The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCouncil Information Memorandum 01-28-1988CITY OF PLYNOUTR CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM January 28, 1988 UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS..... 1. COUNCIL MEETING -- Monday, February 1, 7:30 p.m. Council meeting in the City Council chambers. 2. PLYMOUTH DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL -- Wednesday, February The Plymouth Development Council will meet in the conference room. A copy of the meeting notice/agenda (M-2) Regular City 10, 7:30 a.m. City Council is attached. 3. FEBRUARY & MARCH MEETING CALENDARS -- Meeting calendars for February and March are attached. M-3 FOR YOUR INFORMATION.... 1. MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION ANNUAL DINNER MEETING - On Tuesday, anuary 26, the Municipal Legislative ommission conducted its annual dinner meeting to appraise representatives and senators representing the fifteen communities of the 1988 legislative program. Plymouth was represented by Councilmembers Ricker and Zitur and Frank Boyles. Over 80 persons including city staff members, councilmembers and state senate and representatives were present. Bob Renner reviewed the MLC position with respect to the tax base equalization formula proposed by the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, including Minneapolis/St. Paul and outstate communities. Bob Renner also reviewed the MLC position with respect to transfer payments, local government aids, local revenue sources, property classifications, assessment ratios, income based homestead credit, homestead replacement aid, levy limits, fiscal disparities and state mandates. A packet of materials was provided to each person attending the meeting. I have attached copies of the packet for Mayor Schneider and Councilmembers Sisk and Vasiliou for information purposes. 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM January 28, 1988 Page two 2. SOLID WASTE RECYCLING MEETING WITH THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL CHAIR - On Friday, January 22, Mayor Schneider, Councilmember Sisk, Dick Pouliot, Frank Boyles and I joined mayors, city managers and assistants from the communities of Eden Prairie and Minnetonka to discuss the issue of mechanical and source separation with Metropolitan Council Chair Steve Keefe and Councilmember Dirk DeVries. In his initial announcement of the meeting, Chairman Keefe supplied a letter containing four Metropolitan Council concerns. A written response to each of the Council's concerns was prepared, distributed and reviewed at the meeting with Chairman Keefe. Both documents are attached for Council information. While Chairman Keefe continued to express concern about the viability of mechanical separation, particularly the Reuter plant (see attached Minneapolis Star and Tribute article), he did indicate support for the inclusion of mechanical separation as another tool available to municipalities in addition to source separation. He asked that municipal representatives present remain active in this process and that a representative or representatives of the group present this position before the Metropolitan Council's subcommittee, reviewing the Metropolitan Council's solid waste master plan document. I expect that during the Metropolitan Council's staff review process, staff members will be involved. Once the matter comes before the entire body, Councilmembers may wish to provide input as well. I will keep you briefed on these matters. (I-2) 3. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT PLANNING PROGRAM EVALUATION BY THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR - Attached is the executive summary from the program evaluation recently conducted by the Legislative Auditor's office, critiquing the effectiveness of the Regional Transit Board during its three years in operation. Much of the data contained in the report was derived from written survey results received from 81 of the 91 cities in the Transit Taxing District and from personal interviews and telephone conversations with the same individuals. Frank Boyles completed a survey and participated in an oral interview and telephone conversations as part of this effort. The Legislative Auditor's findings are supportive of suburban transit interests and positions we have taken on transit matters. Among the more noteworthy conclusions are: 1. A slight majority of city officials believe that their city's transit services are adequate. However, officials in cities with populations over 10,000 are more dissatisfied with service. 2. While some city officials report that their involvement in the transit planning process increased since 1984, most believe their level of involvement remains unchanged. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM January 28, 1988 Page three 3. The RTB should obtain more input from local government staff and the Council's Transportation Advisory Board. The RTB should devote more staff time to workinq with local governments. 4. The RTB should encourage cities to develop formal proposals for local transit improvements and establish criteria for selecting proposals. 5. The Legislature should amend the Tax Feathering Statute in accordance with the 1984 Legislative intent, but setting the percentage tax reduction that feathered cities will receive. 6. The Legislature should consider reinstating the opportunity for cities to initiate opt out service, perhaps effective in 1991. Although we are concerned that this would fragment regional transit service, coordination should be possible if the Legislature clarifies the RBT's authority to apply regional standards to opt out cities. A number of these recommendations are particularly gratifying in that they have been Plymouth's position since the inception of the Regional Transit Board. It remains to be seen whether the Regional Transit Board and Legislature will be responsive to this report and act upon its recommendations. (I-3) 4. PLYMOUTH METROLINK - Attached is an article from the Bus Operator magazine, a publication of the American Bus Association, distributed nationally to public and private operators. This bimonthly publi- cation featured Plymouth Metrolink in its January/February issue as a classic example of a public/private partnership. (1-4) 5. 1987 PLYMOUTH ACCIDENT STATISTICS -- To enhance Plymouth's employee safety efforts, we .retain records of both vehicular and personal injury accidents involving City employees for each calendar year. These records are summarized in tabular format to help us identify areas in our safety program requiring additional prevention efforts. Attached are the tables assembled for the Plymouth Safety Program. The first table provides a profile of vehicular accidents which occurred during calendar year 1987. A total of 28 vehicular accidents were reported, amounting to an estimated $8,807 in damage. This compares with 1986 estimated vehicular damage amounts of $9,238. These figures are based upon the damage estimates contained in the accident reports. Eleven of the accidents involved collisions with other vehicles. Ice, snow, and obstructed views, i.e. trees at the intersection, were contributing factors for seven accidents. Two accidents occurred when city police squads were protecting an accident scene, and four others when police employees were responding to a medical emergency, vehicular pursuit or road - bock. Divisions recording zero preventable accidents for 1987 include Sewer and Water, Equipment Center, Community Development, Finance, Engineering, and Administration. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM January 28, 1988 Page four The second table shows on-the-job personal injury accidents for calendar year 1987. A total of 35 accidents occurred, resulting in 41 employee injuries. Of the 41 employee injuries, 11 were OSHA recordable. Eight of those involved lost work days. Accidents involving lost work time occurred in the Police Department, Fire Department, Street Division, Sewer and Water Division, and Building Inspection Division. The final three tables reflect the dollar losses associated with these accidents for each year since 1980. On a division by division basis, personal injury cost over the last seven years has been most expensive in the Fire Division at $60,446.12, followed closely by the Police Division at $50,458.97. On a year by year basis, accident costs vary precipitously. For example, a single accident occurring in 1984 resulted in total accident costs for that year of $69,717.74. By contrast, personal injury accidents in 1987 have resulted in total costs of $7,660.85. Records are also maintained regarding the cost of personal injury accidents by body part injured. Over the last seven years, the most expensive accidents involve back -related injuries, at a total cost of $739897.87. Leg/foot injuries follow close behind at a total of $71,199.73. The final table displays lost work days as a result of Worker's Compensation related accidents. The City has experienced three bad years in this respect: 1981 involved 105 lost work days; 1984, 229 lost work days; and 1985, 146 lost work days. Total lost work days in 1987 amounted to 58 compared to 33 in 1986. This amounts to 464 lost work hours out of a total estimated work hours of all city employees in 1987 of 33,532, or just over one-tenth of one percent. The dollar costs for the lost work days is $7661. Based upon this data, our 1988 Safety Training Program will concen- trate on: 1) Prevention of vehicle backing accidents. 2) Prevention of off roadway vehicular accidents. 3) Back strengthening and back injury prevention. 4) Hand protection. 5) Reevaluation of subduing/arresting suspect procedures. 6) Temporary employee accident prevention training. On a day-to-day basis, the Safety Committee reviews both personal injury and vehicular accidents and makes recommendations to appro- priate supervisors regarding revisions in procedures, equipment, or personnel protective equipment to reduce future similar accidents. Our efforts have been effective as documented by the fact that 101 Safe Driver Awards ranging from one to ten years were awarded this year, the small amount of work time lost due to accidents, and the minimal costs associated therewith. The City is blessed with employees who exercise care and concern in their daily work CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM January 28, 1988 Page five operations. This fact, together with our aggressive Safety Program, combine to make Plymouth's accident reduction program one of the most effective in the State based upon the comments received by our worker's compensation and liability/auto representatives. The returns from this program more than justify our annual $12,000 safety program cost. (I-5) 6. ST. MARY'S OF THE LAKE PARK PLANNING - On Tuesday, January 26, Eric lank met with t e Park onsultant for St. Mary's of the Lake Park to discuss the process which will be utilized for park planning. As part of these discussions, park and trail safety and risk management concerns were discussed. 7. REQUEST BY MR. VONBEHREN TO RECEIVE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT & UTILITY INFORMATION -- A program has been written that will allow Mr. VonBehren access to the information he requested. One of the computer terminals has been secured so that only levied special assessments, pending assessments, and utility information can be addressed. Mr. VonBehren has been instructed on the procedures for using the terminal to obtain this information. In addition, arrangements have been made with him to set up appointments for specific times to make these inquiries. Mr. VonBehren is in agreement with the procedures we have established. 8. GOOSE MANAGEMENT CONTRACT - UPDATE -- At the request of Mayor Schneider, Dick Carlquist has prepared the attached report to update the Council on the goose management contract. (I-8) 9. CORRESPONDENCE RESPONDING TO CORPS OF ENGINEERS PUBLIC NOTICE ON REQUESTCITY LANDFTLL PERMIT -- T am attac inq correspondence forwarded to us from the Corps of Engineers as a result of their public notice on the City's application for landfill permit. (I-9) 10. BEGIN PROPERTY - FINAL SITE INSPECTION SCHEDULED -- A letter has been sent to Larry Begin advising that city representatives will be reinspecting his property on February 2, 1988 to confirm whether Mr. Begin has completed all site cleanup requirements under the July 27, 1987 agreement with the City. A copy of the letter is attached. (I-10) 11. MINUTES: a. Park and Recreation Advisory Commission, January 14, 1988. (I -11a) b. Planning Commission, January 13, 1988. (I -11b) 12. RECYCLING STATUS REPORT -- The 1987 Recycling Status report is attached. (1-12) CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM January 28, 1988 Page six 13. CLAIMS -- Copies of two claims filed against the City are attached. The -first claim from Daniel O'Neill, 665 Windemere Curve, is for the reimbursement of towing and impoundment charges of his vehicle after a snowstorm on January 20, 1988. The second claim filed by Mr. and Mrs. Michael Sazama is for clean-up costs and damages .incurred as the result of a sewer back-up on January 25, 1988. (I-13) 14. WEED & SHRUB COMPLAINT AT THE INTERSECTION OF 101 AND 3RD AVENUE NORTH -- On January 12, Mayor Schneider discussed with Mrs. Merlin Dubbelde, 400 Queensland Lane, the problem of sight visibility at this intersection. A copy of the Mayor's memorandum to me which describes Mrs. Dubbelde's concerns, and Mark Peterson's follow-up report on this matter is attached. (I-14) 15. CORRESPONDENCE: a. Letter to Mr. Don Windseth, 11410 - 53rd Avenue North, from Frank Boyles, responding to Mr. Windseth's concerns about city snowplowing. (I -15a) b. Letter to Mayor and City Council from "A family of Plymouth residents" expressing concerns with allowing snowmobiling in the City. (I -15b) c. Letter to Steven Keefe, Chair, Metropolitan Council, from City Manager, regarding the January 22 recycling discussion meeting. (1-15c) d. Letter to Plymouth City officials from Robert Heinrich, Director, Clean Up Project, concerning the type of pay -for -view movies being offered through cable TV. (I -15d) e. Letter to Susan Christie, 2345 Hemlock Lane, from Eric Blank, commenting on her letter to the Audubon Society on the Curtis Lake wetland and marsh area. (I -15e) f. Letter to Mayor Schneider from Aaron Crohn, 10205 - 27th Avenue North, requesting sidewalk installation along Medicine Lake Road. (I -15f) g. Letter of appreciation from Paul Hooper, Minnetonka Fire Chief, to the Plymouth Fire Department, for assistance provided by the Plymouth Department during a January 13 townhouse fire in Minnetonka. (I -15g) h. Letter of appreciation from Richard Young, Chief of Police, South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department, for cooperation of Plymouth Department during a recent drug project. (I -15h) i. Letter to Mr. Dale Gustafson, Northwest Trail Snowmobile Club, from Public Safety Director, on his attendance at the February 8 Plymouth Forum. (I-151) James G. Willis City Manager DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO January 27, 1988 Plymouth Development Councilmembers Bob Burger, President FEBRUARY 10 MEETING The next meeting of the Plymouth Development Council will be held on Wednesday morning, February 10 at 7:30 a.m. in the Plymouth City Center Council Conference Room. The following items are scheduled for discussion. You may wish to bring up other items as well: I. Final report on asthetic standards recommendations. II. Final report on fire sprinkler/fire lane ordinance amendments. III. Final report on engineering guideline revisions for street construction. IV. Fee revisions: A. Park dedication fees. B. Sewer and water area charges. V. Staffing changes. VI. Other business. I hope to see you at the meeting! BB:kec cc: James G. Willis, City Manager Blair Tremere, Director of Planning & Community Development Fred Moore, Director of Public Works Joe Ryan, Building Official Dick Carlquist, Public Safety Director Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager S.F. 2/9/88 a._ MINUTES PLYMOUTH DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL October 28, 1987 PRESENT: Peter Pflaum, Lundgren Brothers Construction Company; Greg Frank, McCombs -Knutson; Marlin Grant, Marvin Anderson Construction Co.; Fred Haas, Marvin Anderson Construction Co.; Sherm Goldberg, consulting engineer; Don Myron, Don Myron Realty; Bob Burger, Burger Development Group; Fran Hagen, Westwood Planning & Engineering; and City Staff Members, Blair Tremere, John Sweeney, Ray Anderson, and Scott McLellan I. FOLLOW UP ON ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS -- Blair Tremere explained the recent building ordinance amendments regarding waste facilities which are now classified as a conditional use in the Planned Industrial Zoninq District. He said there were some additional future items identified by the City Council and Planning Commission which were largely housekeeping items and the Development Council would be kept informed as those were considered at a public hearing. He reviewed the ordinance amendments approved earlier this year which provide for a limited amount of administrative approval of certain non-residential development plans. Bob Burger suggested that interested parties should become familiar with the ordinance requirements so that they can take advantage of this streamlined review process. II. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW TASK FORCE REPORT -- Bob Burger reported that the task force appointed by the City Council had completed its work, and had communicated its findings to the Planning Commission. He distributed the October 22, 1987 transmittal letter. Blair Tremere reviewed the letter and the findings of the task force. He said the Planning Commission will be considering it at their October 28 meeting and will then determine whether to have a public hearing or whether to just discuss it at a future study meeting. Bob Burger stated that he and two other developers had been involved with the task force and he asked that the Development Council take action to endorse the process as completed so far. There was a MOTION by Peter Pflaum, seconded by Don Myron, to endorse the report as contained in the October 22, 1987 transmittal letter regarding the findings of the Building Aesthetic Task Force. The motion passed unanimously. 111. STATUS REPORT ON BUILDING INSPECTION AND PERMIT ISSUANCE TURN AROUND TIME --- Bob Burger reiterated that the building plan review time had been cut substantially, and that the Building Inspection Department had additional manpower to facilitate the response time for inspections. Assistant Build- ing Official Scott McLellan explained the procedure and lists now used for both plan checking and for determining when work is ready for inspection. He said the plan check time, particularly for residential plans, had been substantially reduced and rarely took longer than five days. He described the process including the screening of those applications which are not in order. Priority is given to those plans which are in order. PLYHOUTH DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL October 28, 1987 - Page two He explained that the new field inspector had reduced the response time substantially since now there are two field inspectors whose primary respon- sibility is residential inspection, while another is primarily responsible for non-residential work. Coverage of the city is much improved. Fred Haas stated that there were some instances with their firm, where they had to wait for footing inspections sometimes up to two days. Scott McLellan stated that Fred should let him or Joe Ryan know when that occurs since the response time generally has been much shorter. Blair Tremere advised that the builders can help at that stage by calling the city before the concrete for the footings is scheduled. The city standard has been and now is, a twenty-four hour response time for virtually all inspections. IV. PROPOSED CHANGES TO ENGINEERING GUIDELINES FOR STREET CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS -- Bob Burger referred to the materials attached to the agenda, namely the October 12, 1987 memorandum from Public Works Director Fred Moore. The sheet, "Recommended changes to present City Engineering Guide- lines" dated October 9, 1987 was reviewed in detail. John Sweeney explained that the City had hired a consultant who had recently completed a pavement management study relative to the City streets. He reviewed the findings of the study which served as a basis for the recommendations for changing the engineering guidelines. Extensive discussion ensued. Bob Burger expressed concern that the changes would result in additional expenses. Sherm Goldberg stated that the first recommendation regarding tests should not be a problem since that normally is done now and does not represent a major additional expense. Greg Frank stated, however, that his concern is with the proposal for addi- tional three feet granular material and the requirement that provisions be made so that house drainage systems tie into the street drainage system. He said that that would be very expensive and could be problematical later on. Sherm Goldberg said that he considered the granular fill requirement to exceed normal requirements including those of MnDOT. Further discussion ensued, particularly regarding the recommendations on storm drainage. Fran Hagen expressed concern with long term and indiscriminate use of the policy particularly as to requirements for granular materials. John Sweeney clarified the difference between the findings of the consultant's report and the engineer's recommendations. Greg Frank reiterated his concerns about the three foot granular material standard. Peter Pflaum said that more time was needed for the Development Council to review this and that the City Council should be asked to table the item. PLYMOUTH DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL October 28, 1987 Page three Bob Burger stated that someone should represent the Development Council at the City Council meeting on Monday, November 2. Peter Pflaum said that there are some evidence of substantial cost impacts with this policy and that the city should also be concerned about possible liability problem with houses tied into the system and there are back ups in the storm sewer system. Fran Hagen inquired whether the City realizes the potential costs which might be involved with city projects. Bob Burger commented that there might be long term maintenance problems, especially with the drainage system and tie-in's to homes. Fran Hagen agreed and said that there might even be long term concerns about rodents who could nest in a storm drainage system. Marlin Grant asked whether this policy format had been adopted in other communities; Sherm Goldberg stated that most cities have a policy with such standards that can be implemented where they are necessary, i.e., the standards are not adopted across the board. Greg Frank inquired whether the study included age of street, and John Sweeney acknowledged that it did. Greg Frank stated that it is important to account for the expected life of street. Sherm Goldberg explained the back- ground which lead to the report. Bob Burger concluded that while the recommendation regarding testing is not a major concern, there are concerns with the other three items. MOTION by Bob Burger, seconded by Marlin Grant, to recommend to the City Council that action on the recommended changes to the Engineering Guidelines be deferred, because of the broad implications of the policy and the potential economic affect; the purpose of the deferral is so that the Development Council can review the report and present a formal response at a later date. The Development Council concludes that full analysis of the proposed changes is extremely important to the orderly development of the city. The motion passed unanimously. Bob Burger appointed a subcommittee consisting Sherm Goldberg, and himself, to coordinate the changes. He said the purpose of the review problem really is and how it can be effectively V. OTHER BUSINESS of Fran Hagen, Greg Frank, review of the recommended is to determine where the solved. Bob Burger stated that he continues to have concerns with the city lot coverage requirement of 20% maximum for all structures including decks. Marlin Grant commented that 20% seems too little. Bob Burger agreed, but stated the City had thoroughly reviewed this on several occasions and had PLYMOUTH DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL October 28, 1987 Page four concluded that the 20% was an appropriate standard. Variances, however, have not been granted regularly and adjustments to Planned Unit Development Plan are not easy. He said that the standard tends to conflict with market conditions where people do seek to have larger homes. He recounted the history of the standard, noting that it was based upon the city's typical minimum lot size of 18,500 sq. ft. (still the city conventional standard). This preceded planned unit developments with smaller lots. Fran Hagen recalled, however, that the City at one time had political problems in allowing lots significantly smaller than 18,5N sq. ft. and that today, one can find lots which are smaller. He suggested that the 20% standard played a part in developing community acceptance of the smaller lots. Bob Burger stated that the real problem is including decks and covered patios. He suggested that the Development Council pursue this again with the City. Blair Tremere responsed to a question from Bob Burger, stating that the Development Council should draft its concern citing specific instances and providing research so that the Planning Commission and Council can see what alternatives there might be. He said that it's conceivable that one option would be no standard, but that is not likely. While the 20% figure might seem arbitrary, it does represent the standard that is reflected in the physical layout of the residential neighborhoods. Bob Burger commented that ordinances and requirements from other cities would be helpful and Blair Tremere responded that perhaps developers who work in other cities could get a copy of those requirements so they could be analyzed. Blair Tremere also recalled that the City Council had been firm in its find- ing the last time this was discussed, and that a sound case needs to be developed before concerns are identified as a major issue which does not have a solution. Bob Burger said that he may appoint a subcommittee to coordinate this and it would be helpful for city staff to identify the number of times residents come back to get permits for decks or patios after the home is built. Marlin Grant indicated that the Minnesota Homebuilders are reviewing ordinances of a number of communities and that this could be one of the items they would check for. In other business, Bob Burger stated that the Development Council committee is still talking to the City Public Safety Department staff about fire sprinkler ordinance changes. He said that Marlin Grant had provided some additional information which was being reviewed. There will be another meeting with the City on this matter and that he will keep Development Council members informed. Bob Burger stated that the next meeting will be in late January. The meeting adjourned at 9:12 a.m. i s i �I cn i . N I j ct d0 f • j i 1 L: ,..pJ n N Qi 1 00 N N ! i I i O [ N hl r I t� L!? N o N o 0 C4 I Cz �( V I T5 i 00 E--4 c) N !..CI aHi' F-+�C aH :21,0 ui W f-+' �r�a H zVoz M I a oma, M O H .. i { O UH Woo vn cn v] 1 ISIS � p o0 00 I j O Lf) �•IN O U cn C7 M �I z• 2 z• z C7 �D H D a� o j a o i � cz v� N 01 w"i N a o a o I crl i o 44 U F{ { PQ n U i ' a P4 W cn a H I a U PC)r W 2 pq cz o U QQ f a, I o Z-,� Q w aw N a o ' Qi I of M oUcn aoo N Vcn N j .. U t• H H x H U a C� C7 i j U p� W C7 i H U H U UU 44 En u W C7 a O a- U ;C�di 1I I72, pp i W, 71 PL: U O cr1 � .. p p., n U C� a 71 `r., PL -4 F-4 a �+ 0 o C) t-4 0 f-4 PL4 n U a p p4 n U CD 2 W � '0o N • � �r1 N � � oda N N a H Q U 6 0 o•• o pq n U V) C-4 cK a LL ^ OO N � 00E °N° U,� W � � P-4 � - N `r N R + �' Fz O •• r..4 D0a z p W cla u 0 U HnU N oUOU N UOU W f� C7 C7 W c 7 o r- -j) N 00 L.L. N CT L MM u. January 59 1988 James Willis City Manager City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55 44 7 Dear Mr. Willis: lita�r 1 �--- o - 4'� �0 Metropolitan Council 4 � {� 300 Metro Square Building Seventh and Robert Streets Ado St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 e Telephone (612) 291-6359 k'r ry C ti'T fit'. 'I/\f~ 1yr ^ 1"� !`moi ♦�� JAN 6 1986 CITY OFPLI NIO T ,_- When we solicited issues to be addressed during the 1988 analysis and revision of the Council's Solid Waste Management Policy Plan, several communities, including yours, urged that the Council reconsider its recycling policy which sets specific goals for source separation and centralized processing of solid waste. Essentially, these communities are seeking more flexibility in the Council's policy that would allow the 16% source -separation goal to be met by sending their waste to the Reuter Resources Recovery Facility. I agree that the Council's solid waste plan needs to take more explicit recognition of the impact of mechanical and centralized processing on recycling as well as source separation, however, the issue is not entirely uncontroversial. At this time, the Council seems somewhat divided on the relative value of source separation versus centralized processing and recycling. Furthermore. the region's solid waste plan assumes that 160 of solid waste will never arrive at centralized processing facilities like the resource recovery facilities or the Reuter facility. So there is only enough processing capacity for approximately 80% of the waste stream program to be on line by 1992. As a result, if we were to count Reuter's results toward the goal, additional processing capacity would have to be made available or part of Reuter's capacity not counted, which would result in additional processing capacity that needed to be made available elsewhere. Some additional factors surrounding the source vs. mechanical operation issue include: o Cost for mechanical processing of recyclables is roughly twice that of source separation; however, this does not include "costs" involved in promoting a higher level of source separation. o If all recyclables were mechanically separated (including the 16 percent), the region would need at least an increase of 1,400 tons/day of processing capacity. The current costs of additional capacity are estimated between $48-$54/ton. o The extent of landfill abatement being achieved through mechanical separation is not known. A Council -sponsored study by Northern States Power should provide better information. An Equaal Opportunity Employer o It is pot clear whether materials separated centrally are as marketable as source separated materials. Reuter claims to be having considerable success with some materials, although they are apparently not separating glass which is crushed in the trucks and is not separable, and yard waste is not as usable when mixed with other municipal waste first before it's separated. Council Member Dirk deVries has asked if we couldn't move quickly on this issue so as to assist the cities that are concerned about it to deal with their solid waste planning requirements. Although there are obviously difficulties associated with this issue, we would like to get together and discuss the issue with you more fully. To that end, I would like to invite you to a meeting on January 22nd, at 8:00 a.m. at the Minnetonka City Hall ( new addition), Shady Oak Conference Room, 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. to discuss this issue with several of your neighbor communities, Council member Dirk deVries, and myself. Sincerely, Steve Keefe Chair cc: Gertrude Ulrich Josephine Nunn METROPOLITAN COUNCIL CONCERNS ABOUT MECHANICAL SEPARATION CONTAINED IN JANUARY 5, 1988 STEVE KEEFE LETTER 1. The cost for mechanical processing of recyclables is roughly twice that of source separation, however, this does not include costs involved in promoting a higher level of source separation. A. All costs associated with source separation and with mechanical processing are not really known yet as much of the data to date relies upon projection. B. The cost for mechanical processing will most certainly be borne by those who use it, therefore, cost is not a metropolitan wide issue. C. The 400 ton per day allocation to Reuter has already been factored into metropolitan area waste stream calculations. Therefore, there is no need for additional capacity or increased costs associated therewith. 2. If all recyclables were mechanically separated (including the 16%), the region would need at least an increase of 1,4W tons per day of processing capacity. The current costs of additional capacity are estimated between $48 and $54 per ton. A. No one is arguing that mechanical separation should be the exclusive regional means of recycling. What we are saying is that the arsenal of tools available to municipalities should include a mix of waste management strategies, including source separation, waste reduction, mechanical separation, etc. A wider variety of solid waste manage- ment tools is consistent with the Metropolitan Council's Solid Waste Management Plan and the Citizen's League study on solid waste management issues. B. Instead of having an unlimited amount of mechanical separation, it is more likely that a limited number of mechanical separators would be available, and that the County's flow control powers would limit the amount of mechanical processing capacity. Therefore, there would be no need to increase the region's processing capacity. C. No one knows precisely the actual tonnage in the solid waste stream today, let alone, the future. It is entirely possible that the stream is larger than currently projected, or that the stream will increase over time. The metropolitan area requires the capacity to absorb such additional tonnages and mechanical separation provides this additional capacity. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL CONCERNS ABOUT MECHANICAL SEPARATION CONTAINED IN JANUARY 5, 1988 STEVE KEEFE LETTER Page Z 3. The extent of landfill abatement being achieved through mechanical separation is not known. A Council sponsored study by Northern States Power should provide better information. A. It is probable that some communities would utilize mechanical processing exclusively, others would utilize source separation exclusively, and still others would combine the two. This blend of tools available to each municipality would addresss landfill abate- ment concerns. B. The use of source separation supplemented by mechanical separation should result in greater recycling. This, after all, is our shared objective and should be promoted by the Metropolitan Council, counties and municipalities. C. The County, or Council could enhance oversight of private facilities by allowing municipal use through contract agreement where oversight provisions addressing landfill abatement, levels, costs, etc., are included to the County's satisfaction. By requiring oversight as a precondition to use of mechanical separation, the County and Council can be assured that landfill abatement is indeed taking place on a continuing basis. 4. It is not clear whether materials separated centrally are as marketable as source separated materials. Private firms are apparently not separating glass and the yard waste is not as usable when mixed with other municipal waste first before separated. A. The issue of marketability of mechanically separated materials is of great interest to the private operator. For him it is his continued business existence. He will do everything necessary to assure that his waste stream is marketable. This is not a metropolitan issue. B. Private separators have indicated that yard waste must be included in their waste stream in order to remain profitable. Here again, it is in the private operator's best interest to assure that the yard waste is marketable for composting purposes. Since the operator's profitability depends upon the marketability of his product, the issue is not a public concern. C. The oversight requirement referred to previously will assure that the amounts landfilled following mechanical separation are within the parameters set forth by the Metropolitan Council and counties. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL CONCERNS ABOUT MECHANICAL SEPARATION CONTAINED IN JANUARY 5, 1988 STEVE KEEFE LETTER Page 3 5. Other arguments which could be made for mechanical separation. A. Allowing mechanical separation will not affect the County's ability to establish source separation, should mechanical separation fail. The County's flow control authorities and requirements for municipal oversight of mechanical separation will provide adequate safeguards to ensure that recycling is taking place satisfactorily. It will also provide the County with the authority necessary to' require municipalities to revert to source separation if mechanical separation proves to be unproductive. B. Mechanical separation is a reality today. It should continue to exist side by side with public programs in order that the public is able to make an ongoing evaluation of the effectiveness of both source separation and mechanical separation programs in dollar, recycling, and landfill abatement terms. If mechancial separation is excluded, no such cost effectiveness evaluation can be made. O cc C U C C 'C7 '� .� ,',~,��J •-" �" N rte' � (�*� O p � -C A C O 03 3��ovao--c 3'n w-d°�U•-�G3i� MO � U��N v x O tea° ■.no>Eu3 ■ L E.6LL 0 � Q c3 rI� C 3 N E N` 0 4' C� Ec,'a� CT o baEty *-= =... C C CZczx U`'v O ��- mom .. °� o v a .. - O cc v L�" -' �c C R° E �, C M. Ucz E I X _ U CL G L. C, `�``c� °�1,5 � COO C .tom C U Ln O U O D U O G � ;� C .0 tC O cr. cC C k w' r `� .. v; o'war~,voa-v °v cs n novo LC o p y co p U L E s U c C x a'� O C ■ UO cd a 3 t" U ` cs N v, prj N O ei C c3 C 'b � � >, C � cz .� 16 O CC7 E b o ,Cr, t1 C r U co >, C CJ > N U E'5 U v •v ac ° C U UC3 v ] C � U O C E M - C q O L3. N E a� Q'r=dc . .E�� Z� ■ - N D I 1 t4 �- C/3 N N r o C -� �' Cl o v c c E> O O NEW ��,�" cz cc. � CO � y U p c 'v �- c+�, •� r��c'c .� O°. - 3 -- E moo `....a E „moo ��..�N... «+ tC N CL A� ons L)v tIQ � a`�o° � o a. GO ��•� H Ct... L v� .fl S c� c v�- .a� U C� H U Evan � F" .0 cC �u� uy ct ��o't� r O H v c... !1 , L1 O ccl ` O v C v Q C SUC CL ]' Q. v 'b Q' C.)•r E c : Vj v c ouo�� NCO wocc ave .� • -• b v�aDv� 6d R E Ef rte. �= n U �n o � 0\ °' 7 c 05 -,g 'o o "VULIUN Continued `: oin page 1B fill -abatement promise. Its most re- cent report to regulatory officials, filed about two months late, indicates that between July and September it paid to dump in a landfill about 75 percent of the garbage it received. It costs the company between $20 and $30 a ton to dump the garbage in a landfill. Reuter, officials said Friday that the report is in error and that the actual figure is closer to 50 percent. But even that figure is much higher than Reuter's initial claim that it could find commercial use for all but 10 percent of the garbage it processed. That's mainly because there are ma- jor roadblocks to the marketing of two of the three major products from which Reuter expected revenue. Reuter hoped to turn at least 50 percent of its trash into fuel. But a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirement that any boiler using Reuter's refuse -derived fuel conduct expensive tests for pollut- ants has effectively shut down the in- state market for the fuel. James Reu- ter maintains that tests being con- ducted at the Argonne National Lab- oratory near Chicago will reveal "a lily-white clean fuel" that will satisfy the MPCA. Moreover, several public -owned heating plants in Minnesota that ex- perimented with the fuel told the Star Tribune that it didn't perform to their specifications or would require expensive modifications. Reuter said it has made limited out-of-state sales, but that these sales aren't very profit- able. The company also planned to turn more than 35 percent of its garbage into compost to be used for soil en- richment. But its efforts to locate a composting facility near Waconia were blocked by neighborhood oppo- sition and road problems. It's now preparing an application for a second site of 130 acres near Chaska, but residents there are opposed too. This makes opening a compost facility this year problematic. The company said it has found buy- ers for the metals, plastics, and card- board it has plucked from incoming garbage. - Reuter's difficulties have ramifica- tions for Hennepin County. Some top county officials opposed the Met- ropolitan Council's decision to allow Reuter to obtain a share of the coun- ty's garbage. , Under an ordinance enacted to meet the Legislature's directive to quit sending raw garbage to landfills, the county eventually will order that gar- bage be hauled to several designated processing facilities, including the downtown Minneapolis incinerator and a Northern States Power plant in Elk River. Both plants are under con- struction. But the Metropolitan Council voted in early 1985 to allow Reuter a share of this garbage to fuel its plant. In doing so, the council overrode a staff recommendation that Reuter not get the trash because it didn't meet the statutory requirements for such an exemption. The firm couldn't get its plant operating quick- ly enough, lacked supply contracts and lacked contracts from buyers, the staff said. Yet if Reuter quits or fails in its venture, the county bears a potential- ly expensive legal responsibility for arranging a new way to keep the exempted garbage out of the landfill. Unlike the incinerator and the Elk River plant, Reuter has not promised to pay the county for the costs of disposal of garbage if the facility doesn't work. "My concern is getting the garbage back," said Genzlinger, the county's top official concerned with trash. "I really hope they make it because I don't want it." But Reuter officials say the financial success of its plant is nearly inevita- ble. The plant charges a fee of about $28 per ton to haulers who bring garbage to the plant. "We need in the upper $40s to make a go of it," James Reuter said. Ac- cording to county officials, the gar- bage -disposal fee should rise to at least this level when the county in- vokes its ordinance power to direct garbage to the expensive Minneapolis and Elk River plants. That could happen next year. But some officials are less optimistic. "Our position was that the Metropol- itan Council was buying a piggy in a poke," said county Commissioner Jeff Spartz. Added colleague Randy Johnson, "I think it's kind of an emperor -wears - no clothes situation where we all want it to work but the facts indicate otherwise so far." Minneapolis officials talked to Reu- ter for months about supplying gar- bage for the plant before discussions reached an impasse a year ago over several points. "The Reuter facility may be a risky economic venture," a staff memo said. "The marketability of its com- post, recyclable materials, and pellets is questionable." However, securities analyst Hamil- ton sees more promise. "'Conceptual- ly its very appealing. It's a very prov- en technology," he said. But he add- ed that problems including the politi- cal environment surrounding garbage issues and the need to line up garbage supplies and buyers for products are dogging the venture's short-term profitability. The plant's losses have helped de- press Reuter stock from a high of $22.50 a share last March to $12.75 before the Oct. 19 market crash. It has been trading in the $7 to $8 range recently. The Eden Prairie plant's success is important to Reuter. What's because it bought the rights to distribute a Swiss firm's waste -processing equip- ment, which it says is in operation in more than 100 waste plants globally. The Eden Prairie plant is the first use of the technology in this country and its success would help Reuter per- suade lenders to finance more such plants. Meanwhile, Reuter is seeking ap- proval from the council and state agencies to expand its trash flow to 800 tons daily, seeking the additional garbage from Scott, Carver and Hen- nepin counties. Hennepin County of- ficials have questioned why the com- pany should get additional garbage when it is having trouble processing its 400 -ton allotment. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT PLANNING Executive Summary The Twin Cities' three -tiered transit planning structure is unique in the U.S. n 1984, the joint Legislative Study Commission on Metropolitan Transit concluded that "the three functions of effective transit service --planning, arranging, and delivering --are misallocated among the various agencies and levels of government." The commission felt that the region's public bus operator, the Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC), could not objectively pian new transit services to meet local needs. In addition, the commission was concerned about rising costs, declining ridership, and the lack of local involve- ment in transit planning. Based on the commission's recommendations, the 1984 Legislature estab- lished a transit planning structure that is unique among large U.S. metropolitan areas. The Legislature limited the MTC to transit operations and short-term planning, and allowed the region's Metropolitan Council to continue long-range transit planning and policy setting. In addition, the Legis- lature established a third agency, the Regional Transit Board (RTB), to con- duct mid-range planning, implement the policies and plans of the Metropolitan Council, and arrange for transit services. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION (3 members) •Route planning and . scheduling 0 Transit operations LEGISLATURE Sets overall transit policy • Approves regional budgets REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD (9 members) • Short and "mid-range" transit planning • Implements Metropolitan Council policies, plans • Broker of services • Reviews and approves transit operator budgets METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (17 members) 1 • Long-range transit planning and policy . setting • Issues long-term bonds Twin Cities Regional Planning Structure Transit ridership has declined more than 20 percent since 1979. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT PLANNING In spring 1987, the Legislative Audit Commission, reflecting general legisla- tive concerns about how well this transit structure was working, directed the Program Evaluation Division to evaluate metropolitan transit planning and the Regional Transit Board. In our study, we asked: • Has there been progress toward the 1984 Legislature's transit goals? • How well has the Regional Transit Board performed since 1984? Overall, our assessment of the RTB and progress toward legislative goals is mixed. While the 1984 changes improved service planning and increased the attention given to unmet service needs and the transit system's cost-effective- ness, we conclude that the RTB has not yet proven itself to be an effective problem solver. BACKGROUND The MTC currently provides 99 percent of the region's regular route transit rides. Regular route ridership grew during the 1970s, but it has declined 20 percent since 1979. Highway congestion during peak traffic hours has in- creased in recent years, and there has been a steady decline in the number of people per private vehicle during peak traffic hours. TOTAL TRIPS (millions) Source: Regional Transit Board. aTransfers are counted as separate trips. 1987 ridership is estimated. Regular Route Transit Ridership 1971-87a Currently, the state funds about 10 percent of regular route transit casts, down from 29 percent in 1980. During the past decade, an increasing portion of the transit system's revenues came from property taxes. The 91 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xi municipalities within the region's "transit taxing district" contribute between 1.25 and 2.0 mills to the regional transit system, depending on their level of service. Property taxes account for about half of transit revenues in the Twin Cities. We found that no other large U.S. metropolitan transit system relies on property taxes this much. According to a survey we conducted, 45 percent of this region's municipal officials think their city property tax contributions are reasonable, and 37 percent said they are not. The Twin Cities' transit system has become increasingly reliant on property taxes. PERCENT Source: Regional Transit Board. Property Tax Revenues as a Percentage of Twin Cities Regional Transit Revenues 1980-87 The Regional Transit Board consists of eight members appointed by the Metropolitan Council and a full-time chair appointed by the Governor. The board spent much time during its first three years responding to "brush fires," partly because key issues caught them by surprise. In addition, it has taken some time for the RTB staff to gain a working knowledge of Twin Cities tran- sit and their role in the decision-making process. The RTB's initial staff hirings were not completed until October 1985, and there was considerable turnover in top managerial staff during the agency's first two years. Since 1984, the topic that the board discussed most frequently was Metro Mobility, the region's main transit program for the disabled. In contrast, some issues were the subject of relatively few board discussions, including rideshar- ing and new suburban transit services. A METROPOLITAN TRANSIT PLANNING TRANSIT SERVICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The 1985 Legislature required the RTB to conduct a comprehensive assess- ment of the region's transit needs. We found that: i The RTB's needs assessment was a useful analysis of existing transit routes and potential transit markets, but it contained no aggregate cost estimates for the recommended service strategies and it did not discuss possible funding sources, as required by state law. The study found that most parts of the region have good transit service to downtown Minneapolis or St. Paul, and service within the central cities is generally good. But the needs assessment found that services for people The RTB's travelling to suburbs and within suburbs is often inadequate. transit needs Unfortunately, utilization of the study has been limited so far. While the assessment was needs assessment was an important step toward better suburban service, we useful, but it found that: has not resulted in • With the exception of Metro Mobility, the board did not make suburban service improvements a priority during its first three service years. Contrary to the 1984 Legislature's expectations, the board improvements has not implemented any noteworthy service improvements inside so far, the "transit taxing district" to date. The board does plan to "test market" some new suburban services during 1988 and it intends to use the needs assessment to select these services. In 1986, the RTB and MTC developed cost-effectiveness standards for MTC routes, and this was a step toward more cost-effective service. However, it has taken the RTB longer than originally expected to finalize and implement performance standards for MTC and non -MTC routes. State law required the RTB to develop an Implementation and Financial Plan during 1986 that would show how it intended to implement Metropolitan Council transit policies and plans. Because the RTB's needs assessment took longer to complete than expected, staff had to rush their development of the Implementation and Financial Plan. The draft plan did not meet the Legislature's deadline nor did its contents fully satisfy the Metropolitan Coun- cil. We also found that: The board has not used the plan as a key decision-making tool. In our view, the plan did not adequately outline: (1) the RTB's expected decision-making process on major issues, (2) justifications for recommended services and capital facilities, and (3) priorities among the recommended ser- vices and facilities. In addition, the RTB submitted its implementation plan to the Metropolitan Council in November 1986 without fare policies, which state law required to be part. of the plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The public had more oppor- tunity to advise RTB on the Metro Mobility program's over- all design than on specific program details. adil THE RESTRUCTURING OF METRO MOBILITY Metro Mobility is the Twin Cities region's primary transit program for dis- abled people. It provides 80,000 to 100,000 rides per month, about double the number of rides given prior to a major program restructuring by the RTB in October 1986. The RTB changed Metro Mobility to a "user choice" system in which users arranged their own rides with providers, rather than calling a central dispatching center. We reviewed the process the board used to plan and implement these changes and concluded that the board's early discussions of possible program changes were open and fair, and there was ample oppor- tunity for public input. The board made some difficult and bold decisions fol- lowing these initial discussions, and it deserves much credit for addressing problems with the previous Metro Mobility system. 90. 8 70- 50 - RIDES 8RIDES 5(THOUSANDS)4 S 1 J t Y, Y J J A■ 0 X D J F Y■ M J J■• 198d 1087 Source: Metro nobility Administrative Center. aProgram restructuring occurred in October 1986. Metro Mobility Monthly Ridership January 1986 - September 1987a However, once the board outlined broad program changes in late 1985: 9 The RTB did not effectively involve Metro Mobility user representatives and providers, and some key issues were unresolved at the time program changes were made. As required by law, the RTB established an advisory committee for Metro Mobility, representing transit providers, the disabled, and social service agen- Ift METROPOLITAN TRANSIT PLANNING cies. But the committee was slow in getting organized, and staff did not provide the committee with enough guidance and opportunity for input. In addition, the RTB did not adequately distinguish its own responsibilities from those of the Metro Mobility Administrative Center. This led to con- fusion about which agency was responsible for monitoring provider perfor- mance. Also, we found that neither the RTB nor Metro Mobility administrative staff developed formal, written specifications for the program's computer system in 1986, so the system put in place in late 1985 lacked some necessary components. The RTB has made better efforts in recent months to involve users and providers in decision making, although some issues remained unresolved late in 1987. COMPKFITIVE BIDDING FOR TRANSIT SERVICES During the past two years, the RT13 has expressed interest in competitively bidding certain transit routes in order to make the system more cost-effective. The RTB received a $350,000 federal grant in 1986 to pursue competitive transit. • The, RTB's failure to define the limits of competitive bidding has been unnecessary and unproductive. We also reviewed the board's process for developing competitive transit guidelines during 1987 and concluded that the board's process for developing guidelines was thorough and open. In contrast to the RTB's implementation planning for Metro Mobility, we think the staff made strong efforts to hear the viewpoints of many parties and present the board with these varying views. So far the RTB has bid out two former MTC routes, and it is too early to judge the potential cost-effectiveness of competitive transit. However, the RTB bid these routes prior to (1) establishing guidelines for the bidding RTB needs to process, and (2) establishing a means of effectively resolving provider dis- clarify which putes. Subsequently, the Legislature mandated the RTB to establish bidding services are procedures, and the federal government criticized the lack of an adequate dis- eligible for pute resolution process. competitive During 1987, the RTB and MTC had a strained relationship, resulting partly bidding. from the board's interest in competitive transit. The MTC wanted a clearer in- dication of which routes the RTB would bid. We concluded that: • The, RTB's failure to define the limits of competitive bidding has been unnecessary and unproductive. We also reviewed the board's process for developing competitive transit guidelines during 1987 and concluded that the board's process for developing guidelines was thorough and open. In contrast to the RTB's implementation planning for Metro Mobility, we think the staff made strong efforts to hear the viewpoints of many parties and present the board with these varying views. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY XV LOCAL INVOLVEMENT IN TRANSIT PLANNING The 1984 Legislative Commission on Metropolitan 'fansit concluded that ser- vice planning needed to be more responsive to local needs and that local governments should play a greater role in planning. We found that: The formal mechanisms for involving local governments in transit planning are still weak. The RTB's record of involving local governments is mixed and shows considerable room for RTB needs improvement stronger links to local The RTB has no ongoing advisory committee of local officials, and it rarely governments. uses the Metropolitan Council's local advisory committee. The RTB effective- ly involved local officials in the development of the Transit Service Needs As- sessment, but did not solicit enough local input for the Implementation and Financial Plan. About 53 percent of the region's cities with over 10,000 population reported at least one contact between RTB staff and city officials in the past year. Metropolitan Transit Taxing District (outlined) zvj METROPOLITAN TRANSIT PLANNING In our survey of city officials in the transit taxing district, we found that: • A slight majority of city officials believe that their city's transit service is adequate. However, officials in cities with populations over 10,000 are more dissatisfied with service. • While some city officials report that their involvement in the transit planning process increased since 1984, most believe their level of involvement remains unchanged. When asked which one type of service would most help their cities, local offi- cials from larger cities preferred bus service that helps residents circulate within the city or travel to adjacent suburbs. In contrast, officials in smaller cities prefer improved service to the central cities. COORDINATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY The Legisla- The 1984 Legislature tried to clarify the division of responsibilities among the ture should transit planning agencies, but we found that: give the Responsibility for some transit issues and functions remains Metropolitan unclear. Council and One problem requiring the Legislature's attention is the lack of adequate RTB greater regional involvement in the planning and coordination of light rail transit roles in the (LRT). The 1987 Legislature gave primary responsibility for initiating and developing LRT to county regional rail authorities, partly because of Hen- nepin County's willingness to proceed quickly and with county financing. light rail. Meanwhile, state law only allows the RTB to do detailed LRT planning be- tween downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul, and the Metropolitan Council's existing authority to plan and coordinate LRT is probably very limited. Al- though the counties and regional agencies have expressed willingness to coor- dinate future LRT development, we think that regional LRT coordination is too important to leave solely to the good intentions of these parties. It makes sense to vest final authority for coordination with the Metropolitan Council, as assisted by the RTB. Even if the Legislature further clarifies this and other planning respon- sibilities (as recommended), we concluded that some lack of clarity may be in- herent in the current planning structure. For example, it is difficult for the RTB to separate itself from operational concerns when it administers more than 40 transit contracts and is responsible for the implementation of new or restructured programs. We reviewed the RTB's accountability to the Metropolitan Council, since one of the board's main functions is to implement Metropolitan Council policies and plans. We found that: • The council's oversight of the RTB during the past three years was relatively weak, but its newly -proposed long-range transit plans provide better guidance than the existing plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xvii In particular, the council's proposed policies: (1) include corresponding strategies and performance measures, (2) outline necessary elements of the RTB's Implementation and Financial Plan, and (3) more closely integrate tran- sit and highway decision making. However, the council's policies do not ade- quately address means by which the council may affect local land use, which strongly influences the effectiveness of transit. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The creation of the RTB in 1984 was a bold legislative initiative, and many na- tional observers point to the Twin Cities' transit structure as a model for other cities. Although it is too early to make final judgements on many of the ef- forts undertaken in the past few years, we think there has been some progress toward the 1984 Legislature's goals. In particular, the RTB improved the region's transit service planning and took some steps toward making the tran- sit system more cost-effective. However, we concluded that: Although RTB's overall • The RTB has not yet proved itself to be an effective problem solver, track record is and it is unclear whether the Legislature's restructuring of transit planning has been a success. mixed, it is premature to The Legislature should reassess the situation in two or three years to see if alter the tran- further progress has been made and RTB's performance has improved. We sit planning will be prepared to help the Legislature with such a reassessment. structure now. The RTB plans to develop some new transit services in 1988, and we think it should have an opportunity to implement these and other programs before the Legislature determines whether to maintain a separate planning agency "between" the Metropolitan Council and transit operators. In the meantime, the RTB needs to (1) do better implementation planning, (2) be a forum for ideas, (3) innovate, (4) be more accountable to the Metropolitan Council, (5) improve its internal oversight, and (6) formalize its relationships with other agencies on key responsibilities. We recommend that the Legislature take the following actions: • Authorize the Metropolitan Council to approve or disapprove the plans of regional rail authorities, based on their consistency with council plans and policies. The council already has this authority over county and municipal plans. • Authorize the RTB to: (1) participate in light rail planning throughout the region by repealing the portion of Minn. Stat. §473398 that limits the RTB's LRT planning to the corridor between downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul, and (2) set regional LRT standards, with the assistance of an advisory team of local and regional officials. • Clarify whether the RTB has authority to: (1) initiate fare changes, (2) enforce sanctions against transit operators, (3) delegate responsibility to the MTC to broker certain services. • Amend the "tax feathering" statute in accordance with the 1984 Legislature's intent, by setting the percentage tax reduction that feathered cities will receive. • Consider reinstating the opportunity for cities to initiate "opt -out" -- service, perhaps effective in 1991. Although we are concerned that this could fragment regional transit service, coordination should be possible if the Legislature clarifies the RTB's authority to apply regional standards to opt -out cities. We also recommend the following actions by the transit planning agencies: • To improve its decision making, the RTB should: (1) limit retreats to internal matters, not policy issues, (2) establish ad hoc committees to work with staff on special projects, (3) compare the current year's actual and planned staff expenditures before approving the next year's workplan, and (4) periodically assemble members' information requests for staff. In general, the board and chair should strive for more open communication and consensus building. • The RTB should obtain more input from local government staff and -~ the council's Transportation Advisory Board. The RTB should devote more staff time to working with local governments. _ • The RTB should encourage cities to develop formal proposals for -� local transit improvements and establish criteria for selecting proposals. • The RTB should immediately establish a policy stating which transit services will be eligible to be bid out. • Every six months, the RTB should prepare for the Metropolitan Council a brief summary of progress in implementing council policies. Each biennium, the council should prepare for the • The RTB's next Implementation and Financial Plan should more clearly outline: (1) the expected decision-making process for major The issues, (2) justifications for recommended services and capital Metropolitan facilities, (3) priorities among recommended services and facilities. Council should hold RTB more • The Metropolitan Council's Systems Committee should review major RTB work products, such as the needs assessment and fare accountable. policies report, even in cases where the review is not legislatively mandated. • The RTB should obtain more input from local government staff and -~ the council's Transportation Advisory Board. The RTB should devote more staff time to working with local governments. _ • The RTB should encourage cities to develop formal proposals for -� local transit improvements and establish criteria for selecting proposals. • The RTB should immediately establish a policy stating which transit services will be eligible to be bid out. • Every six months, the RTB should prepare for the Metropolitan Council a brief summary of progress in implementing council policies. Each biennium, the council should prepare for the EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xix Legislature a brief summary of trends in its Transportation Policy Plan performance measures. • Within one week of adopting policies or policy statements, the RTB should formally notify the Metropolitan Council's transit liaison. If there is any question about the consistency of RTB policy with council policy, the liaison should bring the matter to the council for its consideration. • The RTB should take the lead role in clarifying responsibility for emergency services planning, transit station site planning, and quality assurance monitoring. It should also clarify the responsibilities of its advisory committees. • As part of its new Transportation Policy Plan, the Metropolitan Council should clarify agency responsibilities for regional ridesharing and the encouragement of transportation management organizations. The council should help cities plan future land use development in ways that accommodate transit. a) en (ron c I LL J 0 cu r� 0 L Ord ■i. t� 0 L. 4-J li�� LM M wMa0 a - N.0 01C C m O m CY 0Y L W U'jH E Tci) a C O O N N L N ��'_•� 66E U C- .- O ._ O O am C 7 c[3 a) ii a) tCy c �_ -1-- n Q) .- 0 7 m c`a � o 0,9L y N U n�'a o ¢¢ Nn 3 � � `o 0 c ME cs•� c � ° � °' 3 ► • c m~ w ami m c mL N canto N'o 3 ` Cr U ami ro �ro cn c -o c o �a L v0) ui _++:F ao0E°n�ofl_ .-nom Qc`�ornLa�cn�mEc?cn�,E �o_Q Q' n� C ; Em m �� x� c L a) o c� c E c > co - co - �, D U a) c) oY Ol E=Wis- U°--mOac°� -o�� ,�L��'o3c}nc'v0)-c d °'`oma-n>i� E�0� ��E�_o">o)� LLo=o �NOR)am3N?cn0��axim0 (n �aticEC �,-_Nc C i C._ m yy N N E m F' �,Ew. O N"-- L C N U- _ c OM5 )- d.� m =� L� O a o- 0 0 0 c 7. O c) 7 U O O- _ n� O �y Cc)LC+-OCUE -c tnD 7T N Ec�4i0C+- Q.;. O O o!n cY cL Q.od 0� �r ° cu T5 U C O N N E� O 0� E �•-'� O U N C F, y'da 3�0��EcUu ° a'�Q��avcoc��a�E�un� o)ao m�,am E � Lo CL N�a = CNQv am4) w mc° •V_Yo) Q aE�c�anc ncom °o E +r:�cc c0rn�EEcL6 c0myNOar000 °L_Q - � L O n mN OO U U m�Q)�TO UDLL.c CL O OC O C a> nTN OC D O0 ( O Qlj VEHICULAR ACCIDENT PROFILE 1987 CALENDAR YEAR 1. Six accidents occurred while backing a city vehicle. All six accidents were determined preventable because vehicle operators failed to take all possible and appropriate precautionary actions either before or after backing. (1986 - 6) 2. Eleven of the accidents involved collisions with other vehicles. (1986 - 13) four of these accidents were considered preventable. (1986 - 3) 3. Thirteen accidents occurred off a designated roadway/highway. Six of which occurred on City park property and/or paths. 4. The following were contributing factors in seven accidents: a. Snow and Ice - Six accidents (1986 - 4) b. Obstructed view trees) at intersection - One accident (1986 - 1) 5. Nine preventable accidents occurred during the daytime. (1986 - 5) 6. Three preventable accidents occurring during evening hours. (1986 - 2) 7. One accident occurred while plowing snow. (1986 - 4) S. Two accidents involved a police squad protecting an accident scene. (1986- 1) 9. Four city vehicles were involved in accidents while accomplishing Public Safety objectives (responding to medical emergency, vehicle pursuit, roadblock). (1986 - 3) 10. Preventable accidents involved the following employees: Four - Park Maintenance; Two - Fire; Two - Police; Two - Streets; Two - temporary City employees; One - Park and Recreation. 11. Full time employees in Sewer & Water, Equipment Center, Community Development, Finance, Engineering, and Administration had a record of ZERO preventable accidents. 12. Vehicular accidents resulted in an estimated $8,807 in damage to City vehicles. (1986 - $99238) 1987 1986 1985 TOTAL VEHICULAR ACCIDENTS REVIEWED BY SAFETY COMMITTEE: 28 25 15 Total Accidents Determined Preventable: 13 5 6 Total Accidents Determined Non -Preventable: 13 18 9 Total Accidents Undeterminable: 2 2 0 1. Six accidents occurred while backing a city vehicle. All six accidents were determined preventable because vehicle operators failed to take all possible and appropriate precautionary actions either before or after backing. (1986 - 6) 2. Eleven of the accidents involved collisions with other vehicles. (1986 - 13) four of these accidents were considered preventable. (1986 - 3) 3. Thirteen accidents occurred off a designated roadway/highway. Six of which occurred on City park property and/or paths. 4. The following were contributing factors in seven accidents: a. Snow and Ice - Six accidents (1986 - 4) b. Obstructed view trees) at intersection - One accident (1986 - 1) 5. Nine preventable accidents occurred during the daytime. (1986 - 5) 6. Three preventable accidents occurring during evening hours. (1986 - 2) 7. One accident occurred while plowing snow. (1986 - 4) S. Two accidents involved a police squad protecting an accident scene. (1986- 1) 9. Four city vehicles were involved in accidents while accomplishing Public Safety objectives (responding to medical emergency, vehicle pursuit, roadblock). (1986 - 3) 10. Preventable accidents involved the following employees: Four - Park Maintenance; Two - Fire; Two - Police; Two - Streets; Two - temporary City employees; One - Park and Recreation. 11. Full time employees in Sewer & Water, Equipment Center, Community Development, Finance, Engineering, and Administration had a record of ZERO preventable accidents. 12. Vehicular accidents resulted in an estimated $8,807 in damage to City vehicles. (1986 - $99238) ON THE JOB ACCIDENT PROFILE 1987 CALENDAR YEAR 1987 1986 ACCIDENTS REVIEWED BY SAFETY COMMITTEE: 35 31 Accidents determined non -preventable - 32 28 Accidents determined preventable - 3 2 Accidents Undetermined - 0 1 TOTAL EMPLOYEE INJURY CLAIMS: 41 38 1. In 1987 there were 41 on-the-job employee injuries, of which 11 were OSHA recordable injuries. 71986: 38 on-the-job injuries; 11 OSHA recordable) 2. The 11 OSHA recordable injuries resulted in 58 lost work days and 20 work restricted activity days. (1986: 33 lost work days; 23 work restricted activity days) 3. Lost time accidents involved employees from the following divisions: Street - 3; Police - 2; Sewer & Water - 1; Fire - 1; and Building Inspection - 1. 4. Two lost time accidents were the result of back -related injuries. (1986 - 4) 5. The three preventable accidents involved employees from Streets, Fire and Environmental Divisions. 6. Medical expenses incurred to date for 1987 on-the-job injuries total $1,270 in 1987. (1986 - $19398) 7. Areas of the body injured most often were finger/hand (8), shoulder/back (7), face (4), leg/knee (4). 8. Work activities recording more than one injury include: No. of Injuries Subduing/arresting suspects 4 Fire suppression 2 Hammering/pounding 2 Spraying poison ivy 2 9. Work activities involving two or more employees working together recorded four injuries. --- 10. Eleven injuries involved Park Maintenance division employees, nine of whom were temporary Park Maintenance employees. 11. Injuries by other employee groups include: Streets Fire Police Sewer & Water Office Environmental No. of Injuries 8 7 6 4 4 1 _gMWY OF ON T}E Al KJYY COSTS I Y DIVISION 19SO--1987 DIVISION �� Ekx;icierits Costs 19801 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 TOTAL 3 2 2 1 2 4 3 4 21 Sever & Water 258.00 415.20 185.87 24.00 250.15 171417.75 0 424.00 187974.97 1 3 2 2 2 3 11 11 35 Park Maintenance 28.00 196,00 0 76.35 82253.11 9,722.06 144.00 473.00 187892.52 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Envirom ental 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 4 8 6 7 8 6 47 Police 155.70 171191.80 153.30 31249.26 2,324.74 267130.17 0 1,254.00 50,458.97 2 1 2 1 1 4 5 8 24 Streets 41.00 22.00 44.49 25.00 21.00 191.25 0 3,091.75 37436.49 4 1 7 3 2 3 4 7 31 Fire 271.27 12.00 17268.63 659.90 559455.31 405.85 523.06 19850.10 607446.12 3 3 1 2 0 1 1 0 11 Equip. Maint. 65.40 89.80 99.00 70.00 0 30.00 0 0 354.20 2 1 2 0 0 2 3 5 15 Offices 230.00 292.67 17.00 0 0 58.00 439.40 568.00 19605.07 1 3 2 0 1 1 2 0 10 Reti:reation 66.00 89.00 128.55 0 21.00 19.00 292.44 0 615.99 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 6 Not Attributable 19.81 122.56 400.50 49.30 31392.43 6,221.41 0 0 10,206.01 20 20 23 18 15 26 38 41 201 TOTAL (U5T5 17135.18 18,431.03 2,297.34 4,153.81 691717.74 60,195.49 1,398.90 7,660.85 164,990.34 1 4/1/80 - 1/1/81 K(W6 CD+Ia 5ATICN GLA N5 SZMWY By WAJ TOTAL BODY PART INJURED CLAIMS Head/ Arm/ Tnx*/ Leg/ YENS COST Eye Faoe Back Fingers Shoulder Thigh Foot Multiple Other 20 1 1 4 3 1 0 5 1 4 1980 $ 11135.18 39.00 89.37 315.40 168.70 102.30 124.00 156.00 140.41 20 3 2 5 5 1 1 2 0 1 1981 18,431.03 74.00 33.60 17,117.40 315.10 389.00 292.67 86.70 122.56 23 1 2 2 6 2 0 6 1 3 1982 29297.34 261.65 306.18 20.49 418.30 209.87 276.55 17.00 1 787.30 18 4 2 2 3 0 2 3 1 1983 47153.81 200.95 24.00 103.66 610.30 21926.70 65.00 49.30 15 2 2 4 3 0 0 2 1 1 1984 699717.74 99.00 2-50.15 10,409.96 89.89 557455.31 21.00 31392.43 26 1 0 8 7 3 2 3 0 2 1985 60,195.49 186.85 43,373.52 453.65 219.00 91741.06 6,2.21.41 38 1 4 7 13 1 1 8 2 1 1986 1,398.90 81.00 61.40 415.10 114.00 142.44 584.66 6 4 41 3 3 6 8 3 1 7 1987 71660.85 253.00 1,254.00 2,246.00 113.00 562.10 21004.75 11000.00 12 22-8.00 17 201 16 16 38 48 11 7 36 TOTALS 164,990.34 11195.45 29018.70 73,897.87 17776.30 19624.71 9CV-97 719199.73 1,259.00 107941.41 rn Ln I w w w w VQ w w w w � M ir1 C) n OCN O O O � � N p� Lr\ opo O C� w w fn LrN �— ; o N co n, r• Q O p 0 R O Q f+'1 N tr1 N N N U x H on o n, �p ^r1 �D ^•1 O� CO O\ co 0 U C., m co N 0 O F -- Ir 0. LU C_ Q O M Ll') M r) c n J W E N N fV N N N N w r w U L� U U U U V U U ,,U X V U J H 000300000010 00 0 L. }-D 00-0000000�t07C11i ~ O r) LL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >u0000C)OCOOO LC LOtri W x C7 r) M N N N[ N E E M fV = U U u U U u U V U 00000Sg00 0000v(D'oao N ry D0UClN0L"7'(Ur'7, V U D U O O O D b0:)co OEMr� W rCDnODOC 0040OocOOG000000000 o a 0rw00(� CJ NNNNNCdNN G O G O O O O 0 O O O d 000 0 0:O J 0 0 0 0 .0 O ' 0000M0O0000 6666666 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 D 0 00 0 00 0 C � I W W I I 00 00 ¢(0 co O 1 H >D 1 o u o Oct Ct1 .p ! I t 00 O O LL: R > t� W M 0000000000 0 ! 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 00000000080 008 1 0 0 1 1 XV N 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 S 000 S 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p O 0 I W I IZ DODO 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O Q 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O C;,5 p 000 1 �- I CL ¢ I x I W O Q I W I QU7O W f Q W 0 r x OF-.0000000000000()00 O G 0 0 0 0 0 0 tt7 00000000000 0 0 0 1 a W O oO.00OOOC OOGtrOCC:OG000000ON 0000000000C 000 t o Dzo°00000000ooaa00000000 od0000Cl)00000'000 CL v4 I ¢ 1 F- •• D+ C O O O O o 0 C O o O 0 0 000000000000 O O O O R O C O O C 0 4 0 0 ¢ Co m I ¢oovoovo0ovonavoovo0oaoaoo 0000`0000000 DOO ! <1: I QON00000000-00Q0000 0000q:c o-6 :Miq"rioQ0000 I . . . 1 z; D 1 w an N rym n❑Nw 1 .. ^+ D I DLL int.;. �.,��r.nr..nn I -i ca t --O CbQ7A[, @^J 007C]R[LG)WRQCOCOQ�IraLGzD©U�G3�7dROQJG3Nr,NmNN OmR ' ¢+G J t7 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ � � N, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ED M\ I�WU)C'3ri-0.0i' 0 0,..n."'0Nr4Nn0NN•0A� AD,NM :r n N. \ Q U OAF-O-"CJ-�Oo000C1fOfY�N•-,N"I -4N 4ONNN.-r �tOntttt��eTn _Opal I W c^J Ora czrNnn ...,t�vv�rrann a on •n-40NN nM©wr'`c Ani nrNc\v - • 0 oov000000000000000o-.-""_.( ,,...,..N - Z ` a00000000000 wU-000000000Ao,00000000c000m000000000coo oQo i nF- c o>_cn a o x I ¢C)M a > m L < r a ¢ z � o �1 (Wn�v C 1 ❑O.. a¢ IJz CL x LO U)Cn 17_QU]cncn 1 U3 _ F- Z _ Q_ -- W W Mt D tD C! cn wW +WiWUJ x .. J-JQ¢QW I cM 11J U] o W wceaaL�csa U 0.aaaau I . r- yw z z z " z Z Z Z W F- ¢ I Z ".. V ..J 0 .r cn Q Q Z ." I.- Q rn ." " CO cn " +- w w W IL .. a_0 x mx:LLL=¢:LL�.- - W¢w-J-JJJJ m i x-1 O U lLi WwgU 3 V DDcta.a w I U W '-� ►" w :U Z 3 W w F- W W W W J W W W W •. w W {� = E '"` '''' to �- sr I 00 w [}il.�. MZZ¢0 trxXWlzUxMQ Li = �O� ZZJ-JJ� w l C7 O� U1x[l�YY2J QDDDDZDDJ J F- O 11rM UCnUJUO'IU3mmm x°_F-t-i"-H D I-!~DYDF pF- (L�-W DODDD� .JW I w 1: `O } ¢z¢¢QZZZZ Z=¢li:2ZZZLL+ZZ0Q=p0ul<u �UWr--F`rLSC7 Y _J '_; DgC?.JcrtJQ❑00 q4�Q Q¢��U1lOLnlLO2�UW]jY¢CC:UUC! wa:Z I �¢ w C: U V►-� +-. JJWWWZ ZRQ ! U {fl LC} 2 R Z R d] Cn to U2 �, U R CQ Cr N Ln t13 ¢ w D D Z z Z ►- Y ix L zZ¢DZDQQ¢¢iZZz-ZZZ2Cn Z2ZZZZ¢Zzmzzzz ! ( f C= �' U? Ix LL ¢ M Q ¢ 0 w W W to .. -� O C? O Q ►+ D O r. +r ...� ., p .. p ,, Q¢ Z Z J (n Q ¢fir -.."."►"Q.,. -.Q '" i Z= A ¢at- i--D:F-H- ¢ t p.. ~~" QQ¢¢07¢¢F-t- F -H Maa:U¢tz r� QOl xCr` i1)Ln W LntLcocncnU7�r�U7cnocclxx�o �zzrn fncnU)ui n]�LnNm❑DD J ZWW WWOWW w LLJ4 ►n �Uq) U? U7 2 2 2 2¢ U CJi (ny " U u u (_ ►� U C: U7 UJ Ori [11 2 U7 U� W E. 'Z Z z o R kx Z U M Z W U U U U U¢ Z ,'Z,' Z Q¢ Q (` �¢¢ Z Z Z Z U Z¢ F_ U Z N ♦-., ►" M a" r" U] , M . SQ ► F -Q• ¢F -f -F -I -0J -"❑J lJj U JJ►"..�".. QZ xx Ln Z cr,z ¢¢ JQ_1Q¢C¢J ¢QCrl ~JWJC2>-crjr `" Z Ctl �+i CLUZO_ Zuuuu"Dd40DDDDZ CLCx.d0�vMaZ�-xa-0-TIIMZ � QO] mcnDMDMm ViMQUU7 MCL::UUU*c OC � Q J U fn (n U7 U7 rl U1 U ►" :: U] Q C O O O U L7 U] 0 C7 J J CC UC9 .WillQUq W W¢> U W J w ZZ zxZwM W I CrZ>►+ J ltrts]pWp�� '�¢2>r Z q ww a¢UC:W J Q lr I U7 UJZ¢ ¢Y Y�x �0F w W OD..I J RQJ2 Z._: W Z Q I >~ !-QY02a 1- LtJZF-CC w7 >Z z7Q�J7 zJ�U•+Z+WQ�U 2 1 2U ZJ -Q£0Z) qLL Z ltlQlL �C]>�� Q J '-�>-U I F - ? lL¢ •criLLC <¢¢¢ate, -,q D¢w oC732UJta r ¢ _OIJI WY2.Q _W_!U)q W RCSO W CDx xY�Q� W<L) 4 1 Vj> t tv z cr rr O z cr ') ¢ cr 7 U Ln ¢¢ w q ::c o z I J U < ¢ F- CO W Z CO Q (n D w W _ Z q _ _ Z Z ►" r+ J z Q Y W I .. )'-•►-0 Utz >YJZ Ucr Cr: ]C2ZZ4>+-•�rLwz wo .rvz � > Z ! � J _JCY� ¢f-►+.-. JO: (n F_ VF-F-OON(n•"r. W Nz'" I QD U¢2C7W.1> DWfZ*+LJ]¢WY(LoaX< "�"U3ZCnWJJYWWL�JWF- �YYU�F ! �� Y� "o -wj<o0 "_jD <,c0'tt]:Z.�Jt7W W_JJ Y0UJZ) lL[AU_1�+_l ! LnUTGJXwOCLQILJ nWJcriJi=Za�U1CnDX2UwlLpU4[Uri�WCLu1DDD q M010..0.. JO> qw Y L7 CV t'1 to N Y� P CD N A C') ct rn n 0� N i"7 O Is7 L1f u� O b [7 v in O N R O�i ^�CdN000DOQlOr7L'r7C'l•.�ln '- NN NN 00o000v riff O �� hRRR ['1 r7 M r)M-.rl 00V -)W) aOOOOp(`2c7t'7C'7r7n0 nn OCD MMcp-C-o-AA0-A ANNNMC7L'IC*PPPPUAC*lTA 1 U z 000000000 000000000000000 O 0 O O O O O n 0 G O Op O p p ,0 1 .. A I O II O n v v c c C O t J i1 c0 O 'U U U, m .m j m _N C OU m aci = E o -? o E a) U M) c m - Lto o L E a -c- f6 (n=3 m c G O m u � � m � U Of 6 m r✓ � � + c U O E 4 m ti o c. f- c L Qin•- L C m 70� + � a m n -0 d m U + N 0 — r m ^ o CD T a UL + ! L ti W O� T 0 ` o � N 13 � 2 � h Q1 • a� _C o m o L N w O � b ' "Earn: N m crcn ami fA 7 cn q,Q� 1 cn 0mi Z0Ni -j =' a0' J O m c a N m ZE'�mi oc 3 tr Z w Q y > Z N O Q y,E yi m � o m . Vv O •0.1 W 0 o � 20Z=c�nCC� E1 0tzo Q- v� U .�~pp �3J3o o C')0 zc).E o0z Z r Un N Q1 • oQ Qo D v r E❑ o ff= N N O O m y u [%] C C D O z F- a m In m .t t ro E f O �v °;° cAL.E o9Z 3 1 N cd ate,¢ �Yo o O y O a 2 T H v a T C W O • Y E I _ o 0 3:2 zC) oz c 3 u 3 3 Q • W (n N do O m mm E :6 -Q 0 • W u �- O m f c d � U O Q o M CM -0 E�°=="' O ' z �_ 0 _U3 ZU.c OQZ , d NO Lo ii OQO HJ F=-' zQQu�Q JH_� 2: : o - T- " E4' - 2 O� � ' -�WQ—W - EXU. "� �w �_� a _ Z0 c: ooZ °� w o • 1 w sassouill i f - • N¢ leuogedn000 iayle iiy 1— u, 1 M ewneil paleadej L411- r 0C: Y E r paleioosse siaplosi4 Q r 1 0 7 p 0 N slua6e jeois(yd • ci of anp siapiosip • ut p m Z (sleualew 31.x01 10 sloa;;a n wyQ Q aiwolsAs} 6wu0siod v r' Z E o(h sluabe o xol of anp r -_�0 E Aa. v sua�lipuoo Ajoiejidsa 13 1 LL cn O M m 0 s6unj ayl ;o u / .c cu v seseasip isnpLLJ a m Ecu } slapios�p Jo saseas pc - H W -- O ui�s jeuoitednoop VI W O X o O 1 1 �c ' m ¢ fl -��00 p Q EW Uri �2 0 • z3J3o zU.� o�z r m • y i to O p °oomzN • oar p Y -' Em �� uyccoOz �n - • N } U) a, }• v ° a¢ ¢v r NN Q v O ar=N E,� Eom--cn rvm23U) Z— Z v • 3 1 o� rn m Yco_o T a1 C) r p Y EW °r V _ zU.E Z m ' w on Elo am �N o a x • ? �v"� �iUoL2o z �33l3 ZU_co�Z N �1<wQ _ m=p Z Ix U. H e E¢ o L 7 rl C C7 O Z r p N F - z LU O U W w ro G co Q) r-+ z U 0 m .t ro L �4 N N cd ate,¢ a W Q w W La. r Q O W Q g W J Q Z Q w uj N¢ w 1— Cr z F- 0 �� +tt+`, t.� -. tii-T.f.awe�u-�ti .� a�.•,rfN +.r.•w.. ,w.ry,rti ga..ti e+r is m CD O Ce) rn T10 N E t OH W CD cc Z 2 w '000- cro LL Two (D cr- (n J z �¢w c LL O (n U) LU a�W v _ U) O Q� L z o J Q m U) J U Z �0 N m - ca► co < E g Irc) m `; n LL a zO v oDw N m a: z 0� Ui O� ¢w �z H � � J n0� CL. U) W W �CCcr c`o Ln z >- H U o Q U H N W. ic M W >-0 oz CL 0 20 W Q7 U) 3 o C U_ wCC C) v7 _ i Cl) 0 'a O t w O v cLLJ W 2 L V � � 0 yam, Q3 u= � Q m q� b CL U Qj a C7) t _ to m c _ C -N m O C C m Z; A m O in m O -k -� 0-0 m V' 0� L O T U T OL ro L" j CL a m U m O C O (r- 4 h` C m 0 m[ .�N `�-e� f°cm comm 3 E 0 m E m m o ro L o m ' a_ m� m[C Eve 3p � -- .m E m E m o m ❑ n ❑ cn <, p U U_, E <:0 0 U' y Q E N W Q J co v ¢ .11 00 ;: 3 m C m ai a N U m m U p � v rn N Q {!S w (n 0-o w m C O O ro 0 0 m a m O m cc W 7 0 - LL o -{ 0 W L m m m m Z v cn L) z? y m , ppm 0 v L i.' Ln �_. �_ ' Q L x4.rc W-0o.T c o m o m C N m m 3 z U LLtL�U�H0CL�a v m d eL'v :ice z�� m W > c� > m CL w? sn n p � U c, . f4 o ci O Z9 U E o p c m O V va �� c Ev cn o cEc Q m m C-U C L cc yell tau) m E E y m E .� � Y c v `) O SA oO rn�cn C � � p m !\i N O O m ui O c0 V L O z c \ Q U O O r X+ U w 0 C N 0 R 0 0 c ti � � ._ N CO c m m �y Q a C7) t _ to m c _ C -N m O C C m Z; A m O in m O -k -� 0-0 m V' 0� L O T U T OL ro L" j CL a m U m O C O (r- 4 h` C m 0 m[ .�N `�-e� f°cm comm 3 E 0 m E m m o ro L o m ' a_ m� m[C Eve 3p � -- .m E m E m o m ❑ n ❑ cn <, p U U_, E <:0 0 U' y Q E N W Q J co v ¢ .11 00 ;: 3 p� Y- 1 s J J z L n_ o o m .25 ai a N 3.m�.;ciC m � 'r- CL _ m o c r+ LL m c C o-.. m m C m - 0 am (n 0-o w m C O O ro 0 0 m a m O m cc W 7 0 - LL o -{ 0 W L m m m m Z v cn L) z? y m v h ct ►n/ tiw 0 v L i.' Ln �_. �_ ' Q L x4.rc W-0o.T c o m o m C N m m 3 z U LLtL�U�H0CL�a v m d eL'v :ice Q❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑a❑�❑ Z W r�'nvas W� 7 cn n � f—a d d - u : E- o *J -D c m L m ° L)mE C m L c, . f4 o ci O Z9 U E o p c m O V va �� yrO o f4 `� v r J m L a cO E o m 0 vi R5 Y �. c c��a cEc Q m m C-U C L CD r O c m tau) m E E y m E .� � Y c v `) O SA L rn�cn o NLLL U �C, a Z Cvrn W L N mro-C C c U. •_ Y m Q L 2 C m D O ro A C O C u 0.4 O 0 c 93 o, 3 o m �� o f o� xa m v, o T m E N n H3 w t v 0. L cc m O m = w^ \ 0 w Z o N L m Q= U W `* z - U -C fn -C m O. O t o I ca x J C7) t _ to m c _ C -N m O C C m Z; A m O in m O -k -� 0-0 m V' 0� L O T U T OL ro L" j CL a m U m O C O (r- 4 h` C m 0 m[ .�N `�-e� f°cm comm 3 E 0 m E m m o ro L o m ' a_ m� m[C Eve 3p � -- .m E m E m o m ❑ n ❑ cn <, p U U_, E <:0 0 U' y Q E N W Q J co v ¢ .11 00 ;: 3 p� Y- 1 s J W o Y 3.m�.;ciC m o toots Cl -, _ m o c r+ LL m c C o-.. m m C m - 0 am Z N to •N N_ C G m LU 'n > Cc. m m t cE CT) :.+ Q r;�: o°i m C m m 4 o - ►n/ tiw ` Vy ' Q L x4.rc W-0o.T c o m o m C N m m 3 z U LLtL�U�H0CL�a v m 0 V = Q❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑a❑�❑ Z U O m S- O [7 • -r 0 co m L m ° L)mE c, . f4 o ci O Z9 U E o p c m (�[� r _ -7& Z m�Q' cl cq m caro r J m L a cO E o m 0 vi W ocn CD r O c m usELm Lu CD ¢ .11 00 ;: 3 _Z vc.fm+. o tll C 4W y W o Y 3.m�.;ciC m Cl -, _ m o c r+ LL m c C o-.. m m C m Z N to •N N_ C G m LU 'n > Cc. m m t cE CT) :.+ Q m o.7?-vmi� m e �Q �7 �C'cn a "row o - C U m- V V'z- cc F- m mom' Qf 0 m t .0 C C C E A 0 10 c O ro Vy ' Q L x4.rc W-0o.T c o m o m C N m m 3 z U LLtL�U�H0CL�a v m Q❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑a❑�❑ Z U m L m ° L)mE o ci O Z9 U E o p c m (�[� r J m L a cO E o m 0 vi W ocn CD r O c ? A �' m 3 CO m Y m o Z Q `) O SA L O (0 t- > 0 Q) y am- "U. >a m Z Cvrn W L N mro-C C c Z0 Om u 0.4 O 0 c 93 o, 3 o m �� o f o� xa m v, N n H3 w t v 0. L cc m O m = V mm c Z c � 1 ►- AY.rn cc m m n Ir ¢ .11 00 ;: 3 o r m CL -o o c a wr c 3 R c a� a ro _O E W o Y Q Z �= T m m 0 m O O C:LU Cl -, m E N ai E c Z N to •N N_ C G m LU 'n > Cc. m m t cE CT) :.+ Q g A vo J>. m p V in ti _- miy" O L a m m ro p N m J C CL E �] Z G O p D O E U O m c Q W ui O Z7 .c U U 4 '� m c U C U CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: January 21. 1983 TO: James G. Willis - City Manaaer / FROM: Richard J. CarlQuist - Public Safety Directo SUBJECT UPDATE - GOOSE MANAGEMENT CONTRACT I received a telephone call today from the Mavor concerning an update on our Goose Manaaement contract. He suaQested that this information be put in the Council information packet. On December 2nd. Dr. James A. Cooper and I visited five sites in Plvmouth that had been previously reported as aoose r)roblem areas. The sites were: 1. Parkers Lake 2. Medicine Lake 3. Timber Shores Park 4. Zachary Lane Plavfield 5. Cimarron Ponds The last area mentioned is private property. Dr. Cooper thought all of the visiting areas, with the exception of Zachary Qlavfield. would be appropriate sites to trap geese. He Questioned whether the Zachary olavfield site was one used during the molting stage. He raised that Question when he looked at all of the fences in the area. and indicated to me that geese are extremely paranoid and would not like to be in an area where thev sensed thev were confined. He su4- aested that more than likelv it was an ideal spot for geese to f1v into. either before or after the molting staae. to eat the grass. On December 31st I received a contract from Dr. Cooper to be signed by the Citv of Plvmouth authorizing the Universitv of Minnesota to trap geese in the aforementioned areas. The original amount for the contract was $16.000. which was predicated on a cost of $1.000 for each of the four sites. plus a commitment to do this prosect over four continuous vears. The Council would only have to deal with it one vear at a time. and there is a termination agreement which provides 30 days advance notice. I recontacted Dr. Cooper concerning this contract. and suQQested that it be amended to two separate contracts. The main contract between the Citv and his organization should list three sites. $1.000 each. over a 4 -year period. with a total contract amount of $12.000. The other contract would be one initiated directly with Cimarron Ponds Homeowners Association with a provision for us to sign off on a 50150 basis: in other words our commitment in that oroiect would be a maximum of $500 for each vear that we participated. James G. Willis January 21. 1988 Page Two On the date of this memo. I contacted Larry Gillette. Wild Life Manager for Hennepin Countv Parks. The purpose of my phone call was to suaaest that his oraanization may want to participate in the goose removal oroaram. Mr. Gillette is a longtime friend of Dr. CooAer. datina back to 1973, when the original goose population studies were made. Mr. Gillette stated that thev used Dr. Cooper's services in 1985 and 1986 at the French Park site. In 1985. 56 geese were removed: and in 1986. 156 geese were removed. Mr. Gillette stated that the noose population moves about the Medicine Lake area. and is in effect one flock. When thev made the large removal in 1986. thev had to ao to East Beach to remove the birds! He said that then have a very flexible agreement with Dr. Cooper. and will look at their problem sometime in May. and make a determination on whether to participate. RJC:as DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ST. PAUL DiSTR4CT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS �- 1135 U.S. POST OFFICE d CUSTOM HOUSE ST, PAUL. AAINNESOTA 55101.147p � y REP.r TO ATTENTION Of Construction -Operations �� Regulatory Functions r !r� � y C ' yAq -r-Hl We are enclosing for your information correspondence we received as a result of our public notice that described your project. E It is our policy to give you -the opportunity to offer us your proposed resolution or rebuttal of these comments. be sent this not make any response. However, aay response office so that potential resolutions or rebuttals can be coi sideresd ay in our final evaluation. If ve receive no response within e that no response is intended. of this letter, we will pres� In the interim. we will continue to process your application. �rCO✓ you ou have any questions, please write or call #el l'k _ (/-3 / -,. 7 7 5; 0. - B e ' A. Wopa t �j Enclosure Jt Chief, Regulatory Functions Branch ��r Construction -Operations Division U C-1 Lys 1 -'lack Oak --,Ln, MN 544 17 Re: 87-N5'F -a-3 I am Writing to you t.o express my concerns about the det�eloprr;erit of the wet.lar:d area off of �iW�'. r cnu �'L�ii%irr'. Larie. I feel the wetland should not be filled and develoi)ed . as do many other pe,-)Fle. In the summer, the area attracts waterfowl, which my family and neighbc>rs greatly en=o- Ir; the winter, the wetland is Enjoyed by crosscountry skiers, skaters, and walkers, and is the home of many animals, including pheasants and deer, all year round. It is nice to be able to walk down to the wetland and let my dog loose, where she can run and play without bothering people. It would be terrible to lose this land which so many enjoy. Another proplem that I fear, with the developement of this land, is an increase in traffic. With the developement will come more noise and more cars. We relish the peacefulness of our neighborhood, and enjoy seeing our neighbors` children riding down the street on their bikes. I understand that a new fire station is needed in our city, and agree it should be built here if this is the best location. But no other developing of the wetland should take place. I thank you for listening to my concerns, and hope you will reconsider your plans, and preserve the wetland. Sincerely, zzezl Gr Buhl RECEIVED JAN 2 1 88 REG U LA T OR Y F UNCTM BRANCH Jiro and Diane Welsh 165=0 29th Ave. :North Plymouth, M 55497 Dear Mr. Strandskov, Jams r% _ 9 , l 9%C we are writing in regards to case y CE'NS-CC-RF(87-1159-�'�). This is the request for a permit to discharge fill in the wetland area on Dunkirk Ave. in Plymouth. We live in the Mapledell Subdivision next to the laic in cxuestion. We mould like to request a public hearing in this case. tie feel trtat there are many un -answered questions. Our fears are real. I know that vou are aware of the high water table in this area. Vlan`• of the homec-,:ners have serious water problems already. The property bordering the t•:etlan_ area suffers from soggy backyards and very large cracks in the foundations, just to name a few. If this land is filled, we feel that it might cause more water problems and would further upset the water table in this area. A public hearing on this matter would hopefully, allow the residents to express anN, concerns, and, it would give the Army Corps of Engineers a chance to e�mlain the procedure in granting such a permit. I ma}, be a product of the 60's, but, I think that time has shoz:-n all of us that when we try to alter nature, we usually pay the price. Please give this matter very careful consideration before granting such a permit. It would be disasterous if someones property was more seriously damaged just for the sake of development. Also, we all choose to live in Plymouth because of the natural areas that we enjoy. It is wonderful to see the wildlife in the wetland area. To develo- this area would destroy what -:e have here. Sincerly, Diane C. Welsh January 18, 1988 District Engineer St. Paul District Corps of Engineers 1135 U.S. Post Office and Custom House St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1479 Attn: Regulatory Functions Branch Subject: CENCS-CO-RF(87-1154-23) City of Plymouth Landfill Permit Request Dear Sir: I am writing in response to the above Public Notice. I understand the purpose of the request is to make the wetland suitable as a building site for homes. I reside at the address given below which is lot 9, block 3 in the M apledell first addition that is adjacent to the proposed landfill. OPPOSED TO PROPOSAL I -request that you do not issue a permit for the detriment landfill as proposed since it is seriously at fault to the of my property and probably many of my neighbors. REFERENCE DOCUMENT'S - Enclosed --please find a copy of the Plat of Survey for my Note the property at 16520 29th Ave. N. which was built in 1969. elevation for the lower level at 995.5. I also refer you to the documents submitted to you by the City of Plymouth as prepared by Westwood Planning and Engineering Co. dated 7/21/87 and signed by thier engineer Reg. No. 17369 on 7/17/87. The Plat of the proposal lot for "Dunkirk Meadows" clearly states the design criteria of the N.W.L. (normal water level) as 992.51 H.W.L. (high water level) as 995.5 and the minimum basement level as equal to 997.5. FACTS FROM PROPOSAL Using the logic given by Westwood in the application, it appears the minimum elevation of basements in the proposed new homes would be 2 feet above the normal "high water level" (997.5 - 995.5). This would give a measure of assurance to prevent entrance of ground water into these new homes. For this, I applaud the intentions cf Westwood and the City of Plymouth. Similar consideration, however, should have been given to existing homes. Page 1 CENCS-CO-RF (87-1154-23 ) Landfill Permit Request City of r lymou th 1/18/88 REASONS FOR OPPOSITION ---------------------- The City of Plymouth and Westwood in the proposal must act in a responsible manner for the needs and welfare of existing property and people to prevent possible and/or probable flooding in the existing properties. They have not. By referring to the Plat for my property, you will see that I do not have the safety margin of 2 feet above the proposed hich water level. My lower level is AT the design H.W.L. of 995.5. In fact the proposal will ASSURE that I will have flooding problems. I point out again, the proposal from the City of Plymouth and Westwood supports this fact with new home proposals above the H.W.L. by 2 feet. By simple visual observation from my property, it is obvious there are many other homes in the area that have much LOWER levels. These would be BELOW both the proposed high and normal water levels! ADDITIONAL REASONS AND FACTS ---------------------------- Many of the homes in the immediate area were built in the late 1960s under Permits as issued by the City of Plymouth. At that time the City of Plymouth did not require drainage tile or a sump pump as a condition of the construction. In my particular case, the 1985; I experienced an excessive 1986 and again during the Summer home was purchased in December of flooding condition in the Spring of of 1987. The lower level of my home is completely finished and carpeted except for a small utility room. In the 1986 flooding, I lost use of the lower level for 6 months since all carpeting and padding had to be removed, padding replaced, repairs made, etc. This loss was NOT covered by my Allstate Homeowners Policy since it was due to "ground water". The 1987 flooding was not as severe due to the renovations, including a sump, I had done the previous year. However, water still flooded into 2 rooms. The home immediately adjacent at 16530 29th Ave. N., owned by Linda Walker, also had similar and severe flooding problems during the same time in Spring of 1986. This happened in spite of the fact that drainage tile and a sump pump were installed in that home. Page 2 1Y - CENCS-CD-RF t87-1154-23) Landfill Permit Request City of Plymouth 1/18/18 E RESPONSIBLE ACTION BY THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH -- - I am in -sympathy -with the desire of the City of Plymouth to develop the land in question. This should be done, however, in a way that considers the previous building permits and records of lower level elevations that were recorded and allowed by the City of Plymouth itself. To not do so, would be irresponsible action by the City of Plymouth and their engineers, Westwood. To protect the welfare of the people in existing homes from flooding, I believe the Corps of Engineers should reject the proposal as submitted and should request the City of Plymouth as follows. 1. State the design levels for N.W.L. and H.W.L. for the subject wetlands: a. At the time the first homes were built in the late 1960s. 1At the present time, that is, prior to the above b.proposal. 2. List the lower level elevations of the existing homes in the area adjacent to the proposed landfill. 3. Revise the proposal to control the design high e h water rleel to be 2 feet below the lowest level in 2 abodesign normal water level should be an additional 3 feet below this, as in the original proposal. 4. Send a copy of the revised proposal to all residences in the immediate area, identifing the lowest level in that residence. 5. Resubmit the revised proposal to the US Army Corps of Engineers for review, to ensure the necessary revisions have been made. I thank you in advance for your consideration and handling of the subject matter. Ve ytruly urs, James Parro 16520 29th Ave. N. Plymouth, MN. 55447 cc: Mapledell/Maplecreek Homeowners Association Bill Frenzel Encl: Plat of Survey for 16520 29th Ave. N. Page 3 Rcgistcrcl Tnjcssional Engin"--r and Land. SunNyor 2033 East Wayzata Boulclwa Way :ata, Ainnuota PLAT OF SURVEY ��' i - OF PROPERTY DF 1, -.1 -7- described described as follows: i r Scale: 1 in feet. • ogq.a icj, i ,r L \0.,P or ! CCS Cd L V� CERTIgICXTE OF LOCATION OF BUILDING I hereby certify that made a survey of the proposed location of the building on the above described property and that the location of said building is calpm ;y shown on the above lat. 07 71 /ow V� CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ��! I hereby certify that o & l9 -L surveyed the property described above and that the above plat is a correct representation of said survey. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ��! I hereby certify that o & l9 -L surveyed the property described above and that the above plat is a correct representation of said survey. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY � r ST, PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS Or- ENGINEERS 1135 U.S. POST OFFICE & CUSTOM HOUSE ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101.1474 REPLY TO J 41 ATTENTION OF Construction—Operations- Regulatory Functions 3 /R 31 z Ynl r 7-H�o 5�? We are enclosing for your information correspondence we received as a result of our public notice that described your project. It is our policy to give you, -the opportunity to offer us your proposed resolution or rebuttal of these comments. You need not make any response. However, any response should be sent to this office so that potential resolutions or rebuttals can be considered -in our final evaluation. If we receive no response within 15 days of this letter, we will presume that no response is intended. In the interim, we will continue to process your application. If you have any questions, please write or call 7,9- i� - -7 -7 7 5 B n A. Wopa t Chief, Regulatory Functions Branch Construction -Operations Division James S. Phillips 2910 Black Oak Lane Plymou!h Minnesota, 55447 612-5531755 janles S. PIl11I1PS January 19, 19SE District Engineer St. Paul District Corp of Engineers 1135 U.S. Post Office and Custom house St. Paul, MN 55101-1479 Attention: Regulatory Function Branch REF: CENCS-CO-RF (87-1154-23 Gentlemen: I am i n recei pt of a copy of the appl i cati on by the Ci ty of Plymouth for an Application for Permit to Discharge Fill Material. ThE permit is applied for under reference #CENCS-CO-RF (87-1154-23) under Section 404 Clean Water Act. My property at 2910 Black Oak Lane would be the second closest lot laying between the project site and the mitigation area. I am writing to express a tremendous concern for the feasibility of this project based on previous experience. When they filled my neighbor's lot, which lays one lot due north of my property, it raised the water level enough to adversely effect the water level in my basement thus necessitating a considerable amount of excess drainage through my basement sump pump system. In addition, when the axle plant was completed at the corner of Vicksburg Lane and Highway 55, a terrific amount of back fill utilized to create the site for the axle plant and the visual relief for the residential area raised the water level to such a point that upon, freezing, winter ground heave ruined my back deck and three -season porch which was added to my property. I would like to add that the City of Plymouth issued a building permit for this property and inspected the holes for the footings prior to putting the deck and three -season porch on the house. RECEIVED JAIL 2 2. 88 RNULATORYFUNCTIONS BRANC-H Page two It is my distinct feeling that any additional landfill in this site would have nothing but adverse effects on the residents currently bordering the area under question. I know that Mr. Glen Sampson has legal action pending against the City of Plymouth for similar problems created due to improper control of the water level in the area already. I am firmly convinced that any more fill in that area will cause problems not only for myself but many other residents of this particular area of Plymouth. Enclosed please find a copy of a letter I wrote on April 10, 1986, to Mr. Fred Moore, City Engineer, City of Plymouth. Should you have any questions concerning the above mentioned, please contact me at my office telephone 944-6112 or home telephone 553-1755. Thank you. Sincerely, James S. Phillips ' ENC. 4 2910 Black Oak Road Plymouth, MN 55447 April 10, 1986 Mr. Fred Moore, City Engineer City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Mr. Moore: �=- I have had a conversation with Mr. Dan Campbell of your office regarding a problem created by the .rater level in the marsh directly behind my house or, 2910 Black Oak Road. In addition, Mr. Campbell has been over to view the damage created to my deck because of the water level. In 1984 I secured a building permit from the City of Plymouth for placing a redwood deck behind my house and putting a roof on my existing porch and screening it in. The city tuilding inspector came out and inspected all of the holes for the footings and indicated that they were at least 20 inches deeper than required by city code to be beneath the frost level. This past two winters, however, frost has caused these footings to heave up and in the process have ruined my deck and are creating substantial amount of repair to be done to my porch to make it sound again. In speaking with several people in the neighborhood, many have complained about water -created problems as a result of the raised water level in the marsh behind our homes. I know for a fact that Mr. Glen Sampson has a law suit pending with the City of Plymouth regarding this very problem. It is my indention to have a soil test done it see exactly how far down we have to go with footings to enable us to effectively eliminate the frost problem caused by this raised water level. I would appreciate it if you would consider having the City of Plymouth conduct this soil test since the City Building Inspector viewed and gave the OK to my builder to continue with the sinking of our frost footings. I would appreciate hearing from you at your earliest convenience concerning the above mentioned. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, • -' r V James S. Phillips JSP ..jy CC: James Atkinson, III, Attorney at Law � w & : ..`. ... . DFP.r Sirs : We arf-.. wr ' i n.5-, Gn dC"F'. �l hp wet" rr aY ! �'y��J�?T,�]e jY � _1 i ^.t�� '. � P•�p r't WE c.1 r rn. . c � i - 33evps ;_�rne-: , �^ �' eve _. n� �, - - _.. ] �p r , c it C:'u-f rir�_ C t,:,, _ n F fi ",nSor•4r^ t,i cjj, wij-C. -!- 2_r. L - SP''E'nity „-: 2r rei► •y�P .^�� ry+F^(�` h� +P /J� • "`e C+ �,r r . 7,.y_ t Very c I r ; r :� p 1 .. T'; t, .f 1 r r, • I' :+" .'... i•.. r'11. u C y,T r � -, r Ne t the C�+ 4`=`^+`. tc? e,xtc'rd cli k] ? nc1,^nrPa c.c �, i -P ?r _ _ 1 ,' Wyle tti & Fkc j.� -.,E �•rp_ w T.?`Y:r+prr: Wp :e �..n 3 ,, _ y w=� tn ed �" ps and IY dustr�� rE'inE �"t_:,; �. l .�,•-rt'•171+'y^ )mac. � �^�.r i � Q(^•,. y.� .. r � h _ ,. i n P •}� • n r C ; i- O C �.;316- C �-j /�n'T 1'^: T.in4 1.- a Ci W _ ^t ... n - - �`• Take Z nnk P_7'7t,?''.'" and. see the >r•-�^nP�- �1, + ��^� i � P,'C? } P_?1E r �. W1.,. -Pr we first mcvp-d in, we had pheasr rt nnd. duic ': excer•t for the wetland the city now wants to develop, their Arc n. 1 ci t Pr a'"n11P.j . our fa r.i 1 y w l kc-- 8.r'd. rn7 j r i r t.h i s r- re? grid en ? r�. r r c r erp a',• CmU {,*�.t'� ?� � the r'irt"io'.'• �:i .'_C� _ E': sePin the deer reti nr s n r+ t.: Isn't cur w; z d? i +'e ova'_" to be t.a kP into c or_s � �'_"2_t I -n. We hope you w 7' ill agee t' -.Pt the neer? ds and weire of tha pe I, y.^: "?.'T:1!r'itV E�:'�LL'� cone ri ] cl Wr:Ar de:^i a? r_r 1? t'r:i c - = _ �,c .11e in this Wetland area, please take into cor, si_de-ra on the zest!"�ti!'cr cur h^fiP urluae, Wil ;-s fe v-.� ues anc? R+cFt Of 311 p,�r c;PrPr.' t1'. I-!!' srre cutet. street with wile: �'e nearby, shmil "n we �,,�i. l t s .r. a e � nci a u _ e - we rp alb owed to ih=.ve rt 1 ,?P t these t}_.LrL7c rc-!._}.* -hp "E T�'-P ',or `} ha TITrP +f 1aT�P ('! SI !:ce�'P1`,', € ECE1VED JAN 2 2. 88 REGULATORY FUNCTIONS BRANrCH 15510 30th Avenue North Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 January 21, 1988 District Engineer St. Paul District Corps of Engineers 1135 U. S. Post Office & Custom Douse St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1479 Attn: Henrik C. Strandskov Regulatory Functions Branch Re: Case No. CENCS CO-RF(87-1154-23) Dear V;r. Strandskov: We're sending this letter as concerned residents at 15510 30th Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota. It is our understanding plans are pending to fill the wetland area behind 30th Avenue North. We feel this would be a grievous error not only from the standpoint of conservation, aesthetics, and wildlife values; but also from the standpoint of property values and the potential flood hazard for residents currently living on 30th Avenue North. The area under consideration is a haven for pheasants, fox, deer, rabbits, muskrats, ducks and geese. After the construction of the Dana building on Highway 55 which resulted in some landfill, we noticed a definite decline in the abundance of wildlife and we are certain the pending plan to fill in the wetland would destroy the existing wildlife in its entirety. The homes that would be affected by such action are well cared for homes which are a definite asset to the City of Plymouth, and must not be threatened by a change in environment planned to benefit no one but a developer. Please give serious consideration to the concerns of current residents of this 5eauti ful , val uubl c pati ,.i o:� of %.hC% I %, c , a -1 . Thank you. Sincerely, Allen D. Enge Miriam A. Enge RE VEINED JAN' 2 2. 8S REGULATORY FUNCTIONS BRANCH D�st'ict L.ngzneer" i. FeuJ D1 �--,i'ic4� Corps o4 Enqzneers 113� U.S. Po�1 Office and L"ustom HousL St. Peu], MH55z01-1479 At'Ln: Regulatory Functzons Bre,c|. Re: City of Plymouth �,mzt tu scr.c-.,ge F^]� Material, Referenc� e CE CU -RF On January B, 29BB l sent a letter to tne Corps of Enqinee,� recommending thet the Subject permit be denied. J re�exvE'c' a confirmation of receipt of this let'Ler, dated January - 6 i n c e anuerySince then l have obtained additional inform&tion th&, t confirn.� the infeasibility of this project and the need for +urther re°:ie� of the proposed water levels in effected wEtlands. At a January 14 meeting of the rlomeowners associat1on +or th* developmen� borderinq the proposed project, Plymoui|' Lxi! Manager Jim WilI1s presented a blue print of the proposed plet. similar to the one submitted aE, an attachment to the Per fill application to the Corps. The drawinq states that tnc- normal water,- level (N.W.L.) for the proposed proj�ct would be 9V 5 fect and the high water level (H.W.L.) would be 995.5 feet. lhe lowest basement levels� are specified to be no lower thar, 997.5 feet, which provides a reasonable margin of safety agazns,t flooding for new homes built in thE7 project area. Howeve' , existing homes adjacent to these wetlands are not beinc! afforded the same protection against flooding. The beck lot line of my property at 3000 Bleck Oak Lane (Lot 1, Block 2, Mapledell first addition) lies mdjacent to t.he S ame wet Iarid basin that is being proposed for fillxng. By re+err zng to the enclosed Plat of Survey for my property, you wilI See that the lowest most floor, of my home is at 996.0 feet. Thzs put i�! my home onIy s1x inches above the design H.W.L., which ie an ineuffzcient margin of safety. In the event of an unanticipat Qd rise in water level, l would be unable to keep surface waie, from entering my walkout lower level. By observation of other homes in mv area, my property is not the only one with a lowest most floor below 997.5 feet. The home ot my immediate neighbor to the south^ at 2910 Black Oak L�ne, has a basement level nearly equal to mine. The Plat of 5urvey for another neighbor at 16520 29th Avenue North indicates a basement level of 995.5 feet, which is at the design H.W.L. Ob�iously, the City of Plymouth must give consideration to existinq home� that would be subject to flood1ng by the proposed development project. I request that thc Corp� of Engine�,s reject the propo�a] is L.; requzre the Czty o+ Plymouth to identzAy the loweSt mos� elev ations + o r all exist.inq properties that wou]d be a+feci�d b\ the proposed project. Any plans and exist1n� drainage should �p mod1fied to provide a H.W.L. two feet beIowtoe lowest e:z�t�n� elevation end a N.W.L. five feet be1ow the lowest exis�,n� elevation" Thank you for your cons:�zderatzoo in this m��t�r. Sincerely, Steven E. Wold~ F'. E.. 3 (")00 b]ack Oa| Lane Plymouth, MN cc: Mepledell/e Creei Homeowners As: soczatzon Enc loeure JAN � �~ ' ? � ^~ w� REG LILA TORY FUNCTIONS onAmoH 1 CL 0 77 W z �1 (T) yl 0- 0 V V E V LST SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. ll�v°�VE F. B. ['.C' LAND SURVEYORS 0- DENOTES IRON REGISTERED L7NDER LAWS OF FIATL OF MINNESOTA 7601 73rd Avenue Nor:lt 560.3093 Tc: C: ocr. Minneapolis, MinnesaLa 55•12' c: rs c ( �- T 997 1s 1�/�'2910 Lo:. 1,�Block 2, I+.n=L-- E -L 157 r1«DiiiCN Sanitary Sewer Service Invert = 985.5 LSI t I � ode hereby certify drat this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and the location of all bund- Signed rags and visible encroachments, if any, fromor on said land. Raymond A. Prasch, Minn. Reg. No. 6743 Surveyed by us this 21St day of ""a tg 5-83 -- I I! I. I I ` II1 a C�.i ! ti { I L. till z101 2 Ij It cis 80 aP3 0 997 1s 1�/�'2910 Lo:. 1,�Block 2, I+.n=L-- E -L 157 r1«DiiiCN Sanitary Sewer Service Invert = 985.5 LSI t I � ode hereby certify drat this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and the location of all bund- Signed rags and visible encroachments, if any, fromor on said land. Raymond A. Prasch, Minn. Reg. No. 6743 Surveyed by us this 21St day of ""a tg 5-83 -- I L I. -j -1i �Y C ! fiC 5�✓� f+� — .n r� T �S I� I � i ! , J o 997 1s 1�/�'2910 Lo:. 1,�Block 2, I+.n=L-- E -L 157 r1«DiiiCN Sanitary Sewer Service Invert = 985.5 LSI t I � ode hereby certify drat this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and the location of all bund- Signed rags and visible encroachments, if any, fromor on said land. Raymond A. Prasch, Minn. Reg. No. 6743 Surveyed by us this 21St day of ""a tg 5-83 -- District Engineer, St. Paul District Corps of Engineers 1135 U. S. Post Office & Custom House St. Paul, Minnesota, 55101-147° ATTN : Regulatory Functions Branch Gentlemen: 16520 30th Avenue North Plymouth, Minnesota, 55447 January 20, 1g88 Please refer to case number: r FNCS ''0-RT(87-1 154-23) . I am opposed to the filling of this wetland area because I am already experiencing severe drainage problems, The Plymouth city engineering department has inspected my property on different times and concedes that there is a drainage problem. The additional fill and development of properties will only increase my problem .- I have enclosed a copy o{ the site with my property so indicated. We are already the lcwest property in the neighborhood -.,and the increased run-off will simply drain on to my property. Yours truly, Robert Triebenbach RECEIVED JAS( 2 2. 88 REGULA ORYRMTOKs BRANCH 10 16285 28th Avenue North Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 21.January 1988 District Engineer St. Paul District, Corps of Engineers 1135 US Post Office and Custom House St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1479 Attn; Regulatory Functions Branch Sir: I am writing in response to the public notice, reference CENCS=CO-RF (87-1154-23). Based on the following, I respectfully request that the St. Paul District deny a permit to the City of Plymouth. My wife and I have been residents of the Mapledell/ Maple Creek neighborhood for over 5 years. The adjacent wetland area was one of the positive features we considered in choosing to build our home here. We both very much enjoy the outdoors and rural settings, but need to live in a metro area because of our career choices, The wetland complex, the wetland basin and the surrounding uplands and woods, provides a buffer between the neighborhood and the encroaching development. As the near by land becomes built up, the wetland complex will be even more important in fulfilling this need. Our concern over the eventual loss of a healthy, viable wetland goes beyond the aesthetic and quality of life values. This wetland complex is a very productive nesting area for a variey of waterfowl and habitat for wildlife that includes herons, egrets, songbirds, deer, muskrats and raccoons. While none of these are threatened or endangered species, prime breeding wetlands for waterfowl, such as this one, are beinq destroyed while wildlife organizations spend millions of dollars attempting to restore and protect similiar ones. According to Jim Leech at the US Fish and Wildlife Service, this wetland complex is a "high quality wetland for waterfowl production" and "of the highest quality of its type in the metro region". According to my discussions of the proposed and planned projects with Jim Willis, City Manager, the City of Plymouth has not taken into account the impact these projects will have on the wetland wildlife. The 're"01"E D value of such a productive area should be considered and weighed against the city's economic interest. JAN 2 Z 88 REGuu►TORYFUNCTMS BRANCH =--��Y-A The City of Plymouth could better serve the community by taking advantage of its ownership of this land to maintain and inhance the wetland complex as a wildlife area. Such an area would in addition provide recreational and educational opportunities not found elsewhere in the community. We are concerned for our neiqhbors who live on the perimeter of the wetland. The city, again through discussions with Mr. Willis, contends the wetland has excess water holding capacity and that the reduction in volume from the proposed fill and from the planned road and limited business area should not cause flooding problems. While offering no guarantees, Mr. Willis said this was based on two hydrologist reports and 100 years rains information. we -do not pretend to be experts in this area, but our observations of the wetland conflict with this position. The h6avy rains of k-ast summer caused the proposed mitigation area to fill seemingly to capacity and caused. water to come into the yards of the adjacent homes. We know specifically the properties #8 and #9 on the mitigation map were affected. This occured at a time when the wetland was drier that normal due to the preceeding 8 months of below normal precipitation. This observation is not consistant-with the city's position and does not suggest excess capacity. Also puzzling, and an issue not fully addressed by Mr. Willis, is the suitability for building of the land to be filled. According to Mr. Willis, it was the city's defense in court that the land was not buildable before the modifications of 1978. The.court found to the contrary and that the land was made unfit by those modifications and forced the city to buy the land. If the land was unfit as the city claimed or was made unfit, why is it now buildable? The only answer offered is that essentially all land is buildable. We hope that the St. Paul District will review this matter as well. As taxpayers, we understand and appreciate our city's concern for the expense for this land. We are also concerned, but for the unreplaceable aspects of the wetland complex. We value the aesthetic and quality of life benefits, the wildlife and their need for viable habitat and the unique opportunity the city has to preserve an area that benefits wildlife and provides recreational and educational benefits to the community. We are concerned for our neighbors, for their present and potential water problems and for those who would buy homes in the proposed development, for the suitability of that area for home construction. .��_---• � Jaii The City of Plymouth should take advantaqe of the opoorunities the wetland complex provides, protect and inhance its assets and their value, not destroy the wetland for purposes nearby drier land could better fulfill. Sinc rely J Richard C. McGowen IL • DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ST. PAUL DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1135 U.S. POST OFFICE d CUSTOM HOUSE ST, PAUL MINNESOTA 55101.1479 J. ! / L. r r REPLY TO ATTENTION OF Construction—Operations Regulatory Functions We are enclosing for your information correspondence we received as a result of our public notice that described your project. It is our policy to give you -the opportunity to offer us your proposed resolution or rebuttal of these comments. You need not make any response. However. any response should be sent to this office so that potential resolutions or rebuttals can be considered in our final evaluation. If we receive no response within 15 days of this letter. we will presume that no response is intended. In the interim, we will continue to process your application. If you have any questions, please write or call 79 � 7 7 7r. /I Enclosure 5 tilt � i ke Y- Ben A. Wopat r Chief, Regulatory Functions Branch Construction—Operations Division CM of t1low i Eµr ,tiff United States Department of the Interior --. IN REPLY REFER TO: .. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ° ST. PAUL FIELD OFFICE, (ES) SP FO 50 Park Square Court 400 Sibley Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 January 25, 1988 Colonel Joseph Briggs District Engineer U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1135 U.S. Post Office and Custom House St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1479 Dear Colonel Briggs: This responds to Public Notice 87-1154-23 dated December 24 , 1987 concerning an application by the City of Plymouth to discharge fill material into wetlands contiguous to a state -protected wetland in Hennepin County, Minnesota. The stated purpose of this fill activity is to make the wetlands suitable for homesite development. This residential development would be referred to as Lillie Ponds or Dunkirk Meadows. The palustrine emergent wetland proposed to be filled by this action provide important feeding and nesting habitat for a variety of wildlife including mallards, blue -wing teal, great blue herons, muskrats, mink and numerous non -game species. The value of these types of wetlands to wildlife cannot be over -emphasized. Due to the scarcity of quality wetland within the Metro Region these wetlands are of vital importance to native wildlife. In addition to their wildlife value, these wetland areas perform many hydrologic functions that are of benefit to man. They provide natural protection from floods and reduce the severity of flooding within the watershed and drainage basin by temporarily retaining surface water runoff during heavy rains and floods. They also function as important "buffer areas" which filter and absorb nutrients from adjacent uplands and help to protect the water quality of our lakes, rivers, and streams. These functions are acknowledged in the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act of 1982 which gives local governments in the metropolitan area responsibility for the development and implementation of surface water management plans. The general objective of planning required by the act is to preserve for future use natural water storage and retention systems (emphasis added) . The City of Plymouth, as a local unit of government, should not deviate diametrically from this objective by proposing deliberate destruction of a natural wetland system, in our opinion. The filling of these wetlands for the above stated purpose is clearly a non -water dependent activity and, in our opinion, is inconsistent with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines of the Clean Water Act. During a December 7, 1988 field review of the project area by Mr. Jim Leach of my staff, it was apparent the proposed action could be located totally on an upland area. -2- Numberous upland sites for residential development are available within the project area. As such, we suggest the applicant utilize an upland alternative which, in our opinion, eliminates the need for wetland filling and is environmentally more acceptable. If authorized, this activity would encourage similar type actions and stimulate additional requests for wetland filling. Because of the individual and cumulative adverse impacts on wetlands, we believe it is in the public interest to conserve and protect our Nation's remaining wetland resources. For these reasons, the Service recommends that the Department of the Army permit for this project be denied. Concerning the wetland mitigation proposed by the City, the Service believes this type of proposal is totally unacceptable. The increased water elevation adjacent to this ditch is a result of increased stormwater volume resulting from the previous destruction of natural stormwater retention basins, (i.e., wetlands) within this watershed. To even consider the effects of increased water elevations at this site as mitigation for additional wetland destruction is contrary to the purpose of mitigation. To more adequately address this problem, we strongly encourage the City of Plymouth to establish a wetland protection ordinance and allow wetlands to perform their natural functions,, i.e.,, stormwater retention, groundwater recharge, nutrient sediment traps, wildlife habitat, and benefit the general public rather than promoting additional wetland destruction. Please notify this office as to any action taken by the Corps relative to this permit request. These comments have been prepared under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. et seq. ) and are consistent with he intent of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. This project was also examined for its conformance with the Fish and Wildlife Service Mitigation Policy anc Executive Orders 11988 and 11990. Sincerely, , James L. S h Assistant Field Supervisor cc: MN Dept. of Natural Resources, St. Paul Mr. Louis Flynn, Mn Pollution Control Agency, St. Paul Mr. Wayne Gorski, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chicago Mr. Dan Steward, State of Minnesota, Board of Water and Soil Resources, St. Paul, MN Com. ✓ �-,-�-C- v _ Get' L.•— i` -c -'i r � , 77,�L J JAN 2 b, k A ULATORYFUNCrIDNs BRANCH Lj)-�L4e, 4-j 16310 29TH A�ENi}[ NDRTH PLYMOUTH` MM 55447 JANUAR/ 19. 198B REGULATORY FUNCTIONS BRANCH DISTRICT ENG]NEER ST. PAUL DISTRICT CORPG OF ENGINEERS 1135 U.S. POST OFFICE'- E-31. FFICEST. PAUL, MINNESUTA 55101-1479 REFERENCE: CNCS E -CO ..... RF(87-1154-23) GENTLEMEN: THIS IS TO EXPRESS DEEP CONCFRN ABOin -T HE P�OF'OSFD F]LL nr REFERENCED WETLAND, AND ITS IMPACT ON THE ADJACENT PROTECTED WETLANDS AND ADJOINING PROPERTl�S. OUR MAJOR CONCERN IS THE LEVEL OF THE WATER CURRENTLY EXISTING IN THE WETLANDS IMMEDIATELY ADJACEAT TO OUR REc--.IDENTIAL PROPFRTY. THERE IS VISIBLE STANDING WATER WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, AND WE ARE FEARFUL OF THE IMPACT ON THE TOTAL AREA IF FURTHER RUN-OFF INTO IT IS PERMITTED. IN LAST SUMMERS' HEAVY RAINS, THE LEVEL ROSE WELL UP INTO OUR PROF'ERTY. WE ARE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THIS PROPOSED ACTION ON THE AESTHETIC CHARACTER OF THE AREA~ AND ON THE WILDLIFE WHICH IN- HABITS IT. PLEASE GIVE SERIOUS REVIEW TO THIS PROPOSAL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. SINCERELY YOURS, A. HALE DODDS JAN Y � 7 � �� u u 1 1 REGULA TORvFuwonoms William c . Bal-er 16501 30th eve 1Z. Plv!9outh, "n. �i47 January 2n., 1c4 District Engineer, St: Paul District Corps. of En7ineers 1135 U.S. Post Office and Custom House St. Paul, Mn. 5511-1479 Attn: Re7ulatory Functions Branch Re: City of Plymouth Arrlication for Pernit to Discharge fill material, Ref:CENS-CO-RP (27-125u-2 3) Dear Sir: I am writinFr in response to the Public Notice referenced above. The City of Plymouth is proposing to fill land adiacent to and r_art of a state protected wetland basin, number 27-105W. I am a resident of Marledell Develorment which borders the wet- lands on the west side. I am opposed to the issuing of a herr.:; t for this project for two reasons: 1. The proposed project does not take into consideration the safety margin above high water level (H.W.L, ) for existing homes in the Mapledell development. 2. 'Filling the proposed area will restructure and reduce the size of existing state protected wetlands. These wetlands are considered to be some of the highest auality wetlands in the metro area as stated by representatives from MTR and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Assoc. I rea_uest that the Corp. of Engineers reject the proposal submitted by the City of Plymouth as stated. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, William S. Baker RECEIVED A2 J REGUUiORYFUNCTIONS BRANCH =_ l Dear Neighbors;, This is to fill you in on the meetinv held on Thursday, January 14 re7arding the City's plan to fill and develop the wet- land area behind 30th Ave. N. Many neivhbors expressed concern for the nro`lect by calling and/or attending the meeting. According to Jim Willis, who is a Mapledell resident and the Plymouth City Manager, the city's plan is to build the fire station and dispurse fill so that the land can be sold to a developer.(see map) We as citizens have until January 25, 1988 to express any concerns or opinions on the filling of this wetland area to the Army Corps of Engineers. Some of the concerns listed in the Army CJWps of Engineers public notice are as follows: All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered,'including_-the cumulative effects. Among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and .fiber production and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. to: If you wish to write with .your opinion, you may send your letters Distric Engineer, St. Paul Dist. Corps of Engineers 1135 U.S. Post Office & Custom House St. Paul, Mn. 55101-1179 Attn: Regulatory Punctions Branch On the envelope, and in the body of the letter, refer to case number: CENCS CO-RF(87-1154-23).. You may call the Corps directly at 725-7775. Speak with Henrik C. Strandskov. Mr. Willis also told us that there would be a public hearing regarding the fire station. The land to be sold will also be dis- cussed at that time. We can expect the hearing sometime the end of February or early March. There will be a sign posted on the property of the new fire station to announce the public hearing. If the permit is granted to dispurse fill, this hearing will be very important. We will want to have a say in what is built on this land. We urge anyone with a concern to write the Army Corps of Engin- eers so that your letter will be received before January 25, 1988. It is only with our letters that the Corps w -=investigate any problems or concerns. We will try to keep you posted on what's going on. Ann & Diane AVE. SOT" AYE__ 30Th *I- P --.nym- An, ........................... 51-115+-p-3 A A10 -r vN9ER CO'V- I IN THIS PERMrr REQ/EW 0071 MOV&SID LAM VMS 4rI LRAA POND 11 CITY OF PLYMOUTH reOWN, WMISOTA [Tjux- IPL . -- CITY Or January 26, 1988 PUMOUTR Mr. Larry Begin 4300 Fernbrook Lane Plymouth, MN 55442 SUBJECT: COMPLETION OF YOUR CONTRACTUAL RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THE JULY 27, 1987 AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY Dear Mr. Begin: I have received a letter from Donald Hillstrom dated January 20, 1988, which proposes that we meet at your site on January 30 to talk about problems that exist or how we are going to close out your responsibilities under the agreement between yourself and the City of Plymouth dated July 27, 1987. As you know, the agreement provides that on or before February 1, 1988, the owner will complete all site cleanup including filling, and the City will reinspect the site for confirmation of full compliance with the agreement. If the owner chooses to retain certain classic cars, a structural enclosure will be required. The owner will be solely and exclusively responsible for obtaining the necessary approvals for the structure, if indeed such a structure is allowable under city code and Zoning requirements. All of the above actions were to have been taken before the February 1, 1988 compliance date. You have been well aware of these requirements over the six month span of the contract. In an attempt to support your cleanup efforts during the course of this agreement, we have allowed you to miss cleanup deadlines, relying upon statements made by you and Mr. Hillstrom that full compliance with the agreement would be achieved by the February 1, 1988 deadline. Accordingly, we will reinspect the property on February 2, 1988 to confirm whether complete compliance has been achieved under the agreement and as required by Plymouth city code. If not, we will initiate the necessary actions to achieve complete and total compliance with the agreement. I have asked that the City representatives 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 554" . TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 Mr. Larry Begin January 26, 1988 Page 2 inspecting the site contact you beforehand to afford the opportunity to accompany them during the course of the inspection. Sincer , Frank Boyles Assistant City Manager FB:kec cc: Donald Hillstrom Jim Thomson, City Attorney Dick Carlquist, Public Safety Director Jim Willis, City Manager Mayor €, City Council File Minutes of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting January 14, 1988 Page 1 Present: Chair Edwards, Commissioners Anderson, Reed, LaTour, Beach and Rosen; Councilman Sisk; staff Blank, Busch, Patterson and Pederson 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Edwards called the January meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. in the Council Chambers. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUIES A motion was made by Commissioner Reed and seconded by Commissioner LaTour to approve the minutes of the December 1987 meeting as presented. The motion carried with all ayes. 3. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS a. Athletic Associations. Carol Beach announced that the Plymouth Athletic Association is now a reality, and she has been named the Executive Director. She stated that the Association will use as its boundaries District 284 and the City of Plymouth and that the Association will be a maTher of the National Youth Sports Coaches Association. Right now the only sport they will be involved in is soccer, but later they will branch out to others. b. Staff. Mary Patterson stated that the new recreation specialist would begin her duties on Tuesday, January 19. She also stated that a youth ski trip planned for Monday, January 18, had 80 participants registered. She mentioned that the winter triathlon is scheduled for Sunday, February 14, at French Regional Park, co-sponsored by Plymouth Park and Recreation and Hennepin Parks. She said that the Old Fashioned Christmas event held at Plymouth Creek Park, in cooperation with the Plymouth Historical Society, was a great success, and plans are already underway for the event in December 1988. She indicated that plans are being made now for a special winter event in 1989 in cooperation with the Plymouth Civic League, to be held at Parkers Lake. Some of the activities being considered are: ice sculptures, medallion hunt, smoosh races, dog sledding, skating, etc. She announced that she had done some research on a decade of recreation and learned that the number of programs offered in 1977 was 52 with 1,875 participants and in 1987 was 717 programs with 28,786 participants. She said that athletics had 1,112 participants in 1977 and 7,590 in 1987. She indicated that she is beginning to plan the summer recreation programs and asked commissioners if they had any ideas for new programs to contact her. C. Others. None. January 14, 1988, PRAC Minutes Page 2 4. REPORT ON PAST COUNCIL ACTION a. Parkers Lake Pavilion. Architect Del Erickson is making changes to the concept plans of the pavilion as recommended by PRAC and approved by the City Council. b. Neighborhood Park Names. Council approved the names recommended for the three neighborhood parks built in 1987: Rolling Hills, Heritage and Turtle Lake. Maintenance crews will begin making signs for installation in the spring. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Parkers Lake Update. Director Blank announced that with a financial settlement reached for a piece of property on the south end of the lake, the City now owns 100% of this park. He further indicated that rebidding of the Parkers Lake Pavilion is scheduled for 2 p.m., February 25 and that PRAC may meet the week of February 29 to review the bids before passing them on to the Council. b. Continued Discussion on Park Usage and Cost Study Report. Discussion continued on this subject which was referred to the Park Commission by the City Council. Director Blank stated that Council has recommended that PRAC hold public meetings to discuss user fees. The commissioners suggested that a meeting with the Athletic Associations should be scheduled for February and it should be for the purpose of soliciting input on ways to cut costs and/or raise revenues. Chair Edwards wondered in what ways an athletic association could help cut costs. Director Blank stated they could help by being field attendants and doing things such as lining fields, putting out bases, setting up nets, etc. Commissioner Beach expressed her concern about charging user fees to youth athletic groups. She is very much against it. Commissioner Rosen stated that it may become a reality at some point in the future and now is the time to find out how the athletic associations feel about it. Commissioner Beach then asked what a typical charge to an athletic association would be for using a field. Director Blank responded that that information is not available at this time, but the Cost Study Report does indicate what it costs to maintain one field. Chair Edwards indicated that she feels people don't object to paying user fees for indoor activities such as swimming and tennis, but that they'll be very upset about having to pay for wide open outdoor spaces. Director Blank suggested that PRAC read the philosophy statement from the "Mayor's Task Force on Park and Recreation Program Financing" prior to the February meeting. Director Blank will draft a letter for Chair Edwards to send to athletic associations inviting them to the February meeting. C. Plymouth Creek Site Planning_ Paul Fjare of Brauer and Associates was present to review this subject with PRAC. He indicated that there are three criteria to consider in January 14, 1988, PRAC Minutes Page 3 selecting a site for the proposed community center. They are: - accessibility - community exposure - physical relationship to complimentary land uses. Paul then pointed out Brauer's reasons for preferring a westerly site. They are as follows: 1) Plymouth Boulevard is a major collector more suited to handle traffic generated. Good potential for pedestrian linkage to neighborhoods. 2) Good possibilities in relating to existing community buildings. Fair ability to benefit from existing City Center infrastructure and to share space. 3) Surrounding land use; public and commercial less sensitive to traffic and noise. Will add to the public exposure of the facility through the area's focus as a city commercial center. The commissioners then discussed what would become of the east site if not selected for the community center, since we own this parcel of land. Director Blank responded that this land is high, dry ground and of very good quality and may, therefore, be considered for facilities such as tennis courts. PRAC then agreed that a westerly site was the best choice for the location of the proposed community center. A MOTION WAS MADE BY CCNMISSIDNER BEACH AND SDCOMED BY CICMMISSICNER REED TO RECCMVENID A WES=Y LiOCATICJN FOR THE PROPOSED CCn4JNITY CE=. The motion carried with all ayes. Commissioner Rosen indicated that he is not ready to make a decision to cut down any trees on site #2, but agrees that PRAC needs to move ahead in planning the rest of Plymouth Creek park. This item will be going to the City Council for approval on January 25. Any members of PRAC wishing to attend the Council meeting should let Chair Edwards know. 6. NEW BUSINESS a. 1988 Park Facility Rental Policies and. Fee Schedule. Rick Busch discussed with PRAC the 1988 Park Facility Rental Policies and Fee Schedule and the new proposed policy on Rental of Softball Complexes. He pointed out that the softball complex rental policy has been proposed to help people better understand our policies in regard to using softball complexes and other facilities. He stated that the softball complex rental will apply only to Plymouth Creek and Zachary Playfields and will be for groups wishing to conduct tournaments. January 14, 1988, PRAC Minutes Page 4 Commissioner Reed asked Rick about charging youth athletic associations to use our fields. Director Blank then reminded Commissioner Reed that it has been the policy of the City to not charge youth groups to use fields for normal day to day practices and games. These groups are charged, however, if they wish to conduct tournaments. Councilman Sisk suggested that the policy on Facility Rental be changed to reflect that the fee schedule section applies to tournaments and special events only. He further stated that the City Council may begin to feel user fees for youth groups will be necessary in the future if PRAC wishes to continue building new recreation facilities and athletic playfields. Chair Edwards responded that to adopt that type of policy could create ill will among residents and could cause participants to drop out of our programs. She further indicated that it was her feeling that residents would be less likely to pass a bond referendum for a community center if we started charging our youth to use facilities on a daily basis. Councilman Sisk reminded PRAC of Council's desire to cut costs and raise revenues and further stated that the park and recreation department's budget requests in future years will be very carefully reviewed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY C7CMMISSIONER REED AND SDMCED BY CaVISSIONER BEACH TO APPROVAL OF THE 1988 PARK FACILITY RENTAL POLICIES AND FEE SCHEDULE AND THE 1988 SOFTBALL CCNPLEX RENTAL POLICIES AND FEE SCHEDULE AS PRESENIED BY STAFF. The motion carried with all ayes. b. 1987 Annual Report. Copies of the 1987 Annual Report were briefly reviewed for changes and/or corrections. Director Blank asked commissioners to call the Park and Recreation office if they have any changes prior to the February meeting, so that these changes can be incorporated into the final copy, which will be distributed at the February meeting. C. New Plats. Director Blank is still working with the Planning Department on the plat north of County Road 9 and west of 494. d. Neighborhood Parks - Reservation Policy. At staff's request, PRAC was asked to consider whether or not neighborhood parks should be reservable by residents and to adopt a policy on this. After brief discussion, it was agreed that neighborhood parks should be available to residents on a first-come, first - serve basis with the exception of Lions Park ballfield. A M)TION WAS MADE BY OOMMISSICNER ROSEN AND SECCNDED BY OCHMISSIONER BEACH TO NOT RESERVE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE LIONS PARK BALLFIELD. The motion carried with four ayes. Commissioners LaTour and Reed voted nay. It was their feeling that residents should be able to reserve picnic shelters and tables for family picnics and outings. January 14, 1988, PRAC Minutes Page 5 e. St_ Mary's Neighborhood Park. Director Blank stated that the City Council had selected Barton Aschman Associates with a not to exceed fee of $8,500 to design the St. Mary's neighborhood park. Neighborhood questionnaires will be sent out the week of January 18, with the first neighborhood meeting scheduled for February 10 if the consultant is available. The second neighborhood meeting would then be scheduled for February 17, with PRAC's normal monthly meeting on the 11th of February. Notices will be sent to PRAC once all meeting dates have been confirmed. 7. CCMISSION PRESEWATION None. 8. STAFF CCK' JNICATION Director Blank indicated that the results of the resident survey would be shared with the City Council at their meeting on January 25, and that the results would be available for PRAC's review at their February meeting. The meeting adjourned at 10:54 p.m. CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1987 The Reqular Meetinq of the Plymouth Planning Commission was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Steiaerwald, Commissioners Wire, Stulberq, Zylla, Marofsky (arrived at 7:37 P.M.) and Pauba MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Pluf ka STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Blair Tremere City Engineer Chet Harrison Associate Planner Al Cottinqham Assistant City Engineer John Sweeney Planning Secretary Grace Wineman *MINUTES MOTION by Commissioner Pauba, seconded by Commissioner Wire to approve the Minutes of December 9, 1957 as submitted. VOTE. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Steigerwald introduced the request by the Min- neapolis Auto Auction and reading of the December 24, 1987 staff report was waived. Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mitch Wonson, Benshoof & Associates, representing the petitioner. Mr. Wonson agreed with the Planning Staff Report and recommendations. Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was no one present to speak on this item, the Public Hearing was closed. Chairman Steigerwald read the January 9, 1988 letter from Plymouth residents Mark and Germaine Anderson, 10320 South Shire Drive, into the record. The Andersons opposed further expansion. MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Wire to recommend approval of the Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit, subject to the conditions listed in the December 249 1987 staff report. Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. -1- MINNEAPOLIS AUTO AUCTION - SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT 87099) NOTION TO APPROVE VOTE - MOTION CARRIED Page two Planning Commission Minutes ganuary 13, 1988 Chairman Steigerwald introduced the request by Craig Freeman, Freeman's Inc. Community Development Director Tremere provided an overview of the December 24, 1987 staff report. Director Tremere explained that a Site Plan for a new theater on proposed Lot 1 is also on the agenda. The staff report on the revised General Development Plan reflects the City's concern regarding the building orienta- tion; the entrance to the theater site; and, the petitioner's assurance that the curb cut onto Shelard Park- way will be available for this development. He stated that this could be further discussed with the consideration of the Site Plan. He noted the plans show the angle of the drive from Shelard Parkway; this might be problematical for the proposed shared access. Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Craig Freeman, Freeman's Inc. Mr. Freeman stated that the angle of the access from Shelard Parkway into the Willow Grove development was speci- fied by the City of St. Louis Park. Director Tremere briefly explained the role of the City of St. Louis Park; that the boundary between the City of Plymouth and the City of St. Louis Park is the north curb of Shelard Parkway, not the centerline. Access from Shelard Parkway (nee Betty Crocker Drive) was a function of Freeman's Inc.'s agreement with the City of St. Louis Park. Chairman Steigerwald stated the Commission could make their recommendation on the plat, and then discuss the Site Plan ( Item 6-A under Nev► Business) . Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was no one present to speak on this item, the Public Hearinq was closed. FREEMAN'S INC. REVISED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN PRELIMINARY PLAT AND FINAL PLAT FOR WILLOW GROVE OFFICE PARK SECOND ADDITION (87106) MOTION by Commissioner Wire, seconded by Commissioner NOTION TO APPROVE Stulberg to recommend approval for the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat for Willow Grove Office Park Second Addition, subject to the conditions listed in the December 24, 1987 staff report. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - NOTION CARRIED Chairman Steigerwald introduced the first item under New ITEM 6-A Business, Craig Freeman, Freeman's Inc. Site Plan for a NEW BUSINESS Plitt/Shelard Theater east of Nathan Lane and north of FREEMAN'S, INC. Shelard Parkway. SITE PLAN PLITT/SHELARD THEATER Director Tremere provided an overview of the December 21, (87116) 1987 staff report. He explained the shared parking and drive; the question of whether this plan assures a workable site; the City's concern regarding congestion and difficult traffic circulation. Page 3 Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 198.5 Reorientation of the building could provide the incentive for vehicles to use the appropriate parking areas for the theater. Commissioner Stulberg stated that in reviewing the layout he noted there could be a problem for a vehicle stopping to let people off for the theater and finding the appropriate place to park. Perhaps the building could be moved to the north. Commissioner Marofsky inquired if the building were moved to the north, whether it might encroach into a utility easement? Director Tremere stated that this could be the case. Commissioner Marofsky inquired why there is no drive between parking areas g and C. Planner Cottingham stated that the Agreement between the City of St. Louis Park and the developer stipulates there shall be no crossover between these lots or areas. Director Tremere further explained that the agreement between the City of St. Louis Park and Freeman's Inc. for a curb cut permit was premised on the current Ceneral Development Plan. This compounds the problem for the theater (building orientation), as the traffic would fill the Shopping Center parking lot first. The City of Plymouth has no control over the agreement made between the petitioner and the City of St. Louis Park; the petitioner would need to initiate an amendment to the agreement. Mr. Freeman believes the site plan meets the intent of the agreement, regardless of whether the building orientation and/or parking layout is the best for this site. Chairman Steiqerwald asked about the parkinq requirements. Director Tremere stated the minimum parking requirement is based on the number of seats, a formula of one to four. Craig Freeman stated that the "auxillary lot" was not required by the City of Plymouth but was stipulated by the theater company as a major tenant. Director Tremere explained the shared parking; noting that the problem is with the geometric layout of the parking, not with the number of parking spaces. Craig Freeman stated that he and his architect and engineer spent considerable time and effort on building orientation and parking layout; the entrance was needed as close to Shelard Parkway as possible. An entrance to the north would not work and the tenant would not accept it. Constructing the building further north would place it partially on a storm sewer easement. The building was turned to the west to allow better traffic circulation into the parking lot. Page 4 Planning_ Commission Minutes January 13, 1988 Mr. Freeman stated that directional signage would be pro- vided for the theater showing_ "No Parkinq" for theater patrons beyond a certain point. He noted that businesses in the shopping center would be closed during some of the theater hours. He doubted there could be changes made to their agreement with St. Louis Park, because of the degree of difficulty in obtaining access from Shelard Parkway in the first place. Chairman Steigerwald stated his concern with the overall aesthetics of the site because the building as proposed, "turns its back" to the office building to the east. Director Tremere inquired how the theater patron is going to know when to use the available parking. Mr. Freeman stated they would provide signage showing_ "overflow" parking along with the directional signage. He does not believe the park- ing areas would ever be at capacity. The shopping center lot, at its busiest, will probably fill only one-third of its available parking. Extensive discussion ensued regardinq the number of parking stalls provided. It was established that the plan meets the Ordinance standard for the required number of parking stalls, including the shared parking center spaces. Craig Freeman stated concern about delaying the review process. He met informally with the City in February, 1987' negotiated a lease with the tenant; came back to the City with a preliminary plan in August; and, submitted a formal application in September. Further delay could bring about the loss of this tenant. Commissioner Marofsky inquired about the use of gravel rather than sod in the area between the theater and shopping center; and, inquired about building colors and materials. Mr. Freeman explained the landscape plan and stated the building would be a white stucco material with brown fascia. Commissioner Wire inquired about the lighting for the theater. Mr. Freeman stated the marquee would use fluores- cent tubing. He has not yet received the specifications, but the lighting will meet Code requirements. Director Tremere explained the lighting and signage plan for the development. Detailed plans will be reviewed at the time of request for sign permits. Commissioner Zylla inquired if the City had been involved in Mr. Freeman's agreement with the City of St. Louis Park. Director Tremere answered, no. He explained the history which placed the street in St. Louis Park, rather than the Page 5 Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1988 street being constructed half in Plymouth and half in St. Louis Park which is the usual case. Tri earlier years, the St. Louis Park sites were developed. When the Plymouth sites came in for development, the City of St. Louis Park made it clear that before any access would be granted, the developer would be required to agree to certain stipula- tions. Mr. Freeman reiterated the difficulty in requesting any amendment to this agreement; he believes they were required to give much more than should have been required for a curb cut. He stated that it may be possible to request a wider access, but they don't want to jeopardize this project. Commissioner Stulberg stated he is concerned about acces- sible parking for the theater site. There seems to be some confusion as to whether the number of parking stalls re- quired for the theater has been achieved. Chairman Steigerwald stated he is not comfortable with the site layout or the building orientation. More attention should be given to the building and site aesthetics. Commissioner Marofsky stated he is sympathetic to the devel- oper's agreement with St. Louis park, but the site must work within the City of Plymouth. The parking area layout and access are convoluted. MOTION by Commissioner Marofsky, seconded by Chairman NOTION TO APPROVE Steigerwald to recommend approval for the Site Plan, subject to the conditions listed in the December 21, 1987 staff report, adding Condition No. 15: vehicular access shall be provided between parking areas B and C; Condition No. 16: Ground cover shall be provided on the island west of the building, and that area shall be sodded, versus gravel. MOTION by Commissioner Wire, seconded by Commissioner Zylla NOTION TO AMEND to Amend the Main Motion, adding Condition No. 17. Exterior building lighting shall be limited to safety and entrance lighting with no floos lights; Condition No. 18: Lighting intensity of the sign and the theater marquee shall be compatible with the intensity of the lighting and signage for the shopping center. Commissioner Wire believes the orientation of the building could be better and would draw the interest of people driv- ing on Shelard Parkway. It would not be necessary to turn the building a full 90 degrees, but a more innovative build- ing design, using materials and color to give definition to the entrance and to make it compatible with the other buildings in this development could be accomplished. Page 6 Planning Commission Hinutes January 13, 198S Commissioner Marofsky suggested that a covered walktiay to the ticket window and installing the marquee on the north side of the building would give better, visibility. There are different ways to achieve a better design and function for this building. Roll Call Vote on Amendment. 6 Aves. MOTION carried. VOTE ON AMENDMENT MOTION CARRIED MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Commissioner Wire NOTION TO AMEN to amend the Main Motion by the addition of Condition No. 19. That the developer provide additional information regarding the proposed building plans, giving more detail on exterior materials and building design for staff review. The intent is to assure aesthetic compatibility with the area development. Roll Call Vote on second Amendment. 5 Ayes. Commissioner VOTE ON AMENDMENT Stulberg, Nay. MOTION carried. NOTION CARRIED Commissioner Stulberg stated he does not believe it would be appropriate to attach this as a condition of approval. If the Commission wants specific details, those should be reviewed with the total site plan. MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner 140TION TO AMEND Wire to amend the Motion by deleting Conditions 15 and 16. Commissioner Stulberq stated the drive between parking areas B and C should not be necessary, if the required number of parking stalls for the theater are contained in areas A and B, as suggested by the petitioner. Installing sod in the island should not be necessary, shrubbery with a rock and gravel base is a practical landscape treatment of this area. Commissioner Marofsky stated concern that it has not been demonstrated that traffic circulation is optimum without the access between parking areas B and C. Sodding the area in front of the theater is a safety consideration. Roll Call Vote on third Amendment. 1 Aye. Commissioners VOTE ON AMENDMENT Wire, Zylla, Pauba, Marof sky, and Chairman Steigerwald, NOTION FAILS Nay. MOTION fails. Craig Freeman stated that a drive-through from parking areas B and C is legally impossible given the present language of the private agreement with St. Louis Park; and, only an accommodation for pedestrian traffic could be installed. MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Commissioner NOTION TO AMEN Stulberg to amend the Main Motion by deleting Condition No. 14. Page 7 Planninq_ Commission Minutes January 13, 1985 Commissioner Zvlla stated that while it is not perfect, he can see the logic, from a marketinq standpoint, for the building's orientation to the west. Reorientation to the north could still present the prohlem that people will use only that parking closest to the entrance. Roll Call Vote on fourth amendment. 3 Ayes. Commissioners VOTE ON AMENDMENT Wire and Marofsky, and Chairman Steigerwald, Nay. MOTION MOTION FAILS fails on tied vote. Roll Call on Main Motion as twice Amended. 4 Ayes. Com- VOTE ON MAIN MOTION missioner Wire and Stulberg, Nay. MOTION carried. AS TWICE AMENDED MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Wire asked that the record show his concern with the visual orientation and exterior appearance of the building from Shelard Parkway to the south. Chairman Steigerwald introduced the request by Hewitt HEWITT PETERSON Peterson, Hillsborouqh Manor, Inc., and stated that deferral HILLSBOROUGH MANOR is requested by the petitioner's consultant. He stated that INC. REVISED he understands that the petitioner is requesting deferral PRELIMINARY PLAN/ due to their discussions with the "Harrision Hills" home- PLAT AND owners. He further understands that the petitioner has told CONDITIONAL USE the neighborhood group that there will be no discussion or PERMIT FOR HARRISON consideration given to this development request this even- HILLS THIRD ADDITION ing. Because the Public Hearing Notice has been published (87112) in the legal newspaper and property owners have been noti- fied, the cost of re -notification should be borne by the petitioner. Mr. Greg Frank, representing the petitioner, agreed. MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO DEFER Marofsky to defer as requested by the petitioner; and, that the cost to re -publish the Hearing Notice and re -notify the property owners shall be borne by the petitioner. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION Carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED Chairman Steigerwald introduced the request by APSCO APSCO PRODUCTS FOR Products, reading of the December 21, 1987 staff report was "BIG WHEEL ROSSI" waived. Chairman Steigerwald introduced Scott Shaller, CONDITIONAL USE representing the petitioner. Mr. Shaller had no questions PERMIT (87121) or comments, he noted that half their stores are located in retail centers. Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was no one present to speak on this item, the Public Hearing was closed. MOTION by Commissioner Wire, seconded by Commissioner Pauba MOTION TO APPROVE to recommend approval for the Conditional Use Permit for APSCO Products for "Big Wheel Rossi", for a retail automo- bile supply store, subject to the conditions listed in the December 21, 1987 staff report. Page 8 Planning Commission Minutes 3anuary 13, 1988 Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. Commissioner !Iarofsky abstained. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED MOTION carried. Commissioner Marofskv stated he abstained since he repre- PATRICK HAGEN sents the landlord and this may be viewed as a conflict of PRIME DEVELOPMENT interest. CORPORATION REZONING AND Chairman Steigerwald introduced the request by Prime Devel- PRELIMINARY PLAT opment Corporation. Reading of the December 22, 1987 staff (87123) report was waived. Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Patrick Hagan who stated that Mr. Ron Erickson, KKE Architects, would review the project for the Commission. Mr. Hagan stated they have been working with the adjacent property owner regarding their development and its impact on his property and on road alignments and extensions. They will meet with the City staff on these issues. Director Tremere stated there has been cooperation by the petitioner on these critical issues of traffic circulation and transportation in this area. Ron Erickson, KKE Architects, explained the preliminary plat and rezoning of the property. Commissioner Marofskv inquired about Item 24-G of the Engineer's Memorandum. Mr. Erickson explained the process of land dedication which will allow a portion of land to become part of the site so that it meets the dimension standards. Mr.. Erickson explained the soils conditions and that their plans will work for this site. Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was no one present to speak on the item, the Public Hearing was closed. It was the consensus that the application will be deferred to be reconsidered following the meeting to be held as noted above. MOTION by Chairman Steigerwald, seconded by Commissioner NOTION TO DEFER Marofsky to defer this item to allow the petitioner, City staff, and the adjacent property owner to review mutual design concerns and development impacts. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED Chairman Steigerwald called a Recess at 9:15 P.M. RECESS FEW BUSINESS Chairman Steigerwald introduced the request by Kenneth KENNETH ESTER Ester, Wagner Spray Tech. Reading of the December 21, 1987 WAGNER SPRAY TECH staff report was waived. Chairman Steigerwald introduced SITE PLAN AMENDMENT Mr. Ken Ester, who had no questions or comments. (87126) Page 9 Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1988 Director Tremere explained Condition No. 5 that requires a covenant be placed on proposed Outlot A. He noted the docu- ment is being reviewed by the City Attorney. The condition is tied to the Site Plan to assure that development of the property, once it is sold, will follow in proper order, including construction of the parking lot as proposed; and, that utilities are available for the final platting of Outlot A. Commissioner Stulberg inquired if they would submit an application for a Conditional Use Permit for outside storage MOTION TO APPROVE of semi -trailers. Mr. Ester answered affirmatively. MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Pauba to recommend approval for the Site plan Amendment for Wagner Spray Tech, subject to the conditions listed in the VOTE - NOTION CARRIED December 21, 1987 staff report. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. OLD BUSINESS Chairman Steigerwald introduced the request and explained that this proposal was tabled by the Commission at their meeting on December 9, 1987. Tnere was no one present to represent the petition. Chairman Steigerwald explained that Commissioner Pauba had received a telephone call from Mr. Oim Filippi, Northstar Engineering, consultant for the applicant, who advised Com- missioner Pauba that his client requested their application be removed from this agenda. Commissioner Pauba stated that Mr. Filippi advised that he would be meeting with Standard Oil of Chicaqo and requested a deferral to redesign and revise their plans. Commissioner Pauba said he advised Mr. Filippi to contact City staff. Director Tremere confirmed that staff has concern regarding the stacking plan as proposed and has recommended denial of the variance request. MOTION by Commissioner Pauba, seconded by Commissioner Marofsky, to defer this item for thirty days, and to direct staff to contact the petitioner to determine the status of the petition. AMOCO OIL COMPANY REZONING, GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN PRELIMINARY PLAT FINAL PLAT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, VARIANCE AND SITE PLAN (87062) MOTION TO DEFER Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED Page 10 Planning_ Commission Minutes January 13, 1988 Chairman Steigerwald introduced the request by Thomas THOMAS BISANZ Bisanz, Northland Land Company. Reading of the december 25, NORTHLAND LAND CO. 1987 staff report was waived. Chairman Steigerwald intro- REVISED PUD PRELIMIN- duced Mr. Thomas Bisanz. Mr. Bisanz introduced Mr. Ron ARY PLAN, CONDITIONAL Erickson, KKE Architects, who reviewed the development USE PERMIT, PUD FINAL proposal. PLAN AND PLAT FOR MALLARD POINTE Chairman Steigerwald requested that Mr. Erickson follow the (87110) items as outlined in the staff report, points A. through G., for discussion purposes. A. Drive Aisle Width: Mr. Erickson explained that the petitioner proposes the drive aisles be maintained at a width of 20 ft. The %vidth is adequate for traffic flow and presents a more residential appearance for the development. It also allows one-half acre additional green space for this development. He asked the Commis- sion to keep in mind that these are private drives, not public streets. Commissioner Wire stated he drove through the Haple Grove development where the aisles are 19 ft. wide. They seemed narrow, especially if one were to meet a larger vehicle such as a pick-up truck; there is not much room to get by. How- ever, with the additional two feet (20 ft. width) proposed for this development, along with the increased green space, he believes this is not an unreasonable request. Commissioner Marofsky would like the developer to mark the area entrances as "No Parking and No Stopping." B. Setback between Buildings and Drive Aisles: Mr. Erickson explained the changes that will improve the entrances to the buildings with a front entry island and the addition of a landscaped buffer at the end of the entrance walkway. Commissioner Pauba stated he drove through the Maple Grove development and felt comfortable with the circulation. C. Location and Accessibility of Amenities: Mr. Erickson believes this development to be "amenity -rich." The developer has created different types of open space for a variety of uses. These areas give different options to the residents to choose the amenity area they want to have nearby. He pointed out and listed the ponding area for skating, a gazebo with a bar-b-que pit, picnic areas, a quarter mile trail around the pond, with exer- cise stations and seating along the way, tot lots, volley ball areas, and play fields. The clubhouse is separated from the living units and this separation is needed to provide privacy for the club and pool. The clubhouse is oriented for maximum sunlight and views of Parkers Lake. The clubhouse is designed to provide a sense of community for the development. A_ Page 11 Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1985 Commissioner Marofsky inquired if the space used for offices and maintenance is included in the computation for the amenities. Mr. Erickson stated there will be offices, but he does not know whether they are included in that computation. D. Amount of Parking: Mr. Erickson stated the parking has been increased to 436 spaces. To satisfy the concerns regarding the parking, the plan provides for two cars per unit. If there is a need for additional parking in the future, this can be built, and the plan reflects those future parking areas. They would like to keep these areas as green space, but, any future parking needs can be accommodated. Commissioner Marofsky stated that he would not care to see the parkinq spaces at the front of the development, noted as "future parking", ever used. E. 40 -foot. Building Setback: Mr. Erickson stated that because of the grades and building types, he believes the layout provides variety to dispel the "wall" effect while maintaining an adequate setback. F. Design of Access to the Site: Mr. Erickson stated the access widths remain the same as originally proposed and are believed to be adequate. G. Transition between Residential and Industrial Property: Mr. Erickson showed the through -section for this area. They have added trees for better screening. This developer is also designinq the industrial property, so has a strong interest in maintaining transition and reducing any impact on the residential development. Commissioner Wire inquired if berming would be used. Mr. Erickson stated the plan shows only landscaping. The types, size, and number of trees were discussed. Mr. Erickson stated they could add berming if this would be deemed necessary. Commissioner Marofsky inquired how this would affect the flat land amenities. Mr. Erickson stated the site is rol- ling terrain, and a 3 to 4 ft. slope for berm could be added. Commissioner Zylla inquired if Phase II will he similar to this development plan. Mr. Erickson answered yes. Commis- sioner Zylla inquired if the development of Phase II would not require wider drives. Mr. Erickson stated that if it became necessary, widening the streets could be accomplished at that time. Page 12_ Planninq_ Commission Minutes January 13, 1985 Commissioner Marofsky stated concern that if certain of these items are approved, it could set a precedent for the next development in that this is a total Planned Unit Devel- opment. He inquired what was envisioned originally, as this means that the proposed footprint for the structures and parking will have less area. Commissioner Marofsky stated that this seems to be a sub- stantial change from that plan, and one which affects the Planned Unit Development in total. This development plan may be very nice, but dispersal of density makes a differ- ence that, he believes, would set a precedent. Chairman Steigerwald stated that this is an innovative development plan; the development area encompasses a huqe amount of land; and, the proposed units are salable with good accessibility. Now that most of the major concerns have been resolved and/or diminished; it leaves the Commis- sion with the basic concern with major density dispersal and changes to the total Planned Unit Development Plan. Director Tremere explained that with submittal of plans for Phase II, this developer will need to build his case again by meeting the PUD design criteria and Attributes. He pointed out that Condition No. 5 of the recommendation for approval for the Revised PUD plans, confirms that final plans set the standard for the project. The amendment to the PUD plan brought about the flexibility for future phases of development, as noted by Condition No. 10 which assures an accounting of the number of units and density calculation. Commissioner Wire stated that language may be required to indicate that this approval is for a "prototype" and sets no precedent for future site development in this Planned Unit Development. MOTION by Chairman Steigerwald, seconded by Commissioner Stulberg to recommend approval for the Revised Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan, Final Plan, and Conditional Use Permit for Thomas Bisanz, Northland Land Company, sub- ject to the conditions as listed in the December 28, 1987 staff report, adding Condition No. 11: The entry ways to the units are to be marked "No Parking and No Stopping"; and, Condition No. 12: Berming shall be installed on the north side of the open play fields and the revised plans shall be submitted to be approved by City staff as to compliance with the Landscape Policy. Mr. Bisanz inquired if , in -lieu of signage they could pro- vide yellow striping and assure that information regarding this regulation be made available to all residents. He stated there will be an on-site staff (a caretaker for each building) to enforce this regulation. NOTION TO APPROVE Page 13 Planninq_ Commission Minutes January 13, 1987 MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg seconded by Chairman NOTION TO AMEND Steigerwald to Amend the Motion so Condition Ho. 11 should read: Vehicle parking and stopping will be effectively prohibited at the entry ways to the units, and this regulation will be enforced year-round by the on-site management staff. Vote on the Amendment. 6 Aves. MOTION carried. VOTE - NOTION CARRIED Vote on the Main Motion as Amended. 6 Ayes. MOTION VOTE - MAIN MOTION carried. MOTION CARRIED ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: January 22, 1988 For City Council Meeting of February 1, 1988 T0: James G. Willis, City Manager Through Fred G. Moore "Director of Public Works FROM: Richard J. Pouliot, Project Coordinator SUBJECT: RECYCLING STATUS REPORT Attached are two graphs which reflect the total 1987 recycling status in Plymouth. The first chart is the standard chart which we have used before and reflects a December curbside pickup of 106.5 tons. The total collected from January through December of 1987 is 997.1 tons, or 2.1% of the 1987 waste stream of 47,257 tons. The second chart is a thermometer -like chart, which is indexed on the right in percentages of the waste stream recycled, and on the left the cost sharing by Hennepin County corresponding to the percentage of the waste stream which is recycled. This chart reflects a total for 1987 of 10.531 of the waste stream or 4,975.32 tons. The difference between the 997.1 tons, which was picked up as part of the residential curbside pickup program, and the total, resulted from Boy Scout Troop 584, Wayzata Greenwood School, the Pilgrim Lane School Chess Club and Randy's Sanitation, as well as several commercial/industrial firms who provided reports of their ongoing recycling program. This 10.53% will enable us to obtain 70% of our recycling costs from Hennepin County for the year. The graph also shows the 6% 1987 goal of 2,836 tons, which was exceeded by over 2,000 tons. The 1988 Recycling program is on schedule, except for the signing of the new contract which should be ready for signature shortly. The new Recycling brochures have been printed, the Recycling boxes arrived Monday, January 25 and Wednesday, January 27. Both are now being delivered by the street department to the residents of Plymouth. 4 f� f Richard J. Pouliot RJP:kh attachments: graphs rj - •I r.-1 r7 . ......... I F--- C.L. C -i r r'l rT) r ri r --.J 7-- 7— 7— ('r) 1987 RECYCLING TONS COLLECTED ----, Waste stream = 47,257 tons 80% Cost Sharing 70f Cost Sharing 16% (7561.12 Tor.) 10.53% (4975.32) Recycled,Reported as of 1 ,rY.. 10% (4 , 725.7 Torg) ev s t 1987 6% Goal ty.� r. r s (2836 Ton) T. 60°o Cost Sharing 5% (2,362.85 Tori) f .Y�Y ..�Y. • � fir« .L 3,• ,r 1r�r 4 , 2.1% (997,1 Ton) Recycled via curbside P.U. t prop off center 50% Cost Sharing -77 CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO Date: January 27, 1988 To: Laurie Brandt, City Clerk From: Mel Solberg Subject: Claim against the City On January 20, at 5:35 a.m., Officer Luke Way received a radio call from a city snowplow driver that acarndwas blocking Lsno now removal at the intersection of Plnevlew Officer Way subsequently towed and tagged the vehicle under Plymouth City Code 1310.05, Subd. 6. On the same date, I received a call from Mr. Daniel D. O'Neill, owner of the vehicle, stating he felt the towing was unnecessary and requested that the amount of the tow e arbill ( $54. 0edube rreimbursed by the city. After explaining d p P and city code to him he still felt he was being as treated unfair unfairly. to The procedure for filing a claim with the y P Mr. O'Neill. Mr. O'Neill's claim and copies of Officer Way's report are attached. attach: all D W � , Daniel Do O'Neill 665 Windemere Curve Plymouth, Minn. 55441 Lt, Mel Solberg City of Plymouth Police Dept. T am writing this letter to make a claim against the City of Plymouth for $54. 70. My card a 1978 Chev station wagon}was ticketed and towed in the early morning hours of January 20; 1988 after a major snowstorm of near blizzard proportions. We live on a hill in the Gleanloch section of Plymouth. I was unable; to get up the hill of Windemere Curve on the evening of January 19th., due to blowing and drifting snow) which made the road impassable. I did succeed in backing the car off to the side of the road. T want to make the following points-, 1. The car was parked on Windemere Curve, not a through- street. Tt was parked off to the side of the streets under a streetlights visible and no hazzard to traffic(of which there was none - due to the weather conditions), 2. Tt was not in the way of the snowplow. After a snowstorm of that magni- tude, the usual procedure is gil a snowplow will plow a single lane in the middle of Windemere Curve. There is at least eight feet of unplowed snow on both sides of the street. The edges are usually done later that day. This is the pattern for plowing all of Windemere Curve. The area where the car was parked had not been plowed at 7:00 A. M. when T went to shovel out the car. The car tracks were still visible, Photographs were taken of the site showing the tracks and the plowing. The edges of the street were plowed at about 11:30 that morning. 3. We have lived in our house for thirteen years. On two or three other ocassionsp during snowstorms my car was stuck on the street. T had gone down the next morning and shoveled out the car. There was never a ticket nor car towed! 4. Tn the January -February issue of Plymouth on Parade under the heading of Resident Cooperation Provides Key to Efficient Snowplowing) it states, "The winter parking ordinance prohibits parking on city streets after a 2 1/2 inch snowfall... Tllegally parked cars may be ticketed. " Nowhere does it state that the car will be towed! 5. T believe the Plymouth police officer's decision to have the car towed was unnecessary and arbitrary. T am upset) angry) and seek reimbursement. T am enclosing a copy of the towing bill and a drawing showing the car's location on that night . Thank you for your time and consideration, Sincerely ( r � .�------ ,. ITJ ,` �. �� Q �.__. �, _ � `� � � o � --� -.�. �, � ' i .�+ ? y f `�,--. ' 4 i /j J ,� �_� �.i Police Department -- City of Plymouth RELEASE FOR IMPOUND VEHICLE DATE OF RELEASE TIME TOWING COMPANY --ADDRESS RELEASED TO ADDRESS MAKE LICENSE SERIAL NOW IN STORAGE IN YOUR GARAGE UPON PAYMENT AS FOLLOWS: TYPE. I 111-.11V V TOWAGE$ STORAGE$ Total Charges $ Above charges do not include payment of traffic tag or fine, Director of Public Safety which must be paid at Clerk of Municipal Court, 12601 Ridgedale Drive, Room 201, Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343. BY RECEIPT FOR CHARGES I -RECEIPT FOR VEHICLE Note: No claim for loss or damage to vehicle or contents will be Received of considered unless such loss or damage is specified on the back of this form. L in full paymen*t The sum of I RECEIVED OF of towage and storage charges as above THE ABOVE DESCRIBED VEHICLE AND CONTENTS IN SATISFACTORY CONDITION EXCEPT AS NOTED ON BACK. (SIGN E0) I (SIGNED) WHITE -- Police Department YELLOW Top (Police) Bottom (Venicle Owner) PINK -- Towing Company CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: January 20. 1985 TO: Lieutenant. Mel So i tier c FROM: Officer Luka- Wav SUBJECT IMPOUND OF 1975 CHEVROLET OWNED BY DAN I AL O' N I EL OF 665 W I NDEMERE CURVE Per our conversat zciror, 01f2Ci/8= at 0535. received a ca11 from one of the city shown - 1 ow dr i ver- s that there was. a snow) i rd o* Windemere and P i rrev i ew . I proceeded to the location and located M;-. O'Niel 1978 Chevrolet station waoort. silver in color. Parked facing eastbound on Windemere Curve..a very short distance from the intersec- tion with Pineview. The front end of the vehicle was slanted toward the midpoint of the traffic lane on Windemere. thus allowin❑ a single lane of traffic to ❑ass the vehicle. The snowplow had been by already. and due to the vositionina of the vehicle, there was on I v room for one lane of traff i---. This. cciur) l ed with the fact that the vehicle was within 30 fee} of the intersection. 1 felt ttiat the vehicle was a hazard and had Va11ev Tow 1no impound the vehicIe and a citation was issued was issued for violation of City Ordinance 1310.05 Sub C. Snowbird or Blockinc Snow Removal. Citation- were not issued for par k i nc w i th i r! 30 fee+ c -f ar! inter sect i or, and distance from the curb. Nothing further at this t irr}e. LW:o- 0 PLYMOUTH POLICE DEPARTMENT r- 2 NA►.": DOE BUS!NES� ADGF.ES: i HOME PHONE BUSINESS PHONE. hkti': 't .—✓ICiIM GGFa '1+!.TA!r' C—GUM= 41t.A!.' S—SUSPECT Ih'ARRAh' A—A?REE- T—TAGGEC M—MENTIONEC CONTR'-J. NUMBER (OCA C`++.' AGE'.,` NC:'- IDE", CE REPC-= _. G:M REPS=TEC (-r- M- N ', 0 2 7 1 7 1 0 0 i T� /� 0�� ' i d S 3 S PLACE C0VM'T7EG (P,C, •ADDRESS NC + STREET NAV;- A: N: Gam. 7 ILGN I I? ✓ �� OFFENSE OP AC':V'. Y TYPE i' 6'i1.+E Citi t S N AA OC UC; OFFICER NAME BAGS: PATR_ _ AREk TIMES 7`2 C, ' De+e.l,we Ass -.nes S`;� Gea!ec - — PSN NAVE : DOE HOME ADDRESS HOME PHONE - I BUSINESS ADDRESS T BUSINESS PHONE I r- 2 NA►.": DOE BUS!NES� ADGF.ES: i HOME PHONE BUSINESS PHONE. hkti': 't .—✓ICiIM GGFa '1+!.TA!r' C—GUM= 41t.A!.' S—SUSPECT Ih'ARRAh' A—A?REE- T—TAGGEC M—MENTIONEC FINDINGS RE MARP%S DppISPOS ' IONN 0; LOS: VEHICLE IMPOUND REPORT Plymouth Police Department FILE NO PPD DATE RECOVERED J r J COLOR LICENSE , SER�tiL NO YEAR MAKE --- " OWNERS NAME tr �1 ADDRESS r - - CITY `r STATE ZIP CODE LOCATION RECOVERED DAMAGE TO VEHICLE PROPERTY IN VEHICLE KEYS IN VEHICLE. YES NO REASON FOR IMPOUND. ARREST STOLEN ACCIDENT HAZARD . OTHER DRIVER. OWNER NONE OTHER CITATION. YES NO VEHICLE RELEASE. TO OWNER POLICE RELEASE ONLY (Reason) TOW ORDERED AT TYPE: 1 II ill IV V ARRIVED AT DOLLIES USED. YES NO TOW DRIVER �j�� OFFICER Winching more than 50': YES NO DATE OWNER NOTIFIED =;EI'.ESS VA L EY O)Z) ia6o s ��Nth�Qne.P(, a�nv y��;v�inCJ /�+� ��Jfj"i N X2 4�o7A_�d-unANv-�.f�p.C,. �L.c9-o-,-,� , tJL,� . tantic4Ary o..ao.. 12.KT ^o, �+�a-�' ouk -ESC, . �-c�n� „i".4a.(�u G'__' �71on� � �zsyAB .so,.., '�ueod�� a -AOL /oz6 o5am, ley' /.rs- /�1�, if YA 40 -oon 80,00 � -1 15-40 . 40 c �.. `Irlld.c�. 'tAJc.�.acB'I"o iiuow 00. GQG -D� 83 0 .00 CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: January 21, 1988 T4: Jim Willis, City Manager FROM: Mark S. Peterson, Superintendent of Parks SUBJECT WEED AND SHRUB COMPLAINT AT THE INTERSECTION OF 101 AND 3RD. AVE. There has been some discussion that a vision problem or hazard exists at the intersection of Hwy 101 and 3rd. Ave. Mrs. Merlin Dubbelde has indicated that she contacted the City's representative regarding this issue with no apparent response or adequate solution. I have since contacted both Tom Vetsch of the Street Division and Glenn Upton Weed Inspector. Tom Vetsch indicated that he visited the site and on two separate occasions sent Street Division employees to assess the situation. There response was that a vision problem or hazard does not exist. While traveling east on third Ave. you must pull up to the stop sign in order to see the southbound traffic on Hwy 101. This is due to the Hwy 101 wall which is well beyond any vegetation. Glenn Upton indicated that he to was aware of the situation. The weed complaint was lodged after the program was shut down for the season. He did however visit the site and agreed with the Street Divisions findings that a vision problem does not exist. Glenn went one step further in that he and Paul Buck of the Forestry Division weed whipped and brushed an area along the north side of 3rd. Avenue. I did visit the site myself and would agree that no problem exists. The site consists of an overstory of sumac with an understory of vines and tall weeds. This may cause somewhat of an vegetative encroachment which can be maintained to a limited degree by cutting as done by Glenn and Paul. However I don't feel that the site warrants total removal nor do I feel that it would be prudent. cc: Eric Black cr CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: January 13, 1988 TO: James G. Willis, City Manager FROM: Virgil Schneider, Mayor SUBJECT OVERGROWTH OF SHRUBS, WEEDS AND TREES AT THE INTERSECTION OF 101 AND 3RD AVENUE NORTH. I have received a letter from Mrs. Merlin Dubbelde, 400 Queensland Lane, home phone 475-0273, concerning a problem with sight distance when entering 101 from 3rd Avenue North. In a telephone conversation with her yesterday, she told me she called the Street Department last September or October to report the overgrowth problem. Although, we did cut the weeds some two to three feet back from the curb, she believes we haven't been responsive enough to the problem, and suggests the overgrowth be cut some 10 to 15 feet back from the curb. I advised her that I would be turning this matter over to you, and that you would be in contact with her to advise what action would be taken. Mrs. Dubbelde also reported a similar situation at the intersection of Queensland and 3rd Avenue, stating that drivers are having a problem seeing the stop sign at this intersection. Please keep me advised. 1/19/88 -- Jim, Virgil called back today to correct the last sentence of this memo. He advised that Mrs. Dubbelde stated that drivers are "ignoring" the stop sign at Queensland and 3rd Avenue, rather than "having problem seeing" the signs. Judy 3 �Jly ' January 21, 1988 Mr. Don Windseth 11410 - 53rd Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55442 SUBJECT: SNOWPLOWING Dear Don: Councilmember Vasiliou has asked that I investigate and respond to your concerns about city snowplowing. Apparently, the City's private contractors who plow cul-de-sacs have missed you on more than one occasion. Jim Kolstad, Public Works Maintenance Superintendent, acknowledges that your street has been missed in the past. He assures me that the private contractors have been notified that they are responsible for complete snow and ice control efforts on your street. I believe the problem arises because your street is more of a "bubble" off of 53rd than a true cul-de-sac. Nonetheless, there is no excuse for our missing your street. I apologize for any inconvenience we may have caused you. Be assured that we will make every effort to provide you with prompt and complete snowplowing service in the future. If we don't, gust call me. 1 Sincerely, o k- r•�..a �al,.a�-� �-L- Frank Boyles Assistant City Manager FB:kec cc: Maria Vasi 1 iou Mayor & City Council 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2806 CITY OF PUMOUTR Councilmember Vasiliou has asked that I investigate and respond to your concerns about city snowplowing. Apparently, the City's private contractors who plow cul-de-sacs have missed you on more than one occasion. Jim Kolstad, Public Works Maintenance Superintendent, acknowledges that your street has been missed in the past. He assures me that the private contractors have been notified that they are responsible for complete snow and ice control efforts on your street. I believe the problem arises because your street is more of a "bubble" off of 53rd than a true cul-de-sac. Nonetheless, there is no excuse for our missing your street. I apologize for any inconvenience we may have caused you. Be assured that we will make every effort to provide you with prompt and complete snowplowing service in the future. If we don't, gust call me. 1 Sincerely, o k- r•�..a �al,.a�-� �-L- Frank Boyles Assistant City Manager FB:kec cc: Maria Vasi 1 iou Mayor & City Council 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2806 January 19, 1988 Dear Mayor and City Council Members, We join others in our community who have expressed concern about allowing snowmobiles to run within the city limits. It seems irresponsible to allow them to race up and down our streets at speeds not allowed automobiles, and with less control ... stopping quickly is difficult, etc. We are concerned about snowmobi lers being hurt themselves, and also about those who might be involved in an accident with them... for surely, sooner or 1 ater, this will happen here. It might be well for the Council to keep in mind that, when/if a disabling injury or fatality occurs within our city limits and involving a snowmobile, the Council itself, or the City of Plymouth, could surely be on the hurting end of a lawsuit for allowing such craziness. As they swing around corners, they do not have the visibility that cars allow, and walkers of all sizes and ages, as well as cars, may not be seen by those on these kinds of vehicles_ Again, should an automobile driver collide with one of them, the sad results of such an accident might not be the car driver's fault, but the devastating results could still be the same ... for snowmobilers have little protection compared to that offered those occupying an automobile. Please do consider passing a law that would disallow snowmobiles from using streets and roads in our city, and thus encourage them to go out into safer, more open areas not already occupied by trucks and automobiles. We write representing many in our community who share this concern, and thank you f or your cons i derat i cin. .r - N :F A family of Plymouth residents January 25, 1988 Mr. Steven Keefe Chair Metropolitan Council 300 Metro Square Building 7th & Robert Street St. Paul, MN 55101 `• CITYO� PUMOUTR SUBJECT: JANUARY 22 RECYCLING DISCUSSION MEETING Dear Chairman Keefe: :Thnkand Councilmember DeVries for attending our January 22 recycling ng at the Minnetonka Community Center. I am pleased that you concur that there is role which mechanical separation should play in concert with source separation to achieve our collective metropolitan area recycling objectives. We look forward to working with the Metropolitan Council as you review, evaluate and revise the solid waste system plan. Your suggestion to include a representative from Plymouth, Eden Prairie and Minnetonka in the discussions of the system plan is a good one. Please contact Jim Willis and we will arrange to make a representative or representatives available to further discuss our perspective on this issue. I am attaching for Metropolitan Councilmember information, a sheet entitled "Metropolitan Council Concerns About Mechanical Separation." This information formed the basis for our discussion last Friday and our perspective on the five concerns you raised in your January 5 letter. Once again, thank you for your attendance at the meeting and your responsiveness to our concerns. Sincerely, Vi gil Schneider Mayor VS:kec cc: Dirk DeVries Mayor Donlin Mayor Peterson Josephine Nunn Councilmember Sisk Jim Willis 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESnTA 554-47. TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 .iPfjE!ti .'7Ei `• CITYO� PUMOUTR SUBJECT: JANUARY 22 RECYCLING DISCUSSION MEETING Dear Chairman Keefe: :Thnkand Councilmember DeVries for attending our January 22 recycling ng at the Minnetonka Community Center. I am pleased that you concur that there is role which mechanical separation should play in concert with source separation to achieve our collective metropolitan area recycling objectives. We look forward to working with the Metropolitan Council as you review, evaluate and revise the solid waste system plan. Your suggestion to include a representative from Plymouth, Eden Prairie and Minnetonka in the discussions of the system plan is a good one. Please contact Jim Willis and we will arrange to make a representative or representatives available to further discuss our perspective on this issue. I am attaching for Metropolitan Councilmember information, a sheet entitled "Metropolitan Council Concerns About Mechanical Separation." This information formed the basis for our discussion last Friday and our perspective on the five concerns you raised in your January 5 letter. Once again, thank you for your attendance at the meeting and your responsiveness to our concerns. Sincerely, Vi gil Schneider Mayor VS:kec cc: Dirk DeVries Mayor Donlin Mayor Peterson Josephine Nunn Councilmember Sisk Jim Willis 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESnTA 554-47. TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL CONCERNS ABOUT MECHANICAL SEPARATION CONTAINED IN JANUARY 5, 1988 STEVE KEEFE LETTER 1. The cost for mechanical processing of recyclables is roughly twice that of source separation, however, this does not include costs involved in promoting a higher level of source separation. A. All costs associated with source separation and with mechanical processing are not really known yet as much of the data to date relies upon projection. B. The cost for mechanical processing will most certainly be borne by those who use it, therefore, cost is not a metropolitan wide issue. C. The 400 ton per day allocation to Reuter has already been factored into metropolitan area waste stream calculations. Therefore, there is no need for additional capacity or increased costs associated therewith. 2. If all recyclables were mechanically separated (including the 16%), the region would need at least an increase of 1,400 tons per day of processing capacity. The current costs of additional capacity are estimated between $48 and $54 per ton. A. No one is arguing that mechanical separation should be the exclusive regional means of recycling. What we are saying is that the arsenal Of tools available to municipalities should include a mix of waste management strategies, including source separation, waste reduction, mechanical separation, etc. A wider variety of solid waste manage- ment tools is consistent with the Metropolitan Council's Solid Waste Management Plan and the Citizen's League study on solid waste management issues. B. Instead of having an unlimited amount of mechanical separation, it is more likely that a limited number of mechanical separators would be available, and that the County's flow control powers would limit the amount of mechanical processing capacity. Therefore, there would be no need to increase the region's processing capacity. C. No one knows precisely the actual tonnage in the solid waste stream today, let alone, the future. It is entirely possible that the stream is larger than currently projected, or that the stream will increase over time. The metropolitan area requires the capacity to absorb such additional tonnages and mechanical separation provides this additional capacity. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL CONCERNS ABOUT MECHANICAL SEPARATION CONTAINED IN JANUARY 5, 1938 STEVE KEEFE LETTER Page Z 3. The extent of landfill abatement being achieved through mechanical separation is not known. A Council sponsored study by Northern States Power should provide better information. A. It is probable that some communities would utilize mechanical processing exclusively, others would utilize source separation exclusively, and still others would combine the two. This blend of tools available to each municipality would addresss landfill abate- ment concerns. B. The use of source separation supplemented by mechanical separation should result in greater recycling. This, after all, is our shared objective and should be promoted by the Metropolitan Council, counties and municipalities. C. The County, or Council could enhance oversight of private facilities by allowing municipal use through contract agreement where oversight provisions addressing landfill abatement, levels, costs, etc., are included to the County's satisfaction. By requiring oversight as a precondition to use of mechanical separation, the County and Council can be assured that landfill abatement is indeed taking place on a continuing basis. 4. It is not clear whether materials separated centrally are as marketable as source separated materials. Private firms are apparently not separating glass and the yard waste is not as usable when mixed with other municipal waste first before separated. A. The issue of marketability of mechanically separate;l mutor;aIs is of great interest to the private operator. For him it is his continued business existence. He will do everything necessary to assure that his waste stream is marketable. This is not a metropolitan issue. B. Private separators have indicated that _yard waste must be included in their waste stream in order to remain profitable. Here again, it is in the private operator's best interest to assure that the yard waste is marketable for composting purposes. Since the operator's profitability depends upon the marketability of his product, the issue is not a public concern. C. The oversight requirement referred to previously will assure that the amounts landfilled following mechanical separation are within the parameters set forth by the Metropolitan Council and counties. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL CONCERNS ABOUT MECHANICAL SEPARATION CONTAINED 1N JANUARY 5, 1988 STEVE KEEFF LETTER Page 3 5. Other arguments which could be made for mechanical separation. A. Allowing mechanical separation will not affect the County's ability to establish source separation, should mechanical separation fail. The County's flow control authorities and requirements for municipal oversight of mechanical separation will provide adequate safeguards to ensure that recycling is taking place satisfactorily. It will also provide the County with the authority necessary to require municipalities to revert to source separation if mechanical separation proves to be unproductive. B. Mechanical separation is a reality today. It should continue to exist side by side with public programs in order that the public is able to make an ongoing evaluation of the effectiveness of both source separation and mechanical separation programs in dollar, recycling, and landfill abatement terms. If mechancial separation is excluded, no such cost effectiveness evaluation can be made. rR�o��ECT 2875 Snelling Ave. N. 0 St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612/633-1864 Robert P Heinrich, Director January 25, 1988 Dear City Official: Your city's cable TV provider is in the porn business. The kind of raunch material available in downtown adult theaters and in many of the video outlets is currently available via pay -for -view cable. During the weeks of December 6 and 13, four sex films available through your cable system were monitored. The films, "Sailing into Ecstacy", "Delicious Genies", "Dirty Girls", and "Ecstacy Girls, Part Two" were shown. In these films there was blatant nudity with both male and female genitals being exposed, masturbatory practices by both males and females, couples (male and female) having sexual intercourse as well as references to oral sex, group sex with numerous males and females. There were often elements of violence in sexual context. With FCC deregulation of Cable TV and the state of Minnesota Cable Board no longer functioning, the responsibility for regulating the Cable TV fare in your community now rests with you and fellow members of the City Council. As City Manager of Minnetonka in 1970 I was appointed to a six city Cable TV study commission. We drafted the model franchise agreements and held hearings on what future cable offerings should be. Not in our worst nightmares did we dream that Cable systems would pump such filth into our homes and before our families. A few years ago, Shauna Grant (professional name), a young woman from Farmington, MN, at the age of 18 and in the company of her boyfriend traveled to Los Angeles. In a matter of weeks she was out of money and she was talked into posing for sex magazine photographers. Soon she was starring in XXX -rated movies. Within a year she had acquired a drug addiction, numerous venereal diseases, had an abortion and finally, in deep despair, killed herself. WCCO-TV, in a well done 1987 documentary, chronicled her story in a program entitled "Death of an American Girl." Taking advantage of that free publicity and advertising, the porn czar of Minnesota, Ferris Alexander, featured a "Shauna Grant film festival" at his dirty movie outlets in the Twin Cities, thus profiting as much as possible from her tragic life and death. During the days of January 27 through 29 your Cable System is offering "Shauna: Every Man's Fantasy". I hope you find this as despicable as I do. This type of pay -for -view offerings do not meet Minnesota community standards and must not be permitted. This film and others of its kind must not invade our homes, especially during these terrible days of the AIDS epidemic when the promotion of casual sex is resulting in a death sentencex� for so many. ro Minnesota Clearinghouse to Eliminate Pornography�'V4�� t i 7 r # } The CLEAN UP Project represents scores of groups and hundreds of churches of all denominations in this concern. We plead with you to demand the removal of this material from your cable system. The Holy Scripture rerninds us that the purpose of government is to preserve order and to restrain evil. Please exercise your duty to restrain this evil. If I can be of service to you in this matter or in any other concern regarding the problem of obscenity, please do not hesitate to call on me. Sincerely, Robert P. Heinrich RPH/jh Y' January 21, 1988 CITY OF PUMOUTR Susan Christie 2345 Hemlock Lane Plymouth, M 55441 Dear Susan: I have been asked to respond to the letter you sent to the Audubon Society with regard to the wet lands and marsh referred to as Curtis Lake. Curtis Lake lies in an area irnnediately north of County Road 9 and east of I-494. The surrounding land is guided LA3, high to medium density residential. It is anticipated that sewer will be made available to this area in 1990. Currently, Hennepin Parks owns a trail corridor approximately 100 feet wide, running east -west, south of Curtis Lake and north -south, between the freeway and Curtis Lake. This regional corridor will be a passive area allowing for hiking, biking, horses and snowmobiles. I anticipate minimal development or disruption of this area by the park district. Curtis Lake and the wetlands are protected in a number of ways from indiscriminate development. First of all, Curtis Lake is a designated ponding area within the City of Plymouth storm drainage plan. This means that it will continue to be a major water holding area in the future and, therefore, cannot be filled in any manner. This wetland is also protected by the DNR and the Corps of Engineers. Any efforts by a developer in the future to dredge, fill or otherwise modify the wetlands would require permits from both the Department of Natural Resources and the Corps of Engineers. Through the public hearing process you would have an opportunity to give input to not only the City of Plymouth, but also the DNR and the Corps of Engineers. The City of Plymouth is very proud of the natural open spaces that have been maintained throughout the City. I can assure you that the City will do everything in its power to protect and preserve the wetland that you have enjoyed so much. By way of notification, please keep an eye out for a sign that will go up on this property identifying it as a possible development site if and when that may occur. If you have further questions with regard to this matter, I can be reached at 559-2800 x 265. Sincerely, L";O' ifs Eric J. Blank, Director Parks and Recreation EJB/np cc: City Manager 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD. PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (6121 559-2800 1/5/88 I am sending along a copy of the letter that I have written to the Audubon Chapter, Mpls. Audubon Wetlands Watch, Conservation Committee (David Stamps, Bev Weddle). I also have enclosed a Hennepin County Park map. an a 1987 Park map I saw corridor designation for this Marsh area as the corridor reached from French to Elm Creek park. Is this pian no longer in effect. I believe that the area (wetland) which I am concerned with fell within the corridor. Drive over to the Marsh in the spring. Or now, in the winter. It is beautiful in any season. What can be done????? Susan Christie 2345 Hemlock Lane Plymouth, MN 55441 January 5, 1988 Conservation Committee Audubon Wetlands Watch Audubon Chapter of Mpls. P.O. Box 566 Mpls., MN 55440 I am an artist and a new member of Audubon. I have the November Newsletter here. You have a conservation committee. Possibly you can help save a nearby marsh (and surrounding area). I contacted the Nature Conservancy last summer. Peg Koehring came out to talk to me and visit this wetland. However, she said it was too late for their organization to help. I have been out watching here for the past five years. The marsh is between my home on Medicine Lake and my painting partners home between County Rd. 9 and 10 along Hwy. 494. We both have been watching and painting there, for her it has been 11 years. Basset Creek is just north about 1/3 - l/4 mile. It is rumored that the Hwy. Dept. has plans for a 494 interchange here sometime in the future. Last year a residence was built right along one edge. Housing is creeping closer. I am very worried about the future of this small but vibrant area and its many regular nesting inhabitants. I will be glad to participate and appreciate the power of a group effort. During the season an ever-increasing and very diverse bird and animal population use this area. Last year we saw many new birds. Possibly they were unable to use other areas which had gone dry because of the drop in precipitation and they found a home here. It had water all during the dry time. Fishing supported the herons and egrets as some areas seem to be fairly deep. Susan Frame and I sat down and made a list of what we both have seen in the Marsh and the adjacent woodland. Location: Between County Road 9 and 10, along 494. (primarily along the east side of 494.) Egret Great Blue Heron Green Heron Black Crowned Night Heron at least 2 nesting pairs Bi t t e r n Great Horned Owl Catbirds Goldfinch Red Wing Blackbirds nesting Hawks; Redtail, Sparrow Canada Geese nesting Pintails Grebe nesting Kingfisher Ospray Mallard nesting Woodduck BIueWinged Teal Swa 1 lows Kingfisher nesting Ospray Otters Muskrat Foxes Deer Turtles large snapping Frogs Blue Flag Marsh grasses S i n c e r e I Susan Christie 2345 Hemlock Lane Plymouth, MN 55441 559-5023 cc: Clifton E. French Regional Park Hdqtrs, Shirley A. Bonine, Vice Chair, District Board of Park Comm. Plymouth City Council to\ WRIGHT COUNTY Elm Creek Park Resary Cr]w-Hassan 94 Lake�� Rebecca Park Reserve s 921 11 51{- `" Wild Goose LY�llen Wildlife Chase Islan u�(\ Sanctuar lwawfttass3,e e t8 S 7 ��Iglan � - $ryent Lake Regions! Park 51 , Carver Park Reserve Li-ry Motu,* conte, + CARVER COUNTY M +nnP d P SCOTT COUNTY 242 NOKA COUNTY Coon Rao+ds Dam Reg,0nat Park 35 for 7bC: 252! i 189 . RAMSEY COUNTY + KAINNEAPOLISi a fZ NEW 4 94o 27 DAKOTA t3 —COUNTY The Cnnrwectilcm ti=\ All park buildings closed Christmas Day, and 22.900(1r at noon on Christmas Eve. Dec. - 430 p.m * Sunset Times are Jan. 5 r.m Feb. - 5.30 p.m March - 6 p.m, Facilities for All Parks 559-9000 ac ac a P.O. Sox 41320 Plymouth, MN 55441 559-9000 Park Ranger Office ..... 559-9000 Emergency Only rz Dispatch ..... . ......... 5449511 Baker Park Reserve Entrance Gate!Campg round ... 479-2258 Key 473-7418 Bryant Lake Regional Park ..... 941-7993 Carver Park Reserve - n m Lowry Nature Center ........ 472-4911 Ski Trailhead . I . . . 446-9981 Cleary Lake Regional Park . . 447-4027 Outdoor Recreation Center .... 4-47-12-171 Coon Rapids Dam Regional Park Visitor Center . I .... 757-4700 Crow -Hassan Park Reserve ...... 424-5511 Ski Trailhead428-2765 Elm Creek Park Reserve Eastman Nature Center ....... 420-4300 Outdoor Recreation Center .... 424-5511 After Hours . ... 425-6316 French Regional Park ..... SS9-9000 Ski Trailhead 559-0512 Hyland Lake Park Reserve Hyland Hills Ski Area ..... 835--4604 Outdoor Recreation Center .... 941-4362 Richardson Nature Center ..... 941-7993 Lake Minnetonka Islands ........ 559-9000 Lake Rebecca Park Reserve ..... 757-4700 Entrance Gate ........ ..... 972-3407 Murphy-Hanrehan Park Reserve ......... ......... 447-6913 Noerenberg Memorial Gardens .................. R _ U I _ U U II i 4 R. �� b U C� .s 0 ?� O q vII a of a y U I �I ql [ d{ l Cj O R Reservations available v; n r 0 RR Reservations required 0 o¢ E H - ^� .I a a 4 o rapo0_ .. v cn i+♦"' ---_.--_'_-`t_o Slcer ParReserve • ••_l;inU Bryant Lake Regional Park i• •__Ua •Uo •_A •__x^ _n. tx }_•zl i • •••na •�/0 • — Carver Park Reserve • •apta Geary Lake Regional Park 4i i• _•V_d *m •iR:. -or i•o('� • • • �; • • • • . ! • Coon Rapids Dam Regional Park --- Crow Hassan Park Reserve ! I • Elm Creek Park Reserve �^ __ • • •_ • �• •_ • �i _• • •_ _ _• • r • French Regional Park • • • • • • • • •_ • / • • • _ _ •_ • •_ • • • • • •_ f• • �i • • 10_ • •_ • • • / _• _• • • ! •_ - • • • Hyland Lake Park Reserve • Lake Rebecca Park Reserve • Murphy-Hanrehan Park Reserve • _ _ _ N. Hennepin Trail Corridor Lake Minnetonka Islands - �� _ • —� -- Noerenberg Memorial Park •I Pets allowed oo designated traila only Hennepin Parks Information and Reservations for All Parks 559-9000 Administrative Offices 1261S County Road 9 P.O. Sox 41320 Plymouth, MN 55441 559-9000 Park Ranger Office ..... 559-9000 Emergency Only 911 Dispatch ..... . ......... 5449511 Baker Park Reserve Entrance Gate!Campg round ... 479-2258 Ski Chalet ..... ... .... 473-7418 Bryant Lake Regional Park ..... 941-7993 Carver Park Reserve Lowry Nature Center ........ 472-4911 Ski Trailhead . I . . . 446-9981 Cleary Lake Regional Park . . 447-4027 Outdoor Recreation Center .... 4-47-12-171 Coon Rapids Dam Regional Park Visitor Center . I .... 757-4700 Crow -Hassan Park Reserve ...... 424-5511 Ski Trailhead428-2765 Elm Creek Park Reserve Eastman Nature Center ....... 420-4300 Outdoor Recreation Center .... 424-5511 After Hours . ... 425-6316 French Regional Park ..... SS9-9000 Ski Trailhead 559-0512 Hyland Lake Park Reserve Hyland Hills Ski Area ..... 835--4604 Outdoor Recreation Center .... 941-4362 Richardson Nature Center ..... 941-7993 Lake Minnetonka Islands ........ 559-9000 Lake Rebecca Park Reserve ..... 757-4700 Entrance Gate ........ ..... 972-3407 Murphy-Hanrehan Park Reserve ......... ......... 447-6913 Noerenberg Memorial Gardens .................. 4754666 General Park Houyzz S a.m. - 10 p.m. Trails 8 a.m. - Sunset' Nature Centers and Coon Rapids Dam Visitor Center 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. Daily Hyland Outdoor Recreation Center 9 a.m. - 9 p.m. Daily Elm Creek Outdoor Recreation Center 9 a.m. Sunset*, Sun. - Fri. 8 a.m. - Sunset % Sat. Open 'til 9 p.m. Wed. Cleary Lake Recreation Center 9 a.m. - Sunset', Sun. - Fri. 8 a.m. - Sunset % Sat. Baker, Crow -Hassan and Murphy-Haarehan Trailheads 9 a.m. Sunset*, Sun. - Fri. 8 a.m. • Sunset', Sat. French and Carver Trailhead 9 a.m. Sunset' , Mon., Wed., Fri., Sun. 8 a.m. - Sunset % Sat. Lake Rebecca Trailhead 9 a.m. Sunset' , Thurs., Fri., Sun. 8 a.m. - Sunset'. Sat. 1 nu a��F � udw MONA A AARON CROHN 10205 27TH AVE. N. PLYMOUTH, MN 55441 -Sy 5 -(p %o s g At - JAN 251 CITY Of PLYMOUTH G✓L ,Ewt, .rin %w.�+u �t� .tea 2a?` .e��e ""{ fie. �Eaf � 7t6w' ,lbrrr/�✓ � CL�6�1` d� ��%t 6� yrvmedra� ,�PvLk 02-6 C/u%liu�,. �n ,r,�u (�,Uivwnui✓ ;�/�y"�` �rde �i� u� Xr //�`,�6naErki � 7-il � /77�ree�e �/u- ��iars'. AV/ .� ice- 7��ui �i �i a AUb �J2 � ✓✓n ?Y l ,Etat¢ �° �e .�G�af . �tccGr /'U✓in � iCIGLe .�✓�,6-ev ,0/✓ .Gue-� �k0 �c(ll�vrt t �ti iii a ,2aa� rotate All� ,fib° �e �t�r/ ry�4;r Ul�r� �h ,�C6rtiJ AM& 0 JL 0 7 3� �� IQ nn L L Ar-,( January 1 5, 1988 Lyle Robinson, Fire Chief PLYMOUTH FIRE DEPARTMENT '5400 P1vmouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Chief Robinson: On Wednesday, January 13th at 4:30 pm, the Minnetonka Fire Department responded to a townhouse fire at 5354 Beachside Drive. On our arrival, we discovered a well involved unit that quickly threatened three other units. This fire was difficult to bring under control, and the below zero temperature required frequent rotation of our crews. The Standby Crews that your Department provided during this period were greatly appreciated, as they allowed us the peace of mind to concentrate on a difficult situation. (We did confine the fire to the original unit). Thank you, and don't hesitate to call on us if we can provide your department with any assistance. Sincerely, Paul B. Hooper, Fire Chief MINNETONKA FIRE DEPARTMENT PBH:gh the city offices are located at 14t^00 minnetonka boulevard minnetonka, minnesota 55345 933-2511 South Lake Minnetonka Public Safety Department 143 OAK STREET EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331-3095 RICHARD A. YOUNG Chief January 25, 1988 Chief Dick Carlquist Plymouth Police Department 8400 Plymouth Boulevard 1.yrr,ol:th . Minn= 5ota. 55447 Dear Chief Carlquist: ( 612) 474-3261 I would like to express my appreciation for the cooperation of your department during our recent drug project. Your staff was invaluable in the assistance they provided to Sgt. Talbot and this department. They provided a great deal of manpower which was very beneficial to the project and necessary in the execution of two search warrants in your jurisdiction. Without the assistance of your officers, the successful completion of the searches and subsequent arrests would have been impossible. The conduct of your officers reflects very favorably upon themselves and the rest of your department. Please convey my sincere thanks to all involved. Sincerely, Richard A. Youn Chief of Police iA is " g Ll �LC . JAN 27 �r Mara Serving South Lake Minnetonka Communities of Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood and Tonka Bay t f k January 20. 1988 CITY Or NLYMOU1,14 Mr. Dale Gustafson 7600 67th Avenue North Brooklvn Park. Minnesota 55428 RE: ASSISTANCE FROM NORTHWEST TRAILS SNOWMOBILE CLUB Dear Mr. Gustafson: As stated in our phone conversation yesterday. the City of Plymouth has received numerous complaints from its citizens regarding snowmobiles being used contrary to Citv Ordinance. Specifically, most of the complaints deal with illeaal use of snowmobiles on private or public property. Several members of our Citv Council stressed the imr)ortance of self-policina by members of snowmobile clubs to correct the habits of those snowmobilers who are currently breaking the law. In that regard. I seek ,your help and assistance! In vour current Position of Trail Administrator for Northwest Trails Snowmobile Organization and, more importantly, your position as a member of the Brooklyn Park City Council. I would welcome vour comments and suaaestions. You indicated that perhaps we may be too late this year to make anv significant difference in the behaviors of our snowmobilers. Your offer of being present at the next Citv Council Forum on February 8th is areatly appreciated. In your absence, you did state that a member of a Plvmouth snowmobile club. Jack Elder, would be present. Thank you for your time and consideration in this sensitive matter. I look forward to hearing from you or Mr. Elder at the February 8th Plymouth City Council Forum. which starts at 7:00 P.M.. Sincerely. Richard J. Carlouist Public Safetv Director RJC:os cc: TJames G. Willis - City Manaaer 0 PLYMOUTH BOULE APD, PLY1N, J',' T H. t." j -)TA