Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-02-03_COUNCIL MEETINGROLLCALL RESOLUTION OF CONDOLENCE:- PASTER DONALD C. CARLSON MINUTES of January 19 and 26, 1976, approved as submitted or:�corrected by motion of seconded by I. PUBLIC HEARING ON 1976 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planning Department. II. MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS - REPORT - Continue to February .9, 1976 III. AWARD OF BIDS Tabulations and recommendations by City Manager. Action of Council by motion. A. Pumper..Fire Truck B. Renovation of Chlorine Rooms. IV COMMUNICATIONS A:,.Mr..and Mrs. Scott Garoutte - Housing Inspection `V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A.- Planning Commission 1.1 Final Plat. Approval a. Lake Edina .Village Replat (72 -4) 2. Set Hearing Date a. C -1 and C -2 Commercial District Ordinance Amendments`.(1 /28/76) B. Glen Lake Sanitarium (Continued from 1/19%76) C. Senior Police Reserve Eligibility (Continued from 1/19/76) D. Minneapolis.Lease in Government Center (Continued from 1/19/76) E. Human Relations Services Agreement (Continued from 1/19/76) F. Feasibility Report - Set Hearing Dates G. Topographic Maps H. Notice of Claim - Wm. M Holm I. Building Department Activities -and Organization J. Yorkdale Liquor Store Loading Dock K.. Liquor Marketing Study L. Manager's Absence M. Local 49 Status Report N. Hearing on State Bill - House Committee.on Local Urban Affairs - 11 A.M., Wednesday, Feb..4, Room 83 .0. Salary Resolution - Fire Fighters P. Physical Development Committee Meeting - T.H. 100 /Benton Ave. Interchange VI. ORDINANCES A. First Reading 1. Ordinance No. 431 -A1 - Water Softener License Fees (Continued from 1/19/76). VII. ANY OTHERS WHO DESIRE HEARING BEFORE COUNCIL VIII. FINA14CE A. Purchase of Fertilizer for Braemar Golf Course B. Claims Paid: Motion of seconded by for p;ay- ment of the following claims as.per Pre -List: General Fund. $65,9.87.20; Park Fund, $5,714:66; Park Sinking,.$45,758.50;.Swimming Pool, $`16..25; Golf, $627.93; Recreation Center, $7,338.49; Gun Range, 442.50, Water Works, $4,140.05; Sewer Rental, $1,.033.50; Liquor $125,528.07 Construction, $1,1,0,721.;94; Total, $367,513.09 MEMORANDUM To: The Members of the Edina City Council From: The Edina Human Relations Commission Subject:-Peoplemaking, Family Life Workshop The Edina Human Relations Commission is again inviting Edina churches and organizations to participate in the planning of the Peoplemaking program for 1976. The City Council has always been supportive of the Family Life Workshop in-the past: Any concerns or suggestions that the Council might have for this years event would most gratefully be accepted. A copy of the results of the 1975 Peoplemaking Evaluation Questionnaire is attached. The response indicates that nearly all of the people who participated in the event felt that they had benefitted from attending. Over 385 people attended. Our first steering committee meeting will be held at 10:00 a.m. Saturday, February 28, 1976 in the Conference Room at the Edina City Hall. You are cordially invited:'to attend. Thank you. JB 2/2/76 TO: Edina City Council FROM: Mary Ness, Gene Sylvestre DATE: December 3, 1975 SUBJECT: Citizen Evaluation of Family Life Workshop Evaluation questionnaires were passed out to the 3 -400 participants attending '�P.eoplemaking" the 3rd annual Family Life Workshop held on November 14 and 15, 1975 at Edina West Lower Division. Following is a summary of the•119 resporases: HOW DID YOU LEARN ABOUT THE FAMILY LIFE WORKSHOP? % of Responses Church announcement 14.10 Program brochure 27.3% Poster 5.5% Newspaper .23.7% Friend 13.6% Other, please name 16.6% (Note - Numeral equals frequency of mention: .Schools (5), Library (3), League of Women Voters (3), Parents Without Partners (3), Went last year (3), Mother (2), worked on it (2), Wife (2), Metropolitan College newspaper (2), Father, Husband, Y.M.C.A., Psychology teacher, Edina HRC member, South Hennepin Human Services from Southdale Hospital, A.A.U.W., Wife on committee. DID YOU ATTEND THE KEYNOTE ADDRESS ON FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 14? 0 of Responses YES NO 55.5% IN GENERAL, DO YOU THINK YOU GAINED SOMETHING FROM 6 of Responses YES y /•'° NO 0 No Answer 2.5% 'WORKSHOPS? WHY? Formed some new ideas plus re- inforced others Gained much = It was helpful - Thank.'you Lots of good useful information Stimulating, much learning Key thoughts made it well worth it The more I hear the more the messages converge, synthesize I learned something as to why (things) are happening in my relationships More data on subject (teen -age drug use).. Further, realization of how little Edina does to assist problem. -2- Better equiped for introspection now Opportunity to stimulate my personal growth This is such a fantastic service to our community, Just great : I learned alot from Dr. Ack on Friday night Success Syndrome- gentle, clear insight into topic Assertiveness - well presented with specific examples for application A further learning experience Acquired knowledge of older people Human sexuality very good Chaplain Nohre and Sandy Nohre - excellent! Saw possibility for insight as to where help is possible with my ptoblems. Interesting, thought- provoking topics Yes, partly because of.i.nsights given by speakers and partly from conversations with other participants. Reinforced my current beliefs. Not too much new. Awarness helps to put things in perspective. It opens communications with my family. Personal information gained from hearing speakers. Each subject was of interest to me and was handled well by speakers. Instructors well qualified Gained new insights... confirmed and strengthened principles and concepts in family relationships. The Nohres were splendid ... as speakers and living example of their theories put into practice., Dr. Ack opened some new doors to understanding children from their point - -of view. Thought provoking subjects by experts in their respective fields. I'm a college instructor and social worker - I learned things I can pass on to my students, my clients, as well as use in my own life. 'Enlightening. Good discussions.. Excellent. Like "refresher courses" on good ideas for interpersonal relationships. Lots of good plain talk and ideas. Excellent speakers -3- New perspectives, ideas to digest Most definetly. Workshop was well - organized. Excellent choices of speakers Learned about helpful models about life. Reinforcement of some thoughts and ideas I'd already reached. Increased my capacity to understand, to find out. Thought the movie "Peege" was outstanding. Alcoholism program was helpful. Interesting and knowledgeable speakers. pretty difficult not to gain from a program df this t3rpe if one is at all open - minded. Sessions I was able to attend were personally regarding. Film "Peegee" excellent. Moving. Learned things about myself in relation to other people. Very well organized. Lots of variety of topics. Good resource people. Appreciate the efforts of all the people involved. Tnank you. Really Super. "Success Syndrome" session helped me to clarify some of.my.dissatisfactions with the suburb I live in (not Edina). Excellent topics Lots of food for thought Excellent speakers and topics Very good people conducting the'sessions ... was very. educational. :..practical, the people had worthwhile things to say. I learned alot. I enjoy exploring new areas or new ways. I enjoyed being with so many open, eager, questioning people. (Session on death and) grief was great! Excellent speakers, well prepared. Allowed,time for questions.; Good movie.- Well organized. Coffee and cookies great. I enjoyed the "Cipher In The Snow" movie because I have children that are turning into adults. I learned alot in "Single Again" -4- Interesting, intellegent speakers with information I found useful By verbalizing my thoughts and ideas Hearing that what you are experiencing is normal Very fine Excellent presentations. Good discussion. Presentations stimulated.thought I learned alot I hadn't }mown before. Given me some new insights that I hope will improve me personally and my family relationships Openness of the speakers, dialogues with them, guidelines and principles they offered. Good, relevant materials Learned more about sex education program that is available for families and teens Surprised so many there over 30 Nice to know so many :others have similar feelings Teen -age drug seminar was fantastic... personal involvement of krescurce) people with the problem was such a valuable information source WHY NOT? Christian aspect was completely, omitted Not as much as I had hoped for. Wanted to take in more sessions...scheduled at conflicting times Might like to see emphasis on other than family next year. Do YOU WISH ANOTHER FAMILY LIFE WORKSHOP NEXT YEAR? 0 of Resuonses YES `NO 0 No.Answer 5° HOW COULD THE NEXT WORKSHOP BE IMPROVED? .Get speakers to stick to their topics more -'By assuring closer coordination of printed program with actual... presentations. Describe subject matter in more detail in brochure- Not only identify problem, but propose ways of dealinE with them. ...double up on more topics. Too many good ones only given once. How about 6 subjects an hour each. I wanted to attend more than three. .. Would be helpful to know if skills introduced are on a beginners' level or not. Offer-some topics that build upon some basic (already) learned comrcaiiications skills r Some sessions were terribly simplified... ready for more advanced sessions. Give us "meat ", rather than those sessions where everyone is "teacher ". A session on dyslexia by an expert Separate (discussion of "Single ") divorce from widowhood Plan topics to appeal to specific age levels of children More-give and take in participation Somehow, get smaller groups Possibly have panel of experts on how to raise children, rather than just give the Freudian side. (Dr. Ack is excellent, but biased) Opportunity for small -group discussion - more role- playing or 91-playing activities. ...a sharing session to find out what others learned. Provide for teen -adult "rap" The speaker for the Runaway and Family Crisis was offensive with her language Consider making whole thing on one day. Keynote followed by workshops. Shorter sessions, four in the day rather than three /1 hour sessions so could attend more workshops. Offer a 4th session from 3:30 -5:00 pm Don't shorten time (of sessions) - Need 1 1/2 hours to open up - more time for discussion Expand time...2 days? Longer-- or 2 or 3.a year. Would -be willing to pay group fees. Since more and more people attend each year - more sessions - too many good topics at sametime - repeat sessions. Perhaps pre - registration might help to avoid overcrowded sections. More young people Encourage teen - attendance Lack -of space in some classrooms - but, glad to see it well attended Larger rooms, better ventilation Dif ferent lunch Get extra chairs Don't allow smoking in workshop rooms This one was great - set -up is beautiful right now! This was super - sessions were beautiful... don't know how to improve. Dohlt have any concrete suggestions It was excellent - you did another excellent job I wish I could be six people so I could attend everything I wanted Looking forward to next year Cut down on snapping of cameras No improvements needed Don't know (2) I'm a working Mother and would have loved to attend all sessions All sessions I attended - EXCELLENT: The brochure is,teally the clincher - hope it can get wider distribution Stress there's no charge for workshops so people who can attend only 1 or 2 (sessions) will consider coming Really good publicity Thank you for including people outside your comnnxnity Thank you.. Really super! IF ANOTHER FAMILY LIFE WORKSHOP IS SCHEDULED, WHAT TOPICS WOULD YOU LIKE DISCUSSED? Transactional Analysis Many of the same repeated 'cause you can't get all of the sessions in a day. Similar to this year (5) Same thing .(10) Single parenthood Topics pertaining to child rearing Decision- making Expand range,covering specific catagories i.e. what is unique about 81 yr. olds; how to help 13 yr old channel his-frustration. Topics such as Democratic Family, Perception of Authority, Growing Up Adult, Accepting the Average Student, Faith Hope 8 Love interested me because they aren't being done by every other group around. How about a session on positive attitudes toward success - the country needs more emphasis on.achievement to balance do-your -own -thing attitude. ' F 1 Success Syndrom because it seems unique to Edina Feminist issues - How to deal with women's•changing role Expansion and awareness of human problems Motivation in family for community service and giving How to find self - awareness (4) Richard Obershaw back - enjoyed him most! (2) Dr. Rouner again Felt everyone of these was excellent and up to date Same repeated - expecially Death & Grief, Values, Becoming Us, Faith Hope & Love. Something on stimulation or enrichment in married life when your children are suddenly grown. How to interest family in church worship and activities without intimidation or threats Care of infants - to age 2? Bring back children's creative care and workshop so each member of family can share about day Problem solution (this year was problem identification) Raising children in one parent home Single parent and single persons (2) Family unity and family relations Parent -child relationships'- guidance Parent -child problems by a christian counselor Career selections for young (2) Changing careers Good on Marriage topics More on chemical dependency Marriage- Death & Grief, Young & Old, Values, Assertiveness, Adult change T.A., Gestalt, Reality Therapy, Middle Life, Cultural Demands on Women, How Family is a System Something 10 year olds and up.could participate in Dyslexia -v- How do you maintain balance between job, family, church, community, hobbies, etc.? More.,_assertiveness training Is woman's lib working - are they satisfied with alternatives? DO YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS FOR RESOURCE PEOPLE YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE LEAD A DISCUSSION GROUP? Mrs. Buerosse on ecology Jerry Winters on "Crisis of the 40's ". It's about marriage and individual and family relationships. Physicians and clergy, University professors and teachers are always good. Hopefully, Dr. Joseph Gendron will be asked again Jack Quinell on family life and marriage counseling "How to Use Affirmations with Children" with resource people from the Washburn Child Guidance Center Dick Fowler or someone from his staff at Judson Jerry Bach, Bach Institute Dr. Gus Nelson Dr. Brantner on Death 8 Dying from the University Dr. Knopka,.University of Minnesota - research on adolescent female Judge Lindsey Arthur on problems of juvinile offenders Mary Bourne, Intergenerational Dynamics Tom Wright or Dr. Townes, Adlerian Institute Sal Valdavinos (3) Robert Bartholow Ann Wiens Dr. Philip Hanson Multiservice 226 -8157 Sandy Stolz, Bill Cox, Jean Clark Gestalt Center - Dr. Floyd Winecoff Nohres again (2) Not Sr`Barghni (Director of the Bridge) �E People from Johnson Institute Bob Wilhite, lawyer, (talks on) job opportunities Repeat Dana Lehman- Olson's "Assertiveness" I would like to hear Dr. Ack anytime in his positive reinforcement of how I conduct my family Repeat "Becoming Us" "Death & Grief" sesseion was excellent! WHAT rTriREE WORKSHOPS DID YOU AT'T'END? (Note: Numeral in parenthesis indicates number of times this session presented.) Total a of Respondents All Sessions Success Syndrome - Rouner (2) 14.0 Democratic Family: Virtuous or Virtueless - Swenson 5.7 Perceptions of Authority - Mitchell.(2) 0.7 Single Again: Adjusting to Being Re- single - Andert 3.9 Growing Up Adult: How To Manage Change - Carnes 2.5 Assertiveness - Lehman -Olson 10.1 Sex Education for Adolescents and Their Families - Rosenberg (2) 3.9 Accepting the Average Student - Bechtle 1.4 Chemical Dependency - Stevens 1.4 Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Teen -Age Drug Use - Lepinski (2) 3.2 Signs of An Ailing Marriage - Eilertson 3.2 Loneliness And It's Implications In A Family Setting - Gendron (2) 7.9 Becoming Us: An Experience`in Family Growth- Carnes: 6::8 New Neighbors - Asian Friends - Panel 25 What Are My Values - Rotman (2) "6.1 The Elderly: A New Frontier - Wiesen, (2). 1.8 Coping With Crisis 8 Loss - Winters 5.0 Signs of A Healthy Marriage - Eilertsen 1.1 Explaining Death 8 Grief To Children 6 Adults - Obershaw 5.0 A Very Special Workshop - Family and Childrens' Service 0.3 Intimacy 6 Individuality In Marriage - The Nchres 10.8 Faith, Hope 8 Love - Bone and panel 1.8 MEMORANDUM TO: I City Council FROM: Greg Luce, City Planner SUBJECT: Joint H.R.A. /City Council Meeting, January 26, 1976 Attached per your request is a copy of a revised budget, which Jerry Dalen completed in a "double entry" format. This budget refers to alternate #1 (the project as planned), which we discussed. GL:ln 1/30/76 COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF ACTUAL REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES WITH BUDGET. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA, MINNESOTA FOR PERIOD MARCH 4, 1974 THROUGH JANUARY 26, 1976 Revenue: Union Oil Site Liquor Store Site Community Development: 1975 1976 State Aid: 49� Street and North Halifax 50th Street Landscaping 51st.and South Halifax Signalization Assessments TOTAL REVENUE 29,064 Expenditures:. Acquisition Land: 49� Street Lot (Lunds and Herfurth) $ 85,964 Northside Lot_: Clancy's 44,055 Lunds 80,991 Twin City Federal Liquor Store Edina Properties 35,704 Union Oil 120,276 South Side Ramp .Right of Way 6,313 Relocation - Union Oil 10,000 Public Improvements: 49� Street & North Halifax 11,770 Signal Improvements 51st Street & South Halifax France Sidewalk Walkways and Spaces 1,561 50th Street Plaza Trees and Identification Underground Utilities 18,581 North 49� Street - Parking Northside Ramp 551,784 Northside Surfacing Southside Surfacing Southside Ramp Administration: Interest 9,374 City Contract 45,441 Project Design 66,486 Northside Ramp Design 26,941 Southside Ramp Design 1,193 Legal 17,226 Relocation 400 Surveying 13,309 Miscellaneous 525 Contingencies TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,147,894 Excess of Expenditures over Revenue $1,118,830 JD:ln 1/30/76 Budgeted 68,820 50,000 29,064 46,000 140,000 162,000 11,000 20,000 135,000 687,369 $1,349,253 $ 85,965 44,055 80,991 41,679 144,264 35,704 121,125 440,953 7,264 10,000 149,000 110,000 35,000 46,000 149,000 200,000 25,000 76,500 88,000 46,000 563,767 41,000 57,000 513,600 9,374 80,000 77,000 29,500 26,964 40,000 400 14,459 5,000 161,099 $3,555,663 $2,206,410 Difference 68,820 50,000 46,000 140,000 162,000 .11,000 20,000 135,000 $ 1 41,679 144,264 849 440,953 951 137,230 110,000 35,000 46,000 147,439 200,000 25,000 76,500 69,419 46,000 11,983 41,000 57,000 513,600 34,559 10,514 2,559 25,771 22,774 1,150 4,475 161,099 $2,407,769 GENE SYLVESTRE ASSOCIATES, 12006 BRIAR LANE, MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55343 • (612) 545 -8163 January 28, 1976 Mr. Warren Hyde City Manager City of Edina 4800 West 50th Street Edina, Mn. 55424 Dear Warren, Enclosed is our invoice covering consultative fees and out -of- pocket expenses for the December 30, 1975 - January 27, 1976 period. The consultative fee for the month is billed at $150. This decreased fee is based on the December 23, 1975 letter sent to our firm from Tom Melena, with copies sent to the Mayor and yourself. Below is a summary of our consultative activities for the period. TYPE OF HOURS CONSULTING W-IAT WAS DONE SPENT DATE GBMZAL Held series of discussions to help plan the January 15 community forum on "Drugs and Families ", including discussions with representatives from the HRC, Youth Action, State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Authority and Johnson Institute. Prepared publicity news releases and attended forum. Held discussions with 11RC Executive Committee on future role. of consultant. Prepared materials for and attended monthly HRC meeting. 16.0 12/30 -31 1/2- 5- 12 -13- 14 -15 2.0 12/30,1%7 4.5 1/9 -20 Completed evaluation of effectiveness of resource 3.0 1/19 -21 speakers utilized at recent "Peoplemaking" Family Life Workshop. Also, prepared and submitted report requested by HRC chairman on consultative time spent during 1975 in helping plan and implement workshop. EDUCATION Continued discussions about possible continuation of consultative services to School Administration to help implement their Affirmative Action policy. Since ly, TOTAL HOURS c.c. James Van Va]kenburg Tom Melena HRC Executive Committee 1.0 1/9 -19 2E3.5 .40 4. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION HELD MONDAY, JANUARY 5, 1976 EDINA CITY HALL I. Roll Call: Ronald Hays Donald Johnson James Poehler Cliff Johnson John Telfer Paul Mucke James Bentley II. Approval of the November 24, 1975, EQC Minutes. Mr. C. Johnson moved approval of the November 24, 1975, EQC Minutes. Mr.., Mucke seconded the motion. All voted aye. III. Old Business: A. Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Projects. Mr. Larry Kelley, President of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board of Managers, and Mr. John MacClennan and Mr. John Holmquist of Hickok and Associates, engineers for the District, appeared to review the cooperative projects. Also in attendance were approximately 30 residents living adjacent to the Meadowbrook Marsh area. Mr. Kelley explained to the EQC the past history of the cooperative projects noting that such resulted from petitions submitted by the effected municipalities approximately two years earlier. He explained that a preliminary feasibility report was prepared for the projects in April, 1974, a hearing was held in the fall of 1974, and final plans for the projects were completed in October, 1975. Mr. Kelley noted that the District was now prepared to move on with the work of completing DNR permits and implementing the projects. Mr. John MacClennan thereupon reviewed the cost /benefit analysis and trail place- ment for the Meadowbrook area project, as was requested at the November, 1975, EQC meeting. Mr. MacClennan distributed a copy of the cost /benefit analysis conducted by the District. He noted that based on a 20 year amortization period, the total cost of the Meadowbrook area project would be $13,393.88/year. Total benefits, based on estimated usership by cancers and hikers, was calculated to be $24,090.00. Mr. MacClennan noted that this resulted in a benefit to cost ratio of 1.8:1 for the Meadowbrook area project. A total initial cost of $60,000 was anticipated. Mr. Robert Hanson, 29 Circle West, questioned the initial cost of $60,000, noting that a cost of $120,000 had been estimated at one time. Mr. MacClennan noted that the $120,000 cost included the construction of bridges in the Meadowbrook Golf Course which were not included in the present estimate. Mr. Hanson also questioned Mr. MacClennan regarding the number of days conoeing on the creek would be possible as a result of the proposed water control structure at Lake Minnetonka. He noted that this had obvious implications as to the feasibility of the Meadowbrook project. Representatives of the Watershed District and residents of the Meadowbrook area there- upon discussed at length the number of canoes now using the area. Mr. MacClennan noted that canoe use after improvements to the creek was difficult to estimate. He noted, however, that such canoe use would have little effect on the feasibility of the Meadow- brook project in that it was largely walker- oriented. .. a 1 -5 -76 EQC Minutes, page 2 Mr. Hays questioned the method used to estimate projected usership of the proposed Meadowbrook area nature center. Mr. MacClennan responded that usership was based on comparisons with other similar facilities. Mr. Hays asked if surveys were conducted in the area to ascertain usership. Mr. MacClennan responded that no such surveys were conducted. Mr. Sheldon Rockler, 24 Circle West, asked Mr. MacClennan about the estimated cost of the proposed trails in the Meadowbrook area. Mr. MacClennan explained that the floating boardwalk is estimated to cost $25.00 per lineal foot and the cinder path less than $3.00 per lineal foot. A number of residents of the Brookside Apartments who were in attendance expressed concern about vandalism and misconduct which would occur as a result of the increased public use of the area. They also noted that the wildlife of the area would suffer as a result of the project. Mr. Kelley noted that Wood Lake in Richfield is a similar facility to that proposed for the Meadowbrook area. He noted that Wood Lake personnel report no unusual vandalism problems to surrounding properties. Mr. Hanson and other residents of the area pointed out that Wood Lake is fenced and locked at night and is staffed by full time employees. They noted that Wood Lake and the Meadowbrook area were not comparable in this regard. Mr. Kelley further noted that environmental assessments prepared for the Meadowbrook area concluded that wildlife populations would not be adversely effected. Following discussion regarding the role of the City of Edina in the decision making process for the cooperative agreements, Mr. Kelley noted that the Watershed District had been most cooperative with the City in the past. He noted that all lines of communication regarding the project had been extended and were still open. He further assured the EQC and concerned residents that the Watershed District would not undertake any project of which the City was not in full agreement. In response to a question from the audience, Mr..Kelley explained that all the cooperative projects proposed would be financed by the Watershed District's one mill levy. He noted that the costs for the projects would be assessed over the entire District and that creekside residents would not pay a higher rate. Following further discussion, Chairman Bentley asked the approximately 30 adjacent residents attending the meeting for their recommendations regarding the proposed project. It was the consensus of the residents that proposed trail and canoe facilities were totally undesirable in that their privacy would be lost, property values would decrease, and the present quality of the area would be lost. Mr. MacClennan asked permission to review the alternative trail placements in the vicinity of Circle West in that such alternatives were requested at the November EQC meeting. The EQC agreed. Mr. MacClennan thereupon explained three alternatives to trail placement in the Circle West area. He noted that the original proposal which would follow the property lines of the lots on Circle West would cost'$16,750.00. A trail alternative which would cross the small bay extending toward Circle West would cost $24,750.00. A third alternative which would run across the back of the lots on Circle West would cost $16,250.00. After discussion concerning the proposed trail placement, Chairman Bentley asked if any of the residents would use the trail if constructed. It was the consensus of the residents that they would not use the trail. 1 -5 -76 EQC Minutes, page 3 Mr. D. Johnson moved that the EQC recommend denial of the walking trail, canoe landing facilities and trail centers proposed for the Meadowbrook area on the basis of the relatively low benefits derived from such improvements and the fact that the City has already provided an excellent opportunity for a nature center in Bredesen Park. Mr. C. Johnson seconded the motion. Mr. Telfer noted that reference to Bredesen Park in the motion was not appropriate and asked that it be deleted from the motion. Mr. D. Johnson and Mr. C. Johnson agreed to such a deletion. Mr. Kelley reminded the EQC that the City had in fact requested improvements to the Meadowbrook area in the petition prepared two years earlier. He noted that the Watershed District was attempting to respond to that petition. He further noted that to date no objections had been raised to the proposed projects by the City of Edina or by its representative on the Minnehaha Creek Governing Committee. Mr. Kelley also urged the EQC to realize that the residents attending the meeting all had very special personal interests in the Meadowbrook project and were not necessarily representing the best interests of the general public. In response to Mr. Kelley, Mr. Hays reviewed the petition signed by Edina and noted that the City generally agreed to a nature center concept for the Meadowbrook area. He cautioned the Watershed District that the City's approval two years.ago did not obligate it to approve a specific plan for the area. He also noted that the motion before the EQC does not rule out other improvements to the area such as wildlife ponds, nor does it negate the general requests of the petition signed two years earlier. Chairman Bentley recalled Mr. D. Johnson's motion to recommend denial of the proposed walking trail, canoe landing facilities, and trail centers in the Meadowbrook area on the basis of the low benefits derived from such improvements. All voted aye. IV. New Business: A. Hennepin County Solid Waste Management Proposal. Mr. Hughes presented a letter from Mr. John Derus of the Hennepin County Board regarding the County's solid waste management proposal. Mr. Hughes noted that this letter as well as a hearing held in December were designed to receive input from municipalities and others regarding the County's proposal. Mr. Hughes reviewed briefly the proposed Hennepin County facility which would use solid waste to generate steam in the central business district of Minneapolis. Such steam would be sold to a variety of businesses. He also briefly reviewed the resource recovery proposals of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and Hoerner Waldorf, as well as the Citizen's League Report on solid waste management in the metropolitan area_ Mr. Hughes recommended that because of the complexity of the various resource recovery proposals, a committee comprised of members of the EQC and Recycling Commission should review the proposals in order to answer Mr. Derus' letter and to recommend an official position on the Hennepin County proposal. Mr. Hughes also presented his recommendation for the Hennepin County proposal noting that this could be used as a starting point for the committee. 1 -5 -76 EQC Minutes, page 4 A short discussion followed between the EQC and Mr. Robert Reid and Mrs. Nancy Grimsby of the Recycling Commission regarding the Hennepin County proposal. Mr. Hays and "Mr. D. Johnson volunteered to serve on a committee to study the Hennepin County proposal. Mr. Reid and Mrs. Grimsby noted that the Recycling Commission would select two members for the committee at its next meeting. V. Reports: A. Committee Reports - None. B. Watershed District Proceedings - None. VI. Other Business: - None. VII. Others Wishing to be Heard - None. VIII. Adjournment. Mr. Telfer moved adjournment of the January 5, 1976, EQC meeting. Mr. D. Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye. Meeting adjourned. GH:ln M E M O R A N D U M January 28, 1976 TO: Warren C. Hyde Mayor and Council FROM: Roger Downey SUBJECT: CITY NEWSLETTER The first issue of Edina News, the new City - School District newsletter, was mailed to all Edina residences on Monday, January 26. The issue was typeset by a private printer and then printed on the School District's press. It is officially a School District publication so that it can be mailed at non - profit organization rates. This saves about $1,000 in postage compared to the City's bulk rate permit. Printing on the School's press does not represent a major savings, and the possibility of contracting the printing for the April issue is now being explored. The costs for the January, 1976, Edina News and the January, 1975, City Newsletter are shown below. Edina News -- January, 1976 Typesetting, keylining, design of masthead ..... $ 371.00 Printing labor at Edina East ................... 319.47 Paper ........... ............................... 380.73 Ink ............. ............................... 45.00 Negatives ....... ............................... 16.80 Postage ......... ............................... 296.17 Total ... $1,429.17 City Share ... $ 714.58 City Newsletter -- January, 1975 Printing and folding .......................... $1,249.75 Postage (1st class for those mailed with ...... 1,155.50 homestead exemption forms) Postage (bulk rate for apartments) ............ 247.79 Keypunching apartments ........................ 79.10 Printing labels ............................... 25.00 Affixing labels & inserting into envelopes .... 85.00 Misc. forms and supplies ...................... 5.50 City Total... $2,847.64 h gd MEMORANDUM TO: City Council:and W. C. Hyde, City Manager FROM: Greg Luce, City Planner SUBJECT: Mandatory Planning Act Enclosed are copies of the SenaLe and House versions of the Mandatory Planning Act. This bill was discussed at the City Council meeting two weeks ago when.we discussed the Western Edina Plan. The bill is expected to pass and has the blessing of the governor. Also enclosed are several reviews by groups with which I have been working.. It is the concensus of city planners. and con- sultants that the House version is the more.desirable. My greatest concerns are that, first, the bill will place a tremendous burden on the staff. I would estimate that it would take about lk years of professional person time to prepare the documents required. Secondly, both bills require that our plans conform to the Metropolitan Council's plans. The bill also requires that.our zoning be in conformance with that plan. Thus, the Metropolitan Council winds up dictating zoning to communities. Third, the language of the bill indicates that the zoning ordinance must be in conformance with the comprehensive plan. This would mean that we would have to zone property prior to its anticipated development merely so it would conform with the plan and not necessarily in response to a developer's request, as has been our policy. The. final and most disappointing feature of the bill, to which I believe almost everyone involved in planning agrees, is that the Metropolitan Council can attain this much power as an appointed body. 11[•'l`jo -1E. f.A 15 36 40% Si.^_IC of P- lim- icso"In. OR `' �r � SESSit1I1 s " o N 4o <-:u'2 - Introduc-ed by Casse_ly and Sehreibc:r. React First Time Af r. 14, 1975 and 7:•::ferred t) tLe. Gu- amittee on Local and Urban Affairs. Coznntittce Recommendation and Adoption of Report to Pass as Apr_ 23, 1975. Read Second Time Apr. 23, 1975. 1 A bill for an act 2 relating to netropolitan land use and planning; 3 providing certain requirements and pro- .eemre: for 4 local governmental units and school districts in 5 the metropolitan area; providingi interim zoning; 6 anending Minnesota Statutes 19744 Section 462,35 , 7 by adding a subdivision) Laws 1975, Chapter 13, n Section 193 Y t 11 E r� ` 1 V 5. l I•• �.' i.r FTrj.��l='' c+Y !� T :v- J�.�:+ai'i21, UC i iG� :ri ?li :. .�;" 1NN�;i.-;.', 10 Section 1. ELEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AND PUPOSE 7 The 11 legislature finds and declares that the local governmental 12 units within the retropolitan area are highly 13 Interdependent, that the rapid growth and patterns of 14 urbanization within the area create the need for costly 15 additional state, metropolitan and local public services and 16 facilities and increased danger of air and water pollution 17 and land destruction, and that actions by and developments 18 in one local governmental unit affect residents of the 19 entire metropolitan area, Since problems of urbanization 20 and development transcend local governmental boundaries, no 21 single unit of government can adequately plan their solution 22 and there is a need for the adoption of coordinated plans, 23 programs and controls by all local governmental units and P.+wY_.N�. GYM./ •�'- Pl..wi_�_.�_�_�....Yr_M�•w. _Y•o����w►..�..��ww�_ w�I�..�.r.� 24 school districts in order to protect the health, safety zild 1 nc lo.f.0 -lE 1 Welfare of the residents of the metropolitan area and to 2 ensure coordinated, orderly and economic development. ' •"_."� +.mow + «r.� ww+... r�r�. �. �_ �.+. �.�..._�.�w- .r.� «�- .�._....�r.. �.� 3 Therefore it is the purpose .if suctions 1 to 20 to (1) 4 establish requirements and procedures to accomplish 5 comprehensive local Planning and enact land use controls 6 consistent with planned, orderly and staged development and 7 metropolitan system plans and (ii) to provide assistance to 8 local governmental units and school districts within the - '•.•'�'..— rs�...r..•...� —r —a.r —•ter ��_rr w.�_ -.— 'r••� -+_w _-- ..•mss_ �....�.r 9 metropolitar area for the preparation of Plans and official 10 controls appropriate for their areas and consistent with 11 metropolitan system plans, 12 Sec, 2. [DEFIHITIOIIS,] Subdivision 1. As used in 13 sections 1 to 20 the following terms shall have the meanings 14 .given them. 15 Subd. 2. "Advisory metropolitan land.use committee" or ��— .e.•..e......�.. .,e,.- ............ 16 "advisory committee" means an advisory committee established �. -_ ---- a=- +- •�---- .�— s.�.�..- �- -.—.,- .......ter 17 by the metropolitan council pursuant to section 3 of =ht: 18 act, —�- 19 Subd. 3. "APplicable Planning statute" means Minnesota 20 Statutes, Sections 394.21 to 394.37 for counties and 21 Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.351 to 462.364 for cities 22 and towns. 23 Subd. 4. "Capital impr.ovem;ent program" means an 24 Itemized program for five year prospective period, subject r — 25 to at least biennial review, setting forth the schedule, 26 timing, and details of specific contemplated capital 27 improvements by year, together with their estimated cost, 28 the justification for each improvement, financial sources, 29 and the impact that the improvements will have on the 30 current operating expense of the local governmental unit-or 31 school district. 32 Subd, 50 "Comprehensive plan" means the comprehensive VA EA 1530 HF'1530�1k: EA 1 plan of each local governr,lental unit described in sections 7' 2 to 11, and any amendments to the pl, 3 Subd, 6. "Fiscal devices" means the valuation of 4 property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.111, 5 the designation of urban and rural service districts, 6 pursuant to ' "innesota Statutes, Section 272.67, and the ........� ...__. r+.. w�.. �_. �. �__. a. esw��+ w. w....•.. ,�...._.++......s.r- .......... .........off . 7 establishrr-.ent of' development districts pursuant to Ninnesota a.M ___.__.. w_ �_ �Y✓. w_ w.__ s_ ..��__Mq_ +w__.w�....�__- __.-�M_ .mow. _1__w.Y.MYY 8 Statutes, Sections 472A,01 to 472A,13, and any other 9 statutes authorizing the creation of districts in which the 10 use of tax increment bonding is authorized, 11 Subd, 7, "Local governmental unit" or "unit's means all 12 cities, counties and '".towns lying in whole or in part within ...r..sw..a...- a.,_a. w......_.�.rw.....ow _...._..:.,•n.oc..s,.ar�+t. 13 the metropolitan area, 14 Subd, 8, "retropolitan system plans" means the 15 airports portion of the metropolitan development guide, and 16 the policy plans, development programs, and capital budgets � e— sewrr.�swwaa.ww..��Ya.a.ww ww..rwaaw.w.ti«.n.w..ra. 17 For metro; oiitar. waste control, transPortationr and regional �. Y /' _\ ai./ y_. �M1Rr__ wv.. �w. �NAP.WwY:�Oa/w— ..wY:a+�sv�~_wr w'�_eY•. _.nww.a H.ef'►•w QN 18 recreation open space, Subd, 9, "Official contr "ols" or "controls" means - 20 legislatively defined and enacted ordinances and regulations 21 containing policies, procedures, standards, maps, conditions 22 and other criteria which control the physical development of 23 a city, torn or county or any part thereof or any detail ... �. �. a„_ �, w..__ r. n __r_ow.•a...�.es+wa.r./+�+._oy� __rws�..a....+r._.�.w 24 - thereof and implement the general objectives of the 1, � 25 comprehensive plan, Official controls may include 26 ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision controls, site .�_ .,.._._........ter._. -... ��__�..,._.o 27 plan regulations, sanitary codes, building codes and 28 official maps,. 29 Subd, 10, "Private sewer facility" means a single lot, 30 multiple lot or other Sewage collection or treatment 31 facility owned, constructed or operated by any person other 32 than a local governmental unit or the metropolitan waste 3 15;0 t,: i'�) .iv --Lj, 1 control commission. 2 Subd. 11. "Sc:�ool district" reans any Independent or 3 special school district, as defined in Einnesoti-I Statutes, f.1 4 Section 120.021 subdivisions 14 and 15, wholly or partly 5 within the metropolitan area. 6 sec. 30 [ADVISORY COM01TTEE.] The council shall 7' estabi.ish an advisory metropol.itan land use committee 8 pursuant to Lays 1975, Chapter 13, Section 4, comprised of 9 16 officials of local governmental units, one from each 10 council district, plus a chairperson and such other members 11 as may be necessary to ensure at least one representative 12 from each metropolitan county and one from retropolitan 13 school districts. Not less than one half of the member, of w.�a._.�..i.r.....w �. �a�. a�ww. . �sw• M.. �e+. e.�...e�.m.r.e.arrnl+..we...M1n 14 the advisory committee shall be elected officials, 15 Sec. 4, (GUIDELINES,] The council, following 16 consultation with the advisory committee, shall prepare and 17 adopt guidelines and procedures relating to the requirenents 18 and provisions of sections 1 to 20 which will provide 19 assistance to local governmental units and school districts 20 in accomplishing the provisions of sections 1 to 20,- 21 Sec. 5, [METROPOLITAN bYSTEMS STATEMENT,] By July It- 22 1976, the council shall transvt to each local governmental 23 unit a metroplitan systems statement and to each school 24 district a statement comprised f the parts of metropolitan 25 systems statements affecting the school district, In the 26 preparation of the metropolitan systems statement, the 27 council shall consult with appropriate commissions, 20 officials of the unit and the advisory committee. The 29 statement shall contain information relating to the unit and 30 appropriate surrounding territory that the council 31 recommends that the unit consider in preparing its 32 comprehensive plan, includinv the following: 4 EA . 1tiA I ` Y' P u iir lJ:t1 ^fit. EA 3.`.,3 U 1 (a) The tithing, character., function, location, 2 projected capacity and conditions on use, for existing or 3 planned metropolitan public facilities, IS specified in 4 metropolitan systems plans, and for state and federal public 5. facilities to thc. extent known to the council; 6 (b) The pcoulation, employment and housing; need 7 projections which have been used by the council. as a basis ..�..r�.....r.>_Mrr r. r....... �r. .w..�____..�r'�..r....w•.�..r.w r.. _ r. ....rrw.r�.wrrr�r.a.wanwM.va.M 8 for its metropolitan syster^s clans; 9 (c) Any parts of the land use plan, public f-acilit:ies 10 plan or Implementation program Which may be excluded from 11 the plan of the local governmental unit, The exclusion of �M.�if� W�. s..' YV.MYW.a..wl..l..f...r.IN.�w'.V l.N•�— ••.raA..�../...... �.CN�__ MYT6� M.y� 12 parts shall be. based on the nature and character of existing �a+ws:.r�uw.>.rae.aw�ae. w.t_.�..e.w... �.w_..w.— rw•e..w.�..r.•c..mao. avl.i aw+> w> 13 and projected development v►lthin each local governmental 14 unit and on policies, statements and recommendations 15 contained in metropolitan system plans, .. rn.......e... ..mow.... .....r.�....,�,..._�..ow . 16 Sec. 6, [METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS STAT8HENTS; AMENDMENTS.] 17 Local gove_nnental units shall consider in their initifli 38 comprehensive plans submitted to the council, and school 19 districts shall consider in their initial capital 20 Improvement programs submitted to the council, any 21 amendments or modifications to metropolitan system plans 22 which were made by the council and transmitted prior to 23 January 1, 1977. Thereafter, within nine months after 24 receiving an amendment to a metropolitan system plan, each 25 affected local governmental unit shall review its 26 comprehensive plan and each affected school district shall 27 revie.ry its capital improvement program to determine if an 28 amendment is necessary to ensure continued conformity with 29 metropolitan system plans. If an amendment Is necessary, 30 the governmental unit or school district shall prepare the 31 amendment and submit it to the council for review pursuant Y.��..M..__���rrAw._.�r�_ ._._ YO_. iV_..._.—__.._• Y. �__. M._.�— .._�.MMw........�Aa_�i..A 32 to sections 1 to 20. J HP1530�-1E to 1 Sec, 7, (HEARINGS,] Within 45 days after receipt of . 2 its metropolitan systems statement, or parts thereof or 3 amendment thereto, any local governmental unit or school 4 district may request the council to conduct a hearing at 5 which the unit or district may present its views on the 6 information Proviaed in the statement or amendment. The 7 council shall conduct a hearinc and not later than 30 days 8 after the hearinn shall notify the unit or district of the ._... ----------- .. 30 governmental units adopted prior to the requirements of 31 sections 1 to 20 shall remain in force and effect until 32 amended, repealed or superseded by plans or controls adopted 6 '1530. 9 council's decision. 10 Sec, 8, (COMPREHENSIVE PLANS; LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 11 UNITS,] Subdivision 1. Within three years following the 12 receipt of the metropolitan systems statement, every local 13 governmental unit shall have prepared a comprehensive plan 14 in accordance with sections 1 to 20 of this act and the 15 applicable planning statute and shall have submitted the �., 16 plan to the metropolitan council for review pursuant to 17 section 13. 18 Subd, 2. Local governmental. units shall submit their i 19 proposed plans to adjacent governmental units and affected `t 20 school districts for review and comment at least six months 21 prior to submission of the plan to the council and shall 22 submit copies to then on the submission of the plan to the 23 council. 24 Subd, 3. The plans shall be submitted to the council 25 following approval by the planning commission of the unit 26 and after consideration but before final approval by the 27 governing body of the unit. _ 28 Subd 4. Comprehensive plans, capital inprovement 29 programs, sewer policy Flans and official controls of local 30 governmental units adopted prior to the requirements of 31 sections 1 to 20 shall remain in force and effect until 32 amended, repealed or superseded by plans or controls adopted 6 '1530. M 1 pursuant to sections 1 to 20. Existing comprehensive plans, .y._. w— �. i�r+. rr— rM�A .��_...+r.r.+.'.'n'.ww�w+•w..r _..�_.e r.e.�..r►wM.w 2 capital improvement programs, sevier policy plans, and ..- ....�..�►w_�. rr..�._ r.�ww�• rr� err w.�a rr.w_ w �..� r..r_......w 3 ofiicial controls may be amended as appropriate and new 4 capital improvements programs and official controls may be ' ��.. r..... r_ ��.. ww_ w�•' �► r_... ��ww.rlw— .....r.�www.�...�.w_�_ r.►r Iry �.w.. 5 prepared and adopted prior to the submission to the council w.— ...�.►.�•�_-- �...- -►�• —e�� �.._ a'r'�y— �----" w�..w.ew�.Ar.�.�w.r.►.�.- -.N.+r M 6 of comprehensive plans required by sections 1 to 20, .....�— .�._....w..._ —.rte w. �. �..r�.wA— ..r�.�..n..�./►..r..ww w.—r1.�+.wrs— orw.r —Ar A 7 Sec. 9. (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONTENT43�Subdivision 1, 8 The comprehensive plan shall be a statemcnt in words, maps, 9 illustrations, or other forms setting forth objectives, 10 policies, standards. and programs to guide public and private .r.e.�.......... --+-- - -- —�. ... a.. r. o.... w_.... a..._ .�..r.r....rr....�...o�w..+.,.r 11 land use, development, redevelopment and preservation for wr...... —.�..�.�.r —� r+.._.r.....r r— .�..r..+r�...arw ar rr �. a •�.. r oe r... +— n. aa.�._a.n 12 all lands and graters within the jurisdiction of the local 13 governmental unit through 1990 or through any year 14 thereafter which is evenly divisible by five, Each plan ..A.��sw— .••�•! �...ru.rwrw.r..r..r.�►.awa row.w..r..w..arer� 15 shall specify expected industrial and commercial 16 development, planned population distribution and local e.... w+..+..ww�.— s+�►.w ws�w ww.w. �.w�._ ••►ws..r..rsssor.. a...mw.•. r.ur.vua.w �s 17 public facility capacities upon which the plan is based, 18 Each plan shall co.ztai.n a discussion of the ue.^ J. %..J z w�... r.......-e w....— r.s�..rv.�..aw...m....r.e�.u•.w rs�. w. n•. y., ,- ..r...r.,�.«r.........�.....n .r.. �. 19 public facilities specified in the metropolitan .systen 20 statement and of the effect of the plan on adjacent local r..s+ast+r.m— +.rr.s.Aw.+rVT ►or �rtd.uw.aw i.w:�.s+.Ae 21 governmental units and affected school districts, Exi,st±ng N or. rrwwwvr. r.+ r... i. r.....ra.�•om....�.rw�.�n..r.►w w.� 22 plans and official controls may be used in whole or in part 23 following modification, as necessary, to satisfy the 24 requirements of sections 1 to 20, The comprehensive plan 25 may contain all additional matter which may be included in a wee. �. �. w_ �... w.. ......+,.w_.�.w.�...._...r....s r..a�._. _....+...+..wr.. e...w..w��.s..........- -w. +vo 26 comprehensive plan of the local governmental unit pursuant w r+....._......r_ .r ..w �.....w�..w.... r w.r �w..r.r _... — w....... r r......�... r » r.r.,..e... w .. w.a rrr. 27 to the applicable planning statute, 28 Subd. 2. [LAND USE PLAT.',} A land use flan shall 29 designate the existing and proposed location• intensity and 30 extent of use of land and water for agricultural, 31 residential, commercial, industrial and other public and 32 private purposes, or any combination of such purposes. A 7 EA IS30 *1:530•iE 1 land use plan shall also contain a protection e).c_r-PlIte as 2 appropriate, for historic sites and the matters listed in 3 burrs 1975, Chapter 13, Section 28, 4 Suhd. 3. [PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAN) Ablir facilities 5 plan shy all— describe the character, location, timing, 6 sequence, function, use and capacity of existing and future publiC facilities of the local governmental unit. A Put)lic e..... ...w..... 8 facilities plan must be in at least such detail as may be 9, necessary to establish existing or potential ife —t —on or . 10 departures from r. ,.etropolitan— systeMs plans. and Pr°tect. 11 metropolitan systems plans. A Public facilities plan shall 12 contain at least the following parts: 13 (a) A transportation plan describiriq, designing and ..............� 14 scheduling the location, extter,tr function and capacity Of 15 existing anti - proposed -local public and private 16 transportation services and facilities; S �5) A cotaprehensive . sever plan descri ?ping _ de sinn,atinV is and scheduling the areas to bb-- ieewer— e� by the public yst. temp, 19 the existing and planned capacities of the public syptFm�, 20 the standards an conditions under which the installation of 21 private sever systems will be permitted, and to the extent $2 practicable the not sulLable for public or Private 23 systems because of public heealth# safety and welfare 24 eonsiderationsi 25 (c) A parks and'open space plan .describing, designating 26 and scheduling the existing and proposed parks and 27 recreation open spaces within the jurisdiction. 28 Subd. 4. [IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM.) An implementation 29 program shall describe public prograns, fiscal devices and 30 other specific actions to be undertaken in stated sequence 31 to implement the comprehensive plan and ensure — conformity 32• with retropolit:sn systems plans. An inple;l cnt��tio:� program ..._rte -.- _.... —. ..._- ._�_.____--- ------ ------ 8 �3 S I must he in at least such detail as ray be necessary to 2 establish existing or potential effects on or departures 3 from tr.ietropolitan systems plans and to protect r:etrovolitan 4 syE „tems plans, An implementation orograrr shall contain at ..____._.. __.�_...--- r..._--- .....w...,__ _._.- _- �_._._..,�.._.....�.. 5 least the following parts; 6 (a) A description of official controls, addressing at 1..w...- �- ...I�w_.r.��__— .• w.•. �. �1wIlY� .w.►..__.wrM�/•�._!_�....M.I_e _N...O.w..e+r...�. 7 least the matters of zoning, subdivision, and private sewer 8 systems, and a schedule for the preparation, adoption, and 9 administration of such controls. 10 (b) A capital i;nprovements program for transportation, ...w_.-a.i. M.— _�.r_- •-- o__.�.Iw�V.T.”. �— _ __�.rMrMU_.O_ -. .ra- �� -_ 11 Sewer`,, parks and open space facilities. _r 12 Subd. 5. [URBAr%IZ..�T-.�1.ON AREA5 j The comprehensive plans 13 shall designate, when appropriate, five year urbanization 14 areas and shall specify in the capital - improvements program, 15 the timing and sequence of major local public facilities and p.Yw— _��_�o.— _. +s_•ws._ rr..��4s.�— ...._.�....•w.-r �.o_r. w.+.•-wn�- ..ro•�v. —.w wn �.wu ww....+..I! 16 in the implementation program official controls which will 17 e=ulr hat urbanization occurs only in urbanization areas �.... - .�..., _.....__...... M............_,._...�_... r. - — ..- ....M�..... 18 and in accordance With the plan, 19 Sec. 10. (CITIES,) Except as provided in the 20 netropolitan systems statement, comprehensive plans of . was-_ o�w.. �o.-_/.. s�. r�.._ � .V....�.._�Y...�a_•..a.er.+.-_r r.�.s.— r.�rr..w0/lY�- -IN-MA 21 cities shall include the matters specified in section 8, Yw-._ wr_�.�._....._w Mrs— r.�._�a_ �.-.u..w +P.'.. os_- -..�...�• -. �.�orwr.�_r�.•w.ww_.�a...� 22 Sec. 11. (TOWNS J Subdivision 1. Except as provided 23 in the netropolitan systems statement, comprehensive plans 24 of to ens shall incluc;e the mtiti ens specified in section 8. 25 subd. 2. Ey April It 1;76, each town within the 26 counties of Ano�-a, Carver, DrYota, Scott and 'r'ashingtor., 27 authorized to plan under r innesota Statutes 1974, Sections 28 462.351 to 462.354, or under special law, snail by 29 resolution deterr•ine -whether it v-i11 preoare the �._ .r -------- - - - - -- 30 comprehensive nian for its jurisliction. Each such -to4'n 31 also - shall - snecifY, nursuuant..to agrec;cent - iththe _+ - county 32 itt,in- w:�icEj wit is si t:iw►ted +wany parts _of -Its rl inyancl 9 1 official controls, if any, the nreparation of which it 2 delegates to the county. 3 Subd. 3. Towns within counties Vrhich have adopted 4 comprehensive plans applicable to the town shall, to the .. .._._.�___.__.._......._...._._ ..._ ..._..�r___.r...�...�_ e J/ i 5 maximum extent, use county preparation of their Pr•w— a..._r..ra. _as�._r�.a..�a.ww.w.waw..ar r— rw— r +_s�.aaa.wrew 6 comprehensive plans. Sec. 12. tCOUVTIES.3 Subdivision 1, Comprehensive J .y 6 plans of counties shall contain at least the following; 9 (a) Except for the counties of Hennepin and Ramsey, a 10 land use as specified in section 8, subdivision 2, for 11 all unincorporated territory within the county; - 12 (b) A public facilities plan which shall include all 13 appropriate matters specified ir, section 61. subdivision 3, 14 including a transportation plan, and a description of i+wo.awww_+rw w—a.ra+'wr��. aver. rw.ara+_f+.w_.am�wa..r— awwwa�a. c.w... —w.N 15 existing, and projected solid waste disposal sites and - . �.. wm. e._. arwrraw. wa. c�+. _..r.+m..e..a.wcarsv.+�swra.r.a ..n.nw.orMs 16 facilities; 17 (c) An implementation program, as specified.in_ section 16 B, subdivision 4. , �.o.a.ra araawwa.s.y++..►o.ao++� 19 Subd._ 2. Each county other than Hennepin and Ramsey 20 shall prepare, with the participation and assistance of the 21 town, the comprehensive play. for any town within the county _M- �_Mar�M_- ww.r�soo.P - a.e-- asriw� 22 Which fails by April 1. 1976 to take action by resolution 23 pursuant to section 10, subdivision 2 and shall prepare all 24 or part of any Flan delegated to it pursuant to section 10, 25 subdivision 2. r� 26 Subd, 3. Each county other than Hennepin and Pamsey 27 shall prepare, with the participation and assistance of the 28 town, the comprehensive plan for each town within the county 29 not autherized to plan under Minnesota Statutes 1974, 30 Sections 462.351 to 462.364, or under special la, 1 Sec. 13. (SCHOOL DISTRIC:Si CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ti 32 PROGRAMS,3 Subdivision 1, By January It 1979, each school '� 10 1 1 1 • J J l -� 1. I ft _ S(. 1 district as defined in section 2, subdivision 11r shall 2 prepare and submit to the metropolitan councilr for revievt 3 pursuant to section 13, a capital improvements program, 4 which shall include a description of existing facilities, 5 projected population and facility needs and objectives, •.�...r.w�.r_.0 o.,.r_ r. r-..-_ wo.... �� .-...ew+a__�....�wro.....e�.sr. r.a....w -._rw 6 proposed new school sites, buildings, and building additions 7 with a cost of T.Iere than. $200,000 and the effect of the 8 program on adjacent school districts and affected local 9 governmental units. 10 Subd, 2, Each school district shall submit its capital 11 improvement pl -ogram for review and comment to the local, 12 Qovernnental units Lying in Vhole or in part within the 13 district at least nine months prior to the submission of the .. r. v...... � ..,.- .�....r.�.�.- �...�.�.....- ..try..... =.r.e...��. -.... an.....+...� 14 program to the council. The local governmental units shall 15 review the program and provide comments to the school 16 districts and the council within 90'days on the 17 compatibility of the progran with the proposed co: +iprehensive �.... �. s..... e... e.-.. a.. ��.. r.. �+ r,.-..... as�u. c.... .r..r..m_e.�...........��+�nwo• .a.+.,�.e «y 18 flan of tl:e local governmental unit, ...__.,._...,_a... _�.d._._.- .._,..__............. 19 Subd, 3, The capital improvement progrems'shall be 20 submitted to the council after consideration but before 21 final approval by the governing body of the district, 22 Subd, 4. Capital improvement programs of school 23 districts adopted prior to the requirements of sections 1 to 24 20 shall remain in force and effect until amended, repealed, 25 or superseded by programs adopted pursuant to section 1 to 26 20, Existing programs may bp amended as appropriate and now 27 Programs prerared and adopted prior to the submission to the 28 council of progrars required by sections 1 to 20, Existing 29 Programs may be used in whole nr in cart following 30 modification, as necessary, to satisfy the requirements of + 31 sections 1 to 20, 32 Sec, 14, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, Section 19, is amended 11 1 to read: 2 Sec. 19. [473.1751 [COUNCIL REVIEWI COMPREHENSIVE: 3 PLANS; SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGP -M1S. ] -- E"ti -i 4 L' t�7^ �tr�7iiT-• �tZt3-- CCitttt:.` g'— t�x�c- -oY'— �etY'i'— O�•--+ +}iYf-�i3 --- sir-- +3�`or`i"r�'r— Sc-?1ft 5 rabr,'i+ -+m �r�-s ��"�.�f +�- ?- #�- ��•�- ee�z:�r �- 6 �v�- �rtt- ��rt- eo�rti:°•- a�tdr- r- Ac3�r3•a'*_- �s-i3�,:�eair -ft,- -Pori i d�1tJs' ti'° T�'" �af1P' Y�itCl Tfrd•' e�i�i'l �p-- 3,; i' rC�' i4e3� -Pl- ';r>t��— i'tf?- ''1A +t`�9 8 16e-} 9a-'Chs- ccrttt�c- f�•- c- ?�--�# 10tR!i"� 3? t31' I�C�"' ��t2�•`° �Ce3" f�` O: fR�ti'— Hftir- 1�-- {sE- ¢trcr'•- �tfitf?i• 11 ap�ovQr- �ti �- ��r�-- fa����tt- E�dy- o�- �i�ra- e�E- ��?-- 4.�e��- e�- ��.�r•�fi-�ry.,. 12 13 Subdivision 1. —14 The council shall review the com..prehensive plans of cities, /15 counties and towns, erepared and submitted pursuant to 16 sections 1 to 20 of this act, to determine their 17 compatibility :•'ith each other and conformity ith ........__.._.,...... �.. .._._r...�.............- ......� �_ .- -..... 30 Lropolitan system plans,.i The council ray review and �..rl M..mrr�r_ .b..M....Ye .. r. .GS�.�oww- �.ys.s-- �qr- •+rrO�t.M 19 comment on the apparent consistency of the plans with other \.20 adopted ehan>tsx,,s of the metropolitan development guide. To 21 ensure conformitylwith metropolitan systems plans, the 22 council may require the modification of any plan or part 23 thereof which may have a substantial impact on or contain a 24 substantial denarture from taetr.onolitan systems plans. 25 Subd. 2. The council shall review the capital 26 ir„prove:*ent programs of school districts prepared and 27 submitted pursuant to this act to determine their 26 compatibility with each other and with the co.mprehensi.ve 29 plans of affected local governrt-ental units and to determine 30 their conformity with metropolitan systems plans. The 31 council may review and comment on the apparent consistency 32' 'of the programs wit1- other--- adop of the 12 E i metropolitan development guide. To ensUre confornilty ti;i41i 2 metropolitan systems plans, the council may rectaire the 3 modification of any program or part thereof ^v ch may h, a 4 substantial impact on or contain a substallt-ial d-crz-rtur.e ..�._._- --------------------- --°- �--�--- ----- 5 from metropolitan systens plans. Within 90 days following receipt of a , •� �` �_ 7 comprehensive pl,-:r, of a local governrr,ental urit, capital 6 improvement program of a school district or amendment 9 thereto, prepared in accordance with sections 1 to 20 of 10 this actr the council shall return a statement containiticl 11 its comments and required modifications to the local 12 governmental unit or school district Any reodiffc`tiOIIS 13 required shall be by resolution of the council, cortaEnq.rg �f r. a.. nwu. s�/ a. �— r- .i.ww.r.r�.owr...e.��wnwrww �ss..e•..�'��ssrrwr.�..r.se w.sr�s+rxw...syv 14 findings of fact and final order. 15 action shall be -taken by any local governmental unit or 16 school district to place any such comprehensive plan , 17 capital improvement program or part thereof into effect 19 t°tr's:st~rc'� the council has returned the statement to the unit 20 or district and until the unit or district has incorporatc!! 21 the required modifications in the plan or progran o 22 Promptly after subnission, the council shall notify each 23 cityr town, countyr or special district which may be 24 affected by the plans or programs submitted, of the general ....rte_ 25 nature of the- -,--}cft plans or programs , the date of 26 submission, and the identity of the subMitting unit or 27 district Political subdivisions contiguous to or within 2E the submittinu unit or district snail be notified in all 29 cases. Within 30 days after receipt of such notice any 30 governmental unit or district so notified or the local 31 governmental. unit or district submittinc; the plan or program 32 may request the council to conduct a hearing at which the 13 1 1 submitting unit or district and any other goverririental unit 2 or subdivision may present its views, The council may 3 attempt to mediate and resolve differences of opinion which 4 exist among the participants in the hearing with respect to ' 5 the plans or programs submitted. If within 90 days the 6 council fails to complete its written- esi��r-s i g ir,,•eminti -orgy statement the plans or prorlrar"s shall be ......�..._...M...._ ......_.�.-- �__..�. 8 deemed approved and may-be placed into effect, 9 �.- rri�T� to- 8- p��r�-- so�ett' re• rr�-- t�-- t- c�- F- e��•i•-- rc�,�xrf 10 �,ra�- �e- stzb�+f�t- aci -�-o -- aria-- ae�e�- trpea�-- �a�-- c���o�:- €r-- -t•�:� ,�, i 1 � e-i $"me •'erg- +ero� �a�-p een ; - The written•- c-Othnertt w-e-nd 12 statement of the council shall be filed 13 with the plan of the local goVernment unit or the Program of • .,�er.r..aaw_�.sr..r..aa�.Y�r 14 the school district at all places where the plan or procira:n 15 is required by last to be kept on file, 16 Subd. 4, Any major alterations to the comprehensive 17 plan of a local governmental unit or the capital improvement 18 program of a school district# and any ar°,endments to such a 19 plan or program which may have a substantial impact on or 20 contain a substantial departure from the metropolitan 21 systems plans, shall be submitted to and acted upon by the Mimeo N.Y.�a__Ylr w —r• li�....�1�'s �rrl. �.�a°r�o..• r_..Wr�re >•.4 22 council in the sane manner as the original plan or program, pAM�./ N•M_r+�/_M.ow_rreM��_eY.�N.�'�_ .._�srraiMRwasa+�if. 23 Subd, 5. If a local governmental unit fails to adopt a 24 comprehensive plan or if a school district fails to adopt a 25 capital improvements program in accordance with sections 1 26 to 20 of this act or if the council after a public hearing 27 by resolution finds that a plan or program substantially 28 departs from metropolitan system plans and the local 29 governmental unit or school district does not adopt a plan 30 or prograr with required modifications within a reasonable _wr_r�.rrrrY.r_rA_a•_r __.�r�..+�._Y.+r.Y..�r_�_�__ __•.. 31 time, the coltrcil may commence civil proceedings to enforce 32 the provisions of sections 1 to 20 of this act by 14' 1 appropriate legal action in the district court where the 2 local governmental unit or school district is located, 3 Sec. 15. (PLANS AND PROGRAI;S; ADOPTION; A1:ENDMENT J 4 Subdivision 1. Each local governmental unit shall adoPtl its 5 comprehensive plan and each school district shall adopt its 6 capital improvements program with required modifications r.. �.. .a.�_._..........._- ....._...._ �...��..._w... wow. �. r. r. �. ..�.�..........�...�_........w. 7 Within a reasonable time following receipt of the council.is S 'statement under Section 13, 9 Subd. 2, Any major alterations to the comprehensive 10 plan of a local governmental unit or the capital improvement: .......__.w.+.+.... w....... srM+__._.++ �_...+ mr+-...... �. �. wr.. r. �. . e.. �. w. �w�r•_....�.�.rw.�.a,...�.�..+o 11 program of a school district, and any. amendments to such a 12 plan or program which may have a substantial impact or, or P�• m.. �...__.. fT. �... �_M._s_��......ewr..w..w.r..w.. _ra_ W.`.._.�..... r.r......._�._..r.+.....h 13 contain a substantial departure fron the metropolitan 14 systeris plans, shall be prepared, submitted and adopted in 15 the sane manner as the original plan of program, 16 Sec, 16. (IMPLEMENTATION F-PLA ,Subdivision 1, 17 Each local governmental Y1111t shall adopt official. ` ontro s: 16 as describ-d in Its a Cluj) t-F- Ld— c- ou:, ;Isivt Plan hall 19 submit copies of the official controls to the.council within 20 30 days following adoption thereof, for information purposes 21 only, After notification of the council, a local 22 governmental Unit may adopt official controls or fiscal 23 devices or parts thereof in anticipation of amendment to its 24 comprehensive plan within a reasonable time if the controls 25 or devices are necessary to avoid, undue. hardship. 26 Subd 2. No. local governn►ental unit sha1.1 adopt 27 official controls or fiscal devices or parts thereof that 26 �germit activity in conflict with metropol'i-lan sy'ster,s plans. 2:9 Subd, 3. Tf an official control conflicts with a 30 comprehensive *plan as the result of an Amendment to the 31 plan, the official control shall be amended by the unit 32 within a reasonable time following the amencirmer.t to the plan 15 I so as not to conflict with tt�e amended cor!prehensive plan. 2 Sec. 17. [PLANNING ASSISTANCE:; GRANTS; LOANS.] 3 Subditi'is on 1. The council shall. prepare ane, Pro'.:�ice 4- advisory materials, model plan provisions and official .. fr.__r,�� . o.._. �s.._ w. a_.e w. rw.....+- w....e.....r,.•. -...f wrr ...�._..�ws..__r..rs.«�.....� 5 controls, and on the request of a local governmental unit or 6 sehoul distl•ict may provide assistance, to accompli-.;ii ►t:� 7 purLor_es of sections 1 to 20. 4 a Subd. 2. (GRANTS; LOANS,] Following consultation vdth 9 and recommendation from the advisory committee, the council 30 shall adopt uniform procedures for the awards disbursement 11 and repayment-of grants and loans, The uniform procedures 12 shall include provisions for participation by the advisory 13 co.nmittee' in the review of applications for grants and 14 loans, and for ensuring satisfactory and timely completion 15 of projects, services or activities for which grants are 16 awarded. Applications for grants and loans shall be 17 submitted to the council describing the activities for which �. w... w. �+ sr. ..+....r�aw...r...m._r..rw.�._. wwe+ r. �. aw.• w.�.••ews +...vree.r��wv��w..s. +w�e+.e iQ y=ar►t vs. Ivan funds will be used; the person` which the 19 grantee or borrower plans to use Jr; performing the grant .tea w..�s�.a spa_.._+ �.sr..rv__.u.....�_y_w�.•.r__�+ "�°^'o 20 contract; services and activities which will be paid for by 21° funds of the grantee or borrower; the grantee or borrower's 22 need and ability to pay for the contract services; and other 23 information as the council may reasonably request. Grants 24 and loans shall be made subject to contracts between the 25 council and the recipient specifying the use and 26 disbursement of the funds and, for loans, the terms and 27 conditions of repayment, and other appropriate matters. In 28 m4king.grants and loans, the council shall base its 29 decisions on the recipient's demonstrated need and available 30 financial resources. 032 Subd. 3. [GRANTS,] Grants shall not exceed 75 percent of the total costs and expenses of the project, service or J. 1 16 >i i r J� ��1 I activity for which a grant is awarded. _ rw... M•• n. r. u• r.— .+w...�•N✓_w_w..Jw.w•.r.i�Mw.. w._s✓w...•4 2 Subd. 4. (I,0104S.1 Loans made by the coun;:il slia! 1 be 3 payable on such terms and conditions as the council. 4 determines appropriate, provided that no loan shall carry an 5 interest rate nor be for a term in excess of five Years. 6 Funds received in payment of loans shall be used for 7 additional loans or grants under this section. �.i...w...w..e.�.. way. r.r..w....+�.sswr.•.r.��.r..�+. �..._.ws +.wr..w.rw...•r w► 8 Sec, 18. [EXTEIISION.3 A local governmental unit or 9 school district may by resolution request that the council 10 extend the time for fulfilling, the requirements of sections 11 1 to 20. A request for extension shall be accompanied by a 12- description of tine activities previously undertaken by a .....,�v.�.! —. Ww. w_._ a1.- c_ w./ r• �'• �•• �w... �_ Mr .Ow.M__lw�Y)O.._ /OW..Y,�V.�M.. �•YeMN� 13 local cgoVernmentai unit or school district in fuli-1.11rlent O p�wyr+.s.n�r�.rm..P•wvem..• +• rwrarv�..�+oa...w�m.v.�m<: ty w 14 the requirements of sections 1 to 201 and an explanat;yar, Of 15 the reasons necessitating and justifying the re ucst, Upon 16 a finding of exceptional circumstances or undue hardship, ins. .aJfr.a•.v/�'+�a..nr..Y.ro...F. •..rr...�....MM r.rr+��"'.fsMr. -r seriw.•®.a..i4Mlr M......�s.s.nrwrl'4 17 the council mat *, in its discretion, grant: by resolvti.cn Y+r'.'..'YO..rwr...OLV.'�.e ...rWr.OMbr.w •...r:..m....p.�.•a.1. @.I/WM../'4••�.+...rA ar...b....u� f..ti�M..Ma.1..••_.Y'Y.a..C1 18 request for extension and may attach reesona!:le rcquiremcnrt ..gm.sp�w._Me.. _. �.y� >ae.�....n./w_�. IIr �.:..�d.Y � •..Y.•'1.V.+...n.ti.a.I•.�4.. r... -N w,r! 19 or conditions to the extension, 20 sec,-19, (JUDICIAL REYIEWJ Any local gavernme�atal. 21 unit, scilool district or a.ther person aggi l.eved by a fin&], IWO�..�...Oi per. rig- M_ rr. oa... �� •vv...�...wY.YM�Mf�.�N>...r�.t Mr.t�V..�we..a.i..wvR J 22 council order pursuant to section 13 may appeal the council 23 order pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 15,0424, 24 15.0425 and 15,042E for contested cases, The council, unite 25 district or other person aggrieved by a final order or 26 judgment rendered on appeal to the district court ray APP- ? 27 therefrom to the supreme court in the rianner provided in 28 civil actions. 29 Sec, 20, Minnesota Statutes 1974, Section 462.355, is 30 amended by adding a subdivision to read; 31 Subd. 4. [IM.Rltt C-I'.PINANCF.3 If a municipality is 32 conducting or in good faith intends to conduct studies 17 1 within a reasonable time or has held ors scheduled -M hearing for the purpose of considerin(i 6601) :fib" u► 2 ...._.._.____,..- - -- .._.__��_....�..�....._... -. 3 of a comPvcnensive plan oR official controls�'�s defined !r; t, section 2 of this act or if new ter f -�'..- h plans. ._o. .. 5 controls have not been adolited is annexed to -a municiPellitYr, f• the governing body of the Municipality may apt an it:ter_,m .., - ordinance aprlir.able to all er part of its jurisdiction or ..._.._.�...�_._...�_- .w_„_.w _.w ,......�. 8 the purpose of protecting the planning process and the °"'°""_""` "`•r The interim 9 health, safety and welfare o s citizens, ..wr- 10 ordinance may regulate• restrict or Prohibit _an� y use or :ent within the jurisdiction for a period not to exceed ore year fro*► the date it is crejited, e,nd :aay�bbe 12 -- 13 r'eno eel for one addition nal yea.r, y P!• o -,� This act applies to the counties of AnoY -af 1 it Sec 21 the _..."'°- °r...'°.a.ouo.M Ramsey, Scott and Washington, i5 Carver, Da} :ota, ilenliepin, ._........,.�. 16 Sec„ 22o iEFF'k:CiIVE DATE ']act is�effective on 1! tb` day fo1loving its final enactments 16 I<-- Y 3 i SF1653 -1F Introduced b% Chcnowc th, for the Comri,ittee on Metropotit-,1 and Urban Affairs April 19'rh, 1975 Ref. To Co..,. on LAID OVER ONE DAY Reproduced by PHILLtP5 LEGISLATIVE SERVICE S.F. No. 1653 Companion H.F. Ref. to H. Cosy. KS 1653 vL Mr. Chenoweth, for the Committee on Metropolitan and Urban Affairs, introduced: S. F. No. 1653: 1 A bill for an act 2 relating to land planning in the metropolitan 3 area; requiring local adoption of minimum plans 4 and controls; providing for limited council review 5 and acceptance prior to the adoption of such Pla::s 6 and controls; providing for an advisory 7 metropolitan land planning conrlittee; providing 8 for the enforcement of adopted local plans and 9 controls; including certain expenses in the 10 definition of special levy; providing for interim 11 zoning; amending Minnesota Statutes 1974, Section 12 462,355, by adding a subdivision; and Laws 1975, 13 Chapter 13, Section 19, and by adding sections. 14 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: 15 Section 1. ELEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.] The 16 legislature finds and declares that the local governmental 17 units within the metropolitan area are interdependent, that 18 the growth and patterns of urbanization within the area ��I— YY— .�Ya..�IMYM�. �_ ��. � .�__A.�— +.��_�A.�i�sw�wO.�.��.Y MaRY1 -_Y•Y 19 create the need for additional state, metropolitan and local 20 public services and facilities and increase the danger of 21 air and water pollution, and that deve-lopments in one local 22 governmental unit may have an impact on the provision of 23 regional capital improvements for se*.-ers, transportation, 24 airports and regional recreation open space. Since problems 25 of urbanization and development transcend local governmental 26 boundaries, there is a need for the adoption of coordinated 27 plans, programs and controls by all local governmental units Jr 1O n e 1 and school districts in order to protect the healthy safety 2 and welfare of the residents of the metropolitan area and to 3 ensure ccordinated, orderly and economic developments 4 Therefore, it is the purpose of sections 1 to 17 of this act 5 to (1) establish requirements and oroced�jr- es -_60 accomplish 6 comrrehensive local plannin^, with lanai use controls . 7 consistent with planned, orderly and staged development and 8 the metropolitan system plans., and (2) to provide assistance 9 to local governmental units and school districts within the 10 metropolitan area for the preparation of plans and off! ,-ial 11 controls appropriate for their areas and consistent w'th 12 metropolitan system plans. 13 Sec. 2. Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 14 section to reads 15 Sec, 144x. (473.9013 [DEFINITIONS.] Subdivision 1. As 16 Uaed ill 5eet 101-,5 1 to 17 0 th2La a t/ the foJI,1 n,— grams 17 shall have the meanings given them. 18 Subd. 2s "Advisory metropolitan land use cormitteell er 19 "advisory com;nitteel' means an advisory committee established 20 by the metropolitan council pursuant to section 3 of this 21 act, ` 22 Subd. 3, "Applicable planning statute" means Minnesota 23 Statutes, Sections 394.21 to 394.37 for counties and 24 Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.351 to 462.354 for cities 25 and towns. 26 Subd. 4. "Capital improvement program" means an 27 itemized program for a five year prospective period, subject 28 to at least biennial review, setting forth the schedule, 29 timing, and details of specific contemplated capital 30 improvements by year, together with their estiTated cost, 31 the reed for each i-arovement, financial sources, and the 32 inPact that the improvements will have on the current ._.w.�___..._�..----- - ------ 2 SF1653 -1F KS 1653 1 operating expense of the local governmental unit or school 2 .district. 3 Subd. 5. "Comprehensive plan" means the comprehensive r_ www.wwwe_ww�_r�rw��w— .�_.r�rwa_ w_.�_wr w 4 plan of each local governmental unit described in sections 6 5 and 7 of this act. 6 Subd. 6. "Local governmental unite or "unite means all 7 cities, counties and towns lying in whole or in part within 8 the metropolitan area, but does not include school 9 districts, 10 Subd, 7, t'School district" has the meaning given it by 11 Minnesota Statutes, Section 120.02, Subdivisions 14 and 15, w ws._r r__w_�. w� wwr wwwww- -Ywr_o 12 ad includes any independent or special school district 13 wholly or partly within the metropolitan area, 14 Subd, B. 11,Metropolitan system plans''-means the 15 airports portion of the metropolitan development guide, and 16 the policy plans, development programs and capital budgets —_— r... r... r�. �. r+_ w.. sw_ ww_ ��w� +ww�.www__.n�•.w�__w�._..w.ww —w srwwy 17 for metropolitan waste control, transportation, and regional 18 recreation open space, 19 Subd. 9. "Official controls" or "controls" means 20 ordinances and regulations which control the physical 21 development of a city, town or any part thereof or any 22 detail thereof and implement the general objectives of the 23 comprehensive plan, Official controls may include 24 ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision controls, site 25 plan regulations, sanitary codes, building codes and 26 official maps. 27 - Subd, 10, "Private sewer facility" means a single lot, 28 multiple lot or other sewage collection or treatment 29 facility owned, constructed or.operated by any person other 30 than a local governmental unit or the metropolitan waste 31 control commission, _ w�w YYi 32 Subd. 11. "Fiscal devices" means the vnluatior, of r_ rr —__w w�.._ _wwsw_.r. wl�ww.� Y�..�w AMr.��►_ _w _r_ww wrw i 1 property pursuant_ to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.111► 2 the designation of urhan and rural -service districts► 3 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes► Section 272.67, and the 4 establishment of development districts pursuant to Minnesota 5 Statutes, Sections 472A.01 to 472A.13 and any other statutes 6 authorizing the creation of districts in which the use of 7 tax increment bonding is authorized. 8 Sec. 3, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 9 section to read; 10 Sec. 14413. [47399033 [ADVISORY COMMITTEE.] The council it may establish an advisory metropolitan land use committee 12 pursuant to section 41 comprised of 16 officials of local 13 governmental units, one from each council district, and as 14 many additional members as are necessary to provide 15 representation from each metropolitan county, plus a 16 chairman. 17 Sec. 4, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 18 section to read; 19 Sec. 1440. [473.9043 [GUIDELINES.3 The council shall 20 prepare and adopt guidelines and procedures relating to the 21 requirements and provisions of sections 1 to 17 of this act 22 which will provide assistance to local governmental units 23 and school districts in accomplishinq the provisions of 24 sections 1 to 17 of this act... 25 Sec. 5. Laas 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 26 section to read; 27 Sec. 144D. [473.9063 (METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS STATEMENT.) 28 Subdivision 1. By April 1, 1976, the council shall transmit 29 to each local governmental unit a metropolitan systems 30 statement In the preparation of metropolitan systems 31 statements, the council shall consult with appropriate 32 commissions and officials of the unit. The staterent shall 4 Y • SF1653 -LE: KS 1�5 1 contain information relating to the unit and appropriate 2 surrounding territory that the council determines necessary . Pw_l— w— ww••� —P�• 3 for the unit to consider in preparing its comprehensive 4 Plan, including the follohinas 5 (a) The timing, character, function, location, 6 projected capacity and conditions on use as appropriate,, for 7 existing or planned public facilities specified in 8 metropolitan system plans, including at least interceptor ^ -P POPS.._-- .»- +- _a...w �- ---- -- - - -•_•_ •~• ____ -.M, PM PP -1.... g sewers, highways, transit systems, airports, and regional 10. recreation open space; 11 Information shall also be specified for state and. 12 federal public facilities to the extent known to the 13 council; ��PPy 14 (b) Population, employment and housing need projections '-- °--------- - -r--- ..._.per.....— _w.w,_.oe.— w�PrP —•-v 15 which have.been used by the council as a basis for its 16 metropolitan systems plans. R.- O-- ONw- Pw- -Pi PPS/ - -P -IMP -P 17 Subd. 2. Any local governmental unit may, within 45 18 days after receipt of its metropolitan system statement, 19 request the council to conduct a hearing at which the unit w�.�rP— awn�.�w—s�.wr.a— _a - -.�• �— ��.— �—� +mr vr.rP�•w�w�• 20 may present its views on the information provided in the 21 statement. Not later than 30 days after the hearing, the r- M- P- w_ - -PP-- 22 council shall notify the unit of any changes in the 23 metropolitan systems statement, 24 Sec._6, Laws 19751 Chapter '13, is amended by adding a 25 section to read: '�. 26 •i 27 28 29 Sec. 144E. [473,9087 [COMPREHENSIVE PLANS; LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL UNITS.] Subdivision 1, Within three years following the recei ^t of the metropolitan systems statement, every local governmental unit shall have prepared a 30 comprehensive plan in accordance with sections 1 to 17(0f 31 this act and the applicable planning statute and shall have —r —wr w_ - - -w r_ .�.�n.�.r�r�.�•���•�w.r �.�. w..�...�r_— .mow— _rw ------- — 32 submitted the plan to the metropolitan council—for— review 1 pursuant to section 9 of this act. The provisions of 2 sections 1 to 17.0f this act shall supersede the provisions Nrr rrarr_r ��r —/� r�rrw�r �� _��r� —rr -- r•��r Nrr_ —r —r— wr•i�� r 3 of the applicable planning statute rherever a conflict may 4 exist, 5 Subd, 2, Local governmental units shall submit their 6 proposed comprehensive' plans to adjacent governmental units MYr/�-- r�r— �r���w�fY�� —r YrirMarr— rY��rr— w 7 and affected school districts for review and comment at 8 least six months prior to submission of the plan to the 9 council, 10 Subd. 3, The comprehensive plans shall be submitted to P —r��o r_ r —�_ w_ —ate —w �Mwwr wr_M rMr— r--- r—r—sw wwa� —�rww 11 the council followina approval by the planning cormission of l fry— wl �— r�l— rrrr l�r— Y— w��wr�w•A�rs/�O�rrrr —w— /fir-- _r�r�� r 12 the unit? if anyp and after consideration but before final • rw.rrrr rrr —r _raw - -..� �.-- r�..w.�r wyr-- r— rvw+u� +w 13 approval by the governing body of the unit, 14 Subd, 4, Prior to the adoption of comprehensive plans .� wrrF►rArr w r/r Mr/� ray-- rrrwy� �� _ M A /� — r —ice rl�w� M rrr+ ��� r 15 pursuant to sections 1 to 17 of this act, existing 1 -6 com,Prehensive plans, capital improvement programs, sewer 17 policy plans and official controls of local governmental 18 units shall remain in force and effect, Existing 19 comprehensive plans, capital improvement programs, sewer 20 policy plans, and official controls may be amended as _r- 21 appropriate and new capital improvements programs and 22 official controls may be prepared and adopted prior to the rte• r��s.�.rrw —fir s� r— �w.re.�r...— ssr —�r.r _ -- -r.w..� 23 submission to the council of comprehensive plans required by 24 sections 1 to 17 of this act,.. 25 Sec, 7, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 26 section to read; 27 Sec, 144F, [473.910] [CO ;,PRE'-iENSIVE PLAN COP;TE;%T.] 28 Subdivision 1. The comprehensive plan shall contain 29 objectives, policies, standards and orogra^s to guide public 30 and private land usep development, redevelopTent and 31 preservation for all lands and waters within the 32 jurisdiction _wr —r.r� r. �— r. ..rr..rrr•rr.r..��w���r.rw�w.�r of the local governmental unit through 1990 and r.r.+— ....'.wr..�— r.rrrr— rr— wrrw�r.� rl SF1653 -1E 1 may extend through any year thereafter which is evenly 2 divisible by five, Each plan shall specify expected 3 industrial and commercial development, planned population 4 distribution► and local public facility capacities upon 5 which the plan is based, Each plan shall contain a 6 discussion of the use of the public facilities specified in 7 the metropolitan system statement and the effect of the plan 8 on adjacent local governmental units.and affected school - - r- r. r .�....wtw_wrr•wrwsw�...w.�www__ .. 9 districts, Existing plans and official controls may be used 10 in ;whole or in part followwina modification, as necessary, to 11 satisfy the requirements of sections 1 to 17 of this act, 12 The comprehensive plan may contain any additional matter 13 which may be included in a comprehensive plan of the 14 applicable local governmental unit pursuant to the 15 applicable planning statute, 16 Subd, 2, (LAND USE PLAN @] A land use plan shall 17 designate the existing and proposed location, intensity and 18 extent of use of land and water for agricultural, 19 residential, commercial, industrial and other public and _ �Yr_ _O_wr•wyN_�r �-_ /� 20 private purposes, or any combination of such purposes, The 21 land use plan shall also contain a protection element, as 22 appropriate, for historic sites and the matters listed in 23 section 28, 24 Subd, 3. [PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAh,3 A public facilities 25 plan shall describe the character, location, timing, 26 sequence, function, use and capacity of existing and future 27 public facilities of the local governmental unit, and 28 contain at least the following partst 29 (a) A transportation Pldn.describing, designating and 30 scheduling the location, extent, function and capacity of 31 existing and proposed public and private transportation 32 services and facilities; I 1653 1 (b) A sewer policy plan describing, designating and 2 scheduling the areas to be severed by the public system, the 3 existing and planned capacities of the public systerr., the 4 standards and conditions under which the installation of � 5 private sewer systems will be permitted, and to the extent 6 practicable, the areas not suitable for public or private 7 systems because of public health, safety and welfare ��M�_ w-- �f_ —�i� __ NywrA•� w��-- wMr— _N—_ —ws_ � 8 considerationst 9 (c) A parks and open space plan describing, designating 10 and scheduling the existina and proposed parks and 11 recreation open spaces within the jurisdiction. 12 Subd. 4. [IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM.] An implementation 13 progran shall-describe the types of Public programs, fiscal 14 devices and other actions to be undertaken in stated 15 sequence to implement the comprehensive plan. The program �.�www.wr__w _w_ _ _—_— r�.ra� �• r_rrww w_r w rrNw — w.�.rr w —�._rr s.—r�� 16 shall contain a general description of and schedule for the 17 preparation, adoption, and administration of official 18 controls including controls regarding zoning and subdivision - r .19 ordinances, private sewer systems, and a capital -20 improvements program for transportation, sewers, parks and 21 open space facilities. 22 Sec. 8. Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 23 section to reads 24 Sec. 144G. [473.912] [COUNTIES.] Subdivision 1, 25 Comprehensive plans of counties shall contain at least the 26 following; 27 (a) Except for the counties of Hennepin and Ramsey, a �w— ��_ _�MN_N— �r— �.q_��w_-- _M—__r_wNSN w_r_N•1 28 land'use plan as specified in section 7, subdivision _2 of 29 this act, for all unincorporated territory within the fr____ra�_arw__w_��w__ _ —w wrfaA_Yy_ww_wrrrrr�w__ww� 30 county; 31 (b) A public facilities plan which shall include all 32 appropriate matters specified in section 7, subdivision 3 of N SF1653 -1E KS 1653 1 this act, inclUdinq at least a transportation plan, and a 2 description of existinq and projected solid Waste disposal - 3 sites and facilities; 4 (c) An implementation Program, as specified in section 5 7, subdivision 4. 6 Subd, 2. Each county other than Hennepin and Ramsey Air A_M_��AM_AAAAA�7 r�— A— N�AAAO�AAA� —A�.AA AAAAA 7 shall prepare, with the participation and assistance of the _ NA�ANAA��� _OM_A— A— rA��MAAAANA__. .A —AAArA _ 8 town, the comprehensive plan for any town within the county 9 which fails by December 31, 1975, to take action by A.�AAA —AA—AA wI�AA..A— •�_.A._AA N -�MAwA r OA.._O— YAAAA�4 10 resolution indicating its intention to prepare the A-- AA— AAAAA4��_yM� —AA —A AA�IAAA —AA 11 comprehensive plan, 12 Subd, 3. Each county other than Hennepin and Ramsey AAAA—A�.AAA —AiAA — AAA�AwAAAwew�wAAaAAw 13 shall Prepare, with the participation and assistance of the 14 town, the comprehensive plan for each town within the county A�MAAAAAAAA AA—wr+s�w�..��.r�wAA�+��A —ASAr a— arAAe�r.�for� 15 not authorized to plan under Minnesota Statutes, Sections ANO_— AAf�A —_— I�SYAA 7�— _Y_/�AA�AAAA— AA/AAY�A�AO 16. 462.351 through 462,364, or under special law, .� /es — AaAAM� —Pb� MAAAAAAAOA�� —�A/� �� 17 Sec, 9, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, Section 19, is amended 18 to reads 19 Sec, 19, [473,1753 [COUNCIL REVIEW; COi;PREHENSIVE 20 PL APJ S , 3 - &eeh-- e+t -rr- e& fi�-a: -e tt -a} - e��- E+�- °�►��e?� 21 des -;r- e-- flee�eT- ee��: -�e -fie- -e 22 metre rt sr.- ea et -texi- eea"e-rt-- $ii 4--T-eeeim!-k en ft 23 trey- s- eo�a�eJ- p��- t�-- ee�t�e -eaF 24�-re��°- tat -tt-: tee te- f�>;�- �a- aao ---�►e 25 prvv"ed p�etRS -seta: tares i- tee -Ee- a- eat�:�a_� -� e �e 26 27 artf4�- arcs =��:. LRa-- a�ea�-- 3++�- tc�-- ee�j•k- 3- e� -e-`�e 28 ear -tcrl-cr- eed Aty —. —=. fie- eatrre-�+ --aha 11 �4E-a -�-O- saes --t R& 29 f tl-- te-- kee-- er�ras�eL ..e�►...ioeaee�eR---- �ae+��+ -e- -ire 30 pein4l 4--e ; - 31 Subdivision 1. The council shall review the 32 comprehensive plans of local governmental units and 9 KS 1653 1 subsequent amendments thereto to determine their 2 compatibility with each other and conformity With 3 metropolitan system plans, The council may review and 4 comment on the consistency of the comprehensive plans with 5 other adopted chapters of the metropolitan development 6 guide. The council may require the local governmental unit 7 to modify any comprehensive plan or part thereof, solely to 8 ensure conformity with metropolitan system plans, 9 Subd, 2, Within 90 days following receipt of a 10 comprehensive plan, or plan amendment orePared in accordance it with sections 1 to 17 of this act, the council shall return 12 a statement containing its comments and required 13 modifications, if any, to the local governmental unit, P:o 14 action shall be taken by any local 15—government unit to place any- -eaeter submitted comprehensive 16, plan or plan amendment or part thereof into effect until —,?O 17 lope— *'re"'e�ae-;�r�`—�—e�tb� -; -asp —e the council has 18 returned the comments and required modifications to the unit 19 and until the unit has incorporated the modifications in the w��. w. �— w_--- a_— wr— ���.�'�_�•�r�—.�rw.asoo_ —w —r w��—r�_�e — 20 plan , Promptly after submission, the council shall notify 21 each city, town, county, or special district which may be 22 affected by the plans submitted, of the general nature of 23 the plan, the date of submission, and the identity of the 24 submitting unit, Political subdivisions contiguous to or 25 within the submitting unit shall be notified in all cases, 26 Within 30 days after receipt of such notice any governmenta1 27 unit so notified or the local governmental unit submitting 28 the plan may request the council to conduct a hearing at 29 which the submitting unit and any other governmental unit or 30 subdivision may present its views. The council may attempt 31 to mediate and resolve differences of opinion which exist 32 among the participants in the hearing with respect to the 10 iSF1653 -1E KS 1653 1 plans submitted. If within 90 days the council fails to 2 complete its written comments and recommendations the plans 3 shall be deemed approved and may be placed into effect. Any 4 majo, att -I Bern amendment to a plan subsequent to the 5 council's review shall be submitted to and acted upon by the 6 council in the same manner as the original plan, The 7 written of the council shall i;e 8 filed with the plan of the local government unit at all 9 places where the plan is required by law to be kept on file, 10 Subd, 3, If a local governmental unit fails to adopt 11 or amend a comprehensive plan in accordance with sections 1 12 to 17 of this act the council may commence proceedings to 13 enforce the provisions of sections 1 to 17 of this act by 14 appropriate legal action in the district court where the 15 local governmental unit is located, 16 Subd, 4. Local -,,nvernnental units shall be required to 17 consider in their initial comprehensive plans submitted to 18 the council any amendments or modifications to metropolitan 19 system plans which were made by the council and transmitted 20 to the local governmental unit prior to January 1► 1977, 21 Thereafter, within nine months after receiving an amendment 22 to a metropolitan system plan, each affected local 23 government:�il unit shall review its comprehensive Plan to 24 determine if an amendment is necessary to ensure continued 25 conformity with metropolitan system plans. If an amendment 26 is necessary, the governmental unit shall prepare the 27 amendment and submit it to the council for review eursuant 28 to this section. .W_w� 29 Sec, 10, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 30 section to read; 31 Sec, 144N. [473,914) EPLA14S AND PROGRAIMS; ADOPTION; 32 AMENDMENT,] Subdivision 1. Fach local governmental unit 1.4 1 shall adopt its comprehensive plan with required w - -- 2 modifications within six months followinq receipt of the 3 council's comments and required modifications under section rwwrrrr_ —rrr wrr�.rrw� w rrwwr— ..wwr— w— wrw�rr w w w.rwr 4 9 of .this act, r�rr—wr r..rr ire 5 Surd, 2, Amendments to plans of local governmental rr..i._ _r__..._.�r.wrw rrwr,rr..r. r_rr +rwr_rw�.r r_ rrrrrrr�rr 6 units shall be prepared and submitted in the same manner as 7 the original plan. rrrrrrr�_w 8 Sec. 11, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 9 section to read; 10 Sec. 144I, [473,917] [I,MPLEMENTATION OF COMPREHENSIVE rrrwrr..a w�. _ 11 PLATS,] Subdivision 1. Each local governmental unit shall r^r_rr�r rrrrr����.�+�rswr _r�Nr rrrrrrrrr —r_Y � —� 12 adopt official controls as described in its adopted 13 comprehensive plan and shall file copies of the official 14 controls with the council within 30 days following adoption 15 thereof, r rr Yw . 16 Suhd. 2. A local governmental unit shall not adopt any 17 official control in conflict with its comprehensive Plan, r�vrrrrrr.rr w�rww M—r__ r wra��r— .�r.,�rrr _rrwrwwr r r —r r—ww w�rrwr 18 Subd, 3. If an official control conflicts with a rr�+_r ��rr— r�wrrr w_r,rr..w��.—wwwrr— rrrrrrrrr�r 19 comprehensive plan as the result of an amendment- to the rarm�w— rr—rwrr_—r�.rr�_rr �.—vwr.wwwr mow.-- .�rw.wr�.rw �rr.swwrwwr/ 20 plan, the official control shall be amended by the unit 21 within six months following the amendment to the plan so as r�rrr wrYirrw�r/�r� \�r�lr �r�r r��r MiM rrw rrrrw wr_r 22 to not conflict with the amended comprehensive plan, wwrr w s+r•rw __w r- -r.�w_w w•��wr�p.� wNwrw.�rr rrr - -wr r A 23 Sec. 12, Laws 19751 Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 24 section to reads , 25 Sec, 21A. [473.192] [PLANNING ASSISTANCEi LOANS, 26 GRANTS.] Subdivision 1. On the reauest of a local 27 governmental unit, the council may provide assistance to �wr��M_ ��w•�_ W rrr �wr - -�r1_ __ _w/rr -rrrr w Y r- Mrr��w 28 accomplish the requirements of sections 1 to 17 of this act, 29 It shall assemble and provide advisory materials and prepare 30 model plan provisions and official controls to assist in 31 accomplishing the provisions of sections 1 to 17 of this r wrrr—. �r—. �rr�• rw_ rr—^ � .�.rraw��a.�—r.�r�.r�._r�awr r_rrr 32 act, 12 KS 1653 1 Subd. 2. The council shall establish a plannino 2 assistance fund as a separate bookeepinn account in its 3 general fund for the purpose of maicing grants and loans to 4 local governmental units under this section, The council 5 shall adopt uniform procedures for the award, disbursement 6 and repayment of grants and loans, 7 Subd, 3. Applications for grants and loans shall be 8 submitted to the council describing the activities for which 9 the grant or loan funds will be used; the persons which the 10 grantee or borrower plans to use in Performing the grant 11 contract; services and activities which will be paid for by 12 funds of the grantee or borrower; the grantee or borro:oerls 13 need and ability to pay for the contract services; and other 14 information as the council may reasonably request, Grants 15 and loans shall be made subject to contracts between the 16 council and the recipient specifying the use and 17 disbursement of the funds and, for loans, the terms and ��__�....�_r _ —r �.�.+— r�r_— �s+�aw_w�+�_ rs �ms.ar•o—_ r r sew+_..�r.� •�•� 18 conditions of repayment, and other appropriate matters, 19 Subd, 4. The total amount of money which may be 20 awarded by any grant shall not exceed 75 percent of the 21 total costs and expenses of the project, service or activity 22 for which the grant is awarded, 23 Subd. 5. [LOAIJ TERMS.] Loans made by the council shall 24 carry an interest rate not to-exceed five percent per annum 25 and shall be payable on terms and conditions as'the council •srr_— �..w.s �.n. �..r.. _ _a....e� w.�r r�.�.o...r _ r.� w�.+_..._ �....�� e�.�. _.� _ _r ���..� 26 determines appropriate. Igo loan shall be for a tern., in 27 excess of five years, Funds received in payment of loans 28 shall be credited to the planning assistance fund and shall �.m_�.�rr- -�. r_�._�•_ __ —r.n_ r r�.�._� �.... a��_ �...or_ r �. r o.�r w_..�. —.nw 29 be used for additional loans or grants under this section, 30 Sec. 13. Laws 1975, Chapter 13r is amended by adding a 31 section to read; 32 sec. 144J. [473.9191 [EXTEvSI0N.3 A local governmental 13 1 unit may by resolution request that the council extend the 2 time for fultillinq the requirements of sections 1 to 17 of 3 this act. A request for extension shall be accompanied by a 4 description of the activities previously undertaken by a 5 local governmental unit in fulfillment of the requirements 6 of this act► and an explanation of the reasons necessitating 7 and justifying the request. Upon a finding of exceptional 8 circumstances or undue hardship► the council may► in its 9 discretion, grant by resolution a request for extension and 10 may attach reasonable requirements or conditions to the 11 extension. 12 Sec. 14. [EXEMPTION FROM LEVY LIMIT,] Subdivision 1, 13 The increased-costs to a municipality of implementing 14 section 61 subdivisions 1 to 3 of this act, and sections 7 15 to 10 of this act shall be deemed a "special levy" under 16 Minnesota Statutes 1974► Section 275.50► Subdivision 5. r 17 Subd, 2. The proceeds of any tax levied under this 18 section shall be deposited in the municipal treasury in a ws__�_�r�w �.w_wfw+�wwrwrw.rwa�_w_ww.r_Y 19 separate fund and expended only for the purposes authorized 20 by this section. Mw_r 21 Sec, 15, Laws 1975, Chapter 13j is amended by adding a 22 section to read; 23 Sec, 144K. [473.923) [SCHOOL DISTRICTS; CAPITAL 24 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS,] Subdivision 1, By January 1, 1978► 25 each school district lying in whole or in part within the 26 metropolitan area shall prepare and submit to the __M!r_YYw_�Pr4�wy_ www_ iY� 27 metropolitan council for review pursuant to this section a 28 capital improvements program for proposed new school sites, 29 buildings, and building additions with a cost of more than 30 5200 ►000► includinq a description of the projected 31 population of the district► facility needs and the effect of 32 the program on affected local governmental units. 14 SF165: -IF KS 1653 1 Subd. 2. F,ach school district shall submit its program 2 for review and comment to the local governmental units lying, 3 in whole or in part within the district at least nine months 4 prior to the submission of the program to the council. The 5 local governmental units shall review the proLiram and 6 provide comments to the school districts, and the council 7 within 90 days on the compatibility of the program with the 8 proposed comprehensive plan of the local governmental unit. 9 Subd, 3. The council shall review the capital 10 improvement procrams of school districts and subsequent ®YwM�swww wwNw•- w_�- wN -_iw ��_- __- �w_w -OS -M -_w_1 11 amendments thereto. The council may review and comment on 12 the apparent consistency of the capital improvement programs 13 with with the metropolitan system plans. Failure of the council - 14 to comment on the school districts program within 90 days M�wwwwY�l ww_w wwwwMa__�wYtwM- s- M�- _w -4MM -w l- 15 after its submission shall be deemed council comment on the 16 program. 17 Sec, 16, Minne.sota Statutes 1974, Section 462.355, is 18 amended by adding a subdivision to.read; 19 Subd, 4. [INTERIM ORDINANCE,] If a municipal'ty is 20 conducting or in good faith intends to conduct studies 21 within a reasonable time or has held or has scheduled a 22 hearing for the purpose of considering adoption or amendTent 23 of a comprehensive plan or official controls as defined in 24 section 2 of this act, or if new territory for which no plan 25 or controls have been adopted is annexed to a municipality, 26 the governing body of the municipality may adopt an interim 27 ordinance applicable to all or part of its jurisdiction for 28 the purpose of protecting the planning process and the 29 health, safety and welfare of its citizens. The interim 30 ordinance may regulate, restrict or prohibit any use or 31 development within the jurisdiction for a period not to 32 exceed one year from the date it is created, and may be 5F1653 -1E _ KS 1653 1 renewed for one additional year. 2 Sec. 17: MEW MUNICIPAL SEWER SYSTEMS.] 3 Notwithstandina the provisions of sections 1 to 16 of this 4 act, the council shall have no authority under Laws 1975, 5 Chapter 13 to require a local governmental unit to construct 6 a new sewer system to serve structures or buildings for 7 which a building permit was issued prior to the effective 8 date of this act. 9 Sec, 18. Unless the context indicates other vise, 10 references to section numbers in this act refer to Lajas 11 1975, Chapter 13, 12 Sec, 19, This act applies in the counties'of Anoka, 13 Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, ,Scott and Washington, 14 Sec, 20. [EFFECTIVE DATA,] This act is effective on 15 the day following its final enactment, 16 MIDWEST PLANNING AND RESEARCH, INC. , L A N D P L A N N I N G A N D U R B A N R E S E A R C H C O N S U L T A N T S �r Minneapolis, Minnesota 55405 Telephone: (612) 374 -3030 2101 Hennepin P March 31 1975 Mr. Robert A. Worthington, AIP, Chairman MAIP Legislative Committee Suite 2200 Northwestern Financial Center 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 RE: Manditory Comprehensive Planning Legislation - Preliminary Review Dear Bob: As indicated during our phone conversation of 24 February, I am extremely concerned over the Legislation which the Metropolitan Council has drafted regarding manditory comprehensive planning. A planning professional of course cannot oppose the need to plan, coordinate development, and implement a course of action which has been established. The structure, means and mechanisms by which the Metropolitan Council has proposed to achieve this desirable objective are however subject to question. In this regard, I have outlined below what I consider major points of the proposed bill which require clarification or which are major implications to be thoroughly considered: 1, Governmental reorganization and concepts An overall concern is that the bill is out of sequence with what would appear to be a logical progression in decision - making and establishment of policy concerning local and regional government structure and responsibility assignment. It would seem appropriate that the major transfer of power to the Metropolitan Council from local units and special districts should be addressed as a separate item and issue apart from planning and development concerns. A. Elected Metropolitan Council - an issue generated by the major reorganization proposed is the election of Metropolitan Council members. Being concerned only with planning the bill does not consider what would appear to be a fundamental requirement given the authority being transferred from elected local officials to the appointed regional decision - making unit. If the intent of the Legislation is not to have an elected regional body and this step is not first accomplished, a critical variation from our established form of government would occur. B. Responsibility versus authority - As now structured, local units would maintain near total responsibility for planning and development, yet lose control over their authority to act.. The Metropolitan Council's required review of compre- hensive plan implementation programs creates a major division of responsibility . and authority. Given the required review and amendment process assumedly local units of government would not be able to alter their zoning or capital improvement expenditures until the Metropolitan Council had 90 days to review the modifications and then would be possibly subject to question and legal . action should there be a difference of opinion. This structure divorces the local unit which taxes and spends money from the authority on how expenditures are to be made. For example, in the area of zoning, should the local unit of government be subjected to litigation as a consequence of following the Metropolitan Council's directives, would the Metropolitan Council assume liability or be a joint defendent in the case? Noteworthy also in_this regard is an apparently new transfer _f power and responsibility to park districts and boards with their being delegated all open space, park and recreation facilities planning. C. Check and balance system - A basic principle of american government is a check and balance system. The system which would be produced by the legislation does not apparently provide for this basic element or concern unless it is assumed that local government does and would have recourse through the courts. Potentially, this item is partially addressed through the notation that waiving or modification of established requirements can occur. However, the determination of such variances is not clearly established in terms of who has the responsibility and on what specific grounds this can occur. It is suggested that specific criteria for variances be established in a fashion to the State's Municipal Planning Act for Zoning. Secondly, there should be a form of a board of adjustments and appeal separate from the Metropolitan Council or the Planning Advisory Group. In essence this portion of the Legislation requires considerable review to insure due process of law and equal protection. 2. Demand on Local Governments A potential problem may be the highly specific duties and time limitations which are imposed. Noted above was, what is interpreted to be. a 90 day delay on zoning decisions, and capital improvement expenditures. In addition, however, there is a two year provision for preparation of plans. Is this a realistic situation for central cities, given their diversity and also the concern to involve and gain participation from citizen and neigh- borhood groups? A similar problem may exist for counties within their rural area. Also iiave.the costs and staffing implications of this demand been analyzed and. calculated? Assuming passage of the Legislation, local units may require more time to budget and program work activities. 5100 4 3. Metropolitan Council Responsibilities Experience has indicated that even with current responsibilities and assignments the Metropolitan Council cannot always process referral items within the 90 day period provided for its review and comment. The great influx of additional work will surely add staffing and financial demands on the Metropolitan Council's operation. Has this demand been analyzed and calculated in detail? A related matter is will the Council itself, as now structured on a part -time basis be able to cope with and thoroughly execute its policy responsibilities with the massive decision- making which is envisioned. 4. Metropolitan Assistance As now expressed, the role of the Metropolitan Council is a wide open door. A more precise definition and outline of what areas of assistance can or will be provided is necessary. Should the implication be that the Council staff will be able to do local governmental planning, it is contended that a conflict of interest and breach of - professional planning ethics will exist. Planners, whether salaried or consultant, working for municipal units of government are currently prohibited from becoming financially involved with private interest when they have the responsibility to review and make recommendations on development matters in the public interest. Because of metropolitan activities in housing, park and open space, etc. will the.Council staff be able to objectively work for what are in essence two individual and separate clients? Also, would potential, if not in fact, prejudicial treatment be generated between the units which the Council's staff directly assisted with planning and those communities which completed their own work. Such would apply to comprehensive plans, capital improvements as proposed to be regulated under the Bill, and grant -in -aid applications currently subject to review. 5.. Professional Ability and Qualifications A fundamental issue is the definition of what consitutes an effective comprehensive plan. The Act would appear to indicate that basically a capital improvement program and zoning ordinance.ore the elements to be addressed. While this issue should be addressed in and of itself, a related question is the ability and qualifications of those responsible for preparing as well as reviewing planning work. Governmental agencies as well as the planning profession should make every effort to avoid a repeat of the 701 era problems, part of which can be attributed to unqualified individuals conducting work. The proposed Bill offers no means to prevent the problem occurring either in the private or also the public sector. It is recognized that the structuring, and administering of professional regulation is and should be beyond the scope of the mandatory planning legislation. However, the administration of manditory planning with some form of quality control is a parallel concern and should consequently be addressed in a companion bill. This again points to the need for a thorough analysis of the decision - making process and need to identify all related requirements and issues which are associated with manditory planning. 3 6. Appropriation expenditure The $2,250,000 appropriation for implementation of the Act is a substantial funding request which should be defined and allocated more precisely in terms of use and allocation. Some jusitifcation and rationale (not to be included in the Bill itself) should be provided to more rationally assess the adequacy of or extravagance of the request. 7. Review and comment on proposed legislation In view of the far reaching implication of the proposed Act and also the Metropolitan Council's development framework policies on citizen participation, it is disturbing to see how little exposure through formal channels that this Bill has received and the apparent speed with which it is being pushed into the State Legislative arena. Decisions of this magnitude should receive substantial discussion and review by all interests affected. To achieve adequate discussion would appear to require the delay of introduction of the Bill until at least the next session of the Legislature. would hope that this matter can be more extensively discussed by the MAIP Legislative Committee and. that a formal and more refined analysis and statement could be formulated. would appreciate being involved in such meetings. Thanks for the opportunity to have an advanced review of this matter. Sincerely yours, MIDWEST PLANNING AND RESEARCH, INC. David R. icht, AIP Vice President DRL /nd cc: Bill Chapman Bob Webster Greg Luce Ron West Dick Putman David Hozza Kathy Kozar Dan Sheridan 4 Al COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS Metro Council Bill for an Act (1/28/75 draft) Land Planning By: B. B. Chapman, AIP Wehrman, Chapman Associates, Inc. 1415 North Lilac Drive Minneapolis, Minnesota 55422 I have had an erporfunity to review the 9-111 for an Act carrying a 1/28/75 draft date: The bill represents a substantial change policy concerning responsibility for planning and land development administration within the Metro Area. Although there is a need for public bodies to plan for and administer better land use and development and although the funding for such planning is essential to accomplish this, the suggested bill has soma major problems-. The problem relates primarily to who and how land development ad- ministration should be accomplished. A stratification of the State, Metro, Council and Local responsibilities is not understood within the provisions of tha bill. The following represents my primary comments and questions in this ree.ard. 1 The bill calls for a new Advisory Metropolitan Land Use Commission made up of appointed individuals from various segments of the metropolitan area with the ob- ligation to prepare a Metro System Component. Q Does the metro area need a new plan when the Council already has some Metro System Plans and Development Framework with guides and policies? Instances exist in which the Council or Staff will support one policy in con- flict with another or directly choose not to support the presently M.C. poli- cies. 2. A new Metro System Component is due completed by Apri I 1 , 1970 and a Compre- hensive Plan for each Governmental Unit by April 1, 1978. Q Does this imply that 1v1.C. believes that a Comprehensive Plan is a product? Planning is considered by most as an ongoing process and each elem-ant pro- vides tha guidalin -s for order. It may be questionable to go back to the procedure of preparing product oriented plans. 3. The bill appears to ask the legislature to: (a) Allow M.C. to draw a new Metro- System plan. (b) Require every local governmental unit to prepare a Comprehensive Plan which has "continued conformance and consistancy with the Metro system plan ". (c) Require every local unit to adopt controls (zoning, subdivision regulations, etc) by January 1, 1979 and the controls must be "consistant with the plan ". a Q Does this mean that. local controls and plan must be consistant with the Metro System Plan which is not yet defined? Isn't it a bit difficult to svpoort a new M.C. plan knowing that all local plans rust be consistant and in conformance with it? 4. The Comprehensive Plan required of local units has some extensive definitions of content. Q Does this mean to replace the Comprehensive Municipal Plan definition as contained in Section 462.352 and the Comprehensive Plan relating to coun- ties as contained in Section 394.22 of MN Statures? The draft 1 I I f �_ ' �• • t 5. �n., ararr bile calls rot ,h., park �:stric ;- .o prepare the "parks and open spaces sec- tion" of the loccd comprehensive plan. Q Does this mean That the Hennepin County- Park district has the responsibility to prepare the park and open space sections of comprehensive plans for Hopkins, Vlayzata, Minnetonka and the many other cities of the county? 6. The bill suggests that if an official control becomes inconsistent with the compre- hersive plan because of a plan chcnge, the control shall be amended to be con- sistent with the plan wirnin 90 days. Q Planning is performed by cities in Minnesota for the purpose of "guiding" the future development and riis is done.in many ways including adopting a com- prehersive plan. Coen the sug;estad bill rake. -hs. local plan (which is con r sistenr with the Metro System Component) an edict for local adoption within 90 days rather than a land.use guide? This is contrary to the principle of planning as.a process. 7. The bill allows M.C. to prepare a plan which calls for a consistent local plan and a consistent local zoning and subdivision ordinance and does not give M.C. the responsibility of rianaaement. Q Should a government have such power to plan without the responsibility of management? ?JiiS1t it not be bitter to either:.. (1). give the entire manage -. ment of all lard development to the M.C., or (2) give only that which is of Metropolitan Significance to M.C. and allow local administration of issues of non- metropolitan significance? 8. Plans of local units must include anticipated urban developments designating five year urbanization areas. Q Although M.C. will first prepare the M.C. System Plan and the local plans will be consistent wish the plan, who will be responsible for the growth pro - iection inconsistencies between M.C. and the local government? o' 9. As a result of an Act, substantial amount of local planning can be performed with state funds. Q With planning to be performed with State funding, would it not be wall to assure that such planning be performed under the direction of a "qualified pro- fessional planner "? Legal engineering and Architectural services performed with state funding is performed under the direction of professionals such as Lawyers, Engineers and Architects. 10. Local units may delegate or otherwise contract with another unit of government for services to prepare its comprahansive plan or official controls. This could be an adjacent community, the County, the M.C., the State of Minnesota, a State College, the Stage of Iowa, the Uni` er5!jy or city other government willing to accept the job. Q Is this a reversal of the Stale policy of relying on the private enterprise system to provide services which are available through normal channels? The suggested bill appears to: 1. Call for the placement of all planning in the hands of M.C. and leaving the prob- lem of admi nistrat ion and r esponsibi I iffy with the local bodies. 2. Perpetuate the product approach to planning instead of the accepted process cp- proach. 3. Ask the legislators to require each local unit of government to prepare aplan in conformance with something that doesn't exist. 4. Makes State funds available for planning without even a hint that performance will be under the direction of a qualified professional planner. 5. Favors a system that is contrary to the State policy of using the private enterprise i system for providing services that are reasonable through normal business chcnne s. for the performance of professional services. b. Asks to prepare another M_-tro plan when the present Metro plans are not supported by the M.C., some policies conflict with others and M.C. has not sorted out what F N._-Fro ;� t r �• is of N. Fro s:gniriconce any. gnat is of loco signiricance. a �roM �C M; NNeso A G�nR��e� o\ �e A,,AAevcrAro METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MANDATORY PLANNING LEGISLATION The MAIP Legislative Committee is reviewing the Mandatory Planning Legislation now under consideration by the Minnesota Legislature. This Committee and the Executive Committee of MAIP have a number of concerns relating to H.F. 1530 and S.F. 1653. Copies of these companion bills can be obtained by calling 296- 2887'a'nd 296 -2314. . In order to expand upon the concerns of the above committees and present meaningful input to the Legislature, we seek your comment. Please feel free to comment on the bills or on some of the following issues: 1. Is it a basic truth that since problems of urbanization and development transcend local governmental boundaries, no single unit of government can adequately plan their solution and there is a need for the adoption of coordinated plans, programs and controls by all local governmental units and school districts? 2. To what extent should the Metropolitan Council, consisting of Council members appointed by the Governor of the State, have governing powers over local issues of a local government without assuming also the responsibilities of ad- ministering and managing the implications of such exercised powers? 3. Are there areas of regional concern beyond that which is governed by the Metropolitan Systems Plans of the M.C. that should be placed within the jurisdiction and governmental responsibility of the M.C.? 4. To what extent should a local governmental unit be required to prepare a com- prehensive plan, adopt official controls and implement programs consistent with a regional type plan if the impact of the local plan has no material affect outside the limits of jurisdiction of the local unit of government? To what extent should the M.C. review and comment on such plans? 5. Is it reasonable to require local units of government to adopt plans, controls and implement programs for the purpose of ensuring that urbanization occurs, according to the local comprehensive plan which also is required to be con- sistent with all of the 400 or so policies of the many existing and future chapters of the M.C. Development Guide. 6. Is it reasonable to expect local units of government to attempt to develop comprehensive plans, official controls and implement programs consistent with M.C. guides and policies at a time when the M.C. policies may be somewhat inconsistent and inconsistently administered? 7. Is it necessary for the M.C. to create a new appointed Advisory Metropolitan Land Use Committee to function under the Governor - appointed Metropolitan Council to serve only in an advisory capacity concerning the applications for and the disbursement of grants and loans to local units of government for use in the performance of required planning? 8. 'is it reasonable to enact a law that will change (in the metropolitan area) present municipal planning legislation in order that the comprehensive plan is to be a required City Council adopted plan rather than a plan of a Planning Commission for the purpose of guiding future development. You are invited to promptly return your written comments to B. B. Chapman, AIP, Wehrman, Chapman Associates, Inc., 1415 North Lilac Drive, Minneapolis, MN.55422. January 16, 1976 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council.and W. C. Hyde, City Manager FROM: Greg Luce, City Planner SUBJECT: Mandatory Planning Act Enclosed are copies of the Senate and House versions of the Mandatory Planning Act. -' This bill was discussed at the City Council meeting two weeks ago when we discussed the Western Edina Plan. The bill is expected to pass and has the blessing of the governor. Also enclosed are several reviews by groups with which I have been working. It is the concensus of city planners and con- sultants that the House version is the more desirable. My greatest concerns are that, first, the bill will place a tremendous burden on the staff. I would estimate that it would take about 12 years of professional person time to prepare the documents required. Secondly, both bills require that our plans conform to the Metropolitan Council's plans. The bill also requires that our zoning be in conformance with that plan. Thus, the Metropolitan Council winds up dictating zoning to communities. Third, the language of the bill indicates that the zoning ordinance must be in conformance with the comprehensive plan. This would mean that we would have to zone property prior to its anticipated development merely so it would conform with the plan and not necessarily in response to a developer's request, as has been our policy. The final and most disappointing feature of the bill, ",to which I believe almost everyone involved in planning agrees, is that the Metropolitan Council can attain this much power as an appointed body. -,�d 11 GL:ln ' VA SICZIC of 1:II "ti;:;G1 1110' 1.3 J OF siXT Y - NIT. ii + A` SCSS1flI7 e o r e,,) >a Introduced by Casserly and Selirelb -r. Read First Time Apr. 14, 1975 and R;:ferrs:d t) ti:e Gc,:amittee on Local uud Urb,%u Affair;. Committee Recommendation and Adoption of Report to Pass as Arr•c:.�? +d Apr. 23, 1975. stead Second Time Apr. 23, 1975. 1 rA bill for an act 2 relating to metropolitan land use and planning- 3 providing certain requirements and pro-.ee.,ares tar 4 local governmental units and school districus.in S the metropolitan areal providing interim zoning1 6 amellding Minnesota Statutes 197 -1, Section 5462,35,:5, 7 by adding a subdivisiont Laud 1975, Chanter 13, iz Section 19, ✓►• 1�J• F_TY fI�.. �l�,t,,.71i •t-�V �' -W«. 1_i. �.'�S'N.4 1!R!'. 0 �1 -33C. :7 �1�:11� * 0a M NN7— •� +� -.. %•'a 10 Section it ELEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.] The 11 legislature finds and declares that the local governmental wo�....+.rW...sw.o w�aw..�.�r.. yea......+. w..+.... rw._ s:«+. w. r. r. �.. ..w....r.•e...rar..rr....m.u. o. a.r . r�e.ra, 12 units within the retropolitan area are highly P._ P�..... �...' �. �• i.........._... .,,...,,....,.'w....�...�..,,.w �..W..Awrsar...wwa..q 13 Interdependent, that the rapid growth and patterns of 14 urbanization within the area create the need for costly 15 additional state, metropolitan and local public services and 16 facilities and increased danger of air and water pollution t 17 and land destruction, and that actions by and developments 18 in•one local governmental unit affect residents of the �.O_•..s_rw.wr_rPw�w V.+ .rP� +���MY��w�sPr��+_�.�.M o.rw w.�PM 19 entire metropolitan area. Since problems of urbanization 20 and development transcend local.riovernnental boundaries, no 21 single unit of government can adequately plan their solution 22 and there is a need for the adoption of coordinated plans, 23 programs and controls by all local governmental units and 24 school districts 1n order to protect the healthy safety end 1 hr lo,f.0 -lb 1 welfare of the residents of the metropolitan area and to 2 ensure coordinated, orderly and economic development. 3 Therefore it is the gurposp t)f sections 1 to 20 to (1) .4 establish requirements and procedures to accomplish 5 comprehensive local planning and enact land use controls 6 consistent with planned, orderly and staged development and 7 metropolitan systen plans and (ii) to provide assistance to 8 local governmental units and school districts within the - ---- -- .--- _�__.._.._ 9 metropolItAr area for the Preparation of plans and official 10 controls appropriate for their areas and consistent with 11 metropolitan system plans, 12 Sec. 2. [DEFINITIONS,] SQbdivlsion 1. As used in 13 sections 1 to 20 the following terms shall have the meaning. 14 given them, 15 Subd, 2, "Advisory metropolitan land use committee" or 16 "advisory committee" means an advisory committee established 17 by the metropolitan council pursuant to section 3 of ?his 18 act $ —�• 19 Subd, 39 "Applicable planning statute" means Minnesota 20 Statutes, Sections 344,21 to 394,37 for counties and 21 Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.351 to 462,364 for cities 22 and towns, 23 Subd. 4. "Capital improvement program" means an 24 itemized program for a five year prospective period, subject 25 to at least biennial review, setting forth the schedule, 26 timing, and details of specific eontemolated capital �+ 27 improvements by year, together with their estimated cost, 28 the justification for each improvement, financial sources, 29 and the impact that the improvements will have on the 30 current operating expense of the local governmental unit or 31 school district, 32 Subd. 5, "Comprehensive plan" means the comprehensive F] i EA 153.0 �` Jtlw i HF�1530�1t: EA 1534 1 plan of each local governmental unit described in sections 7 ' 2 to 11, and any amendments to the plan, 3 Subd, 6. "Fiscal devices" means the valuation of .._..__--- --------- 4 property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273,111, 5 the designation of urban and rural service districts, 6 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 272.67, end the 7 establishment of development districts pursuant to 141nne:;ota 6 Statutes, Sections 472A,01 to 472A,13, and any other 9 statutes authorizing the creation of districts in which the 10 use of tax increment bonding is authorized. 11 Subd. 7. "Local governmental unit" or "unit" means all 12 cities, counties and towns lying in whole or in part within 13 the metropolitan area. 14 Subd R. "Metropolitan system plans" means the 15 airports portion of the metropolitan development guide, and 16 the policy plans, development programs, and capital budgets 17 for metropolitan waste control. trans ortationr and regional 18 recreation, open space, Subd, 9, "Official controls" or "controls" means - 20 legislatively defined and enacted ordinances and regulations 21 containing policies, procedures, standards, maps► conditions 22 and other criteria which control the physical development of y r..r+ — ._��+�w��.�rr_.�•�o+.�.s..._a _.s.rr...a�„a ra�....MOw 23 a city► town or county or any part thereof or any detail 24 -thereof and implement the general objectives of the 25 comprehensive plan, Official controls may include 26 ordinances establishing zoninc;, subdivision controls, site 27 plan regulations, sanitary codes, building codes and 28 official maps, 29 Subd, 10, "Private sewer facility" means a single lot, 30 multiple lot or other seviage collection or treatment 31 facility otirned, constructed or operated by any person other 32 than a local governmental unit or the metropolitan waste .k7 ��� a ✓�v•1[._ I control commission. 2 Subd. 11. "School district" reans any indeperncient or 3 special school district, as defined in Einnesota Statutes, 4 Section 120.02, subdivisions 14 and 15, wholly or partly 5 within the retronolitan area. 6 Se.c, 3, [ADVISORY COMi•'ITTEE,] The council shall 7 establish an advisory metropolitan land use committee ra—.+_�.rrra..... -•re o....w...— !a_�.nr... �•+�.._ .•-. y..r..w_.c...��..M....� 8 pursuant to Laurs 1975, Chapter 13, Section 4, comprised of 9 16 officials of local governmental units, one from each t:A . f S 3 0 10 council district, plus a chairperson and such other members ) 11 as may be necessary to ensure at least one representative 12 from each metropolitan county and one from metropolitan 13 school districts, Not less than one half of the members of �M.sO�Y•�� 14 w- ���q�+ l- e.. F 'ali..YY.m..iAar�'�'a.Ma+.•M.p the advisory committee shall be elected officials. is Sec, 4, [GUIDELINES,] The council, following 16 consultation with the advisory committee, shall prepare and 17 adopt guidelines and procedures relating to the requirements Oae�.��..�.w_�...rrrmw_ —•t M.Kry ..MwsJ:...••�....ww 18 r_ ..•l�tmew.a�a.�.� _..�_n�er✓r�.�...�rra� +V r. and provisions of sections 1 to 20 which will provide 19 assistance to local governmental units and school districts 20 in accomplishing the provisions of sections 1 to 20, 21 Sec, 5, [METROPOLITAN bySTE14S STATEMENT,] by July 1,- 22 1976, the council shall transVt to each local governmental 23 unit a metroplitan systems statement and to each school 24 district a statement comprised of the parts of metropolitan 25 systems statements affecting the school district, In the 26 preparation of the metropolitan systems statement, the 27 council shall consult with appropria te commissions, 20 officials of the unit and the advisory committee, The 29 statement shall contain information relating to the unit and 30 appropriate surrounding territory that the council 31 recommends that the unit consider in preparing its 32 comprehensive plan, includinv the followings 4 (a) The tiring, character., function, location, 2 projected capacity and conditions on use, for existing or 3 planned metropolitan public facilities, as specified in 4 metropolitan systens plans, and for state and federal public 5 facilities to the extent known to the council; rr. ..vrr..._rr..r...�w..v..r..._.. �.�w.w....�a_.....�..v...._ .r_�.r 6 (b) The peculation, employment and housing need 7 projections which have been used by the council as a basis- a••�- arr_.wrrs.�r w rwa._�.. arvtirarti� r•_aw _r w...ar_ rr�r�+r_— ...w.y�+.w+sM 8 for its metropolitan Systems plans; 9 (c) Any parts of the land use plan, public facilities 10 plan or Implementation program which may be excluded from 11 the plan of the local govern- ,ontal unit, The exclusion of �..I...rfarw wOr..sO't.. a.Y.rYaswa�p.�— .o_O_N_ e.r+r•.Aa...ar.w.r �iah_rr wWYSSap♦,q 12 parts shall be based on the nature and character of existing s.�.n-rr..na..ra_+ae.a�..wr _M— a.Ir.aeM.ow._rw+ a •.r•.aww_a_ ®a•+u av-w, Ra..y 13 and projected development within each local governmentaI 14 Unit and on policies, statements and recommendatio:Is 15 contained in r..etropolitan System plans. 16 Sec. 6, 11:ETROPOL -ITAN SYSTEMS STATEMENTS; AMENDMENTS.) 7 Local goveinnental units shall consider in their initial 28 comprehensive plans submitted to the council, and school 19 districts shell consider in their initial capital 20 improvement programs submitted to the council# any 21 amendments or modifications to metropolitan system plans 22 which were made by the council and transmitted prior to w-- tea•. —r.�_ _ —_.� .a_r__�.��.¢a.+.sa. rwrw_w...a.r Vrra.s..— r./..a.V 23 January 1, 1977. Thereafter, within nine r:onths after 24 receiving an amendment to a metropolitan system plan, each 25 affected local governmental unit shall review its 26 eomprehbnsive plan and each affected school district shall 27 review its capital improvement program to determine If an •. �..._. �•..+_.._.... r.. .�.vw�..o+•wwa...ew�.._......ww r__�...e.+•. -�.�.r �._•s.r o.e +ra 28 amendment is necessary to ensure continued conformity with 4e..•yrrY�wa..Y� —M_r__ �r�._�..�a�.+.���.._— r—r. w__�w.�_0...�Y...f+A 29 metropolitan system plans. If an amendment Is necessary, 30 the governmental unit or school district shall prepi�re the 31 amendment and submit it to tree council for review pursuant 32 to sections 1 to 20. 5 HP1530-1E EA •1`.,30. 25 following approval by the planning cor-imission of the unit 26 and after consideration but before final approval by the 27 governing body of the unit. _ 28 Subd, 4. Comprehensive plans, capital improvement 29 programs, sewer policy plans and official controls of local 30 governmental units adopted prior to the requirements of 31 sections 1 to 20 shall remain in force and effect until 32 amended, repealed or superseded by plans or controls adopted L•� I 1 Sec. 7, [HEARINGS.) within 45 days after receipt of 2 its metropolitan systems statement, or parts thereof or 3 amendment thereto, any local governmental unit or 3cho -al 4 district may request the council to conduct a he.aring at 5 which the unit or district may present its views on the 6 information proviaed in the statement or amendment. The 7 council shall conduct a hearinc and not later than 30 days 8 after the hearing shall notify the unit or district of the •._____�r.....__..�..r.� .�..__.___,_ .,^..._— _-------- _.�... 9 council's decision. 10 Sec, 8, [COMPREHENSIVE PLAKS; LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL. 11 UNITS J Subdivision 1, Within three years following the 12 receipt of the metropolitan systems statement, every local 13 governmental unit shall have prepared a comprehensive plan 14 in accordance with sections 1 to 20 of this act and the 15 - applicable planning statute and shall have submitted the O dw�MAr+v4�.�_M.�w/�MaAy YAM 16 plan to the metropolitan council for review pursuant to �= 17 section 13. 18 Subd, 2, Local governmental units shall submit their 19_ proposed plans to adjacent governmental units and affected t 20 school districts for review and comment at least six months 21 Prior to submission of the plan to the council and shall 22 submit copies to then on the submission of the plan to the 23 council. 24 Subd, 3. The plans shall be submitted to the council 25 following approval by the planning cor-imission of the unit 26 and after consideration but before final approval by the 27 governing body of the unit. _ 28 Subd, 4. Comprehensive plans, capital improvement 29 programs, sewer policy plans and official controls of local 30 governmental units adopted prior to the requirements of 31 sections 1 to 20 shall remain in force and effect until 32 amended, repealed or superseded by plans or controls adopted L•� I I pursuant to sections 1 to 20. Existing comprehensive plans, 2 capital improvement programs, sealer policy plans, and 3 o{iicial controls may be amended as appropriate and new k capital improvements programs and official controls may be 5 prepared and adopted prior to the submission to the council . I...r.wyrwy_�r�.�wM+r�._e..� .•M +.'rN_'— rw._Ntiwrls�.iA 6 of comprehensive plans required by sections 1 to 20. 7 Sec, 9, ICOMPRE:HENSIVE PLAN CONTENT.3 Subdivision 1. 8 The comprehensive plan shall be a statement in words, gaps, .I.�_�aarl.l� O _"o —w� —_ A —i �...�. W.i �.sy_ W/�_l��A +��r_M/.►M.__I. MN..'1YOW AMA 9 illustrations, or other forms setting forth objectives, 10 policies, standards. and programs to guide public and private w. w_ rwwre ....r +...�+.a"�.""°.�r"��r'��. a+r.e.� �._a...a.wrsr...w�...�...� w..on•_ ®.u+.w 11 land use, development, redevelopment and preservation for 12 all lands and waters within ic.1:e jurisdiction of the local �r... �. e.. �+_ �w�.wAri..rr.+— _.���.�o.vr..wr_ �..�.r.sne.r.r°"s�.�.m spa ���•. e��.r.u.....�v 13 governmental unit through 1990 or through any year 14 thereafter which is evenly divisible by five. Each plan 15 shall specify expected industrial and commercial �.. ra_ ��w. �^. e.. r+—+ I�_ w... � .r_..ro..ava +ww +wm+..�w.e.w.._ • . 16 development, planned population distribution and local 17 public facility capacities upon which the plan is based, 18 Each plan shall cos-stain a discussion of the us^ 03: the .. . q......_..,.. w�.... w .v,w�.o..�..eti..- ......,�.�..., �so.....p.a..Y.<,- ..... - -- -- -a..��.....�.� «z. 19 public facilities specified in the metropolitan system 20 statement and of the effect of the plan on adjacent local 21 governmental units and affected school districts. -Exi,st{ng Nora__../. �w. �.... W�YS�sO�el�� +.i�+/_._..►wegf��.a ...�Ya- _��•_M.oeo �.'.awgM 22 plans and official controls may be used in whole or in part 23 follovring modification► as necessary, to satisfy the 24 requirements of sections 1 to 20. The comprehensive plan 25 may contain all additional ratter which may be included in a w�v_w.w.r�.r�.w.��. +....__- -- r_. �_ rsr. �v. �._ w__ r�.._ w.._ rs. �r . +�...._w�.•�.sr..�...wrw.�v.r 26 comprehensive plan of the local governmental unit pursuant w_+...��.r w__�._...w_. err+ r�...._ v_ w._.._. s. w_ �... n.r.�ese.a.w.�.+..•_..sr_w..i.� 27 to the applicable planning statute. 26 Subd. 2. tL•AhU USE PT.Al2.3 A land Vse p? an Shall 29 designate the existing and proposed location, intensity and 30 extent of use of land and water for agricultural, 31 residential, commercial, industrial and other public and 32 private purposes, or any combination of such purposes. A 7 •1:530 -iE: 1 land use pion shall also contain a protection el(-rf-t)tr 2 appropriate, for historic sites and natters listed in 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 it 12 13 14 15 15 17 1s 19 20 21 22 23 EA Laws 1975, Chanter 13, Section 28. Suhd. 3. (PUBLIC FACILITIES PLANO Apublic facilities plan shall_ describe the character, location, timing, sequence, function, use and capacity of existing and future «.rr��_� «•ten «.MA_i4 �.�� «or. «�Pr «..I•�w�w Public facilities of the low c� 1 9ove�"�u?itM,y.app�c fucilS.ties plan must be in at least such detail r as — may s necessary to establish existing or potential effects on or , departures from metropolitan systens plans and to protect ._......., . "'rr— mar. --r°"" " °'«.a.ru..........r...o«.m^ -.v+ metropolitan systems plans. 'A public facilities plan shall contain at least the following parts: ..,r.,a. ,..�....................� —.-��. -.. -(a) A transportation plan describiriq, designating and scheduling the location, extent, function and capacity - ..�.....a...�...�.._....� existing and - proposed - locale p� ubliic and private transportation services and facilities; (b) A colAnrehensive sewer plan describing i designating and scheduling the areas to be sewerq e� ��e Public ..syst.�w the a eXis i g and planned capacities of the public system, the standards and conditions under which the installation of private sewer systems will be permitteddy and to heexttent practicable, the areas not suitiablefo r public or priVate systems because of public health, safety and welfare 24 considerations; 25 (c) A parks and'open space plan .describing, designating 26 and scheduling the existing and proposed parks and 27 recreation open spaces within the jurisdiction__ 28 Subd. 4. [IMFLE MFNTATIOiv PROGRAM. ] An implementation 29 program shall describe public yr grans, fiscal devices and ._w ---- -- 30 other specific actions to be undertaken in stated sequence' 31 to implement the comprehensive plan and ensure - conform; y 32 . with metropolitan systems plans, An implementation program 8 1%30 01 1 must he in at least such detail as may be necessary to 2 establish existing or potential effects on or departures _ r.r.r•._ —_.rr_ _r__rr — +� +_ _o.w r— w.+.r. .M�r.rrww— .�— ..w...e s r.•O M 3 from r +ietropolitan systems plans and to protect r:etrovolitan 4 systems plans. An implementation orogratr shall contain at —• __— wr__�— qM— d__— Yl.... +_w — r _�.— _•�wrN.w_w.w/.�._wu./M�..�Y 5 least the following parts; 6 (a) A description of official controls, addressing at 7 least tile- matters of zoning, subdivision, and private sewer 8 systems, and a schedule for the preparation, adoption, and 9 ;administration of such controls, - 10 (b) A capital i;nprovenents program for transportation, 11 sewers., parks and open space facilities. 12 Subd. 5, [URbAr.IZ�ITaON AREA5a3 The comprehensive plans ....._._.._..�, .,.....,..._— pro..- -_o—.� 13 shall designate, when appropriate, five year urbanization 14 areas and shall specify in the capital,- improverr.ents program / MwwY. �w_ w.. �s��u--✓/. �. ��ISY _�.��.Y�_Y— .�_�M..W.Y.w+Y —wq R..�MI. t...IaW MW_I w� 15 the tithing and sequence of major local public facilities and 16 in the implementation proctram official controls which will 17Cens.urejthat urbanization occurs only in urbanization areas 18 and in accordance with the plan, 19 sec, 10, [CITIES,) Except as provided in the - r.wr.w.s..a..sr sr w.�wd— �.r >.�'•w._..ra.ra. —+.r 20 metropolitan systems statement, comprehensive plans of w�N__a_M.u_y.rr_-- i�r_Y._rd s�...r_— a.1F_dArry �••••�••I__rio�.r_._W 21 cities shall include the matters specified in section ,8, 22 Sec. 11. [TO'r:NS,] Subdivision 1. Except as Provided _. _.._...._....__..__.. .._.�._._rw____...�_.__......._ ._.. ` 23 in the retropolitan systems statement, comprehensive plans I 24 of toyns shall include the mati.ers specified —in section 8.- 25 Subd. 2. Ey April 11 1;7051 each town within the 126 counties of Ano),-a, Carver, Dr;kota, Scott and 'r'.�shington, 27 authorized to Plan under Minnesota Statutes 1974, Sections 28 462.351 to 462.354, or under special 1a+, snail by 29 resolution cicterrine -chether it will prepare the -__-..•----- _..'w" _ --- —.._"._.._------ _._r --- 30 comprehensive rl -3n for its juris3iction, Each such to:•:n 31 also shall — specify, nursuantr'to agree;*.ent_with the county 32 :vitttin uhich it is any parts of Its rl ;in anti 9 • i v � V • 4 1 official controls, if any# the nreparation of which it Lh J.»V 2 delegates to the county. 3 Surd. 3. Towns within counties which have adopted 4 comprehensive plans applicable to the town shall, to the V+r.w�. wry. rro. r. �_ r��.. .�o.... +��w.�wr�.wa.�..�w�..+. r.w��..•r 5 maximum extent, use county preparation of their 6 comprehensive Plans. Sec, 12. [COUP ?TIES.] Subdivision 1. Comprehensive 6 plans of counties shall contain at least the following: 9 (a) Except for the counties of Hennepin and Ramsey, a 30 land use pla', as specified in section 8, subdivision 21, for 11 all unincorporated territory within the county 12 (b) A public facilities plan which shall include all 13 appropriate matters specified ir, section 6, subdivision 3, ......�,- .s.- • ---• -- - ...�.,4 14 including a transportation plan, and a description of iM -.'-._ �.-. N�. i-• �.•A- O- 4.- ti _.1M...'� - -% 15 existing, and projected solid waste disposal sites and • P. v-.. rm•- �sr.�_w-.M.- •+a.-w-- - aP+ao +o_ awm•w•s 16 facilities) 17 (c) An implementation program, as specified in-section 16 B, subdivision 4, moo... -..... �.....- .......- ..- .a.... 19 Subd,. 2, Each county other than Hennepin and Ramsey 20 shall prepare, with the participation and assistance of the �._- ...._. 21 town, the comprehensive plan for any town within the county 22 which fails by April It 1976 to take action by resolution r m..- ......e...i- e.c.. _.- r.+-- ..r -.e_ r...+rr_e..rs— s•r.- ...,sows... a_rs�...�«.. --,asp 23 pursuant to section 10, subdivision 2 and shall prepare all P�__M _____ /� _- V. -•�_.� __ra4• -_YM� 1��_r��.�YY.�. _ __ _.O__wIr/ M.YM•� 24 or part of any plan delegated to it pursuant to section 10, 25 subdivision 2. 26 Subd, 3, Each county other than Hennepin and Ramsey �.- r-rw_ .r way +• -.w. +w�s._s .� _— _�.w-r 27 shall prepare, with the participation and assistance of the 28 town, the comprehensive plan for each town within the county 29 not authorized to plan under YJ.nnesota Statutes 1974, r - ....w�.r..s...w+s� ..__.......... �. wwr.. r__ r. .._.r...___.ws...- w..wr.._�..r 30 Sections 462.351 to 462.364, or under special lair. 1 Sec, 13, [SCHOOL DISTRIC:St CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 1 32 PROGRAMS] Subdivision 1, Hy January It 1979, each school � 1 10 tl 11 / ,ateSit 1 district as defined in section ?-, subdivision llr shall 2 prepare and submit to the metropolitan councilr for review 3 pursuant to section 13, a capital improvements progrin, 4 which shall include a description of existing facilities, 5 projected population and facility needs and objectives, 6 proposed new school sites, buildings, and building additions 7 with a cost of rl cre than $200,000 and the effect of the 8 program on adjacent school districts and affected local 9 governmental units. 10 Subd, 2. Each school district shall submit its capital 11 improvement program for review and comment to the local, 12 governmental units lying in 4Thole or in part within the 13 district at least nine months prior to the submission of the 14 program to the council. The local governmental units shall 15. review the program and provide comments to the school 16 districts and the council within 90'days on the 17 cot~natibilitF of the program with the proposed comprehensive 18 flan of the local governmental urii t a 19 Subd. 3, The capital improvement programs shall be 20 submitted to the council after consideration but before I 21 final approval by the governing body of the district, 22 Subd, 4. Capital improvement programs of school 23 districts adopted prior to the requirements of sections 1 to 24 20 shall remain in force and effect until arnended, repealed, 25 or superseded by programs adopted pursuant to section l to t 26 20. Existing programs may be amended as appropriate and now i 27 programs prepared and adopted prior to the submission to the 28 council of programs required by sections 1 to 20, Existing y 29 programs ir:ay be used in whole nr in Dart following 30 modification, as necessary, to satisfy the requirements of F 31 sections 1 to 20, 32 Sec. 14, Laws 1975, Chapter 131 Section 19, is amended 11 ► i to reads 2 Sec. 19. [473. 1751 (COUNCIL REVIEW; COMPREHENSIVE 3 PLANS; SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAIMS.j -E tar 4 cy7- �v: rn7-- encl-- evttrr..`g►- sxyc--oY -pr oL--{ +�3--- a�- wa�or -f-he 5 me-�raF�-I-rrHrcT- Ere- 1-- s�rbrr.x�- to- +�i�, €���•# X31- ce��: :: -� 6 7 io�r�t• car, - �ccr�;t p��• hsrn�- �e- p�eis�p-- �t�e; tsr33 :n�- •�t��..s�rfr�-- r�A��eci --tQ 6 P3•srrs-•f-m- -Iertla- t-:•Je; - z2ige-- is "pofxe -- pa�aa,- 5--.,h*z- 2 :.&- -fi <--- .&- a11,w1- 410e-d 9a-�frr�- erntrir��- c��--�#r� 10 e�; �cn► f��sterr---- tta�e-- �r�e-- :rn�t- r.�t�- ;�-- l�e-�• -�f:rQ 11 Qevs��y- �i�- �a�����-• aoc�y_• o�- ��- e�•- ��?-- �e��:- �- e�- s€�rrt -��-- 12 gir�osrrcJ:- •�i-'r? >��Ct +xr- ove��-- ker.� -- :�--i ��- .�.�.e�- s�Q'�c 13 i-ot�- �fi�ss- try- sz3�e��- -ei °�i�o- �t�ir'- ri -a-a- Subdivision 1. —14 The council shall review the comprehensive plans of cities, x`15 counties and towns, orepared and submitted pursuant to �. .�1.we/�iY- o.�OtY_�.�.YYCiYri_ iM•�1O�.T -M ._YYr•I�oYY 16 sections 1 to 20 of this act,.to determine their �.r.w•.ewe.�w+.��.. erg. �. .._.s...«ega...ww.�M..-.oww.�r• �aaay.�r 17 compatibility With each other and conformity )with .... -._... �.._... .._..._..__._....- .......d..._� ..�... .��.._...... -.. 18 rctrapcjltan system plans.i The council nay review and 19 comment on the apparent consistency of the plans with other \-.20 adopted chap -ters of the metropolitan development guide. To 21 ensure conforrr,itYj with metropolitan systems plans, the 22 council may require the modification of any plan or part 23 thereof which may have a substantial impact on or contain a 24 substantial denarture from metropolitan systerrs plans. 25 Subd. 2. The council shall review the capital 26 improvement programs of school districts prepared and 27 submitted pursuant to this act to determine their 28 compatibility with each other and with the coreprehensi.ve 29 Plans of affected local governri-ental units and to determine 30 their conformity with metropolitan systems plans. The 31 council may review and comment on the apparent consistency 32; of the programs with other a opted- -cntors of the 12 C,!2 tropolitan development guide. 10 en:�ure conformity ti;ith 2metropolitan systc °ms plans, the courici.l vay rc ri,,lIre the 3 modification of any program or pert thereof which may have a Pw•e_.os�y.o/- ��..�� .w_ a�r�..yr.r. w.i..ww•. w...r��.ww _- - �. 4 substantial ir,pact on or contain a substantial d--N- r.tur.c 5 from metropolitan systems plans. 6 Subd..3. Wi hin 90 days following receipt* of a 7 ap ital , comprehensive plate of a local governrr.ental writ, capital* g improvement program of a school district or ELmendncnt waw.- r. rw..+.. w +.r........w.w...w_.rww. -.r..w 9 . r......+ thereto, prepared in accordance with sections 1 to 20 of 10 this act, the council shall return a statement containir►n 11 its comments and required modifications to the local 12 governmental unit or schoc'. district, Any roodificc?tlO7s P.�� ®►�u.a�+.�_ w.w�v. w�w...�.us�M.dr'P�.�'�/ off. vf...a�ww�..�.wwa- wo�.►•r/s�uV 13 required shall be by resolution of the councils containing 14 findings of fact and final order. No•.?�1- c;Wrc*.- �':f�ti�:'� 15 action shall be-taken by any local novernmental unit or 16 school district to Enlace any such comprehensive plan , 17 capital improvement program or part thereof into effect 16 Uri tflPcl?�° ��c�- t° I-- �ccs'r�- ��-tzEr3C�- ti3$� ^Y -�i� 19 C�t'a"t4k -1 the council has returned.the statement to the unit 20 or district and until the unit or district has Incorporated w.ewr+- ++as+ww.e....e r w.... oleo+ �r. ww. a� .re.wr..w.w.a.:a.ay.caw.ace.r.� 21 the required modifications in the plan or progran o 22 Promptly after submission, the council shall notify each 23 cityr town, county, or special district which may be 24 affected by the plans or programs sub.-ni.tted, of the general. 25 nature of the- -e+ctk plans or programs , the aace of 26 submission, and the identity of the submitting unit or 27 district Political subdivisions contiguous to or within 28 the sub:ittinu unit or district shall be notified in all 29 cases. Within 30 days after receipt of such notice any 30 governmental unit or district so 11otified or the local 31 governmental unit or district submittinq the plan or program 32 may request the council to conduct a hearing at which the 13 1 submitting unit or district and any other governmental unit 2 or subdivision may present its views. The council may 3 attempt to mediate and resolve differences of opinion which 4 exist among the participants in the hearing with respect to 5 the plans or programs submitted. If within 90 days the 6 council fails to complete its written- esv--rX:- tt-tr -ast3 �,n ►;, 8�¢q� statement the p14-,is or prortrar^.s shall be 8 deemed approved and may be placed into effect. --s' -° a 9 Fri. -t-emti o*y- o -�-p gtr- -B r et t-e-E hc� -E-e +�e•c. �cr- -re•,� e},s 10 it The written- c Mnent-0-e-Sid 12 statement of the council shall be filed 13 with the plan of the local 9oVernment unit or the program of • �y.q�..asM�._e..,ir,.nwoY_.� 14 the school district at all places where the plan or program s,..,.........._ . , .._...._...F._......_.. 15 is required by law to be Kept on file, 16 Subd, 4, Any major alterations to the comprehensive �..� V. _• �Y• �_ �. �.._._ Y__.._t___ i�_./ �. �_. P. ���A ��YMMiaO.�./s_M.�.O./Miw_�w.Y 17 plan of a local governmental unit or the capital improvement 18 program of a school district, and any amendments to such e A�.�'A1NSlO.00/Ir__�.MN_�_' wr_/_ wwl�. Np� _aO.nu..�r'a�w.�Mm�.•unw���a 19 plan or program which may have a substantial impact on or 20 contain a substantial departure from the metropolitan 21 systems plans, shall be submitted to and acted upon by the 22 council in the sane manner as the original plan or programs 23 Subd, 5. If a local governmental unit fails to adopt a 24 comprehensive plan or if a school district fails to adopt a 25 capital improvements program in accordance with sections 1 26 to 20 of this act or if the council after a public hearing 27 by resolution finds that a Fldn or program substantially 28 departs from metropolitan system plans and the local 29 governmental unit or school district does not adopt a plan 30 or prograr kith required modifications within a reasonable 31 time, the coltrcil may commence civil proceedings to enforce 32 the provisions of sections 1 to 20 of this act by 14 j' P 1 approvriate legal action in tfie district court 'whe're the 2 local governmental unit or school district is located. 3 Sec. 15. [PLANS AND PROGRAMS; ADOPTION; AMENDEXIVI:'i 4 Subdivision 1. Each local governmental unit shall adopt its 5 c.omnrehensive.pl.an and each - school district shall adopt its w.. .��....�.w..m.+...r.a....._..._ — - .._• w...__.v_�....e�. w.....r.....+.�r..�..,e.we.w«.s 6 capital improvements program with required modifications 7 within a reasonable time following receipt of the councills g 'statement under section 13. 9 Subd, 2. Any major alterations to the comprehensive 10 plan of a local governmental unit or the capital improvement: 11 program of a school district, and any,amendrnents to such a 12 plan or program which may 'gave a substantial impact on or 13 Contain a substantial departure from the metropolit&n 14 systems plans, shall be prepared, submitted and adopted in 15 the sane manner as the original flan or program. 16 Sec. 16. (IMPLEMEP1TATIOU Lm 7_Subdivision 1. 17 Each local governmental '.It shall adopt official. ontrol: 18 as descrlb�d in Its 19 submit ,copies of the official controls to the council within 20 30 days following adoption thereof, for information purposes 21 only. After notification of the council, a local 22 governmental unit may adopt official controls or fiscal 23 devices or parts thereof in anticipation of amendment to its 24 comprehensive plan :-.ithin a reasonable time if the controls ___ -------- r,._, 25 or devices are necessary to avoid undue hardship. 26 Subd 2. No-local governmental unit shall adopt 27 official controls or fiscal devices or parts thereof that 26 permit activity in conflict wit`i'metropclitan systen;s plans. 21 Subd, 3. Tf an official control conflicts with a 30 comprehensive plan as the result of an amendment to the 31 plan, the official control shall be amended by the unit 32 within a reasonable time following the amencirrent to the plan 15 I so as not to conflict ulith the amended comprehensive plan. 2 Sec. 17. (PLANMING ASSISTANCEI GRANTS1 LOANS.] Applications for grants and loans shall to the council describing the activities 3 Subdiv ;sion 1. The council shall prepare any: Provide pwwarr r.- +.....a. the grant 4 advisory materials, mode? plan Provislons and official which the 5 controls, and on the request of a local uovcrnmental unit or 6 school district may provide assistance, to accompli -Sh ti::" 7 purposes of sections 1 to 20, a Suhd. 2. (GRANTS; LOAI:S,] Following consultation with 9 and recommendation from the advisory committee, the council � r 10 shall adopt uniform procedures for the award, disbursement 11 and repayment-of grants and loans. The uniform procedures 12 shall include provisions for participation by the advisory 13 committee in the review of applications for grants and .e.Offd.rw_b.�Y- ...�i...•._.w•rq .Mr_ — 14 loans, and for ensuring satisf&ctory and timely completion 15 of projects, services or activities for which grants are 16 17 awarded, submitted Applications for grants and loans shall to the council describing the activities be for which 19 pwwarr r.- +.....a. the grant wig..... �r�. a�.. �s.. s. �.- :.r loan funds w... wsa.. IS+__. aw. w..._r+ra+....-.re�.rsr•wr+e.wa will be used; the persons which the 19 grantee or borro�er plans to use Jr) performing the grant 20 contract; services and activities which Will be paid for by 21, funds of the grantee or borrower; the grantee or horrowerts 22 need and ability to pay for the contract servicesy and other ..r- .�..._ -..�_ w+r�.� �...�.m.- ..�...s. rte_....+- .•.�w�s.— .a�.a.v.�... 23 information as the council may reasonably request, Grants 24 and loans shall be made subject to contracts between the 25 council and the recipient specifying the use and 3. 26 disbursement of the funds and, for loans, the terms and 27 Conditions of repayment, and other appropriate matters, In 26 making grants and loans, the council shall base its 29 decisions on the recipient's demonstrated need and available 30 financial resources. 032 Subd. 3. [GRANTS,] Grants shall not exceed 75 percent of the total costs and expenses of the project, service or 16 I activity for %,1hich a grant is awarded, 2 Subu. 4. ELCANS, ] Loans racade by the coUllail s}io! 1 bU 3 payable on such terns and conditions as the council. 4 determines appropriator provided that no loan shall carry an 5 interest rate nor be for a term in excess of five years, 6 Funds received in payment of loans shall bo used for 7 additional 10 -n. or grants under this section, g Sec, 16, [EXTENSION.] A local governmental unit or 9 school district may by resolution request that the council .M. o.. ..... _.r...wr._..r._.w.....rw- .o.+_ ..w+_.�w._.r..w_.n +...+.o� _ .w.._.w....- w.r...�_..,.._sn..p 10 extend the time for fulfilling, the requirements of sections 11 1 to 20, A request for extension shall be accompanied by a 1 7 description of the activities previously uncle- rta:.en by a ...n....r...s.v..._..._._... .. a..._.... w._._._.._ e. m..+ o.. l .- .._.w....wws�......,....u.. - .r_w..u. 13 local c overnmenta3 unit or school district in fu? f f .1.ltaent Of. a.....owp...:_.a /w ....._..Wr.,.w.'"-- ".M,.R'wsA.i t•tI yq 14 the requirements of sections 1 to 201 and an explanafifon of 15 tine reasons necessitating and justifying the re :uc,t, Upon 16 a finding of exceptional circur;.stances or endue hardshi,po �MA..._I.m..F_I..sd...PM.... W. �W.. �.. �... 1_. �...l �A. .MYI.OaI__.. >r \�t'..�ti °�••el.w. Vw6i4. >.lM •...+�i6..ww... t4 17 the council nay, In its discreti onF Qr4nt: by reso v,'.AGn it 1R request for extension and may attach rei:sonz::le rcqu{remc•ntu 19 or conditions to the extension, 20 Sec. •19Q (JUDXCIAL REVIEW,] Any local 5 +ave°11"e;Iral. 21 -unit, scr,00l dis 'rict or other person aggil.eved by a final 22 council order pursuant to section 13 may aPPea' the council 23 order pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 15,042E=, 0. a�n._._.r_•wr wMr_.Ynrar_�n_— .ww�s .w _..'s�..r.r�>_. �.5•_�e. _..'.... 24 15,0425 and 15,0426 for contested cases, The council., unit, 25 district or other person aggrieved by a filial order or 26 Judgment rendered on appeal to the district court nay etppea? 27 therefrom to the supreme court in the manner provided in 28 civil actions, 29 Sec, 20, Minnesota Statutes 1974, Section 462,355, is 30 amended by adding a subdivision to reed: 31 Subd, 4. [INTERIti Ctl'DINANCE,] If a municipality is _— ...___... --- ._.__ 32 conducting or in good faith intends to conduct studies Y._r_ ►�._ .n..^r._M_�.....___ _w rte_.__ w._. _. 17 1 within a reasonable time r has held or has ysc2,ecluledra 2 hearing for the purpose of official controls as de 3 of a coc:p�'e?�cnsive Plan or defined ill _._m�.....- _..._.__�.. section 2 of this act or if new territory for which plan_ s._or, 5 controls have not been adoPtCd Is annexed to a m !�J�IiLY� f. the governing body of the nuriciPalitY r "ay adoptall interim ordinance applicable to all er part of its juxisdi.ction for 8 the purpose of protecting the plannirza process and the g health, safetY and welfare of its citizens, The interim l t h t Jr .. 1p ordinance may regulate, restrict�or. #roYti_��ny use or 11 uevelopnent within the jurisdiction for a period not to 12 exceed one year from the date it is creelted, and may be 13 renewed for one additional year, Sec, 21�This act applies to the Counties of AnoY.z, 14 15 Carver, Da%ota, ilennepin, Ramsey, Scott and Washington 16 Sec. 220 [EFFECTIVE DATE,] This act is effective on 1'! the day fallowing its final enactment, 16 SF1653 -1F. Introduced by Chen, _),.•rcth, for the Com ;ittee on Metropo[itn_n and Urban Affairs April 19th, 1975 Ref. To Co.:,, on LAID OVER ONE DAY Reproduced by PHILLIPS LEGISLATIVE SERVICE KS 1653 '7 S.F. No. 1653 Companion H.F. _. Ref, to H. Com. Mr. Chenoweth, for the Committee on Metropolitan and Urban Affairs, introduced: S. F. No. 1653: J 1 A•bill for an act 2 relating to land planning in the metropolitan 3 area; requiring local adoption of minimum plans 4 and controls; providing for limited council review 5 and acceptance prior to the adoption of such pla. :s 6 and controls; providing tar an advisory 7 metropolitan land planning committee; providing 8 for the enforcement of adopted local plans and 9 controls; including certain expenses in the 10 definition of special levy; providing for interim 11 zoning;*amending Minnesota Statutes 1974, Section 12 462055► by adding a subdivision; and Laws 1575, 13 Chapter 13, Section 19, and by adding sections, 14 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE: OF MINNESOTA: 15 Section 1. [LEGISLATIVE FINDI ?:GS AND PURPOSE,] The 16 legislature finds and declares that the local governmental 17 units within the metropolitan area are interdependent, that 18 the growth and patterns of urbanization within the area 19 create the need for additional state, metropolitan and local 20 Public public services and facilities and increase the danger of 21 air and water pollution, and that developments in one local 22 governmental unit maY have an impact on the provision of 23 regional capital improvements for sealers, transportation, 24 airports and regional recreation open space. Since problems - w��.s-- rr�.w-..�r.rww.- .s.� -w •.�..r �...wwr.r.e.� �w.+wr- w.+.+ew�w.rr 25 of urbanization and development transcend local governmental 26 boundaries, there is a need for the adoption of coordinated 27 plans, programs and controls by all local govern -ental units ac too 1'G _ Ta I and school districts in order to protect the health, safety 2 and welfare of the residents of the metropolitan area and to 3 ensure ccordinated, orderly and economic development, 4 Therefore, it is the purpose of sections 1 to 17 of this act 5 to (1) establish requirements and procedures to accomplish 6 comprehensive local planning with land use controls . 7 consistent with planned, orderly and staged development and 8 the metropolitan system plans-, and (2) to provide assistance 9 to local governmental units and school districts within the 10 metropolitan area for the preparation of plans and official 11 controls appropriate for their areas and consistent with 12 metropolitan system plans. 13 Sec. 2. Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 14 section to reads 15 Sec, 144x. [473.5011 [DEFINITIONS•,] Subdivision 1. As 16 u.,ed it, aectiol "Is 1 to t. `* o o',v'1 t'.. 1 / Vi ��li� c1CtI ��•� fully •ii�� �cr:i.s 17 shall have the meanings given them. 18 Subd. 2. "Advisory metropolitan land use committee" cr �r WHO �4�feA0_ ��__ yi__O��N_Y �� M __ _r•� _�I 19 "advisory committees' means an advisory committee established 20 by the metropolitan council pursuant to section 3 of this 21 act, ` 22 Subd. 3, "Applicable planning statute" means Minnesota 23 Statutes, Sections 394.21 to 394.37 for counties and 24 Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.351 to 462.364 for cities 25 and towns. 26 Subd, 4. IlCapital improvement program" means an 27 itemized Program for a five year prospective period, subject 28 to at least biennial review, settinh forth the schedule, 29 timing, and details of specific contemplated capital 30 improvements by year, together with their estimated cost, 31 the reed for each i- orovoment, financial sources, and the 32 impact that the improvements will have on the current 2 1073 IT 1 SF1653 -1E KS 1653 1 operating expense of the local governmental unit or school 2 .district. 3 Subd, 5. "Comprehensive plan" means the comprehensive 4 Plan of each local governmental unit described in sections 6 5 and 7 of this act, 6 Subd, 6. "Local governmental unite or "unit" means all 7 cities, counties and towns lying in whole or in part within 8 the metropolitan area, but does not include school 9 districts, 10 Subd, 7, "School district" has the meaning given it by 11 Minnesota Statutes, Section 120,02, subdivisions 14 and 15, 12 a.'.d includes any independent or special school district 13 wholly or partly within the metropolitan area, 14 Subd, 8, "Metropolitan system plans" means the 15 airports portion of the metropolitan development guide, and 16 the policy plans, development programs and capital budgets ���_M__��Y_� w•�wl�lgA_ Y_.���_w�._.�M_ RYA 17 for metropolitan waste control, transportation, and regional 18 recreation open space, 19 Subd, 9, "Official controls" or "controls" means 20 ordinances and regulations which control the physical 21 development of a city, town or any part thereof or any ��q r.__a -s wn.uor_+rra.w"�ww.e��.w•ww �.�w.�_ara.�— wswr�.�.r � 22 detail thereof and implement the general objectives of the 23 comprehensive plan, Official controls may include 24 ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision controls, site 25 plan regulations, sanitary codes, building codes and 26 official maps, 27 Subd, 10, "Private sewer facility" means a single lot, 28 multiple lot or other sewage collection or treatment 29 facility ownedr constructed or.operated by any person other 30 than a local governmental unit or the metropolitan waste ��.�rw— w.r..w q_-- �.�ww.�.w rw•1..w..r� r_ _�..w— �—r_.�ws_w _ w... 31 control commission. 32 Suhd. 11. "Fiscal devices" means the valuation of V 1 property pursuant_ to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.111► 2 the designation of urban and rural -service districts, 3 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 272.67► and the 4 establishment of development districts pursuant to Minnesota 5 Statutes► Sections 472A.01 to 472A.13 and any other statutes 6 authorizing the creation of districts in which the use of 7 tax increment bonding is authorized, 8 Sec, 3, Lars 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 9 section to read: 10 Sec. 140. [473.903] [ADVISORY COMMITTEE,] The council 11 may establish an advisory metropolitan land use committee 12 pursuant to section 4, comprised of 16 officials of local 13 governmental units, one from each council district, and as 14 many additional members as are necessary to provide 15 representation from each metropolitan county, plus a 16 chairman. 17 Sec, 4. Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 18 section to read: 19 Sec. 144C. [473.904] [GUIDELINES.] The council shall 20 prepare and adopt guidelines and procedures relating to the 21 requirements and provisions of sections 1 to 17 of this act 22 'which will provide assistance to local governmental units 23 and school districts in accomplishing the provisions of 24 sections 1 to 17 of this act.. 25 Sec, 5. Lays 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 26 section to read: 27 Sec. 144D. [473.9061 [MEIROPOLITANY SYSTEMS STATEMENT.] 28 Subdivision 1. By April 1, 1976, the council shall transmit 29 to each local governmental unit a metropolitan systems �� w•Mir___Y r_�_ �wrr M �. 30 statement, In the precaration of metropolitan systems 31 statements, the council shall consult with aUpropriate 32 commissions and officials of the unit. The staterent shall 4 I SF1653 -LE KS 3 1 contain inforration relating to the unit and aopropri to 2 surrounding territory that the council determines necessary 3 for the unit to consider in preparing its comprehensive 4 plan, including the follo wina: 5 (a) The timing, character► functions location, 6 Projected capacity and conditions on use as appropriate, for 7 existing or planned public facilities specified in 8 metropolitan system plans, including at least interceptor war—_ r�.—. �rww .w'— '�P_— P.�Y__—•�— w—�.�._ - -- y w—_ sewersr highwaysr transit systems, airports, and regional 10. recreation open space; 11 Information shall also be specified for state and. 12 federal public facilities to the extent known to the 13 council; 14 (b) Population, employment and housing need projections 15 which have been used by the council as a basis for its 16 metropolitan systems plans. Y-- r— Y1OYlr_w 17 B.d-- sO�-- Subd, 2. Any local governmental unit may, within 45 18 days after receipt of its metropolitan system statement, 19 request the council to conduct a hearing at which the unit 20 may present its views on the information provided in the PY_— •P_P - -- w- -wares/ _P--- PI.P•P-- .Y— �.-- iM� —A� 21 statement, Not later than 30 days after the hearing, the —YO � —M.rP __ -- Vim_ _riPY YAM —P��� — _— P— w•�rP_ _M— _� —_ - - -Y P- 22 council shall notify the unit of any changes in the 23 metropolitan systems statement. 24 Sec.,6, Laws 19751 Chapter '13, is amended by adding a 25 section to read; 26 Sec. 144E. (473,908) [COMPREHENSIVE PLANS; LOCAL 27 GOVERNMENTAL UNITS,3 Subdivision 1. Within three years 28 followinu the recei ^t of the metropolitan systems statement, 29 every local governmental unit shall have prepared a 30 comprehensive plan in accordance with sections 1 to 17 (of 31 this act and the applicable planning statute and shall have 32 submitted the plan to the metropolitan council for review P_Y•YP —_ — - -r��_ _wIP...�� — 4w�e —'— rrr —_ rP•�/r _--- ��_P•� —r _ r�_— I pursuant to section 9 of this act, The provisions of 2 sections 1 to 17 of this act shall supersede the provisions 3 of the applicable planning statute wherever a conflict may 4 exist, 5 Subd, 2e Local governmental units shall submit their 6 proposed co;norehensive' plans to adjacent governmental units 7 and affected school districts for review and comment at 8 least six months prior to submission of the plan to the 9 council, 10 Subd, 3, The comprehensive plans shall be submitted to 11 the council followina approval by the planning cormission of 12 the unit, if any, and after consideration but before final 13 approval by the governing body of the unit, 14 Subd, 4, Prior to the adoption of comprehensive plans 15 pursuant to sections 1 to 17 of this act, existing 16 con,prehcnsive plans, capital improvement programs, sewer 17 policy plans and official controls of local governmental 18 units shall remain in force and effect, Existing 19 comprehensive plans, capital improvement programs, sewer 20 policy plans, and official controls may be amended as 21 appropriate and new capital improvements programs and — 22 official controls may be prepared and adopted prior to the 23 submission to the council of comprehensive plans required by .•� r_rw_r._... -._... _._.._arm w_ r —� ..r_r�..,.�rrr__ _+oo _ ew.�. _ _ sa Yr w..� 24 sections 1 to 17 of this act,.. 25 Sec, 7, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 26 section to read: 27 28 29 Sec, 144F, [473,910] [COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CU-TENT.] Subdivision 1, The comprehensive Plan shall contain objectives, policies, standards and Programs to guide public 30 and private land use, development, redevelopTent and 31 preservation for all lands and waters within the w M_ r�.._ r�w�a. ��. r• rrw— w_— w_ �.�re..w��.�.�__ra_...rr— _ri.�^ 32 jurisdJction of the local governmental unit through 1990 and 6 SF1653 -1E 1 may extend through any year thereafter which is evenly 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 divisible by five. Each plan shall specify expected industrial and commercial development, planned population distribution, and local public facility capacities upon which the plan is based, Each plan shall contain a F5 1653 discussion of the use of the public facilities specified in the metropolitan system statement and the effect of the plan on adjacent local governmental units.and affected school districts. Existing plans and official controls may be used in whole or in part followina modification, as necessary, to satisfy the requirements of sections 1 to 17 of this act. The comprehensive Plan may contain any additional matter which may be included in a comprehensive plan of the applicable local governmental unit pursuant to the applicable planning statute. Subd, 2, [LAND USE PLAN,] A land use plan shall designate the existing and proposed location, intensity and extent of use of land and water for agricultural, residential, commercial, industrial and other public and private purposes, or any combination of such purposes, The land use plan shall also contain a protection element, as appropriate, for historic sites and the matters listed in section 28, Subd, 3. [PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAN,] A public facilities plan shall describe the character, location, timing, sequence, function, use and capacity of existing and future public facilities of the local governmental unit, and contain at least the following parts: (a) A transportation Plan.describing, designating and scheduling the. location, extent, function and capacity of existing and proposed Public and private transportation services and facilities; I 1 (b) A sewer policy plan describing, designatingq and 2 scheduling the areas to be severed by the public system, the 3 existing and planned capacities of the public system, the 4 standards and conditions under which the installation of 5 private sewer systems will be permitted, and to the extent 6 practicable, the areas not suitable for public or private 7 systems because of public health, safety and welfare 8 considerations; 9 (c) A parks and open space plan describing, designating - 1V and scheduling the existing and proposed parks and 11 recreation open spaces within the jurisdiction. 12 Subd, 4. [IMPLEMENTATION PROGRA14,1 An implementation 13 prograr shall describe the types of Public programs, fiscal 14 devices and other actions to be undertaken in stated 15 sequence to implement the comprehensive plan, The program 16 shall contain a general description of and schedule for the '17 preparation, adoption, and administration of official 18 controls including controls regarding zoning and subdivision 19 ordinances, private sewer systems, and a capital - 20 improvements program for transportation, sewers, parks and ,21 open space facilities, 22 Sec, 8, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 23 section to read; , 24 Sec, 144G. [4731912) [COUNTIES,] Subdivision 1, 25 Comprehensive plans of counties shall contain at least the 26 following: 27 (a) Except for the counties of 'Aennepin and Ramsey, a 28 land "use plan as specified in section 71 subdivision 2 of 29 this act, for all unincorporated territory within the 30 countyl 31 (b) A public facilities plan which shall include all 32 appropriate matters specified in section 7, subdivision 3•of 8 SF1653 -1E KS 1653 1 this act, including at least a transportation plan, and a 2 description of existing and projected solid waste disposal ' r�.w- ..-rrr - - -a�w wrw�w� err_- sr.�- w-sww -w rrr rrr 3 sites and facilities: 4 •. (c) An imolementation program, as specified in section rrr rr rr+rrr�r��rri�rrwr eYw_erw -rwY Y_�wr �� -��r 5 7, subdivision 4. wrrr ww^.rrwwrrr... 6 Subd, 2. Each county other than Hennepin and Ramsey 7 shall prepare, with the participation and assistance of the _ rr.rrr_r...wr_.w��.sw..�rr rrr�rr__wr�rrrr -, .�rrrr�.rwr.�_�.rr 8 town► the comprehensive plan for any town within the county r.w.rrr.�...r_Mw �. rrw�rwrrwrrr r.�w_ 9 which fails by December 31, 1975, to take action by 10 resolution indicating its intention to prepare the r ter. -.� �� rr-.+w Y rw ti�� wr r r rrrrr rwrr r rr it comprehensive plan. 12 Subd, 3. Each county other than Hennepin and Ramsey 13 shall prepare, with the participation and assistance of the 14. town, the comprehensive plan for each town within the county 15 not authorized to plan under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 16. 462.351 through 462.364, or under special law, 17 Sec, 9, Laves 1975, Chapter 13, Section 19, is amended 18 to read= 19 Sec, 19. [473.175] [COUNCIL REVIEW; COMPREHENSIVE 20 PLA;JS. ] ®air -ei-�► err" 3:- eott3t�- e}:- ►- ge��- e- -�r�er 21 +ire s 22 met:�e�tt -t—a eae•re'1 -3-- fee- �s�- �- 1- ee;�!a+exr-ta-- $fl4--r-eee.•+weR tie �r 23 therecrr-tts- !9e`a�► awe- 3- aa�- et- eet�s��e -ass -r 24 ine r - b��c -�r + fed -t-e- �}a;�- z�:� -i-a� -tree �►e 25 pro: posed- ��+��n�- Sri-- �e-- eii-- eci- �e- t- ?3e- ea��e_�- ��eet�► 26 ep►' 94�8�'— cr— Q�ie— ��ai�ti4? '— e0�5- '�- 9!°t— ®� ---:�i �eea— ;ek�cb�R!� 27 ttrr*t--ter ae e-�: teas -a� e� +tai --�+§ e- �►e ��r- -�e� -e -z- e 28 f�tres - 6oe�,-rR& 29 frs --e- twee- a�a- r�c�e- fee- .a�aee�e�-- +-- �►et��+ -e -e 30 t�tsfe; - 31 Subdivision 1. The council shall review the P�Y� ^.�-- .�� -� - -- �r� i M�y� f�.l-- wwM- �rr•w� w 32 comprehensive plans of local governmental units and KS 1653 1 subsequent amendments thereto to determine their 2 compatibility with each other and' conformity with 3 metropolitan system plans. The council may review and 4 comment on the consistency of the comprehensive plans wit]t 5 other adopted chapters of the metropolitan development 6 guide. The council may require the local governmental unit 7 to modify any comprehensive plan or part thereof, solely to 8 ensure conformity with metropolitan system plans. 9 Subd, 2, Within 90 days following receipt of a 10 comprehensive plan, or plan amendment prepared in accordance 11 with sections 1 to 17 of this act, the council shall return 12 a statement containing its comments and required 13 modifications,' if any, to the local governmental unit. rto 14 action shall be taken by any local IS•.government unit to place any —sde4 submitted comprehensive 16_ plan or plan amendment or part thereof into effect until -44 17 + the council has 18 returned the comments and required modifications to the unit 19 and until the unit has incorporated the modifications in the 20 plan Promptly after submission, the council shall notify 21 each city, town, county, or special district which may be 22 affected by the plans submitted, of the general nature of 23 the plant the date of submissionf and the identity of the 24 submitting unit. Political subdivisions contiguous to or 25 within the submitting unit shall be notified in all cases, 26 Within 30 days after receipt of such notice any governmenta1 27 unit so notified or the local governmental unit submitting 28 the plan may request the council to conduct a hearing at 29 which the submitting unit and any other governmental unit or 30 subdivision may present its views, The council may attempt 31 to mediate and resolve differences of opinion which exist 32 among the participants in the hearing with respect to the 10 SN 653•IE 1 plans submitted. If within 90 days the council fails to 2 complete its written comments and recommendations the plans KS 1633 3 shall be deemed approved and may be placed into effect. Any 4 MVIV?- -attrratier? amendment to a plan subsequent to the 5 council's review shall be submitted to and acted upon by the 6 council in the same manner as the original plan. The 7 written comments— sMi— reeeMeafer of the council shall ,e 8 filed with the plan of the local government unit at all 9 places where the plan is required by law to be kept on file. 10 Subd, 3. If a local w�_rwwweswwrws rrrrwwr governmental unit rw rer fails to adopt _ __ wry 11 or amend a comprehensive Plan in accordance with sections 1 12 to 17 of this act the council may commence proceedings to 13 enforce the provisions of sections 1 to 17 of this act by 14 appropriate legal action in the district court where the 15 local governmental unit is located. Mww�Orw Nw1 16 Subd, 4. Local ivernmental units shall be required to 17 consider in their initial comprehensive plans submitted to rwrrs_ rrr�._�rws..eessr r _...rwr•• -er wrr rrr r we,w...ee.� 18 the council any amendments or modifications to metropolitan r�wsw�w a �,,,errrre —rr a�.w.w.�.wo ewr__rw.ea�rrws�wrs. r _ate rw rr.� 19 system plans which were made by the council and transmitted rs.__ ew. swr�... we_ er�rr__. �. rwwr. ��rrsrw�w .�wsrnw.�_a�.r_r ®_rrmsca —w 20 to the local governmental unit prior to January 1r 1977, gY�we sareie��w rre�r��rw —_w srer.r..,ae _r a� n.wr —+—r r ra_rw.r.rsw ww 21 Thereafter, Within nine months after receiving an amendment oa+r:. slew _wr— +�_�+�rrrw+�a—r.r.+rrrrw r.�wemr ers 22 to a metropolitan system plan, each affected local 23 governmental unit shall review its comprehensive plan to 24 determine if an amendment is necessary to ensure continued —wrw or�er wl�ww —wt0 �r er�w�awr— wAw_�Yrirrr Yr 7. r_r�err 25 conformity with metropolitan system plans. If an amendment Nwrn� wrre —r+��w rrrMrO —_w .�wr_�r�rw 26 is necessary, the governmental unit shall prepare the Awe er r �rss e ers_ err._.sr rrs. e� �.es�r rrs�w�rrrr w_ r_rrrr rr r 27 amendment and submit it to the council for review pursuant ��sawrrerr rwY��w_r_r�w_rrw�_e�s �errwrrww/�M rwrrrrrrrrwre�e 28 to this section. 29 Sec, 10, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 30 section to read; 31 Sec. 144N. [473.9141 [PLANS AND PROGRM -TS; ADOPTION; 32 AMEND- MENT.) Subdivision 1. Each local governmental unit s..rrws...rrrrrr r..�e�ee.r..�re ree .wee r..er..rrrrwr •1 shall adopt its comprehensive plan with required 2 modifications within six months following receipt of the Wr a�rr_rrrrrrw �nrwr�— +mow— rwr�rw��— �Y— _ —_rw_� •• 3 council's comments and required modifications under section 4 9 of .this act. 5 Surd 2. Amendments to plans of local governmental _wwrrr�r��w�rrrw_ rr�w�rrw�� rMrrw� —_ wrr �rww� —wr 6 units shall be prepared and submitted in the same manner as 7 the original plan. 8 Sec. 11, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 9 section to read; 10 Sec. 144I, [473.9177 [IMPLEMM44TATION OF COMPREHENSIVE 11 PLANS,] Subdivision 1. Each local governmental unit shall 12 adopt official controls as described in its adopted 13 comprehensive plan and shall file conies of the official w.�r —rr rw.�w.ew .��_r rw��.�—rwwrwr— rrrwrrwww_wwwww 14 controls with the council within 30 days following adoption wwwwa wwr✓Owrr �rwr.�r— w���srq�r — r— ww�wr_ir.�-- wr.orw r_w.�r wwrw 15 thereof. r—rrr�rrr 16 Suhd, 2. A local governmental unit shall not adopt any 17 official control in conflict with its comprehensive plan, a�.wr�r r —w— wwwr- -- w�w�wa�_•��rr r wr�rrwr r r_�. w —wr w�w�.w —r 18 Subd, 3. If an official control conflicts with a . r�r�+ r— rrw—_ w�rw—. �wr_ ��. uyr�y y�— w.�rrrrrrw.�r�..— r.wrrrr- 19 comprehensive elan as the result of an amendment. to the 20 plan, the official control shall be amended by the unit 21 within six months following the amendment to the plan so as .•...rrr 22 to not conflict with the amended comprehensive plan, �_rr rr_s.�r.w ��w rww rwrww � ._.�wrr�w.�r�r— .�wwwwrrwrww�w —r w� 23 Sec, 12. Lags 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 24 section to reads , ._ 25 Sec. 21A. [473.192] [PLANNING ASSISTANICE, LOANS, 26 GRANTS,] Subdivision 1. On the reauest of a local 27 governmental unit, the council may provide assistance to 28 accdmplish the requirements of sections 1 to 17 of this act, — 29 It shall assemble and provide advisory materials and prepare 30 model plan provisions and official controls to assist in wwwY__�wr rr_w rwwrM rrww�ww�� �qr —r�wrr r r --Y�r wr.+ 31 accomplishing the provisions of sections 1 to 17 of this — �•— wrr���rrr�� _wwrr_����lw— ���M��rr_w/�r wr��r 32 act. 12 Sh65:3 -1E KS 1653 1 Subd. 2. The council shall establish a plannin,7 2 assistance fund as a separate bookeepin? account in its 3 general fund for the purpose of making grants and loans to 4 local governmental units under this section, The council 5 shall adopt uniform procedures for the award, disbursement 6 and repayment of grants and loans, 7 Subd, 3. Applications for grants and loans shall be �. —e-.e_ __ __ �r.sr�.�. �_�.— .wew_.r• tea.- .�— �.— r..rrrr�.�s_w __ eye 8 submitted to the council describing the activities for which 9 the grant or loan funds will be used; the persons which the 10 grantee or borrower plans to use in Performing the grant it contract; services and activities which will be paid for by ' ��.w__e r� —_o er�rrrwer•��ew.�.a —rr _w�.es.��.. --wrw_ 12 funds of the grantee or borrower; the grantee or borrower's e M- r.,�ereer�.e_ YY_ ��___Mrereq�errr��_ rrrr.00 13 need and ability to pay for the contract services; and other 14 information as the council may reasonably request, Grants 15 and and loans shall be made subject to contracts between the �mre_eYyr�._ re —ei__M wMNr __ Y_re_werr.�e.� —rw e.w—.r4 16 council and the recipient specifying the use and 17 disbursement of the funds and, for loans, the terms and 18 conditions of repayment, and other appropriate matters, re_M_r. —e _ e_reerr_s�.._e_ —� resew_ r —_ rwrsv.rw —w wra.��rw —r sew 19 Subd, 4. The total amount of money which may be �� e_ 4 20 awarded by any grant shall not exceed 75 percent of the �.aw.ree —_ —ro r—e_ r_ es__o ��orwrss�eN rra �w�— ees.w— m—.wo_w 21 total costs and expenses of the project, service or activity Derr wV.eree �r w_e —rr.sa w�Y.erlwr.r�.� r-- w_e --r_ ree.-w�—.�f e s �r —r 22 for which the grant is awarded, sar�.rrae.0 e...e__.'� r re_ _ -- oa�s..a. —• +� 23 Subd. 5, ELOA14 TERMS,] Loans made by the council shall 24 carry an interest rate not to.exceed five percent per annum wrr_rvrrws __ rsa.rarrdr�e eww.�er— r.., ae__w.�..r... re—re•rr- -..e.. _ 25 and shall be payable on terms and conditions as'the council 26 determines appropriate. I4o loan shall be for a ter,' in — w— r_ eM—__— ww __r_we— w�I�— �ww•��_eN— __- -wa —_e ewwe 27 excess of five years, Funds received in payment of loans 28 shall be credited to the planning assistance fund and stall 29 be used for additional loans or grants under this section, 30 Sec. 13, Laws 1975? Chapter 13P is amended by adding a 31 section to read: 32 Sec. 144J. [473,919] [EXTEvSIOM A local governmental /3 1 unit may by resolution request that the council extend the w °_w _ w —r �.�+.�_ u. r�• w. �+.. �w.�.u.�.r..._...— �..— .�_ww�w.� rrw— _ww- -- ___�.� 2 time for fultillina the requirements of sections 1 to 17 of 3 this act. A request for extension shall be accompanied by a 4 description of the activities previously undertaken by a- 5 local governmental unit in fulfillment of the requirements 6 of this act, and an explanation of the reasons necessitating 7 and justifying the request. Upon a finding of exceptional 8 circumstances or undue hardship, the council may, in its 9 discretion, grant by resolution a request for extension and 10 may attach reasonable requirements or conditions to the 11 extension. 12 Sec. 14. (EXEMPTION FROM LEVY LIMIT.] Subdivision 1. _w_wwwwi—www 13 The increased costs to a municipality of implementing 14 section 6, subdivisions 1 to 3 of.this act, and sections 7 r.siw�.s +_a w.�—w��_a�.� —. _— .��ww�+• ��wo —ww.�w _�—�.ww� �� +w�� 15 to 10 of this act shall be deemed a "special levy" under 16 Minnesota Statutes 1974, Section 275.50, Subdivision 5. •.17 Subd. 2. The proceeds of any tax levied under this _ -- 18 section shall be deposited in the municipal treasury in a �wawas�aaawr—__w wM � .w�.wr�s- -.+www.��.wwrr_ww�.� —_ 19 separate fund and expended only for the purposes authorized 20 by this section. 21 Sec, 15, Laws 1975, Chapter 13, is amended by adding a 22 section to read= 23 Sec, 144K, [473.9237 [SCHOOL DISTRICTS; CAPITAL 24 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS,] Subdivision 1, By January 1r 1978, 25 each school district lying in whole or in part within the 26 metropolitan area shall prepare and subm -it to the 27 metropolitan council for review pursuant to this section a 28 capital improvements program for proaosed new school sites, 29 buildings, and building additions with a cost of more than 30 5200,000, including a description of the projected 31 population of the district, facility needs and the effect of 32 the program on affected local governmental units. 14 SF165:3 -1'r'. KS 1653 1 Subd. 2. Each school district shall submit its program 2 for review and comment to the local governmental units lyin.. -- 3 in whole or in part within the district at least nine months 4 prior to the submission of the }program" to the council. The 5 local governmental units shall review the program and 6 provide comments to the school districts, and the council _mow— wwrrw- -mow ��•+ �ww _..��-- .�swrwwr�--- _ww— ww.�w.w 7 within 90 days on the compatibility of the program with the �w�ww��_�w�wr_ww—rewr A__— rrr —_Y�wl wr_rwr�r.MrwwYw� —w�� w 8 proposed comprehensive plan of the local governmental unit. -- 9 Subd. 3. The council shall review the capital 10 improvement programs of school districts and subsequent �sw.uwwwwwww_.sr_wr w— wwrwwY w— w�Y_�_ ��- -_N�ww rww__ _ww —�. 11 amendments thereto. The council may review and comment on 12 the apparent consistency of the capital improvement programs 13 with the metropolitan system plans, Failure of the council wwwwr—w.��w�.www rrwwe_ —r _rrww.ww�w�.w— wwr 14 to comment on the school districts program within 90 days ww�ww --wYw wiwww �w N _ w Y ww/�rw1�I�w rw— wwMw._ _ ww 1aMw_ w ww w� 15 after its submission shall be deemed council comment on the wYw_r- 16 program, 17 Sec, 16, Minne.sota Statutes 1974, Section 462,355, is 18 amended by adding a subdivision to read; 19 Subd, 4. [INTERIM ORDINANCE,] If a municipal'ty is ^.ww..wv.s ww+rr++er serrww_ 20 conducting or in good faith intends to conduct studies 21 within a reasonable time or has held or has scheduled a 22 hearing for the purpose of considering adoption or amendment 23 of a comprehensive plan or official controls as defined in 24 section 2 of.this act, or if new territory for which no plan 25 or controls have been adopted is annexed to a municipality, 26 the governing body of the municipality may adopt an interim �ww��wr/�rwM— �sNrrww w��.w�.�wAYw�� _wNNw —rw__w wrww —w —w•w_ 27 ordinance applicable to all or part of its jurisdiction for — 28 the purpose of protecting the planning process and the _w— wawa. —M�_�� y1����.� w_ _w�!— r♦__ww w�rrw_ w 29 health, safety and welfare of its citizens. The interim. w wr.w�.�.w rw_w rw.wrr�. ww _rwrw+.wY— w— w.,�_�n_wunw_ 30 ordinance may regulate, restrict or prohibit any use or 31 development within the jurisdiction for a period not to •`.�'+ w.r� +rw_w —.mow w�.w �.w r..�w�w_��_ww �.aw__..w— r_.�_w.� 32 exceed one year from the date it is created, and may be SF1653 -1E KS 1653 1 renewed for one additional year. 2 Sec; 17., ENEW MUNICIPAL SEWER SYSTEMS.] 3 Notvrithstandinq the provisions of sections 1 to 16 of this 4 act, the council shall have no authority under Laws 1975, 5 Chapter 13 to require a local governmental unit to construct 6 a new sewer system to serve structures or buildings for 7 which a building permit was issued prior to the effective 8 date of this act. 9 Sec, 18. Unless the context indicates other vise, 10 references to section numbers in this act refer to Laws ww_w�ww__s�www�w�.�.� ��w ^wr..�s�w�wwwroww�wsw ..11 1975, Chapter 13. 12 Sec, 19. This act applies in the counties*of Anoka, 13 Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, ,Scott and Washington, ®�w_w�rw ww.�ww�w�.�w���w�wr�asw_w ^ems 14 Sec. 20. [EFFECTIVE DATE.] This act is effective on 15 the day follo,vina its final enactment. __ wwrwww ww �ww w_�A�+ 0 16 MIDWLS'T PLANNING AND RL- IH;A�.c JL C=.. PW I L A N D P L A N N I N G A N D U R B A N R E.5 E A R C H C O N S U L T A N T S �r Minneapolis, Minnesota 55405 Telephone: (612) 3743030 2101 Hennepin P March 31 1975 Mr. Robert A. Worthington, AIP, Chairman MA1P Legislative Committee Suite 2200 Northwestern Financial Center 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 RE: Manditory Comprehensive Planning Legislation - Preliminary Review Dear Bob: As indicated during our phone conversation of 24 February, I am extremely concerned over the Legislation which the Metropolitan Council has drafted regarding manditory comprehensive planning. A planning professional of course cannot oppose the need to plan, coordinate development, and implement a course of action which has been established. The structure, means and mechanisms by which the Metropolitan Council has proposed to achieve this desirable objective are however subject to question. In this regard, I have outlined below what I consider major points of the proposed bill which require clarification or which are major implications to be thoroughly considered: 1. Governmental reorganization and concepts An overall concern is that the bill is out of sequence with what would appear to be a logical progression in decision - making and establishment of policy concerning local and regional government structure and responsibility assignment. It would seem appropriate that the major transfer of power to the Metropolitan Council from local units and special districts should be addressed as a separate item and issue apart from planning and development concerns. A. Elected Metropolitan Council - an issue generated by the major reorganization proposed is the election of Metropolitan Council members. Being concerned only with planning the bill does not consider what would appear to be a fundamental requirement given the authority being transferred from elected local officials to the appointed regional decision - making unit. If the intent of the Legislation is not to have an elected regional body and this step is not first accomplished, a critical variation from our established form of government would occur. B. Responsibility versus authority - As now structured, local units would maintain near total responsibility for planning and development, yet lose control over their authority to act. The Metropolitan Council's required review of compre- hensive plan implementation programs creates a major division of responsibility and authority. Given the required review and amendment process assumedly local units of government would not be able to alter their zoning or capital,. improvement expenditures until the Metropolitan Council had 90 days to review the modifications and then would be possibly subject to question and legal action should there be a difference of opinion. This structure divorces the local unit which taxes and spends money from the authority on how expenditures are to be made. For example, in the area of zoning, should the local unit of government be subjected to litigation as a consequence of following the Metropolitan Council's directives, would the Metropolitan, CounciI assume liability or be a joint defendent in the case? Noteworthy also in this regard is an. apparently new transfer ^t power and responsibility to park districts and boards with their being delegated all open space, park and recreation facilities planning. C. Check and balance system - A basic principle of.american government is a check and balance system. The system. which would be produced by the legislation does not apparently provide for this basic element or concern unless it is assumed that local government does and .would have recourse through the courts. .Potentially, this item is partially "addressed through the notation that waiving or modification of established requirements can occur. However, the determination of such variances is not clearly established in terms of who has the responsibility and on what. specific grounds this can occur. It is suggested that.specific.criteria for variances be established in a fashion to the State's'Municipal .Planning Act for. Zoning. Secondly, there should be a form of a board of adjustments and appeal separate from the Metropolitan Council or the Planning Advisory Group. In essence this portion of the Legislation requires considerable review to insure due process of law and equal protection. 2. Demand on Local Governments A potential problem may be the highly specific duties and time Limitations which are imposed. Noted above was, what is interpreted to be a 90 day delay on zoning decisions, and capital improvement expenditures. In addition, however, there is a two year provision for preparation of plans. Is this a realistic situation for central cities, given their diversity and also the concern to involve and gain participation from citizen and neigh- borhood groups? A similar problem may exist for counties within their rural area. Also rave the costs and staffing implications of this demand been analyzed and calculated? Assuming passage of the Legislation, local units may require more time to budget and program work activities. 4 r 3. Metropolitan Council Responsibilities Experience'Ihas indicated that even with current responsibilities and assignments the Metropolitan Council cannot always process r.referral :items within the 90 day period. provided for its review and comment. The great influx of additional work will surely add staffing and financial demands on the Metropolitan Council's operation. Has this demand been analyzed and calculated in detail? A related matter is will the Council itself, as now structured on a part -time basis be able to cope with and thoroughly execute its policy responsibilities with the massive decision- making which is envisioned. 40 Metropolitan Assistance As now expressed, the role of the Metropolitan Council is a wide open door. A more precise definition and outline of what areas of assistance can or will be provided is necessary. Should the_:implication 1-° that the Council staff will be able to do local governmental planning, it is contended that a conflict of interest and breach of professional planning ethics will exist.. Planners, whether salaried or consultant, . working for municipal units of government are:currently prohibited from becoming financially involved with private: interest when they have the responsibility to review cnd make recommendations on development matters in the public interest. Because of metropolitan activities in housing, park and open space, etc. will the Council staff be. able to objectively work for what are in essence two individual and separate clients? Also,. would potential, if not in fact, prejudicial treatment be generated between the . units which the Council's staff directly assisted with planning and those communities which completed their own work. Such would apply to comprehensive plans, capital improvements as proposed to be regulated under the Bill, and grant -in -aid applications currently subject to review. 5... Professional Ability. and Qualifications A fundamental issue is the definition of what consitutes an effective comprehensive plan. The -Act would appear to indicate that basically a capital improvement program and zoning ordinance .are the elements to be addressed. While this. issue should be addressed:.in and of itself, a related question is the ability and qualifications of those . responsible for preparing as well as reviewing planning work. Governmental agencies as well as the planning profession should make every effort to avoid a repeat of.the 701 "era problems, part of which can be attributed to unqualified individuals conducting work%: The proposed Bill offers no means to prevent the problem occurring either in the private or also the public sector. It is recognized that the structuring, and administering of professional regulation is and should be beyond the scope of the manditory planning legislation. However, the administration of manditory planning with some form of quality control is.a parallel concern and should consequently be addressed in a companion bill. This again points to the need for a thorough analysis of the decision- making process and need to identify all related requirements and issues which are associated with manditory planning. 3 6. Appropriation expenditure The $2,250,000 appropriation for implementation of the Act is a substantial funding request which should be defined and allocated more precisely in terms of use and allocation. Some jusitifcation and rationale (not to be included in the Bill itself) should be provided to more rationally assess the adequacy of or extravagance of the request. 7. Review and comment on proposed legislation In view of the far reaching implication of the proposed Act and also the Metropolitan Council's development framework policies on citizen participation, it is disturbing to see how little exposure through formal channels that this Bill has received and the apparent speed with which it is being pushed into the State Legislative arena. Decisions of this magnitude should receive substantial discussion and review by all interests affected. To achieve adequate discussion would appear to require the delay of introduction of the Bill until at least the next session of the Legislature. would hope that this matter can be more extensively discussed by the MAIP Legislative Committee and. that a formal and more refined analysis and statement -could be formulated. would appreciate being involved in such meetings. Thanks for the opportunity to have an advanced review of this matter. Sincerely yours, MIDWEST PLANNING AND RESEARCH, INC. David R. icht, AIP Vice President DRL /nd cc: Bill Chapman Bob Webster Greg Luce Ron West Dick Putman David Hozza Kathy Kozar Dan Sheridan 4 C COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS Metro Council BilI for an Act (1128175 draft). Land Planning By: B. B. Chapman, AIP Wehrman, Chapman Associates, Irc. 1415 North Lilac Drive Minn- apol is, Minnesota 55422 I Nava had an opporfunity to review the Ell1 for an Act carrying a 1/28/75 draft data. The bill represents a substantial chang5 policy, concerning responsibility for planning and land development administration within the Metro Area. Although there is a Head for public bodies to plan for and administer better land use and development: and although the funding for such planning is essential to accompli;'n this, the suggested bill has some majorproblems. The problem relatas primcrily to ` . and i ow land development ad- major problems. should be accomplished.. A srratificetion of'. the State, Metro, Council and Local responsibilities is not understood within the provisions of the bill. The following represents my primary comments and questions in this regard. 1 The bill calls for a new Advisory Metropolitan .Land Use Commission made up of appointed individuals from various segments of the metropolitan area with the ob- ligation to prepare a .N,etro System Component, Q Does the metro area need a new plan when the Council already has some Metro System Plans and Development Frcmework wiih guides and policies? Instances exist in which the Council or Staff wild support one policy in con- - flict with another or directly choose not _to support the presently M.C. poll Gies. 2. A new Metro Svstem Component is due completed by April 1, 1970 and a Compre- hensive Plan for each Governmental Unit by April 1, 1978. Q Dogs this imply that PO ,C, believes that a Comprehensive Plan is a product? Planning is considered by most as an ongoing process and each element pro- vides the guidelines for order. It moy be questionable to go back to the procedure of preparing product oriented plans. 3. The bill appears to ask the legislature to: (a) Allow M.C. to draw a new 1V e' - System plan. (b) Require every local governmental unit to prepare a Comprehensive Plan Which has "continued conformance and consis;ancy with the Metro system plan ". (c) Require every local unit.to adopt controls (zoning, subdivision regulations, etc) by January 1, 1979 and the controls must be "consistant with the plan ". e 4. 5. 6. Q Does this mean that local controls and plan must be consistant with the Metro System Plan which is not yet defined? Isn't it a bit difficult to support a new M.C. plan knowing that all local plans must be consistant and in conformance with it? The Comprehensive Plan required of local units has some extensive definitions of content. Q Does this mean to replace the Comprehensive Municipal Plan definition as contained in Section A62.352 and the Comprehensive Plan relating to coun- ties as contained in Section 394.22 of MN Statutes? The draft bill Ca115 for tha park d:sri's - t0 prepara tha "parks and open space sec- tion" of the local comprehensive plan, Q Does this mean that the Hennepin County Park district has the responsibility to prepare the park and open space sections of comprehensive plans for Hopkins, Wayzata, Minnetonka and thin many other cities of the county? The bill suggests that if an official control becomes inconsistent with the compre- hensive plan because of a plan chcnge, the control shall be amended to b4 con - sistent with the plan. witnin 90 days. Q Planning, is parformed.by cities in Minnesota for the purpose of "guiding" the future development and this is done in many ways including adopting a co-m - prehensive plan. Does the sug @iested bill make.the. local plan (which is con r sistent with .the Metro System Component) an edict for local adoption within 90 days rather than a land use guide? This is contrary to the principle or' planning as.a process. The bill allows M.C. to prepare a plan which calls for a consistent local plan and a consistent local zoning and subdivision ordinance and does not give M.C. the res?onsibi.lity of rn,�nagement. Q Should a government have such power to plan without the responsibility of manag °irent? Might it not be beti-er to either: (] ) give the entire manage- ment of all land development to the M.C., or (2) give only that which is of Metropolitan Si nificance to M.C. and allow local administration of issues of non - metropolitan significance? Plans of local units must include anticipated urban developments designating five year urbanization areas. Q Although M.C. will first prepare the M.C. System Plan and the local plans will be consistent with the plan, who will be responsible for the growth pro - iection inconsistencies beMeen M.C. and the local government? 6- J 9. As a result of an Act, substantial amount of local planning can be performed with state funds. Q With planning to be performed with State funding, would it not be well to assure that such planning be performed under the direction of a "qualified pro- fessional planner "? Legal engineering and Architectural services performed with state funding is performed under the direction of professionals such as Lawyers, Engineers and Architects. 10. Local units may delegate or otherwise contract with another unit of government for services to prepare its comprehensive plan or official controls. This could've an adjacent community, the County, the M.C., the State of Minnesota, a Jtatr College, tha Siam of IOWA, th Uni ;'er5!iy or cny other government willing to accept the job. Q Is this a reversal or the Stave policy of relying on the private enterprise system to provide services which are available through normal channels? The suggested bill appears to: 1 . Call for the placement of all planning in the hands of M.C. and leaving the prob- lem of administrat ion and responsibility %vith the local bodies. 2. Perpetuate the product approach to planning instead of the accepted process ap- proach. 3. Ask the legislators to require each local unit of government to prepare aplcn in conformance with something that doesn't exist. 4. Makes Stare funds available for planning without even a hint that.performarce will be under the direction of a qualified professional planner. 5. Favors a system that is contrary to the State policy of using the private enterprise system for providing services that are reasonable through. normal business channels, for the perfor -mance of pro;essional services. 6. Asks to prepare another Metro plan when the present Metro plans are not supported by the M.C., some policies conflict with others and M.C. has not sorted out what is of Metro significance and what is of local significance. �roM Vttf ot A G�nA��e� o �te A M'eH _TwsJJ,,fe oT (J4 A; OV C �s. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MANDATORY PLANNING LEGISLATION The MAIP Legislative Committee is reviewing the Mandatory Planning Legislation now under consideration by the Minnesota Legislature. This Committee and the Executive Committee of MAIP have a number of concerns relating to H.F. 1530 and S.F. 1653. Copies of these companion bills can be obtained by calling 296- 2887'a'nd 296 - 2314. . In order to expand upon the concerns of the above committees and present meaningful input to the Legislature, we seek your comment. Please feel free to comment on the bills or on some of the following issues: 1, Is it a basic truth that since problems of urbanization and development transcend local governmental boundaries, no single unit of government can adequately plan their solution and there is a need for the adoption of coordinated plans, programs and controls by all local governmental units and school districts? 2. To what extent should the Metropolitan Council, consisting of Council members appointed by the Governor of the State, have governing powers over local issues of a local government without assuming also the responsibilities of ad- ministering and managing the implications of such exercised powers? 3. Are there areas of regional concern beyond that which is governed by the Metropolitan Systems Plans of the M.C. that should be placed within the jurisdiction and governmental responsibility of the M.C.? 4, To what extent should a local governmental unit be required to prepare a com- prehensive plan, adopt official controls and implement programs consistent with a regional type plan if the impact of the local plan has no material affect outside the limits of jurisdiction of the local unit of government? To what extent should the M.C. review and comment on such plans? 5. Is it reasonable to require local units of government to adopt plans, controls and implement programs for the purpose of ensuring that urbanization occurs, according to the local comprehensive. plan which also is required to be con- sistent with all of the 400 or so policies of the many existing and future chapters of the M.C. Development Guide. 6. Is it reasonable to expect local units of government to attempt to develop comprehensive plans, official controls and implement programs consistent with M.C. guides and policies at a time when the M.C. policies may be somewhat inconsistent and inconsistently administered? 7. Is it necessary for the M.C. to create a new appointed Advisory Metropolitan Land Use Committee to function under the Governor - appointed Metropolitan Council to serve only in an advisory capacity concerning the applications for and the disbursement of grants and loans to local units of government for use in the performance of required planning? 8.-- -Is it reasonable to enact a law that will change (in the metropolitan area) present municipal planning legislation in order that the comprehensive plan is to be a required City Council adopted plan rather than a plan of a Planning Commission for the purpose of guiding future development. You are invited to promptly return your written comments to B. B. Chapman, AIP, Wehrman, Chapman Associates, Inc., 1415 North Lilac Drive, Minneapolis, MN.55422. subutba Tublic gCealt li T utsng i cS -mce n IN HENNEPIN COUNTY West 201 Telephone: 925 -3960 8700 W. 36th Street St. Louis Park, Minn. 55426 Telephone: 933 2445 Mr. Warren C. Hyde, City Manager City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mr. Hyde: The following is our report of public health nursing services in Edina during November, 1975 Additional copies are enclosed for council members. this this month this year last yr. month last year to date to date 1st of the month case load C8 88 - -- - -- admitted to service 7 8 91 107 closed to service 11 10 89 89 End of month case load 64 86 - -- - -- Accumulative total case load - -- - -- 153 175 Home nursing visits 41 54 570 689 Health teaching - counseling visits 32 24 335 375 Total home visits 73 78 905 1064 Not home -not found Home health aide service hours Well Child Clinic attendance Immunizations given 1 1 25 19 28 232 330 -3/4 356 -- 2 9 21 - -- 14 108 146 Sincerely, (MISS ) HILDA W. BOY, R.N. HWB:fm DIRECTOR cc: Curtiss V. Rockwell, M.D., Health Officer Kenneth Esse, Sanitarian SUPPORTED BY TAX FUNDS FROM MUNICIPALITIES OF 4 SUBURBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY AND THE UNITED FUND i January 19, 1976 TO: Warren C. Hyde, City Manager FROM: Robert C. Dunn, Director of Public Works and City Engineer SUBJECT: Improvement Feasibility Report (1976 -1) The following improvements have been investigated and it has been determined that they are feasible and their construction would be in the best interests and toward the orderly development of the City of Edina: IMPROVEMENT AND LOCATION ESTIMATED COST PERMANENT STREET SURFACING AND CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER r McCauley Terrace from $ 11,157.57 McCauley Trail east to cul -de -sac Glasgow Drive from $ 18,069.39 W. 78th Street to cul -de -sac W. Highwood Drive (Whiteman $ 12,862.35 Addition) from Blake Road east to cul -de -sac Malibu Drive and Lincoln $ 35,496.59 Drive in Edina Green GRADING AND GRAVELING W. Highwood Drive'(Whiteman $ 9,686.66 Addition) from Blake Road east to cul -de -sac Improvement Feasibility Report (1976 -1) January 19, 1976 Page 2 IMPROVEMENT AND LOCATION ESTIMATED COST WATERMAIN York Terrace from W. 74th Street $ 19,587.02 to W. 75th Street; Easement line W. 75th and W. 74th Street from York Avenue to York Terrace West Highwood Drive (Whiteman $ 8,226.70 Addition) from Blake Road to cul -de -sac at existing West Highwood Drive 500' + North of Pine Grove Road Malibu Drive, Lincoln Drive $ 29,371.33 ,and Easements in Edina Green GRAVELING Malibu Drive in Edina Green $ 9,553.99 SANITARY SEWER Easement line from Lot 5, $ 51084.18 Block 1, Whiteman Addition to South of cul -de -sac on W. Highwood Drive York Terrace from W. 75th Street $ 13,348.58 to W. 74th Street Malibu Drive in Edina Green $'26,050.73 STORM SEWER West Highwood Drive from 269' $ 14,747.28 East of Blake Road to Mirror Lake Malibu Drive and Easements $ 12,029.30 in Edina Green Improvement Feasibility Report (1976 -1) January 19, 1976 Page 3 I hereby recommend that upon acceptance of this report by the City Council on January 19, 1976 that Public Hearings on.these improvements be scheduled for.February 230 1976. Respectfully submitted, Robert C. Dunn, P.E. Director of Public Works and City Engineer RCD : j vn cc: Mayor and Council February 2, 1976 TO: Warren C. Hyde, City'Manager FROM: Robert C. Dunn, Director.of Public Works and City Engineer SUBJECT: Improvement Feasibility.Report (1976 -2) The following improvements have been investigated and it has been determined that they are feasible and their construction would be in the best interests and toward the orderly development of the City of Edina: IMPROVEMENT AND LOCATION SIDEWALK Xerxes Avenue from Heritage Drive to the.East line of part of Lot 4, Cassin's:Outlots Both sides York Avenue from Heritage Drive South to cul -de -sac Both sides W. 64th Street from York to Xerxes South side Heritage Drive from Xerxes Avenue to 300' East of Barrie Road North side W. 66th Street, Rolf to Ridgeview Both sides Ridgeview, W. 66th Street to Valley Lane Both sides Valley Lane, Ridgeview to Valley View Road East side Valley View Road, Valley Lane to W. 66th STORM SQAIER. Easement lines from the South side of Interlachen Blvd. to pond South of Cooper Circle; from pond South of Cooper Circle to Paddock Road;.Paddock Road from South line of Lot 14, Rolling Green Addition North to Lot 9, Rolling Green Addition ESTIMATED COST $ 26,688.26 $ 54,961.42 $ 96,570.71 $ 420--126.00 r Improvement Feasibility Report (1976 -2) February 2, 1976 Page 2 IMPROVEMENT AND LOCATION ESTIMATED COST PERMANENT STREET SURFACING AND CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER Waterman Avenue from Waterman $ 14,863.24 Circle West to cul -de -sac I hereby recommend that upon acceptance of this report by the City.Council on February 2, 1976 that Public Hearings on these improvements be scheduled for February 23, 1976. Respectfully submitted, Robert C. Dunn, P.E. Director of Public Works and City Engineer RCD:jvn cc: Mayor and City Council r !off �t -rte 1-1 New PA pl� OF Mir PI%ESz:mmwa t �"TD '��t�tAiN. rm.- cob-C7 cF 7 7 z '17 77`77- 7757 4W as Nmw wcrky. -V 'I �6- Fi KE4j; Gels Rwv4 j ofn A D D C� mAerrfr-4&. 0 27 t to Mrs L JTZ, W ow nn .4 IP46� a d e' ■ t y c }1 { x 1 r f• 1, t U`. '► TRH iU�`x°e "x' f.,y. # �y +"J . - � � �r , �= _} .,�:_, �}�w �.� ,k,� 1T ::,s _._T^ .:fr•�. ,' a d. :.,�. f ID +rem . s nu,c w E-e4o- �-A OtMMLIt h M E M O R A N D U M January 28, 1976 TO: Warren C. Hyde Mayor and Council FROM: Roger Downey SUBJECT: CITY NEMNSLETTER The first issue of Edina News, the new City - School District newsletter, was mailed to all Edina residences on Monday, January 26. The issue was typeset by a private printer and then printed on the School District's press. It is officially a School District publication so that it can be mailed at non - profit organization rates. This saves about $1,000 in postage compared to the City's bulk rate permit. Printing on the School's press does not represent a major savings, and the possibility of contracting the printing for the April issue is now being explored. The costs for the January, 1976, Edina hews and the January, 1975, City Newsletter are shown below. Edina News -- January, 1976 Typesetting, keylining, design of masthead $ 371.00 Printing labor at Edina East 319.47 Paper ........... ............................... 380.73 Ink ............. ..............................0 45.00 Negatives 16.80 Postage ......... ......................4........ 296.17 Total ... $1,429.17 City Share ... $ 714.58 City :Newsletter ---January, 1975 Printing and folding $1,249.75 Postage (1st class for those mailed with ...... 1,155.50 humestead exemption forms) Postage ('bulk rate for apartments) 247.79 Keypunching apartments 79.10 Printing labels 25.00 Affixing labels & inserting into envelopes .... 85.00 Misc. forms and supplies 5.50 City Total... $2,£47.64 h gd RESOLUTION IN MEMORY OF THE REVEREND DONALD C. CARLSON WHEREAS, the Reverend Donald C. Carlson was the first pastor of Normandale Lutheran Church of Edina, starting a mission group in 1950; and WHEREAS, during the Reverend Mr. Carlson's ministry, Normandale Lutheran Church grew to become one of the most influential congregations in Edina's community life; and WHEREAS, the Reverend Mr. Carlson was an active and effective parti- cipant in many civic matters during the rapid development of Edina;-and WHEREAS, the Reverend Mr. Carlson passed away very suddenly on January 30, 1976; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that on behalf of all of the citizenry, profound grief and deepest sympathy be expressed to his family and to the members of Normandale Lutheran Church; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Edina memorialize "Pastor Don's" outstanding and significant contributions.to the entire community; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that appropriate copies of this resolution be transmitted to the members of his family and to Normandale Lutheran Church. ADOPTED this 2nd day of February, 1976. Mayor city of brooklyn park TO: SUBURBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY MAYORS FROM: JIM KRAUTKREMER, MAYOR, BROOKLYN PARK fk111 If A;, (,�, r January 20, 1976 5 8 pThe following appeared in the January 12, 1976,Minneapolis Star: 5 "De Mars (Minneapolis City Council President) said suburban T opposition to a bill to relieve Minneapolis of paying most of H the cost of indigent care at Hennepin County Medical Center A appears to be dissipating. V E N Under a state imposed formula, Minneapolis taxpayers currently p pay most of the cost because most poor patients live in Minnea- B polis. R 0 Suburban opposition to assuming a greater share of the cost Kapparently waned after the 1975 Omnibus Tax Bill was passed, Y which shifted 90 per cent of indigent health costs from the N county to the state. R This year, Minneapolis taxpayers will pay about $2.4 million for indigent care and suburban taxpayers will pay.about $1.09 million. If the use formula were eliminated, Minneapolis would M pay only $1.29 million and suburban communities would pay $2.24 N million." N E SWe have sitting on our thumbs while Minneapolis continues to put more T and more of their tax burden on Hennepin County suburbs. I believe A that suburban coirLmunities should work with the core cities and absorb 5 some of the obvious burden they have ... but I don't believe we should 5 sit back and give them a blank check to continuously pass more and 4 more of their tax burden on. the suburbs. The time has come to either 3 sign the blank check or voice opposition! We should sit down and T discuss the situation to determine what can be done. E E A meeting has been set up for Wednesday evening, January 28, 1976, at P Minnetonka City Hall Council Chambers, 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard (just Nwest of I -494). It will start at 7;30 p. m. I hope we can get repre- sentatives from every suburban Hennepin County community at the meeting. If you can't make it, please ask a council member to come in your place. 4 If other members of your council wish to come, they are more than welcome. 2 5 4 Please call the City Manager'.s.Office in Brooklyn Park, 425 -4502, to let 5 us know whether you will be there or not. If you can't make it, let us 2 know if you feel something should be done. See you at the meeting! TTV /. .. 2617 ANTHONY LANE N. E. ■ ST. ANTHONY VILLAGE, MINNESOTA 55416 ■ 612/761 -13B66 PROPOSAL The firm of DRM Consultants, Inc., proposes to provide to the Cities of Hennepin County, individually and collectively, the following services: 1. Gather and collect data pertaining to assessments, taxes, property violations, state aids, and services relative to the Suburban community and its relationship to Minneapolis. 2. Analyze and coordinate the ,above data and report the findings to contributing communities.. 3. Provide.,and coordinate public relations, education and lobbying efforts._to acquaint the citizens and government officials with the results of the study. 4. Formulate a program of continuing effort for the gathering and disseminating of pertinent data. 5. Report verbally to collective gathering of representatives of member communities at two week intervals for control and guidance of efforts. DRM Consultants, Inc., proposes to provide the above stated services in the following manner 1. Provide 40 hours of manpower per week to conduct the research, assemble data, and coordinate lobby and public relations efforts. 2. Provide necessary secretarial help. 3. Maintain office space and support facilities such•as telephone,- typewriter, etc. 4. Utilize expertise of municipal officials and staffs to supplement data gathering and analyzation of data. DRM Consultants, Inc.,'proposes to provide the above services for the following consideration: 1. For the period of February 1, 1976 until April 30, 1976a total amount of $13,000.00. 2. For any period shorter than the above, an amount equal to $1,000.00 per week. The City of , Minnesota, agrees to retain DRM Consultants,.Inc. for its portion of the study. We.City of agrees to pay to DRM Consultants, Inc. the amount of $ .05 per capita based on the most current Metro- politan Council census as its rightful contribution to the study. cont. Proposal continued..... Page 2 It is mutually understood that any funds in excess of the amount of $13,000.00 which are received by DRM Consultants, Inc. for this study will be placed in an escrow account and any decision to disburse those funds or to return the unused portion thereof shall be made in concert with representatives from all communities who contribute to the study. Being in agreement, the following affix their signatures..... s/s Mayor Manager DRM Consultants, Inc. City of 2817ANTHONY LANE N. E. • ST. ANTHONY VILLAGE. MINNESOTA 55418 • 612/781 -6866 MUNICIPAL FINANCE STUDY Potential Funding Sources Community Population -1970 Brooklyn Park 29,945 Edina 44,046 Hopkins 13,428 Minnetonka 35,776 Bloomington 81,970 Brooklyn Center 35,173 Chanplain 6,298 Maple Grove 6,275 New Hope 23,180 Richfield 47,231 Plymouth 18,077 ■=7.'i A l Cost @ $0.05 1capita $1,497.25 2,202.30 671.40 _1,788.80 $6,159.75 $4,098.50 1,758.65 314.90 313.75 1,159.00 2,361.55 903.85 $11,752.45 GRAND TOTAL $17,912.20 /ENG1NF-E -: RS J 2817 ANTHONY LANE N. E. ■ ST. ANTHONY VILLAGE, MINNESOTA 55418 ■ 612/781 -6868 DRAFT OF LETTER TO HENNEPIN COUNTY MAYORS PROPOSING FISCAL STUDY, W) CC TO MANAGERS Dear Last year the Suburban Hennepin Communities were almost sand- bagged by Minneapolis with their biased fiscal study and their attempt to get the suburbs to take over the Minneapolis responsibility of the Hennepin County Hospital. Only through the valient efforts of a ,few of our, dedicated elected officials and staff were we able to hold them off.. We -now _enter another legislative session in which Minneapolis has indicated it intends to continue its efforts to get more suburban money into the city. SOMETHING MUST BE DONE:. AND SOON; We need instant manpower and instant effort, both to provide the information to back up our position :and to effectively acquaint the public and the legislators with our problems. I submit to you that we do not have the luxury of sitting back and hoping that someone else will protect our taxpayer's from the unending Minneapolis rape of the suburbs,..... we do not even have the time to organize officially and hire.a staff to do. our research. Please give thoughtful consideration to what follows: I will make myself and the staff of my consulting firm, DRM Consultants, Inc., available to provide research, coordinating _and ' lobbying efforts for the single purpose of protecting the fiscal integrety of Suburban Government. I propose that this effort be undertaken for the months that the legislature is in session and at that time evaluated as to the extent it should be continued. By investing a few dollars now in this study you can insure your community that you are doing everything in your power to protect .their 'interests and their pocketbook. The more communities that are willing to become involved, the more work can be done at a reasonable cost. My proposal is this: For a total cost of $1,000 /t7eek I will provide 40 hours of research and lobbying and public relations manpower plus necessary secretarial help, and maintain office space and support facilities to accomplish the goals stated. -All monies received above the amount mentioned would be put in an escrow" ­ account. At the end.of the legislative session a decision would be made to proceed with additional research and public relations efforts, or even to return unused funds to the communities involved. The attached proposal gives you more detail. Some of your colleagues have already indicated an interest in this approach. It is one way to become opperational immediately, accomplish the task at hand, and have time to evaluate a future course. I'd be happy to discuss the; idea.with,you and your council if you desire more information. I remind you that time is of the essence and hope that you can have this matter on your agenda for your react meeting. Sincerely, C i t y of ff , G 4001 WEST FIFTIETH STREET • EDINA. MINNESOTA $3424 927 -8861 January 19, 1976 Submitted by John Nvlund FERTILIZER PURCEASES FOR EP.AE ?TAR GOLF COURSE Once again I recommend parFx IBDU 24 -4 -12 for fairway fertilization and IBDU 20 -0 -16 for greens. I would like to rake two applications of 20 -0 -16. One in the spring and one in the fall when we aerate. Country Club 8 -4 -24 is 100% Sulphate of Potash which 'is excellent for our dry summers. The 18 -4 -10 is for tees and some greens. The Country Club is a fine granular compared to the IBDU which has a larger size pellet,so more fertilizer is being; used by the plant and less is picked up by our greensmower. IBDU is sold only through Turf Supply Company in Minnesota. Country Club is sold through *Northrop King Company. BREAIMOTNN OF FERTILIZED, PURCHASES ParEx IBDU 4 ton 24 -4 -12 $ 473:50/ton $1894.00 1' ton 20 -0 -16 486.50 /ton 729.75 $2623.75 Country Club 2 ton 8 -4 -24 $ 205.20 /ton $410.40 1 ton 18 -4 -10 363.20/ton 363.20 $773.60 oK C., TOTAL $3397.35 . 1 ..4 VILLAGE nr EDIM. ' PURCHASE Rr" QUISIT'ION ' 19 ----------- - - - - -1 DATE DELIVER MATERIAL T0: — MATERIAL NEEDED BY: SUGGESTED SOURCE OR / USUAL SOURCE: 1 � DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE REQUISITION NO. P.O.NUMBER sia AMOUNT lACC'T. CHARGE •5/ %t may- /-� 7,6't�v �735c o10 6 3.7-5 PREPARED BY: APPROVED Bi DEPART,�SNT' laAD DO NO T KIRK IN itilS S ?•aCS RE ;,EI VED 19 APPrull 1 DEPT. VILLAGE Or EDINA ' REQUISITION NO. PURCHASE REQUISITION ' G ---------------- - - - - -1 DATE I' 19 19 ` DELIVER MATERIAL TO:' !1 l ✓✓ MATERIAL NEEDED BY: P.O.NMER SUGGESTED s%TRCE OR USUAL SOURCE: DEP,VLr`:iT laAD Pftl�t.�art:tG DEYl'. :tG WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners did approve the eventual demolition of the Naysmith- Townsend Residence Hall for nurses at the Glen Lake Sanitarium Complex, and the City Council has been informed that it has been determined by certain studies that said building is structurally sound and in good condition, and the City Council verily believes that-said building represents a potentially viable site for the location of various state, county, or local programs and services, and the City Council further believes that proper consider- ation of the merits of such building was not given by the County Board of Commissioners prior to its decision to approve of the demolition of such building and the City Council deems it proper and in the public interest and for a public purpose to request the Hennepin County )3oard of Commissioners to reconsider the demolition o� said building: NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MINNETONKA THAT the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners be and hereby are urged to reconsider their approval of the demolition of such building and further urges the Board to make additional studies in _respect to the potential use of such building and directs the City Staff to assist the County in such studies. 'Adopted by the City Council of the . o,f, ;Decembl!r, 1975. jai r) /, ATTEST : ' . Ma aret E. Mullen, City Clerk Action on the above resolution: ity of Minnetonka this 15th day Motion for adoption: Higuchi Seconded by: Larsen voted in favor of: c'„�J_ nprrhetto. Hiauchi, Larsen, Hanus, Bailey a .December 22, 1975 The Honorable James VanValkenburg Mayor City -of Edina 4801. W. 50th St., Edina, Minnesota. 55424 Dear Jim: Hennepin County is coritemplat.ing .leas'ing space for a ..det.ox center while the County owns a- structurally sound vacant building on the grounds of.the Glen Lake Sanitarium. The estimated cost.of bringing the Glen Lake building up to minimum standards for use as a detox center is $2.1 million.- The five year lease on the facility the County is cons.ider,ing =would be approximately the same cost a,s bringing this public building up to standards. The ,,Minnetonka, Council has passed the;, :,enclosed,resolutio.n and are hopeful your- Council will join us in this effort. Thank you. Cordially, C. Bailey Ma °r .JCB /t Enc. the_city..off, ces are located at 14.600 minnetonka ,boulevard minnetonka, min.nesota 55.343`; 9337.251=1 X 4 DORSEY, MARQUART, WINDHORST, WEST & HALLADAY DONALD WEST JOHN 5. HIBBS 2300 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING THOMAS R MARTINET WALOO F MARQUART ROBERT 0. FLOTTEN WILLIAM R NIB B4 JOHN W WINDXORST JOHN MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA S S 4 O 2 PHILIP F SORTER HENRY MALLADAT JULE M. MANNAFORD T STR ROBERT J STRUYK MICHAEL A OLSON WILLAM B PAYNE ARTHUR B WHITNEY LARRY W. JOHNSON ROBERT A ME40ERG RUSSELL W, LINDOUIST THOMAS S. MAY (612) 340 -2600 JOHN O KIRBY DAVID R BRINK G LARRY GRIFFITN R A. SCHWARTZBAUER MORACE HITCH CRAIG A BECK DAVID N iRONEK VIRGIL X. HILL DAVID L MCCUSKV CABLE: DOROW THOMAS W TINKHAM WT ROBERT V- TARBOX THOMAS O. HOE JON F T ROBERT J. JOHNSON JAMES H. O'MAGAN TELEX: 29 -0605 EMER'W BARTLE M B. HASSELOUIST JOHNM MASON TELECOPIER:(612) 340 -2868 JOHN P. VITKO NS'ONE PETER DORSEY MICRAEL W WRIGHT 4TEVEN K CHAMr LIN, GEORGE P. FLANNERY LARRY L VICKREY DON D.CARLSON CURTIS L. ROY LOREN R. KNOTT 1466 W -FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MICHAEL J. RADMER ARTHUR E. WEISBERG PHILLIP M MARTIN ST. PAU L, M 1 N N ESOTA 56101 PAUL J SCHEERER DUANE E JOSEPH REESE C. JOHNSON (612) 227- 8017 DAN i NICOL JAMES B. VESSEY CHARLES J HAUENSTEIN MICHAEL TRUGNO WILLIAM A WHITLOCK CHARLES A, GEER - WILLIAM J MEPPEL E.OSCIIVI. UER JOHNC ZWAKMAN JONATHAN VILLAGE CENTER KEN NETH IVERSON THOMAS M. BROWN BROW JOHN R. WICKS JAMES A FLAMER CORNELIUS O. MAHONEY EUGENE L JOHNSON CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318 DAVID L. BOEMNEN THOMAS S. ERICKSON JOHN W WINDHORST, JA (612) 448 -4012 LAWRENCE R. OLIVER WILLIAM C. BABCOCK MICHAEL PRICHARD PRANK H vplGr M iCHAEL E BRESS WILLIAM R SOTH WILLIAM E. MARTIN RAYMOND A. REISTER RICHARD G. SWANS -)N WILLIAM H HIPPEL JR JOHN J. TAYLOR FAITH LOHMAN 115 THIRD STREET SOUTHWEST RORFRTA BURNS BERNARD G HEINZEN DAVID A. RANHEIM ROCH ESTER, MINNESOTA 5 5901 T INI A BEITZ WILLIAM J. HEMPEL ROBERT J SILVERMAN ( 507) 288 - 3156 MICHEL A LAFONC January 29, 1976 The Honorable Members of the City Council Mr. Warren C. Hyde, City Manager City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Re: Topographical Maps Dear Council Members and Mr. Hyde: BRADFORD LFERGUSON ROGER J MAGNUSON J. ROBERT HIBBS JAY F. COOK STANLEY M. REIN CHARLES L POTUZNIK VERLANE L ENDORF DENNIS SURATTI GEORGEANN BECKER ROBERT �CSBINS BARRY O. GLAZER PETER HENDRIASON NICKY R. HAY IRVING WEISEP STEPHEN GOTTSCHALK THOMAS ELKINS KENNET!' J. CUTLER DAVID O'JINLAN JAMES PI?LEMEIER GAR 7 M JOHNSON THOMAS W FINN LYNN KROMINGA JAY L BENNETT OF COUNSEL GEORGE E ANDERSON ROBERT VANFOSSEN On March 4, 1974, the City of Edina entered into a contract with the Harry S. Johnson Companies ( "Johnson ") for the production of topographic maps of the City. The maps have been produced and delivered to the City, and the City has paid the contract price, $34,720. We have recently been advised by Mr. Robert C. Dunn that the maps thus produced, based on field use, are so inaccurate as to be virtually worthless. Mr. Dunn has asked that we determine what remedies are available to the City for this breach of contract. The facts with which we have been provided indicate that Johnson committed a material breach of contract because the inaccuracies in the maps far exceed the margins for error specified in the contract. Moreover, the inaccuracies are so pervasive that the maps cannot be salvaged or used for any other purpose. The City's performance obligations terminate where there has been such a breach, and the City's remedy is to recover, as damages, the value of Johnson's performance had it been in accord with the requirements 7 of the contract. In addition, the City would be entitled to recover conse- quential damages -- in other words, those damages that were in contemplation Icy of the parties at the time of the contract and that resulted because the maps cannot be used. The City can pursue its remedy in three ways: 1. If the City does not want new topographic maps, it can simply declare the Johnson contract breached and demand the return of the contract price. t DORSEY. MAROUART, WINDHORST, WEST 8, HALLADAY The Honorable Members of the City Council Mr. Warren C. Hyde, City Manager Page 2 January 29, 1976 2. If the City does want new maps, it can enter into a new contract with a different contractor. (We understand that Johnson no longer has the capability to perform such a contract.) Johnson would then be liable for the cost of the new contract. Of course, any new contract by the City must be let by competitive bidding, as required by the Uniform Municipal Contracting Law. 3. Again, if the City wants new maps, it can make a claim against the performance bond posted for the Johnson contract. The bonding company would then be obligated to see that new maps were produced, and Johnson would be liable for any new contract cost in excess of the amount of the bond. The bond given by Johnson obligates the bonding company only to obtain bids and a contract for the doing of the work and for payment of that contract to the extent of the bond amount, $34,720. Any cost in excess of the bond amount, as stated, would have to be recovered from Johnson. This letter is given to advise the City of the breach of the John- son contract and of the City's remedies for that breach. We await further instruction as to what action, if any, the City desires to take. Very truly yours, TSE /abc T omas S. Erickson cc: Mr. Robert C. Dunn MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Warren Hyde, City Manager FROM: Gary West, Administrative Services Coordinator. DATE: February 2, 1976 SUBJECT: PROPOSED SALARY SCHEDULE FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL Enclosed is the proposed resolution of maximum wage rates for the unionized employees of the Fire Department. These wage rates are in accord with the provisions of the 1975 -77 Labor Agreement with International Association of Fire Fighters, Local No. 1275. The increase is 6% over the ending wage rates for 1975. Please note that an annual salary is not indicated for 1976. There is a Cost of Living adjustment scheduled in the contract for April'l, 1976,.-and this will affect the final annual salary. I would anticipate bringing a resolution to the Council adjusting the January, 1976, wage rates the second meeting of April or the first meeting of May, depending upon when the Cost of Living figures are released. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE SCHEDULE OF MAXIMUM 14AGE RATES FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL BE IT RESOLVED that the maximum wage rates for Fire Department personnel for the year 1976 be established as follows: July 1975 January 1976 - Biweekly- (Annual) Biweekly (Annual) 1 st Year $ 383.00* ( 9,958.00) $ 383.00* 1 Year of Service 476.00* (12,265.50) 504.56* 2 Years of Service 496:16* (12,784.98) 525.93* 3 Years of Service 530.88 *. (13,679.64) 562.73* . 4-Years of Service 539.84* (13,910.52) 572.23* Driver 554.40* (14,285.70) 587.66* .Inspector Base + 14.56* Base + 15.43* * Members of the Fire Department will receive an additional $ 30.00 per month($ 13.85 biweekly) for operation of the Fire Department Ambulance, qualification for Red Cross First Aid Certificates, and taking such additional instruction in First Aid as may be required by the City. S MEMORANDUM MEMO TO: Warren C. Hyde, City Manager FROM: Bob Bahneman, Acting Building Official SUBJECT: Building Permit Activity I thought you might be interested in today's Building Permit activities: 5101 West 70th Street Nine Mile Creek Apartments 60 Units 7200 York Avenue South York Plaza, Phase II 138 Units 6300 Gleason Road "The Timbers" Apartments 140 Units 5700 -04 Tucker Lane Valuation: $2,130,000. Valuation: $7,000,000. Valuation: $8,000,000. Londonderry Development - 2 Units Valuation: $90,000. 5708 -12 -16 & 20 Tucker Lane Londonderry Development - 4 Units Valuation: $242,000. 5724 -28 -32 & 36 Tucker Lane Londonderry Development - 4 Units Valuation: $242,000. TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS 6901 -03 McCauley Trail South Willys Holmquist - 2 Units Valuation: $101,700. SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS 7044 Lanham Lane - Wally Irwin, Inc. Valuation: $81,100. 7108 Lanham Lane - Wally Irwin, Inc. Valuation: $89,400. 6617 Waterman Avenue - Paul Brown Valuation: $66,600. 6103 Arctic Way - Paul Elmer Valuation: $72,700. I -60 . -a Memorandum Mr. Warren Hyde Page Two SINGLE FAMLIY DWELLINGS (con't.) 7716 Shannon Drive - Quentin Collins TOTALS TOTAL APARTMENT UNITS - 338 Units TOTAL TOWNHOUSE UNITS - 10 Units TOTAL TWO FAMILY UNITS - 2 Units TOTAL SINGLE FAMILY UNITS - 5 Units Valuation: $74,500. Total Valuation:$17,130,000. Total Valuation: $574,000. Total Valuation: $101,700. Total Valuation: $384,300. TOTAL NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS 355 TOTAL VALUATION:$18,190,000. TOTAL PERMITS ISSUED 1/29/76 12 Permits BB:c 1/29/76 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 300 Metro Square Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Thursday February 5, 1976 1:30 P.M. Metropolitan Council Chambers AGENDA 1:30 I. Roll Call 1:35 II. Approval of Minutes: (previous meetings) a. January 15th Meeting b. January 22nd Meeting 1:45 III. Public Hearing on Natural Resources Model Ordinances (Marcel Jouseau) 2:45 IV. Referral _3253 - Project Development Report on CSAH 5 in Burnsville (Connie Kozlak) 2:50 V. Recommendation From the Parks and Open Space Commission Regarding the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program (Bob Nethercut) (Further material to be forwarded) 3:20 VI. Referral -2790 - Lake Elmo Interim Airport Master Plan Study (Chauncey Case) 3:50 VII. City of Edina Resolution in Regard to Ramps to and From the South at Benton Avenue and 1"lighway 100 (Steve Alderson) 4:15 VIII. Review Criteria fcr Discretionary Community Development Block Grants - FY 1.076 (john :sari) Analysis of rIUD Area Office Allocation of Discretionary Community Development Block Grants - FY 1975 (J. Kari) 4:30' Adjournment Robert L. Hoffman 1.30.76 E. F. ROBB. JR. - PHONE _ COMMISSIONER\ 348 -3084^ BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2400. GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55487 Date: December 30, 1975 To: Hennepin County Mayors, Legislat ?s, and others From: E. F. Robb, Jr., Commissions Subject: Minneapolis lease in Hennepin County Government Center In their eagerness to pick.the wallets of suburban Hennepin County taxpayers, the Minneapolis City Council, its Mayor, and three County Commissioners elected from residences within Minneapolis, erred when they tried to slip through a fast ball, high and on the inside, before their new mayor takes office. During the past two festivity -laden weeks, the long - debated tenancy for the City of Minneapolis in the new Hennepin County Government Center was quietly approved. Mistakes involving millions of dollars and other significant lease matters appear to have occurred. Three items will illustrate. $1.1 million "front end" construction money from Minneapolis to the County was omitted from the lease except for provision for repayment thereof under certain circumstances. An escape hatch permitting the County to recover space which may be desperately needed during the lease term, was not included in the lease. And the intended $4.97 annual per square foot rental ($349,000 total) which is too little, actually is at least $27.52 (nearly $2,000,00.0) which is too much. Each of these items can, and probably will, be amended by actions of the City Council and the County Board early next year.. You can influence these amendments. The press may or may not cover adequately these "details" which illustrate the consequences of hidden government and power politics being played in the Taj- MaHennepin today - -- consequences which have affected, and will affect, redistricting, jail, workhouse, detox, health and social services, and other major matters involving Hennepin. County. Open, righteous indignation from taxpayers and their political leaders, is the best way I know to deal with these sorts of problems after they arise. I urge you to be concerned and to take appropriate steps to affect this lease promptly. Attached are excerpts from the lease which may help you in your efforts. If you have any questions, kindly let me know. LEASE .Approved by City Council (excerpts) December 18, 1975 Approved by Hennepin County Board - December 26, 1975 W I T N E S S E T H: LESSOR does hereby lease to TENANT and TENANT does hereby take from LESSOR the Leased Premises in the Hennepin County Government Center, comprising a total of 70,160.14.square feet approximately, for the purpose of conducting various governmental functions initially through the following departments of TENANT: (1) City Data Processing on the "A" Level of said Center, approximately 10,790.70 square feet (Computer Room, 3113 sq.ft.; Computer Systems and Office, 7677.7 sq.ft.); (2) City Attorney on Level 17A, approximately 15,669 square feet; (3) Public Works on Levels.18A and 19A, approximately 15,669 square feet on each level; .(4) City Assessor on Level 21A, approxi- mately 8,312.04 square feet; (5) City Purchasing on Level 22A, approximately. 4,050.4 square feet. - - -- . LESSOR also grants to TENANT, during the term of this lease and any renewal hereof: the use of fifteen (15) parking spaces in the garage beneath the Hennepin County Government Center, - - -- The Parties hereto mutually agree as follows: 1. TENANT shall pay to LESSOR, - -- a monthly base rent of $2.05 per square foot, including parking. - -- 3. LESSOR shall supply util TENANT'S business in the shall pay as additional rent for said services provided in Article 4 below, foot.. Such payment shall be included rent, as above provided. -- ities for the conduct of leased premises. TENANT utility service and for those the sum of $2.92 per square with the payment of minimum 4. LESSOR will.supply regular cleaning services, passenger elevator services during business hours, air conditioning and heat during business hours, use of the vertical mail delivery system - -- and clean and maintain the store fronts which are a part of the leased premises. - -- 28. There are no understandings or miscellaneous agreements not incorporated in this lease. This is a Minnesota contract and•shall be construed according to the laws of Minnesota. - -- :32._ If, during the first ten (10). years of this lease, TENANT'S occupancy of any portion or portions of the premises is terminated, LESSOR will reimburse TENANT in an amount equal to the unamortized costs of finishing that portion of the leased premises, provided that such termination should not have been due to.breach of any obligation undertaken hereunder by TENANT. - -- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have signed this Lease the day'and year first above written: Approved 'as to Legality Date 12/19/75 /s/ Keith M. Stiff Dep. City Attorney Upon proper execution this Agreement will be legally valid and binding and upon date of approval is in compliance with all laws relating to the .subject matter hereto. /s/ LeRoy W- Jackson Assistant County Attorney Date: 12-- 18 -75: APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: Assistant County. Attorney Date: CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS BY: /s /Albert J. Hofstede Its Mayor And: /s /Imogene C. Elsner Ass't. City Clerk And: City Comptroller TENANT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN By: Chairman of its County Board. And: Deputy County Administrator ATTEST: Deputy County Auditor •LESSOR r714 9 �o r K Tev" rc� cp_ Mr. Jav�eS, vas vali NP-11\ Ma yor g Ed was bue5+ 5 0 A �eac ra Val _1/oa K h U,► ^�j B Tom. '.usse -t� �ru9 <r •T -am', ly c-; 7491- yor K Terrace p"o rest •the. wI) p Ved S4rAie o.� yor^ T errac!. anA 75 i-� s +1 o 'Th .4,c, yea lie; G�4 A'. housy:�.5 0-� , b locX Zn the SUM 'm"--f �. cQUS� ��s► n� 7roVn h� S�f` � �IaGNS VZfS �a �.Vlc�S US Ylg ac-rt ail 40 be. +ctyle--11 `I-® kep-p *k e5e horne,5 Qf).a clect�l ;s dtr+ . oj5o gas cn clo+p:`5 .} + ©U4 .ail . 3 re u-) a5 h't Y) Tkc R us:5e- (I a s Ks 4ke �ollow i1-�9c-4"►on o-�' r�cues�i�y Colt 11 G < < : Aar +ke. '7W Te Y, y -ace. be, Paved o s 5�0i1. cl s ve -�y 4.ru1y y 4ctKe Vol, K �r.- h9 yOd Ir5�9 J