HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Information Memorandum 12-29-1988k r6
C Y
CITY OF
PLYMOUTR
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
December 29, 1988
RECYCLING CASH DRAWING
December 29: No Winner
Next Week: $200 Cash Award
UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS.....
1. CITY OFFICES CLOSED -- Monday, January 2.
2. COUNCIL MEETING -- Tuesday, January 3, 7:30 p.m. Regular City
Council meeting in City Council chambers.
3. METRO COUNCIL PUBLIC MEETING - COUNTY TRANSFER STATION PROJECT --
Thursday, January 5, 7 p.m., Cooper High School Auditorium.
Public information meeting on the draft Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement for proposed changes in Hennepin County's planned
solid waste transfer station network. A copy of the Executive
Summary to the SEIS is attached. (M -3)
4. LEGISLATIVE BREAKFAST MEETING -- Saturday, January 14, 8:00 a.m.
A legislative breakfast meeting with local officials and legislators
from Districts 45, 46, 47 and 48 will be held at the Brooklyn Center
Civic Center. A copy of the meeting notice is attached. (M -4)
5. MEETING CALENDARS -- The January meeting calendar is attached. Also
attached is a one -page calendar reflecting 1989 Council Meeting
dates. (M -5)
FOR YOUR INFORMATION.....
1. CABLE T.V. -- The Northwest Cities program will feature an eight to
nine minute segment on the January 19 public meeting on the proposed
community center. Councilmember Jerry Sisk and Park and Recreation
Director Eric Blank will appear on the program which is scheduled to
be taped on Wednesday, January 4. The program will be shown on
channel 37 on Thursday, January 5 at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m., and on
Saturday, January 7 at 6 p.m.
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559 -2800
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
December 29, 1988
Page 2
2. COMMUNITY CENTER - MEETING WITH ARCHITECTS - Last Thursday, Council -
members Sisk and Ricker, along with Eric Blank and myself, met with
the three architectural firms selected for the design competition.
The meeting was held with all three firms concurrently in order that
each would receive the same information from the City as to the
design competition process. We reviewed with them the agreement
between the parties, setting forth the terms and conditions of the
competition. We also reviewed and agreed on the format of the
information to be submitted by February 10. We also submitted to
them the document indicating the types of facilities to be consider-
ed as part of their proposals in order that all would be approaching
the project from the same viewpoint. Each of the firms was specifi-
cally asked to be in attendance at the January 19 public meeting for
the purposes of observation. Councilmember Sisk and Ricker advised
them that following the January 19 meeting, possible changes in the
scope of the program could result which would require incorporation
into their design concept. A copy of the materials submitted to
each of the firms resulting from our meeting of December 22 is
attached for your information. (I -2)
3. COURTESY BENCHES (BUS BENCHES) - In November, a local sign company
contacted us wanting to know the City's position with respect to
courtesy or bus benches. This company had been contacted by
Medicine Lake Lines and asked to site bus benches along routes
served by Medicine Lake Lines and by Plymouth Metrolink. The
company tentatively identified locations for up to 54 benches along
these routes. Most benches are proposed to be on City collector
streets in residentially zoned areas. The attached map shows the
proposed locations.
As a result of this request, we checked to determine the number and
location of benches already in the community. We found that 35
benches have already been installed by another firm. Virtually all
benches are on public property in the right -of -way. Most are on bus
routes. No permits have been applied for or issued. Existing
benches are also shown on the attached map.
We also researched the City's Zoning Ordinance. At present, the
ordinance does not specifically address courtesy benches, and the
off - premise signs on them would be considered as "advertising
signs." Since courtesy benches are not addressed by the zoning
ordinance, they are considered to be prohibited, i.e., not allowed,
unless they were defined as "advertising signs." As advertising
signs, they would be allowed only in the B -3 (as a conditional use),
and in the I -1 districts. "Advertising signs" is the classification
given to billboards which are further regulated by spacing require-
ments. The City Code does not' deal with the benches either. They
are not licensed or regulated except, perhaps, as obstructions
within the right -of -way.
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
December 29, 1988
Page 3
The fact of the matter is, a courtesy bench should serve public
transit routes on collector streets within residential areas, and
really are not billboards, per se, although they support signs
advertising goods and services off the site.
The question raised is whether or not the City Council wishes to:
I. Allow unlimited courtesy benches within the community; or
2. Allow benches within some ordinance - defined guidelines and
regulations.
Because of the number of benches already in place, and the inquiry
about having more installed, it does not seem reasonable to allow
benches to continue or to allow more, absent any form of guidelines
or regulations. Nor is it appropriate to "grandfather" existing
benches which are not allowed by ordinance now. This is especially
true because of the issues of sight obstruction, liability (to the
City) and maintenance of the bench and adjacent area.
The Council should direct whether it desires the staff to develop
ordinance provisions which would either allow benches with certain
restrictions, or prohibit benches altogether. If the Council
desires to allow benches, it would be helpful to receive some
direction on criteria the City Council believes would be appropriate
for courtesy bench regulation. (I -3)
4. HOMESTEAD - DECLARATION NOTICES -- Homestead notices are scheduled to
mailed out by the City on Tuesday, January 3. Property owners will
have until January 15, 1989 to return the cards to the City to claim
their homestead exemption.
5. 1989 PROPERTY TAX STATEMENTS -- Scott Hovet advises that the County
expects to have all real estate payable tax calculations completed
by January 17. The City's property tax statements will then begin
to be mailed on January 23.
Due to last year's legislative changes and with the conversion from
assessed values and mill rates to tax capacity, property owners in
Plymouth can expect to receive an approximate 10 to 15 percent
increase in their 1989 tax bill.
6. ADVERTISING IN CITY PUBLICATIONS -- The attached letters regarding
advertising in City publications were mailed to Plymouth malls,
multi - family rental housing, area car dealers, restaurants/ hotels,
elected officials and Plymouth businesses in the Twin West Chamber.
Businesses who advertised in the 1986 Community Information Booklet
were promised discount advertising rates in subsequent issues.
Therefore, they were mailed a rate sheet reflecting the discount
(see attached). (I -6)
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
December 29, 1988
Page 4
7. BUILDING INSPECTION NEWSLETTER -- Attached is a copy of the Building
Inspection newsletter distributed to building contractors and
developers who perform work within the City. (I -7)
8. COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT REMINDER CARD -- Attached is a response from
Joe Ryan to a community improvement reminder card regarding sign
violations on County Road 9 involving Forster's Packing Company and
B. A. Begin & Sons Contracting. (I -8)
9. 1989 CITY ORGANIZATION CHART -- A copy of the City's 1989
Organization diagram is attached. (I -9)
10. VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER REPORT -- A report, "Volunteer Firefighters In
The United States: A Summary of Social Characteristics And
Commitment" is attached. (I -10)
11. CORRESPONDENCE:
a. Letter from Bob Zitur responding to J. Lynne Kratoska, 615
Narcissus Lane, regarding the Evangelical Free Church parking
lot issue. (I -lla)
b. Memorandum from Dick Pouliot on the Hennepin County Board
Meeting of December 20 at which the Funding Assistance Policy
for Source Seaprated Recyclables and Yard Waste was discussed.
(I -llb)
c. Letter from City Attorney, Jim Thomson, to Dale Hale on the
constitutionality of statutory limits of liability for
governmental entities. (I -llc)
d. Letter to City Manager from City Attorney advising that a
summary judgment hearing on the Holiday Plus lawsuit has been
scheduled for February 4. (I -lld)
e. Note from Rod Hillstrom asking that he not be considered for
reappointment to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
(I -Ile)
f. Letter to Gregory Begin, from Mayor Schneider, in response to
Mr. Begin's letter concerning the renewal of the Cotton Club
amusement center. (I -llf)
g. Letter to Tad Jude from Councilmember Zitur. (I -llg)
James G. Willis
City Manager
JGW:jm
attachments
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SETS) evaluates the impact
of transfer station development at sites in Brooklyn Park, Plymouth and
South Minneapolis. The proposed project involves the construction of a
building of approximatelY.72,000 square feet at each of the three sites
together with appurtenant roads, utility systems and landscaping.* , It is
estimated that on an average day in the year 2000, 350 to 550 tons of
municipal solid waste will be delivered to the Brooklyn Park facility and
400 ' to 700 tons each to Minneapolis South and Plymouth. Delivery will be
made in five -ton compactor vehicles. These deliveries will require up to
240 truck trips per- day at the Brooklyn Park facility and 280 trips at
Minneapolis South and Plymouth. After screening, waste will be- unloaded
from the trucks directly into a pit area, compacted, and loaded out to 20-
ton transfer trailers. As many as sixty (60) transfer trips will occur
daily at Brooklyn Park and 70 at Minneapolis South and Plymouth. The
buildings will also have special provisions for drop -off of recyclable
materials, yard waste, and household hazardous waste. Although an exact
schedule has not been developed, all of the proposed stations arek expected
to be operational by the middle of 1990.
2.0 LOCATIONAL ALTERNATIVES
In the development of the county's solid waste management system, a number
of alternative sites have been studied. These, together with the No Build,
are documented in the 1985/1986 Resource Recovery Project EIS. No
additional reasonable alternatives have been identified for the Minneapolis
South site. The original EIS addressed a Brooklyn Park site and an
alternative. No additional alternatives were required for this SETS. Two
additonal alternatives to the Plymouth site were included in the
supplemental study: the Workhouse Industrial Site off of Niagara Lane and
the County Road 15/1 -494 site. The SEIS concluded that transfer station
operation at the Workhouse Industrial site will result in a perceptible
increase in the "before" to "after" noise levels near the Park —
Business Center. The --following Alternative -SL=a ry T 1e presents the
results recorded in the 1985/86 Resource Recovery Project EIS together with
the impacts identified from the current (1988) supplemental analysis.
3.0 GOVERNMENTAL APPROVALS
Governmental approvals for transfer station development will be needed from
the local communities of Brooklyn Park, Minneapolis and Plymouth; local
watershed management organizations, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,
Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities, Minnesota Department of Health, and
Hennepin County. These approvals include conditional use permits to meet
local zoning and land use requirements, review of grading and storm water
management plans, and permits that pertain to design and operation of the
transfer facility itself.
4.1 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The major issue examined was the potential for groundwater contamination.
The transfer station EAW (Metropolitan Council, 1987) had concluded that
releases of contaminants could pose the same risk to area groundwater
iV
W
...7 U
1 <
O U
O
fu ...1 K
CJ
H
F
W
W
1U�
1 S
O O
M 2
OV U
N W
N
W
M
H
H
H
3
N
� O
z
= I
1 o
H
1 F
.NZ <
1 < KF
[C O
� U
i
W H
1 � O
1 p N
1 X p •
a 7 <C
cc <
� X .
J H
O O
C7 N •
H
1r
H -3
z z x z z x z z z z z z z z z
H z x H H x x 2 x x H x x x X
\ \ x \ \ \ \ \ \ r \ \ \
X z X z z z x z z X x x z x z
xzz z x zzxzxxz z zz
H H X C H \\ \: \ rz
xi x SL zzxzxxx hi xz
M \ \ \ \ \ � \ z Z l„1 \1••1 x X H
Sxx X X x:CX xX SS \ \\
z z H
t0 a
D` v
v n
° o a
Y
Y h Y °
-1 Y o c V
V) t. ° c m
V w o a > y o
V
ca o �c n cc
E - olrogot°cro°.�°c
Yp
..) :h OO O Y y C V .-1 V axi -4 V •.O.1 O� � ol O U
Q 4 S Uo0S° t ]roLxas°HZ L. ai< A.t-c ai
V
1
1
o u e
°
4r ° Y
z
O Y n N
Fz
• M X H
x
H
x z x H H x x
x
X H
O
u p
V a V A
ty
> A o O
O
.-1 c c V
x x x
z
x
x x x x z X x
X
z x
M \ \ \ \ \ � \ z Z l„1 \1••1 x X H
Sxx X X x:CX xX SS \ \\
z z H
t0 a
D` v
v n
° o a
Y
Y h Y °
-1 Y o c V
V) t. ° c m
V w o a > y o
V
ca o �c n cc
E - olrogot°cro°.�°c
Yp
..) :h OO O Y y C V .-1 V axi -4 V •.O.1 O� � ol O U
Q 4 S Uo0S° t ]roLxas°HZ L. ai< A.t-c ai
V
1
1
o u e
°
4r ° Y
M
O Y n N
• M X H
x
H
x z x H H x x
x
X H
M \ \ \ \ \ � \ z Z l„1 \1••1 x X H
Sxx X X x:CX xX SS \ \\
z z H
t0 a
D` v
v n
° o a
Y
Y h Y °
-1 Y o c V
V) t. ° c m
V w o a > y o
V
ca o �c n cc
E - olrogot°cro°.�°c
Yp
..) :h OO O Y y C V .-1 V axi -4 V •.O.1 O� � ol O U
Q 4 S Uo0S° t ]roLxas°HZ L. ai< A.t-c ai
V
1
1
o u e
°
4r ° Y
M
O Y n N
A
n
e0
`
Y O V
O -a o
IgoYY
O
u p
V a V A
ty
> A o O
O
.-1 c c V
o O -1
V
QV ■ X
c
c O
L.
e.112,
C, -,
+%+
7 L ro
C
o
q L b4
O
0 c
o
o V o
e s. u.rf
° O
v u�1
C
°
n A to V
c
a
N
C E
t•
1 C o
o a V
u
V O
V �^ 4
w c
°
O u
L CC ° O
-i
.-1 O
°
O
L I.
•i
o a
o
.1 n Y
O A.
>+ o CO C
Y -4 10
•� B o. °
o a o
'
u>
0.0 p
o
o
<
pp
In O o O L
u C�
6. u tp7 7
3 O
co C O. +7 O--4 -� O p ." n
0
0 9 ro- B 1., a v] 7
�
a°
ax
K X H x �
► {
�
� Y
w
1 4
O U =1 0
-3 H O
O O U 0
U
til �1 •
N
F
m
s
U
H
00
H Z
v o
In
W
H
F
H
a
5
! H
z o
< z
m
Q
m
m z
o. o
1 N i
2 F
J a O
F w
H
7-I
U
2
4] H
N O
N
O� Gl
4] Z
F
6
ft
L]
F
J
U K
¢ 4I
4. h
V x
N
-3 H
Oo
ELI N
U
F
OC H
! <
z z z z z
z \ \ z z
z z x z z
V
i J O
z H
z
x x
z\
z
z
is
1. y
\
z \ \ z z
z z x z z
\`l
V
i J O
is
1. y
z z
x z
eo ro
z z z
z z
ro U n O V
C
eo rd -+ 0
0
4 V as ai
I
L ! L 1 V
n
U .i J
-1
C L
.c C L
U
y V �1 O v
v
O V w U n
V
> c
L -d n V O
to
O V c c U
c
U 0
-4
V L -4 .-1 o
G
Z H 22
2
L u +� V L
cc •-
O. + n 0
O
U
MH H
H M
L cA
eG�
O V y
+� H
V
in V 0 -4
4
V V L ri
.-1
f7
ro {1 U
H
d
c n L o0 �.
W
o ro a
e V u o
t
p e 0
V
L +�
>
X y
z
\ \ \
\ \
.i ,c
H H H
H M
>
O n a ro V
o u u
o
C v b .I >
U
a1 O V •
L
C L C o
c a
7
c. o m .•+ 0
0
+� O V L
v eO.. o
n
0
o c ., c n o
cc
�. O n -+
Ct ¢
t <
v.a ..V L L
c
c o o
.r
A o 7 ++
_
o .•1 O .0 V
V
m
r/ O as L V V
V
m
n d -1 O L ry L
L n
v
>1 7 �.. O s0
J
n
F
u
1
r1 n j O n o
b ro U .� +j +� B
n
0
7
n
n
C u e0 cuM O
>,
+1
O
O
7
b n O
-4
.4
x v]
A
V
1 e B n c A
O
V2
L
'.•1
C
u .i V O V
u
ro n
N
N a
oC + > Al
C7 d
V
W .4
V Os
O
U L
V
.i Os C
,
a
O � a t
m 1) 'a V O L L L +� U 7
u S
O
n u
m e cL d q -4 V O V
a
IQ
e0
V h 7
Os O B b 8 4. n V) �t
n V
CZ
Co O
O
.4
.,
oc�o�
x
W)
O c 14
+�
L .r -4
f. \
q�
L-i2W
H
O L=d
A
GO T C.) v
!
-x .0 U
6G Z H T 4 ft
V1
\`l
supplies regardless of the location of transfer stations. This is because
the entire Minneapolis - St. Paul area has similar hydrogeologic
characteristics. The SEIS evaluation supports this conclusion. It also
concludes that groundwater impacts could occur with several types of : liquid
losses, including seepage of wastewater through hard surfaces, rupture of
underground gasoline tanks, minor spills from vehicles, and accidental
releases of household hazardous wastes. None of these potential impacts are
atypical for industrial land uses. Special mitigating measures for design,
construction and operation have been developed which are projected to
minimize the groundwater impact potential.
4.2 SURFACE WATER
The transfer station development will generally increase the amount of
impervious surfacing. Run -off volumes from these paved surfaces under one -
year and 100 -year storm event conditions will increase for all sites except
Minneapolis South where run -off volumes will remain essentially the same as
at present. Each site's run -off will be controlled by a storm sewer system
with routing through a detention pond. The discharge from the ponds to
local storm sewer systems will be controlled to limit run -off rates to
existing conditions. It is proposed that ponds be equipped with skimming
devices to remove floatable pollutants. They will also be designed with
detention times adequate to allow for the settlement of fine sands. In
addition, spill control and other mitigation measures can minimize the
operational effects on surface water quality.
4.3 LAND USE AND ZONING
A transfer station will be consistent with land use plans and zoning at all
sites. However, transfer stations are not identified as a use intended by
the zoning of any of the of the sites and, therefore, specific standards
will ultimately apply to the cities' issuance of conditional use
permits. Hennepin County will demonstrate through the application and
approval process how the standards will be attained.
4.4 TRANSPORTATION
A traffic analysis of all sites was conducted for 1989, the earliest
year
that any facility will be operational. Supplemental level of service
estimates were generated for the Plymouth site for 1990 with the County Road
6/I -494 interchange in- place. This is consistent with the scoping decision
to project traffic impacts for both existing and future conditions.
Existing conditions are a worst case at the County Road 6/I -494 site.
The results of the analysis were compared at each site with and without the
transfer station for A.M. and P.M. peak hour traffic volumes. There were no
changes in intersection levels of service as a result of the project. At
the Brooklyn Park and Minneapolis South sites, all intersections operated at
Level of Service B or— batten;, intersections serving the Plymouth site
operated at Level QCService P) or better in 1989 without the County Road
6/I -494 interchange. In 930, it is expected that the *CR 6/I -494 ramp
terminals will be operational and will experience the greatest impact of the
transfer station. Site traffic will tend to use this interchange' rather
than either TH 55/I -494 or CR 15/I -494. Level of service will be B or
better at the CR 6/I -494 ramp terminals. This is the same as without the
transfer station site traffic. With-the construction of an auxiliary lane
vii
�A- 3
between the CR 6/I -494 interchange and the TH 55/I -494 ,interchange, no
merging or weaving problems are anticipated.
In addition to level of service, the site traffic impacts were also measured
from the standpoint of increased delays that a motorist might experience at
intersections serving each site. It was found for the Brooklyn Park and
Plymouth sites that the average se in delay at the affeeted
intersections will be ess an Qt o see6nar on avera�. For Minneapolis
Souttr, —the worst cas venue and 28th Street) will be
3.2 seconds. These are not considered to be significant increases.
Sight distance provides a measure of whether drivers traveling at posted
speed limits will have adequate reaction time to come to a complete stop, if
necessary, to allow merging maneuvers from minor roadways or site access
roads. Sight distances were compared to the standards established by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers. In all cases it was found that sight
distances at proposed site access driveways were adequate for safe
joperations.
4.5 NOISE
c rA
At all of the noise receptor locations analyzed, noise levels will increase
because of the operational noise of the proposed transfer stations and
because of the increased vehicular traffic (mostly trucks) on the main
access roadways serving the transfer stations. At most noise receptor
locations, the MPCA daytime noise standards are not exceeded after the
transfer stations are in operation and the increases from the "before" to
"after" conditions are imperceptible or barely perceptible. At receptor 2
for the Brooklyn Park site and at receptor 1 for the Minneapolis site, the
MPCA standards are exceeded in the "before" and "after" conditions but the
noise increases will be imperceptible. Only at receptor 3 for the
Minneapolis South site and receptors 1, 2 and 3 for the Plymouth Workhouse
�\ Industrial site will the operation of the transfer station cause a
p2 perceptible increase in the "before" to "after" noise levels. (Minneapolis
li South *receptor 3 is a cemetery and possibly not a NAC -1 land use category.
Less stringent state standards may therefore apply at this location.) At
all receptor locations, the increased traffic levels (due to the transfer
stations) cause negligible increases in the predicted noise levels.
v
4.6 SOLID WASTE SYSTEM IMPACTS
By the year 2000, the county's overall average waste generation rate per day
is expected to reach 2,945 tons. The county's plans call for 20 percent of
its waste to be handled by recycling, waste reduction, or yard waste
composting projects by 1990. Permitted private resource recovery projects
in the county may use up to about 500 tons per day (TPD).
A significant function of the transfer station operation will be to receive -
hour, az_ ardous wastes• For the SEIS, estimates of the quantities and
types of such materials-were prepared based upon special me day collection
projects overseen by the Minnesota - Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). MPCA
'I experience suggests Efiat�78 percen of the household hazardous wastes
delivered `to the transfer statienill consist of used oil and paints.
Assuming a five percent participation rate in Hennepin County, 47 barrels of
ryl� oil and paint and 63 barrels of all types of materials will be delivered to
transfer stations weekly in 1990. Slightly higher quantities are projected
Viii
for the year 2000.
--)
J
An analysis was performed for the SEIS to determine if the transfer station
system would have adequate capacity over its expected design life of 20 -30
years, or roughly to the year 2020. Hennepin County's solid waste
throughput projections, including high, medium and low scenarios, were
developed using different assumptions about waste generation rates,
recycling /reduction rates, and -diversion to private resource recovery
facilities. The SEIS reviews waste quantities for each of these scenarios
in the year 2020. Waste generation growth rates were applied to assess the
adequacy of individual transfer stations and the transfer station system.
One growth rate assumed was 1.2 percent per year taken from the Metropolitan
Council's Solid Waste Development Guide. A higher rate of 2.4 percent was
also tested. It was concluded that capacities will remain adequate through
2020 assuming some diversion of waste to the private resource recovery
facilities and some diversion through yard waste and recycling programs.
4.7 UTILITIES
Utility requirements will be the same for all sites with the exception of
storm sewer (discussed previously in Section 4.2). Run -off rates will be
limited to existing conditions at each of the• sites. Water usage and
sanitary sewer requirements are not considered significant. The discharge
to the sanitary system will actually be quite low in comparison to
established industrial design rates of 2000 gallons per day (GPD) per acre
in Brooklyn Park and 1,500 GPD per acre in Plymouth. Transfer station
discharges will be 75.0 -1,250 gallons per day total for the entire. site,
which is 10.6 acres in Brooklyn Park and 14.6 acres in Plymouth. The
Minneapolis South transfer station will require 13.to 22 percent of the
sanitary capacity needed by the existing residences on the property.'
4.8 LOCAL COMMUNITY IMPACTS
Impacts to the communities were assessed through analysis of a' variety of
socioeconomic factors. One such factor was a change to the local work force
due to employment opportunities created by the transfer , stations'
construction. Construction would initially create about 80 jobs, and
approximately 14 people would be needed for the day -to -day operation of each
facility.
There would likely be some forced relocations of businesses currently on the
proposed transfer station sites. Because the total employment of these
companies is small, there should be no serious long -term effects.
The city assessors for each community were consulted regarding potential
impacts to the property values of parcels adjacent to the proposed sites.
While they had concerns about potential problems of noise, traffic and
aesthetics, none felt that the transfer stations would have serious long-
term negative mpacts to the roperty -- values _01 adjacent par- -c-e 5:
Metf�opo an ounce stu es_ o land uses that are perceived to be
objectionable en o sup ort tnis L5f-c slon.
The police and fire chiefs in each community were consulted regarding their
concerns about the sites. None expressed any doubt about their departments'
abilities to serve the sites, and none of the departments anticipate having
to add additional staff to serve the facilities.
1 x
In summary, the proposed transfer stations should not have serious long -term
negative socioeconomic consequences for the communities in which they are
built.
4.9 WASTESHED ANALYSIS
Areas served by each transfer station and the HERC facility were determined
based on travel time and distance. The transportation methodology developed
for this analysis resulted in each transfer station being assigned a
wasteshed based on travel time and weighted by the amount of waste
generated.
This methodology results in the assignment of wastesheds to transfer
stations based on minimizing travel time and associated costs.-
The reason a wasteshed analysis was conducted was to estimate, based on each
transfer station's wasteshed, the average waste each site would receive and
also as a check to ensure that the design capacity of the transfer stations
would not be exceeded. The results of this analysis indicate that none of
the facilities would receive quantities of waste that would exceed their
throughput capacity.
4.10 AESTHETICS AND HISTORICAL /CULTURAL RESOURCES
Aerial photographs (oblique views) were taken of each site. Sketches of the
transfer stations were superimposed on these aerials to place the projects
within the context of adjacent land uses. In all cases, sensitive
residential areas will be buffered by intervening, less sensitive land uses
and site landscaping. Conditions that may be attached to the issuance of
conditional use permits at the sites may further minimize the potential for
negative aesthetic impacts. The general conformity of the projects with
planned industrial use for each site as well as existing industrial zoning
further suggests that aesthetic impacts will not be significant.
Communications with the Minnesota Historical Society have established that
none of the sites have known historical or cultural resources.
4.11 FLORA AND FAUNA
There are no significant ecological resources on any of the sites.
EXEC- PROTX2 @6
X
E
4 �' Sni'�'•t�%K�
1111111 Jill 1111111111111111111 !1 !1111111111
City of Golden Valley
DATE: December 21, 1988
TO: City Officials and Legislators
FROM: Mary E. Anderson, Golden Valley Mayor
RE: January 14, 1989 Legislative Breakfast Meeting
fir=' DEG .�f 1988
^ CITY
• _. Of
Charles Darth, Director of Intergovernmental Relations for Brooklyn
Park, and I have arranged for a meeting of local officials and
legislators from Districts 45, 46, 47 and 48. The meeting will be in
Constitution Hall in the Brooklyn Center Civic Center at 8:00 Ali on
Saturday, January 14, 1989. Orange juice, coffee and rolls will be
available.
These meetings usually last about two hours. As in the past, we are
asking particular legislators to make introductory remarks on several
issues and then open it for discussion and questions.
This memo is being sent to Mayors and Managers. Please notify any
others interested.
AGENDA
1. Introductions.
2. Property Tax Reform.
3. Tax Increment Financing.
4. MVET Transfer.
5. • Other.
6. Next Meeting ?
Civic Center, 7800 Golden Valley Rd., Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427, (612) 593 -8000
a CO a
r N
N
o� = N O m N
W H
QI
} p O 0 N
Q
9
Q LU n
m N N
F
W
LL
O O N N
i
j r r CO
N
0)
00
r
}
Q
Z
Q
M O � la4 M
LL N Of m 40 N M
^ O CD
m S
N N
co cn H
K W
N N
3
m
W
O N N
W
O
O O N
a °•-° N
N
cn
m
Q
Z
Q
cr
D
¢
N
�}
M
W
r
N
N
O
CO
N
N
CD
¢
Z
o
CD
F- M:
Cl)
�a
�a
C) o
0
~
N a�
0
N
LO
r-
oa
Q
Lo
,4 o
°o
Cl)
.. C3 M
M
W
^ Z .
Z
n
Z
0
Z
~
W
w¢C7
Z
LO
�°
N J�
J
Z
U �
z
Q
=
o
N
OU O
LL X:
M
O
W
a
Q
F-
J
C7 C'S
O
M��
C)
ca r—
N
M
Ln
Ln
�d W
_J
SUE
LJ.1
3 U
a' Z
cm
U
z_ u >. r� �
Q LL W
o d.
LL o
Q
M LL c:i
x
pOO
OUO
Wc+')C-
Z
° o
tit
O
J
2F--U
OJ^
�Wo
2F} -CJj
U
U
MC7C7
F-
Cg CC �
N
d)
�
NU.J
M°
0
N
Q
}
Q
W
Z
Z
L
N
0)
00
r-
N
N
cn
m
Q
Z
Q
—
f
September
January
May
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
6 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
5 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
July
November
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
S
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
January
l5 BUDGET STUDY
18 CITY COUIJCIL 7:30pm
M
T
W
1
2
1
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
3 CITY COUNCIL 7:;i@pm
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1 T0WN MEETING
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
29
30
31
30
31
23
24
IS CITY COUNCIL 7SOpm
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
25
26
27
28
29
32
February
30
31
26
27
28
29
TO
6 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
31
February
Y
13 T0WN MEETING
20 CITY COUNCIL 7 :30pm
August
9
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
1
2
3
4
March
1
2
3
4
5
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
6 CITY COUNCIL 7 :3 @pm
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
26
27
28
April
27
28
29
30
31
3 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
10 TOWN MEETING
17 CITY COUNCIL 7:3 8pm
March
September
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
1
2
3
4
1 CITY COUNCIL 7:3 @pm
1
2
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
G BOARD OF REVIB)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
15 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
l BOARD OF REUIE'+d
21
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
26
27
28
29
30
31
June
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
5 CiTY COUNCIL 7:30pm
19 CITY COUNCIL 7:3 6pm
April
October
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
July
S
M
T
W
T
V
S
1
3 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
17 CITY COUNCIL 7:3 9pm
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
August
'CITY COUNCIL 7:3apn
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
21 ii i t COUNCIL 7:30pm
29
30
31
30
September
November
June
May
6 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
5 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
December
November
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
N
1
2
3
4
5
6
l5 BUDGET STUDY
18 CITY COUIJCIL 7:30pm
M
T
W
1
2
3
4
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
5
6
7
8
9
10
it
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
October
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
29
30
31
23
24
IS CITY COUNCIL 7SOpm
16 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
26
27
28
29
30
23
25
November
June
6 CITY COUNCIL 7:30pm
December
13 TOWN MEETING
S
N
T
W
T
F
S
20 CITY COUNCIL 7 :38pm
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
1
2
3
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
December
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
1 1
11
1 2
it
�../
13
1 n
1�
1 5
1J
1 6
1V
1 7
1I
n CITY COUNCII 1 -00 T
CITY 4V V/\l•I f �JVfl111
10
1 1
1
L
12
1T
M
1 w
1Z
15
1 c
LV
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
IS CITY COUNCIL 7SOpm
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
29
32
24
25
26
27
28
29
TO
31
F
f
CITY OF
December 23, 1988 PLYMOUTH-
Bryce Hastings
Hastings & Chivetta Architects
101 South Hanley, Suite 1700
St. Louis, MO 63105
Dear Mr. Hastings:
This letter is to serve as written follow -up of our meeting on Thursday,
December 22, 1988. All of the changes that we discussed have been
incorporated in these documents and are hereby submitted to you to officially
represent the City's wishes with regard to the design competition. No changes
were made to the letter form of agreement between the architect and the City
of Plymouth. Please have the appropriate party or parties from your firm sign
two copies of this document and return them to my office as soon as possible.
The City will then sign the documents and return one copy to you.
You will also find attached a copy of a new calendar timetable for this
project. We will notify you of any subsequent changes should they occur.
As a final reminder, we will schedule each of you for a two -hour time block on
Saturday, February 18, 1989, to present your concept plans to the
Architectural Selection Committee. The information with regard to NSP and
Minnegasco energy rates will be forwarded to you as soon as we are able to
gather it.
We appreciate your interest in this exciting program and are confident that
the process we have established will result in excellent concept plans.
Thank you for your time and interest in this program.
Sincerely,
James G. Willis
City Manager
JGW /np
Attachments
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
COMMUNITY CENTER DESIGN CONCEPT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of December 22, 1988 between the City
of Plymouth ( "City ") and HASTINGS & CHIVETTA ( "Architect ").
RECITALS
1. The City is contemplating constructing a community center to meet
broad based community -based needs, to serve as a focal point to integrate
community groups, and to build and strengthen a sense of community.
2. The City has selected three firms to submit an initial design concept
( "Design ") to the City for the community center.
3. For purposes of this Agreement, the term "Design" includes, but is
not limited to, schematic documents consisting of drawings and other
information illustrating the scale and relationship of the various components
of the community center and community center site, and a preliminary estimate
of construction costs based on current area, volume, or other unit costs.
(The details of the information requested in the Design are attached as
Attachment A.)
4. The City - desires to acquire the Designs submitted by the firms and is
willing to pay $15,000 for one of the Designs and $10,000 for each of the
other two Designs.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants
contained in this agreement, the City and the Architect agree as follows:
1. The Architect will submit 17 copies of its Design for the community
center, one of which shall be mounted on a board suitable for visual display,
to the City on or before February 10, 1989. Failure to submit a complete
Design by that date, or such later date that may be specified in writing by
the City, will disqualify the Architect from receiving any payment from the
City.
2. Before submitting its design to the City, the Architect shall review
the City Manager's concept for the community center (attached as Attachment B)
and attend a public meeting on January 19, 1989, in order to fully understand
the City's concept for the community center.
3. The Architect assigns all of its rights, title and interest in the
Design to the City, including but not limited to all the drawings, renderings,
information, and materials submitted to the City. The Design becomes the
property of the City at the time it is submitted and can be used by the City
in any manner that it deems appropriate for its purpose in planning,
developing, and contracting the community center.
4. The Architect grants the City the nonexclusive right to use, copy,
reproduce, and distribute the•Design and all documents submitted to the City,
and the nonexclusive right to build the building depicted in the Design or any
portion or components of the Design.
5. Within 45 days after the deadline for submitting the Design, the City
will complete its review of the Design. The City will pay the Architect
either $10,000 or $15,000 for the Design. The payment will be made within ten
days after the City reviews the Design and decides whether the Architect is to
be paid $10,000 or $15,000. The City's decision shall be within its sole
discretion and the Architect waives and relinquishes all rights to challenge
the City's decision.
6. The City retains the sole discretion to decide whether to proceed
with the final design for the community center and the sole discretion to
decide which architectural firm will be selected to prepare the final design.
If the City decides to proceed with the next phase of the community center,
the City intends to attempt to negotiate a contract with the firm that is
selected to receive the $15,000 payment. However, the City reserves the right
and sole discretion to choose one of the firms that was selected to receive
the $10,000 amount, or select an entirely new architectural firm to proceed
with the final design.
7. By entering into this Agreement and submitting its Design, the
Architect is not receiving any rights to proceed further in the design or
construction of the community center.
8. This Agreement may be terminated by the City upon seven (7) days
written notice to the Architect. In the event of such termination, the
Architect shall be entitled to reimbursement for the reasonable value of its
services as of the effective date of the termination. Such reimbursement
shall not exceed $10,000.
9. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
10. The Architect shall not assign, sublet, or transfer any interest in
this Agreement without the written consent of the City.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Rv
Its Mayor
Its City Manager
HASTINGS & CHIVETTA
By
Its
- c,Z.,
ATTACHMENT A
December 22, 1988
Details of Information Requested in Each Design Submittal
I. Site Plan: The site plan shall encompass the area on Sheet A -1. The
site plan shall be at a scale of 1" -501.
2. Floor Plan: At a scale of 1/16" =1'.
3. Elevation Plan: From each side of the building on a scale of
1/16" -1'.
4. Building Perspective: This graphic shall accurately depict the build-
ing to the site in engineer's scale.
5. Unique Design Features: If in the judgement of the architect the
proposal contains "unique design features," the graphics should be
submitted to illustrate those features. Such graphics should be
produced on a an appropriate scale.
6. Cost Estimates: The City expects that reasonable project cost esti-
mates be made. In this regard, the cost should be submitted on a
total project basis as well as per square foot basis.
7. The architect shall submit a tabulation of gross and net building
space for the building. Each room /space is to be identified and
dimensions and area noted. The area of halls and corridors shall be
noted.
8. Projected /Estimated Energy Costs: Estimated annual energy costs
should be provided for each of the following assuming the building is
operating 16 hours per day, seven days per week throughout the year:
a. Ice arena
b. Pool area
c. Gymnasium
d. Senior center
e. Balance of building space
f. Total building
9. Models: A model of the design shall not be submitted.
10. Drawing sheet size shall be 30" wide by 40" high, north to top.
- oZ�
ATTACHMENT B
December 22, 1988
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
PROPOSED COMMUNITY CENTER
INITIAL CONCEPT DESIGN FACILITIES
I. PASSIVE ACTIVITIES WING
Facilities Description
A. Community Room Hidden coat racks area
Seat 250 round table dinner
8 /table
Large dance floor
Break into 2/4 small rooms
Outside veranda and view of park
Inside view of pool /lobby
Entrance from senior lounge
Lobby, direct outside
Direct access to kitchen
Storage for tables, chairs, etc.
Rest rooms
B. Commercial Kitchen Outside entrance for deliveries
or elevator entrance from base-
ment loading dock area
Provide service to social hall
Office for meal coordinator
C. Two Multi- Purpose 30 people each
Rooms Carpeted floor /tile floor
Sinks /storage, etc.
D. Pottery /Painting Storage space
Studio Capacity 30
Kiln
Sink
E. Crafts Room Capacity 30
Storage and more storage
II. SENIOR CENTER
A. Senior Lounge
B. Game Room
C. Offices- Senior Staff
III. LOBBY /ENTRANCE
�- --o�_
IN
View of park /gardens
Outside seating
Comfortable furniture for 40 -50
Carpeted floor
Fireplace
Coat racks
Pool tables
Card tables
TV
Easy chairs
(1) Senior Center coordinator
(1) Receptionist /information -
copy machine
(1) Assistant coordinator
(1) Outreach coordinator
(2) Volunteers to use
(1) Nurse /health screening room
Meeting room for 10 -12 people
A. Lobby Space for plants or other display
items
Views into as many active spaces
as possible
Handicapped doors
Locking display cases
Seating
(2) Receptionist /Secretary
TV monitors - control
B. Office Area
IV. GYMNASIUM /FITNESS FACILITY
A. Handball /Racquetball/
Wallyball
(1) Community Center Director -
enclosed
(1) Supt. of Recreation - enclosed
Meeting room -12 people - enclosed
Open office for six people
Store room /copy machine
Offices look into pool /gym /ice/
lobby
Registration counter area
Staff lounge - may be in other
part of building
Laundry facilities area
Three courts
Glass end walls
B. Gym /Gymnastics Area
Running Track
C. Aerobics /Dance Room
Three volleyball courts
Two basketball courts
Dividing curtains
Wood floor or equivalent
Storage
Raised or on floor - banked
corners, three lanes
40 capacity
Floating floor
Mirrored walls
Outside /inside views
Storage
Sound system
D. Weight Room Open to gym /or separate room
Glass wall to lobby /hall
Mirrored walls
Carpeted floor /rubber
Exercise bikes
One weight circuit set
V. WET AREA - FOR 500 PEOPLE
VI. LOCKER ROOMS
Deep pool
Zero depth pool
Lap pool
Water slide /ability to add second
slide
Wave making ability
Spray features
Play lagoons for small children
Palm trees /plants
Food service with seating
Underwater viewing
Bubblers
Hot tubs /sauna component
Seating for deck chairs
Guard office /lockers
Access to outside sundeck and
volleyball court area
Opening wall system
Showers on pool deck
Lots of storage
Adult /youth areas
Family changing rooms /handicapped
Baby changing men's & women's
Individual shower stalls
Maintenance storage
=\- C�;�
VII. ICE 200 x 100 ice surface
Seating for 450
Ability to add second sheet
Fireplace /warming area
Direct access
Maintenance and ice resurfacing
room
Locker rooms (4)
Officials room
VIII. CHILD CARE
IX. CONCESSIONS
Babysitting for 20
Outside play area
Pre - school
Lobby area
Seating for 20
—�- oL3
DESIGN CRITERIA
-Good looking roof line (no exposed mechanical)
-Brick or better on outside facing Plymouth Boulevard minimum
-Pool and deck south exposure - view of park
-As much natural lighting in all areas as possible
- Attractive mall entrance drive -up - trees, flowers, fountains, etc.
-Lower level service entrance desirable
- Attitude of energy conservation
-Lots of plants
- Outside garden areas
-Bus parking /drop off area
-Sound - control sound between active and passive areas
-Odor - control odors from active and passive areas
-You are spectator on upper floor /participant on lower floor
-Keep views open - no hiding places for security /safety
- Barrier free building - handicapped friendly
- Ability to change look and feeling
- Non - rusting components
- Places for art display
- Control entry system - how does it work /look
- Access to parking and other buildings, i.e., library
- Siting of library -2 acres - 10,000 sq. ft. -80 cars
- Indoor playground
- General coat storage
- Valuables storage (keys, purses, etc.)
- Parking city code - 1 space /each 300 sq. ft. minimum
NIEL&
W p Ic
Fgc),TYOF -+ :_ SCALE OF MILES
In
PLYMOUTH- s g
is I T. i
j!jf,8j!!! sill jlj,!�.jf
b-
"Oft
I4110m..
ANA
v 5
IV
WIN
F7
STREET MAP
A Eitis4in
T_- (-tom
December 28, 1988
SUBJECT: ADVERTISING IN CITY PUBLICATIONS
Dear Businessperson:
Now you have the opportunity to reach more than 19,OOO'Plymouth businesses and
residents five times each year for as little as $700. Advertising may be
purchased for four publications of Plymouth on Parade and /or the Community
Information Booklet.
COMMUNITY INFORMATION BOOKLET: Slated to be mailed in early April, this
6" x 9 ", saddle - stitched booklet will feature a four color cover and
over 40 pages of information about the city of Plymouth. A total of
22,000 will be printed. Those that are not mailed will be distributed
to new residents over the next two years.
PLYMOUTH ON PARADE: This 5 1/2 " x 8 1/2" booklet is mailed in January,
March, May, July, September and November. Plymouth on Parade is 36 to
72 pages of news on city policies, programs and recreation
opportunities. Advertising will be included beginning with the May /June
issue.
INTERESTED?
For a modest price you can take advantage of this excellent exposure for your
business. Advertisements will be accepted for full -page, half -page and
quarter -page increments. All ads will be single color and grouped in the. back
of the booklets. A rate sheet is enclosed.
Whether you are interested in advertising in one or both of these
publications, your part is easy. Simply provide your camera -ready artwork to
us and we will handle the rest. Attached is a layout sheet for your
convenience.
We need your response now! Contact me at 559 -2800 ext. 230 by Tues.. Jan. 10
to reserve your space. Camera ready artwork must be provided no later than
Friday, January 20.
Sincerely,
Helen LaFave
Communications Coordinator
cc: Mayor & City Council
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559 -2800
1989 RATES FOR ADVERTISING IN CITY OF PLYMOUTH PUBLICATIONS
Comm. Info.
Plymouth
Comm. Info. Bklt.
Booklet
on Parade
& 4 issues of
(one printing)
(4 issues)*
Plymouth on Parade **
full page
$510
$1,900
$2,250
1/2 page
$290
$1,100
$1,250
1/4 page
$165
$ 600
$ 700
* Must advertise
in May, July, September and November issues.
** Must advertise
in Community Information Booklet
and May, July, September
and November issues of Plymouth
on Parade.
REGULATIONS
Camera ready copy due on Friday, January 20.
Cancellations are not accepted after the closing date.
The same ad must be run in all publications.
All ads must be submitted as camera -ready within deadline. The advertiser
assumes all responsibility for ad content.
If submitting a camera -ready ad to be used in both publications, submit
artwork sized for the larger publication.
Direct questions to Helen LaFave at 559 -2800 ext. 230.
t
December 28, 1988
CITY OF
PLYMOUTR
SUBJECT: ADVERTISING IN CITY PUBLICATIONS AT DISCOUNT RATES
Dear Businessperson:
Now you have the opportunity to reach more than 19,000 Plymouth businesses and
residents five times a year for as little as $600. Because you advertised in
the 1986 Community Information Booklet, we are offering you discounted rates.
Advertising may be purchased for four publications of Plymouth on Parade
and /or the Community Information Booklet.
COMMUNITY INFORMATION BOOKLET: Slated to be mailed in early April, this
6" x 911, saddle- stitched booklet will feature a four color cover and
over 40 pages of information about the city of Plymouth. A total of
22,000 will be printed. Those that are not mailed will be distributed
to new residents over the next two years.
PLYMOUTH ON PARADE: This 5 1/2 " x 8 1/2" booklet is mailed in January,
March, May, July, September and November. Plymouth on Parade is 36 to
72 pages of news on city policies, programs and recreation
opportunities. Advertising will be included beginning with the May /June
issue.
INTERESTED?
For a modest price you can take advantage of this excellent exposure for your
business. Advertisements will be accepted for full -page, half -page and
quarter -page increments. All ads will be single color and grouped in the back
of the booklets. A rate sheet is enclosed.
Whether you are interested in advertising in one or both of these
publications, your part is easy. Simply provide your camera -ready artwork to
us and we will handle the rest. Attached is a layout sheet for your
convenience.
We need your response now! Contact me at 559 -2800 ext. 230 by Tues., Jan. 10
to reserve your space. Camera ready artwork must be provided no later than
Friday, January 20.
Sincerely,
Helen LaFave
ComInunications Coordinator
I
�I
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559 -2800 f
�- - �p
CITY OF
PLYMOUTH PUBLICATIONS DISCOUNT ADVERTISING RATES
FOR PREVIOUS ADVERTISERS
Comm. Info. Plymouth
Comm. Info.
Bklt.
Booklet on Parade
& 4 issues
of
(one printing) (4 issues)*
Plymouth on
Parade **
full page
$495 $1,800
$2,150
1/2 page
$275 $1,000
$1,150
1/4 page
$150 $ 500
$ 600
* Must advertise
in May, July, September and November
issues.
** Must advertise
in Community Information Booklet
and May, July,
September
and November issues
of Plymouth on Parade.
REGULATIONS
Camera ready copy due on Friday, January 20.
Cancellations are not accepted after the closing date.
The same ad must be run in all publications.
All ads must be submitted as camera -ready within deadline. The advertiser
assumes all responsi.bility for ad content.
If submitting a camera -ready ad to be used in both publications, submit
artwork sized for the larger publication.
Direct questions to Helen LaFave at 559 -2800 ext. 230.
- I
BUIL12I X3 INSPECTION METE R
CITY OF PLYMOiiM, MINNESOTA
BUILDING INSPECTION DIVISION
DEPAMMENT OF COVMITY DEVELOPMENT
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
December 1988
The purpose of this periodic newsletter is to provide another means of canmmication
among the Building Inspection Division, contractors, and developers who are involved
in construction work in the City of Plymouth. The content will be designed to
outline topics of general interest as provided not only by the City but also by the
development ccmmmity. We believe that by bringing items to your attention in
written form as well as verbally, we will improve the quality of service to provide
you, as well as quality of work you provide the citizens of Plymouth.
Let us hear frost you! If you have questions or comments, please call Building
Official Joe Ryan at 559 -2800 Ext. 222, or drop us a note.
SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGES (SAC)
The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission has approved the sewer availability charge
rates for 1989. The base SAC unit will increase frcm $550.00 to $575.00 beginning
January 1, 1989.
Permits issued after the close of business on December 31, 1988 will be subject to
the increased rate.
INSPECTION REQUEST SERVICE
The Building Inspection Division has implemented a recording device capable of
receiving inspection request calls 24 hours a day, every day for your convenience.
The telephone number for this service is 559 -2985.
This system is designed for only those inspections which do not require "same day"
attention, such as; framing, insulation, plumbing visuals, mechanical rough -ins, and
finals, and building final inspections.
The recorded messages are checked in the morning and afternoon of each working day.
When calling in your requests, provide the following information:
1. Your name or Company Name
2. Type of inspection needed.
3. Job Site Address.
4. Permit Number.
(PLEASE CONTINUE ON OTHER SIDE)
-- 7
Please provide the correct permit number when you call to request inspections. The
permit number is important not only as a reference for the computer, but is also
important to verify that a permit has been issued for the work to be inspected.
Please inform all personnel that the permit number should be provided when
inspections are requested.
We have an accumulation of permit applications that have not been claimed after
approval. A policy of disposing of expired applications has been implemented.
Permits must be taken within 30 days of the date they are ready for issuance.
We have notified persons who have permit applications which have been processed and
ready for some time that unless the permit is paid for and taken within 10 days, the
application will become null and void.
If the expired application required a plan review by us, the applicant will be
invoiced for the entire amount of the required review fee, and that fee must be paid
before any further permit applications will be accepted.
Building Inspector Mike Kulczyk has recently been promoted to the position of
Assistant Building official. Plan Checker Bill Tom was also promoted to the vacant
position of Building Inspector.
In addition, the City Council has authorized approval for an additional full time
building inspector position for 1989. We are currently in the process of
interviewing candidates for this position, and hope to have the position filled
shortly after the first of the year.
Last year our department with the help of the Development Council, produced a number
of checklists intended to help you help us serve you better. The Checklists have
been revised and updated and are available at our front service counter for
distribution.
wo (2) of the checklists identify the required information which constitutes a
complete application or a new single family building permit. These checklists are
used during the plan review stage. It is important for you to be familiar with this
information; and, that you distribute the materials to those involved in the
preparation and design of your building plans, certificates of survey, and permit
applications.
we review only those building permit applications which are received in a "camplete"
form. All incomplete applications will be returned for additional information.
The other checklists outline the requirements to be met prior to obtaining required
inspections by our office, as well as to identify various code provisions, policies
and procedures which are cc mmnly over looked by contractors during the subsequent
phases of construction.
These checklists should be distributed to job superintendents, lead carpenters, and
individuals involved in requesting inspections.
The assigned address for new, single family and two - family dwellings as well as
multi - residential, commercial and industrial projects, must be placed on the front
of each such house or building prior to final inspection approval. The address
numerals should be clearly legible at least four (4) inches in height. This is
required by City Code and it is necessary to ensure that inspectors, as well as
public safety personnel can easily identify the property.
The current addition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) adopted by the State of
Minnesota with the State Building Code is the 1985 addition. While the 1988 _
addition has been available for some time, the State of Minnesota still has not =
adopted it. If you have questions about the design, materials or requirements for
structures, please refer to the 1985 UBC. The last word we had from the State is
that the 1988 UBC should be adopted in the Spring of 1989. We will let you know
when that happens.
SEASCNS GREETINGS11111111
JOE, MIKE, TAMMY, PAT, ARNIE, KEVIN, DON, BILL
f
Y
CITY OF PLYMOUTH 9j: oe5
,,po ,•eye_ � 5
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 { 1
TELEPHONE (612) 559 -2800 a�
1�
MEMO
DATE: December 14, 1988
TO: doe Ryan, Building Official
FROM: Helen LaFave, Communications Coordinator �Kl
SUBJECT COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT REMINDER CARD
Attached is a copy of a Community Improvement Reminder Card received on
December 9, 1988 from dames G. Willis, regarding sign violations at Old
C.R. 9 and Larch (Foresters Meats), and CSAH 9 & Larch Lane - Parkside
Apartments (Begin signs at gravel pit). Would you please check into this
and notify me as to the status of this matter by Wednesday, December 21,
1988.
HL:kec
cc: S.F. 12/21/88
COMMHITY IwROYE?£HT RE?IIHOER
Adaln. Use Only
CIR No.
I have noticed a problem Kith:
Resident has noticed a problem with:
Intersection Sight Obstruction
Street /Potholes
Watermaln /Hydrant
Brush /Weeds /Trees
Filling /Excavating
Drainage
Junk Cars
Trafflc/ a rking Violation
Garbage /Debris
Traffic/Street Sign /Signal
Erosion /Dirty its
Dead Animals in street
Broken /Damaged Equipment
Sign L/`
Streetlight
Other
Description Ot A 1 ♦ L.,xl. — ;-- .....4
c�fltkl
Location
Your name % Date jt
Resident's Name
Address
Phone
Rev. 3128/88
t iP
G
\y �
K
MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: December 21, 1988
TO: Helen LaFave, Communications Coordinator
FROM: Joe Ryan, Building Official
SUBJECT: Community Improvement Reminder Card
Following is in response to your memo dated December 14, 1988 regarding
potential sign violations located on the properties referenced below.
Forster's Packing Company - 11510 Co Rd No 9; temporary sign permits have
been issued, and the sign in question is in compliance with the
provisions of the sign regulations of the zoning ordinance.
B.A. Begin & Sons Contracting - 13600 Co Rd No 9; two letters to Mr.
Begin have been mailed, advising him that the two temporary freestanding
signs which identify various tenants of the Cottonwood Shopping Center
are in violation of the sign regulations of the zoning ordinance. Since
the signs have not been removed, I will be forwarding this matter to the
City Attorney's office for appropriate action.
Please see me should you have any further questions.
0
I
S
i
cc: File f
a
I
I
Q
cr
Q
r�
Z
_O
F-
N
_
Z
Q
U
cc
O
2
F—
O
}
J
a.
LL
O
}
F-
U
rn
00
T
3
n
si
8
S
=- cA
a
VOLUNTEER FIRr,,F.IGIFI'F.RS IN THE UNITED STATES:
A SUMMARY OF SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS AND COMMITMENT
Kenneth B. Perkins, Ph.D. Robert Weiderhold
Most areas in the United States are protected by volunteer firefigh-
ters, but there is growing concern about the survival of this historical,
tradition oriented, cost saving service, In this summary we want to highlight
some of the findings of a recent scientific survey of 3188 volunteer firefigh-
ters from 250 volunteer departments in Minnesota, Oregon, Texas, Alabama, and
Delaware. This national survey, the first of its kind, was supported by the
National Volunteer Fire Council and was aimed at establishing a benchmark for
future research. Before we note the main findings let us say something about
the volunteer sector of fire service.
Volunteers deliver fire protection to three - fourths of the geographical
area of-the U.S. It is estimated that there are over 900,000 volunteers serv-
ing in over 20,000 volunteer departments (VFD's). Most people think of VFD's
as serving mainly small cities and towns, but there are numerous examples of
them defending urban and suburban areas (Long Island, New York, for example).
VFD's are some of America's oldest service organizations dating back to the
1700's and claiming many founding fathers as firefighters. There has also
been dramatic occupational and demographic change in our society. Most rural
areas have an urban occupational character; there is less shift work in
manufacturing; there are now only a few farmers; and people move often in
their job changes. All these things appear to work against the maintenance of
strong VFD's. It is now time to ask the question, "Who is in the volunteer
fire service ?" We offer these findings as a starting point for more study.
I
O Twenty percent of firefighters in the sample came from
managerial, administrative, and professional fields;
17 percent from technical, sales, and support
occupations; 12 percent from service jobs; less than 3
percent were farmers; 23 percent were production or
craft workers; 19 percent were operators and labors.
This finding challenges the traditional stereotype of
the blue collar, red neck volunteer firefighter.
r
1
T-`C7_
0 Firefighters were primarily white males (96%).
The average age was 36, but there were more people 30
years old than any other single age. Ninety -two percent
had finished high school. Thirty -four percent had some
college; 14 percent were college graduates.
O The average length of service was 10 years, but a
considerable number of people had just become firefighters.
Women and minorities were in the fire service an
average of 5 years.
O Seventy percent said they seldom or never seriously
considered quitting being a firefighter. (Fifty percent
said they never seriously considered it.) Three- fourths
of the church member firefighters said fire fighting
was of equal or greater importance than their church
membership. Females and minorities showed the same
level of commitment.
O The fire department's main attractive feature was the
opportunity it provided for community service.
The second attractive feature was the opportunity to do
something exciting in a team setting. Interestingly,
many individuals had a long -time desire to become
firefighters. All these items can be used to market the
image of the department to potential recruits.
O The main thing which individuals said would cause them
to quit the department was that if it demanded too much
time (although most people said that it currently did
not). This was followed by loss of interest and
personality conflicts. These reasons were not
unexpected. They indicate problems which can
be addressed by good departmental leadership.
O The average department size was 36 members. The vast
majority of departments indicated they had little
or no retention problem.
Several of the findings highlighted above show firefighters to be firmly
committed to their role. From a sociological perspective we can suggest how
this happens. First, VFD's are places for primarily all male fraternal inter-
action. Second, being a firefighter means one can be committed to many power-
ful things at once: an action oriented, non - trivial team, one's community,
lives and property of friends and family. Third respected and complex skills
can be acquired in the fire service allowing for personal growth. Fourth,
VT-D's are.grassroots organizations which allow individuals a wide margin for _
t
2
I
giving of their own knowledge and^fabilities. Most organizations in society
put strict limits on what they will accept from members. Finally, we borrow
from sociologist Rosabeth lianter the idea of commitment mechanisms in communal
groups to explain the commitment firefighters have to their units. VFD's
utilize rituals and ceremonies (training and competitions); they allow people
to offer a self sacrifice for something much bigger than they are; and by vmy
of rich lore and tradition VFD's enable the members to experience something
beyond the everyday world.
In sum, the data suggest that the volunteer fire service is far from a
dying institution. Some places do have' serious recruitment and retention
problems, although little reliable information has been gathered making it
difficult to know much about problem spots. Some difficulties experienced by
departments might be solved by targeted recruitment tactics which market the
immensely attractive features and personal rewards of being one of "America's
Bravest." 'New recruits, however, must be promptly involved in the department
so they can overcome their anxiety about being part of a very close —knit
group. This is especially true for female and minority recruits who have not
traditionally been in the fire service fraternity.
This article is based on: Volunteer Firefighters in the United States: A Sociological Profile of America's
Bravest, (Report to the National Volunteer Fire Council). Kenneth B. Perkins, with assistance from Robert
Meiderhold. September, 1987. Faroville, Virginia: Longwood College.
Dr. Eenneth B. Perkins is a sociologist and head of the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Longwood
College in Farmville, Virginia, 23901. Longwood is a state assisted liberal arts institution. Perkins has
been a volunteer firefighter for four years in the Prospect Volunteer Fire Department. Robert Weiderhold is a
sociology graduate and a lieutenant in the Springfield Volunteer Fire Department, in Fairfax county Virginia.
'e
3
r�
i
r
Z \\O'�� -
Mrs. J. Lynne Kratoska
615 Narcissus Lane
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Lynne:
Thank you for your comments in your letter of December 20 regarding the
Evangelical Free Church parking lot issue.
I appreciated you contacting me through your letter and discussing the issue
further on the telephone. Your input and that of the neighbors and church
members was very important on this issue.
If I can be of service to you at any time, please contact me. Happy New Year
to you and your family!
Sincerely,
Bob Zitur
Councilmember
BZ:lr
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559 -2800
1 ; \ VD,-
December 20, 1988
Lynne J. Kratoska
615 Narcissus Lane
Plymouth, MN 55447
476 -1548
Bob Zitur, Councilman
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, YIN 55447
Dear Bob;
I just wanted to personally thank you for the interest you have taken
in the Wayzata Evangelical Free Church parking lot issue. It has
been heartwarming to me, and impressive too, that you were willing to
spend so much time trying to get to the bottom of the conflict and hear
all sides. I keep thinking of your coming out here on that cold day,
and tramping through the snow, while you were suffering with a terrible
cold and belonged in bed!
e
I am sure you have heard by now that the parking lot proposal has been
withdrawn. I suspect it may well come up again at some future date, }
but for the time being we are all drawing a breath of relief.
I would like to mention that I have found Peggy Nestor of the church
to be a good person to deal with, and one that is not likely to add
fuel to the fire of the neighbors' sense of betrayal by the church
at previous times. I am hoping that her attitude of being willing to
listen reflects that of the church board and pastor; and that she
will retain her position there.
We still have prowlers occasionally that frequent the lot and come onto
our property, but thanks to the security gate or wire, there are no
more hot rodding kids, for which we are grateful.
It has been a real education to watch, and be a part of, government in
action. It's nice to know in a very concrete way-just how well the i
system works! Thanks again for your part in that process. I really
appreciate your sincere interest.
Sincerely,
Lynne J. Kratoska
OEM`,
MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: December 20, 1988
TO: James G. Willis, City Manager Through Fred G. Moore, Director of
Public Works
FROM: Richard J. Po liot, Project Coordinator
SUBJECT: HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD MEETING, DECEMBER 20, 1988
Attached is an Agenda for the Hennepin County Board Meeting of December 20th
which I attended. Item 5A, Adoption of Funding Assistance Policy for Source
Separated Recyclables and Yard Waste, came close to being passed in it's
original form. It was removed from the consent agenda, however, and Bud Robb
moved to amend the motion making the purchase of recycling containers
retroactive. It was seconded by Randy Johnson. Discussion ensued because of
Mark Andrews opposition which was based on his perception of the Task Force's
recommendations. Both Bud Robb and Randy Johnson spoke on the equity issue
and sending the wrong message to some cities while penalizing others which we
pointed out in the Mayor's letter.
I., -w
Bob Derus commented both for it because of- the equity, but also against it
because of the support he wanted to show to the Task Force. Mark Andrew
wanted to wait and pass this resolution as is and then bring the item up at a
later date, however, Bud Robb pointed out that he would no longer be around to
ensure that equity was served and preferred to vote on it today. The result
was the amendment passed and payment for the recycling containers at the new
rate will be made retroactive. This will mean $43,650.00 to the City of
Plymouth from Hennepin County.
That after passing the main motion as amended, Randy Johnson wanted it
clarified passing this resolution did not preclude reimbursing cities for cash
drawings and that past discussion merely surrounded how to accomplish it.
Chairman Derus confirmed that this resolution did not preclude reimbursing
cities for the cash drawings.
RJP:am
attachment
cc:
2000 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis
Minnesota 55402
Telephone (612) 333 -0543
Telecopier (612) 333 -0540
J. Dennis O'Brien
John E. Drawz
David J. Kennedy
Joseph E. Hamilton
John B. Dean
Glenn E. Purdue
Richard J. Schieffer
Charles L. LeFevere
James J. Thomson, Jr.
Thomas R. Galt
Steven B. Schmidt
John G. Kressel
James M. Strommen
Ronald H. Batty
William P. Jordan
William R. Skallerud
Corrine A. Heine
David D. Beaudoin
Steven M. Tallen
Mary Frances Skala
Leslie M. Altman
Timothy J. Pawlenty
Rolf A. Sponheim
Julie A. Bergh
Darcy L. Hitesman
David C. Roland
Karen A. Chamerlik
Paul D. Baertschi
Arden Fritz
Mark J. Gergen
Julie A. Lawler
Janet J. Coleman
Stephen J. Bubul
Clayton L. LeFevere, Retired
Herbert P. Lefler, Retired
I.t rt,t•IV
Ld Icr
Ia•ltl�t•�i,
O'Crirl� K.
:i I'mic. I m.il
As %oCi3UIIll
December 28, 1988
Mr. Dale Hahn
Finance Director
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: Constitutionality of Statutory Limits of Liability
for Governmental Entities
Dear Dale:
The Minnesota Supreme Court in the recent case of
Lienhard v. State of Minnesota upheld the constitution-
ality of the statutory limits of liability pertaining to
the State of Minnesota. The case involved a situation
where the plaintiff had been injured in an automobile
accident and claimed that the state was negligent. The
award against the state exceeded the statutory limits of
liability, which at the time of the accident were
$100,000 per claimant and $500,000 per occurrence. (The
limits are now $200,000 per claimant and $600,000 per
occurrence.)
The court also determined that statutory costs and post -
verdict interest are not part of the claim itself and
therefore can be added to the amount awarded, even if the
amount exceeds the statutory limits of liability.
Pre - verdict interest is, however, subject to the limits.
Although the Lienhard decision did not involve a munici-
pality, I can see no reason why the Supreme Court would
come to a different conclusion in a case involving a
claim against a municipality.
Mr. Dale Hahn
December 28, 1988
Page 2
I would be happy to answer any questions you may have
concerning the decision.
Sincerely, I
LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY,
O'BRIEN & DRAWZ
ames J. Thomson, Jr.
0066LT16.134
Enclosure
cc: James Willis
Frank Boyles
Don Kuplic
L(J -'cN cn- .
l.rl'lt�r
tit�nut�cl�
0'111-4-11 .`
llra���i
a I'rolc.%iunal
A, >uCiatiun
2000 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis
'j,,
December 28, 1968
Minnesota 55402
Telephone (612) 333 -0543
DEC
Telecopier (612) 333 -0540
'�
O'Brien
Mr. James G. Willis �. U j� VLtE ►-�u .�
J. Dennis
John E. Drawz
City Manager
David J. Kennedy
City of Plymouth
Joseph E. Hamilton
John B. Dean
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Glenn E. Purdue
Plymouth, MN 55447
Richard J. Schieffer
Charles L.LeFevere
Re: Lyndale Terminal Company v. City of Plymouth
James J. Thomson, Jr.
Thomas R. Galt
Steven B. Schmidt
Dear Jim:
John G. Kressel
James M. Strommen
Ronald H. Batty
A summary judgment hearing has been scheduled in the
William P. Jordan
Holiday Plus lawsuit for February 4, 1989 before Judge
William R.Skallerud
Robert Schiefelbein. The purpose of the hearing is to
Corrine A. Heine
David D. Beaudoin
hopefully have Judge Schiefelbein decide the case without
Steven M.Tallen
a full trial. The issues to be resolved at the hearing
Mary Frances Skala
are whether the hours -of- operation condition can be
Leslie M. Altman
Timothy J. Pawlenty
validly imposed as part of a site plan approval process
Rolf A. Sponheim
and whether Holiday Plus is precluded from litigating
Julie A.Bergh
that issue because it did not object to it at the time it
Darcy L. Hitesman
David C. Roland
was imposed in 1983.
Karen A. Chamerlik
Paul D. Baertschi
The equal protection issue being raised by Holiday Plus
Arden Fritz
Mark J. Gergen
(i.e., that it is not being treated the same as other
Julie A. Lawler
similar uses in the city) will probably not be decided at
Janet J. Coleman
the summary judgment hearing because there are issues of
Stephen J. Bubul
fact that will need to be resolved. I do no know whether
_
Clayton L. LeFevere, Retired
Holiday Plus will pursue that claim if it loses on the
Herbert P. Lefler, Retired
summary judgment issues.
I will keep you advised as to the status of the case.
Sincerely yours,
LeFEV,ERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY,
O'BRIEN & DRAWZ
Ymes J. Thomson, Jr.
0066LT15.I34
cc: Blaire Tremere
Fred Moore =
,.
j
Z-
CITY O�
PLYMOUTR
December 14, 1988
Mr. Rod Hillstrom
12510 25th Avenue
Plymouth, MN 55441
Dear Rod:
DEC 21 _
irk-
Your term on the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will expire On
January 31, 1989. During the next several weeks the City Council will receive
applications from individuals interested in serving on City boards and
commissions and will be conducting interviews with selected applicants to fill
vacancies.
Would you please contact City Clerk, Laurie Rauenhorst, at 559 -2800 by Friday,
December 23, to let her know whether you are interested in the Council
considering you for reappointment to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
The time and effort you have given in service to the City is appreciated.
Sincerely,
qig il Schneider
Mayor
VS /lr
C
i0r7-
flit- �•� /✓�jJ ./ L t�ifiCY.� � 4C/�_ / �/' L�
A^ ol VRAni iTU ani a Gx /Anti PI YMnl ITH MINNFRC)TA SS447_ TEL HONE (6121 ��%
December 22, 1988
Mr. Gregory Begin
c/o Cotton Club
3900 Vinewood Lane
Plymouth, MN 55441
Dear Mr. Begin:
This shall acknowledge your recent letter 'regarding the renewal of your
license to operate an amusement center at'the Cotton Club. In that letter,
you appeared to attribute certain comments to me which, in your view, may
have some bearing on the success of your business.
At the time you appeared before the City Council seeking to obtain the
amusement center license for your business, there was some discussion with
respect .to police problems which could potentially arise from such a
facility. ..Because your business requires a conditional use permit, some may
have -believed that we could adequately deal with any potential problems
which might arise through the permit review process. I noted, however, that
the revoking of such licenses is not quite so simple as it might seem and
noted the current experiences the City of Minneapolis was having with Moby
Dick's Bar. I was not comparing your operation to the Moby Dick operation
in any fashion. In order to assure myself of that fact, I have reviewed the
videotape of that meeting since I received your letter and I believe the
recording quite clearly substantiates the foregoing comment. The tape is
available for your review if you so desire.
As you undoubtedly know by now, the City Council did renew your license for
1989 at its last meeting. It also voted to credit your 1989 license fee in
an amount equivalent to three months of your 1988 license fee. The Council
took this action in recognition of the lapsed time between the time of your
original application and the time your application was finally approved by
the Council.
Thank you for sharing your observations and concerns with me. I trust the
manner in which this matter has now been handled by the City Council
satisfies your concerns.
Yours t ulyq
a- Xaze. - �,
V rgil Schneider
Mayor
VS:kec
cc: Councilmembers
James G. Willis, City Manager
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559 -2800
December 29, 1988--
Commissioner Elect Tad dude
Hennepin County Government Center
A -2400
Minneapolis, MN 55487
Dear Tad:
Thank you for your kind invitation to attend your swearing -in ceremony as our
Hennepin County Commissioner. I am sorry but I have a prior commitment on
that day.
Surprisingly, I thought of you just recently when I was in the Cottonwood
Shopping Center. As I was getting into my vehicle I noticed the small
bookmobile in a dimly lighted area of the lot. Frankly, I had mixed emotions.
To think that nearly 49,000 Plymouth residents' have to leave Plymouth and
drive some distance to either Crystal or Ridgedale (where the parking is
atrocious) to go to a full service library! We both know Plymouth needs and
richly deserves its own community library. I hope you make this effort one of
your top priorities. You can count on our support in this 'effort.
I do hope that you will be in contact on all issues that concern Plymouth with
Mayor Virgil Schneider or City Manager dim Willis. They will keep the Council
Informed. They can be reached at 559 -2800.
Please feel free at any time to contact me for a Councilmember's point of
view. I can be reached at 559 -3728.
Sincerely,
Bob Zitur, Councilmember
BZ:lr
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559 -2800