Recording in progress. Please rise if you're able for the, pledge of allegiance. I pledge and pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Everybody for being here. If, you don't have a seat, I believe our, city clerk's office is setting up a few chairs at the, the screen outside. If you want to sit out there and not be in the crowded room,
feel free. So, we start every city council meeting, with our open comment period. This is an opportunity for anyone from the public to speak on items that we will not be taking public testimony during public hearings later in the agenda. Each person has up to two minutes to speak for a total of twenty minutes. I will keep I will be keeping track of time through a few methods. One, the clock up here, the red clock, as well as the stoplight here.
So please know I may need to cut you off, because of the limited time. I'd also request that each speaker be concise to allow more time for people to speak during the designated time. Participants are also encouraged to limit comments generally to topics that are within the scope and jurisdiction of the Council's ability to affect policy. Council members and staff do not respond directly to your comments during public comment but will instead follow-up on any specific requests separately. If you have materials to share with the council,
you may give them to the city clerk over here to distribute. And at this point, you will be invited up to speak in, order of the public comment sheet. And our first speaker is Toby h. Please state your name, and you have two minutes. Press a button until it turns green. Got it. Okay. My name is Toby. I am a Rochester resident, a member of Workers Strike Back, and I work with folks struggling with drug addiction. I am here today in solidarity with AFSCME Local three nineteen, who are fighting unjust budget cuts to library services and many other crucial services that
working and poor people depend on. I find it utterly despicable that the Democrats and Republicans on the Rochester City Council will decide to cut spending on public services, resulting in the layoffs of part time library workers, and cuts to many services that the hardworking people of Rochester rely on. Even further, the Minnesota state legislature are getting ready to carry out their own anti worker attacks at the state level, proposing to cut nearly $4,000,000,000 from the state budget over the next few years. This is disgraceful, and the city council should join us in fighting for the state to tax the
rich. I'm also here to stand in solidarity with everyone fighting the demolition of historic downtown buildings, as well as the anti racist protesters who have rallied to demand justice for the five year old child that was recently targeted by racist racist vitriol. We know that cuts to public services and austerity budgets disproportionately fall on Black and Brown people, immigrants, and trans people. We also know that the regressive increase in property taxes being proposed also negatively impacts working and middle class families. As working people in Rochester, we reject all of this.
The real answer to these budget crises is for working people to reject budget cuts and austerity, reject regressive taxation, and to fight to win taxes on the rich. This is what socialist city council member, Shama Sawant, and the working people of Seattle did when they built the movement in their city to win the Amazon tax on big business to fund affordable housing. The Amazon tax campaign was successful because of a fighting strategy by Shama city council office. That meant refusing to make backdoor deals with Democrats or big business, but instead fighting them and forcing them to concede through the power of a mass
movement of thousands of working people and union members. Any elected official who votes for these unjust cuts and then should be thrown out of office. No budget cuts, no layoffs, tax the rich. Thank you. Please, we wanna respect all speakers and, decorum in the chamber. So please, no applause. That just takes time away from other speakers. Next up is Heather Dillon. Hello, city council. I'm a member of Local three nineteen AFSCME as well. The Rochester Public Library, I don't need to remind everyone, that it is a cornerstone of our community and provides vital resources and services for
all residents. I want to address a pressing issue, a recent budget projection that indicated we are currently over our part time staffing budget. This, unfortunately, puts our dedicated part time staff, some of whom are here with me tonight and who have asked me to speak on their behalf, at immediate risk of reduced hours and potential layoffs. There are over 39 individuals that are just not employees to us. They're backbone of our daily operations. They ensure access to resources for everyone,
especially our most vulnerable populations, your constituents. Losing their contributions would significantly disrupt services, including the quality of lives for thousands. We believe that the long term costs of losing their expertise, having to eventually rehire and retrain, and the erosion of community trust far outweigh any perceived short term budget savings. We're committed to finding solutions to avoid these outcomes. I understand budget constraints affect various city departments and all city departments, so I'm not only speaking for the library, but for parks and rec and other part time staff as well.
If sustainability is a key consideration, I urge us to prioritize sustaining the skilled workforce that directly supports library operations. This also aligns with the city's core value of customer focus and our mission to enrich our community's future. Excuse me. We are respectfully requesting your immediate attention, advocacy, and alliance in addressing the current part time budget constraints across all city departments with a specific focus on finding solutions that preserve our vital part time library staff and services they provide.
Thank you. Thank you. Next up is David Monbaum. You may have mispronounced your last name. Am I good? Yes. Oh, gotcha. So my name is David Montequin. I am a member of AFSCME Local three nineteen. It is utterly despicable that Democrats and Republicans on this city council are getting ready to carry out massive cuts to the library and other essential public services and layoffs and attacks on public sector workers. Instead of passing an austerity budget and putting the burden on working and poor people
and on public sector unions and workers, the city council should be taxing the rich to fully fund our community's needs. Some of these city council Democrats have said that the state law does not give them the right to tax the rich. This is nothing but an abdication of their duty as elected representatives, and it is unacceptable. If they had any actual commitment towards working and poor people, they would be joining us in demanding that the state legislator tax the rich to fully fund cities throughout the state. But none of this should be a surprise to working people.
Whether in the city council or in the state legislator, both Democrats and Republicans are both parties that represent the rich, not working people. That's why I'm also a member of Workers' Strike Back, a national organization fighting for universal public health care, a $25 an hour minimum wage, and good union jobs for all, and also calling for an end to all US military funding to Israel. Workers' Strike Back was cofounded by socialist city council member in Seattle, Shama Sawant. Shama's office led the way to win the first ever major $15 an hour minimum
wage, a wage that is now $20 and 76 an hour, the nation's highest. Shama's office also won the historic Amazon tax on big business to fund affordable housing. But Shama's office did not do this, by trying to make deals with the Democrats. In In fact, the Democratic Party politicians opposed every single one of these demands despite the progressive rhetoric from some of them. Seattle's Workers Workers won only because they understood they needed to fight back. I urge all working and young people to join Workers' Strike Back solidarity.
Thank you. Next up is Adam Busby. Good evening, city council, council president, mayor. Good to see you. My main reason for being here today is to stand oh, Adam Busby representing ATU Local ten o five. My main reason for being here today is, to stand in solidarity with my brothers and sisters that asked me, and, that was my main reason, for coming today. However, I feel the need to publicly bring your attention to all the missed routes that are being missed. Just one day last week,
we had 20 routes missed. This is due to drivers not wanting to work overtime because of the toxic environment and the micromanaging and the microscopic, video viewing that our managers are doing. So they don't wanna pick up any extra overtime. We've also had a tremendous amount of people, leave for our competitors in town. It's inexcusable. We hear a lot of people, when they're running for office, politicians talk progressive. They talk supporting labor unions. They talk all this. I've I've heard, yeah, we,
you know, we we support, labor. However, most of the time, it's all hat and no cattle. City council has a stand chance to stand with labor and with the passengers. 20 rides along. We missed five today. How many people didn't get to work? How many people didn't get to their dentist appointments? How many people didn't get to dialysis? How many people, didn't make it grocery shopping to feed their children? It it's inexcusable. You all have a contract with Transdev. They should be filling their service, but they're not. There's a way to fix this problem.
If if, higher management would work with me, I'm willing to work with them. There is a solution. They just have to be willing to work together with labor. Thank you. Next up is Ryan Stack. So, my name is Ryan, and I, am in solidarity with all my brothers and sisters behind me, and also with our Rochester public transit drivers. As a user of the service, of both Zipse and Rochester public transit, the service sucks. Transdev and, SunTransit have missed, rides that I have made and called for.
In fact, actually, I called for a ride, to reserve for a ride for the May Day rally, well, an hour in advance. And the, Transdev, reps decided to send the ride a day early. And I told them, no. I don't need the day on the ride on Wednesday. I need the ride on Thursday, and the ride number showed up on Thursday. And so, I think it's time that we need to look at another, operator because the current management is just not cutting it anymore. Thank you. Next up is Veronica S.
Hello. My name is Veronica, and I just moved here three months ago. And I am wondering why these budget cuts are actually happening. Where does this money go? What does it serve? And, honestly, why are we putting more funding towards the police when these services could help me, marginalized communities, and all of Rochester instead? It's it doesn't make sense to me. It also is lining the pockets of the already rich. They do not need more money. It can go to help all of Rochester instead.
That's all I got. Thank you. Next up is Ruth Doyle. Hello. My name is Ruth Poole. I'm a bus rider. I would like to I'm here to inform the city council of some facts concerning the the bus service and the plans for the the link rapid transit program. Two years ago, Rochester purchased began purchasing four electric buses to run on this LINC program. Of those four, one of those buses is completely out of commission and has been for for a couple of months because nobody can figure out what's wrong with it.
One of those buses had axles replaced. One of those buses had batteries replaced. This is an electric bus. It relies on batteries. These buses are frequently in the shop being repaired for problems that are not related to normal wear and tear. The proposed rapid charging system, en route charging system, if you look at the new flyer web site, they say that they can charge a bus. It takes six minutes to charge a bus for an hour and a half of service. The link program is supposed to run buses service every five minutes.
The entire route that this link program goes, the current bus that runs that route, runs in thirteen minutes. That leaves only six minutes total for all of the stops in between. You're not gonna charge a bus on that route. The other thing I would like to draw your attention to is whoever thought that this was a good format for a bus schedule ought to be fired. Nobody uses paper highway maps anymore. They're awkward. They're inconvenient. I am glad I'm not visually impaired because the four eleven route, the times table on there is in three point font.
In order to print this in large print, it would have to be 10 feet wide. I worked it out. And the one the online version of the schedule is just a giant PDF of that. And you have to scroll through it and zoom in. Pay attention. Do your homework. Do the math. It's not rocket science. Please make good use of our savings money. Next up is Maui Dennis. Hello. I am Molly Dennis, a resident of Rochester for many years. I am just, wanna echo all the amazing speakers who talk about justice,
equity, and safety. I'm gonna add to that a safety issue. I sent all the city council a 14 page email today, so I do not have to speak very long because it has been sent to you, as well as the Star Tribune and Rochester School District. So my my speech will be a little bit short. Please read the email. I ask every word of it. It's incredibly important. I'm speaking on more right now on behalf, not just of the pedestrian cycle children's safety when it comes to going to schools,
but also the accountability of policymakers to be able to follow like, have their staff have accountability for what they have, expressed our residents' needs. When I was a council member on the dais, there was talk about the, intersection between Elton Hills and Broadway being done after school let out. And anyone who's part of Ward 6 or Ward 5 or anyone who has kids who go to, the, middle school, at, Kellogg knows that that is now not held through. We have the the,
construction happening. There is huge billows of smoke. There is kids walking through this construction. There is incredible amounts of safety issues when this should have been delayed and was told twice on the dais by city staff that it was going to be. So I feel that we need to make sure that that city staff, the executive branch of government does not oversee and silence the legislative branch. That is a violation of, powers when it comes to both the state and federal constitution. I believe that we need to make sure that all our citizens,
specifically those who are the most vulnerable, have safety. And when we look at the job of the city, not just for liability so we don't get sued, but for the basic integrity and and, you know, accountability of making sure that residents have a safe ability to get to school and get to school. And I hope that you read this email and, and follow through with what was promised. Thank you. Our final speaker is Doris Amundsen. Good evening. I'm Doris Amundson, and I live at 813 Sixth Street Southeast. And I've lived there for fifty six years by Bear Creek Bridge.
I'm here on behalf of the residents in Svalley Park neighborhood who feel as I do to share with you our concerns and opposition to several proposed plans on the, conceptual design that you will be hearing about a little bit later tonight. I'm concerned about the area of the street, which is affected by the bridge that is being built over the Zumbro. The sidewalk on the north side of Sixth Street Southeast from Third Avenue to Ninth
Avenue passing by Riverside School could become a multipurpose eight foot trail, which would dead end or bottleneck at the Bear Creek Bridge and beyond to Fifteenth Avenue. This eight foot trail would allow fast moving e bikes, line scooters, motorcy small motorcycles, roller blades in connection with pedestrians, dog walkers, children walking and riding bicycles to Riverside School, wheelchairs. This combination certainly does not make for a safe experience for all who use this
space. And extending this sidewalk to eight feet brings you to within one or two inches of 12 beautiful trees and 18 utility poles. Again, safety is involved here where there are elements being this close to a path. The other concern is the mid roundabout at Eighth Avenue and Sixth Street. 10 Seconds. I ask you to I I ask you then tonight to look carefully at this presentation that mister Brown will be giving you on the updated status on this and
ask questions. Not everything is in this plan that you see here. So think think quickly and and look at it very carefully. Thank you, Ms. Amundson. That concludes our public comment period. And, thank you. We will now turn to Clark Keith. Oh, I'm sorry. Becca. I'm sorry. Becca Anclin. Hi. My name is Becca. I'm a person who has taken Rochester Public Transit and also ZIPS.
Over the years, Rochester Public Transit and, just a few years ago, Zips have been down. They have not been good. Actually, just a few years ago, I had to, switch workplaces because Zips was late every single time I worked. Going to work, not taking me home, My managers, Joey Smith, he had to come and bring me to work. I my hair was falling out because Zips was not helpful.
They were late. I like, almost every single time, I had to wait an hour. I I if I were was working at Walmart South, I would have been fired, like, within a week. That is despicable, and we need to hold up because the passing passengers need to have groceries just like my colleague Adam. Groceries, going to dentists, going to doctor's appointments. Like, how can we be late to our doctor appointments?
And Rochester Public Transit is an amazing company. I have been a passenger of theirs. I have known Adam since our early days. They helped me get to point a and b. They I was planning on using them for the May Day rally. Well, I couldn't. I had to use Lyft because they were over ten minutes late. That is not right. There were 20 missed bus routes on the May Day rally. Twenty.
That is insane. How would you feel if you you were in Ryan and mine's shoes? You would have been frustrated in standing up here and talking to the city council. Please listen to us. Help local small businesses, Leah, and so many others, and don't destroy buildings. Thank you. Thank you, and I apologize for missing you on the list. We will turn it over to Clerk Casel to call the roll. Good evening. Council Member Keane? Here. Council Member Miller?
Here. Council Member Wall? Here. Council Member Fredericks? Here. Council Member Palmer? Here. Council member Dohring? Here. Council president Schoebring? Here. Mayor Norton? Present. Next on our agenda is the city administrator's report. Administrator Zalms, please go ahead. Thank excuse me. Thank you, council president, mayor, members of the public. We always start this by recognizing our teammates, who, provide services to the community with respect, integrity, safety, and excellence in mind. And today, I just wanted to also note that they do that in in order to uplift Rochester's community vision,
which is a city that cares, where all people are treated with dignity and respect, where residents, employees, and visitors enjoy high quality of life, where businesses and industry thrive, and where the land and environment are renewed and sustained for the benefit of all. It is a welcome and diverse community. So I just wanna thank our teammates, based on some of the, things that Meryl will talk about a little bit later, that have happened in our community over the last few weeks. Really appreciate, how they, treat our community with care in trying to advance those aspirational goals that our community has for itself. With that, I do have just a couple of things, to let people know that they can get out and enjoy.
So Saturdays ten to 11AM, through October. We have Fresh Air Fitness happening at the Zumbro Riverfront in the Zumbro Market parking lot off of Broadway Avenue South. No registration required and free to attend, so, if that's something you're interested in, feel free to stop by. It's it's actually summer. It's got green out. So, we are welcoming people to take part in slow mow summer. It's a little bit different than the no mow May, so now we're saying just let your grass go a little bit longer but not too long and then mow when it's time to mow.
But that's something that's kicking off. You can get your sign at Parkton Recreation Office, which is just, inside City Hall in the rotunda. Also, in celebration of spring and summer, there is a seedling swap that's happening at Cook Park. That will be happening on May 17 from 10AM to noon. So if you want to find different things to grow in your yard or in your garden, please, stop by and you can be part of the seed exchange. And then, RPU is hosting a water tower and well house open house. So if you wanted to find out something about our water distribution center,
Friday, May 9, '2 to '6 pm, they are going to be hosting that at the mall at that water tower there. You can see it. It's a water tower, so if you see the water tower, head there. And you can take a look inside and, figure out how all of that works. We have a number of those across the system. Again, free, family friendly, just thanks to our teammates at RPU for providing that opportunity. That's all I have. Thank you. Next is the mayor's report. Mayor Norton, take it away. Will do. First, I'm going to address, the unfortunate, incident that happened on April 28 in one of our city parks. As has been widely,
made public, there were some, racial slurs and offensive language used in the park targeting a five year old child. There's no place for hate in Rochester. We condemn all forms of racism and discrimination. Our city parks must be places where every resident, every visitor, regardless of race, background or identity, feels safe, welcome and respected. We want our public spaces to be inclusive environments where everyone can come together to relax, enjoy and build connections with other people. The values of kindness and empathy,
respect for one another must guide every interaction. Whether you're a lifelong resident or visiting from another place, you deserve to be valued, included and comfortable in every park and community space across our city. The city remains firmly committed to ensuring that public spaces reflect these values of inclusion, dignity and community. We recognize that these spaces should be a place where people of all backgrounds come together to connect and form lasting relationships. Discrimination in any form will not be tolerated and we will continue working tirelessly to
ensure Rochester is a place where all individuals feel a sense of belonging. The Rochester Police Department has completed its investigation and following standard procedure, has referred the matter on to the city attorney's office for review. If necessary, the city attorney will work with the Olmsted County Attorney's Office to determine the appropriate next steps. This process is being handled with intention, care and urgency, and we ask for the community's continued patience as the legal review moves forward. We remain committed to deep sustained work that leads to meaningful and lasting change in
our community. We recognize the pain that this incident has caused, and I'm so sorry, for those the family that was affected and for the rest of the community who has felt this deeply, since then. So not just to those directly involved, but really for everyone. We hear and support those who have been impacted. The city is committed to doing the hard work of healing and change. There was an event this noon already. There was one this evening at 5PM at the park itself. There will be another event on Wednesday over at the,
Rochester Civic Theater. You'll be seeing more about that and you're welcome to attend any of these events. We will face these moments together as a community with honesty, with accountability and with action. Hate has no home here in Rochester and together we're going to make it an even better place than it is for everyone that lives here. So with that, I'm going to move on. I just want to acknowledge, how difficult this week has been for the council, for the city, the staff here, and for every community member,
and it goes without saying, for the family, that was affected by this. So, this is the time of year we have a lot of proclamations. I warned a couple of the council members in advance. I am going to, to read two of them. I will not read all of them, but this one is particularly, impactful with what we were just referring to. There's a group in town working on something called the five zero seven Experience. So the proclamation reads as follows: The five zero seven Experience has been locally developed as a step toward a better tomorrow and whereas,
the five zero seven experience is about restoring and renewing friendships and reestablishing positive and productive discussions with others in the community and whereas, the five zero seven experience will bring people together for intentional conversations to enhance relationships, therefore, be it resolved that I, Kim Norton, Mayor of the City Of Rochester, do hereby Now therefore be it resolved that I, Kim Norton, Mayor of the City Of Rochester, do hereby proclaim 05/07/2025 as the beginning of the five zero seven experience in our community to help celebrate positive and productive discussions that renew friendships and relationships.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and cause the corporate seal of the City Of Rochester to be affixed on this, I guess May. The May. My apologies. I also have a proclamation, about Rochester Bike Month. Can we bear with me for one more? Whereas, cycling is an important and healthy activity that encourages physical and mental health and fitness, promotes environmental sustainability, affordability and fosters a sense of community and whereas,
Viking provides Rochester residents and visitors with an enjoyable and environmentally friendly transportation option that reduces traffic congestion, air pollution and the city's carbon footprint and WHEREAS, Rochester is a city known for our care and dedication to outdoor access for people of all ages, backgrounds and ability levels and WHEREAS, Rochester is home to a world class network of trails and a growing network of protected and unprotected bikeways that provide residents and visitors with tremendous opportunities to explore the
natural and inherent beauty of our city and WHEREAS, Rochester's robust cycling community includes passionate cyclists, local organizations and businesses dedicated to promoting bike safety, education and advocacy and WHEREAS, a celebration of bike month in May encourages Rochester residents and visitors to embrace biking as a regular activity and recognize the benefits of cycling for health, recreation and transportation. And transportation. Therefore, be it resolved that I, Kim Norton, Mayor of the City Of Rochester,
do hereby proclaim the month of May as Rochester Bike Month in our city and I encourage all citizens to join in the celebration by cycling for fun, for health and sustainability and to support efforts that make Rochester a more bike friendly city. And witness whereof, I have here on two set of my hand and I signed this on the 05/01/2025. So, there must be some bikers in the room. I will just say I had another proclamation, which is quite long. I'm not going to read it, but I just it really does fit with a lot of, what we've been talking about,
which is understanding and accepting differences in the community, recognizing people, calling out those differences in a positive way. And so I do have a proclamation that I will post later this evening online for Jewish American Heritage Month. And as I was, looking at a quote recently, some of you might recognize this one: Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. That was Emma Lazarus, who is a Jewish poet, who wrote that. So, let us move forward in this community, more accepting and celebrating our differences.
Lastly, it was, Family Child Care Appreciation Month. I went over and joined some of the providers this weekend. It was a very busy weekend, I will not even begin to tell you what I did, but that was one of the nice events. So, if you have your child in child care, family child care in particular, please acknowledge the child care providers. They work hard, they're protecting and caring for our children, and they do it for far too little pay. Also this weekend was Fallen Firefighters Memorial. A couple of the city council members joined me over, at the Fire Station 1 in honor and recognition of those who've,
given their lives for in service to this community. And National Firefighters Day was May 4. It's also Natural Historic Preservation Month, and we'll be hearing some interesting issues this evening res that that will resonate with. It's a lot of historic preservation discussion going on. And the dome lights were, lit red for the firefighters and, will be marooned on May 20 for Historic Preservation Month. And I have a reminder well, actually, this is kind of an We've been talking a lot about the Statues for Equality,
we held an informational event to honor, a woman in the city's history. There's a lovely story behind hers, which I'm not going to get into. But right after we had that presentation last week, I received an email that the statue is actually complete and boxed ready for shipping to Rochester, which was a little bit of a surprise. I thought we had a couple more months to fundraise, but if anyone, is interested, we do have, an account over at the Rochester Area Foundation, where we're, we're taking donations. We're about halfway to where we need to be,
so hopefully, soon we'll be able to announce that we, have planned for that shipping and we will have it put in, it looks like, by fall. Hopefully, the parks can fit that in their busy fall season schedule. And lastly, and I'm skipping this one over, you guys, I usually bring you one topic from our RV 2,050, visioning exercise where we took community input. I spent the afternoon between meetings pulling it together. I did not get to the AI generated pairing it into the topics. I got it all printed on a sheet of paper for you,
but I didn't want to give that to you without having gone through and glumped things together so that it made more sense to you as you read the documents. So just know, I did do that work this afternoon. I will get it to you in the next day or two in your mailboxes, and it is on natural resources, and there's a lot of talk about our parks, a lot of talk about clean water, and a lot of talk about trees. But we'll have more about that in your mailboxes later this week. And that's all I have. Thank you, mayor. Next up is our order of agenda. Are there any changes to the order of the agenda?
Staff, council members, is there a motion to approve the order of the agenda? I'll move to approve the order. Moved by Council Member Keene. Second. Seconded by council member Miller. All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, say nay. Motion, carries. Moving on to our consent agenda. I have not received any pulled items. Is that correct? Are there any pulled items? If not, I'd invite a motion to approve the consent agenda in full. Move approval. Moved by, council member Miller. Second. Seconded by council member Doering.
Council member, well, go ahead. Since I'm one who often calls attention to, great deals of money that, we spend at a time, Would note that about $5,000,000 less than either the consultant or the city engineer estimates, reflected in two of the items, for tonight, which is great news for our city. Thanks for pointing that out, council member. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Motion passes. Moving on to our public hearings. We have five public hearings on our agenda this evening.
And before I begin, the public hearings, just a moment to clarify the process. Staff will introduce, the item, and then if there is an applicant or applicant represent representative, they will have ten minutes to discuss their application. Then, I will open the public hear hearing. Members of the public have up to five minutes each, but as I did with the open comment period, we encourage to keep your comments brief and concise, and, don't we discourage you from saying the same thing that other,
public hearing folks have said. And just as kinda to a preview, two of our, our public hearing, items tonight have nearly 30 speakers. So, being concise will be valued by all of us, in order to get home at a reasonable hour. So, after the public hearings, we will close the public hearing, and then the applicant will have five minutes to rebuttal. And then at that point, council members will have the opportunity to, ask questions of staff and the applicant,
and, and then we will, make a decision. And so with that, I am going to call on, mister Anthony Chieke to discuss item g one, which is a zoning map amendment by the City of Rochester. Thank you. Good evening, council president, Schoebring, mayor new Norton, Council Members. My name is Anthony Cheeky from community development. And before you is application CD2025Dash003ZC by the City of Rochester. The property is located generally within north the Northeast portion of the city between 40
First And 40 Fourth Street Northeast, West of Highway 63 North and Broadway Avenue North. The request is to change the zoning of the property of of the approximately 55.48 acre parcel from light industrial to special industrial in support of future development of the property. Staff are recommending approval of the zoning map amendment and for council to direct the city attorney to prepare an ordinance for first reading. And I am available for any questions. Thank you, mister Chiqui. At this point, I will open the public hearing. Is there anyone who wishes to be heard on this item?
Is there anyone who wishes to be heard on this item? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and invite, my colleagues to, with any questions that they may have. Seeing none, is there a motion on this item? I'll I'll make a two part motion. Number one, approving the zoning map, amended CD twenty twenty five-three z c by the city of Rochester to change the zoning district designation of approximately 55.5 acres and directing the city attorney to prepare an ordinance for first reading. Moved by, council member Keane. Is there a second?
Second. Seconded by council member Doring. Council member Keane, anything more to add? No. This looks really straightforward. It's always a little bit of an issue for me when the city is both the approving body and the petitioner. But I think in this case, the zoning makes sense, so I'm gonna support it. With that, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Motion passes. Moving on to G2, which is a major land subdivision by Build Wealth Minnesota, and this will be presented by Mr. Desmond McGill. Yes. Thank you, President Schoebring.
Mayor Norton, members of the council, good evening. My name is Desmond McGill with the Community Development Department. This is a request for a major land subdivision for property of 6.25 acres in size located in Southeast Rochester, having an R3 zoning designation. It's located just South of 8.5 Avenue Southeast and just East of Sixteenth Avenue Southeast. This subdivision includes 42 townhouse lots, eight attached single family homes,
one multifamily parcel for an intended 11 unit structure, a daycare parcel and then a common area lot that will be accommodating things such as private streets, utilities and stormwater management facilities. An HOA will be created for the maintenance of the private facilities such as the private streets and water retention facilities. The parcel is currently surrounded on all sides by existing residential development. And therefore, there won't be any through streets. Both, access points would be from Sixteenth Avenue SE.
Both the review team and also the Planning and Zoning Commission are recommending approval of this application. At their April 9 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval by a vote of seven to one, subject to two conditions of approval. That concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions the, council has after the public hearing. Thank you, Mr. Mickel. Is the applicant here? Please step forward, state your name, and you have ten minutes to discuss your application. Is the green light on there? Now it is. Okay. Perfect.
Mark Walsh with GQED Engineering representative of all of Build Wealth Minnesota. I won't take up your ten minutes. I'm essentially here to answer any questions. Build Wealth Minnesota specializes in getting people into their first homes so they can build wealth of of having homeownership. And so, we're working through some processes of, trying to come down to get the price of the house, reduced. It's kind of a separate item from this major land subdivision, but, essentially, the apartment building and daycare falls into the kind of overall plan of having a community that's, got everything in close proximity and, essentially kind of creates the neighborhoods and,
makes affordable housing, are for sale. These are not rental units except for the 11 unit apartment. The intent of the 11 unit apartment is essentially, a lot of times, to get people to the point that they can then qualify for purchasing a, for sale unit. So here to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. We'll call you back after the public hearing. Thank you. We have, one person who has signed up to speak on this item, Joanne Sandstorm, if you'd like to step forward. And you have five minutes. Good evening. Thank you for having us tonight. I live in the area where that development is proposed.
I did attend the initial level of these additional town homes. We have quite a high density of housing units in that area. We do appreciate law enforcement and the community resource, personnel. They've been great, covering our area, and we hope that that will continue realizing everyone wants this coverage. But with this, large concentration, we hope that law enforcement is available. The other, question was about the traffic access.
There's 28 And A Half Street, and there's only one way to get to 8 And A Half Street from that area. And it or goes to 8 And A Half Street, and that's a high traffic area. And where the stop sign is, we have quite a few accidents. And we did bring this up at the development meeting, and so they were aware of that. We also have an active bus route on 8 And A Half Street. And the other air the other outlet goes on to Marion Road.
I mean, there is another roundabout about Homestead Village. But that's also a high density traffic area. And I hope the traffic I hope the traffic flow has been taken into consideration. Will there be stop signs or something else placed for four way stops? But, we see this coming, and we hope that it does fit in. The other item I thought of is it's supposed to be affordable housing. When we asked about the association fees,
because it's going to be association fees. It was mentioned $50 You can't do that if you're gonna have a private road. Who's going to be paying for the snow removal? Who will be doing the, lawn care, will there be trees, etcetera, that needs taken care of. If it's $50, that's great. But I would hate to have homeowners that are new or say it's affordable, and all of a sudden, they're going, oh, we didn't take this into account in our savings program to afford a car or
a house. Those costs add up. I'm part of an HOA, so I realize people don't realize what is involved with being an HOA member. But we do appreciate, everything that's done, and thank you for listening to me. Thank you. This is a public hearing. Anyone else who wishes to be heard on this item, please step forward. Anyone else who wishes to be heard on this item, please step forward. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing and invite the applicant back up to address any, issues.
Again, Mark Welch. The, traffic, that was something that was actually sent through through the TIS waiver. It was below the threshold, understanding there's a lot of traffic out there already, but it's a site that, at some point is gonna get developed, whether it's 54 sale units plus the apartment or some other type of, it'd probably be a higher density apartment if it was developed a different way. But, so I don't really have anything to add to the traffic portion or the law enforcement. When we were talking about the homeowners association, the $50, we were talking more of, like, the actual cost for the maintenance of, snow removal and grass, not including insurance and other things that would be required for the building.
So, $50 across 50 units plus the day care comes out to about 36,000 a year, which would cover the on-site maintenance that does not include insurance or other, the kitty that has to go in for future replacement in the streets. So those will all be calculated Thank you. Any questions for the applicant at this time? You can be seated. Any questions for staff? Council member Keane? Go ahead. Again, just clarification. I think you said 8 And A Half Avenue. It's actually 8 And A Half Street and Sixteenth Avenue Southeast? 8 And A Half, Street. Correct. I apologize for that here. And just to an assessment,
I see the the stormwater management is more centralized to the east side of the development. Is that consistent with the topography there or it's usually on the edges and this one is not? Is there any comments you can make? I believe it is because of the topography of the site. Probably wouldn't wanna divert that to Public Works or the applicant that could speak better to it, but, I believe it does, it slopes in that direction. Okay. I I think I'll just leave it because I think there is one of the conditions deals with that. So I'll leave it be. Thank you. Any further questions?
Is there a motion on this item? Council member, Palmer. I'll make a, I'll make a motion to, approve, the major land subdivision number CD 2020 Five-three, PLAT with its two conditions. Moved by Councilmember Palmer. Is there seconded by Councilmember Fredericks? Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Passes. Moving on to, G3, which is a utility easement vacation by Chick fil A. And this will be presented by mister Cheeky again.
Thank you, council president Schoebring, mayor Norton, council members. Again, Anthony Cheeky, community development. And before you is CD2025Dash004VAC by Chick fil A Inc. The property is located at 300 Seventeenth Avenue Northwest, and the request is to vacate both an existing 15 foot wide 15 foot wide water main easement and an existing 10 foot wide public utility easement, which were originally dedicated in 1952. The applicant has an approved site development plan for a quick service restaurant on the
site. During the site development plan review process, it was determined that the existing easements would need to be relocated. Also of note, as part of this submission, the neighboring business is also seeking vacation of the same easements. This has been captured in the recommendation and associated exhibits. And as of 04/21/2025, again, the site's development plan, file CD twenty twenty four-three SDP has been approved. And with that, the additional easements have been recorded, staff and agency satisfaction. With this, the existing water main and utility easements are no longer needed.
And I'm available for any questions. Thank you. At this time, is there, is the applicant here or a representative of the applicant? Yes. Fernando del Toro with HR Green on behalf of the applicant. Welcome, mister, Del Toro. You have ten minutes to discuss your application. No. Thank you. Yeah. No. Nothing really to add. Just here for any questions. Okay. I think it's great if you want. We will call you back up if there are any, questions during the public hearing. At this point, I will open the public hearing on this item. Is there anyone,
here who wishes to be heard on this item? Anyone who wishes to be heard on this item? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and invite mister Del Toro if he has any closing words on his, property or application. Nothing nothing to add for me. Thank you. Any questions from council members to the applicant or staff? Seeing none, is there a motion on this item? Council Member Palmer, go ahead. I'll make a motion to approve a resolution approving Utility Easement Vacation Number CD2025-four
VAC. Second. Moved by council member Palmer and seconded by council member Fredericks. Council member Palmer, any more to add on this? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Passes. Thank you, mister Del Toro. And, we will move on to, to, public hearings, g four and, actually, I'm gonna just mention g four and g five. They are both regarding the same properties. While sometimes we will combine our public hearings, into one public hearing, in this case, because they are two separate and distinct actions being requested of the counsel,
we will hold, two separate public hearings, for each item. So with that, I will turn it over to miss Woodward. Good evening, council president, mayor, and members of council. Let's see if I can get this. Nope. That is. Alright. So before you is a request for landmark removal for properties at 309311313315, And 317 South Broadway. To note, part of the application that came forward was to request a demolition permit. And as part of the UDC, anytime there's a request demolition permit for any property located within a landmark historic district,
there needs to be the removal from that historic district in order for that to move forward. So that is what is before you, in this public hearing is a request to remove these properties from the landmark historic district and the commercial district. And that is generated from that demo permit and that demolition permit. It is not a building alteration permit. It would be required a demolition permit in part because all of 309 would also need to be demolished, and the majority of the other buildings would also need to be demolished for the project that is being proposed. There was an HPC recommendation as part of this process,
so that was the first step that that took place in early April, and then city council ultimately provides a decision on that. So HPC provides that recommendation, and then, ultimately, the review needs to happen at city council. There are a couple of options in order to remove landmark designation, and they are listed up there, include reconsideration of historic significance, the reconsideration of historic integrity, or economic hardship. So you not all three of them don't have to occur, but one has to be noted. So what is before you is do the property still qualify as contributing to this
landmark historic district? And has the applicant shown, the economic hardship needed? In terms of landmark designation and historic in terms of landmark designation and historic significance, the district was, designated as a historic district with these two criteria, number one and eight, related to the development heritage of the district. And that was really looking at the downtown central core of the commerce from 1870 to 1962. And central core of the commerce from 1870 to 1962 and the location, scale, and other physical characteristics of all of the buildings together making up that district. So it wasn't necessarily one specific building in that. It was all of the collection of those buildings as it relates to the commercial
district. In terms of historic integrity, there are, I think, eight. There's one behind there or seven. Sorry. There's seven different historic integrity. Just wanna make sure I'm not missing any of those. These all really look at how has this been maintained over time in these different categories, so all of these are still showing significance as well. And then the last option, which is option c, would be really looking at economic hardship. The items under there in current are identified in the UDC as a way to determine economic hardship, as it relates to the properties, and the UDC lays out what needs to be submitted as part of that application.
So, with that, the recommendations and the application was gone through, and we identified findings of fact as it relates to each of these different items that the applicant provided. And, we stated and this was provided to the HPC, and they recommended that that these, stay as a historic maintained their historic significance, and that has not changed, and the historic integrity maintains. And they were determined to be contributing when the district was adopted in 2024. And I would also note that there wasn't really evidence within the application to determine economic hardship, even though it was mentioned a few times. So, that is also why we've noted that up in this part.
So, I think with that, that provides kind of the overview. I will turn it over to the applicant, and then I'm available for additional questions. Thank you, miss Woodworth. With at this point, I would invite the applicant to step forward. And you have ten minutes to, discuss your application. Welcome. Welcome, Mr. Henderson. Thank you very much. Good evening, Council President, members of the Council and honorable mayor. I appreciate the opportunity to be in front of you this evening to talk about some of the details of our project. Good news, we're coming in with a short and abbreviated presentation. So we thought actually you would have a longer meeting prior to this,
but you're moving pretty efficiently. But with that being said, we'll still stick with the shorter version. So what we'd like to address today is more of the merits of the project, actually. And, you've heard kind of the details of what the UDC requires. UDC has crafted and created a complicated process, frankly. I think we're the first ones to kind of go through that and UDC is relatively new. So, we've had an eye opening experience with the challenges of it. So, you'll hear a little bit more about that, but I won't go into some great detail on that. But concerning how it's crafted, the building owners and developers,
in our opinion, providing a response to the evaluation process is kind of a futile process. I mean, the evaluation language is crafted in such a way that the secretary of interior standards is which is extremely subjective. And anybody could offer kind of whatever their agenda is and whatever their position is on a particular aspect of those criteria. So, we obviously responded in the fashion that we thought was appropriate based on our buildings. And the city staff and HPC took their position with kind of a view from
their perspective, which obviously, you know their view is really from what they're charged with doing is to address and hopefully save old buildings, some of them being historic, some of them not being so historic. In our opinion, we're dealing with buildings that we classify as ones that are largely significant. So please keep that in mind. But that being said, regardless of the UDC's evaluation approach, we would really like the council to really consider not only our buildings, but other buildings on South Broadway and in that district, the economic challenges that we're all having.
I think there's other people that maybe aren't here tonight that can speak to that, but I think it's kinda obvious to a lot of us, kind of challenges that we're experiencing. There's a lot of vacant space. If you go up and down South Broadway, go anywhere in our downtown, you'll experience a lot of vacant space. So it kind of speaks for itself in regard to economic hardships. So the existing buildings involved in our property and today's real estate market just do not have the current conditions that meets the future, what the potential market is downtown. I think a lot of us obviously have recognized as a success of UMR.
They're probably one of our biggest future opportunities to revive our downtown. I'm not quite sure retail and some other activities downtown are gonna save us. We don't have critical mass. We don't have what's needed to really draw a lot of retail. So in my opinion, and others may not agree, but, our approach is to work closely with what we think is an appropriate market, and we think our market is is very strong in higher education. So we've been working closely with higher GH providers to try to come up with a project that really suits their needs. And I think a lot of you are very well aware of what their needs
are, and they've communicated that in many venues for that opportunity. The buildings we own, frankly I mean, we bond with the idea of of doing a development. But we are infusing cash into them every every month to keep them open. We cannot attract tenants. The Payne Building is an entirely vacant Second Floor. It doesn't have an elevator. It doesn't have restrooms, which we would put in there, frankly, if we thought we could attract a tenant. But we're just not gonna continue to put money in those buildings without the potential of attracting tenants to help us make them a reasonable investment,
quite honestly. Nobody would do that, I don't think. So and Lou will continue to offer kind of rebuttal to the position of the HPC and the staff. I think we're just acknowledging, look, there's viewpoints that we're all going to have that are varying and different. And they've taken a really hard stance on how they interpret the Secretary of Interior standards. It clearly states in there that it should be applied with flexibility and it should not be just applied with just rigid review of that. So, in our opinion, it was very rigid. We standard requires some flexibility and,
frankly, some common sense of how it should be applied to any jurisdiction locally based on conditions of that jurisdiction or that location. So, with that being said, I want to show you just some quickly, I want to go through the project and show you the attributes of it. First of all, we're just showing you what we're calling benchmarking photos. And you'll see in a minute that we have gone to an approach where we would save the fronts, salvage the fronts. It's been done successfully all over the country over and over and over again. So salvaging fronts and making part of a historic district is nothing unusual.
It's done all over the place. And it's allowed cities to really create a really meaningful development. And by using the fronts that are there, we're coming up with a front design that mimics or mocks what's already there now. So, we can go to the second slide, please. Thank you. So, I don't mean to bore you with a lot of these, but I think anybody can Google this and find out what's been done in other cities in regard to salvage storefronts that are part of a larger development and become an interesting component for that development. So in the next slides, you'll see that we've done that.
We've decided to restore the fronts of the Payne Building and restore the fronts of three fifteen, three 17 buildings. They have some character. I don't really consider them as having anything extremely valuable in terms of character. But that being said, there's some character there and it does add just maybe the ambiance of that street and the vibrancy of the pedestrian experience along that street. So, if we can go back to that. That's what we've done with this project is is to create a a storefront. And but what we've done, and I'll show you the next slide, we've studied the number of massing options.
And this being an option where there's a larger tower in back and a shorter height tower in front, and then we've gone to the next option, option five, which has two equal height towers. The most important thing to note about this is that we've set the towers back 25 feet from the frontage, which was the two things that were of interest, as we went through the process with city staff, was the setback from the street to be subordinate to the fronts and we started at 10 feet, we went to 15, we've gone to 25. And we've dropped the towers down to 11 stories,
equal height towers. And as we've gone through the meetings, frankly, we've had 13 meetings with city staff. And that being a result of some direction from the city council a couple years ago when we asked for these buildings to be removed from the landmark district. And the suggestion at that meeting some of you weren't part of the council, so I apologize. But we have notes, if anybody cares to see them, that what we were encouraged to do. One, if not two, and even a city staff person indicated that we should seriously work with staff to come back with a compromise proposal. And that's what we've done. We've had,
like I said, 13 meetings with staff over the last eight, ten months, however long it's been. Very good meetings. Staff has been very cooperative, very helpful. We've gone back and forth with ideas. And this is a concept that, from my understanding, that we last had agreement on with the staff. A would be a logical conclusion in a compromised position. So these are the two we compared. The one I mentioned, the Eagle Heights Towers, 2 11 story buildings, in a kind of a t shaped, and then it would have 129 units. Next slide, please. So the floor plans quickly, we've incorporated a gymnasium.
As a lot of you know, the University of Minnesota, without a YMCA, does not have any source for a gymnasium. So, we've been working with the University of Minnesota Rochester, to create that for them and half of the main floor would be a gymnasium. And the other half being lobby and parking. Next slide. Next slide is the Second Floor. Very straightforward. Again, that's the Second Floor looking down into the gymnasium. And then there's obviously locker rooms in fitness areas on the Second Floor. Above that, next slide please, would be the floors for the student housing. That really has student housing in it. That's our market we're familiar with.
We own, along with my partner, Grant Michael, to move back, three teen commons. And, I think if you talk to anybody at the University of Minnesota, that's been a hugely successful project for them, desperately needed. And I think based on what we're seeing and hearing and hoping for enrollment, they're going to need more housing. So, we've been working closely with them for more housing. Next slide would just show you again what that gymnasium would look like, how it would activate the street level. We're more interested in activating the street level of the gymnasium than we are, potentially another vacant retail space. There's been an unlimited success in activating street level,
unfortunately, in Rochester, and we don't wanna be in that position to have a space that's not activated. So, You have twenty seconds. Okay. Sorry. So I ran out of time with HPC too. The, so we my our our idea and our hope is that you'll look at the merits of the project strictly on the merits of what we're delivering and what we're bringing and not be really all that hung up on the interpretations of the secretary of the department of interiors, whether it's our interpretation or theirs. But, obviously, they don't agree. So our our request would be to look at the merits of the project I just presented. And,
if we could, we could do the rendering up on the screen as if there's questions. Thank you, mister Henderson. We'll call you back up after the public hearing. K. Thank you. As I mentioned, we have nearly 30 people signed up to, speak on this item. So, being concise will be appreciated. With that, I will invite Abby a up to, be our first speaker. Hi. My name is Abby, and I live and work in Rochester. I'm gonna keep this short and sweet. I want to preserve the historic district because it is the heart and soul of
this city. These businesses give Downtown Rochester culture, community, creativity, and comfort. They are places of healing in a city filled with patients and their families, looking for music and art therapy and safe spaces. I wouldn't want to live in a Rochester without them, and I ask you that we don't have to. Thank you. Thank you. Please keep, your applause down as that just takes away from speakers. Next up is Leah Bee. Hello. Happy Monday to everybody here tonight,
mayor Norton, president Head's Emporium. We're located at 317 South Broadway. I've had the joy of operating in this location for the last twelve years, teaching art, inviting live music, hosting parties, and connecting with our neighbors. Being downtown is definitely a conscious choice that I have to make every single day. And honestly, the last four years have been quite a challenge, and I'm sure that most business owners in our community could probably say the same. But we love it, and it's my lifeblood. The reason that we are still here today is because of the community that we've
created alongside the other small businesses on our block and within the historic district. I think it's interesting that Hal just mentioned that downtown has many vacant spaces, but none of his are. Just yesterday, I met a new tenant that just moved upstairs above our building. Operating an art shop on this sacred block means that we get the opportunity to meet people from all around the world. Rochester residents, people who are new or moving here, people that are here to study with Mayo or here for care at Mayo.
We have people who drive here from all over Southeast Minnesota, the cities, even Iowa and Wisconsin just to take an art class with us. Oftentimes, we get people who wander in or they're there for a class, and they ask us, what is there to do in Downtown Rochester? And we could probably go around the room tonight and ask everybody, what do you think of Downtown Rochester? I think there's plenty to do in this area daily. Aside from the many great restaurants and bars that we have, where is the culture and where is the community in Downtown Rochester? And obviously,
this is a biased answer, but I would say in the historic district. It's at Cafe STEAM, Art Heads, TreeDome, Threshold, Creasels, Tai POP. All of our business models are vital to the future development of community building in our city. We have all created and cultivated an energy down here that is absolutely irreplaceable. The historic buildings on South Broadway that are up for discussion are needed in our community, and they should remain open to the public, not closed for a gym. Heritage preservation is economic development.
There's a reason why many newer buildings in town are still, unfortunately, empty storefronts. New ideas need old buildings. And you I know all of you have heard that saying. I think there's something really honest about that. There's an energy that historic properties hold, and people are truly magnets to them. No property owner should ever be rewarded for demolition by neglect. Please join us all in celebrating and preserving the small amount of history that we do have left here. Let's be proud. This is our city.
We can do it together. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is Abe Stuckley. Welcome, mister Stuckley. You have five minutes. Thank you. Hello. My name is Abe. I am 11 years old, and I have grown up my entire life in the historic district. I was here to speak last year. I asked city council to save this historic block. And now I am back again because I know the hard work it was for the city staff, the council, the community members, and downtown property owners to develop and approve this district. I watched my mom and other business owners like Lucy and Will and Maggie and
Nate work so hard to create community for Rochester residents and citizens from all over the world. World. Please vote to preserve this district, and please find more funding for these property owners to restore their building their buildings and our history should be a part of our future. Just say no to this tower. Thank you. Is Lucy Cresol? Good evening. Can you hear me? Okay. Yes. Good evening, president Schubert, members of the city council, mayor Norton. Good to see all your faces. My name is Lucy Kriesel. So I want to start, did anyone witness prom on Saturday night downtown?
Because I was working downtown until late and watched dozens of happy young people getting their photos taken all over the historic district. We all know the brick, the Cove, the Chateau Theater you can think of the places in your mind that are charismatic and beautiful. There's a rap about historic preservation that it's run by our elders, who don't want things to change and they're the only ones who care. These young people, these prom goers, including the entrepreneurial business owners who were here tonight celebrating the buildings they reside in, they know and we know that there is grit here, it has texture,
and I'm here to express that the historic district is a place for many generations. I turned to a moment when a member of our downtown community recently asked my dad, John Krizel, why are you still here? I'll attempt to answer that question now. We've invested in historic Third Street with our resources, our time, our money, and our spirit for the last fifty years. Yes. This year marks our fiftieth year as a small downtown business in a historic property, John Kreisel's General Merchandise. I chose to come back to this community as a sixth generation member committed,
and I'm proud to be a second generation business and property owner on historic Third Street. This is our true north. It's difficult to impress upon anyone who doesn't have the fortune of being a business owner in the historic district what a joy it is. Fifty years is a whole lot of customer experience, listening to what customers have to say. We get repeat customers for years sharing how their treatment is going, how grateful they are for a second opinion, how grateful they are that there is this place, the antique shop, to connect during a time of hardship and distress, take their mind off of things,
have an experience, meet someone new. Others come in and reminisce about Pilates, Tyrel on third, wands. The three buildings in question survive the cyclone and, as sites of memory, cannot be metricized monetarily, as if they're a plot of land. Right now, I'm sure memories are popping up in everyone's heads, an experience you've had in the historic district at one of these sites, and we certainly feel a loss when they are gone. And not a loss only to us, but to future generations who are trying to make sense of this world and of this place and of this community at this time. I'm fortunate that I could hear stories about the architectural splendor of the 1914 building
and the perfectly acoustical Marian Hall because of my dear father. I don't want to digress about focusing on all we've already lost and who was at the helm of those fateful midnight demolitions. I'd rather focus on the opportunity that we have here today. We need small, emboldened, weird, connecting, curious spaces that tell a story of belonging and offer a sense of place. Like I said, customers plan their appointments around visiting us. They call ahead to make sure we're gonna be open or that we can connect as a part of their visit to Rochester. Or, for example,
when I attended my first Art Heads class, a collage class, I met a handful of medicine students who said this was where they made their first friends, here in the historic district. And you might be thinking, yeah, but art, antiques, a sip of coffee, those could be happen anywhere, right? That's not true, and and we all know what we know, that these sites are sought after for their charm and their fiscal potential. Location, location, location. We can't rebuild this. This is the heart of the city, and it's time to embrace our unique history, especially now that so many people, HPC, city staff,
many prior individuals, have spent countless hours to establish this district collaboratively and with intention. So, with this opportunity, I want to let you know that, the Historic Preservation torch has been carried by our elders, and we're here to demonstrate that we care and we will be carrying the torch of the sense of stewardship that they've paid along the way for a long time to come. Just wanna let you know, please say no to this removal. Let's celebrate our history together. It's common sense, and this is not a mistake worth making. Remember, remember prom. Thank you. Next up is Taylor.
Hello. I've never spoken at a city council meeting before, so here goes what I have. Good evening, President Schubert, members of the city council, and Mayor Norton. My name is Taylor, and I've been a proud resident of Rochester, for my entire life. I'm an artist, a mother, and a photographer for our community in Mayo Clinic. I believe in preserving the historic district because these buildings and the businesses within them foster community and give this city life and heart. These buildings are treasured and have been cared for by the business owners that are passionate about fostering community,
diversity, and vibrancy to our city that has constantly transformed for Mayo Clinic. As someone who grew up here, I have seen the downtown area change and historic buildings be torn down. Changes in downtown area change and historic buildings be torn down. Change is inevitable, and you can't have growth without change, but not all change is good. The pandemic forced many small businesses to close due to the economy and lack of foot traffic, as many Mayo employees started working remotely. Ever since, the city council and Rochester Downtown Alliance have been working on ways to get people back downtown. With the results options for community gathering spaces have only gotten fewer.
Threshold Arts, TreeDome, Art Heads Emporium, and Cafe Steam are some of the last few remaining options. These businesses are all prominent reasons why local residents come downtown and some and and are some of my personal favorite places to spend time and money. When patients ask me what there is to do downtown other than eat, I always recommend these businesses because they give visitors a taste of our city through local art, music, shopping, community spaces, and a really good cup of coffee, all within our quaint historic district.
The national community survey posted on the Rochester government website showed that in 2024, '50 '2 percent of residents felt a sense of community in Rochester. Only forty one percent of residents viewed downtown as vibrant. The importance of inclusivity engagement was, rated at 62%, while the result or they wanted it to be 62 or the importance was 62%, while the result was only 46%. The quality of education, arts, and culture was rated 59%, where the importance was rated at 68%. If these community spaces and businesses go away,
downtown traffic and community engagement ratings will plummet even further. Downtown cannot turn into a series of hotel and apartment building lobbies with high end restaurants that the average resident cannot afford. I am not blind to the fact that Rochester needs more housing, but there are better options. There are plenty of vacant lots primed and ready for development downtown. Specifically, the former Post Bulletin site has been sitting empty since 2020, and the vacant lot next to Blue Duck used to have a building built in 1879 that was torn down in 02/2017. And the only thing that that lot is being used for is snow removal,
rogue garbage, and miscellaneous bike parts. Our town can agree to purchase the entire Seneca factory to save our beloved corn cob water tower, we can preserve and save our iconic historic district and these community spaces. The history of Rochester exists outside of the history of Mayo Clinic, and Mayo Clinic's history should not be the only one that is preserved. Preserving our city's history is just as important as developing its future. To conclude, change is inevitable, but it's important to make the right changes to keep Rochester a place people want to live and not just visit for their health care or their four year residency.
Please vote to keep these important community spaces in these historic buildings, and don't let the intentional neglect of their owner justify their demolition. Please say yes to our treasured plat past, and please say no to to this request. Thank you. Next up is Ethan Shones. Let's see. Perfect. Good evening, president Schoebring, members of the city council, and mayor Norton. My name is Ethan Jones. I'm a Minnesota native artist and photographer. I believe it is important to preserve the historic district because of music and art have a long history here in historical downtown with businesses such as the Bach Music
Company, the Connolly Camera Factory, etcetera. And what places like Treadom, Threshold Arts, Art Heads, and Cafe Steam have done is continue that long history. I love going to these businesses in the historical district. Cafe Steam is a great place to sit, read a book, occasionally listen to musicians if they have them I've been to multiple classes at Art Heads and they've all been phenomenal Showing people how easy it is to pick up a pencil or brush and make art is important and with their classes I hope they will inspire people to pick up art as a hobby and express themselves When
I go to Threshold Arts I am in awe seeing all the creations from local Minnesotan artists Plates, paintings, jewelry, leatherwork, three d printed objects Giving these artists a place to sell their art and allow people to appreciate it is so important. And having a place like Threshold to do that is amazing. And then there's Freedom. I've gone there almost weekly since I've discovered them when moving to Rochester Four Years ago. I bought CDs, vinyl cassettes, and they've given me the ability to expand my musical taste and build up a
sizable collection of music. They've also been a major help when it comes to bringing music to downtown. I've gone to so many concerts there. My first concert there was seeing my best friend before live with his band. My shirt is from seeing, him perform live at another concert over at the thesis fear project. Some of the pins on my camera back are from seeing artists at Treedome. When when I go to these concerts to see music or to take photography, I see a community of people of all ages. From high schoolers to gray haired adults,
even a child or a mother with their baby jamming out to music, and bands and artists, not only from the Minnesota area, but from out of state. They buy their merchandise, their shirts, their CDs. They and they give them money to allow them to do what they love. And to lose these growing pillars of the Rochester art and music community for a class elevator for yet another high rise in the Rochester skyline would be a huge disservice to the art community and would be a major loss to the music community
here. Please say yes to our treasured past and the many people enjoy historic downtown, and please say no to their requests. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is Becca a. Hello again. I, along with many artists as musicians in this town, let's help small businesses win, like Art Heads, Steam Cafe, Tringdom, Thresholds Arts, and many more businesses. I love seeing the historic businesses in Rochester. It reminds me of Blados, bakery when I was living in Winona.
And it just makes me sad that we're letting these developers just destroy buildings. I don't want a gym. I want a community just like the last speaker. I love going there. I love saying hi to Leah every time and seeing her little boy grow up. I love it's a community. It's like our abilities. It's a community. Think of what you're doing. Thank you. Next up is Kevin Reynolds. Hello. My name is Kevin Reynolds. I'm also the administrator of the old Rochester, Minnesota Facebook group here.
And I wanna talk about, one of the things that's really glaring to me in this in this project is, a precedence is about to be set by each and every one of you. Kevin Lund came into this when we were fighting for this landmark, and he gave a beautiful, eloquent, well thought out, detailed presentation on the Paynes Furniture Building and the historical significance of it and within the city not just within the city, but within the state of Minnesota. And I hope,
especially, new members on the council take the time to go back and relisten to Kevin's eloquent speech that he gave, five minute speech. It was amazing. It really blew me away how well prepared he was. This precedence that I see happening before us is if this is allowed to happen, you basically are writing a road map in black and white for any developer to purchase property within the historic district. They they will be able to, with their lawyers, follow exactly what happened in this situation tonight.
And there isn't gonna be anything that we as citizens will be able to do. Our voices will be basically stifled because it'll all be in black and white. So this is not just a small decision. This is a huge decision that you're making to demolish these buildings and to and to change the the skyline too. There's a gentleman that worked downtown Rochester for many, many, many, many, many years. I'm not gonna mention who he is, but, he's having a long discussion with him about what was about to happen
and showing him the picture that was put up earlier of that of that skyline with that tower. And his comment was, Kevin, it's as simple as it just doesn't belong. You look at that. It just doesn't belong there. And he says, it is as simple as that. This is a man that's that worked downtown for literally almost forty years, and I gotta agree with him. At the end of the last HBC meeting, I was here, and the whole process at the HBC meeting was really frustrating for me.
And and I got like I usually do when I stand up, believe it or not, I'm a little more comfortable tonight than I have been in past nights talking to you guys. But, you know, it was a frustration for me that night. But then at the end of the meeting, the chairman of the HBC gave a pointed question right to the developer of, why are you making comments about your building being in such disarray? And but yet, you're saying that the city count the city inspectors have approved it as being sound and good.
And he never did answer the question. I'd encourage you also to go back and relisten to that too, because that was disturbing to me that it was just never answered. And then the comment was, it's time to turn a turn the page. And that was a thing that was repeated over and over again. It's time to turn the page. Recent post bulletin article, he was quoted as saying this is just an old building. It's not just an old building. All buildings have history, and these buildings along here have significant history. And it's very well documented.
And that's why you, as a city council back last fall, voted to make it a historic landmark district. There's very, very few nineteenth century buildings existing like the Oddfellows Building and maybe a half dozen others. These are the last. That's it. There's no more. There's no more to in the city of Rochester anywhere. So I just hope that you take the time to listen to Kevin Lund's presentation and the historic, significance of that means furniture building, and vote no,
please. Thank you. Next up is Tim Schmidt. Okay. Next up is Barb Hudson. Good evening. My name is Barb Hudson. I'm going to just address some of the statements that our applicant has made. Since 02/2017 or for the last eight years, the Rochester Downtown Historic District has been reviewed, studied, discussed, and evaluated by city staff, committees, commissions, and the Rochester City Council. This district meets the United States Secretary of Interior standards for landmark designation.
The Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office also validates the landmark designation of this historic district. In February, the Rochester City Council agreed, and the buildings were deemed significant to the historic development of Rochester's commercial core and voted to landmark the district. Today, the owner, the applicant of some of the buildings in this landmark district says, the buildings are simply old and have no historic significance. It's time for them to go.
It's time to turn the page. In 2023, this owner presented a similar proposal city because this would substantially alter the entire district. The Unified Development Code of Rochester, which was, mentioned by the applicant, is something that seems new, but these ordinances have been around since the city has been around. Around. These ordinance are precisely designated and designed to protect Rochester's historic heritage from the wrecking ball. Similar to building codes,
developers must follow these codes when building or renovating. And I'm sure not every developer appreciates building codes and would prefer to build less costly. The state's Destination Medical Center Corporation board recently approved grants for preservation efforts in the downtown district, and the city created a no interest loan program. City staff are still willing to collaborate with the developers to create a plan for adaptive reuse of these buildings. Now Mayo Clinic is investing over $5,000,000,000
to provide to build a massive bold forward and unbound project, leaders can come up with a creative way to preserve and design around this treasured historic district. Thank you. Next up is Barry Skolnick. Hi. I know you all know me and I know a lot of people, you know, in the audience and in the city. And, I really enjoyed hearing the speakers who came before me because they really are the heart and soul of Rochester. And I there are other districts that are important too and other parts of
Rochester, but this is the only old commercial part of Rochester that's left. And I think it's very, very important that we maintain that so future generations can see what Rochester was, when it was developing. I don't want to wipe it all away. Let's leave some of it there for people to enjoy. You heard what the people said, that is the heart and soul. And it's gone through numerous years of review as has been said by other people, and the Council looked at it.
This is the second generation of the Hal Henderson proposal and it's I don't really see that much I mean, it's changed, yes. But is it that different from what was rejected a few years ago? I don't think so. So it's just like, again, people want it there, they like it there. It's good for our tourism and it's going to be better when the consultant that you just hired is going to be there to work with them and it's very, very important that it happens. Hal mentions that he has economic challenges. Yeah, there are economic challenges,
but hopefully with the help of the DMC and the city, we'll work through those economic challenges to make it what everybody needs here. They need a place to go. Tourism does that. The people who live in the city need a a heart of the city and this is our heart. Please don't put a dagger on the heart. Please let's keep what's there and for future generations to appreciate. And thank you very much. I can't add much to what all the other people have said. I just think we should just keep what is. It's a wonderful place and don't destroy it.
And the businesses like it and the people like it Don't destroy it. Thank you. We can always put some of these other types of buildings on another block. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next up is, John Kreisel. Mister president, members of the council, Kim Morton, our wonderful mayor, Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak here this evening on this very important detailed point. Approximately fifty years ago plus, Louise Hill, along with Park and Rec, had the vision to embrace Rochester's old own own Old Town,
all of which are within our historic district. This was a rendition right here of what was done by Louise with the help of Park and Rec as to what the future of historic Third Street could be. Some of you remember Wongs. Oh my gosh. 1951. We all stood outside in the snow waiting to get into Wong's. Okay? And then we've got the Union Saint Bank, bank building, our first bank building in Rochester right here on the far left. The building I'm in to the far right,
couple have been, demolished. Kennedy Building used to have a Third Floor. Even though the Third Floor burned off, it's still right there with its two with its two floors. Thank you. All of so, all of which are within our historic district that survived our eighteen eighty three cyclone. All of these buildings played not only a major role during and afterwards for providing care to the injured, shelter, food for the people that have no shelter or the workers there, and the dignity to those that lost their lives.
These three buildings now in question on the Palace Block, that block is called the Palace Block, namely the former mammoth dry goods store built in 1879, '1 of the finest Romanesque styled buildings in the state of Minnesota, was renamed the Payne Furniture Building after 1900. I think it was nineteen o four, if I remember correctly. And then became a furniture store, coffin storage facility,
and a funeral facility. So at the time of the of the cyclone, it was it was not a funeral parlor at that time. It was a dry goods store that was there. That came later, but it was used as all the other buildings that didn't tear it weren't weren't torn down by the cyclone. They were they were used in any fashion necessary to move Rochester forward to what it is today. Because of these buildings and that cyclone, needless to say, that's why we have Saint Mary's here today. I ask the council this evening to vote no to this problem.
Note also you should be aware of the purchase agreement, that, Hale engaged to with Cedric Payne. That purchase agreement requires that the facade stays. That's That's an absolute. I worked with the Payne family to make sure that that took place. So there's no denying that that building was historic when it was purchased by Hal. In passing, this proposed pot project will jeopardize the remaining buildings within our historic district. I will point out that Kevin Lund and myself met numerous times with Gusher Folius
who came to realize how important the Conley Moss Building was to this community and to this community's historic district that directly led to the Downes family's ability to purchase this this key anchor on Fourth Street. That's an absolute. One additional key comment, approximately two weeks before the death of Gustafolius, he summoned me to his home, and I don't think he would have had a problem with me sharing what I'm gonna share with you,
this evening that took place at that, meeting with him. So he summoned me to his home, and we conversed for approximately two hours, during which he said to me that he regretted his role that he played in this community, that he loved so much, causing too many landmarks to be demolished. Please listen to the recommendation of your HPC commission. That's why it's called a commission. It's not a committee. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Next up is Samantha Johnson.
Good evening, counsel. My name is Samantha Johnson. I am a scientist and an artist who lives in Rochester, and I've been here for the last six years. I also serve as a panelist for the Southeastern Minnesota Arts Council where we review grants, that show where we delegate arts to the community. While it was the scientific hub of Rochester with the Mayo Clinic that initially brought me here, it has been the vibrant arts community centered in this historic district that has allowed me and made me want to stay. What I love most about this historic district is how it serves such a wide variety of people and communities, all while the businesses support and uplift one another.
These businesses are a corner store cornerstone of major Rochester events such as Rochester Thaw, Social Ice, and Rochester Art Walk, just to name a few. And these are events that not only draw on visitors, but also serve to create an atmosphere that many of us rely on for both personal and professional connection. Eliminating these historic buildings would not only dismantle the communities that they fostered, but also fracture the culture they've helped shape through these important businesses and the notable events that they've had within them. So my husband and I recently made the decision to buy a house and stay
in Rochester. It wasn't our career or the location that persuaded us to make that decision. It was the historical district on Broadway and the community historical district on Broadway and the community created within that that helped us to decide to plant roots here. Rochester already struggles with the feeling of being a transient city with many of our visitors coming for the clinic. We don't need to reinforce that perception by removing spaces that encourage people to stay here and build their lives here. I urge you to consider the bigger picture. Eliminating these historical buildings would strip the city of one of the few remaining centers for local culture,
culture, heritage, and identity. And I will say mister Henderson's photos of that cookie cutter apartment complex is not what we want as a community. And I believe that the city council would agree with me based on their choice of art in the back of the room back there. So I would say please say no to this request to erase a vital part of our Rochester community, history, and culture. Thank you. Next up is Benny Peterson. Hello. I haven't spoken to you since high school, so I am very nervous, and I apologize in advance for that. I am going to keep this as quick as I can because my partner will also be speaking on our feelings.
I have a few points I would like to directly make. We moved into an apartment together two years ago to be within proximity of historic downtown. Our idea of a good afternoon is to walk just down the street, poke our heads into each individual building, and see see what we can find that we didn't see last time. The first thing that you'll notice when you step into any of these businesses is they each have their own unique atmosphere, and I think it's preposterous to imply that they don't have one that's of significance. They each have their own soul,
whether that be students studying in steam, trying to cram as many words into their paper as they can, or going to a live show at TreeDome and experiencing the local music scene, or going to an art class at Art Heads, as many as mentioned, or even just making a purchase at Threshold. We have an incredibly vibrant community of local artists, and and these shops are their home. Without these small businesses allowing us into their doors, our own small art economy would not exist.
They host their own events that give us a place to sell our art, and I think that that is an incredibly important thing for a community to have. My last point I would like to make is that when walking down the street, you do see how vibrant it is. And I think that that is a silly thing to imply, is that these shops are not full of life. And, personally, I would much rather see that than a bunch of sweaty people playing basketball. Thank you. Up is, Atlas Natal. Hello and good evening, President Schoebring,
Mayor Norton, and city council members. I'm dyslexic, so I'm trying my best to make sure I'm reading this properly. My name is Atna Stata, and I live in the Downtown Rochester area with my partner. I'm gonna apologize ahead of time if anything I say is redundant. It's That we're all very passionate about what we have to say about this. I speak as a concerned resident of the community who relies on the kinds of spaces threatened by this proposal. Let's be clear. These are not just any buildings downtown. These are properties that were formally designated by this council based on substantial evidence as
contributing structures to our downtown commercial historic district just last year. The argument that they suddenly lack any historical significance or integrity flies in the face of the city's own findings and the principle of historic preservation. More importantly, these buildings house vital parts of Rochester's current cultural heart. Places like Artheads Emporium, Cafe Steam, Threshold Hearts, and TreeDome are not just businesses. They are active sanctuaries and hubs for our city's artists, our young people,
and critically, our LGBTQ community. They are established essential gathering spaces for locals and visitors alike. To allow the demolition of these buildings displacing these specific community hubs would be devastating. It sends a chilling message about what and who Rochester values if this were to pass, Especially now, in a climate where vulnerable communities need more support, not less, we should be actively protecting spaces that cultivate belonging for our youth, our queer residents,
and our communities of color. As a disabled and queer person, but most importantly, a human being, witnessing this process, I see the potential displacement of these safe and creative havens as a profound failure, a display of ignorance to the real needs and cultural fabric of a significant part of our city. I may not speak for everyone in Rochester, and that is a hard reality for me, but I speak loudly for many when I say, we see this for what it is, is, an attempt to erase history and vital community presence, an attempt to erase art and culture.
Please listen to your Heritage Preservation Commission. Listen to the community members who rely on these spaces. Uphold the Nile. Uphold the denial. Respect our history. Protect our community. And demand development that adds to Rochester, not destroy it. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you. Next up is Rachel Larkin. Good evening, and thank you for taking time to listen to all of our thoughts and feelings. My name is Rachel Larkin. I am here in Rochester and a small business owner, as well as a mom and an artist.
Mayo Clinic brought my family here, but it is not why we stayed. The art, the passion, the emotion, the honest human connection that me and my family were able to make here, through places, with history, with feeling, with color, with rough edges, is why we stayed. I could tell you moments that brought tears to my eyes when we brought my daughter into Cafe STEAM and I got to explain to her how we can ask someone's pronouns, and the baristas helped her practice. I could tell you about how I was able to walk into,
Threshold Arts and purchase pro protecting trans kids, stickers and shirts to support my students that I taught. But what's really important here is that Rochester has a hospital, but it is not a hospital. We do not need to sterilize everything. We do not need to wipe away anything that isn't sharp edged and clean and glass. We can let some things be a little bit crooked and a little bit quirky, Because people come here for Mayo, but they don't stay here for Mayo. They stay here for the human connection,
for the history, and for the art. So please consider creating more history today by allowing us to hold more precious moments in these spaces. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have Mary Sitz. Hi. My name is Mary Sitzel, and I'm a resident here in Rochester, Minnesota. I wanna speak in favor of preserving the historic downtown district. As we expand and build our city, I believe it is important to preserve this historic district and the enrichment it provides our city. I appreciate the community that has been built within these businesses in this district,
and I feel these businesses showcase the legacy that is the history of Rochester. And I am asking today that you preserve that history. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have Vanna. Hi. I'm Vanna. Excuse me. I was digging up a bunch of rotten irises and planted 300 dahlias, and then I just came right here. I'm also a Rochester native, the mother of two of the kids that will be speaking to you. They've spoke here before. Some of one of them is very spicy, just a warning. I'm also a teacher at Art Heads, that is currently at 03:17.
I'm obviously here to protect these buildings, so I can hear my heart pounding in my ears right now. I don't think I've seen any of you in the space. I know I've seen you. You bought a corn corn tower. Thank you. So it's a lot to trust in you because I haven't seen you in the space to know that you know the people that come into this space and the interactions that happen in this space. Even if you come in for a quick visit or be a part of a class, you might understand why this space is important to our community. One question we always get asked almost every single time,
where do those spiral staircases go? That question alone allows us to open up Rochester's history, Mayo Rochester Rochester is Mayo. Is that it? What I see in the space that I work in is community. I see friendships formed. I see relationships maintained through art. I see children build confidence in their self. I see people just not wanting to be alone. And I hear people who are 20, 30, 40 years older than me say that this is the first time they've picked up a paintbrush since elementary school.
I see all ages. I see people from all over the world find relief in this space. In the spring, summer, fall, Rochester is great. There's parks, there's outdoor activities that give Rochester life. But winter? Help me. I can't be the only person that experiences seasonal depression. The historic block is that warmth and light we need in the dark season. Places like Art Heads, Cafe Steam, and Treadome are spaces that are worth the time it takes to shovel out your car. It feels like Rochester has had so much plastic surgery.
The way we rip out historic buildings, it's hollow and artificial. Is there a limit? And those benchmark photos, they look lifeless. What an honor it is to own such a beautiful, historic space, whether you intended it for it to be what it is right now. I'm a fan of old things, old pastimes, old people. I wanna show you, my peers, the younger generation, that old is worth protecting. If you just take care of it, it's worth it. Where do you wanna see these businesses go? Where do we go? I know you will make the right decision for the community that lives here right
now. Thank you for considering. Next up is Luna. Hi again. I'm Luna. I'm 13, and I'm back because clearly some of you aren't listening. Keep tearing down places that hold real history and meaning. And for what? More banks? More parking lots? More overpriced apartments? You're not improving the community. You're wiping out everything that makes it unique. Be honest with yourself. When you were young, what made you feel connected to this place? It probably wasn't a parking lot or a fancy apartment. It was the old corner store, the weird little building that sparked your imagination.
But now you're paving over those memories like they never mattered. Maybe that's what bothers you because deep down, you know it did matter. You just don't want to admit it. And to those voting to tear down these buildings, you're choosing profit over meaning, and it shows. Everything else is already gone, and now you wanna take what's left? I don't understand how people can care so little about the past, but I'm asking you one more time. Do the right thing. You're not just tearing down buildings. You're tearing out the heart of this place. One day, you'll wonder why it feels so empty. I hope you can sleep at night with your decision.
Thank you for listening. Thank you. Next, we have Phoenix. Hi again. My name is Phoenix, if you remember me. Now I am 11 years old. I think the building should still be protected. Most of my life was spent at three seventeen with my friends and family. And I remember when I was in preschool, and I had a day out. And me and my mom went to Cafe Steam and showed a a blackberry Italian soda. I get it. The buildings are a lot of money and responsibilities, but you're not just paying for the life of the building. You're paying for someone's just someone's childhood and memories.
This might just be another building of no worth to you, but this is my life, and I have to fight for it. Why do you get to decide someone else's life after you? You're not gonna make nearly as much memories or moments such as make you happy in a gymnasium. Don't just do it for the people speaking today. Do it for the people that are gonna grow up up after us. If I'm being honest, Rochester is boring as it is, and it's the small buildings that make people happy and smile. Thank you for listening to me today. Thank you. Next, we have Emma Hildebrand.
Hello. My name is Emma. I'm a constituent from Ward 3. I wanted to talk about, my experience with this block. So since moving from a city of over 200,000, of population two years ago, I have missed the sense of community and locality of third spaces, including coffee shops, and other community centers. Since finding Cafe Steam, Art Heads, TreeDome, and Threshold Arts, I have found the camaraderie that I was desperately craving and have gone to one of those, businesses every day since, appreciating these places and this block so much that I moved across town to be
within walking distance of each of them. Many of my peers whom I met through these spaces that have moved to Rochester for work, like myself, have shared similar feelings about this this block. Having community spaces like these are the backbone of this town, and are the, and they will be the backbone of attracting and keeping young people here. Furthermore, all advertised pictures of the Rochester skyline highlight the historic Plummer Building, an iconic established landmark built in 1920. Why? Because we understand the importance of showcasing our history and long preserved culture,
something that this block on Broadway holds a lot of. The addition proposed will destroy this history and block this historic staple from our skyline. Architecture is the most accessible way to teach our about history. It's free, and it's open to people of all backgrounds and abilities. Demolishing this block will rob our future residents of the opportunity to learn about Rochester's rich history. I, for one, want to be able to walk my children and my grandchildren down this block and share the buildings that I hold dear to my heart.
All of this to say, heritage preservation starts with these shops, and destroying our past will rob us of our future. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have Bunny Kettle Camp. Hi, everybody. This is my first time here for how do you do to you and you? Welcome. My name is Shawn Kettlekamp. I am the researcher at the History Center of Baumstuk County. And, I wanted to let you all know that the History Center is going to celebrate its one hundredth anniversary next year. And it was C. C. Wilson, the noted Rochester Pioneer Attorney, who went to, Bert Eaton,
another famed attorney in Rochester, Will and Charlie Mayo, Judge George Granger. Another noteworthy personality is asking them for $25 because he wanted to enroll them all in the Minnesota Historical Society because he felt that Minnesota history was something that they should all, be interest should interest themselves in. And this led Bert Eaton into creating the History Center, for Olmsted County in 1926 It's fascinating reading, learning about the creation of the collection, entirely made up of donations of artifacts and money,
and such was the importance of preserving our history. It's fascinating also this the John Steinbeck novel, about the Dust Bowl, The Grapes of Wrath, where the Joad family is meant to or had to, leave their home in Oklahoma and move to California. And, they had to leave a lot of their things behind And to paraphrase the mother, in that story, she said, looking back on some of the things that they were leaving, how are we gonna know who we are without our past? I wonder what Will and Charlie Mayo,
Cece Wilson, Bert Eaton, and the rest would think of what's left of Rochester. Will Mayo spoke in his last public comments via radio, of Rochester in 1939 as the town where we've spent our lives, and the town that we all love so well. This topic tonight, this is the last nearly entire block of Rochester's beginnings. It's the original business district. The entire town was platted from the building on the Northeast quadrant, corner of Broadway and Fourth Street Aptly referred to as our historic district,
this was set aside already by the Historic Preservation Committee and the city council This is settled, the Payne Furniture Building with its original bonnet top pediment is historic and unique, for one reason It's lasted as long as it has It's the only building that still has that, along the cresting of the building. All the others next to it had fancy brickwork as well, and all had to be leveled off, because of weather over the years, and, had to be made level.
And, I'm just saying to preserve is to create. You know, we're preserving is a noble thing. It's not, we don't need to tear everything down. But we're told that we need to be building housing, student housing for UMR, you know, the University of Minnesota Rochester, to me, it truly should be called the University of Minnesota, Mayo. Because all the classes that are taught there are only there to benefit the Mayo Clinic. They're not you can't get a history degree there. You can't get an English degree there, they're all Mayo Clinic specific.
So the Mayo Clinic, I believe, should provide land and housing for the students, that they are teaching, and the ones that are gonna eventually have their employment at the Mayo Clinic. And as I used to always say, there's a the historic district is one millionth of the building space in Rochester, MN. There's plenty of other places to build apartment buildings. And, you know, we love Hal Henderson, and he knows he has the most beautiful building on Broadway and, historic building on Broadway. He knows it's historic,
and he knows we wanna keep it. All this, proposed demolition, would have the effect of changing the tax base for everyone, and, and it would destroy our historic district. So I encourage you to vote no on this measure. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have, Casey Gonzalez. Is this still here? Yeah. Hello, President Schubert, Mayor Norton, council members. My name is Casey, and I am a student at UMR. Instead of studying for finals, I am here to let you know how important this historic district is to myself and my fellow students.
I am not a Rochester native. I was drawn here by small class sizes, quality education, and skyways to protect from the cold, but what really sealed the deal was the historic district. When I'm walking to class, I go out of my way to walk past these buildings and experience the beauty and the community that is there. When my friends and I talk about where we're gonna hang out and where we're going to study, cafe steam is first on that list. When I study break, I walk through these buildings. Crucial's General Merchandise is a particular comfort for me. These buildings are important to us as students. When I looked at that gym print picture,
I did genuinely cringe. When you put a bunch of nerdy pre health care students in one place, you don't really get a lot of people that are eager to work out in front of a fully windowed wall on the First Floor. I'm not sure that many of my fellow students would appreciate having all eyes on us working out I I don't know of any parties that happen, really It's just study Hey, do you wanna study on the weekend? That's our idea of a party UMR is growing, but that growth does not need to happen in the historic district don't use us as an excuse to destroy important parts of the city.
Please don't take these buildings away from us. Thank you. So we have, Sydney Elifson. I hope I got that right. Hello. My name is Sydney Ellefson Williams, and I grew up here in Rochester, and I work as a local realtor. I have a deep appreciation for the historic properties in our community, whether it's the historic homes in Pill Hill or Old Southwest or it's these prop these historic storefronts on Broadway. These properties must be protected to preserve our city's history. I read a KTTC article that quoted mister Henderson saying,
the buildings are simply old and have no historic significance. I couldn't disagree more. More. We have a very rich history with the Mayo brothers and the Mayo Clinic and all of the buildings associated with that story, but I think it's also important to remember that there are other local businesses that also contributed to making what it is today. The fact that these buildings, in the historic district where they're over a hundred years ago housing local businesses run by local families and they're still being used in the same way today is a huge source of local pride and identity. That is significant. I agree that buildings like these are the heart and soul of our downtown community.
The character and history in these buildings cannot be replicated in modern builds, and it would be an atrocity to demolish them to make way for a modern high rise that are a dime a dozen and won't be used by the majority of Rochester locals. I understand the facades will remain, but it's also the utilization of the properties that's historically significant. I believe it's imperative that we preserve these buildings to preserve the culture and community they create. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next, we have Amber Thompson. Is Amber here? Oh, there he is.
Good evening. Good evening. Mayor Norton, President Schoebring, and members of the council. I am Amber Thompson. I'm a resident of Rochester since 2021. I believe in preserving the historic district because it is a unique and iconic part of Downtown Rochester. Preserving our history is vital for keeping our sense of community alive. Communities are enriched by embracing our history, not tearing it down. There's been discussion tonight of vacant spaces down town, and I'm not sure if this is news for the owner and developer, but these spaces aren't vacant. The businesses located in these buildings are vital also a vital source of community.
I make sure to bring any friends or family that visit Rochester to Cafe STEAM for caffeinating and community. I build my friend group and personal community after moving to Rochester from an event at Cafe STEAM. Art Heads Emporium hosts community events, including Queer Art Nights Without Rochester, which is one of the few sober queer gatherings in Rochester. The other is at Cafe Steam, queer coffee nights, which President Schubert, you've been to. So, you know, it's nice to have that community. Tree Dome brings music and other events to Downtown Rochester, so these are infinitely more valuable than a gymnasium or yet another cookie cutter apartment
situation. Having these historic spaces as a nexus of community helps connect Rochester's past, present, and future. Change is not inherently bad, but demolishing these spaces is not the way to grow Rochester. The founder of Out Rochester put it best saying, I believe we should preserve the places that make Rochester special and that bring communities together, and this block is one of those places. I am joining my voice to the chorus tonight to say please say yes to our history and our treasured past, and please say no to this request to remove the historic designation.
Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have Melissa Thompson. Hello, members of city council, Mr. President, and Mayor Norton. My name is Melissa Thompson. I have been a Rochester resident since 2021, but before that, left Rochester in 1999. And sufficient to say that the Rochester my parents moved us from is very different than the Rochester that I moved to. And I chose to come back to Rochester, and I'm always looking for ways to connect with the community, connect with our history. I believe in preserving the historic district because it is a piece of Rochester that
is valuable connecting us to the past. Not that long ago, for a personal project for a graduate school class, I put together a digital library that featured postcards of Rochester dated before 1920. And I was surprised learning and seeing how few of Rochester's sites from that time still exist, how few buildings. The historic district, despite all of Rochester's change, was the most recognizable of all of these. This also helped me in connecting the dots in the goings on and locations of
the surrounding area by being able to locate those images in reference to the historic district. But my favorite part of this historical district is the local businesses that are in these buildings. I have been to community events at Cafe Steam, at Art Ed's Emporium, and at Tree Dome. I have, bought art from Threshold Arts and every time I wear jewelry from Threshold, somebody asks me, where did you find that? And every time I get to tell them, in Downtown Rochester at Threshold. And it gives me a little bit of a sense of pride of our local
community, of our local art. I can say that finding a community in these spaces is one of my favorite things about Rochester. Please say yes to historic Rochester and say no to this request. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have Amy Good evening. My name is Amy Gerritsen, and I also have spoke previously, to the previous city council, in support of the historic district downtown. And I come here tonight to share just a few words with you from, South Broadway Business Owners,
Nate Nelson and Maggie Panetta, the purveyors of Treedot. They write, these buildings and their tenants have created truly vibrant public spaces, attracted economic growth, and fostered civic pride. If these properties were not on the historic property inventory, these buildings are vulnerable to demolition and new construction, which we feel will also set a dangerous precedent for potential future historic property downtown. The 300 block of South Broadway is a significantly trafficked area of downtown that has
developed into a true hub of arts, culture, and community gathering in Rochester. When relocating our shop from Winona, Minnesota, we sought out the 300 block of South Broadway due to its history and developing cultural spaces like Cafe Steep, Threshold Arts, and Artheads Emporium. We valued the history of these buildings, which housed music spaces such as the Bach Music Building, 19 40 8 to 1971, and Broadway Records, 1980s through about 02/2002.
We've received countless compliments about the look and the feel of our building. Visitors often note that they feel transported to another time and place, or that spaces like ours are often reserved for larger metro areas due to aesthetic appeal and quality of the small businesses on the block. Our location has been paramount to our substantial success as a retailer and live music listening room. Since 2021, we have hosted and participated in hundreds of events and live music shows for all ages and seen revenue increase nearly twofold in each year of business,
all of which we credit to the vibrancy of this block. Unlike other segments of downtown, we are a collaborative, communicative, and friends with our neighbors. This collective of young, small business owners is something the city should take pride in and protect, not disrupt and demolish. Following our re our relocation from Winona to Rochester in 2021, this area gained new businesses, including Type Hop, Threshold Arts, Mezza nine,
LC's Venue, and Morrow to name a few. It is clear that business owners value the historic nature of the area. The Downtown Commercial Historic District anchors foot traffic outside of Peace Plaza. And any disruption would deeply affect businesses from the 300 block of South Broadway, historic Third, And First Ave. The construction in Peace Plaza from 2020 to to 2022 caused significant closures and disruptions to local businesses. Can downtown endure losses like this again?
If construction were to occur in the center of this block, it is likely that businesses will not return to the area and that neighboring businesses, Kathy's Pub, Thai Pop, perhaps others, would be highly affected. We implore you to consider the larger ramifications of this appeal in regards to the larger downtown ecosystem. For these reasons, we urge you to deny the appeals support of the historic preservation committee's recommendation to deny removal of 309311313315317 South Broadway Avenue from the historic inventory,
and to support businesses located in this area now and into the future. Thank you for your time. Good evening, President Schoebring, members of the council, and Mayor Norton. Thank you for your time this evening. I'm Becky Monphetit, Rochester resident and small business owner. I'm a third generation excuse me lifelong resident of Rochester area and a lover of history. My great grandfather operated a service station and boarding house on the corner of current day Civic Center Drive and Center Street. I have the unique perspective of directly observing the city's changes from the past several
decades as well as the perspectives Rochester, Minnesota. I receive a lot of communication from people who who are lonely, who are looking to connect. And do I have a recommendation of where they can do that? More often than not, I find myself encouraging people to head to the historic district, to walk around and see what is happening, to pop their heads into creasels, give shadow rocket rosebud Spirit Dog a little scratch behind the ears, hear a story, and look up for the best views. To enjoy a warm or refreshing drink at Cafe Steam, browse the curated music selection at Tree Dome,
support local artists at Threshold Arts, or to simply breathe in the magic that is Art Head's Emporium. I recommend this area because I trust it. They are a welcoming space for all. I believe in the preservation of this historic district because I've seen incredible history built here, and now I wanna see it preserved here. Significant aspects of my family's history in Rochester have been lost to development, growth, and demolition in the name of progress. We only have dusty photographs as memories of what used to be. The historic buildings in question are more than structures.
They're part of our collective story as a city. They tell the story of through architecture, the generations that passed through them before us, and the love and care of the tenants that are passionately creating new stories, art, food, and commerce for our community. These buildings have a history of supporting the arts and are clearly a location that provides the concept of third place to so many, a gathering spot outside of one's home, their first place, and workplace, their second place, where people can relax, connect, and engage in social interaction.
Broadway Records was located in the historic district in the nineties, and it was my third place as an awkward, curious, and music loving teenager. Development amenable to higher education was mentioned. However, students don't just need a place to sleep. They need a place to live, to explore, to recreate, and to blow off the steam of rigorous academic stressors. Architectural historical preservation matters, even with its cost, because it safeguards the cultural, emotional, communal value embedded in the built environment. Preservation comes at a cost, but so does erasure. Once a historic structure is gone,
its legacy is irretrievable. Keeping just a facade is like framing a beautiful piece of artwork and throwing away the original. It strips away the history, context, and meaning. Frank Lloyd Wright, whose very work has touched our community, said, Buildings too are children of the earth and of time. This district deserves the respect needed to build a lasting historic and architectural legacy in Rochester. Please keep this district from becoming an old, dusty photograph. Please vote to preserve the small amount of history we have left. Thank you. Thank you.
Our last speaker, during the public hearing. So I will alright. Oh, so that, concludes our, speaker list, and I will, at this point, close the public hearing. And before I invite the applicant back up for his rebuttal, I did want to, address my colleagues. We do have in our rules and guidelines that we are to take a break every two hours, and I am looking for guidance as to whether we should push through this agenda
item and then take a break at that point. That would be my inclination if, council members are good with that. With that, we will invite mister Henderson back up to, for his five minute, rebuttal. Thank you, president Schoebring and members of the council and honorable mayor in Horton. Well, you heard a lot of passion there and and comments about their desire for these buildings. I do appreciate the fact that people have enjoyed these buildings without any doubt. But going way back, they've all said they couldn't afford market rents. If I were to charge market rents,
they would leave. So, unfortunately, you know, trying to help them out and and making them have viable businesses, and even you've heard acknowledgment tonight that some of them are doing really well. Well, I can provide you information about the the rents they're paying. And I guess it's time that things will have to change. I just cannot continue to rent these spaces for what we're renting them for. And and pay the taxes, frankly, tax bills just came out. And I think a lot of you heard about what's happening with real estate taxes. One of our properties went up 29%. All these went up 6%.
One of the tenants, I won't say which one it is, doesn't even pay enough in rent to pay our taxes. So it's pretty clear that they've enjoyed these buildings, and and I'm glad they have. But they have not been able or willing or, to pay the rent that it takes to allow that to go on. So I appreciate the passion. I love the fact they've loved these buildings. But they've loved them, and that's great. And I hope they've loved them well enough to even buy them. They haven't set before to do that. And, I I don't know what else to say. We cannot continue to rent these buildings for what they're renting them for.
And, this isn't a wise investment. There's ongoing repair. They don't heal themselves. These old buildings need a lot of of tender loving care. And, frankly, we are not passing the charges off to the tenants. So that would be something else. They are not familiar with really what market rate rents look like. They've had that opportunity to enjoy, really favorable conditions. And I guess I did it to myself. And not just me, my partners. So, Grant Meiklitz has the same feeling I have. I'd really have tenants and no tenants, but from what we've just heard,
now it's working against me. We've tried to be favorable. We've tried to help the Harris community. And now you've just heard that I'm a bad guy because we wanna do something different with the building. They just won't work like they are now. It's just that simple. I don't know what else I can tell you. Things would have to change considerably. My guess would be if we were to step they were to have a conversation with us about what it really takes to support these buildings, I frankly, I don't think they would be there. So I don't know what their alternatives are. I think there is plenty of other, space available.
I think they probably couldn't afford the rent there either. Otherwise, I would think someone would be looking at it, for the fear that theirs would be torn down. We've worked hard to save the fronts. We've worked hard to satisfy the needs of obviously mixed needs and desires in the community. You've heard a lot about the art community needs and others, but there is a need of the University of Minnesota Rochester. So how do we balance those needs, and how do we make the most out of what the future of our community should have? We need students. We need people to fill the jobs and needs of the community and health care. And what better opportunity is to do that in Rochester,
Minnesota? So that's another need that, obviously, this group could not acknowledge. So I appreciate the fact they've enjoyed these buildings. I've done a lot of restoration myself. I live in the in the existing the old Mammer Valley School. But I do think I've got a sense for what is truly historic, what's valuable to to save, and what's basically marginal. And it doesn't have the ability to really support itself and sustain itself long term. This is not the gateway I think we would like to have for our city, a progressive city, and one that has other needs right now. I think there's plenty of space.
A lot of them could consider going to. I think there's somewhere over 400,000 square feet of vacant space in Rochester downtown right now. Now. So I guess we'd have to come down to a discussion about how bad they want to stay because I I can't continue. We can't continue the way we are. And we bought these buildings and we've been waiting to get this approved all this time, much longer than we ever expected. And we've been enduring the consequences of it for all this period, which has been three or four years, if not ten years in some cases. Again, I appreciate the passion.
You've heard some very passionate stories today, but I don't know what I can say about it other than they have to face reality in terms of what the market rates are and what they'd have to pay to operate those buildings in today's conditions. With the expenses we endure, I any one of you, I can sit down and show you personally. I don't want to reveal it publicly. I don't think it's fair to them. I don't think it's fair to anybody to see the finances. But I don't think they want me to reveal them, frankly. So, we surely will if somebody wants to see it because Thank you, mister Henderson. Welcome. Thank you. And, actually, may if you may, just stay there for a moment because,
we are going to now, do question and answers. But I do have a question that you just to your final point there. In your application, you had the opportunity to provide, information on economic hardship, and you didn't provide anything. And you just spoke to economic hardships. So how do you, expect us to make a decision based on what sounds like economic hardship without any documentation? I I don't think it's a fair request for us to reveal that as confidential
information. If anybody wants to personally see it, I'm happy to sit down with them individually. I have no we have no problems whatsoever to to show it to anybody that wants to see it. I just don't think it's the right thing to do. I don't want the rents they pay, and I don't think they do either, to be public. So that's our reason. Okay. With that, council member Wall. I would, like the city attorney to weigh in on the quasi judicial decision that awaits the council. Thank you, council member Wall, council president,
council members, mayor Norton. Just briefly, and I'm I'm sure that director Woodward can also speak to this point, a reminder to all of you that this is a quasi judicial decision where you are making essentially findings of fact through this hearing process today and applying it to the applicable law, that is in the ordinances in the UDC that's been set out before you in the RCA. It's just important, I think, as you know, through a quasi judicial process that, that's how you are making your decision.
You're not making your decision based on other things that aren't part of the law. So for example, the proposed findings that are before you through the RCA consistent with staff's recommendation is the findings that would support that particular conclusion. If the Council were choosing a different direction we would need to sort through the appropriate findings, again, that apply to the law as set out through the UDC. Thank you.
Councilmember Palmer. I have a couple questions. So back to the city attorney. If we decided to economic hardship, that would be one of the reasons that we would deny or we would approve I guess, we would deny the, recommendation. Is that correct? That is that is one of the factors. Yes. Okay. So if mister Henderson could come up, we got a few questions. So when did you start owning this building? 03/2017, I purchased and had my own business in there for a long time. I think it goes back thirty five years. K. You bought it from Alexander Ferris.
Is that correct? Yes. Okay. And you've worked on a lot of historic buildings in Rochester, if I remember right, the one on First Avenue. What is that? Street building on on First Avenue. Yep. Okay. And then on Third Street, you've done some remodels there or some buildings? Yeah. The Kennedy Building way back. We did the new Merchant Exchange Building, which is new, but it's made to look historic. I don't think many people realize that it's a brand new building. The Taphouse building, we did. So, I could list several more if you'd like me to. But, we've been involved in a lot of them. Okay. And then did you do the building across the street from you on Broadway?
On Broadway. I did not. You did not? But you're gonna and my partners did that building. Your partners did. Yep. And you're gonna put a skyway between your building and that building? We thought that's what the city wanted. Years ago, we created an easement through the Payne Building to allow for that to fulfill the master plan. So in our agreements with the city, we allowed an easement. And our understanding was they would want an easement through a new building, so it copies the same thing. Recently, the staff has said there's no interest in that skyway. K. I I've not heard that confirmed by the council. I that would came from the staff.
So And you met with the staff, would you say, 18 times? 13. 13. And you're originally, you wanted to tear the whole site down and start over from scratch, which would be more reasonable. But you've you're now proposing to save the fronts of the buildings. Is that correct? That's correct. Yeah. And but this could be cost. So what does that cost about? It's at least 700,000 per front. To completely restore them. The brick is falling off, frankly, unfortunately. The the the ties that hold the brick on to the backup brick have been
severed, and, they're starting to bow out. Out. And someday, it's probably they won't stay up much longer. So, there's yeah. They just need and the windows are bad. There's water intrusion, and it's just a constant, constant effort to keep it up. And so right now, the property is valued about $3,500,000, I think is what the assessor has said. Yeah. Mhmm. Okay. And you're proposing your new building would be how much? Probably well, in today's market, it's probably north of 50,000,000. 50 million dollars? So if the current taxes now are $65,000 a year, the $50,000,000
building, our taxes would be about $375,000 Well, probably at least that. We pay more than that $3.18 commons and this building would be assisted to that. So by the time it was rebuilt, it we probably be paying close to $450,000 Okay. And now you're in front of the city council and we have to balance, all the different needs that we have. And so the economic hardship is one of the things that you're you're trying to prove and one of them is is that you you can't get rents enough to pay for the property taxes and the upkeep. Is that is that what you're trying to say? True. Insurance.
Don't forget about that. Insurance. Insurance. The list goes on, which I I can I think we do have that with us if somebody wants us to take the time to show all of you? If you really wanna dive into economic hardship, we're prepared to show you that. K. Excuse me, mister president. Go ahead. If you could ask the vendor, Craig. I'm sorry to interrupt. If you could just ask the speaker to make sure that, he's directing his speech towards the microphone. I'm just concerned about the record here, and I think and I'm having a hard time hearing as well. Thank you for pointing that out. The small microphone is what you have to focus on. Okay.
Go ahead, council member. And the building you're proposing is a 29 units? Yes. And and and you, have an agreement with the you to to help with that with the gymnasium. Is that correct? We have conversations with them with not just you but other higher ed providers as well. Okay. And then that would add density our density and that would be our housing that we need for Rochester. When I viewed the the historic, commissions meeting, they were talking about the facade and you're gonna stake that facade, leave it, set back your building 25 feet and then go up with that. Three eighteen,
is that nine stories? The one that's Correct. So when you look at it, you know, one of the things was the facade was was a big deal to some of the historic preservation people. But I looked to my right and I saw, the Garden Inn and then I looked to the back and I see the three eighteen. So you're only gonna be two more stories higher than than that. Isn't that correct? Correct. And, actually, further in that presentation, I didn't have enough time to get there, but we have a rendering showing the view coming up South Broadway. If they can bring it up again, I can show you that view. But you're definitely getting into the territory of taller buildings. So it would not,
at all be out of line and, would visibly work in that neighborhood. Can I interrupt for a minute? Council member Palmer, I you do know that we have two items, and some of your questions are more related to g five. So if you can keep your questions, to the request for landmark removal. But don't we need to have the reason number three is economic vitality? That is a part of this. We're sticking to. Okay. And that is what you're working on is right now is telling us economically it's not viable to keep the buildings going?
Yes. Okay. Thank you. Council Member Keane. Thanks. I have a question for staff. And I just want to understand that, the request for landmark removal, is it looks like it's all, five addresses. But with the saving of the of the facades in the front, how did it get to be five versus the one building that was gonna come down the total building was gonna come down? How did it go from a re a request to, to pull to, to take them all out of the historic district. So, thank you for the question. So part of where the demolition occurred, and there is a bit of a memo that is attached from the building official.
So this would require a demolition permit for also removing the back part of the building. So it does maintain the facades, but the back portions would also be removed. And so the significant amount of what would need to be removed would trigger a demolition permit, which is why all of the buildings are included in this, request. I I think I've heard that before, but I wanna understand that when is that a staff judgment? Or is that what because if you're saving the facades, aren't you therefore attempting to save the historic, like, the community's, interaction with the with the building as opposed to saying,
no. It's the inside of the building, and that's is that a different thing that we're getting involved in? Because this idea of setting it back and then doing a modern building, I thought that was accepted in the historic districts. But apparently, something's happening here that doesn't allow it. So I would I would note that, like, looking at design guidelines in terms of what can be built is probably part of the second public hearing as it relates to the certificate of appropriateness. But in general, the amount of demolition that would need to occur is what is triggering the removal of these properties from the historic district because,
in essence, they would become non contributing to the historic district. And the demolition piece that we included in the UDC also reflects when you would need a permit, through our building. So when a demolition permit would be required versus an alteration permit. So demolition permit, which is why this is coming before you to be reviewed. Alright. That that that's helpful. Can I can I assume that was some of the give and take in these 13 meetings that we've heard about? Or is that just the this is the plan to come in and the city interprets it to be demolition? So so part of the review is what does that project look like?
But then, ultimately, we have to align what is being proposed and submitted as an application and what aligns with the UDC and the historic, overlay within that and the historic HPC requirements. So as part of the requirements and overall looking at what is that proposed project and and then how is the best path forward, to make that application process. And so as part of that, we identified that we would need to go through this step because of what is being demolished within the structures. Let me see if I can ask it slightly different. Could the city have recommended a plan that would have allowed not all five,
but at least four of the structures to remain in the historic district and still be developed? I I think there's always a way within our design guidelines and the secretary of interior standards, which really provide the overall review of a proposed project, which is kind of related to how a certificate of appropriateness is completed, and what does that project look like versus, to what extent that is being done. And so in the second public hearing under the certificate of appropriateness, so we're kind of mixing the two different actions. That's really looking at, does that proposed project meet our design guidelines in terms of a rehabilitation or a
new construction, and how does that fit in in terms of scale and massing, and what does and so that is part of why that certificate of appropriateness, which is a separate action that needs to be looked at. Right. Right. I and I appreciate the idea that we have two different things in front of us, and we're trying to keep them separate. Difficult to do. But I but I still wanna make sure that I understand that the the the owners are coming in saying they're maintaining the facade. I believe it's the staff saying even with that, it's still a demolition. It's not a that is that a is that a judgment or that's a that's
a percentage of change? Or how how does that come to be? So we're noting that there is a required for demolition, and that's also something where we consulted the building official. Like, to what extent of what we're seeing do you consider this either an alteration permit or a demolition permit that's required? So that is part of the reason we included that analysis from the building official as well. So we evaluated both of those things to determine what is that path forward and due to the extent of that demolition is where we landed with this project. Okay. And and Just so anyone's listening to the discussion here,
there was one building where the facade is coming down. And in order to do that, that would have to be taken out. I just wanted to make sure I understood the logic to get us to say all five of the addresses were coming out. That is correct. And it's, 309, which is being proposed to be full demolition. Okay. Thank you. Mayor Norton. Thank you. I have a a I think a technical question, and maybe it's for the city attorney. I'm struggling a little bit with this discussion of the quasi judicial role when, part when it appears that we're starting to veer toward discussing the economic viability
as a determining factor, when in fact throughout this whole process, that has not been brought forward as a factor and we're making a decision on the fly without any facts and without having professionals having looked through all those documents and making a recommendation. So, am I, I guess, correct to be concerned that new information is being brought forward that was not part of a recommendation, or at least trying to be brought forward as part of a recommendation that was not brought forward at the other steps in the process? And then how do we fairly make
a last minute decision without any facts? Mr. Mayor, I can give a try at that and Director Woodward can fill in an additional, space there. I think what I would say is, I think I understand your point. And to the extent that we're kind of equating this with sort of a courtroom process scene, I would say that it goes to the weight of the evidence. K? You've heard some commentary tonight about, economic hardship. You get to evaluate, the weight or credibility of that testimony,
for lack of a better term. And to the President's point, I guess, whether there was an opportunity that was missed to otherwise provide more substantial evidence or background supporting that point. So, you can still attempt to evaluate that point based on what you've heard tonight. Yeah. And I would just note that there are three different options, which is why we presented those three options to be reconsidered, economic hardship. But we also noted in our findings that no documentation was provided to support that,
so we weren't able to evaluate that. And so our findings also note that there was no evidence submitted for that and that they we in our recommended denial is based on the findings, and I'm happy to just reread them or we can put them on the screen just so that, council is aware. But it's that the property has maintained their historic significance and historic integrity from when they were determined contributing to the historic district in 2024. District in 2024. The historic district maintains its historic significance and historic integrity from when it was, designated as a landmark in 2024 and that no evidence was submitted to support a
finding of economic hardship. And so, Mr. Chair, thank you, both for those explanations. We've kind of gone down this path before when we try to do something on the fly. And I guess I would like to just recommend to the council that we're very careful about trying to do something on the fly when no evidence and no financial documentation has been brought before us, nor has it been run by folks that are professionals, which we are not. And so, from my position, I would say I have significant concerns if that's the direction the council is going
to try to go this evening. Council member Doreen. I I thank mayor Norton for bringing up that point. As I was looking at the the proposal brought forward, the economic hardship portion of it was the only portion that I could read into, into thinking about going against the HPC HPC recommendation, but there were no facts or data provided there. And I, I am just wondering through this entire process why the applicant had so much hesitancy to provide that data, which would have helped to make the case.
Is that a question to the applicant? Or or or, or, Director Woodward or, yeah, anyone. Mister Henderson? Yeah. Well, thank you. Appreciate the question. Like I said before, I I really think it's this is our first experience with the UTC and how it's been applied. And I really do not think that asking us for that confidential information is a fair way a fair criteria within UDC. I think it's it's confidential information, like I said. And and, by the way, I would hope that somebody would give me a little respect here for owning buildings
and running businesses in this town. I'm not lying to you. I'm telling you there is economic hardship, and we're happy to show it to you. Please show a little bit of credibility to a local that's tried to run a business in old buildings and allow these people to have enjoyment of them as long as they have. So time is run at source. Can I can I add a follow-up question then? Go ahead. I understand, the desire to keep private information private in terms of rent charging, all that kind of stuff. But there are other economic hardships that you experience having historical buildings,
maintenance, all that kind of stuff, none of that data was provided. So, again, is as the applicant, do you consider that confidential information? And if not, why not provide that information? It wouldn't be the whole picture. It it wouldn't be the whole picture. I mean, it's public information. You can go and look at the real estate taxes. I think anybody can look at that and make their own assessment of what we're paying in taxes alone. All I would have to add to that is the rents we're getting. And it would become abundantly clear, like I said, and I'll say it again. One of the tenants, I won't reveal which one it is,
isn't even paying rent high enough to support the real estate taxes, let alone maintenance insurance and everything else we pay. And and I would say I've done it to myself, probably. Like I said, we wanted tenants in there because we didn't anticipate this process taking this long. We didn't expect to be in this position as long as we've been in it. And it's just time that it's gonna stop. Yep. And if they're willing to pay a lot more rent, and we can tell you what that's gotta be. It's a pretty easy calculation. We don't need some high paid expensive consultant. I mean, I can tell you exactly any real estate person in this community can do the
same. And I can tell you. I've owned a property, experienced it for a long enough time that we can give you that information, and I think it'll become be abundantly clear. And I'm happy to do that if you wanna, I guess, if you wanna table it and want us to provide that. We actually felt out of the three criteria that we didn't agree with the first two. The way they assessed it based on the way we assessed it, like I said, is so subjective. You can twist and spin this any way you want to and just read those criteria. I mean, you can make a case any way you would like to. And frankly, all due respect to the staff, they have a position the way they took their position.
We did not agree with their Yep. And Sir Henderson, I'm gonna stop you because you're you're kind of moving away from council member Doring's question. So, do you have any follow-up? I don't. I did not mean any, that you were doing any malfeasance or anything and not not providing that information. I am just looking for that information to help inform a decision. Yeah. Councilmember Miller. Thank you for the information. I guess my question is also related to economic hardship. I'm new to the council this year and so I have not been part of
the last legislative actions, but when I look at the process of establishing the UDC, establishing the historic district, hearing from building owners in those hearings that the cost of maintenance is a primary barrier, and then working with the DMC Corporation Board to establish incentives for repairs, for adaptive reuse, for other ways to increase the value of those properties to offset property taxes. My question is, have you applied or considered applying for any of those incentives for some of these ways that might increase the value or the productivity of your buildings.
Yeah. With respect, there's a good answer for that one, an easy answer. It's a matching fund. So whatever we get, we match it. So why would we continue to pour more money into a building that doesn't support itself now with the revenue it can generate or the potential revenue it can generate? Why would anybody do that? Other than maybe for the crazy reasons I've been doing it so far. But, it wouldn't make sense to to continue putting money into those buildings right now under the conditions. If market rates were different, you know, there were a lot of people looking to rent rent space downtown and it was
in high demand. And, there's other properties we can show you in Rochester that are getting four to five times more in rent than what we're charging. And I have all that. I can show anybody that wants to see it. We're not charging $45 a square foot. In one case, it's $6 a square foot. And, again, I appreciate your your investment, information for us, not as experts, right, but as a policy board to be able to evaluate. And when I look to our our staff as professionals and experts in these areas, what I see is a recommendation,
and I don't have any evidence legislative actions that we've taken as a body to establish and support this district, I I I see a a gap. And I guess my question my question is just trying to understand that gap and Yeah. Not not choosing some of those Appreciate that. Yeah. My answer would be somewhat of what I just said, though. There were three criteria. And we didn't even think we needed to hit on the hardship one because it would reveal confidential information. We felt the two criteria we only need to meet one. We felt that we met at least one, if not two, of the previous criteria, not just hardship.
So we did not focus on hardship for the reason I've said over and over. It's confidential information. So I if we have spent time, and I spent time talking about hardship, I thought it was pretty clear to everybody with the big spaces we have, excuse me, and things that are happening downtown. Unfortunately, these spaces are not renting. And many times, there's a good reason for that. And respectfully, Mr. Henderson, I would ask on the first two criteria. The district was established in last year, correct? Yes. Correct. And we're evaluating any change from those criteria which were evaluated at the time, correct?
The Landmark District, I guess, that I Perhaps this is a staff question. Are we evaluating Yeah. Maybe as because I don't recall. I mean, I don't remember the Landmark District. We were just simply being asked to be removed from Landmark District. I might direct this to staff and Go ahead. Thank you for the question. The historic District was approved by city council in January of twenty twenty four. There was a previous request when it was just listed on the potential landmark list, from the applicant to remove it at that time, and that was not recommended. And and I understand that. And so what we're being asked to evaluate tonight is is the historic significance and
historic integrity and should there be any changes from the the evaluation that was done at the time of the establishment in 2024. Is that correct? That is correct. We're not reevaluating a past legislative decision. Correct? That is correct. You're evaluating whether there's been any changes to historic integrity or historic significance with these properties since it was established in 2024. Okay. Thank you. And so, respectfully, mister Henderson, my question to you would be on points criteria one and two. What in your opinion has changed since this district was established?
Because in my mind, we're not reevaluating the twenty twenty four legislative action, we're evaluating changes. Well, I think we made the same points back when we requested to be removed. So I don't think we've changed anything from our perspective on it. Okay. Thank you. It's clearly what the criteria requires and we don't agree with how the staff assessed it. Thank you. Further questions? Is there a motion on this item? I'll make a motion. Council Member Palmer? I'll make a motion to remove 309311313315317 South Broadway from the landmark designation because of
economic hardship. I'll second it. Motion has been made by Councilmember Palmer and, seconded by Councilmember Fredericks. Councilmember Palmer, you have the floor. I think the economic hardship is pretty easy to see. We have heard that rents are low, that they're not making the cost. You look at at the, taxes that are paid on those billings of $65,000 which is is not the best use for that, property. And so I think that those, criteria have been well met. Council member Fredericks, do you have a I understand the desires and the passion of the 30 speakers
we had tonight. I am passionate about old structures and history myself. With that said, I believe in property owner rights. Of any all owners of private property should have the right to do as they wish within law and zoning. Council member Wahl, one of the reasons I asked about the quasi judicial is because, and I think it was correctly, stated that, passion is not a part of this decision. So quite dispassionately, with respect to the good work that mister Henderson has done, in this town And, with respect to the passion by the 30 speakers,
I really haven't, heard evidence that would allow me to support the current motion. Thank you. Council I'll just say, I will be voting against this motion. And I think, to disagree with council member Palmer, I don't think economic, hardship has been proven. Mister Henderson did have an opportunity to provide that information to the HPC, and, and I watched the HPC, meeting, and the same line of questioning was a part of that discussion.
And, I was looking for you to give us some documentation, in the interim. And, and I, feel that you have not provided that. And at the eleventh hour, you you tell us that we can all look at it if we would like to. But you knew this meeting was happening today, and you didn't, you didn't reach out to me as a council member to offer that, opportunity to me until now.
So I can't say that, that I have the evidence to show that you have economic hardship. And, to council member Miller's line of questioning, there hasn't been any changes to, the historic significance that was decided by this council a year ago, and we set a a, precedent there. We, in, June, we, we initiated a 1,700,000, project to offer grants and loans and $5,000,000
from, the DMC, to provide, grants and loans to the businesses, along the historic district. Just two weeks ago here in this chamber, we voted to provide a hundred and $27,000 to provide visioning for streetscape and, the the area around all those businesses. So we have we've made a decision, and we continue to work on building what we need to see to have a
historic district. I believe if we do if we, allow, this change, it's really going to, set a precedent for, for the future degradation of the historic district. So I will be voting against this motion. Member council member Keane. Yeah. Again, I I do appreciate the fact that we're in a quasi judicial mode of operation right now. But I I think it's fairly easy to, like, step away from this and see that there is an economic problem when you have
properties that are being taxed taxed based on what somebody could come in and build something else on them. And then we expect the people who are there right now to be able to do this. I I really respect these owners for saying we're not gonna get those sort of market rate rents, but we're gonna keep our buildings occupied. We're gonna keep things going on in here. And I would think the normal if markets work the way they should, the value of the buildings will come down over time to be commensurate with what the rents are, or the other building sitting empty will will not be able to make money.
The the fact is, though, that right now, that this goes back to, you know, eight sixteen months ago, the council did did vote in and the we're working under the laws that we do have on a landmark district in downtown. I look across this council, and it's a little scary. The three people that were here voted against it at the time. But it is the law of the city right now that we have a historic district. And what we have is a challenge to it, and we have to figure a way through it. Again, I'll say it again. I really do appreciate that we're trying to make use of these buildings.
Call it in the interim, call it whatever you want. But these are places being activated, but not at market rates. And yet, when the assessors look, they compare this building to the other properties nearby that have been upgraded and can can get the higher rents. So we have a structural problem in our city, but we're not gonna I don't think we should solve it by knocking down the thing that we just voted for eighteen months ago and saying we have an historic district. Council member Fredericks. I would just say that one difference going forward is anybody coming into this district buying property is going to be aware of what the district is.
He had this building for thirty five years. He owned these other buildings, I'm thinking, eight, four, three years. All longer than it's been, you know. This got put in his lap, okay? As a property owner, that's difficult, okay? We had the Pill Hill thing come ahead of us a few few weeks ago. Obviously, everybody there was for it. It was a good thing for that district. It made a lot of sense. He he got put in this position. And now he now we're holding his feet to the fire to try and make him him figure out a way to make it work. It's a huge investment. It hurts. Do we want business owners investing in this community?
Do we really want do we really want people to move here to make investments? I heard I heard Patrick Seed get up in front of the DMC two years ago, begging for stuff like this to happen. He's trying to make this happen. It's way bigger than the loud voices we're hearing in the room tonight. Please order in the chamber. Please. Please. It is, We're gonna do that. Councilmember, please. You don't need to respond. Council member Palmer. I'm gonna make a motion to, table this until we get some financial information. I'm gonna have to ask our, city attorney if we do can we table something when a motion is on the
table? Can the can the mover of the original motion table it? Or does he does that council member replace his previous motion? Looking to the parliamentarians to help me with this. I'll give the parliamentarian an opportunity first, but we'll weigh in if if need be. Clerk Kasel? I believe we can continue it until a further date if we set. I'll make I'll make a motion to continue until the May 19. Is, are are you are is that a replacement to your previous?
I didn't get a second on the previous. Yes. You did. You got from, talking about your your motion to I don't think it has to replace. I think, a motion to continue takes precedence. Correct. Okay. I need a second, though. Is there a I'll second. The, a motion to, table To continue until the May 19 so financial information can be provided. To continue to, the May 19, and a seconded by council member Fredericks. Is there discussion? Request a roll call vote. Please take the roll. Clerk Keesel.
Council member Keane? Nay. Council member Miller? Nay. Council member Wall? Nay. Council member Fredericks? Nay. Yes. Council member Palmer? Nay. Council member Doreen? Nay. Council president Schubert? Nay. Motion fails. We are back to the original motion. Is there any further discussion on Councilmember Palmer's motion to, can you rephrase your motion? The motion was moved to remove three zero nine, three 11, three 13, three 15, three 17 South Broadway from the landmark designation because of economic hardship.
Further discussion? If not, clerk Kiesl Kiesl, can you take the role on this? Council member Keane? Nay. Council member Miller? Nay. Council member Wall? Nay. Council member Fredericks? Yes. Council member Palmer? Nay. Council member Dohring? Nay. Council president Schoebring? Nay. Motion failed. Is there a motion, on this item? Sure. I'll make a motion adopting a resolution denying the request for landmark removal at 309311313315317 South Broadway.
Second. There a motion has been made by council member Miller and seconded by council member Dohring. Anything further to add, mister Spindra Craig? If we get, could get some clarification from director Woodword. Miss Woodword, please go ahead. Thank you, council president. I just wanna clarify that it is based on the findings provided in the packet and by teammates, and that's included. Is that part of your motion, council member? Amendment accepted. Yes. Based on the findings. I accept that as well. Okay. Anything further to add, council? That Clerk Keeso, please take the roll.
Council member Keane? Aye. Council member Miller? Aye. Council member Wall? Aye. Council member Fredericks? Nay. Council member Palmer? Nay. Council member Doreen? Aye. Council president Schoebring? Aye. Motion passes five to two. Thank you. We will take a, eight minute break and take up the, next, public hearing. Oh, and before members of the public leave, I do notice the the 30 people that signed up for, g four also signed up for g five.
If you do not want to speak in g five, I'm gonna leave these out there, and you can cross your name off. And, and that will make our public hearing a little shorter than the first one. Thank you all. Yeah. Folks, if you could please be seated, we're going to continue the council meeting. Please take your seat. I'm speaking directly to the Kreasels here. Alright. Our next item is Recording in progress. Our next item is g five, which is the appeal of the Heritage Preservation Commission denial of certificate of appropriate appropriateness,
by three eleven Broadway Development LLC project. And, miss Woodward, take it away. I don't know if your your mic is on. Okay. Hold it closer. I've also heard some, comments that people on this side can't aren't hearing as well. So if you can just hold the mic really close. I don't oh, now that's on. There we go. I don't think it was on before. Here we go. So what is the next item before you is whether or not, the certificate of Next one. Is that it? Two. There we go. Tried to get them all together.
So, so this is an appeal of the certificate of appropriateness. The certificate of appropriateness was reviewed by the HPC. Generally, the HPC provides a recommendation and that'sand any appeals would come before city council. And so, the certificate of appropriateness really deals with whether, the proposed project within a historic district meets the the guidelines that are established for the historic district, including both our, Secretary of Interior standards as well as our design guidelines, and I'm gonna walk through a little bit of that. But I just wanted to note, and I think we've kind of gone through the majority of kind of what this
project looks like, but it's really a residential tower. There's a glass elevator on Broadway, which is that three zero nine that would come through and be fully demolished. The proposal is to include a ground floor gymnasium, which is really gonna be two stories, so that would take out both of those floors. There's interior parking via the alley behind the buildings, and it would just maintain the facades of those other structures. So once again, this is really looking at alterations within the historic district as it relates to our, those guidelines. So, district as it relates to our, those guidelines. So there was an HPC decision to deny this,
and this is being appealed by the applicant to city council for review. I just want to also note because it's one of the components when as the historic district ordinance was established and then incorporated into the UDC, we do take into account local design guidelines, so it's not just secretary of interior standards. And these local design guidelines really also, allow for consistency in looking at some of the priorities that the council has and the city has. And so those also include environmental sustainability, safety, equity, and compassion. So those also are part of the design guidelines and were included as we were
building out the historic heritage preservation program here. When we're looking at alterations, there's a number of different guidelines that are provided overall with the Secretary of Interior standards, and they're all listed on the screen, but I'm going to kind of really note that the one that we're really looking at is number nine, and that is new additions and exterior alterations or related new construction. And we're really looking at, what does this new addition look like within the historic district and what are the materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property and that the new work will be differentiated
from the old and be compatible, including withespecially with massing and proportion, scale, and size. And so these are the things that were reviewed at HPC in terms of the guidelines and how it relates to the proposed project. And, it was found in HPC. These were the findings, in fact, that were identified and shared from city teammates to, the HPC that the project does not meet the Secretary of Interior standards, particularly number nine, and the new addition would destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the three contributing properties and the relationship to the district.
Incompatible with the historic scale proportions and massing of the district. It's not necessarily just for those individual properties but how the overall district because just as a reminder, this is looking at all of those properties within the district, and that's how it was categorized, and that demolition permit is required, for these to occur. I would note in that there were a lot of it was mentioned before there's probably about 13 meetings. Some of them also had to deal with proposed financing in terms of of accessing potential TIF funding as well as design of what does that look like. Also in the packet was a memo that we we reached out to New History,
which does some consulting work with the city as it relates to evaluating projects. And we had them also look at the project. And that memo is also attached as, to the RCA in terms of what makes a project that would be compatible with those design guidelines and how that could look moving forward. So with that, I will open happy to answer any questions. Great. Thank you, miss Woodward. And we will invite, mister Henderson to, return to the mic. And you have ten minutes to, address the counsel and, state your case.
Welcome back. I'm back. Mister President Schubring, members of the counsel, and honorable mayor, I won't be repetitive. I'm guessing you're gonna hear some passionate arguments that are gonna repeat what they said before. But, I I I think one thing I would like to add to the previous conversation is there are two council members here that did encourage us to spend time trying to come up with a compromise position to make this project viable and workable for the city. You've heard me talk about the 13 meetings we had. If not at every meeting, but maybe every other meeting, we asked the staff, is this a project the city is interested in?
Is interested in? Is this a project the city wants? Excuse me. It's the smaller one. Yeah. The mobile one. Is this the project the city is interested in, us continuing to pursue talking? Every meeting and, they said yes. Yes. This is a project the city is interested in. This is a project we think the staff can support under certain conditions. We worked at least six face to face meetings and 13, total meetings. And never once did we hear, let's just stop talking. We never once heard that. We we're at the point we don't want it, and that is nothing that was ever communicated to us.
So when we left the meeting before, kindly, a lot of the council members, and I think one staff person commented at that same meeting, would you please consider working with our staff to find a compromised position? We did that. We worked diligently. We changed the design, more expense after expense after expense, every meeting, to change the design to try to arrive at a compromised position. So I respect the fact that the councilmen that were here and are still here, suggested that. And we're still interested in the project. And we got that message all along for the last year. So I'm confused,
frankly. And I'm guessing you're confused with this process too because it is extremely confusing. The UDC process, I think we're the first ones to test it, is is very difficult and it's very, very subjective. And you can take a position no matter what your agenda is, quite honestly. And we made we took a position different than theirs. And I don't think there's anything wrong with our position. And I'm not saying anything wrong with theirs. But they don't agree. That's our society today. I mean, a lot of things are like that. They don't agree with the virus assessment. We don't agree with theirs. So, that's how the thing is written, frankly. I don't know how many of you had time to actually read it in detail,
but I think any of you, if you're in our same position, you might argue the same way we are. So, that's where our confusion comes from. We would spend a lot of time and money at the kind suggestions of the council. We want this project. We're interested in it. Would you please work with our staff? We did that. I don't know what more we could have done. Yeah, we're trying to bring a project that brings a lot to the community. There's places people could enjoy buildings much like ours. There's places to go. If they don't wanna pay the rent, that they are probably gonna have to face up to because, like I said, we have taxes that we have to pay.
And we're just not going to subsidize it any longer. I don't know what else I can say. So those are the facts, and we're we're done subsidizing the favorable rents they've enjoyed. And they've gotten a lot of pleasure out of it, which is great. But we can only tolerate so much of that. I'm being totally frank and honest with you. I don't know what else I can say. We we're trying to come forward with something that we've been encouraged to bring forward, and now we're saying you're not interested. So, we spent a lot of time, money, and effort, and a lot of staff time, quite honestly, of your city staff time working with us. And they worked very diligently with us.
They're great, and they did a nice job working with us. I'm not criticizing that at all. But we were earnestly talking to them about a compromised position, and they were too. But now, nothing's been said about that tonight. So, I won't repeat anything what I said previously, but I hope there'd be some comments about that, by the staff we met with because we thought, last we heard, we had a position that they could support. Thank you. Thank you, mister Henderson. At this point, I will open the public hearing and, start with Leah. Hello again. I didn't think I was gonna get up to speak the second time,
but because we don't have economic hardship, proof, I just wanted to share how much I pay for my parcel at 317. I currently pay 2,800 a month. 317 is 12,000 a year for property tax, and I have an email. I've been I haven't wanted to come and talk on this. This is why I didn't last year, because I was afraid of retaliatory measures. And, frankly, the building has not been taken care of. Here is an email from the day after the last meeting.
So January 23 is when we all voted on, preserving this district. The next day, January 24, Leah, as you know, I have held off years increasing your rent at 317 South Broadway. I've even allowed you to pay $24.60 in lieu of the $26.10 this agreement established. We pay the water bill for upstairs, which is why that agreement was made, the apartments upstairs. At this time, the lease rate for 317 will increase to 2,800 starting 03/01/2024.
This lease rate is considerably lower than almost all the rents in downtown area and considerably lower than steam coffee. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, how? Okay. Cafe Steam pays more than we do. That's what we pay. It's 12,000 for each parcel. I believe 311 is 24,000 a year, and 309 might be 2. I'm not sure what their rents are. But I love this block so much, I signed a lease for the building next door, so I know what the rent is going for, and I felt like I could afford that.
So economic hardship. We've had a building that's falling apart, and here is a letter from Christian Cartwright, city clerk's office, on 02/15/2024. We used to have a liquor license at our space, which was a huge part of our business model. Dear Rochester Artheads Emporium. The city of Rochester did not issue a consumption and display liquor license for Rochester Artheads during the twenty twenty three, twenty twenty four license year. Consumption and display licenses are jointly issued by the city of Rochester and the state
of Minnesota. The state requires verification from the city that all local requirements have been met prior to their issuance of this license. While your business provided required documentation, we cannot provide a liquor license to your premises because of the nature of your building was deemed to be in state of disrepair, and our building safety team would not sign off on your lease on your license. In 2022, our building inspectors had expressed concern about the state of your building located at 317 South Broadway, but they signed off,
allowing licensure, but informed your landlord that improvements would be required within the next year before any further permit and license approvals would be granted to relevant tenants in subsequent years. Upon inspection in 2023, no such improvements have been made, and so our building safety team did not approve your licensure. We lost our liquor license. Without approval from city departments deeming a licensed premises acceptable for the use, the office or the city clerk cannot issue a liquor license.
Multiple attempts have been made to ensure compliance by the landlord of your space, But without fundamental improvement of the state of your building, the issue preventing licensure remains. Sincerely yours, Christiane Cartwright. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have Lucy, Kreisel. Good evening again. Yeah. I didn't expect to be up here. It's kind of hard to know what to say. There's no denial of a power dynamic here with, those who are in the spaces. And the landlord and I I just keep the word accountability just keeps,
like, bounding around in my brain. Like, what happens when a property owner denies elemental care for years of a space? I can think of other properties that's happened too in our community. But, like, what does that mean? I just I'm asking a rhetorical question. How do we hold people accountable? This is this has been a plan. I'm just gonna say something like that. I also wanna just touch briefly on we own a historic property, and we applied for, I think sure,
they could always be better, but the awesome financial opportunities that have been afforded us in the historic district, it's we need a new roof, and it is gonna be substantially helpful to have this economic I always get the order of the words wrong, but the historic initiative development. You all know what I'm talking about. Mhmm. It it it's awesome. Right? We have to do it, and we wanna do it because we care. You heard everyone speaking to the the passion, and, like, we are still here. So I just wanna point out,
like, that's a pretty good thing. And the fact that that has not been approached by the owner of these spaces, I think it's just a yellow flag for me. It's concerning. Just thinking of Rochester's future, what I want to share is actually something that, I just want to close, something I loved hearing from the HPC, from Dob Meyer at the last meeting where this was proposed. They said the following, and it it really gave me a beautiful picture of what is possible, and I just asked for us to not lose our imaginations here.
So he said more or less this, there was a lot of discussion about the birthplace of the city, evidence of our origins, and I think that's truly relevant. You look at historic cities across the world, in our state, on the Eastern Seaboard, and when you walk the streets of those cities, and in particular, those districts which are more historic, their appeal does not lie in any given property achieving a certain level of economic productivity. Historic preservation is about more than that. It's about the whole. If you walk the city streets of Rochester One Hundred Years from now,
wouldn't it be neat to see nineteenth century buildings that across America have been destroyed to make way for progress. So please please think, critically and say no to this proposal. I do not believe there is there is evidence that this would be the best choice for our community. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next, we have Kevin Reynolds. I just wanted to comment on, the beautiful home that Hal Hall Halverson lives in. It's the old Montessori School, the old Bamber Valley School that he spent a lot of time.
Beautiful home. I drive by it every day because I live right over by the stone barn. What so, I mean, if you have the passion to restore a property, it can be done. And he's shown that he can do it, because that is one beautiful piece of property that he lives in. And I just wanna reiterate that this is setting a precedence going forward, that the decision that's that you make here is gonna actually make that road map for any developer to buy a property, not only in downtown historic district, all the way up to the Odd Fellows Building,
the old bank building, even the Pills Hill District that was just voted in. Nothing's gonna stop the developers from buying those properties because you're gonna be setting a road map in black and white for them to follow. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Barry Skolnick. Hi. Just want to mention that, when I was at the HPC meeting, they they talked two things. They talked about, economic hardship and and stuff. They tried to get help to get more information, and he hardship and stuff. They tried to get Hal to get more information, and he just felt it was confidential and didn't want to. And, I just think that the staff has tried to work with Hal on,
adaptive reuse, and apparently, they were never able to do something that was worthy of Hal or or whatever. And it just seemed that it's not like he like he can't do adaptive reuse on his buildings, but they have to meet certain standards so they don't destroy the ambiance of the area and the general look of the buildings. I mean, they're whole buildings. They're not just a facade. They're more than a facade. They have sides to them and all around. And so, if you want to maintain the district, you have to do it in a certain way to meet the standards that have
been set up by the City Council and and and are by and by law what we we allow. And so if he if he doesn't meet that, the staff rightfully say no because those are the standards that you and the City have have adopted for approval for for this kind of thing. And and apparently, he didn't meet them. And he then Molly had letters in in the packet that talks about that. And I I I just feel that you should be consistent and follow the standards that have been approved by the council and the city.
And again, Molly and staff faithfully did that. And I and they just approved what he said that he they didn't approve what he submitted because he didn't meet the standards. It's kinda simple. And then he still could try for adaptive reuse and try different plans, and he could try again and to do that. But I but what he proposed is just too much of a destruction district. If he did it a little bit differently, maybe it would be better. He may not get as much out of it as he would like, but it would at least be more than what he has now,
and I do think he can do adaptive reuse if he tries. But again, it might not be what he wants, but at least it would meet the city's standards and it would be more what he has now. But we do have certain standards and if we change it for him, we have to change it for everybody. And that opens up a whole Pandora's box. So, I don't agree with that. And hopefully, you'll deny you'll approve the city's request to deny his request. Thank you very much. Thank you. Mr. Creso? John Creasle. John Creasle, mister president, members of the council,
madam mayor. A couple of couple of, few questions that I think are relevant. Is the UMR planning to utilize portions of this project? If so, I think it would be important to know to what degree, what percentage. Will there be a Skyway? I think I heard earlier, no. But is will there be one? Will there not be one? I asked a question regarding, to what degree UMR might be a participant and a leaseholder from this standpoint. I wanna remind members of the council that there are there's project ready land currently
available next to where the YMCA used to be, and it would seem to me, that the citizens of Rochester are still asking why is that piece of property looking so derelict when it is ready for development right now. City of Rochester authorized $12,000,000 to go to the UMR to build their campus down there, which is yet to be seen. So, why jeopardize these particular, buildings for a project that would be non contributing to the historic district when there
are other options. Certainly, the scale as it relates to this particular district is I'm gonna say is out of scale. Having been downtown there now for about fifty years, I'm well aware of the activity in the alley alleyway. The alleyway, we've had many projects. I think some of you people might remember that there have been studies of how to activate the alleyway. Well, the project, the project that was, I can't remember the name, but just most most recently built at the south end of the alleyway.
The cars that come out of the parking area, do not pay attention to one way travel. They come out whenever they like. There are it's it's very unsafe, I'm gonna say, for any pedestrian to to walk in that back alley. I'm very concerned about additional parking that I think on this project, I'm not sure, would be, exiting and entering, from the alley side. If that's the case, because I think there are still people in the down in this downtown business district that utilize vehicles and vehicle traffic,
I'm gonna suggest that the alleyway will be less safe with a project of this size, utilizing the alley, to bring bring the cars in and off of the alley. Would definitely have to be a one way, which it is right now, but people don't use it as a one way. I'll just say you can talk to law enforcement about that if you like. And then the I'm gonna say the waste stream, I'm very concerned about. Those of you that haven't visited the waste stream under three eighteen's common,
at times, it is, many times it looks kept. Most of the time it looks unkept. And I cannot imagine, what's gonna happen. But I think I I would like to know, from, Hal and Grant as to, what the utilization of or how they're planning to utilize traffic, underground parking, as well as utilize the necessities of of, waste in this particular location. We need to know that and stay ahead of the game. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next, we have Emma Hildebrandt. Is Emma still here?
I don't see her. How about, Sean Kettlekamp? Or as I said before, Bonnie. She did she did list her name as Bonnie. And I asked you, did I write that? I can't remember. So I just wanna say Rochester at in the beginning was a mill town, a flour milling town. And the the flour mill was next to the river, on the other side of the river from the, this way, from, the government center and directly behind all the buildings on the East Side Of Broadway. And, what I'm trying to drive home is this kind of this historic district kinda spreads out from from just being on Broadway proper Because when you go right
around the corner, you have the original Chicago Great Western train depot on Fourth Street. And, the other buildings going the other direction on Fourth Street, the blue dot kitchen. All of that is is, Can I stop you for a minute? Who's controlling the light here? It's ah, thank you. Continue. Go ahead. There's a light flashing? Yeah. It was flashing. It was a little distracting. So I'm just, wanting to just drive home that that the the historic district isn't just on Broadway. It's it's spread out from there.
And, I'm just hoping that you'll vote no on this project. Next, we have Casey Gonzalez. Is Casey still here? Next, we have, Martha Grogan. Hi. I'm Martha Grogan, mayor Norton, president Schubert, and council members. This has really been an amazing city council meeting, I'll have to say, and I am thrilled to see the passion and commitment of so many young people coming here. So I think no matter what happens today, I feel like this is really a great step forward for our city. And recognizing that it seemed to take a lot of courage for some of the
individuals who spoke, so I think that's very important. I want to start with just a practical, aspect to the project that we're looking at now. There hasn't been any mention of the structural risk. To excavating for a building of this size in buildings that were built in the late 1800s. I've had personal experience with that, in a project that was extremely well engineered supposedly where there was a significant mass of three story building collapse, fortunately, not during the time when school was in session at this particular thing.
So I worry what's going to happen. These buildings are already not so great. Are we literally going to have some structural problems when this excavation occurs? And, also, if I look at the plans, I one of the plans is 13 stories. The Birkman is 14 stories. So we've seen the visual, but just recognize that we're basically putting the Birkman right in the middle of the historic district. And so when you look at the streetscape and the whole feeling of the historic district, yes, there are some other taller buildings,
but this is really dramatic. So that kind of brings me to the design compliance because, having done the Pill Hill District, I had to spend a lot of time reading those secretary of interior standards and our local design guidelines to understand them as much as I could so that I could explain them to neighbors who were some more willing than others to take them on. Right? I spend a lot of time talking to Molly, Lundgren, Patterson about it, you know, using case examples. And so I'm not an expert. I'm not a professional, but Molly is,
and and we have our city staff and new history weighed in. And they said, reviewing all this information, this project does not meet our national or our local standards. Now if you look at the picture, I would argue it's like the CAPTCHA you get on your phone. What does not fit in? I mean, honestly, I think probably a kindergarten kid could tell us that this doesn't fit in. So, I really think Mr. Henderson is arguing that this is just too rigid or draconian, but he did not present an alternate professional. Usually,
you can find somebody. It's like malpractice. You'll find somebody that says, you know, whatever. But he did not present another professional opinion that this does meet the standards. So it's really going back to our ordinance. It took a long time, as most of you know, to get a heritage preservation ordinance in Rochester and to have our program and our HPC committee. And now, again, most of you probably weren't here for that, but then it does allow for historic districts, residential district, the business district.
So now, whether or not a person was actually in favor of that, we have the ordinance and it has guidelines and we have experts that weigh in on it. Councilman Friedrich mentioned that, you know, you should be able to do whatever you want if you're a property owner within building codes and zoning. But the heritage preservation program is an overlay on the zoning, so you can't just do whatever you want. And many people in Rochester have had their zoning changed, but they already own the property. So the fact that he's owned the property for a while bottom line is it
comes down to an owner that, you know, isn't in favor of the historic district, hasn't been for in the beginning, and that's, you know, his right. But I think what this really places at risk is the whole heritage preservation program. Because if you look at that picture and say that is allowed because that's heritage preservation, then you can do anything you want to in Pill Hill, any other landmark. And if I'm a business owner maybe in Lower Town, I'm gonna wonder why are those people in that district getting grants to improve their buildings when this is the kind of building that's allowed?
So we've made great progress in Rochester. It's a really positive night. I think we wanna build on this. Developers are not evil and preservationists are not crazy, but we need to work together for the good of our city. So I hope that you will uphold our ordinance because I really view this as a referendum on the heritage preservation ordinance. That's really what I would say you're voting on. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Mark Hubley. Hubley. Wow. I got up here a lot quicker than I thought I would. There's a lot of passion coming from the audience. President Schubert,
Mayor Norton, council members, A lot of you already know me. My previous role was as the chair of the Heritage Preservation District, Commission. Excuse me. Heritage Preservation Commission. At that time, I was lucky enough to be on the Commission when that downtown district was created. And, I felt like we all understood. We understood where we were going. We were going for a downtown that was walkable, energetic, colorful, built community, created excitement, and was magnetic in the way it brought people downtown. I can't think of a more egregious mistake than to allow five of these storefronts
or five of these addresses to suddenly be turned into a glass window of an empty gymnasium. You would definitely be writing the death certificate of the majority of the other businesses on that block because what would that draw? That wouldn't draw anything new downtown. All night long, I've been hearing very, very brave people who are the tenants of that building talking against the wishes of their landlord, who has already threatened to raise their rents tonight simply for having different points of view than he has,
these brave people were pointing out that you're already winning downtown with this particular collection of properties because it is building a community. It's building a cohesive community. There are several examples given tonight of businesses that came here because that little area of the historic district is working. So don't drop a bomb on it. Don't let it be gutted. Keep working. You've created great tools over the last two years, fantastic tools that are going to continue to build that downtown district into what it was that we all thought we were going for.
So don't change course now. This certificate of appropriateness should appropriateness should be denied because it's inappropriate for the goals that we've been pursuing downtown. Keep building community. It's working. Keep it going. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Nancy Slocum. Hello. I'm Nancy Slocum, and I didn't speak before. And I used to speak to this in this room a lot, when we first began, but it's been a long time since I've been involved in the heritage preservation, business. We, I just wanted to speak from having grown up in this town,
and also my family had been here for a long time. The the Payne furniture building was was something that was a part of our heritage, from the beginning. I'm a Rochester recidivist. I I went away for a long time, and then I came back. And then I got very involved with the, the heritage preservation, business. And in the beginning, we were trying to find a way to to get a group together and have heritage preservation in this town. We had a lot of big setbacks, and I was disheartened,
by the fifth and fifth and the the, college departments and the the, several several others that that I worked really hard on. And I I was so disillusioned when they were just wiped off the map, and we were gone. So I basically stepped out, and also for for physical reasons as well. But I do wanna come back in at this point and say that there's a lot to be said for the heritage preservation for this town.
I I was really, impassioned and and really, really glad to see that it carried out from the beginnings that we had. It's it's I I can't imagine it being that much of a surprise to, mister Henderson, that his buildings were gonna be considered historic. This was not dropped on him. This is not a big surprise. It's been a long time that that, a lot of people have been thinking about, Downtown Rochester and and the things that we used to have and the things that are gone. And I would just urge you all to,
to, not allow this to happen once again. Thank you. That, concludes who's on my list. Is there anybody I missed? Step forward and state your name. Thank you. My name is Shruti Nieke, and I have been a resident of Rochester for over sixteen years now. I moved here from the state of Texas, and part of the reason I stayed here was because I was able to build a community. And that community was built in that block on that block in those buildings. Since then, the first discussions around starting a new business that's now Viryad and employs over a
hundred people in Northwest Rochester, those things are intangible. Those things the conversations that happen in these buildings are intangible, and they're important to the growth of this city and the vibrancy of this community. The growing art district now, we still come there and take the reason I come downtown every weekend and pass three different coffee shops is to come to Cafe Steam and meet my group over there. So it's an important ecosystem, and the meaning of this district is basically an urban ecosystem. And tearing one piece down will really ruin the rest of it, and it's important to remember that.
The last piece of this, I'd like to direct both to city council but also to mister Henderson. I really respect the work you've done in this community community for the past thirty five years. You have obviously built so many key fundamental structures in our downtown. These buildings that you own, plan to develop, or hope to develop, but currently steward are what I think are the beating heart of Rochester. Please make it your legacy to nourish them and not to tear them down. And I hope the city council remembers that while property rights are important,
I am a property owner, I'm a business owner, it is also important the impact these buildings and these spaces have for the entire community. Thank you. Are the is there anyone else who wishes to be heard on this? Saying no one, I will close the public key. Step forward. State your name. Hi. Abigail LaQuay. I spoke to the council in 02/2012 when I was in middle school at, about the Fifth on Fifth project, and I wasn't I wasn't anticipating speaking today,
and I felt like it was time to come back. These issues aren't going to go away. They're not going to go away. I just feel so strongly that it is important to preserve the character. We're really setting a precedent here. And I know other people have said that, but I just I just have to say it again, you know. What we're doing here, is going to shape the downtown forever. You don't get it back. I know that sounds really obvious, but I think that we all need a reminder: it does not come back. You know,
I want to live the rest of my life, in this area. This is really important to me. This is my hometown. So many of my peers, went away for college and never came back. That is a very old story here. Here. I really want this to be a place for my children and for my grandchildren, and I want to retain that culture, not just the buildings. And I will also add to the concept of keeping the facade. I think that a body is more than just its skin. I don't know what that will meaningfully do for historic preservation.
I see that as kind of an empty gesture, frankly. I'm sure it would be better than nothing, but that really doesn't do much for me. And that is what I wanted to say. Thank you. Thank you. This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward. Seeing no one, I am going to close the public hearing and invite mister Henderson back up for his rebuttal. Thank you, President Schoebring and members of the council and mayor Norton. Thanks for the opportunity to speak again and a lot of new information I brought up.
I it's exhausting what more they can bring up. But, there's a number of things I'd like to comment about. It's pretty clear that we're at the crossroads of what makes economic sense and what people want as their passion and want somebody else to allow them to have that passion. I don't know how we can allow continue to do that. I'd like to, but it doesn't make sense. I mean, there's a big difference between owner occupied properties and properties that a person holds for an investment. I would never put as much money in my residence as I have if it was my own residence. And I don't think mister Krizel would have done the same for his building if
it wasn't his own business in there. There's a huge difference there. And I think that needs to be pointed out to the council that if it's owner occupied properties, there's tax benefits. There's all kinds of benefits to lease back to yourself and, and or have a personal residence that you're willing to put money into to salvage and save. And I'm going. My house is being painted for the tenth time today. So, because I want to save the natural wood. I do appreciate historic preservation. These buildings are at a fine line between what is historic and what isn't. We've got the Mitchell Library, the Lumber Building.
We can go on and on about the Foundation House. Those are valuable, valuable historic assets. I'd be the first one to say they're precious. Can anybody really say I can't? I've owned these. You'd think if anybody loved these buildings, I would because I've owned them for a long time. I bought them to run a business out of. I bought them to have some development in the future. And you don't continue to put money in something that we thought would have had a development potential by now. So, I mean, there's a lot of, I think, clear cut answers to a lot of the statements that have been made. We've done a number of buildings in the downtown area.
I could list them all for you if you want me to. Clearly understand the structural challenges. Clearly understand them. We've probably done five or six that are have to be shored up because buildings are next to them. I don't think some of these arguments are valid. We're professional architects and engineers. We understand how to do that. We've done it many times. So we did have another historic preservation opinion. I didn't think it was valid to bring it up because like I said before, everybody's just gonna say, well, yeah. You paid them for that opinion. They paid for their opinion. So what did we what did we accomplish? We had two consultants basically disagreeing with each other. Is that gonna help the discussion?
Our consultant did not agree with the assessment that the new history had. But if you wanna see it, I can give it to you again. But we didn't think it was productive. So it's just another our idea, our thoughts, our passion against somebody else's ideas and thoughts and what they want. So, again, I I I respect your time and thanks for listening this evening. You've heard a lot of information. I really think that our viewpoint of this and what we've done and what we tried to do, should get some definite consideration. Thank you.
At this point, Council members, any questions for Mr. Anderson or staff? I'll repeat Mr. Wall's question from the prior item. Could staff clarify the criteria for this public hearing? Because and is it true or not that economic hardship is part of this criteria? I don't read it in the packet and would like to confirm. Thank you for the question. Economic hardship isn't what is before you in this public hearing is really looking at the design of what is being proposed, and does it align with our local design guidelines in the secretary of interior standards.
So it is looking at, does this proposed project align with that? And it falls within that rehabilitation category in terms of adding on to the existing historic building and what does that look like, and does it meet those standards? Okay. And and can you please just for for the record and for everyone here reiterate, is it true to understand that it is the scale of the proposed development that is and the related demolition extent required that is not in alignment with our standards. Is that the core issue that we are considering here?
Yes. Those were those were identified, throughout this process. And I will just note, like, the new history memo that we pulled together and had reviewed was also shared with the applicant as we were trying to find solutions of what could become a project. So there was a number of discussions in terms of what does that what does a project look like within the historic district? How do we arrive at one that can meet those guidelines, and what does that look like? So that memo was also shared when we received it in terms of what does an addition look like, what is that gonna look like in terms of scale massing, and how could it potentially fit within a historic district.
And I would say, overall, there's been minor changes to the design, but there hasn't been significant ones that would be, significant ones that would be in alignment with our established design guidelines. Okay. Thank you. Council member Fredericks. Thank you, president. Miss Woodward, what what changes, would you want in order to approve this project? What changes would you like to see to approve of this project? So what we had, thank you for the question. What we had shared was really looking at what is the size of the addition and what does that look like in terms of the overall district and the impact. And so some of that is what we've kind of outlined, and we shared the memo from new history that also identified what does a scaled
down version look like in terms of an addition, and where does that set back from the street so that it doesn't have an overall, it doesn't kind of overwhelm the existing structures that are part of the established historic district and recognizing that we're looking at all of the structures in the district together when we're looking at some of these things. And so some of that is kind of a give and take of what what is a project that the applicant wanted to submit versus what do our guidelines really look like in terms of that scale, and massing. And so those are the things that we shared throughout to find try to find
something that potentially could be, approved. So what I'm hearing you state is it was clearly defined to him before it came to you what you would like to see, and it didn't come to you wrapped up like that? I would say that this the apple what is before you is somewhat similar to what was seen previously. There has been small tweaks in terms of what does the massing look like, but we also shared, our feedback along with what does that massing look like and that it should be set back from the street. It should be kind of subordinate, so less, in a better scale with what the existing buildings are. Council member Wahl.
Mister Henderson is kind not to name names, but I am one of those council members who encouraged compromise a year ago, to save the facade and somehow work with staff to come to a project whereby everyone could succeed. In spite of 13 meetings with staff, would it be fair to say, and this is a long, council member Frederick's question, it would be fair to say then that a compromise was never reached with staff. Would that be true? I I would say that is correct.
I think we provided feedback of what our design guidelines look like, and how that arrived at a project. And I think also the applicant has a project that they wanna move forward. So I think there was trying to find some solutions that went back and forth of, like, what could make a project that could get approved, but, ultimately, this is what we received as an application that came before us. Thank you. Council member Keane? Thank you. Mine's more of a procedural question. We just went through g four, and we made a certain decision. Did g five assume a certain decision?
Or does it would this we have the same discussion no matter how g four came out? I I think the way we aligned these two public hearings was, first and foremost was that, the removal of anything within the district was only a recommendation from the Heritage Preservation Commission, and so their action needed to be taken by council. This item came as appeal from the applicant in response to the action that was taken at the HPC. So there was a little bit of back and forth of which came first, but ultimately, it was recognizing that the action needed to be taken, in terms of should there be a demolition,
permit and how does that process work in terms of should they be removed from the district first? And then really looking at, does this project comply with our design guidelines and that appeal process? Okay. Let let me try it slightly different that if we had gone a different direction on G 4, would g five be moot? I would say not necessarily because right now, it's still, there's still an appeal that was before that needed to come before council. Okay. I I guess what I'm struggling with is that if we had said it's we're gonna take this out of the district, I don't think we'd be doing g five right now saying,
does it fit in the district? I yes. I under so it yes. If you had chosen to remove these from the historic district, then a demolition permit could be applied for and submitted without having to have that review. But the other part of looking at some of those is if they're removed from the historic district, either the district boundaries would need to be changed or these would be considered noncontributing properties, and there would still be a a a review process that would need to take place for that spot. Good. That that sort of so there it still would be in the district,
just noncontributing versus not in the district. Correct. Correct. Okay. Thank you. That's helpful. Any further questions? Is there a motion on this item? I'll make a motion denying the request to overturn the decision of Heritage Preservation Commission to deny the certificate of appropriateness for 309311313315, And 317 South Broadway based on the findings that it does not meet adopted secretary of interior standards and and a demolition permit is required. Moved by council member Miller. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by council member Dorian.
Council member Miller, you have the floor. Sure. Thank you. I I appreciate all the comments. I appreciate the work that has gone into this. And I know it's very awkward to talk about quasi judicial hearings. That probably doesn't make a lot of sense to the average member of our community. And so when I look at this decision, what I see is that we are required to evaluate the recommendations, related to design guidelines and these standards. And I appreciate, mister Henderson, that you've come to us, and I I wish you had brought your consultant's report. We we don't have any other criteria to evaluate this against.
And so I I struggle to see anything other than a recommendation and support for that denial related to the historic standards, and so I plan to support the Heritage Preservation Commission's decision. Further dis discussion? Seeing none, all in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Nay. We have, did you vote? I voted thanks. Thank you. Oh, okay. We, motion passes five to two. Thank you, everybody, for, coming and your passion. Thank you, mister Henderson, for, staying with us.
And, I think, council member Fredericks opened the door for continued discussion, with the city staff. So moving on to reports and recommendations. We have h one, which is city, which is, Sixth Street Bridge and Riverfront Projects Update, and this is presented by mister Steve Sampson Brown and Cindy Steinhauser. Thank you, council president Schubert, Mary Norton, members of city council, Cindy Steinhauser, WC administrator. I'm gonna kick off, this presentation and then turn it over to Steve Sampson Brown,
director of construction. So, what we are asked providing for you tonight is just some seeking some an update and getting some discussion. There's no specific action required this evening. This is, to provide you an update on where we're at with the design of the Sixth Street Bridge riverfront and neighborhood safety improvements, specifically design, provide you an update on where we're at with engagement, understanding timeline and milestones, and budget. It's important to note that we are at 30% design for the bridge, and we've got we recognize we've got more work to do, more outreach to do with the neighbors that's planned,
but want to keep moving this along in terms of staying, on track with our timeline. We need to advance this to MnDOT to keep our target for being under contract by September or fall of next year. I want to help you put this in context of where this project sits in terms of the overall area and the significant momentum and investment that's been happening in this area. And it's really happened since the council approved its first ever small area plan with the downtown waterfront Southeast small area plan. And, clerk, can I ask that we could move maybe the text up to the upper right
so we can show a map? Thank you. As you can see, where the, the green blue line shows the project area. But if you look at what's happening around it, there's really a nice kind of triangulation of investment in what I refer to as kind a cultural triangle. In that area, you have, within a five to seven minute walk of this area, you have the library, you have this convention center, you have Rochester Arts Center, Rochester Theater, you have government center, you have UMR campus growth area, You have the work in soldiers field. So this project is a major,
contributing project to what's the investment that's happening there. There has been significant policy oh, trying to do it again. Oh, pardon me. Significant policy action that has been positioning this area for that kind of investment. And so you can see across the many plans going back to 2012, but the more recent activity since 2018, leading up to the adoption of the small area plan in 2021. And all of this all of these plans have embedded within it lots of community engagement that has really informed,
what was ultimately eventually adopted in those plans. The small area plan also positioned us to be competitive for state and federal funding. And what you see here since 2022 are, a list of what I think are really key projects or key initiatives that have happened that have really, again, positioned further investment in this area, not only the state and federal funding that we've received to leverage local funding, but also the kinds of commitments that we're seeing from the private sector in continuing to see this area as an opportunity for revitalization and investment.
And so at its core, we're taking a very strategic approach to this revitalization, of which this project is a part of, and embedded in that community revitalization work is ultimately developing a delivering on an area that supports mixed use development. We recognize we've got really great old historic neighborhoods. We've got riverfront amenities. Got we've got riverfront to cap capitalize on. We've got our proximity to downtown. How do we improve connectivity, not only by this project, but what's happening in the area around it? And most importantly,
also how we're improving safety. So I want to talk a little bit about, before I turn over to Steve, existing conditions. Here's some images of existing conditions of this area, where the project's located. I think a picture's worth a thousand words. There's a lot of asphalt there. There's a lot of lack connectivity. And so, again, thinking about that approach around supporting mixed use development, improving connectivity, improving neighborhood safety, that's what we wanna deliver on, not only, for for Rochester's some of Rochester's most original neighborhoods, but also for the large vacant parcels that,
exist there that are not delivering on highest and best use at this point. And that's obviously embracing the riverfront and its amenity. With that, I'll turn it over to Steve to walk you through the project. Good evening, council president, council members, mayor. So existing conditions. So, generally familiar with the South Broadway area, Sixth Street, going east to west, left to right across your street. So, Broadway relatively fast moving traffic so we have some dangerous intersections for pedestrians and bicycles, lack of walkability connecting the kind of the East Side neighborhoods to the Soldiers Field
area, Discovery Square area. Talked about connectivity. Our goal with this project is to deal with the insufficient sidewalks, and also just getting families and students out and along the corridor. So the project components that we're trying to solve for under this project in the blue line through the middle of your screen is the project area. We're gonna improve access to neighborhoods, the riverfront, and also key destinations on the downtown. We want to do that by providing equitable transportation of walking, biking, rolling, there's transit stops on Sixth Street within the project limit so we have all modes of transportation happening.
We also want to do it through traffic calming. We want a safe, comfortable, use of modes by all users and that's one of the goals of this project. And of course we want to improve this Umbro River access. It's a resource to the community and we want to make that easier for people to connect with who live in the area. So where do we start? So one of the key features is the Sixth Street Bridge. Here's a rendering of the angle that we're going for in terms of look and style. So, one of the things that came out of the public feedback sessions that happened so far is people as a bicyclist or a pedestrian want to be separated from car
traffic. So, we've really done that with this design. We've got narrow 11 foot lanes proposed for the bridge deck. We've got physically separated pedestrian and bike, bridges, minimum 12 foot pedestrian walkway along the bridge, and we really spent a lot of time getting, the views from the bridge right. So it will be a place of, there's shade, there's places to sit, there's places to enjoy the views. We talked a lot about what those views might be. So really trying to improve the neighborhood and get this to be a good quality
connection for people to enjoy. Here's a different perspective of the bridge. Again, you can just see how it will look as we're looking to the east and on the bottom of the screen in the photo is Broadway Avenue. So, again we've got a, an area on Broadway. We've got to get people, now that they're using the bridge, across Broadway safely. So we're working on this, design where bikes and ped are going to go back and forth east to west and also definitely to the north there's a trail that heads into the heart of downtown. We've got different features I talked about here.
You can see the planters. So we're trying to green up the space, with some plantings. We've got shade. We've looked at the orientation of the sun to see if people can actually sit on a bench and be in the shade. So we've worked through all those details. We think we've got a design that people really enjoy. Different perspective from the ground level, looking north so, again you can just see different perspective, different architectural treatment. That's on the bottom photo that's not the exact railing design but we work very hard to have the railing be open so as you're sitting there looking at the
river you can actually see through the railing. Some bridge designs do it better than others and we've got a very pervious railing design so whether you're walking along the railing or looking perpendicular to it you can enjoy the views while you're on the bridge. And again just different street level views so see different perspectives. We've got a each side of the bridge deck will have a single five foot bicycle lane. Looks at different options and in this case we decided we'll have a bike lane in eastbound direction on the south side of the bridge and a westbound bike lane
on the north side. And then we have good physical separation. So we talked about who might show up on the bridge to use it. Is it families with strollers? Is it bicyclists, going to work? And how are those people mixing in different spaces? We want people to be comfortable, as someone's driving a bicycle, faster down the road, they might be commuting to work. So, this is the design we came up with. And with that, I'll pause because this kind of wraps up the bridge design piece before I jump into the roadway. If anybody wants to ask any questions, otherwise, I'll keep going. I'll I'll ask a question,
mister Sampson Brown. So I lived in this neighborhood for fifteen years. So, what I want want you to talk about is once the bridge and the traffic moves into Slattery Park, I know there's a traffic circle within the small area plan. And then what is the plans for Third And, Sixth Street? And then as, miss Amundsen mentioned earlier oh. Still in the bridge right now. No. He had that up before.
But, so if you can talk about unless you're going to talk about the trails, later in your slide presentation. Yes. Heading into the neighborhoods. Yeah. Yeah. I we probably have some better displays. And then, you said third and sixth streets. Yeah. What's the Okay. What's the plans for that intersection? You said Third Avenue. Right. Third Avenue. Sorry. Yes. We'll have that coming up. So, so again, here's, switching to the street. So we took a complete street approach. Again, we want amenities for whether you're walking, biking, driving. There's transit stops. You can see some of the blue dots on the top image shows the transit
stops. We've got narrower drive lanes to again our attempt is to slope cars down. Specifically in the Slattery Park neighborhood it's currently posted 30 miles an hour on Sixth Street. We worked a lot with our consultant Bolton and Mink and the folks in the engineering department Dylan and Sam and others. We think we can get the traffic calming measures set in a way that we can actually lower the posted speed limit to 25 miles per hour. Again, our goal is to have have comfortable, calm, slow moving traffic through the neighborhood area. On the I'm gonna stop you.
Council member we have council member, Fredericks and then we have council member Miller, so I don't want you to get further along. Sure. Gotcha. I'll let him finish this piece, because it's gonna pertain to this piece. I'll let you finish and then I'll go into it. Okay. Sure. So again, just on the West side of the river, West Side Of Broadway, a little bit more urban cross section. We'll have places for people, one of the things we heard during feedback is people wanted places to sit down. If you're not able to walk a long distance, that was one of the things we heard. So we'll have within the parkway area different benches.
And I might have, there we go. So how do we connect the two? So the Sixth Street Bridge project will build the bridge and will come east, heading inland, I'll call it, to the roundabout which the roundabout will be constructed by Link BRT. The sidewalks and the bike lanes around the roundabout, at least in the view on the left hand side, will likely be constructed by the Sixth Street Bridge project. We're still working on that coordination between the two projects but that's generally the plan. As you leave the roundabout and head east to Third Avenue that will be actually
a link BRT segment that's constructed. And then at Third Avenue and Sixth Street, there will be a traffic signal also constructed by link BRT. So that is happening, but, and the two projects have been designed with each other in mind, but that's actually a different project. And then, slide on the right, and maybe this is a good place to pause to take roadway questions. So again, as we're moving, so one of the things we've all heard about is the Riverside car drop off is not a good experience currently so we're actually, disconnecting Fifth Avenue from Sixth Street and you will use we'll go one block north
to Fifth Street in order to, drop children off at the Riverside School. You'll come south and it'll basically be a big loop. And then also recently there was a Safe Routes to School joint city, regional meeting and we talked about each school. And one of the things we heard with Riverside is there's a parking lot to the north of the school, so we'll actually be working with our design team to do things like elevated sidewalks, which are made to slow cars down, and then hopefully work with the school to make sure everybody's using the new drop
off pattern where some people pull into the school parking lot, and they're pulling in and out through the the drive islands that aren't are painted and not raised. So we'll also work with the school folks to try and deal with that to get get cars moving in the correct direction. Maybe I'll pause there and take some questions. Are you ready for your question, council member? I sure am, President. Thank you. My question goes to this. The Sixth Street Bridge, I I really like how it's gonna open up the opportunity for that whole area to be developed properly and increase the tax base in that area.
Obviously, mister Reagan and Mayo are doing a a nice job of of working together with you to get that area established. Okay. But when I go past Third Avenue into the neighborhood, I I haven't heard the the the the neighborhood excited about it. They're not excited about having the traffic entering that neighborhood. And I I I just don't know if if it's not advantage to the people that are living there, if they're not asking for something like this, are we required to go into that neighborhood by some grant? Because I know that you guys did a wonderful job of of locking down money
to do this bridge without it being a burden to the taxpayers. Property tax, let's be clear. Our local property tax is not going towards this bridge. I think that's super impressive. But I'm not hearing my constituents in that area excited about what's gonna be happening from Third Avenue on. We have a four lane road to the north on Fourth Street, and we have a four lane road on Highway 14 or Twelfth Street, to the south. Why we send traffic through that area add to what, you know, is is basically just a residential neighborhood?
Yes. It has a school. And everybody's used to it being that way. Why are we putting it in their lap? Yep. Or go ahead. So I will I have the history on that, but and then Steve is the the, you know, the technical expert in this space. So, I heard a couple of questions in there. First, it is it is included. It's part of the project scope in our, grant application that we submitted to the federal government for the receipt of the $19,900,000 That's not just specifically to the bridge. It was for the whole project, which included riverfront and Sixth Street,
complete street. And the reason we include it pause there a second? Yes. So for clarification, what you're saying is in order to get that 19,000,000, it has to extend down that street? It's the whole project. Yes. Okay. Yep. Alright. We have to deliver on that whole project. And the reason we included it is because traffic the traffic is coming. Like, the the projections show the traffic is coming, and it's not coming as a result of this project. The traffic is coming. We saw this project as a way to do traffic call. Just to be concise and, Cindy, I know we can go on and on about this. Yep. Yep. Let's just make sure we're listening to the neighborhood input then and making sure that's
taken care of. Okay? Yep. Absolutely. Council president Schubert, can I Mister Yetzer, go ahead? I think it's also important context to add that during the smaller planning process, at one point, we did have a diverter going into the neighborhood, and that went through the engagement process. Council president Schubert may remember. And actually, we got more negative feedback on that. So that was at one point considered. You got it. You know how it goes. You just hear the you hear the loud voices. Right? So I I got I got Council network. I we have a follow-up. Yeah. Council member Miller.
Couple of different questions. One, just to jump back to the bridge portion. In an earlier version, there were trees along the bridge. Could you just talk about feasibility, cost, other considerations that led to the the structure rather than shade canopy? Yes. So we worked, quite a bit on that. We actually talked about the earlier grant application showed nice trees. Feedback from the public works and engineering team is that, and parks department, is that the city is having trouble maintaining the health of those trees and that have been installed on other bridge decks around town.
So, we decided to go with something we had greater confidence and lower maintenance in which would be, the planters with maybe a climbing vine. So we'd get some green to it but the, the overhead shade structure would provide the shade versus the taller canopies. But we spent several meetings talking through what's really gonna work well over the time. Thank you. And some questions on the roadway. You mentioned the posted speed being able to get down to 25. Is that the design speed as well for the roadway? That, I would have to check on because there's eighty fifth speeds and there's posted speeds,
and sometimes they're the same. And I'm don't have enough history on this. I'd have to follow-up on that one for you. Maybe this is a related question. Sixth Street is a municipal state aid road. Correct? Correct. And currently, MnDOT sets a different standard than what we would design on our local non state aid streets. Correct? I would defer to Dylan and Tyler to answer that in more detail, but I would say yes. If we were, if we were not constrained by the current state aid roads, we'd probably be adding some additional features which, there is a path to get a variance for those features and we're planning on
requesting those variances. Just unless there's state legislation that changes over the summer, the determinant of those features are unknown. Thank you. You led me right into my next question. Is there still time, should the state allow this, either through legislative change or through variance, to incorporate more safety speed control exactly to address council member Frederick's question related to the perception of fast traffic, cut through traffic in a neighborhood? Yes. Okay. It would be. Perfect. And I just this is a technical question as well, but I'm I'm curious about lane widths.
We recently had, East Center Street come before us with a mini roundabout. Does anybody, here know what the the lane width was in that proposed design? Is it eleven three and a 10 b? I don't know if Tyler knows or I can have that answer shortly if you wanna move on to another question. That's fine. That's why I have a question for now. Council Dylan must know it off top of his head. Yeah. The good evening, mayor. Go ahead. Members of council. Key. The lane widths on Center Street are 11 feet along that corridor. Council by Joaquin. Just as you go as you go along now,
I'm watching where the trails there's a trail on the, East Side, that goes right now goes underneath Broadway, And that's a little further south of the Sixth Street Bridge. And so I think that there's gonna be an underpass there at Sixth Street. But I wanted to if you could try to as you go through this, just make sure how the trails connect in that area. Because There's the South Zumbro Trail is coming from the West. Yes. And I'm not sure if it dead ends there or crosses across the bridge or how that works. Yes. We'll cover that in a few slides. We'll have some good photos of that.
Anything else? Continue. Alright. So I I guess last thing bottom right hand corner, again, we've looked at a mini roundabout. A lot of conversation here, with Dylan and and Sam in the engineering department. So generally right now there's a four stop condition at that intersection. There's 24 conflict points, which is engineering speak for 24 different ways to get into a traffic accident. Roundabout significantly reduces the amount of conflict points, down to eight. So, that's why, there's over 40 roundabout mini roundabouts as of July of twenty twenty four installed in
Minnesota. And there's probably more than that now, so there's a trend. They're perceived as safer. There's data that shows that they're safer and that's why we're recommending that here. So jumping into more focus on the riverfront design. So again we took a more of a long term view. This bridge will be there I say for fifty to one hundred years. You know that's bridges last that long. So what's going to be happening around it as the city evolves over time and development fills in? So this is really our master plan drawing. So again, trying to activate the different corners.
Some of the principles we talked about would be, you know, every person doesn't love the same park bench and the same shade tree. So, trying to create a little bit different unique experience in different places so people can find their favorite third spot. What we ended up focusing on in phase one, we're gonna do all the bridge components, the riverfront trail and the landscaping and then the infrastructure to support phase two. So again, I'll touch on the budget in a few more slides. We're working within the established budget. Phase two is more to come but was outside the,
what we can fit in the established budget for this project. So that's why we kind of set some things aside for phase two. Can you pause? Council member Fredericks, go ahead. I think it's magic how you're gonna turn the water bright blue. Good job. There you go. Here just, one of the costs that we looked at multiple iterations of the waterfront. One of the costs, that drove kind of the need to value engineer back to something more scaled back was the retaining walls. So the areas in red are new retaining walls that are being constructed. On the Broadway side, we're essentially just building enough walls in order to support the new bridge.
On the south side, sorry, on the east side, Ampeze side on the bottom of the screen. We're, constructing enough walls to keep an underpass of the Zumbro River Trail be able to go underneath the bridge and then we're gonna have one connection to come up on top if you want to get onto the roadway or enjoy the view from the bridge. Here's just a phase one. So again, we invested most of our, development money in terms of, landscape development money along the western side and specifically along the,
sorry, got the drawing or is it yeah, sorry, eastern side, Southeast corner, which is adjacent to the AMPI site and then to the north we'll be greening it up. Phase one again here just zoomed in so again just soft landscape, some interesting shapes, but generally we're just building sidewalk and having some bushes and a couple unique places for people to gather and sit, some turf grass if you want to sit on the lawn, amenities such as that. Here we're talking about phase two. So we're again looking at the eastern side, see more hardscape being installed,
more formal places for people to gather. So now maybe we're having school groups or things like that or different music in the park where, you know, anywhere from a dozen to a couple hundred people could potentially gather. Again, those are the phase two amenities. Some of the nicer urban architecture features that you might expect to see in a project like that. Again, just a zoomed in spot, this is adjacent to the AMPI site, so shared use path. Again, we talked about trying to get some green space, so there's a condition to control flooding.
There's a bend as the river comes underneath Broadway Avenue that creates turbulence and scour, which all aims at this one area that's shown in the graphic on the left. So, we do need some hardscape in there to make sure that the embankment stays in place, but we also wanted to make, have an elevated design. So that that was kind of the balance of the concept we came up with in this city. Stop you, mister Simpson Brown? Do we have to, consult with the corps of army engineers for can can you be specific as to what design changes we have to work with
them on, and what is the time frame for that? Sure. Presuming there's, no direction by the council to make major changes to the design we're showing, we will, begin almost immediately preparing our Army Corps of Engineers permit. So this is in the floodway. We're all familiar with the levy system in downtown so we have to have a essentially close to a no rise condition in the floodway. So they look at the one hundred year flood event and the five hundred year flood event and we need to submit that as a permitting request.
Also the starting tomorrow we will be submitting the bridge structure to MnDOT for them to approve, they have to approve the new bridge design. So both those are lengthy processes, but we wanted to get through tonight and then we're gonna start that process and they'll take, up to a year depending on, again, some organizations move quicker than others. So, they may have questions, but we've tried, very hard to, prepare the project in a way that's easily permittable. We're not asking for a lot of, exceptions to their permitting process. Mister Neimeyer. Thank you, council president. I just wanted to clarify for,
the public. The no rise condition essentially means that when there is a flood, the flood water can't reach a higher elevation than it would in current condition. So, just in case that wasn't clear. Thank you. And if I could just also add, we've already begun those conversations with the corps of engineer. We they we at the beginning of the design of this project, we have teammates in public works who have really strong relationships with the corps of engineering and have made, initial conversations with them. But as Steve said, we'll be submitting through the permitting process. So we did a lot of initial due diligence around understanding what they would expect
and understanding the conditions of the river as it currently exists with the current design and what they would be asking for us in terms of submitting a revised proposal. Thank you. Council member Miller. So questions that are peripheral but related to this. This time of year, all our trails covered in geese, goslings, excrement, is this design considering urban wildlife management strategies so that this area itself or, I guess, relatedly, might we need to have a discussion about our more comprehensive urban wildlife management plans
in a future study session and and make sure that as we're designing public spaces, they're actually usable, and that would be nice but for actual conditions. Okay. Gotcha. Sure. I think that's a really great point. And when we think about design of this, we are very much thinking about what does maintenance look like afterwards. Right? As we build these better spaces, spaces that, require or inevitably going to require more maintenance, that's part of the consideration. So, again, thinking about this and thinking about riverfront development is going to happen in phases. And so, while and I know we're working with Paul Woodman,
our parks director. He's done a lot of work in wildlife management as it relates to deer, geese, dare I say crows? But, part of the part of the thing that you need to think about in these spaces is if wildlife is inevitable, how do you make maintenance easy? So where do you have spigots so that you can power wash? You know, where do you when you have a a flood event that suddenly you need to power wash and clean the stairs that come down so you stay connected to the river? So those are the kinds of things that we're thinking about, and what is it gonna mean to maintain this space post construction.
Great. Super important. Yep. And may I just ask one question? I'd written it down and then didn't ask, but the connectivity, you show bikeways on each side, north and south of Sixth Street on the southeast side across the bridge and then it converts to a multiuse path. Can you talk about the planning of actual use of that and how that transition happens, particularly proximity to school, thinking about younger users who might be navigating? How do you build intuitive use into that change from two sides to one? Sure. Let me just go back to a better picture here.
So, I guess we could start here. So, a couple things are happening here. On the Sixth Street, kind of Slatterly Lee Park neighborhood area, where generally the approach on the project was the the mainline pavement is good condition. This is not a full, full depth reconstruct roadway pavement project. It's more of an overlay. So, before I arrived nine months ago, it was kinda determined that the geometry and the curb lines would generally stay the same. So then we need to work within constraints. It was also set up as a goal as to not to acquire significant amounts of property,
and, you know, going 10 feet into people's front yards. We don't have anything like that. We're trying to work within the property, the established right of way lines of the street. So that left us, and then feedback last summer was that, people wanted bikes off the street, behind the curb protected. Sixth Street is an interactive transportation plan, an all ages, all abilities network. We've learned from E Center, just being out in the public, talking with bikes. Everyone prefers a behind the curb bike solution if you're a bike enthusiast. That's probably 95% of the feedback I receive.
So, that left us with the choice of, essentially no parkway, no trees, and have a separated sidewalk, and a, perhaps a five foot bike lane if we could squeeze it in, or we went with an eight foot multi use trail. So yes, there are times when eight foot can get busy, but you know, I ride my bike on the Zumbro River Trail multiple times a week. That's only eight foot wide, and the utilization of that trail is gonna be a lot heavier, I think, as a destination than this particular section of Sixth Street.
So, and today, in this section today, people can legally ride their bike on the sidewalk that's out there, even though it's much narrower. So we're not necessarily, adding bikes to the sidewalk. So that's just some of the things we had to balance as we came up with this option and that's how we arrived at that. And between, to finish the thought, as you come over the bridge and you're eastbound towards the neighborhood, as you arrive at the Sixth Street platform, we are looking at between there and Third Avenue, the best place to go from one lane on each side.
We may, at the roundabout, have people cross because it's probably easier to cross. And then, we do think we have space under Link BRT to get the eight foot multiuse path on the north side from the roundabout up to Third Avenue. So that's what we're exploring now is kinda like the final connectivity piece. Thank you. And I'm not concerned about the eight foot path being wide enough to accommodate. It's it's really in that transition point and just thoughtfully designing it. Yep. Because in our active transportation plan, we talk about all ages and abilities and thinking about about both children and older
adults who might be navigating an unusual space. Yep. And then, just I don't think we have a graphic of it, but where it connects with the existing Barret Creek Trail, we'll have for more advanced riders, they'll be able to cross at a crosswalk, come to the South side and continue eastbound if you're a commuter. We did have it connect on the North side because once you make it across the Bear Creek Bridge, that's the connection to the Bear Creek Trail. There's a peel off that, gets you up and down the river from the north side. Side. So if you're a child and you're a younger rider,
you're you're still you can stay on the sidewalk the whole way and then get connected to the Bear Creek Trail. So that connection made sense on the North side. So I'm just trying to visualize this. So so when you're at the Bear Creek Trail, you're moving east into a very residential area where, where there are a lot of pedestrians that walk that neighborhood. So, so if, you have the curb and it it it's not in the current, street path, so are you're taking taking the sidewalk in front of residential properties and and
widening widening that and then having pedestrians and cyclists. Is there a separation between pedestrians and cyclists in that, in that No. On the north side of the street, no. That'll be an official And how wide is the sidewalk now there? That I would have to check. I think it's about five feet approximately. It's not it's kind of a regular neighborhood sidewalk. Yeah. I I guess I have concerns when it's in a residential area, and,
I like the separation between vehicular traffic and pedestrians, cyclists, but, just some concerns with cyclists that are coming off the trails, going into the neighborhood, and navigating amongst, pedestrians. So I I agree. Sometimes there's not a perfect answer. It's a balance. I would think your most advanced riders that are probably riding the fastest, they're gonna stick to the street. We've already heard that feedback. I'm not gonna use the trail. I'm gonna ride with cars on the shoulder of the road because it's I don't have to deal with pedestrians. There will be just a single pedestrian sidewalk on the south side of the road.
So, again, that would be an option if people felt like they didn't they weren't comfortable on the multi use path. What are you going to do with the parking lane that's on 6 in that residential section? The parking lane will be adjusted, but most of the parking will stay, about 90% of it. So the roundabout, immediately adjacent to where the the corner intersection, we may lose a spot on each corner. But generally, we're maintaining the on street parking. Okay. Further questions? Mister Niemeyer, go ahead. Thank you, council president. I just wanted to comment further on the mixed use path.
So MnDOT standards state that it's gotta be a minimum of eight feet wide, and they've studied these facilities extensively. And they determined that eight feet wide is adequate for the mixed use that that we're talking about, and you actually see a lot of our designs moving more towards the mixed use path approach, because we find it's, more adequate and easier to maintain, over time. Mister Yetzer, did you have a follow-up comment? Continue with your Sure. Presentation. Almost done here. So, again, here's phase two, just a little bit more, again, greening up. So the the top slide is adjacent to Broadway Avenue.
Hazama Plaza will be reoriented a little bit just because we need to, build a bridge abutment. So there will be some disturbance there just in phase one as part of, excavation. So we're still working through that piece. Staying along Broadway heading south. Now this will be in the section of the future, South Broadway Avenue raise grant, but, we have a narrow width. We're trying to green up all the hardscape because we have some nice gray flood walls. Hydraulically, it gets really tight until the, bridge that the river goes under Broadway Avenue can be widened and we get a
wider hydraulic opening. Not gonna be able to do much on this southwest quadrant just because it changes the hydraulics of the river and impacts the flood flow too much to add a trail in. So that's why we're kinda, staying with the higher trail that leads to the sidewalk over the bridge in the current option and near term future. Again, just a quick screen on, so we've done multiple rounds of public engagement. Most of this happened in the first half of twenty twenty four. We've had surveys, open houses, so we've got plenty of good feedback on what people are looking for and that's
what we've incorporated into the design that you're seeing tonight based on And what was the general theme? So, again increased connectivity, folks from the neighborhood want to get downtown, they want to use it not just by driving a car but other modes of transport. They want safety for all bridge users, wanna leverage the Zumbro River as a destination. More green space, less concrete, and just generally set the this quadrant of the downtown up for future development. Project milestones. So again, we're, in May of twenty twenty five.
So this is about the 30% design mark. We're gonna bring back to, public engagement over the next, six weeks, what you've seen tonight. Plus, answer other questions we've received and provide answers in more detail. We're going through the NEPA assessment process. We've actually started that. But now we'll dig in because we know the final look of the project. Looking at finishing the design in early twenty twenty six, advertising, and then we're starting the construction late summer of twenty twenty six. And again in there we need to sign the grant agreement before we start
construction, and we need to get the Army Corps permit for the project. And then just budget. So, funding available, dollars 19,900,000.0 in a RAISE grant, dollars 10,000,000 is coming from Destination Medical Center. And then we received $5,900,000 from the Minnesota Department of Transportation, which is IIJA funds, which helps provide a local match. And that's our project budget, that we're working. And again, just touched on this. So here's the short term next steps. And with that, if you have any more questions, I'd be happy to take them. Otherwise Sure. Council Member Wall,
go ahead. With some of the challenges that we've seen in, bidding and funding, do we still believe that the budget will deliver the project as it's designed? We're tracking that. Right now, we have a pretty significant contingency to monitor that. Obviously, a lot of steel goes into a bridge. Tariffs are starting to impact material prices. So, yeah, that's something we'll have to monitor over the next year to make sure that we remain within budget. Other questions? You're also looking for feedback quest one of the things one, I I really like the,
the engagement to the river and its relationship to the bridge. I think that's in a good place. I when you meet with the neighborhoods and, in that neighborhood, I, one, I I I guess I'm not ready to give up on diverters, from sixth to third. So, you know, make sure that that's a part of the engagement with the neighbors, that that's an option. And, and then, have some concerns with the, the path the the joint path with,
pedestrians and cyclists. I I'd like to see some examples of in residential areas where that works well. I do know that street, and I do do not believe there is a lot of, of parking on the street. The, most of those streets have driveways. And, and so, I think looking at that separation, I think, and, testing that with the neighborhood, I think, is important. Council member Wahl? With, the completion or the building of, the bridge, and I realize that there are commitments to mail parking,
when would we expect, to see with the general development plan, I think, approved, something happening on the Kmart, AMPI site? So I might defer to assistant city administrator Ryan Yertzuk because he's been managing the GDP process for the Ampezeit. Ryan, is that Yeah. Unfortunately, at this time, we don't have a definitive timeline from the developer on moving the project forward. I do know that they are actively working on sort of a bigger vision for the project that, general development plan. I mean, that's what we've been reiterating over and over again. But at this point, I don't have a definitive time line. The next major milestone would likely be an environmental review.
So that's probably what you would see next because there will be an EAW or something of that nature required. The the significant timeline is really tied to the lease and the ability for them to, continue to lease it for parking, and that expires, in the next three to four years. Twenty twenty nine, I believe. Oh, they did the extension. So if it's really '27, they can do an extension as provided for the lease. '27. I I can double check that. We can provide that. Council member, are you council member Miller. Yeah. Thanks for the presentation. Again, I'm just thinking about kind of the infrastructure.
I know we're at that point. I would love to see, innovative options, particularly with signals, automated detection for for pedestrians, bicyclists to navigate particularly that transition point from two way to one way multiuse. I also wonder about the West Side, particularly at First Avenue. If people are coming west across the bridge as a pedestrian or bicyclist, How did they make that transition down to Wayne Stillman Parkway to get to the park? I mean, obviously, there's the trail connection, but thinking about those points where the infrastructure design changes.
And I think a lot of cities, Portland, Oregon being one, has introduced a lot of automated detection so that nobody's pressing a button, but the system is already detecting people when they're there and changing appropriately and then going back to normal conditions. Yeah. And I think, you know, those are things we usually dive into beyond the 30%. We've already talked about as you're westbound over the bridge, maybe creating some, raised islands to better protect so cars aren't zooming across the ADA ramp and cutting the corner. So we're starting to look at some of those more innovative features. Any other comments,
questions? Thank you very much. Great presentation. Oh, I'm sorry. Councilmember King, go ahead. I I just wanted to ask, I'm hearing the 30% and then I see they're going out for bid in about a year or so from now. Is there any is there approval to go from 30% to continue on engineering? Or is there there's no formal approval that this board needs to give? You will be saying this absolutely. We'll be bringing final project design back to you. And ideally, we would bring another study session update when we get to like 60%, but ultimately But going from 30% to 60 to go to bid you need to
be at 70%, right, per construction? Well typically for design bid build process to be 100%. So, if we do construction manager at risk, that's a little different process. So, but for us it'd be 100% design for this project. I'm just really looking at the, like, the next, like, sixty days. Is there an approval we need to do to go to the next step? No. Really, tonight, we just need to make sure the bridge wasn't gonna change because we need to start working with the Army Corps and MnDOT Okay. Really immediately to hit that schedule on the back end.
So, with no significant changes, we're gonna submit those documents literally this week. Week. Okay. And we can provide you a schedule of what it looks like to hit it 60%, one hundred % when it comes to you before going off a bid. Yeah. I even heard in your language, I heard 30% and then I see that, go to bid in in, July of twenty six. So I figured there was something between. This is less of a question, more of a comment. But I'm I wonder now when I look at, like, when I think of pedestrians going to work from over here and now we have the Sixth Street Bridge, do we have any concept? And and I I don't wanna try to design this here,
but are people gonna go across the Sixth Street Bridge, or are they gonna go north towards Fourth Street because it's a more comfortable walk? Or yeah. I just don't know if my take will be is people will take the preferred, which will mean less busy, less lights. And then the question is, do we we're not we don't design for that. We don't know which way people are going. But I would imagine when I look at this design, they're gonna stay on the East Side until they have to come in to cross the cross I think they'll cross at Fourth Street. So they're gonna have another really great option,
and it's called Link BRT because it's gonna be right at the tip of this project, right right on Sixth Street. So if you wanna just if you wanna walk over and experience Soldier's Field, if you wanna go to People's Food Co op, if you, you know, go experience neighborhood, the bridge is your path. Right? If you're looking at, I wanna go to work, further down on second, maybe BRT is my option. But, you know, I think for us, as we try to to advance mode shift goals, it's creating those pathways, alternatives,
other than vehicle. Right? That's what we're doing. So whether it's going across Sixth Street, whether it's grabbing BRT, whether it's grabbing the trail up at Fourth And Kinchu Ing that way, giving people options is what Okay. Really creates freedom for people. No. Very, very good. Thank you. Council member Wall, I used to, work a couple blocks south of Sixth Street, and you have no idea how often I wished there was a way I could cut through south of downtown. So I I think it'll be heavily used. Yeah. I and when I looked at it,
though, I thought the people coming down the new Third Avenue to Sixth Street will not go across on Sixth Street Bridge. They'll continue along the river on the East Side just because it's more of walking through a park. But it it doesn't matter. I think you need to have the different options. But I always I I always think of that with, like, in the college campuses where they try to say, let's put in these paths here, and then people are walking totally different ways. It's just do do you wait for it to happen? But I I think your response of we want to provide options is the best way to think of it. And capitalize on assets that are there,
right? You can use the bridge as a means to get across somewhere or you can use the bridge and the pathway, the pedestrian pathway there to experience the river and be reflective. Council Member Miller. Last comment, and I'm just correcting this on the record because I got an email from mister Dombrowski, that the lanes designed for East Center Street are 10 feet wide, not 11 feet. And I'm assuming that the 11 feet condition is a requirement of the municipal state aid design standards. So Dylan and I actually exchanged notes on that. So, 10 feet's allowed if the heavy vehicle truck traffic is lower.
So we need to look at the bus volumes and figure out if that fits the definition of lower. But generally, 10 foot lanes produce calmer traffic. That's what we're aiming for. And I'm just making this point on the record because, again, thinking about the residential design speed than any posted speed change. Correct. Council president Schubert go ahead, mister Young. My end. It is, in fact, August of twenty twenty seven that the current lease expires. For For Kmart parking. Kmart parking Twenty seven. Very good. Good discussion. Thank you. Moving on, we have,
two first readings. Thank you, Mr. President. Item j one, an ordinance amending and reenacting chapter 92 a of the Rochester code of ordinances North and East of the intersection of Eighteenth Avenue NW and 50 Fifth Street NW identified by pin number 84738, 50 7 1 80 5, 50 8 1 80 2, and 84739. Moving on to the second readings, item k one, an ordinance amending section two dash 12 dash one of chapter two dash 12 of title two of the Rochester code of ordinances relating to police department personnel.
I'll move approval. Moved by council member Keane, seconded by council member Wahl. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Moving on. Item k two, ordinance rezoning approximately 1.07 acres of land located North of Willow Ridge Drive Southwest and West of Sedgemeadow Circle Southwest, pin number seventy eight thousand one hundred and seventy nine and forty seven thousand and six from R2, low density residential small lot, to R3, medium density residential and amending ordinance number 4,478
known as the Unified Development Code of the City Of Rochester, Minnesota. I'll move approval. Moved by Council Member Keene, seconded by Council Member Fredericks. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Moving on, K3. Item K3, ordinance rezoning approximately 3.89 acres of land located South Of Marion Road Southeast and West Of Pearl Court Southeast at 2221 Marion Road Southeast from R2, low density small lot, to MXC, mixed use center and amending ordinance number four four seven eight known as the Unified
Development Code of the City Of Rochester, Minnesota. I'll move approval. Second. Moved by, council member Keane, seconded by council member Dohring. Go ahead, council member Keane. No. I thought we'd take the vote, but I wanted to just call for the record that, we're only there's six people voting now. Council member Palmer has left. And just to make sure we get that on the record. Thank you, council member. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Passes six zero. Any other business for this evening? Seeing none, is there a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second. By Council Member Walls,
seconded by Council Member Miller. All in favor, say aye. Aye. All say nay. Thank you very much.