Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025.06.23 CCP REGULARCITY COUNCIL MEETING City Hall Council Chambers June 23, 2025 AGENDA 1. Call to Order - 7:00 p.m. Attendees please turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full meeting packet is available in the binder at the entrance to the Council Chambers. 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Informal Open Forum This is an opportunity for the public to address the City Council on items that are not on the agenda. It is limited to 15 minutes. It may not be used to make personal attacks, air personal grievances, make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with the presenter. Questions from the Council will be for clarification purposes only. It will not be used as a time for problem-solving or reacting to the comments made but for hearing the presenter for informational purposes only. The first call will be for those that have notified the Clerk that they would like to speak during the open forum and then ask if anyone connected to this meeting would like to speak. When called upon, please indicate your name and then proceed. Please be sure to state your name before speaking. a. Meeting Decorum 5. Invocation 6. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda These items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There isn't a separate discussion for these items unless a Councilmember so requests, then it is moved to the end of the Council Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes b. Approval of Licenses c. Resolution 2025-061 Supporting a FY 2025 SS4A Grant Application for a Comprehensive Transportation Safety Action Plan d. Resolution 2025-62 Identifying the Need for LCDA Development Funding and Authorizing an Application for Grant Funds for ACER Shingle Creek Center Redevelopment e. Resolution 2025-63 Accepting Bid and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 2025-17 West Fire Station 2025 Roof Replacement Page 1 of 184 7. Presentations/Proclamations/Recognitions/Donations 8. Public Hearings a. Resolution 2025-64 Revoking the Hospitality Accommodation License for BC Seva LLC, DBA: Suburban Studios, 2701 Freeway Blvd b. Presentation and Public Commentary Regarding Unmanned Aerial Vehicles 9. Planning Commission Items a. Resolution 2025-65 Regarding the Recommended Approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005 for an Approximately 780-Square Foot Expansion of the Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic and Associated Variances (5831 Brooklyn Boulevard) 10. Council Consideration Items a. Ordinance 2025-07 Establishing Chapter 23-2750 in the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events (First Reading) b. Liquor Store 2 Discussion 11. Council Report 12. Adjournment Page 2 of 184 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 6/23/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager BY: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve the meeting minutes: • June 9, 2025, Study Session • June 9, 2025, Regular Session • June 9, 2025, Work/EDA Session Background: In accordance with Minnesota State Statute 15.17, the official records of all meetings must be documented and approved by the governing body. Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2025.06.09 SS - unapproved 2. 2025.06.09 CC - unapproved 3. 2025.06.09 WS - unapproved Page 3 of 184 6/09/25 DRAFT 1 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION JUNE 9, 2025 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Acting Mayor Pro Tem Kris Lawrence-Anderson at 6:06 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Pro Tem Teneshia Kragness, Councilmembers Dan Jerzak, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Finance Director Angela Holm, Interim City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney Siobhan Tolar. Mayor April Graves was absent and excused. CITY COUNCIL MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if there were any questions on the agenda. Councilmember Jerzak asked two miscellaneous questions on some updates about the North Port Park, as they have received many emails regarding that. He understood that the contact information from the Parks and Recreation Department was given directly to the constituents so they could contact the Parks and Recreation Department with questions. City Manager Reggie Edwards responded that he would find out if the Parks and Recreation Department had given out their contact information so they could communicate directly with constituents and put it in the weekly newsletter. Councilmember Jerzak asked if what they were doing was effective. Dr. Edwards responded that they do not have the issues they had several years ago in their parks, but they do have some sporadic events that have happened, but nothing like they were three years ago. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked the Council if everyone had received the email with photos of North Port Park, and everyone responded that they had. She stated that the images were similar to those of prior years. Dr. Edwards noted that he is referencing the numbers as being better, as they had a much larger volume of calls about multiple parks in previous years. They have received compliments about things happening in the parks as well. Page 4 of 184 6/09/25 DRAFT 2 Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated that North Port has not changed. Dr. Edwards agreed it had not changed and said he did not know if more than one event had happened in North Port, but he would find out that information. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated her concern was that they are so early in the park season, and the neighbors have been traumatized for years. She concurred with Councilmember Jerzak that they are not being effective there and would like to find a new strategy for that park because what the Council is currently doing there is not working. Dr. Edwards stated that he did not hear Councilmember Jerzak say that what the Council is currently doing at North Port is not working. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked Councilmember Jerzak to clarify because maybe she had misspoken. Councilmember Jerzak clarified that he thinks the Council should revisit whether they are being effective because of the volume of emails he has received with the same complaints. He stated he did not know what was happening in that park and wanted to follow up with the Council and find out. He said that maybe the volume of complaints is down, but if constituents are being driven out of their backyard two or three times instead of ten, it is still unacceptable, and he wanted to relay that to the Council. Dr. Edwards stated that he would communicate with Staff and compile a report on what had transpired. He will report back to the Council if they are being effective in their parks, especially regarding large gatherings. Councilmember Jerzak asked if Dr. Edwards could make sure that constituents have the contact information for Parks and Recreation. Dr. Edwards stated he would. Councilmember Moore stated to Dr. Edwards that in the newsletter received by all constituents last week, the special events permit process is on the second-to-last page. She would like to see if parties of over 100 are submitting their permit at least 45 days before the planned event. She also asked if there were sound ordinances in place for parties in the parks and if there was any follow- up by City Staff after a complaint was made by neighbors to check for damages and garbage. Dr. Edwards stated that he would communicate with Staff and prepare responses. He stated that he knows Staff does follow up, but he will report to what extent after complaints are made. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness stated that she remembered voting on the creation of the special events permits and distinguishing the number of their party, as well as deposits that had to be made by the party involved. Councilmember Jerzak stated his understanding was that the lease for liquor store #2 expires at the end of the month, and they had a Work Session at their last meeting about the direction that the store was going. He asked if, once the lease expires, the store is going to enter a month-to- month lease agreement with the owner and if there was any resolution to the issue. Page 5 of 184 6/09/25 DRAFT 3 Dr. Edwards stated that they would continue to negotiate on that, and he anticipates them coming back to the Council at the next Council meeting for an update on the end of the existing lease. He stated they could ask the Finance Director at that time if there was anything she needed to add. Ms. Holm stated that there has been discussion with the landlord on different options and is evaluation the cost. Councilmember Jerzak asked if they were willing to continue the lease on a month-to-month basis. Ms. Holm stated that the month-to-month is one of the options being evaluated. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness stated that at the last meeting, the Finance Director and Liquor Store Manager discussed that they were not interested in doing a month-to-month lease and that it had to be all or nothing. Dr. Edwards stated that the property managers were not at the last meeting about the liquor stores, but they are in negotiations with the landlord at this time. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if they must give notice of non-renewal. Ms. Holm stated the lease ends on June 30, and we do not have to give notice of non-renewal; however, we need time to remove all of our stock and inventory from the building. She stated that the landlord is not interested in long-term month-to-month; however, if operations are discontinued at store #2, we could ask if they would be willing to do a short-term month-to-month in order to remove inventory and city possessions. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted that in reading the minutes from the prior meeting, there were a lot of building updates that needed to be made, such as the HVAC system and flooring. She asked why it would be their responsibility if they were leasing the property. Ms. Holm stated that the HVAC would not be the responsibility of the city, and it would be built into the lease agreement, as well as flooring, tile, and painting. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness asked if Staff felt like they had enough time left to negotiate, as they were getting close to the deadline with no definitive answer. She also asked if an extension would be needed to give the Staff some more time. Ms. Holm stated that the city has had conversations with the landlord and expressed that there is a timeline involved and want to find a resolution quickly. The landlord offered two additional options which will be presented to council. Councilmember Jerzak stated he is feeling a sense of urgency because they have not gotten Staff direction yet on how to move forward with liquor store #2. He asked if they were going to have time to remedy this before the deadline. Page 6 of 184 6/09/25 DRAFT 4 Dr. Edwards stated that it is urgent, and at the last Council meeting, there were a few things the Staff still needed to negotiate with the landlord. Once those negotiations are done, staff will report to Council at the June 23rd meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness reiterated that the Council did not have a consensus on closing liquor store #2 at the last meeting, but did not want this lease expiring to force their hand and have to close the store. Dr. Edwards stated that if the lease expires, the store will have to close, which has always been the case. He stated that the last meeting was about whether operations would continue at liquor store #2. At the next meeting, staff will report on the lease negotiations, and if the Council does not find those terms agreeable, then operations at liquor store #2 will not continue. Councilmember Jerzak concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Kragness that the Council was split on whether operations should continue at liquor store #2. He asked if there was any value in taking a poll with the Council now on how they felt. With a new lease, the Council would need to make new projections on profitability. He does not want to prematurely close the store if it can be profitable, but does not want to have to decide so close to the lease deadline either. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness noted that at the last meeting, liquor store #2 was projected to be profitable. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked how they are in this position when they have two enterprise entities and continue losing money. Dr. Edwards stated that Finance Director Angela Holm could add input too, but at the last meeting, staff showed the Council a negative balance for 2025, but then a less than ten thousand profit, and moving forward, the store would generate a $40,000 profit a year. There would not be a prolonged deficit beyond a year, and it would not affect taxpayers because there is a reserve in the Liquor Store Fund that would absorb that deficit. The stores do generate money and do not have a negative effect on taxpayers. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness stated that the answer to Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson's question is that even though these enterprise entities are not generating as much money as they would prefer as a City, there is a reserve built in to help cushion a deficit. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked where the reserves come from. Dr. Edwards referred to Finance Director Holms on that question, but stated that the Liquor Store Fund has its own reserve and does not draw from reserves of the City at large or from general funds. Finance Director Angela Holm noted that it is important to understand that the Liquor Store Fund operates as one enterprise fund, even though it has two stores. At the last meeting, they were attempting to parse out different business units, and that is where the apparent loss in liquor store #2 became obvious. Had they presented it as one enterprise fund, it would have only shown a profit since liquor store #1 covers liquor store #2 in profitability. She stated that she had discussed this Page 7 of 184 6/09/25 DRAFT 5 with Operations Manager Greg "Woody" Keehr, and it became clear that they needed to address the deficit at liquor store #2. They have already made staffing changes in liquor store #2 to make it more profitable. It is projected that by the end of 2025, these changes will result in a deficit of less than $1,000 or may not even result in a loss at all in profit. The liquor store has a solid, positive cash reserve, and even with a bond payment, they are still generating funds for their reserve. With new projections, she believes they will be able to cover their bond payment and build their cash balance. The Liquor Store Fund will not be able to contribute to the General Fund or tax levy until its bond payment is covered, which is $150,000 a year. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson noted she was not at the last meeting but had read through the minutes thoroughly and still does not understand why liquor store #2 is being kept open even though it is not profitable and is only a mile away from liquor store #1, especially when liquor store #1 is so profitable. She stated she does not support keeping liquor store #2 open. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness replied that at the last meeting, the Operations Manager explained there were a lot of reasons why liquor store #2 was being kept open, even though liquor store #1 was carrying it. Having two stores open allows them to buy at bulk discount, and if liquor store #2 closed, liquor store #1 would not be as profitable. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated that her background is in purchasing, and it is all in how you negotiate. She noted there may be merit to the bulk discount claims, but she is not convinced. Dr. Edwards stated that Finance Director Holms could follow up, but noted that liquor store #2 will make money with a projection of $40,000 a year moving forward and a projected deficit loss of less than $1,000. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness noted that the projected deficit would be $588 at the end of 2025. Dr. Edwards continued that liquor store #2 generates cash flow and will continue to do so as they move forward. Ms. Holm explained that the staffing changes they are making will start generating net income for both stores. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked why they have not been implementing the staffing changes until now. Ms. Holm stated she does not want to blame anyone specifically, but it was business decisions that were made over the last eight years. Those decisions included building a new store, getting a bond, staffing decisions, and not aggressively pursuing bulk buying opportunities. The previous Liquor Manager only looked at gross profit instead of net income, and net income is impacted by low expenses and increased sales. Being on the State Auditor’s deficit list gave them the opportunity to parse out their issues, report them, and move forward with the enterprise. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness noted that the questions the Council had asked contributed to them Page 8 of 184 6/09/25 DRAFT 6 making a plan for profitability, and it seems like they are on their way to doing that. When she was on the Finance Commission, she did not recall hearing any specific plans on how the liquor stores would generate a profit, and it was just about surviving. Councilmember Moore asked if the only option was to sign a new 10-year lease if the Council decided not to close liquor store #2. Ms. Holm stated that is not the only option. The landlord brought two other options forward last Friday: a three-year lease or a five-year lease. Staff will outline those lease options with costs in their projections and show the Council at the next meeting. Councilmember Moore said she was happy to hear there was more than one option on a lease agreement. She asked how much money was in the reserve account for both stores. Ms. Holm responded that she did not know the exact number, but the last she knew, it was around $700,000. Councilmember Moore stated that was more than she anticipated and asked if, in the event the Council chose to close liquor store #2, they could use that reserve to pay off the bond payment for liquor store #1. Ms. Holm stated that would be an option. Councilmember Moore asked if the $700,000 in the reserve account could only be used within the Liquor Store Fund enterprise. Ms. Holm replied yes, there are opportunities, but they would have to look at debt services, months of operation, among other things, and there is a minimum that must be kept within the operation. If there was excess, she would not recommend draining the reserve account, but paying off the bond payment could be an option. Councilmember Moore stated she was not in total support of municipal liquor stores, in general, but now that she knows there is a reserve in the Enterprise Fund to pay the bond payment, it is becoming more enticing. She acknowledged that Mayor Pro Tem Kragness said there would be an effect on employees if the store closed, but there is an effect on the City regarding things happening statewide and nationally. She would like to discuss those issues further during the budget prioritization discussion, but for the record, she is in favor of closing liquor store #2. Councilmember Jerzak stated he is willing to listen to the new projections and lease proposals despite being uncomfortable keeping liquor store #2 open. He noted that the Council is currently at the consensus of closing liquor store #2. He asked if the liquor store Staff is comfortable with the short time frame to negotiate the lease, knowing that the Council was in favor of closing the store. He also stated that at the last meeting, the Operations Manager discussed the discounts for buying by the case, and he would like to see how much of an advantage there is with the cost compared to net profits versus gross profits. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness stated that she is not in favor of closing liquor store #2 and has confidence in the Staff and the projections. She thinks it would be premature to discuss closing liquor store #2 until the Council can see the new lease contracts and make an informed decision. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated that this decision is getting down to the wire now, and she would be willing to give the liquor store #2 a one-year lease option to see if they could make Page 9 of 184 6/09/25 DRAFT 7 it work. She is more confident in the direction in which liquor store #2 is going, but the Council should push the landlord to make the lease shorter, as the Council is on the fence about liquor store #2 staying open. She also suggested making the HVAC and new flooring improvements part of the new lease agreement. She is trying to find a way to say yes to keeping the store open, but lease negotiations need to be aggressive; otherwise, her vote is to close it. Ms. Holm said she would ask for the one-year lease option and see if it is possible. Dr. Edwards stated he understood the direction the Council wants to go and will come back with numbers to show the Council. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said the Council has the power to make this lease negotiation go in its favor. She cited her previous experience in purchasing and suggested strong-arming the landlord to get the improvements and the length of the lease that the Council wants. She thanked Ms. Holm for all her efforts. Councilmember Moore commented that at the last meeting during the Open Forum, there was a request to adopt a pet store ordinance, and she would like to follow up on that. She noted that there have been a lot of questions about water restrictions and gardens, but after the newsletter came out, it was clarified at a neighborhood meeting that water restrictions do not apply in those cases. She pointed out that there is some conflicting information on the City’s website versus the newsletter, and she would like some clarification on that. Councilmember Moore asked if there was a time during the Council report when they could talk about upcoming meeting times and dates for viewers of the meetings, so they could get that information. She mentioned events like Night to Unite for community engagement, Random Acts of Kindness, and the joint Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park Juneteenth celebration. She said it would be nice to have reminders for these events for viewers instead of just reading proclamations at the meetings. Councilmember Moore asked Dr. Edwards about the legal services contracts. She also asked if the prosecution's legal services and cities have the same rates from 2010, as stated in the Council’s packets. If the rates have changed in the last 15 years, they need updated information. Dr. Edwards stated that the numbers in the contract in their packets are current and accurate and have been adjusted to show current-day rates. Councilmember Moore asked if they were charged any time someone asked the City Attorney a question. Dr. Edwards stated that is correct. Councilmember Moore asked if that pertains to community members, Staff, and Council as well. Dr. Edwards stated that the City Attorney does not engage in inquiries from community members. Councilmember Moore asked if everything else falls under legal services, such as the Mayor asking questions during a Council meeting, when they are being charged an hourly rate. Dr. Edwards explained that Council meetings have a flat fee that the City pays the City Attorney. If a question comes up outside of a meeting and they call the City Attorney, the clock starts, and the Page 10 of 184 6/09/25 DRAFT 8 City is charged an hourly rate for that call. Councilmember Moore asked if the City gets a breakdown of those calls and charges, and when the Council gets them. Dr. Edwards said it is in their contract; it shows per hour what the City is charged depending on the subject matter. Councilmember Moore asked if it is part of the City Attorney’s quarterly report on billed services, and Dr. Edwards confirmed it is. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if it was the consensus of the Council that certain constituents do not have access to the City Attorney. She noted there have been instances where residents have gone directly to the City Attorney instead of the proper Staff. Dr. Edwards suggested that it does not happen, and the City is not billed for those calls. If a constituent called the City Attorney, they would be told that the attorney could not help them, so it would not be necessary to make any changes. City Attorney Shiobhan Talor addressed the Council and said she is their City Attorney, so she represents Brooklyn Center and is counsel for City Staff and City Council. If she receives questions from constituents, she refers them to Dr. Edwards. Councilmember Jerzak asked if they could move on to the next miscellaneous item. He discussed how important community engagement is and described an event he attended at Palmer Lake, where there were thirty residents in attendance and another event where there were only six residents in attendance. He suggested having events at two, three, or four parks on the same night so people can get to know each other. He stated that he wants constituents to see that the Council is responsible with taxpayer dollars for these events. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson concurred with Councilmember Jerzak and stated that her Orchard Lane neighborhood meets, but other nearby areas could be merged with hers to have one event at the same time. She thinks that merging different areas by regional location could be something they explore next year. Dr. Edwards respectfully asked the Council to design those regional location meet-ups so that they can be raised to the policy level and figure out other options, as opposed to telling the City Staff how this work should be done in regard to City engagement with the community. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson apologized to Dr. Edwards and said she was not trying to indicate that she wanted to change any policies but was throwing out options for Staff to consider. She said the events that were being held were great events, but might have had better attendance if those events had been combined with other areas. She again apologized if it came across the wrong way. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness stated that Councilmember Moore had discussed earlier that these events needed more advertisement, and that may help with attendance levels. Page 11 of 184 6/09/25 DRAFT 9 Councilmember Moore asked if this was the first year that the departments made presentations to Council. Dr. Edwards stated that the departments have done presentations before, but they started last year and only got halfway through all the departments, so this year will be the first year that every department has presented. Councilmember Moore asked if, during those presentations, was the time to ask questions to the departments from a policy perspective, versus the Council having discussions about it during Council meetings. She said a few years ago, community engagement events were well attended, and the poor attendance now should be on Dr. Edwards' radar as well as the Directors and their designees to better utilize Staff during those events. Councilmember Jerzak concurred with Dr. Edwards' comments but noted that this is the third time he has discussed this, and nothing has changed. He brought it up to get a pulse from the Council and discussed it with Dr. Edwards, and if the departments come back and say that they will continue to operate this way because it works and it is what the citizens want, then that is okay too. His concern was purely the attendance levels. Dr. Edwards stated that City Staff thinks about community participation on a daily basis, so they are trying, and there are some things that they will explore to figure out what is working and what is not. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked for clarification on 6e, the tax rule, and special assessments for Brooklyn Center’s little league fields and wanted to confirm that they are not forgiving the past due balance but are trying to accommodate them and work out a payment plan over five years. Dr. Edwards confirmed that this is correct. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness called for a two-minute recess from 7:20pm until 7:22pm. Dr. Edward stated that before they go on a recess, he wanted to mention that Staff is doing a new process for 2026 with the legislature pertaining to a bonding request, so it will not only go through their Legislators, but also through a portal application process, and the deadline for 2026 is coming up on Friday, June 13. He intends to make applications for the bonding requests for this year to accommodate changes if they need to be made. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness agreed that those bond requests should get in. Councilmember Moore confirmed the bond requests were regarding the TIF, Central Garage, and infrastructure for the opportunity. CITY MANAGER MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION ITEMS Dr. Edwards stated that the last item to discuss is the audit presentation on July 21, and the Staff will still have the audit available on June 30. The auditor is not available until July 21 to do the presentation, so he would like to set the date. Page 12 of 184 6/09/25 DRAFT 10 Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked if the audit would be distributed to the Council in advance, and if they have questions, they can call the auditor. Dr. Edwards stated he would not call the auditor as he was only available for the presentation as scheduled. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson explained she was asking because the audit has a lot of material to go through, and she wants the opportunity to go through it thoroughly before the presentation. Dr. Edwards introduced the new City Clerk, Shannon Pettit. The Council congratulated Ms. Pettit and said they were happy to have her on board. Councilmember Moore asked if that means the Deputy City Clerk position is now open at this time. Dr. Edwards stated it is, and that position is still a part of the budget at this time. Posts and interviews have been made for that position. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness called for a two-minute recess before the Regular Session from 7:33pm until 7:35pm. BUDGET PRIORITIZATION DISCUSSION CCX BROADCAST OF STUDY SESSION Mayor Pro Tem Kragness stated they will move the Budget Prioritization Discussion and CCX Broadcast items to the next meeting. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said she would like to discuss those items after the Regular Session. Dr. Edwards stated they do not have a Work Session scheduled for this evening, so they have to create a Work Session now and discuss those two items there. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness asked if Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson wanted to discuss both items instead of going home. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she really wanted to discuss the budget prioritization schedule. Councilmember Moore made a motion and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to add Budget Prioritization Discussion to the Work Session agenda that will be held after tonight’s regular Council meeting. Motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pro Tem Kragness adjourned the meeting at 7:10 p.m. Page 13 of 184 6/09/25 1 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JUNE 9, 2025 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL The Brooklyn Center City Council met in an Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Teneshia Kragness at 7:11 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Mayor Pro Tem Teneshia Kragness and Councilmembers Kris Lawrence-Anderson, Dan Jerzak, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Community Development Director Jesse Anderson, Economic Development Manager Ian Alexander, Assistant City Engineer Lydia Ener, City Planner Ginny McIntosh, City Clerk Shannon Pettit, and City Attorney Siobhan Tolar. Mayor April Graves was absent and excused. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 4. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM Mayor Pro Tem Teneshia Kragness opened the meeting for the purpose of an Informal Open Forum and reviewed the Rules of Decorum. Alfreda D. spoke via Zoom and stated they just went through George Floyd's fifth anniversary and wanted to address the State-sanction laws. She discussed the murder of George Floyd and stated it sent shockwaves through the City, country, and state of Minnesota. She stated it brought to light the realities of policing and racial injustice. Less than a year later, Dante Wright was also killed in Brooklyn Center, and Dante was a father, son, and friend. Brooklyn Center has become a symbol of injustice and, for some, an awakening. The community carries deep trauma, especially the young people in the community. She stated she has heard whispers of a federal pardon for Derek Chauvin, and it feels like salt in a wound after the community has not been allowed to heal correctly. This pardon would signal to the community that there is no accountability and that justice is up for debate. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness stated that Alfreda's allotted two minutes had passed and thanked her for sharing her thoughts. Page 14 of 184 6/09/25 2 Julie B. addressed the Council via Zoom. She wanted to recognize City Staff for their authentic relationship building that requires consistency, authenticity, mutual respect, and humility. She noted that the City has people who show up like that daily. She mentioned the Director of Community Prevention, Health and Safety Director, LaToya Turk, and how she effectively serves the community of Brooklyn Center with a smile and ensures that everyone has what they need. She mentioned Ms. Turk has an incredible team that continues to serve the community with the same commitment. Julie B. thanked Christina Jones, Armando Oster, and Raquel Gutierrez for their work. She discussed having a similar meeting with the Parks and Recreation Manager Charles Walker, and noticed he had a level of rapport with the youth in the community that is not built overnight. She mentioned that Parks and Recreation Director Wiseman has been a gift to the City and has created spaces with increased access to the residents, which has never been done before. Despite the excellent City Staff, she said she had been disappointed recently after attending a few graduation parties this weekend for Brooklyn Center graduates, none of which were held at any parks. She said she hopes they foster inclusivity in the decisions about how the community can use the parks. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness stated that Julie B.'s two minutes were up. Julie B. stated said she would email her remaining remarks to the Council. Kevin S., a citizen of the Evergreen neighborhood, discussed a building on the corner of 69th and Humboldt. There was talk of veteran housing, a coffee shop, and underground parking. He said it seems like it is affordable housing with 31 units, and that neighborhood already has three group homes on his block and three more on the next block. He understands that there are people in need, but does not understand the need for 31 new units. He asked if a center for the homeless and a social service agency could be put in a government building instead of the middle of a residential area. He requested that the Council investigate the matter further and see if there is a better spot to better serve the people in need in Brooklyn Center. There being no further comments, the Informal Open Forum was closed. 5. INVOCATION Councilmember Jerzak quoted Oprah Winfrey, "Passion is energy. Feel the power that comes from focusing on what excites you." Councilmember Jerzak also quoted Benjamin Franklin, "If passion drives you, let reason hold the reins." 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, as amended, adding a Work Session meeting with agenda item, Budget Priority Discussion, and the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Page 15 of 184 6/09/25 3 1. May 27, 2025 - Study Session 2. May 27, 2025 - Regular Session 3. May 27, 2025 - Work Session 6b. LICENSES FIREWORKS - TEMPORARY TNT Fireworks 3245 Co Rd 10 N Brooklyn Center MN, 55430 GARBAGE HAULER Allied Waste 8661 Rendova St NE Circle Pines, MN 55014 Curbside Waste 18150 118th Ave N Dayton, Mn 55369 Walters Recycling & Refuse 2830 101st Avenue NE Blaine, MN 55449 Waste Management 10050 Naples Street NE Blaine, MN 55449 MECHANICAL Home Care Heating and Air LLC 14450 Ewing Avenue S, Burnsville 55306 Midwest Maintenance & Mech 750 Pennsylvania Avenue S, Golden Valley 55426 MH Plumbing Inc. 6725 277th Avenue NW, Isanti 55040 MJW HVAC, Inc. 13600 Edgewood Street, Becker 55308 RENTAL INITIAL (TYPE IV – six-month license) 5316 Colfax Avenue N CAG MINNESOTA FUND II LLC RENEWAL (TYPE IV – six-month license) 6242 Scott Avenue N Cosco Property I Llc 7141 Newton Avenue N Ih2 Property Illinois Lp Page 16 of 184 6/09/25 4 RENEWAL (TYPE III – one-year license) 7025 Grimes Avenue N SFR ACQUISITIONS 3 LLC RENEWAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 4809 Twin Lake Avenue N Twin Lake Apartments 4708 Twin Lake Avenue N Michael N Mohs 5925 Washburn Avenue N Endura 5925 Llc SIGNHANGER Signapolis, Inc. 7435 Washington Ave S, Minneapolis 55439 6c. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LETTER OF ENGAGEMENT WITH CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER LAW FIRM FOR LEGAL SERVICES 6d. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT EXTENSION WITH KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED LAW FIRM FOR LEGAL SERVICES 6e. CANCELING AND RE-ASSESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR 6030 VINCENT AVE N TO HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS (BC LITTLE LEAGUE FIELDS) Motion passed unanimously. 7. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS 7a. PROCLAMATION – JUNE 19, JUNETEENTH Mayor Pro Tem Kragness read in full a Proclamation recognizing June 19, 2025, as Juneteenth, Freedom Day in Brooklyn Center. Councilmember Jerzak moved and Mayor Pro Tem Kragness seconded to adopt a PROCLAMATION Recognizing June 19, 2025, as Juneteenth, Freedom Day in Brooklyn Center. Motion passed unanimously. 7b. PROCLAMATION IN CELEBRATION OF COLORS OF SOUTHEAST ASIA (COSA) FEST Page 17 of 184 6/09/25 5 Mayor Pro Tem Kragness read in full a Proclamation recognizing June 7, 2025, as the Celebration of Colors of Southeast Asia (COSA) Fest. Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to adopt a PROCLAMATION Recognizing June 7, 2025, as the Celebration of Colors of Southeast Asia (COSA) Fest. Motion passed unanimously. 7c. PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING JUNE 2025 AS LGBTQIA+ PRIDE MONTH IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Mayor Pro Tem Kragness read in full a Proclamation recognizing June 2025 as LGBTQIA+ Pride Month in the City of Brooklyn Center. Councilmember Moore moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to adopt a PROCLAMATION Recognizing June 2025 as LGBTQIA+ pride month in the City of Brooklyn Center. Motion passed unanimously. 7d. PUBLIC WORKS UPDATE Dr. Edwards introduced Public Works City Engineer Lydia Ener. Public Works City Engineer Lydia Ener started her slideshow presentation with a reminder that the Public Works Department consists of six functional divisions, including administrative/engineering, street maintenance (storm sewer, traffic control, street lighting), park maintenance and forestry, public utilities (water, sanitary sewer), central garage, and facilities maintenance (maintenance and janitorial). Ms. Ener stated that the role of Public Works in Brooklyn Center is to be responsible for adequately and cost-effectively providing for the maintenance and operations of the City's infrastructure and facilities. The duties this includes are 105 miles of city streets and 5,100 traffic signs, 520 acres of parks and natural areas, 62 miles of trails and sidewalks, 88 miles of storm drains and 40 treatment facilities, water and sewer operations, and all Municipal-owned buildings and grounds. Ms. Ener highlighted the Public Works 2024 accomplishments, which included over $12 million invested in City assets. These assets included the Department’s most significant project, which is the Orchard Lane East improvement in phase 1, which is still ongoing, the I-94/Dupont Avenue water main crossing project, the 65th Avenue trunk storm sewer rehabilitation project, and the first traffic calming pilot program, along with improvements to the City tree canopy and the start of the lead service line project. Page 18 of 184 6/09/25 6 Ms. Ener explained that the traffic calming pilot program involved implementing delineators to knock down and address speeds in the East Palmer Lake area. The water main installation on 66th Avenue and Orchard is a 16-inch pipe. She noted that most water mains are six to eight inches, so this water main is exceptionally large. Ms. Ener noted the Department’s 2025 goals, including the Orchard Lane East improvements moving to phase 2. This project is way ahead of schedule, and Staff are already paving 65th Avenue and a few other streets. Staff are also 60 to 75 percent done with all their utility work there. Other goals include the 67th Avenue and James Avenue Mill and Overlay, where Staff are currently working on dewatering and the spot hydrant and gate valves, the Lift Station #9 that includes both the force main and a large lift station, the Well #11 and Well House construction, the Expanded Traffic Calming Program in another area by 58th and Fremont and Emerson, and continuing Lead Service Line project and try to track down any lead services in the City. Ms. Ener highlighted the Department’s long-range goals and priorities: Capital Improvement Plan Project areas, the standard street, storm, water, sanitary maintenance project, and the Orchard Project, one of their capital improvement projects. The continued Traffic Calming Program is part of the Capital Improvement Plan and will set aside money to keep funding that project and find areas that need work. Implementing the Park Capital Improvement Plan involves putting soft foam under playground equipment. Humboldt Avenue and 65th Avenue area improvements are some of their next big projects. Staff do not have a standard mill and overlay plan but are considering reducing speeding and crash rates and pedestrian safety at that intersection. This project will improve streets, stormwater and sewer water, and sanitary facilities. Public Works is still looking at Highway 252 improvements and is collaborating with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and the County on how to address those issues. Ms. Ener asked the Council if they had any questions. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson thanked Ms. Ener for her presentation and stated she lives a block north of 63rd Avenue, and there are pillars in the median there, but at Unity, a lot of traffic is still speeding. She asked if Public Works had done any studies on that particular area because speeding had not decreased and the pillars have not slowed down drivers. Ms. Ener replied that the area in question at 63rd Avenue and Unity is tough because it is called Municipal State Aid Street and was constructed recently, but before any of their Staff was there. It is a wide street, which makes it difficult to attempt to control speeds. She said the best way to control speeds is to narrow and constrict the road, and the only way to do that on such a wide street is to look at two-stage crossings, which are the pillar medians that Councilmember Lawrence- Anderson is referring to. These medians are put there so people can safely stop in the middle of a two-lane street and cross at the next break in traffic. She said sometimes it is difficult to deal with the existing infrastructure. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson said that the street is like a racetrack with the amount of speeding there, and she cannot imagine how the residents there feel. Ms. Ener noted that Public Works is aware of the issue in that area and has received complaints from residents. Putting up an Page 19 of 184 6/09/25 7 automated speed sign helps, but it usually loses its ability to remind people to control their speeds for a certain amount of time. Since the street was so recently redone, all they can look at are retrofit options, which focus on ensuring safe crossings for pedestrians. Councilmember Moore asked where the Department is starting the Traffic Calming Program. Ms. Ener replied they would begin on 58th Avenue and Fremont, and 58th Avenue and Emerson based on elevated crash rates in that area. The locations where Staff will implement the Traffic Calming Program are not just based on residents' information but also on MnDOT's crash rate data and local police. Councilmember Moore asked about the permanent Traffic Calming Program on East Palmer Lake and what that entails. Ms. Ener explained Staff would recreate the temporary speed tables in a true bituminous manner. The Department had temporary speed tables in that area, which have been removed and will be used in another location. The new, real, bituminous speed tables will be in the exact locations up and down Newton, are the same size, and will feel the same to drivers, but they will be permanent. Councilmember Moore asked about the water main in Orchard and its size. Ms. Ener said there is a 16-inch regional line on 66th Avenue, but the lines that serve the neighborhoods are typically eight-inch pipes. Councilmember Jerzak commended Ms. Ener on the work done at Palmer Lake and East Palmer Lake, and the work of Public Works with the community. Councilmember Moore commended Ms. Ener on her presentation and the work that she is doing for Public Works and the work their Staff is doing. Councilmember Moore moved and Mayor Pro Tem Kragness seconded to approve the presentation from the Public Works and Engineering Department, accomplished in 2024, and the goals they are working towards in 2025. Motion passed unanimously. 7e. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ANNUAL REPORT Dr. Edwards introduced the Community Development Department Director Jesse Anderson. Community Development Director Jesse Anderson explained that their report will be a bit of a recap of 2024 and some of the happenings in 2025. Mr. Anderson showed an organizational chart with four different manager levels, including Building Officials, Housing and Community Standards Manager, Economic Development Manager, and Planning Manager. He highlighted the overview of their services, which includes Building and Community Standards such as building and construction regulation, rental licensing, property maintenance, vacant building, and housing programs. Their Business and Development Services include planning and zoning services, long- Page 20 of 184 6/09/25 8 range strategic planning, EDA/Economic Development Programs, Business Retention and Expansion Program, and Workforce Development. Mr. Anderson discussed their Rental Program and stated they track and inspect all rental licensed properties and are working on a Citywide resource packet for all rental tenants. Staff investigate and resolve property complaints, investigate unlicensed rental properties, and provide education on tenant protections and rental licensing administration. The Department participates in CPTED inspections, which are crime prevention through environmental design inspections and are done by inspection staff. Staff work on rental plans with Type 3 and Type 4 licenses and inspect all their multi-family units as part of the renewal process. Mr. Anderson described their Rental Program, which includes almost 12,000 total housing units and is approximately 3,608 rental units, or 30 percent of the units in Brooklyn Center, and 8,300 single-family homes. The Department currently has 668 active rental licenses, over 80 percent of which are 2- to 3-year licenses. The Department has 43 properties with expired licenses, but they are working on getting those licenses updated and renewed. The Department has 175 properties they are aware of, which are residential care facilities or group homes, that they cannot license due to the State legislature passing last year. Staff have discussed getting licensure back from the legislature, but conversations did not go well, and Mr. Anderson does not believe that restrictions on group homes will be lifted. Mr. Anderson highlighted some of the Department's accomplishments with the Rental Program; there was a lot of change in ownership of the multi-apartment building owners, so a lot of training took place for new apartment managers. Staff have attended resident council meetings, specifically at Sonder House, regarding tenant concerns and ongoing protections with property owners and managers. Some of the Department’s goals include a tenant resource packet for residents in the fall of 2025, a tenant protection work session with the City Council in the Fall of 2025, a rental license program points system work session with the City Council in the Fall of 2025, an update the rental policy and procedures handbook, continuing to work on automate rental license renewals through their software. Mr. Anderson discussed their Property Maintenance and Code Enforcement Services, with a Complaint-based Program and a Proactive Code Enforcement Program. In 2024, they had 3,374 Code Enforcement cases; in 2025, they currently have 1,890 Code Enforcement cases. Staff have noticed an increase in illegal dumping on commercial properties and vacant lots and loitering on vacant EDA properties. The Proactive Code Enforcement program includes neighborhood sweeps, long grass, corridor sweeps, and commercial property. Mr. Anderson discussed their Vacant Building Program, which has 65 vacant properties. A vacant commercial property between Sears was sold to a company called TransformCo. The former Brown College building has gone through tax forfeiture, and the Code Enforcement Staff is monitoring it. Code Enforcement Staff will be more involved in the EDA mowing process, so it will be on an as-needed basis to save on cost instead of a set mowing schedule with their EDA properties. Page 21 of 184 6/09/25 9 Mr. Anderson noted their 2025/2026 Code Enforcement Initiatives, which are plans to finish a sweep of the entire City by the end of 2025. Department Staff are knocking on doors to provide education with a follow-up and formal complaint notice, monitoring commercial vacant properties for trespassers, abating trash and dumping, and participating in tall grass enforcement. Staff are currently one-quarter of the way through the properties. Staff are currently working through the rental properties, and it is a struggle for Staff to finish this task as it is a very lengthy process. The Department got a lot of phone calls after the fact, but it is still their goal to finish the sweep by the end of the year. Mr. Anderson discussed the 2024/2025 Building Division Initiatives and accomplishments. Those included an updated fixed fee permit schedule, continued cross-training in preparation for Opportunity Site, updated handouts and brochures, review of updated codes for 2026 adoption, new electrical inspection contractor, software permit flow process update, building inspector intern, continued education with DIY homeowners and contractors to make sure building codes are followed, single-family homes that convert to MDH Assisted Living facilities requires a Change of Use review (new CO) that requires Building Official review. Mr. Anderson introduced City Planner Ginny McIntosh to discuss planning and construction. City Planner Ginny McIntosh stated that the 2025 Planning Activities to date are a few building plans which include CAPI’s expansion, New Horizon Academy, two conditional use permits for O’Pretti! and New Horizons daycare, two subdivision (platting and minor subdivisions/lot splits) for CAPI and Admiral Lane, one planned unit development/amendments (PUD) which were also CAPI, one Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) amendment for cannabis, and some concept plan reviews. Ms. McIntosh stated that, as far as planning highlights go, they are still not seeing a lot of construction, and permits are way down. The Department is seeing this decline in construction everywhere, including Minneapolis. Some expansion projects along Brooklyn Boulevard, including New Horizon and CAPI, are planned for the summer. Brooklyn Boulevard Dental Clinic submitted expansion plans for next week's Planning Commission meeting, as they are looking to expand their business and invest in some property. Ms. McIntosh and Staff have met with the lenders who assumed ownership of the C. Alan development site, through the foreclosure process, has met with contractors on site, and hopes that construction will begin again on the south side of that development. Despite market conditions, she has also received calls about expanding multi-family properties in the area and some housing development proposals. Ms. McIntosh stated that their 2025/2026 initiatives include continuing to look at the UDO; it is a living document that is not a one-and-done process as far as the zoning code. The Department will implement cannabis regulations after a recently drawn lottery for the first round of cannabis licensing. Staff will be monitoring and being proactive with the “Missing Middle” legislation to Page 22 of 184 6/09/25 10 be more efficient and competitive with the development process in Brooklyn Center. Some bills did not pass, but had language that would have limited local decision-making authority. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked what the “Missing Middle” legislation means, as she hasn’t followed it. Ms. McIntosh explained that it is a group of affordable housing advocates, builders, social workers, and other groups that have all come together and are pushing for more housing quicker, with fewer restrictions, and making it more affordable. The League of Minnesota Cities and Metro Cities are heavily involved and are the primary reasons nothing has passed. The Yes to Homes Coalition is a vast group organization that has been trying to push through new legislation that would remove requirements such as building material requirements and multi- family units being built in any commercial district. Some cities have been proactive in reforming their development approval processes, such as removing conditional use permits and allowing for additional routes for administrative approvals to avoid getting additional Council approval. She mentioned the City of Rochester has a lot of growth happening, and they do not have to go through the Council for approval, which lends itself to faster building. The City of Bloomington and Richfield are also following the same path, and Staff is looking into that process. Ms. McIntosh stated that Staff will start prep work on the 2050 Comprehensive Plan, which the Council will see in upcoming budgets, and to allocate money for the Comprehensive Plan. Staff will also work towards a Housing Policy Plan like the Local Affordable Housing Act (LAHA) and initiate a Home Rehab Loan Program with a tentative start date of July 1, 2025. Ms. McIntosh discussed reviewing options for their 2025 funds and when the funding amount will be determined. Right now, there is an estimated $500,000 in that fund. Staff will also explore funding options for the Housing Trust Fund adopted in 2025. Ms. McIntosh stated Staff will look at the Opportunity Site, which is not just planning but the whole Department, and look at additional opportunities for funding and development opportunities, specifically on the outside perimeter. Staff will continue to address the City Council's strategic priorities, such as the Sears site, the Target site, the Brown College site, 57th and Logan, the Opportunity Site, minimizing vacancies in retail spaces, and the build-out at Shingle Creek Crossing. Councilmember Jerzak stated that he followed the "Missing Middle" legislation very closely, and it comes down to a loss of local zoning control and increasing density with the hopes of reducing costs and red tape and delivering a product faster. Ms. McIntosh stated that some of the items the legislature would ask for regarding the "Missing Middle" legislation are things that Brooklyn Center already has, such as ADUs. She stated that it is an offensive versus defensive stance regarding City approval on building and asked if the City Council would want to do some of the things the "Missing Middle” legislation would ask for in advance or preferred to wait and see. Page 23 of 184 6/09/25 11 Councilmember Jerzak stated that he thinks the City should be proactive and noted that one of the things the legislation has eliminated is parking restrictions. There is probably a place for some of the legislative items but now is not the time to discuss all the details. He stated the City will have to consider and discuss as it comes. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked about the Home Rehab Loan Program with a start date of July 1, 2025, and where information is for that program and the application process. Mr. Anderson answered that that information was unavailable; they had just signed the contract and approved its guidelines. The Department has started its contract with the Center for Energy and Environment, so the Center for Energy and Environment will run part of the program. There are two programs, the Hennepin County Rehab Program and the City LAHA-funded program with the Center for Energy, and they do the same thing. The Hennepin County Rehab Program has 400 on its waitlist. Mr. Anderson will publicize the program starting July 1 on their Department’s website and will also have information about the program on the Center for Energy and Environment’s website. Ms. McIntosh continued her presentation with their 2024-2025 Construction Activity breakdown. These projects include Wangstad Commons (December 2024), Los Campeones Gym (December 2024), Pollo Campero (March 2025), ACER Innovation and Catalyst Center (April 2025), Surly Brewing Company – Fermentation Tanks (May 2025), Icon Beauty (June 2025), MTI Distributing Expansion (Summer 2025), Oh Pretti! Events and Rentals (Summer 2025), LC Coffee Lounge (Summer 2025), Hello Fresh Distribution (Summer 2025), and Medtronic Capital Improvements with MEC Campus (Ongoing). She noted that their Department is down in building permit projection valuations, but other projects have not yet come in with their permits, so that those values will go up. Ms. McIntosh said that construction activity is down, but no one is investing or building right now if they do not have to, so the Department is not seeing a lot of building activity right now. However, that may change as the year goes on. She handed the presentation over to Economic Development Manager Ian Alexander. Economic Development Manager Ian Alexander stated that the EDA-Owned and Scattered Sites, which include 902 53rd Avenue North, 7000 Brooklyn Boulevard, and 1601 James Circle North, are being prepared with RFP materials with Economic Development Coordinator Amy Legreen to see what the market provides in the next few weeks. Mr. Alexander discussed Opportunity Site: Phase 1 (South End), and he discussed it with a developer named Bob Lux, who can finance the project. However, their challenge is that financing requires someone to mitigate the risk. Staff are working with two or three other organizations that could mitigate the risk to the developer. Due to recent legislative changes, bonding will not happen for the amount the Department wanted. The Department currently has $3 million and will stretch it as far as possible. TIF Legislation will hopefully move ahead as it is in the bill, but it will have to be structured so that they have sites that still generate income for the City. Page 24 of 184 6/09/25 12 Mr. Alexander discussed the North End of the Opportunity Site. He stated they did not move forward with the Brown College site but are looking at restructuring at the Target site for both the MOU with Minneapolis for the First Responder Regional Training Facility and putting together the Sports Facility Development plan and project. Staff are discussing site acquisition for the Sports Facility with the City Attorney shortly. He also discussed special legislation called the Opportunity Zone Bill that would provide federal and State tax incentives, and State legislation that would provide investment incentives. Mr. Alexander discussed other Economic Development projects and activities moving forward with ARPA Funds. These include Market Plaza, NEOO Phase 1 – Support City-Led development, NEOO Phase 2 Technical Assistance, and Sanders Technical Assistance Program. Staff were working with environmental consulting agencies, but funding was cut for those programs due to recent federal budget cuts. Staff are working with Brianne and Thrive on the Economic Development Growth Plan. Staff are also working with the Fortis Capital Equity Fund program to create a project similar to what the City of Minneapolis is doing to finance its commercial developments. The Department will have a functional website in the next two weeks and has been working diligently. Staff have been working collaboratively with the design group GJR Architects on several different developments and have put in money for the daylighting at Shingle Creek Crossing. Mr. Alexander stated that they support small businesses with the Equity Fund Development, the Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce, and other resources like the Facade Improvement Fund, the Onsight Navigator and Consultants, and BrookLynk contracted through Brooklyn Park and CareerForce Center. Mr. Alexander gave a grant update, noting that the Department has a lot of grants but has to use its money strategically and is working with Bolton & Menk to structure its infrastructure correctly and adequately. Mr. Alexander discussed the Sears site and stated he had talked to the new owners at TransformCo. The new owners at TransformCo. would like to do something with their site but are unsure what that will be. He hopes Staff and the new owners will make some decisions and announcements in the next few weeks. Mr. Alexander stated that other projects Staff are working on and making progress on include Morty’s Bark and Brew, Jumbo’s Africa, and the townhouse proposal at the 5400 block of Brooklyn Boulevard, where they are waiting on materials from Amani Construction to draft a development agreement with the City. The Department also has the C. Allen Homes Townhomes project, where lender foreclosure is complete, and lenders are seeking a new developer to complete the project; they are working with City Staff to determine outstanding work items on the project to help it move forward. Mr. Alexander noted that other projects Staff are working on are expanding the Restaurant Depot and are in discussions with the Benderson family, which owns Slumberland. The idea would be Page 25 of 184 6/09/25 13 that the Restaurant Depot would take part of the Slumberland site. The Restaurant Depot's CFO flew out and looked at the Slumberland site. There is a gap in funding that will be challenging to overcome, but they are determined to work through it. Mr. Alexander stated Staff contacted the owners of 6200 and 6300 Shingle Creek, and the owners flew up from Texas and met with a group interested in redeveloping those buildings, and the owners seemed interested. Mr. Alexander noted the Department is still working on several projects and opportunities for their 2025/2026 initiatives that include the Sports Facility, the First Responder Education and Wellness Facility, continued initiatives for phase 1 of the Opportunity Site, complete Equity Fund Structure, monitoring grant opportunities, continue small business opportunities, and the Economic Growth Plan. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness stated she appreciated the behind-the-scenes report and that things are in motion. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked Mr. Anderson about the 5.8 percent 6-month provisional licenses and would like to see a comparison over the last five years. Mr. Anderson stated he could send that information to the Council. Councilmember Moore thanked Staff for their presentations and asked Mr. Anderson about terms of code enforcement and rental inspections being prioritized, doing a sweep through all the properties, and what that means. She stated the rental inspection process seems inefficient, with the Council seeing properties with 19 tenants and 17 violations. She noted that Councilmember Jerzak did a synopsis of the Department before and knows he will be involved moving forward with some of that discussion. She stated in terms of code enforcement; it does not seem like Staff is making that a top priority and is there any way that all of the City Staff could report code violations as they see them instead of doing a very laborious sweep of the City. Mr. Anderson stated that as far as noting violations, Staff see violations all the time, but if Staff stopped every time, they saw one, they would not get very far in the process. For every violation Staff sees and reports, they must make a proper entry, follow the legal process, generate a letter, accept phone calls, and do a follow-up to ensure the violation has been corrected. If the violation has not been corrected, it involves multiple visits, issuing a citation, and maybe a hearing appeal with the hearing office. He stated the problem is not necessarily a violation but the process and time it takes to document everything on their end. Staff respond to all complaints within 24 hours, so those complaints are a priority for Staff. Mr. Anderson noted that as far as the sweep goes, Staff does a sweep of the City multiple times a month for grass violations, but to check for broken windows, curb violations, and the like is too time-consuming for his Staff. The Department takes one block and may write up 20 to 40 properties, and that would be a whole day's worth of work to document everything. Page 26 of 184 6/09/25 14 Councilmember Moore asked if this is the best the Department can do right now, or if the Council needs to look at changing something to make it more effective and easier for their Staff. Mr. Anderson said the Department is always looking at improvements for efficiency and is rolling out a new process for rental renewals that will require less Staff involvement. He said part of the process that takes the longest is time with customers; for example, if a property owner fails an inspection, it takes them a long time to walk them through the corrections and the process. Councilmember Jerzak thanked Staff for the comprehensive presentation. He stated that he has a lot of experience in this area and would like to provide Dr. Edwards with a direct outline of his specific questions for the Department so they can respond later. He noted that violations are a complex issue, there is a lot of time involved in documenting and fixing code violations, and that does not even consider all the grass violations in the City. He also stated that this is the only Department that funds itself, and when forecasted revenues fall short, they have large projects that cannot start, like the Opportunity Sites. He asked how close they are in their revenue projections compared to last year. Mr. Anderson stated Staff analyzed their 2024 revenue and looked at all the revenue sources that come through rental inspections, such as rental licenses, reinspection fees, citations, and building permits. Across the board, most of them were over budget except for the building permit revenue. Building permit revenue was low, which is their biggest permit fee, with businesses like CAPI's spending close to $50,000 on their permit. Councilmember Jerzak stated he appreciated that the revenues are over budget. The Council has an upcoming work session about rentals. He will look for innovative ways to protect tenants' rights to ensure rentals are well-maintained and safe while still delivering a good product to the residents. He stated that even though the City lost 173 group homes and the Staff for those group homes has been absorbed in other areas, the Council will want to know what their Department is doing to fill that vacuum and how they are utilizing that Staff. Mr. Anderson said that although the City has lost 175 group homes, licenses, and rental revenues are all overachieving their revenue streams and are projected to be high again in 2025. Councilmember Jerzak stated he was referencing Staff time. Mr. Anderson noted that rentals still take up much of their Staff time. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she appreciated having their PowerPoint in advance. Councilmember Moore asked if the City still has the Hennepin County Rehab Fund and if it is giving out any money to residents. Mr. Anderson stated that the Hennepin County Rehab Program has an allocation fund of close to $200,000. The Community Development Department has allocated $188,000 in funds in 2024 and expects its funds will be closer to $500,000 in 2025, but they do not have that official number yet. He stated that if those funds go fast, the Department will add more and discuss them with the Council. Page 27 of 184 6/09/25 15 Councilmember Moore asked when the last time was that any allocated funds were given to a Brooklyn Center resident for home improvements. Mr. Anderson said those loans come in all the time, and some of them are $30,000 loans. Councilmember Moore stated that she would like to see the specifics of those loans. Councilmember Moore asked if any ARPA funds were left and if the money had already been designated to departments within the City. Dr. Edwards noted that those funds have been allocated and accounted for. Mayor Pro Tem Kragness moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded to accept the presentation on the Community Development Annual Report. Motion passed unanimously. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 11. COUNCIL REPORT 12. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pro Tem Kragness moved and Councilmember Jerzak seconded adjournment of the City Council meeting at 8:45 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Page 28 of 184 5/27/25 -1- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA WORK SESSION JUNE 9, 2025 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Work Session called to order by Mayor/President Pro Tem Teneshia Kragness at 8:46 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor/President Pro Tem Teneshia Kragness and Councilmembers/Commissioners Dan Jerzak, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Laurie Ann Moore. Also present were City Manager Reggie Edwards, Finance Director Angela Holm, City Attorney Siobhan Tolar, and City Clerk Shannon Pettit. Mayor/President April Graves was absent and excused. ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS BUDGET PRIORITIZATION DISCUSSION Mayor/President Pro Tem Kragness stated she had a note from Mayor/President Graves to discuss graphs and strategic priorities as a baseline. City Manager Reggie Edwards stated that since Council had expressed interest in having this discussion, they still have a budget process in which the Council and Finance Commission will be having conversations on their priorities. The budget is an expression of values as far as what they want to achieve, and the roadmap exists within the strategic plan to provide the cost, which shows where they do spend dollars within the organization. Mayor/President Pro Tem Kragness said this conversation is in addition to the conversation that they will have with the Finance Commission. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson stated she believed that in prior years, they had a meeting as a whole on what their priorities are as a Council and then passed that on to Staff. Councilmember/Commissioner Moore asked if Mayor/President Graves had comments she wanted to bring to the discussion since she was absent. Page 29 of 184 6/9/25 -2- DRAFT Mayor/President Pro Tem Kragness stated Mayor/President Graves had left a note saying that the process of this discussion was adding strategic priorities of the Council as a baseline, and to let the consensus decide how they wish to discuss going forward. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson stated her number one priority is no new spending, to come into this budget year frugally, and look at basics. She stated Brooklyn Center residents are not as affluent as other communities and the City needs to keep its levy flat, if not lower. Dr. Edwards clarified that they will have the conversation relating to priorities prior to department presentations. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson said she would hate for departments to think they have all the funding they want, only to find out that they do not. Councilmember/Commissioner Moore concurred with Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence- Anderson, and her priority has always been public safety and basic services. The residents want their water and clean, safe streets. She would not support anything over 0 percent in a levy increase, and there are areas like the Heritage Center, the golf course, and the liquor store that have all been revenue losses. She realizes some of those are not an impact on the levy, but some of them are. She asked about duplicity between departments in terms of activities that are happening in community engagement, and to cut any excess, as times are not good economically for many residents of Brooklyn Center. This is a time for the community to come together and support one another. Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak concurred with what has already been said and wanted to add not to plan for any grants to aid in funding. The City has to do more with less, and the reality of where they are at, not only with all the Federal and State budget cuts but also the rising costs of food, credit card debt, mortgages, and insurance, is making it more difficult. The rising costs are particularly difficult for senior citizens on fixed incomes. He noted that Dr. Edwards has a very difficult job with union contracts that are up this year. As far as a levy increase, he stated he will not vote for one. There are a lot of needs, but they just do not have the capacity to fulfill all of those needs, and the City may have to freeze positions if necessary. He stated to Dr. Edwards that it was not fair that he must go to his Staff with legitimate needs and say this is where the Council is at, but it is the reality. Mayor/President Pro Tem Kragness stated her background is in finance and looking at the numbers, she feels very strongly about maintaining the budget as well, but is not in support of anything that causes people to lose their jobs. She understands the consensus of the Council is to be as frugal as possible with their budget. Councilmember/Commissioner Moore stated she agrees and does not want to see any dedicated Staff lose their jobs; however, there was a new recreation position approved previously in 2024 and posted for a $100,000 salary. There was also talk about a Deputy City Clerk position still available and when she was on the Finance Commission, they had to sit down and make priorities Page 30 of 184 6/9/25 -3- DRAFT on what they are willing to spend money on. She thanked the Council/EDA for talking about their budget priorities. Mayor/President Pro Tem Kragness said that process was helpful on the Finance Commission because there is a difference between a want and a need, and when you start putting dollar signs next to the list it becomes clear what can be spent where. Councilmember/Commission Jerzak asked Dr. Edwards if they are going to use the colored dots like the Finance Commission does, so they can better visualize where money is going to different departments. He also commented that if there is a hold put on spending, the Directors need to deliver that news to those departments. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson asked when that budget prep meeting is on the schedule. Dr. Edwards stated that meeting will be July 21st because the auditor would be available until then to make their presentation. There will not be a meeting on June 30th. Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak asked if he could get calendar invites on the updated dates. Dr. Edwards stated that is the only meeting that has changed. They will send out calendar invites, but they will discuss the budget and priorities at the July 21st meeting. Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak asked about the discussion regarding 360 and when that was happening. Dr. Edwards stated they could use a meeting on June 30th to discuss that if the Council would like, but in previous meetings, it was the consensus of the Council that they did not want to do multiple meetings, and agreed to discuss everything on July 21st after the audit presentation. Councilmember/Commissioner Moore stated she did not recall that it was the consensus not to have another meeting on June 30th, but it had been several weeks since that conversation. Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak did not recall having that conversation either and would like to vote on putting the June 30th meeting back on the schedule. Councilmember/Commissioner Moore agreed and said she recalled they need to have a meeting about the 360 and the budget overview and levy discussion. She would propose that the June 30th meeting be back on the schedule with the 360 regarding Dr. Edwards and whatever agenda items he saw fit. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson asked if the 360 meeting was at the next work study session instead of having another meeting. Dr. Edwards said he would look at the schedule, but that might be too close and not give enough time. He recommended putting it back on the June 30th meeting. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson stated she wants a hard copy of the audit as soon as it's available so she can review it before the auditor makes their presentation. Page 31 of 184 6/9/25 -4- DRAFT Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak wanted to clarify an earlier statement he made about potentially freezing positions if they do not have the funds. Those positions do not include public safety, like Police Department Staff, Fire Department Staff, and positions in Public Works for snow removal. Those positions are not up for debate. He is referencing other positions that do not have the priority. Dr. Edwards clarified that freezing departments is really freezing vacancies and not filling them. Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak stated he is not advocating for freezing vacancies, but everything must be on the table. The Council will wait for Dr. Edwards' input and presentation and either approve it or not. Dr. Edwards clarified that freezing goes across all departments that have vacancies. Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak stated he would want the Fire Department and Police Department to be exempt from freezing their vacancies. Councilmember/Commissioner Moore asked if the June 30th meeting is all about a closed session with the 360, and if there are other Work Session items that they can discuss that evening when they are together. Dr. Edwards stated that if the session is closed, they can legally only discuss the item for which they closed the session. The Council can take time when the meeting is open and discuss any matters they need to. Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak stated that maybe they could meet earlier at 5 o’clock to discuss those items in advance. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember/Commissioner Moore moved and Councilmember/Commissioner Jerzak seconded adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at 9:15 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Page 32 of 184 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 6/23/2025 TO: City Council FROM: THROUGH: BY: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk SUBJECT: Approval of Licenses Requested Council Action: Mechanical Licenses A-abc Appliance & Heating Inc. 8818 7th Ave N., Golden Valley 55427 Angell Aire, Inc. 12253 Nicollet Ave S., Burnsville 55337 Erickson Plumbing Heating Cooling 1471 92nd Lane NE, Blaine 55449 HLT Heating & Cooling LLC 244 Richmond St W, South Saint Paul 55075 Jerry Dahl Heating/Air 1933 164th Lane NE, Ham Lake 55304 MN Plumbing and Home Services 21017 Heron Way, Suite 105, Lakeville 55044 Schwantes Heating and Air Conditioning, Inc. 6080 Oren Ave S., Stillwater, 55082 Top Tier Heating and Air Conditioning 16015 Central Ave NE, Ham Lake 55304 Amusement Devices Dos Hermanos 1400 Shingle Creek Crossing Mi-Michoacana 1360 Shingle Creek Crossing Suite #210 Background: Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Page 33 of 184 Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Rental Criteria 2. For Council Approval 6.23.25 FOR COUNCIL 5.27 to 6.10 Page 34 of 184 Page 2 of 2 b.Police Service Calls. Police call rates will be based on the average number of valid police calls per unit per year. Police incidences for purposes of determining licensing categories shall include disorderly activities and nuisances as defined in Section 12-911, and events categorized as Part I crimes in the Uniform Crime Reporting System including homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft, auto theft and arson. Calls will not be counted for purposes of determining licensing categories where the victim and suspect are “Family or household members” as defined in the Domestic Abuse Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 518B.01, Subd. 2 (b) and where there is a report of “Domestic Abuse” as defined in the Domestic Abuse Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 518B.01, Subd. 2 (a). License Category Number of Units Validated Calls for Disorderly Conduct Service & Part I Crimes (Calls Per Unit/Year) No Category Impact 1-2 0-1 3-4 units 0-0.25 5 or more units 0-0.35 Decrease 1 Category 1-2 Greater than 1 but not more than 3 3-4 units Greater than 0.25 but not more than 1 5 or more units Greater than 0.35 but not more than 0.50 Decrease 2 Categories 1-2 Greater than 3 3-4 units Greater than 1 5 or more units Greater than 0.50 Property Code and Nuisance Violations Criteria License Category (Based on Property Code Only) Number of Units Property Code Violations per Inspected Unit Type I – 3 Year 1-2 units 0-2 3+ units 0-0.75 Type II – 2 Year 1-2 units Greater than 2 but not more than 5 3+ units Greater than 0.75 but not more than 1.5 Type III – 1 Year 1-2 units Greater than 5 but not more than 9 3+ units Greater than 1.5 but not more than 3 Type IV – 6 Months 1-2 units Greater than 9 3+ units Greater than 3 Page 35 of 184 Location Address License Subtype Renewal/Initial Owner Property Code Violations License Type Police CFS* Final License Type** Previous License Type*** Consecutive Type IV's 4201 Lakeside Ave N #101 Condo Initial MEKUANINT TAYE 8 Type III N/A Type III N/A N/A 6424 June Ave N Single Initial June Avenue Llc 3 Type II N/A Type II N/A N/A 4216 Lakebreeze Ave N Multiple Family 1 Bldg 4 Units Renewal LAKE BREEZE HOLDINGS LLC Did not meet requirements 6 = 1.5 per unit Type II 0 Type III Type III N/A 5304 Vincent Ave N Two Family Renewal Lou Yang & Pao G Vang 1 Type I 0 Type I Type II N/A 5319 Queen Ave N Two Family Renewal Karen Pelak Trust 2 Type I 0 Type I Type I N/A 4207 Lakeside Ave N, #124 Condo Renewal DON STENBERG 1 Type I 0 Type I Type II N/A 5351 4th St N Single Renewal Infinite Property Llc 1 Type I 1 7/14/24 5th Degree Assault Type I Type I N/A 5410 France Ave N Single Renewal SFR BORROWER 2022-1 LLC Did not meet requirements 0 Type I 0 Type IV Type IV 4 5432 Dupont Ave N Single Renewal Xiangming Guan & Ping He 3 Type II 0 Type II Type I N/A 5611 Knox Ave N Single Renewal Pro Operam Sub Xi Llc 0 Type I 0 Type I Type I N/A 5701 James Ave N Single Renewal Sunset View Rentals Llc Did not meet requirements 1 Type I 0 Type IV Type IV 4 6900 Regent Ave N Single Renewal Houa Her & Neng Thao 0 Type I 0 Type III Type III N/A 7000 Oliver Ave N Single Renewal P E Enohnyaket/m Enohnyaket Did not meet requirements 7 Type III 0 Type III Type III N/A *CFS = Calls for service for renewal licenses only (Initial licenses are not applicable to CFS and will be listed as N/A) **License type being issued ***Initial licenses will not show a Type I = 3 year, Type II = 2 year, Type III = 1 year, Type IV = 6 months All properties are current on City utilities and taxes Rental Licenses for Council Approval 6.23.25 Page 36 of 184 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 6/23/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Kory Andersen Wagner, Public Works Planner THROUGH: Kory Andersen Wagner, Public Works Planner, Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works BY: Kory Andersen Wagner, Public Works Planner SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-061 Supporting a FY 2025 SS4A Grant Application for a Comprehensive Transportation Safety Action Plan Requested Council Action: Approve the attached resolution authorizing submission of a FY 2025 Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Planning & Demonstration grant application and committing the required 20 percent local match. Background: Between 2018 and 2022, Brooklyn Center recorded 23 traffic-related fatalities, 51 serious-injury crashes, and 316 minor-injury crashes on city streets—the highest five-year total in the past decade. Although Hennepin County’s County-wide Safety Action Plan guides investments in county facilities, the City lacks a comprehensive, locally focused roadmap to evaluate its entire 224-lane-mile roadway network and develop neighborhood-scale safety solutions tailored to Brooklyn Center’s needs. The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) program—created by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act—provides $5 billion in competitive grants over FY 2022-2026 to help local, regional, and Tribal entities eliminate roadway fatalities and serious injuries. For FY 2025, the SS4A Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) was issued on March 28, 2025, and makes approximately $982 million available: about $580 million for Implementation Grants and roughly $402 million for Planning & Demonstration Grants, with applications due by June 26, 2025. Planning & Demonstration Grants—our chosen track—support the development of Comprehensive Safety Action Plans, supplemental safety analyses, and quick-build demonstrations, while Implementation Grants fund construction-ready safety projects that flow from an approved Action Plan. This investment aligns with the City’s ongoing traffic calming work and builds off the 2025 Park Capital Investment Plan, which identified critical bike and pedestrian connections between City Parks. Once the plan is complete, Brooklyn Center will be eligible for SS4A implementation grants. In 2025, grants ranged from $2.5 million to $25 million per award. In 2024, the average amount received by local governments for roadway safety improvements was $11.5 million. Budget Issues: Brooklyn Center will request $120,000 in federal Planning & Demonstration funds (total project cost $150,000) to develop a Comprehensive Transportation Safety Action Plan that meets SS4A requirements and positions the City for future Implementation Grant Page 37 of 184 opportunities. The required 20 percent local match ($30,000) is paid for with leftover funds from the 2025 Park Capital Investment Plan. Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Safety Action Plan Resolution Page 38 of 184 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR A FY 2025 SAFE STREETS AND ROADS FOR ALL (SS4A) PLANNING & DEMONSTRATION GRANT APPLICATION WHEREAS the Safe Streets and Roads for All (“SS4A”) discretionary-grant program—created by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act—will distribute approximately $982 million in FY 2025, including roughly $402 million for Planning & Demonstration Grants that help local governments eliminate roadway fatalities and serious injuries; and WHEREAS between 2018 and 2022, the City of Brooklyn Center experienced 23 traffic-related fatalities, 51 serious-injury crashes, and 316 minor-injury crashes on city streets, the highest five-year total in the past decade; and WHEREAS the City lacks a comprehensive, locally focused roadmap to evaluate its 224 lane-mile roadway network, and completing a Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (the “Plan”) is a mandatory prerequisite for future SS4A Implementation Grants, which range from $2.5 million to $25 million per award and averaged $11.5 million to local governments in FY 2024; and WHEREAS the Plan will build on the City’s ongoing traffic-calming initiatives and the adopted 2025 Park Capital Investment Plan, which identified critical bicycle and pedestrian connections between city parks and WHEREAS the City intends to request $120,000 in federal Planning & Demonstration funds toward a $150,000 project and will provide the required 20 percent local match ($30,000) using unspent funds from the 2025 Park Capital Investment Plan; and WHEREAS completion of the Plan will position Brooklyn Center to compete for significantly larger Implementation Grants and other federal or state safety funding; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that: 1. The City supports and approves the submission of a FY 2025 SS4A Planning & Demonstration Grant application for the development of the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Safety Action Plan. 2. The City commits to providing a $30,000 local match, to be paid from unspent 2025 Park Capital Investment Plan funds, along with necessary in-kind staff support. 3. City staff are authorized and directed to execute all documents and take all actions necessary to submit the application and administer the grant. 4. Upon award, staff shall return to the Council with any required agreements for acceptance of the grant funds. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Page 39 of 184 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Page 40 of 184 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 6/23/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Krystin Eldridge, Associate Planner THROUGH: Jesse Anderson, Community Development Director BY: Krystin Eldridge, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-62 Identifying the Need for LCDA Development Funding and Authorizing an Application for Grant Funds for ACER Shingle Creek Center Redevelopment Requested Council Action: Motion to approve the resolution identifying the need for Livable Communities Demonstration Account Transit Oriented Development (LCDA-TOD) funding and authorizing the submission of an application for grant funds for the ACER Shingle Creek Center Redevelopment Background: African Career, Education, & Resources Inc. (ACER Inc) is seeking funding from the Metropolitan Council for the 2025 Livable Communities Demonstration Act -Transit Oriented Development (LCDA-TOD) Grant to redevelop Shingle Creek Center. In 2023, ACER applied for Development funding to remodel their suite, relocate their headquarters into Brooklyn Center from their Brooklyn Park location and pursue a food hall concept. In 2024, ACER, Inc. and Ignite Business Women Investment Group (IBWIG) purchased Shingle Creek Center to assist the consistent influx of BIPOC entrepreneurs. For this round of funding, ACER Inc., plans to transform the mall into a dynamic, community-driven, mixed-use destination. This will require two phases. This initial phase focuses on revitalizing the existing one-story mall located at 6069 Shingle Creek Parkway. The renovation will modernize the structure, improve tenant spaces, and prepare the facility to host a diverse range of local businesses. The mall will also house a public market inspired by the Reading Terminal Market in Philadelphia — offering culturally diverse food vendors, retailers, and community gathering space. This phase will also establish critical retail and workforce infrastructure to support economic activity and BIPOC business ownership by: • Improved connectivity and design: creating a pedestrian-oriented plaza, upgraded landscaping, and potential skyway connecting the north and south buildings to enhance accessibility and climate resilience. • Opening the south side of the building to add retail entrances, parking and sidewalks. • Enhanced retail diversity by offering more small, affordable units to support a larger number of immigrant and BIPOC-owned businesses. Page 41 of 184 • Expanding the existing Worker Center co-located on site • Creating cultural activation and mobility: Plaza design, potential skyway, bike- friendly infrastructure, and accessible public spaces Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities Grants offers the grant programs below: The Livable Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA) supports development and redevelopment projects that link housing, jobs and services and use community and regional infrastructure efficiently. • The LCDA – Transit Oriented Development (LCDA-TOD) grants are focused on high density projects that contribute to a mix of uses in the TOD-eligible area. TOD-eligible areas can be along light rail, commuter rail, bus rapid transit, and high frequency bus corridors. • The Pre-development grants are for teams who are defining or redefining a project that will support Livable Communities and Imagine 2050 goals. • The Policy Development program provides funding to participating cities to support locally adopted policies that influence physical development and further both LCA and Imagine 2050 goals with an emphasis on equitable development. • The Tax Base Revitalization Account (TBRA) helps clean up contaminated land and buildings for subsequent development. These grants are intended to provide the greatest public benefit for the money spent, strengthen the local tax base, and create and preserve jobs and/or affordable housing. TBRA has three different funding opportunities: Contamination Cleanup, Site Investigation, and SEED. • The Local Housing Incentives Account (LHIA) helps expand and preserve lifecycle and affordable housing, both rented and owned. The Metropolitan Council provides funding for development to foster economic growth, by increasing density, adding new housing or jobs, minimizing climate impact, or further equity outcomes and mitigate specific barriers to access for historically marginalized populations. ACER Inc. expects to pursue the maximum amount of $1,000,000. Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Page 42 of 184 Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution_2025_LCDA_ACER_ShingleCreekCenterRedevelopment 2. ACER Site Plan Concept 0410 2025_Final_02 Page 43 of 184 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 2025- RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION ACCOUNT AND AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is a participant in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act (“LCA”) Local Housing Incentives Program for 2025 as determined by the Metropolitan Council, and is therefore eligible to apply for LCDA Livable Communities Demonstration Account; and WHEREAS, the City has identified proposed projects within the City that meet LCDA purposes and criteria and is consistent with and promotes the purposes of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and the policies of the Metropolitan Council’s adopted metropolitan development guide; and WHEREAS, the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to adequately manage an LCDA grant and; WHEREAS, the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement; and WHEREAS, the City acknowledges LCDA grants are intended to fund projects or project components that can serve as models, examples or prototypes for LCDA development or redevelopment elsewhere in the Region, and therefore represents that the proposed project or key components of the proposed project can be replicated in other metropolitan-area communities; and WHEREAS, the City acknowledges Met Council Livable Communities Demonstration Account grants are intended to fund development projects through the construction phase of a development. WHERES, only a limited amount of grant funding is available through the Metropolitan Council’s Livable Communities Demonstration Account LCDA initiative during each funding cycle and the Metropolitan Council has determined it is appropriate to allocate those scarce grant funds only to eligible projects that would not occur without the availability of grant funding. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, after appropriate examination and due consideration, the governing body of the City: 1. Finds that it is in the best interests of the City’s development goals and priorities for the following proposed LCDA projects to occur at this particular site at this particular time: Page 44 of 184 ACER Shingle Creek Center Redevelopment - Phase 1 - 6000 Shingle Creek Parkway 2. Finds that that LCDA Project component(s) for which Livable Communities LCDA is sought: a. Will not occur solely through private or other public investment within the reasonable foreseeable future; and b. Will occur within the term of the grant award (three years for Development grants,) only if Livable Communities LCDA funding is made available for this project at this time. 3. Authorizes the City Manager to submit on behalf of the City an application for Metropolitan Council Livable Communities LCDA grant funds a for the project components identified in the application, and to execute such agreements as may be necessary to implement the Project on behalf of the City. June 23, 2025 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 2 Page 45 of 184 1600 Utica Ave South St Louis Park, MN 55416 + 612.289.8419 www.designbymelo.com DESIGN BY MELO, LLC DRAWING -PROJECT PLACE LOGO HERE Unnamed LOMA 3246 Nicollet Ave Minneapolis MN 55408 P00 ACER SITE STUDYOVERALL SITE PLAN 6096 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 ZONING SUMMARY & SITE PLAN - STREET MODIFICATIONS Zoning Information Zoning District MX-C: Commercial Mixed Use Density 10-60 DU/Acre (min. 2 Acre contiguous parcel for residential use) Setback Front, Side: 10 ft Rear: 20 ft Height 48 ft or NA Parking Requirements (no minimum indicated in zoning code) Housing: 2 spaces per unit (120 Max) Retail 4 spaces 1000 sf (for buildings over over 10,000sf) (119 Max) Restaurant: 2 spaces per 4 seats and 1 space per 2 employees (where total restaurant area is over 15% of shopping center) Site Information Parcel A (South) - 1.6 acres Parcel B (North) - 2.81 acres A B NEW STREET LOCATION PROPOSAL - SHIFT 55' NORTH TO ALLOW FOR EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING TO REMAIN PREVIOUS STREET LOCATION PROPOSAL ACER PROPERTY PARCELS Page 46 of 184 1600 Utica Ave South St Louis Park, MN 55416 + 612.289.8419 www.designbymelo.com DESIGN BY MELO, LLC DRAWING -PROJECT PLACE LOGO HERE Unnamed LOMA 3246 Nicollet Ave Minneapolis MN 55408 P00 ACER SITE STUDYOVERALL SITE PLAN 6096 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 SITE SUMMARY Parking Capacity Shingle Creek Back Lot Large Shared Lot Small Multifamily Lot Underground Multifamily Garage Total 26 stalls 94 stalls 14 stalls 54 stalls 188 stalls Multifamily - Areas Ground Floor Commercial Ground Floor Residential (Lobby and Ammenities) Level 2-5 Residential (each) Total 15,000 gsf 3,100 gsf 16,800 gsf 85,300 gsf Multifamily - Areas 1-Bed (650 sf ea.) 2-Bed (850 sf ea.) 3-Bed (1150 sf ea) Total 16 units 28 units 16 units 60 units Shingle Creek Sopping Center - Areas South Center Building North Center Building Total 15,350 gsf 14,300 gsf 29,650 gsf Project Information Page 47 of 184 1600 Utica Ave South St Louis Park, MN 55416 + 612.289.8419 www.designbymelo.com DESIGN BY MELO, LLC DRAWING -PROJECT PLACE LOGO HERE Unnamed LOMA 3246 Nicollet Ave Minneapolis MN 55408 P00 ACER SITE STUDYOVERALL SITE PLAN 6096 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 OVERALL SITE PLAN - OPTION A RETAIL & RESTAURANT SOUTH BUILDING (15,350 sf) RETAIL & RESTAURANT NORTH BUILDING (14,300 sf) EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING (8,500 sf) PARCEL & DEVELOPMENT BY OTHERS PARCEL & DEVELOPMENT BY OTHERS RENOVATIONS TO SHOPPING CENTER, OFFICE BUILDING REMAINS Page 48 of 184 MIXED USE - MULTIFAMILY UNDERGROUND PARKING COMMERCIAL LEVEL 1 RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 2-5 (ABOVE GRADE - 85,300 SF) RETAIL & RESTAURANT SOUTH BUILDING (15,350 sf) RETAIL & RESTAURANT NORTH BUILDING (14,300 sf) 1600 Utica Ave South St Louis Park, MN 55416 + 612.289.8419 www.designbymelo.com DESIGN BY MELO, LLC DRAWING -PROJECT PLACE LOGO HERE Unnamed LOMA 3246 Nicollet Ave Minneapolis MN 55408 P00 ACER SITE STUDYOVERALL SITE PLAN 6096 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 OVERALL SITE PLAN - OPTION B PARCEL & DEVELOPMENT BY OTHERS PARCEL & DEVELOPMENT BY OTHERS RENOVATIONS TO SHOPPING CENTER, NEW MULTIFAMILY BUILDING Page 49 of 184 1600 Utica Ave South St Louis Park, MN 55416 + 612.289.8419 www.designbymelo.com DESIGN BY MELO, LLC DRAWING -PROJECT PLACE LOGO HERE Unnamed LOMA 3246 Nicollet Ave Minneapolis MN 55408 P00 ACER SITE STUDYOVERALL SITE PLAN 6096 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 SHOPPING CENTER SITE PLAN RETAIL & RESTAURANT SOUTH BUILDING (15,350 sf) RETAIL & RESTAURANT NORTH BUILDING (14,300 sf) Page 50 of 184 1600 Utica Ave South St Louis Park, MN 55416 + 612.289.8419 www.designbymelo.com DESIGN BY MELO, LLC DRAWING -PROJECT PLACE LOGO HERE Unnamed LOMA 3246 Nicollet Ave Minneapolis MN 55408 P00 ACER SITE STUDYOVERALL SITE PLAN 6096 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 SHOPPING CENTER FLOOR PLAN Page 51 of 184 1600 Utica Ave South St Louis Park, MN 55416 + 612.289.8419 www.designbymelo.com DESIGN BY MELO, LLC DRAWING -PROJECT PLACE LOGO HERE Unnamed LOMA 3246 Nicollet Ave Minneapolis MN 55408 P00 ACER SITE STUDYOVERALL SITE PLAN 6096 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 PLAZA VIEW Page 52 of 184 1600 Utica Ave South St Louis Park, MN 55416 + 612.289.8419 www.designbymelo.com DESIGN BY MELO, LLC DRAWING -PROJECT PLACE LOGO HERE Unnamed LOMA 3246 Nicollet Ave Minneapolis MN 55408 P00 ACER SITE STUDYOVERALL SITE PLAN 6096 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 FRONT VIEW IMPROVEMENTS Page 53 of 184 1600 Utica Ave South St Louis Park, MN 55416 + 612.289.8419 www.designbymelo.com DESIGN BY MELO, LLC DRAWING -PROJECT PLACE LOGO HERE Unnamed LOMA 3246 Nicollet Ave Minneapolis MN 55408 P00 ACER SITE STUDYOVERALL SITE PLAN 6096 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 REAR VIEW IMPROVEMENTS Page 54 of 184 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 6/23/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Mike Marsh, Deputy Director of Public Works THROUGH: Elizabeth Heyman, Director of Public Works BY: Lydia Ener, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-63 Accepting Bid and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 2025-17 West Fire Station 2025 Roof Replacement Requested Council Action: Motion to approve the resolution accepting the lowest responsible bid and award a contract to Diverse Construction Services, LLC of Columbia Heights, Minnesota for Project No. 2025-17 West Fire Station 2025 Roof Replacement. Background: Bids for the Improvement Project 2025-17 West Fire Station 2025 Roof Replacement were received and opened on June 12, 2025. The bidding results are tabulated below: Bidder Total Base Bid Diverse Construction Services LLC $561,583.00 Peterson Bros. Roofing and Construction, Inc. $598,000.00 Palmer West Construction Co., Inc. $608,400.00 McPhillips Bros Roofing Co. $616,300.00 Mint Roofing $647,564.00 Berwald Roofing Co., Inc. $692,700.00 John A. Dalsin & Sons, Inc. $711,182.00 Central Roofing Company $728,115.00 Commercial Roofing and Sheet Metal, Inc. $729,350.00 Rosenquist Construction, Inc. $789,375.00 BL Dalisn Roofing $817,548.00 Of the twelve (12) bids received, the lowest responsible bid of $561,583.00 was submitted by Diverse Construction Services, LLC of Columbia Heights, Minnesota. Only eleven of the twelve bids received have been reported, due to Matthews Building Solutions, LLC, who was the original apparent low bidder, rescinding their bid. This was based on an error in understanding of the project work scope due to incorrect assumptions regarding the plans and specifications as a part of preparing their bid. Budget Issues: The bid amount of $561,583.00, for the Base Bid, is within the budgeted amount for the project. (see attached Resolution – Costs and Revenues tables). Inclusive Community Engagement: NA Page 55 of 184 Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: NA Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. West Fire Station 2025 Roof Replacement - Bid Award - Res Page 56 of 184 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2025-17 WEST FIRE STATION 2025 ROOF REPLACEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 2025-17, bids were received, opened and tabulated on the 12th day of June, 2025. Said bids were as follows: Bidder Total Base Bid Diverse Construction Services LLC $561,583.00 Peterson Bros. Roofing and Construction, Inc. $598,000.00 Palmer West Construction Co., Inc. $608,400.00 McPhillips Bros Roofing Co. $616,300.00 Mint Roofing $647,564.00 Berwald Roofing Co., Inc. $692,700.00 John A. Dalsin & Sons, Inc. $711,182.00 Central Roofing Company $728,115.00 Commercial Roofing and Sheet Metal, Inc. $729,350.00 Rosenquist Construction, Inc. $789,375.00 BL Dalisn Roofing $817,548.00 WHEREAS, it appears that Diverse Construction Services, LLC of Columbia Heights, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Diverse Construction Services, LLC of Columbia Heights, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 2025-17, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. Page 57 of 184 RESOLUTION NO. _______________ 2. The estimated project costs are as follows: Engineers Amended COSTS Estimate per Low Bid Contract $ 570,000.00 $ 561,583.00 Contingency $ 57,000.00 $ 57,000.00 Subtotal Construction Cost $ 627,000.00 $ 618,583.00 Admin/Legal/Engr. $ 63,000.00 $ 62,000.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 690,000.00 $ 680,583.00 June 23, 2025 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Page 58 of 184 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 6/23/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager BY: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-64 Revoking the Hospitality Accommodation License for BC Seva LLC, DBA: Suburban Studios, 2701 Freeway Blvd Requested Council Action: - Motion to revoke the Hospitality Accommodation License for BC Seva LLC, DBA Suburban Studios, with revocation being effective July 14, 2025, based on violations of Brooklyn Center City Code Chapter 23; revocation shall also include any conditions and requirements as outlined in the city licensing code. Background: On June 4th, 2025, an inspection of Suburban Studios, 2701 Freeway Blvd. revealed that the building was no longer operating as a hospitality accommodation, but rather a Recuperative Care Facility. HOSPITALITY LICENSE VIOLATIONS 1. Suburban Studios has ceased operating as a “Hospitality Accommodation”. Section 23-2402(C) of the Brooklyn Center Licensing Code states: “Hospitality Accommodation -- Any facility such as a hotel, motel, condominium, resort, or any other facility or place offering six or more lodging units to guests for periods of less than thirty days, but not including jails, hospitals, care facilities, senior living centers, residential treatment facilities, prisons, detention homes, and similar facilities.” Suburban Studios currently operates as Care Chexx, a Recuperative Care Facility. 2. Failure to comply with City Zoning Code and the existing Planned Unit Development Agreement (PUD). Pursuant to Section 23-2413(A)(6), Failure to continuously comply with any zoning, health, building, nuisance, or other Code requirements is grounds for license revocation, suspension, or non-renewal. As referenced in the zoning violation letter dated June 13th, 2025, regarding Suburban Studios/Care Chexx clear operation of the business as a Recuperative Care Facility violates the existing PUD, past and present Zoning Codes, and began operating without proper zoning approval. FACTUAL FINDINGS 1. Failure to operate as a Hospitality Accommodation Page 59 of 184 • Suburban Studios submitted a Hospitality Accommodation License renewal on March 31, 2025; • The Hospitality License was approved by Council on May 5, 2025; • On or about June 2, 2025, the City learned that there was to be a grand opening of the Care Chexx Recuperative Care Facility (See enclosures); • City inspectors learned that there were full-time medical staff onsite, including LPNs, RNs, and Nurse practitioners, for a total of 32 staff people; • The business operated 24 hours per day; • There was food service provided; • The facility was not open to the public; • City staff also learned that the owner of Suburban Studios entered into a three- year lease with Care Chexx; • Care Chexx is a business in partnership with Minnesota Community Care, and Care Chexx is the identified provider operating from the Suburban Studios Property; • Care Chexx and Minnesota Community Care hold “Recuperative Care” licensure through DHS; • The Recuperative Care facility provides care to homeless individuals who are being discharged from the hospital; • Based on multiple points of contact with the primary contact at Care Chexx, it was unclear how many rooms were offered for recuperative care, but the lease specified that all rooms may be used for this purpose; • The housekeeping staff formerly employed by Jay Patel/BC Seva LLC, are current employees of Care Chexx; • According to their website, adult individuals experiencing homelessness who are being discharged from a hospital, emergency room or clinic, but still require short-term medical recovery support are eligible for Care Chexx services; • Referrals come from hospitals, healthcare providers, and public health clinics; • Referrals must be connected to Minnesota benefits; • Patients can stay at Care Chexx up to 21 days but may be extended up to a maximum of 60 days; • Patients do not pay individually for rooms with a credit card, the facility submits claims to MHCP/DHS for services, the Recuperative Care facility is eventually reimbursed; • More information about Care Chexx can be found here: https://carechexx.com/. 2. Failure to Comply with Zoning Code Requirements (see enclosed Zoning Enforcement Letter for additional information) • The subject property, is located within a Planned Unit Development (PUD) with an underlying I-1 (Industrial Park) zoning designation. Section 35-2103.e (Existing Planned Unit Developments) stipulates that, “planned unit developments, and parcels zoned as a planned unit development, in accordance with prior zoning regulations shall remain in effect and shall remain subject to any and all agreements, conditions and standards applicable to the planned unit Page 60 of 184 development. Amendments shall be processed in accordance with the procedures identified for planned unit developments in this UDO.” • City Council Resolution No. 98-47 granted approvals for the subject property to operate as a “three story, 104 unit efficiency hotel” and approval of the Planned Unit Development acknowledged “efficiency or extended stay hotels offering transient lodging accommodations for periods of longer than one week as being comparable in intensity and use as transient lodging defined in the Brooklyn Center zoning ordinance and, therefore, an allowed use in this Planned Unit Development.” • Pursuant to the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions (of the PUD), “Lot 3 (the Suburban Studios Property) shall be used and developed for a 104 unit, three story efficiency hotel of approximately 45,450 square fee without either a restaurant or a bar and for no other use unless the owners of Lot 3 secure either an amendment to the planned unit development plan and conditions approved by the City Council, or a rezoning of Lot 3 to a zoning classification which permits such other use.” • Chapter 35-8300 outlines the required processes and procedures an applicant must follow to amend a PUD, which includes undergoing a major PUD amendment, akin to a new application process. • Suburban Studios did not attempt to amend the existing PUD referenced above, nor request a zoning reclassification prior to operating outside of the intended use of the property. STAFF CONCLUSIONS • The definition of Hospitality Accommodation specifically excludes hospitals, care facilities, senior living centers, residential treatment facilities, prisons, detention homes, and similar facilities; • Suburban Studios is no longer the operator of the premises; Care Chexx is the operator of the facility located at 2701 Freeway Boulevard; • Care Chexx is operating a Recuperative Care Facility in contravention of its Hospitality Accommodation License; • As a requirement of the Level I Hospitality Accommodation License (currently held by the Property Owner,) the Licensee must have clear check-in policies that, at a minimum, require all guests reserving or renting a room to use a credit card to guarantee the reservation or rental; • The Recuperative Care Facility use is most similar to that of a “Nursing Care Home, Rest Home, or Convalescent Home,” which is defined under the City’s preceding zoning code Section 35-900 (Definitions) as a, “facility which provides for the accommodation of persons who are not acutely ill and not in need of hospital care, but who do require nursing care and related medical services. Examples of nursing care include: bedside care and rehabilitative nursing techniques, administration of medicines, a modified diet regimen, irrigations and catheterization, application of dressings or bandages, and other treatments prescribed by a physician;” Page 61 of 184 • Suburban Studios has violated the zoning code by failing to undergo the proper rezoning process and/or PUD Amendment process. REQUESTED COUNCIL LICENSING ACTION[ The City has found that Suburban Studios is in violation of its Hospitality Accommodation License. For the reasons stated in this memo, Staff recommends revocation of Suburban Studios Hospitality Accommodation license. Although City Staff understands the complexity of the hotel landscape in Brooklyn Center and recognizes the Council’s desire for Brooklyn Center to be a business-friendly and welcoming community, City Staff have spent many hours and resources investigating and addressing the current issue at Suburban Studios. The Licensee is clearly in violation of the Ordinance requirements for maintaining a Hospitality Accommodations License. RECOMMENDED LICENSE CONDITIONS: 1. Delayed Revocation Effective Date. Delay revocation for 21 days from June 23, 2025, to allow individuals staying on the premises to evacuate and find alternative lodging. 2. Any other conditions or requirements as outlined in the city licensing code. Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Suburban Studios Hospitality Accomodation License Violation Letter - Suburban Studios 2. 2701FreewayBlvd_SuburbanStudios_ZoningEnforcement (06.12.2025) 3. 2701FreewayBlvd_GrandOpening_RecuperativeCare (06.02.2025) 4. Care Chexx Grand Opening 5. Suburban_Studios_Hospitality_Accommodation_License_Revocation_Resolution Page 62 of 184 BR291-440-1032941.v3 June 18, 2025 BC Seva LLC dba Suburban Studios c/o Jay Patel 16764 Reeder Ridge Eden Prairie, MN 55347 NOTICE OF LICENSE VIOLATION & HEARING OPPORTUNITY To Jay Patel: The City has found that Suburban Studios is in violation of their Hospitality Accommodation License. For the reasons stated below, I am forwarding this matter to the City Council pursuant to Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 23-2403 for consideration of adverse licensing action up to and including Hospitality Accommodation License revocation. Recommended license revocation is based on the following violations: 1. Suburban Studios has ceased operating as a “Hospitality Accommodation”. Section 23- 2402(C) of the Brooklyn Center Licensing Code states: “Hospitality Accommodation -- Any facility such as a hotel, motel, condominium, resort, or any other facility or place offering six or more lodging units to guests for periods of less than thirty days, but not including jails, hospitals, care facilities, senior living centers, residential treatment facilities, prisons, detention homes, and similar facilities.” Suburban Studios currently operates as Care Chexx a Recuperative Care Facility. 2. Failure to comply with City Zoning Code and existing Planned Unit Development Agreement (PUD). Pursuant to Section 23-2413(A)(6), Failure to continuously comply with any zoning, health, building, nuisance, or other Code requirements is grounds for license revocation, suspension, or non-renewal. As referenced in the zoning violation letter dated June 13th, 2025 regarding Suburban Studios/Care Chexx clear operation of the business as a Recuperative Care Facility, violates the existing PUD, past and present Zoning Codes, and began operating without proper zoning approval. City staff has been in regular contact with Hotel staff regarding the concerns associated with the converted use of the property and the failure to gain the proper change of use agreements. This letter serves as your official notice of a hearing opportunity before the City Council pursuant to Section 23-2413(B). You must submit a written request for a hearing before the City Council within 10 days of the issuance of this letter or your right to a hearing is waived. The hearing will be held during the City Council’s regular meeting on June 23rd, 2025, which starts at 7:00 p.m. Page 63 of 184 At the hearing, BC Seva LLC dba Suburban Studios may be represented by counsel or a person of its choosing and shall be given the opportunity to be heard and present evidence. The City Council will consider your testimony, review the evidence presented, consider staff recommendations, and may make a decision regarding Suburban Studios’ Hospitality Accommodation License. If the City Council finds that a violation of the terms and conditions of BC Seva LLC’s Hospitality Accommodation License or the relevant City Code requirements related to the operation of a Hospitality business has occurred, the Council may take adverse license action including suspension or revocation of BC Seva LLC dba Suburban Studios Hospitality Accommodation License. You may contact me with questions. Sincerely, Dr. Reggie Edwards City Manager redwards@brooklyncentermn.gov 763-569-3309 Via Daren Nyquist Deputy City Manager dnyquist@brooklyncentermn.gov 763-569-3301 Page 64 of 184 June 13, 2025 BC Seva LLC dba Suburban Studios c/o Jay Patel 16764 Reeder Ridge Eden Prairie, MN 55347 ZONING AND BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT LETTER 2701 FREEWAY BOULEVARD (SUBURBAN STUDIOS) Dear Mr. Patel: An inspection of 2701 Freeway Boulevard (Suburban Studios) was completed on June 4, 2025, following notification by Brooklyn Center Fire that the building appeared to no longer be operating as a hotel, but rather a transitional care facility. City staff present during the inspection were: Xiong Thao, Housing and Community Standards Manager; Kristin Sundmark, Code Enforcement Inspector; Ginny McIntosh, Planning Manager; and Dan Grinsteinner, Building Official. Section I: Background City staff met Cedric Lattimore (Care Chexx) on-site and explained to Mr. Lattimore that the City was notified of a change of use and wanted to visit the property to (1) determine the use of the property and if any remodeling was underway, and (2) address open permits. Mr. Lattimore stated that Care Chexx had rented all the rooms, effective June 1, 2025, for a contractual period of three (3) years. He noted at that time that they would be operating a DHS Recuperative Care Facility from the Subject Property and providing care to individuals experiencing homelessness and who required additional care and support in a clinical setting following illness, injury, or hospitalization. Individuals are typically referred to the facility by hospitals, healthcare providers, and clinics, must be Minnesota Health Care Programs (MHCP) members, and meet other requirements for recuperative care services. City staff inquired as to whether the Subject Property would remain under the Choice Hotels flag as a Suburban Studios hotel location, and if someone from the general public would be able to rent a room on the Choice Hotels website. Mr. Lattimore stated that, while the plan was to apply for a City Hospitality Accommodations license and operate as a Suburban Studios location, rooms would not be available to the public as Care Chexx’s lease agreement stipulates the leasing of all rooms, whether occupied or not, for the contractual period. Following City staff inquiry, Mr. Lattimore stated the hospitality staff previously employed by BC SEVA LLC were now the employees of Care Chexx and there was a total of 32 on-site staff, including security, nurses, and a nurse practitioner, to meet the 24-hour care requirements. He indicated Care Chexx staff would ideally conduct rounds approximately every 30 minutes on each occupied floor and unit and were required to conduct checks at least once every 24 hours to comply with the Recuperative Care Facility service requirements. He stated they would have dedicated desks set up in common hallway areas and locked medication storage. Mr. Lattimore expressed private security would monitor all common areas, including the building’s hallways, stairwells, and exterior areas every 30 minutes. Page 65 of 184 P a g e | 2 City of Brooklyn Center | 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy | Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 | (763) 569-3330 | www.brooklyncentermn.gov The typical stay for an individual is less than 21 days, although stays can be extended with documentation from a medical provider for up to 60 days. Individuals are provided with three (3) meals per day through an off-site meal delivery service and housekeeping. Although Mr. Lattimore indicated plans to provide on- site case management and social services, an individual is not required to accept housing as a condition of discharge and are permitted to return to the streets if they decide to. City Building Official Dan Grinsteinner asked Mr. Lattimore if he could review open City permits at the inspection as City staff were aware of ongoing fire alarm monitoring issues following a power outage the previous weekend, and an open permit for the bathroom ceiling in room #208. Mr. Lattimore indicated to Building Official Dan Grinsteinner that Deputy Fire Marshal Brandon Gautsch of Brooklyn Center Fire had been on-site earlier in the day to review the fire alarm panel and confirmed its restoration. Building Official Dan Grinsteinner inspected the fire alarm panel and stated Brooklyn Center Fire would need to be present for testing. Although Mr. Lattimore indicated Deputy Fire Marshal Brandon Gautsch had already tested the panel and approved it, Building Official Dan Grinsteinner stated he was required to test the panel and close out the permit, and that he would coordinate with Brooklyn Center Fire. A battery drop and final inspection will need to be scheduled with the fire alarm company. With respect to the open permit in room #208, Mr. Lattimore directed City staff upstairs and granted access to Building Official Dan Grinsteinner to complete the inspection, which has not yet passed as the Building Official requires visual verification of the first layer of sheet rock. The Property Owner will need to schedule a final inspection with the City to close out this permit (BU24-0646—issued July 16, 2024). At the conclusion of City staff’s inspection, Mr. Lattimore deferred any further operation questions to the Care Chexx CFO, Keith Lattimore. Since the inspection, City staff has been in communication with the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) and the Minnesota Health Care Programs (MHCP) Provider Resource Center regarding the Recuperative Care Facility use. Section II: Interpretation of Use City staff, in partnership with the City’s attorney, have reviewed Chapter 35 of the City Code of Ordinances and the City approvals for the Subject Property as identified under Planning Commission Application Nos. 98004 and 98005, which approved the respective land subdivision, rezoning to a three-parcel Planned Unit Development, and site and building plan approval for the Subject Property. The Subject Property, located at 2701 Freeway Boulevard, along with neighboring properties 2741 Freeway Boulevard (Motel 6), and 2781 Freeway Boulevard (Franz Reprographics) are all located within a Planned Unit Development with an underlying I-1 (Industrial Park) zoning designation. This development was approved by the City of Brooklyn Center in 1998. In 2023, the City of Brooklyn Center adopted comprehensive amendments to its zoning provisions which resulted in the effective retirement of the I1 District; however, the new zoning provisions, as identified under Section 35-2103.e (Existing Planned Unit Developments) stipulate that, “planned unit developments, and parcels zoned as a planned unit development, in accordance with prior zoning regulations shall remain in effect and shall remain subject to any and all agreements, conditions and standards applicable to the planned unit development. Amendments shall be processed in accordance with the procedures identified for planned unit developments in this UDO.” Page 66 of 184 P a g e | 3 City of Brooklyn Center | 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy | Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 | (763) 569-3330 | www.brooklyncentermn.gov City Council Resolution No. 98-47, which was adopted on March 23, 1998, granted approvals for the Subject Property to operate as a “three story, 104 unit efficiency hotel” and approval of the Planned Unit Development acknowledged “efficiency or extended stay hotels offering transient lodging accommodations for periods of longer than one week as being comparable in intensity and use as transient lodging defined in the Brooklyn Center zoning ordinance and, therefore, an allowed use in this Planned Unit Development.” The report on file with Planning Commission Application No. 98005 further notes that, “hotels, motels, and transient lodging uses are not acknowledged uses in the I-1 zoning district. Up until 1990, hotels and some specific other uses were acknowledged special uses in the I-1 zoning district and could be authorized through the granting of a special use permit.” The report further notes that, “the City was not necessarily opposed to restaurant or hotel uses at these locations but was concerned that the special use permit process would not protect the interests and concerns of the City. The PUD process was considered appropriate for considering anything other than light industrial or service/office uses in for I-1 zoned property.” In reviewing the Subject Property during the June 4, 2025 site inspection, available documentation, and in communication with DHS and MHCP, City staff believes there has been a clear change in use of the site. The Recuperative Care Facility use is most similar to that of a “Nursing Care Home, Rest Home, or Convalescent Home,” which is defined under the City’s preceding zoning code Section 35-900 (Definitions) as a, “facility which provides for the accommodation of persons who are not acutely ill and not in need of hospital care, but who do require nursing care and related medical services. Examples of nursing care include: bedside care and rehabilitative nursing techniques, administration of medicines, a modified diet regime, irrigations and catheterization, application of dressings or bandages and other treatments prescribed by a physician.” Section 35-330 (I-1 Industrial Park) of the City’s preceding zoning code does not identify “Nursing Care Home, Rest Home, or Convalescent Home” uses as either a permitted or special use; therefore, the use is prohibited unless determined otherwise. It is City staff’s interpretation that the Recuperative Care Facility can no longer be interpreted as a “hospitality accommodation” use and the Subject Property shall immediately cease operation as a Recuperative Care Facility. If the Property Owner or operator would like to pursue a formal request for approval of the new use, the Applicant needs to schedule a pre-application meeting with City staff to address their requests, submit a Planning Commission Application to the City of Brooklyn Center with all necessary documentation, and receive City approval of an amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development. See Section IV for Next Steps. Further, in reviewing the City of Brooklyn Center’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the Subject Property is identified with a future land use designation of “Commercial (C).” This designation identifies, “planned commercial uses generally located along the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor, on the frontage of I-94 and along Highway 252. Uses in these areas include hotels, restaurants, auto sales, and other small retail uses.” City staff will require additional review before a formal determination can be made; however, a request for a comprehensive plan amendment may be required to forward any request for a new use. Section III: Change of Building Occupancy Page 67 of 184 P a g e | 4 City of Brooklyn Center | 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy | Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 | (763) 569-3330 | www.brooklyncentermn.gov City Building Official Dan Grinsteinner conducted a review of the approved construction plans on file for the Subject Property and has determined that the Recuperative Care Facility would trigger a change of use, which requires issuance of a new Certificate of Occupancy؅—see attached. Pursuant to state law, “No building or structure shall be used or occupied, and no change in the existing occupancy classification of a building, structure, or portion of a building or structure shall be made until the building official has issued a certificate of occupancy for the building under Minnesota Administrative Rules 1300.0220, Subpart 1.” A new Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued unless the Property Owner submits a Planning Commission application to allow for the conversion of the Subject Property and secures approval from the City Council. The Building Official would require plans from a State licensed architect that provide a code analysis with health, life, and safety items addressed (e.g. travel distance, exiting), and a City building permit would need to be applied for and issued. Section IV: Next Steps This letter is your notice of zoning violation. To adequately address this issue, you will need to take the following action steps: 1. The Property Owner and Operator must cease continued operations of the Recuperative Care Facility. 2. If the Property Owner would like to operate as a Recuperative Care Facility, the Property Owner should contact City Staff to begin the process to amend the Planned Unit Development. Due to the change in use of the facility, you will need to undertake the Planned Unit Development Major Amendment Process as outlined in Sections 35-8300 (Planned Unit Developments) and 35-8306 (PUD Amendments) of the Brooklyn Center Unified Development Ordinance. Submittal of a Planning Commission application for the requested amendment does not guarantee City approval. 3. Review additional City communication regarding the status of the Hospitality Accommodations License for Suburban Studio. 4. Adhere to any requirements related to potential Hospitality Accommodations licensing action. 5. Schedule inspections and close out any open City permits. To schedule, please contact City of Brooklyn Center Community Development Department main line at: (763) 569-3330. Pursuant to Section 35-1603 (Penalties), continued operation of the Subject Property as a Recuperative Care Facility may be subject to penalties, including administrative fines. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly at (763) 569-3319 or gmcintosh@brooklyncentermn.gov. Thank you for your cooperation and compliance in this matter. Sincerely, Ginny McIntosh Planning Manager Enclosures: City Council Resolution No. 98-47, adopted March 23, 1998 Page 68 of 184 P a g e | 5 City of Brooklyn Center | 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy | Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 | (763) 569-3330 | www.brooklyncentermn.gov Memorandum, prepared by City of Brooklyn Center Building Official Dan Grinsteinner, and dated June 10, 2025 Care Chexx Recuperative Care for Homeless Patients Flyer CC: Dr. Reginald Edwards, City Manager Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager Shannon Pettit, City Clerk Siobhan Tolar, Kennedy & Graven Megan Rogers, Larkin Hoffman Care Chexx Choice Hotels Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) Minnesota Health Care Programs (MHCP) Page 69 of 184 HomeWho We Are  FAQsMake A ReferralJoin Us Empowering Lives, Strengthening Communities Page 70 of 184 Our Stor y: Compassion Meets Excellence At Care Chexx, we bring decades of experience in government leadership, federal grant management, and community services. As a Minority & Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) with 80+ years of combined expertise, we are dedicated to fostering equitable access to essential resources. Our lived experience drives our commitment to compassionate, high-quality, and innovative solutions. Let’s be great together. M e e t t h e T e a m COUNTDOWN TO OUR GRAND OPENING -JUNE 2, 2025 Care Chexx LLC is proud to announce the grand opening of our 125-bed Recuperative Care Program, serving the greater Twin Cities area. This much-needed facility will provide short-term residential care for individuals who are medically stable and no longer require hospitalization—but who are not yet well enough to recover in traditional shelters or on the streets. Our program offers a safe, structured environment where healing is possible. What is Recuperative Care? Page 71 of 184 Recuperative care—also called medical respite care—offers short-term medical support and essential services for people experiencing homelessness or housing instability. It’s designed for those recovering from illness, injury, or surgery who no longer need to stay in the hospital. Our program provides a safe and structured space with medical oversight, case management, and supportive care. By helping people heal in dignity, recuperative care reduces hospital readmissions and strengthens the health of the entire community. Par tner Webinar Invitation | May 21 & May 23, 2025 To support our partners and answer questions about referrals and coordination, we are hosting two live webinars for hospitals, clinics, and shelter providers. Join us to learn how Care Chexx can support your patients' recovery while easing the burden on acute care systems. V i e w W e b i n a r I n f o Page 72 of 184 How We Help We offer compassionate, community-based services that support healing, housing, and hope for those in need. Hospital Transpor t L e a r n M o r e Social Suppor t L e a r n M o r e Page 73 of 184 Recover y Housing L e a r n M o r e Stable Living L e a r n M o r e V i e w M o r e Page 74 of 184 Client Stories A Lifeline for Those in Need “After my surgery, I had nowhere to go and no one to help me. Care Chexx gave me a place to rest, recover, and rebuild my life. Their staff treated me with dignity and helped me nd stable housing. I’m forever grateful.” Reggie Care With Purpose Star ts Here Care Chexx LLC is growing—and we’re looking for dedicated individuals ready to make a meaningful impact. As we expand our services, we welcome those who are driven by purpose, compassion, and a commitment to community care. Together, we’re building a healthier future—one person at a time. J o i n O u r M i s s i o n Page 75 of 184 Navigation Home Who We Are  FAQs Make A Referral Join Us Follow Us  © 2025 | Carechexx.com Page 76 of 184 Page 77 of 184 BR291-440-1033850.v1 Member ______ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 2025-064 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER RESOLUTION REVOKING THE HOSPITALITY ACCOMMODATION LICENSE FOR BC SEVA LLC DBA SUBURBAN STUDIOS HOSPITALITY ACCOMMODATIONS LICENSE WHEREAS, BC Seval LLC, doing business as Suburban Studios (“Licensee”), a business located at 2701 Freeway Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, MN, holds a Hospitality Accommodation License; WHEREAS, Suburban Studios submitted a renewal application for the Hospitality License on March 31, 2025; and WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council (“Council”) approved the license renewal on May 5, 2025; and WHEREAS, the Suburban Studios property is located within a Planned Unit Development (“PUD”) in an underlying “historic” I-1 (Industrial Park) zoning designation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the existing Unified Development Ordinance (“UDO”, “Planned unit developments, and parcels zoned as a planned unit development, in accordance with prior zoning regulations shall remain in effect and shall remain subject to any and all agreements, conditions and standards applicable to the planned unit development. Amendments shall be processed in accordance with the procedures identified for planned unit developments in this UDO;” and WHEREAS, on or about June 2, 2025, Suburban Studios ceased operating as a Hospitality Accommodation establishment pursuant to Brooklyn Center City Code Section 23-2402(C) and instead began operating as Care Chexx (“Care Chexx”) Recuperative Care Facility; and WHEREAS, during an onsite inspection, city staff learned that the Care Chexx had (1) entered into a three-year operator’s lease with BC Seval LLC, (2) hired all of Suburban Studios house-keeping staff, (3) employed full-time medical staff, including LPNs, RNs, and Nurse Practitioners for a 24-hour operation; and Page 78 of 184 WHEREAS, city staff also learned that in order to operate the facility, Care Chexx staff must hold Recuperative Care Licensure through the Department of Human Services; and WHEREAS, the Recuperative Care facility provides care to homeless individuals who are being discharged from the hospital; and WHEREAS, through investigative efforts, city staff concluded that Suburban Studios is not operating as a Hospitality Accommodation and began operating as a Recuperative Care Facility in violation of the zoning code; and WHEREAS, the Licensee neglected to properly amend the Planned Unit Development as required by the PUD and city ordinance; and WHEREAS, based on facts and findings of city staff obtained through investigation and inquiry and memorialized in the staff report and attachments, Zoning Enforcement Letter, and Hospitality Accommodation Violation Letter, city staff has found that Suburban Studios violated Section 23 of the City Code by ceasing to operate as a Hospitality Accommodation and violating the zoning code; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center hereby revokes the Licensee’s Hospitality Accommodation License based on the foregoing recitals and the following findings of the City Council: 1. The Licensee has ceased operation as a Hospitality Accommodation. The Licensee sought renewal of the Hospitality Accommodation License, received the renewal, and then entered into an operators lease for the operation of a Recuperative Care Facility onsite; 2. The Licensee has failed to seek proper zoning approvals and has failed to amend the existing Planned Unit Development Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions of the PUD and the UDO. The City has not received a rezoning request or an application for PUD Amendment prior to changing the use of the premises to a Recuperative Care Facility which is grounds for revocation pursuant to Section 23-2413(A)(6) of the Hospitality Accommodation License Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center does hereby revoke the Hospitality Accommodation License for BC Seva LLC, dba Suburban Studios subject to the following conditions: 1. The Hospitality Accommodation License revocation shall take effect 21 calendar days from the date of the passage of this resolution; 2. Licensee shall comply with any conditions and requirements as outlined in the city licensing code. Page 79 of 184 ADOPTED this 23rd day of June 2025, by the Brooklyn Center City Council with a vote of ___ June 23rd, 2025 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Page 80 of 184 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 6/23/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Garett Flesland, Chief of Police THROUGH: Reggie Edwards, City Manager BY: Garett Flesland, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Presentation and Public Commentary Regarding Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Requested Council Action: - Motion to Receive Public Commentary - Motion to Close Public Commentary - Motion to accept public commentary regarding the use of unmanned aerial vehicles by the Brooklyn Center Police Department. Background: The Brooklyn Center Police Department intends to incorporate the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (aka Drones) into it's operations in the future. The Brooklyn Center Police Department would like to present a brief overview and requests that the Council provide an opportunity for public comment regarding this topic at a regularly scheduled meeting (as required by Minnesota Statute 626.19 Subd. 9). Budget Issues: Currently, we have allocated $20,000 of Public Safety Aid money for use in establishing an Unmanned Aerial Vehicles program. Inclusive Community Engagement: We have had conversations with community members regarding this topic at three community events (in 2024 and 2025) and we have solicited feedback from community members via social media and on the city's website. Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: N/A Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. BCPD Drones for City Council 20250623 Page 81 of 184 ; Unmanned Aerial Vehicles -UAS a.k.a. Drones Garett FleslandPolice Chief June23,2025 Page 82 of 184 Agenda •Powerful tool •Safety benefits •Operations •Federal and State regulations •Transparency / Accountability / Privacy •Opportunity for public comment 2Page 83 of 184 Why a Drone Program? 3 A group of up to 600 people searched for 10 hours. A drone located the boy after 10 minutes in the air. Page 84 of 184 Benefits Situational Awareness: Live Video Feed provides decision makers with accurate information to make tactical and strategic decisions. Less officers present at a scene. Provides the ability to cover a much larger area in a shorter amount of time. Faster deployment versus, or in conjunction with, Minnesota State Patrol aircraft. De-escalation –> can create space, which affords more time 4Page 85 of 184 Local Adoption In the 2023 Bureau of Criminal Apprehension report at least 99 Public Safety Agencies use UAS technology in Minnesota. Several others are researching or starting programs each month, providing their communities with invaluable technology and life saving capabilities. Some agencies locally that currently have a UAS Team include the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Robbinsdale, Minneapolis, Maple Grove, and Plymouth Police Departments. 5Page 86 of 184 When Would We Use Drones? •Life safety - search and rescue of vulnerable or missing adults and children •Emergency situations -situations that poses an immediate public safety risk •Natural disaster response - coordination of water rescues, flood assessment, documenting damage •Crime scene - searching for evidence and documentation •Community engagement - and /or training purposes 6Page 87 of 184 FAA Rules include •Must fly at or below 400 feet. •UAS needs to be kept within visual line of sight. •Can’t fly in restricted airspace without a waiver from the FAA. •UAS must yield the right of way to all aircraft. 7Page 88 of 184 MN State Statute 626.19 All authorized uses will comply with MN State Statute 626.19(2), which requires a search warrant, except as provided in 626.19(3). UAS are shown to significantly reduce the exposure of the community to life and safety risks by allowing first responders to leverage time, distance and cover when handling violent, dangerous and treacherous situations. 8Page 89 of 184 Authorized Uses per MN State Statute 626.19 Nine exceptions to using a drone outside of having a Search Warrant: 1.During an emergency 2.Over a public event 3.Counter the risk of a terrorist attack 4.Aid in natural or manmade disasters 5.Conduct threat assessments. 6.Collect information from a public area if reasonable suspicion of criminal activity 7.Collect information for crash reconstruction 8.Over a public area for employee training or public relations purposes 9.Aiding other non law enforcement government entities 9Page 90 of 184 Prohibited Uses - per MN State Statute 626.19 and BCPD Policy 1.Must comply with all FAA requirements. 2.Must not deploy an UAS with facial recognition or other biometric matching technology. 3.Must not equip an UAS with weapons. 4.Must not use an UAS to collect data on public protests or demonstrations. 5.Must not use an UAS to conduct random surveillance activities. 6.Must not be used to target a person based solely on actual or perceived characteristics. 7.Must not be used to harass, intimidate, or discriminate against any individual or group. 8.Must not be used to conduct personal business of any type. 10Page 91 of 184 Privacy •The agency must not use an UAS to conduct random surveillance activities (Policy). •NO facial recognition capabilities (State Statute, Policy). •Deployment will be to look for a specific suspect(s) or on the approved list of purposes only (previous slide). •We will not be looking for additional crimes or as a proactive enforcement tool. •A law enforcement agency must delete data collected by a UAV as​ soon as possible, and in no event later than seven days after collection, unless the data is part of an active​ criminal investigation (626.19). 11Page 92 of 184 Transparency & Accountability •Every use of the UAS will be approved by a Sergeant or Commander and each flight will be thoroughly documented. •Third party software will store and upload all flight data. This includes the dates, times, altitude, speed and direction of the UAS and camera . Any complaints can be thoroughly investigated with the stored flight data. •UAS flights, program costs and additional data requirements will be sent to the BCA annually based on statute. 12Page 93 of 184 Staffing and Oversight Commander: •Oversees the UAS program and ensures all policy and laws are being followed. •Approve training. •Ensure proper data collection and reporting to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Program Coordinator-Sergeant: •Assist with the collection of proper data and reporting to the BCA/FAA. •In charge of the day-to-day operations. •Responsible for training, documentation and supervision of UAS pilots. Lead Pilots: •Training, maintenance and inventory of aircraft. •Responsible for documenting every flight. 13Page 94 of 184 Community Feedback Solicited Drones were discussed during Community Public Safety Meetings -11/02/2024 (x2) -02/27/2025 Feedback on draft policy was solicited -06/06/2025: Via city's website -06/06/2025: Via Facebook 14Page 95 of 184 Additional Community Feedback / Comments We are requesting that the City Council provide an opportunity for public comment at this regularly scheduled meeting. 15Page 96 of 184 ; Unmanned Aerial Vehicles -UAS a.k.a. Drones Garett FleslandPolice Chief June 23, 2025 Page 97 of 184 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 6/23/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Ginny McIntosh, Planning Manager THROUGH: Jesse Anderson, Community Development Director BY: Ginny McIntosh, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-65 Regarding the Recommended Approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005 for an Approximately 780-Square Foot Expansion of the Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic and Associated Variances (5831 Brooklyn Boulevard) Requested Council Action: Motion to approve Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005 for an approximately 780-square foot expansion to the Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic located at 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard and associated variances, based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, as amended by the Conditions of Approval. Background: Property Owner MMS Properties LLC (“the Applicant”) is requesting review and consideration of a proposal that would renovate the existing, approximately 4,005- square foot Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic, located at 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard (“the Subject Property”), and construct an approximately 780 square-foot addition to accommodate a larger patient waiting and reception desk area, three (3) patient operatories, and an ADA-compliant restroom. As the existing building is non-conforming with respect to setbacks, certain variances are requested from Sections 35-2302 and 35-5100 of the City Code. Due to the requests submitted as part of Planning Commission Application No. 2025- 005, a public hearing notice was published in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post on May 29, 2025. Mail notifications were sent to all physical addresses and taxpayer addresses located within 350 feet of the Subject Property, a public hearing notice was published on the City website, and provided in a City bulletin to subscribers. City staff have been in ongoing discussions with project representative Josh Juaire of Calco Comprehensive Development regarding plans for the expansion of the Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic, which is located near the northwest corner of Brooklyn Boulevard and Bass Lake Road (County Road 10), since last year. The existing building, which was constructed in 1970, has always operated as a dental clinic. The Applicant notes that their current practice has been in operation since 2000 and the clinic provides dental care to hundreds of patients in and around Brooklyn Center. While they love their location, they have reached the point where they require additional space to grow their practice and offer more amenities and services. As part of the project proposal to expand the footprint of their building, they are also seeking to undertake an interior and exterior renovation. Page 98 of 184 A public hearing was held at the Planning Commission meeting on June 12, 2025. City staff were not in receipt of any communication from the public in advance of the public hearing, and no members of the public spoke at the public hearing. Project Representative Josh Juaire of Calco Comprehensive Development was present at the meeting and addressed questions of the Planning Commissioners. Questions raised by the Commissioners included the necessity of a sidewalk connection from the clinic building to the public trail, located to the east of the property, and if there were alternative building material options for the exterior renovation. One of the Commissioners noted that the City and surrounding owners have put a lot of time and money into improving Brooklyn Boulevard over these past few years and for the Applicant to make the expansion as aesthetically pleasing and functional as possible. Another Commissioner noted that the clinic has been in Brooklyn Center for a very long time as a loyal citizen—even when the area wasn't well kept, and as a need in the community, the Commissioner wanted to ensure the City provided a path for the Applicant to make improvements to their property. City staff relayed that the Neighborhood Mixed-Use 2 (MX-N2) District where the Subject Property is located emphasizes pedestrian connections and avoiding situations where pedestrians are forced to walk through parking lots to get to public ways, and that City staff was requesting the connection be provided. With respect to the proposed use of Hardie board or LP siding for a portion of the front addition, Project Representative Josh Juaire indicated that Dr. Marty Spanish of Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic was looking for materials that would provide different textures, as the existing building is entirely comprised of brick. Although architectural building materials are reviewed as part of the site and building plan amendment process, the Applicant is able to work with City staff following any formal determination by City Council to entertain alternative building materials so long as they comply with the City's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requirements as outlined under Sections 35-2302 (MX-N2—Neighborhood Mixed-Use) and 35-5203 (Building Materials). Ultimately, the Planning Commission elected to unanimously (5-0) recommend City Council approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005 for a (1) a major amendment to the site and building plan for the Subject Property located at 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard that would construct an approximately 780-square foot, one-story addition and related site improvements, and (2) variances to Sections 35-2302 and 35- 5100 regarding the maximum allowable build-to setback of between 5 and 20 feet for an approximately 24.3 foot setback (14.3 foot deviation) along Brooklyn Boulevard, and a variance from a requirement that at least 50% of the first floor of the front facade of the primary building be located not more than 10 feet from the front lot line (14.3 foot deviation), based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, and as amended by the Conditions of Approval. Page 99 of 184 A copy of the Planning Commission report, dated June 12, 2025, draft resolution approving Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005, and PowerPoint presentation are included with this memorandum. Budget Issues: None to consider at this time. Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report with Exhibits - Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005 2. City Council Resolution - Recommending Approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005 3. City Council Presentation - Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005 Page 100 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 1 Planning Commission Report Meeting Date: June 12, 2025 Application No. 2025-005 Applicant | Property Owner: MMS Properties LLC Location: 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard | PID: 03-118-21-13-0101 Requests: Variances and Site and Building Plan Amendment Map 1. Subject Property Location. Requested Action Property Owner MMS Properties LLC (“the Applicant”) is requesting review and consideration of a proposal that would renovate the existing, approximately 4,005-square foot Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic, located at 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard (“the Subject Property”), and construct an approximately 780-square foot addition to accommodate a larger patient waiting and reception desk area, three (3) patient operatories, and an ADA-compliant restroom. As the existing building is non-conforming with respect to setbacks, certain variances are requested from Sections 35-2302 and 35-5100 of the City Code. •Application Filed: 05/13/2025 •Review Period (60-day) Deadline: 07/12/2025 •Extension Declared: No •Extended Review Period Deadline: Page 101 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 2 Due to the requests submitted as part of Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005, a public hearing notice was published in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post on May 29, 2025—refer to Exhibit B. Mail notifications were sent to all physical addresses and taxpayer addresses located within 350 feet of the Subject Property, a public hearing notice was published on the City website, and provided in a City bulletin to subscribers. Background City staff have been in ongoing discussions with project representative Josh Juaire of Calco Comprehensive Development regarding plans for the expansion of the Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic, which is located near the northwest corner of Brooklyn Boulevard and Bass Lake Road (County Road 10), since last year. The existing building, which was constructed in 1970, has always operated as a dental clinic. The Applicant notes that their practice has been in operation since 2000 and the clinic provides dental care to hundreds of patients in and around Brooklyn Center. While they love their location, they have reached the point where they require additional space to grow their practice and offer more amenities and services. As part of the project proposal to expand the footprint of their building, they are also seeking to undertake an interior and exterior renovation. The Subject Property originally received site and building plan approval in 1968 under Planning Commission Application No. 68048 for a commercial (office) building in what was formerly the City’s C1 (Service/Office) District. Prior to this, the Subject Property had been contemplated under Planning Commission Application No. 62068 for development of a five (5) unit multiple-family residential building with six car garage, in which the then Applicant would have occupied one of the apartments. That request was ultimately denied by the City Council. Map 1. 1969 (L) and 2024 (R) Imagery—Source: Hennepin County. Site Data: 2040 Land Use Plan: Neighborhood Mixed Use (N-MU) Neighborhood: Kylawn Current Zoning: Neighborhood Mixed Use 2 (MX-N2) District Site Area: Approximately 1.03 acres Page 102 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 3 Surrounding Area: Direction 2040 Land Use Plan Zoning Existing Land Use North N-MU (Neighborhood Mixed Use) MX-N2 (Neighborhood Mixed-Use 2) Office (5901 Brooklyn Boulevard — Brookdale West Professional Building) South N-MU (Neighborhood Mixed Use) MX-N2 (Neighborhood Mixed-Use 2) Commercial (5801 Brooklyn Boulevard — Former CVS Pharmacy) East TOD (Transit-Oriented Development) TOD (Transit-Oriented Development) Office (3300 County Road 10 Building) West N-MU (Neighborhood Mixed Use) MX-N2 (Neighborhood Mixed-Use 2) Single Family Detached Existing Conditions Page 103 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 4 Image 1. Existing Site Conditions at Subject Property. REQUESTS Site and Building Plan (Major Amendment) Image 2. Select Architectural Renderings of Proposed Addition. Page 104 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 5 Image 3. Proposed Building Addition for Subject Property (in red). Section 35-7601 (Applicability) notes that site and building plan approval is required where the construction or erection of a new building or add on to an existing building would result in an increase in gross floor areas of all buildings by more than 10 percent (%), or there is the expansion or change of building or parcel use that results in a different intensity of use. As proposed, the approximately 780-square foot expansion would constitute an approximately 19.5 percent (%) change to the existing 4,005-square foot dental clinic. While this would otherwise be considered a “minor site and building plan amendment” per Section 35-7605 (Amendments), the associated request for certain variances automatically moves the building modifications into a major site and building plan amendment, which requires review and consideration by Planning Commission and City Council. Section 35-7604 (Site and Building Plan Criteria) provides that no site and building plan review application shall be approved unless it meets the following criteria: a.It fully complies with all applicable requirements of this UDO; b.It adequately protects residential uses from the potential adverse effects of a non- residential use; c.It is consistent with the use and character of surrounding properties; and Page 105 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 6 d.It provides safe conditions for pedestrians or motorists and prevents the dangerous arrangement of pedestrian vehicular ways. Site Design The Applicant outlines in their narrative that the proposed 780-square foot addition would allow the dental clinic to grow its practice and offer more amenities through construction of a larger patient area, front reception desk, and an ADA compliant restroom for patient use. The addition would further allow the room necessary to accommodate three (3) additional patient operatories to grow the practice. Given the age of the building, ownership is also interested in completing interior and exterior renovations to modernize the building and provide additional interest to the front entrance, which faces Brooklyn Boulevard. Image 4. Proposed Interior Layout for Building Addition (in red). With respect to the building’s interior, the Applicant proposes a buildout of the currently unfinished walkout basement, which would serve as a dedicated staff lounge and break room, as well as new office space. Other updates identify floor replacement, new paint, door and trim work. The exterior updates, as currently contemplated, would include the replacement of all existing windows and doors, new landscaping along Brooklyn Boulevard, and painting of the brick. The existing sidewalk would be re-routed to accommodate the proposed addition and new entrance but would comply with any ADA requirements (e.g. ADA parking and loading, accessible route). Dimensional Standards The MX-N2 (Neighborhood Mixed-Use) District where the Subject Property is located requires buildings Page 106 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 7 to be located a minimum of 5 feet and a maximum of 20 feet from the primary and secondary street frontages, with remaining minimum 10-foot setbacks for the side interior and rear property lines. Additionally, at least 50 percent of the first floor of the front façade of the primary building shall be located not more than 10 feet from the front lot line. As the Subject Property was developed prior to these newer zoning regulations, the Applicant is requesting certain variances which are discussed later in this report. Parking | Circulation | Access |Connection There are no plans to alter the existing parking lot, which wraps around the building on three sides. Although the proposed front expansion is modest, it does allow for the Subject Property to become less non-conforming with the new MX-N2 District provisions. As an example, the MX-N2 District does not allow for vehicle parking areas to be located between the front façade of an existing or new structure and the primary street frontage of the lot unless otherwise permitted. Access to the Subject Property is currently limited to a right-in/right-out (RIRO) curb cut off Brooklyn Boulevard. There are no plans to alter the existing drive aisles or driveway curb cut access onto Brooklyn Boulevard; therefore, a review from Hennepin County Transportation was not requested. The Subject Property currently has secondary access to 58th Avenue North via the former CVS Pharmacy property located at 5801 Brooklyn Boulevard. The existing parking lot provides 41 parking spaces, and the provided plans identify two (2) dedicated ADA parking spaces with a shared loading space. Section 35-5506 (Required Parking Spaces) requires the following for “medical and dental clinics”: Assuming three (3) dentists, 12 clinic staff, and a new total square footage of approximately 4,785 square feet, a maximum of 31 parking spaces would be required as the gross floor area provision results in a greater maximum parking need requirement. It was noted by City staff upon site visit that there were more than enough parking spaces available given the time of day (approximately 10 a.m. on a Tuesday). Typically, the City would be supportive of a reduction in parking areas; however, as the Applicant notes a total revised impervious coverage amount of 59.6%, which is well below the maximum permitted 80% in the MX-N2 District, City staff is comfortable with the Applicant maintaining the existing parking lot as-is. The Subject Property is in a highly accessible area of Brooklyn Center, as it is located along Brooklyn Boulevard, and near the intersection of Brooklyn Boulevard and Bass Lake Road (County Road 10). A new multi-use trail was installed along the west side of Brooklyn Boulevard as part of the Brooklyn Boulevard modernization project and lies just east of the Subject Property. Although the Applicant notes plans to reconfigure the layout of the existing private sidewalk to better serve the proposed addition and front entrance, City staff noted a gap in sidewalk connection from the front entrance to the trail. City staff is requesting the Applicant tie in the private sidewalk to the public multi-use trail. Page 107 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 8 Image 5. Proposed Private Sidewalk Route for Subject Property with Requested Connection (in red). Lighting A photometric plan was not provided as part of the application submittal. In reviewing the existing site lighting, City staff observed existing, non-conforming building lighting. The building currently provides flood lighting around the building with what appear to be security cameras. Wall pack and floodlight-style lighting are not permitted except for loading and service areas per Section 35-5400 (Exterior Lighting). Provide sidewalk connection to trail Page 108 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 9 Image 6. Existing Building and Site Lighting on Subject Property. The City Code requires any lighting to be designed and arranged so as to restrict direct illumination and glare onto abutting parcels. City staff requests the Applicant provide a photometric plan with a lighting fixture schedule identifying any new building or site lighting (e.g. bollards). Site lighting should provide consistent levels of illumination, avoiding pockets of high or low levels of illumination. For primary building entrances/exits and pedestrian pathways, including the re-configured sidewalk, the following minimum illumination requirements apply: Trash | Screening The Subject Property is currently served by an existing trash enclosure located at the southwest corner of the property. Although the wood of the enclosure is weathered, the enclosure is fully opaque, and the panels appear to be in fair condition. No corrections are required at this time. All ground mounted equipment over 30-inches in height or greater than 12-cubic feet (e.g. transformers, mechanical) shall be effectively screened from public view. Similarly, any existing or new roof-mounted equipment shall also be screened from view through the use of parapets, wall/fencing materials, or paint compatible and complementary to the building. Architectural Materials City Code requires the exterior wall finishes on any building to have no less than 60-percent face brick, natural or colored stone, pre-colored or factory stained or stained on site textured pre-cast concrete panels, textured concrete block, stucco, glass, fiberglass, or similar materials. The existing building is majority comprised of brick and glazing. Although the Applicant is still working through the building Page 109 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 10 materials for the proposed addition, the Applicant indicates an interest in using an LP or Hardie board- type siding product in a board and batten configuration to help break up the brick. Any brick would be painted to match the siding product. City staff is not opposed to the use of other materials, but discussed the City’s requirements as outlined under Section 35-2302 (MX-N2 – Neighborhood Mixed-Use), which includes requirements for at least 50 percent of each building façade facing a street, park, plaza, or other public space (not including areas occupied by doors or windows), to be faced in brick, stone, cultured stone, real stucco, or other material of equivalent visual attractiveness, quality, and durability, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. Additionally, Section 35-2302 requires each ground floor façade for a nonresidential use facing a public right-of-way to have transparent windows or other transparent glazed areas covering at least 50 percent (%) of the ground floor façade area between three (3) and eight (8) feet above sidewalk grade. Required glazed areas shall have a visible light transmittance ratio of 0.6 or higher, and shall not include reflective, heavily tinted, or black glass windows. The Applicant notes in their narrative that the glazed area percentage of the proposed front façade is 112.10-square feet, or 55-percent of the identified ground floor façade area. Although City staff were able to review the submitted architectural renderings, which reflect new windows and glass doors along the front façade, City staff requested the Applicant revise their plans to more clearly note the areas between three (3) and eight (8) feet above sidewalk grade, and total square footage for those areas facing a public right-of-way. Landscaping Image 7. Proposed Landscaping Removals and New Landscaping. In reviewing the Subject Property’s original approvals, City staff were unable to locate an approved landscape plan in City records. For the City’s mixed-use zoning districts, including the MX-N2 District where the Subject Property is located, Section 35-5603 (District Landscaping Requirements) sets minimum landscape requirements that are calculated with a project’s valuation. Any landscaping shall be coordinated with lighting plans, and City staff requests the landscape plan be layered over any existing or proposed utility lines to ensure no plantings will be located within utility easements or over utility lines, or that different plantings are selected for these areas. Page 110 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 11 To promote species diversity and resilience, no more than 40 percent (%) of the total number of trees may be of the same species, and landscape vegetation should use native and resilient plant types where possible in order to promote landscape resiliency and reduce site maintenance requirements. The Applicant provided a plan sheet (Sheet C101) which outlines the removal of two (2) trees to accommodate the proposed addition. In their place, Sheet C201 identifies the installation of fragrant sumac or small green velvet boxwood in the front yard abutting Brooklyn Boulevard, and two new sunburst honey locust trees. Sunburst honey locusts are considered low maintenance and specifically bred to not shed thorns or seed pods, which is a perk considering their proposed locations are in proximity to the multi-use trail. Along either side of the new covered porch, the Applicant intends to install Karl Foerster grass. Following a site visit, City staff noted existing landscaping on site, including mature trees. As mature trees can be counted toward the minimum planting requirements, City staff requests the submitted site layout plan (Sheet C201) be revised to identify other on-site landscaping in a table format for the purposes of calculating the minimum landscape requirements. The Applicant should ensure all new landscaping is located outside any identified easements and should be coordinated with any proposals for new site lighting for the building addition. Landscaped areas shall be maintained with a site irrigation system and shop drawings provided to the City as part of any installation. Signs No specific signage requests were made as part of the Application submittal, and following a review, it appears an existing freestanding sign located on Brooklyn Boulevard will not be impacted by the proposed construction of the addition. Should the Applicant desire new wall, directional, or freestanding signage, any new signage would be required to comply with the provisions outlined within Section 35-6000 (Signs) of the City Code. Engineering Review Principal Engineer Touyia Lee provided an initial review of the submitted plan set and provided commentary regarding the proposed expansion. These include: 1.The presence of an existing 10” sanitary main line along with a utility easement running west to east across the Subject Property. The proposed sidewalk would fall within the existing easement. This is acceptable per City staff; however, it should be noted the Property Owner assumes liability for any replacement assuming future repairs or replacement. The proposed building addition appears to be located approximately seven (7) feet outside this easement. 2.The provided plan set identifies ADA access for the north parking lot area only, which is where the identified ADA parking spaces are located, and the primary access to the main entrance. 3.There is an existing trail easement running along the east side of the Subject Property, along Brooklyn Boulevard. There appear to be no impacts with the proposed addition. 4.An NPDES permit is not required as the total disturbance is less than one (1) acre. 5.There do not appear to be any new external water or sanitary service connections, but Applicant would need to coordinate with the Building Official for any new plumbing or mechanical network expansion. Page 111 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 12 Pending approval of the applications requests, the Applicant would need to coordinate with City Engineering on the identified site improvements. Building Review Building Official Dan Grinsteinner conducted a cursory review of the proposal in a memorandum dated June 10, 2025—refer to Exhibit C. Ultimately, building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes and prior to the issuance of permits. The Applicant will also need to meet any minimum ADA requirements with respect to the building and site improvements (e.g. ADA parking and new sidewalk configuration) and prior to the issuance of any building permits, a SAC (Sewer Availability Charge) determination shall be submitted to the Metropolitan Council, and any associated fees paid at time of permit issuance. Although nothing was noted in the referenced memorandum, the Applicant should coordinate with the Hennepin County Health Department for any approvals relating to the proposed staff kitchen area. Variances Variances may only be granted when the Applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, subdivision 6, the City Council may only grant approval of a variance where “practical difficulties” exist as to the strict compliance with the City’s Unified Development Ordinance. It should be noted that economic considerations alone shall not constitute a “practical difficulty.” In considering a variance application, “quasi-judicial” authority is exercised in that the City evaluates the facts presented against a legal standard. Prior to requesting consideration of a variance, an Applicant should always review all possible alternatives that would meet code requirements before applying for a variance. Each of the following criteria shall be satisfied in accordance with Section 35-71000 (Variances): 1.The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance. City Staff Response (Finding): The Applicant has worked with City staff to try to meet the requirements of the City’s new Unified Development Ordinance and its enhanced requirements surrounding building scale, pedestrian friendliness, and accessibility. The Subject Property was constructed around 1970 and is uniquely situated on a parcel of land that slopes downhill as you head west. Given the existing size of the Subject Property’s building (approximately 4,005-square feet) and the building’s existing orientation on the property, the Applicant notes in their memo that the building would need to be effectively doubled in size to meet today’s front build-to requirements for the MX-N2 District in which the Subject Property is located. The Applicant has designed the proposed building expansion to try and meet the intended purpose of the City’s MX-N2 (Neighborhood Mixed-Use 2) District, dimensional standards, and the Applicant’s business operation needs while creating minimal impacts to the surrounding properties and residential neighborhood to the east. Page 112 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 13 2.The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. City Staff Response (Finding): The Subject Property is located within the Neighborhood Mixed- Use (N-MU) future land use designation under the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Subject Property also falls within Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay designation, which is a 1,200- foot (600 foot on each side of the centerline) corridor that calls attention to land adjacent to the roadway for special consideration at time of redevelopment. Both the Neighborhood Mixed-Use designation and Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District are identified as key areas for change, and where the community is focused on creating a walkable, transit-connected, experience-based place that brings the City forward and offers new opportunities to existing and future residents. The Applicant proposes a small expansion that will allow for the expansion of services to the Brooklyn Center community, and City staff feel it meets the intended purpose of the Neighborhood Mixed-Use future land use designation, which further envisions neighborhood scale retail, service, and commercial uses, in addition to residential. 3.The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this UDO. City Staff Response (Finding): The property owner intends to utilize the property in a manner permitted by the City’s Unified Development Ordinance. Applicant MMS Properties LLC indicate in their application that they have been operating at this location since 2000, and the Subject Property has always been home to a dental clinic. With the ever-evolving changes in dental practices, the Applicant requires an expansion to better serve their patients and specifically call out the need for a larger waiting and reception area, the addition of three operatories, and an interior and exterior remodel. Despite the proposed expansion, there are no plans to alter the existing use of the property in such as way as to violate the City’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). “Medical and health uses,” including dental clinics, are considered a permitted use in the MX-N2 District where the Subject Property is located. 4.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The plight of the landowner, per City staff’s review, is due to circumstances unique to the property and not created by the landowner. Although City staff attempted to locate the original staff report for the Subject Property, only the application cover sheet with application requests and approval Page 113 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 14 dates and City Council meeting minutes with approval conditions were identified. The building received its approvals in September 1968 and following a review of the property survey City staff presumes the Subject Property was constructed with a minimum 50-foot front yard setback given the Subject Property’s adjacency to Brooklyn Boulevard, which is considered a “major thoroughfare.” Under the City’s preceding zoning code, properties abutting major thoroughfares were required to provide enhanced minimum 50-foot front yard setbacks, as opposed to the then standard 35-foot setback for a C1 (Service/Office) District property, which the Subject Property was previously zoned as. Image 8. Identified Front Yard Setback for Existing Building on Subject Property. As the Subject Property is now located in the City’s MX-N2 District, which requires a minimum 5- foot to maximum 20-foot front build-to setback, and further requires at least 50 percent of the first floor of the front façade of each primary building to be located not more than ten (10) feet from the front lot line, this places the Applicant in a unique circumstance of effectively having to either demolish and rebuild their dental clinic, or double the size of their building in order to make their existing building conform to current zoning code provisions. As proposed, the approximately 780-square-foot addition would place the new building approximately 24.3 feet from their property line, as measured from the exterior wall, and 23.1 feet from the new covered entrance. This means the proposed addition is deficient in the maximum front-build to setback by approximately 4.3 feet, and by approximately 14.3 feet for the at least 50-percent of the building that is required to be located not more than ten (10) feet from the front lot line. 5.The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. City Staff Response (Finding): The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. It will be in line with the UDO and enhance the public realm. Many of the commercial buildings constructed within this segment of Brooklyn Boulevard are from the same era (1968-1978) and clearly prioritized parking and vehicle circulation over providing neighborhood-scale businesses Page 114 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 15 that were accessible to local pedestrians. With the adoption of the new Unified Development Ordinance in 2023, City staff has been working through redevelopment and expansion proposals that aim to scale developments to fit into the surrounding neighborhood fabric and prioritize pedestrians. Projects located in proximity to the Subject Property that have received approvals in recent years along Brooklyn Boulevard include CAPI USA’s Immigrant Opportunity Center, Wangstad Commons (multi-family residential), and the C Alan Homes triplex development. City staff commends the Applicant’s efforts to address the new code provisions under the City’s Unified Development Ordinance and through their request to expand towards Brooklyn Boulevard and the new trail. Anticipated Permitting and Conditions Following a review of the submittal materials and requests, approval of all application requests (i.e. site and building plan amendment and variances) is required in order to forward the application request. It should be reiterated that in order to approve the variance requests, satisfaction of all criteria is required. City staff recommend the following conditions be attached to any positive recommendation on the approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005 for the Subject Property located at 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard, which contemplates the approval of an approximately 780-square foot addition and site improvements and certain variances for Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic: 1.Any major changes or modifications to this site and building plan, and as outlined within the City Code, can only be made by an amendment to the approved site and building plan and approval by City Council. 2.The Applicant shall revise the submitted plans to provide a connection between the private sidewalk and public multi-use trail. 3.The building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 4.The Applicant shall work to ensure all applicable Minnesota Fire Code requirements have been met as part of any site and building plan approval and any proposed modifications. 5.A SAC determination shall be submitted by the Applicant to the Metropolitan Council and any associated fees paid at time of any building permit issuance. 6.The Applicant shall revise the submitted photometric plan to identify any new building or site lighting as part of the proposed addition and a fixture schedule, with lighting in compliance with Section 35-5400 (Exterior Lighting) of the City Code. 7.The Applicant shall comply with Section 35-5600 (Landscaping, Screening, and Fences) and revise the provided site plan as necessary to identify any preserved plantings and ensure any new planting locations are not within identified utility easements or over utility lines. a.The Applicant shall ensure an irrigation system is in place or install a new system where necessary to facilitate maintenance of site lighting and green areas, and irrigation shop drawing shall be provided for review and approval prior to installation. 8.Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or ground mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view per City Code requirements and a detail sheet provided. 9.The Applicant shall comply with all conditions identified by the City of Brooklyn Center Engineering Division. 10.The Applicant shall submit a sign permit application for any proposed or relocated signage (e.g. wall, freestanding) and receive issuance of a permit prior to any installation. All signage shall Page 115 of 184 App. No. 2025-005 PC 06/12/2025 Page 16 conform to Section 35-6000 (Signs) of the City Code. Recommendation Based on the above-noted findings, City staff recommend the Planning Commission recommend City Council: Approval of (1) a major amendment to the site and building plan for the Subject Property located at 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard that would construct an approximately 780-square foot, one-story addition and related site improvements and (2) variances to Sections 35-2302 and 35-5100 regarding the maximum allowable build-to setback of between 5 and 20 feet for an approximately 24.3 foot setback along Brooklyn Boulevard, and a deviation from a requirement that at least 50% of the first floor of the front façade of the primary building be located not more than 10 feet from the front lot line, based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, as amended by the Conditions of Approval in the June 12, 2025 Planning Commission Report. Attachments Exhibit A – Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005, submitted May 13, 2025 . Exhibit B – Public Hearing Notice, submitted for publication in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post, and dated May 29, 2025. Exhibit C – Review memorandum, prepared by Building Official Dan Grinsteinner, and dated June 10, 2025. Page 116 of 184 SIP Project Narrative & Statement of Design Intent | 1 Project Name Brooklyn Blvd Dental Project Location 5831 Broklyn Blvd Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 Date: 5/11/2025 Project Narrative The parcel located at 5831 Brooklyn Blvd. The existing building was built in 1970, and has always operated as a dental clinic. Dr Bill Kotonias bought the practice and building in 2000, and Dr Marty Spanish bought the building from Dr Kotonias in 2024. Brooklyn Blvd Dental and DDS Marty Spanish, DDS Bill Kotonias, and DDS Lam Tu have been operating since 2000 at the current location of 5831 Brooklyn Blvd. They currently serve dental care to hundreds of patients in and around Brooklyn Center, and have 12 additional staff members. Brooklyn Blvd Dental love their current location, but need more space to grow their practice at this location, and offer better amenities to their patients. They would also like to update both the interior and exterior of the clinic to be more aesthetically pleasing. The existing building is located within the MX-N2 zone which accommodates small-scale, mixed-use neighborhood activity centers with comfortable gathering places, located and scaled to provide minor/convenience services near low density residential neighborhoods. The current use of this existing building is permitted per MX-N2. The doctors are proposing a 780sf addition to the front of the existing building facing Brooklyn Blvd. The dimensions of this addition are 41’-0” North to South along the Blvd, and 19’-0” in depth. This addition will allow a larger patient waiting area, larger front reception desk, and an ADA compliant restroom for patient use within the waiting area. It also will add some additional interest to the front of the existing building by adding some decorative pillars and a covered entrance at the exterior. The addition will also accommodate three additional patient operatories to allow for practice growth. Along with the addition, the Doctors would also like to update both the interior and exterior of the existing clinic. The interior updates would include finishing the unfinished basement into a staff lounge and break room, replacing the flooring, repainting, and replacing all doors and trimwork. Exhibit A Page 117 of 184 SIP Project Narrative & Statement of Design Intent | 2 The exterior updates would include replacement of windows and exterior doors throughout, re- landscaping the front of the clinic, and painting the existing and new brick exterior to match. The ADA sidewalk will also need to be reconfigured to allow for the new addition and entrance. The proposed addition does not meet the front setback façade requirement per section 35-2302.d. The existing building is set back roughly 50’-0” from the lot line. For this addition to be compliant, the addition would need to be 40’-0” deep. This would be far more space and expense than the doctors need and want. The Doctors would like to use a LP or Hardie product in a board and batten style configuration for the addition. This would be non compliant with section 35-2302.d. Their request is to have the existing exterior brick be painted to match the color of the new LP or Hardie board and batten. They would like to add more texture and different materials to the building’s exterior if possible. The front façade transparent glazed areas requirement per section 35-2302.d will be met. The glazed area percentage on the proposed front façade is 112.10sf, or 55%. In conclusion, this project would be a great addition to the Brooklyn Blvd corridor. It creates aesthetically pleasing exterior elements to the existing elevations, while offering additional operating room to the practice, staff and patients. This would help Brooklyn Blvd Dental continue to better serve quality dental care to the Brooklyn Center community for years to come! Applicant/Preparer Contact Information: Josh Juaire Calco Comprehensive Development LLC 13055 Riverdale Dr NW Coon Rapids, MN 55448 (612)-636-8148 josh@calcocd.com Owner Contact Information: Marty Spanish, DDS Brooklyn Blvd Dental (952)-239-2569 mspanish@brooklynblvddental.com Page 118 of 184 Page 119 of 184 Page 120 of 184 Page 121 of 184 Page 122 of 184 Page 123 of 184 C001COVER DMPDESIGNED: LIC. NO.: DATE: DAVID M. POGGI DRAWN: CHECKED: DMP DMP44573 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. 04-21-2025 CIVIL METHODS, INC. P.O. Box 28038 St. Paul, MN 55128 o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.com DATE / REVISION:SHEET NO: PRELI M I N A R Y NOT F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 04-21-2025 Preliminary Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 4/ 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 1 8 P M Pr i n t D a t e : Fi l e L o c : C: \ C M \ C i v i l M e t h o d s , I n c \ C M I - D o c u m e n t s \ 7 . P r o j e c t s \ 2 5 0 2 0 _ B r o o k l y n B l v d D e n t a l \ 0 8 _ D R A W I N G S A N D S P E C I F I C A T I O N S \ C 3 D \ S h e e t s \ C 0 0 1 _ C o v e r . d w g BROOKLYN BLVD DENTAL ADDITION 5831 BROOKLYN BLVD BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR BROOKLYN BLVD DENTAL ADDITION BROOKLYN CENTER, MN APRIL 2025 INDEX NOTES PROJECT TITLE Feet 0 200 400 OWNER: Brooklyn Blvd Dental 5831 Brooklyn Blvd Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 SURVEY: Kurth Surveying, Inc. 4002 Jefferson St NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Attn: Randy Kurth Ph: (763) 788.9769 randy@kurthsurveyinginc.com CIVIL: Civil Methods, Inc. PO Box 28038 St. Paul, MN 55128 Attn: Dave Poggi, PE Ph: 763.210.5713 dave.poggi@civilmethods.com BUILDER / DEVELOPER: CALCO Comprehensive Development 10355 Riverdale Dr, Ste 500-220 Coon Rapids, MN 55448 Attn: Josh Juaire Ph: 651.792.7950 josh@calcocd.com CITY / TOWNSHIP: City of Brooklyn Center City Hall 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Ph: 763.569.3300 VICINITY MAP CONTACTS LEGEND: X.X% CO CO Page 124 of 184 M16 M24 M26 G G G G 69.13 32 . 8 6 8. 3 7 28 . 2 0 23.07 S 0 ° 3 4 ' 1 2 " E S89°13'23"W 48 . 9 7 N0 0 ° 1 2 ' 5 7 " E 40.47 N 1 4 ° 1 2 ' 5 3 " W 1 0 4 . 0 2 10' 5' D & U EASEMENT PER PLAT 1 0 ' D & U E A S E M E N T P E R P L A T S 0 ° 3 4 ' 1 2 " E DR A I N A G E A N D U T I L I T Y EA S E M E N T P E R P L A T 5' D & U EASEMENT PER PLAT 20' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT 1 0 ' D & U E A S E M E N T P E R P L A T CONCRETE CURB WALL B I T U M I N O U S CONCRETE CURB WALL WALL WA L L SIGN TRASH AREA TRASH AREA 5' D & U E A S E M E N T P E R P L A T B I T U M I N O U S 2.3 ± 10 6 . 5 1 N 89°20'53"E 1 0 7 . 7 5 181.78 8 6 0 . 4 0 x 8 6 1 . 3 4 x 8 6 0 . 3 4 x 28.23 N89°49'12"E S2 6 ° 5 3 ' 1 7 " W 32 . 6 8 B R O O K L Y N B O U L E V A R D ( C O U N T Y R O A D N O . 1 5 2 ) 10' B I T U M I N O U S C36 1 0 ' D & U E A S E M E N T P E R P L A T C101EXISTING CONDITIONS & REMOVALS FEET 0 20 40 DMPDESIGNED: LIC. NO.: DATE: DAVID M. POGGI DRAWN: CHECKED: DMP DMP44573 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. 04-21-2025 CIVIL METHODS, INC. P.O. Box 28038 St. Paul, MN 55128 o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.com DATE / REVISION:SHEET NO: PRELI M I N A R Y NOT F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 04-21-2025 Preliminary Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 4/ 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 1 8 P M Pr i n t D a t e : Fi l e L o c : C: \ C M \ C i v i l M e t h o d s , I n c \ C M I - D o c u m e n t s \ 7 . P r o j e c t s \ 2 5 0 2 0 _ B r o o k l y n B l v d D e n t a l \ 0 8 _ D R A W I N G S A N D S P E C I F I C A T I O N S \ C 3 D \ S h e e t s \ C 1 0 1 _ R e m o v a l s . d w g BROOKLYN BLVD DENTAL ADDITION 5831 BROOKLYN BLVD BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 “ ” LEGEND: Page 125 of 184 M26 G G G G 69.13 32 . 8 6 8 . 3 7 28 . 2 0 23.07 S 0 ° 3 4 ' 1 2 " E S89°13'23"W 48 . 9 7 N0 0 ° 1 2 ' 5 7 " E 40.47 N 1 4 ° 1 2 ' 5 3 " W 1 0 4 . 0 2 10' 5' D & U EASEMENT PER PLAT 1 0 ' D & U E A S E M E N T P E R P L A T S 0 ° 3 4 ' 1 2 " E DR A I N A G E A N D U T I L I T Y EA S E M E N T P E R P L A T 5' D & U EASEMENT PER PLAT 20' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT 1 0 ' D & U E A S E M E N T P E R P L A T CONCRETE CURB WALL B I T U M I N O U S CONCRETE CURB WALL WALL WA L L SIGN TRASH AREA TRASH AREA 5' D & U E A S E M E N T P E R P L A T B I T U M I N O U S 2.3 ± 10 6 . 5 1 N 89°20'53"E 1 0 7 . 7 5 181.78 8 6 0 . 4 0 x 8 6 1 . 3 4 x 8 6 0 . 3 4 x 28.23 N89°49'12"E S2 6 ° 5 3 ' 1 7 " W 32 . 6 8 B R O O K L Y N B O U L E V A R D ( C O U N T Y R O A D N O . 1 5 2 ) 10' B I T U M I N O U S C36 1 0 ' D & U E A S E M E N T P E R P L A T C201SITE LAYOUT FEET 0 20 40 DMPDESIGNED: LIC. NO.: DATE: DAVID M. POGGI DRAWN: CHECKED: DMP DMP44573 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. 04-21-2025 CIVIL METHODS, INC. P.O. Box 28038 St. Paul, MN 55128 o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.com DATE / REVISION:SHEET NO: PRELI M I N A R Y NOT F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 04-21-2025 Preliminary Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 4/ 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 2 4 P M Pr i n t D a t e : Fi l e L o c : C: \ C M \ C i v i l M e t h o d s , I n c \ C M I - D o c u m e n t s \ 7 . P r o j e c t s \ 2 5 0 2 0 _ B r o o k l y n B l v d D e n t a l \ 0 8 _ D R A W I N G S A N D S P E C I F I C A T I O N S \ C 3 D \ S h e e t s \ C 2 0 1 _ L a y o u t . d w g BROOKLYN BLVD DENTAL ADDITION 5831 BROOKLYN BLVD BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 “ ” Page 126 of 184 M26 G G 20' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT 1 0 ' D & U E A S E M E N T P E R P L A T CONCRETE CURB WALLWALL SIGN N 89°20'53"E 181.78 1 0 ' D & U E A S E M E N T P E R P L A T “ ” LEGEND: X.X% C301GRADING & EROSION CONTROL FEET 0 10 20 DMPDESIGNED: LIC. NO.: DATE: DAVID M. POGGI DRAWN: CHECKED: DMP DMP44573 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. 04-21-2025 CIVIL METHODS, INC. P.O. Box 28038 St. Paul, MN 55128 o:763.210.5713 | www.civilmethods.com DATE / REVISION:SHEET NO: PRELI M I N A R Y NOT F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 04-21-2025 Preliminary Review Set. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 4/ 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 2 8 P M Pr i n t D a t e : Fi l e L o c : C: \ C M \ C i v i l M e t h o d s , I n c \ C M I - D o c u m e n t s \ 7 . P r o j e c t s \ 2 5 0 2 0 _ B r o o k l y n B l v d D e n t a l \ 0 8 _ D R A W I N G S A N D S P E C I F I C A T I O N S \ C 3 D \ S h e e t s \ C 3 0 1 _ G r a d i n g . d w g BROOKLYN BLVD DENTAL ADDITION 5831 BROOKLYN BLVD BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 Page 127 of 184 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Details for CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING May 29, 2025 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Please take notice that the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center will hold an in-person public hearing on Thursday, June 12, 2025 at approximately 7:00 p.m. Meeting materials can be accessed by visiting the City of Brooklyn Center's website at:https://www.brooklyncentermn.gov/. A denite time for this application to be considered cannot be given as it will depend on the progression of the agenda items. TYPE OF REQUESTS: Variances and Site and Building Plan Amendment APPLICANT -- PROPERTY OWNER: MMS Properties LLC PROPERTY ADDRESS -- PID: 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 -- 03-118-21-13-0101 BRIEF STATEMENT OF CONTENTS OF PETITION: The Applicant and Property Owner proposes a renovation of the existing, approximately 4,015-square foot Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic, and an approximately 780-square foot addition to accommodate a larger patient waiting and reception desk area, three patient operatories, and an ADA compliant restroom. As the existing building is non-conforming with respect to setbacks, certain variances are requested from Sections 35-2302 and 35-5100 of the City Code. Comments and questions may be forwarded to gmcintosh@brooklyncentermn.gov up until 4:30 pm on the day of the meeting, or by contacting Ginny McIntosh at (763) 569-3319. Your comments will be included in the record and addressed as part of the meeting. Alternatively, you may participate in the Planning Commission meeting via Webex at:logis.webex.com Meeting Number (Access Code): 2630 868 3321 Password: BCPC06122025 By Phone: 1 (312) 535-8110 (Enter Access Code) Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at (763) 569-3300 to make arrangements. Respectfully, Ginny McIntosh Planning Manager Published in the Sun Post May 29, 2025 1472438 Save Share Exhibit B Page 128 of 184 City of Brooklyn Center | 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy | Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 | (763) 569-3330 | www.brooklyncentermn.gov Community Development 763-569-3330 June 10, 2025 5831 Brooklyn Blvd Bldg Building review comments for a newly proposed addition to Brooklyn Blvd Dental and located at 5831 Brooklyn Blvd. 1.Prior to a Building permit being issued a SAC determination for the addition will need to be completed by Met Council and SAC determination letter received. 2. Separate permits and signed plans required for Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical & Fire sprinkler permit are required to be submitted to the Building Department for this building review. The Community Development Department must be contacted on all proposed signage for this building. Permits are required for all exterior signage. 3.An accessible route from the existing parking lot (North) shall be provided at a slope of 1:20 & 48” inches in width. MN Accessibility 305.5 Provisions for new construction shall apply to additions. Where an alteration /addition affects the accessibility to or contains an area of primary function, the route to the primary function area shall be accessible. 4. The building will be required to have a sprinkler system installed if not already installed. City of Brooklyn Center ordinance 3-101 B. (2) as adopted by the Minnesota State Building code 1306 Special Fire Protection system 1306.0020 Subp. 2, Existing and New buildings. Group “B” occupancies with 2,000 gross square feet of floor area. 8.Signed building plans and building permit application to be submitted to the City Building Department for review. If any items need to be addressed, comments will be provided in a plan review letter addressed to the architect of record. Sincerely, Dan Grinsteinner Building Official City of Brooklyn Center 763-569-3313 Exhibit C Page 129 of 184 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2025-005 FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 780-SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION OF THE BROOKLYN BLVD DENTAL CLINIC AND ASSOCIATED VARIANCES (5831 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD) WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005, submitted by MMS Properties LLC (“the Applicant”) requests review and consideration of an application requesting site and building plan approval for an approximately 780-square foot expansion of the existing approximately 4,005-square foot dental clinic located on the approximately 1.03-acre Subject Property for an approximately 4,785-square foot building; and WHEREAS, Section 35-7601 (Applicability) requires site and building plan approval in cases where the construction or erection of a new building or addition to an existing building would result in an increase in gross floor areas of more than 10 percent and the proposed clinic expansion would result in a 19.5 percent increase to the overall gross floor area; and WHEREAS, amendments to the approved site and building plan of 25 percent or less change in gross floor area would be considered a minor amendment, but the Applicant’s request for certain variances automatically moves the building modifications into a major site and building amendment per Section 35-7605 (Amendments); and WHEREAS, the existing building is centrally located on an approximately 1.03-acre parcel and the Subject Property slopes downhill to the west; and WHEREAS, at the time of its construction, the existing approximately 4,005-square- foot building was constructed at an approximate 50-foot setback, which at the time was a typical minimum front yard setback required for properties abutting major thoroughfares like Brooklyn Boulevard (County Road 152); and WHEREAS, the City’s new Unified Development Ordinance, adopted in January 2023, rezoned the Subject Property from C1 (Service/Office) District to MX-N2 (Neighborhood Mixed-Use 2) District, and instituted new dimensional standards as provided for under Sections 35- 2302 (MX-N2— Neighborhood Mixed Use) and 35-5100 (Dimensional Standards Summary), including a maximum allowable front build-to setback of between 5 and 20 feet, and the Applicant requests an approximately 24.3 setback along Brooklyn Boulevard for a deviation of approximately 4.3 feet; and WHEREAS, the Applicant further requests a variance from a requirement that at least 50% of the first floor of the front façade of the primary building be located not more than ten (10) Page 130 of 184 RESOLUTION NO. feet from the front lot line for a deviation of approximately 14.3 feet; and WHEREAS, City staff acknowledges that in order for the Applicant to comply with the new dimensional standards the existing building would need to be nearly doubled in size in order to meet the maximum allowable front build-to setback and requirement that at least 50% of the first- floor façade be located not more than 10 feet from the front lot line; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota held a duly noticed and called public hearing on June 12, 2025, whereby a planning staff report was presented and public testimony regarding Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005 were received; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota considered the major amendment to the site and building plan and variance requests in light of all testimony received, the guidelines and standards for evaluating the requested major amendment to the site and building plan under Section 35-7604 (Site and Building Plan Approval Criteria) and variances contained in Section 35-7100 (Variance) of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance, the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, as well as information provided by the Applicant with respect to the proposed use’s operations and need for expansion, and the request generally satisfies the criteria outlined within the above Sections; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota finds as follows regarding Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005, as submitted by Applicant MMS Properties LLC: a) The proposed building expansion and site improvements will comply with all applicable requirements of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance, with exception of the requested variances to allow for the building expansion; b) The proposed building expansion and site improvements adequately protect residential uses from the potential adverse effects of a non-residential use; c) It is consistent with the use and character of surrounding properties along Brooklyn Boulevard; d) It provides safe conditions for pedestrians or motorists and prevents the dangerous arrangement of pedestrian and vehicular ways; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, subdivision 6, the City Council further finds as follows: a) The requested variances are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance; b) The variances are consistent with the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan; c) The Applicant proposes to use the Subject Property in a reasonable manner permitted by the City’s Unified Development Ordinance; Page 131 of 184 RESOLUTION NO. d) The plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the Subject Property and not created by the landowner; and e) The variances would not alter the essential character of the locality in which the Subject Property is located. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that it hereby approves Planning Commission Application No. 2025- 005 for the requested major amendment to the site and building plan and certain variances to the front build-to setbacks that would allow for an approximately 780-square foot expansion of the Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic and related site improvements at the Subject Property addressed as 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard, conditioned on compliance with all of the following: 1. Any major changes or modifications to this site and building plan, and as outlined within the City Code, can only be made by an amendment to the approved site and building plan and approval by City Council. 2. The Applicant shall revise the submitted plans to provide a connection between the private sidewalk and public multi-use trail. 3. The building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 4. The Applicant shall work to ensure all applicable Minnesota Fire Code requirements have been met as part of any site and building plan approval and any proposed modifications. 5. A SAC determination shall be submitted by the Applicant to the Metropolitan Council and any associated fees paid at time of any building permit issuance. 6. The Applicant shall revise the submitted photometric plan to identify any new building or site lighting as part of the proposed addition and a fixture schedule, with lighting in compliance with Section 35-5400 (Exterior Lighting) of the City Code. 7. The Applicant shall comply with Section 35-5600 (Landscaping, Screening, and Fences) and revise the provided site plan as necessary to identify any preserved plantings and ensure any new planting locations are not within identified utility easements or over underground utility lines. a. The Applicant shall ensure an irrigation system is in place or install a new system where necessary to facilitate maintenance of site landscaping and green areas, and an irrigation shop drawing shall be provided for review and approval prior to installation. 8. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or ground mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view per City Code requirements and a detail sheet provided. 9. The Applicant shall comply with all conditions identified by the City of Brooklyn Center Engineering Division. 10. The Applicant shall submit a sign permit application for any proposed or relocated signage (e.g. wall, freestanding) and receive issuance of a permit prior to any installation. All signage shall conform to Section 35-6000 (Signs) of the City Code. Page 132 of 184 RESOLUTION NO. June 23, 2025 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Page 133 of 184 City Council Meeting| June 23, 2025 Ginny McIntosh, Planning Manager Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005— MMS Properties LLC Page 134 of 184 2 Requested Action Property Owner MMS Properties LLC (“the Applicant”) is requesting review and consideration of a proposal that would renovate the existing, approximately 4,005-square foot Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic, located at 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard (“the Subject Property”), and construct an approximately 780-square foot addition to accommodate a larger patient waiting and reception desk area, three patient operatories, and an ADA -compliant restroom. As the existing building is non-conforming with respect to setbacks, certain variances are requested from Sections 35-2302 and 35-5100 of the City Code. •Subject Property (Acres): 1.03 •Zoning District: Neighborhood Mixed -Use 2 (MX-N2) •2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Designation: N-MU Page 135 of 184 3Page 136 of 184 4 1969 2024 Page 137 of 184 5 Background •City staff have been in ongoing discussions with project representative Josh Juaire of Calco Comprehensive Development regarding plans for the expansion of the Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic since last year. •The Subject Property originally received site and building plan approval in 1968 under Planning Commission Application No. 68048 for a commercial (office) building in what was formerly the City’s C1 (Service/Office) District. •The existing building, which was constructed in 1970, has always operated as a dental clinic. The current practice has been in operation since 2000 and provides dental care to hundreds of patients in and around Brooklyn Center. •While they love their location, they have reached the point where they require additional space. They propose construction of an addition, as well as an interior renovation and build-out of the existing clinic building. The owners would also undertake an exterior refresh to modernize the building. Page 138 of 184 6 Site and Building Plan Select Architectural Renderings of Proposed Addition. Page 139 of 184 7 Site and Building Plan Proposed Building Addition for Subject Property (in red) | Property Line (in gold) Page 140 of 184 8 Proposed Interior Layout for Building Addition (in red). Site Design •The Applicant proposes a buildout of walkout basement, which would serve as a dedicated staff lounge and break room, as well as new office space. Other updates identify floor replacement, new paint, door and trim work. •The exterior updates, as currently contemplated, would include the replacement of all existing windows and doors, new landscaping along Brooklyn Boulevard, and painting of the brick. •The existing sidewalk would be re-routed to accommodate the proposed addition and new entrance but would comply with any ADA requirements (e.g. ADA parking and loading, accessible route). Site and Building Plan Page 141 of 184 9 Site and Building Plan Parking | Circulation | Access |Connection •There are no plans to alter the existing parking lot, which wraps around the building on three sides. •The existing parking lot provides 41 parking spaces, and the provided plans identify two (2) dedicated ADA parking spaces with a shared loading space. Section 35-5506 (Required Parking Spaces) requires the following for “medical and dental clinics: •The Applicant plans to re -configure the layout of the existing private sidewalk to better serve the proposed addition and front entrance, City staff noted a gap in sidewalk connection from the front entrance to the sidewalk. City staff is requesting the Applicant tie in the private sidewalk to the public multi-use trail. •Assuming three (3) dentists, 12 clinic staff, and a new total square footage of approximately 4,785 square feet, a maximum of 31 parking spaces would be required under current code. Page 142 of 184 10 Site and Building Plan Lighting •A photometric plan was not provided as part of the application submittal. •In reviewing the existing site lighting, City staff observed existing, non-conforming building lighting. The building currently provides floodlight lighting around the building with what appear to be security cameras. Wall pack and floodlight-style lighting are not permitted except for loading and service areas per Section 35-5400 (Exterior Lighting). •City staff requests the Applicant provide a photometric plan with a lighting fixture schedule identifying any new building or site lighting (e.g. bollards, wall sconces). •Site lighting should provide consistent levels of illumination, avoiding pockets of high or low levels of illumination. •For primary building entrances/exits and pedestrian pathways, including the reconfigured sidewalk, the following minimum illumination requirements apply: Page 143 of 184 11 Site and Building Plan Trash and Screening •Existing trash enclosure is in fair condition, no corrections required at this time. •All ground mounted equipment over 30-inches in height or greater than 12-cubic feet (e.g. transformers, mechanical) shall be effectively screened from public view. Similarly, any existing or new roof-mounted equipment shall also be screened from view through the use of parapets, wall/fencing materials, or paint compatible and complementary to the building. Page 144 of 184 12 Site and Building Plan Architectural Materials •The Applicant is still working through the building materials for the proposed addition, but is interested in using an LP or Hardie board-type siding product in a board and batten configuration to help break up the brick. Any brick would be painted to match the siding product. •City Code requires the exterior wall finishes on any building to have no less than 60-percent face brick, natural or colored stone, pre -colored or factory stained or stained on site textured pre -cast concrete panels, textured concrete block, stucco, glass, fiberglass, or similar materials. The existing building is majority comprised of brick and glazing. •Section 35-2302 requires each ground floor façade for a non-residential use facing a public right-of-way to have transparent windows or other transparent glazed areas covering at least 50 percent (%) of the ground floor façade area between three (3) and eight (8) feet above sidewalk grade (no heavily tinted or black glass windows. •The Applicant notes in their narrative that the glazed area percentage of the proposed front façade is 55-percent (%) of the identified ground floor façade area. Page 145 of 184 13 Site and Building Plan Landscaping •City staff unable to locate any originally approved landscape plan. City’s mixed -use zoning districts utilize project valuation system for determining minimum landscaping requirements. •Applicant provided plan sheet which outlines removal of two (2) trees to accommodate addition. Applicant would install fragrant sumac or small green velvet boxwood in the front yard, two (2) new sunburst honey locusts, and Karl Foerster along the addition. •Applicant should revise site plan to include all existing and new landscaping and irrigation system is required . Signs •No specific signage requests were made as part of the Application, and there is an existing freestanding sign along Brooklyn Boulevard. •All signage will need to comply with the allowances as outlines in the adopted City signage regulations. Page 146 of 184 14 Additional Reviews •City Engineering reviewed the submitted plans in May 2025 and provided commentary regarding the proposed expansion. No major concerns were identified. •Building Official conducted a cursory review on June 10 of the submission and provided the following comments: •Fire sprinkler/monitoring system requirements •ADA regulations to be met with respect to building and site improvements — sidewalk reconfiguration, ADA parking •SAC determination from Metropolitan Council Page 147 of 184 15 Variances •The Applicant is requesting approvals for certain variances to forward their request for expansion. #1 #2 Page 148 of 184 16 Variances •Variances may only be granted when the Applicant for the variance establishes there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance provisions. Pursuant to MN State Statutes 462.357, subdivision 6, City Council may only grant approval of a variance where “practical difficulties” exist as to the strict compliance of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance and each of the following criteria must be satisfied: 1.The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance. 2.The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3.The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Unified Development Ordinance. 4.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. 5.The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Page 149 of 184 17 Summary •A public hearing was held at the Planning Commission meeting on June 12, 2025. •City staff did not receive public comments prior to the meeting, and no members of the public spoke during the hearing. •Project Representative Josh Juaire of Calco Comprehensive Development was present at meeting and available for questions. •Planning Commissioners inquired on necessity of sidewalk connection to public trail and if alternative building materials had been contemplated for the building addition/exterior renovation . •Additional Commissioner comments noted the City of Brooklyn Center and surrounding owners have put a lot of time and money into improving Brooklyn Boulevard over the past years and for the Applicant to continue that level of effort by making the expansion as aesthetically pleasing and functional as possible. •Additional comment by Commissioner noted the clinic has been in the City for a very long time as a loyal citizen, even when the area wasn’t well kept. As the business serves a need, the Commissioner wanted to make sure the City provides a path for them to make improvements and remain in the City. •Planning Commission elected to unanimously (5-0) recommend City Council approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005. Page 150 of 184 18 Requested Council Action Motion to approve Planning Commission Application No. 2025-005 for an approximately 780-square foot expansion to the Brooklyn Blvd Dental Clinic located at 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard and associated variances, based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, as amended by the Conditions of Approval. Page 151 of 184 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 6/23/2025 TO: City Council FROM: Shannon Pettit, City Clerk THROUGH: Daren Nyquist, Deputy City Manager BY: Barb Suciu, City Clerk SUBJECT: Ordinance 2025-07 Establishing Chapter 23-2750 in the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events (First Reading) Requested Council Action: -Motion to approve the first reading of Ordinance 2025-07 Establishing Chapter 23-2750 in the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events. Background: Tonight is the first reading of an ordinance regulating Temporary Cannabis Events. This new ordinance is a result of the State Legislature legalizing cannabis. All regulations for cannabis are in Chapter 342 of the State Statutes. This ordinance requires a permit for any/all Temporary Cannabis Events that will be held in Brooklyn Center. There will be an application process that all organizers must complete before an event can be held. There could be special services incurred with the permit, as well as documentation. The permit will be similar to our Special Events permits. Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Temp Cannabis Events PowerPoint 2. Temp Cannabis Events Ordinance Page 152 of 184 Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 23-2750 of the City Code to Regulate Temporary Cannabis Events (Minnesota Statutes Chapter 342) 1st Reading City Council Meeting, June 23, 2025 Page 153 of 184 Background 2 •The State established the Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) to create statutes and licensing processes. The OCM released the Local Guide for Adult-Use Cannabis in August 2024 and held the Licensing Lottery on June 5 for social equity and general applicants. •City Council approved the Cannabis Business Licensing Ordinance, which was effective June 7, 2025. •Staff continues working on ordinance creation and changes to comply with the OCM statutes and licensing processes. Page 154 of 184 Background 3 •City Staff and the City Attorney worked together to update the ordinance to comply with all OCM standards and regulations while keeping the requirements and language similar to that of the Special Event permits and requirements. Page 155 of 184 Licensing Parameters: 4 •Any person or organization desiring to hold a Temporary Cannabis Event in the City of Brooklyn Center must apply for a permit. •Application must be filed a minimum of 45 days prior to the event. •Events with an anticipated attendance of 1,000 people or must apply a minimum of 90 days prior to the event •One week (7 days) prior to the event, the organizer must submit proof of state licensure. •Organizer must provide proof of liability insurance and automobile insurance (if required). Page 156 of 184 Licensing Parameters: 5 •Required documentation: ü Application/Form ü Diagram of Event Site ü Security and Emergency Plan ü Parking and Traffic Plan ü Special Services (if any) ü Sound Amplification (if any) Page 157 of 184 Licensing Regulations: 6 •May not be held on City-owned property or school property. •If held outdoors, may not be held on property within 500 feet of a residential property or treatment facility. (Measurement to be made from the entrance of each building or tenancy.) •May not be held at any single location more than four (4) times in a calendar year or for more than three (3) consecutive days. •Events can only be held between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Page 158 of 184 Licensing Regulations: 7 •On-site consumption of edible cannabinoid products and lower- potency hemp products is permitted; however, on-site consumption of alcohol or tobacco is not permitted pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 342.40, Sub. 8(d). •Applicant must provide a 10-day notice to residents within 500 feet of the event. Page 159 of 184 Proposed Fee Schedule 8 •Cannabis Temporary Event Permit Application Fee - $100.00 Cannabis Enforcement and Violation Fees will mirror those which was approved for the Cannabis Retail Registration Fines as shown in the diagram. Page 160 of 184 9 Questions? Page 161 of 184 1 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the ___ day of ___, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard to consider an ordinance related to tenant protections. Please notify the City Clerk at 763-569-3306 if there are any questions about how to connect to the meeting. Auxiliary aid for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763-569-3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. 2025- AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CHAPTER 23-2750 TO REGULATE TEMPORARY CANNABIS EVENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Article I. Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 23, is amended by adding the following double- underlined language and deleting the following stricken language: Section 23-2750; TEMPORARY CANNABIS EVENT REGULATIONS Section 23-2751. PURPOSE AND FINDINGS. The City of Brooklyn Center makes the following legislative findings: A.Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to protect the public health, safety, and welfare in the City by implementing regulations pursuant to M.S. §342 related to cannabis and hemp businesses within the City. B.Findings. The City finds and concludes that these regulations are appropriate and lawful, that the proposed amendments will promote the community’s interest in reasonable stability in the development and redevelopment of the City for now and in the future, and that the regulations are in the public interest and for the public good. Section 23-2752. DEFINITIONS. Unless otherwise noted in this section, words and phrases contained in M.S. §342.01 and the rules promulgated pursuant to any of these acts shall have the same meaning in this ordinance. A.Applicant means the entity with a license issued by the Office of Cannabis Management that is applying for a Temporary Cannabis Event Permit. Page 162 of 184 2 B. Cannabinoid Products means a cannabis product, a hemp-derived consumer product, or a lower-potency hemp edible as defined in M.S. §342.01. C. Residential Treatment Facility means any facility licensed or regulated by the Minnesota Department of Human Services that provides 24-hour-a-day care, lodging, or supervision outside a person's home and which also provides chemical dependency or mental health services. D. School means a public school, as defined in M.S. §120A.05, subd. 9, 11,13, and 17, or a nonpublic school, or church or religious organization in which a child is provided with instruction in compliance with this section and M.S. §120.24 but does not include a home school. E. Special Services means the exclusive allocation of city resources, including, but not limited to, city personnel, equipment, rights-of-way, property or facilities for use in conjunction with a specific event or activity, as requested by the host or sponsor of the event, or as requested by or on behalf of any person attending the event, or deemed necessary by city staff in order to maintain public safety. Special Services shall include, but not be limited to, any of the following: street closures; requiring police officers to stop or reroute traffic; special police protection; stationing emergency vehicles at or in the immediate vicinity of the event; exclusive use of city streets or property as a staging area or for event parking; additional street cleaning and garbage removal services; special signage, such as temporary no parking signs; the use of any city building, equipment or other property for any purpose other than the normal operations of the facilities; or the City otherwise providing exclusive services. F. Temporary Cannabis Event means a special event, held on public or private property, hosted by an individual or an organization holding a Temporary Cannabis Event Organizer license issued under M.S. §342.39. G. Temporary Cannabis Event Organizer means an individual or an organization licensed by the State of Minnesota to hold a Temporary Cannabis Event, as described in M.S. §342.39 and 342.40. Section 23-2753. TEMPORARY CANNABIS EVENT, PERMIT REQUIRED. Any person or organization desiring to hold a Temporary Cannabis Event in the City must first obtain a Temporary Cannabis Event Permit. Section 23-2754. PERMIT APPLICATION. Page 163 of 184 3 A.Form. Any person or organization desiring to hold a Temporary Cannabis Event must apply for a permit using the application provided. Incomplete applications will be returned to the applicant with details on how to make the application complete. In addition to other relevant information, the application must contain the following: 1.Applicant name, address, phone number; 2.Address of proposed Temporary Cannabis Event; 3.Name of property owner, if different from applicant, and signature of property owner authorizing use of property for the Temporary Cannabis Event; 4.A copy of the application for a Temporary Cannabis Event Organizer license submitted to the Office of Cannabis Management under, and meeting the requirements of, M.S. §342.39, subd. 2; 5.A diagram of the Temporary Cannabis Event showing: a. Location and description of sanitary facilities meeting federal and state requirements; b. Location and description of solid waste disposal facilities meeting state and local regulations; c. Location and description of mobile food vending to be offered at the Temporary Cannabis Event; proof of license and permit for vending must be submitted at least seven days prior to the event and kept on site for immediate inspection. 6.Security: In addition to meeting the requirements of M.S. §342.40, subd. 3, the City may require the applicant to employ, at their own expense, additional security personnel necessary to protect a maximum number of persons permitted to attend the event and to preserve order in and around the event site as determined by the City. No permit shall be issued unless the City police and fire departments have approved the security plan. Pursuant to Rules 9810.1500, Subpart 9, a Cannabis Business must maintain video surveillance of all premises associated with the business license and ensure that video surveillance is active during the entirety of any temporary cannabis event held onsite. At Temporary Cannabis Events, the video surveillance equipment must be mounted in a manner to record activity occurring in the area accessible to the public, including any designated retail areas and points of entry and exit. Page 164 of 184 4 7.Emergency Plan: Applicant shall provide the City with an emergency plan that details procedures for managing or responding to emergencies as required by the Minnesota State Fire Code. In addition, for events where there is a possibility for more than 1,000 people to congregate, the applicant shall provide trained crowd managers. The minimum number of crowd managers shall be established at a ratio of one crowd manager to every 250 persons. Where approved by the official fire code, the ratio of crowd managers may be permitted to be reduced only when the facility is fully equipped with an approved automatic sprinkler system or based upon the nature of the event. The emergency plan and the number of crowd managers must be approved by the fire department. 8.Parking and Traffic Plan: The City will require the applicant to submit a parking and traffic plan and provide, install, and remove all traffic control equipment if necessary. Applicants are required to pay all costs for traffic control measures and traffic control personnel. Applicants must provide individual property owner consent if the Special Event will have off-site parking. 9.A description of any Special Services, city personnel, city equipment, and city property which the applicant requests the City to provide, including the applicant's estimate of the number and type needed, and the basis on which the estimate is made. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains sole discretion to determine the number and type of Special Services required for the event. 10.Whether the Temporary Cannabis Event intends to permit on-site consumption. 11.Whether the Temporary Cannabis Event intends to charge a fee. 12.If the applicant proposes using sound amplification or a public address system or if there will be any playing of any music or musical instruments, the identity of the designated individual responsible for monitoring sound levels and the name and contact information for a person on-site during the event that will be able to respond to noise complaints. B.Time for filing. A Temporary Cannabis Event permit application must be filed with the City at least 45 days in advance of the date in which the Temporary Cannabis Event is to occur. Applications received less than 45 days in advance of the date of the event will be rejected. C.Permit fee. An applicant for a Temporary Cannabis Event permit must pay a nonrefundable permit fee in the amount established by the City's fee schedule. Section 23-2755. PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW. A.Special Services. The City shall determine whether Special Services may be necessary, and the cost for such Special Services. Page 165 of 184 5 B.Review. When a Temporary Cannabis Event will not require any Special Services, the City Manager, or their designee, may review and approve the permit application administratively. In cases where a. Temporary Cannabis Event requires Special Services, the application will be presented to the City Council for review. C.Imposition of Conditions. The City Manager, or their designee, may impose reasonable restrictions on the issuance of a Temporary Cannabis Event permit. D.Permit Denial. The City may deny an application for a Temporary Cannabis Event permit if it determines from a consideration of the application or other pertinent information that: 1.The information contained in the application or supplemental information requested from the applicant is false or nonexistent in any material detail; 2.The applicant fails to supplement the application after having been notified by the City of additional information or documents needed; 3.The applicant fails to agree to abide by or comply with all the conditions and terms of the Temporary Cannabis Event permit, including payment of all costs and expenses; 4.The Temporary Cannabis Event would substantially or unnecessarily interfere with traffic in the City, would interfere with access to the fire station or fire hydrants, or would interfere with access to businesses or residences in the immediate vicinity of the event and there are not sufficient city resources available at the time of the event to mitigate the disruption; 5.The Temporary Cannabis Event is of the size or nature that requires the diversion of so many law enforcement officers to properly police the event, site and contiguous areas that allowing the Temporary Cannabis Event would unreasonably deny law enforcement protection to the remainder of the City and its residents; 6.The proposed date and time of the Temporary Cannabis Event conflicts with a previously scheduled event and there are not available at the time of the proposed Temporary Cannabis Event sufficient city resources to provide services for both events without substantially or unnecessarily interfering with police, fire, water, public works, or other services to the City as a whole; 7.The location of the Temporary Cannabis Event will substantially interfere with any construction or maintenance work scheduled to take place upon or along public property or right-of-way; 8.The Temporary Cannabis Event would likely endanger the public safety or health; Page 166 of 184 6 9.The Temporary Cannabis Event would substantially or unnecessarily interfere with police, fire, water, public works, or other services to the City as a whole and there are not available at the time of the proposed event sufficient city resources to mitigate the disruption; 10.The applicant fails to comply with the liability insurance requirements, or the applicant's insurance lapses or is canceled; and 11.The applicant has, on prior occasions, made material misrepresentations regarding the nature and extent of Special Services required for a Temporary Cannabis Event in the City or has violated the terms of a prior Temporary Cannabis Event permit. E.Right of Appeal. If the Temporary Cannabis Event permit application has been denied, the applicant may appeal the decision to the City Council. The applicant must provide the City Manager with a written notice of appeal within five business days of the date of denial. Section 23-2756. FEES FOR SPECIAL SERVICES. A.Special Services Fee. The applicant must pay the costs of all Special Services used during the Temporary Cannabis Event. Such costs will be established in the City's Fee Schedule. At the discretion of the City Manager, the applicant may be required to pay a Special Services fee deposit based on estimated costs of the Special Services to be provided at the Temporary Cannabis Event, Deposits are due at the time of application. Section 23-2757. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE. A.If the Temporary Cannabis Event requires Special Services, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Cannabis Event permit, the permit applicant and authorizing officer of the sponsoring organization, if any, must sign an agreement to indemnify, defend and hold the City, its officials, employees, and agents harmless from any claim that arises in whole or in part out of the Temporary Cannabis Event, except any claims arising solely out of the negligent acts or omissions of the City, its officials, employees and agents. B.General Liability Insurance Required. The applicant must possess or obtain General Liability insurance to protect against loss and damages on account of bodily injury or property damage arising from the Temporary Cannabis Event. A certificate of insurance must be filed with the City prior to issuance of the Temporary Cannabis Event permit. The certificate of insurance must name the City, its officials, employees and agents as additional insured. Insurance coverage must be maintained for the duration of the Temporary Cannabis Event. Any company hired or working on behalf of the applicant or sponsor must also present the City Page 167 of 184 7 with a certificate of insurance naming the City, its officials, its employees, and agents as additional insurers. C.Minimum Limits. Insurance coverage must be a commercial general liability policy. The minimum limit must be at least $2,000,000 for any single occurrence. If on-site consumption is permitted at the Temporary Cannabis Event, the policy must also include an endorsement for such consumption. The City may require additional endorsements depending upon the type of Temporary Cannabis Event and the proposed activities. The liability policy must include the City as an additional insured. D.Waiver or Reduction of Required Limits. The City may waive or reduce insurance requirements of this section under circumstances, including but not limited to, the inability of the applicant of officer of the sponsoring organization to secure insurance coverage, or the insurance requirements are more than the reasonable risk presented by the proposed Temporary Cannabis Event. Section 23-2758. TEMPORARY CANNABIS EVENT REGULATIONS. A. Location Restrictions. 1.May not be held on City-owned property or school property; 2.If held outdoors, it may not be held on property within 500 feet of a residential property or a residential treatment facility; 3.May not be held at any single location more than four (4) times in a calendar year. A.A Temporary Cannabis Event may not be held for longer than three (3) consecutive days; B.Hours Restrictions: Temporary cannabis events shall only be held between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. C.On-site consumption of edible cannabinoid products and lower-potency hemp products is permitted. D.Pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 342.40 Subdivision 8(d), on-site consumption of alcohol or tobacco is not permitted. E.No person holding a permit for a Temporary Cannabis Event shall allow, and no participant in a Temporary Cannabis Event shall camp overnight at the location of a Temporary Cannabis Event, except for a reasonable number of persons required to maintain security. F.No person shall make or cause to be made any distinctly and loudly audible noise that Page 168 of 184 8 unreasonably annoys, disturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace, safety or welfare of any person, or precludes their enjoyment of property or affects their property's value. This general prohibition is not limited by the specific restrictions contained in the City Code, Section 19-1200. If amplified music and/or speaking is utilized, the following requirements must be met: 1.The applicant must have designated a person affiliated with the Temporary Cannabis Event that is responsible for monitoring sound levels and has the authority to ensure that sound does not exceed 80 decibels as measured 50 feet from the property line, or 50 feet from the source, whichever is more restrictive. 2.The amplified music and/or speaking can only be for a period of four hours or less between the hours of 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m. Monday-Friday, and 9:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m. on weekends and legal holidays. Amplified speakers are required to be positioned in a way to limit noise to the surrounding residential areas. 3.The applicant must have provided at least two names and valid and current contact information for on-site contacts at the event that will be able to respond to noise complaints and ensure that noise generated at the site complies with this chapter. G.Smoking and vaping are prohibited. No person shall smoke or vape any product, including cannabis flower, cannabis products, and lower-potency hemp products, or use any cannabis or lower-potency hemp-related or electric delivery devices at a temporary cannabis event. H.Cleanup: Applicant shall, at no cost to the City, immediately clean up, remove, and dispose of all litter or materials of any kind that are placed or left on the premises because of the event, or be charged the hourly rate of the employee for cleanup. I.Notice to Residents: Applicant must provide a 10-day notice to residents within 500 feet of the event. For events that occur over a course or a route, the applicant shall attempt to notify the public. The City will provide the applicant with the mailing list. If amplified music and/or speaking are utilized, such notification must include the name and contact information of the person on-site during the event that will be able to respond to noise complaints. J.All Temporary Cannabis Events must follow all requirements of M.S. §342.01, et seq., and all city policies related to special events. Section 23-2759. ENFORCEMENT. A.Misdemeanor: Any person who violates this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, is subject to a fine and imprisonment as prescribed by state law. Each day each Page 169 of 184 9 violation continues or exists constitutes a separate offense. B.Administrative fine: Any person who violates this chapter is subject to administrative fines in an amount set forth in the City fee schedule. Each 24-hour period each violation continues or exists constitutes a separate offense. C.Violation of any provision of this Chapter shall also be grounds for revocation of the Temporary Cannabis Event Permit, denial of any future application for a Temporary Cannabis Event permit, and action against any City-issued business license held by the Temporary Cannabis Event Organizer. Section 23-2760. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect following its passage and publication in accordance with state law. _____________ __ Date April Graves, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ City Clerk (Strikeout indicates matter to be deleted, double-underline indicates new matter.) Page 170 of 184 Council Regular Meeting DATE: 6/23/2025 TO: City Council FROM: THROUGH: BY: Kat Ellgren, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Liquor Store 2 Discussion Requested Council Action: Background: Budget Issues: Inclusive Community Engagement: Antiracist/Equity Policy Effect: Strategic Priorities and Values: ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2025 Liquor Lease Renewal Page 171 of 184 Liquor Store #2 Lease Renewal Options October 8, 2018 Review City Council Meeting, June 23, 2025 Angela Holm, Finance Director Greg “Woody” Keehr, Liquor Operations ManagerPage 172 of 184 Staff Responses to Council inquiries •What impact does “shrink” have on operations? •Shrink can be either on paper (count issues) or actual missing product. Between 2017 and 2024, other than 2021, shrink represents less than 0.5% of total gross sales, with several years below 0.2% • Is there enough cash to pay the bond? •No, there currently is not enough cash in the Liquor Fund to fully pay the bond should municipal liquor operations cease entirely. The bond principal due is $2.0M. The fund currently has approximately $1.0M in cash. Cash from ongoing operations will be used to make the bond payment each year. •What is the financial impact of focused purchasing? •Focused purchasing enables staff to make large purchases, often of highly desirable products, at a reduced per item price. The reduced supplier cost enables staff to place the items on sale or have lower shelf pricing and still maintain a profit margin on the item. •There is not one single price point, profit margin, or pricing structure as the items purchased change in response to consumer demand. 2Page 173 of 184 Liquor Store #2 Lease Background ØCurrent Lease was originally intended as a “bridge” while staff evaluated options for purchase of a building for Store #2 ØExpires June 30, 2025 ØBuilding a new building or buying an existing building is not a viable option at this time ØStaff propose staying at the current location and entering into a new lease agreement ØStaff have negotiated an amendment(s) to the existing lease 3Page 174 of 184 Lease Option 1 – Ten Year Term Advantages •5-Year Base Rent Lock •Maintains the same rent for first five years •Increase in lease cost of 2% annually for remaining five years •Rent credits to offset cost of air conditioner replacement costs (allows for replacement of all five rooftop units) •Allows for longer-term strategic planning •Promotes staff stability Drawbacks •Longer term may be concerning if operational results do not perform as forecasted 4Page 175 of 184 Lease Option #2 – Five Year Initial Term Advantages •Five Year Term with five-year renewal option •5-Year Base Rent Lock Disadvantages •Increase to the current rental rates •Reduced rent credits for air conditioner replacement – will limit replacement to two or three units •Increase in lease cost of 3% annually for remaining five years 5Page 176 of 184 Lease Option #3 – Three Year Initial Term Advantages •Three Year Term with seven-year renewal option •3-Year Base Rent Lock Disadvantages •Increase to the current rental rates •Reduced rent credits for air conditioner replacement – will limit replacement to one or two units •Increase in lease cost of 3% annually for remaining seven years 6Page 177 of 184 Lease Option #4 – One Year Term Advantages •Short term lease would allow for flexibility in the event operational results are not as forecasted Disadvantages •No Base Rent Lock for future amendments •Increase to the current rent •Unknown increase in lease cost for additional years •No rent credits for air conditioner replacement •Staff Retention concerns •Ongoing lease negotiations required 7Page 178 of 184 Lease Option Comparison 8Page 179 of 184 Lease Option Total Cost Comparison 9Page 180 of 184 Store #2 Projected Net Income 10Page 181 of 184 Staff Recommendations •Reservations regarding a ten-year lease are understood. Staff still recommend this as the most cost-effective option •The one-year lease option is not recommended as the instability and uncertainty of this short-term lease may be counter-productive to improved operations •The three-year lease, with the related renewal option, should provide sufficient time for staff to determine if the operational changes made at both stores will produce sustained positive results 11Page 182 of 184 Requested Council Action 12 Approve a Resolution Authorizing a Lease Amendment for Liquor Store #2 Page 183 of 184 13 Questions ? Page 184 of 184