Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council Packet 10-26-1987 Special
e f CITY OF PLYMOUTH A G E N D A SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 26, 1987 CONSENT AGENDA All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in normal sequence on the agenda. 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:30 P.M. 2. INVOCATION 3. ROLL CALL 4. CONSENT AGENDA 5. MINUTES - Approval of Minutes of the Regular Council meeting of October 19, 1987 6. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. Disbursements for period ending September 30, 1987 B. Participation in League of Minnesota Cities Cities Week" C. Ordinance Amending Zoning Ordinance relative to solid waste transfer facilities as conditional use permits D. Award contract for purchase of carpet for City Center building E. Change Orders: 1) Approve change order No. 3 for 14 day extension of completion date for Zachary Lane water treatment plant, Project 431 2) County Road 61 Park, change order No. 4 F. Approve payment No. 5 for S. J. Groves Office Park area improvements, Project No. 648 7. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS A. Status report on reduction of site performance guarantee for Dean Johnson for Creekside of Plymouth 2nd Addition (79018) 7 7. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS B. Proposed engineering guideline revisions: street standards r C. Quarterly Reports: 1) Insurance claims 2) Litigation report D. Public and Capital Improvement Project status report including status of New C.R. 9 and water treatment plant E. Open meeting law report F. Evaluation of departmental cost effectiveness G. Resolution amending policy Relating to On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licenses H. Report on park usage and maintenance I. Resolution authorizing consultant study of ordinance regarding retail parking standards 3. Trail and sidewalk standards K. CCR Reports 8. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: October 21, 1987 for City Council Meeting October 26, 1987 TO: dames G. Willis, City Manager FROM: Community Development Coordinator Ray D. Anderson through Blair Tremere, SUBJECT Community Development Director MICHAEL McNEELY. SITE PLAN FOR PHEASANT TRAIL TOWNHOUSES (87107) SUMMARY: The attached Resolution approves the Site Plan for 24 townhouse units on 21.31 acres south of 53rd Avenue North and east of Ximines Lane, as part of the approved plat for Pheasant Trail. The Planning Commission reviewed the application at the meeting on October 14, 1987 and recommended approval of the consent agenda by unanimous vote. 1. Resolution 2. October 14, 1987 Planning Commission Minutes 3. October 7, 1987 Planning Staff Report 4. Large Plans CITY OF PLYMOUTH q Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the day of , 19_ The following members were present: _ The following members were absent: introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 87 - APPROVING SITE PLAN FOR MICHAEL McNEELY FOR PHEASANT TRAIL TOWNHOUSES (87107) WHEREAS, Michael McNeely has requested approval of a Site Plan for the construction of a 24 -unit townhouse development to be located south of 53rd Avenue North and east of Ximines Lane; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request and recommends approval; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request for Michael McNeely for a Site Plan to construct a 24 -unit townhouse development to be located south of 53rd Avenue North and east of Ximines Lane, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with City Engineer's Memorandum. 2. Compliance with Policy Resolution No. 79-80 regarding minimum floor elevations for new structures on sites adjacent to, or containing any open storm water drainage facility. 3. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement for completion of site improvements. 4. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance. 5. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approv- als per Ordinance provisions. 6. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the structure and no outside storage is permitted. 7. An 8 1/2 x 11 inch "As -Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted prior to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City Policy. 8. The approved Final Plat shall be filed prior to the issuance of Building Permits. The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The o owing voted against or abstained: hereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 14, 1987 The Regular Meeting of the Plymouth Planning mission was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Pa a, Commissioners Wire, Stulberg, Zy a and Marofsky MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Stei 'rwald and Commissioner Plufka STAFF PRESENT: Planning rector Blair Tremere Communi Development Coordinator Ray An rson Assis ant City Engineer Sohn Sweeney Pla ing Secretary Grace Wineman MINUTES MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Commissioner Wire MOTION TO APPROVE to approve the September 22, 1987 Planning Commission Minutes as submitted. VOTE 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Commissioner Wire MOTION TO APPROVE to approve the Consent Agenda, Item 7-C. Site Plan for Michael McNeely, Pheasant Trail Townhouses for 24 multi- family units, subject to the conditions listed in the October 7, 1987 staff report. VOTE 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED Coordinator Anderson explained that Mr. and Mrs. Robert McAuliffe, have again requested deferral of their request to the meetinq of October 28, 1987. A letter confirming their request is on Healso explained that a Public Hearing Notice was publishe n the legal newspaper for Ponds North, for Site Plan and Cond Tonal Use Permit review by the Plan- ning Commission on Octob 14, 1987. The application was withdrawn by Gair & Assoc tes, the petitioner's consul- tants. Their October 8, 198 etter confirming the with- drawal is on file. PUBLIC HEARINGS Vice Chairman Pauba introduced the request a an overview MARY SCHLENZ of the October 7, 1987 staff report was presen d by Co- CONDITIONAL USE ordinator Anderson. PERMIT FOR A CLASS II RESTAURANT Vice Chairman Pauba called on the petitioner, she was not (87104) present. 233- Page 242 Planning Commission Minutes October 14, 1987 NEW BUSINESS' Vice Chairman Pauba introduced the request and anov iew BOULDER PROPERTIES of the October 7, 1987 staff report was provided by ordin- INC./SITE PLAN AND ator Anderson. VARIANCE (87100) Vice Chairman Pauba introduced Mr. George DapfeIs, Boulder Properties, Inc., who had no questions or cements. MOTION by Commissioner Stulbe/ 87sattaftf d by Vice Chairman MOTION TO APPROVE Pauba to recommend approval fPlan and Variance for the bank facility to be lohe southeast corner of County Road 9 and Vinewoodject to the condi- tions listed in the October 7, report. Vote. 4 Ayes. Commissionef Marofsky, abstained. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED At the beginning of th/meeting, the Coordinator confirmed ROBERT AND MARY that the petitioners have requested deferral of this item MCAULIFFE/LOT for the second time in correspondence dated October 12, CONSOLIDATION/ 1987. DIVISION (87065) MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Commissioner Wire *MICHAEL McNEELY to recommend approval of the Site Plan, subject to the PHEASANT TRAIL conditions listed in the October 7, 1987 staff report. TOWNHOMES/SITE PLAN 87017) There was no one present to represent this consent item. MOTION TO APPROVE VOTE - MOTION CARRIED Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. PUBLIC HEARING Vice Chairf8faQ, Pauba introduced the Ordinance Amendments. Director Tremereowed slides of real estate signs seen throughout the City, Me of which were in the public right- of-way. Director Trem noted that an informational letter was sent to area realtors n September 1, 1987, explaining the use and placement of to rary real estate signs. He stated that most of the real t who called understand problems arise with signs placed 1 the public right-of- way. Many voiced a need to erect signag to direct the home buyers to their product off the site of th ouse for sale. He related the problems of City manpower to I I y enforce these sign regulations; and, that no permit is r uired for temporary real estate signs. The City Council has directed that the issue of off-site real estate signage be dealt with and that a Public Hearing be held so that realtors and other interested parties are allowed to speak on this item. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXTUAL AMENDMENTS REVIEW OF TEMPORARY REAL ESTATE SIGNS C CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPME14T DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT DATE: October 7, 1987 FILE NO.: 87107 PETITIONER: Michael McNeely 4 7 C MEETING DATE: October 14, 1987 REQUEST: Site Plan for Pheasant Trail Townhouses LOCATION: South of 53rd Avenue North and East of Ximines Lane GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -2 (low medium density ZONING: R-2 (low density multiple residential) residence) District FlArVr-RfV INn The petitioner requests approval of a Site Plan for construction of a 24 -unit townhouse development. The City Council approved the Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit, and Variances for Anderson's Pheasant Trail by Resolution No. 85-940. A part of that plat included 24 townhouse units on 21.31 acres. The City Council also approved an Ordinance rezon- ing certain land located east of 53rd Avenue North and Ximines Lane from FRD (future restricted development) District to R-2, in conjunction with the approval of the Final Plat (Resolution No. 85-941). The City Council approved the Final Plat and Development Contract for Pheasant Trail for Michael McNeely on dune 1, 1987 (Resolution Nos. 87-339 and 87-340). This plat includes 24 townhouse units, three single family residential lots and one outlot. ANALYSIS: 1. The site plan complies with the ordinance provisions for lot size and dimensions; building setbacks; number of parking spaces (within the building and surface park- ing); parking design and layout; rooftop equipment (none); trash receptacle (within the building); lot coverage by structures; building height (two story vs. three story allowed); illumination requirements; and, landscaping. 2. Park dedication requirements have been satisfied; fees were paid at the time of filing of the final plat. 3. The Physical Constraints Analysis identifies that this property is located in the Shingle Creek Drainage District. It is not in a Shoreland Management District and does not contain any wetlands. It does contain some major woodlands but no severe slopes. The soils appear suitable for urban capability with public sewers. PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS AND RECOMENDATION: We recommend approval of the Site Plan subject to those conditions reflected in the draft Recommendation. Attachments: 1. Recommendation 2. Location map 3. Engineer's Memorandum 4. Large Plans RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR OCTOBER 14, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FOR MICHAEL McNEELY (87107) APPROVING SITE PLAN FOR MICHAEL McNEELY FOR PHEASANT TRAIL TOW14HOUSES (87107) 1. Compliance with City Engineer's Memorandum. 2. Compliance with Policy Resolution No. 79-80 regarding minimum floor elevations for new structures on sites adjacent to, or containing any open storm water drainage facility. 3. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement for completion of site improvements. 4. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance. 5. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approv- als per Ordinance provisions. 6. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the structure and no outside storage is permitted. 7. An 8 1/2 x 11 inch "As -Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted prior to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City Policy. S. The approved Final Plat shall be filed prior to the issuance of Building Permits. res/oct (mcneely)1 d n 0 NT. iii: IIIIII .r, ii i r: ill=t1: odes:•g Spa_ tug a i i is a' i•,, •• W Ma w City of Plymouth E N G I N E E R.' S M E M 0 to Planning Commission & City Council DATE: October 8, 1987 FILE NO.: 87107 PETITIONER: Mr. Michael McNeely, Pheasant Trail ,Investors, 12800 Industrial Park Blvd., Plymouth, Mn. 55441 SITE PLAN: Pheasant Trail LOCATION: South of 53rd Avenue, East of Zachary Lane in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 12. ASSESSMENT RECORDS: N/A Yes No 1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use. 2. X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed use. 3. X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are issued. 4. Area assessments estimated - Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at the time of Site Plan approval: None. 5. Other additional assessments estimated: None. LEGAL/EASEMENTS/PERMITS: 6. X Property is one parcel - The approval of the site plan as proposed requires that a lot consolida- tion be approved by the City Council and the necessary resolution should be processed at the same time as the site plan approval. i N/A Yes No 7. X Complies with standard utility/drainage easements - The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet W) in width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any building permits.) 8. X Complies with ponding requirements - The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year high water elevation and conformance with the City's comprehensive storm water requirements. 9. X All standard utility easements required for construction are provided - The following easements will be required for construction of utilities. 10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights-of-way have been vacated - It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements/right-of-way to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it is their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated. 11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the City with this application - It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order that he may file the required easements referred to above. 2- t UTILITIES AND TRAFFIC: N/A Yes No 12. X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained - The following permits must be obtained by the developer: DNR Mn DOT Hennepin County MPCA State Health Department 13. X Complies with Storm Drainage Plan - Bassett Creek Minnehaha Creek Elm Creek Shingle Creek Army Corps of Engineers Other The site plan will be submitted to the City's consulting engineer for review to see if it is in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All of their recommendations shall be incorporated in a revised plan. The grading and drainage plan shall also indicate proposed methods of erosion control, including the placement of silt fence in strategic locations. Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary: 14. X Necessary fire hydrants provided - The City of Plymouth requires that all parts of a building such as the one proposed be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant. It will be necessary to locate hydrants in such a manner that the site plan complies with this section of the City Ordinance. 15. X Size and type of material proposed in utility systems has been provided - The utility plan shall be revised to indicate the size and type of material required in the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain services and storm sewer. 16. X Post indicator valve - fire department connection - It will be necessary to locate the post indicator valve in such a manner that it will not render any of the existing fire hydrants inoperable. 3- I N/A Yes No 17. X 18. X Hydrant valves provided - All new fire hydrants shall be valved with 6" gate valves per City Engineering Guidelines Detail Plate No. W-2. This plate should be referenced on the site plan. Fire lane provided - It will be necessary to construct a fire lane surrounding the building that can be utilized for fire protection purposes. The fire lane shall be constructed to current City Standards. Variance requested. 19. X Sanitary sewer cleanouts provided - It will be necessary to provide cleanouts on the proposed internal sanitary sewer system at a maximum of 100 foot intervals. 20. X Acceleration/deceleration lanes provided - Acceleration/deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of and 21. X All existing street right-of-ways are required width - Additional right-of-way will be required on 22. X Complies with site drainage requirements - The City will not permit drainage onto a City street from a private parking lot; therefore, the site plan shall be revised accordingly. 4- N/A Yes No t 23. X Curb and gutter provided - 24. X STANDARDS: N/A Yes No 25. X 26. 27. X X The City requires B-612 concrete curb and gutter at all entrances and ` where drainage must be controlled, Curb Stone may be used where it is not necessary to control drainage. For traffic control either B-612 or curb stone is required around the bituminous surfaced parking lot. The site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance with this requirement. Complies with parking lot standards - The City will require that all traveled areas within the parking lot, as well as the proposed entrances, shall be constructed to a 7 -ton standard City design with six inches of Class 5 100% crushed limestone and three inches of 2341 wear or five and one-half inches of 2331 base and two inches of 2341 wear. All parking areas may be constructed to a standard 5 -ton design consisting of four inches of Class 5 100% crushed base and two inch bituminous mat. The site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance with these requirements. It will be necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's utility foreman, 24 hours in advance of making any proposed utility connections to the City's sanitary sewer and water systems. The developer shall also be responsible for contacting Jim Kolstad of the Public Works Department for an excavating permit prior to any digging within the City's right-of-way. All connections to the water system shall be via wet tap. The City will require reproducible mylar prints of sanitary sewer, water service and storm sewer as-builts for the site prior to occupancy permits being granted. The site plan complies with the City of Plymouth's Engineering Standards Manual dated 1985. See Item 18. 5- J] Submitted by:it,/. City Engineer M I N U T E S REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 19, 1987 A regular meeting of the Plymouth City Council was called to or- der by Mayor Schneider at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the City Center at 3400 Plymouth Boulevard on October 19, 1987. PRESENT: Mayor Schneider, Councilmembers Vasiliou, Zitur, Crain, and Sisk, City Manager Willis, Assistant Manager Boyles, Planning Director Tremere, Public Works Director Moore, Park and Recreation Director Blank, Public Safety Director Carlquist, City Attorney Thomson, and City Clerk Brandt ABSENT: None PRESENTATION Mayor Schneider read a proclamation declaring the week of Octo- ber 18-24 as National Business Women's Week. The Mayor acknowledged a contribution from 3 & R Pizza towards the policemen's vest fund. Mayor Schneider read a resolution thanking the volunteer soccer coaches for their hours of service to the community. CONSENT AGENDA Motion was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt the consent agenda deleting item 8-T-2. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MINUTES MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to approve the minutes of the Regular Council meeting of October 5, 1987 as submitted. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. 4 s PRESENTATION Item 4 CONSENT AGENDA Item 5 MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 5, 1987 Item 6* Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 309 PUBLIC HEARINGS Mayor Schneider opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING EASEMENT VACATION No one chose to speak and the hearing was closed at 7:37 p.m. Item 7-A MOTION was made by Councilmember Sisk, seconded by Councilmem- RESOLUTION NO. 87-667 ber Crain, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-667 AUTHORIZING THE VACA- EASEMENT VACATION TION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY AND STREET EASEMENTS, WAGNER ADDI- WAGNER ADDITION TION. Item 7-A Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. Manager Willis stated the Council directed an engineering study on whether or not to undertake drainage improvements in Wood - creek Addition. The purpose of the hearing is to give the pub- lic the opportunity to hear the report and ask questions. The hearing was noticed in the official newspaper and mailed notices were sent to those residents in the proposed assessment dis- trict. There are three alternates under consideration and the Special Assessment Committee is recommending alternate A. If the project is ordered and contracts let, a second hearing will be held to allocate costs to the subject properties and resi- dents will know definitely what their cost will be. Director Moore stated the project was initiated a year ago by property owners within the area because of the severe erosion in a drainage channel in the area. Engineering reports defined the alternates. He showed slides of the area and recommended that the costs be assessed over the entire drainage area with the four abutting properties, who receive more benefit, paying an additional cost; he pointed out these four lots. Councilmember Sisk asked if this situation could be considered hazardous to the public. Attorney Thomson answered that debris can be a safety hazard to children. Director Moore stated the City's easement is over the lots to the east and not over Outlot C. Some easements would have to be obtained from the homeowners association on the outlot. He stated the channel is a lot deeper that it was before and the trees have changed the routing. Mayor Schneider opened the public hearing at 7:50 p.m. The Mayor read a letter from Gregory and Connie Korstad, 10915 34th .Ave., favoring the project but objecting to his proposed assessment. Robert Sievers, 10905 34th Ave., owns one of the four lots to be assessed the extra amount. His concern is that the channel is all in the outlot except for lot 2. He questioned their receiv- ing lateral benefit since it is not on his property. He PUBLIC HEARING - PROJECT 660 Item 7-B Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 310 favors the project but is concerned about the singling out of the four lots as receiving extra benefit. Sohn Kulle, 10505 36th Ave., asked questions on the difference between the alternates. He also favors the project. Director Moore explained the differences are that alternate A and B would involve installation of a pipe but in different con- figurations, and alternate C involves cleaning out the channel and installing rock riprap. Tim Peterson, 3235 Wellington Lane, stated he thinks the lots to the south of Outlot C should be assessed as well and asked how the assessment area was arrived at. He favors the project. Director Moore answered that this lot may be deleted out but the assessment area will be better defined when the project is ordered. The people not affected by the channel would not be notified as they will not be assessed. Mr. Peterson asked whether their channel, which is smaller and is also experiencing erosion, could be improved at the same time before it gets to the same state as this one. Director Moore stated there is no where near the flow of water through their channel and at the present time the project includes only this one channel. There have been no requests from residents to do the other one. They would have to petition for a public improvement and an engineering study would be ordered. Bill Leininger, 3215 Wellington Lane, favors the project as it is his property that is being eroded. Mark Windfeldt, 10601 36th Ave., approves of the project but questioned why he was assessed. Director Moore answered that drainage from the entire area along 36th Ave. goes through pipes which end up at the channel. Roger Rydberg, 3225 Wellington Lane, asked why the builder wasn't required to put in the right stuff in the first place. Director Moore stated that this development was approved in 1972 or 1973 and he couldn't find anything relating to the channel. Mr. Sievers stated the creek, in 1974, was very small and pro- bably no one believed anything had to be done. He asked if the assessment would be changed if this were declared a safety issue. Mayor Schneider answered it would not. The hearing was closed at 8:09 p.m. Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 311 MOTION was made by Councilmember Sisk, seconded by Councilmem- ber Zitur, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-668 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, WOOD CREEK ADDITION AREA, STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO. 660. Director Moore stated this is winter work and probably will be done in January or February. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-669 APPROVING AMENDMENT TO STAGED GROWTH ELEMENT OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CRAIG SCHERBER (87059). Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-670 APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CRAIG SCHERBER FOR "MEADOWS OF BASS LAKE" (87059). Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-671 SETTING CONDITION TO BE MET PRIOR TO PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE REZONING LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PINEVIEW LANE AND SCHMIDT LAKE ROAD 87059). Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 87-668 ORDERING PROJECT WOODCREEK ADDITION DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 660 Item 7-B RESOLUTION NO. 87-669 AMENDMENT TO STAGED GROWTH ELEMENT, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CRAIG SCHERBER (87059) Item 8-A* RESOLUTION NO. 87-670 PRELIMINARY PLAT MEADOWS OF BASS LAKE CRAIG SCHERBER (87059) Item 8-A* RESOLUTION NO. 87-671 SrTTING CONDITION REZONING LAND PINEVIEW LANE & SCHMIDT LAKE RD 87059) Item 8-A* MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ORDINANCE NO. 87-28 ber Sisk, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 87-28 AMENDING THE ZONING ORDI- AMENDING ZONING CODE NANCE TO CLASSIFY CERTAIN LANDS LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER PINEVIEW LANE & OF PINEVIEW LANE AND SCHMIDT LAKE ROAD TO R -1B (LOW DENSITY RES- SCHMIDT LAKE ROAD IDENTIAL) DISTRICT. Item 8-A* Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- RESOLUTION NO. 87-672 ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-672 APPROVING SITE PLAN AND SITE PLAN & VARIANCE VARIANCE FOR BEGIN DEVELOPMENT FOR BERKSHIRE OFFICE PARK BEGIN DEV., BERKSHIRE 87098). OFFICE PARK (87098) Item 8-B* Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. Manager Willis stated the petitioner, Jerry Behme, 5700 Vagabond BOARD OF ZONING APPEAL Lane, has requested this appeal from the Board of Zoning ruling JERRY BEHME be deferred until the November 2, 1987 regular meeting. Item 8-C Bill Pribble, 17330 19th Ave., stated, Mr. Myron, owner of the JOANN PRIBBLE PETITION property to the south, is placing him in a position of having to (84097) develop his property to maximize its value and get the road. Item 8-D They do not wish to develop the property, but are aware of the Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 312 fact that it will have to be developed to get their return. At the present time they have had at least eight developers ap- proach them but one in particular has not been able to deal with the property owner to the south regarding a public road across his development. He has not accepted an offer on the property. Because there is no public access except through another sub- division, their property has lost value. It is his opinion that the City has the authority to deal with his wife's request to establish a public cartway. He said, in lieu of that, the reso- lution should be amended to state that the City will obtain the necessary right-of-way for a public way through eminant domain. He disagreed with the City Attorney's opinion and explained why. Mayor Schneider stated the problem is the cost of obtaining the property and asked if he would pay for it. Mr. Pribble answered that the cost should be paid by the City if it is obtained through eminant domain. Attorney Thomson stated the Council shouldn't amend the resolu- tion as requested because it could be interpreted that the Coun- cil decided to and directed the condemnation of the property effective tonight. The cost of eminant domain at the time of platting is typically borne by the acquiring entity; but the City can require the developer to do certain things and this type of cost could be assessed to the applicant. Mayor Schneider asked why Mr. Pribble believed the City would benefit by the road. Mr. Pribble answered that the property would then go on the tax rolls. He added he hasn't yet seen the agreement which pro- vides for maintenance of Outlot A. MOTION was made by Councilmember Sisk, seconded by Councilmem- ber Crain, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-674 DENYING PETITION TO ESTABLISH PUBLIC CARTWAY ACROSS OAKDALE WEST THIRD ADDITION 84097). Councilmember Sisk stated he appreciates Mr. Pribble's stand but doesn't see where the City is hindering the development of his property. How road right-of-way is acquired now is a matter of negotiation between Mr. Pribble and Mr. Myron. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, four ayes. Councilmember Vasiliou voted nay. RESOLUTION NO. 8o7-674 DENYING PETITION PUBLIC CARTWAY, JOANN PRIBBLE (84097) Item 8-D Jack Boarman, architect for Fire Station 3, showed the overall FIRE STATION 3 site plan and floor plans of the station. They will present the SCHEMATIC PLANS color and material selection later but expect it to be metal, Item 8-E masonry, and glass. They are now asking permission to move on to final development plans. Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 313 Councilmember Vasiliou asked if the firefighters have commented on the plan. Mr. Boarman answered that this project has undergone two plan submissions, five or six site plan layouts, and various floor plan revision changes. Submissions were made to the fire department along with input from the fire chief and director of public safety. This will continue through development. They are looking for long term stability in their choice of colors. Councilmember Sisk asked about 33rd Ave. and stated he doesn't know if creating a new road is necessary for accessibility. Manager Willis answered that 33rd Ave. probably will be instal- led before Medina Road as the right-of-way north of the station is not owned by the City. The land the City has in the area contemplates 33rd Ave. Councilmember Sisk asked if the bond referendum included the cost for a street. Manager Willis answered that it did not but, if a street is installed, the property will be assessed for it. Mr. Boarman stated they need the loop effect which can be obtained in several different ways. At this time all they need is approval of the part of the project they are in charge of, the building plans. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- RESOLUTION NO. 87-675 ber Vasiliou, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-675 APPROVAL OF FIRE FIRE STATION 3 STATION 3 SCHEMATIC PLANS AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PLANS TO BE SCHEMATIC PLANS DEVELOPED BY ARCHITECT. Item 8-E Councilmember Sisk stated his concern is that the plans do not dictate the road. Councilmember Crain agreed but stated he believes there is suf- ficient flexibility to provide service to the facility and doesn't have to be approved at this point. Mr. Boarman stated the building should have an impact on the road but not decide it because of the need for vehicle access to the site. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. Edward D. Svetc, 5330 Vicksburg Lane, explained what he's been WAIVER OF EROSION & trying to do with his property; excavate between 139 and 200 SILTATION CONTROL cubic yards of material from a pond on his property which is in POLICY an FRD District. He has permission from the Soo Line Railroad Item 8-F to undertake the project as long as he doesn't disturb the drainage and he obtains their prior approval. He was told by City staff that a contour map was required, but a contour survey Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 314 for the eastern portion of his property would cost between 1,000 and $1,500 according to a private land surveyor. He also objects to the $2,000 bond requirement for a simple $1,200 pro- ject. He understands the need for an ordinance and policy but they should fit the circumstances and staff needs to have the discretion to waive provisions. A cash deposit equivalent to the cost of the project is not reasonable. Councilmember Vasiliou agreed and stated some common sense is needed. She doesn't support the staff recommendation to enforce the ordinance literally and doesn't believe a $1,000 project re- quires a financial guarantee. Councilmember Crain stated his concern is that, if the project is not done right and creates a drainage problem, it will cost the City to repair the work. Councilmember Sisk asked if there were some modification that would give the staff more latitude to take care of the average citizen in cases such as this. Manager Willis stated that when rules are established there has to be a threshhold. The current Council policy doesn't give the staff any latitude. The Council could amend its threshhold, en- force the policy, or give staff power to waive the rules. Director Moore stated there are two distinct regulations this relates to, the building code and the erosion policy. There are other instances around the City where residents want to fill in wetlands that are protected. He believes the permit process is good as it brings out the other agencies that have to be dealt with. There is very little additional work that would need to be done by Mr. Svetc to obtain a permit. Councilmember Sisk stated sometimes an individual resident gets caught up in the rules and regulations made to protect the rest of the City. He doesn't want to see the City scrap its ordi- nance and policy, but he would like to see a solution worked out to help this individual. Councilmember Crain would like to see the permit process modi- fied with regard to the deposit required for small projects according their scale. Attorney Thomson suggested the Council waive a portion of the policy in this case. The permit should still be required. Councilmember Sisk asked how the individual can be made respon- sible for any correction work the City may have to undertake. Attorney Thomson answered the individual is always responsible. By waiving all or a portion of the requirement, the City doesn't give up the right to go after the individual. Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 315 MOTION was made by Councilmember Crain, seconded by Councilmem- ber Zitur, waiving the erosion and siltation policy for Mr. Svetc for his project under condition that he receives, in writ- ing, a letter of approval from the neighboring land owner if he continues to elect to place fill on their property, maintaining the $38 permit fee, that the topographical map be updated, and waiving the bonding requirement. Mr. Svetc stated, because of the time involved in getting writ- ten permission from the Soo Line, he would move the fill onto his own property. Motion carried, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-676 AUTHORIZING REDUCTION OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR BEGIN CONSTRUCTION FOR COTTON- WOOD PLAZA (86124) to $266,000. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-677 AUTHORIZING REDUCTION OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR ERIN PROPERTIES (87024) to 3,800. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-678 AUTHORIZING REDUCTION OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR JOHN LAVANDER FOR PARKERS LAKE BUSINESS CENTER (86126) to $6,000. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-679 AUTHORIZING REDUCTION OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR JOE HAMM FOR HAMM-BERG ADDI- TION (85102) to $12,200. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-680 AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR JAMES PETERSON FOR WILLOWHAVEN NORTH (86033). Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-681 AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR ST. PHILIP THE DEACON LUTHERAN CHURCH (86071). Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 87-676 BOND REDUCTION BEGIN CONSTRUCTION COTTONWOOD PLAZA 86124) Item 8-G-1* RESOLUTION NO. 87-677 BOND REDUCTTON ERIN PROPERTIES 87024) Item 8-G-2* RESOLUTION NO. 87-678 BOND REDUCTIOP PARKERS LAKE BUSINESS CENTER, JOHN LAVANDER 86126) Item 8-G-3* RESOLUTION NO. 87-679 ND REDUCTION HAMM-BERG ADDITION JOE HAMM (85102) Item 8-G-4* RESOLUTION NO. 87-680 BOND LE E WILLOWHAVEN NORTH JAMES PETERSON (86033) Item 8-H-1* RESOLUTION NO. 87-681 BOND RELEASE ST. PHILIP THE DEACON LUTHERAN CHURCH 86071) Item 8-H-2* Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 316 MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-682 AUTHORIZNG RELEASE OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR CRAWFORD-MERZ CONSTRUCTION FOR LEMER COMPANY (85104). Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-683 AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR NEDGAARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR ALJON TOOL (87052). Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. Director Carlquist stated that representatives were present from the Luverne Fire Apparatus Company, from General Safety Equip- ment Corporation, which is the low bidder, as well as officers from the fire department. Last week some Councilmembers were concerned that the bids were isolated to one type of truck. The original specifications called for a specific type of truck chassis to match the present trucks. General Safety bid three different chassis and the fire department recommended the low bid of the three. The Waterous pump would be an advantage because it is a local manufacturer. The firefighters believe it is reliable and should have been called for in the specs. The all bolt con- struction is required for the maintenance of the trucks. With bolted construction there is some movement which relieves stress on the equipment. The City Attorney assured him that these were legitimate reasons to include them in the specs. Councilmember Sisk asked how much latitude was given to the bid- ders. Director Carlquist answered that the bid specs specified the truck types. Attorney Thomson stated the specs in this case said that any bidder who wanted to submit an exception to the specs could do so; it was their alternative. The City can do what it believes to be in the best interest of the City with regard to accepting exceptions. Councilmember Vasiliou asked why the low bidder was asked to comment on Luverne's letter. Director Carlquist answered that he shared all the information with all the bidders to get as much information as possible. Ben Whitney, attorney for Luverne, stated he believes the bid- ding process was flawed because the specs were so tightly drawn that only one manufacturer was able to meet them which was a violation of state law. The pump is manufactured by only one Minnesota company. Luverne offers a Hale pump which meets the NFPA requirements and is identical. The all bolted body RESOLUTION NO. 87-682 BOND RE EASE CRAWFORD-MERZ CONST. LEMER COMPANY (85104) Item 8-H-3* RESOLUTION NO. 87-683 BOND RELEASE NEDGAARD CONSTRUCTION ALJON TOOL (87052) Item 8-H-4* FIRE APPARATUS Item 8-I-1 Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 317 construction is also only offered by one manufacturer; the body types are equivalent. Luverne can provide functionally equiva- lent equipment but not the identical equipment. The effect of these closed specs is to eliminate other manufacturers. Of all the manufacturers, only two bids were received and one wasn't close to the specs. The tightness of the specs eliminated com- petitive bidding. They are asking for the ability to compete and asked the City to rewrite the specs and reopen the bidding. Luverne didn't submit a bid because they didn't believe they could meet the specs. Only nine days were allowed to bid when other cities allow 30-45 days. Steve Reedy, vice president of Luverne, stated the specs were vague, however, they also stated that if the bid didn't comply, they would be thrown out. Paul Teeuwen, sales manager for Luverne, stated they were work- ing the bid until the last day when they realized they couldn't comply, so they submitted a letter of protest. Director Carlquist stated that, on October 13, he talked to Mr. Teeuwen who told him that their bid was completely done but they decided not to turn it in. Attorney Thomson stated that the specs do not state that, if the bids don't comply, they will be thrown out. The specs do state that the bidder can submit exceptions. Mr. Whitney pointed out a part of the specs which stated that no exceptions would be permitted. Attorney Thomson agreed that this point was only raised since the last Council meeting. Councilmember Crain asked why the specs were for a particular type of water tank. Chuck Scharlau, firefighter, stated specs for this truck were worked out about three years ago as a Joint effort among 25 fire departments. When they were originally put out, eleven compan- ies bid. The water tank is bolted to give and not rupture because of stress. Mayor Schneider pointed out that, in 1983, the truck cost was 126,000 and today it is $127,000 so he doesn't believe the City is being overcharged. Attorney Thomson commented that state law says a spec product cannot be asked for if this eliminates competitive bidding. It can be done, however, if a valid reason is that the City wants a certain performance level and there are opportunities for more than one bidder. Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 318 Councilmember Crain asked if the 1983 bid included specs for a Waterous pump and bolted construction. Mr. Scharlau answered that the type of seal was specified and the only manufacturer was Waterous. Luverne bid on this in 1983. Mr. Teeuwen asked if the fire department operates two types of pumps now. Mr. Scharlau answered that they have three types of pumps which he works on. The job of maintenance would be easier and faster if there were only one type. Brad Johnson stated it is his understanding that Waterous wil only sell to another company which can guarantee proper instal- lation of the pump. Councilmember Vasiliou stated it is important that the fire department have some latitude in the choice of equipment and it is appropriate that all guidelines be as they are. She is con- cerned with other aspects of the bidding process and believes the City errored in its presentation of specs and doesn't believe the complaints of Luverne should have been sent to General Safety. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-684 AWARDING BID FOR PUR- CHASE OF TWO 1250 GPM PUMPERS AND ONE 1500 GALLON PUMPER, ALTER- NATE NUMBER 1 WITH TRADE IN to General Safety Equipment Corpora- tion in the amount of $345,570. Councilmember Sisk stated the fire department needs this quality and the City Attorney agrees the City is on legal ground and the price is acceptable. He feels comfortable that the City would be getting the best value and has no problem with voting for this resolution. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. Director Blank stated the architect is working on why the bids were so high and feels he has been able to identify about five areas which were different. Barb Edwards, Chair of PRAC, stated PRAC recommends to reject the bids and explore alternatives, which is what they are in the process of doing. MOTION was made by Councilmember Crain, seconded by Councilmem- ber Vasiliou, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-685 REJECTING BIDS FOR THE PARKERS LAKE PAVILION. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 87-684 AWARD F BID FIRE APPARATUS Item 8-I-1 PARKERS LAKE PAVILION Item 8-I-2 RESOLUTION NO. 87-685 REJECTIRG--B—= PARKERS LAKE PAVILION Item 8-I-2 Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 319 MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-686 REVISING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR TYRELL FIFTH ADDITION (87029). Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-687 ORDERING PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS FOR PONDING PURPOSES, OUTLOTS "F" AND "I", PARKERS LAKE NORTH 2ND ADDITION. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-688 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, BASS LAKE PLAZA AREA/HARRISON HILLS UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROSECT NO. 011-001/630. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-689 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, CARLSON CEN- TER EIGHTH ADDITION, STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PRO- JECT NO. 751. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 87-686 REVISING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT, TYRELL 5TH ADDITION Item 8-J* RESOLUTION NO. 87-687 ORDERING HEARING EASEMENT VACATION PARKERS LAKE NORTH 2ND ADDITION Item 8-K* RESOLUTION NO. 87-688 ORDERTNG BIDS BASS LAKE PLAZA/ HARRISON HILLS PROSECT 011-001/630 Item 8-L-1* RESOLUTION NO. 87-689 ORDERING BIDS CARLSON CENTER EIGHTH ADDITION PROSECT 751 Item 8-L-2* MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- RESOLUTION NO. 87-690 ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-690 APPROVING PLANS AND ORDERIO BIDS SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, FERNBROOK FERNBROOK WOODS ADDN. WOODS ADDITION, STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROSECT PROSECT 720 NO. 720. Item 8-L-3* Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-691 RECEIVING REPORT AND CALLING FOR HEARING ON STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS, JAMESTOWN ADDITION for November 16, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-692 RECEIVING REPORT AND CALLING FOR HEARING ON STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS, DEVRIES 2ND ADDITION for November 16, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 87-691 ORDERING HEARING STREET LIGHTING JAMESTOWN ADDITION Item 8-M-1* RESOLUTION NO. 87-692 ORDERING HEARING STREET LIGHTING DEVRIES 2ND ADDITION Item 8-M-2* Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 320 MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-693 RECEIVING REPORT AND ORDERING PROJECT, STREET LIGHTING, PHEASANT TRAILS ADDITION. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-694 RECEIVING REPORT AND ORDERING PROJECT, STREET LIGHTING, HERITAGE RIDGE ADDITION. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-695 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, LAKE CAMELOT ESTATES ADDITION (85114) to $594,242. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-696 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, WILLOW HAVEN NORTH ADDITION (86033) to $6,322. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-697 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, SILVERTHORNE 2ND ADDITION (86025) to $4,329. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-698 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, SILVERTHORNE ADDITION (82052) to $27,104 private and 3,892 on public improvements. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-699 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, WOODLANDS 2ND ADDITION (86059) to $2,240 private and $414 on public improvements. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-700 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, TIMBERTON ADDITION (83054) to $448. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 87-693 ORDERING PROJECT STREET LIGHTING PHEASANT TRAILS ADDN. Item 8-N-1* RESOLUTION NO. 87-694 ORDERING PROJECT STREET LIGHTING HERITAGE RIDGE ADDN. Item 8-N-2* RESOLUTION NO. 87-695 BOND REDUCTION LAKE CAMELOT ESTATES 85114) Item 8-0-1* RESOLUTION NO. 87-696 BOND REDUCTION WILLOW HAVEN NORTH ADDN. (86033) Item 8-0-2* RESOLUTION NO. 87-697 BOND REDUCTION SILVERTHORNE 2ND ADDN. 86025) Item 8-0-3* RESOLUTION NO. 87-698 BOND REDUCTION SILVERTHORNE ADDITION 82052) Item 8-0-4* RESOLUTION NO. 87-699 BOND REDUCTION WOODLANDS 2ND ADDN. 86059) Item 8-0-5* RESOLUTION NO. 87-700 BOND REDUCTION TIMBERTON ADDITION 83054) Item 8-0-6* Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 321 MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- RESOLUTION NO. 87-701 ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-701 AUTHORIZING CONDEMNA- CONDEMNATION TION PROCEEDINGS, PROJECT NO. 762, STORM WATER POND BC -P12, PROCEEDINGS COTTONWOOD COTTONWOOD PLAZA ADDITION. PLAZA, PROJECT 762 Item 8-P* Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-702 CALLING FOR LOCATION/ DESIGN PUBLIC HEARING COUNTY ROAD 6/I-494 INTERCHANGE, PROJECT NO. 250 for November 23, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-703 ORDERING PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED VACATION OF TRAIL EASEMENTS, CARLSON CENTER FIFTH ADDITION, LOTS 1 THROUGH 4, BLOCK 1 for November 16, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-704 AUTHORIZING THE EXECU- TION OF THE GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE METROPOLITAN REGIONAL .ARTS COUNCIL. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-705 AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE FOR VOTING EQUIPMENT in the amount of $37,200. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. Councilmember Crain stated he asked that this item be removed from the consent agenda because he believes it should be done verbally. He thinks the increase is well earned and totally appropriate. RESOLUTION NO. 87-702 CALLING HEARING C.R. 6/I-494 INTER- CHANGE, PROD. 250 Item 8-Q_* RESOLUTION NO. 87-703 ORDERING HEARING TRAIL EASEMENT VACATION, CARLSON CENTER FIFTH ADDN. Item 8-R* RESOLUTION NO. 87-704 GRANT AGREEMENT METROPOLITAN REGIONAL ARTS COUNCIL Item 8-S* RESOLUTION NO. 87-705 AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE, VOTING EQUIPMENT Item 8-T-1* MOTION was made by Councilmember Crain, seconded by Councilmem- ORDINANCE NO. 87-29 ber Sisk, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 87-29 ESTABLISHING THE SALARIES SALARIES OF MAYOR OF MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL BY AMENDING SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 OF AND CITY COUNCIL SUBSECTION 205.01 OF THE PLYMOUTH CITY CODE. Item 8-T-2 Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. Discussion was held on the recommended distance of 750 ft. from ON -SALE LIQUOR IN schools, churches, and residential areas and the live music pro- SHOPPING CENTERS hibition in shopping centers and office complexes. Item 8-U Councilmember Crain stated the 750 ft. should apply to all three types of licenses. Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 322 Mayor Schneider asked if the 750 ft. was from the structure or from the property line. Manager Willis stated it should be from the building because of the size of some sites. Councilmember Crain stated it should be from property line to property line. Attorney Thomson stated measures can be applied if it is within the 750 ft. Renewal of the existing liquor licenses would be applied against the ordinance in effect at renewal time but the Council could decide each one individually. Manager Willis stated one of the requirements could be enforced if there was a specific problem but the Council would probably not want to cut off an existing license. MOTION was made by Councilmember Sisk, seconded by Councilmember Vasiliou, directing staff to draft the necessary policy changes. Motion carried, five ayes. Councilmember Vasiliou asked if future requests from homeowners DRAFT POLICY ON GEESE associations would have to agree to work with Dr. Cooper or TRANSLOCATION could they simply use the money to round up the geese them- Item 8-V selves. Manager Willis stated this is expected to be a working relation- ship with Dr. Cooper to make the program successful. At the present time Dr. Cooper is the only one licensed by the Depart- ment of Natural Resources to trap geese. Councilmember Sisk asked if this policy could be modified to in- clude any others who might, in the future, be licensed to under- take the program. Manager Willis pointed out that this is an experimental program and will be reviewed by the Council at budget time next year. Director Carlquist stated three public properties have been identified already: Parkers Lake, Zachary playfield, and the east beach. MOTION was made by Councilmember Sisk, seconded by Councilmember Crain, to adopt the draft policy. Motion carried, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- RESOLUTION NO. 87-706 ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-706 DESIGNATING DIRECTOR MINNESOTA POLICE AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR TO THE MINNESOTA POLICE RECRUITMENT RECRUITMENT SYSTEM SYSTEM (MPRS) to be Chief of Police and Police Lieutenant Item 8-W* respectively. Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 323 Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- RESOLUTION NO. 87-707 ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-707 AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION AUTHORIZING CDBG OF CITY OF PLYMOUTH GRANT APPLICATION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR GRANT APPLICATION FOR INCLUSION IN THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT YEAR XII BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FOR YEAR XII. Item 9-A* Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- RESOLUTION NO. 87-708 ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-708 AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION AUTHORIZIR CDBn OF CITY OF PLYMOUTH GRANT APPLICATION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR GRANT APPLICATION FOR INCLUSION IN THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT YEAR XIII BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FOR YEAR XIII. Item 9-A* Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Sisk, seconded by Councilmem- ber Vasiliou, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-709 APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT TO MATT BULLOCK CONTRACTING in the amount of $1,825. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 87-710 APPROVING INTERFUND TRANSFERS FOR VARIOUS PARK AND TRAIL PROJECTS. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. MOTION was made by Mayor Schneider, seconded by Councilmember Vasiliou, to appoint Ken Wass as chair of the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals. Motion carried, five ayes. MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded by Councilmem- ber Crain, to appoint Ken Anderson as vice chair of the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals. Motion carried, five ayes. Discussion followed on the attendance record of one member. MOTION was made by Councilmember Sisk, seconded by Councilmember Crain, directing the Mayor to talk with the member and report back to the Council. Motion carried, five ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 87-709 FINAL PAYMENT MATT BULLOCK CONT. Item 9-B RESOLUTION NO. 87-710 INTERFUPD TRANSFERS Item 9-C* APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR & VICE CHAIR TO BOZA Item 9-D Regular Council Meeting October 19, 1987 Page 324 Councilmember Sisk requested that PRAC receive a copy of the survey for review. Mayor Schneider suggested this not be completed until two to three weeks after new C.R. 9 opens. The Council agreed. Councilmember Vasiliou stated the number of questions is a pro- blem and she doesn't believe this should be done now. She ques- tioned wording of questions relating to the community center, Plymouth on Parade, and cable programming. Councilmember Crain suggested some changes; the Council agreed. He also asked that the respondent be told the survey will take between 15-20 minutes at the beginning. MOTION was made by Councilmember Sisk, seconded by Councilmem- ber Zitur, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 87-30 AMENDING PLYMOUTH CITY CODE, SECTION 900 REGARDING KENNELS. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, five ayes. The meeting adjourned at 11:40 p.m. City Clerk APPROVING QUESTIONS RESIDENTIAL SURVEY Item 9-E ORDINANCE NO. 87-30 AMENDING CODE REGARDING KENNELS Item 9-F A CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: Friday, October 23, 1987 for the City Council meeting October 26, 1987. TO: James G. Willis, City Manager FROM: Dale E. Hahn, Finance Director SUBJECT Disbursements I hereby recommend for payment the attached listing of disbursements for the following funds: Norwest Bank - Metro West General Fund $ 1,132,102.97 Construction Fund 255,792.08 Utilities Fund 377,832.35 Special Assessment Fund 357,451.00 Metropolitan Bank - Plymouth Housing & Redevelopment Authority $ 4,156.77 GRAND TOTAL FOR ALL FUNDS $ 2,127,335.17 Above totals are for the period ending September 30, 1987. A'eac'& Dale E. Hahn I HEREBY APPROVE THE ATTACHED LISTING OF DISBURSEMENTS AND RECOMMEND SAME FOR PAYMENT. James G. Willis W z CL V nI 9i —WN N r A NNN N ff 4 q 4 v v w 1i 0 6:O A a ro ;AA 6; O 4 4 Z I Z Z ;o Z. a X N F. F. nq i i i I ri r, n r4 ti-r. is, r, c)' aj L- n m o 7 r ru CD ry 4o a) C3 m-0 0 M n71 m 71 CD -1 w n0 J a n r a ru cr 1; L4 1 r* 4 A m Q' IfI u A Lri T cc r, r, Ir a- 1-1 f q r ff, r- v rn c r rU 4 Ln rr, r rL, cc 14 in, a, r- ze a T. T11 T, tr Ti t- cr J-! r cr ly 17 cr r cr cr- T- a- a vr T- Ul Ij n UZ ml21 Di D nD i 01 cl tj n zr 10 r, r, I cc r; 4 Im ni m I I r,I 1 r", rm m m inj M m 4 114 4 4 LI c, --x LI 4 0 ej C4• C, A 0- Cl 1.- 4 1 H cli J 1 m 1 73 0 0 <> I W1 I.- uX I j1-1> I>. ck L zr_ 1> I-- I,! 3 iv) I,, x I.- a. la w a Y 4 j 1" Ll 411 1A 3 51 iy j F-- 7* t L-1i W 7 x Ij 4, Lj I.- 1 Irl V I l 2: z 3 3 71 e> j 4 a E a 1 I..f w m a j j 0 _j 4 e it tk IA 3 LIJ t-4 r i La L U-1 1 j 0 C) t3 11-11 n, al Ci n r, 731 zj n C) n; L:) I Ln Lj L. n 2, J- yl. r r- 3 1-0 13 n j U I 'JIto n r- f, 1 nj njn17mA4mrrV01 4 lu M. u U: u Fu ru N AiiF hiipii 44414 n 7--. oiv mew. N" v J) 0 N N . '4 N 0 Ln Ln mi s ru m c3 rn 10 r C r rn; a- In C31 q c3i r T Ti T 4 f1 4 In C-11 S A ful I ru r -i 4 ti Ll z ml n r ru UI Ir- m m In a- n 4 In T tr C) 7' cr C-j n r i a- nj ril I- iru Er n M o' ru 4 ru 1-0 q ru cri T- I- I-' T" cr Ticr* 7L In; Z r n n-, r d S. lu 0 t. cr I -q I U rn! M cri 7- cr cr lcr a7 a- 0- cr cr tr cr C- A ru In n r- cr 0 Ir! cr J, V CF 71- Li yl 0 o C.3 j 1 M J r, A j P -A 13 rl 10 Ad 4: nj I M. cl fn AJi 41 1 3 EM 1 9 m 1> In I m ryl n ril j 31 Cl X A 61 14 31 v j 1 4 r7Z J1, j L 41 Lj rl j ro e -,k n n 0.4 fr 4: 4 14 I -j n rn n AiiF hiipii 44414 n 4 q Ft w Av&m'mI6v%M!. now I" tp m c3 rn 10 C3 C ILn M ru u U n n r m Ln Ir- m m In a- n 4 In T tr C) 7' cr C-j r' CD a- nj ril I- iru Er n M o' ru 4 ru 1-0 q ru N r- I- rl u 0 Aa co S. I -q cri 7- cr cr lcr a7 a- 0- cr cr tr cr C- A ru In n r- cr 0 Ir! cr J, V CF a- Li 1:3 0 C3 C.3 M 0 C) Iq P -A 13 rl 10 Ad 4: nj I M. n, fn 71 41 4 m m irn In I m ryl n ril j Cl 14 Z 41 Lj I'a I.- e -,k 0.4 1:21 I -j It> 4 LSZ x i T- C 1d 1%-.' c 0 1 r j T q'jj LiI.- It: 14 W A. 14 L i'r ri j Ld A al In 3 llrD 7a 3 In j:j3 C3 In r-- m cl, 14 Jl ru C-_ u I C) In D 7 n A q M ru n Iji2l nr nn In. rl Q r hi r. t" In L:r r a- 3, T In Ln! W'F-- TqIMMmm IN i T A• O O n O i 0'' N N N N N N 1!I A II 1p1 ASA t 1 J 0 0 0 ti` 300 0 n v n -o n m a l - r+ n r n a a a o- ^i v a n o s o a o- N n v a u a s -o - N n , e n o a d= v- M n 0 n n v N u v N N v n ,o n nen n n n n v•••• e••• a n n n n n n n n O-. N A• O O n O i 0'' N N N N N N 1!I A II 1p1 ASA t 1 t t V, f f loll ; ni 0 0 0 ti` 300 0 0 0 0 laic' O 0 0 I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 f I I r I 7 j v, I a- 1i 7 I I cz O fr I 17 M or I Q O C Icl tr co I ii c O M1 4 A tl'1 O O{ O O C'SRI i AM1 c- I m 1i J7C-1 rui.0 m 17 RJ m IL m n U I= Cr o cn a J7 Si m S an 0 to n1 11J im M1 m 0 Im a- U ru U M1 ra T n f1J c' e-1 m I w7 I I I 1 i f` F N r ifs IN I fes M1I M1 M1 PI M1 M1 r, M1 M1 M1 3- M1 r- r- r CL:W Q a m n c IV z, Ca t m m',) al c as a ml r-1 i r -R a a i a u r4 4 ra i ctl a a a H a i ra y a j I a i.a ra a a t..a a a 1 i.a a A Iq T., ia- a-{ I a- Mfr a- ar 01 r o- a- Q- o- 6-a- a- I o' o- a- n- a- a - Ln DI r i: a' n rirr nd N. r•-. r.: SI, M{ Dn. f 0 0- Iu m rym iTi r Lnm n M1 y, irrirr, rn n, n.• u h r,t m rr n•, C rn r 2 v al 0 0 al a KZ n m II n n rml tet t m I ntl w t n m r*! rn m t'7m i • In m I • n M in w r» T, I i I I j y C i• v I i I i F is LII O T I W tetV Ivt v r v f., O i W H L..1 v I O v Q I V 7 V J In, Y sA F7 3 V V R..t r V H i1 v H 1 X1 HIx I1 c L J Z L w 1 Jc. l V 1 7 i0 ItJ t7- J J Q ly t.] tii tal F F h h R l!-•- 7 O V 2 1-4 t L..i J O J i OP ( J I r 2 Y. r I LI Ft J H d 3 C a V' FQ t 11.1 C L H 1J 1 N a L 7 IS F 1-1 1 t l v I1. 4 F 11I!.tR Q It t.l c r i J O W Q C:7 J Q n E. V 1~ Z H i•-{ Y. KL r1C u1 1 G a= 3.1 1 L7 W t' f -i A. f F U. i-1I.R pit U- 9 h 11 L Vn 14 O FI Jd tI 7_ I r d 1,7 Y, T ja. h J WJ h X OJ' a I2 2 h S F N L• h 7 LL 7 Y A rr. H 2 n R J i2 t.! 1. IJ J L.: M1 W iOC t R( Y O 1 d Q17 E- 2 tT_ J J J b6_' O 7 H Y Fi F F- J, F I s Z' 1 7 F k'. 1h: t- L F C F m ritH I 7 O L V s. 77 W IJ J J J• 7 Q T•I Z 1 7 O L CL l rL f_. ie X 7 J f' a i I 7s t-. JI r] f7 L C7 17 a O Q 7 n J. il M1 f fJ1 s I C, ut 7 v: O J7 r 7 7 n- ff m Jt n. n; r7: JM1 n D D. M1! A Ir mfJ' r. r Ui nt r- 0 m nJ J hl• S rr J7 s M1 FO L n I n Irt ul) I D D J7 D i 0i II I D D i 01 a :.D i Dj I D v n -o n m a l - r+ n r n a a a o- ^i v a n o s o a o- N n v a u a s -o - N n , e n o a d= v- M n 0 n n v N u v N N v n ,o n nen n n n n v•••• e••• a n n n n n n n n 7 N n Y C O n C a O- N n 0 0 0 0 N N N N N_ N_ N N N', II M n n q .1 /01 f• t f• h O 0 0^ N C O Q p'C O n O!0I1hCb 0 0 !O 0 0 0 !0.0 0- N ^I f nONMM.n n n 1 I t j I I j I I i I i i i t I t I I tn I I M r n T; m al G; rn Q In! .-a C OI t7 Cl r'! O In T 1 7 O n M1 D n o al r 2- til In -r I n o o nJ i.a o .n m o v m a I al S lJ 1 nil U O j of 1J T I . • •1 N! l hJ Oi r im ru m i • 1S S I • unIjM1V• fri: o Q R: r" rv!i r CD j, M1 rl T irl O i TU') rn tn! D al 71 n rl Q fru .D A Q- u RI i T, r ru ri .D' ti ri ri j rl r r M1' F M1 M1 M1 r r' M1 M1 r ,M1 r M1 tr- M1 M1 fM1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 f+ r 0! n x a u m r! fl 40 a m all V m n m a m 7J 1.0 a Yl m r n 4 z a a a fj a a,' i a a': i '. •i ri ri .i i a i ra a i 14 14 a a SA .a TII T r rj T Ir tr Ir d' a -i T ;T Er ff Q" it O' tr 0- T T Q' R- A.. a - ff' tom; ,-a `-:J tn! s ":'n .DIn r tlIVt T r) raA m s In cn CI yt n j; s z n . Jl ul OI¢ n .n n n D U jil .i5 r a, n I.G D m a r V 4 r m n m rnI m n nil n. m nl n rn •nl m 4 T. m j;,m m ini m m fm m n -n j If 1 F F. a jr•91 u v V' N d 47 V F H 1 J 1 Q F 1 4I 7 9 J tJ F-' V1 f= I ViJ I F V 1 I j t' F J JI O J 3. H t9 H C, I LJ q Y Y L/71 L F IW V 1 V) Fj 1 D i L I.- J ? i..I 1 n H n V J F tL - OI J NL J Q S a I;' 2 O r7 F S i 1.1 U- LJ r^ Y • n, i- 3 7 T 2 T' 11 H T V+ lG I C 41 -D. J 1 't w d L r I J 1 1 n F 7 y T' i..l 7 M 444--- V W 5- y J 1 F A tl, i 7 IJ Y, f 'C tQ . J 3 } J Q 2 H T jj.A 1 J Li! J R Jl l" t..J `z s- 1L [ rig F J J '.9 .y ti fJ r{ a I2: i l HI U Q; .7 3 }I 4 •-4 7 T Q 4 !Y-. J d L r o 1,.. a FT 0 X nI n rr I J j2 J' '7 m OI a; n In rj i7 l 3 4V7 tr S' l r T• r rarJSI'll ci u n c in r.I n r r a- s n , to n J a 7' "1 n r. n o pi c n 11 r r T Fr J '-) U 1 ni; nr nl tnl A n nj •• M1 f,r• q -i, v m S S LA T T' IT, T- 7 r r u ai 3 n n a T R' I TI r o- r I I I I f v.v f v v vm o v v v n n nn n n 1 1 I I I i i i 1 I I• I I f- n, a vIn M t: vtn cf, ti4 0 N r J» i n r I I.0 M1 ra o LnIr- M1 O a rM1' 1 r- M1 M1 M1i M1 M1 a M1 M1 zn W M1 M1 M1 M1 M1I M1 M1 M1 f I uC) a ra Ira ai ral ri ra rira raa i ra rara r: ra r rira 9a 14It 7 a r-1 a Iqa f I fTiTJ' Q'l r J'i J' T J i S Q" D- I z V l ra ja7 JIr- 13AI tr- a IS M1 7 lnl Ftil rrl nr I:r- M1 1 4l -r Nt! r"1c. U I n: u mn ra: Sr O nI.A zu lyt il M1m Si I i n! m41 t t u n M. rq t,r n Irri n r,t rt r*t j• jr j 1.1 n 11 el A14 j j I I r-aiY 9 ra I i 11 _ i r JI v c c o 4 i Z I x z t— r A X. j V1 4 L IA - CllJ F J i4 4 L 7i_N G1 T iT LL 1- 7 j f•C 7 i.I J! Y al 3 IJ! Wf t O O' tet! 1 it o 21 ic :., i.J O T• a', rq Ivf Y Ir 3Y_ La d a I« t a r 1 r l 7 rr'' rT r r i t4r rteQ" T I T a" r T rr r T r: T J" ra- TT r r r i' r r f'. 7' T". 'r T S r, r I r T rr rT) T T! YIir rr rr r T trT rr, Q' T I T Y-1 I r' T rT r Ifrr lr Ttr fr rr' TT I i a-, m a o Ln r o 0 o rM o 0 6 0 0 0 r, 0 a. Ln 0 C S gr C3 C3 0 A 0 0 Ln M M dU A 0 C3 r Ln r rU A L" 9 9 1• ; C; 1 Iz r4 8 LA 0 C; Jn Ln C3 0 0 A Ln O I 14 dl rA 0 0.- rq m 17 rn r4 M1 a C3 14 go r 0 rn A ni r 10 mi C3 ,11 61 z Ln C3 kn q n. 6n mNV) 0 0. 7 0 0 14 C; rZ CL Ic I rl r N N N N N r r- I%rt ui o CC) v 0 0 .0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IG go 0 go 40 M 10 so dO 0 .0 AtNr%- r- f f%. r, r, r, r- r r- r4- r- f r- m C% N f r- r r- o%. Ci A 4 a rA R I 'R n M cr T, v ir tr r T' tr WI cr W* cr cr T, w W- UL cr W w w a w v N 90 tT C3 rR rU m S LM Ji M1 0 9- C3 rR M M Ln M N 40 tr V cr 0ir r cr W- 0 0 0 0 0 C3 0 M C3 0 I< r4 r4 rR PR r4 eR rA pq rq fu ru J 0 0 1 0; a, a- W' Cr cr 0- cr cr w, a' 7' W, w* cr r, Or u" w* Or W 0 v 0 V 0. X: m mm m m mm m "I m m m r; A r; rp rn M m rn m r" m m r" m in m Id A oc z K: i61WwOL z ki LII N Q Vj O. j W L-1 1-4 4-4 4 2 0-4 z IM L.jOC I.- w cm 1at I EL v r H z M zx d L W Ov 0 C4 1-- 9 LAJ O 1- 01 0" ce v M 4 CL V Cw i V 0 06 0- 61 14 N 4• w 1- W V) 61 14 cc Io z 0k.0 co C v 1+ W 0 cc 0 0 cc Ct 0 z S Y Y Z -9 w 1- I 1-4 z 9 w ar 0 W V Wj CL o; w W U- w V a W O OK x ac X 0 I 6j 0 x z x C X v Z z j 4c 6) 01 0 9 w V 09 L. v W3c W i ki wcoP.- m v v 0 m V j 23 r 11 i Lj i v re tj 3 La Z F 0 41 K431 z 0 0 C j 14 3r- z w w i4 C s 1 4 14 hMl 2, 11) W j orw i ILa , UJ 30. 4 W z z w CL z I H w j _j fA I-- I P -j w 61 C j 3 k 0:4 S.- of uj v 3 c ta v W nc w w 4 w o O M 0 06QwQ La Z 0 as m 33 W CL 0. a Wac Z 3 of 0 9 Z 6j M of t K 41 Lyl 9 4c 4 -a Ca O 1 V V A kj g* W Li w IL. LL- J X 2 X o M C3 C3 0 C3 C3 C3 C3 0 C3 Co Ln C3 C, C 0 LM C 14 0 n0 0 0 0 -a in C3 r' Ln InM Nn Ln 0 C3 Ln P. n NLn NLn 0 -0 z tn 0 r- m Ir Ln -- r- O; Ln Ln T" u qIr M N C3 Ln mIA a r, LI) N M r. W r4 ru Am 0 a, Ln r- (r CD q M T 0 go C3 4 r -W N mM Z cc 14 A IR 4 14 r4 14 14 rU MA nj nj rU rW ni W m m rn m m ---v j v 0= N fl f P. v n O 9 1_ NNV: '1 V ' Y :, N^ f•1 IVI. i IfTooo- F O LnF r11 Irl O C5 Ln ul r(1 S O o f A A, m j m Q' o -0 v1 N F0 m 7 u1 O mV ru m m A S vt ttl m O O .a it N F m O J m N N 0 m rL 0" ! S a' m rU A O L"dl d1 m O rl' D N 7 1- 6n Ln o m o Q M M ru m F n D- m A s rU m i u1 m In .t m ry b Iq w z a m rq o m r ru ru m R ru b I Q cr w n F h ri A O m ru m 14 CL Ic ra rU I M1 M1 F F i W 43 FO FO m M19 M1O Fm M1 M1 m .0 M1 0 M1O : m Fm F m Fim cc M1m M1r •O 0 M1 M1 m O M1 M1 4 O M1 b M1 F M1 0 m -0 0' 1- Q M1 F F M1 F M1 M1 F M1 F F F F FM1 F rt F 7 F 6. F F M1 M1 F fi N F M1 D A ri ri rA ri ra I ri A ri a A A rq r°I IN A k A rat r4 ri A ri rel A i A Q' w- cr cr! Q' I Q' j cr crQ' i tl' rT a- c a- it it a cr it Q• I cr Iy" cr Q. Q. II Y Nn1 mru SN 1n n1 aN Fru 0ru tr O ru m Aru m m m m x' Lnm am M1 m Om w- m 4 ru S I Lni p M1 ! 40 0' V R' cr rT i a- G' Q' Q' C' r#' cr 0' cr c o- cr Q• I 7 S Q. ', 0' q. S S 0.. tl' S S 7 tr cr 0' v m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m rr m m m rn, m m m m m I isiiIjI I I Y. Q J F W V N W 0. Z W Z V f z j W N Z O N Z CL W LL. M I 2 Z V H Z N N7 W N I V l9 2 d V N S Y N < CL d 01 H W I K W W W A O K' d J < V F d A D. W H H Z La V V O K O W 2 M M W W Y O F F Y W U- J I K Ii F- . N V m d O O V i- W V O Z M Z N H J V W Z J S >: W ti W J i V It N O W W 1y1 J IL 4 z Q H S O O V SO V Z O CL JO W yl Ii W N K H S I L! Y Jz4 cr I t4 N W V H ac K J Y J Z W J W! Z > OkyI N I X WN J 0 1- M Z S D 7 I O o m d N- V W H rrWEWytJ t 1w.,1 I V y. J O J J W Z 2 2 W 2 K Z H S V W Y J N Ct 7 j m K 3; FZ j Ji< 2 O i z IL O C} 1.- < w cc W- Y Z N W W N W ejl O iW Z W ui U. Z• H H F F- 1-- U- U- O mO WW K 1- Z Cl Ur i< O H i1 I Z 1• K K K 4 H W W b W W j H - W H< O O O S Y Z 4 JJ r! f a I S S S i Z Z i Z OA o O ut ru OO ON O O ul O O Om! O f r O Oul O O! O pp O O 0 O I O Cb O O O T d ti M1 On O 1 P O O 0 u7 ,II QO o1 . O O M1 F O p2 Q' m O ul to p ul J N 17 O O Ln O O O O O O O F M1 W s s n O ru ru m s S Jr m cr O O O ru ru ruyhl ru Ln Ln M1 ru cr tr a' m m m s s s s s s X s s y1 Ln Ln Ln Lm ul iI Ln n i n Ln ur ui I Ln Ln Ln O 1 A a 7 N 'J N '1 ' f 01 N 1 - i JAbOJ .• N of P N~ J 7 N N N N N N Y -'1 N n A rl n P P P T t .^ N Jt o•e•°_ao n °'tl V'qN v.°v' +v9 .i;-,47, X',nnnneiiviaooaaRnna eon n,en'000.°om Doc°o nnn n"n T, l YZ Q3 1 WF N H W0.' YV W2 V W A WL Z i I ff O O O O C m N O t+l O to F • • i ' 1 .p A i .A 1 ru m A to r 1- S O R N Q' W 2 0 N i rl R M 7 m m m o o O o 1p o O CL V o o 0 m 0 ti 4 R R R M1 RT, l YZ Q3 1 WF N H W0.' YV W2 V W A WL Z i I ff R M1 G{ R I II I Q' to cr t!1 7 ni Ln Lin O S p ru Q 0' N S A T O S t11 I I i ! O 1 O i I A O M i O N i O 41 a O N n fi 0 -C u r • • • • • 4 J m O S ff! 14 L; m R rU rl A C rT co S .A M1 S 04 1 I r7 ! un n in F • • i ' 1 .p A i .A 1 Q' i m Of' 1 '. O f.1A! O fz - R Vt S N ri rm H 11 ru O Al N ! I R R R p i i rl RRRRM1RRRRRwRRM. N R m R R M1 R R R R R p o m o to tC o m m m m o o 0 a o 1p o o p o o 0 m 0 4 R R R M1 R R M1 R R M1 R R M1 R i R fM1 R r7 r+l 1 rl i i A r1 a -i dl r1 •i r+l r1 i A i 0 H ! : dl r7 rl n!1 a A •1 6' Q' T O' a- Q' Q• tr Q' r[' cr Q' Ir Q' Q" tr Q- cr tr cr cr Q.. Q' Or cr T, O rt N m S Ln y R m O ri ru m 1 LA 0 M1 6 0' 1 O N m to D rr U7 t!1 Hf Vi U1 un to M 1/1 Ln J -0 0 J M 2 A i .A JI D M1 M1 M1 R M1 R R f• 0' f!- tT tl' 0' 0' Q' fr fl' cr 1 Q" T rt' cr cr w- Q' ff- fX' it T rmmmmmmTmmmmmf" m; m r?f m m ry1 m '. m m m m m rt i I L 2 W W W V H Z O J w I -- O Ji V N N CA N V O t! f V W. a N Z W N 2 i) H 1 4 Y O 1 H W w W W O V h 1-- rAl L W V J S 4' CK AJC w M W A Z Z t 4 O z Z U- G F 1- F- W 1 s 1- w y V W O W S Q N HA J a N Z N7 a A 3 J A < i W L F* O V Z i a < K W rr 1.4 A K ad N or F W A Y N It W W 1•- Z O Z< V V W Z V S! W i W N 2 ZJJSN1- W H S! W W J H z N a F O! H A 3 i O H u W W 1- > F O K N 2 O L6H W N gA d N 01 I>_ J O 1-- MA WH fY J S W O JF+ Q OC J F i V Z J H F ! 6 z Y d J m M Y M W W W Z 1+1 H I< W M 94 V J D m< O 2 m i 3 V llQQ t7 I Z Y W W 2 N'1 H 3 V J W W W 1- OC K 1.1 Q Z H J I J V' D H7 W1-- 4fl N T W1- WIL W M- H S W H Z S I< V i YY I OO 1.- w J J Z N IFF FFF 111 1 i 2 Y j KI< lYf•! Y W I= I SF J W W w C V 3 = O- F S H V V V I M H U1 d ON Y l! O 4- 3 j i-- M 3 W 3 i< N2O4mwL9NNHfN O Q O O O O O O O I O O R pQI O O O N C'J O' O O! OO Cl O to i C' 0' tT Q' vn O M1 O O til to R O O tf1 R O O to N Ln ru V1 T ru m O p R O O uD th O m R Q' O CZ O O N S AM1 m 7 R a" tr O N N ru m O A N ru N fu '. m m m R R cr O ru m S S R R R rr C L y R R R R R R R w R R M1 R O a 0 o co m m W o Q' Q` v v v. n n n r t a v• e• o- a» n n n n n n 0 00 C3 0 0 1 0 m M C3 M 0 L3 a 7) a 0 C3 C3 C 7 c Ln C7 r1J O C*3 IZ O; nj A LA 8 V: 1.- 7 In r, Ln rr, M 0 q C3 q cr rki Ln w z rm 14 ru r C3 A n m IIkn 0 ru 0ru ru 43 r, M1 r M1 f> r r- fL r- r, ti r- Iq W m m m m a b-0 0 m 40 1 r r r M1 r r, P- r- r- N I r- rl rL i iittrtrIrITtrIrIrT, it tr z 10 Ir 0 A nj r" ar Ln -a N miIr 40 0 0 10 m In c c.0 cr ff r Ir 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ir Ir IF cr cr W I r" r" rn rn m 1 11 rn m rn rr rn lz m ce 0 LJ WleuiLJ I.J U- ac x v j M I F 1 4 W kj w vi v C-1 z W 3 W z La LLJ Lav j Wx z 9 1.- z V 44 E: CK U- LJ j m fe z z 4 H 0-4 K 0 A11 1.- L-1 Q W 14 1 1 ; -j Uj L" L41 p I.- m x 0 r CL 0 g z x r LLJ x coz FW- Q V 43 C W 61 0 W Hcr U- D Iz- z w qL W; 14 -3 i I j i o cr T" Ir m v tr w cr cr cr cr Ir cr T* IT Ir ir Ir Q. ir ir (r Er V Ir cr z Ir a- v Ir I- W, cr 71 W, W, cr cr r W Ir r a- W" a- W, W, a- T* ff, T, Er cr a -cr Ir cr a' cr F 3 N v 0 v n -. » o .•neo - n n a .+ u no0o v I , I I mao= n -J e:n ono_o lop 0. to r, vnnnn - n n I i I I I I o Ln O O O Ln Y -a o m m o m 4 to N m o Ln o 0 © O -D r s S tr rM1 r Lr Ln Ln ut p o o m r Ln 40 tr Y Y o ru .a m ru M r o ru cr ru Ln -a ti -a ru cr.n o L4 a o ti 1- ru J M1 -A Y M1 .a m Y ru u- m Y nI o -a r r ir I m Ir Lr : •a 0r L .4 W z r m A ru m Y S m ru w cr r m4 ru Lr Ln A m g A ti ua o m ru o r a nl I I I i s M1 r r M1 r r r r- M1 M1 r r M1 M1 r P. M1 r rL r r r r r N r r r ru W m co to b •O a0 cc •O c -0 m Q co m - .0 -0 m -0 0 - i b O -0 CO W t- ir < S S Y ,T S S S S S S Y S S S S S T A N n.l ru N ru nJ pi nu ru ru nJ ru ru ni n1 nl nJ ru N ru ru nl n.1 : nA N ru nU N jr s Lr it Lr c r Q- tr 4' c- Lr Lr Lr Lr 4' it Lr cr Lr tr cr Lr tr tr Lr w, Or o II z Y Ln r m Ir o v m Y Ln ,o r m c o A ru m T ..o r ao c- o rl is Lr Lr tr Lr Lr tr o o. o a o 0 0 0 o a A A .a A A A . , +L a ru ti V o tr tr Lr v a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o La Q a o Lb o a b o 0 C m m m m m m S S S S S S S S S S i I i LJ I o Z i V N • Z N > V • 2 V V Z M • 2 Z 0. Q H N W V O Q JZ V Z. S H V < Z • N V Z H o r - W 2 H M pi E Z J Q N Z \J V a F V O X O > a N O < J H 0. O O Z I rt 1.- (Y I Q V p.1 w • i w V cr- J • N E O H H I Z x F V N Y L- W V N (n W W E W0 2 !- i N O W : H cl 'V1 V 4 N N F N x V' a N• r H V W <; Z I [- w I• Z LY :J F < 08 N O Q .Y S R' O I s 1- 3 7 0 w x u F O Lk O rn a K LJ t- Ir O to I o V H N E V rr V O Z V 0. V rr Jrb V rm I N W 1'r d J { 0. W .'J Z N If E W z W LL. N: W N N ! : A 4J O 0. H w IL' N J d O Z O w Q E ti 0. J : .Q W 4 Z Z = A ! Q 9 O < ! W W t>e w M V: A a H H • W z or W -z 1- N O O O Z: 0. V V LAI J m W, N 1 O- < Ik O < N N < M O `1 J J x O t J N 9 H t Y J ISL f•- J N i of Z :D l- to < W A f1= 2 47NHONOfVQWW2WW < 'j-yJ rd M H 0. W: O F- F- N- V' LL N I Y K Q M yJ V J W 3- 9QV' F m J ::J A N 11, Y 0_' fu W `: A l4 ,¢[ H O Z N < F < V V J J V:Z N < W W W W. O O 72O • a < 2 0 W O 0:: a a a a a < Q < < m m m :p m! m r m v v yr v V 1,3 u i a rO an O 'J O O '. O O O O O O : O O O O O O! O O O O J!1 OO r` O O O o r O 0" 67 O O u7 r1 O In rn O Ln M1 O A L O O O O A O Ln M1 n r O Ln O O n Ln J ru ru ru M1 S to M1 S ru ru r O m m r7 V1 J c' ti ru ru O W A .: .: ru ru m S Ln -A M1 r M1 Cr O O O A A ru m m S -a S Ln r m ri A A ri A A A .A A 'm nl ru N ru r i 1 aoo-wn nonooT^ Mamo ao-- v v v v v v a vv n n rr o a a n'n n a—oo 0 0 o n n w `con n o A o A Ln Ln v- 0 0 ru r cr Ln o m i r o o q Ln 1 M ru O T O 0 Ln 0 ru O O ti,n M1 rn ti r 0 IM1 V' m 0 0 S o m 1 m O rn m Ln i ry M1 N Ln O O m o 0 ru 0 m A m S S m mm rin O ru N SF- Ln z s rir 4 m ru 0 r A r ru co1L Ln o ru I A 4 A .a W z m 14 rn S ru 1 t i r ru A ht 1 0 9n 14 r it O ru -0 m 15 K O r9 n1 S rU r7 1. ru r7 i Ln 0. V: ut i i m i iSM1M1M1NM1rM1M1M1M1M1M1f` M1M1 r M1 M1 1 r r N M1 : r 1! M1 M1 r W CC) 4 Cc 40 o O Q m O O rp lo V' K S 1 S S S S S S S S S S l S S T A ru N n; nJ ru ru n1 ru rU ru rU nJ a)ru ru ti ti fu N ru rU U nl ru mi ru nl N a- V V' T a- V' V' V' rT cr it V' Q' cr tr 0" tr _ 0- v tr Ir cr V• tr V' V• O2 nl m S N7 A- M1 m LT' o rA ru m S Ln A r Cc V- O A: ru On Sn In r b r Y rU ru rU nl ru nJ ru nJ m m m m M m m m m m A S 1 4r S S S S r -- LiLi o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o a o d o o o o a 2 S 1 S S S S 1 S S S S S S S S S S S S i S S S Ti iji i i I i Im vH O Z N O F j INVMO. J V M V V N K K CL L H O 0. O O W I 1.- W W J O O UJ In lJ S C W Z• M N Z N W O N 4 O O O M I O N U. 1 d w Z F m W a CL a. Y W O V f^ O M 1- M O le- K Z w 2 S HI Y V 2 V 7 N Z z 1 V of d N N W 1- F In 2 V H W O O F.- O Z O Q W Z C W W W F 2 Z N m 77 z 0. W K J D V V N W V z Z M 2 O F F f- H CL 2 V W W W O E- tin M X i N M Q 4 Z W W C C S- Ir Q• O W O IH• O 1, F F J W Y N In W H O W J W O w Z X F J C O m N N r, LVI W Z_ Z J O A J Z O V Q! N H C' F LYI F i a Q J z Z O N d l7 W 4 V 1 Q O LL O J Z z Z Z K t m 0 3 Z Z N m K Z W W W W Wi W! W Lr Y O M O r- V O W W• O 2 Z S 2 S W W! H IL W W J 1 N Y O M of F F z M it F' L- F m tV 1- of 1- J 4 3 N V A t- Q 4 Z r- W- at 0. LY S O i F- N j W 0. O 2 W K K V yl W 1.- H! K O O O O O! 3 Z H H Fi•L O; 0.' W S H Y Z Y J J C t C C N Ln E z Z Z z Z Z Z CL m j V r I I O ur O O L-) O O O LO O o m 0 O O O O O O O o o b O o 1 o O 4 a N O O O ru O Ln ver 0 u1 O r7 0 O O O Ln Ln N O Ln 41 Ln : u9 Ln o ul Ln A M1 O rn n a v r ra M1 O ti ti Ln O M1 rU 1J W m M1 M1 IU .-i i O N O W S M1 ti nu nJ S Ln it O O rU u7 u7 Ln r 0" O O O O O m S! M1 r m m V' m m S S S S 7 S Ln u'1 ul Ln Ln Ln ui i Ln 0 .A 0 a A 0 0 .0 D A A I I I M1 O O M1 O M1 O o O O o i o O tv n o I I o m O o O O O O O OmM1TOrunmo0" O d O O r ll a m O o Ln O Q] O O T o O RJ M1 tf S nJ D o N n8 O 14 rlO n: O S A! O O! ti rI! O u1 ttiFqrtGRl0..D O ni A m M1 7 Ir i A 0•' S S j f}JY i A f1- i A fff 1lU W 2 ti m T ti ru rri O M1 1:4 ru m V 7 j o m s A m m .a CL t J 1 I iea S N M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 ti M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 I t` M1t• t` M1 i M1 M1 M1 M1 4A ru W 0 40 c 40 m -0 40 Cc Cc 0 a m a 0 O 0 c a O C +O b g b 0 40 -0 O I.- cr < a s s s s s a s 7 s s 7 s s S S a S S S S s S SDNnirurLNNr'U rL N ru ru ru IL ni N ru ni ru ti N ti N ru ni rU ru IU 0' cr tr Ir cr tr T it Ir r T Ir it T : T r T, 0' q' T Ir Cr 0" C- tr ! cr cr C3 r- N m S !n D M1 0 0" m .s Rl m S n J M1 O v O A ru m r L, ' -0 N Y to Ln Ln n N V1 n u9 Ln N J .0 0 J -0 m 0 .L 0 J M1 I,- M1 ; M1 M1 M1 M1 N V O 7 0 o O O O CJ O O O O o O O O O O O O j 0 b O! O CI O o O 2 S S S S S S S S 7 S 7 S S S S S S S S S S S S S cn ta Z w i30 H Z! i Z W W Z 7 N N N • j 06 V H 1!1 S O W F C Z V td z J A C S M I IjrYGf~ m . z z rab V- b L7 M V H 2 H V 0! O 1 1 2 1LV V aN N W N • z M O INI w! N N I O W 2 K N 1' OC W A J 1[.' W' WF< N N F rJ W Z F W <• Z O 3 N Y S H O W Z W: 1' M X M 1+- W V t}I CL w V Y N V `. V W F Z M Z H til O O 12 0- 3 F' O if OI I 1L M S YO OC H t V F H 114J tL : H A w O Q r.r I Z 04N lJ J! Q z MF NO IL W Z w y p V F J I Oickc I/1 V or O Z 3O Q w H O i K 1 i J O j J K W O J r 3 U J O W w < F m N w V I a O H ti' zO H: V j N N a t9 CL 2 I t N V Irw 0. H'= M! m 7 W A I S V' < S J0 O W J F 7 W W Nz} W O 2! N Ij- H 0= z W W J W' c L ', O 41pIm S S1 i l9 q 1 I Wz } 107 N F Q t Z tm Q W H H W ac 1- y/ CK I ac W Ic i F W WCr H of T= FN O Oi< A HC/1 N N F F! o J' i 3 H O i W 3 i x 04 N i o a! tL' Z' o n o v1 a o 0 0 o o 0 0 !n O o 0 0 0 o o it cr d T c Ir cr ca O M1 n O O 21ul O v1 a :. to O O O O u1 •r V1 0'• Q' it Cr Cr Q' 0' T 0' z M1 N m M1 O O ll Rl N m m -0 o r '17 IM1 n :. ru M1 cr T cr T C' Q' T T Q' W T O ru N J: M1 M1 M1 M1 N q .4 N S S n 0 M1 N Ir ', Cr cr a- 0' cr T 0- cr D M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 M1 N 9: Co a 0 p P 0 c b C' 0' cr cr Cr cr cr a- 0•• I I i T- 1 t 0 M C3 C3 c cr C3 0 0 0 0 o A o o O o 93 Ln r C3 In 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 MmCP Ln C3 3 ff! C3cr771Lnr: 40 LA C3 Lr) i I.- rA rq Ln ni IR Ln ni 'A 1-4 OA ru ru Irl rU C3 IA A ru A 0 Ir A CL r m IU w 40 cc 43 40 -C co cc .0 -0 CC .0 CC Yo m 'a 40 CC fa I. - Er -C S T z S S :r S S S S S S S S 7_r Of (U ru ru ni ru ru ru ni Nmi ni ru ni ni ru tini ji ni I ru cr W, M, cr 71 W* F, IT, 17- W- a- 7- ¢ cr tr cr cr tr w- 1 tr ff' C3 A ni m S Ln -0 f;M1 co'. crvomgo .0 0 R rU (r M to1 -0 Y f%- r co cc .0 -0 -0 T71 T w- cr 1 C 10 C) C3 C3 0 0 r C3 cp C3 1 C3C! I : . T S S x S S S x _r 4r I rn to0 Vq jk.9 CL 0wLnCLI-- Ln Iz 0.4af 0 Lj V L-1 0 &4 tm tIt z Z Q 3-- W Z z LJ z z 0 CL 3: &ol z -i -C z 49 " '> -oc I 4 z K V w w W wi CL Q. ;r %4 m to i` o m I CO 0 0 I (A 61 K: -i O -ia r 0 (4 1 x 0 x w W ILL v z -3 m 0 v W V (A w W w i 6j _j :3 m W Ch t-4 W :3 0 %j4V0LaW:o -i 14 $-4 -K w zp I.- 1 Li r- Lij L4, Z I w i tj Z z 41f -C z 9C0 Ck tA -72 a`cr0W- Ir tr cr cr 7- Ir tr Tcr T, Tv cr cr cr t r v tr cr cr ir Ir cr tr cr cr cr cr cr cr r cr Ir cr (r r Z Ir cr Ir T, T* ir cr T* cr Ir T, cr tr r ir cr cr tr tr cr r Ul Ir T, cr tr cr cr cr ir cr cr 71 Ir tr cr cr or Ircr ar cr cr M.. V Ir tr a- cr T" a" T, M, w- T- T, a" IT, (r Ir Ir cr cr cr cr 0 'd .6 Q vnao-v,.n yNIa i'1 on +niiea°ar'v Yt°nnnnaao.niNNN I , j I i I I j I I i I I I i I l jI ; O O C 0 0 S 0 -a O ra o o S 9 0 o rti o m 0 n A .a ry 0 0 M n -a o 0 I t- c u, m Ln .o s ni S nj o o w z s o ru Iq r4 s ru m O ui a' Ln CL m I I I I i CC i s r r` r` r r r• n r r` ', ry W m o a m m -10 I r I A nr ru nr ru nJ nl nl ti N mi i I I m S vt :0 c- O r7 ti .i N Vn uY rn m CO cr G- c. Q. Ir i m m QG m - c" 0- x m m m m m m V I I I I a m i w < V ' 1 y p < a M I W H rX V aF i l7 W N J V W Z W W N• z M M O W W M x < V - O M V O < W x O w V A A I i I W ? J N O x w J J z z z < J < O< U.. t7 W L V W H z N W M J W W z W O W w w M x w ! M ! I M E 2 Ic U. Y E F V I i acO o 0 0 c- 71 r4 c- o- a I A m N 0 0 cr ir Ln Ir c- rl z O J O m c Q' M1 c' R' O . w ru rn .4m rr n- m c- c- M1 m m rn yr c- o- z i Ir -0 j i i I I 1 I nA f I I n nt LL 4h T" e> 2t k -j 41i- A u Ij I I 1 I f I I s rL Y M1 t` ti W 37 41 Q) r a r r M1 T, s cr r4 r ,n J Y M1 M1 M1 V M1 r r 4! S li m o r n V r -I Ln J M1 M l7 F m p s n Wz J L] V O r W a o a F J m a r F v1 a O s rL Y M1 t` ti W 37 41 Q) r a r r M1 T, s cr r4 r ,n J Y M1 M1 M1 V M1 r r 4! S li O V M l72 r w r WF J F v1 3 F O O H W F Y iJ J O W ti d J 3 Q a c W Y O N z K Z F i r i o O 7 rt V Y OL= Ir M- D T T, v'n»neo o•. :n vzv. n._ I i i I i I I i t I i IQ3I II z O I I j i T ai j I ' v 1 I I I 1-i I I iI Y.- 71 I I I I N M.. i..N N N N N 1 N n '1 1'1 __ r1 A '] Q • Q Q 'Q Q _ ! Q h A + r A A f W 2 ru M1 q' c w 4 t , I O CL r W O III r j i ! W r I M1 M1 M1 IiWep0i F -- t M1 M1 rr I= I o 0 rT r i A to ri 2 o O ZIav- ; u M1 M1 V ru ru I I m W i Z I i mm j 1oc WF i H LI! fF i W x Y I fir. V J 7 I Ip} 2 w C 1 no'nna+eYa'ieiivnnI'Snnnvmn$eoo10°eoconnnn n f i I i i E W I I i I I I I i i I j f J Z ', ; 1 c w 4 t , I W O III r j i ! W r I i rr i I o 0 o A to ri 2 ru O I I i I i 1 I I I I ' I I i I I I i I I I I i i I j f I I i I I I I I j i E i f CITY OF PLYMOUTH Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meetinq of the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the day of 19 The following members were present: The following members were absent: introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 87 - APPROVING DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1987 WHEREAS, a list of disbursements for the period ending September 30, 1987 was presented to the City Council for approval: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the payment of the list of disbursements of the following funds is approved: Norwest Bank - Metro West General Fund Construction Fund Utilities Fund Special Assessment Fund Metropolitan Bank - Plymouth Housing & Redevelopment Authority GRAND TOTAL FOR ALL FUNDS 1,132,102.97 255,792.08 377,832.35 357,451.00 4,156.77 2,127,335.17 The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against or abstained: Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612)559-2800 MEMO DATE: TO: October 22, 1987 FROM: dames G. Willis, City Manager SUBJECT Laurie Brandt, Clerk LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES "CITIES WEEK" SUMMARY: As part of the League of Minnesota Cities 75th anniversary celebration, they are asking cities to participate in "Cities Week", May 1-7, 1988. The purpose of Cities Week is to recognize cities and help citizens understand the role of cities. They are asking each community to establish a Cities Week committee and designate a contact person to serve as liaison with the League. Attached are League suggestions for the types of celebrations a city could carry out. If Plymouth chooses to participate, an RSVP will have to be sent to the League along with the name of the contact person the Council has selected. Att. 0 1988 CITIES WEEK ORGANIZATION I. Establish a Cities Week Committee. These are some options you may wish to use. A. Citizens committee representing local business, city officials, school officials, civic organizations, church groups, and interested residents. (Designate a contact person to correspond with the League and the Cities Week Subcommittee.) B. Committee made up of city council members who delegate specific responsibilities to volunteers. Volunteers may be city or school officials; business people; or civic, church, or citizen representatives. (Designate a contact person.) C. Committee made up of city council and city clerk (or other staff members) with the clerk as the designated Cities Week coordinator and League contact person. D. A joint committee made up of several neighboring communities would plan a joint celebration. (This would be especially effective if a school district covers more than city.) Each city would have two or three representatives on the committee but would designate only one contact person. E. Any organizational structure you choose. II. Cities week committee would coordinate selected events for the community. (Choose one, some, or all.) A. Release of Balloons B. Community/Volunteer Partnership C. Open House, City Tour, Council -Citizen Meeting D. Mayors Exchange E. Cities in the School F. Other activities your committee chooses to sponsor Information on these activities is on the following pages. V" 1988 CITIES WEEK BALLOONS To draw attention to "Cities Week" activities, your city may want to release balloons at 1:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 4, 1988 after the Civil Defense sirens go off. We invite cities all over the state to participate. Please help make this a media event. Some ideas: Have your mayor read the Governor's Proclamation. If your city is involved in "Cities Week" in the schools activities, have the student mayor as a speaker or invite essay contest winners to read their essays. Invite your local legislators to participate. Include any activities you feel would add to the events like having the school or community band or choir perform. To generate interest you could ask local businesses to donate prizes, and either insert a coupon stating the prize in the balloon, or attach it with a twister band. Prizes would not need to be elaborate; such as a free malt or a box of cookies. Advertising the availability of prizes may help you draw a larger crowd. Balloons with the League logo "League of Minnesota Cities -- Helping Minnesota Grow for 75 Years" will be available from the League office (see order form below). Please place your order by March 1, 1988. BALLOON ORDER FORM # Our city would like to order balloons at: circle one 4.50 per 50 $9.00 for 100 $13.50 for 150 $18.00 for 200 22.50 for 250 $27.00 for 300 City Name Address Authorized Signature r 1988 CITIES WEEK CITY / VOLUNTEER PARTNERSHIP I. Recognition dinner Cities Week may be a good time to recognize the people in your community who help the city business run smoothly. Include all volunteers such as commission members, committee members, volunteer firefighters, reserve officers, school board, other. You may want to include essay contest winners and other students. This may be a good time to present a slide show about your city. II. Awards program This program could be similar to the recognition dinner without the cost. You may want to give out awards after a council -citizen meeting or when you release balloons. Any city -sponsored activity will work. Your city may want to include an overview of each volunteer group. And, you could give a certificate of appreciation to each volunteer. Call the League for a sample certificate. L_1 1988 CITIES WEEK OPEN HOUSE / CITY TOUR / COUNCIL -CITIZEN MEETINGS I. Open house A. All or selected public facilities could be open to general public for 2 - 4 hours during the day. B. Provide a one page handout as to function of each facility and a map showing locations. A. City hall B. Public works garage C. Police department D. Fire department E. Selected park structures F. Well G. Water treatment plant H. Lift stations I. Other public structures Il. City tour - provide map of intinerary A. New development 1. Commercial 2. Industrial 3. Residential B. Park facilities C. Streets/bridges - point out future repair needs D. Tax exempt properties - schools, churches, hospital, etc. E. Cable facilities F. Available development sites G. Historic sites III. Council -citizen meetings A. Overview of city government B. Open agenda C. Slide show of community D. Recognition of volunteers CJI 1988 CITIES WEEK MAYORS EXCHANGE A featured event of Cities Week will be the Mayors Exchange Program. The major focus of the program is to allow city officials to become better acquainted with other communities. The LMC Board of Directors listed this project as a priority at their retreat last fall. Attached is a Mayors Exchange interest sheet. Please indicate your community's interest in participating in the program. If there is a certain city you would like to pair with, please let us know. Also, you may wish to point out what types of projects, problems, programs, and activities you would be interested in showing to officials from other cities. The exchange of mayors could take place for one day during Cities Week or at another time convenient to both cities. Please return the interest sheet to Jean Mehle, League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Ave. E., St. Paul, MN 55101, by February 15,1988. The Cities Week Subcommittee members will draw names for pairing cities in late February, unless two cities agree on the pairing prior to the drawing. You may choose to pair with a city of similar size, from an area close to your city, or one that is very different from your city. The Mayors Exchange Program is an ideal vehicle for everyone to participate and show the pride they have in their community. If you have any questions, please call the League office at 612/227-5600. We look forward to your participation in this first Mayors Exchange Program and hope it will become an annual event. I w• 1988 Mayors Exchange Program Interest Sheet Please check the following that may apply to your city: Our city will participate in the Mayors Exchange program Our Cities Week contact person is Address Our mayor is Our city would like to pair with a city of the following population: a. Under 2,500 b. 2,500 to 5,000 c. 5,000 to 10,000 d. Over 10,000 e. Any of the above Our city would like to pair with a city from the following area of the state: a. Northeast b. Northwest c. Southeast d. Southwest e. Central Minnesota f. Metropolitan area g. Any of the above Our city has made arrangements to pre -pair with the city of What type of projects, programs, problems, and activities would you be interested in seeing in another city? What types of projects, programs, etc. would you be interested in showing another community? Please return this form to Jean Mehle, League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Ave. E., St. Paul, MN 55105 by February 15, 1988. 1988 CITIES WEEK CITIES IN THE SCHOOL Contact school officials early in the school year so they can add to curriculum and contact principal. Plan an assembly for the local school. Work with the school principal for implementation. I. Elementary school A. Mayor and council present program geared to 6-12 year olds 1. Brief history of city 2. Duties of city council 3. Duties of city staff (where appropriate) 4. City/school relationship 5. City services 6. Citizen involvement 7. Questions and answers B. Mayor and/or city clerk present program Same as above C. Hold mock election of students to mock city council Clerk could explain election procedure II. Junior high school A. Mayor and council present program geared to 13-15 year olds 1. History of city 2. Essay contest: "What does city government do for you?" Publish winner in local newspaper 3. Duties of city staff/council 4. Hold mock council meeting with audience participation B. Mayor and clerk or city administrator present program Same as above C. Hold mock election III. Senior high school A. Mayor and council present program geared to 16-18 year olds 1. History of city 2. Essay contest on community. Suggest city officials to judge. Publish winner. 3. Outline city services 4. Outline interrelationships with other governments school township county state B. Mayor and clerk or city administrator present program. Same as above. C. Hold mock council meetings with student participants. SCHOOL IN THE CITY This program is geared for the junior and senior high schools. Have interested students sign up. I. Shadow program - student spends an afternoon with city official A. Coordinating teacher assigns students to participating staff or elected official B. Students assume role of person shadowed and hold mock council meeting C. Students to report back to their peers Il. Reception or picnic supper or dinner for all participants III. Special council -citizen meeting A. Summarize the day's shadow program and introduce participants B. Present certificates to students C. Rest of agenda is open for citizen input IV. Hold a mock city council meeting with students as council members and mayor r CITIES' WEEK VOLUNTEERS Aug. 1, 1987 City/Contact/Title Apple Valley, Lynn Boland, Personnel Director Coon Rapids, Joan Anderson Golden Valley, Pat Butler Hanover, Barb Irvine, Councilmember Hoyt Lakes, Gerald O'Donnell, Mayor Keewatin, Delrose Israelson, Clerk Lyle, Nancy Williamson,Clerk Madelia, Joe McCabe, Administrator Mapleview, Kenneth R. Nash, Mayor Mendota Heights, Liz Witt, Councilmember Minneapolis, Duke Addicks, Legislative Liaison Moorhead, Morris Lanning, Mayor Nashwauk, Arleen Halliday, Clerk/Treasurer New Hope, Carol Carlson, Director of Administrative Services Prior Lake, David Unmacht, Assistant Manager St. Anthony, Dave Childs, City Manager St. Cloud, Patti Gartland, Administrative Aide Waite Park, Al Ringsmuth, Mayor Zumbrota, Alfred E. Colling , III, Mayor Cities Week committee member Cities Week committee chair 0 eL CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: October 22, 1987 for City Council Meeting October 26, 1987 TO: James G. Willis, City Manager FROM: Blair Tremere, Community Development Director SUBJECT ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING WASTE FACILITIES SUMMARY: The attached draft Ordinance amends the Zoning Ordinance to estab- lish all waste facilities as conditional uses in the I-1 (planned industrial) District. The present Ordinance only classifies Hazardous Waste Facilities as a conditional use and would allow other waste facilities as a permitted use provided all activities were within buildings). This amendment was undertaken at City Council direction and the Planning Commission considered the matter at the Public Hearing on October 14, 1987. The Commission unanimously recommended approval. The amendment adds some definitions that are needed to support the new terms. The amendment basically deletes specific reference to "Hazardous" and orients the new lang- uage to a broader category of "Waste Facilities," which include hazardous waste. A copy of the draft recommended by the Planning Commission has been forwarded to the President of the Plymouth Developers Council. The definitions that are added are drawn from the current City Code language and from State regulations dealing with Waste Management. I have indicated in the right-hand margin, of the staff report draft, which sentences and/or paragraphs are being amended. AttAnhmPnt¢ 1. Draft Ordinance 2. October 14, 1987 Planning Commission Minutes 3. October 14, 1987 Staff Report (including draft recommended by Planning Commission) CITY OF PLYMOUTH ORDINANCE NO. 87 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PORTIONS OF THE ORDINANCE NUMBER 80-9, ADOPTED JUNE 16, 1980 AS AMENDED, AND KNOWN AS THE PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE, RELATIVE TO WASTE FACILITIES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Amendment of Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 4, Subdivision B., is hereby amended by the addition of the following: Garbage -- Animal and vegetable wastes and other wastes or putrescible matter includ- ing but not limited to grease, wrappings, shells, grounds, bones, entrails, and similar materials resulting from the handling preparation, cooking, service and consumption of food, and other animal wastes. Rubbish -- Waste products which have composed wholly or partly of such materials as garbage, sweepings, swill, cleanings, trash, refuse, litter, industrial solid wastes or domestic solid wastes; organic wastes or residue of animals, fruit, or other vegetable or animal matter from kitchen, dining room, market, food establishment or any place dealing or handling meat, fowl, fruit, grain, or vegetables; offal, animal excreta, or the carcass of animals; tree or shrub trimmings, or grass clippings; brick, plaster, wood, metal, roofing materials, pipe or other waste matter resulting from the demolition, alteration or construction of buildings or structures; accumulated waste materials, cans, used containers, boxes and packing materials, junk vehicles, ashes, tires, Junk, Christmas trees, rocks, sod, dirt, glass, Jars, bottles, auto parts, cement brick, leaves, burn barrels, household appliances, furniture, toys, floor cover- ings, fabric, drain oil, solvents and fluids, or other such substance which may become a nuisance. Waste, Solid -- Any garbage, refuse, rubbish, and other discarded solid materials, except animal waste used, for fertilizer, including solid waste materials result- ing from industrial, commercial, and agricultural operations, and from community activities. Solid waste does not include earthen fill, boulders, rock, and other materials normally handled in construction operations, solids or dissolved materials in domestic sewage or other significant pollutants in water resources, such as silt, dissolved or suspended solids in industrial waste water effluents, dissolved materials in irrigation return flows, or other common water pollutants. Section 2. SECTION 4. Subdivision B is hereby amended in part to read as follows: Hazardous] Waste Facility -- All property, real or personal, including negative and positive easements and water and air rights, which is or may be needed or useful for the processing, disposal, [and/or] transfer and/or storage of hazardous and/or solid wastes, except property used primarily for the manufacture of scrap metal or paper. [Hazardous] Waste facility includes but is not limited to transfer and storage stations, processing facilities, and disposal sites and facilities. Waste Facility does not include drop-off centers which are accessory to allowable uses and which -are operated by a governmental unit, civic organization or similar non-profit group expressly for the collection of recyclable waste including paper, clean glass and metal containers. and other elioible household wastes from individuals. Page two Ordinance No. 87 - Section 3. SECTION 8., Subdivision D., is hereby amended in part to read as follows: 2. CONDITIONAL USES g.[Hazardous]Waste Faciities as regulated in Section 9. Section 4. SECTION 9., Subdivision D is hereby amended in part to read as follows: SUBDIVISION D -[HAZARDOUS] WASTE FACILITIES 1. Purpose. The provisions of this Section of the Zoning Ordinance are intended to provide the guidelines and requirements for the development and operation of [hazardous] waste facilities which the City Council by Resolution may authorize as conditional uses when such facilities are allowed by this Ordinance to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community and to assure harmony with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. 2. Application Requirements. Applications for a [Hazardous] Waste Facility Conditional Use Permit shall be made by the owner or owners of the property and shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator. Owners may designate, in writing, an agent, such as the prospective developer or operator; the owner must, in all cases, sign the application. All applications shall be accompanied by an administrative fee as prescribed by City Code and shall include the following: d. The names and addresses on self-adhesive mailing labels of the owners of record of all property within[1,OOO] 1,320 feet of the boundaries of the site as the same appear on the records of the Hennepin County Auditor. The certified list from the County shall be submitted. 4.) Building Design and Special Equipment. b) Location and description of equipment utilized in handling, proces- sing and containment of[hazardous]wastes. f. Description of Facility Management and Operations, including, but not limited to the following: 1.) Operation of Facility. a) A description of the process (incineration, chemical processing, dis- posal,[and/or] transfer,[and] storage, and/or physical separation). 5.) Operator Credentials. a) Operator's management experience with comparable[hazardous]waste facility. Page three Ordinance No. 87- b) Operator's net worth, and bonding capacity; demonstrating compli ance with applicable Federal standards as set forth in Code of Federal Regulations such as, but not limited to (CFR) 40, Parts 12.3, 264, and 2.65. c) References from persons familiar with operator' s[ hazardous] waste facility management experience. 3. Procedure Before any[ hazardous] waste facility may be approved, the complete application shall be evaluated in the following manner: 4. Development Standards and Performance Criteria. The Development and operation of a[ hazardous] waste facility shall be subject to the applicable following special standards and criteria: 1. No outside storage of materials, containers, or trash disposal facilities involving hazardous wastes; any outside facilities involving other wastes shall be enclosed and/or screened per approved plans. m. All loading or unloading of[hazardous]waste materials within buildings. o. Current inventory of[ hazardous] waste materials, by type and location, posted at main entrance of site. All hazardous waste materials shall be clearly designated. 5. General Regulations e. Withdrawal: The application for a[Hazardous]Waste Facility Conditional Use Permit may be withdrawn by the applicant at any time during the approval process. 6. Enforcement. The Zoning Administrator shall be responsible for assuring that[Hazardous]Waste Facilities authorized by the City Council are in compliance with conditions assigned by the permit, this Ordinance and City Codes, and other applicable regulations. Enforcement shall be as set forth in Subdivision A of this Section. 7. Review and Renewal. Hazardous]Waste Facilities which have been authorized by the City Council are subject to periodic review by the Zoning Administrator. Those permits which specify periods of review and renewal as a condition of the permit shall be administered in the manner set forth in Subdivision A of this Section. S. Revocation. The Planning Commission may recommend, and the City Council may direct the revocation of any[ Hazardous ]Waste Facility Conditional Use Permit for cause, upon determination that the authorized conditional use is not in conformance with the conditions of the permit or is in continued violation of this Ordinance, City Codes, and other applicable regulations, as set forth in Subdivision A of this Section. Page four Ordinance No. 87- 9. Permit Amendment. Persons to whom Conditional Use Permits for[Hazardous]Waste Facilities have been issued may propose amendments to the permit at any time subject to the require- ments and procedures for permit amendment as set forth in Subdivision A of this Section. 10. Expiration. b. In any instance, where an existing and established[Hazardous]Waste Facility is abandoned or closed for a period of six months, the Conditional Use Per- mit related thereto shall expire six months following the date of abandon- ment or closure as determined by the Zoning Administrator. Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. Adopted by the City Council this day of , 19_ ATTEST City Clerk Mayor Page 242 Planning Commission Minutes October 14, 1987 NEW BUSINESS Vice Chairman Pauba introduced the request and an overview BOULDER PROPERTIES of the October 7, 1987 staff report was provided by Coordin- INC./SITE PLAN AND ator Anderson. VARIANCE (87100) Vice Chairman Pauba introduced Mr. George Daniels, Boulder Properties, Inc., who had no questions or comments. MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Vice Chairman MOTION TO APPROVE Pauba to recommend approval for the Site Plan and Variance for the bank facility to be located at the southeast corner of County Road 9 and Vinewood Lane, subject to the condi- tions listed in the October 7, 1987 staff report. Vote. 4 Ayes. Commissioner Marofsky, abstained. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED At the beginning of the meeting, the Coordinator confirmed ROBERT AND MARY that the petitioners have requested deferral of this item MCAULIFFE/LOT for the second time in correspondence dated October 12, CONSOLIDATION/ 1987. DIVISION (87065) MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Commissioner Wire *MICHAEL McNEELY to recommend approval of the Site Plan, subject to the PHEASANT TRAIL conditions listed in the October 7, 1987 staff report. TOWNHOMES/SITE PLAN 87017) There was no one prsent to represent this consent item. MOTION TO APPROVE VOTE - MOTION CARRIED Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. PUBLIC HEARING Vice Chairman Pauba introduced the Ordinance Amendments. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXTUAL AMENDMENTS Director Tremere showed slides of real estate signs seen REVIEW OF TEMPORARY throughout the City, some of which were in the public right- REAL ESTATE SIGNS of -way. Director Tremere noted that an informational letter was sent to area realtors on September 1, 1987, explaining the use and placement of temporary real estate signs. He stated that most of the realtors who called understand problems arise with signs placed in the public right-of- way. Many voiced a need to erect signage to direct the home buyers to their product off the site of the house for sale. He related the problems of City manpower to fully enforce these sign regulations; and, that no permit is required for temporary real estate signs. The City Council has directed that the issue of off-site real estate signage be dealt with and that a Public Hearing be held so that realtors and other interested parties are allowed to speak on this item. Page 243 Planning Commission Minutes October 14, 1987 Director Tremere stated that many "Parade of Homes" signs were taken down this year. Perhaps the industry can regu- late itself and the Ordinance is too restrictive. Commissioner Wire stated he can see where these signs could be possible safety hazards and nuisances; and, if they are a safety hazard, the police or Community Service Officers could remove them. To place signs off site, the realtor must secure the permission of the property owners, and after an established period of time, the property owner should remove the sign if the realtor fails to do so. He does not believe a Public Hearing is warranted; the Ordinance is clear in its requirements, and those signs which would be Judged to be safety hazards because of being placed in the public right-of-way should be removed. Commissioner Stulberg believes the City can enforce the regulations set forth in the present Ordinance, as needed. Commissioner Marofsky stated that the property owner would be held responsible for signage placed on his property with his permission. Taking away any regulations will cause more problems. Director Tremere stated that the City's potential liability problem is when drivers and pedestrians can't safely proceed through an intersection because signage is hampering their visibility, and the City has an Ordinance prohibiting such signs which is not enforced. Vice Chairman Pauba stated that there is no problem with signs on private property with the owner's permission; and, this is allowed for in the Ordinance. Realtors who wrote to express their concern regarding Ordinance regulation, could, in -lieu of a Public Hearing, be asked to list what they believe to be their needs. Discussion ensued regarding publishing a proposed amendment for review. Director Tremere reiterated the Council's desire that staff and the Planning Commission address this issue with an appropriate Ordinance Amendment. It was the consensus of the Commission that the Ordinance language provides for that signage deemed necessary for the sale of homes and property; those signs that constitute safety hazards would be removed by City personnel. Commissioner Stulberg recommended that the Ordinance not be amended; he would vote "no" on a recommendation to amend the Ordinance regarding temporary real estate signs. However, the direction is for staff to draft an amendment and subject it to Public Hearing. Page 244 Planning Commission Minutes October 14, 1987 Director Tremere stated this would be done soon. Vice Chairman Pauba introduced the Zoning Ordinance Amend- AMENDMENT REGARDING ment regarding Waste Facilities. WASTE FACILITIES Commissioner Marofsky inquired about the definition for Hazardous" Waste. Director Tremere stated the definition would remain as written. Director Tremere reviewed the added definitions for garbage, rubbish, solid waste, and the additional language to "waste facility". Vice Chairman Pauba opened the Public Hearing, and upon determining that no one was present to speak on this item, he closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Marofsky inquired about "liquid" waste. Direc- tor Tremere noted that "liquid" is included in the defini- tion for Rubbish/Waste Products and under hazardous waste, but of itself is not defined. Commissioner Wire inquired about the control of odors. Director Tremere stated that odor control is addressed by the Zoning Ordinance and in the City Code. Commissioner Marofsky stated that the definition for rubbish seems to be the same as that for garbage. Director Tremere explained that the language is based on the need for regula- tion of process facilities and by progression of the defini- tions. He stated that the key language is in the definition for "solid waste". Commissioner Marofsky stated concern that notification should be made to property owners who are more than 1,000 ft. from a proposed facility. Director Tremere stated that 1,000 ft. exceeds the State requirement by three times. Commissioner Marofsky recommended that the those properties within a quarter mile minimum should be notified. MOTION by Commissioner Zylla, seconded by Commissioner Stulberg to recommend approval of the Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance concerning waste, and waste facilities; and, in Section 9, Subdivision D., 2., d., change 1,000 ft., to 1,320 ft. Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:20 P.M. DRAFT AMENDMENT NO. 1 HEARING DATE: October 14, 1987 nVC.f'RTPTTnm _ Provision for new language and revisions to existing language which will broaden the regulatory requirement for Hazardous Waste facilities to include all waste facilities. New definitions are added to the Zoning Ordinance to cover solid waste, garbage, and rubbish. SECTIONS INVOLVED: Sections 4 and 9, EXPLANATION/PURPOSE: The City Council directed staff and the Planning Commission to develop and to consider at a Public Hearing, language which would amend the Zoning Ordinance to broaden the scope of the regulations regarding waste facilities. The current Ordinance provisions are limited to Hazardous Waste, as defined in the Ordinance. The revisions proposed would delete most references to the word "Hazardous" and the regulations would be all inclusive. The regulations consist of a special Conditional Use Permit Section which is very detailed as to its administration and application for such facilities. Special standards are set up which have been found to be consistent with State regulations. Provision is made in the definitions for activities such as recycling centers and recycling drop-off points operated by city groups and similar organizations for individuals. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Amend Section 4, Subdivision B., to modify the definition of Hazardous Waste Facility; add a definition of Solid Waste; and, add definitions of garbage and rubbish. 2. Amend Section 9, Subdivision D. to make the requirements of this Section all inclusive of waste facilities and not just Hazardous waste facilities. ordamend(waste)1 ORIGINAL (T+Qs-rINC-, PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE Section 4, Subdivision B Group (and Foster Care) Home -- See "Residential Care Facilities". Guest Room -- Any room or rooms used, or intended to be used by a guest for sleeping purposes.. Hazardous Waste -- any refuse or discarded material or combinations of refuse or discarded materials in solid, semi-solid, liquid, or gaseous form which cannot be handled by routine waste management techniques because they pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or other living organisms because of ,their chemical, biological, or physical properties. Categories of hazardous waste materials include, but are not limited to: explosives, flammables, oxidizers, poisons, irritants, and corrosives. Amended by Ord. No. 82-19) Hazardous Waste Facility -- all property, real or personal, including negative and positive easements and water and air rights, which is or may be needed or useful for the processing, disposal, and/or transfer/storage of hazardous waste, except property used primarily for the manufacture of scrap metal or paper. Hazardous waste facility includes but is not limited to transfer/ storage stations, processing facilities, and disposal sites and facilities. Amended by Ord. No. 82-19) Height of Building -- The vertical distance from the "Grade" to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof or to the aver- age height of the highest gable of a pitch or hip roof. Home Occupation -- An occupation or profession of a service character which is clear- ly secondary to the main use of the premises as a dwelling and does not change the character thereof. Any activity resulting in noise, fumes, traffic, light and odors, fabrication of materials, mechanical repair, or mechanical testing, to such an extent that it is noticeable that the property is being used for non- residential purposes shall not constitute a home occupation. Any activity re- quiring or resulting in the construction of any special structures or any special entrances into the main building which are visable from the exterior of the premises or any parking facilities, special lighting, antennae, or special fuel storage tanks (such as those required for butane or LP gas) shall not constitute a home occupation. Provided further that such occupation shall be carried on only by members of a family residing in the dwelling, that not over twenty-five (25) percent of the gross floor area of any one story is used for home occupation or professional purposes. There shall be no sale of products from the site, other than products clearly incidental to the allowed service or occupation. Hotel (Motel) -- Any building or portion thereof where lodging is offered to transient guests for compensation and in which there are more than three (3) sleeping rooms, with no cooking facilities in an individual room or apartment. Junk Yard -- Land or buildings where waste, discarded or salvaged materials are brought, sold, exchanged, stored, cleaned, packed, disassembled or handled, including, but not limited to scrap metal, rags, paper, rubber products, glass products, lumber products and products resulting from the wrecking or salvage of automobiles or other vehicles. 4-7 PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE Section 4, Subdivision B Garbage -- Animal and vegetable wastes and other wastes or putrescible matter includ- ing but not limited to orease, wrappings, shells, grounds, bones, entrails, and similar materials resulting from the handling preparation, cooking, service and consumption of food, and other animal wastes. Rubbish -- Waste products which have composed wholly or partly of such materials as garbage, sweepings, swill, cleanings, trash, refuse, litter, industrial solid wastes or domestic solid wastes; organic wastes or residue of animals, fruit, or other vegetable or animal matter from kitchen, dining room, market, food establishment or any place dealing or handling meat, fowl, fruit, grain, or vegetables; offal, animal excreta, or the carcass of animals; tree or shrub trimmings, or grass clippings; brick, plaster, wood, metal, roofing materials, pipe or other waste matter resulting from the demolition, alteration or construction of buildings or structures; accumulated waste materials, cans, used containers, boxes and packing materials, junk vehicles, ashes, tires, Junk, Christmas trees, rocks, sod, dirt, glass, jars, bottles, auto parts, cement brick, leaves, burn barrels, household appliances, furniture, toys, floor cover- ings, fabric, drain oil, solvents and fluids, or other such substance which may become a nuisance. Waste, Solid -- Any garbage, refuse, rubbish, and other discarded solid materials, except animal waste used for fertilizer, including solid waste materials result- ing from industrial, commercial, and agricultural operations, and from community activities. Solid waste does not include earthen fill, boulders, rock, and other materials normally handled in construction operations, solids or dissolved materials in domestic sewage or other significant pollutants in water resources, such as silt, dissolved or suspended solids in industrial waste water effluents, dissolved materials in irrigation return flows, or other common water pollutants. Hazardous] Waste Facility -- All property, real or personal, including negative and positive easements and water and air rights, which is or may be needed or useful for the processing, disposal, [and/or] transfer and/or storage of hazardous and/or solid wastes, except property used primarily for the manufacture of scrap metal or paper. [Hazardous] Waste facility includes but is not limited to transfer and storage stations, processing facilities, and disposal sites and facilities. Waste Facility does not include drop-off centers which are accessory to allowable uses and which are operated by a governmental unit, civic organization or similar non-profit group expressly for the collection of recyclable waste including paper, clean glass and metal containers, and other eligible household wastes from individuals. PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE 2. CONDITIONAL USES Section 8, Subdivision D a. Any permitted or accessory industrial use, not conducted within a building including storage of materials, products and vehicles. b. Retail and service establishments essential to the operation of this district and providing goods and services which are primarily for the use of persons employed in the district; any such commercial use allowed under this Section shall be subject to all requirements of this Ordinance and the City Code applicable to such commercial use. (Amended Ord. No. 82-08) c. Free standing office buildings for corporate, administrative, executive, pro- fessional, research, sales representatives offices, or similar organization, and generally compatible with the industrial district; any such commercial use allowed under this Section shall be subject to all requirements of this Ordin- ance and the City Code applicable to such commercial use. (Amended Ord. No. 82-08 and 86-26) d. Industrial Buildings including single tenant/occupant and multi-tenant/occu- pant buildings, allowed by this Section, which contain office uses which occupy more than 50% of the gross floor area of the building and are found to be generally compatible with the Industrial District. Any such commercial use allowed under this Section shall be subject to all requirements of this Ordin- ance and the City Code applicable to such commercial use. (Amended Ord. No. 86-26) e. Residential structures and related residential uses necessary for security and safety reasons in relation to a principal use. f. Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) as regulated in Section 9. g.[Hazardous]Waste Facilities as regulated in Section 9. 3. ACCESSORY USES a. All secondary uses customarily incident to the permitted or conditional uses listed including but not limited to the following in approved multi -tenant buildings: over-the-counter printing, duplicating, and photocopying services; secretarial and word processing services; and telephone answering services. Ord. 87-16) b. Off-street parking and loading as herein regulated. c. Signs as herein regulated. d. Outside, above -ground storage facilities for gaseous, non -liquid fuels used for heating purposes, or for dispensing purposes clearly incidental to the approved principal use and not for sale, as regulated in Section 10. Amended Ord. No. 82-15). AM Amended by Ord. No. 82-19) PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE Section 9 SUBDIVISION D -[HAZARDOUS] WASTE FACILITIES 1. Purpose. The provisions of this Section of the Zoning Ordinance are intended to provide the guidelines and requirements for the development and operation of [hazardous] waste facilities which the City Council by Resolution may authorize as conditional uses when such facilities are allowed by this Ordinance to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community and to assure harmony with the v Comprehensive Plan of the City. 2. Application Requirements. Applications for a [Hazardous] Waste Facility Conditional Use Permit shall be made by the owner or owners of the property and shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator. Owners may designate, in writing, an agent, such as the prospective developer or operator; the owner must, in all cases, sign the application. All applications shall be accompanied by an administrative fee as prescribed by City Code and shall include the following: a. A description of the proposed use and of its conformance with the Conditional Use Permit standards as set forth in Section 9, Subdivision A, and with the standards as set forth in this Subdivision. b. A legal description of the site, including Hennepin County Property Identi- fication Number(s). c. A map showing the site and all property within 1,000 feet of the boundaries of the site. d. The names and addresses on self-adhesive mailing labels of the owners of record of all property within 1,000 feet of the boundaries of the site as the same appear on the records of the Hennepin County Auditor. The certified list from the County shall be submitted. e. A complete site plan, as described in Section 11; to include the following data: 1) Site and Environmental Characteristics for the property and land within 1,000 ft. of the Site. a) Existing Vegetation. b) Hydrology/ Hydraulics; seasonal high water table; and proximity to aquifer(s). c) Physiography and Topography, and slopes (2 foot intervals). d. Existing land uses. e) Microclimate (a description of wind impact upon terrain and slopes). 9-24 PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE 2.) Transportation Section 9, Subdivision D a) A route plan to and from site including hours of use. b) Road and rail (on and off-site) security, and turnaround time. c) Method of construction and financing of road or other transporta- tion facilities, if applicable. 3.) City Utilities. a) Availability of City sanitary sewer and water. b) Method of utility construction and financing, if applicable. 4.) Building Design and Special Equipment. a) Floor plan layout for all levels identifying use and occupancy of all defined areas and rooms. b) Location and description of equipment utilized in handling, proces- sing and containment of[hazardous]wastes. c) Description of automatic shut -down system and controls, if appli- cable. d) Description of standby power and fuel sources and supplies. e) Equipment inspection and replacement plans. f) Location and description of any proposed accessory equipment exter- nal to the building. 5.) Development and Operation Schedule. a) Schedule of site development and building construction. b) Schedule of commencement of operation. c) Schedule of compliance with the applicable State and Federal requirements. f. Description of Facility Management and Operations, including, but not limited to the following: 1.) Operation of Facility. a) A description of the process (incineration, chemical processing, disposal, [and/or] transfer,[and] storage, and/or physical separ- ation). b) Plan for handling ruptures, spills, and the like (on-site and enroute to and from site for roadways and railroads). c) Hours of operation. d) Number of employees (total and at maximum shift). e) Site maintenance plan. f) Operations monitoring plan (standards, procedures, personnel and the like). 9-25 PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE Section 9, Subdivision D 2.) Emergency Preparedness Plans. a) List of available emergency equipment with location identified. b) Evacuation and emergency alert plan for the facility and for the surrounding area. c) Emergency training plan for facility employees at time of initial hiring and during continued employment; and, for public safety personnel of the City and area communities which provide support services through Mutual Aid Agreements. d) Coordination plans with applicable area public safety and health care agencies. e) Waste containment plan. 3.) Pollution Control. Mitigative measures for odor, noise, surface and ground water, and air pollution. 4.) Reclamation Plan. a) A long-term site and building maintenance plan for facility should operation cease. b) Plan identifying how site and facility could be utilized by and converted to other allowable land uses. 5.) Operator Credentials. a) Operator's management experience with comparable[ hazardous] waste facility. b) Operator's net worth, and bonding capacity; demonstrating compli- ance with applicable Federal standards as set forth in Code of Federal Regulations such as, but not limited to (CFR) 40, Parts 123, 264, and 265. c) References from persons familiar with operator's[ hazardous] waste facility management experience. d) Evidence of permit application submittal to applicable State and/or Federal agencies. 6.) Environmental Assessment Worksheet - as defined by and on forms provided by State Environmental Quality Board. 3. Procedure Before any[ hazardous] waste facility may be approved, the complete application shall be evaluated in the following manner: a. The complete application shall be referred to qualified consultants selected by the City for evaluation as to compliance with applicable State and Federal regulations; and as to consistency with accepted standards of the particular activity or industry represented and proposed. All costs incurred for this review shall be paid by the petitioner who shall execute a written agreement therefor, and shall provide a cash escrow, to be determined by the City, to pay all consultant review and analysis fees as set forth in the agreement. rs PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE Section 9, Subdivision D b. Upon receipt of the consultant's report, the findings of the Environmental Assessment review process and upon preparation of the City Staff Report, the application shall be referred to the Planning Commission for: 1.) Evaluation as to compliance with the standards for Conditional Use Per- mits as defined in Subdivision A of this Section; 2.) Evaluation as to compliance with the standards set forth in this Sub- division; 3.) Consideration of public hearing testimony; 4.) Development of a recommendation to the City Council, which shall make the final determination as to approval or denial. 4. Development Standards and Performance Criteria. The Development and operation of a[ hazardous] waste facility shall be subject to the applicable following special standards and criteria: a. Pollution Control Agency (PCA) Permit(s). b. Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Permit(s). c. Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Permit(s). d. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) and Environmental Impact Statement E.I.S.), if required. e. Submittal and maintenance of performance agreements and financial guarantees as required by this Ordinance and City Council policy and conditions. The performance agreements and supporting financial guarantees shall, at a mini- mum, cover the following: completion of required site improvements; emergency clean-up and correction activities specifying a minimum time for the commence- ment of such activities by the operator, after which the City may initiate and complete appropriate clean-up and corrective activities; and, closure and post -closure activities. f. Compliance with approved monitoring and reporting procedures. g. Conditional Use Permit renewal requirements. h. Utilization of principal arterial roadways for access routes. i. Two independent emergency access/escape routes through other than residential areas. 9-27 c PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE Section 9, Subdivision D j. Minimum 1,000 ft. setback to storm water holding areas, natural drainage fac- ilities, and wetlands. k. All storm water run-off shall be held in on-site ponding prior to release into natural drainageways or the municipal storm drainage system. 1. No outside storage of materials, facilities involving hazardous wastes; wastes shall be enclosed and/or screened containers, or trash disposal r outside facilities involving other er approved plans. m. All loading or unloading of[hazardous]waste materials within buildings. n. Compliance with applicable policies and regulations relating to development, operation and closure/conversion. o. Current inventory of[ hazardous] waste materials, by type and location, posted at main entrance of site. All hazardous waste materials shall be clearly designated. p. Maintenance and continued implementation of approved emergency training pro- grams for all employees at the time of initial hiring, and during continued employment; the training program shall be reviewed at least quarterly as to whether they are current in terms of state-of-the-art emergency procedures and techniques; training programs shall also be maintained and implemented for public safety personnel of the City and of area communities who provide sup- plemental services to the City by Mutual Aid Agreements. q. Maintenance of approved emergency preparedness plans to include provisions for alerting applicable agencies and area property owners; and provisions for emergency evacuation of the facility and of the surrounding area. r. Required emergency clean-up and corrective operations shall be promptly under- taken and completed; the City Council may establish, as a condition of the permit, a specific reasonable time frame for the commencement and completion of such activities; in the event of noncompliance, the City may initiate ap- propriate procedures as set forth in performance agreements and financial guarantees to initiate and complete the required work at the operator's expense. 5. General Regulations a. Rules and Regulations: The Planning Commission and City Council may from time to time amend or vary the application and review procedures and the quantity and type of documents to be presented. b. Plan Changes: The Zoning Administrator may authorize minor changes in the location, place- ment and height of structures after the Final Site Plan has been adopted; however, any change in use and any major change shall be made only after public hearing by the Planning Commission and approval by the City Council. The Zoning Administrator shall determine what constitutes a major change. 9-28 PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE c. Certification of Plans: Section 9, Subdivision D All architectural and engineering plans shall be designed and certified by a professional architect or engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. The site plans may be prepared by a professional site planner, but must be certi- fied by a registered engineer or architect. d. Review: If the development is not progressing reasonably well, according to schedule, the owner may be required to submit a statement to the Zoning Administrator setting forth the reasons for the lack of progress. If the Council finds that the development has not occurred according to the established develop- ment schedule or is not otherwise reasonable in the view of the Council, the Council may revoke the Conditional Use Permit and all development shall cease until a revised schedule is approved. e. Withdrawal: The application for a[Hazardous]Waste Facility Conditional Use Permit may be withdrawn by the applicant at any time during the approval process. f. Miscellaneous: Signs, parking facilities and any other provisions not specifically discus- sed in this Section shall be governed by regulations contained elsewhere in this Ordinance or in other applicable ordinances, laws, or regulations. 6. Enforcement. The Zoning Administrator shall be responsible for assuring that[ Hazardous] Waste Facilities authorized by the City Council are in compliance with conditions assigned by the permit, this Ordinance and City Codes, and other applicable regulations. Enforcement shall be as set forth in Subdivision A of this Section. 7. Review and Renewal. Hazardous] Waste Facilities which have been authorized by the City Council are subject to periodic review by the Zoning Administrator. Those permits which specify periods of review and renewal as a condition of the permit shall be administered in the manner set forth in Subdivision A of this Section. 8. Revocation. The Planning Commission may recommend, and the City Council may direct the revocation of any[ Hazardous] Waste Facility Conditional Use Permit for cause, upon determination that the authorized conditional use is not in conformance with the conditions of the permit or is in continued violation of this Ordinance, City Codes, and other applicable regulations, as set forth in Subdivision A of this Section. 9-29 PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE 9. Permit Amendment. Section 9, Subdivision D Persons to whom Conditional Use Permits for[Hazardous]Waste Facilities have been issued may propose amendments to the permit at any time subject to the require- ments and procedures for permit amendment as set forth in Subdivision A of this Section. 10. Expiration. a. Permits which have been issued under the provisions of this Section shall expire without further action by the Planning Commission or the City Council, unless the applicant commences the authorized use within one year of the date the Conditional Use Permit is issued; or, unless before the expiration of the one year period, the applicant shall apply for an exten- sion thereof by completing and submitting a request for extension, including the renewal fee as set forth in the City Code. b. In any instance, where an existing and established[ Hazardous]Waste Facility is abandoned or closed for a period of six months, the Conditional Use Per- mit related thereto shall expire six months following the date of abandon- ment or closure as determined by the Zoning Administrator. c. In the case of abandonment or closure, the terms of required agreements re lated to closure and postclosure, including related financial guarantees, shall be implemented and enforced in accordance with applicable policies, codes, and regulations as directed by the City Council. Amended by Ord. No. 82-19) 9-30 CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: October 22, 1987 For Council Meeting of October 26, 1987 TO: James G. Willis, City Manager FROM: Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Award of Contract Carpet for City Center Building On October 13, 1987, bids were received for the purchase of new carpet for the City Center Building. Bids were received from three companies. One of the companies submitted a base bid and also four alternate bids on various carpets manufactured by different companies. The carpet specified is of a very high quality in order that it will have a ten year guarantee. Also, the specifications required a high degree of static electricity control because of the computer and electronic equipment within the offices of the building. Of the bids received, it has been determined that only the base bid of Pink Company and the bid of Daytons Commercial Interiors meet the minimum specifications. The estimated amount for the cost of the carpet was $19,500. The lowest bid meeting the specifications is $300 more than the estimate. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the purchase of the carpet from Pink Company based on their base bid of $19,799.26. Fred G. Moore, P.E. FGM:kh Attachment: Resolution CITY OF PLYMOUTH Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a the City of Plymouth, Minnesota was held on the 1987. The following members were present: The following members were absent: adoption: meeting of the City Council of day of , XXX introduced the following Resolution and moved its RESOLUTION NO. 87 - AWARDING BID FOR CITY CENTER BUILDING CARPET WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the furnishing of carpet for the City Center Building, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Pine Co. J & J Ind.) - Base Bid 19,799.26 Daytons J & J Ind.) 21,117.72 Cheney Carpet, Inc. Carpeter Mills) 17,877.44 Pink Co. Alternate 1 14,860.62 Pink Co. Alternate 2 17,765.71 Pink Co. Alternate 3 19,061.82 Pink Co. Alternate 4 17,765.71 WHEREAS, the bid of Cheney Carpet, Inc. and the four alternate bids of Pink Company are not in accordance with the minimum specifications; and WHEREAS, it appears that Pink Company (J & J Industries) - Base Bid, of Plymouth, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder, complying with the minimum specifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA: 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Pink Company, of Plymouth, Minnesota, in the name of the City of Plymouth for the furnishing of Carpet for the City Center building according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk in the amount of the low bid of $19,799.26 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against or abstained: Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. I 4 October 20, 1987 Fred Moore CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55447 RE: Carpet for Remodeling Dear Fred: WORKPLACE ENVIRONMENTS, INC. 2830 VICKFBURG LANE • PLYMOUTH, MN 55447 612-559-4155 After reviewing the bids received for carpeting, we have determined that there was no "Equal" bid. The two companies that bid J&J (as specified) were Dayton's and Pink Company with Pink Company the lowest bidder for that product. Based on this information, we recommend Pink Company to supply your carpeting. Sincerely, L ENVIRONMENTS AME/vn BID OPENING FOR CARPET CITY CENTER BUILDING PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE------------- BID TIME: 10:00 BID DATE: October 13 1987 CONTRACTORS Total Base Bid 1- Pink Co. J & J Industries) - Des,B;d 19,799.26 2. Daytons J & J Industries) 21,117.72 3. Cheney Carpet Co. (Carpeter Mills) 17,877.44 4. Pink Co. Shaw Commercial Systems) - AIt. sb 1 14,860.62 5. Pink Co. Shaw Commercial Systems) - A14-%rZ. 17,765.71- 6. Pink Co. HiLine - Krause Carpet ',1iIls)-Ait.#3 19,061.82 7. Pink Co. Philadelphia - Capital)-Ajt.sry 17,765.71 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE------------- DATE TO FROM CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO October 22, 1987 For Council Meeting of October 26, 1987 James G. Willis, City Manager Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Change Order No. 3 Zachary Lane Water Treatment Plant City Project No. 431 Attached is a request from the contractor, Shaw -Lundquist Associates, Inc., for a 14 day extension on the contract completion date for the Zachary Lane Water Treatment Plant. This request has been reviewed by the City's Consulting Engineer, Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc., and is recommended for approval. The contractor is requesting this extension because of the delay which was caused by the 15 inches of rain received during the week of July 20. The contractor had just completed the excavation for the main Water Treatment Plant building. Because of the rain on July 20 and again on July 23, the contractor had to re -excavate this area as a result of damage from the heavy rainstorms. The contractor's request for an extension is not because of the lost time on the day of the rain, but because of the additional work required as a result of the heavy rainfalls. I have requested that the contractor and the consulting engineer be in attendance at the City Council meeting in case the City Council has any questions. The contractor is aware of the importance of completing the Water Treatment Plant on schedule and is attempting to bring his construction back to the projected schedule. Attached is a resolution which is recommended for City Council approval granting the 14 day extension to the completion date for the Zachary Lane Water Treatment Plant. Fred G. Moore, P.E. FGM:kh Attachments: Resolution Request for Time Extension CITY OF PLYMOUTH Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a the City of Plymouth, Minnesota was held on the 1987. The following members were present: The following members were absent: iCit4c adoption: meeting of the City Council of day of XYtX introduced the following Resolution and moved its RESOLUTION NO. 87 - APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 ZACHARY LANE WATER TREATMENT PLANT - PROJECT NO. 431 WHEREAS, Change Order No. 3 has been prepared providing for the following: Extend contract completion date by fourteen calendar days. AND WHEREAS, Change Order No. 3 for the Zachary Lane Water Treatment Plant Contract, Project No. 431, is recommended for approval; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA; that Change Order No. 3 for Zachary Lane Water Treatment Plant Contract, Project No. 431 by extending completion date for "substantial" completion to June 15, 1988 is approved. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against or abstained: Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. C7AC'f l CiCiC Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55713 612=636.4600 October 5, 1987 Mr. Fred G. Moore Director of Public Works City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55447 Re: Zachery Lane WTF City Project # 431 Our File # 70233-c.o. Dear Fred, Engineers & Architects Uno G. Bonestruo, P.E. Ruben W. Rusene, /'.L' Joseph C. Anderhk, P. L. Bradford A. Lemberg, P.E. Richard £. Turner, P.E. James C. Olson, P.£. Glenn R. Cook, P.E. Kath A. Gordon, Y.L. lhumas L. Nurrs. Y.£. Rithard W. Tower, Y.L. Robert G. Schum hi, P.E. Manor L. Surrulu. P.E. Donald C. Burgardl, P.£. Jerry A. Bourdon. P.E. Murk A. Hanson, P.E. Ted K. Fred, P. E. Michael T. Ruulmunn, Y.E. Robert R. YJry/rrh% PL Dawd 0. LosAvia. P.E. Thomas W. Peterson, Y.E. Michael C. Lynch, P.£. Karen L. Willis. P. E. James R. Muland, P.L. Kenneth P. Anderson, P.E. Keith A. Barhrrrann, P.E. Murk R. Rolls, P.£. Ruben C. fi ssek, A./.A Thomas E. Angus. P.L. Stun L. Young, Y.E. Chanes A. LrnAson Leo M. PuwelAky Harlan M. Oban Susan M. Eberhn Enclosed is a copy of a letter from Shaw -Lundquist asking for a 14 day extension to the completion date. Also enclosed are copies of their daily log which documents lost time. We recommend the time extension be granted. Please review their request and if you concur we will issue a change order. Meanwhile we continue to ask Shaw -Lundquist for quotations such that we may resolve change order no. 1. We will keep you advised. Yours Very Truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Thomas E. Noyes TEN:df Encl. CC. Bob Fasching - Plymouth Phil Caswell - BRA 6994e Shaw -Lundquist Associates Inc. General Contractors -(612) 454-0670 Triangle Office Park • 2805 Dodd Road • St. Paul, N4N 55121 September 29, 1987 Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, MN. 55113 Attn: Mr. Thomas Noyes Re: Change Order Proposal No. 3 Change of Contract Time Zachary Lane Water Treatment Facility Plymouth, Minnesota Dear Mr. Noyes: Enclosed are copies of pages from the project job log which is filled out daily by our superintendent. The log indicates the work force and work completed each day. Since the start of the project on June 11, 1987 through August 5, 1987, when we first asked for a time extension, the log shows that we have experienced 21 lost workingdaysduetorain. 10 of the days were during a period which has been called "The flood of the Century." The log shows one lost working day on June 17. It shows that the clearwell progress was delayed significantly the week of July 5 - 11. The clearwell is not a critical item on our schedule. We had added costs due to the cleanup operations. We completed excavation of the Main Plant on July 20, 1987. The log shows rain on the evening of July 20, 1987, July 23 and July 27. These rains, along with complete saturation, kept us from starting in the Main Plant. We eventually started in the Backwash Area on August 4. The Main Plant is the critical item on our schedule. The (14) calendar day delay due to this flooding will cost us more for heating during the winter. We cannot recover these costs. We must, however, ask for an extension of (14) calendar days. The project schedule is very tight with perfect conditions. These heavy rains are beyond our control and our progress has been dealyed. Sincerely, SHAW-LUNDQUIST ASSOCIATES, INC. Bradley W. Folkert Project Manager BWF/mg Encl. An Equal Opportunity Employer 7 C V Mr. Tom Noyes Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 Subject: Contract Document for Filtration Equipment Zachary Lane Water Treatment Plant City Project No. 431 Dear Tom: As we discussed on the telephone, attached herewith is an executed copy of the Contract Document which we received from General Filter Company for the Water Treatment Plant Equipment. You have previously received a copy of a letter from the City Attorney making comments on the Contract Document. General Filter Company has made several changes in the Contract Document that was presented to them. You should review all of these changes to see if the Contract ds now executed by General Filter Company, and complies with the plans and specifications on which they submitted a proposal. After this review is complete, and if the Contract is in order, please return it to me since it is one of the copies which would be executed by the City. This Contract should have been executed and completed over three months ago. I would appreciate if you would expedite your review since it may require meetings with General Filter and our City Attorney if their changes to the Contract do not comply with the specifications. If there are any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, 1 Fred G. Moore, P.E. Director of Public Works FGM:kh Enclosure 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 1: iyc v- C'+S[' xM4 CITY OFAugust10, 1987 PLYMOUTR Mr. Tom Noyes Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 Subject: Contract Document for Filtration Equipment Zachary Lane Water Treatment Plant City Project No. 431 Dear Tom: As we discussed on the telephone, attached herewith is an executed copy of the Contract Document which we received from General Filter Company for the Water Treatment Plant Equipment. You have previously received a copy of a letter from the City Attorney making comments on the Contract Document. General Filter Company has made several changes in the Contract Document that was presented to them. You should review all of these changes to see if the Contract ds now executed by General Filter Company, and complies with the plans and specifications on which they submitted a proposal. After this review is complete, and if the Contract is in order, please return it to me since it is one of the copies which would be executed by the City. This Contract should have been executed and completed over three months ago. I would appreciate if you would expedite your review since it may require meetings with General Filter and our City Attorney if their changes to the Contract do not comply with the specifications. If there are any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, 1 Fred G. Moore, P.E. Director of Public Works FGM:kh Enclosure 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 Shaw-Lundquis Associates, Inc. ME- General Contractors 612) 454-0670AILI Triangle Office Park • 2805 Dodd Road • St. Paul, NIN 55121 August 5, 1987 Honorable City Council City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota c/o Mr. Thomas Noyes Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates 2335 West Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 Re: Change of Contract Time Zachary Lane Water Treatment Facility City Project No. 431, File No. 70233 Plymouth, Minnesota Dear Mr. Noyes: On the evenings of July 20, 1987 and July 23, 1987 we experienced very heavy rainfalls at the Zachary Lane Water Treatment Facility. During the work day of July 20, 1987 we had completed the excavation for the main Treatment Facility and also received the reinforcing steel for the base slab. The rainfall on the evening of July 20, 1987 filled areas of the excavation with water, requiring pumping, and washed away other areas which were final graded. We were in the process of drying out the excavation when we received an even heavier rainfall on the evening of July 23, 1987. This rainfall left up to ten (10) feet of water in this excavation and washed more silt and sand into the excavation. These two significant rainfalls are abnormal for the month of July. These two rainfalls combined for almost fifteen (15) inches of rainfall. We also received another two (2) inches on July 26, 1987 which further delayed our work progress. We consider these rainfalls to be acts of God that have delayed our construction start in the main Treatment Facility. We are asking for an extension of the Contract Time based on unforeseeable delays caused by the weather which is beyond our control. The delay we experienced is equal to fourteen (14) calender days. Please review this request and contact us if you have any questions. Sincerely,161 8192p, SHAW-LUNDQUIST ASSOCIATES,INC.m' N Bradley W. Folkert Project Manager An Equal Opportunity Employer DAY DAILY LUG CUNT RACTOR ^_ ___ J 0 B NAME-_._.....__.._____.._ JOB N0. ij Work Performed Today(s-.CC iCc !'l NSriIAe 1 emp. AM PM i a I II 5alrty Mrrung Worts fora • Super iniendenl Clerk 61rCklayers Carpenters Cemem Masons Electricians Iron Workers Laborers Operating Eng. Plumbers Pipr Fitters Sheet Mehl Truck Drivers Problems Delays Total Sub-Contractor Progress lEqu.pment Hrs. i Special Assignments Material Purchased Extra Work I Authorized By IApprox. Pi ce i Equipment Rented Today e Supervisor's Signature t y' Rented From I Rate CCONTRACTOR _'S JOB NAME 1 JOB NO_f. Work Perfurmed Today i _``-- PM L s Selers Meering r Work Fora i11o. S uPerrntrndent Clerk brrcKravers Carpenters Cement Masons E leC Ir rUans Iron Workers Laborers Qprratrng Eng Plumbers Pipe Fitters Sweet Metal Truk Qnvrrt Problems Delays_ 7 Sub Coniraclur Progress Special Assignments Extra Work Equipment Rented Today Supervisor's Signature Authorized 8y Approx. Price Rented From I Rate Total Equipment Hrs. Materlal Purchased i CONTRACTOR Z'_ JOB NAME JOB NO. Aork Pellutmed Today /.i Ad. / iI,y t Problams Delays Special Assignments Extra Work I Authorized By IApprox Price E4urpment Rented Today I Rented From I Rate tat rer Temp. AM '?fD Prr, Satett Meetrn Work Ford Nu Super nten0ent T clerk drrCklay erI Carpenters 1 Cement Mosuns ElectIIcuans Irun VVuikerl Laborers Operating Eng Plumuers Pipe Fitters Sheet Metal Truck Dr.vers Total Equipment I Hrs Material Purchased 1 r Sub-Contraclor PrpgtesS 8 JULY 19 4 CONTRACTOR Work Performed Tldcy V Z DAILY LOG DAY X JOB NAME (' JOB NO. Y wrdtner C Trrrrp. AM / V P4,t rioreir Mretrng Worh Foru Suprrrnlrndenl Ctrrs, tsr ck.arers Carpenters Crment Masons q' Y Erectrrcnan% Author led By Iron YVorkers Material Purchased LaUorers OPerar,ng Eng P um rrs Pipe Fnters s" Sheet Metal Truck pavers t- Rented From Total Equipment Hrz yr -Y r I a Speciel Assignments pt- q' Y Extra Work Author led By Approx. Pace Material Purchased Equipment Rented Today Rented From Rate r r t Supervisor'sSlgnatur iM .:r . r. ie, k'yiy- r. DAY DAILY. LOG 19 OJULY 9 CONTRACTOR — JOB NAME _ T JOB NO _ y%„k Prrlormecl Today_ --- - -- Trmp. AM Z PrV.. Sdtrr Mrel.r,y Sub Contractor Progress SPec,al Assignment cis. sd:.. ....... .. ...a..,.... _...,... Super, n l enol, r. I Clerk t Br,cklave's Carpenter s Cement MasUn1 crectr,c,ens Icor, Workers Laborers Owat,ng Eng Plurnbers P,pe Fmers Sneer Metal Truck Df,ers ToW 41Equrpment Hrs Material Purchased F + I, r1 ` r c _ 4, r i _tt F t ' Y ^_ t t !. __ 7 rc Iti at .l ?R , i Itj "F'a.J[f } r r t. I ,t . t i y.. S I, i4 ` r ,. ' a F_ irYi ildj t ''r a i f , wall. t> n, F: u t} ,; l.c4t- Mr J r f,i r k) I I i t yl , - .1 r , rY ft %y I, I E :_ r. J7 I 1 a ,e.ltt 1 Y ,'v '' f t y' i E J.. ,F, b .. r'rYt. r ,.«!` A+°s r i,-+ / 1'tlf f77dt'tr 4 r ^tSC,[r- I i't 1 i i[ ! t ! t _''ti H I ry,rr sG,$ int'. lF Y `{', L i#. '3'uF' jj( +T t; t3' I f. t,+ 1.' A t. J A. 1 ,I '.>" i2 ' t'1+[ 4 t fi .'-)I ,P'.. J,. d7M i,Q ib ' t . k :. t' !` L.:[ !* i r t it - 't' i F P i :. r= . ly :±. t .tt .[L 7 e t % 1 I t7 ' 1 .,., ' '= Y ', qy f , r{ t , i+w I.sS,, t, + t t!t t t M . i 1. t tf jt t1 $, 1'; h P t,,p; Y ' 7' ti' tw .X J . 3 , ] ,iA 7' ,th t ry r1. r .t -I ir.T t.^+` 'pj t..a 'Y / 'j ' iIt t..`'' iitf, is .( tl f . ' p:' ta ;•h . , . tea A , y(1.`C tgi»tX1 h '"[ T' ,+I Mt {s ';!'FI.'air i7 tl,,i;yt , r t. V ,!s (1i 14 1'd i r r y,, t t ' 1 r , t ' c ,n ti r i I q' = 1 r t :'[yeti' L ,, r . t f.e M T +tet",. ut ;.'i '1... p If n t .Jat i E, ,{n' M ., 1 (f1 w i at ?, rJ j yp. ? fik" r h t,,yy , ff AS{L,t'` l f Wb v k x I;i_3 5Y E}8,. _i tk_.i.t;?4';7 Ik.; x--, b ss'x lT .. 1L !IS, uRJ` ili:74.i t R T in .u kf.w.tr'I'i`I . ;, i,Y7 : y. DAY DAILY LOG CONTRACTOR_ JOB NAME wort. Perturmed Tuda Problems Delay Sub -Contractor progress Special Assignments Extra Work Equipment Rented Today Supervisor's Signature J 194 ,DULY 13 B NO. _ Pelf rtiraRrr f Trr- Atvjs PM 5ra rry Merlrny Work Forc• No 5uprirlenUrnl /_ 1 let I, 8"n klayers arPrnlrrs Lrnrenl Masons Elrnnc ons Iron WW kers _ Laborers OPeld1mg Eng Plumbers P -Pe F niers Sorel Meral Truck pr vers Total Equ prnent Hrs Authorized B Material PurchasedVApprox. Pr Ice Rented From I Rate 20 JULY 19LLL DAILY LOG DAY CONTRACTOR - S-- JOB NAME - JOB NO. -j-____ t rater , J r Wurk Peftormed Tudey f S1f! 7 1 Saretq Mertiny Work Force Olio pri,nirnClrnl1 C II'iA I Ca t rnrrra r — Crmrnt Maswi5 Elrclric.ar-s i i Iron 1'Voikers LaUGr ers / L)prret ng Eng Prumuers P.pr Filters Sneet Mrtai Tiun, Grrvers PiobItr,): Delays Sub Gontractur Progress prclar r+aaiyrrirr r I Extra Vvork Equipment Rented Today Total 4'y''-' EquipmentHrs. Authorized By IApprox. Price Rented From I Rate Supervisor's Signal ure_---_4/ Material Purchased DAY UAI L Y LVU v JOB NAME JOB NO CO TRACTOR 5%p , 1';t Perturmed Today_— -- - 1 Trrnp. AM Pf fit• -- — ---------- Sertts Mrrt ug-- Worl Fora No. S pe'.111 1cent Ca,prntr s Crn,ent Maso"s Etecu,cians I, O,• 1'VMArrs UNr,ot,ny Eng Plum(,er1 P,pr F n ter s Sheri Metal Truck UI'vers i U•Contractor Progress_—_ pedal Assignments Eiktra Work Equipment Rented Today Supervisor's Signature Tout EquipmentHrs. Material Purchased Authorized By Appro*. Pt ice Rented From Rate 01 22 LY 18 DAILY LOG DAY JOB NAME 24 L•C/_—_[_ JOB NO. CONTRACTOR_ _ _ ----= Wratnrr Work Perlor'med Today.. r r " Temp. AM ZC/ PMt*P L _ r-67 Work Ford No. Supr,,ntenaent clers. Ca,penters Cemem Mesons a Erec1nc,ans 5 Iron Workers Laborers ,fid r t ope,at,ng Eng Plumbers P,pr F,Uers Sneer Metal Truck Dnvrrs Problems Delays_ Spectal Ass,gnments t -I 1 Y OUI t Equipment Hrs p r Material Purchased Extra Work Authunred rieByApprox. Pc Rented from Rate Equ,prnt Rented Todaym r• • 44 i y? a Supervisor's Signature. s ., :. - , ti :.,s s.t'.:! u {Vt:+.l'I+`{#!F"•' , fi"it .,-'fir: ,at`1,. ' , , .i+ DAILY LOG 19 JULY 23 DAY JOB NAME JUB NO.— CONTRACTOR__.— A Yyrarnc• Q V,pl. Perlotmed Cody w U limp. AM ZG PMCUCICC - 412 r No r r $.tcly MtrUng S prl nlcnOrnt _ Lit - 8, lthlayHl CaIpen Iers L Crmenj Mesons _ Elrctl.c.ens Iron Woralb uu0/erS ppetat.ng Eng Pwmuers P,pr F eters Sheet MOW Truck Dtswers CQ Problems Delays 1 00 yTotsl t Sub Contractor P,uglrss_ Equipment His. J 1 Spvc.al Assignments fu Material Purchased Authorized By Approx. Price Extra Work Rented from Rate EQ.,.pment Rented Today Supervisor's Signature I . /ijh' Yj f . P ' 3'.F}wt y.1 f .M i 1}f 1 trYF"` 4f ++FFy ry d. < Y F L l! 4 . t h t /IyX S A., • il., 1......._.v,..__' JI i.•rt .,_ q.r1'r.: i.._.11-.. .i,.. - H..... t.!'ii is ULY 19 Y4 DAILY LOG DAY c C CONTRACTOR J JOB NAME JOB N0. e Temp- AM7 PN J Safety Mertmg Work corp Suprr ruentlrnt 1 CIFrA ir;C layers Cerprntrrs Cement Masons E Iter means I,On VHOrs.ers Laborers Operol,rlg Eng Plumbers P.pa Freers Sneet Metal Truck Drivers Special Assignments_ Total Equipment Material Purchased ` r I 4( -: 1 Material Purchased ` r DAY — DAILY LOG 19!JUC2D7 CONTRACTOR __ _ JOB NAME LyJJOB N0. N rh P ter mrd T3day 3+----• 1rmf:. AM urtr, Mrri r.4 Wo Forc*_4— CrerA ii'i bnuiave s t,:ai prnirrs Erecu-c,ans lion Viwi ers LdViir ers orrerai ny Eng PLI mlJCr1 P a Fitters heel Mer., Truck Dr,ve(s Problems Delays ss IrY.-' – C) Total Sub Coniractur Progress Equipment Hrs. Special Assrgnmenis_ e f Entre Work Authorized By Approx. Price Equipment Renteo Today Rented From Rate r t Supervisor's Signature r . ".. :x.,, •.}... r,.. *-: .:ct.r irQ•:r rrq,a.-.•r n.'•-raw•.:.r r a:T',' N';' ,co,-.wpb.Xoio4t Mater al Purchased 1 ULY 19 DAILY LOG DAY CONTRACTOR4.F , JOB NAME L -.n-JO6 NO. Trm,. AM Satets Merlin Work Force 5.pei.mendem Cie, k 8, .( I,lavers Cdlprriiers Cement mdsoo:i Eiecti,Lians l'ov. Vvulkefs Ldtjweis Operating Eng Pl„mbefs P.pv Fitters sricef Metal Truck Drovers wk Priformeo No I Total SubCormaclu, Piugiess zyz,) Equipment Hrs. Special Assignmirms Extra Work I Authorized by I Approx Pi ice Equipment Rented Today Supervisor's Signature 00- VIF Rented From I Rate Material Purchased w F41 V I W DAY — JDAILY LOG CONTRACTOR JOB NAME p,owmed Todd- e. r 30 LILY 19 DAILY LOG DAY CONTRACTOR JOB NAME JOB N0. Work Performed Today Temp, AM pkd '" r y is Safely Meeting xs cr Work Forp Super,nrendent Clerk y. Br ckiavers Carpenters Cement Masons E lecincrans Iron Workers - Laborers operanng Eng. Plumbers 1 Pipe Fitters Sneer Metal 9 Truck pavers+-d,M; .. r Special Assignments Extra Work Equipment Rented Today Supervisor's Signature Total Equipment W Material Purchased Authorized By —] Approx Price f Rented From I Rate i t• QAY DAILY LOG 19 JUL 31 c CONTRACTOR 5' J 0 B NAME ,. J 0 B NO. — y yk Per tot me d Today•-4w +r Weorr r r v Salrly Mrriny Work fora No s S„Prl nrrnAenr C le, k F bI IckIeyers pt•n rer1 cemenr N1asons E leU r.c,ans 1 I lion 1Notkers Y: r Lalrui rrs f OPeratiny Enq Pwrnurls P pr Finers Sl Metal I--- Truck Or vPrs r of oulems Delay: _ tw V Total Sur, Contractor Progress 4–— Equipment His f SWec,at Assignments _ Eaua Work I Authowed By IApprox Price FO-1pment Rented Today I Rented From I Rate 6pervr>;or's Signature Material Purchased I t Rj O V)l I u. O 1 ol tiO i aV) 0 u I t O V)l I u. O 1 ol tiO i I t I1 ol i I t 60 CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: October 21, 1987, for October 26 City Council Meeting TO: James G. Willis, City Manager FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: COUNTY ROAD 61 PARK - CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 SUMMARY: The attached resolution approves Change Order No. 4 in the amount of 3,376 to lower the grade on the 34th Avenue entrance into County Road 61 neighborhood park. This Change Order was prepared at the request of Mayor Schneider. BACKGROUND: On Tuesday, October 20, Mayor Schneider, James Willis and I met with Merilee Riley, President of the Heritage Homeowners Association, at County Road 61 park. We walked the entire park site with Mrs. Riley and listened to the concerns that she and other members of her neighborhood have with regard to the steep hills that enter into this park area. She indicated that it is the consensus of the neighborhood living north of the park that they are uncomfortable with the steep grade associated with the two northerly entrances. As the Council will recall, the northeast entrance from County Road 61 was kept at a high elevation in order to retain as much of the berm effect as possible which protects the homes in the Heritage area from the noise on County Road 61. For this reason, we have not considered an option which would lower the grade on the northeast trail entrance. The northerly entrance from 34th Avenue originally was not graded to any great extent because we felt that the existing grade would be acceptable as a trail entrance. With the added expense of building a parking lot at this park, we were looking for ways to achieve cost savings wherever possible. Making a severe cut into this northerly hill would have been expensive and exposed us to some amount of erosion. Therefore, we opted for a design which made the minimal cut in this area. We have reviewed this situation with our contractor and have negotiated a change order in the amount of $3,376. For this amount, he will remove approximately 100 feet of the trail and grade down approximately three feet of hill and remove the material from the park site. He will then re -install the 100' of trail over the newly graded area. The steepest 50 feet of trail will be reduced from an 11% grade to approximately 7 1/2%. The hill will be taken down as much as practical, so that the side slopes can be maintained without the added expense of having to install retaining walls on the two side yards. If the Council approves this change order, I expect that the work would be completed within the next 10 working days. JA The existing contract amount is $290,844.70. Change Order No. 4 in the amount of $3,376 brings the new contract amount to $294,220.70. I recommend the City Council authorize Change Order No. 4 in the amount of 3,376 to Barber Construction for re -grading of the northerly trail at County Road 61 park. Eric J. tlank, Director Parks and Recreation np Attachments CITY OF PLYMOUTH Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on t e day of 19 . The following members were present: The following members were absent: introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 87 - APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 FOR PROJECT NO. 711 WHEREAS, the residents living north of County Road 61 neighborhood park have expressed concern for the grade of the northerly trail entrance into County Road 61 park, and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the grade on this hill can be lowered by approximately three feet, and WHEREAS, the Director of Parks and Recreation has recommended that said grading be undertaken by change order to the contract with Barber Construction; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMJTI'H, MINNESOTA, that the contract with Barber Construction in the amount of $290,844.70 is hereby amended by Change Order No. 4 in the amount of 3,376, bringing the new total to $294,220.70. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in avor t ereo The following voted against or abstained: Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. it f 1* i 1 I i t1 I Ii.... .._.. 1i I Y I I l i e'J 1 1 E tea... s ._:., ., , ,...:.: i.. Ith N F 1 til 1' r 1 I is 3 Sill: In 16V'.'531..{.iuYti.]RY.:.ti•;Kti•i..:..:..:..:..:.!. _..:. ..:..:. i.:. :. .:..:..:..:. ..:.. 12 c..• V r.... s. I .. Z i i CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE-. October 22, 1987 For Council Meeting of October 26, 1987 TO-. James G. Willis, City Manager F R O Mi Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Approval of Payment No. 5: Groves Office Park Area Improvements City Project No. 648 Attached herewith is request for Payment No. 5 for the Groves Office Park Area Improvements. This request for payment requires City Council Approval since it is recommended that the retainage be reduced from the standard 5% to 2%. The contractor has completed all of the work on the project with the exception of the installation of the traffic signals at 13th Avenue and County Road 18. The contractor is awaiting delivery of the signal poles, which are expected to arrive on November 6. The controller for the signals has been checked by the Hennepin County Signal Maintenance Division and has been found to operate properly. Since the major portion of this project was the street construction and all of that work has been completed and is acceptable, it is recommended that the retainage be reduced to 2%. Attached is a resolution which is recommended for City Council adoption. I Fred G. Moore, P.E. FGM:kh Attachment: Resolution Payment Request A CITY OF PLYMOUTH Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota was held on the day of 1987. The following members were present: , The following members were absent: C7tiX introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 87 - REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. 5 GROVES OFFICE PARK AREA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT NO. 648 WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth as owner and Bury and Carlson, Inc. as contractor, have entered into an agreement for the Groves Office Park Area Improvement Project, City Project No. 648; and WHEREAS, the Engineer, Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc., has certified their approval of Payment Request No. 5; and WHEREAS, said payment requires City Council approval since the retainage is recommended to be reduced to 2%. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA: Request for Payment No. 5 in the amount of $81,744.79 to Bury and Carlson, Inc. for the Groves Office Park Area Improvement Project is hereby approved and the City Finance Director is hereby authorized and directed to pay the same forthwith. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: , The following voted against or abstained: Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. r - r 1 cl:: co ro C71 T Lr) a O O O C N,Q) C) N t'--• M W f 00 x U u1 a 00 Q -C Ol W ro O L.r) U r- z 0. 00 v O CO O d cY O r- Z O o O 0 0 r` W O O p Z O Z 0. 0 w 1- U F- 0. v O Q w Q e -- o_ Cl- of U w O N r W x 2 Z J cn O o n O C w w U w v r 1 cl:: ro T Lr) a O O r - C N,Q) C) N t'--• Of W f O x O E Q -C Ol W ro Ui CD U w z 0. M v r v ro T Lr) a O O r - C N,Q) C) r- Q O x O E Q -C Ol irl ro U U w z N M v CO t d cY O r- O o 0 0 r` p r m 0. C- M U Cl- p T ¢ CW a 4 U w O Nx h co n O C Z1 H m U) 1,D U J F o O? o o z N F-- 8 Ol w wOf N W F 7 7 z 3 z 0 O Cx: O cr O v a) v a. T Lr) C O O r - C N,Q) C) r- O O E Q -C Ol irl 0" E s Q) N M CO t d cY O r- OO r` 00 O 0. C- M U Cl- T ¢ N v) r 00 n O C an .- v J M d) > o I'll N J v r- Ol N CL 2 7 Q LOr N v o o A M O 00 N 2-Q C t!) N a) A N o t J N +- o 7 n Q) N v1 v} tR v V Q) Q) 4j dP v A co b\ O '- O 6\ r O ae v v O C M OC 1 V A C 00 UlAON n L aJ d Cl) 00 4-> - r r` co C A M Lr) v N v A tlP d° op N OO : M r1 OOC aQ O U 4 O Q) A C M to co O N Ln rCEMOM G) o Q 1--4 rvr- a co N N N a) o v N + O O a) L A O C O A 07co t L O co I'D U O +- io OD OD rn N O O r C A C r L N rn r O Cl rn V) a L o d r O Lr) O V O I'D r c0 N N n o a) a 1 Z a 3 10 v U U O O U-) OZ w Ui c v a) v C O O L O E CO w OO w O 0. C- U Cl- T ¢ O U-) OZ w Ui c I 7F - CIN OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: October 23, 1987 for City Council Meeting October 26, 1987 TO: dames G. Willis, City Manager FROM: Blair Tremere, Community Development Director SUBJECT REPORT OF INVESTIGATION OF SITE IMPROVEMENTS COMPLETION AT "CREEKSIDE OF PLYMOUTH" (79018) SUMMARY: The City Council on September 14, 1987, considered the recom- mendation to reduce the financial guarantee for approved site improvements from $24,550.00 to $10,000.00. The attached Resolution does that. The Homeowners Association President submitted a letter which requested the City Council to not take such action because of alleged site improvements and construction features which were not in order. The City Council directed staff to look at the complaints individually and meet with the Homeowner Association President and the petitioner to update the list of complaints based upon the August, 1987 survey and determine what, if any, are Code violations, and return to the Council with a report. We have investigated the matter and provide the following report of our findings. We recommend that the Council adopt the attached Resolution reducing the financial guaran- tee to $10,000.00 which is an appropriate amount to cover the remaining site improve- ments which are subject to the approved Site Plan and City site development requirements. The site improvements have been inspected several times, using the information submit- ted by the Homeowners Association as a guide. These inspections followed the initial inspection conducted by staff upon request of the petitioner. The information provided by the Homeowners Association came in two parts; the first part was delivered at the City Council meeting; the more recent data was received at the end of September. The recommended amount of $10,000.00 will cover the remaining work needed, including survivability and including trees which were improperly planted. Our staff will be specifically designating those plantings which are subject to the agreement so that there will be no mistake about the items covered. We found that many of the instances cited in the information were for properties in the first phase of this development which was found to be complete and consistent with the City requirements under a separate agreement and Council action. In other words, survivability problems with respect to plantings in the first phase are the responsi- Page two Memorandum to City Manager October 23, 1987 bility of the Homeowners Association and/or does not cover the perpetual maintenance beyond the first winter after installation. the individual homeowners. City Ordinance and guaranteed survivability of plantings There are instances of concrete walks which have been subject to frost heaving and/or settlement. . None of the walks were required by the approved plan; the City Ordinance does not require the walks; and, the Building Code does not require the walks nor does it have construction specifications relative to the installation of walks. The damage that can result to a sidewalk due to frost heaving over time is a matter of maintenance which is the responsibility of the homeowner or of the Homeowners Association. The few areas of sod damage or drainage problems were considered in the original and current recommendation. The conclusion regarding site improvements is that there may be certain maintenance items that the Homeowners Association will find should have been avoided due to better installation techniques and procedures. The solution to that would be whatever legal remedies are available through the civil courts, since the City does not require them or determine the appropriateness of the construction. More significant perhaps is the fact that the City is not in a legal position to constrain the developer to require corrective work. The completion of the Code related construction items on the dwellings themselves is in progress. The Building Official and Inspectors have reviewed each of the complaints and claims submitted by the Homeowners Association and have identified those which are Code related. Furthermore, Building Official doe Ryan identified several units which had not received a final building inspection due to remaining corrective work and he has sent a letter to each of those homeowners advising them of the need to gain access to their units so a final inspection can be made. I understand that Mr. Johnson and his employees have been performing numerous correc- tive items and doe Ryan will be tracking that work. Joe Ryan estimates that the Code related corrective work can be completed within two to three weeks and that he has advised the petitioner that this is the City's expecta- tion. Inspections will be ongoing both in response to calls from the petitioner as well as response to directions from doe. The difficulty faced by some of the home- owners is that, numerous instances of settlement or alleged poor workmanship involved dwellings in the older phase of the project. These units were finaled and found to be in compliance with the Building Code at the time of construction. Further, there are numerous instances where the items cited are not related to the Building Code (or any other City Ordinance) and are matters of workmanship and quality rather than matters of soundness and safety. Thus, it may be necessary for the Association and/or individuals to consider appropri- ate civil action if the items are not adjusted or corrected to their satisfaction. We have encouraged Mr. Johnson to work with the Homeowners Association to complete this task; the Homeowners Association has indicated their desire to do the same. A meeting was scheduled with the parties and had to be rescheduled for the afternoon of Friday, October 23, 1987. t Page three Memorandum to City Manager City Council Meeting October 16, 1987 October 23, 1987 I will be prepared to advise the Council about that meeting. I have concluded that there is, to some degree, a lack of communication among the home- owners and the developer; some of this can be identified as nonresponsiveness by the builder to the homeowners and their concerns. It is also important to note however that some of the data provided by the Homeowners Association is the result of a survey appraisal taken by a management company whose interests are to identify those features of the development that they are or are not responsible for as a site manager. There- fore, many items are very selective and not related to Codes and Ordinances, but rather are related to maintenance or to the desire to not be liable for damages which have occurred or which might occur. I believe that some of that information has been mis- construed to be that the project was improperly constructed and developed. The need to separate general maintenance items and up -keep from sound construction and compliance with minimum Building Code, is apparent. The site improvements also fall in that category where there may be an aversion to replacing trees and shrubs that were thought to be "permanent" and somehow "guaranteed" as to long term survivability. Attachments 1. Resolution 2. Location Map 3. Correspondence CITY OF PLYMOUTH Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the day of , 19 The following members were present: The following members were absent: introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 87 - AUTHORIZING REDUCTION OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR DEAN JOHNSON FOR CREEKSIDE OF PLYMOUTH 2ND ADDITION (79018) WHEREAS, a Final Plat for Dean Johnson for Creekside of Plymouth 2nd Addition located north of 38th Avenue North and Orchid Lane was approved under City Council Resolution No. 83-371; and, WHEREAS, the developer submitted the required Site Performance Guarantee in the form of a Letter of Credit in the amount of $171,2.30.00; and, WHEREAS, the City Council under Resolution No. 85-09, authorized the reduction of the Letter of Credit to $130,272.50; and, WHEREAS, the City Council under Resolution No. 85-865, authorized the reduction of the Letter of Credit to $91,555.00; and, WHEREAS, the City Council under Resolution No. 86-700, authorized the reduction of the Letter of Credit to $24,550.00; and, WHEREAS, upon notice from the developer, City staff has inspected said site and recommends reduction of the financial guarantee; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does authorize the reduction of the Letter of Credit No. SB4929 in the amount of $24,550.00 which was submitted to guarantee site improvements for Dean Johnson for Creekside of Plymouth 2nd Addition located north of 38th Avenue North and Orchid Lane, to $10,000.00. The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by _ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against or abstained: Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. I ` 3 T - r 30TH AVE. i 1 55TH CITY HAL. V z SEP 14 1987 Gregg C. Miller, President Creekside of Plymouth Homeowners Association 15248 40th Ave N. Plymouth MN 55446 James G. Willis, City Manager City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth MN 55447 September 14, 1987 Dear Mr. Willis On Friday, September 11, I received a September 10 letter from your Associate Planner, Al Cottingham, informing me as President of Creekside of Plymouth, that he would be recommending to the City Council on Monday September 14, that the council "reduce the Financial Guarantee of builder/developer Dean Johnson to $10,000" from approximately $24,000 for Creekside of Plymouth. Please advise the City Council that the Board of Directors of Creekside of Plymouth strongly feel this recommended action should not be passed by the City Council at their meeting of September 14. This action, if passed, would be premature, untimely and may jeopardize the the ability of the Association and the City to recover costs necessary to correct landscaping and constructions problems well documented in the enclosed Eberhard Management Association "Creekside Apartments (townhomes) Walk Through 3/25/1987" and further documented in an Association August 1987 mail -back survey of all residents which is now being tabulated. This information is being used by our Management Association to negotiate a fair settlement with the builder, Dean Johnson, which we hope to complete in the next couple of months. As I mentioned to Mr. Cottingham, plantings have died because they were left in their plastic bags when planted and the slope of some driveways has caused significant water problems. Other significant problems are clearly obvious from the enclosure based on the frequency that they occur through the townhouse complex, notably the sidewalk problems where over 30% have significant cracks that in some cases pose a real safety problem and possible litigation. Please do not hesitate to contact the Association if you would like additional clarification on this subject. We sincerely thank you for your consideration of our request. Sincerely, egg C. er, Preside Creekside of Plymouth Homeowners Association Copies for Council Members Gregg C. Miller, President Creekside of Plymouth Homeowners Association 15248 40th Ave N. Plymouth MN 55446 Blair Tremere, Director Community Development City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth MN 55447 September 29, 1987 Dear Mr. Tremere OCT 7 1907 In response to your letter of September 15 and subsequent telephone requests, I have enclosed the following additional information on behalf of and with the consent and knowledge of the Board of Directors of Creekside of Plymouth: 1. An updated list of potential code violations or discrepancies, incomplete construction items and items which do not conform to the city's "Site Improvement Agreement with Mr. Dean Johnson. This is a an update of the list I previously provided and was verified on September 22, 1987 by Eberhardt Property Management as items still in need of correction (see Exhibit A). This list should be read in conjunction with the following additional exhibits. 2. August 1987 homeowner surveys with narratives explaining deficiencies and the behavior of Mr. Johnson as homeowners repeatedly request corrections to deficiencies, to no no avail in most cases. see Exhibit B). 3. June 1986 homeowner surveys reflecting complaints of homeowners on construction and landscape issues. (see Exhibit C) 4. Selected quotes of homeowners reflective of Mr. Johnson's attitude and behavior when dealing with these people and their problems (Exhibit D). 5. Photographs of some of the incomplete and deficient construction taken by Eberhardt Property Management (Exhibit E). 6. Correspondence related to Mr. Johnson's use of defective roofing material (see Exhibit F). 7. A March 30, 1987 letter from American Family Insurance denying coverage to a homeowner at 15297 40th Ave for water damage caused by water running inside the dewling because of the need for additional flashing and a sealer to cover the area where the house meets the garage. This is a common problem in Creekside where the original builder plans, according to Eberhardt Property Management, were modified, with or without permission of the city, to cut out a section of the roof to provide for a window and the cut out is now and has been leaking in many units (see Exhibit G). 8. An April 9, 1987 letter from Eberhardt Property Management discussing a meeting where Mr. Johnson assumed responsibility for some items and explained why he feels he should not be responsible for other items (Exhibit H). 9. An April 20, 1987 letter from Palanisami and Associates stating that cracks in the interior walls on one unit were the result of improper construction. "The garage floor should have been poured on top of 18 inches of granular soil and the home built at least two feet above the water table (see Exhibit I). 10. Mr. Johnson's June 12, 1987 letter to Certainteed Corporation pointing out roofs where inferior shingles were installed by Mr. Johnson and requesting that they be replaced by the manufacture. (see Exhibit J). 11. Tom Cloutier, Commercial Lawnscaping, letter of June 20, 1987 to Eberhardt Property Management pointing out the following: (See Exhibit K) a. Improper Construction of bike paths which is causing grass to die - cost to repair $4,000.00. b. Improperly exposed insulation on homes being damaged by lawn maintenance equipment. C. A list of dead trees (30) and shrubs (73): cost to replace 6,048.65. These numbers are minimums since Mr. Cloutier did not have access to the site plan. 12. Bud Morin's (Creekside Director) survey of dead and missing trees 39) and shrubs (88) (does not include those dead or missing on county road 9) (see Exhibit L) These numbers are minimums since Mr. Morin did not have access to the site plan. 13. Individual letters from home owners with construction problems see Exhibit M). 14. September 21, 1987 letter from a horticulturist with the Horner Maintenance Group, Golden Valley, specifying trees and shrubs died because of improper planting e.g. 4" to 6" too deep with the trees. see Exhibit N) Sincerely 1.,, Zoigg C. M/ rdof ex, President the Bo Directors Creekside of Plymouth Homeowners Association cc. Dean Johnson e CREEKSIDE OF PLYMOUTH BOARD MEETING SEPTEMBER 29, 1987 `y , RESOLUTION The following resolution was moved by :7224 /j 'l> and seconded by z ? Voting for MC nba bls f ll J L 1/fid/ PR14/ Pij! 5 lP.E of Ti Voting against The Board of Directors of the Homeowners Association of Creekside of Plymouth resolve at this meeting to affirm the Board authority of its President, Gregg C. Miller, to communicate with the City of Plymouth of behalf of the Board of Directors of Creekside of Plymouth, opposing release or reduction of the Site Performance Guarantee for Creekside of Plymcuth, where such release or reduction was requested by the builder, Dean Johnson, and where Mr. Miller opposed such release or reduction on behalf of the Board, in letters to the City dated July 6, 1987 and September 19, 1987 and where the Board of Directors now at this board meeting, authorize its President, Gregg C. Miller, to respond in writing to a request for additional information from the City of Plymouth and where the Board of Directors endorse the creation of a Committee of the Board to work with the City of Plymouth and the Builder in the resolution of construction and site performance issues and to bring a final settlement of these issues to the full Board of Directors before the Builder is released from any construction or site performance liability to the Homeowners Association and where this resolution supersedes any other resolution or act by this Board or previous boards of this Association as these acts or resolutions pertain to construction or site performance issues. QC 19fii gaGaleu I S 0 61AXI 5/5T6e /v CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: October 22, 1987 For Council Meeting of October 26, 1987 TO: James G. Willis, City Manager FROM: Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Proposed Engineering Guideline Revisions Street Standards At the July 27, 1987 Council meeting the City Council received and approved the final report for the Pavement Management Study. in addition to evaluating and making recommendations on the existing condition of our City Streets, the report made recommendations for changes to our existing street standards. These recommendations would be for new street construction. With regard to the revisions to the street standards, the City Council adopted the attached motion: That the City Engineer revise the "Engineering Standards to include the recommendations in the Pavement Management Study, present the revisions to the Development Council, and bring these revisions back to the City Council for consideration". Attached are the proposed revisions to the Engineering Standards. These revisions will be presented to the Development Council at their October 28 meeting. These revised guidelines, along with comments from the Development Council, will be presented to the City Council at the November 2 City Council meeting for City Council consideration. Any comments which the City Council has at this time would be presented to the Development Council at their meeting. Fred G. Moore, P.E. FGM:kh Attachment: Proposed Revisions DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO October 12, 1987 Plymouth Development Council Members Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works Proposed Engineering Guideline Revisions Street Standards Recently the City had completed a "Pavement Management Study" for all the streets within the City of Plymouth. This study evaluated our 206 miles of streets and suggested either maintenance or reconstruction of these streets in order to ensure a long useful life. One of the conclusions of this study was that some of our newer streets are deteriorating at a more rapid rate than should be expected. Byreviewingthesestreets, it was determined that this deterioration is mainly as a result of wet or poor soil conditions. The study made seven recommendations on revisions to our Engineering Guidelines in order that the new streets which are constructed within the City will have a 20 yearlife. Attached herewith is a copy of the recommended changes to the present CityGuidelines. These revisions will be considered by the City Council at theOctober26, 1987, Council meeting. It is recommended that these changes be effective for all plans and specifications submitted after January 1, 1988. I would like to review these Councilmembers at the next meeting. FGM:kh Attachments: Revisions proposed" changes with Development 10-9-87 RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO PRESENT CITY ENGINEERING GUIDELINES V. Testing Requirements (continued) 4. Streets a Suil tests indicated tMOUitable soils whicl, shall be exuavated an Soil testing is required to provide for proper pavement design based on the existing subgrade soils laboratory determined R -Values. Where soil tests indicate unsuitable soils or presence of ground moisture a recommendation for corrective work along with a recommendation for the possible need for an under drain system is required. VI. Construction Requirements (continued) 4. Streets In areas where the subgrade soils are not subiect to frost heaving but have become unstable during construction (silty sands) the City Engineer may require that geotextile fabrics be used. In areas where the subgrade soils are subject to frost heaving (silts and clays) the City Engineer may require that the subgrade be replaced with three feet of granular fill and drain tile. VI. Construction Requirements 3. Storm Sewer Where catch basin leads or storm sewer is less than six feet deep granular pipe bedding to a depth of six feet is required to eliminate frost heaving. All curb box bolts on catch basins shall be removed to allow vertical movement of the curb box corresponding to curb movement due to frost. VII.Miscellaneous (continued) 10. In areas where drain tile is installed, drain tile stubs are required to be made available for extension to building footing drains. 7C- - I CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: October 21, 1987 TO: James G. Willis, City Manager FROM: Dale E. Hahn, Finance Director SUBJECT INSURANCE CLAIMS REPORT SUMMARY: In accordance with City Council direction, I am attaching a copy of the insurance claims status report. The information was supplied by Don Kuplic, the City's insurance agent. The claims are summarized under the various status categories. O O O r O o C1 C9 OS A W r A m w O O N O r O D OD tO r 07 LD 1 z It LA OD co OD co m m V V Ol A A O_ i.r r O r r O r O r n O r tD r OIr w M N OV NO NW rt0 n m O M OD C) W OD h V Ol A A wW O v v v r J J TIr O' O11 w w wQ NN Om i CD lu 1"r• l"f rt O l< l< tG 3 p 10 m co n D D C O O 3 r+ to a rn m tO s 0- 0 1to o cr B 3 to D w o m n 1 3 3 r+ L w o c a n N rn D B M w n n x w 3- w z O 0 O m w 3 3 C O O O w w N U O Z w 3 3 3 C a• m w C a B n r+ N n m D r+ sN3O to m 7c C m n H B E n w w c B J• w s O n N D r+ wO S(D 3 7 tO w 3 O n E m 3 N O tO rn O_ 3 tO v w m r+ r+ n n r+ 1 < O B 3 w O F 3- r+ n-5 3 O(D 0 O to 1 O_ w n w w Z m C LO r+ 3' 3< O. 3 3 l< O N rn m w 3 t< w H m O n Q 3 N r+ 3 w N v O_ -+ M m -1 C O_ E3 m r+ N 3 N r 3 h m 3 w to m m d LO tO 7 O_ O w n Q 3 N 3 m O m r+ O tO Z r+ r+ m O f w O 3 O i m tO 3 w h 7 Z O M r+ 7 tG N CL 3 B tO 3 - m 3 Q p m N w m w 3 t< O C m 3 m m 3 3 w -1 C 3 1 r+ 3 rt O_ 3 tO 3 w r+ In V1 w O_ m LO 3 n O a m rt 3 n p r+ en mn n h r+ E -1 k/i Z z n S m m i O N m a T7 -i -0 O n m S m N O w O w m O Z d O m m]. 3 h C to r f C N m t0 0 to m sj. CD n v to V m m m w in r+ S m m w 1 n m B S o O w o o. s 3 w 3 O Z 1 - r+ 3 M lO 3 O_ a w n O m m N 3 I O_ m D N w m S N 1 n d N N\ l B to S r+ 3 w cr cs+ N1+ r+ O' m m O n r -f n 3 m M r m I w En tO w m 3 w tD r1 tD O w (d+ 1 r\ N r+ d Cr n w m r+ OD C v+ L l V m m\ C O O rt m w C Z O V A- to O OD N to E m 3' D n w O m 0 0 o V w m 3 w z m O O_ 0 0 O \ O_ t< to 3 D r+ d O O O OD CD 3 rn r+ O O OD O_ O E m O 0 O c r+ 3 -S F_ 3 n r+ w r+ m n m l< m rrt m N In Q 0 n O r+ m Om O r+ 3 "1 N Z D O O s m O< m 3 w 1 rt m O _ m O m N In N C) 0 N N N OD co co V V 0 0 A V N r OD OV VD a w O' o' rt rt z C) x o l9 m o D a c N rn m rt rmr I I CD 0 0 rt 9 Oa O O m r) OD D p z 7 CD rt w n rt 0 n E v n I V 3 0 0 w o n w mw w 0 o rt wr« o n n 3 rt -$ n n m m w w w N n r CDCD mm c v Cn rt o rmo m 0o1 r o r m m w o£ N E E Cr)0 s 0 v. m V Cu m CD 1 E 0 7 Cr n w In rt w m r+ cc NA r+ w Ln w JS 3 ort OV o m w n c r+ c n rt N w rt 3 w E w n OD rt n w wQ mV S- Zo, 11 3 rt — m O v ID m ncFE N m 1 o- 3 cr 0 o w n to O r+ n r T 3- 7 C wn GN c o <<< O rtO rt n ;lD o rt0 o w m 3 w m m a o OO' n w (Dm 03 O r+ m < n N D v+ CL cn m v. . c o M O r+ o D x ID n r n w o w rt0 n 1 o m 1 cD a r+ -1 w rf m n a E n o 0O w z l9 D aNrn rmr I I 0 rt 9 O O m r) OD N p z CD Co OD LA Oo rtm I V n LA LA N r A o rmo r o r Z N N Cr)0 V 0 wIInrt w mmNAONOODz OV I I n 0 OD OD OD mV M Z N o, 0) v n n n n r T N c o <<< O rtO rt0 rt0 3 w m oO' OO' 03 O mM D x z n r n w o w n 1 1 cD a m n a E n o w V 0O rtr 7 E n3 w<< a < to z m O O 7 rt m CD w m n w m w to 3 rt E rt 3 3 n c rt c m e m r m • w c w 1 5 a n n n n 1 3 w m o m o c— m CD =3 n m n n m m m n rr w n rt rt w0 n E n r Q 3 w c— -1 w 3 w w m w UD w 1 O 3= a rt n n 7 n 0 n rt rt m 3 r+ c o Xc Q wv m w o m rt m 0 w n o r+ n- 3 o n m s rt 1 Lo o m rr 1 m w n w n n -0o< CL << m-1 v o v m c o m m w w c 0 m n -1n n m 1 rt H -5 CD c 1 3 E E c w w l0 3 1 w o w m n v 3 —Q 3 3 3M N rt w m r+ n rt 0 3 o Z m w L. rt n m 7 n O 3 w n 3 rt m O 7 3 -1 n to m1 o n o w w w cn • i w n c o nvnnnoo — v Dnm w om 3Eq H+ H+ O U-1 r+ w rt i C) 0 m r+ 0 O O OD N o w o o w n rt w v n w w U1 OD O w rt r'h 1 a m C n o w cn x I O m Ort m w v V 3 n O rt w (n m v m << o 1 m o n c c o0 It O 2000 First Bank Place West Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 Telephone (612) 333-0543 Telecopier (612) 333-0540 Clayton L. LeFevere Herbert P. Lefler 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 Herbert P. Lefler III James J. Thomson, Jr. Thomas R. Galt Dayle Nolan Brian F. Rice John G. Kressel James M. Strommen Ronald H. Batty William P. Jordan Kurt J. Erickson William R. Skallerud Rodney D. Anderson Corrine A. Heine David D. Beaudoin Paul E. Rasmussen Steven M. Tallen Mary F. Skala Christopher J. Harristhal Timothy J. Pawlenty Rolf A. Sponheim c-a a Profc?sioNli Association October 20, 1987 James G. Willis City Manager City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 t, Re: Quarterly Status Report on Pending Civil Litigation Dear Jim: This report covers the pending civil litigation matters as of October 10, 1987. As with the previous reports, I am only summarizing the facts and circumstances of the cases opened since the last report. Again, this report does not cover matters being handled by the City's insurer. MATTERS STILL PENDING SINCE LAST REPORT 1. Middlemist v. City of Plymouth. Trial on the damages portion of the case was held on September 14, 1987 before Judge Roberta Levy. Judge Levy has indicated that she will be issuing an order awarding the plaintiff approximately $100,000 as the fair market value of the property. 2. Special Assessment Appeals. a. Project #408 (Dunkirk Lane). We have settled one of the appeals. The remaining ones are still pending and we have not yet received a trial date. 3. Eminent Domain Cases. a. Project #853 (Cit Cavanaugh). The case has been Minenko for trial. receive a trial date r of Plvmouth V. assigned to Judge We are waiting to from Judge Minenko. James G. Willis October 20, 1987 Paae 2 b. Project #455 (City of Plymouth v. Swan Lake Properties). The case has been assigned to Judge Hedlund, who has granted the City's motion to limit the size of the taking to only include the property surrounding the lake, not the lake itself. A pretrial confer- ence is scheduled for November 10, 1987. C. Citv of. Plymouth v. Matti (Parker's Lake). We are discussing settlement with the property owner. The hearing date has not been scheduled. d. City of Plymouth v. Forster Properties. The City obtained title and possession to the property on June 8, 1987. The proper- ty owner has not vet completed an apprais- al of the property. We hope to have the commissioner's hearing within the next three months. 4. Veit & Co. v. Citv of Plvmouth/Kenko, Inc. v. City of Plymouth. At the present time the City is only tangentially involved in these lawsuits because the parties have agreed to litigate the matter among them- selves. The plaintiffs will only pursue their claim against the City to the extent that they cannot recover on their judgments against the defendants. 5. City of Plymouth v. Neutgens. Pursuant to a stipulation of the parties, the count has ordered the property owner to remove the heavy duty construction vehicles by November 30, 1987. 6. Belgarde v. City of Plymouth. This matter involves a claim by a property owner for payment for an easement that the City acquired in 1979. The plaintiff has taken no action to pursue the case since initiating the lawsuit. 7. Benson v. City of Plymouth. This matter involves a claim for reimbursement for park dedication fees and miscellaneous other fees incurred in connection with a lot division application. The plaintiff has not pursued the case since initiating the lawsuit. 1, James G. Willis October 20, 1987 Page 3 CASES CLOSED SINCE LAST REPORT 1. Stroman v. City of Plymouth (47th Avenue Extension). This matter has been settled in accordance with the terms previously approved by the City Council. 2. City of Plymouth v. Harstad. The Commissioner's award of $3,600 (the City's appraised value) has been filed and the time period for the property owner to appeal has expired. NEW MATTERS None. Sincerely, LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ J mes Thomson, Jr. JJT / amm SINCE LAST REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO October 22, 1987 For Council Meeting of October 26, 1987 James G. Willis, City Manager Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works Public Improvement Project Status Report Attached herewith is the following information with regard to the current public improvement projects: Approved Payments - 9/5/87 to 10/21/87 Short, Elliott, Hendrickson Report Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. Report Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc., Inc. Report This morning I met with the project inspectors for Hennepin County and the contractor on the New County Road 9 Improvement Project. Last Monday evening I reported that because of delays caused by weather and bad soil conditions, New County Road 9 was not expected to open to traffic until mid November. Now for the good news, the County and the contractor are both confident that by Monday, November 9 an additional portion of New County Road 9 can be opened to local traffic. New County Road 9 would be open between Larch Lane and Northwest Boulevard and that portion of Northwest Boulevard going South from County Road 9 would be open. The County would continue to leave the signs in place for the official posted detour, but signs would be installed on this portion of roadway which would state Road Closed - Local Traffic Only". Once this is done, I believe it will be a matter of minutes before our local residents know that they can avoid the long detour by using County Road 9 and going to Highway 55 on Northwest Boulevard. This was a conservative schedule by the contractor and with cooperative weather condition, who knows, maybe even more of the roadway will be opened by November 9. Fred G. Moore, P.E. FGM:kh Attachments: Approved Payments List Status Report Information 4t PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS APPROVE PAYMENTS FROM 09-05-87 TO 10-21-87 REPORT NO. 34 PAYMENT DATE DATE OF NO. RECD CONTRACTOR PROJECT APPROVAL AMOUNT 1 9/1/87 Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. 1987 Streets 9/17/87 61,905.70 Projs. 530,539,642) 4 9/10/87 Bury & Carlson, Inc. S.J. Groves Office Park 9/10/87 61,716.20 Proj. 648) 1 10/2/87 Machtemes Const. Tyrell 5th Addn. 10/2/87 90,631.73 Proj. 737) 3 8/20/87 Preferred Paving Gleason Lk. Dr. Trail 10/9/87 28,282.08 Proj. 602) 8 10/2/87 Anderson Bros Const. Fernbrook Lane 10/2/87 102,628.06 5 10/2/87 S.J. Louis Const. Pike Lake Interceptor 10/8/87 8,560.43 Phase II (Proj. 008-000) 4 10/5/87 Shaw -Lundquist Const. Zachary Ln. Water T P 10/8/87 284,263.75 Proj. 431) 3 10/7/87 C.S. McCrossan Const. 1987 Utilities 10/9/87 2,034.90 Berg 2nd Add (Projs. 738 625, 431, 702) MEMORANDUM ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 222 EAST LITTLE CANADA ROAD, ST PAUL, MINNESOTA 55717 612 484-0272 TO: FRED MOORE, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS FROM: DAVE PILLATZKE-`' DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1987 SUBJECT: PROJECT STATUS REPORT PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA SEH FILES: 86089, 87047 AND 87131 Gleason Lake Drive (CR15 Trail), Project 602 The project has been completed. 1988 Street Study An agreement letter for engineering services has been submitted to the city for review and approval. TH 101 and Fernbrook Lane Trails, Project 724 The majority of the work on the Fernbrook Lane Trail has been completed. A cable fence, clean up, plantings, and final inspection remain. Paving of the STH 101 project began today. The retaining wall has also been started. All other assoclatcu grauing an%d Pipe work is complete. It appears that the project should be completed on schedule. DJP:jms a , SHORT ELLIOTT ST PAUL, WISCONSIN SFALLS, HENDRICKSON INC. MINNESOTA WISCO f 1987 STREET IMPROVEMENTS - BUFFAIO BITUMINOUS: Project completed. Final reinspection to be completed week of October 19, 1987. PROJECT 737 - TYRELL 5TH ADDITION - MACHTEMES CONSTR.: All utilities and aggregate base completed. Contractor working on cleanup and punch list" items. PROJECT 011-001/630 BASS LAKE PLAZA/HARRISON HILL UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS Bid date set for November 17, 1987. PROJECT 517 - REVERE LANE/TRENTON PLACE 2ND ADDITION: Bid date set for October 27, 1987. PROJECT 720 - FERNBROOK WOOD - UTILITY & STREET IMPROVEMENTS: Bid date set for November 17, 1987. Yours very truly, WW' ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Harlan M. Olson HMO:li Page 2. 7420e i CONSTRUCTION PRrOGRES REPORT Zachary Lane WTF Plymouth, IIN Project No. 43-1 8ctober 21, 1987 Work: Completed: Progress this month, overall, has been good. Important points have been reached which have allowed up to 6 contract - ars to be working simultaneously. While only in additional 5-10% of the concrete has been placed, bringing the total to around 50%, appror:im.atel y half to /4 of the uti 1 i ty vaor been completed. The large ductile iron raw water, finished water, and overflow pi,i,rg is nearly completc, The process piping and under -floor plumbing has beg_::r;, bu.t ha= been the slowest moving, preventing greeter progr 2s:, ..an we inigh have seen otherwise, The work. on the building continues in tt,,_ lower Pun:p _. petering Room, with the concrete floor slab in place. Tte+' w,al1s are to be brought up niext, bringing tie hors; up to the filter level, The Buried Clearweli h._ -,s been wat_rproored and is now being backfilled and 'buried. This will opt -nn the site up to allow the several contractors to work: mare ea ily. The utility work is expected to be finished in the next few weeks. The process piping in, to, and from the gravity filters will allow the concrete stork to proc._ed q ri cl<l y, Schedule: Shaw -Lundquist still estimates that the work: is three weeks behind schedule. They are still confident that this can be made up by bringing in more personnel and by pushing the critical subcontractors even more, 14eather is already becoming an item to contend with, so sny gains made on the slip in the schedule are much better sooner Than later, Phil Caswell Bonestroo, 'Rosen_,, finder 1 i k &< Assoc. 2000 First Bank Place West Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 Telephone (612) 333-0543 Telecopier (612) 333-0540 Clayton L. LeFevere Herbert P. Lefle• 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 Herbert P. Lefler III James J. Thomson, Jr. Thomas R. Galt Dayle Nolan Brian F. Rice John G. Kressel James M. Strommen Ronald H. Batty William P. Jordan Kurt J. Erickson William R. Skallerud Rodney D. Anderson Corrine A. Heine David D. Beaudoin Paul E. Rasmussen Steven M. Taller Mary F. Skala Christopher J. Harristhal Timothy J. Pawlenty Rolf A. Sponheim LcFCN (11-C Ld lcr hennc(IN 0,111.4.11 .L' ilIrawl a Profcs ional As.ociafiun October 21, 1987 V/Mr. Virgil A. Schneider Mayor Citv of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 Mr. Jerry Sisk Council Member City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 Mr. Robert Zitur Council Member City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 Re: Open Meeting Law Mr. David Crain Council Member City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 Ms. Maria Vasiliou Council Member City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Mayor Schneider and Council Members: You have requested an opinion concerning the Open Meeting Law. It is my understanding that you are primarily interested in knowing how the law applies to meetings between the City Council and its attorney, consultants, or employees. The Open meeting law, in relevant part, states: Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, all meetings, including executive sessions, of . . . the governing body of any . city . . . and of any committee, subcommittee, board, department or commis- sion thereof, shall be open to the public. Minn. Stat. § 471.705, Subd.-1 (1986). Courts have consistently stated that the Open Meeting Law is to be broadly construed in favor of open meetings. Mr. Virgil A. Schneider et al. October 21, 1987 Page 2 Merz v. Leitch, 342 N.W.2d 141, 145 (Sup. Ct. Minn. 1984) . The Open Meeting Law does not define the term "meeting." Appellate court decisions in Minnesota, however, have defined it to include all meetings at which a quorum of the City Council is present even though no official action is taken at the meeting. St. Cloud Newspapers v. District 742 Community Schools, 332 N.W.2d 1, 6 (Sup. Ct. Minn. 1983). Perhaps the best definition of a "meeting" was given by the Supreme Court in Moberg v. Independent School District No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510, 518 (Sup. Ct. Minn. 1983). The Court stated that a meeting is a gathering of the governing body "at which members dis- cuss, decide, or receive information as a group on issues relating to the official business of that governing body." Two basic exceptions exist to the Open Meeting Law, as it applies to municipalities. The first exception is a statutory one contained in the Open Meeting Law itself. That exception pertains to closed meetings to consider strategy for labor negotiations, including negotiation strategies or review of labor negotiation proposals. The second exception to the Open Meeting Law is based on the attorney-client privilege. The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that because the attorney-client privi- lege is based in part on the Minnesota Constitution, an exception to the Open Meeting Law exists in those situa- tions where a governing body meets with its attorney to discuss "threatened or pending litigation." Minneapolis Star & Tribune Company v. Minneapolis Housing and Rede- velopment Authority, 251 N.W.2d 620, 626 (1976). The Court went on to note, however, that the attorney-client exception applies only to those situations where the meeting is necessary to discuss litigation. The excep- tion "would almost never extend to the mere request for general legal advice or opinion by a public body in its capacity as a public agency." Id. In other words, discussions between a governing body and its attorney are not properly the subject of a closed meeting unless they pertain to threatened or pending litigation. The Open Meeting Law extends to meetings with employees. Probably the most extreme example of that principle is the Minnesota Court of Appeals decision in Itasca County Board of Commissioners v. Olson, 372 N.W.2d 804 (Ct. App. Minn. 1985). The issue in that case was whether the Mr. Virgil A. Schneider et al. October 21, 1987 Page 3 County Board could discuss in closed session the job performance of the hospital administrator, who was a supervisory employee of the County. The employee had requested that the meeting be closed to the public, claiming that the evaluation would reveal information that was classified as private pursuant to the Minnesota Data Practices Act. The Court ruled that the Data Practices Act was not intended to be an exception to the Open Meeting Law and that the performance evaluation had to be done at an open meeting. I have not found any Minnesota Appellate Court decision addressing the issue of meeting with a consultant. The Attorney General has issued an opinion that concludes that such meetings are required to be open meetings. The facts of that case were that the City Council wanted to meet in informal group sessions with its consultants who were in the process of developing a comprehensive plan for the city. Ops. Atty. Gen., 471-e, Oct. 28, 1974. In light of the Itasca County decision cited above, I believe that the Attorney General's conclusion is cor- rect. In summary, all meetings of the City Council, including those with its attorneys, consultants, or employees, must be open to the public unless one of the exceptions to the Open Meeting Law applies. This conclusion, of course, does not mean that members of the public need be present at the meeting. The only requirement is that the place and time of the meeting be properly noticed to the public and that the public be afforded the opportunity to attend. I will be happy to answer any further questions that you might have concerning the Open Meeting Law and its applicability to any particular situation. Sincerely yours, LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ mes Thomso JJT / amm cc: James G. Willis CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: October 22, 1987 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: dames G. Willis, City Manager SUBJECT EVALUATION OF DEPARTMENTAL COST EFFECTIVENESS As part of my performance goals and objectives for 1987, I am to provide the City Council with an evaluation of at least two activities In each department to assess the cost effectiveness thereof, and alternatives to our existing method of delivery. In completing the evaluations, comparisons have been made between hiring full-time persons vs. part-time employees; comparing privatization of certain services against conducting work in-house; and finally, consideration of elimination of certain services altogether. The areas which have been evaluated are as follows by department: I. Administration A. Use of part-time video producers in lieu of a full-time position. B. Implementation of a File Management project using a college intern. II. Finance A. Contractual property appraisal in lieu of on -staff appraisers. B. Contractual vs. staff computer programming. III. Community Development A. Staff vs. contractual building inspection services. B. In-house plan check vs. contractual plan check services. IV. Public Works A. Street sweeping by contract vs. in-house sweeping. B. Ownership of telephones and switch vs. rental. Mayor and City Council October 22, 1987 Page 2 V. Park and Recreation A. Elimination of diseased tree program services. B. Closure of West Medicine Lake Beach VI. Public Safety A. Assessment of alarm permit fees B. Discontinuance of lock -out services The evaluation set forth on the attached pages are in response to the Council's previous direction and a part of our continuing effort to assure that City services are delivered in a fashion which is cost effective to our community. The Council should provide direction on which program changes described above should be further explored during calendar year 1988. FB:kec I. ADMINISTRATION A. USE OF PART-TIME VIDEO PRODUCERS IN LIEU OF A FULL-TIME POSITION Personnel resources for service delivery can be provided through on -staff full or part-time employees or by contract with outside vendors. In the case of video tape productions, we have elected to use part-time on -staff video producers to accomplish City purposes. This decision was made after analyzing the appropriateness of requesting a full-time position for this purpose. We found that the hiring of one full-time video producer position would be substantially more costly than utilizing three temporary part-time video producers, and would not eliminate the need to hire additional part-time video producers to complete video tapes, and other projects requiring evening or weekend work. Were the City to hire a full-time video producer, the hourly rate would be about $9.00 per hour, or $18,720 a year. Fringe benefits would add about 30% to this amount, yielding a total annual salary and benefit package of $24,336. Considering annual vacation and disability, a full-time position will yield approximately 1,976 productive annual work hours. Our three part-time video producers can each work an average of 20 hours per. week, 52 weeks a year, for a total of 3,120 productive hours at a total cost of about $20,000. The advantage of part-time video producers is their ability to work evening and weekend hours to complete productions and cablecasting. Weekly Council meetings and special events are examples of this need. The disadvantage of part-time video producers is the fact that they normally work other jobs which sometimes will create conflicts in scheduling. For the immediate future, I plan to continue with part-time video producers because of the flexibility and cost effectiveness of this arrangement. B. IMPLEMENTATION OF FILE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM According to the Association of Records Managers and Administrators, most organizations could immediately dispose of one-third of their paperwork, transfer another one-third to inactive storage, and continue uninterrupted and more efficient operations with the remaining third. Moreover, 95% of all documents five years or older, are never looked at. It is estimated that every inch of paper in filing cabinets today costs Page 2 an average $300 to create, and Because paperwork accounts for offices waste approximately 65¢ records. almost $14.00 a year to store. nearly 90% of office work, most of every dollar spent handling Government is seen as the permanent repository of public records. Consequently, we tend to retain a much higher volume of records than private industry. The figures above are probably understated for local government. Recognizing this, we have initiated an Administrative Department filing system project. The purpose of the project is to develop a new, more efficient, streamlined filing system for the City Manager's office, including personnel records, administrative department materials, and city clerk records. The University of North Dakota specializes in record management curriculum for students. After checking other communities who have used University of North Dakota interns, we contacted the college to determine if an intern would be interested in completing a file conversion program for Plymouth. Following that, we developed a filing system project outline, complete with objectives and costs. The total cost of the Administrative Department filing conversion was almost $7,000, $4,000 in labor for the intern, and $3,000 in equipment and supplies. As a result of the project, the following occurred: 1. Files now contain expansion space, are not overstuffed and are consistent with one another, allowing for easy reference. 2. Folders themselves are neat, organized and do not contain duplicated material. 3. The classification system is consistent and readily identifies a primary and secondary reference, as well as the date for permanent file storage. 4. Three lateral files are now doing the work which previously required five vertical files. 5. As a result of the purge, 40 feet of files were recycled or archived. All in all, the total reduction in administrative files was 36% for active files, and 37% in inactive files. Page 3 6. We have developed a records manual for the Administrative Department and identified one position which is solely responsible for file maintenance, updating and purging. We expect that in combination, these results will substantially improve records access and administration. As step two in the process, this project has moved to the Community Development Department's Planning and Building Inspection Divisions to update their filing system. The benefit is expected to be greater in this department since the Planning Division files are utilized by all City departments. Since these projects are short lived in nature, we have elected to use the temporary services of an intern rather than investigate contractual relationships with consulting firms or the hiring of a full-time position. II. FINANCE A. CONTRACTUAL PROPERTY APPRAISAL IN LIEU OF ON -STAFF APPRAISERS In September 1986 the Hennepin County Finance Department provided a property appraisal administration cost proposal to the City of St. Louis Park which would indicate the approximate cost for Hennepin County to assess St. Louis Park. The County has established a fee structure for this service. Fees are based on property type and valuation as follows for existing parcels only: Parcel Valuation Parcel Type Fee Vacant land $ 10.45 Residential (Existing) 0- - $100,000 28.20 100,000 - $200,000 41.80 200,000 - $300,000 78.35 300,000 - $400,000 104.50 Comm'l, Indust. Apts 106.60 Based on this Hennepin County fee schedule, the following is an indication of what the cost would be for the County to assess Plymouth: Page 4 Parcel Type Vacant Land Residential (Existing) 0- to $500,000 Comm'l, Indust, Apts Total The above cost schedule for Plymouth combines all residential parcels together for an estimated parcel valuation fee of $41.80. In both tables it is demonstrated that vacant land, commercial, industrial and apartment properties are revalued every year. The table includes only existing parcel types in Plymouth. The above projected cost schedule does not include any building permit activity or new construction. Nor does the cost data include other services which the assessors provide to the public. Chief among these are dealing with new residents filing for Homestead exemptions, (approximately 1,600 a year), and responding to calls for public information regarding properties (approximately 9,600 calls a year). Other services not provided by the County under its proposal include maintaining our assessing record data base, and handling many assessment administration functions. The 1987 budget for this activity is $210,800. In 1988 the budget is $235,400, reflecting a new appraiser. On balance, recognizing the need to provide prompt information and assistance to residents and others involved in property purchases/sales, no savings or service improvements could result in contracting with Hennepin County for their appraisal services. B. STAFF COMPUTER PROGRAMMER VERSUS CONTRACTUAL PROGRAMMER The current practices of contracting for professional computer programming services remains cost effective for the City for various reasons. Parcels Parcel City Valued Valuation Annual Parcels Annually Fee Cost 2,433 2,433 10.45 25,425 12,866 3,216 41.80 134,429 542 452 106.60 48,183 15,7 6,16T 208,037 The above cost schedule for Plymouth combines all residential parcels together for an estimated parcel valuation fee of $41.80. In both tables it is demonstrated that vacant land, commercial, industrial and apartment properties are revalued every year. The table includes only existing parcel types in Plymouth. The above projected cost schedule does not include any building permit activity or new construction. Nor does the cost data include other services which the assessors provide to the public. Chief among these are dealing with new residents filing for Homestead exemptions, (approximately 1,600 a year), and responding to calls for public information regarding properties (approximately 9,600 calls a year). Other services not provided by the County under its proposal include maintaining our assessing record data base, and handling many assessment administration functions. The 1987 budget for this activity is $210,800. In 1988 the budget is $235,400, reflecting a new appraiser. On balance, recognizing the need to provide prompt information and assistance to residents and others involved in property purchases/sales, no savings or service improvements could result in contracting with Hennepin County for their appraisal services. B. STAFF COMPUTER PROGRAMMER VERSUS CONTRACTUAL PROGRAMMER The current practices of contracting for professional computer programming services remains cost effective for the City for various reasons. Page 5 Changes to existing programs are not conducive to in-house staff because the changes are not regular in occurrence or in duration. New system development requires individuals with differing areas of expertise. In the past we have used a variety of different software firms because of their specific areas of expertise. It would be highly improbable that we could employ one person capable of developing and programming each application within the time frame that contractual programmers have provided. The total hours of programming services purchased in 1986 was larger than prior years due to the development and implementation of the permit issuance and tracking system, recreation registration, and the Telxon data collection devices for property appraisal. During 1986, the City paid outside programmers $34,325 for program development and modification. The cost for a staff programmer with appropriate skills would exceed $40,000 annually. Based upon this information, it is evident that the contractual programming has been most cost effective under the present system, and will be more so using LINC II. III. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT A. BUILDING INSPECTION AND BUILDING SYSTEMS INSPECTIONS We now provide inspection services for building construction, remodeling, plumbing work, mechanical work, and sewer and water installation, in addition to a number of other less frequent inspections which are generated by permits required by the State Building Code and/or City Code. Years ago the Council decided to return the responsibility for electrical work inspection and permits over to the State Board of Electricity. The first six months of 1987 saw a field inspection force of three inspectors, one of whom was primarily assigned plumbing inspection and sewer and water inspection work. These three inspectors conducted 8,374 inspections or, 2,790 inspections each. That works out to 465 inspections per month; the annualized base would be 5,580 inspections each. The total number of inspections for the year could be viewed as approximately 16,748 (realistic adjustments could be made for the extremely mild winter last year and for the likelihood that the coming fall and winter will not be as active). For purposes of this analysis, however, the number of inspections is sound for cost comparison. Page 6 We investigated available private vendor inspection services earlier this year and found that the most available service that could respond to Plymouth's needs, at least for one inspector, charges a flat rate of $20 per inspection. If $20 were the rate for all inspections conducted by the Building Division in the coming construction season, the total charge would be $334,960. The entire budget for the Inspection Division for 1987 was authorized at $254,900. The budget includes all support services and some other services such as plan check. In 1988 the budget is 301,600. The cost of inspections alone through a private vendor would exceed the total cost to the City for all of the protective inspection services now provided by the Building Inspection Division. B. BUILDING INSPECTION DIVISION PLAN CHECKING This is another service provided by the City for which the City gets revenue in the form of plan checking fees. Under the State Building Code we are responsible for the correctness of all work that is permitted by the City. Thus, if all plan checking work were contracted to a private vendor, the Building Official would still be solely responsible for the accuracy of the plan review and enforcement of the Code as the approved construction took place. The 1987 budget allocates $18,000 for these services; however, because of high level of development, we forecast that nearly 24,000 will be expended by the end of the year. This is still less costly than a full-time plan checker who typically makes a salary comparable to a building inspector (i.e., $36,000 per annum including benefits). Private vendors will provide plan checking services. We have used these services to review complex commercial and industrial plans where the Building Official identified that the nature of the work is beyond the capacity of our staff. Typically this means there are engineering aspects to a structure or system which needs a particular expertise. We currently spend nearly $5,000 annually for these types of services. Page 7 My recommendation with respect to plan checking, is that provision be made for acquiring technical expertise when necessary for complex plans and that an additional amount be budgeted for temporary help. The temporary status allows us the ability to decrease the number of hours based on the work to match in number of hours with workload to get the best cost effectiveness for our personal dollar. I believe we have achieved a reasonable "balance" by usinq qualified temporary plan checkers, supplemented by professional individuals when more complex plans are involved. The "turn around" time required to review plans is always a concern as we try to review plans within one week. This is another reason for maintaining immediate supervisory control of the plan check rather than contracting out to a third party. IV. PUBLIC WORKS A. STREET SWEEPING BY CONTRACT VERSUS IN-HOUSE SWEEPING Each year the number of City streets increase by several miles. We are responsible for sweeping streets at least once each spring, and more often in problem areas. Periodically, we have debated the costs and benefits of street sweeping through contract vs. in-house. We have concluded that our "highbreed" system which involves street sweeping by contract, using City crews to assist in refuse disposal, remains the most cost effective approach. Under our current system, 178 miles of City streets are swept once each year utilizing two City trucks and between two to four contract sweepers. City trucks and personnel are used to dispose of the sweepings. The entire project requires about seven weeks and the commitment of two city employees on a 40 -hour per week basis for completion. Our City costs, personnel and equipment, are estimated at $22,200 this year. The cost for contract sweeping for 1987 will reach $55,000. In 1988 the contract amount is projected to cost $57,200. Total annual program costs are 77,000 to $79,000. To develop "in-house" street sweeping capabilities would require the addition of two employees. Given the skill required to operate this equipment, it would not be likely that temporary employees could be hired to operate the equipment. Salaries and benefits for these employees would be approximately $65,000 Page 8 annually. Street sweeping equipment is very specialized and subject to high maintenance. A street sweeper costs about 70,000. We would have tb purchase two units. Our current program, calculated over a five year period (assuming constant dollars and number of street miles) amounts to $395,000 dollars. An in-house program over the same time span would cost $465,000 dollars. The five year period is used for analysis as after that time, it would be necessary to replace the street sweeping units. The estimated savings over the five year period is $70,000 or 14,000 per year. B. OWNERSHIP OF TELEPHONE SWITCHING EQUIPMENT VERSUS RENTAL In 1978, after substantial analysis, we elected to purchase our own telephone system, rather than continue telephone system rental through the Bell Telephone network. With the assistance of a consultant, the City prepared specifications and awarded bid for the purchase of a Sieman's SD -192 telephone switch and ancillary equipment at the total price of $45,000 including the consultant fees. Northwestern Bell bid a rental system, known as Dimension. The rental rate for the equipment including maintenance is about 2,000 to $2,500 per month. For analytical purposes I have assumed $2,000 per month for the first five years and $2,500 per month for the last five. The primary benefit of the Bell bid was the security associated with the name and the equipment. Since 1978, we have upgraded our telephone system on two separate occasions, the first requiring $29,500, and the second $9,000. Our average telephone maintenance expenses annually have been 4,600. Adding these figures together, for 1978 until the present, we find our expenditures have been $132,500, including the original telephone equipment, upgrading and maintenance over the last ten years or $13,250 per year. Telephone trunk line rental would be the same under either aquisition alternative. If we had elected to "play it safe" and rent all equipment, we would have paid a total amount of $270,000 or $27,000 each year. There is no question that there are some disadvantages with system ownership. But all in all, the sytem has served our requirements and resulted in a $137,000 in savings to Plymouth taxpayers over the years. We will continue to monitor the cost effectiveness of our current arrangement, recognizing that this field is continuing to change rapidly both in terms of basic technology and services, as well as pricing. Page 9 V. PARK AND RECREATION A. ELIMINATION OF DISEASED TREE PROGRAM SERVICES The City may wish to consider dropping all segments of the diseased tree program. A considerable cost savings could be made if we got out of the business of identifying diseased trees and providing for the hauling through contract services of trees set out on the curb. This would reduce our need for temporary tree inspectors during the summer months. The City forester would continue in his role of providing information on urban trees to the citizens of Plymouth. We would also continue our reforestation program throughout the park system, boulevards, trailways, etc. We could expect to see approximately a $40,000 reduction in the forestry budget if this was implemented. As to service level impact, I believe many residents, who continue to have elm trees, may feel the City had let them down when it came time for the removal of these dead trees. But as times change we must also continue to reevaluate our capacity to provide some of the less essential services to our citizens. B. CLOSURE OF WEST MEDICINE LAKE BEACH The Council may wish to consider the closing of West Medicine Lake Beach. While annual attendance at Parkers Lake and East Beach are each about 11,000 persons, West Medicine Lake Beach about 6,000. These individuals could be accommodated at the other beaches if West Beach were closed. The seasonal cost savings in closing the beach for lifeguards would only be about $1,500. There would also be some maintenance cost savings with closing this facility. There are some strong emotional ties from this older part of Plymouth to the West Medicine Lake beach area. I expect the Council would receive a negative reaction if this beach were closed for swimming. I also suspect that people would continue to go to this area to swim with or without a formal beach operation. If and when West Medicine Lake park is redesigned and updated, the beach program here would be dramatically altered in terms of its physical characteristics, in an effort to make it safer. Page 10 VI. PUBLIC SAFETY A. INDICATE THE ASSESSMENT OF ALARM PERMIT FEES Last year the Police Department responded to 1,162 false intrusion alarms. In most cases, two police cars responded. Each call takes about 20 minutes, or a total of 40 minutes for two officers. This equates to approximately $17 for each false alarm call, or almost $20,000 for the year. In 1986 the Fire Department responded to 378 false alarms. Alarm calls are responded to by one station. In approximately 1/3 of these alarms, no fire truck was sent from the fire station. In practice, an officer responds directly from his home with a handy -talkie and cancels the fire truck for false alarms. Nonetheless, each false alarm involves approximately nine firefighters at the station awaiting orders. For false alarms, each firefighter receives a minimum one hour of pay. The cost for each false alarm is for 10 firefighters at $7 per firefighter, or 70 is personnel costs. As a rule of thumb, the cost of a pumper, excluding personnel, is 100 per hour. This cost must be considered in two thirds of the false fire alarms. When pumpers respond to a false fire alarm, the total time involved is one hour. Thus, the costs involved in responding to false fire alarms is: Without a pumper: 125 calls X $ 70 = $ 8,750 With a pumper: 253 calls X $170 = $43,010 51, 6 Therefore, the total costs involved is $51,760. In both cases, I believe we should adopt agressive permitting programs which both recover the majority of the city costs and motivate property owners to reduce false alarms. B. DISCONTINUE LOCK -OUT SERVICES Last year the Police Department, primarily the Community Service Officers, responded to 1,584 motorists lockouts. The average time involved from the original call to clearing the scene is approximately 20 minutes. Based on that estimate and the average Page 11 25 per hour on service calls, there would be $13,068 expended in this category. Costs associated with this service could be recovered by a service charge for each lockout. In the alternative, both the time and money invested in this service could be saved by discontinuing the service and allowing private vendors to fulfill this need. The latter approach is, in my view, preferable. e CITY OF PLYMOUTH 7 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: October 21, 1987 TO: James G. Willis, City Manager n FROM: Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manage SUBJECT PROPOSED REVISION TO COUNCIL POLICY RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF ON SALE LIQUOR LICENSES SUMMARY: At their October 19 meeting, the City Council endorsed the proposed criteria which would allow free standing restaurant establishments, as well as those located in office buildings and shopping centers, to apply for an on sale liquor license. The Council directed that the on sale liquor license policy be revised to reflect the new criteria and submitted to the Council for final approval. Attached is a copy of the revised policy provision which are recommended for approval through adoption of the attached resolution. FB:kec Attachment CITY OF PLYMOUTH Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the —` day of , 19 The following members were present: — The following members were absent: introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION 87 - ADOPTING A REVISED POLICY RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF ON -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSES WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of considering on -sale liquor license applications from restaurant facilities operating in shopping centers and office buildings, as well as free standing structures; and WHEREAS, the Council's current policy relating to the issuance of on -sale intoxicating liquor licenses only allows for on -sale licensing of free standing facilities only; and WHEREAS, the City Council has agreed to criteria applicable to licenses in free standing, office building, and shopping center facilities; and WHEREAS, the policy relating to issuance of on -sale intoxicating liquor licenses as amended October 26, 1987 incorporates those criteria. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should, and hereby does, adopt a revised policy relating to the issuance of on -sale intoxicating liquor licenses dated October 26, 1987. The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by and upon- vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against or abstained: Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. POLICY RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF ON -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSES Resolution No. 87 - October 26, 1987 (Supersedes Res. No. 66-105, July 11, 1966; Res. No. 73-306, August 6, 1973; Res. No. 79-775, November 19, 1979; Res. No. 80-935, December 15, 1980; Res. No. 81-802, November 23, 1981; Res. No. 82-201, April 19, 1982; Res. No. 85-180, March 4, 1985). I. Data requirements for consideration of license requests: a. Prior to staff acceptance of each application for a new "on -sale" intoxicating liquor license, the applicant shall submit: 1) Complete application and other supporting materials required by the City Clerk. 2) Survey plat plan of the proposed site of the establishment showing location, size, shape, construction, site landscaping and off-street parking drawn to scale and prepared by a registered surveyor or engineer. The survey plat plan must also show all parcels within 750 feet of the property line of the proposed establishment indicatinq the zoning and guiding of each and whether the property is developed. 3) Sketches of the proposed structure showing front, rear and side elevations, which sketches shall indicate the material to be used in the exterior facings of the structure. The suggested floor plan of the proposed establishment shall also be submitted together with the information regarding the anticipated volume of liquor to food, type of entertainment provided (if any), and any other relevant information requested. 4) Signed release forms and supporting data required by the Plymouth Police Department to complete the background investigation. Each applicant and application for on sale liquor license will be thoroughly investigated by the Plymouth Police Department in accordance with the then prevailing department procedures governing such investigations. A summary report and recommendations of the Police Department investigation findings shall be forwarded to the City Council through the City Clerk's office for consideration at the time of public hearing. 5) The appropriate license fee as provided in Section 1010.01, Subd. 5 of the Plymouth City Code. 6) Investigation fee to cover the costs associated with a comprehensive investigation of the applicant as follows: a) $500 if investigation is limited to within the State of Minnesota; or b) $2500 minimum for investigation required outside the State. c) The $500 or $2500 investigation fee shall be non-refundable and due whether the license is ultimately approved or denied. Actual costs incurred by the City for out of state investigations only, in excess of $2500, but less than $10,000, shall be invoiced to and paid by the applicant prior to the public hearing for consideration of the license. - 1- Il. Criteria for various types of on sale licenses. The City Council will consider on sale liquor requests from restaurant facilities properly located in accordance with the zoning ordinance which are free standing, located in an office building or located within a shopping center. For the purposes of this policy free standing means a single building located on a single parcel. The criteria for new and renewal licenses for each type of facility are as set forth below by an "X" for the type of structure proposed: Free Office Shopping Criteria for new license issuance: Standing Building Center 1. Building (exclusive of land) must have a minimum valuation of $1,098,000.* X 2. Property line for building shall not be within 750 feet of the property line of a church or school. X X X 3. If the property line of proposed facility is within 750 feet of property line of resident- ially zoned or guided property, the Council may require special conditions including, but not limited to: landscaping, berming, light- ing, hours of operation, security guard, traffic control or other special mitigating efforts at the Council's sole option. X X X 4. Licensee may only be a restaurant. X X X 5. Liquor bar(s) prohibited in facility. X X 6. Live music or dancing prohibited. X 7. Facility must have a minimum 150 seats for dining. X X Additional criteria for renewal license requests: 1. Provide a certified Public Accountant's state- ment showing total sales, food sales, liquor sales and percentage of total sales for each for previous year. The Council shall not normally renew the license unless at least forty 40) percent of the establishment's annual gross sales is in the serving of prepared food. X X X 2. The City Council shall annually review the oper- ation of all establishments possessing on -sale liquor licenses prior to the expiration date. The Council will not normally issue a license for a business which is not established, or is closed for business as of January 31 of any - given year. In such cases, the Council shall make a determination as to whether or not the license should be renewed based upon a report presented by the Manager together with supporting material obtained through the Police Department investigation. X X X 1a- Free Office Shoppinq Criteria also required for renewal: Standing Building Center 3. Applicants requesting license renewal shall be responsible for submitting all items required for new application in the format designated by the City Clerk and Police Department with the exception of items No. I.a. (2), I.a. (3) and I.a. (6). X X X 111. City Council criteria for licensing approval (new or renewal) all facilities 1) It shall be the policy of the City of Plymouth to consider the followinq criteria in addition to applicant conformity with state statute, city ordinance and this policy in determining whether a new or renewal license shall be granted: a) The investigative and staff report submitted by the Police Department and City Clerk. b) Input received through the public hearing process. c) A showing by the applicant that: 1) Adequate vehicular transportation facilities, in accordance with city comprehensive plans, are available to serve the site. 2) Adequate buffering and distance is in place or to be provided by the licensee to assure adequate buffering to adjacent residential neighborhoods. 3) The petitioners has or will take affirmative action to minimize public safety type problems commonly associated with on -sale liquor establishments (including, but not limited to D.W.I. drivers, disturbing the peace, etc.). Such affirmative action may include, but not be limited to, the following programs and/or indicators: a. Purchase of Dram Shop insurance. b. Posting of local alcohol treatment resources for bartender/waitress use. It shall be the policy of the City Council to issue or deny on -sale liquor licenses as soon as practical following the public hearing for such a license. The Council shall not issue on -sale liquor licenses to be effective at a future date; rather it shall require the licensee to take immediate possession of the license. Method of calculating building value: Annually, this figure shall be automatically revised based upon the Boeckh Building Cost Index for brick and steel commercial buildings (fan/Feb 1985 Index, 1519.5). The revised figures shall be based upon the ratio of the current index to previous year's index as described below. The Boeckh building index for brick and steel commercial buildings is secured for the same time period for the current year. The percentage increase between the old and the new index plus 100% is multiplied times the old dollar value for structure, etc., to yield the new dollar value. lb- CITY CF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 DATE: October 21, 1987 MEMO TO: James G. Willis, City Manager rl FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: REVIEW OF PARK USAGE AND MAINTENANCE As part of the 1987 Performance Standards and Measures for the City Manager, I have been asked to prepare a review of the appropriate park usage and current park maintenance levels for our park system. In the following pages, I have attempted to review for you and the Council the following items: Our current park system plan, which identifies our park standards and park usage philosophy. A summary review of the Task Force Report on Park and Recreation Financing for Facilities and Program. The growth in the park system in terms of acres, programs, and other information since 1980. Park maintenance costs for neighborhood parks, community playfields, city parks, and costs per facility such as: ice skating, soccer, softball, etc. After you have had a chance to review this document, I would be happy to meet with you and further review and analyze the information that I have provided here. In 1980, the City Council charged the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission with the task of preparing a comprehensive park system plan for the City of Plymouth. After a year and a half in the development process, this plan was adopted by the City Council in February of 1982. Contained within this plan is the philosophy, rationale and procedures by which the City of Plymouth has chosen to acquire, develop and maintain a variety of park facilities. Inherent in developing this document was the process of developing a variety of standards that the City should strive to obtain. As an example, standards for neighborhood parks were: one park per neighborhood 2.5 to 3.5 developed acres per 1,000 population five to 21 acres in size. For community playfields, the standards developed were: one playfield per community 2.5 developed acres per 1,000 population 20 to 65 acres in size. For city parks, the standards developed were: four to five parks disbursed throughout the City, with a 20 acre minimum or large enough to encompass and protect a natural resource. The Park System was also reviewed for what we refer to as its "functional standards." The integrity and flexibility of the entire park system can be monitored through the use of the following functional classifications. There is no one "correct" mix of functional components, but it is nevertheless imperative that each component be represented within the system in order that the system can be balanced and that it demonstrates its long-term viability. The five functional classifications are: Conservation - the preservation of significant natural amenities such as lakes, creeks, wetlands, prairies, woodlands, unique and significant landforms, vegetative communities and views, flood plains, etc. Conservation, in this sense, means protection from destruction by all forms of urban encroachment. Ornamentation - the decorative, aesthetic aspect of the park system. Ornamentation is usually provided through the development and maintenance of natural amenities, either formally or informally. Culture - refers primarily to the non -recreational programming of the parks and, as such, usually represents a small percentage of land area, though frequently a large part of programming. Culture encompasses historical places, public amphitheaters, museums, educational programs and so on. Recreation - includes participatory activities, active and passive, intensive and extensive, for all age groups in the community. Reserve - perhaps the most important, yet most frequently overlooked function of a park system is its reserve --its ability to expand and be flexible in the face of future growth and development, as well as changing recreation demands and opportunities. At this time, the two areas that we would appear to be the weakest in are ornamentation and cultural facilities. The fountains and featured gardens at Parkers Lake are our first attempt to promote these areas within our park system. The next phase of the development plan was to review the Plymouth communities. A study was done of the population, household size, employment growth, and other trends by walking neighborhoods and driving neighborhoods. Population by neighborhoods was the driving factor creating the demand for acres of neighborhood park and community playfields. Facility standards were also analyzed. In this process, we are able to compare ourselves now and in the future to national norms with regard to the number of tennis courts per 1,000 people, the number of softball fields per 1,000 people, the number of baseball/softball fields per 1,000 people, etc. The next part of our development process was a park needs analysis. The park needs analysis for neighborhood parks is also included in the appendix of this report. Within the park needs analysis, we looked at the ultimate population of each neighborhood, the existing park acres within that neighborhood, compared that to our standard of 2.5-3.5 acres per 1,000 people and were able to determine which neighborhoods at that time had a deficiency in park acreage. This allowed us to set up a plan by which parks would be acquired in future years. This has continued to be the guiding force in our annual development of the capital improvement program. The next step in the process was perhaps the most important. This was the future park identification phase. In this phase, the consultant was charged with the responsibility of locating within the community a variety of options that would meet the standards for the various park types that had been set out earlier in the report. Each site was compared against other sites in its ability to provide the components that would allow each park to function properly in providing the desired experiences to the park visitor. Some of the items that were numerically scored in ranking these facilities were: location within the walking or driving neighborhood relationship to the thoroughfare guide plan vegetation surface water conditions existing ownership and use adjacent proposed land use proximity of sewer and water wetlands and soil conditions. Each of these factors has a different importance to each different type of park For example, a central location is much more important to a neighborhood park that people walk to than it is to a playfield to which most people may drive. It was this type of analysis that allowed the Park Commission and planners to take the prototype standard of a neighborhood park and compare it to specific sites in the field throughout the community. The end result is what we know today as the comprehensive park system plan; a detailed mapping of all future park sites to be acquired by the City of Plymouth. The final part of the park system plan was the setting of priorities based on the current demand as determined by populations within neighborhoods. Included in the appendix are the priorities developed in the 1982 plan and an analysis of the park acquisition that has taken place between 1982 and 1986 to meet the priorities that had been established. Next I will touch very briefly on the results of the Task Force on Park and Recreation Program Financing. In January of 1982, the Mayor and City Council charged a task force to study and report on the guiding philosophies that would be used in preparing future financial programs as they relate to the park and recreation component of the City budget. Jim Rice, Chairman of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission at that time, was chosen to chair this task force. On May 2, 1983, the City Council passed a resolution endorsing the findings and concepts as developed by the Task Force. This resolution is also included in the appendix of this report. The findings of the task force are contained for the most part within the five major funding philosophy statements that they prepared as part of the report. These funding statements as taken from the report are: A. Research and Planning The majority of all research and planning should be underwritten by tax -supported resources. This deals with the long-range planning for the total park and recreation system. B. Construction of Facilities . The City shall use endowments, grants, gifts, etc., whenever possible to underwrite facility construction. When these sources of funds are not available, the taxpayer should underwrite the capital costs of such facilities. New construction should include a forecast of operating costs; no construction should start until the City has agreed to pay the operating costs. C. Maintenance of Facilities The City's financial resources shall be used to maintain the basic level of maintenance necessary to maintain in a reasonable manner, all parks and recreational facilities within the system. We believe that the everyday, ongoing maintenance, e.g., mowing the grass, is inherent with the City -ownership of any and all parks and should not be cost -associated with special user groups. User groups shall pay the majority of costs necessary to cover extra- ordinary maintenance associated with their group's use of special facilities. D. Development of Programs Because recreation is important to all segments of our population including the young, old, gifted and handicapped; the taxpayer should underwrite the cost of the research and development of programs to meet the needs of all segments of the community. E. Operation of Programs Program participants should pay the direct costs and some administrative costs associated with participating in any given activity. Special consideration will be given to underwriting some costs for the mentally and physically handicapped and elderly populations. In preparing our annual City budgets and the capital improvement budget, we have tried to prepare our financial programs based on these five funding philosophy statements. One example of this is the fee policy we have that requires the Wayzata Youth Soccer Association to pay approximately a $1,000 user fee for the rental of our soccer facilities during their annual invitational soccer tournament. The Association on the other hand does not pay a rental fee for our facilities for their in-house soccer program which is geared toward the basic Plymouth youth recreational participant. Another example is the fees charged for adult softball participation which includes costs associated with field maintenance and energy costs for night play. These type of management practices directly resulted from the philosophies put forth in the Task Force report. The next area that needs to be reviewed in this report is the subject of growth. Growth within the City of Plymouth has been driving us in two ways. First, new people have created a demand for additional neighborhood parks throughout the community. In the last seven years, the City has newly developed neighborhood parks at Timber Shores, Mission, Schmidt Lake, Rolling Hills, Amhurst, County Road 61, and Maple Creek. Our total park acreage has increased from approximately 275 acres to approximately 600 acres between 1980 and 1987. Our city population has increased 130% from 1980 to 1986. A dramatic increase has occurred in the number of participants in programs during the same time frame. Increases in our program participation far exceeded the rate of population growth during the last six years. Listed below is a summary of some of this participation growth. Number of programs Participation in fee supported general recreation programs Adult team sports Individual sports Use of playfields (1981) Population 1980 1986 121 779 4,132 17,443 461% increase 422% increase 137 482 352% increase 1,322 1,664 126% increase 1,021 3,197 313% increase 31,615 41,207 130% increase These figures do not include Wayzata Recreation programs provided on a contractual basis in 1986 & 1987.) Of the figures above, the most important statistic to this review is the 300% increase in the use of the community playfields. The jump from 1,000 games per year to over 3,000 games per year is a direct result of the increasing program demands not only by adult athletics, but more likely from the various youth athletic associations that continue to grow and expand programs within our City. As people become more wellness conscious, we will see more people staying active later in their lives. The young soccer player of today will want to participate in adult leagues as they get older. Later in this report you will see the hours associated with maintaining individual sport facilities. Had we not developed an appropriate community playfield system, the neighborhood park system would have seen a dramatic increase in inappropriate uses and a much higher maintenance cost associated with that usage. Problems with parking, noise, trash, etc., would be very common. Rick Busch of our staff is assigned the responsibility of working with the youth athletic associations and our adult sports program. It is his job to attempt to balance the needs of the users versus the ability of the playfields to withstand extremely heavy user occasions. We have in the past said "no," and we will say "no" in the future when it is necessary. The continued growth of all of our sports user groups will be one of the most important determining factors on the timing of the development of the Bass Lake and Parkers Lake community playfields. Park Maintenance Costs Without a doubt, the most startling figure within the Park and Recreation budget has been the dramatic increase in the park maintenance budget, which was $256,810 in 1981 and is projected to be $796,200 in 1988. Our highly maintained acres have increased from about 100 acres to about 350 acres between 1981 and 1987.During this time we also have added four additional year-round shelters, for a total of 5. The park maintenance division will have grown from five full-time employees in 1981 to 10 full-time employees in 1988. Our part-time or seasonal work for us has also increased from approximately 7,000 hours to 14,500 hours annually during this same time period. Since 1984, the park maintenance division has had available a computer on which all of our maintenance time cards could be entered. Based on an analysis of the last three years, we have estimated that average maintenance hours per acre for neighborhood parks is approximately 41 hours per acre per year. The average time for our beach facilities is between 80 and 90 hours per acre per year. The average time for community playfields appears to be between 80 and 83 hours per acre per year. The major items of the maintenance program for the neighborhood park system lies in four areas. (This example is Green Oaks Park excluding new construction.) Est. % A. Mowing and trimming 45% B. Play structure repair 6% C. Rink flooding and cleaning 14% D. Garbage pick-up 10% 75% Other components of our neighborhood park maintenance work make up the remaining 25% of the annual cost. Examples of this are: fertilizing, broadleaf weed control, signage, tree planting, trail maintenance and repair, etc. We have designed our new neighborhood parks in an effort to keep park maintenance costs down. The three new parks developed in 1987 total 45.8 acres in size. Of this amount, 9.13 acres or 20% will be high maintenance or mowed area. The remaining 36.67 acres or 80% will be very low maintenance, natural area. Attached in the appendix is a detailed end of year summary for 1986 showing costs for the various parks within the City. Listed below is a summary report of a review of the park maintenance hours for neighborhood parks, beaches and playfields for the year 1986 along with a summary report for the years 1984 and 1985. 1986 Beaches 10.8 Acres Review of Park Maintenance Hours 913 Hours 3.0 1986 Neighborhood Parks West Beach 7.0 Acres Schmidt Lake 239 Hours 5.0 Acres Queensland 190 Hours 6.8 Acres Green Oaks 308 Hours 3.0 Acres Lions 401 Hours 8.0 Acres Mission Hills 227 Hours 2.2 Acres Circle 200 Hours 13.0 Acres Shiloh 303 Hours 45.0 Acres 1,868 Hours : 45 = 41.5 Hr/Ac 1986 Beaches 10.8 Acres East Beach 913 Hours 3.0 Acres West Beach 390 Hours 13.8 Acres 1,303 Hours : 13.8 = 94.4 1986 Playf ields 24.0 Acres Plymouth Creek 1,757 Hours 5.0 Acres LaCompte 706 Hours 14.0 Acres Plymouth Jr. High 1,417 Hours 18.0 Acres Oakwood 1,328 Hours 33.0 Acres Zachary 2,566 Hours 17.0 Acres Ridgemount 931 Hours Playfields in General 385 Hours 111.0 Acres 9,090 Hours : 112 = 81.89 Summary 1984 & 85 1986 Neighborhood Parks 41.0 Hours/Acre 41.00 Hours/Acre Beaches 79.0 Hours/Acre 94.00 Hours/Acre Playfields 83.5 Hours/Acre 81.16 Hours/Acre These figures do not include any new construction hours." The park maintenance work associated with the community playfields is much broader and more time consuming than the maintenance required for neighborhood parks. Items such as irrigation maintenance, building cleaning and repair, line painting, infield maintenance, top dressing, and seeding and sodding add to our other maintenance areas to, in effect, double the average hour per acre cost for community playfields. The most time consuming are: mowing/trimming 120 line painting 80 seed/sod/repair 90 building/repair/maint. 60 rink maintenance 160 irrigation 40 garbage 50 60% One should remember that the average neighborhood park runs between two and approximately 13 acres in size. The community playfields on the other hand run between 17 and 33 acres in size. This factor alone dictates by their very size that they will require more work per site each year. Contract maintenance on such things as plumbing, electrical, irrigation and lighting are not reflected in these hour per acre costs. The special nature of these systems requires either special training or special equipment that at this time is not practical for the City to provide on an in-house basis. In an effort to quantify our overall maintenance effort, I would suggest that on a scale of 1 through 5 our overall ranking perhaps could be rated as a 4 -- While there are some areas such as trimming, weeding and miscellaneous repairs where we could improve, there are other areas such as field dragging and lining, snow plowing and rink flooding where our level of service could be somewhat decreased. One means of gauging the success of the maintenance service provided would be feedback from the community. During the last five years, we have received high marks from both the community survey instrument and from the athletic associations and the adult sports community. In 1979 and 1980, the City was being criticized for poor maintenance on many of its facilities. At the time of my hire, it was made clear to me that part of my responsibility was to make improvements in this area in an effort to turn around the perception of the community of our poor maintenance. Hopefully, we have been able to meet this goal. Just as not all parks are created equal, not all athletic fields are created equal. Some programs by their very nature require more sophistication and more maintenance than other programs. Outlined below are our best estimates of the annual cost for the maintenance on one hockey rink, one softball field, and one soccer/football field. Because our recording system is based on hours worked on projects by site, Mark has had to estimate as best he can some of the hours associated with each of these cost estimates by facility. 1,825 Grand Total $4,727 Mowing Hours Hours 260 Painting 48 Full -Time Part -Time Wage Equipment Mowing 26 Turf Renovation 411 260 Painting 10 8 160 100 Irrigation 13 208 65 Turf Renovation 5 80 100 Spray & Fert. 8 128 56 Electricity 8 128 40 Garbage 22 110 55 Miscellaneous 16 256 80 Trimming 10 50 50 Infield Mint. 20 48 320 240 106 80 1,856 1,046 Equipment and Materials Light Bulbs 375 Irrigation Equip. 400 Fertilizer 300 Chemicals 80 Paint 20 Electrical 300 AgLime 100 Lime 250 1,825 Grand Total $4,727 Mowing 26 416 260 Painting 48 768 480 Irrigation 13 208 65 Turf Renovation 70 1,120 1,400 Spray & Fert. 8 128 56 Electricity 8 128 40 Garbage 22 110 55 Miscellaneous 16 00 256 80 189 22 $3,134 $2,436 Materials and Equipment Light Bulbs 375 Irrigation Equip. 400 Fertilizer 300 Chemicals 80 Paint 353 Sod 500 Seed 400 Top Dress Mix 250 Electrical (Cont.) 300 Grand Total $8,528 SKATING RINK COSTS Brooming 45.75 732 457.50 Shoveling 122.75 1,964 660 Blowing 15 240 30 Flooding 69.25 1,108 690 Board Repair 7.25 116 35 Line Painting 8 128 20 Garbage 5 80 25 Berms 8 128 40 4,496 1,957.50 uipment and Materials Light Bulbs 100 Grand Total $6,553 In our estimation, one of the best things we have going for us with regard to our park maintenance is the fact that we have very few soccer/football fields laid over softball/baseball fields. We currently maintain 18 softball/baseball fields and 11 soccer fields. Of this amount, only three sites have a soccer/football laying over the top of the softball/baseball field. We are also fortunate in most cases we do not have pleasure skating rinks laid out on top of any of our athletic surfaces. Whenever you try and maintain ice rinks on top of grass surfaces, you end up with weeds. This would necessitate a total renovation and reseeding project every spring in those areas. Klaprich Field in Wayzata is a classic example of this. Because their entire surface is flooded in the winter time, during the summer months they do not have an adequate turf surface to play field games on. As we build other facilities in the future, these are items we will keep in mind, so we are sure we have the easiest, maintainable surface. Because of the high expense of maintaining soccer/football fields, we are researching the capital costs associated with using an artificial turf surface to determine if, in the long run, there would be a cost savings over our grass surfaced areas. We have a new soccer field at Plymouth Creek in the capital improvement budget for 1.988. Our analysis of this life cycle cost will be prepared in conjunction with that project. In conclusion, what we have tried to accomplish as our overall philosophy can be summarized as such: A. Build the appropriate facilities in the appropriate locations to meet the need in that population or attendance area. B. Design the facilities in such a manner that they can be maintained in a reasonable fashion based on appropriate use. In new parks, create the smallest possible areas that will require high maintenance. C. Provide safe, attractive facilities to the public that present a good image for the City of Plymouth. Because wet athletic turfs are most susceptible to damage, we closely monitor all of our facilities for the necessity of cancelling games in order to protect the surface. D. Make the necessary repairs and maintenance to our facilities as quickly as possible, so that unsafe conditions are corrected and further deterioration, and a poor public image is not created. Finally, we must continue to provide motivation and training to our maintenance division so that they can most effectively and efficiently carry out their duties and responsibilities in these areas. With a continuing spirit of cooperation and understanding between the City Council, Park and Recreation Advisory Commission and our user groups, I am confident that we can continue to provide safe, clean, and fun recreational experiences to the citizens of Plymouth. np Attachments: Neighborhood Park Needs Analysis Funding Task Force Resolution Development Priority List from Comprehensive Plan Park Acquisition, 1982-86 Park Maintenance Hourly Detail Reports NEIGHBORHOOD PARK NEEDS - ULTIMATE fminlmum recommended size - 5 acres Actual Neigh- Existing Park Needs Ultimate Dor- Ultimate Netghbcrhood at 2.5-3.5 DefIcIency hood Population Parks/Acres Acre/1,000' Acres) Comments (aee also Task 2 - Inventory) 1 1,778 5-6 None primarily office Industrlel; population estimate probably too high 2 0 0 None entirely office-Industrlel 3 2,219 5.5-8 5.5-8 could be provided by bbple Grove 4 945 5 5 could be provided by Maple Grove; see also comments for 5 and 6 5 3,423 8.5-12 8.5-12 Egan Park (20.7 ac) could be developed as nelgghborhood park to serve m3lghbor- 6 5,796 14.5-20 14.5-20 hoods 4,5 and 6 7 3,880 9.5-13.5 9.5-13.5 a neighborhood perk at Fomerleau Lake could serve neighborhoods 7 and 8 8 1,446 5 S 9 4,098 10-14 10-14 10 1,066 Timbershores (part)/5 5 None 11 2,021 5-7 5-7 12 3,297 8-11.5 8-11.5 Zachary Lane Elem. could be developed as neighborhood park, but location Is poor 13 2,732 Schmidt Lake/6.9 7.0-9.5 None 14 3,604 9-12.5 9-12.5 15 1,877 5-6.5 5-6.5 16 5,643 14-20 14-20 17 1,179 5 5 18 542 0 None primarily industrial 19 1,709 54 54 20 2,998 7.5-10.5 7.5-10.5 21 4,564 Central Park(part)/15 11.5-16 11.5-16 could be provided In Central Park 22 1,402 5 5 could be provided In Central Park 23 3,438 8.5-12 8.5-12 should be north of creek; population estimate probably too high 24 2,824 Mission Hills/19.3 7-10 None requires additional development 25 5,331 Four Seasons/28.3 13.5-18.5 None nay require additional facilities; erosion problems exist 26 4,076 Kilmer/1.3 10-14 7-11 23rd and E.M.L. needs development 23rd b E.M.L./4.9 E. Medicine Lake part)/1.7 27 2,265 Hemlock/0.3 5.54 1.5-4 part of M. Medicine Lake Park (3.5 ec) M. Medicine Lake functions as neighborhood park part)/3.5 28 0 0 None entirely Industrial 29 2,519 Unnamed park/22 6.5-9 6.5-9 outlots In Maple Creek addition require considerable development 30 1,800 Shiloh/13.3 5-6.5 None 22 out of 33.6 acres at the Identified Ponderosa/4.9 parks are credited toward neighborhood Fazendin/12.2 recreation; the balance Is storm water Olive Lane Pond/3.2 retention or otherwise unusable 31 2,557 6.5-9 6.5-0 32 1,830 Greenwood Elem(part)/6 5-6.5 None though clnsslfled as community playfleld, Greenwood Is not developed as such. Can serve neighborhood needs unless and until developed as playfleld 33 1,519 Greentree west/10.8 5-5.5 None Green Oaks adequately serves Green Oaks/6.8 neighborhood park needs. Green- Meadowood/10. tree west and Meadowood are special use parks 34 1,893 Imperial Hills/9.1 5-6.5 None the best existing neighborhood park In P 1 ymout h 35 1,946 5-7 5-7 36 3.255 8-11.5 8-11.5 37 1,320 Lions Park/3.1 5-5 None -2 Lions Park functions as a neighborhood park and would otherwise be adequate for the population, except for the five acre minimum stlpulatlon 36 1,150 Gieanloch/6.9 5-5 None acreage Is adequate, but acquisition at Gieanloch would be desirable for facl- lltles expansion 39 3,191 8-11 8-11 west Medicine Lake Park and/or Community Club can provide some neighborhood functions 40 80 0 None entirely Industrial 41 834 5 None -5 small neighborhood, could be served by St. Louis Park NEIGHBORHOOD PARK NEEDS - ULTIMATE (Cont'd) Neigh- Existing bor- Ultimate Neighborhood hood Population Parks/Acres 42 773 43 891 44 1,407 Sunset Hills/20.8 45 2,965 Circle Park/2.2 46 1,640 47 1,802 48 436 49 338 50 313 Birchvlew/13.8 Queensland/7.11 Ferndale No./5.3 minimum recommended size - 5 acres Actual Park Needs Ultimate at 2.5-3.5 Deficiency Acre/1,000• Acres) Comments 5 5 LeCompte could function as neighborhood perk, but is designed as playfield 5 5 small neighborhood, could be served by Minnetonka 5 None 7.5-10.5 None also meets needs of neighborhood 150, although Birchview also functions as community playfleld 5-5.5 5-5.5 5-6.5 None well served 5 None good site; needs development 5 None small neighborhood, could served by Wayzata or by Queensland Fork S None could be served by Blrchvlew and Circle Perk in neighborhood 145 CITY OF PLYMOUTH Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota was held on the 2nd day of May 19 8 . Th ffoll win tubers were present: Mayor Davenport, ounce mem ers oeneils,chnei erire nen The following members were absent: none Councilmember Threinen introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 83-246 A RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE FINDINGS OF THE MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON PARK AND RECREATION PROGRAM FINANCING WHEREAS, the Task Force on Park and Recreation Program Financing, has completed their review of this matter and submitted a report to the City Council dated July 19, 1982, and WHEREAS, the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission has reviewed said report and is in concurrence with its findings, and WHEREAS, the opportunity has been given to various community groups to review and comment on said report, and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and accepts the contents of said report, NOVI, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the recommendations brought forth in the report from the Task Force on Park and Recreation Program Financing be hereby approved, and further, that said recommendations will be used to help guide the City Council in development of future Park and Recreation budgets and Capital Improvement budgets. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Moen , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereoeils, Schneider,and Threinen The following voted against or abstained: none Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. TABLE 4 Priority I - Developed Neighborhoods Neighborhood Deficiency Proposed Acquisition 26 7-11 ac. 7.5 ac. 27 1.5-4 ac. 5 ac. 35 5-7 ac. 2 ac. (special use) 39 8-11 ac. 5 ac. 42 5 ac . none 43 5 ac. 12 ac. 46 5-5.5 ac. 6 ac. Subtotal - Priority I 36.5-49.5 Acres 35.5 Acres Priority II - Developing Neighborhoods Neighborhood pre -1990) Neighborhood Deficiency Proposed Acquisition 3 9 10-14 ac. 5 ac. 10 ac. 11 5-7 ac. 6 6 ac. 12 8-11.5 ac. 10 ac. 10 ac. 14 9-12.5 ac. 5-6 ac . 18 ac. 15 5-6.5 ac. Priority III 5 ac. 16 14-20 ac. 9 ac. (additional) 17 5 ac. 5 ac. 20 7.5-10.5 ac. 6 ac. 21 11.5-16 ac. 10 (in Plymouth Creek Park) 22 5 ac . none 23 8.5-12 ac. 9 ac. 29 6.5-9 ac. 11 ac. 31 6.5-9 ac. 8 ac. 36 8-11.5 ac. 6 ac. Subtotal - Priority II 109.5-149.5 Acres 113 Acres Priority III Developing Neighborhoods post -1990) Neighborhood Deficiency Proposed Acquisition 3 5.5-8 ac. none 4 5 ac. none 5 8.5-12 ac. 14 ac. 6 14.5-20 ac. none 7 9.5-13.5 ac. 10 ac. 8 5 ac. none 19 5-6 ac . 8 ac . Subtotal - Priority III 53-69.5 Acres 32 Acres TOTAL 199-267.5 Acres 180.5 Acres PARKS ACQUISITION 1982 - 1986 Acres Park 35 Central Park Plymouth Creek Park) 8 Rolling Hills 9 Sunrise Neighborhood Park 45 West Medicine Lake 11 St. Mary's 6 Maple Creek Park Mapledell) 29 Workhouse 4 Amhurst N.P. 2 Swan Lake N.P. no name) 2 Northeast N.P. 19 Bass Lake Playfield Site Dream Pomerleau Lake 25 Parker's Lake 15 Co. Rd. 61 Site Site Conditions Southern border settled. Location of 34th Avenue. Moved south a few hundred feet over original desig- nation. Developed and in operation. 29th & Orleans Lane. Acquired all except one residence on south side in holding). Moved east 1 to 2 hundred yards. N.E. corner of 4 -CP. Developed and operating. Switched to north over original proposal. Neighborhood park at mid- point of south. Playfield per Brauer & Associates proposal. 3/4 mile north of Central Park. 1/4 mile north of French Reg. Park. S.W. of Schmidt Lake. Due east of Bass Lake. Owe in its entirety by 1987. 19 acres plus! N.P. of 7 acres south of the western 1/2 of play - field site. Shot out of the water. Effort transferred to Mud Lake. In planning for First Phase Development. Proposed for 1986 develop- ment. CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: July 9, 1986 TO: Dale Hahn, Financial Director FROM: Mark S. Peterson, Park & Forestry Supervisor SUBJECT PARK MAINTENANCE PER ACRE TIME SUMMARY cc: Eric Blank PLAYFIELDS ACRES 1984 HRS. 1985 HRS. 2 YR. AVERAGE ZACHARY 33 3,179.50 3,179.50 3,179.50 PLYMOUTH CREEK 25 1,485.22 1,255.75 1,370.49 PLYMOUTH 14 1,290.00 1,620.00 1,455.00 OAKWOOD 18 1,217.50 1,616.00 1,416.75 LACOMPTE 5 812.25 650.75 731.50 RIDGEMOUNT 15 1,090.00 965.00 1,027.50 110 9,074.00 9,287.00 9,180.74 MAN HRS./ACRE 82.50 HRS./ACRE 84.50 HRS./ACRE 83.50 HRS./ACRE NEIGHBOTHOOD PARK SCHMIDT 6.9 162.00 133.00 147.50 QUEENSLAND 5.1 148.25 110.00 129.13 GREEN OAKS 6.8 274.75 1,099.00 673.38 LIONS 3.1 118.00 134.50 126.25 MISSION HILLS 8.0 213.50 146.50 180.00 CIRCLE 2.2 114.75 595.00 354.88 SHILOH 13.3 191.50 281.25 236.38 45.40 1,222.75 2,499.25 1,847.52 MAN HRS./ACRE 26.93 HRS./ACRE 55.00 HRS./ACRE 40.69 HRS./ACRE BEACHES EAST BEACH 10.8 830.00 788.25 809.13 WEST BEACH 3.0 242.25 321.50 281.88 1,072.25 1,109.75 1,091.01 MAN HRS./ACRE 77.7 HRS./ACRE 80.40 HRS./ACRES 79.06 HRS./ACRE cc: Eric Blank CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTHBMO 55447 TEEP 559- MINNESOTA ONE ( 2800 MEMO DATE: January, 1987 TO: Eric Blank, Director FROM: Mark Peterson, Park & Forestry Supervisor SUBJECT END OF YEAR 1986 REPORT tree planting 6.0 001 CITY HALL garbage pickup 17.75 trimming 4.0 special events 1.0 aeration 4.0 park & rec. equip. 4.0 1,041.5 broadleaf weed control 3.0 cleaning building 1.0 003 GREEN OAKS down time 1.5 mow• 91.5 irrigation maint. 54.0trimmin 50.5 trail maint. rep. 34.5 infield maint. 18.0 tree & shrub maint. 13.5 fertilizing 3.0 tree planting & shrubs 8.0 broadleaf weed control 6.0 garbage pickup 36.75 play structure repair 20.0 safety meetings 45.0 snow plowing rinks 5.0 training 33.0 brooming rinks flooding 18.25 deliveries 26.25 3 rinks 21.5 special events 17.0 new construction park & rec. equip. 2.0 signs 4.0 planting beds 4.0 equipment maint. 4.0 staff meetings 10.5 trail maint. repair 30.0 misc. 10.25 tree planting 3.0 308.25 N _ garbage pickup 33.25 494.0 30-Y 004 LIONS 002 QUEENSLAND mowing 45.25 mowing trimming 53.5 14.5 trimming 8• line painting 2.5 line painting 50 infield maint. 26.25 sodding 35. sodding 12.5 fertilizing 1.5 fertilizing 1.75 broadleaf weed control 4.5 broadleaf weed control 6.0 play structure repair 12. play structure repair 3.0 snow plowing rinks 4.25 plumbing repairs 4.0 brooming rinks 19.5 snow plowing rinks 2.75 snow blowing rinks 2• brooming rinks 18.5 flooding rinks 21.75 flooding rinks 17.75 misc. rink maint. 5.0 misc. rink maint. 3.0 new construction 726• fence repair 1.0 signs 4.25 new cosntruction 69.5 trail maint. rep. 120. signs 2.0 tree & shrub 3.25 END OF YEAR REPORT CONTINUED 004 LIONS CONTINUED equipment maint. trail maint. rep. tree & shrub maint. garbage pickup bleachers special events 005 CIRCLE mowing trimming fertilizing broadleaf weed control play structure repair snow plowing rinks brooming rinks snow shoveling snow blowing rinks flooding rinks downtime misc. rink maint. new construciton signs tree planting garbage pickup goals sidewalks 006 KILMER mowing trimming fertilizing broadleaf weed control play structure repair snow plowing rinks brooming rinks flooding rinks misc. rink maint. tree & shrub maint. garbage pickup 007 4 SEASONS mowing trimming topdressing sodding fertilizing snow shoveling flooding rinks board repair downtime misc. rink maint. new construction signs 75 138.0 1.0 19.25 3.0 50 401.0 54.0 2.75 1.5 6.5 28.0 6.25 20.5 4.0 2.0 14.25 2.0 8.0 301.75 12.75 6.0 25.25 50 1.0 497.0 34.25 16.50 1.50 4.0 28.0 3.25 20.0 12.25 4.0 12.5 15.5 151.75 191.0 14.75 3.0 18.0 3.0 1.0 7.75 6.0 4.0 13.0 1.0 25 trail maint. rep. tree planting garbage pickup 008 IMPERIAL HILLS mowing trimming line painting sodding fertilizing broadleaf weed control play structure repair snow plowing rinks brooming rinks flooding rinks misc. rink maint. new construction signs electricity equipment maint. trail maint. repair tree & shrub maint. garbage pickup goals & posts n1 n SNTT.nA mowing trimming infield maint. topdressing fertilizing broadleaf weed control play structure repair snow plowing rinks brooming rinks snow blowing rinks flooding rinks new construction signs tree & shrub maint. tree plainting garbage pickup ni l mr.mT.nrx mowing trimming broadleaf weed control play structure repair tree & shryb maint. garbage pick up misc. 2- 97.0 24.0 5.5 389.25 69.0 7.5 1.0 14.0 1.75 4.0 11.0 3.75 16.75 19.75 3.0 515.75 11.75 3.0 1.0 41.0 3.0 18.5 24.0 769.5 109.25 13.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 12.0 61.0 4.0 16.25 2.5 25.75 7.5 8.5 12.0 7.5 18.5 303.25 32.50 4.50 4.0 29.0 2.5 13.0 4.5 90.0 END OF YEAR REPORT CONTINUED 3- 013 MISSION HILLLS fence repair 26.0 new construction 116.0 mowing 111.75 signs 18.0 trimming 8.50 equip. maint. 2.0 line painting 50 trail maint. repair 27.50 infield maintenance 3.5 tree & shrub maint. 42.0 fertilizing 2.0 tree planting 1.5 broadleaf weed control 20.0 garbage pickup 145.75 signs 14.0 beach maint. 153.50 equip. maint. 1.0 deliveries 1.5 trail maint. repair 12.0 special events 2.5 tree & shrub maint. 13.5 park & rec. equip. 7.0 garbage pickup 22.25 planting beds 15.0 bleachers 4.0 1.0 docks & walks 4.0 misc. 913.25 special events 2.0 planting beds 1.75 018 PARKERS LAKE 227.75 014 GLEANLOCH broadleaf weed control 18.5 mowing 33.0 plumbing 10.0 trimming 1.75 downtime 1.0 fertilizing 1.0 misc. 1.0 broadleaf weed control 4.0 fence repair 29.5 play structure repair 10.0 new construction 139.0 trail maint. repair 25.0 signs 1.0 garbage pickup 15.50 trail maint. 68.0 90.25 tree & shrub maint. 2.0 016 WEST MEDICINE tree planting 22.0 mowing 94.0 tree inspection 1.5 trimming 14.75 garbage pickage 16.0 tdisc. 12.25 beach maint. 20.5 fertilizing 1.0 misc. 4.5 broadleaf weed control 14.0 334.5 play structure 42.0 019 TIMBER SHORES plumbing repairs 2.0 mowing 78.5 misc. bldg. maint. 4.0 trimming 6.0 snow plowing rinks 2.0 infield maint. 14.5 brooming rinks 2.0 topdressing 4.0 flooding rinks 11.5 fertilizing 1.5 downtime 1.0 broadleaf weed control 5.5 misc. rink maint. 24.0 play structure repair 8.0 fence repair 1.75 flooding rink 2.0 signs 5.0 new construction 32.0 garbage pickup 110.75 signs 17.5 beach maint. 48.5 equip. maint. 2.0 390.5 trail maint. 127.50 017 EAST MEDICINE LAKE tree & shrub 26.0 mowing 158.5 tree planting 2.0 trimming 27.50 tree inspection 1.0 fertilizing 2.0 floral arrangement 2.0 broadleaf weed control 14.0 garbage pickup 23.5 play structure repair 18.0 bleachers 10.0 painting & staining 32.0 misc. 16.0 cleaning bldg. 6.0 docks & walks 239.75 plumbing repairs 35.0 deliveries 3.0 misc. bldg. maint 46.50 622.25 downtime 50 END OF YEAR REPORT CONTINUED 4- 020 PLYMOUTH CREEK fertilizing 5.0 mowing 232.0 broadleaf weed control 10.0 trimming 59.5 play structure repair 9.0 line painting 62.0 painting & staining 18.0 infield maint. 180.25 cleaning bldg. 47.5 aeration 14.0 plumbing repairs 3.0 topdressing 4.0 electrical repairs 10.0 seeding 22.5 misc. bldg. maint. 12.0 sodding 6.5 snow plowing rinks 6.5 fertilizing 8.0 brooming rinks 49.5 broadleaf weed control 12.0 snow shoveling 131.5 play structure repair 12.0 snow blowing rinks 27.0 painting & staining 25.0 flooding rinks 65.0 cleaning building 40.0 board repair 7.0 plumbing repairs 6.5 downtime 1.0 electrical repairs 41.0 misc. rink maint. 40.0 misc. bldg. maint. 10.75 irrigation maint. 37.5 snow plowing rinks 16.75 signs 3.5 brooming rinks 78.75 electricity 6.0 snow shoveling 179.00 tree & shrub 4.5 snow blowing rinks 25.25 garbage pickup 36.75 flooding rinks 74.0 deliveries 12.25 board repair 9.5 special events 75 downtime 1.5 park & rec. equip. 1.0 misc. rink maint. 56.0 706.5 irrigation maint. 102.0 023 PLYMOUTH PLAYFIELDS fence repair 31.0 mowing 168.0 new construciton 59.50 trimming 33.75 signs 11.0 line painting 89.0 electricity 8.0 infield maint. 144.75 equip. maint. 8.0 aeration 7.0 trail maint. repair 219.75 topdressing 38.25 tree & shrub maint. 4.5 seeding 36.0 tree planting 6.0 sodding 4.0 garbage pickup 63.25 fertilizing 6.0 bleachers 2.0 broadleaf weed control 13.0 tennis courts 2.0 play structure repair 2.0 docks & walks 2.0 painting & staining 18.0 goals 2.0 cleaning bldg. 54.0 misc. 1.0 plumbing repairs 10.0 deliveries 25.0 electrical repairs 43.0 special events 29.0 misc. bldg. 21.0 park & rec. equip. 5.0 snow plowing rinks 11.5 1,757.75 brooming rinks 73.75 snow shoveling 152.75 021 EGAN snow blowing rinks 38.0 nisc. 5.25 flooding rinks 102.75 5.25 hockey rink lines 6.0 board repair 7.0 downtime 2.0 022 LACOMPTE misc. rink maint. 48.5 mowing 80.0 irrigation maint. 66.50 trimming 13.5 fence repair 3.0 line painting 4.0 5.5 infield maint. 52.75 signs electricity 13.5 aeration 2.0 equip. maint. 2.5 topdressing 4.0 tree & shrub maint 8.0 seeding 6.0 END OF YEAR REPORT CONTINUtD 5- 023 PLYMOUTH PLAYFIELD CONTINUED seeding 10.0 garbage pickup 66.75 sodding 19.0 bleachers 1.5 fertilizing 29.0 tennis courts 53.5 broadleaf weed control 1.5 windscreens 33.0 play structure repair 47.50 docks & walks 10.0 painting & staining 17.0 goals 7.0 cleaning bldg. 68.50 deliveries 12.25 plumbing repairs 1.0 special events 50 electrical repairs 55.5 park & rec. equip. 2.0 misc. bldg. maint. 58.50 street department 2.0 snow plowing rink 25.0 1,417.5 brooming rinks 74.25 024 OAKWOOD snow shoveling 145.0 mowing 8.75C27.7 snow blowing rinks 43.75 trimming flooding rinks 149.75 line painting 11 .5 hockey rink lines 11.0 infield maint. 37 board repair 8.0 aeration 24.0 downtime 3.0 topdressing 0 misc. rink maint. 61.5 seeding 47 .5 irrigation maint. 80.0 sodding 51.0 fence repair 16.0 fertilizing new cosntruction 561.0 broadleaf weed control 4.0 signs 14.0 painting & staining330 electricity 11.0 cleaning building 46.5 equipment maint. 12.0 plumbing repairs 11.0 trail maint. repairs 84.75 electrical repairs 46.75 tree & shrub maint. 18.0 misc. bldg. maint. 29.25 garbage pickup 113.75 snow plowing 9.75 bleachers 54.0 brooming rinks 45.75 tennis courts 52.0 snow shoveling 122.75 windscreens 51.50 snow blowing rinks 15.0 docks & walks 4.0 flooding rinks 69.2 goals & posts 14.0 board repair 7.25 misc. 1.0 downtime 3.50 deliveries 57.0 irrigation maint. 52.5 special events 20.75 fence repair 4.0 park & rec. equip. 9.0 signs 12.5 planting beds 6.0 electricity 15.0 2,566.75 equipment maint. 1.5 026 GREENWOOD trail maint. repair 14.0 mowing 5.0 tree & shrub maint. 5.5 trimming 1.0 garbage pickup 4.5 infield maint. 2.0 tennis courts 36.5 8.0 docks & walks 2.0 027 RIDGEMOUNT goals 8.0 mowing 138.0 misc. 2.0 trimming 18.75 deliveries 17.0 line painting 133.0 park & rec. equip. 3.0 infield maint. 21.0 1,328.0 aeration 4.0 025 ZACHARY seeding 3.0 mowing 259.25 sodding 3.0 trimming 28.0 fertilizing 12.0 line painting 108.5 broadleaf weed control 3.0 infield maint. 109.50 play structure repair 2.0 aeration 18.0 cleaning building 4.5 topdressing 35.0 plumbing repairs 1.0 P END OF YEAR REPORT CONTINUED 027 RIDGEMOUNT CONTINUED electrical repairs 15.0 misc. bldg. maint. 4.5 snow plowing rinks 11.0 brooming rinks 63.0 snow shoveling 159.25 snow blowing rinks 19.0 flooding rinks 68.25 board repair 6.0 downtime 1.0 misc. rink maint. 48.75 irrigation maint. 64.50 new construction 2.0 electricity 2.0 equipment maint. 1.5 tree & shrub maint. 1.5 garbage pickup 35.0 bleachers 7.5 tennis courts 55.0 goals & posts 2.0 misc. 1.0 deliveries 18.5 special events 50 park & rec. equip. 1.0 misc. 931.0 028 FERNDALE NORTH 6.0 mowing 5.5 infield maint 2.25 misc. rink maint. 1.0 trail maint. 8.0 16.75 030 GREENTREE WEST mowing 2.0 sodding •25 misc. 1.0 3.25 031 AMBER WOODS mowing 2.0 equip. maint. 5.0 trail maint. 2.0 special events 4.0 034 OLIVE POND 13.0 032 FAZENDIN 30.5 mowing 63.50 trimming 5.0 fertilizing 50 broadleaf weed control 2.0 new construction 53.0 signs 1.0 trail maint. 135.50 tree & shrub maint. 9.0 garbage pickup 2.0 docks & walks 1.0 035 23RD. & E. MEDICINE 272.2 6- 033 PONDEROSA mowing 37.0 broadleaf weed control 6.0 equip. maint. 1.0 broadleaf weed control 44.0 034 OLIVE POND 2.0 mowing 30.5 trimming 1.0 fertilizing 75 broadleaf weed control 1.5 snow plowing rinks 1.75 brooming rinks 14.25 snow blowing rinks 2.50 flooding rinks 19.5 signs 1.0 equipment maint. 1.0 misc. 73.75 035 23RD. & E. MEDICINE 1.0 mowing 8.0 misc. 8.5 16.5 037 OAKVIEW POND mowing 39.50 trimming 3.0 broadleaf weed control 4.0 garbage pick up 2.0 fertilizing 48.5 038 BIRCH PARK 22.0 8.50misc. b. 50 8.50 041 MEADOWOOD mowing 35.0 trimming 3.0 fertilizing 25 broadleaf weed control 4.0 misc. 1.0 snow shoveling 1.0 downtime 3.0. signs 1.25 48.50 042 34TH. & E. MED. LAKE mowing 9.5 trimming 3.75 misc. 50 fence repair 6.0 trail Maint. cepa. 1.75 21.50 043 CEMETERY mowing 82.50 trimming 29.0 topdressing 8.0 sodding 20.0 fertilizing 1.5 broadleaf weed control 22.0 163.0 END OF YEAR REPORT CONTINUED 7- 045 SUNSET HILLS 053 PUBLIC WORKS play structure repair 3.0 mowing 129.5 snow plowing rinks 1.5 trimming 25.0 brooming rinks 18.25 seeding 1.0 snow shoveling 1.0 fertilizing 7.0 snow blowing rinks 50 broadleaf weed control 14.0 flooding rinks 11.25 play structure repair 62.25 misc. rink maint. 5.0 painting & staining 12.0 new construction 11.0 cleaning building 202.0 garbage pickup 1.5 plumbing repairs 6.0 53.0 electric repairs 2.0 047 PILGRIM LN. ELEM. misc. bldg. maint. 48.5 mowing 51.50 snow plowing rinks 1.0 trimming 10.0 snow shoveling 2.0 infield maintenance 25 downtime 40.5 broadleaf weed control 3.0 misc. rink maint. 10.5 misc. bldg. maint. 1.0 irrigation maint. 10.0 snow plowing rinks 8.5 new construction 285.5 brooming rinks 46.0 signs 118.5 snow shoveling 97.25 electricity 1.0 snow blowing rinks 18.75 equipment maint. 889.50 flooding rinks 35.75 trail maint. 12.0 misc. rink maint. 26.50 tree planting & shrubs 28.5 irrigation maint. 16.0 tree inspection 16.0 fence repair 2.5 garbage 6.0 new construction 2.0 tree removal 7.5 trail maint. repair 35.0 safety meetings 5.5 tree & shrub 4.0 training 24.0 tree planting 33.5 bleachers 67.0 garbage pickup 16.25 tennis courts 6.0 403.75 docks & walks 2.0 049 12TH. AVE. POND goals & posts 8.0 snow plowing rinks 50 beach maint 1.0 brooming rinks 24.75 deliveries 91.0 snow shoveling 3.50 special events 13.5 snow blowing rinks 12.50 park & rec. equip. 13.5 flooding rinks 22.50 planting beds 2.0 63.75 staff meetings 32.25 050 INDUSTRIAL STRIP street department 12.0 mowing 4.0 water department 12.0 4.0 2,227.50 051 FIRE STATION 441 054 SUNRISE irrigation maint. 28.5 mowing 122.5 tree & shrub 50 trimming 9.5 special events 75 fertilizing 3.5 street department 3.0 broadleaf weed control 5.0 32.75 play structure repair 14.5 052 FIRE STATION 412 misc. 2.0 1.0 fence repair 15.0 misc. electrical repairs 50 new construction 18.0 irrigation maint. & repairs 18.0 equipment maint. 7.0 equip. maint. 122.0 tree & shrub maint. 16.0 misc. 4.0 tree planting 3.5 tree '& shrub maint. 6.5 garbage 17.25 deliveries 2.75 233.75 special events 75 155.50 5 END OF YEAR REPORT CONTINUED 056 SCHMIDT LAKE PARK mowing 69.5 trimming 8.5 seeding 1.0 sodding 2.0 fertilizing 2.0 broadleaf weed control 3.0 play structure repair 14.0 new construction 2.0 equipment maint. 4.0 trail maint. 80.0 tree & shrub maint. 1.0 tree planting & shrub 8.0 garbage pickup 36.75 bleachers 4.0 docks & walks 1.0 deliveries 2.0 misc. rink maint. 238.75 057 LIFT STATIONS mowing 16.0 trimming 1.0 broadleaf weed control 2.0 19.0 058 TRAILS mowing 5.0 trimming 13.5 sodding 5.0 broadleaf weed control 12.0 downtime 50 new construciton 108.0 signs 2.0 equip. maint. 2.5 trail maint repair 441.0 tree & shrub maint. 16.0 tree removal 11.0 deliveries 3.5 misc. 616.5 059 INSPECTIONS 58.0 play structure repair 47.0 snow shoveling 8.0 misc. rink maint. 4.0 tree & shrub maint. 8.0 tree planting 7.0 weed inspeciton 1.5 garbage 9.0 beach maint. 1.0 dock & walks 2.0 87.5 060 PLAYFIELDS IN GEN. line painting 15.0 infield maint. 27.0 play structure repair 29.0 cleaning building 4.0 electrical repairs 3.25 misc. bldg. maint. 18.0 snow plowing rinks 5.0 8- flooding rinks 4.0 downtime 2.0 misc. rink maint. 31.0 irrigation maint. 5.0 fence repair 8.0 signs 36.0 tree inspection 1.0 garbage pickup 92.25 bleachers - 8.0 tennis courts 10.0 goals & posts 16.0 misc. 1.0 deliveries 58.0 park & rec. equip. 4.0 planting beds 8.0 385.5 061 SIDEWALKS mowing 34.75 trimming 13.50 broadleaf weed control 1.5 snow blowing 6.0 misc. 2.25 tree & shrub maint. 21.75 garbage pickup 2.0 deliveries 8.0 89.75 062 NEIGHBORHOOD PARK mowing 11.0 broadleaf weed control 1.0 play structures 105.50 snow plowing rinks 4.0 flooding rinks 17.0 misc. rink maint. 1.0 signs 28.0 tree planting 2.5 garbage pickup 25 170.25 063 MAPLE CREEK mowing 46.25 trimming 10.50 fertilizing 1.0 play structure repair 4.5 snow plowing rinks 1.0 brooming rinks 11.25 snow blowing rinsk 50 flooding rinks 31.0 misc. rink maint. 1.0 fence repair 4.0 new construciton 4.5 signs 11.25 trail maint. repair 14.0 tree & shrub maint. 7.5 tree planting & shrubs 10.5 garbage pickup 19.75 178.50 END OF YEAR REPORT CONTINAD 064 AREAS OUTSIDE CITY training 50.50 deliveries 90.0 special events 2.0 142.5 100 WORK DONE FOR OTHERS line painting 35.50 downtime 2.0 new construciton 4.5 trail maint. repair. 2.0 deliveries 2.0 park & rec. equip. 4.75 street department 56.50 water department 95.00 sewer department 2.0 204.25 t ti CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: October 22, 1987 for City Council Meeting October 26, 1987 TO: dames G. Willis, City Manager FROM:` Blair Tremere, Community Development Director SUBJECT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONSULTANT STUDY OF ORDINANCE RETAIL PARKING REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY: The attached Resolution authorizes a study of the Ordinance Retail Use Parking Standards by Barton-Aschman Associates which has cur- rent data and expertise in this field. The analysis and findings would serve as an informational base for the Planning Commission and City Council in consideration of a proposal to amend the current Ordinance standards. Earlier this year we were contacted by a local shopping center owner who indicated a willingness to underwrite the costs of such a study so that such an informational base could be created and serve as the foundation for a proposal to amend the Zoning Ordin- ance. That party did not proceed with the project and did not authorize the study. We recently were contacted by other developers, Ryan Construction Company, Prudential Insurance Company and Mr. Ron Clark, who indicated a desire to explore the same pos- sibilities. We reaffirmed with Barton-Aschman Associates, the scope of the study and the not -to -exceed costs. These parties have agreed to underwrite the cost of the analysis and findings by Barton-Aschman who would operate under the direction of the City staff and report to the City staff. The study is similar in many respects to the traffic studies we conduct through the firm Strgar-Roscoe; however, the City does not have a standard agreement or retainer with Barton-Aschman and thus, this action is appropriate. Incidentally, last winter we checked with several firms who had expressed an interest in conducting such a study; Fred Moore and I concluded that Barton-Aschman's expertise and local current data base plus their familiarity with the City of Plymouth, make them the best choice. Barton-Aschman has agreed to a not -to -exceed amount of $5,000.00 and the respective developers are aware of that. The underwriters have acknowledged an understanding of the following criteria: Page two Memorandum to City Manager October 22, 1987 City Council Meeting October 26, 1987 1. The study and its results may not lead to the conclusion that the Ordinance should be revised. 2. The study and its conclusions may suggest that the Ordinance is not adequate and in fact should be made more stringent. 3. The study and its conclusions and any possible changes in the City Ordinance do not assure any development interest that specific plans will be approved until the Ordinance has in fact been amended. 4. All informal reviews and discussions about a prospective development would be based fully on existing Ordinance requirements and there would be no speculation by the City staff as to possible amendments regardig parking standards. We have advised inquiring parties that for new development, the City does not sense discomfort with the current parking standards. However, there may be a basis for considering different standards more applicable to modern retailing methods and experi- ences since the current Ordinance standards were adopted some time ago based upon then current knowledge. I believe this ties in to some degree with the direction from the Council, to evaluate the entire subject of different commercial guiding classifications. A key point is that both staff and developers acknowledge that, for new development, variances are highly suspect relative to minimum parking standards. Good, current, basic data is needed to substantiate the actual known experience with parking for retail uses. When the study is complete, we will analyze it and provide the Planning Commission with the findings and a report of staff conclusions and recommendations as to whether the current standards should be modified. This then would be ultimately considered by the City Council. Attanhmantc 1. Resolution 2. October 6, 1987 Correspondence and October 5, 1987 Scope of Study 3. October 12 and October 19, 1987 Correspondence CITY OF PLYMOUTH Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the day of , 19_ The following members were present: The following members were absent: introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 87 - AUTHORIZING STUDY OF ZONING ORDINANCE RETAIL PARKING STANDARDS BY BARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES WHEREAS, development interests including Ryan Construction Company, Prudential Insur- ance Company, and Ron Clark Construction, Inc., have expressed a desire to have the retail parking standards in the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance evaluated to determine whether the standards should be modified; and, WHEREAS, the minimum parking standards in the Zoning Ordinance were established based upon data current some time ago and they may be subject to change given current inform- ation which can be generated and provided for analysis; and, WHEREAS, Barton-Aschman Associates has been recognized as a local firm which has the expertise and experience in the review of such traffic related matters as parking standards and which has knowledge of the Plymouth Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, the development interests have agreed to underwrite the costs of an analysis of the Ordinance Retail Parking Standards which would be conducted under the direction of the City staff; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has directed staff to review the Comprehensive Plan distinc- tion among the various commercial districts including those which provide for retail uses; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MIN- NESOTA, that it should and hereby does authorize the City Manager to enter into an Agreement with Barton-Aschman, Associates, for the analysis and review of the City Ordinance Minimum Parking Standards for Retail Uses pursuant to the proposal dated October 5, 1987 for a not -to -exceed amount of $5,000.00; FURTHER, be it resolved that the authorization shall be made only upon receipt of authorizing letters from development interests who have agreed to underwrite the costs; FURTHER, be it resolved that the analysis and findings of the study shall be referred to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation in conjunction with a review of the Minimum Parking Standards for Retail Use. The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against or abstained: Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 October 6, 1987 Mr. Blair Tremere City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boule,rar d Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Blair: 612-332-0421 OCT 'e` Based on our discussion I have revised the February 20, 1987, proposal concerning the shopping/retail center parking study and ordinance analysis for the City of Plymouth, Minnesota. A copy is attached for consideration by you and developers who have expressed interest in the study. We are prepared to ccumience work on this project upon your direction. Should you have any questions or wish us to proceed, please give me a call. Sincerely yours, ohn C. Mui. P.E. Vice President Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 October 5, 1987 612-332-0421 PROPOSAL TO CONDUCT A SHOPPING/RETAIL CENTER FARMC G STUDY AMID ORDINANCE ANALYSIS FOR THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA Scope The proposed Plymouth Parking Study and Ordinance Analysis is relatively straight -forward. The purpose of the analysis is to provide data for city staff to determine whether to recommend that the city alter its present orr?inance standards for retail and service establishments and for shopping centers. In some instances they may continue to be appropriate though somewhat stringent. There are three basic portions of the study. They are: 1) collection of new data on parking accumulation at the target type sites; 2) recommended applications in various shopping center and retail settings; and 3) setting of new minimum standards in specified instances. In addition, it is proposed that other data already available through independent Barton-Aschman studies completed in 1986 can be used by the city to give more flexibility to the present city ordinances. These studies cover larger commercial centers and specialty stores which might seldom be used in city hearings. They also include some data on trip generation and parking needs for typical free-standing office buildings. No collection of new data is proposed for the latter classifications of land uses. The parts of the study may be summarized as follows: Tasks 1. DATA COLLECTION Maximum parking accumulation would be counted for at least 8 smaller centers agreed upon by the city and the consultant. Short counts can be used since it is well established what constitutes the maximum accumulation hours. The consultant as well as the city can provide additional examples based on data collection for other studies of a similar nature. One technique that might be considered a larger number of centers. This has in the Twin Cities and elsewhere. is the use of aerial photographs for been used successfully on many sites Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. October 5, 1987 Page 2 Before undertaking this task a list of the developments to be counted must be approved by the city staff since they have first hand knowledge of the types of problems being encountered, the specific answers being sought and type or types of centers to be analyzed. The parking accumulations counts will have to be taken on an average weekday and also on a weekend, probably Saturday. This, of course, increases the costs of the data collection. Hopefully the centers can be grouped into two or more types. To make the study more comprehensive, supplemental data on special types of retail and service establishments such as discount stores can also be added to the primary types of centers as specified by the city. 2. DATA ANALYSIS AND APPLICATION The data analysis does not include a detailed review of files compiled for national or local application. These data are readily available, and reference or comparison to such standards may be appropriate but a detailed documentation does not appear to be important or pertinent. The data analysis would concentrate on the information collected in this study. The usual practice of using averages of all the data collected does not appear to be appropriate. Rather, we would propose a set of data for each type of center and strongly recommend that data from a very similar center to the one being proposed be the basis for staff recommendations. If more than one similar development can be sited it is a distinct advantage. It will be determined with city staff as to the exact format that is needed for making determinations as well as the extent of the data to be summarized. 3. RECCWaMTIONS ON lm_ T OR STA:3D.= To BE ACCEPTABLE To THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH The report may conclude and staff may recommend retention of existing ordinances but with specific options allowed for flexibility under some circumstances. The consultant will formulate such options, if feasible, with the assistance of city staff. The consultants recommendations for modifications of current standards should be held as an internal document subject only to staff review and use in reports to the Planning Commission and City Council. This could be in the form of early drafts of the recommendations. Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. October 5, 1987 Page 3 COSTS AND SCHEDULE The estimated cost of the proposed study is $5,500 to $6,000. The study with appropriate analysis and recommendation will be completed in 60 days. We appreciate the opportunity to submit on this proposal and look forward to a constructive project. OCT RYAN c00Ft.r!cOmpany TAtio0 INCOgcoPOQgTEO October 12, 1987 Mr. Blair Tremere Director Community Development City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Blair: This letter is written in response to your October 7, 1987, letter and will serve as an authorization and underwriting of the Barton-Aschman Associates feasibility study. As stated on prior occasions, Ryan Construction Company continues to have concerns regarding the existing CN and CS zoning and the parking ratios under the existing City ordinance. We continue to share our concerns with these parking ratios in light of the modern retailing methods utilized today. We understand and agree to the following items: 1. The study and its results could reveal that the ordinance should not be revised, it should be revised with more stringent requirements, or, as Ryan Construction Company feels, the parking ratio should more adequately reflect a less stringent parking ratio. 2. We also understand that any conclusions cr possible changes to the City ordinance does not assure that any specific development plans will be approved until the ordinance has been amended. 3. Additionally, all current informal reviews and discussions about prospective development would be based on the existing ordinance requirements and City staff would not speculate as to the possible amendments regarding parking standards. 4. The maximum cost for the parking study will not exceed $6,000.00 we would sincerely hope that the study could be completed for a lot less money than this amount). This letter will serve as a notice to proceed for the City of Plymouth. The actual funding will be comprised of the following: # of the amount paid by Ryan Construction Company, 4 of the amount paid by Prudential Property Company, ; of the amount paid by Ron Clark Construction. 700 INTERNATIONAL CENTRE, 900 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE 612/339-9847 Blair Tremere Page Two October 12, 1987 If you have any questions or comments relative to this letter, please call me directly at 339-9847. We understand the study may take up to 60 days and therefore as a group we are most anxious to begin this process. Sincerely, RYAN ONSkrdan ION COMPANY Donald R, Senior Pr Coordinator DRJ/sls cc: Pat Ryan Ron Pentz Ron Clark DON2:Tremere 10112 The prudential October 19, 1987 Mr. Blair Tremere Director Community Development City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Dear Blair: We are in agreement with Don Jordan's letter of October 12, 1987 regarding the Barton-Aschman parking study. We would ask that the study be authorized and proceed. We appreciate your attention to this matter. Sincerely, RONALD L. PENTZ General Manager The Prudential Property Company Minneapolis Realty Group Office RLP/jvj c.c. Mr. Don Johnson Mr. Ron Clark f• . J J s- 5 r. t 0 OT A Sjnidq ar. ;;f The PrjOe''ia: nsurar._ _ vGmpa.. Am—c-. V TY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 DATE: October 22, 1987, for October ity I Ocil Meeting TO: James G. Willis, City Manager F n FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director of Parks and Recreation J SUBJECT: TRAIL AND SIDEWALK STANDARDS Earlier this year the City Council asked Blair Tremere, Fred Moore, and me to review the existing engineering standards for the width of sidewalks and trails. They also requested that the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission have an opportunity to review our recommendation prior to this matter being brought back before the City Council. Blair, Fred and I have met twice to review this issue. We have also gathered information through the League of Minnesota Cities and the American Society of Planning Officials (see attached). It is our opinion that the City of Plymouth should continue with a sidewalk minimum in residential areas of five feet, a sidewalk minimum of six feet in the downtown Plymouth area, and that all bikeways or trails be a minimum of eight feet. Our reasoning for this is that as the volume of walkers increases on the sidewalk, the width should also increase to meet the higher demands of these areas. The only sidewalk plan the City currently has is that of the downtown Plymouth area. In this area, the plan calls for six foot wide sidewalks, because of the retail nature of the downtown business area. In our residential neighborhoods, sidewalks are generally installed at the desire of the developer, and in some cases, have been installed at a four foot width. It is our recommendation that a five foot width be used so that in the future if mechanical means of snow removal is necessary, a motorized vehicle can more easily work on the five foot surface. Also, the extra foot of width will make the users more comfortable. With Plymouth's large lot size, this extra foot of width will not effect the appearance of the front yard. The two attached documents do not give any specifics on widths that can be taken as absolutes. I think the basic message is clear that as traffic increases on a sidewalk, just as a public street, the width of the sidewalk should also increase. If you consider the problem of snow removal as an important issue, then it is reasonable to assume that a five foot width is appropriate. Councilmember Sisk raised the issue at the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission meeting of what is the difference between a sidewalk and a trail. For our purposes, Fred, Blair and I believe that a sidewalk in a residential area is not designed to be a bikeway. Rather, its function is for walking, and therefore, does not need to meet the eight foot width standard for a bicycle trail. A sidewalk on a residential street is in a location where the developer has chosen to put the sidewalk for the convenience of the public or to add an amenity to his development. In reviewing the City's trail plan, you will note that residential streets are considered to be all bikeways and appropriately used for biking. On major collectors and other thoroughfares, trails have been planned to provide for safe biking and walking. Bi -annually, the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission reviews the Comprehensive Trail Plan and updates it according to our latest development information. It would be appropriate for PRAC the next time they undertake this assignment, to once again, assure themselves that the trail plan adequately provides for trails in those areas where a dangerous situation may exist due to the conflicts between walkers, bikers and automobiles. The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission did review this subject at a meeting on Wednesday, October 14. The Commission adopted a motion recommending the standards as proposed by staff. The current engineering guidelines have a standard of five foot sidewalks in residential areas, six foot sidewalks in the downtown Plymouth area, and eight foot wide for trails. If the Council concurs with this recommendation, no action is necessary. The existing guidelines will continue to be enforced. np Attachments league of r-ninnesota cities September 16, 1987 Mike Ridley City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Mr. Ridley: This is in response to your recent request for data on the average width of sidewalks in cities. II am enclosing a copy of a report put together on average widthsinWisconsincities. I searched our files, but didn't come up with any comparable information on Minnesota cities. (The onlythingIfoundwasthatJordan's policy calls for a six foot sidewalk, many ordinances refer to specifications kept on file at city hall. We don't seem to have any of these.) i You may also want to contact the American Public Works Association (1313 East 60th St., Chicago, 60637, (312) 667-2200). The association has a number of technical publications and manuals. I believe that as of 1976 they had a publication discussing sidewalk specifications (I found a reference in our files). I hope that this information proves useful. Sincerely, Jay Squires Research Assistant SEP Is 1? Al C I T y t, . CONi1U111';, ...., I r,niversity aver -)UE east. sL. {soul, rninnEsota t5.-3-1 01 (612,122-7-5600 i C C:_. -D': ER I ' STD I47 T.:. ST -IND -'RDS Tables X11 and "_17I are sur^ cries of sidewalk construction de- tails for the studied reportin; cities with Table NIV sho%:ino the distribution of all reported sidewalk standards for eacL population group. Required Nu:::bc-r of Sidewalks. Of 4S cities reporting, it was found t a , or c_;,, do not require sidewalks on both sides of streets in new residential areas. Madison reported that sidewalks were required on both sides of the street. Table XIV shows an indi- cation that the smaller cities do not, as a rule, make this require- ment. Sixty-six per ce: t of the cities that do not require sidewalks on both sides of streets in new residential areas make provisions to install sidewalks on petition of owners, which of course usually pro- vides a nonuniform distribution of needed sidewalks. S'lhere there are children, and there usually are in new residen- tial areas, sidewalks on both sides of the street is a good safety measure. The tentative number of pedestrians per day justifying the con- struction of 2 sidewalks, according to the reco=rendations of the American Association of State Highway Officials is 500 when the assumed design speed for the street is fro:. 30 to 50 miles per hour and the number of vehicles using the street ranges from 50 to 100 per hour. The AAS! --TO also recommends that there should be one sidewalk on the street when the assumed design speed is from 30 to 50 miles per hour, the number of vesicles using the street ranges from 50 to 100 per hour, and the number of pedestrians per day equals 150. Sidewalk Width. Elwyn E. Seelye recommends that sidewalks for minor residential streets should be from 4 to 6 feet in width. (*1) The National Committee for Traffic Safety recommends a minimum width of 4 feet for sidewalks on local residential streets with single- family units. (*2) Eighty-six per cent of the reporting cities have a standard sidewalk width of from 4 to 5 feet. The city of Madison has a standard sidewalk width of 5 feet a. inches, which is wider than the recommended widths. A 5 -foot sidewalk would be more than sufficient in residential areas and would provide a saving in con- struction costs. At the accepted standard of 22 inches per pedes- trian lane, a 4 -foot sidewalk would actually suffice in the new single-family unit urban residential subdivisions. os;;n, a a oolc for Civil Engineers, Vol. 1, Second Edition, Elwyn E. Seelye, 1953, page 3-60. 2) "Building Traffic Safety into Residential Developments," National Cormittee for Traffic Safety, 425 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago, Ill. 1 1 A Oa. t0 t:a_ s :csid i_l arews, it:y:: E. :ccl.,; alsorecozi,me nds til« -c t si"'ev,alk be 6 intes t ie:c at residential c: ive- S:-ic oO lnp C11-4 es USc as1QC',;»;a .'_C: 1S 1GSS tlla.^.:' - t le recti,. --,,endedC%=ems, and On' C1L_CS inCllldlnb ..:adiSon reported a st«nd»rdthiCizmassofv _ :Chea o: T. •- orc. The. e were also only - citics N; hichepozedusingt:.o rete;: :e: ded G -inch thicit sidewal: at resider-tialdriveti;,«ys. Side;:al:: Construe pion. All cities included in the survey re- porter trat s14e:a s Viare constructed o concrete. 3) Highway Design and Construction; Arthur G. Bruce, 1934, page 4) Design, Data Look for Civil Engi Elwyn. E. Soelyoneers, Vol. 11 Second Edition, 1953, page 3-93. 24- 1950 Population, U.S. Census NS - Not Stated 1) Installed on petition of o.ners 2) - Requirad on both sides of arterial straets otherwise one lido only 25- 3) - Except at driveways where it is 6" 4) - Owners required to build sidewalks 5) - Built by davelopers 6) - Only wiiera there is a need ii?) - Gr&nolithic 3" - Bitur4inous Cone. 21' S=:Vwalr:s e.`::iI'ed on cul Lx Dot: Sides Sidewalk o_ 111 S. anda-rd Stands d Construe- Intra- Block enzd:a: ntyV c.,.-a:,k,:idaWFai: C.cb: o.:.i:5 ti On Bloc:: Connstructio n 1; --proved iidt:l Fickness CoastructeG Special Sidewalks Special C: a S --r s n Peet in. Inches of Concrete Assessed Pro%ided Assessed 50,000-1 0,030 Crow_ * Cr...._ :c..pics, IJwa ho(;•1) j 5 Yee Yeo No 1i..... Yos Flo Laain es j 40,3) Yes Yes NO i:.ccL--., :deb. o(i`2) 4 Yes No(*4) Yes Rockford, X11. No i,2., 4.5 4 :.0 4.5 Yes Yes No Sioux Cit„ Io::a So(:aj 4 Yes Yes No JLr :•.O. No (1-1) 4 4 to 5 Yes Yes i0 Topeka, Kansas No(*i) 4 4(-i 3) Yes Yes No 130,W3-150,000 Grog?* Borkelay, C;,1:No(ia) 4 to 6 3.5 Yes No(v") Yes Yes Corpus Christi,Sax. Ya* 4 Y,a Yes o Duluth, Xinm. ho(*1) 5 4 Yes Yes Yes Ycs is Paso, lex. No 5 4 Yes Yes No va:isVille, 1.L. Yes 5 7 Yes Yes No Gary, Ind. Yes 5 4.5 to 5 es Yes No Kansas City, Kan. No(<<1) 4 4 Yes Yes No Knoxville, 5 4 es Yes obile, kl.. No 4 4 Yes es Yes pas New iIocford, Mass. Yes 5 11) Yes Yes No(*4) Na Yes 1;c(*5) South vend, Ind. Yes 5 4 Yes Yacoma, Wash. Yes 5 4 Yes Yes No 150=0-203.000 Crouv* Les Xoires, Iowa No(*6) 4 4 Yes Yes Yes No G: and rapids, '•:ieh. Yes 5 to 6 4 Yes Yes Yes Naw Havan, Conn. Yvs 5 4 Yes Yes No wiciiita, Kalw..s No 4 4('3) Yec Yes N 1950 Population, U.S. Census NS - Not Stated 1) Installed on petition of o.ners 2) - Requirad on both sides of arterial straets otherwise one lido only 25- 3) - Except at driveways where it is 6" 4) - Owners required to build sidewalks 5) - Built by davelopers 6) - Only wiiera there is a need ii?) - Gr&nolithic 3" - Bitur4inous Cone. 21' 26- 5ida,.rlks iteocil•::d on P.eoular Fath Si lcs Sidewalk Intra - of ali Construe- Intra-_cck Per:aanantiy Si;:exaIk Side -walk Sidev..iks tion Block Z-0- .action i.:proved dth l:.icknass Co.Wtructed Special Sidewalks Specia, Cit- Str.:: is eet i^. Inches o= Concrete J sessed Provide? Assessed 110.0.3-25.000 Grouo* iie:.Vor Jir: NO(+'1/ 5 4('3) Yes No(*4) No I Chip ev.,a Falls o(*1) a 4 Yes Yes No Cud:=:y Yes 6 5 es Yes No(*5) Janesv.L e Yes 5 4(<`3) Yes Yes No Yes 5 40,3) Yes Yes No. ar.:..""fieldI 5 Yes Yes No i:eaa.:. No(!:2) 5 40`3) Y;:s Yes . No JtCYcns : Jint J(!:y) 5 4 Yes Yes NO va;,a J:: ; Yes k i Yes Yes No Wisconsin :rapids o(i-l) 5 4 Yes Yes No Apple'; -or. No (4,1) 5 4 Yes Yes No Beloit No 4 Yes Yes No uu Claire Yes 5 Yes Yes No r'ond du Lac Yes 4.5 4(*3) Yes Yes No La Crosso No(*2) 6 4 Yes No(*4) Yes No( -6) X" .i:owoc No(Xl or *2) 5.33 4(;?) Yas Yes No e ay ar. Yes 6 4 Yes Yes No S;Per:Or Yes 6 4 Yes Yes No a%:W.osa Yes 5 5 Yes Yes No Vast All -'s Yes 5 5 Yes Yes No 50,000-10D.000 Gro:: a* Gre&a Bay Yes 5 4 Yes Yes Yes No encash:. No(i'l or *2) 5 4 Yes Yes NO e. dison Yes 5.3? 5 Yes Yes Yes NO Racine Yes 4 Yes Yes Yes I *1950 populatior., U.S. Census 4) Owners required to build sidewalks INS - Not Stated i5) Future plans 411) - Installed or. potition of ovrArs 6) Built by City i (*2) - On, order o. Co=ion Cou.;;il ikcept at driveways where it is 5" j ( j - accept at drivuways where it is 61, 8 5 ft. on 50 ft. straets and 6 ft. on 60 ft. streots 9) No established policy 26- O : CI0 N C-N L'NN o 0' G 1 r-{ lo O r . r -i r -i 1 r N, . ri ri r -i h fn q r-{ Cl• H t-3 rNC\ : C —7 U O O'O r: t No I O r U c O 0 X71I Q i z a ri c- to C) 0 0 a N X t ri 10 t G IiU.c+i._1 N 1 0 I 1 C-1 cam' E- c. o': iiti t E- r; ri 7 r -i l0 1 t3 I N G;,—1` G•r 1 o{ 1 {O cn o' vUiloo b i 0-1 1 8 IlO Co i U ri Lam- I eciolZ^c ri cl r' N ri -.Z' C\ • ' Cr- LC\ UH i. It (v : 1 I g I N!I 0 0 1 0 F 1 z= I C\t p ri p s E" C E o r 0 ter— j0r-i C. cMZ 1OE- l CC N1 ti U U, G O I 1--t- O HrCi r -q N r!. E-+ s: 31 a ra c' 1U;. ~! 0 HI Q SI 1 118 181 1 1+8 8118 Niiia A ovI0 sa rl H I~ uV N I N I I I I S I I 11--t O : CI0 N C-N L'NN o 0' G 1 r-{ lo O r . r -i r -i 1 r N, . ri ri r -i h fn q r-{ Cl• H t-3 rNC\ : C —7 U O O'O r: t No I O r U c O 0 to o r -i 'Co O z a ri c- to C) 0 0 a N X ri l 0 i N 1 0 I C-1 r E- 1 c,; M r4 1 1 7 I C'l l r -i I"II I oo00(V0 0 0 r -i r? ri Mi O 1 to I N l 0 i 0 1 0 C-1 r r; ri 7 r -i l0 1 t3 I N I I O 1 {O U o' i0 S 0-1 1 8 IlO o- 110 U ri Lam- I N ri 0 r r' N ri -.Z' C\ • ' Cr- LC\ r -i I r• r-i r -i N 1 I g I N!I 0 0 1 0 F 1 z= I C\t p ri p s 1 c,; M r4 1 1 7 I C'l l r -i I"II I 27- oo00(V0 0 0 r -i r? ri Mi O 1 to I N l 0 i 0 1 0 C-1 r r; ri 7 r -i l0 1 t3 I N I I O O 1 {O U o' i0 S 8 1 8o- 1 I 18 r -i I r• r-i I N O I g I N!I 0 0 1 0 F ri ri 0 ter— j0r-i cMZ 1 Cr, rq O I 1--t- HrCi r -q N ri I 1 118 181 1 1+8 8118 Niiia c N I N I I I I S I I 11--t G 0 N 1 118 0 m to t018 8 1, 8ci1 r-1 L)' ri Ori e -i M O, 1 1 1 Irc 0 ri to r -i ri ri Icv 1 v U j p 1! ri M 1 1 8 F 1 to 1 r•I 1 18 S 1 8 Cd lHM11ItoII— 1 r -i1 ICO to I Ito i 0 t O f. LO CJ Cj 4-a 4-4 44 r..{ Yi •A • Y{ r'I O t1 N 0 E 4 P C! M E— E- C U i-1 O O Z E• G iCo 27- f 1 1 L 9 AMERICAN SOCIETY 1 1 1 1 OF PLANNING OFFICIALS f 3 E A S T 60th S T R E E T— C iHICAGO 37, ILLINOISt• t ------------------- Information Report No. 95 j From the Lihrory of k AMERICAN SOCIETY CSF1 PUMNING OFFICIALS i SIDEtYALKS IN THE SUBURBS* bruary 1957 Sidewalks typify the difficulties that beset suburban residential develop- ments. Problems of municipal finance, design standards, and public vs. private responsibility are all involved. Sidewalks -are an. everyday part ofthelivesofyoungsters, who give the suburban population pyramid its char- acteristic shape and for whom maas.produced subdivisions mainly exist. Though the simplest of structures, the decision as to the need for a side- walk is based on many variables. Whether to have sidewalks depends pri- marily on Populatian density (in turn a function of zoning, method of sewagedi:;posal, and size of lot) and traffic (which is affected by car ownership, design of streets, and major street systems). Sidewalks and Safety It seems almost axiomatic that sidewalks reduce traffic danger to pedes- trians. And yet this belief has been questioned when applied to children. It has been suggested that "as accidents usually occur when they run intotheroadwayoremergefrombehindparkedcars," perhaps sidewalks do notcontributetotheirsafety. And it has been hinted that sidewalks actuallytendtoencourageplayinginthestreetratherthaninoff-street areassuchasrearyardsoraplayground. (See The Community Builders Handbook, Urban Land Institute, 1737 K Street, N.W.)Washington, D.C.; 1954, P. B0, which cites the opinions of a widely -known builder. The authors of theHandbookrecommendthatingeneralthereshouldbeasidewalkonatleastonesideofthestreet.) I Against these opinions are arrayed those of the National Safety Council. When asked by PLANNING ADVISORY SERVICE if any studies had been made to de- termine whether sidewalks contribute to safety, the director of the TrafficOperationsDivision, National Safety Council, replied: Copyright, American Society of Planning Officials, 1957. Unfortunately there is no good accident information available which would demonstrate the relationship between child safety in areas with sidewalks and without sidewalks. It is the consensus Of most safety authorities, however, that sidewalks are desir- able in all areas in which there is any appreciable pedestriantraffic. Certainly this would apply in all residential develop- ments. This viewpoint is further elaborated in the National Committee for TrafficSafety' s, booklet, Building Traffic Safety into Residential DevelopmentsNationalSafetyCouncil, 425 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago 11; $1): Traffic safety demands good sidewalks on each side of every res- idential street. Vehicular traffic and pedestrians should be segregated. It is unsafe, unreasonable and often disagreeable to pedestrians to be forced to walk on the paved roadway. Parents do not want children playing in the roadway -- yet if they have roller skates, scooters or other wheeled toys, they will use the roadway unless a smooth sidewalk is available. Mothers with baby carriages and elderly persons should have sidewalks. Nearly three-fifths of the persons killed in traf- fic are killed at night, and walking on the roadway is a majornighthazard. In numerous places state or county highway authorities have become so impressed with their need that theyarebuildingextensivemileagesofhighwaysidewalks. How in- appropriate it would be for new residential developments not to provide them. There may be places, as in estate -type develop- ments, where a sidewalk only on one side, or even no sidewalks, can be justified, but this should be a very rare exception. Although there are no statistical data to support the widely held beliefthatsidewalkscontributetopedestriansafety, there are figures that show conclusively -- if proof is needed -- that it is not safe for children toplayinthestreets. The Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, in its month- ly Statistical Bulletin reports from time to time on major causes of death among children who are industrial policyholders. About 6,000 deaths occur annually in the United States from accidents amongchildrenatages5-14 years, the leading cause of death in this group.* Motor vehicle mishaps accounted for two-fifths of the total accident mortal- ity among these insured children in 1953-1955. Of these, over half werepedestrians, but the proportion varied with age. Among children 5-9 years How major a cause death by accident is in this age group is seen whenitiscomparedwithdeathfromothercauses. The loss of life from acci- dents among boys 5-14 years was more then four times that from cancer andothermalignantneoplasms (the second highest cause), fully seven times thatfromacutepoliomyelitis, and nine times the loss from pneumonia and influ- enza combined. Among the older elementary school boys -- those at ages 10- 14 -- accidents took a greater number of lives than all other causes to- gether. Accidents account for well over a fourth of all the deaths amonggirlsar.d far outrank any other cause. 2 of ase, almost three-fourths of the victims were pedestrians, whereas atages10-14, the proportion was only a little over one-third. On occasion, an extreme condition dramatizes the relation between sidewalks and safety ofchildren. Kentucky officials of the Veterans Administration will no longerapproveG. I. loans on big projects without sidewalks, according to theLouisvilleCourier -Journal of June 5, 1955. The last project completedpriortothisrulingcontained520lots. It Was approved for V. A. guaran- teed loans without sidewalks, paved curbs, and gutters. The V. A. officialsobservedthatthechiefprobleminbigdevelopmentswithnosidewalksisdangertopedestrians, especially children. When county school buses un- load children in such big suburban developments "the children cover theroadsastheydispersehomeward." It was reported that Montgomery County, Maryland had completed 12 miles ofsidewalksduringthecourseofayear. They were built primarily to servepublicschooldistricts, according to the Washington Post and Times HeraldofMay15, 1955. Mortality from motor vehicle accidents to pedestrians isalsohighamongolderagegroups, according to the figures available to theMetropolitanLifeInsuranceCompany. In the period 1953-1955, the averageannualdeathrateper100,000 among white male pedestrians was 24.7 in theagegroup65-74 years. In the next lowest age group -- 30-64 years (whichcovers35insteadoftenyears) --it was only 6.4. The company observesthatthesharpriseintherateforolderpeopleisdueinconsiderabledegreetotheirinabilityaspedestrianstocopewithcurrenttrafficcon- ditions. If it is true that juxtaposition of children and elderly adults to movingautomobilesisanundesirablestateofaffairsatthepresenttime, what ofthefuture? .Examination of trends reveals nothing that diminishes the caseforsidewalksinmostresidentialdevelopments. The rising birth rate, theexpansionofthepopulationintosuburbs, the growing number of old people, and the increase in car ownership* all combine to make an increasinglyhazardoussituation. If sidewalks are needed in new developments now, it ishardtoa4oidtheconclusionthattheywillbeneededevenmoreinthefuture. Motor vehicle registrations increased 7.2 per cent between 1954 and1955 (Department of Commerce). A study made by the Ford Motor Company pre- dicts that by 1960 about 74 per cent of American families will own at leastonecarascomparedwith66percentin1955 (New York Times, June 19, 1955). According to "The Biggest Car Market Yet" by Gilbert Burck and Sanford S. Parker, 9 per cent of American families owned two cars in 1956 compared with5percentin1953 (Fortune, November, 1956). The Ford survey showed thatonly2percenthadtwocarsin1941. Persons over 17 years of age per autoregisteredwaseightin1920) slightly more than two in 1955, and is ex- pected to be somewhat less than two in 1975 ("Urban Areas of the Future" byRobinsonNewcomb; Urban Land, November 1956). Percentages and ratios shouldbemodifiedbyapopulation -increase factor to get an idea of increase inactualnumbers. Projections made for an article, "By 1976 What City Pattern?" indicate that the number of cars in use will be 80 million in 1965 and morethan100millionin1976, or roughly double the number in 1956 (Architec- tural F07=, September 1956). 3 Sidewalks as a Function of Densit Given the desirability of sidewalks in residential neighborhoods where theincidenceofpeopleandautomobilesishigh, can we say that sidewalks are not needed Where the incidence of both is lou? And if so, can we draw a line between subdivisions where sidewalks are needed and those where theyarenot? And finally, can we develop some kind of a measure that bears a reasonable relation to the factual situation? One of the measures of sidewalk traffic is population density. Populationdensityisrelated, in turn, to size of lot and type of dwelling. Conse- quently, we can hypothesize that where the average lot size in a single- family residential development has a certain minimum value, sidewalks arenotneeded. The problem is to determine this minimum value. Specificationsareasfollows: 1. Lots ere so large that children have no inclination to playinthestreet.* 2. Lots are so large and development so spread out that: A. Distances between house and schools, stores, and puT)- lic transportation terminals are great enough to discou.-- age walking and all but require travel by auto; b. Frequent visiting back and forth among neighbors is not likely to take place. A residential development that fits these criteria is often called an "open," a "residential estate," or a "country homes" development. What are the lotdimensionsthatfittheseterms? Qr4 standard is offered by The Community Builders Eandbook, which makes theobservationthat ". . . in open developments of large lots of loo -footfrontageormore, sidewalks may be eliminated without objection." If we assume that lots with 100 -foot frontages have, on the average, an area ofone-third to one-half acre, then density is about two families a grossacre. Does this density jibe with the picture evoked by the phrase "opendevelopment"? Is it true, in experience, that at this density housewivesseldomvisitbackandforth (pushing baby carriages) and that children play only in their own and the next door neighbors' back yards? Another standard is offered by the Housing and Home Finance Agency in SLI - gested Land Subdivision Regulations (Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C.; 1952, 45 cents). Tobeginwith, this manual distinguishes three general types of residentialdevelopmentsandsetsupcorrespondingstandardsforutilityandstreet im- provements: a. For apartment, row house, and similar multifamily residen- tial types, improvements to be in accord with STANDARD A. No matter how large the lot there should be a safe place for rcilerskating, tricycling, and kindred activities. 4 b. For cne-fail; detached dwellings with tyrical lot widths of ft. or less,* improvements to be in accord with STANDARD B. C. For country homes with typical lot widths greater than "b" above, improvements to be in accord with STATMARD C. The manual then specifies the installation of sidewalks in all three types of developments. What about a subdivision located in an area designated by five -acre, 300 - foot frontage minimums under the zoning ordinance? bots of this size seem to fit the specifications above. However, subdivisions with lots ranging from less than five acres and 300 -foot widths downward to one-third of an acre and 100 -foot widths are open to question. Where the line is to be drawn between sidewalks and no sidewalks should be determined on a local basis after a field survey. Table 1 following is made up of various subdivision provisions that relate sidewalk requirements to residential density. Density is expressed in terms of area, frontage or lot width, and type of dwelling. In a few cases, dis- tricts established by the zoning ordinance are used as a density reference. In addition to stating whether sidewalks are required at all, these pro- visions also relate sidewalk width and location to residential density. Sidewalks as a Function of Traffic As we have seen, the need for sidewalks is related primarily to the number of pedestrians. Need also is related to the amount of vehicular traffic. Given a constant daily volume of pedestrian traffic in an area that might not require sidewalks by other standards, can we say that there are certain traffic conditions that in themselves justify building sidewalks? Common sense tells us that the answer is affirmative. And the problem again is to determine the point at which traffic volume becomes critical. One attempt has been made by the American Association of State Highway Offi= cials. Its findings on this subject are reproduced in Traffic EngineeringHandbook (Institute of Traffic Engineers, New Haven, Connecticut; Second Edition, 1950) in a table headed "Tentative Number of Pedestrians per DayJustifyingSidewalkConstruction." In all examples, design speeds of 30, 40, and 50 miles an hour are assumed. ONE sidewalk is justified if vehicles number 30 to 100 an hour and if there In another section, the HHFA manual observes that lot size should con- form with zoning ordinance standards, but that in the absence of a zoningordinance "generally accepted minimums are a width not less than 60 feet and an area not less than 6,000 square feet" where served by public sewer. Lots must be large enough to accommodate a septic tank and leaching field in areas not served by public sewer. 5 T AE L:: 1 SIDE6'ALKS RELATED TO RESIDEITIP.L DENSITY Type of area Association of Washington Cities Regulating Subdivisions, Informa- tional Bulletin No. 167, 1954). Areas proposed for SINGLE DWELLING UNIT homes. Proposed APARTMENT HOUSES, ROW HOUS- ING, GARDEN APARTMENTS. Proposed COMMERCIAL, SHOPPING and RETAIL LAND USES. Fairfax County, Virginia (1956) Subdivisions in which land use con- forms to SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (17,000 sq. ft.) or greater density. Within a.subdivision block where a PUBLIC SCHOOL OR SCHOOL SITE is lo- cated and further, within the dis- tance of one block in any direction from such block wherein a public school or school site is located." Greenwich, Connecticut (1954) Large -lot RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDEN- TIAL AGRICULTURAL ZONES (12,000 sq. ft. to 4 acres). R-6 and R-7 ZONES (6,000 and 7,000 sq. ft. respectively). R -MF MULTI -FAMILY ZONES. BUSINESS ?ONES. 6 Sidewalk requirements 4 -foot sidewalks. B -foot sidewalks. 12 -foot sidewalks. 4 -foot sidewalks "on both sides of major thoroughfares and one side of local thoroughfares." 4 -foot sidewalk "on one side of all streets." No sidewalks required. 4 -foot sidewalks on at least one side of streets. 4 -foot sidewalks on both sides of streets. 10 -foot sidewalks on both sides of streets. Table 1 -- contir.t:e Type cf area Howard County Indiana (1956) Where there is proposed an average of 3 or more lots per gross acre. Midland, Michigan (1950) Lots 60 feet wide or less. Where necessary, in the opinion of the planning commission, to safe- guard the safety of pedestrians, ir- respective of the width of lots. i Montgomery County Ohio (1955) ILot frontage greater than 80 ft. and where essential to pedestrian movement and safety. Lots have either a width of less than 80 ft. at building line or area is less than 15,000 sq. ft. Parsippany -Troy Hills, New Jersey (1950) LARGE LOT (40)000 sq. ft. and greater; frontage 200 ft. and greater). Sidewalk requirements 4 -foot sidewalks on each side of a street. Sidewalks on both sides of every street. Sidewalks on one or both sides Of streets. Planning commission may require sidewalks. 4 -foot sidewalks on both sides of a street. No sidewalks required. MEDIUM LOT (15,000-40,000 sq. ft.; front Adequate graded shoulders forages100-200 ft.). pedestrian traffic on each side of pavement." j SMALL IAT (less than 15,000 sq. ft.; frontages less than 100 ft.). Passaic County, New Jersey (1954) OPEN DEVEIAPMEAT (100 ft. x 200 ft.; maximum density, 2 families per acre). ONE -FAMILY (60 ft. x 120 ft.; maximum density, 6 families per acre). 7 4 -foot sidewalks on both sides Of street. No sidewalks required. 4 -foot sidewalks. Table 1 -- continued Type of area MULTI -FAMILY AND ROW (maximum density25familiesperacre). BUSINESS. Washtenav County, Michigan (1953) ACREAGE (5 acres; lot width 300 ft.; persons per acre -- 0.6+x). IJME SUBURBAN (1 acre; lot width 150 ft.; persons per acre -- 3.6). SMALL SUBURBAN (j acre; lot width 100 f't.; persons per acre -- 5.6). WATERFRONT RESORT (1/3 acre; lot width 75 ft.). LARGE SINGLE-FAMILY (1/4 acre; lot width 75 ft.; persons per acre -- 9.5). WDERATE 9INGI.F-FAMILY (1/5 acre; lot width 65 ft.; persons per acre -- 11.2). SMALL SINGLE-FAMILY (1/6 acre; lot width 60 ft.; persons per acre -- 13.3). MINIMUM SINGLE-FAMMY (1/7 acre; lot width 55 ft.; persons per acre -- 16). MULTI -FAMILY, ROW, APARIURns. Sidewalk requirements 5 -foot sidewalks. 12 -foot sidewalks. Sidewalks not required. Sidewalks not required. Sidewalks not required. Sidewalks not required. Sidewalks not required. Sidewalk one side of street; 4 -foot minimum, prefer 5 ft. Sidewalks both sides of street. Sidewalks both sides of street. Sidewalks both sides of street. Persons per acre is simplified here, being an average of the grossdesirablepersonsperacre" and "net possible people per acre" figures asgiven'in the source. 1 are 150 pedestrians a day; or more than 100 vehicles an hour and only 100pedestriansaday. Tk'0 sidewalks are justified if vehicles number 50 to100anhourand500pedestriansaday. A footnote reads, "Smaller pedes- trian traffic densities may justify two sidewal-ks to avoid a considerableamountofpedestriancrosstraffic." Whether any of these conditions refer to residential neighborhoods is notindicated. Assuming, however, that the design speed of 30 m. p. h. appliestolocalresidentialstreets,* is it possible to translate these figuresintotermsofresidentialdensity? It is pointed out in Building Traffic Safety Into Residential Developmentsthatsubdivisionvehiculartrafficwillconsistof: 1. Vehicles driven by the residents. 2. Service vehicles. 3. Visitors' vehicles and casual traffic. One automobile for each single-family unit can reasonably be assumed. (Thebreakingpointbetweenoneandmorethanonecarperfamilyoccurs "wheredensityoflandoccupancyislessthantenpersonsperacre, walking dis- tance from established transit service is over one-fourth mile and familyincomelevelisaboveaverage . . . ." Ibid.) As a rule -of -thumb, but forpurposesofcalculatingstreetcapacity, this same source observes that ordinarily not over 40 vehicles per 100 family units will move during thepeakhours." This figure brings us in the neighborhood of the first setoftrafficvolumeconditions, which justify ONE sidewalk, though compari- sons between average and peak vehicular traffic are not, strictly speaking, comparable. The required pedestrian count is easier to approximate, if "pedestrian" isgiventhefleetingmeaningordinarilyascribedtothisterm. A boy on atricycleplayingonthesidewalkforonehourshouldnotbecountedasonepedestrianbutprobablyasthreeorfour, or maybe more. In this connection, some references to Traffic Engineering Handbook are ofinterest. Average walking speeds, according to the Handbook, have beenfoundtovaryfrom3.5 to 4.5 feet a second, depending on temperature, typeofcrowd, density of sidewalk use, and other factors. A "pedestrian" asdefinedforpurposesofaccidentclassificationis "any person afoot." Butthisisinterpretedtoinclude "any person riding in or upon a device movedordesignedformovementbyhumanpowerortheforceofgravityexceptbicycles, including stilts, skates, skis, sleds, toy wagons, scooters, scooter -bikes (having wheels less than 24 inches in diameter), tricycles, baby carriages, etc., while upon or adjacent to the highway." Twenty-five miles an hour is more co=only observed and is the speedrecommendedintheUniformVehicleCode. 9 Our hypothetical boy on a tricycle, if he plays in the street fc~ an hourbecausethereisnootherhard, level surface, exposes himself to accidentbymanymoretimestheexposureoftheadultpedestriantraversingthesari -- path once or twice within that hour. On this basis alone, it should not behardtocountmorethan150pedestriansadayinatypicalresidentialneighborhood. Another approach to the relating of sidewalk need to traffic is found inlocalsubdivisionregulationsthatspecifysidewalksbyreferencetotype ofstreet. Examples are shown in Table 2. Provisions of this kind often arefoundintablesthatindicateminimumimprovementstandardsforstreetsofdifferenttypes, sidewalks being one type of street improvement. Though it is possible to derive a measure of sidewalk need from volume oftraffic, this variable is seldom sufficient in itself. On the other hand, we do know that residential subdivisions of given densities can be expectedtogeneratepedestriansandtrafficinvolumessufficienttorequirethein- stallation of sidewalks for purposes of safety. Design Standards Construction. For residential developments, concrete sidewalks four inchesthickarealmostalwaysrecommendedandspecified. The standard manual on sidewalk construction is Sidewalks and Curbs, beingPartCofStandardSpecificationsforPublicWorksConstruction (publishedbytheAmericanPublicWorksAssociation, 1313 st 60th Street, Chicago 37; W. Width of Sidewalk. The widely accepted minimum width is four feet in low- density neighborhoods. This is based on a foot traffic lane of two feet. If one foot, eight inches is taken as a standard dimension of an adult male, measured from elbow to elbow with arms folded,* then a lane base of two feetseemsadequate. However, the character of sidewalk traffic anticipated in a new developmentshouldbeconsideredindeterminingwhetherfourfeetissufficient. If asidewalkistobeusedmainlybypersonswheelingbabycarriagesandsmallchildrenridingwheeledtoys, then four feet is hardly adequate. In residential neighborhoods of higher densities, sidewalks should be cor- respondingly wider. Two of the subdivision regulations listed in Table 1requireawidthoffivefeetinmulti -family developments. Here again, thevalidityofthiswidthshouldbetestedagainsttherequirementsofsidewalkusers. In business districts, widths may vary from ten to 30 feet or more, accord- ing to Municipal Public Works Administration, (published by The Interna- tional City Managers' Association, 1313 East 60th Street, Chicago 37; 1950). See Time Saver Standards, F. W. Dodge Corp., 119 West 40th Street, New York; U),54, $12.50. 10 TABLE 2 SIDEWALKS RELATED TO TYPE OF STREET Type of street Modesto, California (1952) Along all major thoroughfares -- 90 ft. right-of-way. Along the frontage of all business iproperties. Other locations where deemed neces- sary by planning comMission. Oklahoma County. Oklahoma (1952) I Officially designated major streets and highways. Any minor street where deemed essen- tial for public safety by the plan- ning commission. San Antonio, Texas (1953) New streets and existing unpaved_ streets located within the subdi. vision and extending the length of one or more blocks. Minor streets -- 50 ft. R.O.W. Collector residential streets -- 60 ft. R.O.W. Collector commercial streets 70 ft. R.O.W. Arterial streets -- 82 ft. R.O.W. Sidewalk requirements Sidewalks required. Sidewalks required. Sidewalks required. Sidewalks may be required. Sidewalks may be required. Optional.* Concrete sidewalks required 4 ft. x 4 inches P.C.C.). Same. Same. 4 ft. x 3 -inch concrete sidewalk abutting the concrete curb may beconstructedinsubstitutionforstandardsidewalksinminorstreetswhensuchconstructionmeetswiththeapprovalofthedirectorofpublicworks. 11 Location and Placement of Sidewalks. Whether sidewalks are located on on. - side or both sides of a street depends on density of development, as we haveseen. Eowever, if a sidewalk is located on gust one side of a street, the presumption must be that it will be used by adult pedestrians only. If itsfunctionistoservealsoasawayforvehiclespropelledbysmallchildrenandforbabycarriages, then location on one side only is unreasonable. The question of sidewalk placement (with respect to street and propertylines) is closely connected with the somewhat controversial question of curbtype. Rolled curbs are enthusiastically endorsed by builders. If rolled curbs areused, a savings of 20 per cent over cost of installing straight curbs and gutters can be realized because they are easier to lay and require lessforming. Steel templates can be used, and only front and back forms areneeded. Use of the rolled curb also eliminates the need for driveway cuts, curbs, and aprons, thus further reducing costs. (See The Community BuildersHandbook, pp. 80-83 for discussion of further cost-cutting advantages. Alsopp. 32-33 of the Home Builders Manual for Land Develo went, revised edition, 1950, published by the National Association of Home Builders of the U. S., 1625 L Street, N. W., Washington 6, D. C.). Types of curbs and their relation to sidewalks was one of the points consid- ered by the special committee that prepared Building Traffic Safety intoResidentialDevelopments. Pros and cons of each type of curb were consideredandthefollowingrecondationsmade; In developed areas curbs are usually necessary to control storm - water runoff, and in most localities a curb height of about sixinchesisrequired. Either a straight curb or a roll -type curbhasbeenused. The roll curb and gutter have some advantages in economy, as for example in obviating the necessity for curb cutsandcurbreturnsatdriveways. . . .If roll curb is used on local residential streets it is recommended that the combination curbandgutterbetwofeetwide, and that it be rolled on a 17 -inchradius. The principal advantage of the straight curb is that by its use, driving and parking areas are defined more effectively than byanyothertypecurb. It constitutes more of a barrier to a ve- hicle out of control than a rounded roll curb. Children arelesslikelytoridewheeledvehiclesintoroadwayshavingstraightcurbsofrecoaanended6 -inch height. Straight curbs are recom- mended at all intersections, whether or not they are used else- where. The general consensus among those contributing to this report wasagainsttheplacementofthesidewalknexttothecurb, but therewasnotcompleteagreement. It was generally agreed, however, that the sidewalk should never be placed adjacent to any curb on 12 a feeder street. In other words, the sidewalk should not be placed next to the curb anywhere except on a local residential street with straight curb -- and even this had no strong supportfromthetrefficstandpoint. Even if straight curbs are used, there are overriding disadvantages to plac- ing the sidewalk next to the curb. This has been convincingly outlined inanarticlebyL. K. White, City Engineer, Wichita, in the February 1949 is- sue of The American City titled "Where Should Sidewalks Be Placed?" For years it has been the practice in this city to build the sidewalk on line and grade where driveways are constructed tothepropertyline, so that future sidewalk construction connects existing walks at the driveways. A sidewalk can be built adjacent to the curb, but there are ob- jections. 1. There will be a step at each driveway location, and in wet and snowy weather this part of the walk will be in water and snow. This step will be a hazard, particularly at night, because it will not be lighted as the steps are at the street corners. 2. A walk adjacent- to the curb is also a hazard to childrenriding "wheel goods," such as roller skates, tricycles, scooters, and wagons. Driveways also present a hazard and limit the use of the walk for this purpose to the distance between driveways. 3. Walks have a slope of -inch per foot for drainage; drivewayshaveaslopeof1 -inch per foot and sometimes more which isIf to walk on and dangerous when wet or icy. 4. A walk adjacent to the curb should be 6 inches thick, as itwillbesubjecttovehiculartravel, with an increase of 50% in cost compared with the cost of a 4 -inch walk, which is used atthepropertyline. S. Melting snow will be splashed onto a walk next to the curbbyvehiclesatnight, will freeze, and in the morning, just whenthechildrenaregoingtoschool, it will be covered with afrozenmixtureofsnow, dirt and ice. City ordinance requiresthepropertyownertokeephiswalkcleanofsnowandallformsofdirtanddebris. 'We doubt if the ordinance could be enforcedifdailycleaningwerenecessary. 6. The detail at street crossing is very hazardous because the pedestrian must choose between crossing the street at the widest part of the intersection or make a detour back to the propertylineandback, which we doubt would be done. For crossings havingavalleygutter (and nearly all do in this area), the walk linewouldbeinwater. For stop streets, the walk line would be 15or20feetinfrontofstopsigns. 13 7. A lawsuit involving a pedestrian accident at either a drive- way or a street Crossing would be difficult to defend by the citylegaldepartmentonthegroundsthatinthiscityitisnotthe usual and customary construction. The owner of the "unusual" driveway could also be brought into the lawsuit. B. For years the wire companies have placed their poles next tothecurb, and if a change in policy requires moving the poles, we believe that they could justifiably ask to be paid for the cost of the work. Street -light poles must remain next to the curb in order to keep the fixture in the street and would be an obstruction. In fact, poles cannot be moved back of a curb walkbecauseofthetrees. Recommendations of Building Traffic Safety into Residential Developments re- garding sidewalk placement are as follows: Most technicians favored the recommendation that sidewalks be set back from the curb at least 3 feet, and if trees were planted in the strip the set -back should be at least 7 feet. Advantages of setting the sidewalk back from the curb 3 feet or more include: 1) There is space to pile snow removed from the roadway or side- walk; (2) Pedestrians are not as likely to be "splashed" by passingcars; (3) There is a "safer" distance between the moving vehicleandthepedestrian; (4) Children are less likely to ride wheeledtoysintotheroadwayoveran "insulation" strip; (5) There is space for placing fire hydrants, utility poles and street signs outside of the sidewalk area. One further recommendation remains and that is whether the set -back shouldbetheminimumofthree. feet or wider to accommodate trees. Since the question of street tree placement was discussed in PLANNING ADVISORY SERVICEInformationReportNo. 86 (Land Development Ordinances: Grading; Curb CutsandDriveways; Street Trees, May 1956), the reader is referred to this re- port for details. In brief, the arguments against placing trees in planting strips are thattheymaycauseblindintersections, obstruct the vision of both. driver andchildren (who are apt to dash into the etreet when cars are passing), screenstreetlights, damage underground utilities, obstruct overhead utilitylines, and cause difficutly in street widening. The new trend is to encour- age or require that all trees and shrubs be planted on the far side of thesidewalk, away from the curb. Depending on width of right-of-way, this will mean either that trees will still be located on public property or withintheprivatepropertyline. FINANCING SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION Sidewalks are in the class of public improvements known as local improve- ments. A local improvement is made in a particular locality, and it resultsdirectlyinanenhancementofvaluetothepropertyinthatlimitedarea. It also confers a type of benefit upon the area that is not enjoyed by allwhoareunderataxingjurisdiction. 14 In accordance with the theory of speciei benefit, sidewalks, generally spear- ing, are not eligible for general revenue financing.* If sidewalks are installed at the time of land development, the cost ispassedontothebuyerinthepurchasepriceofthelot, or the house and lottogether, as the case may be. If they are put in after land development, householders still pay for the sidewalk improvement, usually by specialassessment. Sidewalk Financing in New Residential Developments By far the most common practice in new subdivisions is installation and pay- ment by the developer in accordance with local ordinance. Usually he is re- quired to finish construction of sidewalks (and other improvements as speci- fied) prior to final plat approval or to post a performance bond in lieuthereof. Evidence of the prevalence of this practice .has been gathered in severaldifferentsurveys. Most recent and comprehensive is that reported in theUrbanLandInstitute's Technical Bulletin No. 27, Utilities and FacilitiesforNewResidentialDevelopment (1737 Y. Street N. W. Washington 6, D. C.; 1955) $3). For this survey of municipal policy on subdivisions, question- naires were sent to 140 of the 237 cities with populations of 50,000 andover. Of the 114 cities replying, 75 (or 74 per cent) reported that the de- veloper pays the entire coat of sidewalks. Sixty-seven of the 174 urbancountieswerealsoqueried. In 31 out of the 43 replying, the developerisrequiredtopaytheentirecostofbuildingsidewalks. Fifty-one out of the 97 cities, counties, and townships whose subdivision regulations were inspected for PLANNING ADVISORY SERVICE Information ReportNo. 38, Installation of Physical improvements as Required in SubdivisionRegulations** May, 1952) require or may require sidewalks. In the past, cities in the United States approved plate on hundreds of acres Of unimproved land and accepted the financial obligation of putting instreets, sidewalks, sewers, and other facilities. The disastrous results ofthispolicyarewellknown. It is largely because of the widespread lossesincurredbycitygovernmentsduringthedepressionandthecreationofvast Statutes vary, however. In the state of Washington, for instance, emunicipalitymaypayforsidewalkconstructionoutofitsgeneralrevenue, inaccordancewitha1949act. In addition, Washington cities may use two othermethodsinfinancingsidewalkimprovements: the municipality may require theowneroftheabuttingpropertytoconstructtheimprovementathisowncostorexpense; or it may do the work but assess all or any portion of the costagainsttheownerofabuttingproperty. Companion reports are No. 48, Performance Bonds for the InstallationofPh_Sieal Improvements (March 1953); and No. 58, Forma dor PerformanceBonds (January 1954). 15 areas of "dead" land that so many cities and a growing number of counties now require that improvements be installed before plats are approved ar.d streets dedicated. Special assessment financing of improvements in new subdivisions has not dis- appeared entirely, but it is no longer in favor for this purpose. Competent observers have pointed out that when a local government employs special assessment financing to build improvements in new subdivisions it is actuallytakingaflyer" in the real estate business. (For further discussion see Thee Special Assessment Today with E!phasis on the Michigan Experience, by William 0. Winter; Michigan Governmental Studies No. 26, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor; 1952. $2.) Special assessment financing of sidewalks in new subdivisions compares un- favorably with builder -installed sidewalks in several respects. If side- walks are built on a mass production basis at the same time as streets, curbs, and gutters, considerable economies in material, equipment, and labor can be realized. A large economy is effected in the cost of pouring con- crete. Grading for all three types of structures can be done at the same time. However, it is important to time the building of walks so that they are not broken by heavy equipment rolled onto the lot during house con- struction. In the matter of finance, the concentrated handling of all documents by one consolidated outfit is less expensive than the financing of several opera- tions by different offices. On the other hand, when heavy equipment is brought into an area where houses are already occupied it becomes a somewhat hazardous operation. If the municipality is involved in the contract -- as it is more often than not it is open to increased chance of public liability suit. And finally, when a person buys a house and lot not fully served with local Public improvements -- streets, sidewalks, and sewers -- he may be buying a pig in the poke. The ancient rule of caveat emptor still holds in the courts, but local governments are now more likely than previously to try to protect the unwary, as well as serve their own corporate interests. If the streets and sidewalks are yet to be built, the pro rata costs charged for installing thein may increase the annual payments on the buyer's property enough to work a hardship in his budget. And in time, delinquent assessment payments will cloud titles. Neither of these possibilities is necessarily apparent at the time of purchase. Though mass produced subdivisions are the predominant form of residential development at the present time, individual house construction is still taking place on plated land in relatively undeveloped areas. Where there are undeveloped properties between houses, it is neither practical nor desirable to require the individual owner to put in his own sidewalk. If sidewalks are needed in areas of this type, they will probably have to befinancedbythemethodsusedinolder, sidewalk -deficient neighborhoods. 16 Sidewalk Financir.^ in Established Neighborhoods In built-up neighborhoods that need sidewalks, the most co=on method offinancingisbyspecialassessment. The extent of this practice is shown inthe1953editionofTheMunicipalYearbook (which reports the latest figuresavailable), published by The International City Managers' Association, 1313East60thStreet, Chicago 37, from which the following table is extracted. Population group No. cities No. cities reporting using special assessments for sidewalks Over 500,000 . . . . . . 13 9250,000 to 500,000 15 14100,000 to 250,000 . 36 30501000to100,000. . 77 6025,000 to 50,000 . . . . 156 10,000 to 25,000 . . . . 415 122 292 All cities over 10,000 . 712 527 The cities surveyed by ICMA used four principal methods of financing specialassessmentprojects. (In addition to sidewalks, sewers, water lines, newstreetpaving, repaving streets, curbs and gutters, off-street parking, andstreetlightingwerefinancedbythesemethods.) The predominance of specialassessmentbondfinancingisshowninthefollowingbreakdown, from The Municipal Yearbook, 1953: also taken Special assessment bonds 450 Bonds guaranteed by full faith 299andcreditofcitygovernment Bonds secured by liensains the benefited PMpertiesg t 151 Advance payments from property owners for all or part of 143 the cost Temporary loans from various city funds (usually revolving 220 Rind) with property owners repaying city over a relatively short period of time Special certificates or propertyliensissuedtocontractorwho 93 in turn sells them to a local bank. 17 There are several methods of floating special assessment papers. In Texascities, special assessment certificates are marketed by the contractor at ahighrateofinterest -- around 6 per cent. These certificates are heavilydiscounted, and in order to secure his investment, the contractor must boosthiscontractprice, which also increases the building cost. In Illinois, general assessment bonds are sold. These are guaranteed onlybythespecialassessmentsactuallycollected. Interest rates run from 5 to6percent -- about twice as much as general obligation bonds. Here alsothebondsmaybediscountedashighas30percent, with a compensating in- crease in contractor's bid. The third method, sometimes known as the special general obligation bond, is used in Michigan and Wisconsin. In this type, the city appropriates enoughmoneytomeetthedebtservicecostincaseofdeficiency. These bonds sell at a slightly higher rate than general obligation bonds. However, sincetheyarebackedbythefaithandcreditofthecity, they reflect the creditratingofthecityandarenotdiscounted. Despite its disadvantages, the special assessment is the best method of financing sidewalks once the opportunity has passed for initial installation along with street paving. Readers considering its use are referred to the excellent Michigan study mentioned above -- The Special Assessment TodaywithEmphasisontheMichiganExperience. Procedure and forms used in the various methods of financing sidewalks aredescribedinSidewalkImprovements, Informational Bulletin No. 126, pub- lished by the Association of Washington Cities in cooperation with the BureauofGovernmentalResearchandServices, University of Washington, Seattle 5, 1950. It is a useful manual even though limited to the statutory procedurespermittedinonestate. CONCLUSIONS Sidewalks, like babies and cars, are here to stay. In mass produced sub- divisions -- the dominant form of city -building -- they are an adjunct of amodeoflife. The trends that make sidewalks desirable or necessary nowshownosignsofdeclininginthefuture. Consequently, city and urban county governments can expect for some time to have to cope with the prob- lem of seeing that sidewalks are installed. Past experience has shown the inadvisability of relying on the special as- sessment to finance new local improvements. On the other hand, experience with laws that require developers to build sidewalks prior to plat approvalshows, by three pragmatic tests, that they are successful: (1) sidewalksareinplacewhenfamiliesmovein; (2) cost and risk to local governmentisataminimum; (3) lump sum payment in purchase price of house is moresatisfactoryforownerthantaxesaddedlater. However, the special assessment is still a reliable method of financingsidewalksinbuilt-up areas that lack sidewalks but need them. In In a period of rising capital improvement expenditures, municipal and urbancountygovernmentswillbewelladvisedtoexaminetheircurrentsidewalkPoliciesandprogramstoseeiftheyaredesignedtomeetpresentandfuturedemandsfornewsidewalks. 19