The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCouncil Information Memorandum 02-07-2003rip DummY FEBRUARY 79 2003 12 meeting agenda Page 3 Environmental Quality Committee (EQC) February ........................................ Park & Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC) February 13 meeting agenda .......................... Page 4 March and April 2003 Page 5 Official Meeting Calendars for February, p ................................................... Tentative list of agenda items for future City Council meetings ..................................................... Page 11 NEWSARTICLES, RELEASES, PUBLICATIONS, ETC. page 12 Minnesota Transportation Alliance Federal Update...................................................................... City news release about Youth Advisory Council Co—Chair Jean Yin, who has been named a candidate in the 2003 Presidential Scholars Program ..................................................... Page 16 Home Free Community Programs First Quarter 2003 statistical report ....................................... Page 18 STAFF REPORTS hair and Vice—Chair for the Planning Commission ............................ Page 20 Notice of appointment of C Summary of City Hall counter visits through First Quarter 2003 .................................................. Page 21 Summary of City Hall switchboard phone calls through First Quarter 2003 ................................. Page 21 CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS POLICY—CORRESPONDENCE Letter to Michael Stanga regarding parking at the LifeTime Fitness/Ice Center page 23 complex. A copy of Michael's original correspondence is attached ................. Summary of 2003 correspondence tracking................................................................................... Page 25 CORRESPONDENCE Letter to the State Department of Administration from Community Development Director Anne Hurlburt with comments on the proposed amendments to rules governing buildingpage 26 official certification.......................................................................................................... CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMO February 7, 2003 Page 2 Letter to MnDOT Metro Traffic officials requesting a speed zone determination study on County Road 47 from Highway 101 to County Road 61 ........................................................... Page 31 Letter from Metropolitan Council Chair Peter Bell to Leonard and Judy Luedke responding to a request that Plymouth amend its comprehensive plan to allow development of the area in northwest Plymouth affected by the installation of the Elm Creek Interceptor. Correspondence from the Luedkes and City staff are also included.................... Page 35 ...................................................................................................................... Update on Egan Park plansPage 40 ............................................................................................................ Thank—you letter from the Plymouth Crime & Fire Prevention Fund to Councilmembers for work in adopting the charitable gambling ordinance............................................................... Page 41 Letters to Cub Foods Manager Robin Gault and to resident Bruce Johnson regarding Mr. Johnson's complaint about parking lot lighting at the Vicksburg Cub Foods ................................ Page 42 Letter to residents regarding an application for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment from Association Free Lutheran Bible College (2003009) ........................................ Page 45 Letter to residents regarding a request for a Conditional Use Permit from Howard and Julie Tripp (2002153) Page 46 ..................................................................................................................... Letter to residents regarding a request for variance for Dean Temple 2003005 Page 47 Letter to residents with notice of a request for sketch plan review by Kraus Anderson Realty (2002162)Page 48 ............................................................................................................................ LEGISLATIVE ITEMS League of Minnesota Cities Friday FAX....................................................................................... Page 49 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE Wednesday, February 12, 2003 Public Safety Training Room, Public Safety Building Aizenda Items• 7:00 PM Call to Order: Chair: Kathy Osborne • Review of Agenda • Approval of Minutes (attached) • Guest Introduction & General Forum Guests may address the EQC about any item not contained on the regular agenda. A maximum of 15 minutes is allotted for the forum. If the ll 15 minutes are not needed or theforum, the EQC will continue with theagenda 7:05 PM Election of Officers: Chair & Vice Chair 7:15 PM Up -dates: ❖ EQC's 2002 Annual Report & 2003 Annual Plan. A Final report has been prepared based on EQC's earlier comments. The report will be forwarded to the council for their review and approval. Ron Q. ❖ 2003 Environmental Fair & Expo. Margie v 7:30 PM Solid Waste Program 2002 Annual Report & 2003 Work Plan. As requested by EQC, staff has prepared an annual report and work plan, which will be presented at the meeting. Kris H. 8:10 PM Developing a Green Communities Program Memo Councilmember Ginny Black has prepared a report to consider developing Green Communities Program as part of the Council's Goals and Priority. Councilmember Ginny B. 8:30 PM Flexible Fuel Vehicle Discussion: As part of the 2003 annual plan, EQC has scheduled the Flexible Fuel Vehicle (FFV) Discussion for the month of Feb. The purpose of the discussion is to better understand the concept FFV and to identify potential opportunities. Terry J. 8:45 PM Plan for next meeting: March 12, 2003! Public Safety Training Room The following items were included in the EQC 2003 annual plan, however, EQC members may also help to determine the agenda for the next meeting: ❖ Meeting to start at 6:00 pm, for new members introduction. ❖ EPA Phase 11 ❖ Met -Council Grant Update ❖ 2004 Annual Plan (Budget Considerations) ❖ Plymouth Beach Closing Policy •'• Mosquito Control ❖ Phosphate Free Ordinance & Management Update 9:00 PM ADJOURNED Supplementary Agenda Items: ❖ none 3 C\Documents and Settings\khoffman.CTTYCENTEA.000\Local SettingsWemporary Internet Fi1es\0LK2D\021203 .doc Regular Meeting of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission February 13, 2003, 7 p.m. AGENDA 1. Call to Order a. Appoint Chair and Vice Chair 2. Approval of Minutes 3. Visitor Presentations a. Athletic Associations b. Staff -Diane Evans c. Others 4. Report on Past Council Action a. Approved facility rental policies and fees b. Approved 2003 park capital improvement projects .5. Unfinished Business a. Approve 2002 annual report & 2003 work plan b. Name for Environmental Park C. d. 6. New Business a. b. C. 7. Commission Presentation 8. Staff Communication 9. Adjourn ME OFFICIAL CITY MEETINGS February 2003 Sunday Monday I Tuesday Wednesday I Thursday Friday Saturday Jan 2003 Mar 2003 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 1 1 2:00 PM -7:00 PM FIRE & ICE FESTIVAL, 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Parkers Lake 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7:30 PM 7:00 PM 7:00 PM HUMAN YOUTH PLANNING RIGHTS ADVISORY COUNCIL, COMMISSION, Council Chambers COMMISSION - Council Chambers Council Chambers 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 7:00 PM HRA STAKEHOLDERS MEETING, Plymouth Creek Center 12:00 PM GRAND OPENING FOR THE RESERVETRANSIT STATION drus CO PM SPECIAL DISGUSTS PARK NG. CAPITAL PROJECTS, Public Safety Training Rowe P:00 PM REGULAR CIIL MEETG, OUNN.e :00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION: COMMISSIONERS ORIENTATION, Medicine Lake Room :00 PM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMIT -TEE ESC). Pubik Safety ralnui Room 7:00 PM PARK & ADVISORY COMMISSION (PRAC), Council Chambers 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 PRESIDENTS DAY - City Offices Closed 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION, CounciIC Chambers 7:00 PM HOUSING & rNT AUTHORITY HRA), Methane Lake Room 6:00 PM SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING: GOALS & PRIORITIES, Plymouth Creek Center 23 24 25 26 27 28 7:00 PM PARTNERS IN PREVENTION FORUM, Plymouth Creek y Center 1AM -1'00 PM WINWEST STA OF HE CITY LU ON, a.wcc.nw 0 PM SPECCIAL UNCIL MEEfINo: SOCLATOHONN R QUEST R. THIRD ICE SHEET, bw S.fery Tnming Room I 7:00 PM PLYMOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON TRANSIT (PACT) - Medicine Lake Room LMC CONFERENCE FOR EXPERIENCED OFFICIALS, Doubletree Park Place Hotel, St. Louis Park 00 PM REGULAR OUNCIL MEETING, nal CMmbM modifiedon2/7/2003 vI OFFICIAL CITY MEETINGS March 2003 Sunda Monda Tuesda Wednesda Thursday Friday Saturday 1 Feb 2003 Apr 2003 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S LMC 1 1 2 3 4 5 CONFERENCE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 FOR 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 EXPERIENCED OFFICIALS, 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Doubletree Park 23 24 25 26 27 28 27 28 29 30 Place Hotel, St. Louis Park 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 5:30 PM YOUTH ADVISORY 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION, 7:00 PM HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - Council Chambers COUNCIL TOWN FORUM, Plymouth Creek Center Council Chambers Ash Wednesday Day 7:00 PM PARK d RECREATION COMMISSION R(FRAC), Medicine m (First of Lent) La onlyo) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 7:00 PM REGULAR 7:00 PM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE COUNCIL (EQC), Pubilc Safety MEETING, Council Training Room Chambers 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 7:30 PM YOUTH ADVISORY 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION, 7:00 PM HOUSING a REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (HRA),Medidne Laka Room COUNCIL, Council Chambers Council Chambers 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 11:46 NA LYMOUfRMTKA 7:00 PM BUSINESS COUNCIL, BORN Conlere�me Room, PLYMOUTH 0IIIDC.6—P.rk—y, 4th ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON :00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, Council TRANSIT (PACT) - Medicine Lake Room hambers 30 31 7:30 PM YOUTH ADVISORY COUNCIL, Council Chambers modified on 2/6/2003 OFFICIAL CITY MEETINGS April 2003 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 2 3 4 S 7:00 PM 7:00 PM HUMAN PLANNING RIGHTS COMMISSION, COMMISSION - Council Chambers Council Chambers 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 DAYLIGHT SAVINGS COMMENCES- set clocks ahead 1 hour 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, Council Chambers 7:00 PM EVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE (EQC), Plymouth Creek Center 7:00 PM PARK & REC ADVISORY COMMISSION (PRAC), Council CChambers PRIMAVERA PLYMOUTH FINE ARTS COUNCIL SHOW Plymouth Creek Center PRIMAVERA PLYMOUTH FINE ARTS COUNCIL SHOW Plymouth Creek Center PRIMAVERA PLYMOUTH FINE ARTS COUNCIL SHOW Plymouth Creek Center 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 7:30 PM YOUTH DVISORY COUNCIL, Council Chambers PRIMAVERA PLYMOUTH FINE ARTS COUNCIL SHOW Plymouth Creek tenter 7:00 PM BOARD F EQUALIZATION Council Chambers PRIMAVERA PLYMOUTH FINE ARTS COUNCIL SHOW Plymouth y Creek tenter Passover begins at sunset 8:00 AM -1:30 PM - HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION STUDENT WORKSHOP, Plymouth Creek Center 7:00 PVM MOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT UTHORITY (HRA), Medicine Lake Room Good Friday 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Easter 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, Council Chambers '00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION, Council Chambers :00 PM PLYMOUTH ADVISORY OMMITTEE ON TRANSIT (PACT) - Medicine Lake Room 27 20 7:30 PM YOUTH ADVISORY COUNCIL, Council Chambers 29 1 C0 AM RnM CITY EMPLOYEE RE0ILUNCH, Plymouth Creek carte 11:45 MOU PLYMOUTH-MTKA BUSINESS heratoEn R'dgedale IL' 'DO PM RECONVENE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION Council Chambers ✓ 0 Mar 2003 S M T W T F S May 2003 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 modified on 2/6/2003 9 Tentative Schedule for City Council Agenda Items February 25 • Jake Braking of Trucks • Report on control of buckthorn in City -owned spaces • Accept Annual Reports and Approve Work Plans for City Boards and Commissions • Public hearing on proposed assessments of 2002 Weed Eradication and Destruction, Roll 2 • Public hearing on proposed assessment of 2002 Removal and Destruction of Diseased Trees, Roll 2 • Approve increase in engineering fees for City's approved consulting engineering firms • Weed Mowing issues March I I • 2002 Unaudited Financial Report and proposed fund transfers March 25 Feb 04 03 01:25p LJR,Inc. 6516904094 p.2 "A rawlAM N _—� _-_L`ISF r In Motion News February 3, 2003 — Page I of 4 trLg:h`w wiy.3love.,I is eottr In Motion News is a weekly publication delivered by MOVE during the legislative session designed to provide MOVE members, citizens and public officials with a timely review of legislative activities related to transportation policy and funding. The South/West Metro's transportation systems are experiencing gridlock and a significant and timely infusion of public investment is critical to ensure the continued viability of these communities. Call us at (612) 819-1743 or email us atit�<<<mo•, er::n c;1m for more information. House Happenings Ne►v Report focuses on Municipal Street funding concerns: Legislators reviewed a report conducted by the Minnesota Transportation Policy Institute that focused on the funding of city streets. There are approximately 19,000 miles of city streets statewide, of which only 2,800 (15%) receive funding from the state's highway fund. The remaining miles are supported primarily by local property taxes and street assessments. i- State funds for City Roads not keeping up: Minnesota cities received 9% of the state funds dedicated to highways and bridges, or about $100 million annually, while they spend approximately $250 million per year for road maintenance, construction and reconstruction projects. The gas tax and vehicle license plate revenues primarily support the state's road and bridge projects fund. ; Increase in Local Road Traffic: Vehicle miles traveled statewide have increased 18% from the years between 1995 and 2000, while city/state aid streets have seen about a 30% increase. The report by the Transportation Policy Institute attributes this increase to motorists using local roads to avoid clogged state arteries, particularly in congested portions of the Twin Cities and other metro areas. Senate Snippets Consultant Contracting Procedures Scrutinized: Both the Senate and House Transportation Committees reviewed Mn/DOT contracting processes with senior department officials and representatives of the Department of Administration. The hearings were done in response to findings presented in several newspaper articles published in the .Star Tribune over the past several weeks. While the Department of Administration has overall responsibility for "signing off' on contracts with consultants, officials from both MnDOT and Admin indicated that the existing contracting laws are often cumbersome and time-consuming, leading to inefficiencies and higher costs on projects that require a speedier timeline. :- Not _just LRT. • The Star Tribune and Pioneer Press newspaper articles tended to focus on the Hiawatha Light Rail Transit project, which was under a very tight time schedule and budget. However, both papers noted that similar contracting problems occurred during the past several years on numerous road -building and reconstruction projects as well. )Z/ Feb 04 03 01:25p LJR,Inc. 6516904094 p.3 A Fair Balance between Accountability and Efficiency: A review by the Legislative Auditor found some improprieties overall but no clear violations of Minnesota laws. In testimony before both committees, he noted that contracting issues are a dilemma faced by public entities needing to balance "accountability" and "efficiency". It was also noted that in many instances, consultants begin work prior to having a contract in place and do so while accepting responsibility for costs associated with that work until the final contract has been fully executed. r lWinnesota's Debt -Capacity Ability: Senate Capital Investment committee members reviewed the state's debt management practices with Finance Department staff last week and found that the state has a significant amount of debt capacity available and the current amount falls well within the management guidelines in place. This is good news for a further discussion of bonding for highway and bridge projects. Current guidelines suggest that the state's debt service level should be less than 3% of the general fund and less than 2.5% of total personal income. During the 2004-05 biennium, Finance Department officials are predicting these figures will be 2.35% and 1.65% respectively. Administration Announcements ❖ The Pawlenty Administration announced that the Commissioners of Transportation and Administration, Carol Molnau and Brian Lamb, will form a joint oversight committee that is charged with reviewing past state contracting practices while at the same time establishing new internal guidelines and recommendations for changes to existing laws. Commissioners Molnau and Lamb wasted no time in beginning this process and met last week before legislative committees to outline the process they will use to review contracts between the two agencies. MNDOT Machinations ❖ Officials from both MnDOT and the Department of Administration are indicating that the new joint review/oversight committee that has been established by Governor Pawlenty will actively engage frontline staff members to ensure that the many nuances of current laws and rules are thoroughly digested and understood by all staff in both agencies. It is expected that a number of procedural modifications and legislative recommendations will be forthcoming in the next few months as a result of these actions. MO vE Memo How to repay Trunk Highway Bonds? The Minnesota State Constitution requires that any bonds sold for trunk highway purposes be retired with funds from the Trunk Highway fund, thereby prohibiting the state's general fund from being used for this purpose. This leads state officials to their current predicament—in order to sell highway bonds MnDOT must use existing resources that have been dedicated to funding other projects to retire the new bonds, unless revenues to MnDOT are increased. 13 Feb 04 03 01:26p LJR,Inc. 6516904094 p.4 MOVE MESSAGE A significant number of legislators from MOVE areas are serving on transportation and bonding committees this year. We will be providing you with a list of those members in the weeks to come and encourage you to engage them in discussions regarding transportation funding and infrastructure needs important to you. As we noted last week, until public support for additional investment increases measurably, the administration and legislature will not act in a significant manner to increase transportation funding in the short or long term. The ongoing budget debate will dominate all legislative actions, including whether or not to increase funding for important state transportation facilities and regional roadway improvements. The lack of consensus on a "balanced" transportation system package, particularly one that does not increase revenues for transportation purposes, will stymie most efforts to increase funding this session. The lack of a workable solution means it is even more important to engage policymakers in a discussion of specific regional transportation concerns and to make them personal. MOVE plans to assist you in making your case to your representatives. The following notes regarding the gas tax should be enlightening and tend to be part of "transportation insider jargon". rnMR)Ol ation Facts --Believe it or Notl ! ALL ABOUT MINNESOTA'S GAS TAXES ➢ All proceeds from the gas tax in Minnesota are dedicated only to roads and bridges that are part of the state aid highway system. Under state law, taxes on gasoline can only be levied on a statewide basis and used to pay for "state projects". )> The current 20 -cent gas tax has not been increased since 1988. It is now worth about 13.7 cents in buying power (a 33% decrease in value) using 1988 dollars. If one adjusted the current gas tax of 20 cents per gallon for inflation since 1988, it would now be worth 29 cents per gallon. Insiders call this "indexing". r Wisconsin has indexed its gas tax since the early 1990s and its current tax is 27 cents per gallon of gas purchased. - Minnesota's gas tax revenues currently generate about $600 million per year statewide, but because of the decrease in "buying power" due to inflation since 1988, revenues are only purchasing about $400 million per year of goods and services for Minnesota's roads and bridges. i= A 10 -cent gas tax increase across statewide Minnesota would cost the owner of a vehicle that travels 12,000 miles per year and averages 20 mpg approximately $60 per year in additional fees. R. Feb 04 03 01:26p LJR,Inc. CAPITOL CHATTER 6516304034 p.5 Jin: Nobles, Minnesota Legislative Auditor, commented on MnDOT's violation of contracting rules and laws by noting that "if the speed limit was 35 miles per hour, MnDOT might have been going 40 to 45 mph". Transportation followers at the Capitol are beginning to worry whether a bonding bill will get passed this year at all, particularly if MnDOT has to find the funds in-house to pay for it (see page 1). Cutting an additional $20-$25 million out of the MnDOT budget on an annual basis to pay for future bonding would directly impact current maintenance operations or design and engineering efforts on other projects. Folks are beginning to wonder what the spring pothole season will bring, and are hoping that the snow will stay away (too late now). MnDOT officials assured House members that they "were not hiring any consultants to staff the new contracting review committee" in an appearance before the House Transportation Committee last week. MOVE needs new members! Callus at (612) 819-1743 or email to r ig _irtJG• E_Fid;','x n if you know of a company or individual who would like to receive In Motion as a nety member of MOVE. We etre slowly groiving but need your help to keep going, especially in these turbulent transportation funding times. / f City of Plymouth News Release For Immediate Release February 5, 2003 Contact: United States Department of Education Office of Public Affairs: (202) 401-1576 Contact for Jean Yin and parents, Hoke and Grace Yin: (763) 559-9379 LOCAL STUDENT JEAN YIN NAMED CANDIDATE IN PRESIDENTIAL SCHOLARS PROGRAM Jean Yin, a graduating senior at Wayzata High School, has been named one of more than 2,600 candidates in the 2003 Presidential Scholars Program. Yin serves on the City of Plymouth's Youth Advisory Council and the Wayzata/Plymouth Area Chemical Health Commission. As a candidate in the Presidential Scholars Program, Yin was selected from nearly 2.8 million students expected to graduate from U.S. high schools in 2003. Now in its 39`h year, inclusion in the Presidential Scholars Program is one of the highest honors bestowed upon graduating high school seniors. Scholars are selected on the basis of superior academic and artistic achievements, leadership qualities, strong character and involvement in community and school activities. The 2,600 candidates were selected for their exceptional performance on either the College Board SAT or the ACT Assessment. Further consideration is based on students' essays, self - assessments, descriptions of activities, school recommendations, and school transcripts. A distinguished panel of educators will review these submissions and select 500 semifinalists in early April 16 The Commission on Presidential Scholars, a group of some 32 eminent citizens appointed by the President, will make final selection of the Scholars. They will select one young man and one young woman from each state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and U.S. students living abroad; 15 students at -large; and up to 20 students from the creative and performing arts. The U.S. Department of Education will announce the Scholars in May. Scholars will be invited to Washington, DC, for several days in June to receive the Presidential Scholars medallion at a recognition ceremony and to participate in events and activities with their elected representatives, educators, and other leading individuals in public life. For more information about the Presidential Scholars program, parents and students can call the Presidential Scholars Office at (319) 341-2331, or send an e-mail to PSP@act.org. NOTE TO NEWS EDITORS: A complete list of candidates will be available on the program's web page at www.ed.gov/offices/OIIA/Recognition/PSP (case sensitive). Semifinalists will be announced early April and Scholars in May. News media without internet access may call (202) 401-1576 for a list of candidates by state. For more information about the student(s), contact the student(s) directly. I _� Home Free Community Programs 3409 Kilmer Lane N. Business (763) 545-7080 Plymouth, MN 55441 Crisis Line (763) 559-4945 Fax (763) 545-7071 11 r January 30, 2003;� 3 CO �(A Dwight Johnson, City Manager Jc" 3400 Plymouth Blvd - Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Mr. Johnson: I have enclosed the statistical report for the ist quarter of 2003. If you have any questions or comments please feel free to contact me. Thank you for your continued support to Home Free and Battered Women and their children. Si cerely, Cu,ulu Q�t1�iO�� Laura Landis Program Coordinator Home Free Community Program CC: Craig Gerdes, Chief of police Sgt. Lindman Elliot Knetsch, City Prosecutor Pat Murphy, Mission Inc. Mary Monteon, Home Free Nita Quinn, Home Free all CITY OF PLYMOUTH QUARTERLY REPORTS JANUARY 1, 2002 - DECEMBER 31, 2002 IST QTR 2ND QTR 3RD QTR 4TH QTR, YTD 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 Police Activities: Arrests 24 20 17 22 83 Dual Arrests 1 1 4 4j 10 Juvenile Arrests 1 0 3 2i 6 City Prosecution: Formal Complaint 161 12 21 91 58 Declined 01 0 0 0 0 Home Free Victim Services Provided: 3681 362 4011 480 i 1611 OFP's Written 101 11 14 14; 49 OFP's Granted 7 61 5 11 29 Harassment Orders Written 4 1 1 0 6 Harassment Orders Granted 1 1 2 0, 4 Safety Plans 12, 16 27 12! _ 67 Family Financial Assistance 3 6 2 51 16 Court Advocacy Provided 61 56 45 551 217 Systems Advocacy 501 411 43 49; 183 Transportation Provided ! 171 17 13 18i _ 65 Face -to -Face w/Information or referral 301 34 37 58 159 Phone w/Information or referral 991 88 101 1511 439 Letter w/Information or referral 53-681 99 85i 305 # of Support Groups 211 171 12 22! 72 UNDUPLICATED NUMBER SERVED: _ # of Women Sheltered 1 1 5 0; 7 # of Children Sheltered 01 0 6 0! 6 # of Women Attending Support Groups* 331 19 18 22i 92 # of Children in Support Group Childcare* 251 23 121 _ 22 62- # Victims Served in Community Programs ! 901 83, 94; 87 3_54 Total Unduplicated 1491 1261 135' 131' 541 "Support Group #'s include all cities j 19 DATE: February 6, 2003 TO: Judy Johnson, Mayor cc: Dwight Johnso , City Manager FROM: Anne Hurlbu*mmunity Development Director SUBJECT: Appointment of Planning Commission Chairperson and Vice Chairperson According to Section 305.03, Subd. 3. of the Plymouth City Code, the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson of the Planning Commission are appointed by the Commission from among the members of the Commission, subject to approval by the Mayor, for a term of one year. At their February 5, 2003 meeting the Commission selected Peggy Larson as Chairperson and Frank Weir as Vice Chairperson. On behalf of the Planning Commission, I am requesting that you indicate your approval of the appointments. memos\ahurlbur\pcchair2003. doc z v SERVICE COUNTER VISITS FOR ONE WEEK PERIOD J� "--" indicates no surveys were conducted. 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 1986 -- 953 690 677 1987 849 832 670 804 1988 853 1,180 894 -- 1989 1,278 1,406 1,203 1,047 1990 1,474 1,725 1,191 1,538 1991 1,444 1,338 1,194 946 1992 1,575 1,046 1,402 1,373 1993 -- -- 1,417 1,280 1994 1,167 1,493 994 794 1995 1,160 1,254 765 -- 1996 1,103 1,190 1,058 -- 1997 654 800 810 -- 1998 583 728 650 1,458 1999 -- -- -- -- 2000 902 530 893 929 2001 1,019 1,184 1,084 1,081 2002 1,047 1,416 1,082 1,041 20031 1,001 J� "--" indicates no surveys were conducted. PHONE CALLS FOR ONE WEEK PERIOD -2-2--- NOTE: DID System installed 4th Quarter 1989 "--" indicates no surveys were conducted. 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quartet 4th Quarter 1986 -- 4,534 3,848 3,391 1987 4,311 4,648 4,069 3,315 1988 3,639 4,942 4,156 -- 1989 4,901 5,235 4,593 2,284 1990 2,181 2,142 1,607 1,544 1991 1,613 1,406 1,389 -- 1992 1,265 1,907 1,795 1,617 1993 -- -- 1,295 1,294 1994 1,154 1,699 1,058 898 1995 1,502 1,117 1,148 -- 1996 1,282 1,154 1,234 -- 1997 1,002 1,108 554 -- 1998 485 707 641 422 1999 -- -- -- -- 2000 412 604 664 436 2001 474 831 732 651 2002,- 360 598 646 388 20031 386 -2-2--- NOTE: DID System installed 4th Quarter 1989 "--" indicates no surveys were conducted. February 3, 2003 CITY OF PUMOUTR Michael Stanga 6399 Juneau Lane N Maple Grove, MN 55369 Dear Michael: Your letter regarding parking at the Ice Center and LifeTime Fitness has been forwarded to me for review and comment. First, thank you for taking the time to write to the Mayor about this issue. Just to bring you up to date on where we're at — the Plymouth Ice Center and LifeTime Fitness, by code, requires 700 cars of total parking. With the final expansion we've done this summer, both in front of and behind the Ice Center and LifeTime, we now have 775 off—street parking stalls. There are also approximately 100 additional on—street parking stalls available for the Ice Center and LifeTime patrons to use. During the last two years, we've been monitoring the hockey games at the Ice Center and have had only one or two events where all of the available parking has been filled. Many people choose to park on the street, so they can get away faster after the game is over. The Ice Center is part of City Center zoning, where on—street parking is both allowed and encouraged by City ordinance. You will find that in front of the other businesses, such as the Mann Theater and Doolittle's Air Caf6, on—street parking is the norm. Michael, thanks again for taking the time to write to the Mayor, and good luck with your Boy Scouts Merit Badge. Sincerely, 6,&4 Eric Blank, Director Parks and Recreation EB/np cc: Mayor and Council �* Z3 PLYMOUTH A Beautiful Place to Live 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 • TELEPHONE (763) 509-5000 www.d.plymouth.mn.us Michael Stanga 6399 Juneau Lane North Maple Grove, MN 55311 Dear Mayor Jay 7-;e rn e y, I am writing this letter to inform you of a problem that has faced the city of Plymouth for quite some time. The parking problem at the Plymouth Ice Center/Lifetime Fitness needs to be worked out. Currently, there are a large number of cars that do not have space to park their vehicles because all of the parking spaces have been filled up. Many of the citizens that attend the Lifetime Fitness/Plymouth Ice Arena, have complained about this ongoing problem. Please send a reply, (It is mandatory for my Boy Scouts Citizenship in the Community Merit Badge) along with any plans to fix the Lifetime Fitness/Plymouth Ice Center problem. Sincerely, Michael Stanga Z 2s N rn m a- 0 o � a � o co c a „ � d 'al o cbf a o c 0 0� a A a co v v .b N N � � Ca w M � U y � o .O w v aj Q w C4 � N b U U C�. "y U N y N co A 5 w E H w a U U � C cnn a m C N V U 0 F b w a' CO N M 'ct h 10 ' . h 2s N rn m a- (9 February 3, 2003CITY C)F PUMOUTR Colleen Chirhart Department of Administration Building Codes and Standards Division 121 E. 7`h Place, Suite 408 St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 RE: Proposed Amendment to Rules Governing Building Official Certification, Minnesota Rules, chapter 1301.1201 Dear Ms. Chirhart: Thank you for the opportunity to present the following comments on the proposed amendment to the rules governing building official certification, Minnesota Rules chapter 1301.1201 at the February 4, 2003 public hearing. Plymouth recognizes that the legislation adopted in 2001 specifically requires the Commissioner of Administration to "by rule, establish a graduated schedule of administrative actions for violations of sections 16B.59 to 16B.75 and rules adopted under those sections." We appreciate the Department of Administration's willingness to remove certain proposed administrative actions from the rules that have been objected to by the League of Minnesota Cities, Plymouth and other cities, as we believe many of them interfere too much with the employment relationship between the city and certified building officials. However, even after the changes already agreed to have been made, we believe additional changes still can and should be made without violating the requirements of the legislation. While the law implies that the rules should provide for penalties short of suspensions and revocations, it is not prescriptive as to how many steps must be in the graduated schedule, nor does it state that certified building officials must be subjected to graduated steps far more intrusive in the employer/employee relationship that required for other regulated professions. Plymouth is particularly concerned as we employ a number of certified building officials, and require state certification as a condition of their employment. Not only would the proposed rules impose state supervision over our employees, potentially conflicting with City personnel policies and labor agreements, but they could have severe consequences on our ability to properly enforce the building code in our community. We offer the following specific comments and recommendations for changes in the proposed rules: Subpart S Plymouth concurs with the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) comments concerning items A (2), B(1) and B(2) and finds the changes that the Department of Administration has proposed to make 2.6 PLYMOUTH A Beautifu(Pface To Live 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 • TELEPHONE (763) 509-5000 OF ---*MW www.d.plymouth.mn.us Comments of City of Plymouth February 3, 2003 acceptable. In addition to these changes, we request that items B(3), B(4), C(1) and C(2) also be deleted. As a replacement, we recommend the addition of new item B(2) to read as follows: " The commissioner may reduce the classification of a `certified building official' to `certified building official -limited' as defined in Minnesota Rules part 1301.0200." This penalty would use existing rules as a means to reduce the scope of activities of a certified building official, as the "limited" certification restricts a building official to code administration for one- and two-family dwellings, their accessory structures, and certain exempt classes of buildings. If such a penalty was imposed upon one of our employees, we would then need to deal with how it might affect the terms of their employment. It would not, however, intrude on the employer relationship and management responsibilities of the city in the same way as would, for example, a restriction on public contact. The final change we request to Subp. 5 is that the last sentence in item (C)(6) be removed. If a certified building official has "any economic advantage gained as a result of the official's actions" we believe that it is highly likely that laws have been violated and criminal prosecution or other severe action should be taken, far beyond an administrative penalty. We have prepared a recommended revision to Subpart 5 that we respectfully request be considered. Attached are both "redlined" and "clean" versions of the text of Subpart 5 showing the proposed changes. Subpart 6 Subp. 6 provides for notification of any certified building official named in a complaint, and provides them an opportunity to meet with the committee and respond to the allegations. Complaints against a certified building official may raise issues of great concern to the official's employer (such as misconduct or incompetence.) The employer is ultimately responsible for the actions of this employee under established principles of law, and must have notice in order to fulfill that responsibility. The employer may also have information essential to proper investigation of the complaint. We recommend that the following sentence be added to the end of Subp. 6: "The committee shall also provide the employer of the certified buildinE official an opportunity to meet with the committee to provide information and comment upon the allegations." Subpart 8 Subp. 8 provides that if the building official is designated in a municipality by its appointing authority, the commissioner shall notify the appointing authority of actions imposed upon the building official. This provides notice to the city only after actions have been imposed. It also appears to apply only to the "designated" building official, not all certified building officials. As is our concern with Subp. 6 stated above, it is important that the municipality be informed earlier in the process so that we may take appropriate action with regard to our employees. We must safeguard the city's ability to protect the public and adequately enforce the building code should an investigation be underway or an action be pending concerning one of our employees. The employer may also have information essential to proper investigation of the complaint. Comments of City of Plymouth February 3, 2003 We recommend that Subp. 8 be rewritten as follows: Subp. 8 Municipal notification. If the building official is designated i1* employed by a municipality by its appointing autheFity, the commissioner shall notify the appointing authority clerk of the municipality of orders for hearing and the actions imposed upon the certified building official. As provided in the Notice of Hearing, we hereby request to be notified of the date when the Administrative Law Judge's report will become available. We also request to be notified of the date on which the agency adopts the rules and the rules are filed with the Secretary of State. If you have any questions about these comments and recommendations, please contact one of the following City of Plymouth staff members: Joe Ryan, Building Official (763 509-5431); Jeanette Sobania, Personnel Manager (763 509-5070) or Anne Hurlburt, Community Development Director. (763 509-5401.) Thank you again for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Dwight Johnson Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP City Manager Community Development Director cc: Mayor and City Council Roger Knutson, City Attorney Tom Joachim, State Building Official �Ial Comments of City of Plymouth February 3, 2003 Recommended Amendments to Subp. S, Redlined Version Subp. 5. Graduated schedule. Notwithstanding Minnesota Statutes, section 16B.65, subdivision 5b, one or more of the actions from one or more levels in this subpart may be imposed upon a certified building official for a failure to fulfill the duties and responsibilities of a certified building official. A. First level: (1) The commissioner may issue a letterer -to the certified building official outlining substantiated unacceptable actions and the corrective action that is expected of the building official in the future. building,(2) :Pie cenified apelegy to the eemplainant and any ether - B. Second level: (2)M The commissioner may require the certified building official to attend and successfully complete one or more appropriate training courses or programs designed to address any deficient practice identified by the committee. building,(3) The commissioner- may limit the scope of A,@r4E that can be peffbi:med by the eeFtified b a a building duties that inekide E)*(4) The GARimission AARditiARI; en the eeFtified b a b b ublie • (2) The commissioner may reduce the classification of a "certified building official' to "certified buildin, official -limited" as defined in Minnesota Rules part 1301.0200. C. Third level: The eemmissie building,(1) affieial a&b and may ifielude- vem-edi-al .` and fvpel4s to the cemmittee an a.,;rhodulp set by the committee. b Upen eampletion meetings. The menitaf: of the pFebatiaaaFy shall period, the a Fe Eno unfest+ieted e ..:t., o whe+he.- f usher aeti.,., f. -em the Sehed a ule athe is aeeessaf-y-. building, official's fitiless to per-f4iB duties in (2) The eemmission a a i limitation as established in subitems (3) and (4) 4the seeend leN,el in the -,Faduated schedule. (3X I The commissioner may deny the certification or recertification of an applicant. (4 2� The commissioner may suspend the certification of a certified building official as determined by the committee. ( 3� The commissioner may revoke the certification of a certified building official. K*)L41 The commissioner may impose an administrative penalty not exceeding $700 for each separate violation upon the certified building official. The aFfleant of the penalty impased upon the building, b gained 17 Comments of City of Plymouth February 3, 2003 Recommended Amendments to Subp. S, Clean Version Subp. 5. Graduated schedule. Notwithstanding Minnesota Statutes, section 16B.65, subdivision 5b, one or more of the actions from one or more levels in this subpart may be imposed upon a certified building official for a failure to fulfill the duties and responsibilities of a certified building official. A. First level: (1) The commissioner may issue a letter to the certified building official outlining substantiated unacceptable actions and the corrective action that is expected of the building official in the fixture. B. Second level: (1) The commissioner may require the certified building official to attend and successfully complete one or more appropriate training courses or programs designed to address any deficient practice identified by the committee. (2) The commissioner may reduce the classification of a "certified building official' to "certified building official -limited" as defined in Minnesota Rules part 1301.0200. C. Third level: (1) The commissioner may deny the certification or recertification of an applicant. (2) The commissioner may suspend the certification of a certified building official as determined by the committee. (3) The commissioner may revoke the certification of a certified building official. (4) The commissioner may impose an administrative penalty not exceeding $700 for each separate violation upon the certified building official. 3a Hennepin County Administration Sandra L.Vargas, County Administrator A-2303 Government Center 300 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55487-0233 January 31, 2003 Mr. Ed Brown, Traffic Studies Supervisor Mn/DOT Metro Division 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 612-348-7574 FAX: 612-348-8228 TDD: 612-348-7367 www.co.hennepin.mn.us Re: Request for Speed Zone Determination on County Road 47 in Hennepin County Dear Mr. Brown: We request that the Minnesota Department of Transportation determine the speed limit that is safe and reasonable for all of County Road (CR) 47 in the City of Plymouth. The requested limits of the study are from CSAH 101on the west to CSAH 61 on the east. Enclosed is a related resolution adopted by the Plymouth City Council at its January 7, 2003 meeting. We concur with the City of Plymouth's request for a review, and note the recent and continuing development of the area. We look forward to your review, and would appreciate being advised of your anticipated schedule for a review. Yo s truly, Gary . Erickson .ssistant County Administrator, Public Works and County Engineer GJE:wkp Enclosure: 1 cc: Ronald Quanbeck, City of Plymouth James N. Grube, Hennepin County Tom Johnson, Hennepin County An Equal Opportunity Employer 3' Recycled Paper January 21, 2003 Thomas D. Johnson, P.E. Transportation Planning Engineer Hennepin County Transportation Department -1600 Prairie Drive Medina, MN 55340-5421 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SPEED STUDY — COUNTY ROAD 47 FROM COUNTY ROAD 101 TO COUNTY ROAD 61 Dear Mr. Johnson: `RECEIVED AN 'rRA�st''" ` �I t0►`I1 pLANI The City of Plymouth is requesting a speed zoning study for County Road 47 from County Road 101 to County Road 61. Enclosed is a copy of the Certified City. Council Resolution No. 2003- 023 requesting the Hennepin County Department of Public Works to request the Commissioner of Minnesota Department of Transportation to conduct the speed zoning study. Please forward this request -to MnDOT at your convenience. I also request that you keep us informed of actions taken by the County on this.matter, as well as any response you receive from Mn/DOT. Thank you for your response to this request. If you have any questions, please contact Carla Stueve at 763-509-5535 or me at 763-509-5525. Sincerely, Ronald S. Quanbeck, P.E. City Engineer Enclosure cc: (B. - Daniel .- Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E., Director of Public Works Carla J. Stueve,.Traffic Engineer Z PLYMOUTH A Beautiful Pface to Live 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD - PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 *TELEPHONE (763) 509-5000 www.d.olvmouth.mmus CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION NO. 2003-023 REQUESTING HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TO REQUEST THE COMMISSIONER OF THE MNIDOT TO CONDUCT A SPEED ZONING STUDY COUNTY ROAD 47 FROM COUNTY ROAD 101 TO COUNTY ROAD 61 WHEREAS, additional development adjacent to County Road 47 has occurred and more is currently underway, which has increased traffic levels along this roadway; and WHEREAS, it has been over six years since MnDOT has reviewed the existing speed limits along County Road 47 from County Road 101 to County Road 61; and WHEREAS, citizen requests have been received over the past few years to examine the existing speed limit along County Road 47 due to the speed and volume of traffic and the difficulty of accessing this roadway during peak periods; and WHEREAS, residents currently use the trail system on the south side of County Road 47 between Annapolis Lane and County Road 61 and residents from the residential neighborhoods to the north need to cross County Road 47 to access the trail; and WHEREAS, the City is developing a neighborhood park with a trail system on the western shore of Lake Camelot, with an entrance located south of Dallas Lane; and WHEREAS, with the new trail construction for the park, the Three River's Park District will be developing a regional trail to connect into the City trail system in the park, which will encourage more pedestrians to use this roadway for: recreational purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT F—PREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIM CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA: That the City request the Hennepin County Department of Public Works to make a request to the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation to undertake an engineering study to determine the safe and reasonable speed on the following road: County Road 47 from County Road 101 to County Road 61 (Northwest Boulevard). Adopted by the City Council on January 7, 2003. 33 Resolution No. 2003-023 Page 2 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS. The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth City Council on January 7, 2003,. with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof. WITNESS my hand officiaRy as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this day of Ger• _ dZI d2 �72- ity Clerk -5k Metropolitan Council Building communities that work February 3, 2003 Leonard Luedke 17910 Co Rd. 47 Plymouth, MN 55446 RE: Northwestern Plymouth Dear Mr. Luedke: L 1 V fe 2rn;� , CITY OF KYWA;1H v M41-1 atom( REP Thank you for your letter dated January 23, 2003, regarding your thoughts for the development of Northwest Plymouth. In response to your comments, Council staff reviewed Plymouth's 2020 Comprehensive Plan and the City's decision to keep Northwest Plymouth rural until after 2020. It is my understanding that it was the City's decision not to urbanize Northwest Plymouth before 2020 and that timing of urbanization will remain a local directive. The Metropolitan Council's 1996 Regional Blueprint shows Northwest Plymouth as Illustrative 2020 MUSA, indicating that the Council anticipated that this area would urbanize by 2020. However, the Plymouth 2020 Comprehensive Plan, reviewed by the Council in 2000, planned for this area to remain as a rural area and not staged for urban development until after 2020. The Plymouth Comprehensive Plan includes the following statements (Section 4.3.1 of the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan is attached): "Following a lengthy public process with many opportunities for land owner and developer input, the City decided that this plan would add only part of Northwest Plymouth to the 2020 Urban Service Area (MUSA). The area outside of the 2020 MUSA area will not receive the public sewer and water and other services needed for urban development. " `°... This area is characterized by wetlands and woods, some steep slopes, and 5 -acre parcels that would be difficult to assemble for urban development. This reflects the City's decision to protect the existing rural character of this area and retain the option of large -lot single family homes even as the surrounding area urbanizes. " While Council policies encourage urbanization adjacent to areas already served by regional sewer and transportation system, the Council respects the City's decision, based on its public input and planning processes, not to urbanize this area of Plymouth before 2020. If you have any further questions or concerns, please contact Tom Goodrum, sector representative for Hennepin County communities at 651- 602-1513. Siney, -24 ;0 Peter Bell Chair cc: Anne Hurlburt, Community Development Director, City of Plymouth Saundra Spigner, Metropolitan Council District 1 Ann Beckman, Acting Director, Planning and Growth Management Phyllis Hanson, Manager Planning and Technical Assistance Tom Goodrum, Sector Representative, Hennepin County www.metrocouncil.org 11; S_ Metro Info Line 602-1888 230 East Fifth Street • St. Paul. Minnesota 55101-1626 • (651) 602-1000 • Fax 602-1550 • Til' 291-0904 An Equal Opportunity Employer 4.3.1 NORTHWEST PLYMOUTH/ 2020 URBAN EXPANSION AREA The area that lies roughly north of Schmidt Lake Road and west of I-494 is commonly referred to as Northwest Plymouth (see Figure 4-1). This area (plus an area south of Highway 55 along the western border of the City) covers about 3,100 acres, a little more than 13 percent of the City's land area, and lies outside Plymouth's 1999 urban service area boundary. The area is occupied by large lot residential development, recreational facilities, lakes and wetlands, some agricultural uses and vacant land. 12020 Urban 7�--�—� • — - �` Expansion Area ( 1 -. _-� Ru ra I Area _ o U ' IL SW _ _,. AtyaswMt FIGURE 4-1 MaR3. .Th0.7000 .ots77s1 NORTHWEST PLYMOUTH .— — ®coMsutrinc Cour, tKC. 4bRymouthComprehenzifeRan Following a lengthy public process with many opportunities for landowner and developer input, the City decided that this plan would add only part of Northwest Plymouth to the 2020 urban service area (MUSA). The area outside the 2020 WSA area will not receive the public sewer and water and other services needed for urban development. For the most part, the future land use map will designate this area as LAR (Living Area Rural). Existing public open space and a private golf course will continue to be designated P -I (Public Institutional). Plymouth Land Use Plan - (Draft for Adoption 8/8/00) 36 4-3 In addition to identifying the 2020 urban expansion area, this plan includes a staging plan for the extension of city services. The staging plan illustrates the general order of sewer and water extensions into the urban expansion area. The City will consider development applications to be premature and inconsistent with this plan if they require infrastructure out of the order shown on Figure 4-2. 26 z gn 4. o W. FL P i i } _r!1 t I� ;- veawkie ebeeklm 7-1 T N 1. j — Y 1tuynrn�nt Schmldt Lk Rd ,'•=- i Z -- 1 r - ?'2 XCrd Ord `.. 2. 1 sw No Oesmst+ DEVELOPMENT STAGING PLAN, FIGURE 4-2 " ""10. ZOO -- 2020 URBAN SERVICES AREA ContuerrKc Gaocs, tKc. trlymouthComprehensive Plan Land uses in the urban expansion area will be, for the most part, residential. This portion of Plymouth does not have the access to major roadways that characterizes many of the already developed portions of the City. Consequently, continued industrial and commercial development would not be appropriate in most of Northwest Plymouth. The plan does show one commercial area at the intersection of Vicksburg Lane and CSAR 47 to serve the neighborhood shopping needs of the surrounding areas. Within the urban expansion area, some of the existing large -lot residential areas and the Hampton Hills Golf Course will remain guided LAR (Living Area Rural). The areas designated LAR will not receive or be assessed for City sewer and water, prior to 2020. The area is characterized by wetlands and woods, some steep slopes, and 5 -acre parcels that would be difficult to assemble for urban development. This reflects the City's decision to protect the existing rural character of this area and retain the option of large -lot single family homes even as the surrounding area urbanizes. Plymouth Land Use Plan — (Draft for Adoption 8/8/00) 4-4 3'� AN C�COQ Fecip-N� G2C� � �27Q, .Jan 23 2003 Mr. Peter Bell Metropolitan Council Mears Park Center 230 East 5th St. St. Paul Mn. 55101 Dear Mr. Bell: State law requires cities to update their comprehensive plans every ten years. It is my understanding that the Metropolitan Council allocates to the cities how much of the population influx they are expected to absorb. The last figure that I heard was about one million people in the next quarter century. When Inter cities that are fully developed, are asked to absorb additional population, they must redevelop. I will use"New Hope for an example as 1 have first hand information about what they are doing. New Hope bought many small homes and tore them down_ Most of those lots are standing vacant after two years. Most of those homes were sound ,wand occupied byeoptethat:�could�aifordao,own;and live In. them 1heyWereanify:;;_:;.�:,: u,'�. -w, �,,; .,; 3.,r;;a; affordable houses, tom down by the city to be replaced with more expensive units, which would require government subsidy to make them affordable again. Why tear down any affordable housing units, when the Met. council has raw land zoned as housing reserve standing empty, in an area that has infrastructure such as adequate schools, county roads; county parks, and sanitary serrer. One such place is Plymouth. The Pitet. Council is in the process of purchasing easement to install the Elm Creek Interceptor through N.W. Plymouth. We think The Met Council should ask the Plymouth City Council to amend it's comprehensive plan to allow development of this area as soon as the sewer is completed. At this time, this area with a sewer trunk line soon to be installed, can not develop until after the year 2020. This prime area is near the huge new Wayzata High school, that was designed to accommodate the capacity generated by development of this area. Wayzata school district has also purchased land in the area to build an elementary school when it is needed. This prime area has at least 560 acres for sale to development, county. roads on three sides, -and two four lane roads that reduce to two lanes as they pass through. Plymouth also holds a -job fair each year trying to entice workers to take the flus out to Plymouth to fill their jobs. We have close in land with vast infrastructure sitting idle, while we hear talk of expanding sewer to Elko and Hugo in order to accommodate growth. N.W. Plymouth should be considered as infill, as it is surrounded with development. The last administration approved and applauded Wild Meadows, in Medina, which extravagantly put 150 units on 345 acres of land, 240 acres of it into wild prairie and wetland. These units are to sell for $500,00042,000,000, to which the former Met. Council gave a grant for $73,000.00 to monitor the run off water. I hope with the current economic condition, your new administration will be more efficient with land utilization. My proposal is to stop redeveloping (tearing down affordable housing) until all of the close in undeveloped land has been utilized. By utilized, I mean heavy density, where workers can afford to live without long commutes. Why build such low density now, when we have the vision of the future, and that there is a need for heavy density. Higher density allows more people to pay their own way and gives them more dignity. Sincerely Leonard and 36dy uedke 17910 Co Rd. 47 Plymouth, Mn. 55446 cc: Judy Johnson, Plymouth Mayor 3R February 5, 2003 CITY OF PLYMOUTH - Dear Neighbor: I'm writing to you today to bring you up to date on the latest plans for Egan Park near your home. As some of you may recall, in the mid 1980's, we tried the idea of community gardens at Egan Park. This idea was unsuccessful in that we were not able to adequately supply water to the gardens. Now, many years later, we are going to try a new idea. On an experimental basis for the summer of 2003, we are planning to operate an off—leash dog park on the property. Our plan is to establish an off—road parking area for six to eight vehicles on the south side of County Road 47. We will install a short wooden walkway over the creek, leading to the dry ground south of the creek. On the high and dry ground, we will mow an area for an open meadow and a couple of trails where people will be allowed to bring their dogs to exercise them. The outer parameter of the property will remain in its natural state and will not be mowed, adjacent to any neighboring property. In an off—leash park, all dogs must be accompanied by an owner and cleaned up after, just as in any City park. We hope to open the park sometime between May 15 and June 1 of this year. Staff and the Park Commission have done a lot of research on off—leash dog parks and have found throughout the country that they have been very successful and not a problem for surrounding neighbors. The story we have heard over and over again from throughout the metropolitan area and around the country is that pet owners who bring their dogs to an off leash area appear to be the most respectful and rule—abiding group. In short, they do everything in their power to not become a nuisance for neighbors, so that they can continue to enjoy the off leash dog park experience. At the end of the summer, we will do an evaluation of the park operation, and we would value your input at that time also. If you have any questions about this proposal, please feel free to give me a call at 763-509- 5201, or you can write or e—mail me at City Hall (eblank@ci.plymouth.mn.us). Any thoughts or suggestions you may have will be forwarded to the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission at their March 6`h Commission meeting. Final plans for the park will be presented to the City Council in April. If you are unable to reach me, you may also contact Mark Peterson, Superintendent of Parks, at 763-509-5941. Sincerely, Eric Blank, Director Parks and Recreation EB/np Cc: Mayor and Council Park Commission Superintendent of Parks PLYMOUTH A BeautifulFlace to Live 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 • TELEPHONE (763) 509-5000 www.d.plymouth.mmus P L Y M O U T H D A1ZMW PREVENTION FUND February 6, 2003 Mayor Judy Johnson and City Council Members 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Mayor Johnson and City Council Members: We would like to extend our heartfelt appreciation and thanks to you for the Council's dedication in researching, critically evaluating, and adopting an ordinance that would allow for charitable gambling in the City. It is clear that your senior staff, the City Attorney, and the Public Safety Advisory Committee spent a significant amount of time studying this issue. The ordinance that they drafted and that you subsequently adopted both protects the City's interests and creates a win/win environment for success. As you know, the PC&FPF and Lions Club are committed to support programs and initiatives`that promote safety and enhance the quality of life in Plymouth. We will continue to do so and look forward to returning to the Council in a year to share with you the positive differences that this ordinance has made in our community. Thank you for everything that you have given. Working together, we make a difference. Sincerely The Plymouth Crime and Fire Prevention Fund Billie K. Goodman, President Tom Tarragos, Vice President, Cortland Ornburg, Treasurer, Don Pemrick, Executive Boardmenber Chuck Scharlau, Executive Boardmenber David Hogshire, Executive Boardmenber Jackie Hogshire, Executive Boardmenber Jerad Hoff, Executive Boardmenber Curtis Smith, Executive Boardmenber Sara Cwayna, Executive Boardmenber Bill Hebert, Executive Boardmenber Greg Leuer, Executive Boardmenber cc: Dwight Johnson, City Manager Roger Knutson, City Attorney Ed Stanke, Plymouth Lions Club j\ Plymouth -Crime and Fire Prevention Fund. 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55447 (763) 509-5198 February 6, 2003 Robin Gault, Manager Cub Foods 3550 Vicksburg Lane Plymouth, MN 55447 SUBJECT: Lighting Complaint Dear Mr. Gault: CITY OF PLYMOUTFf As a follow-up to my letter of January 23, 2003, Plymouth staff has investigated the complaint that the parking lot lights at your facility are producing glare. In making a determination, staff used the two standards for maximum intensity of lighting and glare found in Section 21105.06, Subd. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The first standard requires that lights not exceed one-half foot candle as measured from the property line or the center of a public street. In this case, although the centerline is the governing location, for safety reasons, staff measured the foot candles from the sidewalk on the Cub Foods side of Vicksburg (this also represents a more conservative location). In two locations along the sidewalk, staff measured 0 foot candles, which exceeds the ordinance requirement. - The second standard relates to glare which the ordinance defines as "the effect produced by the intensity and direction of any illumination sufficient to cause an impairment or temporary loss of vision." The standard requires that lighting be arranged so as not to produce glare beyond the property line. Three members of the Planning staff all concluded that the effect of the lighting at the property line did not cause an impairment or temporary loss of vision. We have therefore concluded that the lighting at Cub Foods meets the City's requirements for glare and no corrective action is necessary. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact me at 763-509-5452. Sincerely, Nkw V�-tt-� Barbara G. Senness, AICP Planning Manager cc: Plymouth City Council PLYMOUTH A Beautiful Place to Live 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 -TELEPHONE (763) 509-5000 www.d.plymouth.mn.us CITY OF PLVMOUTR February 6, 2003 Bruce Johnson 16045 36`h Place Plymouth, MN 55446 SUBJECT: Cub Foods Parking Lot Lighting Complaint Dear Bruce: After reviewing your letter of February 3, 2003, I stand by my original statements regarding the height of the light poles at Cub Foods. Staff has reviewed the lighting at Cub Foods to determine whether or not it is producing glare beyond the property line. In making a determination, staff used the two standards for maximum intensity of lighting and glare found in Section 21105.06, Subd. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The first standard requires that lights not exceed one-half foot candle as measured from the property line or the center of a public street. In this case, although the centerline is the governing location, for safety reasons, staff measured the foot candles from the sidewalk on the Cub Foods side of Vicksburg (this also represents a more conservative location). In two locations along the sidewalk, staff measured 0 foot candles, which exceeds the ordinance requirement. The second standard relates to glare which the ordinance defines as "the effect produced by the intensity and direction of any illumination sufficient to cause an impairment or temporary loss of vision." The standard requires that lighting be arranged so as not to produce glare beyond the property line. Three members of the Planning staff all concluded that the effect of the lighting at the property line did not cause an impairment or temporary loss of vision. We have therefore concluded that the lighting at Cub Foods +1? PLYMOUTH A Beautificl Place to Live 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD - PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 -TELEPHONE (763) 509-5000 www.d.plymouth.mn.us Bruce Johnson Page 2 meets the City's requirements for glare and no corrective action is necessary. We will communicate this conclusion to the manager of Cub Foods. Sincerely, W VAAA '�M 1-� Barbara G. Senness, AICP Planning Manager cc: Plymouth City Council Dwight Johnson Anne Hurlburt T4 CITY OF February 6, 2003 PLYMOUTR Dear Resident/Land Owner: The City recently received an application from Association Free Lutheran Bible College, under File No. 2003009, for a PUD (Planned Unit Development) Amendment to allow grading and site work for a ball field in the eastern portion of their site located at 3120 East Medicine Lake Boulevard. The ball field would be located to the east of the former ball field. The ball field would not be lighted, pursuant to the previously -established terms of the PUD for this site. Additionally, there would not be a scoreboard for the ball field. A map indicating the location of the site is provided below. This letter is being mailed to all landowners within 750 feet of the site in order to provide notice and information about the application — in advance of the official notice that will be sent out prior to the Planning Commission's public hearing on the matter. The City will send out another letter notifying you of the Planning Commission public hearing date, not less than ten days prior to the hearing date. The purpose of the public hearing is to allow neighboring property owners to appear in front of the Planning Commission to ask questions and make comments relating to the application. You may also submit comments in writing. All written comments will become part of the public record. If you have any questions or comments concerning this application or the review procedures, please call Shawn Drill, Senior Planner, at (763) 509-5456. In addition, you may review information relating to this application at City Hall during regular office hours. Office hours at City Hall are 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Mondays and Wednesdays through Fridays, and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Tuesdays, except holidays. Plymouth City Hall is located at 3400 Plymouth Boulevard. Sincerely, Barbara G. Senness, AICP Planning Manager notices/2003/2003 009-first-notice.doc +S I Al PLYMOUTH A Beautiful Place to Live 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD - PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 *TELEPHONE (763) 509-5000 www.d.plymouth.mmus CITY OF February 7, 2003 PLYMOUTR SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HOWARD AND JULIE TRIPP (2002153) Dear Property Owner: Pursuant to the provisions of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance, this is to inform you of a request by Howard and Julie Tripp, under File 2002153, for a conditional use permit for a detached accessory building exceedingl,000 square feet to allow construction of a 26 - foot by 54 -foot garage for property located at 5650 Juneau Lane North. , Hennepin County records indicate your property is within 500 feet of the site of this proposal. You are hereby notified of, and cordially invited to attend a Public Hearing to be held by the Plymouth Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m., on Wednesday, February 19, 2003, in the City Council Chambers at the Plymouth City Hall, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard. The public will be invited to offer questions and comments concerning this application at that time, or feel free to call the City Planning Department at (763) 509- 5450 for more information. INFORMATION relating to this request may be examined Development Information Counter (lower level), on Mondays and Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4.30 p.m., and Tuesdays from 8:00 a.m. holidays. Sincerely, Barbara G. Senness, AICP Planning Manager 2002153propnotice 4-fb at the Community Wednesday through to 6:00 p.m., except PLYMOUTH A Beautifu(Place To Live 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD - PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 - TELEPHONE (763) 509-5000 www.d.plymouth.mmus CITY OF February 7, 2003 PUMOUTR SUBJECT: VARIANCE FOR DEAN TEMPLE (2003005) Dear Owner/Occupant: This letter is written to inform you that Dean Temple, under file 2003005, submitted a planning application requesting approval of a variance to allow a 5 -foot front yard setback where 25 feet is required for construction of a third stall garage addition and a room addition for property located at 18540-23`d Avenue North. While a formal Public Hearing is not required, it is the City's policy to inform adjacent property owners/occupants of such applications. Hennepin County records indicate your property is within 200 feet of the site of this proposal. You are hereby notified of and cordially invited to attend a meeting to be held by the Plymouth Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m., Wednesday, February 19, 2003, in the City Council Chambers at the Plymouth City Hall, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard. INFORMATION relating to this request may be examined at the Community Development Information Counter, at Plymouth City Hall on Mondays and Wednesday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., and Tuesdays from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except holidays. If you have any questions about the specifics of this proposal, please contact the Community Development Department at (763) 509-5400. Sincerely, IN4W �Va-r) Barbara G. Senness, AICP Planning Manager 2003005propnotice +T PLYMOUTH ABeautifulPlace7oLive 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 • TELEPHONE (763) 509-5000 @"W. M*WW www.d.plymouth.mmus February 7, 2003 CITY OF PLYMOUTFt SUBJECT: SKETCH PLAN FOR KRAUS ANDERSON REALTY (2002162) Dear Property Owner: Pursuant to the provisions of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance, this letter is to inform you of a request by Kraus Anderson Realty, under file 2002162, for sketch plan review of a commercial development located at the southwest corner of State Highway 169 and Schmidt Lake Road. Hennepin County records indicate your property is within 750 feet of the site of this proposal. You are hereby notified of, and cordially invited to attend a Public Meeting to be held by the Plymouth Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m., on Wednesday, February 19, 2003 in the Council Chambers at the Plymouth City Hall, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard. The public will be invited to offer questions and comments concerning this application at that time, or feel free to call the City Planning Department at (763) 509-5450 for more information. INFORMATION relating to this request may be examined at the Community Development Information Counter (lower level), on Mondays and Wednesday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., and Tuesdays from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except holidays. Sincerely, . fbop" em1w.-V Barbara G. Senness, AICP Planning Manager 2002162propnotice ®Pyla -*WO ou a LO PLYMOUTH A Beautifu[N[ace To Live 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447-1482 • TELEPHONE (763) 509-5000 www.d.plymouth.mmus Jan 31 Z003 16:4420 Via Fax -> 763+5B9+5B6B Judy Johnson ,3 L M c L .y»+ •>J.�Ih�m�ww CM4s - Fr1 aFax - Y A weekly legislative update from the League of Minnesota Cities Salary freeze bill introduced On Thursday, Senator Tom Neuville {R -Northfield} introduced a bill that would attack the state's massive budget deficit by freezing state and local government employee salaries. The bill, S.F. 214, is a one-page bill that spells out a prospective freeze in state and local government salaries. The freeze would prevent a government employer from increasing, or contracting to increase, the salary or wage rate of any full-time or part-time employee from February 1, 2003, to June 30, 2005. The bill does not yet have a House companion. The bill does not contain a "recapture" provision --in other words, there is no specified formula that would allow the state to recapture any local government salary savings through state aid reductions. Given that the state budget forecast has excluded most inflationary increases in spending, including state employee salaries, and the fact that there is no local government "recapture" provision, the bill, as drafted would seem to have little impact on the state's budget deficit. Presumably a recapture provision would be added to the bill at a later date. In the press conference where the concept of the freeze was introduced, Senate Majority leader Dick Day suggested that state aid payments would be reduced by an amount commensurate to the salary savings to the local unit of government. As drafted, the bill contains no specified penalty for non-compliance. If a penalty is modeled after the state's salary cap statute, noncompliance might result in a gross misdemeanor against the employer and a requirement that the employee repay any wages that exceed the freeze. The bill carves out a few exceptions, including one for persons promoted or transferred to new job assignments with significantly more job responsibility. In addition, wage increases enacted prior to February 1, 2003 would not be affected. The bill has raised many concerns among city officials. One city suggested that the proposal might be an incentive for city employees to unionize given Page BB1 Of BBZ January 31, 2003 that existing contracts would not be affected but that normal job performance wage increases for non-union employees would be prohibited. This could lead employees to believe that their best protection against future wage freezes is a union contract. Other cities raised concerns about the impact of the freeze on their workforce and the fact that the plan would not allow cities to use alternative cost savings plans to address any state budget cuts. The League will oppose the freeze as an infringement on local control. The next few weeks While the House and Senate battle over the provisions in the phase -one budget proposal, the governor and state agencies are preparing for phase - two, the proposal for the 2004-05 state budget that will, according to the governor, include $4.2 billion in state spending reductions. We have received numerous phone calls and e-mail messages from member cities asking what we might see on the horizon. Clearly, the $4.2 billion deficit for the upcoming two-year period will dominate the budget discussions. Governor Pawlenty has vowed to solve the crisis without raising state taxes to balance the projected deficit and the House and the Senate appear to be waiting for the Governor's budget proposal before they respond—except the Senate Republicans who are suggesting a government salary freeze (see related article). The principles of the Pawlenty plan will likely be released around February 11 with full details following by the constitutional deadline of February 18. Pawlenty's proposal will be based on the budget deficit projected last December, even though an updated forecast will be released by late February or early March. At this time, few people believe that the February forecast will greatly reduce the projected deficit and in fact, many capitol observers seem to believe that the economic news might actually get worse. We have heard rumors about what the Governor might suggest for LGA, the market value homestead credit and levy limits, but apparently For more information on city legislative issues, contact any member or the League or Minnesota Cities Intergovernmental Relations learn. 651.281.1200lIor 800.925.1122 T Jan 31 Z003 16:45:86 Via Fax -> 763+509+5060 Judy Johnson Fr1 a Y Fax- A weekly legislative update from the League of Minnesota Cities nothing has been set in stone. As we have been speculating for the past two months, state aid cuts will likely be proposed for both the 2003 and 2004 distributions. However, the cuts may be "backloaded" into the 2004 distribution meaning the 2003 cut would be smaller but that the 2004 cut could be much larger. This structure would at least minimize the effect of the immediate cuts and allow cities more time to prepare for the 2004 cuts. However, the 2004 cuts might still create major headaches for cities. Although levy limits are due to expire, it now appears likely that some sort of local levy control could be proposed and these "controls" could even prevent cities from replacing cuts in state aid. Reform of the LGA system appears to be in the mix of discussions, but the legislature may not have enough time to address reform given the magnitude of the deficit. Stay tuned. Free firefights grant program workshop 2003 Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program Free Workshop is Monday, February 3"' The purpose of the workshop is for FEMA/USFA to explain the FY 2003 fire grant program and to answer any questions you may have. There will be other workshops offered around the state similar to those offered in 2002. For more information on this workshop, and others scheduled, go to flap.:/,(ruin nesota fi► eser N, ice.cdrn. Date: February Yd 2003 Time(s): Two Identical 3 -hour workshops (1-4 p.m.)(7-10 p.m.) Where: Anoka -Hennepin Technical College East Auditorium Who: Interested city/township officials, fire department representatives and grant writers Questions or to register: contact Warren R. Jorgenson (Southern District Coordinator of Fire EMS Safety Training) at 320/894-5071 Page OOZ Of OOZ January 31, 2003 State Auditor Releases Report on Large City Finances State Auditor Pat Awada today released the annual report on the finances of cities over 2,500 population. In her press release, Auditor Awada states "Spending is up 11.3 percent on average, and fund balances are high, meaning that, in general, these cities are not suffering from a lack of resources." The 11.3 percent increase in spending cited in the press release appears to be inflated due to the fact that there are 23 additional cities now included in the report for cities over 2,500 population. Last year's report included 185 cities while this year's report includes 208 cities. There were 25 cities that eclipsed the 2,500 population threshold during the last decade. Two cities actually declined to less than 2,500 population and are excluded from the report. If the spending increase is computed only for those cities that were over 2,500 population in last year's report, the total increase in spending would be 8.5 percent and if debt principal payments are excluded the increase falls to 6.5 percent. In addition, the population in the large cities increased by more than 1.5 percent indicating that some of the spending growth could be due to growth in the service base of these cities. The fund balance information includes a new, prescribed acceptable fund balance range. "This is to give citizens a better understanding of how cities manage taxpayers dollars," said Awada. "Fund balances from 35 to 50 percent fall within an acceptable range for sound fiscal management. Cities within that range will have enough funds to provide cash flow for ongoing expenses as well as have funds available for unforeseen contingencies." This new fund balance "standard" may generate immediate questions about individual city fund balances. The report is available at the state auditors web site: httn:/Iwww.osa.state.rnn.as. We will be reviewing the report over the next several days. For more information on city legislative issues, contact any member or the League of Minnesota Cities Intergovernmental Relations team. 651.281.1200 or 800.925.1122 5_0 CITY OF PL` MOU rH COUNTY OF HENN-PIN In re Application for Relocation BcRefits by James Anderson and Evelyn Anderson FINDINGS AND DECISION GRANTING ELIGIB)lLM FOR RKLOCATxON BENEFITS This appeal of the City Manager's decision denying eligibility for relocation benefits was heard by Third -Party Hearing Officer Daniel J. Beeson on, January 14, 2003 - Ton W. Morphew, Esq. appeared on behalf of Claimants, James and Evelyn Anderson.. Thomas M. Scott, Esq, appeared on behalf of the City of Plymouth. Based upon the Memoranda of Law, Affidavits and en,tize record submitted by the parties through their respective legal counsel, as well as the arguments of counsel, the Third - Party Hearing Officer makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I. In the year 2000, the City of Plymouth and Hennepin County conunenced a road improvement project for the upgrading of County Road 101 within the City of Plymouth. The construction included widening of the existing two-lane roadway to upgrade to a four -lane roadway with medians, turn lanes, and bituminous trailways. 2. No federal funds were involved in the project. 3. in order to construct the new roadway, additional right of way was required from the Claimants' parcel. The additional road fright of way requited was a strip easement to be taken from Claimants' parcel along the existing roadway. This strip taking and road improvement project would not have required the acquisition of the Claimants' home. 6l/Z� abed`•£@q# l`•WdzS E $0 VVZO !1,uuosvGsq 'v'd`j8TTTAV'UaTTT9'Japu8ga1 :Aq lues Z00NIVW H1110KAId Vd NOS,L1INH '113gdWH0 0SSSZStTS9 Xvd S17:9T coot/t'0/ZO 4, The proposed roadway improvement drew substantial neighborhood opposition. This opposition included concerns regarding the adverse impact of the new roadway construction upon on a number of single-family homes located adjacent to County Road 101. 5, During the preliminary design phase, several homeowners expressed a desire to sell their homes to the City and i hove prior to commencement of construction, 6. In an effort to accommodate these specific requests and public concerns, City staff identified eight (8) homes, including the Claimants, home, which would be significantly impacted by the neve road construction. On January 25, 2000, Fred G. Moore, the City's Director of Public Works, recommended approval of a plan whereby the eight (8) homeowners would be given the opportunity to voluntarily sell their homes to the City at fair market value_ However, under this voluntary acquisition plaza, if the owners did not wish to sell their homes to the City, Hennepin County would proceed to acquire the necessary strip easement from the property without acquisition of the home. 7. On February 1, 2000, the Plymouth City Council authorized the voluntary property acquisition program for the eight (8) County Road 101 borne$ as outlined in Mr. Moore's letter to the homeowners, except that $500 instead of $300 was, allowed for homeowners' appraisal report/review. 8. On, February 29, 2000, Hennepin County approved the voluntary, acquisition plan based upon a 50/50 acquisition cost split between, the City and County, as well as the condition that the total acquisition would occur only if the owners were willing sellers. The agreement further contemplated that each of the homes would be resold, and that the City and County would split the proceeds evenly upon resale. 2 64161 a8ad`•Eati �i`•INd�S E £0/b0/40 `-VOELOSV4S9 V,d`a8ITTAVIuaTTT91uapu2AaI :Aq }uaS 900(j NIVW H.LIOKArld - Hd u05,Ll NH 1139dWV3 OSSMfTS9 XVI Sr:9T 9002/60/ZO 9. City appraiser Daniol Jenldns apprnised the -alue of Claimants' property 1cc2t®d at 17915 30"' Place North to be $190,000 as of April 11, 2000. A copy of this appraisal was given to Claimants. 10. City appraiser Debra Blindman also appraised the value of Claimants' property as of April 14, 2000, to be $190,000. A copy of Ms. Blindman's appraisal was also givers to Claimants. 11. Appraiser Clarke Goset, retained by Claimants, appraised the value of the property as of June 21, 2000, to be $210,000. 12. On July 31, 2000, Claimants signed a Purchase Agreement with, the City. The purchase price was $200,000. The City signed the Purchase Agreement on August 9, 2000. 13. The Purchase Agreement drafted by the City and executed by the City and the Claimants contains the following clause at Section 6: SECTION 6 RELOCATION BENEFITS 6.1) This is a voluntary sale. The Buyer has not threatened the use of eminent domain.. If the Seller had not requested that the Buyer acquire the Subject Property, Buyer would not have acquired it. 6.2) Buyer hereby waives the night to relocation assistance, services, payments, and benefits that otherwise might be entitled pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 117.52 or under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended by the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation. Assistance Act of 1987. 14. The purported relocation assistance waiver contained in Section 6 of the Purchase Agreement fails to - 3 0�1y4 a6ad`£Sb#'� C`wdzs;e 60/b0/40 `•Y9£L09V1S9-V-d`Je7TYVV9'U8TTT£`Jepuena1 :Aq �uag 600z uIVK H1110KN1d t- Vd u0S1110 1139dKV3 0SSSZS6TS9 Xdd S6:9T 9002/60/ZO 9) specifically describe the type rand amounts of relocation assistance services, payments and benefits for which the Claimants were otherwise eligible; anti b) separately list those benefits being waived. 15. No relocation assistance services, payments or benefits were provided by either the City or County. In addition, the Claimants were never provided any information by the City or County regarding relocation advisory services, assistance or benefits, nor were the contents of Section G explained to the Claimants by the City or County prior to their execution of the Purchase Agreement. 16. The City does not argue the validity of the purported waiver clause. (City Memorandum, p. 7). Rather, the City argues that the Claimants were not eligible for relocation benefits because this was a voluntary sale, and the Federal Uniform Relocation Act (URA,) regulations do not provide any benefits to the Claimants in such circumstances. Specifically, the City claims under the federal regulations an oumer- occupant who voluntarily conveys property is net considered a "displaced -person." 49 CFR 24.101(a) (1). (City Memorandum, p. 5), 17, Both the City of Plymouth and Hennepin County have the power of ernincrnt dornaim 18. On October 10, 2000, Claimants conveyed title to the property by a Warranty Deed to the City. 19. On March 11, 2001, Claimants made their initial request to the City for determination of eligibility for relocation benefits. 20. On May 20, 2002, Plymouth City Manager, Dwight D. Johnson, denied the Claimants' Application for relocation benefits. 4 61/SG efdd`£Bv#� i•`Wd�S £ £0/Vo/ZO `•V2eL0GVlGq b'81jaTT?W*2`uaTTTE)'.taPUOAaI :Aq 1uaS 900(n KlVW 111110KA'Id Vd NOS1110 T121(ldKV3 0955Z56T99 XV3 0:9T 9002/r0/ZO 21- The City of Plyrnouth's acquisition of Claimants' home was an ncquisition hV negotiation as defined by Minn. Stat. Section 117.5 0, subd. 4(b). 22. As a result of the City's acquisition by negotiation of the Claimants' home, the Claimants moved themselves and thc�r personal property from their home. Therefore, the Claimavnts are defined as displaced persons pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 117,50, subd. 3. CONC)LVSIONS OF LAW 1. In 1973, the Minnesota legislature enacted the Minnesota Uniform Relocation Act (M`U1ZA). Minn. Stat. Sections 117.50-117.56 (2002). 2. The Act "intended to make public funds available to reimburse relocation costs incurred by households and businesses displaced by public acquisitions of property where there is no federal financial participation." In re the Aoolication for Relocation Benefits of James Brothers Furniture, Inc. 642 N.W.2d 91,95 (Minn. App- 2002), rev. den. (June 18, 2002). 3- The terra "displaced person" is defined in the United States Code and in the Code of Federal Regulations. However, as held by the Minnesota Court of Appeals, the federal Act's definition does not mirror the Minn. Stat. Section i 17.50, subd. 3 definition of "displaced person_" James, 642 N.W.2d at 97-98. Further, the Court of Appeals concluded that the MURA definition of "displaced person" should be construed to be `broader" in scope than the federal Act's definition because MURA does not include "direct result" and "project or program" requirements. 642 N.W.2d at 98. 4. The MURA references the federal ,Act's "substazttive provisions-, it does not incorporate the Act's procedural provisions..," James, 642, N.W.2d 96, N.S. Therefore, 5 6!•/91 E0/v0/ZO !VOCLOSVGS9 b"d`-�aiT?YV�`uaiTFO`�+epue�a� :Aq quaS 900Qn 11IVW H1110WA'Id f dd KOSI1111x 1121gdM OSSSZSVTS9 XVJ 9r:9T 9002/r0/ZO the t.crm "diaplaccd persoaw" mm dermad by'thc MT -TRA rind not tho £cdaral Act, applies in this case, 5. Minnesota Statutes Section 117.50. subd. 3 defines "displaced person" as "...any person who moves £torn real property, or moves personal property from real property, as a result of acquisition undertaken by an acquiring authority..." The Claimants are displaced persons under the M[JRA statutory definition. 6. In cases where there is no federal financial participation, MURA broadly and specifically requires that "In all acquisitions undertaken by any acquiring authority... the acquiring authority, as a cost of acquisition, shalt provide all relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits required by the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970..." Mizin. Stat. Section 117.52, subd. 1 (2002) (emphasis added). 7. Minnesota Statutes Section. 117.50, subd. 4 defines "acquisitions' to include "acquisitions by negotiations_" The purchase by the City of Plymouth of the Claimants' home was an acquisition under the MURA statutory definition. S. Minnesota Statutes Section 117.5 0, subd. 4 defines "acquiring authority" to include "the state and every public and private body and agmicy thereof which has the power of eminent domain." The City of Plymouth and Hennepin County are each an acquiring authority under the MURA statutory definition. 9. The City argues that because the federal regulations provide that owner -occupants who voluntarily sell their property are not "displaced -persons", the Claimants are not entitled to any assistance or benefits under the URA. 10. Minn. Stat, Section 645.16 provides in part: 6 EwlL 86Bd`•COP#-37sl:W4CS:C CO/VO/ZO !VeCL05V1S8 V*d`-j$lT►n'W`uattTE)`.18PUBAeI :Aq ;u®s LOOCn KIVK H,LION111d f Vd KoSlalJM TI3H NVO OSSSZSVTS9 YVA 0:9i £OOZ/60/ZO "The objeot of nJJ interpretation and construction of laws is to Ascertain and effectuate the intention of the legislature. Every law shall be construed, if possible to give effect to all its provisions, i' ben the words of a law in their application to an existing situation are clear and free from all ambiguity, the letter of the law shall not be disregarded under the pretext of pursuing the spirit." 11. Taken as a whole and in order to construe Minn. Stat. Section 117.50-117.56 to give effect to all of its provisions, MURA must be construed to mandate substantive relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits to displaced persons in all acquisitions by any acquiring authority where there is no federal financial participation_ The application of MURA to the facts presented in this case by the Claimants is clear and unambiguous. 12. The Claimants are displaced persons under MURA (as defined in Minn. Stat. Section 117.50, subd. 3) and are entitled to all substantive relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits provided under the URA as required by Micui. Stat. Section 117.52, subd. I. Pursuant to the agreement between the City and County, relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits will be shared equally by the City and County as an "acquisition cost," 13. Unlike the URA, MURA provides a means by which an acquiring authority may insulate itself from responsibility to provide relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits to an owner -occupant of property who voluntarily sells real property to an acquiring authority provided that the specific requirements of Minn. Stat. Section 117.521, subd. 1 relating to voluntary waiver of relocation benefits are met. In all other cases whero there is no federal funding, METRA mandates that acquiring authority trust provide an owner -occupant who is a displaced person as defined 7 6�/6a a5ed•`EBtit�� l`WdE9 E EO/b0/ZO `va9EL05VGS9 'V'd`uejjTW$`uajjt9`Japuenaj :Aq �.uag 8000 KIVW H,LIOWA'Id f Vd NOS, aNN 'TIHgdKVD OSSSZSVTS9 Xdd 96 ; 9T COOZ/b0/ZO by Minn. Stal. Section 11.7.50, eubd. 3 with substantive relocation nssistarlan, services, payments and benefits provided under the LJRA'. 14. Because the written waiver contained in the Purchase Agreement signed by the Claimants did not meet the specific requirements of Minn. Stat. Section, 117,521, subd. 1 (Findings of Fact, Nos. 14 and 15), the purported waiver is invalid, and the Claimants have not waived their rights to relacatian assistance, services, payments and benefits. Further, the City has not argued the validity of the waiver clause. 15. Although the City Manager's initial decision was understandable, the denial of relocation benefits claim, was based upon a mistaken interpretation of the MLJ1tA. DECISION The City Manager's Denial of Claim for Relocation Benefits is reversed. The Claimants are eligible for relocation assistance, Dated: February 4, 2003. payments and benefits. ' It is noted that pursuant to Minn Stat Section 117.56, the provisions of 117.50 to 117.56 "... sha11 not apply to any proceeding brought by a govermnenral subdivision under Sections 463.15 to 463,24." (i.e. proceedings relating to hazardous and substandard buildings.) 61/81 e6ed`ggq##� i`•WdES=£ £0/b0/ZO `•gB£LOSg159 t1'd`uaTITVI�`uaTttO`aapuc��a� :Aq �uag 6000�J KIVK H1110KNId f Vd KoS,LIINM '1136dKV3 09S5ZSVT99 XU Lt:9T COOZ/b0/ZO CITY OF PI YtvroUTH COUNTY OF HENNEPIN In re Application for Relocation Benefits by Richard Pickering and Janice Pickering FINDINGS AND DECISION GRANTING ELIGIBILITY FOR RELOCATION BENEFITS This appeal of the City Manager's decision denying eligibility for relocation benefits was heard by T7iird-Party Hearing Officer Daniel J. Beeson on January 14, 2003. Jon W. Morphew, Esq. appeared on behalf of Claimarris, Richard and Janice Pickering. Thomas M. Scott, Esq. appeared on behalf of the City of Plymouth. Based upon the Memoranda of Law, Affidavits and entire record submitted by the parties through their respective legal counsel, as well as the arguments of counsel, the Third - Party Hearing Officer makes the following.- FINDINGS ollowing: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In the year 2000, the City of Plymouth and Hennepin County commenced a road improvement project for the upgrading of County Road 101 within the City of Plymouth. The construction included widening of the existing two-lane roadway to upgrade to a four -lane roadway with medians, turn lanes, and bituminous trailways. 2. No federal funds were involved iii the project. 3. In order to construct the new roadway, additional right of way was required from the Claimants' parcel. The additional road right of way required was a strip easctrncat to be taken from Claimants' parcel along the existing roadway. This strip taking and road improvernent project would not have required the acquisition of the Claimants' horne_ q 88ed`ggb#_'Mi•`nd0S:C £0/b0/0D `VBEL06vGgs b' d` JaiTTV$`uaTTT0'.Japuena1 :Aq ;uag OTOZ KIVK H1110NiAld f Vd NOSLANM 113gdKV3 OSSMrT99 M Lr:9T cOOZ/r0/ZO 4. Tho prpposed tesdway improvemcni drrcw substimtial neighborhood opposition. This opposition included concerns regarding the adverse impact of the new roadway construction upon on a number of single-family hoer es located adjacent to County Road 101. 5. During the preliminary design phase, several homeowners expressed a desire to sell their homes to the City and trove prior to commencement of construction. 6. In an effort to accarnmodatc these specific requests and public concerns, City staff identified eight (8) homes, including the Claimants' home, which would be significantly impacted by the new road construction. On January 25, 2000, Fred G. Moore, the City's Director of Public Works, recommended approval of a plan whereby the eight (8) homeowners would be given the, opportunity to voluntaAly sell their homes to the City at fair tmatkat value. However, under this voluntary acquisition plan if the owners did not wish to sell their homes to the City, Hennepin County would proceed to acquire the necessary strip easement from the property without acquisition of the home. 7. On February 1, 2000, the Plymouth City Council authorized the voluntary property acquisition program for the eight (8) County Road 101 homes as outlined in Mr. Moore's letter to the homeowners, except that $500 instead of $300 was allowed for homeowners' appraisal report/review. 81 On February 29, 2000, Hennepin County approved the voluntary aequisitior plan based upon a 50/50 acquisition cost split between the City and County, as well as the condition that the total acquisition would occur only if the owners were willing sellers. The agreement further contemplated that each of the homes would be resold, and that the City artd County would split the proceeds evenly upon resale. 5 afed`•Beb# 7�(`.WdESE e0lV0/20 `V9ELOSbl59 'tl'dgjsTTTW'S`u®TTTp`.Japuena-I :Aa )Lues TTOZ KIVK H1110NAId t 6'd KOSL11ux 'Il3fldKVD 0SSSZSVTS9 XVI LP:9T £OOZ/60/Z0 City apprcddor Scott A. $rcitenfold appraised tho value of property located at 3030 Highway 101 North to be S190,000 as of April 8, 2000. A copy of this appraisal was given to Claimants. 10. City appraiser Debra Blindman also appraised the value of Claimants' property as of April 24, 2000, to be 5207,000. A cop} of Ms, Blindman's appraisal was also given to Claimants. 11. Appraiser William C. Warner, retained by Claimants, appraised the value of the property as of September 7, 2000, to be $225,000. 12. On December 27 2000, the City offered to purchase the Claimants' property for $225,000 based on the Warner appraisal. Along with the written purchase offer, the City enclosed a draft Purchase Agreement. 13. The Purchase Agreement drafted by the City contains the following clause at Section 6: SECTION 6 RELOCATION BENEFITS 6.1) This is a voluntary sale. The Buyer has not threatened the use of eminent domain. If, the Seller had not requested that the Buyer acquire the Subject Property, Buyer would not have acquired it. 6.2) Buyer hereby waives the right to relocation assistance, services, payments, and benefits that otherwise might be entitled pursuant to Minn_ Stat. § 117.52 or under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Ileal Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended by the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance, Act of 1987. 14. The Claimants did not sign the City's draft Purchase Agreement, but drafted and submitted their own Purchase Agreement to the City. The Claimants' Purchase 3 6l/9 a6ed`•£9b# 7a(`•WdFS=£ £0/q0/20 !oquoSblg9 �'d`�aTtF�y�`uaTT�O`-�apue�a� :AP �"S ZTOZ NIVK H,L110A[AU f- ted NOSIaNH 11219dKV3 OS55Z56T99 XVJ 86:9T COOZ/60/Z0 Agreerusant £ox sale at $225,000 did not contain any waver of relocation .assistance clause. 15. The City approved the Purchase Agreement on January 23, 2001. 16, On February 14, 2001, the City and Claimants entered into a Contract for D ed pursuant to the terms of the Purchase Agreement. 17. No relocation assistance services, payments or benefits were provided by either the City or County. In addition, the Claimants were never provided any information by the City or County regarding relocation advisory services, assistance or benefits. 18. The City does not argue the validity of the purported waiver clause_ (City Memorandum, p. 7). Mather, the City argues that the Claimants were not eligible for relocation benefits because this was a voluntary sale, and the Federal Uniform Relocation Act (URA) regulations do not provide any benefits to the Claimants in such circumstances. Specifically, the City claims under the federal regulations an owner - occupant who voluntarily conveys property is not considered a "displaced -person." 49 CFR 24.101(x.) (1). (City Memorandum, p. 5). 14. Both the City of Plymouth and Hennepin County have the power of eminent domain. 20. On June 1, 2001, Claimants conveyed title to the property by a Warranty Deed to the City. 21, On October 15, 2001, Claimants made their initial request to the City for relocation benefits. 22. On November 6. 2001, the City denied the Application ort the basis that the sale was "strictly voluntary." 4 5G/G EO/b0/ZO `•beE/Ospoig-V-d`j8TTtWV`uaTTT9'JapueAa� :AP IueS CTOOVK H.LION1Ald r ted HOS,LANH 11dUNVO OSSSZStTS9 Xd3 SP:9T COOZ/b0/ZO 23. On November 21. 2001. the Claimants made a second request to the City for detennination of eligibility for relocation benefits. 24. Ori May 20, 2002, Plymouth City Manager, Dwight D. Johnson, denied the Claimants' Application for relocation benefits. 25. The City of Plymouth's acquisition of Claimants' home was an acquisition by negotiation as defined by Mitm. Stat. Section 117.50, subd. 4(b). 26. As a result of the City's acquisition by negotiation of the Claimants' home, the Claimants moved themselves and their personal property from their home. Therefore, the Claimants are defined as displaced persons pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 117.50, subd. 3. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. In 1973, the Minnesota legislature enacted the Minnesota Uniform Relocation Act (METRA). Minn. Stat. Sections 117.50-117.56 (2002). 2. The Act "intended to make public funds available to reimburse relocation costs incurrcd by households and businesses displaced by public acquisitions of property where there is no federal financial participation." In re the Application for Relocation Benefits of James Brothers Furniture, Inc. 642 N.W.2d 91,95 (Minn. App. 2002), rev. den. (June 18, 2002). 3. The term "displaced person" is defined in the United States Code and in the Code of Federal Regulations. However. as held by the Minnesota Court of Appeals, the federal Act's definition docs not mirror the Minn. Stat, Section 117.50, subd. 3 definition; of "displaced person." James, 642 N.W.2d at 97-98. Further, the Court of Appeals concluded that the M[;RA definition of "displaced person" should be construed to be 5 5l/8 aBed`Eeq# d7a�`Wd�S E £0/Vo/Zo `V8EL09blS9 -17-d'ue1TTn'8'ueTTzD'uepuan2� :Aq ;uaS VTOL 11IVK H1110WA'Id f ted u0S,L11NH 1139dXV3 0555Z56TS9 XVJ OAT £OOZ/b0/ZO 1%ooadoz" in acope than tho fadcni! Act'q definition because MUItA does not include "direct result" and')=jcet or program" requirements. 642 N.W.2d at 98. 4. The MURA references the federal Act's "substantive provisions; it docs not incorporate the Act's procedural provisions..." James, 642, N.W.2d 96, N.5. Therefore, the term "displaced person" as defined by the MURA and not the federal Act, applies in this case. 5. Minnesota Statutes Section 117.50, subd. 3 defines "displaced person' as "...any person who moves from real property, or moves personal property from real property, as a result of acquisition undertaken by an acquizir�g authority..." The Claimants are displaced persons under the MURA statutory definition. 6. In cases where there is no federal financial participation, MURA broadly and specifically requires that "In all acquisitions undertaken by any acquiring authority... the acquiring authority, as a cost of acquisition, shall provide all relocation assistanceg services, payments and benefits required by the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970..." Minn. Stat. Section 117.52, subd. 1 (2002) (emphasis added). 7. Minnesota Statutes Section 117.50, subd. 4 defines "acquisition" to include "acquisitions by negotiations." The purchase by the City of Plymouth of the CIaimants' home was an acquisition under the MURA statutory definition. 8. Minnesota Statutes Section 117.5(, subd. 4 defines "acquiring authority" to include "the state and eery public and private body and agency thereof which has the power of eminent domain." The City of Plymouth and Hennepin County are each an acquiring authority under the MURA statutory definition. 6�/6 EO/VO/Zo !VeELOSV4S9 'd'd'u6TTTWV`uaTTTO1japutne-1 :Aq 1uaS STOLE NIVX H111OKA'Id f Vd NOS,LIINX 11HgdM OSSSzstTS9 XVJ 0:9T tOOZ/60/ZO 9. The City argues that beeauge tho federal regulstiorI9 provide acct earn-Qcctipants who voluntarily sell their property arc not "displaced -persons", the Claimants are not entitled to any assistance or benefits under the URA. 10. Minn. Stat, Section 645.16 provides in part: `-Me object of all interpretation and construction of laws is to ascertain and effectuate the intention of the legislature. Every law shall be construed, if possible to give effect to all its provisions. When the words of a law in their application to an existing situation are clear and free from all ambiguity, the letter of the law shall not be disregarded under the pretext of pursuing the spirit." 11. Taken as a whole and in order to construe Minn. Stat, Section 117.50-117.56 to give effect to all of its provisions, MURA must be construed to mandate substantive relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits to displaced persons in all acquisitions by any acquiring authority where there is no federal financial participation. The application of MURA to the facts presented in this case by the Claimants is clear and un2mbiguous. 12. The Claimants are displaced persons under MURA (as defined in Minn- Stat. Section 117.50, subd. 3) and are entitled to all substantive relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits provided under the URA as required by Minn. Stat, Section 117.52, subd, 1. Pursuant to the agreement between the City and County, relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits will be shared equally by the City and County as an "acquisition cost." 13, Unlike the URA, MURA provides a means by which an acquiring authority may insulate itself from responsibility to provide relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits to an owner -occupant of property who voluntarily sells real property to an 7 61/Ol a58d'E91,#—F1WVAdl9-'E EO/VO/2!0 !VSE409V19e 'v'd`J8TTTV4V'uaTTTO`aapuena1 :Aq Juag 9TOZ KIND H,LIONNU f ted KO5.LIKM 113gdKV3 OSSSZSVTS9 YVA 0:9T COOZ/60/ZO acquiring authority provided that the cpecific requirements of Minn. Stat. Section 117.521, subd. 1 relating to voluntary waiver of relocation benefits are met. In all other cases where there is no federal funding, MUR.A mandates that acquiring authority must provide an owner-occuparn who is a displaced person as defined by Minn. Stat. Section 117.50, subd. 3 with substantive relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits provided under the URA' - 14. Because the written waiver contained in the Purchase Agreement signed by the Claimants did not meet the specific requirements of Minn. Stat. Section 117.521, subd. I (Findings of Fact, Nos. 14 and 15), the purported waiver is invalid, and the Claimants have not waived their rights to relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits. Further-, the City has not argued the validity of the waiver clause. 15. Although the City Manager's initial decision was understandable, the denial of relocation benefits claim was based upon a mistaken interpretation of the MURA. DECISION The City Manager's Denial of Claim for Relocation Benefits is reversed. The Claimants are eligible for relocation assistance, services, payments d benefits. Dated: February 4, 2003. iIanicl I Beeson Third -Party Hearin 1t i$ noted that pursuant to Minn. Stat Section 117.56, the provisions of 117.50 to 117.56 ". , . shall not apply to any proceeding brought by a governmental subdivision under Sections 463.15 to 463.26_" (i.e. proceedings relating to hazardous and substandard buildings.) 8 6G/tt a6ed`£9v I`•Wdz9 E £Q/q0/ZO `VOOLOSvlSB-V-d`uaTTTVIV'uaTTt£'Japu8Aaj :Aq ivaS LTOZ NIVK HLilOIiAId ted u05,L1INH 111d8dKV3 0955Z96T98 XVJ 6V AT COOZ/60; 20