Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 06-05-1989 SpecialCITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: dune 2, 1989 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: dames G. Willis, City Manager SUBJECT JUNE 5 STUDY MEETING The following items are proposed to be discussed at our 5 p.m. study meeting following a light dinner, of course). I. Downtown Plymouth; non-residential development 2. Cable TV - special meetings involving City Council matters and City Council meetings on Channel 37. 3. Metropolitan Council - Metropolitan urban service area/stage growth. 4. Other 3W:kec a ( -Z- Z_ z 0 Dear Frank, June 1,1989 The revision of the Plymouth City Code 1135.03, Massage Distinguished, is fine as worded except it excludes 2 groups I feel should be included: those educated in another state and those with less education but ample experience. A possible rewording may go as follows: a) Have received a comprehensive certificate of massage 500 class credit hours minimum) from a school recog- nized by the appropriate State Higher Education Board; Documented hours of experience may be substituted for up to 200 hours of education) and If you need to contact me, I can be reached at home: 559-7401 or at the Plymouth Back & Neck Clinic: Thank you. 557-0101. Sincerely, O i Debra McCullough June 1, 1989 City Clerk City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Dear City Clerk and Members of the Council, I will not be able to attend the hearing regarding the intersection sight obstruction complaint at the Northeast corner of Ranchview and Gleason Lake Drive (15430 Gleason Lake Drive).on Monday, June 5, 1989. Please consider continuation of this hearing until the next convenient Council Meeting date. Thank you. o Don Hauge 15430 Gleason LakeD 've Plymouth, MN 55447 475-3428 v MEMO CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 DATE: June 2, 1989 TO: James G. Willis, City Manager FROM: Blair Tremere, Director Planning and Community Development SUBJECT: CORRESPONDENCE FROM METROPOLITAN COUNCIL REGARDING METROPOLITAN URBAN SERVICE AREA (MUSA) You requested a summary memo regarding this subject which we have been discussing with the Metropolitan Council staff for several weeks. We received the attached May 30, 1989 letter from Metropolitan Council Chair Steve Keefe regarding a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Stage Growth Plan for property in the northwest corner of Vicksburg Lane and County Road 9. We had received an earlier confirmation from the Metropolitan Council that they had endorsed this particular amendment; however, they indicated in the earlier letter that they were going to take the additional time allowed by their policy to study the issue of Stage Growth and the Metropolitan Urban Service Area Impacts. The attached letter confirms the approval of this specific amendment. The third item in Mr. Keefe's letter which is reinforced by the attached Metropolitan Council Staff Report, is the basis for our continued concern regarding an issue that came to our attention in April when we received the so called "Systems Statement" as required by State law. You responded to the Systems Statement materials in a letter of May 10, 1989 to Mr. Keefe. A copy of that letter is also attached. The issue is this: A Metropolitan Urban Service Area boundary was identified in our Comprehensive Plan of approximately ten years ago. It was approved by the Metropolitan Council after the City Council adopted the Stage Growth Plan which had been mandated by the Metropolitan Council. That boundary has been amended by the Metropolitan Council (at least through their staff interpretation) to be the boundary of the post -1990 Urban Service area which we have recognized and enforced as the Stage Growth Area during the 1980's. James G. Willis June 2, 1989 Page Two An informational meeting that Fred Moore and I attended on May 19th and the special meeting you, Fred and I had with Metropolitan Council Staff members on May 24 confirm that the Metropolitan Council (staff) position is that the Year 2000 Metropolitan Urban Service area boundary is the Stage Growth Plan boundary. The Metropolitan Council Staff has acknowledged that they have not maid reference to the Capital Improvement Program amendments we have sent them each year (as required by State law) and that, despite the annual detailed programs for utilities represented in the CIP, the MUSA line is based on their perception of our "need" for Urban land through the next decade. We identified at our May 19th meeting some of the information they they could use to reevaluate their position, i.e., their projections of the supply of land that Plymouth would need to meet the demand through the 1990's. SUMMARY The Metropolitan Council has officially informed the City that there will be no further amendments to the Stage Growth Plan entertained until the matter of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area boundary is resolved. While the City has, per State law, nine months to respond to information in the Metropolitan Council Systems Statement, it is our intention to get this specific matter of the MUSA boundary resolved promptly. It will have an impact on all of those developers that expected to receive an amendment to the Stage Growth Plan either because sanitary sewer could be provided by gravity or, as in the case of Ryan Construction Company and Mr. Craig Scherber, by virtue of an accelerated CIP project. There are a variety of legal and/or political questions involved in this which will need to be sorted. We are reviewing this in detail now and have undertaken the extensive research and deliberative effort to get the information prepared. I recommend that the Council be made aware of this situation; we will keep you informed as to the next phase. Attachments: I. May 30, 1989 letter from Metropolitan Council 2. May 10, 1989 letter to Metropolitan Council pl/bt/willis/6-2:dbc) VAA METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, MN. 55101 612 291-6359 May 30, 1989 James Willis, Manager City of Plymouth ` 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55447 _ RE: City of Plymouth r 4_ Comprehensive Plan Amendment `' ! 13 -Acre Staged Growth Amendment Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14352-3 Dear Mr. Willis: At its meeting on May 25, 1989, the Metropolitan Council considered the City of Plymouth's comprehensive plan amendment. This consideration was based on a report of the Metropolitan and Community Development Committee, Referral Report No. 89-43. A copy of this report is attached. The Council adopted the following recommendations contained in the above report: 1. That the Metropolitan Council adopt this report and findings as stated in the report as part of these recommendations. 2. That the City of Plymouth's Staged Growth Amendment to the City of Plymouth's Comprehensive Plan be approved. 3. That the inconsistency between the Council's and the City's interpretation of the location of the MUSA line be resolved prior to Council consideration of another amendment to the City's Staged Growth Plan. Sincerely, 56,-ZXjL- Steve Keefe Chair SK:ll Attachment cc: Al Cottingham, Associate Planner, City of Plymouth Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator, City of Plymouth R.A. Odde, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Richard Thompson, Metropolitan Council Staff Metropolitan Council Meeting of May 25, 1989 Business Item: B-2 M E T R O P O L I T A N C 0 U N C I L Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fifth St., St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612-291-6359 REPORT OF THE METROPOLITAN AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Referral Report No. 89-43 DATE: May 19, 1989 TO: Metropolitan Council SUBJECT: City of Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Amendment 13 -Acre Staged Growth Amendment Metropolitan Council District 9 Metropolitan Council Referral 14352-3 BACKGROUND At its meeting on May 18, 1989, the Metropolitan and Community Development Committee discussed a staff report and recommendations dealing with the review of the City of Plymouth's submitted amendment to the Staged Growth Plan of its comprehensive plan. ISSUES AND CONCERNS Richard Thompson, Council staff (ext. 6457), presented the report and answered questions from the Committee. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That the Metropolitan Council adopt this report and findings as stated in the report as part of these recommendations. 2. That the City of Plymouth's Staged Growth Amendment to the City of Plymouth's Comprehensive Plan be approved. 3. That the inconsistency between the Council's and the City's interpretation of the location of the MUSA line be resolved prior to Council consideration of another amendment to the City's Staged Growth Plan. Respectfully submitted, Joan Campbell, Chair I METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 E. 5th St., St. Paul, MN 55101 612) 291-6359 DATE: May 12, 1989 TO: Metropolitan and Community Development Committee FROM: Richard Thompson, Research and Long Range Planning SUBJECT: City of Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Amendment 13 Acre Staged Growth Amendment Metropolitan Council District 9 Metropolitan Council Referral No. 14352-3 INTRODUCTION The City of Plymouth submitted an amendment to the Staged Growth Plan of its Comprehensive Plan. The amendment affects 13 acres of land northwest of County Road 9 and Vicksburg Lane. (See Attachment A.) The major issue involved in this amendment is the location of the MUSA line. The city contends the MUSA line is as shown on Attachment A, and that the 13 acre parcel affected is within it. However, the parcel is outside the MUSA official Council MUSA, which is represented by the unshaded area. AUTHORITY TO REVIEW The Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1976 requires that amendments to local comprehensive plans be prepared and submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and adopted in the same manner as the original plans. (Minnesota Statutes 473.864, Subd. 2, 1978.) Guidelines adopted pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 473.864 for reviewing proposed amendments provide for a 90 -day review period for amendments potentially affecting one or more of the metropolitan systems, and a 60 -day review period for amendments that do not have a potential impact on metropolitan systems. The City of Plymouth submitted its proposed Staged Growth Amendment on March 28, 1989. On April 10, 1989, the Chair determined that the proposed amendment has no potential impact upon any of the metropolitan system plans. However, beyond this determination, the Council has 60 days from receipt of the proposed amendment to review and comment upon the apparent consistency of the proposed amendment with the Metropolitan Development and Investment Guide. Therefore, the 60 -day review period applies and ends on May 26, 1989. 3 proposed amendment to the Plymouth Staged Growth plan. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That the Council adopt this report and findings as stated above as part of these recommendations. 2. That the City of Plymouth's Staged Growth Amendment to the City of Plymouth's Comprehensive Plan be approved. 3. That the inconsistency between the Council's and the City's interpretation of the location of the MUSA line be resolved prior to Council consideration of another amendment to the City's Staged Growth plan. KJP00084 04.14.89 May 10, 1989 Mr. Steve Keefe, Chair Metropolitan Council Mears Park Centre 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Dear Mr. Keefe: CITY OF PLYMOUTFt This acknowledges receipt of your April 10, 1989 letter and the partial 1988 Metropolitan Systems Statement for the City of Plymouth. We later received a memo dated April 13, 1989 conveying the Traffic Assignment Zone Map for the Systems Statement and an April 11, 1989 letter conveying a Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA) map for Plymouth. Your assistance is needed to clarify and correct what appears to be a misinterpretation of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area boundary for the Year 2000 for Plymouth. The map we received from your staff planner Robert Overby indicates -that the MUSA boundary is not only the perimeter of the Rural Service Area, but also the post -1990 Staged Growth Area which is entirely within the MUSA. Plymouth defined a specific MUSA line indicating the limits of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area and the Rural Service Area when our Comprehensive Plan was updated approximately 10 years ago. You will be able to verify, I'm sure, that this was approved by not only the Metropolitan Council Planning Staff but also by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. The Metropolitan Council specified that Plymouth should also indicate, within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area, a so-called "Staged Growth" or post -1990 development area based upon calculations o'F land supply and demand. After extensive negotiations with the Metropolitan Council staff, the City of Plymouth received approval of its updated Comprehensive Plan, including the MUSA boundary and the post -1990 Staged Growth Area. The City of Plymouth has not requested and does not anticipate the need to request any changes to the approved MUSA boundary. We have for many years updated our 5 year Capital Improvement Program annually, and we have sent copies to the Metropolitan Council. We plan to commence extension of sanitary sewer and municipal water into those areas that have been in the Staged Growth Area for the last 10 years; and this is in accordance with the adopted Capital Improvement Program. This has been anticipated for several years and will begin later this year so developments can begin in 1990. 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD. PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 May 10, 1989 Page Two We met with members of the Metropolitan Council staff who were then under the direction of Ms. Pat Pahl in 1986 when revisions were being made to the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework Guide. The Metropolitan Council staff had made some preliminary calculations and indicated to us that there seemed to be a need to reserve some land within the MUSA through the year 2000, but that it would be substantially less than that which had been reserved during the 1980s. We responded that, when we undertook the updating of our Comprehensive Plan in 1989 and 1990, we would meet with your staff again and deliberate that point. We indicated that we could then determine where that area would be if it really were necessary. Your staff responded affirmatively. We commenced the updating of our Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Guide Plan last December and we are in fact in the midst of public hearings regarding the Land Use Guide Plan Element and Map. The Systems Statement is very timely and it is important to us as a matter of sound community planning to resolve the misinterpretation of the Year 2000 MUSA boundary. It is our view that the boundary should remain as it has been defined for about 10 years; we foresee no amendments or changes to that at this time. It should not however be confused with the perimeter of the Staged Growth Area which has been held in reserve and in rural status for the last 10 years, with the exception of a few amendments which have been approved by the Metropolitan Council. Community Development Director Blair Tremere is managing the Comprehensive Plan Update process and I recommend that you have your key staff person contact him so that we can arrange a meeting if necessary to resolve this matter promptly. We are continuing with our updating effort but I am sure that you will agree that it is vital that this matter be resolved as soon as possible since the development community depends on our planning (and yours) for sound guidance in making their economic decisions. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, James G. Willis City Manager cc: Blair Tremere File pl/bt/keefe:jw) Please cal -1 me if you have any questions. CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 DATE: June 2, 1989 for Council Meeting of June 5, 1989 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: James G. Willis, City Manager SUBJECT LUNDGREN BROTHERS CONTSTRUCT N - REISER ADDITION - PUBLIC TRAIL TO MOONEY LAKE (89005) Eric Blank and I have met individually with Michael and Peter Pflaum since the last Council Meeting to discuss and view the question of trail access to Mooney Lake across proposed Lot 20. Eric and I have also walked the site and developed a proposal which is attached. As noted on the attached graphics, the proposed trail corridor would be 50 feet along the south side of Lot 20. The trail corridor would, however, fan out at the westerly end of Lot 20 to incorporate the point overlooking Mooney Lake. We have highlighted on the graphics the 988.0 ordinary high water level established by the DNR as compared to the shoreline as it existed last October (984.2). Eric and I believe the best interest of the City would be served by taking the land as indicated for the trail pursuant to the City's park dedication ordinance. The developer will still have a large developable lot upon which to build a substantial home. I believe both parties "win" with this proposal. I have sought to review the specific proposal with Peter Pflaum today, following receipt of the graphic, but was not able to reach him. Lundgren Brothers has suggested that the City consider adopting deed restrictions to place upon the trail. Those proposed restrictions are attached. Eric and I have reviewed them and believe that only one, in our view, appears to be necessary. Proposed restrictions 1, 2, 3 and 5 are either covered by current City ordinances, policies or state law. Item number 4, dealing with construction, appears to be reasonable. We can appreciate the fact that a shelter or recreational equipment could be a potential problem on the desirability of someone to develop a home on the site. We do believe, however, that a fishing dock, similar to the one at Timber Shores Park, appears to be a reasonable facility which we believe would likely be constructed at the lake shore. JW:kec 2 - NORTH 13-5 _ 3o too goo 5... 17 44.800 S.F. 3i,000 s. 4 ,in 18 , 44,5005 C 3 v90 r 13(0 32-1 C', PROP SED CITY OF PL LAKE OVERLOOK 1 go I \ / MOONEY LAKE 0 h 988.0m, DNR 0. H.W 1 a T 9 o so r, W N 0 PETERSON O 0 t5' 1 J 2 H O s m N FDX- WASSINK 5 t3 N 89`Z9 28'E MILLER TF -7U OU- HIL IS3.4 N 89' Zo w ds9D S.F. WIRTZ w N 17- 00 O PARTNI=RSKiF 0 M TcSTA 0, `°'`f lot roo' REISER PROPERTY SATHRE-BERGOUIST, INC. •oolk E CITY OF PLYMOUTH 106 50VTM BROADWAY • WAYZATA, MN 55391 n E w0. TELEPM0NE614*47"00o LAKE OVERLOOK o Lundgren Bros Construction's Suggested Deed Restrictions for Trail -Park -Preserve Property in Southeastern Corner of Reiser Property Proposed by Plymouth Parks Department Within the Trail -Park -Preserve property the following shall be prohibited: 1. Alteration by Plymouth or the public of the wetland within the lagoon; 2. Any pavement wider than 8 feet; 3. Entry, operation or parking of any trailer or motor vehicle, except trailers or motor vehicles operated by Plymouth or its contractors for purposes of maintenance or repairs. "Motor vehicle" includes, without limitation, the following: automobiles, trucks, vans, recreational vehicles, all -terrain vehicles, motorcycles, motor bikes, snowmobiles, "jet -skis" or "wet -bikes", and watercraft equipped with motors which exceed lake power regulations; 4. Construction of any shelter, recreational equipment, boat launching ramp, pier, or dock other than a fishing dock; 5. Removal of trees or natural vegetation for any purpose except routine maintenance and the construction of a trail to the lakeshore.