[1:32] Please rise as you're able for the pledge of allegiance.

[1:57] Welcome everybody to our August 17th regular city council meeting. We have a quite packed agenda.

[2:06] and we have opportunities for many members of the public to speak. So we are going to start

[2:14] our meeting as we always do with our open comment period. And this is an opportunity for

[2:20] members of the public to speak on items that we will not be taking a public testimony during a

[2:26] public hearing later in the agenda. During open comment, members of the public have up to two minutes

[2:32] to speak for a total of 20 minutes, however the council is able to suspend our rules and open

[2:39] that up if we need to. I will be keeping track through two methods. One, the stop light here

[2:46] in front of me and you the speaker and the digital clock on the wall that will be to your right.

[2:56] And I request that each speaker be concise to allow as many people to speak during the designated time as possible.

[3:04] Participants are also encouraged to limit comments generally to topics that are within the scope and jurisdiction of the Council's ability to affect policy.

[3:14] Council members and staff do not respond directly to your comments during public comment, but will instead follow up on any specific requests separately.

[3:24] If you have any materials to share with the council, you may give them to the city clerk who is to my right there and casele to distribute and you will be invited up to speak in the order in which you signed up and we will start with Mr. Jared Locker.

[3:44] And Jared, you may have to push that till it turns clear.

[3:48] Jared Locker, resident Rochester.

[3:50] Good evening Mayor Norton, council members, fellow citizens and distinguished guests.

[3:55] I want to speak with you tonight about the proposal for additions of student housing to the historic Broadway district, which would affect

[4:01] TREDOM, art heads and podium, steam cafe, and many other retail businesses located on Broadway.

[4:06] When I take into account the recommendations of the Heritage Preservation Commission,

[4:10] the existing businesses, the planned development, the incredible amount of road construction currently, the voices of the business owners in the area, and the nature of the project.

[4:18] I ask that you respectfully decline the request.

[4:21] When it comes to preserving Rochester's history, it is important that we not only consider

[4:25] the economic implications of such reservations, but the character of the city, and the meaning

[4:30] it has not only to every day citizens, but those who currently occupy the buildings.

[4:35] While I agree there is a need for student housing.

[4:38] When I consider all the factors, I do not believe this is the appropriate project, and there

[4:42] are other viable alternatives that must be considered.

[4:45] Analyze and discussed with the larger public.

[4:48] We must preserve not only our historic district, but the arts and the character of our

[4:52] city, as well as consider the deleterious effects more construction may have on existing businesses,

[4:58] and the pressure that we have to do.

[5:00] There are already under not to mention disruptions to already limited parking. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Locker. And I just want to be clear to folks that Mr. Locker spoke to item G1. There will be a separate hearing under G1. So if you signed up on the blue sheet and you want to speak to item G1, which is the appeal to the Historic Preservation Committee's denial of certificate of appropriateness,

[5:28] You may want to be on this sheet and when we do get to public hearings,

[5:33] not that I'm encouraging you to do it, you will have five minutes at a public hearing.

[5:38] I'm not encouraging people to take five minutes,

[5:40] but you will have more time during that.

[5:43] So just to be clear and I didn't want to interrupt Mr. Lucker.

[5:48] So we will continue with open comment period with Jessica Sia.

[5:57] I will put you on that sheet.

[6:00] Thank you.

[6:00] Next, we have Carol and Lumis.

[6:22] Hi, I'm Carol and Lumis.

[6:23] I would like to thank the mayor for giving us this opportunity to look at this again.

[6:29] I am talking about the H.0.2 Willow Creek Feasibility Study.

[6:33] Both of reports narratives from September 25th and this one focus on connecting people to

[6:39] the jobs, food sources and school, which sounds lovely, but this, but truly this feasibility

[6:45] reports, sole focus, and one track plan is the connection to the sports complex.

[6:51] Not connecting the people to these important community needs since those plans are unfunded

[6:56] at this time.

[6:58] So, I please ask the council to vote nay on accepting the report and nay on the segment

[7:03] one-see alternative A, which divides my family's property and look at how we can connect

[7:11] The people's needs first then add the sports complex after, which again, can be done without segment one C alternative A.

[7:20] Thank you. Next we have Jesse Loomis.

[7:38] Hi, I'm Jesse Loomis talking about the Willow Creek like project as well.

[7:42] I believe Pat, you guys all got to copy of this.

[7:48] Why are we trying to cut through the middle of our property when we have all these other alternatives

[7:54] and according to Dylan over here who at the beginning of us, when we talked, he was going to do

[8:01] the feasibility studies and all these routes we discussed, which none of them were done except for

[8:06] one. We don't understand why now you guys own the other side of the highway by in Whitesons,

[8:13] you have the dike that goes around the whistle-bakeies pond, you have the ability to go on all the

[8:24] two down and going on the west side of the bridge coming under, going around the pond and in

[8:32] your last little branch you had coming off that would connect you down to whistle thinkies.

[8:39] You could bring all that in, cut out all this bike path on the east side of that creek,

[8:44] which you're worried about the bridge. You don't have to make a bridge. You can come under here

[8:48] and your little branch that would come back to the sports complex can all be done in one shot.

[8:52] You don't have to build this whole bike path here, which will bring you to all the communities down here at the school whistle-binkies channel one. It'll bring you

[9:03] I mean if you can see it is a red line on your on your map here, but there's no reason to come through the middle of our property for the spike path when there's any other alternative.

[9:14] I mean at the end of the day it comes down to there's no reason to take something from somebody that does not want to give it.

[9:21] if there's any other alternative.

[9:23] At the end of the day, it's on voting for a bike path.

[9:26] It's voting to steal from people that aren't willing to sell something.

[9:30] So that's the most I can say about it.

[9:32] But there's ungodly opportunities with all the current bike paths you got.

[9:37] This is the quickest road to get you to the one you already have established.

[9:42] Thank you, Mr. Loomis.

[9:45] Next we have Michelle Girls Burger.

[9:57] G1, I'll put you down for G1.

[10:04] Jacqueline Johnson.

[10:14] Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Jacqueline Johnson. I'm the managing director of Rochester Civic Theatre, and a board member of Minnesota citizens for the arts, and a member of the Rochester Arts and Culture Strategic Plan, steering committee.

[10:28] I'm here in support of the proposed council action to fund an arts and culture,

[10:34] arts and culture, economic impact study for Rochester.

[10:39] Across Minnesota, Arts and Culture represents a $13.8 billion industry.

[10:44] In 2024, the nonprofit arts and culture sector in Region 10, which includes Rochester,

[10:50] generated more than $86.8 million in economic impact,

[10:54] And across the state, the average arts attendees spend more than $33 beyond the price of admission

[10:59] to on restaurants, hotels, gas, shopping, and other local businesses.

[11:05] But statewide and region-ten data only tells us part of the story.

[11:10] We need a clear, Rochester-specific picture of this sector's economic impact.

[11:15] That's what this study will provide. The findings will be a community resource for strategic planning

[11:20] and future advocacy. This study can identify opportunities for growth and investment, informed

[11:26] decisions by arts organizations, by businesses, tourism partners, funders, and the city.

[11:33] In arts and culture economic impact study, also perfectly compliments the experience

[11:38] Rochester study through the Minnesota Tourism Center, giving our community a more complete

[11:44] picture of how arts, culture, entertainment, and attractions contribute to Rochester's economy.

[11:51] This investment is one piece of a much larger effort from the arts for the Rochester Arts

[11:56] and Culture of Strategic Plants during Committee, supported by active research, data, and

[12:01] countless volunteer hours.

[12:04] Thank you for your consideration.

[12:06] Thank you.

[12:08] Next we have Rylan Wolff.

[12:11] Good

[12:21] afternoon. I would like to voice my support for Miss Jacqueline's wish for the advancement of Rochester's art culture. Otherwise, I feel like my points have been spoken for already. I'll equip my enough and I would like to give up my time. Thank you.

[12:35] Thank you.

[12:36] Next, we have Stephanie Kylen.

[12:46] Good evening.

[12:47] My name is Stephanie Kylen, and I'm here representing

[12:50] Arts and Culturals Strategic Plan Steering Committee,

[12:54] and speaking in support of tonight's Council

[12:55] initiated action item to fund an economic impact study

[13:00] for this sector.

[13:01] The Arts and Culturals Strategic Plan and Steering Committee

[13:04] was created to formally identify the needs and challenges

[13:07] within Rochester's Arts and Cultural Landscape

[13:09] through a community research process

[13:11] With broad representation from across the sector, our goal is to find solutions and create a long-range strategic plan for a thriving arts and cultural landscape.

[13:20] Over the last year, 80 arts and cultural arts and cultural organizations have participated in our process

[13:27] and are searing committee represents 12 organizations from both nonprofit and for-profit arts and cultural sectors.

[13:34] We are structured to include participation from new groups at any point within our process.

[13:39] I became a member of this year in committee through my work at Rochester Symphony.

[13:44] Last spring, this project was accepted into the Chris Nelson Community-Based Research Program

[13:49] at the University of Minnesota, also known as Kira.

[13:52] The program supports community-based initiatives like ours at no cost.

[13:57] Along with methods such as stakeholder mapping and focus groups and important next step is to conduct

[14:02] an economic impact study.

[14:03] Well, all the work so far has been conducted through volunteer hours and through cure

[14:08] a resources, the economic impact study is one piece of the research that we can not conduct

[14:13] ourselves.

[14:15] And they mean unique nature of our group and our strategic planning focus, make us in

[14:19] eligible for many grants and other funding opportunities that we've explored.

[14:23] Funding the study through Council initiated action will allow us to continue moving forward

[14:27] at a critical point in our process.

[14:29] The current conversations and questions about what we are doing in Rochester that impacts our arts and cultural landscape make this work especially timely.

[14:38] The next step in our process could not be more beneficial than it is right now.

[14:42] Thank you for your consideration.

[14:43] Thank you, Ms. Biden.

[14:45] Next we have Terry Kinsey.

[14:52] Members of the Rochester City Council, Mayor Norton,

[14:55] and members of the Rochester community.

[14:57] I'm Terry Goss Kinsey, Ward 5 Resident and Chair.

[15:00] Of the Rochester Sustainability and Resiliency Commission. On behalf of the Commission, I am here to express our support in advancing the community focus sustainability pilot programs that will be discussed at this meeting.

[15:12] The Commission recognizes the extensive community engagement effort completed by city staff during the natural gas franchise fee discussion.

[15:20] Commissioners were also highly engaged in that process and appreciated the emphasis on transparency, a fortability and visible community benefit.

[15:29] Community feedback reflected strong interest in local investment that reduced household energy costs,

[15:35] support renters and lower income households, and contribute to Rochester's broader sustainability and greenhouse gas reduction roles,

[15:43] goals through practical community-centered action.

[15:46] The programs that you will discuss will do just that.

[15:49] Our Commission discussions emphasize the importance of developing visible community-centered pilot programs

[15:55] that residents can directly experience and have clear and measurable outcomes.

[16:00] These programs need to be accessible to renters and households that may not traditionally benefit from existing rebate or incentive programs.

[16:09] In conclusion, the Commission believes these pilot programs provide an opportunity to demonstrate measurable community benefit such as reduced cost,

[16:18] Strength and Public Understanding and Trust, expand community participation in local climate

[16:24] actions, and inform future sustainability and resiliency investments within the City of Rochester.

[16:30] The Sustainability and Resiliency Commission appreciates Council's continued leadership in exploring

[16:36] sustainability funding and community investments strategies. Thank you.

[16:40] Thank you. Next we have Amy Cockett.

[16:45] Good evening, I'm Amy Cockett, I live at 716-28th Street in Rochester, Northwest.

[16:52] I am also a member of the League of Men Voters.

[16:55] The League of Men Voters is a national state and local organization, always nonpartisan.

[17:01] We defend democracy and power voters, but we also study issues and then take stance.

[17:07] One of the issues that we've studied thoroughly is the environment.

[17:10] Our position on that is the League of Min voters supports action by appropriate levels of government

[17:17] to encourage the use of renewable resources and energy conservation through funding for research and development, financial incentives,

[17:27] rate-sitting policies and mandatory standards.

[17:31] The League urges you to fund the Sustainability Commission's pilot program request tonight found in number H3.

[17:39] We also remind you of one of your adopted 2627 recommended budget strategic priorities which

[17:49] is responsible environmental stewardship in your budget program says of these strategic priorities.

[17:58] We will focus our resources and initiatives to drive progress in this area and here is your

[18:04] chance.

[18:06] H3.

[18:06] Please vote yes.

[18:07] Tonight.

[18:08] And I will free it my seat and go home and watch you online.

[18:12] Thank you, Ms. Cockett.

[18:13] Next up, we have Nells Pearson.

[18:27] Hey, good evening.

[18:28] Thank you.

[18:28] I'm Mayor Norton.

[18:30] I'm Nells Pearson.

[18:31] I am a candidate running for Minnesota Senate District 24.

[18:35] Just here tonight by way of introduction.

[18:38] And as always, appreciate the hard work that you all do for the city of Rochester.

[18:42] I have been up and running as a candidate since May and in that time, we've attended City Council

[18:49] and Township meetings in 24 jurisdictions.

[18:53] We'll be wrapping that up this week and completing our final Township meeting to have attended

[18:59] a Township meeting in each of the Townships that I hope to represent moving forward.

[19:05] So I always just want to thank everything that you do.

[19:08] I was telling a story about our farming, our neighbors in farming,

[19:11] to internship and how when one superintendent's giving the

[19:14] roads report, another superintendent says,

[19:17] well, how are the Johnsons doing with the repaying of the roads?

[19:20] And they reply, well, they're waving at me again.

[19:23] And so, you as city council people, you get to deal with that every day.

[19:26] You see it more personally in the grocery stores,

[19:30] and you live with us, you are amongst us.

[19:33] And it's certainly something that I don't take lightly,

[19:36] and appreciate the service that you provide.

[19:39] I just always ask that should I be so fortunate to be elected

[19:43] that you would be my eyes on those township roads

[19:45] and in the city of Rochester and the grocery stores,

[19:48] letting me know if there's any issues or problems

[19:52] that the status causing that would prevent anyone from waving at us again.

[19:56] So thank you for so much for the time and have a great evening.

[20:00] Thank you, Mr. Pearson. Next, we have Kyle Pike.

[20:13] Good evening. Madame Mayor, esteemed members of the Rochester City Council. I come to you tonight on

[20:19] less grave circumstances than January, so I'll be a little walk back from that. But I come here

[20:26] to speak on behalf of my friends and neighbors to advocate for local businesses and you'll

[20:31] have to forgive me. I'm not as prepared as it was in January. But for generations, the city

[20:36] of Rochester has relied heavily in small businesses, which are and will continue to serve as

[20:42] the lifeblood of this city.

[20:44] As you are well aware, many thousands of Rochester area residents work or operate small businesses

[20:51] and various parts of Oamstead County, and we all rely on one or another to help keep our local

[20:56] businesses thriving and successful.

[20:59] Although the over-privileged and lordly members of its board of directors are today, scarcely

[21:04] likely to admit it, even the illustrious male clinic and Saint Mary's hospital were once a

[21:12] small business practice operating right on what was then zumbro street and what is today

[21:18] second street. These corporate overlords could forsake the entirety of my hometown,

[21:24] for greed and profit and sleep sound, soundly, for their evil. Many thousands of their staffers,

[21:30] doctors, nurses, and employees trample upon the backs of hometown kids like me, without even

[21:35] thinking twice of the pillaging they do to the businesses, neighborhoods, and former

[21:40] heritable architectural spaces, they demolish and level in the name of corporate profitable

[21:47] greed.

[21:48] Each one of you need to wake up to the reality of obnoxious construction noise and cluttered

[21:54] city streets that bury the rotting bones of what was once my hometown.

[21:58] You have all had a helping hand in corrupting Rochester and to incorporate money funnel for the only and biggest game in a town built now around and allegedly not for profit medical industry that mutated out of what was begun as an altruistic investment in the Miller's farmers and laborers who built this city.

[22:20] Thank you Mr. Pike.

[22:23] Next up, that will, that concludes our open comment period, and I am going to, I'm going

[22:31] to say this again when we do have our public hearings and I didn't say anything during open

[22:35] comment, but we have 40 people that are signed up for G1 and applause will just take away

[22:43] time from people's presentation.

[22:45] And so please just be respectful to all speakers and remain silent in between the speakers.

[22:54] Thank you.

[22:55] With that, I will call on Clarke Kassel to call the roll.

[22:58] Good evening.

[22:59] Council Member Keen.

[23:01] Council Member Miller.

[23:03] Council Member Wall.

[23:04] Council Member Fredericks.

[23:05] Here.

[23:06] Council Member Palmer.

[23:08] Here.

[23:08] Council Member Doring.

[23:10] Here.

[23:10] Council President Schubering.

[23:12] Mayor Norton.

[23:13] Present.

[23:13] Thank you. Next up, we have our City Administrators report. Administrator Zelms, please take it away.

[23:21] Thank you. Council President, Mayor. Members of the Council, lots of members of the community that are here today.

[23:27] I just wanted to start off as I always do with thanking all of our teammates for acting with respect integrity, safety and excellence in mind and everything that they do.

[23:35] Out of respect for the many speakers that are forthcoming. I will zip through this.

[23:39] We do have our final two board concerts coming up this Wednesday, the 19th at White Oaks Park,

[23:45] Reigns with Jojo Green and next Wednesday, August 26th, me like these with scorched waves,

[23:51] we'll be at Cook Park, they'll start at 5.30 and go and tell about 7.45 pm. So be happy to

[23:57] join everyone there. Also, we are looking for feedback about the Silver Lake skate park expansion,

[24:04] so if that's something that you're interested in, there will be opportunity for feedback that

[24:08] last week. There's a brief online survey and that is running through Friday, August 28th. You

[24:14] can find it on RochesterMN.gov to take the survey. There's press release there. It's also on

[24:19] our social media. We are nearing the end of summer. So I'm sorry to say the closing dates for pools

[24:26] and beaches as well as splash pads. Silver Lake pool closed yesterday. Soldier's Field Aquatic

[24:32] Center will close on Sunday, August 23rd and beaches splash pads will be open through Monday,

[24:38] September 7th, which is Labor Day. So, enjoy that while it lasts. Our last

[24:43] item on this agenda is about alternate side parking and snow. So, it's

[24:46] coming quickly. Storytime at White Oaks Park, White Oaks Park will be getting

[24:50] a lot of action this week. So, August 21st, on Friday, 9.30 a.m. to 10. The Rochester

[24:57] Public Library is hosting a Storytime, bring your blanket.

[25:00] If there is bad weather, but again, that will be at White Oaks Park on August 21st, now we'll turn it over to the mayor.

[25:07] Thank you, Administrator. There's sounds of Mayor Norton, take it away.

[25:10] Great. I have a couple announcements as well. First, the on Friday, so it's passed. I wanted to note that it was national emergency management awareness month.

[25:21] So we had the City Hall lights done green for them and was a nice follow-up to the

[25:29] Practice run. We did the emergency management run that we did over at Century High School. We could go. So that was good timing for that. We want to recognize them for all they do.

[25:40] We have the town hall that we're hosting called Getting Around Town. It's about all modes of transportation and Rochester. It will be Thursday, August 20th this week.

[25:50] From 6 to 730 and we move the location, we've been holding them at our CTC, but with the start of the school year, we're going to move it over to John Marshall's cafeteria, so please feel free to pop up there and I, you know, requesting the council if they're, if you're available, some of you are some of you aren't to pop up. It's really nice to have you at the tables when folks have their discussions. It's really helpful. So looking forward to that.

[26:20] We're looking at showing on September 10th, we don't have the location identified, we're

[26:25] confirming the one that we thought we had. We've moved this event called 911 reclaiming ground

[26:32] zero. This will be the 20th anniversary of 911 and some folks have done a documentary about it,

[26:38] but it's not just about 911 and what happened. That is covered in it, but it really is about how

[26:43] New York City responded using community engagement and so we would encourage you to come.

[26:51] We'll have more information as we have a location and we'll do some publicity about it so

[26:57] we'd love to have you at that. We are I will be doing we the parks department and I will be doing

[27:05] my last tree planting and for those of you that don't know our delstated this when he was mayor

[27:12] where he did tree plantings regularly.

[27:15] And I don't know how long he did it during his tenure,

[27:17] but he did it a number of times.

[27:18] And I thought it was a great idea.

[27:20] So I took it up.

[27:21] And so for the last eight years,

[27:23] I have been purchasing and working with the Parks Department

[27:26] to put in 10 trees a year.

[27:28] We'll be doing a few extra this year.

[27:31] So we will be putting in our 70th to 80th trees out at Cascade Lake.

[27:36] We've just selected Cascade Lake.

[27:37] It was a new city park.

[27:39] It needed some tree cover.

[27:41] So that's where they've all gone.

[27:43] It's been a joy to do, and if you'd like to come help us plant trees on September 17th at 9 a.m.

[27:49] If you're available, we'll be at Cascade Lake Park to put in our last seven, and there will be

[27:53] three special trees that have been purchased to honor my friend Melissa Hartman and her husband that died this year,

[27:59] so they will be putting in three crab apple trees in honor of them.

[28:04] Also, on Wednesday's September 23rd, we will be hosting the Youth Leadership and Success Summit.

[28:09] for high school students, we will be having people in a variety of businesses come talk about their careers,

[28:17] but it is also about leadership and wellness. The students have helped plan this. We will have

[28:22] if all goes well the governor and some other folks from up in the Twin Cities as well. Some really

[28:27] wonderful speakers locally and then folks that will be sharing about their own career choices and

[28:34] they got there. So that will be a day that students have off-school, September 23rd, and it

[28:39] will start around noonish and go until 7 or 8 in the evening. And we'll be at Civic Center

[28:45] and Chattoe Theatre to be fun. Last, or one of the last things I have to share, I guess, is

[28:53] that I want to thank Anna Eric Devin, Elizabeth and Chloe listed here. These are local artists

[28:59] who stepped up and you see I took one day because we had a sick day with one of the artists

[29:05] and we provided an art project for all of the summer school kids in the Rochester Public Schools

[29:10] who for whatever reason needed that extra help this summer so we supported the artists by having

[29:17] them come and the day I was there was a little simpler we painted bird houses because I am not an artist

[29:24] though I loved the arts, so it was wonderful and those five artists gave their time and talent

[29:30] to our students and it was fabulous.

[29:34] And lastly, the Sustainability Resiliency Commission takes part of our policies or our procedures

[29:42] for the city, I guess it's an ordinance says that we will have a youth member, and typically

[29:48] the youth tend to be juniors or seniors and so they go away to college and so we're often

[29:52] having every year a new youth opening, so if you know

[30:00] Any youth who are really interested in sustainability and resiliency, they could go online and apply for that position.

[30:09] And we say 16 to 21, I think, for any interest to do so. If you're interested, please go online and apply. That's all I've got.

[30:19] Thank you, Mayor. Next up, we have the order of the agenda. Are there any changes to the order of the agenda?

[30:27] I don't see any, I would recommend a motion to approve the agenda.

[30:32] Move by council member Fredericks and seconded by council member.

[30:39] Well, all in favor say aye.

[30:41] I would say nay motion passes moving on to our consent agenda.

[30:46] I have not received any notice of items to be pulled.

[30:49] Is that correct?

[30:50] If not, I'd invite a motion to approve the consent agenda.

[30:55] Second.

[30:56] moved by council member Fredericks and seconded by council member Dorang. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye.

[31:03] Poe say nay motion passes. Moving on to our public hearings. We have four public hearings on our agenda this evening.

[31:12] And before we start as I mentioned, we do have over 40 people signed up for the first public hearing. And so we do have some guidelines for that.

[31:24] First staff will make a presentation or introduction of the item that we are dealing with, and then if there is an applicant or applicant representative present they will have up to 10 minutes to discuss the item.

[31:42] After that, I will open the public hearing and members of the public will have up to five minutes each strongly encouraged to keep comments brief concise and building on but not repeating previous comments.

[31:59] Public can be joining us in person only as far as public testimony.

[32:05] After all of the people that want to speak during the public hearing have been heard,

[32:13] we will invite the applicant back up for a rebuttal to answer any questions that came up during

[32:19] the public hearing or to make any closing comments about the item. After that, I will invite

[32:28] my colleagues and the mayor to ask any clarifying questions of staff and or the applicant.

[32:36] So with that we will move to item G1 which is an appeal of the historic preservation committee's

[32:42] denial of certificate of appropriateness for 311 Broadway edition renovation and we have

[32:51] Irene Woodward to make this presentation.

[32:54] Good evening council president mayor members of council. I'm going to do the introduction for the public hearing. I just wanted to kind of this is an appeal of a certificate of appropriateness that was heard by the Heritage Preservation Commission. I will kind of go through the different criteria. These are all listed in the packet under the RCA so I'm just going to highlight a few of those. This is a quasi judicial. It kind of mirrors a zoning appeal. So all of those different items that we identified in the packet are kind of make up our findings of fact for this particular

[33:24] application. Just to note, this was denied by the Heritage Preservation Commission and they noted

[33:31] that the rehabilitation standards of 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, and 10 were not being met. I can repeat those

[33:39] at the end, but just wanted to note them up front as we go through these, and I'm just going to kind

[33:42] of highlight some of these. I know there's a lot of public that wants to also provide comments.

[33:49] Just to note that applications when we review for anything of this certificate of appropriateness,

[33:53] we reviewed against the rehabilitation standards, but also the city adopted design guidelines

[33:59] that take into account city priorities that were done by Council. So it is the combination of

[34:04] those two documents is how we review each of these different criteria.

[34:09] So to start,

[34:11] really what I wanted to highlight on this is that as we continue to look at this application,

[34:16] it will continue as a mix use, a majority of commercial space will remain, which really indicates

[34:21] and continues that this is referencing a commercial historic district as it was identified and

[34:26] designated.

[34:27] And the distinctive materials, especially those along Broadway, will remain and that's

[34:32] a key factor within this.

[34:35] Moving on to the next one, the historic features of the sides are going to continue to

[34:40] be preserved.

[34:41] In addition, the storefront at 309 will be rehabilitated.

[34:44] It had undergone several different iterations over the years and kind of closed in and

[34:49] part of this, it will be open back up and taken into account to look more like a store front,

[34:53] which was at one time that way, which is an appropriate part of the rehabilitation standards.

[35:01] The changes that have occurred within the district within the period of significance will be maintained, along with also noting that the rehabilitation of the facade of 39 and to the alley side of the buildings will utilize more contemporary design, which is consistent.

[35:20] None of the materials being removed calls that qualify as distinctive materials features

[35:25] or finishes, but I'm like that is behind those front facades, which are facing Broadway

[35:30] will remain intact and be preserved within this, and that there are the changes having

[35:37] occurred to already at 3.11 to 3.17 within the period of significance will be preserved,

[35:43] so those will be maintained as they are.

[35:50] The other thing to note is that no character defining features are being removed or replaced

[35:54] in this project.

[35:55] Within the character defining features within the historic study that was completed to

[36:00] designate this, we're all generally along the facade facing Broadway, where those

[36:04] character defining features that were identified during that.

[36:07] And we're adopted as part of that historic district study.

[36:12] And wanted to note on this, one of the main things that I think there's been some comments

[36:17] comments and feedback also from HPC was about the overall massing of the structure.

[36:22] When we look at it, we look at the presence of 318 comments building, mitigate the additional

[36:26] building mass.

[36:28] Noting that within the historic district, it's the collective of all of the buildings that

[36:31] were established and designated, so it's not one particular building, it's the overall district

[36:36] that was established, so as we're looking at the overall district, we're looking at the impact

[36:40] of that massing within that district, and with the location of 318, it looks like it kind

[36:46] lines with that, and so we'll not have an impact on the other buildings.

[36:52] In addition, it has been designed to both compatible and differentiated from the properties

[36:56] historic elements, which is the recommendation when we're looking at additions or re-abiltations,

[37:01] especially when we're looking at additions, is that it has a differentiated so that you're

[37:06] not mimicking what is on those front facing facings, that are part of those contributing

[37:10] buildings.

[37:15] And then the last item that I just want to quickly note it are properties are being

[37:18] person.

[37:19] Once again, I've kind of noted a couple of times that it's really looking at those properties

[37:22] being preserved along Broadway is being a key feature of this.

[37:26] And so with that, I will note and I'll just provide the recommendation.

[37:30] This was a staff recommendation that was submitted to HPC.

[37:34] Once again, the HPC voted 62 to deny the certificate of appropriateness and most of their

[37:43] for each one of them was really concerns about the addition with a detract from the district,

[37:48] the concerns about setting precedents and the massing design are not compatible with these buildings

[37:52] with a district and just wanted to note those and that is the end of the brief presentation

[37:58] and I'm happy to answer any questions at the completion of the public hearing. Thank you, Mrs. Miss Woodward.

[38:03] Next up, if the applicant is here, if they can step forward and introduce yourself and you have up to 10 minutes.

[38:18] How do I advance this slide, just the green button?

[38:21] Okay, thank you.

[38:22] Good afternoon.

[38:23] Good evening, Mayor.

[38:25] Council President Council members.

[38:26] My name is Bob Heiss.

[38:27] I'm working with how Henderson Grant McElitz and the GH Investment Group.

[38:31] regarding this three-level Broadway development.

[38:38] What this appeal is about is that HPC denied the request for appropriateness,

[38:45] and did so without any factual support, any substantive factual findings,

[38:51] and GH2 did not walk away.

[38:53] They met with the city.

[38:54] The city invited them to continue in this down this road,

[38:59] to find a project that would be compatible with what the city was trying to do in terms of

[39:03] developed a downtown district. And so after months and multiple meetings and many, many

[39:11] communications, a substantially modified proposal was developed and that proposal earned the support

[39:19] of the experts, the city development team.

[39:26] The properties we all know what the properties are,

[39:28] So I'm not going to go into detail on that.

[39:30] The city's done a good job of outlying that.

[39:32] Quick history.

[39:33] All I would point out is that, again, GAs 2 did not walk away.

[39:36] They were invited by the city to continue this progress, this project, and find a way

[39:42] that they could collaborate together with the development team and come up with solutions

[39:46] to some of the concerns that the initial project raised.

[39:50] And they did that through months and months and hours of communication and collaboration.

[39:56] and this is a snapshot of what the differences are.

[40:00] And see the 309 Broadway, the facade is now being preserved as opposed to full demolition. The storefronts

[40:05] are returned to historic opening. Preserved whole portions of the buildings to be used as apartments.

[40:12] It went from 11 stories to 7 stories, which satisfies the mass inconsiderations. There are now

[40:17] setbacks that didn't exist before that satisfy the city development team and the standards and the guidelines.

[40:23] and no change in the designation of the buildings as contributing buildings was required.

[40:29] This is just to give you the visual.

[40:31] The city has it in theirs but you can see the substantial difference in the massing that

[40:36] resulted in the significant changes to the proposal and to the project which clearly as

[40:42] the city has determined falls within the lines of the standards and the expectations.

[40:50] The, I think it's important. I'm not an expert in historical preservation. I'm not an engineer.

[40:57] I'm not an expert in downtown district renovation and remodeling and expansion.

[41:02] I rely on experts. I suspect that nobody here in you or I don't mean this in a disrespectful way.

[41:09] We're not experts in historical preservation or downtown development. I don't envy the position that you're in.

[41:15] This is outside a lot of people's expertise and it's a hard position to be in to have to make a decision like this.

[41:22] So what do we do? We rely on experts. The city has a team of experts that are devoted and committed to understanding the Secretary of Interior Standards in the context of a project like this.

[41:33] They're committed to understanding the UDC in the context of a proposal and a project like this.

[41:39] So what do we do? We rely on what the experts say and the experts have indicated that this project,

[41:46] this new proposal, substantially modified, comports with, complies with, and it hears to the

[41:52] Secretary of Interior Standards. And it hears to the UDC, the regulations and the codes that apply

[41:58] to a project like this, just in brief, the HPC's decision. It was a one-page letter.

[42:10] that denied on 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, and 10, the Secretary of Interior Standards, and the conclusion

[42:17] was simply not met.

[42:20] No factual support, no factual justification, no basis whatsoever other than not met.

[42:30] To the extent that somebody from the HBC may have submitted some documents to the City Council

[42:35] afterwards that weren't provided to us that were not part of the HPC proceeding, it's outside

[42:42] the scope of the HPC proceeding. It's inappropriate to rely on anything that was provided

[42:48] to the council after that. And certainly if something was provided, we would have liked

[42:52] to have seen it so that we could address it. Not a single factual finding in a quasi-do

[43:03] and we would ask that the City Council

[43:05] take that into consideration.

[43:09] We look at what's the investment case for this.

[43:14] The,

[43:17] this isn't theoretical.

[43:19] It's not hypothetical.

[43:20] It's real.

[43:21] The second floor of three-level broadway

[43:22] hasn't been rented in five years.

[43:25] This is despite over $900,000 being invested in the pain building.

[43:30] The second floor remains.

[43:33] Beijing. Right now ownership of subsidizing tenants, they may not know it, they may not

[43:39] appreciate it, but at $15 a square foot as opposed to what the market is for that area

[43:43] for between $25 and $35. It's not sustainable. It's not theoretical. It's reality.

[43:49] The mass simply doesn't work without this project. There's no realistic path to recouping

[43:57] the investment in these buildings as they sit today. And that's what makes really an opportunity

[44:02] for the City Council to allow for real investment in these buildings to be possible.

[44:08] What's the practical alternatives?

[44:10] Sell the buildings, who's going to buy these buildings after what they've been through

[44:13] for the past three years in the current condition that they're in.

[44:17] Maintain under minimum, it's not sustainable.

[44:20] You can keep putting money in to maintain the building but the rents that are getting paid

[44:25] aren't sufficient to maintain that.

[44:31] So downtown business property owner support this, and we should not have to choose between allowing a property owner to reinvest in his store of building and supporting the small businesses that have made downtown possible.

[44:46] Why this matters?

[44:48] Whether the commission's decision was supported by the findings in the HPC, which it clearly was not because there were no factual findings and what's at stake in the outcome.

[44:58] This is a 23 million dollar.

[45:00] Aller investment that's being brought to downtown Rochester. The city development team itself recognizes what brings. More business, more residents, more revenue, more vitality for the whole downtown community. Not just this block.

[45:14] There's a message beyond this one project. If a developer does everything that they're asked and working with the city, goes to meetings, makes changes, makes revisions, complies with everything that the city wants.

[45:26] And then is told by the HPC we reject your project because it affects old buildings.

[45:31] It sends a message to development that development and downtown Rochester is not wanted.

[45:38] We would think that this council has the opportunity to send an opposing message today.

[45:43] And that message is that if you work with the city, if you combine and collaborate with the city,

[45:48] and you provide what the city is looking for and compliance with the standards and the regulations,

[45:53] your project should be approved, and for that reason, we're asking that the City Council

[45:58] except the recommendation. The second recommendation now by the experts, the development

[46:05] team, to overturn the HBC's denial, to award the certificate of appropriateness, and to allow

[46:11] this project to go forward. I want to say thank you on behalf of GH2 Investments, Mr. Henderson,

[46:18] and Mr. Michaelettes, and we have anticipated some questions.

[46:23] So in the slide deck, there are questions and answers.

[46:26] I don't know, how much time do I have left?

[46:28] I mean, you have a minute and 50 for seconds left,

[46:31] but you also will have five minutes

[46:33] after the public hearing date.

[46:34] All right, sir, questions.

[46:36] All right.

[46:36] So let me just take what time I have left.

[46:38] There are no conditions that this approval

[46:41] and this recommendation for approval or subject to.

[46:44] Standards also all that are identified

[46:46] are not supported by any factual findings or any factual support.

[46:51] When you talk about the alley, we're very conscientious of the alley, how and grant have already

[46:56] done things to enhance that alley by consolidating garbage collection for all the business owners

[47:01] in that area, by installing new lights, by installing benches, by installing planters, some

[47:07] of which have been vandalized already with planst being stolen and rocks being pulled out of

[47:12] the planters, but it shows that they're willing to work and do more.

[47:15] And this project, if they're given the opportunity to move it forward, can do so much more

[47:20] to preserve the culture of that alley, actually enhance the culture of that alley by doing

[47:25] some things like this.

[47:28] This just demonstrates the massing.

[47:31] This has been done in other cities throughout the United States.

[47:35] You can see a lot of historic buildings have accepted the idea of regenerating with modernization

[47:41] that bring revitalization to a downtown community and a downtown district.

[47:46] So we're not asking the city of Rochester do something novel or something

[47:49] that hasn't been done. Again, this shows the massing,

[47:53] this tower support into the historic buildings.

[47:57] Professional support, we relied on the former commissioner

[48:00] of the Minneapolis Heritage Preservation Commission who supports our project

[48:04] consistent with all the Secretary of Interior Standards

[48:07] as the city team and the experts have identified and if for some reason it needed to be removed

[48:14] the historic buildings would be preserved in the original state and this just identifies

[48:19] over five meetings and 2024, six meetings and 2025 and two meetings and 2026 and multiple

[48:25] conversations. Thank you. Thank you. We will invite you back up after the public hearing.

[48:30] At this time I will open the public hearing and I will go through the list of

[48:35] Speakers and a reminder, please remain quiet during the speakers and after the speaker is done, and we will start with Sean Kettlecamp.

[48:53] Hi there. I'm Sean Kettlecamp.

[48:57] The researcher.

[48:58] If you could hold a microphone, just a little closer.

[49:01] History Center of Olmstick.

[49:02] And the researcher at the History Center of Olmstick County.

[49:06] I just want to say that you all created the historic district and it can't be something that's a hop-on hop-off.

[49:14] We changed our mind later, we want to do something different.

[49:22] It's all been set.

[49:24] The historic district is in place, and when he says that he can't find anybody to buy those buildings,

[49:32] I think really what it comes down to is what are you going to rent it out for?

[49:37] You know, if you're doing everything specifically for the University of Minnesota Rochester,

[49:44] that's, I don't know, that's not going to work.

[49:48] And I've said it before, the University of Minnesota Rochester should really be the University of Minnesota Mayo

[49:53] because you can't take an English degree or a history degree there.

[49:58] It's only teaching...

[50:00] They're only teaching classes for what they want to make workers for them, anyhow.

[50:11] My aunt, Nuckel, Jerry and Mary Ellen Kettle camp lived here for years. They moved to Denver

[50:16] in the late 1960s. And my aunt, Mary Ellen's father, was the district attorney and mayor

[50:26] of South Bend, Indiana attorney for this due to Baker family, and it was my aunt, Mary Ellen,

[50:34] who when she moved to Denver, I'm ran and was on the city council there, who counseled

[50:40] me, I'm going to the city council, if you had something to say, you should go, and don't

[50:48] be afraid. And so I've tried to keep that in mind. But, you know, she was on the City Council

[50:56] there, but she would come back. They would, my aunt and uncle, Jerry and Mary Ellen would

[51:00] come back every year. And I always remember in the late 1970s, my mother was talking to her

[51:07] about some issue here in town. And my mother told her that this, this and that thing was

[51:16] happening and my aunt said to her things happen in Rochester, Minnesota that don't happen

[51:26] anywhere else. And I've always remembered that because it just kind of speaks to, you know,

[51:36] kind of unacceptable behavior. I mean, going to the for staff recommendations and going to

[51:43] city developers and everything if they're trying to get you all to vote a certain way that's

[51:51] unacceptable and telling the city council how to vote is something that I don't believe

[51:59] should happen.

[52:02] But you know corruption is chic these days and I just don't want you all

[52:09] to be pushovers for changing your historic district by a building that's so towering that

[52:18] when you're driving down Broadway, you're not going to be able to see the Kailer Hotel

[52:21] or anything else beyond that, it's not so much really what's happening right there on Broadway

[52:28] in front of that building, it's like coming up there on a car, you're not going to be able

[52:32] see beyond that, you know, it's just towering over an historic building that, and a historic

[52:41] district, that we all care very much about. And I remember being out at the history center,

[52:49] how to give tours that Mayo would, and have people come up and want to know where was the downtown

[52:57] Rochester, and you try to explain it to him, and it's very difficult because they all want

[53:08] to rent out to, like I said, the University of Minnesota Rochester. It could be hard to

[53:15] sell that building, but depending upon who wants to buy it and what they want to use it for,

[53:21] if they're not going to use it for the university,

[53:25] they have all kinds of great possibilities.

[53:29] So I encourage you, please, to vote, no,

[53:33] we don't want any building on top of our historic buildings

[53:36] and we don't want anything done to our historic district.

[53:41] As little as it is, we're only asking for a millionth

[53:45] the building's face and olive Rochester

[53:46] and that apartment thing that they want to build could be built anywhere else.

[53:51] Thank you so much.

[53:52] Thank you.

[53:53] Next we have Chris Allen.

[54:02] Good evening.

[54:02] Thank you for having us here.

[54:05] My name is Chris Allen.

[54:06] I'm a 50-year resident of Rochester.

[54:09] I'm the daughter of Marge Allen, who founded Channel 1.

[54:13] And I am a professional artist.

[54:16] Grass roots.

[54:19] It's what started Channel 1.

[54:21] It's only bigger.

[54:25] It continues to grow.

[54:27] Look at your audience here in attendance tonight.

[54:30] It is the people.

[54:32] It is a grassroots effort to say,

[54:35] No, we want our history.

[54:39] We, the people are here to protect and preserve our own history as permanent residents of Rochester, Minnesota.

[54:46] It's a progressive state as a direct result of grassroots efforts.

[54:51] Minnesota is ranked fourth in the country to support and promote the arts.

[54:56] Yet Rochester?

[54:59] Rochester?

[55:00] Artists rank less than 1 percent in our state. 1 percent. Think of the growth.

[55:10] Our small art businesses

[55:11] are being threatened by creating an unnecessary change today, proposing to add five floors of student

[55:18] housing, and to our haven of historic buildings that have remained throughout the hardworking

[55:25] historians of our downtown neighborhood. Two stories says charm, seven stories says corporate

[55:31] greed, honestly. Changing our historic neighborhoods downtown would displace and once again,

[55:39] would hide the creative, hardworking artists, artists, musicians, performers, writers, and

[55:44] grandwriters of the most expensive place to live in Rochester in Minnesota right now. The vibe is

[55:51] to the ripple effect building the building of the Civic Center had on the Rochester Arts Center.

[55:58] Have you been there? Do you know where it is? Do our visitors know where it is?

[56:02] How much more could it grow?

[56:07] So please have the decency to support alternative businesses that are

[56:12] arts focused and settled in a well-established downtown location for all of us. Thank you.

[56:18] Thank you. Next we have Richard Gill, please. Everyone was so good that after the first speaker

[56:25] and if you do want to apply, go out to the lobby. Mr. Gill, go ahead.

[56:34] Hello. My name is Richard Gill and I'm here to speak specifically about the importance of

[56:39] Triton Records and the need for it to remain open uninterrupted, which being possible,

[56:47] which would

[56:49] wrote in Rochester and graduated high school in 1998. So I was around during the money magazine

[56:54] best city in America days and as an artistic teenager during that time, I can say that it was

[56:59] anything but that for us. We would hang out in public spaces like the Galleria or the Peace

[57:04] Plaza and get her asked or ticketed by security guards and police officers just for existing in

[57:08] those spots. The same thing happened during the live music shows at the play more ballroom.

[57:13] Grass by the owners even though we went to spend money there. It was not an ideal situation and

[57:18] made us all extremely bitter and untrusting

[57:20] of the people and positions of power in the city.

[57:23] In 2003, I left Rochester, and when I moved back a few years ago,

[57:27] I saw a much different city.

[57:29] There are multiple venues that host

[57:30] a original live music, and there was a vibrant arts

[57:33] and music community.

[57:35] On this particular stretch of Broadway that we're talking about,

[57:38] there's a coffee shop, an art store, and a record store,

[57:41] and all these places welcome the youth with open arms.

[57:44] The point I'm trying to make is that the impact

[57:46] Tritome has on the community goes beyond dollars and cents.

[57:50] In a place like Rochester that when your young seems to only care about the male clinic

[57:55] and catering to the over 60 population,

[57:58] Tritome is a place for the youth to go for live music and community events.

[58:02] Kids have taken prom and senior pictures at Tritome.

[58:04] Bands have formed in that store.

[58:06] Friendships and relationships have started there.

[58:09] I met one of the very most important people in my life because of that storefront.

[58:13] It's important to this community.

[58:14] It's more than just four walls and some crates of records.

[58:18] It's a cultural and community hub for this city.

[58:21] I would hate for the next generation of young people

[58:23] to miss out on that at the expense of more apartments.

[58:25] For the next generation to grow up the way my friends and I did,

[58:29] bitter and untrusting of the people and positions of power in the city.

[58:33] Feeling like their best interests are not being considered.

[58:35] They've already lost one place with the closing of thesis.

[58:38] Don't let them lose this place too.

[58:41] Even for the amount of time it takes to renovate a building.

[58:43] Thank you, Mr. Gill. Next up, we have Charlie Miller.

[58:52] Good evening, Council President Shubring, Mayor Norton, and members of the Council.

[58:55] My name is Charlie. I'm here tonight to ask you to deny the appeal for item G1

[58:59] and uphold the historic Preservation Commission's decision.

[59:03] I'd like to speak from a slightly different perspective than others here tonight.

[59:06] I'm relatively new to Rochester. I moved here with my two teenager sons

[59:10] to receive ongoing medical care from the Mayo Clinic last summer.

[59:13] When I arrived here we didn't know anyone or have any community.

[59:16] I didn't have a network of people or a sense of where I belonged yet.

[59:20] The businesses in these historic buildings changed that for me.

[59:22] Through these businesses, from attending ZNC and open mic nights at Kathy's team,

[59:27] and painting classes of art heads to attending concerts at Trino,

[59:29] I found my people, I found employment, I found music, art,

[59:33] friendship, and a sense of belonging.

[59:35] The community that I built here over the past year is directly connected to these spaces.

[59:38] And I think that's something that can be easy to overlook when we talk about historic preservation.

[59:42] We aren't just preserving old buildings for preserving the places where people build lives.

[59:45] These spaces give us pop businesses, artists, musicians, and community members somewhere to gather and create something together.

[59:52] They contribute to the character of Rochester in a way that a new development simply can't replicate overnight.

[59:57] I'd also like to note that a huge part of the community spaces these businesses...

[1:00:00] As this is provided is the safe, welcoming environment they create for my teenagers and for Rochester's youth as a whole.

[1:00:06] Almost weekly, I have the privilege of witnessing close to a hundred of our youth.

[1:00:10] And young people gather at Tridom to enjoy live music together. As a parent, I can't name nor imagine another space.

[1:00:16] That feels as wholesome, inclusive, and safe for our youth on a Friday night. These spaces give young people a place to belong, connect with one another, and experience their communities in a way that's incredibly meaningful.

[1:00:25] I moved here only a year ago and these businesses helped me make Rochester feel like a home.

[1:00:30] I hope we'll make decisions that allow future residents to have that same opportunity to arrive here not knowing anyone and find a community waiting for them.

[1:00:37] Please deny the appeal for items to you on and uphold historical preservation commission's decision.

[1:00:41] Thank you for your time.

[1:00:41] Thanks, Miss Miller. Next up we have Riggs Repp King.

[1:00:54] Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Riggs Repp King.

[1:00:58] I'm a Rochester small business owner resident and homeowner.

[1:01:01] And I'd like you to, I'd like to ask you guys to reject this proposal.

[1:01:06] I want to be very clear, I am not opposed to housing, especially for students, and I am not

[1:01:11] opposed to development.

[1:01:12] I'm opposed to destroying Rochester's history when there are other places to build.

[1:01:17] These South Broadway buildings date back to the late 19th century.

[1:01:21] They are a part of Rochester's architectural and commercial history, and once they are gone,

[1:01:25] they are gone forever.

[1:01:27] But they are also more than just old buildings.

[1:01:29] These spaces have become important parts of Rochester's art and creative community.

[1:01:34] They provide places for artists and creative businesses to work, gather, and contribute to the

[1:01:38] character of downtown. That community is part of what makes these buildings valuable today, not just

[1:01:43] what happened in the 100 years ago. The federal secretary of interior standard for historic properties

[1:01:49] found in 36 CFR part 68 emphasizes preserving historic materials and features, minimizing changes to

[1:01:56] buildings and avoiding alterations that destroy the character and make history property significant.

[1:02:02] These principles are consistent with Rochester's own heritage preservation policies,

[1:02:07] which recognize the preservation of historically significant properties as being in the public

[1:02:11] interest. Understand that facades may stay similar, but these buildings are more than just that.

[1:02:18] So I have to ask, why are we willing to make an exception here? This is not the first time we've

[1:02:23] this conversation. This is by my understanding the fourth time of proposal has come before the council

[1:02:27] about these changes. At what point do we stop changing small pieces of the proposal

[1:02:35] and recognize

[1:02:37] that the fundamental problems remain the same? Changing the number of units, changing the design,

[1:02:42] and making other small adjustments doesn't change what is being asked of you tonight. To approve

[1:02:46] a development that comes at the expense of historic buildings, I don't need believe we need to make

[1:02:55] and buildings continue to go up and their vacant underlies utilized lots throughout and around

[1:03:00] downtown where new housing can be built without destroying 19th century buildings. We can have both.

[1:03:05] We can build housing for these students and we can preserve history. What we cannot do is demolish

[1:03:10] or fundamentally alter historical buildings and then decide years later that we wish we had protected them.

[1:03:16] If this council proves this proposal after four separate hearings and repeated revisions,

[1:03:20] what precedent does that establish for the next historical property? What does historic

[1:03:24] historic prevention actually mean if a developer can simply keep modifying a proposal

[1:03:29] until the preservation concerns are worn down. These buildings have survived well over a century.

[1:03:35] I am asking you not to be the council that decides they won't make it another century. Please

[1:03:40] reject this proposal and require development to happen in a way that allows Rochester to grow

[1:03:44] without erasing history, art and character that makes our downtown unique. Thank you. Thank you,

[1:03:59] for your service.

[1:04:00] In Mayor Norton, I first knew you as PTA President.

[1:04:03] Thank you for serving children,

[1:04:05] for serving this community, for representing our state,

[1:04:09] and at an national level, and international level,

[1:04:11] your service has been phenomenal.

[1:04:14] I came to Rochester, 1998, to teach at gauge.

[1:04:18] I was a brand new teacher.

[1:04:19] My first grade, I taught was sixth grade,

[1:04:22] which was kind of a nightmare for me.

[1:04:25] But we managed, and one of the sections

[1:04:28] that I taught was Minnesota and Rochester history.

[1:04:32] And we went to the History Center to learn about the tornado that wiped out most of Rochester.

[1:04:38] August 1st, 21st, about this time of year 1883, most of this town was wiped out.

[1:04:45] The historical buildings are gone. There's photographs and drawings of it.

[1:04:49] What remains in downtown Rochester are a few historical buildings.

[1:04:55] for the sake of our children, and their understanding of the history of this town in this country.

[1:05:00] I urge you to veto or to deny this permit and keep those buildings in place as they are for the sake of the children, for their sense of history, for the sense of the artist community that is there.

[1:05:14] I, in my retirement, have become an artist of woodworker, a cabmaker, a carver. I appreciate art heads and all the buildings in that block, but I also appreciate the historical nature of those buildings.

[1:05:26] as a carpenter and woodworker, I appreciate the stone, red and brick. That's steel and glass,

[1:05:32] but the brick of the stained glass on those tarfronts adds so much to what this town is already lost.

[1:05:39] So please don't let us second turn it all. I apologize to a few buildings we have left. Thank you.

[1:05:44] Thank you, Mr. Yigweik. Next we have Santiago can too. Can too.

[1:05:51] Thank you.

[1:06:04] Good afternoon, the mayor and the council, the city council, quick apologies.

[1:06:09] My throat is not exactly where I would like it to be, but this was an issue that was important to me and so here I am anyhow.

[1:06:16] So my name is Santiago.

[1:06:18] I moved here to Rochester about a year ago or so with my wonderful partner Phoenix.

[1:06:23] We came here looking for new work.

[1:06:25] We came here looking for a new culture and a new life.

[1:06:28] And so far we have very happily found it.

[1:06:31] And a big part of that was because of the institutions that we have in our historic district,

[1:06:38] the arts and the life and the youth and just every part of the energy that really

[1:06:45] feels us up and allows us to live and allows us to feel like we have a home.

[1:06:51] I, because I don't have as much of an experience living here and because I'm a relatively recent resident,

[1:06:57] I want to save some of the more technical aspects of this kind of conversation to more experienced residents to this small business owners who are impacted.

[1:07:06] What I really want to speak to is my role as a resident and your role as you are deciding on this.

[1:07:13] First, I want to speak to your role specifically, particularly in the kind of decision that I think you should be making and that really you are entrusted to be making.

[1:07:21] I think that there are three big principles that really underpinned this type of discussion.

[1:07:26] I think the first is a recognition that this is not a decision on the actual certificate of appropriateness itself.

[1:07:35] That has already been delegated, that has already been decided by the previous historic preservation committee.

[1:07:41] This is about an appeal to that.

[1:07:43] And so I would ask you first and foremost to go towards the past precedent.

[1:07:48] There are going to be lots of arguments that are made about why it still does not satisfy the historical guidelines for the heritage.

[1:07:55] and for the heritage preservation. But even if you don't necessarily buy all of them and think,

[1:08:00] well, maybe there's an argument to be made there. If there is any amount of doubt,

[1:08:05] I implore you to go back to the precedent that has already been established by the initial committee

[1:08:11] when they said, no, this does not go by our guidelines. We will not allow this to stand. As someone

[1:08:17] before me to already said, this has been delegated multiple times, multiple times the same decision

[1:08:22] has been reached. I would implore you to reach the same. But second is I think it's important

[1:08:28] to recognize that in terms of a lot of the economic developments that could be brought by

[1:08:32] this by a lot of the money and investments that the applicant of this speaking to, this is not

[1:08:37] a unique issue to just this district. There are many opportunities to be building new housing,

[1:08:43] to be getting new investments. This is not about whether we want our city to grow, whether we want

[1:08:47] more money into it. It's whether we want these specific apartments and these specific developments

[1:08:53] in this specific area. And so I would ask you to look first and foremost to the impact

[1:08:58] it will have on this area specifically. To the impact it will have on the small businesses that

[1:09:03] will be impacted by its construction that will lose a lot of the valuable people that are going

[1:09:09] towards it that are giving them this money money that are relying on it for community and for

[1:09:16] And for the enrichment that these historical places bring them, I would implore you to look to that first and foremost.

[1:09:23] And finally, I would like you to look to your commitment and the commitment that you have not just to the people in this room, but to the 120,000 people that stand outside of it.

[1:09:33] The people who directly rely on the type of culture that these types of areas bring, who are finding themselves just like me, somebody who was able to find a new life,

[1:09:43] who's able to find a sense of community, who's able to find a place where they wanted to be,

[1:09:49] where they wanted to grow, where they wanted to say, where they wanted to give back into the community

[1:09:53] and to give more personal investment into these places. This doesn't come just because I so happened.

[1:10:00] That was one of the first places that I went to and made a couple of friends and thought, wow, maybe I can find people like me.

[1:10:06] It's because as a music lover, I was able to go and frequent to the vinyls in Tredome and attend their life concerts and see just how much vitality there was.

[1:10:15] And see how much love other people had for the city and for the spaces that are found in this city. And I was able to think, man, this could actually be just a wonderful place to live, but you don't get that with simple housing developments.

[1:10:29] You don't get that with just looking at financial amounts and looking at money amounts that are going in and out of people's pockets.

[1:10:36] You look at that by hearing your constituents, by listening to the voices that have already spoken here now and that will continue to speak at well after I'm done

[1:10:44] who are imploring you the same thing. Don't give up on this city. Don't give up on the things that give it life that make it a place that's worth living in

[1:10:52] and please because of that, I implore you, uphold the precedent, uphold the denial for the certificate

[1:10:59] of appropriateness. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Canto. Next, we have Gabriel Mesparen.

[1:11:14] Good evening, Council. My name is Gabriel McSparen. I am 23 years old and approximately one year

[1:11:20] in two months ago. I moved from Su City, Iowa, to Rochester, after graduating with honors and

[1:11:25] just associates of applied sciences degree and engineering. Currently I work in broad cast

[1:11:30] engineering, but over the past year I have cultivated a range of experiences and fields

[1:11:34] related to mechanical engineering, IT administration and construction. I'm all by all means

[1:11:40] what is now considered a high skill worker if there is such a thing. I bring all of this up to

[1:11:45] illustrate one of the biggest problems that Iowa is currently facing economically at the moment

[1:11:49] and that is the continued phenomenon of young skilled workers moving elsewhere after graduating

[1:11:55] not only for better career opportunities, but also in search of more vibrant culture and a stronger

[1:12:00] sense of community within the cities that they live in. Iowa is currently being

[1:12:05] blood dry by private contracting and luxury housing firms who decimate small businesses in order

[1:12:09] to build luxury apartments and student housing that no one in the state can even afford.

[1:12:15] And personally, I see what's happening between Iowa and Minnesota mirrored on a smaller scale

[1:12:20] between Rochester and the Twin Cities.

[1:12:23] I myself and I know I'm not alone in this have already started to consider moving due to what

[1:12:28] I had to perceive to be this city's hostility and carelessness towards the vibrant culture

[1:12:34] oriented small businesses that serve this community.

[1:12:38] The most recent example of this hostility and carelessness being the completely unnecessarily

[1:12:43] unnecessary and utterly avoidable closure of T.S. beer project on 2nd Street Southwest.

[1:12:48] The continued reconstruction and renovation of every single small business and building space and town in order to create student housing and luxury apartments is not only economically short-sighted.

[1:13:00] It continues to solidify Rochester as a simple tourist destination for those from out of state who only wish to visit the city to seek medical care at the Mayo Clinic.

[1:13:10] Well, this practice may be may bring negligible profits for the companies leasing these properties in the short term.

[1:13:18] In the long term, it will only cause younger skilled workers such as myself to want to look elsewhere for community or aunts and culture and work opportunities.

[1:13:27] If this renovation is approved, it not only sets a dangerous precedent for the disregard of small businesses in Rochester and the communities that they build.

[1:13:35] But it also sends a message to younger educated people that the communities and cultures that are important to them are not important and do not matter to this council.

[1:13:47] I'm just one example of someone who will look elsewhere for community and work opportunities if this practice of kicking out vibrant small businesses continues.

[1:13:54] Now, taking all of that into consideration, I humbly ask that this council deny the appeal for item G.1, and I'll uphold the decision of the historic preservation commission to deny this certificate of appropriate appropriateness for an addition to the project at 309-317 Broadway Avenue.

[1:14:14] Please allow these businesses to keep their respective building spaces so that they can continue to maintain, grow and nurture the communities and cultures that contribute to the action.

[1:14:24] economic growth that the city needs to maintain in order to keep the people who want to live here living here. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Tyler.

[1:14:37] Hey everyone.

[1:14:40] This is a pleasure having the chance to be in front of you all and usually stuck in the back recording this so I appreciate your time tonight.

[1:14:48] I'm here as a stakeholder in a downtown business and I'll just put the last

[1:14:53] what three years now dragging my family.

[1:15:00] Finally, from Ohio to Tucson all over the country, everywhere across the Midwest, looking for unique businesses, shops, art supply stores, and curating ideas that we could bring back drops or something that we maybe didn't have here.

[1:15:17] And along the way, without even trying, we always ended up in these small towns, historic districts, time and time again.

[1:15:27] And that color and vibrancy was always so important and any time a day that we might have gotten there,

[1:15:34] there was always something going on.

[1:15:37] People walking around, shops, bustling, et cetera, et cetera.

[1:15:43] And we definitely wanted to bring that back in some way here.

[1:15:47] And we saw that it worked everywhere else.

[1:15:49] If you've ever had a chance to be in downtown Hastings near the bridge or in park rapids,

[1:15:56] It's always an epicenter, it's a diamond, it's a gem, it's magnet, it attracts people who are either passing through town or on their way elsewhere.

[1:16:06] I brought this book with me, because my small sliver part of our business downtown was to curate a gift shop, something that was reminiscent of some of the old vintage junk you might find as a tourist in an old gift shop.

[1:16:21] And I put together a museum of Minnesota history, Rochester, history's on one shelf.

[1:16:29] We got a huge case of red all stuff to celebrate entrepreneurship on Broadway.

[1:16:34] And we've had nearly a thousand people sign in from Paris, Florida, New York, California,

[1:16:41] Texas, everywhere.

[1:16:42] And what's amazing about this is that it's always a conversation starter.

[1:16:47] And we get people towards the end of the line in the block late evening on a Saturday, a lot

[1:16:53] of things were closed, they've had their meal, and they're having the worst time of their

[1:17:00] life visiting mail and going through that experience.

[1:17:04] And we're kind of at the block for retail, and they always stop in.

[1:17:08] And we always say, we use the word linger, because they linger because they want a

[1:17:13] conversation that doesn't remind them of anything else going on in their lives at the moment.

[1:17:18] And there's nothing else that can really replace that experience.

[1:17:22] And I know that businesses come and businesses go.

[1:17:26] And I don't understand why we aren't using this moment in time to save this little gem that

[1:17:33] we have downtown's magnet that does attract people when they leave Mayo's ecosystem.

[1:17:39] them, they always end up down there, just wandering around, even without a mission.

[1:17:44] And I hope we can use this moment here to really continue a conversation about why subsidizing

[1:17:52] a perfect little section of what's left, why subsidizing something like that would be

[1:17:58] bad to keep it affordable for small businesses.

[1:18:02] This new building is gray, and glass, and white, it's dead color, and people don't notice

[1:18:10] it, they don't see it in the same way, and I just hope that you'll vote in favor of

[1:18:19] this appeal tonight, not based on maybe your friendships or any personal text you might

[1:18:25] received or the idea that we, this can't be supported and maintained and sustained in any

[1:18:34] which way. So I appreciate your time tonight and thank you.

[1:18:39] Okay, next. Next we have Lea B.

[1:18:47] We actually met at 317 South Broadway and our first kiss was in the cove where these buildings might

[1:18:55] built. Well, I hope you all are well. Good to see your faces again. I feel fortunate to be

[1:19:01] a steward of a property on this block. My mom and I, she's here too. My mom and I were just

[1:19:08] talking about the golden hour downtown and if you haven't experienced it, I highly recommend

[1:19:14] an hour or so before the sun begins to set, it cuts through the top of our buildings. It bounces

[1:19:20] off the street across the street and then that sunshine comes right into our windows in the

[1:19:26] west and for like 15 to 20 minutes the whole room is golden and it feels like magic and it's

[1:19:33] a good reminder of one of the many reasons that we're in that exact location. My understanding is that

[1:19:39] this proposal violates multiple preservation guidelines and I trust that you've all read over these

[1:19:45] standards as we all have. I trust the judgment of the HPC members, the experts, and I sincerely

[1:19:55] hope you do as well. They are an unbiased organization.

[1:20:00] A pointed by the mayor and this council. The guidelines presented are not just downtown specific, as you know. These guidelines are set for all across our country. The decision that you make tonight can set a precedent for what rules will be broken all across our city. And as the third largest city in Minnesota, it can really set a precedent for our state. Tonight, you're hearing other voices, perspectives, and

[1:20:29] my request is that you all listen and decide with a sound mind. My ask is that you deny

[1:20:37] this appeal for a modern tower and the financial status is not what you're voting on this evening

[1:20:44] and landlord set the rent cost for their tenants. I like to think that the people who inhabited

[1:20:52] these buildings a hundred years ago also experience that golden sunshine and I hope that future

[1:20:59] done our Asians after I'm gone. Will as well. Thank you for listening to your communities.

[1:21:05] Appreciate all of you. Thank you. Next we have Barry Scholnick.

[1:21:18] My name is Barry Scholnick. I know

[1:21:21] you will know me and this is probably one of the most difficult. Mr. Scholnick, if you can get closer to

[1:21:26] the microphone there, just there. We can bring it down if you want. There we go. Okay. Yeah.

[1:21:32] My name is Barry Scholnick. You will know me. This is one of the most difficult species I've had.

[1:21:37] because I care so much about it and I was with the original group at Mark Builder back that

[1:21:44] helped design the the HPC and and and that the whole district and I really don't want to

[1:21:51] see it ruined. I was so concerned about it and what the what the staff the city staff was

[1:21:57] proposing that I called ship-o and spoke to Michael Cooper was probably recognized as one of the most

[1:22:06] of standing authorities for preservation and for the standards.

[1:22:11] And he looked at it and he said, this can't be.

[1:22:13] This no way does this qualify as meeting the standards.

[1:22:18] It doesn't.

[1:22:19] And he said, and I can quote him on it.

[1:22:21] And I've asked other people to call him Ben Zastro, also spoke to him.

[1:22:26] And I think Ben already sent you some kind of an email about it.

[1:22:30] And it's very clear that the HPC is not violating the standards.

[1:22:35] Cooper is one of the national experts in it and he said that HPC was right on the money and

[1:22:42] believes in it totally so it's not like all the experts are against HPC and HPC are your legal

[1:22:49] experts in a sense they're the ones who the mayor and the other person pointed out the mayor

[1:22:55] and the city council approved as their legal representatives and the criteria are the

[1:23:01] the most important things. And by the way, one of the

[1:23:07] prior speakers made a mistake, you know, UMR is not behind

[1:23:10] House proposal. I check with the Chancellor's office there.

[1:23:14] And they specifically said they have nothing to do with

[1:23:16] House proposal whatsoever. They didn't ask for it, and they're

[1:23:19] not working with them on it. So they have nothing to do with it.

[1:23:22] There are other students who could be involved with, but it's not

[1:23:25] UMR students, at least not anywhere now, maybe someday, but not

[1:23:30] now, so anyone who thinks that is wrong, so they shouldn't be criticized for it, but they

[1:23:35] will still not behind it whatsoever.

[1:23:38] The other thing that you should know is that within the districts, there are things called

[1:23:43] non-contributing buildings and contributing buildings.

[1:23:47] The contributing buildings are the ones that are worthy of landmarking, and the buildings

[1:23:52] on the block are all contributing buildings.

[1:23:55] The building that how owns on the network is involved with on the next block, that's

[1:24:00] non-contributing.

[1:24:01] So yes, it looks like that building, but as Shippo will tell you, when you put a non-contributing

[1:24:06] addition on top of a contributing building, you ruin the district because you don't want

[1:24:13] to include non-participating non-contributing objects and large things on top of your landmarks.

[1:24:22] That's suicide in terms of keeping a landmark district.

[1:24:26] If there's issues about how much money, yes, we need to have some look at the economics of the district, and they should be a study session on that, and we should talk about that, and I fully agree with that.

[1:24:39] But as far as saying that these don't meet the standards, I mean the HPC felt that it met the standards.

[1:24:46] and, again, ship of fields that meet the standards and other states of historical preservation

[1:24:50] office.

[1:24:51] So they don't agree with Molly and, you know, and, and, and I mean, so there are differences

[1:24:57] of opinion there, but, but it's very clear.

[1:25:00] That you only have to miss one standard. You don't have to have a majority. Even one standard, instead of nine, it's very clear that this is a bulky object, no much bigger and out of sync with the rest of the objects, and it wouldn't be a contributing a part of the district. So it's a non-contributing. You don't want to increase non-participating bulk. And a house that he wants is to set a precedent for the rest of Iraqians. But yeah, he's right.

[1:25:30] drive the district by, you don't think that other developers are going to come along and try

[1:25:35] to build more on top of the district.

[1:25:37] Yeah, those are the stride.

[1:25:38] Is that what you want and go right ahead?

[1:25:40] I suggest what you do is have the meeting approve the HPC thing, and I don't change, don't

[1:25:48] approve house proposal, but what you should do is try to sort of meet a amongst each other

[1:25:54] to try to come up with ways of economically improving the buildings downtown and how to get

[1:26:00] incentives, tax evadements and stuff like that. That's what you should be doing in my opinion.

[1:26:05] Please, please don't don't deny the HPC decision and stick with that. Thank you, Mr. Colt.

[1:26:13] Next we have Vanna Passy.

[1:26:25] My name is Vanna.

[1:26:27] I've been here.

[1:26:29] Okay.

[1:26:30] Thank you.

[1:26:31] I was here the last.

[1:26:33] You can move it down a little bit.

[1:26:35] There we go.

[1:26:35] Just like that.

[1:26:37] There we go.

[1:26:38] Perfect.

[1:26:38] All right.

[1:26:39] Okay.

[1:26:40] My name is Vanna.

[1:26:41] I've been here.

[1:26:42] I think the last two meetings that we've talked about this.

[1:26:45] I spoke to you in May of 2025 and sorted my children.

[1:26:50] I work at Art Hezemporia, which currently occupies 319 and 321 and previously we were in 317.

[1:26:59] I have a lot of love for 317.

[1:27:02] I raised my children there.

[1:27:04] My frontal lobe finished developing there, I think.

[1:27:08] And I met a lot of people in our community in there.

[1:27:11] It's apparent I have emotional ties to this space, the block.

[1:27:16] My latest experience.

[1:27:17] I think it was Friday, night, August 7th, I pulled up into the front of all these buildings.

[1:27:24] I think it was about 10 p.m.

[1:27:25] I went to visit Leon Tyler after their shift to my surprise.

[1:27:31] The curb was littered with what looked like teenagers or young adults.

[1:27:35] I can't say for sure.

[1:27:37] I was confused.

[1:27:38] I found out it was because of tree dome and their events.

[1:27:43] As a mother of two basically, 13agers, it's comforting to see a space that is not alcohol-centered for these young people.

[1:27:51] They're off their phones, sitting on the curb, having real-life relationships and experiences.

[1:27:56] Please don't threaten to take moments like this away from all of our kids.

[1:28:00] The modern world seems to view new as better, old, as weak.

[1:28:04] I know that to be untrue.

[1:28:06] new is empty and old is full of stories, perspective is important when we talk about these historic buildings.

[1:28:14] I'm trying to see the perspective from seven stories high. Who does that serve?

[1:28:19] Students and only the students? What about my community that is already here?

[1:28:24] The people that have spoke to you that have called you, that have emailed you?

[1:28:30] It doesn't serve the community that already exists.

[1:28:34] We are the people who spend our time and money in these places.

[1:28:37] We are the people who work there.

[1:28:39] We are the people who interact with the locals and the non-locals and the existing students.

[1:28:46] We know the bizarre quirks on that block.

[1:28:48] We understand the value and the impact on the community and those that are visiting.

[1:28:55] We understand it all more than you could possibly know.

[1:28:57] It's very intimate.

[1:28:58] To insist on not protecting and preserving the historic district is so out of touch, a 7 story building on downtown Broadway is so out of touch.

[1:29:10] I heard the term out of touch wealth just recently and it hasn't left my mind.

[1:29:15] I ask you to trust in this community and the HPC.

[1:29:18] No means no.

[1:29:20] Thank you.

[1:29:21] Thank you.

[1:29:22] Next we have Luna Snater.

[1:29:32] Good evening, my name is Luna and 14 years old, and I have spoken about this not once, not twice, but three times now.

[1:29:40] And I'm here tonight with my family and friends, and I've grown up with the historic district.

[1:29:46] People have spoken about the community that's been built, the story behind these buildings, and the charm these spaces bring to Rochester.

[1:29:55] But nothing seems to stick. I know it's not easy for you to decide what's next for these spaces.

[1:30:00] But please listen to your community. If we continue to gut Rochester of these meaningful places, Rochester will become bland and lifeless, and I truly believe no one here will tonight wants that for a city.

[1:30:12] It is worth taking care of what we already have rather than having to modernize and strip a joy for Rochester. Just imagine yourself traveling to an entirely new city. Ask yourself, is it the dull apartments that make you feel connected or is it the small businesses that make you feel a part of something bigger than yours?

[1:30:30] self. I guess it depends on what you value in life. Thank you for listening. I hope to never

[1:30:35] have to talk to you about this again. Thank you, Miss Nader. Next we have Phoenix Nader.

[1:30:53] Hello again. I'm Phoenix. I'm 12 years old. I'm here to preserve the historic district. You

[1:30:58] probably remember me from the other two times I did this. I don't really know what to say. Building

[1:31:04] 317 isn't just a structure bricks. This is more than half my childhood. I watched them open the building

[1:31:11] 317. I watched them close it, but I'm not going to see it tear down, especially not for over

[1:31:17] price departments that are modernizing historic buildings. Thank you for listening. Thank you.

[1:31:25] Next, we have Alida, Alida Custler.

[1:31:34] Hello council. My name is Alida Custler,

[1:31:36] And I'm here to share my thoughts as a private citizen, not on behalf of any of the board's

[1:31:41] commissions or organizations that I am in association with. That said, I am involved in our

[1:31:46] LGBT QIAS2 plus community, the art community, and I have a deep interest in historical preservation.

[1:31:55] I hope all of you have had an opportunity to watch the HPC meeting from June where this proposal

[1:31:59] was denied because it did not meet six of the ten criteria laid out of the secretary of interior

[1:32:05] standards.

[1:32:08] If the developers had actually listened to the discussion that was had,

[1:32:13] they would have had a clear understanding of why the commission cited these six criteria.

[1:32:17] Here's a summary of the HPC's findings. The removal of one third of the space from the back

[1:32:23] of several buildings and the modernization of the alleyway violates standards one, two, five,

[1:32:29] six, and ten, and the fact that it significantly alters the spaces of these buildings and the

[1:32:35] buildings with the rest of the district and city. This includes but is not limited to the view

[1:32:40] shed of the caler and plumber building from the corner of Broadway and 4th Avenue.

[1:32:45] Standard 10 specifies that if the new edition were to be removed, the historic building would be returned

[1:32:50] to its original state. The removal of one third of the back of several buildings makes that impossible.

[1:32:57] The number of floors being added to this proposal violate standard six as it adds five additional

[1:33:02] levels when the standard limit for historical building this size is two.

[1:33:07] The proposed materials height and size violate standard nine as it makes no effort to be

[1:33:12] compatible with the historical buildings.

[1:33:15] The standards across the country say that it may not duplicate the original style but must

[1:33:20] be compatible in style, materials, colors, and must not overshadow the original building.

[1:33:27] These are national standards that we should abide by.

[1:33:29] These are standards that are applied to the historic district, and when applied,

[1:33:35] encompasses more than just the face of these buildings. The HPC weighed every part of this

[1:33:39] proposal heavily. For the developers to state that they were denied without factual reasoning

[1:33:45] is plainly incorrect. It's staff that failed to give reasoning for the HPC discussion,

[1:33:52] and that's a staff issue, not an HPC issue. To overturn the HPC's expertise is a clear

[1:33:58] service to every citizen in our city and a blatant disregard for the importance of historical

[1:34:03] preservation. Additionally, in reviewing the DEI impact of this, the city failed to account,

[1:34:11] specifically for the LGBTQ community, who would be hit hard by this proposal. Treat on what

[1:34:17] have to move because their space would be turned into a lobby. They are the only mid-sized stage

[1:34:23] for musicians in town. The backslide of threshold arts would be demolished, eliminating their gallery space.

[1:34:30] Both of these businesses frequently highlight women and queer individuals. These businesses

[1:34:35] and cafe steam are also all places where queer events are had and display queer art.

[1:34:42] I am disappointed that this perspective was occlude excluded from the evaluation. I appreciate

[1:34:47] your time and your consideration and I hope you uphold the HPC's decision to deny this proposal.

[1:34:52] Thank you. Next we have Sarah Hutchinson, Hutchinson.

[1:35:04] All right, oh gosh, hey guys, okay. I'm Sarah Hutchison. I live here for 18 years. I moved, I live in the cities now, but I'm here because this kind of sucks.

[1:35:15] I want you guys to think about a time where you felt like you didn't really fit in to the world. Maybe you had a hobby or an interest that just wasn't something you felt like you could pursue, or you felt like you couldn't express yourself in the exact way that you wanted to.

[1:35:30] I hope that if you've ever felt this way, you were at some point provided with, or you

[1:35:35] eventually found a place or a person or a thing that allowed you to express that feeling.

[1:35:42] And I hope that the experience of expressing your true self allowed you to feel more confident

[1:35:47] in the person that you are.

[1:35:49] As a teenager, I was lucky enough to be supported in this exact way, by people who run and

[1:35:54] occupy the very businesses that this appeal threatens.

[1:35:56] these places, Triedome, Kathy, Steam, Art, Heads, Emporium, are run by passionate, creative people

[1:36:02] who have been providing spaces for people like me to explore my passions and my creativity

[1:36:09] and express the thing that makes me different. When I was 14, right, Luna's age, I was given

[1:36:15] the opportunity to perform at the inaugural Rock Chester Music Festival and event aimed at providing

[1:36:21] a stage for young musicians and artists. I was eager and absolutely horrified, getting on a stage

[1:36:26] that felt way too big for me, but that day, fear and all truly changed my life, and it opened

[1:36:32] a door to a version of myself that was itching to get out. This opportunity to share my

[1:36:37] passion with people who cared about me was invaluable, and the community members who supported

[1:36:41] that festival are the same people that are so deeply invested in the artistic heart of Rochester.

[1:36:47] That first festival took place at the Wicked Moose, like on the south side of town. In 2018,

[1:36:52] that building was demolished and they put an apartment building there. On the corner

[1:36:57] first Avenue and Forest Street just down the road from here, there used to be an

[1:37:01] art gallery. When I was a teenager I played my first show with a real band in

[1:37:05] the back of that building. It was New Year's Eve. All of my friends were there. We

[1:37:09] laughed and we danced and we listened to real music performed by real people who

[1:37:13] cared so deeply about the community that was being created. I think of that

[1:37:17] night fondly and without it I wouldn't be the person that I am today. This gallery

[1:37:22] closed, and the building that C4 occupied was eventually torn down to create. You guessed it in

[1:37:28] apartment building. You must understand that creative and cultural institutions are what make

[1:37:33] Rochester special, interesting, and a meaningful place for all of us. I've only been around

[1:37:37] for 26 years, but I've seen so many music venues and community gathering spaces disappear from Rochester.

[1:37:45] Because so many of you only care about making Rochester a big and shiny to people who don't live

[1:37:50] here, but like maybe one day might live here.

[1:37:53] You must understand that this is much bigger than any opportunity for profit.

[1:37:57] Your actions, your choice to put small business owners and their vibrant, interesting

[1:38:01] neighbors needs second, and apartment buildings, road construction, and corporate entities

[1:38:05] need first, needs first, has made you all look really bad.

[1:38:10] On the Destination Medical Center's website, there's an introductory video that provides insight

[1:38:13] to the DMC's vision for Rochester.

[1:38:16] This is a quote from that video.

[1:38:18] Destination Medical Center in Rochester and the Mayo Clinic are working together to transform Rochester into a city that offers hope, health and healing to everybody who comes in.

[1:38:27] This hope and health and hearing that you're healing that you are all aspiring to must not only come in the form of a new hospital building.

[1:38:34] Hope comes from acknowledging and affirming that the work of existing communities is important and a vital part of this town's future.

[1:38:42] Healing comes from giving people a place to gather.

[1:38:45] Newcomers and young people in Rochester need a place to meet, a place to get to know one another,

[1:38:50] they need creative outlets, and they need a place where they can feel a sense of community.

[1:38:54] We all know that no matter what direction you go, your choice will have a real lasting impact on the way that Rochester will look and feel in the future.

[1:39:01] If you want that impact to be that you approve the construction of a bunch of apartment buildings and parking lots and parking garages, then sure, so be it.

[1:39:10] And if this is the case, I hope that when you sit and reflect on your actions many years into the future when there are no cultural, creative, or artistic institutions left because you literally tore them all down, you have fun in your house, all by yourself, no community to engage with, and I hope that you will be willing to take responsibility for it.

[1:39:27] But I know that at your core you were all good and caring people.

[1:39:30] I know that you want the best for Rochester, just like all of us.

[1:39:33] And I have the potential to maintain and support the places that people meet where people laugh and cry and smile and share stories and become closer to one another.

[1:39:43] I hope that you see that the people of Rochester and specifically young people are worthy.

[1:39:50] Of places where they can share their passions and their interests.

[1:39:54] And I hope that you see.

[1:40:00] And that they are deserving of a place where they can be themselves. Thank you.

[1:40:03] Thank you. Next we have Joel Campos.

[1:40:15] Mr. Norton, Kent City Council.

[1:40:20] Hi.

[1:40:22] As a nine year goes in a Rochester. I find myself to love the community and

[1:40:26] pacing it offers, whether it be getting good to do groceries,

[1:40:31] address to meet friends, maybe at a local music show, like Trudeau,

[1:40:35] this is your project, we're even getting coffee at Seem Cafe. I mentioned these because they

[1:40:42] hold a place in my heart due to my own hometown, not upholding upholding to these standards.

[1:40:48] I believe other community members have come to know or just seen around our urging that you

[1:40:53] need to take away this place we call home. After many years many of us finally found that home

[1:40:58] inside a record store that is ran by amazing people. As a musician is difficult to find places that will

[1:41:04] set not just one, but many genres and forms of light to perform for others' life.

[1:41:10] Truedom has been that place for many musicians, and they are greeted with love and

[1:41:14] cheers every time they showcase their talents.

[1:41:17] It sounded to me and many others that this is being considered to be taken away.

[1:41:22] For many, this is all we have since everyone gets a privilege to be a part of the male

[1:41:26] clinic staff or government members within the state of Minnesota.

[1:41:30] As an educator as well, please think of the youth that would be affected by your decisions.

[1:41:35] Not many places here in Rochester are accessible to many of the youth who want the chance to finally be a part of community.

[1:41:41] Treatment offers that more compared to any other program provided by the City of Rochester.

[1:41:48] Please consider preserving the arts and music life here in Rochester to give myself and other community members

[1:41:54] the feeling of grabbing a vinyl record like it was the sixties. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

[1:42:00] Next we have Zo Do Ben. Do Ben.

[1:42:10] Hello. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes. So good evening.

[1:42:14] Mayor Norton and members of the council. I am Zoie Dubin, a researcher and a recent resident of Rochester.

[1:42:21] When I moved here two years ago, the first thing I heard about Rochester was that I will leave.

[1:42:26] I will work here two to three years and then I will realize that I want arts and culture and a space for dancing and music and I will leave.

[1:42:34] I asked my father who grew up here and spent his youth here and then moved out as soon as he possibly could.

[1:42:41] What he used to do as a child and a teenager in Rochester and his answer was a drive to the cities.

[1:42:47] Since moving here though, I don't agree. I've actually found an amazing art community at Art Heads.

[1:42:52] I founded the Monthly Zincene, an art club at Cafe Steam downtown, and I've been recently

[1:42:58] able to throw Rochester's first Zincestival, which was spread across the historic downtown

[1:43:03] including Tridome, which really lovely opened their doors for us to have this beautiful event

[1:43:08] that brought together local artists. With the extensive construction that's been closing down

[1:43:14] all of these local businesses and all of these art spaces, I respectfully ask if the council

[1:43:18] follow the advice of the HPC and preserve historic downtown. Thank you.

[1:43:23] Thank you. Next we have Eric Strangeland.

[1:43:35] Well, thank you for having here. And don't worry,

[1:43:38] everybody adds an art to my last name. Well, um, you know, I only learned about this, uh,

[1:43:44] yeah, I didn't know. Oh, I did. Yeah, I did. That's okay. Thank you. Sorry. It's okay. It was a professional

[1:43:51] conference where my name tag had really arrived. The person was like, I'm so sorry. But anyway,

[1:43:57] but yeah, I learned about this what two days ago. I've been a resident here for seven years

[1:44:03] and in that time, I keep on thinking myself, I should go to a city council meeting, but

[1:44:08] yeah, I guess a family learned about something was like, yeah, I need to go.

[1:44:13] Yeah, I started during the beginning of the presentation, the meeting here, you were shown,

[1:44:17] oh, all the kids, like in summer school, doing all that art stuff. And, you know, you said,

[1:44:21] appreciate the arts and I mean I believe most people here like know the importance of it and it's

[1:44:28] like one of the things where you know every weekend actually the previous person speaking was talking

[1:44:33] about like oh you know told going up the cities stuff like that and you know when I first moved

[1:44:37] here I thought like oh you know Twin Cities are only an hour or a half drive away and I thought it was

[1:44:42] going to be driving them up other all the time but because of the downtown here I it's like well

[1:44:46] I do that. You know, there's plenty of stuff to do here, but, you know, I go downtown a bunch.

[1:44:53] I'm, I go to tree dome. I see a bunch of shows there, and this thing is like, I feel like I'm the old guy in there.

[1:45:01] Because there's like so many kids. There's a bunch of kids. That's where the kids go. One of the way to hear music. I go there. I do a bunch of painting. I paint a lot of people. If you ever go to Kathy's, I've a bunch of little paintings above the bear cooler. But you know, it's like that area, you know, there were people too, speaking to wanting to do some an initiative about, you know, looking into the culture in the art world. It's like that block, that section of buildings, that is where the culture is, that's where the art is.

[1:45:31] And I know that, and I don't know who the people are, who are presenting for the

[1:45:37] Secule.

[1:45:39] You know, I'm sure they're very fine people.

[1:45:41] They live productive life.

[1:45:43] But you know, when they come here, and they talk about wanting to, you know, was it rescue

[1:45:50] or reinvigorator?

[1:45:51] What are their word rehabilitate?

[1:45:53] That's right.

[1:45:54] They want to rehabilitate 309, and they keep on calling it 309.

[1:45:59] Well, through a nine, has business that has a name in it.

[1:46:03] It's a tree dump, which I mean,

[1:46:05] they show the slide or it was showing like,

[1:46:08] oh, you know, the people have covered this, right?

[1:46:10] There's almost like a wave of the hand.

[1:46:13] And, you know, I know in their presentation too,

[1:46:15] they were talking about like,

[1:46:17] oh, this construction's gonna be done in a manner

[1:46:19] that's not gonna be disruptive.

[1:46:21] And it's like, well, just take our word for it.

[1:46:24] I, and as many people have said before,

[1:46:26] that this is kind of in the wake of thesis, which is another kind of smaller music venue

[1:46:31] shutting down. I really don't think it would be good to be overturning the denial to letting

[1:46:42] the appeal go through. And I believe in my heart of hearts, I think all of you value the arts

[1:46:50] and culture, and I'm just, again, coming here, short notice, this is supposed to be the first

[1:46:56] tape of my vacation, and I just came here because I really believe that all of you, all of you

[1:47:04] have the best intentions of your heart, and I want to speak to that, and thank you for having

[1:47:09] having us here. And, again, one of the things they said is all of the small business owners

[1:47:14] support this, well, where are all the small business owners that are supporting this today?

[1:47:19] I mean, I've heard multiple small business owners, but none of them are in favor of this.

[1:47:25] Anyway, thank you.

[1:47:26] Thank you, Mr. Stanglin.

[1:47:29] Next we have Nick Duncanson.

[1:47:40] Hello.

[1:47:41] Plenty of people before me, and I'm sure after me I'm going to speak on this better than I am,

[1:47:46] but I'm here because I thought this is very important.

[1:47:48] This is my first city council meeting I've ever been to.

[1:47:52] I was I found it really funny that there were some concert announcements included in the PowerPoint before this this meeting so I can see that everyone here knows how how important local music and culture is and I think that denying this this appeal is is the way to hold on to that music and that culture I understand the need for housing but this is not the way to go about it building apartments that are for students isn't a good idea if those students will have absolutely nothing to do when the culture of Broadway dies.

[1:48:21] they'll go downstairs and they'll be nothing there for them to do. I'm sure

[1:48:26] you know the people who are for this are going to say that these businesses are going to

[1:48:30] survive through this and be fine but but I don't think that's going to be the case we've seen

[1:48:34] that with thesis closing. Rochester is not a city in the rest belt that needs revitalizing its

[1:48:41] vitality is already here. We don't need to add on to these historic buildings if the life blood

[1:48:48] this city is already in them. I'm from St. Cloud. I've only lived here a year. Every time I tell

[1:48:55] someone I'm from St. Cloud, they kind of go, oh, sorry. St. Cloud wishes they had our scene and I want

[1:49:01] to keep ours. They had to build a millions of dollars ampitheter to build up a scene of music and

[1:49:07] culture. We don't need to spend millions to build that. We already have a scene that we should be

[1:49:12] fostering, not suffocating. Watching Thesis go has been disheartening and I don't want that to keep

[1:49:17] happening to these great places.

[1:49:19] If these businesses are forced to shut down, which we have seen happen, then I fear the culture,

[1:49:23] I fear for the culture and identity of Rochester.

[1:49:26] If the scene cafe becomes Starbucks, Typop becomes an Applebee's, and Tree Dome becomes

[1:49:30] an insurance office, how excited will those living here be to go to Broadway?

[1:49:35] The facades are not what is important.

[1:49:38] I don't want to live in a town that looks like it has culture.

[1:49:41] I want to live in a town that actually has the culture.

[1:49:45] I'm at all of my new friends here since moving your last year in this block, essentially.

[1:49:50] And I hope that many more friendships can be made here as well. Please deny this appeal.

[1:49:55] Thank you. Next, next we have Ethan Slough Slough.

[1:50:03] I'm sorry. I'm sorry

[1:50:08] for that.

[1:50:12] Over a year ago, I and many others came to speak at City Council as hellhenders

[1:50:18] enshrined for the third time to convert historical buildings into student housing. Tens of

[1:50:23] Rochester residents came and spoke long to the evening about how important it is for Rochester to

[1:50:28] deserve these historical buildings and how destroying them not only deals major blows

[1:50:34] to the art and music community here in Rochester by kicking their current tenants out,

[1:50:39] but also destroys parts of Rochester's history. And over a year later, we are back again

[1:50:44] as how Henderson tries to appeal the decision made by the city council. It concerns me that the

[1:50:51] Department of Community Development is recommending that city council reversed the appeal.

[1:50:55] There are direct violations of the standards of rehabilitation it says this project is adhering to, relevant sections such as Section 1.

[1:51:04] A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, et cetera.

[1:51:14] Section 9, new additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property.

[1:51:26] And Section 10, new additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

[1:51:41] This project requests that one building is completely destroyed in order to complete a lobby area for the student housing, leaving nothing but its facade.

[1:51:51] Furthermore, it builds up against the rooftops of Kathy's and Tap House and destroys multiple historic buildings all for the sake of 35 apartments.

[1:52:00] Not only are these drastic changes, but they are not changes that would be easily reversed.

[1:52:05] Kevin Lund pointed out in 2023 during the second hearing about this that two of the building's

[1:52:10] effective in this project were used as a community space following a tornado in 1883 with

[1:52:17] Dr. W. W. Mayo and Sister Mary Alfred Prisent, meaning there are direct ties to Mayo's history.

[1:52:25] We need to keep these buildings. The current residents of the buildings affected by this

[1:52:30] project are thriving businesses that serve the younger members of this community.

[1:52:35] With the recent announcement of these sphere projects closing, Treadome is one of the only

[1:52:41] places for maintenance and Rochester that does live music regularly, and is hosted local

[1:52:46] artists, musicians from out of state, and even some musicians from overseas.

[1:52:51] Dressual arts own has allowed many Minnesota artists the opportunity for more people to

[1:52:56] and purchase their art, and they normally would buy themselves.

[1:52:59] Cafe Steam has become a major place for many people to hang out with friends and relats

[1:53:04] and study, and a time where third spaces are being attached more and more nationwide as

[1:53:09] shown here in this very meeting.

[1:53:11] This building project greatly impacts the music and our communities who will ironically probably

[1:53:16] be living in some of these proposed apartments.

[1:53:18] It also sets dangerous precedent where any historic building can be altered or destroyed

[1:53:23] for future projects.

[1:53:24] This only benefits Hal Henderson who allegedly resorted the practices such as predatory rent increases when some of these business owners spoke out last year raising rent by up to a thousand dollars and resulting in some of them not one to come here tonight out of fear of further retaliation.

[1:53:43] And while we're at it, how will this construction affect the 317?

[1:53:47] A building currently housed by Soloflo, a soon to open wellness spa that, according to its blog on its website, is housed by Hal Henderson's son, Ryan Henderson.

[1:53:59] Will that be altered at all, or will they have be conveniently untouched?

[1:54:05] In 2023, during his second attempt at demolishing these buildings, he cited difficulties in the upkeep.

[1:54:11] If a cost so much should do so, why did he spend money doing the upkeep on solar flow?

[1:54:17] Clearly, there's plenty of money for upkeep if he's putting in the updates needed to accommodate

[1:54:22] sauna's, cryotherapy, light therapy, et cetera for his son's business. Why not spread the wealth

[1:54:28] instead of intentionally letting these buildings rot? City Council, you have denied this three times

[1:54:34] and it's time to do it a fourth. What message will you send to your citizens tonight?

[1:54:40] But you care about the arts and the history of Rochester or that you care about the arts and history of Rochester

[1:54:47] only until something more commercially and economically valuable becomes available to replace it.

[1:54:54] Whatever message you send I ask that everybody here remember in the future.

[1:54:59] Thank you.

[1:55:00] Next we have E.L.I. French.

[1:55:15] Hi, my name is E.L.I. French. I've lived in Rochester, my whole life. I actually grew up down the road from the Dorothy Day House.

[1:55:26] I watched downtown grow, but beforehand there wasn't much to do here. I remember the most fun I had was going to the Apache Mall and trying to bug the security officers.

[1:55:39] see how quickly we could get kicked out.

[1:55:45] After we would just walk around downtown and kind of snake through the alleyways and try to avoid anyone that we didn't want see in us.

[1:55:56] It's not like that anymore.

[1:55:58] I get to go down there and I get to hold my head high.

[1:56:01] I get to hold my chest out.

[1:56:03] And I get to walk wherever I feel like I need to to feel love and support it.

[1:56:09] Being a part of the career community here is I feel like my silence has enough on that

[1:56:18] It's gotten better significantly, but it's still it still tears us apart regularly

[1:56:27] I also currently live down the road from thesis. I see it every day

[1:56:31] I drive past it every single day. I am trapped in my neighborhood. I have one way out

[1:56:37] I can take a right and go the completely opposite direction towards fire in or I can take a left and

[1:56:42] maybe make it downtown or to my job on time, watching it suffocate has been disheartening, heart

[1:56:51] breaking, and it scares me, because for the first time I want to stay in Rochester. For the

[1:56:57] first time I don't want to run away, and for the first time I want to fight for this place,

[1:57:02] I want to fight for the community that I've been that I've seen built, and I hope that you guys

[1:57:10] make the right decision to deny this and to protect the community that we have built and that we

[1:57:16] have fought for because we do deserve it as well. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Veronica Starfall.

[1:57:36] We met. I think it was like what six months ago. Same thing over again. Why are we here again? Honestly.

[1:57:44] Anyways,

[1:57:47] my question for them, do they know how many vacancies we currently have?

[1:57:51] What the rent prices are like for these vacant buildings?

[1:57:54] There is a lot, literally right beside where they want to build that they could build

[1:58:00] on instead.

[1:58:02] Why are we trying to currently destroy perfectly good businesses that bring in culture, tourism,

[1:58:10] everything like that. Why are we currently trying to destroy that? Rather than build up on it,

[1:58:19] bring, if we, I'm very energetic right now.

[1:58:27] The whole reason I decided to stay in Rochester

[1:58:30] is because of this historical district. I found a place I could be myself to enjoy the tea that

[1:58:37] get there, the music, the venues I've been to, the art that I see. It has given me a place

[1:58:45] to stay, and if we continue to destroy our local businesses for the sake of the students or even

[1:58:54] the doctors, are they going to want to say, because they won't have anything to do, because I'm

[1:59:00] think about leaving myself, because there's nothing to do here, because it's being choked over

[1:59:06] and over again. And it saddens me, because I love this city. I have been here three here,

[1:59:12] three years, and I want to stay. But if there is nothing to do here, why would I?

[1:59:23] We have,

[1:59:23] I have met some people, I would consider my best friends at thesis, but I can no longer go there,

[1:59:30] because it's been choked. I can't go and enjoy the music that I really enjoyed there. The last

[1:59:38] punktoberfest, which is a yearly thing thesis held. It would have hours of music and I have only

[1:59:50] gotten to go to one. But now I won't, I won't get to go to any more after that.

[1:59:59] Another question is

[2:00:00] Where would the businesses go? Do we just abandon the local businesses for student housing?

[2:00:07] Do we not help them subsidize them to go somewhere else if we're going to kick them out of

[2:00:13] their basically rightful place to be?

[2:00:25] Do you have a main question? Why are we here again? This

[2:00:29] is the fourth time. Why are we even considering listening to a person who does not know how to

[2:00:35] taking note for an answer, over and over again,

[2:00:39] the fourth time at this point.

[2:00:41] Why can't we, why can't, you just not accept no?

[2:00:46] And I feel it's prime real estate.

[2:00:48] You can make lots of money there.

[2:00:52] Other than that, I do hope you stick to the decision

[2:00:56] that has been made by the HPC.

[2:00:59] And I hope y'all enjoy your local business this more.

[2:01:03] Thank you. Next we have B.J. Gaines dead birds.

[2:01:18] My folks, thank you for holding this today and for listening to your constituents,

[2:01:24] into our emotions.

[2:01:26] And I hope you felt them as I felt them.

[2:01:29] Sitting in the back row, listening to my friends and friends of my friends who I've never seen,

[2:01:34] but can tell that I've met them one time that has show it thesis,

[2:01:38] or a tree dome, or maybe one of them taught me how to sell at art heads.

[2:01:44] And hearing the emotion in our voices, as we stand here and shake and plead,

[2:01:49] for our businesses to stay alive.

[2:01:52] I heard about the closing of thesis two weeks ago,

[2:01:58] and my coworker told me that, and I had to take a 30 minute break from work to mourn,

[2:02:04] which might sound very dramatic.

[2:02:06] I can't imagine what it would do to all of our youth today to lose multiple of these businesses at once.

[2:02:14] These places where we get to go to enjoy art and culture and get to know more people and love more people and find new friendships.

[2:02:23] It's been a truly wonderful place to be.

[2:02:28] I feel that we have two emotions in this room and one of them is love for this city,

[2:02:33] for Rochester, for wanting to make it a better place,

[2:02:36] for wanting to keep the things that make it unique

[2:02:39] and special and make it reminiscent of the city

[2:02:42] that parents grew up in, grandparents grew up

[2:02:44] and your children will grow up in.

[2:02:47] And then I feel there is one of contempt

[2:02:50] from those people in the back over there

[2:02:53] who could not bother to be here for the pledge of allegiance

[2:02:56] who could not bother to be here for the entirety

[2:02:59] of our speeches, who could not bother

[2:03:01] To even listen to us with the shred of emotion or kindness who will smile and contempt at you as you turn to look at them whenever something damning is said

[2:03:13] They do not care for us. They do not care for you. They do not care for your decisions

[2:03:18] They do not care for the people you appointed causing calling them quasi governmental

[2:03:23] They are real people that you appointed. They made a decision

[2:03:27] These people cannot accept no for an answer, and I feel it is because they've had too much money to have had no for an answer too many times in their lives.

[2:03:37] We all know what it's like to have no for an answer, and that's why we're here today, because we care about this,

[2:03:43] and we really, really want you to make the decision that prioritizes the children, the teenagers that will bump up into you as they're enjoying the music completely.

[2:03:52] I'll go home for you just living lives when your seniors will come and teach new people how

[2:04:00] to men they're clothing in art heads when you get to have a nice coffee and meet new people

[2:04:06] from out of state who are visiting the Mayo Clinic who just want to have a conversation with a

[2:04:10] real person. People who are studying students in the cafe they'll certainly be there. I met some

[2:04:17] them today. It's so important to have these businesses. It's so important to have local businesses

[2:04:24] and places where fathers can take their daughters to listen to music together and places

[2:04:29] where people can make these memories. These are all real things that I've experienced. I've

[2:04:33] only lived here for a year and I care so much about it. I really beg you to uphold the decision

[2:04:39] that the historical preservation committee has made. And to please listen to those experts that

[2:04:44] everyone around me, everyone who is spoken here today has brought up.

[2:04:50] They know what they're talking about.

[2:04:52] They care, like you care.

[2:04:54] That's why you work here.

[2:04:57] Thank you.

[2:04:59] Thank you.

[2:05:00] Next, we have Connor Johnson.

[2:05:13] Hello Mayor Norton and members of the City Council. I'm here to speak with you on a personal level asking you to reject the G1.1 appeal and project the small downtown businesses.

[2:05:25] I am a student at Gustavocetalphus College, I am a chemistry major, and I wish I live in

[2:05:33] Manorville, which is a great historical town with an amazing community, and that community

[2:05:41] is highlighted by the new Tuesdays in the park music concert series, which I just want to

[2:05:55] I'm not feeling very inclined to because I am seeing how these small businesses are being treated.

[2:06:02] I started going to treat them a couple of years ago and I met some of my closest friends there.

[2:06:08] I go there with my closest friends.

[2:06:10] I've met so many amazing people there and it's going to curse down crazy to say,

[2:06:16] I've heard people that I know, even say that some of the best nights of their lives have been at a tree dome show.

[2:06:22] I see students over at Café Steam from UMR and I just think I believe that the soul of a city is in its small businesses and it's arts and I'm also a musician, so it hits hard when I see the music scene and the arts scene being hit by

[2:06:46] in by profits, basically. I love mail. I think it is a great hospital, obviously. But

[2:06:57] the heart of the city, the heart of any city, isn't its arts, it's small businesses.

[2:07:02] When I go to college and I tell people that I'm from around Rochester, they say, oh yeah,

[2:07:07] that's the place with mail in it. And that's great that we're known for such a great thing.

[2:07:11] However, I always tell them about tree dome and I tell them about cafe esteem and I talk about my experiences there

[2:07:19] And I tell them hey, you should come around and come to a show sometime. That would be awesome

[2:07:23] because I just I love it so much and I love Rochester's the city. I want it to be

[2:07:30] when I go and tell people about Rochester at my college. I want to be able to be proud of Rochester and I want to be able to tell them

[2:07:39] that I don't want Rochester to be known as just the Mayo City.

[2:07:44] I want it to be known as a place that supports small businesses, supports the arts.

[2:07:49] And I don't want us to be known for a place that is aggressive towards the arts and

[2:07:53] pushes it out for money.

[2:07:55] One final thing I want to add is that I do have friends at UMR and UMR is a great school.

[2:08:03] They talk about great the school is but I've also heard complaints that there's not much to do.

[2:08:06] And we have to realize that UMR students are also part of our community and community members deserve

[2:08:14] to have places where they can gather, they can make connections, treat them as also a great place for people who are under 21.

[2:08:23] And I think that we just deserve as a community to have these small town businesses and I think that these apartment developments could be we could find an alternative solution because housing is important.

[2:08:36] But I think community is much more important for a city. Thank you. Thank you.

[2:08:42] Next we have gauge send and send in.

[2:08:54] Hello, I am gauge send and I am asking you please to not go through with this appeal.

[2:09:02] I have attended treatment for many years, just like Connor has and many other people have here too.

[2:09:09] And I have seen amazing things, some of the best conversations.

[2:09:15] It's a cultural center.

[2:09:17] It's a place where art is freely shared and expressed.

[2:09:23] And I can't imagine Rochester without it.

[2:09:28] Because for many years growing up around here,

[2:09:30] I didn't even know what to do in Rochester.

[2:09:34] There's, I don't know, go to Walmart and walk around,

[2:09:36] not by anything leave. That was one thing and then I found true dome and I found a place where

[2:09:42] I felt important. I felt the importance of the city more than just mayo and the money.

[2:09:52] I've seen many bands formed. My sister is in a band who formed through

[2:10:00] Through treedome and gained a platform because of it. And I can't imagine what she'd be doing without treedome.

[2:10:10] I've been to many other places also with the music scene. I go up to many levels all the time to experience it.

[2:10:18] But it is nowhere near as special as what we have in Rochester. I can go to treedome and I can recognize everyone there. I can talk to them about anything.

[2:10:29] where other places that's not quite the same.

[2:10:36] And I feel like we need to protect this.

[2:10:37] We need to protect the people who have found a community

[2:10:40] and safety within Tridome and Art Heismporium and Cafes team.

[2:10:45] I really implore you.

[2:10:48] Please do not go through with this appeal.

[2:10:51] Thank you.

[2:10:52] Next we have Brian Dean.

[2:11:00] Good evening, Mayor and City Council members.

[2:11:02] I'm Brian. I live in Ward 6. It's great that Rochester is a growing city and improving infrastructure

[2:11:10] and building new housing is doubtless and necessary part of that growth. Every time a new

[2:11:15] crane goes up in the city, it should not leave a wake of destruction. Thesis beer plans on closing

[2:11:22] its doors by the end of the year, citing a 50% drop in business since the second street construction

[2:11:27] begin. Red cow and other second street businesses have also reported significant losses and

[2:11:35] shop owners along the corridor. Point two lost parking and blocked sidewalks as customers simply

[2:11:42] can't visit the area. We're watching the same story play out twice. Construction has already cost us

[2:11:49] now a redevelopment decision could cost us 300 block of Broadway as well. These are

[2:11:57] businesses that actually make downtown worth visiting. When I go downtown it's to

[2:12:02] buy a record at Tridom, grab coffee at Café Steam, find a book at Diatom, purchase or

[2:12:10] view some art at Thresholds, or make some art at Art Heds. downtown Rochester is

[2:12:17] starting to feel like it goes down and this vote decides whether we lose one more block of it.

[2:12:23] I'm asking the City Council to deny the appeal and uphold the Heritage Preservation Commission's decision.

[2:12:29] Rochester doesn't have to choose between growth of downtown, of a downtown worth visiting,

[2:12:34] but tonight's vote is exactly that kind of choice, and I urge you to choose the latter. Thank you.

[2:12:41] Thank you. Next, we have Jean Procat.

[2:12:48] Good evening. Thank you for listening to all of us. It's really important and I'm grateful.

[2:12:53] I'm Jean Procat. I am Rochester's poet laureate. I was appointed by the city in 2024 by many of you on this panel.

[2:13:01] As a representative of our arts community, I find it vital that I offer my insight to the appeal.

[2:13:09] Let's see, so I'm here talking as the poet laureate but also as a public school teacher.

[2:13:16] The argument that the facades will be preserved and that most street-level businesses will remain after construction is in bad faith.

[2:13:24] The word preserved means many things. Here preserved means buildings and social architecture.

[2:13:30] The word investment also works too fold and I encourage investment and people over profit.

[2:13:38] In August 2024, I was in Washington, DC, representing Rochester among 20 poets laureate from the United States.

[2:13:47] Introducing Rochester was an interesting task to those poets laureate who only know us as home of Mayo Clinic.

[2:13:53] When I spoke about our arts scene, I was discussing the exact businesses on Broadway that would be impacted if not closed because of this appeal to the decision.

[2:14:06] These businesses keep people in our city as you've heard tonight.

[2:14:10] They're where we gather to feel safe. They where are where we can express individuality.

[2:14:16] They are open to our minority populations when they otherwise have experienced the pressure directly in Rochester.

[2:14:22] they served our immigrant community during Operation Metro Surge, and they have literally

[2:14:28] literally saved lives. Sacrificing these businesses would be losing what myself and

[2:14:34] our poets and musicians and artists and many of my students fight to prove. Arts are what

[2:14:40] pull people together in times of celebration and vulnerability. Even temporarily losing this

[2:14:46] camaraderie does not make our city, not only make our city less interesting, it makes us

[2:14:51] safe. It makes us lonely. It's a stay home. It tells us that we don't matter.

[2:14:58] Disappeal operates under...

[2:15:00] Order the guys that upward development will make Rochester's downtown more robust. I reject

[2:15:05] this premise, especially from a developer who knows that business proximity and shared patrons

[2:15:11] are necessary for success. I never visit steam without walking through diatom, art heads, threshold,

[2:15:17] and tree dome. Even a temporary closure of Broadway will suck the breath from them.

[2:15:22] Already downtowns, orange signs, cringeyns, and broken concrete are preventing any activity other

[2:15:28] business in that space. As a poet, I will not point off that well point out the obvious that

[2:15:34] that's working metaphorically too. Stepping into my other role, I would like to speak to you as a

[2:15:40] teacher. In my 10th grade class, I teach the play a raisin in the sun written by Leraine's

[2:15:45] Henry and Hansberry and it is about redlining in 1960 Chicago. To set that play up, I often talk

[2:15:53] about what Rochester means to them and the value of living in a neighborhood that makes you

[2:16:00] I've taught this unit for 10 years and every time when I ask the students to use adjectives that define Rochester, they come up with boring, I've had to ban that word, their teenagers, so it's not unexpected, but I really have had to prevent them from saying boring and class.

[2:16:18] I always push back on that observation by describing the opportunities that the Broadway business

[2:16:25] is offer.

[2:16:26] I tell students that Kathy's team offers an open mic where they get to have a voice beyond

[2:16:31] centuries walls.

[2:16:33] When Art Head holds a Zene event, I begin class with an announcement to go if they can.

[2:16:38] I tell them about our poetry readings at the Chateau and Grio, I hang art from local artists

[2:16:43] that I purchased at threshold.

[2:16:45] I talk about my record collection and tree dome.

[2:16:49] I shared about four times when diatom books

[2:16:52] opened the most adorable little closet of a bookstore.

[2:16:55] And last time I was there, Lucie the owner,

[2:16:57] told me that she had seen a freshman

[2:16:59] from century multiple times who was always walking out

[2:17:02] with a stack of new old books as an English teacher's dream.

[2:17:06] It is hard to believe that I need to argue

[2:17:09] for the preservation of the city and the culture of my city

[2:17:12] and that's the third largest city in a state that is the most arts-funded state in the Union,

[2:17:18] would consider disrupting our most unique spaces for seven floors of a towering milkto skyline.

[2:17:25] I'm proud to see that many Rochesterians are here to stand up for our small businesses.

[2:17:30] I'm asking, as I'm guessing you've figured out, for a vote to deny the appeal,

[2:17:35] it does not hold up this here, your standards, it doesn't fit into the historic vision plan,

[2:17:39] And it's such a dangerous precedent that would discourage any new independent businesses to take shape in our landscape.

[2:17:45] I'm here's a teacher for my students and I'm running out of time, so it's just like a lecturing class.

[2:17:51] And I'm sorry I didn't read a poem, but thank you for listening to all of us.

[2:17:55] Thank you. Next we have Connor Quartron.

[2:18:08] Well, my name is Connor Quartron. I am Mutton. Now 22 and to give you some backstory on myself.

[2:18:16] I was born and raised here and I went to school in Cassen and I had a teacher who had

[2:18:23] a class called Genius Hour where you were to come up with a Shark Tank product and you

[2:18:30] did basically the whole class making the project and my project was this brand called Seamless

[2:18:36] and the vision at its time was just for clothing but then it turned into skateboarding and

[2:18:42] As you can tell, with the community how important skateboarding is, especially with the expansion of the skate park,

[2:18:48] there is going to be more people coming into this town for the skate park just in itself,

[2:18:53] and treed on isn't just a music record store.

[2:18:57] It's now a skate shop.

[2:18:59] And it's the only one really that sells used skate goods because there's zoomies, and there's the garden,

[2:19:08] and none of those places will sell my product.

[2:19:12] The garden is a professionally only, you know, supporting of local brands, you have to be a professional skateboarder to actually have your things in there.

[2:19:26] And thank you, Rich and Charlie for taking me in and supporting my vision and my dream because no one else would, and they are the only people that will.

[2:19:35] And if you approve this, they will be gone and I have nothing.

[2:19:40] I have nothing and it's not just that it's that this will help the community in the sense

[2:19:47] of that I use my brand to build events and to support the local scene as much as I possibly

[2:19:53] can.

[2:19:53] I put out videos to try to encourage people to just keep skateboarding, skateboarding is a very

[2:19:58] important thing.

[2:20:00] It helps people not just connect with the community, but also with sobriety and challenging and athleticism exercise.

[2:20:07] I don't have to get into it. You already know. But it's not just skateboarding. That's important here. It's also the scene of people that come together that make Rochester Rochester.

[2:20:19] And it's not just the people who are already here, it's the people that are coming in, like, you know, even celebrities, just yesterday David, our cat from the screen series was directing inside a Kathy's bar, this scene, if you changed the look, no one will care.

[2:20:37] I mean, this will be influenced on the people generations to come.

[2:20:42] This isn't just the now.

[2:20:44] This is, you know, for the future generation of our community.

[2:20:50] And I understand that I don't know specifics on the building and everything like that.

[2:20:55] So the choice is yours here.

[2:20:57] And you know the importance of the community, but just know that this country is built on dreams.

[2:21:03] And this place is the biggest supporter of dreams that I've ever seen in my entire life.

[2:21:10] And these people make this town.

[2:21:12] So thank you for your time.

[2:21:14] Thank you.

[2:21:15] Next we have Amy Garrison.

[2:21:31] In 2025, I spoke on this topic on behalf of this Maggie Penetta and Mr. Nate Nelson,

[2:21:39] owners of TREDOM records and creative studio and a wonderful skateboard job.

[2:21:46] Tonight, I have come with a statement from Mr. Nelson, Mr. Nelson and Ms.

[2:21:52] Phaneta again that I would like to share with you. They write, Dear City Council, we are

[2:22:00] writing as the owners of TREDOM, the vinyl record store and all ages music venue at

[2:22:06] re-09 South Broadway to uphold the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission and deny the appeal

[2:22:14] for the proposed development on South Broadway. There should be no comparison to previous

[2:22:21] proposals for development on this block because each proposal has had the same outcome, disruptions

[2:22:28] and displacement that cannot be undone,

[2:22:31] historic properties forever changed,

[2:22:35] and construction.

[2:22:38] Our location at 309 is set for nearly full demolition in this proposal.

[2:22:43] When no other efforts have been made to renovate the property,

[2:22:49] I will move down to share a few more excerpts from this letter.

[2:22:53] They want to take a moment to share how treat-um brings attention to this district

[2:22:58] at a larger scale. Earlier this year, we received a backing small businesses grant from Main Street

[2:23:05] America and American Express, a growth and innovation grant specifically for businesses in historic

[2:23:13] districts with strong community impact. Tridum was one of only 400 recipients nationwide and only

[2:23:22] eight in Minnesota. Mr. Nelson and Miss Penetta include this fact because affecting the historic

[2:23:31] property status would affect small businesses like theirs the ability to apply for these

[2:23:37] grants to pay their fair market rate to building owners such as how so you see how these

[2:23:43] things they are tied together.

[2:23:50] Last year, when the council was last approached about this

[2:23:54] project. Much time was given to the idea that businesses on our block were only there for

[2:24:00] sweet heart rent deals. And that without rent increases the buildings would become economically

[2:24:07] and viable. Shortly after last city council meeting regarding this property, we entered into

[2:24:13] a new three year rental agreement for the space, but with a rent increase of nearly 100% over

[2:24:20] those three years, and a 60% increase already in state it.

[2:24:26] We felt that the new rate in term was a fair adjustment to support the building, but at

[2:24:32] a pace we were only able to manage by making significant changes.

[2:24:36] The important thing to us was remaining in that space, not just for location, but because of

[2:24:43] the history of these community spaces.

[2:24:46] Our music scene is about to undergo significant changes.

[2:24:51] Without thesis, beer project, Rochester, thaw, changes to the chat toe, making it critical for us to maintain our space.

[2:24:59] Thank you.

[2:25:00] Keep Rochester's musical legacy alive.

[2:25:05] The full version of this letter, I believe, was emailed to council members. I do have a full version of the letter, including different historical photographs of the property and photo taken at freedom events.

[2:25:21] And so that is my conclusion of representing the owners of Triton as myself, Amy, I just want to say I am so proud of all of these young people who got up here tonight to speak.

[2:25:37] It's certainly not easy to approach the council and talk about these very large and meaningful adult issues.

[2:25:46] can be hard to navigate and hard to understand.

[2:25:53] I know it's hard to be a property owner. I don't

[2:26:01] think that Mr. Henderson is, you know, this evil person. It's not about that. Simply,

[2:26:13] just simply this appeal really should be denied. It was already denied by the HPC and I just

[2:26:20] have not seen evidence within that large multi-page proposal. I can't remember how many pages

[2:26:30] it was. I did read the whole thing. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, so thank you very much

[2:26:36] Thank you council and may I present the letter and if if you give that to the city clerk

[2:26:43] I sorry, I certainly will thank you so much for your time. So we are on our final page. I have seven more

[2:26:51] folks that have signed up

[2:26:54] After the seven people speak I will ask if there is anyone else who wishes to speak

[2:27:01] So, if you're thinking about wanting to speak, I think if you can let someone from our city clerk staff know that so that we are very efficient in getting those folks on the list after the last person speaks, I will close the public hearing and we will take a 10 minute break.

[2:27:27] So with that, I'm on the last page.

[2:27:29] I have seven signed up and the next person is Andrew Kinoff.

[2:27:40] Good evening, Mayor Norton City Council, Council President Schubering.

[2:27:46] I have essentially six takeaways that I can't want to talk about here relative to agenda item G1.

[2:27:53] I agree with the HBC's majority viewpoint that the proposed addition and rehabilitation

[2:28:00] file late several standards in the Secretary of the Interior's guidelines for treatment

[2:28:05] of historic buildings and support the denial of the COA. Key takeaway number two, well,

[2:28:12] the city and the applicant did their due diligence and provided significant information

[2:28:16] relative to the project. I believe that city staffers at the community development committee

[2:28:20] got their decision wrong in initially recommending a COA in three reasons for that. The

[2:28:28] The interpretation of the standards referenced was very narrow and highlighted certain aspects

[2:28:34] of the proposal that supported a narrative while disregarding or minimized others.

[2:28:40] The community development committee did not consider the full scope of the project,

[2:28:45] especially relative to other cultural and historical landmarks in the city.

[2:28:49] And their views have said landmarks.

[2:28:51] We've heard a little bit about this.

[2:28:52] the view shed and spatial relationships of the plumber building and the caler sign.

[2:28:58] The Community Development Committee consistently is conjecture an opinion to reach its decision

[2:29:02] to recommend a COA approval, which is in direct contradiction to the modus operandi of this process.

[2:29:09] The third takeaway I have here is in my professional capacity as a small business owner.

[2:29:16] I do a significant amount of computer-aided design that would be CAD work that's drafting of ground plans,

[2:29:21] sections, elevations, perspectives, basically what you saw in the submittal.

[2:29:27] When I reviewed all the documents that were in the submittal, there were several things

[2:29:31] that were missing from these drawings.

[2:29:34] There were key annotations that were missing.

[2:29:36] There were dimensions that were missing.

[2:29:39] There was, sorry, there was not Northstamps to orient somebody looking at the drawings.

[2:29:46] The drawings have been built architecture since the sidewalks, roads, trees, and alleyways.

[2:29:50] The drawing's lack proper use of line weights, which are different thicknesses of lines to make drawings easier to understand, and they do not include any use of color to graphically.

[2:30:00] Explain architectural elements. Additionally, beyond the drawings, the renderings are also inefficient. The renderings do not show in any existing detail of the architectural components in the area. That would ideally be included to adjudicate the project, into totality, including architecture of the Kathy's rooftop and views of both the plumber building and the caler sign.

[2:30:25] Lastly, in this regard, the use of white model boxes to show other existing architectural

[2:30:29] components, minimizes the viewers' ability to see how the proposed edition specifically

[2:30:35] violates the spatial relationships found spatial relationship language, excuse me, found

[2:30:41] in standards two and nine.

[2:30:43] So from a professional perspective and a drafting perspective, I just think we have a lot

[2:30:47] of issues with what was submitted here.

[2:30:50] Key, finding number four, nowhere in the administrative record, which is referenced by the applicant in the appeal multiple times, nowhere in that record did I see any indication that the applicant engaged the business owning tenants about this proposal or engaged the public, which I do not think shows a good faith effort.

[2:31:12] And just a couple more for you here in my minute and a half remaining.

[2:31:18] I was very surprised I would say maybe even shocked that a private developer or property owner can go directly to a small city department and things go their way.

[2:31:30] Could potentially have a massive landscaping altering construction project approved with virtually no tenant community or public input.

[2:31:39] that seems on Democratic, and that seems deceptive.

[2:31:43] And finally, I also think it's very surprising and shocking that the community development

[2:31:49] department process does not include any public hearings for community to offer input.

[2:31:56] That seems disingenuous and egregious, and I hope in the future the council can address

[2:32:01] specifically items five and six.

[2:32:03] Thanks for your time.

[2:32:04] Have a great night.

[2:32:05] Thank you.

[2:32:06] Next we have Dilleth Alverson,

[2:32:13] Dilleth.

[2:32:15] I probably messed up your name.

[2:32:21] It's Danielson for the record.

[2:32:23] But, Dan, where's the D in there?

[2:32:25] Okay, go ahead.

[2:32:27] My name is Dylan. I'm 27 years old.

[2:32:30] Most of my life has been spent in and around here.

[2:32:32] I spent a lot of days at the Mayo R&R as a kid, graduated from RCTC.

[2:32:36] I worked two jobs here in F2, community about 40 minutes to do anything.

[2:32:39] So, Rochester is effectively my home.

[2:32:41] This city has one of the greatest music and arts community that I've ever seen easily in Minnesota anywhere else for that matter.

[2:32:48] So, we want to preserve what little joy we still have left and I'm going to point a little thread here, so bear with me.

[2:32:54] But the average person is struggling to get by, a conservative estimate, tells us about 25% of American families live paycheck to paycheck.

[2:33:00] activity increases wage, wages remain mostly stagnant. We have an affordability crisis and economic and

[2:33:07] equality and mobility is now worse than it was in the yielded age. All that to say in a deeply

[2:33:11] inequitable society, one where face-to-face human interaction is less common than in generations

[2:33:15] past, where we live more alienated and isolated lives. People need to feel like there are part of

[2:33:21] something that matters. Something beyond ourselves at the bare minimum. Local businesses in general,

[2:33:26] in our community in particular, you have so many of us are belonging to a huge part of our identity.

[2:33:32] Unfortunately, not only the average person's wallet being plundered, but our cultural institutions and third spaces have been under attack by corporate interest for decades.

[2:33:40] It's nothing new, and we need to wholly reject it at every turn or risk exceeding even more ground to people who don't have any of our interests at heart.

[2:33:47] What good is more apartments the average person will struggle to afford it?

[2:33:51] And what good is a city if there are no spaces for us to belong?

[2:33:53] What's the point of working if we can't immerse ourselves in the world around us from

[2:33:56] we're off the clock?

[2:33:58] Our local businesses matter, without them, we're a monotonous corporate slopscape.

[2:34:02] We've become just another soulless coffee pace city where we can get the same to

[2:34:05] potable, you get in Florida, the same Walmart, you can get in Washington State, and drive

[2:34:09] the same gut-offel strode you would interrogate Indiana.

[2:34:12] We're losing thesis beer project and that's already too steep of a price for me to pay.

[2:34:16] We're Rochester, and that means something to me.

[2:34:18] The arts are not just commercial, they're essential.

[2:34:20] These aren't just businesses, they're cultural pillars to us.

[2:34:24] Treadoam, Cafe Steam, threshold, they're essential.

[2:34:27] Treadoam is a wonderful place.

[2:34:29] Me and so many others go to for concerts.

[2:34:31] I performed at Cafe Steam in 2024 for the office,

[2:34:34] and it's our closest thing to a third place that I can think of.

[2:34:36] threshold and art heads, they welcome me without judgment.

[2:34:39] We can't afford the cost of losing functional and mind you,

[2:34:42] commercially viable businesses and let them be eaten alive by disinterested capital.

[2:34:46] Artistic fulfillment and collective purpose supersedes private interests.

[2:34:49] Now, in forever, we work to live, not live to work, and we require communal spaces to put it plainly.

[2:34:56] Me and many others don't believe it as a community development, always see as the acceleration of community.

[2:35:00] Community collapse. Given that these businesses are not shutting down naturally, I think there's no other way to phrase it. So when earlier called it suicide, I would beg the differ. It's not meant words. I think it's a form of cultural homicide. These places are all we have. We have these nice things like people over profit and all that abstract idealist language isn't for nothing. But these people are in front of you. They're real. They're here. People watching outside, people in their homes. So self-shurbing short term gain for one man is never ever worth the human costs. It's right in front of you. Three failures should be enough to strike

[2:35:29] out. So let's make something clear. We're all here today again to reject every time to destroy

[2:35:34] our irreplaceable arts community. We will again, if and when we need to, home to make the

[2:35:38] right choice. Thank you. Next we have John Prissel.

[2:35:51] Goodness. Madam Mayor, Mr. President,

[2:35:54] members of the council. I've been going to City Council meetings since approximately

[2:35:59] in 1964 when the city of Rochester rejected given the piece of property that now is a parking lot

[2:36:12] where Kmart is, the Graham Arena, and going there since here again since 64.

[2:36:22] This is epic

[2:36:29] life because of the people that have spoken here tonight.

[2:36:33] This gives me hope so much hope because attending all these city council meetings has been

[2:36:40] a drag, it's been an embarrassment because our city has freely given away its soul.

[2:36:48] It's even doing it more so now with the help of tiff money, with the help of outside landlords

[2:36:55] words that could care less about the fabric of this particular community, it's being discovered

[2:37:02] by outside money so that it can turn into something that in the future the useful leave

[2:37:09] this community because there's nothing here, there's nothing here of uniqueness.

[2:37:16] So here again I'm given hope for the first time since about 1964.

[2:37:20] before.

[2:37:22] I say, everybody that came here before me because maybe some of you will stay here

[2:37:30] in the future. My family has been here for six generations.

[2:37:36] I don't know what that means.

[2:37:38] I guess it means that there was hope someplace along the way so they would stay here again

[2:37:44] for a few more generations. But the vision is in your hands. If you lack the vision,

[2:37:51] And do not understand the fabric of a community and what a community is, the youth will come here for some training and then they will leave because this is a bland, sterile community.

[2:38:10] Let us not be that way in the future.

[2:38:17] I ask you to deny the project as put forth again for the, what is it?

[2:38:24] The fourth time by Hal and his team, the Commission, HPC, who are the experts, not city staff,

[2:38:35] have given you their findings.

[2:38:37] Now, I will ask you this, do experts contact other experts.

[2:38:44] As I understand it, the experts here, within the city council, did not contact Mr.

[2:38:50] Coup.

[2:38:52] So, why would they not seek another expert in the state of Minnesota, to phone call away?

[2:38:59] that negates their ability to even be called experts, experts are HPC. They are a commission.

[2:39:10] They're advisory to you. You take their word over city staff. They are not the experts.

[2:39:22] Now I want to touch on a few points that Bob Hicei believes said, if I'm not mistaken, I think there were some

[2:39:30] correct details there. He said downtown business owners support this. He asked for data

[2:39:38] in fact. Where are those data in fact? He said development is not wanted really. Where's that

[2:39:47] where's that data and where are those facts? Maybe we got too many cranes around here. I don't know.

[2:39:55] There are, if I'm not mistaken, the Mayo Clinic has 31 surface parking lots.

[2:40:00] Senator, yet to be developed. We have other land available to be developed. It's development ready.

[2:40:08] Collection tax base from that.

[2:40:12] And I believe Bob mentioned that the ally has been enhanced really?

[2:40:20] I've been to many studies over the years where we talked about enhancing allies.

[2:40:25] He also said that they enhance the LA by, I guess,

[2:40:31] to create team comments dealing with a waste stream.

[2:40:35] If this project takes place,

[2:40:37] people are not going to walk through that LA.

[2:40:40] It's not going to be an inviting space.

[2:40:43] Put yourself in a car coming from the south,

[2:40:46] driving north.

[2:40:47] What are you going to see?

[2:40:48] Are you going to be invited into a community that welcomes you?

[2:40:52] That is, thank you very much for your time.

[2:40:55] and the vision is yours. Thank you, Mr. Christo. Thank you very much. Lucy Christo.

[2:41:13] You said my name, right? Yes, I did. Lucy Christo. Number 34. I've been counting. Good evening.

[2:41:21] Good evening. Thank you for your time. Good to see all your faces. My name is Lucy. I'm the owner of

[2:41:26] Diatom Books located 319321, which shares a brick wall with the adjacent buildings and

[2:41:32] question, it's only entrances via the alleyway which is very unique between 3rd and 4th.

[2:41:38] I'm a second generation business owner in the historic district, let the familiar family

[2:41:43] antique business being an anchor and steward of the district for 50 issues on historic 3rd.

[2:41:50] So my business, John's business as well as many small unique quirky enterprises that are

[2:41:56] located in contributing buildings would be directly affected by this proposal in a multitude

[2:42:01] of ways. Some who haven't been mentioned tonight,

[2:42:05] Kathy's, tap house, threshold arts,

[2:42:08] solely flow, rates the artist,

[2:42:10] luckies, bitter and poor, the garrons,

[2:42:12] smoke shop, historic Francis Apartments,

[2:42:14] Typop, those are also all businesses

[2:42:16] which are loved and coveted in this corridor.

[2:42:20] Keep in mind that the alleyway is the lifeblood

[2:42:23] of all of these businesses, even to include

[2:42:27] the non-contributing complex of three-18 comments.

[2:42:30] So I know waste isn't pretty, but it definitely

[2:42:32] is part of this ecosystem, and I see it all the time.

[2:42:35] I don't feel as though the west side of these buildings

[2:42:39] has been discussed enough as being appropriate and essential

[2:42:43] for these businesses to function.

[2:42:46] So why do people stay in Rochester?

[2:42:47] I can't even turn around because I'll, yeah, who?

[2:42:52] Because, you know, everybody's

[2:42:54] set it in this room, right?

[2:42:56] Like, the wind is in our sails.

[2:42:57] We've already won, because we have

[2:42:59] community here, but I just wanted to share some of the things people have said to me just

[2:43:04] testimonies over just being open nine months. Our senses are overwhelmed. This is a place

[2:43:10] of solace in between our appointments. This is where I take my family when they visit. I made

[2:43:17] my first true friend here. How you experience this part of town makes you want to stay, right?

[2:43:25] We know this is true.

[2:43:28] You already know this, you've heard all the testimonies tonight from all of these incredible articulate neighbors.

[2:43:34] This district in this neighborhood is vibrant and animated, and the historic district soul is our ballast.

[2:43:41] So when you hear and repeat tonight, I love acts, I love why I love going to this music thing.

[2:43:46] It's not even just a affection, it's this need for safe, inspiring, third places that are

[2:43:53] human scale in size and in soul, okay, and there's a lot of names for it, it can be your tribe,

[2:44:00] your respite, the spirit, softness, culture, connection, but it's all the same thing we've heard

[2:44:05] it tonight, pride for this downtown neighborhood. I just want to briefly touch on how this is

[2:44:13] unnecessary development and just touch on state historic preservation, office should have been consulted,

[2:44:20] still needs to be considered.

[2:44:23] These have always been commercial buildings, standard one, the viewshed to include adjacent

[2:44:27] contributing buildings, standard two.

[2:44:30] You've heard these all before, okay?

[2:44:33] And just to the applicant, regardless of the amount of hours and accommodations and discussions

[2:44:39] and effort. That does not equal that a home run has been hit here. Third time is in the

[2:44:46] charm. It's not right. It's not right for this place. So when I'm thinking about, you

[2:44:52] know, are we going to see, are we going to get what we see here? I'm not sure. I love doing

[2:44:58] the last speakers talking about.

[2:45:00] I feel like the insufficient responses to the standards, to the violated standards, not just one, okay, but six, and that there is a sense of not good faith, by not directly addressing these concerns from community members.

[2:45:22] So when we're, especially when we're engaging community history, right, there's a level of responsibility to the stewardship of history that is not just our own.

[2:45:33] It's, it's other people who have been in the room tonight and who aren't in the room tonight who share stories about this block that is so essential and there's a responsibility there.

[2:45:43] Both staff and the applicant have acted out of staff with the UDC preservation standards in addition to undermining the expertise of the commissioners who serve on our HPC.

[2:45:53] Please do not deny these findings.

[2:45:56] Please uphold the denial.

[2:45:58] You know, in with the old, let us not lose our imaginations of what we can create here.

[2:46:04] I was a mainstream grant recipient, so we're many others, and a lot of money has been invested into this community already.

[2:46:11] also into the Downtown Commercial Historic District, which is our future history. So I just

[2:46:16] ask you, this is really hard work, we would all agree and at the end of the day it's

[2:46:21] always worth it. Thank you for your time. Thanks, Ms. Krisa. Next, we have Emily Brith.

[2:46:31] Good evening Madam Mayor and members of the council. My name is Emily Brithsman and I'm the

[2:46:36] mother of three teenage boys. My kids don't play sports. They don't yet have jobs to go to.

[2:46:43] And, but you know, they, they are readers, they're artists in their music musicians, and they are also chronically at a loss for things to do in Rochester, that are age appropriate and safe.

[2:46:56] Treat them as the only business in town that they are actually excited to go with me and spend time together as a family digging through bins looking for albums.

[2:47:06] The records we buy there together give us something to talk about and connect on long after we leave the shop.

[2:47:12] I can honestly say this business has helped my family stay bonded through the teenage years.

[2:47:18] And that's a challenge, right?

[2:47:20] I've also found treat them to be a safe space for my kids to hang out at.

[2:47:24] Something that, by the way, we did not have when I was a teenager here.

[2:47:30] It is the only venue in town where they can spend an evening with their friends,

[2:47:33] listening to live music, and not be around people drinking, and all that comes with that.

[2:47:38] Hundreds of kids attend shows at treat them on a regular basis.

[2:47:43] When they are there, they actually put away their phones and engage with music and

[2:47:46] the atmosphere while enjoying each other's company.

[2:47:49] And if you have teenagers, you know that this is an increasingly rare phenomenon.

[2:47:54] If this is a replacement for the apartments, there's literally nowhere else in town that these

[2:47:58] kids can go that will fill the same need that they have.

[2:48:04] I have also attended multiple community events at these businesses.

[2:48:07] They actively support local artists like my husband.

[2:48:10] who, and it gives them a space to, to share of it and sell of their work.

[2:48:16] Developers care about getting a return for their investors, but the city residents will be the ones that pay the cost if we lose the space to development.

[2:48:24] The construction of the apartments alone would do these businesses in, losing these spaces would mean more than losing a coffee shop or an art shop and a record store.

[2:48:33] They are cultural cornerstones in a company town.

[2:48:37] For most downtown public spaces are not actually for the residents of Rochester.

[2:48:43] Rochester cannot survive on Mayo alone.

[2:48:46] And people may move here to work at the hospital,

[2:48:48] but it's places like Tritom, Art Heds, and Cafe Steam that get them to stay.

[2:48:53] Please vote to deny the appeal and protect these important spaces for our community and for our kids.

[2:48:58] Thank you.

[2:48:59] Next we have Jess Garcia.

[2:49:01] Good

[2:49:10] evening. Council President Schubring, members of the City Council Mayor Norton.

[2:49:15] My name is Jessica R.C.A., I'm a word for resident and mayoral candidate who cares

[2:49:20] for and frequency these historic businesses we're all trying to protect tonight.

[2:49:26] We have all been watching in horror as businesses in our city have been struggling and

[2:49:30] or closing down for the last few months, seeking clear and direct help from City Hall.

[2:49:36] Do not let these businesses be the next casualties.

[2:49:40] You have the opportunity to show up for them for all of us by denying this appeal.

[2:49:47] Upleting the denial of the certificate of appropriateness as determined by our local heritage

[2:49:52] preservation commission will signal to the community that you care about what is important

[2:49:57] to us.

[2:49:59] It will signal to...

[2:50:00] Small business owners that you value them. It will signal to building owners that they cannot treat their

[2:50:06] tenants the way they reportedly do and expect to be rewarded for it by us offering them more business.

[2:50:12] When the requester of this appeal is someone I'm told, accepts rent payments from tenants while

[2:50:18] allowing buildings to fall and disappear. After it's repeatedly brought to his attention

[2:50:24] and some other issues you heard from other speakers before me, that is very concerning.

[2:50:29] When the outline standards by the Secretary of the Interior are not followed, as the HPC

[2:50:35] outlined, which they're now trying to discredit, that's also concerning.

[2:50:40] It does not seem this project has the best interests of Rochester residents or small business

[2:50:45] tenants in mind.

[2:50:48] That is made particularly apparent when the apartments they hope to build would be housing

[2:50:53] students that would want to be able to access the businesses targeted and made vulnerable

[2:50:57] by this project. And these young people who spoke before me are all confirming these businesses

[2:51:04] are what will attract and keep them here. So city leaders, I believe that if you have the courage

[2:51:11] today to preserve the historic district you helped create, you will help to maintain the

[2:51:17] vibrancy of downtown. You will ensure the culture and community created on that block and flourish

[2:51:23] and expand outward. You will be helping to maintain a city culture that preserves our heritage

[2:51:29] and uplift every day resident and small business owner over corporate interests.

[2:51:35] So I urge you to deny this appeal. It is not good for our historic downtown. It is not good for

[2:51:41] our small business community. It is not good for the people of our city. Thank you for your time.

[2:51:47] Thank you. Next we have Michelle girl's burger.

[2:51:55] Is she still here?

[2:51:59] Oh, okay.

[2:52:02] Okay. Next we have

[2:52:06] Kristen Meyer.

[2:52:15] Thank you all for listening to me. This is my first city holiday meeting. So

[2:52:19] First of all, I'd like to say that it's just amazing all of the businesses in this block that are available to young people

[2:52:30] Um, where I grew up, we had a TCB Y and a Perkins, um, and, um, so it's, it's, it's wonderful.

[2:52:38] They know obviously what they have and it needs to stay where it is, um, seven years ago,

[2:52:46] I brought my, bought my dream home in Rochester, a 97 year old home at that, um, all the people who

[2:52:53] lived in it before me took excellent care of, um, and I intend to do the same.

[2:52:59] I don't consider myself an owner of this home, I consider myself a caretaker, and that's

[2:53:04] what all of us are of Rochester and the buildings and businesses in history we have here.

[2:53:11] And I would just like everyone to consider that for the future.

[2:53:16] Would you like a future with, you know, these giant, Lord?

[2:53:28] I don't even know the words, it's just, it's not what's fair to Rochester and our history

[2:53:35] and the people who live here.

[2:53:37] So thank you for listening to me.

[2:53:39] Thank you.

[2:53:40] Next we have Nick Navatni.

[2:53:49] All right.

[2:53:49] Thanks for listening to everybody.

[2:53:52] today. I am a small business owner. I'm a co-owner of my time my music and the festival director of the

[2:53:57] Rochester Thought Music Festival that ran from 2019 to 2026 and the heart of our festival was in

[2:54:05] this historic district. The incredible businesses that open their doors to us as a company to

[2:54:10] bring thousands of musicians over the years of the event. It just speaks to the character of people

[2:54:18] run these businesses and operate and hold these buildings. And I think it's so crucial to having

[2:54:26] this vibrant arts and music scene. We've worked with thousands of musicians that we brought

[2:54:30] to Rochester for the first time. And the first thing they tell us about is how special this

[2:54:35] district truly is in the shape that it's in right now. We hear from folks all over the country

[2:54:40] when they come here of Haul. I went to Cafe Steam. I had a best lot to have my life. I went and saw

[2:54:46] Some crazy record I haven't seen in 20 years of trade home.

[2:54:49] It's all of these little things that add to these very crucial

[2:54:52] third spaces that make our city very unique

[2:54:55] and it gives people a reason to come back.

[2:54:57] That's I think the biggest thing any time we worked with.

[2:55:00] Anybody that came through the festival and spent time in this district, the next question I got was, how do I get back? How do I come back? I think if we were to impact this area, you would be having less people asking that question. And I think that's a very dangerous situation that could happen if this building goes through.

[2:55:19] Another note that I just cannot not touch on, there is, and it was mentioned before, there's

[2:55:25] so much pride with the folks that have come up in the spoke, especially the young folks in

[2:55:29] our community that are standing up for their music, their arts, their creative spaces, their

[2:55:33] spaces where they feel safe in a world that seemingly tries to make it harder and harder to feel

[2:55:39] safe every single day. So I think the big point to take is please do stand up to what the historic

[2:55:48] preservation said and keep these buildings intact.

[2:55:51] It is the heartbeat of our arts community.

[2:55:54] It's the heartbeat of our creative economy here.

[2:55:57] And that ripples all the way throughout to the edges of the city.

[2:56:00] So yeah, thanks.

[2:56:02] Thank you, Mr. Nervani.

[2:56:04] Next up, we have Andy Smith.

[2:56:11] Mayor Lorton City Council members

[2:56:13] and very hardworking city staff that sits here as well.

[2:56:18] You guys know me, I've talked all of you many times.

[2:56:21] My name is Andy Smith.

[2:56:22] I am the state representative for this district in the Minnesota House.

[2:56:26] And I'm here on many different wearing many different hats.

[2:56:30] The one is of course, small business owner.

[2:56:32] I want to come and defend my fellow small business owners.

[2:56:36] Two, as someone who loves the arts and who is tried to add to the arts in this city.

[2:56:41] And it's been so grateful for those who have added to that arts community.

[2:56:46] but I do feel that I also am here a bit in my official capacity as the representative of

[2:56:53] this district and this people because I have heard about this particular issue in this vote a lot.

[2:57:00] And I'm happy to be here to tell you this. The Rochester people are optimistic,

[2:57:06] they're wonderful people. We'll love Rochester. We're excited about the future of our city.

[2:57:12] But I do think that there's a growing suspicion with people of Rochester, that that future is going to be guided not by what is best for the vast majority of people of Rochester.

[2:57:24] What will make their lives better, more enjoyable, more fulfilled, but rather by landlords, executives, and corporations.

[2:57:33] And I can't honestly think of a better example of why people have that fear than the idea that to revitalize downtown we would have to morally injure the part of our downtown that is most alive.

[2:57:51] And we know it's the most alive because of what we heard tonight.

[2:57:55] You heard from kids, you heard from the parents of those kids.

[2:57:59] You heard from people who have been here, their family has been here for 50

[2:58:03] of years, people who have moved here this year, to a couple of people who have

[2:58:06] been moved here yet, but are excited to move to Rochester eventually because of

[2:58:11] places like this downtown.

[2:58:15] Thank you for listening to these voices.

[2:58:17] I'm happy to add mine to the loud chorus that asks you, please deny this

[2:58:24] Thank you. Thank you. That concludes all the people that have signed up. I will ask, is there anyone else wishing to be heard on this item before the public hearing?

[2:58:40] Anyone else wishing to be heard on this item?

[2:58:47] Please come forward. State your name and you have up to five minutes, but you don't have to use it.

[2:58:54] No worries. I'll try now. Did you already speak on this?

[2:58:57] No, I was here earlier. I was talking about the public's, uh, the open speaks, that's okay. Very good.

[2:59:03] Well, I'm Ryan Wolff. I am the aforementioned UMR student of this area.

[2:59:09] I want to say that my time is at UMR as a student has been very fun and enriching.

[2:59:15] However, the greatest sentiment that I have heard amongst UM, my fellow UMR students, has been, there is nothing to do here.

[2:59:22] I have had many UMR friends who have transferred to other schools because they have found

[2:59:27] no fulfillment.

[2:59:29] I watched, just down the street, as a building was turned to rubble and it became the

[2:59:35] laughing stock of the school because it was charmingly hidden behind the chicken wire fence

[2:59:39] with fake fines.

[2:59:44] I would also like to mention that the establishments at the sector, being mainly treat

[2:59:50] and cafe steam or places where my classmates work at and where we have a lot of fun.

[2:59:56] Many days we go to cafe steam to study and I remember the many.

[3:00:00] Frustrating nights of my classmates as they tried to hammer in the concept of bone layers.

[3:00:09] And then after we had our time at cafe steam, where my friends shook and threatened to throw coffee in my face as they could not get the point across,

[3:00:16] we went to treat home to go have a night where we flung and laughed and worked off the previous stress.

[3:00:23] I'm in my 30 year of nursing school, and I'm also currently a healthcare provider.

[3:00:27] When I think about Rochester, and I think about the greatness that our health care industry is here,

[3:00:35] I also think about how I want our patients to not only remember the walls of their hospital room,

[3:00:39] but also the culture of this city, and the art that is a part of it.

[3:00:46] And as everybody knows, there's already way too much construction in Rochester,

[3:00:50] and I would like to ask why I add more now.

[3:00:54] Thank you for your time, and I hope you will make the right choice again as you have three times before.

[3:00:58] Thank you. This is a public hearing anyone else wishing to be heard on this item. Please step forward.

[3:01:04] This is a public hearing anyone else wishing to be heard on this item.

[3:01:09] Please

[3:01:11] identify yourself and

[3:01:14] You do a five up to five minutes. You don't have to use them. Yeah. Well, okay. I am Emily Filos. I am a community member

[3:01:22] I work in many places around town in the community and all I have to say is echoing

[3:01:28] everybody else is statements obviously, that block is very important. I've seen firsthand what

[3:01:35] another person was describing, just dozens of teens out on the sidewalk during breaks between

[3:01:41] music, enjoying in the one place that's not like age-restricted, there's no alcohol, that sort of thing.

[3:01:48] And personally, sometimes, like, if having a rough day, it's middle of winter,

[3:01:56] which, you know,

[3:01:58] happening at tree dome is what gets me up and moving and going out when normally I wouldn't

[3:02:03] be doing anything downtown. I always go to the businesses next door by someone there. It's a

[3:02:10] great little block and it's one of the highlights of this city itself. Thank you. This is a public hearing

[3:02:16] anyone else wishing to be heard. Step forward, please identify yourself. You'll have up to five minutes.

[3:02:22] Hi, I'm Liam McCarran. I'm a newest resident here. I moved here about two years ago from Queen

[3:02:27] New York, a lot busier than here, huge vibrant arts

[3:02:30] and I've worked in the scene over in New York for many years.

[3:02:34] I worked for both acts big and small.

[3:02:37] And I saw how important it was for those communities

[3:02:39] to come together.

[3:02:42] And I sadly was forced to move out of the city

[3:02:44] that I call it home my entire life

[3:02:46] because it was just getting too expensive

[3:02:48] and just on the level of both two to all these developments

[3:02:51] of rent going up and just part for me to live

[3:02:54] in that place I moved Rochester.

[3:02:57] And as soon as I came here, whenever I tell someone right from day-to-day, I always have the same answer whenever I tell him from here.

[3:03:03] They say, why? Why are you here? It's boring. There's nothing to do. There's so many other places you could be. Why do you choose here?

[3:03:11] And you know, I always, you know, do the joke, oh, it's cheaper, et cetera.

[3:03:14] But I really found, and this short time here, I found a really close community, and I really, I guess I've discovered the whole thing of Midwest,

[3:03:21] Kindness in Minnesota nice first hand and I've seen that these communities

[3:03:26] Especially in places like steam and places like TREDOM. They're kind of the only place

[3:03:32] I really have a whole lot of fun here, you know, I find myself with my friends that I met here

[3:03:38] and I asked them hey, is there anything going to do on most of the time we're always sending each other

[3:03:43] on Instagram posts of concerts they're doing at TREDOM. We're always talking to each other about you know

[3:03:51] have to talk to each other and to see that these communities are getting crushed by these developers

[3:03:57] that force me not only out of my home in New York but force me out of my apartment here in

[3:04:02] downtown myself because they're turning down to make more luxury apartments and these fancy

[3:04:06] apartments further downtown. It's just heartbreaking to see a city that when I moved here I saw

[3:04:11] I had so much opportunity and could have just, I felt like a city that was just rising or rising

[3:04:17] Now, like it's crumbling, I just so quick.

[3:04:19] I thought it was, you know, going to get so big.

[3:04:22] So I just really want to see this place succeed

[3:04:24] because it is my home.

[3:04:26] And these are the places that everyone seems to agree

[3:04:29] or make you want to stay.

[3:04:31] And if they're gone, I don't know.

[3:04:33] I don't know.

[3:04:34] I don't know if there's going to be a whole lot of reasons

[3:04:35] for me to stay around here.

[3:04:37] Thank you for your time.

[3:04:38] Thank you for stepping up.

[3:04:39] This is a public hearing, and anyone else wishing to be heard,

[3:04:43] please step forward, state your name,

[3:04:45] and you have up to five minutes.

[3:04:48] Good evening.

[3:04:49] My name is Chris Kenepke.

[3:04:51] I'm just a guy.

[3:04:53] I'm just a person who lives in Ward 1.

[3:04:55] And I just, I felt compelled to come to this meeting,

[3:04:58] and I've sat out in the lobby for the last.

[3:05:00] 3 hours. For me, a perfect weekend day, I have two young daughters. I have an 11 and an 8-year-old. We would go to

[3:05:08] library, then we'd go to Cafe Steam and I'd get a night holler to wake up, and we would go to the different

[3:05:15] districts, different buildings that are being impacted by tonight's hearing. And for me, that's a perfect

[3:05:20] Saturday. And I'm really going to miss that if that goes away. But what I have to comment on,

[3:05:26] life-long Rochester resident and sitting out there during these last three hours is this

[3:05:31] community has given me so much pride and I can't quite overstate watching the the youth just the

[3:05:39] people with passion come up and talk about this and it gives me so much pride in the things that they're doing here

[3:05:46] and for me it would be bad to lose that perfect Saturday but for them quite the community

[3:05:53] I'm so grateful and I don't know if you were aware of this community, it was here, but I am so glad to hear them speak their support in their passion and I really appreciate that and I don't want to take any of your time.

[3:06:03] Thank you.

[3:06:04] Thank you.

[3:06:05] This is a public hearing.

[3:06:06] If you wish to be heard on this item, please step forward.

[3:06:10] State your name and you have up to five minutes.

[3:06:12] Hi, I'm Lucy Rasmussen.

[3:06:14] And I have been a very thorough member of this community that these businesses have provided

[3:06:22] for me.

[3:06:23] I have learned so much about music.

[3:06:25] I've discovered so much, so many new people in this community.

[3:06:30] I have discovered myself, really, as who I am as a person, and to think that this would

[3:06:36] all be destroyed for some bland buildings that have no meaning, no community, nothing that

[3:06:43] provides anything for this community would kill me inside to see something like this be destroyed

[3:06:49] for unaffordable housing for these students.

[3:06:53] Yeah, I mean, I'm barely holding on as it is and to see that it would all be destroyed by

[3:06:59] you know, these kids they come here to learn and at the end of the day, they come here to pay

[3:07:03] for school.

[3:07:04] You think they have the money to pay for expensive housing that's going to destroy something

[3:07:09] that they can do in their spare time where something else can be built elsewhere.

[3:07:13] I have found such a great community through these buildings.

[3:07:17] I have grabbed so many refreshing drinks from steam.

[3:07:19] I have found so many amazing records from Treadome and they have opened up so many opportunities

[3:07:26] for you know possibilities for people who want to be in bands and form these different kinds

[3:07:31] of communities and seeing this, it really hurts me and I really, I denied this.

[3:07:36] I do not want this to happen, that is all I have to say.

[3:07:38] Thank you. This is a public hearing. Anyone else wishing to be heard on this item? Please step forward.

[3:07:47] Anyone else wishing to be heard on this item? Please step forward. One final time. Anyone else wishing to be heard on this item?

[3:07:56] I will close the public hearing. At this point what we are going to do and you are all welcome to stay and I hope you all do.

[3:08:06] We are going to take a 10 minute break when we get back the applicant will have five minutes to respond to the public hearing and any closing comments and then after that myself, my colleagues, the mayor will have an opportunity to post questions to staff and the applicant and after that we will deliberate on a decision.

[3:08:33] So with that, we are on a 10 minute break.

[3:19:17] Before we continue on item G1, I just want to let the council know that under our rules, we are not to begin a public hearing after 10, 15 this evening.

[3:19:37] After G1, we have G2, G3, and G4, which are public hearing.

[3:19:45] So depending on the length of the discussion on G1, we may bump ourselves up to that 10, 15 times.

[3:19:55] So I am wondering if council members...

[3:20:00] We just have any interest in suspending the rules, which I think you two three and four may be able to be dispensed with more rapidly.

[3:20:11] If there is a desire to suspend the rules and I don't know if according to our rules, we can postpone discussion of G1 and then come back to it after dispensing with two three and four.

[3:20:29] Mr. Spindler, Greg.

[3:20:32] Yes, Mr. President, whether super-majority vote you could.

[3:20:35] Okay, so is there interest in suspending the rules and pausing the progress that we have made on G1,

[3:20:45] which is all the way through three hours of public testimony, we will go to G2, G3 and G4 so that we are able to hold those public hearings

[3:20:55] before our time certain of 1015 and then we will come back to G1. Is there a motion?

[3:21:05] Council member Keene. Just before a motion, is there a possibility of suspending the rules

[3:21:11] and starting the public hearings after 1015? Or is that not an option for us?

[3:21:16] That is an option as well. Okay. Council President, that would be my preference

[3:21:21] that we continue on with our G1 work and suspend our vote now to suspend our rules to start our other public hearings later and see if we can get a supermajority there.

[3:21:33] Okay.

[3:21:34] Is that sound? Is that that would be my motion?

[3:21:36] Is that second?

[3:21:39] Okay.

[3:21:39] There is a motion on the table to suspend the rule that we actually can have public hearings after 10-15,

[3:21:50] made by Council Member Keen and seconded by Council Member Doring. Any further discussion on

[3:21:56] favor say aye? Aye. Any opposed say nay? We are able to hold public hearings after 10

[3:22:02] 15. Thank you very much. We will move back to G1 and at this point we will hear from our

[3:22:10] applicants and the applicant you have five minutes to respond to any questions, things you heard

[3:22:17] during the public hearing and any other information

[3:22:20] that you would like to share with the council.

[3:22:24] Appreciate that, Council President, Council Members and Mayor.

[3:22:28] One thing I know for sure after tonight is the arts

[3:22:33] and the music, the culture, they're not leaving Rochester.

[3:22:38] The passion that filled this room with the arts,

[3:22:42] and the love for music, and the love for the downtown

[3:22:44] convince me they're not leaving. And the great thing about this proposed project, we're

[3:22:51] not asking them to leave. We're not destroying any buildings in the downtown district.

[3:22:58] We're not proposing to destroy the downtown district. What the passion shows me is we

[3:23:04] all love that place of our first kiss with our wife or our spouse or a partner. We all

[3:23:10] those special places where we celebrate things. We want to keep them to ourselves. We don't

[3:23:17] want others to share in that and that's what's happening. Excuse me please and no response from

[3:23:24] the audience or we will have to have you removed from the audience consider. Continuums are has.

[3:23:31] We're proposing to bring more people into the downtown community to provide a place homes

[3:23:38] for others to come into the downtown community.

[3:23:43] And that passion is so deep that they don't want that.

[3:23:49] This proposal is about inclusivity and broadening

[3:23:53] the rich history of Rochester,

[3:23:56] in a way that preserves the historic integrity

[3:23:59] of the downtown district as confirmed by the experts,

[3:24:04] the city, the city development team.

[3:24:07] to live with the UDC, who live with the Secretary of Interior Standards, on a daily basis.

[3:24:15] You've heard people come up here and say that the standards aren't met.

[3:24:20] The HPC concluded only that they're not being met with the proposed project.

[3:24:29] They provided no factual support.

[3:24:33] I know the city, somebody said it was a staffing issue.

[3:24:36] it's not. The city requested the HPC to provide findings of fact, verbally requested that and

[3:24:45] they didn't do it.

[3:24:48] The only information in the record that is of any substance factual findings

[3:24:55] comes from the city. Your experts, your development team.

[3:25:00] On this new revised proposed projects, satisfies all ten standards.

[3:25:07] It complies with what the city asked, the

[3:25:11] HCT team to do, and they did that over months of meetings, over months of communications.

[3:25:31] To

[3:25:32] PC's denial based on standards. This is a standards-based analysis. I can stand up here

[3:25:40] and be emotional and compassionate about the community that I have found in Rochester.

[3:25:47] But what I have to say, what I feel is not part of the standards-based analysis

[3:25:53] that you have to consider. Your experts, the city, did that analysis through all

[3:26:01] of them. We addressed it in our comprehensive appellate brief and appeal documents.

[3:26:11] The record from the HPC provides

[3:26:14] no factual support for denying the request for a certificate of appropriateness. It actually

[3:26:23] contravenes the recommendation of the experts in the room. Those experts have now come due and said,

[3:26:30] We request for action that you overturn the HPC's denial and they provided reasons under all 10 of those standards that show that this new proposed project complies with every one of those standards.

[3:26:48] Old buildings bring challenges.

[3:26:53] The rents that people pay or below market, it only even cover the property taxes for the buildings.

[3:27:00] Please, please keep your thoughts here, self-continuous cash has old buildings, bring challenges.

[3:27:11] Different types of shops come in, we're already seeing it on Broadway, THC being sold in shops,

[3:27:16] but don't only stores on Broadway.

[3:27:20] They bring an element that does not bring character to a historical district.

[3:27:27] But we're offering is an opportunity to continue the historic nature of downtown Rochester

[3:27:34] while also growing downtown Rochester, making it more inclusive to more people that can

[3:27:40] take advantage of the rich, history, and culture, the arts, and the music, and the shops

[3:27:45] downtown.

[3:27:46] And we ask you to overturn the HPC's denial.

[3:27:50] Thank you, Mr. Hess.

[3:27:52] At this time, I will invite my colleagues to ask questions of staff and, or the applicant, Council Member Key.

[3:28:03] Yeah, I had a question for staff just going through this much of the public input.

[3:28:08] Our item is about an impact to local small businesses in the space that has become the anchor for these local arts communities.

[3:28:15] What are the decision criteria that one through ten that have anything to do with the business

[3:28:20] that is currently operate within the space, the historic building that is being under

[3:28:25] question for the certificate?

[3:28:29] I'm thinking this one, I'm going to support where it goes ahead.

[3:28:32] Then thank you, Council Member Keen.

[3:28:35] The certificate of appropriateness deals with the alteration that is being proposed to the

[3:28:40] building, it doesn't have anything to do with the existing businesses within the building.

[3:28:44] So it's evaluating how the alterations to the exterior are the additions, how that has

[3:28:49] an impact on the overall structures and the buildings, not necessarily on what the existing

[3:28:53] businesses are.

[3:28:55] Okay, do you consider that to be like a rigorous sort of thing or is it a flawed in the criteria

[3:29:01] we're using that we don't consider what's happening in the building right now?

[3:29:05] The rehabilitation standards don't really consider that and that along with the design

[3:29:10] guidelines and really focus on what is the design of the building and what are those elements

[3:29:14] that need to be considered in terms of the overall additions, alterations and things that are

[3:29:19] happening with those buildings and those are the primary of what we're evaluating as part of

[3:29:23] this certificate of appropriateness. Okay, thank you. And then I also had a question for the owner

[3:29:28] owner representation just comparing this project to pod projects we've seen before and turned down.

[3:29:35] It appears to me that this new product is better protects the historic streets streetscape

[3:29:41] But I also want to confirm is it and it does these stepbacks, but I also am trying to understand

[3:29:47] Can I assume that this project is economically viable and then this is a way now that the building is maintains historic preservation

[3:29:54] But it's also maintained. Yes, just okay. All right, so good

[3:30:00] Good, good, I'm glad to hear that because I will be surprised then if this group comes back in the next year to saying we need public support for something because if it's economically viable, you should be able to handle it yourself and not depend on public support for that.

[3:30:15] I mean, certainly as we go forward, certainly if there's public funds that are available to anybody else that would also be available to us,

[3:30:22] we should consider it, but it doesn't mean that we have to pursue it.

[3:30:25] But I wouldn't want to be locked in right now to say that we're not allowed to apply for public funds that are available to any other develop.

[3:30:32] No, good point, but I'm trying to establish that this is an economically viable project.

[3:30:38] You wouldn't come in here with a test that said,

[3:30:40] But for some support that the city or DMC would give you, we can't do this because you're coming in with an economically viable project.

[3:30:48] Well, we like to think so, but part of the economics is sort of tiff funding or other public funding that may be available.

[3:30:54] I'm not saying we're asking for that right now.

[3:30:56] I know you're not sure, but I'm just trying to get it on there that when we when we deal with this and try to say you need to come back with something that both

[3:31:03] preserves the history of the building but is also economically viable. I think that says that

[3:31:10] we're not coming that further. Now we're new and you've talked about DMC's got these

[3:31:13] grants and stuff. That's fine. Yeah. Okay. So if there's a facade grant and we're working on the

[3:31:19] facade, we're not saying, no, we shouldn't be able to apply for that. No, no, but I but this idea of going

[3:31:24] through and coming back with the butt foretests going. We want to do this, but you guys have to come to

[3:31:28] the table. That's not what I'm seeing what you're coming back with at that time. Thank you.

[3:31:33] you're correct. Okay.

[3:31:37] Questions from council members? I have a question at to, well first to the

[3:31:42] owner group and Mr. Henderson you may want to answer this as well. And this has to do with,

[3:31:49] see, you're the owners of 309 to 317 Broadway, which are contributing properties to the downtown

[3:31:59] commercial historic district. So can you talk to us about how your proposed alterations contribute

[3:32:09] to the historic district that the building is in? And when I say how it contributes to the

[3:32:18] historic district, looking at the objectives of the historic district and its activation of

[3:32:27] in France, public realm, character all of those pieces of what it means to be in a historic

[3:32:34] district.

[3:32:37] I want to have a friend who's bringing in members of the council and I'm a mayor in

[3:32:40] order.

[3:32:41] Thanks to the opportunity tonight and appreciating you listening to us as a revival period.

[3:32:46] There's a lot of information offered tonight that is not true.

[3:32:49] I won't go into that, but I wish I could if we had time.

[3:32:53] So, to answer your question, I think if you look at the image on the screen, essentially

[3:32:58] it's exactly what's there now.

[3:33:01] And by development that allows us some economic vitality at work with, it allows us

[3:33:06] to bring those buildings back to the original radiator and character.

[3:33:10] Without it, they're not going to get what the HPC was hoping to get in terms of the character

[3:33:15] quality, all the things that they're hoping to accomplish with the HPC, meant mantra.

[3:33:24] So yeah, without giving us some financial, viable ways of generating their level of income

[3:33:29] needed to maintain these properties, the property taxes, the insurance, the maintenance,

[3:33:35] is just not available long-term reality.

[3:33:39] It becomes a point we have to face that really, we've heard a lot of passionate conversations

[3:33:44] and then I get it, I appreciate it, understand it, but I've not heard a word about the five

[3:33:49] years that we've subsidized the rent at a $5 square foot rent, almost three, and then we

[3:33:54] doubled it. 100% we did to 10. But I don't think there's anybody in this room that owns property,

[3:34:01] that would say that $10 square foot is sustainable to operate a building and main thing

[3:34:06] to the quality bill. Go ahead, this is your answer, sir. Sorry, this is not possible. I think you

[3:34:12] you talk anybody that's a landlord talking to you real estate agent and that's

[3:34:15] pressure property. They will tell you the market raise at least 25 dollars for

[3:34:19] a quit or creator.

[3:34:23] Please you are not a member of the City Council or the mayor

[3:34:28] and so you do not have the right to speak right now. So please if you would keep

[3:34:33] your thoughts to yourself, Mr. Henderson continue. Appreciate it. Thank you. That's all

[3:34:38] Thank you.

[3:34:40] A lot of politicians.

[3:34:40] I have no more to say.

[3:34:42] You can.

[3:34:43] I appreciate it.

[3:34:44] Thanks again.

[3:34:44] I have a question for staff.

[3:34:46] So, and I want to talk about, and I think it's, measure nine, and it's the whole idea

[3:34:55] of new alterations being subordinate in.

[3:35:00] Size, scale, material, massing, to the historic building and to the historic district itself, I believe.

[3:35:12] So, I'm just trying to get my head around how a seven-story building, which is, I think, four or five stories higher than any of the contributing buildings,

[3:35:26] with, among the 31 buildings that are contributing buildings in the historic district,

[3:35:32] how that building is subordinate to the historic district or the historically,

[3:35:42] the historic contributing building.

[3:35:45] Thank you for the question. I will start and provide a little bit of context as we

[3:35:51] establish the commercial historic district. It is the collection of all of the buildings together

[3:35:55] is how it's evaluated. It's not one individual building. So as we started to evaluate the addition

[3:36:01] being put, we are evaluating how that contributes or how it aligns with the massating of the

[3:36:07] overall district and evaluating it. So it wasn't just looking at the existing properties, but

[3:36:11] the overall district. And so we were looking at, as we mentioned, some other buildings within the

[3:36:16] district and how it happened impact overall, not just on one specific, but on the entire historic district.

[3:36:23] My understanding is though that the building you're using as the to say that it this proposal is subordinate to is a non-contributing building and it is the tallest building in the district and it is non-contributing.

[3:36:43] Why isn't it

[3:36:46] it

[3:36:46] used in relation to the building that it is becoming an alteration to?

[3:36:53] As we started to evaluate, and then I'll let Ms. Patterson Lunger and jump in if she needs to add additional context.

[3:37:00] We're looking at how

[3:37:01] ultimately as we're looking at this addition to the building, it really starts to mimic

[3:37:06] three 18 commons and it starts to look like an addition to that building within the historic district

[3:37:11] And that it is set back from the facades of the buildings that are facing Broadway, and so that you're still maintaining that perspective when you're on Broadway and maintaining it within the historic district, but then able to have the addition in the rear and be able to kind of tie those together. And I'll let Ms. Patterson Lunger and also add to it.

[3:37:33] Chair Schubering, I think your question, if I'm understanding correctly, relates to standard number nine, and that the size scale and pulling just the last part of that standard, and proportion and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment, so the way I read that is the property is the landmark property, which is the historic district.

[3:37:59] The landmark property are not the individual buildings. They're contributing to the district,

[3:38:04] but when we're talking about protecting the integrity of the property,

[3:38:08] I read that as the property that is landmarked, which is the district and its entirety.

[3:38:13] So we're looking at how the features, the materials,

[3:38:18] features scale and proportion and massing impact the property,

[3:38:22] which is the district as a whole, which we've landmarked.

[3:38:26] Do that answer? Well, let me pose a hypothetical. And can you go to slide 31 in the deck

[3:38:38] here? So I have a hypothetical, if we are to approve this appeal, and I'm looking at

[3:38:49] the integrity of the historic district itself, and one of the pieces that I'm really concerned

[3:38:55] with is precedent and how we are sending a precedent.

[3:39:00] So on slide 21, 31 we have a view of the non-contributing parking lot that is on the corner

[3:39:09] of Broadway and for Street, correct?

[3:39:14] That is part of the historic district, it is a parking lot right now, it's not contributing,

[3:39:19] it is adjacent to the three 18 building, which is across the alley. So if we are to then

[3:39:31] have a seven story building that we say is not it is subordinate to other buildings.

[3:39:44] A, and I don't even know who owns that property, but let's say developer owner comes in and says I want to build a seven story building there on that corner, which is the first block of the historic district going

[3:40:00] Set a precedent to allow other blocks non-contributing or contributing to then scale up to seven

[3:40:10] stories, eight stories or whatever we consider, whatever's considered subordinate to another building.

[3:40:19] Sure, I think we would have set the precedent to review the project within the context of what's what's adjacent to it.

[3:40:29] What's adjacent to that empty lot is a two story building on Broadway.

[3:40:35] And I think a three or four story building, which is the Francis apartment to the west.

[3:40:43] And then the hue is right there, and that also is taller.

[3:40:48] So we would be looking at how a new building in that site would relate to, um, to

[3:40:56] its environment, um, within the historic district.

[3:41:01] So not necessarily a seven story building, because there isn't, um, what, eight to 10 story

[3:41:09] building right next to it.

[3:41:10] I mean, please bear with me, my colleagues.

[3:41:15] I'm going to ask maybe even more immediate one.

[3:41:18] So if we were to continue with this and approve this appeal,

[3:41:25] and the seven-story building goes up on the rear of 309-37317,

[3:41:34] What prevents that 7th story building from being the support, then the owner of the building to say?

[3:41:47] Well, I want to go further forward and the 7th story building is what I'm using as a guide.

[3:41:58] I would just note that any new, if there was a new project coming in for that corner lot,

[3:42:04] that would also require a certificate of appropriateness and would have to go through

[3:42:07] and we would evaluate what that proposal is against those design standards that have been

[3:42:13] Council adopted as well as the Secretary of Interior Standards and evaluate those things to determine

[3:42:19] as to what Molly is saying, what is that general look of what's happening around there.

[3:42:25] So it's, it's, we're not, it doesn't necessarily mean the next one would need to be that.

[3:42:29] So the certificate of appropriateness would need to be reviewed by a city teammates at that time,

[3:42:34] and then it would go to the Heritage Preservation Commission as well.

[3:42:38] Council members, other questions I can keep going.

[3:42:41] Can I ask a question on their husband talk among the applicant that the HPC did not address findings?

[3:42:53] Can you clarify that?

[3:42:57] The H, I think what the clarification and I would just note is the motion that was made by the

[3:43:02] HPC was specific and identifying the building and the project didn't meet 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, and 10.

[3:43:12] There was additional discussion at the HPC, the Heritage Preservation Commission, but in terms

[3:43:17] of the motion that was taken, those were the specific ones that were identified during that.

[3:43:21] But there was discussion about generally about the historic character

[3:43:25] the property will be retained, will be retained.

[3:43:29] The project would detract and doesn't preserve the sense of history.

[3:43:34] These are home to marginalized businesses,

[3:43:36] loss of sight of caler, sight, and plumber building.

[3:43:39] Seven stories is too big.

[3:43:41] And there were several other.

[3:43:42] But that was summary of discussion that was

[3:43:44] had at the Heritage Preservation Commission,

[3:43:46] the actual motion that was taken only reference those numbers.

[3:43:51] Okay,

[3:43:55] council member Palmer.

[3:43:59] So how long has the staff in working on this proposal with the applicant?

[3:44:07] I, after the last request which was to remove the properties from the historic district,

[3:44:13] there's been on and off conversations.

[3:44:14] I would say, since that time period there haven't necessarily been consistent.

[3:44:18] There's been questions asked of us review and we've met with them on occasion.

[3:44:23] I can't say how many, but it's probably been going on.

[3:44:27] since after that last time where there was a request to move in from the historic district.

[3:44:32] In the recommendation from the staff is that we approve their or overturn the HBC's recommendation.

[3:44:40] Is that correct?

[3:44:41] The recommendation that staff made to the Heritage Preservation Commission was to approve the certificate of appropriateness and the motion and our recommendation would to be overturned the Heritage Preservation Commission.

[3:44:53] So if I go to the next block over and oh

[3:45:00] And we've got the Bible Business Center. I think that's nine stories. How does that fit into the historic district?

[3:45:07] So, the Bible Business Center is not within the historic district.

[3:45:10] Okay. Is the parking ramp?

[3:45:12] It is not.

[3:45:13] Okay.

[3:45:15] Is the hotel that's just to the north of this part of the district?

[3:45:20] No.

[3:45:21] So, the district kind of moves around a little bit. It doesn't like a solid block.

[3:45:25] It does move, there is a, I think we've shown that kind of district a number of times.

[3:45:31] So it, it, it kind of goes along there and it shifts in terms of what is contributing a non-contributing properties within the historic district.

[3:45:37] Can I ask a question on the developer?

[3:45:39] Go ahead.

[3:45:41] Um, support work.

[3:45:42] Mr. Hayes.

[3:45:43] Our question is, is, last time, if you wanted to take the whole building down, you didn't want to do that.

[3:45:49] And it was a lot of million dollars just to keep the facade.

[3:45:51] I'm assuming there's an added cost to just working in the back of this building and the

[3:45:56] alley is there added cost to that or would it be just cheaper to throw the whole building

[3:46:00] down and just start from scratch.

[3:46:02] It's probably less expensive to get closer to the micro from its natural

[3:46:06] presence.

[3:46:07] Yeah, it would be less expensive to tear the building down but there are an added cost related

[3:46:14] to the project in keeping the culture of the alley and trying to enhance the alley and do

[3:46:21] things that Helen Grant have already started in the alley. And you're adding 35 apartments

[3:46:26] roughly 37, I think, does he did downtown? Yes. Okay. Mayor Norton?

[3:46:36] Yeah, this has been an

[3:46:38] interesting process. And I guess, I've been talking to some former city council members, I would

[3:46:44] say throughout this process. Mr. Henderson has been asked to keep coming back with something else

[3:46:52] that preserves the historic integrity.

[3:46:55] And this is closer to what the council had been asking for.

[3:46:59] So I want to acknowledge that you have heard what they have said

[3:47:03] over time and have made changes every time.

[3:47:07] And you have brought something different

[3:47:09] forward this time.

[3:47:10] So I want to acknowledge that.

[3:47:12] I do, I think the question probably ties a little bit

[3:47:17] onto, I think, what Council Member Palmer was getting at.

[3:47:21] but I want to ask it very specifically. A person buys a building or a set of buildings and they

[3:47:27] own them. It's their property. They can rent, they can leave the map to, they can do whatever they want.

[3:47:33] And we have some wonderful businesses that have been allowed to be there.

[3:47:39] Does, and I don't know if this is for probably for staff, but does a building owner

[3:47:44] that happens to have the building or buildings that are then designated as a historic.

[3:47:53] Do they have the right to remove those buildings completely from a block?

[3:48:03] We do have a process in place if you are trying to submit for a demolition permit,

[3:48:08] then you would be required to remove the property from the historic district,

[3:48:13] and show that it is no longer contributing to the historic district.

[3:48:21] That's not exactly getting to the to the answer.

[3:48:25] If someone owns property and they don't want it anymore and they own it and it's theirs.

[3:48:31] Does our designation as a historic district mean they no longer have control over what they do with their buildings and their property?

[3:48:42] No, within the historic district there are ways that we go about this process of making changes to it.

[3:48:47] So they still have the ability to make changes.

[3:48:50] Interior changes aren't reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission.

[3:48:54] It's only exterior in terms of additions or things that are happening.

[3:48:58] So there is a process.

[3:49:00] And does that process include removal of buildings?

[3:49:06] The process to remove a building would be that someone was submitting for a demolition

[3:49:10] and they would need to remove it from request removal

[3:49:12] from the historic district.

[3:49:14] And does the city or the HPC have the right to tell someone

[3:49:19] who owns property that they cannot get rid of that property?

[3:49:24] That property could be sold.

[3:49:26] So it doesn't mean that that property owner has to maintain that.

[3:49:29] They could sell the property.

[3:49:30] It would still be within the historic district

[3:49:32] because the historic district is an overlay zone within our UDC.

[3:49:38] So, what I'm trying to get out is that if a person owns property and they decide they don't want that property, they want something else,

[3:49:46] we have a process to go through to modify that property to make it appropriate for the historic district we've designated.

[3:49:54] That is correct.

[3:49:58] I guess I'm trying to get out.

[3:50:00] Do they have the right to just get rid of the building demolish it because they're not so, so my council member is saying a bit business owner really doesn't own that building and have the right to decide what to do with it because the HPC won't let them, I mean I'm trying to really understand that because I don't want to put it in a position where buildings will be demolished because we're not allowed them to be modified.

[3:50:29] So I'm trying to get at, do they have the right to remove their buildings, because they don't want them, they want them to be something else,

[3:50:36] or have we just allowed an owner from a building to control his building?

[3:50:43] So I think I understand what you're trying to get at.

[3:50:46] And I think that's where within the Unified Development Code, within the Heritage Preservation Overlay,

[3:50:51] there is identified in terms of if you wanted to be removed from his historic district,

[3:50:56] If you wanted to demolish it, there's a process to identify that.

[3:50:59] There's a process if you want to make an alteration to your building, and that doesn't

[3:51:03] prevent anyone from selling their building to somebody else or utilizing it within the

[3:51:08] interior in a different way.

[3:51:10] But in terms of removing it or demolishing the entire structure that is a contributing building

[3:51:15] and identified within the historic district, that is a process that you'd have to go to

[3:51:20] to remove it from, and that comes before the city council to remove it from the historic

[3:51:25] district and have that approval.

[3:51:28] Just to clarify so we know that this council in January of 24 designated a historic

[3:51:37] district that includes 31 buildings and in that that ordinance, the council said with

[3:51:47] these 31 buildings, if you want to alter that building or you want to demolish it, there

[3:51:53] process, it starts at HPC, it comes here to this city council, and that's what we're doing this evening.

[3:51:59] So anytime any one of those 31 buildings want to make an alteration or they want to put

[3:52:07] something else there, it has to come to our council. Yes, that's what I was trying to clarify,

[3:52:13] that there is a process for removal as well, but that ultimately, these people on that

[3:52:19] that property. The city does not own the property. They do. And so ultimately they have some choices to make.

[3:52:28] So I just wanted to make that point and I guess the Mr. Henderson or has anyone ever made an offer to purchase your property?

[3:52:41] Please come to the microphone, Mr.

[3:52:43] Sorry.

[3:52:44] If you're going to answer.

[3:52:48] The answer is no.

[3:52:49] If not.

[3:52:51] And no one in the room in the book tonight has approached us.

[3:52:54] If something were to buy it, they would obviously have more control

[3:52:57] over the future.

[3:52:58] As a tenant, they don't have that level of control.

[3:53:02] And therefore, we have to generate enough income,

[3:53:04] to make these property viable, maintain and pay the tax,

[3:53:07] to pay the insurance, pay the maintenance, let's go on.

[3:53:10] So, yeah. I mean, if they wanted to buy them, they should approach us. We're more and

[3:53:15] happy to do that. City wants to buy them. You should approach this.

[3:53:18] Okay. Thank you. I just wanted that on the record.

[3:53:20] Yeah. Okay. Thank you. And I was just to clarify.

[3:53:22] Our first proposal was to remove the buildings to demolish them.

[3:53:26] And that was denied. So that I think answers your question.

[3:53:29] It's been tested before.

[3:53:30] Okay. And that was one of our requests early on. Thanks.

[3:53:33] Thank you.

[3:53:34] Council Member Wall.

[3:53:36] Mr. Henderson, I hate to have you come back up again, but please,

[3:53:43] I really appreciate the passion of so many of the speakers here tonight, and I think there's an assumption on the part of many of those speakers that the current businesses will simply be displaced permanently. Is that part of the proposal?

[3:53:56] It was one thing I was referring to, there's not true.

[3:54:00] They certainly would be displaced during a time of construction.

[3:54:03] Our goal is not to do that.

[3:54:05] Seeing coffee would stay, the businesses other than the treatle would have to be replaced somewhere

[3:54:10] and possibly come back.

[3:54:12] But again, they'd have to be well, they'd be able to pay the rent and willing to pay the rent.

[3:54:16] That's the be the question.

[3:54:18] Can their business tolerates that?

[3:54:20] Do they generate enough for the business to tolerate or rent to that level?

[3:54:23] And that's what I mentioned is a reality check.

[3:54:25] And your business has to be able to produce enough income to rent a space that you want to be in.

[3:54:33] That is probably where some of my next questions were going to go, however, I thought maybe

[3:54:40] when you talked about an economically viable project, you could use the towers to help

[3:54:50] subsidize some of the costs of the street level, not really.

[3:54:56] Well, yeah, to a point, yes, we can't get...

[3:55:00] We continue to maintain those buildings long-term without something that allows us enough economic generation to do that.

[3:55:07] So, they'll just maintain that a certain level that the income that we generate could support, which currently it doesn't.

[3:55:15] Yeah. So, you would see the rent going from 5 to 10 to 25.

[3:55:21] I would have to.

[3:55:23] I'm just telling you the truth. And you ask anybody that's renting space downtown.

[3:55:26] You look at what the discovery one of two buildings are renting for, you know, they're a lot more than that.

[3:55:35] And I could give you a list of brand new or the bacon space that's on the Merchier change building that the Mazda building property was in.

[3:55:43] Their business was in. It is now being listed at 32 dollars a square foot, just a half a block away.

[3:55:49] So it gives you a sense of what the difference is and what we're getting and what the real market is.

[3:55:54] So, I mean, even if we were to get $25 square foot,

[3:55:57] I'm not convinced that it even covers the expenses

[3:56:00] and all the cost of real estate taxes

[3:56:02] that are doing a meal.

[3:56:03] With the buildings as they currently are.

[3:56:05] Well, they're not.

[3:56:06] Right.

[3:56:07] And that's actually a lot of the motivation for doing this.

[3:56:10] And it's not just that.

[3:56:11] It's going to be other people again,

[3:56:12] and the same issues we're having.

[3:56:14] You can kind of, either unless there's a major decision

[3:56:17] to support these businesses for the purposes,

[3:56:19] these people passionately want,

[3:56:21] which I can totally understand and appreciate.

[3:56:23] And, in fact, we've helped them for the last 10 years, but I haven't heard a word about that.

[3:56:27] Nobody said that they appreciate that.

[3:56:30] So, that part is the reality as economics are coming to the Earth.

[3:56:35] It's just the way things are, you know?

[3:56:38] And the property taxes insurance, everything else is not allowing us to continue on this path.

[3:56:43] It's just as simple.

[3:56:44] I imagine if I were you, I'd be very discouraged at this point with the time and money

[3:56:49] that you put into that.

[3:56:51] I think maybe I'm along the same route as the mayor and if you could sell the building to someone who

[3:56:59] would be willing to take on those just in the paper tonight on North Broadway, a woman who bought

[3:57:06] her building an art building, if someone wanted to take that on, this is a very thorny.

[3:57:15] Now, I appreciate what you've done, I appreciate the passion of the community.

[3:57:18] It's hard to have a business that supports these rats.

[3:57:20] I agree.

[3:57:21] I don't disagree with that.

[3:57:22] It's hard to have a business these days to do that.

[3:57:25] Thank you.

[3:57:26] Thank you.

[3:57:28] Councilmember Miller.

[3:57:30] Yeah, the question for staff and a first-in-read section from the Secretary of the Interior

[3:57:34] Standards and the Sucction from the Landmark Designation Study, then have a question.

[3:57:39] So standard number one says a property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed

[3:57:44] new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and

[3:57:49] environment. The quote I'm pulling from the landmark designation study which stated 2019 but with

[3:57:57] 2024 updates says of this block of the early commercial development along Broadway and its cross streets

[3:58:03] the highest concentration of accident buildings is located in the 300 block of Broadway Avenue South

[3:58:09] and on 3rd time, 33 South West between Broadway and 1st Avenue South.

[3:58:13] Architecturally, this area is characterized by

[3:58:16] contiguous development along the blocks.

[3:58:19] One, and two story-masonry buildings with first-level

[3:58:21] storefronts, flat roofs, punched openings at upper levels,

[3:58:25] and revival style details.

[3:58:27] So is that block scale, building form,

[3:58:29] and the continuous low rise, street wall character

[3:58:32] defining under the 2022 guidelines,

[3:58:35] or only on the facades, like, thinking about flat roofs, I mean obviously that's considering

[3:58:42] a characteristic beyond just the facades. So how would you interpret standard one with that quote

[3:58:49] from the designation study?

[3:58:57] Yeah, councilman Miller, are you asking if the addition, if the addition

[3:59:05] would alter that characteristic? Correct. So looking at minimal change. How do you interpret

[3:59:14] that or help us understand that standard within this project? So the minimal change to the

[3:59:22] distinctive, to the distinctive, it's distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial

[3:59:28] relationships. So, what are the distinctive materials features, spaces, and spatial relationships?

[3:59:36] I interpret that based on the eligibility study to be the facades of these buildings.

[3:59:42] Those are where the distinctive, well, read it again, the distinctive materials features, spaces, and spatial relationships exist.

[3:59:51] And it's, and that's why, um, the last go round, I recommend it denial because the,

[4:00:00] The addition was infringing on that in terms of its proximity to those facades by pushing them back further, you are allowed to still, as a, as a viewer, as somebody who's experiencing that space, you're still experiencing them at that second, at that two-story level when you're in the district.

[4:00:19] Okay. So then I appreciate you bringing up the viewshad. So how did the analysis, your analysis

[4:00:26] is staff contemplate the viewshad? What points is it the entirety of the district where you kind

[4:00:33] of looking at that from and saying minimal change? Sure. Yeah. So and then you've got an illustration

[4:00:40] on the screen right now that shows that you do see the tip of the plumber building from some

[4:00:46] advantage points. How important is that to understand the history of the district? I think that's where my interpretation is that being able to see that does not directly relate to the historic significance, at least not to the weight of prohibiting this.

[4:01:10] Okay. And then also looking back to the guidelines, I was looking through the documents,

[4:01:16] as the guidelines state character defining features must not be radically changed,

[4:01:20] obscure, damaged, destroyed. And so I'm curious about the word obscured, too,

[4:01:24] because I mean, it does feel like depending on your vantage point,

[4:01:28] there is some scurrying of the spatial relation of the district.

[4:01:32] Of the character defining features, but also it defines the environment as well.

[4:01:38] and some, which I would assume goes to the spatial relationships

[4:01:41] between the buildings.

[4:01:43] Sure.

[4:01:45] Yeah, I mean, I don't think that it's obscuring.

[4:01:50] And I use the example at the HPC meeting.

[4:01:53] You have some historic districts

[4:01:54] where the significance of the view shed

[4:01:57] is directly related to the significance of that historic site.

[4:02:01] Take a battlefield where you see something

[4:02:04] in the distance where maybe some action was coming

[4:02:07] from that direction and it has a direct relationship to the historic significance of that property.

[4:02:14] I don't see this as being that case. I just don't. That's my opinion.

[4:02:20] So then I have some questions for the applicant.

[4:02:29] So if the Standard 10 which the HPC also found for

[4:02:32] denial says that if the additional removed, but the character defining features would be intact. So

[4:02:40] if for some reason this project, this addition were approved and then removed what would remain

[4:02:45] of these buildings. I think that, why all the emphasis was on the fuss odds and the preservation

[4:02:51] and the setbacks. So all of that would be preserved. What's behind that, it would come down,

[4:03:00] but then it would be back and it's original condition based on the historically significant

[4:03:04] besides as as was always articulated to us. Okay. So on standard one, which you can

[4:03:10] talk about minimal change, did you consider alternate addition heights between zero

[4:03:17] and seven stories of addition and where what were some of the alternatives?

[4:03:21] I think we were 14 but lower between like a two story addition and a seven story

[4:03:27] addition. Yes, we did consider a lot of variations but to make the project

[4:03:32] economically viable. You have to have a certain amount of space that's

[4:03:35] rentable to generate revenue and income to support the cost of and then the

[4:03:40] ongoing maintenance. So we leveled out at at seven with that number of

[4:03:44] units and so seven is the minimal change that your analysis makes the

[4:03:49] building economically viable. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Consumantredoring. I'm

[4:03:56] ready to make a motion. Go ahead. Consumantred. I moved to deny the

[4:04:02] requested appeal and not overturn the denial of the certificate of appropriateness for an addition to the

[4:04:07] project at 309-3317 Broadway Avenue. Motion has been made by Councilmobredoring, is there a second?

[4:04:16] I'll second that motion. Go ahead.

[4:04:19] I want to thank the members of the public who came and spoke during public comment.

[4:04:26] I am also a fan of the businesses in these buildings.

[4:04:30] I just read a great book about national parks that I purchased from Diatem and looking for

[4:04:35] a reading a history of Mayo Clinic that my wife is reading was also purchased at Biota Diatem.

[4:04:42] The threshold hurts is where I go to buy my Christmas gifts because I believe in supporting

[4:04:46] local artists.

[4:04:47] Art heads, I wish I was good at visual arts, I'm a musician.

[4:04:52] So, love going in that space, but it's really not for me.

[4:04:56] Kathy steam as a as a pass

[4:05:00] Order of opening and affirming church and a fierce advocate and ally for the LGBTQIA plus community here in Rochester when members of my congregation were looking for a safe place. The whole Bible study for keen youth in that population, Kathy steam was my first recommendation.

[4:05:21] Treadome is a beloved business from my family.

[4:05:25] My son is a sneakerhead and like thrift store shopping.

[4:05:30] Doesn't really work for me, but I like going into,

[4:05:32] I love going into Treadome with him as he was growing up.

[4:05:35] So I could pat Phoebe on the head.

[4:05:38] Love the businesses.

[4:05:40] That being said, our task is to not make this decision

[4:05:44] based on the current business use.

[4:05:47] Therefore, I have been doing a lot of research and came across the document, the Secretary

[4:05:55] of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for

[4:05:59] Preserving Rehabilitation, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings.

[4:06:06] These document is very lengthy offers recommendations on page 26.

[4:06:13] New exterior additions and related new construction.

[4:06:15] There must be a balance between differentiation and compatibility to maintain the historic character and the identity of the building being enlarged.

[4:06:26] I don't believe that our current proposal does that. Page 146 recommended designing new exterior additions to historic buildings or adjacent new construction that are compatible with the historic character of the setting that preserves the historic relationship between buildings and the landscape.

[4:06:43] because I believe in a central character of this historic district is the view of the

[4:06:51] plumber building and the caler sign I believe that our current proposal does not meet that

[4:06:58] recommendation page 156 recommendation ensuring that the addition is subordinate

[4:07:04] and secondary to the historic building and is compatible in massing scale materials

[4:07:09] relationship of solids to solids to voids and color, what's not recommended in this document.

[4:07:17] Constructing a new addition that is as large or larger than the historic building,

[4:07:23] which visually overwhelms it. The results in the demunation or loss of its historic character.

[4:07:29] I believe this proposal takes the non-recommended route. Recommendation, page 156, using the same

[4:07:37] forms materials and color range of the historic building and a manner that does not duplicate it but distinguishes the addition from the original building.

[4:07:49] Looking at the renderings provided by the applicant in the packet, it does not appear from the renderings provided that the same materials and at least colors aren't being used in the complete construction of this new addition.

[4:08:06] Recommendation page 156 ensuring that the addition is stylistically appropriate for the historic building type

[4:08:15] If I look at the 309 building that has a big glass tower sticking out of the top of it

[4:08:22] top of it. I believe that

[4:08:24] This proposal does not abide by that recommendation

[4:08:29] Recommended considering the design for a new addition in terms of its relationship to the historic building as well as the historic district

[4:08:35] neighborhood and setting, I believe, contributing properties in the district itself will be

[4:08:42] diminished by the size and scope of this addition. Therefore, it doesn't buy by that recommendation.

[4:08:49] Recommendation, deciding on addition to a historic building in a densely built location,

[4:08:54] such as the downtown commercial district, to appear as a separate building or in fill rather than

[4:09:00] in addition. In such a setting, the addition structure must be compatible with the size and the scale

[4:09:07] of the historic building and surrounding buildings. Usually, the front elevation of the new building

[4:09:13] should be in the same plane, not set back from the historic building. This approach may also provide

[4:09:19] the opportunity for a larger addition or infill when the facade can be broken up into smaller

[4:09:25] elements that are consistent with the scale of the historic building and surrounding buildings.

[4:09:31] I do not believe that the project in front of us follows that recommendation. My main standard

[4:09:38] for voting to uphold the HPC's decision is standard 10, make it reversible. New additions,

[4:09:46] new construction should be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future,

[4:09:50] the essential form and integrity of the historic property, and its environment would be unimpaired.

[4:09:57] If you remove the back from a building, you are...

[4:10:00] Changing the structural integrity of the building. Therefore, I feel like this project does not live up to that standard.

[4:10:09] I really appreciate the work that our community development department has done. Mr. Henderson, I appreciate your continued passion to do work here. I just don't think we are here yet, to make me feel comfortable moving forward.

[4:10:25] Thank you, Council Member. As the seconder, I will speak next and I will support the findings of the HPC.

[4:10:37] And again, I also will echo what my colleague said is I appreciate Mr. Henderson you coming back here with an altered version,

[4:10:51] But I really it's hard to see when you look at the building and it's the alteration is supposed to be subordinate to either the historic building or subordinate in the historic district and it's clearly a building we can see it is not subordinate to the district.

[4:11:18] And I have some concern with staff using a non-contributing building as the model to then say this building is subordinate to that building.

[4:11:36] We are in a place colleagues where we have a historic district that was designated less than two and a half years ago.

[4:11:48] and it's been tested by developers, and it also has some integrity to it.

[4:12:01] And we are also creating this certificate of appropriateness.

[4:12:08] I have some concern with staff not reaching out to the State Historic Preservation Office for their input on whether or not this was appropriate.

[4:12:18] This is appropriate. We are very nascent in the work of protecting 31 buildings in a very small part of our city and we made that decision that we wanted to protect these buildings and with that protection comes standards and

[4:12:43] And the need for business owners who were consulted as we went through this process on what those standards mean as far as whether something is appropriate.

[4:13:02] I really am most concerned with us opening the door to allowing what, as I said, this

[4:13:10] council created to be diminished and wounded by the first of a thousand cuts here.

[4:13:19] And we also have as a council and as a DMC put financial commitments into building up this historic district with no interest loans grants and others to help really build the vitality that we all want to see in the district and I just have to also say I am just overwhelmed

[4:13:49] by the over 40 patrons and Rochester residents who are creating vitality there and they are creating

[4:14:02] that and we need to be looking at preserving that and I encourage you Mr. Anderson to encourage

[4:14:10] that vitality where it's at and look at those no-inserts loans and look at your history

[4:14:19] story properties as historic properties. I look at this, and I say, this is a back door way, or maybe even a back alley way of getting around the objectives of our historic district. And what you need to do is work with the communities there and see what you can do with the buildings you have.

[4:14:49] or sell them, because they are in our historic district.

[4:14:56] Council member Wall.

[4:15:01] Last night, my wife and I decided that we would eat downtown and then walk through the downtown.

[4:15:10] So that we could really study the fronts of the buildings, look in the alleys.

[4:15:14] It's something that we think is valuable, and we would like to preserve.

[4:15:18] I would like the best of both worlds. I would like a viable project that would protect and save those buildings.

[4:15:27] I worry that this might be the last best effort to actually save the facades and two-thirds

[4:15:36] of the buildings that if Mr. Henderson needs to divest himself of those buildings, who will

[4:15:44] take that on and is willing to invest the amount of money that would actually bring the

[4:15:51] buildings to continue safe operation with businesses that can afford the rent.

[4:16:02] It's so thorny.

[4:16:06] You know, you want to have it all.

[4:16:10] I appreciate the work Mr. Henderson has done.

[4:16:14] The community lack of support has been overwhelming.

[4:16:19] Mr. President, over here, Mr. Spindler Craig.

[4:16:24] Thank you, if I could interject. I was just trying to figure out the right time to push

[4:16:29] the issue a bit on the question of findings. There's more discussions to come, I think,

[4:16:36] but we really do need clarification, perhaps, from community development, whether they have

[4:16:41] enough from the motioners in this case to have clarity on what findings would support this particular motion.

[4:16:52] We really do need some amount of clarity in order for the body to deliberate on those specific proposed findings.

[4:17:01] So I would defer to community development to weigh in.

[4:17:05] Miss Woodward. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify. I know that Council Member Doring listed and kind of went through the guidelines that were identified in the Secretary of Interior standards.

[4:17:14] The actual standards that we reviewed that were part of Heritage Preservation Commission are in the packet of those 10 numbers.

[4:17:21] So I just and then I heard Council President Shubring mentioned being consistent with the Heritage Preservation Commission. So I wanted to make sure that we were clear on what those findings were.

[4:17:32] Council Member Doring.

[4:17:35] So, I feel like my motion stands because I feel like standard 10 is not being met.

[4:17:42] Thank you.

[4:17:44] Yeah.

[4:17:44] Can I add and clarify, Mr. Patterson Lundgren.

[4:17:49] I spoke to the scale and size of the alteration.

[4:17:54] Is that standard 9 or is that 10?

[4:17:58] Part of me while I look.

[4:18:04] Yep, that is number 9.

[4:18:05] So, Council Member Doring, are you okay with adding also it's not in keeping with standard 9?

[4:18:11] Absolutely.

[4:18:14] Okay.

[4:18:15] Council Member Miller.

[4:18:17] Yeah, I would agree with that. I think standard 10 for me is just the crux of this.

[4:18:22] If the permanent demolition of part of the buildings and 309 largely in its entirety but for

[4:18:28] the facade is removed, it's essential form has changed and like those aren't reversible

[4:18:35] steps for the buildings and I think that's the clearest place where I just can't

[4:18:41] understand how to apply standard 10 in a different way. I think similarly

[4:18:46] standard 1 and 9, the talk about minimal change and the spatial relationships

[4:18:51] also I cannot get my head around how a seven-story addition is compatible in scale

[4:18:58] with a two-story building.

[4:19:03] So those are my read of the HPC. I find it more difficult to apply

[4:19:08] to five and six, but I think one nine and ten, it seems quite clear to me that those findings

[4:19:21] do not fit the Secretary of the Interior Standards.

[4:19:26] Council Member Palmer.

[4:19:30] Staff is recommending

[4:19:32] 9 and 10, how did you justify 9 and 10?

[4:19:40] So with number 9, I'm indicating that the proposed project will not destroy the historic

[4:19:48] materials, features, and spatial relationships that provide the historic character to

[4:19:53] these properties along Broadway.

[4:19:55] That takes us back to what the eligibility study indicates.

[4:20:00] It's referring to the facades of the buildings, and it's referring to them being directly adjacent to Broadway.

[4:20:08] And it's referring to them as being direct entry from Broadway. Mixed uses. It doesn't.

[4:20:20] project has very little impact on four of those storefronts, on two of the buildings. The project

[4:20:27] has a little more impact on 309, but it maintains that facade, so you're still experiencing

[4:20:36] those that the character defining feature features of the historic district.

[4:20:42] Number 10.

[4:20:44] Number 10.

[4:20:45] Let me just look at my notes here.

[4:20:49] Again, I think that it's the essential form and integrity of experiencing it within the historic district.

[4:20:56] One of the things that our certificate of appropriateness considers is the exterior, right?

[4:21:03] We don't review and we don't require certificate of appropriateness for alterations on the interior.

[4:21:10] So I think you start to have to define, where does that, you know, where does that happen?

[4:21:18] You're still maintaining the exterior facade, and that's why that's why I made that recommendation.

[4:21:27] And you're comfortable making that recommendation.

[4:21:29] I stand by what, yeah, by what I said.

[4:21:32] And you're our historic preservation person on staff.

[4:21:36] Yes.

[4:21:37] Correct.

[4:21:40] Can I follow up on council member Palmer's questioning, Mr. Patterson Longard? Yes, you are our historic preservation specialist on staff.

[4:21:52] Can you talk to us about why the state historic preservation office was not contacted and asked to weigh in on this alteration?

[4:22:05] Absolutely. Yeah, that is not part of our process.

[4:22:07] that's not part of our adopted process, there's no requirements for it, and it's not something

[4:22:12] that we typically do for a certificate of appropriateness. So it's not typical, and it's not

[4:22:19] required, so there you do it for other historic preservation projects, don't you? No, not for certificates

[4:22:26] of appropriateness. When we are looking at designation, then we are required to reach out to them

[4:22:33] get their opinion. That's by state statute and buyer UDC. We're not required and we don't

[4:22:39] typically follow that as a procedure for a certificate of appropriateness.

[4:22:45] When a building owner wants to demolish a building is ship-o contacted?

[4:22:53] So when a building owner wants to demolish a building, they have to come before the city council

[4:22:58] want to ask for the designation to be removed.

[4:23:02] Community development will not issue a building demolition permit unless you remove the designation from it.

[4:23:13] We are not required by statute to approach the state preservation office for removal of properties from

[4:23:24] for removal of the designation.

[4:23:28] But you have in the past, correct?

[4:23:31] I don't believe we have.

[4:23:35] The demolition of the Lourdes High School, I do know that

[4:23:38] Shipwell was there was a letter from Shipwell speaking against that.

[4:23:48] We specifically didn't reach out to them.

[4:23:50] It could have also been the applicant at the time that requested that from Shipwell.

[4:23:55] Are there any other council members wishing to be heard on this item?

[4:24:00] Council.

[4:24:00] Can I follow my question?

[4:24:02] Yeah, absolutely.

[4:24:03] Go ahead, council member.

[4:24:04] The building's landmark.

[4:24:06] Or is that the district is landmark?

[4:24:11] The district is landmark.

[4:24:13] We landmark the historic district.

[4:24:14] That is the property that is landmarked.

[4:24:18] The buildings, these three buildings,

[4:24:19] contribute to the historic district and to the landmark.

[4:24:24] But is the district that is landmarked?

[4:24:27] I'll call the question.

[4:24:31] Can you hold on to calling the question?

[4:24:33] It looks like all the questions.

[4:24:34] It'll just be, I hadn't spoke yet.

[4:24:38] Go ahead and cancel my breaking.

[4:24:39] I mean, in this discussion, I'm following,

[4:24:42] there is this one quasi-judicial,

[4:24:44] and we have these criteria left to use.

[4:24:46] It seems reasonable that differing people.

[4:24:50] Can I take the criteria and say it's met or not met?

[4:24:53] I think that's, can happen with these things.

[4:24:55] I am still trying to like take this whole-

[4:25:00] The public hearing is far more the powerful part of the public hearing and the emotion, but also the idea of the support for these avant-garde communities and what they need and what they're owed from us.

[4:25:14] But I can't find any of that in the criteria that I'm dealing with.

[4:25:17] And I'm worried that we're working to get there.

[4:25:21] And I'm fighting that impulse.

[4:25:29] Councilmember Waltox about the naughty issues

[4:25:31] with historic preservation.

[4:25:33] We as an owner of the Shateau are fighting with the same thing.

[4:25:36] How do we maintain that building viably

[4:25:41] and have it just be used as a community place?

[4:25:47] for whatever reason. It's not working out. I'm sitting here right now knowing that we went through one of

[4:25:54] these reviews for demolition and another review for another building type that we could not accept

[4:26:00] because we were like the experts were looking at going like it does not support the integrity of it.

[4:26:06] I actually do have much more of a facade view of what the historic district is that you experience it

[4:26:11] as you're walking around. I'm kind of thrown off that someone says, no, when I go over to the corner of

[4:26:16] and this I can't see something. I had no concept that that was part of the historic district that you can't block anything or that you could put a drone up and say oh you're changing the roofs.

[4:26:27] I just didn't think that was part of what we were protecting. I thought I really did think it was the streetscape and what our staff talks about of the setbacks from there.

[4:26:36] So, as the motion is made here, now, I don't think I'm not going to support it.

[4:26:42] I think we have this back and forth going on with, we did a historic preservation policy,

[4:26:52] which I don't need to say this, but I will, that I didn't support at the time, but it is

[4:26:55] the law of the land, and I'm going to enforce it for how we're going to use it in this

[4:27:04] problem of how do you make these buildings viable versus how do you keep them historic?

[4:27:12] And it is a struggle.

[4:27:13] I struggle with the idea of what does it mean to be economically viable.

[4:27:16] I don't want to say, well, you could have made ten more dollars of fortitude to

[4:27:19] done this.

[4:27:20] Does that something we have to do now?

[4:27:22] And I don't think that's upon us.

[4:27:23] But I think it is a worry that and we've struggled with this through DMC and

[4:27:27] through other areas to say, how do we help make these better?

[4:27:31] And this is a case where the building owners are coming and saying,

[4:27:34] And we can protect the fronts of this.

[4:27:36] We can do the setbacks that you talked about.

[4:27:38] We can do this height because it's really not noticeable from this.

[4:27:42] So based on those things, then what I thought a historic district was for, both contributing

[4:27:46] and non-contributing, it makes it difficult for me to support this motion.

[4:27:50] Thank you, Council Member.

[4:27:53] So we are voting on the motion to support the findings of the HPC and clerk case of the

[4:28:04] Please call the roll council member keen me council member Miller. Hi

[4:28:09] Council member wall.

[4:28:18] Nay

[4:28:20] Council member Fredericks

[4:28:22] Council member Palmer. May

[4:28:25] Council member Dorene. Hi

[4:28:27] Council president Schubert. Bye motion fails. May make a motion. Yeah, go ahead. Council member make a motion

[4:28:34] Proving the requested appeal and overturning the Nile of the circuit of appropriate this for an addition to the project gets

[4:28:40] 309 to 317 Broadway Avenue is there a second to that motion.

[4:28:45] Second motion made by council member Palmer and seconded by council member

[4:28:50] Frederick's any more to add council member.

[4:28:53] Any further discussion?

[4:28:55] President.

[4:28:56] Again.

[4:28:58] I'll jump in earlier.

[4:28:59] Go ahead.

[4:28:59] This time.

[4:29:00] Are there findings?

[4:29:01] I want to clarify with the movements.

[4:29:03] What with the movements?

[4:29:04] What findings are being referenced?

[4:29:06] Are there findings?

[4:29:07] The ones provided by the staff in the staff report in the packet.

[4:29:12] That is correct.

[4:29:13] Any additional clarification needed by community development?

[4:29:18] No, we don't need anything additional.

[4:29:19] Thank you.

[4:29:22] Council Member Wall.

[4:29:25] Very just so hard.

[4:29:28] If we were to move ahead, it would be with my certain hope that we would be working with the businesses that that

[4:29:37] It really was the crux of what so much of the testimony was about tonight and the community that is so important to Rochester

[4:29:47] So that would be a proviso for me.

[4:29:52] Councilmember Fredericks.

[4:29:54] I read in Molly.

[4:29:55] Thank you for helping us navigate some really difficult waters.

[4:30:03] Clerk case, so please call the roll. Council member keen. Aye. Council member Miller. Aye. Council member Wal. Aye. Council member Fredericks. Aye. Council member Palmer. Aye. Council member Doryn. Aye. Council President Shubing. Aye. Motion passes 43. Thank you everyone for being here. And for your testimony, we all appreciated it.

[4:30:31] and we hope to see again. We are going to move on now to item G2, which is the 2026 transit

[4:30:41] program of projects federal transit administration. This is Rachel Fos.

[4:30:52] And you can hold for a

[4:30:53] minute if you like as people leave.

[4:31:22] Please exit if you're not staying for the meeting.

[4:31:42] Go ahead, Ms. Fauge.

[4:31:43] Good evening, Mayor, council members.

[4:31:46] This is the 2026 annual program of projects.

[4:31:49] There's sometimes affectionately called the pop.

[4:31:52] To receive our federal funds, which include operation and capital project dollars.

[4:31:56] This year, it's just operations and I'll be getting to that in a second.

[4:32:00] So these funds are federal apartments that are distributed based on an equation.

[4:32:06] And that equation includes population and population density.

[4:32:08] and so those are often referred to as formula funds.

[4:32:11] So a few years, they're discussing formula funds,

[4:32:13] or 53-07 funds, these are the same.

[4:32:16] They have many names, but the same dollar amount,

[4:32:19] because it's an equation.

[4:32:22] The pop is a compliance checkpoint for FTH,

[4:32:25] an opportunity for FTH to verify that the formula funds are being

[4:32:29] used for eligible and appropriately scoped projects.

[4:32:31] It's also an opportunity for public engagement

[4:32:34] in terms of our federal funding opportunities.

[4:32:37] The projects listed are found in the State Transportation Improvement Plan or the

[4:32:41] Step and they are funneled through Role Cog and I can throw in a bunch more

[4:32:47] acronyms as we go.

[4:32:49] So they're in the step and the tip, federally and statewide.

[4:32:55] So you'll note that in the public notice that the transit development plan was listed as

[4:32:59] one of the funding projects, however, that is included under VA's contract.

[4:33:04] So that is a value add and that is being services we've provided to the city at no cost to our

[4:33:10] our contract so that those funds have been rolled back into the operational dollars for that grant.

[4:33:17] I wanted to point out that in their very loud it says local match and that local matching clues are

[4:33:23] our local dollars from Rochester from our revenue and our advertising dollars but additionally it includes our

[4:33:33] federal grant. So we're still on the hook for 15% total of that if we were to spend all of those

[4:33:40] dollars and I think that's a really important designation there. We don't have to spend all of

[4:33:45] the dollars. We can roll those over. You sell those kind of listed out within the public notice as well.

[4:33:51] And so the project program projects includes current current known projects and again,

[4:33:58] that's just operations for this year. It doesn't include competitive grant opportunities.

[4:34:02] So things like the link BRT grants that we received or even the North Broadway grant are not.

[4:34:08] They wouldn't be able to sit with in here because these are just our federal funding dollars.

[4:34:13] So we're requesting approval of our annual program of projects.

[4:34:18] Thank you, Ms. Fauci.

[4:34:21] And this is a public hearing.

[4:34:24] Anyone wishing to be heard on this item?

[4:34:27] Please step forward.

[4:34:30] Anybody wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward.

[4:34:35] Anybody, anybody wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward.

[4:34:38] Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing.

[4:34:41] I'll let you back up.

[4:34:43] Are there questions from Council Member Keen?

[4:34:47] Yeah, just on that.

[4:34:49] This is the thing I had the federal and then local state is ripped.

[4:34:52] in there is the state funding up.

[4:35:00] For federal is like 70% in state, is pan or is it very different?

[4:35:06] It can vary. And so a few council meetings ago, we approved the state funding. And so that is more of a state

[4:35:14] driven dollar amount. So it's not coordinated together. They're neighbors, but they're not,

[4:35:22] they're not, they're not, they're not utilizing the same form. Okay. All right. Thank you.

[4:35:26] Any further discussion?

[4:35:28] Is there a motion on this item?

[4:35:30] I'll be a motion adopting a resolution authorizing the filing of the 2026 transit program projects

[4:35:36] on a subsequent submission of grant application and execution of grant.

[4:35:41] Second.

[4:35:41] Motion made by council member.

[4:35:43] Frederickson seconded by council member.

[4:35:45] Can any further discussion?

[4:35:47] Council member.

[4:35:49] Thank you.

[4:35:51] All in favor say aye.

[4:35:53] Aye.

[4:35:53] post-ANA motion passes, thanks Rachel.

[4:35:56] Next up, we have item G3,

[4:35:59] which is a conditional use permit by UCI tower,

[4:36:03] Mr. Desmond McGill.

[4:36:06] Yes, thank you, President Shubring.

[4:36:08] Thank you, Mr. McGill, for staying later than you usually have to.

[4:36:12] You're welcome, and a good evening, Mayor.

[4:36:16] Members of the council, I'll be bringing you this introduction.

[4:36:19] This is a conditional use permit

[4:36:21] or a free-standing commercial wireless telecommunications facility.

[4:36:26] It consists of 125 foot monopole tower and ancillary equipment

[4:36:30] in located in light industrial district at 1811

[4:36:33] seventh street northwest.

[4:36:36] The subject site is at the John Hardy's restaurant location situated north

[4:36:40] and west of the inner change of Highway 14 and Highway 52.

[4:36:45] The applicant UCI is looking to construct this monopole

[4:36:49] for a service provider with the co-location space

[4:36:53] for two additional providers for companies wishing

[4:36:56] to serve this area.

[4:36:58] The applicant looks to establish a 25 by 35 lease area site

[4:37:02] on the south side of the restaurant.

[4:37:04] The leasing site is generally concealed by large structures

[4:37:08] located to the northwest south and southeast.

[4:37:12] To approve this facility, you see requires

[4:37:14] that that no existing viable monopole structure

[4:37:18] or other structure be available to co-locate on within a half mile.

[4:37:23] This proposed facility meets that criteria, a free standing

[4:37:28] monopole up to 75 feet is permitted.

[4:37:32] Is it permitted use in the light industrial zoning district?

[4:37:35] However, through a council approved CUP, up to 50 additional feet of height may be requested and approved.

[4:37:45] The 125V height for this structure is requested to maintain adequate service and reception in the central portion of the city.

[4:37:54] This structure will serve as a replacement facility for an existing 180 foot height tall tower located 100 feet east of this site at the John Marshall High School.

[4:38:06] the facility will likely eliminate future need for other monopoles in this immediate

[4:38:12] vicinity subject approval of this request any future model pull within a half

[4:38:18] mile of this site would need to demonstrate why this particular site would not meet their needs.

[4:38:24] Should all three of this co-locating areas on this pull be used, the UDC does also require

[4:38:32] that any other monopole that could be located in this general area, be no closer than 100,

[4:38:39] 1000 feet away at their July 22 meeting. The planning commission did recommend approval of this

[4:38:46] by unanimous 7-0 vote. And that's my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

[4:38:51] Thank you, Mr. McGill. Is there an applicant for this item?

[4:38:56] Please step forward, state your name, and you have up to 10 minutes, but you don't have to use them all.

[4:39:01] My name is Matt Coenard. I represent UCI. I would say the same thing that I set up the planning

[4:39:08] commission as the staff report is very complete. I'm happy to reiterate anything, or if you

[4:39:13] have any specific questions, I'd be happy to answer those as well.

[4:39:19] We will invite you back after the public hearing and see if my colleagues have any questions for you.

[4:39:26] you can sit down now.

[4:39:27] Okay, thank you.

[4:39:28] This is a public hearing.

[4:39:29] Anyone wishing to be heard on this item please step forward.

[4:39:33] This is a public hearing.

[4:39:36] Anyone wishing to be heard on this item please step forward.

[4:39:38] This is a public hearing.

[4:39:39] Anyone wishing to be heard on this item please step forward.

[4:39:43] Forward.

[4:39:43] Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing

[4:39:46] and invite the applicant back up for any closing comments.

[4:39:52] Does anybody have any questions?

[4:39:53] Does anybody have any questions?

[4:40:00] We need to turn down. It's the lease has been terminated. It will be coming down at some point.

[4:40:06] That is what we've been told soon. This is a pretty complicated project that's going on right now. There's a lot of things that are going on that are just sort of gray areas and everybody's a little bit in the weeds. Right now there is no viable alternate solution. That's what this is.

[4:40:25] So, so once this tower is done and completed is the other tower coming down.

[4:40:30] That's my understanding. Yes. It's not ours to take down. We just know we just know the

[4:40:36] circumstances of it. Okay. Any further questions on this? Is there a motion on this item?

[4:40:44] I'll move to adopt the resolution approving a conditional use permit CD-2026-011-CUP by

[4:40:52] you see I tower for the construction of a wireless communications facility consisting of 125 foot

[4:40:59] monopole tower and ancillary equipment in L1 zoning district. Motion made by council member

[4:41:08] keen and seconded by council member Fredericks you could sit down sir. Any further information to share?

[4:41:15] All in favor say I I post a nay motion a motion passes six to one with council member Palmer voting nay

[4:41:26] Thank you

[4:41:27] We will now move on to

[4:41:30] G4

[4:41:31] Which is our 2027 master fee schedule mr. Aaron Parrish actually I can take that one mr. President if that's already going ahead

[4:41:40] Mr. President, Council members, Mayor Norton, Administrator Zelms.

[4:41:44] As part of the budget process, before you tonight,

[4:41:47] is the 2020 Southern Master Fees Schedule.

[4:41:49] Some of the salient components of this year's schedule.

[4:41:53] 32 fees have been removed, seven fees have been added,

[4:41:56] the Community Development Building Division,

[4:41:59] some of which were transferred from their housing code update.

[4:42:03] Then there were some fire-related fees implemented

[4:42:07] for non-emergency, non-mission critical services based on the most recent current FEMA equipment

[4:42:14] rates, which is a similar methodology that we use for the public works that's currently

[4:42:19] within the fee schedule as well.

[4:42:23] So with that, you see a clean version of a red line version that shows the changes and with

[4:42:27] that me and my colleagues can stand for any questions.

[4:42:30] Thank you, Mr. Anderson.

[4:42:31] We may have questions after the public hearing.

[4:42:33] Uh, uh, uh, I will now open the public hearings.

[4:42:37] Is there anyone wishing to be heard on this item?

[4:42:40] Is there anyone wishing to be heard on this item?

[4:42:43] Anyone wishing to be heard on this item?

[4:42:46] Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing.

[4:42:48] Are there questions from council members to staff?

[4:42:53] Seeing no questions is there a motion on this side?

[4:42:56] Yes.

[4:42:56] I'll make a motion approving an ordinance establishing the 2027 master schedule

[4:43:01] direct in the city attorney office to repair an ordinance for the first reading on September

[4:43:05] 21, 2026. Motion made by council member Fredrex is there second. Seconded by council member

[4:43:13] wall any further add all in favor say I post a name motion passes. Moving on to our reports

[4:43:22] and recommendations H1 is wood debris management operations update. This is an item that was vetoed

[4:43:29] Mayor Norton, the veto automatically places the item back on the next agenda for consideration

[4:43:35] to override a veto, the item must pass with a super majority of the body voting eight,

[4:43:43] I, five, regardless of a forum, the item may only be considered as it was passed, no amendments

[4:43:49] may be made, Mayor Norton.

[4:43:55] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[4:43:58] So as I've mentioned in my veto node, I support this project.

[4:44:03] I think it belongs in the 2027 budget.

[4:44:08] One of my hesitations with this and one of the things I shared at the last meeting

[4:44:13] and maybe not as well as I should have.

[4:44:16] I view contingencies as for unexpected items that come at the end of the year.

[4:44:22] We are very close to the end of that year, we in fact are in the next month going to be discussing the next budget and it seems to me this would be an appropriate discussion for that in the first place.

[4:44:36] Secondly, I think when an item comes forward like this and it happens several other times since I've been mayor, it disallows a council to be able to think about its priorities and the things it may want to spend that contingency on.

[4:44:52] as opposed to a single item that is brought forward.

[4:45:00] Kind of out of the blue. And so, for me, we have had at least two items in the last month that I would have loved a discussion about should the contingency be spent on this.

[4:45:14] I'll hate to get into the controversy of Elton Hills Drive. But one of the questions was asked, could we put in protected by claims, and we were told that will cost $150,000, and that's not part of our budget or whatever amount.

[4:45:29] The

[4:45:33] item that's going to come up later this actually the next item is another item where with extra funding we could have considered alternative routes for a bike path.

[4:45:46] There are multiple things that this board cares about.

[4:45:50] And when we have an item like this, it gets approved, if you determine that a contingency shouldn't

[4:45:55] just be held for emergency, it should be the items that you select should be part of a larger

[4:46:05] picture and not just a single item brought for it.

[4:46:07] That is my belief.

[4:46:09] So I was very uncomfortable to have an item brought forward that wasn't an emergency that in

[4:46:14] my going over and talking to all the neighbors that have moved into the home said we don't

[4:46:18] here, any noise from halfway, it's not an issue, and I had been led to believe or at least that was what I heard is that it was loud and we would have to, you know, this, one of the reasons we want to do this is to tamp down noise. The neighbor said that the construction noise of the homes being built around them was a far bigger issue than anything that they had heard and these are literally the next, there's a trees and the next thing beyond those trees is halfway and they said they don't hear anything from there.

[4:46:48] So, as I went home after the last meeting with two items, only two items on the agenda and two items that had a lot of controversy and a council member missing, it was my determination that we bring this back and have the full board vote again for the reasons that I listed.

[4:47:11] Thank you, Mayor.

[4:47:17] I'll speak to it.

[4:47:19] I agree with you, Mayor.

[4:47:21] When it comes to the contingency fund that best practices are to have both staff and council members to feel they can come forward with projects to use the contingency funds.

[4:47:41] I do however look at the contingency fund as something that gives our staff the flexibility

[4:47:49] to use not just in an emergency, but when situations change when there is a new direction

[4:47:57] that a project may come before us and I think I definitely support this project.

[4:48:07] I think I heard you say you also support the goals of this project so I agree that best practices

[4:48:17] are not to use the contingency fund but we do have a contingency fund and it is tied to the

[4:48:27] is it? It's late. You know what?

[4:48:32] Do you want me to clarify how the contingency is built into the budget?

[4:48:38] So annually, you're existing lobby carries a million dollars each year, and multiple times throughout the year.

[4:48:44] Sometimes staff will come forward with something based on things they've heard from Council.

[4:48:47] We've been working on this half a way, site for at least three years, perhaps longer.

[4:48:52] And so as that the dynamics have changed throughout the how we've been looking at where the project might go

[4:48:59] Where we might be able to move the commercial site part of their way from development. That is actively happening there

[4:49:06] This is how it has developed over time. There's been emerging changes in where and how that could go the alternative would be that you would either need to add

[4:49:14] $350,000 maybe more depending on the timing of this project oftentimes the cost of them go up

[4:49:21] to your 2027 level or find a pathway to agreement of four or five of you to reduce $350,000 worth of the budget if you wanted to stay at the current proposed level.

[4:49:33] That is at 5.59% increase year over year, not the rate. So the contingency serves as a, as you have stated, an opportunity to bring items forward to the council that we have typically don't bring those forward without having been working on them.

[4:49:47] And you still at the end of the year if the contingency isn't utilized whatever is remaining goes towards the 42% reserve and that 42% reserve from a governmental finance officers accounting standard and from a state.

[4:50:00] The standard is where it still provides you that buffer for any type of emergent issue coming

[4:50:05] for pandemic, a financial recession, things of that nature.

[4:50:10] So the actual emergency reserve is your general fund reserve.

[4:50:15] Thank you.

[4:50:16] Administrator Zams for clarifying what I was trying to say.

[4:50:21] Council member Wall.

[4:50:22] And I might say just in a little bit different way, although I think Mr. Schuberg was going

[4:50:28] down that road, my understanding of contingency is not always a emergency. I would more

[4:50:36] call it a change order, and I think this is a change order, and we use contingencies

[4:50:41] and construction projects. It's to cover change orders or things that are different than

[4:50:47] what we had planned. So I'm not unhappy using that 350 rather than adding 350. The only additional

[4:50:54] I would say is we as a city have invested money in that particular housing development through our sales tax money and I think it would be good to support that

[4:51:07] Anyone else wanting to be a council member

[4:51:10] Key I'm just going to put it the moment I think we have to I mean our only action is to put the exact same motion exactly okay so adopting a two part resolution

[4:51:19] authorizing preliminary approval of relocation of commercial operations, and authorizing preliminary

[4:51:26] support to the funding request of $350,000 in contingency funds for the cost associated.

[4:51:33] Motion has been made by Council Member Keen and seconded by Council Member Frederick

[4:51:37] saying more to add Council Member Miller.

[4:51:42] Sure.

[4:51:43] I'll just take for the record.

[4:51:44] I mean, my position hasn't changed since the last time this came up.

[4:51:46] My gripe with the way this is come is that it was a council update with no identified funding

[4:51:55] source across and then the first time it comes to the open meeting to our discussion, the recommendation

[4:52:01] of a funding source, not a consideration of possible funding sources with a recommendation

[4:52:06] to use contingency and then this doesn't allow us to compare alternative projects in the

[4:52:11] So I don't plan to support this as I did in the first time, but I understand, welcome to our last meeting, Council Member Wall.

[4:52:19] Get to litigate both items.

[4:52:24] Council Member Fredericks.

[4:52:27] Don't you have us?

[4:52:28] I hope I'm good.

[4:52:30] Are you moving your pen?

[4:52:31] It looks like you want to read the answer.

[4:52:33] If I were an option here, you would have bought everything.

[4:52:36] I do.

[4:52:38] Council Member Doran, go ahead.

[4:52:39] I'm also going to remain consistent and not,

[4:52:42] support the motion, Mr. Councilmember Miller, very well expressed both last time and this time.

[4:52:52] His rationale and I agree with his rationale, so I will not be supporting the motion.

[4:52:58] Councilmember Palmer.

[4:53:01] I have an excited how I'm going to vote because it's not an unexpected expense,

[4:53:12] and this is something we can budget for next year.

[4:53:14] I really have a problem with us, not waiting until emergencies or something that's unexpected.

[4:53:22] One of my examples would be Cook Park Pickleball that was something that came up last

[4:53:26] year we used, Consentancy Funds for that, that came up unexpectedly and hopefully this next

[4:53:32] week is going to be open, it will not have happened if we didn't use Consentancy Funds.

[4:53:36] this would probably happen next January in our budget.

[4:53:41] And so moving to roll call, yes.

[4:53:45] Sounds like Mr. Yeser may be able to clarify how this became an emergent issue.

[4:53:51] Yeah, thanks, Council President Schubering. Members of the Council Mayor, I do want to clarify

[4:53:56] that. I appreciate the opportunity. The reason why we're saying it's unexpected, certainly

[4:54:01] the project as Administrator Zones pointed out has been in conversation for some time.

[4:54:06] The change that was unexpected outside of the budget processes previously we had been working towards a partnership with the county utilizing their site where we did not think that we would be bearing this much cost.

[4:54:17] And so that's what has changed about the project since we had been talking about it over the years. So that's the reason for the ask

[4:54:27] clerk case. Please call the roll.

[4:54:30] Council Member Keen.

[4:54:32] Hi.

[4:54:33] Council Member Miller.

[4:54:35] Council Member Wall.

[4:54:37] Council Member Fredericks.

[4:54:39] Council Member Palmer.

[4:54:43] Aye.

[4:54:44] Council Member Dwayne.

[4:54:45] Aye.

[4:54:46] Council President Schubert.

[4:54:48] Aye.

[4:54:49] Motion passes five to two.

[4:54:51] Our next item is H2, which is the Willow Creek Regional Trail Feasibility Study and Professional Services Agreement for Final Dec.

[4:55:00] Our last meeting, as she mentioned, it was our only two items. And as I said before, it automatically

[4:55:06] places it on our agenda and to override we must pass with five. And the item may only be considered

[4:55:14] as it was passed. No amendments may be made. Mayor Norton. Thank you. This was the second of a

[4:55:24] difficult discussion that we had at the last meeting and this is when I had been

[4:55:30] involved with prior and I shared some of this at the last meeting as well. I had the

[4:55:39] family had been here before when the site was brought forward. We moved ahead and did some

[4:55:45] testing on their property that they did not want to have but we did it anyway. I worked with

[4:55:55] Dylan, in particular, met with the family and they shared their concern about not wanting

[4:56:01] their property, bifurcated with a trail and could we please find alternatives.

[4:56:10] And again, this is where we have to make choices as a council about how we decide to spend

[4:56:16] money. I do support and have supported putting a trail out to connect Willow Creek and

[4:56:26] out further in the past. This has been talked about for as long as I can remember.

[4:56:30] And I do support that concept, but I do not support a condemnation process and

[4:56:38] moving a trail, putting a recreational trail on someone's personal property. They live

[4:56:44] the country for a reason, they purchased a homestead out there, they have a pond and land and

[4:56:51] they love their life and they don't want a trail through the center of it. And so I was frustrated

[4:56:59] and that we did have an alternative brought for that was not seriously considered. At least it wasn't.

[4:57:06] It didn't appear to be seriously considered as an alternative because of the cost and again we have

[4:57:11] contingency funding for unexpected delays, and we had a discussion at the time about going

[4:57:16] out for potential grants or finding other funding or approaching the county or township

[4:57:21] or whatever.

[4:57:22] There are other discussions that came up at the meeting.

[4:57:25] I have since talked to some of our legislators who would be interested in helping us if we

[4:57:32] need a deferral on a timeline.

[4:57:34] They would be interested in going back and asking for an increased amount based on what we

[4:57:39] found, which is it will cost another million plus four, I think, 1.4, 1.3, that they would entertain

[4:57:49] the idea of talking about bringing forward and asking for additional funds at the state level.

[4:57:55] And in fact, one of them said that's not become all that unusual because the costs have gone up so

[4:58:01] much on so many projects that that would be a reasonable request. So I am not interested in

[4:58:10] personally, I cannot sleep over the idea that we would be taking doing something to property

[4:58:17] owners that truly don't want it and have asked us not to do it and if there were no other

[4:58:23] alternatives, there was a long the board of a property, it would be one thing but neither of those

[4:58:27] are true. We have other alternatives and perhaps there are even more we haven't thought of. It would

[4:58:31] be my preference and the reason I vetoed it is because I want us to find those and not

[4:58:38] to go through a condemnation and put a trail through some of this personal property.

[4:58:43] Thank you, Mayor.

[4:58:44] Council member Miller.

[4:58:46] I emailed staff some questions and advance of this and just want to get those on the record.

[4:58:51] So just if the veto were overturned, what council of thruvolves would remain before the city acquired any property interest,

[4:58:59] and is imminent domain action proposed or authorized by this vote?

[4:59:06] Mr. Dumbrowsky.

[4:59:07] Good evening, Mayor President. Members of the council, this vote would just identify the trail alignment that future action would need to occur with the council to initiate property acquisition.

[4:59:22] At that point, you do identify the potential for the use of a 90 day quick take.

[4:59:28] If it got to the point where we couldn't agree with different property owners and needed to go to court there would be an additional action the council would need to take to

[4:59:38] File in the district court for a condemnation proceeding

[4:59:42] So my second question is how common is this process what was passed at our last meeting in

[4:59:50] Trail

[4:59:52] Efforts in

[4:59:53] For example, the Chester Wood Strail Extension.

[5:00:00] Or has it been historically? The most recent project we completed would have been the Chesterwoods extension from Eastwood Gulf, of course, out to 50th Avenue southeast.

[5:00:10] That is a similar path. Overland goes through different properties. We worked with the property owners along that project.

[5:00:19] Part of the, when we get to acquisition process, if we have an alignment, part of that process in acquiring land, easements in this case,

[5:00:28] is there's negotiation that could be you're taking two of my trees I want two more trees planted

[5:00:36] as part of the project just everything's up for negotiation at that point as we move into that process.

[5:00:42] So related to Mayor Norton statement about where this parcel is located could you talk

[5:00:49] about the bonding dollars that were authorized with the state ledger legislature for sewer expansion in

[5:00:55] these Rochester and how that impacts city growth and development in the broader Southeast

[5:01:01] region of town. Generally speaking, you have this area, the shops on main area and the subdivisions

[5:01:09] that are south of Highway 52, the Highway Axe is a barrier to people who cannot drive, choose not to

[5:01:18] live cannot afford to drive this path. The goal is obviously to provide access.

[5:01:27] Both people, they're getting, say, into downtown and vice versa, to access whether it's

[5:01:34] recreating, getting to the future sports complex. Game Haven Park is what the bonding

[5:01:40] money was approved for. There's a very clearly identified corridor that we're working

[5:01:45] within. And there's only one place to cross the highway that's safe. And as the city engineer,

[5:01:52] I know these are not always easy decisions, but we need to bring back the most feasible option.

[5:01:57] We looked at county one. We would have to reconstruct the entire county, the ditches,

[5:02:03] provide an urban section, the length of that corridor going all the way out, traveling up the hill

[5:02:08] to the roundabout. And then back over on another county road, it just is priced us out of that

[5:02:14] is an alternative. You can't go down Broadway, 65 miles per hour as you pass Highway 52 and

[5:02:21] having to try to navigate a maze of signals and the exit ramps on ramps with the two highways

[5:02:29] at that interchange. So really it's looking at two ways to go along the creek that we presented

[5:02:37] in the feasibility study. We did also during early stage of the study look at going east of the

[5:02:44] property. There's about 90 feet of elevation difference. So create a

[5:02:49] challenge isn't being able to even make the ADA grades work where we were

[5:02:54] having to carve out these 25 foot cuts and sort of this cavern you'd be

[5:02:59] walking and biking through just to make the grades work and tremendous amount of

[5:03:03] earth work and costs. So ruled that out and we're left with these two that were

[5:03:07] presented in the feasibility report. We're going to present to you the most

[5:03:11] feasible option, which with the funding we have was the one we recommended, and in addition

[5:03:19] to the difference and construction costs of the two alternatives, what would other cost

[5:03:24] differences be and design work and ongoing maintenance work of the two alternatives.

[5:03:29] So the current design proposal was for the recommended alternative.

[5:03:33] If the council chooses to go a different direction, we will need to get an updated proposal

[5:03:37] from our consultant, the line of attention hearing, then there's the ongoing maintenance

[5:03:43] costs talking with our parks, teammates, and thinking about winter maintenance and just

[5:03:50] replacement of a boardwalk. Those numbers, we're looking at 10 to 15,000 dollars annually.

[5:03:57] Let's say we need to replace the boardwalk 30 to 40 years from now, just using inflation, we're

[5:04:04] looking at a couple million dollars in the future, as compared to just a paved betuminous path

[5:04:13] on going crack ceiling and just different preservation plus the plowing in the winter time.

[5:04:22] That's more in the $1,000 annually.

[5:04:27] You said, Pearson, the elevated section would have a 30 to 40 year useful life.

[5:04:33] what is the use of life of a paved section?

[5:04:37] We would try similar to our roadways to get 50 years out of that

[5:04:41] with the ongoing preservation work,

[5:04:45] like we do with our roadways.

[5:04:46] And what would the replacement cost of that be?

[5:04:48] 50, 60 years from now.

[5:04:51] I don't have that number right in front of me,

[5:04:54] but it's not going to be 2 million.

[5:05:03] I've got a question on kind of the, so you, and your team did due diligence to look at several options, numerous options, is that correct?

[5:05:22] correct. And so you came up with the two here and can you talk about from a kind of view

[5:05:31] shed or screening the differences between the two with there is the one that goes through

[5:05:41] the property owner's property and then there's the one that's on the edge of the property as far

[5:05:46] is the ability to screen that to for the neighboring properties.

[5:05:54] Owners.

[5:05:54] Well, I mean, like I said, when we're going through acquisition and negotiating what the project

[5:06:00] looks like, like on the Chester Woods extension, all of the properties we were bisecting

[5:06:07] along that corridor, we added a fence along each side of the path, we worked with those

[5:06:12] need to get farm equipment in and out to increase the pavement depth and certain locations.

[5:06:19] We've provided gates in certain areas, worked with the property owners.

[5:06:23] So with this project, for example, we could talk about a potentially offense that provides

[5:06:28] a more of a screening benefit than just a barrier.

[5:06:34] But between the two, I mean, you have the wood, you're in the woods, Council President.

[5:06:40] So there's going to be trees that provide some of that screening just with the natural corridor that we're looking at with either of these two alternatives.

[5:06:50] Thank you. Council member Doring.

[5:06:55] No.

[5:06:56] I just have a point of inquiry for our council chair.

[5:07:01] I know a member of the public wanted to speak about this bike path during public comment.

[5:07:06] I think there was some miscommunication where that person was invited to have a seat, because

[5:07:12] there was a assumption they were going to talk about G1, wondering if it's appropriate

[5:07:16] to invite that particular member of the public who sat here now for four and a half hours,

[5:07:22] or three and a half hours.

[5:07:23] Comfortable.

[5:07:24] I'm proposing that we suspend the rules and allow one member of the public who chronic

[5:07:30] to speak on this item during open comment period, and somehow got steered, probably by me,

[5:07:38] to the G1.

[5:07:40] So that's what I proposed.

[5:07:42] Council.

[5:07:43] So we have a motion to suspend the rules for one member of the public to speak.

[5:07:49] The motion has been made by council member Doring and seconded by council member Palmer.

[5:07:54] We do need five to do this.

[5:07:57] five to do this, anyone need to speak to it, all in favor say I, I post a name, it passes

[5:08:05] unanimously. So with that, we can invite, yes, I remember your name, Girl Spurker, come up

[5:08:18] and you have two minutes to speak.

[5:08:26] You can have someone come up and help you.

[5:08:40] Yes, and

[5:08:41] We just discussed that and I really appreciate my colleague

[5:08:45] Bringing that up. So go ahead

[5:08:48] We have seen that. Yes, yes, you see the alternative routes absolutely

[5:08:54] This is already placed in public

[5:08:57] Domain already to get you over to whistle-bake use the school

[5:09:02] I drew this out. She'll doesn't know what I drew. She just kind of saw. I'm here for more short alternative routes that were never ever looked at

[5:09:11] due diligence was not done by the city engineer to make sure he was spending our money, my money, too, the appropriate way.

[5:09:23] He just wants to get as fast as he can to this new complex.

[5:09:27] They're bypassing the school.

[5:09:29] Everything that they say that they want to do with this project so that the people can use this path to get to the other side of 52.

[5:09:38] I'm all, I understand it to be honest, but they do not need to come across my property in that pot with so many alternatives.

[5:09:46] Thank you, Mr. Lumis. I, because this goes for her has that this is her time.

[5:09:53] We just wanted to know, Jessie wanted to know why they didn't go for the west side.

[5:10:00] That is the west side. That is the west side. Okay. And then, plus, when you're talking about somebody's land, if you want to get it, how come no ones ever said how much money that they could receive for the land? Like are we talking?

[5:10:16] You know, because some of the parts of the city and they're out in the country, they go by the feet. And so, you know, maybe you want to give Pat 2 million dollars.

[5:10:27] I mean, I don't know what's in your budget.

[5:10:30] Maybe that's a big number, but I know the town is changing

[5:10:36] all the time and they're selling the land by the foot.

[5:10:41] So maybe if you, because how come no number has been set?

[5:10:45] Will address that after you're done speaking?

[5:10:47] We'll ask our staff that.

[5:10:49] And I know the loomuses have been there for over 50 years.

[5:10:53] so it's generational and they've built up things for their grandkids to be out there in the pond and

[5:11:00] all those things and I was just here to support because I know if you guys all had land out there,

[5:11:07] you just want to keep it to yourself too. Thank you. We appreciate it. We appreciate you staying. Thank you.

[5:11:15] Mr. Dumbarowski, can you speak to compensation to where that fits into the process?

[5:11:24] Sure.

[5:11:24] So the council has an authorised us to proceed with land acquisition once that would happen

[5:11:30] if it happened.

[5:11:32] That is when we need to hire an appraiser, establish a valuation, there's a process when

[5:11:38] we make an offer, then the property owners can do their own independent appraisal, get reimbursed,

[5:11:43] up to a certain amount for those for that appraisal.

[5:11:46] It's all part of the negotiation process that we need to follow during acquisition procedures.

[5:11:55] Council member Frank Rick's Mr. Dumbraowski.

[5:11:59] This is a fun one, but I've had about a week to think about this after you brought up

[5:12:04] the fence through the one that you're using to connect to Chester Woods.

[5:12:09] The construction easement that go through there, yeah we put up a fence and that sounds

[5:12:12] good.

[5:12:13] but there's trees laying on about every other section

[5:12:15] of that fence currently.

[5:12:17] It's solid parsnip, it's solid buck thorn

[5:12:20] and it's solid box elders, all three non-desirables.

[5:12:23] It's almost impossible to mitigate that issue

[5:12:26] now that that fence is there.

[5:12:28] You know, you go spray in, you're hitting everything.

[5:12:31] And now we just, it's just a mess.

[5:12:33] I use that trail weekly multiple times.

[5:12:36] It's a great trail, but don't go off the trail,

[5:12:39] you're gonna itch or break out in boils, it's nuts.

[5:12:42] So, it sounds good to put up a fence, but then how are you going to maintain that after it?

[5:12:47] When there's nothing there, you can actually maintain the side and that construction

[5:12:50] easement and take care of it.

[5:12:53] I don't know if that fence keeps anybody older in any way, but that's my opinion.

[5:12:58] And I wait and I sit and it's just, it's just another thing.

[5:13:06] For any further discussion on this item, Council Member Palmer?

[5:13:10] Yeah, I voted against doing this and I will not support over writing the video on this.

[5:13:16] I think condemning the land is wrong.

[5:13:21] There is an alternative to it and we need to do that.

[5:13:24] I'm all in favor of the trail.

[5:13:25] I think the trail is fantastic.

[5:13:27] Go out to game Haven Park.

[5:13:28] We've planned for it for a long period of time.

[5:13:31] But I think this segment, one C, and the two, is doable and I think that's what we need

[5:13:37] to be doing and focus on that.

[5:13:39] I think going to court sounds great. It's going to cost a lot of money. It takes some more time than we really want to take so

[5:13:46] It comes from our Fredericks. I believe that taking of land by government entities is for basically safety or emergency purposes only and I don't see this as either

[5:13:57] I don't see this as either and I think we should reserve that right just for

[5:14:02] Must situations. This isn't a must

[5:14:05] So I'll stand by my boat as same as last week as well

[5:14:09] Council Member Qual. Mr. Dubrovsky, is there much farther west route that's been suggested

[5:14:18] here tonight? I don't have that in front of me, but I'm guessing it might be what was

[5:14:23] shared after the first open house and trying to get to the whistle-binkies with Lake Business Park

[5:14:31] area and work your way along the public streets,

[5:14:39] which is challenging with the floodway that

[5:14:41] we still need to navigate and have to construct boardwalks.

[5:14:45] And then I'm not certain where we're going to acquire the space to get through that industrial

[5:14:52] area. Those are all plated lots. So we're going through the same conversation and impacting

[5:14:59] a business but

[5:15:01] We're going to have similar conversations if that's the direction the council wants us to go. And we can, if that's the case.

[5:15:10] Mayor Norton.

[5:15:16] Thank you. Having trouble with my microphone.

[5:15:19] I did just want to say, I struggle a little bit with a conversation about the extra upkeep on the wood options, because it is actually the option that we chose to do at a game haven.

[5:15:29] So it is, we do have a history of choosing that option.

[5:15:33] So I'll just say,

[5:15:37] I don't think that holds water

[5:15:39] with what we're doing.

[5:15:41] But I am asking for you to uphold the veto.

[5:15:44] I am asking that we find an alternative route,

[5:15:46] whether that's the one we were just talking about,

[5:15:50] or another way, I do not think it is fair

[5:15:52] to take someone's property against their will

[5:15:57] when there are other options and there are other options.

[5:16:03] I saw you move your microphones, so I didn't know if you were going to speak.

[5:16:07] Yeah, I can't.

[5:16:07] I can't.

[5:16:08] Can't go ahead.

[5:16:10] And again, I just feel like we should just be dealing with the veto here instead of just

[5:16:15] re-litigating the same thing.

[5:16:16] We're all just just restating whether we, why we supported it or why we didn't.

[5:16:21] The fact is, I think we're really here to see where if it's a, if we can overwrite

[5:16:26] or overwrite the veto or not.

[5:16:27] I did support the staff recommendation this because of the, and I do trust the assessment that it was a 1.3 million dollar hit to move to a segment to a and then, and then that would block the money that we had hope to use as an overpass it.

[5:16:47] So I was thinking it was the public safety trade-offs here and this diviability of this route.

[5:16:52] We've been talking about doing this since 2021 and we're on a little bit of a clock right now with

[5:16:57] bonding from 2023. So this idea of sending the staff back to look at other options to me as

[5:17:04] just folly. If we're, if we're, you know, we have used this idea of there's very set methods

[5:17:11] of going through and you're getting easements. It's not like taking over people's property,

[5:17:16] you're getting easements to do this. And they are contentious. And I think that's what our staff

[5:17:21] said we need to give them the ability to get that started and see where it goes. Just to back

[5:17:26] off on it, I'm not there at this point. I think this is a valid public interest in getting

[5:17:32] this trail to work. And that's why I think why I'm trying to move this move this work forward

[5:17:37] and public works as a comment. Go ahead, Mr. Neymar. Yeah. Thank you, Council President. We just

[5:17:44] wanted to reiterate what Council member Keen had to say there that if we have to go back and draw

[5:17:49] alternative routes, there could be schedule implications to this.

[5:17:52] It's not a forever clock on the grant we have to mid-2028 to get the project done.

[5:17:59] So, just as the council makes a decision, keep that in mind.

[5:18:03] And so with that, I'll make a motion just to route the two-part motion again, accepting the feasibility

[5:18:07] study and recommendation of the preferred route to advance the final design and authorizing

[5:18:13] supplemental agreement in the amount of 418,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 dollars would

[5:18:18] align and engineering for a final design for the proposed trail.

[5:18:23] I'm motion made by Council Member Keenan.

[5:18:25] That's seconded by Council Member Miller.

[5:18:28] Any more to add?

[5:18:30] Council Member Miller?

[5:18:31] Sure.

[5:18:31] I'll just add.

[5:18:32] I also accepted an opportunity to go out and see the trail.

[5:18:35] And I appreciate the hospitality that I received, I think, where I'm coming to and this is

[5:18:41] the upfront and long-term maintenance cost and differences and the ongoing commitment of public

[5:18:47] funds that we do not have a budget for. And so that's why I will be supporting this motion tonight

[5:18:52] because I think that with the growth in Southeast Rochester, additional population that will be

[5:18:58] cut off or provided access by this trail connection. I think there's a public safety, I think there's a

[5:19:05] transportation access, I think there's an economic access point to be made there and that's why

[5:19:11] I'm planning to support this as I did in two weeks ago.

[5:19:15] I also will support it again as I did two weeks ago and I really look at it as, and I think

[5:19:24] Ms. Girls Burger mentioned, there is urban growth here and we are seeing it all over and

[5:19:32] we have an urban growth plan and that includes trail systems and others and we do have a process and I do believe staff has done due diligence to find the best alternative

[5:19:53] it is the most workable alternatives.

[5:19:56] That said, there is a process that starts at...

[5:20:00] The issues of compensation and mitigation of screening. And in that process, the property owner has an arbiter that is a part of that process.

[5:20:15] I do believe this has to do with being good neighbors and I do believe that we as a city have been a good neighbor and trying to be a good neighbor.

[5:20:28] And there are projects that we do that change environments.

[5:20:34] It happens. It's what we do. They're difficult decisions.

[5:20:37] We try to work with the neighbors, we work as well as we came with the neighbors, and we want to work well with the neighbors going forward.

[5:20:48] Conflomer Doring.

[5:20:51] I plan to not support the motion tonight, which would be a change in position for me from our last meeting.

[5:20:58] I have not had very many decisions from the Dius that I've regretted, this was one.

[5:21:02] My vote, so I appreciate the mayor's opportunity

[5:21:06] to bring it back before this body.

[5:21:11] I, along with some of my colleagues

[5:21:13] on the dias this evening, have a problem

[5:21:17] with intersecting the Loomus property down the middle

[5:21:20] when there is a viable option

[5:21:22] to go towards the edge of their property.

[5:21:25] I know that that is a more difficult route to navigate.

[5:21:29] It will take some additional costs.

[5:21:31] It might delay some future infrastructure projects.

[5:21:37] I just think it's the right thing to do.

[5:21:40] So I will not be supporting this motion tonight.

[5:21:43] Thank you. Council member,

[5:21:44] uh, click case.

[5:21:45] So please call the roll.

[5:21:47] Council member Keen.

[5:21:49] Hi.

[5:21:50] Council member Miller.

[5:21:51] Hi.

[5:21:52] Council member Wall.

[5:21:53] Ne.

[5:21:54] Council member Fredericks.

[5:21:57] Council member Palmer.

[5:21:59] Ne.

[5:21:59] Council member Doran.

[5:22:00] Ne.

[5:22:00] Council President Schubering.

[5:22:03] Aye.

[5:22:03] The motion fails to get five votes and does not override the veto.

[5:22:09] Thank you.

[5:22:10] Moving on to H3, which is sustainability pilot programs funding request.

[5:22:17] Who is the lead on this one?

[5:22:19] Mr.

[5:22:20] I'm the Council President.

[5:22:22] Council President Mayor Norton, Council members.

[5:22:25] Thank you for having us here tonight.

[5:22:27] I'll have my colleagues come and sit behind me here.

[5:22:30] So, good evening, Erin, looks down with public works department, also with me as Caleb Betzold,

[5:22:35] our Sustainability Coordinator, Josh Mason and Laurie Cook with roster public utilities.

[5:22:41] Tonight we are here to talk about the proposed sustainability pilot program funding request.

[5:22:47] This is a follow up from the city session that we had in April.

[5:22:52] So, just really quick, what we're going to cover briefly for you tonight is we'll do a recap of that April study session.

[5:22:59] what we had heard from at least the majority of the council members to continue to work on this

[5:23:04] project. The proposed sustainability pilot programs, and you'll see we kind of have a

[5:23:09] suite, so when we say programs, there's two main buckets, and then within that there are some

[5:23:13] suite of options. The implementation and the evaluation plan at this time, and then we'll close

[5:23:20] out with what is the asked before council tonight. And Kayla will be assisting me with the

[5:23:26] and then Josh and Laurie are here to be able to help with any questions, specifically as relates to RPU and their assistance with the proposal.

[5:23:37] So again, at the April study session, what we had heard from the majority of the council members was, if you remember that that was tied into the engagement that we had done on the natural gas franchise fee.

[5:23:48] and the direction was, don't move forward with a natural gas franchise fee based on that

[5:23:52] public engagement and instead develop specific testable and measurable pilot programs based

[5:23:59] on that community feedback that could be considered.

[5:24:03] It was also too specifically work with Rochester Public Utilities on developing those programs

[5:24:08] to make sure they work in concert with the RPU programs that lead in on their expertise and

[5:24:15] implementing rebate programs, and then to return to Council with approximately $100,000 in

[5:24:23] 2026 Council to Conditancy Funding for Consideration. So since that time, that's what we've done.

[5:24:30] We've worked with our Pew. We've also worked with other city departments as we evaluated program

[5:24:35] implementation, program expertise in an effort to create efficiencies and streamlining. We also

[5:24:43] So through that we're able to identify administrative responsibilities how to be able to implement this within a regional financial ask,

[5:24:52] review some of the technical components and regulatory components.

[5:25:00] Proposed pilot programs that you'll see before you tonight. And so with that, before I get into the high level of the proposed programs,

[5:25:09] who just wanted to step back based on the community feedback. Because this is what we used as we work through that process to kind of keep fine tuning and narrow down the list of the programs that you'll see tonight.

[5:25:22] The public engagement that we have received, the feedback,

[5:25:28] one is what people wanted to see was support for home improvements

[5:25:32] that reduced energy use and household costs,

[5:25:35] so ways to reduce those costs, direct visual investment,

[5:25:39] back into the community, so getting the funds back

[5:25:42] into the hands of residents for those projects,

[5:25:44] that it would be resident community led projects,

[5:25:48] that the programs are accessible to a wide range of applicants,

[5:25:51] so not just single family residents, but also multi-family renters, things, things of that nature,

[5:25:57] that there are clear eligibility requirements associated with those program details,

[5:26:03] and then that we're able to have measurable outcomes and funding transparency.

[5:26:07] So where the funds are being used and what are we accomplishing with that?

[5:26:11] And so that's what we used on the basis of bringing forth the programs that you'll see tonight.

[5:26:16] And so from a high level standpoint, again, there's two primary buckets, where we say funding areas that we're looking at.

[5:26:24] The proposal is $75,000 in the first bucket, which is for residential rebate pilot programs.

[5:26:32] These are targeted incentives that are specific for residential energy efficiency.

[5:26:37] And then you'll also hear some emerging technologies.

[5:26:40] So it allows us to beta test those technologies and start to roll those out.

[5:26:47] The second piece and Kayla is going to go into great detail on that.

[5:26:50] So I'm not going to on this slide.

[5:26:51] You have a few more slides coming up.

[5:26:53] We're still going to talk about that in more detail.

[5:26:55] The second one is partnering with the building community grant program and actually enhancing that by 25,000.

[5:27:03] Chau was just meeting with the council last week talking about that program and so the recommendation

[5:27:10] is to increase that by $25,000 and it would have specific support for environmental stewardship

[5:27:18] focused projects that are led by residents and those community organizations. With this approach it

[5:27:26] allows us to utilize existing RPU programs tying into the expertise they already have with

[5:27:33] implementing rebate programs and through their billing system.

[5:27:39] We can also implement on a small scale that allows us to measure that and be able to track

[5:27:46] that.

[5:27:48] So there's hard data that we can bring back to council and be able to do a fully evaluation

[5:27:53] when we come back for a recommendation for 28 and potentially beyond. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Kayla.

[5:28:03] Thank you, Erin. Good late evening, Council members, Council President Mayer. I'm going to talk just a little bit more specifically about the programs that we are recommending.

[5:28:14] So, this slide kind of shows the breakdown of the 75,000 that we're recommending in the residential

[5:28:19] pilot program budget and so really the goal of this is to mix energy efficiency, electrification,

[5:28:25] resilience, and renewable energy strategies. We feel that each of these rebates kind of serves

[5:28:30] a different purpose in that regard. So first, the 22,500 for the plugin or also known as Belkanese

[5:28:37] solar. The purpose here is to explore a smaller and potentially more accessible version of renewable

[5:28:44] energy for those folks that maybe our renters or multifamily or residents who can't install

[5:28:51] rooftop solar for whatever reason. And so with this one we are going to be working with our

[5:28:57] PU and community development on some equipment certification and code related conversations

[5:29:03] and hoping to launch that program in 2027.

[5:29:07] Next, 20,000 for the battery storage rebates,

[5:29:10] which could be partnered with new or existing rooftop solar

[5:29:14] or standalone batteries.

[5:29:16] There is also a state of Minnesota battery incentive,

[5:29:19] and so this rebate could partner with the state of Minnesota rebate

[5:29:24] to kind of further reduce those up front costs.

[5:29:27] That's what you hold for a minute.

[5:29:29] Council Member Wolff. One of the questions I had in looking at this chart is, do you have any

[5:29:35] idea how many households represent the 225 and then the 20 and then the 20? How many households

[5:29:41] are we going to touch? We do on the next slide. Oh, that was my question too, so. Okay. Thank you.

[5:29:50] and I get to the next slide, could we have it in each on each row?

[5:29:53] Council member, Palmer else, that's a question.

[5:29:55] So on your first...

[5:30:00] If you're approval, what are you talking about?

[5:30:03] Yes, and I might invite our PU up to kind of assist with this, but we are talking with community

[5:30:08] development and our PU about just some aspects of the program that we still need to kind

[5:30:14] of figure out details on and hoping to launch in 2027.

[5:30:18] Okay, but you're asking for a contingency funds. You're hoping to do something and you don't have the code.

[5:30:25] And what I'm concerned about is that you're going to say plug in balcony solar, is this for rentals, is this for home owners?

[5:30:34] There's a lot of questions here that doesn't make any sense.

[5:30:37] Yep, I can feel that question.

[5:30:39] Great questions, councilmember Palmer.

[5:30:42] So the idea behind this one is we want to be ready.

[5:30:44] So there's a lot of interesting balcony solar, but there is right now.

[5:30:49] There's questions regarding on the code side.

[5:30:52] Our building officials as well as the state building officials have been in correspondence on the national energy code side of it to put language into that code.

[5:31:03] It just isn't going to be ready until they're anticipating mid 2027.

[5:31:08] And in order for us to move quickly, we want this in the hopper to then be able to implement the program if that is successful.

[5:31:17] Now people are purchasing these, there are items available, and so there are being used already.

[5:31:24] We just would not want to be able to have a rebate program and incentivizing something until that has been fully fleshed out.

[5:31:31] So in the event that does not fall into place and we're not able to implement part of the ask would be to allow us to shift that funding into one of the other pots,

[5:31:42] where we are seeing high demand and perhaps have already exhausted all the funding within that area.

[5:31:49] So if not, I don't know.

[5:31:51] There's a certification right now, UL 3700 listed products.

[5:31:57] With the plug-ins solar, we're likely looking at some of the smaller systems.

[5:32:00] You hear like 1.2 KW, a number that other states have used.

[5:32:05] We're looking at something probably around like 420 watts or smaller, and it is essentially

[5:32:10] you plug it into an outlet, and it delivers power into the home that essentially powers like

[5:32:16] a refrigerator, some light bulbs, that's sort of thing. It does not export power out to the grid.

[5:32:22] So, from a code perspective, is it a electrical code from from you as a distributor or is it from

[5:32:28] the building code as being proposed and you think it's going to pass next July? Is that what which is it?

[5:32:35] There's a couple things going on. There's state legislation right now.

[5:32:39] Um, that was introduced earlier this year that did that pass that will likely come back in the 2027 session, um,

[5:32:46] what the safety standard is that UL 3700. So essentially, once products are certified under UL 3700 customers can buy them,

[5:32:55] they've been deemed saved and tested, um, and able to be used. So the only UL listed product,

[5:33:03] You all, yep, you all 3700.

[5:33:05] And our views cool with that.

[5:33:08] Yep.

[5:33:08] And I know Lori, do you want to jump in?

[5:33:10] You have a conversation with our state electron spectator.

[5:33:13] And this is the very reason why I didn't pass it to the state or this year is because some of these concerns about it.

[5:33:17] Well, the state doesn't pass anything to the end of May.

[5:33:20] So.

[5:33:20] Right.

[5:33:21] Yeah.

[5:33:21] And they don't do June 1.

[5:33:23] No, exactly.

[5:33:25] Yeah.

[5:33:25] So in each of the states that have passed balcony solar product or balcony solar laws,

[5:33:31] The laws are essentially to prohibit utilities and other entities from disallowing it to be used.

[5:33:42] And again, virtually all of the states have allowed up to 1,200 watts, which, you know, without any fuel support or anything like that,

[5:33:53] What we're proposing is only UL 3,700 products, which so far are all in the, you know, 420 watt range, some that are going up to about 550 and incentivizing good behavior, if you will, you know, these products are already shipping any any of us could buy one right now and plug it into our wall.

[5:34:19] what we want to incentivize is, you know, the smaller safe units that are UL listed.

[5:34:27] My last question. What's it cost? What's a UL listed product cost that you're going to

[5:34:32] save how much? That's actually on an upcoming slide. Okay. Thank you. And one of

[5:34:41] other thing to follow, but I'm not the electrical code expert. And so that's where we've been

[5:34:46] talking with community development on this. So, regardless of the

[5:34:50] comment that I made. So, what we're understanding is there is some

[5:34:53] code changes that are being proposed. And no.

[5:35:00] We'll come out and draft for the twenty twenty nine update. But if it's in draft and are the state of Minnesota and our our team has been involved with drafting that language, they will reference that and allow that to be rolled out early. So if it goes beyond the products that that Josh and Laurie had just mentioned, those are what we would also be able to then implement, but it would come down to the approval from our community development department to start implementing that.

[5:35:32] Thank you.

[5:35:33] Continuous to jump to the north.

[5:35:34] Yeah, let's see how much this stuff's going to cost.

[5:35:37] Okay. You can see kind of the rationale for the rest of them.

[5:35:42] Electric panels remove the barriers to these larger electrification projects.

[5:35:46] Air sealing and insulation kind of the first step energy efficiency.

[5:35:50] And then some funding reserve for program administration.

[5:35:53] So getting into the question that was just raised on the proposed incentive amounts.

[5:35:58] and so this is where we're looking at incentives from one to three hundred dollars for the balcony

[5:36:03] solar, depending on kind of some of these conversations that we're still having sizes of systems,

[5:36:08] eligibility, the safety that you all certified equipment types, things like that. So we're looking

[5:36:14] at a reach of 75 to 220 households with that one. Battery storage, we're looking at 2000 per project,

[5:36:21] again. I ask a good clarifying question. So how much of the cost of whether it's the plug-in

[5:36:28] solar unit or the battery storage rebate? How much of that cost does the incentive cover? Is the

[5:36:37] whole thing or is it a portion of what the consumer pays? The plug-in solar would be around by

[5:36:46] had to 15%, battery storage, probably somewhere in that range too.

[5:36:52] 10%, 10% to 15% of the incentive is 10% to 15%

[5:36:58] of the total cost, I got it.

[5:37:00] And then we did try with these as well,

[5:37:03] to find other programs that we could support,

[5:37:06] so for instance, battery storage,

[5:37:08] the state of Minnesota incentive may also apply

[5:37:11] for that one, same with electric panel,

[5:37:16] and then on the air ceiling and insulation that one,

[5:37:19] partners with the Minnesota Energy Resources rebate,

[5:37:22] which is the natural gas company.

[5:37:23] So looking to leverage other funding sources

[5:37:26] to continue to bring down those upfront costs.

[5:37:30] We're looking at 2000 again for the electric panel upgrade add-on

[5:37:34] and that would be partnering with an RPU incentive

[5:37:37] for our source heat pumps,

[5:37:39] so supporting barriers to electrification,

[5:37:41] not just someone who would like to increase their electric panel, and then the air sealing

[5:37:46] and insulation, again supporting the Minnesota energy resources rebate and we're looking

[5:37:53] at about 100 projects for that.

[5:37:57] This table kind of or this chart kind of shows the program

[5:38:01] cost effectiveness of the RPU program. So what we did was look at how these programs not only

[5:38:10] matchup with other RPU programs on a cost effectiveness scale, but also how do they fill gaps

[5:38:16] in existing programs. So, you know, we don't want to duplicate existing programs, we want

[5:38:20] to fill gaps, and we want to support RPU in that sense. And so, we do feel that the programs

[5:38:26] that we have recommended fall within a reasonable cost effectiveness range, and then the electric

[5:38:31] panel is not shown on this one because it doesn't directly save energy, but it does reduce those

[5:38:37] barriers for those larger projects.

[5:38:40] And then the second piece or the second pilot program, Bucket, is the enhancement of the

[5:38:46] building community grant program, and so this would be an additional $25,000, that would

[5:38:52] be directed towards environmental sustainability related projects within this larger grant

[5:38:57] program.

[5:38:58] So I know a child was here recently and she shared a little bit about this program, but it

[5:39:02] a very popular program. There's currently $100,000 allocated annually to this grant and funds

[5:39:08] are utilized within, they have been utilized within the first six months of 2024, 2025,

[5:39:13] and 2026. And so we also know that some environmentally-focused projects are not receiving

[5:39:19] full funding. And so this would really be in an effort to support and enhance the program,

[5:39:25] to support environmental projects and to, again, leverage the existing, you know, application

[5:39:33] structure, the outreach process, the staff review structure, essentially tweaking the program

[5:39:39] making small changes, bringing the sustainability team into the review, but leaning on the program

[5:39:45] that already exists. And then I listed some potential projects on here, but again, these are grassroots

[5:39:52] efforts and so it really is up to the community on this one.

[5:39:58] A little bit about implementation.

[5:40:00] And then evaluation. So this timeline here shows a little bit about what the future timeline would look like. So if funding were to be approved tonight for the rest of the year, we would kind of be working with our PU and city departments to finalize all of the components of these programs. So, you know, eligible equipment, program materials putting together the applications, the rebate processing order of operations, things like that.

[5:40:28] And then in 2027 launching the ready program.

[5:40:31] So conducting outreach through existing channels

[5:40:34] in collaboration with RPU with the healthy home program

[5:40:39] that we've created through community groups, things like that.

[5:40:44] And then tracking metrics, costs, outcomes

[5:40:49] of all these programs, both quantitative and qualitative.

[5:40:53] So on the quantitative side, we'll be looking

[5:40:55] at participation, number of projects,

[5:40:59] dollar per KWAH, reduced, dollar per greenhouse gas emission,

[5:41:03] reduced or saved, and then on the more qualitative side of things,

[5:41:09] we would be looking at, you know, participant experience,

[5:41:12] certainly, you know, similar to the community grant,

[5:41:15] the photos, the stories, the community impact of that grant enhancement.

[5:41:22] So as we go through these programs, we would be collecting that data,

[5:41:25] analyzing that data and then coming back to you in 2027 to kind of report on the outcomes of

[5:41:30] these pilot programs with recommendations for how we'd like to either continue, modify, or

[5:41:37] discontinue each of these pilot programs moving forward into 2028 and beyond. And with that,

[5:41:43] I will turn it back to Aaron.

[5:41:47] Yep. So then just the last is we wanted to follow up. Just to remind

[5:41:52] the ASP before Council tonight is to authorize the use of $100,000 from the 2026 contingency funding

[5:42:00] with $75,000 for the residential rebate pilot programs, $25,000 to expand the building community

[5:42:08] grant program with that sustainability focused funding. And then the second component of that is authorizing

[5:42:16] staff to finalize and implement those programs, evaluate the 2027 pilot here and then return

[5:42:24] to council with the final results and recommendations for next steps. So with that, if there's

[5:42:30] any additional questions. Council member Keene. Yeah, again, I just want to, I know you

[5:42:37] tie this together, but you were with us, I think, and maybe in the winter, when you talked about,

[5:42:42] like, hey, we've done this outreach.

[5:42:43] And I think it was a council recommendation

[5:42:46] to try to do a pilot and do it this way.

[5:42:49] So just to tie that together.

[5:42:50] And I am supportive of that.

[5:42:52] The couple things I'm surprised at, though,

[5:42:54] I'm really glad to see RPU here with you,

[5:42:56] because I know there was some early on,

[5:42:58] like, how does this work and how does this work in conflict

[5:43:00] or in together?

[5:43:01] So it's good to see that.

[5:43:04] One thing with the, I'm glad to see the balcony stuff

[5:43:07] on here, because it's happening, whether, like you say,

[5:43:09] whether we support it or not.

[5:43:12] But I imagine it's all behind the meter

[5:43:14] and there's no way of tracking whatever

[5:43:16] that ends up doing.

[5:43:18] And I see our view kind of saying,

[5:43:20] you can help get them out there,

[5:43:22] but there's no way to know that they reduce,

[5:43:26] because it's all behind the meter.

[5:43:28] Is that to a team play, have that one?

[5:43:29] Are you answering?

[5:43:31] You'll need to verbally answer for our...

[5:43:34] Yes, we think a bit more like energy conservation.

[5:43:35] It's behind the meter, it's reducing that energy usage.

[5:43:38] reducing demand, which allows it to be part of your demand management, exactly.

[5:43:43] Where some of these other things that we were talking about when you talk about converting

[5:43:46] things to electric, I don't think the RPU dollars can participate in that right now.

[5:43:52] If customers on a time of use rates, then they can. Okay, because we don't want to build

[5:43:57] load that contributes for a peak. You know, so that's why we have a time of use, like electric vehicles,

[5:44:02] for examples, a good one too. Yeah, we can provide incentives for electric vehicles, assuming that they

[5:44:07] are going to be charging at night if they're on top of you straight.

[5:44:10] Okay. My other kind of observation for this was I was surprised by the level of detail on

[5:44:14] what the spending is and the breakdown to that. I'm probably good, but you also, do you feel

[5:44:19] you're painting yourself into a corner a little bit? Yeah, thank you for that question, Councilmember.

[5:44:25] A little bit, but there was a lot of thought that went into this. So again, we did research the number

[5:44:30] of projects that we felt we could fund being able to talk with the applicants, get their experience,

[5:44:37] be able to track it was important so that we had that measurable information and so that also

[5:44:41] played into, you know, the factors there. And then the last thing as I noted in customer

[5:44:47] Palmer's previous questions, not knowing fully what would happen with the balcony solar,

[5:44:53] yeah, that $22,500, part of that ask would be if there's a program that all the funds are being

[5:45:00] We expected much faster than we thought. There's a lot of interest in it. We have the flexibility to be able to shift those funds.

[5:45:06] And that's the specific one because when I look at the timeline, like if you're going to get approvals in mid-year, then you're going to be back to us and report back in October, it's just, there's just no time.

[5:45:17] It's going to be very, very fast. But we do think, when you look at the amount of investment that could be made in this space, I know 100,000 dollars is a big ask.

[5:45:28] it also is a small amount in comparison to many other rebate programs that you see the investments

[5:45:35] happening in these residential properties. So we do think that we would be able to implement

[5:45:40] it and get those funds out to the community with the short amount of time that we have.

[5:45:45] Very good. And again, the way the motions are put in front of us, you do have the flexibility

[5:45:52] next May to switch funds around you don't need to be back to us. Correct. That's our, that's our, that's I'm going to state is my understanding too but I'm just going to get it out there. Thank you.

[5:46:05] Council member Palmer.

[5:46:08] Well, I asked the building code question. I've been in the building code for 40 years and nothing happens fast there. So I've, I've, I've, I've,

[5:46:20] plug-in system is $1395 and $150 to have it delivered.

[5:46:26] So I'm not particularly sure that people are going to be spending money to save a little

[5:46:31] bit of money and I'm missing this whole entire concept.

[5:46:36] The other one is the system and the emergency using our dollars for something like this.

[5:46:43] He want to plan it, you could plan it.

[5:46:45] I think our Pew does a really, really good job on sustainability.

[5:46:48] need to do a really good job on rebates. I would rather just give them money and just say,

[5:46:53] hey, here's 50 grand. This is kind of what we like to do and we don't have to reinvent the wheel here.

[5:47:01] And they're already, they're already here, they're experts in this. So I won't be supporting this

[5:47:05] motion. I think somebody's going to make for those a couple of reasons.

[5:47:11] Councilmember Miller.

[5:47:13] Could you clarify the other savings that would come from having a solar panel behind the

[5:47:17] the initial cost and rebate. I'm going to defer my colleague

[5:47:22] understand the cost proposition. Yeah, I can answer that question. So

[5:47:26] first smaller system about 420 watts, you would save about

[5:47:30] $70 annually. Okay. So what is the payback

[5:47:34] period of that compared with rooftop solar? Very similar.

[5:47:38] Very similar. Yeah, probably that eight to 12 years. Okay.

[5:47:41] You know, I'm heading on cost, but somewhere in that range. And

[5:47:43] compared with a rooftop solar program, the advantage of this

[5:47:46] renters who we heard not represented, they're able to take that with them. Should they move?

[5:47:51] It's not fixed to the building. Yeah, they can move it. There's no interconnection process that

[5:47:56] they need to go to. There's no extra meters or extra wiring or anything required. Thanks.

[5:48:02] I've got a question on it. So you mentioned, yes, a hundred thousand dollars is a lot of money,

[5:48:08] but it's also when it comes to really implementing and evaluating, it may not be that much.

[5:48:15] And so what I'm struggling with is the evaluation of the pilot project and how you're going to get data that will then support the expansion of the program.

[5:48:34] And so can you talk, I know you covered it, but can you talk through that again in a little more depth.

[5:48:39] And actually, Kales, since you covered this in more detail,

[5:48:42] we'll have you covered that question on a little bit.

[5:48:44] Yep, and I did flip back to the evaluation pieces that we'd be looking at.

[5:48:49] Yeah, I think that's part of why we kind of have these two programs that are pretty different.

[5:48:54] I think on the residential energy rebate side, it really is more that quantitative side of it.

[5:49:00] And we started with a larger list of what the rebates could be and we kind of trimmed it down

[5:49:05] to these four options.

[5:49:07] We do recognize that some of them have kind of a smaller number of projects, but we will

[5:49:13] be working closely with our PO on the data collection with those, you know, and we'd

[5:49:21] like to also, you know, do surveys and understand kind of did this move the needle, did

[5:49:27] this make an impact on if you could complete the project or not.

[5:49:30] And then we also have RPU, you know, has the, you have your different formulas that you

[5:49:38] used to calculate all of the energy and greenhouse gas emission reductions savings from

[5:49:42] all of these.

[5:49:42] And so we'll have kind of that hard data and then on the community grant side of things,

[5:49:47] you know, they have the criteria already that they used to evaluate the effectiveness of

[5:49:51] that program.

[5:49:52] And so I think we do understand that it is a limited amount of funding.

[5:49:56] we're also taking that funding and kind of breaking it down into.

[5:50:00] So several different options as well, and that is why we tried to use existing program structures, where we could, and really align with processes and try our best to not recreate the wheel.

[5:50:11] So just to clarify, so a lot of the data you're going to get is the experience that the homeowners or the participants in the project give you.

[5:50:27] We, a council member, keen, talked about behind the meter, so that we're, you're going to be relying on the, the participants and their assessment of how much they're saving. Is that correct on the plug-in balcony? Is that a good way to, am I hearing that properly?

[5:50:50] How are we going to determine?

[5:50:52] So member Keene says no, I'm not.

[5:50:54] Okay, go ahead.

[5:50:56] We can quantify the energy savings, yes.

[5:50:58] And then you can for the participants.

[5:51:01] Yep.

[5:51:02] For example, for example,

[5:51:03] each solar panel that's installed.

[5:51:05] We can claim energy savings.

[5:51:06] I contribute to our state energy savings.

[5:51:08] Go all the 1.5 percent.

[5:51:10] So it helps us in that way as well.

[5:51:13] But the point with behind the meter in front,

[5:51:16] it just was with the rooftop things.

[5:51:18] we're connected into the RPU system and when this and even is behind the meter, I think what

[5:51:23] we'll do for these is estimate how much impact they have like on average and I think that's a

[5:51:29] fine way to do these kinds of things exactly. Yeah, because whatever information the systems will

[5:51:34] know likely which way which direction the house are facing so we can do some pretty good estimates on that.

[5:51:38] That helps. Thanks for that clarification. Council member, Fredericks. Thank you.

[5:51:44] I hate shooting holes and things, but I got it a little bit here and you're like, I look

[5:51:49] at it this way.

[5:51:51] I see the amount of the incentive to do it.

[5:51:55] And somebody that's struggling to make ends meet isn't going to buy a $1,400 piece of equipment

[5:52:01] to save 100 bucks.

[5:52:03] I mean, our 50 bucks or 70 bucks.

[5:52:06] I see it as giving people a little bit of money that are going to purchase this stuff anyway.

[5:52:12] They're going to buy this stuff anyway, and it gives them a little bit of off of what they're buying

[5:52:18] To for somebody in my mind to make a decision like I'm going to step outside of my norm and I'm going to try something new

[5:52:25] I'm going to have to get a substantial savings and then and to get payback

[5:52:30] I heard you say seven years, but by my math said 20 years if it's 70 bucks and the things 1400 bucks

[5:52:36] It's 20 years. I don't know. That's my math, but I'm just saying

[5:52:42] And then what's the reliability of this stuff is it tried and true and a lot of solar panels in the fast friends of mine

[5:52:47] I'm tried them they failed before they even got close to a payback things like that. There's there is there is a lot more to

[5:52:55] Somebody taking this leap than just

[5:52:58] Honestly a very small percentage of their money up front

[5:53:02] To to do it so

[5:53:06] Councilmember Miller. Yeah, I feel like we're kind of relocating past discussions and I know it's like somewhat

[5:53:11] narrow direction, but I think you've provided that. So with that said, I'd like to make a motion,

[5:53:16] adopting a resolution authorizing $100,000 from 2026 Council contingency funding for

[5:53:21] sustainability pilot programs, including $75,000 for residential rebates, and $25,000 for a

[5:53:28] sustainability focused expansion of the building community grant program, and authorizing staff to

[5:53:33] finalize and implement the programs with the 2027 pilot year and return to Council with the

[5:53:39] all-time recommendations. How second, most you made by Councilmember Miller and seconded by Councilmember

[5:53:45] Keenan, any more to add Councilmember Miller? Again, I think you've done what we asked you to do

[5:53:50] what direction came from the last time we engaged this. I appreciate the innovation in thinking

[5:53:55] about projects that are emerging, balcony solar being one battery projects that are immediately

[5:54:01] paying back their full potential, but are flexible or applicable to different subset of

[5:54:10] and so I feel like you've heard our feedback,

[5:54:12] you brought us a program that meets those conditions,

[5:54:14] and so I've got to support this.

[5:54:18] Com some of our metrics.

[5:54:20] Thanks. I have a feeling this is going to pass tonight,

[5:54:23] and that's fine. I'm on board with that,

[5:54:25] but I don't want to come back and ear to and say,

[5:54:26] hey, we're going to do a franchise fee

[5:54:28] and guests staying this program.

[5:54:29] I'm not on board with that.

[5:54:32] Because that hits everybody,

[5:54:34] that isn't getting an incentive from it,

[5:54:36] and it hits our lowest paid people in this community,

[5:54:39] are least affluent, the hardest.

[5:54:44] I will also be supporting the measure and because of the data and the information that

[5:54:51] we will be gathering.

[5:54:52] So I will be very interested in the evaluation piece of this to really give us a clue

[5:54:59] to what?

[5:55:00] Correction, we should be going in. I understand council member Frederick's point, but there are people out there that purchase these products and they see some kind of benefit. They see some kind of savings. I have a solar panel system on my roof and it's very successful.

[5:55:24] So it's the evaluation that I'm really going to be looking at, so with Council Member Palmer

[5:55:31] go ahead.

[5:55:32] Well, I'm a little uncomfortable tonight with contingency contingency contingencies

[5:55:36] being spent.

[5:55:38] It's not free money and we need to be very careful what we're using for this is not an emergency,

[5:55:44] this is not unplanned, we can budget for it next year.

[5:55:47] We have RAPU who's there and I Mr. Frederick's math, I think it's 22 years to pay back for the plug-in and that equipment I would say would not last 22 years that just be my guess.

[5:56:03] There's a lot of unknowns in this project and I don't like unknowns and I also would not be in favor of a gas franchise fee, sneaking in the back door.

[5:56:15] Clerk case, so please call the roll.

[5:56:18] Council member Keen.

[5:56:19] I, Council member Milley.

[5:56:22] Council member Wall.

[5:56:24] Council member Fredericks.

[5:56:26] Council member Palmer.

[5:56:29] Council member Dory.

[5:56:31] Council President Shubing.

[5:56:32] Aye.

[5:56:33] Motion passes five to two.

[5:56:35] Thank you.

[5:56:36] So at this point, it is five minutes to midnight.

[5:56:40] We do have two more items on the agenda.

[5:56:44] I'm going to just kind of check with my colleagues.

[5:56:47] Do we want to power through or do we want to five minute break?

[5:56:51] Power through. Power through. Okay, we are.

[5:56:56] We are at seasonal parking restriction update Mr.

[5:57:00] Tyler and me, my air.

[5:57:01] Also, I did want to welcome you good morning instead of not getting there.

[5:57:06] Yeah, not quite. The break would have helped.

[5:57:09] But you have to say good evening, you're right.

[5:57:11] Thanks for having us here for update on seasonal parking restrictions.

[5:57:16] We're calling this attempt number two after study session last week.

[5:57:19] I'm Tyler Neymar, Public Workstractor, Dan Plasga,

[5:57:22] our Street Maintenance Managers, also here to help with the presentation.

[5:57:27] We'll start with a little.

[5:57:28] Only I get advanced slide.

[5:57:32] Start with a little background on the ordinance.

[5:57:34] As a reminder, alternate side parking in the way it works

[5:57:37] as you park on the even odd sides of the street.

[5:57:39] based on the calendar date when we are under the parking restrictions. Compliance is handled through

[5:57:45] enforcement, and that is ticketing. But we do implement a warning period each season, season, where

[5:57:53] information is supplied to people that are in violation of the ordinance. This is how we

[5:57:59] started to kind of onboard the community to the seasonal parking restrictions and then later ticking

[5:58:04] begins. These details have all over time. We started with a pilot in East Side Pioneers

[5:58:10] neighborhood. In 2019 we did a city-wide adoption of that ordinance and then in 2021 the season

[5:58:16] was shortened to November 1st or from November 1st April 1st and that is the date that we are

[5:58:22] currently under. So at that point Dan's going to share some operational observations of this.

[5:58:30] Yeah, thank you Tyler. So, you know, the background goals of the, uh, thanks here.

[5:58:37] Background goals of the program are we really want to provide predictable, routine,

[5:58:41] thorough, fast and equitable snow removal across the city. And what that means is congested

[5:58:47] streets typically, you know, on towards the inner part of the city, what are seeing the same level of

[5:58:52] services those neighborhoods, for example, more off-street parking. And it also provides routine,

[5:59:01] expectation for residents and a proactive approach to our snow removal

[5:59:05] challenges. And a couple other benefits the ordinance has one of those as

[5:59:11] like law enforcement efficiency and second is street sweeping for those winter

[5:59:17] days we might not have snow on the ground.

[5:59:21] So what do we see from an operations

[5:59:23] perspective? Well from the snow cloud driver seat we've seen a lot of success streets

[5:59:29] are definitely cleaner, we're able to clean them better with cars parking on just one side.

[5:59:36] Tiles are able to also move more quickly through the route, more efficiently, and less follow-up,

[5:59:42] kind of day in and day out. We also seen fewer plow versus parked vehicle damage claims,

[5:59:48] which can be difficult when you're trying to squeeze a large plow through streets with cars park

[5:59:53] on both sides, less buried cars because people are moving their cars every day versus

[6:00:00] I'm sitting on a street for weeks and then we get called to deal with those icy speed bumps that are pretty difficult to remove, come to January. And actually it's less towing for residents versus how we used to do in the past where we'd come in and post a street and clear it, we'd have to pull a lot of cars in that situation.

[6:00:21] So, looking at ticketing data, this was the winner of 2425.

[6:00:28] So, if you look at that, you can see the first part in November was the warning periods,

[6:00:32] and all the tickets were issued during that period.

[6:00:34] And then, as you might expect, the first kind of start of tolling,

[6:00:40] there were obviously a lot of tickets as people were going to use to the ordinance.

[6:00:44] And then, after that, ticketing kind of coincided with a snowfall event,

[6:00:48] where we get snow and forest snow and ramp up so that we could

[6:00:53] follow the streets and then that would subside.

[6:00:58] And as far as analyzing

[6:00:59] ticketing by vehicle, so number tickets per vehicle, you can see by far the

[6:01:04] majority of tickets were just one per vehicle, you know, on the net trail off

[6:01:09] very quickly after that. So what that shows us is, you know, people likely

[6:01:14] got to tick it and like, oh, this is this is what the ordinance says or maybe

[6:01:17] they're a visitor Rochester,

[6:01:19] and then we're aware of the program at that point.

[6:01:24] And so what do we hear feedback from residents

[6:01:29] and people calling in and stuff?

[6:01:32] You know, it's definitely increased over time now.

[6:01:35] It's again, it's a routine occurrence.

[6:01:37] Everyone or people understand how it works

[6:01:39] and why it works.

[6:01:40] The majority of the negative increase

[6:01:42] that received are, you know, it's February.

[6:01:45] There's no smell and I gotta take it.

[6:01:47] So a lot of dissatisfaction around that ticketing and not being any snow on the ground.

[6:01:53] And in the spring we're able to address that we're working with the police department

[6:01:56] by saying, okay, there's no snow in the forecast, let's just spend the enforcement.

[6:02:02] In the fall, that's a little more difficult to do because, you know, we have a state

[6:02:08] at start, and then if you're to delay that, how to communicate that, obviously there's

[6:02:12] street signs saying November one is one it started so you know one thought we had was

[6:02:19] we could possibly extend that warning period farther until we get that first null

[6:02:24] fall.

[6:02:33] So public works has also been working with D.I. Director Mattella to take a

[6:02:41] justice equity diversion inclusion audit look at the alternate site parking

[6:02:46] ordinance. The purpose of this ought is to clarify and understand if disproportionate impacts

[6:02:52] exist within the ordinance. There was some suspicion some years ago that that might be the case.

[6:03:04] So to start, we map ticketing locations and are justice tracks. Those justice tracks are established based on specific levels of people of color, lower incomes and limited English proficiency.

[6:03:16] When we layer those on top of each other, we actually do see a disproportionate impact as you can see on your slide.

[6:03:23] 41% of the tickets in the city came in 11% of the city area and 15% of the population.

[6:03:31] You can see those areas indicated there in that kind of olive color.

[6:03:35] So we started asking, okay, so what's causing this? This looks disproportionate.

[6:03:41] And note as we move through here, the bold outlined areas, highlight the justice tracks,

[6:03:48] that's meant to guide our visual. Again, those are the areas that have had 41% of the tickets

[6:03:52] over this duration of ticketing. So when we look at building age by track, we do see a correlation

[6:03:58] with older parts of the community. This is likely due to the characteristics of those communities.

[6:04:04] They tend to have smaller lots, smaller lodges and driveways, and that leads to more on-street

[6:04:09] parking thereby probably more ticketing.

[6:04:16] When we overlay owner occupancy on the ticket areas,

[6:04:20] again, we generally see lower or low, excuse me.

[6:04:24] Lower owner occupancy rates in these areas of denser ticketing.

[6:04:28] That's likely the higher,

[6:04:32] excuse me.

[6:04:33] Lower rates at lower owner occupancy rates

[6:04:37] in the areas of denser ticketing.

[6:04:39] That's likely means that we've got more turnover in occupancy

[6:04:42] and potentially less ordinance awareness in those areas.

[6:04:46] Also interesting to note that when we first went through this,

[6:04:50] we tried to use the registration data

[6:04:52] that was associated with the license plates of the tickets

[6:04:55] and most of those were actually outside of city limits.

[6:05:00] To do a GIS exercise, we had to pivot back to the ticket location as it was issued, the physical location of the ticket.

[6:05:12] And lastly, looking at percent single family units, we're generally seeing lower owner occupancy, meaning higher occurrences of rentals and apartments, that results in probably more vehicles per address.

[6:05:24] Also with a half parking spot per unit, that likely means that on street parking is utilized by visitors going to those residences.

[6:05:36] So, a few other things to keep in mind related to this audit are practices do include more frequent enforcement near downtown,

[6:05:44] but that is deemed as appropriate as poorly-plowed streets near downtown will impact the most people and the most traffic.

[6:05:50] It's also a fact that we need to plow streets in Minnesota and Rochester,

[6:05:55] and different areas of the city interact differently with those operations regardless of what our ordinances say.

[6:06:01] The team still finds that seasonal parking is accomplishing its goals and there's nothing inherent in the ordinance as it stands today that is a disproportionate has more to do with the characteristics of the communities than it does with the ordinance itself.

[6:06:19] So tonight we're looking for Council input on a couple items first. If you have

[6:06:23] or can you hold them in it, you don't need my.

[6:06:26] So you're going to put. Oh, you're jumping the gun. Okay, go ahead.

[6:06:31] So we have any perspectives on the Jedi audit and also returning to the challenge that Dan Brown

[6:06:37] of earlier about ticketing before snow falls. Other cities have implemented a sliding start date for seasonal parking restrictions.

[6:06:44] This would be a potential tool for us to implement in the fall for these people that are getting tickets when snow hasn't fallen for the season yet.

[6:06:53] One significant consideration with that is how to keep a warning period.

[6:06:57] We've talked to parking enforcement in our police department and they really don't want the warning period to go away.

[6:07:05] They see that as an important part of onboarding the community these restrictions each season.

[6:07:10] If we were to start restrictions with an announcement, say within 48 hours of a forecast, it's

[6:07:17] no fall.

[6:07:18] They fear that we would generate a lot of confusion in the community without some sort of

[6:07:22] onboarding period.

[6:07:24] Alternatively, it does seem feasible to us that we could implement a warning period from

[6:07:29] November 1st, where the ordinance sits today, up until 48 hours before the first forecast

[6:07:35] deplorable snow and that actually wouldn't take an ordinance revision at all. That would just be

[6:07:40] direction from you all to have us implement the ordinance that way. So with that, welcome your feedback.

[6:07:47] Come to remember, Palmer. I'm not a fan of the program that we have in a couple of reasons in your

[6:07:53] data that you had in 2024, we had nine events that you plowed. Overall three of them were two inches

[6:08:01] more. So, to me, I'm moving my car left and right all the time for three events that are more

[6:08:08] than two inches. And so, that doesn't make my sense and you just got done saying that we could

[6:08:14] have a sliding start. The problem with that is that we always tell everybody we're sweeping the

[6:08:19] street. That's why we have the early start on this assault removal. So, I don't know where you're

[6:08:28] coming from on that. But for me, I understood that we are going to pull one side of the road and come back the next day and pull the other side of the road.

[6:08:36] But what I see is that we pull both sides of the road, we pile the snow on the car that's on the other side.

[6:08:43] I don't want to see if the savings there for us.

[6:08:46] Thank you.

[6:08:47] Take the second part. I was going to respond to some of the first stuff.

[6:08:50] Not every winter is created equal right and the last few that we've had are fairly mild right.

[6:08:54] The ordinances are designed to cover an average winter and a couple of our last ones haven't been that so

[6:09:01] Yes, the community does struggle with having to move their vehicles in a

[6:09:05] Lower than average snowfall winter. That's a fact, right?

[6:09:08] But we need to put something in place that protects us in the event that we haven't above average winter

[6:09:12] So that's why we've advocated when we did the ordinance. It was after or during a big snow

[6:09:18] winter and so we decided to do that which we've goofed around with it

[6:09:24] But to me, if we only have three events of two inches or less, and we can make an announcement

[6:09:31] to say, hey, a snow emergency, you need to now park on Eve inside or now park on the

[6:09:35] outside.

[6:09:36] To me, that just makes more sense and is easier for people.

[6:09:39] I've lived in North East Rochester where I had a single car drive.

[6:09:44] In all my neighbors, that's a headache to move your car back and forth, left and right, and

[6:09:48] do that.

[6:09:49] So to me, it just makes more sense for us to make this announcement, the AIDS is a snow emergency

[6:09:53] more than two inches, let's move your car.

[6:09:56] Do you want to speak to that?

[6:09:57] Because you were part of that really.

[6:09:59] Yeah, we're not.

[6:10:00] Okay. Yeah. I mean, we do a lot of research when we drop the ordinance forward to start, and I, you know, a couple of things, thoughts I have, you know, with this, with these trending warm or winters or similar ice, you know, we've had a couple bad ice events in that, those are almost, you know, more difficult to plow and sometimes less forecasted.

[6:10:18] And I mean, there's streets where if, if that ordinance wasn't in fact, in effect, and let's say we, you know, call it, say starting tomorrow at midnight park on the odd side. Well, if people won't comply, you know, there's streets.

[6:10:29] We're not going to get down if cars are in the way.

[6:10:32] So in that brain is up to a towing component.

[6:10:36] So it would be one, I guess, specific comment on that.

[6:10:41] And I'm curious, you brought up towing.

[6:10:45] Outside the downtown area, how many cars will we towed last year?

[6:10:50] Not very many.

[6:10:51] And that's part why.

[6:10:52] That's by design, actually.

[6:10:55] So the alternate side parking allows us to get away

[6:10:57] was way less towing because in general we're able to plow the streets more effectively.

[6:11:03] What we dealt with before was not being able to get down streets. People were getting delays

[6:11:08] in service to get their streets plow because we couldn't physically get the plow through.

[6:11:11] We had to wait for the tow truck to show up.

[6:11:14] And on top of that we're talking about disproportionate impacts.

[6:11:18] I have a hard time accepting that a ticket is a worse situation for somebody in these disadvantaged

[6:11:26] communities than their car getting told and not being able to get to work in the morning.

[6:11:30] So that's, that's some of the trade-offs that we've talked about as we continue to contemplate

[6:11:35] the best way to implement self-law.

[6:11:37] So I am in favor of snowmurt and sea, but I'll end with the last thing is you see snowball and cars

[6:11:44] wrong count and they sit there for a week and nobody, no one, tickets them, no one,

[6:11:48] toes them and you get people who are roof followers and they they call me and say,

[6:11:53] Why is it this car being moved in that's really frustrating for people, again, who are actually

[6:11:58] following the rules and there's cars that have lasted 10 days that I've seen that no one

[6:12:04] cares.

[6:12:06] Yeah, I mean, obviously, the plow dryer, I can feel that frustration too and I think a lot of

[6:12:10] times it is.

[6:12:11] It's definitely in the background.

[6:12:13] I think it's kind of the last resort for pulling those cars because we're trying to give

[6:12:17] people the benefit of the doubt.

[6:12:19] you know, they are typically getting tickets, maybe multiple tickets,

[6:12:23] PDs trying to get in contact with them, the tolling and impoling is kind of a last resort.

[6:12:29] So, but I'd like to respond to your other question on the Paul and the other side.

[6:12:32] I mean, if we were to literally, and that is some confusion, if we were to literally

[6:12:35] Paul only half of the street, that other side we'd in touch would be so compact,

[6:12:40] and that, you know, it wouldn't be able to be plowed. So we're still going to

[6:12:48] not plow it tight to the cars, give people room, as much as possible, room to get out of it.

[6:12:54] But obviously, we're going to clean up as much of the street as we can with, you know, what we can get to.

[6:13:01] Councilmember Fredericks.

[6:13:03] Thank you.

[6:13:03] I'm going to enjoy arguing with Sean a little bit here with my back to him.

[6:13:08] So efficiency is utmost important when it comes to snow removal.

[6:13:12] I mean, you can't have drivers, alter, hit and thing, scratch and your head.

[6:13:16] and how they're going to get things on. It's just, it's just not efficient. Having a definite start date is important.

[6:13:24] A parking enforcement officer can forget to give him a ticket. I mean, they can tell when it's a problem.

[6:13:29] They can tell when it's not a problem. They have jurisdiction to make decisions.

[6:13:34] So we can trust their judgment. I would guess. I don't think they're just right around giving everybody,

[6:13:38] running around giving everybody tickets for the heck of it. Consistency is super important.

[6:13:43] People do not do a good job of keeping themselves informed.

[6:13:47] That's just a recipe for failure to say we're going to put it out there when the time comes.

[6:13:52] About 10% of the people will be tuning into said station or website or what have you.

[6:13:58] That's probably an exaggeration, but I bet you it's less than 50.

[6:14:01] So now you got major problems with vehicles on both sides, you're hit and stuff.

[6:14:04] I mean, we don't need those problems.

[6:14:07] People are going to complain. It's inevitable. No matter what, people are going to complain.

[6:14:12] And I agree with you, what's a parking ticket 20 bucks?

[6:14:17] I've got a few.

[6:14:18] How much $35 for this?

[6:14:19] Okay, $35.

[6:14:21] I'm going to remember going forward to go back and forth.

[6:14:25] That's going to, I'm like, that's on me.

[6:14:27] I didn't read the sign that's on, I feel like every block

[6:14:29] when you're in these residential parts town, be informed.

[6:14:34] And I've got the tickets.

[6:14:36] I've paid the tickets, so.

[6:14:38] And like Dan said, the data shows that is the case, right?

[6:14:41] Most people after they get their first ticket, they comply the rest of the sea.

[6:14:45] And I'm used to it next year.

[6:14:46] And then you're changing it the next year.

[6:14:48] You got to stay consistent in five years.

[6:14:50] Everybody just be used to it.

[6:14:52] They'll complain a little less hopefully except for Sean and way we go.

[6:14:56] That's my take.

[6:14:58] Mayor Norton.

[6:15:05] Good morning, everyone. Two things really quick. Did you do any data collection before to know about the difference between what we were doing before and now, as far as, and I was thinking, even with the diversity equity and inclusion, the Jedi ordinance, you're saying, like pre 29. Yeah, we didn't put any of those, we didn't track and map all those, Andrew. Okay.

[6:15:30] certainly not from a diversity echoing standpoint, yeah.

[6:15:33] But we did have the information that you were

[6:15:34] towing much more frequently.

[6:15:36] Yes, that's true.

[6:15:37] OK, so that's what I was trying to get at.

[6:15:39] You were towing more.

[6:15:40] You don't know about the number of tickets before and after

[6:15:44] or compliance before and after, because you

[6:15:46] just weren't tracking that.

[6:15:48] I mean, we would call in cars, same thing.

[6:15:50] Cars that would sit for weeks

[6:15:52] with all being moved, I mean, I'm certain there were

[6:15:55] less tickets before the order.

[6:15:58] OK.

[6:15:58] but you were having a more difficult time plowing and I will just say you guys do a great job

[6:16:03] plowing and keeping the streets clean, you know, it's rare that somebody complains that you haven't

[6:16:08] gotten to their street and usually it's a cul-de-sac when I hear from someone, but so I think you do a

[6:16:12] really good job. I did wonder, have you noticed and maybe you don't, maybe you don't check this,

[6:16:18] but I often wonder if it ties a little bit to equity, if some of the people that are maybe

[6:16:22] getting ticketed in the streets and the ones that are more than once because they didn't learn,

[6:16:27] And I don't know that it was they didn't order, they may not have a driveway or garage.

[6:16:31] And I'm wondering if you've seen any correlation between areas that don't have driveways

[6:16:35] and garages were street parking as they're only option.

[6:16:39] And then we're kind of punishing them for something we don't have a lot of control over.

[6:16:45] But yeah, I think the answer is potentially right.

[6:16:47] It was a little bit over generalization to say they have smaller driveways and smaller garages.

[6:16:52] They may not have either.

[6:16:53] Yeah.

[6:16:54] You're right.

[6:16:55] Right.

[6:16:55] some of those areas.

[6:16:57] So what we've talked about with a child is,

[6:16:59] okay, if there's nothing inherently disproportionate

[6:17:03] about the ordinance, what could we do?

[6:17:06] And what we've started to talk about

[6:17:07] is there a different way to engage or a different way

[6:17:09] to educate on the ordinances,

[6:17:12] like what would the next steps be there

[6:17:14] to be able to successfully implement it in those?

[6:17:17] Yeah, and I appreciate that.

[6:17:18] That was gonna be my suggestion.

[6:17:20] If there are some areas of areas who don't have driveways,

[6:17:22] don't have garages, you know, is there a way we can get to them earlier with some education

[6:17:27] to try to prevent?

[6:17:29] Thanks.

[6:17:31] Councilmember Miller.

[6:17:34] I'll stick to the feedback side.

[6:17:36] Perspectives on the Jedi audit, it seems like there's maybe not enough data to really draw the

[6:17:42] lesson when you're looking at location and ticket versus where the registration falls.

[6:17:46] So I suspect it's likely also building style design of the roadway is availability of

[6:17:53] off street parking. So with that said, I think in some of these areas where there's

[6:17:57] hired demand for on street parking, I think a rolling enforcement start date, but with a

[6:18:05] continued warning period starting in November first, could really feel like giving people a

[6:18:09] break, particularly in the downtown where parking is already at a challenge capacity level,

[6:18:14] particularly for on-street parking. I think the warning period allows the police to have jurisdiction,

[6:18:20] flexibility, but by not having to enforce writing tickets when there's no snow on the ground,

[6:18:26] no snow in the seven day forecast, but it's after your November 1st, especially with our

[6:18:30] trending climate, it seems like the winters have been quite mild. And I think it would reflect an

[6:18:37] evolution of the spring practices that we've already implemented, ending the season early.

[6:18:41] It feels consistent with that policy and I would support piloting that.

[6:18:48] It also feels like we're all acknowledging that we have communications challenges as a city and so evolving our tools,

[6:18:53] making sure that we're able to work with partners, employers, businesses, neighborhood associations to expand the capabilities of reaching people at the right time.

[6:19:03] But with that said, when there's snow in the forecast, people pay a lot more attention to the forecast than they do to city communication.

[6:19:08] so I think tying those things together with the warning system could be a really common sense of

[6:19:13] evolution of the program that I could absolutely find myself supporting this.

[6:19:18] Council member, Keen.

[6:19:21] Yeah, I'll stick to the feedback, but first just thanks for like kind of doing this sort of like review

[6:19:25] of these sort of programs instead of just waiting until complaint driven. This is just good to see.

[6:19:30] As far as the Jedi stuff, again, it's good to see that going on and I would agree that they're probably

[6:19:35] more neighborhood or kind of oriented than they are really like equity equity issues.

[6:19:43] And I want to go back to the start of this. I mean, I think you undersell the value of

[6:19:48] one we went to seasonal parking, and it's not just cleaner streets. It's less things on cars.

[6:20:00] And I don't think it's all based on the fact that we really have had lighter winters. That input about like plowing things, but these ice events really have been. And when they get down, it once they get down, it's really hard to use those owners better to pre-treat before that happens than treating them.

[6:20:20] And I also find that seasonal is, and we've got like six years of it now.

[6:20:26] This idea of changing it to like, emergency and telling them is a snow emergency.

[6:20:32] I just think, I haven't, the bad, the two examples I have that worked so dramatically

[6:20:37] worse than Rochester that they just, you just can't get the word out.

[6:20:41] So I think we have done a better job of training people over time.

[6:20:45] So I'd stick with the seasonal, I like the idea of talking about, you know, we have a better

[6:20:49] way to end the system now.

[6:20:50] as far starting up, I still would suggest November 1st and, you know, whether we have these sort of, like,

[6:20:56] two months or two weeks and maybe it's four weeks of just letting people know that, hey, you got to start,

[6:21:03] follow up following these rules.

[6:21:05] But I would like you to keep track.

[6:21:06] I mean, is it really faster or is that just, is everyone so wild?

[6:21:11] Is it really less dinged cars and where our emergency stuff is that better use of our equipment?

[6:21:17] because I really do think the roads are better,

[6:21:20] but that could be back to this other thing of lighter winters.

[6:21:24] I don't think back in 2019 when we had the Polar Vortex,

[6:21:26] I don't think that's why we did this.

[6:21:28] We're working up to this for many years coming up to it.

[6:21:32] But those are the years you do this stuff for.

[6:21:35] And you better have it in place when you do get that next bad year.

[6:21:39] So I'm more thankful for the program we have

[6:21:42] than leaning into, let's start experimenting with it.

[6:21:45] I'd rather not do that.

[6:21:47] Thank you, councilmember. Any other feedback? I just want to thank you as well for the program and I don't get to say this very often. I agree with councilmember Frederick's on his approach to this so that's my feedback.

[6:22:04] He was excited about that. Thanks, gentlemen.

[6:22:08] Thank you.

[6:22:09] We are going to move to council initiated actions.

[6:22:13] I won. We have one council initiated action and that is arts economic impact.

[6:22:19] Analysis council member Miller go ahead.

[6:22:21] Thank you and I will try to keep this as brief as I can.

[6:22:25] Realizing that we're already well in just Tuesday.

[6:22:28] Thank you for our speakers who came to the open comment period to share feedback and

[6:22:32] and perspective on the work that they've been doing.

[6:22:36] I've been thinking about arts and culture for a little while.

[6:22:38] I know this comes to us for discussion

[6:22:40] was part of how does the city support arts and cultural efforts

[6:22:43] as the indoor recreation presentation a few months.

[6:22:47] Weeks ago, and I've been able to really

[6:22:51] wonder about kind of the underlying foundational

[6:22:53] organizations of different groups, different sectors

[6:22:55] of our community, the Greater Rochester Arts

[6:22:59] and Cultural Trust has been active for many years.

[6:23:01] It's my understanding that they are wrapping up.

[6:23:03] This operations this year, having done the statues

[6:23:06] for equality, project with the mayor.

[6:23:08] And so I've been wondering about what's next

[6:23:10] and how might we engage the arts and cultural organizations

[6:23:13] who are already doing great work in our community.

[6:23:16] And so I was able to engage with them,

[6:23:18] several points in this year.

[6:23:19] They've been diligently working to bring everyone together,

[6:23:22] do stakeholder mapping, seek funding, be denied funding,

[6:23:26] go to the University of Minnesota's

[6:23:27] for SNL's research center, find on alternative approach to do the strategic analysis, be able

[6:23:34] to report and understand this impact in our community.

[6:23:38] And it's my understanding that one of their sort of stop points has been the ability to

[6:23:45] find an economic impact study.

[6:23:47] They have a proposal, it's included in this attachment in this packet.

[6:23:51] And it seems like a quite reasonable amount of contingency, they would not qualify until the

[6:23:56] community building funds cycle, which does not open until January 2027. So in order to advance

[6:24:02] the work of our many partners who we heard from the impact of arts and culture tonight in

[6:24:08] an earlier hearing, I think this is a common sense way that we can advance this,

[6:24:13] tied into the work that experienced Rochester has done with the tourism master plan work with a study

[6:24:17] through the University of Minnesota and expand that look beyond just tourism impacts and

[6:24:22] attainment, but also into the arts and cultural impact and economic impact for our community

[6:24:27] of these 82 organizations that they've identified.

[6:24:30] So I appreciate Councilmember Keene reviewing this with me supporting it and so we're bringing

[6:24:35] this forward with the proposal that we would find this economic impact study as proposed by the

[6:24:41] University of Minnesota Extension Office at a cost of $7,000 using 2026 contingency.

[6:24:47] council member keen yeah I'll just add that again when discussion is what council member Miller I did have memory

[6:25:00] A lot of other things that the council had sort of gotten involved with that didn't end up well.

[6:25:04] And I think this one we structured such that it is the city contract with someone as opposed to giving money to somebody else to do something.

[6:25:11] I think that this is a little bit modelled if you look at the sports foundations and how they try to look at how they approach the city for support.

[6:25:20] They have the foundation, they have this advisory board. The arts are much more all independent players and not really having any sort of like

[6:25:29] structure all way of dealing with the city, this doesn't solve that problem, but I think it gets you in those discussions towards how you could do this better.

[6:25:40] Thank you.

[6:25:40] Council Member Fredericks.

[6:25:44] The arts, seeing adds a lot of character to community, and I enjoy it.

[6:25:50] I'm obviously very not artistic, but I very much enjoy it.

[6:25:54] I like the culture it brings to a city, I always find myself going to parts of every city

[6:25:59] I visit that is very culturally art-facing, so on and so forth, so I plan and supporting

[6:26:05] it.

[6:26:06] What do we do with the information when we're done?

[6:26:09] Yeah, so great question.

[6:26:09] Mr. Miller?

[6:26:10] Thank you.

[6:26:11] So as part of the proposal, there is a presentation that would be included of the results, so

[6:26:16] similar to the way that the researchers worked with the experience Rochester to provide

[6:26:20] a presentation in that case in a video format and executive summary, we could receive that

[6:26:26] presentation ourselves as a study session in coordination with the Arts and Culture

[6:26:31] Steering Committee.

[6:26:33] So that would be my recommendation is that we hear a live presentation which would be

[6:26:38] already scoped into that study and I believe that they would target early next year to complete

[6:26:43] that work.

[6:26:44] Come from our team where you're going to understand how to just add to this that yeah, I think the softer

[6:26:51] Value of this work is how it will it help the arts groups

[6:26:56] Organize better and that's the softer side. That's not it's not like a

[6:27:00] Plant outcome, but if they'd see a way of saying

[6:27:03] We shouldn't be all these separate organizations all competing with each other. What's the way we can run together?

[6:27:08] And I think that's what I'm looking for out of this a better way that the city interacts with

[6:27:13] what we like a lot generally referred to as the arts, but there isn't a place you do that.

[6:27:19] It looks a member.

[6:27:20] It looks to me like to organize better than any group in this community after this evening.

[6:27:26] So I think they have the ability to come together well.

[6:27:29] And with that kind of power, they should be able to come up with some great things for this community.

[6:27:34] Councilmember Wall.

[6:27:36] Two of the people in open comment identified themselves as part of the Rochester Arts and Cultural Strategic Plan,

[6:27:42] steering committee, how did the 12 become a part of this self-organized?

[6:27:51] So council member Miller.

[6:27:53] Thank you.

[6:27:53] It's been a process of invitation and stakeholder mapping and an invitation to further participation.

[6:27:59] So for those groups, those 12 organizations that opted in to more work, more meetings and

[6:28:05] the others, it's my understanding have opted in to being engaged but not having the capacity

[6:28:11] to participate in the steering committee's work.

[6:28:15] Thank you, a second question.

[6:28:17] How were the 82 arts organizations identified?

[6:28:22] So, my understanding is that there was a broad survey.

[6:28:26] An invitation sent out, obviously, while there's not an arts and culture steering committee

[6:28:32] trusts Arts Council formally organized.

[6:28:35] There's broad cooperation and knowledge across that space.

[6:28:39] I'd also point to the work that Greg just on to identify stakeholders, so it's an evolution

[6:28:44] of that work.

[6:28:45] Many organizations are nonprofits, so there's public filings, and it's been an iterative

[6:28:50] process to map out all of the relevant stakeholders across performing arts, visual arts,

[6:28:56] businesses that have an arts component, educational programs, and working together across

[6:29:01] this network mapping.

[6:29:03] And so much of that work and I participated in a meeting where it was literally, are we missing

[6:29:08] anyone, what of these 12 organizations, who do you know, who is not represented here and building

[6:29:13] that out in collaboration with the researchers from the Chris Nelson Center at Kira?

[6:29:19] So the survey will go to just these 82 organizations?

[6:29:24] They would be the target of that economic study.

[6:29:27] So for the economic impact, I was wondering what will actually be measured in Rochester from something

[6:29:35] so massive as just for kicks when they bring in 3,000 families doesn't include the wonderful

[6:29:44] Latino fest and what that brings over a long weekend doesn't include independent music

[6:29:53] studios of eight panel teachers.

[6:30:00] Really? It's weird. I think it's a great question. I appreciate you raising it. I think that there is a question of who's not here and that can be added, but at least from the project approach as presented in this proposal, it is really trying to clarify what's being surveyed.

[6:30:17] So what is the art, what type of art is that organization representing visual art, performing art, physical art, cultural event.

[6:30:27] What kinds of services and activities and that will be subjective?

[6:30:31] How many employees is that organization employing?

[6:30:35] Full-time part-time, what is the total organizational spending annually?

[6:30:39] How many artists have been supported, helped, involved, and so for an organization that is doing performance?

[6:30:44] So I mean, I would suspect that that includes the number of participants for those events.

[6:30:48] And then it allows the flexibility of additional survey questions that get to that.

[6:30:56] What is the, what is the size scope impact?

[6:31:00] Take it sales, perhaps, right, other, other features that are not universal to the organizations,

[6:31:06] but are attempting to get at that impact.

[6:31:09] And any, any study, I mean, I'm sure we could never define a perfect study that we would,

[6:31:15] forever be refining it to figure out whether the individual piano teacher who, to just

[6:31:20] two afternoons a week out of their home fits within that impact. I mean, we do have to draw

[6:31:26] a line somewhere or we'll never get started. This felt well anchored into a scientific method

[6:31:35] with a research organization that is well known and gave a defined project scope that is

[6:31:41] at a reasonable amount. So that's why I felt comfortable bringing this forward. It felt like

[6:31:46] the organizations that are active in this space had done quite a bit of due diligence.

[6:31:52] May or

[6:31:52] not. Yeah, I'm not opposed at all to this and I, but I just want to be clear, we have had for the

[6:32:03] last 20 or 30 years, 20 years, the greater Rochester Arts and Cultural Trust, which was exactly what

[6:32:10] you've just defined, which was a group of organizations,

[6:32:14] and at one point the list was very long

[6:32:17] of people from all the different arcs

[6:32:19] or art organizations, including members of the city,

[6:32:24] or Del Brady sat on that committee forever.

[6:32:25] It had legislators as well.

[6:32:28] And so as we move forward, I think it might be

[6:32:31] who've the group to interview whose left of Grout,

[6:32:35] there are four people, I think, we just said goodbye to one

[6:32:38] left town about what worked and what didn't work so we don't make the same mistake and also

[6:32:46] recognize that while this organization has been slowly disappearing over time and we are

[6:32:55] self disappearing as of when there's a there's a talking trails thing that's getting done and

[6:33:01] when that's done that organization intends to close down they do and have a long history of

[6:33:07] in grants in this area. So I just I just really hope that whoever does this research will get a

[6:33:14] hold of and I've got the names of who's left on that small committee that remains so that we don't

[6:33:21] end up because the group you know I don't want to say fought with in itself but a little bit

[6:33:28] didn't feel like it was doing for their group or was doing too much for another group and

[6:33:32] You know, what I saw tonight with an art organization that was all here excited wanting to work together is what we need more of and and not what happened with with the other organization. So I would encourage them to reach out and get that information and include it.

[6:33:49] Councilmember Doring.

[6:33:51] I plan to support this the CIA as well. I would I would ask for an additional question to be included in the project approach and that would be the number of volunteers that the.

[6:34:02] organization engages, that is not a, that also shows economic impact, right?

[6:34:09] So, I would invite that as another tool and another metric to be explored.

[6:34:18] To that point, Council Member Miller.

[6:34:21] So, we're, we're proposing funding this at $7,000.

[6:34:26] dollars and is a cure that's doing the project do we do we is there ability to have

[6:34:38] input to the mayor's point and to council member Dorings point I mean it looks like we

[6:34:44] would be the sole funder of this correct correct and I think what we would do is direct

[6:34:49] to take that proposed expansion of a volunteer number of volunteers and or volunteer hours to the proposal.

[6:35:00] To make sure that that's feasible within the funding amount and then to enter into an agreement with them to proceed with the study.

[6:35:08] And the mayor's point to get some of the history of previous groups as well.

[6:35:15] So I would think that that's probably outside of the scope of the proposal directly, but would be feedback and direction to the steering committee members to pursue those connections, and I'm hearing that the mayor would like to be a resource to create those connections.

[6:35:28] should they not happen. Sounds good. All right is there a motion on this? Sure. I'll make a motion

[6:35:37] to draft staff to

[6:35:41] enter into an agreement with the University of Minnesota Extension to advance the

[6:35:47] Economic Impact Study the University of Minnesota Extension and allocate $7,000 from 2026

[6:35:53] contingency funds to fund that work.

[6:35:57] Motion made by council member Miller,

[6:35:59] seconded by council member Fredericks,

[6:36:01] any further discussion?

[6:36:02] All of favor say aye.

[6:36:04] Opposed say nay, motion passes.

[6:36:06] Thank you.

[6:36:08] Moving on to our ordnance second readings,

[6:36:13] go ahead, Mr. Spindler Craig.

[6:36:14] Thank you, Mr. President.

[6:36:15] Item K1, an ordnance amending subsection one

[6:36:19] and subsection two of subparagraph A

[6:36:23] of paragraph 10 of clause E of section six zero point two zero zero point zero four zero

[6:36:29] relating to floodplain overlay and various definitions of the unified development code for

[6:36:36] proof. Second motion made by council member keen and seconded by council member

[6:36:41] wall all in favor say aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye. Motion passes

[6:36:47] councilmember Palmer grateful to his colleagues are very grateful that he had two

[6:36:54] items under other business and he is relieving us of that so questions have

[6:37:01] been answered great so is there a motion to adjourn so moved second okay I didn't

[6:37:06] hear the who who made that motion motion made by councilmember Palmer and

[6:37:12] by council member Miller all in favor say aye. Opposed say nay we are adjourned.

City Council

Agenda

Transcript