NW COUNCIL ACTION REOUESTED Gloria Dei Lutheran Church 1212 12th Avenue NW Seventh Day Adventist Church 1100 3711, Street NW A motion to adopt a resolution approving the changes in voting precincts for the City of Rochester. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING ar=ENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA CITY CLERK ITEM DESCRIPTION: LICENSES, BONDS & MISCELLANEOUS CITY ACTIVITIES DATE: 6/. D- 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 — ON SALE Olmsted County Fair Olmsted County Fairgrounds 3`d Ave & 16' St SE Rochester, Mn. 55904 July 31 s` to August 6t' CIRCUS Astro Amusement Company 33 West Higgins Road South Barrington, I160010 For Olmsted County Fair 7/11/06 to 8/6/06 GAMBLING — PREMISE PERMIT Hiawatha Sno Seekers 16243 Co Rd 9 Dover, Mn. 55929 PREMISE AT: 63 Club 1726 South Broadway GAMBLING — TEMPORARY SE Minnesota Association of Realtors 3400 East River Rd NE Rochester, Mn. 55906 Raffle 7/19/06 COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to LICENSE, BONDS AND MISCELLANEOUS CITY ACTIVITIES , PAGE 2 .TUNE 5, 2006 Ronald McDonald House 850 2nd St SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 Raffle 7/28/06 AT Willow Creek Golf Course 1700 48t St SW ON SALE TEMPORARY LIQUOR St John the Evangelist Catholic Church 11 — 40' Ave SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 Annual Block Parry July 8, 2006 PEACE PLAZA FOOD CART Steven S. Ross DBA Wally's Wieners 603 0 St SE Rochester, Mn. 55904 SIDEWALKS — CEMENT Hildebrandt Construction 1104 5" St NE Stewartville, Mn. 55976 SIDEWALK CAFE Victoria's Restaurant 7—l'tAve NW Rochester, Mn. 55901 MISCELLANEOUS Salvation Army 20 — l' Ave NE Rochester, Mn. 55906 Musical Concert 6/25/06 & 8/27/06 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM David Sletten for Minnesota Mile 606 3' Ave NE Byron, Mn. 55920 5K Run 8/19/06 6:30 AM to l l:30 AM LICENSES, BONDS AND MISCELLANEOUS CITY ACTIVITIES PAGE JUNE 5, 2006 St John the Evangelist Catholic Church 11-4`hAve SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 Annual Block Parry July 8, 2006 Rochester Jaycees %Anne Wangsness 416 Zumbro Dr NW 41 Rochester, Mn. 55901 4"' of July Kiddie Parade 7/4/06 8:00 AM to ll:30 AM COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve the above licenses, bonds and miscellaneous city activities. MEETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 6/5/06 —ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY CLERK b _ � ITEM DESCRIPTION: STREET CLOSINGS, METERS BAGGED PREPARED 130 ROCHESTERFEST 2006 DONNA J SCHOTT The folloNng street closings are needed for the Rochesterfest Celebration for 2005 running June 18d' thru June 26th. Street closing have been cleared through the Public Works and Police Departments. Sunday June 181h 6:00 AM through Sundav, June 25th Streets Closed Civic Center Dr from Center Street to 2"d Street S.E. — All meters bagged —No Parking 1" Street S.E. from Civic Center Dr to I" .Avenue S.E. — All meters bagged — No Parking Meters Bagged: 100 Block West Side of 1" Avenue S.E. Between 2"d Street and I" Street S.E. —Bagged for Reserved Parking (Police, Fire, Emergency & Rochesterfest Personnel) 8 Meters in the 10 Block of 1 st Ave SE on West Side Starting at the South End — Bagged for Reserved Parking Monday June 19 2006 — No Parking after 1:00 PM Meters Bagged — Johnson Printing Comer (311 2"d Ave NW) 2"d St NW — North Side of Park - 100 to 200 Block 2" d Ave NW — West Side — 100 to 200 Block Friday, June 23, 2006 Street Closings — Grand Parade 1. Civic Center Dr at Broadway East to west Silver Lake Dr/Civic Center Dr NE 2. West Silver Lake Dr from 7d' St NE, South to Civic Center Dr (South Bound Lanes Only). 3. Civic Center Dr South to East Center St. (All Lanes). 4. l st St to I" Ave NE 5. 1" St NE — Behind Wells Fargo - 200 Block — Bag Meters Will be closed at 1.00 PM to allow for parade line-up. Local traffic will be Allowed until 5:00 PM. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: STREET CLOSINGS — ROCHESTERFEST 2006 PAGE 2 JUNE 5, 2006 FRIDAY JUNE 23, 2006 - CONTINUED 1. Yd Ave SE from 2"d St SE, South to e St SE 2. 4 h St SE from 3`d Ave SE East to 1 ld' Ave SE 3. 11 a' Ave from 4d' St SE North to East Center St. 4. East Center St from 11a' Ave SE West to 15` Ave SE 5. 2"d St and I" Ave SE Will be Closed at 5:45 PM During the parade, 9`s Ave and East Center along with I O'h Ave and 40' St SE will be Manned by Police Officer and used as emergency/escape routes for local residents. Meters Bagged and Parking Lots Closed: 1. Mayo Field Parking Lot, Civic Center North Parking Lot. Closed All Day Friday, June 23, 2006 2. Posted NO PARKING signs Thursday June 22, 2006 after 4:00 PM on the parade route (including any metered areas). Vehicles will be towed after 5:00 PM on Friday, June 23, 2006 SATURDAY, JUNE 24, 2006 Street Closings — Street Dance 15` St SE Closed at East End IS` Ave SE Closed From 1" St to Center St (by Post Bulletin) Will Be Closed at 7:00 AM COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve the Rochesterfest 2006 street closing and bagging of meters. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING '3I - DATE: 6/5/06 "^ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA CITY CLERK L Q ITEM DESCRIPTION: ROCHESTERFEST ACTIVITIES PREPARED BY: DONNA JSCHOTT The following licenses, permits and miscellaneous activities are needed for the Rochesterfest 2006 events during the week of June 17a' thru June 25th. It is also requested that sound amplification permits be given a blanket approval for waiver of the time requirements for those events that exceed 11:00 PM. DATE OF EVENT LICENSES/PERMITS SATURDAY, JUNE 17 Lumberjack Championships Sound Amplification Permit, 3.2% Beer, Miscellaneous American Heart Ass'n Walk Miscellaneous Intertribal Pow Worn Sound Amplification Permit, Miscellaneous Frisbee Dog Contest Miscellaneous Blues Dance Sound Amplification Permit, Dance Oakwood Cemetery Walk Miscellaneous SUNDAY, JUNE 18 Lumberjack Championships Sound Amplification Permit, 3.2% Beer, Miscellaneous Guided Historic Walking Tour Miscellaneous Intertribal Pow Wow Sound Amplification Permit, Miscellaneous MONDAY, JUNE 19 Downtown Noon Entertainment Sound Amplification Permit Ice Cream Social Sound Amplification Permit, Miscellaneous Teen Night Sound Amplification Permit, Dance TUESDAY, RUNE 20 Downtown Noon Entertainment Sound Amplification Permit Celebrity Game Fright Sound Amplification Permit WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21 Downtown Noon Entertainment Sound Amplification Permit Kiwanis Parent/Child Fair Miscellaneous Family Fun Night Sound Amplification Permit 10 Who Make A Difference Sound Amplification Permit COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: le 301L ROCHESTERFEST ACTIVITIES PAGE 2 JUNE 5, 2006 THURSDAY, JUNE 22 Downtown Noon Entertainment Country Night DBA I" St Market & Concert FRIDAY, JUNE 23 Downtown Noon Entertainment Fabulous Friday Night Dance Grand Parade SATURDAY, JUNE 24 Yard Sale & Learn to Row Sandblast River Walk Water Ski Show Street Dance SUNDAY, JUNE 25 1860's Baseball Civic Music Concert COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Sound Amplification Permit Sound Amplification Permit. Dance, 3.2% Beer Miscellaneous, Sound Amplification Permit Sound Amplification Permit Sound Amplification Permit. Dance. 3.2% Beer Sound Amplification Permit, Parade Miscellaneous Miscellaneous Miscellaneous, Sound Miscellaneous Sound Amplification Permit. Dance, 3.2% Beer Sound Amplification Permit Sound Amplification Permit, Miscellaneous A motion to approve the above Rochesterfest Activities for June 2006 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 351 MEETING DATE: 6/5/06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Consent Agenda Finance Department -T) 9 ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED By: Approval of Accounts Payable Dale Martinson Respectfully request a motion to approve the following cash disbursements: Investment purchases of $9,838,260.80 Accounts payable of $10,952,720.37 Total disbursements $20,790,981.17 (Detailed listing of disbursements submitted separately.) COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: j REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: (o S pLe AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Consent Agenda Fire i r tY x ITEM DESCRIPTION: City Council approval to accept three donations to the Rochester Fire PREPARED BY: Department Pubilic Education Safety Fund (42230.59560) R. Vance Swisher COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED The Rochester Fire Department is requesting that City Council approve acceptance of the following donations to the Rochester Fire Department Public Education Safety Fund (42230.59560). • Sam's Club #6427 - $1,000.00 • Rochester Education Association - $150.00 • Hy-Vee Barlow Plaza - $323.71 The Rochester Fire Department will send a follow up letter to each organization upon City Council approval to accept their donation. 391 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE 6/5/06 ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. _insent Human Resources IL ) ITEM DESCRIPTION: Execute NEOGOV Service and Escrow Agreements PREPAF Linda NEOGOV workforce management system, tailored to the unique needs of public sector employers, has been chosen to automate the City's hiring process. The products and services of NEOGOV will streamline the recruiting, selection and hiring processes city-wide. Applicants will submit employment applications and receive status updates and notifications electronically. Department heads, managers, and supervisors will have detailed scoring, reporting and analysis tools available. The automated scoring functionality utilizes the criteria established by the hiring manager and electronically identifies the qualified applicants. Identified department representatives will be able to view applications via the internet. The first phase of implementation will be to offer the online application for all City of Rochester employment opportunities effective June 15, 2006. After this initial phase, Human Resources will continue to implement additional features of NEOGOV. The additional functionalities include an online requisition process, detailed applicant tracking, applicant correspondence, detailed reporting, and analysis tools. Ultimately, NEOGOV will enhance the recruitment, hiring, and selection process to attract the most qualified applicants. NEOGOV has prepared a Services Agreement and Preferred Escrow Agreement outlining the terms and conditions for providing online services. Start-up costs were requested and approved in the CIP for 2006 and amount to $7,000 for provision of the system and training and $2,500 for the escrow arrangement. The agreements have been reviewed by the Director of Human Resources, Director of Finance and IT, and the City Attorney. NEOGOV has extended the City a six (6) month, full money back guarantee. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreements. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING / DATE: 6/5/06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Consent Agenda Police (� ITEM DESCRIPTION: Advertise Bids for Communications Center Consoles PREPARED BY: Rick Krueger The Police Department requests approval to advertise for new Communications Center consoles and related equipment to be furnished to the City as indicated in the specifications provided by the Police Department. The funding for this item has been budgeted in the 2006 Capital improvements Program. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids for new Communications Center consoles and related equipment. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING Z// / DATE: 6/5/2006 AGENDA SECTION: Consent Agenda Police Modifications of Armored Vehicle by Sole Source Vendor DEPT: PREPARED BY: Steven Johnston Funds to revamp/upgrade an armored vehicle for the Police Department's Emergency Response Unit were requested and approved in the Department's 2006 Machinery and Equipment Revolving Fund Request. The cost of the work will be $51,472.50. This amount would normally require that the City let competitive bids for the work. The Police Department would like the City Council to review this request to determine whether the Council believes it would be appropriate for the City of Rochester to forego the normal bidding process in favor of a sole source vendor. Police Department staff has researched the nature of the work to be done and searched for vendors capable of performing the work over a period of about two years. The search for vendors was limited to companies that specialized in armored vehicles. The Department contacted several national tactical officer organizations and publications and was unable to locate any vendor that could meet the needs of our upgrade project. The Department eventually contacted Bodyguard Armoring in Austin, Texas. Bodyguard Armoring gave a quote of $51,472.50. Our upgrade project is somewhat unique in that it involves modifying the body of our current armored vehicle to fit onto a new chassis — something that other companies were unwilling or unable to do. r`1.partment staff found three other vendors who specialized in armored vehicles. None of the three wanted to bid on the oject because they either dealt with new vehicles or did not perform the type of work needed. One of these companies referred us to Bodyguard Armoring. Department Staff spent a several hours searching the hitemet for other vendors to no avail. Consequently we believe that Bodyguard Armoring would likely be the only bidder willing and capable of performing the work in an acceptable manner and that letting this project forbids would only further delay the completion of the work. It is important to complete this project as soon as possible because the armored vehicle is an essential piece of rescue equipment that could be needed at any time and is not in dependable condition at this time. The cost of the work is within the amount budgeted for the project. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: The Police Department would like the City Council to make a determination of whether or not to allow the Police Department to bypass the normal bid process and enter into a sole -source purchase of services, and if so to authorize the Mayor and the Clerk to enter into a contract with Body Guard Armoring of Austin, Texas to perform the work needed on the armored vehicle provided that the terms and conditions of the contract meet with the approval of the City Attorney. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: d� / REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/2006 ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM ND CONSENT Police 'j1 `�" ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: City Ordinance Revisions Steven Johnston Requested addition to RCO 134.34 (Parking meters) The purpose of this request is to allow public/governmental employees to perform their duties without being hampered by the need to plug a parking meter. The Police Department will dismiss these citations routinely. This addition to RCO 134.34 will serve to legitimize what has been practice for some time. The Police Department requests that the following subdivision be added to that ordinance. Subd 4 Vehicles exempted This section does not apply to vehicles that are owned by any governmental entity when the driver of that vehicle is on duty or is performing a governmental service. Requested revision to RCO 134.23, Subd. 2. The purpose of this request is to allow the Police and Public Works Departments to park speed mnnitnrin❑ trailers without violating the one -hour time restrictions otherwise imposed on trailers by RCO W23 Subd 1. Subdivision 2 of that ordinance grants exemptions. The Police Uepanmeni requests LnaL ,34.23 Subd. 2 be modified as follows. The text to be deleted is indicated with a strikethrough. The new text to be added is underlined. Subd. 2. This section does not apply to overnight parking related to emergencies, public works projects, construction projects, 49-A-f Civic Center or community events where such overnight parking is approved by the Police Department or the Public Works Department or trailer -mounted speed monitoring equipment. These proposed revisions have been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Amend RCO 134.34 and 134.23 Subd. 2 as described above. The Department would request that the normal rules be suspended, waiving additional reading of this action so that these changes may become effective on June 11, 2006. These changes will not affect the citizens of Rochester in general. COUNCILACTION: Mobonby: second by: io: Meeting REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date_ 6105106 AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. � Rochester Public Utilities Consent Agenda ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: Kathy Wilson Consideration of Public Utility Board Action The Rochester Public Utility Board has approved the following on May 30, 2006 and requests the Common Council's favorable consideration: to approve a resolution to approve an air permit settlement agreement with the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA), and that the Common Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement for Air Permit Settlement Agreement, Silver Lake Plant Unit 4 (Air Emissions Permit Number 10900011-003). to approve a resolution to approve a Term Sheet for Power Supply Arrangements between Olmsted County, the City of Rochester and the Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency (SMMPA), and the creation of an Addendum to the August 8, 1994 Interconnection and Interchange Agreement between Olmsted County, Minnesota, the City of Rochester, Minnesota and SMMPA, contingent upon the approval of the City Attorney and General Manager, and that the Board request the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Addendum. GENERAL MANAGER: X7 F COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: FOR BOARD ACTION Agenda Item # 5. Meeting Date: 5130106 SUBJECT: Air Permit Settlement Agreement PREPARED BY: Joe Hensel, Director of Field Services ITEM DESCRIPTION: A major amendment of the Silver Lake Plant Air Permit that allowed the construction of the RPU/Mayo steam system was approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) on June 27, 2003. Following permit issuance the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA) filed a petition for review to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) on the grounds that the Clean Air Act requires the installation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for a PSD project involving a major modification. The EAB denied the petition for review and affirmed the issuance of the permit on August 3, 2004. MCEA then filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit. RPU Management and attorneys from Van Ness Feldman (VNF) have been negotiating with MCEA to resolve the legal challenge of the permit. During negotiations a settlement agreement was drafted and revised numerous times to deal with issues and concerns of both parties. MCEA's attorney recently informed VNF that the settlement agreement had finally been agreed to by their client. Follow-up review by MPCA, Minnesota AG office, DOJ and U.S. EPA was also satisfactorily concluded. The settlement agreement essentially obligates RPU to proceed with the emission control project for Silver Lake Plant Unit 4. The cost for emission control is in the range of $29—$34 million based on a refined cost estimate prepared by Utility Engineering. This proposed project was reviewed by the Board at the July 2005 meeting and the Board directed staff to proceed with design, engineering and pernutting. An update will be provided to the Board on the project, including costs and schedule. It is our understanding that execution of the settlement agreement will be a definitive action and no further administrative or legal appeals of permit issuance would be available. The final version of the agreement has been review by the City Attorney. A copy of the agreement is provided for Board review. UTILITY BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: It is recommended that the Board approve the settlement agreement and request Common Council approval, and settlement agreement execution by the Mayor and City Clerk. ,it :5 v3S G66eral Manager bate FOR BOARD ACTION qfl 1 Agenda Item # 6. Meeting Date: 5130106 SUBJECT: RPU /Olmsted Term Sheet for Power Supply Arrangement PREPARED BY: Wally Schlink, Director of Power Resources ITEM DESCRIPTION: Minnesota Statute 216B.1691 established a Renewable Energy Objective (REO) for Electric Utilities which set a good faith effort to generate or procure renewable energy to provide their retail customers commencing in 2005 of at least one percent of total retail electric sales. This amount increases by one percent of the utilities total retail electric sales each year until 2015. A section of this statute specifically identifies that a portion of the renewable energy must be generated by a biomass energy technology including a municipal solid waste facility. The Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency is included in this legislation and must meet the objective, as well as file plans with the commission reporting on its efforts to meet the objective. Although it appears that municipalities are exempted by the statute is has been the policy of RPU to actively participate in providing renewable energy to our customers and to support local initiatives in our community. The Olmsted County Waste to Energy Facility is in the process of installing a third burner in their plant that will increase the electrical output of their facility and meets the definition of biomass energy technology in the statute. RPU, SMMPA and OWEF have been in discussions to develop a mutually beneficial agreement that helps SMMPA meet the REO, supports RPU in supplying a significant amount of renewable energy to its retail customers and provides a dependable revenue stream to OWEF by agreeing to purchase all surplus generation from the OWEF facility. The parties have reached an agreement and developed a term sheet that establishes the financial terms and obligations of the tentative agreement which is attached. The items of significance are: • SMMPA will receive the available accredited capacity from OWEF Units I & 2 • SMMPA will receive the available accredited capacity from OWEF Unit 3 when completed • SMMPA will purchase the surplus energy when we are below CROD for $.0415 per kWh • RPU will purchase the surplus energy when we are above CROD for $.05 per kWh • Energy prices will be escalated at the GDP Implicit Price Deflator for the first quarter of each year The term of the agreement is ten years with a continuation clause unless notice of termination. The actual contract will be handled as an addendum to the August 8, 1994 Interconnect and Interchange Agreement between Olmsted County, Minnesota, the City of Rochester, Minnesota and Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency. a.M Ge ral Manager bate JI FOR BOARD ACTION Agenda Item # 6. Meeting Date: 6130106 UTILITY BOARD ACTION REOUESTED: 1. Staff requests Utility Board approval of the RPU / Olmsted Term Sheet for Power Supply Arrangement. 2. Staff recommends that the Utility Board approve the creation of an Addendum to the August 8, 1994 Interconnection and Interchange Agreement between Olmsted County, Minnesota, the City of Rochester, Minnesota and the Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency, contingent on the approval of the City Attorney and General Manager, and that the Board request the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Addendum. General Manager Date REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE 21�-? / 06/05/06 :ENDASECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works D lQ ITEM DESCRIPTION: AWARD OF CONTRACT: (J2574) PREPARED BY: Construct / Expand the Civic Center North Parking Lot D. Nelson Bids were received and opened after 11:00 a.m., May 31, 2006 for the following local improvement. Project: City No. (J2574-06) Construct / Expand the Civic Center North Parking Lot ProiectBackground: The project consists of constructing bituminous surfacing, curb and gutter, storm sewer, landscaping, and parking lot lighting. This project will accommodate bus and large vehicle parking requirements. The project will be funded from Parking Enterprise funds. r5 k irr p h k y x PROJECT LOCATION err a r. The following bids were received: Total Bid 1. Rochester Sand & Gavel $ 101,876.88 2. Road Constructors, Inc $ 105,492.22 Engineers Estimate $ 89,863.90 Project Recommendation: Public Works Department recommends the City Council proceed with an award to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution awarding the contract, (J7245) Construct / Expand the Civic Center North Parking Lot to Rochester Sand & Gavel. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 06/05/06 GENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works 1) 1 ITEM DESCRIPTION: ADVERTISE FOR BIDS: (J7749) PREPARED BY: 1s1 Avenue SW from West Center Street to 2n, Street SW D. Nelson This is a request for a resolution to advertise for bids for the following project: Project: City No. (J7749) d Reconstruct 1"Avenue SW from West Center Street to 2" Street SW Project Background: The consists of reconstructing 15t Avenue SW from Center Street to 2nd Street SW. Work will project include: new concrete pavement, new sidewalks, curb and gutter, signal system modifications at 1" Ave and 1" Street, and rehabilitation of storm sewer catch basins. This project is included in the 2006 -2011 Capital Improvement Program, item #23, page 36. This project will coordinate projects to turn 1" Street into a pedestrian area later in 2007. Funding for the project will be through City Share (tax levy funds) and from Assessments to the abutting property owners. PROJECT: LOCATION r s. i ti 1 I COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: A resolution should be adopted authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids and conduct a bid opening on June 28, 2006 at 11:00 AM. Note to City Clerk: Advertise 3 times in the Post Bulletin and Construction Bulletin. Attachments: Notice of Bids : OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 6-3 / DATE: 6-5-06 3ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED AEBY:Establish No Parking Zone on Wood Lake Drive SE D. Kram Whistle Binkie's parking has been overflowing onto Wood Lake Dr SE. The congestion has caused difficulty for Rochester City Lines buses to get through the adjacent curved section of Wood Lake Drive. Emergency vehicles such as fire trucks would have a similar difficulty. A no -parking zone is proposed on the inside of the curve, plus on the outside of the curve from 20' south of the Whistle Binkie's driveway to west of the Textile Care driveway. Businesses in the area have adequate off-street parking and are not expected to be affected, with the exception of Whistle Binkie's patrons, who may have to walk a bit further when the parking lot is full. Ty S2 Textile Care Services wOOD LAKE DR SE Whistle Binkie's \ 35 ST SE I COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Add paragraph 343 to Section B "No Parking Zones" of the Comprehensive Traffic and Parking Resolution to read as follows: 343 Wood Lake Dr SE, on the southwest side from 320 feet to 610 feet more or less north of the easterly intersection with 35th St SE, and on the northeast side from 420 feet to 560 feet more or less north of the easterly intersection with 35th St SE, at all times. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: GENDA SECTION: CONSENT REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works ITEM NO 6/5/06 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Service Agreement: Minnesota Conservation Corps and PREPARED BY: Rochester Public Works ►; B. Huberty Last year the City contracted with the Minnesota Conservation Corps (MCC) to complete work on two storm water maintenance projects at sites with such difficult access that heavy equipment use was not possible without extensive environmental damage. Additionally, MCC was selected for those projects because the maintenance activities could only be completed using low impact methods that require intensive manual labor. Using City staff or contracting with construction companies would not have been an appropriate use such skilled labor. The Minnesota Conservation Corps (MCC) is a non-profit organization rooted in the Civilian Conservation Corps of the 1930's that specializes in conservation project work. It is their goal to provide an affordable alternative ($550.00 per four -person crew per day) for accomplishing natural resource related projects in exchange for hands-on experience for their trained and supervised crews. The Public Works Department again desires to use MCC services for up to 12 crew days this summer in order to rehabilitate several storm water ponds and a drainage way. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approve a contract with MCC in an amount not to exceed $6,600.00 to be paid with the Storm Water Utility operating budget. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion Second bv: to: H AStormwater\MCC RCA 2006 Contract.DOC 56 SERVICE AGREEMENT Between _r__M Minnesota Conservation Corps s City of Rochester This contract, and amendments and supplements thereto, subject to the Laws of Minnesota is by and between the FRIENDS OF THE MINNESOTA CONSERVATION CORPS, 2715 Upper Afton road, Suite 100, Maplewood, MN 55119 (hereinafter "MCC') and City of Rochester, 201 4th St. SE, Room 108, Rochester, MN 55904 (hereinafter "PURCHASER"). The PURCHASER is in need of assistance with watershed stabilization work. MCC represents that it is duly qualified and agrees to provide the services described in this contract. TERM OF CONTRACT 1.1 Effective date: June 5, 2006 or the date MCC obtains all required signatures, whichever is later. 1.2 Expiration date: September 30, 2006, or until all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first. DUTIES OF MCC 2.1 Complete services as specified in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto, and shall be a part of this contract. 2.2 Hire and supervise MCC personnel in accordance with MCC guidelines. 2.3 Provide basic orientation and training as appropriate for MCC corpsmembers. 2.4 Provide consultation and on -site project review to ensure that service is progressing in accordance with this contract and MCC guidelines. 2.5 Provide personnel and payroll administration for MCC corpsmembers. 2.6 Provide all necessary transportation of MCC corpsmembers to and from service sites. 2.7 Provide basic tools, safety gear, personal supplies and equipment needed by MCC corpsmembers to meet all state and federal safety requirements. 2.8 Provide worker's compensation for all MCC corpsmembers. 2.9 Track services completed and make this information available to PURCHASER upon request. MCC Service Agreement: July 1, 2005 Page 1 City of Rochester sr DUTIES OF PURCHASER 3.1 Provide project specific direction and assistance to the MCC work crew. 3.2 Provide public information that MCC is performing services within the PURCHASER'S area of responsibility. 3.3 Provide at least one media promotion to the public stating that the services(s) are being performed by MCC. Any publicity regarding the subject matter of this contract must not be released without prior written approval from MCC's Authorized Representative. 3.4 Ensure safe working conditions in and around project areas that meet all state and federal standards. 3.5 Secure all local, county, state and federal permits required by law prior to the commencement of work. 3.6 Provide MCC corpsmembers with training and educational opportunities relevant to the services being performed. PURCHASER may provide or arrange said training or may request MCC assistance in providing or arranging said training, as described in Exhibit A. 3.7 Provide specialized tools, safety gear, personal supplies and equipment that are not available through MCC and that are needed by MCC corpsmembers to meet all state and federal safety requirements. 3.8 Provide all project materials, supplies and chemicals. PAYMENT 4.1 PURCHASER will pay MCC for services performed by MCC. 4.2 PURCHASER's obligation to MCC under this contract is up to a maximum of $6,600.00, based on the following fee schedule: $550.00 per four -person crew per day. 4.3 MCC may invoice monthly. MCC shall send final invoice to PURCHASER upon service completion. 4.4 PURCHASER shall make payment within 30 days of receipt of invoices. CANCELLATION 5.1 This contract may be cancelled by the PURCHASER or MCC at any time, with or without cause, upon 30 days written notice to the other party. In the event of such cancellation, MCC shall be entitled to payment for services performed. 5.2 MCC reserves the right to withdraw corpsmembers from PURCHASER for emergency response work including, but not limited to, natural disasters and wild fire response. MCC will make reasonable efforts to accommodate the needs of the PURCHASER. PURCHASER has no funding commitment to MCC for services completed by MCC while corpsmembers have been withdrawn from PURCHASER for emergency response. PURCHASER shall remain liable for payment for services that MCC provides to PURCHASER. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES 6.1 MCC's Authorized Representative is Dustin Looman, 2300 Silver Creek Road NE, Rochester, MN, 55901, (507) 280-5581, or his/her successor. The PURCHASER's Authorized Representative is Barb Huberty, Environmental and Regulatory Affairs Coordinator, 201 4th St. SE, Room 108, Rochester, MN 55904, (507) 529- 4907, or his/her successor. MCC Service Agreement: July 1, 2005 Page 2 City of Rochester AMENDMENTS WAIVER AND CONTRACT COMPLETE 7.1 Any amendments to this contract shall be in writing and shall be executed by the same parties who executed the original contract or their successors in office. T2 If MCC fails to enforce any provision of this contract, that failure does not waive the provision or its right to enforce it. LIABILITY 8.1 Each party shall be responsible for its own acts and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts and omissions of the other party and the results thereof. GOVERNING LAW JURISDICTION AND VENUE 9.1 Minnesota law, without regard to its choice -of -law provisions, governs this contract. Venue for all legal proceedings out of this contract, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. DUPLICATION DISPLACEMENT, SUPPLANTATION 10.1 PURCHASER certifies that assignment of MCC corpsmembers will not result in: 10.1.1 Duplication of an activity otherwise available in the locality of the program. 10.1.2 Displacement of currently employed workers or workers on seasonal layoff or layoff from a substantially equivalent position, including partial displacement such as reduction in hours of non -overtime work, wages, or other employment benefits. 10.1.3 Termination or layoff of employees. 10.1.4 Infringement on the promotional opportunity of an employee or infringement on services performed by an employee as part of the employee's assigned duties. 10.1.5 Supplantating the hiring of employed workers. 10.1.6 Infringement on the assignments of any presently employed worker; an employee who recently resigned or was discharged; an employee who is on leave, on strike, being locked out, subject to a reduction in force, or has recall rights subject to a collective bargaining agreement or applicable personnel procedure. 10.2 (Applicable to AmeriCorps MCC Crews.) MCC crews that are AmeriCorps funded are subject to the provisions of 42 U.S.C. §§ 12501 - 12682 and 45 C.F.R. parts 2500 - 2550. These laws require, in part, that AmeriCorps assistance be used only for a program that: 10.2.1 Does not duplicate, and is in addition to, an activity otherwise available in the locality of the program; 10.2.2 Will not displace an employee or position, including partial displacement such as reduction in hours, wages, or employment benefits; and 10.2.3 Will not create a service opportunity that will infringe on the promotional opportunity of an employee. 10.3 The positions and job duties of persons employed in projects shall be submitted to affected exclusive representatives prior to actual assignment. An AmeriCorps/MCC member shall not perform services or duties or engage in activities that: 10.3.1 Would otherwise be performed by an employee as part of the employee's assigned duties. MCC Service Agreement: July 1, 2005 Page 3 City of Rochester '7 10.3.2 Will supplant the hiring of employed workers. 10.3.3 Are services or duties with respect to which an individual has recall rights pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement or applicable personnel procedures. 10.3.4 Have been performed by or were assigned to any presently employed worker; an employee who recently resigned or was discharged; an employee who is on leave, on strike, being locked out, subject to a reduction in force, or has recall rights subject to a collective bargaining agreement or applicable personnel procedure. ASSIGNMENT 11.1 Neither party may assign this Agreement or any interest herein without the other party's prior and written consent. MERGER 11.2 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. The parties agree that there were no inducements or representations leading to the execution of this Agreement except as stated herein. The parties agree that this Agreement supersedes all prior oral and written agreements, and communications between the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this contract to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. PURCHASER: PURCHASER certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed this contract on behalf of PURCHASER as required by applicable articles, by-laws, resolutions, or ordinances. By: Title: Mayor of Rochester Date: ATTEST: By: Title: Rochester City Clerk Date: MCC: MCC certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed this contract on behalf of MCC as required by applicable articles, by-laws, resolutions, or ordinances. In Title: Asst. District Manager Date: (Seal) MCC Service Agreement: July 1, 2005 Page 4 City of Rochester &0 EXHIBIT A MCC will work under the direction of Rochester Public Works Department to complete the following listed storm water maintenance activities. Two projects will be targeted during the # of (12 days for a 4 person crew, not to exceed $6,600) allotted to the City. Projects will be completed as time allows, according to the priority order listed below. If additional time remains after the completion of these two projects, other similar tasks may be offered to MCC for completion up to but not exceeding the approved budget. 1. Storm Water Pond Logging The MCC will be given a list of ponds that require removal of trees, brush, rubble and litter. They will also be given site -specific instructions, maps, and figures necessary to facilitate the work, as necessary. Where possible, wood will be thin spread on -site to allow for natural decomposition. When this is not feasible, depending on the quality of the wood, it will either need to be chipped or hauled to the Hathaway Brush dump, which will necessitate coordination with the Rochester Park and Recreation Department or the Community Work Service crew, respectively. Any debris will need to be delivered to the Public Drop Area at the Ohnsted County Solid Waste Management facilities on Silver Creek Dr., either by MCC or in cooperation with Community Work Service. 2. Woodridge Apartments Drainage Way Over time, the drainage way on the west side of Woodridge Apartments has become choked with sediment and vegetation that need to be removed prior to re -grading and re -seeding. MCC will manage the removal of vegetation according to the same procedures identified in Item 1. MCC will assist City Maintenance staff with the removal of sediment. MCC staff may also be needed to either complete the seeding following instructions provided by the seeding contractor or assist the seeding contractor with installation. MCC Service Agreement: July 1, 2005 Page 5 City of Rochester 61 conformance with the City standards and the approved drainage plan, grading plan and specifications. e) Owner acknowledges that development of the Property is limited due to inadequate capacity in the existing public storm sewer system. To accommodate development of the Property, the Owner agrees to construct at its own expense public storm sewer pipe (size to be determined by the City) extending in the 19th Ave NW ROW approximately 400 south of the Property and there connecting to an existing stormsewer man hole. For constructing the off -site storm sewer, the Owner will be reimbursed for a portion of its cost by the City in the form of a credit in the amount of $7000.00 which will be applied to the applicable Storm Water Management charge for the Property as outlined in paragraph (c) above. f) The proposed construction plans for this Project indicate that the Owner intends to construct private stormsewer within the public right-of-way. Prior to construction of any private infrastructure within the public right-of-way, the Owner shall make a written request to the City Engineer and shall have received written approval for such encroachment in the form of a Revocable Permit issued by the Rochester City Council. 6) Storm Water Management District. NA. 7) Avisational Easement. NA. 8) Noise Abatement. Owner will incorporate noise abatement designs into the permanent habitable buildings to be constructed on the Property consistent with the Housing and Urban Development interior noise levels established at no more than 45 dBA for interior spaces. Owner also waives all future rights to request government provision of any noise abatement to serve the Property. Owner agrees to dedicate a Noise/Air Space Easement for the entire Property, attached as Exhibit `B'. Owner agrees to pay a document preparation and recording fee of $70.03 for the Noise/Air Space Easement if the document is executed separate from this Development Agreement. 9) Trans ortation Improvement District. NA. 10) Transportation Improvements. Owner acknowledges the development of the Property impacts the abutting roadway infrastructure. Owner agrees to provide the following transportation improvements: a) Owner shall pay for all traffic control signs, as deemed necessary by the City Engineer. b) Owner agrees to pay for its proportional share of the proposed construction of 191h Ave NW, extending north along the west line of the Property from the proposed terminus of 29'° PI NW, and connecting to 30's PI NW. The Owner's cost applicable to the project shall be equal to the cost to design & construct a 36 wide bituminous roadway with concrete curb & gutter, storm sewer & catch basins, and pedestrian facilities. lllllllllllllllllllllllllllll OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER Ohnsted County, Minnesota I hereby certify that this document was filed in this office on 712912004 at 9:00:00 AM and was duly recorded as document number A-1031959 DANIEL J. HALL — County Recorder, by _Deputy, _p Well Certlficale: Received _ Not Required Abstr. — yes_ no_ Fees: Tntal S19.50 fleceivetl Imm/return m: CITY PUBLIC WORKS TONYA KLEES NOTE: This Development Agreement for the Property does not constitute an Official Document of the City of Rochester until approved as to form by the City Attorney and authorized by the Rochester City Council for execution by the Rochester Mayor and City Clerk. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Sawinski Pines (Part of Lots 19 & 20, Allendale Subdivision) 03123/04 THIS AGREEMENT, is made as of this A4day'of M,1 4"rr2D 6` by and between Emerald Green of Rochester, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, (hereinafter referred to as "Owner"), and the City of Rochester, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City"). WHEREAS, Owner owns and wishes to develop real property as a residential development proposed as GDP#226, "Sawinski Pines", which property is generally described as part of Lot 19, Allendale Subdivision, Olmsted County, Minnesota (See Exhibit 'A' for complete description); and, WHEREAS, Owner has an executed Purchase Agreement to acquire real property generally described as part of Lot 20, Allendale Subdivision, Olmsted County, Minnesota, and which upon purchase (anticipated closing on or before 8/l/04), intends to develop said property as a residential development proposed as PP#03-49 "The Pines" (See Exhibit `A' for complete description), and hereinafter referred collectively referred to along with that part of Lot 19, as the "Project" or the "Property," depending on the context in which it is used; and REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/06 ,ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works 'D �rJ ITEM DESCRIPTION: Supplemental Agreement #7 Value Engineering Gravity PREPARED BY: Interceptor Phase I, J7712 J. Loehr The City previously entered into a contract with Lametti & Sons, Inc. for the construction of a project described as follows: Project No. N12-42. J7712 "Gravity Interceptor Sewer Phase 1". SA #7 The plan and specification provide for installation of a siphon to be tunneled under the Zumbro River from stations 36+20 to 39+00. The Contractor has submitted a Value Engineering Proposal under section 01240 of the contract to substitute the tunneled siphon with the installation of the siphon by open cut methods. The open cut siphon proposal has been reviewed by Public Works staff the City consulting engineer HR Green. We find that the VE Proposal as submitted by Lametti & Sons is acceptable. Section 01240 stipulates that the City and Contractor both receive a shared benefit in the cost saving of the VE Proposal. The VE Proposal results in a deduct to the contract of ($247,536.00) as the savings to the City for the Value Engineering Proposal. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adopt a resolution authorizing of the Value Engineering Proposal SA #7 and a contract savings to the City of ($247,536.00). Attachment: SA #7 COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: CITY OF ROCHESTER- DEPARTMENT OF CITY ENGINEER SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT PAGE 1 OF' Supp. To Contract No. J7 No. 7 Contractor: Lametti & Sons, Inc. Fed. Project Project No.: M2-42 Dept No. J: 7712 Address: 16028 Forest Boulevard North Location: Gravity Flow Interceptor Phase I P.O. Box 477 Hugo, MN 55038 I his contract is amenWa as I011ews: WHEREAS; The plan and specification provide for a tunneled siphon from stations 36+20 to 39+00 as depicted on drawings „ x C5 and C19. Plan sheet SO, as issued under Addendum 2 and as modified via RFI 10 to the contract, calls for stainless steel d pipe, flexible couplings, flexible compression collars and thrust block; and, UWHEREAS; The Contractor has submitted a Value Engineering Proposal under section 01240 of the contract to substitute these features with an open cut siphon, HDPE pipe with bends and flexible boots as shown on attached sheets 1, 2 and 3; and, o v WHEREAS, The Engineer deems it appropriate to accept this proposed revision and share in the cost reduction of such VE 2 b Proposal subject to the following conditions. b 'FL; L Compliance with the terms of the MNDNR permit as modified. a _ 2. Relocation of mussels must be conducted prior to initiating river operations. Mussel relocation must be conducted J° between May 1 and October 1. Costs for mussel relocation will be borne by the City of Rochester. 3. The Contractor shall not make claim of any kind or character whatsoever, for any other cost or expense he may occur, or may be hereafter incurred as a result of work covered by this Agreement Contractor accepts all risks for this work including, but not limited to, unforeseeable subsurface conditions, severe weather and acts of God. a•q 3 U % d a o NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED THAT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL: °0 1. The Contractor shall constrict the siphon in accordance with attached sheets 1, 2 and 3. G e d a 2. The Contract Amount shall be adjusted as follows: „ „ y a. Items 4, 6 (160 LF), 13, 14, 15, 48 and 49 shall be removed from the contract and replaced with a lump sum o •= item equal to the value of said items at the quantities and unit prices indicated in the contract Schedule of E'm m b Prices, i.e. S1,453,000 (see Item 01240.01, Page 2/2) So w b. VE Proposal Item 01240.02 shall be added to the Schedule of Prices in the deductive amount of c 'o ($247,536.00). c. Progress payments for siphon work will be made for items 01240.01 and 01240.02 based on an approved 3 '0 Schedule of Values to be submitted by Contractor. a.v W4o E 9 $ Estimate of Cost !~ (SEE ATTACHED PAGE 2 OF 2) Ew60 Amount Requested $ ($247,536.00) Original Contract 10.827 415 00 Previous Additions $124,940.00 Total to Date $ 10,704,319 00 Percentage -increase -decrease 1.1% Approved as to form arld execution ------------------- City Attorney Approved by Common Council Resolution -------------- Date Mayor ----------------- Dated2006 Approval by Project Engineer Dated _ _ _ _ 2006 Dated _ _ _ _ 2006 Dated _ _ _ _ _ 2006 ------------ Accepted by Contractor ------------ Approved City Engineer ------------ Funds Available Director of Finance ------------------ City Clerk PAGE2OF2 a LL Y OF ROCHESTER- Supp. To Contract No. J7712 DEPARTMENT OF CITY ENGINEER No. 7 The Contract Schedule of Prices is hereby amended with the quantity and item revisions shown below. Item No. Item Unit Quantity unit ice Amount 4-5100.519 F AND I 24IN PIPE SEWER LF (324) $300.00 ($97,200.00) 6-5100.519 F AND I48 IN PIPE SEWER LF (160) $800.00 ($128,000.00) 13-5100.523 F AND 1108 IN CSG AND 48/24 PIPE LF (280) $32DO.00 ($896,000.00) 14-S100.534 F AND 124 IN 45 DEG BEND BEND (12) $2200.00 ($26,400.00) 15-S 100.534 F AND 149 IN 45 DEG BEND BEND (4) $4000.00 ($16,000.00) 48.2453.603 WORK SHAFT AT SIPHON INLET EACH (1) $150,000.00 ($150,000.00) 49-2453.603 WORK SHAFT AT SIPHON OUTLET EACH (1) $140,ODD.00 ($140,DOO.00) 01240.01 SIPHON STA 35+91 TO 39+99 LS 1 $1,453,000.00 $1,453,000.00 01240 02 VE DEDUCTION FOR SIPHON LS 1 ($247.536.00) ($247.536.00) TOTAL AMOUNT OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT ($247,536.00) REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING (9 7 / DATE: 6/05/06 3ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works ITEM DESCRIPTION: Engineering Services: Design Storm Water Ponds NW p 3.3 PREPARED BY: Project J 6555 J. Wellner The Storm Water Management Master Plan indicates the need for a storm water management pond to serve the storm water runoff from the Prairie Crossing Development and adjacent areas. The pond is located northeasterly of the Prairie Crossing Development and will serve Prairie Crossing as well as much of future city develoRment to be located within Section 4 of Cascade Township. The pond will be located to the south of 75t Street NW. McGhie & Betts, Inc. has provided a proposal for the professional services required to complete preliminary and design services for the construction of the pond. McGhie & Betts represents many of the developers in the watershed that will contribute storm water discharges that will impact the design requirements of the storm water pond. The proposal for Preliminary and Design services is based on an hourly rate basis not to exceed $63,540. The project is listed in the 2006 CIP page 72 line 27. 1111 75th Street NW _ �---- i Section 4 Z Y 1�> 4 i m Prairie Project Location Crossing i \ i l l i j COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an engineering service agreement with McGhie & Betts, Inc. in the amount of $63,540 for the Preliminary and Design of storm water management pond NW p3.3. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: q/ / 6/5/06 "GENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: CONSENT AGENDA I Public Works ITEM DESCRIPTION: ROC 52 City Release for Future Claims or Liability ITEM PREPARED BY: R. Freese Zumbro River Constructors and the Minnesota Department of Transportation seek releases from the City for future claims and liability related to the construction of the ROC 52 Project for the following items: City staff has negotiated a $60,000 lump sum settlement, subject to Council approval, with ZRC for their use and the associated wear and tear of various city streets used as haul roads and unmarked detours during the ROC 52 Project. This settlement amount will be used by the City to resurface the TH 52 East Frontage Road from 18th Avenue to 33`d Street NW. hi addition, ZRC will resurface at their cost the TH 52 East Frontage Road between Memorial Parkway and llth Street SW and 22" d Street NW between Elton Hills Drive and the TH 52 East Frontage Road. ZRC must give this settlement to MnDOT and then MnDOT will "credit" it against the City's ROC 52 cost share obligations. ZRC and MnDOT both seek a release from the City against future claims by the City for unknown future damages to city streets that may result from ZRC's use of those streets during the ROC 52 Project. 2. MnDOT acquired as part of the ROC 52 Project right-of-way for the TH 52 East Frontage Road between 7th Street NW and Assissi Heights Drive. A portion of the right-of-way was acquired from the Hillcrest Shopping Center owner. MnDOT and the City staff have determined that a portion of the right-of-way acquired from Hillcrest will not be needed for the frontage road now that it has been constructed. MnDOT has agreed to convey that right-of-way back to either the City or Hillcrest in the future. However, Hillcrest desires to reconstruct at this time a portion of the parking lot lost due to the right-of-way purchase. MnDOT and City staff have agreed on the amount of the right-of-way purchased by MnDOT that will be returned to the City or Hillcrest. Since MnDOT is not ready to permanently covey the right-of-way back to the City or Hillcrest at this time, Hillcrest must seek a Right -of -Way Permit from MnDOT for encroachment of the Hillcrest parking lot into the East Frontage Road right-of-way currently owned and managed by MnDOT. Hillcrest has applied for a Right -of -Way Permit and the City staff has indicated to MnDOT the City's support for the parking lot layout. MnDOT seeks from the City a release stating that all ROC 52 work within the TH 52 East Frontage Road from 16`h Street NW to Assissi Heights Drive, the entire frontage for the Hillcrest Shopping Center, was constructed pursuant to project plans and specifications and that the City will accept this portion of the TH 52 East Frontage Road as complete, subject to Project Warranty provisions, when officially tamed back to the City by the MnDOT Commissioner's Order. Public Works staff recommend in favor of these two releases, the actual document language subject to the approval of the City Attorney. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the City Attorney to review and approve document language for the City's release of claims and liability for the above mention items and further authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said documents. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: _ _ ____. Second by: __ to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/06 3ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITE NO. Consent Agenda i Public Works ITEM DESCRIPTION: Development Agreement —Maine Street Development First PR PARED BY: Supplemental Amendment M. Nigbur_�T_/ Maine Street Investors of Rochester LLP and Maine Street Development Company of Rochester LLC are developing property they own in Section 26 of Rochester Township in the 40t" & 48t" Street interchange area. This property is subject to the terms of the Maine Street Development Agreement. The Owners have requested that the existing Development Agreement be amended to reflect the staging of construction to correspond with the infrastructure adequacy. The original Development Agreement shall include the following addition: 1. The Owner's Obligations shall be amended to include Section 28 which shall read as follows: 28.) Development Phasing: The Owner and City acknowledge that Adequate On -Site & Off -Site Public or Private Facilities (APF) for the full build out of the Project have not been constructed and are not currently available to serve the Property. Therefore the development of the Property shall be phased to coincide with the availability and construction of the necessary infrastructure. The required On -Site and Off -Site Public or Private improvements may include, but are not limited to: streets, sidewalks, public sanitary sewer, and water utility extensions, storm water management facilities, soil erosion and sedimentation control, monumentation as well as other items that are necessary or material to the project, such as school sites or parkland which may be identified during the development approval process. Staff recommends the Council approve the First Supplemental Amendment to the original Development Agreement. The Owner has executed the agreement. 40th Street _.-... r' - irj �1 r PROPE -- - 46th Street r : Street rf', r, COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Maine Street First Supplemental Amendment with Maine Street Investors of Rochester LLP and Maine Street Development Company of Rochester LLC. COUNCIL ACTION: motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: GENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA I Public Works h '--� 6/5/06 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Revocable Permit: Awning on Building at 14 First Street SW PREPARED BY: M. Nigbur'� Acropolis Properties, the Owner of the property located at 14 First Street SW (Unit Number 2, 100 First Avenue Commercial Condominium, Condominium Number 75) has requested the City issue a revocable permit for the placement of an awning that extends into the right of way of 1" Street SW (Peace Plaza area). The awning is to be installed as shown on the exhibit below. Staff has reviewed the request and would recommend in favor of granting a Revocable Permit. The Owner has executed the Revocable Permit, which includes the standard language for revocation and liability protection for the City. Support bracket TOP VIEW QD I 23" FRONT VIEW Support bracket 203" I COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: MnnnLeG tO 5SnG surface with . in. Anchorshorip especoncrete � in. 5quam IrAluminum� Brackete SIDE VIEW SupparL bracket 36" Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the revocable permit with Acropolis Properties located at 14 First Street SW for the olacement of an awning in the riqht of way of First Street SW. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion Second by: 0 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING / DATE: 6/5/06 ,GENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: I ITEM Na . ,�— CONSENT AGENDA Public Works ITEM DESCRIPTION: Real Estate — Settlement for Right of Way Acquisition for Kings Run pR PARED BY: Sewer Project (J-7708) M. Nigbur�// The City has acquired a permanent easement and a temporary construction easement on property owned by John and Evelyn Wallin (Owners) for the construction of King's Run Sewer in northwest Rochester. The Owners were paid $20,000.00 for the rights on their property per a previously executed Settlement Agreement between the City and Owners. The City would like to modify the terms and conditions of the existing Settlement Agreement to reflect the construction difficulties that have been encountered during this project. The revised Settlement Agreement includes the following terms and conditions: • Owner agrees the execution of this agreement provides the City the right to enter upon the Property for the construction of the project • City shall provide payment of $1,000.00 per week to the Owner for work commencing on October 4, 2005 through February 3, 2006. Payment shall be made Within 30 days of execution of this agreement. • City will provide Owner a minimum of two weeks notice prior to commencement of sanitary sewer construction work to be installed through the Property. Work activities shall be completed within 3 weeks of the commencement of work (for returning the parking lot to aggregate base). City shall provide payment of $1000.00 per week for this estimated three week work period. Payment shall be made within 30 days of completion of the work. • City has provided two temporary handicap parking stalls on the east side of the building during construction activities. • City will expand the Owners parking lot to accommodate 3 additional parking stalls concurrent with the restoration of the parking lot area. • City will maintain sidewalk access to building. • City will do minor regrading to the berm to minimize the impact of TH 52 drainage located in the northwest comer of the property, without jeopardizing snow removal from the parking lot. No curb will be added to the west side of the parking lot. Final design of the berm is subject to Owner's agreement. • City shall restore all disturbed areas, associated with the project, to a condition similar to that which existed prior to construction including cub & gutter and bituminous paving. Restoration is estimated to begin July 24, 2006 and is expected to last 4-5 days for completion. The exact timeframe for commencement of restoration is dependent upon the construction completions occurring prior to said timeframe. City will keep Owner informed of timelines as they may be adjusted. ................ _ GE ORGETOW NPrvW PROPOSED SEWER % /( SU BJECT PROPERTY , - si sT NW f PENN,NGSON cs NW p po s£ Zy�. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Settlement Agreement with John & Evelyn Wallin for the affected property._ COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 77 i 6/5/06 GENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM O. CONSENT AGENDA I Public Works �o ITEM DESCRIPTION: Revocable Permit — Part of Lot 1, Block 1, Vision Real Estate PARED BY: Replat 1pIaEM. Niobur Vision Real Estate Investments LLC, the Owner, has requested the City issue a revocable permit for the placement of a wooden "deck" on the building located at 3269 1gth Street NW over and in an existing utility and drainage easement. The easement and subject improvements are located on a part of Lot 1, Block 1, Vision Real Estate Replat. The Owner will install and maintain the new deck at their own expense. The deck shall be built as follows: • The deck platform shall not extend more than 12 feet from the building structure. • The three deck posts to be placed in said easement shall not be more than 10 feet from the building structure. • The deck shall be 10 feet above ground level at the point closest to the storm sewer contained within said easement. Staff has reviewed the request and would recommend in favor of granting a Revocable Permit. The Owner has executed a Revocable Permit which includes the standard language for revocation and liability protection for the City. �i r • 7 i N ° ^ IIFF' 1051 �VJ «E 1C°9.0F�'r' I (D i hH'rI N C C 4 _ Fri rn " Z 4 uem uu4 P_. 3g i u.Gl •I Imp - I ' '.i. I r r $ 1 oas 1•ade o Is 1•a,d COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the revocable permit with Vision Real Estate Investments LLC to allow the placement of a wooden "deck" over and in the utility and drainage easement located on part of Lot 1. Block 1, Vision Real Estate Replat. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING 7c DATE: 6/5/06 3ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works a 7 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Real Estate — Property Acquisition for the Hadley Valley Trunk PREPARED BY: Sanitary Sewer (J-7744) i j M. Nigbur o" The City will be constructing a sanitary sewer trunk line to serve the Hadley Valley area (Haverhill Township). Based on the designs that have been developed, City staff pursued acquisition of fee ownership of the north 100 feet on two parcels as well as temporary construction easements. Based on the continued negotiations between the City and the owners, preliminary settlements have been reached. They are as follows: • The City agrees to pay $28,520.00 to Richard Stanley and Edward Stanley, tenants in common, as total compensation for the acquisition and relocation expenses. • The City agrees to pay $33,480.00 to Richard Stanley and Nancy Stanley, husband and wife, as total compensation for the acquisition and relocation expenses. Staff recommends approval of the payment to Richard Stanley and Edward Stanley and to Richard Stanley and Nancy Stanley for the north 100 feet of each property for the placement of the sanitary sewer trunkline, the temporary construction easements and relocation expenses. All owners will execute the necessary conveyance documents. Z Z M W � Z .... � n;on,m smreY �� Ilmxy Su nlgi Tom. ---� Tem POYary Ease menl Area r hmd = SYRaN EdnnrRic d aNW _.� Y. Z COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Authorize payment in the amount of $28,520.00 to Richard Stanley and Edward Stanley for the needed north 100 feet of their property, the temporary construction easement and relocation expenses. 2. Authorize payment in the amount of $33,480.00 to Richard Stanley and Nancy Stanley for the needed north 100 feet of their property, the temporary construction easement and relocation expenses. 3. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Settlement Agreement with the owners of each COUNCIL ACTION: motion Second to REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING / / DATE: 6/5/06 GENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works b - zp ,S ITEM DESCRIPTION: Real Estate: Parcel Conveyance from Verna Badger Revocable PREPARED BY: Trust to the City j M. Nigbur;%Vl Richard E. Badger and lone B. Colburn, as Trustees of the Verna Elizabeth Badger Revocable Trust Agreement, have executed a Trustee's Deed conveying, to the City at no cost, the parcel shown below and described as that part of the SE Y< of the NE'/<of Section 20, Township 107 North, Range 14 West, which lies easterly of the most easterly right of way line of the former Chicago and Northwestern Railway. Staff recommends acceptance of this parcel due to its location near the Douglas Trail. i 1 Gifted Parcel COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the acceptance of ownership of the parcel of property gifted to the City by the Trustees of the Verna Badger Revocable Trust Agreement. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/06 3ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works= ITEM DESCRIPTION: Revocable Permit: American Engineering Testing, Inc. Monitoring PREPARED BY: Well , M. Nigbur7it�� American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET), in conjunction with US Bank and MPCA, would like to place a monitoring well in the public right of way of 9" Street NW to observe the quality of the groundwater and soil to verify the extent of groundwater contamination. The monitoring well would be placed southerly and adjacent to Lots 4 and 5, Block 3, of Gooding Addition. The monitoring well must be located in the boulevard area in said right of way and cannot be located within the existing sidewalk. The monitoring well will be six inches round and have an above grade height of the approximately two to three feet. AET will provide the City a performance bond in the amount of $3,000.00 as surety of maintenance and repair of the monitoring well and the public property affected by it. AET will provide to the City a report of any findings or test results during the existence of the monitoring well. AET shall perform all work and bear all costs associated with the installation maintenance and repair of said facilities as well as any damage that may occur. Staff has reviewed the request and would recommend in favor of granting a Revocable Permit. AET has executed a Revocable Permit which includes the standard language for revocation and liability protection for the City, i r. S' Monitoring Well Site k aM COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Revocable Permit with American Engineering Testing, Inc. to allow for the placement of a monitoring well in the right of way of 9th Street NW southerly and adjacent to Lots 4 and 5, Block 3, of Gooding Addition. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION GENDA SECTION: I ORIGINATING DEPT: Consent Agenda Public Works ITEM DESCRIPTION: Development Agreement— Pebble Creek Development MEETING 9- ,/ DATE: 6/5/06 ITEM NO. y S P�PARED BY: d M. Nigbur A{�n The Owners, Pebble Creek Rochester LLCNVestern Walls, Inc./Charles DeWitz, desires to develop their property as a mixed single-family residential, multifamily and commercial development to be known as Pebble Creek. Owner 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: • Annexation • Storm Water Management • Grading and drainage • Dedication of ROW • Dedication of Parkland requirements Pedestrian Facilities • Owner's payment of the development related charges including Storm Water Management, Sanitary Sewer Availability, Water Availability and Transportation Improvement District Charges. Staff recommends the Council approve the Development Agreement subject to execution by the Owners. Council Action Requested. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Pebble Creek Development Agreement with Pebble Creek Rochester LLC/Western Walls, Inc./Charles DeWitz. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 05/06/06 3ENDASECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works b ,3f ITEM DESCRIPTION: Feasibility Report and Request for Hearing for: (J7749) PREPARED BY: Reconstruction of 1" Avenue SW — Center Street to 2ntl Street SW M. Nigbur N%i{ This is a Feasibility Report for the following local improvement project: Project: City Project No. (J7749) Reconstruction of 1 st Avenue — Center Street to 2n1 Street SW Project Background 1 s Avenue is an urban street with a width of 48 feet with 10 metered parallel on street parking spaces. The existing pavement is concrete and local areas are cracked and worn. Portions of the project still consist of concrete paving brick which are also worn. This project will modify storm sewer and watermain, some of which dates back to 1887. Additionally, we will be proposing to modify the parking arrangement on 15t Avenue to facilitate diagonal parking. There will be a neighborhood meeting with the abutting property owners prior to the Assessment Hearing and Project hearing. Estimated Project Costs Construction Street $445,200 Pedestrian Facilities $157,800 Storm Sewer $ 44,300 Watermain $ 49,300 Traffic Signals $120,000 Project Cost Distribution Pursuant to City Policy, the costs will be assessed to the Owners for 50% of the street construction/storm sewer/traffic signal and pedestrian facilities. The pedestrian facilities costs will be allocated 50% to the Owners and 50% from the downtown abatement funds. Recommendation We report the project is feasible as a Reconstruction project and recommend its construction in 2006. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adopt a resolution receiving the Feasibility Report. 2. Adopt a resolution ordering a Project Hearing to be held for July 5, 2006. 3. Adopt the resolution ordering the preparation of the Assessment Roll. 4. Adopt the resolution ordering an Assessment Hearing for July 5, 2006. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 05/06/06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works 1) "31 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Feasibility Report and Request for Hearing for: (J7749) PREPARED BY: Reconstruction of 1st Avenue SW — Center Street to 2n° Street SW )� M. Nigbur lS�v This is a Feasibility Report for the following local improvement project: Project: City Project No. (J7749) Reconstruction of 15t Avenue — Center Street to 2nd Street SW Project Background 1 Avenue is an urban street with a width of 48 feet with 10 metered parallel on street parking spaces. The existing pavement is concrete and local areas are cracked and worn. Portions of the project still consist of concrete paving brick which are also worn. This project will modify storm sewer and watermain, some of which dates back to 1887. Additionally, we will be proposing to modify the parking arrangement on 1st Avenue to facilitate diagonal parking. There will be a neighborhood meeting with the abutting property owners prior to the Assessment Hearing and Project hearing. Estimated Proiect Costs Construction Street $617,760 Pedestrian Facilities $205,140 Storm Sewer $ 57,590 Watermain $ 90,090 Traffic Signals $156,000 Project Cost Distribution Pursuant to City Policy, the costs will be assessed to the Owners for 50% of the street construction/storm sewer/traffic signal and pedestrian facilities. The pedestrian facilities costs will be allocated 50% to the Owners and 50% from the downtown abatement funds. Recommendation We report the project is feasible as a Reconstruction project and recommend its construction in 2006. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adopt a resolution receiving the Feasibility Report. 2. Adopt a resolution ordering a Project Hearing to be held for July 5, 2006, 3. Adopt the resolution ordering the preparation of the Assessment Roll. 4. Adopt the resolution ordering an Assessment Hearing for July 5, 2006. .:OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: D--3 ) REPORT ON THE FEASIBILITY OF A PROPOSED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR: RECONSTRUCTION OF lsr AVENUE SW FROM WEST CENTER STREET TO 2Nc STREET SW June 2, 2006 Honorable Mayor & Common Council City of Rochester, Minnesota A resolution proposing the following project: Reconstruction of 1s` Avenue SW from West Center Street to 2nd Street SW Feasibility Report We report the project is feasible and recommend its reconstruction. The project to reconstruct Is` Avenue SW from West Center Street to 2nd Street SW was included in the City's 2006-2011 Capital Improvement Program, with a recommended 2007 construction. It is now recommended that this project be constructed in 2006 due to scheduling and staging issues with the nearby 1" Street Plaza project. The costs of this project should be paid from Rochester Public Utility funds, City local funds, and assessment charges to abutting property owners. Background: I" Avenue SW was originally scheduled to be reconstructed from West Center Street to 2nd Street SW in 2007. Under the original schedule, the I` Street Plaza would have been constructed before I" Avenue SW project. The I" Street Plaza project runs from the Galleria to 2nd Avenue SW and includes the intersection of 1'` Street SW and 1" Avenue SW, hi the spring of 2006 it became apparent that the planning and design time required for the plaza project would not allow its construction in 2006. Therefore; consideration was given to constructing this section of I" Avenue SW in 2006, before the plaza project. Then in 2007, upon completion of the Plaza construction, the entire area would be newly constructed for the plaza opening. This segment of I" Avenue SW is an urban design street. The block from West Center Street to Is` Street SW has a width of 48 feet face to face with no curbside parking. The block from 1" Street to 2nd Street SW is 48 feet face to face with parallel parking areas on each side. The existing right-of-way is 95 feet wide and owned by the City of Rochester. The geometry currently provides for two lanes of traffic in each direction. The existing pavement is a concrete pavement. Local areas of the pavement are cracked and wom. The intersection of 1" Street SW and I" Avenue SW consists of concrete paving bricks that are severely worn. The existing sidewalk is in very poor shape except on the east side of the street between West Center Street and I" Street SW which was replaced several years ago. All of the other sidewalk is in need of full replacement. These two blocks of I" Avenue SW are served by City storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water main. The existing watermain in the south block dates back to 1887 and needs to be replaced. Stone sewer revisions will be required to facilitate surface drainage changes in the plaza project. The existing sanitary sewer does not require replacement or reconstruction. The traffic signal located at 1" Street SW and 1" Avenue SW was installed in 1988 and will be removed. A new signal to control traffic and pedestrian movements may be installed at the intersection in coordination with the plaza project. -2— JuNE 2, 2006 Currently, V Avenue NW currently has a rated loading of a 10-ton axle truck route and the posted speed limit on I' Avenue SW is 30 mph. The Project: The project will reconstruct the two blocks to a 2 lane urban section with diagonal parking on one side. Right turn lanes will be provided at West Center Street and 2"d Street SW. The street geometrics will narrow through the intersection of V Street SW and I" Avenue SW. This intersection will be part of the future pedestrian plaza of I' Street SW. The proposed improvement consists of removing the existing concrete' roadway, completing underground utility work as required, placing new aggregate base, and replacing the concrete pavement with a new 10-ton design section. Angle parking will be introduced in both blocks. The north block will provide angle parking for southbound traffic. The south block will provide angle parking for northbound traffic. No parking will be allowed opposite the angle parking. The sidewalks to be replaced will be reconstructed to the typical urban core streetscaping design with exposed aggregate banding and decorative lights. Some of the curb work will require removal of 4 trees in front of the Marriott Hotel. The proposed streetscaping will allow replacement of some of these trees and the installation of decorative lighting consistent with the downtown core. Recommendations: We recommend that the project be constructed and funded in accordance with the Capital Improvements Program (CIP 2006-2011), Major Streets Category, line 24 with the exception that the construction take place in 2006 rather than 2007. The engineer estimate is included with detailed information as shown in the table below: Engineer Estimate Cost Construction: 300 — Street $617,760.00 500 — Pedestrian Facilities & Decorative Lighting $205,140.00 400 — Storm Sewer $57,590.00 100 — Watermain $90,090.00 600—Traffic Signal $156,000.00 $1,126,580.00 +..I-PkO.IiP7149t.Asse ru,ihility Report ti . 30.06 rtm4ed.DN' -3— Special Assessments Frontage: TUNE 2, 2006 Frontages will be assessed in accordance with the current City policy. Street reconstruction costs will be assessed at 50% of costs, with 25% allocated to the properties on either side of the street. The other 50% of street costs will be City funded. Sidewalk reconstruction costs will also be assessed to the fronting properties. Sidewalk assessments will be established as 50% of the cost of removing existing sidewalk and replacing with concrete sidewalk. The remaining 50% of the sidewalk costs will be paid by the downtown abatement funds. Special Assessments Service Replacement: Water main and water services will be replaced as part of the project. Replacement of watermain is funded 100% by the Water Utility. However, the City of Rochester's Watermain and Sewer main Policy adopted by the City Council on October 20, 1997, requires than any lead or galvanized water services must be replaced with copper as part of watermain replacement. Cost of service replacement charges for water and/or sewer will be billed directly to the property owner and shall be based on the City's standard rates. If the service replacement charge is unpaid the City may levy the unpaid charge against the property as a special assessment. Payment of this assessment is required over a period not to exceed 5 years. Interest is charged at 5.75% annually from the date the service replacement is billed to the property owner P PRO I L't'.'NJ PROJ T-419' I ce,+iliry Repuri u5."0 06 rvvivad.I )N -5— BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT JUNE 2, 2006 Pro' ect No: Orig. Date June 2, 2006 State Project: J No: Description: Reconstruction of 1"Avenue SW from West Center Street to 2 Street SW Engineer Estimate Cost Contract Cost Final Cost Construction: 300 — Street $617,760.00 500 — Pedestrian Facilities & Decorative Lighting $205,140.00 400 — Storm Sewer $57 590.00 100 — Watermain $90,090.00 600 — Traffic Signals $156,000.00 $i 126,580.00 Funding Distribution Engineer Estimate Cost R6oliester Local Funds — Streets & Traffic Signal $493,675 RPU — Watermain Funds $90 090 Downtown Abatement Funds $102,570 Special Assessments — Frontage (Streets) $337,675 Special Assessments — Frontage (Sidewalk & Decorative Lighting) $102,570 Special Assessments — Water Service Connections TOTAL $1,126,580 Distribution Percentages City Local Funds 44% City RPU Share 8% Abatement Fund 9% Special Assessments Street 30% Special Assessment Sidewalk 9% }':+PRO1G("rS"J-PR(/JU%79ytAs.enxlPeasil+ility Rcpo. t ni.701 [1G r,+ i,ed. [)O(' -4— JuNE 2, 2006 Funding Distribution: The costs of this project should be paid from Rochester Public Utility funds, City local funds and assessment charges to abutting property owners as follows: Funding Distribution Engineer Estimate Cost Rochester Local Funds — Streets & Traffic Signal $493,675 IRPU — Watermain Funds $90,090 Downtown Abatement Funds $102,570 Special Assessments — Frontage (Streets) $337,675 Special Assessments — Frontage (Sidewalk & Decorative Lighting) $102,570 'Special Assessments — Water Service Connections TOTAL $1,126,580 Distribution Percentages �ity Local Funds 447 City RPU Share 8% Abatement Fund 9% Special Assessments Sfreet 30% Special Assessment Sidewalk 9% Submitted for your consideration: Approved: Pelson Richard W. Freese, PE Manager City Engineer 1,P9?'g9`..AsSeisTeasi hi lily Report 05.3o pG reviszd.l)(H' GENDA SECTION: Consent Agenda ITEM DESCRIPTION: Interim Devel Midwest, Inc. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works Agreement —Onyx Waste Services NO. 6/5/06 PARED BY: M. Nigbur, Onyx Waste Services Midwest, Inc., Owner, and the City Staff have had discussions relating to impacts on the public infrastructure resulting from the development of Owners' Property (Part of SW Y2 NE %, Section 17-106-13) located in Marion Township as a commercial mixed solid waste transfer station. Owner would like to proceed with development of the Property even though some of the needed infrastructure is not yet in place. The City is willing to let Owner proceed with development of the property. The content for a interim development agreement has been decided and a document has been created to outline the terms and conditions of development of the property. The major items covered in the agreement include the following: • Storm Water Management • Grading and Drainage Transportation Improvements • Right of Way Dedication • Pedestrian Facilities • Real Estate Dedication • Alternate Sanitary Sewer Service • Owner's payment of the development related charges including Storm Water Management, Sanitary Sewer Availability, Water Availability and Utility Connection. Staff recommends the Council approve the Interim Development Agreement. The Owner has executed the Interim Development Agreement. SUBJECT PROPERTY TH 14 w U MALLARD PL SE ' ROLLIN G22IDGE ST SE 1 � _IITRUMPETER DR SE z Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Interim Development Agreement with Onyx Waste Services Midwest, Inc. for development of their Property. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: q/ / 6-5-06 -iENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works C) — �?2 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Approve J6336 share to install gates at 7" St NW railroad crossing, 7PR PARED BY: r D. Kramer4, The railroad crossing on 7th Street NW at the DM&E main track currently has flashing lights. Staff submitted a funding request to upgrade this crossing by adding gates, as part of the Minnesota Railroad -Highway Grade Crossing Safety Improvement Program. The purpose of the project is to improve the safety at the existing crossing; this project is not related to the proposed upgrade and expansion of the DM&E railroad. The project was approved for 2009 funding, with a total estimated cost of $225,000. The Federal Highway Administration will pay $202,500 (90%) and the city's share will be $22,500 (10%). This project is not currently included in the city's Capital Improvements Program, and will need to be added in the 2007-2012 CIP, with the city's share proposed to be funded from Municipal State -Aid funds. MnDOT requests acknowledgement of the city's willingness to fund its portion of the project. 7 ST NW - RR CROSSING 3 N V� z to SprA o = AsrERIV RF— R T rNw G L D r m + ri �4 Zn r m COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution approving the city's participation in the 2009 Rail Safety Improvement project to install gates at the 7th St NW railroad crossing at the DM&E main track, USDOT 193232W, S.P. 55- 00126, city project J6336, with the city's estimated cost being $22,500. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: to, (If 4 IF May 16, 2006 Minnesota Department of Transportation Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations Mail Stop 420 Tel: 651/405-6060 1110 Centre Pointe Curve Fax: 651/405-6082 Mendota Heights, MN 55120-4152 651/406-4793 iuhe.carr@dot.state.mn.us David Kramer, P.E. City of Rochester 2014m Street SE, Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 Dear Mr. Kramer: Attached is a list of all Rail Safety Improvement projects that were submitted to the District 6 Area Transportation Partnership (ATP) for 2007-2010 funding. The ATP approved the projects listed on Table I. The projects that were not funded are listed on Table II. The list includes the location and description of the project, the railroad, year the project is scheduled for installation, and estimated costs for local and federal participation, along with the total project cost. All costs are estimates only and may differ, higher or lower, from the final cost. Please provide written acknowledgement (either email or letter by June 30, 2006) of your agency's willingness to fund the local participation for your 2009 project. When the project is constructed, the railroad bills the local municipality directly. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Best regards, /� C.�/ Q. J Julie R. Can Mn/DOT, Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations (OFCVO) encl: TABLE'S I & II cc: Gene Dahlke/i'im Spencer/Susan Aylesworth, OFCVO Laurie Nagle/Greg Paulson/Steven Kirsch, Mn/DOT, District 6 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/06 3ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. , CONSENT AGENDA Public Works �L1 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Revocable Permit: Hanson & Younge LLC —Temporary PARED BY: Sedimentation Basin 7. M. Nigbur 7,0; Hanson & Younge LLC, the owner and developer of Scenic Oaks Fifth and Sixth Additions, has requested approval to utilize City owned land for placement of a temporary sedimentation basin for sediment control during construction of said additions. The City land to be utilized is described as the North 180.00 feet of the West 180.00 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 34, Township 106 North, Range 14 West. The owner will perform ail work and bear all costs associated with the sedimentation control basin as well as the restoration of the City land utilized. Staff has reviewed the request and would recommend in favor of granting a Revocable Permit. The owner has executed a Revocable Permit which includes the standard language for revocation and liability protection for the C ity. Sedimentation Basin Location t COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Revocable Permit with Hanson & Younge LLC to allow for the utilization of City land for a temporary sedimentation basin. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: GENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works MEETING / DATE: 1 6/5/06 ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION: Real Estate — 20'" Street SE Extension (J-2208) PREPARED BY: M. Nigbur The City is proposing to construct an extension of 20'h Street SE from I f Avenue SE to Marion Road SE (J-2208). Staff would request authorization to retain consultants for the real estate acquisition process. Staff also requests the authorization to negotiate and settle with the land owners for the needed land rights for a value not to exceed 15% above the appraised value. Settlement amount in excess of the 15% may be settled by approval of the City Administrator. If negotiations do not progress Staff would also request authorization, at the direction of the City Administrator, to begin the 90 Day Quick Take eminent domain process. The City has been in discussions with Owners of Property along the alignment of the roadway project. Discussions have been proceeding however the City must ensure the project schedule is met. Adoption of a resolution authorizing: 1) Retaining consultants for the real estate acquisition process 2) The staff to negotiate/acquire the needed real estate for costs not to exceed 15% above the appraised value 3) City Administrator to settle land acquisition in excess of 15% above the aTraised value, 4) Use of the 90 day "Quick Take" for land acquisition associated with the 20 Street SE Extension. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING f 7 / DATE: 6/5/06 3ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT Public Works _ 3 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Substitute AUAR Update for 201h St. SE Connection EAW PREPARED BY: pp ' B. Huberty A new 20th Street SE connection is proposed for construction between Marion Road and 11th Avenue SE. Since the project will be a collector roadway over one mile long, it meets the requirements for a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) as outlined in Minnesota Rule 4410.4300, subp. 1 and subp. 22(A). The City Council is the designated Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for this project. Rather than preparing an EAW, the City will propose to use the 2006 Marion Alternative Urban Areawide Review (Marion AUAR) as a substitute, as allowed by Minnesota Rules 4410.1300. The 2006 Marion AUAR incorporated the 20th St. SE Connection, exluding the western terminus, and envisioned the future construction of this roadway. Although the western terminus was outside of the AUAR project area boundary, it fell within the area evaluated and reviewed by coordinating agencies during the AUAR process. The most significant environmental issues identified in the AUAR for the proposed 20'h Street SE Connection corridor included wetland, floodway, and floodplain impacts. The floodplain is associated with three streams that cross the corridor: Bear Creek, Willow Creek, and Badger Run. Since this road project is consistent with the AUAR it can, therefore, be substituted for an EAW. AUAR's must be updated every five years. The required update for the AUAR is due by June 18, 2007. The City has decided to voluntarily complete the five-year update for the AUAR approximately one year in advance of the required date in order to: • Provide a framework for additional public review of the proposed project, • Incorporate additional detail resulting from 201h St. SE Connection preliminary design work, and • Confirm that there are no additional issues associated with the western project terminus. The Marion AUAR and its Update #1 will provide sufficient environmental documentation for the Council to determine whether a Negative Declaration on the need for a state EIS is appropriate. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Pass a resolution that confirms that the Marion AUAR Update is an acceptable substitute for the EAW that will be needed for the proposed 201h St. SE Connection project. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City proposes to construct a new 20th Street SE connection between Marion Road and 11th Avenue SE; and. WHEREAS, the project will function as a collector roadway over one mile long, thereby meeting the state threshold requiring a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) as outlined in Minnesota Rule 4410.4300, subp. 1 and subp. 22(A); and WHEREAS, Minnesota Rule 4410.4300, subp. 22(A) allows local government to be the designated Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for this type of project; and WHEREAS, an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) may substitute for an EAW if the project is consistent with the AUAR as per Minnesota Rule 4410.1300; and WHEREAS, the 2006 Marion AUAR incorporated the 20th St. SE Connection, excluding the western terminus, and envisioned the future construction of this roadway; and WHEREAS, even though the western terminus was outside of the AUAR project area boundary, it fell within the area evaluated and reviewed by coordinating agencies during the AUAR process; and WHEREAS, AUAR's must be updated every five years and the required update for the Marion AUAR is due by June 18, 2007; and WHEREAS, the City has decided to voluntarily complete if first five-year update for the AUAR approximately one year in advance of the required date in order to provide a framework for additional public review of the proposed project, incorporate additional detail resulting from 20th St. SE Connection preliminary design work, and confirm that there are no additional issues associated with the western project terminus; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this road project is consistent with the Marion AUAR and it can therefore be substituted for an EAW. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Marion AUAR and its Update #1 will provide sufficient environmental documentation for the Council to determine whether a Negative Declaration on the need for a state EIS is appropriate. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS _ DAY OF 2006. PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED THIS DAY OF .2006. MAYOR OF SAID (Seal of the City of Rochester, Minnesota) PIPROJECTSU-PROJ\J22D81Earthtech\Resclulion AUAR subs for EAW-doc REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 06/05/06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. , CONSENT AGENDA Public Works )jam, ITEM DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract— Public Estates Third — J5210 to Serve Bamber Valley PREPARED BY: J M. Baker_ Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: Bamber valley Development, LLC. (Owner) & Griffin Construction Co., LLP (Contractor) are requesting a City -Owner Contract J5210 consisting of `Public Improvements to Serve Bamber Valley Estates Third". COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City / Owner Contract for J5210, "Public Improvements to Serve Bamber Valley Estates Third". t,:OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by Second by: to: 3ENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: Owner Contract — J5155 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works Improvements to Serve The Wilds — ITEM NO. /o/ / 06/5106 PREPARED BY: �` M. Baker I� Staff would offer the following Owner Contract project for consideration by the Council: Todd Fiedler & Patricia Fiedler (Owners) & Griffin Construction Co. LLP (Contractor) are requesting a City -Owner Contract J5155 consisting of "Public Improvements to Serve The Wilds". yq COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the City! Owner Contract for J5155, "Public Improvements to Serve The Wilds". COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6-5-06 9ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works J ITEM DESCRIPTION: Speed Zone Study, vicinity of 3'0 Avenue SE bridge over Zumbro PRpARED BY River /, D. Kramer The city retained the engineering firm WHKS to prepare a report on pedestrian protection on the 3`d Avenue SE bridge over the Zumbro River. The report was presented to the city council in April, and identified six alternatives. Alternative # 2 in the report indicated: "Reduction of the posted speed limit along the corridor from 30 mph to 25 mph (and enforcement of the revised posted speed limit) would help mitigate the frequency and magnitude of accidents, as well as bring this stretch of the corridor into compliance with the horizontal design standards. The reduction in speed limit would require a request that Mn/DOT investigate and authorize the reduced speed." It was the consensus of the council to proceed with alternative 2 and some of the other alternatives. Minnesota statute 169.14 establishes a speed limit of 30 miles per hour in urban districts and prohibits local authorities from posting other speed limits unless specifically authorized by the state Commissioner of Transportation. A council resolution is necessary to initiate a Mn/DOT study and commissioner authorization to post a different speed limit on this roadway. �� IIIa WW>I I I I I "TER TEI IT 4 STSE 4a1 x ---w ran WM F--n w m � r--\ COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution requesting Mn/DOT to conduct a speed zone study on Civic Center Dr SE/3`d Avenue SE from East Center St to 4th St SE. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6-5-06 iENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works CONSENT AGENDA EPR7PARED ITEM DESCRIPTION: Establish No -Parking Zone, BY: 3m Avenue NW, fromW Center Stto 2nd St NW merBW The two -block segment of 3`d Avenue NW from West Center Street to 2"d Street NW is planned for reconstruction this summer. The reconstructed street will have parking prohibited on the east side of 3`d Ave between Center St and 1 st St NW, and on both sides between 1 st St NW and 2no St NW, similar to the existing parking prohibitions. Staff was unable to locate an existing no -parking resolution for this segment of TO Ave NW. emu► 2ST NW z w w v w ST NW M th dist H sp al WEST CENTER ST COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Add paragraph 342 to Section B "No Parking Zones" of the Comprehensive Traffic and Parking Resolution to read as follows: 342 P Ave NW, on the east side from W Center St to 1 st St NW, and on both sides from 1 st St NW to 2n0 St NW, at all times. COU NCI L ACTI 0 N: Motion by: Second by: to: AGENDA nsent REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORIGINATING DEPT Human Resources I I Gm ural.KIr 1 RJR; Council Approval of Letter of Understanding with IUOE Local #49, Parks and Recreation for Central MEETING DATE 6/5/06 ITEM NO. D-41 PREPARED BY: Linda Gilsrud The City and IUOE Local #49, Parks and Recreation are in the second year of a three-year collective bargaining agreement (2005-2007). The Union has submitted a letter of understanding regarding member participation in the IUOE Central Pension Fund (CPF) allowed by Minnesota Statute 356.24, subd. 1 (9). The City would agree to deduct $0.50/per hour effective with the pay period beginning June 22, 2006 from each IUOE Local #49 member's earnings. The Union agrees to indemnify and hold the Employer harmless against all claims, suits, orders, or judgments brought against the Employer exclusively by a Union employee for contributing an amount that might otherwise be paid in wages to the Employee for purposes of making pension contributions per this article. The City requires a copy of the most recent Central Pension Fund Trust document to remain on file in the City Clerk's office. The Union agrees to assume the responsibility for enrolling IUOE union employees in the Central Pension Fund, providing all fiduciarily required Fund information, and providing the signed Pmployee enrollment forms to City payroll staff in a timely manner so deductions can begin. ne Union agrees that Local #49 representatives are responsible for advising retiring or terminating employees about their pension payout options. The Union agrees that when an unpaid leave of absence is requested and approved by departmental leadership for a Local #49, Parks and Recreation employee, Union representatives are responsible for communicating the employee's obligations to the Central Pension Fund during the unpaid leave of absence when no earnings are due the employee from the City of Rochester. The Central Pension Fund contribution deducted from the pay of all members of Local #49, Parks and Recreation will be determined each calendar year by the membership and communicated to the Director of Human Resources by the Local #49 business agent on or closely after December 1 of each year. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the Letter of Understanding. ,.OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. CONSENT AGENDA Public Works �_¢2 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Construction Engineering Services: Intersection Improvments TH 14 East / CSAH 22 (J-7245) p PARED BY: D. Nelson �t This is a proposal from Yaggy Colby and Associates to provide Engineering Services for the following local improvement projects: Project No. M6-09, J7245 S.A.P. 55-622-44 "Intersection Improvements TH 14 East / CSAH 22" Yaggy Colby and Associates (YCA) is capable of providing the desired level of Construction Engineering Services necessary to construct a successful roadway intersection improvement project to State Aid standards. The Department of Public Works recommends that YCA be retained to provide Construction Engineering Services for the project. Compensation is proposed at the actual cost and expense fee structure with a not to exceed amount as follows: J 7245 $36,865.92 (8% of contract amount) A contract was awarded for the project at the City Council meeting of May 22, 2006. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution authorizing the execution of Construction Engineering Service Agreements with Yaggy Colby & Associates to provide construction services for project J 7245. Attachments: YCA Construction Engineering Service Proposal COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: eY t �a Nub 3��d .. m YAGC �12006 COLBY •v €aLY''4� ASSOCIATES Mr. Doug Nelson E R 61 R E E l S City of Rochester Department of Public Works 201 SE 4 Street, Room 108 R R C N I T E C T S Rochester, MN 55904 1RRRSCffI iItIITEETD RE: Proposal For Construction Services Intersection Improvements T.H.14 East/C.S.A.H. 22 S R R U E Vol S Rochester, Minnesota City Project No. M6-09, (J7245) MUM S.A.P.55-622-44 Dear Mr. Nelson: Yaggy Colby Associates is pleased to respond to your request for professional services for contract administration, project observation, and construction staking on the subject l6chesfrt Office: project. Our familiarity with the project would prove very beneficial in completing these tasks. 117 WW Aveni Rochester, MN `---- - 507-2BB-6464 , SCOPE OF SERVICES 507.266-5056Fax The firm proposes to provide the following services: • Establish work limits. ®pls/StFaalOffim - • Provide construction control staking. sst-set-snag • Perform project observation by MnDOT certified staff Bestial s.rffice: • Coordinate and track material testing. 651-437-2909 • Record quantities of work and submit payment vouchers. • Perform final inspection and verify completion of all required work. @asea tfg office: -- • Verify all quantities and submit final payment voucher. satsza-ssaa • Provide record drawings. oelafietl r#fice: 262-646.6655 PROPOSED FEES Yaggy Colby Associates proposes to provide these services on an hourly rate basis, with a total fee "Not To Exceed" $36,865.92. This fee amount is based on eight percent (8%) of the contract amount of $460,824.07. This fee proposal includes on -site project observation of approximately 6 hours per day. Mr. Doug Nelson June 1, 2006 Page 2 PROJECT TEAM Mr. Chad Schuman will continue to serve as the Project Manager for Yaggy Colby Associates on this project. Mr. Chris Munn will coordinate all construction staking on the job. Mr. Bruce Rogne will serve as the engineer's Project Representative, and will coordinate all project observation for the work. Yaggy Colby Associates looks forward to working with the City of Rochester on this project. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, YAGGY COLBY ASSOCIATES 15501fm� Chad Schuman, PE, PTOE CS/DM:bd YCA #9496 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/05 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Public Works h-43 ITEM DESCRIPTION: STORM WATER PERMIT APPLICATION PARED BY: \ B. Huberty �D��°y'j" The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency issued a revised municipal storm water permit in March 2006. The revisions were precipitated by court order as a result of a lawsuit won by the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy. The most significant change affecting Rochester is the new requirement to complete a Nondegradation Report to assess whether our existing and planned storm water management practices are adequate to offset the pollutant loading caused by urban growth since 1988. The work to complete this Report has already begun since it is due on August 31, 2007. Because the permit had to be re -written to address the court order, the permittees were required to submit a new permit application. The permit consists of three parts: 1. The permit application, 2. A Self -Assessment and Determination of Maximum Extent Practicable, and 3. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP). These are the same three components that were completed in March 2003. For 2006, the permit application format was slightly modified. The Self -Assessment has been updated to reflect 2006 data and the current status of our storm water management program. The SWPPP has been updated using the new, required MPCA format and reflects the revised permit requirements. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Duly authorize the Public Works Director to sign the completed permit application on behalf of the City of Rochester and to submit the application and SWPPP to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. As the authorized representative, the Public Works Director will have overall, site, and administrative responsibility to implement the SWPPP. UOUNCIL ACTION: Motion Second to: PAC0MM0MMS4\Permit\Permit - 2006\RCA-MS4app.DOC RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the City execute a storm water permit application and submit it along with Rochester's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS DAY OF 2006. / -07CH PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL CITY CLERK APPROVED THIS DAY OF 2006. MAYOR OF SAID CITY (Seal of the City of Rochester, Minnesota) PAGOMMONWS41Pe"WPe"it- 2006V2ESOLUTION applicabon.doc REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/06 AGENDA SECTION: Consent Agenda ITEM DESCRIPTION: Special District Development Creek Development ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. Public Works I D-44 PARED BY: M. NigburtspT The Owners, Pebble Creek Rochester LLC/Western Walls, Inc./Charles DeWitz, have previously executed an existing Development Agreement for Pebble Creek Special District (addressing some minor Special District language) and have recently executed a second Development Agreement for the remaining provisions found in a typical development. The Owner desire to amend the Development Agreement for Pebble Creek Special District to allow the Owner to commence the timeline for subsequent developments concurrent with the approval of this current Development Agreement for Pebble Creek. This change would allow the owner 2 years after the approval of the Development Agreement (on the agenda for your review at tonight's meeting) as the starting point for meeting ordinance provisions for requiring development activity approval within 2 years of the previous development approval. Staff recommends the Council approve the First Supplemental Amendment to the Development Agreement for Pebble Creek Special District. Council Action Requested. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the First Supplemental Amendment to the Development Agreement for Pebble Creek Special District with Pebble Creek Rochester LLC/Western Walls, Inc./Charles DeWltz. 4OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: f REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 64 Consent Agenda City Clerk cM DESCRIPTION: Rochester Downtown Alliance - Misellaneous Street and Sound D-95 Amplification Device Permits I Judy Scherr The Rochester Downtown Alliance will again be holding the Arts and Craft Market on First Avenue S.W. between Second Street and Third Street from June 15 through August 31, 2006. The Arts and Craft Market will be open from 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM with live music performed from 5:45 to 8:00 PM. The Alliance is requesting that the Sound Amplification Permit limitation be to Waive the Maximum Allowable Sound Pressure Level and Require the Amplified Sound to Terminate No Later Than 10:30 PM. First Avenue S.W. is blocked off from Second Street to Third Street to accommodate approximately 34 vendors. The City Showmobile will be used for the live entertainment. Nearby businesses will be participating in the events. The Rochester Police Department and the Public Works Traffic Department have given their approval for arrangements in regard to barricades, traffic concerns and crowd control. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve the Miscellaneous Activities Permit and Sound Amplification Permit for the Rochester Downtown Alliance for the Arts and Craft Market to be held from June 15t" through August 31, 2006. „DUNCIL ACTION: motion by: second by: to: APPLICATION # PERMIT ;# DATE RECEIVED _ RECEIPT AVMBER COUNCIL DATE: AMOUNT PAID APPLICATION FOR SOUND AMPLIFICATION PER DATE OF APPLICATION: Do APPLICATION TO BE SLBMITTED AT LEAST 30 DAYS IN ADVANCE OF EVENT TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, 201 4'H ST. SE, ROCHESTER, MN. 55904 APPLICANT INFORMATION n ..J NAME OF APPLIC HOME ADDRESS: DATE OF BIRTH: 1 L 1 I— r 0 HOME TELEPHONE NUMBER: _ 0J 1 - 2 V - �ZL4 7 CELL PHONE NUMBER: NAME OF ORGANIZATION: �%PV'k.f C 1nii V-1— _ -- .1,. - _ A 1 i . ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NUMBER: I 4— CONTACT PERSON INFORMATION CONTACT PERSON DURING EVENT: HOME ADDRESS: DATE OF BIRTH- I I— (o s TELEPHONE NUMBER: _ 22 (, � 44 CELL PHONE NUMBER: EVENT INFORMATION PURPOSE OF EVENT: y DATES) OF EVENT: A -I n=e `� — 1 3 DAY(S) OF WEEK: —I ]11 1 IfG f-j ri t i LOCATION OF SPECIAL EVENT: + s4 ,Q� 4) GW Y iI i ��� �J 1)d �+ '-�� q�Cl C DESCRIPTION OF ENTERTAINMENT TO BE PROVIDED: q o4 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO WILL BE PERMITTED TO BE IN ATTENDANCE ON ANY PARTICULAR DAY 5V HOW WILL ATTENDANCE BE LIMITED TO THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE INDICATED N 2. START TIME: _ 5'45 rj Of) END TIME: Q Q_ l 1 ATTACH A SKETCH, SITE PLAN, TAGE PLOT OR OTHER DESCRIPTION OF THE LAND AND PREMISES TO BE USED FOR THE EVENT FOR WHICH THE PERMIT IS SOUGHT. BE SPECIFIC AS TO THE PLACEMENT OF SOUND SYSTEM SPEAKERS AND THE DIRCTION THE SOUND WILL TRAVEL. 2. PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF THE FACILITIES AND ARRANGEMENTS TO BE IMPLEMENTED FOR THE HANDLING OF FOOD, MEDICAL NEEDS, SANITATION, FIRE SERVICES, GARBAGE DISPOSAL, AND SECURITY INCLUDING CROWD CONTROL AND TRAFFIC CONTROL. (Use Additional be I�fN�ecessary)) ( ri^( iYl(�C 1 le l t -e� V� Ct nr' -0/) pi `G'l o iy) N. (yin �- AG ( ant! nr U� o l r :!SAE " o incv-,Uk LU i VpDUbl'l'c 'eo,tq-,3 3. ATTACH A WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE CHIEF OF POLICE OR THE CHIEF'S DESIGNEE STATING THAT, IN THE CHIEF'S OPINION, APPROPRIATE ARRANGEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SECURITY AND POLICE PROTECTION FOR THE EVENT FOR WHICH THE PERMIT IS SOUGHT INCLUDE CROWD CONTROL, TRAFFIC CONTROL AND POLICE PROTECTION FOR ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. 4. PROVIDE THE MEANS AND METHODS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT TO PREVENT NOISE FROM THE EVENT FROM UNREASONABLY DISTURBING THOSE PERSONS WHO LIVE OR WORK IN THE VICINITY OF THE EVENT. (Use Additional SheetlfNecessary) APPLICANT REQUESTS THE COUNCIL TO IMPOSE THE FOLLOWING SOUND LIMITATION (Check One) ' MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL NO MORE THAN 85 DECIBELS MEASURED AT PROPERTY LINE OR VENUE BOUNDARY. WAIVE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL AND REQUIRE THE AMPLIFIED l SOUND TO TERMIhIATE NO LATER THAN 10:30 P.M. The Applicant hereby agrees that a copy of Rochester Code of Ordinances 117 has been provided with the application and that the Applicant has read and does understand the regulations found within the Ordinance, and does intend to comply with the regulations found within the Ordinance and any conditions of approval imposed upon the permit that might be granted in response to his application. It Signature of Applicant PERMIT FEE: $25.00 YOU WILL NEED TO CHECK WITH THE PARK DEPARTMENT AT 281-6160 TO OBTAIN THE REQUIRED PARK DEPARTMENT PERMITS IF YOU ARE HOLDING YOUR VENUE ON PARK DEPARTMENT PROPERTY. PARK DEPARTMENT.• COMMENTS: POLICE DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS: FOR ADMINISTRATION USE ONLY (SIGNATURE) (SIGNATURE) FIREDEPARTMENT.- COMMENTS: (SIGNATURE) PLANNING DEPARTMENT.• COMMENTS: (SIGNATURE) CITY CLERKAPPROVAL: PERMIT # RECEIPT NUMBER COUNCIL DATE: G ISID C, AMOUNT PAID_ ACTIVITIES PERMIT SUBMIT APPLICATION CITY CLERKS OFFICE 201 EST. SEE, ROCHESTER, MN. 5590E DATE OF APPLICATION: (0/ I JD(n NAME OF ORGANIZATION OR INDIVIDUAL: TYPE OF EVENT OR PARADE: LOCATION OF SPECIAL EVENT: hC1 CFA d SOUND PERMIT REQUESTED: EVENT DATE: ) 2 Th u r�rJlry S JLiA-U{n'3)S i`ac-i( i �n�:�� TIME: _START90rr)FINISH: TOTAL TIME: 1 2- hr,, ADMISSION CHARGE: r�nrl9 # OF UNITS: + # OF PERSONS.. PURPOSE OF PROCEEDS (IF APPLICABLE): NA EXTRA MANPOWER OR EQUIPMENT NEEDED: COSTS OF EQUIPMENT OR MANPOWER: ` 0 — THISAPPLICATIONIS MADE SUBJECT TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER AND THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBYAGREES FOR THEMSELVESAND OTHERS FOR WHOM THIS APPLICA TION IS MADE THAT THE SA ME ARE A CCPTABLE AND WILL BE OBSERVED. THE CITY OF ROCHESTER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CANCEL ANY PERMIT. }� I Ai14rxej APPLICANT R cr � 6y- Dcjy rykl i )nl ADDRESS: Z2—() j ' i (a` 4 A? l oi0 cI�Shn A)C yscn Prx-iL)64r . YYlL-) 0) 04 HOME PHONE NUMBER: 2-3 a- S-342— BUSINESS PHONE NUMBER: 5—Q—I — 424 — 2S(oG, ARE ANY ADDITIONAL SERVICESREOUESTED BY ANY CITY DF.PARTMF.NT� 7F.cn i7.17T REMARKS: n Pa5-4 cot dX o� IS4 AE qj �va f' �c, k- j1i PERMIT FEE: $25.00 PAYABLE TO THE CITY OF ROCHESTER SEE ATTACHED UPDATED 6/15/04 lctc d Fay1y 1,uYs�ctiy i'rMcLPcp e�� tOC.vvl Fr IF PARADE, WALK, RUN, ETC — SUBMIT MAP OF ROUTE TO BE TAKEN. IF YOUNEED TO BLOCK THE STREET YOU WILL NEED TO SUPPLY YOUR OWN BARRICADES BY CONTACTING ONE OF THE FOLLOWING SUPPLIERS: Highway Technologies, Inc 3005 Valleyhigh Dr NW Rochester, Mn. 55901 (Bus) 507 - 282-1105 (Cell) 507-208-1335 (Fax) 507-282-1130 Safety Signs 4612 8 h Street SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 507-285-0205 Will there be any merchandise or food offered for sale? YES NO If so, you will need to request a permit from the Park Department. PLEASE CHECK WITH PARK DEPARTMENT FOR ANY PERMITS - 281- 6160 YOU WILL NEED APPROVAL FROM THEM FOR ANY PARK FACILITIES POLICE DEPARTMENT. COMMENTS: PARK DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS: FOR ADMINISTRATION USE ONLY SIGNATURE SIGNATURE PUBLIC WORKS -STREET MAINTENANCE. - COMMENTS: SIGNATURE PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC: COMMENTS: SIGNATURE FIRE DEPARTMENT - IFAPPLICABE COMMENTS: CITY CLERK• DATE SENT.• REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6-05-06 ,GENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ORIGINATING DEPT: PLANN- IlE G ITEM NO. -- % ITEM DESCRIPTION: Amendment to Harvestview II Special District #16. PREPARED BY: Mitzi A. Baker, qpninrPlanner May 30, 2006 On May 1, 2006 the City Council approved an amendment to Harvestview II Special District #16. This amendment is separate from the one previously acted on. This amendment primarily a) adds land not previously owned by the Applicant, and labels that land as `Town Center District", and b) amends the layout for compact residential dwellings along the west side of the District to be single family detached dwellings with public roads and alleys instead of the attached dwellings with access via private roads/driveways previously approved. City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this item on May 10, 2006. Mr. Hauessinger moved to recommend approval to amend Special District #16 Harvestview II, and Special District 412 Harvestview with the staff -recommended findings. Ms. Rivas seconded the motion. The motion carried 8.0. Council Action Needed: The Council should instruct the City Attorney to prepare an Ordinance amending Special District #16, reflecting their decision. Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Attorney 3. Planning Department File 4. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on Monday June 5, 2006 in the Council / Board Chambers in the Government Center at 151 4th Street SE. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion ey: second by: o: �a I li3✓rll� ytio34 �N,NNt..1d 0315W�0-2131G3H�Dy soot i I NO _ Q3AI373?I + �WHana 4XsS A f` tvLll 1� Q '" P'it •q:._ dJ r all It I Wrtl _/ 1/tf 11411 It j Ir. �i iili All r.j ✓i�r�` 1—� •/'��L//, `_ I isJ{��y l`,' It, IGId, �, PI 11 l tl +I Jj � r. � �xh �� ✓ � il� ��e�� � � r:' , ` ` Cz 1 '�1 I` ` I t �/ i ��h' I'�S': Y `��L'i �r I sr �� �'Y. �"�.. I U §, t • � Y' ��.ia �r•vR/f� 4� R Aa s@ � " ... I I l � '- �iy • �kn�,i I a.. g B � `= lb� ! �i, II I � ill I�,. '•- � 1/ 1 F�. �.�r�r_ I �. �tln �a��_� - �: r ini�-.- il,l: �i, JLf �'`m h�111 tit ./tIT�— ,%(%�Fa-'.i,�N �.���, li•.� d 7 � t t .IFI` Q da igg i ( f.5 r 9Uki In e . � -k ROC rIESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPA.,LF.MENT DE.Ro...... a: HlNhe 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 - Rochester, MN 55904-4744 coux,r of www.olmstedcounty.com/planning @q TED•9D GUS'r'D TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner DATE: May 4, 2006 RE: Amendment to Special District #16 known as Harvestview II by Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. The applicant is proposing to add an additional 6.59 acres (former Pittenger property) to the Special District and place the parcel in the "Town Center District". The proposal is also to change a one block area shown for attached townhomes on the General Development Plan to "compact single family". The property is located along the north side of 55th Street NW, along the east side of 60th Avenue NW, along the south side of the Douglas Trail and west of 50th Avenue NW. Property Information: Applicant/Owner: Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. 3428 NW Lakeridge Place #200 Rochester, MN 55901 Engineer: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Size and Location: The property is located along the north side of 551h Street NW, along the east side of 601h Avenue NW, along the south side of the Douglas Trail and west of the Harvestview development. The development is approximately 163 acres. Background Information: The Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual allows for the establishment of Special Districts (SD) in order to permit a more flexible means of development where there are public benefits for doing so. Section 62.900 of the Land Development Manual Includes the provisions related to the establishment of a Special District, and is attached for your information. The City previously approved Special District (SD) #16 Harvestview Il, which includes an Ordinance, Exhibits, and a General Development Plan (GDP). The approved Special District #16 Harvestview it includes four Land Use Districts: Neighborhood Residential District, Urban Residential District, Town Center District and a Mixed Use District. BUILDING CODE 507/285-8345 • GISiADDRESSING/MAPPING 5071285-8232 • HOUSING/HRA 507/2B5-8224 „,y,,, �,,, PLANNINGIZONING 507/285-8232 • WELUSEPTIC 5071285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 4CTlnN FMPI nYFR Concurrent with this application, an application to amend the Harvestview II General Development Plan is being considered. On May 1, 2006 the City Council approved an amendment to Harvestview II SD and GDP to include the transfer of approximately 4.2 acres of land from the Harvestview SD and GDP to the Harvestview II SD and GDP. The amendment also added language to the SD to allow more flexibility in the Town Center District with regard to floor area ratio and height. That amendment also approved changing the development style at the corner of 551h St. NW/50 1h Ave. NW from a mixed use multi -story building with an open space court yard to a single use office/medical clinic building. Summary of Proposal: The current amendment proposes to modify the boundaries of the SD to include a parcel not previously owned by the applicant. The property being added is approximately 6.59 acres of land, formerly the Pittenger property. Findings for the Special District Ordinance: Refer to Sections 64Q.210 of the attached Harvestview It Special District Ordinance for the intent, findings and principles. Prior to City Council action on this item, the legal description will need to be modified to accurately reflect the total area included in the Special District. Action Needed: The Planning Commission will need to hold a public hearing to consider the expansion of this Special District and amendment to the block along the east side from attached dwellings to single family detached dwellings. A General Development Plan application is being considered concurrent with, and as part of, this Special District application. The Commission could consider these two items simultaneously. Separate action should be taken on the two applications, however. A Preliminary Plat for Harvestview Second will also be considered concurrent with these applications. The amendment to the Special District should either be approved, approved with changes, or denied. Following the Planning Commission public hearing and recommendation to the City Council, public hearings will be scheduled with the City Council for consideration of the Special District and the General Development Plan. Excerpt from the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual 62.900SPECIAL DISTRICTS In order to permit a more flexible means of new land development and redevelopment, the City of Rochester finds that regulations are necessary to permit the creation of special districts. Such regulations shall promote the public health, safety and general welfare and shall be substantially in accord with and promote the purposes and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 62.901 Purposes: The further specific purposes and conditions supporting the establishment of a special district are: 1) The existence of a special and substantial public interest in protecting the existing or proposed character of an area or unique geological, ecological, archeological or social characteristics of an area; or 2) The existence of a special and substantial public interest in protecting areas surrounding an individual building, group of buildings or man-made features and their environs; or 3) The need to establish modifications to or to supplement existing zoning regulations to accomplish a special public purpose. 62.902 Effect: The effect of a special district designation shall be as an overlay district. The regulations established in special district legislation shall supersede the regulations of the underlying zoning district. To the extend they are not inconsistent with the special district regulations, the underlying zoning district requirements shall remain in effect. 62.903 Submission Criteria: The petition for establishment of a Special District shall be accompanied by two (2) copies of the proposed ordinance language, a summary of the intent and effect of the proposed modification, and a map indicating the boundary of the district and the boundary of the underlying zoning districts. An application fee as required in Paragraph 60.175 shall accompany the petition. 62.904 Procedure: An application for a Special District shall be processed under the Type III Review Procedure, with a Phase II Hearing Process utilized. 62.905 Notifications: Notifications for Comprehensive Special Districts shall be sent to all owners within the area proposed for rezoning and all owners owning land wholly or partially within 350 feet of the exterior boundaries of the area proposed for rezoning. For Single Purpose Special Districts, notifications shall be sent to all owners of land within the defined area of the proposed Single Purpose Special District. 62.906 The ordinance establishing a particular Special District shall contain a statement of intent setting forth the nature of the special and substantial public interest involved and the objectives to be promoted by special regulations or procedures within the district. 60.237 SD SPECIAL DISTRICTS: Existing Special Districts approved by Ordinance numbers 3443, 3404, 2726, 2516, 2247, 3385. 3468, 3497, 3503, 3520, 3534, 3604 and 3615 are recognized as separate zoning districts and the plans and procedures established for each Special District will continue in force. When a Special District Ordinance does not specify the procedure or criteria to amend an approved site development plan, the proposed amendment will be reviewed under Section 64.148. When a Special District Ordinance requires a specific site/development plan review process, but does not specify the critieria by which to review the site/development plan, 113 the development will be reviewed under Section 61.148. When a Special District Ordinance requires a two-phase review, the development will be reviewed under Section 61.146 and either Section 62.708 (1) (for preliminary plans) or Section 62.708 (2) (for final plans). Excerpt from the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and land Development Manual ) i Page 2 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: May 10, 2006 cnizth of Minnesota School of BusinE Ms. Mitzi A. Baker presented the staff report, dated May 3, 2006, to the Commission The staff report is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Ms. Rivas asked h'6W high the roof would be. Ms. Baker responded th`aNto the top plate, it is 35 feet. The applicant's representattivve ,.Dennis Barger of TDI Associates, dressed the Commission. He stated that he was present tnswer questions. Ms. Rivas asked if this was the only le the applicant us far the buildings. Mr. Barger responded that this was the s , e that was.hosen for this site. Discussion ensued regarding elevations. r Ms. Baker explained that the applicant has fil,, a Fifte Development Plan Review application as well. dY Ms. Rivas referred to an email receive • rom Julie Kohma (this email is on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Depart ent) requesting that ow plowing not begin until after 6 a.m. Mr. Barger stated that he wou4 discuss this with the manageme .,,company. Discussion ensued regardpg the notification distance. With no one else wi. ing to be heard, Mr. Burke closed the public he0Ogg. Mr. Haeussinge moved to approve of Type II Design Modification #06-02 by Badger Midwest Hol ..g=_,,LLC with the staff -recommended findings. Mr. Pestka seconded the motion. Tmotion carried 8-0. Amendment to General Development Plan #241 known as Harvestview II and Special District #16 known as Harvestview II by Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. The applicant is proposing .o add an additional 6.59 acres (former Pittenger property) to the Special District and identifying as a Town Center District The proposal is also to change an area shown for attached townhomes to compact single family on the General Development Plan The property is located along the north side of 55th Street NW along the east side of 60th Avenue NW along the south side of the Douglas Trail and west of 50th Avenue NW. AND Preliminary Plat #06 09 by Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. to be known as Harvestview Second The plat proposes to subdivide approximately 50.29 acres into 105 into for sinale family residential development and 5 outlots The plat also dedicates Page 3 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: May 10, 2006 Ms. Mitzi A. Baker presented the staff reports, dated May 4, 2006, to the Commission. The staff reports are on file at the Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department. Ms. Baker gave the history of the GDP and Special District process on the property. Ms. Baker explained that a mid -block pedestrian connection is required and explained that it would need to be a hard surface. The applicant's representative, Andy Masterpole of McGhie and Betts (1648 Third Ave SE, Rochester MN 55904), addressed the Commission. He stated that the applicant is in agreement with having a mid -block pedestrian connection. However, he disagrees that a 10 foot wide bituminous surface is needed. He discussed the fact that a 10 foot wide path would be connecting with a 5 foot wide sidewalk. Ms. Rivas questioned who required a 10 foot wide path. Mr. Masterpole responded Public Works, due to snow plowing, maintenance vehicles, etc. However, this path would not be maintained by Public Works but by an association. Therefore, he asked that a 10 foot wide path be required but a 5 foot wide path. Ms. Baker explained that this particular mid -block connection is different than those in other developments as this would not be on a 30 foot outlot dedicated to the public. She stated that the Commission could recommend that only a 5 foot wide concrete path be required. Mr. Masterpole stated that he would need to get in touch with the Fire Department to provide information showing that there is adequate space for their vehicles to turn around in. Mr. Masterpole discussed the complexity of developers going through the special district process and asked that the Commission recommend that the process be reviewed to make it easier for those designing developments. Ms. Rivas stated that CURE had recently discussed the special district process and that he should get in contact with her to discuss the issue. With no one else wishing to be heard, Mr. Burke closed the public hearing. i Page 4 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: May 10, 2006 Mt:_Haeussinger moved to recommend,approval of Preliminary P at #O6 09 an Substantial Land Alteration by Joel Bigelow &ion , Ehterprises Inc to, 6Known as Narvestview Second with the staff-recommendedindgngs and conditions Ms RiVas� .seconded the motion. The motion carried s r U''� §'c��15.'.�J ,d -'CONDITIONS:' �iyM` H k �J r +�.dr .'F. zyj� `.y+r X U1S^w11 1 The Plat shall be revisedasfolJoilys 5' a) Roadway names shall 6e modified aaspddifibdby the Pia[ ing Department J" Addressing Staff, in,theattach6 memorandum dated Apnl25, 2006, E b) All intersections shall be perpendicular„` kk""3� jl c) A 6 footwide concrete mid block pedestrian connectional bexp�ovided k ' + ` thraugh OuticiVE; between :E wnox Pl NW &Solstice PI NUJI, 5 i;� = x s il) Right of way dedication for 55 Street shall include dedication -adjacent. o the a 4y former Pittenger parce iT.consiit6rit With thez�emamder AA 5l n.-I & t,. 5ry 2 Parkland dedication for this plat shall be met vla deferred land dedication with land to tie dedicated located adjacent to the proposedielementary school site to Lie£locted s westerly of this that The.land as to be dedicated when the property is accessed,vra a zQ t ;.:public'road or when the City wishes; to begib Ile opment�of,the property per the April 17 2006 memorandum from Rochester Park and Recreation r ✓- vT., 8 J, 55x RE twyt`i t J x lr ,` k : c F l:Cr'i�C.� r 3 The grading and drainage plans and erosiG :and sedimentation control plans mtistbe approved'by the City prior to commencemenof grading activities on this property; z�txy r st w4 A-1 °n Y xtNN g 'ly '' w 4 The applicant mu"st provide surety thatguarantees"that the site Swill be.fully restored, 'aft&completion of the excavation activity, to a SaTexonditionj@hd onevthat permits a �. : reuse of the site m, a manner compatible with the Comprehensive p}an,'iteighborhood - plans, aril Land use Plan and applicable City policies, Said surety must be provided .t.` prior to commencement"of grading:activities: on this property^ Aseparate surety will i be required fQr the Substar tialland Alteration. unless the restorationTI cost for said ' " work is ucluded in the City Owner Contract Bonds S.:-There are: inadequate on and off site pubhc,facilities, specifically Sanitary 5ewer,t , ; ; Water,.P;ubli6Roadways;`and Storm, Water Management Facilities, to.accommodate the development of this Property: No 'development will be allowed to occur until the City'Council has determined that all required pub icsfaciiities are adeqITIuate for said ,.development. , Alternatively, the developer may request to,j6in with the City in making these'inadequate';public facilities adequate for this development, and may enter. into a ' development agreement prior to Final Plat submittal;' -that outlines thedeveloper's anii City's obligations related, `,but -not limited to:.;access';locations tri required controlled access, stormwater management (including any obligations for off site; facilities), !transportation;improvements (including any off site improvements necessary to k ` y accommodate this development); pedestrian facilities, gontriLiutwns for existing & „future public infrastructure, and the extension of public uUlrties to abufing eroperties ;where applicable. 6:. Pedestrian Facilities are required along the entire frontages of both sides of all public streets within the development as well as along the abutting periphery'public roads Specific obligations will be outlined in the DevelopmenA t greement 7. Owneishi & Maintenance'of the Outlots must be addressed `prior to Final Plat" Paee City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: May 10, 2006 approval and should be outlined in the Development Agreement Y; i8. The City has established policies for the maintenance of public alleys ; Any public alleys within this developmentwill bem ,ainfained in a manner consistent With alley ` maintenance elsewhere in the City ; They Owrier or subsequent Neighborhood Association may .decide that the City s established policy for the maintenance public alleys does hot megt the expectations of oeetls of;the Owner or a subseguerit 4 Neighborhood Association In "such case the Owner or subsequent Neighborhood ' Association may nobfy the City Engineer that Owne -or. a �JelghborhoodAssac>atiop , intends to take over the".maintenance of tlie,alley-at ncr ..... andwithout anyJiatirfity to �' the City. This provision will be addressmed the DevelopmentA,groement forthe Property.b 9. Access to individual lots lying north of 56' Street NW Will beyla the proposed paJblican_ alleys. Access control must be dedicated alangall piablie roof s iexce;pt aheysythat' abut the "compact single. family" development area ?,,Controlled Access will be regwred along the frontages of other publlcroads Within the development, ann will be specified prior to or concurrent with Finial Plat review, 'C n �r 10. As noted by Rochester nt,the Rhester Fire Deparbne:the intersection design ofSolstice. ace . , NW, Cornucopia Ave NW,`and Equinox Place NW does not appear La be designed to accommodate fre apparatus to negotiate the intersection ;The mtersectiop design p' must in"sure allowing fire apparatusfo negotiate through Prior to find Platsubmittal, the design.shall lie reviewed with Rochester Public Works and the Rochester Fire Department to ensure this condition is incorporated tntotfie trial tlesin 'Y ti. 6.. t d Y 'S a�i y:W IY.• L f 1 11."Additional water -main -is -Weeded within: that +portion ofthe paralielstreet on either side: of Outlot E, along with an.;additional utility o m easement tinimize water service g lengths and provide adequate fre:protection Additional revisions toFthewate system layout iite required, Which includd.fire hydrant and valve pla mcements°and must be' accomodated prior to approval of construction plans and Final Plat application k 12. if Outlat "A" is transferred to the applicant or any other private party in the future, -the Outlot must be re platted ,and the ee-plat must include dedication of right of way for Harvest Lake Drive consistent with the General Development Plan . REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6-5-06 1GENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. " PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING '6:� ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED 8Y: Amendment to General Development Plan #241 known as Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner Harvestview II. May 30, 2006 On May 1, 2006 the City Council approved an amendment to Harvestview II Special District 416. This amendment is separate from the one previously acted on. This amendment primarily a) adds land not previously owned by the Applicant, and labels that land as "Town Center District', and b) amends the layout for compact residential dwellings along the west side of the District to be single family detached dwellings with public roads and alleys instead of the attached dwellings with access via private roads/driveways previously approved. City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on May 10, 2006. Please see the attached minutes for additional detail. Mr. McGuine moved to recommend approval of Amendment to General Development Plan #241 known as Harvestview II and GDP # 190 known as Harvestview with the staff -recommended findings and conditions. Mr. Haeussinger seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-3, with Ms. Rivas, Ms. Wiesner, and Mr. Wallace voting nay. CONDITIONS: Mr. Haeussinger moved to recommend approval of Amendment to General Development Plan #241 known as Harvestview II, with the staff -recommended findings and condition, modifying that there be a 5 foot wide concrete path. Ms. Wiesner seconded the motion. The motion carried 8-0. 1. A 5 foot wide concrete mid -block pedestrian connection will be provided through Outlot `E', between Equinox P1 NW & Solstice PI NW. Council Action Needed. 1. If the Council wishes to approve the General Development Plan it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution, with findings, for Council approval. Distribution: l ��✓'� 1. City Administrator 2. City Attorney 3. Planning Department File 4. This item will be considered some time after 7:00 p.m. on Monday June 5, 2006 in the Council / Board Chamber at the Rochester - Olmsted Government Center Building COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: oil HE I ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPAxTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite too • Rochester, MN 55904-4744 COUNT. OF www.olmstedcounty.com/planning TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner DATE: May 4, 2006 RE: Amendment to General Development Plan #241, known as Harvestview II. Property Information: wWV . •Ife�r�Ahin�'� , /b�rsJ' �scw `fl Applicant/Owner: Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. 3428 NW Lakeridge Place #200 Rochester, MN 55901 Engineer: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Size and Location: The property is located along the north side of 55h Street NW, along the east side of 60`h Avenue NW, along the south side of the Douglas Trail and west of the Harvestview development. The development is approximately *170.49 acres. Summary of Proposed Amendment:_ On May 1, 2006 the City Council approved an amendment to Harvestview II Special District (SD) and General Development Plan (GDP) to include the transfer of approximately 4.2 acres of land from the Harvestview SD and GDP to the Harvestview it SD anq GDP. That amendment also approved changing the development style at the corner of 551h St. NW/50eh Ave. NW from a mixed use multi -story building with an open space court yard to a single use office/medical clinic building. The current amendment proposes to modify the boundaries of the SD and GDP again, to include a parcel not previously owned by the applicant. The property being added is approximately'6.59 acres of land, formerly the Pittenger property. This parcel is proposed to be placed in the Town Center District. No development plans or layouts are being proposed for this parcel at this time. Another change to the GDP and SD is to modify the type of dwellings and the development style of a one block area long the east side of the GDP. This block is proposed to be changed from an attached dwelling/townhome development with private interior roads to a block developed with single family detached dwellings with an alley dissecting north/south through the block. If the Special District amendments are approved, the amendments to the General Development Plan would be acceptable if approved with conditions as identified in this report. BUILDING CODE 5071285-8345 - GIS/ADDRESSING/MAPPING 5071285-8232 • HOUSINGMPA 507/286-8224 PLANNINWONING 507/285-8232 • WELL/SEPTIC 5071285-8345 7� FAX 507/287-2275 `C-1(� ANPniiAl napnRTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Page 2 General Development Plan May 4, 2006 Amendments to the Harvestview II Special District are being proposed and considered concurrent with this application. The GDP includes approximately *170.49 acres of land proposed to be developed with mixed uses, including a range of residential densities as well as commercial uses. As identified in a previous report for the Harvestview II GDP: The Land Use Exhibit for the special district shows how the adjacent properties could be developed if they were included in this special district. Based on this plan the east side of 60" Avenue NW would basically have commercial uses established along its entire frontage. Also with the potential site layout the most northerly roadway from 60" Avenue NW is shown as a main commercial center into the development. This most northerly access location on 60" Avenue NW will be rightin/rightout only once roadway improvements are made to 60" Avenue NW. The middle access location on 60`" Avenue NW will be the future location of a signal light and it would be more logically to have the main commercial area Into the development at this location and have the northerly portion be housing of some type. No review was performed on this portion shown on the GDP. It is very likely that staff would not the support the conceptual layout shown on the adjacent properties that are not part of this proposed special district. Staff Suggested Findings and Recommendation: The findings and conditions previously adopted for the approval of this GDP remain valid for the proposal. Staff recommends that the findings and conditions in the attached resolution should be adopted, with the following additional conditions/modifications: 1. A mid -block pedestrian connection will be provided through Outlot 'E', between Equinox PI NW & Solstice PI NW. *NOTE: The total area being added to the GDP and Special District and the correct legal description need to be clarified and corrected prior to City Council action on the GDP and Special District. Staff and the consultant are coordinating to resolve this. f ROCHESTER M� TO: Consolidated Planning Department DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC 2122 Campus Drive SE WORKS Rochester, MN 55904 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 FROM: Mark E. Baker DATE: 4/28/06 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the REVISED application for General Development Plan #241 & Special District #16 for the proposed Harvestview II development. Public Works has previously made comments on this request on 12130/04. New comments related to the AMENDMENTS ON THE CURRENT PLAN are as follows: 1. Dedication of controlled access will be addressed in the Development Agreement and based on the inclusion of the new "Town Center District", will include but not be limited to, both sides of the public roadway lying between the Attached Townhomes and Town Center from 55t' St NW to 56 h St NW. 2. Public Works has previously commented on maintenance policies for public alleys, and the proposed additional alley within the single family area west of Harvestview I is subject to the same policies. 3. Public Works has no other NEW comments based on the current GDP amendment. Charges/fees applicable to the development of this property will be addressed in the Development Agreement and City -Owner Contract(s) C:\Documents and Settings\plambake\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK246\GDP241 AMENDMENT HarvesNlew 11 GDP 4-06.doc BEFORE THE COMMON COUNCIL CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA In Re: Amendment to General Development Findings of Fact, Plan #241 Conclusions of Law, (Harvestview II) and Order On May 1, 2006, the Common Council of the City of Rochester held a public hearing, upon notice to the public, to consider the Planning and Zoning Commission's findings of the public hearing held on April 12, 2006, in response to the application for an amendment to General Development Plan #241. The applicant is proposing to transfer approximately 4.2 acres of land from the Harvestview I GDP and Special District, to the Harvestview II GDP and Special District, and to amend the style of development proposed on the 4.2 acre area located immediately north of 55th Street and west of 50th Avenue N.W. At the May 1S1 public hearing, all interested persons were given an opportunity to give testimony and make presentations concerning the application. Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, the Common Council of the City of Rochester does hereby make the following findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. At its public hearing on this application, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered the issue of whether the proposed amendment to General Development Plan #241 satisfied the conditions of ROCHESTER, MINN., CODE ORDINANCES §61.215 (1999). 2. R.C.O. §61.215 provides that a general development plan must comply with all of the following criteria: /:�J A. The proposed land uses are generally in accord with the adopted zoning map. If the general development plan is being processed concurrently with a rezoning request, the general development plan and the rezoning request must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. If the general development plan is being processed concurrently with an amendment to the land use plan map and a rezoning request, the land use plan map amendment, rezoning request, the land use plan map must be consistent with the policies of the comprehensive plan. If there is inconsistency between these documents, the means for reconciling the differences must be addressed. B. The proposed development, including its lot sizes, density, access and circulation are compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use of adjacent property. C. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing Plans. D. The proposed plan makes provisions for planned capital improvements and streets reflected in the City of Rochester's current 6-Year Capital Improvement Program, adopted Thoroughfare Plan, the ROCOG Long - Range Transportation Plan, Official Maps, and any other public facilities plans adopted by the City. Street system improvements required to accommodate proposed land uses and projected background traffic are compatible with the existing uses and uses shown in the adopted Land Use Plan for the subject and adjacent properties. E. On and off -site public facilities are adequate, or will be adequate if the development is phased in, to serve the properties under consideration and will provide access to adjoining land in a manner that will allow development of those adjoining lands in accord with this ordinance. 1. Street system adequacy shall be based on the street system's ability to safely accommodate trips from existing and planned land uses on the existing and proposed street system without creating safety hazards, generating auto stacking that blocks driveways or intersections, or disrupting traffic flow on any street, as identified in the traffic impact report, if required by Section 61.523(C). Capacity from improvements in the first 3 years of the 6-year CIP shall be included in the assessment of adequacy. 2. Utilities are now available to directly serve the area of the proposed land use, or that the City of Rochester is planning for the extension of utilities to serve the area of the proposed development and such utilities are in the first three years of the City's current 6-Year Capital Improvements Program, or that other arrangements (contractual, development agreement, performance bond, etc.) have been made to ensure that adequate utilities will be available concurrently with development. If needed utilities will not be available concurrent with the proposed development, the applicant for the development approval shall stipulate to a condition that no development will occur and no further development permit will be issued until concurrency has been evidenced. 3. The adequacy of other public facilities shall be based on the level of service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing plan for development. F. The drainage, erosion, and construction in the area can be handled through normal engineering and construction practices, or that, at the time of land subdivision, a more detailed investigation of these matters will be provided to solve unusual problems that have been identified. G. Area in DEOZ will be managed in such a way as to maintain the quality and quantity of groundwater recharging lower aquifers and to protect discharge, interflow, and infiltration, and recharge processes taking place. H. 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. 3. R.C.O. §60.532 (5) authorizes the approving body to impose modifications or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance with §61.215. 4. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the General Development Plan application using the criteria found at Section 61.215 and recommended the following findings of fact: A. The property is designated for "low density residential' types of land uses on Land Use Plan. The applicant is petitioning for a Special District for the property, which would create a mixed -use development consisting of single family attached, single family detach, multi -family residential, and retail/commercial/office uses. The Land Use Plan supports mixed -use development. J z r B. Minimum lot sizes of 35 feet wide are proposed within this development, with the larger single family lots being approximately 60-80 feet wide. Reduced lot sizes, setbacks and roadway widths along with increased density being proposed with the Special District would result in a more compact development. The proposed street and alley layout as shown on the GDP is acceptable, however, specific access spacing and design will be reviewed in detail at the time of construction plan / site development review, and individual access locations/design may be subject to modifications to meet design/ordinance standards through the detailed review process. The applicant needs to meet with the City Public Works Department to review the proposed roadways and determine if all of the classifications are warranted. The roadway standards and cross sections should be supported be the Public Works Department prior to the City taking any action on the GDP and Special District. Based on the supported roadway standards and cross sections the roadway layout of the GDP could change. Modifications to the roadway in Phase I, in the north half of the compact single family area, the intersection in the south central and the intersection in the NE corner need to be changed so that the streets intersect at right angles. C. See responses to Criteria A and B. A petition to re -zone this property to a Special District is being considered concurrent with this GDP. D. 55th Street, west of 52nd Avenue N.W., was recently upgraded. The rest of 55`h Street NW, from 52"d Avenue NW to 60t Avenue NW, is scheduled to be reconstructed this year. The proposed street and alley layout as shown on the GDP is acceptable, however, specific access spacing and design will be reviewed in detail at the time of construction plan / site development review, and individual access locations/design may be subject to modifications to meet design/ordinance standards through the detailed review process. The applicant needs to meet with the City Public Works Department to review the proposed roadways and determine if all of the classifications are warranted. The roadway standards and cross sections should be supported be the Public Works Department prior to the City taking any action on the GDP and Special District. Based on the supported roadway standards and cross sections the roadway layout of the GDP could change. Modifications to the roadway in Phase 1, in the north half of the compact single family area, the intersection in the south central and the intersection in the NE corner need to be changed so that the streets intersect at right angles. E. The proposed street and alley layout as shown on the GDP is acceptable, however, specific access spacing and design will be reviewed in detail at A P- the time of construction plan / site development review, and individual access locations/design may be subject to modifications to meet design/ordinance standards through the detailed review process. The applicant needs to meet with the City Public Works Department to review the proposed roadways and determine if all of the classifications are warranted. The roadway standards and cross sections should be supported be the Public Works Department prior to the City taking any action on the GDP and Special District. Based on the supported roadway standards and cross sections the roadway layout of the GDP could change. Modifications to the roadway in Phase I, in the north half of the compact single family area, the intersection in the south central and the intersection in the NE corner need to be changed so that the streets intersect at right angles. The Transportation Improvement District (TID) cost allocation program will be applicable should the applicant voluntarily enter into a development agreement with the City to increase the adequacy of the current public facilities. The property is within the Northwest High Level Water System Area, which is available in four locations to the site. Static water pressure within this area will range from 55 to 100 PSI depending on final grades. Builders will need to install pressure -reducing devices, in the higher - pressure areas, near the domestic water meters as required by the MN Plumbing. The water mains must be looped to prevent "dead ends" and extended to adjacent properties per the requirements of RPU Water Division. A sewer line was recently installed that runs diagonally through the site from the Weatherstone Development, The City Public Works Department has previously informed the applicant that additional land (approximately 17 acres) may need to be acquired by the City for the construction of additional regional stormwater management facilities that are needed to serve this, and abutting future developments. Without these additional facilities there would be inadequate public facilities to serve the proposal. The additional land needed will change the layout of the GDP and Special District. Parkland dedication requirements for this development will be approximately 30 acres. At least 13.5 acres of the projected land requirement should be in the form of qualifying land and meet the minimum dedication standards. The dedicated land should have a natural slope of 4% or less and not be located in a watercourse, a 100 year floodway, drainage easement or water ponding area and must be suitable i for the seeding and cultivation of grass. The proposed parkland does not provide adequate qualifying parkland to meet the dedication requirement. According to the storm water management plan, to up 2 and a half acres of the 8 acre park is to be used for stormwater storage and the open space/trail corridor located east of the proposed elementary school, which had been previously been considered as meeting at least 1/2 acre of parkland dedication requirement, is now proposed to be used for permanent stormwater storage. The GDP will need to be revised adding 3 acres of land, which meet the minimum dedication standards, to the 8 acre park since there are now stormwater storage ponds shown on the park sites. Future ownership, maintenance and construction responsibilities for the open space areas/environmental corridors and future trail corridors will be addressed in the Development Agreement. F. The City Public Works Department has previously informed the applicant that additional land (approximately 17 acres) may need to be acquired by the City for the construction of additional regional stormwater management facilities that are needed to serve this, and abutting future developments. Without these additional facilities there would be inadequate public facilities to serve the proposal. The additional land needed will change the layout of the GDP and Special District. Detailed grading and drainage plans will be required when the property is platted. G. N/A. H. See responses to Criteria A and B. 5. Based upon its recommended findings of fact, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the General Development Plan subject to compliance with the following conditions: A. There are on and off site public facilities that are currently inadequate to accommodate the proposed development, specifically sanitary sewer capacity and storm water facilities. The development must be phased -in in a manner consistent with the City's planned infrastructure improvements. No development will be allowed to occur for any phase, until the City Council has determined that public facilities are adequate for said phase of development. Alternatively, the developer may request to join with the City in making h i these inadequate public facilities adequate for this development, and may enter into a development agreement, prior to Final Plat submittal, that outlines the developer's and City's obligations relating, but not limited, to: stormwater management, transportation improvements, access control, pedestrian facilities, right-of-way dedication, contributions for public infrastructure, wetland maintenance & ownership, and the extension of public utilities to abutting properties. B. Grading & Drainage Plan approval is required prior to development. The Special District / GDP narrative indicates that the City has existing stormwater detention facilities abutting this Property that will provide Storm Water Management for the proposed development. Public Works staff has previously informed the Owner that additional land (approximately 17 acres) may need to be acquired by the City for the construction of additional regional stormwater management facilities that are needed to serve this, and abutting future developments. The GDP and Special District plans may need to be revised to accommodate the area needed for stormwater management facilities. Exhibit 'G' indicates proposed on -site stormwater facilities that have not formally been reviewed by Public Works staff to determine their adequacy for addressing part of or all of the applicants obligations related to Storm Water Management for this Property. This is a conceptual drawing and that supporting documentation for design etc has not been submitted and/or reviewed. The finished property line grading abutting the perimeter roadways shall match the future profile and cross section determined by the City, and/or County. C. Pedestrian facilities are required at the Owner's expense along both sides of all new public roads within this development, and along the abutting frontages of the periphery roadways as specified in the GDP / Special District narrative. The Owner's obligations regarding construction of internal trails, including any required mid -block connections, and the proposed pedestrian bridge should be addressed in the Development Agreement. D. Ownership & maintenance of the wetlands and other proposed open space needs to be addressed in the Development Agreement. E. Right-of-way dedication and reservation for the perimeter roadways will be addressed in the Development Agreement for the Property, and will include the following obligations of for this Property: 100 ft for 60th Ave NW, and 60 ft for 55th ST NW. Dedication of controlled access will be required through the platting process for the entire frontages of the perimeter roadways, with the exception of any approved public streets access locations. F. The proposed 11 roadway classifications + alley shall be reviewed in detail with Public Works to determine if all classifications are warranted, or if certain proposed classifications can be combined. An agreement regarding the permitted street classifications should be reached prior to final Special District approval. G. The street length of residential streets should be minimized per RCO 64,124. Streets having a length in excess of 1000 feet without a horizontal curve with a maximum 200 ft radius and minimum 30 degree deflection should be discouraged / redesigned unless traffic calming measures are incorporated. H. An environmental corridor of sufficient width, extending northeasterly from just north of the 55t' St NW / 60th Ave NW intersection to the regional stormwater ponds, shall be defined on the GDP and subsequently dedicated to the City for stormwater conveyance. I. Proposed Street Section 'A' will need to be modified to accommodate turn lanes and adequate storage for a future signalized intersection. Various street sections indicate parkingy. Parking will need to be prohibited adjacent to intersections with 55' St NW & 601h Ave NW as necessary to allow for turn lanes and to reduce congestion entering & exiting these roadways. J. Streets shall intersect at right angles. In phase 1, in the north half of the compact single family area, the intersection in the south central and the intersection in the NE corner need to be changed. K. The Owners shall provide regional storm water management facilities on the property consistent with the Section 7 Storm Water Management Plan or any subsequent Council revision to the Section 7 Plan approved before December 31, 2005. If the City needs to acquire land within the Harvestview II GDP from the Owner for the implementation of the Section 7 Storm Water Management Plan or any revision, the Owner shall submit a revised GDP to reflect the public storm water management facilities. L. If storm water storage ponds are constructed on the areas that are shown as public parkland, the applicant shall revised the GDP to accommodate for the loss of usable parkland. M. All walkways shall be eight feet in width. N. Amend the Harvestview II GDP to properly label the 4.2 acre parcel as being in the Town Center District, and to modify the boundaries of the GDP so that it is clearly included in the Harvestview 11 GDP. O. The property proposed to be transferred from the Harvestview GDP #190 & Special District #12 to the Harvestview II GDP #241 & Special District #16 is included in the executed Harvestview Development Agreement and Supplemental Agreement. Execution of a Second Supplemental Development Agreement is required to address, in part, the Owner's applicable Transportation Improvement District contribution based on the current proposed use of the Property. P. As proposed, the easterly access driveway to 56'h St NW does not meet recommended guidelines for corner clearance as outlined in the ROCOG 2035 transportation Plan (see Page 4-60). Modifying the proposed driveway to an "Exit Only" could address this issue. Alternatively a TIR should be prepared to determine if the access driveway location as proposed will negatively impact the operation / level of service on 50th Ave NW. Q. The private access to 551h St NW was previously identified as a one-way for southbound traffic. The southerly parking lot access is too close to the intersection of 55`h St NW and must be modified (to be minimum 120 ft). 6. The Applicant's representative indicated its acceptance of and agreement with the conditions as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Council. 7. The Common Council concurs with and adopts as its own the findings of fact, conditions and the recommendation made by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Council. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW R.C.O. §61.215 provides that the Council shall approve a general development plan if the following criteria are satisfied: A. The proposed land uses are generally in accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and zoning map, or that the means for reconciling any differences have been addressed. A GDP may be processed simultaneously with a rezoning or plan amendment request. B. The proposed development, including its lot sizes, density, access and circulation are compatible with the existing and/or permissible future use of adjacent property. C. The mix of housing is consistent with adopted Land Use and Housing Plans. D. The proposed plan makes provisions for planned capital improvements and streets reflected in the City of Rochester's current 6-Year Capital Improvement Program, adopted Thoroughfare Plan, the ROCOG Long - Range Transportation Plan, Official Maps, and any other public facilities plans adopted by the City. Street system improvements required to accommodate proposed land uses and projected background traffic are compatible with the existing uses and uses shown in the adopted Land Use Plan for the subject and adjacent properties. E. On and off -site public facilities are adequate, or will be adequate if the development is phased in, to serve the properties under consideration and will provide access to adjoining land in a manner that will allow development of those adjoining lands in accord with this ordinance. 1. Street system adequacy shall be based on the street system's ability to safely accommodate trips from existing and planned land uses on the existing and proposed street system without creating safety hazards, generating auto stacking that blocks driveways or intersections, or disrupting traffic flow on any street, as identified in the traffic impact report, if required by Section 61.523(C). Capacity from improvements in the first 3 years of the 6-year CIP shall be included in the assessment of adequacy. 2. Utilities are now available to directly serve the area of the proposed land use, or that the City of Rochester is planning for the extension of utilities to serve the area of the proposed development and such utilities are in the first three years of the City's current 6-Year Capital Improvements Program, or that other arrangements (contractual, development agreement, performance bond, etc.) have been made to ensure that adequate utilities will be available concurrently with development. If needed utilities will not be available concurrent with the proposed development, the applicant for the development approval shall stipulate to a condition that no development will occur and no further development permit will be issued until concurrency has been evidenced. 3. The adequacy of other public facilities shall be based on the level of service standards in Section 64.130 and the proposed phasing plan for development. F. The drainage, erosion, and construction in the area can be handled through normal engineering and construction practices, or that, at the time I?J of land subdivision, a more detailed investigation of these matters will be provided to solve unusual problems that have been identified. G. Areas in DEOZ will be managed in such a way as to maintain the quality and quantity of groundwater recharging lower aquifers and to protect discharge, interflow, and infiltration, and recharge processes taking place. H. 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. 2. R.C.O. §60.532 (5) authorizes the Council to impose conditions on its approval of a general development plan. 3. By a substantial amount of the evidence and testimony presented at the May 1, 2006, hearing, it is hereby determined by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the proposed amendment to General Development Plan #241 complies with the requirements of §61.215, subject to the 17 conditions as described above. ORDER The Common Council of the City of Rochester, pursuant to R.C.O. §61.215, does hereby approve the proposed amendment to General Development Plan #241 subject to the 17 conditions as described above. Dated at Rochester, Minnesota this day of May, 2006. Dennis L. Hanson President of the Rochester City Council Fof.zone05%G 1)P`241.Amd1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION kGENDA SECTION: PLBLIC F E.SRINGS ORIGINATING DEPT: PLANNING EM DESCRIPTION: Preliminary Plat #06-09 by Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. to be known as Harvestview Second. The plat proposes to subdivide approximately 50.29 acres into 105 lots for single family residential development and 5 outlots. The plat also dedicates right-of-way for a number of new public roadways. The applicant is also requesting approval of a Substantial Land Alteration permit to allow for grading that exceeds 10 feet of cut or fill on the property. The property is located along the north side of 551h Street NW, south of the Douglas Trail and west of Harvest Moon Boulevard NW. May 30, 2006 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: MEETING DATE: 6-5-06 r 3 PREPARED BY: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner The City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on May 10, 2006 to consider this preliminary plat. Mr. Haeussinger moved to recommend approval of Preliminary Plat #06-09 and Substantial Land Alteration by Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. to be known as Harvestview Second with the staff -recommended findings and conditions. Ms. Rivas seconded the motion. The motion carried 8-0. 1. The Plat shall be revised as follows: a) Roadway names shall be modified as specified by the Planning Department Addressing Staff in the attached memorandum dated April 25, 2006; b) All intersections shall be perpendicular; c) AS foot wide concrete mid -block pedestrian connection will be provided through Outlot `E', between v' Equinox PI NW & Solstice PI NW; -d) Right of way dedication for 551h Street shall include dedication adjacent to the former Pittenger parcel, consistent with the remainder of the Plat. 2. Parkland dedication for this plat shall be met via deferred land dedication with land to be dedicated located adjacent to the proposed elementary school site to be located westerly of this plat. The land is to be dedicated when the property is accessed via a public road or when the City wishes to begin development of the property per the April 17, 2006 memorandum from Rochester Park and Recreation. 3. The grading and drainage plans and erosion and sedimentation control plans must be approved by the City prior to commencement of grading activities on this property. 4. The applicant must provide surety that guarantees that the site will be fully restored, after completion of the excavation activity, to a safe condition, and one that permits reuse of the site in a manner compatible with the Comprehensive plan, neighborhood plans, and Land use Plan and applicable City policies. Said surety must be provided prior to commencement of grading activities on this property. A separate surety will be required for the Substantial Land Alteration, unless the restoration cost for said work is included in the City -Owner Contract Bonds. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: Page 2 RCA 05/30/06 5. There are inadequate on and off site public facilities, specifically Sanitary Sewer, Water, Public Roadways, and Storm Water Management Facilities, to accommodate the development of this Property. No development will be allowed to occur until the City Council has determined that all required public facilities are adequate for said development. Alternatively, the developer may request to join with the City in making these inadequate public facilities adequate for this development, and may enter into a development agreement, prior to Final Plat submittal, that outlines the developer's and City's obligations related, but not limited to: access locations and required controlled access, stormwater management (including any obligations for off -site facilities), transportation improvements (including any off -site improvements necessary to accommodate this development), pedestrian facilities, contributions for existing & future public infrastructure, and the extension of public utilities to abutting properties where applicable. 6. Pedestrian Facilities are required along the entire frontages of both sides of all public streets within the development as well as along the abutting periphery public roads. Specific obligations will be outlined in the Development Agreement. 7. Ownership & Maintenance of the Outlots must be addressed prior to Final Plat approval and should be outlined in the Development Agreement. 8. The City has established policies for the maintenance of public alleys. Any public alleys within this development will be maintained in a manner consistent with alley maintenance elsewhere in the City. The Owner or subsequent Neighborhood Association may decide that the City's established policy for the maintenance of public alleys does not meet the expectations or needs of the Owner or a subsequent Neighborhood Association. In such case the Owner or subsequent Neighborhood Association may notify the City Engineer that Owner or a Neighborhood Association intends to take over the maintenance of the alley at no cost and without any liability to the City. This provision will be addressed in the Development Agreement for the Property. 9. Access to individual lots lying north of 56th Street NW will be via the proposed public alleys. Access control must be dedicated along all public roads (except alleys) that abut the "compact single family" development area. Controlled Access will be required along the frontages of other public roads within the development, and will be specified prior to or concurrent with Final Plat review. 10. As noted by the Rochester Fire Department, the intersection design of Solstice Place NW, Cornucopia Ave NW, and Equinox Place NW does not appear to be designed to accommodate fire apparatus to negotiate the intersection. The intersection design must insure allowing fire apparatus to negotiate through. Prior to Final Plat submittal, the design shall be reviewed with Rochester Public Works and the Rochester Fire Department to ensure this condition is incorporated into the final design. 11. Additional water main is needed within that portion of the parallel street on either side of Outlot E, along with an additional utility easement to minimize water service lengths and provide adequate fire protection. Additional revisions to the water system layout are required, which include fire hydrant and valve placements and must be accommodated prior to approval of construction plans and Final Plat application. 12. If Outlot "A" is transferred to the applicant or any other private party in the future, the Outlot must be re -platted, and the re -plat muss include dedication of right-of-way for Harvest Lake Drive consistent with the General Development Plan. n; Council Action Needed: 1. The Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the Land Subdivision Permit and Substantial Land Alteration Permit. The Council must make findings of fact as a basis for the decision. I'6 I I h IL 25. y7dryR = ti n /e fifl I �L_ KY 91: V611 9MVE VY ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNENTG DEPARTMENT oY,4ocxEST ".ylyNx 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 • Rochester, MIN 55904-4744 O IIH T VOFwww.oimstedcounty.com/planning �`•. ,:`� C ��__�+_JJ � •. RA TED•ACGC9TY TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner DATE: May 4, 2006 RE: Preliminary Plat #06-09 by Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. to be known as Harvestview Second. The plat proposes to subdivide approximately 50.29 acres into 105 lots for single family residential development and 5 outlots. The plat also dedicates right-of-way for a number of new public roadways. The applicant is also requesting approval of a Substantial Land Alteration permit to allow for grading that exceeds 10 feet of cut or fill on the property. The property is located along the north side of 55th Street NW, south of the Douglas Trail and west of Harvest Moon Boulevard NW. Planninq Department Review: Applicant/Owner: Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. 3428 NW Lakeridge Place #200 Rochester, MN 55901 Engineer: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave. SE Rochester, MN 55904 Report Attachments: 1. Land Development Manual Excerpts 2. Referral Comments 3. Copy of Preliminary Plat 4. Copy of Harvestview II General Development Plan (see current petition to amend GDP #241, being considered concurrent with this application) Development Review: Location of Property: The property is located along the north side of 55'" Street NW, south of the Douglas Trail and west of Harvest Moon Boulevard NW. Zoning: The property is zoned SD-16 Harvestview II Special District. Petitions to amend the existing Special District Ordinance and approved GDP are being considered concurrent with this petition. BUILDING CODE 5071285-8345 • GIB/ADDRESSING/MAPPING 507/285-8232 • HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 PLANNING,ZONING 507/285-8232 • WELLSEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAx 507/287-2275 �� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER 4" Page 2 May 4, 2006 Proposed The plat proposes to subdivide approximately 50.29 acres into 105 Development: lots for single family residential development and 5 outlots. Roadways: The Plat proposes to dedicate right-of-way for several new roadways. Roadway widths and designs were included as part of the Special District and General Development Plan for the property and will need to be reviewed in detail with this and the Final Plat. Right of way will be dedicated for 55" Street NW. There are 8 new public roadways proposed for dedication with this Plat, in addition to three alleys. Roadway designs will vary from standard roads to accommodate a more compact development. Access control will need to be added to the Plat and dedicated along the frontage of all public roads where lots have frontage/ access to an alley. Utilities: Sanitary sewer and water main are proposed to be extended from the Harvestview First Replat, which is adjacent to the east side of this Plat. Additional water main is needed within that portion of the parallel street on either side of Outlot E, along with an additional utility easement to minimize water service lengths and provide adequate fire protection. Additional revisions to the water system layout are required, which include fire hydrant and valve placements. Sidewalks: Pedestrian facilities will be required throughout the development and will include a combination of sidewalks and bituminous paths. A mid - block pedestrian facility will need to be provided between Equinox and Solstice Place, through Outlot "E". Drainage: Outlots'B" and "D" will have drainage easements dedicated over them and will be used to convey storm water through the site. Outlot "A" is currently owned by the City. This Outlot may be land in excess of what is needed for the regional stormwater ponds that will be built south of the Douglas Trail and may be transferred to the applicant for development with townhomes. Detailed grading and drainage plans will also be required prior to submittal of the Final Plat application. Wetlands: A No -Loss application was approved for this site in 2005. There are no wetlands on the property. Spillover Parking: The spillover parking requirements for the single family homes is 126 stalls. Since this subdivision is designed with narrower roadways with garage access from alleys for the single family homes, most of the roadways will not accommodate on -street parking. It appears that on -street parking would be allowed on Harvest Lake Drive NW, 561" Street NW, and 52nd Avenue NW. The applicant is proposing Solstice Place NW and Equinox Place NW as one-way roads, with parking on one side. If this design is approved, spillover parking Page 3 May 4, 2006 requirements for the subdivision will be accommodated on -street. Spillover parking for Block 3 and Outlot C will be evaluated at the time specific development is proposed. Parkland Dedication: Parkland dedication for this plat shall be met via deferred land dedication with land to be dedicated located adjacent to the proposed elementary school site to be located westerly of this plat. The land is to be dedicated when the property is accessed via a public road or when the City wishes to begin development of the property per the April 17, 2006 memorandum from Rochester Park and Recreation. General Development The applicant is proposing to amend the approved Harvestview II Plan: GDP (#241) and Special District (#16) concurrent with this application. Substantial Land Alteration & Staff Suggested Findings: The applicant is requesting approval of a substantial land alteration permit to perform grading within the residential and golf course areas of the development. There are minor areas that will exceed the allowable 10 feet of cut or fill. Regarding findings for Section 62.1105, staff suggests the findings as written can be made, with the exception of #13 and #14. Staff suggests the following findings for those two items: #13) The grading and drainage plans and erosion and sedimentation control plans must be approved by the City prior to commencement of grading activities on this property. #14) The applicant must provide surety that guarantees that the site will be fully restored, after completion of the excavation activity, to a safe condition, and one that permits reuse of the site in a manner compatible with the Comprehensive plan, neighborhood plans, and Land use Plan and applicable City policies. Said surety must be provided prior to commencement of grading activities on this property. The Planning Staff would suggest the following findings for Section 61.146: 1) Not applicable. 2) Not applicable. 3) Not applicable. 4) The Rochester Public Works Department will need to review and approve the grading and drainage plan for this work. This plan must accommodate permanent and interim erosion and sediment control. 5) Not applicable. 6) Not applicable. 7) Not applicable. 8) Not applicable. Staff Review and Recommendation: 1 Page 4 May 4, 2006 The applicant is proposing to amend the approved Harvestview II GDP (#241) and Special District (4416) concurrent with this application. Preliminary Plat: Section 61.225 of the Land Development Manual lists the findings that must be made by the Planning Commission and the Council when reviewing a land subdivision permit application. This section is attached for your information. This development is also subject to design standards established as part of the Special District and General Development Plan approvals for the property, including roadway design. Action should first be taken on the proposed amendments to the Harvestview II Special District and General Development Plan, which are being considered concurrent with this petition. Staff recommends that the following modifications or conditions be imposed on this preliminary plat in order to insure that the required criteria and standards are met: The Plat shall be revised as follows: a) Roadway names shall be modified as specified by the Planning Department Addressing Staff in the attached memorandum dated April25, 2005; b) All intersections shall be perpendicular; c) A mid -block pedestrian connection should be provided through Outlot 'E', between Equinox Pt NW & Solstice PI NW; d) Right of way dedication for 5e Street shall include dedication adjacent to the former Pittenger parcel, consistent with the remainder of the Plat. 2. Parkland dedication for this plat shall be met via deferred land dedication with land to be dedicated located adjacent to the proposed elementary school site to be located westerly of this plat. The land is to be dedicated when the property is accessed via a public road or when the City wishes to begin development of the property per the April 17, 2006 memorandum from Rochester Park and Recreation. 3. The grading and drainage plans and erosion and sedimentation control plans must be approved by the City prior to commencement of grading activities on this property. 4. The applicant must provide surety that guarantees that the site will be fully restored, after completion of the excavation activity, to a safe condition, and one that permits reuse of the site in a manner compatible with the Comprehensive plan, neighborhood plans, and Land use Plan and applicable City policies. Said surety must be provided prior to commencement of grading activities on this property. A separate surety will be required for the Substantial Land Alteration, unless the restoration cost for said work is included in the City -Owner Contract Bonds. 5. There are inadequate on and off site public facilities, specifically Sanitary Sewer, Water, Public Roadways, and Storm Water Management Facilities, to accommodate the development of this Property. No development will be allowed to occur until the City Council has determined that all required public facilities are adequate for said development. Alternatively, the developer may request to join with the City in making these inadequate public facilities adequate for this development, and may enter into a development agreement, prior to Final Plat submittal, that outlines the developer's and City's obligations related, but not limited to: access locations and required controlled access, stormwater management (including any obligations for Page 5 May 4, 2006 off -site facilities), transportation improvements (including any off -site improvements necessary to accommodate this development), pedestrian facilities, contributions for existing & future public infrastructure, and the extension of public utilities to abutting properties where applicable. 6. Pedestrian Facilities are required along the entire frontages of both sides of all public streets within the development as well as along the abutting periphery public roads. Specific obligations will be outlined in the Development Agreement. 7. Ownership & Maintenance of the Outlots must be addressed prior to Final Plat approval and should be outlined in the Development Agreement. 8. The City has established policies for the maintenance of public alleys. Any public alleys within this development will be maintained in a manner consistent with alley maintenance elsewhere in the City. The Owner or subsequent Neighborhood Association may decide that the City's established policy for the maintenance of public alleys does not meet the expectations or needs of the Owner or a subsequent Neighborhood Association. In such case the Owner or subsequent Neighborhood Association may notify the City Engineer that Owner or a Neighborhood Association intends to take over the maintenance of the alley at no cost and without any liability to the City. This provision will be addressed in the Development Agreement for the Property. 9. Access to individual lots lying north of 5e Street NW will be via the proposed public alleys. Access control must be dedicated along all public roads (except alleys) that abut the "compact single family" development area. Controlled Access will be required along the frontages of other public roads within the development, and will be specified prior to or concurrent with Final Plat review. 10. As noted by the Rochester Fire Department, the intersection design of Solstice Place NW, Cornucopia Ave NW, and Equinox Place NW does not appear to be designed to accommodate fire apparatus to negotiate the intersection. The intersection design must insure allowing fire apparatus to negotiate through. Prior to Final Plat submittal, the design shall be reviewed with Rochester Public Works and the Rochester Fire Department to ensure this condition is incorporated into the final design. 11. Additional water main is needed within that portion of the parallel street on either side of Outlot E, along with an additional utility easement to minimize water service lengths and provide adequate fire protection. Additional revisions to the water system layout are required, which include fire hydrant and valve placements and must be accommodated prior to approval of construction plans and Final Plat application. 12. If Outlet "A" is transferred to the applicant or any other private party in the future, the Outlot must be re -platted, and the re -plat must include dedication of right-of- way for Harvest Lake Drive consistent with the General Development Plan. J S Page 6 May 4, 2006 REMINDER TO APPLICANT: • Approved grading, drainage and construction plans and an executed Development Agreement will need to be submitted with the final plat application if the applicant intends to record the final plat documents prior to completion of infrastructure improvements, • Prior to development, the property owner will need to execute a City Owner Contract for construction of the public roadways and utilities. • The applicant must obtain any land use approval that is required by another governmental entity with land use jurisdiction, in whole or in part, over this development. Page 7 May 4, 2006 Excerpt from the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual 61.225 Findings for Land Subdivision: The Zoning Administrator, Commission or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a land subdivision if all of the following findings with respect to the proposed development are made: 1) The proposed land subdivision conforms to all relevant requirements of this ordinance and variances have been granted to permit any nonconformance; 2) That the proposed water system and sanitary sewer system are adequate to serve the normal and fire protection demands of proposed development and to provide for the efficient and timely extension to serve future development; 3) That the plan for soil erosion and stormwater management meets the adopted standards of the City of Rochester and is consistent with the adopted Stormwater Management Plan or adopted drainage or stormwater policies; 4)That the vehicular and non -motorized system is consistent with adopted transportation plans and is consistent with the street layout standards listed in Section 64.120 and traffic service standards in Section 61.526; 5)That the lot and block layout provide for safe and convenient vehicular, service and emergency access, efficient utility service connections, and adequate buildable area in each lot for planned uses; 6)That the proposed land subdivision has taken into account the current 6-Year and other Long -Range Capital Improvements Programs and the elements listed therein in the design of the subdivision; 7)That the proposed subdivision, if in a residential zoning district, addresses the need for spillover parking consistent with the requirements of Section 63.426; 8)That right-of-ways and easements of adequate size and dimension are provided for the purpose of constructing the street, utility, and drainage facilities needed to serve the development; 9) That the proposed parks, trail thoroughfares and open space dedications are consistent with adopted plans, policies and regulations; 10) That the proposed subdivision will not have off -site impacts on the street, drainage, water or wastewater systems that exceed adopted standards; 11) That the proposed subdivision will not have adverse impacts on the safety or viability of permitted uses on adjacent properties; 12) That the proposed land subdivision is designed in such a manner as to allow for continued development in an efficient manner on adjacent undeveloped lands; Page 8 f May 4, 2006 13) That the soils, topography and water tables have been adequately studied to ensure that all lots are developable for their designated purposes; 14) That the proposed land subdivision is consistent with the standards of the Citys adopted Comprehensive Plan with regard to street standards and classifications, and other matters not addressed in this ordinance; 15) That any land located within Zone A as shown on the currently adopted Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps of the Flood Insurance Study, Rochester, Minnesota, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is determined to be suitable for its intended use and that the proposed subdivision adequately mitigates the risks of flooding, inadequate drainage, soil and rock formations with severe limitations for development, severe erosion potential, or any other floodpiain related risks to the health, safety or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision in a manner consistent with this ordinance; and 16) That the proposed land subdivision, if approved, would not result in a violation of federal or state law, or city or county ordinance. 61.226 Conditions on Approvals: in considering an application for a development permit to allow a land subdivision, the approving body shall consider and may impose modifications or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance with the criteria of Section 61.225. / 1 J ROCHESTER PARK AND RC.CREATION DEPARTMENT rochester 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 17 2006 TO: Jennifer Garness Planning RE: Harvestview 2 Preliminary Plat # 06-09 Acreage of plat.......................................................... 50.29 acres Number of dwelling units ............................................. 105 units Densityfactor............................................................ .0244 Dedication............................................................... 2.56 acres Fair market value of land ............................................. na The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: Deferred land dedication with land to be dedicated located adjacent to proposed elementary school site to be located westerly of this plat. The land to be dedicated when the property is accessed via public street or when the City wishes to begin development of the property. O:\PARK DEDICATION\2006\NW 2898\HARVESTVIEW 2.DOC Rochester -Olmsted Planning �_partmsnt Phone: (507)285-8232 GIS/Addressing Division Fax: (507) 287.2275 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 Rochester, MN 55904-4744 PRELIMINARY PLAT REFERRAL RESPONSE DATE: April 25, 2006 TO: Jennifer Garness; Stephanie Foster FROM: Randy Growden GIS/Addressing Staff Rochester -Olmsted County Planning Department CC: Andy Masterpole RE: HARVESTVIEW SECOND PRELIMINARY PLAT # 06-09 A review of the preliminary plat has turned up the following ADDRESS and ROADWAY related issues. 1. Label for Comucopia Avenue NW is missing north of its intersection with Solstice Place NW. RECOMMENDATION: Label roadway between Solstice Place NW and Harvest Lake Drive NW as CORNUCOPIA AVENUE NW. ROCHESTER p4lw . TO: Consolidated Planning Department DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC 2122 Campus Drive SE WORKS Rochester, MN 55904 201 4" Street BE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 FROM: Mark E. Baker DATE: 4/28/06 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the application for Preliminary Plat #06- 09, for the proposed Harvestview Second development. The following are Public Works comments: There are inadequate on and off site public facilities, specifically Sanitary Sewer, Water, Public Roadways, and Storm Water Management Facilities, to accommodate the development of this Property. No development will be allowed to occur until the City Council has determined that all required public facilities are adequate for said development. Alternatively, the developer may request to join with the City in making these inadequate public facilities adequate for this development, and may enter into a development agreement, prior to Final Plat submittal, that outlines the developer's and City's obligations related, but not limited to: access locations and required controlled access, stormwater management (including any obligations for off -site facilities), transportation improvements (including any off -site improvements necessary to accommodate this development), pedestrian facilities, contributions for existing & future public infrastructure, and the extension of public utilities to abutting properties where applicable. 2. Grading & Drainage Plan approval is required prior to Final Plat submittal. A separate surety will be required for the Substantial Land Alteration, unless the restoration cost for said work is included in the City -Owner Contract Bonds. 3. Execution of a City -Owner Contract, and dedication of any applicable public easements is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure to serve this development. 4. Pedestrian Facilities are required along the entire frontages of both sides of all public streets within the development as well as along the abutting periphery public roads. Specific obligations will be outlined in the Development Agreement. CADocuments and Settings\plastost\Local Settings%Temporary Internet Files\OLK1C\PP06-09 Harvestview Second.doc I 50 ROCHESTER TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Mark E. Baker DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 5. Ownership & Maintenance of the Outlots needs to be addressed prior to Final Plat approval and should be outlined in the Development Agreement. 6. The City has established policies for the maintenance of public alleys. Any public alleys within this development will be maintained in a manner consistent with alley maintenance elsewhere in the City. The Owner or subsequent Neighborhood Association may decide that the City's established policy for the maintenance of public alleys does not meet the expectations or needs of the Owner or a subsequent Neighborhood Association. In such case the Owner or subsequent Neighborhood Association may notify the City Engineer that Owner or a Neighborhood Association intends to take over the maintenance of the alley at no cost and without any liability to the City. This provision will be addressed in the Development Agreement for the Property. 7. Access to individual lots will be via the proposed public alleys. Controlled Access will be required, in addition to that shown on the preliminary plat, along the frontages of all other public roads within the development. 8. All intersections shall be perpendicular. 9. A mid -block pedestrian connection should be provided through Outlot `E', between Equinox PI NW & Solstice PI NW. 10. Preliminary Construction Plan comments will be provided separately to the Developer's Engineer C9Documents and Settings\plastost\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK1 C\PP06-09 Harvestview Second.doc ROCHESTER TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Deaaar WORKS MENT OF PUBLIC Rochester, MN 55904 2010 Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287.7800 FAX — 507-281.6216 FROM: Mark E. Baker Charges/fees/obligations applicable to the development of this property will be further addressed in the City -Owner Contract, and Development Agreement, and will include but are not limited: ❖ Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) ❖ Water Availability Charge (WAC) Transportation Improvement District Contribution ❖ Storm Water Management s Pedestrian Facilities ❖ Pedestrian Ramps Street Signs •:• First Seal Coat C:\Documents and Settings\plasfoshl-oval Settings%Temporary Internet Files\OLK1C\PP06-09 Harvestview Second.doc I I6 The band to reach for... DAVID A. KAPLER Fire Chief DATE: April 28, 2006 TO: Jennifer Garness, Planning FROM: R. Vance Swisher, Fire Marshal SUBJ: Preliminary Plat #06-09 by Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises to be known as Harvestview Second. 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 including hydrants properly located and installed in accordance with the specifications of the Water Division. Hydrants shall be in place prior to commencing building construction. a) The minimum fire flow for this single family development area shall be no less than 1,500 gpm at 20 psi. The actual required fire flow per lot will be determined by the size and construction type of the buildings being proposed. 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) The intersection of Solstice Place NW, Cornucopia Ave NW, and Equinox Place NW does not look to be designed in an appropriate method which will allow fire apparatus to negotiate the intersection. Please review the design of this intersection with the Rochester Public Works Department to insure the intersection is designed in a method that will allow fire apparatus to easily negotiate through. b) Minimum street width shall not be less than 20 feet clear drivable width. c) 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. 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) Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises McGhie & Betts, Inc (e-mail only) 153 rp . . wr plrGyr, we deliver April 17, 2006 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Preliminary Plat #06-09 by Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises, Inc. to be known as Harvestview Second and a SLA to allow for grading that exceeds 10'. Dear Ms. Gayness: Our review of the referenced preliminary plat is complete and our comments follow: 1. Static water pressures within this area will range from 87 to 100 PSI. The builders must install pressure -reducing devices near the domestic water meters as required by the Minnesota Plumbing Code. 2. Additional water main is needed within a portion of the parallel streets on either side of Outlot E {along with an additional utility easement to minimize water service lengths and provide adequate fire protection. 3. Other revisions to the proposed water system layout are required, which include fire hydrant and valve placements. We have provided the applicant's engineering firm with these comments. Please contact us at 507-280-1500 if you have questions. Very truly yours,(I "44A Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Bureau Gary Schick, Building & Safety Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises, Inc. McGhie & Betts, Inc. Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 154 WETLAND COMMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS Application Number: Preliminary Plat #06-09 by Joel Bigelow & Sons Enterprises Inc. to be known as Harvestview Second No hydric soils exist on the site based on the Soil Survey Hydric soils exist on the site according to the Soil Survey. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands on the property and submitting the information as part of this application. ❑ A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and is on file with the Planning Department. A wetland delineation is on file with the Planning Department and a No -Loss, Exemption, or Replacement Plan has been submitted to the Planning Department. A wetland related application has been approved by the City. This plan incorporates the approved wetland plan. No hydric soils exist on the property based on the Soil Survey. However, due to the location in the landscape, the property owner should examine the site for wetlands. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands. ® Other or Explanation: A No -Loss application was approved for this site in 2005. There are no wetlands on the property. From John Harford Wetlands LGU Representative Rochester Minnesota Land Surveying Urban - Land Plaz n g Consulting - C1vd Engineering Geotechnical Engineering r�onstniction Material Testing Landscape Architecture 1648 Third Avenue S.E. Rochester, MN 55904 SUBSTANTIAL LANC) ALTERATION April 12, 2006 Mr. Brent Svenby Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive Rochester, MN 55904 RECEIVED APR 12 2DDS ROCHESTER - OLb1STED RE: Exemption from Section 62.1101.2 (a) for Harvestview Second Dear Mr. Svenby: Section 62.1101 of the Rochester Land Development Manual and Zoning Ordinance contains standards for substantial land alteration projects. The grading of the Harvestview Second site will result in exceeding a 10-foot vertical cut and/or fill over various portions of the site. This project meets the definition of Section 62.1101.2.1.1.4 where the cut/fill involves a grade change of 10-feet or more from the pre-existing grades and 62.1101.2.1.1.5 where movement of earth in excess of 100,000 cubic yards. The enclosed display map indicates the cut and fill areas on the site. The maximum fill would be approximately 15 feet and the maximum cut would be approximately 15 feet. Section 62.1102.LF provides for an exemption provided there are sufficient findings made as contained in 62.1105, The following are suggested findings in support of the request: Section 62.11050-15). 1. The activity necessary to grade the portions in excess of 10-foot vertical cut/fill will not result in unstable slopes or unsafe access. The slopes on the site will be a maximum of 3:1 and a portion of the grading would involve cuts or fills in excess of 10'. 2. The environmental impacts of grading on this site to adjacent properties will be minimal. 3. There is access to the site from the north and east. It will not be necessary to truck in fill or haul fill off of the site, which will minimize the impact on the surrounding roads. 4. The additional grading will not adversely affect air quality, the ground water, or surface water quality. S. The natural topography of the area will be re -graded to provide adequate slopes for single — family dwellings for this development and the overall scenic quality will be maintained. 6. The grading is compatible with the proposed adjacent neighborhood developments. Tel. 507,289.3919 Fax. 507.289.7333 The grading will be confined to the Harvestview development site and will not unduly affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties. 8. There will be minimal impact to the visual quality of adjacent properties during the time of grading. 9. The grading plan will provide for proper restoration stabilization in accordance with the codes for the City of Rochester. 10. The grading will not result in negative impacts on the drainage patterns. The grading of the site is such that run-off is directed to appropriate locations in the street and handled through the City stormwater plan. 11. The area of grading does not contain sinkholes and will not affect the groundwater or the subsurface water quality once restoration and stabilization is completed. 12. The grading of the site will take place in one phase taking approximately 12-16 weeks. This time frame is appropriate for the size and location of this activity. 13. Permanent and interim (during construction) erosion/sedimentation control will be provided for in the grading plan. The City will review and approve this city/owner contract. 14. A performance and payment bond is required for all work associated with the construction of the public improvements. This bond will be submitted with the city/owner contract. In addition, a surety to fully restore grading activities will be provided. 15. This development will comply with the standards in the Land Development Manual and on file with Public Works. Yours very truly, McGHIE & BETTS INC. 04 Andrew J. Masterpole AJM/bd RECEIVED APR 1 2 21906 ROCHESTER- OLMSTED P! .INNING DEPARTMENT I � �I b � i Np�gr, � 0 7 AI NOW A OEMN �.�����'i•�IMNIiw1D' All- « 17- It�tESTL(�W SEND l l5 a DISPOSAL OF TREES AND BRUSH In November 2004, the City Council adopted an amendment to the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. The text of the amendment is as follows: 61.200 SUBDIVISION ACTIVITIES: The requirements of Sections 61.200 through 61.584 identify approvals that will be required to authorize any subdivision activity which is defined as a subdivision by statute or City ordinance. Any person seeking approval of subdivision activity, development activity or a conditional use permit must indicate whether there will be burning of brush, trees or debris that will be cleared as part of the subdivision activity. In order to apply this provision, you will need to indicate at the bottom of the page plans for disposal of trees, slash, and brush. Please sign and date the form. You must submit this information to the Planning Department prior to applying for a burning permit from the Fire Department. If plans change prior to obtaining a burning permit, you will need to notify the Planning Department. Within this development as proposed through the development application, trees, slash, and brush will be disposed by: Is Burning on site Chipping on site Salvaging and removing from the property Other; describe in detail: 1� Signature of ApIgicant q Development Proposal Date RECEIVED APR y Z 2006 ROCHESTER - CLMSTED ❑ gyp; n�i,,r. .CG cq�-'.'T, J cAdocuments -and settings\kristie'.local settings,temporary internet f;les',olk3\1920-S5.doc REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6-5-06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. ?UBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING '; ITEM DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #06-11 to be known as HRB Subdivision PREPARED`BY: John Harford, Senior Pl June 1, 2006 Planning Department Review: See attached staff report dated May26, 2006 recommending approval subject to the following conditions: I. The applicant shall provide an access easement for Lot 2 and record the easement prior to recording of the final plat. 2. Stormwater management must be provided. Grading and drainage plans will be required for review and approval at the time development is proposed for Lot 2 and/or redevelopment of Lot 1, and a Stormwater Management fee will for any new areas of impervious surface associated with the development/redevelopment of this property. 3. Prior to the submittal of the final plat documents, the applicant shall work with the Rochester Public Utilities to identify all necessary easements for future watermain to serve Lot 2. The applicant shall either revise the final plat to add the easement or grant the easement as a part of the Site Development Plan review process whichever is deemed acceptable by Rochester Public Utilities. Council 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 Monday, June 5, 2006 in the Council Chambers at the Rochester / Olmsted County Government Center. 5. McGhie & Betts, Inc. COUNCIL ACTION: Motionby: second by: to: 500 ft. Notification Area of Lots 2, 4, and 100 of Auditors Plat B (all in one parcel) 902 7th ST NW Final Plat406-11 by HRB Properties PIN: 74.35.23.054151 Ward: 5 (Bob Nowicki) Neighborhood Assoc: None A 5/23/06 N Olmsted County is not responsible for ommissions or errors contained herein. If discrepancies are found within this map, please notify the GIS Division, Rochester -Olmsted County Planning Department, 2122 Campus Drive SE, Rochester, MN 55904, (507) 285-8232. s I� SAL B8 Di:e a a say IS -$ e ea3a8g�g� CS i�iii a ?Ps�6�; Ian ?s ea Ite i � ga 8Iv 43 l ji 3 3 7 eaeanaisanw_��_ Sf't69 _---uslz--- 21G1 -_� Al �mi. AYYE un t � ui�W�inia M ..Yanea — ue �I 1,� M Dg --� 8. 1'C7d 'a.eL'liGllb '" Io7 %61 1 ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 • Rochester, MN 55904-4744 C O O H, y 4 F www.cimstedcourty.com/planning TO: Rochester Common Council FROM: John Harford, Senior PlanneiciV DATE: May 26, 2006 RE: Final Plat #06-11 to be known as HRB Subdivision. The plat proposes to subdivide existing commercial lots, Lots 2, 4, and 100 of Auditors Plat B . The property is located south of 71h St., NW, north of the D M and E Railroad, and west of Cook Park, with a current address of 902 7th St., NW. Planning Department Review: Applicant/Owner: HRB Properties c/o Mac Hamilton 4057 28t' St., NW Rochester, MN 55901 Surveyors/Engineers: McGhie and Betts , Inc 1648 Third Ave., SE Rochester, MN 55904 Referral Comments: 1. Rochester Public Works Department 2. Planning Department — Addressing Staff 3. RPU —Water Division 4. RPU — Operations Division Report Attachments: Plat Data: 1. Referral Comments 2. Copy of Final Plat 3. Location Map Location of Property: The property is located along the south side of 7" Street NW, west of Cooke Park and east of 111" Ave., NW. Zoning: The property is zoned M-1 (Mixed Commercial Industrial). Proposed Development: This development consists of realigning the lot lines of Auditor's Plat B, Lots 2, 4, and 100 into two lots one with frontage and one landlocked consisting of a total of approximately 2.01 acres. In 2001 this property was reviewed as a Final Plat #01-30. The lot lines are slightly different in the current proposal. BUILDING CODE 507/285-8345 • GISIADDRESSING(MAPPING 5071285-8232 • HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 PLANNING20NING 5071285-8232 • WELL/SEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 AN Pnl 1A1 nPPORTUNITYIAFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Development Agreement Roadways: This plat proposes no new roadways. Pedestrian Facilities: Pedestrian facilities are required along both sides of all new roadways within this subdivision and along 7" Street. An area will be graded for a future 5 foot wide sidewalk along 7t' Street NW. Wetlands: This site was reviewed for the presence of Wetlands. No Wetlands were identified. Public Utilities: Water service exists for the property from 7" St., NW. If Lot 2 requires service a utility easement is required across Lot 1. . Sanitary sewer is available in 7'" St., NW. Spillover Parking: Parking requirements will be reviewed when a Site Development Plan application is reviewed for the development of the property. Parkland Dedication: There is no parkland dedication required for this commercial property. General Development Plan: There is no GDP for the property. Preliminary Plat: No preliminary plat was submitted nor required. The applicant intends to create 2 lots out of 3 existing lots in an auditors plat. The existing access is across Lot 1 and there is an existing private access easement recorded on Lot 2 of Auditors Plat B to the east of this property. There is an existing public utility easement on the southerly portion of the proposed Lot 2 that will affect the buildable area of the lot. In 2001 a Final Plat got-30 was reviewed by the City Council. The Council voted to approve the plat with three conditions as follows: 1. Stormwater management must be provided. Grading and drainage plans will be required for review and approval at the time development is proposed for Lot 2, and a Stormwater Management tee will apply if on -site detention is not provided, for any new areas of impervious surface associated with the development of this property. 2. Prior to the submittal of the final plat documents, the applicant shall work with the Rochester Public Utilities to identify all necessary easements for future watermain to serve Lot 2. The applicant shall either revise the final plat to add the easement or grant them with a site development plan whichever is deemed acceptable by Rochester Public Utilities. 3. The plat shall be revised to include the existing utility easement for the existing trunk relief line sewer that crosses the southerly edge of Lot 2. Planning Staff and Recommendation: The Planning Staff has reviewed the submitted final plat in accordance with the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual and would recommend approval of this final plat with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall provide an access easement for Lot 2 and record the easement prior to recording of the final plat. 2. Storm water management must be provided. Grading and drainage plans will be required for review and approval at the time development is proposed for Lot 2 and/or redevelopment of Lot f, and a Stormwater Management fee will for any new areas of impervious surface associated with the development/redevelopment of this property. 3. Prior to the submittal of the final plat documents, the applicant shall work with the Rochester Public Utilities to identify all necessary easements for future watermain to serve Lot 2. The applicant shall either revise the final plat to add the easement or grant the easement as a part of the Site Development Plan review process whichever is deemed acceptable by Rochester Public Utilities. E 0 EL 0 z Ir a m bl O N L d L 0 Q x W U L a w 161P ROCHESTER TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Mark E. Baker DATE: 5/31/06 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 20140 Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the application for Final Plat 906-11 for the proposed HRB Subdivision. The following are Public Works comments on this request: I. A similar request (FP#01-30 RC Properties Subdivision) was reviewed to subdivide this Property in August 2001. 2. Grading & Drainage Plan review & approval will be required prior to additional development / redevelopment, of either of the proposed two Lots. A Storm Water Management Fee is applicable for any future development / redevelopment that includes an increase in impervious surface area. 3. The applicant should submit evidence to Planning and/or Public Works, that an Access Easement exists for the benefit of Lot 2, Block 1. 4. There is a reconstruction project underway for 7"' ST NW along the frontage of this Property. The access to the Property is being modified as part of the reconstruction project. 5. Execution of a City -Owner Contract, and dedication of applicable utility easement(s) will be required if the extension of public watermain and or the addition of hydrant(s) is required for development of this property. 6. Site Development Plan approval is required for individual lot development. Chargesifees applicable to the development of this property include the following (Note: The rates below are adjusted August I" each year. The Owner will be responsible for payment of the applicable charges based on the rates in place at the time of payment.): Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) for the area currently described as part of Lot 2, Auditor's Plat 'B' @ $2,098.99 per acre Water Availability Charge (WAC) for the area currently described as part of Lot 2, Auditor's Plat 'B' @ $2,098.99 per acre Sanitary Sewer Connection Charge for proposed Lot 2, Block 1 @ $52.84 per foot of frontage Stormwater Management — TBD Plant Investment Fee for future development - TBD Assessments for 7" St NW reconstruction Settinas%Temoorary Intemet Fi1es%0LK61%FP06-11 HRB Subdivision.doc rp we pledge, we deUver May 22, 2006 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Final Plat #06-11 by HRB Properties to be known as HRB Subdivision. Dear Ms. Gamess: Our review of the referenced final plat is complete and our comments follow: Water service to this property is only available from 7`h St. NW. If Lot 2 requires service then a utility easement across Lot lwould be necessary to serve Lot 2. Please contact us at 507-280-1500 if you have questions. Very ( truly yours, L ".JA Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Mac Hamilton, HRB Properties McGhie & Betts, Inc. Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 j1 f tP Rochester -Olmsted Planni:,:.,apartment Phone: (507) 285-8232 GIS/Addressing Division Fax: (507) 287-2275 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 Rochester, MN 55904.4744 FINAL PLAT REFERRAL RESPONSE DATE: May 22, 2006 TO: Jennifer Garness, Stephanie Foster FROM: Randy Growden GIS/Addressing Staff Rochester -Olmsted County Planning Department CC: Jan Chezick; Ed Kuisle; McGhie and Betts Inc. RE: HRB SUBDIVISION UPON REVIEW OF THIS PLAT THE FOLLOWING FEES ARE REQUIRED TO BE PAID BEFORE THE PLAT CAN BE ADDRESSED. E911 ADDRESSING FEE: GIS IMPACT FEE: $ 80.00 (1 LOTS/ADDRESSES) $430.00 (2 LOTS/OUTLOTS) Notes: 1. Additional E911 Addressing fees may be required upon Site Plan review. 2. Final Plats must be approved and the above fees paid before application requests for addressing can be submitted to the E911 Addressing Staff — Rochester/Olmsted A review of the final plat has turned up the following ADDRESS or ROADWAY related issues: 1. Upon review of HRB SUBDIVISION the GIS / Addressing staff has found no issues to bring forth at this time. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING Al DATE: 6-5-06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ITEM DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #06-12 to be known as Bamber Valley Estates PREPARED BY: 3rd John Harford, Senior Pl r Junel,2006 Planning Department Review: See attached staff report dated May 30, 2006 recommending approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Parkland dedication for this Plat shall be met via dedication of land in the form of Outlot A, Bamber Valley Estates Third. Dedication is to occur once the site is graded and accessed via a public street or when the City wishes to begin development of the park. Grading of the Park site is subject to review by the Rochester Park Department. Council Action Needed: 1. A resolution approving the plat can be adopted. Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2 Cit Attorne y y 3. Planning Department File 4. Applicant: This item will be considered sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, June 5, 2006 in the Council Chambers at the Rochester / Olmsted. ounty Government Center. 5. McGhie & Betts, Inc. i,. tAll COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: 1200 ft. Notification Area of Parcel located in Pt NE 1/4 Sec 8 Rochester TWP Final Plat to be known as Bamber Valley Estates Third Final Plat #06-12 by Roger Carlson PINs:64.08.11.O7185O; 64.08.12.71851; 1, 64.08.11.071852; 64.08.12.071854 Ward: 2 (Marcia Marcoux) Neighborhood Assoc: None 5/23/06 T N Olmsted County is not responsible for ommissions or emors contained herein. If discrepancies are found within this map, please notify the GIS Division, Rochester -Olmsted County Planning Department, 2122 Campus Drive SE, Rochester, MN 55904, (507) 285-8232. ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNLNG DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 • Rochester, MN 55904-4744 C O V N t Y OF www.olmstedcounty.com/planning TO: City Planning and Zoning Commi sion ,i FROM: John Harford, Senior Planne DATE: May 30, 2006 p..oi']...y »�M�Ngi RE: Final Plat #06-12 by Roger Carlsen to be known as Bamber Valley Estates Third. The plat proposes to subdivide 8.67 acres into 7 residential lots and one outlot. The property is located west of the Historical Society and Baptist Church property, and north of Salem Road, SW at the north end of Autumn Ridge Road, SW. Planning Department Review. Applicant/Owner. Roger Carlsen 4410 NW 19" St. Rochester, MN 55901 Engineer: McGhie & Betts, Inc. 1648 Third Ave SE Rochester, MN 55904 Report Attachments: 1, Land Development Manual Excerpts 2. Referral Comments 3. Copy of General Development Plan 4. Copy of Preliminary Plat Development Review: Zoning: The property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family). Streets: The plat proposes to dedicate land for the extension of Autumn Ridge Road, SW that will be a cul-de-sac. Utilities: Utilities will be extended from Bamber Valley Estates. A utility easement document has been drawn up and a copy included with the application. Sidewalks: Pedestrian facilities will be required throughout the development. Sidewalks are required in this portion of the development. Drainage: Approval of detailed grading and drainage plans will also be required prior to final plat application. The grading plan was approved by City Public Works on May 17, 2006. BUILDING CODE 507/285-8345 • GIS/ADDRESSING/MAPPING 5071285-8232 • HOUSING/HRA 507/265-8224 r—p-1 PLANNING/ZONING 507/285-8232 • WELLSEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 � �9 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITYYAFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER II Page 2 June 1. 2006 Wetlands: Minnesota Statutes require that all developments be reviewed for the presence of wetlands or hydric soils. A No Loss application was approved in 2003 for the larger property covered by the GDP and preliminary plat. There are no wetlands in the area covered by this plat. Spillover Parking: The spillover parking requirements for this development would be 9 parking spaces. The proposed roadways, as well as individual driveways, should be adequate to accommodate the required spillover spaces. Parkland Dedication: Parkland dedication for this Plat and for the other two Bamber Valley Estates plats is to be met via dedication of land in the form of Outiot A, Bamber Valley Estates Third. Dedication is to occur once the site is graded and accessed via a public street or when the City wishes to begin development of the park. Grading of the Park site is subject to review by the Rochester Park Department. General Development This property is included in the Bamber Valley Estates General Plan: Development Plan, which was approved in February 2003. This final plat is generally consistent with the GDP. Preliminary Plat: A preliminary plat was approved for this property on February 2, 2004 with the following four conditions/modifications: 1. The mid -block pedestrian connection shall be identified as an Outiot on the Plat. 2. 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 approved privately constructed on -site detention facility. 3. Controlled access shall be dedicated along the frontages of Autumn Ridge Road from Autumn Lake Court to CSAH 25. 4. Parkland dedication for this Plat shall be met via dedication of land in the form of Outiot C, Bamber Valley Estates Second. Dedication is to occur once the site is graded and accessed via a public street or when the City wishes to begin development of the park. Grading of the Park site is subject to review by the Rochester Park Department. Staff Review and Recommendation: Staff would recommend the following conditions/modifications to insure the applicable criteria (61.225) are met: 1. Parkland dedication for this Plat shall be met via dedication of land in the form of Outiot A, Bamber Valley Estates Third. Dedication is to occur once the site is graded and accessed via a public street or when the City wishes to begin Page 3 June 1, 2006 development of the park. Grading of the Park site is subject to review by the Rochester Park Department. Page 4 June 1, 2006 Excerpt from the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual 61.225 Findings for Land Subdivision: The Zoning Administrator, Commission or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a land subdivision if, with respect to the proposed development, all of the following findings are made: 1) The proposed land subdivision conforms to all relevant requirements of this ordinance and variances have been granted to permit any nonconformance; 2) That the proposed water system and sanitary sewer system are adequate to serve the normal and fire protection demands of proposed development and to provide for the efficient and timely extension to serve future development; 3) That the plan for soil erosion and stormwater management meets the adopted standards of the City of Rochester and is consistent with the adopted Stormwater Management Plan or adopted drainage or stormwater policies; 4) That the vehicular and non -motorized system is consistent with adopted transportation plans and is consistent with the street layout standards listed in Section 64.120 and traffic service standards in Section 61.526; 5) That the lot and block layout provide for safe and convenient vehicular, service and emergency access, efficient utility service connections, and adequate buildable area in each lot for planned uses; 6) That the proposed land subdivision has taken into account the current six -year and other Long -Range Capital Improvements Programs and the elements listed therein in the design of the subdivision; 7) That the proposed land subdivision, if in a residential zoning district, addresses the need for spillover parking consistent with the requirements of Section 63.426; 8) That right-of-ways and easements of adequate size and dimension are provided for the purpose of constructing the street, utility, and drainage facilities needed to serve the development; 9) That the proposed parks, trail thoroughfares and open space dedications are consistent with adopted plans, policies and regulations; 10) That the proposed subdivision will not have off -site impacts on the street, drainage, water or wastewater systems that exceed adopted standards; 11) That the proposed subdivision will not have adverse impacts on the safety or viability of permitted uses on adjacent properties; Page 5 June 1, 2006 12) That the proposed land subdivision is designed in such a manner as to allow for continued development in an efficient manner on adjacent undeveloped lands; 13) That the soils, topography and water tables have been adequately studied to ensure that all lots are developable for their designated purposes; 14) That the proposed land subdivision is consistent with the standards of the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan; 15) That any land located within Zone A as shown on the currently adopted Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps of Flood Insurance Study, Rochester, Minnesota, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is determined to be suitable for its intended use and that the proposed subdivision adequately mitigates the risks of flooding, inadequate drainage, soil and rock formations with severe limitations for development, severe erosion potential, or any other floodplain related risks to the health, safety or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision in a manner consistent with this ordinance; and 16) That the proposed land subdivision, if approved, would not result in a violation of federal or state law, or city or county ordinance. 61.226 Conditions on Approvals: In considering an application for a development permit to allow a land subdivision, the approving body shall consider and may impose modifications or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance with the criteria of Section 61.225. AEM 7 M N WN I SLLdve 1SWA 3.*Z 4 AON I � w Y f e I 1 9 :e i i I / � � § § E � | !•; � !; ! ! �• ; � � _ ! `H y§ \ , © !§ ■w J-7q ! � | � | � } � , ! § � , ! ! � | ! § �| | ! ROCHESTER PARK AND h_CREATION DEPARTMENT 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6160 FAX 507-281-6165 MEMORANDUM DATE: May 23, 2006 TO: Jennifer Garness Planning RE: Bamber Valley Estates 3 Final Plat # 06-12 Acreageof plat.......................................................... 8.67 a Number of dwelling units ............................................. 7 units Densityfactor............................................................ .0244 Dedication............................................................... .17 a Fair market value of land ............................................. na The Park and Recreation Department recommends that dedication requirements be met via: Dedication of land in the form of Outlot A Bamber Valley Estates 3. Dedication to occur once the site is graded and accessed via public street or when the City wishes to begin development of the park. The grading plan for the park site has been reviewed by the Park Department. C:\,Documents and Settires\p1aj9arn\Lcca1 Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\OLK61\SAMRER VALLEY EST 3 (2).DOC pu __. 191 r we plcdye, we detwer May 22, 2006 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Final Plat 406-12 by Roger Carlsen to be known as Bamber Valley Estates Third. Dear Ms. Gamess: Our review of the referenced final plat is complete and we have no objections. The water main within this property has been installed and approved. Please contact us at 507-280-1500 if you have questions. Very truly yours, Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 ROCHESTER M4.w TO: Consolidated Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 FROM: Mark E. Baker DATE: 5/24/06 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 201 4" Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281.6216 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the application for Final Plat 906-12 for the proposed Bamber Valley Estates Third subdivision. The following are Public Works comments on this request: 1. A Development Agreement has been executed for the Property, and development is subject to the terms of the Agreement. 2. A City -Owner Contract has been executed by the Owner & Contract for this project. Execution of the Contract by the City is required prior to construction of public infrastructure to serve the Property. 4 Charges/fees applicable to the development of this property are addressed in the Development Agreement & City -Owner Contract Cmocuments and SettingslplajgarnlLocal Settings\Temporary Internet Files10LK611FP06-12 Bamber Valley Estates Third.doc 1931 Rochester -Olmsted Plannins ,apartment GISIAddressing Division 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 Rochester, MN 55904-4744 FINAL PLAT REFERRAL RESPONSE DATE: May 22, 200E TO: Jennifer Garness, Stephanie Foster FROM: Randy Growden GIS/Addressing Staff Rochester -Olmsted County Planning Department CC: Jan Chezick; Ed Kuisle; McGhie and Betts RE: BAMBER VALLEY ESTATES THIRD FINAL PLAT # 06-12 Phone: (507) 285-8232 Fax: (507) 287-2275 UPON REVIEW OF THIS PLAT THE FOLLOWING FEES ARE REQUIRED TO BE PAID BEFORE THE PLAT CAN BE ADDRESSED. E911 ADDRESSING FEE: $ 640.00 ( 8 LOTS/ADDRESSES) GIS ID'IPACT FEE: $ 520.00 (8 LOTS/OUTLOTS) Notes: 1. Additional E911 Addressing fees may be required upon Site Plan review. 2. Final Plats must be approved and the above fees paid before application requests for addressing can be submitted to the E911 Addressing Staff — Rochester/Olmsted Planning Department. A review of the final plat has turned up the following ADDRESS or ROADWAY related issues: 1. Upon review of BAMBER VALLEY ESTATES THIRD the GIS / Addressing staff has found no issues to bring forth at this time. I RECEIN-ED MAY 1 8 2�06 F C,EST=R-G._MST.D pEFARTMENT EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE made this � day of /'ar 2006, by and between BAMBER VALLEY DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Inc., a Minnesota limited liability company, hereinafter "Grantor", and the CITY OF ROCHESTER, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter "Grantee". WITNESSETH: In consideration of the payment of one dollar and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which Is hereby acknowledged, Grantor does hereby dedicate to the public and does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey to Grantee, a permanent and unobstructed easement for the construction and maintenance of a public watermain and connections thereto over, above, and below the following described land in the City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota, to wit: SEE EXHIBIT'A' Grantor hereby covenants with Grantee that it is lawfully seized and possessed of the real estate above described, that it has a good and lawful right to convey the same, and that it will forever warrant and defend the title thereto against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has caused these presents to be executed on the date and year first above written. BAMBER VALLEY DEVELOPMENT, LLC a Minnesota limited liability company By: By: �v Its: Its: By: By: Its: Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS COUNTY OF OLMSTED) On this L'�_ day of 6 2006, before me, a notary public within and for said county, personally appeared EP,, and the and respectively of BAMBER VALLEY DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, personally known to me to be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing instrument on behalf of the company. THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY Rochester Public Works Department 201 e Street SE, Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904 // . // /GI" /' NOTAWPUBLIC E. DELISLE ry Public -Minnesota I#BZEVERLY y Commission Emlroe Jan 01, 2010 Vyyyyy�t RECEIVER MAY 1 8 2006 C I j(p EXHIBIT A PUBLIC WATERMAIN EASEMENT FOR: BAMBER VALLEY DEVELOPMENT, LLC DATE: MAY 10, 2006 A 20.00 foot easement for public watermain purposes over, under and across a part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 106 North, Range 14 West, Olmsted County, Minnesota. The centerline of said easement is described as follows: Commencing at the most easterly corner of Lot 8, Block 3, BAMBER VALLEY ESTATES SECOND, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence North 34 degrees 01 minute 46 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the northeasterly line of said Lot 8, a distance of 166.76 feet to the most northerly corner of said Lot 8 for the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence North 39 degrees 46 minutes 35 seconds East, 400.00 feet and there terminating. The sidelines of said easement are to be prolonged or shortened to terminate on said northeasterly line of Lot 8 and on the easterly line of Lot 9 in said Block 3. EXCEPT any part thereof lying within Lot 1, Block 4 in said BAMBER VALLEY ESTATES SECOND. RECEIVED MAY 1 8 21)06 ROCh!ESTER-OLMSTED �" '�NNWO DEF.4RTMENT REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ,n MEETING / DATE: 06-05-06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. ?UBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING '' ITEM DESCRIPTION: Final Plat #06-13 by Dave Reiland Building Construction LLC to be PREPARED BY: known as Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes. The applicant is proposing to develop 13 Theresa Fogarty, townhome units on approximately 2.48 acre of land located east of Ashland Drive NW and Senior Planner north of Heritage Place NW. Junel,2006 Planning Department Review: See attached staff report dated June 1, 2006, recommending approval subject to the following conditions: f. Prior to recording, the final plat: a. The water main and service items noted on the Performance Residential #06-08 RPU- Water review letter, dated March 7, 2006 shall be completed. 2. A GIS Impact Fee and E91 f Addressing Fee shall be assessed and must be paid prior to recording the final plat, per the May 23, 2006 memorandum from Rochester -Olmsted Planning Department — GIS Division. 3. A City -Owner Contract has previously been executed for Public Improvements to serve Fox Trails. Execution of a separate Contract is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure needed for the development of this Property that was not include in the prior City -Owner Contract. Council Action Needed: 1. If the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution with findings supporting their decision. 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 Monday, June 5, 2006 in the Council Chambers at the Rochester / Olmsted County Government Center. r v 'OUNCILACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: �P €i IN+ �i M W O Z O LU W U ~ H LL L z ^VJ/ Cie F-- S X O ^ LL CI M:d±�g1 pt{9:'Y I I „ ______ Y , gSj � .N 'N 3,Dv-71 3,,Vj, 13H �Y jg �� _ 26238'32' ID3.1k Y S, � 'mcr• -cam_ ., ww rns y 8ul �g�/ wq _ M n I gI l r UL - 2 n 0 %ne4n[lon u Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes 'PorenW.l FYl�ae d Gommerclal�7,'m.,,. M 34 91 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN "max West 19th Development I 1650 ft. Notification Area of Lot 5 Block 5 Fox Trails to be known as Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes Final Plat #06-13 by Dave Reiland Building Construction LLC PIN: 74.29.24.072882 Ward: 3 (Bruce Snyder) Neighborhood Assoc: None 5/23106 NN Olmsted County Is not responsible for ommisslons or errors contained herein. If discrepancies are found within this map, please notify the GIs Division, Rochester -Olmsted County Planning Department, 2122 Campus Drive SE, Rochester, MN 55904. (507) 285-8232. ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PL.AN'NING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 • Rochester, MN 55904-4744 C P Il X TV o f www.olmstedcounty.com/planning TO: Rochester Common Council FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Planner DATE: June 1, 2006 �nlA�st�tl� a- a**X3 IF RE: Final Plat #06-13 by Dave Reiland Building Construction LLC to be known as Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes. The applicant is proposing to develop 13 townhome units on approximately 2.48 acres of land located east of Ashland Drive NW and north of Heritage Place NW. City Council Hearing Date: June 5, 2006 Plannina Department Review., Applicant/Owner: Dave Reiland Building Construction LLC PO Box 7024 Rochester, MN 55903 Surveyors/Engineers: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 Third Avenue SE Rochester, MN 55904 Referral Comments: Rochester Public Works Department Rochester Park & Recreation Department Planning Department — GIS Division Planning Department — Wetlands -GU Representative Rochester Public Utilities — Water Division Report Attachments: 1. Copy of Final Plat 2. Copy of West 19th Development GDP 3. Location Map 4. Referral Comments (5 letters) 5. Copy of referral comment from RPU- Water relating to Performance Residential Development #06-08 Development Review., Zoning: The property is currently zoned R-2 (Low Density Residential) on the City of Rochester Zoning Map. Roadways: There are no new public roadways being dedicated with this plat. BUILDING CODE 507/285-8345 • GIS/ADDRESSING/MAPPING 507/2B5-8232 • HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 PLANNING/ZONING 50712B5-B232 • WELLJSEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 �<J LNi Piv JAI nPPn RTI NITY;AFFIRMATNE ACTION EMPLOYEE iq �- Page 2 Final Plat #06-13 Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes 6/1 /2006 Pedestrian Facilities: A Development Agreement has been executed for this property, which includes the requirements for pedestrian facilities. Drainage: Grading and Drainage Plans for this development have been approved. Wetlands: Minnesota Statutes now requires that all developments be reviewed for the presence of wetlands or hydric soils. A wetland related application has been approved by the City. This plan incorporates the approved wetland plan. Public Utilities: The water main and service items noted on the Performance Residential #06-08 review letter, dated March 7, 2006 have not been addressed. A Development Agreement has been executed for this Property, and development is subject to the terms of the Agreement. A City -Owner Contract has previously been executed for Public Improvements to serve Fox Trails. Execution of a separate Contract is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure needed for the development of this Property that was not included in the prior City - Owner Contract. Spillover Parking: As per Section 63.426 of the LDM, all residential development must provide spillover parking for service vehicles and visitors. This development requires 16 spillover parking stalls. It appears as though the additional parking can be accommodated on the roadways and most likely within private driveways, as well. The Owner should be encouraged to provide unit mail boxes to limit the loss of on street parking. Parkland Dedication: The City Park and Recreation Department indicated dedication for the lot was met via September 9, 2004 cash in lieu payment for Fox Trail plat. Dedication for Lot 5, Block 5 was calculated at the time using the assumption that 28 dwelling units would be built on the lot. The proposed Performance Residential Development will have 13 dwelling units built on the lot. Dedication credits of 0.37 acres should be established for the Fox Trail applicant and be made available for their use in meeting dedication requirements for Fox Trail 3rtl 1q,31 Page 3 Final Plat #06-13 Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes 6/1 /2006 General Development Plan: This property is included within the approved West 19'h Development General Development Plan (GDP). 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)". Final Plat Planning Staff Review and Recommendation: A Development Agreement has been executed for this property. 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 subject to the following modifications / conditions: 1. Prior to recording, the final plat: a. The water main and service items noted on the Performance Residential #06-08 RPU- Water review letter, dated March 7, 2006 shall be completed. 2. A Gig Impact Fee and E911 Addressing Fee shall be assessed and must be paid prior to recording the final plat, per the May 23, 2006 memorandum from Rochester - Olmsted Planning Department — Gig Division. 3. A City -Owner Contract has previously been executed for Public Improvements to serve Fox Trails. Execution of a separate Contract is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure needed for the development of this Property that was not include in the prior City -Owner Contract. Note to Developer: • A Development Agreement has been executed for this Property, and development is subject to the terms of the Agreement. o4 ROCHESTER Ml. " TO: Consolidated Planning Department DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC 2122 Campus Drive SE WORKS Rochester, MN 55904 201 4n' Street SE Room 108 Rochester, MN 55904-3740 507-287-7800 FAX — 507-281-6216 FROM: Mark E. Baker DATE: 5/31/06 The Department of Public Works has reviewed the application for Final Plat #06-13 for the proposed Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes (reolat of Lot 5 Block 5, Fox Trails) development. The following are Public Works comments on this request: 1. A Development Agreement has been executed for the Property, and development is subject to the terms of the Agreement. 2. A City -Owner Contract has previously been executed for Public Improvements to Serve Fox Trails. Execution of a separate Contract is required prior to construction of any public infrastructure needed for the development of this Property that was not included in the prior City -Owner Contract. Charges/fees applicable to the development of this property are addressed in the Development Agreement & City -Owner Contract and have previously been paid. C:\Documents and Senings\plajgam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK61\FP06-13 Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes (reolat L5 B5 Fox Trails).doc h wro<< nc9 - z F ,•-- ROCHESTER PARK AND RECREATION Rochester, MN DEPARTMENT DATE: May 23, 2006 TO: Jennifer Garness Planning RE: Final Plat #06-13 Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes Dedication for the lot was met via Sept 9, 2004 cash in lieu payment for Fox Trail plat. Dedication for Lot 5 Block 5 was calculated at that time using the assumption that 28 dwelling units would be built on the lot. The proposed PRD will have 13 dwelling units built on the lot. Dedication credits of 0.37 acres should be established for the Fox Trail applicant and be made available for their use in meeting dedication requirements for Fox Trail 3r6 C:1Documents and Setting slplajgarn\Local Setting s\Tempo rary Internet Files10LK611FOX TRAIL RIDGE TWNHMES.DOC 201 FOURTH STREET SE ROOM 150 ROCHESTER MINNESOTA 55904-3769 TELE 507-281-6164 FAX 507-281-6165 DSTOTZ@CI.ROCHESTER. M N.US iRochester -Olmsted Pianninc, apartment GISIAddressing Division 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 Rochester, MN 55904.4744 FINAL PLAT REFERRAL RESPONSE DATE: May 23, 2006 TO: Jennifer Garness, Stephanie Foster FROM: Randy Growden GIS/Addressing Staff Rochester -Olmsted County Planning Department CC: Jan Chezick; Ed Kuisle RE: FOX TRAILS RIDGE TOWNHOMES FINAL PLAT #06-13 J Phone: (507)285-8232 Fax: (507)287.2275 UPON REVIEW OF THIS PLAT THE FOLLOWING FEES ARE REQUIRED TO BE PAID BEFORE THE PLAT CAN BE ADDRESSED. E911 ADDRESSING FEE: S 1040.00 (13 LOTS/ADDRESSES) GIS IMPACT FEE: $ 610.00 (14 LOTS/OUTLOTS) Notes: 1. Additional E911 Addressing fees may be required upon Site Plan review. 2. Final Plats must be approved and the above fees paid before application requests for addressing can be submitted to the E911 Addressing Staff — Rochester/Olmsted A review of the final plat has turned up the following ADDRESS or ROADWAY related issues: 1. Upon review of FOX TRAILS RIDGE TOWNHOMES the GIS/ Addressing staff has found no issues to bring forth at this time. /q7 / WETLAND COMMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS Application Number: Final Plat #06-13 by Dave Reiland Building Construction LLC to be known as Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes No hydric soils exist on the site based on the Soil Survey Hydric soils exist on the site according to the Soil Survey. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands on the property and submitting the information as part of this application. A wetland delineation has been carried out for the property and is on file with the Planning Department. A wetland delineation is on file with the Planning Department and a No -Loss, Exemption, or Replacement Plan has been submitted to the Planning Department. ® A wetland related application has been approved by the City. This plan incorporates the approved wetland plan. No hydric soils exist on the property based on the Soil Survey. However, due to the location in the landscape, the property owner should examine the site for wetlands. The property owner is responsible for identifying wetlands. Other or Explanation: From John Harford Wetlands LGU Representative wr pleA,ge, ear Atlivtr May 22, 2006 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Final Plat #06-13 by Dave Reiland Building Construction, LLC to be known as Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes. Dear Ms. Garness: Our review of the referenced final plat is complete and our comments follow: The water main and service items noted on the Performance Residential #06-08 review letter dated March 7, 2006 have not been addressed. Please contact us at 507-280-1500 if you have questions. Very truly yours, "44A (j Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Dave Reiland Building Construction, LLC Yaggy Colby Associates Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 /qq j rpu we p(rGyr, we de ivrr March 7, 2006 Rochester -Olmsted CONSOLIDATED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904-7996 REFERENCE: Type I Performance Residential Development #06-08 by David Reiland Building Contractor, LLC for the development of 13 townhome units to be known as Fox Trails Ridge Townhomes on Lot 5, Block 5 Fox Trails Subdivision. Dear Ms. Gayness: Our review of the referenced Performance Residential Request is complete and our comments follow: 1. The existing 8" water main that is stubbed into the property in front of unit `B" must be abandoned properly at the hydrant tee in the boulevard. 2. Individual water services extending from the water main in the street to the units with curb stops within the boulevard area are required. Please contact us at 507-280-1500 if you have questions. Very truly yours, od-AA Donn Richardson Water C: Doug Rovang, RPU Mike Engle, RPU Mark Baker, City Public Works Vance Swisher, Fire Prevention Bill Anderson, Yaggy Colby Associates David Reiland Building Contractor, LLC Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 1GENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORIGINATING DEPT: PLANNING MEETING DATE: 06-05-06 ITEM NO. zc- -` 7 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Vacation Petition #06-05 by Maine Street Investors of PREPARED BY: Rochester, LLC, The Gardens Manufacturing Home Community, LLC and Maine Theresa Fogarty, Street Development Company of Rochester, LLC to vacate the public utility and Senior Planner drainage easements dedicated as Lot 1, Block 1, Outlots A, D and F within The Gardens Subdivision and Lots 1 & 3. Block 1. and Lots 1-6. Block 2 located within South Broadway Business Center First Addition, the property is 40th Street, east of T.H. 63 and east and west of St. Bridget Road May 30, 2006 Planning Department Recommendation: See attached staff report dated May 30, 2006. Council Action Needed: located south of SE. 1. Following the hearing, if the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution to approve the vacation petition as recommended by staff. Attachments: 1. Staff Report dated May 30, 2006. Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Clerk 3. City Attorney: Copy of legal description is attached 4. Planning Department File 5. Applicant: This item will be considered by the Council sometime after 7:00 p. June 5, 2006, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 m. on Monday, 4th Street SE. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: D'4;k EASEMENT VACATION MAP _ . PT. OF THE GA'.31NS PT. OF SOUTH BROADWAY BUS. CENTER 1 ST OLMSTED COUNTY, MINNESOTA j 0 100 zoo 400 SCALE IN FEET :...............: t`•`_. '_'A.i it IeE. �t L---F Ui 1- Ui OLITLOT D i . 20 A " UTILITY EASEMENT UTury EASEMENT "C" STREET EASEMENT "D" STREET EASEMENT T" DRAINAGE EASEMENT T" DRAINAGE EASEMENT "G" DRAINAGE EASEMENT "H" DRAINAGE EASEMENT :=`,:'_'i EASEMENTS TO BE VACATED CI ITLi IT A F./ Id J I_. ---- LOT 1, D•'LOCI; 1 — V. PROJECT NUMBER 8652 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY, PLAN OR ENGINEERS- ARCHITECTS aa4Vaval..dn REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY SURVEYORS •PLANNERS DATE OF SURVEY 05/18/06 LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA- I DRAFTED BY MJH 717THIRDAVE. S.E. MN SURVEYED BY YCA pp;ROCHESTER, "` �`T"•`�•' LICENSE EXPIRES W30106 507.288-6464 FAX; 507 268.5058 91 IRVFYF(1 Fnw —.... —.... .... e—.•--,-e-v.� ate/ I I I I I 1 1 1ILt11111 ❑ 200 ft. Notification Area of Lot 1, Block 1, Outlots A, D and F, The Gardens Subdivision and Lots 1 & 3, Block 1 and Lots 1-6 Block 2 within South Broadwav Business Center First Addition vacation #06-05 by Maine Street Investors of Rochester, LLC The Gardens Manufactured Home Community, LLC Maine Street Development Company of Rochester, LLC Ward: 1 (Amy Blanker) Neighborhood Assoc: None 5123106 N Olmsted County is not responsible for ommissions or errors contained herein. If discrepancies are found within this map, please notify the GIS Division, Rochester -Olmsted County Planning Department, 2122 Campus Drive SE, Rochester, MN 55904, (507) 285-8232. ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 • Rochester, MN 55904-4744 CC U M T. OF www.olmstedcounty.com/planning TO: Rochester Common Council FROM: Theresa Fogarty, Senior Planner �tx� uil+ IIBr�.�arinr.►�. A �rR�SinrN�➢J DATE: May 30, 2006 RE: Vacation Petition #06-05 by Maine Street Investors of Rochester, LLC, The Gardens Manufacturing Home Community, LLC and Maine Street Development Company of Rochester, LLC to vacate the public utility and drainage easements dedicated as Lot 1, Block 1, Outlots A, D and F within The Gardens Subdivision and Lots 1 & 3, Block 1, and Lots 1-6, Block 2 located within South Broadway Business Center First Addition, the property is located south of 401h Street, east of T.H. 63 and east and west of St. Bridget Road SE. City Council Meeting Date: June 5, 2006 Planning Department Review: Petitioner: The Gardens Manufactured Home Community, LLC 4325 Garden Court SE Rochester, MN 55904 Architect / Engineer: Yaggy Colby Associates 717 Third Avenue SE Rochester, MN 55904 Reason to Vacate: The utility and drainage easements were dedicated in September, 1998 as proposed design alignments. The design alignments have now been finalized and do not match the old alignments with the new final plats. Referral Comments: No objections received by referral agencies Report Attachments: 1. Copy of Site Plan 2. Location Map Planning Staff Review and Recommendation: There were no objections received by the referral agencies, therefore staff recommends approval this vacation petition as requested. BUILDING CODE 507/285-8345 • GISIADDRESSING/MAPPING 507/285-8232 • HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 PLANNING/ZONING 507/285-8232 • wELUSEPTIC 507/285-8345 FAX 507/287-2275 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6-5-06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: IT�O. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Works ITEM DESCRIPTION: Expand Residential Permit Parking Zone 6, PR PARED BY: 7t" St SW 700 block r D. Kramer This is a public hearing to consider a petition from the residents of this neighborhood to establish residential permit parking on their street. This would be an expansion of existing residential permit parking zone 6 (Edison School Area). The purpose of the zone is to control parking of vehicles by nonresidents of the area. This block currently does not have any parking restrictions. RCO 138A.03 requires the petition to be signed by owners or occupants of at least 75% of the units. As marked on the map below, 13 residential parcels abut the proposed zone. Signatures from 10 of the 13 units (76.9%) are included on the petition. The petition has been reviewed to meet the requirements of RCO 138A. Notice of this hearing was mailed to residents on May 22, 2006. 609 61 6 619 15 619 3: 616 619 � LU W LI 7r) � 623 Q Q 25 721 715 711 703 701 r 7STSW m 05 730 726 722 716 712 628 r- 709 r1 3 713 712 719 716 718 725 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Add paragraph 23 to Section L, "Residential Permit Parking", Zone 6 (Edison School Area) of the Comprehensive Traffic and Parking Resolution so as to read: 23 7" St SW, from 7" Ave SW to 'h Ave SW, on both sides, from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM, Monday through Friday. COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: Petition for Installation of Residential Permit Parking We the undersigned residents or owners hereby petition the city council to create a residential permit parking zone 8:00 am to 4:00 pm, Monday through Friday, on 7`h Street SW between 71h Ave SW and 8th Ave SW. Informational note: The current cost for permits is $5.00 for the initial application, plus $5.00 per vehicle per year. Generally only residents of property along this zone will be able to purchase permits. If there are employees who work at property along the zone, they will also able to purchase permits. Temporary permits (for residents' guests) are also available. Permits are issued at the City Clerk's office. Printed Name Signature Address Include Apt. Number Phone I. H I is Pl r lJ 716 7� SW . z&q9)�? 2.7al 714w - SIO .0- �3 4. gg"- 5. ��, Ceti , �ZCj al-- 6 (c6 6. 7. �( ILXi -7 . ltll,�t �)W 8• y! -763 7 5T Sk/ - 5� 9. q 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5106 Public Hearing ORIGINATING DEPT: CHARTER COMMISSION ITEM NO. �r :M DESCRIPTION: Request for ordinance amending the home rule charter, section 7.06, relating PREPAI to the establishment of compensation for elected officials. Charter BY: In 1997, the Rochester Home Rule Charter was amended to require that the council annually adopt an ordinance that set the salaries for elected officials for the upcoming year. It was brought to our attention earlier this year that this process was in conflict with state law. Although the Charter Commission recognizes that the City Council took appropriate action in attempting to comply with both the charter and state law, it is the Charter Commission's desire that the charter be amended to remove this inconsistency. The Charter Commission further believes that any increases to the existing salaries should be done through the formal process of ordinance adoption. The Charter Commission requests that Section 7 .06 be amended as follows: SECTION 7.06 (Compensation; elected officials). The salary for the offices of mayor, councilmember-at-large and councilmember shall be fixed by ordinance adopted by the Council. The ordinance shall state that no increase in salary shall be effective until after publication and on a date that is after the next succeeding municipal election. Under Minn. Stat. §410.12, subd. 7, amendments to the charter may be made by ordinance upon recommendation by the charter commission. Amendment of a charter may be made only after a public hearing upon two weeks' published notice containing the text of the proposed amendment. Following the hearing, the council may adopt the ordinance amending the charter by affirmative vote of all its members, lbject to the public's right to object by petition. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the proposed ordinance upon affirmative vote of all members present. The ordinance shall be effective 90 days after publication, subject to the public's right to petition for a referendum. OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS I CITY CLERK ITEM DESCRIPTION: SOUND AMPLIFICATION MEETING DATE: 6/5/06 DONNAJSCHOTT The following SOUND AMPLIFICATION REQUESTS 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. Lourdes Foundation 621 West Center St Rochester, Mn. 55902 Under the Big Top 6/24/06 12:00 PM - 3:00 PM MAXIMUM SOUND OF 85 DECIBELS Boomer's Lounge 3737 40" Ave NW Rochester, Mn 55901 Street Dance 6/17/06 6:30 PM to 10:30 PM WAIVE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE 10:30PM Salvation Army 20 — I" Ave NE Rochester, Mn. 55906 Musical Concert 6/25/06 & 8/27/06 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM WAIVE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TO 10:30 PM ROCHESTERFEST SOUND ACTIVITIES Week -Long City Celebration June 17 — 25 Intertribal Powwow June 16 18 Blues Concert June Country Night June 21 21 Friday Night Dance June 23 Street Dance June 24 MAXIMUM SOUND OF 85 DECIBELS Rochesterfest Parade June 23 Lumberjack Championships June 17-18 Teen Night June 19 MacAttack Family Fest June 25 Rochester Concert Band June 25 WAIVE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TO 10:30 PM COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: SOUND AMPLIFICATION REQUESTS PAGE 2 .TUNE 5, 2006 Olmsted County Fair Olmsted County Fairgrounds 31d Ave & 16t' St SE Rochester, Mn. 55904 July 3 1 " to August 6' MAXIMUM SOUND OF 85 DECIBELS St John the Evangelist Catholic Church 11— 4a' Ave SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 Annual Block Party July 8, 2006 MAXIMUM SOUND OF 85 DECIBELS Mt. Zion Christian Center 428 3rd Ave SW Rochester, Mn. 55902 Church Outreach 6/24/06 1:00 PM to 5:00 PM Peace Plaza WAIVE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TO 10:30 PM Diversity Council 220 South Broadway Rochester, Mn. 55904 Juneteenth Celebration Mayo Park 6/18/06 12:00 Noon to '7:00 PM COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve the sound amplification permits as presented. t f / MEETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE 06/05/06 3ENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS PLANNING r— c-;;?— ITEM DESCRIPTION: Decision on the need for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet PREPARED BY: (EAW) in response to the citizens' petition to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) with Phil Wheeler, AICP regard to the Willow Heights 51h Addition Planning Director A group of citizens has petitioned the EQB requesting that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet be prepared for the Willow Heights 5" Addition development described in GDP #268 and preliminary plat #06-02, which was heard at the May 1 2006 Council meeting. The petition (which is attached) identifies the following environmental concerns: 1. Substantial Land Alteration 2. Decorah Edge 3. Wetland Species 4. Disturbance of Dumping Sites 5. Proximity to Rochester Public Utilities Well #31 According to the EQB Publication EAW Guidelines: Preparing Environmental Assessmentyyoricsneets (Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, February 2000; accessed at http://www.mnplan.state.mn.uslpdf/2000/eqb/eawrules.od on May 31, 2006), the information disclosed in the EAW process "... has two functions: to determine whether an EIS is needed, and to indicate how the project can be modified to lessen its environmental impacts; such modifications may be imposed as permit conditions by regulatory agencies." The City makes its decision on whether or not to order an EAW based on three considerations: (1) the likelihood that information important to development decisions will be produced through the EAW that is not already produced through the '''ty's development review processes, (2) consistency of the proposed development with City development policy and (3) tether there are conditions that can be established through the review process that can mitigate impacts. Under the first _insideration, if the EAW request deals with matters already thoroughly addressed through normal review processes, then the EAW is unnecessary because it provides no additional information and does not affect the outcome. If the EAW raises issues not adequately addressed, an EAW may be needed. Under the second consideration, if the development is comparable to other developments in the community that have been found consistent with City policy, then an EAW is not needed because City policy has determined that the impacts of the proposed level of development are acceptable. If the development is unusual in significant respects, then an EAW may be needed. Finally, if mitigation measures are known or readily identifiable, then an EAW may not be needed, but if such measures are unknown or difficult to identify, then an EAW may be useful. The applications of these considerations to the five issues raised by the petitioners is presented below. [continued on next page.] Council Action Needed: 1. Direct the staff to prepare findings in support of the direction the Council takes with regard to the need for an EAW. The Council needs to make this decision in response to the petitioned request for an EAW within 30 working days of receipt of the petition on May 16, 2006. The latest regular meeting that is within the required time frame is June 19, 2006; however, that meeting is after the expiration of the 120 day period for deciding on the Substantial Land Alteration (June 14, 2006). The decision should be supported with findings in accordance with EQB rules. 2. if the Council determines that further steps need to be taken with regard to the design and implementation of mitigation measures in upcoming stages of the development approval process, you should direct the Public Works Department and Planning Department to work with the developer to refine those measures. Distribution: �i7j,—: Jft •%'G7rtidN2/a >$P42kiii< rfur doers �� pan���/ys�� skb... jj`?��.(����j��J r� aye,V 1. City Administrator ��yj.,Rwo"'r, C.#y�}���tr/, e'�tlA`�_A`3^k5— COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: second by: to: Page 2 / RCA June 1, 2006 Issue Existing review processes Consistency with policy Mitigation measures Substantial land alteration Risks associated with slope ew residential The mitigation measures stability, runoff, diversion of developments have involved include controlling erosion, groundwater to surface water, comparable amounts of earth dust, and safety impacts as offsite impacts, and impacts of removal. well as required reclamation trucks hauling, blasting, dust, plantings. Existing processes and so on, are addressed by address these issues. Rochester Public Works as part of its grading plan review and stormwater management. Decorah Edge The approval criteria for The Council has not yet None that do not result in GDP's include a finding that initiated an ordinance defining substantially changing the "areas in the DEOZ will be more clearly how development application. managed in such a way as to should proceed in the maintain the quality and Decorah Edge. quantity of groundwater recharging lower aquifers..." That finding was made as part of the GDP approval. Wetland Species Wetland delineation entails Beyond its wetland ordinance, Require a complete plant identification of wetland the City does not have a policy survey of the site by a plants. Those that are regarding protection of rare professional botanist; associated with fens are species. DNR administers coordinate with DNR to protected, in that fens are not policies with regard to takings ensure that rules regarding allowed to be replaced. of endangered species. fens and takings of endangered species are complied with. Disturbance of Dumping Sites Grading plan review and City policy does not restrict Existing processes address building code enforcement dump sites from development. these issues. involve guaranteeing that Redevelopment of dump sites finished grades are stable. is efficient in terms of land use Dump sites may be less of a and maintaining urban risk to groundwater and slope densities. stability following development than they are at present. Proximity to Rochester Public RPU staff have reviewed risks Grading and other activities Conditions required as part of Utilities Well #31 to Well 31 and conclude that associated with residential the GDP approval address they are minimal (see development commonly occur directing surface water attached). in close proximity to municipal (whether runoff or intercepted wells, many of which are groundwater flows) away from located at the foot of the the emergency response zone Decorah Edge. for Well 31. The EAW process involves several state agencies in commenting on potential environmental impacts. There have been a number of EAWs completed (Hart Farms, Fieldstone and Spring Brook Valley/Barony Woods) for surrounding developments V which were required to complete an EAW because they met a mandatory EAW category. These EAWs have brought to the �.` attention of City staff the environmental concerns in the area (such as the Muchner Calcareous Fen). The rare species identified in the EAW petition should be investigated further and dealt with in accordance with applicable * i state law and rules. However, the City can require that investigation without reliance on the EAW process by adding such a requirement as a condition to the SLA or the preliminary plat. With the other environmental concerns, City staff will monitor the development and suggest mitigation measures to the development during the development process. Recommendation: t V Staff concludes that an EAW is not necessary if the Council imposes a condition on the SLA as recommended in the Request for Council Action. Because City ordinances do not address rare plant species as a standard condition of approval of SLXs, If that is not made a condition of SLA approval then an EAW would be warranted because no other process will guarantee Its completion. If the Council concludes that an EAW is not necessary, the Council should direct staff to prepare findings cF...— ....c C— to The fnhlo ahnva I F- 2- Schorr, Judy From: Wheeler Phil [wheeler.phil@CO.OLMSTED.MN.US] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 4:33 PM ro: Schorr, Judy Subject: FW: Willow Heights Residential Development Judy - Please copy this for the Council. Thanks. - Phil Phil Wheeler, AICP Planning Director 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 ph 507-285-6232 fax 507-287-2275 a community that welcomes diversity, with a safe, non -discriminating environment, and with respect and opportunity for all -----Original Message ----- From: Wheeler Phil Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 2:02 PM To: 'Neumann, Gary'; 'Adkins, Terry' Cc: Svenby Brent Subject: FW: Willow Heights Residential Development The following communication from Ann Pierce through Michelle Caron may influence the wording of the related condition on the Kottschade EAW and SLA. I am reviewing the rules referred to in the email for guidance. We will have advice by Monday night. - Phil Phil Wheeler, AICP Planning Director 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 ph 507-285-8232 fax 507-287-2275 a community that welcomes diversity, with a safe, non -discriminating environment, and with respect and opportunity for all -----Original Message ----- From: Michele Caron[mailto:Michele.Caron@westwoodps.com] Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 9:00 AM To: Wheeler Phil Cc: Frank Kottschade; Svenby Brent; Gen Bolling Subject: FW: Willow Heights Residential Development Mr. Wheeler - At the request of Mr. Frank Kottschade, we are forwarding the attached email from the DNR to you for your information. As you can see, no plants of the species of concern were located during the quick walk through by the DNR and the Westwood plant biologist. However, potential habitat was identified, which may or may not be within areas of grading impact on the site. Please feel free to contact Ann Pierce at the DNR directly if you have questions. The Developer will follow the appropriate permitting process if any endangered species are identified during a more thorough site inventory, prior to the grading activities. The following link is provided that summarizes the permit process: http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecological_services/nhnrp/endangered_permits. html 1 We appreciate your assistance with this issue. If you have questions or require additional information, please call me at 952-697-5712. Thank you - Michele Jackson Caron, PE Senior Project Manager Westwood Professional Services 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MDT 55344-7310 DIRECT 952-697-5712 EMAIL michele.caron@westwoodps.com MAIN 952-937-5150 FAX 952-937-5822 WEB www.westwoodps.com -----Original Message ----- From: Ann Pierce[mailto:Ann.Pierce@dnr.state.mn.usl Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:14 PM To: Todd Kolander; Gen Bolling Subject: RE: Willow Heights Residential Development Gen, as I was looking through the petition I found a description of where they found each plant. Below you will find my description of the site and recommendations for further survey work. During our field visit on May 30, 2006 we did not locate the species in question. However, due to time constraints we were only able to walk through the site. Based on this walk through the site does have habitat that could support some of these species. The site consists of mesic oak forest community with ravine areas, wetland, and degraded dry prairie and savanna areas. These areas are in need of management and invasive species control but there are still a number of native species occurring here and I could not rule out the possibility that some of the species listed may also occur here. Western Jacob's Ladder (Polemonium occidentale) would likely not be found on the site. The only state records in Minnesota and Wisconsin occur in the far northern portions of each state. The petition submitted does include location descriptions for each species (at the end of the each narrative). I suggest that an ecologist experienced in identifying these species conduct a thorough survey based on the location description given in the petition. This would likely take at least a full day field visit to relocate the locations described and to search for the species in question. Thank you, Ann Ann Pierce, Ph.D. Regional Plant Ecologist Southern Region MNDNR 2300 Silver Creek Road Rochester, MN 55906 Office-(507)280-5076 ann.pierce@dnr.state.mn.us >>> "Gen Bolling" <gen.bolling@westwoodps.com> 05/31/06 8:06 AM >>> Thank you both for meeting me on site yesterday!! Ann What I am looking for is a narrative explaining whether or not there is suitable habitat for the T & E species that the locals claim are on site, and why. I also would like to know your recommendations regarding how the site should be surveyed in order to search for these plants. And how we could contact the locals in order to get more information from them regarding the location of these plants ...... I think they would be more responsive to the ➢NR compared to the developer. 2 f Do you have time to provide a narrative today? Let me know if you have any questions. Chanks again to both of you for you help!! Gen From: Gen Bolling Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 10:22 AM To: 'Ann Pierce'; 'Todd Kolander' Subject: Willow Heights Residential Development Ann/Todd Just confirming our meeting today at 1:30. My cell number is 612-237-2309, although I am not sure it will have a signal that far south of the Cities. I hope to be on site around 1:00. I have a silver Nissan altima. Gen Genevieve Bolling Environmental Scientist Westwood Professional Services 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344-7310 DIRECT 952-906-7488 EMAIL gen.bolling@westwoodps.com <mailto:gen.bolling@westwoodps.com> MAIN 952-937-5150 FAX 952-937-5822 WEB www.westwoodps.com <http://www. westwoodps.com/> 3 �� Caste �-�-• 06;05.06 19:07 FAI 1 952 472 4771 THOMAS E. CASEY ram DATE: June 5, 2006 THOMAS E. CASEY �- Attorney at Law J 2854 Cambridge Lane ��q Oj(/j,v Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-1099 ' I (952) 472-4771(fax) tcasey®visi.com FACSIMILE TRANSMISSIONLETTER PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING PAGE(S) TO: NAME: Judy Schm, City Clerk FIRM: City of Rochester FROM: Tom Casey TIME: t� FAX 4: (507) 285-8256 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES ('including this cover sheet): 17 pages IF THERE IS ANY PROBLEM IN YOUR RECEIPT OF THIS TRANSMISSION, PLEASE CALL (952) 472-1099 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. FAX MESSAGE: See enclosures pertaining to the follow items on the City Council's June 5, 2006 agenda: Agenda Item F.2: Decision on need for EAW — Willow Heights 5th Addition Agenda Item H.1: Substantial Land Alteration Permit Application, Willow Heights 5t' Addition NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY: The information contained in this facsimile message is legally privileged and confidential, intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIF-IED that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. tf you bane received this facsimile in error, please notify us by mlepbone and return the original message to us at the above address via the U.S. Postal Service. Thank you. 06%65.06 13:05 FAX 1 952 472 4771 IhVXAa L. WAZIni THOMAS E. CASEY Attorney at Law 2854 Cambridge Lane Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-1099 (952) 4724771(fax) tcaseyerisicam June 5, 2006 City of Rochester Common Council c/o Judy Scherr, City Clerk 201 4th Street SE Rochester, MN 55904 VIA FAX ONLY (507) 285-8256 RE: Notice of Intervention — Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Minn. Stat. 116B.09) EAW Petition and Application for Substantial Land Alteration Permit "Willow Heights — 5 h Addition" - Rochester, Minnesota Lear Honorable Council: On behalf of Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth, enclosed please find my client's Notice of Intervention, pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Minn. Stat. 116B.09, Subdivision 1). As the Notice states in detail, my client becomes a "party" to this proceeding upon the filing of this Notice with your office. As a party to this proceeding, my client respectfully requests (and is entitled to) all "due process" considerations including, but not limited to, timely receipt of documents, adequate time to review documents and prepare for any meeting or hearing, adequate opportunity to present their viewpoint at any meeting or hearing, etc. Therefore, Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth requests adequate time to present and respond to comments during the June 5, 2006 Common Council meeting. E. TEC/rf you for your fond consideration. cc: Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth file Encl. 06.05.06 13:05 FAX 1 952 472 4771 THOMAS E. CASEY CITY OF ROCHESTER COMMON COUNCIL In Re: The Application of North American Realty, Inc. for a Substantial Land Alteration Permit for the proposed "Willow Heights — 5`s Addition" Development. NOTICE OF INTERVENTION TO: Rochester Common Council, c/o Judy Scheer, City Clerk, 201 41° Street SE, Rochester, MN 55904, PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Minnesota Statute 116B.09, Subdivision 1), the undersigned intervenes in the above -entitled proceedings before the City of Rochester Common Council and other applicable commissions and committees. BACK AROUND 1. North American Realty, Inc. (hereinafter the "Developer") has filed an application with the City of Rochester for a Substantial Land Alteration Permit on approximately 39 acres of land to build a residential development. 2. The City of Rochester Common Council has scheduled a meeting for Monday, June 5, 2006 to consider the Substantial Land Alteration Permit. Therefore, a "proceeding" has been commenced pursuant to Mmn. Stat. 11613.09, Subd. 1. 4. Intervenor is the Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth (hereinafter "Intervenor"), a Minnesota non-profit association organized, in part, to protect the City of Rochester from the adverse impacts of excessive development. Virtually all of Intervenor's members reside within the State of Minnesota. Mr. Rick Brink, Intervenor's authorized representative, lives within the City of Rochester. 5. Intervenor asserts its legal right to be a party to this proceeding pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Minn. Stat. 116B.09, Subd. 1), which states in part, "Except as otherwise provided in section l 16B.10, in any administrative, licensing, or other similar proceeding ..., any natural person residing within the state ... or any association, organization or other legal entity having ... members ... residing in this state shall be permitted to intervene as a party upon the filing of a verified pleading asserting that the proceeding ... involves conduct that has caused or is likely to cause pollution, impairment, or destruction of the air, water, land or other natural resources located within the Z12 Ub/UO/Ub 1s:U0 tAA 1 eaz 4iG 1/I1-1hU➢1.A.� h. UA)hl state." (Emphasis added) 41a 6. The Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Mini. Stet. 116B,a Subd. 4) stares, "Natural Resources shall include, but not be limited to, all mineral, animal, botanical, air, water, land, umber, soil, quietude, recreational and historic&[ msourc m. Scenic and esthetic resources shell also be considered natural resources when owned by any governmental unit or agency." This Notice of Intervention is based on the following: 1. Upon information and belief, as explained below, the Developer's subdivision application, if granted, ".. _ is likely to cause pollution, impairment, or destruction of the ... air, water, land and other natural resources located within the stare." 2. In support of this Notice of Intervention, the Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), on file in the City of Rochester offices, is incorporated by reference as though fully set forth. 3. This Notice of Intervendon is not intended to constitute a complete inventory of all environmental impacts. Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth reserves the right to subunit additional facts in support of the Notice of Intervention at the various hearings and meetings in this proceeding. STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF OLMSTED ) Rick Brink, being fast duly swum on oath, states that he is the authorized representative of the Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth, the Intervenor above -named, that be has rears the foregoing Notice of Intervention, and that the same is true of his own knowledge, except as to those things stated on information and belief and as tosuchbe verily believes it to be taut. Subscribed and swora to before me this 5th day of June, 2006. Fri Rick Brink, Authorized Representative Rocbester Citizens For Responsible Growth 3740 — 9"' Ave. SW Rochester, MN 55902 (5C7) 2g7-0997 MARYA BRA0D*H runnier niBec-wra»ov, rrmrot®r�st+t� 06,o5.06 19:05 FA% 1 952 472 4771 THOMAS E. CASEI 1Z14 MINNPSOTA QQVBRNMENT DATA PRACTICES &U REQUEST This Notice is also deemed a request by the Rocheswr Citizens For Responsible Growth, the Intervenor, pursuant to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (Minn. Stat. 13.01 et seq.), that Intervenor be provided a copy of all data and information pertaining to the Developer's application at the time said data and/or information are generated All information and correspondence shall be submitted to Intervenor at the above address, Rick Brink, Authorized Representative Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth THOMAS E. CASEY Attorney at Law 2854 Cambridge Lane Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-1099 (952) 472-4771 (fax) tcasey@visi.com June 5, 2006 City of Rochester Common Council c/o Judy Scherr, City Clerk 201 4th Street SE Rochester, MN 55904 VIA FAX ONLY (507)285-8256 RE: Comments regarding EAW Petition and Application for Substantial Land Alteration Permit "Willow Heights — 5`h Addition" Rochester, Minnesota Dear Honorable Council: On behalf of Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth, I offer the following comments: AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET MUST BE ORDERED I. AN EAW IS MANDATORY BY RULE. A. PHASED ACTION. Minnesota Rule 4410.1000, Subpart 4 states, "Multiple projects and multiple stages of a single project that are connected actions or phased actions must be considered in total when determining the need for an EAW..." (Emphasis added.) Minnesota Rule 4410.0200, Subpart 60 defines a "phased action" as "... two or more projects to be undertaken by the same proposer that a RGU determines: "A. will have environmental effects on the same geographic area; and "B. are substantially certain to be undertaken sequentially over a limited period of time." The proposed "Willow Heights - 5ch Addition" development contains approximately 39 acres with approximately 61 detached units. The same developer is working on a nearby development called `Bonnie Vista Estates," which proposes 175 twin homes, a 68-unit condominium building, situated on 55.2 acres. These development proposals must be considered together in determining the need for an EAW. Rochester Common Council June 5, 2006 EAW: B. LAND USE CONVERSION. Minnesota Rule 4410.4300, Subpart 36, requires an "A. For ... residential developments where the lot size is less than five acres ... resulting in the permanent conversion of 80 or more acres of ... agricultural, native prairie, forest, or naturally vegetated land ...." The combination of "Willow Heights — 51h Addition" (approximately 39 acres) and "Bonnie Vista Estates" (55.2 acres) exceeds the 80-acre threshold of naturally vegetated land that will be permanently converted. Therefore, an EAW is required. C. OVER 100 UNATTACHED OR 150 ATTACHED UNITS. Minnesota Rule 4410.4300, Subpart 19, states in part: "An EAW is required for residential development if the total number of units that may be ultimately developed on all contiguous land owned or under an option to purchase by the proposer ... equals or exceeds a threshold of this subpart ... "B. 100 unattached units or 150 attached units in a city that does not meet the requirements of item D." Paragraph D requires that a city, not located in the 7-county Twin Cities metropolitan area, file with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board Chair a certification that it has adopted a comprehensive plan containing the following elements: (1) land use plan; (2) transportation plan; (3) sewage collection system policy plan; (4) capital improvements plan; and (5) implementation plan. There is no evidence that the City of Rochester has complied with this requirement. The combination of "Willow Heights — 5`h Addition" and "Bonnie Vista Estates" exceeds the 150 attached unit threshold. Therefore, an EAW is mandatory. II STAFF APPLIED AN INCORRECT LEGAL STANDARD IN DETERMINING WHETHER AN EAW IS NECESSARY. The June 1, 2006 Staff Report (page 1) states in part, "The City makes its decision on whether or not to order an EAW based on three considerations: (1) the likelihood that information important to the development decisions will be produced through the EAW that is not already produced through the City's developmental review processes, (2) the consistency of the propose development with the City development policy and (3) whether there are conditions that can be established through the review process that can mitigate impacts." Staff provides no legal authority for this criteria. In fact, the Rochester Zoning Ordinance, Section 61.540, states that the current rules of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board must be applied in deciding whether or not to order an EAW: Rochester Common Council June 5, 2006 "61.540. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: "The current rules issued under the authority granted in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 116D, implementing the Environmental Policy Act, shall be followed in determining the need for preparation of Environmental Review Program documents. Necessary documents, such as Environmental Assessment Worksheets and Environmental Impact Statements, shall be prepared and the review of such documents completed prior to final local action by the City of Rochester on any development related permit or process related to the project." [Emphasis added.] Minnesota Rule 4410.1100, Subpart 6, states in part: "The RGU shall order the preparation of an EAW if the evidence presented by the petitioners, proposers, and other persons or otherwise known to the RGU demonstrates that, because of the nature or location of the proposed project, the project may have the potential for significant environmental effects." [Emphasis added.] Based on the facts described in this Petition and this legal standard (note double modifiers — ,'may" and "potential"), the City of Rochester Common Council has no choice other than to order an EAW. EQB staff member Greg Downing's letter (May 12, 2006) states on page 1, "The standard to be used to decide if an EAW should be done is given in part 4410.1100, subp. 6." Minn. Rule 4410.1100, Subpart 6 states in part, "The RGU shall order preparation of an EAW if the evidence presented ... demonstrates that ... the project may have the potential for significant environmental effects." [Emphasis added.] Note again the double modifier— "may" and "potential." In fact, Staff appears to incorrectly apply some of the standards used to determine whether an EIS must be ordered. Minn. Rule 4410.1700, Subp. 7 contains the four specific factors that must be considered in determining whether an EIS must be ordered. The 3Id factor is: "C. the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority." Staff incorrectly analyzes whether laws and permit agencies will minimize impacts in determining whether an EAW is necessary. Reminder: Minn. Stat. 116D.04, Subd. la(3) defines an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) as " a brief document which is designed to set out the basic facts necessary to determine whether an environmental impact statement is required for a proposed action." [Emphasis added.] See also Bolander v. City of Minneapolis 502 N.W. 2d 203, 206 (Minn. 1993); and Trout Unlimited v. Minnesota Dept. of Agriculture 528 N.W.2d 903, 909 (Minn. App. 1995). The Staff Report (June 1, 2006) discusses various permit review processes and concludes that the environmental impacts will be minimized by the permit requirements. Again, as described above, Staff applies the wrone standard to determine whether an EAW must be ordered. Rochester Connnon Council June 5, 2006 "The very purpose of an EIS ... is to determine the potential for significant environmental effects before they occur. By deferring this issue to later permitting and monitoring decisions, the [RGU] abandoned [its] duty to require an EIS where there exists a potential for significant environmental effects." (Emphasis added.) See Trout Unlimited v. Minnesota Dent. of Agriculture 528 N.W.2d 903, 909 (Minn. App. 1995). See also Pone County Mothers v. MPCA 594 N.W.2d 233, 237-238 (Minn. App. 1999). [An EAW is the first step towards an EIS.] In summary, the purpose of environmental review is to inform the permitting agencies of issues before they make their decision. Instead, Staff prematurely concludes that there are no facts that would be helpful to permitting agencies (i.e. the City, MPCA, etc.) before they make their decisions. III. STAFF INCORRECTLY STATES THAT THE EAW DECISION MUST BE MADE BEFORE JUNE 14, 2006. The Staff Report (June 1, 2006) incorrectly states on page 1 that the City Council must make a decision on the EAW Petition before June 14, 2006 because that is the expiration date of the 120-day period (the so-called "60-day rule" — codified as Minn. Stat. 15.99) for deciding on the Substantial Land Alteration Permit application. In fact, a citizens' EAW Petition tolls the "60-day rule" until the environmental review process has been completed. See Allen V. City of Mendota Heights 694 N. W.2d 799 (Minn. App. 2005); review denied. W. IN SO MANY WORDS, CITY STAFF ADMIT THAT THERE "MAY BE A POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS." THEREFORE, AN EAW MUST BE ORDERED. The Staff Report (June 1, 2006) states on page 1, "If the EAW raises issues not adequately addressed, an EAW may be needed." The Staff Report (June 1, 2006) also states on page 1, "... if [mitigation] measures are unknown or difficult to identify, then an EAW may be useful." As described in Section V below, protection and mitigation measures are vague and inadequate. Staff acknowledges the vagueness on several occasions. Therefore, an EAW must be ordered. V. PROTECTION AND MITIGATION MEASURES ARE VAGUE AND INADEQUATE. Although my client asserts that mitigation measures are not part of the EAW Petition analysis, the proposed mitigation measures are, in fact, vague and inadequate. Therefore, under these facts, an EAW must be ordered. A. The Staff Report (June 1, 2006) states on page 1, "If the Council determines that further steps need to be taken with regard to the design and implementation of mitigation measures in upcoming stages of the development approval process, you should direct the Public Works Department and Planning Department to work with the developer to refine those Rochester Common Council June 5, 2006 measures." In other words, Staff candidly admits that mitigation measurers are vague and need more work. One of the outcomes of environmental review is that mitigation measures are discussed in an orderly way, with orderly time frames for citizen input and response. Citizens would be deprived of these opportunities if environmental review is denied. B. RARE SPECIES. The Staff Report (June 1, 2006) states on page 2, "City Ordinances do not address rare plant species as a standard condition of approval of SLAs [Substantial Land Alterations] ..." Staff, therefore, recommends that that the rare species "... be investigated further and dealt with in accordance with applicable state law and rules." This is contrary to the purpose of environmental review; that is, to inform the permitting agencies before a decision is made. Environmental review will allow the citizens the opportunity to comment on the investigation and provide input on design alternatives and mitigation fiirxTB!1i�91 C. DECORAH EDGE. The Staff Report (June 1, 2006) states on page 2, "The Council has not yet initiated an ordinance defining more clearly how development should proceed on the Decorah Edge." The existing process is vague; that is, "... areas in the DEOZ [Decorah Edge Overlay Zone] will be managed in such a way as to maintain the quality and quantity of groundwater recharging lower aquifers ..." Environmental review will provide a formal, orderly process to determine, with input from citizens, the best way to protect the Decorah Edge from development impacts. D. PROXIMITY TO ROCHESTER WELL #31. The Staff Report (June 1, 2006) states on page 2, "RPU staff have reviewed risks to Well 31 and conclude that they are minimal." However, the RPU report (no date) contains a very important CAVEAT: "This [report] is based on the assumption that up -gradient concentrations of nitrate are not grossly elevated. We do not have background concentrations of nitrate in the upper aquifer in the vicinity of Willow Heights." Furthermore, the RPU report also states, "We do not know what impact blasting will in the vicinity of a well would have on the yield or efficiency." Finally, the RPU report discusses a lawsuit for damages as a remedy if the development adversely affects the well. Lawsuits are expensive and time-consuming. Moreover, the developer may not have enough money to pay for damages and a surety bond may not be high enough. Prevention is a more prudent practice. Therefore, my clients respectfully request that an EAW be ordered to begin the process to determine the background concentrations of nitrate, the effect of blasting on the drinking water well, and other potential adverse impacts on water quantity and quality. VI. STORMWATER DISCHARGE. Urban runoff ordinarily contains a large variety of pollutants, including petroleum compounds, heavy metals, herbicides and pesticides, fecal coliform bacteria, oxygen -demanding substances, phosphorus and other nutrients. Motor vehicles are one of the major sources of urban runoff pollutants. Other sources include lawn treatments, deicers, pets, lawn clippings and garden waste. Stormwater ponds, even if properly designed and maintained, generally have approximately 65% removal efficiency of phosphorus. Predictions of removal efficiency for Rochester Common Council June 5, 2006 other pollutants are beyond the scope of the EAW Petition. Improperly designed stormwater ponds may directly contact groundwater, creating even more adverse environmental effects. [See also MPCA manual, "Protecting Water Quality Runoff in Urban Areas" (March 1, 2000), page 5.01-2, which describes pollutant removal by type of facility. Removal of nitrogen is even less efficient than phosphorus.] In other words, a substantial fraction of pollutant loads entering any stormwater pond will move into the groundwater, discharge from the pond to a public water, or bioaccumulate. The precise amounts of unremoved pollutants, and the methods to prevent or mitigate these pollutants, need further examination through the environmental review process In conclusion, stormwater runoff from the site (even after best management practices are instituted) "... may have the potential for significant environmental effects ..." and, therefore, an EAW must be ordered. THE PROPOSED LAND ALTERATIONS CONSTITUTE A "QUARRY," WHICH IS PROHIBITED IN AN R-1 ZONING DISTRICT My client agrees with the Planning Department Report (June 1, 2006) that the "... excavation ... meets the threshold ... [of] ... a quarry. A quarry is not a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district, which is the zoning district of the property." (See Zoning Ordinance, Section 62.1101, which defines a quarry as an excavation over 100,000 cubic yards of material.) In fact, the proposed excavation may exceed 500,000 cubic yards. THE PROPOSED LAND ALTERATIONS DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE PROPOSED EXEMPTION Zoning Ordinance, Section 62.1102. Lf creates an exemption that would allow the proposed land alterations if the City Council makes certain findings: "62.1102 EXEMPT ACTIVITIES: "1. Except as required for a reclamation plan, which may be imposed on any of the following activities as part of any required City permit or approval process, the provisions of these Sections 62.1100 through 62.1113 shall not apply to the following activities: "... f. Development activity for which a general development plan, subdivision permit or other Type III approval has resulted in the review of the proposed cut and fill work and for which a grading permit is required. To qualify for this exemption, the Council shall have made the findings established in Section 62.1105." However, the developer has not complied with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance, Section 62.1105 as follows: Rochester Common Council June 5. 2006 "62.1105 FINDINGS NECESSARY FOR ISSUANCE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS: The City shall approve a conditional use permit authorizing an excavation activity only if all of the following findings with respect to the proposed activity are made, in addition to those listed in Section 61.146 [emphasis added]: "1. The activity will not result in a danger to life or property due to (I) steep or unstable slopes, (2) unsafe access to the property, (3) excessive trafc, or (4) proximity to existing or planned residential areas, parks and roadways; " [Comment: The grading, as proposed, will result in some areas exceeding the requirement that no site shall exceed a slope of 3 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical over a distance of 30 feet. Staff cannot conclude at this time that this criterion will be satisfied. Staff defers to a later date the issue of whether grading plans, drainage plans, construction techniques, etc. will satisfy city standards. Furthermore, the lack of information frustrates public review and circumvents the environmental review process.] "2. Visual, noise, dust, and/or excessive on- or off -site environmental impacts on public parks, roadways and residential areas can be adequately mitigated by the Applicant and a fully detailed plan is submitted by the Applicant to demonstrate the mitigation methods to be used, the cost of such mitigation, the source of funds for such mitigation, and adequate legal assurance that all ofsuch mitigation activities are carried out; " [Comment: No "fully detailed" plans have been submitted to demonstrate the mitigation methods. There is no evidence at this time that the developer will satisfy this criterion. Furthermore, the lack of information frustrates public review and circumvents the environmental review process.] "3. The use of trucks and heavy equipment will not adversely impact the safety and maintenance of public roads providing access to the site, or such impacts will be mitigated; " [Comment: The Staff Report (May 31, 2006) incorrectly states that "... materials being hauled from the site would be going for the roadway construction project adjacent to the property or to the applicant's property located south of 40`h Street SW. One of my client's members, Rick Brink, has informed me that the roadway construction project will be completed before the proposed development is underway. Furthermore, no plans have been submitted to demonstrate the mitigation methods. There is no evidence at this time that the developer will satisfy this criterion. The lack of information frustrates public review and circumvents the environmental review process.] "4. The proposed use will not adversely affect air quality or ground water or surface water quality; " Rochester Common Council June 5. 2006 [Comment: The EAW Petition amply indicates why ground and surface water will be adversely affected. Moreover, as stated above, the purpose of environmental review is to determine the environmental impacts before permit decision are made. No plans have been submitted to demonstrate the mitigation methods. There is no evidence at this time that the developer will satisfy this criterion.] "5. The proposed use will not adversely affect the scenic quality of Rochester or the natural landscapes, environment, wildlife and wildlife habitat; or if such effects are anticipated to occur, the reclamation plan provides for adequate restoration of the site following completion of the excavation activity; [Comment: There is no evidence at this time that the developer will satisfy this criterion and adequately "restore" the site, even if a "reclamation" plan is completed.] "6. The activity will be compatible with existing development and development anticipated in the future, including other uses as shown in the Comprehensive Plan, including but not limited to: patterns of land use, recreational uses, existing or planned development, public facilities, open space resources and other natural resources; [Comment: The proposed activity is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which guides the subject property as "open space/recreational." Furthermore, the 24-month mining activity is not consistent with nearby residential uses.] "T The activity will not unduly affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties;" [Comment: Many citizens have stated how the proposed development will adversely affect the use and enjoyment of their properties. For example, see April 12, 2006 Planning Commission minutes, when citizens voiced concerns about noise, traffic, and general incompatibility.] "8. The site plan provides for adequate buffers and screening year-round from unsightly features of the excavation operation; " [Comment: The Staff Report (May 31, 2006) implies that no buffers will be required for the first 24 months. Therefore, this criterion is not satisfied. "9. The reclamation plan provides for adequate and appropriate restoration and stabilisation of cut and f ll areas;" [Comment: The Staff Report (May 31, 2006) states that the reclamation plan meets existing ordinance standards. My clients request adequate opportunity to review and comment on the Reclamation Plan. Furthermore, environmental review must be ordered to determine the adequacy of the Reclamation Plan.] Rochester Common Council June 5, 2006 "10. The excavation activity will not result in negative impacts on drainage patterns or stormwater management facilities; " [Comment: The Staff Report (May 31, 2006) candidly admits the grading and drainage plans have not been provided to the City. Therefore, there is no evidence that this criterion is satisfied. Furthermore, the lack of information frustrates public review and circumvents the environmental review process.] 11. The proposed activity will minimize impacts on sinkholes, wetlands and other natural features affecting ground water or surface water quality; " [Comment: The proposed quarry will adversely impact the "Decorah Edge" areas which directly contribute to ground water recharge. As stated in the EAW Petition by Justin Blum, Minnesota Department of Health, "Therefore, to maintain the drinking water quality a this well [RPU Well 431 ], it is important to maintain the capacity of the [Decorah] edge in the area to filter out contaminants such as nitrate commonly found in shallow ground water." There is no evidence that the proposed activity will "minimize" wetland impacts because wetland delineation is not been completed and proper wetland "sequencing" has not been accomplished — which first requires "avoidance" of wetland impacts. Finally, the RPU report is cited to indicate that the risk to Well #31 is "minimal." As stated above, the RPU report (no date) contains a very important CAVEAT: "This [report] is based on the assumption that up -gradient concentrations of nitrate are not grossly elevated. We do not have background concentrations of nitrate in the upper aquifer in the vicinity of Willow Heights." Furthermore, the RPU report also states, "We do not know what impact blasting will in the vicinity of a well would have on the yield or efficiency." Finally, the RPU report discusses a lawsuit for damages as a remedy if the development adversely the well. Lawsuits are expensive and time-consuming. The developer may not have enough money to pay for damages and a surety bond may not be high enough. Prevention is a more prudent practice. Therefore, my clients respectfully request that an EAW be ordered to begin the process to determine the background concentrations of nitrate, the effect of blasting on the well, and other potential adverse impact on water quantity and quality.] " 12. The intensity, and the anticipated duration of the proposed excavation activity is appropriate for the size and location of the activity;" [Comment: The Staff Report (May 31, 2006) incorrectly states, "The grading work is expected to be completed in coordinated [sic] with the 40"h Street SW reconstruction project." One of my client's members, Rick Brink, has informed me that the 40`h Street reconstruction project will be completed before the proposed development is underway. Furthermore, the proposed excavation is too intense for that location.] N Rochester Common Council June 5, 2006 "13. Permanent and interim erosion and sediment control plans have been approved by the City," [Comment: The Staff Report (May 31, 2006) candidly admits that no interim or permanent erosion or sediment control plans have been submitted, except for a "preliminary" erosion control plan. No plan has been approved.) "14. Surety has been provided that guarantees the site will be fully restored, after completion of the excavation activity, to a safe condition, and one that permits reuse of the site in a manner compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, neighborhood plans, the Land Use Plan and applicable City policies;" [Comment: According to the Staff Report (May 31, 2006), no surety has been provided.] "15. The proposed activity complies with the requirements of the adopted building code. " [Comment: The Staff Report (May 31, 2006) states that this criterion has not been satisfied.] NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 61.146 As Zoning Code, Section 62.1105 (discussed above), also states that the land alteration (i.e. quarry) must comply with Section 61.146: "61.146. Standards for Conditional Uses: The zoning administrator, Commission, or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a conditional use unless one or more of the following findings with respect to the proposed development is made: "1. Provisions for vehicular loading, unloading, parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and onto adjacent public streets and ways will create hazards to safety, or will impose a significant burden upon public facilities. [Comment: A traffic analysis is necessary to answer this question.] "2. The intensity, location, operation, or height of proposed buildings and structures will be detrimental to other private development in the neighborhood or will impose undue burdens on the sewers, sanitary and storm drains, water or similar public facilities. " [Comment: The proposed development has the potential for significant environmental effects on groundwater and surface water. See EAW Petition for details.] "3. The provision for on -site buffer yards and landscaping does not provide adequate 10 Rochester Common Council June 5, 2006 protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development. " [Comment: Certainly, nearby properties will be adversely affected during the 24- month excavation period.] "4. The site plan fails to provide for the soil erosion and drainage problems that may be created by the development. " [Comment: The Staff Report (May 31, 2006) candidly admits that this criterion has not been satisfied.] "5. The provisions for exterior lighting create undue hazards to motorists traveling on adjacent public streets or are inadequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site or such provisions damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties. " [No comment at this time.] "6. The proposed development will create undue f re safety hazards by not providing adequate access to the site, or to the buildings on the site, for emergency vehicles." [No comment at this time.] "7. In cases where a Phase I plan has been approved, there is a substantial change in the Phase Hsite plan from the approved Phase I site plan, such that the revised plans will not meet the standards provided by this paragraph. " [No comment at this time.] "8. The proposed conditional use does not comply with all the standards applying to permitted uses within the underlying zoning district, or with standards specifically applicable to the type of conditional use under consideration, or with specific ordinance standards dealing with matters such as signs which are part of the proposed development, and a variance to allow such deviation has not been secured by the applicant. " [Comment: This requirement is not satisfied. See above for details.] THE PROPOSED OUTLOT FOR DRAINAGE NEEDS ADDITIONAL PUBLIC INPUT The "Request for Council Action" contains the recommendation: "The applicant shall install surface and subsurface drainage facilities on the back portions of Lots 6, 7, and 8 consistent with the final approved drainage plan to mitigate any surface water runoff or groundwater discharge from the site to the dwelling units of the residents on Willow Court SW. The preliminary plat shall be revised so that these drainage facilities are located within an outlot. The outlot shall be deeded to the residents living on Willow Court SW, if the residents are agreeable to maintaining said outlot ..." 11 OV 05,06 13:05 FAX 1 952 472 4771 THOMAS E. CA.SEY H Rochester Common Council June S, 2006 According to Rick Brink, this is the first time Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth has heard of this recommendation. My client requests additional time for investigation and public input before a decision is made. CONCLUSION The standard by which the City of Rochester Common Council must apply to order an EAW is low. "The city need only find that `there may be potential for significant environmental effects.' ... Given this minimal standard, we conclude that the city's decision to order an EAW was reasonable..." Boland er v. Chi y Q£Minneapolis 489 N.W.2d 804, 810 (Nfiinn. App. 1992), affirmed 502 N.W. 2d 203 (Minn.1993). [Emphasis added.] The very purpose of an EIS ... is to determine the potential for significant environmental effects before they occur. By deferring this issue to later permitting and monitoring decisions, the [RGU] abandoned [its] duty to require an EIS where there exists a potential for significant environmental effects." (Emphasis added.) See Trout Unlimited v. Minnesota Dent. of Agriculture 529 N.W.2d 903, 909 (Minn. App, 1995). See also Pone Count Mothers v. MPCA 594 N.W.2d 233, 237-239 (Minn. App. 1999). [Emphasis added] Likewise, based on the facts known to the City of Rochester Common Council at this time, and the vague and insufficient mitigation measures, there is no option other than to order an EAW. Therefore, Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth requests that an EAW be ordered and the proposed Substantial Land Alteration Permit be tabled until the environmental review process has been completed. Even if the City Council decides not to order an EAW (a decision subject to judicial review, at my client's and other citizen's discretion), the City Council must deny the Substantial Land Alteration Permit application for non-compliance with the ordinance criteria described above. On behalf of Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth, I thank you in advance in anticipation of your kind attention. Very ly yours 1 Thomas E. Casey TECH cc: Rochester Citizens For Responsible Growth file P S. — Dear Ms. Scherr: Please include this letter as part of the public record in this proceeding and include this document as a handout to the Common Council. Thank you. 12 4 MEMORANDUM W Date: Tune 5, 2006 Re: Willow Heights, Rochester; EAW Petition and Rare Species Westwood File 20061082.00 To: Michele Caron, Eden Prairie From: Rob Bouta, Sr. Environmental Scientist This memo responds to the rare plant species discussion in the petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) on Willow Heights Residential Development. wEDwood holnimml UMcos Ii.Apnay:am :A.m@ ears ran' ss .: ,,e yib53P51 iU ... .iZAii 5r?1 _. a.. vrnc43:w;nmcut.^.•.;am www.wasrswodps.mm The primary purpose of an EAW is to determine whether a project has potential for significant environmental effects. In our opinion, the project does not have potential for significant environmental effects on rare species. Consequently, an EAW process would be unnecessary. The petition for an EAW mentioned six plant species that the petitioners believe may be present on the site. For the reasons explained below and provided in the table that follows, only prairie shooting star, Sullivant's milkweed, and Christmas fern warrant a thorough survey. A site walk-through was conducted by a Westwood Professional Services and the DNR Regional Plant Ecologist (Ann Pierce) on May 30, 2006. Ms. Pierce indicated the site consists of mesic oak forest with ravines, wetland, and degraded dry prairie and savanna. Onsite observations of common buckthorn and prickly ash confirm that the plant communities are degraded, and suggests that the site has been grazed in the past. The Minnesota County Biological Survey (MCBS), began by the DNR in 1987 as a systematic survey of rare biological features, has been completed for Olmsted County. The MOBS did not identify any plant communities within the project site. Review of available published information (Minnesota's Endangered Flora and Fauna, Coffin and Pfannmuller, 1998; Internet search) did not reveal confirmed records that the three species for which a survey is warranted occur in Olmstead County. Prairie shooting star and Christmas fern would be more likely than Sullivant's milkweed to occur on the site. Regarding Sullivant's milkweed, Minnesota's Endangered Flora and Fauna indicates that most surviving plants in Minnesota are confined to prairie remnants that occur on railroad rights of way, and the species shows little ability to survive in degraded habitats. . II MINCITIEWETAO St CLOUD ENNEAD Memorandum — Willow Heights, Rochester; Rare Species June 5, 2006 Page 2 ��. The three species for which a survey is not warranted include western Jacob's-ladder, small -leaved pussytoes, and showy orchis. DNR Ecologist Ann Pierce stated that, in Minnesota and Wisconsin, western Jacob's-ladder is only known to occur in the far Westwood northern portions of each state. Small -leaved pussytoes and showy orchis are candidates for state protection, but are not protected under state law at this time. Scientific name Common name State Status State Protected Preferred Habitat Dodecatheon prairie shooting star Endangered Yes Prairie, savanna, rock meadia outcrops, woodland Asclepias Sullivant's milkweed Threatened Yes Mesic tallgrass prairie sullivantii Polystichum Christmas fern Threatened Yes Wooded slopes acrostichoides Polemonium Rather open rich conifer occidentale ssp. western Jacob's-ladder Endangered Yes swamps with Sphagnum lacustre moss carpet Antennaria small -leaved pussytoes Special No Open or partially shaded arvf olia concern areas; sandy soils Galearis Showy orchis Not listed; No Not Applicable s ectabilis under review planning > engineering > surveying Willow Heights 5th Addition, Plant Summary Page 1 of 2 Scherr, Judy From: Wheeler Phil [wheeler.phil@CO.OLMSTED.MN.US] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 4:34 PM To: Scherr, Judy Subject: FW: Willow Heights 5th Addition, Plant Summary Attachments: WillowHeightsRareSppMemo.pdf Judy — Please copy this, and the attachment, for the Council. Thanks. - Phil Phil Wheeler, AICP Planning Director 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 ph 507-285-8232 fax 507-287-2275 a community that welcomes diversity, with a safe, non -discriminating environment, and with respect and opportunity for all From: Wheeler Phil Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 1:36 PM To: Svenby Brent; Neumann, Gary; 'Adkins, Terry' Subject: FW: Willow Heights 5th Addition, Plant Summary More email related to the EAW issue. Gary, do you plan to make copies for the Council? - Phil Phil Wheeler, AICP Planning Director 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 ph 507-285-8232 fax 507-287-2275 a community that welcomes diversity, with a safe, non -discriminating environment, and with respect and opportunity for all From: Michele Caron[mailto:Michele.Caron@westwoodps.com] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 11:27 AM To: Wheeler Phil Cc: Svenby Brent; Frank Kottschade; Rob Bouta Subject: Willow Heights 5th Addition, Plant Summary Dear Mr. Wheeler - We have conducted preliminary research on the potential plants of concern listed in the Petition for an EAW by the neighbors of the Willow Heights 5th Addition and are providing the attached memo for your information. Based on our previous email that detailed the agency permitting process if any protected species are found, and the staff reports provided last Friday, we are confirming that the Developer will have a comprehensive plant 6/5/2006 Willow Heights 5th Addition, Plant Summary Page 2 of 2 inventory completed by a qualified consultant and then obtain permits for any protected species to be impacted (if found) as part of the final design and permitting process. Please let me know if you require additional information or have questions. We appreciate your assistance with this. Michele Jackson Caron, PE Senior Project Manager Westwood Professional Services 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344-7310 Dflucl 952-697-5712 EbfAll_ michele.caron westwoodips.com MAIN 952-937-5150 FAX 952-937-5922 WE13 www.westwoodDs.com <<Wi IlowHeightsRareSppMemo.pd f>> 6/5/2006 rp-W i¢e p4dyr, wr dr/trrr Phil Wheeler, AICP Planning Director 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 Subject: Willow Heights 5th GDP Impacts on RPU Well 31 RPU Staff have discussed the proposed development and potential impacts to Well 31. We also hired a consultant (geologist) for an outside opinion. Although there is some uncertainty, from an engineering, operations and water quality perspective our collective opinion ' f water quality impairment is low. This is based on the assumption that up -gradient concentrations of nitrate are not grossly elevated. We do not have data on background concentrations of nitrate in the upper aquifer in the vicinity of Willow Heights. In the past Well 31 had nitrate concentrations that were detectable, but not significantly elevated. We will continue to monitor water quality and watch for changes in trends. Well 31 is an important water supply well. It was 9th and 10th out of 24 high capacity wells in terms of pumpage and hours of operation (respectively) in 2005. it is likely that annual pumpage will go up in the future with the extensive commercial development underway in this part of the city. The well is also relatively efficient (kWhI1000 gallons pumped). We don't know what impact blasting in the vicinity of a well would have on the yield or efficiency. It is possible that some maintenance or redevelopment could be required if the overlying formation is disturbed. We will continue to take monthly static water level (SWL) measurements to determine if there are any changes to the potentiometer surface. We are also considering installing instrumentation to gather continuous water level data (SWL and cone of depression). Developers should be aware that if a well is clearly impacted by development activity, and the well would subsequently have to be re -developed or replaced the City would have the right to seek damages from the responsible party. If the decision is to proceed with an EAW, RPU requests that potential impacts to water quality, water quantity, and well operation be included in the scope. /" /for Joseph S. Hensel Director of Field Services ROCHESTER PUBLIC UTILITIES 4000 East River Road NE Rochester, MN 55901-2813 Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 May 12, 2006 RECEIVED MAY 16 2006 Mr. Brent Svenby Rochester/Olmsted Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 RE: Citizens' Petition for an EAW for the Willow Heights, 5`s Addition project Dear Mr.Svenby: The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) has received a petition requesting that an EAW be prepared on the project described in the petition, and has determined that the City of Rochester is the appropriate governmental unit to decide the need for an EAW. The requirements for environmental review, including the preparation of an EAW, can be found in the Minnesota Rules, chapter 4410. These rules and various guidance documents are available at our website, www.eqb.state.mn.us. The procedures to be followed in making the EAW decision are set forth in part 4410.1100. Key points in the procedures include: 1. No final government approvals may be given to the project named in the petition, nor may construction on the project be started until the need for an EAW has been determined. Project construction includes any activities which directly affect the environment, including preparation of land. If the decision is to prepare an EAW, approval must be withheld until either a Negative Declaration is issued or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is completed (see part 4410.3100, subpart 1.) 2. A first step in making the decision regarding the need for an EAW would be to compare the project to the mandatory EAW, EIS and Exemption categories listed in parts 4410.4300, 4410.4400, and 4410.4600, respectively. If the project should fall under any of these categories, environmental review is automatically required or prohibited. If this should be the case, proceed accordingly. 3. If preparation of an EAW is neither mandatory nor exempted, the City has the option to prepare an EAW. The standard to be used to decide if an EAW should be done is given in part 4410.1100, subp. 6. Note that this requires that a record of decision including specific findings of fact be maintained. Avileseto Cnwi�nnmont�l llruliTn Anaed _��o---.„o ��.+�. o.an umn—I,m=Nnurasi-207.11s2ZFnx nsi-aae-�89a•TM et]trB2]-3529 �'MMN.EOB.STAiE,MN.l15 4. You are allowed up to 30 working days (Saturdays, Sundays and holidays do not count) for your decision if it will be made by a council, board, or other body which meets only periodically, or 15 working days if it will be made by a single individual. You may request an extra 15 days from EQB if the decision will be made by an individual. 5. You must notify, in writing, the proposer, the petitioners' representative and the EQB of your decision within five working days. I would appreciate your sending a copy of your record of decision on the petition along with notification of your decision for our records. This is not required, however. 6. If for any reason you are unable to act on the petition at this time (e.g., no application has yet been filed or the application has been withdrawn), the petition will remain in effect for a period of one year, and must be acted upon prior to any final decision concerning the project identified in the petition. Notice of the petition and its assignment to your unit of government will be published in the EQB Monitor on May 22, 2006. If you have any questions or need any assistance, please do not hesitate to call me at 651/ 201-2476. Sincerely, Gregg Downing Environmental Review program staff cc: Rick Brink, petitioners' representative i RECEIVED MAY 1 6 2006 ROCHESTER- CLMSTED PL.4NNfNG DEPARTMENT Willow Heights 5th Addition Petition for Environmental Assessment Worksheet RECEIVED J Rick Bin nk MAY 16 2006 3740 9 AV STER•OLMSTED 507-287-0887 rick87fc35@yahoo.com Gregg Downing MN Environmental Quality Board 300 Centennial Office Building 658 Cedar Street St. Paul, MN 55155 I, Rick Brink of 3740 9a Ave SW, Rochester, MN, 507-287-0887, hereby identify myself as a representative for the following petitioners (Appendix A) who wish to request an EAW be completed for the proposed Willow Heights 5n' Addition in Rochester, MN. The proposed project is known as Willow Heights 5th Addition (formerly proposed as Creek View Estates), and identified as General Development Plan #268 and Preliminary Plat #06-02 and is proposed by North American Realty, 3800 Hwy 52 North, Rochester, MN 55901. The proposed development encompasses approximately 39 acres of land located along the north side of 40 Street SW, west of Willow Heights Drive SW and east of 90' Ave SW, Rochester, MN 55902. See Figures l thru 3. As per EAW petition guidelines, North American Realty has been notified that this petition has been sent to the EQB. GDP #268: www.co.olmsted.mn.us/links/docs/CPZC/20060412 gdp268.pdf PP #06-02: www.co.olmsted.mn.usAinks/does/CPZC/20060412 pp0602.pdf The proposed project has several potentially harmful environmental effects, which we the petitioners conclude, creates a reasonable need for an EAW to be performed. The following aspects of the project support this conclusion: 1) Substantial Land Alteration To put all of the subsequent concerns in perspective, first consider that the proposed Willow Heights 5`h Addition is requiring a substantial land alteration permit and plans to move 500,000 cubic yards of materials, most of which will be trucked off the property. The amount of grading was described as "massive" by a Rochester Planning and Zoning Senior Planner. The development also proposes substantial changes to the existing elevations over 50% of the project area, utilize blasting, and have resulting slopes with 2:1 ratios (exceeding the minimum design standards, and requiring special variance), including difference in elevation to surrounding properties of over 150 vertical feet. Essentially, this land is being used as a source of fill materials for another development, just across 40s' St SW, known as Willow Creek Commons West. It is believed that this massive excavation activity would have adverse affects on the sensitive environmental features outlined below. See pages 35-42 of the 20060412 pp0602.pdf referenced above for details of the Substantial Land Alteration permit request. See Figure 5 below which is an excerpt from this document, and highlights the blasting areas and topographical changes. 2) Decorah Edge The proposed project consists of large portions of land associated with the Decorah Edge, a critical ecological system providing focused groundwater recharge. About half of the drinking water in the Rochester area recharges at the Decorah Edge. The importance of the Decorah Edge is already widely known, with legislation currently under development (but not yet enacted), which would require such areas be left undisturbed to preserve the benefits they provide to Rochester's and Olmsted County's groundwater: nitrate & nitrite removal from upper -aquifer groundwater before re -infiltration to the lower aquifers. Although legislation regarding the Decorah Edge has not yet become law, we believe the completion of an EAW is important to ensure minimal impacts to this important ecological system. See Figure 4 for an overlay of the development and the Decorah Edge. From the rochesterdeoz3.pdf below, here is a highlighted area showing that most of the proposed development site is on the Decorah Edge (Pink is Decorah Edge Overlay Zone): Appendix B includes the following presentation by Terry Lee: htti):I/www.co.olmsted.mn.us/upload dir/planning/pac/20060216decorahedge ppt :) Other Reference Materials on Decorah Edge: J httn://www.co.olmsted.mn.us/upload dir/p1anning/pac/rochesterdeoz3.1)df http://www.co.olmsted.mn.us/upload dir/ilanning/pac/nomapdecorahedgegroundwaterre chareeareasummary2004v5.odf httn://www.co.olmsted.mn.us/upload dir/admin/decorahedge.odf '' httl)://mn.usjzs.gov/,)ubs/00-4215.pdf 3) Wetland Species -� Researchers have found that Decorah Edge areas contained some of the most diverse wetlands in the state, providing refuge to rare woodland, wetland, and prairie species that have been unable to survive elsewhere. According to first hand observations from some members of this petition, we appear to have several species that are on the endangered, threatened, special concern list. We believe the following plant species are present on the site: Prairie Shooting Star (endangered); Western Jacob's Ladder (endangered); possibly Sullivant's Milkweed (threatened); Christmas Fern (threatened); Small Leaved Pussytoes (special concern); Showy Orchis (under review). Please see Appendix C for a report on these plants, with pictures of the plants taken directly from the Willow Heights 5`h Addition site. In addition, there are wetlands on adjacent properties which could be adversely affected by the proposed development, but the impact of which has not been addressed by the proposed development plans. We believe the completion of an EAW will help identify and preserve this important plant life. 4) Disturbance of Dumping Sites A few locations (See Figure 4) on the proposed development were previously used as dumping sites. At one time, trees with Dutch Elm disease from the city of Rochester were dumped and burned here. Another location contains dumping from a building demolition. The size of the dumping sites is believed to be larger than the map indicates, based on first hand observation of those participating in the tree dump activity. The concern with the dumping sites involves contamination of surrounding wetland areas when this material is dug up and disturbed. 5) Proximity to Rochester Public Utilities Well #31 1 A RPU Well #31 has an Aquifer Sensitivity rating of HIGH according to the June 2004 RPU Wellhead Protection Plan (see link below, or Appendix D, full report can be viewed at RPU). This means the bedrock aquifer is considered to exhibit a high sensitivity to contamination because of its geological setting. The same report indicates that the Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) vulnerability rating of Well #31 is MODERATE to HIGH. The proposed development has a street and 5 houses directly in the ERZ (Emergency Response Zone) of Well #31. Any contamination spilled within the ERZ could start showing up in the well in less than 1 year. An additional 35 houses are proposed within the WHPA (Wellhead Protection Area), where contaminants spilled could reach the well d 4- in less than 50 years. In addition, many of these homes are proposed directly on the Decorah Edge, which provides a natural water filtration for the aquifers supplying Well #31. In addition, in an e-mail from Justin Blum, MDH/Environmental Health who has been working with RPU since 1993 on the Wellhead Protection Plan, he states the following: "Specifically to the well 31 situation, the aquifer is rated as vulnerable because a portion of young water (< 50 years old) was found in the well by tritium age dating methods. At the well site itself, there is a sufficient thickness of low permeability materials overlying the aquifer that direct infiltration from the surface to the well bore is not a large concern. This leads one to the conclusion that the water is percolating into the water supply aquifer at or near the (Decorah) edge and flowing back from the (Decorah) edge toward the well. Therefore, to maintain the drinking water quality at this well, it is important to maintain the capacity of the (Decorah) edge i the area to filter out contaminants such as nitrate commonly found in the shallow ground water." Given the sensitivity rating of Well #31, the proximity of streets and structures, the proposed substantial land alteration (including blasting and massive excavation), all combined in the sensitive area of the Decorah Edge, we believe the drinking water supply for all those served by Well #31 would be put at an unacceptably high risk by the proposed Willow Heights 5'" Addition. See Figures 6 and 7. RFU Wellhead Protection Plan: htti)7//www.ri)u.oT-Jpdfs/RPU wellhead partl text.vdf Conclusion In conclusion, we the petitioners believe that the special circumstances of the proposed Willow Heights 5`s Addition project, when considered together for a complete picture of the environmental impact, provide substantial evidence that a discretionary EAW should be performed, even though the threshold for a mandatory EAW was not met. PRELIMINARY PLAT _ Site, Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Streets r.T✓� for _ WILLOW HEIGHTS 5TH ADDITION ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA Figure 1 — Preliminary Plat (rev—wh_plat.pdf) rp - LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCALE) 1 l f -- #� i t Figure 2 — Topo of Proposed Willow Heights 5' Addition (rev—wh—plat.pdf) tYPICLLIOTS Figure 3 — Proposed Plat with Topo and Houses sj f + (1"s �`�� � -fi. ��grDeEDRfHEE.TgH8E8431 fIi ' ` Tr � � CxtxOE ORE♦. 111WWW < T TIRY 16 Y W � niKING NJfFb �-• S 4 � f CPlOI1G ONG iR-Tuu a 'r � Figure 5 —Proposed Blasting Areas and proposed areas of Substantial Land Alteration (page 45 of www.co.olmsted.mn.us/links/docs/CPZC/20060412 pp0602j) Figure 5 — RPU Well #31 location with respect to proposed development (yellow) (page 26 of www.coATn,,(ed.rnn.m/unIoad dir/nI•inning/cPzc/20060222edi1268.pd1 t y Nnf IkET 1, 'mod !4,4701, �y xxv F ait �•su �V AMEL .\EMI �. •.,.� 'P �.. Figure 7 — Proposed Site with Decorah Edge and Well #31Highlighted (page 27 of . na.co.nlmaed.ma.i z/unlii�d didnlannincirnzcP (NH ih,, ,. n�6E.txlf MEETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA SECTION: :SOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES ONS ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE G. 2. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES, as appropriate. DATE: 6/5/06 ITEM NO. G PREPARED BY: TERRY L. ADKINS G. 3. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES (for adoption). a) An Ordinance Creating And Enacting Section 6.031, And Amending And Reenacting Sections 4.03, 6.00, 6.02, 6.04, and 6.05 Of The Home Rule Charter Of The City Of Rochester, Relating To The Mayor's Veto Authority. b) An Ordinance Amending And Reenacting Section 64Q.100, And Subdivisions 3, 4, And 5 Of Section 64Q.230 Of The Rochester Code Of Ordinances, Relating To The Harvestview II Special District. c) An Ordinance Creating And Enacting Section 61.255 To The Rochester Code Of Ordinances, And \ Amending And Reenacting Sections 60.200, 61.211, 61.214, 61.215, 61.225, 61.230, 61.231, 61.232. 61.233, 61.237, 61.251, 61.584, and 64.131 Of The Rochester Code Of Ordinances, Relating To Final o� Plats, The Completion Of Public Improvements And The Need For Adequate Public Facilities. 1 d) An Ordinance Amending And Reenacting Section 64M.100 Of The Rochester Code Of Ordinances, Relating To The Boundaries Of Land For The Harvestview Special District. G.4. MISCELLANEOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: I€QUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING6/04-)4 61 DATE: 5=i5 B6 o q< AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. 'UBLIC HEARINGS — Tabled Item PLA.NNNG ITEM DESCRIPTION: Substantial Land Alteration for Preliminary Plat #06-02 by PREPARED BY: Brent Svenby, North American Realty known as Willow Heights 51h Addition. The applicant is Senior Planner requesting approval of a Substantial Land Alteration permit to allow for grading that exceeds 10 feet of cut or fill on the property. The property is located along the north side of 401h Street SW, west of Willow Heights. May 30, 2006 On May 1, 2006 the Council held a public hearing on General Development Plan # 268 and Preliminary Plat #06- 02. As part of the preliminary plat, the applicant requested approval of a Substantial Land Alteration for the grading work proposed on the property. The SLA is required because of the elevation changes proposed, the amount of material being excavated, and the 2:1 slopes proposed on the property. The Council approved the GDP and the preliminary plat but the SLA request was tabled to the May 151h meeting. The excavation proposed on the property meets the threshold for removal of material associated with a quarry. A quarry is not a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district, which is the zoning of the property. However Section 62.1102 exempts certain excavation activities from all of the requirements of Sections 62.1100 through 62.1113, which includes the section incorporating the threshold of 100,000 cubic yards that, if exceeded, places the SLA into the quarry category. Exemptions indude development activities for which a GDP, subdivision permit or other Type III approval has resulted in the review of the proposed cut and fill work for which a grading permit is required. To qualify for this exemption, the Council shall have made the findings established in Section 62.1105. his means that an SLA meeting the definition of a quarry is exempt from the zoning constraints on locating in he R-1 zoning district only if the findings to Section 62.1105 can be made. A citizens' petition for an EAW has been filed for this project. The determination on the EAW petition will also affect the SLA requested. If it is determined that an EAW is warranted for the development then the requested SLA should be denied. During the public hearing, the testimony seemed to center around how this development would affect the adjacent properties which complain that they have drainage problems. Staff met with the Public Works Department to review the requested SLA and what measures would likely be necessary to help prevent additional drainage, both surface and subsurface, from affecting the property owners who live on Willow Court SW. The conclusion reached was that the applicant should install surface and subsurface drainage facilities on the back portions of Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block 2 consistent with the final approved grading and drainage plan to mitigate any surface water runoff or groundwater discharge from the site to the dwelling units of the residents on Willow Court SW. This would require that the preliminary plat be revised so that these drainage facilities are located within an outlot. The maintenance and ownership of the outlot would have to be addressed. if the council approves the requested SLA staff recommends that the following conditions be added: 1. The applicant shall provide a detailed plant survey of the site conducted by a professional botanist in consultation with the DNR to identify rare, threatened, or endangered species and plant communities prior to proceeding with any activities associated with development. If the plant survey results in required revisions to the SLA, the SLA approval shall be suspended until a modified plan has been approved by the Council. 2. The applicant shall install surface and subsurface drainage facilities on the back portions of Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block 2 consistent with the final approved grading and drainage plan to mitigate [continued on next page] COUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: tc: Page 2 RCA June 1, 2006 [Conditions, continued] any surface water runoff or groundwater discharge from the site to the dwelling units of the residents on Willow Court SW. The preliminary plat shall be revised so that these drainage facilities are located within an outlot. The outlot shall be deeded to the residents living on Willow Court SW, if the residents are agreeable to maintaining said outlot, so they can maintain the surface and subsurface drainage facilities, otherwise said outlot shall be owned and maintained by the homeowners association that will be established for the subdivision. 3. Any Interim and Final Grading Plan(s) and Drainage Plan(s) reviewed and approved by the City for the proposed Substantial Land Alteration within the Willow Heights 5'h Subdivision shall meet the standards reflected in the findings of Section 62.1105, and appropriate geologic investigations, analysis and resulting recommendations, grading and drainage plans, and construction techniques and other appropriate measures / mechanisms will be required of the Applicant to guarantee compliance. Council Action Needed: 1. The Council should include a motion to adopt findings to support either approval or denial of the proposed Substantial Land Alteration Activity. 2. The motion shall also include approval or denial of the proposed slopes at 2:1. Attachment: 1. SLA Findings 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 Monday, June 5, 2006 in the Council Chambers at the Rochester / Olmsted County Government Center. �=)3(i TO: Rochester Common Council FROM: Brent Svenby, Senior Planner Phil Wheeler, AICP, Planning Director DATE: May 31, 2006 RE: Substantial Land Alteration for Preliminary Plat #06-02 by North American Realty known as Willow Heights 5th Addition. The applicant is requesting approval of a Substantial Land Alteration permit to allow for grading that exceeds 10 feet of cut or fill on the property. The property is located along the north side of 40th Street SW, west of Willow Heights. Substantial Land Alteration: This application includes a request for approval of land disturbing activities defined as Substantial Land Alteration according to Section 62.1101, B of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual (LDM). The amount of material to be removed from the site exceeds the threshold established in Section 62.1101 (100,000 cubic yards) distinguishing a quarry, which is not allowed in the R-1 District. However, Section 62.1102 of the LDM exempts a substantial land alteration from those thresholds (and other parts of the ordinance dealing with substantial land alteration) when it is part of a Type III application, such as a preliminary plat, subject to making findings established in Section 62.1105 and 61.146 of the LDM. As part of this development, the applicant proposes to excavate approximately 400,000 to 500,000 cubic yards of materials on the property and change the existing elevations more than I feet. Some of the material will be moved to the 401" Street SW improvement that is scheduled for this year. According to the applicant's project narrative "the site has design challenges imposed by the natural slopes and a difference in elevations of the surrounding properties of over 150 vertical feet. A change in elevation of over 10 feet will be required over approximately 50% of the project area in order to provide acceptable public roads and the park". Sections 61.146, 62.1102 and 62.1105 of the LDM are attached Staff Suggested Findings: If the City Council approves the proposed substantial land alteration, staff recommends the following findings to Section 62.1105 and 61.146 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual: 62.1105 1) The activity will not result in a danger to life or property due to (1) steep or unstable slopes, (2) unsafe access to the property, (3) excessive traffic, or (4) proximity to existing or planned residential areas, parks and roadways. The grading will need to Mz meet engineering standards adopted by the City. The grading and drainage plans will need to comply with City standards as well as the reclamation standards and be approved by the Rochester Public Works Department. Access and traffic will not create unsafe conditions. Rochester Public Works Department advises that any Interim and Final Grading Plan(s) and Drainage Plan(s) reviewed and approved by the City for the proposed Substantial Land Alteration within the Willow Heights 5th Subdivision shall meet these standards and any geologic investigations, analysis and resulting recommendations, grading and drainage plans, and construction techniques and other appropriate measures / mechanisms will be required of the Applicant to guarantee compliance. Failure by the Applicant to meet these standards shall result in denial of the Grading Plan(s) and /or revocation or suspension of the Grading Permit(s) until the standards are met. 2) Visual, noise, dust, and/or excessive on- or off -site environmental impacts on public parks, roadways and residential areas can be adequately mitigated by the Applicant and a fully detailed plan is submitted by the Applicant to demonstrate the mitigation methods to be used, the cost of such mitigation, the source of funds for such mitigation, and adequate legal assurance that all of such mitigation activities are Carried out. Rochester Public Works Department advises that any Interim and Final Grading Plan(s) and Drainage Plan(s) reviewed and approved by the City for the proposed Substantial Land Alteration within the Willow Heights 5th Subdivision shall meet these standards and any geologic investigations, analysis and resulting recommendations, grading and drainage plans, and construction techniques and other appropriate measures / mechanisms will be required of the Applicant to guarantee compliance. Failure by the Applicant to meet these standards shall result in denial of the Grading Plan(s) and /or revocation or suspension of the Grading Permit(s) until the standards are met. 3) The use of trucks and heavy equipment will not adversely impact the safety and maintenance of public roads providing access to the site, or such impacts will be mitigated. The equipment conducting the grading work on the property will also be the equipment utilized to move the earth. The applicant has stated that access to site would be from 4dh Street SW and the materials being hauled from the site would be going for the roadway construction project adjacent to the property or to the applicant's property located south of 40`h Street SW. Rochester Public Works Department advises that any Interim and Final Grading and Drainage Plan(s) reviewed and approved by the City for the proposed Substantial Land Alteration within the Willow Heights 5th Subdivision shall meet these standards and any geologic investigations, analysis and resulting recommendations, grading and drainage plans, and construction techniques and other appropriate measures / mechanisms will be required of the Applicant to guarantee compliance. Failure by the Applicant to meet these standards shall result in denial of the Grading Plan(s) and /or revocation or suspension of the Grading Permit(s) until the standards are met. 4) The proposed use will not adversely affect air quality or ground water or surface water quality. The proposed excavation work should not affect air quality. The SLA is likely to reduce the flow of groundwater through the site, diverting it to become surface water. However, since the quality of the lower aquifer is high (and typically higher in quality than the groundwater in the upper aquifer), there should not be a significant site -specific impact on groundwater quality. Erosion and sedimentation control measures will be required during grading activity. Stormwater management control measures will be required during and following development. Rochester Public Works Department advises that any Interim and Final Grading Plan(s) and Drainage Plan(s) reviewed and approved by the City for the proposed Substantial Land Alteration within the Willow Heights a Subdivision shall meet these standards and any geologic investigations, analysis and resulting recommendations, grading and drainage plans, and construction techniques and other appropriate measures i mechanisms will be required of the Applicant to guarantee compliance. Failure by the ) Applicant to meet these standards shall result in denial of the Grading Plan(s) and /or revocation or suspension of the Grading Permit(s) until the standards are met. 5) The proposed use will not adversely affect the scenic quality of Rochester or the natural landscapes, environment, wildlife and wildlife habitat; or if such effects are anticipated to occur, the reclamation plan provides for adequate restoration of the site following completion of the excavation activity. The proposed grading work will affect the natural landscape on the property. Currently the property is heavily wooded and contains a ravine. With the proposed grading the majority of the trees and brush on the property will be removed to allow for the development of a single family development. As part of the reclamation plan the applicant is providing the required plantings per the reclamation standards found within the Land Development manual. The EAW petition addresses concerns about rare plant species found on the site. These species should be identified by a professional botanist and mitigation measures identified meeting DNR standards and rules applying to takings of rare species. These measures may result in restrictions on the amount and location of grading and earth removal on the site. 6) The activity will be compatible with existing development and development anticipated in the future, including other uses as shown in the Comprehensive Plan, including but not limited to: patterns of land use, recreational uses, existing or planned development, public facilities, open space resources and other natural resources. Single family residential uses adjoin the property to the east, north and west. The scale of earth removal and the removal of the majority of the existing forest cover is not typical of low density residential development, but is allowed by the ordinance. The duration of the excavation activity is expected to be completed within 24 months. After restoration of vegetation and development of the property, the result of the proposed activity will be compatible with existing development and development anticipated in the future. 7) The activity will not unduly affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties. The extent of the grading and removal of vegetation will affect views from adjacent properties and therefore the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties. Whether this is an undue impact or not is a matter of judgment, since the LDM accommodates substantial grading in conjunction with GDP's, subject to these findings. The grading is anticipated to be completed with 24 months and the reclamation plan meets the standards of the ordinance. 8) The site plan provides for adequate buffers and screening year-round from unsightly features of the excavation operation. The grading is anticipated to be completed with 24 months, so no bufferyard is required. Noise and dust control will need to comply with City standards. 9) The reclamation plan provides for adequate and appropriate restoration and stabilization of cut and fill areas. The City Engineer has waived the requirement for a 3:1 slope and advises that the cut and fill areas will be stable. The reclamation plan meets existing ordinance standards. 10) The excavation activity will not result in negative impacts on drainage patterns or stormwater management facilities. A preliminary drainage study has been submitted that identifies proposed stormwater management facilities that will address surface water quality and will encourage infiltration for groundwater recharge. According to the drainage study, stormwater runoff currently being routed across the site from the adjacent residential neighborhoods will be routed through the property in a manner that should not negatively impact the existing drainage patterns or stormwater management facilities. At the time the grading and drainage plan is submitted for approval by the City detailed studies will need to J be provided so that drainage patterns and stormwater management facilities can be adequately studied. Rochester Public Works Department advises that any Interim and Final Grading Plan(s) and Drainage Plan(s) reviewed and approved by the City for the proposed Substantial Land Alteration within the Willow Heights 51 Subdivision shall meet these standards and any geologic investigations, analysis and resulting recommendations, grading and drainage plans, and construction techniques and other appropriate measures / mechanisms will be required of the Applicant to guarantee compliance. Failure by the Applicant to meet these standards shall result in denial of the Grading Plan(s) and /or revocation or suspension of the Grading Permit(s) until the standards are met. 11) The proposed activity will minimize impacts on sinkholes, wetlands and other natural features affecting ground water or surface water quality. According to the Sinkholes and Sinkholes Probability Map from the Geologic Atlas of Olmsted County, there are no known sinkholes on the property and the property has a low to moderate probability of containing sinkholes. A wetland delineation will need to be completed for the property. A preliminary investigation found 3 wetlands on the property. The applicant will need to work with the Local Government Unit on any mitigation. It appears that the grading will affect a wetland located on the western portion of the site. Approval to fill this wetland will need to be granted by the LGU. Since part of the property is in the Emergency Response Zone of Well 31 and much of the property is affected by Decorah Edge geology, groundwater impacts related to drinking water supply should also be considered. The wetland delineation necessary to determine if there are groundwater supported wetlands on the site has not yet been submitted to the Planning Department. It appears from published soil maps that there are two areas of elevated groundwater associated with edge hydrology associated with the site, one on the southwestern comer of site and one encompassing most of the existing Willow Court development. The access to the site off 40t" Street SW crosses the western perched water table area; much of this area has already been extensively altered by Mn/DOT's work in the 40t' Street SW right of way. While concerns have been expressed by DNR staff about the impact of the grading on the potential impact of the SLA on the municipal well, RPU staff have concluded that the risk to the well is minimal provided runoff is directed away form the well. 12) The intensity and the anticipated duration of the proposed excavation activity is appropriate for the size and location of the activity. The extent of removal of material from the site meets the definition of a quarry, normally not allowed in this district. However, the LDM exempts excavation and grading activities from the thresholds defining quarry operations when associated with an approved GDP or plat. The grading work is expected to be completed in coordinated with the 401" Street SW reconstruction project. It is anticipated that the grading work with be completed within 24 months. The duration seems appropriate for the size of the project. 13) Permanent and interim erosion and sediment control plans have been approved by the City. The Rochester Public Works Department will need to review and approve the grading and drainage plan for this work. This plan must accommodate permanent and interim erosion and sediment control. The applicant has submitted preliminary erosion control plans as part of this request however at this time a formal grading plan has not been submitted for approval. 14) Surety has been provided that guarantees the site will be fully restored, after completion of the excavation activity, to a safe condition, and one that permits reuse of the site in a manner compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, neighborhood plans, the Land Use Plan and applicable City policies. Surety will need to be provided -p 35 that guarantees the site will be fully restored after the completion of the excavation activity. The Public Works Department will need to determine the amount of surety needed that will allow the site to be fully restored to a safe condition. This surety can be provided through the owner -contract process for this development. If grading is to occur prior to an owner/contract, a separate surety will need to be provided. Rochester Public Works Department advises that any Interim and Final Grading Plan(s), Drainage Plan(s) and Reclamation Plan(s) reviewed and approved by the City for the proposed Substantial Land Alteration within the Willow Heights 5' Subdivision shall meet these standards and any geologic investigations, analysis and resulting recommendations, grading and drainage plans, and construction techniques and other appropriate measures / mechanisms will be required of the Applicant to guarantee compliance. Failure by the Applicant to meet these standards shall result in denial of the Grading Plan(s) and /or revocation or suspension of the Grading Permit(s) until the standards are met. 15) The proposed activity complies with the requirements of the adopted building code. The grading and drainage plan will need to be approved by the Rochester Public Works Department prior to any grading on the property. Additional information is needed to determine if soil corrections are necessary to adequately support buildings and public roadways. The Planning Staff would suggest the following findings for Section 61.146: 1) Not applicable. 2) Not applicable. 3) Not applicable. 4) The Rochester Public Works Department will need to review and approve the grading and drainage plan for this work. This plan must accommodate permanent and interim erosion and sediment control. 5) Not applicable. 6) Not applicable. 7) Not applicable. 8) Not applicable. CITY OF ROCHESTER ZONING ORDINANCE AND LAND DEVELOPMENT MANUAL EXCERPTS Conditions on Approvals: In considering an application for development permit to allow a land subdivision, the approving body shall consider and may impose modification or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance with the criteria of Section 61.225. 62.1102 Exempt Activities: 1) Except as required for a reclamation plan, which may be imposed on any of the following activities as part of any required City permit or approval process, the provisions of these Sections 62.1100 through 62.1113 shall not apply to the following activities: a) The land area included within 15' or as reasonably defined by the City Engineer to allow soil stabilization of the identified boundaries of a building submitted for a building footing and foundation permit. b) Stormwater management facilities or other public infrastructure approved by the City c) Excavations or blasting for wells, tunnels or utilities that have received all necessary governmental approvals. d) Refuse disposal sites controlled by other applicable City, State or federal regulations. e) On -going cemetery (burial) operations. f) Development activity for which a general development plan, subdivision permit or other Type III approval has resulted in the review of the proposed cut and fill work and for which a grading permit is required. To qualify for this exemption, the Council shall have made the findings established in Section 62.1105. g) Uses in the Central Development Core (CDC) District. 62.1105 Findings Necessary for Issuance of a Conditional Use Permit: The City shall approve a conditional use permit authorizing an excavation activity only if all of the following findings with respect to the proposed activity are made, in addition to those listed in Section 61.146: 1) The activity will not result in a danger to life or property due to (1) steep or unstable slopes, (2) unsafe access to the property, (3) excessive traffic, or (4) proximity to existing or planned residential areas, parks and roadways; 2) Visual, noise, dust, andlor excessive on or off -site environmental impacts on public parks, roadways and residential areas can be adequately mitigated by the Applicant and a fully detailed plan is submitted by the Applicant to demonstrate the mitigation methods to be used, the cost of such mitigation, the source of funds for such mitigation, and adequate legal assurance that all of such mitigation activities are carried out. 3) The use of trucks and heavy equipment will not adversely impact the safety and maintenance of public roads providing access to the site, or such impacts will be mitigated; 4) The proposed use will not adversely affect air quality or ground water or surface water quality; 5) The proposed use will not adversely affect the scenic quality of Rochester or the natural landscapes, environment, wildlife and wildlife habitat; or if such effects are anticipated to occur, the reclamation plan provides for adequate restoration of the site following completion of the excavation activity; 6) The activity will be compatible with existing development and development anticipated in the future, including other uses as shown in the Comprehensive Plan, including but not limited to: patterns of land use, recreation uses, existing or planned development, public facilities, open space resources and other natural resources; 7) The activity will not unduly affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties; 8) The site plan provides for adequate buffers and screening year-round from unsightly features of the excavation operation; 9) The reclamation plan provides for adequate and appropriate restoration and stabilization of cut and fill areas; 10) The excavation activity will not result in negative impacts on drainage patterns or stormwater management facilities; 11) The proposed activity will minimize impacts on sinkholes, wetlands and other natural features affecting ground water or surface water quality; 12) The intensity and the anticipated duration of the proposed excavation activity is appropriate for the size and location of the activity; 13) Permanent and interim erosion and sediment control plans have been approved by the City; 14) Surety has been provided that guarantees the site will be fully restored, after completion of the excavation activity, to a safe condition, and one that permits reuse of the site in a manner compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, neighborhood plans, the Land Use Plan and applicable City policies; 15) The proposed activity complies with the requirements of the adopted building code. 61,146 Standards for Conditional Uses: The zoning administrator, Commission, or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a conditional use unless one or more of the following findings with respect to the proposed development is made: 1) Provisions for vehicular loading, unloading, parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and onto adjacent public streets and ways will create hazards to safety, or will impose a significant burden upon public facilities. 2) The intensity, location, operation, or height of proposed buildings and structures will be detrimental to other private development in the neighborhood or will impose undue burdens on the sewers, sanitary and storm drains, water or similar public facilities. 3) The provision for on -site bufferyards and landscaping does not provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development. 4) The site plan fails to provide for the soil erosion and drainage problems that may be created by the development. 5) The provisions for exterior lighting create undue hazards to motorists traveling on adjacent public streets or are inadequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site or such provisions damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties. 6) The proposed development will create undue fire safety hazards by not providing adequate access to the site, or to the buildings on the site, for emergency vehicles. 7) In cases where a Phase I plan has been approved, there is a substantial change in the Phase 11 site plan from the approved Phase I site plan, such that the revised plans will not meet the standards provided by this paragraph. 8) The proposed conditional use does not comply with all the standards applying to permitted uses within the underlying zoning district, or with standards specifically applicable to the type of conditional use under consideration, or with specific ordinance standards dealing with matters such as signs which are part of the proposed development, and a variance to allow such deviation has not been secured by the applicant. 61.147 Conditions on Approval: In considering an application for a development permit to allow a Conditional Use, the designated hearing body shall consider and may impose modifications or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance with the criteria of Paragraph 61.146. 9 rpu we pfedye, we deAtvrr Phil Wheeler, AICP Planning Director 2122 Campus Drive SE Rochester, MN 55904 Subject: Willow Heights 5th GDP Impacts on RPU Well 31 RPU Staff have discussed the proposed development and potential impacts to Well 31. We also hired a consultant (geologist) for an outside opinion. Although there is some uncertainty, from an engineering, operations and water quality perspective our collective opinion is that the risk of water quality impairment is low. This is based on the assumption that up -gradient concentrations of nitrate are not grossly elevated. We do not have data on background concentrations of nitrate in the upper aquifer in the vicinity of Willow Heights. In the past Well 31 had nitrate concentrations that were detectable, but not significantly elevated. We will continue to monitor water quality and watch for changes in trends. Well 31 is an important water supply well. It was 9th and loth out of 24 high capacity wells in terms of pumpage and hours of operation (respectively) in 2005. It is likely that annual pumpage will go up in the future with the extensive commercial development underway in this part of the city. The well is also relatively efficient (kVNI000 gallons pumped). We don't know what impact blasting in the vicinity of a well would have on the yield or efficiency. It is possible that some maintenance or redevelopment could be required if the overlying formation is disturbed. We will continue to take monthly static water level (SWL) measurements to determine if there are any changes to the potentiometer surface. We are also considering installing instrumentation to gather continuous water level data (SWL and cone of depression). Developers should be aware that if a well is clearly impacted by development activity, and the well would subsequently have to be re -developed or replaced the City would have the right to seek damages from the responsible parry. If the decision is to proceed with an EAW, RPU requests that potential impacts to water quality, water quantity, and well operation be included in the scope. 4- b for Joseph S. Hensel Director of Field Services ROCHESTER PUBLIC UTILITIES 4000 East River Road NE Rochester, MN 55901-2813 Rochester Public Utilities, 4000 East River Road NE, Rochester, Minnesota 55906-2813 telephone 507-280-1540 facsimile 507-280-1542 r •••® �� rra x.,rr _ uag euv raasax�ou NV,d XIS I �o 121h vOfPs." - IV3a ME& Hi8CN 1,6 9/Z LU U) LJJ z LN I UMMM 'T ksm NO, low I'VE wi Lt: 0�3 0 at n maxr'•��..n x. vx>��umx �mv: —urol sp/rSp/CO / imss nax v3asawou DNIQVd0 1d37NOO [[[ suaws �eaarorx wss rmex�x ua Nvoia3wa HiaoN 'MI 28 TR $'� '.._ III �.�•� 6 G �- � ! ❑ `� `n: z s. gge o 3 LLt.0 " Lew' `, ti � `, ,•— La W¢1 �I 0< Jo- 00oz �Wm -cZmzgW> LU CO oil l- J-„-j'— $I ptl 4- _ '• �I� , r�h�T��/—v', vest NN y"„ .M. I Rj.T�T Ll 1 Q N1YON1S.lVi1191N Wi uIV3a NaWENNiaoN Id NOljV"V133U L a Ir nWpGWt ��� I REVIp �\//ISPD j''�,R } �� t �• �z �_ R_ �� Ea4°°''' 1 9 0 " a!t: e>txe .G SE.d�:'i3i ®N' ppS A 2 -`<•�.-_. — ,� .,j`— d 5 i iS33 NIS B55e�i$ W Y Y S x g +_.i 1 - \ '�>_ti -' � �j �1 4 tom.. �- �- e'S"_. � • � I I I r jr -Z � � ��✓ `�---,.� jetj? ����(`] 4, �= `'�. r _ I , �r! � / "� ;`- _ ' �� �\. I IIII I . �� I11�1 ,, 'fl �'-.' • � i o t Rnry w � .uemmT "u' "mv - � .- _, russ wr Y3asasuux runav Ls.lvan��H uxs h �10N pNtl Sl[Y13p 5�e [0 M173tl pNY pNlptltlp n559505i rrn r�..r n 14 •.r�......s .- - urea MUM�uaoN rn�e,. ��116v- n���r Sri rnr�rr..V SItlISNyI ED f�f/ irrr7 ri.'i FW En p CO e 4 ¢n W Y$pk' `��ggLm�6:2 G 3 O �3bep �k MR` b H �. $.Si409 �8 gs ":ft �Q5pII �xp Y? LO W e �98 l; Kg7: a 3x 2 am a P! 82 as Lu 3e;m I y�$�$� UR i;= � -a 3 i :€ ie3i hp 3 ? M E3 s ? gg -t• ea a 5 i� ��� � r Revised Project Narrative Substantial Land Alteration Permit Willow Heights 51h Addition - Rochester, MN (Formerly Proposed as Creekview Estates) Prepared By: RLK Incorporated March 15, 2006 For Substantial Land Alteration Permit For Review Concurrently with the Preliminary Plat Purpose This request for concurrent review of a substantial land alteration permit with the preliminary plat has been prepared for the Willow Heights 5th Addition (formerly proposed as Creek View Estates project) in accordance with Section 62.1105 of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance. The project site is an undeveloped f39-acre parcel located on the north side of 40'h Street SW, between 40" Street and Willow Court. Revised applications for a General Development Plan (GDP) and land subdivision permit/ preliminary Plat are being submitted concurrently with this request. It is anticipated that the applications will be heard before the Planning Commission on April 26, 2006. The proposed grading activities constitute a substantial land alteration as defined by the Zoning Ordinance due to the amount of excavation and grading required to provide fill material for the adjacent 401h Street improvements, as well as to construct acceptable slopes on the proposed public roadways that will access 40`h Street and 9°i Avenue as shown on the preliminary plat documents. The project proposes to extend the public streets from an existing residential district to a comparable residential subdivision and to grade an area suitable for the proposed public park. The site has design challenges imposed by the natural slopes and a difference in elevations of the surrounding properties of over 150 vertical feet. A change in elevation of over ten feet will be required over approximately 50% of the project area in order to provide acceptable public road slopes and the park. As required, material will be moved across 40" Street for crushing within the Willow Creek Commons project area. A Conditional Use Permit was obtained for substantial land alteration and quarry activities for the crushing operations on the Willow Creek Commons site. The hauling will be coordinated with the 40'h Street improvements contractor. As required by the Land Development Manual for the City of Rochester, the project will meet the requirements of Section 62.1105 of the Code as described below: 1) The activity will not result in a danger to life or property due to (1) steep or unstable slopes, (2) unsafe access to the property. (3) excessive traffic, or (4) proximity to existing or planned residential areas, parks and roadwa.vs; Excavation activities will incorporate safety measures as required. Final plan design will meet slope and stability requirements per Code and will be consistent with the existing character of the neighborhood and Project Narrative —Application for Substantial Land Alteration In Conjunction with a Preliminary Plat Willow Heights 5"' Addition Revised March 15, 2006 RLK Incorporated Project No. 2005-686-M Page 1 of 8 zonine district. The majority of the construction access will be off of 40'" Street, including all hauling. Access will be coordinated with the 40"' Street improvements contractor. 2) 1'isual, noise, duet, and/or excessive on- or off -site environmental impacts rnt public parks, roadways and residential areas can be adequately mitigated by the Applicant and o f dlr detailed plan is submitted by the .applicant to demonstrate the mitigation methods to be used, the cost qJ such mitigation, the source oJfunds for such mitigation, and adequate legal assurance that all grsuch mitigation activities are carried out: Blasting will be completed in accordance with all regulations. All vehicles will be properly muffled. Erosion control measures are identified on the grading plan. The contractor will monitor the condition of off -site roadways on a daily basis and cleantremove any dirt from the paved surfaces caused by project traffic. Final measures will be proposed with the grading permit plans to be submitted for approval. With the proposed erosion control and sedimentation measures, there are no other off -site impacts anticipated due to the construction. 3) The use of trucks and heavy equipment will not adversely impact the safety and maintenance ofpublic roads providing access to the site, or such impacts will be mitigated; The contractor will monitor the condition of off-site'roadways on a daily basis and clean/remove any dirt from the paved surfaces caused by project traffic. 4) The proposed use will not adversely affect air quality or ground water or surface water quality; With the proposed erosion control and sedimentation measures, groundwater and surface water quality will not be adversely affected. There will be no impacts to air quality. S) The proposed use will not adversely affect the scenic quality of Rochester or the natural landscapes, environment, wildlife and wildlife habitat; or ifsuch effects are anticipated to occur, the reclamation plan provides for adequate restoration of the site following completion of the excavation activity; The project proposes to maintain the naturally sloped character of the site and area. The preliminary plat plans identify the roadway, park and grading improvements that will be constructed following the excavation. The reclamation plan includes tree plantings as required by Code. 6) The activity will be compatible with existing development and development anticipated in the future, including other uses as shown in the Comprehensive Plan, including but not limited to: patterns of land use, recreational uses, existing orplanned development, public facilities, open space resources and other natural resources; Following the excavation activity, the project will accommodate a single family residential development that is in conformance with all existing R-I zoning district requirements, and comparable to the adjacent residential developments. 7) The activity will not unduly affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties; Excavation activities will be completed in accordance with all regulations. The proposed development is comparable to the adjacent developments. Project Narrative —Application for Substantial Land Alteration In Conjunction with a Preliminary Plat Willow Heights Sth Addition Revised March 15, 2006 RLK Incorporated Project No. 2005-686-M Page 2 of 8 C; � Y� 8) The site plan provides.for adequate buffers and screening verrr-round from unsightiv,features of the excavation operation: The project will be minimally visible from the west and north sides of the property due to the elevation difference of the graded property. 40 Street is anticipated to be under construction during the excavation of this project; the property on the south side of 40" Street is undeveloped and owned by the Applicant. The existing residential lots along the east side of the project will be screened from the project by tree stands. 9) The reclamation plan providesforadequate and appropriate restoration and stabilization of cut and fill areas, - The proposed reclamation plan includes restoration and stabilization of the cut and fill areas to provide for public roadways, a public park and single family residential lots in character with the neighborhood. Appropriate erosion control measures are proposed. 10) The excavation activity will not result in negative impacts on drainagepatierns or stormwater management facilities; A preliminary drainage study has been completed that identifies proposed stormwater management facilities that will address surface water quality and will encourage infiltration for groundwater recharge. Stormwater runoff currently being routed across the site from the adjacent residential neighborhoods will be routed through the project in a manner that will not negatively impact the existing drainage patterns or stormwater management facilities. 11) The proposed activity will minimize impacts on sinkholes, wetlands and other natural features affecting ground water or surface water quality; There are no anticipated sinkholes. Minimal wetland impacts are proposed that will be mitigated as required by regulations. A preliminary drainage study has been completed that identifies proposed stormwater management facilities that will address surface water quality and will encourage infiltration for groundwater recharge. 12). The intensity and the anticipated duration of the proposed excavation activity is appropriatefor the size and location of the activity; The duration of the excavation will be coordinated with the schedule of the adjacent 401h Street construction project, as needed to provide fill material from this site. 13) Permanent and interim erosion and sediment control plans have been approved by the City; Preliminary erosion control plans have been submitted with the preliminary plat documents for concurrent review. Prior to excavation, final plans will be submitted for approval for a grading permit. 14) Surety has been provided that guarantees the site will be fully restored, after completion of the excavation activity, to a safe condition, and one that permits reuse of the site in a manner compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, neighborhood plans, the Land Use Plan and applicable Citypolicies. The project will result in a residential use that is consistent with existing R-1 zoning district regulations and comparable to the adjacent neighborhoods. Project Narrative —Application for Substantial Land Alteration In Conjunction with a Preliminary Plat Willow Heights S'h Addition Revised March 15, 2006 RLK Incorporated Project No. 2005-686-M Page 3 of 8 1 O 15) The proposed aciirin. complies with the requirements Of the adopted building coda. Buildine plans will be submitted for permit upon site plan approval that will meet the building code requirements. Proposed Excavation Activities The following excavation activities are proposed on the project site: Removal of earth from the site between 10,000 cubic yards and 20,000 cubic yards per gross acre, involving a change in pre-existing grades of 10 or more vertical feet (substantial land alteration). Disturbed Area The project will disturb approximately 39 acres. The applicant is North American Realty, Franklin P. Kottschade, President. Amount of Material to be Moved Approximately 400,000 to 500,000 cubic yards of material will be moved as a part of the Creek View residential development. Assessment of Existing/Pre-Alteration Conditions Information required by Section 62.1106, Paragraph 2, is included on the plans and supplemented with the following. Existing Zoning: R-1, Mixed Single Family Residential District Existing Site Use: The site is partially wooded with sloping topography and three small potential wetland areas. The site is currently undeveloped, with off -site drainage flows being routed from the adjacent developed areas down the slopes across the site. Soil Types: See attached geotechnical report (previously submitted) Roadway Conditions: 40th Street adjacent to the site is currently under construction as part of the TH 63 improvement project by MnDOT. For the most part, hauling of material will occur directly onto the 40'h Street construction project to the south. Excess material may also be utilized on the Willow Creek Commons property south of 40'h Street, including mining pond fill Hauling will be coordinated among the associated contractors. Water Wells: There are no known water wells on the site. The Minnesota Department of Health has been contacted regarding any other wells within'/z mile of the property. Floodplain: There are no 100-year flood fringe, floodway or shoreland districts within the project area. Wetlands: A preliminary wetland delineation has been completed on the site; three small potential wetlands have been identified. After start of the 2006 growing season, the delineation will be reviewed with the Local Project Narrative —Application for Substantial Land Alteration In Conjunction with a Preliminary Plat Willow Heights Sth Addition Revised March 15, 2006 RLK Incorporated Project No. 2005-686-M Page 4 of 8 a4j Government Unit (LGU) for approval. Proposed wetland impacts will be mitigated with off -site credits as approved with future permitting. Utilities: A public sanitary sewer trunk line and public watermain are located on the site adjacent to the east boundary. within the existing Willow Court SW right of way. The project proposes to sen a the proposed lots from connections to the sanitary sewer in Willow Court SW. The lower proposed lots will be served by the connection to the public water main in Willow Court. Public water main and sanitary sewer are located in the existing 9°i Avenue SW right of way. This sanitary sewer is too shallow to serve the development: the water main will be extended to serve the upper lots. To serve the western portion of the lower cul de sac, a sanitary sewer trunk will be installed in the proposed 40ih Street right of way along the southern boundary, from the existing manhole at the intersection of 40'h Street and Willow Court SW. Traffic: A traffic analysis was previously prepared for MnDOT for the design of the TH 631401h Street improvements that included this parcel and current zoning_ Adjacent Land Use: The property is bounded to the north, east and west by existing residential development which is zoned R-1. The southern boundary is 40 Street SW which is currently being improved under a MnDOT contract. Grading and Drainage The applicant/developer proposes to excavate approximately 400,000 to 500,000 cubic yards of material and move a portion of it to the 40'h Street improvements project currently under contract by MnDOT, while rough grading the site for ultimate development in accordance with the preliminary plat design. Excess material may also be utilized on the Willow Creek Commons project south of 40t' Street. The Grading Plan identifies approximate limits and proposed contours for the project. Resulting slopes will be stabilized as the project progresses in accordance with City requirements. Trucking of the material will most likely not require travel outside the limits of the two sites; haul routes on the public roadway system will be identified as needed. The project grading is expected to be concurrent with construction of the 40`h Street project. Grading of the site will occur in conjunction with the 40'h Street construction during the summer of 2006. The majority of the project will be graded within 24 months subject to coordination with the completion of the MnDOT 40'h Street project. A waiver will be requested from the City Engineer during final plat and grading plan review, for slopes steeper than 3:1, due to 2:1 slopes resulting after grading in the subsurface rock. Preliminary geotechnical investigation of the existing rock in the vicinity of the project indicate that the rock has adequate stability for 2:1 slopes. Drainage for the impervious areas of the site will be routed to infiltration areas that will recharge the water table. Temporary sedimentation ponds will be provided to accommodate runoff during the proposed grading operations. Final design will be completed after approval of the preliminary grading and drainage design that is being considered with the preliminary plat application. Drainage design has been completed in accordance with the City of Rochester standards. Off site flows will be routed through the development and into the existing pond area located in the low area along the west property boundary or directly into the ditch that outlets the pond. The majority of the site runoff will be routed to the south Project Narrative —Application for Substantial Land Alteration In Conjunction with a Preliminary Plat Willow Heights 5'h Addition Rev&edMarch 15, 2006 RLK Incorporated Project No. 2005-686-M Page 5 of 8 i and routed beneath 40ib Street via culverts into infiltration basins constructed on the south side of the road on property owned by the Applicant. The site ultimately discharges into Willow Creek. Temporary sedimentation treatment during excavation and for the graded site will be provided in temporary basins shown on the substantial land alteration plans: the ponds will be graded in the initial stages of the earthwork activities. Swales will be graded as required to direct the site runoff into the ponds for sediment removal during the time period prior to storm sewer construction. Other erosion and sediment control measures will be implemented including typical measures as illustrated on the grading plan. Operations Plan per Section 61.140 The site plan illustrates the proposed project area, street layout and a potential stockpile location. Hours of operation shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. through 10:00 p.m., as allowed by City Code. The grading plan identifies approximate limits of the area that will have a vertical change in elevation greater than ten feet, and possible blasting limits. A grading permit application will be submitted after approval of this application. The contractor shall stabilize the graded site through respreading topsoil and seeding. The proposed and existing ponds will provide sediment removal as required until final roadway and utility improvements are completed and homes are constructed on the site. Vegetation will be removed by typical clearing methods and disposed of by the contractor in a lawful manner. The Contractor will be responsible for implementation of dust and noise control plans. Dust control measures include watering of on -site haul roads. Noise control measures include operational mufflers on equipment to meet state and local noise ordinance requirements. Limited blasting may be required on an "as -needed" basis for excavation of the rock material in the portions of the project area as shown on the grading plan. If required, a signage plan for construction activities will be submitted as part of the grading permit application. Stormwater runoff, orosion and sedimentation control for the rough graded site are identified on the Grading Plan. Final drainage and erosion control improvements will be designed with the final plat application upon preliminary plat approval. Due to the proximity of existing residential development to the project area, site fencing and/or additional security measures will be implemented including a six-foot high security fence around any potential blasting area as required. Anticipated construction equipment includes backhoes, dozers, front-end loaders, dump trucks, scrapers, rubber tired rollers, and other construction equipment as required for completion of the project. The following sequence of progression is proposed: • Install erosion control measures and excavate ponds; 1 Project Narrative —Application for Substantial Land Alteration In Conjunction with a Preliminary Plat Willow Heights 5'h Addition ReuisedMarch 15, 2006 RLK Incorporated Project No. 20OS-686-M Page 6 of 8 J Mor • Clear site within current excavation phase limits: • Strip topsoil and stockpile; • Cut material and process/screen; Truck and scraper material to fill area: Grade and compact engineered fill; • Respread topsoil and seed area within 7 days of completion of earthwork activities; • Adjust erosion control fencing and other measures after turf has been established. Lighiine is not anticipated to be required Current plans may include off -site hauling of material to the adjacent 40" Street SW project and/or to the Willow Creek Commons project on the south side of 40"' Street SW. All hauling coordination will be done between the associated contractors. With the proposed erosion control and sedimentation measures, there are no other off -site impacts anticipated due to the construction. The contractor will monitor the condition of off -site roadways on a daily basis and clean/remove any dirt from the paved surfaces caused by project traffic. The project will require water for use in dust control; water will be obtained from the existing pond on the south side of 401h Street. No electric, sanitary or communications utilities are anticipated to be required. Portable sanitary facilities will be provided. As required, generators will be used to power equipment. The nearest police station is located at 3" Avenue and 4'h Street SE. The nearest fire station is located at 6" Street and South Broadway. Site access will be available via 40'h Street and TH 63. Reclamation Plan and Report Requirements for reclamation are identified on the Grading and Reclamation Plan and in the above text. Permanent landscape and tree requirements are calculated based on the requirement of 8 deciduous and 8 coniferous trees per disturbed acre of area that will result in a change in elevation of greater than 10 feet, which includes approximately 15 acres of the f39-acre project area. Trees will be planted within the project area and/or on properties in the vicinity of the project that are owned by the Applicant/ Developer. Calculations result in a total 240 trees required as follows: 15 acres times 8 trees = 120 deciduous trees 15 acres times 8 trees = 120 coniferous trees Actual locations of the required trees will be determined with the final platting stage of project development as permitted. All erosion control, turf establishment and drainage facilities as required by the phased development and all applicable City requirements will be provided. Attachments Soil Borings (previously submitted) Project Narrative —Application for Substantial Land Alteration In Conjunction with a Preliminary Plat Willow Heiahts 5 h Addition Revised March 15, 2006 RLK Incorporated Project No. 2005-686-M Page 7 of 8 �L50 Project Team Applicant/ Developer North American Realty 3800 Highway 52 North Rochester, MN 55901 Frank Kottschade, President Civil Engineer/Landscape Architect RLK Incorporated 6110 Blue Circle Drive, Suite 100 Minnetonka, MN 55343 Phone 507-287-0909 Fax 507-288-0658 Email faknar@deskmedia.com Phone 952-933-0972 Fax 952-933-1153 Michele Caron, P.E., Project Manager/Sr- Prof. EngineerEmail mcaron flkinccom Eric Johnson, ASLA, Senior Landscape Architect Email jdict ichArlkinc.com GAWillow Creek Cononom LLP2005-686-M`_Conmspondemc\Revised SLA 1-27-061Revised Narrative-subsian land all O1-27-06.doc Project Narrative —Application for Substantial Land Alteration In Conjunction with a Preliminary Plat Willow Heights 5r^ Addition Revised March 15, 2006 RLK Incorporated Project No. 2005-686-M Pace 8 of 8