Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Information Memorandum 04-25-1986CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM April 25, 1986 UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS..... 1. COUNCIL/STAFF DINNER MEETING -- Monday, April 28, 6:00 p.m. The Councillstaff dinner meeting will be held in the City Council conference room. 2. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING -- Monday, April 28, 7:30 p.m. Special City Council meeting in the City Council Chambers. 3. PLYMOUTH POLICE AUCTION --Saturday, April 26. The Police Department auction of unclaimed property will be held at 10:00 a.m. at the City Center. All items will be on display at 9:00 a.m. 4. PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY AWARDS -- The 13th annual Plymouth Community Awards will be held at the Radisson Inn Plymouth on Tuesday, May 6 beginning at 7:30 p.m. Tickets for the event are available at the information counter at the City Center for $4.50. 5. PARKS TOUR -- Saturday, May 10. A tour of Plymouth's parks for City Council and Park and Recreation Advisory Commission members has been scheduled for Saturday, May 10. The park and recreation van will leave the City Center at 8:30 a.m. and the tour should be concluded by 12:00 noon. If you are interested in attending, please call the Park and Recreation office (ext. 266). (Note: Since the van can only accommodate 10 persons, please call as soon as possible) 6. CALENDAR -- A copy of the May calendar of meetings and events is attached. (M-6) FOR YOUR INFORMATION..... 1. TWINWEST CHAMBER "COMMUNITY COFFEE BREAK" -- The TwinWest Chamber Community Coffee Break for Plymouth was held this morning at the Plymouth Holiday Inn. A total of 21 persons were in attendance. A copy of the Local Focus Report presented by Councilmember Crain at the Coffee Break is attached for the Council's information. (I-1) 2. TOWN MEETING AGENDA - AREA ONE -- Attached for the Council's review Is the Area 1 Town Meeting agenda. If Councilmembers desire any changes to the agenda, please contact me by April 28 so they be incorporated. (I-2) 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM April 25, 1986 Page Two t 3. GREEN OAKS PARK -- The Council is aware of certain concerns raised by Mrs. Rosen with respect to the recently completed improvements to the play area in the Green Oaks neighborhood park. Mrs. Rosen stopped by the office on Wednesday afternoon to visit with me about her concerns. We had a good visit and I have indicated to her that I would like to meet at the site to further explore her concerns. I have also received a letter from the neighbors immediately east of the Rosen's, Mr. and Mrs. Carlson, who have similar concerns. Copies of their correspondence and my replies are attached for your information. (I-3) 4. MINUTES -- The following minutes are attached: a. Planning Commission, April 16, 1986 (I -4a) b. Park and Recreation Advisory Commission, April 10, 1986 (I -4b) 5. PUBLIC SAFETY STATISTICS - FIRST QUARTER -- Public Safety Director ar quist has prepared the attached First Quarter Report on public safety statistics for the Police and Fire Divisions. Total police calls increased 9.3% in the first quarter. Significant increases were experienced in the following areas: assault, theft, DWI, liquor laws, PD accidents, and hazardous violation tags. The Fire Division received a total of 121 calls, of which 64 were classified as false alarms. (I-5) 6. PLYMOUTH ON PARADE -- The May/dune issue of Plymouth on Parade is included with this memorandum. 7. MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT -- The 1985 annual report of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is attached for the Council's Information. (I-7) 8. "LOSING INSURANCE OVER ZONING DISPUTES" -- The attached article taken from the American Planning ssociation magazine addresses the impact of recent legal challenges to zoning ordinance disputes on the ability of cities to purchase liability insurance. (I-8) 9. TRAFFIC ADVISORY - LARCH LANE -- Due to numerous complaints received on vehicles speeding on Larch Lane north of Schmidt Lake Road, the Public Safety Department will be distributing the attached "traffic advisory" letter to area residents via the Crime Watch networks. Stationary radar patrol will begin in this area in approximately two weeks. (I-9) 10. EXTRA EFFORTS -- The attached article, "When the skies aren't friendly an the doctor can't be reached", was distributed to all City employees last week. (I-10) 11. BOND NEWSLETTER -- The Ehlers and Associates bond newsletter for April is attached. (I-11) I CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM April 25, 1986 Page Three 12. CORRESPONDENCE: JGW:jm attach a. Letter to Elliott Perovich, Regional Transit Board, from Frank Boyles, advising of service level changes for Plymouth Metrolink and Medicine Lake Lines effective June 30, 1986 to allow Plymouth to become eligible to the 1.5 mill rate for full peak, limited off-peak service for 1986. (I -12a) b. Letter to Jerome Coffell, 10225 31st Avenue No., from Blair Tremere, clarifying the Council's action with regard to the Lake Park Heights Development and advising of the procedure for withdrawal of the petition for Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Also attached is a letter to Gregg Downing, Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, from Blair Tremere, relative to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet petition. (I -12b) c. Letter to City Council from HRA program participant stating appreciation and gratitude for improvements made to their home through a housing rehabilitation grant. (I -12c) d. Letter from Richard Harris, to Public Safety Director, concerning a speeding ticket he received and the performance of the Plymouth police officer issuing the ticket. A response to Mr. Harris from Dick Carlquist is also is also attached. (I -12d) e. Letter of appreciation from Nancy Hardenbergh, 18025 - 12th °venuc No., concerning assistance provided by Officer Dave Digatono. (I -12e) f. Letter to Mrs. Donald E. Olson, 4830 Wellington Lane, from City Manager, responding to her questions on special assessments and the interest rate on the amount assessed. (I -12f) g. Letter to Craig Shaver, from City Manager, in response to an inquiry received by Mr. Shaver from Carter Hicks, 17425 - 23rd Avenue No., on proposed improvements on Highway 101 north of County Road 6. (I -12g) James G. Willis City Manager m C N h LL(LNN War=c°N O ~ N N:- cn — CC) C h � Ln cv) K ^co RR i ,zNm (n {Op �NN 0 1� c Q o W I CC 14 c U in U :E: A U Cq I p., z a l w z � Oa U O U F-4Mxi O 2] cnH 04 o'< U U a U U rz ZD z ly OU c �O W W L= � U U O Z Ix O I� 00 oaz Ln O U z M a U c u c o a 0 ria. U � w U I 14 c U in U :E: A U Cq I p., z a l w z � Oa U O U F-4Mxi O 2] cnH 04 o'< U a U U rz ZD z OU c �O p4 W I H W U in U :E: A <' o o t UU VV 04 o'< U I E. Of the 3,845 acres which Metropolitan Council anticipates for development the following breakdown exists: Residential: 2,300 Commercial: 400 Industrial: 400 Public (streets, alleys & parks): 745 *Source of statistics is Metropolitan Council Development Framework and most recent projections II. Developments underway in Plymouth right now. (Show colored map of commercial/residential development A. Commercial Industrial - 1. SCANTICON: 283,00 sq. ft. conference center, hotel, restaurant and associated recreational amenities. 2. FLAGSHIP: two phase multi -tenant office building for a total 439,913 sq. ft.; Phase I is completed and phase II is in the review stages. 3. WELSH CONSTRUCTION: a multi -tenant shopping center including such uses as a grocer, drug store, etc; 72,616 sq. ft. 4. ITT: a planned 15 story office complex for a total of 250;000 sq. ft. B. Residential - 1. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS: Total development includes 1523 residential units; 430 acres of which 56 is to be developed with industrial uses. 4/24/86 OUTLINE FOR LOCAL FOCUS REPORT l (Show growth chart) I. Plymouth is a rapidly development community: 1970 1980 1990 2000 A. Population: 18,077 31,615 49,000 58,000 (Current population 38,940 est.) B. Households: 4,645 10,491 18,000 22,000 C. Employment: 6,587 20,000 34,000 45,000 D. Demand for land development in 1980-1990 is anticipated at 3,845 acres with a total of 5,892 acres available. E. Of the 3,845 acres which Metropolitan Council anticipates for development the following breakdown exists: Residential: 2,300 Commercial: 400 Industrial: 400 Public (streets, alleys & parks): 745 *Source of statistics is Metropolitan Council Development Framework and most recent projections II. Developments underway in Plymouth right now. (Show colored map of commercial/residential development A. Commercial Industrial - 1. SCANTICON: 283,00 sq. ft. conference center, hotel, restaurant and associated recreational amenities. 2. FLAGSHIP: two phase multi -tenant office building for a total 439,913 sq. ft.; Phase I is completed and phase II is in the review stages. 3. WELSH CONSTRUCTION: a multi -tenant shopping center including such uses as a grocer, drug store, etc; 72,616 sq. ft. 4. ITT: a planned 15 story office complex for a total of 250;000 sq. ft. B. Residential - 1. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS: Total development includes 1523 residential units; 430 acres of which 56 is to be developed with industrial uses. UUILiNE FOR LOCAL FUCU5 REPORTS April 24, 1986 Page two 2. FOX RUN: 62 single family homes (Lundgren) 3. STEEPLECHASE: 60 single family homes (Lundgren) 4. JAMESTOWN: 100 single family homes (Centex) 5. KINGSVIEW HEIGHTS: 214 single family homes (Harstad-Todd) 6. BASS LAKE ESTATES: 87 single family homes (Burger Development Co.) 7. PARK PLACE: 500 apartment units (Tipton Corp) 8. PARKSIDE OF MEDICINE LAKE: 211 apartments units (Baton Corp) III. COMMUNITY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 1986 (Show Park and Trail System Plan) A. Parks & Recreation 1. Parkers Lake City Park and Playfield a. Scheduled for two phase development 1986 and 1987 b. Consists of 25 acres c. Primary recreational facilities for walking trails, picnicing, swimming beach and fishing. 2. Trails - 5 segments to be built bringing park system to over 30 miles. Residential surveys in 1978, 1982, and 1985 have consistently found the trail system to be one of the most desirable attributes of our park system. B. Major Streets (Show CIP - Street map) 1. County Road 6/494 interchange a. Land being acquired for right-of-way. b. Thoroughfare Guide Plan and development patterns show need for interchange here. c. Supported by Carlson Center tax increment financing. 2. County Road 9 a. Improving County Road 9 to four lanes wide with island b. Improvements from County Road 18 to I-494. OUTLINE FOR LOCAL FOCUS REPORT April 24, 1986 Page three 3. County Road 10 a. County is in planning stage for County Road 10 Improvements. b. No date guarantees c. When improved would be comparable to County Road 9 standards. 4. Highway 101, County Road 6 - Merrimac a. Extends four lanes northerly from 101/C.R. 6 intersection to Merrimac Lane. b. Accident Reduction Traffic Safety Program - 31 accidents have occurred over the last 3 years. 5. County Road 15 - I-494 to Vicksburg - widening and resurfacing. 6. Fernbrook Lane/Highway Lane/Highway55 intersection improvements - Addition of right an turn lane from sout ound Fernbrookto Highway 55. IV. CITY COUNCIL PRIORITIES A. Environmental - Implementation of aggressive erosion control policy to minimize pollution of lakes and streams. 1. Developers are responsible for creating erosion and siltation control plans for all property they deelop. 2. Developers must also submit a $2000 financial guarantee. 3. If a problem develops, the developer is given a 48 hour notice to clean up. If not, the City does and charges the developer costs plus a 100% penalty. Lk?J-� U. ijL,-l jLL sPy 1,1- 5.: 4. It is hoped that the severity of the penalty will encourage responsible controls to eliminate siltation and erosion. B. Infrastructural Replacement - With over $50 million worth of streets, sewer and water lines, parks, and other public facilities, the Council is concerned about their replacement after their productive life. 1. The City commissioned a Tischler study to identify the costs of replacing existing public infrastructure. The report shows that replacement of the City's existing facilities total $40.5 million by year 2000. Over $31.3 million is attributable to replacement of streets before year 2000. OUTLINE FOR LOCAL FOCUS REPORT Page Four j 2. The problem with infrastructure is funding replacement in light of state levy limitations. ' 3. To provide a means of funding these projects the Plymouth City Council directed the City Attorney to prepare legislation pro- viding for the establishment of infrastructural replacement fund In municipalities. Such costs are not subject to levy limits. C. Risk Management/Loss Control - Insurance unavailability and cost increases reen orce ounces perspective to reduce exposures for liability both to city employees and especially residents of the community. In July 1985, Council adopted a comprehensive risk management policy which is now being implemented to avoid the liability hardships and potential hazards to residents which can be associated with public facilities. D. Water Conservation/Supply 1. The City Council has initiated efforts to conserve water through even -odd sprinkling ban. 2. This conserves water and money by cutting down peak demand useage. 3. The Council is currently studying two alternatives for supplying municipal water. The major issues involve separation or consolidation of well fields and diversification or consistency between aquifiers used. V. PROSPECTS FOR PLYMOUTH'S FUTURE A. Fiscal strength to continue 1. Well developed long range planning. 2. Fiscal projections of impacts of current decisions. 3. Good balance between commercial/industrial and residential. 4. Conservative fiscal policy by City Council. B. Will remain a desirable place to lives 1. Characterized as "City in country setting". We find this is the reason most come to Plymouth. To be close to downtown, but also In the country. 2. Open space and natural beauty designed into community through Comprehensive Plan and Council is supportive of executing the plan. C. Plymouth will continue to he a top Metro area community primarily because of the talents of its residents and business leaders and the desire of those persons to share their talents with their community through volunteer and service organizations, participation on community task forces, city commissions or homeowner associations. TOWNa MEETING AGENDA AREA ONE May 12, 1986 7:30 p.m. I. THOROUGHFARES A. Carlson Center Addition - Interchange of I-494 and County Road 15, County Road 61. B. County Road 15 - Vicksburg Lane to I-494 C. Interchange of I-494 and County Road 6 II. PARKS A. Circle Park B. Parkers Lake C. Lion's Park D. Luce Line Trail III. HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT A. Parkers Lake planned development B. Welsh Shopping Center C. Carlson Center development IV. OTHER ITEMS A. Public Transportation feedback - Plymouth Metrolink B. Local Government Access Cable Channel 7 C. Solid Waste Recycling Program D. Transient Merchant Ordinance Changes E. Sprinkling Restrictions April 24, 1986 Mrs. Linda Rosen 18715 - 27th Avenue No. Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Mrs. Rosen: CITY O� PUMOUTR ------------- L-'--3' Thank you for coming in Wednesday afternoon to visit with me regardinq your concerns with respect to the Green Oaks neighborhood park. I previously received your letter of April 21 in which you set out many of your concerns. Following our visit, I believe I have a more clear under- standing of your point of view. First and foremost, I am truly sorry that the problems you and your family are currently experiencing were not foreseen and dealt with prior to the upgrading of the play apparatus last year. It has been the City Council's practice to seek neighborhood involvement in the design or upgrading of neighborhood parks in order that those who are not only most directly impdci,ed, but those who use the parks may have an effective voice in their design. The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission has diligently attempted to develop park plans which reflect that type of involvement. The City Council, when considering recommendations from the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission, also utilizes that input in order that the most appro- priate policy decision can be made. Regrettably, in this case, it appears that the process did not work to your satisfaction. At Mayor Schneider's direction we are developing a report on the history of Green Oaks neighborhood park from its initial improvement through the most recent upgrading last year. This report will be presented to the City Council on May 5. I will see that you receive a copy of that report so you may become familiar with it and plan to attend the Council meeting. A copy of the report will also be presented to your Homeowners Association in order that they too, will be familiar with the concerns which you and others have raised with respect to the park. 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 t Mrs. Linda Rosen April 24, 1986 Page Two Mrs. Rosen, I can assure you that it is the intent of all of the employees of the City of Plymouth to work cooperatively with Plymouth residents. We work for you and it is our desire that our work efforts will be received positively. But we, too, are human, and there are bound to be occasions when we are not successful regardless of our intentions. There are also bound to be occasions when decisions are made which are not found to be either appropriate or acceptable by some. We obviously try to minimize these more difficult situations and I believe in large measure, we are successful in so doing. I plan to be in touch with you in the week ahead in order that I can visit with you further about this matter, preferably at the park site. Thank you again for taking time from your day to share your concerns with me. Yours truly, mes G. ills Ci Manager cc: Mayor & City Council Park & Recreation Advisory Commission Eric Blank, Director of Park & Recreation President, Green Tree West HOA I am writing to you on behalf of my two children, Stacie and Karin, as well as my husband, Rick, and myself. We four are being unduly harassed by the City of Plymouth and we are being forced to live our lives as if under seige. We have lived on Green Oaks Park for five years and during this time we have always tried to be responsible citizens and have realizedfrom the start and to the fullest extent that we must as a family put up with many inconveniences and general disturbances due to the unique location of our home. We have always been totally aware that the area directly behind our lot line is not "an exten- sion of cur back yard." Last year, against our repeated and strongest protests, the city installed what can only be described as one of the most ex- tensive if not the most extensive playground facility in Plymouth 15 feet from private residential property thereby creating an incredibly highly concentrated traffic pattern (play equipment and shelter) to develop and actually butt up against and overflow into three families' properties. This playground, which is located in one corner of a space about 6 acres in size, is used and enjoyed by hundreds of Plymouth residents and their children. But this play- ground is also a source of monumental and debilitating noise pollution and the responsibility and the overwhelming burden of absorbing this outrageous noise has been wrongfully shoved down the throats of these same families. We cannot escape this noise! Young children can and do appear as early as 7:00 a.m, and the disturbances continue all day till the older teenagers leave as late as 2:00 or 3:00 a.m.There is virtually not one room in our house, not even the basement, where we can hide from the constant and offensive swearing, the high pitched shrieking nerve wracking crying, whining and fighting. Just picture yourself standing on the edge of a school play ground during recess and having to live 24 hours a day like that. The area in question starts 28 feet from our deck. We can hear word for word everything that is said in the playground even when spoken in normal tones and we can near every move that is trade. -2- �=3 Certainly there are times when there are only a handful of people • in or near the playground or shelter. But it is at these times that a small boy may stand for 20 minutes and throw rocks on -the metal slioe which sounds to us like constant gunfire ricocheting through our house. Next two 6 year old girls may come along and say "Let's play fire engine's and then proceed to run back and forth across our lot line shrieking and screaming at the top of their lungs for 15 solid minutes. Next someone who is jogging may come along & tie his two poodles to our fence and only after these dogs have barked for 1/2 hour straight will he reappear and take them away. Teenagers are constantly golfing directly towards our house and hitting. our house and property. People are drawn toward this little corner of the park because that is where all the action is. And even if they are doing something which might be dangerous for my child or someone else's them, attitude is usually something like this, "You can't touch me, I'm on public property!" We have had liquor and beer stored in our window wells and near our house. We had had personal products of the grossest nature thrown in our yard and displayed on our fence. We have been the objects of any number of obscene gestures all of which have originated from the shelter directly behind us. Cur entire back yard has been rendered 100% useless since we are apt to be the victims of many forms of harassment just for "beino there." It is an everyday occurrence to see or hear in excess of 40 or 50 kids all of whom are well within 50 feet of our property ---most being even closer. Children of all ages virtually stand in line to climb on the top of the shelter (via the stacked picnic tables) where they repeatedly toss each other off in a kind of "King of the Hill" fashion. Children have flown o`'f that structure and landed on their backs, stomachs, knees and at least one on his bicycle. Some others just sit up there for hours playing their boom boxes full blast and stare into all of our windows. If we or our children are unfortunate to appear•in one of these windows at the wrong time we can be subjected to just about anything. Teen age boys have discovered the sand box and use it as a sand trap and the golf ballsjust fly back and forth between the playground and the shelter. We recently had friends over for Sunday dinner only to have them excuse themselves early because they "couldn"t stand the noise!" We, at times, especially during the peak hours can only resort to getting in -3- ==3 the car and driving around until dark. My husband is in sales and we greatly depend on the use of our home for the entertainment of • his clients as this has a direct affect on his yearly productivity and success. We are now actually afraid if not unable to invite guests into our home for fear of what they will hear, see or experience. We consider this situation to be libelous. The Park Department has certainly succeeded in erecting a major attraction and permanent hangout for the older children and for teen- agers. But now that this baby has been delivered who is going to take on the responsibility to care for it? This is a park that is usually totally unsupervised. Children who are there are pretty much free to behave as they please and this situation has becomecomplicated by the dramatic increase in the numbers of children using the equipment. Does the Park Department actually believe that mothers will walk hand in hand to the park with their 8, 10, 12, and 14 year olds and sit there and watch them "hang out with their friends" for 3 or 4 hours? Parents want to send their children to Green Oaks Park. They don't always._ want to bring them. This many children together unsupervised (and because they haven't been able to use the basketball court or the baseball diamcnd yet one might expect the numbers to increase) can and does lead to u`,a;)tic and destructive behavior. Whose responsibility is it to intervene when things get totally out of hand? is it our job, here, to make sure that no one gets hit in the eye with a rock, hit in the head with a line drive, or gets shoved off the playground equipment or the shelter? This out of control zoo -like atmosphere surely needs and demands responsible and constant supervision and policing. We are in no way criticizing the children of Plymouth. We all think they are the best! This playground by the very nature of it's size and due to the huge volumes of young people it attracts and the traffic it creates and the noise it produces has been placed too close to private residential property! We have been forced into a situation that can only be described as ludicrous. And the after the fact suggestion that cosmetic camouflage might help noise and disturbances of this magnitude points to the fact that no orae can even begin to under- stand or appreciate just how disruptive our lives have been. -4 - We have tried for one year to patiently work through the Park Department but we have found the system to be non- functioning. We have sought to always be fair and we have been treated unjustly and have been discriminated against. We feel confident that we have lost substantial equity in our house; our back yard and our home have been denied us and our rights to privacy and peace of mind have been extremely violated if not taken away. We are living in a nightmare! This situation is extremely serious and demands someone's immediate attention. C � � r April 24, 1986 CITY OF PLYMOUTR Mr. & Mrs. Kent Carlson 18705 27th Avenue N. Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Carlson: Thank you for your letter of April 22 in which you express concerns with respect to the Green Oaks neighborhood park. I have recently received a similar communication from your neighbor, Mrs. Rosen, echoing many of your concerns. I sincerely regret that the recently completed improvements to the neighborhood park have not been deemed to be satisactory to you. It was clearly the City's intent to improve the park for the enjoyment of the neighborhood. The process used by the City in developing or upgrading neighborhood parks is to involve the citizens of that area. Even though we make good faith efforts to insure that this process is adhered to, and that the results of that process reflect a consensus of viewpoints from within the neighborhood, It would appear that this was not achieved in this instance. That is regrettable. The City's Park and Recreation Advisory Commission prides itself on being responsive to neighborhood concerns. The Council, similarly, seeks to insure that park plans reflect the interests of the particular neighborhood being served. And as you pointed out in your letter, certain changes were made to the park as a result of concerns expressed by your neighborhood at the time the Council did ultimately approve the park improvement plan. Obviously, the City does not design, build, or equip neighborhood parks to create aggravation for the neighborhood. I truly regret that the problems you and the Rosen's are currently experiencing had not been more fully communicated to, or understood by, the Park and Recreation Advisory Committee or City Council prior to the improvements being undertaken. I have previously spoken with Mrs. Rosen and have indicated to her that I would like to meet with her some time this coming week at the park. Perhaps, it would be possible to meet with one or both of you at the same time. You may also be interested to know that Mayor Schneider has requested that we develop a report on the history of the Green Oaks neighborhood park up through the most recent improvement project. I expect to have this report scheduled for the May 5, 1986 Council agenda. I will see that you are provided with a copy of this report. You may wish to attend that Council meeting. 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 Mr. & Mrs. Kent Carlson April 24, 1986 Page Two I do not have any simple or pat answers certainly willing to work to see if a neighborhood, and the community, can be and I will be in touch with you in order the coming week at the park site. Yours truly, )s G. Willis i; Manager OGW:jm to your several concerns, but I am solution acceptable to you, your found. Thank you for your letter that we might meet sometime durinq cc: Mayor & City Council Park and Recreation Advisory Committee Eric Blank President, Green Tree West HOA Mayor of Plymouth Plymouth Council Members 18705 27th Ave. N. Plymouth, MN 55447 April 22,1986 -:_--3 This letter is sent to express our concern with the present location and existing conditions of the playground area in Green Oaks Park. The backyard and property line of our lot are immediately adjacent to the play area. We were aware of the play area be- hind the six foot fence when we purchased our property in 1983. Preschool and primary grade school children were the normal users of that equipment, while older boys used the adjacent basketball area. In the spring of 1985, we received communication from the Plymouth Park Department concerning the intended upgrading of the play area. At a meeting at city hall, we reviewed the plans for the new equipment with Eric Blank,park supervisor. At that time we voiced our concern over several things: 1. The noise resulting from a proposed cable ride. 2. The location of all the equipment in such a small area of the park. 3. The noise level resulting from increased usage by older children. We requested considration of moving the play equipment to a more central location in the park away from adjoining homes. Considering the park area is six plus acres it seemed such a move would eliminate -the noise problem from being concentrated in such a small area. We recall Park Director Blank indicating the area could not be moved because existing retaining walls were all in place in this area and to move would involve additional costs. He did feel the new equipment could be screened with trees and doubted if the noise would be a problem even with higher usage. He thought the equipment would not be taller than the previous equipment and therefore not visible from our back patio. After voicing our concern at a Park Commission meeting, the cable ride was eliminated from the plans and the basketball area was moved to the south of the play area. When construction began the existing landscaping timbers were found to be rotting and were completely replaced. Only one tree was moved along our property line and the highest level of the new equipment is visible from our patio. Considering the size of Green Oaks Park, we must logically ask the question - why must the playground be located in one corner of the park where the closest landscaping timber is but 15 feet from our property? To our knowledge no other park in Plymouth has this huge amount of play equipment of this nature so close to homesof property owners. We felt and still have the same opinion that there is a central location which would be more suitable. The project was completed last fall. With the coming of spring we have observed as many as 40 children using this area at one time.The noise generated as they play can be overwhelming. Not onlythe yelling and screaming associated with play, but also the noise made by stones as the rumble down the slides and shute. Stones are also good for throwing and the tin roof of the picnic shelter makes an ideal target. We also note the area has become a meeting for -Iiininr High kids. Besides the previously mentioned ,lacc ,„r --- nusinces we now hear more tune buXes and noise at dusk and after dark. This is only April so it will increase as it gets warmer. Another factor is with the equipment in a corner it is very difficult for the police to check the area. We are not antipark nor anti - children But the question still haunts us - why should 90%of children in a large park be concentrated in one small area of the park? Why should adjacent homeowners, investing their money in quality real estate, be asked to put up with a noise level when it could be eliminated through a practical alternative? Perhaps the city feels that since we have an existing fence at the end of our property all of our and the city's problems are solved. The fence is certainly not a magic "cure-all." Would you buy this property knowing that there were 40 screaming kids directly behind the fence? We feel that our property has decreased in its value and we have been discriminatedagainst with the placing of all this new equipment so close to our property line. Last weekwe spoke with a concerned father who accompanied his pre-schooler and 2nd grade child to the park. He felt they needed protection because of so many children playing in such a small area and because of the older kids. He voiced concern over the kids playing on the roof of the shelter. We believe the park isintended to be an unsupervised play area but with so many children in such a small area it isn'tsafe. We believe this neighborhood playground area has gone from a quiet,safe area for toddlers and grade children to one of unacceptable concentrated noise and the accompaning hazards from higher usage without supervision. We realize accidents can happen even with supervision but still the words of the father previously mentioned stick with us, "I'm here to protectmy children." To summarize: Why is it necessary for us to be greeted with the noise from 40 kids as they play 15 to 20 feet from the privacy of our backyard? Why must we endure garbage and rocks thrown over the fence i into our yard? Why should we put up with kids breaking our privacy fence and running in our ya-d to get away from others? Why must all the activities for children be concentrated in one part of the park (playground, basketball area, and ball diamond) when there is so mucr, area to spread out the noise and traffic? Now all of this is in one third of the total space. Our feelings cannot be contained any longer on a subject that we feel should be brought to the attention of responsible people in our city governmentand be acted upon. We realize we are but two among the many residents of the area but we firmly believe a mistake was made by upgrading the existing play area and leaving it in its present location. Upon looking at the area,Eric Blank said he felt it was a mistake and it should have been moved.Now, what can be done to rectify this mistake? Sincerely, CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 16, 1986 The Special Meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman Pauba, Commissioners Wire, Stulberg, Plufka, and Mellen MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Steigerwald STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Blair Tremere Community Development Coordinator Sara McConn Associate Planner Al Cottingham PUBLIC HEARINGS Vice Chairman Pauba requested an overview from Director Tremere regarding the anticipated Public Hearings for sev- eral Zoning Ordinance Amendments. Director Tremere explained that information was available, for the people present, relating to each of the proposed amendments. He explained that the President of the Plymouth Development Council received a copy of the related informa- tion and has responded with correspondence that was distrib- uted to the Commissioners. Director Tremere explained the proposed Ordinance Amendment which would allow churches in the Future Restricted Develop- ment (FRD) District as a conditional use. The suggested language for the definition of a rural community church was described. One of the parameters for allowing a church in the FRD District is that the Guide Plan designation relates to one of the residential Living Areas, or one of the com- mercial areas. As a measure to control the magnitude of the church, a restriction is suggested to the maximum sanctuary seating capacity. Finally, Director Tremere explained, as a housekeeping measure, the language in Section 8, Subdivision B, would include a listing of churches. INIM ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS CHURCHES IN FUTURE RESTRICTED DEVELOP- MENT (FRD) DISTRICT Page 65 Special Planning Commission Meeting April 16, 1986 Vice Chairman Pauba opened the Public Hearing and recognized Mr. ion Strohschein, 1815 Shadyview Circle. Mr. Strohschein commended the staff on the proposed wording of the Ordinance Amendment and supported the proposal to allow new churches in the rural areas of the City, yet controlling the overall magnitude in the rural district. He urged adoption of the language as proposed. Vice Chairman Pauba closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Plufka expressed concern with the language in that it alluded a 10 acre site could double the maximum seat capacity. Mr. Strohschein commented in response that an absolute maximum of 275 seats, regardless of site size, was acceptable. Director Tremere commented that from a planning perspective, a maximum of 275 seats was appropriate. There would be no need to refer to a minimum lot size of 5 acres as it would be redundant; this is already established for the FRD District. MOTION by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE Magnus to recommend approval of the draft amendment relating to churches in the Future Restricted Development (FRD) District as stated in the April 8, 1986 staff report deietiny "iur each 5 acres of site". VOTE. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. Director Tremere introduced the second Zoning Ordinance Amendment with an explanation of the history relating to transient merchants, City Code definitions, licensing requirements, and produce sellers. He offered a description of the previous procedures for approving transient merchant licenses which included City Council action. Over the past several years, this licensing approval has become an admin- istrative function, eliminating the previous verification of adequate zoning. The new language distinguishes between transient merchants and transient produce merchants. The transient merchants may be licensed and regulated by the City. A produce mer- chant would not be licensed, per State statute provisions, but can be regulated for such things as location, parking, ingress and egress, signage, etc. Director Tremere reviewed the City Council direction to staff and the Planning Commission. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED TRANSIENT PRODUCE MERCHANTS —T! ` \c.__ Page 66 Planning Commission Minutes April 16, 1986 The City Attorney's comments were summarized by Director Tremere including that it is not appropriate to limit the type of merchant by the product sold. If the merchants are to be limited to different districts, it must be by a physi- cal attribute of the business. Current zoning ordinance provisions were summarized relating to parking, circulation, location of curb cuts, ingress and egress. The proposed zoning ordinance amendments would allow for temporary signage only while the activity is oc- curring. Requirements for produce merchants were summarized identifying that a written affidavit would be required confirming they have grown the produce being sold; and, that written authorization from the owner of the land where the sales occur must be provided. It was noted that a reasonable fee to cover administrative costs could be required. Commissioner Plufka requested a clarification of the sug- gested language for signage. Director Tremere explained that the language would be modeled after existing provisions for temporary real estate signs, however, this would be a new type of temporary sign. The intent is that the sign would be portable and only erected during the business period. The sign would not be left on any property when the merchant is noL present and conducting business. Vice Chairman Pauba opened the Public Hearing and recognized Jeanie Gaudette, 1005 North Highway 101. Ms. Gaudette explained that she owns a vegetable stand which is operated from her residence. She was in some agreement with the proposed Ordinance language, but questioned how many parking spaces would be needed and how that number would be determined. Director Tremere responded by stating the Ordinance does not contain a specific recommendation for this type of land use. The Ordinance does require that adequate parking be provided, and not be located on the public roadway. He sug- gested that the owner of the business could estimate, based on past experience, the needed parking which would have to be provided on their site. Ms. Gaudette questioned that if experience prevails, and the business increases to where parking is on the public street, would there be a reasonable amount of time to correct the situation. Director Tremere suggested that the problem be solved by the operator prior to the City receiving any com- plaints or learning of the problem. --7'-IAQ— Page 67 Planning Commission Minutes April 16, 1986 Vice Chairman Pauba confirmed that the City would be reason- able in allowing correction of the violation. Ms. Gaudette explained her concern that she has noticed signs within the R -1A District advertising home businesses. She questioned why the produce merchants would not be able to have a sign in the R -1A District for their business. Director Tremere explained that the Zoning Ordinance restricts signs in the R -1A District. He summarized that home occupations which have been approved by the City are not allowed to have advertising signs. There may be cases where signs were installed without the City's knowledge and without appropriate approvals for home occupations. Commissioner Plufka confirmed that those people with signs are at the risk of being cited in violation of the Ordinance. Ms. Gaudette stated she initiated this business three years ago and thought there were no violations or zoning con- flicts. She stated that 1985 was her first profitable season; she does not mind being regulated but wants to be able to continue her business or she would be placed in financial distress. She reviewed the accident reports at the riynuu%iCity na_ita_ aiiufound that no accidents occur- red at the intersection of 10th Avenue and Highway 101 dur- ing her business season or hours of operation. She questioned the concern that her business is a safety hazard. David Gaudette, 1005 North Highway 101, stated that they could demonstrate they have adequate room to provide neces- sary parking, and safe ingress and egress. Commissioner Mellen questioned what verification was pro- vided by the City for this type of business. Director Tremere explained the typical question is whether or not an owner could sell from their property, the vegetables they grow on that property. The response to that question would have been yes. Many times there may be a misunderstanding as to the business limitations. Clarence Oansson, 1250 Highway 101 North, stated that he is initiating an engraving business and has questions where he can sell his products from a trailer; what restrictions would apply; and, what fee is necessary. He stated he plans on soliciting additional business from operations in the City. —�-- L\0. Page 68 Planning Commission Minutes April 16, 1986 Director Tremere suggested Mr. Jansson review the proposed ordinance amendments and explained the current City Code requirements for transient merchants. Mr. Jansson confirmed that as he would change locations to sell his product, signatures from the owners of the property at the new location would be required to be submitted to the City. Director Tremere suggested that Mr. Jansson visit the City Center to discuss the current Ordinance provisions which relate to transient merchants as well as home occupations. Commissioner Stulberg cautioned Mr. Jansson that he should also review the Sign Ordinance provisions, especially relating to signs painted on the side of trucks. Scott Rusten, 17725 10th Avenue North, summarized his con- cerns regarding merchants in residential areas, which in- clude safety, parking generated by a retail business such as the Gaudettes, extent of days and hours the business is in operation, and the change of character this type of business has on the neighborhood. Mr. Rusten confirmed that his concerns relate to all types of transient merchants. Commissioner Plufka explained that the State statutes allow for control but not licensing of certain produce sales. Director Tremere agreed with Commissioner Plufka, noting that produce mcr611011-Its a11U2 -LIE oiiisIeii"I iiimr -1a1-1t,s c:.uld be restricted to or from certain districts. Mr. Rusten stated that he recommends the City exclude such merchants from the R -1A District. Vernon Peterson, 17425 County Road 47, stated his recommen- dation that there not be an administrative fee for the produce merchants. He stated that the people regulating such merchants are already paid in their salary. Vice Chairman Pauba confirmed that Mr. Peterson does not want a fee applied to that person who grows produce and sells it from their own property. John Muchlinski, 17710 10th Avenue North, expressed concern with allowing produce merchants in the R -1A Zoning District as it is degrading to the "Village". He stated the Gaudette business has turned out to be one which trucks in produce which is not grown on this site. Mr. Muchlinski stated that Plymouth has sufficient open area for this type of business without bringing it into residential neighborhoods. He expressed concern that there is not safe egress from the Gaudettes, considering the proximity to Highway 101. 'Ac, Page 69 Planning Commission Minutes April 16, 1986 Mr. Muchlinski explained that the residents brought their concerns regarding the Gaudettes to the City last year. They were allowed to let their business continue through the end of the season. He expressed concern that the City would allow them to initiate a new season and then would not be required to close. He stated he did not think any of the Planning Commissioners would want this type of business in their neighborhoods; and, that parking will always be a problem as customers will not want to go to someone's back- yard, but will park on the public road. He summarized his concerns about locating a commercial use in the R -1A District. Commissioner Mellen confirmed that Highway 101 is posted "No Parking". Mr. Muchlinski offered comments relating to 10th Avenue North where parking does occur on both sides of the street. Paul Jung, 17605 10th Avenue North, agreed with Mr. Muchlinski. He travels from the south on Highway 101 and it is difficult to turn onto 10th Avenue North. Mr. Jung stated that on certain days, 25 - 30 cars have used his driveway to turn around and the circulation is a bad situation. Vice Chairman Pauba stated he agreed he would he concerned if this type of business were proposed in his neighborhood. Jeanie Gaudette submitted letters from Dawn Foster, 1750 10th Avenue North; Karn Born; Vernon and Rosanna Linn, 1005 Peony Lane; and, Elsie Thompson, 17530 10th Avenue North, who stated support for her operation. Commissioner Mellen inquired as to the delivery of produce via trucks. Ms. Gaudette stated she was told you could not start a business without corn being one of the products, therefore, she had the corn delivered. She currently leases land from her father and will grow her own corn. If this cannot be transported via trucks, she will transport it in an automobile. She stated she grows all of the other produce on her site. Commissioner Wire inquired if she serves her own neighbor- hood. Ms. Gaudette stated generally people come from 11th, 12th and 17th Avenues. Although, people do stop on their way to and from work. Ms. Gaudette stated she feels she can regulate the traffic and desires the opportunity to demonstrate this. ='--'1Q. Page 70 Planning Commission Minutes April 16, 1986 Arvid Dittbenner, 17715 10th Avenue North, explained he was one of the original homeowners in this area and concurred that all have tried to be good neighbors. He expressed concern that Ms. Gaudette refers to the operation as a "produce store". Mr. Dittbenner inquired how the City could prevent another operation such as this. The traffic is a concern as you consider the number of children in this area. Mr. Muchlinski stated he does not give validity to the signed letters from the standpoint that some of the people are not living in the immediate area. Mr. dung expressed concern that if the cars of visitors to the site do not park at the corner, they park in front of his house which he does not appreciate. Mr. Rusten stated that considering the growth the Gaudettes have experienced, the need was demonstrated to limit the size of this type of use which should be restricted from residential areas. He stated in no way should they be allowed to truck produce in to their property. Ms. Gaudette clarified that her business is not operated year round, but is temporary, approximately 84 days of the year. Mr. dung inquired about the aspect of employees for this type of business. Director Tremere clarified that the pro- duce could not be purchased from someone else, otherwise the business would be considered a wholesale operation. You could have an employee who works for you on your land where your produce is grown. Vice Chairman Pauba closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Plufka clarified that the proposed ordinance amendment does not Just apply to a particular piece of property but rather, to all the land within the City. He stated he did not think a property owner should be stopped from selling produce grown in their backyard in a safe and orderly manner. The character of such an operation greatly changes when produce is brought in from somewhere else, even if it is grown by the same owner. A residential lot limits the size of the business, by limiting the amount of produce grown there. If produce is brought in from another site, there is no control or limit to the size of the operation. Page 71 Planning Commission Minutes April 16, 1986 Commissioner Plufka stated that when the business becomes transient, then it is no longer appropriate for residential areas. Perhaps a transient business could be allowed in the Future Restricted Development (FRO) District, but once the property is zoned for urban use, then it no longer is appropriate. Vice Chairman Pauba agreed with Commissioner Plufka's com- ments. Commissioner Wire concurred that if the produce is grown on a lot, the owner should be permitted to sell that produce, but not to truck in produce. Commissioner Wire clarified the suggested sign provisions which would require the sign to be taken down when the bus- iness is not operating. Commissioner Stulberg stated transient merchants in the residential districts should be required to obtain a Home Occupation Conditional Use Permit. He is not opposed to allowing transient merchants in the residential districts, on vacant land, where the operation is conducted safely. Safety provisions such as those required in Section 10, Subdivision B are necessary. Commissioner Mellen concurred that if you exclude transient merchants from residential districts, too many other uses, such as selling a single vehicle, flowers, might also be restricted. Commissioner Plufka expressed concern with allowing the use of vacant property by a transient merchant, but excluding a homeowner. He stated the proposed language would not specifically address garage sales, and they should not be considered as home occupations. A distinction was drawn between a home occupation which is service oriented versus transient merchants which are product oriented. Commis- sioner Stulberg disagreed and noted that a home occupation is a business which is operated for a profit. Commissioner Magnus questioned if the proposed ordinance language would exclude garage sales. Director Tremere stated the ordinance does not specifically address garage sales other than as an incidental residential activity which is accessory to the residential use. The proposed ordinance language does not address garage sales. Page 72 Planning Commission Minutes April 16, 1986 Commissioner Wire inquired if the Commission desired to charge a fee for the administration of transient/ produce merchant regulations. Commissioner Mellen expressed concern that if a permit is not required, there would be no time to collect a fee. Commissioner Wire clarified that those persons who grow and sell produce from their property would be excluded from a fee; other transient and produce mer- chants would be required to pay a license fee. MOTION by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE Magnus to recommend approval of the Ordinance Amendments re- lating to transient merchants and produce merchants per the April 8, 1986 staff report, providing that allowed signage shall be temporary and only be erected during the period of actual activity; transient produce merchants and transient merchants should be prohibited in all residential districts, but allowed in the Future Restricted Development (FRD) District; and, there shall be no administrative fees related to produce merchants. MOTION to AMEND by Commissioner Mellen, seconded by Commis- NOTION TO AMEND sioner Stulberg to strike the recommendation restricting transient produce and transient merchants from all resi- dential districts. It was explained that the intent of the amendment is to allow transient merchants in all districts. The Commission discussed the merits of the amendment. Commissioner Stulberg noted that if the amendment is sup- ported by the Commission he intended to further amend the Motion to allow sales only on vacant parcels. Roll Call Vote on Amendment. 2 Ayes. Commissioners Wire, VOTE - NOTION TO Magnus, Plufka, and Vice Chairman Pauba, Nay. MOTION for AMEND- NOTION FAILS AMENDMENT fails. Commissioner Wire asked for a Commission consensus with respect to signage and fees. MOTION to AMEND by Commissioner Wire to require an administrative fee for all transient merchants. MOTION died for lack of second. Roll Call Vote on MAIN MOTION. 4 Ayes. Commissioners VOTE ON MAIN NOTION Stulberg and Mellen, Nay. MOTION carried. NOTION CARRIED Vice Chairman Pauba informed the Planning Commission that they would next discuss the proposed amendment relating to temporary promotional activities and events in the I-1 District in order to conduct the Public Hearing for the citizen present. = ` \oo Page 73 Planning Commission Minutes April 16, 1986 Director Tremere introduced the proposed zoning ordinance TEMPORARY PROMOTION amendment with respect to Section 8, Subdivision D, and ACTIVITIES IN I-1 explained the intent for allowing promotional activities in DISTRICT the Industrial District, similar to those allowed in the Commercial Districts. Vice Chairman Pauba opened the Public Hearing and recognized Mr. Doug Rippie, 12832 Highway 55. Mr. Rippie explained an aspect of his business which includes a periodic promotional event where specialty vehicles are displayed. Also, owners of the specialized vehicles will swap or trade parts and accessories. Mr. Rippie explained such events. Invitations are mailed directly to a limited market and not to the general public. He stated there is a need to allow this in the Industrial District. Director Tremere clarified the current language pertaining to the limitation that the activity be related to the bus- iness, tenant, and owner. Mr. Rippie confirmed that a per- mit would still be required prior to the event being conducted. Vice Chairman Pauba closed the Public Hearing. MOTION by Commissioner Wire, seconded by Commissioner Mellen to recommend approval of the ordinance amendment relating to temporary promotional activities and events in the I-1 Zoning District, per the April 8, 1986 staff report. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. Vice Chairman Pauba opened the Public Hearings relating to the ordinance amendments for standards allowing subdivisions creating parcels so that each unit of a two-family dwelling can be owner occupied; calculation of lot coverage for bus- iness and industrial development; clarification of Planned Unit Development (PUD) standards as to minimum area required/ allowed for PUD's; and, multiple free standing business signs for individual tenants in -lieu of wall signage. No one was present to speak on any of these items and Vice Chairman Pauba closed the Public Hearings. MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENTS REGARD- ING PROMOTIONS IN THE I-1 DISTRICT VOTE - MOTION CARRIED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS C - F MOTION by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE Magnus to recommend approval of the ordinance amendments AMENDMENT ON TWO - relating to standards allowing subdivisions creating parcels FAMILY DWELLING so that each unit of a two-family dwelling can be owner LOTS occupied, per the April 8, 1986 staff report. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - NOTION CARRIED -A--- y c, Page 74 Planning Commission Minutes April 16, 1986 Commissioner Plufka inquired if the intent of the proposed language relating to maximum lot coverage is to allow the developer to choose if 100% of the site will be used in the calculation. He confirmed that if that choice were made, then the Park Dedication requirements would be based on 100% of the site. Director Tremere clarified that the staff recommendation is not to have an option. The ordinance language proposed calls for the calculation to be based upon that land which is located at or above the 100 -Year High Water Level. This is the same as PUD's and would apply only to sites where the condition exists. Commissioner Plufka noted that the Plymouth Development Council addressed this item and desires an option for this calculation. He recommended the calculation be mandatory as suggested by Director Tremere. Commissioner Stulberg agreed. MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE Plufka to recommend approval of the ordinance amendments re- LOT COVERAGE lating to the calculation of maximum lot coverage for bus- CALCULATION iness and industrial developments as recommended in the April 8, 1986 staff report; the application of the rule is to be mandatory, not optional. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED Coordinator McConn explained the concern expressed by the President of the Development Council, regarding the limita- tion of subjective decisions, so that a petitioner knows up front the expectations relating to Planned Unit Developments. Commissioner Stulberg concurred that developers desire limited subjectivity "up front", but seek more subjectivity as the Commission and Council review the proposed plans. Director Tremere explained the recommended amendments to Section 9, Subdivision B. He noted much of the language was already in the Ordinance. Commissioner Plufka commended staff on the recommended language. MOTION by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE Stulberg to recommend approval of the ordinance language for AMENDMENTS REGARD - clarification of Planned Unit Development (PUD) standards as ING PUD STANDARDS to minimum area required, attributes, and bonus points, per AND ATTRIBUTES the April 8, 1986 staff report. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED Page 75 Planning Commission Minutes April 16, 1986 MOTION by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commissioner Mellen to recommend approval of the ordinance language re- lating to multiple free standing business signs for individ- ual tenants in -lieu of wall signage. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. OTHER BUSINESS Director Tremere identfied the remaining ordinance amendments to be brought forward for Planning Commission consideration at a later meeting. He explained also that staff is reviewing policies as to currency and as to whether some can be adopted as ordinances. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:15 P.M. NOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT REGARD- ING FREESTANDING SIGNS IN THE I-1 DISTRICT VOTE - NOTION CARRIED 'LA)2� Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission April 10, 1986 Page 7 Present: Chair Edwards, Commissioners Anderson, LaTour, Mullan, Reed and Rosen; staff Blank, Brown, Patterson and Pederson; Councilmember Zitur; Doug O'Brien, Sunset Hill Elementary School Principal; Bill Bushnell, Sunset Hill Playground Committee; George Watson, Brauer & Associates Absent: Commissioner Beach 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Edwards called the April meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Commissioner Mullan and seconded by Commissioner Reed to approve the February minutes as presented. 3. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS a. Staff Mary Patterson discussed the May/June issue of Plymouth on Parade which is in the process of being printed and will be mailed to residents about the first week in May. She stated that this summer's programs will be our largest ever. We are facing space problems at Wayzata Senior High, which is the only high school available to us in the summer. We are unable to use District 281 schools without paying for janitorial overtime. A new program for summer is outdoor exercise for parents and their children at Zachary Park. Our senior exercise class "Over SO and Fit" has been very popular this spring and well attended, so we are going to continue it this summer. A request this spring resulted in the City hiring an interpretor to assist a hearing-impaired mother in our Teeny Tumblers class, where parents participate with their children. It is the first time we have ever had a request of this nature, and Mary anticipates that more requests of this kind could be made in the future, thus necessitating appropriate budget planning. Ruth Brown stated that summer classes begin the week of June 16. She has begun her summer hiring, since she will be on maternity leave in May and part of June. She announced that we will be conducting a joint recreation effort with the City of Wayzata this summer which will entail offering swimming lessons, tennis lessons and sand volleyball to the residents of Wayzata. This is being done on an experimental basis for the summer of 1986 only. If, after reviewing the program at the end of the summer, it is deemed successful, we may consider repeating the joint venture in future summers. The City Flea Market and Craft Fair is scheduled for Saturday, May 17, which is the same day as our swimming registration. Holding these two events at the same time should prove beneficial to both groups. b. Athletic Association Representatives None were present at this meeting. C. Others Doug O'Brien, principal of Sunset Hill Elementary School, and Bill Bushnell, representing the Sunset Hill Playground Committee, were present to request financial support from the City for the construction of a new playground at Sunset School. They are asking the City for a $10,000 donation to help with the removal of existing asphalt surfaces; `A ,b PRAC Minutes - April 10, 1986 Page 8 the removal of unsafe, obsolete play equipment; the preparation of beds around and under relocated new play equipment; the drilling of holes for equipment footings; the purchase of concrete and installation of concrete in footing holes; the purchase and installation of 6 x 6 timbers around the structure; the purchase and installation of black plastic mulch on prepared beds; the purchase, hauling and installation of pearock in the prepared beds; and the purchase and installation of asphalt basketball court between recycled backboards and hoops. They are willing to accept the donation in the form of money and/or labor from our park maintenance crews. Director Blank is recommending that the donation be in the form of money only, since it is too difficult to judge how much time would be required of our park maintenance crews in completing this job. Commissioner Rosen questioned how often this playground is used after school hours and on weekends in order to justify our involvement in this project. Mr. O'Brien stated several families are seen using the equipment on weekends and in the evenings after school. Director Blank also stated that the Sunset Hill playground and the surrouding park is considered the neighborhood park for this area, therefore justifying its use by individuals other than school students. The playground equipment would be owned and maintained by the school district and they would also be responsibile for the liability. Commissioner Reed requested that if we donate to this project, we should consider erecting a sign of some sort identifying this playground as a City neighborhood park, as well as showing that we contributed financially to the equipment. Commissioner Rosen recommended that before PRAC donates a check for ;10,000, bids should be received and examined and then the money given accordingly. Commissioner Rosen was also concerned with the precednet PRAC would be setting by becoming involved with this project. Director Blank pointed out that when PRAC was approached ifL 19003 by the Pilgri... Lane PTA to donate matching funds to their playground improvements, the question of setting a precedent arose at that time also. PRAC decided then that they would probably be asked by schools with playgrounds serving as neighborhood parks to donate to future improvements, and that they would review each case separately and would likely donate matching funds. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER MULLAN AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER REED RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY CONTRIBUTE UP TO $10,000 FOR THE ITEMS LISTED IN DOUG O'BRIEN'S LETTER DATED MARCH 21, 1986, CONTINGENT UPON RECEIVING AN ITEMIZED COST BREAKDOWN ON EACH ITEM, AND FIRM COMMITMENTS ON VOLUNTEER LABOR AND EQUIPMENT. ALL SCHOOL DISTRICT FUNDS ARE TO BE SPENT FIRST BEFORE CITY FUNDS ARE USED. THE CITY SHALL HAVE THE OPTION OF SUPPLYING LABOR AND OR EQUIPMENT TO ACCOMPLISH ANY OF THE LISTED TASKS. The motion carried with four ayes. Commissioner Rosen voted nay because he was concerned with setting a precedent. (Commissioner Anderson did not vote, as he left the meeting prior to this item being discussed.) Chair Edwards requested that staff bring back to the May meeting a portion of the minutes from the meeting in 1983 when PRAC approved the matching funds for the Pilgrim Lane PTO regarding the discussion on precedent setting. It was suggested that staff also check with the City engineering department to determine if there are sites within the City requesting fill where the old asphalt surface from the playground could be discarded. Staff was also asked to report back to PRAC by the May meeting what other schools may desire in terms of playground equipment improvements. PRAC Minutes - April 10, 1986 Page 9 4. REPORT ON PAST COUNCIL ACTION a. Joint Powers Agreement with Wayzata Director Blank reported that the City Council approved the joint powers agreement with the City of Wayzata at their April 7 meeting. This joint agreement is for one year only on a trial basis. b. Approved Purchase of Property at 3005 East Medicine Lake Boulevard The Council approved purchasing the property at 3005 East Medicine Lake Boulevard for inclusion in the Hennepin County Regional Trail Corridor, contingent upon the City being reimbursed (including interest) within five years. The contingency failed, however, when the Metropolitan Council denied the interest portion of the re -payment. We are now waiting for final action from the Suburban Hennepin Regional Parks District. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Parkers Lake Update George Watson shared construction drawings for Phase I development of Parkers Lake with the commissioners. The drawings included plans for landscaping, grading, planting, etc. Mr. Watson also had samples of park benches, lighting fixtures, and the material that would be beneath the sand in the beach area. Director Blank discussed writing our 1987 LAWCON grant application for 'Phase II of Parkers Lake City Park which would include the boat launch, fishing docks, and picnic shelters. b. Zachary Building Director Blank reviewed with the commissioners the meeting he has held with the architect and with Hennepin County Health Department regarding the Zachary concession building. Three proposed plans for the building have been developed. Director Blank is recom- mending dropping all three plans; two because they are too costly, and the third because it is simply an open air shelter and could not be used for concessions. Director Blank is recommending instead that the City go ahead with the proposed landscaping, which would allow portable concession vehicles access to the playfield area, as well as pave the way for the construction of a concession building at some time in the future. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LATOUR AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSEN APPROVING DIRECTOR BLANK'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PROPOSED LAND- SCAPING AT ZACHARY PLAYFIELD. The motion carried with all ayes. C. St. Mary's Land Acquisition Update The acquisition of the property at St. Mary's will be wrapped up within the week, once the City gives St. Mary's a check to pay special assessments. d. Neighborhood Park Development/Improvements - Queensland & Imperial Hills Architectural drawings should be ready within a few days for viewing by the neighborhood residents. Meetings for the residents to view the plans are tentatively scheduled for April 22. Letters will be sent to residents the week of April 14. 6. NEW BUSINESS a. New Plats There were no new plats to review. b. 1986 Trail Projects Director Blank is recommending following the basic trail plan established in 1985 covering the years 1985-87, and completing those trail projects this year that were to have been done in 1985, as well as making the Luce Line trail the top priority in PRAC Minutes - April 10, 1986 Page 10 1986. PRAC approved this recommendation unanimously. C. 1987 LAWCON Grant Application Director Blank stated that he intends to write our 1987 LAWCON grant application for Phase II of Parkers Lake which will include the boat launch, fishing docks, picnic shelters and parking lot. 7. COMMISSION PRESENTATION Chair Edwards announced that she is planning to attend a dinner for Commission and Board members on Tuesday, April 15, at the Hyland Lake Park Reserve in Bloomington. Commissioners Rosen and Mullan will also attend as well as Director Blank. Commissioner Reed attended the first meeting of the French Park Advisory Board where he learned that $2.5 million has been set aside for a water play area within French Park. Commissioner Rosen asked if a parks tour could be arranged for sometime in the spring. Director Blank stated he would schedule one for early in May. 8. STAFF COMMUNICATION None. 9. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:33 p.m. S CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: April 22, 1986 TO: James G. Willis, City Manager FROM SUBJECT Richard J. Carlquist, Public Safety Director FIRST :QUARTER REPORT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE Our first quarter report this year indicates some very dramatic increases in activity. I believe that some of the increase is due to the unusually warm weather that we received in March of this year as compared to a very snowy March in 1985. Some of the more significant increases occured in assault, theft, DWI, liquor laws, PD accidents, and hazardous violations tags. A surprising decrease occurred in animal details over the same time period from last year. I find this decrease inconsistent with my assumption that the warm weather increased other activities. I would certainly guess that dog problems would have increased correspondingly. I have also included with the police report,my first quarter report for the investigations section including youth services and community relations. Also, note the new report that we have created to help us better track our overtime costs. FIRE We continue to have approximately fifty per -cent of our calls being classified as false alarms. The major offender appearsto be the apartments. In discussing this particular problem with the fire inspector, I find that the lions share of the false alarms at apartments are beyond the users control. In short, pull stations have been unlawfully set off by persons believing that their prank is very minor. Some dye was placed on one of the pull stations at Ridgewood Apartments and a young juvenile was apprehended in that manner. The total estimated loss to personal property from fire in this first quarter is approximately half of what it was during the same time frame last year. Please note that I have scribbled some abbreviations next to the names of persons who appear on the participation report. I did this because I did not want you to be confused if you happened to see a very low response percentage for the particular fire fighter involved. We currently have two persons still out on a leave of absence and that's what that L/A stands for, and we have seven rookie fire fighters still attending school and that is what the FFI stands for. Normally, we do not require fire fighters who are attending the rookie school to also respond to fire calls. Enclosures. RJC: skp PLYMOUTH POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT CLASS I MURDER RAPE ROBBERY ASSAULT BURGLARY THEFT AUTO THEFT ARSON 1985 0 I 0 1 20 55 183 18 1 1986 0 0 2 41 49 212 13 2 TOTALS 1985 278 1986 319 +14.7% CLASS II MONTH JANUARY - MARCH 1986 FORGERY EMBELLEL STOLEN WEAP PROSTI SEX GAMB OFFENSES LIQ. U15URDEKLY COUNTERFEIT 1FRAUDI MENT 1PROPERTYlVANDALISMIOFF ITUTIONIOFFINARCILINGIFAM/CHILDID.W.I.ILAW I CONDUCT I OTHER 1985 1 48 1 0 2 1 80 0 0 4 10 1 0 1 82 2 5 1 70 1986 4 28 1 0 0 1 90 0 0 8 29 1 0 1 112 28 12 1 97 TOTALS 1985 305 1986 409 +34.1% CLASS III FATAL PERSONAL ACCIDENT INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE SNOWMOBILE ACCIDENT DROWNING MEDICAL EMERGENCY SUICIDE SUICIDE ATTEMPTS I NATURAL DEATH ANIMAL I BITES I FIRES 1985 1 0 41 181 0 0 150 0 3 4 7 52 1 1986 1 1 40 234 0 0 175 0 8 5 6 62 1 TOTALS 1985 438 1986 531 +21.2% CLASS IV ASSIST ANIMAL FALSE LOCK OTHER WARRANT TRAFFIC FIREARM SUSPICION MISSING LOST PUBLIC IDOMESTICIDETAILIALARMSIPROWLERI OUTS JAGENCYISERVED DETAIL IVIOLATIONJINFORMATIONIPERSON IFOUNDINUISANCEI MISC. 1 1985 47 1 308 1 225 1 10 1 262 109 1 74 1 388 1 7 1 300 6 21 1 188 1 361 1986 49 1 280 1 242 1 8 1 327 94 1 110 I 519 1 1 1 254 4 33 1 202 1 255 1 TOTALS 1985 2,306 1986 2,378 + 3.1% HARZARDOUS VIOLATIONS 1985 864 1986 1,099 +27.2% CRIMINAL OFFENSES CLEARED 1985 37.4% 1986 30.9.% TOTAL NUMBER OF INCIDENTS 1985 3.327 NONHAZARDOUS VIOLATIONS 1985 1,643 1986 1,722 + 4.8% 1986 3,637 + 9.3% PLYMOUTH POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT CLASS I MURDER RAPE ROBBERY ASSAULT BURGLARY THEFT AUTO THEFT ARSON 19,95 0 0 1 5 16 65 2 0 1986 0 0 0 12 13 77 2 0 TOTALS 1985 89 1986 104 +16.9% CLASS II MONTH MARCH 1986 _5 FORGERY EMBEZZ EL STOLEN WEAP PROSTI SEX GAMB OFFENSES LIQ DISORDERLY COUNTERFEITIFRAUDI MENT 1PROPERTYlVANDALISMIOFF ITUTIONIOFFINARCILINGIFAM/CHILDID.W.I.1 LAW I CONDUCT I OTHER 1 1985 1 1 8 0 0 31 0 0 1 5 0 1 33 2 2 37 1986 1 2 9 0 0 41 0 0 3 14 0 0 47 7 5 28 TUTALS 1985 121 1986 156 +28.9% CLASS III FATAL PERSONAL PROPERTY SNOWMOBILE MEDICAL SUICIDE NATURAL ANIMAL -- ACCIDENT INJURY DAMAGE ACCIDENT DROWNING EMERGENCY SUICIDE ATTEMPTS DEATH 1 BITESIFIPE 1985 0 15 55 0 0 48 0 0 1 1 15 1986 0 11 70 0 0 52 0 3 2 2 26 TOTALS 1985 135 1986 166 +23.01/ CLASS IV ASSIST ANIMAL FALSE LOCK OTHER WARRANT TRAFFIC FIREARM SUSPICION MISSING LOST PUBLIC IDOMESTICIDETAILIALARMSIPROWLERIOUTS JAGENCYISERVED IDETAIL IVIOLATIONJINFORMATIONIPERSON IFOUNDINUISANCEI MISC. 1985 21 1 127 1 81 3 73 28 17 143 4 94 2 7 59 143 1986 16 J 124 1 97 6 126 32 28 168 0 103 0 16 79 107 TUTALS 1985 802 1986 902 +12.5% HAZARDOUS VIOLATIONS 1985 282 1986 511 +81.2% NONHAZARDOUS VIOLATIONS 1985 569 1986 497 -12.7% CRIMINAL OFFENSES CLEARED 1985 32.2% 1986 28.8% TOTAL NUMBER OF INCIDENTS 1985 1,147 1986 1,328 +15.8% c� LZ O CL Ti N v a VV Ln W -.4 3'Q —=`s-� C. < --q 3 T C- • , �1 T C. . --A 3 -n Cr — a ---I T C- ►-. O O c, C+ -3 m LL Q 7 O O (D 0) r+ ' Q O < o cu a= c+ -3 cr 7 < o m w c+ -1 0" O O < o t-+ M O -3 Q O < Z J (n N F-- N V N) N N_ J / m CT. I..- I--� W c z = v NvN W = W �• W m W O .a.> a W �G ►-• r-. -� < Z 3 to s' J m m 3 Z O O fL O 77 O m O -+ > C > > C< O m C -- C+ c+ c+ c+ r+ Cn N N c+ cn r+ N z m ^ c001ow ul--j N01OO1 v: N AcnNV N N G N C-: m (n N F-- N V N) N N_ C r 000Cn V CT. I..- I--� W CnNm�! ;htGO�O NvN W = r-. Z m c C'1 C � m Cn Lr. Cn N N N r- cn r+ N m ^ c001ow ul--j N01OO1 v: AcnNV C) i.- WO1 G C1 D r —+ Lr) o M z 0 a c c z a n 7 A O lv fv O10 -Pb N w 00 w M CD Ln V S IV A C << c z i 0 m 3 D CL 3 r1 v m co 0 00 00 w cn m -+ w A pp N W V V Cn N 00 00 OJ O) A pp Z a2 3� V 01 0 01 CO tO A A -4 m r 0 Ln m 0 C-) w���-� N w�►-� w� v V Nr -'N V W w0 AO100tO 4bt.-Cn-4 W A(nw r- 0) 01(0 V NO1t0 CTiN-Pb CO O1 C0 CnN CnO1ACT r N V W ►'r r-+ W Ln A W O A N W w v1 00 co 00 01 W O0 tO tO Co 0.- ko CO rn A A V �-- Lrl r I- V W wcn000 co caAI.- AN00w A CO Cn m W 00 Cn O N N W V U1 n N N N O1W W O VAW O W tnNwO Nr- C) �- Cn --I Ln a v: r < v>. c ! I!I W 0m C: - T C n D f.r r- 00 00 9 r n r>> 7c c m 3 c V , r > N N Z3_ D > 9 r rr. c O O O O O Z z z rt rf z r+ r+ Q G O� V F S -1i D V V N> N c rr v C cIn W W rN.. D En co cn C: r. z cn N In I/] n K C) i C b (7 f O N E T w C) w m rn car. o a N• J � C ,� �. V: T N N C W Cl a z 0 3 i ' v; O nI x rr O c I , ( I T. 0 O` co � c U� � z n M. 0 'v c m z kj 1c) P 1cr% 1-2 ON N n � \° T a N IN ( I00 I�I n v: r < v>. c ! I!I W 0m C: - T C n D f.r r- 00 00 9 r n r>> 7c c m n ? T c n > Q r D r z O w O c z C, M. N N z D > m z c c O O O O O Z z z rt rf r} r+ r+ Q K O� V pi -1i V V N> N c rr N C cIn W W rN.. En co cn z (1) cn N In I/] z C) � C b (7 z O N E T w C) w m rn z o a N• D � V ,� �. E C N N C Cl a t 2 :r i ' T O U x rr c I , ( I T. t O` co � C' U� � D z n M. n n m LO kj 1c) P 1cr% 1-2 ON O n � \° a IN ( I00 I�I 00 00 n ? T c n > Q r D r z O w O c z C, M. N N z m z c C Z m z K O� V C -1i V V N> N c rr N rN.. z K z T z O T w w m rn z D V E C N N Z t 2 :r i ' T O U x c T. T Z � D z n n m 3 n a IE O v n z v N O tr' z n ? T c n > Q r D r z O w O z c � c Lr. _ CT a, c c .. vz. r- D o z z -� M. z z 3 tDl.' r � r N � y � 3 IIr n S z V t N co 00 rn V -n ON v r.. z N N S m z c Q m z K N -1i V V N> N c J z z K a C 0 w w T, D V C N N Z z c � c Lr. _ CT a, c c .. vz. r- D o z z -� M. z z 3 tDl.' r � r N � y � 3 IIr n S z V t N co 00 rn V -n ON PLYMOUTH DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY YOUTH SERVICES JUVENILE CASE DISPOSITIONS MARCH 1986 - CASE ASSIGNMEMENTS - 25 Cases Assigned 33 Juveniles Identified 8 Females 25 Males in Recidivist - OFFENSES - 13 Shoplifting 5 Theft 5 Criminal Damage 0 Neg. Fires 0 Harassing Comm - DISPOSITIONS - 6 Cou rt 20 Warn & Release 0 Bridge 4 Other Mary Uhlig, Youth Service Officer 0 Truancy 4 Runaway 0 Health & Welfare 2 Alcohol Viol. 4 Other 0 Child Protection 0 Counseling 0 SOS VS � --4 p z C cn D C- C 3 D 3 -M Cr tc o rD o f1 rD c c c tL Z7 Gi rD G) .0c) c+ n < c t p co �G -5 Q /�' CJl O N W � G � 3 Cn O O Cn C Z N Z -4 v W :c U1 rD -< • Lo ul cn o ? m O O O 4 n Z O f 3 N r-� N C 4�b W N tc \ Z Cll O U1 O n c o 0 o e+ D V) ►- O Z 1 O C � � 3 0+ 2 C T7 < m � z < m r 01 D C a c+ z G m z cn -0 N O = < C7 O O O O�-- G'> C N K z z z m O 3 C N a-� C+ r z Cn O CJI (n 1 C O O O Z O Cn N CI1 V -+• S N m O O cn to n C) O o O I-- C-) N U) v v D C� N 4-- 4:1b r r N 3 i� ►-' N V o o m r w N w co m D N N (n N --1 G -4 N m n-- mr-n2-- G C (D rD C W z rr n, Q << c G fD - N O C O O n t-+ z Z O to Gam. O O a, -+• r+ c r+ S N --+• n N Z rL l< Ln C C: << c c C-+ o n r+ y O n rt N 71? NO'-IIN-I-4 m z 0 D z n m o• S S 3 N z 3 3 I -I - uln -3m :3 7 D r Lr T• C_- C- C- -47ZZzcz--4-4=nC-o--4zz---i -4 7ZZ r.7 = X --4 -4 = n C- --4 M M ---i Z c It n c c 0 n-3 C-1 O rD rD p • • X N (D :3 N :T O_ ;7 M C rr, W O• (D c a 4< ... -� J -J. o G C N O C fD O 7 r+ .Z rt C a r+ 06 rr C �+ M. = O ct O J m O (t ? 1- 01r r0+.0 o Qj n o CD n o to c_ z � � V: r+ 1 �G 1 N v z c C Z z c a c n 3 z Q t< r C tc rr rD rD n (D O G O n D y c c v 4 v. T C ti N r+ o Q, >r N (D Z C a r+ \ O O r+ a c �-=zoC = zo n Mc�� c+ S a r+ to d S c C_ C N C-) -'• S n 2 - r+ eD N KIr. R (D D v N Z r c. • -z D o c ccz�tc D C c S r C n I a � C -•+, a- -. rt 1 V � N N N T Lr- La -+..Q t0 -,. ... — r- fD e•'r 7r 7< C 77 R ri m ..�. r �. r+ C,+ z G c* to 3 � N M, J (A r+ Z r+ m z 1 1 N W 4:h- -.j 0-- r -Q t.0 rja)m WN ICN pmwIV LnLnCCOo:71C-a N rr, • W 0) z G U' a 06 z C-) M • N N v N • • N • • N • • Cry T N 3 Z 1 0 O C m rn T z z M. z D O Z N 1 1 A N Wm o, 3 m Z m z -i 1 W, a Lr W W W W W W W W G 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1= ✓.� _.� f Q c �-Z 717' -h 7r CC. rD �. OL cn a 0 c R e•+ a —r, -n c e-1 C+ Q O (D -5 2 ✓. J. (r+ C+ -+• n = (lt ✓. `` o' �' (Do�(DO-z(D --4- CL c c rD rc o n -•• � z ?_ +N'+ n �' O w (D' o S H a 0 C O N d N d c•+ T � N rD m Ic IZ H n (D rD !n N (D N - C+ C 7 Q Er J. a rt C-) -4 w (D c) ti n m(DrD(Da�o,�T VI Vs !n to n O O O T1 QSCQ < = r-. J. ✓. ✓. ✓. to ✓. {n n C+ C+ C+ C+ C 7r 717 717 m ('T C'+ C't f+ J. J. ✓. Z C R (n S �. D C) C) (TN --1 m Z v D z n m (T • (J1 V1 �--+ B m -r` Is 0 0 x C z m m r 0 z SUMMARY OF OVERTIME WORK JANUARY 1 THROUGH MARCH 21, 1986 CLERICAL PROJECT NUMBER 100 SUB PROJECT # 153 Microfilming, Filing, Special details *Ted Strauch 55.50 hours * Temporary Employee — INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT NUMBER 200 SUB PROJECT # 250 Investigator called out by supervisor Luke Way 3.00 hours SUB PROJECT # 251 Mary Uhlig Niel Nielsen SUB PROJECT # 252 Luke Way Mike Ridgley, SUR PROJECT # 253 Niel Nielsen Investigator taking statements from suspects, victims, etc. 2.00 hours .50 hours Interviewing/counseling parents of juveniles .50 hours 2.00 hours TOTAL HOURS 55.50 TOTAL HOURS (Clerical) 55.50 Completing investigation while suspects are still in custody 4.00 hours 4.00 TOTAL HOURS (Investigations) 12.00 3.00 2.50 2.50 COMMUNITIY SERVICE OFFICER PROJECT NUMBER 500 SUB PROJECT # 550 Fill in for Vacations, Training, LTD.+�'�-�-�^ Jane Laurence 2.00 hours Nia Wronski 21.50 hours Mary Uhlig 131.00 hours Steve Barg 6.00 hours SUB PROJECT # 551 Shift extension to answer calls/paper work. Nia Wronski 2.75 hours SUB PROJECT # 555 Miscellanous Nia Wronski .50 hours 160.50 2.75 .50 TOTAL HOURS (Community Service Officers) 163.75 SUMMARY OF OVERTIME WORK CONTINUED JANUARY THROUGH MARCH 21, 1986 page 2 PATROL PROJECT NUMBER 300 SUB PROJECT NUMBER 350 Fill in for Vacations, Training, LTD. 358 Radar Assignments 351 Holiday Pay - Christmas, Thanksgiving, New Years 360 Court (extension of shift only) 353 Shift extended to answer calls/paper work 361 Emergency Response Team call out 354 Complete D.W.I. arrest 365 Explorers 356 Attend meetings 366 Misc. 357 Surveillance 400 All Contractual Work TOTAL HOURS 85.25 146.50 81.75 17.00 42.50 1.25 6.00 14.25 8.25 24.00 6.75 176.75 610.25 TOTAL SUB PROJECT # 350 351 353 354 356 357 358 360 361 365 366 400 HOURS LEVENS 2.50 3.50 6.00 DAHL 6.50 2.50 9.00 ANDERSON 8.00 1.00 9.00 FOREMAN 8.00 2.00 7.00 4.50 4.00 25.50 T. LARSON 11.50 2.75 1.25 3.25 1.50 20.25 NELSON 9.50 1.75 1.50 1.50 14.25 LINDMAN 1.50 5.00 1.75 2.00 10.25 J. LARSON 4.50 8.00 5.25 .75 2.00 .75 .50 37.25 59.00 HOLZERLAND 17.00 8.50 25.50 BEVENS 4.50 9.50 1.25 2.00 2.00 5.50 24.75 nIGATnNO 14.nn .75 47.25 62.00 TWAnDLE 1n.On R.nn 1.25 6.75 .25 16.00 42.25 WARD 18.5n 6.75 2.5n 2.00 .50 2.00 31.75 64.00 STIRRATT 4.00 16.00 3.25 5.00 6.00 34.25 FRANZ 8.25 6.50 4.25 7.50 1.25 1.00 2.00 .25 2.00 33.00 FORSLUND 1.50 14.50 4.25 4.00 24.75 DUERKSEN 8.00 1.25 2.25 2.00 4.00 17.50 THOMPSON 5.00 1.50 6.25 2.25 2.00 2.00 19.00 OIE 8.00 2.25 10.00 20.25 HERMAN 8.00 8.00 5.25 1.25 30.50 55.00 BUSKE 7.00 8.00 7.50 2.25 4.00 28.75 WAY 6.00 6.00 LAURENCE .50 .50 TOTAL HOURS 85.25 146.50 81.75 17.00 42.50 1.25 6.00 14.25 8.25 24.00 6.75 176.75 610.25 PLYMOUTH FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT TYPE OF REPORTED INCIDENTS BY TIME OF DAY MONTHLY JANUARY - MARCH 1986 0001 0401 0801 1201 1601 2001 CONFIRMED NUMBER OF FALSE PERMITS ESITMATED 0400 0800 1200 1600 2000 2400 CALLS ALARMS 1 TOTAL ISSUED LOSS PRIVATE DWELLINGS 2 1 3 1 5 1 5 1 8 1 8 1 23 8 31 -- $34,100 APARTMENTS 1 5 1 6 1 4 1 6 1 6 1 5 1 6 26 32 -- HOTELS AND MOTELS I 1 1 I I I 1 I 0 1 1 I 1ALL OTHER RESIDENTIAL I I I 2 1 I I 1 0 i 2 2 -- PUBLIC ASSEMBLY I I I 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 I 1 1 5 -- SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES I I I I 2 1 I I 2 1 0 1 2 -- HEALTH CARE INSTITUTIONS i 1 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 3 1 2 9 11 I 1 1 -- PENAL INSTITUTIONS 0 0 O STORES AND OFFICES 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 5 7 -- INDUSTRY, MFG. 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 6 1 -- 26,500 STORAGE IN STRUCTURES 0 0 O - SPECIAL STRUCTURES 0 0 O - FIRES OUTSIDE OF STRUCTURES 1 1 1 0 l - - - - FIRES IN HIGHWAY VEHICLES 1 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 1 1 5 4 9 1 -- 18,200 FIRES IN OTHER VEHICLES ( I 1 0 I 0 O FIRES IN BRUSH, GRASS I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 4 1 -- I - - FIRES IN RUBBISH, DUMPSTERS I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 -- I - - ALL OTHER FIRES I I I I I I 11 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 -- 1 200 MEDICAL AID RESPONSES I I 1 1 1 I I I I I 3 I 0 I 3 -- *MALICIOUS FALSE ALARMS I i I i I i I 0 1 0 1 0 -- MUTUAL AID OR ASSISTANCE I 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 I 0 ALL OTHER RESPONSES 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 6 1 3 1 9 1 -- I - - TOTALS 1 10 1 19 1 22 1 24 1 28 1 23 1 63 1 63 1 126 1 1 1 $79,000 *INCLUDED IN FALSE ALARM TOTALS YEAR TO DATE 1985 CONFIRMED CALLS 57 FALSE ALARMS 64 TOTAL CALLS 121 _STIMATED LOSS $165,650 PLYMOUTH FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTH MARCH 1986 FIRE FIGHTER PARTICIPATION THIS MONTH/TO DATE IFIRE STATION `#2 ( IS CALLS TO IHIS PERCENT t 1NAME MONTH 1 DATE MONTH ( DATE IBEGIN, R. 13 50 ( 42 ( 59 ( * Not adjusted for period of time in training. ** Adjustment for vacation and excused leave of absence. IARBEITER 17 44 55 ( 52 TOTAL ALARMS THIS MONTH 49 1MARTIN 13 27 ( 42 ( 32 FIRE STATION #1 THIS MONTH 40 1 BEr,IN, K. ( 23 59 74 ( 69 FIRE STATION 02 THIS MONTH 31 IBRANYON 14 ( 38 ( 45 ( 45 1BULLEN 12 1 35 39 ( 41 1 1SCHRODEN T 1 - - ( - 1 - 1 Oa, I LYMER, RON I - ( - 1 - I - 19/4- IBUHLMAN 1 12 1 33 1 39 1**40 1 ILUTH 1 19 1 47 1 61 1**57 1 ITOMBERS, WM. 1 17 1 49 I 55 1 57 1 1LEUER, G. i 26 1 67 1 84 1 79 1 IWIMMERGREN 11 1 19 1 **55 } **26 1 LBERRY 1 2 1 3 1 * 6 ( * 4 18RENNAN 1 10 1 35 1 32 41 (FISHER 1 15 i 36 1 **6n —46 JSCOFIELn 1 la 1 66 1 **75 ( **85 JJULSETH I 13 35 1 42 41 1 1LEUER, K. 1 28 1 73 1 90 86 ISTARR I 13 1 26 1 42 1**35 1 IJAMINSKI 1 12 1 30 1**40 i**36 1 IANDERSUN, P. I 12 I 30 1 39 1 35 1 IbURKE, DAVID 1 19 1 55 1 61 1 65 1 f � 1DAHLSTRUM 1 22 1 28 i *55 ( *27 ; �7� 1 FRANKS 1 13 1 14 1 *42 1 *16 } -t� TO DATE 126 TO DATE 102 TO DATE 85 FIRE FIGHTER P I I FIRE_ STATION`# ICIPATION THIS MONTH/10 DATE CALLS I P PLYMOUTH FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTH MARCH 1986 _ _^ { NAME I MONTH { DATE { MONTH ( DATE I MOLTING 1 17 1 63 1 43 1 62 { * Not adjusted for period of time in training. ** Adjustment for vacation and excused leave of absence. 1 EVENSON, DEN 1 17 1 41 1 43 1 40 1 1 JACH 1 14 1 36 1 **41 1 **38 1 TOTAL ALARMS THIS MONTH 49 { SHELDON, R. 1 34 1 90 1 85 1 88 1 FIRE STATION #1 THIS MONTH 40 1 KUSS C 17 1 44 1 43 1 43 1 FIRE STATION #2 THIS MONTH 31 TOMCYYK 1 17 { 42 { 43- { 41 { SCHARLAU, A 1 12 { 38 { 30 { 37 1 { WELCH { 21 { 44 { 53 { **45 { 1 VEFLIN 1 25 1 53 { **71 { **55 { { SISK ( 24 { 32 I *60 _ 1 *31 { �' ( HEBERT, N. I 31 ( 66 I 78 I 65 PHILLIPPE I 18 I 34 ( 45 I 33 i JUHNSON, B. 34 I 89 I 85 I 87 1 NELSON 24 I 40 I *60 1 *39 _ 1 —L LINDBERGER I 14 1 39 I 35 i 38 1 FOURNIER I 12 1 32 1 30 1 31 1 1 SCHARLAU, C. 1 28 1 67 1 70 ( 66 1 1 LEDER, D. 1 22 i 53 1 55 1**56 1 ELLIOTT, n. 1 36 1 63 1 90 1**84 i { PLACK 1 15 1 33 1 38 1 **39 1 1 KNUTH 1 19 1 35 i 48 ( 34 1 1 ELLIOTT, S. 1 1 ( 10 1 3 1 10 1 { LAHTI 1 34 ( 61 1 85 1 60 1 ( ARBOGAST I 19 1 28 I *48 HEBERT, DAVID ( 9 I 30 23 1 29 HEBERT, BARB ( 16 1 42 1 40 I 41 ( SMITH, CARY ( 21 1 40 i 53 1 39 1 TO DATE 126 TO DATE 102 TO DATE 85 PLYMOUTH FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT TYPE OF REPORTED INCIDENTS BY TIME OF DAY MONTH MARCH 1986 TOTALS 1 3 1 8 I 8 I 9 I 10 11 21 28 49 0 $28,500 "INCLUDED IN FALSE ALARMS TOTALS lARCH 1985 CONFIRMED CALLS 20 FALSE ALARMS 25 TOTAL CALLS 45 STIMATED LOSS $63,350 0001 0401 10400 1 0800 0801 11200 1201 1 1600 12000 1601 1 2001 2400 CONFIRMED I CALLS I FALSE ALARMS I TOTALL NUMBER OF PERMITS ESTIMATED ISSUED I LOSS PRIVATE DWELLINGS I I I 1 3 1 4 1 4 1 7 I 4 I 11 I I $3,000 APARTMENTS 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 I I 4 I 0 1 10 I 10 I I HOTELS AND MOTELS l I I 1 I I 1 0 I 1 1 1 I ALL OTHER RESIDENTIAL 1 I I 2 1 I I 0 I 2 I 2 I I PUBLIC ASSEMBLY I I i I I I I 0 I 0 I 0 I 1 SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES I I I i i I 0 0 I 0 1 I HEALTH CARE INSTITUTIONS I I I I 2 1 I I 0 I 3 I 3 PENAL INSTITUTIONS i I I I 1 i I 0 0 1 0 I I STORES AND OFFICES I I I 2 I I 1 1 I 0 I 3 3 1 I INDUSTRY, MFG. I I 1 1 1 I I 2 I I 2 I 2 I 4 1 I 25,000 STORAGE IN STRUCTURES I I I I I I I 0 i 0 I 0 1 I SPECIAL STRUCTURES I I I I I I I 0 I 0 I 0 I I FIRES OUTSIDE OF STRUCTURES I I I I I 1 1 I 1 I 0 I 1 FIRES IN HIGHWAY VEHICLES I I I I 1 I I I 1 I 0 i 1 1 I 500 FIRES IN OTHER VEHTCLES i I I I I I I 0 I 0 1 0 I 1 FIRES IN BRUSH, GRASS 1 i 1 I 1 1 l I 2 1 I 3 I I FIRES IN RUBBISH, DUMPSTERS 1 I I I 1 0 1 0 I 0 I ALL OTHER FIRES I I I 1 I I 1 1 0 I 1 I I MEDICAL AID RESPONSES I I l i 1 1 I I 2 I 0 2 i "MALICIOUS FALSE ALARMS I I I 1 i 1 I 0 I 0 I 0 1 1 MUTUAL AID OR ASSISTANCE I I I I I I 0 1 0 I 0 ALL OTHER RESPONSES 1 1 3 I 1 I I i 2 i 5 1 2 I 7 I 1 TOTALS 1 3 1 8 I 8 I 9 I 10 11 21 28 49 0 $28,500 "INCLUDED IN FALSE ALARMS TOTALS lARCH 1985 CONFIRMED CALLS 20 FALSE ALARMS 25 TOTAL CALLS 45 STIMATED LOSS $63,350 �:�kNAHq '44 Z\G 9�9sNED Vc' MINNEHAHA CREED WATERSHED DISTRICT P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 BOARD OF MANAGERS: David H. Cochran, Pres.. Albert L. Lehman . John E. Thomas Camille D. Andre . James B. McWethy . James R. Spensley • Richard R. Miller WATERSHED BOUNDARY ti NMArs, ' LAKE MINNETONKA MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT ANNUAL REPORT FOR 1985 MINNESaTA PIS April, 1986 INDEX Page Introduction ........................................... 1 The Managers and Meeting Information ................... 1 Appointments to Board of Managers ...................... 2 Permit Applications .................................... 2 Hydrologic Data Collection ............................. 3 Gray's Bay Control Structure/Lake Minnetonka........... 3 Water Maintenance and Repair Fund ...................... 4 Minnehaha Creek Channel Improvements/Cascade Lane Area, Edina (Project CP -8) ............................. 5 Upper Watershed Storage and Retention Project, Painter Creek Subwatershed (Project CP -5) .............. 5 Watershed Management Planning Chapter 509/ Development of Revised District Rules .................. 5 Floodplain Regulation .................................. 6 Boundary Amendments .................................... 6 Cooperative Study with City of St. Louis Park.......... 6 Rule Providing for Recovery of Expenses ................ 7 Lake Minnetonka Tour ................................... 7 City of Long Lake/Cooperative Study .................... 7 Budget/1985............................................ 7 Financial Records ...................................... 7 INTRODUCTION This Annual Report of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District provides a summary of the major activities of the Board of Managers during 1985. Any person wishing additional detail is encouraged to contact any individual manager. THE MANAGERS AND MEETING INFORMATION As of December 31, 1985, the names, addresses and terms of the managers are as follows: Camille D. Andre David H. Cochran Albert L. Lehman James B. McWethy Richard R. Miller James R. Spensley John E. Thomas 10401 Cedar Lake Rd. Term Expires Apt. 419 March 8, 1986 4640 Linwood Circle Term Expires Excelsior, MN 55331 March 8, 1987 3604 West Sunrise Drive Term Expires Minnetonka, MN 55345 March 8, 1988 4380 Thielen Avenue Edina, MN 55436 5340 Hollywood Road Edina, MN 55436 5117 Chicago Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55417 6326 Smithtown Road Excelsior, MN 55331 The present officers are: David H. Cochran President Albert L. Lehman Vice President John E. Thomas Secretary Camille D. Andre Treasurer Term Expires March 8, 1986 Term Expires March 8, 1988 Term Expires March 8, 1987 Term Expires March 8, 1986 During 1985, twelve regular meetings were held by the managers on the third Thursday of each month at 7:30 p.m. In order to make the meetings of the managers more accessible to all residents of the District, the managers meet in odd numbered months in the St. Louis Park City Hall and in even numbered months at the Wayzata City Hall. -1- The managers exchanged information with other governmental units affected by the programs and policies of the watershed district and honored requests to attend meetings of municipal, county and state officials as well as meetings of interested citizens. The managers received substantial support and assistance from the Hennepin and Carver County Boards of Commissioners through the year which greatly assisted the District in carrying out its programs during 1985. During 1985, the managers continued to serve in organizations dealing with water resource issues. President Cochran was elected a director of the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts, and was selected to participate on the Water Resources Board's Chapter 509 Advisory Committee as well as the Metropolitan Council's Task Force on Lake Minnetonka. The Board participated in the activities of the Metropolitan Area section of the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts and in the deliberations of the annual meeting of the Association, held November 29-30, 1985. The managers supplied copies'of minutes of all meetings and reports to interested citizens and to public officials throughout the District. Copies of the 1984 Annual Report were filed in 1985 with the Minnesota Water Resources Board, the department of Natural Resources, the Boards of County Commissioners of Hennepin and Carver Counties and with State Senators and Representatives from the area within the watershed district. APPOINTMENTS TO BOnvn OF KPNAGERS The terms of Managers Albert expired March 6, 1985. The Board Hennepin County appointed Richard to fill one of the two positions, of the City of Minnetonka to fill the oath of office April 2, 1985. PERMIT APPLICATIONS L. Lehman and Michael R. Carroll of County Commissioners of R. Miller of the City of Edina and reappointed Albert L. Lehman the other. Manager Miller took The watershed district received 183 permit applications during 1985. In each instance, the proposed project was reviewed in detail for compliance with the District's environmental protection rules. Applications were received for projects such as dredging, filling, shoreline erosion protection, highway and utility crossings, preliminary plat review and drainage and grading plans for site development. Prior to acting on the applications, considerable effort was spent with city staffs and/or applicants to bring some of the proposed projects into compliance. A summary is attached to this report showing the project location and type of application received. -2- As in previous years, a large majority of the applications received were from the Lake Minnetonka portion of the watershed district, reflecting the continuing urbanization of that area. All permits granted by the watershed district specifically require compliance with applicable municipal ordinances and, if the permit involves Lake Minnetonka, the applicable ordinances of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. In addition, permits issued by the watershed district require compliance with any applicable rules of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The Board of Managers also took action as necessary regarding complaints, permit violations and activities which had been undertaken prior to issuance of a permit from the District. HYDROLOGIC DATA COLLECTION The District's hydrologic data collection program was continued during 1985. The data for 1984 is published in the Annual Hydrologic Data Report dated October, 1985. This is a very comprehensive program, which, along with data from other agencies has formed a long-term data bank for use in managing the water resources of the District, particularly Lake Minnetonka and the city lakes. Copies of this report were submitted to the Minnesota Water Resources Board, the Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Department of Natural Resources, the Freshwater Biological Institute, and local government officials and citizens' groups. GRAY'S BAY CONTROL STRUCTURE/LAKE MINNETONKA During 1985, the District operated the Gray's Bay Control Structure under the existing Management Policy and Operational Plan approved by the Department of Natural Resources on May 20, 1983. The existing management policy and operating plan was reviewed by the Board in the Fall of 1985 to determine whether any modifications in that plan were warranted in order to reduce flooding and control lake levels and stream flows. Following review, the Board concluded that the plan did not warrant modification and, pursuant to the terms of that plan and the DNR permit, notified all municipalities within the District of its intent to request renewal of the existing plan without modification. The District requested the DNR to renew the plan on December 30, 1985. The managers also investigated means to add public safety measures at the dam. The District, in connection with a project proposed by the City of Minnetonka, authorized the use of Water -3- _. i__ --7 Maintenance and Repair Funds to construct a fence around the control structure. As of year end, the City informed the District that it would not be proceeding promptly with its project. The managers are evaluating the desirability of proceeding with the public safety improvements independent of the City project. A new operating agreement was signed during 1985 between the District and the City of Minnetonka, providing for the City to provide labor and other services as requested by the District for the proper operation of the dam structure. The control structure was closed for the winter season December 10, 1985. Due to exceptionally high precipitation during the latter part of the fall season, Lake Minnetonka elevation was at 929.07 as of that date, compared with the desired lake level under the management policy of 928.6. The managers continued to rely heavily upon participation of each of the municipalities on Minnehaha Creek in recording creek elevations and flows and reporting that data to the District. The District prepared monthly summaries of this data and made these summaries available to interested municipalities and citizens. The assistance of each of the municipalities was invaluable to the District in making the operational adjustments required during 1985 to accomplish the management objectives of the Headwaters Control Structure. WATER MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR FUND The Board of Managers continued its practice of requesting from the municipalities within the District suggestions for maintenance projects to be paid in part from the District's Water Maintenance and Repair Fund. From the numerous requests received, the managers approved the following projects for 1985: Project Municipality 2 Excelsior -shoreline protection at Excelsior Commons Estimated District Cost Allocation $20,000 50% of actual construction costs not to exceed $4,000 for rip rap only 3 Minnetonka -shoreline $5,000 erosion protection at Burwell House As indicated earlier, the managers installation of fencing at the Gray's Bay Dam connection with the City of Minnetonka project -4- 50% of actual construction costs not to exceed $2,500 authorized control structure in at the dam. The authorization approved payment of 50% of the cost of material and labor for fence construction, not to exceed $1,000. MINNEHAHA CREEK CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS/CASCADE LANE AREA, EDINA (PROJECT CP -8) Channel improvements authorized by the Board on December 19, 1983 in the Cascade Lane area of Edina to help reduce high water problems in this area were not completed by the contractor during the Winter of 1984. The contractor commenced work January 8, 1985 and completed the project by February 21, 1985. The Minnesota Department of Transportation committed to pay up to a maximum of $30,000 for the cost of the project. The City of Edina also contributed to the project. UPPER WATERSHED STORAGE AND RETENTION PROJECT, PAINTER CREEK SUBWATERSHED (PROJECT CP -5) Pursuant to a contract awarded December 20, 1984, work on the Upper Watershed Storage and Retention Project in the Painter Creek subwatershed commenced on January 9, 1985. All projects, consisting of flow control devices and channel improvements, to slow the rate of runoff into Lake Minnetonka, and improve water quality, were completed by the contractor by July 17, 1985, except for minor site restoration. Of the 25 parcels over which easements were needed for the project, voluntary agreement was reached with the owners of 21 properties. Valuation hearings were held by District Court-appointed commissioners with respect to the four remaining properties in early 1985. All awards were paid by May, 1985. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLANNING CHAPTER 509/DEVELOPMENT OF REVISED DISTRICT RULES During 1985, a significant portion of the District's work in the development of its 509 Plan consisted of the development of computer modeling of the hydrologic characteristics of the entire watershed. By the end of 1985, this work was being placed in final form by the District's engineers for presentation to the Board of Managers. As a part of its Chapter 509 work, the Board of Managers also determined that it would be appropriate to prepare and adopt revised rules of the District, incorporating and based upon the Chapter 509 policy statements which had been developed by the Board during 1984. The rules clarify the permitting program of the District, and provide clearer statements of the requirements -5- of each rule. Accordingly, the District prepared draft revised rules, and held a public hearing on the proposed revised rules on November 21, 1985, at which hearing a number of interested persons appeared or submitted comments. As of year end, the Board had directed the staff to incorporate these comments into the proposed revised rules for consideration by the Board early in 1986. FLOODPLAIN REGULATION The issue of floodplain filling continued to be an area of concern to the managers, particularly in St. Louis Park and Edina, where residents along Minnehaha Creek have experienced high water conditions and have brought those concerns before the managers. The managers continued to urge all creekside municipalities to amend their floodplain ordinances to prohibit any further filling in the floodplain in Minnehaha Creek, since additional encroachment in the floodplain contributes to higher water levels and peak flows thereby increasing the potential of damage to structures and property. BOUNDARY AMENDMENTS On May 17, 1985, the Water Resources Board, in response to a petition from the District, and following hearing, issued an Order amending the District's boundaries. This action was coordinated with the decisions by the Water Resources Board on the legal boundaries of all watershed districts and water management organizations adjoining the District. In addition to these District -initiated modifications, the City of Victoria petitioned the Water Resources Board to amend the boundary of the District to include additional lands within the City of Victoria within the legal boundary of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The Board of Managers supported the petition of the City of Victoria for this change, and on December 13, 1985, the Water Resources Board issued an Order approving the change sought by the City of Victoria. COOPERATIVE STUDY WITH CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK During 1985, the District's engineering staff and the engineering staff of the City of St. Louis Park undertook a cooperative study to investigate drainage patterns within a subwatershed in the City of St. Louis Park, identified by the District as MC -19. The Board was particularly concerned with this area due to previous contamination at the former Reilly Tar and Chemical site located in this subwatershed. The results of that study were reported to the Board in February, 1985. The City of St. Louis Park, in response to the study, committed to implement such steps as it deemed appropriate and necessary to deal with am localized flooding issues identified by the study. Water quality data for the South Oak Retention Pond was also reviewed by the Board of Managers during 1985. The Board invited representatives of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to brief the Board with respect to water quality issues and the proposed remedial action plan to be implemented at the former Reilly Tar site. RULE PROVIDING FOR RECOVERY OF EXPENSES During June and July, the Board of Managers reviewed problems arising where individuals perform work without a District permit, and then later apply for a permit after the fact, and problems associated with violation of issued permits. The managers concluded that it would be appropriate to charge such applicants a fee equaling the cost of the District's engineering evaluation of such applications or violations. On September 19, 1985, the Board of Managers held a public hearing on a proposed Rule which would impose fees in those circumstances. The rule was adopted by the Board following the public hearing. LAKE MINNETONKA TOUR In order to better familiarize all managers with permit issues as they arise in the vicinity of Lake Minnetonka, the Board of Managers conducted a tour of selected bays of Lake Minnetonka in June, 1985. CITY OF LONG LAKE/COOPERATIVE STUDY In connection with the development of an industrial area in the City of Long Lake, the managers encouraged the City of Long Lake to develop a comprehensive stormwater management plan for that subwatershed. Following meetings between the District staff and the City's staff and elected officials, a conceptual plan was submitted to the Board of Managers by the end of 1985. BUDGET/1985 As required by law, the managers, pursuant to notice, held a public hearing on September 19, 1985 on proposed budgets for the District's Administrative Fund, Water Maintenance and Repair Fund, and Watershed Management Planning Fund. Following the public hearing, the managers adopted budgets for 1986 for these funds and certified tax levies to the Counties for collection. FINANCIAL RECORDS The financial records of the District are kept by a certified -7- public accountant. All financial transactions are recorded in the minutes of its meetings. The treasurer of the District maintained separate records for five funds in 1985: (1) the Administrative Fund; (2) the Water Maintenance and Repair Fund; (3) the Data Acquisition Fund; (4) Watershed Management Planning Fund, and (5) the Upper Watershed Project Fund (CP -5). Records for each of these funds include the dates and amounts of all expenditures, the names of individuals receiving payment and the purposes for which payment is made. The official depository for the District is the Wayzata State Bank, Wayzata, Minnesota. During 1985, the financial records of the District were audited for the year 1984 and a copy of the audit was filed with the State Auditor for the State of Minnesota in April 1985. 2498n Respectfully submitted, avid H. ochran, President Board of Managers of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District -8- 1985 PERMIT APPLICATIONS PERMIT APPLICATION CATEGORIES A - Grading and Drainage B - Bridge, Culvert or Utilities C - Floodplain Development D - Dredging E - Shoreline Improvements or Rip Rap F - Shoreline Setback Variance G - Fill or Excavation H - Other Categories I - Municipality Total A B C D I E F G H I Chanhassen 2 1 1 1 5 Dee haven 1 4 1 1 7 Edina 2 1 3 Excelsior 1 1 1 3 Golden Valley 0 Greenwood 5 1 6 Hopkins 0 Independence 0 Laketown Twp. 1 1 Long Lake 4 1 2 7 Maple Plain 1 1 Medina 1 1 2 Minnetonka - 19 3 1 3 1 1 1 29 Minneapolis 1 1 1 3 Minnetonka Beach 0 Minnetrista 1 7 8 Mound 5 3 8 2 18 Orono 1 1 23 1 1 27 Plymouth 6 1 7 Richfield 1 2 2 5 St. Bonifacius 0 St. Louis Park 5 1 1 2 9 Shorewood 4 1 7 3 15 Spring Park 1 1 1 3 Tonka Bay 2 1 1 1 10 14 Victoria 1 1 3 1 6 Wayzata 2 1 3 Woodland 1 1 Total Permit Applications 58 1 13 1 9 75 8 6 13 183 PERMIT APPLICATION CATEGORIES A - Grading and Drainage B - Bridge, Culvert or Utilities C - Floodplain Development D - Dredging E - Shoreline Improvements or Rip Rap F - Shoreline Setback Variance G - Fill or Excavation H - Other Categories I - Municipality Total MARCH 19813 AMERICAN PLANNING 2"r41jVc:sVewsASS0C,AT,0N Losing Insurance Over Zoning Disputes In the near future, the final decision about whether to allow zoning amendments or grant permits may be made, not by a city council, planning director, or municipal attorney, but instead by a municipal risk manager. The loss of municipal liability insurance and the inability of cities to purchase insurance is affecting all local government decisions. Evidence is mounting that insurance companies are assessing the impact of controversial zoning decisions and canceling municipal liability policies when they believe that there is a potential risk or threat of a lawsuit. To be on the safe side, some of the companies are canceling policies even without assessing whether a community's zoning decision will be challenged in court. Insurance companies argue that municipalities have already been subject to heavy damage awards in cases related to police, fire, public transportation, and other services. Because of the size of these awards and the uncertainty of court decisions, the companies have canceled policies, stopped writing new ones, and become extremely sensitive to any potential municipal liability risk. The New York Times recently reported that the Aetna Life and Casualty Company decided not to renew liability insurance for at least 400 municipalities across the country last year. Newsweek reported that the Utica National Insurance Group recently announced it was canceling all of its local eovernment policies—leaving 229 New York cities, towns, and counties scrambling for new coverage. Much of the liability insurance problem is the result of the "deep pockets" principle being applied in court decisions. Deep pockets means that a plaintiff can draw second and third parties into a suit as defendents and hold them responsible for total damages if the primary defendent is unable to pay. For example, if the location of a portable sign causes a traffic accident, an injured party could sue not only the sign owner, but also the municipality, claiming poor enforcement of zoning regulations or inadequate on-site inspections. A jury might then find the sign owner liable for $100,000 in damages and the municipality liable for $5,000. But if the sign owner couldn't come up with the the whole $100,000, the municipality would / have to pay the remainder of the award. , Municipal Liability in Land -Use Cases Downzonings—rezonings that reduce density allowances or result in less intensive development—are the most common source of legal challenges to a community's zoning ordinance, and these challenges usually involve a request by developers for monetary damages. Another common circumstance is one in which local boards or commissions deny or severely restrict specific development projects. The U.S. Supreme Court in Wil- liamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank (See Zoning News, August 1985) has discouraged some challenges of local regulations that seek compensation. The Court ruling requires developers to receive a "final, definitive position" from local regulatory boards or commissions before seeking judicial intervention. The Court ruled that landowners must follow all reasonable steps, such as variance procedures or other state and local appeal procedures, before they can legally challenge local regulations as unconstitutional takings of land, which require compensation. Despite this ruling and the reluctance of other courts to award money damages, the threat of money damage awards is affecting the ability of local governments to maintain or to purchase liability insurance. Two different examples of this problem follow. Greenwood Village, Colorado. Village officials are convinced that their liability insurance was canceled early last year because, in 1983, a developer sued the village for $850 million in a zoning dispute. The case is pending, but, if that amount is awarded, each of the town's 5,780 residents could receive a bill for nearly $150,000 as his or her share of liability. The dispute centers around a five-year battle over the scale of development at the Denver Technology Center. Tech Center owners insist that their agreement with the village allows the business park to develop up to 22 million square feet in the village. City officials argue that the agreement allows the Center to develop only 11 million square feet and that 22 million square feet of development would clog the city streets with traffic. Village officials concluded that the community's infrastructure couldn't sustain the 22 million square feet of office and commercial development, which is more than exists in nearby downtown Denver. According to Greenwood Village City Manager Jim Mullen, the insurance company did not specify why they dropped the community's insurance, but local officials are convinced it was the pending lawsuit. The village has unsuccessfully tried to get insurance through 25 different companies since its policy was canceled. The village is already having difficulty getting people to serve on boards or to run for local office because of the threat that public officials may be held personally liable for decisions related to city business. Mullen said that village officials are now considering ways to reduce the number of village council decisions. They are also trying to set up a $1 million liability trust fund and are considering cutting back on services to help support the fund. Berkeley, California. The city apparently lost its liability insurance because it could be made a defendant in cases in which landlords sue tenants who are running businesses out of their apartments. The city's insurance was dropped last fall shortly after the city council adopted a zoning change that would allow renters to operate home occupations without getting the approval of their landlords. The Berkeley ordinance states that "a use permit application for a home occupation may be filed by a lessee in possession of the property without the consent of the owner of record of the legal title." Fur- thermore, "any provision in a rental agreement that waives or modifies any provision of this section regarding home occupation use permits is contrary to public policy and void." According to Assistant City Manager Nancy Bellard, when the city's insurer found out about the new liberal policy on home occupations, it concluded that many of these home activities were hazardous, and so it canceled the city's liability insurance. The insurer was angered because artists and craftsmen might use electric kilns, flammable paints and varnishes, and other dangerous materials in their apartments without the approval of their landlords. The zoning code amendment applies to all types of home businesses—piano lessons, typing, and development of com- puter software programs—but it was the possibility of artists working with hazardous materials in their apartments that disturbed the insurance companies. In two articles regarding the Berkeley ordinance in the Underwriters' Report, an insurance news magazine, insurance experts stated that pro- hibiting a landlord from controlling business activities in a leased premises will create major problems for homeowner insurance companies. These companies typically insure against losses that arise in connection with the residential use of a house or apartment but consistently exclude the higher risk exposure associated with business activities. According to the Underwriters Report, insurance policies in California contain a provision that specifically excludes "bodily injury or property damage arising out of business pursuits of any insured party except activities therein which are ordinarily incident to nonbusiness pursuits." According to Nancy Bellard, the city's liability insurance was dropped because the city's insurer concluded that Berkeley will be drawn into any suit involving a tenant's home occupation. Landlords might argue that the city encourages home businesses in apartments and that they can't do anything to stop these businesses. The city's potential liability would also be increased because landlords would find it more and more difficult to buy insurance. City zoning officials dispute the idea that the ordinance or permits issued under the ordinance create the opportunity for dangerous home businesses. According to city officials, no hazardous business activity is allowed because the zoning code precludes any home occupation that involves toxic or dangerous materials or hazardous equipment. The city officials are now working on guidelines that will allow local officials to draw distinctions between hazardous and nonhazardous home businesses. Conclusion Municipal liability risks are not incurred just by communities adopting new ordinances. According to some legal experts, municipalities also increase their liability risks by failing to adopt needed regulations. For example, experts in the field of natural hazards (e.g., flooding, earthquakes, hurricanes) think that local officials run greater liability risks if they fail to adopt regulations that help prevent loss of life and property in such catastrophes. According to this argument, local gov- ernments that fail to adopt land -use regulations in light of scientific data that clearly indicate a natural hazard may be liable when property owners suffer losses and the court finds that the municipality failed to take actions that would have prevented or mitigated these losses. High Court Backs Limits on Adult Theaters Last month the Supreme Court held that Renton, Washington, zoning officials had the power to restrict adult movie theaters by confining them to one area. The Court's decision in Citv of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc. upheld the city's zoning code, which prohibits adult motion picture theaters from locating within 1,000 feet of any residential zone, single- or multifamily dwelling, church, park, or school. In 1976, the Court had ruled that Detroit's ordinance, which required dispersal of adult entertainment businesses, was constitutional. These two decisions effectively give local zoning officials broad powers over the siting of adult theaters. In a 7 to 2 decision, the Court concluded that Renton's zoning code did not violate constitutional free speech pro- tections when it restricted adult theaters to a relatively isolated 520 -acre site. The Court decided that the Renton city council's "predominant concerns were with the secondary effects of adult theaters on the surrounding community, not with the content of the adult films themselves." Justice Rehnquist, writing for the majority, said that the "ordinance by its terms is designed to prevent crime, protect the city's retail trade, maintain property values, and... the quality of urban life, not to suppress the expression of unpopular views." The Court dismissed Playtime Theatres' arguments that the 520 acres open to use as adult theater sites were not com- mercially viable because they were substantially developed and not currently available for sale or lease. Playtime Theatres considered building a new theater in the designated area to be prohibitively expensive. The Supreme Court found that these arguments were disputed by the lower court's finding of "ample and accessible real estate" within the 520 acres available for development as an adult theater. Furthermore, the high court concluded that the Constitution does not compel local governments to ensure that adult theaters or other types of adult-oriented businesses "will be able to obtain sites at bargain prices." An important aspect of the decision for local planners is the Court's ruling that Renton was entitled to rely on the experience and studies of other cities in adopting its zoning restrictions. The U.S. Court of Appeals had ruled that Renton had improperly relied on the experience of other cities in lieu of testimony about and study of the potential effects of adult theaters in Renton. The Supreme Court, however, found this ruling to be too rigid and concluded that the city did not have to conduct new studies or produce independent evidence. In a strongly worded dissent, Justice Brennan criticized Renton stating that the "city council conducted no studies and heard no expert testimony ... and never considered whether residents' concerns could be met by restrictions that are less intrusive on protected forms of expression." He concluded that the city's findings regarding the secondary effects of adult movie theaters and the need for special zoning controls "were not findings at all but purely speculative conclusions." Whereas the majority justified Renton's review and consideration of the experience of Seattle, Detroit, and other cities, the minority questioned whether the findings made by these cities were relevant to Renton's problems. In the minority opinion, Justice Marshall was joined by Justice Brennan in calling the Renton ordinance "plainly unconstitutional." Justice Brennan wrote that the ordinance's language, history, and effect all showed a design "to suppress the content of adult movies." TRAFFIC ADVISORY April 24, 1986 Dear Resident, I have received complaints regarding speeding on Larch Lane north of Schmidt Lake Road. This particular portion of the Larch Lane roadway is where the speed limit is reduced from 40 miles per hour to 30 miles per hour. Also, this same area is undergoing development that will eventually occupy the available lots on the west side of Larch Lane. Undoubtedly, in the future more pedestrians will be crossing this road. With this last thought in mind �, - it is ever so i,::ro tvi.t �w:at t:e_s �,�e the posted speed limit. I seek your compliance! For the most part the persons using Larch Lane north of Schmidt Lake Road are residents. I doubt very much that there are strangers who migrate to this area of town to test the speed of their vehicles. In the very near future and periodically thereafter I will be directing police officers to set up stationary radar on Larch Lane (in particular north of Schmidt Lake Road) . My mother use to say "to be forewarned is to be forearmed". You have been so notified. Thank you. Sincerely, Richard J. Carlquist Director of Public Safety Plymouth Police Department RJC:tmb 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 -7 -=1( -)- CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: April 18, 1986 TO: All City Employees FROM: dames G. Willis, City Manager SUBJECT COURTESY AND COMMON SENSE The attached brief article appeared in today's Minneapolis Star and Tribune. I commend it to your reading. So often it is the little things that make the difference in our daily lives. The extra measure of courtesy which leaves the customer feeling good about the contact with the City. The use of "common sense" when dealing people and their problems to find a way to say "yes" rather than "no" or some other negative turndown. Let's all be mindful of how we ourselves wish to be treated and then treat others in a similar fashion. 3GW:jm attach Minneapolis Star and Tribune Fri., April 10, ivno When the skies aren't friendly and the doctor can't be reached By liene Barth Newsday New York I've never met a government bu- reaucrat so sucked dry of human kindness as some private -sector specimens I've recently encoun- tered. Item: I'm booked on a Pan Ameri- can flight with two children, aged 6 and 3. No husband, just me and the babes. The travel agent has assured me that our seats are pre- assigned. We're at JFK 90 minutes before flight time (you never know what will happen with small kids). There's no curbside check-in so we stand in line 45 minutes to surren- der our baggage. The clerk says the computer doesn't show preas- signed seat; we'll be awarded chair numbers along with our boarding passes at the flight gate. At the gate desk, I'm issued board- ing passes for three seats, all wide- ly separated. "I'm traveling with two small children," I point out. "I can't help you," the clerk re- plies, "but as soon as you board ask the stewardess to straighten things out." I ask the smiling flight attendant who greets us to help. "The flight is fully booked," she said. "1 can't rearrange seats." "My children aren't even togeth- er," I plead. My 3 -year-old clutches my leg, my 6 -year-old bites his Up. "This flight is booked," she replies, her plastic smile intact. "If you don't take your seats they'll be given away. Now please move along." I hold my ground. And so does she. Another flight attendant notices. "What's wrong?" he asks. I explain the seating problem and whiz bang be solves it, rejoining a severed pair of lovers and rescuing a non- smoker from the 'Choke section in the process. I'm indebted to steward John Gu- liano for doing his job. Item: My father is having a heart attack before my very eyes. On a weekend afternoon. He won't let me call an ambulance before be talks to a doctor. Our family doctor is unreachable. I try to telephone a friend's cardi- ologist, Dr. Steven Shappell, whose Bay Shore office is two minutes from our house. The doctor's line is answered in- stanUy and, in a purposefully calm voice, I describe the circum- stances of my call. The telephone answerer refuses to contact the doctor because my father is not his patient. "This is an emergency," I repeat disbelievingly. The woman at the other end of the line hangs up on me. I find the telephone number of another cardiologist in the yellow pages. The person belonging to the voice at the other end of the phone appears gripped by my brief story, but she also has her instructions. I am no longer calm: "Are we going to discuss medical etiquette while my father dies, or are you going to contact the doctor?" She calls a doctor who immediate- ly rings me back. I'm thankful that the woman who answered the phone of Drs. Joseph Lambert, Marc Kirschner and Mi- chael Masciello on Saturday, April 5, found her soul — in time. I'm also indebted to Mascielio for do- ing his job. No doubt the flight attendant who ignored small children's need and the answering -service operator who hung up on an 85 -year-old man's heart attack would say they were following orders. But the stewardess and the operator each had a choice of reactions. In fact, each had a counterpart who, thank God, opted to help. That doesn't let their bosses off the hook. It's employers who signal priorities: "Keep the traffic mov- ing" or "Don't bother the doctors." Dr. Shappeil later called his an- swering service's response "inex- cusable." noting that "services are a chronic problem" and explaining that he and his partner "see no primary patients because we're both working on coronary patienLs referred by other doctors almost 24 hours a day." Donald Parker, vice president in charge of passenger services for Pan Am, did not return my call. Perhaps the employers' instruc- tions to their workers include "Make the public happy'! and "Be polite." But paymasters can make It known which commands they consider most important. They may also sanction, if only by indifference, job conditions (top much work, too little pay, poor. supervision) that invite kicks in the soft tissue of strangers. , Good Germans are molded from the most ordinary of human clay. ,; _�1 —\ V W -=-N\.. EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC: FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS FIRST NATIONAL-SOO LINE CONrOURSUETTE AVE. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 339-8291 (AREA CODE 612) VOLUME 32, NUMBER 2 FILE: Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates, Inc. - Please distribute to governing body members April, 1986 HOUSE TAX REFORM ACT DELAYED Some curbs on "essential purpose" (governmental) tax-exempt bonds proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives Tax Bill, H.R. 3838 have been delayed until September 1, 1986, by leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee and the U.S. Treasury. The delayed date applies to all tax-exempt bonds issued under current law except bonds issued for industrial development, Section 501-c-3 organization, student loans, mortgage subsidy, other private consumer loans, bonds issued to fund pensions, payments by private parties for the use of bond financed property, or bonds that would be industrial development bonds if such payments were used to pay debt service. The proposed curbs which will be delayed are: - Defining bonds for certain public improvements as non-essential and therefore subject to unified per capita volume limits. - New arbitrage limits and rebates except for advance refunding bonds (cannot include issuance costs in calculating true interest costs). - Requirements that 5% of the proceeds be expended within 30 days and that all proceeds be spent within six months. - Arbitrage information reporting. - Making interest on certain bonds, subject to a minimum tax. - Restrictions on advance refunding bonds issued before 1986 except for a limit on the temporary period to 30 days and except for the method of determining true interest cost. SENATE TAX REFORM PROPOSAL The recent Tax Reform proposal by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Packwood would have subjected all municipal bond holders to an alternative minimum income tax. Packwood justifies his proposal on the basis of fairness in restructuring the federal income tax system. This proposal is unfair since all taxpayers will pay increased borrowing costs and unconstitutional since the Constitution establishes independent states united through an independent federal government. This proposal has been unanimously defeated in the Senate Finance Committee. TAX REFORM ACT RECOMMENDATIONS It is important that you as local municipal officials continue to contact your elected federal representatives to ensure tax reform will not adversely restrict your local governments ability to issue tax-exempt financing. Minnesota Senator Durenberger's proposal S.2166 appears to be the best proposal available. One point is certain, no one knows the final form tax reform will take. We recommend that you finalize your borrowing plans for 1986 and move to secure that financing immediately. Municipal rates currently are as low as they have been in the last seven or eight years. We at Ehlers and Associates, Inc. are prepared to assist you in securing cost effective long term financial solutions that have helped Ehlers and Associates, Inc. build better communities for more than 31 years. WISCONSIN OFFICE Ehlers and Associates, Inc. is proud to announce the opening of our new Wisconsin office, which will be headed by Seegar Swanson, Jr., Chairman of the Board and includes Account Executive, Marilyn Gulke. The office is located at: 20700 West Watertown Road Waukesha, Wisconsin 53186 Phone: 414-785-1520 The office will allow us to serve our clients in central and eastern Wisconsin. Very truly yours, EHLE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. even F. Apfelter Director-Senioresident S U M M A R Y O F A R E A B 0 N D S A L E S Bond Net Buyer Municipality Date Type of Bonds Amount Maturity Rate Index Rating Iowa Waverly 02/04/86 G.O. Bonds 2,200M 1987-1998 7.20% 7.86% A-1 Lisbon 02/10/86 G.O. Street Improvement Bonds 66M 1986-1995 9.09% 7.73% NR Michigan Rockford Public Schools 02/19/86 G.O. School Building 8 Site Bonds 4,500M 1989-2006 7.34% 7.62% A/A. Minnesota Paynesville 02/03/86 G.O. Waste Disposal Refunding Bonds 675M 1987-1993 8.33% 7.861 NR Prior Lake 02/03/85 G.O. Improvement Bonds 3,450M 1987-2006 1.641 7.861 Baa -1 Becker County 02/04/86 G.O. Solid Waste Bonds 160M 1988-1997 7.24% 7.86% NR I.S.O. #284 (Wayzata) 02/04/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 4,095M 1987 6.11% 7.86% NR I.S.D. #504 (Slayton) 02/10/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 690M 1987 6.27% 7.73% NR I.S.D. #735 (Winthrop) 02/10/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 515M 1987 6.44% 7.73% NR I.S.D. #271 02/11/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. Of Indebt. 3,600M 1987 5.74% 1.13% MIG -1 (Bloomington) I.S.D. #894 02/11/86 G.O. School Building Bonds 395M 1989-1998 6.961 7.73% A (Granite Falls) Breckenridge 02/12/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 500M 1987 5.90% 7.13% NR I.S.D. #829 (Waseca) 02/12/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 1,040M 1987 5.90% 7.13% NR I.S.D. #31 (Bemidji) 02/18/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 1,800M 1987 5.81% 7.62% NR I.S.D. #650 (Franklin) 02/18/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 230M 1987 5.99% 7.62% NR I.S.D. #732 (Gaylord) 02/18/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 460M 1987 5.85% 7.62% NR I.S.D. #279 (Osseo) 02/18/86 G.O. School Building Bonds 7,735M 1988-1998 6.60% 7.62% A -1/A. I.S.D. #535 (Rochester) 02/18/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 3,800M 1987 5.30% 7.62% MIG -1 Rochester 02/18/86 G.O. Improvement Bonds 6,500M 1986-1995 6.06% 7.62% Aad I.S.D. #564 02/19/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 1,500M 1987 6.10% 7.62% NR (Thief River Falls) I.S.D. #270 (Hopkins) 02/20/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 6,050M 1987 5.87% 7.62% NR I.S.D. 0417 (Tracy) 02/24/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 170M 1987 5.811 7.44% NR S.S.D. #1 (Minneapolis) 02/25/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 31,500M 1981 5.321 7.44% MIG -1 I.S.D. #881 02/26/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 460M 1987 5.80% 7.44% NR (Maple Lake) Karlstad 02/26/86 G.O. Temporary Hospital Bonds 1,060M 1988 6.20% 7.44% NR I.S.O. #761 (Owatonna) 02/27/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 2,000M 1987 5.951 7.44% NR I.S.D. #16 02/27/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. Of Indebt. 2,905M 1987 5.851 7.441 NR (Spring Lake Park) Wisconsin Waunakee Community 02/10/86 G.O. School Building Bonds 1,900M 1987-2001 7.68% 7.73% A School District Waukesha County 02/20/86 G.O. Promissory Notes 4,400M 1986-1992 6.22% 7.62% Aa -1 Stevens Point 02/21/86 G.O. Refunding Bonds 10,700M 1988-2002 7.161 7.621 Aa South Dakota Meade School District 02/11/86 G.O. Capital Outlay Certificates 750M 1988-1990 7.251 7.13% NR Vermillion School Dist. 02/24/86 G.O. Capital Outlay Certificates 740M 1988-1996 8.18% 7.441 NR '\ �a=�,_ MEL ro April 21, 1986 CITY OF PLYMOUTR Mr. Elliott Perovich, Chair Regional Transit Board 270 Metro Square Building St. Paul, MN 55101 Dear Mr. Perovich: The contracts between the City of Plymouth and Medicine Lake Lines, and between the City of Plymouth and Regional Transit Board, provide that, no later than June 30, 1986, service levels for both Plymouth Metrolink and Medicine Lake Lines within the City of Plymouth will be revised during off-peak hours to become eligible to the RTB service definition of "full peak, limited off-peak". Plymouth is currently classified "full peak and full off-peak". I attaching for your information a letter dated April 8, 1986 from Dave Pesch, Transit Planner of Medicine Lake Lines, toqether with attachments outlining changes that will be made effective June 30, 1986 to off-peak service provided to Plymouth residents through the Medicine Lake Lines linehaul system, and Plymouth Metrolink internal circulator. The;•e changes will enable the City of Plymouth to become elin"ihle to 1 5 mill rate for full peak, limited off-peak service for 1986 payable 1987 Regional Transit Board levy. Please contact me as soon as possible if we have misinterpreted your service guidelines. In the absence of such notification, I will presume that Plymouth will be classified as a full peak, limited off-peak community by virtue of the service changes outlined herein. Yours v �J3 tru , Frank Boyles Assistant City Manager FB:jm cc: Ruth Franklin Medicine Lake Lines Legislative Representatives City Council 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559.2800 KAeD 1.0, 1 n e La Ke p =` {' E v3LDE1% VALLE F eit' 541-9� ., April 8, 1986 Mr. Frank Boyles Assistant City Manager City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MSI. 55447 Dear Frank: This correspondence and attachmexits outline the changes Medicine Lake Lines will be making to transit service affecting the City of Plymouth. The changes are being made in accordance with the Plymouth City Council's Resolution with respect to the 1985-1986 Transit Tax Levy. Upon implementation of these service changes the City of Plymouth's citizens will be provided with full peak sevice and limited off peak service as defined by the Regional Transit Board including peak period regular route service, plus weekday mid-day regular route service ,i at intervals longer than 60 minutes on the route with greatest frequency. Q �`- Attachment I shows the changes to be made to Medicine Lake Lines service within Plymouth's city limits. The changes are effective June 30,1986 and are expected to affect 8-12 riders on a daily basis. In most cases, the riders will have service adjusted by a couple of minutes, however, one inbound and one outbound trip segment will be eliminated. This segment elimination will affect from 1-3 riders per day. i! Attachment II shows the current Metrolink Mid-day Circulator route and schedule characteristics and the proposed schedule changes. Effective June 2, 1986 i' the route will remain the same but the bus will travel only clockwise. The headway will be greater than 60 minutes. All Circulator riders could theoretically �j be affected by this change (322 trips made March '86) but in effect all current !! riders can make the same trips as before although the bus direction and riding time may vary depending upon their origin and destinations. I trust these service changes will satisfy the intent of the Resolution. Please advise me of any questions or concerns you may have. Cordially, Dave Pesch Transit Planner DP/dy cc: Jim Johnson, Vice President Medicine Lake Bus Company H H U w Ga G•4 w L a H C4 H Q w N U w w w F:4 w z H a W x a a W z H U H Q W z O H H U W a W H z H (v b $-4 $-4 4J 4 U U U N ca ca ca ca H a O' a a W z z H O C4 w Q z O m H D O a) 911!11 1 1 I .10O, M 7 7 7 Ia)r-I Cn N N N N N N N N O r 1 00O 1 M O .•a ra N a N N N N 1n O .-1 r+ H 11) 4J N N N r O -cr �D I I N N N a al Cj Ln O L2 to O O .••1 H O a l N N 4-1 ri —4 c� 00 O M O u T--4 r rnLr)�p N u2 Ln .. O O CA I —1 ri N N Er) -4 A H %D CO r-4 cr 0 0 ri .--1 r♦ r♦ LT 0 a v >4 :I ?4 }a L� u, r O M o 0 0 0 N as to r O M Q I rn rn rn rn N In r O M z O H H U W a W H z H (v b $-4 $-4 4J 4 U U U N ca ca ca ca H a O' a a W z z H O C4 w Q z O m H D O a) I 1 1 I N N N N 00 N %,D r O r 1 ri 1 a N N N N r O V 1n O .-1 r+ H N N N N r O -cr �D r O %D O r•1 .••1 H %D 00 O M O O T--4 ri a O O O O 0 0 0 0 ri .--1 r♦ r♦ LT a >4 :I ?4 }a En Ln N as ca ca ea Q N N M M C 1 f4 'O S4 0 1~ �j .4-1� 0 r. 41 �:l O 1~ 4-4 r1 W 1s .� • rl G U 'O • r-1 rti �4 r i �4 C/) :1 O r l O r -i ,C�4J EO 4J U :� r -i (1) CQ (a In C a� Attachment II PLYMOUTH METROLINK MIDDAY CIRCULATOR Current service characteristics are presented below. The revised service will leave Ridgedale at the following times: 9:00, 10:01, 11:02, 1:00, 2:01, 3:02, 4:03. Service will run clock -wise only. Revised schedule times effective June 2, 1986. MIDDAY GIKGULA I UK STOP LOCATIONS Departs miageowe- on int: COUNTERCLOCKWISESTOP ODD HOURS nuur 0,- LOCATIONS CLOCKWISE EVEN HOURS 1009 209 409 Civ Ad 73 & CIy. Ad -IS 911 1111 111 311 �+Vi Niagara d Cry. Rd. 15 ^i, .,. .,... Ot SIO , 10- Pkrk E1 Rida lox, y .,x '. 1 t,1. x:.1174 cif 1 Vick,' , Piy.nouth Shopping Center 913 1113 113 313 ViCksburg 6 10th Ave. N. 1011 211 411 P'N•vvw 6 26th Ave. N. 918 1118 118 316 '0, Dunkirk & Civ. Ad.6 1014 214 414 * 14eti:' P«netooll a. u+�1►x� 1:; Y' S LAU9, i , M 216 416 Nn hu, La - R,dgewood Apts. 922 1122 122 322 Nwy, 101 6 19th Ave. N. 1016 ,, , N•4qua6 281h Ave. N. 927 1127 127 327 Jewe18 25th Ave. N. 1019 219 419 Vk{kSWr1&.70ftA01tPQjfi_ c 4a^ `.4.3X.8' ILIM :: ON1 :�.. D,rnk•,k 8 30th Ave N 930 1130 130 330 Dunkirk 8 30th Ave. N. 1021 221 421 ma1ya14BMAyk,,N a Z931itf X1731,• kj4 1C. tV"h1L2d1L W Jrwe1 6 2b1h Ave. N 932 1132 132 332 N,ayara 6 28th Ave. N 1024 224 C424� Nwy. 101 i 2E}h. J1eta, `" `S Nwv 101 6 191h Ave N. 't1.Ji: 935 a.11t1.1.:� 1135 135 335 Fernbrook d 34th Ave. N. 1029 229 429Vi Mew. �4111.C4c Dunkirk 6 Cry Rd.6 917 1137 137 317 P,neview 8 26th Ave. N. 1.035 235 435 Vwkktarrg i 10th Ava. N 939 1139 139 339 Plymouth Shopp-ng Cit -1 1040 240 440 - V ~_1 A&VINRIMiL Niagara 8 Cry. Rd. 15 942'. 'Al 1142 t 142 342 . Cry, Rd. 73 8 Cry. Rd, 15 1042 242 442 250 R,dgenaven at Target 950 1150 — — 350 Ridgehaven at Target ARRIVE Rk !Ve:. ''4 airy jMM " ,:1164:'-. it':160.Yw' Ar ruw rntlrCatef durC—ri or ouv. f N %~ 1 Air 0 KEY MIDDAY ---- CIRCULATOR ROUTE STOP LOCATIONS Niagara & Cty. Rd.15 Vicksburg & Cty. Rd.15 Vicksburg & 10th Ave. N. Vicksburg & Cty. Rd.6 Dunkirk & Cty. Rd.6 Hwy. 101 & Cty. Rd.6 Hwy. 101 & 19th Ave. N. Hwy. 101 & 25th Ave. N. Jewel & 25th Ave. N. Holly & 28th Ave. N. Dunkirk & 30th Ave. N. Vicksburg & 28th Ave. N. Niagara & 28th Ave. N. Niagara & 21st. Ave. N. Fernbrook & 34th Ave. N. Harbor La. -Ridgewood Apts. Pineview & 26th Ave. N. W. Med. Dr. & 26th Ave: N. Plymouth Shopping Center Park & Ride Lot Cty. Rd. 73 & Cty. Rd. 15 Plymouth Rd. & Cty. Rd. 15 Arrive Ridgedale Leave. Ridgedale 9:00 10:01 11:02 9:09 10:10 11:11 9:10 10:11 11:12 9:11 10:12 11:13 9:13 1-:14 11:15 9:14 10:15 11:16 9:15 10:16 11:17 9:16 10:17 11:18 9:18 10:19 11:20 9:19 10:20 11:21 9:20 10:21 11:22 9:21 10:22 11:23 9:2 10:24 11:25 9:24 10:25 11:26 9:2 10:26 11:27 9:2 10:30 11:31 9:3 10:31 11:32 9:3 10:36 11:37 9:3 10:38 11:39 9:4 10:41 11:42 9:4 10:42 11:43 9:4 10:4 11:44 9:4 10:4 11:48 9:5 10:51 11:52 11:0012:01 1:09 2:10 1:10 2:11 1:11 2:12 1:13 2:14 1:14 2:15 1:15 2:16 1:16 2:17 1:18 2:19 1:19 2:20 1:20 2:21 1:21 2:22 1:23 2:24 1:24 2:25 1:25 2:26 1:29 2:30 1:30 2:31 1:35 2:36 1:37 2:38 1:40 3:41 1:41 2:42 1:42 2:43 1:46 2:47 1:50 2:51 3:02 4:03 3:11 4:12 3:12 4:13 3:13 4:14 3:15 4:16 3:16 4:17 3:17 4:18 3:18 4:19 3:20 4:21 3:21 4:22 3:22 4:23 3:23 4:24 3:24 4:25 3:26 4:27 3:27 4:28 3:31 4:32 3:32 4:33 3:37 4:38 3:39 4:40 3:42 4:43 3:43 4:44 3:44 4:45 3:48 3:52 April 22, 1986 Mr. Jerome F. Coffel 10225 31st Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55441 Dear Mr. Coffel: CITY OF PLYMOUTFF \a\cs bcc: Jim Willis Mr. Decker indicated at the City Council meeting Monday night that if the City Council directed a re -design which addressed the concerns that you and other neighbors have about the "Lake Park Heights" development area, the neighbors would be in a position to withdraw the petition to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB). The Council did direct such revisions, and, while Mr. Decker was prepared to sign a statement to that effect at the meeting, the City Attorney advised that we check into a withdrawal procedure since certain events may have been triggered by the submittal of the petition to the EQB. This is to inform you that we called Mr. Gregg Downing of the EQB, and he informed us that if you submit a letter to the City stating that the petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (E.AW) should be withdrawn, with a copy to Mr. Downing at the EQB, the matter will be considered withdrawn. I recommend that you consider this based upon the remarks made by Mr. Decker and upon the observation that withdrawal cf that petition at this time will save significant administrative and procedural steps and costs. The extensive deliberation at the City Council meeting Monday night, indicated to me that our time and efforts would be better spent facilitating the review of revised plans than in processing a formal response to the State Environmental Quality Board. A letter stating that the petition should be withdrawn may be directed to me; a copy of that letter should be directed to Mr. Gregg Downing at the EQB. Please contact me or Community Development Coordinator Sara McConn should you have questions regarding this. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, c Blair Tremere, Director Community Development BT/gw cc: File 85O89/EAW Community Development Coordinator Sara McConn 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559.2800 7:T, \Q b bcc: Jim Willis CITY OF April 22, 1986 PUMOUTR Mr. Gregg Downing Minnesota Environmental Quality Board 100 Capital Square Building 550 Cedar St. St. Paul, MN 55101 RE Petition for Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for Lake Park Heights Development (85089) Dear Mr. Downing: This is to acknowledge receipt of your April 18, 1986 letter on April 21, 1986, regarding the petition you received requesting that an EAW be prepared. The City Council considered this item at their April 21, 1986 meeting and deferred action on the planning application regarding this project. This consideration included extensive discussion among the Council, the developer, and the neighboring residents, including those who submitted the petition to the Environmental Q,jality Board (EQB). The City Council is aware of the time frame for official response to your notice, namely, 15 days from the receipt of the notice (with a possible extension of 15 days if necessary). The City Council believes the matter may be resolved through direction to the applicant for re -design which may result in revised plans being submitted for consideration on or before the date that action on the EAW petition is required. The residents were involved in the discussions that led to that conclusion. We will keep you informed. Thank you for your notice. Sincerely,- wl.Y----- Blair Tremere, Director Community Development BT/gw cc: File 85089 Mr. Jerome F. Coffel Mr. Thomas Graham, Graham Development Co. 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559.2800 To ` e Gey GL 1 GL re'Ltt �,�Le� AI -14 alLk- /2&'� � y ',,�,& ff/6L/7- 4-�-2i O-oje� &--e- CLAt 0-&0 -74c:�� ,d O ,'&4 cq.4/U J _ W k- it Cc�(� 7e CIL. ,, 7, �'Q ' 4� G;►c�n� �p� � ,� C7%i CSC /`� e n ar >Lo Goa t �o c.0 a, a, wo6 -- OA 0l , C� G UL_j6_t oc ort— CL- t4 fi `tic �� �2t O �c6r%j ql Lt- hy acli Ct/" / fo f G iZG G� cam. # O l XI -11(1.2. f i J / A 7� 0-4 l C(il c.,LjU-nu^� 27/�ti c/ic.. >t --,e G �� � y /V+e,, L. �e y►� tet_,., ���� r—k-W -.e et.)ccy- .ti.! �->-,o►�..c-. � � O� ��U �X� a ��-% ��'�Y �2e 427 � of y -�' � c� l �L� C~1'�s�GYI ���( I� Vt-(✓� / J �cC..��' \� ,. �� V y V vJ� Z vt% J 64 CITY n� PLYMOUTH+ April 17, 1986 Richard J. Harris 94 Inland Lane Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Dear Mr. Harris: Thank you for your letter concerning the performance of one of our officers and your feelings about the lack of justification for the issuance of a speeding ticket to you. We "the police" are frequently cast in a negative role because of the necessity for enforcing certain laws, in particular, traffic which is in reality often a lose/lose proposition. Because of this "fact of life" for police officers I have been sending all of them to a specialized training program to improve their public relations. I don't believe that the officer meant any put down when the comment was made to you, "Have a better day tomorrow". We are trying to teach the officers verbal skills that will ease or diffuse negative confrontations. The past stereo type of the police officer who reacts only coldly to police/citizen contact is one that we have been trying to improve on. I recognize that there is some risk to extending the police personality beyond the "All I need is the facts" syndrome. In the short run some problems for both the police and citizens alike may develop as consequences of our reaching out. But, hopefully the long range effects will be beneficial. In closing I would encourage you to use the courts to satisfy your concern about being not guilty of the charged offense. I have found the judges to be more than fair toward the citizen in situations such as yours. Again, thank you for taking the time to write. I hope that any future contact that you may have with the Plymouth Police Department will be in a much better vein. Sincerely, Richard J. arlquis Director o Public Safety PLYMOUTH POLICE DEPARTMENT JC/ tmbMIN.- r 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMCUTH MINNESOTA 554.:' TELEPHONE (612) 559-2500 G L%JsrsZ Ar PDLL Gjg-- 34(e0 kLvmn(ff- t PL/. PL_V MO jj1--4 ,/Itis SS DR,F9-i MIZ CA/ZL&tJLS i . 4 -�- A 9-r- , r-/w,n A-7? 41 rd e-- / 7 4r/o AJ ,gyp, 36rn -- t.-!5 7 Z6 kqzci 3 . 9"tJAUiL}S "� OiV 7 � G1TA77Dal%. /YII�D� fit ui�rPa2'_ ,QT- A CDAJ6.6-7-74W .Z 7"? -HS AL/-e-ZaZT,U 1110G44-770OIJ - %� ��a /rrt/ : �,v � t�4 ✓ ��,�/C�4-i��n � �tD 7�2s9v�-lr,�� EW� . Al. L) _ , -1- ZEA 6DP-n 7Z) ro�i 4�f- 77 1A17P25"N-T7,_ AA/90 /YW V i©/ S ..E, nM5- AS 1►�z�t/z�2 sz&Jj ©i j asi:7-),Oa . 2- ?7/�ZA,,6,n �i7f2 S/MPAPIA11, GAtJ /y11� LJizf/.� rami � 2/l0l-� T rrtl� Cao�Gtb 730 AD v .s 1-ka4 z6LlbGuXAi2s M BL- ©A,71-0 SS t r1AS rv��lU-f Z .4S�W,6- u//tS ©n/ S5 i9yvJO W,+S 39/-,I/A/23 77A!� C -/?f22 BD77-4 CSR Pf4SS2SIO Ate_ AAXO ADPf1.��! 3 7B6/ir?-� to, -z- A- /M //,A w Ss u1AS A497- -4a-�7- wh 55:w ..7. D A,e / lffn Q A)L.I Gam. DAl // -/W /�L Al (UGI. h / 4LI A'9I %iO f'Y/1I L.L_Y Cytl /D/s .ZS✓ mWAJ r-e49)M SS„ AZCiED Wq\ G�GL�GLtf.�rV�Z'- ���1 =-\ QC -I- 3 f ti/#S 7tD7AL-L-Ysc�RP�P� z� B� So -P- AS/GQ. fvt�"uL j,-� z U/AS S P 1�c/V10 LBW S i cu /4S Z Ce;0/itJIev i?V-� CL]G+.111i11ifLJ , , ? 5 /-S h SU2p AAIB 2AJ Mq OPIA11CN MC>7 -/V I1 �f 2 L41ASit) ' T s P jF 'vd/L A;t- A LL- 2-- jWf4-K1 71- DA�S� /1�1 , � �/ CALls� A ��l�Gdt cl C�q��/ 6P w1hinU YES w,R 7W -F- 69Pk M&AT- c csk1.L_ M 7WEV l��it.� --77-.gBz�c.4�S� poi wAR Cam % UP 7r-) SPS }{$DlJ iqeL%r— 7ZVO 07,* CeeYAiln �?S�tip� ; 1AIMg0AA12400 Z- W&AJO v4V V24 601AA, ?S $U i M,4 -V' t'A - S--�'G$'-lEbC4 SS MPH-ZA.1 j;9—SM-4. 44P,-- . MV6a -/YD MV Z- -S $9U ,C9 7-� C!%;W-�GU UuIYS UJ2./ T�,dJ W,17�LI607 WVC -4 tN�G oANcDA1 Z-,2 A-07-1�U1,llr2UV ALT' PMP&k� AivL--�l Lf-42'--,rO Cif --/Grp SfY_ uJ /T14- PF S�� /rL LSA /Uf�iC� 7W� 7- 51l/A-776AJ Lv ZRASA 1Af- r12/�}--TI�GU A4&AJI-1f WTAC� W fo& Gum f=t eS j liV A- L/A�©;E!- Ca412.S LS tib 7- 873�ZE- -rW-2E- W,4S AL&UC— /A) 7Mr-A?leoI7- 6li14il�. /,7-- -/7J/S SrAj 643 - Pr PZC, .., life cr- / 5 AILDgAE677 ht.,&0 Z Z- n A-�D7" Sr-&- A -D /L [,tJi43 i-DLJf � /- l c/ -IAYF- SPEE40 U/, -9S 1AfD /GA9F-k �0&r2 SPL?Z L1 MM IT 5 > wAhIC,4 ZAJ Al V ©PIAltDlkJ 1On AAO 7 --SAV UES MUG4- C,eYJL.n -71�r ' /tl WEU— Ag- 02 M/rOW Sr,. 770 u/IMT2fi4 f�LBrp /LI`G CA��L /S AAD r- Gi /? / S '*BIQ�:t/at/�� L4-bLitn BZ- C -LD -S -2 -/7E c�� S DoUcci.Cl3,r2 A-A,n -rP z. hl;+C 8P34U SA,3r /AA= CW7A-1 l/LV l,&f0UL,4 1l*Lc—sL.bw7m L)6w U - -; �4D�. Xjji7 [— !�i2 �WCe,? tSnr�u��3 v Si�� /eU DO/'��i�11Av6 STMT-CAJZ LJA-� —SP1�.�,D/" A��l m i� A�'Y'e'Qc1EV'10.*J OF= Aocor3W Z P ff,/- A}DUT TWLS Z t ri' A C, L w Cr i ''44 7n P�2.�lJi� T�i2S AA 69y/12r BE :At O;F- R&IAJUPLZ�', Z -WAf7- �121L 4 CZbl/�II /OA J Gr- /f--1 UA9A9D 4eO4/OU It �l2f� S aZ/�1�ihi16�A� I-� 1'J Ll� fi if i 9,4-4 SA-1SF-V �1►U�T3-f i A.� . m /Mice_ .Son4 2- �77SYCAIJ7?)A) .4AJ *14 S /L]vM- Dr— -7;14L& QUA 2/n 7nCDU .4Aln S77GL X"G_ Tif GT U2 QDLJGe- DEP 17— ,s ZZIA.. A&DOU JZ -)B o,= l.�liUlnS WOOD CME- 077W ./2 7..74 MVe.-- 6AV14SA 7V /1MIAIO --P- D/Z)aI 'T %HIr- FaIDP ATI' L®�lt ltill�Gtlr O>z- ~ f-� Atli_ A- 8tn M- DA -V 7P]slAn2QQ1(�l /til.�W -sUloG i ��.5/BLOC &4ae�3ALIC4� A p r i 1 17, 1 1986 Plymouth Police Department 3400 Plymouth Bou Iverd Plymouth MN 55447 I was dreading coming to report a theft/ Burgary � today but Officer David Digatono should the utmost consideration and patience listenning to me. I left with thefeeIing that while everything may not quite alright in the world, I have found ru-p-p-o+-- support and comfort. The interview was skillfully handled for which many thanks. �,l 1 1 . I'�}"GGi' Ci2N+ re vs Nancy C . Hardenbergh 18025 12th Avenue North Plymouth MN 554477 Have typed this letter three times and that's enough. The typos, I hope, will not make you think that I don't care enough to send the very best because I do but my fingers don't seem to agree. n c h April 24, 1986 r CITY OF PLYMOUTR Mrs. Donald E. Olson 4830 Wellington Lane Plymouth, MN 55442 Dear Mrs. Olson: I am writing this letter to follow up our telephone conversation regarding questions involving your special assessments. Your home was assessed a total of $15,963.88 for street, curb, gutter, storm drainage, sewer and water improvements. Of this amount, $14,958.88 was assessed for a period of twenty years, and the balance, $1,005.00, for ten years. The interest rate on both assessments is 9.36%. The twenty year assessment includes the costs for the street, curb, gutter, storm drainage, sewer and water. The second assessment is for what we call "area charges" for sanitary sewer and water. This latter assessment assists in paying for the very large water pipes and sanitary sewers which have been constructed throughout our system in order that it can function to serve your property. Your two main concerns dealt with the overall magnitude of the total assess- ment and the interest rate on the amount assessed. It is the City's policy to assess all Lhe costs associated with public improvement projects to that specific project area only, and not to have other city taxpayers burdened by those costs through higher taxes. All citizens in Plymouth have been assessed for streets, storm drainage, water and sanitary sewers, or will be assessed when those utilities are made available. The costs for the installation of these improvements will vary from area to area within the City, and therefore, the actual amount assessed to each house within different project areas will vary. We recognize that the costs associated with these projects are substantial. All of our projects are awarded to contractors submitting the lowest responsible bid for the work. In this fashion, we are able to have the work done at the best price which is available in the marketplace. The interest rate on special assessments is based upon the costs incurred by the City in borrowing money to pay the bills incurred for the project. It is not practical, nor reasonable to expect our citizens to be able to pay in one lump sum the total costs incurred when the City installs extensive public improvement projects. The State law provides that these costs may be assessed over a period of years and further allows the City to borrow money in order that the contractors may be paid. When we borrow money for these purposes, we do it through the sale of bonds. These bonds are sold to the lowest bidder, thereby insuring that the lowest cost of borrowing the money Is made available. The bonds are sold with a variety of maturities, with fixed interest rates for each maturity. Our interest costs are therefore fixed, and can not be reduced or increased. 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559.2800 Mrs. Donald Olson April 24, 1986 Page Two You inquired whether or not it would be possible for the City to lower the Interest rate on this project now that interest rates generally are declining. I indicated that I did not believe it would be possible to refinance this project and thereby lower your interest costs. I will, however, check into this matter further and advise you of what I learn. Thank you for sharing your concerns with me and I will be in contact with you as soon as possible to follow up further on your inquiry. Yours truly, Ja es G. Willis Cl y Manager OGW:jm cc: Mayor & City Council S/F 5/1 April 24, 1986 CITY OF PLYMOUTR Mr. Craig Shaver 250 Peavy Lane Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Craig; Monday evening the Council approved the agreement with the Department of Transportation for the improvements on Highway 101 north of County Road 6. As part of their approval, the City Council directed that the City staff develop, in conjunction with the neighbors, a landscaping plan to reduce the Impacts of the project as they relate to the removal of existing vegetation. We believe that this improvement project is long overdue. In fact, we believe the road should be widened out, at least County Road 24. That apparently will have to wait for a different day. I am confident, however, that the actions of the City Council will insure that the adverse impacts perceived by the residents of this project will be minimized. Thanks Craig, for your interest in this matter. Yours truly, James . Willis anager OGW:jm cc: Fred Moore 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 Craig Shaver District 45A Hennepin County Committees: Environment and Natural Resources General Legislation and Veterans Affairs Taxes April 9, 1986 Carter Hicks 17425 - 23rd Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55447 Minnesota ka C House of Representatives David M Jenni Thank you for visiting with me regarding the proposed "Improvements" of Highway 101, just north of County Road 6. Enclosed is a copy of the letter from the Department of Transportation which resulted from my contacts. Like you, I am not pleased by projects simply for the sake of spending federal funds. Unfortunately, our case is weakened by the accidents which have taken place there. I have, however, asked for documentation of the accidents. In addition to contacting MnDOT, I spoke with Jim Willis. the Plvmnuth City Manager. He indicated the City had not given its final approval. It may be worth contacting the City and asking approval of the project be contingent on some landscaping to replace the trees which are to be removed. I appreciate your bringing this to my attention. My regret is that we did not know of it earlier in the planning stages. Sin ale rel/ � /&v, Craig Shaver District 45A CS/bb Enclosures cc: Mr. Jim Willis Reply to: ❑ 331 State Office Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 0 P.O. Box 61, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 �=-- \ Q `b * 1,141 -r--rota Department of -i ran sport a: ion T., '_?':i1:i.Jr1 b--`iId:n7,,, FaU , VYl5 OF ? t, 2 1: 11arch 26, 19E15 The Fenorabl e Craig S�,avc Representative, District 45A 250 Peavey U.nr_ Wa,-za,A, t.;ir r.�scta 55?0: Dear RcpresEr:tPLivc S avt r: This is writtr-r; as a fclIG',. u to cur recer..t di:cL'"s ion rey^.rdir0 the �:i'. or T;' 10, it rise vici;,i ;.; cf ;o. Rd. 6 in Pl-v-mouth. This project is scheduled for E: contract lettir- cr7 11 cf this year. This means that all the ccrtract the prOjECt has begin advertised,, plans sold, c^d docu'nents hav;: beEn completEt, contractors a E t)usy puttir-g together their bids. Thus, any changes at this point it tine are sirpiy not feasib"ie. Although we c<an certainly undErstand the concern o -Er the loss of the trEE5 tKE rig"ht-Gf-v,';',', there was u .rade-Off that had to bE t:.REn into consideration. This projec•c is a p—nrt of cur SafEty Imrrcver:,Ent Program and is funded with a cate-ory of federal funds entitled "Hazard Elimination Safety (HES)°. The intent of this progrzn. is to adcrESS specific Nroblerl areas where safety is z. ri.jcr concern. That is the situati;.n cn TH 1011 in this :.rea. Specifically, the problem is created by traffic traveling northbound on TH 'M wanting to mate a left hard turn into the residential areas at both 19th Avenue an 6'erin.ac LanE. As this traffic stops in the northbound lane waiting for a cap in southbound traffic so that they can turn, a crowing number of rear -end accicEnts are OCCGr'rin3. T' -.r: proltct we are Coing to construct provides fCl' a 'bypass lar:e11 So tha', the rear -End accidents can be reduced. This pr,LcL. hau Ci ig•inai ly bef-ri scheduled for, contract letting Even earlier, but due to problems getting the necessary environmental mitigation taken care of because of the lake, it had to be delayed until this time. Unfortunately, in the interim period there was a fatality at one of these intersections where a motor cyclist was hit from behind while he was waiting to make a left hand turn. That is precisely the reason for the project, to avoid that type of accident from continuing to happen. We do take into consideration on our projects the concerns of the neighborhood. In. this case, we are trying to save as many trees as possible, but there are a fair number that will have to corse out sinply because of the need to widen for the bypass lane. It really boils down to a simple choice in this case. Either we build the bypass lane which requires taking the trees, c•r we leave the trees and ignore the safety problem. Although we are sensitive to the environmental issues, when it ccr:ics to the matter of traffic safety, I believe it is our responsibility to look at the safety aspect as top priority. An Eydul Oppurnu!J En:ploYer Representative t;--rch 26, 1986 Page 2 Craig Shaver In discussing this project with our design people in the Golden Valley Distract Office, it appears there is a homeowner living across the lake that is ccncerned about excessive noise levels. 1� is his belief that eliriinating the trees between the highway and the lake will leave him with dramatically increased noise levels. From our experience in the area of noise, we simply do not think that this is going to be a significant problem. There is cne ether consideration that I should mention. The trees that are teing taken cut are, in therlselvEs, a potential safety hazard. Some are so close to the highway that they have tir. n iii' `; =h cics bEfcra. So even without the near: for a b-/,SZss lane, it would eerhaps r, ,ve bz-en best -wa re„iove sc-ro., of the trees an;:r3 . I h.—pe this at least provides you additional inferiilaticn you need, feel free to call. Sincerely, olizee Dick G.rson, Director Go v,_rnr,ent Rel ations cc: W. Crawford J. Katz/B. Dixon G. Ellis with our reasoning on this project. If there's an or if ),,:u have further comments or questions, pleas -E