Loading...
2002-01-22 Planning Comm MinutesPlanning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2002 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, January 22, 2002 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Lorberbaum and Commissioners Betlej, B. McManus, Hesse, Dolan, and M. McManus. City Staff present were Public Works Director Jim Danielson, City Attorney Tom Hart, and Administrative Assistant Patrick C. Hollister. Also present was Planner Steve Gritiinan of NAC. Minutes were recorded by Becki Shaffer. Excused: Commissioner B. Friel APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chair Lorberbaum asked for corrections to the minutes of November 27, 2001. Chair Lorberbaum referred to page 7, 10th paragraph, Sara Moss was spelled incorrectly. It should read Sara Maas. Commissioner Betlej asked to move the third paragraph on page 1, which introduces the people present for the Request for Variance, Ridder property, and insert it after the introduction of the Planning Case on page 3. Commissioner B. McManus referred to Case No. 01 -37 under the Verbal Review on the last page. The sentence should read: "Case No. 01 -37: Dr. Eul Kang, Wetlands Permit for Deck — was approved ". Commissioner B. McManus referred to the same page in the paragraph that he stated his endorsement for the recommendations. The third bullet should read: "Significant number of old and young residents, but there are no play areas. Commissioner Dolan referred to page 7, second paragraph that states: "It was the consensus of the Commission to require a monetary park dedication in lieu of land." This sentence should be struck from the minutes, as there was no formal vote. COMMISSIONER M. McMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BETLEJ, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 27, 2001 AS CORRECTED. 1 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 MOTION CARRIED PLANNING CASE #01 -39 INHERITABLE WORLD LLC 1744 DODD ROAD VARIANCE, SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND WETLANDS PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF RIDDER PROPERTY Chair Lorberbaum stated a letter was received by the City requesting this case be tabled until the February meeting. Mr. Dick Braun was present and formally asked the Commission to table this item. He also apologized to the neighbors in the audience for taking their time to attend. Commissioner Betlej asked that Mr. Braun confirm for the record that the review period will be extended by sixty days, from 180 days from the date of application. COMMISSIONER BETLEJ MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER B. McMANUS TO TABLE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL THE FEBRUARY 26TH MEETING. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 MOTION CARRIED Note: Due to a timing issue, ChairLlorberbaum asked Mr. Danielson to present the verbal review at this time. VERBAL REVIEW — JIM DANIELSON 1. Planning Case #01 -38 — Noeker request for front yard setback variance to construct a garage along Delaware Avenue — was approved as recommended by the Commission. 2. Planning Case #00 -40 — Gopher State One Call request to construct a detached accessory building — was denied as recommended by the Commission 3. Town Center Concept Plan — the City is the Applicant, and is being represented by Carolyn Krall, who will be making the recommended changes by the Council and the Commission. This will be brought back to the Planning Commission and is to be scheduled for the March meeting. 2 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 Chair Lorberbaum stated that, for the Public Hearing of the Excel Energy Proposal, the City Attorney, Mr. Tom Hart, was in attendance to advise during the proceedings of this meeting. The City has decided to have a court reporter present as well. It was noted that the court reporter could not make it during this meeting, but will be available if the meeting is extended until January 24th. The court reporter will transcribe the January 22nd meeting via videotape. Chair Lorberbaum asked that people contact her via email for any last minute notifications that she may get to the others before the meeting. PLANNING CASE #02 -01 BRIAN VOGEL 1705 VICTORIA ROAD VARIANCE FROM REAR YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT Mr. Grittman reviewed the site plan of the property that illustrates the location of the house and the deck. Mr. Vogel is requesting a variance to the minimum 30 feet rear yard setback as he wishes to locate a gazebo 25 feet from the rear lot line of his property. Mr. Grittman stated it was discussed whether it would be appropriate to consider this a detached accessory structure, in which case the setback would be compliant, however the structure would then be out of compliance with the height requirements. Because the deck is physically attached to the house, it is considered part of the principal building and is subject to principal building setback requirements. Mr. Grittman reminded that Commission that variances are regulated by the zoning ordinance under a set of criteria that can be summarized as whether or not the City can find that there is some physical feature of the property that is unique and the property in that causes the applicant a hardship in complying with the conditions. Mr. Grittman stated that the property, in this case, it is questionable whether or not it is necessary to construct a gazebo to make reasonable use of this property. There are two possible solutions that would comply with the ordinance: • Drop the structure to grade eliminating the height issue and allowed to be a detached accessory structure, or • Move the gazebo closer to the house and meet the rear setback. As a result of the findings, it is recommended that the requirements for hardship are not met and do not recommend the variance. Commissioner Dolan asked what the height limitations. Mr. Grittman stated that for detached accessory structures, it would be 15 feet. The overall height of the gazebo is approx. 26 feet from the ground to the top of the gazebo. Commissioner Dolan stated that according to the ordinance, the gazebo would have to be located 5 feet from the main structure. Mr. Grittman stated that there is a separation requirement as well. 3 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 Commissioner Betlej asked if this measurement was to the height of the average part of the roof. Mr. Grittman stated that the actual definition measures that the average height of the sloped roof. Mr. Brian Vogel, 1705 Victoria Road, stated that the gazebo has already been built. He explained the measurements and layout of the deck. He was told by the City Planners that it is the roof that causes the concern. Mr. Vogel stated he could take the roof panels off the top. Mr. Grittman stated that if there were not a roof on the structure, it would comply with the setback requirements. The deck alone would be allowed to extend into the yard further than it already is. Mr. Vogel stated he had signatures from all the neighbors, except two. Mr. Vogel stated that one of the neighbors were concerned that with this deck, there would be a lot of loud parties. Chair Lorberbaum informed Mr. Vogel that the City received a letter from four pairs of neighbors. She also recommended to Mr. Vogel that he bring as many signatures to the City Council as he can when this is reviewed at the Council meeting. Commissioner B. McManus asked why Mr. Vogel came for a permit if the gazebo was already built. Mr. Vogel stated the Code Enforcement representatives saw the treated wood in the driveway and told Mr. Vogel he needed to obtain a permit. Commissioner B. McManus asked how much of a personal trauma would it be to the Vogel family to take the roof off. Mr. Vogel stated that he planned on screening the gazebo to keep the bugs out. If the roof had to be removed, it would defeat the purpose. Commissioner Betlej asked for clarification that the gazebo be opened sided. Mr. Vogel stated that it was. He added that the lower part of the deck is skirted and the whole structure is level to accommodate the walk out to allow access directly to the gazebo without having to descend via stairs. Chair Lorberbaum stated that the Commission has to recommend approval with a hardship, that without it, the property cannot be put to a reasonable use. With the fact the Vogel's lived there for about 13 years says that the property can be put to a reasonable use. Mr. Vogel stated that it would be a hardship to move the gazebo. Commissioner Hesse stated that he sees a lack of support from the neighbors and the words that the gazebo is a large scale in proportion with the homes, he would assume that would be a visual concern. If Mr. Vogel had the full support of all the neighbors and if he presented this support to the City Council, there would be a better chance for this to be approved. Commissioner Dolan stated it was hard for him to grant consent given the fact that there are neighbors complaining And he would support this, but as long as the neighbors are complaining and Mr. Vogel is not in conformance and the gazebo was built without a permit, he will have to vote against this. Chair Lorberbaum opened the public hearing. 4 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 Becky Coates, 1699 Victoria Road South, is Mr. Vogel's next -door neighbor and stated the house is a walkout, with the hill dropping down. She stated that the deck and gazebo is very nice. She stated that she did not even know he was building it until about 5 weeks later. She added that Mr. Vogel is a good, quiet neighbor. The big pine trees in Mr. Vogel's back yard blocks the view of the gazebo from the neighbors. COMMISSIONER B. McMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BETLEJ TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 MOTION CARRIED COMMISSIONER B. McMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY CHAIR LORBERBAUM, TO DENY THE VARIANCE BASED ON THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO HARDSHIP INVOLVEMENT. Further Discussion Commissioner Hesse recommended an amendment to the motion that he had discussion to the neighbor, particularly those who have appeared to be in disagreement and work with them prior to meeting with the City Council. Chair Lorberbaum replied that the Commission could recommend that to Mr. Vogel, but it will not be a part of the actual motion. Commissioner Hesse stated the Commission could recommend approving the variance if the applicant comes to the Council with permission of the neighbors. Chair Lorberbaum stated that could be added if the maker of the motion accepts that. Commissioner B. McManus stated the Commission could make lots of conditions and provisions, but Mr. Vogel is a nice guy who is trying to fix up his yard, and the Commission must make a decision on the rules that govern the Commission. He moved denial of the request based on the fact there is no hardship. Chair Lorberbaum also gave Mr. Vogel a copy of the signatures received by the City. AYES: 3 (Chair Lorberbaum, Commissioners B. McManus and M. McManus) NAYS: 3 (Commissioners Hesse, Dolan, Betlej) MOTION FAILED It was noted that because Mr. Vogel will be out of town during the next City Council Meeting, he would be scheduled to appear on February 19tH Commissioner M. McManus stated that on two occasions, individuals have come before the Commission and have not had the information that the Commission did. She would like a clarification to how the information is relayed to the applicant. Mr. Vogel added that out of all the neighbors, only two have disapproved and one of them, located at 1724 Vicki Lane, is not 5 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 within the 100 -foot boundary. Director Danielson stated that it is City Policy to send all the information that the Commission has is also sent to the applicant. He will follow up with the Planning Secretary to insure future correct distribution. Commissioner Betlej added that sometimes the information is delivered via US Mail and that could cause a delay. He suggested that the Planning Secretary call the applicant in advance to inform that the information is available. PLANNING CASE #254.04 - 02.02 XCEL ENERGY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 115Kv POWER LINE FULL WIDTH OF CITY EAST TO WEST, ONE HALF MILE SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 110 Chair Lorberbaum introduced this planning application and asked Mr. Grittman to provide an overview of this planning application. Mr. Grittman presented a map of the city illustrating the route of the Xcel Energy power line. The utility company is seeking a CUP that would permit them to construct a second circuit on the existing route. Part of that project would be to replace the poles with higher ones. The new poles would carry two circuits on the line instead of one. The project started out with original CUP request to the City that was put on hold to allow formation of a steering committee comprised of the mayors of Mendota Heights, Sunfish Lake and South St. Paul. A consultant was then hired to study alternative routes and various other factors related to the project and issued a preliminary report about a year ago. South St. Paul has come to an agreement with Excel for their portion of the line. Sunfish Lake is currently processing its CUP. Xcel is now challenging the cities for their inaction on their original request. The CUP is required because the City defines this use an essential service. A significant amount of information was presented to the Commission, and in that information is a report from the task force relating to the effect of electromagnetic field (EMF) and there is a public health hazard that the City should take into account and that contention is being disputed by the applicant. Commissioner Dolan referred to the consultant's report which states: Xcel has taken the position that the Public Utilities Commission would not permit Xcel to spread the cost of undergrounding project to anyone other than the ratepayers in Sunfish Lake ". Has the Public Utility Commission acknowledged that stance? Mr. Grittman replied that was his understanding. Commissioner Dolan referred to the statement " Prior to the last legislative session, owners of transmission lines of more than 200 kV had the option to seek a statement of need from the Public Utilities Commission, then chose between a local governmental approval process or approval by the Environmental Quality Board (EQB)." Would this be the case that Xcel could bypass the process coming before the City and go directly to the EQB. Mr. Grittman stated it is his understanding that if they get a certificate of need from the PUC, they can choose their forum. It is not believed that this has occurred. 6 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 Commissioner Hesse asked City Attorney Tom Hart if he was aware of this change in state law and is Xcel able to bypass the City if they chose the EQB route? City Attorney replied that it is his understanding that they would bypass the City Council but has not reviewed it in great detail. He has spoken to the mayor and other key people regarding this statute, but the focus tonight should be on the facts. He will follow up. Commissioner Hesse asked for clarification on the critical area response from the DNR. Assistant Administrator Patrick Hollister stated the Commission received an application for a CUP and Critical Area Permit and a Wetlands Permit. Xcel's proposed project would require granting all three and should be considered. Chair Lorberbaum added for property notification given all three were given as the note says only CUP. Commissioner M. McManus stated it was her understanding that the need for the additional lines is to serve as a backup in case of a power shutdown or failure. Was there another need identified for broken development residential use. Is that the basis of the need? Mr. Grittman stated this would be better answered by Xcel. Commissioner M. McManus referred to a statement which concerns the serious depreciation of surrounding property value ... was is viewed as "serious ", and whether or not the general purpose of this will be in harmony with the entire ordinance. She would like some clarification of these issues. Mr. Grittman stated those were the standards that the ordinance lays out for consideration, and would like the Commission to analyze the project in light of those requirements and make determination of what the Commission views as "serious" and "harmonious" about the project. Commissioner Betlej asked if the Commission was provided a copy of the report referenced in the CIA Report that talks to the appraisement. Mr. Grittman stated that he is not sure that this information was provided. It may have been mentioned in the CIA Report as their interpretation of the report. Commissioner Hesse referred to a reference to the Comprehensive Plan and what the area is intended for in the long term. Mr. Grittman stated the transmission lines run through low - density residential areas, some medium and some commercial /industrial ... there is a mixed use in this area. Commissioner Hesse asked if, in the future, this area would become more low density. Mr. Grittman replied he did not know. David Callahan, Sighting and Land Rights for Xcel Energy, presented a general description of the project. He reviewed a sketch which depicts part of Xcel Energy's existing system in the southeast Metro area, from Newport through South St. Paul, Inver Grove Heights, Sunfish Lake, Roger's Lake substation in Mendota Heights then to the substations in Bloomington (Wilson substation) and by the International Airport. The primary source of power into this system is from the Red Rock substation in Newport. Mr. Callahan stated the problem with the system is that as load is added to this system, and Red Rock being the major source of this system, in 2001 during the high -load times (summer), the 7 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 source from the Red Rock substation was lost due to equipment failure or any other reason, the remaining points of the system could not maintain service in this area. There is a double contingency system in the metro area where any two components of the system can be removed due to failure, maintenance, accident, or other reasons, and the system will still function under all conditions. This is not the case anymore. During the high summer loads, the remaining sources are no longer able to handle the load from the Red Rock substation. Xcel proposes to maintain system reliability by construct, in two bases, from the Red Rock substation to the Roger's Lake substation and ultimately, from Roger's substation to Wilson substation, a second circuit the same size as the existing circuit. What this does is puts the existing load on these lines between the two circuits so that if one of the sources is lost due to a failure in one of the circuits, the remaining circuit will pick up that load and supply the system so that there is the double contingency under all conditions. During this project, Phase I would be to double circuit the line from Red Rock to Roger's Lake. The line terminations would be done in the Roger's Lake substation to accept the new circuits and maintain reliability for the southeast metropolitan area. The proposal states that Xcel will use the existing right -of -way single corridor. One of the advantages to double circuiting the line in regards to EMF is that the lines are higher and there is a cancellation factor between circuits and it divides the amperage in half. Mr. Callahan reviewed a chart that shows the reduction of the EMF from the existing line and the proposed line. EMF has been a concern in the public sector, and Xcel is a regulated utility and must adhere to all regulations. EMF has been studied for over thirty years, and to date, there has been no consistent or conclusive study whether or not EMF is associated with health facts. Because of that, the responsible federal and state agencies have not issued any exposure standards for EMF. On this particular project, given the EAW on the project, which did review EMF issues, no significant environmental impacts have been identified. These findings were also reviewed with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission and the Department of Health. They did not issue any warnings or regulations as well. Construction is planned for the Fall/Winter /Spring for off -peak times so Xcel has the advantage of construction through the wetland and critical areas, as well as Dodge Nature Center. Any damage to property from this construction will result in settlements with the landowners. In the fall of 2001 /Spring of 2002, the Roger Lake substation is scheduled, line foundations, and some structures in South St. Paul. In the fall of 2002 /Spring 2003, the remaining line foundations, structures and the wirework. The idea is to get this project done so that Xcel can have the redundancy replaced for the following summer peak period. The problem occurs as a contingency issue if there is a failure of equipment. Xcel can't maintain the system. With the system intact, the capacity if able to handle the load. In the summer of 2001, if Xcel were in situations that if there would have been a failure, the outages /rolling blackout situations would occur, but the contingency did not occur. 8 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 In conclusion, the reliability has been at risk since the summer of 2001. It does have a direct impact on Mendota Heights, as well as the other cities involved, as all electricity comes from this system. Xcel hopes to work with the City to find a timely solution. Commissioner B. McManus asked how many actual power lines are in existence right now that are through that circuit. How many wires are running above the neighbor's heads. Mr. Callahan replied that there is one three -phase circuit that has three conductors, which carry the current, and then on top, there are two wires that are called "lightning shield wires ". Commissioner B. McManus asked how many there would be when the plan is put into effect. Mr. Callahan replied that the new line would have the existing circuits through three conductors on one side of the structure, and the new circuits would run from the three conductors on the other side of the structure. Overhead, there will be two lightning shield wires. Commissioner B. McManus asked how the City got into this fix in which the lines appear to run continuous to so many homeowners in Mendota Heights. Did the buildings /neighborhoods develop around these lines, or how are we seeing these lines going through these residential areas. Mr. Callahan stated that the system has been in place since 1 928. He hasn't researched Mendota Heights, but photographs of other areas of South St. Paul and Sunfish Lake were reviewed. At that time, Sunfish Lake was basically farmland, and South St. Paul was just beginning to develop. Mr. Callahan stated he suspects that Mendota Heights was rural in nature. He believes that most of the homes along the line were built after 1928. Commissioner B. McManus asked what cities are the major users. Mr. Callahan replied that the basic service territory map depicts Eagan, Bloomington, International Airport, Mendota Heights, West St. Paul, South St. Paul, Sunfish Lake, and Inver Grove Heights. He added that South St. Paul probably has the most residents adjacent to the line. Commissioner B. McManus stated that it appears that Mendota Heights is paying a bit of an environmental penalty because of the heavy users across the river to the west. Is Mendota Heights providing a great deal of power to them? Mr. Callahan replied that the transmission system doesn't serve and stop at city limits. This is a connected system. The system between the Red Rock substation and the Wilson substations and the lines is being built to benefit all the users within that system. He does not believe it is accurate to characterize this system whereas an individual city is paying a penalty if the load goes down. It depends on where the existing problem is at in the infrastructure. Commissioner Betlej asked about the amount of lines coming into the Roger's Lake substation is six. Mr. Callahan stated that in the main system of power, there are two lines going to the north that are tied together as if there is one line. There are two lines, each a source from the High Bridge Plant facility in St. Paul. There are two 115 kV lines running down to Lone Oak facility. There is a source from the Red Rock and one from the Bloomington and from High Bridge. Commissioner Betlej stated that from the standpoint of the citizens of Mendota Heights, it seems there are quadruple backup. Mr. Callahan stated there are three sources, but the primary source is from Red Rock. The other two sources are weaker sources. Before Summer 2001, if the primary source was lost, the remaining sources were adequate to supply the remaining load because of the double contingency. But because of the general load growth on this entire system, it's not true 9 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 anymore. After summer of 2001, the system reached the point that if the primary source were lost, the remaining sources would not be able to handle the load. The whole area, including Mendota Heights, would experience a low voltage situation and the remaining lines could get to the point where the equipment would overheat. To save the system, the load would have to be reduced to protect the system from failing completely until it's out of the high overload situation. Commissioner Betlej asked how much, since 1928 when the equipment was initially put in, has the amperage on these lines increased? Mr. Callahan stated he did not know, but the load has increased in this area. Some of the system has changed over time. He would have to look back and research. Commissioner Betlej asked for the reason that Xcel would lose a circuit. Mr. Callahan stated there are several reasons. One is an equipment failure, and another could be an accident, such as an act of God, or a vehicle hitting the pole. Lightning can also cause failure. The lines also need to be maintained. Lines with this amount of voltage cannot be maintained when it is on. As the load continues to grow in this area, this deficit area starts to grow as well. It may even reach the point where it will get into the off -peak season where one can't afford to lose lines without having contingency problems. Most experiences with outages are lightning related equipment failure. Commissioner Betlej stated that Mr. Callahan made the comment that there would be a benefit of the reduction of EMF due to double circuitry. If one line is down for maintenance for a period of time, that benefit goes away. Mr. Callahan stated that the remaining line would have to carry the entire load and so the amperage would increase along one side. That would be as short a period of time as possible as the system is a connected system. The redundancy is built into the system and this would be during equipment failure time where the equipment would be replaced, and the EMF would go up to approximately the amount of the existing line today. Commissioner Betlej referred to the Normal Maximum Magnetic Field in 2001 chart and cancellation of the line. Mr. Callahan replied that it is 65 mG on the existing line and standard measures are taken about 3 feet from ground level and 25 feet from the center of the line. Commissioner Betlej asked what is the assumption of the amount of power being carried through these lines. Mr. Callahan replied that calculations are based on normal 2001 normal conditions, and these levels will be seen approximately 90% of the time because the current does go up and down as the load changes. Steve LaCosta, Xcel Energy Engineer, stated that he develops magnetic field calculations for the project and gave some clarification to the numbers and percentages seen in relation to time of usage. He also explained how the EMF would be decreased with vertical lines. Commissioner B. McManus asked for the range. Mr. LaCosta stated the maximum would be 87, with a double circuit it would be 33. If growth would continue as the same rate, by the year 2010, the number would be 34 on a double circuit. 10 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 Commissioner Betlej asked Mr. Callahan about his comment on the health affects due to EMF. Mr. Callahan stated that Xcel takes guidance from the agencies that regulate that issue. EQB, Public Utilities Commission, and Dept. of Health. There has been thirty years of study, but there has been no conclusion drawn as to whether magnetic fields do or do not cause health effects, therefore there are no regulations issued associated with transmission lines or any other lines or any other lines. Commissioner Betlej commented on the possibility of burying the lines. There have been several descriptions of the cost, it that a cost based on a bid for the work? Mr. Callahan stated it was based on historical experience. Mr. LaCosta stated there hasn't been a cost developed for Mendota Heights, either in the CAI Report or by itself. CAI quoted a price for Sunfish Lake for $9.5M for about 7,000 feet. Mr. LaCosta quoted a cost of $6.5M for about 6,000 feet for Sunfish Lake. These are estimated costs with different cable configurations. Chair Lorberbaum asked how many feet it would be. Mr. LaCosta stated that for Mendota Heights, east of the substation would be about 1.3 miles, or 6,800 feet. That is similar to the size in Sunfish Lake. The other side is about 2.3 miles. Mendota Heights therefore is a total of 3.6 miles. There is so much that goes into the costs to bury transmission lines, such as terrain differences, wetlands, etc. Commissioner Betlej asked how much of the $6.5M for the line that goes through is end pieces and how much is the line in between. Mr. LaCosta stated he did not have that information on hand. Of the $6.5M, probably $5.5M is the line in between and $1M for the ends. To terminate the ends, it is required to terminate the overhead lines, and bring the overhead lines to a structure that has to support the tension of the two overhead circuits. In regards to burying a double circuit, there is a different cost. With the double circuit, one must bear the tension of the overhead lines on both ends, then the cables have to be brought up the structures and terminate the cables, and that's a big expense. Mr. Callahan stated that Xcel's transmission system spans over 3,900 miles of transmission lines, and 13 miles of that is underground. The reasons for those were lack of a place other than putting in an underground line, such as downtown Minneapolis. Where there is the ability to place overhead lines, this is the standard procedure. When a community or entity requests that Xcel installs something beyond the standard, or bury an existing line, it has been customary to pass that incremental cost to the requestor. Commissioner Betlej asked if he understands how the polling of the comparable properties were analyzed? Mr. Callahan stated CAI did their report in Colliers Towle, they are subcontractors. It seems they compared the houses away from the lines with the houses near lines and looked at historical sales data of these properties to see if a difference in the value of properties can be identified. Chair Lorberbaum stated she had different views and would like a clarification of Xcel's view. Will MnDOT allow the lines to be strung along I -494? Mr. Callahan stated it was phrased differently from different people. MnDOT has a policy of not allowing transmission lines to be located on or within their interstate highway right -of -ways. Beyond their right -of -way, they do not have any preference as it's beyond their property. That's why there are different answers 11 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 depending upon how the questions are phrased. In order to build a line along the MnDOT right - of -way of I -494, you would have to acquire, assemble and create a right -of -way and that would not be part of MnDOT. Commissioner M. McManus stated that Xcel's estimate of growth is based on the fact that individuals will not change their use of energy. She is assuming that residents will be energy consumers to the hilt and not change behaviors in terms on how energy is managed. She used as an example, California and their rolling blackouts, and how individuals have change their energy consumption to make sure their use was held to a different level. Maybe individuals have to manage their own business in a different way to avoid the things we've seen. We haven't come very far since 1928. We still have poles sticking out of the ground, around individual's homes, and a lot of lines hanging. Xcel is basing on resident's energy use today consumption and growth. She thinks the American public may have a different view of how we should manage our energy consumption for future generations. Commissioner McManus referred to the outline of the existing system. She stated that this shows only a Point A to Point B. Why can't energy be redirected from other parts of other systems to help with that? Mr. Callahan stated the systems are built to react to demand. This system, what's there today and what it being proposed, is reacting or anticipating the demand from the customer every time they turn on the switch, every time they have appliance turned on that raises demand. The system uses a computer simulation model to check the load and reading the meters, each station has a meter that charts the demand. Commissioner McManus asked if the system could draw from any other systems to redirect where there might not be as much use. Mr. Callahan stated in the CAI report, there are three or four system alternatives, which would require other systems to be constructed in a similar fashion. The conclusion that Xcel presented and based on their data, their system alternatives did not solve all the deficiencies that this alternative resolved. Chair Lorberbaum stated it was her understanding that they are only tasked at specific number of alternatives. They were not asked to come up with what is the best alternative. Of the alternatives given, Xcel's response is correct. They were never asked to come up with another one. Of the limited alternatives that were given up to five, Xcel saying that this was the best one of them. Mr. Callahan stated there were no constraints put upon them in terms of their search of system alternatives, they developed those based upon a study of the existing systems. They identified first contingency deficiencies and they showed how each proposed alternative resolved these deficiencies and this alternative resolved almost all the deficiencies. Chair Lorberbaum stated that if the meeting runs out of time, it would be continued on Thursday, January 24th Commissioner M. McManus stated she was looking for some mutual aid from other systems, distributing support around a broader area than just Newport, South St. Paul, Sunfish Lake, and Mendota Heights. Mr. Callahan stated it was all one system, it is all connected. This is just a segment of the system where a deficiency is. 12 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 Commissioner M. McManus asked if there were any differences between individual residents and businesses, or are they both classified as a consumer of equal value. Mr. Callahan replied that in terms of the system, they all add load to the system. Commissioner M. McManus stated that there are no reports then regarding business use, growth, and development. Mr. Callahan stated that in generating projections, by reading meters, trends are developed. Commissioner M. McManus asked if there were any concerns regarding tax statements relating to lines that are buried and is an issue? Mr. Callahan stated that the line had been reviewed by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board. The first step in that review is an environmental assessment worksheet. That process looks at wetlands crossed, it looks at overhead and underground, and all environmental factors such as noise, aesthetics, etc. The result of that environmental worksheet was called a "Negative Declaration ", meaning that there was no significant environmental impact found. If there were, then the next step would be to move into an environmental impact statement to see what to do about the concerns identified. Commissioner M. McManus referred to the statement in the reports regarding health effects. When health bodies are not real sure, they say there is "insufficient epidemiological evidence to determine that EMF exposure causes cancer and other disease ". She doesn't believe that this is true and when the question is asked about health effects, there is the relationship that is shown in the studies and this statement is what state agencies sometimes use when they don't have to get involved in local issues. Chair Lorberbaum referred to the Executive Summary, page 4. She read "CAI studies of the proposed improvements and the five alternative options" indicate that none of the plans satisfied all of the identified transmission system needs. So basically, they only looked at the five that were given to them. They did not look at other things that they could do, but only responded to the five that they were requested to look at. Mr. Callahan stated he was not aware that they were requested any number. They were given our system information; they identified the alternatives based on their studies of the existing system. Commissioner Hesse asked what is the understanding of the EQB alternative that was discussed, the potential of Xcel bypassing local process. Mr. Callahan stated that was not correct, that their interpretation of the amendment of the existing Park and Plant Sighting act that was passed this summer was that it only applied going forward to any project that wasn't under local application prior to August 1St. This project was under application in Mendota Heights and South St. Paul prior to August 1St, Xcel feels obligated to commit this at the local level. Commissioner Hesse asked if any field measurements had during peak hours. Mr. Callahan stated the models are quite accurate as whether to EMF cause health effects. The relationship between the current and the line is direct relationship that can be protected by computer models. The figures presented represent the computer modeling of the transmission line and it's configuration. Magnetic fields are caused by currents flowing on any electrical conductor, such as appliances, house wiring, etc. When measurements are taken in a house, it must be certain 13 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 that the measurements are of the line, and not the appliances. It's a geometrical inverse relationship when moving close to appliances, as they can show a much higher reading. Commissioner Hesse asked if there were any way to take a measurement outside the home and get a relative feel for a level contributed by the actual power lines versus going inside the home, subtracting the reading from the power lines, and get some sort of feel of what is coming from inside the home itself. Mr. Callahan replied that this could be done by the modeling or by the meter. Xcel loans meters to residents to help take their own readings. Commissioner Hesse asked what kind of levels come from standard electronic equipment such as household appliances. Mr. Callahan stated that it depends on how close you are to the appliance, and how long you are by the appliance. He added that Xcel is regulated to depend on agencies such as Department of Public Health, EQB, and the Public Utilities Commission and what their review of these issues are on a statewide basis, and as of this time, based upon conclusions of the studies, they have not seen any issues to regulate the magnetic fields at this time. Commissioner Hesse asked why Mendota Heights has not been evaluated when it comes to underground lines. How is the cost spread out per resident in that power service area on an annual basis? Mr. Callahan referred to the evaluation for Mendota Heights in that there are several wetland areas in the city. These present unique problems in terms of estimating undergrounding. The city would be responsible for payment of this cost, by laying a surcharge to the customer over a period of time. Commissioner Hesse believes the residents should have some idea of what they will be paying on an annual basis for overhead lines versus buried lines. Mr. Callahan replied that Xcel could generate this information. It's usually carried over a period of years. There is interest involved and going out for a longer period doesn't necessary make the payments drop off. Commissioner Hesse stated there will probably be an increase in costs, whether the lines are buried or not. He would like to see something showing if the city chooses to do a five -year scenario, this is what one will see on the average. It would be good to see the difference for the two alternatives, which are either double circuit the lines above grade, or bury it. Mr. Callahan stated that the surcharge is the incremental cost to be paid by the requesting community; the overhead line cost is spread over all the ratepayers in North and South Dakota, and Minnesota. He gave an example of doing another county, looking at about $9M (overhead) over entire rate base, it came out to be about $2.50 per year per customer. Commissioner Hesse asked for some kind of estimate from Xcel. Commissioner Dolan asked if there were any thought about undergrounding all the lines and spreading the entire cost against all ratepayers? Mr. Callahan stated that as a public utility, they are to provide reliable service at reasonable rates. The cost of doing that would be so high that it would be very egregious on the consumer's bills. Commissioner Dolan asked what may happen if the lines are not double up the lines. Mr. Callahan stated it is a risk analysis called a contingency. If the source is lost from Red Rock during the high load period, the remaining sources will not be able to maintain. 14 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 Commissioner Dolan asked if there was a sense as to what is happening around the country where these issues are going. Are more lines being put underground because people are being more sensitive to the issues? Mr. Callahan stated there is a concern, but he has no data showing this information. Bloomington is considering burying a continuation of the MAC project past the Mall of America and will be taking the additional cost. St. Paul is also considering something by the Science Museum. These are based on aesthetic issues. Commissioner Betlej asked if Lone Oak substation is a load on the system. Mr. Callahan replied that it was. Commissioner Betlej asked about the bigger distribution lines to the south. Mr. Callahan stated there is a 69 kV line that goes south, that's a different voltage. This is not connected into Lone Oak as depicted on the map. The system depiction map is now drawn accurately. Commissioner Betlej asked if there was a different in maintenance costs for overhead versus an underground line? Mr. Callahan stated that overhead lines are easier as it's more visible to see a problem than if it were underground. Also, it is easier to repair. Underground lines are encased in a concrete vault, if something happens; it has to be dug out and repairs. Mr. Callahan stated he did not know what the analysis of long term, but mile for mile it's more problematic to maintain underground. Chair Lorberbaum asked if the line broke underground, would Xcel know where the breakage was or does the whole line have to be pulled to find it? Mr. LaCosta stated it was very difficult to locate where the failure is because of the thickness of the insulation. It takes longer to put back in service. Commissioner B. McManus stated that Xcel provides a good service and reasonable rates. He has not detected over the past year or so that Xcel and some of these communities are in the same boat. He understands that Xcel has the potential of appealing the judge's decision on this case and having everything their way. Commissioner B. McManus added he has noticed questions coming from the Commission seeking alternatives and seeking to find Xcel's attitude to find alternatives. He asked if Xcel has even considered any alternatives? Mr. Callahan stated that Xcel invested $130,000 for any kind of study for the EQB Review, PCA Review, Department of Health Review, and gave these agencies their system to allow them to identify possible system alternatives, which are contained in the report. Those were presented in the Steering Committee as well. In terms of EMF, and living within regulatory environment, neither Xcel nor the regulators can identify the solution the city is looking for. What Xcel is proposing, they feel answers all of the regulations imposed by these agencies and based upon their findings. Mr. Callahan added that it's not that Xcel is unwilling to look, but sometimes the solution that's not as desirable is the one that turns up. Commissioner B. McManus replied that he was surprised that Xcel responded that was, as they did not deny that they have looked at other systems. It seems Xcel's response is that this is the system they looked at and haven't looked at others. Mr. Callahan stated he was talking about the 15 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 electrical system that serves this territory. Commissioner B. McManus stated Mr. Callahan's answer seemed to be that Xcel has not even considered compromised solutions. Mr. Callahan stated they looked at those alternatives, but we live within regulations that apply to the entire customer base. All customers have to be treated in an equitable and fair manner. These issues are regulated and the Public Utilities Commission regulates the rates. Commissioner B. McManus asked for confirmation that these regulatory agencies told Xcel that they would do this. Mr. Callahan replied that it was not as specific as that, but as a utility, Xcel is to provide reliable economic energy to customers and based upon the industry knowledge of overhead versus underground costs, the regulations regarding EMF in the transmission systems Xcel builds an overhead system to meet objectives, and this line was reviewed by the agencies that reviewed those things because of concern on the public regarding this line. They have not indicated to Xcel that there is any basis for them to do else wise. Chair Lorberbaum stated that this is an applicant, and there are many applicants that come before the Commission. The Commission has the right to say to this person, "yes, it's approved what you're asking ", or "we recommend rejection to the City Council of your proposal ", or "we'd like you to add a window, or under these conditions we recommend approval ". It's nice if we come up with alternatives, and the Commission can come up with some conditions with a recommendation of approval, if that's what the group comes up with. Commissioner B. McManus stated that the varied questions the Commissioners are asking, to consider the cost of doing X, Y, and Z, or consider running lines in an existing industrial corridor Xcel did not address option A and B of CAI, and didn't like C, D, and E as they didn't work. But A and B, Xcel was temped but did not reject them. It would have been nice if Xcel had given reason(s) for rejecting them. Mr. Callahan replied that he said that there is a planning engineer that can go into detail about all the contingencies and sufficiency's that were addressed by each one of these options, and how each option met these, and whether they've resolved the issue or left more to do to resolve the issue. Commission B. McManus stated that A and B were not rejected, but nobody wants to talk about the A and B options. The Commission is trying to find alternatives and trying to figure out what it would cost to do these things so conditions can be added. People coming before the Commission usually have some options and are prepared to give information on costs. Chair Lorberbaum stated that three years ago, people did come up with the alternatives. That is why there were options A thru E in the study, and they have been evaluated and whether they say which one is preferable, at this point, they've said this is our submittal, this is A, and we have critiques on B through E. Mr. Callahan stated that as a result of the study of CAI and Xcel's in- house studies, Xcel concurs that this is the proposal that has been applied for. Commissioner Hesse asked if Xcel has a problem to go into homes to monitor EMF measurements. Mr. Callahan stated that was true. Commissioner Hesse asked if there were any kind of monitoring program that could be put in and have some additional monitoring that could be set up that says there is no problem now, and will be able to confirm that there will be no 16 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 problem in the future. If there is a problem, these are the actions to be taken. Mr. Callahan stated there is no standard that can be measured against. Measurements can be taken before and after. Chair Lorberbaum stated a condition could be placed to have Xcel take "x" number of measurements periodically. This is a health and safety issue if the Commission knows what levels are considered dangerous, and what if it reaches that level. Chair Lorberbaum opened the public hearing. She stated that the meeting will go until 11:30 pm, and if necessary, will reconvene on Thursday, January 24th. at 7:00 pm. It is the intent of the Commission to come to a decision on Thursday night. Roger Conant, President of the Power Line Task Force introduced himself and some of his colleagues. He stated there are five lines. Mr. Conant stated that Mr. Rick Gonzales, Principal Engineer for Xcel Energy gave a presentation at Sunfish Lake. In that presentation, Mr. Gonzales said Xcel's plans for the next few years is to double circuit all the lines in the metropolitan area. Mendota Heights has at least five going into Roger's Lake. Logically, if Mendota Heights approve this line, and it gets built, Mendota Heights will not have many grounds for not approving the other five lines when their times comes in the next five years. Mr. Conant believes that if this happens, Mendota Heights will be for the next eighty years a power line tree farm. One of the major issues concerns the high levels of magnetic fields that are emitted by the lines and the potential health effects by the lines. Mr. Conant introduced Magda Havas, B.Sc., Ph.D., Trent University, Peterborough, and Ontario, Canada. Ms. Havas addressed the March 22nd public meeting of the Steering Committee. With the conclusion of that meeting, Xcel refused to come back to the Planning Commission and sued, unsuccessfully, to have the courts declared that the lines have approved automatically. Clearly Xcel, which has been participating eagerly in the environmental impact review process until March 22nd, was apparently disturbed by Magda Havas' testimony. She has prepared and published a 250+ page analysis of EMF for the Canadian National Review Council and is the author of more than sixty academic papers on EMF and related topics. Ms. Havas has been working with the subject of EMF for about ten years and it took her approx. three years to come to the decision about the health risks of this form of energy. Ms. Havas continued to give updated information that has been published since the March 2000 meeting that relates to the values that Xcel calculated on the magnetic fields coming from their lines. Ms. Havas gave the Commission a brief summary of her presentation for their review. Ms. Havas outlined three critical biological effects identified consistently. • Increased risk of childhood Leukemia for children whose residents exceed 2 to 4 mG. Ms. Havas referred to the Wartenberg 2001 paper, which contains analysis of nineteen different studies, and based on these combined statistical power of those studies, he came up with a value 2 -fold increase. Earlier was a study by Ahlbom who took a number of very key studies and came up with the same conclusion. 17 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 • Increased growth of estrogen- sensitive breast cancer with values of 12 mG or higher. Not only were breast cells stimulated, but the effect of tamoxifen, the drug used to treat this form of breast cancer, lost its effectiveness. • A 2002 study in California of women who were within their first ten weeks of gestation, and found that women that were exposed anytime during a 24 hour period, their exposure to EMF of 16 mG, there was a increased risk for them of having a spontaneous abortion. Ms. Havas pointed out some key points: • When it comes to childhood Leukemia, the critical distance has been identified as approx. 50 meters, or 150 feet from power lines. It depends on how much current is going through the lines and that will determine how high the magnetic field is. This could however, be used as a baseline to start with. • Bedrooms are the key environment for exposure to children. A German study found the greatest association was with bedroom magnetic fields as they found almost a full 4-fold increase in childhood leukemia. • Children under the age of 6 are much more susceptible to EMF then children up to the age of 14. Their rate for acute lymphoblastic leukemia increased to almost a 6 -fold with fields above 1.4mG. There have been studies that are regularly sighted showing no impact, such as U.S. National Cancer Institute. Other studies Ms. Havas pointed out were the Canadian Study and the UK Study. Some scientific studies will say the evidence is weak. In epidemiological studies, this term means there is less than 2 -fold increase in risk. It does not mean that the study was improperly done. Ms. Havas quoted from Wartenberg and agrees with his conclusion. "Many people believe there are no data to support an association between residential and magnetic field exposure and childhood leukemia. To the contrary, the data strongly and ultimately consistently support such an association. Although the estimated magnitude of the risk is moderate, if one chooses to use these summary estimates for interpretation, given the widespread exclusion to magnetic fields, they suggest as much as 15% to 25% increase in childhood leukemia rate which is a large and important public health impact." Ms. Havas stated that Xcel found that 25 feet from the power line, the calculated magnetic field is 65mG. Ms. Havas stated she was very surprised that this is so high, with all the houses around it. She referred to a table that showed occupational exposure. Ms. Havas stated that typically, in a home, there are three sources for magnetic exposure: outdoor wiring, indoor wiring that can generate a high magnetic field if not properly installed, and appliances (which vary on individual use), some of which include electric shavers, sewing machines, electric blankets. She also explained that newer appliances are being made by following stricter guidelines to be safer than those in the past. When talking about appliances, the expediential decreases over a distance of a few feet. When talking about power lines, the concern covers much greater distances. A lot of the total exposure comes from the power lines. 18 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 Ms. Havas stated that there are a lot of health effects; they have been very well documented with multiple tests showing the same results in multiple countries. There are some studies that show no effect are not nearly as powerful as those that do show the effect, and sometimes these studies are all weighed equally. Commissioner Dolan asked if, in Dr. Havas' opinion, these lines should be buried in all cases? She replied that the field should be less than 2 mG. Even lines that are buried have shown to give some effects, and burying those wires closer together could minimize them. Because the wires are so far apart, they are not canceling each other. Commissioner Hesse asked if these fields cause health conditions, or do they exasperate them. Dr. Havas stated that EMF does not cause cancer; they do not initiate leukemia or breast cancer. EMF does promote the rate of which existing cancer develops. Epidemiological studies cannot determine whether EMF causes miscarriages, they can only determine whether or not there is a statistical association between the two. Commissioner Hesse asked why, in North America, does it seem that PUC, OSHA, etc. is not considering this seriously. Or is it that they don't know and no one has come up with something that has convinced them that the level has to be set. Ms. Havas stated she did not know the answer to that. It could be that the individuals in the power to made these guidelines are being very conservative and want to make absolute sure there is a health issue before making any statements. Commissioner Hesse asked for Ms. Havas' opinion on a monitoring program. She replied that the existing line she does not recommend that be maintained the way it is. It is already rated very high. She does agree that if it goes to a double circuit system and they are vertical rather than horizontal, the magnetic field will be reduced, but not nearly as low as it has to go. Burying the line will drop off more quickly, but she suggested to have them calculated as to how much. Chair Lorberbaum asked Ms. Havas to give a copy of her presentation to Xcel. Ms. Havas explained the differences between association and causality. Ms. Havas stated she heard some comments tonight that there are no epidemiological studies that show cause effect relationships. This is a correct statement as epidemiological studies do not show causation because that is not what it is designed to test, then you will falsely conclude that there is no cause effect relationship. That is not necessary correct. The only way to show causality is in vivo or in vitro. One could suggest causality by having enough epidemical studies that are showing the same thing, and then one would suspect a cause and effect relationship. Commissioner Betlej asked why this has not become an issue? Those increased risks out there are 2 -fold, you have a very small number and so you double your odds, but the cell is not very significant. Ms. Havas stated that whether or not it is significant is a different thing than whether or not 2- folding. One could have a 10 -fold increase that would not be statistically significant based on the way it's been done. There is the increase risk value (i.e. 2 -fold) and there is also significant cell, whether that number is a real number. And if you don't have a large enough 19 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 population size, you may end up with the value that gives you n -fold increase. As an example, Ms. Havas stated that if you take all the women in the country with breast cancer, a 2 -fold risk sounds like a very small number, but because there are hundreds of thousands of women, 2 -fold that is very significant. Commissioner Betlej stated there are a lot of regulations regarding drinking water, exposure to chemicals, etc. If a range of exposure of EMF was placed in the same light that exposure to other toxic things in the environment are, what would be the acceptable exposure level. Ms. Havas stated when standards are set for drinking water, the standards are set to protect the most sensitive individuals in our population, which are most likely to be children under the age of six. Commissioner B. McManus stated that Ms. Havas may be leading the Commission astray in the wrong direction. There are statistical methods which give great assurance that the relationships are significant, and there is a great level of confidence that can be applied by using statistical techniques, promises a cause and effect relationship, but which to the discerning viewer this looks good. He believes that Ms. Havas can say, with some confidence, that whether cancer is caused or not, there is statistical evidence that the relationship is so great that it goes way beyond randomness. Ms. Havas agreed with him. The miscarriage study that showed a 6 -fold increase is suggesting causation. Commissioner B. McManus asked Ms. Havas about her credibility. Ms. Havas stated her resume was included in the packet of information. She believes she has international recognition and since she has been working with the EMF topic for 8 years, she feels she is relatively new. She believes that she is viewed with respect from her colleagues, however the physicists at the college feels she may be wasting her time because they are convinced there are no health effects from electromagnetic field. She has a good relationship with the people from the Public Utility Commission. In closing, Ms. Havas stated this was a local issue. She is part of a number of environmental networks that monitor what's going on globally in the EMF. This particular issue is actually looked at through the Internet. There are number of people who are very interested in the decision of this particular Council. Ms. Havas believes that the decision of the City will go far beyond the community itself. Chair Lorberbaum asked that detrimental property values are something the Commission is concerned about. She would like to have more information for Thursday's discussion from the presenters on detrimental property value changes from the current lines to the proposed ones. COMMISSIONER HESSE MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BETLEJ, TO TABLE THIS DISCUSSION UNTIL THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 2002 AT 7:00 PM IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 20 Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 2002 MOTION CARRIED Meeting adjourned at 11:30 pm. 21