Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL PACKET 11152005 Meeting Sheet IIIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII 104949 Box: 33 Folder: PL PACKETS 2005-2011 Document: PL PACKET 11152005 i CITY OF ST. ANTHONY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA NOVEMBER 15, 2005 7:00 P.M. REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS I. CALL TO ORDER. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. III. ROLL CALL. IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA. V. MEETING MINUTES. VA Review and Approve Planning Commission Minutes of September 20, 2005 VI. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL. VIA No Designee Required. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS. VII.1. None VIII. Concept Reviews. VIII.1. None IX. PUBLIC INPUT. Individuals may address the Planning Commission about any item not included on the Regular Meeting Agenda. Speakers are requested to come to the podium, state their name and address for the City Clerk's record and limit their remarks to five (5) minutes. X. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION. X1. Comprehensive Land Use Plan Update X2. Discussion of Community Design and Active Living in Ramsey County X3. Process to Amend City Ordinance XI. ANNOUNCEMENTS. XII. ADJOURNMENT. HAPlanning\PC Agendas\2005\111505 pc agenda.doc Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 1 1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 2 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 4 September 20, 2005 5 5 7:00 p.m. 7 8 9 I. CALL TO ORDER 10 Chair Stromgren called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 11 12 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 13 Chair Stromgren invited the Commission and the audience to join in the Pledge of Allegiance. 14 15 III. ROLL CALL. 16 Commissioners present: Chair Stromgren; Vice Chair Hanson; Commissioners Galyon, 17 Hoska,Jensen, Jenson, and Young. 18 19 Absent: 20 Also present: Assistant City Manager Kim Moore-Sykes. 21 22 IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 23 24 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Young, to approve the meeting agenda 25 as presented. 26 Motion carried unanimously 27 28 29 V. MEETING MINUTES. 30 5.1 Review and Approve Planning Commission Minutes of August 16 2005. 31 32 The Commission had the following corrections to the minutes: 33 34 Commissioner Galyon: 35 • Page 7, Line 3, reads: `egr4ess'; should be `egress'. 36 • Page 8, Line 22, should read 'anew driveway `to the' garage'. 37 38 Commissioner Young: 39 • Page 15,Line 10,reads `live-saving'; should read `life-saving'. 40 41 Chair Stromgren: 42 • Page 12, line 29, 2-foot should read 2-hour. 43 44 Commissioner Jenson: 45 • Pagel 1, line s reads `Commissioner Jensen'; should read Commissioner Jenson'. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 2 1 2 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Jensen, to approve the meeting minutes 3 of the Planning Commission of August 16, 2005 as amended. 4 Motion carried unanimously 5 6 7 VI. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL mission member to the September 27, 2005 City Council g 6.1 Designate a Planning Com 9 Meeting. 10Commission 11 Chair Stromgren stated that he and Ms. Moore-Sykes would discuss the Planning 12 representative for the September 27, 2005 City Council meeting at a later time. 13 14 VII. PUBLIC HEARING. 15 16 7.1 Conditional Use Permit—49er's CateringServices 2829 AnthonyLane Sou 17 18 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. 19 20 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Eric Reiners, an architect with Welman, Sperides Architects, 21 representatives for Local 49, is present as a representative for the Local 49er's to answer any 22 questions the Planning Commission might have regarding their application for a Conditional Use 23 Permit. She provided the Commission with a brief overview noting that the Local 49er's had 24 recently completed construction of a catering kitchen and related facilities,which they are 25 interested in opening to the public for weddings and special events. She stated that the 26 application had been reviewed previously by City Council but because the City's zoning 27 ordinance did not allow this use in the Industrial Zoning District the Local 49er's petitioned the 28 Council requesting that the Ordinance at Section 1640.03 be amended to allow catering as a 29 permitted conditional use in the Industrial Zoning District. She stated that the City Council 30 approved the amendment at their August 23,2005 meeting and the applicant is now requesting a 31 public hearing to consider graining a Conditional Use Permit for their catering services. She 32 stated that they reviewed potential traffic impacts and it was determined that allowing the 33 services would not have additional impact to the area. She stated that Staff has outlined five 34 conditions and reviewed with the Commission. 35 hlman Freese, stated that Mr. Refiners was not able to attend this evening 36 Mike Freeburg, Po 37 adding that he was asked, on short notice, to represent the International Union of Operating 38 Engineers,Local 49, in his place. He explained that he is not actually involved in this project but 39 assured the Commission that he would do his best to answer their questions. He indicated that 40 the parking issues have been resolved and assured the Commission that they would be in 41 compliance with all outlined requirements and conditions. 42 43 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. 44 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 3 1 Commissioner Jensen referenced Condition 3, which states that there would anywhere ookinon the of 2 food on site and asked if there is any possibility of cooking actually takingpace 3 site. 4ood onis 5 Ms.Moore-Sykes assured the Commission that there would tion oven or grill, located at thetsite. 6 there are no actual cooking facilities, such as a stove, nve 7tchen and g Chair Stromgren further clarified stating that appy a stated that based on the equipmenthey ave 9 of the ki compliance with Health Department standards. H 10 on site there is no issue with regards to what they would be able to do outside of warming 11 prepared food. 12 13 Vice Chair Hanson asked if they should include a section that would clarify and outline the hours 14 of operation for the facility. 15 Commissioner Jensen stated that the hours of operation for facilities in an industrial zone are no 16 17 usually regulated and asked what it would prevent. 18 ed that it could be included as condition noting that the liquor licensing 19 Chair Stromgren statfacility. 20 would help to govern the hours of operation for the ty 21 22 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Vice Chair AnH�anori nLane South as submittedl of e 23 Conditional Use Permit for catering activities at 2829 Y 24 25 Chair Stromgren stated that he would like to add a friendly amendment to restrict the hours o 26 operation to 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. 27 28 Motion by Chair Stromgren, second by Commissioner Jenson restricted to proposed 10 00 a me to 1:00 29 amendment as Condition 7 to state that the hours of operation, 30 a.m. 31 32 Commissioner Jensen accepted the friendly amendment. 33 Motion carried unanimously 34 35 36 7.2 Conditional User Permit Request—Drive-throu for Sn der's Drugs 37 38 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:17 p.m. 39 40 Ms.Moore-Sykes stated that the City received a request from David Leonard, Snyder's rug 41 Stores, Inc., for a Conditional Use Permit for a drive-throughta brief overview window,the r ras equest noting thed by the at Mr. 42 Zoning Code. She provided the Commission with a bne ept review at their August 16, 2005 43 Leonard appeared before the Planning Commission in a conc 44 meeting,proposing to move Snyder's Drug Store from its current location in the St. Anthony 45 Shopping Center to the end cap unit in the St. Anthony Marketplace. She explained that Mr. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 4 I Leonard has indicated that the lease at their current location is up soon and since the current site 2 no longer fits their needs they became interested in the St. Anthony Marketplace unit when they 3 were told that it was available. She further explained that Mr. Leonard found this location 4 attractive because it is an end cap and they could easily install a drive-through for the 5 convenience of the physically challenged customers and parents with small children. She stated 6 that the Planning Commission had discussed the traffic flow of the proposed drive-through 7 window and it was suggested that to alleviate traffic issues that the proposed drive-through be a 8 one-way. She reviewed the proposed conditions with the Commission 9 10 David Leonard, Snyder's Drug Store, Inc.,referenced the no-canopy condition stating that they 11 had discussed and agreed to a small canopy over the window and explained that the intent is to 12 protect employees from inclement weather. 13 14 Ms. Moore-Sykes confirmed adding that it was also noted in the minutes. 15 16 Commissioner Jensen clarified that the hours of operation for the drive-through would correlate 17 to the hours of operation for the pharmacy. 18 with 19 Mr. Leonard confirmed that the hours of operation be hortertan h drive-through egular tore hours. He the He 20 pharmacy noting that the pharmacy hours 21 stated that there is an understanding that the store would be open two hours later than the 22 pharmacy. 23 24 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:23 p.m. 25 26 Commissioner Jenson asked that Item 3 be amended to reflect the hours of operation. 27 2g Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that she has made note of the hours of operation and assured the 29 Commission that the conditions would be amended to reflect the hours of operation for the drive- 30 through. 31 32 Chair Stromgren referenced Item 2,which addresses the flow of traffic and asked to include a 33 statement that would direct traffic in a southbound direction to avoid headlight reflection into the 34 neighboring residential areas. 35 36 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Hoska, to recommend approval of 37 the Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through window at the Snyder's Drug Store as submitted 38 with amendments to Condition 1 to allow for a minor canopy over the receiving box location; 39 Condition 2, orient the drive-through traffic to a one-way, southbound flow pattern to minimize 40 potential traffic conflicts; Condition 3,hours of drive-through operation would be limited to 9:00 41 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; and Condition 4, as submitted by staff. 42 43 Chair Stromgren submitted a friendly amendment to insert the requirement of a 4-foot maximum 44 overhang for the canopy. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 5 1 Commissioner Jensen accepted the friendly amendment. 2 Motion carried unanimously 3 4 5 7.3 R-2 Rezonin Re uest for 3645 Chelmsford Road 6 7 8 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:26 p.m. 9 10 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the applicant,Troy Martenson, is not present and asked the o table this discussion until the applicant arrives or would they 11 Commission if they would prefer t 12 prefer to move forward with the report. 13 14 The Commission agreed to move forward with the report. 15 16 Ms. Moore-Sykes proved the Commission with a brief overview of the request stating that Staff 17 is asking the Planning Commission to consider a request by Troy Martenson, owner of 3645 18 Chelmsford Road to rezone the property from RSingle-Family zoned R-Dl lwitht t existing o 19 Family Zoning District. She stated that the property 20 single-family structure on the lot. She noted that it is a comer lot with a 75-foot utility easement 21 given to Xcel Energy that goes across the northern portion of the lot. She stated that the property 22 adjacent to the east is zoned R-2 and the properties de been several attempts to spltly across 37th Avenue to it this lot bue north tt 23 the property are zoned R-4. She stated that there have 24 because of the utility easement,the requests have either been denied by the City or upon 25 discovering the easement, the petitioners cancelled their applications. She stated that the current 26 owner also went before the City Council at its June 21,2005 meeting with a petition for an R-3 27 Townhouse Zoning District rezoning request adding that Council denied the request due to 28 concerns about spot zoning. She stated that Mr. Martenson is now proposing to submit a 29 rezoning request that would change the current zoning of R-1 to R-2 and presented his concept to .30 the Planning Commission at a concept review at the July 19, 2005 meeting. She noted that the 31 property adjacent to the subject property is currently zoned R-2, despite its current structure 32 being used as asingle-family residence. She explainedbuiistrict requires lding setback line 33 a corner lot have an area of 14,000 square feet and 100 feet in wilt at the ilding 34 and based on two different sources, staff has varying information about the square footage othat the 35 subject lot. She stated that to plat map that the City receives from Hennepin County eb site shows 36 to lot is 23,540 square feet,while the information from to Hennepin County 37 to lot is 19,260 square feet. She stated that an enclosed copy of a survey of the lot shows an 18- 38 foot by 220-foot roadway easement that accounts for the discrepancy in to square footages 39 adding that this lot conforms with to area and width as required by the City,s Zoning Ordinance 40 for an R-2 designation. She noted that a letter from Xcel Energy he easement as long with it doeplic tion 41 that states that they are comfortable with a driveway over t 42 disrupt to easement too much. 43 44 Chair Stromgren suggested closely the public hearing since to applicant is not present to address 45 this request. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 6 1 2 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:29 P.M. 3 4 Motion by Chair Stromgren, second by Commissioner Young, to recommend denial of the 5 proposed request to rezone the property located at 3645 Chelmsford Road from an R-1 Single- 6 Family Zoning District to an R-2, Two-Family Zoning District because the applicant failed to 7 attend the Planning Commission meeting and public hearing and because the requested changes 8 have not been made to the proposal since the concept review. 9 10 Motion carried unanimously 11 12 7.4 Proposed Text Amendment to the City Code to Allow Egress Window Wells Encroach 13 into Side Yard Setback 14 15 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. 16 17 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that this is a request to consider a proposed text amendment to the City's 18 Zoning Code to allow egress window wells as encroachment no more than 3 feet into the side 19 yard or front yard setback. She provided the Commission with a brief overview stating that by 20 omission from the St. Anthony Zoning Code, egress window wells are not a permitted use or 21 allowed as an encroachment into the side yard setback of the R-1 Zoning District. She stated that 22 Section 1600.03,Uses Not Specified, states that if a use is not specifically permitted,permitted 23 by conditional use permit or prohibited, the use will be considered prohibited and Section 24 1650.03, Encroachments in Yards, does not include egress window wells as an allowed 25 encroachment. She stated that staff received several requests this summer from residents asking 26 to be allowed to install egress window wells in the setbacks and in many situations the yard was 27 generally sufficient to allow for the installation without going into the setback, side yard or front 28 yard areas. She noted that in these situations the Building Inspector and Fire Marshall would 29 oversee the installation to ensure proper placement and dimensions, as required by the building 30 code. 31 32 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Staff did some research to determine how other Cities address this 33 issue noting that all the Cities that responded to Staff's requests for information indicated that 34 they do not have anything in their zoning ordinances that specifically address egress windows in 35 the setback because it's more of a safety issue. She stated that as such, egress window wells are 36 basically allowed by their City's policy and usually without the zoning department's 37 consideration. She noted that all stated that building permits are required for egr4ess window 38 wells construction so that the Building Inspector and Fire Marshall can review the building plans. 39 She noted that the Cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul,Blaine, Hopkins,New Brighton and 40 Lexington have adopted policies that are based on the Minnesota Building Codes for 41 encroachments into the side or front yard for egress window wells. She stated that in speaking 42 with the Planning and Zoning Departments for the Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul,they both 43 indicated that egress window wells are allowed no matter what because it's an issue of safety for 44 both the resident and emergency response personnel. She indicated that Michelle Howard of the 45 Minneapolis Planning and Zoning Department said that they viewed the installation of egress Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 7 1 window wells the same as St. Paul and that both Cities have side yard setbacks on some 2 properties that are three to four feet from the property lines. She noted that they also view egress 3 window wells as always allowable because of the safety issues that they address. She stated that 4 Ms. Howard, as did the planner from St. Paul, stated that they have never required property 5 owners to attend public hearings on their requests to prove hardship or to consider economic gain 6 as an impediment to the allowance and construction of these structures. She stated that it is 7 considered simply a matter of safety and they can be installed without planning and zoning 8 review. She stated that it appears to be the same procedure for other Cities that Staff contacted. 9 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Staff also requested memos from the Building Official and the t. 10 11 Anthony fire Department regarding egress window wells noting that the memos were received 12 and included their feedback. She stated that since Staff did not find any ordinance language 13 dealing with egress window wells from other metro communities simply adding egress window 14 wells to the already existing ordinance text would be the easiest text amendment and reviewed 15 the proposed text changes with the Commission. 16 909 30t' Avenue, stated that she would be in favor of the propose text 17 Ramona Steadman, 2 18 amendment as long as the side yard and rear yard areas are preserved. She shared her experience 19 in trying to get an egress window well installed in their home with the Commission. She 20 explained that Staff had informed her that they would need a variance due to side yard setback 21 requirements. She indicated that they began this process in June and they still do not have an 22 egress window well installed. She expressed concerns stating that all they want is a safe area for 23 their daughter. She noted that surrounding Cities do not require this kind of process adding that 24 it is her hope that the Commission recommends approval as it saves lives. 25 26 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. 27 28 Chair Stromgren clarified that the only question here is whether they make it a staff leve 29 approval process or do they make it a conditional use permit process to allow for closer review 30 for unique conditions. He stated that there is argument for both ways noting that he does agree 31 with the Building Official in that they do not want to make the process overly cumbersome and 32 discourage people from following through with getting the proper permits. He stated that there 33 are instances where safety could be an issue and should be considered. 34 35 Commissioner Jensen agreed noting that building permits can include specific stipulations that 36 are available and easily resolved, accepted or disputed by the applicant without having to get 37 involved in a governmental permit process, as required by a conditional use permit. He stated 38 that he would trust a text amendment that include not making t a permit ppocessroval that�would 39 Building Official. He stated that he would advocate 40 require a Planning Commission timetables. 41 42 Commissioner Young clarified that the permit could trigger inspections by the Building Inspector 43 and Fire Marshal adding that the packet clearly stated that it would trigger inspections. She 44 stated that this is a big difference and asked that this be clearly explained. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 8 1 Ms. Moore-Sykes acknowledged the differences and agreed that there is a big difference. She 2 assured the Commission that the Building Official and the Fire Marshall work closely on these 3 requests and do review the issues closes for stormwater and safety issues. 4 5 Commissioner Galyon stated that he understands the arguments for adding the text amendment 6 noting that as a person who lives in the City of St. Anthony and understanding the impracticality 7 of the situation for the applicant, the conditional use permit is not a rigorous process noting that 8 it allows neighbors to come in and voice their opinion in regards to the window well location. 9 He noted that the third paragraph of the Fire Chief's memo notes that to place an egress window 10 close proximity to a stairway would be impractical in the event of a fire. He stated that all of 11 these concerns should be reviewed adding that he would be in favor of putting a review process 12 in place that would allow the opportunity to talk through the issues. He referenced the text 13 amendment noting that it states `as long as access to the rear yard is preserved' and asked what 14 this would mean in terms of access. He stated that the references to access should be further 15 clarified stating that it would make sense to have some form of process in place to review all 16 issues. He stated that the process could be changed in the future and further clarified as the move 17 forward. 18 19 Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that preserving rear yard access could mean access for utility repair, 20 maintenance for easement utilities or emergency vehicle access. She stated that a conditional use 21 permit process would be considerably more rigorous because it would require a four-fifths vote 22 and it would require a super majority to pass a conditional use permit. She stated that if the 23 Commission is looking for more planning oversight they could consider a permitting process 24 similar to what is used for garages in setbacks. She explained that it would involve a public 25 hearing but it only requires a simple majority. She stated that it would be a variance process for 26 the applicant. She asked the Commissioners to recognize that these processes do take time and 27 that this is a life safety issue that does not have that kind of time for consideration. 28 29 Commissioner Galyon acknowledged the safety concerns stating that there are several options 30 that could be considered adding that he would like to see some form of process included in the 31 ordinance that would help to regulate the installation and allow•residents a forum to provide 32 feedback. He noted that the proposed text amendment is limited to R-1 and R-2 zoning and 33 asked how R-3 Zoning Districts would be handled. 34 35 Chair Stromgren explained that R-3 Zoning districts are considered separately due to their size 36 and because they would have alternate escape routes. 37 38 Commissioner Jenson stated that in the paragraph following the test amendment it states that the 39 permit would trigger inspections by the Building Inspectors and Fire Marshall, which would 40 provide oversight of the construction of the egress window well and setback. He referenced the 41 example given of the driveway next to the window well and the request to install a small safety 42 fence and asked if the building inspection process would have the ability to highlight a need for 43 something like this. 44 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 9 1 Chair Stromgren stated that they could add a sub-condition life safety. n that gBuilding Official the 2 authority to require fencing or guard rails for fall protection 3 4 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that they should also keep in mind that driveways are not allowed in e 5 setback area. She explained that there is a minimum setback on one side of five feet and cannot 6 encroach the area. She stated that there is theoretically 7-feet between the side yard and 7 driveway,which would give reasonable space for safety. 8 9 Commissioner Galyon expressed concerns stating that he does not believe that the process would 10 be too rigorous for residents to come through. He asked that they explore other opt ons to 11 provide residents with an opportunity or forum to express their opinions. He stat the 12 numbers are not big enough to show that there is a big problem in this area adding that he does 13 agree that this is a life safety issue that should also be considered. He stated that he is not against 14 it adding that it should continue to be petitioned through a conditional use permit process. 15 16 Commissioner Hoska stated that he supports the text amendment as proposed noting that in being 17 a member of the Fire Department he finds himself in live saving situations where this is a true 18 asset and life saver. He stated that this is a safety issue and does not want the process to be too 19 cumbersome for the residents. He stated that he is sure that the Fire Marshall and Building 20 Official has enough sense to make sure that the fencing would be placed if safety issues are 21 identified. 22 Commissioner Galyon acknowledged Commissioner Hoska stating that he does appreciate his 23 24 views adding that he does not agree that keeping a permit process in place would impede the 25 process or impact safety. 26 27 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Jenson, to recommend approval o 28 the proposed text amendment to the City Code to allow egress window wells to encroach into the 29 side yard setbacks as proposed by Staff. 30 d to include a friendly amendment to add a subsection granting authority to 31 Chair Stromgren aske d rails or similar fall protection to protect the public. 32 the Building Official to require fencing, guar 33 lained that his reason for 34 Chair Stromgren exp the friendly amendment is because it is specifically 35 exempted from the building code and someone could challenge the decision if they do not give 36 the Building Official this tool. 37 38 Commissioner Jensen accepted the friendly amendment. 39 40 Ayes—6 Nays—1 (Galyon) Motion carried 6-1. 41 42 7.5 Zoning Ordinance Amendment—Vehicle Sales Prohibited 43 44 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 10 1 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Staff has recently received several complaints from residents about 2 all the vehicles for sale at Wiltshire Park School parking lot. She stated that because this is not 3 listed as allowable in the Zoning Ordinance for any zoning district, selling vehicles in this 4 manner is not allowed. She stated that vehicles parked on public property or public right-of-way 5 would be cited and towed at the owner's expense. She explained that Wiltshire Park is 6 considered private property and as such, the police can only respond if and when there is a call 7 from the school staff. She further explained that the Police and the Public Works Department 8 have been working with the school staff to determine a resolution to this situation and as a result 9 of Staff discussion, she has received a copy of the City of Falcon Heights' ordinance regarding 10 vehicle sales. She stated that the ordinance language was used as an example of a possible 11 ordinance that the City could adopt to alleviate the situation. She stated that the proposed 12 language was sent to the City Attorney and the Police Department for their comments. She 13 stated that the Police Department has been working with the school board and that signs are now 14 posted in the area that states parking is not permitted in the area and would be enforced. She 15 reviewed the proposed text changes with the Commission. 16 17 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 7:54 p.m. 18 19 Commissioner Jensen asked what the consequence would be if someone violates the posted signs 20 21 22 Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that this would give the Police Department the opportunity to cite 23 the individual or tow the vehicle if it is on private property, such as Wiltshire Park. 24 25 Commissioner Jenson asked if public property would include parking in front of a house or in a 26 driveway. 27 front of a house would be considered public property 28 Ms. Moore-Sykes confirmed that parking in 29 and the vehicle would have to be pulled into the driveway. 30 31 Commissioner Jensen asked if this would also include all recreational vehicles. 32 33 Ms. Moore-Sykes confirmed that it would include recreational vehicles such as boats on trailers, 34 snowmobiles and four-wheelers. She explained that if the school has a vehicle for sale they 35 would be able to display the vehicle because they own the property but another individual would 36 not be able to park or display their vehicle on school property because they do not own the 37 property. She stated that the proposed ordinance clearly states that it does have to be the 38 residence of the resident where the vehicle is parked. She stated that the verbiage is very clear. 39 40 Motion by Commissioner Jenson, second by Commission Galyon, to recommend approval of the 41 proposed text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance as presented. 42 43 Motion carried unanimously 44 1 7.6 Administrative Subdivision of property—Kenzie Terrace Properties 5s Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 11 1 2 Chair Stromgren opened the public hearing at 7:59 p.m. 3 4 Ms. Moore-Sykes reviewed the listed properties with the Commission noting that these are all 5 properties the City has acquired for redevelopment o d a ein 996,atyears thhave part of their ld by the City 6 until a buyer or project could be identified. She state 7 redevelopment plan for this area,the City Council met with the owners to discuss the prospect of 8 acquiring these properties. She stated that by 2000 the City had acquired all of the LLP pShe erties and 9 that on October 29,2004 the City sold all of the lots to Autumn Woods Partners, 10 stated that as part of the agreement, the City agreed to combine these lots into one parcel and 11 record it with Hennepin County. 12 roperties, confirmed that the lots along Kenzie are all properties that they 13 Paul Brewer, LaNel P 14 purchased from the City and reviewed with the has been deeded and rsion. He stated that as ecorded with the 15 Woods they have a triangular parcel titled Par 16 County. He stated that now, in order to prepare the parcel for development, they want to convey 17 Parcel A to a partnership that owns the parcels that would be eventually developed. He stated lg that until they get a solid plan together for this area theydo not an can record ivision of 19 the parcels and they are asking the City to waive the subdivision requirements so they He stated that without 20 Parcel A as a separate parcel from the lots they purchased from the City. 21 the City waiver they would have to subdivide the property. He stated that at this time they are 22 requesting that the Planning Commission waive the for asion requirements allowing them to final development plan for the 23 record the deed for Parcel A and when they get t point 24 site they would come back to present a formal subdivision plan for the site. 25 26 Chair Stromgren closed the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. 27 28 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissiolocated nera 2534 Kenzie Terrac approval Kenzie 29 the proposed administrative subdivision of property 30 Terrace; 2542 Kenzie Terrace; 2546 Kenzie Terrace and 2548 Kenzie Terrace and combine these 31 lots into one parcel and record it with Hennepin County as proposed by Staff. 32 Motion carried unanimously 33 34 35 VIII. CONCEPT REVIEW 36 ,-nnertv located at 37 8.1 Redevelopment of the Kenzie Terrace/LowM Avenue Commercial P 38 2520 Kenzie Terrace. 39 group of 40 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that John Harriss,Harriss Architects, is representinga gr p 41 developers that are interested in redeveloping 2520 Kenzie Terrace,which is the old KFC 42 commercial site. She stated that the parcel is currently zoned commercial and that their proposal 43 is to rezone the lot to an R-4 and construct an owner-occupied condominium with 33 units. She 44 explained that because of the size of the lot,they might also request a variance to the height 45 restriction to construct a 4-floor building. She noted that they have a similar project on Central Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 12 1 Avenue and reviewed with the Commission. 2 3 John Harriss, Harriss Architects, stated there is great potential on this site noting that it is a 4 gateway to the community. He stated that when they reviewed the site a couple of things stood 5 out including the intersection at Kenzie Terrace and Lowry,which would provide a great 6 opportunity for green space and a pocket park. He stated that the property has two exposures 7 from Lowry and Kenzie Terrace noting that if the building were turned it would create a 8 formidable presence from both perspectives adding that the main entry would come in off Lowry. 9 He stated that they would also provide access to an underground parking area and a drop-off area 10 at the front of the building. He stated that the proposed building would be 4-stories above grade 11 with 66-spaces for parking,with most of the parking being underground. He explained that due 12 to the size of the footprint it would be necessary to extend the underground parking beyond the 13 building limits and reviewed with the Commission. He noted that the top of the parking area 14 would be a green-space area adding that no one would ever know that there is underground 15 parking in that area. He stated that the site is currently paved and it is their belief that they would 16 be helping the stormwater runoff by adding green space in this area. He reviewed the materials 17 for the proposed building noting that it would be primarily brick with stucco or stone accents, 18 similar to a current project of theirs on Central Avenue in Minneapolis. He stated that the units 19 would range from 1000 square feet to 1,400 square feet in size and assured the Commission that 20 it would not be age restrictive adding that it is their belief that the majority of individuals 21 interested would fit the empty nester profile. 22 23 Chair Stromgren noted that there is an issue with the shape of the site stating that it appears that 24 they would need a variance on three sides because the R-4 setbacks would be more restrictive. 25 26 Mr.Harass assured the Commission that they would be ok from the Lowry side adding that he 27 knows they are five feet closer to the line on the Kenzie side. He stated that if this is a major 28 issue they would be willing to consider making an adjustment. He explained that they felt that 29 due to the heavy commercial nature of Kenzie Terrace that it would be appropriate to bring the 30 building up 25-feet. He stated that it is his belief that they are ok with the property that abuts the 31 residential area adding that they are looking to apply for one or two setback variance requests. 32 33 Chair Stromgren clarified that in an R-4 Zoning District the rear yard requirement is 40 feet and 34 that code defines it as opposite of the main entry. 35 36 Mr. Harriss acknowledged his concern noting that these are all issues that they plan to discuss 37 with Staff. He assured the Commission that they would work closely with Staff to make the 38 necessary adjustments to the proposal. 39 ulations for 33-unit building they would need at 40 Chair Stromgren stated that based on his calc 41 least 70,000 square feet to compensate for the density. 42 43 Mr. Harriss agreed that the square footage would have to be reviewed further and assured that 44 Commission that this would be reviewed further with staff prior to the next hearing. 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 13 1 Commissioner Jensen asked if the Planning Commission has ever reviewed setbacks with respect 2 to structural distance. He expressed concerns stating that they would have to process variance 3 requests for all areas of the underground parking that would be built apart from the main building 4 structure. He stated that they would have to provide the Commission with a clear set of plans 5 that clearly outlines and defines the utility and variance issues. 6 7 Mr. Harriss assured the Commission that it is their plan to meet with the Public Works 8 department to discuss all of these issues. He stated that it is his hope that he would receive some 9 kind of encouragement from the Commission to move forward on this project so that they can 10 begin to schedule their meetings with Staff. 11 12 Vice Chair Hanson asked Mr.Harass why he believes that this project would be a success. 13 14 Mr. Harriss stated that they believe that this is an appropriate scale for this location noting that it 15 would be a great location for the proposed building. He stated that they plan to do a market study 16 noting that based on their experience in this area and on the sales in St. Anthony this site has 17 great potential for this type of housing. 18 19 Bob Leback, developer, stated that he has spent the last twelve years raising equity with 20 condominium projects and it is his belief that he is seeing the Twin Cities accepting this type of 21 market more and more. He stated that he is seeing a lot of fill-in sites, in various areas,that are 22 providing smaller unit projects for the empty nester market. He stated that he sees this as 23 complimenting the assisted living proposals more so than as a conflict. 24 25 Commissioner Jensen asked for further clarification on the traffic flow for the site. He expressed 26 concerns stating that given the odd configuration of both sites there could be traffic issues to the 27 west. He asked if a shared access point would be appropriate in order to help with the circulation 28 of traffic. He suggested that they do a traffic study to help determine traffic flow and circulation. 29 30 Mr. Harass stated that they would welcome getting together to discuss and review the traffic 31 flows for the area. He noted that Ms. Moore-Sykes has already identified several traffic schemes 32 and reviewed with the Commission. He indicated that they are very open to considering any 33 number of options with respect to traffic flow noting that he does see a possibility for combining 34 three access points and reviewed with the Commission. 35 36 Commissioner Jenson asked why the front entrance faces Lowry South versus Kenzie Terrace. 37 38 Mr. Harriss explained that it was a question of how it would eventually lay out on the lot and 39 reviewed with the Commission. He stated that they felt a strong building presence on Kenzie 40 Terrace would be the best view versus a view of the parking lot. 41 42 Chair Stromgren stated that part of the problem going forward is in looking at all of the variances 43 they would need. He stated that there are certain tests the City and State can do to see how some 44 of variances could be met and reviewed the process with the Commission. He stated that the 45 tests would have to pass and all conditions would have to be met in order to gain approval of the Commission Meeting Minutes Planning Commig September 20, 2005 Page 14 1 variance requests. 2 3 Mr. Harriss noted that in order to build they would have to meet the minimum requirements for 4 the number of units addingthat they would not be able to build a 33-unit building without going view the proposal with Staff noting that one of the 5 up four stories. He stated that he would re p p 6 things that ends up driving a project like this is the parking requirements,which could take up a 7 lot of buildable space. He assured the Commission that they would work to identify and site the g building in on the lot so that the setback requests would be acceptable to the City. He stated that 9 they are in the early stages of planning and are working to identify all issues that should be 10 addressed. 11 12 Chair Strogren stated that it is nice to have a developer who comes in and immediately m 13 provides a 2-space per unit parking up front adding that he also appreciates the green-space 14 recommendations in their plan. 15 they 16 Commissioner Jensen stated that had previously discussed the text amendment requiring a 17 three-acre minimum adding that A PUD would more than likely happen on the north side of the 18 property. He stated that this proposal is clearly under the three-acre minimum and that this alone 19 would reopen the discussions. 20 21 Chair Stromgren asked if they have a timeline in place. He stated that the Commission expects 22 to see extensive plans and designs at the public hearing. 23 24 Mr. Harriss stated that they anticipate beginning the project in the next four to five weeks. He 25 stated that they would like to try getting this done internally within the next 30-days. He 26 expressed concerns stating that if they have to revisit the design in a substantial way that could 27 delay the process. He stated that their target is to have the preliminary plat ready and available to 28 review at the next Planning Commission. He assured the Commission that they would not come 29 before the Planning Commission without a complete package for them to review. He asked the 30 Planning Commission for positive feedback on the project noting that it would allow him to be 31 able to go back to the owner and request an extension. 32 33 Commissioner Jensen stated that the Commission is not opposed to housing at this location 34 adding that they want clarity from the Public Works department on this site. He stated that the 35 existence of property lines on an `as is' condition othe�Commissiindication on t be able towhere know where the uld e 36 on a re-plat. He stated that it would be nice for 37 lines are because this is where the setbacks would come from. 38 39 Chair Stromgren referenced the County right-of-way and asked for clarification. 40 d the Commission that they 41 Mr. Harriss assure would not submit this without a survey adding that nt from the City for potential redevelopment of this 42 they would like some sense of encourageme 43 parcel. 44 45 Chair Stromgren asked if the Concept Review is on the Council agenda. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20,2005 Page 15 1 2 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the City Council would review the Planning Commission minutes 3 noting that the concept review is usually done at the Planning Commission level. She stated that 4 it would be up to the Commission to decide if they want the concept review to be done at the 5 Council level. 6 7 Chair Stromgren stated that he would like to get a feel from the Council as to their thoughts on 8 this proposal noting that the proposal for housing is a good one. He stated that he would like 9 more clarification and answers to their questions. 10 11 Mr. Harriss stated that he would like to take the path of least resistance noting that the propose 12 general site plan and configuration of the building is the best design for the site. He stated that able to the Commission and 13 they might be able to come up with something more account 14 reviewed. 15 16 Commissioner Jensen expressed concerns stated that this corner does not have much viability. 17 He stated that they would probably be lookinP�° e rezoning in He stated that itthis ssarea,which time to address howeans�hey ere 18 would probably be a text amendment for the 19 would handle smaller sites. 20 21 Commissioner Jenson agreed noting that this site has been underutilized for over ten years. 22 23 Ms. Moore-Sykes suggested considering another concept review with the Planning which 24 She stated that it appears that the groundbreaking won't happen until next spring, 25 give them some time to work through the plan. 26 would robabl not take place until the Spring of 27 Mr. Harriss confirmed that the groundbreaking p Y 28 2007 and reviewed with the Commission. He stated that there is still information that the current 29 owner has to provide and the owner would have to provide them with an extension to get the 30 project done. 31 Commissioner Hoska noted that if they were to go through any of the first ring suburbs 32 33 would see a lot of this kind underutilized properties adding that they are now trying revitalize 34 the first ring suburbs and make them a place people want to live. 35 36 Ms.Moore-Sykes indicated that they are also very close to the college campuses adding that 37 there is also a market for professionals and singles who want to be close enough to downtown yet 38 not in downtown area. 39 40 IX. PUBLIC INPUT 41 42 Glenn Gavik, 2605 Lowry Avenue Northeast, stated that he lives next door to the propose 43 project the Commission just discussed and expressed concerns that he did not hear from anyone 44 regarding this project. He stated that he is concerned that they are proposing to build a four-story 45 building next to his home and that it would affect his property value. I Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 16 1 2 Chair Stromgren explained that notices are sent out to affected property owners for public 3 hearings not concept reviews and reviewed the process with Mr. Gavik. 4 5 Mr. Gavik asked what they would do for homeowners that live in the area. He stated that he and 6 his neighbors have lived in St. Anthony for over 29-years and asked the Commission how they 7 would feel if they had something like this going up next to them. He expressed concerns stating 8 that he does not understand why they want to squeeze so much onto such a small parcel of land. 9 He indicated that there has been some discussion about the possibilities of buying out the 10 properties in the area adding that he has not heard anything regarding the results of that 11 discussion. 12 13 Chair Stromgren stated that the Commission would update City Staff about the possibilities and 14 their interest in possibility selling their properties adding that the City would not have anything to 15 do with the decision for a property buyout. 16 17 Mr. Gavik asked why the developers have not tried to work with the residents in purchasing their 18 lots. He indicated that one of the residents,who lives in the middle of the properties, did not 19 want to sell so the developers did not pursue it any further and asked why. He stated that it 20 appears that there is no concern about the other residents adding that he would like to know what 21 the setbacks are for the development. He asked the Commission to make sure that they adhere to 22 all of the requirements. 23 24 X. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION. 25 26 Captain John A Ohl—Named as St Anthony Police Chief 27 28 10.1 Ms. Moore-Sykes announced that John Ohl has accepted the position of the Chief of 29 Police for the City of St. Anthony and reviewed with the Commission. 30 31 XI. ANNOUNCEMENTS 32 33 Commissioner Jenson asked if there have been any more leases granted in the commercial 34 sections of the City. He asked if there would be an open house for Silver Lake Village. 35 36 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that an Open House for Silver Lake Village is scheduled for October 19, 37 2005. 38 39 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the Chamber of Commerce is working with the management team 40 on the Oktoberfest noting that it is currently scheduled for October 15, 2005 from 3:00 P.M. to 41 9:00 P.M. 42 43 Commissioner Hoska asked for an update on tenants for the Hitching Post. 44 planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 17 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that she is not certain what is happening with the St. Anthony 1 2 Marketplace outlot. She stated that she isnot sure entre timeline still for forward int an 3 construction noting that it is soon. She stated that H Y 4 purchase agreement noting that a letter has been sent to the Attorneys noting that should start seeing sohme movement 5 Post has mee Hitching t all of the requirements. She indicated that they ding that the liquor license application would be before the Council at 6 in next couple weeks ad 7 their next meeting. 8 g Commissioner Jensen asked if it would be appropriate for alle�sihes before anything else come before 10 text amendments that would address requests f point they 11 the Commission for consideration. He stated that hey shoulod the communityat . He He st ed that i would 12 make accommodations for design and what would be right f 13 would make sense to examine this before another request is presented for consideration. 14 15 Chair Stromgren agreed stating that both are very small parcels. 16 from the Public Works department on these issues 17 Commissioner Jensen stated that hearing ey move forward with applications or not. 18 would be very relevant whether th 19 Ms. Moore-Sykes agreed stating that there are several issues and concerns that would have to e 20 21 addressed before they could move forward. 22 Commissioner Jensen asked if Lowry p right-of-way is a split ht-of-way with the County and where does it 23 24 stop. He asked if this would impact the design in any way. 25et that information together for their next review 26 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that she would try to g re research on the PUD's for smaller parcels. 27 adding that she would also do mo 28 the 29 Commissioner Jensen extended kudos to Public Works Dlot of difference with the drivers in the 30 pedestrian signs. He stated that he signs have ma 31 area. 32 dical 33 Commissioner Jenson stated that they have had a lot of discussion they remain consistent with all 34 group regarding setbacks adding that they should mak 35 groups. 36 37 XII• ADJOURNMENT 38 39 Motion by Commissioner Jensen, second by Commissioner Hoska,to adjourn the meeting at 40 9:07 p.m. 41 Motion carried unanimously. 42 43 44 Respectfully submitted, 45 Bonnie Sullivan Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 20, 2005 Page 18 1 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report No.: X. 1 From: Kim Moore-Sykes,Assistant City Manager Date: November 15, 2005 Subject: Comprehensive Land Use Plan Update Requested Action: Discussion and answer questions. Background: In 1998, the City submitted its Comprehensive Land Use Plan to the Metropolitan Council as per state requirements. Legislation had required cities in Minnesota to compile this document which was to discuss the city's zoning districts, transportation, sanitary and storm water sewer systems,water system,parks and recreation, housing plan,implementation plan and community profile. This legislation also stated that these Comprehensive Land Use Plans would be undated every 10 years. As such, the City of St. Anthony's Comprehensive Land Use Plan is scheduled to be reviewed and updated by December 31, 2008. Staff received the Systems Statements from the Met Council in September. The Met Council is asking the City to address key changes in transportation,water resources and parks policy plans ultimately in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Initially, the Met Council offered the City an opportunity to a hearing if there was disagreement with their assessment of the City's System Statements. These documents were submitted to Jay Hartman, Public Works Director and Todd Hubmer, City Engineer for their review. Their comments indicated that there were no additional concerns or issues to be addressed. The Local Planning Handbook that is referenced in the attached documents can be easily accessed at www.metrocouncil.org/plug/lph/handbook.httn. The 2030 Regional Plan can also be accessed at the same web site,www.metrocouncil.ore under publications. Attachments: * 1998 City of St.Anthony Comprehensive Land Use Plan * July 12, 2005 Letter Advising City of Upcoming Comp Plan Update Requirement * Sept. 12, 2005 Letter and System Statements for the City of St. Anthony * Miscellaneous Framework Information Pieces * 2030 Regional Development Framework Revised Forecasts 111505 Comprehensive Land Use Plan.doc Metropolitan Council July 12, 2005 RE: Local Comprehensive Plan Update s Dear Local Official: The Metropolitan Land Planning Act(MLPA) requires communities to review and update their comprehensive plans every 10 years, with the next update due by December 31, 2008. The Metropolitan Council is working on several items to assist you in this process. Here is what to expect from the Council in the next few months: • Now that all metropolitan systems plans have been adopted, systems statements will be issued in late August or early September. Systems statements are customized summaries of the systems plans for each community, and describe local planning requirements that local units must address to satisfy the 2008 update required by the MLPA. Each community will have sixty days to review and discuss with Council staff potential issues regarding the contents of its systems statement. If these issues cannot be resolved, the community may request a hearing to consider amendments to the systems statement. • A redesigned Local Planning Assistance Handbook will be available in late September. It will provide guidance on comprehensive plan content and the Council's plan review process. The new Handbook will be unveiled at the American Planning Association 's Upper Midwest 1/ Conference, September 28th-30`x'in Alexandria, MN. Shortly thereafter, the Metropolitan Council's website will have on an online version of the Handbook, and paper copies will be available. In October, the Council will host seven local planning information forums. There will be one ( in each County to discuss the 2008 plan update process. The Council's Planning and 11911?V Operating Division staff will be available to answer questions about specific elements and ��I��requirements. Watch for announcements and current information at the Metropolitan Council website, http://www.metrocouncil.org , and at the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities website, www.amm 145.or . Sincerely, Phyllis Hanson, Manager, Local Planning Assistance C:(Documents and SettingslkmoorelLocal Settingsl Temporary Internet Files DLKWuly 2005 Local Officials CP Update Letter]doc Metropolitan Council 2030 Regional Development Framework-Revised Forecasts,Aug.24,2005 Community 2000 Population Forecasts 2000 Household Forecasts 2000 Employment Forecasts Census 2010 2020 1 2030 Census 2010 1 2020 1 2030 estimate` 2010 2020 2030 ANOKA COUNTY Andover 26,588 33,000 39,000 40,500V7,'262 07 12,100 14,600 15,500 3,062 4,200 4,800 5,200 Anoka 18,076 19,000 19,800 20,800 7,900 8,500 9,000 13,250 14,400 15,200 16,200 Bethel 443 450 460 51049 160 180 200 248 330 380 440 Blaine 45,014 63,300 72,000 76,000926 20,700 29,300 31,200 16,298 20,100 21,600 23,100 Bums Twp. 3,557 4,480 4,990 5,800123 1,530 1,820 2,120 294 350 400 450 Centerville 3,202 3,700 4,100 4,700077 1,340 1,600 1,850P21,462 59 520 630 670 Circle Pines 4,663 5,400 5,300 5,400 1,697 2,050 2,100 2,20057 2,250 2,400 2,450 Columbia Heights 18,520 20,000 21,400 21,700 8,033 8,600 9,200 9,30019 6,600 6,800 7,000 Columbus Twp. 3,957 4,000 4,240 4,680 1,328 1,450 1,600 1,75082 730 900 1,000 Coon Rapids 61,607 65,700 66,000 65,000 22,578 25,600 26,500 27,000 24,200 26,000 27,800 East Bethel 10,941 11,800 11,700 12,100 3,607 4,210 4,420 4,640 , 11 1,380 1,500 1,610 Fridley 27,449 27,000 26,900 27,500 11,328 11,600 11,900 12,300 25,957 30,200 33,000 35,300 Ham Lake 12,710 15,200 15,200 15,200 4,139 5,100 5,300 5,500 2,812 3,050 3,200 3,450 Hilltop 766 770 770 770 400 410 410 410 254 350 420 470 Lexington 2,142 2,250 2,250 2,300 819 910 950 1,000 631 880 1,050 1,120 Lino Lakes 16,791 22,500 26,300 30,700 4,857 7,100 8,600 10,100 2,444 2,950 3,300 3,550 Linwood TWp. 4,668 4,920 5,000 5,400 1,578 1,820 1,950 2,090 120 140 150 160 Oak Grove 6,903 7,400 7,600 8,100 2,200 2,600 2,800 3,000 354 430 530 640 Ramsey 18,510 30,000 43,000 44,000 5,906 10,300 15,500 16,500 3,587 6,700 1 9,100 1 11,300 St.Francis ' 4,910 7,700 10,400 12,800 1,638 1 2,800 4,000 5,000 1,226 1,630 1,960 2,220 Spring Lake Park 6,667 6,600 6,600 6,800 2,676 2,700 2,750 2,950 4,287 4,600 4,800 4,850 Anoka CountyTotal 298,084 355,170 393,010 410,760 106,428 130,980 153,980 163,610 106,814 125,9901 138,060 148,980 CARVER COUNTY Benton Twp. 939 940 940 940 307 320 330 340 300 310 320 330 Gamden Twp, 955 960 980 1,030 316 •340 370 400 12 30 40 50 Carver 1,266 21900 4,000 5,600 458 1,100 1,600 2,300 156 350 550 600 Chanhassen 20,321 27,500 34,500 38,000 6,914 10,200 12,800 1000 7,571 11,300 13,560 13,900 Chaska 17,603 27,000 33,000 35,700 6,169 10,000 12,500 14,000 10,251 12,800 15,100 16,600 Cologne 1,012 1,800 2,500 3,200 385 700 1,000 1,300 212 300 400 450 Dahlgren Twp. 1,453 2,000 5,700 9,400 479 1 700 2,100 3,600 106 550 1,500 2,000 Hamburg 538 600 750 1,000 206 240 300 400 100 110 120 170 Hancock Twp. 367 390 420 440 121 140 160 170 35 40 40 50 Hollywood Twp. 1,102 1,100 1,150 1,300 371 410 450 500 130 150 160 170 Laketown Twp. 2,331 1,800 830 0 637 600 300 0 331 750 d8,100 1,600 Mayer 554 1,600 2,550 3,500 199 600 1,000 1,400 74 210 400 New German 346 420 570 830 143 180 250 370 52 70 140 Norwood YoungAmerica 3 108 4,500 6,700 8,800 1,171 1,800 2,800 3,800 1,553 2,100 2,670 San Francisco T 888 980 1,100 1,200 293 350 410 460 30 40 60 Victoria 4,025 11,000 20,700 30,200 1,367 4,100 7,600 11;000 836 1,020 1,240 Waoonia 6,814 10,600 12,500 22,700 2,568 4,500 5,300 9,400 3,777 7,000 9,400 Waconia Tw . 1,284 1,340 1,460 1,590 429 490 550 620 180 300 450 Watertown 3,029 4,700 5,800 6,200 1,078 1,800 2,300 2,500 670 1,200 1,770Watertown Tw . 1,432 1,470 1,620 1,800 478 540 620 700 191 220 280 Young America Twp. 838 870 950 1,200 2671 300 350 450 90 90 90 100 Carver County Total 70,205 104,470 138,720 174,630 24,356 39,410 53,090 68,510 26,657 38,940 47,460 52,430 Pagel Community 2000 Population Forecasts 2000 Household Forecasts 2000 Employment Forecasts Census 2010 2020 2030 Census 2010 2020 2030 estimate' 2010 2020 2030 QAKOTA COUNTY Apple Valle 45,527 61,700 69,100 71,200 16,344 22,400 26,100 27,500 11,250 16,800 20,100 22,000 Burnsville 60,220 61,400 63,000 65,000 23,687 25,200 27,000 28,700 31,825 37,700 41,200 43,300 Castle Rock T 1,495 1,500 1,550 1,650 514 550 600 650 200 - 230 250 270 Coates 163 170 190 200 64 70 80 90 254 280 300 320 Douglas Tw , 760 820 850 880 235 270 300 320 70 80 Eagan 90 100 63,557 67,000 68,000 69,000 23,773 26,500 28,000 29,000 42,114 48,300 52,000 54,200 - Empire Tw 1,638 2,050 4,650 5,100 515 700 1,600 1,800 174 250 300 340 Eureka Twp. 1,490 1,500 1,650 1,800 496 550 630 700 80 100 120 140 Green ton 12,365 20,500 27,100 32,000 4,169 7,500 10,500 12,500 3,833 6,600 8,400 9,900 Greenvale Twp. 684 730 790 880 227 260 300 340 150 160 170 190 Hampton 434 690' 730 740 156 260 290 300 262 280 300 350 Hampton Twp. 986 1,000 1,050 1,200 320 360 400 450 88 90 100 110 Hastings 18,201 23,000 27,500 30,000 6,640 8,800 11,p00 12,500 8,317 8,700 9,000 9,400 Inver Grove H ts. 29,751 33,900 40,600 44,200 11,257 14,000 17,000 18,000 7,018 9,300 1p,900 12,100 Lakeville 43,128 55,200 76,500 86,000 13,609 19,200 28,000 33,500 9,885 11,900 13,200 14,400 Lil dale 552 790 790 790 338 490 490 490. 461 480 500 550 Marshan Tw , 1,263 1,300 1,350 1,400 404 450490 520 200 230 250 270 Mendota 197 210 230 270 80 90 100 120 100 130 150 170 Mendota H ts. 11,434 12,000 12,000 12,100 4,178 4,600 4,800 5,000 8,099 9,100 9,800 10,300 Miesville 135 150 150 150 52 60 60 60 121 130 140 160 New Trier 116 120 120 120 31 30 30 30 44 50 50 60 Ninin erTw 865 940 990 1,050 280 330 370 400 80 220 310 400 Northfield 557 740 940 1,950 216 300 400 500 p 0 0 Randolph 318 370 390 400 117 140 150 .170 97 110 120 140 Ravenna l w . 536 620 630 670 192 240 260 280 88 90 100 110 Ravenna Twp. 2,355 2,500 2,600 2,800 734 840 920 1,000 103 120 130 140 Rosemount 14,619 22,700 30,100 35,700 4,742 8,000 11,200 13,500 6,089 8,400 10,100 12,200 Seiota Tw D. 285 370 430 500 92 130 160 190 50 60 70 80 South$t.Paul 20,167 19,900 - 20,000 20,700 8,123 8,300 8,600 9,000 7,708 8,100 8,300 8,500 Sunfish Lake 504 510 520 530 173 190 200 210 0 0 0 Vermillion 437 520 600 720 160 200 240 300388 420 450 480 Vermillion Twp. 1,243 1,250 1,350 1,500 395430 500 550 60 80 90 100 . West St.Paul Waterford Twp. 517 540 560 570 193 210 230 240 270 320 350 370 19,405 20,100 21,100 21,700 8,645 9,000 9,300 9,600 8,783 10,700 12,000 13,000 Dakota County Total 355,904 416,7901 478,110 512,670 131,151 160,650 190,300 208,510 148,261 179,510 199,340 214,150 Page 2 Community 2000 Population Forecasts 2000 Household Forecasts 2000 Employment Forecasts Census 2010 2020 2030 Census 2010 2020 1 2030 estimate* 2010 2020 2030 HENNEPIN COUNTY Bloomington 85,172 87,500 90,500 93,000 36,400 37,700 39,200 40,000 101,564 118,600 126,200 137,500 Brooklyn Center 29,172 29,500 30,500 29,500 11,430 11,800 12,200 12,100 16,693 18,200 18,600 19,000 Brooklyn Park 67,388 74,500 80,500 85,000 24,432 28,400 32,000 35,000 1 23,256 26,900 29,100 32,000 Champlin 22,193 23,700 24,500 25,800 7,425 8,500 9,200 10,000 2,623 3,700 5,100 6,200 Chanhassen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 930 1,700 1,700 1,700 Corcoran 5,630 11,600 19,900 24,600 1,784 4,000 7,000 8,500 1,542 4,000 6,500 7,200 Crystal 22,698 22,700 22,800 23,500 9,389 9,700 10,100 10,500 5,567 6,600 7,300 8,10Q Dayton 4,693 5,600 20,100 28,700 1,546 2,000 7,800 11,000 1,057 3,900 5,800 6,900 Dee haven 3,853 3,900 3,900 3,900 1,373• 1,450 1,500 1,500 977 1,000 1,100 1,200 Eden Prairie54,901 61,200 62,500 63,000 20,457 24,200 25,500 26,500 49,392 55,000 62,000 65,000 Edina 47,425 49,000 50,000 51,500 20,996 21,600 22,000 22,500 52,753 57,100 60,000 62,400 Excelsior 2,393 2,500 2,700 2,800 1,199 1,250 1,330 1,400 1,578 1,9802,250 2,450 Fort Snelling442 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,195 36,400 37,200 37,900 Golden Valley 20,281 22,700 23,000 24,000 8,449 9,000 9,200 9,600 29,467 31,700 33,100 34,500 Greenfield 2,544 3,190 4,050 4,300 817 1,000 1,300 1,600 100 1,240 2,000 2,700 Greenwood 729 760 770 780 285 320 330 330 200 220 230 250 Hanover 332 410 510 630 113 150 200 250 59 60 70 80 Hassan 2,463 3,500 6,100 4,500 778 1,200 2,100 1,600 627 3,150 4,850 0 Hopkins 17,367 17,900 18,600 18,900 8,359 8,500 8,800 9,000 11,777 13,600 14,800 16,300 Independence 3,236 4,000 4,480 4,900 1,088 1,380 1,600 1,800 150 160 160 170 Long Lake 1,842 2,100 2,250 2,450 756 900 1,000 1,100 2,327 2,600 2,700 2,700 Loretto 570 690 700 700 225 280 290 300 250 280 300 350 Maple Grove 50,365 64,500 75,700 84,000 17,532 24,900 30,300 34,000 16,749 32,500 42,900 45,960 Maple Plain 2,088 2,550 2,570 2,600 770 920 '950 1,000 1,681 2,350 2,800 3,300 Medicine Lake 368 420 440 470 159 180 190 200 50 60 70 F 70 Medina 4,005 5,800 9,200 12,700 1,309 2,100 3,240 4,450 2,928 5,500 6,700 7,900 Minneapolis 382,747 402,000 423,000 435,000 162,352 172,000 181,000 187,000 301,826 317,000 332,500 346,500 Minnetonka 51,102 51,500 51,500 53,500 21,267 22,300 23,100 24,000 50,471 53,800 56,000 58,600 Minnetonka Beach 614 640 660 660 215 240 240 240 210 210 210 210 Minnetrista 4,358 5,600 9,400 13,300 1,505 2,100 3,750 5,300 313 820 1,150 1,330 Mound 9,435 10,400 11,000 11,400 3,982 1 4,350 4,600 4,800 1,709 1,860 2,020 2,170 New Hppe 20,873 21,500 22,000 22,500 8,665 9,100 9,600 9,800 12,900 13,900 14,500 15,100 Orono 7,538 8,300 1 9,500 9,800 2,766 3,200 3,950 4,100 951 1,230 1,420 1,500 Osseo 2,434 2,600 2,850 3,300 1,035 1,100 1,200 1,400 2,318 2,700 2,950 3,050 Plymouth 65,894 73,000 76,000 78,500 24,820 29,000 31,500 33,500 52,574 59,900 63,400 64,500 Richfield 34,310 37,700 41,300 45,000 15,073 16,500 18,000 19,500 1 11,602 17,100 17,600 18,100 Robbinsdale 14,123 15,200 16,600 16,500 64097 6,500 7,000 7,000 6,988 8,100 8,800 9,600 Rockford 144 240 470 700 57 100 200 300 583 680 740 840 Rogers 3,588 13,000 14,400 24,200 1,195 4,700 5,200 9,000 4,208 6,000 7,100 15,500 St.Anthony5 664 5,90,p 6,200 6,600 2,402 2,400 2,600 2,800 1,999 2,650 3,100 3,400 St.Bonifaclus 1,873 2,850 2,750 2,900 681 1,100 1,100 1,200 398 520 600 700 St.Louis Park 44,102 47,000 49,300 51,500 20,773 22,000 23,000 24,000 40,714 46,200 50,500 52,500 Shorewood 7,400 7,500 7,600 8,100 2,529 2,770 3,000 3,200 732 990 1,160 1,180 Spring Park 1,717 1,850 2,000 2,100 930 1,000 1,080 1,130 788 1,330 1,690 1,800 Tonka Bay 1,547 1,800 11800 1,800 614 750 760 780 150 200 240 280 Wa to 4,113 4,300 4,500 4,700 1,929 2,100 2,200 2,200 5,912 6,200 6,400 6,600 Woodland 480 500 530 510 173 180 200 200 0 0 0 0 Henne in CountyTotal 1,116,206 1,213,600 1,309,630 1,384,800 456,131 504,920 550,610 585,680 856,838 969,890 1,045,610 1,105,230 Page 3 Community 2000 Population Forecasts 2000 Household Forecasts 2000 Employment Forecasts Census 2010 2020 2030 Census 2010 2020 1 2030 estimate' 2010 2020 2030 RAMSEY COUNTY Arden Hills 9,652 11,200 13,500 22,500 2,9593,800 4,600 8,000 12,429 15,200 17,100 20,000 Blaine 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 664 770 840 850 Falcon Heights 5,572 6,100 6,100 6,100 2,103 2,350 2,400 2,500 3,698 3,900 4,050 4,200 Gem Lake 419 440 450 490 139 160 170 190 548 720 840 870 Lauderdale 2,364 2,400 2,600 2,600 1,150 1,160 1,250 1,250 700 730 750 800 Little Canada 9,771 10,900 11,900 12,800 4,375 4,900 5,300 5,700 5,693 6,400 6,900 7,300 Maplewood 35,258 37,500 38,100 39,300 13,758 15,600 16,500 17,500 29,961 36,600 41,000 44,500 Mounds View 12,738 12,900 13,000 13,400 5,018 5,400 5,600 6,0004,382 5,900 7,000 7,600 New Brighton 22,206 22,700 22,500 22,800 9,013 9,400 9,800 10,000 10,542 12,900 14,400 15,600 North Oaks 3,883 4,400 5,500 5,900 1,300 1,600 2,100 2,300 1,008 1,060 1,100 1,070 North St Paul 11,929 12,600 12,700 13,400 4,703 5,100 5,400 6,000 3,500 5,900 7,500 8,500 Roseville 33 690 36,000 37,000 38,300 14,598 15,500 16,000 16,500 39,103 42,500 44,700 46,100 St Anthony2,348 3,250 3,200 3,400 1,295 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,383 1,700 1,900 2,050 St.Paul 286,840 305,000 320,000 331,000 112,109 120,000 127,000 133 000 184,589 196,600 210,000 220,600 Shoreview 25,924 28,50Q 29,000 29,000 10,125 11,000 11,300 11,300 9,829 14,200 15,800 16,800 Spring Lake Park 105 110 - 110 110 48 50 50 50 0 0 0 0 Vadnais H ts. 13,069 13,800 14,300 16,800 5,064 5,600 6,100 7,400 7,119 8,000 8,500 9,100 White Bear L 11,293 13,100 13,500 13,500 4,010 4,850 5,100 5,200 2 164 4,150 5,900 6,800 White Bear Lake 23,974 26,800 27,400 27,500 9,469 11,100 11,300 11,600 11,833 13,300 14,200 14,900 RamseyCoun Total 511,035 547,700 570,860 598,900 201,236 219,170 231,670 246,290 329,145 370,530 402,480 4271640 SCOTT COUNTY Belle Plalne 3,789 6,500 8,300 10,800 1,396 2,500 3,300 4,400 1,469 1,910 2,200 2,700 Belle Plaine Twp. 806 770 790 1,300 266 280 300 500 55 70 80 90 Blakeley Twp. 496 600 730 800 166 220 280 310 27 50 70 80 Cedar Lake Twp. 2,197 2,660 3,070 3,700 719950 1,150 1,400 50 60 70 80 Credit River Twp. 3,895 4,610 4,880 5,200 1,242 1,610 1,780 1,940 219 270 300 340 Elko 472 2,650 6,400 10,200 155 970 2,350 3,900 74 200 550 750 Helena Twp. 1,440 1,600 1,800, 2,200 450 550 650 800 90 100 100 110 Jackson Twp. 1,361 1,420 1,500 1,670 461 510 580 650 120 500 750 870 Jordan 3,833 5,800 7,60010,700 1,349 2,250 3,100 4,400 1,264 1,500 1,650 1,870 Louisville Twp. 1,359 1,390 1,500 1,700 410 450 520 600 385 420 440 460 New Market 332 3,050 6,700 10,600 131 1,150 2,500 4,100 100 200 350 500 New Market Twp. 3,057 3,970 4,800 5,700 956 1,300 1,630 1,950 257 300 300 400 New Prague 3,157 4,700 6,200 7,200 1,160 1,800 2,500 3,000 2,570 2,800 2,950 3,150 Prior Lake 15,917 28,000 40,400 39,900 5,645 10,700 16,200 17,200 7,671 12,000 15,100 17,200 St Lawrence T 472 600 800 1,400 144 200 280 500177 200 210 220 Sand Creek Twp. 1,551 1,650 1,850 2,100 478 550 650 750 180 220 250 270 Savage 21,115 31,900 39;000 42,700 6,807 11,000 14,500 16,000 4,680 6,000 6,900 8,700 Shakopee 20,568 39,500 48,500 52,000 7,540 15,000 19,500 21,500 12,476 17,800 21,300 22,800 Spring Lake T 3,681 4,270 4,880 5,500 1,217 1,470 1,730 1,990 145 210 260 300 Scott CountyTotal 89,498 145,640 189,700 215,370 30,692 53,460 73,500 85,890 32,009 44,810 53,830 60,890 Page 4 Community 2000 Population Forecasts 2000 Household Forecasts 2000 Employment Forecasts Census 2010 2020 2030 Census 2010 2020 2030 estimate" 2010 1 2020 2030 WASHINGTON COUNTY Afton 2,839 ----2,-9o-oT 3,000 3,100 996 1,100 1,200 1,250 290 450 560 630 Bayport 3,162 4,600 5,300 6,000 763 1,140 1,300 1,500 4,478 5,200 5,700 6,300 Baytown Twp. 1,533 1,820 . 1,960 2,160 492 600 680 760 50 70 100 120 Birchwood 968 950 930 930 357 370 370 370 0 0 0 0 Cottage Grove 30,582 35,300 43,700 53,000 9,932 13,000 16,500 20,000 5,950 8 500 10,000 11,500 Dellwood 1,033 1,060 990 970 353 380 390 390 121 150 170 180 Denmark Twp. 1,348 1,750 2,150 2,550 481 650 820 990 300 360 400 440 Forest Lake 14,440 19,600 24,000 29,300 5,43381000 9,900 12,600 6,359 7,900 9,000 10,400 Grant 4,026 4,400 4,450 4,500 1,374 1,540 1,570 1,600 612 620 620 630 Grey Cloud Island Twp. 307 1,100 3,300 6,800 117 370 1,110 2,500 50 100 240 240 Hastings 3 . 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hugo 6,363 11,300 19,000 25,700 2,125 4,300 7,600 10,600 1,768 2,050 2,270 3,350 Lake Elmo 6,863 9,952 18,403 24,000 2,347 3,619 1 6,324 8,727 1,636 2,250 7,200 14,000 Lakeland 1,917 1,880 1,790 1,760 691 700 710 710 300 420 500 600 Lakeland Shores 355 350 320 320 116 120 120 120 50 50 50 50 Lake St.Croix Beach 1,140 1,140 1,100 1,080 462 480 480 480 100 110 120 130 Landfall 700 700 700 700 292 300 300 300 50 60 70 90 Mahtomedi 7,563 8,400 8,900 9,200 2,503 3,000 3,400 3,550 1,160 1,870 2,350 2,500 Marine on St.Croix 602 760 880 1,000 254 320 370 430 224 290 330 380 May Twp. 2,928 3,200 3,600 4,000 1,007 1,200 1,400 1,600 37 40 50 50 Newport 3,715 3,800 4,400 4,890 1,418 1,580 1,850 2,130 2,035 3,900 5,200 6,500 New Scandia Twp. 3,692 3,900 4,200 4,700 1,294 1,500 1,700 1,900 255 420 520 610 Oakdale 26,653 28,000 28,400 30,000 10,243 11,300 12,000 13,000 7,189 9,300 10,600 11,900 Oak Park H ts. 3,777 5,500 5,400 5,700 1,528 2,180 2,300 2,500 3,000 3,900 4,500 5,100 Pine Springs 421 400 380 360 140 140 140 1401 0 0 0 0 St.Mary's Point 344 370 350 340 132 150 150 150 10 10 10 10 St Paul Park 5,070 5,700 6,400 7,100 1,829 2,160 2,500 2,900 1,172 1,400 1,600 1,700 Stillwater 15,323 19,100 21,300 19,900 5,797 7,500 8,100 8,600 10,169 11,600 12,500 13,600 Stillwater Twp. 2,553 2,690 2,940 3,350 833 960 1,110 1,260 112 120 120 120 West Lakeland Twp. 3,547 3,860 3,950 4,190 1,101 1,290 1,400 1,510 80 90 90 100 White Bear Lake 351 400 450 450 149 270 300 300 130 140 150 170 Willemle 549 550 550 570 225 230 240 250 134 140 140 150 Woodbury 46,463 59,300 73,500 84,000 16,676 23,500 30,500 35,000 15,700 26,000 34,200 37,000 Washington County Total 201,130 244,732 296,693 342,620 71,462 93,949 116,834 138,117 63,521 87,510 109,360 128,550 REGION TOTAL 2,642,062 3,028,102 3,376,723 3,639,750 1,021,456 1,202,539 1,369,984 1,496,607 1,563,245 1,817,180 1,996,140 2,137,870 'Employment based on estimates provided by the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development Page 5 !� Metropolitan Council September 12, 2005 Mr. Jerry Faust,Mayor City of St. Anthony 3301 Silver Lake Rd.NE St. Anthony,MN 55418 Dear Mayor Faust: Enclosed are documents that are intended to help your community update its comprehensive plan. The Metropolitan Council is providing these documents as required by state law. State law also requires that communities submit their updated comprehensive plan to the Council three years from the date this material is received. The documents comprise your"system statement,"which shows how changes in the Council's regional system plans for transportation,water resources management and regional parks specifically affect your community.The system statements contain: • Key changes in transportation, aviation,water resources and parks policy plans. • System plan considerations affecting your community. • Forecasts at densities to help achieve regional policy goals. The complete text of the Council's regional plans,our new Local Planning Handbook and other helpful materials can be found on line at htti)://www.metrocouncil.org/planning/framework/timeline.htm. Paper copies are available by calling the Council's Data Center at 651-602-1140. The Council will hold a series of outreach meetings in October to assist communities with questions regarding system statements and comprehensive plan updates(see enclosed schedule). You can also contact the Council sector representative who's assigned to work with your community with any questions(see enclosed map with contact information). We recognize that updating your comprehensive plan will require considerable time and effort. At the same time,we believe it is a valuable opportunity for local officials,community leaders and concerned citizens to take stock of where you are as a community, what your neighbors are doing and how your local plans fit into those of the region. Sincerely, —JLA—a� Tom Weaver Regional Administrator www.metrocouncii.org Metro Info Line 602-1888 230 East Fifth Street • St.Paul,Minnesota 55101-1626 • (651)602-1000 • Fax 602-1550 • TTY 291-0904 An Equal Opportunity Employer System Statement City of St. Anthony Following the January 2004 adoption of the 2030 Regional Development Framework, and the more recent adoptions of the Transportation Policy Plan, the Water Resources Management Policy Plan, and the Regional Parks Policy Plan, the Metropolitan Council is issuing system statements pursuant to state statute. Receipt of this system statement and the metropolitan system plans triggers communities' obligations to review and, as necessary, amend their comprehensive plans within the next three years. The complete text of the 2030 Regional Development Framework as well as complete copies of the recently adopted metropolitan system plans are available for viewing and downloading at http://www.metrocouncii.orci/planning/framewQrk/bmeline.h . Paper copies are available by calling the Council's Data Center at 651-602-1140. Metropolitan system plans are long-range comprehensive plans for the regional systems-- transportation and airports, wastewater services, and parks and open space, along with the capital budgets for metropolitan wastewater service, transportation and regional recreation open space. System statements explain the implications of metropolitan system plans for each individual community in the metropolitan area. They are intended to help communities prepare or update their comprehensive plan, as required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act: Within three years following the receipt of the metropolitan system statement, every local governmental unit shall have prepared a comprehensive plan in accordance with sections 462.355, subdivision 4, 473.175, and 473.851 to 4 73.8 71 and the applicable planning statute and shall have submitted the plan to the Metropolitan Council for review pursuant to section 473.175. Local comprehensive plans will be reviewed by the Council for conformance with metropolitan system plans, consistency with Council policies and compatibility with adjacent and affected governmental units. The system statement includes forecasts at densities that assure regional growth is achieved consistent with adopted policies. These forecasted densities help ensure regional services and costly regional infrastructure can be provided as efficiently as possible, and that development and growth within the metropolitan area occur in a coordinated manner. The system statement also contains an overview of the transportation and aviation, transit, wastewater, and regional parks system plan updates, and system changes affecting each community. Forecasts. The following forecasts are part of the 2030 Regional Development Framework(adopted January 14, 2004 and updated on August 24, 2005). They are used by the Council to plan for its regional systems. Communities should base their planning work on these forecasts. However, given the nature of long-range forecasting, the Council will maintain an on- going dialogue with communities to consider any changes in growth trends or community expectations about growth that may have an impact on regional systems. Forecast of population, households and employment: Revised Develo ment Framework 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Population 7,727 8,012 9,150 9,400 10,000 Households 3,453 3,697 4,000 4,300 4,600 Employment 1 3,650 1 3,382 4,350 5,000 5,450 The Council forecasts growth at appropriate densities for communities in order to protect the efficiency of wastewater, transportation and other regional system investments, and to help ensure the metropolitan area can accommodate its projected growth by the year 2030. Growth management. The Regional Development Framework sets an overall minimum residential density standard of 3 to 5 units per acre in developed and developing areas where urban service is located or planned. The average minimum standard of 3 units per acre is important to the efficient use of regional systems, including wastewater system investments. Communities that significantly over-utilize or under-utilize regional systems can cause inefficiencies in the use of regional resources. Additionally, achieving housing at these density levels may help communities meet their obligations under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act to plan for and address their housing needs. Geographic planning area. The city of St. Anthony is designated as a"developed community" geographic planning area in the 2030 Regional Development Framework. Geographic planning areas are shown on the 2030 Planning Area map. The planning area sets overall densities that the planned development patterns in your community can be expected to achieve. (If there are discrepancies between the 2030 Framework Planning Area map, and the metropolitan systems plans because of adjustments that occurred subsequent to the adoption of the 2030 Regional Development Framework document, communities should follow the specific guidance contained in this system statement.) As St. Anthony plans for current and future residents, it should focus on protecting natural resources, ensuring sufficient public infrastructure, and developing transition strategies to increase density and encourage infill development. Specific strategies for developed communities are found on pages 24-25 of the 2030 Regional Development Framework. 2 System statement review process. If your community disagrees with elements of this system statement, or has any questions about this system statement, we urge you to contact your sector representative, Jim Uttley, 651602-1361, to review and discuss potential issues or concerns. The Council and local units and districts have historically resolved questions about forecasts and other components of the system statement through discussions. Request for hearing. If a local governmental unit or school district and the Council are unable to resolve disagreements over the content of a system statement, the unit or district may by resolution request that a hearing be conducted by the Council's Land Use Advisory Committee or by the state Office of Administrative Hearings for the purpose of considering amendments to the system statement. According to Minnesota Statutes section 473.857, the request shall be made by the local unit or district within 60 days after receipt of the system statement. If no request for a hearing is received by the Council within 60 days, the statement becomes final. System statement issue date: The official date of the issuance of this system statement is September 12, 2005. 3 Transportation System Statement -- St. Anthony Village Key Changes in the Plan The revised Transportation Policy Plan adopted by the Metropolitan Council in December 2004, is the metropolitan system plan for airports and transportation with which local comprehensive plans must conform. This system statement summarizes significant elements of the metropolitan system plan and highlights those elements that apply specifically to your community. In addition to reviewing this system statement, your community should consult the entire Transportation Policy Plan,the 2030 Regional Development Framework and other pertinent regional planning and policy documents, including the Aviation Policy Plan,to ensure your community's local comprehensive plan and plan amendments conform to the metropolitan system plans. A PDF file of the entire revised Transportation Policy Plan, the 2030 Regional Development Framework, the Local Planning Handbook and other regional planning and policy documents Of the Metropolitan Council are available online at the Metropolitan Council's Web site: htt� //www metrocouncil org/nlanning/framework/timeline.htm. The Aviation Policy Plan, adopted in 1996, is not available electronically,but a copy can be obtained by contacting the Metropolitan Council's Data Center at 651-602-1140. The revised Transportation Policy Plan incorporates the following changes: • The planning period has been extended from 2025 to 2030. • No significant increase in the level of transportation funding was assumed. • The expenditures shown in the Transportation Policy Plan must be constrained by the level of funding that is anticipated. However,the revised plan also examined two alternative scenarios—what could be built if highway revenues were increased by 30% over the next 25 years, and what it would cost to provide enough additional capacity to hold congestion to the 1998 levels. • The highway expansion projects shown in the plan have changed little since the 2001 plan, due to this lack of additional resources. (See Fig 4-11 for highway expansion proposals.) Metropolitan Highway System Plan investment priorities no longer contain the "Improvements"category. Most improvement corridors are now designated"Management" corridors. • The new investment timing provisions are contained in the Plan. Table 4-11 contains projects in Mn/DOT's Highway Work Plan(scheduled in 2009-2013) construction, reconstruction, and bridge replacement greater$10 million. Table 4-12 contains Regional Priority Project to move into the 10-Year Highway Work Plan, if there are resources available in the 2005-2009 time period. • Funds have also been allocated to obtain right of way for new crossings of the Mississippi River between NW Hennepin and Anoka Counties and of the Minnesota River in the vicinity of Chaska. Construction dollars for these projects are not foreseen before 2030. • Chapter 5 contains new policies and procedures on managing the scope, cost and revenue sources of projects to insure that sufficient resources are available to implement the region's -T-1 - transportation priorities as shown in this plan. This includes procedures to manage the use of Federal High Priority Project(HPP) funds and matching funds for these federal dollars. The Council and Mn/DOT will monitor scope and costs to ensure major projects continue to meet regional objectives in a cost effective manner. • The plan envisions significant improvements in the bus system, including new express bus routes, arterial corridor enhancements, suburb-to-suburb service, transit stations,park-and- ride lots and other features. The goal is to increase transit ridership 50 percent by 2020 and double it by 2030. • The plan proposes additional express commuter bus corridors as well as enhancement and expansion of existing bus service in freeway corridors. Within each corridor, express bus routes will be supported by park-and-ride facilities,circulator networks, and"transit advantages." • The plan includes construction of five new"transitways"on dedicated rights-of-way by 2020 to help slow the growth in traffic congestion and improve mobility, and three additional transitways by 2030. Unlike the 2001 plan, the technology for each corridor was not identified in the Plan; rather the most appropriate and cost-effective mode for any given corridor is best determined after extensive study of the individual corridor. Figure 4-2 (attached) shows the 2030 Transitway System and Express Commuter Bus System. • The plan now includes detailed information on the facilities needed for transit passengers, such as stations and-park and ride lots, as well as facilities needed to support the transit system, such as garages and bus layover sites (Figures 4-5 and 4=6). Communities should plan for development and redevelopment around stations and park-and-ride lots. • Policy 18 (previously policy 17) on transportation and land use elements in local comprehensive plans was rewritten and more detail provided in some strategies as to what the Council expects in local comprehensive plans. • The TPP now includes references to the regional aviation system as defined in the Aviation Policy Plan. The 1996 Aviation Policy Plan remains in effect with the exception of the Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aircraft Noise. These guidelines have been updated and included in the TPP as Appendix H. System Plan Considerations Affecting Your Community 1. Metropolitan Highways There are no metropolitan highways in the city of St. Anthony Village. Figure 4-11 shows the metropolitan highway system and highway investment priorities in the region. 2. Transit Routes and Facilities St. Anthony Village is within the Metropolitan Transit Taxing District. The southern part of St. Anthony is within Market Area H. The northern part of St. Anthony Village is within Market Area III. Service options for Market Area II include regular-route locals, all-day expresses, small vehicle circulators, special needs paratransit(ADA, seniors), and ridesharing. Service options for Market Area III include peak-only express, small vehicle circulators,midday circulators, special needs paratransit(ADA, seniors), and ridesharing. -T-2 - St. Anthony Village should identify existing transit service (available on the Council's website) and desired future transit service options consistent with the Transportation Policy Plan's transit system service areas (Table 4-1 and Appendix M). St. Anthony Village should identify existing transit passenger and support facilities and future improvements to and expansion of these facilities. Passenger and support facilities include bus stops, shelters,transit centers, stations, and park-and-ride lots. ADA bus stops should be located along bus routes. ADA bus stops are currently needed along 39`h Avenue North between Stinson and Silver Lake Road. 3. Aviation Plan and Facilities The TPP/APP includes policies and text on protection of the region's airspace resources. The airspace policy states that both Federal Aviation administration(FAA) and MnDOT Aeronautics safety standards must be a major consideration in the planning, design,maintenance and operation of air transportation facilities and services. There are no existing or planned aviation facilities within St. Anthony Village. However, each community has a responsibility to include airspace protection in its comprehensive plan. The protection is for potential hazards to air navigation including electronic interference. Airspace protection should be included in local codes/ordinances to control height of structures, especially when conditional use permits would apply. The comprehensive plan should include policy/text on notification to the FAA as defined under code of federal regulations CFR-Part 77, using the FAA Form 7460-1 "Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration". Instructions can be found at www.faa.gov/ary/ace/vart77.cftn. -T-3 - J P 2030 E Transitway System Figure 4 - 2 p �B N i 10 star Transitways on �nh Dedicated ROW �eS� -'CT=sti,a-evi t0 1 4 TS Tier 1 Northstar ® _ Northwest fe Cedar Avenue 1-35W Central -` ` �¢ u~ r 3 „ � P a Tier 2 '� ���e m4 on rah Red Rock Rush Line Southwest LIV IF Ch tiTransitways on Dedicated ROW August 2004 Express Commuter Bus System Figure 4-4 Area of Potential Transit Service Expansion I I zr 1 Transit Taxing District Potential Transit Expansion Areas 4 —1_I a 1 Ct 0 5 10 20 Miles Au gu st 2004 Figure 4-5 Transit Passenger Facilities Active Park&Ride Capacity(12/2004) o Less than 100 { 100-500 OGreater than 500 (g} Programmed Perk&Ride(2005-2008) Transit Centers&Stations Q Current Q Planned ©Transit Center and Park&Ride FadW Custom SheNers j O Existing -- ® Future ; Online Stations ' + 0 Existing ® Future p } Twin Cities C81)s ! o Bus Station e o y-„ Downtown Minneapolis + Downtown St Paul pp9�cd ® Sj7 t % -4- - Figure 4-6 Transit Support Facilities j Downtown Mlnneapo is [3 Legend I - ®; I - ❑ Foil R uaw LWUQ r Pahl@/ 6h0k tle r tam _ - _- - _ -- .. - i - _ ,✓•a_�' �r''-' - hamsio o.rlale Camp .__. PIOWCata¢EXPanbk -HOV 9q - �i -•PkUa HCV lake I �.. • ® Pkun NeV CilaDe --' L6umkaka(Pts i Rale Oki lake -.r• ,... I r F, - -k ,�- - I r r ✓ ' TaktaCOktmICIIV 7un011d CYDs - r - I I ` 10 Il „ �,'•' y�A­,�" '• :1 _. rr � - .;•I i7-.� I ❑. ����aaa������ •"� _—_ - —_ --..I -_ tr 5I` t '�I '"l, •� si.:" f I � _ � '-'- \LI �,_-e�. I _. 4 E3 �G�. ... � '\ �`i�-�'r'i:•;" i ted' .®•'rL. 1. � 11 - •7ro 1� dY.J } r3Y iDowntown St.Paul r- x •a -2;1 j�"'..1'L.._i•..'Gi•1? i ._ 1�Y: � � ilc.r.1• . 1 ± �,• K � - •i Figure 4-11 2030 Constrained Metropolitan Highway System Plan Investment Priorities v� 4c� -=-.-vim--L,..a-..:.�._:-, M Z L =r F 14 Y 1 y t 1 f5 Highway Investment Priorities August 2004 O%i 2005 - 2008 TIP Projects ON management Expansion ROW P rese rva tion 0 3 6 12 Miles I I I I i I I I i Wastewater System Statement -- St. Anthony Key Changes in the Plan The revised Water Resources Management Policy Plan, adopted by the Metropolitan Council in March 2005, is the metropolitan system plan for metropolitan wastewater services with which local comprehensive plans must conform. This system statement summarizes significant elements of the metropolitan system plan and highlights those elements that apply specifically to your community. In addition to reviewing this system statement, your community should consult the entire Water Resources Management Policy Plan, the 2030 Regional Development Framework and other pertinent regional planning and policy documents to ensure your community's local comprehensive plan and plan amendments conform to the metropolitan system plans. A PDF file of the entire Water Resources Management Policy Plan, the 2030 Regional Development Framework, the Local Planning Handbook and other regional planning and policy documents of the Metropolitan Council are available online at the Metropolitan Council's Web site: http://www.metrocouncil.org/planning/framework/overview.htm. The revised Water Resources Management Policy Plan incorporates the following changes: • A coordinated approach to water supply planning in the metropolitan area with the goal of providing for a sustainable, reliable and secure supply of high quality water to support orderly economic growth and maintain the region's high quality of life. • An approach to surface water management that ties together the control of pollution from point and nonpoint sources. Local surface water management plans will be reviewed for impacts on the regional wastewater system. • A policy under which the Council will consider acquiring and operating local wastewater treatment plants in rural growth centers upon request where enough growth is projected to make it economically feasible for the Council to become involved. • A plan that provides for cities to reduce excessive inflow and infiltration (UI) of clear water into the metropolitan sewer system. A financial assistance/surcharge program is included that will provide a funding mechanism to help solve the I/I problem. • A policy that continues to require inspections of individual sewage treatment systems (ISTS) at least once every three years by trained individuals. In addition, the Council has added further clarification on what is needed in a community's local ISTS management program. W - 1 System Plan Considerations Affecting Your Community i 1.Metropolitan Sewer Service Forecasts: The forecasts of population, households, employment, and wastewater flows for St. Anthony as contained in the adopted Water Resources Management Policy Plan are listed below. These forecasts are for sewered development. The sewered housing forecasts were estimated based on SAC data, annual city reports, current trends and other information relating to your community. The wastewater flows are based on historical wastewater flow data and the projected sewered housing and employment data. Table 1 Year 2010 2020 2030 Sewered Population 9,100 9,400 10,000 Sewered Households 4,000 4,300 4,600 Sewered Employment 4,350 5,000 5,450 Average Annual Wastewater Flow MGD 1-01- L02 1.06 Allowable Peak Hourly Flow MGD) 3.13 3.16 3.29 The flow projections represent the Council's commitment to a level of service, assuming that the Council's underlying demographic forecasts are maintained. Adjustments may be required based on verified growth or lack of growth. The city should contact Council staff to discuss any proposed adjustments. Flow projections do not represent an allocation of interceptor capacity except in the event a temporary system constraint occurs. The community must strive to keep its wet weather flows within the allowable peak hourly rate. At a minimum the Council will reevaluate flow projections every five years. Moreover, the Council will also continue to monitor each city's flow on a continuous basis and note any significant changes. The Council will use these growth and wastewater flow forecasts to plan all future interceptors and treatment work needed to serve your community. The Council will not design future interceptor improvements or treatment facilities to handle peak hourly flows in excess of the allowable rate for your city. St. Anthony, through its comprehensive planning process, must decide the location and staging of development, and then plan and design its local wastewater collection system to serve this development. If you plan a total wastewater flow from your community in excess of the Council's forecasts, your assumptions will be analyzed by the Council for their potential adverse effects on the capacity or operation of the metropolitan system. W- 2 You should also note that urban development at overall densities that are substantially lower than identified for your community in the Council's Growth Management Strategy Section of the Systems Information Statement will also be analyzed by the Council for their potential adverse effects on the cost of providing metropolitan sewer service. Description of Metropolitan Disposal System Serving your Community: The attached map shows the location of the Metropolitan Disposal System (MDS) serving your community. The following paragraphs contain information on the existing and planned metropolitan facilities serving your community. The wastewater flow from the City of St. Anthony is treated at the Metropolitan WWTP located within St. Paul, MN. There are many projects scheduled for the Metropolitan WWTP through 2030. These projects will provide additional capacity at the plant as well as improve its ability to meet required permit standards. The City of St. Anthony is served by two interceptors 1-MN-302 and 1-RV-430. Interceptor 1-MN-302 currently has an available capacity of 2.35 mgd to provide for the long-term needs of the city. Interceptor 1-RV-430 currently has an available capacity of 0.59 mgd. The Council has no proposed interceptor improvement projects scheduled through 2030 within the city. The city needs to verify its long-term needs as part of its comprehensive plan update. If necessary, detailed information regarding metropolitan facilities is available from the Council's Municipal Services Section by calling the staff at (651) 602-1005. Increases in growth rates and resulting increases in flow beyond those shown in Table 1 may result in short-term capacity limitations within the MDS. Inflow/Infiltration Reduction Goal The Council's Water Resources Management Policy Plan states that the Council will establish UI goals for all communities discharging wastewater to the MDS. Communities that have excessive UI in their sanitary sewer systems will be required to eliminate the excessive UI by 2012. The Council will begin the implementation of an M assistance/surcharge program in 2007. The money collected from the communities with excessive UI may be used by those communities to remove UI from their systems. The Council will limit increases in service within those communities that have not met their UI goal(s) starting in 2013. The Council will meet with the community and discuss this alternative before it is implemented. This time period may be shorter if excessive UI jeopardizes the Council's ability to convey wastewater without an overflow occurring. In this case the Council may limit increases in service within those communities that have excessive UI immediately upon notification to the community. The Council plans to implement a wastewater rate demand charge program, starting in 2013, for those communities that have not met their UI goals. These revenues will be used to help defray W - 3 the cost of providing attenuation within the MDS to recover the capacity lost to excessive I/I. The UI goal established for the City of St. Anthony is the allowable peak hourly flow rate as shown in Table 1 and varies based on annual average flow. The Council's metering program shows that the city's 2004 annual average flow at meter M055 was 0.30 mgd. The current I/I goal for this connection point from your community is an allowable peak hourly flow of 1.1 mgd. The 2004 annual average flow at meter M055A was 0.073 mgd. The current I/I goal for this connection point from your community is an allowable peak hourly flow of 0.29 mgd. The 2004 annual average flow at meter M104 was 0.33 mgd. The current 1/I goal for this connection point from your community is an allowable peak hourly flow of 1.2 mgd. The 2004 annual average flow at meter M 105 was 0.019 mgd. The current I/I goal for this connection point from your community is an allowable peak hourly flow of 0.076 mgd. Specific Requirements for the Sewer Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan The Council has completed a review of the current information in the city's existing comprehensive plan and has determined that the following information is needed to update the sewer element of the city's comprehensive plan/local sewer policy plan: • A sewer map showing the city's existing service area and proposed trunk sewer system through 2030 and ultimate sewer service area. • A table showing the projected population, households, employment and flow forecasts by interceptor for the city for 2010, 2020 and 2030. • A description of the city's UI program. What efforts does the city make in the maintenance of its sanitary disposal system? Does the city prohibit the connection of sump pumps, rain leaders and passive drain tile from the sanitary sewer system? 2. Surface Water Management In 1995, Minnesota Statutes section 473.859, subd. 2, was amended to make the local surface water management plan required by Minnesota Statutes section 10313.235 a part of the land use plan of the local comprehensive plan. Section 103B.235 provides that a local surface water management plan should be prepared once a watershed plan for the area has been approved. Section 103B.235 also generally identifies the content requirements for the plan. The local surface water management plan must be submitted to both the watershed management organization(s) within whose watershed the community is located and to the Metropolitan Council for its review. For guidelines on the contents of local surface water management plans, please refer to Appendix B2-b of the Council's Water Resources Management Policy Plan. Council records indicate that St. Anthony is in the Rice Creek Watershed District and the Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization (see attached map). The W - 4 Mississippi River WMO watershed plan was approved by BWSR in 2000. The Rice Creek WD watershed Plan was approved by BWSR in 1997. St. Anthony updated its local surface water management plan in 1997. St. Anthony needs to update its local surface water plan to be consistent with the Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization's watershed management plan. All local surface water management plan updates should be submitted to the Council review concurrent with the review by the watershed management organizations. Failure to have an updated local surface water management plan consistent with the local surface water management plan content requirements found in Appendix B2-b of the Water Resources Management Policy Plan will result in a metropolitan system impact. Advisories 1. Water Supply Planning Minnesota Statutes section 473.859, subd.3 requires cities with a municipal water supply system to develop a water supply and conservation plan and submit it to the Council for its review. Communities serving more than 1,000 people are required by Minnesota Statutes section 103G.291 to submit the emergency and conservation plan to the Department of Natural Resources. The guidelines for water supply plan updates were released in 2005. St. Anthony needs to update its local water supply plan consistent with the new guidelines and submit the water supply plan to the Council for its review. For contents of local water supply plans, please refer to Appendix B2-c of the Council's Water Resources Management Policy Plan. W - 5 I rr St. Anthony f Ne w Brighto Z iii 4. tAYrY-. X _ S'Z _ `•rf��b A $AV-490 ® MCES Meter ter; .a MCES Interceptor Meter Shed FM, M055 nxx s 0 M055A M104 M�oS Ras evgfe � x [� ` U102 r Framework 2030 ifrTinneapofrs Developed AreaMY i s ;i �F W - 6 I St . Anthony SIX CMES New Brighto RoseviVe M SSIsSIBPlf RIVER ®Watershed Management ATkneaPoGs Prionty\Nater Features _ Community Boundary Parcel Boundary Service Area s W - / Regional Parks System Statement City of St. Anthony Key Changes in the Plan The 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan adopted by the Metropolitan Council in June 2005 is the metropolitan system plan for regional recreation open space with which local comprehensive plans must conform. This system statement summarizes significant elements of the metropolitan system plan and highlights those elements that apply specifically to your community. In addition to reviewing this system statement, your community should consult the entire 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan, the 2030 Regional Development Framework and other pertinent regional planning and policy documents to ensure your community's local comprehensive plan and plan amendments conform to the metropolitan system plans. A PDF file of the entire 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan, the 2030 Regional Development Framework, the Local Planning Handbook and other regional planning and policy documents of the Metropolitan Council are available online at the Metropolitan Council's website: htlp://www.metrocouncil.orgZplanning/framework/timeline.htm. To meet the needs of the region in 2030, the 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan includes the following changes to the current regional parks system. ✓ Designate two existing county parks and three trails as "regional." • In Washington County, Pine Point Park • In Ramsey County, Tony Schmidt Park • In Ramsey County/St. Paul, three regional trails—Trout Brook, Summit Avenue, and Lexington Parkway ✓ Acquire and develop three new parks. Search areas include: • Northwestern Anoka County • Empire Township in Dakota County. Please note that the Metropolitan Council approved a park master plan and a boundary for the park has been established. • Blakeley Township in Scott County ✓ Acquire and develop seven new trails. Search areas include: • The Crow River, in Carver County and Three Rivers Park District • Both a north/south and an east/west trail traversing Dakota County • An east/west trail traversing Scott County • In Three Rivers Park District, a trail connecting parts of Baker Park Reserve; a trail connecting Baker and Crow-Hassan Park Reserves; and a trail connecting Crow-Hassan and Elm Creek Park Reserves ✓ Acquire land within the current boundaries of 30 existing parks and four trails. ✓ Acquire natural-resource lands adjacent to six existing parks and six existing trails. P-1 t To meet the needs of the region beyond 2030, the Council proposes four new regional parks or reserves and three new trails be acquired. These parks and trails would not be developed until after 2030,but the opportunity to acquire them will likely be lost if the lands aren't identified and purchased before 2030. The goal is to complete the acquisition of the regional park system and secure opportunities for future generations. Search areas include: ✓ Parks—Miller Lake area and Minnesota River Bluff and Ravines in Carver County; southwestern Dakota County; and Cedar Lake area in Scott County. ✓ Trails—northwestern Anoka County; central to south Carver County; and Minnesota River to Spring Lake in Scott County. P-2 Figure 1: All additions and changes to Regional Park System Plan • ��•� ,4`� '�,vl"-"SY'9.:Ar;s� i,. s sr - "�"" '' �'-3`-.Y+';•�.$",Rr•,9�,y'u8re wee•<+� 'F1gu�Regro�drf!P s: 'ysfemStatemen �< � "�� .,�� *�'�"j,�-_� ^;:.�: ��;•"' w��.:�iryr2��°��,s�� '... s:..., a+.a..,.x a:...s„c:s-a,a.n..>» ova-wn:..ssr,;�kSr.n�LA✓.P�-4�; a�ia.' .. �i�t•:,- s.,.�.�:.oM�3rd.t•.dr�fl.• - ,.-ru 2030 Regional Parks v - Policy Plan ` - ""SeartA arae l`I aGs � i• � Rum alvei�enrral q.9'�. t- ANOKA : 77r us�eeRi 1 ` 17 ,3r i n PinePolnrP —96 ny t •.a u —_.- __—',fT __ ` _, - '—ro .ae�n eO` tea'�ie�,. t[ VtlA9Hi— N i — — — <,. ,, 1 .....*-r tw.' -� ,^l'- ...a ��� tand•Bu nd t •4 - t---- ."y T-. CARV I -- --�w oudl -r < •, Miller Lgke .`-- 1 �., :• ,mar.. , � �T� T++ev'• i •t"` i ;;n �`' ,. .�.,.,n,. �%ter.. ,G �--�- r_r`� � - .-wwew•' ,c.e-. ice"""r._:: r,..�� e"'°�'°MNRI�erB/ullardRa�n i4 f'- ..:. :-�•:1." _ ra�:••[� ,1 ''s.' r- _ __ � - TA DAKO _� �— Etnplia `CJ)F'W{• ro �""'-) N -� �^•^'ls.vvJ.CwC<M Nm r IWC 'y-I' .- ••. }ly' R.a,nP TTm ' a...a�,.r.. j '"' `'�.�-.•` ...u.n..*.a w.a�. I r.wa...... � �.�...n„ r,.w..T.e - lakeleySearchArea 'ig edarLake ^61. . •t'' l j sINbakofaSearchbree I --f•---- •I--------- 0 5 10 i5 p MI" I Regional Park Search Areas• Regional Trail Search corridors• Parks and Preserves ;N Lakes and Major Rivers ® Boundary Adjustment = Boundary Adjustment 0 Federal Lan-Proflt 2020 MUSA Y Recognition of Regional µ ,h Recognition of Regonal Status ® Regional Status ,,9 State Land •as groes or plan and corridors"Its) es snows are nor planting purposes Dory j New Unit and ere not Indicative orspec[Rc proposed New Unit Regional Trails park boundaries ortratalignment& • Completing tl>e System Existing Y. Planned 0 Completing the System Propos Metropolitan Council State Existing P-3 1. Regional Park System Plan Considerations Affecting Your Community Regional parks and trails in your community The following regional parks and trails within St. Anthony as contained in the adopted 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan are listed below. Table 1: Regional Parks and Trails in St. Anthony Regional Park or Trail Unit Master plan boundary of Master plan boundary is not Name unit is set. Comprehensive set. Comprehensive plan plan should acknowledge should acknowledge general boundary location with final boundary or alignment subject to park or trail master lan Silverwood Special Recreation X Feature St. Anthony Rail Road Spur X Regional Trail Silverwood Special Recreation Feature-This is an existing Special Recreation Feature with an established boundary. Three Rivers Park District is working with the city and others on the process of creating a development master plan to help determine the future use of the park. The boundary as shown in Figure 2 should be acknowledged in the city's comprehensive plan. Three Rivers Park District is responsible for Regional Park System facilities located in the Hennepin County part of St. Anthony. Jonathan Vlaming is the contact person and can be reached at 763- 694-7632. St. Anthony Rail Road Spur Regional Trail—This is a proposed regional trail that would follow the existing railroad corridor. Since there is an active railroad operating on the tracks, trail planning would not take place until there is a change in the status of the use of the tracks. At that time Three Rivers Park District and Ramsey County will work with St. Anthony and others to master plan the trail. The general alignment of the proposed trail as shown in Figure 2 should be acknowledged in the city's comprehensive plan. Greg Mack is the contact person for Regional Park System facilities in the Ramsey County part of St. Anthony. He can be reached at 651-748- 2500. Figure 2 shows the location of all parks and trails listed above in St. Anthony, plus any parks and trails adjacent to the city's border. P-4 Figure 2: Map of St. Anthony with regional parks and trails in the city and adjacent to the city ^ax.:h�. ..-� :..?, M^a� Nr.c,` :.[."•'.aoy :'3,"3Z;:,�°��'�,i,-:-, i.�;�'.'��'.`��'csi=.'..';x`.-�'�:IYs�C� �;jf�^�;�k.r..�,�.f..ft�t.s"-'` _"',h1 20D5° ;Figure.2�rReg�onaf Pa�r�ks System�,Sta�ement Map' �•�_;r•"•�,F�i�;r, �,���;�+;'� `•Nf�.a-,,> -`y x >.�«`" �� "� -. r .. ... .. _1.0.:..o�SR'•,.� -a' o.t .+.`,�,2.r:4asa..xYa_,:.S.f,+.�,.....-. .�f:..t+:i;'ska,,.,G.}i a,:r:.7F;.n!'._.✓.� St. Anthonynecwpouc���`� s-IHlllto'p' t" Pt~ t":: �G. ► Arden Hills � :_ _.. = 1. i=ce- _;�. . _ '1 •,ate -.I•e _ �i;� , "__ • . '. New'Bn hton, I. Columbia il-le ts' € r 1 =. _ _k• V 77 r , 1 i1, I ,,M� � sc r nYRa" Y' j -Anthony % ad Spur Roseville j t 1 Ra I ;' inne�al�i- lis � j y } t- littil 1.411 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3 5 Miles N Regional Park Search Areas• Regional Trail Search Corridors• Parks and Preserves -`$ Wetlands(NW) ® -M Federal land ,, Lakes and Major Rivers BoundaryAdjustmerd i3oundaryAdjustmerd PrivateNon-Profit >•:i`-?_% Minor Rivers and Streams Recognition of Regional Status IM Regional Recogrdtlon of Regional „1 State Land m Trout Streams �n Status :f'"r•._'-.t:New Unit Local and County Land 2020 MUSA Completing the System Regional Trails — TLG Street Cemer6nes(2005 New Unit Search areas(parks)and oorridors(balls) ' Existing as shown are for planning purposes only '�-- Planned and are not hrdicaMe of spechk proposed ® Proposed Completing the System park boundaries or hail alignments ® State Existing Proposed boundaries Wthln park search areas pending master plan approval are highlighted=In yellow P-5 a+z�� �. i _7t i`• � t� r. I 10 ether,, shy in our uture d :.:_...,,.: } _!:__ �.,.,,.,_.. ;l. :,, •. _ !rte, ,`i�-'}. Metropolitan Counciisl v :r. ";y,,.-• 'Y�,.•Y` -rC- ,;.`N' t1` L '�.>Met Er it^�b�t '{E.c ,. .-kt .rt ',t 4.y1(' M M- - '3. F�:s��j. 1;,r F� _�'!'r+''i"'}.'.c,•L,, rul +a 3 �.� ��`_;' x" 'r��;i.. �. :r :.:..f.:.�•.-_':'-�: '. - .. -•i >',:-�;� ,•.+a� 3 , Lb +r: 'es{ r t' ,• v �- .5.-4-•. v 3s .,,� x- 2 . .. } �xn'i �.y E t -•.rA,�•n A .. i�.. � fti. t- 5., °fir s r �rr z � r t, ."�Fl�� ,+.. u � r + .:� ti k/ S.�/✓may+ Q1� 3r�� a�* •c` !' a F �k � .' �7 � :� ' r ;;v' i f _LL i s :• t .-: �.�, r ; �•-s4!'i'G Y`y o r•-v ;r3ay� � _es>"l�R s r it "e• 1��C r-�( '�1 !� \\�.4 r 'E. +I,.•'4.1I L.t.l sr• ,..+-,..:,. n , e t n re a i -..A.-�1 1+ S 1 1f - `ti .c -n-�'R L✓ ea ,m' T e -'t •4i..:,.v.--�. S f}= s' •,.:_,w;,-. .. ;�>:w-..r -.+f.*...i• 4f � ••�-,x. ps`+``„a '1 � �-1"�,_-^•- ' cf ,E.. r r� Ika 1-; -+ .i• + g s f -- S .s- s�r--x'^ �1�/ + h' 1 ,��� ��•AI. :Y_' ti. ra ��'; j. a +�":�� .s- y�•+ t C'. j k :.y. x t; •� 11i: A 'rc-ir pI_1 P.*.'sem .. • f_ r1. _f'f :�ca`d'`�r cif?y -�+t t _ — �2. r `r E'4'� -��,p.'Y>c'"h•s•..r trt(` t r. L .��.7.y.j3.�s 1� 7 ` i M Sl. •il �i' 3i1�{�ri c fi!�"1 t�,,.tta�t >{�!-. ---+Y'}?�:. �N, .;'fie �ti. i,S.et.. �r'„�� •S :1_ +�" �, 4 y`"', � r�,�:t t a .fc a''" .sir ez. � �{ti�+_�'-f��r.•>i� '•...`'cow `.\'•��}nl r� p.f/." n �i!„��4�� dty - �v - .� `@=-�!"$ i•>r pa �Y v • s � `fi” Ft a s 9RrS - `i c-A -_:L_. }.s t c• r ?,�. s R s� 2 ��re`�;•1v7 icy; Citi- 7 Vii.�i -r9 6� �f{ reser f •c.. �., i �f'7c-,1 -+.C, .2; 1'i y. u¢�rF��TA" A �..� `�1�' C��L t _ i; `t- 5 1 ��• - .w5 -^�+a \ s :. 'iL 1.� c r -- Y i.• [..� ^a e a e e' p t� yS ,� .,. ::=r•'� - e."^ .*;i a -F.n i:! "�� - ry 1 r 4 - f f t C"�-t a� mss.... �� ..j�.s^ •".may :>. �..iy�� � a��i• �Li F .,..y.,,- i8t`•'�•c. 'i.. . tie., st �'S `}r 70�•�.. •' �t�I,FS ':1ax.fi x +, +i Int 't t•..o `4'i +4�; £h,.i>3 �_ c 4 s . 1. }: f, �. n�tiy. r�7 1 r a.. r 1 ...��.q,j Ik.,{r� dr ,.� �,lyiy::�{Y `;r 9a\•�. ?_.L, q."; E:� +.. u si+ qe a \;' Fs` :�• \ rs, � s a Y e\ ;. y <\� � .\�:.;• f;'r F-4. F :Y " e a, a x51 .,^,-!'t 't s•E ;' 4 � 4 �Z'. �� i � r r 1�<f� $' •4�.. t �'.,r'�fi.3 ..r a h.,'t!•.t+ ti � � 4�Il -t 4 }e a: � � �L _ w�^'�:�•�a, �.•.;�`�r>�:,.<ai'3�:�„"n N•Kr..a <:�.:,..+ <aa.. .•-,y,.�t2�i�+S.s: �:a= a;a:i k-.>•.�i.?�=4j� y`4�y..:�..�Sa�frd���a. � �; r / i .fir ♦. _ • � I<' I 'y 3 r' F t - ... • 111 .•.. - �� _ _ z ,r' - W • • .• .. • • We • • • of • W • • • ••• • • i - t rl k �-1 Z, V k'�y •�.1 r z v 4. y L I 1 b {e -. 'I • •• • _ • • i� Ar, 15 rte . 4 t ` F � r sz I �`f _ �,f I •••• - • - • • •- - •• I�5 f ,-t v r f�. •�tht b d '�—.{ �-��'� 1._.� � r a�n� ! �'�'-` --{'-.: 1 .. z-�'t..�r.,r—.-�.�jL I���'r� I+r'."1i;�—�-•1.'�;�°�_,,,�.y�rtl i.�'�fnrV + '�-'�'_'1``� - - • - • I,�! �-�Vim"��r"-�f���r, �-Q •,,c t "1-G.'��� � i1 ��, , j,; v • -�� - !r -,rr.-t rf 3 5 ,::', •->N3 ���i ����x rl � �'----:u N: �••+r'C='`f M`"'�: •••• • • ••• • Cti� rw 1� aIr IS a fi k I y`��r_•�f.. a7,77N .u+ } -r 7iy F^� �> i•-c3c.. �yy f •. �' ! \��r'�" �-' -_y+'t �S `gTl`1"p r"�Y•-- �lf.t--L��-�b3. �k�.�{ � s��Y��'�A+y k �E1�r+l,.� °r � I {, , j, - t a `'z�i/z �f�-t... • , -�- � �;, tT e.t y�3's F,:: i j �u-V,.c .. P �h�t ..ar]._.S2S,rt•••a"'.�Y 4 / �� �i �yF�: 1 J �+��'�3.j•t "��. .__;,,.,� q t�.i'} ar i '•r-* r.,r„�,�n I a �K54 >�,, i.r�'^'.rC + ;.u'�35 f"�� ��..i�,-� � �''g� 1,R ll ...� •� �SS+'��� r r "3-L-t•-.�•.���k7 rE 4 x"�`''�-sy.. ,.��.f`•' ,{t e x a s��l -�t / -:V 4 7. - (F�,,•,"1''.�'!��' J - I t� tv 1 s� `�41'�' : !�{i�t�'°a � � r t w r. r,+4 !�"���s''¢ i� !.° �-r' ��"P•+-„ ti�-s.=°--4 !��1K-„�j�{l'?�"�}����� �,).� 1L - '•avr`y-:-yr+ -✓ -c.ctt'�"1' *�s.f �'-ty, 7 zy�'�`�'t xx s a ._ lfi` ,N,.�;tr�{a'kr ,, 8 , ON�;s.; a +r^ tr.H .{ "� .��-`"',tri"V ��tc�y- �,y��';`"E_`.-> +�...=,•y�y � �-�.<7'�•t�Y� � �'�'°�7 s -`^�v:�•�"fir `gin ttr n � �'� `�r3�. �Z, ''� r -L"• �c ti \SX, r 4 rr kw lv h s w.. � y+t'y cr ryas-�iyh Y-c z'C. N - .c„ � .... tt r. •�-; t ,* � '��>it f� -� 3 � '4Y •�-e:`- Sk�l y� a 4 r �.,:;, S d2 4 Y �� t �':.�. ..,�:� '. � €'� �. t� �£ aZ • a� n�,r � '•ikSif 'F--fit 1 �w3. 'mss t•^�_ .I --.+4._ CNN �� Tai t a, ;a � ,-'q, .�?'Y w �,. 5.3' -.�y +-w�-. .-':>:" 1,'+a�-J .Ck{-��;rr;.-';,`''gS.j.''yf,I�.�L�r'�,'x,�k,�t?.''.j3�' i'+vs.n..A "t.��tr,�.�.:,;/.r RyC .:,.r'.•M1;`i1ry'Ll-,v-�'•-A1.iiF"'Wa��Y_e}e'r'i$j.,''t¢ ,,'{�.> u!''_.<1`L � � -sTS ..s.?r, i-�rt t Fx y-,-[s. yT.s {'�1,?.=�_.�, iF-..y,y`.7.�„�ti.�y,,x..% .... - 't'�T 7 ` k^4 L.•t'�sL"lfirS,`�r,,''•':i P `•"i��.t, .. �.Y�:� h' �W�„�a.l: af-.¢ i. '.F;.4�•a.-;•�-"_�+`.r. .�tti1�>''7` 1 •.lt s'- - .,yq 1 G~:.c{. r.�',4: n'�.��'1'. W.,,�� y r.��x��\a��v�,�Y'�4�y'� I';,k� !, -�t!..n, >:=" I,w.. •H ,flcrrra , -y'.:' ,^��.-`� �, :;�q'. ,-. n"' x -� 'i' �a.��,.�`` .i •,- , _!' ^G z ��'�,�` �,.;...,�t•+F= r� .�:,.3:� '��',a"4 �`"'7` .r/ .' ,z,�.��-"'�ir,� y,7�.� m .w�y ---��"`"'.`-'*� Q;� rii.; ''n�f`i'8:�z �"�i'`�t�'ry � _�3'-�"�'"r��,� �i�tr:�• -`�� 4'' t',.. ,�:_ •�3'fr51�� i.x�� �� 1�-4. :,;� �1 •��'` ..� � 7-c�j�"� '3„��1. s�.- s 2 - i ,tl �. [�,U,�iT , ,`�.^ ♦t d + --;y. t,a7:Y .y`��1 =I=�}`r �. 1.1Y �; ! ..LF 1�'..��. 1.r- 2.t:k7. �.'+�'.n��, •, Y.�•A +L�'t�C � � � T�tea. �'�� 5 ti •�� x -- � r.�. Ll c•"- �� - s.__ 3�"4' � -. 1. ��, �,n: �. ..tom �/�,tr Y � ,T � •Aar +tnt� „-f'u y t,r•s��a, 4y .,r'� �'`s'�t,w�S �� �va� +:'i --r r? 'l .`c'r- .moi � 't.�a C„?:3`t'�''7 •��. y r:£.�/ t�"`^FF-=_=El'a`+�,>'ti�„`�. F,�� � .vr � �E a,, a��,�,�`"£'� �..};� v;;�g,7Gjg.3 '?�'. _ 7 .4' ''.�t�. R1h'?.�t Ra. ��c3` .••�;-`�� :�..,. ....- .a �.'�-,•_ .<.,..--..�_._�...,.�t... _... �,�.2?:..v,T.c�•...'�`ti.-.,Ki�a_.`�,. .;�.,_�+.�7;...�:�.-4.�°r ''� �J..'s..:�S'S,.2; 2 {� i ••• • •.• • • •• • • • � �r :R rH T.•'.�1`'�'-s�•�� �55�����'�J, 7. tS rte.-�t� C u i ,t i{- _ � t t �� $�L � ! �\''�i•,r%� '.di a"'� is .x it � s ,-6aTM TI`S P�t a \° ` 1. 't Ni � yrs�k y fi�a��i r.� -� :� r S ,{•� A�t �� ,.� �„5t�^ .e ce y s� � (nK'. �� The next steps in shaping our future The Regional Framework, adopted in January 2004,:is the initial"chapter" and unifying theme of the Council's metropolitan development guide. This document is required by state law to help ensure the orderly and economical development of the seven-county metro area. The Framework will inform the Council's policy plans for four vital regional systems: ■ Transportation ■ Airports ■ .Water resources ;including wastewater collection and treatment) ■ Regional parks and open space The Council intends to complete work on these new policy plans by early 2005. For the first time, the transportation and airports plans will be incorporated in a single document. Once the new policy plans are completed and adopted,the Council will.issue"system statements" to local governments by July 2005, indicating how the regional plans affect each community, Then local communities will have until July 2008 to prepare or update local comprehensive plans that are consistent with the Framework and the four policy plans. . The Council will provide a new Local Planning Handbook to assist local officials in preparing their comprehensive plans. The complete,text,of the Framework and additional information about the policy plans are available online at www.metrocouncil.org. Paper copies may be obtained from the Council's Data Center by calling 651-602-1140 or by e-mail at data.center@metc.state.mn.us. About the Metropolitan Council The Metropolitan Council is a 17-member body appointed by the governor. It was created by the Legislature in 1967 to ensure"the coordinated, orderly and economical development"of the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area—.consisting of Anoka, Carver, Dakota,Hennepin; Ramsey, Scott and Washington Counties. In addition to its planning functions,the Council operates a regional transit system that carries about 150,000 passengers a day, provides wastewater collection and treatment services for 103 communities,and oversees a regional parks system that attracts more than 30 million visitors a year. . „A Metropolitan Council AA r )I i - ,.,r L :S -T v, Il j l rL / Z. i / I f.-1.a J 1 S l - / I ,1 _ 4. 41 I (. F �. { - �Y J . 1 : - ,. .. ;, .. ;,Y t:. �.�y - I: -"— - f t' t (� �Y _ i .0 .,7'1-" ..,-.": �" ��',, , --S—�;P!.Z--"e. -, -,�"'-,-..- . �.t . -".".I." ,.��;..."', ]T j -9 .. !. . i----"'.` ..._-, :]:�7:. ,. :.,. ...--:;I- - . ,I. -– . ,� . y _ Trane-Nortation at .the crossroads � `� -' --�'.�- -,L. .,,�-, ----', . . . .-..".�.�:�--:,�"..--"�-,-', --"-.,-�1-1--l--"-.---�-�-"��.,� - .----'-1,-.;;�l'., ,;.-,�`� -,-.,"�-�-"-,-,-!� �� -,- - -- r _ _ - - ' ' . ­ - -- - , ��' . ---... -., :1-11, - .. ----.---l:.-:"--', I - . . -_q��Ill fml� . � j w ♦ - - "`5 r '+ ti t 4 c� -v Fj\ ' `�� —— �- za i s . _.. _..:, y _r�r+ t r .. :;- . . . '., � wY . :� �,C�: � . . ,� .. I . . -, 1. ,-Ilw. � "'. . ., �. I - . r.!-.,�.,:;.:.,.l ... . ii.7..!,-� :::: ::.:�;,.-...: ��::._ � ­!'..� -. . , I . .1 ,: ., -., ---_­,� . - Z. .. I ... ... .. . :; , �� � , ., :: -,- �,-,�...: -. . 1. - - --.... - "--':' ----��-:��,r-.,-. .- . -- -.. --.-- -.. I - , .-.:.:.: : . ,I .! ,�... ..... .- . � . :., .��:. ,:'��'.., :..;- . . �, . . ... .". .I . ..:., I - .. Ih ..� .... ...- . I .- I �. IF. 1 ,:�,----"-�, -.... , .%.l....-... . . . - "--,^ - ,. ,. , -� .;: I . y777A -. .. ... -.. � - - � I .-,.. �: ,- .: -7-7 . . -,-., , - .: � : �.. .,�:: - . ;�,, -,. l. . . , - �. . - ,�- -, -... .. " : �,:, ,:. ,:: - - -- - -..-- � -,� ., :1,. .... ll-�- .. .. ..... I . r , - : -. : ;. . ...- . ..- . .�, ...��, ..: -..Ii,:-.. ��-�.,,.I. -, --- -.'�i� . .::, . i�. :,:�. '. . . ".7��, 1:�; �; - - ` ,L. .: .. . : -:�;,..,,�� ���,��,,., ,-.--. .: ' ' . ; --�i: . 2 . .l .l... I - . -I.....,..l.--...-.'- -I.: ,, - Z: -. .:. -. : " ��..��, ; . -��,�.' - . � r� � . �.! ;� . �' . .. - �� , ":.. : - � .- . .' --. . . .�:: � : '. , - .. . .. 1-� - � .-... :. ; , . . : .. ..�: .., � ' . . .. i�.: . , -..o- I - ,.,;�� .�t..,.-�,,--�-� . ,� . -. % , �-:: .-I. ..pgf��� I . -;`max,, . . . . "I . �,:-% ,� " - -, �:!- . . . . . .:. . .,.- :.. , . ... p -�-. . � . , - . ' . .:. � - - �%� ._ . . . -�-� - .,—, . . -.: I . . . iJ Metropolitan Council ii _1 More people, more trips Slowing the growth in congestion Since 1970, the population of the Twin While growth is a good thing, it poses challenges, as anyone who has Cities metropolitan area has grown by traveled in peak-hour traffic can attest. In 1990, 30 percent of the region's 767,000, or more than 40 percent. freeway lanes were congested during peak periods; by 2000, the figure had During this same period, the region grown to 60 percent. In the Council's 2004 survey of metro area residents, has seen: traffic congestion ranked as the No. 1 concern, outpacing crime, education •More women entering the workforce. and housing. Between 1970 and 2000, the proportion There are no "silver bullets" that will eliminate congestion. But the of women in the Twin Cities workforce Council's Transportation Policy Plan contains policies and strategies increased from 48.8 percent to 71.4 P designed to slow the growth in congestion and improve mobility. percent. Consistent with the 2030 Regional Development Framework–the umbrella •Dramatic growth in auto ownership. chapter of the Council's metropolitan development guide–the In 1970, a third of the households in the Transportation Policy Plan calls for: Twin Cities metropolitan area had two cars. By 2000, the figure had increased to •Planning and investing in multi-modal transportation choices 62 percent. In 2000, there was slightly based on the full range of costs and benefits. more than one car for every licensed driver in the metro area. ■Encouraging mixed-use development in centers along transportation corridors that better links housing,jobs and ■Increased suburbanization and decen- � amenities, and reduces the need for single-destination trips. tralization. In 1970, 54 percent of the !„ ■Making more efficient use of the regional transportation region s households were outside of system by encouraging flexible work hours, telecommuting, Minneapolis and St. Paul. By 2000, the ridesharing and transit ridership. figure had risen to 73 percent. Similarly, the share of the region's jobs located ■Focusing highway investments first on maintaining and outside of the central cities grew from 44 managing the existing system, and second on slowing congestion. percent in 1970 to 69 percent in 2000. ��, ■ Building transit ridership by expanding the current bus ■Rapid growth in the adjacent counties, system and developing a network of dedicated rail and/or where large numbers of the adult bus "transitways." population commute to work in the ■Encouraging local communities to implement a system of fully seven-county area. interconnected arterial and local streets, pathways and bikeways. Today, more people are making more trips and traveling longer distances, with suburb-to-suburb commutes exceeding thosefrom the suburbs to the central r cities. Il BY 2030, the region is expected to add 3 g P nearly 1 million people, 470,000 households and 560,000 jobs. This will generate an additional 4 million daily - �Q -w r ' ' Q"`�° m trips, a 37 percent increase in travel on s7o- our region's roadways. — - e Mlrazisx 0 0! r 34 w.0, �= s i• j r 4 .;..r f G (Li ' :.cn An �� 7` �'�'yL�+� �`•_"94:: �Ng, 11 �.}!� 55 i li°y� +l a �3g j� w� gR*' >' 1 k.N: 43i j�y'�g7Y01 �=I {if�l�Jnr�3 Y� � f f'' 'r�r 6�_J"i'�� rw �$y=.���.�, ��j * lQ��i �_•�� �� � (, E �,. 3.�F:..a.,I rrte�, + b y , � a T,��P ted✓ w., , �� � �. �"`ccc NS im NF amma "MIX !L 35WEff in 1;. .. ��� lj� in OAAR All. rti ;,� � �j�! Ix�•� _1 .� �F�1Y'i �1�qr� Nt t:fhiga �. �a7��is�Cf.� r �Is �'. ��" LAS• +J+g4 Qtr g IL . � �� fl .w1 r ' l I e1'I�erg� �d f rt �k +lir �c �a ,1i,rvPs6S9�pDE6c o` gi. i ��1 ��` •>1tr d+l �. "'� � , , >•�. � 31�t .rt ` '1�� , )+' � _,• '�^f$�.j° 1,yy r�° to e• .� •! 1 f �` r + ` �p �•. I ,� -5� .... �i,7•.r��� 9�� ��$^ .apt;�#,�. ��I lel l , " 1_ur I�c"``u L✓' rl 13_! ; ���,�`�se�l�yi� Ll�i�1t5>a�'1wa•n_!', �1 ,Ft t ��4{{.-)■ '���"yr��y��t'�h,► h`1 i���,,� S^ 1 7� 'l7gR . IN ^' �� • _ rrr+Ai c'i rI� -/!r.' 7'a + 1 : 'r+h■ .I + �, � 1!(�-�pc �1r. r u i I �YSIL �r zw f�`f r'1. � �`�t} �y��(-f Ytt�G l�f %��� JLR�P.�_.. �®y�,��.'I Itjs } Qy.•:a ���:.ti� � � R..�f {YiL p��gjriowf■. q� 3� G daw c 7 DIY p2® ": JIM■N Vii ow `N J ■ t -r��• I +``h, ' S Ems Now In EMN ME MEN �� ��■���`�� ,,���e��n�■■ 1�-��■..moi■l��ls�,�o■v�■ 3 Three scenarios for highways Growing the transit system The TPP's highway plan–developed in close coordination — The transit plan is with the Minnesota Department of Transportation–focuses ® o intended to increase investments on maintaining and managing the existing ridership by 50 percent, 657-mile highway system, removing bottlenecks and adding or 36 million riders per capacity where possible. year, by 2020–with the goal of doubling ridership by 2030. The How far and how fast the region can go in improving the =1 strategies for achieving the 2020 highway system hinges on the success of proposals to target include: r- increase federal and state funding. Because of the political uncertainties, the plan outlines three scenarios: ■Adding new express bus routes, i 1_'i limited-stop routes, improved frequency o Constrained Plan Scenario: Based on current funding levels, and longer hours of service, as well as this scenario estimates about $283.5 million a year will be available. additional passenger amenities such as Of this total, $162 million would be needed to maintain and manage transit centers, bus stop shelters and the current highway system.Another $29.5 million would be needed for park-and-ride lots. other purposes, leaving just $92 million for expansion projects. Based on F current cost estimates, the region would be able to build by 2030 only °Funding enhancements such asr those expansion projects previously planned for construction by 2025. bus-only shoulders, ramp-meter bypasses and signal priority that give buses cv ® Unconstrained Plan Scenario: This scenario illustrates the travel-time advantages in mixed traffic. magnitude of highway investments required to hold congestion on the °Providing additional fare incentives ` metropolitan highway system at the same level that existed in 1998. Its such as the MetroPass now available implementation would require about a 425 percent increase in highway through employers and the U-Pass avail- funding over the current levels, admittedly an unlikely prospect. able to University of Minnesota students. ° ■Developing a network of dedicated ® Constrained Plus 30% Plan Scenario: This scenario assumes a 30 "transitways" –including bus rapid percent increase in highway funding over the Constrained Plan Scenario. transit, light rail and/or commuter rail– Of the $368.5 million in annual resources, nearly$200 million would be with mode choices based on a usercarerail available for expansion projects.This scenario would accelerate by 10 years cost-benefit analysis.The region now has the improvements planned by 2030 under the Constrained Plan scenario. cost-benefit such t analysis. nsitways: bus rapid transit In addition, it would provide funds to expand the entire I-494/694 beltway on Isuc and LRT in the Hiawathait to six lanes, and expand and upgrade certain minor arterials. cor- ridor. Five additional transitways should be added between 2005 and 2020, with work done to advance three more. The cost of implementing the transit plan: $500 million in capital investments to grow the bus system and $800 million to $1.4 billion to build the transitways, _ with an additional$120 million a year for operating costs by 2020. An integrated network of transitways TIER II Transitways Under the TPP's transit plan, a network of dedicated transit corridors (post-2020) will be developed.These corridors will give transit a travel time advan- Red Rock Corridor:This corridor follows tage over single-occupant autos, improve transit service reliability and Highway 61 and the Burlington Northern boost the potential for transit-oriented development. and Canadian Pacific railroad tracks The most appropriate and cost-effective technologies will be deter- approximately 30 miles from Hastings mined on acorridor-by-corridor basis. Potential echnologies include through downtown St. Paul to downtown light rail transit, commuter rail and bus rapid transit. Many of these Minneapolis. corridors have been studied extensively and in some cases studies have Rush Line Corridor:This 80-mile corridor progressed to the point of selecting a locally preferred technology. begins in downtown St. Paul and generally follows Highway 61 and Interstate 35/35E north through Ramsey,Washington, Chisago � TIER I Transitways (between 2005 and 2020) and Pine Counties. Cedar Avenue Corridor:A 22-mile bus rapid transit service from Southwest Transitway:The Southwest the Mall of America in Bloomington to Lakeville. Improved transit corridor extends between Carver County and service will be provided to Eagan,Apple Valley and Lakeville along Minneapolis, including the cities of Eden Cedar Avenue. Estimated capital cost: $60 million. Prairie, Minnetonka, Hopkins and St. Louis j Park along railroad right-of-way acquired for Central Corridor:An 11-mile light rail line or bus rapid transit future transit by the Hennepin County service on University Avenue between the two downtowns. Estimated Regional Railroad Authority. capital cost: $240 million for BRT and $840 million for LRT. i Northstar Corridor:A commuter rail line on existing railroad tracks between Big Lake and Minneapolis, linking with the Hiawatha LRT line. Estimated capital cost: $265 million. j Bottineau Boulevard: Bus rapid transit along County Road 81 from Minneapolis northwest to Osseo, Dayton and Rogers. Estimated capital cost: $50 million. I-35W Corridor: Bus rapid transit on I-35W south between down- town Minneapolis and Lakeville as the reconstruction of I-35W is completed.The HOV lane from Highway13 to I-494 will be extended _ through 46th Street when reconstruction of the Crosstown interchange is completed.This plan proposes completion of a new fifth lane in each direction north of 46th Street that would extend into downtown and would be reserved for "priority transit/HOV" operations. Estimated capital cost: $50 million. While there are many demands competing for scarce public resources, existing revenue streams simply will not be adequate to implement this.plan and meet the region's transportation needs. Maintaining highway funding at current levels will result in significant increases in traffic congestion, delaying the movement of people and goods, reducing the region's economic competitiveness and harming our quality of life.Transit service improvements, which could help ease the pressure on our highways, will not be possible at current funding levels. Indeed, current funding levels will not be adequate to maintain transit service at current levels. Working with the Governor, the Legislature, the business community and other stakeholders,the Metropolitan Council will actively pursue an adequate level of funding to address the region's unmet transportation needs. The Transportation Policy Plan also addresses issues dealing with aviation, freight, bicycling and walking. The complete text and additional information about the plan are available online at www.metrotouncil.org. About the Metropolitan Council The Metropolitan Council is a 17-member body appointed by the governor. It was created by the Legislature in 1967 to ensure"the i coordinated,orderly and economical development"of the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area—consisting of Anoka,Carver, Dakota, Hennepin,Ramsey,Scott and Washington Counties. F In addition to its planning functions,the Council operates a regional transit system that carries more than 200,000 passengers a day, provides wastewater collection and treatment services for 103 communities,and oversees a regional parks system that attracts more than 30 million visitors a year. LOCAL SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENTS Watershed management organizations (WMOs) are required to prepare plans to address watershed management issues (see Minn. Stat. Sec. 103B.201). Local governments are required to prepare local surface water management plans that are consistent with all applicable WMO plans (see Minn. Stat. 103B.235). In addition to the requirements in 103B.235, in 1995 the Metropolitan Land Planning Act was amended to require that each local community's comprehensive plan include a surface water management plan. Local surface water plans are to be reviewed by the Metropolitan Council as part of the local comprehensive planning process prior to adoption by the WMO. Local surface water management plans are crucial in helping the region meet the challenge of cost-effective management of water quality and quantity. Local Surface Water Management Plan Requirements (Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410) Minnesota Rules, Chapter 8410, requires the following elements to be discussed in local surface water management plans: 1. Purpose of plan 2. Water resource management related agreements 3. Executive summary 4. Land and water resources inventory 5. Establishment of policies and goals 6. Assessment of problems 7. Corrective actions to problems identified in number 6 8. Financial considerations 9. Implementation priorities 10. Implementation program 11. Amendment procedures Council staff looks for information on these elements as part of their review of local surface water management plans. Since the rules were adopted in 1992, many changes have taken place in water management. Therefore, the Council has been promoting additional elements to be considered in local surface water management plans. Additional Recommended Plan Elements 1. Local ordinances to implement the plan such as: — Erosion and sediment control ordinance — Stormwater management ordinance — Wetland protection ordinance — Buffer ordinance — Shoreland ordinance — Floodplain ordinance — Critical area ordinances where applicable (consistent with Executive Order 79-19) 2. Ways to control runoff rates so that land-altering activities do not increase peak stormwater flow from the site for a 24-hour precipitation event with a return frequency of 2, 10, and 100 years. 3. Criteria such as NURP wet detention basin minimum pollutant removal efficiency to protect and improve stormwater runoff quality. 4. Ways to address thermal pollution effects, particularly in watersheds with thermal sensitive environments/fisheries (i.e., trout streams, fens). 5. Stormwater practices that promote infiltration/filtration and decrease impervious areas (LID or low impact development), where practical. 6. Information on the types of best management practices to be used to improve stormwater quality and quantity. 7. Requirements for presettlement of stormwater prior to discharge into all lakes and streams. 8. Wetland management plan that incorporates a function and value assessment for wetlands. Presettlement of stormwater prior to discharge into wetlands must be consistent with values and uses of wetlands as identified in wetland management plan. - 9. Water quality goals for each water body. 10. Information related to MPCA's TMDL program, where applicable. 11. Policies related to nondegradation. 12. Required elements of MPCA's NPDES Phase II stormwater management program, where applicable, including: — Public education and outreach — Public participation/involvement — Illicit discharge detection and elimination — Construction site runoff control — Post-construction runoff control — Pollution prevention/good housekeeping. 13. Information on spill containment strategies and techniques. 14. Information on groundwater protection as relates to surface water protection. COMPREHENSIVE SEWER PLAN REQUIREMENTS The Council looks for provisions in a community's comprehensive plan that provide for wastewater service commensurate with the needs of expected future development. The Council's requirements for the wastewater, surface water management and water supply sections of a comprehensive plan are listed below. Under state law, local governments are required to submit both a wastewater plan element to their comprehensive plan as well as a comprehensive sewer plan (CSP) describing service needs from Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). Before any local government unit in the metropolitan area may proceed with a sewer extension, the CSP must be consistent with the Council's Wastewater Systems Plan and be approved by the Council. In the past, the required information in the CSP has been broader in scope than the information required for the comprehensive plan and has provided more detailed engineering information. To simplify this process and allow the Council to review both documents simultaneously, the Council has combined the required elements of both plans into the following criteria: Requirements for Areas Served by the Regional System 1. Adopted community forecast of households and employment in five-year increments to 2030,based on the Council's 2030 forecasts with any subsequent negotiated modifications. 2. A map or maps showing the following information: a. The community's existing sanitary sewer system identifying lift stations, waste disposal sites, existing connections points to the MDS, and the future connection points for new growth if needed. b. Inter-community connections and any proposed changes in government boundaries based on orderly annexation agreements. c. The location of all private and public wastewater treatment plants. d. The map should designate each existing or future connection point to the MDS as a local sewer service district. 3. A table or tables that provide the following information: a. Capacity and design flows for existing trunk sewers and lift stations. b. Information on the number of existing and potential connections by local sewer service district, and projected flow volume in five-year increments through 2030 and build out. There is no preferred method for projecting interceptor flows. Communities may use the method that is most appropriate, and indicate methodology and assumptions used. c. Proposed time schedule for the construction of new trunk sewer systems that require connections to the MDS. d. Accompanying information on the type and capacity of the treatment facilities, whether municipally or privately owned, copies of their appropriate National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) or State Disposal System (SDS) permit. 4. City goals, policies and strategies for preventing and reducing excessive infiltration and inflow (UI) in the local sewer system, including: e _ a. Requirements and standards for minimizing inflow and infiltration and the disconnection of illegal sump pump and foundation drain connections to the sanitary sewer system. Copies of ordinances prohibiting the discharge of foundation drains and/or roof leaders to the sanitary disposal system as well as copies of ordinances requiring the disconnection of existing foundation drains, sump pumps and roof leaders from the sanitary disposal system should be included. b. Information on the extent, source and significance of existing I/I problems along with an analysis of costs for remediation. c. Implementation plan including program strategy, priorities, scheduling, and financing mechanisms for eliminating and preventing excessive 1/1 from entering the system. Requirements for Areas Not Served by the Regional System 1. Adopted community forecast of households and employees in 10-year increments to 2030 (based on Council's 2030 forecasts with any subsequent negotiated modifications). 2. Description of community's management program for on-site sewage treatment to comply with MPCA 7080, and a copy of the community's current on-site ordinance. 3. Map showing the locations of existing public and private treatment systems, if any, including package treatment plants and group on-site systems. 4. Map identifying location of on-site sewage disposal systems. Location of known non- conforming systems or systems with known problems should be identified. 5. Description of conditions under which private, community treatment systems (for example, package treatment plants, community drainfields) would be allowed. Examples of such conditions should include allowable land uses, installation requirements,management requirements, and local government responsibilities. 6. Capacity of and existing flows to public and private treatment systems. 7. Brief description of the community's sewer system plan (proposed to 2030) including the following information: a. Projected flows in 2010, 2020 and 2030. b. Local objectives, policies and strategies for preventing and reducing excessive infiltration and inflow including sump pumps and drain tile in the local sewer system. c. Proposed timing and financing of any expanded/new wastewater treatment facilities. d. Copies of facility planning reports for the upgrading of the wastewater treatment plants. 8. Map showing the service areas through 2030, staging plan if available, and any proposed changes in governmental boundaries affecting the community, including any areas designated for orderly annexation. , ...I_..4.ft _-, , , �;� I .,. . ,� J-ft - 'I , � _­:�t , "', . . ....I .1 , 1ji-_��',!;-Z_'�T4,:..;,�v . Z.- - ,�� W.,�. ��- .-,- ",", . .. ,'. - .4--t'; .--l-;:,; � �I,Q'..'v -, ,�,, , --�-, "" ','�,V��:7"4. F, ," ,',:�!, _," .­ . .. , ',,A," I � . . ,�_* , . 7-�: � . . � _ . , ,', ­�./­" 1 !-�IrMA-�'. ��Y_,­ " '�, - ­- ­�­­ - . '� -l"," 1� �.�� , ;j, � --1 I I ,_­,�; �,�� :" - ., %-� ,�:... 1"t, �l ,­­ - -I . � $: 1 ': , ;. ,"- ., 91 ��- , ��._-� - , -l", , . .3`3:,� .� , - ;�-'., �,.,�t ,-,,;,,k . , . !-,� `�J .,...,:!-,.�.,_�­.�-,.!Ol - , V *,I,-, N. - - .. -. .. � � .;�, .;� _'...�. .,..:. . '. l-.'`;:­�,­- - '' "�-,Y,,: . .. . -1 . " , " '..� - I I . . .l..l;*. Im" .. ". ." � I 1. "? . I�-I --­"r4l,_� ";' 1�', -. '. .+ , -Z.;; � - p",- _m , , ,��.", . ,.f,, � _. I.. . ,_ i e.. .. I.1--.'. A .1. .. .. .. I I ..�.` ff, -- - � : ff I- I.,A% -, I..v71- . -, m I .1- - �, �, ,� f �, T PROMMEMAZ ,'. -,lp4b_U­ ­,`�, , �z,A- . � -�, � -gr. - ­� N;.�,.­.; �,­ :�, -'��;:,� .!"V,."(�'.1�l";. , . ­�V'' ,:�,i . .., !"� p j r ., ,.,_',­� � .. - .__ A- . ­- -�� .,� %...1 71 i�r',�W I � I . .4'. .. . ,-, 1,1��,tlj!. , , .. �­ll ­,­ '. --.r- .�- ,"R19 Es, -A-- ,--,, , �­�T . -, ., . .k. ;I..."1 1�:77..�- . 'Ar _�' � .." - 6,11" .. - 'i rl­ `�'l �v , ,,i , " .� ,,_., .. " ,�`,�.: I .� -, - F ,,, - .. -,- ., -, ,� ...;�-, �. . .� .. :, ., x I" � �'.�11.t I I " . -, , I ,, . .. .... -- lll­�M­l - - - I -. -- 1� - " I', L -I - ,.;":,I,: ,- - .;I ,,, 'T .� ,�li. :.�! � . -*�- - , :..�.�...-_44._­�.�-,_- ..- - - i�, ;;l , � ,.�,?, - . �­.., ".. 7N....1-I - ��llq I-� , - __- �A�Z,��--,�-_!7'V.-.(�.�-�� - . , ". I;. V; :. i O.:� - ,- "'..-�.�F� 1� , �'i v '� 1-:51�,;:�_ll , ,� ,r;'.., "__�,-i--' .� . . .-11-1 I , � �t �1,N 1. , '�� . "., �_-j:! 1, .--. ,rp . . �;�q�­.. . .- I-A;�.1­7i.';:­ll" i 1, - - - ,,,­.,,�� , -.�,�, . if, .. :­ , " .1­� I""i � - � --� A'. -„..1r1,. I. , . f; �- + .”, , , , .f" .1;7 r, I .,�,�, I\ , ,� . , " _'1-- ,�.l v,--l"i, �4,* i vim[ ,,, , g , , ,r � A__ - � � 17 0 ���,PIT. 1, 'i-,.,;;i-. -1._�_ .-1 7'. Z��,�.,__ ­. ,V.. -Y ,',�;,_. - - - - , ,� ­I� ­.�,_ � '_ -­.- , . . "i.... ­ , .e . ­ - . ­� 11.�.__,.;- , ., . ,�- n - - ,-jr, ,� /P": �.. .141 -k I - , l7i�ll�iP I . e!, . ". .., . , �11 :-,- - ",- , ::,c -,, ,�;._Sl� ;, ,;i -.. W,I _m.1:� ­, ,�.fr-�";,. .�.,, . -,-1" I - * - . r ---.-�­.�;._ .��-.� "W,-P, ". ,K,,- -� �I��.-.i4 r,r, ,-�'�.­ :,­', � 4��lf�".. -t ,;&,r, 4;.11,� .�1��:!1, ,.if, . .�- -� . R'��,z�', - - ,�z �% - � t .­� -.N7.,.­P.;. J -­.��'. I- ­.-`?.­­ . ".�12"- . .:�: .I.,v �' . .", ....... �-,;�Z.j Y_j . -,, . �,��A j�_��,-;,-��­ -j-, - - �-'.l..'I.-, -: " ".1, , - I ." -14. .. ­ � V - , , ir , ­,­�%'. . 1-2 L 17 14'�_�, ,�,- I,, , , - ,; . - ,�." !�'� -,. . ,fir.. —N. . ­��Hi",;:,;_-1 , ., �z��,F , .- �r I ., - -,;�_��, .�;!.� . .,�.� -".-,:�,'_z.j '4)!�- .-.,, �, _��.;_,rl ..�.�:,...;�_;,--:�.i. - ,,;,-,i, `-� . �! " ,.; , .,..�% . �,-- � 1 o7 'i �I 1.�.'l . �,_ .�� !, �� I " ; ` - '�,%1".m, %'�--Z' -�7,­-" -�,?:. ...� ­". - , 41Ks_l li,i�._,� , J- " --�-1`� -j .1., 1.1�7.. .-I .. , ... -�,,, .�­ " -,"--,,-��:": . � - :_�`6." �, , .. )i, . - ..:��7. ., , . 1-1--x�r .Of ,,, , I- , 'R p I i � . -5(' 1•. 1 ppq37 u k-.N N r, �.� '.-�;�..,'!.,,�! -,(�. . �,�:,:­.�,:.:!:.�', .. ­- _-,..­--`--� ­r­�?'j'.',�,,�;j .w -�, O'.9"'! -,- _�, j - ", 11 1.­�lll . , -.4 ,, -- ,, I... ,�-* "'.. k - - - .� .t -�'- 1. I., -I- — � -- ..,I-�,'., -r� , �'; I ?, , .. I I _......'.. - �; 11 ., , "... . . ,. . '. '� , , - - .. '/.:` I . .. f " y . I -L . - 1�1 lllli�­;; "r. - ­� l .;�-I;l . .i , . �;� ., f , I '..:,,. I I �f -,;U,�-�1 ,:. : i � . . -A , ,,,I.i-,- �-"-,".4­­ )_-, v , ­' '. ", K. ,I - .,�,p , ­.... . I \1 .. ,- �11 , ­ I ­-��-1 - 1 1:-:.�I.1 ,,,.411,1)�,­,,�-,,,�­ - , i.,I� " _�_��, . . .c1.. -- " . i-�-?,��l - ,• �_-, ­-- 4 "I I,11�1"-1.��_,..,,-,,-,�.� i ,,, I _� .. 0 . it, Ll�'... I -(��.:-f,,'4" � ,-; , 2 .'.� � . �� -l-,,,lz - _.,<�.,qz'l, _" . . "�,..!"��, -�­­ '.' - - ,-- -i- '-�l __" 4 �. .�.. ,::�:­- ­ yl.,Z, ,',, -i�,,;,� - %�,'_-',,-e V - �. ,_,_ ,Yl v ., 4,��" , , ,; i�, ! -, -�;� ,� "":., ,�-_g$,jj, ,; , �, .� �zj. . "7. I _ - .. � -4") " 4 .01 r� - , %f ,7XI; -!� ... ..; - si_,.,�L'.;;,;,.J_-��_l M-S, - '- -�,7­,1,7­.2 -, ��.�-._'%�-,-;,i, f ;,:"., -z , - ,�­- ""-..� I . ,�.,��. �,t�7 � � :��,�,A�; , , & �_ _ i.:;zj�",.A , � .1, rll>-:-. ,...t,�,", , ,� � � .-. . \. , , . ,:jN,:,- -,; ,,, . 'P-;.7� - . %., 'z ., , _ �I%A" � . -; !, -,-,'ml.j, - - .-­ 1. ll.� " � l4'1 . " .- ,� ...- , ­_1;ia,__ ., .. -. .�,!­ I I .,,,, -m - - ',�'tL - - ": - - , - , - ;_�,, .. ��L�� �� . - :,. -�. _-',��­�:­­�­.;T',. , .'. , g . _� . ,..- ."W-, , - -,-, ., , , , - , 1. .; _�.� _e� .-.1".-11 -, . � -,-,,,,--,�,,�.-',,'�,,,�,,�c",--.,� ,,�;%,.,'-'-"A' ,, I ") 1�_�,,�,,-� 2,-.---�L,,.�-LE ,�l . .� '.IT- - ! � . .1 -. 1.- . .: ) ,;� �,' .:,�.--, .0 �,."-7 ,i.t..9.i .l. , --.-.��,, . .;,. "`;��­ X, X �,-, i.t�t ',,� � tl�. , .� 1�1� _;'...., ,�l-t -.-""��,.,."�,,Ii-',­�,`W_11.r�,-�,.] -�'P L .�1. r. -T, -'.'.. - I _. , ­,­A� "I", , .... ,, : lri�I , . �.1-1 , ..,.��, , -!,�' .. �;,-�a.?";�.�A,­��, .�z ,­,., ­ -,, �',­Wz-, 9:-.-t �;O.5,-,;�- �,-.1 .` .,kz-�,,��, , - - . . .! I' ;i. ,i,� , I .11,- " - .. 11 � A,�.��".,i_,�",.:-""'f,�Z�";,­­­, ­�' �t,v......iqzZ, .. , _ --_,'-l'. , - ,,.-�'.4.:�,;r,'.'�,.7�..�..%�','�'-­�,",,;!:� � fi, .;. i'�._ .,-.,;.-�. .1.1 I - - ,rp, . ` , .j. , -j"., ",,-"r,�,_.ky _� ;V5 .., . � ., _( 1"."'. , . . 'Y -�,'g. ,!� ,., -�r,-�4,�; .-I 7 ��J,,��­�, ;�, ... ,I.,�)-l....,­� " .�111�:'3111e. , , "t - . . �, . V" _.:._�m,' ,., -_ ,,.'�_ ,,;,f. - -V . ,�l ­ .. *,`/ . " N . . - --!�.t -�, ,'�"� _f� �&, ; � -t-,'-, 9_1 11 . . , ,7, , . "­.I I , - , .", .,I 11 i��:, ..- , � - . ­ _. �,� .. , - .I , .. _ -�--;t. - .�',-­ 14;.�_:Of -'r, ;.. 7 , .... � ... , ,. �p - , ; A ...+4r I1:1., "�­;�. -�'.I___ . - ,­" .; I .� .',j�:.:� I.,I _.L .1, , I ,..:. , �'.�, ­I_'j:.?'.' .���. - ...­ 4, - ,-:.t,'k?'Z. . I -!�?L;',-,S"--.1 �, . � . - �1111'I�a , -, ,� ..��,`.�.:, �'. �- , �7Z�i'.;`:�- _- ; F, �N. -; lo;�'i-l'."i-:1�_:,"ii�1 ; - -,, - I - . �:��. -- �.-�--.: L,-�..,-p.�-,�'� .t — -;r � �,­-1 " - , . U. - �:,"'; �j".,.! ­-,..".1. -, . I'. 1 ��.lv.. �,. , - . - - � ...I, . .1. - -;­.. - r-11- ­ � I , . �,.,,i - . ..__ ....... � ,., I ..4 11.'� , ­-",;;66i.wWi Z .:.,?' ­', -,­_--,��­ -:7�k�--i":"o: , -.-'�� Y�� .".�.­:­I�.__1,�­­­'. . , , .. . - - -;-:.,�..,�.-� . ,�-!,,;-.: ., , - ,�---E7T ,,. ...."l-l"... .�.. -,._,­,�; ..;­'. - ;_... .", : -; -. - -,. -_ ,�,C." � . "� Z, — �__. 111.1 " _,:,l,',-',-.q .1 ,�'. !�� _�,,,��' - -!­_�.=,', �,.�,:,J�7, .r.,� ,. , . �� "li, . IP7. ��. r_.. _,­� r . .­� �,___ ,. ? ,. ,, . - _ _-V - � .�.! ;� k' ;��' ��, .1-1.11 ... �.., ,'_ .-l-f ��'i!�,, . " - - ­�--­' ­-,.,,!,, .,-,�-7 ,,��.-, --.'J�,;,�I.tz�. ., _�­�",� .., . F. -� . -"�',, 7.:l.',-..4-_.n.- � .,c �� � . ,; , . .. _��-;��.�,,'�"'- .a'�:�j ", -,-'­­.. -­ ... _� -�; �,­,";:.�­��,. . ,��' � " -,,"...,,1,­,,��7�:.:-,-.,- r., .." - -i�Z�I,, '� �.A;,�, �q, , .. ,-;. ,�v.T,-�-.., , - " �;' -' ­';l I � - ,-, ;­ "..... ..""', � I I i .., -, "L-1��..-, r.._.�;,�­�,; ....�.­ .; . .,�.r.,, - I... - , - ,��, .,:",� - .1 "..-".,: _, - ,7 .. ; :- �-1,:� %'��.7-"."? 7.�,-.',-..�-,rr".:�.�'- ..-,. ., . - .- . _.,, �­_ll -, I - __,_..'�T_t _,,��,-,,�;, ,�-1.­,;4"._�,f,,�­ ,-_;..�. .�!.5j'-�.j - - - W, - ..".e."'. __ . '7-,Z , , - :",17:���`,' , . _;x, ..... .1.1 ll:.l­,4�:.-.%�_ l_ ..Y:; �-., -'N,ft a-e�,,� �.�,!_-_;Zj.�;I- �'­ -.,,,,.',�.:rf.j,"-, ., . - .,��: '_.�, - . - __,� - . �­- .�-: -i.�,,-,`�:. ,�� . " ._._ . - , . � - .. 1� ". �,.� -.1 . � , , _ �-. - ,7` - ,;.-z _.::.- -,. , . .-,. ,-,,�,: .: , �- . .I., I , " - - " :1 �:__ ._ �-�­- ,...-,.-.. .. . '_. ....-I - - , - . . . .. - - - - ., .. , � !. -,�,: ,.- .- -N �l _ .;,�'.. , �v:­.,4 -- . 1. , . :- ­.. ." -, , ...,�? �,�t, -��.�.�,",�.�� -­.�:,'_! ..; _., - -,, I- -N �.I-,-" '.f ". 1 4, i _41LZ, � fy 'MAI;'-s ;",;,i','-;�, � ;.,- �!-i`�!:�­�,:.;,; - � '. ( ......_;. I "i. "."... • �.�. ,... -L , I . ;�, j, . .,,:� , .-�.- I.i.. . .,,?�� �:, 1,. ? j l-,;.. ;-­ , _t,� - - .1�.?,� � 'F Pl�.,-.6." - .� . . -. I `­ -,�l:-, - .. I ,�' - 'amort. _1 .. .. all �, , �,� - 1',��, - - I r - -, - , . I " '?,�j-'.- X�.,, ., , :--. ,­=.'�- '...__.- .., , ,��- .1 _­�;3- _. . t- , , 11, .. .1 A . .1" _ __ _�.�r .-.� . ,jl,���.� .,,�:" I , -- t I . _.., , , � . , - . . . . � �.c , - . ? . . � . "..'I,;..- o-l-I.- -, ,%, . . �;, i `, ., .."":""",.���i�:-�� ,. ,. ! -,-,-' - .%,. . , . ,;.-I, ..,� -, . -Z.- '��%,��, _'..�,` i. .I . �� �-. ��-��;...- - . -� " � . ":,41!-,',l�,, -1-" -.i.;,-.,t� - .0 ,;`:_ i . . . � - - �l - �11 , - , I - - ., . - !`if , ,", . , 4411-'�.�,,j�,,-, ` -. . . . __ ­ . . _ � ,I i���, ,.._�a� ,"--!".., ....... � '. '.. _ __, -, .� . ­,,'�,- I I. 11 , ,� -- -. ;i, �, . 1, ".1,z, ;, - I. � :.. . I- ll�­ . ,% . - ��, . I I,Wlr,4,�.-41-al, �,; ­"­-� , --;-rN, , 1- ,.v.",,�."­ � - �. � . .. - k.�.i�,,.',,,'.,��,�,.,.,,�, , v I -r ��,,��__­ ._ ­ _­..,­;­. - .:,- ;i...-_. -.-;:� .0, _T., ,,.._ _� - ..-_­ ... I�� -1.1 � - I - ..' . -�,�.'., ',I- � -.,.-, -j�,!4'i "', '��-I , - , � .,..�'. .-I-,I I I!;;;_-,.-_:Ln�:�.�'�j,;, 4�"'. i;;"" ,, "- , -:.,l, , . , . ,. -.�,- . �, - � � ,i '.�­� "r " -�, ,,,, z,�l-:w;,'� ­� ,­�_ - ::r." -,,-.�7, '-i `,*,�;,:rl,t�-�.��' �-"-'�Pll��;�'?-I",,"- .. .- .. 2;-,�;,��_-!L�z 4'.":,.,.- �­�-:-- "-;, '-k�,"_,��,�-_4:,�-.,:��.­.-, -.,..,. -,� -, _.,.;l: 1,�;�_...:-, ..,;.�:.. .. , , __ .�.: ­ I --lk .. ". ­.,; __­ -�',� . -1. , ,..,.'..-1. -v....- --.."',�1!q�� d.� "l:r,..V­ � - � . . ,.�, ...1,.lam..,.�, I-� ­ --<ll I I I I I�: ..y­,k.A­ . I. � L� ." , .1, ,-� - � K� i , I�:::.� ,' , ' ,',�' ',,'_-,-�-�j,.:.� . - I � . .i. . , I !, . ., ��- �p 1.,.&�I. ,, - - - V1,11#11-'.�1. .. ZSITFI-'�J-il JC ,`;-,�� ,,--. ,�.t '.-, X� -t , �4, ,7 _-�, -": . . - - . .-�� -_.. ,. , _ ,1;1,4_�. . _, - � �. ,�I-gtL , �� ...I- -_ ,,-,��:�:,!, q �;t , - �,­� . � ., - , - :�-J.'.,F:, -.� -- *P­i� .-��,�.4, ".��'.,"- - � ....I__�..'�..m'i 7, ... �fj I F , , ,,�,- A" ��-,-I,;,--, -t!.,[.�,:_ . _. , ,� ,�.��"'.-�.;�, � ,­�' .."­� :-,,­�`,­­ - _. ..,-F, ,I _. L-- �� , .;_,� I- �,�:i.-� ,` ',;�,, .-;'?,7. 74:�-,-;"S.!:.-'�,',.7"-�'-�Z�7 j.%'.- - , ,, , , ,1,11 _�: '('�. �;"�7-.;�il-'-"�"--� I - � &_,i,!;:� _� " : , �:, �,­. ­..�... - _- ---j ­�.� lt'­-_r,,,l'.'l­­­ I -7 I,�,y,J�,,-­'A .:.�`��'t?-b­�3-7;-.�.Y.i,��'E-'.'�"',,,f�,�-�'t�.,!,;�7�',l,�,,.,,-�,'41.� �,�, :.; �.:l,�. -.�.,�-�,-_%.:, .. ....,-.. - � ­. ,�_- ".., .1 I... _jl- ,- ,,�.. .r�J'�._ -­.,"'.. ­'. - - % I- -- - _ . �,' ..1-1.1-1...'o. , -�!­ ;'�`,.- -__� -- , __—, _,� , W�-'�O i��,-"I'v-,-,-i,--,,.-,�-7.�,"",7.1.-,',', f.'r- ,' '­%­�-.,- ' ,-,�,.-�-.,,��"-i�"',"'�7'�-11�-�;7�,,-,,;�"-�;;-­-_.�-��," �,-� --- - .,. - 1�*4', . .J.�V , _ , . - ,- ��. _-I ,� �,�,-,�-,,". � . ,!�4;7,- . . .��,,__­�t�,­­,-� - ... ': -�--,-��-�,l� _z _�l -^I- ---W,t��­,-iFl? , , -- , � � p;;-.�;­­IT,�-,!'i ..­._� ,_�. -,-__ __ - 3- _�;., j,: ­7 �-,; -,( � , . �. - _ ., .� .. , ;�� .1-1111 I I - I ml: � J,rx­`_,4�,�:'14.'�? . �'i.!�_ ;; _.,rr�.._,��­ � �,.,.,-...." .1. ,I-, , .._ . — ­­ - . ..�, -I.,.: � _:�,­.­­­-7--3, _*1 -:_ j i� _�'_, .'Ili"",i,'.-': - . .11 11 � �;� �,_ ,­�,_, I pp I.g,,.Yi.",,.-.�;,�.._'r.-,4iF'--'. -­-.� � Z�,?-�-��, ,ra,�-.z,7��­ . � ,, - 7111-., 7 . .. 1.I ----- .5..-.1.11--, .�r -,��:�-��-,;�_-,,---�,?;4�;��,,--.-..-_ . .:i�,._._, - ,�;-Z'I i5r.�,-,�.�., ?I . . ......V,j ' ��:. . . �. 1�1. � � I -i.1 Jr. - . .... ..-:7,.'j ; ,lr . _I . .j I .., - . � � - � - - -. "4W,11 - , 6 -- - ..� , -, 1 _ . , I . ��,� ,;. -C� - -. . , ,.Z",� - ..- � 1, - . 11 .11,A :�,r.7. ,.,,,,. ..�� ��.I� ,,� — . - . _­ .� F �,-r,,I, . _ - �.,,.. - ­-, , �11 k. ,, , . . - - , ��:�':,;',',-?i�'.-I���'r-.5,��,,;"�;... -. , . .1;.. - ��ff��-_.,`-'_,- -..". - �-�.',!T�-',',;P.e"S -­�,�,-�, ­.,..'�. -I ­­J'fj�­,". .% � � , : .­ , "",�7 7-, . � ;O.A,�lj�WA.1,.. . " -.�- ;M --, , __. - I., � , . .. , , �,. I , i)i -�.ti�,,.;q�., -: _: .i, - _ - ;, ,�." ', -'..-,- - - --% ---;!5z4_m-. ­ ­ i�:E9. T7'� t_ �� - , ,.l.._.� -1-1', -w,;­,j.,.-Z-.­!-.V­- , ,� ­_.. --i; '�� - ;. �w IV -,..I,. '. :� �zi - - -A.v.,;, -7. . ,;- .� -,z��'!--_.� k,j..: ,1,,i-f-, ... -. _��;�,_�_"-,._:k= .I.-.M 1';.��l -1 - -___../-/.fir - -Z�-- -- - - ., �. -- ­ - - t�:., :-�: ,-,.­,,--�`,-'--,.:� ,. ,. . , - :.�� 1;7-7-- ��_.;�111­. ..., �­_­ ­ [ . '­-, ,� "...,-...- ,­-i. . - , ��,p _�-- -,,;, ')- . - , .1-1,­­6.�' "; `, ..-. 1- , ,�t�_L .I,_' ­,��-f�m;p-:Vi­ ".,,, - .I;iv '., '" --,;,,r 1.A.:,.� --- �tg-L - � --j , ,. I.. -��-6 �� ,. ,� , . , - - ," Q , I_ -,.-, � .,;,?. . , --,-P.. , � '. -11__ 1. _�__ .i.� ,��, .;:, � I ,,,r,-, '.� _: ­?, - ., U�'..-` .- _- -!.-. -;z;- ,-�I.'t-,� , , , ., . , C � , .. %. ..Z�, - . � _ - - - -.--. -,_ . I 1. Z:� - � ... :, .I ,-, -f,�)- . - :--%,.. ..!...`;�.7. , , , ___ , , - .. , .- . - -'Ii.-,�,-��.'.�-.-��,��:;Z�,,.�l.::-,�,,Il�l, ill,. . 11 . I I .1 '.. .. -. ". . - -7: � ...�'l, 151 ! I-.".�.,1:,; .::L�,'..,,- , . , I. . - , -, ,�"/ .� . ;�;I -, . � ... ., . . . . -gt, I ".111-1 ....., ,�, - ...:�, '�4__:!� `�, '11"P i It" . . Z;4 .Z. NO'( , ,�, . : . , -,.,. -, - -.I-,�;�,--�L-- - '-,�__!:�L.-,,,I�.."'M C. �,,- .� - � I 1,�il,,I. ."..-I- ... ., � � . i. �- - ....11, �v I -, � - , '. ..,,-,-----�-__= � --- . -.I �­_-�,-C,-, -.: "�,fI.".- ( .f .) .�j -�� . ..... r> 7-�ek- .� -� =��--" . . . 1. ,...: .. ,�. I I.:­ .�_,npll - ; � : :....._� ...� , - ­­ � _1 . -- I ,� ; �- - " ,-- - lk � . I , I _. 1, 1.- ) �;U 1% -".!,-.,� . � r;J; "; "", '.' 'ljl� - - .li, ­­.� Z__f .. ; ,�"'i -�T .��::,,,-�� _�,�, - --­­�-' Fr yl . _ ,;,,,j,lj�R'r ­ . 1,I ,...J,. . ... . - . , ..; .... . .: I . _�­ 7 � A, �,:�......�� , . . - . . ,b .. .� - .. f. . -. - - . ,, ', ',; i�.�� - , . ....Z , -1,4.� . . . L.. I.... ;:-, n". -.-. -, -:1�- I - -, I . . . . - t��: , -,%" -�: . .., -- ­ j�77;��,­;,.T.- ,,-�,7,--�.,�`: . - . .. . , 1 ,�,-,r �t.;.-,'�.-,,,.-- ..". --�- �l t:11--i e��--:.""; . ',­�.;.,..�­w, ,,�­Vm'�` " , "',- -1 . - � - , '.. 1, ,� .. . _-1 ` . 4,,I ��i ,--�, � . . - 1. -- .I ;-.1- 1'or�3.,04,-,;i_4,lp�>­,".,,:�'­j . . . .1� ..I -- . . -ty.;-� �V.,i�,_t --m - -- . .-,�: . . , . .� . . ��",.! .% . . , , - , _ � ., . - �t 4'a'!�L"Y i��....--,_.�� � . - �T`�', " , ;z,-- - �� . . , ,-; .M., lill� , - - ,,� � , -- . -- - 1±f,4a, '� -, . �-_.,..�', � , ­�,:.; '�:., .z . .",- w - ,.�,,Z-:�.-�, "71C71� ,­ , _.�,t.%,!fj,_-.; -�� ,�, , .. ;W _�� ,", - - .1, I �.,. � ,zz:�_ , . - ., ` 'Vi� . , . z, , ., ; -.;-n��,�r'�,�--, --I ,­ - .. .. . : 7- .- . ..( - , , - 4 f'. I :_ - .� .. . . _'. - �6_ ,. � . I . ..,: .�_ .,.. �. I� . ,f - ��i _� , . �. . ...1._i�tL�,J_i_ ._'i�ga­__-"�l!��P'��,��;!-_�l fj,�.:, �,:..` i___090 il - "j- �.-��. - -Ar '. t;� -�.;2 . ,' '-.1'pjt , I . . . ;�,� . -.,- � . ., � . . . --" -- . . .: ..: _`�� .. �Z� - . . _ .. . . , - "". -., 1. ­­I_'� . - ­��­1. ,; I I. . . , ��.:,�-'.�:.."�,,-�:,.,. �, . ,.---__,,.1;r_' - - ,�: . . .- . : . .k - . _­ - , - . ,-::-:­�,., _.. ...-,.,.��=.! I . :�, .- . �71 I�..1. . . . � . . . .. . .. ­,��­Z"� - - ........... --1 ­=�-p,,�!%,�� �- ,;, --i�oill-1,1 -1 � - - .�.��.... ... . L��,--,., I .z7i,�;��,, ,4-,---,-,. ­ ,,, __ � , - �_.. 1�,ll , " _-'� -. -.",: I-,. . .,I ., , , , ,�, �. �: . ., `27,. , -:'j-,,�.-,,.,.I I- ��," - I- i . I ,... ,�, . ...., r. ,­.�­�,t...,., �, , -- . --i.:�'- . . ..� - , , - , ,..� -"-:; _ .-. - . , .1.. . j _...�. .�- - �-.­;;4� .. , ... . .. A - I '.. . . 17;.- . .- - -,­-> .....'lq, ., "I., I 1_11- - r. - ,. -I , , :�--..-. ...i---- ,�.,,­� �-_:,: " ...r:' . ..�� . : . I __ _.- -­"�,-,�­_,L:"i�:;�-: rP;F4f.'_1.2�� ��__:..,_-, ,:, - _: ., -%'�. -.­�- 4�­ _,,,, , � , ,.",.�t.e�.�r.,­­­.�. '. '_�_.-," , . .�. I ..�.71 -.t- � �,,. .. :.%." _... .. :,7,1. '.�;, . ,��, . . I ", " . 1. . .. .... -_ _' , ., -._','�r',�.f__' I I 11, , " ;-' ..-1- _:. -�. %­.- . .. .. .I I I -"..--..-. '77 ,"I I., - �_ .� . '.. j�l_ - . ::I , .. .. I .. - � ., . -­"- . - ,N- -1-1-, , ,!� , I . ­Z���- . ," ,-", , . .1. , . : . . I �. ,=�n=__:_. - � i--.C. -.." - ,,, , � . .- . . .I .. . � -..,-.,, .� . -,,��,­�f��_,, ­�­.��­­ ..:� -1 _�_ -­� - ­... __ .- - , - -- --, ­ - � �� , " . , . , - , . - - -1 , . ... _... __ . �' � � � , -"'`_," _­-,­-,"'%" ,­ , "�' ­ , , -,-- ""'L, '�_ , , ,­ - ,, """"�.......�", " ­ ,-,--, � -,----,,- ­"' "' , - , -,_­­, , "",",_`_` _- !;�-­`%�-�%�­, ,� , , "� _,�_ ., .-�,.--.. ". ., . --i�-.�7...�­ ��­ _4.7�, ..,.:". , ;,.,---: , . I . � - ­�.,Y_ I l_­__";-,: _.� :.,� 11-1 , !�ll 71;.� , - - .,- � . ,.- � � " __� "I. --.-. -�, ­ - - -­.!I- �....... .; . . " � I -�,.,;_',�.4. ..., , ; - I__ I-.---.--� ,- _��' , - ,, --- __ 11-11-1 - , ,, ­ ­ �` �, � ,� ,, - ,� . . . .-: ;�, _....- ,, , r -. - , ­ - - -­ - - - -I - , . � . . - - .... . � �r ", -I. . �:�t, ­�I .�---.�.---.--7;-----�711,�-11---.-�-- ll-I,-,,I.-`.. - I - I --1 -I.- ,r . , -. � ,.. , .. - .- ..I'. -__ __- - _�__ , .__ -- , - -, - - �:�t� --- � -, 77—,=�------------. ­--�-­�----7 --.-�-.7-----­---_.­­. ------. -7-­-__--_--,__­_--------------- -­----- ----.­­---.-- - . - . . .11 . �. , :4,- . .. I. .I .I .,.I. ... . -I�n, .: .�� I I: �. enera .- - I ­...�_,I- Q. . . .. ,.. ' � �:.. .: ! �,fi I tu �,. 1.. :. - . t � 0. ., I"__ . �- : �..w te .-,.:resour .op:��: --von.01 ... reti S' � :,j � :,, :! - ­ , . . . . _ -'.! . . . .� .. ­-:..; 4:�:�1 . . �. .­ , , . . . . � � - �-��-�--..�L-----.--.-.--- --,--..---..-.--.,�.......-,---�----:--�----.,----.----,.. -------------------I--.-----.- . 1: . ::. , . ". ..::i,_l. rj.jT,z,7,77,�t-r,:�.- ._., . ,q -, - �-. � . g.5I "! 7 ��,'lr I.;,�,n,,M�� .., !� : � -, �,-_­llv� I.\ �,!- - kA . , ,-.-,r.,­1�.�;';�� �1.�.l *101 - ., I . ,;� .­ �,�,',,_��;'u�l '41.! ­. �� I I" ,�g A 1. I ..1 ,.j. i.- . �A,�.1114 ) I ,,� ,,,��,,�C�`V'.-",_-�f_ .. r�� - , W­q� - , .%f!. I ;,..-, f . F; . � , ,. " , I I M -1 -�W ,w,.;f!. I . i � , �le p ,Z. , � ,11 - , 1-1� - I , �,;.�.-I " - - - . .�%:; - I . .. , _l - I . ,, �'��L."'.W".1, . ­ 1. ii ... . 1� , .-- - ` " / . I\. -,� �....I , :i i�"1 I,i�;7,��,' -,, I I . i'� - ! : 1.14� I ��, I -- , ; v.,.. '. , , , ;; 1. . 11 . - � ," .. I I ­ - ..".! .... I ,i . . 11 'N., 4 1 .. I. i ,�::,. , . i I -,�, - , . ,.z'. ;.,� '­ . . �_ . �.�--­ ,-,.. I I � . -..I I. -I - .... __:"!I .: �---,�,­­­.-...11 ____ ,,, . %.. .: , _i.,_�,: - �,� I:,". ;--- -- ..�.". -"... .. .. ,; . - � .. : I_.. :___ `2 -� " -.m - .1 � �.. . , I ��:. - . . . . ., . . . . . � . . . " _� . . , . . . . . .,. . . .-. . . i�i . .- � _. . �,m.t` I.__ � � . . . . .�. -, : . , .. ,,, aftWA: . .- r i . -, � :.',., . . . .1 . . . . .. . . .. . ..'l_.-__. I .. _. . ,- 7-1 .,�� - , . . .. — .. ig , _ . � . - - , 1, � .� i... I '. 1. ,. - . , xj .I� i . -- . .� . � - �. . I . _ , I ,� .. "I . � . .. . - I ,, � F -,, , ��,_-�_.,-_ � -- . . :-I ; . . . �.I ... I . .,-:,, - - . 4 ,i . ., , . : . ., , � , . .. . . - .. '. � R�� - .. . .. - ,;.'�,. --`-t-, . t..,..- ... . - , ----, - -- V - - - '�I..� � � .. . . - 1, �.. .�.,..� - - .- -, , �� :.. .. .. :, - ;.. -1 %-: : '...,� . - �`-, � :.L11-1 - � ,; ;,-�,�. .-.: t . ".�,.�� "��t:.;�t� ..- ; . . ��.. ,. ...M��� :q �. ,11 V Ali � .. ., . .�.1 . ,; i! , �.I . , .1 - . - --r-_ _. - - . L� ,,O i :,., � : Yl ---- . - Metropolitan - . . 11141, ... .. ,;. � - , 0 � . 'xi - . � . I . I.Council -d j I motrop it s�A-� ol " � . --,-", ,, ,- ,,, I',4611-i'l 1 1 1 - r -. ­ . I NO n ARK, ,W 01 r IN wo im� r. 4r -BA-MR-5.1 Mm-.1, sg 'A; : 7 � - .� 1te nz, , a . N2 Mir plA .......... 511 P g_ rMA g RS IF —0, vgg k,_ gp IN 10 E R R Z� Ro IS Mli off 1 6 4 W 0 a NO 440 P. 0 Z2 -PA', F V I 'P.—T N -:RPR-1. MH R w l -r--"k t"'^.��,L`�- :?rp„ �$:-`4;��+'•-�+8 .4�•�r'4-_.t�"r r4,'IA;,�. .x.y/yi y- �" � r' •y.�,�m:'J+-'ck- -rC- MOT i •�^-- ;,:, ,,^ .-.Gs4 t,•=s. r,rb3� ,�+r �. " t5.:-•�..,;. $ _..3F -`t a"«...;E�L '`r I'. --� ~GY:i� �;'ii'c .,� -. - iv ,,rF..�.r fir:. •t- " '":tS�' .FxSTE,t. • '�;I=ef}. ei'' st•s. z, a � .z '� (rr"s �' r „,.. `sem r '.i",c l�:t+s=: •n 5 ,-? c 4.. .ay- .. -c�?..'=: '4 `+�a`.•;, r-7..sS -.':7.' - r� : 43;.•,,,.+- y '�'';.-_.;'1 - ,• -'F-.. --'� _�-., r= :$ E,r-tusci'! .5' <?•: Y�t'i=z r -s�s'?� :5r-4._ .�-�-'_ > i^•+a_. c,;_� �:i-n _ 0 ��yy�� .a•�,�. x7 r� � r7r .r �r'.. �-d4 H ..!Yss"'C`: _ z. S '-"r. ,`�'i �.+A- '�'. . �5-.r?^� "��•��£u Via.."k'� .6=r"r�`'rr��r ,� . ��nr�,egt,�r -.>.c:: `'- •,�;'��„ y,gin.t r er f'S 3�n - �'t`.rF .:E}.hyr'- ,�ny�•,d sf'^-S` --,sT i F1' 'S'+ -r•`, �'y'- .'s;l?�, 1,+C.f ,_- t�' --+. H:F?,' m.-..rr, a 4�•:r,Fs a ir�tr.�. x3 'T -•,:;!''r; :s+r ,4-" -�,a;SS.§.1 '-:�-•w fi;,�'; �" r te.n•4'„ s.r-;`r- K t s.a:T r;;z.t '1;`.. O''f 9. :': /:;': ,-r } e; -:.a W ,{� h"=r oc C9 �';-` Te.,`S '• �;-r •`..tr' e3_' , ,a s� ��if�'y���. - '��L^'c,t�:T y '�,s h i�'�-•� `W tF'"a - F'N �'t3' r f's.. �- sr Y.+.:ti"� � �.t..... � '' ,t.-}.� ;^^`,kms. k ,I',rt.° vr;..Fa•. .;� •�r .,C `". so 'g t. 3 r-=.<_=2;,,,'e• 4r r -- a �-.c` .� „l,r A,r-�. �•3, %�t4.- a .r ti.� 3.�[-�;,. .TF.t.'':.,�. ..�i`.'h'x.. f x ",c:i rm --) ��..—`iy !r{{r�:-i S x''N. •�iSY•i',,`�'i. 'G!v f: x,��_rw"' � .•e .. �-' r x Y� ��s- � .:�`�© ��. e x�ss�-t_..F�}k>>•� .../iYt� � ?Y vs.1�. ��'-i;.,r_..�5c ��3!'w':;�ej�y2rs�Xrayi""�:,"•�r�;:s'_, �'��{„r�. f e��sf..L�'_ ��((.,.. � ���r'1 1� .,�#t r-,?�� t.x� H '�k,.- � �t"F 4L-�' �'.�... •,a' :-.:>r't• ��"]"ry.-�.�i='Z4�':r- � "a4� '� c,C;'.•L `�`.yiW. '�'^..'cS9,..T�'y:I ysM...f �,GF1r,.:f'�s•, Icii;.x' ��r. :- •-FS�i ri a,*^{ir ."$Tr '=�a.':{g-�.t?.�'E'SP''•,,r:.. ._� b�:�•lr' J'. -..//�//� t�//::''1i { �;�,c�{"A1+;t�n L�'' jl�i-a {",�: L .. r '�� '.= r't- .#•. �. a �5-,�}r I ,;x Y ? 'kAi; iy n - gy ����sz��,.-� �u �� x-a.r±-, x�_•.. rl..'.-"a�rr µ:„:v^ - ? - r '!�-��'t ,,, r _,,24,is? ., x �^ - - ,� ,r• . �.���?f r.�. � N, � Y t-�-.�,far y� Ka 4' � •'�-r #a `• ? `,}tL;:- :�;v. ;:�"yi t"`r� 4•cU���..``,-a:�,ic's •=w;�ate„ z-a-tc?�.,. ..;r_r3.'`i',�`a�'l Cw'a'..,�;n r q ,h. „-� ,.:•�'•/ r•., .� F a-�£...r�S, S .: n ':r - cs't'� '` I;'" R/-fie f r.Y`-�S'Y.53.�t�•:•e 1�-,��-�• �,q,,..�{ ��,��xb�3- �'k�i�*�7✓*s—'�-o=r"-`�.•v "i�;..3tiu-i'z` . �y Si•rv`' s.t`� -�.. 'r t�--,a •a-"r.. rS`n-zr. .e,ri.'�:a• tT �--� b ' 'x�fs. ��i. ._C •c.��`ir.:,.'-.,�`i revs�rw'�r.} 3��: "w•.ar Yl.�r GY'�'' '�� -�.�, i.k 1 _�,w �Js,....� �:.}C, >:�a�.�Ya�`„e^t �'�'f�- t "c�".tJ f� .i�_y�i'r•S��-M1�.;�C �i -^nom����. ��4 '.,y�"ry.�-.,;.r .- Y "'x'71,•rt_; �+� a Yf' Y-�"'�'� �'�;,4- ""` c�{'M'r �.'�"V� r�'T-v,.1rL:u,rfzy�i'�:i�•�1t '�`�,.q-�� s�v's,�,:��r,�,r..: is_Nlr ! ,�y y�,c3�.�� $.CLQ�`��-};�1 T � ���;x n~S,,y'-r .��`� Y'�ii,�`iY,� f$' k "NYy.4 .Y" �'� ..ems '�'''[, ,,�-•r•.� -�`3.��s .-u��Y.4�r ;y.T-�"J.�f a'�k r �75��Y:�, 'W�dc..d��r,� ryda:: �a.,§1'�.['3,.Fr(t.,�1;�_k-L-� �' .-•r ,�S4la,_,.�r, y,�-�-},^��,.•:,-^' � � _t^'�r��, a;. r ,r�+ fir;: ''�..,� ;."3 #�r� •z i` k a-+3�^�..',�• �. ��(, Ys-?i1`�•r�ss-"L`ri r.�'N w f..r•, ,X'`* e, a, t `:;r�r.�-1tsf :=F' X �_ f. _ .�: ')..5«' .,. a.4,w�ATM.'.}Tj� `�l=-},-i-"�-;]w# r�'a� �- � 'Ls•!" H`rc,� 4 R Ci6 too ••. • • _ ,"• •••• • • • •• ti c.1�1�11�44,?.�3 � ?'ty cr nim � ��r • • • •• • ° L3� RYyrYf, , j��€ IE3t��yr � �a1r {t`�c� 3': ,,'i�-�ix �k�, � \E.fir ti ,til f£ L I�1f t S"yt,-•�.�' 'e',. h at- v"tS -jF:' j i s t- 4 s yr ; :x • - -• • • - • xNe-,'� 77 £{)�/'� 'Wj 7 �rr•� • -• - - - • • N7 - _ I.r. �~b ~1) f y iC Pk .eR .. t '?�}6 W� i• t 13 A -f✓ �, < li:?*3 �2'i s'v - • •• - • - - • ' r ry � �, ••e.ter,? ;�� �'d�•, i s �� -+�u��?,e its".,.,- i'�...ai�.s•ilk.1,"�a.M=.t.x�..�._dl�•,'�r•^ti.?,�Y -•^"�,--x"�J-.-:,n_) ti.).i:. s, lyd:c- �..,e�..'4, ;Y' 1 1`..` h �.. °c.,'L }�r5 'r y�.` 1 ._'1 .1 a 1'v'o ectng the qualzty of'water 4 4 .-- - S .- I. II The ti idated:'1�'/ate7 Plan puts an increased emphasis on control of non}�ornt source polluuori=urban and agy>rculew al s ;runoff:=The US 1 n iionnreutal Pi-otecuon.Agency esriinates that tnore.than 90 percent of ch'e pollution ofahe nation s .warerwzys is from nonpoule''souiceS Pornt'source°controls alone cannot;adegtiately begin to ddress the polluaon:. ;'artrrbited to rronpotnt souices ' - TheVUki Plaza proposes that rf the<surfue`water,iiranagemc.nt section of a communrtys local compr;ehensrye plui -14"k'st"'n- mlihasrs on rriarragmg nonpornrso.circe poalunon;ahe Council could'frnd the local plan to be uconsrstent , with Veronal policies;: Such a finding called a system riripact, would'r-equue'tnodiFceanon of the lc%cal plan The.Council ill continue.to.wort :in partnership wrtli local governments, watershed organiiatrons, and other public 'and private aritrues of a variety of efforts to reduce nonpornt soircc pollution; including ` Ongoing q'onttoring of rater quality tri the regron's.la�es rr�rers and:stre rms " Technucal,Assrstaiicc to`lielp the Gounci;l's p4tti ers a stitute best mai agenent practices that reduce stoiinwater : rriiIof', pievenr erosionAnd flooding, grid marniarn rimprove water.quality, Review of'local comprehensive plans,`ti�at�isI e mana,,c ..,pI' s, local surface„eater inanagemeri't'}ilans, environmental per'mit's Arid other docwiients to ensiii-e that communities Ade fulf Ilii�g their nonpomt source 1 pol'lutron r'eductron requ:ircments and therefore;reducing the impacts on the region;'s wastewater systeril. Y -, 1. - . About the MetNopohtrcza`Councal The.Metropolitan Council is a:17 member body appointed by the governor It was created by the Legislature in 1967 to ensure 'the coordinated,•orderly and economical development' of,the seven=county,Twin Ci. Stm66tan area consisting`:ofAnoka, Carver; ;1Dakota Hennepin Ramsey,Scott and'Waship'g,bn Counties I In addition toots planning functions the Council.operates a regional transit system that carries about 150 000 passengers arday ,. !L.- :r provides wastewatercollection and treatment services;for 103 communities and;oversees a regional parks systemahat attracts more than 30 million visitors a year:: �I :r l 1� . i.�Me.trOpolitan Council jl : I , I x 1 .. .. u O v:{i-fi"-. s• ��v4�i3.," '�. `` as r.wt t k} t t r r + x iTl`�-. �, r-ti; _y. 3 ,�:`H. r,. a i n it ; 5 l f 4 r > y; y 1 .fit w -�.f r r of F � .'Y . c° r � 4W �r„ ^� 5 fi F i xy x !� �.: , r .�. a a.a 41� 4 ri :.,Nr w-i}4 ➢fY. tr¢u�'iyr+b ;r Y 3 r f fir- r .ay t x �+s ''1`"- i4 r r . � a 3 `" 'M1•. �+£"S,.r �t 7 .< 3 T 4 d{.,{ r• a r -- x4 Y .3rd .+ s. 1 nk 'F mow• ? V:2R �(\` �f F. lm 1 '7' s.. -„�. cr•;X `_+ S ,.IS �'_I D �/ O �A�Do JLtfig '. PJ ' �� Y 4 TF1 �' + - �: r _ J ,.r� b.Rr. :;E � .::) r .,.j. _ a ti`. v f ! r .r?• i< v �--� o -!"� ro•. 1 w R :,�� �.r r `fib ? "k a k t-; ,i- -- fi '� -'v s ,'''2.•�Ft+ <'�v g,.� + !' t, 'y t S Y.y t'>sEad&- s �c�yr ]c•,q ag fir„3-'r`c'"'�3.<" rl 2'.yJ-'fr 3+t 8 �T i d.-, re# i `,' t, - w i,.. - w" r, .'> .y- .C� ., +.dna?i ,.,---F I .`y •fir. ,. a r. x i °v a' y--- '" 7r� 3; '* ir,sz r ay��, a#r,.F� ix1�..4.5 +�e 1 i 4�e v 4 'hi P -.a E, - rte' '- !� _ ' fr - T�i. ' _ VA7�~h f,� ,:,,S�;',' p� -.,?F�}'nY J-Xw,G..� + CYC',^ ..r r` -, i F !c y ti a y' >w '. Y"�c' f ; -1 . a. ar t r a. 1 x�{ALN., f� Y j h_ , � - .,,., #.may ' ' x l '.z' * $3 4.. f .} 4 Orf r j �33�i i , r� `'., hl j 4 �! vr` „ i yf ,y,e't �. 4`- R v, a.t l; t r r� -.s f �i4 r:44 .e ' - TJ- 4� ^i`�.3r� '}y . ,- - % F k• . Yf ,Zc_ v.. { T '.f .`- t 1 s i f1. y w.' '-.r. S� t `s.s t - S -c:r T 'k.^ - f __{z .?"' , t�.( y e,YL 11,r^'t s J 4r '�T 5._s'ms s ,��sit7n +r { a' r,a. s� a T ::: �A-f"i-tit' •.��' c3F'41 ri°•C., i �' 'ip IPr',- , ,' f"Lc�f \►,.,i `siE`9 Y r 1 �. 2,b .roi. c. e x , t#�7 tt "r ^s fjlT �' ?s+ � =fie 2 7,t� a i�J".k'r,.! '.�:ae 1 -� r -'; •,r -- ,y j _ t •< r _ ti 1 r 1 4 .,,.r'r, u s • -,i } �... tr L e�. : ti t: ; z y.- "} -r-1.1"t,7•M�fL.� .�,i i� yi 7 "J S a �1}�v: �.r.;� 1'C �tcty!.f�,_ r�u•' s'nl�`m Zvi Y � �. I r }C yd M -a�.. 1.�,a ' �•. 'r,t;� y t/` -.'Y} �L„"Tr �. Sa1-�,... } !-J-,a:rd1 4s....:x'�4a'. ;a 4 ,,,�µ t \"bh 1 S¢✓{w •�,.•2' j..S r F,y,1�43''{ r �-✓A?y4{,� ;j a .tx Yn�r'i-!- v` f •r., 53 1 i '�`. k a F }n r �k ,I� t `3 11"�i '* ,lrx y `'t '� u a-.'. a'r iY 1 Ih _Ay 3 ?�` k f {r ...V 7 /��,1!s, _ !-" t ti c}r a.st.- .� r. 3'47,'- 'i�-,- - r a } rte.', ,T t ':S-lf' �- tt a}-F fyl' �t ti}r . :it 'Y; - - v 9?''-3�`..k'rlr J Ysr`!r i Jh T' Y sV E t' n: i[ r4 Z ,uric- ��r,. r s 1 ,S ` + Z'r .11 Y� r' �i Ta I,z F �i l�?�4 �ft t„i �fgtr l., "`�- : -9 (;t_ �' �' '} ..� „-tx' -E'7 r 'G .!` , -F.%L t- 4* 1'.y�rV � �`� r - w ,i t' .`: x , y c'' - s :? -y �.,t .ray ., . s �- .r!•V, -# � » F :'�� 'b -.L ti yt A ;•c,a ;S' Sha - *f !# 4�'1idj. - "1„ r.. S 1�/i..: ..+ ✓ • it r } ""� #, v� Icy.Y' 5 L.r% ��' *C' --.`Y- ` t }" { r.�• "x;'4'5.-- ,>,ry„r�'� i.."S.#v r it y f ,V��w {; + w 'µ?r 'F ' tf t` y •5y i" I L ..:� Fy 6 \L�/by AwK, �i^.�_ a" � ... �.' �C�}S-a� ; r ' �* u� r is .tti " a r. " ��TM K�, r S---—0�1rr, Y' • r"SAl, 3;.n± F r ` Fl ,, ^n' P-�� �r2es "f' �t : 3.w,:,, s.,."rt 'di``�.�'�""r�";� y y _ 'L YF`r'a '�p2 M,�Lyyi� #2 �,,-t`y ?� - 4e1.. -t` - t ^+" f ti fi�i""., M 5 rF f';'•:S- a ? "r�,' yAt � "s a -r•' ` "`..r`� tIfr'�. �°? �4 t 1$ "�.- Mme• h� '+ 1 a ,t 8'y r'aC IR7„_'rt. +�'•, .x y3sR�`.x '3 1 rr '' {• ,�' `!�-iij ,, iy#.�,}} �tf`.. �•t'4 '^� - v �l a1w Pv 171 k fin, f -�(;'1c} �}�' ,i`' 5' ,.' k. -M '410-1" Z .' r �, 7fZP�s r �'4`',•�!}. R:,r. .,r, tt ' . 'C� S+ Y. -'k41C R. ~ �, .1 ,�Yl1 "».ya' 1 rl` "`y 9 = 7r ,, - i 'al a � � E N'•^� '; 1 - 4r y,7 ;t•:+'f° x r,�' r.5 -1c W1 .a _-�' 1_, -i�r ` sii ke 4' a . :"�3e 'x .��.; '�y,"�1'.t P _ .e '>,' �r`�? .y yt: -`: �r'n I .' ' ^.aft �4� -w.}� i�y N' �''���-F{',�{� r. _�A A w�,,:�r •n' .5t x ���Y.+r•� * �7. � � _ 3:E'. .itn 'r c F„ J •�, ��j'' aX':'. A - -•Mrd,- -�sC �y t.,. _ t y�. S�•i y _ 7. 1. .� � .�'S :'f�" Hrr k�- ?v:,., 'l. 'l 1e ..F' :Tti"' RR 3 - i..T n �r .:. c,:- r , a- a r; ♦ y fif V k t " `{,i �' ,�+''tii 7,e:1}'`.rt.'f'<,#2',v�' ' .; y .•{i /h.�,:,..�t!': '"rti. } L' ;.W. L v '?�� _ F ' r.r,, Y o- ,�, i •.w ze k L" 'K1.,{'i '{a�i � t � v7 si�Y r+� '}✓ ` 'L y tS,F'' :,l '« 4r r i. k 1. K �� �"c _ a-`ar d* r 3r`r+� +'' + ,r f y,�ct+���y? .� .s r� 91.+� f N jt�.. t' 't",`•u-$h', c•�E �r �.:T�: , .,t� �'`,ht..'-� T .�?.: w r 1j .-; r� ik' IWO - h ' .. �i.�` {, -W}„'tw .. w e i f }. ._ . ' F . % F .1 1; Out.I':. '''!';do.. Io1. ec e..1L'', -�-..-.. u-,,--.- -tio. .n. . oI .� 1.ut� ":: u..,.' I , . ; - --r1 . ene��tions . �.. ,:: . I _.ln ;: - . .' .. . I� !: --'. I:- : '� .. "':..' .. . s :! -� : ,...;" :. % � - .- �� r - -s mar} pp Y ;. F L Vii' -i ,, 3 '4 'I 1. i, f + •4 4 y- 4 0�.,. �+,�r� �I o�`�' ' s ��5fi, bL. V �r k .. '411 1. a .",?.'- rz, x..tgt'r � a,�.r,`�r�1 ., y.`w "7 -,lc-' r y. . . Fes`; � 'v tlF "' r a ' 7 r i - d - - F :::+ .-F4' • ! r f - — — - _ _ — . - . _ . -- -- -- .- ._.. .._._ �P .. .. ..— _ _ ...- . - - _ + . : tropolitan it Me Counc t ... -'. _ .._ - ... - _ I, .t -it- Yfi t', P, t .� ":: S ;,ic, ., .. .r: ..r.. ,'q.'- "F V,__ . t ? _ l L F f A renowned parks system Expanding the system Thanks to the vision and commitment of previous generations, the To meet the needs of the region in 2030, the Council proposes a seven-county Twin Cities area enjoys a regional parks and open variety of changes to the current regional parks system.Among space system with few rivals across the globe. them: • Designate two existing county parks and three trails as More than 100 years ago,visionaries like Horace Cleveland and "regional." Charles Loring helped establish an outstanding network of drives, In Washington County, Pine Point Park parks and boulevards around the lakes and rivers of Minneapolis In Ramsey County,Tony Schmidt Park and St. Paul. In response to state legislation, the Metropolitan In Ramsey County/St. Paul, three regional trails -Trout Council in 1974 designated about 31,000 acres of existing parks Brook, Summit Avenue, and Lexington Parkway owned by counties,cities and special park districts as "regional Acquire and develop three new parks. Search areas include: recreation open space."Those parks had about five million visits Northwestern Anoka County in 1975. Empire Township in Dakota County ffim Blakeley Township in Scott County Is Between 1974 and 2004, the Council—with both regional and Acquire and develop seven new trails. Search areas include: state funds—invested$367 million to help local park agencies The Crow River, in Carver County and Three Rivers develop these parks as well as acquire and develop new parks and Park District trails for the growing metropolitan population.Today, the system Both a north/south and an east/west trail traversing includes: Dakota County 52,000 acres An east/west trail traversing Scott County • 47 regional parks and park reserves In Three Rivers Park District, a trail connecting parts of Baker • Six special recreation features,such as the zoo and conservatory Park Reserve; a trail connecting Baker and Crow-Hassan Park at Como Park Reserves; and a trail connecting Crow-Hassan and Elm Creek • 22 regional trails (170 miles currently open to the public) Park Reserves 30.5 million visitors annually(2003 estimate) Acquire land within the current boundaries of 30 existing parks and four trails Between 1970 and 2000, the population of the seven-county area Acquire natural-resource lands adjacent to six existing grew from 1.87 million to 2.64 million.The Council projects that parks and six existing trails & by 2030 nearly one million more people will live in the region. 0 OV p_ / p Now is the time to identify and preserve the last best natural The last best places resources and outdoor recreational opportunities in the region for future generations. To meet the needs of the region beyond 2030, the Council propos- es to acquire four new regional parks or reserves and three new Preserving ourfuture trails.These parks would not be developed until after 2030, but the opportunity to acquire them will likely be lost if the lands As it works to preserve and expand the regional parks system,the aren't identified and purchased before 2030.The goal is to secure Council will be guided by five major policies: the last best places, complete the acquisition of the regional park • Identify and protect,forever, lands with high-quality natural system, and secure opportunities for future generations, just as our resources that are desirable for regional parks system activities. predecessors did for us. Search areas include: • Provide adequate and equitable funding to acquire, develop ° Parks—Miller Lake area and Minnesota River Bluff and Ravines and rehabilitate regional parks and trails. in Carver County;southwestern Dakota County; and Cedar • Provide a regional system of recreation opportunities for all Lake area in Scott County. residents while maintaining the integrity of the natural ' Trails—northwestern Anoka County; central to south Carver resource base. County; and Minnesota River to Spring Lake in Scott County. • Promote master planning and integrated resource planning across jurisdictions. ' Protect the public investment in the regional parks system. y•.>:�a yxs- tat Tura $h � x 1 s ..t s c, x`; S . F k ;!tea w'a y;. fr .y , .lr t_53 V.yrs o _ «9a ti ...'Ric,y'i --U S 1 fes.• .,�.,-,,r +A., ;l:.t" �7 1. � �'3, �s ?'3`' _ �.-1';+ '�'"5 «..-t1 e �+ -�..T+h r� ti`` Y t`>i.a.4".� .EvT=,,, �i."}�ti+ tr ..a�•�,iEa•- f .S':s 2;;. 'l -�� C ..,,5 c ' '�ty -'I'ylrf� •1z,'. -•rill s.J'1' �' .ns a 4'2i�J7 i s ui-tl r: k �7. '7„ I �`y xp!a'+'ins;:y;. ,� 6• :, - Ye fes'- i'i ,2„Y,: ':i a c:rr �.-�°?yp g",: "ti,. Y;�- :: .s '�v�-+""sk s,{-r ,�,y.ck M.•,�'r -y.-��1'{C�` �;A "4 ar�4Gr-`�� i„�`M {M t.�,.s�-'La"X 1'a�, 1CM'`��T'. C ��"'aFr�_:rrd..'�`h,cr�.,^�`E�' '� '��i.,sSs-�''�y.'' �4T,'3. SsS+ E 1 Y�2,.rp'9 ''� �"�'' ^k. -.Ja_a� r4: n �i-- +4a �'.., .,/>"•,n�s, s-.J.�,q�-'x C-.. �1 ,�`..,1..• �� v'�-'J. .�t•.a.., r ,�,�'".'Qm'3`n. „'",. �' ,tea•_. t" Lq"�", M1... .�->;c-'L''S < .- ,_.� h 7' v_ `Y+. r e r3• `.s :,.'.moi, .tJS�'L.7 G ••��-�- k +' .s "kc ''3 `�' �� � � � •,y,'Il "c. �c_ , ,.rf'�• � r �..�.- P- pp'. ! -" r 5'F v-' ' r�>yx-s 3'P':� kJ ::,•P X7 ` - ' �Otv c �'�/�� 'rj- y>.r • 3 � a:,;. �;...`SJ �' *r9 t--.v,i`-s„� 5? 'r y ,7 �".`� sTr S.. '._e,''cs' s`r w i c , :.sy;:�,.,•R� ...i., zF-1rr. F r`�t ?✓'�J.rh„t�. ti k� .�� '�✓� 4��f ��,�i-.4•-t!a S ���.y a$�7„�''cl�"s.Y��.'-+Z �:i'�..;r,,,_J� 4 �ti�cz' 'i-'=x" r fs�- $- r; sr c` �4, r.7r x:',-r� jY-'�' J ..").+_;�+%•'� -Y -'" r.n - + ::�`''e'�y+rc� a,ik ",H'- rs :.sr,�F a ,� .q�rr.. .�.y5' :xx.- c.• -- .:.+Iln "'mj,c",.� .�.,?'� FY'.''._t' �,t '�" .ai-.. *c`' = t-;Ye`'r's�` 't - ry"` - '•�s 3+ t1u• "� T ';g fit ' .k ..y> rx' t+'') J v C:. .t" t 1 3 -a`r'' �'+� f 'E I✓ "�1 . '( 7.A Il^ � �.fi'.•j�nl lh.. ^l �'1-.,.ryY'(Jr Q�,,rias-`>. a 'fi.evw.'�4 ✓':`yii�vri...:r _ 'Y"�4Kr.� , .� y... ,. ,� .- r 3 .r '-Ts +'� -" # a >:. '' s x. 1.,4 # rs y 1"-••. -.��•�.-2�'.'�� J�J�'f<y.ti.\,f�--� -;r�'.A, }-. ._. •,. �vya`, '�":c,.�__f"'{v -`_.s', IEai.-r.�,rh;r� �-T�"- v.�c>:.' Z�� r..���kN .� j{ -'r•,�t�-a>"�ii��a �:;J � �._.' sw15 r7 .:'• - 'oT". -r�5{/1 't`"t"� d7..,,,. _ ,. t" #t 1� 7 ,.r=e1".� ,z `��a'`".?54. .i:;�-��i {, ifs'`• r .:s „s�+,.T��• 'X:gid x „�-, xt' s. tr„1 .,,'C,�:?3'• �S.��ti�'- Y'5.;,�'l`a:-s���+s�.a'�-,v,,����•�NXv�. e..3-•,s,f. i`” r.;.a�`-i'.n a .,.rte -k-'..._ - r'S, a n s ��p"-,. „"Ti,'_� y�r '�� .f z sr �_4 rr''' r -,�.,� `�. £:;is. ,r+i 8..„ray. s" �,.�' � -,i `S :�v-„a t �:.t3.1,..y'i -c :��r'[r�.y rt�y.�[ ,• �rr� ,,,_F i✓('�A e. y, � "1 s i €i-¢ art r'." sr n. �., =$s1L�'.,. .y.S;vF f±-..Ys .><e`,..,T� .7 r?.�.i`'._�:z•.3S �.!rta�,o-�`r�.�..*:.1 5: -s."��t�.`iS,3�Pf-s-.,��i,�',�'���;�'�r,'.Q� �.��y„^'�'>+'��1_��,P� _:r����s�c.sr�i''rx�,e'F'f,t-;t$.r Y,..,t+.,FjcM.�,si r.f..--: • r ^� • �� 2' T L 1 ` 1 � � }I.. - ..!} is •+ v 1. y r l: J 1 T �• I 1 / 1 1 • ' 1 . Financing our legacy to the future Estimated cost torehab, develop and expand regional parks and trails (2005 dollars)... Acquisition:. Rehab and dev. Annual cost* a System component Acres 25 year total 25-year /o of costs ($mill ($mo:ns) ($.millions) ns) illio Rehab and develop existing parks/trails' 52,000 0 187.6 57:50 43 Acquire land in current park,boundaries 5;100 125.1.... 18.4 5'74; ':, 33 Acquire'land`adjacentto existing.parks 1;546 10.8 5.6 0:66; 4 Convert local parks/trails-to regional status 547 0 2.0 0.08 . <1 New:units needed by 2030 8,000 45.3 28.9 2.97 17 Completing the system(units needed beyond 2030) 2,523 12.0" .. 0 0.48:, 3 TOTAL 69.,716 193:2 242,5 $17.43 100 For the owner of a$20.0;000.home in the seven-county metropolitan area,.the average annual cost of the regional parks system,including the proposed sys- tem additions,would be$6.75 per year on regional property taxes over the next 30 years.This estimate is based on the Council issuing a.maximum of$7 mil- lion annually of bonds as a.40%match to$10.5 million in state,federal and other funds.The funding"would.be used to acquire land, rehabilitate_aging parks and trails,and develop new park and trail facilities: The estimates are in 2005 dollars.They do not include any assumption concerning the effect of inflation on costs over the next 25 years,or . assume any private sector donations.Consequently,these are.conservative estimates.Additional funds from the public and private sectors will be needed to finance actual costs over this time period.Estimates will be considered again and refined every four.years when the parks policy plan must undergo a comprehensivereview required by Minnesota law. Help build our legacy for the future. The Metropolitan Council works closely with 10 county and city park agencies to acquire, develop and maintain the regional parks system: The Council invests regional and state funds for.acquisition and development of the system, and the 10 partner agencies operate and maintain the parks. The bulk of funds.for parks operation and maintenance are raised from local property taxes. From 1985 to 2004 the state provided to local park agencies an average of 9.3 percent of the cost to operate and maintain the parks each year. The Council's 10 regional parks system partners are-. Ramsey County Parks and Recreation (651) 748-2500 Anoka County Parks (763) 757-3920 www.co.ramsey.mn.us/parks/index.asp www.anokacountyparks.com/ Saint Paul Parks and Recreation (651) 266-6400 Bloomington Parks and Recreation (952) 563-8877 www.stpaul.gov/depts/parks/ www.ci.bloomington.mn.us/cityhali/dept/commserv/ parkrec/parkrec.htm Scott County (952) 496-8475 www.co.scott.mn.us Carver County Parks (952) 466-5250 www.co.carver.mn.us/parks Three:Rivers Park District (763) 559-9000 www.threeriversparkdistrict.org/parks/ Dakota County Parks.(952) 891-7000 www.co.dakota.mn.us/parks/index.htm Washington County Parks (651)430-8368 ww.co.washington.mn.us/parks Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (612)230-6400 www.minneapolis.parks.org/home.asp About the Metropolitan Council The.Metropolitan Council is a 17-member body appointed by the governor. It was created by the Legislature in 1967. to ensure"the coordinated,.orderly and economical development"of the seven-county Twin:Cities metropolitan area—consisting of Anoka; Carver. Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey; Scott and Washington Counties. In addition to its planning functions,the Council operates a regional transit system that carries about 150,000.passengers a day, provides wastewater collection and treatment services for 103 communities,and oversees a regional parks system that attracts more than 30 million visitors a year: �� MetropolitanCouncil STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report No.: X.2 From: Kim Moore-Sykes,Assistant City Manager )/VV / ��V" V Date: November 15, 2005 Subject: Ramsey County Initiative in Community Design and Active Living Requested Action: Discussion of attached materials. Background: Ramsey County officials have developed an initiative that they unveiled earlier this fall based on the need as communicated by many neighborhoods to: • develop safe walking routes to schools and local shopping areas; • design safe street crossings; • create safe recreation opportunities and physical activities for residents of all ages. Jan Parker,Ramsey County Commissioner,is a member of the panel that is launching this Active Living initiative that supports change is land use design, transportation and public- private partnerships to develop policies that encourages activity in every or most aspects of our daily lives. As Jan reported at a workshop in September, that in many neighborhoods it is difficult to walk or bike to school, shop or run an errand because many of our communities are/were designed to provide access to and/or encourage the use of automobiles. Initially, the Active Living initiative is in the early phase of planning, trying to inventory the existing physical infrastructure and in changing people's attitudes. As part of the presentation I attended,Ann Forsyth, Director of the Metropolitan Design Center at the University of Minnesota, focused on the social aspect of physical planning,urban design, and urban development. Ms. Forsyth literally walks her talk: She walks everyday to and from work, no matter the weather. Rick Killingsworth,Program Director for the Ruth Mott Foundation in Flint Michigan, discussed is experience as a health care practitioner working with city planning officials in finding ways to provide and promote physical activity opportunities through and despite "built environment interventions." Tyler Norris,president of Community Initiatives, Inc., a Boulder, Colorado based firm that is focused on improving health and healthcare outcomes, has worked with several communities and groups initiating various civic, health, education and social ventures,including Active Living by Design. Attachments • Various handouts from the Active Living Initiative Workshop 111505 Ramsey Co Active Living.doc ' Speaker Biographies — Active Living Ramsey County Community Kick-off Ann Forsyth Ann Forsyth is Director of the Metropolitan Design Center at the University of Minnesota. Trained in planning and architecture, she focuses on social aspects of physical planning, urban design, and urban development. Forsyth has appointments in both the architecture and landscape architecture departments. She has won over forty awards, citations, and fellowships for individual and collaborative professional and research work. Her publications include over seventy-five reviews, monographs, chapters, and articles in planning, geography, and design journals. She has written three books: Constructing Suburbs: Competing Voices in a Debate Over Urban Growth (Gordon and Breach/Routledge, 1999), Reforming Suburbia: The Planned Communities of Irvine, Columbia, and The Woodlands (University of California Press, 2005), and Designing Small Parks: A Manual for Addressing Social and Ecological Concerns (with Laura Musacchio, Wiley, 2005). She is principal investigator of the Twin Cities Walking Study, funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Rich Killingsworth Rich Killingsworth is Program Director for the Ruth Mott Foundation in Flint, Michigan. He is past Director of Active Living by Design, and was Associate Research Professor at the University of North Carolina School of Public Health. Rich served for 15 years in the federal government and was a health scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the lead interventionist on CDC's Active Community Environments Initiative, the first national effort to increase physical activity and improve health through community design and transportation alternatives. Mr. Killingsworth is one of a few public health practitioners collaborating with city planning, transportation, architecture, and outdoor recreation professionals to promote physical activity through built environment interventions. He has provided technical assistance to federal agencies, elected officials and national organizations. His media interviews include the New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post, Time, Chicago Tribune, ABC News and National Public Radio. Rich has presented and published extensively, and serves on several national organizations and boards. He is completing his Ph.D. in Architecture, Behavior and Culture at Georgia Institute of Technology. Rich.is an avid runner, cyclist, and hiker. Tyler Norris Tyler Norris is president of Community Initiatives Inc, a Boulder, Colorado-based firm dedicated to improving health and healthcare outcomes, revitalizing authentic democracy in the process. Tyler is founding co-Chair of the W.K. Kellogg Foundation's National Leadership Alliance and NAC Chair of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Active Living by Design. Clients include: Kaiser Permanente, the American Hospital Association, and the YMCA of the USA. Tyler is President of the Kuhiston Foundation in Tajikistan, which helped start that nation's national park and micro-credit systems. He has served at the National Civic League, and as Director of the U.S. Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities. Tyler has worked with over 350 communities and groups in the US and internationally, initiating civic, health, education and social ventures. Tyler is co-author of Communities that Learn (Community Initiatives, 2004) Trendbenders (American Hospital Association, 2002),Facilitating Community Change (Grove International, 2000) and the Community Indicators Handbook (Redefining Progress, 1997). He is a whitewater kayaker, mountain biker, backcountry skier, practitioner of Kriya yoga, and pilot. With Juliana Forbes, he is blessed with 2 children, Eliza 12 and Emmet 10. al� gn aDes '' nd AmN'va Uvmg M in e County '77 .......... Whg A* Presenter: Ann Forsyth, Metropollitan Design Center Me x tropoRan Design Ceni'ter September 2005 www.designcenter.u rnn.edu Community Design and Active Living in Ramsey County Presenter.Ann Forsyth,Metropolitan Design Center Metropolitan Design Center September 2005 Community Design and Active Living • Active living • Reasons for Physical activity • Four aspects of community design related to walking • Evaluating places • Twin Cities Walking study • Environmental change is not a quick fix 1. Active Living What Researchers Do and Don't Know about Environment We do know that differences in density,street pattern,mixed use,and pedestrian infrastructure seem to affect walking But so does income and personal preference,etc. We don't know how much the environment matters and who is most affected We don't know whether the perceived vs.the real environment Is most important We don't know which aspects are key—e g.residential or employment density,sidewalks or crosswalks $Millions In research under way 1 • D • Active Living Ramsey Statistics From Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System(BRFSS), CDC.2003 48.8%of Ramsey County adults don't get 30+ minutes of moderate physical activity five+daystweek or PA for 20+minutes 3+daystweek. 23%of Ramsey County adults report a height and weight In the obese category(having a Body Mass Index of 30 or greater). (Portland Oregon Is 19%,in 1990 the MN figure was 10%.) Twin Cities Walking Study,stratified random bul_Mq&suMq,not reported,found 29%with BMI over 30 in Ramsey. 1. Active Living Ramsey Statistics,2 "Physical Inactivity in Minnesota was responsible for$495 million In preventable medical costs In 2000"(MN Department of Health) A physically active population would expect to see: —30%fewer cases of heart disease,_stroke,colon cancer and osteoporosis —18%fewer cases of type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure —16 percent fewer injuries from falls in the elderly —12%fewer cases of depresswn and anxiety —5%fewer cases of breast cancer 2004 Minnesota Student Survey--those active 5 or more days per week for at least 30 minutes Grade 6 Boys 52% Girls 45% Grade 12 Boys 45% Girls 28% 2. Reasons for Physical Activity People are active , in different parts of their lives •Work •Exercise and leisure •Care/chores/errands •Commuting to work To date,data collected only for some types of activity such as commuting and exercise 2 2. Reasons for,Physical Activity Why the Recent Focus on Walking in Research and Interventions? • Walking is an activity that is inexpensive,does not require special equipment,and almost everyone does it already every day • Many more people walk than bike.According to the U.S.Census,only 0 4 percent of the population in the U.S.commuted to work by bike.In contrast 2.9 percent walked to work as the main means of transportation • Almost everyone walks at some time,if only between their parking space and destination 2. Reasons for Physical Activity Why People Walk—Three Perspectives • Transportation • Urban design(physical planning,architecture, landscape architecture) • Physical activity research �I 2. Reasons for Physical Activity Transportation Assumes demand for travel can be derived from demand to move between destinations People maximize personal utility,where utility varies by personal history and tastes;tows is on minimizing time and money costs Costs beyond time and money(such as physical discomfort, family responsibilities)not well integrated MuW=3) Benefits of travel(e.g exercise,time out)also not well accounted for Various camps,particularly the car group vs.the transit group—all mechanized,economics-0nented —..bu,..m.m 3 2. Reasons for Physical Activity Urban Design Underlying theory.Walking increases with supportive physical features Several schools:e g New urbanists,traits and park proponents Researchers crime and public space.Propose that Walking Increases with more complex,varied environments,with physical dimensions and movement speeds sealed to the human body,and with activity(critical mass) Overall those in architecture,landscape architecture,physical planning focus on cultivating sensitivity to place;not data driven 2. Reasons for Physical Activity Physical Activity • Commonly propose that physical activity occurs In some environment,environmental characteristics(physical and social)will Influence physical activity behavior It is only recently that physical environmental characteristics have been included in studies to predict physical activity Until recently environment meant the social environment,the food environment... Physical activity researchers are often very active people Different Views of the Same Place Transportation:Disincentives to driving Urban design.Dynamic,complex environment(Jane Jacobs) Physical activity Social/physical supports and constraints Why this matters .because of different solutions .r.«ate......, 4 3. Four Aspects of Community Design Related to Walking Four dlmenslons —Density —Street pattern —Mixed use —Pedestrian Infrastructure But other aspects of the environment also matter,though these are not technically part of the built environment but rather its use —Traffic —Climate and air quality —Eta 3. Four Aspects of Community Design Related to Walking Density — Increased density can provide a critical mess of people and places,to create a physical sense of community — Density can increase transit viability,auto congestion,and parking costs,making walking a more attractive option Street Pattern 3. Small blocks provide more direct routes 4. Small blocks that are highly connected provide options for taking altemative routes for safety and variety 3. Four Aspects, cont. Mixed Use People often move between different kinds of activities and If they are Gose together they may be Inclined to walk 6 A mixture of uses Ikely means that people are around at different times of the day and night,increaslr�g safety and the period of time In which people are fkey to we k Pedestrian Infrastructure 7. Street trees,street furniture,and such features as overhangs and awnings can Improve pedestrian comfort 8 Street lights,pedestrian crossings,sidewalks,and traffic calming enhance safety 9 Varied and detailed surroundings make walking more interesting 5 . I u e t a r 'Ff pI e, r M-11 �er�in�,s a �€ to j �,;•4'� "`� u 4T"� ' '� ,.'` i. •7 a t "s� fir .lii„l?iEi �+r PAA r lift, `Y ` 4 'kit, ��{�`�`���' ti .3 43t7,.ti�°,�y�.�.�•Ny��.�'n�'7�5�`.i:�rF't�yro}�,�� ��tires} .�-"f�',,1fa�,•�� Place with fewer assets However,do sidewalks(or other elements) make a difference on the margin? 4. Evaluating Places It is possible to evaluate places according to these principles The following slides show typical environments in the metropolitan area and asks how walkable they are in terms of both physical and other characteristics 7 a t 3l 1 - y s �� �.,;i'.-.rpt� � ` � -�- U'C� � ?• 5. Twin Cities Walking Study Very Early Findings Hypothesis 1: High density,high street connected (small block)neighborhoods T walking behavior. •High density focus areas have more self-reported travel walking but less leisure walking than low density areas..Total walking does not differ. •Focus areas with small blocks have no difference to big blocks in leisure or travel walking. •Total self-reported PA and(measured)BMI do not differ by either density or block size. •But there are lots of variables left to analyze including acc;elerometry+many environmental measuresl 6. Environmental Change is Not a Quick Fix • Environments change slowly—over decades • Is it more effective to make environments more attractive or to make alternatives like driving more unattractive? •Obesity seems to be Increasing quicker than environments have been changing--4s environmental change enough? 9 Community Design and Active Living • Active living • Reasons for Physical activity • Four aspects of community design related to walking • Evaluating places • Twin Cities Walking Study • Environmental change is not a quick fix Credits OM—PWMgamW C aNNbmnwWmpMdit •.WwYy a sMntmLLT. D �n Cvbrb sYyweyoeW tr Wpemb ems b M Imbvhb, =a•wb6a�rod"=btlww•e P-=I JWK RaMlAdtn wd laMwp• awmm...ud..rya Mn.m:N..Pw+NR M .JW K•wp�F•mr,Awn Lnmmm� tbrrotl�Pabr Jwm��(b•dyb AtNM TibPwibEm ra VMrrypwlf!•1n®1AGm•BIw6NNdaM— P�mbabnbOWbtrwabb P•mCtlbntr n>np•p aloEVW p•Po•u<AeborrbJp�m�•h npb•Q 6bnlalar w aDebn Crbr6igp b PwMbd an slvna.aprn.L 6trdabr v>A ana. a'b`carr b.P•s�b mpuyu pwi•baen a nd wmen 0 ise o wa d•WW P.J a s.owyi e«ev na.m e.•wpe a wry mtrbb a•o pa8s•1 h ie.a b m abba am,ybw•sm m yywm e.Onbn Cabr dm iw(maKyeu�•Aq Md-po O.-Oi Cw f ybww� m�M. .wN e 2182SO o 10 How i t ! I 4 i rb rl�5* .-F 011' I{,T-5F 01 Ix I� 7z"ca +.BIW C��•. P1 ,f7tfo+?�fC The Impact of the Built Environment on Hea �5., io..£, *�l 3t k *mow J .�•��Ss`,,,i`Y T - ' ;_ 3 . Access to health care Quality of and access to schoo opportunities { t J y zIyTJ Iy�.+,e 1St , Air.111 water quality 1�r{�ryr n ,a f kr � Public safety ih14. / Choices forphysical activityIIIA i. Ease of social Investment m social .I l it,011 4.� LL �A �s''��r a'•r: � ti. � A.�'Gw ff""' � {.n{Q rY J S i s r IT; ��-,��, -fit .,.aP^ :.:aac...::.:v»'s.�a•xi�q��s�' '�'wi»-.'���ez. ��: T r��,i� 'n�ra x 1 &•may.r' � M a ...i � � r .yx` ;fi}giy f'�i �.• t4 -t,.�� A.4r r r�.l. ,'w,��,: µ� }sc� ; sl p � s)•. Ft�9., � � ,��• � ,� .7jr Ell w 3 n i Y ax�y'a,r ki It � i •z-'�'� e, ` t e x r i PIP., '•��c.'.``cYi rt qtr: � �� -- I i t 4 s K' " 'r7 NI t li (moi Place Matters S is a dynamicThereinterplay1 Ar qW II Lt many factorslex 1 1 '! system Behaviorguided 1 I settings, socio-cultural scripts, • 1 .:. cognitions 1environment �,. ?:r3,_ z?n•w-r`'�' cd. ~��r.4. ,1a¢.,gS.Ta 41 6� The Life of Cities The Life of Streets • Jane Jacobs Donald Appleyard ..the need of cities fora most intricate and close- 4 More traf5c means smaller grained diversity of uses social networks,less that give each other neighboring,less interaction, and more isolation constant mutual support, —Less traffic improves both economically and socially" conditions for walking and bicycling and encourages social interaction Socio-Environmental The Life of Public Places Etiology of Disease d • William H.Whyte —Intimate scale of public spaces invites socializing, activity,and neighboring a 9 a -The ideal approach to health promotion and disease prevention 'x will he to address all factors in an integrated manner. Traditional Prevention Has Focused on Modifying Individuals'Lifestyles Li s le ¢@ { IH alth •Economy •Diet •Obesity •Technology •Physical activity •Diabetes •Regulation •Alcohol • Heart disease •Affordability •Tobacco • Cancer •Land use •Drug Use •STD/HIV •Transportation •Sexual activity • Injury •Housing 3 • 1 The Burden of Physical Ina tivi7986-2000 ty �1rs. loo 90 -' eo q"I The Problem p 10 - 27%ot emtlts ale 6l'dmtary so _ - 70%do sot aehteve reeommendad dose g ,o The Public Health Burden f >o r a - 64%overweight and 1 in 3 obese 20 - CVD,Cancer,Diabetes to - Physical inactivity Is a primary factor in 0 t I I I I I I I ova 200,000 deaths aamially 1956 1997 198&1989 1940 1991 1992 2993 1994 1995 1996 1"1 1998 1999 2000 The Economic Burden Medical costs associated with physical 30 Mmtes or Moderately Intense Physical Activity at Least Five Days Per Week mrm nvity wiceed S 100 blWon atlnua0y. f9N¢cafester.arrow came aver rre.eata,aer.n.l N{tlfee —Qu— 1-2— asFaa ucoNHANa111-119K Oma&-a Obesity Trends* Among U.S.Adults Obesity Trends*Among U.S.Adults BRFSS, 1985 BRFSS, 1991 (*BM X30,or 30lbs overweight for 5'4'parson) (•OMI X30,or+30 The overweight for 5'4v parson) y� e a'M a'It ❑NOData @<to% ®10%-14% .15%-19% ®20%-24% .225% ❑NOData Q<10% ®10%-14% .1S%-19% ®20%-24% .225% D D S--BNaNanl Nat Fade U-111 t9t Sy t rN CEC $tiara BNaNeeN Nat ft 9r Sur WW—State CBG Obesity Trends*Among U.S.Adults Obesity Trends* Among U.S.Adults BRFSS, 1997 BRFSS,2001 (*OMI X30,or-30 Ibs ova Ight fore'4'person) (*am alto or-30 Ibs ovarsralght for B'4'parson) s� • ems fo []No Data EDc10% ®10%-14% M15%-19% 520%-24% .X25% ❑NUDeta ®<10% ®10%-14% M35%-19% 020%-24% .ass% D 5,,—&M—I Nst Faew 9w M.—Syrian,iaG Seav I4aaNanl Nat FM r Saratov Syatarrt CPG 4 Obesity*Trends Among U.S.Adults Prevalence of Overweight Children and eRFSS,zoos Adolescents in the United States (•BHI t30,or 301bs overwelght for e'1'person) ®6-11 years of age 01 iii years ofage 18 _eJV 14- 8?12 /D 16 N 8 d 2 0 19611970 1971-1974 1976 1980 1988-1994 1999.2000G� . �NO Deu Q<10% ®10%-14% �15%-19% ®20%-24% .225% Came.tr Obev1 Ca1d —p16 ion6N y14 Carrtr Nre,NNOM.N.EVW11.G y(IGM D NNaW Maes atlN —o,(I mBury J Haaer IlaJotob Noreen EvrNudr 6urvq(teeaa4,od N�rel NSIT E.mm,An ewgtle8ea5 atl 193&70) $Warr.aN AIW Wl Fader 5—vUbme Syda MC. �e Why the Recent Obesity Epidemic? 50 �qy 3 rs S i AS "k= '1=' •Many competing theories 35 e 3 > Transportation > Television 25- > Labor Saving Devices 20- > More Work Hours 1S n > Less Physical Activity to sola aoae s > Fast Food 0 Sora $e > Community Design r 10 rvvo r e mso Ne r04a ePdO Y^ Built Environment and Physical Activity Research Conclusions b� A Living in Activity Friendly Communities could.. - Generate 2 more walk/bike trips per person per week � - Prevent up to 1.7 pounds of weight gem per year lrMiur. mmanl� c;lewaaq. ati - °n'r%m1!•%. - Positively effect wagdng/cycling -. g for trarupottetion _"- - �' •r ., -Positively impact the total number :r,• � p of minutes of ph icel activity rar... PrmvdT/mT ," (40%more physical activity) - Decrease amount of time spent in rdAeo`ve'rw.:ti"t•r' waits :H" uw > a car.Each hour spent in a car is the likelihood with f 6%increase in the likelihood of obesity .Swvig d et 2003,9adma a v 3003,�Lra au r 2003,Fmnk d a12003,Sbaa12004,Frank et al years - reale life eapeetancy by 4 m a 2ma.L p.2004 years 5 Travel Behavior and Reduced The Impact of Driving and Physical Activity Walking on Obesity • US average=73 mins/day of driving B0 • 25%of all trips are one mile or less, but 75%of these trips are made by .e. car Every additional 30 minutes e: Automobile Trips spent dnving per day translates • Children between the ages of 5-15 W ° into a /o 3 increase in the odds of walk/bike 40%decrease since 1977 o ion 1910 1000 im x being obesity • For school trips one mile or less, , Every additional Kilometer(6 only 31%are made by walking �� miles)walked translates into ° nearly a 5%reduction to the odds • In the US,6%of tnps are byof being obese walking/btking.In contrast,Italy is r Wa/k and Bike 54%;Sweden,49%. a Trips F—k1 M,-i&h.KT.e.�,e—WPw x„�IM Phr�-1o.d,we,..e ion IBES Im ,BB5 nn rwm.m� The Effect of Mixed Use onO. e The Impact of Land Use on Health and s Behavior _ + ®Minutes Walked • Participants were divided into - 80 four groups based on the level Urban Sprawl of land use mix • so, AM Each quartile increase to land >Large effect on use mix was associated with a utilitarian walking 40 12 20%reduction in the odds of ° D May even reduce • being difference m weight for an leisure time walking 30 average 5'to••wnitemeleain >Increases BMI 20 the lowest quartile of mored use n Increases in BP 10 and the highest quartile of mixed use was 10 pounds 0 i..eP..i �.•,v. agePe� L=W-W ed.ia T.eEOy R-W WIO.0 mftDWM rb�fift ui rl Spmkci d0.4.LLe� i.moa Sprawl Is Associated with More , i d1dings Health Problems Designing 1600 If the average person spent only 1500One 1110re minute per day going 1 1400 -' -in extraupstairs,they would burn, per year,or.8 pokinds. 1300 t kcal -For only 2 minutes per dav, 1200 Low Average High Sprawl Sprawl N Number of chronic conditions per 100,000 persons 6 Active Living Movement Active Living Movement: Timeline olai ya a` d PEPW o JOH — — aeapfa �MIT FSTiY Y®1 at 1996-2001 s © YS bA m _ca ices* a TobG eve PJ k1®5 gland. Active Living Movement: Timeline Active Living Movement: Timeline 2003 2001-02 2002 ap e' n as ° 5apa 1998-2001 ° x Dee °9 75ap c 1998-2001 Gomes ,y f0' aP ° tM d` ea� eil "T �c-mn� aT Y .�.ie�aa•- df aC9V0 d, T Active Living Movement: Timeline Active Living Movement: Timelin 2005 2004 2004as 2003 2003 n n I a sl 2002 °; 2002 SAFETF,A�,,,, d F22 ! gr 1998-2001 - ,j 'funding �• - 199&2001 'I jF'�S�eps ' ants vaterp�' as esu. ° ' Guide -° 7 Active Living Movement: Timeline Defining Our / and Now 2005 2004 Tbink CriticallyBuild Upon Experience 2003 Imagine New Solutions 2002 Leap Out of Comfort Zone 1998-2001E �_s t �.r l'�'' - H` a !t� >'�•^,., Scs6raxpand Spbere of Influencefit-.. ib r z t .y z1�F'' y�ryaF 11 :� A e.w 4.ESet Your Vision What Will / I II ♦ ��iH i t ` 4 '"�*�S �<�wY a cs is3.9�2t- T.�"', t +, r '�. a°.P'+t '3� L u:: Yq cL_=�• ��—mow.-� �6 c�-7� t <"c W k W gxiil� ilk te y y 2 / � S7up 0� d�,S... :wai STAFF REPORT To: Planning Commission Report No.: X3 From: Kim Moore-Sykes,Assistant City Manager Date: November 15, 2005 Subject: Process to Amend City Ordinances Requested Action: Discussion of attached materials. Background: Staff was asked to put this on the agenda as a discussion item so that the process to revise or amend an ordinance can be reviewed. Attachments: • Chapter 2 OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION, Section 200.06 Ordinances,Resolutions, and Petitions. 111505 Process to amend ordinance.doc unless a larger number is required by statute. Except as otherwise provided by statute or ordinance,a majority vote of a quorum will prevail in all other cases. Subd. 2. Voting. The votes of each member of any question pending before the Council will be recorded in the minutes except as provided in Subd. 3. of this Subsection. If any Councilmember present does not vote, the Clerk will so indicate in the minutes. Subd. 3. Vote Recording. When the meeting minutes show a resolution or motion was adopted without showing how each Councilmember voted, it will be considered a unanimous vote in which all Council-members present voted in favor of the resolution or motion. 200.06 Ordinances, Resolutions, and Petitions. Subd. 1. Readings. Every ordinance will be presented in writing and will receive three readings before the Council prior to final adoption, except that rezonings or other zoning ordinance amendments shall require only one reading. However, an ordinance may be adopted at the meeting in which it is first read or at a subsequent meeting if the Council rules are suspended for that purpose. Every ordinance introduced will be recorded in the minutes by title. Subd. 2. Si ning and Proof of Publication. Every ordinance and resolution passed by the Council will be signed by the Mayor, attested by the Clerk and will be numbered, recorded and filed in an ordinance or resolution book within 20 days after its publication. Proof of publication of every ordinance will be attached to and filed with the ordinance. No resolution will be published unless the laws of the State require it to be published or unless it is directed to be published by the Council. Subd. 3. Repeals and Amendments. Every ordinance or resolution repealing or amending all or a part of a previous ordinance or resolution will give both the title and the number of the ordinance,resolution or Code Section to be repealed or amended. Every amending ordinance or resolution also will set forth in full each section or subdivision to be amended. Subd. 4. Petitions. Every petition or other communication addressed to the Council will be in writing and will be read in full upon presentation to the Council unless the Council dispenses with the reading. Each petition or other communication will be referenced in the minutes. 200.07 Committees. Committees may be appointed by the Council from time to time with duties as may be required and defined by a majority action of the Council. Any matter brought before the Council for consideration may be referred by Council action to an appropriate committee for a report and recommendation. Each written committee report will be signed by a majority of the members and will be filed with the Clerk prior to the Council meeting at which it is to be submitted. Minority reports may be submitted and will be attached to the majority report. 2-3 ST. ANTHONY CITY CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY THIRD QUARTER 2005 CASE# DATE VIOLATION ADDRESS COMPLAINT OFFICER STATUS 55 7/6/2005 2850 ANTHONY LANE SOUTH UNPAVED STORAGE LOT RL CLOSED 56 7/11/2005 3000 BLOCK OLD 8 FOR SALE CAR IN STREET RL CLOSED 57 7/11/2005 3317 EDGEMERE DOG DROPPINGS RL CLOSED 58 7/12/2005 2800 36TH AVE. REFRIGERATOR DOOR RL CLOSED 59 7/12/2005 4000 FORDHAM GRASS CLIPPINGS IN STREET RL CLOSED 60 7/12/2005 2903 PENTAGON APPLIANCES LEFT OUT RL CLOSED 61 7/13/2005 2916 33RD AVE. BUSHES OVERGROWN RL CLOSED 62 7/13/2005 3259 STINSON AVE.• WEEDS RL CLOSED 63 7/18/2005 4001 PENROD WEEDS RL CLOSED 64 7/19/2005 3900 FORDHAM WEEDS AND BRUSH RL CLOSED 65 7/20/2005 3101 EDGEMERE WEEDS RL CLOSED 66 8/1/2005 3616 36TH AVE GARBAGE CANS RL CLOSED 67 8/1/2005 3606 ROOSEVELT UNFINISHED GARAGE RL CLOSED 68 8/1/2005 3219 STINSON JUNK/WEEDS IN YARD RL CLOSED 69 8/1/2005 2921 SILVER LAKE RD. GUTTER RUNOFF RL CLOSED 70 8/1/2005 3404 SILVER LAKE RD. WEEDS RL CLOSED 71 8/2/2005 3524 SILVER LAKE RD LONG GRASS RL CLOSED 72 8/4/2005 3120 ROOSEVELT GARBAGE RL CLOSED 73 8/4/2005 3100 ROOSEVELT WOOD PILE IN FRONT RL CLOSED 74 8/10/2005 3519 ROOSEVELT TRAILER ON GRASS RL CLOSED 75 8/10/2005 3017 CROFT DRV. CAR ON GRASS RL CLOSED 76 8/10/2005 3000 BLOCK OLD 8 CAR ON GRASS RL CLOSED 77 8/8/2005 2809 SILVER LAKE RD CAR ON GRASS RL CLOSED 78 8/10/2005 3412 BELDON FLAGS/BANNERS RL CLOSED 79 8/10/2005 3108 EDGEMERE FLAGS/BANNERS RL CLOSED 80 8/12/2005 3509 MAPLEWOOD WEEDS/ADDRESS RL CLOSED 81 8/12/2005 3800 SILVER LAKE RD. BANNERS RL CLOSED 82 8/16/2005 STINSON AT LOWRY CAR FOR SALE RL CLOSED 83 8/22/2005 3400 BELDON VEHICLE ON GRASS RL CLOSED 84 8/22/2005 3313 BELDON RODENTS RL 85 8/23/2005 3920 MACALASTER TREES IN R.O.W. RL 86 9/1/2005 2508 ST.ANTHONY BLV. LONG GRASS RL 87 9/1/2005 3500 SILVER LAKE RD. RETAINING WALL RL 88 9/1/2005 3408 SILVER LAKE RD. CAR ON GRASS RL 89 9/14/2005 3219 STINSON TREES OVERHANGING RL 90 9/14/2005 3201 STINSON LONG GRASS RL 91 9/14/2005 3501 BELDON CAR ON GRASS RL 92 9/29/2005 3213 36 TH COUCH ON CURB JM 93 9/29/2005 2829 STINSON CAR ON GRASS JM 94 9/29/2005 2828 ROOSEVELT BUSHES OVERGROWN JM 95 96 a i Y 1 1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 2 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 3 OCTOBER 25, 2005 4 5 CALL TO ORDER 6 Mayor Faust called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. 7 8 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 9 Mayor Faust invited the Council and audience to join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. 10 11 ROLL CALL. 12 Present: Mayor Faust; Councilmembers Gray, Horst, Stille, and Thuesen. 13 Absent: None. 14 Also Present: City Manager Mike Mornson. 15 16 17 CONSIDERATION,DISCUSSION,AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ALL OF THE FOLLOWING 18 ITEMS. 19 20 I. APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 25,2005 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA. 21 Motion by Councilmember Horst, seconded by Councilmember Stille, to approve the City 22 Council Meeting Agenda of October 25, 2005. 23 24 Motion carried unanimously. 25 26 II. PROCLAMATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS. 27 None. 28 29 III. CONSENT AGENDA. 30 A. CC27ZQGTn'CTeb�-'STS--2005 CoUIImTi SeC • 31 B. Consider licenses and permits. 32 C. Consider payment of claims. 33 D. Resolution 05-081 re: Consider approval of Hennepin County Recycling Score Grant. 34 E. Resolution 05-082 re: Consider approval of Ramsey County Recycling Score Grant. 35 36 Councilmember Thuesen requested the removal of Consent Agenda Item A. 37 38 Motion by Councilmember Thuesen, seconded by Councilmember Horst, to approve the Consent 39 Agenda items B, C,D, and E. 40 41 Motion carried unanimously. 42 43 A. Consider October 11 2005 Council meeting minutes. 44 45 Councilmember Thuesen stated on page 4, line 37 and 38, it should say, "He reported... this 46 Me at the end of the year". 47 48 Motion by Councilmember Thuesen, seconded by Councilmember Grey, to approve the Consent 49 Agenda item A as amended. a City Council Regular Meeting Minutes 2 October 25, 2005 Page 2 1 2 Motion carried unanimously. 3 4 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS. 5 None. 6 7 V. REPORTS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF. 8 None. 9 10 VI. GENERAL POLICY BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL. 11 A. Consider Engineer Report, Todd Hubmer, WSB, reporting 12 i. Consider Resolution 05-083,re: 2006 street project plans and specifications and 13 ordering of bids. 14 15 Mr. Hubmer reviewed the resolution with the Council and indicated that this is for the 16 improvement by reconstruction of the roadways and utilities of 301'Avenue NE from 17 Stinson Boulevard to Wilson Street; Murray Avenue; Roosevelt Street NE from St. 18 Anthony Boulevard to 30th Avenue NE; Coolidge Street from St. Anthony Boulevard to 19 29th Avenue NEE; and the alleysouth of Murrayrom Wilson Street to Roosevelt Street. Y 20 He added due to several items increasing the new total project cost is $1,865,000. 21 22 Mayor Faust asked if the price went up due to the alley. Mr. Hubmer replied correct. 23 24 Councilmember Thuesen asked if any special or unique problems are anticipated. Mr. 25 Hubmer replied no, it appears relatively normal. He added water and sewer in the alley is 26 difficult due to the width and the structures already there. 27 28 Motion by Councilmember Stille, seconded by Councilmember Thuesen,to adopt 29 Resolution 05-083, re: 2006 street project plans and specifications and ordering of bids. 30 31 Motion carried unanimously. 32 33 ii. Resolution 05-084; Foss Road lift station. 34 Mr. Hubmer reviewed the resolution with the Council and indicated that the proposed is cn 35 replacing the trunk sant sewer from Silver Lake Road east down 39 Avenue as well ep g sanitary 36 as improvements to discharge up to the City of Roseville. He added this is being done to 37 accommodate development at Silver Lake Village. 38 39 Councilmember Stille asked if this project has enough capacity for future developments. 40 Mr. Hubmer replied this will be looked at in the feasibility study. 41 42 Mayor Faust asked if the development is paying for the upgrade although it serves other 43 people in the community. Mr. Hubmer replied correct, fees have been collected from the 44 development. 45 46 Mr. Mornson asked what percentage the lift service serves now. Mr. Hubmer replied 47 100%. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes 3 October 25, 2005 Page 3 1 2 Motion by Councilmember Grey, seconded by Councilmember Thuesen,to adopt 3 Resolution 05-084, re: Foss Road lift station. 4 5 Motion carried unanimously. 6 7 iii. General Updates. 8 Mr. Hubmer reviewed the report with the Council and indicated that the 2006 street 9 reconstruction project, the 39h Avenue project, and the Shamrock holding pond have all 10 been completed. 11 12 Mayor Faust requested details about the street project and how it encompasses two 13 seasons. Mr. Hubmer replied the first season public works will restore the area back to 14 the way it was prior to construction, then they will return next spring and replace any 15 areas that have settled, redo sod if needed, and put a second layer of asphalt on. 16 17 B. Consider Resolution 05-085 re: Joint powers agreement with Ramsey County. 18 Mayor Faust reviewed the resolution with the Council and indicated that those residents on the 19 Ramsey County side could take items such as yard and grass clippings to the Ramsey County 20 site;however, those on the Hennepin County side do not have access to a close site. He added 21 the City of St. Anthony is entering into a pilot agreement effective November 1,2005 through 22 December 31, 2005 that allows all residents of St. Anthony to drop off recycling at the Ramsey 23 County site. Information will be provided within the recycling program and in the newsletter. 24 25 Councilmember Thuesen asked if site operation information could be posted on their website. 26 Mayor Faust replied yes, and a phone number that residents can call. 27 28 Councilmember Stille stated the dates are March 28 through November 30 and noted the times, 29 directions, and a website residents could reference for information. 30 31 Councilmember Casey asked if there was a charge. Mayor Faust replied not for residents. 32 33 Motion by Councilmember Thuesen, seconded by Councilmember Grey, to adopt Resolution 05- 34 085, re: Joint powers agreement with Ramsey County. 35 36 Motion carried unanimously. 37 38 C. Consider Resolution 05-086 re: Charge for copies/police reports. 39 Mr.Mornson reviewed the resolution with the Council and indicated that there is a change in 40 state law on how much the City can charge for copies and for police reports. He added if the 41 request is less than 100 copies the City can charge .25 cents per page and if over 100 copies the 42 charge is based on a fee calculation method. 43 44 Mayor Faust asked if legal council has reviewed the issue and if it is in conformance. Mr. 45 Mornson replied yes, it has been reviewed by legal council and spoke of at a conference. 46 i City Council Regular Meeting Minutes 4 October 25, 2005 Page 4 1 Councilmember Grey asked what is the fee reduction estimate for the City. Mr. Mornson replied 2 about$1,000. 3 4 Motion by Councilmember Horst, seconded by Councilmember Grey, to adopt Resolution 05- 5 086,re: Charge for copies/police reports. 6 7 Motion carried unanimously. 8 9 D. Consider Ordinance 05-013, re: park dedication fees. (second reading) 10 Mr. Mornson reviewed the ordinance with the Council and indicated that this is the second 11 reading to amend park dedication fees, which allows the City to become more in line with the 12 going rate. 13 14 Motion by Councilmember Stille, seconded by Councilmember Grey, to adopt Ordinance 05- 15 013, re: Park dedication fees. 16 17 Motion carried unanimously. 18 19 E. Consider Ordinance 05-014, re: Wine and 3.2 malt liquor combination license. (second 20 reading) 21 Mr. Mornson reviewed the ordinance with the Council and indicated that this will allow 22 businesses with an on-sale wine license and an on-sale 3.2 malt liquor license to sell intoxicating 23 malt liquor without an additional license. He added there currently are two businesses in the 24 City this would apply to. 25 26 Councilmember Grey asked if there are any other restaurants in the City looking at doing 27 something like this. Mr. Mornson replied none currently in the City,but some that are looking at 28 coming into the City. 29 30 Motion by Councilmember Grey, seconded by Councilmember Thuesen, to adopt Ordinance 05- 31 014, re: Wine and 3.2 malt liquor combination license. 32 33 Motion carried unanimously. 34 35 F. Consider Ordinance 05-015,re: Fees for combination liquor license. (second reading) 36 Motion by Councilmember Thuesen, seconded by Councilmember Horst, to adopt Ordinance 05- 37 015, re: Fees for combination liquor license. 38 39 Motion carried unanimously. 40 41 VII. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER AND COUNCILMEMBERS. 42 City Manager Mornson reported the following: 43 • The next City Council meeting will start at 8:00 p.m. 44 • There will be a public swearing-in for the two new officers that are starting, and the new 45 captain and new sergeant will be introduced. 46 • Staff is waiting for changes to the Cable Commission report. 47 • There is a tentative police union contract agreement. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes 5 October 25, 2005 Page 5 • 1 • Holding a December 27 Council meeting will be decided at the December 13 meeting. 2 • A MAMA meeting was held regarding storm clean-up costs; the money spent for St. 3 Anthony Public Works to do clean up was extremely low compared to other cities. 4 • He has been nominated by his peers to be a MAMA board member next year. 5 • A League of MN Cities and Metro conference and luncheon will be held shortly. 6 • Residents have until November 18 to submit applications for the Planning and the Park 7 Commissions. 8 • 37t'Avenue,between Stinson and Silver Lake Road,was stripped based on resident 9 requests. 10 11 Councilmember Grey stated he attended the Silver Lake Road Task Force meeting. The results 12 of an assignment to prioritize values on the Silver Lake Road project were sidewalks on both 13 sides of the roads;preserve identity characteristics; two lanes with turn lanes, lighting in the 14 corridor, and reduce congestion and added utilities. He added tomorrow he is attending an 15 orientation for youth and family. 16 17 Councilmember Horst stated he also attended the Task Force meeting. 18 19 Councilmember Stille stated he attend the Operating Engineers Local 49 ribbon cutting 20 ceremony. He added the facility has doubled in size and is open to the public as a banquet hall. 21 22 Councilmember Thuesen stated there was an article in the paper that talked about street projects 23 and how cities were paying for them. He added previous Staff and Councilmembers,were 24 proactive in taking on the debt each year, which will allow the City to be ahead of the game. 25 26 Mayor Faust indicated on October 13 a liquor forum of mayors, City managers, and liquor 27 managers was held. Out of the 30 cities invited, over 70% came. The forum provided the 28 opportunity to discuss how to handle assaults made on the liquor operation. Next will be a 29 roundtable at the League of MN Cities conference. On October 15 he attended the Silver Lake 30 Village open house put on by the Chamber of Commerce. He attended the Operating Engineers 31 Local 49 ribbon cutting ceremony. 32 33 VIII. COMMUNITY FORUM. 34 Mayor Faust invited residents to come forward at this time and address the Council on items that 35 are not on the regular agenda. 36 37 Lowell Ludford, 2813 Townview Avenue, stated he has concerns regarding emergency planning 38 and that there is a need for public information and education. While other cities have sanitized 39 emergency plan copies in their libraries for the public, the City of St. Anthony does not. The City 40 needs to take a positive action regarding its' role such as brochures and postings. If there is a 41 metro wide emergency condition how much help can be expected from other cities. Local 42 governments need to develop their own plans. A slow decision hurts, and it is up to government 43 officials to assist residents. He suggested Council review and/or appoint a task force to address 44 a City emergency plan,which should be started by early next year. 45 46 Mayor Faust thanked him for his comments. He added City Council is proactive and as soon as 47 a sanitized plan is available and legal council has reviewed it, it will be made available. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 25, 2005 Page 6 1 2 IX. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. 3 Mayor Faust stated the St. Anthony Sister City Association annual meeting is November 7 at 4 7:00 at City Hall. The Chamber is still collecting money to support the troops in Iraq so they 5 may be in touch with loved ones during the holiday season. He encouraged everyone to vote on 6 November 8 and to vote for the proposed school referendum. 7 8 X. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATIONAL DOCUMENTS. 9 None. 10 11 XI. ADJOURNMENT. 12 Chair Faust adjourned the meeting at 7:54 p.m. 13 14 Respectfully submitted, 15 16 17 Cheryl Felix 18 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 19 20 Mayor 21 ATTEST: 22 City Clerk 23 f Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 15, 2005 Page 1 1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 2 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 4 5 November 15, 2005 6 7:00 p.m. 7 8 9 I. CALL TO ORDER 10 Chair Stromgren called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 11 12 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 13 Chair Stromgren invited the Commission and the audience to join in the Pledge of Allegiance. 14 15 III. ROLL CALL 16 Commissioners present: Chair Stromgren; Vice Chair Hanson; Commissioners Galyon, 17 Hoska, Jensen, and Jenson. 18 19 Absent: Commissioner Young. 20 21 Also present: Assistant City Manager Kim Moore-Sykes. 22 23 IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 24 25 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Hoska, to approve the meeting agenda 26 as presented. 27 28 Motion carried unanimously 29 30 V. MEETING MINUTES 31 5.1 Review and Approve Planning Commission Minutes of September 20 2005 32 33 The Commission had the following corrections to the minutes: 34 35 Chair Stromgren had the following corrections: 36 • Page 2, line 36, reads: `Michael Freeburg, Pohlman Freese, stated that Mr. Reiners was not 37 able to attend this evening'; Should read: `Michael Freeburg, Welman, Sperides Architects, 38 stated that Mr. Reiners of Welman, Sperides Architects, was not able to attend this evening'. 39 • Page 10, Lines 2, 5 and 23, reads: `Wiltshire Park'; Should read: `Wilshire Park' 40 41 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Jenson, to approve the meeting minutes 42 of the Planning Commission of September 20, 2005 as amended. 43 44 Motion carried unanimously 45 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 15, 2005 Page 2 1 VI. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL 2 3 6.1 No Desi eig� e Required. 4 5 VII. PUBLIC HEARING 6 7 NONE 8 9 VIII. CONCEPT REVIEW 10 11 NONE 12 13 IX. PUBLIC INPUT 14 15 NONE 16 17 X. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION 18 19 Vice Chair Hanson referenced the September 20, 2005 Concept Review for the redevelopment of 20 the Kenzie Terrace/Lowry Avenue commercial property noting that the minutes indicate that the 21 applicant was planning to return to present in October or November and asked if Staff has heard 22 anything from the applicant. 23 24 Ms. Moore-Sykes confirmed stating that she has not heard anything from the applicant. She 25 stated that today is the deadline for next month's agenda adding that she has not received 26 anything for next month either. 27 28 Chair Stromgren stated that if the applicant has met with Hennepin County to discuss the right- 29 of-way for Kenzie Terrace would the City be notified or involved in any way. 30 31 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the City would not be notified or involved in the process. She 32 stated that normally the developer would notify the City. She stated that she could try to get a 33 copy of the minutes from that meeting for their review. 34 35 10.1 Comprehensive Land Use Plan Update. 36 37 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated the City is scheduled to update the Comprehensive Land Use Plan by 38 December 31, 2008. She explained that it is a statutory requirement by the State of Minnesota 39 noting that the last time it was updated was in 1998. She stated that the last update was a huge 40 project noting that a Task Force was created that included stakeholders from the community, the 41 Planning Commission and City Council representatives. She stated that the City invited 42 considerable input from individuals who had an interest and stake in the City's land-use plan 43 noting that they also hired facilitators and planners as consultants to get the plan moving forward. 44 She stated that Staff does not believe that the update process would be as extensive this time 45 noting that this was a means to update the Planning Commission and the Community that this is Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 15, 2005 Page 3 1 a process the City would be involved with over the next couple of years. She stated that the City 2 would probably hire a consultant to assist and will probably have help from the Metropolitan 3 Council representative and Staff. 4 5 Commissioner Jenson asked who would be responsible for updating the plan. 6 7 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Staff, the Planning Commission and possibly a task force would 8 work on the Comp Plan amendments, with the assistance of a consultant, and would then be 9 submitted to the Metropolitan Council for their review and approval. She stated that she has 10 included a full copy of the Comprehensive Plan for their review in addition to documents from 11 the Metropolitan Council that include their suggestions as to what items the City should review. 12 She stated that the Metropolitan Council is asking the City to address key changes in 13 transportation, water resources and parks policy plans. She stated that the Public Works Director 14 and City Engineer would also be involved in the process noting that it is Staff s plan to include 15 everyone who has information to contribute. 16 17 Chair Stromgren asked if the State requires a mandate or does Staff look at this as an entirely 18 new process or simply as an update process. 19 20 Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that Staff views this as an update to what the City already has 21 included noting that it has to be a comprehensive update that includes all projects. 22 23 Commissioner Jensen asked if part of the strategy would include getting the documents out to 24 Council early for their comments. 25 26 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Staff plans to get the information to Council early for review in 27 addition to surrounding jurisdictions and Counties so that they have input into the updates and 28 provide Staff with any comments. She indicated that this process is required anytime there is a 29 major amendment to the plan. 30 31 Chair Stromgren asked what the timetable is for the completion of the update process. 32 33 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that this has to be completed by December 31, 2008. She stated that the 34 Finance Director is aware adding that this has been included in the budget process so that funds 35 are available when needed. 36 37 Vice Chair Hanson stated that this would probably be one of the top priorities for 2007-2008. 38 39 Ms. Moore-Sykes confirmed noting that Staff would initiate the discussions in 2006 and update 40 again in 2007. She stated that it should be completed at least six months before the deadline in 41 order to provide time for review. 42 43 Commissioner Jensen stated that given the outline of the Commission's work tasks and few areas 44 subject to redevelopment, he is sure that it could be completed by the end of next year and then 45 tweak it for 2007. He stated that he doesn't want to prejudge the process noting that a lot of the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 15, 2005 Page 4 1 systems for a built community are already in place and many of the improvements at the major 2 sites have occurred over the last five years. He stated that a lot of the major units are done noting 3 that the City would probably do better, on the consulting side, to have them finish their work in 4 2006 rather than get plugged up in 2007 or 2008. 5 6 Ms. Moore-Sykes agreed noting that this was the strategy that was employed in the mid-90's. 7 She stated that it was recognized that consultants do get busy and if the city can remain ahead of 8 the crowd, the costs are not as high. She stated that it is conceivable that the process could be 9 completed by 2007. 10 11 Commissioner Jensen noted that most of the implementation of any re-development sites would 12 be market-driven not Comprehensive Plan driven. He stated that they are already out with two 13 major RFP's and are seeing the fruits of the City's labor. 14 15 Chair Stromgren stated that because some of the major pieces have been completed more detail 16 could be included noting that it is possible that some of the priorities have now shifted and 17 should be updated. 18 19 Commissioner Jensen asked if the City of Minneapolis has offered up any of their designs for the 20 parkway, as it comes through St. Anthony's border, to review. 21 22 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that she has not received any information except for a CD outlining the 23 38h Street area. 24 25 Commissioner Jenson asked if the new entrance to The Landings is an actual street. 26 27 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that this used to be 38`h Avenue noting that it is her understanding that 28 they plan to rename it. She stated that it would probably be an interior, private road. 29 30 Commissioner Jensen referenced the Autumn Woods site and asked if there is any progress on 31 the Planning Commission's discussion as to whether the PUD ought to be a smaller size. 32 33 Chair Stromgren stated that this was an item that he wanted to bring up as a fourth item that the 34 Commission should continue to move forward on the ordinance updates. 35 36 10.2 Discussion of Community Design and Active Living in Ramsey Countx 37 38 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that she recently attended a Ramsey County meeting on active living. 39 She explained that they discussed the development of safe walking routes, designing safe street- 40 crossings and creating safe recreational and physical activities for residents of all ages. She 41 stated that the plan is to use the physical structures currently in place by modifying it so that it is 42 more pedestrian friendly and safer for those individuals who choose not to use a vehicle to travel. 43 She explained that the concept evolves from the sustainable communities where one would work 44 and play within their community. She noted that this is more of a reduced-use adding that it was 45 a very interesting meeting and discussion. She stated that she has included the information Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 15, 2005 Page 5 1 received from the meeting for their review. She reviewed the topics of discussion with the 2 Commission noting that topics included active living, what it is and why people should be more 3 involved. She stated that the current emphasis was on the high price of fuel and conservation 4 noting that they also discussed the physical benefits of walking and riding a bicycle. She stated 5 that they discussed creating safe neighborhoods and communities by walking through the 6 neighborhoods along with gathering for community activities at the local parks. 7 8 10.3 Process to Amend City Ordinance 9 10 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that there was a request to discuss how ordinances are revised, changed 11 or added. She explained that in City Code, Chapter Two, Page 2.3 it discusses the process of 12 how ordinance resolutions and petitions are changed. She briefly reviewed the process with the 13 Commission stating that normally the process begins when Staff identifies the need for an update 14 and puts together the revised language; she then submits the proposed changes to the City 15 Attorney for review and revisions; and from there the proposed changes are either presented to 16 the Planning Commission for their review and recommendations, or if the proposed changes 17 come directly from Staff, City Council would have the opportunity to review and make their 18 recommendations. She stated that a public hearing would then be held. She explained that with 19 ordinances every revision has to be presented in writing and would receive three readings, which 20 is basically three public hearings before the City Council, with the exception of re-zoning or 21 other zoning ordinance amendments, which only require one reading or one public hearing. She 22 stated that this change was made a few years ago and explained that it makes it easier to pass re- 23 zoning issues for re-development projects. She stated that once the readings are done and the 24 changes are published in the City's legal newspaper, which is the Bulletin, it becomes official. 25 26 Chair Stromgren asked if it would be correct that there is no mandated or formal requirement on 27 the Planning Commission's review process in terms of public hearings because it is only a 28 recommendation. 29 30 Ms. Moore-Sykes confirmed. 31 32 10.4 Ordinance Updates 33 34 Chair Stromgren referenced Commissioner Jensen's mention of the discussions the Planning 35 Commission has had with regards to ordinance updates stating the Commission has reviewed a 36 number of issues that should be updated within the code. He reviewed noting that the issues 37 include PUD size and requirements; native plantings, lot size and redevelopment requirements. 38 He stated that the Commission would like this moved forward so that things are updated in a 39 timely manner. 40 41 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the Commission could submit their recommendations and she could 42 then submit their recommendations to the City Attorney for review. 43 44 Chair Stromgren stated that they do not have many issues to review and would not require a lot 45 of time. He stated that previously a sub-committee has been put together to review the issues Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 15, 2005 Page 6 1 noting that this could be one way for the Commission to handle the review. He noted that 2 another way to address this would be through a Planning Commission work session. He stated 3 that if there is nothing for the Planning Commission to address at the December meeting that this 4 would be a good time for the Commission to meet in a work session. He suggested changing the 5 regular monthly Planning Commission meeting in December to a work session to discuss the 6 ordinance updates. 7 8 Ms. Moore-Sykes agreed that the work session would be a good idea noting that it would not 9 have to be a televised meeting. 10 11 Commissioner Jensen asked if there is a sense among the Commissioners that a PUD ordinance 12 that is for a larger sized property would have utilized the process. He asked if the process was 13 adequate or should it be tweaked to address the smaller-sized PUD issues. 14 15 Chair Stromgren agreed noting that he has been thinking about the same issues. He stated that 16 most Cities do not have the strict prohibition of mixing an Residential and a Commercial that St. 17 Anthony's code has. He stated that there could be other ways to accomplish this through a 18 mixed-zoning use without the PUD. He asked Ms. Moore-Sykes to pull together information on 19 this topic for their review prior to the work session. 20 21 Commissioner Jensen suggested that the Commissioners forward any information they might 22 have to Ms. Moore-Sykes that would include similar ideas from other Cities. He stated that it 23 would be beneficial to have all information pertaining to these issues for their review prior to the 24 work session. He stated that the sites on Kenzie could stall out because the City does not have a 25 mechanism in place to allow for the use. 26 27 Chair Stromgren noted that the current applicant did not include any commercial/retail in their 28 proposal; it would seem like a prime location where this could be included. He stated that this all 29 points back to what Ms. Moore-Sykes discussed with respect to livable Cities initiatives and 30 mixed-uses within a walk able distance. 31 32 Commissioner Gaylon asked Ms. Moore-Sykes to email the Commissioners with an agenda of 33 items for the work session. 34 35 Commissioner Jensen stated that aerial maps of the City would be good planning tools and asked 36 if the City has any large-scale aerial maps that could be used during their work session. 37 38 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the only maps available are the wall maps. 39 40 Commissioner Jensen suggested checking with the Metropolitan Council to see if they have any 41 aerial maps available. He stated that they do have maps available from various projects they 42 were involved with and suggested checking to see what they would charge for a 200-scale map. 43 44 Commissioner Jensen referenced the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinance amendment process 45 stating that approximately a year ago he was on the School Board Task Force that dealt with the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 15, 2005 Page 7 1 walkability issues and changes to the busing distance parameters. He stated that a big part of the 2 task force's responsibility was to try to identify the nodes where buses would actually stop and 3 also the lack of sidewalks and touch down places. He stated that an inventory of street lighting 4 was also done and found to be okay but not 100-percent adequate. He stated that one of the 5 issues they struggled with was that there was no mechanism available to bring the School Board 6 issues forward and suggested merging their issues together with the Planning Commission as 7 they tool up with a work program and a capital improvements component of the Comprehensive 8 Plan. 9 10 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that the Silver Lake Road Task Force is currently looking at 11 reconstructing in 2007. She stated that sidewalks are a big issue in addition to lighting and 12 crosswalks. She stated that she would forward copies of their meeting minutes for their review. 13 14 XI. ANNOUNCEMENTS 15 16 Commissioner Jenson provided the Commission with a brief update of the Silver Lake Road 17 Task Force noting that they have met three times to discuss the issues. He stated that there are 18 approximately 40 members on this Task Force including members from Hennepin County and 19 two City Council Members. He explained that there is one more meeting planned with the idea 20 to finalize the plans, get it into the 2006 budget process and construct in 2007. 21 22 Chair Stromgren asked that a final report be provided to the Commission for their review. 23 24 XII. ADJOURNMENT 25 26 Motion by Vice Chair Hanson, second by Commissioner Jensen, to adjourn the meeting at 7:33 27 p.m. 28 29 Motion carried unanimously. 30 31 Respectfully submitted, 32 Bonnie Sullivan 33 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.