HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 08-28-1995 SpecialMINUTES
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 28, 1995
A special meeting of the Plymouth City Council was called to order by Mayor Tierney at
7:08 p.m. in the Public Safety Training Room, 3400 Plymouth Blvd., on August 28, 1995.
COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Tierney; Councilmembers Edson, Helliwell, Anderson,
Granath, Wold, and Lymangood.
ABSENT: None.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Johnson, Assistant Manager Lueckert, Community
Development Director Hurlburt, Public Works Director Moore, Housing Supervisor
Goldsmith, Transit Administrator Sweeney, and City Clerk Ahrens.
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mary Hill Smith and Roger
Scherer.
NORTHWEST PLYMOUTH/CLUSTER PLANNING/ELM CREEK
INTERCEPTOR ISSUES
Community Development Director Hurlburt presented background information on
Elm Creek Cluster Planning, the Livable Communities Act, and related topics. She
stated that the Metropolitan Council Regional Blueprint Update summarizes the
draft regional development scenarios. These scenarios will be used to create local
development scenarios for Plymouth. The Elm Creek Cluster Planning is currently
very active, and a housing agreement has now been drafted between the City of
Plymouth and the Metropolitan Council. She said that the formal agreement will
be presented to the City Council for action in October.
Director Hurlburt reviewed the draft housing agreement. She stated that more
work is needed on the section relating to goals for owner -occupied, affordable
housing. Staff is currently compiling data showing values of all Plymouth housing,
as well as recently built units, which will be used for further discussion. Additional
information is also being prepared to better recognize Plymouth's past efforts and
existing programs for affordable housing.
Director Hurlburt explained that the draft housing agreement contains goals in
three areas: 1) housing affordability, 2) life cycle housing, and 3) density of
development. The draft agreement proposes that between 1996 and 2010, the City
will work toward expanding the share of its rental housing affordable to low and
moderate income families. Plymouth would work to make 35 percent of its rental
housing affordable to families earning no more than 50 percent of the regional
Special Council Meeting
August 28, 1995
Page 2
median income (up to $25,500 in 1995). In addition, a significant portion of the
new rental units should be affordable to very low income households, that is, those
at 30 percent of the regional median income.
Director Hurlburt stated that in 1994, only 42 percent of Plymouth's homesteaded
housing was valued at $115,000 or less. This is in contrast to 69 percent for all
developing area suburbs and 77 percent for all communities in the northwest
Minneapolis planning sector. She said that between 1996 and 2010, the agreement
proposes that Plymouth will work to increase the percent of its homesteaded
properties valued at or below $115,000 in 1994 dollars, in an effort to move
toward a level more like that experienced by other developing suburbs. She said
that Plymouth will do what it can to influence housing costs, recognizing that since
1991 only about 40 percent of new construction ownership housing in the region
has sold for $115,000 or less, a level affordable to households at approximately 80
percent of regional median.
She said that because land costs in Plymouth make single family detached houses
at $115,000 almost impossible to develop, most of the new affordable ownership
units will be attached housing, i.e., townhomes and condominiums built at higher
density to reduce the per unit costs. Director Hurlburt stated that Plymouth will
promote an increase in the density of multi -family housing developed in the city. A
density of at least 11 units per acre for new multi -family development will try to be
achieved between 1996 and 2010. This target density is consistent with multi-
family housing densities in other developing area suburbs.
Director Hurlburt stated that expanded diversification of housing stock is not the
City's top priority given that its current housing diversity is 39 percent non -single
family detached. However, Plymouth recognizes that the new construction
housing market and increasing life cycle housing demands may mean continued
development of multi -family housing. For the period 1996 through 2010,
Plymouth will make every effort to maintain the non -single family detached share
of its housing at least 34 percent of its housing stock. She stated that significant
rental housing (29 percent of all units) exists in Plymouth. However, much of it is
not affordable to low and moderate income households. Through the period 1996
through 2010, the draft agreement proposes that the City establish as a target goal
that a minimum of 20 percent of the units added to the City's housing stock be
rental housing.
Councilmember Lymangood asked if consideration is given to the amount of
wetlands and other area unusable for building when considering density levels.
Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that the Metropolitan Council
has not provided a good definition of how density will be determined, and how
Special Council Meeting
August 28, 1995
Page 3
wetlands will be considered. She said the City is updating its land use data to try
to make it comparable to the Metropolitan Council data.
Mr. Scherer stated that the Metropolitan Council is attempting to achieve an
overall higher density than currently exists in the region, with a goal of about 10
percent more density. This will save significant costs in extension of sewers and
roadway systems.
Councilmember Lymangood stated that Plymouth has an area of 36 square miles,
of which only 26 percent is undeveloped. He expressed some concern that
Plymouth is being asked to achieve significantly greater density in the remaining
area of the City. He said this will be particularly difficult with the amount of
wetlands in this area.
Mr. Scherer stated that he believes the Metropolitan Council is looking at
increasing density by 10 percent on the non -wetland areas only. He believes the
wetland areas would be exempted from the calculations. Ms. Smith agreed that
Plymouth will not have to meet the same benchmarks for its wetland areas as the
dry, buildable areas. However, some density improvement can be achieved.
Mayor Tierney asked what the Met Council is requesting with respect to rental
housing.
Director Hurlburt responded that the Metropolitan Council was not asking
Plymouth to increase its ratio of rental housing versus ownership. The desirable
mix is 25 percent, and Plymouth is already at 29 percent. Plymouth could meet its
goal by making some of the existing apartments affordable. She cited some efforts
in this area were the Towne Square project, and the Council requiring that a
number of units remain affordable in the Parkside Apartments when their request
for development revenue bonds was approved. The draft agreement set the goal
of 35 percent of new housing being rental versus individual ownership. She said
that Plymouth would have to significantly increase the availability of land for
higher density development if additional rental units are desired. There are
currently very few available sites for higher density residential.
Councilmember Wold asked about the current occupancy rates of rental property
in the City.
Housing Supervisor Goldsmith said that in May, 1995, less than 2 percent of the
rental units in the City of Plymouth were vacant.
Councilmember Wold stated that it would be very difficult to ensure that the 15
percent of units that are currently affordable in the City remain affordable with that
level of vacancy rates.
Special Council Meeting
August 28, 1995
Page 4
Housing Supervisor Goldsmith stated that many of the lower priced units are the
older units in the community. He believes that the owners will have to maintain
moderate rents in order to maintain the 2 percent vacancy rate.
Councilmember Lymangood stated that the City's housing diversity appears to be
adequate; however, he is concerned about the proposed density goals.
Director Hurlburt stated that she does not believe that any of the goals or
benchmarks are unreasonable, but the affordability goals would be the most
difficult to obtain. She stated that only 40 percent of the new housing constructed
in the metro area since 1991 qualifies as affordable. Plymouth only has about 8
percent of its new housing which meets this affordability threshold and most of
those units are townhomes and condominiums.
Mayor Tierney stated that several outstate communities including Marshall are
looking at providing more low income housing. She suggested that the City look
statewide at housing costs to determine what is affordable.
Councilmember Edson asked if Plymouth will be expected to "catch up" to the
benchmark figures or whether they are goals for future development. Director
Hurlburt stated that these are future benchmarks. Councilmember Edson
expressed some concern that there is only a small area of the City remaining to be
developed, and that a higher density will now be attempted in that concentrated
area. He does not believe it would be good planning to have all the same type of
housing unit in the same area of the City. Mr. Scherer stated that it is difficult to
achieve these goals, but it is only a matter of degree. He said that 10 percent
greater density may be achievable and may not visibly look much different than
other existing developments in the City.
Mayor Tierney stated that roadway access is another issue that must be considered
if a 10 percent increase in density is desired in the remaining area of the City to be
developed. She asked for clarification from Mr. Scherer on what he considered
desirable density. Mr. Scherer clarified that he believes the density benchmark for
Plymouth may be in the area of 2.2 units per acre. Directory Hurlburt stated that
the most recent version of the draft housing agreement indicates a desired density
of 2.5 to 3.5 units per acre, and that the issue of wetland calculation needs to be
clarified.
Ms. Smith stated that one of the difficulties of the Metropolitan Council is that
they do not have the best computer equipment available from which to make
projections. She said that information provided by local communities is almost
always more accurate than that created by the Met Council. She stated that cities
are aware of areas that are undevelopable, of which the Met Council may not.
Special Council Meeting
August 28, 1995
Page 5
Councilmember Lymangood suggested that it may be useful for Plymouth to
provide Mr. Scherer and Ms. Hill with specific examples related to density. He
suggested that staff provide density information to them using the Soo Line West
project to demonstrate the difference in density both including and excluding the
wetland areas.
Ms. Smith stated that she believes Plymouth has done quite well in its benchmark
figures when compared to other communities outside the I-494 - I-694 corridor.
Councilmember Lymangood requested that staff prepare a graph showing the age
of housing (pre 1970) in a percentage format versus the affordable ($115,000 or
less) homesteaded properties. This information should also be provided to Mr.
Scherer and Ms. Smith.
Community Development Director Hurlburt explained that by November 15 of
each year, the City must decide whether to participate in the Metropolitan Livable
Communities Act for the coming year. In order to participate, the City must agree
to use its locally generated affordable and life cycle housing amount for such
housing in the City. For Plymouth, this amount is estimated to be about $87,000.
The City's current HRA levy expenditures meet this criteria, and no additional
revenues or expenditures would be required to qualify. The City would also have
to adopt goals and an action plan for encouraging development of affordable and
life cycle housing negotiated with the Metropolitan Council. She stated that
Plymouth will be developing these goals and an action plan as part of its planning
related to the Elm Creek Cluster Planning.
Councilmember Helliwell stated that she is concerned about excessive growth. If
development continues at the current rate, it won't be long before all of the land
between Minneapolis and St. Cloud is developed. She said that she has somewhat
amended her view that large homes should not be built on small lots because of the
many factors involved.
Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that the Metropolitan Council
will be considering various development scenarios, one of which will be no
expansion of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. She noted that if the service
area is not expanded, affordability within the area would be even more difficult.
Mr. Scherer stated that housing in this area is quite affordable when compared to
other areas of the country.
Special Council Meeting
August 28, 1995
Page 6
TRANSIT ISSUES
Manager Johnson updated the Council on the status of Metro Mobility service in
Plymouth. He stated that the funding for Metro Mobility for Plymouth and six
other opt -out communities was proposed to be abolished on September 1, 1995.
He stated that the staff has negotiated with the Metropolitan Council staff on how
Metro Mobility could be continued in Plymouth. In July, the preliminary figures
showed a total subsidy of $350,000 for Plymouth service, or about $11 to $12 per
ride. One half of all rides originated in Plymouth. An agreement was discussed
whereby the City could receive continued Metro Mobility service for six to eight
months. He stated the figures have changed somewhat since that time, and the
average subsidy per ride is now estimated as $15. The previous cost estimate to
continue service has now increased to $225,000, which would be about 70 percent
of Plymouth's opt -out money. The City had hoped to retain a significant portion of
the unused levy to meet future needs and expanded service in the City.
Ms. Smith stated that Metro Mobility is a serious problem for the Metropolitan
Council. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) legislation does not allow
the Metropolitan Council many options in dealing with the issue. The ADA
regulations require the Metropolitan Council to provide service to those areas with
regular route, off-peak transit service. She said that the Metropolitan Council is
trying to allow communities like Plymouth to use any money remaining from the
90 percent of their transit tax dollars that they receive to be applied toward Metro
Mobility.
Councilmember Anderson left the meeting at 8:15 p.m.
Councilmember Lymangood noted that from 1991 to 1995, Plymouth has
accumulated $2,335,345 in unused transit funds. He asked what occurs to this
balance.
Transit Coordinator Sweeney said that the Metropolitan Council policy on use of
the funds has been revised several times. He said that of the over $2 million that
was accumulated, Plymouth has only about $425,000 of carry-over funds; the
balance has been taken by the Metropolitan Council. Whatever is unspent in 1995,
Plymouth can carry over one half the amount, with the other half going to the
Metropolitan Council.
Councilmember Lymangood requested that staff provide information prepared by
George Bentley relating to Plymouth's transit funding to area legislators and to
Representative Orfield. This information shows the millions of dollars that
Plymouth has contributed in transit tax levy dollars, the amount of Plymouth's
Special Council Meeting
August 28, 1995
Page 7
unexpended funds, and how Plymouth is receiving decreased services while
contributing to the transit system of the region.
Public Works Director Moore stated that, in essence, Plymouth has donated $2
million of local transit tax dollars to serve areas outside of Plymouth.
Manager Johnson stated that Metro Mobility funding is allocated from State
income tax dollars. He expressed concern that Plymouth residents pay State of
Minnesota taxes, but will receive no Metro Mobility services from that source.
Plymouth would have to use local property tax dollars to provide the Metro
Mobility service. He believes Plymouth taxpayers are actually being double taxed
for the same service.
Councilmember Edson stated that the action of the Metropolitan Council relating
to Metro Mobility also conflicts with the Livable Communities Act goals. He
stated that good transit service is needed in order to provide access to homes and
jobs. Plymouth needs to be expanding transit services, not reducing service.
Ms. Smith again stated that the Metropolitan Council is extremely limited in its
options. The Metropolitan Council inherited the transit system when it was $8
million in debt, with severe problems and deficits. Ms. Smith stated that it would
seem rational to ensure Metro Mobility service continuation for those residents
most needing it, perhaps those needing it for job or medical reasons. However,
under the ADA, this information cannot be asked of passengers. She also stated
that the paratransit service in the metro area, provided through Metro Mobility,
has been exceptional and has created very high expectations. It will be difficult to
amend this service.
Manager Johnson stated that the initial estimated cost of $150,000 to $175,000 for
Plymouth to contract the Metro Mobility service in its current format would be
more than the option of using the Dial -A -Ride service as a replacement. However,
the greater cost seemed worth it because seamless service would be provided.
Under the proposal to use Dial -A -Ride as a replacement for Metro Mobility,
transfer points would have to be established for passengers. He stated that at the
current estimated cost of $225,000 or more to continue the Metro Mobility service
in its current format, Plymouth will have to look at other options.
In response to Council questions, Ms. Smith stated that a few legislators are
concerned with the transit issue, but it has not been an important state-wide issue
to date. She predicted that it will be a more important issue in the upcoming
legislative session because there is no longer any way to adequately fund transit
except through property taxes. She stated that big mistakes were made in
designing transit systems. She noted that Plymouth became an opt -out community
because it was paying tax dollars for transit, but receiving no service. She stated
Special Council Meeting
August 28, 1995
Page 8
that the property values in suburban areas are increasing, while values are staying
flat in the inner -ring cities. Therefore, the inner city transit system is suffering
while suburban systems are growing and flourishing. This is another problem that
the Metropolitan Council must address.
Councilmember Edson asked who establishes the levy for the transit tax. Ms.
Smith stated that the tax is an established amount of the mill rate. Mr. Scherer
added that the maximum allowable amount has been levied for some time.
Mayor Tierney stated that there are additional communities looking at cities like
Plymouth and considering also opting out of the transit service. She reported on
the current efforts of the AMM and the LMC with respect to transit issues.
Councilmember Edson stated that transit service costs must be commensurate with
the private sector. He noted that in the City of Minneapolis, the garbage hauling
service was contracted for a number of years until the city was able to
competitively provide the service.
Mr. Scherer stated that there were many internal problems with the transit service
when it was transferred to the Metropolitan Council. He noted that labor
contracts were negotiated between a friendly Regional Transit Board and transit
workers union. Currently, they are facing the possibility of a strike. He stated that
similar poor management was evident when the sewer systems were transferred to
the Metropolitan Council. Both of these systems were significantly mismanaged
and in debt when taken over by the Metropolitan Council.
Transit Coordinator Sweeney explained the plan to continue Plymouth service
should a strike occur. The parking lot at Waterford Plaza would be designated for
commuter parking, with transit vehicles leaving for Downtown Minneapolis every
10 to 15 minutes. He stated that the smaller buses Plymouth uses are contracted
with National School Bus. Nine small buses could be dedicated to the Metrolink
system. He stated that one challenge will be to consider the reverse commuters,
those individuals coming into Plymouth work sites. They can get to the central
commuter lot in Plymouth from downtown Minneapolis, but then need
transportation to the Plymouth business.
Ms. Hill stated that the City also needs to consider the concerns of
commercial/industrial owners in retaining workers who rely on the transit system.
Councilmember Edson stated that it appears there are no easy answers relating to
the Metro Mobility service. He requested that staff recommend an alternative for
providing paratransit service to the City Council to include costs and various
options. At this point, he would favor retaining the existing Metro Mobility
service, while continuing to evaluate other options for providing the service in a
Special Council Meeting
August 28, 1995
Page 9
more cost efficient manner for implementation in early 1996. He also believes that
the taxicab option should be considered under the Dial -A -Ride scenario. Transit
Coordinator Sweeney stated that this may have merit as 69 percent of the users of
Metro Mobility don't need the use of a lift.
Councilmember Edson summarized that he believes the City needs to continue
Metro Mobility service until another option is found. The City could evaluate the
system prior to April 1, 1996, and develop alternatives for Council consideration.
The alternatives and report should be provided to the Council in time to implement
an alternate system by April 1. He stated the City also needs to mount a lobbying
effort with legislators, the Governor, AMM, LMC, and users of the systems.
Manager Johnson stated that one current proposal is for an eight-month agreement
to continue the Metro Mobility service. This would take the service through the
1996 legislative session. Councilmember Lymangood stated that he would support
continuation of Metro Mobility as proposed, but he views the existing arrangement
as a short-term solution.
Councilmember Wold expressed concern that Plymouth would not be getting
adequate value for its tax dollar with the least expensive scenario of the Dial -A -
Ride option. He would support staying with the existing Metro Mobility service
for six to eight months so that staff can develop alternatives for getting better
value for the tax dollar.
Councilmember Edson agreed. He noted that the estimated cost of the Dial -A -
Ride option is $175,000, and that would not guarantee getting individuals to
Plymouth employers. Transit Coordinator Sweeney stated that under that
scenario, some people would definitely lose their jobs.
Councilmember Edson stated that the transit issue is very difficult to resolve, and
the City needs to work to educate legislators and State government on the issues.
He does not believe that it is wise to segregate certain segments of a regional
system by funding decisions, particularly when those decisions are contrary to
other goals related to affordable housing. He stated that the only way to have the
best system possible is to ensure an integrated Metro Mobility system throughout
the metro area.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m.
Laurie F. Ahrens
City Clerk