01-27-97 CCAt
cm
��
-
N g
I
1° m
CITY OF OTSEGO
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
AGENDA SECTION: DEPARTMENT: MEETING DATE
4.OPEN FORUM: City Clerk January 27, 1997 -
6:30PM
ITEM NUMBER. ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: EB,CC
4.1.SPECIAL PRESENTATION:
a. Tom Constant and Jeff Bartheld, Park and Recs Comm - Discuss with
Council Re: Draft for Otsego Bike and Trail Plan and Public
Information Meeting/Appreciation Day Change, etc.
BACKGROUND:
Attached is a copy of the Bike and Trail Plan (draft). Tom Constant
and Jeff Bartheld from Park and Recs Comm. will explain that they
would like to hold a public information meeting on this late in
February or early March. They also want to change "Appreciation Day"
to "Otsego Family Fun Day" for July 12, 1997.(Attached is a list of
ideas for that celebration. The shingles for the old Town Hall will
cost approximately $4,000.00. They will also update the Council on
other Park and Rec. information. (See Attached)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for update and discussion. Tom and Jeff will explain
further.
Thank you,
Elaine
OTSEGO BIKE AND TRAIL PLAN
CITY OF OTSEGO
November 271 1996
Y.vJphl-
-UrxAFI
•i3
I-
; -Or p,
iscussion
urP()JPs Only
OT703.rpt L
OTSEGO BIKE AND TRAIL PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
II. GOALS AND POLICIES
City Comprehensive Plan
City Comprehensive Park, Trail, and, Recreation Plan
III. PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
User Groups
Stress Rating for On -Street Bike Facilities
Other Performance Criteria
IV. EXISTING SYSTEM
Bike Routes and Pedestrian Facilities
Planned Improvements
Snowmobile Trails
Alternative Uses
V. TRAIL CORRIDORS
VI. ROUTE ALTERNATIVES
VII. DESIGN STANDARDS AND TREATMENTS
VIII. PLAN ASSESSMENT
IX. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDICES
Stress Ratings for On -Street Segments
Pedestrians - MN Statutes 169.21
Operation of Bicycles - MN Statutes 169.222
LIST OF FIGURES
IV -1 EXISTING TRAIL AND BIKE SYSTEM
IV -2 STRESS RATING FOR ON -ROAD BIKE ROUTES
IV -3 PLANNED TRAIL AND BIKE ROUTE IMPROVEMENTS
IV -4 EXISTING SNOWMOBILE TRAILS
V-1 TRAIL DESTINATIONS
V-2 FUTURE OTSEGO PARKS SYSTEM
V-3 POTENTIAL TRAIL/BIKE CORRIDORS
VI -1 ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREETS
VII -1 TYPICAL RURAL STREET SECTION
r-
INTRODUCTION
AND SUMMARY
I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
Introduction
The City has developed goals within its comprehensive planning
documents which encourage the safe and convenient movement by all
transportation modes. Several policy statements are directed towards
development of pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
The City Council charged the Parks and Recreation Commission in 1996
to develop a bike and trail plan for the City. The Commission commenced
work on the plan in May and continued the process over the course of the
year.
The Bike and Trail Plan should be viewed as a framework for development
which is a dynamic document rather than a static plan. While the
document recommends several trail corridors, these should be viewed as
conceptual in nature. If the same link can be made with an alternative
route or at a more advantageous time, these options should be
considered.
The plan also provides developers with a framework where they can
understand the City's objectives and which they can integrate trail
corridors into their development plans to assure compatible development.
The Parks Commission discussed the merits of providing for equestrian
trails. To date, however, no demand has been expressed by residents
requesting such facilities. Additionally, with increasing development, the
ability to provide such facilities will be more remote. Finally, alternative
facilities are available at Crow-Hassen and Elm Creek Regional Parks. It
was thus determined that the City trail system would not include
provisions for equestrian trails.
Other trail uses which are addressed to different extents are:
1. Cross Country Ski Trails
Cross country ski trails will generally be provided only at larger park
facilities. They may be provided in conjunction with off-road
recreational trails. The terrain, aspect, corridor width, aesthetics,
and accessibility will largely determine the suitability of a corridor
for cross country skiing on a case by case basis.
I-1
2. Snowmobiles
Snowmobile trails generally are developed in cooperation with the
Department of Natural Resources as exclusive use grant-in-aid trials.
The snowmobile association is the local unit responsible for
snowmobile trail development. It is anticipated that this will
continue for the forceenable future.
3. All Terrain Vehicles
A# terrain vehicles (A TV's) are a relatively recent mode of recreation
travel. No designated trails are available in the City for use by
ATV's. ATVs are generally incompatible with non -motorized
transportation, thus, no provision will be made for them within the
bike and pedestrian trail system. More recently, in the northern part
of the state, joint ATV and snowmobile giant -in -aid trails are being
developed with ATVs prohibited once snowmobile season is
underway.
As bicycle ridership increases, the potential for conflicts between
bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists also increases. This need not
automatically occur since bicycles and motor vehicles can, in many
instances, co -exist on the same road network. The City does need to be
aware of, plan for, and design suitable facilities which will allow for safe
movement by all modes of transportation.
Bicyclists, in particular, have certain expectations when choosing a route
to ride. There is an "implied warranty" which is perceived by the user
when an agency invites, encourages, or offers a facility for the public.
The agency with jurisdiction of the facility is offering an "implied
warranty" that the facility is safe and suitable for that activity. As
indicated in the Northwestern University Bike Workshop Manual,
"An agency may invite the public to bicycle on a facility in a
variety of ways: through publicity during project planning or
funding stages, news releases, brochures, or other
publications or 'bike path' signage."
The City thus takes on a responsibility to design and maintain facilities in
a safe and suitable condition in order to limit its liability exposure. The
City also needs to make a conscious decision on which "routes" it wishes
to sign to encourage bike traffic versus where it may provide a suitable
facility which may be used but is not formally designated as a bikeway.
1-2
In order to better understand the bike plan elements, the following list of
definitions* is offered explaining the most commonly used terminology in
bicycle facility planning and design.
BICYCLE - "Bicycle means every device propelled solely by human
power upon which any person may ride, having two tandem wheels
except scooters and similar devices, and including any device
generally recognized as a bicycle though equipped with two front or
rear wheels (MN 169.01 Subd. 51) (Considered a vehicle by MN
Statute 169.01 Subd.2, MN 169.222 Subd. 1).
AVERAGE BICYCLES - "The Design Bicycles comprised of both
Group B (Basic Bicyclists ) and Group C (Children).
BICYCLE FACILITIES - A general term denoting improvements and
provisions made by public agencies to accommodate or encourage
bicycling, including parking facilities, bikeways, bikeway maps, and
shared roadways not specifically designated for bicycle use.
BICYCLE LANE (BIKE LANE) - "Bicycle Lane" means a portion of a
roadway or shoulder designed for exclusive or preferential use by
people using bicycles. Bicycle lanes are to be distinguished from
the portion of the roadway or shoulder used for motor vehicle traffic
by physical barrier, striping, marking, or other similar device. (MN
169.01 Subd. 70)
BICYCLE -PEDESTRIAN LANE - A portion of a roadway designated
for the preferential or exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians.
BICYCLE NETWORK - A continuous system of bikeways and
roadways in a region or municipality.
BICYCLE PATH (BIKE PATH OR OFF-ROAD BIKEWAY) - "Bicycle
Path" means a bicycle facility designed for exclusive or preferential
use by people using bicycles and constructed or developed
separately from the roadway or shoulder. (MN 169.01 Subd. 9)
BICYCLE -PEDESTRIAN PATH (SHARED OR MULTIPLE USE PATH) -
A path designated for the preferential or exclusive use of bicycles
and pedestrians.
* Mn/DOT Bikeways Manual, 1996
1-3
BICYCLE ROUTE - The term "bicycle route" means a roadway or
should signed o encourage bicycle use. (MN 169.01 Subd. 62)
BICYCLE TRAIL - "Bicycle trail" means a bicycle route or bicycle
path developed by the commissioner of natural resources under MN
85.016. (MN 169.01 Subd. 71)
BIKEWAY - "Bikeway" means a bicycle lane, bicycle path, or bicycle
route, regardless of whether it is designated for the exclusive use
of bicycles or is to be shared with other transportation modes. (MN
169.01 Subd 72)
CROSSWALK - "Crosswalk" means that portion of a roadway
- ordinarily included with the prolongation or connection of the lateral
lines of sidewalks at intersections or any portion of a roadway
distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other
markings on the surface. (MN 169.01 Subd. 37)
GROUP A - ADVANCED OR EXPERIENCED BICYCLIST. The FHWA
Design Bicyclist comprised of experienced riders who can operate
under most traffic conditions.
ti
GROUP B - BASIC BICYCLISTS. The FHWA Design Bicyclist
comprised of casual or new adult and teenage riders who are less
able to operate in traffic without provisions for bicycles.
GROUP C - CHILDREN. The FHWA Design Bicyclist comprised of
pre -teen riders whose roadway use is initially monitored by parents
and eventually are accorded independent access to the roadway
system.
DESIGNATED SHARED STREET OR HIGHWAY - Any street or
highway designated as a bikeway and recommended for use by
bicyclists and characterized by basic signage and the absence of
striping or marking for cyclists. Traffic calming measures may be
implemented to maximize their usefulness and safety.
LIGHT TRAFFIC - Pedestrian, bicycle, ,and other types of non -
motorized traffic. Mopeds are sometimes considered "light traffic."
PEDESTRIAN - "Pedestrian" means any person afoot or in a
wheelchair. (MN 169.01 Subd 24)
1-4
RIGHT OF WAY - A general term denoting land, property, or interest
therein, usually in a strip, acquired for or devoted to transportation
purposes. "Right-of-way" means the privilege of the immediate use
of the highway. (MN 169.01 Subd 45)
ROADWAY - "Roadway" means that portion of a highway
improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel, exclusive
of the sidewalk or shoulder. In the event a highway includes two
or more separate roadways, the term "roadway" as used herein
shall refer to any such roadway separately but not to all such
roadways collectively. (MN 169.01 Subd. 31)
SHARED STREET OR HIGHWAY - Any roadway upon which a
bicycle lane is not designated and which may be legally used by
bicycles whether or not such facility is specifically designated as a
bikeway.
SHOULDER - "Shoulder" means that part of a highway which is
contiguous to the regularly traveled portion of the highway pnd is
on the same level as the highway. The shoulder may be pavement,
gravel, or earth. (MN 169.01 Subd. 73)
SIDEWALK - "Sidewalk" means that portion of a street between the
curb lines, or the lateral lines of a roadway, and the adjacent
property lines intended for the use of pedestrians. (MN 169.01
Subd. 33)
STREET OR HIGHWAY - "Street or highway" means the entire
width between boundary lines of any way or place when any part
thereof is open to the use of the public, as a matter of right, for the
purposes of vehicular travel. (MN 169.01 Subd. 29)
TRAFFIC CALMING - Physical and other measures used on a street
or highway to reduce the dominance and speed of motor vehicles.
VEHICLE - "Vehicle" means every device in, upon, or by which any
person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a
highway, except devices used exclusively upon stationary rails or
tracks: (MN 169.01 Subd. 2)
WIDE CURB LANE OR WIDE OUTSIDE LANE - The right -most
through traffic lanes that are substantially wider than 3.6 m (12' ±).
1-5
II GOALS AND
POLICIES
II. GOALS AND POLICIES
The stated goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan were
reviewed to determine the framework of development for this plan.
Similarly, the policies of the City's Park, Trail, and Recreation Plan were
reviewed to determine their applicability towards development of this plan.
The applicable goals and policies providing guidance are:
City Comprehensive Plan - excerpted from the Transportation Element
Goals.
Goals:
• Pro' vt e�,�-'.forsamom e to- a ,ernerJ y 11 nodes..
• Support the development of public transit, para -transit systems, car
pooling and other such measures which willrrunim zehe_,eefor,
Policies:
Transportation facilities shall be planned to function in a manner
compatible with adjacent land use. In those instances where the
function of a transportation facility has changed over time to
become incompatible with adjacent land use, programs shall be
established to eliminate this incompatibility.
• Transportation facilities shall be designed to conserve natural
resources and minimize the total need for on-going public
investment.
• A Capital Improvement Program shall be prepared and annually
updated for transportation facilities.
• Transportation planning and implementation shall be coordinated
with neighboring and affected jurisdictions.
• The transportation system shall focus: on. activity centers within
community ,and rn neigibormg communities.
• The mobility needs of all persons shall be considered in the planning
and development of the transportation system.
• Early and continuing citizen involvement shall be provided in
transportation planning and implementation projects.
• When feasib/e : adequate 7ightmg and ouW66n;;furnctti�e-inn/ be
considered murbanized areas�o��heavy pedesriianr,,r»ovement
• Pedestrian street crossings on heavi/y;trave/%o!;streetshal/be
clear/y marked rand/orligh`ted�
II -2
• Priority shall be gi yen,'to the establishment of pedestrian and blcyc%
facilities in the areas' -In' yand surrounding churches, parks, isolated
neighbbrhoods, and commercial development.
• Streets designated:as mJoi artena/s-shall.be designed to _protect
pedestrian and biyc% ovarallel%ng?�affic
Otsego Comprehensive Park, Trail, and Recreation Plan
Policies:
• Create and maintain a system of recreation facilities that provide for
the future needs at the neighborhood and community -wide levels.
• Provide social, community, and recreation facilities designed to
satisfy the needs of all age groups within the community.
• Provide a park, trail, and recreation system for the handicapped to
enjoy and easily participate in.
• Work with local schools and community-based organizations in
coordinating the use of shared facilities to minimize costs and at the
same time utilize more resources.
• Promote and encourage citizen involvement in park, trail, and
recreation development plans.
• Provide quality parks, trails, and recreation activities that meet the
needs of the urban and rural residents.
II -3
• Review and submit recommendations to the City Council on all park
and trail land acquisition issues.
• Acquire and develop ample park and trail land to meet the present
and projected future population needs.
• Acquire park and trail land in conjunction with the subdivision
process.
• Accept gifts and donations for park, trail and recreation land to
meet the present and future needs identified in this comprehensive
plan.
The goals and policies articulated in the City's comprehensive plans
portray a City philosophy towards alternative transportation modes which
is friendly, but which will require a concerted effort to implement. That
effort will necessarily include development of physical facilities; an
education campaign to disseminate awareness of rights and
responsibilities of bicyclists, in particular; enforcement to ensure & safe
operating environment for all modes of transportation; and
encouragement to try alternative modes rather than relying solely on the
use of the automobile.
RECOMMENDED POLICY MODIF/CA TIONS AND NEW POLICIES
Trails shall be classified as either a transportation or recreational trail.
Transportation trails provide as direct of a link as possible between
population areas and activity modes such as schools, parks, churches,
places of work, and shopping areas. They generally will occur adjacent
to collector and minor arterial streets.
Transportation trails shall be required along all new collector streets and
minor arterials and shall be provided along existing collector and minor
arterials at the time of major improvement or street reconstruction.
Transportation trails shall be funded with general operating funds, grants,
transportation funds, developer's fees, or bond proceeds.
Recreational trails shaft be developed in places of interest such as natural
areas, parks, creek corridors, around lakes, or other areas suited to
recreational use. Development shaft be funded through park or trail
dedication fees, general funds, or bond proceeds.
11-4
Developers shat/ provide trails on all new through streets within their
development with a projected ADT above 500.
Developers with land abutting a minor arterial or collector street shall
construct a 10' wide bituminous trial in accord with City standards. ff
said street leads to a major park, school, commercial center, or other
major activity area, a separate 6' wide concrete pedestrian walkway shall
be constructed on the side opposite the bituminous trail. At the City's
option, the developer may be required to escrow funds for the future
construction of the improvements.
The City may establish a district wide financing method pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes 435.44 for the purpose of constructing sidewalks or
trailways. Property owners in such a district, established by resolution of
the City Council, shall participate in the financing of sidewalks or trails
within said district.
II -5
III PERFORMANCE
CRITERIA
Ill. PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
User Groups
The performance of a bike and pedestrian system needs to be evaluated
much as a road network would be. That is, unless the route is meeting
a need, provides convenient access, is a safe operating environment, or
is a pleasant experience, the number of users will be limited.
In order to develop criteria of how the system should perform, the
Commission reviewed the needs of different experience groups. In the
developm,nt of most bike plans, including federal and state manuals,
three classifications of bike users are recognized:
1. Group A is the advanced bicycle riders who are experienced cyclists
who typically may be expected to commute or tour via bicycle. It
is estimated that this group is comprised of 5% of today's
bicyclists. This group generally desires:
• Direct access via street and highways.
• The opportunity to operate at maximum speed with minimum
delays.
• Adequate pavement space so neither the biker nor motorist
have to change lane positions when overtaking the other.
2. Group B is the basic rider group of casual or new adults and teenage
riders who are not as confident to operate in traffic without special
provisions for bicycles. Typically, this group's preferences are:
• Comfortable access to destinations.
• Direct routing.
• Low speed, low traffic volume streets or designated bicycle
facilities.
• Well defined separation of bicycles and motor vehicles on
arterial and collector streets (bike lanes or shoulders) or on
separate bike paths.
3. Group C are pre -teen riders whose use of roadways is initially
monitored by parents and who eventually are allowed independent
access to the system or parts thereof. Both they and their parents
prefer:
• Access to key destination points (schools, recreation
facilities, shopping, or other residential areas).
• Residential streets with low motor vehicle speed limits and
volumes.
• Well defined separation of bicycles and motor vehicles on
arterial and collector streets or on separate bike paths.
Due to the similarities of desires for Groups B and C, the federal
manual encourages recognition of two broad classes of bicyclists;
Group A and Group B/C. The manual further states:
"Generally, Group A bicyclists will be best served by
designing al/ roadways to accommodate shared use by
bicycles and motor vehicles. This can be accomplished by.
• Establishing and enforcing speed limits to minimize
speed differentials between bicycles and motor
vehicles on neighborhood streets and/or by
implementing "traffic -calming" strategies.
• Provide wide outside lanes on collector and arterial
streets built with an "urban section" (i.e., with curb
and gutter).
• Provide usable shoulders on highways built with a
"rural section" (i.e., no curb and gutter).
Generally, Group BIC bicyclists will be best served by a
network of neighborhood streets and designated bicycle
facilities, which can be provided by:
• Ensuring neighborhood streets have low speed limits
through effective speed enforcement or controls
and/or by implementing "traffic calming" strategies.
• Providing a network of designated bicycle facilities
(e.g., bike lanes, separate bike paths, side -street
bicycle routes) through the key travel corridors
typically served by arterial and collector streets.
• Providing usable roadway shoulders on rural
high ways. "
Stress Rating for On -Street Bike Facilities
Northwestern University Traffic Institute has developed a stress
rating system for bicycle suitability on streets. The rating system
has been field tested and checked against user groups for validity.
In short, the higher the stress rating, the less likely the route will
attract bicyclists, nor should users be encouraged to use a high
stress related route.
The two broad classes of "design" cyclists obviously will have
different expectations and capabilities to cope with varying traffic
situations. The three most important factors to the comfort level of
cyclists for on street bike routes are the volume of traffic, speed of
traffic, and curb lane width (e.g., wide right lane, paved shoulder,
bike lane). Secondary factors which reinforce the initial factors to
determine whether bicyclists should be encouraged to use a
particular street are the number of commercial driveways per mile,
parking turnover, and percent of trucks (including RV's).
The stress level rating is an attempt to quantify the suitability of a
route rather than simply basing decisions on an arbitrary level. It is
recommended that the City adopt this system to evaluate possible
on -street bike routes.
III -3
}t '
Stress Level Interpretation
1. (Very Low) Streets reasonably safe for all types of
bicyclists.
2. (Low) Streets can accommodate experienced
and casual bicyclists and/or may need
altering * or have compensating
factors* * to accommodate child
bicyclists.
3. (Moderate) Streets can accommodate experienced
and casual bicyclists, may need altering,
and/or contain compensating factors to
accommodate casual bicyclists, not
recommended for child bicyclists
4. (High) May need altering and/or have
compensating factors to accommodate
experienced bicyclists, not recommended
for casual or child bicyclists.
5. (Very High) Street may not be suitable for bicycle
'use.
Generally, to be rated suitable for casual riders, the routes
would need to be rated at or below "3", and to accommodate
children, the route would need to be classified at or below "2".
On any given street segment the ratings for each of the
primary factors are determined, the three ratings are added up
and averaged to determine the overall stress rating. The
secondary factors are only used to determine if the initial
stress rating is degradated.
* "Altering" means that street may be widened to include wide
curblane, paved shoulder additions, etc.
* * "Compensating condition" can include street with wide curb
lanes, paved shoulders, bike lanes, low volume etc.
III -4
t��
The ratings for the three primary and three secondary factors are:
Stress Level .L
_ 3
4 _ 5
Primary Vehicles per hour per
Factors lane* _< 50
150 250
350 > 450
Curb lane width** 15
14 13
12 _< 11
Traffic speed (mph) <_25
30 35
40>_45
Secondary Commercial driveways
Factors per mile < 10
20 30
40 >50
Percent trucks' * * 2
4 6
7 10
Parking turnover/hour/ no
block parking
< 5 10
15 >20
* ADT x 10% - Number of travel lanes
* * Includes paved shoulder
* * * Includes RV's
Other Performance Criteria
Other performance criteria that need to be considered
are:
Group
Group
—
B/C--Accessibility
Acceptable distance to bike/hike facility
--
'/2 mile
Distance to high priority destinations (school,
parks, churches, businesses)
8 miles
2-4 miles
Directness of Routes
Utilitarian/transportation same as roadway 2 block
or better detour
Recreation same
Continuity Group Group B/C
Gaps in system provide direct avoid directing
alternative to high volume,
., high speed
Interrupted by high volume roads bike sensitive
(e.g. 101) traffic signals
roads
may shut user
off from parts
of system
Route Attractiveness
Separation from motorized traffic
Safety*
only if shorter
route or not safe
paved shoulders
wide curb lanes
travel speed
60 mph or less
with less than
6% trucks
collectors &
arterial
corridors
designated
facilities (bike
lane, bike paths
or low volume
residential
streets
travel speed
30 mph or less
* Children younger than 11 should ride with parents in most street siWations
other than immediate neighborhood.
IV EXISTING
SYSTEM
f.-
IV. EXISTING SYSTEM
Bike Routes and Pedestrian Facilities
The existing system is comprised of two Wright County designated bike
routes on County State Aid Highways (CSAH). The first route is on
CSAH42 from the Otsego/Dayton border to the Otsego/Elk River border.
Only that portion east of State Trunk Highway 101 is currently signed as
a bike route.
The second designated route is CSAH39 from CSAH42 to the City's
western border. This route is not signed.
- Table IV -1 highlights pertinent information about each of the routes.
The only other facility for alternative modes of transportation in the City
is a five foot wide concrete sidewalk from 96th Avenue to the bridge over
the Mississippi River. The bridge itself is limited to vehicular' travel lanes,
thus presenting a problem area for safe pedestrian movement across the
river. Figure IV -1 illustrates the existing system.
Theoretically, the City has nearly 12 miles of existing bike routes
designated within the City. From a practical perspective, however, the
speed and volume of vehicular traffic discourages less experienced riders
and children from using the shoulders on these routes. The routes will be
important, however, for more experienced riders. Figure IV -2 illustrates
the stress rating for various segments along CSAH's 39 and 42 as well as
other major routes.
IV -1
f�
TABLE IV -1
OTSEGO BIKE & TRAIL PLAN INVENTORY
' 1 yy1. Counts
s Currently (April 19 96) signed East of STH 101 IV -2
Average
Posted
Width of
Road
Daily Traffic
Speed
Travel
Design
Length
Route
Classification
Facility
(Motorized)'
Ljlaft
Lanes
Section
it
CSAH39
Minor Arterial
8' paved
2100-4250
55 mph
12'
Rural West of
6.93 mi
1._
shoulder
Int 42 & 39
CSAH422
Collector
8' paved
1850-4800
55 mph
12'
Rural South of
4.97 mi
shoulder
Int 42 & 39
Walkway
Collector
5' concrete
n/a
n/a
n/a
urban
0.57 mi
96th Ave
& bridge
' 1 yy1. Counts
s Currently (April 19 96) signed East of STH 101 IV -2
�
I
D
i e.
vro I
♦
n
—
W .
�
Q—
nor
wnm co,
i Q
�cf)
n
i
p
f
YWY.' dfRM Jn
W+
_ izig
J
Li
\
�\
1
N
n
o ,I
--�
ol
\
1
^
1M1Mr
1010.'.
Y
As shown on Figure IV -2, that portion of CSAH42 between 101 and CSAH39 is
rated too stressful to serve casual adult riders or children. Also, the segment of
CSAH39 between O'Dean and Page is rated too stressful to be used by the
Group B/C user groups. These segments already have a wide paved shoulder so
no additional physical improvements to the road pavement, itself, will benefit the
less experienced riders. Alternative facilities should be provided for the Group
B/C riders.
The other possible bike routes with segments which have stress ratings above
"3" (e.g. CSAH39, 85th Street, Page Avenue, and Nashua Avenue) can be
improved with pavement widening to lower the stress level to a point where
casual adult riders will comfortably use the routes.
Planned Improvements
The City has been awarded a federal Intermodel Surface Transportation
Enhancement Act (ISTEA) grant. These grant funds will be combined with City
funds to develop bike and pedestrian facilities as shown on Figure IV -3. In short,
the planned improvements include:
• Provide bike lanes at left turn bypass lanes on CSAH39 and 42.
• Provide paved shoulders along Nashua Avenue from CSAH39 to
City Hall and Otsego Prairie Park.
• Provide paved shoulders along Page Avenue from CSAH39 to 85th
Street.
• Develop an off-road trail from 85th Street to the Otsego Elementary
School property.
• Provide paved shoulders along 96th and Ohland between CSAH's
39 and 42.
The improvements are scheduled to be undertaken during 1997. As shown on
Figure IV -3, the improvements will provide access and egress to a significant
local street network. Major facilities which will be linked to neighborhoods are
the Otsego Elementary School, Wright County's Otsego Park, and Otsego Prairie
Park.
IV -4
10 CITY of
P
f ? O"EGO
,.rte,. �r�.„ _ 2.67/1.67 �
\ �� UN TTlE LR[AT RTR4 kUAU
co 10
..M 2.67 I 3.
li4
14 13 s 1 is
co
r
3 /2.3
3.0.- 2. a
3.67 I 3.3�
r
2
• 23 ' ' un. sTncT 1
j I I I 3.3 I 233
30 3
�- -- -�
ss za 27
27 25
n
Taa IA{!T
crrr OF I.1 AERTnu,E „� - i i •��
34 aw v 15 31 r 32
n, 36 � 33 34
` 35
31
�Itltlitliltiilligtl!lIIIl;illlti�lit1t11�lI1l�IlIi11lli,�f,�llltl.�
STRESS LEVEL RATING `D
��. 5 2 3.3 1996 EXISTING CONDITIONFIGURE IV-2
_/2.3 RMSED RA11NG AFTER 1997 _
.15 , -----••• 3 IMPROVEMENT STRESS RATING FOR ON
5 ROAD BIKE ROUTES
cmy OF
10 OTSEGO
P
II �\
iwa » ON TLE GRLAT R)9RR ROAD
10
r nm fwar SSy, 3• I I �~ ,
'15 14 13 i ��/ � 1 "-� IS
� fU3L Nl
rr 22 f333n 24 1 I' 20 uM fMm 21 I ( mum
23 I , — i 3
-.- 27 -gyp - • / 25 /30 29I 2 I 22 '
•--/// � I I I �, d 2
V b
fTN fafIIi \
cm OF AUEWMU.E
r arm
34S v 35J6 !/ 31 i 32 33
35 - -
tilltllifiitlil'li1lifltlll�liilltlitiillt�lllrlll�ilili�!11�lI111•` _
FIGURE IV -3
1997 PLANNED TRAIL AND
BIKE IMPROVEMENTS
Snowmobile Trails
Figure IV -4 illustrates existing snowmobile trails within the City. These are
generally links from or to adjoining communities. These may occur within street
or highway rights-of-way or across private land. The development and
maintenance of these trails have been a function of the snowmobile association
rather than the City. It is unlikely that this will change in the near future. The
City should, however, work with the snowmobile association to assure continued
use and compatibility as development occurs. Those trails on private land are
exclusive snowmobile use trails subject to the consent of the landowner.
IV -7
arT or
,o o OTSEGO
` •vc[ 3. NWOS 3/ ON THS GRLAT RIYLf NUA )
10
o
SSM SIISQ)
14
i
24 I 1 I 20 SSM I SM)� 21 I _ I rm Era
3
23
1
27 6 25 30 i 29 ' 28 27
i
34-1 35CITY OF LBERTVILLE _
3t a.e )> 35 36 !/ 31 \ 32 33 34 _
35 I �
i
23
,1ll�Irrftlr,irtll!llllllll;iiirtfllritrtril�{tr�r�rrfllllr,�llt�i��1 -
- SNOWMOBILE TRNIS
FIGURE IV -4 l 1
EXISTING SNOWMOBILE TRAILS ° o
V TRAIL
CORRIDORS
V. TRAIL CORRIDORS
Figure V-1, adapted from the Park and Recreation Plan, illustrates potential
trail destination points. Sixteen areas are identified as probable
destinations classified as follows:
Neighboring Communities -4
Commercial Areas
-2
School
- 1 (also recreation)
Recreation Facilities
-8
Conference Center
-1
16
Six of the destinations are along CSAH39 or logically accessed from
CSAH39. Elk River and Dayton as well as Otsego Elementary School and
the VFW soccer fields would or could be accessible via CSAH42.
For the immediately foreseeable future, the greatest demand for facilities
is anticipated to be in the eastern half of the City. The primary trip
generators are expected to be the elementary school, County park, and the
commercial area at the intersection of CSAH's 39 and 42. Other
important trip generators will be the VFW soccer fields and Otsego Prairie
Park.
Until such time that facilities are developed or additional residential
development occurs in the western part of the city, a low number of
pedestrian or bicycle trips is expected in the western part of the City.
Figure V-2 illustrates the long term future development of neighborhood
parks in each of the park districts. Each of these would generate trips
from an area approximately one mile away. Ultimately, it would be
desirable to link the neighborhood parks by a trail system.
Also depicted are segments which should be incorporated into the system
to fill in gaps, make more direct access possible from neighborhoods to
destination points, or to ultimately expand the system.
The transportation element of the City's Comprehensive Plan addresses
pedestrian and bicycle trails. The Comprehensive Plan advocates
"emphasis on the development of a trail system along major and minor
arterial and collector streets." Several valid reasons are given.
V-1
\ or
'° 2 OTSEGO
2 to
F�OCN rlr THE CKLA7 RIYRR ROAD
if
L—U)
�
p RI
15
1
i 6
1
5 10•
-- er 22 aatY, 24 1 1 I O20 21
23 I 3
/ 11
10
-- 27 6 ' 25 30 ,
29 i 28 I 27 3 12 2
_ lOM 1AQl [yyl „ Jp,1, aq[[I
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE-
u� [wm
34—,, \ 35 31 , 32
J6 33 34
3s 13
--- ----------- _1�_ CSW „
IIlII{Iliflliillli7111111I1i{i111f�lfllfll�{lill�ll(It1lii�ilillllj�
)\ Cr1Y OF LOONnCELLO O OLD Cm KALI „ OTSEco 13EMENTMY SCHOOL
\J W1ER ACCESS O7 OISEOO WOLFE MAIMGIIENT AREA 12 VETERANS ME310RNL PARK SOCCER FELOS .�1f•
f COMrvtoom Comm O OTSE00 COUMY PARI( IJ CLTY OF DAYTON
cffy OF AiJlQiVLii 0 COY OF lax WER - FIGURE V- I
1) orim CRY WLL ANO , n PARK to COMMERCIAL AREA TRAIL DESTINATIONS /
OTSEGO, MINNESOTA
CM of
TO // \�\ v OTSEGO
f) I \\ U THE GRLT IU1'lM 40eL
10
f I
iv
/ \ 1
_ r- tlM.•fQl_ O.IIA) / 1•.13
I �
fer 22 ) r II 24 ,jl 1 20 \\ f)nl snl¢T 21/
5
23 3
111 III•. \\ I � /� .I
6 _ '1
27 25\\ ' 30 29 1
yy 28
\ / I
. ._.__. _ .. _ _.... _.......- - - ..._ _.... _ _._-_..-'. � � ....._..qM .•n rnlen ...-f--_ !t,r m..o.w .. >A , al...-roM sfrar...:: I 1
cm OF ERmu.E ��
.fM snm 34 aw v 35 36 J/ 31 1 32 \
1 33 34
\ f . 35
� \ I
Ifirttlil111t!!I' If11�1l1� � '//
I!I►�tlit��t�tifllit�t�tt�r�,lltlil��';`,i I-_..
- E14SDHG PARKS/RECREATKNI FACIUTES — TWO ULE RADIUS
i 1
p.,K%,wimTm PARK "NK DISTIom FIGURE V-2
oFUTURE OTSEGO PARK
✓— C CONCEPT M IDCATK1N OF FUTURE PARKS WITH ONE WE RADIUS SYSTEM
• "They provide the most direct routes to various trail user
destinations.
• Crossings of thoroughfares can be better accommodated with
traffic controls that exist or are planned with the development of
thoroughfares.
• Trail construction in conjunction with street improvements result in
lower overall cons truc tion costs.
• Street routes typically are located in areas having the fewest
physical limitations that would inhibit street construction. Trail
routes following the street rights-of-way typically also benefit from
fewer physical limitations.
• Funds are available with the construction of vehicular thoroughfares
for the development of trails.
• The general acceptance to trails in residential areas is better along
thoroughfares than along rear yards or at other isolated locations.
• Street rights-of-way provide available area for trail development. "
The last two reasons have somewhat less validity since off-road trails have
gained greater public favor. Secondly, as previously discussed, a separate
trail pathway will be difficult to provide within existing right-of-way widths
with rural street sections. In those cases where an urban section with
curb is located in a 60' right-of-way, the standard 10' trail width would
need to be reduced to 8' or an easement, or additional right-of-way would
need to be acquired.
Generally, it is difficult to develop new trails along rear lot lines in areas of
existing development. These alignments after development create
controversy, usually involve numerous landowners, require small strips of
land, and often require extensive relocation expenses for trees, fences,
gardens, etc. However, in undeveloped areas, trails can be incorporated
into the plat before any homes are constructed. These generally can be
an integral asset of the development that is well received by homeowners.
These trail alignments tend to be safer since most driveway/pathway
conflicts are eliminated. They can also provide more direct routes and
often are more aesthetically pleasing.
V-4
The City's Park Trail, and Recreation Plan proposes the following
bike/pedestrian facilities:
• Otsego Creek/Napier Avenue
• Kadler Avenue; CSAH39 to Mississippi River
• CSAH19; CSAH39 to Albertville
• Quaday Avenue; CSAH42 to 72nd Street
• Odean Avenue; CSAH39 to CSAH37/Odell Pond
• 85th Street; Page Avenue to Nashua Avenue
• Nashua Avenue; 85th Street to Mississippi River
• 96th Street; CSAH39 to CSAH42
Improvements to Nashua Avenue and 96th Street are planned for 1997 as
previously discussed. The parks plan also recommends identifying CSAH's
39 and 42 as bike routes.
The "Pedestrian and Bicycle Trails" section of the transportation element
recommends the development of walking and possibly bicycle trail at the
following:
• Along the north side of County Road 39 between Nashua Avenue
and Highway 101.
• Upon 85th Street between Needham and Page Avenues.
• Alongside Odean Avenue from 78th Street to a proposed westerly
expansion of the Otsego County Park.
• Along the west side of County Road 42 (Parish Avenue) between
50th Street and the Mississippi River.
• Along 96th Street between County Road 42 and a future
connection to 95th Street.
Contingent upon full adjacent development, the Trails System Plan should
be expanded to include the following trail segments in the future.
• Along the north side of County Road, 39 between Kadler and
Nashua Avenues.
• Along the east side of Nashua Avenue between 85th and 97th
Streets.
V-5
• Upon a future easterly extension of 85th Street between County
Road 42 and Page Avenue.
• Along the west side of County Road 42/Quaday Avenue between
72nd and 90th Streets.
• Alongside Odean Avenue from 78th Street to Odell.
Figure V-3 illustrates trail routes based on those expressed in the City's
comprehensive plan and the City's recreation and trail plan. Additionally,
routes are illustrated which have been discussed as desirable by the Parks
and Recreation Commission. The proposed corridors form a network
which would eventually provide access to nearly all parts of the
community. Figure V-3 illustrates possible trail corridors for future
developments. A few areas where routes should be considered are:
• West of Kadler to Jalger Avenue.
• A north -south corridor between CSAH39 to an extension of. 70th
Street located approximately halfway between Nashua and LaBeaux
Avenue.
• An extension south of 70th Street along Packard Avenue.
• An extension south of 70th Street to Rice Lake and northward from
70th to link with the elementary school.
• An extension south of 70th Street to the newly merged southeast
portion of the City.
The proposed corridors are approximately one mile to one and a half mile
apart. This ultimately would provide a system which would be accessible
from within a half to three fourths a mile from any point in the community.
V-6
Q FE
1p
O �
� N
N /1
W
,
n
ur�m m 1 n 1 Gz+
' 1
1 I
N ■Nt■■■■t■■Ai■■■■■� — i
■ � r+.a+r ry ■ � .." O i#
MEL
�� 111 ■1■nl■n^ nl■^1■nl II■1 ■nl■ul \11■In��
N N
■ j _ a
■ N 0 ., OOOOC
N
0000e
VI ROUTE
ALTERNATIVES
VI. ROUTE ALTERNATIVES
One of the City's policies articulated in the Comprehensive Plan is:
"Pedestrians and bicyclists shall be afforded right-of-way
separated from motorized traffic at a minimum along arterial
and higher classified streets."
Figure VI -1 illustrates the functional classification of arterial and collector
streets. A summary of the classification is:
PrincipalArterials
STH •
1-94
Minor Arterials
CSAH39
CSAH19
Nashua Avenue - CSAH39 to 77th Street
70th Street - (extension of) Nashua Avenue to CSAH42
CSAH42 - 77th Street to Dayton
Other less heavily traveled routes but intimidating or uncomfortable for
Group B/C riders may be collector routes. These include:
• Odean Avenue
• Kadler Avenue
• 80th Street
• 85th Street
• CSAH42 from Elk River to 70th Street
Alternatives to be considered for the arterials include alternative corridors.
Alternatives to be considered for collector routes may include alternative
corridors or alternative design treatments to provide an safe operating
environment with a higher degree of safety.
Principal Arterials
No trail corridors are planned along either of these routes due to safety
concerns with the speed, volume, and traffic mix. The southwest part of
the City west of 1-94 can be linked to the rest of the system by providing
a route to Albertville and crossing over at CSAH 19.
VI -1
CITY OI
10 P OTSEGO
twat s. swlloF 7] ON TLE CRLT RI►■R ROAD
10
—_ 1i ! HI 1i11rj�/ 11#IHIIICIS�A11N1 #3i9i111�I11I1H1111� 11111111# II�I#vy
kv
11111If
7
14
I 1 I I
N 1
1��yr+.r
ew 22 s.lQi Iii 24 1 t �•"'t'r!!,.,2 snlm 1 �j� �..�+-
r -+'/j In 1 3 r.= •--
P-4+
23
27/ 6 7 25 30 2 27
2
- - - li1#HHlliil % Hili #HI I I Hill Iffuldin 1 ffliffifillintlizi,
! 1 ! nnwluu
.)Ta S1 T 1 _
/94 CITY CIF'SaMERTYILLE
34 o.w v 35 _
36 J/ 31 jam. 33 34 lila #
35 i
Ism•
---` ,%AZ-�_ IlHtlllliflll fill! ll`lilfillMlllill! - - �- - -
t11111111illrillil?11111111��{{Itt�lilllll{{I{Iltitilllt!{Iritlllj _
FUTURE STREET
— PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 1
11111111111111 M■ROR ARTERML FIGURE VI -1
M1118= COLUCMR STREET STREET CLASSIFICATIONS
The major concern with TH 101 is that it separates the eastern part of the
City from the major portion of the City. Three major intersections are
planned with controlled crossings. All three intersections should be
equipped with signals timed to allow a safe crossing for both pedestrians
and Group B/C bicyclists.
Minor Arterials
As was indicated earlier, that portion of CSAH39 between Odean and
Page Avenues is considered to be too stressful to be used comfortably by
Group B/C riders. An alternative to this segment would be north on Odean
onto 93rd, Ogren, and then linking with 96th. This route would provide
a reasonably direct route to the County Park and a short cut to Elk River.
While not addressing all of the problems, it would provide significant relief
for a large number of bicycle trips.
A long term route alternative should be evaluated for CSAH39. One
option would be acquiring additional right-of-way and developing an off-
road trail along the road itself. Another option would be to acquiro trail
right-of-way within the UPA power line easement from at least Nashua
Avenue to the western limits of the City. This area of the City is yet
relatively undeveloped and has relatively large landholdings. This could
serve as an effective alternative for class B/C riders rather than using
CSAH39.
Another area that needs to be considered for a route alternative is the
portion of CSAH42 from 101 to 85th Street. Otsego Elementary School
is situated roughly in the middle of this segment. The school is a
destination point both for students and staff, yet it generates significant
traffic on CSAH42. The average speed of vehicular traffic in this area is
50-55 mph. CSAH42 even with paved shoulders is not a safe operating
environment for elementary school aged children. An alternative route is
recommended which would roughly parallel CSAH42 from TH 101 thru the
elementary school property. This trail should be planned with a reasonably
direct route linking to the proposed trail extending to the school property
from 85th Street. This off-road trail would also enhance access to the
VFW soccer fields on Quaday as well as enhancing access to the school.
VI -3
VII DESIGN STANDARDS
AND TREATMENTS
VII. DESIGN STANDARDS AND TREATMENTS
Facility improvements which enhance pedestrian, bicycle, and other
transportation modes can vary widely. Roadway improvements such as
bike lanes or paved shoulders are, in large part, dependent on the roadway
design (i.e. cross slope, longitudinal gradient, and pavement thickness.)
The shoulder width varies dependent on traffic circumstances. Off road
trails, however, may have independent alignments, grades, and other
features.
Since many of the future improvements will be funded with state and
federal funds, conformance to state and federal design standards will be
necessary. Additionally, the state and federal standards become "industry
standards." A higher degree of liability exposure thus can be incurred with
significant deviation from the standard.
It is recommended that the City adopt Mn/DOT Standards as expressed in
"Minnesota Bicycle Transportation Planning and Design Guidelines"
(Bikeways Manual) published by Mn/DOT in June, 1996 and as may be
amended from time to time.
Developers who are required to construct trails as part of their
development shall also be required to adhere to Mn/DOT Standards and
Specifications.
A synopsis of the standards follows. The reader is referred to three
references for a more complete compilation of the standards. These are:
Mn/DOT "Bikeways Manual" (standards)
Mn/DOT's Standard Specifications for Construction (1995 Edition
and amendments).
Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, (Mn/DOT -
signage)
Rights -of -Way
One of the difficulties with providing separate off-street bike or bike/
pedestrian facilities is the width of the road right-of-way. Mn/DOT's
design standard requires approximately 20' of separation between the
edge of path and the edge of travel way when there is no curb. The
typical rural street section would have no curb.
VII -1
Street widths and rights-of-way widths vary depending on the function of
the street. Most typical dimensions would be:
Table VII -1
Rural Street ROW Dimensions
' Rural pavement section
' Requires 2' from outside of path for clear zone.
A separate bike path cannot be accommodated within rights-of-way of 80'
or less with a rural section. In addition, the amount of right-of-way
necessary can increase significantly dependent on grading and drainage
requirements.
FIGURE VII -1
Typical Rural Street Section
66'
z
J
44' MINIMUM REQUIRED
W
Z
J
ADDRtONAL
W Row
o REQUIRED
M
a
2' CLEAR
On urban streets with curbs, a pathway can be located within four feet
from the curb. A typical 10' pathway thus could be accommodated in an
80' right-of-way and (dependent on the paved shoulder width) may be
accommodated within a 66' ROW.
VII -2
Distance
from Edge
Additional'''
ROW
Half of
Half
Street Width
of Travel way
to ROW
ROW
Required
Width
60'
ROW
30'
12' pavement, 4'
shoulder 18'
14' min
66'
33'
12' pavement, 4'
shoulder 21'
1 1 ' min
80'
40'
12' pavement, 8'.
paved 28'
4' min
shoulder, 2' taper
' Rural pavement section
' Requires 2' from outside of path for clear zone.
A separate bike path cannot be accommodated within rights-of-way of 80'
or less with a rural section. In addition, the amount of right-of-way
necessary can increase significantly dependent on grading and drainage
requirements.
FIGURE VII -1
Typical Rural Street Section
66'
z
J
44' MINIMUM REQUIRED
W
Z
J
ADDRtONAL
W Row
o REQUIRED
M
a
2' CLEAR
On urban streets with curbs, a pathway can be located within four feet
from the curb. A typical 10' pathway thus could be accommodated in an
80' right-of-way and (dependent on the paved shoulder width) may be
accommodated within a 66' ROW.
VII -2
The City has expressed a policy of providing bike and pedestrians separate
paths from the roadway for at least arterials and higher classified streets.
A separate policy states that, "when possible, bicyclists shall be provided
a right-of-way separated from both pedestrian and vehicular traffic."
In order to accomplish this and to serve the majority of bicyclists (Group
B/C), either additional right-of-way or an alternative right-of-way should be
sought for at least the following corridors:
CSAH39
CSAH42 between 101 and 85th Street
All designated or planned arterial and collector streets
The City should explore alternative corridors generally within two to six
blocks of the arterial streets. Proximity to the arterial is important for
maintaining accessibility to destination points and to serve as an attractive
alternative for Group B/C riders and pedestrians.
Type of Facilities
Previous sections have discussed the different types of bike and trail
facilities, including widened lanes, paved shoulders, bike lanes or separate
pathways. On low volume neighborhood streets (below 500 ADT) and
traffic speeds at less than 30 mph, no special facilities would normally be
provided.
On streets with higher volumes (up to 1200 ADT) and limited right-of-way,
bike facilities are recommended to be a paved shoulder or designated bike
lane. On collector streets, an interim facility may be a paved shoulder until
either an alternative or additional right-of-way is acquired. Long term, the
desirable facility is separate pathways for pedestrians and Group B/C
bicyclists. Table VII -2 outlines the preferred facility associated with each
functional roadway.
VII -3
Table VII -2
Separation Guidelines for
Bicycle Facilities'
Principal Arterial (freeway, limited access
highways)
Minor Arterial Street (over 3,000 ADT)
Collector Street (1,000-3,000 ADT)
High volume local street (350-1,200 ADT)
Low volume local street (up to 500 ADT)
Large distance separation
Barrier, distance or grade
separation
Barrier, distance, or grade
separation
Shoulder or bike lane
Shoulder or shared space
w/vehicles
Adapted from Table 3-1 "Separation Guidelines for Bicycle Facilities%.
Creating Bicycle Transportation Networks: A Guidebook.
Table VII -3 outlines the width of the shoulder or bike lane required
considering traffic volume and speed. As indicated, with traffic speed less
than 30 mph, four foot wide shoulders can be suitable for average cyclists
on roads with greater than 5,000 ADT. At speeds from 30-43 mph and
ADT up to 2,500, a six foot wide shoulder would be required. Above 43
mph, an eight foot shoulder would be required. Both CSAH39 and 42
have eight foot paved shoulders.
Table VII -3
Roadway Shoulder Widths for Average
Bicyclists on Rural Road Sections'
Speed AADT2/lane Shoulder Width
0-30 mph < 1,0003 to > 5,000 4.0' (1.2m)
36-43 mph < 1,000 4.0' (1.2m)
30-36 mph < 1,000 to > 5,000 6.0' (1.8m)
36-43 mph <2,500 6.0' (1.8m)
> 43 mph > 2,500 8.0' (2.4m)
' Mn/DOT Bikeways Manual.
2 Annual Average Daily Traffic.
3 With AADT <500 do not need shoulders unless the roadway is
heavily used by trucks or heavy commercial vehicles.
VII -4
J�
i.
Table VII -4 outlines the minimum separation between the vehicle travel
lane and separate pathways. With an urban section at traffic speeds less
than 45 mph, a minimum four foot separation is required if no signs are
located in the separation area. At speeds greater than 45 mph, the
separation required with an urban section is 10'.
At speeds less than 37 mph on rural sections, a 20' separation is required.
Table VII -4
Path Separation from Travel Lane
Urban Section Separation'
<31 mph (50 km/h)
32-44 mph (51-70 km/h)
> 45 mph (> 70 km/h)
Rural Section Separation (no curb)'
<_ 37 mph (<_ 60 km/h)
> 37 mph (> 60 km/h)
Mn/DOT Bikeways Manual
Path Widths
4' (1.2m, no signs)
4' (1.2m)
10' (3.Om)
20' (6m, 3m [min])
23' (7m)
The standard width for most pathways accommodating two way traffic
and light pedestrian traffic is ten feet paved. In restricted areas a
minimum width of eight feet of pavement is required. The pathway
would have a 1.66' shoulder and clear zone on each side of the paved
surface. Table VII -5 indicates path widths as recommended in the
Mn/DOT Bike Manual.
Table VII -5
Path Widths
Light Pedestrian & 2 way bicycle
(< 2,000 users/day)
Heavy Pedestrian & 2 way bicycle
(> 2,000 users/day)
VII -5
Good
Satisfactory
Aja
11.5'
10'
8'
(3.5m)
(3.0m)
(2.4m)
13.2'
11.5'
10'
(4.0m)
(3.5m)
(3.0m)
Curve Radii
The minimum radius of curves is predominately a function of the speed of
travel. Table VII -6 outlines minimum radii associated with different
speeds. The standard design speed for off-road paths in the City will be
19 mph (30 km/h) requiring a minimum radius of approximately 80 feet.
Table
Nii*uuu-ff 5?,adius of Curvature
Design Speed
16 mph (25 km/h)
19 mph (30 km/h)
25 mph (40 km/h)
31 mph (50 km/h)
38 mph (60 km/h)
Miscellaneous Criteria
Minimum
Radius
53'
(16m)
79'
(24m)
155'
(47m)
271'
(82m)
467'
(142m)
Cross Slope: The standard cross slope for pathways will be 2% to
provide for adequate drainage.
Longitudinal
Gradient: The maximum longitudinal grade for pathways will be
5% meeting ADA requirements.
Pavement
Thickness: Pavement thickness will vary dependent on soil type but
the minimum will be:
2" 2331 Type 31 Wear Course
4" Class 5 Aggregate Base
VII -6
VIII ASSESSMENT
PLAN
VIII ASSESSMENT OF PLAN
The success of a comprehensive trail plan depends on several factors, one
of which is measured against the performance criteria originally stated.
Other factors include whether the plan is implemented, the acceptance by
users, the desire to fund, and the long term safety record of the system.
The first factor can be evaluated to a certain degree at this time. Table
VIII -1 highlights the major planned trail routes against the 12 performance
criteria. As indicated, 13 of the 20 routes score relatively well (8 of 12
points). CSAH37, 39, 42, and Odean Avenue, however, score poorly
unless a separate treadway can be constructed in conjunction with these
routes.
VIII -1
f
J .
Table VIII -1
Assessment of Plan
V
0
0
rn
`0
0
O
c O
OV
�
O
L
O
W
W
Z
N
N
Q)tD
W
>
Q
1
Q
N
>
df
o2i
O
J
>
Q
>
Q
r
O
M
N
d
N
N
d
4J
U)
4•
(f)2
^
M
O Q
D_
7
O
Q
cn
+�
(n
>
Q
>'
o
•
Q
Q
Q
Q
c
t
cv
O
+,
c
(9
U
t
O
p
O
cvcu
�C
+.
(A
(n
(n
(n
t i
O
to
� coo
m
)
cu
-a
c j
(C)
co
U
cu
(aa
U
U
U
U
oo
r
U�
Y
.�
A
Z
O
am
rn
o_
to
d
a.
w
CRITERIA
Stress Level <2 (B/C) with improvements
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Street Level <3 (A) with improvements
X
X
X
X X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X_
X
X
X_
X
Accessibility
X
X
X
X_
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Within 1/2 mile
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X_
Distance to high priority destinations 2-4 mile
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Directness of routes
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
No gaps in route
X
X
X X
X
X
X_
X
X
X
X
Avoid hi -volume or high speed roads
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X_
X
Not interrupted by hi -volume roads (>2,500)
X
X
X
_X X
X_
X
X
X
X
X
X_
Planned separation (collector/arterials)
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X_
X_
__X_
Majority on roads < 30 mph travel speeds
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Majority on roads < 500 ADT
X
X X
X
X
_X
X
X
X
X-
6
5
4
6
9
8
6
12 9
8
9
9
6
10
10
8
11
9
8
9
V
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
"Bicycle Facility Design Workshop Manual." Northwestern University Traffic
Institute. July -August, 1996.
Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). August, 1991.
Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodate Bicycles. Manual FHWA
Contract No. DTFH61-89-C-00088. Prepared by WM C. Wilkinson III, et.
al. November, 1992.
Otsego Comprehensive Plan. City of Otsego. Prepared by Northwest Associated
Consultants. September, 1991.
Wright County Transportation Plan. Prepared by Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc.
1994.
APPENDIX
OTSEGO APPRECIATION DAY RECAP & FUTURE IDEAS
AT THE 1996 APPRECIATION DAY:
(1) ANTIQUE GAS ENGINE & TRACTOR DISPLAYS
(2) MODEL FARM EQUIPMENT DISPLAY
(3) HORSE & WAGON RIDES
(4) SMALL ANTIQUE & CLASSIC VEHICLE DISPLAY
(5) TABLE BY HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION
(6) CHILDREN'S GAMES BY COMMUNITY RECREATION
(7) F.F.A. CHILDREN'S BARN YARD
(8) FOOD VENDOR
(9) DARE SEMI AND OFFICER BOB
THE FOLLOWING ARE SUGGESTED IDEAS, AND ACTIVITIES THAT WOULD HELP
TO IMPROVE THE 1997 EVENT: 7 I2-� %
(1) FAMILY DANCE IN EVENING "DRUG & ALCOHOL FREE"
(2) CAR SHOW COMPLETE WITH CLASSES AND AWARDS Fvze4,4 Io -,,,-
(3) CRAFTERS
(do
(5) EXPANDED GAMES FOR RIDS & FAMILIES
(6) CHARGE A FEE FOR EVENT & SECURE AREA (SPECTATORS ONLY, DISPLAYS FREE'
(7) ALLOW SET UP AND POSSIBLY LET EXHIBITORS ONLY STAY ON GROUNDS
OVERNIGHT *THIS WOULD HELP WITH SECURITY OF EVENT ALSO*
(8) CHANGE NAME OF EVENT TO MORE ACCURATELY REFLECT THE DAYS ACTIVITIES
(9) ENCOURAGE COMMUNITY GROUPS AND LOCAL BUSINESS TO SET UP BOOTHS
AND DISPLAYS
(10) GET EARLIER NOTICE OUT TO EXHIBITORS AND MAKE A BIGGER EFFORT
TO ENCOURAGE LOCALS TO TAKE PART
(11) HAVE A CELEBRITY SOFTBALL GAME I/E PARRS & REC VS. COUNCIL
SOMETHING ON THAT ORDER (DONKEY BALL?)
(12) IN ADDITION TO OUR REGULAR FOOD VENDOR, ENCOURAGE SERVICE
GROUPS I/E LIONS, BOY & GIRL SCOUTS, ETC. TO SET UP SMALL REFRESHMENT
STANDS WITH WATERMELON SLICES, ICE CREAM ETC.
OTHER IDEAS????
WE NEED TO GET THE FAMILIES TO THE PARR EARLY IN THE DAY AND ENCOURAGE
THEM TO USE THE PARR, PICNIC AND SPEND THE ENTIRE DAY TILL THE DANCE.
THE PROPOSED IDEAS WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO THE EVENTS THAT TOOK
PLACE IN 1996D a7
r, �
Qom, ��. ��-�-,-
G��
CITY OF OTSEGO
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
11 AGENDA SECTION: DEPARTMENT: MEETING DATE II
IS.CONSENT AGENDA (Non -controversial items) January 27, 1997 - I
Il 6:30PM
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: EB,CC
5.1. Consider resignation of Dave Sederberg from EDAAC
5.2. Consider resignation of Debbie Carron from Park and Recs. Comm.
BACKGROUND:
Attached is a letter from Dave Sederberg asking to resign from the
EDAAC. I received a call from Debbie Carron stating she is resigning
as of January 1, 1997 from Park and Recs Comm. (See is sending a
letter that she gave to Tom Baillargeon, but I have not as yet
received it).
STAFF RECOIrMMATION :
Approve the resignation of Dave Sederberg from EDAAC and Debbie Carron
from Park and Recs Commission with a letter of appreciation of their
service being sent to each of them. They have both been very good
members of their respective commission and we will miss them.
Thank u,
Elaine
DAVID C. SEDERBERG
14930 Ogren Place N.E.
Elk River, MN 55330
January 14, 1997
City Council, City of Otsego
Otsego City Hall
8899 Nashua Ave. N.E.
Otsego, MN 55330
l
RE: Re -appointment to Economic Development Authority Advisory Commission
JAN 1 5 1997
I wish to hereby notify you of my desire not to be re -appointed to the EDAAC. At this
time I would also like to express my appreciation to the City Council and members of the
EDAAC for the opportunity to serve on this Commission for the past two years. It was
genuinely a very pleasant and enriching experience. However, due to family and professional
commitments, I feel I am no longer able to participate in the EDAAC with the level of
commitment it deserves. My decision was arrived at after extensive contemplation and was
not intended to be statement of any dissatisfaction with the City Council, EDA or EDAAC.
In closing, I would like to say that the EDA and EDAAC are an extremely important
part of the future development of Otsego, and I believe will ultimately succeed in their
mission. If at some point in the future 1 am able to renew my commitment with the
integrity it deserves, I would not hesitate to reapply (pending any vacancies). Once again, it
has been a pleasure to get to know and work with such a dedicated group.
Sincerely,
CITY OF OTSEGO
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
AGENDA SECTION: DEPARTMENT: MEETING DATE
7.ANDY MAC ARTHUR, CITY ATTORNEY January 27, 1997 -
6:30PM
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: EB , CC
7.1. Draft of Moratorium Re: New Developments
BACKGROUND:
At the Sewer and Water Workshop the Council asked me to have the City
Attorney draft a Moratorium Re: New Developments with a couple of
options for Urban and Rural. Andy has done that and they are
attached. Attached also is a letter from Bob Kirmis Re: Planning
issues, as he will not be at this meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Andy will explain the Moratorium and options. This is a Council
decision as to how they proceed with this.
Thank you,
Elaine
William S. Radzwill
Andrew J. MacArthur
Michael C. Couri
Megan M. McDonald
January 23, 1997
RADZWILL & CO URI
Attornevs at Law
705 Central Avenue East
PO Box 369
St. Michael, MN 55376
(612) 497-1930
(612) 497-2599 (FAX)
City Council Members
City of Otsego
c/o Elaine Beatty, City Clerk
8899 Nashua Avenue NE
Elk River, MN 5530
RE: Proposed Moratorium- Draft Resolution And Optional Interim
Ordinances
Dear Council Members:
Please find enclosed for your consideration two options for a
proposed Interim Ordinance establishing a moratorium. The first
option establishes a moratorium over residential development within
the entire City. The second option establishes a moratorium over
only the "urban" portions of the City.
I have also enclosed a proposed resolution for adoption which,
hopefully, sets forth the salient facts upon which a decision to
establish a moratorium are based. In order to support such a
moratorium there should be such a resolution stating the reasons
for the City's action.
For the benefit of all Council Members, I have included a copy of
the applicable statute which allows the City to pass an Interim
Ordinance, Minn. Stat. 462.355. Such an Interim Ordinance must be
based upon a need for the City to complete studies regarding a
particular action. In this case the Council has already directed
the revisions to the Comprehensive Plan, as well as the sewer
study.
The statute allowing the passing of an Interim Ordinance does not
list any specific requirement that there be a public hearing in
order to pass the ordinance. In fact, the Attorney General's Office
has indicated that the statute is separate from the provisions
establishing procedures for a regular rezoning which requires a
Letter to Otsego City Council
January 23, 1997
Page 2
public hearing and a 2/3 vote for approval. Op. Atty. Gen. 63b-14,
October 6, 1982.
Thus, passage of the Interim Ordinance does not require the usual
4/5 vote required for a rezoning, only a majority.
I will often recommend that a public hearing be held even if not
required, depending upon the situation. In this case, because of
the nature of the moratorium contemplated, the desire of the
Council to make a decision as soon as possible, the possible
adverse affect of the consideration of further applications until
this matter is resolved, and the potential overall affect on the
City, I think that the City would be justified in proceeding to
adopt an Interim Ordinance without public hearing. It is, however,
a Council decision.
Between the two options proposed, it is my strong recommendation
that the first option, a moratorium over the entire City be
implemented. A moratorium over only the eastern portion of the -City
would defeat the whole purpose of the action.
The City can apply a moratorium to developments which have already
applied for processing. See Almquist v. Town of Marshan, 245 NW2d
819 (Minn. 1976) and Wedmeyer v City of Minneapolis, 540 NW2d 539
(Minn. App. 1995).
In the present case my recommendation is that all developments
already in process be allowed to continue through processing. I
have drafted the Interim Ordinance to be effective only after the
effective date of the Interim Ordinance, the date of publication.
In some Interim Ordinances specific exempted subdivisions are
listed within the interim ordinance. Another option would be to
change the effective date to give applicants a "window" in which to
submit an application.
The interim ordinance moratorium, as drafted, excludes commercial
and industrial development, individual residence construction on
already approved lots, CUPs, variances, and 1 per 40 splits. It is
specifically directed at residential subdivisions.
The proposed ordinance is also drafted to apply for a one year
period. It can be lifted at anytime by Council resolution. I have
drafted it this way in order to try and avoid the problems that
have occurred with other City moratoriums where we have had to come
back and extend a moratorium because the originally established
time period was too short. It is also unclear what time period
there would have to be in order to make needed changes once a
decision for or against sewer and water services has been made.
Due to the short time period given me to draft these documents
Letter to Otsego City Council
January 23, 1997
Page 3
there may be changes that become apparent to me prior to the
meeting. I will comment on any such changes at the meeting on
Monday.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.
Very ly yours,
An ew J. cArt
RADZWILL COURI
Encls.
cc: Bob Kirmis, Dave Licht, NAC
Larry Koshak, Hakanson Anderson
DRAFT 1/23/97
CITY OF OTSEGO
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN INTERIM ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM
ON RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF OTSEGO.
WHEREAS, the City of Otsego is in the process of studying the
feasibility of constructing a wastewater treatment plant, either
jointly or by itself, and is also pursuing other alternative means
of providing waste water treatment and water facilities to its
citizens; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has also directed the City Planner to
commence preliminary studies regarding needed amendments to the
City's Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, a decision regarding provision of wastewater treatment
facilities and/or agreements is inextricably connected with the
City's revision of its Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, virtually all residences and businesses within the City
are currently served by individual septic systems; and
WHEREAS, information has been provided to the City Council that
numerous such private systems have failed over the years; and
WHEREAS, the continuation of approval of residential subdivisions
which must rely upon individual septic systems in greater numbers
raises environmental concerns; and
WHEREAS, the decision as to whether or not to proceed with the
provision of wastewater treatment and water services will
fundamentally affect needed changes to the Comprehensive Plan and
official controls: and
WHEREAS, the present Comprehensive Plan is based upon the original
assumption that sewer service would be contracted for from the City
of Elk River, said assumption, while possibly valid at this time,
has been invalid for a period of years; and
WHEREAS, the City has initiated and has been provided with an
engineer's report regarding the possibility of establishment of a
joint waste water treatment facility with the City of Dayton; and
WHEREAS, the City has also been provided with limited information
regarding the possibility of establishing City water services in
conjunction with construction of wastewater treatment facilities;
and
WHEREAS, there have been recent indications that the City of Elk
River may once again consider offering waste water treatment
services to Otsego on a contractual basis; and
WHEREAS, the City has presently received numerous applications for
residential development within the City; and
WHEREAS, at this point in the decision making process City staff
find it difficult to give proper guidance and information to
Developers regarding said residential developments because of the
uncertainty regarding wastewater treatment and water services; and
WHEREAS, decisions regarding residential development which are
currently before the City, and could possibly be presented to the
City in the near future, may fundamentally affect the City's
ability to deliver wastewater treatment facilities and water
facilities to residents of the City; and
WHEREAS, construction of a wastewater treatment facility by the
City will mean the assumption of a great financial burden by the
City, and it is imperative that all available planning controls be
initiated to assure that development is properly controlled and
correctly staged; and
WHEREAS, the City needs to continue to consider and process
applications for Commercial and Industrial development because of
its crucial need to expand its tax base; and
WHEREAS, while the City has the authority to adopt a moratorium
which would affect those applicants already in process, it desires
to allow those applicants already in process to proceed with their
applications, while preventing further applications which could
potentially affect the City's service delivery capability; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the decision
regarding water and sewer service is a priority item which must be
made as soon as possible, and has set a date for the making of that
decision; and
WHEREAS, additional residential subdivisions may be contrary to the
City's ultimate development objectives; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the present situation
requires a temporary halt to the receipt of applications for and
processing of residential subdivisions, with those specific
exceptions set forth in the Interim Ordinance, a copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhibit A and herein incorporated by reference,
in order to protect the planning process and the health, safety,
and welfare of the citizens of Otsego.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Otsego that said Council does hereby adopt by this resolution the
attached Interim Ordinance Establishing A Moratorium On Residential
Subdivisions Within The City of Otsego, Exhibit A.
ADOPTED this day of January, 1997 by the Otsego City
Council.
IN FAVOR:
OPPOSED:
CITY OF OTSEGO
Larry Fournier, Mayor
Elaine Beatty, City Clerk
IC )WERS I HOUSING, REDEVELOP.MF— IT, PLANNING § 462.355
administrative
311 be advisory
lg commission
the governing
2ment may be
case of other
1g body of any
or an official
istments. The
division 6 and
iy charter, the
trate board of
ming commis-
ard of appeals
le board. The
y may direct.
he board, the
provide that
final subject
td the right of
i the board of
�n notice
ng ooard.
ng the matter
oner by mail.
or attorney.
mg body, the
Such rules
the filing of
record of its
findings, and
rder. In any
:he board of
an appeal or
ltative autho-
ys, to review
ie appeal or
1, eff. Mal
correction biI;
he reference tc
7, subd. 5.
Law Review Commentaries
Lind use controls. Jerome F. Fitzgerald. 24
Bench and Bar No. 2, p. 17 (Feb. 1967).
Library References
Municipal Corporations Z-177.
WESTLAW Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations § 551 et seq.
Motes of Decisions
Board of appeals and adjustments 2
Planning agencies I
1 1. Planning agencies
A planning commission established by a viI.
lage zoning ordinance is not a planning agency
within the meaning of subd. 1, so as to require
a two-thirds vote of the village council for its
abolishment and therefore an amendment to a
village zoning ordinance passed by a majority
vote would be effective for this purpose. Op.
Atty.Gen., 110-A, Oct. 17, 1969.
In the absence of statutory specification of
the number constituting a quorum of a plan-
ning commission, a majority of the members
of the commission would so constitute. Op.
Atty.Gen., 59a-32, May 11, 1960.
Where city charter provided that any person
entitled to vote at city election was eligible to
any appointive office, residents of the county,
who were not residents of the city, could not
be appointed to special planning commission.
Op-Atty.Gen., 110-A, Feb. 6, 1957.
City council could, pursuant to § 471.27, cre-
ate by resolution a special planning commis-
sion of limited duration to make study and
submit plan for the regulation of the future
physical development of the city. Op.Atty.
Gen., 110-x, Feb. 6, 1957.
2. Board of appeals and adjustments
The powers of the board of appeals and
adjustments are set forth in §§ 462.359, subd.
4, and 462.357, subd. 6, and the intent of subd.
2 of this section can be accomplished only by
reference to § 462.357, subd. 6. Op.Atty.Gen.,
59a-32 (Gr. x 5), Jan. 13, 1966.
462.355. Preparation, adoption, and amendment of comprehensive mu-
nicipal plan
Subdivision 1. Preparation and review. The planning agency shall pre-
pare the comprehensive municipal plan. In discharging this duty the plan-
ning agency shall consult with and coordinate the planning activities of other
departments and agencies of the municipality to insure conformity with and
to assist in the development of the comprehensive municipal plan. In its
planning activities the planning agency shall take due cognizance of the
planning activities of adjacent units of government and other affected public
agencies. The planning agency shall periodically review the plan and recom-
mend amendments whenever necessary.
Subd. 2. Procedure for plan adoption and amendment. The planning
agency may, unless otherwise provided by charter or ordinance consistent
with the municipal charter, recommend to the governing body the adoption
and amendment from time to time of a comprehensive municipal plan. The
plan may be prepared and adopted in sections, each of which relates to a
major subject of the plan or to a major geographical section of the municipali-
ty. The governing body may propose the comprehensive municipal plan and
amendments to it by resolution submitted to the planning agency. Before
adopting the comprehensive municipal plan or any section or amendment of
the plan, the planning agency shall hold at least one public hearing thereon.
303
§ 462.355 LOCAL GOVERNMENT POLICE POWERS
A notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing shall be published once
in the official newspaper of the municipality at least ten days before the day
of the hearing.
Subd. 3. Adoption by governing body. A proposed comprehensive plan or
an amendment to it may not be acted upon by the governing body until it has
received the recommendation of the planning agency- or until 60 days have
elapsed from the date an amendment proposed by the governing body has
been submitted to the planning agency for its recommendation. unless
otherwise provided by charter, the governing body may by resolution by a
two-thirds vote of all of its members adopt and amend the comprehensive
plan or portion thereof as the official municipal plan upon such notice and
hearing as may be prescribed by ordinance.
Subd. 4. Interim ordinance. If a municipality is conducting studies or
has authorized a study to be conducted or has held or has scheduled a hearing
for the purpose of considering adoption or amendment of a comprehensive
plan or official controls as defined in section 462.32, subdivision 15, or if
new territory for which plans or controls have not been adopted is annexed to
a municipality, the governing body of the municipality may adopt an interim
ordinance applicable to all or part of its jurisdiction for the purpose of
protecting the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of its
citizens. The interim ordinance may regulate, restrict or prohibit any use,
development, or subdivision within the jurisdiction or a portion thereof for a
period not to exceed one year from the date it is effective, and may be
extended for such additional periods as the municipality may deem appropri-
ate, not exceeding a total additional period of 18 months. No interim
ordinance may halt, delay, or impede a subdivision which has been given
preliminary approval prior to the effective date of the interim ordinance.
Laws 1965, c. 670, § 5, eff. Jan. 1, 1966. Amended by Laws 1976, c. 127, § 21, eff.
April 3, 1976; Laws 1977, c. 347, § 68; Laws 1980, c. 566, § 24; Laws 1983, c. 216, art.
1, § 67; Laws 1985, c. 62, §§ 1, 2, eff. July 1, 1985.
Historical and Statutory Notes
Derivation:
Laws 1929, c. 340, §§ 1 to 3.
Laws 1929, c. 176, §§ 1 to 4.
St.1927, §§ 1569, 1571 to 1573, 1614 to 1616.
Laws 1925, c. 284, § 1.
Gen.St.1923, §§ 1569, 1571 to 1573, 1614 t
1616.
Laws 1923, c. 364, § 1.
Laws 1921, c. 217, §§ 1 to 3.
Gen.St.1913, §§ 1581 to 1584.
Laws 1913, c. 420, §§ I to 3.
Laws 1913, c. 98, § 1.
St.1961, §§ 462.01 to 462.11, 462.18 t
462.23.
Laws 1955, c. 463, § 1.
Laws 1955, c. 158, § 1.
Laws 1953, c. 579, § 1.
St.Supp.1940, §§ 1617-1 to 1617-3, 1664-9
to 1664-93, 1933-42 to 1933-45.
Laws 1937, c. 239, § I.
Laws 1935, Ex.Sess., c. 35, §§ 1 to 3.
Laws 1935, c. 376, § 1.
Laws 1935, c. 235, § I.
Laws 1931, c. 163.
The 1976 amendment added subd. 4 regard-
ing interim ordinances.
Laws 1977, c. 347, § 68 provides in part that
Laws 1976, c. 127, § 21 (adding subd. 4) is
reenacted, effective retroactively to April 3.
1976.
The 1980 amendment revised subd. 4 which
° formerly provided:
"If a municipality is conducting or in good
faith intends to conduct studies within a rea-
sonable time or has held or has scheduled a
1 hearing for the purpose of considering adop-
tion or amendment of a comprehensive plan or
official controls as defined in section 473.852,
304
or
hay-
pati:
mai
all c
pro,
s e
any
for
dat,
adc
L
rec'
sol;
red
sic-
su
ser
er:'
"ac
its
the
.a.,
\l_
§ 462.353
HOUSING, REDEVELOPMENT PLANNI .)USC,, REDEVELOPMENT, pLANNLNIG
amendment to an official control established Place Partners v. City der.
permit or other approval required under an want to sections 462.351 to 462.364, orf y:' `�%�dbury
r
official is '� W 2a8' review Sec
sections certifyare control established pursuant to t}
interest,
oporedb Y, App.1992, 492 —d
and municipal utility fees duno e ontpropethe Arty taxes, s tial assessments,
Propertyarcelo to �persalt
taxes which are being paid under the applicationoelas
plan effectuation; zonir.
procedure for p
of provi �-2.307'`,-
a stipulation,
judgment, poses or which are being appealed as provided by law, are
for purposes of this
[See main voiur
not considered delinqu,
subdivision if all required a
stipulation, order, confession of judgment, or P Payments are due under the terms of
Amended Ppeal have been paid.
''�•
Sul _. a, Certain zoning ordinances. A mu:
has the effect of altering
by Laws 1996, c. 282, § 3. _
zoning ordinance that
ements in
h
manufactured
Historical and Statutory Notes
r manufactured home
995 the
efore. J edit lot size and setback.requirer
1996 Legislation
hen e=ting
m
[See main volue
cants that there are no delinquent ro rt
The 1996 amendment added subd. 5, Pepermitting Ppe Y tax.
n
municipalities to require certification from a , penalties, interest, or muni•
PP special assessments, g_
single family use. A sta
pal utility fees due.
Subd.'7. permitted
licensed day care facility sen -LL
462.353, pre p
paration, adoption, and amendment of comprehensive municipal Ian
p p
;ewer persons, a
day care facility licensed under Mtnnesei�mittzd�-
be considered a p
[See main volume for 1J
fewer children Shall
of zoning, except that a residentia
Subd la Plan update by metropolitan municipalities. Each municipality in th��,ezules
metropolitan area, as defined in section
the purposes
who have violated criminal statutes rela
the basis of conduct in viclation
473.121, subdivision 2, shall review and update it
comprehensive plan and fiscal devices and official controls
subdivision 2.
delinquent on
shall not be considered a permitted use.
shal
as provided in section 473,861
[See main vo:
Amended by Laws 1995, c. 176, § 4. [See main volume for 2 to ;]
Amended by Laws 1994• c. 4 "a°• s 3; Laws 1995. c.
Historical and 'S'
Historical and Statutory Notes " X.;
1995 Legislation •,.. ,..
1994 Legislation
subd. la relating to
Laws 1995, c. 176, § 1 that this act
The 1995 amendment added subd. la relating to applies in the counties
Plan updates by metropolitan
The 1994 amendment added
zoning ordinances- which alter requirements of
ofAnoka,
municipalities. Carver, Dakota
Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, Washington.
manufactured home parks.
and
Law Review and Journal Commentaries
Recent developments
1995 Legislation providednt, in that a
The 1995 amendmeat treatsbjuvenile sex offend -
in condemnation law. C.
Blaine Harsrad, 64 Hennepin Law. 22 (March-
residential facility .
Notes of
April 1992).
Notes of DecisionsAmendment
of zoning ord n ncess 0.6 32-44
Neighborhood opposition
Compensation 3
Although state statute
Conditional use Permits 63
Public health, safety and welfare 63.6
grants municipalities
broad authority to enact moratorium, that authori-
2. Interim ordinances tY is not unlimited; municipality must exercise its
Enforcement 70.5 opposition, amendment of zoning
Neighborhood
"
Freeze on conditional use application resulting moratorium authority for purpbee of protectingordinances
Planning Process, and may
from council member's Y not an�Y enact
interim
40.6
Public health, safety and welfare, conditional
request that city attorney moratorium o
ordinance to delay or prevent
draft interim ordinance imposing moratorium on single project Medical
such applications Inc. City
use permits 63.6
Unincorporated territory 5a
V. of
does not Savage, App.1992, 487 N.W2d g63
require same formal
Procedures which
are statutorily required for City acted arbitrarily in adopting
adoption of interim ordinance, and ordinance pro- issuance of building and special moratorium on
for the freeze does
5.5• Unincorporated territory regulations ani
regiil
not exceed the authori industrial zones where city permits m
of the
of the city and is a proper and le CY weeks after waste �' eniacced moratorium six
of the city's general power its�res exercise declaratory judg-
City may extend subdivision
control_
building code enforcement. but not zoning `
limits where county zonir.,
and mens action seeking determination
pthe puity to g termination that infectious
regulate land use and development n the public's waste Processing facility was permitted use under
interest v. City
two miles beyond city
regulations are in effect Op Atty.Gen„ No. 59a -
1995:.
of Minneapolis, A city zoning ordinance. Medical
1995, 540 N.W.2d 539. PP• Services, Inc. v.
.W.2d 39. City of Savage, App.1m 487 N.W.2d
32 Aug. 18 .
-"
of zoning districts
Statute which permits interim ordinances rem_ 3. Compensation � .._.. 263
lag, restricting, p
g or Prohibiting any land rise
development
9. Classification
Olsen v. City of Minneapo lis 1962, [main vc
Minn. 1, 115 N.W2d 734.
is or A city's interim moratorium denying
less formal a Permissive and does not prohibit owner all economically viable r g Property
approaches. Wedemeyer. v. City of two Use of property for
Minneapolis, App.1995, Years was not a taking
umel 263
14. Interpretation of zoning ordinances
accord':
540 N.W2d 539.
c noo moratori-
um did not deny owner "all economically viable use
Zoning ordinance should be construed
to plain and ordinary meaning of its terms. in fav
?2
§§473.01 to 473.11 METROPOLITAN AREA
Repealed
of Anoka, Caner, Dakota. Hennepin. Ramsey,
Scott, and Washington.
DEFINITIONS
473.121. Definitions
Subdivision 1. Terms. For the purposes of this chapter, the terms defined
in this section have the meanings given them in this section, except as
otherwise expressly provided or indicated by the context.
Subd. 2. Metropolitan area or area. "Metropolitan area" or "area" means
the area over which the metropolitan council has jurisdiction, including oniv
the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota excluding the city of Northfield, Henne-
pin excluding the city of Hanover, Ramsey, Scott excluding the city of New
Prague, and Washington.
Subd. 3. Metropolitan council or council. "Metropolitan council" or
"council" means the metropolitan council established by section 473.123.
Subd. 4. Metropolitan county. "Metropolitan county" means anv one of
the following counties: Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott or
Washington.
Subd. 5. State agency. "State agency" means the state of Minnesota or anv
agency, board, commission, department or educational institution thereof.
Subd. 5a. Metropolitan agency. "Metropolitan agency" means the metro-
politan parks and open space commission, regional transit board, metropolitan
transit commission, metropolitan waste control commission, metropolitan air-
ports commission, and metropolitan sports facilities commission.
Subd. 6. Local governmental unit. "Local governmental unit" means any
county, city, town, school district, special district or other political subdivisions
or public corporation, other than the council or a metropolitan agency, Iving in
whole or part within the metropolitan area.
Subd. 7. Repealed by Laws 1986, c. 460, § 59.
Subd. 8. Metropolitan significance. "Metropolitan significance" means a
status determined by the metropolitan council pursuant to the rules and
procedures established by section 473.173.
Subd. 9. Repealed by Laws 1986, c. 460, § 59.
Subd. 10. Policy plan. "Policy plan" means a long-range comprehensive
plan of the metropolitan council.
Subd. 11. Independent commission, board or agency. "Independent com-
mission, board or agency" means governmental entities with jurisdictions lying
in whole or in part within the metropolitan area but not including agencies that
are subject to the requirements of section 473.161.
Subd. 12. Metropolitan parks and open space commission. "Metropolitan
parks and open space commission" means the commission established in
sections 473.302 to 473.341.
Subd. 13. Park district. "Park district" means a park district created
under chapter 398.
8
ITAN AREA
METROPOLIT.IN GOVERNMEN7 § 473.864
751 as compiled
additions with a cost of more than $200,000 and the effect of the program on
6• is reenacted,
adjacent school districts and affected local governmental units.
197e."
Subd. 2. Each school district shall submit its capital improvement program
for review and comment to the local governmental units lving in whole or in
part within the district and to adjacent school districts at least nine months
at least the Y =
prior to the submission of the program to the council. The local governmental
units and adjacent districts shall review the program and provide comments to
use ''
the school district and the council within 90 days on the compatibility of the
plan as
ted territory :
program with the proposed comprehensive pians of the local governmental
units and the capital improvement
programs of the school districts.
:afters speci- ; z
Subd. 3. The capital improvement programs shall be submitted to the
council after consideration but before final
plan, and a '
approval by the governing body of
the district.
nd facilities;
Subd. 4. Capital improvement programs of school districts adopted prior to
subdivision
the requirements of sections 462.353, subdivision 4, 473.175, and 473.851 to
473.871 shall remain in force and effect until amended, repealed, or superseded
repare, with+
by programs adopted pursuant to sections 462.355, subdivision 4, 473.175, and
)Ian for any _:
473.351 to 473.871. Existing programs may be amended as appropriate and
ce action b y
new programs prepared and adopted prior to the submission to the council of
a all or'.,
programs required by sections 462.353, subdivision 4, 473.175, and 473.851 to
b,'ion 2
b p.;
473.871. Existing programs may be used in whole or in part following
modification,
r, with
as necessary, to satisfy the requirements of sections 462.355,
subdivision 4, 473.175, and 473.851 to 473.871.
[an for each
462.351 to
Laws 1976, c. 127, § 13, eff. April 3, 1976; Laws 1977, c. 347, § 68.
Historical and Statutory Notes
Laws 1977, chapter 347, § 68, provides: §§ 462.355, 473.121, and 473.1751 as compiled
"Laws
f.:
1976• Chapter 127 in in Laws of Minnesota for 1976. is reenacted.
P [ part enacting
§§ 473.351 to 473.372 and amending effective retroactively to April 3, 1976."
51 as compiled
is reena
Library References
1976."
Schools p63. C.I.S. Schools and School Districts § 241 et
WESTLAw Topic No. 345.
seq.
4 f 3.864. Plans and programs; adoption; amendment
Subdivision 1. Each local governmental unit shall adopt its comprehensive
plan with
required modifications within nine months following a final decision,
order,
or judgment
� g ment made pursuant to section 473.866. Each school district
shall adopt
._;
its capital improvement program, after receiving and considering
the council's
review statement sent pursuant to section 473.175 and making
any amendments
which the school district determines may be appropriate.
Subd.
din
2. Amendments to comprehensive plans of local governmental units
and to
an co a
capital improvement programs of school districts shall be prepared,
submitted, and adopted in conformance
ram, w,.�..
with guidelines adopted by the metro -
Dolitan council
dation
pursuant to section 473.854.
Liw. 1976.
nd buil
1881' c. 127, § 15, eff. April 3, 1976: Laws 1977, c. 347, § 68. Amended by Laws
c. 242, § 1, eff. May 20, 1981.
�.
385
§ 473.859 METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT
Historical and Statutory Notes
1995 Legislation
The 1996 amendment, in subd. 1, provided that
each plan may contain an intergovernmental coor-
dination element and an economic development
element; in subd. 2, included a reference to the
water management plan under section 103B=
and inserted a list of types of land and water to be
included under the plan; and in subd. 5, added a
paragraph relating to comprehensive plans in rede-
velopment areas.
Laws 1995, c. 176, § 12, provides that this act
applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota,
Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington.
473.864. Plans and programs; adoption; amendment
[See main volume for 11
Subd. Z. By December 31,_.1998, and at least once every ten years thereafter, each local
governmental unit shall review and, if necessary, amend its entire comprehensive plan and its
fiscal devices and official controls. Such review and, if necessary, amendment shall ensure
that, as provided in section 473.865, the fiscal devices and official controls of each local
government unit are not in conflict with its comprehensive plan. Upon completion of review
and, if necessary, amendment of its comprehensive plan, fiscal devices, and official controls as
required by this section, each local government unit shall either:
(a) submit to the metropolitan council the entire current comprehensive plan together with
written certification by the governing body of the local government unit that it has complied
with this section and that no amendments to its plan or fiscal devices or official controls are
necessary; or
(b)(1) submit the entire updated comprehensive plan and amendment or amendments to its
comprehensive plan necessitated by its review to the metropolitan council for review; and
(2) submit the amendment or amendments to its fiscal devices or official controls necessi-
tated by its review to the metropolitan council for information purposes as provided by
section 473.865.
Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, local governments shall consider, in
preparing their updated comprehensive plans, amendments to metropolitan system plans in
effect on December 31, 1996. For metropolitan system plans, or amendments thereto,
adopted after December 31, 1996, local governments shall review their comprehensive plans
to determine if an amendment is necessary to conform to the metropolitan system plans. If
an amendment is necessary, the local government shall prepare the amendment and submit it
to the council for review by September 30, 1999, or nine months after the council transmits
the metropolitan system plan amendment to the local government, whichever is later.
The periodic review required in this subdivision shall be in addition to the review required
by section 473.856.
The metropolitan council may grant extensions to local government units in order to allow
local government units to complete the review and, if necessary, amendment required by this
subdivision. Such extensions, if granted by the metropolitan council, must include a timetable
and plan for completion of the review and amendment.
Amendments to comprehensive plans of local governmental units and to capital improve-
ment programs of school districts shall be prepared, submitted, and adopted in conformance
with guidelines adopted by the metropolitan council pursuant to section 473.854.
Amended by Laws 1995, c. 176, § 9.
Historical and Statutory Notes
1995 Legislation Laws 1995, c. 176, § 12, provides that this act
The 1995 amendment rewrote subd. 2. applies in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota,
Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington.
140
METROPOLITAN GOVT AE`
473.865. Implementation of plan=
2. Conflicts
Discrepancy between zoning ordinate
prehensive plan does not affect press:.-
municipal zoning decision is valid; rat:
to zone in accordance with comprehere
merely evidence that city's action was
R.A. Putnam & Associates, Inc. v. City
Heights, Dakota County, App.1994.
264, review denied.
City council's concern that developrn
which necessitated rezoning of props
473.867. Planning assistance; gr
[Se
Subd. 6. Assistance for plan u
and grant funds available under
amendment of local comprehensive
by section 473.864, subdivision 2.
units to evaluate the need for tech:
Amended by Laws 1995, c. 176, § 10.
Hist
1995 Legislation
The 1995 amendment ad d.
assistance for plan updates.
473.872. Repealed by Laws 1994
PUBLIC SA.FE7
473.891. Definitions
Subdivision 1. Applications.
473.905.
Subd. 2. Board. "Board" or
Subd. 3. First phase. "First
communications system" means
Subd. 4. Local elected offici
local government.
Subd. 5. Local government.
or statutory city, or town, lying
Subd. 6. NPSPAC channels.
Advisory Committee channels" r
866 to 869 megahertz-
Subd.
egahertzSubd. 7. Plan. "Plan" or
means the plan adopted by the r
communications system.
Subd. 8. Subsystems. "Sub
identified in the plan as subsyste
phases and operated by local go%
DRAFT 1/22/97
OPTION 1
CITY OF OTSEGO
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
INTERIM ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF OTSEGO.
Section 1. Purpose. This interim ordinance is hereby established
for the following reasons:
A. To halt present residential subdivision and subdivision
applications within the City of Otsego.
B. To enable the City to conclude ongoing studies regarding
the provision of sewer and water services and completion of
revisions to the City Comprehensive Plan which have already been
initiated.
i
C. In order to protect the Planning process, and insure proper
land use controls.
D. To protect the City's ability to financially undertake a
sewer treatment plant if approved.
E. To protect the environment, and to provide for a safer
water supply.
F. To protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens
of Otsego
Section 2. Authority and Purpose. The City Council is empowered by
Minn. Stat. 462.355, Subd. 4 to pass an interim ordinance,
applicable to all or a part of its jurisdiction , for the purpose
of protecting the planning process and the health, safety, and
welfare of its citizens.
Section 3. Temporary Prohibition. For one year after the effective
date of this ordinance, or until such earlier time as the Otsego
City Council determines by resolution that the reasons for the
moratorium no longer exist, no application for any type of proposed
residential subdivision shall be accepted or processed by the City.
Section 4. Exceptions. Specifically exempted from this prohibition
are the following:
A. Applications for commercial or industrial subdivision.
B. Allowable 1 per 40 land splits within agricultural areas.
.C. The issuance of building permits for individual residences,
or accessory buildings upon lots which have been previously
approved and which are in full compliance with the applicable lot
requirements for a buildable lot within the zone in which they are
located.
D. Applications for Conditional Use Permits.
E. Applications for variances.
This interim ordinance shall not affect those development
applications for residential subdivisions which have submitted a
complete application to the City prior to the effective date of
this ordinance.
Section 5. Misdemeanor. Any person, persons, firm or corporation
violating any provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be punished
pursuant to Minn. Stat. 609.02, plus costs of prosecution.
Section 6. Injunctive Relief. In the event of a violation of this
ordinance, the City may institute appropriate actions or
proceedings, including requesting injunctive relief to prevent,
restrain, correct, or abate such violations.
Section 7. Separability. It is hereby declared that the several
provisions of this ordinance are separable in accordance with the
following; if any court of competent jurisdiction shall adjudge any
provision of this interim ordinance to be invalid, such judgment
shall not affect any other provisions of this ordinance not
specifically included in said judgment.
Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take affect from
and after its passage and publication, and shall remain in effect
until one year after the effective date, unless a shorter period of
time is approved by proper resolution of the Otsego City Council.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Otsego this day
of , 1997.
IN FAVOR:
OPPOSED:
CITY OF OTSEGO
Larry Fournier, Mayor
Elaine Beatty, City Clerk
DRAFT 1/22/97
OPTION 2
CITY OF OTSEGO
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
INTERIM ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISIONS WITHIN PORTIONS OF THE CITY OF OTSEGO.
Section 1. Purpose. This interim ordinance is hereby established
for the following reasons:
A. To halt present residential subdivision and subdivision
applications within certain portions of the City of Otsego.
B. To enable the City to conclude ongoing studies regarding
the provision of sewer and water services and completion of
revisions to the City Comprehensive Plan which have already been
initiated.
C. In order to protect the Planning process, and insure proper
land use controls.
D. To protect the City's ability to financially undertake a
sewer treatment plant if approved.
E. To protect the environment, provide for a safer water
supply.
F. To protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens
of Otsego
Section 2. Authority and Purpose. The City Council is empowered by
Minn. Stat. 462.355, Subd. 4 to pass an interim ordinance,
applicable to all or a part of its jurisdiction , for the purpose
of protecting the planning process and the health, safety, and
welfare of its citizens.
Section 3. Temporary Prohibition. For one year after the effective
date of this ordinance, or until such earlier time as the Otsego
City Council determines by resolution that the reasons for the
moratorium no longer exist, no application for any type of proposed
residential subdivision shall be accepted or processed by the City
within that area of the City of Otsego as graphically exhibited on
the attached Exhibit A, which is herein incorporated by reference.
Section 4. Exceptions. Specifically exempted from this prohibition
are the following:
A. Applications for commercial or industrial subdivision.
B. Allowable 1 per 40 land splits within agricultural areas.
.C. The issuance of building permits for individual residences,
or accessory buildings upon lots which have been previously
approved and which are in full compliance with the applicable lot
requirements for a buildable lot within the zone in which they are
located.
D. Applications for Conditional Use Permits.
E. Applications for variances.
This interim ordinance shall not affect those development
applications for residential subdivisions which have submitted a
complete application to the City prior to the effective date of
this ordinance.
Section S. Misdemeanor. Any person, persons, firm or corporation
violating any provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be punished
pursuant to Minn. Stat. 609.02, plus costs of prosecution.
Section 6. Injunctive Relief. In the event of a violation of this
ordinance, the City may institute appropriate actions or
proceedings, including requesting injunctive relief to prevent,
restrain, correct, or abate such violations.
Section 7. Separability. It is hereby declared that the several
provisions of this ordinance are separable in accordance with the
following; if any court of competent jurisdiction shall adjudge any
provision of this interim ordinance to be invalid, such judgment
shall not affect any other provisions of this ordinance not
specifically included in said judgment.
Section S. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take affect from
and after its passage and publication, and shall remain in effect
until one year after the effective date, unless a shorter period of
time is approved by proper resolution of the Otsego City Council.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Otsego this day
of , 1997.
IN FAVOR:
OPPOSED:
CITY OF OTSEGO
Larry Fournier, Mayor
Elaine Beatty, City Clerk
CITY OF OTSEGO
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
AGENDA SECTION: DEPARTMENT: MEETING DATE
7. ANDY MAC ARTHUR, CITY ATTORNEY January 27, 1997 -
6:3004
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: EB,CC
7.2. 80TH ST/Walter Berning and Sons Contract and Resolution
BACKGROUND:
At the Council Meeting of January 13TH, the Council asked me to draft
a Contract with Walter Berning and Sons. The City Attorney has
preliminary reviewed the matter and based upon the statutes and the
listed exception to the statutes it appears that a contract or
resolution is inappropriate. This is an issue that is contained
primarily in Attorney Generals opinions. Prior to the meeting, the
City Attorney will contact the Attorney Generals office and provide
more information at the Council Meeting Monday Night, 1-27-97.
STAFF RECOb1MENDATION :
This is a Council decision and a date needs to be determined.
Thank you,
CITY OF OTSEGO .
ENGINEER'S AGENDA ITEMS
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JANUARY 27, 1996
8.1 ISTEA Projects FY96 & 98
Merland Otto will be at the Council Meeting to give status report on each of the
Bike Path and Trail Projects. He will also answer questions on the Mn/DNR
Grant Assistance application for the FY98 project.
Refer to the attached information.
8.2 Any other Engineering Business
agenda1.27
FY96 ISTEA PROJECT
REVIEW OF ESTIMATED COSTS
The City Council has, at various times, considered options to scale back the FY96
project to reduce the City's cost. At the January 22, 1996 Council approved a
scenario eliminating land acquisition with a total project cost estimated at $270,453
($170,683 ISTEA, $99,772 City). This scenario eliminated most of the off road trail
and used streets (Palmgren) instead to link to Otsego Elementary School.
In May, Council determined to negotiate with Lefebvre's which would require
construction of the off road trail. An estimated new target budget was $230,400 for
construction.
The pre-bid estimate is $390,488, ($160,088 over budget - 30.5%). The reasons for
the higher estimate are multiple including use of the initial application figures (now four
years old), use of state average costs significant restoration costs for work with
encroachments in the rights-of-way, increased signage and striping, and general across
the board costs. For example, the costs of providing four foot shoulders on Page
Avenue is $23.34/LF and shoulders on Ohland and 96th cost $28.19/LF.
Original Estimate
Total $246,100 (Construction Only)
ISTEA 184,575
City 61,525 (+ land and engineering Total Project Cost = $316,820)
Scaled Down Project 1/22/96 (Approved by Council)
Eliminate Land Acq.
Total $270,453
ISTEA 170,683
City Share 99,772 Including Engineering, no land
MSA $76,580
Non -MSA 23,192
Construction Only:
MSA Totals: $177,342
Non -MSA Totals: 50,234
$227,576
$227,576
-19,667 (Palmgren)
$207,909
22,500 (off road) not including land
$230,409 TARGET BUDGET: $230,400
A comparison of the estimate from the project memorandum and the pre-bid estimate
based on design drawing is outlined below. As indicated, the single greatest element
over budget is the Ohland and 96th segment.
FY96 ISTEA PROJECT
Project Pre -
Memo Cost/ Bid Cost/
SeamenSeament Lencith Estimate LF EST LF
Bypass Lanes - - $31,200 - - $39,908' -
Off Street to 1,378 LF 14,000 $10.16 23,0842 $16.75
School 2
85th St. Signs vs - - 800 - - 1,160
CSAH 39 & 42
Nashua Avenue
3,572 LF 42,500 11.90
64,760 18.13
Page Avenue
2,458 LF 33,200 13.51
57,381 23.34
Ohland & 96th
6,758 LF 90,304 13.36
190,506 28.19
Old Town Hall
- - 12,300 - -
5,7403 - -
Trail Amenities - - 21,400 -- 4503 - -
$245,7044 $390,4885
' Added Frontage Road @ CSAH 39 ($9,450)
2 Includes some landscaping, amenities, barbed wire fence ( $4,014)
3 Included w/off street costs
4 Total of $396.00 attributed to rounding pro -rate share of shoulders Page, Nashua,
96 & Ohland
5 $7,500 for Mobilization not shown
Our recommendation to scale the project back to the target budget figure is to:
• Eliminate work on the bypass lane at Tom Thumb frontage road on 39.
This was added in hopes it could be afforded.
• Extend bike facility only from 39 to the westerly trail linking with Otsego
County Park. Delete all other work on 96th.
• Make minor revisions cutting back on restoration, silt fence, etc.
The estimated reduction should be on the order of $150,000 bringing us back to an
estimate of $240,000, approximately $10,000 more than where Council wants to be.
This would be approximately $2,500 for the local share.
Council should be aware that this project is scheduled to be bid by Mn/DOT this
spring. The City's 25% share ($57,000 and change) must be transmitted to Mn/DOT
prior to letting a contract (estimated in May). The City will pay overhead costs directly
since these are not project eligible.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve the recommended modification to the project to reduce the costs and
authorize submittal to Mn/DOT.
OT709.prj
557,:8:.25 57,160.00 S22.064.00 S64.75E.25 S6,746.25 59,457.00 55,743.D0 5450.00` ��%, �J. :J90,48E.60
OTSEGO PARK PROJECTS
STATUS REPORT JANUARY 22, 1997
OT708 Otsego Prairie Park
This project (OT708) is nearing completion with completion of the outdoor
recreation grant items anticipated around July 1, 1997. The only major item
left on this project is paving a trail from the existing trail to the ballfields.
Smaller items and amenities previously discussed by the Commission include
signing for HC access parking, signing of ballfields 1 and 2, fabrication and
installation of players benches. In addition, maintenance will become a big item
with a need to fertilize right away in the spring. Additional requirements will be
mowing, weed control, etc.
All reimbursement funds from DNR have been received except approximately
$6,000 which will be requested with the project closeout.
OT709 FY96 ISTEA Project
This project has been designed and is nearing final stages of coordination with
Mn/DOT. A spring bidding is anticipated with construction occurring over the
summer. Project elements include bike bypasses on CSAH39 and 42, bike
shoulders on Nashua, Page, and Ohland, and an off road trail linking 85th to the
elementary school property. Minor trail amenities are also included in the
project.
OT703 (Miscellaneous - Old Town Hall Relocation)
This endeavor is aimed at relocating the old Town Hall from its current location
to Otsego Park. A conditional use permit needs to be approved by the Council
yet this spring. Jeff Barthel is working on getting a licensed mover to relocate
the structure which will be placed on a slab constructed by volunteers. Some
grading and site work will also need to be done by volunteers and City staff.
Plans then call for the restoration of the structure over a three to five year time
period.
OT703 Otsego Bike and Trail Plan
The Parks Commission is developing a draft of this document. The estimated
percent of completion is about 80-85%. Major elements yet remaining are the
implementation chapter, review, public input, Council comments and approval.
We anticipate completion in approximately May.
F1
OT76 FY98 ISTEA Project
This project extends bike and pedestrian facilities along 85th, Odean, and
Nashua to 85th. Significant elements of this project would need to be redefined
in the Project Memorandum stage if the Council pursues this. Mn/DOT has
approved funds but the Council has not yet approved the local share.
No project steps have been completed. The community thus will lose
approximately $238,000 of grant funds unless a decision is made to move
forward fairly soon.
Miscellaneous and Program Elements
• Need to coordinate with Three Rivers Soccer Association regarding
delivery of soccer nets at Otsego Park
• T -ball, others? at Park
• Maintenance requirements and determination how this will be
accomplished. Contract services vs. employees. Purchase of mower/
mowing fertilizer/weed killer. Purchase and spreading of fertilizer.
• Winter Fest; January 25
• Easter (March 31 ?)
• Bike Rodeo
• Appreciation Day; July 12
• Haunted House; October 25
• Area Rec programs
• Review of site plans/plats for park dedication purposes.
OT703b.rpt
CITY OF OTSEGO
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
AGENDA SECTION: DEPARTMENT: MEETING DATE
9. COUNCIL ITEMS CITY CLERK January 27, 1997 -
6:30PM
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: EB, CC
9.1. Set date for interviews for Board and Commission Members,
which was cancelled on January 22, 1997 due to weather.
BACKGROUND:
We need to reschedule with the people being interviewed for the Boards
`and Commissions for the City. I suggest we set a date and an
alternate date if some people can not make it. (We wouldn't use the
alternate date unless absolutely necessary).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Set a date and an alternate date that fits into the Council's
schedule. Please give the Staff time to re -notice the people being
interviewed. Possibly Thursday, February 20th at 6:30PM as our
calendar is getting full
Thank you,
Elaine
FY98 ISTEA PROJECT
GRANT APPLICATION FOR FUNDING ASSISTANCE
The City has received approval for an FY98 ISTEA project for additional trail and bike
facilities development. At this point, the Council has not approved moving forward
with any aspect of this project primarily because of concerns over how the local share
would be funded.
DNR administers a program which provides grants to match the local share for ISTEA
projects up to a maximum of $50,000. The funds are made available on a
reimbursement basis, thus, the City must incur the cost and then be reimbursed. The
program includes an application process which must be completed by March 31.
On December 23, the City Council briefly discussed whether or not to submit an
application request and determined not to submit. It is our understanding that the
Council wishes to reconsider whether to pursue funds through this program. Attached
is an information sheet, the application request form, a background memo outlining
project elements, and a project map.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED:
Consider whether to pursue or not pursue additional grant funds to assist with
matching the local share costs for the FY98 ISTEA grant
If the decision is to request funds, direct Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc. to
prepare the application for Council approval and submittal to DNR in accord with
DNR's schedule requirements.
OT901 .98
COOPERATIVE TRAIL GRANT PROGRAM
Information Sheet
October 14, 1996
Deadlines/ To receive an application, sponsors must submit an Avviication Request Fore no later than January 31,
Important Dates: 1997. The complete application is due on March 31, 1997 to be eligible for this funding cycle.
Reimbursement grant awards will be announced in August 1997.
Program purpose:
The emphasis of this program is to promote trail access between people and desirable destinations, not
612296-6048
to develop significant new recreation facilities. Its primary purpose is to complete trail connections or
Northwestern MN
remove barriers to use between where people live (e.g., residential areas within cities, and communities)
Les 011ila
and significant public recreation facilities (e.g., parks and other trails). Priority will be given to residential
218/327-4263
connections to state and regional facilities. A secondarily purpose is to link existing trail segments.
How it works:
This program provides reimbursement grants to local units of government for trail development or serves as
Craig Mitchell
a partial local "match" for ISTEA trail Enhancement projects.
Eligible applicants:
Cities, counties, and townships.
Minimum
Project must result in a trail linkage that is immediately available for use by the general public. There
Requirements:
must be demonstrated compatibility of the uses provided by the project proposal with uses provided by
the recreation facility. LocaUarea support must be demonstrated.
Eligible projects:
Land acquisition and trail development. However, acquisition of trail right -0f --way will only be eligible
when it is proposed in conjunction with trail development.
'mrsement
A maximum of fifty percent of the total eligible project costs. Minimum -55,000. Maximum -S50,000.
Amount:
Local match:
50% "hard match" for eligible elements of the project proposal. Neither this funding source nor the
"hard match" can be used for labor services and/or to meet existing payroll (i.e., only contract services,
materials and supplies are reimbursable). Match must not be state funds or Metropolitan Council
Grants.
Project period:
Funded projects will need to begin promptly after an agreement as been completed between the State
and the applicant. Funding for these projects is only available through December 31, 1999.
Disbursement of funds:
Grants are reimbursable. Costs must be Incurred and paid for before reimbursement can take place.
Submit Application Recreation Services Section
Request Forms to: Trails and Waterways Unit
Department of Natural Resources
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4052
Contacts: Dan Collins
Statewide
612296-6048
Ardon Belcher
Northwestern MN
218!755-2265
Les 011ila
Northeastern MN
218/327-4263
Tim Browning
Centel MN
2181828-2693
Craig Mitchell
Southeasten MN
507/285-7176
Dave Wolff
Southwestern MN
507/359-6068
William Johnson Twin Cities Metro Area
6121772-7936
APPLICATION REQUEST FORM
One Application Request Form should be submitted per project. Please make copies of this form, as needed.
Applicant County
Contact Person
F1
Address
Phone Number (during normal working hours)
Project Name -
Please check the appropriate program (if known) and provide an estimated total project cost:
Outdoor Recreation Grant Program
Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program
Cooperative Trail Grant Program
National Recreation Trail Fund (Symms)
Regional Trail Initiative Grant Program
Total Estimated Cost: S
Congressional District (1-8):
Project Description:
Conservation Partners Grant Program
Community Environmental Partnerships
Grant Program
Cooperative Water Recreation Programs
Public Boat Access Program
Fishing Pier Grant Program
Clean Vessel Act Grant Program
Legislative District (1A -67B):
Hakanson
Anderson
Assoc., Inc.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Larry Koshak, and Kevin Kielb
FROM: Merland Otto
DATE: October 18, 1996
RE: 85th Avenue Bike Trail/FY 98 ISTEA
3601 Thurston Avenue
Anoka, Minnesota 55303
612/427-5860
Fax 612/427-3~�e+- 0520
As we have previously discussed, the FY 98 ISTEA grant for bike trials was approved
by Mn/DOT. The City Council, however, has not given final approval or authorization
to proceed with the project due to concern over the inability to fund the City's share.
The grant amount is for $238,275 with the City' stsshare63 ing $73 425 plus
engineering costs (est at 20% of $317,700 project
A portion of the FY 98 project is for the development of an off-road bike path along
85th Street. The total FY 98 project elements include:
FY 98 ISTEA PROGRAM
Construct bi,uminous bike/pedestrian paths off-road within ROW
3,975 LF
Nashua Avenue from Napier to 85th Street 13,375
NE 85th Street from Nashua to Page Avenue 4,200
Odean Avenue from CSAH39 to NE 85th Street
Odean Avenue from NE 85th Street to NE 78th Street 3,450
Quaday Avenue from CSAH42 to VFW soccer complex 34 375 LF
34,375 LF - 5,280 = 6.5 miles @ $42,650/mile $277,200
Designate and sign bike lanes
85th Street NE from Page Avenue to CSAH42 = 0.5 miles $500
Landscape and scenic elements
Landscaping trail segments and town hall site $14,000
Wetland boardwalk, 700 SF @ $30.00/SF $311 000
Engineers Landscape Architects
Surveyors
r
Memorandum
Page 2
October 18, 1996
Since Odean Avenue is scheduled for improvement in the year 2000, it would be
premature to develop bike paths along it under the FY 98 program. We would also
want to re-evaluate Quaday and Nashua Avenue improvements and probably modify
those portions of the project.
There may be the possibility of redefining the FY 98 project to include both the bike
and sidewalk construction along 85th Avenue and fund these improvements with
ISTEA funds along with the MSA project.
These segments would then get constructed with 75% ISTEA funds rather than using
100% local funds to construct them at a future date. Engineering would also be done
in an efficient manner as a minor part of the MSA project rather than as a separate
project at a later date.
The attachments illustrate the FY 98 project as presented in the grant application and
a typical section along 85th Avenue. If the City were to pursue this modified course,
a Project Memorandum would have to be prepared for the project re -defining the
project, etc. This would need to be done promptly in order to receive approvals in a
timely manner.
HE
Enclosures
OT901a.mem --"
Hakanson
Anderson
Assoc., Inc.
� �, �•, �,��� ,fir,, �� ,
..
J H N— 1 3— 9 7 SRT 11:42 A M CITY
BLANDIN FOUNDATION
40 —
'May 31, 1995
OF A BERTVILLE 6,1,22 497 3210 P.O.]—
Garrison L. Hale
City Administrator
5975 Main Ave NE S e�- oZ C5 _. Q G �- 3 r T 7
PO Box 9 _
Albertvile MN 55301 ho l (a uJ - citp. Std : n4Lrs — Fe-, 6. 3 r Y , 98
I am pleased to delighted hear that the cities of Albertville, Otsego,
St. Michael and the Township of Frankfort are interested in the Blandin
Community Leadership Program. While I have tentatively scheduled a
leadership r6treat for your communities on September 28 -October 3, 1997,
the following steps need to be taken to complete the "application process."
A. The nucleus of a steering committee needs to be formed. This group
should include leaders/spokespersons/gatekeepers who represent:
- education - media
- human services - business
- health care - industrial base
- churches - service organizations
- agriculture - local government
- labor - minorities
B. This steering committee is brought together to meet with the recruiter
for the leadership program, Alan Judd. Alan works for us part-time.
He is the Community Education Director in Staples and can be
reached at 218-894-2497. Please contact him directly to set up a
meeting time.
At this meeting, the program is explained in detail and the group must
reach agreement that the program is appropriate for the four
communities and that they will support and be involved in the
recruitment process. The group will also be asked to identify the
short and long-term challenges facing these communities, as well as
the area's assets. This will serve as the bases for designing
recruitment strategies which will bring forth applicants who can help
these communities deal with their challenges and build on their
resources. The group will also be asked who else should be on this
steering committee.
C. Based on the results of this meeting, Alan will give me his
recommendation as to whether these communities should be
accepted, rejected or delayed until later.
----
Post -It' brand fax transmittal memo 7671 Morpage,
47 �
100 NORT7 0.
Dept. P one 0 e6 FAX 6-0523 - FA218/327-1949
JAN -1:5-97 SAT 11:43 AM CITY OF ALBERTVILLE 612 497 3210 P-_2
IrYINC COMMUNITY_NEEDS & RE
The following is a Iist of "areas" from conuuUuiities that have gone througli
the process of idenlifying conununity issues & resources - as your comnuuiity is
about to do. You may use the structure listed below or organize the "areas" of
your community in a different fashion. You may add or delete "areas" as you
profile your cotrnuuuity.
The list below will allow your steering committee to divide and work ice four
or two groups, or stay in one group.
1.) Education
Youth Issues
Tecluiology
Senior Issues
Media
2.) Health Care
Churches
Environmental
Human Serv.
Prof. Services
3.) Government
Utilities
Transportation
Law Enforcem.
Finance/Banking
Cultural Diversity
4.) Recreation
Retail
Tourism
Ec. Developm.
Industry
Housing
Q
7-1 DWS �� �O�?�?1.6�. �� �� e-,/
d1-/e-0/,�;�,� � ��; f awjv. -fieee
04w -e r r/s5
4s
A Jr � �� �l/.s 07--o-) l �%� r/o�dc c� O%7 7�k
CITY OF OTSEGO
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
AGENDA SECTION: DEPARTMENT: MEETING DATE
9. COUNCIL ITEMS CITY CLERK January 27, 1997 -
6:30PM
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: EB, CC
9.2. Consider some of the money from the Holiday Recognition Dinner
Auction to be used to help pay for display case in the City Hall.
BACKGROUND:
The Vision Committee of Otsego has disbanned and has donated money to
Park and Recs for the Old City Hall Building and the remainder of
$1,396.00 has been earmarked for a glass display case for City Hall in
the hallway. The lowest quote we received for a custom made display
case lighted is from Paul Kirscht for $1,679.85. This means that
$283.85 would need to be paid for from another source. In the past we
have earmarked the money from the auction for a shelter for the Otsego
Prairie Park.
STAFF RECOMENDATION:
Because the Boards and Commissions will be using this display case, I
personally would like to see enough money to help pay for the amount
remaining for the display cabinet, after the money from the Vision
Committee is used come from the auction, as we all participate in it.
This is a Council decision.
Thank you,
Elaine
.OL � -13A- L
uu*mtzN-1
,ADDRESS
DATE TERMS
(IN ACCOUNT WRH --�
UC.581 Z
t� 11n ( CU
IIV
vo(uS
TU (D
l2ti'f:.'U P,4-r)cL t6o
oa a,
L 5 li
UC.581 Z
CITY OF OTSEGO
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
AGENDA SECTION: DEPARTMENT: MEETING DATE
9. COUNCIL ITEMS CITY CLERK January 27, 1997 -
6:30PM
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM DESCRIPTION: PREPARED BY: EB,CC
9.3. Discussion of deadline date for decision on Sanitary Sewer and
Water.
BACKGROUND:
This item was directed to be on the Agenda by the Council at their
Workshop of January 21, 1997 Re: Sewer and Water. The Council needs
to consider a date for a final decision as to if they will pursue
sewer and water for the Eastern end of Otsego.
STAFF RECOZ1MENDATION:
This is a Council decision and a date needs to be determined.
Thank you,
Elaine
ClalMS List for Approval
For the period 01/14/97 rn 01/'-)l/Q7MUNICIPAL OF CITY OF OTSEGO
BOOTH DOCUMENTS & PUBLISHERS, INC GAVEL & BLOCK
MN DEPT OF REVENUE 1996 SALES TAX COLLECTIONS
FIRSTAR TRUST COMPANY 1987 BOND PAYMENT
NORTHERN AIRGAS
SCHARBER & SONS
OXYGEN,ACETYLENE
MTCE SUPPLIES INV. 123096
GLENS TRUCK CENTER INC
PARTS-INV.080257_
THE HARDWARE STORE
_
SUPPLIES
PRECISION FRAME & ALIGNMENT
REPAIRS
JOHN'S AUTO ELECTRIC
REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE
BFI - WOODLAKE SANITATION SERVICE
DECEMBER SERVICE
WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITOR -TREASURER
JANUARY SERVICE
GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL, INC
INV. 6120550
LAPLANT SANITATION INC
DECEMBER SERVICE
ST JOSEPHS EQUIPMENT INC
PARTS -INV 50018
BEAUDRY OIL COMPANY
PROPANE DELIVERY 1/14
MN STATE TREASURER
4TH QUARTER PERMITS
WESTSIDE WHOLESALE INC.
REPAIR
H G WEBER OIL COMPANY
1/10 & 1/15 DELIVERIES
MINNESOTA MUTUAL
FEBRUARY PREMIUM
01/71/97
CLAIM TOTAL ACCOUNT ACCOUNT
01/21/97 2206 713.00
01/21/97 2207 54.475.00
01/21/97 2208
01/21/97 2209
01/21/97 2210
01/21/97 2211
01/21/97 2212
01/21/97 221
01/21/97 2214
01/21/97 2215
01/21/97 2216
01/21/97 2217
01/21/97 2218
i
01/21/97 2220
01/21/97 2221
01/21/97
01/21/97 2223
11.23
5.11
51 .
54.43
66.09
�3 7.30
317.50
8,395.00
4 .00
460.00
814.28
523.42
31.29
1,332.45-
164.20
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
MAYORS DUES
01/21/97
2224
20.00
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE
TRUST 1997 DUES
01/21/97
2225
50.05 -
ECM PUBLISHERS INC
INV. 16565
01/21/97
2226
35.36
NAPA OF ELK RIVER INC
PARTS
01/21/97
2227
24.19
BANK OF ELK RIVER
1991 BOND PAYMENT
01/21/97
2228
S.156.
EAST SIDE LEASING CO.
COPIER LEASE
01/21/97
2229
237.92
IIMC
DUES
01/21/97
2230
100.00
FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY
INV. 389173
01/fl-/97
2231
47.34'
LITTLE FALLS MACHINE
PARTS
01/21/97
2232
167.87
ZIEGLER INC
PARTS INV. 3233
01/21/97
2233
1,155.74
BOYER TRUCKS
REPAIR PARTS
01/21/97
2234
CROW RIVER FARM EQUIPMENT
PARTS & SUPPLIES
01/21/97
2235
.6
150.70
CHOUINARD OFFICE PRODUCTS
OFFICE SUPPLIES
01/21/97
2236
23.16
JRIGHT COUNTY HIGHWAY DEPT
SALT & SAND
01/21/97
2237
6,
iAKANSON ANDERSON ASSOC INC
DECEMBER SERVICE
01/21/97
2238
4,110.93
PLIP.11 v,_.:,e SAA ,1111-9-7
n
Reg.
OreR�P lGc c�
AJC.
7t_14 -4t
9 a4'50
1V1-411VV-CV6
101-21802-000
301-47500-601
101-43100-203
101-43100-203
1 - _-
101-43100-203
101-43100-400
101-41610-390
101-42100-390
151-
101-41610-390 -4101-41610-390
101-43100-203
101-21801-
101-43100-220
101-41400-130
101-45100-130
101-41600-130
101-41100-355
101-41400-
101-41400-350 1-414 -
101-41400-350
101-43100-220
101-41400-410
101-41400-355
101-41940-203
101-43100-220
101-43100-220
101-43100-203
101-41400-201
701-41560-302
701-41560-302
701-41560-302
701-41560-302
713.00
50,000.00
11.23
5.11
54.43
66.09
317.50
8,395.00
WT 0-T
460.00
814.28
523.42
31.29
63.00
36.60
28.00
20.00
50. OT
35.36
24.19
237.92
100.00
47.
167.87
1,155.74
251.6S-
150.70
23.16
588.75
62.50
437.50
339.75
JAN -24-1997 10:41
N or^ -C 116
P'NtNC
k, �
TRAN'SM ITTAL
DATE :
TO:
NAC 612 595 9837 P.01/03
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CC NSUL.TANTS
5 7 7 5 W A YZ ATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 5 5 5
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 5 5 4 I B
PHONE (6 1 2 )595-9635
24 January 1997
Elaine Beatty
FROM: Bob Krmis
QUANTITY: ATERIAL/DESCRIPTION:
FM
emoraindum to Council
VIA:
MAIL
D
FAX
Fx]
PICK UP
D
DELIVERY
0
REMARKS:
NUMBER
OF PAGES
INCLUDING
COVER:
3
DATE 0:
1/24/97
Please distribute to Mayor and City Council. We have
Provided copies to Andy and Larry.
PROJECT: Otsego - Development Moratorium
JOB NUMBER: 176.08
JAN -24-1997 10:41 NAC 612 595 9e37 P.02iO3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM.
DATE:
RE:
FILE NO:
Otsego Mayor and City Council
Bob Virmis / David Licht
24 January 1997
Otsego - Development Moratorium
176.08
J LTANTS
RESEARCH
This memorandum is intended to reiterate our office's position in regard to the possible
establishment of a development moratorium in the City.
As stated in the Planning Tactics Section of the Comprehensive Plan update, and
highlighted at the recent January 21 City Council workshop, we believe there is likely no
other decision in Otsego's history as important as to whether or not to proceed with public
sewer. Various issues associated with such service possibility have been well
documented in previous correspondence.
At this time we believe the establishment of a development moratorium represents a
responsible planning action for the following reasons:
1. A delay in residential development will provide the City of Otsego time to fully
consider and evaluate the ramifications of sanitary sewer service.
2. The continued allowance of residential development may run contrary to the
ultimate objectives of the City (by allowing development in undesirable locations
(i.e., unsewered area).
3. The continued allowance of unsewered residential development serves to escalate
public health concerns. Such development, if allowed, should be determined to be
in conformance with the City's sewer planning efforts.
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 145
PHONE 8 1 2-585-9035 FAX 6 1 2-595-9037
JAN -24-1997 10:42 NAC 612 595 9837 P.03iO3
4. The City's Comprehensive Plan presently exists in a state of "limbo" as its validity
relates directly to the City's sewer planning efforts. As such, staff has encountered
difficulties advising developers of the City's land use objectives. Continued
discussions with developers on development goals will remain "diffcuit" until such
time as a direction is established on the sanitary sewer Issue.
This issue is scheduled for discussion at the forthcoming 27 January City Council meeting.
PC: Elaine Beatty
Andy MacArthur
Lary Koshak
2
TOTAL P.03