Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutweekly notes - Sept 22 2017 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS—WEEKLY NOTES for: September 22nd 2017 409 TO: City Council Members&Staff FROM: Eric Johnson,City Administrator Zoning and Development Items: 1. The City has not received any new applications; 2. The Issacson Building at 14385 60th street(where Pizza Man is located)was supplied a letter requesting a number of site clean-up matters be addressed.See enclosed,some have been taken care of to date,but the site remains in poor condition.Please see the enclosed letter. 3. Staff did have a meeting with Creative Homes(Palmer Site 13-Single Family Homes)to initiate their development process as they have indicated that they plan to now move forward.Staff will be sending an update to the neighborhood surrounding the Palmer Development site updating them that the City expects the developer to commence construction in 2017 or 2018—see enclosed. 4. 1 have excerpted a short article from the LMC Legislative Update for 2017 that highlights MN STAT 415.19 that outlines specific actions a City must now take before it adopts an ordinance update.Overall,the impact is not meaningful from a cost or process standpoint,but will delay consideration for adoption or repeal of ordinances by at least 10 days. 5. In Oct 2016,STANTEC did perform a pre-construction traffic count/study along 58th Street/west of CSAH 15—to understand the baseline data for the anticipated traffic impacts and/or improvements once the Kwik Trip was completed and operational.They will be doing the second comparative study—now post construction in early October. 6. Staff did seek a proposal from a recognized consultant/firm that can complete independent Fiscal Impact Studies related to annexations and development proposals. Enclosed is a copy of a draft Annexation Fiscal Impact Study the City will generally request of the Hy-Vee Development elements.This study—when completed—should provide the information that this was outlined in Scott Richards letter dated 8/23/17.While this version should likely be amended to some degree completion of these type of studies—by a qualified third party such as SPRINGSTEAD—are typical of major annexations and aid cities in understanding costs in the short and long term and are funded by the party(the developer)seeking the annexations. Mayor McComber provided: MAOSC Federal Legislative Update-Sept 2017 METRO CITIES NEWS—for Sept 22nd,2017 Article from the Star Tribune—Traffic Counts on STH 36/Bridge. Meeting Report from the Coalition of Utility Cities"Economic Development Brainstorm"Meeting 9/13/17 SAVE THE DATE—Nov 13th—Greater MSP Annual Meeting. SAVE THE DATE-The 2018 LMC Conference will be in St.Cloud, MN-June 20-22 1 of 27 cl-k City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd.N. Direct: 651.439.4439 x 1105 P.O. Box 2007 Email:jhultman@cityofoakparkheights.com Oak Park Heights,MN 55082 Phone:651.439.4439 Fax:651.439.0574 September 18,2017 Mr.Will Isaacson Isaacson Children's Property Co. 8027 N.501h St. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 Re: Oak Park Plaza @ 14375 601h St. N.,Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 Site Maintenance Compliance Request Dear Mr. Isaccson: I was over to the retail center this past week and noted a number of items in violation of City Nuisance Ordinance 1109,that require vour immediate attention. The City has communicated with you on several occasions as most of the items noted below and at this time does request your immediate attention to the following: • Patch the holes at the building parapet where signs have been removed, most -- noticeable at Lace Salon and a few at Keep it Growing; however,ensure the entire fagade is patched. • Remove signs from the multi-tenant sign for those businesses that are no longer in operation at the retail center and replaced them with blanks. These should be the same as the rest of the sign in background color. We did discuss your getting blanks when the sign was updated for this purpose. • The space vacated by former tenant Lace Salon needs to be - cleaned up so that it is tidy in appearance through glass from exterior, including hanging wiring.Also,the area beneath the former signage on the face of the building is dirty and needs to be cleaned. • Review the rear of the retail center property to ensure that all trash containers, etc.are fully screened within appropriate trash enclosures. • The asphalt continues to remain in poor and deteriorated condition throughout the retail center. This needs to be patched or replaced so that it is safe for vehicle traffic. • Have a handrail installed to each side of the stairway located to the eastern end of the sidewalk. 2 of 27 • The grass needs mowing and weed treatment.Weeds and other vegetation need to be trimmed back and treated. Presently the West access has vegetation that obstructs clear traffic visibility when exiting/entering. 00_M AQUW I am happy to meet with you on site or at City Hall to review and discuss the requests noted above. If this is something you desire, please contact me immediately. Regardless, your prompt attention is requested to have compliance addressed no later than Friday, October 20. 2017. A site check shall be made after this time to verify the status of compliance. Continued failure to address these issues will result in additional enforcement actions by the City. Sincerely, PLANNING&CODE ENFORCEMENT Jule 'ultman, Building Official c: Eric Johnson,City Administrator 3 of 27 City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N.Box 2007.Oak Park Heights,MN 55082•Phone(651)439-4439•Fax(651)439-0574 September 21, 2017 TO: RE: Palmer Site Update—5625 Oakgreen Ave. r Dear City Resident: As you may recall, in 2014 the City was approached by the Property Owner(Creative Homes) of the above property to consider the placement of 13 single family homes on the site generally known as the "Palmer Site". It is the 7+/-acre site located at the southeast comer of Oakgreen Ave and 58th Street.At that time, a number of public hearings were held and while there were some concerns, the project was viewed as generally favorable by the neighborhood and was subsequently approved. Since that time,the Developer has obviously not moved forward with their project but has continuously sought extensions to their approvals. In early 2017, the City informed the Property Owner that if it did not complete the necessary steps to commence the project by October 31s, 2017 — by executing the necessary Developer's Agreements and posting required financial securities-that the City's approvals would lapse and the Council could not consider any further extensions. Meaning, that if they still desired to develop the site that they would be required to go back through the City established review process. The City wanted you to be aware that at this time, the City has been re-engaged by the Property Owner and they appear to be moving forward with the necessary submittals to meet this 10/31/17 deadline which would likely result in construction in Spring 2018, or perhaps late 2017.This would include tree removals, roadway construction,storm water construction and other regularly anticipated elements associated with single family residential development. There have not been material changes from the 2014 plans. Please contact me if you have any questions or would like further information on the submitted plans. The enclosed maps generally show the approved layout. Kind Regards Eric Johnson, City Administrator -- 651-439-4439 4 of 27 P� ( II r � , .d K y� �w r w. .1 c j' � -41 a lZ p OJ O Notice of proposed ordinances �1 Legislative Budget Office established Chapter 77 (HF 1242*/SF 1224) creates a new statute, First Special Session Chapter 4 (no HF/SF 1*) is the state Minn.Stat.§415.19,to require a 10-day notice for most government finance bill.Article 2,section 3 creates new proposed ordinances.Interim ordinances are exempt from language,Minn.Stat.§3.8853,establishing the Legislative this notice requirement. Budget Office under the control of the Legislative Coordi- • Definitions natiN Commission.The office is tasked wrtlh nra6din J the • Electronic notification system."Electronic noti- Leg' with"nonpartisan,accurate,and timely infor- fication system"is an electronic notification system matio on the fiscal impact of proposed legislation,with- operated by the city that distributes general city infor- out re to political factors."Minn.Stat.§3.987,subd 1, mation or notices through email. is am ded to reflect that this office will be responsible for • Proposed ordinance."Proposed ordinance"is a pro- loc government impact notes.Effective Jan.8,2019. (AL) posed new ordinance or a proposed amendment to an ordinance. • Ten-day notification.At least 1+Q_days before a city HOSPITALS council schedules a final vote on a proposed ordinance or proposed amendment to an ordinance,it must: blit hospitals investment powers specified • Provide email notification of the proposed ordinance C pter 18 (HF 559/SF 341*)is the public hospitals or proposed amendment to an ordinance if the city in estment bill.It amends Minn.Stat.§ 144.581,subd.1 has an electronic notification system that distributes sp cifying the powers of a governmental entity that owns city information or notices via email. operates a hospital,to allow the governmental entity ramendment tice of a proposed ordinance or the proposed o invest hospital funds in a security recommended by an to an ordinance in the same location stment adviser,bank,or trust company,provided the public notices if a city does not have an are invested according to written investment poli- electronic notification system. cies d procedures established by the governmental entity. • Update the city website with the language of the pro- (LJnd r Minn.Stat.§ 144.581,a hospital owned by a gov- posed ordinance or the proposed amendment to an er ent entity in part has the authority to own shares of ordinance if the city posts ordinances on its website. sto in business corporations.Investments by publicly If ordinances are not posted on the city's website,the o ed hospitals are also governed by Minn.Stat.ch.118A, city does not have to comply with this provision. loch limits investments by government entities to United • Business license application or license renewal.If es securities,certain state and local securities,certain a city has an electronic notification system,the city must co ercial paper that is highly rated,and certain general inform those who apply for a new business license or ob' tion bonds.) (Note:Section 2 of Chapter 18 pertains to license renewal of these notification procedures at the Co k and Orr ambulance services hospital district tax use modifi- time of the application. c 'on.It is summarized in the Local Laws section.)Effective Aug. • Failure to provide notice. Failure to provide this ,2017. (AF) notice does not invalidate an adopted or amended ordinance. • Minimum requirements.A city may provide more HOUSING notice than required by this new law if it has the abilf ity to do so. Workforce housing development grant program Chapter 94 (HF 1620/SF 1456*) is the omnibus jobs and ec ' ug. 1,2017.(11K) Chapter growth appropriations bill.Article 1,section 3 appropriates$2 million each year in ongoing funding to Police and firefighter civil service commissions Chapter 97 (HF 1640/SF 1354*) amends Minn.Stat. the workforce housing grant program.Article 6,section 28 § removes the program from the Department of Employ- 420.03.It requires vacancies in a police and firefight- ment and Economic Development(DEED),Minn.Stat.§ ers'civil service commission to be filled by appointment within 90 days.It authorizes commissions to set their own 1 16J.549.Article 11,section 7 authorizes Housing Finance Agency(MHFA) to administer the program in Minn.Stat. meeting schedules and choose their own meeting loca- tions.Under current law,the commission must meet the §462A.39.The qualifications are very similar to those firm the program when it was administered in DEED first Monday in February of each year and must meet at with one change related to the preference among applica- the city hall.It decriminalizes donations or solicitations to, tions now is given to cities with population under 30,000 or for,any political party or political purpose.Effective Aug. instead of those with populations less than 18,000.Effective 1,2017. (AF) July 1,2018. (HC) Page 12 League of Minnesota Cities 6 of 27 POSTED: 9-21-17 -5A-v f LE- T1 OL THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON OCT 10TH 2017—AT THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY COUNCIL MEETING— (MN Stat 41519) CITY O OAK PARK HEIGHTS WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 2017 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 401, ZONING ORDINANCE AS IT RELATES TO THE ACCESSORY BUILDING REGULATIONS FOR HEIGHT, SIZE AND ALLOWANCES FOR TEMPORARY STRUCTURES IN SECTION 401.02.13 DEFINITIONS; 401.15.1)ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, USES AND EQUIPMENT; AND SECTION 401.15.C.8 BUILDING TYPE AND CONSTRUCTION THE CITY COUNCIL OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 401.02.13 Definitions, is amended to include the following: Temporary Structures: Any structure that is designed, constructed and intended to be used on a short-term basis. SECTION 2. Section 401.15.D.1-11. Accessory Buildings, Uses and Equipment, is amended to read as follows: 1. Connection with Principal Building. An accessory building shall be considered an integral part of the principal building if it is connected to the principal building by a covered passageway. 2. Location. No accessory buildings shall be erected or located within any required yard other than the rear yard except by approval of a conditional use permit according to the provisions of Section 401.03 and Section 401.15.D.13 of this Ordinance. 3. Height/Setbacks. Accessory buildings shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height or exceed the height of the principal structure on the lot. Accessory buildings shall be five (5) feet or more from side lot lines, eight (8) feet from the rear lot line, and shall be six (6) feet or more from any other building or structure on the same lot. Accessory buildings may be closer than six (6) feet to other buildings or structures provided the 7 of 27 requirements of the Building Code are met. Accessory buildings shall not be located within a utility and/or drainage easement unless written approval is obtained from the easement holder. The setback and height requirements under this provision may be varied by approval of a conditional use permit as provided for in Section 401.03 and Section 401.15.D.13 of this Ordinance. 4. Lot Coverage. No accessory building or detached garage or combination thereof within a residential district shall occupy more than twenty-five (25) percent of the area of the rear yard except by approval of a conditional use permit according to the provisions of Section 401.03 and Section 401.15.D.13 of this Ordinance. 5. Number of Structures. No building permit shall be issued for the construction of more than one (1) private garage or storage structure for each detached single family dwelling, commercial, industrial, public or institutional building except by approval of a conditional use permit according to the provisions of Section 401.03 and 401.15.D.13 of this Ordinance. Every detached single family dwelling unit erected after the effective date of this Ordinance shall be so located on the lot-so that at least a two (2) car garage, either attached or detached, can be located on said lot. 6. Size. No accessory building for single family dwellings or combination of attached and detached accessory buildings shall exceed one thousand, two hundred (1,200) square feet of floor area, except by conditional use permit as provided for in Section 401.03 and Section 401.15.D.13 of this Ordinance. 7. Administrative Approvals. Storage buildings one hundred twenty (120) square feet or less and in conformance with the provisions of this Ordinance may be approved by the Building Official without a building permit, and may be in excess of the number of structures allowable in Section 401.15.D.5. above. 8. Building Permit. No building permit shall be issued for the construction of an accessory building in a residential district when an existing detached garage or other accessory building is located on the same lot, except by conditional use permit as provided for in Section 401.03 and Section 401.15.13.13 of this Ordinance. 9. Accessory Uses. No accessory uses or equipment such as air conditioning cooling structures or condensers, swimming pools, and the like which generate noise may be located in a side yard except for side yards abutting streets where equipment is fully screened from view. 8 of 27 10. Compatibility. The same or similar quality exterior material shall be used in the accessory building and in the principal building except as allowed as a temporary structure in Section 401.15.D. 11. of this Ordinance. All accessory buildings shall also be compatible with the principal building on the lot. "Compatible" means that the exterior appearance of the accessory building including roof pitch and style is not at variance with the principal building from an aesthetic and architectural standpoint. 11. Temporary Accessory Structures. Temporary accessory structures shall be allowed in all zoning districts with the issuance of a special event permit for a maximum of 50 days in a calendar year subject to the following: a. The structure shall be securely fastened to the ground, subject to the safety requirements of the manufacturer. b. The structure shall be kept in good condition and its appearance shall not be detrimental to the area or adjacent properties. C. The temporary use does not involve the erection of a substantial structure or require any other permanent commitment of the land. d. The temporary structure shall be removed at the end of the permit period. If not removed within 10 days thereafter, the City shall have the right to remove the structure at the permittee's expense. SECTION 3. Section 401.15.D.13. Accessory Buildings, Uses and Equipment, is amended to revise Section 401.15.D.13 i and j as follows: 13. Conditional Use Permits. Application for a conditional use permit under this sub-section shall be regulated by Section 401.03 of this Ordinance. Such a conditional use permit may be granted provided that: L The building height of an accessory building shall not exceed twenty (20) feet. j. Accessory buildings or detached garages or combination thereof within a residential district shall not occupy more than twenty-five (25) percent of the rear yard. SECTION 4. Section 401.15.C.8. Building Type and Construction, is amended to revise Section 401.15.C.8.a.5) as follows: 8. Building Type and Construction. 9 of 27 a. General Provisions. 5) Accessory Buildings. All accessory buildings to residential dwelling units and non-residential uses shall be constructed with a design and materials consistent with the general character of the principal structure on the lot as specified in Section 401.15.1) of this Ordinance except as allowed for temporary accessory structures specified in Section 401.15.13.11. SECTION 5. The Planning Commission of the City of Oak Park Heights held a public hearing at their September 14, 2017 meeting, took comments from the public, and recommended that the City Council approve amendments to the accessory building regulations as it relates to height, size and allowances for temporary structures in Section 401.02.13 Definitions; 401.15.13 Accessory Buildings, Uses and Equipment; and Section 401.15.C.8 Building Type and Construction. SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication. 10 of 27 Eric Johnson From: Mann, Lee <Lee.Mann@stantec.com> Sent: Monday, September 18,2017 10:35 AM To: Eric Johnson Subject: Traffic Counts and study for Kwik trip and the intersection of 58th and Stillwater Blvd Hi Eric, Just an fyi on the timing of taking updated traffic counts for the above referenced intersection. Last year we took counts on Oct 11 th and 12th,so we will be aiming to do the updated counts the same week this year. Lee M. Mann, A-11', M14, W1, CA Principal Stantec 2335 Highway 36 West,St. Paul MN 55113-3819 Phone: (651) 604-4850 Cell: (651) 775-5956 Lee.Mann@stantec.com (I SHOE The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied,modified,retransmitted,or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization.If you are not the intended recipient,please delete all copies and notify us immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this email. 1 11 of 27 Springsted City of Oak Parks Heights,Minnesota Annexation Study Work Plan September 2017 Objective(s) The objective of this study is to assist the City of Oak Parks Height to develop an annexation impact analysis that will project the costs and benefits associated with the projected growth of the City through the annexation of approximately thirty acres of land area lying west of the City within Stillwater Township. The projected costs and benefits will assume the extension of existing services and infrastructure to be extended into the proposed annexation area. Public costs include the cost of constructing capital facilities(to be paid for by the developer)to support the anticipated growth,the associated operating costs,and the cost of providing municipal services including roadway and utility replacements over one life-cycle. Benefits include property taxes,other fee revenues,community and economic impacts associated with growth and all other appropriate impacts(pro or con)due to new development in the annexation area. Our project appro d b �F Task 1 Review Bac a round I r nn w.on an su ➢ Review bac ' o 'on an assump asF • City's most recent financial information 0 2016 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 0 2017&2018 budget • Proposed land uses in the in the annexation area • Anticipated rate and type of growth and development in the annexation area • Base-line City information related to the provision of services including,but not limited to, miles of streets maintained,miles of sanitary and storm sewer mains,annual police and fire calls,development approval,building permitting and inspection,parks and recreation acreage,etc. • Current staffing levels in all departments and discuss anticipated additional staffing needs and increased operating costs resulting from development with department heads Task 2 Develop Projected Fiscal Impacts of Annexation ➢ Develop projected fiscal impacts resulting from the development of the annexation area • Annual residential and commercial growth and development in the annexation area based on information provided by the City or the developer • Cost of infrastructure and City services needed to accommodate the anticipated development including: o Project the cost of maintenance needed to support the growth and development in the annexation area 12 of 27 City of Oak Parks Heights,Minnesota Annexation Study September 2017 Page 2 o Projected revenue from utility rates to be paid by the development(assumes current City adopted rates) — Does revenue pay for cost of utility maintenance(at current costs)and replacement of utility mains through the first replacement cycle(assumed to be 50 years) o Projecting the annualized operating cost of roadways and their regular replacements thorough one full life-cycle(assumed to be 30 years) o Cost of providing other non-utility City services(police fire,general administration at the City's established standards to the annexation area o Property tax(at current tax rates)and other City revenues resulting from growth and development in the annexation area Task 3 Present Memorandum of Findings ➢ Springsted will first prepare a Preliminary Memorandum subject to the review of the City prior to any final report being completed or shared with other entities. ➢ Springsted will prepare a Final Memorandum of Findings that will contain our findings and recommendations. We will provide an electronic copy in PDF format to the City of Oak Parks Heights ➢ We wilLuawaoauhe Meampowhim of Fin ' to th or workshop session Expectations At a minimum,the following information will be needed to complete the various studies: ➢ Annexation Study Required Information • Copies of the City's most recent Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports • Copies of the 2015,2016, and 2017 budget including revenues and expenditures for each utility • Map and legal description of the annexation area • Map of available City utilities to serve annexation area • Projected growth and development in the annexation area • Other relevant information Timeframe/Schedule for Completing the Project Springsted will commence work on the project immediately after receiving the notice to proceed. We will complete the project within 4-6 weeks of receiving the notice to proceed provided that all necessary information can be obtained in a timely manner and provided that the City is available for necessary meeting in accordance with the schedule. 13 of 27 City of Oak Parks Heights,Minnesota Annexation Study September 2017 Page 3 Should any unforeseen circumstances arise, Springsted can draw on its staff of 70+professionals to keep the project on schedule to the greatest extent possible. Compensation Springsted Incorporated will perform all tasks delineated in our Proposal to Provide an Annexation Study for a professional fee of$ 10,500 which includes all direct and indirect costs. Additional Work Should the City of Oak Parks Heights request and authorize additional work outside the scope of services described in this proposal we would invoice the City at either our standard hourly fees or at an agreed upon fee based on the additional scope requested plus any related out-of-pocket expenses. Additional work includes work outside the scope of services as described in this work plan including,but not limited to: • Work related to a special request • Additional on- tsr • Additional de pmenen ri, a . . � �� Rata Principal&Senior Officer $260 Senior Professional Staff $215 Analyst/Project Manager $160 Support Staff $75 For Client Springsted Incorporated 14 of 27 1 MAOSC SEPTEMBER FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE CONGRESSIONAL SCHEDULE Congress spent the majority of the month of August in recess.Both Chambers returned from their annual August recess the week of September 4, following the Labor Day holiday. The President and Congressional Leaders reached an agreement the first week of September to extend government funding and the national debt limit deadline until December 8, 2017 in order to have more time for negotiations. The House of Representatives has shifted its primary focus to releasing a tax reform proposal and passing the annual budget. The House has also passed all 12 appropriations bills for fiscal year 2018 during the second week of September. The first week of August the Senate remained in session in order to focus on negotiating a version of healthcare legislation that could garner majority support,which was unsuccessful. The effort on healthcare reform has continued as some Senators have put forward their own plans for reform, and the Senate Health, Education,Labor, and Pensions Committee have starting holding hearings to develop bipartisan fixes to the American healthcare system.Meanwhile the remainder of the Senate has shifted its focus to working on annual appropriations bills. UNITED STATES SENATE Affordable Care Act Repeal: In the last week of July,the Senate rejected several amendments to House-passed bill H.R. 1628, designed to repeal parts of the Affordable Care Act(ACA). After the Senate rejected this series of amendments, efforts to overhaul the ACA have stalled. Since returning after the August recess, some new proposals to repeal the ACA have emerged, including the Graham-Cassidy bill.Essentially,the bill would terminate the ACA's Medicaid expansions,premium tax credits,cost-sharing reduction payments, small business tax credits, and Basic Health Program as of 2019 and redistribute the money funding those programs to the states. The bill would also impose per capita caps on Medicaid funding, also offering the states the alternative of a broader Medicaid block grant. Even with the failed amendments and other plans emerging,under the rules of the Senate,the reconciliation option for repealing the ACA in the Senate expires on September 30. This means that if the Senate wants to pass Healthcare legislation with only 51 votes instead of 60 votes, it must do so by September 30.As an alternative to a large,partisan overhaul bill,lawmakers from both parties have started working at the beginning of September in the Senate Health, Education, Labor,and Pensions(HELP)committee on short-term stabilization measures for health insurance. They are considering a series of proposals intended to fix the ACA designed to solicit bipartisan support. Appropriations: The Senate Appropriations Committee has approved eight of its 12 annual funding bills, setting up different levels of spending with the House. The full Senate has yet to vote on any of these funding measures. In the Senate,appropriations bills require bipartisan support with 60 votes required to pass. Since returning at the beginning of September the Appropriations Committee has already begun work on the remaining four Appropriations Bills. 15 of 27 i UNITED STATES HOUSE Budget: The House Budget Committee passed a budget earlier this year,but the measure won't receive a vote until at least the end of September. It could be well into October before the House and Senate agree on a budget. It may face tough opposition to passage on the floor of the House of Representatives as some members of the Majority have raised concerns. The House budget, which calls for more than $200 billion in spending cuts, is a necessary precursor to tax reform legislation as it will allow the Senate to pass the tax legislation with only 51 votes bypassing the standard 60-vote requirement to overcome a potential filibuster. Tax Reform: Congressional Leadership will release a tax reform framework the week of Sept. 25, 2017. Those details will be a crucial negotiating chip as the conference moves to pass a budget resolution for fiscal year 2018 in early October. The House Ways and Means Committee has faced mounting pressure to release a tax plan since returning this month,but lawmakers have not commented on the specifics to be included in the forthcoming document. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady(R-TX) spoke on Sept. 13 to the conference,to discuss the details of the tax plan. Ways and Means Members are expected to meet Sep.24-25 to approve the final details of a tax plan. Once the budget resolution,which will include tax reform instructions, is passed,the committee will introduce the legislation and mark up a bill through regular order before bringing tax reform to a floor vote. Appropriations: The House passed a$1.2 trillion, 12-bill spending package on Sept. 14 that reflects Congressional leaders' plans to prioritize defense over domestic programs in fiscal year 2018. The omnibus bill passed on a mostly party-line vote, with Congressional Leaders relying on members of the Majority to support the legislation.But in the Senate,the measure will be vulnerable to a budgetary challenge by members of the Minority. The big boost for defense greatly exceeds the allowable spending under the Budget Control Act(BCA). The omnibus spending package is likely to remain on hold this fall while appropriators await bipartisan budget talks that will give them better numbers to fund various programs. FAA Reauthorization: The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved a bill (H.R. 2997),on June 27,2017,to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA). However,the bill has continued to face a series of delays due to a controversial proposal to shift Air Traffic Control(ATC)to a nongovernmental entity,which President Trump has endorsed. The legislation,however, still has not been scheduled for a vote in the House, increasing the likelihood that an extension of the agency's authority will be needed. The current authorization is the result of a 14-month extension passed last July and is set to expire on September 30. The bill currently under consideration in the Senate (S. 1405), calling for a four-year authorization of the FAA, does not shift ATC into a nongovernmental entity. In order to pass the Senate, the bill must get at least 60 votes,requiring bipartisan support. WHITE HOUSE Infrastructure Approval Process: President Trump reiterated his belief that the federal government should shrink its environmental oversight role and reduce its permitting timeline to 16 of 27 3 two years for infrastructure projects,while signing an executive order Tuesday,August 15, 2017. The President issued a similar order on January 24,2017, calling for expedited environmental review of priority infrastructure projects. This recently signed executive order sought to promote expediting projects by rescinding a previous rule that required federally funded projects to meet flood-risk reduction standards. The President spoke of additional options to expedite agency review including the creation of a new process whereby major infrastructure projects would only require review under a single Federal Agency that would take the lead on the project. Under this procedure,projects would be given a schedule and missed deadlines would result in the issue being elevated to senior agency officials. These announcements followed an infrastructure meeting among administration officials, including Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao and her deputy,Jeff Rosen.Neither the President nor the Secretary of Transportation provided an update on the status of Administration's infrastructure proposal. However,National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn recently indicated that he hopes to have an infrastructure bill brought up in the House this year, following tax reform. Continuing Resolution: The President signed legislation (H.R. 601) on Sept. 8 to fund the government, suspend the Federal Debt Limit and provide$15.25 billion for hurricane relief. The President and lawmakers agreed to adding a three-month extension of the U.S. debt limit and government spending to a hurricane-relief bill over the opposition of some lawmakers who pressed for a longer debt extension. The plan will extend the U.S. debt limit and funds to keep the government running through Dec. 8,2017. The legislation temporarily suspends the debt limit,allowing Treasury to reset its extraordinary measures that give it some extra time, once it nears the debt limit. The actual amount of time granted by the extraordinary measures will depend on various factors, including Treasury's borrowing patterns, incoming receipts, but has been estimated under this legislation to run out something in the spring of 2018. CONCLUSION LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN Federal Relations Group will continue to work diligently on behalf of the Minnesota Association of Small Cities and with the members of the Minnesota delegation on the aforementioned issues and continuously report back with updates.Please do not hesitate to contact us at(202) 544-9840 if you have any questions or if there are any areas of interest you would like an update on that were not discussed in this article. 17 of 27 Current/Archived Newsletters -Metro Cities Page 1 of 4 CETRO CITIES Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Search I GO Metro Cities News September 22, 2017 Newsletter Archive Have you heard the latest? Small Cell Wireless Legislation Update Follow us on Twittery ` and Timelines 16000, 'r WNS Two important dates are approaching related to the small cell wireless laws Vow 404 OWANIAMS enacted in the 2017 legislative session. Cities working on co-location agreements 164406111610 SWIN11" for the siting of small cell facilities must complete them and make them available to the public six months after enactment, or by November 30th, 2017. Co-location agreements can include a definition of j scope and permitted uses, rental fees, and _ terms of removal. They are not required, and cities can include similar provisions in a ,Iqov� permit or ordinance. low The new law also includes a ban on local moratoriums related to small cell r placement. This provision becomes effective on January 1st, 2018. If a city In CurrentlArchived plans to adopt an enabling ordinance in Newsletters: response to the new small cell legislation, they should do so before January 1st. A Archives city's legal counsel can help determine any needed changes to local ordinances to comply with the law. The League of MN Cities has prepared additional information, including model ordinance information, on the new law. Please click here for that information. 18 of 27 h4://www.metrocitiesmn.org/index.asp?Type=B BASIC&SEC=%7b3738C3AO-1B97-4... 9/22/2017 Current/Archived Newsletters -Metro Cities Page 2 of 4 Questions? Please contact Steve Huser at stevenAmetrocitiesmn.org or 651- 215-4003. Met Council Studying Options to Preserve Manufactured Home Parks The Metropolitan Council is reviewing strategies to preserve manufactured home parks in the region and has identified manufactured housing as an important category of existing affordable housing. At this week's Committee of the Whole, the Council reviewed work to date on the issue. This initiative, called the Manufactured Home Park(MHP) Preservation Project, included two parts. The MHP Preservation Report evaluated the state of the region's manufactured home parks. The second part was a pilot program grant, aimed at preserving manufactured home parks. In August, the Council awarded $235,000 to Maple Hill Estates in Corcoran, to defray part of the cost of connecting to the regional wastewater system. Council staff presented several options for continued preservation options by the Council that could possible include Sewer Availability Charge (SAC)deferrals for MHPs, encouraging cities to include MHP preservation strategies in local comp plan updates, evaluating the pilot grant program, evaluating an MHP SAC discount, allowing MHPs to be eligible for Livable Communities grants, exploring options for private inflow-infiltration (1/1) or investing in an infrastructure fund, and expanding the MHP pilot. Metro Cities will continue to closely monitor this work. Metro Cities' policies on SAC oppose using SAC to subsidize Metropolitan Council goals and objectives. Contact Charlie Vander Aarde at 651-215- 4001 or charile(a)-metrocitiesmn.org with any questions. Legislative Committee to Hear Bill Requiring Approval of Local Housing Goals The House Job Growth and Committee next Monday will hear HF 1037-Vogel, that would require statutory approval of local 19 of 27 http://www.metrocitiesmn.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7b3738C3AO-1 B97-4... 9/22/2017 Current/Archived Newsletters-Metro Cities Page 3 of 4 housing goals. These goals, negotiated every ten years between cities and the Metropolitan Council, are voluntary and negotiated to access grant funding under the Livable Communities Programs(LCA). The legislation would require that local housing goals be submitted each year to the Legislature and stipulate that local goals could be adopted only after legislative approval or if the Legislature adjourns without acting. The bill would also require statutory approval of any housing element of a regional development framework and require the Met Council to report ALHOA (affordable/life Cycle Housing Opportunities Amounts)that represent local funding commitment for these types of housing opportunities as part of LCA participation. Metro Cities' understanding is that all participating communities meet the established amounts. Metro Cities opposes the insertion of statutory approval over the local housing goals that are negotiated at the local- regional level, are voluntary and negotiated for the purposes of accessing regional grant programs. Please contact Patricia Nauman at 651-215-4002 or Aatricia(&metrocitiesmn.orn with any questions or for further information. Comprehensive Planning Forum Thanks to the 50+ city officials who participated in Metro Cities'forum on local comprehensive planning last Friday. Special thanks also to city staff from Saint Louis Park, Burnsville, Brooklyn Park and Shoreview for presenting information on their city's approaches to planning and to Lisa Barajas from the Metropolitan Council for her presentation on comprehensive planning basics, frequently asked questions and regional requirements. Metro Cities staff have received positive feedback from attendees on the content and information provided at the forum. Forum materials was compiled for attendees and will be posted soon our website, or if you would like a hard copy of the materials, please email Sarah Fredericks at sarah(&-metrocitiesmn.or Policy Committees Wrapping Up 20 of 27 http://www.metrocitiesmn.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7b3 73 8C3AO-1 B97-4.... 9/22/2017 Current/Archived Newsletters -Metro Cities Page 4 of 4 This week marks final policy committee meetings for 2017. Committees were well attended, well chaired, and saw robust discussion on a variety of issues. Metro Cities greatly appreciates the time and effort that city officials put in to participate in this process. The recommended policies will be considered and approved by the Board of Directors in October. Metro Cities News is emailed periodically to all Metro Cities member mayors, councilmembers, city managers and administrators to keep officials abreast of important metro city issues. This information is also intended to be shared with city staff. If you'd like to sign up to receive Metro Cities News, please email newsletterCobmetrocitiesmn.org and provide the following: Name, Title, Employer and Email address. Thank you. Metro Cities 145 University Ave W., St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 Phone 651-215- 4000 Fax 651-281-1299 Website www.MetroCitiesMN.org Home I About Us I Metro Clues Members I Board of Directors I Legislature I Metropolitan C uncll I Metro Cities Task Force Report on Metropolitan Governance I Press and Publications 12017 Legislative Policies I Policy Committees I Current/Archlyed Newsletters I Metropolitan Area Management Association I Questions.Commends or suggestions I I Links and Presentations Powered Ey g05.,-XV—.). Printer-friendly Version 21 of 27 http://www.metrocitiesmn.org/index.asp?Type=B BASIC&SEC=%7b3738C3AO-lB97-4... 9/22/2017 Eric Johnson From: Mary Mccomber <marymccomber@aol.com> Sent: Friday, September 22,201710:11 AM To: Eric Johnson Subject: Fwd:Traffic on new crossing Eric, For weekly notes. Mary Sent: Fri, Sep 22, 2017 8:03 am Subject: FW:Traffic on new crossing More traffic crossing new St. Croix River bridge than old Stillwater Bridge Some motorists might have avoided the old Stillwater Lift Bridge By Kevin Giles Star Tribune, Thursday, September 21, 2017—8:39pm Daily traffic has increased significantly on the new St. Croix River bridge compared with crossings on its predecessor,the Stillwater Lift Bridge, according to data from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. Measurements taken at the east end of the four-lane bridge,where it connects with St. Croix County, show a daily average of 28,145 vehicle crossings since its opening in early August. The two-lane Lift Bridge was logging about 17,000 daily crossings when it closed to vehicle traffic on Aug. 2, the same day the new bridge opened. On the Minnesota side,traffic near the bridge isn't being counted. However, sensors on the main road leading to the bridge,Hwy. 36, show an increase in traffic, according to Minnesota Department of Transportation data. "I think there still could be a lot of sightseers,potentially," said Brian Kary,MnDOT's traffic operations director. With any new bridge and road project,he said,traffic patterns shift as motorists find new routes. Some of the motorists on the new bridge might have diverted from the Interstate 94 bridge at Hudson, Wis. Vehicle crossings on I-94 in Minnesota declined from 88,600 two weeks before the new bridge opened to 86,300 two weeks afterward, Kary said. Seasonal changes and recreational travel also will influence traffic counts on the St. Croix River bridge and area highways,he said. The new bridge was built to accommodate 71,500 vehicles a day, according to MnDOT. When the new bridge was being built at Oak Park Heights, engineers said they expected heavier traffic because the bridge would draw motorists who avoided congestion on the old one. In addition,the Osceola bridge north of Stillwater closed for repairs for most of September. 1 22 of 27 The WisDOT numbers show more vehicles traveling east on the new bridge an average of 14,369 vehicles daily—than heading west, 13,776. Data also shows that bridge crossings,both east and west, diminished somewhat since the first tally was taken Aug. 10. MnDOT's first sensor on Hwy. 36, about 3 miles west of the bridge, shows traffic increasing by 2,000 vehicles a day in both east and west lanes. Farther west,at Manning Avenue toward Interstate 694,traffic has increased by an average of about 1,000 vehicles daily. Daily one-way traffic varies by location and time on Hwy. 36, ranging from a low of about 14,000 on some days to a high of more than 27,000 on others. Many commuters crossing from Wisconsin work at major employers such as Andersen Windows in Bayport and the state prisons at Stillwater and Oak Park Heights. MnDOT hasn't measured traffic in downtown Stillwater since the Lift Bridge closed. i 23 of 27 sil_CDAI (TION OF 1-77-77 Becker•Cohasset•Granite Falls•Hoyt lakes•Monticelkt•Oak Park Heights•Red Wing Meeting Report: September 13, 2017 Economic Development Brainstorm Wednesday,September 13,2017 11:00 a.m.—1:00 p.m. Offices of Flaherty&Hood,P.A. 525 Park Street,Suite 470 St. Paul, MN 55103 Report from Bradley Peterson on his meeting with the Center for Energy and Environment Last week, Bradley met with Joe Sullivan and Mike Bull of the Center for Energy and Environment,as well as Brian Halloran,the group's contract lobbyist. CEE reached out to Flaherty& Hood because Joe Sullivan used to work at the firm, representing CLIC.As a result, he is familiar with our issues and believes it is important that we are tied in with environmental and energy groups who are beginning discussions about transitioning away from coal and nuclear. CEE knows that our communities need to be part of any discussion about the future of our state's energy generation infrastructure.They would like to help us tie in to these discussions with other groups.They can be a good resource to bridge conversations between CLIC and environmental groups. Moreover,they may be able to connect us to well-funded groups who can provide valuable research and analysis. Bradley will continue to work with them. What are the challenges we face? The Becker experience showed us that we need to be proactive in planning for transitions away from our generating plants, potentially long before the licenses for those plants are scheduled to terminate. However, before we can develop a package of Economic Development tools or transition aids to seek at the legislature,we need to get our hands around what exactly the challenges are. If cities are going to transition smoothly,we will need to"develop our way out." Challenges: • Tax base o We are engaged in this on the electric generation tax reform legislation o In parallel to what we want to do on economic development,do we need to keep pressing/press even harder on tax reform?Can this be part of providing communities with a "soft landing" in transition? • Broader economic impacts 24 of 27 o Without further study it is difficult to have a full picture of economic reliance on the industry. o We need to get a handle on the full extent of the ripple effects: ■ Loss of jobs ■ Loss of residents ■ Impact on housing market ■ Impact on schools • What additional research is needed to identify the scope and nature of the challenges? o Look at how reliant certain businesses/industries on plants? o We need an inventory of direct employment, related employment,school enrollment o Find external groups to fund a study? o CEDS study(Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy) ■ Doing CEDS plan makes you eligible for federal funding to accomplish goals identified in the study. • Need to be talking about these transitions in terms of the impact on county,region,state, ratepayers. • Adaptive use of existing infrastructure o Water infrastructure ■ Becker example—existing water infrastructure would be well suited for other large water users like data centers. o Can we learn from the Benson example? o Other examples around the country? ■ La Crosse ■ Elk River Reactor o Planning for transmission infrastructure.What transmission lines/throughways are needed? • Dry cast storage o Would have been addressed in the amendments we were proposing to tax reform package o How do we ensure it is secured,safe, paid for,and land use on the location Is addressed. o We assume there will be no federal solution. o Xcel or someone should have responsibility.Otherwise usable land will be nuclear storage. Other issues • Land use o How do we create land use and transportation patters that can serve the future of the state? o We have the opportunity to plan for overall development.Should this planning be done at the city level,or cooperatively at the regional/statewide level o Existing undeveloped land ■ Becker/Monticello example. Potential for parkland,tourism, recreation, use of the river. ■ Ideally an opportunity for collaboration ■ There's incentive for the state to help with transportation(adding a river crossing in particular) 2 25 of 27 o Are we safe to assume that if infrastructure is in place,growth and development will follow,given the natural assets of the land? • Wildlife o Monticello swans example.What happens to them and what needs to be done for them? Brainstorming possible legislative options to explore in the future • State has typically been a good partner in trying to hold communities harmless • LGA o 10% max increase needs to be done away with for transitioning cities. • Transition aid o How much?What does it look like? • Border cities/JOBZ type authority? • How can we make use of our existing infrastructure,such as rail • TIF tools • Siting of new plants o Would host cities get preferential treatment in selection? • Utility taxation o Given our current moment,should we push more aggressively? o Red Wing example:The most recent version of the bill would provide less revenue to Red Wing than in receives under current law, but with far more certainty. • What are options if they mothball a facility? • We need to be a party at the table in the Integrated Resource Plan process • Most importantly,we need to get a handle on the proper sequence of planning/transition events o What comes first?Transportation needs,development,etc. o State should be very interested in how land currently owned by Xcel is developed. Planning for Sept. 14 meeting with LEC legislators • Mathews,Osmek, maybe Goggin will attend • Is the LEC the right venue? • Are they willing to help us get on the agenda and help frame a conversation? • Help make sure Xcel and MN Power are at the table where needed? • Communities have a lot of investment in these plants.We need to figure out a plan/process for this rather than an ad hoc,city-by-city approach. • We can't look at this with a narrow view. 3 26 of 27 X017 GREATER MSP ANNUAL MEETING , 7 VOW i q r" Ir � M"M ,agar MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13 15:30 - 8:00 pm The Ordway Theater 345 Washington IS aintPa��r �� FORMALiN TO FOLLOW Questions)Contact jmft Lghnsgn at 651-287-1362 2 27 of 27