HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Information Memorandum 09-06-1985CITY OF
PUMOUTR
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
September 6, 1985
UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS.....
1. SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING -- Monday, September 9, 7:30 p.m. Special
City Council meeting in City Council Chambers.
2. PLYMOUTH HRA -- Monday, September 9, 6:30 p.m. The Plymouth
Housing and Redevelopment Authority will meet in the Council
Chambers. Agenda attached. (M-2)
3. BUDGET STUDY SESSION II -- Tuesday, September 10, 7:00 p.m. in the
Council on erence oom.
4. CITY COUNCIL FILINGS -- Tuesday, September 10, first day to file for
Mayor and two Councll positions. Closing date: Tuesday, September
24.
5. PLANNING COMMISSION -- Wednesday, September 11. The Planning
Commission forum 1s scheduled for 6:15 p.m. with the Planning
Commission meeting following at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers. Agenda attached (M-5)
6. HRA CONSULTANT INTERVIEWS -- Thursday, September 12, 6:00 p.m. The
Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment Authority will interview
consultants in the City Council conference room. A copy of the
letter sent to the consultants on the interviews is attached. (M-6)
7. PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION -- Thursday, September 12,
7:30 p.m. The Park and Recreation dvisory Commission will meet in
the City Council Chambers. Brauer and Associates, consultants,
will present the attached summary report for Parkers Lake City Park
at this meeting. A copy of a letter sent to area residents inviting
them to attend the September 12 meeting is also attached, together
with PRAC meeting agenda. (M-7)
8. REVISED SEPTEMBER CALENDAR -- A revised September calendar is
attached showing the ptember 30 Budget Study Session III. (M-8)
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
September 6, 1985
Page 2
FOR YOUR INFORMATION.....
1. TRANSIT TAX FEATHERING QUESTION -- During the month of September the
Regional Transit Board will address the question of the property tax
transit levy for the metropolitan area. Following discussions
between the Mayor, Frank Boyles and myself, we agreed that the most
appropriate approach for Plymouth is to await the Regional Transit
Board's preliminary conclusions on the transit tax feathering
question as it relates to Plymouth. On September 9, the Regional
Transit Board will preliminarily consider this issue. On September
10, the Board will mail resolutions of intent to the municipalities
in the transit service area requesting municipal response by
September 24. On September 26, the Administration and Finance
Committee will review the municipal responses, and on September 30,
the Regional Transit Board is scheduled to certify the levy. Upon
receipt of the Board's resolution of intent, a memorandum will be
prepared for City Council consideration at the September 16 meeting
setting forth the options available to Plymouth together with the
financial impact of each. At the September 16 meeting, the City
Council will have to make a choice between transit service levels to
be provided to Plymouth residents versus tax relief which can be
obtained through service cuts. It should be noted that any
reduction which the City achieves through transit service cuts WILL
NOT impact the City's own property tax levy. The transit levy is an
independent levy which is normally included under "miscellaneous
levies" together with those of the Hennepin County Park Reserve
District, Metropolitan Council, Mosquito Control District, etc.
2. BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS CONCERNING WITH ZONING
ORDINANCE VARIANCE STANDARDS - , SEPTEMBER 6
-- The Board of Zoning Adjustments and Appeals has noted its concern
with respect to some of the variance criteria in the City's Zoning
Ordinance. The attached memo from Blair Tremere deals with this
topic in some detail. I am providing the Council with this infor-
mation at this time in order that you might become familiar with it,
as I propose to place it on a Council study session as soon as
practicable. (I-2)
3. APPRECIATION BREAKFAST FOR EMPLOYERS OF PLYMOUTH FIREFIGHTERS --
gain t is year we will be hosting a buffet breakfast at t e o iday
Inn on Friday, September 27 for employers of our firefighters.
Breakfast will commence at 7:30 a.m. and be concluded by 9:00 a.m.
This informal get together provides a forum for us to express our
thanks to the employers whose willingness to permit their employees
to actively participate as firefighters helps us to maintain our
Volunteer Fire Department. If you would like to attend this
breakfast, please let Laurie know by September 9 in order that
reservations can be made for you.
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
September 6, 1985
Page 3
4. MINUTES:
a. Planning Commission, August 28, 1985 (I -4a)
b. Board of Zoning Adjustments and Appeals, August 12, 1985 (I -4b)
c. Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission, August 14, 1985
(I -4c)
5. "WASTELINE" -- The Metropolitan Council's monthly publication
"Wasteline" is attached for your review. (I-5)
6. RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT - PLAN REVIEW -- As reported previously
to the Council, since June 1st the City as been using the services
of former building inspector Gene Soboy to assist with plan review
of new single family building permit applications. During this
period, Gene has completed review of 119 plans for the City,
resulting in a turn around time of four to five business days for a
new single family building permit. A status report prepared by doe
Ryan on plan review is attached. (I-6)
7. COMMISSION APPLICANT -- Attached is an application for commission
appointment from Michael Sankey, 4630 Terraceview Lane. Mr. Sankey
indicates his preference to be appointed to the Park and Recreation
Advisory Commission or Planning Commission. (I-7)
8. HAZARDOUS WASTE PROCESSING -- On August 22, the Minnesota Waste
Management Board granted clearance to the Metropolitan Recovery
Corporation and CECOS International to allow them to submit a permit
application to the Pollution Control Agency for a hazardous waste
treatment and recovery facility they propose to develop in the City
of Roseville. This facility will be designed to treat and recover
metals from the wastes of metal finishing firms, and will handle
other types of wastes as well.
9. SCHOOL ZONE ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROSECT -- Attached is a copy of the
dates and times the o ice epartment will be conducting the school
zone accident prevention project at Armstrong Senior High, Plymouth
Junior High and Pilgrim Elementary School. During each time period
each school area will be covered, with emphasis placed at Armstrong
as this area generates the most complaints. (I-9)
10. CHILD ABUSE IN PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS -- Eric Blank has provided
the attached article entitled, " reventing Child Abuse in Parks and
Recreation Areas". (I-10)
11. COUNCIL FOLLOW UPS:
a. Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety on East Medicine Lake Boulevard -- On
August 15, the City Council directed that a gravel sou der be
installed along the lakeside of East Medicine Lake Boulevard
between 18th Avenue and 26th Avenue. This work was to be
performed by our street department.
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
September 6, 1985
Page 4
All of the work has been completed with the exception of one
small area where we are waiting for delivery of a storm sewer
culvert. This is a special sized culvert which was not in
stock. Tom Vetsch and street division employees working on the
trail received several nice compliments while they were perform-
ing the work.
The Council also requested clarification from the Hennepin
County Park Reserve District on the schedule for development of
the regional trail in this area. Attached is a letter received
from Robert Wicklund, Central Division Manager, Hennepin County
Park Reserve District, indicating that the Park Reserve District
has submitted to the Metropolitan Council a request to include
in the Regional Capital Improvement Program, acquisition funds
in the 1988-89 bienium and development funds in the 1990-91
bienium . This funding would allow the Park Reserve District to
complete the Trail Corridor from Elm Creek Park Reserve to
Theodore Wirth Park which includes the Plymouth portion along
the east side of Medicine Lake. In this regard, the District is
urging the City's support to the Metropolitan Council of these
capital improvement requests.
Mr. Wicklund also suggests that if the City finds this schedule
for the trail improvements inappropriate, that the District may
consider a proposal whereby the City would fund the construction
of the trail with reimbursement by the Park District at such
time as Metropolitan Council funds are received. (I -11a)
b. Council Communications -- The attached correspondence responds
to Councilmember asi iou's duly 31 memorandum on my practice/
procedure relating to distribution of Council correspondence.
(I -11b)
12. CORRESPONDENCE:
a. Letter from Fred Moore, to ferry Sisk, 17015 28th Avenue North,
regarding damage to the trailway along Dunkirk Lane north of
22nd Avenue. (I -12a)
b. Letter from Sandra Gardebring, advising of the Metropolitan
Council's review and approval of the EAW for reconstruction of
the CSAH 9 in Plymouth. (I -12b)
c. Letter from Sandra Gardebring, advising of the Metropolitan
Council's review and approval of the Comprehensive Plan
amendment for the southwest corner of I-494 and County Road 9
(Trammel Crow Company). (I -12c)
d. Letter to Thomas Benshop, from Sara McConn, in response to
discussions concerning school district boundaries and the
finalization of the lot division/consolidation for Benshop
office building project. (I -12d)
CITY COUNCIL INFORNATIONAL NENORANDUM
September 6, 1985
Page 5
e. Letter from George Wilson responding to Frank Boyles' letter of
August 27 concerning the City's action with respect to the Dave
Johnson platting request at County Road 6 and Highway 101 and
enforcement action against a vegetable stand located at 10th
Avenue and Highway 101. (I -12e)
James G. Willis
City Manager
JGW:Jm
attach
A G E N D A
PLYMOUTH HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Special Meeting
September 9, 1985
6:30 P.M.
I. Roll Call
II. Approval of Minutes for August 5, 1985 Meeting
III. Rehabilitation Program Update
IV. Section 8 Program Update
V. Scattered Site Home Ownership Program Update
VI. Senior Citizen Site Development
VII. Other Business
VIII. Adjournment
PLANIAING C0'11,1ISSI0N MEETING AGENDA
%EDNESDAY, SEPTE►4BF11 11, 1955
M--
WHERE: Plvmouth Cit\ Cente
3400 Plymouth Boule%aro
Plymouth, MN 55447
CONSENT AGENDA
All items listFa with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine b\ the Planning
Commission and will he enacted by one motion. There will he no separate discussion of
these items unless a Commissioner, citizen or petitioner so requests, in which evr_r,t
the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in normal sequence ori
the agenda.
PUBLIC FORUM 6:15 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER 6:30 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
*3. CONSENT AGENDA/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Planninq Commission Minutes August 26, 1985
4. CONTINUED BUSINESS
A. Capital Improvement Program
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7:30 P.M.
A. Trammell Crow Company. MPUD Preliminary Plan/Plat, Conditional Use Permit and
Site Plar, for property north, west, and south of Annapolis Lane (55044)
B. Robert Fitch, Fitch Construction. Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, Final Plat, and
Variance for property at 5620 Pinevi�ew Lane (85070)
C. Minneapolis Auto Auction. Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit Amendments for
property at 1125 Nathan Lane; and the MAA Oakmar site at 1605 County Road 15
(85074/85075)
D. Christ Memorial Lutheran Church. Conditional Use Permits for a Montessori
School and operation of a daycare center at the church at 13501 County Road 15
(85078)
E. Dean R. Johnson, Cenvesco, Inc. RPUD Concept Plan, Preliminary Plan/Plat, Re-
zoning, and Conditional Use Permit for "Quail Ridge of Plymouth" on property
east of Turtle Lake and north of County Road 9 (85081)
F. Robert Gersbach, Preliminary Plat for property at 2540 West Medicine Lake
Drive (55053)
G. Robert Lamson. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Variance, and Lot Division for
propert% at 100 Black Oaks Lane (85084)
H. Thomas Leverenz. Conditional Use Permit for a Home Occupation for a business
in�olvinq a real estate property management and sales office and tax account-
ing service at 14005 County Road 9 (85085)
PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDF
Planning Commission Aaenda. September 11, 1955
PUBLIC HEARIIJGS CONT' D
I. Holidav Station Stores. Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for the facility
at the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Southshore Drive and High%4aN
55 (85088)
J. Lundgren Brothers Construction Company. RPUD Preliminary Plan/Plat and
Conditional Use Permit Amendment for "Mission Trails" located north of
Goldenrod Lane and 41st Avenue North (85091)
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. dames and Frances Schurter. Lot Division/Variance for property at 16810 12th
Avenue North (95071)
7. OTHER BUSINESS
8. ADOOURIVIEIJT 11:00 P.11.
"4,,
September 5, 1985
Mr. Charles Thompson
North Ridge Properties
5430 Boone Ave. No.
New Hope, MN 55428
Dear Mr. Thompson:
CITYO�
PUMOUTR
This is to inform you that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will
consider your proposal on Thursday, September 12, 1985 at the Plymouth City
Center.
Your proposal will be considered for forty-five minutes starting at 8:45
p.m.
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority has indicated that approximately
fifteen minutes will be devoted to hearing from the petitioner and the
balance of the time will be devoted to a question and answer period.
You may and should assume that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's
Commissioners have reviewed all of the narrative material you have sub-
mitted. It is assumed at this time that your submitted materials constitued
your basic proposal and that no new or different information will be sub-
mitted at this session other than information generated by the questions and
answers.
Also, please remember as I noted in my last letter that the Commissioners do
not wish to be contacted regarding the developer proposals outside the
context of regular meetings or this interview session.
Thank you for your continuing interest in this project.
meeting with you next week.
Sincerely,
Blair Tremere
Community Development Director
BT/!g
cc: File
We look forward to
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD PLYMOL`N MINNESOTA 55447,-E-EPHONE 1612, 559 2800
August 28, 1955
Mr. Eric Blank
Park Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN
RE: August 15th Public Seminar
B&A Project #85-35
Mr. Blank:
The attached report is a recap of the information
collected at our public seminar on Thursday, August 15th.
There were 57 registrants, including 2 individuals from
the City Council and 3 from the Park and Recreation Advisory
Commission.
An agenda was given to all registrants upon arriving.
Questionnaires regarding general timelines for presentation
and guidelines for operation were integral with that piece.
This report is comprised of these questions, along with the
corresponding answers submitted.
Your opinions are an important part of our planning effort
and will be used in the development of a comprehensive
Mas,ttr�lan for Parker's Lake City Park.
BVAUER J,,ASSOC IATES LTD.
Paul S. Fja�e, M.L.A.
President
PSF/jt
7901 Flying Cloud Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 ❑ (612) 941-1660
PP I OP ITY SUMI',�,-, I ZA,,T IOP,
QUESTIONN TPE RETUP.hED SEN ���,P OF AUGUST 1
1. TR A, ILS - h1kinc, walkirg, jogging, biking 1
x -country skiing, benches, lights.
2. SWIMMING - beach house control structure, 5
sunbathing, telephone, lights,
emergency equipment, office,
(change rooms).
3. PICNICING - passive, picnic benches, concert, 3
informal field games, play equipment,
group area.
4. NATURE STUDY - natural environmental - flora & 2
fauna introduced species
5. FISHING - shore, dock, boat 4
6. MEADOW GAMES AREA - informal field games 6
7. BOATING - rental of canoes & paddleboats 7
8. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
-Ice skating - Boating access
- Concession - Snowmobile access
- Pitching horseshoes - Archery
CITY PARK - Definition taken from the approved Plymouth Park
System Plan (1981).
Size and Function
Service area: 4 to 5 parks throughout the City
(approximately 2-3 mile radius)
Spatial standard: not applicable
Size: minimum 20 acres or large enough to encompass special
natural features; no average or maximum size.
Type of use: extensive, active and passive, educational,
some programming.
Clientele: all ages
Funtional characteristics
primarily reserve conservation
and ornamentation with some
recreation and culture.
Brauer & Associates Ltd. -1- August 28, 1985
Context
Location: - where resource exists (particularly water bodies)
- dispersed throughout city
- limited roadway frontage is desirable
- located near collector or minor arterial
Access: pedestrian/bicycle, automobile and public transportation
Adjacent land use: immaterial
Natural Conditions
Resource dependency: strictly resource oriented
Exposure: immaterial
Topography: varied, may be steep and/or include wetlands,
floodplains, water bodies
Vegetation: varied and of significance and interest
Development
Timing: acquisition should occur as soon as resource is iden-
tified and funds made availabe--development timing is
less critical
Degree of development: low -to -moderate
Typical facilities/activities:
Act i ve
- recreation trails
- meadow games area
Passive
- nature trails - park benches
- nature study - picnic tables
Support
- park center with restrooms
- parking -- dependent on actual
facilities, generally between
3 to 5 spaces/acre
- full utilities
- swimming beach
- boating
- fishing
- storage building
- path lighting
- signage
- waste receptacles
Other comments
- may incorporate neighborhood park within its boundaries
- not required in industrial neighborhoods
- programmed activities provided by City and Schools,
presuming that resource is of sufficient quality to
warrant nature -orientation
Brauer & Associates Ltd. 1-A
August 28, 1985
RESULTS OF ?ARKERS LAKE CITY PAPA QUEST IOtl',:A?R`_
Below is a tally of the facilities/activities proposed for
Parkers Lake City Park and the number of residents who would
use them. A total of 3,477 questionnaires were mailed to
area residents. To date, 566 have been returned and com-
piled. The activities/facilities are listed in order of
popularity.
1.
Walking
487 ..
80% =
453
2.
Picnic grounds
450
3.
Swimming and Biking - tied for 3rd
421 ..
70% =
396
4.
Concerts
390
5.
Flower gardens
349
6.
Sunbathing
345 ..
60% =
340
7.
Cross-country skiing
315
8.
Fishing from shore
307
9.
Ice skating
303
10.
Fishing from dock
283 ..
50% =
283
11.
Renting canoe, boat, etc.
271
12.
Play equipment
258
240
400/C =
226
13.
Field games
..
14.
Jogging
209
15.
Waterslide
203
16.
Fishing from boat
186
17.
Concessions
182 ..
30% =
170
18.
Bird watching
169
19.
Pitching horseshoe
124
20.
Diving
113 ..
200/0' =
113
21.
Water skiing
93
22.
Sailboating
83
23.
Windsurfing
80
24.
Archery
74 ..
101/c =
56
25.
Bike rental
44
Residents
were also asked to add items to
the list. The
numbers in parantheses indicate how many
times an
item was
mentioned.
Volleyball (11), Pavi11ion or building of some kind (5), Tenni
courts (5), Nature trails (7), Snowmobi1ing (3), Golf putting
green (2) Exercise stations (2), Dog exercise area (2), BMX
dirt bike track (2), Roller skating (2), Skateboarding (2),
Bleachers (1), Scoreboards (1), Public phones (1), PITS progra
(1), Paddleboat rental (1), Target shooting (1), Innertube
slide into lake (1), Croquet (1).
Brauer & Associates Ltd. -2- August 28, 1985
PARKERS LAKE CITY PARK SEMINAR
August 15, 1985
PROGRAM;
7:00 Registration - Pick up name tags, fill out question-
naire, coffee.
7:20 Welcome - Eric Blank, Dir. Park & Recr. Dept., Plymouth
Betty Threinen, Chairperson, Park & Recreation
Advisory Commission
Paul Fjare, Landscape Architect, Brauer & Assoc.
George Watson - Landscape Architect, Brauer & Assoc.
7:30 Presentation - Parker's Lake City Park Area
7:45 Table Discussion Groups
8:45 Reports from Table Discussion Groups
9:30 Closing/wrap-up
GUIDELINES
1. The table discussion and group interaction are the primary
reasons for this seminar. For the seminar to be meaningful,
input and discussion from all participants is encouraged.
2. The presentation is intended to stimulate discussion and
questions for discussion in the small table groups. Specific
questions will be answered during the discussion groups.
3. After breaking into smaller groups, select an individual to
report back to the entire group about your discussions. This
segment is important to the seminar process.
4. Remember, tonight's seminar is not a public hearing. We are
interested in your opinions and ideas concerning the future of
Parker's Lake City Park. With input from all participants the
seminar can be beneficial to all parties and aid Brauer &
Associates, in gaining meaningful data and ideas during even-
tual formulaiton of a comprehensive master plan for Parkers
Lake City Park.
5. YOU ARE HERE TO INFLUENCE US. AS THE DESIGNER FOR PARKERS
LAKE CITY PARK, WE WANT TO HEAR YOUR VIEWS AND OPINIONS. WE
ARE HERE TO LISTEN.
Individual questionnaires were not uniformly completed by
all individuals attending the seminar. For that reason, the
total number of responses will not add up to the number of
persons in attendance.
Brauer & Associates Ltd. -3- August 28, 1985
PARKER'S LAKE CITY PAP SEM INAP
August 15, 1955
Please fill out the questions below before the seminar
begins ton ioht. Tne forms will be picked up just prior to
beginning the meeting.
Please DO NOT include your name.
1.
Sex: Male 27
Female 19
2.
How long have you
lived in Plymouth?
The average length
of residence by seminar participant
was 9.6 years.
The length of time reported varied
from two months
for 4 individuals to 30 years for
one
individual.
No -
19
3.
Do you presently
use other Plymouth Parks? Yes
- 25
4.
Are all of your
recreational needs met within the
City
of Plymouth?
Yes 11 No 31
Who would expect them to be?
If not, which activities do you particpate in elsewhere?
Sailing -2
Hikinc - 3
Picnicing - 7
BMX Track - 1
Boating/Waterskiing - 5
Cross-country skiing - 3
Wayzata - 2
Swimming Dogs - 1
Playground - 2
Swimming - 2
Fishing - 2
Golf - 3
Location of Activity
Minnetonka
Mpl s . City Lakes
HCPRD - Baker - 5
Maple Plain
Minnetonka
HCP D - Baker Pk.
HCPRD - Medicine Lk.
HCPRD - Mpls. Parks
Long Lake
HCPRD - Baker & Rebecca
Hopkins & HCPRD - Baker
Minnetnnlra z wr.ppn - Baker
Golden Valley - Mpls.
Brauer & Associates Ltd. -4- August 28, 1985
Tennis - 2
Little League - 1
Horseshoes - 1
Tennis - 2
No locations specified:
bird watching
driving
berry picking
horse back riding
down hill skiing
swimming
canoeing
sunbathing
Medalist Sports Cluh - Hopkins
Crystal
St. Paul
Wayzata
A major portion of the evening was devoted to small group
discussions, followed by a report back from each group
regarding a set of discussion questions. One point of
interest occured during the evening when a Parker's Lake
resident offered to remove his speedboat from the lake. The
discussion questions are as follows:
Please select a member of your group to serve as the
reporter for this evening's session. He or she will be
called upon to make an oral report on your group's findings
at the end of the discussion period. The report should be
relatively concise and reflect the general conclusions of
your group.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. What is your impression of a City park?
too big, too much
lion's Park little used
conservative development
a place for neighbors to enjoy families, & friends
should be a park, devlopment sized for the lak
environment of lake preserved
place to relax, participate in recreation activities,
increased home values near parks, use for all residents
within City
small, quiet
Parkers Lake City Park is a good idea
2. What activities should be included in Parkers Lake City
Park?
biking
concert
wal king
Brauer & Associates Ltd. -5- August 28, 1985
cross country skiinc
ball field - only one!!
fishing
beach/swimmino - only one!!
picnicing
trails - jogging
biking
boating (waiver to residents) - all types of boats allowed
bird watching
fish pier
ice skating/with warming house (summer beach house)
swimming beach
snow mobile - access linkage to N.W. trail only
small group activites such as volleyball
rowboat only - non notorized
playground equipment
connect trails to Luce Line Tail
3. What priority for development would you place on those
items in question #2? (1 - first priority, 2 - second
priority, 3 - third priority, etc.)
Those ranked nearest the top were reported most fre-
quently by priority classification and weighted accor-
dingly. Ultimate priority ranking for inclusion in
the program statement for Parkers Lake City Park rests
with the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission.
Trails - walking
cross-country ski
jogging
passive - individual or family
Nature - Retain natural pristine quality of flora and
fauna.
fishing
biking
picnicking
beach/swimming
concerts
ballfield (informal)
4. Of the activities listed in question #2 -
a. Which do you feel members of your discussion group
would participate in?
all of the above
hiking
available for all
Brauer & Associates Ltd. -6- August 28, 1985
5.
b. With what frequency would members of your group
participate?
. daily
minimum weekly
. weekly or less
10 times per year
c. Would a nominal fee charge limit your use of the
activity?
d. What would your group be willing to pay for access to
the activity?
1. fee to help control volume - Free to residents
$25.00 to non -res.
2. hours enforced
3. no fees
4. swimming 50¢ to $1.00
5. parking
6. nominal yearly fee for usage
7. fee would not limit parks use.
8. bikes $1.00/hr.
9. canoes $5.00/hr.
Cook's choice
The above questions are intended to stimulate
discussions among group members. Although the questions
listed should be discussed, discussion among individuals
should not be limited to just those questions. Please
feel free to ask any questions and raise any points that
you feel should be discussed.
Concerns -
. beach within too close proximity
. control of who can use park
need to limit activities due to restrictive size of
area.
limit number of motor boats - potentially ban
commercialism
proximity of Workhouse - security
definitly should not include "drawing activities, ie,
large heavy boating, water skiing from outsiders
. overdevelopment
Co. 6 safety
maintenance budget - cost to City for upkeep
overuse
motorized craft - boats & snowmobiles
no beer or liquor in park
safety and comfort;: lighting, toilets, shelters for
picnic areas, adequate parking, concern for noise
control, telephone, water
Brauer & Associates Ltd. -7- August 28, 1985
Questions
if very tie, what type o` support is necessary
lavatory facilities
parking within property
city park police force to regulate
DNR - restrictions for how much sand to control bass and
spawning beds.
SEMINAR EVALUATION
1. Were goals and objectives of this seminar clearly stated?
Yes 35 No 0
2. To what extent were these goals and objectives realized
and understood by you?
Very much 19 Somewhat 15 Very little 0
3. Would you attend a similar seminar in the future?
Yes 29 Possibly 6 No 0
4. Overall reaction to the seminar?
Excellent 9
Good 23
Average 2
Poor 0
Unsatisfactory 1
5. Other comments recorded were:
a. Thank you for the opportunity to be heard.
b. Good, as long as input is truly used.
c. Very helpful and informative. I feel much more con-
fident of the project development since this morning.
d. Is there really enough room for all the "natural"
activities we have discussed? Twenty-five acres
isn't much room.
e. I believe there are already plans made and set to go
regardless of our semtiments. I am concerned about
my tax dollars.
f. Letter advising meeting seemed to indicate that deve-
lopment was to include ball parks, etc. that won't
be worked on until 1990.
g. Could have clarified goals of small groups clearer.
Brauer & Associates Ltd. -8- August 28, 1985
pCITY C�
September 5, 1985 PUMOUTR
Dear Resident:
M-7
Attached you will find a summary report dealing with Parkers Lake City Park from
Brauer $ Associates to the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission. This data
is a compilation of all the information gathered from the questionnaires returned
by the community, the City's comprehensive park system plan, and the citizen
input from our meeting of August 15, 1985.
This is the information the consultant is using to prepare the first concept
plan for Parkers Lake City Park. This plan will be presented by the consul-
tant to the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission on Thursday, September 12.
Please consider this letter your invitation to attend the Park and Recreation
Advisory Commission meeting on that evening beginning at 7:30 p.m. in the City
Center Council Chambers.
If you have any questions that you would like to discuss with me prior to the
meeting, I can be reached at 559-2800 x 265. Once again, I wish to remind
you that the proper place for citizen involvement in the design process takes
place now by your interacting with the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission.
The City Council will not be conducting public hearings on this matter once
it passes out of the hands of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission.
Thank you for your time and interest in this matter. We look forward to seeing
you on September 12.
Sincerely,
Eric J. Blank, Director
Park and Recreation Department
/np
enclosure
340: PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559.2800
Plymouth Park and Recreation Advisory Commission
Regular Meeting of September 12, 1985, 7:30 p.m.
Plymouth City Center Council Chambers
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes
3. Visitor Presentations
a. Athletic Associations
b. Staff
C. Others - Len -.hiede (Pilgrim Lane PTO)
4. Report on Past Cc,-ncil Action
a.
b.
5. Unfinished Business
a. Parkers Lake - Brauer
b. Neighborhood ?ark Improvements Update
C. 1986-90 CIP, 1986-87 Budgets
d. Oakwood Parking Lot Update
6. New business
a.
b.
c.
d.
7. Commission Presentation
8. Staff Communication
9. Adjournment
Next Meeting - October 3
}
U)
Q
11J
D
Q
Z
2
}
Q
Z
D
U)
M—
a
w
x U
"J. M
H .•�
L
E
w
t_
u')
U x
U
U
�ZCz
3+
< rn
w
N
Z
kp
r— U
C
G 4.J
N
41
O
C G
W Z w'-
G cJ
c: 0
•,44-1
GC E F
G
H
H w C
•G E
'� w
U
i L
2'
+.J v
N
CJ S C
;a V: C •rl
.0
U
U) -i
a w
r -i
w
I v M C
e Q o'
a v
p
Z �
p, •�
i . J:
Q
+J L1
U
to
S7 U
C G
u
U
G
L;
C •' C
G U
c..wZ
aanU
UJB
U
G
w
cn
v:cr
a
r4
v
>
U
� U � w
E•
U � P4
U � �
H
Lr
�
cm
vi ca
p0.y
m
a H
O� C.) O U
oCa
o
U O U
U C U
0 c.`.`•'.
.`•'
Q r, H
Q � H
N�
U
!11"�
H
w�
o
H
i
I
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
MEMO
DATE: September 6, 1985
TO: James G. Willis, City Manager
FROM: Blair Tremere, Director of Community Development RL•
SUBJECT BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS CONCERN WITH ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE
STANDARDS
The Board of Zoning Adjustments and Appeals at their August 12, 1985 meeting acted to
recommend "that the City Council review the Zoning Ordinance standards because the
Board is having difficulty finding that petitions meet the six criteria." I have
attached a copy of those criteria.
I have also attached correspondence and a memorandum from the City Attorney which was
generated last spring after Board Chairman Larry Marofsky raised a question as to the
adequacy of the variance criteria in light of recent amendments to the State Statutes.
Associate Planner Al Cottingham informs me that the Board seems to be concerned that
they find that variance requests meet the test of some of the variance criteria but
not all. The Zoning Ordinance states that the Board shall not approve any applica-
tion, and the City Council upon appeal shall not grant any application unless a find-
ing is made relative to all six criteria.
This seems to suggest that the Board is inclined to grant variances that do not meet
the test of the six criteria. It seems to follow that if the criteria were modified
granting variances would be easier. The City Attorney found that "there is no legal
reason why the Ordinance needs to be amended, nor why the Board of Adjustments and
Appeals should not continue to rely on the Ordinance standards in making its decisions
regarding variances."
The City Council by itself or in conjunction with the Board and/or the Planning Com-
mission may wish to review and reconsider the variance criteria as outlined below.
However, I think it is important to stress another fact of planning and land use law:
Courts generally have found that repeated variances for similar requests, such as a
yard setback, constitute effectively an amendment of the Ordinance. The risk of deny-
ing a variance based on a firm standard when in fact a multitude of variances have
been granted from that standard is high, and cities generally have been found to be
arbitrary and capricious to have such a practice.
My point is that perhaps the Ordinance requirements and development standards that are
the focus of variance requests should be amended rather than undertaking a
modification of the criteria which should be met before variances from the adopted
standards are granted.
Page two
Memorandum to James G. Willis, City Manager
Ordinance Variance Criteria
September 6, 1985
I recommend that, if the City Council finds merit in the Board's recommendation, a
Joint meeting with the Board and with the Planning Commission should be established
wherein the purpose and validity of the Ordinance Variance Criteria could be discussed
with the City Attorney.
I would also propose that, prior to that meeting, the Board of Zoning and the Planning
Commission, if the Commission shares the concern, prepare a list of specific concerns,
problems, and possible solutions.
It is my view that sound definition of the problem is vital to assure that the
perceived need to modify the variance standards is not based upon a difficulty in
denying variance requests which do not have merit, per the standards, or upon a
failure to correct zoning requirements which may be obsolete or otherwise
problematical and therefore in need of change or deletion.
Attanhmantc
"'OrAe an ianc a
11 � Sa do��uts�on C o� 7"�e
Zo nin Ono�l�hQnce .
9
-reo M Ss cTO n
Pay •n o L47A
1) That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, a
particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from
a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to
be carried out.
2) That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is hased
are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and
are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zon-
ing classification.
3) That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a
desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of
land.
4) That the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Ordinance
and has not been created by any persons presently having an interest
In the parcel of land.
S) That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the
neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located.
6) That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of
light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the con-
gestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or
endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or Impair
property values within the neighborhood.
Page 5
Board of Zoning Minutes
August 12, 1985
MOTION by Chairman Musatto, seconded b} Commissioner 04arss
to deny the request for Ronald Haekenkamp for property
located at 425 Quantico Lane for the following reasons:
1. The variance criteria have not been met:
2. This would set an undesirable ,.precedent in the
City.
3. A gar-ge could be cons'rucd within the Ordinance
standards.
RESOLUTION NO. B 85-21
MOTION TO DENY
VOTE 6 Aves. 1 nay. Commissi er Plukfa voted nay. MOTION VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
carried.
Chairman Marofsky revie d the Ordinance proceedings for the
petitioner in regard. to the rights to appeal the Boards
decision to the CiV Council.
MOTION was ma by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commis- MOTION TO APPROVE
sionerBige w to recommend that the City Council review the
Ordinanc equirements of the rear yard coverage for resi-
dentia detached structures.
. 7 ayes. MOTION carried.
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
MOTION was made by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commis- MOTION TO RECOMMEND
sioner Bigelow to recommend that the City Council review the
Zoning Ordinance standards because the Board is having dif-
ficulty finding that petitions meet the six criteria.
VOTE. 7 ayes. MOTION carried.
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
ADOOLNUWNT. The meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m.
March 19, 1985
Mr. Larry P. Marof sky
7240 Brooklyn Blvd.
Brooklyn Center, MN 55429
Dear Larry:
CITY OF
PLYMOUTFF
I referred your February 22, 1985 letter to City Attorney Herbert P. Lefler, and asked
for his opinion as to the question you raised regarding the impact of the 1982 statutes
upon the Plymouth variance criteria.
I enclose for your information a memorandum prepared by a member of the City Attorney's
staff with which the City Attorney agrees. I also concur with the analysis and
conclusion of that memorandum. It appears that the statutory language does not
supersede the City's variance criteria nor are the criteria substantially altered by
the undue hardship definition.
Incidentally, I have asked Associate Planner Al Cottingham to see that the other
materials you received at the Zoning Seminar are distributed to Board members, so they
can review them and compare the findings and answers with the materials you received at
the seminar.
Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Sin erely,
Blair Tremere, Director
Community Development Department
BT/gw
cc: File
Attachment
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 5592800
2000 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis
Minnesota 55402
Telephone (612) 333-0543
Telecopier (612) 333-0540
Clayton L. LeFevere
Herbert P. Lefler
J Dennis O'Brien
John E. Drawz
David J. Kennedy
John B. Dean
Glenn E. Purdue
Richard J. Schieffer
Charles L. LeFevere
Herbert P. Lefler III
Jeffrey J. Strand
Mary J. Bjorklund
John G.Kressel
Dayle Nolan
Cindy L Lavorato
Michael A. Nash
Brian F. Rice
Lorraine S. Clugg
James J. Thomson Jr.
James M. Strommen
Mary C. Nielser
Terry L. Hal!
Ronald H. Batty
LeFevere
Lefler
Kenned-,
O'Brien
Drai%-7
PI off "i'ma1
1.a. iaiiolI
March 11, 1985
Mr. Blair Tremere
Director of Planning and Community
Development
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
=-
MAR 12 1985
V t ``, tJ t t�
CIr`,`r JN'i iii ti:..V
i.
In re: Plymouth Zoning Ordinance and Amendment to
Section 462.357, Subd. 6, of Minnesota Statutes
Dear Blair:
Your letter concerning the above matter was researched by
Mr. Ron Batty of this office and I enclose his Memorandum to
me. I have reviewed it and concur in its conclusions and in
the discussion it contains.
Yours very truly,
Herbert P. Lefler
HPL:np
enclosure
MEMORANDUM
MAR 1 ,� jgPc
CITY Cif.
TO: HPL CC„3,r{�+wii
FROM: RHB
DATE: MARCH 7, 1985
RE: PLYMOUTH VARIANCE CRITERIA
Issues: The chairman of the Plymouth board of adjustments and
appeals has asked whether the 1982 amendments to Minn. Stat.
Section 462.357, Subd. 6 invalidate or supersede the criteria
established in the Plymouth zoning ordinance concerning granting
variances. If this is the case, the chairman has also asked
whether and in what way the city's zoning ordinance should be
amended.
Discussion: Section 462.357, Subd. 6 authorizes boards of
adjustment and appeal to grant variances from local lard use
regulations and it specifies some of the grounds for doing so.
Prior to the 1982 amendments, the statute merely contained
language linking the granting of variances to finding "undue
hardship". There was no definition of that term and courts and
city councils generally relied on the criteria in local
ordinances and the guidelines established in the large body of
case law in making decisions regarding variances. The statute
contained provisions which expanded the traditional meaning of
undue hardship. For example, "inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems" was included as a type of
hardship. However, it was clear that undue hardship was not
limited to such circumstances and the statute did not contain a
comprehensive definition.
In 1982 the statute was amended by expanding the language regard-
ing undue hardship. The amended statute specified that the
hardship must be unique to the property, not be self-created and
not simply facilitate an increase in value of the land. In
addition, it must be determined there will be no substantial
adverse impact on adjacent properties as a result of granting the
variance.
The 1982 amendment, in effect, incorporated into the statute a
large body of case law on the meaning of what constitutes undue
hardship. However, full exposition of the numerous court
decisions on the subject will reveal subtle distinctions with the
statutory standards. In some instances, nuances will be noted
which are not to be found in Section 462.357, Subd. 6. For
example, the fact that the
itself and not to a personal
clear in case law than in the
a two-part test for variances
Despite these subtleties, the
1982 amendments is a fair if
variances.
hardship must relate to the land
attribute of the landowner is more
statute. That there is, in effect,
is also more evident from case law.
statute as it exists following the
abbreviated summary of the law of
Section 11, Subd. C of Plymouth's zoning ordinance contains six
criteria for granting a variance. They are slightly more
expansive than those contained in the statute and are actually a
better summary of current variance law. It is clear that the
standards enumerated in the Plymouth ordinance are fully
consistent with Section 462.357, Subd. 6 and there is no reason
to believe that the statute has invalidated any of the city's
ordinance relating to variances.
It is also clear that there was no legislative intent to render
the statute the exclusive arbiter of variance standards. This is
evident from the fact that the amendment retained previous
language stating that undue hardship is "not limited to" the
defined conditions. Although this phrase originally referred
only to inadequate access to sunlight, it now serves as a general
modifier to the entire list of criteria for variances. Accord-
ingly, ordinances such as Plymouth's which contain specific
criteria are not in conflict with the statute merely because
their language does not precisely follow that of the statute.
Recent case law also suggests that the amended statute should not
be viewed as having preempted the field regarding variances. In
VanLandschoot v. City of Mendota Heights, 336 N.W.2d 503 (Minn.
1983), which involved an interpretation of Section 462.357, Subd.
6 as amended in 1982, the supreme court upheld the denial of a
variance on grounds that it violated both the statute and the
Mendota Heights zoning ordinance. That ordinance, like
Plymouth's, stated specific criteria for granting variances which
were essentially similar to those contained in the statute but
were not verbatim. Moreover, the court noted that the test of
reasonableness which must be applied in such cases is measured by
the standards set out in the local ordinance, not those contained
in the statute.
The decision in VanLandschoot does not suggest that ordinance
criteria supersede those established in the statute. However, it
does mean that the first test in the case of variances will be
against the standards in the ordinance. Clearly, ordinance
standards relating to variances are permissible and, in fact, are
viewed by the supreme court as the primary guides to the
reasonableness of granting a variance.
Conclusion: The variance criteria contained in the Plymouth
zoning ordinance are neither inconsistent with nor have they been
2
superseded by the standards mentioned in the applicable statute.
There is no legal reason why the ordinance needs to be amended
nor why the board of adjustments and appeals should not continue
to rely on the ordinance standards in making its decisions
regarding variances.
3
1 —c7;?
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
MEMO
DATE: March 1, 1985
TO: City Attorney Herbert P. Lefler
FROM: Community Development Director Blair Tremere
SUBJECT INQUIRY ABOUT IMPACT OF MINNESOTA STATUTES ON PLYMOUTH VARIANCE STANDARDS
I have attached a February 22, 1985 letter from Board of Zoning Adjustments and Appeals
Chairman Larry Marofsky, and a photocopy of a portion of Minnesota Statutes which
relates to the Enabling legislation for Board of Adjustments and Appeals. I have also
attached a copy of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance Variance Criteria which are found in
Section 11, Subdivision C.
Chairman Marofsky questions whether relatively recent changes in the statutes render
the Plymouth criteria ineffective, obsolete, or contradictory.
If current statutory language warrants, we should consider appropriate revisions to our
Ordinance; I would appreciate your advice on that point. It would be my opinion that,
if the question raised by Chairman Marofsky is a matter of opinion, i.e., a matter of
interpretation, then I am not so inclined to change our standards. I do not wish to
suggest that we should avoid clarifying and/or updating our variance criteria language,
but I believe that our criteria are similar to many other communities, who have
patterned their variance standards under the guidance of not only the statutes, but
also applicable case law.
Therefore, I would appreciate your opinion on the question raised by Chairman Marofsky,
and if warranted I would appreciate your recommended draft language for amending the
Zoninq Ordinance Variance Criteria.
Thank you for your assistance.
BT/gw
LAW OFFICES OF
LAWRENCE P. MAROFSKY
7240 BROOKLYN 6ODLEVARE
MINNEAPOLIS. MINN 55429
February 22, 1985
Mr. Blair Tremere
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Blair:
7E_Ec11ONE 556-457C
4;�EA CODE 6
LI:.>•T_
At the recent seminar held by the Government Training Service,
some interesting issues were raised in light of the Minnesota
Legislature's amendments to Minnesota Statutes 462.351 and
462.357 Subd. 6 as it relates to Boards of Adjustments. The 1982
legislature added the second and third sentences to Subdivision
6, Section 2, relating to undue hardship and its definition. The
issue raised at the seminar was "In light of the statute, did the
legislature supersede municipal ordinances and the municipalities
rules for granting variances?" I think the undue hardship rule
set forth in this section does change substantially the six
criteria provided in Plymouth ordinance. You may want to have
somebody review this to see if there is a significant change and
if we must amend our ordinance.
I have enclosed herein copies of the case example and discussion
questions as well as the copies of the statutory material which
were presented to us at the seminar. Ken Quass has the answers
to the questions. We thought that it might be appropriate to
photocopy the materials and send them out to the board of zoning
members and at the next meeting Ken can give us the answers.
Yours truly, .-
�C
Lawrence P. Marofsky"
LPM/pje
Enclosure
-9-
CITY PLANNING ACT
462.352 DEFINITIONS
Subdivision 1. For the purposes of sections 462.351 to
462.364 the terms defined in this section have the meanings
given them.
Subd. 2. "Municipality" means any city, including a city
operating under a home rule charter, and any town.
Subd. 3. "Planning agency" means the planning commission
or the planning department of a municipality.
462354 ORGANIZATION FOR PLANNING.
Subd. 2. Board of adjustments and appeals. T'he governing body of any
municipality adopting or having in effect a zoning ordinance or an official map
shall provide by ordinance for a board of appeals and adjustments. Tle board
shall have the powers set forth in section 462.357, subdivision 6 and section
462.359, subdivision 4. Except as otherwise provided by charter, the governing
body may provide alternative)), that there be a separate board of appeals and
adjustments or that the governing body or the planning comrussion or a commit-
tee of the planning commission serve as the board of appeals and adjustments, and
it may provide an appropriate name for the board. T'he board may be given such
other duties as the governing body may direct.
In any municipality where the council does not serve as the board, the
governing body may, except as otherwise provided by charter, provide that the
decisions of the board on matters within its jurisdiction are final subject to judicial
review or are final subject to appeal to the council and the right of later judicial
review or are advisor}' to the council. Hearings by the board of appeals and
adjustments shall be held within such time and upon such notice to interested
parties as is provided in the ordinance establishing the board. T'bs pard shall
within a reasonable time make its order deciding the matter and shall serve a cony
n such order u oP n L e_appe ant or petgticner by mail. arty may appear at
e Baring in person or y agent or attorney. Subject to such limitations as may
be imposed by the governing body, the board may adopt rules for the conduct of
proceedings before it. Such rules may include provisions for the giving of oaths to
witnesses and the filing of written briefs by the parties. The board shall provide
for a record of its proceedings which shall include the minutes of its meetings, its
findings, and the action taken on each matter heard by it, including the final
order. in any municipaliy in which the planning agenco does_not -act-as the
board of a u-stm—encs and aI�eals. the board shall make no decision on an appeal
or petition until thetanning nenc , if there is one, or a r�resentative authorized
"as�s'ad rfasona le opportuni�_not to exceed 60 days, to rev►ew_ and report
6 th-6�oard o a �ustments and appeals upon the appeal or petition.
still
462.357 PROCEDURE FOR PLAN EFFECTUATION; ZONING.
Subd. 6. Appeals and adjustnien(s. Appeals to the board of appeals and
Adjustments may be taken by any affected person upon compliance with any
reasonable conditions imposed by the zoning ordinance. The board of appeals
and adjustments has the following pcmers with respect to the zoning ordinance:
(1) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any
order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an administrative officer
in the enforcement of the zoning ordinance.
(2) To hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance
in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of
circumstances unique to the individualpr�eri}' un ear i onsidera�ion, and to grant
such variances -on y w7ien ►t is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping
with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in
connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot
be put to a reasonable use. if used under conditions allowed by the official '
controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circum --
stances unique to his
property not created bZ the landowner, and thee varTance�if ranted, xiil_no-alter
the essential cTiarac_ter of the loca_lit ._ Economic considerations alone shall not
constitute an undue hardship ff reasonable use for the property exists under the
terms of the ordinance. Undue ha -d5t al� _includes, but is not limited to,
inadequate access to direct sunlit for solar energy systems. Variances shall be
`anted. or earl s diered construction as defined in section 116J.06, subdivision
rwhen in harmony, with the ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments or
the governing body as the case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that
is not permitted under the ordinance for property in the zone where the affected
person's Iand is located. The board or governing body as the_case_may_ be, may
permit as a variance the teorary use of a one family dwelling as a two family
dwelling The board or governing body, as the case may be may impose
_`c0tMQns_ in- the granting -of--variances -to unsure compliance ando protect
adjacent properties. _ _
Subd. 7. Permitted single family use. In order to implement the policy of
this state that mentally retarded and physically handicapped persons should not be
excluded by municipal zoning ordinances from the benefits of normal residential
surroundings, a state licensed group home or foster home serving six or fewer
mentally retarded or physically handicapped persons shall be considered a permit-
ted single family residential use of property for the purposes of zoning.
Subd. 8. Permitted multifamily ase. Unless otherwise provided in any town,
municipal or county zoning regulation as authorized by this subdivision, a state
licensed residential facility serving from 7 through 16 persons or a licensed day cart
facility serving from 13 through 16 persons shall be considered a permitted
multifamily residential use of property for purposes of zoning. A township,
municipal or county zoning authority may require a conditional use or special use
permit in order to assure proper maintenance and operation of a facility, provided
that no conditions shall be imposed on the facility which are more restrictive than
those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the
same zones, unless the additional conditions are necessary to protect the health and
safety of the residents of the residential facility. Nothing herein shall be construed
to exclude or prohibit residential or day care facilities from single family zones if
otherwise permitted by a local zoning regulation.
History; 1965 c 670 s 7; 1969 c 259 s 1; 1973 c 123 art S s 7; 1973 c 379 s 4;
1973 c 539 s 1; 1973 c 559 s 1,2; 1975 c 60 s 1; 1978 c 786 s 14,13; Ex1979 c 2 s
42,4J, 1981 c 356 s 248; 1982 c 490 s 2; 1982 c 507 s 22; 1984 c 617 s 6-8
-11-
462.358 PROCEDURE FOR PLAN' EFFECTUATION; SUBDIVISION REG-
ULATIONS.
Subd. 6 N'ariancesc Subdivision regulations may provide for a procedure
for var)'ing the regulations as they apply to specific properties where an unusual
hardship on the land exists, but variances may be granted only upon the specific
grounds set forth in the regulations. Unusual hardship includes, but is not limited
to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems.
16236 CERTLFIED COPIES FILED WITH COL';N'71iRECORDER.
Subdivision 1. Required documents;. A certified copy, of every ordinance,
resolution, map, regulation adopted, or variance granted under the provisions of
sections 462.358 and 462.3595 shall be filed with the county recorder of the county
or counties in which the municipality adopting it is located. Ordinances, resolu-
tions, maps, regulations or variances filed with the county recorder pursuant to this
subdivision do not constitute encumbrances on real property. The order issued by
the governing body' or board of appeals and adjustments as the case may be, shall
include the legal description of the property, involved. Failure to file an ordi-
nance, resolution, map, regulation, variance, or order shall not affect its validity or
enforceability.
[For text of subds 2 and 3, see M.S. 1982]
History: 1983 c 187 s 1; 1983 c 216 art I s 68
462.361 JUDICIAL REVIEW.
Subdivision 1. Review of action. Any person aggrieved by an ordinance,
rule, regulation, decision or order of a governing body or board of adjustments
and appeals acting pursuant to sections 462.351 to 462.364 may have such
ordinance, rule, regulation, decision or order, reviewed by an appropriate remedy
in the district court, subject to the provisions of this section.
Subd. 2. Exhaustion of remedies. In actions brought under this section, a
municipality may raise as a defense the fact that the complaining party has not
attempted to remedy his grievance by use of procedures available to him for that
purpose under ordinance or charter, or under sections 462.351 to 462.364. If the
court finds that such remedies have not been exhausted, it shall _ require the
complaining party to pursue those remedies unless it finds that the use of such
remedies would serve no useful purpose under the circumstances of the case.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
AUGUST 28, 1985
The reaular Meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission was
called to order at 7:00 P.M1.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Steigerwald, Commissioners
Wire, Magnus, Plufka, Mellen and Pauba
MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Stulberg
STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Coordinator
Sara McConn
City Engineer Sherm Goldberg
Public Works Director Fred Moore
Community Development Secretary
Grace t;ineman
*CONSENT AGENDA/MINUTES
MOTION by Commissioner Pauba, seconded by Commissioner
Mellen to recommend approval of Item No. 5.-A of the Consent
Agenda, Woodbridge Properties for Scoville Press, Reaffirma-
tion of Site Plan Approval; arid, the Auqust 14, 1985 Minutes
as submitted.
VOTE. 6 Ayes, Commissioner Maqnus abstained from the vote
on the Minutes of August 14th. MOTION carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application for Lot Con-
solidation, Site Plan, Variance, and Conditional Use Permit
for Learning Tree Daycare Center, and requested an overview
of the August 19, 1955 staff report by Coordinator McConn.
Mr. Gene Pederson, 1014 24th Avenue South, Fargo, North
Dakota, representing the application, stated he has read the
staff report and has no problems with the recommendations.
He commented that this was a difficult piece of land to
develop but they have met all requirements.
Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was
no one present to speak on this item, the Public Hearing was
closed.
4a'_
*WOODBRIDGE PROPERTIES
FOR SCOVILLE PRESS
REAFFIRM SITE PLAN
APPROVAL FOR SITE
AT 14505 27TH AVENUE
(82062
MINUTES/AUGUST 14TH
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
BERT BISBEE, PLYMOUTH
C.W. FOR LEARNING
TREE DAYCARE CENTER
LOT CONSOLIDATION
SITE PLAN, VARIANCE
AND CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT (85068)
MOTION by Commissioner Magnus, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Plufka to recommend approval for the Lot Consolidation, Site
Plan, Variance, and Conditional Use Permit for Learning Tree
Daycare Center subject to the conditions as stated in the
staff report dated August 19, 1985.
Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried.
-187-
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Page 1SS
Planninq Commission 11inutes
August 28, 1955
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application by Arthur
and Marilyn Zenzen for a Conditional Use Permit ,Amendment
for setback encroachment, reading of the August 19, 1985
staff report was waived.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Arthur Zenzen who ex-
plained his request. Mr. Zenzen stated that it is true
other homes in the neighborhood have decks and porches and
meet the minimum requirements, however, the other homes have
a different layout. The homes of a similar style are smal-
ler than his residence; and, his home is on a cul-de-sac lot
which diminishes his back yard area. He stated his is the
only home where a porch/deck cannot be constructed without a
variance. He believes his plan is conservative and that
relative to the variance criteria there is a hardship be-
cause of the house desiqn and the considerable cost that
would be incurred to remodel the home to reduce or alleviate
the need for the variance. He stated he is not building
anything onto his home that will negatively impact the
neighborhood.
Commissioner Pauha inquired if he is the first owner and
whether the home was built from his own plans or purchased
"as -is". Mr. Zenzen stated he bought the home "as -is" and
the builder was explicit as to what home would be on each
lot. He noted not everything on the plans was to their
liking, but the trade-off was price. Commissioner Pauba
inquired if Mr. Zenzen had talked with the builder or the
real estate agent regarding plans for addinq a deck or
porch. Mr. Zenzen stated he did not investigate the reduced
lot size at that time. Commissioner Pauba stated he does
not disbelieve the fact that this residence on this lot
would make it hard to add this amenity, however, a cul-de-
sac lot is not unique in Plymouth and lots on cul-de-sacs do
benefit home owners. Mr. Zenzen stated the deck would need
a variance but the porch requires the variance as there is
only one area of the home where it can be constructed. He
stated that to change its location would create the need to
board up one side of the home and remove walls which would
be very costly.
Commissioner Pauba inquired if Mr. Zenzen could reduce the
14 ft. dimension to 10 ft. Mr. Zenzen stated this would not
be practical. Commissioner Pauba stated that Mr. Zenzen has
not proven a hardship with his request.
Chairman Steigerwald stated that it would seem that the
enclosed porch could be reduced to 10 ft. and he concurs
that a hardship is not proven.
ARTHUR AND MARILY14
ZENZEN - CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT AMENDMENT
FOR SETBACK ENCROACH-
MENT AT 3975 BALSAM
LANE (85079)
Paae 189
Planning Commission Minutes
August 2'-,, 1985
The Commission and Mr. Zenzen discussed the merits of revis-
ino the plans for the porch. Mr. Zenzen explained that.
there are slidino glass patio doors installed that would
suggest that a deck/porch could be added, and that this area
is the best to match the roofline of the home.
Commissioner Mellen inquired about the fact that it appears
the porch would overlook neighboring property and this could
be an invasion of the neighbors' privacy. Mr. Zenzen stated
that the sight line from the porch would be between the
homes next door and that his neighbors have commented they
hope he receives approval for his variance.
Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was
no one present to speak on this item, the Public Hearing was
closed.
MOTION by Commissioner Wire, seconded by Commissioner Plufka MOTION TO APPROVE
to recommend approval for the Conditional Use Permit ,Amend-
ment to allow for a reduced rear yard setback within the
"Mission Hills" RPUD for Arthur and Marilyn Zenzen at 3975
Balsam Lane, subject to the conditions as stated in the
August 19, 19.35 staff report and based on the fact that the
patio doors were installed at the time the home was built;
that the porch dimensions are small; that the lot is a cul-
de-sac lot; arid, the 4 ft. variance will not have an impact
on the surrounding and adjacent properties.
Commissioner Plufka stated he feels there is a uniqueness to
the situation as far as the topography and the practical
standpoint of constructing the porch on the area of the home
where the sliding glass patio doors have been installed. He
stated that Mr. Zenzen should have the same amenity as the
other homeowners in the development. Chairman Steigerwald
concurred, and stated that even though a hardship is not
demonstrated, common sense rules that the addition will en-
hance the appearance of the home where the patio doors have
been installed. Commissioner Pauba stated that he speaks in
favor of allowing the variance to allow the homeowner enjoy-
ment of his home.
Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. Commissioner Mellen, Nay. MOTION VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
carried.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the Conditional Use Permit PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE
Amendment request by Prudential Insurance Company and re- COMPANY/CONDITIONAL
quested an overview of the August 15, 1985 staff report by USE PERMIT AMENDMENT
Coordinator McConn. FOR REVISIONS TO THE
MPUD PLAN FOR
Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Carlos Hodge, represent- NORTHWEST BUSINESS
ing Prudential Insurance Company. Mr. Hodge explained the CAMPUS (85080)
request and stated he would answer questions from the
Commission.
Page 190
Planning Commission Minutes
August 2S, 1955
Commissioner Plufka inquired why these changes were being
made in terms of location; if the expectation was to use
this secluded spot for a facility that would promote the
isolation of this area and that this would mean the facility
would not be for transient trade but for planned events.
Mr. Hodge stated that the facility if planned for 70 to 75%
of the occupants to stay on a contract basis and they would
spend several days in the facility.
Commissioner Plufka stated he understands they are not deal-
ing with specifics this evening, but noted that this loca-
tion would be limited in terms for any on-site signage that
would be visible, and inquired if this would be a problem?
Mr. Hodge stated no, there is a monument sign at the
entrance and this facility would have repeat business by
corporate and business users who would be coming in groups
for planned events.
Commissioner Pauba inquired how large the facility would be
and how many rooms. Mr. Hodge stated it is proposed there
would be approximately 240 quest rooms, but that conferences
would be the primary purpose for the facility.
Commissioner Wire inquired about the number of stories.
Mr. Hodge stated the front of the building is proposed as 1
to 2 stories, but would appear to be only one story because
it would be earth sheltered, the facility is proposed to be
4 to 5 stories at the back where the guest rooms would be
located.
Commissioner Plufka inquired whether the parking would be to
the south and if they could provide sufficient area for
parking. Mr. Hodge confirmed the area of parking and stated
they see the parking area as adequate. Commissioner Plufka
stated his only concern would be that the traffic from the
facility would go north instead of south. Mr. Hodge stated
they would anticipate the people using the facility would be
coming in on Highway 55 and would go back the same way as
they would be coming from the airport. He stated that
groups would spend from 3 to 4 days in the facility.
Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing.
Mr. Ed Heins, 2920 North Berkshire Lane, inquired what would
be built on the other property now that the areas had been
reversed. Mr. Hodge stated they do not have specific plans
at this time, but office/office research facilities are
proposed.
Chairman Steigerwald closed the Public Hearing.
=" -,-A c,-,
Paqe 191
Planning Commission 11inutes
August 26, 1965
Commissioner Wire stated he has concerns that if the financ-
ing would not go through, the use could be different from
that proposed at this time. He is concerned that another
group could propose a lower calibre facility under this
Conditional Use Permit Amendment if approved.
Coordinator McConn noted that the request is for the revis-
ion to the MPUD Plan as to use and that there is no specific
plan being reviewed at this time. The petitioner has pro-
vided a conceptual plan which will be reviewed in more
detail in accordance with Ordinance requirements.
Commissioner Wire stated that if this proposal does not
materialize that the Conditional Use Permit Amendment should
be revoked and the "swap" should go back to the original
MPUD Plan. Coordinator McConn stated this is not within the
staff recommendation. Commissioner Wire suggested the
Conditional Use Permit Amendment be dependent upon the Site
Plan.
Commissioner Plufka commented that the Commission could give
their recommendation on the revision to the Planned Unit
Development and would be assured of reviewing all subsequent
site plans to recommend approval or denial. Coordinator
McConn further explained that the Planning Commission is re-
viewing this revision as land use only and would be review-
ing more detailed plans of all proposed development.
Commissioner Magnus stated he is concerned about this change
especially 20 years from now, when the economy could turn
the whole plan around. Coordinator McConn commented that
the original approval for the Planned Unit Development did
not include detailed plans for the "hotel/motel"site.
Commissioner Magnus stated the City should have protection
from a developer who may feel that under this approval he
would not be required to provide a high grade development.
Chairman Steigerwald noted that, plans not meeting the
City's requirements would be reviewed and recommended for
denial. Commissioner Magnus questioned whether they would
be required to come for for further review. Coordinator
McConn stated detailed site plans for all sites within the
Planned Unit Development must be reviewed by the Planning
Commission and receive approval from the City Council.
Chairman Steigerwald questioned the Commission adding
conditions of approval to this request, as they have not
done this with any other Planned Unit Development. He
stated it is his opinion that this amendment enhances the
concept of this development.
Paqe 19?
Planning Commission ilinutFs
August 2b, 19S5
Commissioner Nire stated that the original plan for the
hotel/motel area was approved because it Has next to the
highway, and traffic would not be going north through the
complex. He stated the proposal is qood but if it does not
materialize he would not want to see another type of hotel
facility proposed for this area, and he would want the areas
to revert to the original proposal. Commissioner Magnus
concurred.
Commissioner Plufka stated there are controls on all devel-
opment and any other proposal wi_11 have to come back through
the Commission and Council for approval of changes or modi-
fications.
MOTION by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Chairman NOTION TO APPROVE
Steigerwald to recommend approval for the Conditional Use
Permit Amendment for revisions to the Mixed Planned Unit
Development Plan for "Northwest Business Campus" subject to
the conditions stated in the August 15, 1985 staff report
and adding Condition No. 5 to state that: "In recognizing
this Amendment to the Mixed Planned Unit Development, the
Planning Commission takes note of the Concept as set forth
by Prudential Insurance Company for the conference center;
and, if the concept fails, Prudential Insurance Company will
amend the MPUD Plan as appropriate.".
Commissioner Wire reiterated his concerns. Chairman
Steiq_erwald commented that the concerns are valid, however,
the City is working with a petitioner who is providing a
quality development; and, this layout and location would
improve the proposal.
Roll Call Vote. 6 Aves. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the request by Theresa and THERESA & WILLIAM
William Hill for Lot Division, Variance, and Rezoning and HILL - LOT DIVISION
requested an overview of the August 14, 1985 staff report by VARIANCE AND REZONING
Coordinator McConn. (85069)
Commissioner Plufka stated that it appears the parcel would
be 53 1/2 ft. in width at the front setback. Coordinator
McConn confirmed this.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Bob Gomsrud, who owns
the existing residence. Mr. Gomsrud explained the land
area.
Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing.
Teresa Mize, 5460 Norwood Lane, stated she was not clear on
the location of the existing home and the location of the
proposed parcel. Mrs. Hill responded.
Paqe 193
Plannino Commission Hinutes
August 25, 1955
Chairman Steiger„ald closed the Public Hearing.
110TI0H by Commissioner Pauha, seconded by Commissioner Wire
to recommend approval for the Lot Division, Variance, and
Rezoning for Theresa and William Hill, subject to the con-
ditions as stated in the Auqust 14, 1965 staff report.
Roll Call VOTE. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried.
NEN' BUSINESS
MOTION TO APPROVE
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
MOTION by Commissioner Pauba, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Mellen to recommend approval of Woodbridge Properties for
Scoville Press, Reaffirmation of Site Plan approval for the
construction of an industrial buildino at 14505 27th Avenue
North, subject to the conditions as stated in the August 19,
1985 staff report.
VOTE. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Chairman Steigerwald called a recess at 5:20 P.M. RECESS
PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP)
The Public Hearing for the Capital Improvements Program com-
menced at 8:30 P.M.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the Capital Improvements
Program for 1986 - 1990 and noted the Commission will take
input from those in attendance and will deliberate this in-
formation at the September 11, 1985 Planning Commission
meeting. He noted this will not be a Public Hearing, but
invited those in attendance to come to this meeting.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced Public Works Director Fred
Moore. Director Moore stated he had overheads to explain
the proposals and will answer any questions. He noted the
CIP supports and complements development and allows the City
to guide and direct development.
Chairman Steigerwald stated they would begin by discussing
the Program for streets. Director Moore and Commissioner
Steigerwald discussed County Roads 6 and 15 and that County
Road 15 would become part of the City's road system. Direc-
tor Moore further explained that the trail will be completed
as part of this improvement by widening the roadway to ac-
commodate the trail.
Chairman Steigerwald inquired about areas of reconstruc-
tion. Director Moore stated a priority list will be pre-
pared in 1986 for street improvements and reconstruction
throughout the City will begin in 1987.
Page 194
Planning Commission iIinutes
August 2S, 19S5
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the Program for sanitary
sewer and introduced the letter received from Hewitt Peter-
son & Associates who are concerned about the construction of
the Pike Lake Interceptor. Chairman Steigerwald introduced
Mr. David Peterson, representing these concerns.
Mr. Peterson stated they want to urge the Commission and
Council to get sewer to the property in this area. He is
concerned that the City has put too much emphasis on the
plans by Tennant Company for their property; and, that Ten-
nant Company has not responded by going forward with any
development plans for their land. He stated their concern
about the reguidinq for this area.
Chairman Steigerwald stated the Commission is aware that the
timing was not right for the reguiding of this land, and the
City has been somewhat hampered with the problem of Tennant
Company's inability or unwillingness to make a decision.
Director Moore explained the history of this land informing
the Commission that in 1980 the property was owned by Laukka
& Associates who proposed a residential development. They
sold the land to Tennant Company and their development plans
were restricted by market conditions and the economy. He
stated it has been economically unfeasible for the City to
provide service from the north with a pumping station as
there are topographical problems. He stated the City was
unwilling to condemn land because of the size of the
property; and, Tennant Company had said they would provide
potential sewer line alignments. However, they have not
said they will give the City the easements without cost
which could necessitate those property owners who want sewer
service to bear the cost.
Chairman Steigerwald stated this property has "dangled" for
some time, however, it is difficult and expensive for the
City to provide service.
Mr. Peterson stated he knows the practicalities of the mat-
ter and they will go before the Council to discuss the
financial aspects. He stated the costs can be worked out,
and he wants to urge that service be provided to their land
in 1986.
Mr. Bruce Rashke, 5200 Willson Road, #407, Minneapolis, MN
55424, stated he represents "Metal Masters" who are also
concerned about the emphasis the City has placed on develop-
ment plans from Tennant Company. He stated they realize
there will be costs involved, but they want the area ser-
viced regardless of what Tennant Company decides. He stated
the City should provide service to the businesses in this
area who are requesting the service.
Page 195
Planning Commission F1inutes
August 2S, 1955
Ben Stroh, Superior Ford, stated they have been waiting for
service since 1979. He stated he encourages a feasibility
study, be prepared to study servicing this land with a lift
station on a temporary basis.
Director Moore stated that the cost proposal has been made
available, however, the City has not heard back on the fund-
ing from attorneys and representatives of the area
businesses.
Chairman Steigerwald inquired if there are water problems
there now. Mr. Stroh stated no, but that these could occur
and they feel fortunate they have not had many problems.
Mr. Raschke stated they have a problem with run-off and that
they have been faced with substantial expense because of the
septic system now in use. He reiterated he would like this
resolved.
Steve Poindexter, Poindexter, Oacosbon & Stromme, Multifoods
Tower, Minneapolis, Mid 55402, stated he represents a proper-
ty owner who is also concerned about Tennant Company's in-
decision on development of their property and that the City
is taking no action on getting service to properties in this
area. He stated that if the City is not able to put in the
Pike Lake Interceptor, alternatives should be formulated
such as bringing service from the south. He stated they
have the authority to request a feasibility study regarding
the ability to hook-up to the sewer to the south with the
use of a lift station. It is his opinion this should be
ready for review by the City Council. Director Moore
explained the substantial cost for this alternative.
Chairman Steigerwald explained that they will make their
recommendations to the City Council who will take action on
their input. However, the Commission does not deal with the
financial aspect of any proposal.
Commissioner Plufka further explained that the Commission
will weigh the importance of the project relative to devel-
opment in the City and determine the urgency. Chairman
Steigerwald added that the Council will act on the Programs
at one of their meetings in late September or early Oct-
ober. He reaffirmed that the input from this meeting will
be deliberated by the Commission before they forward their
recommendations to the City Council.
Mr. Poindexter inquired if the Commission will be given the
feasibility study. Chairman Steigerwald stated they will
review it if it is available. Director Moore reiterated
that the study has not been requested, nor has there been an
offer to pay for it, therefore it is very unlikely any study
would be available for consideration at the September 11,
1985 meeting.
Zia
Page 196
Plannina Commission Minutes
August 28, 1985
Mr. Poindexter stated he does not want arty complications
with Tennant Company and that the feasibility study is
important to dvelopment of their land. He stated they
expect fair treatment from the City regarding the zoning of
the land and it is critical that the City have an alterna-
tive solution to the Pike Lake Interceptor. He stated they
are very concerned about being rezoned to FRD (future re-
stricted development) District because they have not been
serviced with utilities.
Chairman Steigerwald assured him that the Commission will
deal with these problems and their recommendations will be
forwarded to the City Council.
Bob Lindell, 5505 North County Road 18, stated that only a
small area of the property is low and that a lift station
should not be a problem. He stated it would be less expen-
sive to service the property from the south.
Director Moore stated that the Comprehensive Sewer Plan was
designed for the entire City and are the most economically
feasible to service areas of Plymouth. He noted that a lift
station cannot handle this entire area and trunk sewer must
be installed. He stated this could be a major expense for
the small number of businesses which could be served. He
explained that any interim measures will have an interim
life as far as capacity. Any major development to the south
would require the capacity used by ,a temporary lift
station.
Director Moore explained the plans for sewer in 1990. Com-
missioner Wire inquired about in -fill corrections. Director
Moore explained that a study is underway.
Chairman Steigerwald explained the City Council format which
would allow two people to speak on an item and that those
interested should plan accordingly.
Messrs. Poindexter and Peterson requested a copy of informa-
tion which explains this format.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the Water programs. Commis-
sioner Wire inquired if the capacity is adequate from a
planning standpoint, and noted that a watering ban has been
in effect for the City of Plymouth. Director Moore stated
there is adequate water, but not for unlimited use for lawn
watering. Commissioner Wire inquired if Plymouth could add
to their capacity. Director Moore stated there are studies
underway and that the City has doubled its well capacity in
the past four years. He stated that a metro -wide watering
ban may be instituted because all municipalities and the
metropolitan area know the need to use their water wisely.
Page 197
Planninq Commission Hinutt-s
August 2S, 1955
Commissioner Magnus inquired if there was sufficient capa-
city for fire protection now and in the future. Director
Moore stated the City is not in trouble here, and that pump-
er trucks increase the safety factor. Chairman Steigerwald
inquired about selling water to St. Louis Park. Director
Moore stated the City sells to St. Louis Park only during
the winter months.
Commissioner Wire noted that rates have gone up and that it
would seem that those who are not heavy water users should
not subsidize those who are, such as those homeowners with
automatic lawn sprinkling systems; the large consumers
should pay hiqher rates. Director Moore stated this had not
been considered, a flat rate is paid per gallon. He stated
that the rate increases provide financing for the wells,
towers, and water treatment; and, should discourage high
water useage. Director Moore explained about the area aqui-
fer and water treatment which is being studied.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the discussion on the storm
sewer program. Director Moore stated there is nothing spec-
ific concerning this and that installation is normally in
conjunction with development. Chairman Steigerwald inquired
about upgrading, especially some of the old open drainage
ditches. Director Moore stated there would be some upgrad-
ing done. Commissioner Plufka inquired about pond mainten-
ance, water quality, and dredging. Director Moore commented
that the State has mandated the Wastershed Districts to pre-
pare management programs. Plymouth participates in four of
these organizations who are preparing plans for water qual-
ity. They should be completed by December, 1986 for at
least one of the management organizations and the others are
underway.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced discussion of Fire Station
No. 3. Director Moore stated the facility is planned for
western Plymouth and the locations under consideration are
Dunkirk to Highway 101 to County 24, however an exact site
has not been selected at this time. Commissioner Wire in-
quired if the cost includes equipment. Director Moore
answered affirmatively. Commissioner Mellen suggested that
it might be feasible to consolidate an ambulance service
with this new station. Director Moore stated this had not
been considered, but is a good idea.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the discussion on the Park
programs. He explained that the cash fees -in -lieu of land
dedication are put into accounts for the development and
acquisition of parkland, however, this money is not used for
maintenance. The Commission's concensus was that even
though maintenance costs are high, the park program is
important to the quality of the community.
-'A c�
Page 196
Planning Commission Minutes
August 28, 1965
Commissioner Wire stated his concern whether it is good
planning to recommend installation of sewer (such as in Area
A as discussed) before there are definite development
plans. If the sewer is installed and development does not
follow this could put pressure on the City to accept what-
ever type of development is proposed for the area. He
stated it is his opinion this should not be a "carte
blanche" decision.
Chairman Steiqerwald agreed this was a good point and
inquired how much of this area was represented by those who
spoke to the Commission. Director Moore stated that Hewitt
Peterson represents a large area, however the others repre-
sent much smaller parcels. He added that a temporary pump-
ing station could not include development on the Peterson
property.
Commissioner Plufka noted that if the Commission does not
make a recommendation to accomplish servicing the area, the
Commission and Council must "bite the bullet" on the zoning
because if the area is not serviced, it should be designated
as FRD.
Chairman Steigerwald closed the Public Hearing.
OTHER BUSINESS
The Commission suggested that upgrading and roadway planning
should be part of the planning for a proposal for a shopping
center in the area of Highway 101, Highway 6, and Olive
Lane.
Coordinator MclConn discussed upcoming agendas and new busi-
ness items.
. 1NT1IT;Z:I. VrI
The meeting adjourned at 10:10 P.M.
=_ .4 b
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH
BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
August 12, 1985
The Reqular Meetinq of the Board of Zoning Adjustments and
Appeals was called to order at 7:30 P.Id.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Marofsky, Commissioners
Plufka, Bigelow, Victor, Musatto,
Cornelius and Quass
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Associate Planner Al Cottingham
MINUTES
MOTION was made by Commissioner Bigelow, seconded by Commis-
sioner Musatto to approve the July 15, 1985 Minutes as MINUTES JULY 15, 1985
amended.
VOTE. 4 Ayes. Commissioners Plufka, Cornelius and Quass
abstained.
OLD BUSINESS
Chairman Marofsky introduced the request submitted by WALSER CORPORATION
Walser Corporation for a variance from the maximum sign 9825 56TH AVENUE NO.
square footage and height for property located at 9825 56th
Avenue North. Chairman Marofsky introduced the Board mem-
bers and explained to the audience the duties of the Board.
Mr. Richard Sjoquist, representing Walser Corporation re-
viewed the proposal noting the size of the existing signage
versus the proposed signage. Mr. Sjoquist showed pictures
of the signs from different areas and pointed out the height
difference of the Ford signage on the site to the north. He
noted that this was due to an elevation difference between
the two sites, but felt that this did hamper their adver-
tisement. He went on to state that with their site being
set back from County Road 18 and buildings between them and
County Road 18 that this renders poor visibility from either
County Road 18 or County Road 10.
Chairman Marofsky inquired of the petitioner, about the in-
formal discussions he has had with staff in regards to
locating an additional dealership on this lot. Mr. Sjoquist
responded that they have decided against pursuing such
development.
Paqe 2
Board of Zoning Minutes
August 12, 1985
Commissioner Quass inquired how this hardship is unique to
this parcel. Mr. Sjoquist responded that since this site is
not located immediately adjacent to County Road 18 and that
the elevation is lower than that of the property to the
north, it gives this site poor visibility.
Commissioner Plufka was concerned as to how you allow this
car dealership to increase their signage and not allow the
Ford Dealer to increase his.
Commissioner Quass stated that it seems that the hardship
was being created by General Motors and not the City since
they only had certain size signs that the dealers could use
and were not flexible in allowing different sizes that they
make.
Chairman Marofsky pointed out to Mr. Sjoquist that the
existing siqnage could be moved to the east, maintain the
20 ft. setback and give them better visibility. Also,
there are other alternatives that could better the marketing
of their site.
Commissioner Quass had some concern with whether or not it
would really help to have larger signs to promote their
business, or should they increase their marketing via the
newspaper, radio or TV.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Victor, seconded by Commis-
sioner Cornelius to deny the variance request for Walser MOTION TO DENY
Corporation located at 9825 56th Avenue North for the fol-
lowing reasons:
1. The variance criteria have not been met.
2. The existing signage exceeds the Ordinance
standards.
Substitute MOTION by Commissioner Quass, seconded by Commis-
sioner Mussatto to table this proposal, directing the peti- MOTION TO DEFER
tioner to submit marketing data showing that the existing
signage is inadequate and that the proposed increased sign-
age would help their business. It was noted that this in-
formation should be received within 90 days or this item
would appear before the Board for action at their November
meeting.
VOTE on the substitute MOTION. 7 ayes. MOTION carried.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION
NEW BUSINESS: VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Chairman Marofsky introduced the request submitted by Ross ROSS POMERENKE
Pomerenke for a variance from the rear yard setback for pro- 14125 40TH AVE. NO.
perty located at 14125 40th Avenue North.
Page 3
Board of Zoning 11inutes
August 12, 1985
Mr. Pomerenke stated that he had no comments to add to the
staff report and his narrative included in the report.
Commissioner Quass questioned staff as to the location of
the deck on the survey and felt that it was not properly
located. Staff clarified that there were two sets of slid-
ing glass doors and this was the appropriate location for
the proposed deck.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commis- RESOLUTION NO. B 85-18
sioner Musatto to approve the request for Ross Pomerenke for MOTION TO APPROVE
property located at 14125 40th Avenue North for the follow-
ing reasons and subject to the following conditions:
1. The variance criteria have been met.
2. No other variances are granted or implied by this
action.
Chairman Marofsky noted that he had two concerns; one is
lack of maintenance and two, that no sod had been installed
on this property; Mr. Pomerenke should be doing_ this before
putting a deck onto his home.
MOTION was made by Chairman Harofsky to amend the main
motion by adding Condition No. 3 stating that the petitioner
MOTION TO AMEND
should provide a copy of a contract showing that this pro-
perty would be sodded by October 15th or a financial guar-
antee of some sort to cover the sodding of the site.
Motion died for lack of second.
VOTE 7 ayes. MOTION carried.
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Chairman Marofsky introduced the request submitted by Mr.
STEVEN CHELTE AND
Steven Chelte and Deborah Strum for a variance from the
DEBORAH STRUM
front yard setback and lot coverage for property located at
1401 WEST MEDICINE LAKE
1401 West Medicine Lake Drive.
DRIVE
Mr. Chelte reviewed his request and stated that they had
decided to propose the detached garage, placing it within
six ft. of the side property line, leaving it approximately
20 ft. back from the front property line. Also, they would
like to increase the deck size to 10 ft. by 25 ft., rather
than 9 ft. by 25 ft. He stated that the new garage would be
located over the foundation of the old garage that was
destroyed when a tree fell on it.
The Board discussed the size of this lot, the location of
the garage and the deck. It was determined that the unusual
shape of this lot and topography was very restrictive for
locating the garage and deck in any other manner.
Page 4
Board of Zonina Minutes
Auqust 12, 1955
MOTIOPJ was made by Commissioner Mussatto, seconded by Com- RESOLUTION NO. B 85-19
missioner Plufka to approve the request for Steven Chelte RESOLUTION NO. B 85-20
and Deborah Strum for property located at 1401 West Medicine MOTION TO APPROVE
Lake Drive for the following reasons and subject to the
following conditions:
1. The variance criteria have been met.
2. No other variances are granted or implied by this
action.
VOTE, 7 ayes. MOTION carried.
Chairman Marofsky introduced the request submitted by Mr.
Ronald Haekenkamp for a variance from the required rear yard
lot coverage for property located at 425 Quantico Lane
North.
Mr. Haekenkamp reviewed his request and stated that they
would like to change the size of the garage from 1,200 sq.
ft. to 1,000 sq. ft. and would like to exceed the height re-
quirement of 12 ft. the change would allow a 10 ft. overhead
door on the garage, so they can fit their truck on a trailer
into the garage. He reviewed the Ordinance criteria and
stated that the Ordinance was placing the hardship on them
by only allowing them to have a 30 percent rear yard lot
coverage, if the structure was attached to the house then it
could be 1,000 sq. ft. He also identified other garages in
the area that were approximately 1,000 sq. ft. in size and
had been in existence for some time.
Chairman Marof5ky stated he questioned the hardship that the
Haekenkamps were facing, in that they created their own
hardship by having so many vehicles and not the Ordinance.
Discussion continued amongst the Board members and staff as
to the Ordinance requirements for lot coverage and the term-
inology used in determining the 30 percent rear yard lot
coverage. Commissioner Plufka stated that as he saw it, the
Board had three alternatives which included denying the
request and the petitioner could appeal the Boards decision
to the City Council; deny the request and ask the City
Council to look at the Ordinance to see if they feel the
Ordinance should be amended; or, approve the request and
then recommend that the Council amend the Ordinance language
to allow for an accessory structure of 1,000 sq. ft. in the
rear yard.
Discussion continued on amending the Ordinance and the dif-
ficulties this would place on the City. They questioned
whether or not allowing people to locate a structure of that
size in their rear yard would be acceptable.
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
RONALD HAEKENKAMP
425 QUA14TICO LANE
Page 5
Board of Zoning Minutes
August 12, 1955
110TIOH by Chairman Musatto, seconded by Commissioner Ouass
to deny the request for Ronald Haekenkamp for property
located at 425 Quantico Lane for the following reasons:
1. The variance criteria have not been met.
2. This would set an undesirable precedent in the
City.
3. A garage could be constructed within the Ordinance
standards.
RESOLUTION NO. B 85-21
MOTION TO DENY
VOTE 6 Ayes. 1 nay. Commissioner Plukfa voted nay. MOTION VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
carried.
Chairman Marofsky reviewed the Ordinance proceedings for the
petitioner in regards to the rights to appeal the Boards
decision to the City Council.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commis- MOTION TO APPROVE
sioner Bigelow to recommend that the City Council review the
Ordinance requirements of the rear yard coverage for resi-
dential detached structures.
VOTE. 7 ayes. MOTION carried.
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
MOTION was made by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commis- MOTION TO RECOMMEND
sioner Bigelow to recommend that the City Council review the
Zoning Ordinance standards because the Board is having dif-
ficulty finding that petitions meet the six criteria.
VOTE. 7 ayes. MOTION carried.
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
ADJOURNMENT. The meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m.
=`4 b
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Board of Zoning
Adustments and Appeals of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 12th
day of August . 1985. The following members were present: Chairman Marofsky,
Commissioners Plufka, Bigelow, Victor, Musatto, Cornelius and Quass
The following members were absent: None
Commissioner Plufka
adoption:
tom* ***
introduced the following Resolution and moved its
RESOLUTION 140. B 85-18
APPROVING VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ROSS POMERENKE, 14125 40TH AVENUE NORTH (08-01 85)
WHEREAS, Ross Pomerenke has requested approval of a 13 foot rear yard setback rather
than the Ordinance rear yard setback of 25 feet in order to construct a 12 x 20 foot
deck onto his existing home;
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Adjustments and Appeals has reviewed said request;
N0W, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request for
Ross Pomerenke, for a variance for a 13 foot setback on property located at 14125 40th
Avenue North for the following reasons:
1. The variance criteria have been met.
2. No other variances are granted or implied by this action.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
Commissioner Musatto , and upon vote being taken thereon,
the following voted in favor thereof: Chairman Marofsky, Commissioners Plufka,
Bigelow, Victor, Musatto, Cornelius and Quass
The following voted against or abstained: None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Board of Zoning
Adustments and Appeals of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 12th
day of August . 1985. The following members were present: Chairman Marofsky,
Commissioners Plufka, Bigelow, Victor, Musatto, Cornelius and Quass
The following members were absent: None
Commissioner Musatto
adoption:
introduced the following Resolution and moved its
RESOLUTION NO. B 85-19
APPROVING VARIANCE REQUEST FOR STEVEN CHELTE AND DEBORAH STRUM 1401 WEST MEDICINE LAKE
DRIVE (08-02-85)
WHEREAS, Steve Chelte and Deborah Strum have requested approval of a 15 foot
encroachment into the Ordinance front yard setback of 35 feet in order to construct a
22 x 24 foot garage onto his existing home;
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Adjustments and Appeals has reviewed said request;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request for
Steven Chelte and Deborah Strum for a variance for a 20 foot setback on property
located at 1401 West Medicine Lake Drive for the following reasons:
1. The variance criteria have been met.
2. No other variances are granted or implied by this action.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
Commissioner Plufka , and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof: Chairman Marofsky, Commissioners Plufka, Bigelow,
Victor, Musatto, Cornelius and Quass
The following voted against or abstained: None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Board of Zoning
Adustments and Appeals of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 12th
day of August . 1985. The following members were present: Chairman Marofsky,
Commissioners Plufka, Bigelow, Victor, Musatto, Cornelius and Quass
The following members were absent: None
Commissioner Musatto introduced the following Resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. B 85-20
APPROVING VARIANCE REQUEST FOR STEVEN CHELTE AND DEBORAH STRUM 1401 WEST MEDICINE LAKE
DRIVE (08-02-85)
WHEREAS, Steve Chelte and Deborah Strum have requested approval of a 21.1 ft.
encroachment into the Ordinance front yard setback of 35 feet in order to construct a
10 x 25 ft. deck onto his existing home;
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Adjustments and Appeals has reviewed said request;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request for
Steven Chelte and Deborah Strum for a variance for a 13.9 ft. setback on property
located at 1401 West Medicine Lake Drive for the following reasons:
1. The variance criteria have been met.
2. This does not set an undesirable precedent in this neighborhood.
3. No other variances are granted or implied by this action.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
Commissioner Plufka , and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof: Chairman Marofsky, Commissioners Plufka, Bigelow,
Victor, Musatto, Cornelius and Quass
The following voted against or abstained: None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
=-4 Q
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Board of Zoning
Adustments and Appeals of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 12th
day of Auqust . 1985. The following members were present: Chairman Marofsky,
Commissioners Plufka, Bigelow, Victor, Musatto, Cornelius and Quass
The following members were absent: None
Commissioner Musatto introduced the following Resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. B 85-21
DENYING VARIANCE REQUEST FOR RONALD HAEKENKAMP, 425 QUANTICO LANE NORTH (08-03-85)
WHEREAS, Ronald Haekenkamp has requested approval of a 19% increase of the Ordinance
allowed 30% coverage of the rear yard in order to construct a 1,000 sq. ft. detached
garage;
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Adjustments and Appeals has reviewed said request;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby deny the request for Ronald
Haekenkamp, for a variance for a 19% increase lot coverage on property located at 425
Quantico Lane North for the follo�sing reasons:
1. The variance criteria have not been met.
2. This would establish an undesirable precedent in this neighborhood.
3. An improvement could be developed within the Ordinance standards.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
Commissioner Quass , and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof: Chairman Marofsky, Commissioners Bigelow, Victor,
Musatto, Cornelius and Quass
The following voted against or abstained: Commissioner Plufka
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Judie Anderson
3030 Harbor Lane
Plymouth. MN 55441
Phone 612 553 144
elm creek
Watershed Management Commission
TECHNICAL ADVISOR
Hennep,^ Conservation D!stnct
12450 Wayzata Boulevard
MinnetonKa MN 55343
Phone 612,544-8572
M I N U T E S
August 14, 1985
I. The meeting was called to order at 5:10 p.m. by Chairman Fred Moore.
=--L� C__ .
II. Robert Derus moved and Earle Strande seconded a motion to approve the July 10,
1985, minutes. Motion carried.
III. Derus moved and Steve Peaslee seconded a motion to accept the Treasurer's Re-
port and pay the bills, including an additional bill from Will Hartfeldt in the
amount of $809.20. Motion carried.
IV. Those present:
Terry Muller - Maple Grove
Leon Zeug - District Office
Earle Strande - Dayton
Robert Derus - Corcoran
Dave Anderson - District Office
V. Reports from the District Office.
Fred Moore - Plymouth
Randy Johnson - Champlin
Mark Johnston - Park Reserve
Steve Peaslee - Hassan
Judie Anderson - Secretarial Service
A. Plymouth Flooding - The Plymouth City Council, at its July 12th meeting,
declined to approve funding for a study of water levels at the site under discussion.
Moore moved and Muller seconded a motion requesting the HCD to investigate the ef-
fects from a channel cleanout on Elm Creek on the duration of flooding from summer
rainfalls upstream of County Road 47. Motion carried. The results from this in-
vestigation shall be available for the Commission's September meeting.
B. Stream Monitoring - Results of the June 14th monitoring of Elm Creek and
its tributaries have been recorded. Concentrations of suspended solids and volatile
suspended solids and turbidity were within acceptable limits at all sites except
Hamel. Turbidity was found to be within acceptable limits at all sites while con-
centrations of total phosphorus continued high in June, with the highest concentra-
tion occurring at the boundary between Elm Creek Park Reserve and the City of Cham-
plin. Fecal coliform bacteria were within acceptable limits at all sites except
Hamel and in the Elm Creek Park Reserve.
C. Lakes Monitoring - Results of the June and July monitorings are available
from the District Office.
D. Mill Pond Inspection - The Mill Pond was inspected on July 15th. The ex-
tent of winter -killed areas was becoming apparent. Qualitative and quantitative
weed surveys are being done. The next quantitative survey is scheduled for August.
Minutes
August 14, 1985
VI. Copies of the 1984 audit report were distributed. Judie Anderson was di-
rected to ascertain from the accountant what financial basis was used in compiling
the report.
VII. Derus moved and Peaslee seconded a motion directing Judie Anderson to pur-
chase a bond from State Farm to bond the signatures of the officers with a fund
balance of 60,000.00. Motion carried..
VIII. Champlin Mill Pond - Johnson requested a 50/50 split of monies from Champlin
and the Commission to fund a study on methods of cleaning, improving, and maintain-
ing the Mill Ponnd. Moore moved and Derus seconded a motion requesting the District
Office to try to complete its study of this subject by October first. Motion car-
ried. Its contents will be discussed at the Commission's October general meeting
and be available for a meeting in Champlin on October 22.
IX. Johnson moved and Peaslee seconded a motion concurring in Moore's appointment
of Terry Muller, Earle Strande, Fred Moore and alternate Steve Peaslee to the Tech-
nical Committee of the Commission. Motion carried. The Committee will meet at
the office of the HCD and meetings will be called by Leon Zeug in a timely manner.
X. Plat Reviews.
A. 85-013 Elm Creek Estates - Maple Grove. Muller moved and Strande seconded
a motion to approve the recommendation of the HCD. Motion carried.
B. 85-014 Shadow Creek - Maple Grove. Peaslee moved and Johnson seconded a
motion approving the plans for cutting and filling in the floodplain. Retention
plans will be reviewed at a later date. Motion carried.
C. 85-015 Northwoods First Addition - Maple Grove. Strande moved and Peaslee
seconded a motion to approve the recommendation of the HCD. Motion carried.
D. 85-016 Maple Ridge - Maple Grove. No action.
E. 85-017 Rice Lake Road Restoration - Maple Grove. Muller moved and John-
son seconded a motion to approve the recommendation of the HCD. Motion carried.
F. Lutz's Elm Creek Addition - Medina. A grading plan is required. No
action taken.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Judie A. Anderson
Executive Secretary
JA
WASTELINE
August 1985
Issue No. 9
Editor: Joan Steinmann
SELLING RECYCLING TO THE PUBLIC — MAGIC?
What does it take to get people to recycle? It's a cr -tial
question for any governmental agency or private group that's
starting up a recycling program: if publicity doesn't reach out
to inform people and spur them to participate, all the other
efforts associated with such a program are wasted.
What makes for a successful publicity campaign? Speakers at
one of the panels at the June "New Roles in Recycling and
Composting" conference in St. Paul offered a number of
answers.
"Repetition, reinforcement and persistence are all-important,
said Regina Desvernine, who represented Holt & Ross, Inc.,
the public relations firm that put together the first statewide
recycling campaign, in New Jersey. "Start with a common
theme—then everything one organization does can reinforce
what the others are doing," said Desverine. "And don't let
recycling problems overwhelm you."
New Jersey's theme was magic, and Mr. R.E. Cycle (William
Romer), the campaign's traveling magician, performed while
Desvernine spoke. His character and the magic theme are
known throughout the state, not only because of his
performances but through their appearance in newspapers,
on grocery bags and in a massive billboard project.
One difficulty for the New Jersey campaign was reaching the
local level. "We had to seal seven and a half million people on
recycling, but the hard part was selling the local governments,"
said Desvernine. Persisting with a memorable, attractive
campaign paid off. "What local or county official can resist
a picture of himself in the newspaper? What child can resist
magic? And businesses love community relations projects."
Still, maintaining awareness and participation must be an
ongoing effort, said Desvernine. "Our job is to continue to
promote, promote, promote."
Char Iten, Delano city council member and one of the
initiators of the recycling program that now serves Delano,
Greenfield and Independence, emphasized the importance of
reaching children through the elementary schools and
enlisting the help of volunteer organizations.
"We started the recycling program because Hennepin County
threatened to site a 'mega -dump' near us," said Iten. A local
women's group made large, simple posters illustrating the
landfill problem and how to recycle, and showed them to kids
at school.
Eventually, 18 organizations joined with the women's group
to take brochures from door to door when the program began
to offer curb -side pickup of recyclables. A local grocery
printed recycling information on its bags. The program was
honored with a $12,000 award from Sears Roebuck & Co.
SEP
�JITY&"r
"Counties and municipalities need to take a larger role in
public education about recycling, along with the companies
that provide the service," said Colleen Halpine, a solid waste
planner for Ramsey County. She spoke about the county's
efforts to promote both recycling and composting.
To publicize composting, the county had how-to brochures
distributed to every household, placed notices in local news-
letters and in the St. Paul Pioneer Press and Dispatch, and put
together brief, clear public service announcements for radio
and television.
For recycling, the county also produced a 24 -minute videotape
to be aired on cable television, and hired a half-time staff
person to concentrate on publicity.
Bernie Beerman, of Beerman Services, stressed high-quality
service as the key to making promotion of a recycling
program effective. Beerman Services picks up recyclables from
several Twin Cities Area communities and runs a drop-off site.
"Dependability is very important in promotion," said
Beerman. "Remember you're competing with a highly
dependable solid waste collection industry."
For example, if stops are missed in a curbside pickup program,
"have a back-up system, such as a drop-off site."
Beerman also recommended providing effective, complete
instructions for recycling and maintaining good relations with
customers. "When you distribute information, it has to be very
specific," he said. "Spell it out, for instance, if material must
be sorted. People won't always ask questions if they don't
understand."
But even so, Beerman advises against arguing with people if
they don't follow instructions perfectly. "The customer is
always right," he said. "Pick it up even if it isn't properly
sorted. Don't leave stuff behind."
Also, problems with customers can be turned to a program's
advantage. "You can turn complainers into promoters of your
program," by responding politely and constructively, Beerman
said. "If they bother to call, it means they care and they can
help."
Finally, "Don't forget 'thank you'," said Beerman.
NEW COMMITTEE TO HELP GET OUT THE WORD
ON RECYCLING, RESOURCE RECOVERY
Letting people know about landfill abatement programs and
encouraging them to participate is especially important in the
Twin Cities Area, because a new state law and the Metro
politan Council's solid waste policy plan call for an end to land
disposal of unprocessed trash in 1990. Now a new interagency
steering committee set up by the Council is working on a plan
to improve publicity about efforts to reuse and recover
resources from trash in the region.
The Solid Waste Public Education Steering Committee—
including members from such diverse agencies as the Council,
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Association of
Metropolitan Municipalities, the League of Women Voters
and Jacobson's Sanitary Service—is one of the first attempts
to pull together all the various government agencies and
private organizations that are marketing abatement programs
or simply providing information about solid waste management.
The need to coordinate the efforts of these groups has grown
acute as many new recycling and composting projects spring
up around the region. Through the committee, which was
called for in the Council's solid waste plan, the groups can
share ideas and resources, find out about existing publicity
tools and use them where possible—instead of creating new
ones for each new program.
After studying the various programs that promote recycling
and resource recovery, the committee will decide whether a
unified regional publicity campaign is necessary, and what
role each agency should play. It will establish a permanent
regional clearinghouse for information about solid waste
management and develop strategies for reaching specific
segments of the population. The committee will also
explore different ways of funding publicity efforts, and
help decide which criteria the Council should use when
giving out grants and loans for public education on landfill
abatement.
The committee is expected to release its recommendations for
public comment around the end of September.
COMPOSTERS SWAP TRADE SECRETS
Leaves, grass clippings and other yard waste make up a fifth of
all trash going to Twin Cities landfills, but composting looks
like a promising way to deal with the high volume of this
organic material produced annually in the Twin Cities Area.
To explore its possibilities and problems, representatives of
existing composting programs—and people interested in
starting new ones —met in July at a forum sponsored by the
Metropolitan Council.
Many speakers at the forum underscored the problem of
marketing the compost. In most cases, that means giving it
away now, but the need to find takers of the compost is
growing as the supply increases.
Publicizing the fact that the compost is available and making
it easy for people to get it are keys to the problem, most
speakers agreed. "There's no problem getting rid of compos;
if a city is willing to deliver it," said Mike Banwart, a planner
in Hennepin County's Environment and Energy Department.
He noted that Minneapolis, which delivers compost within
a 25 -mile radius, couldn't keep up with the demand for it.
Composting programs in the Metropolitan Area vary widely.
Some use no special equipment, and don't water or turn
the compost to promote decomposition. Some control the
access to drop-off sites to discourage dumping of noncompost
able wastes or have their employees monitor the dumping.
A number of operations turn the compost piles regularly and
shred the yard waste for better consistency (Hennepin County
uses a $95,000 shredding machine).
-I:_-5
Costs vary also. In Ramsey County alone, costs per ton of yar
waste composted range from $12 to $100.
Many of these variations reflect differences in the needs and
character of different parts of the Twin Cities Area. In rural
areas, Washington County emphasizes backyard composting,
said county planner Zach Hansen, but the county also set up
centralized sites to serve more densely populated areas.
Washington County's Forest Lake composting site now
receives lake weeds, solving a local disposal problem and
supplying "moisture that helps the breakdown process,"
Hansen said.
Yet discussion at the meeting did suggest that centralization
and pooling of resources could benefit composting efforts.
One possibility is sharing expensive equipment that's used
only intermittently. Another is consolidating composting
operations at "mega -sites." Rick Hlavka, a solid waste planner
in Ramsey County's Public Health Department, said a 100 -acre
site could receive county yard waste in the future.
Specific subjects—such as finding sites for composting,
publicity for programs and the problem of lead in compost—
will be topics of discussion at smaller meetings during the
next few months. If you're interested in attending or getting
more information about composting in the area, call Grant
Scholen, of the Council's staff, at 291.6549.
REPORTS AVAILABLE PROFILING RECYCLING,
COMPOSTING PROGRAMS
Want to start a community recycling or composting project?
Interested in what programs are already operating in the
Twin Cities Area?
Two reports put together by the Metropolitan Council's
solid waste assistance team can help you out. Each is a
collection of profiles of selected Twin Cities Area recycling
and composting programs, providing basic information about
organization, financing, staffing, hours and type of services.
The reports give an overview of current "low-tech" landfill
abatement activities in the area.
Although not every recycling or composting program in the
region is included, the reports offer a good introduction to
the bigger ones—and many of the small ones as well. The
emphasis is on programs affiliated with local governments.
To get copies of Profiles of Selected Metropolitan Area
Recycling Programs (pub. no. 12.85-069) or Profiles of
Selected Metropolitan Area Leaf Composting Programs
(pub. no. 12-85-070), call team coordinator Jim Uttley
at 291.6361.
WILL TOMORROW'S FUEL BE AS CLOSE AS
YOUR TRASH CAN?
Today's time machine, as suggested by the hit summer movie
Back to the Future, is a plutonium guzzler, but 30 years hence
all it will need to run is mixed municipal solid waste. The mad
scientist who invents the device can travel back through the
decades to 1985 and then give his newly made friends a return
trip to 2015. There's no need to worry about procuring
plutonium to fuel this trip: the scientist simply thrusts some
stuff from the garbage can—banana skin, beer bottle, etc.—
into a neat little unit on top of the machine, and they all
blast back to the future. With a little ingenuity, who knows
what uses technology may eventually find for trash?
Printed on recycled paper.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612)559-2800
MEMO
DATE: August 30, 1985
TO: Blair Tremere, Director of Community Development
FROM: Joe Ryan, Building Official 3p -
SUBJECT: PLAN REVIEW
Since June 1st, Gene Soboy has performed the Plan Review of 119
new single family building permit applications.
Listed below are the totals for each month, together with a
weekly average.
MONTH TOTAL WEEKLY AVERAGE
June 49 12
July 44 11
August 26 7
With the incorporation of Gene's services, we have been able to
reduce the turn -around -time on the issuance of new single family
building permit applications to approximately four to five
business days.
Please contact me if you have any further questions.
Thank you.
Application Received by City on: Committee(s)/Commission(s) Applied for:
1st Choice Park & Rec Advisory Committee
2nd Choice anning Commission _
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT
TO COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE
Personal Information
Name: Michael W. Sankey _ Age: 38 Home Phone: 559-4326
Home Address: 4630 Terraceview Lane
Number of Children: 2 7 & 9
Ages (of those living at home):
Lived in Plymouth since: 1983
Property (other than residence) owned in Plymouth: none
Occupation
Present employer:
Position Title:
Education
Name of Institution
City of Medina Work Phone: 473-9209
Chief of Police
Normandale St Comm Coll
Metropolitan State U
Course Work Taken Beyond High School
To/From Degree/Credits
74-75 AA
76-77 BA
Area of Emphasis
General
Public Administration
Previous Experience
List other civic experience you have had including name of organizations, dates of
participation, name of city, position held and accomplishments:
I have planned and directed a bike-a-thon for St. Judes Research Hospital in Sept 82.
I have assisted in coaching youth soccer the past two years and now am currently
coaching one soccer team and assisting on another. I am a heavy user of Plymouth park
facilities and am familiar with a great deal of the city.
List other
relevant experience
--E
/
I have
extensive public speaking experience.
Opinion Questions
What do you believe you could contribute to the community if appointed to a City
commission or committee? Why?
I have a broad general background in the inner workings of city government including
personal experience dealing directly with commissions and city councils. I understand
procedure and law. I have a very keen interest in the development of the City overall
and I believe that my experience and knowledge would be an asset to the city.
How do you believe you would benefit if appointed to a committee or commision?
I believe the broader understanding of the overall planning and operation of the City
government would make me a better citizen and voter. I would hope to share my
increased awareness with other people both inside and outside the community.
As a commission or committee member, what issue(s) might cause conflict between
civic responsibility and personal/professional interests?
I do not believe that there are any areas of conflict.
Date available:immediately
Available for commission/committee meetings on
the following evenings (circle)
Mon ues, We , Thu. P Fr (except 1st & 3rd Tues)
Signed: ��17�Q L„� ��� Date: August 29, 1985
SCHOOL ZONE ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROJECT
Date Time Officer
Sept.
3 0700-0900
8
1400-1600
19
Sept.
4 0700-0900
5
Sept.11
1400-1600
20
Sept.
5 0700-0900
8
Sept.12
1400-1600
20
Sept.
6 1400-1600
20
Sept. 9
0700-0900
9
1400-1530
16
Sept.10
1400-1600
21
Sept.11
0700-0900
7
1400-1530
19
Sept.12
0700-0900
8
1430-1630
19
Sept.13
0700-0930
9
1400-1600
16
Sept.16
n700-0930
9
:400-1600
16
Sept.17
1400-1600
20
Sept.18
0700-0900
9
Sept.19
0700-0830
8
1430-1530
21
Sept.20
0700-0830
8
1430-1630
19
ARMSTRONG SR. 0730-1420 hrs.
PLYMOUTH JR. 0830-1510 hrs.
Pilgrim Elem. 0905-1525 hrs.
.w<. •.2 x �' : S �. T `tom' ..
91?E-[E-N- -T-LVG-
LV
,uffl -.zMUSE
'�-+-
ate, � � zz r�� _..rt }..,5'J. x .. - ��'••_
F-.
Z-• -kilt y - i }+V. Jk ,p. Y •�
AL
REFER' TO
MY MAC-E�
Vy
-
e,•,�-TJ;
�jr: .''
'nAO AC Williams and Terr y j: Holcom� . .
t
rdlf e r iy�i.�� �Y r w. `' a srj,}'!C. 'tom?"•%'. 7'_ -Iv, - ..
c.: wr.e � f k •e 4• *-tS-+[�bT Yl..•al�h--�. t'_ t .•—r �^�.. ..� -�.' .�
At, rARM&oncomwnONjSErrEM9ER 190
ROWING NATIONAL AIN'D LOCAL concerns
about child abduction and molestation prompted
the Parks Depariment and the Security Division
of the Public Works Department in Broome County, NY,
to establish a program for preventive action to protect
children from abuse in parks and recreational areas.
While compiling the information necessary for
developing the program, the Security Division identified
numerous concerns. Three factors that emerged are par-
ticularly significant and shocking for the park and
recreation profession:
• One of every four female children and one of every
seven male children will be sexually abused or molested
before his or her 18th birthday.
• Forty-three percent of molested male children are at
parks or recreation facilities before being assaulted.
• The public is unaware of child abuse in major park
and recreation areas, so parents do not hesitate to leave
their children unattended there for long periods.
As a result of its findings, the Broome County Depart-
ment of Parks and Recreation and the security Division
have joined in a cooperative effort to increase public and
professional awareness of child abuse in recreational
areas. The chief goals of the effort are:
• Recognition. To enhance people's ability to recog-
nize conditions that are potentially unsafe for children in
park and recreation facilities.
• Reaction. To respond properly to unsafe conditions,
to crises and to children who may have been sexually or
physically abused.
• Reporting. To ensure compliance with department
policy and other mandated procedures when reporting
abuse.
• Prevention. To aid in preventing abuse, by employ-
ing appropriate designs, maintenance systems, and prof-
grams
ro-grams for recreational areas.
The Broome County Department of Parks and Recrea-
tion administers a comprehensive county -wide
system that encompasses 4,500 acres and features several
regional parks. The parks include campgrounds, swim-
ming beaches, lakes, picnic areas, athletic facilities, and
nature reserves. The department has 150 full-time and
part-time employees and attracts over one million visi-
tors per year. Broome County Security, a division of the
Public Works Department, is responsible for ensuring
public safety at these facilities as well as at the county air-
port, college, nursing homes, and several other locations.
To combat child abuse in such a diverse and complex
system, the security Division has developed an extensive
employee training program. The program is presented to
park administrators, supervisors, full-time maintenance
and recreation staff, and seasonal program staff mem-
bers, particularly those who are instructors or who work
at the major beaches. The presentation is modified to
meet the needs of each type of audience.
When combined with appropriate pari, design, main-
tenance, program development, and employee selection,
this training is intended to provide a lasting reduction in
the opportunities for child abduction and molestation in
-:=— C
parks and recreation facilities.
The goals of Recognition, Reaction, and Reporting are
achicived through the employee training program. The
program systematically trains park personnel to recog-
nize the identifying characteristics of likely child
molesters and abused children. The program also teaches
park personnel how to respond to incidents of actual or
potential abuse.
Adults with abnormal sexual desires for children are
called pedophiles. These individuals tend to frequent
locations where children are present. The pedophiles
fulfill their desires by watching children play and some-
times by photographing them. (Chart A provides a list of
characteristics common to pedophiles.)
Children who have been physically or sexually abused
also possess identifying characteristics and behavioral
patterns, which are enumerated in Chart B. By being
aware of the indicators of child abuse, park personnel
can make children less vulnerable and make our parks
safer.
Broome County's training program also provides in-
formation on how children react to sexual abuse and
what responses are appropriate for adults who encounter
abused children. Because these children may feel power-
less, depressed, angry, or re)ected, adults should exercise
caution in dealing with children who disclose that they
have been abused. Park personnel must have supportive,
understanding, and open-minded attitudes to respond
properly.
Follow-up reporting is also crucial for addressing child
abuse. As part of the training program, park personnel
are informed of the department's policy and procedure
for reporting incidents of child abuse to the proper
authorities.
In addition to increasing employees' awareness of
child abuse, an essential part of Broome County's preven-
tion program includes taking account of the potential for
child abuse in other aspects of the parks department's
CHART A
Pedophile: Common Characteristics
• Often a rniddle-a£ed mar
• Usuallt non-violent.
• Often �� as molested as a child.
• Usually likes to photograph or collect
picture of children.
• Lsuall% relates to children mere easily
than adults
• Often seeks emplo'•ment and frequents
locations N% here children are present.
PADYC A Z?rrPA aTnNTirvrTPmRFR 1QR5 59
CHART B
Sexually Abused Children: Common Indicstow
(The finding of any of the "Behavioral Indicators" given in this table does not inesmpably imply the presence of
child abuse. Rather, thew indicators repaemnu behavioral patterns or features that are found in many abused and
neglected children The presence of one or more of these uxbca'tois should simply alert the reader to the possibility
that abuse has occarre&)
PHYSICAL INDICATORS
• Difficulty in walking or sitting;
• Tarn, stained, or bloody underclothing
• Pain or itching in the genital area;
• Bruises or bleeding in the external genitalia or in
the vaginal or anal areas;
*V real diseae ee�eeiffiliy in pee tteel
.. `e'n'd :/Y ._L _�.�� .[•
operation. As a result, the department has changed park
designs and maintenance practices, has more thoroughly
evaluated its program formats and locations, and has
screened potential employees more carefully.
Aesthetics is naturally a primary consideration in
developing park facilities. In the past, Broome County
has attempted to design its facilities to blend as nearly as
possible with their environments. Although this remains
a major concern, the parks department has made every
effort to ensure that the facilities also are safe for
children.
A basic consideration is location. Previously, play areas
were located near restrooms, and where possible, trees or
woodlands were used as buffers between play areas and
picnic areas. Aesthetics, accessability, and user patterns
remain important considerations in designing park
facilities. However, further consideration must be given
to the fact that deviant behavior may be most prevalent
in restrooms and that wooded areas provide ideal cover
from which potential abusers can observe children at
play without being seen, and that such areas provide
secluded places for abuse to occur.
Broome County has altered designs so that play areas
can be observed from great distances and so that adjacent
areas provide no cover where pedophiles could lurk.
Future play areas will contain no spaces where children
can hide or where sexual abuse can occur without being
visible to security patrols, particularly at twilight or
nighttime.
Areas surrounding those used intensively by children
60 PARKS & RECREATION/SEPTEMBER 1985
BEHAVIORAL INDICATORS
• LInwillirngnes4 to change fDr the gym or to
participate in physical education class;
a Withdrawal, fantasy, or infantile behavior,
• Bizarre, sophietilcated, or unusual sual sexual
bels or knowledge in young chime -
• Poocpees:.. r
. -r� . .rte v�i'i►:,:. _ l._;�C _ _- __.. .r-: �. _ ...��, w": .� s,.. e. w, . r !.'�
should be thinned and trimmed in a manner that ensures
visibility. Undergrowth, particularly in isolated areas or
along riverbanks, should be controlled so that abuse can-
not take place unobserved.
Close attention is required for maintaining plant life in
and around areas used a lot by children. Nlaintenance
workers must find the delicate balance in assuring that
the park setting remains natural and pleasing, while pro-
viding a safe, secure atmosphere for children.
Because many parks around the country are over-
crowded, there have been efforts to provide isolated or
secluded playgrounds, picnic areas, and shelters. The
need for safety does not make such efforts impossible, but
proper design and maintenance practices are necessary
to provide an appropriate balance.
Programs should be held in clearly visible areas of the
park, rather than being limited to secluded or wooded
areas so as to preserve the peace and quiet for the every-
day park visitor. The delicate balance can be maintained
with forethought and careful consideration for all of the
factors involved.
The ratio of instructors to participants should be low to
protect children from wandering off or being taken from
groups by potential abusers. The potential for child -
snatching is greatest on nature interpretation hikes,
where children sometimes lag behind or venture off on
their own.
Recently, programs have been designed to include
quiet time or reflective thought for the participants.
Continued on page 82
When you want the best!
4
MA
Manufacturers of Quality Athletic Recreation and Physical Education
Equipment for over 32 rears.
We are pleases to introduce an exciting new ace,t on
to our line!!
EXER-TRAIL & EXER-CENTER
OUTDOOR FITNESS SYSTEMS
• Exer-Trail :s perfect for parks. campgrounds, reso-s etc.
• Exer-Center s !deal for limited space such as corporate
recreation centers, schools, hospitals, etc
• Both syster^s are designer metal & redwood for the
ultimate in ou,abdity and beauty
SEND FOR OUR FREE, FULL-COLOR BROCHURE
P.O. Box 400 • Waterford, CT 06385 • (203) 447-3001
'i -b -.d- .- -M --p-, ILI
CHILD ABUSE
Lonttnuc'd rnorri pate 60
These activities are acceptable, but they require close
supervision, especially when thev take place to seciuded
areas.
Pedophiles relate very well to children and may seek
jobs that entail being close to children. Such jobs it ciude
recreation leaders for parks, 111C.As, and Headstart pr,,�
granis. Because of the possibility that pedophiles might
seek jobs %with the Broome Countv Department of Parks
and Recreation, the department has requested that
Security thoroughly check the background_, of all full-
time and part-time employees who are directly invoived
with children in the county's recreation programs.
Another effect of the preliminary training is that anv
employee %vho possesses hidden pedophilic tendencies
will know that child abuse is a departmental concern
and that any pedophilic behavior may be observed.
Broome County has taken a comprehensive proactive
approach to preventing child abuse. The parks and
recreation department and the security division main-
tain a constant et tort to recognize and avert undesirable
activity and to enhance their ability to prevent and res-
pond to incidents of child abuse. Broome County's ap-
proach affects all aspects of the park and recreation field,
particularly as it is served by public safety officials.
This article has merely touched on many of the issues
in an effort to stimulate thought about this complex and
important subject.
NATIONAL JOB BULLETIN SERVICE
As a memcersh p service. NRPA offers to is mercers the ''National Job Bulletin Service" for a fee of S25 per year. The list is
published the ` -st of each month with a mid -month _,;:date (except for October and December)
Name __
Membership ^. Tiler
Address
Jobs from last Bulletin included:
• Director of Parks & Recreation ($18,528-533.720)
Seeking professional and highly motivated individual to manage parks
and recreation department offering a wide range of programs year
round. The City has 18 parks. two swimming pools, and an 18 -Mole
golf course. B.A. degree in parks & recreation or equivalent plus five
years experience required
• Recreation Specialist (2) (S'T914)
Plan, coordinate, implement and evaluate public recreation programs
utilizing schools and parks to assigned neighborhoods. The position
requires Associate Degree in recreation 8 parks
Recreation Therapist (517.500-$25,000)
Represent the department at team meetings Run therapy sessions
including physical confidence. human sexuality. physical education.
assertion, etc. Supervision of interns Serve on various committees
Masters level or A.B. plus five or more years of experience
To subscribe. lust _olete and return with $25 payment to:
Narona! Recreation & ParK Asscc anon, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22302
Street
Check enclosed
Charge to Visa Card #
_______ (Must oe a- ndividual member)
-ny
Exp. Date
State
(FOR CHARGES ONLY
Charge to MasterCard # Exp. Date CALL TOLL FREE 1-800-626-NRPA)
TO LIST EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES, CALL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (703) 820-4940
NO CHARGE FOR LISTING
82 PARKS & RECREATIONISEPTEMBER 1985
z,a c0c,
_;Z
Name __
Membership ^. Tiler
Address
Jobs from last Bulletin included:
• Director of Parks & Recreation ($18,528-533.720)
Seeking professional and highly motivated individual to manage parks
and recreation department offering a wide range of programs year
round. The City has 18 parks. two swimming pools, and an 18 -Mole
golf course. B.A. degree in parks & recreation or equivalent plus five
years experience required
• Recreation Specialist (2) (S'T914)
Plan, coordinate, implement and evaluate public recreation programs
utilizing schools and parks to assigned neighborhoods. The position
requires Associate Degree in recreation 8 parks
Recreation Therapist (517.500-$25,000)
Represent the department at team meetings Run therapy sessions
including physical confidence. human sexuality. physical education.
assertion, etc. Supervision of interns Serve on various committees
Masters level or A.B. plus five or more years of experience
To subscribe. lust _olete and return with $25 payment to:
Narona! Recreation & ParK Asscc anon, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22302
Street
Check enclosed
Charge to Visa Card #
_______ (Must oe a- ndividual member)
-ny
Exp. Date
State
(FOR CHARGES ONLY
Charge to MasterCard # Exp. Date CALL TOLL FREE 1-800-626-NRPA)
TO LIST EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES, CALL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (703) 820-4940
NO CHARGE FOR LISTING
82 PARKS & RECREATIONISEPTEMBER 1985
z,a c0c,
PARK RESERVES
BAKER
CARVER
CROW-HASSAN
ELM CREEK
HYLAND LAKE
LAKE REBECCA
MURPHY-HANREHAN
REGIONAL PARKS
BRYANT LAKE
CLEARY LAKE
CLIFTON E. FRENCH
COON RAPIDS DAM
EAGLE LAKE
FISH LAKE
JAMES W. WILKIE
LAKE SARAH
SPRING LAKE
SPECIAL USE AREAS
ARTHUR E. ALLEN WILDLIFE
SANCTUARY
BAKER PARK GOLF COURSE
CLEARY LAKE GOLF COURSE
HYLAND HILLS SKI AREA
NOERENBERG MEMORIAL PARK
WAWATASSO ISLAND
WILD GOOSE CHASL ISLAND
TRAIL CORRIDORS
NORTH HENNEPIN TRAIL
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
DAVID LATVAAHO
CHAIR
GOLDEN VALLEY
WILLIAM H. BOYNTON
VICE CHAIR
ST. LOUIS PARK
JUDITH S. ANDERSON
BLOOMINGTON
PATRICIA D. BAKER
MINNEAPOLIS
SHIRLEY A. BONINE
MAPLE PLAIN
WILLIAM I. HOLBROOK
MINNEAPOLIS
SCOTT L. NEIMAN
MINNEAPOLIS
VERN J. HARTENBURG
SUPERINTENDENT 8
SECRETARY TO THE BOARD
--T- \ \C.., -
Hennepin County Park Reserve District
3800 County Road 24 * Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 9 Telephone 612-473-4693
August 29, 1985
Mr. Frank Boyles
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Boyles,
Your letter of August 14, 1985 to David Latvaaho, Chairperson
of the Hennepin County Park Reserve District Board, has been
referred to me for a response. As Central Division Manager
I am responsible for the operation of Hennepin Parks facilities,
both existing and planned, within the City of Plymouth.
With respect to your request for information on the proposed
North Hennepin Trail Corridor as it runs along the east side
of Medicine Lake, I can tell you that we share the City of
Plymouth's desire to see the trail constructed. We have sub-
mitted to the Metropolitan Council a request to include in the
Regional Capital Improvement Program, acquisition funds in the
amount of $1.3 million in the 1988-89 bienium and development
funds in the amount of $1.95 million in the 1990-91 bienium.
This funding would allow us to complete the Trail Corridor
from Elm Creek Park Reserve to Theodore Wirth Park including
the stretch along the east side of Medicine Lake. Any effort
by the City of Plymouth to' support our capital improvement
requests with the Metropolitan Council would be greatly appre-
ciated. As you know, the Metropolitan Council's Regional Park
Board Program is our primary source of capital funds.
If the City of Plymouth should find that this schedule is not
sufficiently timely it is conceivable that Hennepin Parks might
consider a proposal whereby the City would fund the construction
of the trail with reimbursement by our agency at such time as
Metro funds are received. In any event we will be for certain
coordinating the trail improvements with your City staff as the
planning process advances. Eric Blank of your Parks and Recreation
Department has been given a copy of the most recent planning
documents regarding trail location. If I can be of any further
assistance in this matter please do not hesitate to contact me.
S3*_ri;erely,
lRbert M. Wicklund
Central Division Manager
cc: V. J. Hartenburg, Superintendent
H. M. Jessen, Associate Superintendent
J.W. Christian, Director of Operations
CITY OF PLYMOUTH _T \ \ Cti_
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special meeting of the City Council of
the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 12th day of August 1985.
The following members were present: Mavor Davenport, Councilmembers Neils,
Schneider and Vasiliou
The following members were absent: Councilmember Crain
Councilmember Schneider introduced the following Resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 85- 613
A RESOLUTION ENCOURAGING THE HENNEPIN COUNTY PARK RESERVE DISTRICT
TO PROCEED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE REGIONAL TRAIL ALONG
EAST MEDICINE LAKE BOULEVARD BETWEEN 13TH AVENUE AND 36TH AVENUE NORTH
WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth has received a substantial number of complaints from
Plymouth residents living along East Medicine Lake Boulevard with respect to
pedestrian and bicycle traffic hazards along East Medicine Lake Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Plymouth desires to minimize pedestrian and
vehicular traffic hazards; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan for the Hennepin County Park Reserve District calls
for the construction of a regional trail along East Medicine Lake Boulevard between
13th Avenue and 36th Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the hazards associated with the usage of East Medicine Lake Boulevard by
pedestrians and motorists requires prompt consideration of trail improvements to
adequately separate motorized and non -motorized vehicles and pedestrians;
NOH', THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Plymouth,
Minnesota, that it should and hereby does strongly encourage the Hennepin County Park
Reserve District to proceed with construction of the regional trail between 13th and
36th Avenues along East Medicine Lake Boulevard; and
FURTHER, that such improvements should be coordinated with the City's Director of
Public Works and Park and Recreation Director in order that such trail improvements
be complementary to the anticipated road improvements northerly of 26th Avenue; and
FURTHER, that the City Council requests from the Hennepin County Park Reserve
District a schedule showing the anticipated design and construction schedule for this
regional trail in order that safety hazards outlined above may be mitigated.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
Mayor Davenport , and upon vote being taken thereon, t
following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Davenport, Councilmembers Neils,
Schneider and Vasiliou
The following voted against or abstained: None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF
PLYMOUTR
U
July 31, 1985
Memo to: Jim Willis
From: Maria Vasiliou
1-`�b
Jim, would you please review the correspondence policy/practice/procedure
for my benefit. Specifically, I'm interested in knowing the routing pro-
cedures, what "qualifies" a memo for inclusion or exclusion from routing
and what determines what's in the informational packet.
Also, I would appreciate your input on the procedure you and your staff
use for answering the person who requested information in the first place.
The example we're most familiar with is the McDonald's memo.
The confusion for me stems from memos I have sent requesting information
or follow-up that I don't get back through what I would call a regular channel.
I'm also concerned about my memos being distributed to persons other than those
called out, yet I don't received copies of "other" correspondence that goes
through the system and most important of all, out to the public.
If you have questions or need clarification please give me a call. Thanks.
cc: Mayor Davenport
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
MEMO
August 2, 1985
Maria Vasiliou
Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manage `rk
DULY 31 MEMORANDUM
I have received your duly 31 memorandum which asks for a clarification
on various issues relating to distribution of Council correspondence.
As you know, dim is out of town until August 22, so I thought I would
provide you with my perspective on the matter. I must caution, though
that dim may have a different perspective or additional comments to
make. I have therefore placed a copy of your memorandum in suspense
so that he has the opportunity to respond when he returns.
We do not have a formal written correspondence policy practice or
procedure. Instead, incoming mail is reviewed by either dim or I.
Where it is believed that a piece of information, complaint, compli-
ment, or question would be of interest to various members of the
Council, we routinely include it in the Manager's information memo-
randum to all Council members. If we believe that the information is
extremely sensitive, distribution will normally be limited to all
Council members only separate from the information memorandum.
Likewise, if a member of the Council requests a clarification or
information, we will normally copy other members of the Council since,
in most cases, other members will have a similar interest in the
issue. The McDonald's landscape issue is a good example of this
situation. It is our intent to provide all Council members infor-
mation on pertinent issues. As such, we would not intentionally
exclude one Council member or another from information which we
believe is important. When in doubt, we have tried to error on the
side of sharing too much, rather than too little information. If the
Council believes that this is an inappropriate position, or that a
formalized policy is necessary, we could certainly discuss this matter
further at an upcoming special meeting.
FB:Jm
cc: Mayor Davenport
S/F 8/23
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
MEMO
DATE: August 26, 1985
TO: Maria Vasiliou
FROM: James G. Willis, City Manager
SUBJECT COMMUNICATIONS
Maria, I apologize for being so late in responding to your July 31
memo. I think Frank in his August 2 memo pretty well covered this
subject, but perhaps I can highlight a couple of points.
The Council information memorandum was established a couple of years
ago as a means of trying to share information with the Council in a
more organized fashion. Prior to that time, far less information was
shared with the Council because it had been presumed that council
members were not interested in much of the day-to-day or routine type
of correspondence and information which the office receives. With
changes in the City Council composition, however, it became apparent
that council members did desire more information and a better
"feeling" of what was occurring in the community. The information
memo was developed to respond to that need. Initially, I included
information which I felt council members may be interested in.
Subsequently, staff members began sharing information with me which
they themselves felt I would like to share with council members, and
ultimately, council members, themselves, occasionally provided infor-
mation which they felt should be shared with other council members.
The collective result is the present information memorandum.
Whether or not a particular item is included in the information
memorandum is largely subjective, although If there is a question, I
will include it. Occasionally, council members suggest that there is
too much information. I would rather error on the side of providing
too much, rather than too little, because the council members can skip
over the information they don't desire to read. The only items which
I will exclude involve items which, from my perspective, are not
appropriate to share publicly. Such items would include some corres-
pondence from the City Attorney or others dealing with legal matters,
items involving property acquisition or other information which is
deemed to be private under the Data Privacy Act. This information is
shared uniformly with all council members, although it is done outside
the context of the regular information memorandum. The information
memorandum, as you may be aware, is available to the chairs of the
Planning Commission and Park and Recreation Advisory Commission, as
well as the media and City department heads.
August 26, 1995
Page 2
Normally, the person who requests information from myself or through
me from another staff person, will receive a written response via the
information memorandum. The question here is largely one of timing.
Depending on when a response to an inquiry is prepared, I will most
often have it distributed along with the information memorandum as the
alternative would be to mail it to the council member and also share
it through the information memorandum. Given the fact that the
information memos are distributed directly to council members' homes,
I am concerned that they will frequently beat a memo distributed by
mail, again depending on the timing of mailing.
With regard to the "McDonald's" memo, Sara McConn developed that
memorandum following your verbal comments at the council meeting.
Responding to inquiries raised by council members at council meetings,
it is again a judgement call. Depending on how the inquiry is made,
determines largely how it is responded to. For example, if the
council member asks that the staff specifically provide a response to
a particular subject, and in the absence of direction to the contrary
from the balance of the Council, we will address the issue. On the
other hand, if the nature of the inquiry is more in the form of a
off -hand remark, a formal response may not be prepared. If I am alert
enough to detect in the remark some underlying issue which I believe
should be responded to, then I would, of course, respond as noted
above.
Maria, your memo seems to suggest that you believe we might improve
the means by which we follow up on council member's requests and/or in
the distribution of those items. I would welcome any suggestions you
have for improving our present procedures as I recognize they are not
perfect.
Because it is my policy to share all information with all members of
the council on an equal and uniform basis via the information memo, it
may be difficult to address your concern about your memos being
distributed to persons other than those specifically called out. To
the best of my knowledge, you receive the same information,
correspondence, etc., at the same time and in the same format as other
members of the Council. That is my practice. If you are aware of
instances where this is not being done, I would appreciate being
informed so that practice can be promptly corrected.
Again, I apologize for this being late, but your memo came while I was
on vacation. Let's have a cup of coffee and go over your concerns
when it is convenient.
JGW:jm
cc: Mayor Davenport
t
CITY C)�
PLYMOUTR
September 3, 1985
Mr. Jerry Sisk
17015 28th Avenue North
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Dear Jerry:
I wish to thank you for calling to our attention the damage to the trailway
along Dunkirk Lane North of 22nd Avenue. After locating the damage and invest-
igating the matter, we learned that the damage was caused by the contractor
installing the trail within the park south of the Mapledell Addition. This
contractor was required to repair the trail and they have completed this work.
Again let me thank you for calling this to our attention.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
FGM:kh
cc: Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager (85-52)
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
= r , Qt'-
� �s a
�vNJ
else aa��,
o -,,vv/ eve
►vi a U e �?s � � � ��Q
dl, ,?a v ve c%
y
J `.5 6 j
_ Veh��/LS
pu •/t •_••��J
�(_ •cpF I
• • (._" tee.• • Q ���V �4 5 �1 a �/�! g
40
4p 41 1
%. - FF :.. e C.— -.F �-- - 6:. C-1 Teas
L04O4
- �-
� �s a
�vNJ
else aa��,
o -,,vv/ eve
►vi a U e �?s � � � ��Q
dl, ,?a v ve c%
y
J `.5 6 j
_ Veh��/LS
pu •/t •_••��J
�(_ •cpF I
• • (._" tee.• • Q ���V �4 5 �1 a �/�! g
40
4p 41 1
%. - FF :.. e C.— -.F �-- - 6:. C-1 Teas
August 27, 1985
Theodore J. Hoffman, P.E.
Chief Design Engineer
Department of Transportation
Hennepin County
320 Washington Avenue South
Hopkins, MN 55343-8468
RE: Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Hennepin County Project 9/6901; S.A.P. 27-609-16
Reconstruction CSAH 9 in Plymouth
Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 13013-1
Dear Mr. Hoffman:
`� b
Metropolitan Council
300 Metro Square Building
Seventh and Robert Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Telephone (612) 291-6359
At its meeting August 22, 1985, the Metropolitan Council considered the EAW for
reconstruction of CSAH 9 in the City of Plymouth. This consideration was based
on the following statement from the Consent List which was approved by the
Council.
The county has submitted an EAW for reconstruction of CSAH 9 from I-494 to
Nathan Lane in Plymouth. 1.8 miles will be constructed on new alignment
while .3 miles from I-494 to W. Medicine Lake Road will be constructed on
the existing alignment. Much of the new right of way has been acquired
since the early 1970's through dedication. A portion of the new roadway
passes through Medicine Lake Regional Park which is consistent with the
Park Master Plan. A portion of the road also crosses a wetland near Lost
Lake. This will be mitigated by increasing the size of the wetland south
of the road. The EAW is accurate and complete for purposes of Council
review and an EIS is not needed insofar as regional plans and policies are
concerned.
The Council approved this staff report as its comments on the EAW.
Sincerely,
S" 4�
Sandra S. Ga
Chair
SSG: Sam
cc: Greg Downing, Environmental Review Coordinator, Environ. Rev. Sec., EQB
James Willis, Manager, City of Plymouth
Connie Koz-lak, Metropolitan Council Staff
An Equal Opportunity Employer
August 23, 1985
Al Cottingham, Associate Planner
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
RE: City of Plymouth
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review
Trammell Crow Company
Southwest Corner I-494 and County Road 9
Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 12393-7
Dear Mr. Cottingham:
1 a c_,
V,etrocic�ltar r,Ounc
30/'.'P.'etrc SouarF 5utic!nc
Seventn anc: Rober. Stree,s
St. Paul, Mmnescta 5510
Telephone (6121 291-635G
At its meeting on August 22, 1985, the Metropolitan Council considered
above amendment to Plymouth's comprehensive plan. This consideration
on the following statement from the Consent List which was adopted by
Council:
the
was based
the
This plan amendment proposes to change the planned land use of a six -acre
parcel of land south of Hennepin County Road 9 and west of I-494. The
area was originally planned for limited business. The property adjacent
to this site is developed in industrial use. In order to expand the
existing industrial area, the city has been requested to replan the six -
acre limited business area to allow industrial development. The site in
question is within the sewer service area, and this change will not have
an adverse impact on local or regional sewer systems. The regional trans-
portation system in this area will not be affected by this change in land
use. The Plymouth amendment is in conformity with metropolitan system
plans, consistent with the other chapters of the Metropolitan Development
Guide and compatible with the plans of adjacent communities.
The Council adopted the above statement as the Council's review of this pro-
posed amendment to the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan.
Sincerely,
Sandra S. G�rdebring
Chair
SSG:Sam
Attachment
cc: James Willis, Manager, City of Plymouth
Ray Odde, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
Thomas Caswell, Metropolitan Council Staff
Municipal File
An Equal Onoortunity Ennplover
z gad.
CITY Or -
September 4, 1985 PumbUTR
Mr. Thomas Benshop
10601 Olsen Memorial Highway
Plymouth, MN 55441
RE School District Boundaries
Dear Mr. Benshop:
This letter is written in response to the discussions of last week at which time I
explained to you that Hennepin County offices contacted Blair Tremere, Director of Com-
munity Development to inform us that the Lot Division/Consolidation approved by the
City Council could not be executed as approved by the City. The reason is that the
School District boundary line cuts through this property near the west end, and unless
the location of the line is changed, there will be two tax parcels -- one in each
School District.
Fortunately, the line does not affect any building, but rather cuts through the west
parking lot for the proposed new building.
Consistent with our conversation of August 29, 1985, enclosed please find information
relating to petitioning a change in the School District boundaries.
Previously, when we have faced a situation where land is bisected by School District
boundaries we have been able to come to a mutual agreement upon discussing the situa-
tion in further detail. We suggest that the boundary be modified to follow your
westerly property lines.
Minnesota Statute, Section 122.21 establishes that the property owner must submit a
petition to the Hennepin County Board asking that the District boundary lines be alter-
ed. You are required to provide reasons for the proposed change with the fact showing
that granting of the petition will not reduce the size of any District to less than
four sections. Once the petition is submitted to the auditor who will present it to
the County Board, they have six months to issue an Order either granting or denying the
petition. We have found that if the land owner and School Districts involved are in
agreement with the proposed revisions, the Hennepin County Board has responded
affirmatively.
It would be appropriate for you to contact the School Districts involved in order to
discuss potential resolution of the situation, and to coordinate the processing of the
petition to the Hennepin County Board. Dr. Roger Adams is the Acting Superintendent of
Independent School District 284 (210 Highway 101, P.O. Box 660, Wayzata, MN 55391-
9990); and, you should contact the Administrator of Hopkins School District 270 (1001
Highway 7, Hopkins, MN 55343).
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD. PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
\aC
Page two
Mr. Thomas Benshop
September 4, 1985
If we can answer any questions, or be of further assistance in resolving this
situation, please feel free to contact our office. We are interested in seeing this
situation resolved expeditiously so that the finalization of the Lot
Division/Consolidation can be made. If you feel it would be appropriate for us to be
involved in correspondence and/or meetings with the School Districts, please feel free
to contact us.
Sincerely,
Sara L. McConn
Community Development Coordinator
SM/gw
cc: Blair Tremere, Director Community Development
File 85029
ENCS
Wr1
- *
I
�•
=
l
.-.
N
a
i
s
17140 14th Ave North
Plymouth, MN 55447
September 3, 1985
Mr. Frank Boyles, City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Boyles:
In reply to your letter of the 27th of August, just two
comments:
1. There are many other prohibited business's in this area of the city.
A towing service, A delivery service, A cement contractor, etc. that
go on 52 weeks a year dispite complaints. Thus my opinion that Plymouth
has one set of rules for some, an another set for others. Its a shame
that I will not be able to support a Plymouth businessperson an will
have to buy produce from a non-resident who's sorce of supply is the
Mpls. Farmers Market. We should be open minded here.
2. I am sure glad however that the city staff and council has a "desire to
sensitive to the complaints of Plymouth residents". I will sure share
that statement with my other neighbors who opposed the Johnson project.
Maybe the residents who have complained about the Oakwood playground,
the School warehouse, Dunkirk Lane, Zinnia Lane would be interested in
the cities desire also. This city government is only interested in one
thing, BUSINESS, they forget who elected them to office. Maybe some
November this will result in a change. If you leaders were home on
Monday nights watching the council meeting on cable TV maybe you would
see just how many citizens leave that council chamber happy. It not
very many. You all talk about sensitive but when citizens disagree in
groups of 80 an 100 this is not "small potatoes".. I am not the only
one who feels this way either. I think you may see this come November.
S'nc rely yours,
George F.1 Wilson
August 27, 1985
Mr. George Wilson
17140 - 14th Avenue No.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Wilson:
CITY OF
PLYMOUTR
=- \ Q c,
Your August 25 letter expresses concern about the City's action with respect
to the Dave Johnson platting request at County Road 6 and Highway 101 and
about our enforcement action against a vegetable stand located at 10th
Avenue North and Highway 101. Greater familiarity with the City Code would
be of great assistance to you in understanding both matters.
As you are aware, the City Council approved a final plat and plan for the
Dave Johnson petition, including a rezoning request. In response to
anticipated traffic problems, the Council required that the proposed
southern access to the plat be aligned with 14th Avenue to the west. The
Council also provided for certain other curb cut restrictions in accordance
with a professional traffic engineer's recommendation. The traffic study
examined the traffic conditions on Highway 101, recognizing it will continue
to carry increased traffic, as well as the impacts of traffic from the "Red
Owl" site. You may wish to review a copy of this report which is on file in
the City Center. Moreover, to respond to resident concerns in the vicinity,
the Council required that buffering be installed on the south and east of
the project to a 90% year around opacity.
With respect to the "Mom and Pop" vegetable stand, it may not be licensed as
a transient merchant since it does not meet ordinance criteria. Therefore
it is prohihited. We received a complaint from others living in the area.
As I am sure you can appreciate, our desire is to be sensitive to the
complaints of Plymouth residents.
If you have any other questions about
actions with respect to the vegetable
Cottingham at 559-2800.
Yours v tr ,
Frank Boyles
Assistant City Manager
FB:jm
cc: Mayor do City Council
Al Cottingham
either the Johnson development or our
stand, please feel free to contact Al
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
17140 14th, Ave. N.
Plymouth, MN 55447
August 25, 1985
City Manager
City of -Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Sir:
As I read more and more about Plymouth City
Goverment, I have more and more trouble understanding dust how
it operates. It looks more and more like we seem to have rules
and laws that apply to some an not to others. I might not agree
with everything the city councel desides, but for the most part
can live with most of them. I hope also that you might not
agree with my feelings on a certain item, but can live with my
right to disagree.
I cannot understand however how you can ignore the
input to you and the city councel concerning traffic at 14th
Avenue North and Highway 101. You tell us traffic is not a
problem, not a concerr:! Yet now not Z weeks later to have taken
steps to close down a little (Mom &< Pop) vegetable stand at
10th Avenue North- and Highway 101. Four blocks way. You claim
traffic problems at the stand. Explain to me please how a
vegetable stand that is only open a few months a year can be a
problem but a rezone to commerical at Herb's Corner is not a
traffic problem. Does this mean,that if when Herb's Corner
opens an traffic is a problem the city will shut it down some
Wednesday Morning? I think: not!
I have been stopping at that little stand now for two
years. I have never seen any traffic problem. I have never- seen
anymore that one or two cars there. Some people walk or bike
there. Next somebody will complain about to many bikes on 101
or 10th Avenue North. But to close this stand down for traffic
or anyother reason is wrong! There is no problem here.
Si cerely yours,
George F. Wilson
1