HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 01-10-1994 SpecialPlymouthr
Adding Quality to Life
Materials for City Council Meeting
Lyl'c A( cv f D
3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 • Tel: 763-509-5000 • www.plymouthmn.gov
U-fRa
l
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MN 55447
DATE: January 7, 1994
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Process for Monday evening interviews for Ward 2 Council member
Council member Lymangood has inquired about the procedure to be used in the
interviews via a voice mail message this morning, and invited Mayor Tierney and
myself to develop and clarify a process. After discussing the matter with other staff
members and Mayor Tierney, the following is proposed:
1. All council members should come early at 5:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as
possible to coordinate the questions and procedure. With Mayor Tierney's
concurrence, staff has today posted the official meeting; to start at 5:30 p.m. so that the
Open Meetings Law procedure is met.
2. Over the weekend, as you review the applications of the candidates and their
responses to the written interview questions, each council member should think of two
or three questions to ask the candidates. The Mayor and I see no necessity for the same
questions to be asked of each candidate. Monday, at 5:30 p.m., everyone should
generally share the questions they plan to ask so we care coordinate any duplications.
3. During the actual interview periods, Mayor Tierney will welcome each candidate
and make introductions. Each council member will then be given the opportunity to
ask a question or several short questions, recognizing that there will be an average of
only three minutes per council member for questioning on the average in a 20 minute
interview. A council member is free to pass if he or she has no questions for a
particular candidate or if the question has already been asked.
4. Two 5 minute breaks have been built into the schedule at 7:20 p.m. and 8:25 p.m.
5. Mayor Tierney hopes that council members can stay for a short time afterwards to
discuss the results of the interview process and how to proceed toward a decision. One
candidate may stand out for everyone, or you may want to have a second interview or
some other procedure for the top two or three candidates.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MN 55447
DATE: January 6, 1994
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dwight Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Summary of Events
Baton Property. On Tuesday, Eric Blank and I met with Doug Bryant and Del Miller
of the County Park District. Neighborhood residents Bob Donnelly and Rita
O'Donnell were also present. The City's Park and Recreation Commission had
previously suggested, and the Council had previous approved, a meeting so that the
City could find out what the Park District's position is on possible acquisition of the
Baton property. I related City activities to date on the property including the December
20th action denying the most recent development plan, the creation of an Open Space
subcommittee of the Park and Recreation Commission (FRAC), and the
recommendation by PRAC for $250,000 for acquisition of open space/nature preserve
areas (undesignated) in the next Capital Improvements Plan.
Park District members expressed a definite willingness to accept the property if it can
be obtained and to maintain it. They indicated that the previously stated asking price of
nearly $800,000 is a major barrier to even considering being a partner in acquisition.
They expressed hope that the owners would consider at least a partial gift of the
property which might bring some tax advantages. They did not rule out a small
contribution if the price of the property becomes much lower for any reason, but the
district board has no official position on this. They outlined their method of
establishing priorities for the many millions of dollars in requests for projects and
acquisitions throughout the County. They expressed interest in the City's pending
study and rating of various areas that might be candidates for acquisition.
It was also discussed that the City has some sensitivity to negotiating to acquire this
property since we are still in a regulatory posture on approval or disapproval of a
development for the property, and since we are just undertaking an objective city-wide
study to determine which of about two dozen properties, if any, should be acquired as
natural preserve area. Park District officials expressed concern that their involvement
in negotiations at this time might affect the price of the property. The residents present
said they may have some ideas they could pursue on their own.
Police Contract. Several weeks ago, the City bargaining team and the Police Union
bargaining team arrived at an agreement after a full day of mediation. The proposed
agreement provided for 2.75 % wage increases for both years, as well as some increases
in city contribution for insurance. The total package was close to 6% for the two
years. Even though their bargaining team accepted the offer, the union as a whole
voted it down this week. This contract may go to arbitration now, which is unfortunate
since we probably won't even get the chance to renegotiate to fmd out what the
problem issues really are. A current contract does continue in force for 1994, but it
had a reopener for the wages and insurance benefits only. We had tried for a two year
contract with them in negotiations based upon both parties apparent interest in this.
Police officers are considered "essential" employees under Minnesota law and do not
have the right to strike.
Sam's Club. The City Attorney's office has sent a letter to Carlson Real Estate
Company indicating that further action or expense pursuant to the rezoning adopted on
December 20th is at their own risk, in light of the council's action on January 3rd to
refer the matter to the Planning Commission for consideration of rescinding of the
rezoning. The new Planning Commission hearing will be on January 26th, the earliest
possible time. Linda Fisher of Carlson has advised that they will be submitting a
preliminary plat soon. The City Attorney's office is looking into whether or not we
should begin processing it before the rescinding is decided. The Attorney will be
addressing similar issues about the publication of the December 20th rezoning
ordinance and its submission to the Met Council. As of now, we are assuming we will
not be proceeding on any of these matters relating to the December 20th action unless
further research by the Attorney indicates that we must. Before the January 26th
Planning Commission meeting, staff will also be working with the attorneys on what
findings of facts would be necessary to support a rescining action.. We have not yet
seen a draft of the covenant. Finally, Council member Granath's inquiry of the
Attorney on this matter has been forwarded to the Attorney for response.
Scheduling of future special council meetings. Several of you have discussed with
me the inefficiency of our scheduling process late Monday evening. Staff agrees.
Several events combined to make it difficult. The first three months are by far the
busiest on the City calendar in any case. Secondly, a new council had a backlog of
meetings to schedule. Third, staff was prepared only with a recommendation on the
meeting with the legislators (February 14th). We guessed incorrectly that we would
wait until January 24th to schedule a goal setting meeting or a special issues discussion
meeting, so we were not ready with recommendations on those meeting dates. I really
think that after March, we will be able to meet almost entirely on Monday evenings and
will avoid much of the problem we had last Monday evening.
To be doubly safe, however, we are including a survey in your packet today about your
availability over the next several months. This way, if we do have to schedule a non -
Monday meeting, staff will have a starting point for proposing suggested dates.
Several of you and the City Clerk all came to this idea independently. Please fill out
the survey form and return it to us within the next week.
Soo Line Crossing at Pineview. A meeting with the Soo Line (CP Rail) public works
director is scheduled for 8 a.m. Monday morning. John Edson and Joy Tierney will be
joining several residents and staff to see if our proposed project to install crossing arms
at this crossing can be speeded up. The City has offered to pay the full cost of
installation, but the railroad's rules require them to design and construct the arms. The
crossing arms are needed for safety and also so that a city ordinance that prohibits
nighttime train whistles will take effect at this crossing. The whistle ban applies to
those crossings that have both protective gates and flashing lights.
City Manager evaluation. If any of you did not receive the packet of evaluation
information and forms I left on your desks Monday night, please let me know. Please
complete this if at all possible by Friday, January 14th, and return them to John
Edson's office in the envelope provided. Thank you.
Appointment to Senior Community Services Board. I have been invited to serve on
the Board of Directors of Senior Community Services which is headquartered in
Minnetonka. This is a private, non-profit agency that provides a wide variety of Senior
Citizen programs and activities to many western suburban municipalities, including
Plymouth. I have an interest in serving on this board, but recognize the possibility for
a conflict of interest at budget time. Accordingly, I would not vote on the board on
any matter pertaining to the level of services or the amount of funding of any program
they have in Plymouth. As City Manager, I am not involved in day-to-day supervision
of their contract with the City. If this does not seem acceptable to any of you that I
serve on this board (without compensation, of course), please let me know so we can
discuss it. I will certainly not serve if this is a problem of any kind. The total amount
of the contracts with the City is $23,339 in 1994.
DATE: January 6, 1994
TO: Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Kathy Lueckert, Ass't Manager through Dwight Johnson, Manager
SUBJECT: Council Coordinating Representative (CCR) Preferences
Attached is a matrix showing the CCR preferences turned in by each of you on Monday
evening. There are some "ties" in preferences, particularly for the Planning
Commission, Park and Recreation Advisory Commission, the Financial Advisory
Committee, the Plymouth Civic League, and the Municipal Legislative Commission.
I hope this information is helpful to you when appointing CCRs. Please call me on
550-5013 with any questions.
CCR PREFERENCES
Anderson Granath Edson Lymangood Helliwell Tierney
Planning Commission 3 3
Park & Recreation Advisory
Commission 1 1 2
Board of Zoning, Adjustments
Appeals 4
Financial Advisory Committee 2 2
Water Quality Committee 1
Human Rights Commission 4
I.S.D. 279 2
I.S.D. 281 4
I.S.D. 270 3
I.S.D. 284 2
Suburban Rate Authority X
Municipal Legislative
Commission 1 X
Special Assessment Committee
Plymouth Civic League 1 X
NW Suburbs Cable
Communication Commission X
NW Suburbs Community
Access Corporation
Wayzata/Plymouth Area
Chemical Health Comm. 3
Environmental Cities Coalition
Fence Viewer X
Community Collaboration Task
Force - I.S.D. 284' X
n
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MN 55447
DATE: January 5, 1994
TO: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager
FROM: Laurie Rauenhorsq! city Clerk
SUBJECT: EXCERPT ON SAM'S CLUB MOTION - 12/6/93
As requested by Councilmember Lymangood, attached is an excerpt from the
December 6, 1993, City Council meeting relating to the motion on the Sam's Club
reguiding/rezoning issue.
There are more comments that I could not pick up on the tape or could not attribute to
a specific person, but I believe this is the essence of the motion.
Excerpt from 12/6 City Council Meeting regarding Motion on Sam's Club
Tierney: Mr. Mayor, I'd move for denial.
Helliwell: I'll second.
Bergman: Any further discussion?
Discussion)
Bergman: This does require a 4/5 vote to approve a land use guide plan change.
So we've got a motion and a second so it doesn't appear the votes are
there, but I just want to remind the neighbors that are here tonight, I
won't be on the Council - Maria won't be on the Council - but
something will come up for a proposal on this site and I want the
Councilmembers here to remember what the residents said: they aren't
opposed to a bulk distribution center; things like that; so they may hold
you to your word. O.K. Any further discussion? Roll call.
Edson: No
Tierney: Aye
Helliwell: Aye
Vasiliou: No
Bergman: No
Bergman: O.K. this means that the requested land use guide plan change/rezoning
has been denied. Nice plan. Right? No? It's rezoned? Rezoning?
Hurlburt: You have passed no motion.
Bergman: What?
Hurlburt: You have not passed a motion.
Vasiliou: Right.
Tierney: So you could try the positive, the other, the other way for approval.
Bergman: It will fail too. It will fail too; just leave it .... Then it's O.K.
Bergman to Meller: (question)
Meller: It doesn't pass.
Bergman: It doesn't pass. It got three votes, that's not bad.
Vasiliou: It did not pass.
Richard Stewart: Point of clarification ... was it stated as a denial?
Vasiliou: Correct.
Stewart: But yet it was presented as a positive, don't you have to present it as a
positive to vote?
Vasiliou: Her motion was to deny and it took four people to disagree with that.
Stewart: I understand that, but were you voting on to accept? I'm getting a little
technical now, but as written it says to change it; now shouldn't that
have been presented as the motion is to change the guide plan?
Vasiliou: The resolution here says, denying land use guide plan amendment for
Carlson Real Estate Company.
Bergman: It takes 4/5.
Stewart: So it was written as a denial.
Vasiliou: There was one of each. They chose to further the denial first.
Steward: O.K. Right. I understand that part. It was just as it was stated.
Bergman: O.K. Thank you.
10
I
DATE: January 6, 1994
TO: Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Kathy Iluec e , Assistant City Manager through Dwight Johnson,
Dwight Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Scheduling Future Study Session Meetings
We'd like to try an alternative method of scheduling study session meeting dates rather
than taking time during a regular Council meeting to compare calendars. Attached are
calendars for the months of January through April. Please take a few minutes and
indicate your schedule for these months, noting the dates which would cause conflicts
with possible study sessions.
If you could fill out the calendars and return them to me on January 10 or 13, we will
have an idea of your schedules so that when it is necessary to arrange a study session
date, we will have a good idea of what dates work for everyone. The approval of these
dates then should be a quick process at a regular meeting. Please call me on 550-5013
should you have questions or suggestions.
on
a
c
wM--
r
a F,
05
N
a
O
d
N - -
I
i
14Z o
A
a
c
O M O
v
rn
u
c
z
w
cw
C
w
z
C
z
w
w
0
w
CO
w
wM--
r
a F,
N O
N - -
I
i
Ar
zzC)
Ee
z=
W
u ° 5
O M O
v
rn
u
c
z
w
cw
C
w
z
C
z
w
w
0
w
CO
w
rn
z
F -
w
w
w
z
0
z
w
w
0
w
U)
w
LO
c
z
w
w
w
z
0
z
w
w
0
w
D
w
r
V
W
W d'
W U
W
U
MSI
U
LO
c
z
w
w
w
z
0
z
w
w
0
w
D
w
n r
z F
N Zck
w o
r N
3N
w
U
U
n
z
x
A9waw
N 3w$X N
LO
c
z
w
w
w
z
0
z
w
w
0
w
D
w
vrn
LO
0
Z
w
w
w
z
0
w
U)
w
S4K
631t4t CITY COUNCEL MEMORANDUM
To: City Attorney
From: Nick Granath, Councilmember Ward 3
Date: 5 January 1994
Subject: Sam's Club Zoning
Reference: Memo 30 Dec 93, "Plymouth Community Development: Sam's Club
Proposal" from City Attorney
cc: Mayor, City Manager, City Council Members
Summary:
The new City Council has begun a process which could have the practical effect of
rescinding the 20 Dec 93 zoning amendment of the Sam's Club property. As the zoning
ordinance has already been amended in favor of the developer, the City is now in the unusual
role of initiating an amendment to an amendment and possibly adversely impacting
interested parties.
Action:
Please advise on the following question: What now is necessary to lawfully, and with the
least risk to the City, conclude the "recession process". Please address both the procedural
and substantive aspects. For example, is the City required to show reasons beyond those the
opposition to Sam's Club has already made part of 20 Dec 93 and earlier record ?
Back round:
On 3 Jan 94, by a two-thirds vote, the new City Council passed a motion to refer back to the
Planning Commission the 20 Dec 93 resolutions which had amended the Sam's club property
from planned industrial to commercial. Those Councilmembers supporting this motion
expressly stated for the record that the purpose of the referral motion was to begin the
recession process". Prior to this vote much effort went into clarifying the meaning of the
motion, including verbal advice given by City Attorney. Attorney had already provided
written advice on this subject. That memo made it clear that the City could lawfully act to
rescind an ordinance that has been previously enacted, at any time before the rights of third
parties have become vested, where there is no statutory, charter, or other prohibition against
such action." Further, Attorney explained that an action for damages by the developer is: 1)
possible but not certain 2) would likely be a claim for damages based on reliance only for
that period of possible reliance from 20 Dec 93 to 3 Jan 94. Further, Attorney advised that
in order for the "recession process"to succeed following passage of the motion to refer, there
must follow: 1) "full procedural" due process that any rezoning would and 2) another vote by
two-thirds of the Council to amend the zoning back to commercial.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MN 55447
DATE: January 6, 1994
TO: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager
FROM: Laurie Rauenhor41-ty-Clerk
SUBJECT: INFORMATION ON BOARD/COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP
The attached information was prepared for Councilmember Lymangood and is being
shared with all Councilmembers at his request. He requested the information in light
of the fact that various boards and commissions have different membership structures.
He noted from previously distributed information that several commissions are
established to have one representative from each ward and three at -large
representatives, while others have all at -large representatives or some other seemingly
odd representation mixture (i.e. Water Quality Committee).
I believe the attached information may help the Council understand the reasoning of
previous Councils and the source of the membership structure of the various
commissions. They can then better determine whether they desire to make changes to
the membership structure of any boards or commissions.
HRA
Membership: 5 at -large.
Established: State Statute.
To amend: Change in state law.
Planning Commission
Membership: 7 members; 4 from wards; 3 at -large.
Established: In City Code under provisions of the Minnesota Planning Act
statute.
To amend: Ordinance amending City Code Section 305.
Board of Zoning Adjustments and Appeals
Membership: 7 members; 6 are at -large; 1 is Planning Commissioner.
Established: In City Code and Zoning Ordinance.
To amend: Ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance Section 11.
Water Quality Committee
Membership: The charge adopted by the City Council on July 31, 1991,
establishes the Water Quality Committee at 5 members (appointed from 4
wards, with Ward 3 having two representatives due to the large body of water
Medicine Lake - in that ward.)
When the Council made appointments to the Water Quality Committee, there
were seven applicants. After the interviews, the Council decided to appoint all
individuals who applied; thus, the membership was expanded to seven
members. Ironically, Wards 1, 2, and 4 each had two applicants, and Ward 3
had only one.
Established: By Resolution on July 31, 1991.
To amend: Adopt resolution amending the membership and charge of the
committee. Currently, the charge and the membership appointed by the City
Council do not match.
Financial Advisory Committee
Membership: 7 members; at -large
Established: By Resolution on March 2, 1992. During establishment of the
Committee, the City Council discussed that individuals appointed to this
committee must have extensive experience in financial matters in order to
independently analyze the financial statements, budgets, and other financial
information of the City.
To amend: Adopt resolution amending the membership and charge of the
committee. (The Council amended the charge on December 20, 1993, but this
was related only to duties and responsibilities of the Committee; not
membership.)
Park and Recreation Advisory Commission
Membership: 7 members; 4 from wards; 3 at -large
Established: In City Code.
To Amend: Adopt an Ordinance amending City Code Section 305.
Human Rights Commission
Membership: 11 members; 4 from wards; 4 from school districts; 3 at -large
Established: In City Code.
To Amend: Adopt an Ordinance amending City Code Section 305.
Open Space Committee (Subcommittee of PRAC)
Membership: 10 members: 4 from wards, 4 PRAC Commissioners, 1
Planning Commissioner, 1 Council member
Established: By resolution on January 3, 1994.
To Amend: Adopt resolution amending membership and charge of the
committee.
1-3-94
Item 8 -B&C
This was provided by a resident following the
Daniel Development proposal discussion of
project alternatives."
Laurie Rauenhorst
City Clerk
Dear Harrison Hills Residents,
I am writing this letter to make sure that everyone is aware of the impact the proposed Ponds Development Plan will have
on our subdivision. I would ask everyone to take time to understand the issues associated with the proposed plan and
voice any issues or concerns with your City Counsel members prior to Monday's meeting. It is at this next meeting the
Counsel will vote on the proposed plan.
As a resident of Harrison Hills I am most concerned with the projected increase in traffic along 55th Ave under the
proposed plan. Recently you should have received a copy of the projected traffic study showing the peak traffic volumes
and the average daily traffic volumes for the proposed plan.
The projected increase in "peak hour traffic" and "average daily traffic" through our neighborhood is
significant.
Today, peak evening traffic on 55th Ave is 43 cars.
Projected peak evening traffic on 55th Ave, once development is complete, is 140 cars.
The projected traffic volume will be 1,500 cars per day once develop is complete. This is probably
10 to 15 times higher than the current traffic volume.
Also, there are no plans to put any controls along the proposed Trenton Lane North road to discourage or
impled drivers from using 55th Ave as a cut -through from Bass Lake to Zachery Lane.
Several area residents met informally with the developer, Mr. Hunt to better understand the issues and options available
to the residence. I would like to say that Mr. Hunt was very cordial during our discussions and appears willing to work
with the residents to achieve a mutually agreeable solution. I have discussed two alternative plans with Mr. Hunt and
although, he prefers the second alternative he is not the one who will be making the final decision. The final decision
will be made by the City Counsel on Monday night. A description of the two alternatives discussed is attached. The
alternatives listed are not our only alternatives nor may they be the best alternatives.
Please review the proposed plan and voice your issues and concerns with the your City Counsel members. With enough
voices in opposition to the proposed road design it is my hope that the design will be altered to significantly reduce or
eliminate any increase in traffic through our neighborhood. Your City Counsel member names and numbers are:
Mayor . — - - Joy Ternie - - -550-5069 4th Ward (Harrison Hills rep) ---John Edson-- -550-5067
At Large - - - -Chuck Lymangood• -550-5093 At Large _ - — - - Carol Helliwell —550-5066
Just to reiterate, the final decision will be made by the City Counsel this Monday, January 3. Please try to attend the
meeting if at all possible. Remember, if you don't show up your voice can't be heard. The City Counsel meeting starts
at 7:00 pm and is located in the Plymouth City Center - Administration Bldg, located at 3400 Plymouth Blvd, Plymouth.
If you need directions please call the receptionist at 550-5000 during normal business hours. The vote on the proposed
plan should occur relatively early in the evening as part of Old Business.
i' '-';
s to -i 6 1 •' t ..___.,. ,. .
1, ' •...
I,.-' fist + q r;
11 N"uF t•t )/ rlt 1. t .l 11 , is 1
Ir• .
1. .•"•' ,, ` 1 ,
1 1
L, •
1 I i•'
I I
ISo/J /4 ILLS
SS'
I
rnative N1:
Develop the land adjacent to Harrison Hill as two separate subdi istons.
The section connected to Harrison Hills would include the Domes along Union Terrace.
The second section of homes would not have access to Hard on Hills sub -division. This second set of homes
would be accessed from entrances off of Bass Lake Road and Nathan Lane.
A cul-de-sac would be created at the end of Trenton Lane.
The section of land between the proposed cul-de-sac at the end of Trenton Lane and 55th Ave could include
a bike path or emergency road for easy access between the two subdivisions.
Benefits:
Neither 55th Ave nor 53rd Ave would become a cut- rough for drivers to gain easy access to Zachery
Lane.
The traffic along 55th and 53rd would not significantlyi increase from todays levels.
During the building phase, construction vehicles could enter from Bass Lake Road and/or Nathan Lane and
could cross between the two sections long a temporary Oervice road at the end of the proposed cul-de-sac.
Homes along Trenton Lane would become more desirable due to the elimination of heavy traffic.
The requirement by the Public Works Department to include two separate entrances into all residential areas
would be met.
The developer would not sacrifice any proposed lots
Drawbacks:
An additional stretch of road would be developed betw en Nathan Lane and the Ponds development.
The dividing of the subdivision may have a negative i pact on the value of the lots.
T
t' •
f • i' f . •
4 ; t r r' i i
I•, :, t l+
p Innf t/ t11 1 Irl n fora x•
1.4,
r
Z
z
of ; , ; . •. ;
1tn fZ21 S a/J
o rte
Alternative N 2:
Terminate 55th Ave with a cul-de-sac.
Benefits:
Traffic levels on 55th Ave would not increase.
It is probably more desirable that traffic increase along I 53rd Ave, which consists primarily of townhomes,
than through a neighborhood of single family homes.
Volume of traffic predicted would probably not reach the same level for 53rd due to a less convenient cut -
through.
The developer does not sacrifice any proposed lots.
Drawbacks:
The projected increase of traffic would shift to 53rd Ave.
l . 1(,44#' h;(
r1
Z
I ID