Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Council Information Memorandum 01-21-2011
rp)CITY OF PLYMOUTH COUNCIL INFO MEMO January 21, 2011 UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS HRAAgenda 01127111....................................................... ................................ --- ............................. Page 3 January, February, March 2011 Official City Meeting Calendars....................................................... Page 5 Tentative List of Agenda Items for Future Cite Council Meetings ................................................... Page l 1 INFORMATION News Articles, Releases, Publications, Etc ... Vacant -property laws multiply in suburbs, Article.. Star Tribune ...................................................... Page 12 Proposed AIS program is generating a wave of ire, Article. Star Tribune......... ................................ Page 14 Golden Valley franchise fees encounter opposition from Xcel Energy, Article, Saar Newspapers.... Page 16 Governor Dayton. Metropolitan Council Public Affairs................................................................... Page 18 Ehlers Market Commentary, Ehlers, Lac........................................................................................... Page 21 Governance of Transit in the Tvvin Cities Region, Q#ice af'the Legislative Auclitor•......................... Page 23 MEETING MINUTES Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, January 5, 2011................................................................ Page 27 CORRESPONDENCE Letter to residents for comprehensive plan amendment. January 21, 2011 ....................................... Page 34 Letter to residents for comprehensive plan amendment sanitary sewer districts, January 21, 2011 .. Page 35 Letter from Board of Hennepin County Commissioners, Sandy Engdahl recognition ...................... Page 36 Letter to MNDOT regarding interstate 494 expansion project, January 21, 2011 .............................Page 37 -2- MEETING AGENDA PLYMOUTH HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THURSDAY, JANUARY 27, 2011 - 7:00 p.m. WHERE: Medicine Lake Room City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 CONSENT AGENDA All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner, citizen or petitioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in normal sequence on the agenda. 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. 2. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve HRA Meeting Minutes from November 18, 2010. B. Plymouth Towne Square. Accept Monthly Housing Reports (November and December, 2010). C. Vicksburg Crossing. Accept Monthly Housing Reports (November and December, 2010). 3. NEW BUSINESS A. Vicksburg Crossing. Marketing Report. B. Plymouth Towne Square. Approve sale of refunding bonds. C. First Time Homebuyer and Rehabilitation Program Changes. 4. ADJOURNMENT -4- p lymouth Addin3 Quality to Life January 2011 _jV J'1 Modified on 0121111 1 liff NEW YEAR'S DAY Observed NEW YEAR'S DAY CITY OFFICES CLOSED 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers 9 10 11. 12 13 14 15 3:30 PM PM 7:00 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL7.00 ENVIRONMENTAL PARK Et REC MEETING* 'QUALITY ADVISORY Medicine Lake Room COMMITTEE COMMISSION (EQC) MEETING (PRAC) MEETING 7.00 PM Council Chambers Council Chambers REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 5:30 PM 7:00 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING** COMMISSION MARTIN LUTHER Medicine Lake Room MEETING KING JR. Council Chambers BIRTHDAY Observed CITY OFFICES CLOSED 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 5:30 PM 00 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL A MEETING HRA M MEETING*** Medicine Lake Room Medicine Lake Room 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL 'Meeting -th Sheriff Stanek on Com unications Facility Discuss Council Goals and Priorities or 2011 and MEETING Discu s Council Chambers Renov tion Council Chambers "" Discuss L tility Rate Study and Utility Trunk Fund Analysis l► �, _jV J'1 Modified on 0121111 City of Plymouth Adding Quality to Life February 2011 Modified on 011211 If �. 2 3 4 5 7:00 PM 6:00 PM 2:00 PM PLANNING BOARD AND FIRE & ICE COMMISSION COMMISSION FESTIVAL MEETING RECOGNITION Parkers Lake Council Chambers EVENT Plymouth Creek Center 6 7 8 5:30 PM 9 10 11 12 7:00 PM 7:00 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL PARK & REC MEETING' QUALITY ADVISORYCOMMITTEE Medicine Lake Room COMMISSION. 7:00 PM (EQC) MEETING (FRAC) MEETING REGULAR COUNCIL Council Chambers Council Chambers MEETING Council Chambers 13 14 15 16 7:00 PM 17 7:o0 PM 18 19 PLANNING HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION COMMISSION MEETING MEETING Council Chambers Medicine Lake Roam 20 21 2 2 7:00 PM 2 3 7:00 PM 2 4 7:00 PM 25 26 REGULAR COUNCIL PLYMOUTH HRA MEETING PRESIDENTS MEETING ADVISORY Medicine Lake Room DAY Council Chambers COMMITTEE ON TRANSIT (PACT) MEETING CITY OFFICES Medicine Lake Room CLOSED 27 28 Discuss Transit System and Str t Assessment Policy Modified on 011211 If me a City of Plymouth Adding Quality to Life March 2011 Modified on 01121111 CHANGES ARE NOTED IN RED 1 127:30 AM 3 7:00 PM 4 5 STATE OF THE POLICE DEPT. CITY MEETING ANNUAL Council Chambers RECOGNITION EVENT Plymouth Creek 7:00 PM Center PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council hamber 6 7 8 7:00 PM 9 7:00 PM 10 11 12 REGULAR COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL MEETING QUALITY Council Chambers COMMITTEE (EQC) MEETING Council Chambers 13 14 1S 1f 17 18 19 6:00 PM 7:04 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING' COMMISSION Medicine Lake Room MEETING Council Chambers 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 7:00 PM 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL HRA MEETING MEETING Medicine Lake Room Council Chambers 27 28 29 30 31. ' Discus Future Park Issues and U date with City Manages Modified on 01121111 CHANGES ARE NOTED IN RED -10- Tentative Schedule for City Council Agenda Items February 8, Special, 5:30 p.m., Medicine Lake Conference Room • Discuss transit system • Discuss Public Improvement Special Assessment Policy February 8, Regular, 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers • Public Hearing on the request of tax increment financing assistance for West View Estates (Sands Companies) • Approve Request for Proposal for Comprehensive Municipal Recycling Services February 22, Regular, 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers • Public hearing on the request to create a Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment for a multi -family apartment project, Quest Development March 8, Regular, 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers • Discuss Park and Recreation Advisory Commission's Annual Work Plan + Oaths of Office to Firefighters Sergio Flores and Aaron Morris March 15, Special, 6:00 p.m., Medicine Lake Room • Discuss future park issues • Update with City Manager March 22, Regular, 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers April 12, Board of Equalization, 6:00 p.m., Council Chambers April 12, Regular, 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers April 26, Board of Equalization Reconvened, 6:00 p.m., Council Chambers April 26, Regular, 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers —11— Note: Special Meeting topics have been set by Council; all other topics are tentative. Vacant -property laws multiply in suburbs TIM HARLOW, Star Tribune Let's Get Graphic once made banners and signs out of a storefront in Mounds View. When the company moved out of the space in the 2400 block of Hwy. 10 in August 2009, youths and others set up a skateboard park inside the empty building. "That's an extreme case," said city community director Ken Roberts. But it illustrates what can happen when nobody monitors vacant buildings. Mounds View and Richfield officials could soon have a new tool to help put vacant properties on a watch list. Both suburbs are considering ordinances requiring owners of vacant buildings and houses to register them with the city and pay a fee for doing so. Minneapolis and St. Paul have long had such regulations. With a rising number of unoccupied buildings amid the foreclosure crisis, more cities are likely to do likewise to fight crime, squatters and vandalism. "I do think this will become a trend," said Steve Devich, city manager in Richfield, where leaders expect to present an ordinance to the City Council soon. "if it's a problem for Richfield or Mounds View, it's a problem for every city. It's not just in the inner city." In the past few years, Crystal, Hopkins, Anoka, Albertville, Coon Rapids, Princeton and Brooklyn Center have adopted such ordinances, the League of Minnesota Cities said. Besides preventing blight and curbing crime, the ordinances provide revenue to cover monitoring and cleaning up derelict properties. In Mounds View, a preliminary proposal calls for owners of unoccupied buildings to pay the city $500 a year. With 125 vacant properties as of December -- up from 110 in July and 70 three years ago -- that would generate more than $62,000. The money would be used to cover staff time and to address issues such as illegal dumping, unmowed lawns and broken windows. "if the program goes forward, we can be more responsive [to complaints] and resolve things in three days rather than three weeks because we will have better information," Roberts said. While his city has not been overrun with empty buildings, Devich said, the ordinance in Richfield would help to ensure that vacant properties are up to code and prevent a swell of properties for which the city would have to care. That was one reason why Crystal, with 160 vacant properties, enacted its ordinance in 2009. The idea was to generate accurate information about properties, keep them from falling into disrepair and place the burden for city services on the property owners. "Crystal is a bedroom community. If our neighborhoods suffer, then our city could be lost," said Patrick Peters, Crystal's community development director. Devich and Roberts say their city councils will look at what constitutes a vacant building and how to deal with cases such as when owners are snowbirds or in the military, or if an owner dies and family members are looking after the property. "It is a tool to get properties in shape, and we'd have the leverage to make that happen," Devich said. Tim Harlow - 651-735-1824 -13- � �7 More Than' 1,CM copies delivemd each week in the WmIam a =h 4 SATURDAY, JANUARY 15, 2011 Propo'se'd -AIS program is generating a wave -of ire Concerns being raised over proposal's cost, duplication of effort, MCWD's. authority By Amanda Schwarze require anyone who'want- Staff Writer ed to put a watercraft, dock, boat ramp or other A proposed program equipment in a water body aimed at stopping the located in the watershed spread of aquatic invasive district to demonstrate that species is creating a lot of it is free of any -AIS: To do discussion about what is that, the MCWD is propos- the best way to deal with ing a permitting process the problem, where people would pay a Curtailing the spread of fee to have their watercraft easily transportable and or other equipment inspect - impossible to eradicate ed and, if needed, decon- aquatic invasive species taminated to be certified as (AIS) has proved a daunt- free of ATS. ing task, but the The proposal also . Minnehaha Creek includes a tamper -proof tag Watershed District or sticker system to deter- (MCWD) is proposing a mine which watercraft and program to do just that. equipment are authorized The agency is. considering to .enter water bodies. A creating either a regulatory blue sticker would mean or a voluntary inspection that' the equipment was program. While the gra- inspected and found to be posal ha& its supporters, AIS -free or was decontarli- others have concCout mated. the -plan. �'` 'jnkg The MCWD is consid- Naves ering a rule that would Continued on page 3 waves Continued from front That sticker would AIS"fromcoming into their around the state to create said. allow the equipment to be lakes so it is unfair to have unifoimriles. He said -that a '.. He -said that there at'e no placed in any non -infested them pay less for the pro- lot of people use Lake known ways to eradicate water body in the watershed- gram. He said residents -in Minpetonka who live out-. Aly so "once it's there, it's district without inspection. the Lake Minnetonka area . side of the district and who there forever. The impacts Boats leaving non -infested 'lave been saying all along may not be aware of the "AM irreversible." waters would again receive `help us, help us,"' prevent program, which could lead ' Osgood said he thinks a blue •sticker or tag, but infestation, but.now that the to fines if they are caught in that a lack of political will is, those leaving infested lake -is infested, the resi- the water without a sticker 'the reason why a statewide waters would receive red dents might have to shoul- or tag on their boat.. .'AIS prevention program has tag or sticker and that would der a greater portion of the Another issue Hams ;:riot yet been. created. He mean that the boat must be costs for a prevention pro- has with the proposal is the itud that- 60w the state's decontaminated and dried gram.' . . inspection process. He -said • '-Gadget def dt..is taking. pri- before going in non -infested. In a letter to the that since "Just -about any- '�onty, but there are still waters. MCWD, Lake Minnetonka thing that touches the , 'things that could be done on In order to perform the Conversation District water" will need to be a larger scale to prevent the inspections, the MCWD is (LMCD) officials noted that inspected prior to going into spread of ALS. ' The state proposing to create deconta- they thought that Lake the water, there will be long : already has goodlaws pro- mination stations at public Minnetonka should be lines for inspections during hibiting the transfer of AIS boat launches, marinas and exempt from the program if the spring for people who .but, Osgood said, those major access roads to lakes it becomes a reality because want to install their docks laws are not being enforced and to provide signs and "a high degree of coopera- and launch their boats. well. He also said that. maps to permitting and tion already exists, and Wbile.Hanus said'he is increasing the penalties for inspection stations and needs to continue, amongst supportive•of a plan to stop -violating those law's could decontamination sites. To the various regulatory agen- the spread of AIS and that help. Currently, the most pay for the program, which cies,' in the - Lake he would be willing to pay a common fines are about the, organization estimates Minnetonka area. fee for an effective program, $50, Osgood said. will cost $180,000 per year, The LMCD letter also he said that the MCWD's : The MCWD's program, the MCWD is proposing a notes a concern that the pro- proposal has "serious, seri- if enacted, could eventually property tax while seeking gram would create a dupli- ous loopholes." be enforced 'statewide, grants and contributions cation of efforts in some The Lake Minnetonka Osgood said. He said that from other government matters on the lake. "For Association (LMA), how- other watershed districts are organizations. example, the LMCD cur- ever, is supportive of the closely' watching the The proposal also notes ' rently permits a number of proposal, LMA Executive MCWD's process. that, while the program, multiple docks on; Lake Director Dick Osgood said. Before -the MCWD would initially be funded by Minnetonka that store five "It addresses AIS concerns would adopt any rule or pro - watershed district taxpayers or more watercraft (com- in- a way that is needed and gram, they would convene a and permit fees, the costs mercial marinas, yacht in a way (fiat can't be done task force that would allow would later shift in part to clubs, municipal -docks and on a lake -by -lake basis," he for technical and stakehold- "rhe recreational and com- . homeowner association said. '.This fits the bill.'.' er input during the develop- mercial users of the water docks)," the letter notes. Osgood said that there trent of regulations, the pro - bodies in the Nkmehaha The LMCD officials added are some "logistical hur- posal'nows: ' Creek watershed whose that the proposal also dies" that would need to be The MCWD includes activities present the great- includes the permitting by . cleared, such as Hanus's all or part of 27 cities in est threat and potential to the MCWD . of things like concerns about long lines at Hennepin and Carver exacerbate the impacts docks and boat lifts. `The inspection stations. and Counties. Cities included in caused by invasive species." LMCD is concerned about informing water users com- the district are: Chanhassen, That idea upset Mound this duplication and redun ing from outside the water- Deephaven, Edina, Mayor Mark Hanus. dancy in effprts, which will shed district of the rules. Excelsior, Golden' Valley, Hanus said that shifting need to be resolved by the Overall; though, he said he Greenwood, Hopkins, the costs to those who pres- MCWD." thought the program was Independence, Laketown ent the greatest threat means Hanus also said that framed well in the MCWD Township, Long Lake, that people living in the instead of looking at a proposal and that the details Maple Plain, Medina, Lake Minnetonka area will watershed district -wide pro -just need to be filled in. Minneapolis, Minnetonka, be paying more for the pro- gram, the MCWD should be He said that opposition Minnetonka - Beach, gram because the lake working toward a statewide to the addition of more reg- : Mi metrista, Mound; Orono, already has rF lfoil and program. If the Minnesota ulations and fees should be 'Plyrizouth, Richfield, zebra mussels. People living Department of Natural listened to, but that stopping Shorewood,' Spring Park, in non-infected areas of the' Resources (DNR) is not, the spread of AIS will St. Bonifacius, St. 'Louis watershed district -are the doing anything about the require some far-reaching Park; Tonka Bay,. Victoria, ones who will really t befit problem, he said, the solutions. "We can't ;get a . Watertown Township, froav'the prograin; he'said, MCWD should work with' handle. on:. it. without: being Wayzata and -Woodland. because it % i!]I' elp'pt4nt other watershed districts heavy handed:' Os ood �o11viBLk tiQifv3c' ve"I f� -ft r' r n invlix) fq ,i$ .'-}iM1r ist. 1 r sem: —15— Pagel of 2 Golden Valley > News Golden Valley franchise fees encounter opposition Pn�ti=age from Xcel Energy by Sue Webber - Sun Newspapers Published: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 10:31 PM CST An ordinance requiring an electric franchise fee from Xcel Energy, approved last October and scheduled to take effect Jan. 1 in Golden Valley, has run into a roadblock. "Xcel Energy cannot consent to the franchise fee ordinance," said a Dec. 29 letter to Golden Valley Public Works Director Jeanine Clancy -from Laura McCarten, regional vice president of Xcel Energy. McCarten's letter said the fee ordinance "places Xcel Energy at a competitive disadvantage vis-a-vis other energy suppliers within the city of Golden Valley." "Almost all municipalities collecting franchise fees do so uniformly on all energy suppliers within the municipality," the letter said. Xcel Energy has consistently opposed the franchise fees because a similar franchise fee is not being imposed on CenterPoint Energy. McCarten proposed that the dispute be resolved through binding arbitration. "During the arbitration process, Xcel Energy would collect franchise fees from Golden Valley residents beginning with the January 2011 billing cycle, but hold such fees in an account pending final resolution of this dispute," McCarten's letter said. Tim Strommen, an attorney with Kennedy and Graven who is representing Golden Valley on the issue, acknowledged that Xcel Energy's objection has been an ongoing discussion between representatives from the city and the utility company. He said the City Council met in a closed session Jan. 4 to discuss "the threat of litigation," but has taken no formal action. Strommen said the city is likely to move at its Jan. 18 meeting or at a special meeting that could be called sometime before then. It would be impossible for the city to move forward with franchise fees without the utility's cooperation or participation, Strommen said. "That's what the court would ultimately decide if we are forced to go to court," Strommen said. "The mechanics of franchise fees are that the utility would notify its customers of the surcharge to be added to their bills." City officials said earlier that the anticipated $630,000 that could be raised from the franchise fees each year would provide partial funding for Golden Valley's $20 million Douglas Drive improvement project, scheduled to begin in 2016. —16— http://www.mnsun.com/articles/2011/01/14/golden valley/news/gvl3 franchisefees.prt 1/14/2011 Page 2 of 2 The ordinance approved in October 2010 stipulated a monthly flat fee of $2 from every residential customer and small nondemand commercial and industrial firm, plus $22.50 from small commercial and industrial demand customers and $206 each per year from large commercial and industrial customers. Golden Valley has 8,963 residential customers, 597 small nondemand commercial and industrial customers, 396 small commercial and industrial demand customers and 119 large commercial and industrial customers. An Aug. 12, 2010, letter from Briggs and Morgan, Xcel Energy's legal counsel, expressed the company's objections. "Xcel Energy cannot agree to place itself at a competitive price disadvantage when the future effects of such action cannot be known," Attorney Thomas Basting Jr. said in the letter. "Xcel doesn't take a position on whether to impose a fee," Basting said "It should be imposed in a competitively neutral manner on all energy suppliers." Basting said about 50 communities in Minnesota have franchise fees. "In all cases, Xcel has successfully negotiated terms and fees," Basting said. "I don't know of any case where fees were imposed without a negotiated agreement." He conceded that the $2 fee is "not particularly onerous." "We're concerned primarily with the larger industrial and commercial users," Basting said. Basting said Xcel is "fully aware of the city's concerns, and we have proposed solutions and terms to address that." City officials have been in discussions with Xcel Energy about the franchise fees since March 2010, City Manager Tom Burt said earlier. Copyright © 2011 -Sun Newspapers [x] Close Window 17— http://Wvwv.mnsun.comlarticles/2011/01/14/golden valley/newslgvl3franchisefees.prt 1/14/2011 STATE of MINNESOTA MARK DAYTON GOVERNOR Contact: Bonnie Kollodge Metropolitan Council Public Affairs 651-602.1357 Governor Dayton announces Metropolitan Council Nominating Committee & Extends Deadline for Metropolitan Council Applicants ST. PAUL Jan. 14, 2011 --- Governor Mark Dayton today announced members who will serve on the Metropolitan Council Nominating Committee, which will make recommendations to the governor for appointments to the Metropolitan Council. In addition, the governor's office has extended the deadline for applying for seats on the Metropolitan Council. The Metropolitan Council is the regional planning agency that operates the regional bus and rail system, collects and treats wastewater and plans regional parks. Earlier this month, the governor announced the appointment of Susan Haigh as Council Chair, who serves at -large. Nominating Committee: The members of the seven -member nominating committee are: • .Fay Cowles, Co -Chair, Itasca Project Transportation Committee • Bill Hargis, Former Mayor, City of Woodbury • Mary Hamann -Roland, Mayor, City of Apple Valley • Janet Williams, Mayor, City of Savage • Melvin Carter, St. Paul City Council member • Dennis Berg, Former Anoka County Commissioner • Gail Dorfinan, Hennepin County Commissioner Jay Cowles will serve as chair of the nominating committee. The committee will review applications and letters of support submitted to the Secretary of State's Office. It will select candidates to be interviewed at a series of public meetings and recommend finalists for each of the 16 Council districts. Extended Application Deadline: The application deadline for anyone interested in applying has been extended by one week. Individuals interested in serving on the Council must complete an Open Appointments Application Form by the end of the day on Jan. 21. Application forms are available on the Secretary of State's website at www.sos.state.mn.us or by calling 651.556.0643. Applicants are asked to attach a current resume to their application, along with any letters of recommendation. According to statute, applicants must be a resident of the district for which they are seeking appointment and knowledgeable about urban and metropolitan affairs. A map of Council districts is available at: www.metrocouncil.orgZabout/district mgps.htm. The nominating committee will take testimony from selected applicants at a series of four public meetings. Selected applicants will receive details on the format in advance of the meetings. Each meeting will include one hour of testimony for each Council district. These meetings will be open to the public. Public meeting dates and times have been modified to reflect the new application deadline, with the Jan. 31 and Feb. 2 meetings cancelled and meetings on Feb. 16 and 17 added. Public Meetings: Date Council District Location Time CANCELLED 1 1,2,9,4-0 -Br-e.:Irlt..-. PaFk City 14x11 i CANCELLED Feb. 2 4�5, 15 16 L+ie . bake City Hall Feb. 9 3, 6, 7, 8 St. Louis Park City Hall 6:30 p.m. 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. Feb. 10 11, 12, 13, 14 Met Council Chambers 6:30 p.m. 390 N. Robert Street St. Paul Feb. 16 4, 5, 15, 16 Prior Lake City Hall 6:3 0 p.m. 4646 Dakota Street S.E. Feb. 17 1, 2, 9, 10 Brooklyn Park City Hall 6:30 p.m. 5200 85th Avenue N. —19— Questions about the appointments process should be directed to Judd Schetnan at the Metropolitan Council. He can be reached by email at judd.schetnan@;metc.state.mn.us or by phone at 651,602.1142. The Metropolitan Council coordinates planning and development in the seven -county metropolitan area and directly operates regional services, including bus and rail transit and wastewater collection and treatment. The Metropolitan Council consists of 16 metropolitan citizens appointed from geographically defined districts in the seven -county metropolitan area and a chair. All 17 members are appointed by the governor to four-year terms that are co - terminus with the governor. -30- -20— Ehlers Market Commentary January 18, 2011 YIELDS CONTINUE TO INCREASE AT START OF 2011 Market performance is just one of many factors to consider in deciding whether or when to issue bonds. Setting priorities and financial planning are prerequisites. The recent roller -coaster of interest rates has made it difficult to determine whether it was the right time to issue bonds. Since our last commentary at the start of 2011, rates have continued to increase. Municipal Market Data The following depicts typical yields for AA rated bonds, according to the MMD, from mid-October 2010 to January 2011. Rates and yields for years 1 through 30 went up during all four of the selected dates. Interest rates for longer term bond issues rose faster than the shorter term as shown by the wider spread between -the - lines in the later years. Based on this information, it may be advisable for your local government to issue bonds with a shorter term. We reviewed Build America Bonds (BA.Bs) activity during 2010 in previous editions of this Market Commentary. At the end of 2010, many issuers opted for taxable BABs over traditional tax exempt bonds. This reduced the supply of tax exempt bonds and held down long-term tax-exempt rates. The fact that the authority to issue BABs has expired has likely contributed to the upward trend of long- term rates. EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE —21— www.ehiers-inc.com Offices in Minnesota: (800) 552-1171 Wisconsin: (800) 717-9742 Illinois: (800) 417-1119 Ehlers Market Commentary January 18, 2011 Ehlers Sales The good news is that recent sales indicate that tax exempt rates for issuers in our region are lower than the data and indices above. Here is a representative sampling of competitive sales during the past week: ® City of Mound, Minnesota - $5.4 million GO Refunding Bonds at 2.50% for 12 years a City of New Brighton, Minnesota - $2.16 million GO Bonds at 1.95% with 10 -year term City of Mequon, Wisconsin - $3.18 million GO Refunding Bonds at 2.67% for 10 years Village of Poynette Wisconsin— $1.52 million in GO Corporate Purpose Bonds at 3.56% for a 20 -year term Algoma Sanitary District, Wisconsin — $2.55 million GO Refunding Bonds at 3.61% with a 15 -year term The attached competitive sales report shows additional sales at yields below indices. In many cases, the yields on these bonds are substantially below the MMD yield indices for the same maturities and ratings. Proposed SEC Guidelines Defines All Appointed Members To Public Boards As Municipal Advisors Part of our fiduciary responsibility is to keep our clients informed of the federal government's efforts to regulate the financial industry. Last week various municipal officials expressed concerns about a proposed Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) requirement in the draft registration rules for Municipal Advisor's (MAs) released by the SEC on Dec 20, 2010. The SEC has proposed that all appointed members to public boards be registered as a MA. The SEC Release explicitly excludes appointed members of a governing body as employees, thereby including the appointed members as municipal advisors. The SEC states: The Commission does not believe that appointed members of a governing body of a municipal entity that are not elected ex officio members should be excluded from the definition of a "municipal advisor." The Commission believes that this interpretation is appropriate because employees and elected members are accountable to the municipal entity for their actions. In addition, the Commission is concerned that appointed members, unlike elected officials and elected ex officio members, are not directly accountable for their performance to the citizens of the municipal entity. The SEC is concerned that a Mayor or Governor could appoint members to various Boards and steer business to specific firms due to the political connections of the Mayor or Governor. We have heard concerns about this issue from a number of clients. 1WEHLER ehlers-inc,com LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Page 2 —22— The region has made significant advances in transit in recent years, but the region's transit governance structure is far from ideal. OFFICE OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR STATE OF MINNESOTA Evaluation Report Summary / January 2011 Governance of Transit in the Twin Cities Region Major Findings: • The Twin Cities region's transit system has performed well on most measures of efficiency, effectiveness, and impact in comparison with I I peer regions. • However, the governance of transit in the Twin Cities region is complex and fraught with distrust, and coordination among the many transit organizations in the region has been difficult. The Metropolitan Council's role as the regional transit planner has been hampered by how members are appointed; as a result of its structure, the Council lacks adequate credibility and accountability among stakeholders. Additionally, there is no agreed-upon set of priorities for transitway development in the Twin Cities region, and existing Minnesota law prohibits consideration of all potential transitways in the region. • Scarce resources for transit are Iikely to become scarcer as the state confronts a significant budget deficit. The Metropolitan Council and suburban transit providers have disagreed over the allocation of "supplemental" Motor Vehicle Sales Tax revenue in the region, increasing the distrust and tension between these groups. Key Recommendations: • The Legislature should restructure the Metropolitan Council so that it has a mix of appointed and elected Council members, all serving staggered terms. Given the current structure of the Metropolitan Council, we do not recommend eliminating other organizations involved with transit, such as the Counties Transit Improvement Board or the Transportation Advisory Board. • We do not recommend eliminating the suburban transit providers, although there are opportunities for some consolidation. • The Metropolitan Council should coordinate with stakeholders to prioritize potential transitways for future development based on the needs of the region. • The Legislature should amend Minnesota Iaw and allow consideration of the Dan Patch corridor. • The Legislature should not commit capital funds to transitway development projects without ensuring that operating revenues for the first five to ten years have been identified. • The Legislature should explicitly give the Metropolitan Council authority to allocate the "supplemental" revenue for transit in the region generated by the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax. Room 1.40 Centennial Building, 658 Cedar Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1603 • TeI: 651-296-4708 • Fax: 651-296-4712 E-mail: auditorastate.mmus • Web Site: www.auditoi —23— .tus • Through Minnesota Relay: 1-800-627-3529 or 7-14 2 The transit system in the Twin Cities region performed well relative to 11 peer regions around the country. However, the region's governance structure has created challenges and conflicts. GOVERNANCE OF TRANSIT IN THE TWIN CITIES REGION Report Summary Transit in the Twin Cities region includes several transit types, or "modes." Our evaluation included four modes of transit: regular -route bus service, light rail transit, commuter rail, and bus rapid transit! The Twin Cities region has recently added two modes of transit, bus rapid transit and commuter rail, and is developing two new light rail lines. Nevertheless, in 2009, regular -route bus service provided close to 90 percent of the transit rides in the region. Metro Transit, a division within the Metropolitan Council, is the primary provider of transit in the region and operates bus, light rail, and commuter rail services. Suburban providers offer bus service to 12 communities in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Several organizations have transit responsibilities in the region, including the Metropolitan Council, the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB), the Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB), county regional railroad authorities, and suburban transit providers. Many of these organizations were created to address perceived local transit needs. The structure of transit governance in the region has changed several times since the Council was created in 1967 and has gone through periods of fragmentation and consolidation. In 2009, providers spent almost $319 million on transit operations in the Twin Cities region. Since 2004, the region has spent more than $1.7 billion on transit capital expenditures. When compared with 11 peer regions around the country, transit in the Twin Cities region performed favorably.2 For example, in 2008, the Twin Cities ' Our evaluation does not address dial -a -ride service, such as Transit Link and Metro Mobility. 2 The 11 peer regions are: Baltimore, Cleveland, Dallas -Fort Worth, Denver, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Portland, St. Louis, San Diego, Seattle, and Tampa. —24— region's transit system performed better than most of its peers on efficiency measures, including subsidy per passenger and operating costs per passenger. The Twin Cities region also compared favorably when evaluating service -use measures, such as passengers per hour and passenger miles per mile of service. Our evaluation focused on governance of transit in the region. We considered the governance of transit to include: (1) planning for and identifying potential corridors for new transit; (2) developing and building transitways, including conducting analyses to determine optimal routes and transit modes; (3) providing transit; (4) generating revenue for transit, typically through imposing a levy or tax or collecting passenger fares; (5) allocating revenue for transit; and (6) measuring the performance of transit. Governance of transit in the Twin Cities region is complex and made more difficult by the uneasy relationships among the various organizations involved with transit in the region. Each transit organization serves a distinct but somewhat overlapping role for transit in the region. Each organization can operate independently to some extent but also must coordinate with others in the region. The complexity of the system makes it difficult to know which organization is accountable for which transit responsibility. There is significant distrust between the Met Council and the other transit organizations in the Twin Cities region. This distrust makes coordination among the organizations difficult. The strongest example is the relationship between the Met Council and the suburban transit providers. In interviews we had with suburban transit providers and Council staff, and during joint meetings with representatives from the two organizations, the conflict and distrust between these two groups were evident. SUMMARY Coordination among the many transit organizations involved in governance is difficult. A central governance issue has been the Metropolitan Council's lack of credibility with elected officials and other transit stakeholders. The relationship between the Met Council and the Counties Transit Improvement Board is also strained. For example, the two organizations disagree over the definition of "transitway," which has led to tension regarding CTIB's funding priorities. Coordination among transit organizations in the region is time consuming and inefficient. The suburban transit providers and Metro Transit coordinate their services effectively. However, coordination between the Met Council and the suburban providers has required significant time and energy from both Council and suburban provider staff, even though the suburban providers represent only about 6 percent of all rides in the region. The suburban providers and the Council have had innumerable staff and committee meetings, required approvals, e-mails, and shared letters. Staff on both sides of this relationship think the coordination efforts are inefficient and time consuming, and the lack of trust between these two groups makes it difficult to reach agreement on many transit -related issues. Coordination between the Council and CTIB is also time consuming. Having both bodies make decisions about transit investments in the region leads to overlap and requires additional coordination. The Metropolitan Council's structure has created a lack of credibility among many stakeholders and transit organizations in the region. The Met Council's lack of credibility stems from the governance structure of the Council itself. Because Council members are appointed by the governor rather than elected, many stakeholders we interviewed did not think that Met Council members are sufficiently accountable for their decisions. Many stakeholders with whom we met believed that Council members represent the views of the governor and not the region as a whole or the district from which they were appointed, Because Met Council —25— members are appointed, local elected officials often question the legitimacy of Council decisions. Transit resources have been unpredictable. Transit providers spent almost $319 million in 2009 on transit operations in the region. Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MUST) revenues are the largest source of operating funds for transit in the Twin Cities region. However, these revenues have not grown as projected. The state's May 2007 projections anticipated that more than $169 million ofMVST revenues would be allocated to transit in the Twin Cities region in fiscal year 2010; instead, $140.7 million was allocated to transit in the region. Minnesota statutes do not identify how "supplemental" Motor Vehicle Sales Tax revenue should be allocated for transit in the region. In 2006, Minnesota voters passed a constitutional amendment to allocate additional Motor Vehicle Sales Tax revenue to transit. However, the Legislature has not clarified how this funding, known as "supplemental" MUST revenue, should be allocated within the region. Staff from the suburban transit providers told us that they had expected to receive a formula - based portion of the new funds. Instead, the Met Council created a procedure to distribute the supplemental MUST funds based on regional priorities. There is no agreed-upon set of priorities for transit in the region, and state laws prohibit consideration of all potential transit corridors. Because the process for developing transitways in the region relies on local initiatives and funding, there are multiple transit corridors being evaluated without a common understanding of the region's transit priorities. Each community considers its transit project to be a priority, but the project may not be a priority for the region. 4 With multiple entities involved in governance, the region has not achieved consensus on a set of priorities for transit. Changing the composition of the Metropolitan Council is the first step in improving the governance of transit in the region. GOVERNANCE OF TRANSIT IN THE TWIN CITIES REGION Additionally, at one time organizations in the region had conflicting maps regarding potential transitways in the region. In its 2030 Transportation Policy Plan, the Met Council developed a map identifying potential transitways in the region. But, the Counties Transit Improvement Board developed a different map that did not include all potential transitways and indicated different modes for some potential corridors. State statutes do not add clarity. The goals for transit identifed in law are vague and are not prioritized. Furthermore, state law prohibits the consideration or study of the Dan Patch corridor (a potential commuter rail corridor between Minneapolis and Northfield) for development as a commuter rail line.3 The prohibition regarding the Dan Patch corridor has implications when planning other transitways in the region. 31 aws of eL$nnesota 2002, chapter 393, sec. 85, subds. 2-4. Summary of Agency Responses The Legislature should restructure the governance of the Metropolitan Council to increase its credibility, accountability, and effectiveness as the regional transit planner. Many problems with the governance of transit stem from having the governor appoint members to the Met Council. In particular, the current governance structure has led to: (1) diminished accountability and credibility for the Council, (2) difficulty in building consensus across organizations in the region, (3) reduced effectiveness due to an increased need for coordination, and (4) multiple competing visions for transit. We conclude that the structure of the Met Council must be addressed before other aspects of transit governance can be corrected. We present four governance options for the Metropolitan Council for the Legislature to consider; we recommend having a mix of appointed and elected Council members, all serving staggered terms. We received three response letters dated January 13, 2011. Metropolitan Council Chair Susan Haigh wrote that "the Council agrees that [the] transit governance structure should be thoroughly examined and discussed. " Chair Haigh also noted agreement with the report regarding the complexity of the region's transit governance structure, the difficulty in coordinating regional transit service, and the unpredictable nature of transit resources. In disagreement with the report, Chair Haigh said, "The Council believes our agency has considerable credibility" with numerous regional, state, and federal transit organizations. Hennepin County Commissioner Peter McLaughlin, Chair of the Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB), wrote that "CTIB strongly supports the Report's basic recommendation that the Metropolitan Council should be re -structured to include local elected officials. " However, Chair McLaughlin also wrote that the report "overstates the differences between the Metropolitan Council and CTIB's priorities for transitway implementation" and does not acknowledge CTIB 's successful efforts for transit in the region. Chanhassen Mayor Tom Furlong, Chair of the Suburban Transit Association, acknowledged that "the administration of transit governance in the region is complex, " but also noted that "transit operations are well -coordinated among the regionalproviders resulting in seamless, high quality service to transit users. " The full evaluation report, Governance of Transit in the Twin Cities Region, is available at 651.296-4708 or: www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/ped/2011/transit.htm —26— Approved Minutes City of Plymouth Planning Commission Meeting January 5, 2011 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair James Davis, Commissioners Dick Kobussen, Nathan Robinson, Gordon Petrash, Scott Nelson, Erik Aamoth and Marc Anderson MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barbara Senness, Senior Planner Marie Darling, City Engineer Bob Moberg and Office Support Specialist Laurie Lokken 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PUBLIC FORUM 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Commissioner Petrash, seconded by Commissioner Robinson, to approve the January 5, 2011 Planning Commission Agenda. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. APPROVAL OF THE DECEMBER 15, 2010 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MOTION by Commissioner Petrash, seconded by Commissioner Kobussen, to approve the December 15, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes. Vote. 6 Ayes (Commissioner Robinson abstained). MOTION approved. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7. NEW BUSINESS A. SECURITY STATE BANK OF HOWARD LAKE (2005059) Chair Davis introduced the request by Security State Bank of Howard Lake for a subdivision variance for two lots in Executive Woodlands for property located at 4t' Avenue North and Harbor Lane North. Senior Planner Darling gave an overview of the staff report. -27- Approved Planning Commission Minutes January 5, 2011 Page 2 Commissioner Anderson asked if there had been any negotiation on any of the elevations (garage elevation, first floor, lower level, etc.) as shown on the proposed grading plan submitted. Senior Planner Darling responded that there had been discussion about some of the elevations. She said that when the applicant originally submitted their request, they had proposed a driveway grade of 10%, which is the maximum. She said that staff did request that they drop the garage floor elevation so that the driveway slopes could be moderated. She said that 10% is quite steep and the applicant is proposing 7-8%, which is a little more moderate. Commissioner Anderson asked if there had been any discussion about the elevation difference between the first floor and the garage and if steps were put in the garage, would there be a greater separation there. Senior Planner Darling replied that the garage floor elevation on Lot I I did not change very much and would not result in the need for many steps. She said that staff had only asked the applicant to lower the garage floor elevations in order to produce the more moderate driveway slopes. Commissioner Kobussen asked what the distance would be from the end of the pond to where the foundations would be on these homes. Senior Planner Darling responded that what is shown is a concept layout for these homes, including a conforming location and logical size, and there is no proposed construction on either one of the lots. She said that homes could be constructed right up to the edge of the drainage and utility casement, which does take up a sizeable portion of the lots. She said that would leave them with a house pad that would average about 45 feet in depth and about 85 feet in width. Commissioner Kobussen said that his concern is the distance from the water to where the foundation would be and what the chance would be of that ground becoming saturated up against the basement wall. City Engineer Moberg responded that in looking at the schematic submitted with the proposed house pads in relationship to the pond, that the normal water elevation of the pond would probably be about 20 feet from the edge of the house. He said that the high water mark would be in the neighborhood of 10-15 feet from the footprint of the house pad as shown. Chair Davis said that the staff report included a letter from Braun Intertec that addressed Lots 5, 6, 11 and 12 in this development and asked if Lots 5 and 6 already have approval for basements. Senior Planner Darling responded that according to the geotechnical report, the groundwater is too high on Lots 5 and 6 to propose going lower than the two feet above the high water elevation of the wetland. She said that the applicant has proposed a plan modification. to alter the grades, essentially to build up around what would be the foundation of the homes on those two lots. She said that would not require a variance and would be reviewed administratively. Commissioner Kobussen asked what water would be draining into the pond, how the excess water drains away from the pond if it becomes flooded to the maximum level and where that water then drains to. Senior Planner Darling responded that Braun Intertec has suggested that a perforated pipe should be buried on the outside of the foundation of the home that would carry the subsurface water back to the pond. She said that should the pond overflow, staff has recommended that a backflow preventer be put on the pipes so that water does not flow backwards to the foundation. Senior Planner Darling also stated that the pond would drain Approved Planning Commission Minutes January 5, 2011 Page 3 through the emergency overflow route, which would lead to Harbor Lane. City Engineer Moberg added that the development has a storm sewer system that discharges into the pond. He said that at the east end of the pond, there is a control structure that is tied into the storm sewer that drains to 4`h Avenue and continues east and north to a fairly large wetland complex on the west side of I-494. He said that if the control structure did not work or was blocked, water would drain over land out to Harbor Lane and drainage could go either along 4t' Avenue or south to Gleason Lake Drive. Commissioner Anderson asked for the elevation of the emergency overflow. City Engineer Moberg responded that the emergency overflow elevation on the west end of the pond is at 985.5, so essentially the lowest opening elevations on these two lots would be 18 inches above that elevation, which would be in compliance with the subdivision ordinance. He said the lowest floor elevation is the only issue requiring the variance. Commissioner Nelson asked if there were any statistics as to what kind of rain event would cause the pond to overflow. City Engineer Moberg replied that when this development was designed, the standards required that the pond would handle what is considered a 100 -year event, which in this area translates to six inches of rainfall in a 24-hour period of time. He said that an event in excess of that would be when we would start looking at an emergency overflow. Commissioner Kobussen asked if there are any restrictions on what kind of waterproofing material can be used on basement walls and flooring to make sure it doesn't crack or leak at a later date. Senior Planner Darling responded that the building code would require that the foundation be waterproofed and constructed to code standards and we would require an inspection to make sure that is the case should the variance be approved. She added that what those materials are varies based on the type of construction proposed. Chair Davis introduced the applicants, Dave Nash and John Vogelbacher, both representing Security State Bank. Mr. Nash said that Security State Bank took over this property from the original developer. He said that the bank had asked him to look at the four lots in this development that are designated as slab -on -grade (Lots 5, 6, 11 and 12). He said that to make any determination from an engineering standpoint, he needed to know where the water table was and he felt comfortable that that was not an issue. He said that he had Braun Intertec investigate those four lots and the report came back that the water table was right there for two of the lots (Lots 5 and 6). He said that he told the bank there was nothing they could do for Lots 5 and 6 because as an engineer, he felt uncomfortable recommending a basement on those lots and so they took them out of the variance request. He said that on Lots 11 and 12, they are asking for the ability to put in basements. He said that a basement would be at least 16 feet above the water table that was used -at the time that Braun took their piezometer readings. He said that clearly tells us that the adjacent pond is not impacting the water table for these lots, which is consistent with heavy clay material. He said that setting basements at the normal water level of the pond is an acceptable alternative design criteria for low basements in other cities. He said that the standard for the lowest openings would be to maintain a foot and a half clearance from the emergency overflow of the existing pond. He said you wouldn't want any less than that to minimize the potential for flooding on those lots. —29— Approved Planning Commission Minutes January 5, 2011 Page 4 Mr. Nash said that as far as steps in the garage, particularly on Lot 11, more steps could be added. He said that he laid out a typical lot with a decent driveway slope at 7% and with a 9 -foot basement. He said the reason being that on any house design, it is desirable to minimize the number of steps in the garage. He said that it may be increased when they come in with their actual house design but he is just showing a potential house and giving whoever buys these lots the flexibility to put in a different type of house. Mr. Nash said that he took the original plan and put houses in the exact same spot. He said that is not to say that is where the house is going to be as they are custom lots. He said they could be moved closer to the pond. He said that it should not impact groundwater. Mr. Nash said that the slab -on -grade houses that were mentioned in the staff report are five lots in Carlson Terrace. He said the first two lots have unfinished basements and the other three are slab -on -grades. He said that they all have about the same assessed value but that Lots 3, 4 and 5 all get bigger in square footage. He said that without a full basement on these lots, somebody is going to try to make these houses bigger and impact trees more. He said that trying to get a full basement on these lots adds more value to the house but decreases the footprint of the house. Commissioner Nelson asked if the applicant was okay with slab -on -grade for Lots 5 and 6. Mr. Nash responded that they are not requesting a variance. He said that by increasing the slopes on driveways, they can put in modified split -entry with a half basement and not a slab -on -grade. He said they would require retaining walls on the front of the house to save trees. He said this would provide more value than just having a flat house. Commissioner Nelson said that it was noted in the staff report and in the resolution that future homeowners would bear the risk of future inundation if a variance was granted. He asked if it behooves the developer or builder to notify the homeowner that a variance had been granted to have a full basement on their property and if the city bears any responsibility if the basement floods. Senior Planner Darling replied that the future homeowners would be notified. She said that the variance resolutions would be recorded against the property, as would a revised final plat resolution and the amended development contract. She said that the documents get recorded against the property so that there is a clear indication that there is something different on this particular property. She said that she did check with the city attorney on the liability issue and that the city would not bear responsibility for inundation on this site. Commissioner Nelson said that the prospective homeowner would be given that disclosure prior to closing or to building on the property. Senior Planner Darling said that the notice that the resident would get would be the recorded resolution approving the variance plus the other two revised items. Commissioner Petrash asked if that disclosure is to the bank or to the next owners. Senior Planner Darling replied that all subsequent property owners would be notified by these documents during closings. —30— Approved Planning Commission Minutes January 5, 2011 Page 5 Mr. Vogelbacher said that the variance would be in the disclosure document given to prospective buyers prior to writing a purchase agreement for the lot. He said that recorded documents don't tend to get read, so disclosure is important to protect liability of the seller and the seller's agent and to duly inform the buyer. Commissioner Kobussen said that would be true only for the first buyer and that the second buyer would only have what is recorded. Mr. Vogelbacher stated that would be true. Commissioner Kobussen asked if there was any way of raising the basement so that it's equal to the maximum high water level and putting more steps in. He asked if the applicant had thought as another option about raising the first floor height, raising basement level and putting a few more steps in the garage as an alternative of either a slab -on -grade or full basement. Mr. Nash replied that they had looked at that and could have more steps. He said that to build a house with the full basement that's two feet above the high water level on these ponds, they couldn't meet that goal. He said to get a 10% driveway slope would require six feet of steps in the garage. He said that as an alternative, they came back and tried to fi-nd a way to lower the basement. He said that to get up to the full standard requirement for a pond would require raising the basements three to four feet more. Mr. Vogelbacher said that a house could be built on either of these two lots. He said that in this particular neighborhood, a number of other lots in the project have full basements, lookouts, walkouts, etc. He said that they have gone through marketing of the neighborhood and there is a great deal of apprehension from builders and from buyers as to what is going to happen to these slab -on -grade lots and market values. He said that they are trying to create lots that are valuable enough to support the value of the existing homes that are in the neighborhood. He said that there is no question that a nice house could be built on these lots but it has a pretty substantial impact in regard to the overall fabric of that collection of 12 homes. He said that there is a huge variance of values in the neighborhood. He said that it could detract from marketability for the desirability of existing homes and lots in the neighborhood. He said that the premise of trying to improve the lots is to hold the integrity of the neighborhood together. Commissioner Nelson asked that Mr. Vogelbacher define what he meant by a wide variance in values. Mr. Vogelbacher replied that the assumption is that a slab -on -grade home on these two lots would be in the $400,000 - $550,000 range. He said that may not be an acceptable variance to a homeowner trying to sell a 1.7 million dollar home. He said that in terms of how it fits in the neighborhood would be odd and detract from other homes. He said that a range of $500,000 - $750,000 could potentially swing what could happen. Commissioner Kobussen asked what the probability was of the wall cracking and settling over a 40 -year period. Mr. Nash responded that the water table is 20 feet down and the basement on this lot would be no different from the basement on the lot right next door to it. Commissioner Anderson said that the lot value was established a long time ago when this plat was approved. He said that some developer, using a reputable engineer, valued all the considerations (trees, elevations, ponding and location of ponding) and came up with what they —31— Approved Planning Commission Minutes January 5, 2011 Page 6 thought was their best solution that some of these lots are slab -on -grade. He said that the Planning Commission is now being asked to change that by three and a half feet. He said that is three and a half feet lower than where it is supposed to be and all the waterproofing in the world is not going to help someone 10-20 years down the road that bought themselves a problem. He said that he would not vote in support of approving something with a three and a half foot variance. He said that he disagrees with the concept that it's all they can do. He said that a change in the elevation of the basement and steps in garage would make that change to something that is very doable. He said that he would consider something in between but they are not asking for that at this point. He said that what they are asking for puts some future homeowner at risk. Commissioner Kobussen said that he looks at this becoming a problem. He said that when your home floods, only federally -sponsored insurance for flood plains is covered and this is not in a flood plain. He said that he would hate to see someone buy a home 20 years from now and find they have a huge problem because whenever there is a major rain storm, it's a possibility it could flood and that there could be excessive water in that basement. He said that there are other ways of raising the site, lowering the floor, even going to slab -on -grade. He said that in layout of this development, it was considered an acceptable practice to put in slab -on -grade and it wouldn't deteriorate from this neighborhood. He said that in the Carlson Terrace area, there is no difference in assessed values. He said that there are other workable solutions than approving a three-foot variance in floor level and that he would not be voting in support of this proposal. Commissioner Nelson said that he agrees with both commissioners statements. He said that on the marketability issue and from his experience in building a house, it is the cost per square foot to build. He said that the examples given in Executive Woodlands are $200-$300 per square foot, based on assessed value. He said that a slab -on -grade home on these lots (if 4,000 square feet as done in Carlson Terrace) at $250-$300 per square foot would put you into a 2 million dollar home. He said that he does not see an issue with it being compatible with the neighborhood and agrees with the issues of future homeowners and water down the road. He said that he would not be voting in support of this proposal. Chair Davis said that he agreed with the other commissioners and that based on the other houses in this area, a slab -on -grade could be built that would match the qualities of the other houses. He said that five other Lots in this neighborhood have not been sold yet so it's not a hardship that these two lots are standing out as unbuildable. He said that water in a basement is a bad thing and that as much as we say we can mitigate it, this is a long term proposition. He said that he would not vote in support of this variance request. MOTION by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to deny the request by Security State Bank of Howard Lake for a subdivision variance for two lots in Executive Woodlands for property located at 4`h Avenue North and Harbor Lane North. Commissioner Aamoth said that we try to try to look at balancing the responsibility of the city with trying to do what we can to make sure folks have opportunities to do commerce and to provide homes for people. He said that he agreed with the other commissioners, particularly —32— Approved Planning Commission Minutes January 5, 2011 Page 7 with the issue of long term risk and whether or not it's the right thing for us to put somebody at risk. He said that for that reason, he would not vote in support of this variance request. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. S. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Chair Davis, without objection, to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 p.m. —33— City of Plymout� 9) 0 Adding Quality to Life January 21, 2011 SU13JECT: REQUEST FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, REZONING, AND A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GENERAL PLAN FOR AN APARTMENT BUILDING WITH 157 DWELLINGS AT 9805 AND 9855 HIGHWAY 55 FOR QUEST DEVELOPMENT, INC. (2010086) Dear Resident/Land Owner: Pursuant to the provisions of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance, this letter is to inform you of a request by Quest Development, Inc. under file no. 2010086, for approval of the following items for an apartment building with 157 dwellings at 9805 and 9855 Highway 55: 1) a comprehensive plan amendment to reguide the property from LA -4 (living area 4) to LA -5 (living area 5); 2) a rezoning from RMF -4 (multiple family 4) to PUD (planned unit development); and 3) a PUD general plan amendment. A map showing the location of the subject property is provided below. Hennepin County records indicate your property is located within 750 feet of the site of this proposal. You are hereby notified of, and cordially invited to attend a public hearing to be held by the Plymouth Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m., on Wednesday, February 2, 2011, in the council chambers at the Plymouth City Hall, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard. The public will be invited to offer questions and comments concerning this application at that time, or feel free to call the city planning department at (763) 509-5450 for more information. You may submit comments in writing. All written comments will become part of the public record. INFORMATION relating to this request may be examined at the community development information counter (lower level of City Hall), on Mondays and Wednesday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., and Tuesdays from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except holidays. Sincerely, Barbara G. Senness, AICP Planning Manager noticesl20100-010086 propnotice 3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 551-47-1482 • Tel: 763-509-5000 - www.plymouthmn.gov —34— NEIL City of _Plymouth Adding Quality to Life January 21, 2011 SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO REVISE SANITARY SEWER DISTRICTS AND DEVELOPMENT STAGING PLAN (2010096) Dear Resident/Land Owner: Pursuant to the provisions of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance, this letter is to inform you of a request by Gonyea Company, under File No. 2010096, for approval of a comprehensive plan amendment to revise the city's sanitary sewer districts (re-routing sewer from west to north) and development staging plan for properties along County Road 47 and Dunkirk Lane. Hennepin County records indicate your property is located within 750 feet of the site of this proposal. You are hereby notified of, and cordially invited to attend a public hearing to be held by the Plymouth Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m., on Wednesday, February 2, 2011, in the council chambers at the Plymouth City Hall, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard. The public will be invited to offer questions and comments concerning this application at that time, or feel free to call the city planning department at (763) 509-5450 for more information. You may submit comments in writing. All written comments will become part of the public record. INFORMATION relating to this request may be examined at the community development information counter (lower level of City Hall), on Mondays and Wednesday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., and Tuesdays from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except holidays. Sincerely, ;0112"n Barbara G. Senness, AICP Planning Manager notices/201012010096 propnotice 3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 - Tel: 763-509-5000 • www.p(yFnouthmn.gov —35— MIKE OPAT CHAIR BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY 612-348-7881 FAX 612-348-8701 mike.opac@co.hennepin.mo.us DECEIVED JAIL 1 4' 2011 COMMISSIONERJ._ r A-2400 GOVERNMENT CENTER' MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55487-0240 January 12, 2011 The Honorable Kelli Slavik Mayor of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447-1482 Dear Mayor.Slavik: On behalf of the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners, I would like to express our sincere gratitude for the significant contribution made by your staff Sandy Engdahl during the recent Gubernatorial Recount. Due to the logistical challenges of hand counting over 470,000 ballots within a short window of time, Hennepin County requested your staff's assistance in organizing and conducting this recount. Your staffs support was a critical factor in the success of our recount effort. On Tuesday, January 25th, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners will be formally commending Sandy Engdahl along with eleven other local election officials for their assistance with Hennepin County's recount efforts. cc: ril�-Ah rens Sandy Engdahl Sincerely, Mike Opat, Ch ' Hennepin my Board of Commissioners J[ —36— PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER rtp) City of 'M Plymout� Adding Quality to Life January 21, 2011 Mr. Richard Dalton Mn/DOT Environmental Coordinator 1500 W. County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 SUBJECT: INTERSTATE 494 EXPANSION PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Dear Mr. Dalton: City of Plymouth staff has reviewed the Environmental Assessment/Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Interstate 494 Expansion Project including construction in the City of Plymouth. Additionally, as a member of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) Technical Advisory Committee, City staff has had the opportunity to review comments from the BCWMC. A large portion of the Interstate 494 Expansion Project is within the Medicine Lake watershed. Medicine Lake is listed as impaired water for excess nutrients by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. In the past several years, significant investments have been made to improve the water quality in Medicine Lake through a variety of projects and best management practices by the City of Plymouth, BCWMC, Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, Hennepin County, Three Rivers Park District, and Metropolitan Council. City staff is supportive of comments made by the BCWMC and would appreciate careful consideration of water quality impacts including increased water volumes, rates, total suspended solids, phosphorus, chloride, and any other impacts to water bodies downstream of this project and where significant investments have been made to improve the water quality in Medicine Lake. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly at 763-509-5526. Sincerely, DerekAsche Water Resources Manager Cc: Bob Moberg, City Engineer City of Minnetonka City of Maple Grove 3400 Ptyrriouth Etvd ., Plymouth, Minnesota 55447.148.2 • TeL• 763-509-5000 • vNrv.ptymouthmn.g,)v 0.\Engineering\GENERAL\LTRS\DEREK\2011\494 Expansion Pr_ Tommen s. ocx