Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Information Memorandum 07-02-1987CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM July 2, 1987 UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS..... 1. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING -- Monday, July 6, 7:30 p.m. Regular City Council meeting in U177T Council Chambers. 2. PLANNING COMMISSION -- Tuesday, July 7. The Planning Commission Forum will begin at 7:15 p.m., with the Regular Planning Commission meeting following at 7:30 p.m. Agenda attached. (M-2) 3. MUSIC IN PLYMOUTH -- Wednesday, July 8. Special entertainment including the Plymouth Puppet Playhouse, Wayzata Children's Choir, Sweet Adelines, Teddy Bear Band, starts at 5:30 p.m. The " Music in Plymouth' concert featuring the Minnesota Orchestra begins at 8:00 p.m., with a fireworks display following the concert. 4. PARK & RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION -- Thursday, July 10, 7:30 p.m. The Park and Recreation dvisory Commission will meet in the City Council chambers. Agenda attached. (M-4) FOR YOUR INFORMATION 1. WASTE TRANSFER STATION -- The attached article on the County's site selection for a waste transfer site appeared in the June 29 Sailor. (I-1) 2. SIMONSON APPEAL TO SUPREME COURT -- The Council will recall that Mr. Simonson appealed the ourt's decision with respect to his conviction of making harrassing telephone calls. The City Attorney's offices informed me that the State Supreme Court has denied Mr. Simonson's appeal which brings to an end his appeal, and therefore, his conviction stands. 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 CITY MANAGER'S INFORMATION MEMORANDUM July 2, 1987 Page Two 3. SOLID WASTE TRANSFER FACILITY SITING PROCESS -- Frank Boyles attended the June 30 meeting of the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. While not a formal agenda item, the Plymouth Solid Waste Transfer Siting Issue was brought to the table as an item for discussion. Commissioner Keefe moved, and Commissioner Spartz seconded, a motion to adopt a resolution identical to that which was originally passed by the Board and subsequently reconsidered and failed. During the proceedings, Commissioner Robb stated that the siting process has been characterized by chaos where significant public input was provided in the earlier siting, but not for the Plymouth site. The fact that the Board has failed to consider Plymouth's arguments demonstrates the chaos of the process. Commissioner Robb moved that the Board adopt a resolution substituting the Hopkins site for the Plymouth site. This motion was defeated by a 4-3 vote. He then moved to add the Hopkins site in addition to the Plymouth site. This motion too was defeated on a 4-3 vote. The resolution was again brought to the table with an amendment by Johnson to delete reference designating the Plymouth site and resolving that the staff explore the Plymouth and Hopkins site on the basis of their evaluation criteria including total cost. This amendment was defeated by a 4-2 vote. The original resolution being on the table was voted upon and adopted by a 4-3 vote, Commissioners Spartz, Keefe, Andrews and Derus voting yea, and Commissioners Robb, Sivanich and Johnson voting nay. Attached is a copy of the resolution which was ultimately adopted by the Board together with the arguments which we have previously made to the Board regarding the Plymouth Site proposal. (I-3) 4. MINUTES -- Attached are the minutes from the June 24 Planning oma mission meeting. (I-4) 5. CITY EMPLOYEES -- I have received the following correspondence on Plymouth City employees: a. Letter of congratulations to Sue Mauderer from Michael Wandmacher, Minnesota Board of Assessors, on her designation as a Licensed Accredited Minnesota Assessor. (I -5a) CITY MANAGER'S INFORMATION MEMORANDUM July 2, 1987 Page Three 6. CORRESPONDENCE: a. Letter to Hennepin County Library Board Members from Mayor Schneider, requesting the addition of a community library for Plymouth as part of the County Library's 1988-1992 Capital Improvement Program. (I -6a) b. Letter to Mary West, 17200 - 30th Avenue No., from Mayor Schneider, in response to Ms. West's letter on the City's proposal for organized refuse collection. Ms. West's dune 22 letter is also attached. (I -6b) c. Letter from Senator Dave Durenberger, to Frank Boyles, on the status of S. 79, the High Risk Occupational Disease Notification and Prevention Act. (I -6c) d. Letter from Congressman Bill Frenzel, to Frank Boyles, on the status of H.R. 162, the High Risk Occupational Disease Notification and Prevention Act. (I -6d) e. Memo from Marcy Shapiro, Director, West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board and Mary Cayan, Director, Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council regarding the first quarter report, 1987. (I -6e) Ja es G. Willis Ci y Manager PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TUESDAY, DULY 7, 1987 WHERE: Plymouth City Center 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 CONSENT AGENDA All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission 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. PUBLIC FORUM 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3.* APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:15 P.M. 7:30 P.M. Planning Commission Minutes, dune 24, 1987 A. dames F. Fox, Minuteman Press International. Conditional Use Permit to operate a copy duplicating center in the Four Seasons Shopping Mall at the southwest corner of County Roads 18 and 9. (87070) B. Dennis Backes, Northwood Homes, Inc. Rezoning, Preliminary Plat and Variance for "Ponds North" for six multiple family residential lots for property northwest of 54th Avenue and Nathan Lane. (87058) C. Draft Comprehensive Plan, Ordinance, and Code Amendments. 5. OTHER BUSINESS A. point Meeting with the Community -Based Residential Facilities Task Force 6. ADJOURNMENT 9:30 P.M. Regular Meeting of the Plymouth Park and Recreation Advisory Commission July 9, 1987, 7:30 p.m. AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes 3. Visitor Presentations a. Athletic Associations b. Staff c. Others 4. Report on Past Council Action a. b. C. 5. Unfinished Business a. 1988-92 CIP - action needed b. Parkers Lake Building Update c. Neighborhood Parks Update - Amhurst, Rolling Hills, County Road 61 d. Parkers Lake Update - Grand Opening Schedule e. 1987 Trail Projects Update f. Lions Park Play Equipment g. Plymouth Creek Park Planning - discussion h. 6. New Business a. New Plats b. C. d. 7. Commission Presentation 8. Staff Communication 9. Adjournment Next meeting - September 10 rjYIII ULII w, then isn't chosen for trash facile Hennepin County had selected ply h, s. ste'fpr.Awaste- transfer station &rlier this month. Later, coovers - couldn't decide w ere they wanted the facility.. . "Whether they going to choose Plymouth or not remains to be seen," said City Manager James wM..,We're just going to have to wait." During their June 17 meeting, -.: the doinmissiuners had approv ed. piymouth as the site for the facility,which would serve as a collection point for the county's - garbage before its transfer. to: a recovery station: ;The proposed , location is at the intersection. of County Road .s and InWState 494. _ Later in the meeting, Sam . Sivanich'asked to have the site reconsidered. Originally he had supported the Plymouth site, but: t. - then - changed - his vote = :which motion : �: caused the to - fail "Iknow that's'not the end of , the subject," Willis,: said;, "I _ don't,know why Sivanich'asked _ . ' to have it reconsidered: , I '.think this is just a temporary. lull ...I wouldn't -'r be __surprised , if ,:they _ seriously consider the Plymouth Plymouth —officials haven't gone on record opposing the site, ,but-' they: have;, conveyed their: .:concerns o ti the �T' county commissioners:. # , �. e.t,.>*,a thp-Mnrern are -:the . GukR l _--.I:-i-- - . •-groundwater;; =sapply (the: main - wellfield is_ local nea7'the site), the traffic access. ,and roadway =Main;; nce K (the c�untY estimates 320 danytrips to and ;from ,the facility_); alis . hours of opera Ado/�n/�,-n��oyisee an-, odor: ..I• j j i,. Walimissione s - faa r .. e•A- pected • to 'consider the location #orm.the facility._ at their July i 0ossz 1-3 RESOLUTION NO. 87-6-455 R1 The following resolution was offered by Commissioner Spartz, seconded by Commissioner Keefe: WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners, in Resolution 84-6-375R1, found that four solid waste transfer stations are appropriate to serve Hennepin County, and the resolution designated the Bloomington east site (96th and James), the Minneapolis south site and the Brooklyn Park east site for transfer stations in Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County Board Resolution 84-12-905 designated a fourth transfer station to be on county -owned property in. the City of Hopkins; and WHEREAS, Board Resolution 86-4-334 moved the proposed Hopkins transfer station to a site in Eden Prairie and directed staff to work out plans to accommodate the change in location so that the total solid waste needs of the county are addressed; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County Board Resolution 87-3-141 approved the agreement with HDR Techserv, Inc. for services related to the design of up to four transfer stations; and WHEREAS, the design contract with HDR Techserv, Inc. includes a site review and evaluation phase to finalize the location of up to four transfer station sites in Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County Board Resolution 87-3-172 directed county staff to investigate the feasibility of locating a solid waste transfer station in the vicinity of the Adult Corrections Facility in Plymouth and also directed investigation of possible sites in the vicinity of 60th and Lyndale in Minneapolis; and WHEREAS, investigations have been completed, and a document entitled "Solid Waste Transfer Stations - Alternatives Report", dated June 3, 1987, has been submitted which evaluates six alternative sites and reviews transportation economics concerning the transfer station system and transportation to resource recovery facilities; and WHEREAS, concept plans developed in the current process indicate that transfer station sites would not only transfer waste to resource recovery facilities but also serve as transfer sites for recycling from individuals and recycling companies, for collection points for yard waste, for compost and as locations to receive special waste from household solid waste; and WHEREAS, to serve the above purposes, ideal sites need to be approximately ten to fifteen acres in size; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 85-5-224 directed the County Administrator to negotiate the purchase of property north of 96th Street and east of James Avenue in Bloomington as a site for a transfer station; and JUN 1 71987 OOG93 RESOLUTION NO. 87-6-455 R1 (continued) WHEREAS, Resolution No. 86-12-930 directed the County Administrator to proceed with condemnation and continue previously directed negotiations for purchase of property in the City of Brooklyn Park at 7035 Winnetka Avenue. BE IT RESOLVED, that the following four transfer station sites are designated to serve Hennepin County: Brooklyn Park East, Bloomington (96th and James), Minneapolis south, and Plymouth (I494 and CSAH 6); and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That County staff and HDR conduct investigations under the existing design contract, and report by August 15, 1987, on recommendation for expansion of the Minneapolis south site, and that the County Administrator be directed to negotiate the purchase of 1.3 acres of the existing South Minneapolis transfer station at 21st Avenue and 29th Street. The County Administrator is also authorized to hire an independent appraiser to provide input to the staff recommendations; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that staff is directed to work with the City of Bloomington to find ways to accommodate the receiving of yard waste, glass, cans, paper and household special wastes at the designated Bloomington site, or to find an alternative receiving location to serve the area; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Administrator is directed to negotiate for the purchase of the Plymouth site and if negotiations are not productive by September 15, 1987, condemnation is authorized to be filed on the Plymouth site. Commissioner Spartz moved that in the case of Plymouth that condemnation not commence until such time as we have completed environmental assessment of the potential for pollution of the aquifer, seconded by Commissioner Keefe and approved unanimously (Johnson absent). The question was on the adoption of the resolution and the vote was as follows: YEAS: Spartz, Keefe, Sivanich, Andrew; NAYS: Derus, Robb; ABSENT: Johnson. Resolution adopted. Commissioner Sivanich moved to reconsider the resolution, seconded by Commissioner Derus and there were Five YEAS; One NAY (Keefe); One ABSENT (Johnson). Motion adopted. The resolution was now again before the Board. Chairman Andrew called for a vote on the adoption of the resolution as follows: YEAS: Keefe, Spartz; NAYS: Derus, Robb, Sivanich, Andrew; ABSENT: Johnson. RESOLUTION FAILED. ATTEST: 1(4r fi,26xtz Clerk of 0 e Count Board JUN 1 71987 COMMENTS BY DEPUTY MAYOR DAVID CRAIN TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS June 11, 1987 I. The City of Plymouth has taken the position that we wish to be responsible County citizens. A. This is demonstrated by the fact that Plymouth is the site of numerous County facilties or facilities providing County functions including: 1. Hennepin County Adult Correction Facility - This is the only such facility in the County and because of its nature and proximity to residential areas has been the subject of many community meetings and City/County discussions. 2. Facilities such as the former Pioneer House and Home Free Shelter also call Plymouth home for treatment of individuals with chemical use problems and victims of intra -family abuse. 3. Plymouth hosts two suburban Hennepin County parks, includ- ing the Park Headquarters. 4. The City is home for a number of decentralized residential care facilities and is being considered by others. B. While we desire to remain responsible, Plymouth residents and the City Council question what burden a single community must bear on behalf of County residents. Some communities in our County carry no burden whatsoever from a County perspective and should be given more thorough consideration by the County. C. A second issue of equity has to do with the process by which this site in Plymouth has been selected and how it contrasts with the process used in selecting other sites. The other sites were selected afater allowing substantial opportunity for public input. This site is being designated following a very short time table with essentially no opportunity for the public to comment. D. The final equity question is the fact that one site (the Hopkins site) has already been dismissed from further consid- eration of the basis of its proximity to a food warehousinq operation. The fact of the matter is that the proposed Plymouth site is immediately adjacent to a food warehousing and distribution center operated by Log House Foods. This fact should be given consideration with respect to the Plymouth site. Page two II. If the County does not believe it appropriate to more equitably spread the County burden to other communities, and desires to continue with accelerated consideration of the Plymouth I-494 - County Road 6 site, there are specific concerns which members of the Council and community have, and which need to be addressed. We would expect the County to thoroughly investigate and respond to each. A. First and foremost, we are concerned about possible adverse affects to the City's groundwater supply. 1. The City's main wellfield which will ultimately consist of fourteen wells, lies in immediate proximity to the proposed site. 2. The City Council has previously enlisted the services of a hydrologist who's findings indicate that the re -charge area of the City's wellfield extend into this area. Moreover, the cone of depression caused by the pumping of water of the aquifer also includes this area. In other words, when pumps are in operation, any spill into the aquifer may be drawn into the City's water system by the action of the wells. 3. The County must thoroughly investigate the potential for groundwater contamination to determine what steps, if any, must be taken to eliminate any threat whatsoever to the City's ground water system. 4. While the Council has already taken the steps to develop a second decentralized wellfield, the bulk of our water will continue to be drawn from the primary wellfield. B. Traffic Access/Roadway Maintenance and Construction 1. County estimates suggest that 320 trips a day will be made to and from this site by five to six ton garbage packer vehicles and larger transfer vehicles. To this number must be added trips of residents or businesses using the site or employees working at the site. 2. Continuing development in our community has created capacity problems for County Road 6. 3. County Road 6 congestion has been felt on other area road- ways once residents seek to use alternative routes to accomplish their transportation objectives with the least amount of congestion. 4. Prior to the City becoming aware of its status as a candidate for the transfer facility, a study was conducted in connection with our Tax Increment Financing District to determine the need for roadways improvements in this raye onree area. The finding of the traffic engineer was that there Is a distinct lack of capacity on County Road 6, County Road 61 north of County Road 6 to Highway 55, and that there was a distinct need for the construction of an interchange at I-494 and County Road 6. 5. The County Road 6 - I-494 interchange project, to be funded in part through tax increments financing is not scheduled for construction before 1989. Additional fund- ing sources have not yet been identified. 6. If a Hennepin County Facility is to be located at this site, decisions must be made with respect to the timing of the construction of an interchange at I-494 and County Road 6 as well as the expansion of roadway capacity on County Road 6 and County Road 61 north of 6 to Highway 55. C. Site Management Issues - Noise, Odor, Hours and Days of Operation, Oversight and Fire/Public Safety Issues. 1. The introduction of a solid waste transfer facility intro- duces a host of issues because of the nature of the operation. 2. The 320 packer trucks and solid waste transfer vehicles daily will create noise problems in adjacent residential areas. We expect that the County will identify potential noise impacts especially in residential areas. 3. We would expect that the County will fully mitigate and eliminate any odor problems associated with operation of the site. The standard operating procedures for the site should require total and complete removal of solid waste daily and not allow for overnight and weekend storage of solid waste on the site whatsoever. 4. Days and hours of operation are another issue requirina attention. Current City Code provides that between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., noise is prohibited that disturbs the peace, quiet and solitude of residences or businesses in the community. Accordingly, refuse collectors in Plymouth are limited to hours of collection after 7:00 a.m. This facility would be subject to the same conditions. 5. A solid waste transfer facility would require continuous County oversight to assure that City requirements are complied with. The City and its residents would expect that the County would perform this function aggressively and on a continuing basis. 6. Included in this charge would be costs incurred by the City's Public Safety Department, that is police and fire, rage i'our to train firefighters and police officers in dealing with the unique public safety .issues which naturally arise with the existence of a solid waste transfer facility, especially one containing other sorts of household wastes. 7. The City Council and residents of the community are justifiably concerned about mitigating any impact which such a facility might have upon our community's environ- ment. Consequently, we would expect the County to under- take an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EWA), to identify environmental impacts. The EAW could raise questions or concerns which may require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). II. I want to emphasize that Plymouth, and it's residents, are respon- sible and concerned County citizens. Accordingly, we are willing to work with the County with the assurance that our concerns will be dealt with in a sensitive and responsive manner. As you are aware, the site under consideration is zoned for industrial use and would require a conditional use permit. Conditional use permits require the review and public hearing by the City's Planning Commission and ultimate approval by the City Council. While we desire to cooperate with the County Board, we must be reasonably assured that a solid waste transfer facility will be evaluated sensitively. CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 249 1987 The Regular Meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Steigerwald, Commissioners Wire, Zylla, Stulberg, Plufka, Marofsky and Pauba MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Blair Tremere City Engineer Sherm Goldberg Community Development Coordinator Ray Anderson G: VIIIK MOTION by Commissioner Wire, seconded by Commissioner Pauba to approve the Minutes of June 10, 1987 as submitted. Vote. 5 Ayes. Chairman Steigerwald and Commissioner Stulberg, abstained. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application by Robert Cowan, CABO Company, Inc. for "Beek's Pizza". Reading of the June 12, 1987 staff report was waived. Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was no one present to speak on this item, the Public Hearing was closed. s-� VOTE - MOTION CARRIED ROBERT COWAN CABO CO., INC. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BEEK'S PIZZA (87063) MOTION by Commissioner Wire, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE Stulberg to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for Robert Cowan, CABO Company, Inc., for "Beek's Pizza", subject to the conditions as listed in the June 12, 1987 staff report. Roll Call Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION carried. Chairman Steigerwald introduced the request by Harstad Companies, and requested an overview of the June 12, 1987 staff report by Director Tremere. Director Tremere stated that it is significant that the density will now meet minimum density requirements as speci- fied in the Land Use Guide Plan if this Amendment is approved. -143- VOTE - MOTION CARRIED HARSTAD COMPANIES AMENDMENT TO PUD PRELIMINARY PLAN/ PLAT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR "LAKE CAMELOT ESTATES" (87056) Page 144 Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1987 Chairman Steigerwald introduced Jim Merila, Merila & Associates, who represents the petitioner. Mr. Merila stated the reason for the amendment is to enlarge the lots to save trees and add to the amenities of the entire development. Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was no one present to speak on this item, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Marofsky also noted that the draft Resolution does not address which lots will have a 25 ft. front yard setback. Director Tremere responded that 25 ft. was approved for the original development and it would be appropriate to specify what it says in Resolution No. 86-738 under Item No. 6, to be carried forward to detail the revised lots. Commissioner Marofsky stated that Lots 2 - 8, in Block 1; and Lots 3 - 9 in Block 2, have 25 ft. setbacks as originally approved by Resolution No. 86-738. The two corner lots fronting on Cheshire Lane, Lots 1 and 9, Block 1, and the two corner lots fronting onto Berkshire Lane, Lots 2 and 10, Block 2, should also have a 25 ft. setback on the respective streets. These four corner lots shall have a minimum yard setback of 35 ft. from 61st Avenue North. All other lots will have a 35 ft. front yard setback. MOTION by Commissioner Marofsky, seconded by Commissioner NOTION TO APPROVE Pauba to recommend approval of the PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat and Conditional Use Permit Amendment for Harstad Companies for "Lake Camelot Estates", adding the specific reference to those lots with a minimum 25 ft. yard setback. Roll Call Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - NOTION CARRIED NEN BUSINESS Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application by Orville and Joyce Miller. He requested an overview of the June 16, 1987 staff report by Director Tremere. Director Tremere pointed out the key issues in this applica- tion. The petitioner is seeking a variance from the Urban Development Policy which regulates the development of land in the City, and in this case, the property is a 3.71 acre parcel which at this time is not served by sanitary sewer. The Urban Development Policy addresses development of land in the unserviced portions of the City and discourages, as a matter of policy, the subdivision of land in this area; and, therefore, the creation of buildable lots. VARIANCE FROM POLICY RESOLUTION 75-664 FROM THE PLATTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION CODE AND, FROM THE LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FRO DISTRICT (87053) Page 145 Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1987 There are Variance Criteria in the Urban Development Policy which are cited in the staff report. The essential issue is based on the evidence submitted in the case made by the petitioner as to whether there is a basis for granting a Variance from the Policy. If the Commission's finding is in the affirmative, then there are other considerations which impact this request. One is that the petitioners are seeking to divide property other than by platting; and, they are seeking to do this by metes and bounds description. This is a Variance from the Subdivision Code. Secondly, while the standard in the FRD (future restricted development) District is 5 acres, since the petitioner now has a parcel which is less than 5 acres, they are seeking to create three parcels which are substandard to the ordinance requirements for buildable lots in this zoning district, and one would not have frontage onto a public street. Director Tremere stated that sanitary sewer is available in this area and the sewer line at this time is approximately 1,000 ft. east of the property and could be extended to the property. Commissioner Steigerwald inquired as to what the procedure would be to extend sanitary sewer to the property? Director Tremere responded there is more than one way to accomplish this; the property owner could petition the City alone or in conjunction with other residents in the area who are not served by sewer. The City could unilaterally, as a matter of Capital Improvement, install the sanitary sewer. Typi- cally, sanitary sewer is petitioned for by the property owners. Commissioner Plufka inquired as to whether extension of the sewer is in the CIP (Capital Improvements Program)? Direc- tor Tremere responded that extension of sanitary sewer to this area is not currently in the CIP. The usual incentive for any developer or property owner to petition for sewer is so they can further develop their land. Commissioner Plufka inquired as to whether there is a prob- lem with sanitary sewer capacity in this area, or if there would be a need to trade any lands because of the MUSA (Metropolitan Urban Service Area). Director Tremere responded that this is not an issue. Page 146 Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1987 Commissioner Wire inquired as to whether there are any sites on the north side of County Road 6 served by sanitary sewer? Director Tremere responded that he recalls no sites served on the north side of County Road 6, west of Urbandale. Engineer Goldberg agreed. Chairman Steigerwald asked Mr. Goldberg if the plan was to continue the sewer north? Engineer Goldberg responded that the line would most likely be extended west along County Road 6. Chairman Steigerwald introduced Donald R. SJostrom, 807 Twelve Oaks Center, who represents Mr. and Mrs. Miller. Mr. SJostrom stated the Miller's purchased their property in 1958, before present subdivision regulations; and, "could" have divided the property into several lots at that time. According to Mr. SJostrom, the property does not present a problem as far as private sanitary systems. There has been no problem in 28 years and consultants have assured the Millers that the same thing could be done on the proposed lots with no problem. Mr. SJostrom stated that the three homes proposed could be served with less than 1,000 ft. of new sewer line if the sewer were extended between the existing homestead and the two new lots. He stated that parcels in the surrounding area are less than 5 acres. Immediately behind this parcel there is a home built within the last two years on property that was approximately 2 acres and was split into two par- cels of less than 1 acre each, several years ago. Director Tremere stated that the City did not allow this split. The divisions in this area were done many years ago, some before the City had subdivision regulations. None of the parcels were created by City subdivision action. Sewer is available, and the desire to create lots is normally the activity that brings sewer into an area. This policy variance would not be necessary if sewer were being extended to the property. Commissioner Marofsky inquired what the cost would be to extend sewer to the property? Engineer Goldberg responded that property owners along County Road 6 would be assessed for the sewer extension and the cost would be somewhere be- tween $20,000 and $25, 000.00. Mr. SJostrom stated that the Millers have paid for water on their property; they do not need and have paid for an Area Page 147 Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1987 Sewer Charge which has created a hardship for them. If they were allowed to divide this property it would relieve some of that hardship. Mr. Sjostrom referred to the Subdivision Code Variance Criteria in Section 500.41, paragraphs a., b., and c. He addressed how the Millers' request meets these Criteria. The area is a prime buildable area and the Millers have paid Water and Area Sewer Charges. When the Millers purchased the property, they assumed that lots could be created. This proposal will not create an increase in traffic; and, septic tank systems will not affect the property as it would If sewer line were extended. Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. William Ogden, 1505 Xanthus Lane. Mr. Ogden stated that he has two concerns. One is his concern regarding the water quality and whether the aquifer would be disturbed by this development. His other concern is that lots in the area are "good sized" and this proposal is for smaller lots which would have an impact on the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Ogden does not see the benefit of extending sewer into this area. Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Marshall Masko, 18520 County Road 6. Mr. Masko was interested in knowing what size homes would be built on these lots? He also inquired if the variances are granted would he be able to divide his 3 acre lot into two lots? Chairman Steigerwald explained that, if a variance were granted in this area, it could be viewed as a precedent for a similar situation. Chairman Steigerwald recognized Mr. Orville Miller, 18630 County Road 6, petitioner, who read a statement of the history of the area and emphasized the growth and the many public and private improvements made in this area since the time he purchased the property. He and others had objected to the construction of the water reservoir and to the charges for water availability which they do not need. Mr. Miller stated a concern with security in the area due to a previous daylight burglary; and that, smaller lots may discourage intruders from coming into this heavily wooded area. Page 148 Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1987 Mr. Miller stated that the most critical element to the development of his property is the lack of sanitary sewer, which will be available eventually. His system has been checked and the operation is good. MOTION by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commissioner Wire to recommend denial of the Variance from Policy Resolution No. 75-664 for Orville and Joyce Miller, per reasons cited in the draft conditions. Commissioner Plufka stated the requirements in Resolution 75-664 and noted he is compelled to follow the fact that granting the variance would set a precedent which would pre- vent the Commission from denying other petitioners similar requests. If this would be granted to others, it could begin to have a deleterious effect. Commissioner Plufka stated that sanitary sewer should be extended to this area if it develops. He stated that the bases for denial are those listed in the draft Resolution of the staff report. Commissioner Marofsky stated that Mr. Miller's documentation demonstrates why the City has this policy; the request would add two lots with septic systems. Commissioner Wire noted the close proximity of the sewer line; the connection would be as feasible as constructing septic systems and maintaining them. Commissioner Pauba agreed. Commissioner Plufka stated that others in this area may want to develop; the petitioner should determine if that is the case. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION carried. MOTION by Chairman Steigerwald, seconded by Commissioner Wire to recommend denial of the Variance from the Platting Requirements of the Subdivision Code and Lot Size Require- ments for the FRD District. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION carried. OTHER BUSINESS Director Tremere reviewed the June 23, 1987 memorandum to proposed amendments to the zoning and subdivision codes regarding the R -1B District and the conventional platting standards. NOTION TO DENY VOTE - NOTION CARRIED NOTION TO DENY VOTE - NOTION CARRIED Page 149 Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1987 Extensive discussion ensued about the term "fringe" and the purpose of the R -1B District. Staff was directed to prepare additional information on the transitional function. Director Tremere reviewed the Mayor and Council's direction, and cited the need to clarify the Land Use Guide Plan on this matter. ADJOURNMENT Meeting Adjourned at 9:45 P.M. State of Minnesota BOARD OF ASSESSORS Centennial Office Building — P.O. Box 64446 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55164 Phone: 61 2-298=5649 642-0481 June 15, 1987 Ms. Susan M. Mauderer, AMA 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Dear Ms. Mauderer: The Board of Assessors wishes to take this opportunity to congratulate you for your diligence in achieving the Licensed Accredited Minnesota Assessor designation. You have demonstrated to the Board that you have the ability to perform the task that is demanded of you in the role of assessor. It is up to you to use this ability and also to continue to improve yourself in the years ahead. Let your work demonstrate that you are a credit to the profession and a leader in the field. The wise assessor knows that having done well is not sufficient but that he must continue to do well in order to be recognized as a true professional. Congratualtions again and keep up the good work that you have demonstrated in becoming a Licensed Accredited Minnesota Assessor. Continue to reach for other goals in the profession. Sincerely, MICHAEL P. Wandmacher, Secretary Board of Assessors MPW:mgs Enclosure AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Iia June 24, 1987 CITY OF PLYMOUTR Hennepin County Library Board Members Hennepin County Library Administrative Offices 12601 Ridgedale Drive Minnetonka, MN 55343 SUBJECT: PROPOSED HENNEPIN COUNTY LIBRARY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 1988-1992 Dear Hennepin County Library Board Members: Congratulations on your efforts to retain the high quality County library services to which our expanding Hennepin County suburban population has become accustom. The Plymouth City Council and our residents agree with your long range plan philosophy which states that, "People need similar library resources whether they live in cities, suburbs or rural area'. The construction of the Maple Grove Community Library to open in September 1987, the completion of the second phase of the Ridgedale Area Library scheduled for use in 1990, and the completion of a Minnetonka Community Library for use in 1988, are of real benefit to residents in the immediate geographic vicinity of these two western suburbs. Unfortunately, even the second phase construction of the Ridgedale Area Library in 1990 leaves a substantial number of Plymouth's current and future population unserved. We believe that the Hennepin County Library Board's 1988-1992 Capital Improvement program should reflect the construction of a Community Library in Plymouth. The basis for our position is: 1. The library board's objective is to serve as great a proportion of the suburban Hennepin County population as possible by making community libraries available within a three-mile service radius of the using population. Using the community library map contained in the Capital Improvement program (see Exhibit 1), it .is clear that the vast majority of Plymouth, geographically- and population -wise is left unserved. From census data, 23 square miles or two-thirds of our 35+ square mile community, and 19,000 or nearly one-half of our residents will not be served at least through 1992. In 1992 the unserved population is projected to be 23,100. To provide a clearer picture of the unserved geographic and population area, we have portrayed this information on a city map (see Exhibit 2). 2. Even when the Ridgedale Area Library is included (see Exhibit 3), a large proportion of the Plymouth population and geography is still unserved. Geographically, we estimate that 16 square miles or just under one-half of the 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447. TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 nennepiii t-ounLy uorary isoara Memoers June 24, 1987 Page two city would be unserved. This unserved area includes a current population of 15,000 persons. Most significant is the fact that the unserved area including west of I-494, south of County Road 9, and north of Highway 55, and the area immediately east of I-494 and south of Bass Lake Road are our growth areas and will only serve to increase the unserved population in Plymouth. 3. Since the initiation of the Hennepin County Library's long range plan in 1969, there has been a 17% increase in Hennepin County population growth based upon your figures. In Plymouth, the growth rate has been well over 50%, from 18,000 In 1970 to more than 42,000 today. Our population is expected to increase to 51,000 by 1992. The Library Board should consider this substantial population growth in the 1988-1992 Capital Improvement Program. 4. The physical facility portion of the Capital Improvements Plan states: " In the future, library buildings should be built to respond to the development and growth of communities whose populations equal at least four percent of the total Hennepin County suburban population:' This criterion would Justify the construction of a community library in Plymouth now, as our current population constitutes 6.8% of the 1986 population within the County served by the library system. This percentage is likely to increase as Plymouth develops at a faster rate than the remainder of the County. The development of a library in Plymouth would likely be easier than in other communities given that the City controls a large tract of land in the central portion of our community. Our long range plans contemplate the development of a library on this property which is near our City Center building and U.S. Post Office and immediately served by Highway 55 and County Road 9. I strongly encourage the addition of a community library for Plymouth as part of the 1988-1992 Hennepin County Library Capital Improvement program. We are anxious to work with you and your staff in achieving this end. City Manager James Willis is available to work with your staff to provide any information you may need to further these objectives. Sincerely, Virgil Schneider Mayor cc: City Council Hennepin County Commissioners Dale A. Ackmann, County Administrator Robert H. Rohlf, Library Director EXHIBIT I Community Libraries mile service radius EXHIBIT 1, /r/17CPITY OI ES LE OF SCAMIL PLYMOUTR 5 -- .n a,. S�F����$��� �'�8 m�€'. fis?tdrei:[ar���s�t>Caai �:€g ej a ': :E " '"e� ,e 'gar 9tir.Ult Se :3 a ss..@-ts'l.aia l=i°. T IF STREET MAP 111 `► • Y.� 1,1, � •, �z,• C1,tr L1. .. ..,.:l�11 - Isar ; : /.��.�. i k jii�.,�.. r• •1�yv, .I �, '�/��rt.. i : ;�;�;•:. 1. 4, • •.:err 11 1,r� •■.. H �� WK . p�� r� � C — «.�:. _ ��:� ice/ �•__.-..__ -'�i►�Iwe. I ;Its -A{;' •u �'�-�- - 1 � •1�1"111 .��•�� I • „ � �.: �� ���.�/.a�. ►�t_ � i� +MLV N•.- .Rye•'' •, lot f MINIM EXHIBIT LLL) U 111 `► _. ' tC' 1� L �YY n• i k jii�.,�.. r• •1�yv, .I �, o ll 1' •,,��� L.; .• � � I ;Its -A{;' •u �'�-�- - 1 � •1�1"111 .��•�� I • „ � FitIt41, EXHIBIT LLL) U CITY OF June 25, 1987 PLYMOUTR Ms. Mary L. West 17200 30th Avenue North Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Subject: Solid Waste Disposal Dear Ms. West: Z�6 Thank you for your letter of June 22, 1987, regarding the trash pickup in the City of Plymouth. The City of Plymouth will be holding a public hearing pertaining to the issues which you have addressed on July 20, at 7:30 p.m. in the City Center Council Chambers. I would encourage you to attend if at all possible as more detailed answers may be available at that time. As your letter points out, the City, in cooperation with Hennepin County and the State of Minnesota, is trying to "get a handle on the solid waste problem", and it is necessary for the City to comply with the requirements of the State law as well as ordinances adopted by Hennepin County. The specific issue which you raise, as to where the balance of your garbage will go after you have source separated the recyclables from it, can best be answered by referring to Hennepin County's Ordinance No. 12 (excerpts enclosed) wherein they state that "all designated waste generated within the County, as required by State Law, must be delivered to one of the transfer stations, or to the Greyhound facility and may not be delivered to any other disposal site except as provided by the County". One of the provisions of the County makes an exception and does allow a certain quantity of garbage to be delivered to the Reuter Plant, where Waste Technology now dumps their garbage. It is, therefore, possible that your garbage would continue to go to the Reuter Plant if picked up by Waste Technology, Inc. It should be noted, however, that the Reuter Plant is in business to generate fuel from the refuse which will be burned in the future, just as the refuse is burned in the Hennepin County Burn Facility. 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 Ms. Mary L. West June 25, 1987 Page Two One of the most difficult decisions facing the City Council at the public hearing on July 20, will be whether to ask the residents of Plymouth to give up their choice of who will pick up the garbage at their residence and on what day that garbage will be picked up in order to cooperate with the requirements of the Hennepin County Ordinances in attempting to reach the Recycling and Solid Waste Management goals of the County and the State of Minnesota for the Metropolitan area. If you would like more information or wish to read the Hennepin County Ordinances in more detail, please contact the City Staff and this information will be made available to you. Thank you. Sincerely, Vi gil A. Schneider Mayor VAS:kh Enclosures cc: City Councilmembers 10-3-85 ORDINANCE NUMBER TWELVE SOLID WASTE DESIGNATION ORDINANCE FOR HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY ADOPTED BY THE HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ON DECEMBER 10, 1985 IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTIONS 473.811 AND 115A.86 WHEREAS, the County has adopted a comprehensive solid waste master plan which includes a plan for designation approved by the Metropolitan Council as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 115A.84; and WHEREAS, the County has complied with the procedures established for designating a facility for required use under Minnesota Statutes, Section 115A.85; and -WHEREAS, the County is authorized to implement designation by this Ordinance pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 115A.86; NOW, THEREFORE, the County Board of Hennepin County, Minnesota, does ordain: SECTION I. DEFINITIONS The terms defined in this Section shall, for all purposes of this Ordinance, have the meanings herein specified, unless the context clearly otherwise requires: Subsection 1. "Acceptable Waste" shall mean garbage, refuse, and other solid waste from residential, commercial, industrial and community activities which is generated and collected in aggregate, including, in limited quantities, non - burnable construction debris, tree and agricultural wastes and tires; excepting however, Unacceptable Waste as defined herein. Subsection 2. "County" shall mean Hennepin County, Minnesota. Subsection 3. "County Board" shall mean the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners and their authorized representatives. Subsection 4. "Department" shall mean the County's Department of Environment and Energy. Subsection 5. "Designated Waste" shall mean "mixed municipal solid waste" as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 115A.03, subd. 21, which means garbage, refuse, and other solid waste from residential, commercial, industrial and community activities which is generated and collected in aggregate, but does not include auto hulks, street sweepings, ash, construction debris, mining waste, sludges, tree and agricultural wastes, tires, and other materials collected, processed and disposed of as separate waste streams; excepting, however, Unacceptable Waste as defined herein. Subsection 6. "Designation" shall mean the requirement contained in Section II herein, that all of the Designated Waste that is generated within the County's boundaries, as required by State law, be delivered to one of the Transfer Stations, or, if permitted by the County, to the Greyhound Facility. 2 Gp;pii " p�-•: .�.�,.� tires to the extent the air emission criteria appli- cable to the Greyhound Facility are violated by their combustion, marine vessels and major parts thereof, transformers, trees and lumber more than six feet long or one foot in diameter, nonburnable construction material, demolition or other construc- tion debris, any materials which if processed at the Greyhound Facility would cause the bottom ash produced at the Greyhound Facility to be classified as hazardous waste, and waste which was generated outside of the County. Subsection 18. "Waste" shall mean all solid waste delivered or caused to be delivered to the Facility by any Person. SECTION II. DESIGNATION Subsection 1. Application of Ordinance. This Ordinance shall govern the transportation and disposal of all Designated Waste generated or disposed of within the County, as required by State law, and all Persons engaged in transportation or disposal of Designated Waste within the County. Subsection 2. Designation. On and after the Effective Date all Designated Waste generated within the County, as required by State law, must be delivered to one of the Transfer Stations or, if permitted by the County, to the Greyhound Facility and may not be delivered to any other disposal site except as provided in subsections 3 and 4 herein and in Section IV, subsection 7. The County may from time to time designate additional Facilities. This subsection 2 is binding on all Persons. Subsection 3. Exceptions. The following materials shall be exempt from Designation: (a) Materials that are separated from solid waste and recovered for reuse in their original form or for use in manufacturing processes, as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 115A.83. (b) Materials processed at another resource recovery facility, provided that: 1. Such facility was in operation at the time of approval by the Metropolitan Council of the County's Designation Plan, on April 25, 1985; 2. Such materials shall be exempt only at the processing capacity of such other facility in operation at the time of approval of the Designation Plan; 9u-� ate, i 987 y4f AP . A -e, .eU cE�VE O JrRf UN 241981 X rOfPLY/,qujr Rob & Mary West 17200 30th Ave. N. Plymouth, MN 55447 DAVE DURENBERGER MINNESOTA ' uitea ziofez 'Senctie WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510 June 11, 1987 Mr. Frank Boyles Assistant City Manager City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Dear Frank: P�'=it/firs. JU14 26 1�a7 = CITY f,..:: --, lc 1 Thank you for contacting me about the Occupational Disease ?:atificatior. Bill. LikE you, I am concerned about the expense and liability questions you raised. The AFL-CIO, the Electronics Association (which represents 3000 member companies), and the sponsors of the bill have jointly agreed to support a compromise amendment to the original bill. I did not agree to co-sponsor the bill until this compromise was reached. Thank you again for sharing your concerns with me. I hope you will continue to stay in touch on this or any other legislative matter of mutual interest. It is a privilege to serve you in the United States Senate. incerely, Dve Durenberger United States Senator DD/ah BILL FRENZEL THIRD DISTRICT, MINNESOTA WASHINGTON OFFICE: 1028 102-225-2871 ORTH BUILDING 202-2Coligre�� of t je I�tteb Otateg; 30ouze of Repreantatibeo Madington, O.C. 20515 June 26, 1987 Mr. Frank Boyles Assistant City Manager 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Dear Mr. Boyles: G MINNESOTA OFFICE: MAYBETH CHRISTENSEN Room 445 8120 PENN AVENUE SOUTH BLOOMINGTON, MINNNESOTA 5543' 612-881-4600 Upon a recent review of my correspondence, I discovered that I had not responded to your letter asking that I oppose H.R. 162, the High Risk Occupational Disease Notification and Prevention Act of 1987. Thank you for writing and please forgive my most tardy reply. Like you, I'm not inclined to support this legislation. In my judgment, the bill will create too great a strain on our country's small businessmen. Significant costs will be imposed upon employers through the mandating of new employee medical benefits. The bill will also open the door for billions of dollars in liability claims against employers. I am more disposed towards supporting H.R. 2278, the Henry- Jeffords alternative to H.R. 162. The Henry-Jeffords bill utilizes the hazard communication machinery that is already operated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). This bill would accomplish effective risk notification without creating as great a burden on employers. It also would avoid the creation of more costly bureaucracy in the Department of Health and Human Services which is what H.R. 162 authorizes. If H.R. 162 comes to the floor for a vote, my present intention is to vote against it. Thanks again for your letter. I appreciate being informed of your views. BF: rm Yours very truly, &J, rltlt� Bill Frenzel Member of Congress THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS 191 �1 RF�F��Fr JUL 2 1967 = CITY s�- MEMO TO: City of Plymouth City Council and Staff MEMO FROM: Marcy Shapiro, Director West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board Mary Cayan, Director Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council SUBJECT: First Quarter Report, 1987 The following information is being submitted as per your request for quarterly updates from human services agencies funded by the City of Plymouth. The report contains three sections; Committee and Network Updates, Special Events Updates, and Program Information. COMMITTEE UPDATES Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council: The Public Communications Committee has developed a new logo design for the Council that has been incorporated into letterhead, envelopes, business cards, and report covers. The committee has designed a press release format that will be sent to two hundred representatives of the Twin Cities media to increase coverage for our events. The committee has arranged for an hour-long presentation about the Council to be aired over local cable TV stations in May. Upcoming plans for the committee include developing an agency -wide communication plan and re -writing Council brochures. The Membership Committee is in the process of evaluating the materials used by local municipalities when recruiting new members for the Advisory Commission. Cities have been surveyed about their recruitment and recognition procedures for the appointed Commissioners. The committee will develop an updated information packet for use by the cities as well as a series of recommendations for recognition activities. The Community Social Services Act Committee is in the process of developing 1987 service priorities for the northwest area. To date the committee has participated in a county -wide telephone survey, has surveyed citizens at three local information fairs, has surveyed clients of the Energy Assistance Program, has presented a preliminary report to the Hennepin County Division Managers, and has conducted a focus group for local mental health providers. The Northwest Area was represented on the United Way Youth Leadership Committee by Bill Dix, a board member from Brooklyn Park. The committee selected youths from the Twin Cities to receive leadership training in Washington D.C. Jason Zeman of Robbinsdale was selected as the youth representative from the northwest area. The Northwest Network met several times in the first quarter of 1987. The Network sponsored a Time Management training session attended by twenty local service providers, has planned a forum on "The Professionalization of Human Services" for May 1987, and has established future direction with the assistance of a facilitator. The Child Abuse Network met twice since the beginning of 1987. Approximately forty providers met both times to hear speakers on important issues, and to share program information. West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board: C_o_m_m_u_n_ity SocialS _e_r_v_ic_e_sCommittee_ is in the process of developing our service priorities for the West Hennepin area. So far this year, we have conducted a survey of the general public, a survey of area mayors, a survey of consumers of area social services, a review of local research, a survey of area youth, a forum to get suggestions from area service providers and a focus group on emergency social services. A preliminary report has been presented to the Hennepin County Division managers and has been given to County Commissioners. West__Hennepin_Chemical _Abuse _Prevention Committee has been concerned about getting decisionmakers to focus on prevention and abuse among youth. After a series of discussions, we worked with Commissioner Sam Sivanich who gained unanimous support from the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners to create the Hennepin County Task Force on Youth and Drugs. This task force is designed to develop solutions to reducing the demand and supply of alcohol and illegal drugs. Community__Health_Sgrv_ices _ Comm ittee_developed a report on Community Health needs in West Hennepin which included a series of recommendations to Hennepin County. This report was presented to the Hennepin County Community Health Advisory Committee. In addition, we have been working on providing assistance in the development of a local block nursing program. "Delicate Bal ance "Work ing__Group is working on developing a conference which would focus on the effects of health care financing on mental health and chemical dependency care. We have sponsored two such conferences previously. This third conference would be aimed at an audience of the business community. West__Hennepin_ Youth _Services _Providers meets monthly with an attendance of 25-30 area service providers. Recently it has had speakers from youth employment and chemical abuse programs. Providers West is a service coordination group which meets quarterly. Recently it has focused on services and needs in individual municipalities. West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board is also in the process of organizing a new providers coordinating group which would have agency directors for its membership and would deal with major policy and funding issues for services. The West Area -was -represented_ on the United _Way_Youth -Leadership_Committee ------------------------- by Lois Gunderson. The committee selected youths from the Twin Cities to receive leadership training in Washington, D.C. Sasomma Samuel of Mound was selected as the youth representative from the West area. John Alsup from Wayzata is the West Hennepin area alternate. PersonnelCoMeittee has been in the process of reviewing all West Hennepin Personnel practices, procedures, salary scales and benefits. New personnel policies, ,fob descriptions, affirmative action policies, hiring procedures, and salary scales are being prepared. PROGRAM INFORMATION Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council: 1). Surplus Commodities were distributed at two sites in January and February. Approximately 450 persons from Plymouth received commodities at each distribution. 2). The 1986-1987 Energy Assistance Program served twenty households from Plymouth as of March 19, 1987 for a total Plymouth grant amount of $7,450. 3). The Emergency Services Program served five residents of Plymouth with $486.00 in the first quarter of 1987 and twenty-five persons from HomeFree Shelter for the amount of $223.00. Graphs are attached for your information. West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board: 1). The 1986-87 Energy Assistance program has services about 1000 house- holds in the West Hennepin area so far. We will have specific figures for Plymouth in the second quarterly report. We have 8 decentralized sites for taking applications including Plymouth City Hall which utilizes volunteers who are residents of Plymouth. Overall we have 31 volunteers. 2) The 1987 Emergency Services Program has served the following numbers of people in West Hennepin during the first quarter: 854 for food, 111 for shelter, and 428 for housing assistance, clothing and trans- portation assistance. Plymouth is served through the Interfaith Outreach Program. Specific numbers for Plymouth will be available in the second quarterly report. WHHS received a grant from the Minne- apolis Foundation to help enhance the emergency services program. The grant will allow us to train volunteers to be better advocates for clients and to provide classes on parenting, nutrition and budget management. In addition we received a grant from Hands Across America to do community education on hunger in our communities. 3) The House Doctor Program serves Plymouth, Tonka Bay, St. Louis Park. The City of Plymouth receives and the grant, and through a contract with Plymouth, WHHS implements the program including organization of a community energy council, publicizing the services, taking applica- tions, selecting a vendor to provide weatherization services. So far 55 applications have been taken in the three communities during the first quarter. SPECIAL EVENTS/ACTIVITIES Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council The following events or activities have occurred in the first quarter of 1987: 3,500 copies of the updated Directory of Services for the northwest area were distributed to area cities, libraries, service providers, public officials, churches, hospitals, and school districts. * 110,000 service resource cards were distributed to households and service providers in the northwest area. * The NWHHSC participated in three resource fairs to distribute information about area services, service needs, and about the Council. * Municipal Profiles were prepared for and distributed to each of the member municipalities of the Council. To date, presentations on the profiles have been made to the City Councils of Robbinsdale, Golden Valley, Maple Grove, Brooklyn Center, and Champlin. * The NWHHSC produced an annual report and conducted an annual meeting on January 29, 1987. Newly -appointed Advisory Commissioners were given an orientation session to the NWHHSC. * Members of the Board of Directors of the NWHHSC received presentations by the NW Branch of the Red Cross, Courage Center's Home Sweet Home Program, and Oasis and Breckinridge residential facilities. West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board The following events or activities have occurred in the first quarter of 1987: s West Hennepin Human Services worked ,jointly with the Bridge to successfully raise funds from foundations, corporations and churches to start and develop the first suburban youth in crisis housing program called the Bridge West.WHHSPB is working to help generate community support. * We have distributed over 2000 copies of "Home Sweet Home" which is a guide for affordale housing. We also continue to distribute "Basic Tools: A Survival Skills Guide for Unemployed and Underemployed " a We have revised our mini—directory of human services in the West Hennepin area. We are currently seeking private sector funding for the directory and hope to print about 100,000 copies. r * Our Board of Directors worked with Dale Nelson of ADC Telecommuni- cations to develop a new mission statement which better reflects our mission and activities. Mr. Nelson donated his time to lead the Board through a process to develop the mission statement. After developing the new mission statement, the Board developed goals and objectives which reflect that new mission statement. * We are in the process of putting together a major research and data gathering report on welfare and poverty programs in West Hennepin. We anticipate the reports release in July, 1987. * WHHS staff worked with Hennepin County staff to develop a survey and study on services for senior citizens in West Hennepin. The report makes a number of recommendations to WHHS in the areas of service coordination and planning. * WHHS has been working with Hennepin County Commissioners to look at the possibility of Making Ridgedale Service Center a full service center with all social and financial aid services available at this center. The Hennepin County Board Chair has asked County staff to look at this issue. * WHHS has developed a proposal for a volunteer peer support program for financial aid recipients to help them better understand the ser- vice system and look at ways to become independent. This proposal has been submitted to C. A. S. H. for funding. * Each year we develop an annual legislative agenda with issues that we actively work for at the state legislature. This year our agenda includes 25 iters and focuses on health care, ,lobs, child care, mental health services and energy issues. We work with state coalitions concerned with these issues in order to assure passage of legislation. * We provided technical assistance to an average of 10-15 agencies per month. * We do an average of 75 information and referral calls per month. JOINT EFFORTS: In addition to separate agency activities, the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council and the West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board also jointly work on projects and committees. Joint efforts in the first quarter of 1987 include: The Long -Range Planning Committee is comprised of three members from each of the three suburban human services councils. The committee is in the process of hiring a consultant to assist in formulating long-range plans for each of the councils. The Councils agreed to work cooperatively in their planning processes in order to share common information, to become more aware of each organization's direction, and to develop cooperative ways of working together in coming years. The Lobbying Task Force is made up of representatives from the three suburban human services councils and from Community Action for Suburban Hennepin. The task force developed two common issues to be jointly pursued in the 1987 legislative session; child care subsidies and health care for low-income persons. Each organization also works on additional issues outside of the task force arrangement. The Housing Advocacy Project ended in October of 1986, but the West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board and the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council are jointly pursuing funds to implement the recommendations made by the Project. The Mental Health Aftercare Providers are staffed jointly by the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council and the West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board. The providers met three times in the first quarter of 1987. Their primary focus this year has been on proposed changes in mental health legislation. The Coordinating Council is attended by the eight human services councils in Hennepin County. The Council met three times in the first quarter of 1987 to hear speakers and to plan surveys for the community Social Services Act process. The Energy Concerns Task Force is a suburban -wide group of energy program providers who meet on a bi-monthly basis. This task forcesponsored an energy forum in the first quarter of 1987 and produced a directory of suburban energy program providers. A Service Coordination Meeting was held on January 29, 1987 for providers of emergency services, surplus commodities, and energy assistance programs. The purpose of the meeting was to explore the ways in which services are currently being coordinated and to make recommendations on how to improve existing coordination efforts. A report with recommendations was distributed to the boards of directors of the three councils, to C.A.S.H., and to the meeting participants. Two joint training sessions were held during the first quarter of 1987. Sensitivity Training was conducted for the staffs of the Energy Assistance Program and Emergency Services Providers by staff members from Catholic Charities. A presentation was also made by the Metropolitan Council to the staffs of the three suburban human services councils.