Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999 07-26 CCP Regular Session • CITY COUNCIL MEETING Public Copy City of Brooklyn Center July 26, 1999 AGENDA I 1. Informal Open Forum With City Council - 6:45 p.m. - provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes, it is not televised, and it may not be used to make personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Open Forum will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made but, rather, for hearing the citizen for informational purposes only. 2. Invocation - 7 p.m. - Pastor Judy Fornara, Spiritual Life Church 3. Call to Order Regular Business Meeting 4. Roll Call 5. Council Report 6. Ap of Agenda and Consent Agenda rr � � -The following items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Council Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes - Councilmembers not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from the vote on the minutes. 1. Study Session - July 12, 1999 2. Regular Session - July 12, 1999 b. Licenses C. Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 1999- 05, Contract 1999 4, 53rd Avenue Trail - Fence Columns d. Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 1999- 05, Contract 1999 -K, 53rd Avenue Trail - Fence is e. Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Trees CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- July 26, 1999 7. Planning Commission Item a. Planning Commission Application No. 99006 Submitted by Mark and Katarina Peschel. Request for a Variance from the Critical Area Interim Development Regulations to allow a building setback less than 100' from the ordinary high water mark of the Mississippi River at 6830 Willow Lane. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its July 15, 1999, meeting. -Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve Planning Commission Application No. 99006 subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. 8. Council Consideration Items a. Hearing on Denial of Application for Currency Exchange License for Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers, 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center -Requested Council Action: -Open Hearing. -Close Hearing. . - Motion to approve or disapprove application. b. Mayoral Appointment to Northwest Hennepin Regional Human Rights Commission - Requested Council Action: - Motion to ratify Mayoral nomination. C. Resolution Amending the Schedule for Amusement Device License Fees - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. d. Set Date and Time of Facilitated Council Work Session with Carl Neu - Requested Council Action: - Motion to set Saturday, September 18, 1999, 8:00 a.m. for facilitated Council work session. e. Preliminary Report on Traffic Review - Requested Council Action: - Discussion and review. f. Update on Brooklyn Center Cares - Requested Council Action: -City Manager will provide verbal update. 9. Adjournment City Council Agenda Item No. 6a 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 JULY 12, 1999 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER STUDY SESSION The Brooklyn Center City Council met in study session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 6:04 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Debra Hilstrom, Kay Lasman, Ed Nelson, and Robert Peppe. Also present: City Manager Michael J. McCauley, Assistant City Manager/HR Director Jane Chambers, Community Development Director Brad Hoffman, Public Works Director Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Recording Secretary Maria Rosenbaum. 1. DISCUSSION OF AGENDA ITEMS Council discussed agenda item 8g, Brooklyn Boulevard Street and Enhancement Projects. City Manager Michael McCauley asked the Council if they would like to explore further options for underground utilities. It was the consensus of the Council for staff to pursue further options for underground utilities. Council discussed other agenda items and what the purpose was of agenda item 8e, Set Date of Hearing on Denial of Application for Currency Exchange License for Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers, 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center. Mr. McCauley informed the Council that the purpose of this item on the agenda was to set date of hearing for July 26, 1999. 2. DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL BROOKPARK DENTAL EXPANSION Community Development Director Brad Hoffman discussed the potential Brookpark Dental expansion. Park Dental has outgrown their current facility and are looking to construct a new office preferably in the same location. Park Dental has requested the City to use its power of eminent domain to acquire the property at 6421 Brooklyn Boulevard. Park Dental would in turn pay all expenses associated with the acquisition including relocation. 07/12/99 -1- DRAFT Mr. Hoffman informed the Council that discussions are taking place with the surrounding property owners for this potential expansion and that the property owners will be notified if this item were to come before the Council for approval. Mr. McCauley asked the Council if they would like staff to proceed with this project and produce a development agreement for approval by the Economic Development Authority (EDA). It was the consensus of the Council for staff to proceed with this project and bring back for approval at the July 26, 1999, EDA meeting. 3. MISCELLANEOUS Councilmember Hilstrom raised the issue of having police officers wear different colored shirts when patrolling with the radar gun on streets. Mr. McCauley said that orange vests may be an option. Mr. McCauley distributed a letter received from Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council regarding the next CO -OP Northwest meeting and discussed the City needs to determine if this can be funded or justified for 2000. 5. ADJOURNMENT The study session adjourned at 6:44 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 07/12/99 -2- DRAFT ® 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 JULY 12, 1999 CITY HALL 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM The Brooklyn Center City Council met in informal open forum and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 6:45 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Debra Hilstrom, Kay Lasman, Ed Nelson, and Robert Peppe. Also present: City Manager Michael J. McCauley, Assistant City Manager/HR Director Jane Chambers, Public Works Director Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Recording Secretary Maria Rosenbaum. S Mike Gandrud, 5319 Dupont Avenue North, addressed the Council regarding the water utility billing charges. He wanted to know why the City of Brooklyn Center's charges are so high. Mr. McCauley explained the minimum billing charges and how they are calculated. Mr. McCauley offered to have a breakdown prepared and Mr. Gandrud said there was no need, he understood the reasoning behind the charges. ADJOURN INFORMAL OPEN FORUM A motion by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to adjourn the informal open forum at 6:49 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 2. INVOCATION A moment of silence was observed. 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7:00 p.m. 07/12/99 -1- DRAFT 4. ROLL CALL 0 Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Debra Hilstrom, Kay Lasman, Ed Nelson, and Robert Peppe. Also present: City Manager Michael J. McCauley, Assistant City Manager/HR Director Jane Chambers, Public Works Director Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Recording Secretary Maria Rosenbaum. 5. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Lasman reported that she attended a Year 2000 meeting and a town meeting represented by Phil Carruthers and Linda Scheid on July 8, 1999. Councilmember Nelson commended the Charter Commission on the recent report received and their efforts. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA A motion b Councilmember Nelson seconded b Councilmember Lasman to approve the agenda Y � Y pp g and consent agenda. Motion passed unanimously. 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to approve the minutes from the regular session on June 28, 1999. Motion passed unanimously. 6b. LICENSES A motion by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to approve the following list of licenses. Motion passed unanimously. AMUSEMENT DEVICE - OPERATOR Americinn Motel and Suites 2050 Freeway Boulevard Chi -Chi's 2101 Freeway Boulevard Hilton Minneapolis North 2200 Freeway Boulevard K -Mart 5930 John Martin Drive Nickels and Dimes, Inc. 1328 Brookdale Center AMUSEMENT DEVICE - VENDOR Kiddie Rides International 3801 East 50th Avenue, Denver, CO Mendota Valley Amusement, Inc. 9177 E. Courthouse Blvd. Ct., Inver Grove Theisen Vending Company 3800 Nicollet Avenue South, Minneapolis 07/12/99 -2- DRAFT • GARBAGE COLLECTION VEHICLE A W Disposal P.O. Box 115, Norwood Aagard Environmental 3291 Terminal Drive, Eagan Aspen Waste Services, Inc. 2523 Wabash Avenue, St. Paul Midwest Grease Buyers, Inc. P.O. Box 26, Redwood Falls T & L Sanitation Service, Inc. P.O. Box 34695, Blaine MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Cronstroms 6437 Goodrich Avenue, St. Louis Park Gilbert Mechanical Contractors, Inc. 4451 West 76th Street, Edina RENTAL DWELLING Renewal: Ann Rockler Jackson 1329 63rd Lane North D & J Properties 5843 Fremont Avenue North SIGN HANGER Signcrafters 7775 Main Street NE, Fridley 6c. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES . RESOLUTION NO. 99 -107 Councilmember Nelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. 6d. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ARCHITECT'S FEASIBILITY REPORT AND AUTHORIZING THE DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -19, REHABILITATION OF WELLHOUSE NOS. 5 AND 6 RESOLUTION NO. 99 -108 Councilmember Nelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: r 07/12/99 -3- DRAFT RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ARCHITECT'S FEASIBILITY REPORT AND AUTHORIZING THE DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -19, REHABILITATION OF WELLHOUSE NOS. 5 AND 6 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7a. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 6,11, 21, AND 23 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES ADDING SECTIONS REGARDING COMPUTERIZED CRIMINAL HISTORY AND DRIVER'S LICENSE HISTORY INQUIRIES City Manager Michael McCauley discussed this ordinance amendment would authorize the City of Brooklyn Center to conduct computerized criminal inquires and driver's license inquiries on job applicants and various license applicants. The Police Department is capable of conducting such inquires through the Criminal Justice Information System; however, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension requires that the City authorize the inquiry by ordinance. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. No one wished to address the Council. , A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Nelson to close the public hearing. Motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 99 -12 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 6, 11, 21, AND 23 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES ADDING SECTIONS REGARDING COMPUTERIZED CRIMINAL HISTORY AND DRIVER'S LICENSE HISTORY INQUIRIES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Councilmember Nelson. Motion passed unanimously. 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 07/12/99 -4- DRAFT • 8a. FINANCIAL COMMISSION AND PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE STRUCTURAL AND ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES AT THE CIVIC CENTER 1. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENGAGEMENT OF ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER ADDITION Donn Escher, Financial Commission Chair, and Don Peterson, Park and Recreation Commission Vice - Chair, each addressed the Council and presented adopted resolutions from their respective Commissions recommending the option to build a Community Service Center Addition. Mr. McCauley gave an overview of the process which started approximately one year ago. The City hired an architect who identified issues that needed to be addressed. Some of the issues raised relating to City Hall were the heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and the installation of ducted returns. The roof has reached its useful life and needs to be replaced at City Hall. There is inadequate wall insulation and poor windows. The Council Chambers has inadequate cable casting equipment and poor audio visual capabilities. There is structural cracking in corridor to assessing area. There are non - compliant cables from past systems that are flammable that need to be removed, and there are electrical service needs that need to be upgraded to handle increased electronics. At the Community Center the wading pool requires reconstruction of separate filtration system and other improvements. There is also deteriorating brick along the south wall, poor ventilation, and brick deterioration in penthouses on Community Center. Both buildings do not provide access to meet current standards or even reasonable access to programs and rest room facilities. The City is well past dates for compliance and planning to meet issue with the Americans With Disabilities Act. Three options were designed from the above listed issues addressed: Design 1 Do what has to be done to fix the buildings and use the space vacated by police. Design 2 Address accessibility at the Community Center by creating a functional 1st floor entrance and locker area. Design 3 Address accessibility by providing a new building, rather than substantially invest in extending the life of the existing City Hall and provide the 1 st phase of a master plan to replace the Community Center when the life of the pool is used and the bonds for police and fire are retired to free up bonding capacity. • 07/12/99 -5- DRAFT The three design options were discussed with the Financial Commission and the Park and Recreation • Commission. Both Commissions adopted resolutions to pursue the option to construct a new building adjacent to the Community Center. Council discussed soil boring issues and the funding available. RESOLUTION NO. 99 -109 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENGAGEMENT OF ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR COMMUNITY CENTER SERVICE CENTER ADDITION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. 8b. RESOLUTION UPDATING FINANCIAL COMMISSION DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Mr. Escher explained the history of the Financial Commission and the reasoning for updating the p rY g p g duties and responsibilities of the Commission. He streamlined portions of the resolution before the Council and shared that he enjoyed volunteering to serve on the Financial Commission. RESOLUTION NO. 99 -110 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION UPDATING FINANCIAL COMMISSION DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Nelson. Motion passed unanimously. 8e. COMMERCIAL ZONING REORGANIZATION Mr. McCauley requested direction from the Council on forwarding to the Planning Commission for its recommendation on ordinance changes for the following four suggested commercial zones and permitted uses: Central, Neighborhood, Highway/Industrial, and Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. McCauley suggested having the Planning Commission outline and identify current uses and recommend reorganization to the four suggested zones and bring back to the Council in approximately five or six months. 07/12/99 -6- DRAFT Councilmember Hilstrom asked if staff would be looking into a moratorium. Mr. McCauley responded that the City Attorney may provide a report on a moratorium; however that may not be what the City wants to do. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom, seconded by Councilmember Nelson to refer this issue to the Planning Commission. Motion passed unanimously. 8d. RESOLUTION URGING CONTINUED FUNDING OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM Mr. McCauley discussed this resolution would request the Minnesota members of the House and Senate Delegations to support continued funding of CDBG Funds to allow for the many worthwhile programs that are undertaken by cities that would have to be discontinued without this Federal local partnership. Mayor Kragness also suggest residents to write their Representatives. RESOLUTION NO. 99 -111 Councilmember Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: ® RESOLUTION URGING CONTINUED FUNDING OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Nelson. Motion passed unanimously. 8e. SET DATE OF HEARING ON DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR CURRENCY EXCHANGE LICENSE FOR COMMUNITY MONEY CENTERS, INC. DBA MONEY CENTERS, 6219 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD, BROOKLYN CENTER Mr. McCauley requested to set hearing for July 26, 1999, on denial of application for the currency exchange license for Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers, 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Nelson to set July 26, 1999, for hearing. Motion passed unanimously. • 07/12/99 -7- DRAFT 8f. PROCLAMATION DECLARING AUGUST 1, 1999, TO BE BLUE AND WHITE SUNDAY Mayor Kragness discussed that Woodcrest Baptist Church of Fridley requested the City Council declare August 1, 1999, to be Blue and White Sunday to express the gratitude for outstanding performance of all local Law Enforcement personnel by honoring them on Blue and White Sunday. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to adopt proclamation declaring August 1, 1999, to be Blue and White Sunday. Motion passed unanimously. 8g. STAFF REPORT RE: BROOKLYN BOULEVARD STREET AND ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS Public Works Director Diane Spector updated the Council on the Brooklyn Boulevard street and enhancement projects. She discussed there had been minor adjustments to the plans since the Council last reviewed them for technical reasons and in a few cases to minimize right -of -way takings. Plans have been submitted to Mn/DOT State Aid for initial review. The review process should take one to two months and when the initial review is complete, Consulting Engineers OSM, will modify the plans to reflect State Aid's comments. The final version of the plans will be submitted to the City for review and approval by the City Council in September. On the enhancement portion of the project considerable discussions have taken place between staff, consulting engineers BRW and Cain Ouse, Mn/DOT State Aid, and NSP regarding the proposed street lighting, and how to administer the various parts of the project now that it has technically been rolled into the roadway project for sun setting purposes. Ms. Spector discussed that an agreement has been reached with State Aid that the enhancements portion of the project will be completed in three packages or phases and discussed each package /phase. A motion by Councilmember Nelson, seconded b Councilmember Hilstrom to accept report. Y p P Motion passed unanimously. 8h. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1999 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO SUBSTITUTE MISCELLANEOUS BITUMINOUS IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FOR SEALCOATING Mr. McCauley discussed this resolution would amend the 1999 general fund budget to substitute miscellaneous bituminous pavement improvement projects for sealcoating. Sealcoating is not anticipated now in 1999 or 2000. With the street reconstruction projects, sealcoating would be directed in 2001 to newer streets. The patching and cracksealing will continue. 07/12/99 -8- DRAFT • RESOLUTION NO. 99-112 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1999 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO SUBSTITUTE MISCELLANEOUS BITUMINOUS IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FOR SEALCOATING The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Nelson. Motion passed unanimously. 8i. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -20, AZELIA AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS Mr. McCauley discussed this resolution would establish the next step of the Joslyn site development for Wickes. The plan is to expand the street width on commercial property and not on the residential side of the street. Council discussed the traffic in the Azelia area and if residents would be notified if Mn/Dot goes forward with the project. Mr. McCauley responded input from the residents in the immediate area will continue to be solicited. s RESOLUTION NO. 99 -113 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -20, AZELIA AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. 8j. REPORT ON POLICE AND FIRE BUILDING PROGRESS Mr. McCauley reported that it is anticipated that the building will be ready for staff to move in between the middle of August and early September. 8k. SET DATE FOR MEETING WITH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Mr. McCauley suggested setting July 26, 1999, 5:30 p.m. at 5701 Shingle Creek Parkway (1 st floor board room) for meeting with Chamber of Commerce. • 07/12/99 -9- DRAFT A motion by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to set July 26, 1999, 5:30 p.m. at 5701 Shingle Creek Parkway. Motion passed unanimously. 81. SET TIME AND DATE OF FACILITATED COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mr. McCauley suggested Thursday, September 16, 1999, for a facilitated Council work session. Council discussed other possible dates and it was the consensus of the Council to set Saturday, September 18, 1999, for a facilitated Council work session. The time will be determined later. This item will be on the agenda again for Council approval. 9. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adj ourn the meeting at 8:11 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. City Clerk Mayor 07/12/99 -10- DRAFT • City Council Agenda Item No. 6b City of Brooklyn Center • A great place to start. A great place to stay. MEMORANDUM TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Maria Rosenbaum, Deputy City Clerk DATE: July 21, 1999 SUBJECT: Licenses for Council Approval The following companies /persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each company /person has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective licenses, submitted appropriate applications, and paid proper fees. Licenses to be approved by the City Council on July 26, 1999: GARBAGE COLLECTION VEHICLE Browning Ferris Industries 8661 Rendova Street NE, Circle Pines RENTAL DWELLING Initial: Douglas Anderson 2812 O'Henry Road Yurity Tsurkan 5701 James Avenue North Renewal: Helene Ebhardt 5639 Girard Avenue North Turning Point, Inc. 819 -21 55th Avenue North SIGN HANGER Let's Get Graphic Design, Inc. 8290 Main Street NE, Fridley Taurus Sign Company 1046 Wakefield Avenue, St. Paul 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer City Council Agenda Item No. 6e MEMORANDUM DATE: July 21, 1999 G TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Michael Krech, Public Works Specialist SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 1999- 05, Contract 1999 -I, 53rd Avenue Trail - Fence Columns Summary Explanation Project No. 1999 -05, Contract 1999 -I includes the construction of the fence columns which will be part of the field stone and metal fence that will be located between the houses along the new Bellvue Lane and the greenway along 53rd. Bids for Contract 1999 -I were received and opened on July 21, 1999. The bidding results are tabulated as follows: Bidder Bid Opened Amount Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. $103,382.00 Jay Bros., Inc. $106,900.00 Of the two (2) bids received, the lowest bid of $103,382.00 was submitted by Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. The total Engineer's Estimate was $62,625.00. While the bid is considerably greater than the engineer's estimate, this is the second time this contract has been bid, and bids are unlikely to get better. References provided by the low bidder have been contacted. Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. has proven experience in performing all of the requirements included in this contract. Accordingly, staff recommends acceptance of the low bid and award of the contract to Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. of Willmar, MN. Recommended City Council Action Approve the attached resolution accepting the low bid and awarding a contract to Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -05, CONTRACT 1999 -I, 53RD AVENUE TRAIL - FENCE COLUMNS WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1999 -05, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer on the 21st day of July, 1999. Said bids were as follows: Bidder Bid Or)ened Amount Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. $103,382.00 Jay Bros., Inc. $106,900.00 WHEREAS, it appears that Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. of Willmar, 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 Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. of Wilmar, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1999 -05, according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract is signed. • RESOLUTION NO. 3. The estimated project costs and revenues are as follows: COSTS Engineer's Estimate As Amended Per Low Bid Contract $62,625.00 $103,382.00 Contingency(10 %) $6.262.50 $ 10.338.20 Subtotal Construction Cost $68,887.50 $113,720.20 Admin/Legal /Engr. $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $70,387.50 $115,220.20 REVENUES EDA $70,387.50 $115,220.20 Total Estimated Revenue $70,387.50 $115,220.20 i 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. City Council Agenda Item No. 6d • MEMORANDUM DATE: July 21, 1999 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Michael Krech, Public Works Specialist) SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 1999- 05, Contract 1999 -K, 53rd Avenue Trail - Fence Summary Explanation Project No. 1999 -05, Contract 1999 -K includes the construction of the fence which will be part of the field stone and metal fence that will be located between the houses along the new Bellvue Lane and the greenway along 53rd. The fence will be installed after the fence columns have been installed under Contract 1999 -I. Bids for Contract 1999 -K were received and opened on July 21, 1999. The bidding results are tabulated as follows: Bidder Bid Opened Amount Town & Country Fence $44,562.50 Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. $46,143.00 Jay Bros. Inc. $115,500.00 Of the three (3) bids received, the lowest bid of $44,562.50 was submitted by Town & Country Fence. The total Engineer's Estimate was $57,250.00. References provided by the low bidder have been contacted. Town & Country Fence has proven experience in performing all of the requirements included in this contract. Accordingly, staff recommends acceptance of the low bid and award of the contract to Town & Country Fence of Brooklyn Park, MN. Recommended City Council Action Approve the attached resolution accepting the low bid and awarding a contract to Town & Country Fence. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -05, CONTRACT 1999 -K, 53RD AVENUE TRAIL - FENCE WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1999 -05, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer on the 21st day of July, 1999. Said bids were as follows: Bidder Bid Ooened Amount Town & Country Fence $44,562.50 Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. $46,143.00 Jay Bros., Inc. $115,500.00 WHEREAS, it appears that Town & Country Fence of Brooklyn Park, 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 Town & Country Fence of Brooklyn Park, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1999 -05, according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract is signed. RESOLUTION NO. 3. The estimated project costs and revenues are as follows: COSTS EnLyineer's Estimate As Amended Per Low Bid Contract $57,250.00 $44,562.50 Contingency(10 %) $5.725.00 $4.456.25 Subtotal Construction Cost $62,975.00 $49,018.75 Admin/Le al /En r. 1 1 g g $ ,500.00 $ , 500.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $64,475.00 $50,518.75 REVENUES EDA $64,475.00 $50,518.75 Total Estimated Revenue $64,475.00 $50,518.75 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. City Council Agenda Item No. 6e MEMORANDUM DATE: July 21, 1999 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Joyce Gulseth, Public Works Administrative Aidei - SUBJECT: Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Trees The attached resolution represents the official Council action required to expedite removal of the trees most recently marked by the City tree inspector, in accordance with approved procedures. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and Diseased Tree Removal Agreement has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of Brooklyn Center giving the owners twenty (20) days to remove diseased trees on the owners' property; and WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of these diseased trees by declaring them a public nuisance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The diseased trees at the following addresses are hereby declared to be a public nuisance: TREE PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS NUMBER ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EDWARD & JEANETTE CAMERON 5318 NEWTON AVE N 115 JACOB OHLHAUSER 3301 49TH AVE N 116 TWIN LAKE MANOR 3311 53RD AVE N 117 WILLIAM & DONNA ZIESKA 5455 BROOKLYN BLVD 118 DANIEL SOFFA & JOHN KELLY 5801 BROOKLYN BLVD 119 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ACROSS FROM 6336 HUMBOLDT 120 JOY ANDERSON 1201 73RD AVE N 121 CLIFTON & LORI DELYSER 1601 73RD AVE N 122,123 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER EAST PALMER PARK 124 TERRIE PHILLIPS 4412 66TH AVE N 125 PATRICIA WEITZEL 4418 66TH AVE N 126 DONALD & ARLYS PULS 5219 WINCHESTER LANE 127 BROOK PARK FELLOWSHIP 4801 63RD AVE N 128, 129, 130 RENE & PATRICIA FERGUSON 6118 FREMONT AVE N 131 WARREN & DOROTHY BROWN 5622 COLFAX AVE N 132 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owner(s) will receive a second written notice providing five (5) business days in which to contest the determination of the City Council by requesting, in writing, a hearing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. All removal costs, including legal, financing, and administrative charges, shall be specially assessed against the property. RESOLUTION NO. 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 p assed and adopted. City Council Agenda Item No. 7a MEMO To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager From: Ronald A. Warren Planning nd Zoning S ecialist g g P •"'`' Subject: City Council Consideration Item - Planning Commission Application No. 99006 Date: July 21, 1999 On the July 26, 1999 City Council Agenda is Planning Commission Application No. 99006 submitted by Mark and Katarina Peschel requesting a Variance from the Critical Area Interim Development Regulations to allow a building setback less than 100' from the ordinary high water mark of the Mississippi River at 6830 Willow Lane North. Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning Commission Application No. 99006 and also an area map showing the location of the property under consideration, the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter and other supporting documents. This matter was considered by the Planning Commission at their July 15, 1999 meeting and was recommended for approval. It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the application subject to the recommendations of the Planning Commission. • O Application Filed On 7 -1 -99 City Council Action Should Be Taken By 8 -30 -99 (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 99006 Applicant: Mark & Katarina Peschel Location: 6830 Willow Lane Request: Variance The applicants are seeking a variance from the Critical Area Interim Development Regulations to construct a solarium addition on the rear of their home at 6830 Willow Lane. The variance request is from the 100 ft. setback from the normal high water mark of the Mississippi. River. The property in question is zoned R1 (single family residence) and is located on the east side of Willow Lane in the 6800 block. It is bounded on the east by the Mississippi River; on north and south by single family homes; and on the west by Willow Lane with single family homes located on the opposite side of that street. The Peschel property is within the State designated Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor District established in 1976 and is subject to the standard and guidelines contained in the Interim Development Regulations until the City adopts its own regulations for this area. Such regulations will be forthcoming as a revised Critical Area Plan is completed and an implementing ordinance is adopted. The interim regulations require that all structures be placed no less than 100 ft. from the normal or ordinary high water mark of the river and no less than 40 ft. from all blufflines. The objectives of these dimensional standards are to maintain the aesthetic integrity and natural environment, to reduce the effect of poorly planned shoreline and bluffline development, and to prevent soil erosion. The structure which is to be approximately 11 ft. x 14 ft. will be setback at least 40 ft. from the Mississippi River bluffline which is at an 830 ft. elevation. The ordinary high water mark is, as best as we can determine, 800.8 ft. and the addition would be approximately 77 ft. inland from that mark at the closet point. The interim regulations have been in place since at least 1976. The City has been responsible for the enforcement of the regulations but has done so by only requiring a 40 ft. building setback in areas along the river where there is a bluffline and using the 100 ft. ordinary high water setback in areas where there is no bluffline. The Peschel's home, which was built in 1979, was built using this manor of setback interpretation, thus the reason that the existing building is closer than 100 ft. to the normal or ordinary high water mark. • 7 -15 -99 Page 1 Mr. Mark Peschel approached the City in November and December of 1998 inquiring about a permit for a solarium addition that would also have encroached upon the 40 ft. bluffline setback. He was advised that the addition should be set back 40 ft. from the bluffline which has been determined to be at the 830 ft. elevation. He was directed to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) regarding questions as to the verification of the bluffline. He made such an inquiry in the spring of this year and area hydrologist, Tom Hovey reviewed the site on April 13th and responded to Mr. Peschel in a May 3, 1999 letter advising him that for the solarium to be constructed as proposed variances from the 40 ft. bluffline set back and from the 100 ft. ordinary high water mark setback would have to be granted by the City of Brooklyn Center. Mr. Peschel has had discussions with the City staff and has revised his plan so as to meet the 40 ft. bluffline setback and request a variance from the 100 ft. ordinary high water mark setback because no addition could be made whatsoever to the home and meet that setback. I have been advised, since Mr. Peschel's conversation with the DNR, that the proper interpretation of the Interim Development Regulations requires that both the bluffline and ordinary high water mark setbacks are to be applied unless a variance is granted by the City. Mr. William Hull, an attorney representing the Peschels, has provided written comments relative to their variance request and has provided a survey drawing showing the existing home, the proposed addition with the bluffline and ordinary high water mark elevations as well as photographs showing an outline of the proposed addition as well as views from and towards the river. Mr. Hull states his belief that the applicant's proposal will not adversely affect the stated S objectives of the dimensional standards and criteria of the Interim Development Regulations which are again, to maintain the aesthetic integrity and natural environment, to reduce the effect of poorly planned shoreline and bluffline development, and to prevent soil erosion. He notes the addition would be built at an elevation of 832 ft. which is 32 ft. above the ordinary high water mark of the river and would be built inland 77 ft. from this mark as well. The 40 ft. bluffline setback will be met and the addition will not be visible from the river because of surrounding trees, bushes and evergreens. He also notes that the addition will have less impact on the river than already existing neighboring structures that extend closer to the river than 40 ft. from the bluffline or 100 ft. from the ordinary high water mark. Attached for the Planning Commission's review is a copy of the Standards and Procedures for Zoning Ordinance Variances from the City of Brooklyn Center and information relating to the statutory prerequisites provided to us from the DNR relating to Minnesota Statutes 462.357, subdivision 6. Both of these items authorize variances that are in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance and regulations . The ordinance standards and the statutory prerequisites are for the most part the same. City Ordinance procedures state that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals (Planning Commission) may recommend, and the City Council may grant, variances from the literal is 7 -15 -99 Page 2 provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique and distinctive to the individual property under consideration. The Board will not recommend and the City Council will in no case permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the ordinance in the district where the affected persons land is located. The variance standards are as follows: (A) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific parcels of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out. (B) The conditions upon which the application for a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought, and are not common, generally to other Property within the same zoning classification. (C) The alleged hardship is related to the requirements of this ordinance and has not been created by any persons presently or. formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. (D) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. The applicants written arguments can be found on page 3 of the submitted letter where they address each of the specific standards, A - D. They believe the enforcement of the strict letter of the 100 ft. setback would pose a particular hardship on the owner and note the City's past interpretation of the bluffline and ordinary high water mark setbacks as being one or the other. They believe to now impose the 100 ft. setback as well as the 40 ft. setback would impose more restrictive requirements on the q applicants use of the property than on neighboring properties. They also note that the conditions upon which the variance request are based are unique to the Peschel property, are related to requirements of the setbacks applicable to the property and were not created by the Peschel's or previous owners. They also believe that because the bluffline is covered with trees, bushes and brush that the objectives of the setback can be accomplished by only enforcing the bluffline setback. They also note that the granting of the variance will, in their opinion, not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land in the vicinity. They add that the addition will have no impact on the shoreline and will not even be visible from the river. They state that neighboring properties encroach far more significantly on the shoreline and views of the river than does the proposed Peschel addition. In evaluating the variance proposal the Commission must make its decision based on the Standards for Variance provided. As the staff sees this matter, the key issue is whether or not the granting of the variance will adversely affect the stated objectives for which dimensional standards and criteria have been established in the Interim Development Regulations and that the granting of the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. The stated objectives of the Interim Development Regulations are that the setback requirements are to maintain the aesthetic integrity and natural environment, to reduce the effect of poorly planned shoreline and bluffline development and to prevent soil erosion. We do not see the granting of 7 -15 -99 Page 3 this variance to adversely affect these stated objectives. A hardship can be considered if the Peschel's cannot use their property in a manner consistent with other development along the river. Although it has been pointed out that the City's interpretation of the Interim Development Regulations require that both the bluffline and ordinary high water mark setbacks are to be applied it seems reasonable that the bluffline setback standard in this particular case is the most important. Granting the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality given the location of other structures and their impact on the river in this immediate neighborhood. The location of the solarium addition will not alter the character of the Mississippi River corridor as it will be appropriately setback from the established bluffline and will, for the most part, not be visible from the river. All in all we do believe the variance request is reasonable and is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance and the rules and regulations and therefore to not grant the variance would be considered a hardship to the Peschel's. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices of the Planning Commission's consideration of this variance request have been sent. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance request to allow a variance from the 100 ft. ordinary high water mark setback contained in the Interim Development Regulations for the Mississippi Critical Area on the basis that the standards for granting a dimensional variance are met, that the granting of the variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance and regulations and, furthermore, that the granting of the variance will not adversely affect the stated objectives of the dimensional standards of the Interim Development Regulations which are to maintain the aesthetic integrity and natural environment, to reduce the effect of poorly planned shoreline and bluffline development and to prevent soil erosion. ® 7 -15 -99 Page 4 1 V I z �1� L NOSN3r13 1 1 °� I I AV E. — I °► FREM AVE• _� L N '3AY I EMERSON AVE N L ��__ _ --- t—�+ =" _ DUPONT AVE N E A I I I I 1100 1_ Z COLFAX AVE N J 1 DUPONT AVE• N ! •�; 1000 10 '3AV XVj 100 1 _ : {� �y 13RYANT AVE N COLFAX AVE N' _ 900 •3AY IMKJB � ALDRIC}I AVE N gRYANT AVE. N � ,_.Y- � � I J' ; ,'\ '�'- -- 600 J i __- '3AI tDIlIOIV AFF I CAMDEN AVE N w . 700 7 3AY N3 = 1 > m�\ CAMDEN AVE. N 5TH AVE N N 3AY N30WD F�1 DR. I 1 I I i - --"'- ��_ �� . 14 'HIG TN 252 Ql 600 _ - -_ d > T i I I I I f L RS r - r ------ - wwrrrrrwwwrwwwr rr�rr�r�� W RIVER RD rrwrr rrrr ? Q1� __:wr�rrrrrr rrr . : 1 - �"' ---� •� - r rte. �=— w • WES? RIVER RD. 1 _ I DALLAS DAI RD Ly .�►�` a:r�•r� r rwr rr WILLOW LA. '� > ' I I ' — DALLAS RD RI 1 RIVERDALE RD WILLOW A. N. .. ,�. 200 00 �' , ` WILLOW LA i WILLOW LA. N. t R 0 DURM& 1S 0 ♦ ` .. '`- •• ,,, -TVER_ . Q CITY of RROOKLyH P O �•• . v o x x x m m rn m m m m m Z z z z z z z z z z z OF MIN/yF Minnesota Department of Natural Resources m W DNR Waters - Metro Region, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 -6793 9 �e Telephone: (651) 772 -7910 Fax: (651) 772 -7977 0 5 � May 3, 1999 Mark Peschel 6830 Willow Lane Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 RE: SETBACK VARIANCE, MISSISSIPPI RIVER CRITICAL AREA CORRIDOR, 6830 WILLOW LANE, BROOKLYN CENTER, HENNEPIN COUNTY Dear Mr. Peschel: This site is within the state - designated Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor District, _ established in 1976, and the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (MNRRA), a unit of the National Park System, established in 1988. The Department of Natural Resources works with local units of government to review and assist with ordinance development, implement the plan and ordinance, and review all developments within the Corridor which require a public hearing or discretionary action. In the case of Brooklyn Center, no regulations have yet been adopted to comply with the minimum standards and guidelines for the Critical Area. Under this situation, local units of government shall grant a development permit only if the development is specifically permitted by the Interim Development Regulations, including. Wherever there is a conflict between the Interim Development Regulations and existing laws or ordinances, the more restrictive provision shall apply. [IDR A. 3. b.] All structures and accessory uses or appurtenances of residential development shall be subject to the dimensional standards and criteria in section F of these Interim Development Regulations [IDR C.3.]. The objectives of dimensional standards and criteria are: to maintain the aesthetic integrity and natural environment, to reduce the effect of poorly planned shoreline and bluffline development, and to prevent soil erosion. Grading and filling provisions [IDR E. l.]. No clear cutting within 40 feet landward from blufflines. [IDR E. 2.]. All new structures shall meet the following minimum standards: the structure shall be placed no less than 100 feet from the normal highwater mark (ordinary high water level), and no less than 40 feet from all blufflines [IDR F. 4.]. DNR Information: 651 -296 -6157 - 1- 888 -646 -6367 - TTY: 651 -296 -5484 - 1- 800 - 657 -3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer Is Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a f Who Values Diversity W Minimum of 1o% Post- Consumer Waste Mr. Mark Peschel Page 2 May 3, 1999 New structures and additions to existing structures shall be limited to a maximum height of 35 feet. [IDR F. 5. a.] In response to the City's and your request, I met with you on -site on April 13, 1999 and verified the location of the bluff and made some measurements. The existing house, at the southeast corner, is 51 feet from the bluffline. The proposed addition to the house is 36.5 feet from the bluffline. Using a drawing from our files and our recent measurements, it appears that the existing house is approximately 87 feet from the ordinary high water level. The proposed addition will extend to approximately 72.5 feet from the ordinary high water level of the Mississippi River. It appears the development as proposed would not comply with the above regulations and would require two or more approved variances from the above Interim Development Regulations. Variances may only be granted by the City when in conformance with the hardship prerequisites of MN Statutes, Section 462.357 and those of the Critical Area Interim Development Regulations I. 3. If you intend to proceed with a development proposal that does not comply with the Critical Area regulations, the City's Zoning Staff should be able to give you more information. We appreciate the opportunity to assist with bluffline determination. Thank you for complying with the regulations to protect and preserve the Mississippi River Corridor. Please feel free to call if you have further questions. Sincerely, Tom Hovey Area Hydrologist cc: Ron Warren, City of Brooklyn Center Sandy Fecht, Critical Area/MNRRA Hydrologist • State of Minnesota - DNR Waters Comments Pages: 1 Date: 5 -10 -99 To: Ron Warren From: Sandy Fecht Critical Area /MNRRA Hydrologist cc: Fax: 651 - 296 -5939 Comments: ... I have reviewed the Interim Development Regulations again and have confirmed my interpretation that an OHW variance will be needed. No bluffline variance will be needed if the structure is placed 40 feet from the bluffline. I emphasize the following from the IDR, with interpretation in italics: All structures and accessory uses or appurtenances of residential development shall be subject to the dimensional standards and criteria in section F of these Interim Development Regulations [IDR C.3.]. The word, "Standards ", is plural, so all standards are to be complied with. All required setbacks shall be applicable to each bluffline proceeding landward from the river. All new structures shall meet the following minimum standards: the structure shall be placed no less than 100 feet from the normal highwater mark (ordinary high water level), and no less than 40 feet from all blufflines [IDR F. 4.]. Since the word, "and, " was used instead of "or, " both dimensional standards must be met, and met for all blufflines. If any dimensional standard cannot be met, then a variance is needed for each one which is not met. Let me know if my explanation is still weak. Thanks for the opportunity to confirm. COLEMAN, HULL & VAN VLIET A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1 0THERINE M. BERGENTHAL MARCIA B. HAFFMANS MICHAEL P. COATY 8500 NORMANDALE LAKE BOULEVARD ERIC R. HEIBERG JEFFREY W. COLEMAN SUITE 2110 TIMOTHY R. DUNCAN MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55437 WILLIAM D. HULL (612) 841 -0001 WILLEM F. VAN VLIET (1924 - 1996) FAx (612) 841 -0041 `ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN Direct Dial: (612) 841 -0201 wdhull @chvv.com July 1, 1999 HAND DELIVERED Board of Adjustments and Appeals City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Attention: Ron Warren RE: Request for Variance — Mark Peschel 6830 Willow Lane S Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Members of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals: Our law firm represents Mark Peschel. Mr. Peschel is a resident of Brooklyn Center residing with his wife at 6830 Willow Lane. Mr. Peschel's property is located on the Mississippi River. He is requesting a setback variance to allow him to construct a solarium on the back of his house. The solarium will be constructed primarily of glass and will be 11 feet wide. The property is subject to a 40 -foot setback from the bluff line and a 100 -foot setback from the normal high watermark. The proposed addition will be 40 feet from the bluff line, but only approximately 77 feet from the normal high watermark. The existing home is currently approximately 88 feet from the normal high watermark. Mr. Peschel is requesting a variance from the 100 -foot setback from the normal high watermark. Enclosed as Exhibit A is a survey drawing showing the existing home, the proposed addition, bluff lines, and water elevation. Also enclosed as Exhibits B1 through B4 are four photographs showing the existing home, an outline of the proposed addition, the view looking east towards the river, and a view looking west from an island is located in the river toward the subject property. June 28, 1999 Page 2 • I. A VARIANCE MAY BE GRANTED IF IT IS IN KEEPING WITH SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE. Minnesota Statutes § 462.357, subd. (6), and the City of Brooklyn Center's "Standards and Procedures for Zoning Ordinance Variances," both authorize variances from zoning ordinances, "that are in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance." Such is the case here. The objectives of the setback requirements are to maintain the aesthetic integrity and natural environment, to reduce the effect of poorly planned shoreline and bluff line development, and to prevent soil erosion. Mr. Peschel's proposed addition will not adversely affect any of those objectives. The proposed addition will be built at an elevation of 832 feet, 32 feet above the normal high watermark. It will be built 77 feet inland from the normal high watermark. It will be built on what is now a sodded portion of Mr. Peschel's backyard and will be 40 feet inland from the bluff line. Consequently, it will not contribute to any soil erosion. It is consistent with the setback's objective to reduce the effect of poorly planned shoreline development. This is a one -story addition to a two -story structure that is already in place. Many of the properties in the vicinity of Mr. Peschel's property already extend beyond the 40 -foot bluff line setback and the 100 foot high watermark setback. It is not a new development, but rather a minor addition to an existing structure. Finally, the addition will meet the objective of maintaining the aesthetic integrity and natural environment of the Mississippi River. As can be seen from the enclosed photographs, Mr. Peschel's backyard is surrounded by trees, bushes and evergreens. Consequently, the new addition will not be visible from the river. Since the proposed addition will be 32 feet above the river elevation and 77 feet inland from the shoreline, it will have no negative impact upon the aesthetic integrity and natural environment of the shoreline. II. THE PROPOSED ADDITION MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR GRANTING VARIANCES. Minnesota Statutes § 462.357, subd. (6), and the City of Brooklyn Center's "Standards and Procedures for Zoning Ordinance Variances" both permit variances under the following circumstances: (A) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific parcels of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the is strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out. June 28, 1999 Page 3 (B) The conditions upon which the application for a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought, and are not common, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. (C) The alleged hardship is related to the requirements of this ordinance and has not been created by any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. (D) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. Mr. Peschel's variance request meets all of these criteria. A. Enforcement of the strict letter of the 100 -foot setback requirement would impose a particular hardship on the owner. In the past, the City has interpreted the bluff line and high water setbacks as an either /or proposition. In other words, the City has in the past required that only one of the setbacks be met. To require both setbacks to be met in Mr. Peschel's case would impose more restrictive requirements on the use of his property than have been imposed on neighboring properties. In fact, several properties in the vicinity have structures that impact far more significantly on the river than Mr. Peschel's proposed addition. B and C. The conditions upon which this variance request are based are unique to Mr. Peschel's property, are related to requirements of the setbacks applicable to his property, and were not created by Mr. Peschel or any previous owner. Because Mr. Peschel's property has a bluff line that is covered with trees, bushes and brush, the objectives of the setbacks can be accomplished by enforcing only the bluff line setback. Furthermore, because of the dimensions of Mr. Peschel's property, enforcing the strict requirement of the high water setback and the 35 -foot street setback, would render his property virtually unusable. D. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land in the vicinity. As explained earlier in this letter, Mr. Peschel's proposed addition will have no impact on the shoreline and will not even be visible from the river. In addition, neighboring properties encroach far more significantly on the shoreline and views from the river, than Mr. Peschel's proposed addition. In summary, Mr. Peschel's request for a variance is consistent with the rY q purpose and intent of the bluff line and high water setbacks, will have no negative impact on the shoreline or views from the river, is consistent with the City's historical application of the • bluff line and high water setbacks, and will have far less impact on the river than structures on other properties in the vicinity. I have personally spoken with Tom Hovey, June 28, 1999 Page 4 area hydrologist for the DNR, who has visited the property. Mr. Hovey told me he has no objection to the proposed variance, and that the DNR would not challenge the City's decision if a variance were granted. For all of these reasons, we respectfully request that Mr. Peschel's variance request be granted. Very truly yours, C6 AN, rIULL &.VAN VLIET, PLLP William D. Hull WDH/vk Enclosures cc: Mr. Mark Peschel • JUN -07 -99 11:40 FROM:AXEL H OHMAN INC ID:612 661 3247 PAGE 11/16 r elf.- — - r r r _ p /, �� llft i .00 i Stu F . j f � 132 •r � iC•f , � � l :� i i.. r -•.�.� - i.i^ _,;,�....�.,�� ' � +: r �\ - \ I � f I Al . cap ft Al l ! tt r t.� ers. mo d' / -i .Shs. � � � 1 ` 1 t , f •, • O 1 t1t i' °..__ _ ` . `!I't +r�' f t r ' It t it l:tt Q � I • � t! 1 � i � t t 1 0 . ' t• 1 ti ' i 1 S vi 1 f t � ��' 4l' Dili Iltl .�, t. 9 i1� I� t i S r 6 0 • '_ s 1 I' .4 �t , ftrr � on 4hr5 i �; 'Vq ... rT K t .Rp , l � a Y 1� { .- _^ .ty� ^�, " ^� ; ° }' `c } t�" n• � -.,a..., w'ePit ..v �✓, a - r� 1 �t, i key sl �� i 'Po r 'S6 l i ul 4 5 k Y � TF 0.1 lGY� {;� +,1}.�; ,�A. < n � r '� i� '_'W+ah➢YLL.: ?i.Y''''F /A. :SYrtj� � �1 t~ _. � ! ... • r x w f) .1`�t t i � W ! y U 0, A. r` jo r k -;- U. V4.4 i♦ �4 f '�+ U. � •� r r * . 3• r f;• � r �; � � ♦T of .+,; ,_ +' �.. -. t� ir X .X � Jc 'A'?:'.. v +...F � .c , 5'F °: i' a• an �: IF Ov - f ' At r � o _'^w.,,,,�_ "'k- -;..� >.r.,;rw^a,,,.a,�.,,- ""�.., _. ''..,�•.,,."^►: - ��S:Y'� """�c+i�! `»w_,•lf -..„ ::. --•,. .,,�_ -"!, 'e•'"'Sw - - w..a�., -- �' �,' �_,...��'.ws -_ "g - `'�'reF� . 3£""- ' ,..... � ...- '�[' -�; "- _`��- e:' .:_ - _ ..,. - . �.-. "'+aim... ." +z.oM. *... "",_ - cn�gi�„1�+^+��. "",,• - w` av ""....�, =a- x�.... - .` �r-•"" _ x , _ .. _.. '�` � ..: • . c '.'�. e. -u.""M,r � y,. _.c - ..sJ �..:rd.M ,. �; ar - ':r.'r.• , N - tt .. .u�^��^a►. +M- .,,, n,ex- rk. y o,,'" °" '� • . '"�' .,�• ""p, ;{„i_ .5,.--+..." ,,,,.,,aq, _�'- •4;1R,. _- ...... y�•+.,, ,tr«: ::,IK '�.• � �... - � P ' - .�..__ •,,.... ....,�'����.�,.,...,F:�._. `�`' �h'^°""ya.- y:e. -,,,,_ � , .., ,. ..''...:"•- , ,,r� �� ..R� � �,�._ �� � Y A te a" �,-y �t .a r ..•^.�.:.. _.- „ ' -_ ..� _ - wy� `-'a__ -- +� � „�,u'- +�” +'Zd► ��.." ;'�w.;i%.a -++� .. !,+. _ -wM` °, � � 3�,�, -,:.'" � .y - ..a.F '��''�� .� "'rr`"s"' } - _ „...: -. _. �. �� --•__! '•� � +��� " _s`�''r.^`' �..r'e� + ��.w �. �. .. -: ,..+ .a,r� , ✓' " .. S.,mc �u�4v`7'�' � ' 7 ' -�a:. • _.... �_ _.,c_ �. ' ` = �'. "�s-. _� "Sc� .+mow - - w�aa+.- � "£:��=� � s _ -.„!EI. '- �,.'�'�,,..� =" - - �.w.. ""'_'�: �,FiV'..eal�' ,_�` ' _ ` _1.±- p Y ��wnri�'Z7orTa,� „ •..��w M D4 5R; i ^`.= _. yam• - t$�� 1 ate: ��^ _ ror.�' i- N^'^.�R -. �• .a+w �•� }_ .. � ._ .f� +.`� K. r '^ "" _:... �. - '^w _ - ^.r,== "ae..:- aCF•- «:_. ;� -`, •- .'�,., "�'..'':- '"""�..o•.e� w. mr��' ^ , ✓a+.+xv,.. .,.�,,,.�x+....,� "an'o��.. � ... '�.'""e�...� •.aw.:.?- .. ..:"- .;�,""^'^••..-_. `•�' '�"' - T ' _ � - .�.`�_ �-r- names �.' ���s.;'iF..��wn_sw °" � " � _ i����.r 'gam "' r �' �++"' �v -_+, .- �� .... ..��- .- .�.; �,7��+— '"` >,�,.. �,,- �':w -_ - - _���^y —•- « -� �^!- '�^:.:.......- - ,��.�.'°"= :,.+�+� �''" -"�.�' ��:. -� -.� .r. - *�.,n.,.•: - - .- ,.... `^..��,� +- �. _ � e � "`'"n "�'^ -�... _ •ae.►..,a..... , w = , � °r ,. w e°�.e ::r+ .., ter. """""a.:�n = -y+� -- 'r- _ - 7 r...r1' 1 '°"s pL .. .. �'�""' �� •- .:.� � ��l�,., +Gg.,�..iC � ; -+�. K a- ' �."� .,,_._ _ „` _' - ::..�.__�'...�:,�� c'sa► "- .z': ^� �"r*�o'���r`r �lifw "��_�Kw3. *. -•.:� . 3".."...r�F -�.'��"�'��., ` ," ' T ,� +r,,..` .,...... -•+i.. _. `.=._ �... u: - `""a1., -' - '.. 'i' t•�•��r�;n[t a ae � �c������5k���� 9w++'�- .z5M'• �.,dF':3!,,wy',t„� �R-^ . f 6.. ..._ -. . " -�s� -• •.. t -^^•. -" ^ : �-x .... _ _ ,+�. � " ,n� .�4.�'`'SuI'. ?kr��$. --aa M,'",'dn r fX.�•A..:�y ,�„ _ - _ -- .._.:.:,.,i. ��� • � � «�� ' � �Y `r'y""'"n'.g � �� ",,.�"y��S M'"trt�da�a."�.. z�f sm�R ,., x . ... --._. +� ` � �r7a ,.,: '. 'ft"' .r.r�r,,,,r 'L..a . �n ; � �` .�.�..! � •�ik�`o++•.+n �'� - °S'�` � .am o �. rz r uC� ,� i= a^sr- ,.S+�.►+ -- — _� -...; �* '"�4^_�r +r+.w� �'�'''`,,.,. j�±,+��+,r- r;C`i+�N "` ?+i �,'.?:,.e �y .e n . 't .r �s ✓. , r. 'ov • 7 r � STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCES CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY 41 yone contemplating a request for a variance from the Zoning Ordinance should consult with the Planning staff, prior to submitting an Application to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, for the purposes of familiarization with applicable ordinance standards and evaluation of the particular circumstances. A prospective applicant will provide documents and information, as requested by the Secretary, to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals or to the City Council. An application must be submitted fourteen (14) days prior to the regular meeting of the Board. In instances where the strict enforcement of the literal provisions of this zoning ordinance would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique and distinctive to an individual property under consideration, the City Council will have the power to grant variances, in keeping with the spirit and intent of this ordinance. The provisions of this ordinance, considered in conjunction with the unique and distinctive circumstances affecting the property, must be the proximate cause of the hardship; circumstances caused by the property owner or his predecessor in title will not constitute sufficient justification to grant a variance. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals may recommend and the City Council may grant variances from the literal provisions of this ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue. hardship because of circumstances unique and distinctive to the individual property under consideration. However, the Board will not recommend and the City Council will in no case permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this ordinance in the district where the affected person's land is located. A ance may be granted by the City Council after demonstration b evidence that all of h Y t e following i Oalifications are met: (A) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific parcels of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out. (B) The conditions upon which the application for a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought, and are not common, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. (C) The alleged hardship is related to the requirements of this ordinance and has not been created by any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. (D) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals may recommend and the City Council may impose conditions and restrictions in the granting of variances so as to insure compliance with the provisions of this ordinance and with the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and to protect adjacent properties. Copies of the Zoning Ordinance may be obtained from the Administrative Office. O estions should be directed to the C _ Community Development Department, at (612) 569 3330. Standards and Procedures for Zoning Ordinance Variances Revised 2 -95 • The Board of Zoning Adjustment should solicit testimony on all of the following variance prerequisites from MN Statutes. We ask the Board to consider the statutory prerequisites and posed questions (shown in italics) regarding the Critical Area River Corridor in their final decision. According to the courts, the applicant has a heavy burden of proof to show that all of the prerequisites have been met. In addition to the statewide statutory requirements, the Board also needs to follow variance requirements in their ordinance. The Board may impose conditions in the granting of variances to ensure compliance and protect adjacent properties. The City Council acting as a Board of Appeals and Adjustments has the following statutory powers with respect to variances and the zoning ordinance from MN Statutes, section 462.357, subd. 6: 1) Variances shall only be granted when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Is this proposal the best design alternative to protecting the Mississippi River and preventing and mitigating irreversible damage to this resource? Have the purposes established for the Critical Area been met? 2) Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property. What unique circumstances of the property compel the proposal design so that variances are required? 3) Undue hardship means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. Can a reasonable use, such as single-family residential use, be achieved by adherence to the conditions allowed by the ordinance? Courts have said that a board of adjustment is not required to approve a variance unless to deny it would mean that the property cannot be put to any reasonable use. 4) Undue hardship means the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Court cases have shown that problems peculiar to the present owners or their individual or economic desires do not satisfy the prerequisite because they don't relate to the al property? I he itsel . What is unique about the actual land o the individual t property .f q .f .f problem is common to a number of properties in the area or along the river, such as blufjlines, then it is not unique to the subject property. In the case of expansions, was the structure built originally right at the setback line and the owners now desire to expand over the setback line, thereby self - creating their own hardship? Another factor to consider is whether the landowner bought the property after the effective date of the ordinance provision from which the variance is sought and had access to knowledge and • information about ordinance requirements prior to designing the project. 5) Undue hardship means the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. What is the locality like - setbacks, uses, size and types of structures of neighboring properties? Are the values and the essential character that caused the Mississippi River Corridor to be designated a Critical Area and a National River and Recreation Area being altered? Is the essential character detrimentally altered if structures are placed on top of a bluff or encroach into the bluff setback? 6) Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if a reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Can a reasonable use be achieved through compliance with the ordinance, even though it may not be the highest economic or profitable use? 7) No variance shall be granted that would permit any use that is prohibited in this ordinance. Is this a use allowed by the ordinance? 8) Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Also from Interim Development Regulations - I. 3. b. b. A dimension variance may be granted only when the following findings are made: (1) the strict enforcement of the setback or height restrictions, or lot size or line of signt will result in unnecessary hardship. "Hardship" as used in the consideration of a dimension variance means that the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the dimension provisions of these interim devleopment regulations; (2) there are exceptional circumstances unique to the property that were not created by a landowner after April 25, 1975; 3 the dimension variance does not allow an used that is not a compatible O Y use in the p land use district in which the property is located; (4) the dimension variance will not alter the essential character of the locality as established by these interim development regulations; (5) the dimension variance would not be contrary to the intent of the order. • Jul 14 '99 12:56 P.01/03 �� MrNN Minnesota Department of Natural Resources lit J 500 Larayette Road of A�Q�� St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 -40' NgTUA Phone: (651) 297 -2401; fax 296 -5939 E -uuul: sandy.*ht@adnr.statc.mn.us July 13, 1999 City of Brooklyn Center Planning Commission c/o Ron Warren 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Planning Commission Members: Via fax and mail RE: Application No. 990006 Mark & Katarina Peschel, 6830 Willow Land North Mississippi River Critical Area/NINRRA Corridor Thank you for the notification of the public hearing for a variance from the 100 -foot setback from the ordinary high water level for a solarium 77 feet from the ordinary high water level. This site is within the state - designated Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor District, established in 1976, and the ® Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (MNRRA), a unit of the National Park System, established in 1988. The Department of Natural Resources works with local units of government to review and assist with ordinance development, implement the plan and ordinance, and review all developments within the Corridor which require a public hearing or discretionary action. We have reviewed the materials received on July 8, visited the site, and submit the following comments for consideration in all decision - making and submission for the formal hearing record. In the case of Brooklyn Center, no regulations have yet been adopted to comply with the minimum standards and guidelines for the Critical Area. Under this situation, local units of government shall grant a development permit only if the development is specifically permitted by the Interim Development Regulations, including all of the following: • Wherever there is a conflict between the Interim Development Regulations and existing laws or ordinances, the more restrictive provision shall apply. [IDR A. 3. b.] • All structures and accessory uses or appurtenances of residential development shall be subject to the dimensional standards and criteria in section F of these Interim Development Regulations [IDR C.3.]. The objectives of dimensional standards and criteria are: to maintain the aesthetic integrity and natural environment, to reduce the effect of poorly planned shoreline and bluffline development, and to prevent soil erasion. • Grading and filling provisions [IDR E. 1.]. • - No clear cutting within 40 feet landward from blufflines. [IDR E. 2.]. DNR Information: 651- 296 -6157 - 1 -888- 646 -6367 • TTY: 651- 296 -5484 - 1 -800- 657 -3929 M Equal Opportunity Employer Ifs Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a Wt,n Valor -t Nverciry _1 Minimum of to Post - Consumer WaSte Jul 14 '99 12:57 P.02/03 RE: variancc, Application No. 990006 Page 2 • All new structures shall meet the following minimum standards: the structure shall be placed no less • than 100 feet from the normal highwater mark (ordinary high water level), and no less than 40 feet from all blufflines [IDR F. 4.]. • New structures and additions to existing structures shall be limited to a maximum of 35 feet. [IDR F. 5. a.] Assuming all of the other provisions are complied with, including that the new structure is no less than 40 feet from the bluffline, a variance is only needed for the requirement that the structure shall be placed no less than 100 feet from the normal highwater mark (ordinary high water level). Members acting as a Board of Zoning Appeals on variance decisions should solicit testimony on all of the following variance prerequisites from Minnesota Statutes. We ask the Board to consider the statewide statutory prerequisites and posed questions (shown in italics) regarding the Critical Area River Corridor in their final decision. According to the courts, the applicant has a heavy burden of proof to show that all of the prerequisites have been met. In addition to the statewide statutory requirements, the Board also needs to follow additional, more restrictive variance requirements in their ordinance. The Board may impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and protect adjacent properties. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments has the following statutory powers with respect to variances and the zoning ordinance from MN Statutes, section 462.357, subd. 6: 1) 'Variances shall only be granted when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. S Is this proposal the best and only alternative to protecting the Mississippi River and preventing and mitigating irreversible damage to this resource? 2) Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property. What unique circumstances of the property compel a solarium within the ordinary high water level setback? If the constraint is common to a number of properties in the area or along the river, such as blufflines or steep slopes, then the circumstances are not unique to the subject property. 3) Undue hardship means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. Can reasonable use of single family residential use be obtained in this location without the solarium? 4) Undue hardship means the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Court cases have shown that problems peculiar to the present owners, their individual desires, or economic desires do not satisfy the prerequisite because they don't relate to the property itself. What is unique about the actual land of the individual property for the structure and • development? If the problem is common to a number of properties in the area or along the river, such as blufflines, rhea it is nor unique to the subject property. Jul 14 '99 12:57 P.03/03 RE: Variance, Application No. 990006 Page 3 5) Undue hardship means the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the • locality. Is the essential character of the 1►;fississippi River Corridor detrimentally altered? 6) Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if a reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. 7) No variance shall be granted that would permit any use that is prohibited in this ordinance. 8) Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The circumstances of this individual property or land itself are not unique. Many properties .near to the Mississippi River in the city have bluffs, blufflines, and steep slopes. We strongly disagree that the property is not "virtually unusable" as asserted, but reasonable use of the property with a single- family home has been achieved since 1979. If the City plans to approve the variance, we recommend the following conditions be included to meet state Critical Area requirements: la The new structure shall be no less than 40 feet from the bluffline. lZ Existing vegetation between the structure and the river, and the structure and the bluff shall be maintained. Critical Area requires retention of existing vegetation. • Native vegetation species of trees and shrubs should be planted between the structure and the bluff. Critical Area requires buffering and landscaping of *structures. • Best management practices to minimize runoff, erosion, and sedimentation shall be utilized during and after construction. Thank you for your consideration of these comments and variance prerequisites in order to protect the Mississippi Diver. A copy of all decisions regarding variances shall be forwarded to us following the action. Sincerely, DNR v ters �-- Sandy Fecht .Critical Area/MIQ2RA Hydrologist cc: Mark & Kawina Peschel Arta Hydrologist Tom Hovey • National Park Service - Nancy Duncan/Laura Ball Metropolitan Council - Sandra Pincl Steve Johnson MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR MEETING JULY 15, 1999 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Willson at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chair Tim Willson, Commissioners Stephen Erdmann, Rex Newman, Sean Rahn, Dianne Reem, and John Whitehead were present. Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission/Planning and Zoning Specialist Ronald Warren, and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Arlene Bergfalk. Commissioner Graydon Boeck was excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 27.1999 There was a motion by Commissioner Reem, seconded by Commissioner Newman, to approve the minutes of the May 27, 1999 meeting as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. S CHAIR'S EXPLANATION Chair Wilson explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. APPLICATION NO. 99006 - MARK 8r K ATARIN A PESCHEL Chair Wilson introduced Application No. 99006, a request for a variance from the Critical Area Interim Development Regulations to allow a building set -back less than 100' from the ordinary high water mark of the Mississippi River, submitted by Mark & Katarina Peschel, 6830 Willow Lane. This application was filed on 07- 01 -99, requiring Council action by 08 -30 -99 (60 days.) Mr. Warren presented the staff report using overhead transparencies to describe the location of the property and the site plan that included the area contours and bluff lines. (See Planning Commission Information Sheet dated 07 -15 -99 for Application No. 99006, attached) The applicants seek a variance to construct a solarium addition on the rear of their home. The single family residence is located in the 6800 block on the east side of Willow Lane, bounded on the east by the Mississippi River, and by single family homes on the north and south and Willow Lane on the west side. This property is within the State designated Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor District established in 1976 and is subject to the standards and guidelines contained in the Interim Development Regulations (until the City adopts its own regulations for this area). 07 -15 -99 1 Mr. Warren reviewed the regulations which require that all structures be placed no less than 100 ft. from the normal or ordinary high water mark of the river and no less than 40 ft. from all bluff lines. The standards are designed to maintain the aesthetic integrity and natural environment, to reduce the effect of poorly planned shoreline and bluff line development, and to prevent soil erosion. The City has been responsible for enforcement of the regulations, and has done so by only requiring a 40 ft. building set back in areas along the river where there is a bluff line and using the 100 ft. Ordinary high water setback in areas where there is no bluff line. The City's setback interpretation of the regulations allowed the 1979 construction of the Peschel's home closer than 100 ft. to the normal /ordinary high water mark. Using the City's interpretation for this Application, construction of an I F x 14' solarium at an elevation of 832 ft., 77 ft. inland from this mark, and meeting the 40 ft. bluffline setback would be allowed. The heavily wooded area adjacent to the river would conceal the addition from the river. Mr. Warren reviewed the applicant's prior discussions with the City and the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) regarding the proposal and referred to letters from the DNR dated May 3 and July 13, 1999 regarding the application. In general, DNR representatives believe the proposed application does not meet the requirements of the Critical Area regulations, and any construction requires approval of variance(s) by the City of Brooklyn Center. Photographs of the home showing the placement/design of the solarium and a survey drawing attached to a letter dated July 1, 1999 from the applicant's attorney were viewed and discussed. The City's Standards and Procedures for Zoning Ordinance Variance and relevant Minnesota Statutes were reviewed as they relate to this Application. In addition to the applicant's arguments supporting approval of the variance outlined in the July 1, 1999 letter which addresses each of the specific variance standards, A -D, staff evaluation of the application supports approval of the variance from the 100 ft. setback from the normal high water mark of the Mississippi River. Mr. Warren explained his opinion that the stated objectives of the Critical Area regulations which include maintenance of aesthetic integrity and natural environment, reduction of the effect of poorly planned shoreline and bluffline development, and prevention of soil erosion are not violated by this proposed construction. In addition, a hardship could be considered if the applicant cannot use their property in a manner consistent with other development along the river. Further, although regulations require enforcement of both the bluffline and ordinary high water mark setbacks, it appears reasonable that the bluffline setback standard is most important in this particular case, and is in keeping with the spirit and intent of relevant regulations. Therefore, Mr. Warren recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the variance request submitted under Application No. 99006. Mr. Warren noted that a public hearing scheduled for this meeting on the Application has been properly noticed. • 07 -15 -99 2 Chair Wilson called for questions from the Commissioners. The solarium will be constructed of glass and natural stone. Mr. Warren provided detail in response to Commissioner Newman's questions regarding the 1979 construction of the Peschel home as it related to interpretation of the Critical Area regulations and pointed out that at that time, approval of construction was based on interpretation of those regulations as requiring either a bluffline or high water mark setback. Subsequently, the DNR has indicated that both setback requirements must be met. Mr. Warren noted that the bluffline is basically at the same point as it was when the home was built. PUBLIC HEARING - APPLICATION NO. 99006 There was a motion by Commissioner Rahn, seconded by Commissioner Whitehead, to open the public hearing on Application No. 99006 at 8:04 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Wilson called from comments from the public. Mr. Mark Peschel, the applicant, stated the current application has evolved from an earlier plan submitted to the DNR. He explained the solarium will be a greenhouse/conservatory for plants and p g rY p greenery re- located from another part of their home for more convenient care of the plants. A 3 ft. wall of natural stone will be built with the remainder of the solarium constructed of insulated glass. Mr. Peschel reviewed a project undertaken by the neighborhood in the past, under the auspices of the DNR, designed to "shore up" the river bank in the area (not related to this application), which did not prove to be very successful. Commissioner Newman inquired whether there would be reflections from the glass on the river. It was indicated while an reflection would be unlikely, depending on the sun's location a reflection Y Y p g u P may occur near the island in the river. Mr. Carl Wolter, 6807 Willow Lane, supported approval of the application for a variance and stated the solarium plan was a good proposal. Commissioner Newman inquired about the suggested conditions for approval outlined in the DNR letter dated July 13, 1999, and asked whether there is a need for additional planting of "native vegetation species of trees and shrubs" between the structure and the bluff. No other persons from the public appeared before the Commission during the public hearing on Application No. 99006. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING There was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Erdmann, to close the public hearing on Application No. 99006 at 8:22 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Willson called for questions /comments from the Commissioners. The Chair suggested consideration of the stipulations outlined in the DNR's letter dated July 13, previously referred to during discussion. Mr. Warren agreed three of the conditions would be appropriate, excluding the • 07 -15 -99 3 reference to requiring additional tree and shrub plantings because the adjacent area is heavily wooded already that obscures visibility of the proposed solarium from the river. The Commissioners discussed the stipulations, particularly the interpretation of the term "best management practices," with regard to runoff, erosion, and sedimentation during and after construction. ACTION TO ADD CONDITIONS Following discussion, there was a motion by Commissioner Reem, seconded by Commissioner Newman, to attach 3 conditions outlined in the DNR July 13 letter, to the recommendation for approval of this application. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION TO RECOM APPROVA OF APPLICATION NO. 99006 - VARIANCE REOUEST There was a motion by Commissioner Erdmann, seconded by Commissioner Newman, to recommend to the Council that it approve Application No. 99006, submitted by Mark and Katarina Peschel, 6800 Willow Lane, to allow a variance from the 100 ft. ordinary high water mark setback contained in the Interim Development Regulations for the Mississippi Critical Area on the basis that the standards for granting a dimensional variance are met, that the granting of the variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance and regulations and, furthermore, that the granting of the variance will not adversely affect the stated objectives of the dimensional standards of the Interim Development Regulations which are to maintain the aesthetic integrity and natural environment, to reduce the effect of poorly planned shoreline and bluffline development and to prevent soil erosion, subject to the following conditions: 1. The new structure shall be no less than 40 feet from the bluffline. 2. Existing vegetation between the structure and the river, and the structure and the bluff, shall be maintained. 3. Best management practices to minimize runoff, erosion, and sedimentation shall be utilized during and after construction. Voting in favor: Chair Wilson, Commissioners Erdmann, Newman, Rahn, Reem, and Whitehead. The motion passed unanimously. The Council will consider the recommendation at its July 26, 1999 meeting. The applicant must be present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Planning Commission will require that the application be returned to the Commission for reconsideration. OTHER BUSINESS FUTURE MEETING DATES • 07 -15 -99 4 ® There was no additional business to bring before the Commission. The next meeting of the Planning Commission will be a study session on Thursday, July 29, 1999. Mr. Warren requested the Commission's approval to present a business item regarding the Cub Foods development for consideration at that meeting. The Commissioners consented to the additional agenda item. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Whitehead, to adj ourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. Chair Recorded and transcribed by: Arlene Bergfalk TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 07 -15 -99 5 City Council Agenda Item No. 8a City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Kragness, Councilmembers Hilstrom, Lasman, Nelson, and Peppe FROM: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager DATE: July 22, 1999 SUBJECT: Reconsideration of Application for Currency Exchange License for Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers, 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Following is an index of the materials provided for this matter: Letters regarding hearing. Letters regarding denial of application. City Council Minutes from June 14, 1999. Resolution materials provided at June 14, 1999, City Council Meeting. Correspondence on properties on Nicollet Avenue South. Correspondence on check cashing operations. Letter and attachments from City Attorney Charlie LeFevere. Letter regarding inquiries from the St. Louis Park Assessor and Hennepin County Assessor's Office. 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer Office of the City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center • A great place to start. A great place to stay. Sharon Knutson City Clerk July 6, 1999 Ms. Carolyn V. Wolski Leonard, Street and Deinard 150 South Fifth Street Suite 2300 Minneapolis, MN 55402 RE: Request for Hearing Under Minn. Stat. §53A.04 for Reconsideration of Application for Currency Exchange License for Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers, 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota i Dear Ms. Wolski: Your letter of July 2, 1999, was received via messenger last Friday, July 2. At its July 12, 1999, meeting, the Brooklyn Center City Council will set the date and time for the requested hearing for reconsideration of application for currency exchange license for Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers, to operate at 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard. The proposed date of the hearing is scheduled for Monday, July 26, 1999, at 7 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center. Should the date change, I will notify you immediately. Sincerely, Sharon Knutson, CMC City Clerk cc: Cary Geller, Community Money Centers, Inc. Kevin M. Murphy, Deputy Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Commerce Charles L. LeFevere, City Attorney, Kennedy & Graven 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer LEONARD, STREET AND DEINARD • PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION July 2, 1999 Carolyn V. Wolski 612 - 335 -1641 cvwl641@leonard.com Via Messenger Maria Rosenbaum Deputy City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Re: Request for hearing (reconsideration) under Minn. Stat. §53A.04 Application of Community Money Centers, Inc. for currency exchange license Dear Ms. Rosenbaum: This law firm represents Community Money Centers, Inc., which applied for a currency exchange license to operate a Money Center store at 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard in Brooklyn Center. As you are aware, the City Council voted June 14, 1999 to deny our client's application. By letter dated June 30, 1999, our client was advised by the Minnesota Department of Commerce that its application was denied because of the denial by the City of Brooklyn Center. In accordance with Minn. Stat. §53A.04, Community Money Centers, Inc. hereby requests a hearing on the City of Brooklyn Centers denial of its currency exchange license application. I understand this hearing will take place at the next regular City Council meeting. At your earliest convenience, please advise me of date, time and location of the hearing. Very truly yours, LEONARD, STREET AND DEINARD Professional Association Carolyn V. Wolski cc: Cary Geller, Community Money Centers, Inc. Kevin M. Murphy, Deputy Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Commerce Michael J. McCauley, City Manager, Brooklyn Center 150 SOUTH FIFTH STREET SUITE 2300 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TEL 612- 335 -1500 FAx 612 - 335 LAW OFFICES IN MINNEAPOLIS, SAINT PAUL AND MANKATO i MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE A Financial Examinations Division June 30, 1999 Ms. Maria Rosenbaum Deputy City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Ms. Rosenbaum, The resolution adopted by the Brooklyn Center City Council denying the currency exchange application for Community Money Centers, Inc. was received. Minn. Stat. §53A.04 (copy included) requires the local governing body to inform the • applicant of their right to a hearing if the application is denied as an action by that body. In accordance with statute, the City of Brooklyn Center must send Community Money Centers, Inc. notice of their rights and the procedures for requesting a hearing. Please forward a copy of this notice to me for our records. If we do not hear from the City of Brooklyn Center or the applicant within 30 days as to any pending hearing or further consideration, the application will be considered withdrawn and denial will become final. If you have any questions please contact Leah Grobove, at the below number. Sincer Ke in M. Murph y� Deputy Commissioner Img Encl. cc. Mr. Cary Geller • 133 East Seventh Street, St. Paul, MN 55101 -2333 Telephone (651) 296 -2135 • Fax (651) 296 -8591 • TTY/TDD (651) 296 -2860 e -mail: financial @state.mn.us Web Site: www.commerce.state.mn.us An Equal Opportunity Employer MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Financial Examinations Division June 30, 1999 Mr. Cary Geller Community Money Centers, Inc. 6525 Nicollet Avenue PO Box 23090 Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Dear Mr. Geller, The Department of Commerce received, reviewed, and forwarded your application of licensure to operate a currency exchange business to the City of Brooklyn Center for approval. In a public meeting held June 14, 1999 the Brooklyn Center City Council disapproved the application for a currency exchange location at 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §53A.04, (copy included) a license cannot be issued without concurrence of the governing body. Since the local governing body denied the application, any request for an administrative hearing must be made to the City of Brooklyn Center. If you do not contact us within 30 days as to any pending hearing or further consideration by the City of Brooklyn Center, your application will be considered withdrawn and denial will become final. Be sure to retain a copy of this letter for future reference in dealing with this Department. If you have any questions please contact Leah Grobove, at the below number. Sincer , Ke n M. Murphy Deputy Commissioner Img Encl. cc. Ms. Maria Rosenbaum, Deputy City Clerk'' 133 East Seventh Street, St. Paul, MN 55101 -2333 Telephone (651) 296 -2135 • Fax (651) 296 -8591 • TTY/TDD (651) 296 -2860 e -mail: financial @state.mn.us Web Site: www.commerce.state.mn.us An Equal Opportunity Employer == 53A.04 53A.04 Approval or denial of an application. (a) Within 30 days after the receipt of a complete application, the commissioner shall deny the application or submit the application to the governing body of the local unit of government in which the applicant is located or is proposing to be located. The commissioner may not approve the application without the concurrence of the governing body. The governing body shall give published notice of its intention to consider the issue and shall solicit testimony from interested persons, including those in the community in which the applicant is located or is proposing to be located. If the governing body has not approved or disapproved the issue within 60 days of receipt of the application, concurrence is presumed. The commissioner must approve or disapprove the application within 30 days from receiving the decision of the governing body. The governing body shall have the sole responsibility for its decision. The state shall have no responsibility for that decision. (b) If the application is denied, the commissioner shall send by mail notice of the denial and the reason for the denial to the applicant at the address contained in the application. If an application is denied, the applicant may, within 30 days of receiving the notice of a denial, request a contested case hearing pursuant to chapter 14; provided that if the denial is based upon the refusal of the governing body to concur the governing body must afford the applicant a hearing. The applicant shall have no right to the hearing provided for in this section if the denial is based upon the governing body's 10 refusal to concur but shall have a hearing before the governing body. City of Brooklyn Center Office of Administration Agreat place to start. Agreat place to stay. June 17, 1999 Mr. Kevin Murphy Deputy Commissioner Minnesota Department of Commerce 133 East Seventh Street St. Paul, MN 55101 -2333 RE: APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY MONEY CENTERS, INC. dba MONEY CENTER TO OPERATE AS A CURRENCY EXCHANGE COMPANY AT 6219 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD, BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA, 55429 Dear Mr. Murphy: At its meeting on June 14, 1999, the Brooklyn Center City Council DISAPPROVED the application for Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers to operate as a currency exchange company at 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, Minnesotajor the following reasons: 1. State Law provides that the City Council must approve or disapprove the issuance of the license and that failure to disapprove the application within 60 days of the application is deemed to be an approval. 2. State Law provides no standards for consideration of the application by the City Council. 3. The City Council is concerned that the City's zoning ordinance may not adequately protect the public health, safety, and welfare in that such controls: a. May allow uses such as currency exchanges which may not be compatible with the neighborhood; b. Do not preserve properties which are uniquely suited for neighborhood service and retail establishments for such uses; C. May allow uses which increase, or contribute to factors increasing, crime, blight, deterioration, diminution in property values; and d. May allow uses which impair orderly development and redevelopment or which create disincentives to reinvestment in the Community. 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 - City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 - FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer 4. There is a need for study and evaluation of the City's zoning ordinances and official control, which studies have been ordered by the City Council. 5. There is a need to preserve the status quo while such studies - are undertaken to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and to protect the planning process. 6. The Council does not wish for the license application to be approved while such studies are underway by reason of failure to act within the 60 day deadline imposed by State Law Sincerely, I x- r i O,.y.f Maria Rosenbaum Deputy City Clerk MR: Enc: • • RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR A STUDY OF VARIOUS TH 100 TRAFFIC ISSUES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom. Motion passed unanimously. 8d. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A CURRENCY EXCHANGE LICENSE TO COMMUNITY MONEY CENTERS, INC. DBA MONEY CENTERS, 6219 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD, BROOKLYN CENTER Mr. McCauley discussed this resolution authorizing issuance of a currency exchange license to Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers was referred by the Department of Commerce for the City of Brooklyn Center to review under Minnesota Statute §53A.04 which requires the City to render a decision regarding approval of the license. Council discussed the zoning issues and the possibility of getting guidance before approving this resolution to license Community Money Centers, Inc. City Attorney Charlie LeFevere informed the Council that the law requires a public hearing for this type of issue. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Nelson to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Cary Geller, President of Money Centers, addressed the Council for any questions they had. Councilmember Nelson asked Mr. Geller if he has other currency stores. Mr. Geller reported that he does have other currency tores and that the are located in shopping centers. Y Y pP g With no one else appearing Councilmember Hilstrom moved and Councilmember Nelson seconded a motion to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Hilstrom expressed concerns and made a motion to disapprove the application for a currency exchange license for the following reasons: 1. State Law provides that the City Council must approve or disapprove the issuance of the license and that failure to disapprove the application within 60 days of the application is deemed to be an approval. 2. State Law provides no standards for consideration of the application by the City Council. 3. The City Council is concerned that the City's zoning ordinance may not adequately protect the public health, safety, and welfare in that such controls: 06/14/99 -7- a. May allow uses such as currency exchanges which may not be compatible with the neighborhood; b. Do not preserve properties which are uniquely suited for neighborhood service and retail establishments for such uses; C. May allow uses which increase, or contribute to factors increasing, crime, blight, deterioration, diminution in property values; and d. May allow uses which impair orderly development and redevelopment or which create disincentives to reinvestment in the Community. 4. There is a need for study and evaluation of the City's zoning ordinances and official control, which studies have been ordered by the City Council. 5. There is a need to preserve the status quo while such studies are undertaken to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and to protect the planning process. 6. The Council does not wish for the license application to be approved while such studies are . underway by reason of failure to act within the 60 day deadline imposed by State Law. • Councilmember Nelson seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Mayor Pro Tem Peppe suggested staff to gather further information and report back to the Council at the June 28, 1999, meeting. 8e. RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE NEW POLICE STATION, PROJECT NO. 1998-09 Mr. McCauley informed the Council that this resolution would award a contract for furniture and equipment for the new police station which were included in the budget for furnishings of the new building. These items would be to equip the larger facility and for those items which cannot be relocated from the current space. Councilmember Hilstrom asked when the new building would be occupied and if updates could be given until the building is occupied. Mr. McCauley responded they should be in the new building sometime in September or October and that updates would be provided. RESOLUTION NO. 99 -97 Councilmember Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 06/14/99 -8- Office of the City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. MEMORANDUM TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk JWZ& DATE: June 9, 1999 SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing Issuance of a Currency Exchange License to Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers, 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center The Minnesota Department of Commerce has received an application from Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers to operate a currency exchange at 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, and has forwarded a copy of the complete application to the City of Brooklyn Center for review. Minnesota Statute §53A.04 requires the Minnesota Department of Commerce to submit any application for licensure as a currency exchange to the governing body of the municipality in which the currency exchange proposes to conduct business. The Statute requires the governing municipality to render a decision regarding issuance or denial of the license within 60 days; it also requires the governing municipality to publish notice of intent to consider the license (published in the Brooklyn Center Sun -Post May 56, 1999). UQ Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers has submitted to the Minnesota Department of Commerce the appropriate fee, current fee schedule used for cashing checks, surety bond in the amount of $10,000, and background investigation by the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. The Brooklyn Center Police Department completed a background check and found no reason to deny the license. Planning and Zoning Specialist Ron Warren has reviewed the application and finds no zoning regulations which would prohibit the issuance of the license. • 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer • its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A CURRENCY EXCHANGE LICENSE TO COMMUNITY MONEY CENTERS, INC. DBA MONEY CENTERS, 6219 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD, BROOKLYN CENTER WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 53A.04 requires the Minnesota Department of Commerce to submit any application for licensure as a currency exchange to the governing body of the municipality in which the currency exchange proposes to conduct business; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Commerce has received an application from Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers, 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center allows for such conduct on premises within the City of Brooklyn Center. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the issuance of a currency exchange license to Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers to operate at 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard is hereby approved. 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. • • NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER A CURRENCY EXCHANGE LICENSE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center will consider the application for a currency exchange license from Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers to operate at 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. This consideration will be given at the June 14, 1999, City Council meeting at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. The meeting will be held in the Council Chambers of the Brooklyn Center City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Sharon Knutson City Clerk (May 26, 1999) • c AlEA ' T CENTERS We rake if. easy.► Cary D. Geller Community Money Centers, Inc. We make it easy. President 6525 Nicollet Avenue, RO: s ox 23 Richfield, MN 55423 Tele: 612 866.5674, Fax: 612 866.4342 . Email: carydgeller ®emaii.msn.com Community Money Centers, Inc. May 12 " ', 1999 Ms. Jane Chambers Corporate Office City Of Brooklyn Center 6525 Nicollet Avenue 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway P.O. Box 23090 Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Richfield, MN 55423 Re: Application for Currency Exchange License at 6219 Brooklyn Tele: 612 866.5674 Blvd., Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 Fax: 612 866.4342 Dear Ms. Chambers, Community Money Centers, Inc. d.b.a. Money Centers, recently leased the above referenced property and subsequently made application to the State Of Minnesota for a Curren Exchange License. May 5` 199 Y � Y � 9, Deputy Commissioner Kevin Murphy forwarded a copy of the application and a letter explaining the procedure to you. Money enters has operated current excha stores in Minnesota for Money Center locations Y p Y 1532 University, Suite #100 more than seven years. We take pride in our respectful and friendly approach to our business, We have a history of community and business St. Paul, MN 55104 involvement and are members of the Minnesota Better Business Bureau, Tele: 612 645.3965 Midway Chamber of Commerce, and Minnesota Retailers Association to Fax: 612 645.8090 name a few. Please accept my invitation to visit any or all of our locations listed on the left side of the page. If I can provide information or insight, let me know. M 6525 Nicollet Avenue y card is enclosed. Richfield, MN 55423 Thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. Tele: 612 866.6505 Fax: 612 866.8090 Sincerely, D " Pre dent 2600 Nicollet Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55408 Encl:1 Tele: 612 870.2885 Fax: 612 870.2975 0 P _ MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Financial Examinations Division May 5, 1999 Ms. Jane Chambers Assistant City Manager Brooklyn Center City Offices 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Dear Ms. Chambers, Enclosed is an application by Community Money Centers, Inc. dba Money Centers to operate as a currency exchange company at 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard, Minnesota, 55429. Minnesota Statute 53A.04(a) states: "Within 30 days after the receipt of a complete application, the commissioner shall deny the application or submit the application to the governing body of the local unit of government in • which the applicant is located or is proposing to be located. The commissioner may not approve the application without the concurrence of the governing body. The governing body shall give published notice of its intention to consider the issue and shall solicit testimony from interested persons, including those in the community in which the applicant is located or is proposing to be located. If the governing body has not approved or disapproved the issue within 60 days of receipt of the application, concurrence is presumed. The commissioner must approve or disapprove the application within 30 days from receiving the decision of the governing body. The governing body shall have the sole responsibility for its decision. The state shall have no responsibility for that decision." We are submitting the enclosed application for your review and approval. Please respond back in writing within 60 days of the receipt of this notice as to the decision of the governing body regarding the application for the currency exchange operation. If I do not hear from you within 60 days, approval will be presumed. If you have any questions, please call Senior Examiner Leah Grobove at (651) 296 -2297. Sincel' y r Kev' Murphy D uty commissioner Img lmg 133 East Seventh Street, St. Paul, MN 55101 -2333 Telephone (651) 296 -2135 • Fax (651) 296 -8591 • TTY/TDD (651) 296 -2860 e -mail: financial @state.mn.us Web Site: www.commerce.state.mn.us i f STATE OF MINNE� A (F� oartment Use Only) . DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 133 EAST SEVENTH STREET • ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 , (651) 296 -6319 =�9 :3 1 : 1 4ec — t LICENSE NUMBER I PROCESSING DATE NAIC NUMBER INSURANCE COMPANY CURRENCY EXCHANGE BOND NUMBER LICENSE APPLICATION The data which you furnish on this form will be used by the Department of Commerce to assess your qualifications for a license. Disclosure of your social security number is voluntary. You are not legally required to provide this data, however, if you do not provide your social security number the Department of Commerce may be unable to grant a license. The .Department may use social security numbers for revenue recapture as authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 270A and for identification purposes. After issuance of a license, all information contained in this application, except your social security number, is public pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13. A. TYPE OF LICENSE 3 NEW O INDIVIDUAL PROPRIETORSHIP 99 CORPORATION O RENEW O AMENDED NAME O LIMITED LIABILITY O PARTNERSHIP B. APPLICANT INFORMATION NAME OF CURRENCY EXCHANGE Money Centers I NAME OF CORPORATION OR PARTNERSHIP (see #5 of instructions) Community Money Centers, Inc. BUSINESS ADDRESS (No Post Office Boxes) TELEPHONE NUMBER 6219 Brooklyn Blvd. I( 612) 866 -5674 CITY STATE ZIP CODE COUNTY Brooklyn Center I MN 1 55429 ( Hennepin NAME OF INDIVIDUAL MANAGING THIS LOCATION STATE TAX ID NUMBER Richard Krietzman 1 1718779 ALL applicants must answer the following questions. If any questions are answered "YES ", you must attach a detailed written explanation and all legal documentation, if applicable. Have you, a of the owners, partners, officers, directors or shareholders owning more than 10% of the corporate stock, or any employee with the authority to exercise management or policy control over the company ever: YES NO O CX 1. Held a currency exchange license in any other state other than Minnesota? If YES, the new license application must include a verification of license certified by the state(s); all other applicants must verify that the certification(s) previously submitted is accurate. O [X 2. Been the subject of any inquiry or investigation by any division of the Minnesota Commerce Department? O M 3. Had any occupational license censured, suspended, revoked, cancelled, terminated or been the subject of any type of administrative action in any state including Minnesota? REV. 7/98 (OV YES NO O F3 4. Have you ever been charged with, or convicted of, or been indicted for or entered a plea to, any criminal offense (felony, gross misdemeanor or misdemeanor), other than traffic violations, in • any State or Federal Court? O 12 5. Been a defendant in any lawsuit involving claims of fraud, misrepresentation, conversion, mismanagement of funds or breach of contract? O ® 6. Been notified by the Commissioner of Revenue, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 270A.72, that you currently owe the State of Minnesota taxes? O 12 7. Have any unclaimed roe unclaimed funds or roe over 3 ears I P P rtY ( old) to report unde r Minnesota property rtY Y ) P Statutes, Section 345.37? O EX 8. Filed for bankruptcy or protection from creditors or currently have outstanding unsatisfied judgment(s)? O Q 9. Been affiliated with any other currency exchange? I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION AND ANY ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE: I CERTIFY THAT THIS DOffEHA OT BEEN ALTERED OR CHANGED IN * ANY MANNER FROM THE FORM ADOP E D COI ERCE. , � Q s : �,ol,► �- -� �i � •% 4 Sign ture of Owner, Partner or Corporate Officer .Date PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ON AN ATTACHED SHEET: All NEW applicants must provide a signed, notarized statement from the applicant stating the proposed of the currency exchange is not located within 1/2 mile of another currency exchange. O A current fee schedule of all fees charged by your currency exchange office for cashing checks,''money orders or travelers' checks. The list MUST include the type of check cashed, the fee that is charged, and whether or not the fee varies depending on the amount of the check. O A list including the name, date of birth, title, address and social security number for the following individuals: any owner, partner, officer, director, stockholder (owning 10% or more of the corporate stock), or any employee with the authority to exercise management or policy control over the company. O All individuals listed above must request that the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension conduct a background investigation on the form provided. Completed form(s) MUST be submitted with your license application. O The work experience covering ten (10) years prior to application for each person listed above, . INSTRUCTIONS 1. To apply,- complete (please type or print in ink) and submit this form with the $300 fee to the Department of Commerce, 133 East Seventh Street, St. Paul, MN 55101. Check or money order must be payable to the , . "MINNESOTA COMMERCE DEPARTMENT'. DIVE CANNOT ACCEPT CASH. Incomplete forms will be returned to the business address listed. , 2. In order to become licensed, the applicant must provide the Commissioner of Commerce with a $10,000 bond (on the form included with this application). 3. If applicant is a corporation, attach a copy of the Articles of Incorporation filed with the Secretary of State. Applicants must also provide a list Identifying the percentage of ownership for each officer and director (including manager) and stockholder. 4. If the applicant is a partnership, attach a copy of the Articles/Agreement of Partnership and a list Identifying the percentage of ownership by each partner. 5. The name under which the business will be conducted must be exactly the same as the name on your license. If operating under any name other than the exact corporate or partnership name or, if an individual proprietorship doing business under any name other than your first and last name, attach a copy of the Assumed Name Certificate by the Minnesota Secretary of State (651) 296 -2803. 0 OL CENTERS We make if easy! Community Money Centers, Inc. April 16th, 1999 Minnesota Department Of Commerce Corporate Office 133 East Seventh Street 6525 Nicollet Avenue St. Paul, MN 55101 P.O. Box 23090 Re: Location proposed for 6219 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center MN Richfield, MN 55423 p p Yn ' y ' Tele: 612 866.5674 Dear Sir or Madam, Fax: 612 866.4342 To the best of my knowledge, the above referenced location is one half mile or more from the nearest licensed currency exchange. Sincerely, • l . C.ary/D. Money Center locations State of Minnesota 1532 University, Suite #100 County of Hennepin St. Paul. MN 55104 Tele: 612 645.3965 On this 16th day of April, 1999, before me personally appeared Cary D. Fax: 612 645.8090 Geller who acknowledged that he is the President of Community Money Centers, Inc. DBA Money Centers and as a corporate officer, he is authorized to sign on behalf of the company. 6525 Nicollet Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 HELEN M. EIDE NOTARY PUBLIC•MINNE A IZ Tele: 612 866.6505 - M , ;; rn Expirr, Jan. 3t, 2000 Notary l is Fax: 612 866.8090 U 2600 Nicollet Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55408 . Tele: 612 870.2885 Fax: 612 870.2975 • a a s . h ing � - ,,, - Fee s Fee Percentage of Total Check Amount The Percentage a aetermmen by the We of meot cattrea Type of Check 4% Government Check on the first visit Q� 2.5% Government Check $500 or less on subsequent visitsa 3% Government Check $500.01 or more on subsequent visits 4% Computerized Payroll on the first visit • 6% Other Payroll on the first visit o 16- u 3% All Payroll on subsequent visits 0 6% Insurance Check or Draft 3% Money Order Issued by Money Centers 6% Money Order Issued by bank 10% Money Order Issued by others 4% Cashier's Check 12.5% Personal Check ALL C HECKS CARE S1U ]3JECTTQA Z50 ..PER LTEM SURCHAELG_E,,,.,_.. A $20 per item fee will be charge for returned checks. CENTERS mmakeit eas t i STATE OF MINNESOTA .)ND NUMBER: 94792 CURRENCY EXCHANGE SURETY BOND W ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Community Money Centers, Inc. (Name of Currency Exchange) a Minnesota, Corporation (Description or form of business organization, including state of incorporation) with business office at 6219 Brooklyn Blvd., Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, 55429 (Street Address, City, State, Zip) as PRINCIPAL and Empire Fire & Marine Insurance Company (Name of Surety) a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Nebraska which is authorized to engage in the business of insurance in the State of Minnesota, as SURETY, are hereby held and firmly bound to the Department of Commerce of the State of Minnesota in the sum of TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000). Principal and Surety hereby bind themselves, their representatives, successors and assigns, jointly and severally by these presents. The parties further agree that: 1. The purpose of this obligation, which is required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 53A.08, is to secure the compliance by Principal with the terms of Minnesota Statutes, Section 53A.02 to 53A.13, and any other legal obligations arising out of the Principal's conduct as a currency exchange. 2. This bond is for the benefit of the State of Minnesota and all persons suffering damages by reason of the Principal's failure to comply with Minnesota Statutes, Section 53A.02 to 53A.08, or other legal O bligations arising out of Principal's conduct as a currency exchange. 3. If the Principal shall violate Minnesota Statutes, Section 53A.02 to 53A.08, or other legal obligations arising out of its conduct as a currency exchange, the Commissioner of Commerce, as well as any person damaged as a result of such violation shall have, in addition to all other legal remedies, a right of action on this bond in the name of the injured party for loss sustained by the injured party. 4. This bond shall be effective from April 16th, 1999 until December 31, 1999. Signed and Sealed this 16th day of April, 1999. Empire Fire & Marine Insuran a Company Community MoTr c. (Na ty) ( f Curr (Signature of Attorney in F ct) Cary D. /Geller, President FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Approved as to form and execution by the Director of Licensing. SIGNATURE DATE REV. 6/95 • ACKNOWL MME OF PRINCIPAL(S) STATE OF l `�1 Oyu St•� -n ) 1 / )Ss. COUNTY OFf E IT KNOWN, that on the day of P/ , 19; L , personally appeared before me, Cary D. Geller to me well known to be the person ho ecuted the foregoing bond, and has acknowledged the same to be his own free act and deed, and t he executed the same for the uses and purposes therein expressed. Notary Public MMs 1Q§ HELLENM. ID E A � CIPAL(S) t►• $1, 2006 • STATE OF )SS. COUNTY OF w 1 d is ay y of / 1 f y� personally appeared before me Cary D. Geller personally known, who, being by me duly sworn; did say that he is the President of the corporate principal(s) named in the foregoing bond; that the seal affixed thereto is the corporate seal of the corporation(s) that said bond was executed in behalf of the corporation(s) by authority of its Board of Directors; and he acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of the corporation. J Notary Publ16 HELEN M. EIDE A y ��la6R Ty STATE OF MINNESOTA) -)SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this 16th day of April, 1999, before me personally appeared Richard H. Davies to me personally known, who being sworn did, say that he is the Attorney -In -Fact of the EMPIRE FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of that corporation, and that said instrument was executed on behalf of the corporation by authority of its Board of Directors; he acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. • •w/VNVwwK•,vv� , yV"Vv.VVV~ JF MARIE GE1 ` NOTA ?Y PUBLIC- MINNESOTA my commission Expires Jam 31.2000 , - N o� ry U b c I EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY . OMAHA, NEBRASKA POWER OF ATTORNEY Know All Men by These Presents: That this Power of Attorney is not valid or in effect unless attached to the bond which it author Iles executer!, but may be detached by the approving officer if desired. Thal EMPIRE FiRE AND MARINE iNSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation duly organiLed under the laws ul the State of Nebraska, -nnd having its principal office in the City of Omaha, County of Douglas, Stale of Nebraska, dues hereby make, constitute and appoint rtichard H. Davies, Bruce A. Myers, Nicholas L. Newton, Carolyn L. Davies, Deborah A.H. Larson and Victoria A. Racelle its true and lawful Altorney(s) -in -fact, to make, execute, sign, seal and deliver for and on its behalf as suiely and as its act and deed any and all bonds and undertakings of suretyship. NOT EXCEEDING IN AMOUNT Seven Fiundred and Fifty Thousand and No/ 1 00------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- Dollars ($ 750.000. ) and to bind EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY thereby as fully and to the Sallie extent as if such bonds and undertakings and other writings obligatory in the nature thereof were signed by an Executive Officer of EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY and sealed and attested to by one other of such officers, and hcieby ralilies and cunluins all that its said Attorneys) -in -fact may do in pursuance hereof. This power of attorney is granted under and by authority of Article III, Section 3.1 of the by -Laws of the EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY and by Resolution of the Board of Directors duly adopted as follows: 'All bonds, policies, undertakings or other obligations of the corporation shall be executed in the corporate nanie of the Company by the Chairman of the Board, President, any Vice - President. Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, or Treasurer, or by such other officers as the Board of Directors ►nay authorize. The Chairman of the Board, President, any Vice - President, Secretary, any Assistant Secretary. or the Treasurer may appoint Attorneys in Fact or Agents who shall have authority to issue bonds, policies, or undertakings in the name of the Company. The corporate seal is not necessary for the validity of any bonds, policies, undertakings or other obligations of the corporation.' e certified that the above is a true and exact copy. 7l itness Whereof, the EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY has caused ttrese, presents to be sighed by its President, and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed, duly attested by its Secretary this 4th day of June , 1U08. Attest: EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE= COMPANY Secretary ��`' I'iesident STATE OF NEBRASKA ) ss. COUNTY OF DOUGLAS) On this 4th day of June , A.D. 1998, before me personally carne Arny S. Bones to me known, who being by me duly Sworn, did depose and say: that she resides in the County of Douglas, State of Nebraska; that she is tine Secretary of [lie EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; that she knows tiie seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed to the said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order of the Eloard of Directors of said corporation and that she signed tier name thereto by like order. Signed and sealed at the City of Omaha. Dated 4th day of June , 1998. �/. 6 GENEAMI 1101MY•Stite of Nebruki ( V ,� JOHN T. KINSI ER t `\ ' V Comm. Ez . Ott. 9,101)0 P � My P � /Jolary CERTIFICATE i J I, the undersigned, Secretary of the EMPIRE FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, A Nebraska Corporation DO HEREBY IFY that the foregoing and attached POWER OF ATTORNEY remains in full force and has not been revoked; and fuilhennore, t he Resolutions of the Board of Directors set forth in the Power of Attorney are now in force. Signed and sealed at the City of Omaha. Dated the 16th day of April 1999 a mv, n�.�� Secretary EMPIRE FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY GENERAL INDEMNITY AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the undersigned Cary D. Geller, President (hereinafter called "Indemnitor") has requested and may hereafter request EMPIRE FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY (hereinafter called "Surety ") to execute or to procure the execution of bonds, undertakings or recognizance's as may be required from time to time by the Indemnitor, for any purpose whatsoever in connection with the Indemnitor's affairs, either in the name of the Indemnitor or of the following designated persons, firms or corporations, each of which is subsidiary to or controlled by, or affiliated with said Indemnitor, and in each of which said Indemnitor has a financial interest, to wit: Currency Exchange Surety Bond, Bond Number 94792, written April 16th, 1999 for $10,000.00, Community Money Centers, Inc. versus State of Minnesota. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises the Indemnitor, being substantially benefited by the execution and delivery of said bonds, undertakings or recognizances, hereby agrees as follows: 1) That the Indemnitor will at all times indemnify and save the Surety harmless from and against every claim, demand, liability, cost, charge, counsel fee, expense, suit, order, judgment and adjudication whatsoever in consequence of any bond, undertaking or recognizance, executed or procured by the Surety as mentioned herein, and in the event of payment by the Surety the Indemnitor agrees to accept the voucher or other evidence of such payment as prima facie evidence of the propriety thereof and of the Indemnitor's liability therefor to the Surety. 2) All of the terms and conditions of this agreement shall stand for the protection of any other Surety procured by the Surety herein on any such bonds, undertakings or recognizances, either as co- surety or as reinsurer. This agreement shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the Indemnitor. IN Wl NESS WHE EOFpp the Indemnitor as caused this instrument to be signed, sealed and delivered this / day of j t 1 , 19 . /1 BY. ( ik ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF INDEMNITOR n STATE OF / /' l ; L , 1L VS"Tt COUNTY OF On this / day of c1 / , 19 1?, before me personally came Cary D. Geller, to me known to be the individudi described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and has acknowledged to me that he executed the same. Notary Public HELEN M. EIDE W OTARY PIEI.IC- MINNESOTA y Camminima Exom J&L 31, 2000 s • ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION 7X Y// OF SGS EXPRESS, INC. The undersigned, being a natural person over the age of 18 years, for the purpose if forming a business corporation under and pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 302A of Minnesota Statutes, does hereby adopt the following Articles of Incorporation: Article 1 Express, Inc. The name of this corporation is SGS Ex_ Article II The address of the registered office of this corporation is 150 South Sth Street, Suite 2300, Minneapolim, Minnesota 55402. Article III The aggregate number of shares that this corporation has authority to issue is ten thousand (10,000), with a par value of ® One -half Cent ($.005) per share. • Article IV ' L? CJ The board shall have authority to establish more than one (` class or series of shares of this corporation, and the different classes and series shall have such relative rights and preferences, with such designations, as the board may by resolution provide. Article V Except as may be otherwise provided by the board 1.i a resolution establishing a class or series of the shares of this corporation, shareholders shall have no preemptive rights. Article CI There shall be no cumulative voting by shareholders for the election of directors. Article VII Any action required or permitted to be taken at a board meeting, if such action need not be approved by the shareholders, may be taken by wr`A ten ncticn signed by the number of directors that would be required to take the same action at a meeting of the board at which all directors were present. • Article vllz A director of the corporation shall not be personally liable;:- to the corporation or its shareholders for monetary damages. for`... breach of fiduciary duty as director. The ' fo regoing shall' not be deemed to eliminate or limJ.t the liability of a director' for any breach of the director's duty of loyalty to the corporation its shareholders, (ii) for acts or omissions not in good faith 'or-- that involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of " law , :;',:;,:° (iii) under Section 302A.559 or 90A.23 of Minnesota Statutes,` for any transaction from which the director derived any improper personal benefit, or (v) for any uct or omission occurring prior:,_ to the effective date of this Article VIII. Any repeal or.'• :.:. modification of this paragraph by the shareholders of corporation shall not adversely affect any right or protection of.', a director of the corporation existing at the time of such,repenl_ or modification. Article IX The name and address of the incorporator are: Ga E. Peterson Suite 2300 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, these Articles have been executed this 30th diy of April, 1992. c Gail E. Peterson Incorporator STATE OF MINNESOM 0VARTMiNI' OF STATE FILED APR 3 01992 Setralary o� Slala t • 2 o s•rnrl* OF MINNE ti` �•�• SECRETARY OF STATE NOTICE OF CHANGE OF REGISTERED OFFICE-/ RE-GIST'ERED AGENT Please read the instructions on the back before completing this for 1. Corporate Name: SCS EXPRESS, INC. DRA CIIECK EXPRESS HN 2. Registered Office Address (No. & Street): List a compete street address or rural route and rural route box number. A post office box is not acceptable. 6525 Nt(:01,1,E1' AVE., RICHFIELD MN' 55+27 Street City State ' Zip Code 3. Registered Agent (Registered agents are required for foreign corporations but optional,._: far dtlnn4ttsrta corporations): NONE If you do not wish to designate an agent, you must list "NONE" In this box. DO NOT LIST THE CORPORATE NAME. '. In compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 302A.123. 303. 10, 308A.025. 317A. or 3226.1351 certify that the above listed company has resolved to change the company's registered office and /or anent as listed above. ' i certify that I am authorized to execute this certificate and I further certify that I understand that by signing this certificate I am subject to the penalties of perjury as set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 609.48 as if I had signed this certificate under oat,( ignatuie of Authorized Person CARY 9. GELLER, PRESibEN'f Name and Telephone Number of a Contact Person: CARY 1) G E L L E R 12) ' 196 6 - 5 614 pioese print legibly Office Use Only Filing Fee: Minnesota Corporations, Cooperstives and Limited Ltibiiity Companies: $35.00. STATE OF MINNESOTA Non - Minnesota Corporations: $50.00. DEPARTMENT Of STATE.. FILED .. Make checks payable to Secretary of State LIB,. 1 0 1995 Return to: Minnesota Secretary of State 180 State Office 91dg. • 100 Constitution Ave. �/ Cxrct ;�ro dE Stets. . St. Paul, MN 551554299 (812)296.2803 03n3027'' Rev. 5193 `��,� 1. 53' •� 1 ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT OF ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF SGS EXPRESS, INC. I, Crary D. Geller, the President of SGS Express, Inc., a Minnesota corperation, , do hereby certify that by resolutions in lieu of a special meeting of the sole shareholder and sole director of said corporation effective as of April 11, 1996, the following ' resolutions were adopted in writing by the sole shareholder and sole director, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 302A: RESOLVED, that Article I of the Articles of Incorporation cf this corporation shall be amended to read as follows: Article I The name of this corporation is Community Money Centers, t; Inc. • RESOLVED FURTHER, that the President of this corporation is authoriged and directed to make and execute Articles of Amendment embracing the foregoing resolution and to cause such Articles of Amendment to be riled for record. in the manner required by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereto set my hand this I6, day of April, 1996. Cary C Geller, President • ti(r.l - E �)F M!i`I�•IE`,UtA Ufi ^RfntE ^ OF ATF rlLED ; 1996 Secretary of State It ..- .. '�'ai.;.xrt .r- .z�t;,tr� F -'4Y• c�• I,i•. ,a� t�;� # � �,.�,x;� #'t'� j..,, a S5G °lli� fJ. ttfi� ,'t`1C;. } �i'f7tip'1)i • ,. i. •�f� s . ): *�xi: f'�`91,tt. iY.lr��5i� :•�` _ , - ��t'ri;�'igi:' ..t 11 � � +•i' CIS' p:t l,,.J'�, ; +''i fir•. •i:r1 tt�� s ^'f�'y .a," �Z'�+��i '�T'y� ri d: . .li"� •.. i# . ,�r7�.7 %��, Yb: ". n). `.. STATE OF MINNESOTA � DEPARTMENT OF STATE �~ hereby certify that this is a true and complete - y documont as filed for record n this office. DATED. 19DK0 a,�l�+ce A -re B 2. c of Minn L.. .t ► �: ,� Q ra t Rif OF STATE � ���RETIa► ,.� CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION L �p 1, ,Joan Anderson Grows, Secretary of State of minrieson,a, do ^ertif.y That: Articles of Incorporation, 1 duly stigned and acknowledged sander Oat have been filed on , } this Ci. 3r ? in the Office of the Secretary of Slate, for the t incorporation of the following corpporation, under And in ?7 accord;.ince with the provisions of. tllp chapter OF Minnesota � St.Al;utes listed below. This corporation is new l egally orc..w i zed under the ►'� i ;aws or ti i nnes . Name: SGS ExprP sG, Inc. > { Cor Cl-,ar:.er Number- 7K -4 I 1 � ( � 1 K c:hap1.er Formed Under: 302A , s This certiCicate has been is^.ued on 04 /30/1997. t Z • � 1 4. Secretary of State. f r � - �. ,rr- ry T �o • r►rr�j- +±rrfvviirC ��,��► •� • �w •�±• ��i ° - ,�i►'ti - '•'� J• ��r • f 039 1 STATE FOR OFFICE USE ONLY STATE OF MINNESOTA Y � „s�le�dl j G� .7J.:• auv....... SECRETARY OF STATE '�. ERTIFI CATS OF r� r ASSUMED NAM E S �CRTAny Q Mfnrrrsata staluiss Gbapfrr333 Resd the direction+ tin reverse side before cotnptcting. Filing Fee: $75.00 All information on this fonn is public information. To expedite the relu nt of your documents, please submit a, stamped self - addressed envelope. The filing of an assumed name doeu not protect a user's exclusive rights to that name. The tiling is required sh a consumer protection, In order to enable consumers to be able to identify the true owner of a business. PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT LEGIBLY IN BLACK INK FOR MICROFILMING PURPOSES. 1. State the exact assumed nams under which the business is or will be conducted: (one business name per a ' n THE MONEY CENTER 2. State the address of the principal place of business. A complete street address or rural route and rural route box number is requhad: the address cannot be a P.O. Box. 6525 NICOLLET AVE. RICHFIELD My 55423 Street City State Zip code 3. List the name and complete street address of all persons conducting business under the above Assumed Name. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.. if the business owner is a corporation or other business entity, list the legal name and registered office address. Name (please print) Street City State ZIP COMMUNITY MONEY CENTERS, INC., 6525 HICOLETT AVE., RICHFIELD, 14H 55423 A. List the Standard industrial Code (SIC) that most accurately describes the nature of the business operating under this name 4 Select one of the 2 -digit SiC Codes listed on the reverse side of this form. ° 5. 1 cattily that I am authorized to sign this certificate and 1 further certify that I understand that by signing this certificate, I am subject to the penalties of perjury as forth in Minnesota Lf e ction 09.48 as if I had signed this 1. certificate under oath. Signature (ONLY nne person Itsted In N3 Is required to sign.) 08115/96 CARY D. GELLER, PRESIDENT Dale Print Name rind Title CARY D. GELLER, TRESIDENT 612- 866 -5674 Contact Person Dayluns Ptww Number 05920807 Rev. 8195 ". 289011 .t . • L � 1' . . ♦ .� i. � i �� �• r7i Ft •r1: ('• � j :.:. ' "L� ,{ �. i' �y.Y. . , :....� i , ." ..:, 1 (M '. ' :. ':r -'SO.. 7' qi.•. - ' +i. � � '••- f' -t M y7�g J a A I " j ":t ' t ':t�i'5r ,'" =k :-J7S'I+�J't;•3 �7�:,;.�y�1: +.:i, �$.*'i?' i i •.i.. a. °r ; ;�''ili•( �,?'': f!':'!f�n}sl'�:; !its: + P" f ia� _ • •�} 'P. :r S. •F s` it �' 4 ; .�'. ;ts � ,r e::•.- ,n"i C1 'n;r .;,• ?:p r�!!;1 t:•'�#� #j �' "'�t�lnr #r #) i�qM�. »i rr � . .t w., „ ; 1.• �i..•,:'.:r r►i i�, �5:'c';t�� t�:'! :brit? `' v, - ..• t S' �r, ht1 i ..,_.!:, :, +',.. • , .. }yi ,1 iir`� - Fa'r ,r] `'i.^1 j•'� �. #'tiY?i4,: . ! +, : "i` i ., �•+'sp #',+ !r ; 't'j,..) �:{yt °, >r•;�''i} « "tt :.i;,3 �i� _��., , . i v#1'1! -# #;.1: if " ., li CY t, •.. .,' ?A fity!}, :# 1:`i�.'T • .u.,k -= c. - #i,,a 7't'.''.'�tw;+��rf:.Pdt;r {{ gs{f;:fj • ,• _ , ,�;j T r i`'Y;E7'if'!# ,. •!':a ' •?;�;t',N`� - ' . _ •' ' i • ' 'i _ •iY i� ;•,. .'•,p'.� ..,i }iY:a .,.eei -•�• .i i,4 : •nIS:k� , y : • t i MINNESOTA (: L..a ' 0 STATE . , ,e , e... i ,• ,.� eby cet�ify that this is a h i1',' >,t JfJ;r' ;Lat " t and comp ate copy of the _ .�. +..,. ucument as filed for record in this office. DATED -1 ( Dq 199� p { i o f Ass '�&cr�OU7 �Qfat�ata Y 53A.01 CURRENCY EXCHANGES 248 �1 CHAPTER 53A } CURRENCY EXCHANGES N 53A.01 Definitions. 53A.07 Filing of fees; unreasonable fees. 53A.02 License. 53A.08 Bond. 53A.03 Application for license; fees. 53A.081 Annual report and investigations. 53A.04 Approval or denial of an application. 53A.09 Powers; limitations; prohibitions. 53A.05 Change of name, ownership, or 53A.10 Violations. location. 53A.I I Books of account; annual report. P � 53A.06 . Fine, suspension, or revocation of 53A.12 Rules. license. 53A.13 Fee notice; false advertising; penalty, 53A.01 DEFINITIONS. Subdivision 1. Currency exchange. "Currency exchange" means any person, except a bank, trust company, savings bank, savings association, credit union, or industrial loan and thrift company, engaged in the business of cashing checks, drafts, money orders, or travelers' checks for a fee. "Currency exchange" does not include a person who provides these services t incidental to the person's primary business if the charge for cashing a check or draft does not exceed $1 or one percent of the value of the check or draft, whichever is greater. I Subd. 2. Commissioner. "Commissioner" means the commissioner of commerce. History: 1989 c 247 s 1; 1995 c 202 art 1 s 25 53A.02 LICENSE. j Subdivision 1. Requirement. A person may not engage in the business of a currency exchange without first obtaining a license from the commissioner. Not more than one place of business may be operated under the same license, but the commissioner may issue more than one license to the same licensee upon compliance by the applicant with all the provi- sions of this chapter for each new license issued. Subd. 2. Distance limitation. No license may be issued or renewed under this chapter if the place of business to be operated under the license is located or proposed to be located within one —half mile of another licensed currency exchange. The distance limitation im- posed by this subdivision is measured by a straight line from the closest points of the closest structures involved. Subd. 3. Prohibition. A licensee may not contract with another person or business enti- ty to manage the currency exchange business. This subdivision does not prohibit the licensee from employing persons to operate a currency exchange facility. History: 1989 c 247 s 2; 1992 c 504 s 2 53A.03 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE; FEES. ' i i (a) An application for a license must be in writing, under oath, and in the form pre- scribed and furnished by the commissioner and must contain the following: I (1) the full name and address (both of residence and place of business) of the applicant, and if the applicant is a partnership or association, of every member, and the name and busi- ness address if the applicant is a corporation; (2) the county and municipality, with street and number, if any, of all currency exchange locations operated by the applicant; and (3) the applicant's occupation or profession, for the ten years immediately preceding the application; present or previous connection with any other currency exchange in this or any other state; whether the applicant has ever been convicted of any crime; and the nature of the applicant's occupancy of the premises to be licensed; and if the applicant is a partnership or a corporation, the information specified in this paragraph must be supplied for each partner and each officer and director of the corporation. If the applicant is a partnership or a nonpub- lily held corporation, the information specified in this paragraph must be required of each partner and each officer, director, and stockholders owning in excess of ten percent of the corporate stock of the corporation. �;1 i 249 CURRENCY EXCHANGES 53A.05 (b) The application shall be accompanied by a nonrefundable fee of $250 for the review of the initial application. Upon approval by the commissioner, an additional license fee of $50 must be paid by the applicant as an annual license fee for the remainder of the calendar year. An annual license fee of $50 is due for each subsequent calendar year of operation upon submission of a license renewal application on or before September 1. Fees must be depos- ited in the state treasury and credited to the general fund. Upon payment of the required annu- al, license fee, the commissioner shall issue a license for the year beginning January 1. (c) The commissioner shall require the applicant to submit to a background investiga- tion conducted by the bureau of criminal apprehension as a condition of liceusure. As part of the background investigation, the bureau of criminal apprehension shall conduct criminal history checks of Minnesota records and is authorized to exchange fingerprints with the Fed- eral Bureau of Investigation for the purpose of a criminal background check of the national files. The cost of the investigation must be paid by the applicant. (d) For purposes of this section, "applicant" includes an employee who exercises man- agement or policy control over the company, a director, an officer, a limited or general part- ner, a manager, or a shareholder holding more than ten percent of the outstanding stock of the corporation. History: 1989 c 247 s 3; 1992 c 504 s 3; 1993 c 354 s 1 53A.04 APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF AN APPLICATION. (a) Within 30 days after the receipt of a complete application, the commissioner shall deny the application or submit the application to the governing body of the local unit of gov- ernment in which the applicant is located or is proposing to be located. The commissioner may not approve the application without the concurrence of the governing body. The govern- ing body shall give published notice of its intention to consider the issue and shall solicit tes- timony from interested persons, including those in the community in which the applicant is located or is proposing to be located. If the governing body has not approved or disapproved the issue within 60 days of receipt of the application, concurrence is presumed. The commis - sionermust approve or disapprove the application within 30 days from receiving the decision of the governing body. The governing body shall have the sole responsibility for its decision. The state shall have no responsibility for that decision. (b) If the application is denied, the commissioner shall send by mail notice of the denial and the reason for the denial to the applicant at the address contained in the application. If an application is denied, the applicant may, within 30 days of receiving the notice of a denial, request a contested case hearing pursuant to chapter 14; provided that if the denial is based upon the refusal of the governing d P ernin body to concur the governing body must afford the a g g Y g g Y PP li cant a hearing. The applicant shall have no right to the hearing provided for in this section if the denial is based upon the governing body's refusal to concur but shall have a hearing be- fore the governing body. (c) This section applies to initial applications and renewal applications. (d) The state shall have no responsibility for the action of the governing body. History: 1989 c 247 s 4; 1992 c 504 s 4 53A.05 CHANGE OF NAME, OWNERSHIP, OR LOCATION. Subdivision 1. Name or location. If a licensee proposes to change the name or location Of any or all of its currency exchanges, the licensee shall file an application for approval of the change with the commissioner. The commissioner shall not approve a change of location if the requirements of sections 53A.02, subdivision 2, and 53A.04 have not been satisfied. If the change is approved by the commissioner, the commissioner shall issue an amended li- cense inthe licensee's new name or location. A $50 fee must be paid for the amended license. Subd. 2. Ownership. The licensee shall notify the commissioner 30 business days in advance of any change in ownership of the currency exchange. The commissioner may re- voke the currency exchange license if the new ownership would have resulted in a denial of '. initial license under the provisions of chapter 53A. History: 1989 c 247 s 5; 1992 c 504 s 5 53A.06 CURRENCY EXCHANGES 250 53A.06 FINE, SUSPENSION, OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE. (a) The commissioner may suspend or revoke any license under section 45.027 if the commissioner finds that: (1) the licensee has failed to pay the annual license fee or to maintain in effect the re- quired bond or to comply with any order, decision, or finding of the commissioner under Laws 1989; chapter 247; (2) the licensee, or any officer or director of a corporate licensee, has violated any provi- sion of Laws 1989, chapter 247, or any rule or order of the commissioner under this chapter or chapter 45; (3) the licensee, or any officer or director of a corporate licensee, has violated any other law which would indicate that the person is untrustworthy or not qualified to operate a cur- - renc exchange; or Y (4) any fact or condition exists which, if it had existed at the time of the original or re- , newal application for the license, would have warranted the commissioner refusing the is- suance of the license. (b) A license may not be revoked until the licensee has had notice of a hearing pursuant to the provisions of chapter 14. (c) A licensee may surrender any license by delivery to the commissioner. The surren- der does not affect the licensee's civil or criminal liability for acts committed before the sur- render, or affect the liability on the bond required by sections 53A.01 to 53A.13, or entitle the licensee to a return of any part of any license fee. (d) Before suspension or revocation of the license, the commissioner may fine a licens- ee for violations of Laws 1989, chapter 247, as authorized under chapter 45. History: 1989 c 247 s 6 xj Y. 53A.07 FILING OF FEES; UNREASONABLE FEES. Subdivision 1. Approval of fees. Fees charged at each location for check cashing ser- vices must be filed with and approved by the commissioner. Subd. 2. Amendment of fees. A licensee may amend its fees at any time by filing the proposed amendments with the commissioner. The application for amendment shall be in writing, under oath, and in the form prescribed by the commissioner. A fee of $50 shall ac- company the application. The commissioner shall approve or deny the application 60 days after the filing of a complete application to amend its fees. Subd. 3. Standards; unreasonable fees prohibited. The commissioner may disap- prove the fees filed by a currency exchange if they are not fair and reasonable. In determining whether a fee is fair and reasonable, the commissioner shall take into consideration: (1) rates charged in the past for cashing of checks by those persons and organizations providing check cashing services in the state of Minnesota; (2) the income, cost, and experience of the operations of currency exchanges existing prior to this enactment or in other states under similar conditions or regulations; (3) the amount of risk involved in the type of check to be cashed and the location where the currency exchange operates; (4) the general cost of doing business, insurance costs, security costs, banking fees, and other costs associated with the operations of the particular currency exchange; (5) a reasonable profit for a currency exchange operation; and 1 (6) any other matter the commissioner deems appropriate. The commissioner shall set a separate rate, consistent with the above standards, for checks issued by a government entity in an amount up to $500 to be cashed by a currency exchange. History: 1989 c 247 s 7 53A.08 BOND. Before a license may be issued to a currency exchange, the applicant shall file annually with and have approved by the commissioner a surety bond, issued by a bonding company ' 251 CURRENCY EXCHANGES 53A.11 fir: authorized to do business in this state in the principal amount of $10,000. The bond must run - to the commissioner and is for the benefit of creditors of the currency exchange for liability incurred by the currency exchange on money orders issued or sold by the currency exchange, for liability incurred by the currency exchange for sums due to a payee or endorsee of a check, draft, or money order left with the currency exchange for collection, and for liability incurred by the currency exchange in connection with providing currency exchange ser- vices. The commissioner may require a licensee to file a bond in an additional amount if the commissioner considers it necessary to meet the requirements of this section. In determining the additional amount of the bond which may be required, the commissioner may require the licensee to file its financial records, including all bank statements, pertaining to the sale of money orders for the preceding 12 —month eriod. In no case may, the bond be less than the 000 or m P y 10 ore than i the o inr $ outstanding liabilities. History: 1989 c 247 s 8; 1992 c 504 s 6 53A.081 ANNUAL REPORT AND INVESTIGATIONS. Subdivision 1. Annual report. On or before April 30, a licensee shall file an annual report with the commissioner for the previous calendar year. The report must contain in- formation that the commissioner may reasonably require concerning, and for the purpose of examining, the business and operations of each licensed currency exchange. Subd. 2. Investigation. The commissioner may at any time and shall at least once in each year investigate the currency exchange business of any licensee and of every person, partnership, association, and corporation engaged in the business of operating a currency ex- change in the manner provided under section 45.027. Subd. 3. Fees and expenses. The licensee shall pay the costs of an examination or in- vestigation in the manner provided under section 60A.03, subdivision 5. Subd. 4. Classification of data. Financial information on individuals and businesses that is submitted to the commissioner in the annual report under subdivision 1 are private data on individuals or nonpublic data. History: 1992 c 504 s 7, 1996 c 439 art 1 s 6, 1 Sp1997 c 3 s 19 53A.09 POWERS; LIMITATIONS; PROHIBITIONS. Subdivision 1. Deposits; escrow accounts. A currency exchange may not accept money or currency for deposit, or act as bailee or agent for persons, firms, partnerships, associations, or corporations to hold money or currency in escrow for others for any purpose. However, a currency exchange may act as agent for the issuer of money orders or travelers' checks. Subd. 2. Gambling establishments. A currency exchange located on the premises of a gambling establishment as defined in section 256.983 1, subdivision 1, may not cash a war- rant that bears a restrictive endorsement under section 256.983 1, subdivision 3. History: 1989 c 247 s 9; 1996 c 465 art 3 s 1 53A.10 VIOLATIONS. Any person, firm, association, partnership, or corporation that violates Laws 1989, chapter 247, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. History: 1989 c 247 s 10 53A.11 BOOKS OF ACCOUNT; ANNUAL REPORT. The licensee shall keep and use in the licensee's business the books, accounts, and rec- ords that will enable the commissioner to determine whether the licensee is complying with the provisions of Laws 1989, chapter 247, and with the rules adopted by the commissioner. A licensee shall preserve the books, accounts, and records for at least two years after making the final entry. History: 1989 c 247 s 11 • 53A.12 CURRENCY EXCHANGES 252 53A.12 RULES. The commissioner may adopt rules under chapter 14 as may be necessary to administer and enforce this chapter. History: 1989 c 247 s 12 53A.13 FEE NOTICE; FALSE ADVERTISING; PENALTY. Subdivision 1. Fee notice. The fees charged by currency exchanges for rendering any service authorized by sections 53A.01 to 53A.13 must be prominently displayed on the premises of the currency exchange in the fashion required by the commissioner. Subd. 2. False advertising. A licensee may not advertise, print, display, publish, dis- tribute, or broadcast any statement orrepresentation that is false, misleading, or deceptive, or. that omits material information. Subd. 3. Civil liability; penalty. A person who violates any subdivision of this chapter is liable to the person damaged by the violation for actual damages. The court may award reasonable attorney fees and costs. History: 1989 c 247 s 13 - 53A.14 [Repealed, 1992 c 504 s 8] s, 3.� q� =�M • i MEMORANDUM July 6, 1999 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Anne Finn, Administrative Specialist Ar SUBJECT: Properties on Nicollet Avenue South After reviewing the attached report from Richfield's Department of Public Safety, you requested the following information: 6500 Nicollet Ave. S.: Firstar Bank of Minnesota 6501 Nicollet Ave. S.: Paper Warehouse and Simeks Meats & Seafood Please let me know if you need further information. • pOxLYN CE&V BROOKLYN CENTER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: Anne Finn, Administration Specialist FROM: Tami Leiran, Police Administrative Aide DATE: July 6, 1999 SUBJECT: Money Center and Teller's II Anne, As I explained earlier, the request for criminal activity prior and proceeding the period in which Money Center in Richfield and Teller's II in St. Louis Park opened is far from conclusive evidence that these businesses caused an increase in calls for service or problems for the cities involved. There are many factors outside the business (i.e. other businesses, bus stops, weather, seasonality, etc.) that could cause the neighborhood to have an increase in calls for service. It is not an accurate comparison of crime to base the number of calls for service prior and proceeding the opening of a business in a designated area. The only information of value that one could use is the actual number of calls for service reported for the business itself. There is absolutely no way to determine if the check cashing businesses involved have any effect on the crime being committed in that particular area. In addition, there is no statistical data available to support this premise. As far as the residential neighborhoods surrounding the business the same goes for them. There is no way to determine that crime increased in surrounding neighborhoods by comparing the calls for service prior to the business opening to a period of time once the business was in operation. Again it would be like comparing apples to oranges. It is statistically not possible to make that assumption. I did call the two agencies you requested information from and the following is the best information they could provide. Richfield P.D. - Spoke with Jennifer Rabrugi in Crime Prevention (861 -9800) Jennifer did a search for the number of calls for service for the 6500 Block of Nicollet Avenue for 4/1/94 - 4/1/95 and 4/1/95- 4/1 -96. Money Center is located at 6525 Nicollet Avenue . in a strip mall. Jennifer indicated that a good portion of the crime in that area is due to a bus stop at 66th and Nicollet that criminals use to get in and out of the city. I inquired as to surrounding residential neighborhoods and she reported that they are cornered off from the area of the business. (See attached report from Richfield P.D. indicating calls for service for the 6500 Block of Nicollet Avenue.) 4/1/94 - 4/1/95 (18 calls for service; 1 animal assist, 1 assist other agency, 2 checks /other forged, 6 alarm, 2 P.D. accidents, 1- 911 hang -up, 1 person- suspicious, 1 parking violation, 2 thefts, and 1 open door /window.) 4/1/95 - 4/1/96 (80 calls for service; 31 alarms, 10 thefts, 8 checks /other forged, 2 public assist, 1 noise complaint, 3 vandalism, 2 shoplift, 2 P.D. accidents, 1 animal at large, 6 person suspicious, 4 fire /assist, 2 vehicle suspicious, 1 parking violation, 1 recovered stolen property, 1 judicial matter, 1 disturbance, 3 harassment, and 1 threat.) St. Louis Park P.D. - Spoke with Joan, Administrative Assistant (924 -2605) Joan was asked to do a search for the block of 4900 Excelsior Blvd between 6/1/88- 6/1/89 and 6/1/89- 6/1/90 since Teller's II is located'at 4901 Excelsior Blvd. Joan reported that the computer system they have could not produce a report for all calls for service prior to 1989. She could only produce a report for actual calls when a report was written. She also reported that they only recently started reporting calls for service by neighborhoods, therefore she is unable to provide any reports by residential neighborhoods. (See attached report for actual reports written during the 1988 -89 and 1989 -90 time period.) cc: Joel Downer • JUN -30 -1999 13:32 CITY OF RICHFIELD P S 612 866 0297 P.01 ( Richfield Public Safety: Calls for Service i Calls for Service for: 6500 Block ofNicollet Requested By: —' TA O m: 411/94 To: 4/1/95 Note: Calls are listed In order of address and unit number. Due to data privacy mgu/ations, calls involving Juveniles can only be Identified "Juvenile Matter' and calls involving criminal sexual conduct are excluded LOCATION UNIT CALL TYPE DISPOSITION DATE TIME CALL CASE NUMBER NUMBER ;5500 S, NICOLLET AV ZSIST IMAL ASSIST ssiat and Advise 1121!95 1036 1501511 OTHER AGENCY Assist and Advise 1/25/95 0033 1601737 CHECKS,OTHER FORGED Report Taken 3095 1403 504327 95001065 1 ;8501 S. NICOLLET AV I LARM - FIRE Non- Billable False Alarm 223/95 1353 1503831 ALARM - BURGLARY jBiBable False Alarm 3/18/95 2235 X505556 6503 S. NICOLLET AV I ALARM - BURGLARY 'Billable False Alarm 118195 j 1057 1500659 ALARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 1/14195 0100 500962 I !ALARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 1121/95 1 0337 501486 '6607 S. NICOLLET AV PD ACCIDENT Report Taken 2/24/95 0625 503875 95000945 i 1911 HANG -UP EEsist sist and Advise 3115/95 ! 1734 505265 6611 S. NICOLLET AV I ' PERSON- SUSPICIOUS port Taken 3114195 1305 1 505167 95001270 ,6519 S. NICOLLET AV I ,PARKING VIOLATION and Advise 1/9/95 I 1732 500651 PDHR ACCIDENT ;Report Taken 218/95 f 1553 502758 95000677 4201 THEFT Report Taken 3/17/95 1351 505408 95001330 16625.5. NICOLLET AV ! ALARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 3127/95 ! 0828 506149 ! 1 8533 S, NICOLLET AV I OPEN DOORIWINDOV1i Assist and Advise 1121/95 I 2013 501534 ` ITHEFT Report Taken 217195 1733 1502683 95000656 I G (CHECKS,OTHER FORGED Report Taken ( 2/13/95 j 2101 1 503137 95000769 1 G OP 1 30; Jun -99 t JUN -30 -1999 13:33 CITY OF RICHFIELD P S 612 966 0297 P -02 Richfield Public Safety: Calls for Service Calls for Service for: 16500 Block ofNicollet Requested By: Brooklyn Center Police Departme 4/1195 To: 4/1/96 Alofe: Calls are fisted In order of address and unit number. Due to data privacy regulnUons, calls Involving juveniles can only be Identified Juvenl/e Matter' and calls Involving criminal sexual conduct are excluded. LOCATION UNIT CALL TYPE DISPOSITION DATE TIME CALL CASE NUMBER NUMBER I I, ;8500 S. NICOLLET AV M - BURGLARY (Billable False Alarm 1 514/95 1237 1510444 508938 1 + i ALARM - BURGLARY Non - Billable False Alarm I 5124195 1104 (ALARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 1 7/13J95 0647 1514426 (THEFT, BIKE Report Taken 7/31195 1202 '515937 i { ( ALARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 95003839 I 1 8112/95 0840 516950 I � CHECKS,OTHER FORGED Report Taken 8!23/95 1330 517780 195004295 CHECKS,OTHER FORGED !Report Taken 9125195 , 0928 520296 k95004938 CHECKS,OTHER FORGED (Report Taken 1015195 1008 521013 195005134 I I CHECKS,OTHER FORGED !Report Taken 10/28/95 1155 522741 95005556 1 (' 1 �LARM - ROBBERY (Billable False Alarm 10/31/95 1307 522945 { -- I (PUBLIC ASSIST �ssfst and Advise 1218195 1 2002 525621 1 =M - BURGLARY jBlllable False Alarm 1 12114/95 ' 0723 525961 I ( NOISE COMPLAINT,ANY (Gone on Arrival 12/17/95 I 1734 1526201 ALARM - ROBBERY (Billable False Alarm { 1/10196 i 1 445 ;600649 1 1 f ALARM - BURGLARY !Billable False Alarm 1115/96 2333 1600992 ! PUBLIC ASSIST Assist and Advise 1/16/96 I 0702 1601005 1 ' I ALARM - ROBBERY Billable False Alarm 2120196 1512 1603393 I CHECKS,OTHER FORGED Report Taken I /96 I 1454 !604452 (96001119 16501 S. NICOLLET AV I VANDALISM !Report Taken I 3/7 317 195 1345_1508346 195002056 1 SHOPLIFT Assist and Advise 1 5/5/95 1835 509017 !ALARM -FIRE /Non- Billable False Alarm 5/15195 1 1600 509774 IPO ACCIDENT Report Taken 612195 1540 511196 95002706 (THEFT lAsslst and Advise 626195 1120 513115 IANIMALAT LARGE {Gone on Arrival { 716195 j 1614 513938 (ALARM - BURGLARY ;Billable False Alarm 7/22/95 1926 515263 ! (PERSON- SUSPICIOUS 'Assist and Advise 8/3/95 2013 516246 i ALARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 8/17195 0724 517323 I (FIRE - MEDICAL Fire Report Taken 926195 1237 520400 i (ALARM - BURGLARY IBIIIable False Alarm 10095 I 0453 520795 i 1 THEFT, BIKE sist and Advise 10)8/95 1638 521270 LARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 1 10/15/95 1 0656 521737 THEFT, VEHICLE ,Report Taken 1 12/11/95 j 1042 525783 195006356 P Assist and Advise i 12/22/95 ! 2004 526553 - (ALARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 123/96 ! 0342 1 ,501526 ICHECKS,OTHER FORGED lReport Taken 2/9/96 I 1006 602639 96000673 I ! VEHICLE- SUSPICIOUS IAsslst and Advise 2/15/96 2011 ,603112 . 1 { SHOPLIFT (Report Taken j 3/9/96 1614 1 604608 96001157 8503 S. NICOLLET AV PARKING VIOLATION (Assist and Advise j 5131/95 1358 511026 ALARM - BURGLARY ( Billable False Alarm ! 1122/86 2122 1601512 3507 S. NICOLLET AV 1 RECOV OTHER STOLEN. Report Taken ! 1122196 ! 2241 1601519 96000398 3509 S. NICOLLET AV (FIRE ASSIST (Fire Report Taken 1 12110/95 1 0300 525723 1 1 3511 S. NICOLLET AV !JUDICIAL MATTER Report Taken 416195 1147 1 506877 95001685 ;FIRE - MEDICAL - !Fire Report Taken 4/25195 1 1719 1508287 I ;FIRE ASSIST (Fire Report Taken 212196 1 1216 1602179 3515 S. NICOLLET AV I !VANDALISM Report Taken 823/95 1608 517792 l95004299 I !THEFT Report Taken 11/14/95 I 1850 523956 195005844 (THEFT Report Taken 12/16/95 1125 526120 95006461 I 151 COLLET AV IVEHICLE SUSPICIOUS lReport Taken 5115/95 1444 509768 95002379 I ALARM - BURGLARY DISTURBANCE ;Non- Billable False Alarm 1 6!10/95 0958 511823 IAsslst and Advise 1 6/29/95 1658 513373 ( ALARM - BURGLARY 1 Blllable False Mann ` 7/15195 1832 514625 1519 S. NICOLLET AV I IHARRASSMENT Assist and Advise I 62/95 ` 1622 511806 - 1 0- Jun -99 1 JUN -30 -1999 13:33 CITY OF RICHFIELD P S 612 866 0297 P.03 LOCATICN UNIT CALL TYPE DISPOSITION DATE TIME CALL CASE 019 S. NICOLLET AV (PERSON- S NUMBER NUMBER USPICIOUS Gone on Arrival j 8/8/95 j 1920 516679 I THEFT, VEHICLE Report Taken 1120198 ' 1710 160134 1960003 + t �IARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 1/29/96 0532 ;601893 304 IHARRASSMENT ( Report Taken ( 6!8/96 0959 511666 195002810 THEFT Report Taken 7/31/95 0933 515929 95003837 720195 1905 515072 !6519 S. NICOLLET AV #1 & &2 1 PERSON- SUSPICIOUS Gone on Arrival ' 8521 S. NICOLLET AV H Assist and Advise 5/10195 I 2204 509406 I j ( jPDHR ACCIDENT Assist and Advise 1 12/20/95 1733 526401 I I 18525 S, NICOLLET AV. ALARM • BURGLARY JBillable False Alarm 415195 1617 1506814 I 1 l 1ALARM - BURGLARY LEN12bl False Alarm I d /18/95 ( 1125 507751 (ALARM -BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 4/28195 I 0915 508472 11 ALARM • BURGLARY (Billable False Alarm 5112/95 0741 509517 J ALA RM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 1 I LARM - BURGLARY 113111able 6/1195 2117 (511135 False Alarm 6/8/95 2225 �LARM - BURGLARY !Billable False Al 511715 arm 6/22/95 0615 1512 j ( LARM • BURGLARY Non - Billable False Alarm 7/4/95 1127 513749 ! ( ALARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 7/5/95 0516 513828 1 ( (ALARM BURGLARY Billable False Alarm 1 12/10/95 1841 525754 j ALARM - BURGLARY Billable False Alarm I I ( 211196 2018 602137 ALARM - BURGLARY 011able False Alarm 2/15196 2022 603113 1 16627 S. NICOLLET AV THREATS Aeport Taken 1 9!12/85 1331 519335 95004688 1 ;6529 S, NICOLLET AV PERSON - SUSPICIOUS Assist and Advise 718/95 2315 1514106 ( ( (CHECKS,OTHER FORGED Report Taken ( 7!22195 0015 1515179 95003630 ' VANDALISM ( (Report Taken I 1013/95 1659 1520905 j95005103 8833 S. NICOLLET AV THEFT" iReport Taken 11/12/95 1121 523789 195005804 C FORGED ssist and Advise ( 4/17/95 ( 1905 507717 ( I (PERSON - SUSPICIOUS lReport Taken j 4118195 2212 507780 95001912 i j (THEFT 'Report Taken - I 8/5/95 1420 1516406 95003967 0 • 10,1 ur�99 2 JUL -06 -99 07:46 From:ST LOUIS PARK PD T -662 P -01 Job-480 C DF ST. LOUIS • J7 1PARK POL DEPARTMENT A FACSIMILE TRAN DATE: 7/ q TO: inn y ,S / -d 7/ FROM: NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER PAGE: • IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE THE CORRECT NUMBER OF PAGES, PLEASE CALL (61 2) . 9�O M M Ems sFllRcH Y-Bo — ,�ooD �c act o E xc��sio� /kJC,o En> rte$ Q 6 fJ,QoT E eFd 4. f eE 6Fe1 Q� . 6 4�, BEET /�1 G�ET cJ�E� 7'4j CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The document( accompanying this fax may contain confidential information which Is legally privileged. The information is Intended only for the use of the intended recipient named above. if you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied Information except Its direct delivery to the intended recipient named above is strictly prohibited. If you have received this tax in error, please notify us immediately by telephone to arrange for return of the original documents to us. 3015 Raleigh Ave. S.,St. Louis Park, MN 55416 -5705 Phone: 612 -924 -2500 Fax: 612 -924 -2678 TOO: 612- 824 -2671 JUL -06 -99 07:46 From:ST LOUIS PARK PD - n T-682 P.02 Job -480 REPORTS BY ADDRESS `'� CODE CRIME LOCATION DATE CASE -NO M O1 DRUG PARAPHERN M6501 4800 -- - EX 8904 CR890000005344 - -- -- - T '59 THEFT -$250 LES T4159 4800 EX 8905 CR890000007127 <*> 2C U 3496 THEFT -MS- BICYCL U349 4801 EX 8808 CR88000001137S <*> 1C D 3550 DRUGS -SCH 2 NA D3550 4808 EX 8904 CR890000006262 <*> 1C T 2029 THEFT - $251 -$250 T202 4815 EX 8810 CR880000014917 T 2029 EX 8901 CR890000001246 J 2500 TRAFFIC- GM -DRIV J250 4815 EX 8807 CRBBGOOCG10167 <*> 3C T 2029 THEFT -$251 -$250 T202 4818 EX 8812 CR880000018122 <*> 1C 9 9313 FOUND PROP 4820 EX 8905 CR890000006453 T 4159 THEFT -$250 LESS T415 4820 EX 8810 CR880000015301 <*> 2C U 1063 THEFT -FE -BY SW U1063 4825 EX 8904 CR890000005567 V 1021 VEH THEFT -FE -OV V102 4825 EX 8808 CR880000012890 <*> 2C U 3306 THEFT -MS -PURSE 0330 4860 EX 8812 CR880000018103 U 3306 EX 8812 CR880000018187 U 3304 EX 8903 CR890000003345 < 3C U 3496 THEFT -MS- BICYCL U349 4875 EX 8807 CR880000009556 <*> 1C A 52 ASLT 5- INFLICT A5352 4900 EX 8905 CR890000006868 9 00 DAR /DAS /DAC 4900 EX 8807 CR880000009593 9 9200 EX 8808 CR880000011164 9 9200 EX 8809 CRBBOO00013668 9 9720 DEATH INV 4900 EX 8806 CR880000008372 N 3070 DISTURB PEACE- N3070 4900 EX 8904 CR890000005671 9 9303 LOST PROPERTY 4900 EX 8902 CR890000002257 9 9740 MENTAL /CRISIS 4900 EX 8808 CR880000011789 0 3600 OBSENITY MS =IND 0360 4900 EX 8810 CR880000014763 P 3110 PROP DAMAGE -MS- P311 4900 EX 8903 CR890000003051 P 3110 EX 8904 CR890000004871 9 9808 SUSPICION /INFORMATIO 4900 EX 8808 CR880000011118 T 4029 THEFT -$250 LES T4029 4900 EX 8904 CR890000005622 T 4029 THEFT -$250 LESS T402 4900 EX 8809 CR880000013055 T 4029 EX 8811 CR880000016384 T 4029 EX 8812 CR880000018023 T 4159 THEFT -$250 LESS T415 4900 EX 8806 CR880000008592 T 4159 EX 8807 CR880000010173 T 4159 EX 8808 CR880000012350 T 4159 EX 8808 CR880000012745 T 4159 EX 8902 CR890000002247 T- 4159 EX 8902 CR890000002594 T 2029 THEFT -$251 -$250 T202 4900 EX 8807 CR880000009676 T 2029 EX 8809 CR880000014619 T 2029 EX 9811 CR880000017173 029 EX 8812 CR880000018682 159 THEFT - $251 -$250 T215 4900 EX 8807 CR880000010494 T 2159 EX 8807 CR880000010499 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 6/1/88 THROUGH 5/31/89 JUL -06 -99 07:46 From:ST LOUIS PARK PO T -662 P.03/08 Job -480 REPORTS BY ADDRESS CODE CRIME LOCATION DATE CASE -NO T 0 59 -$251 -$250 T215 -4900 EX ----- ------- -- 8809 CR880000013985 --- - - - - -- - - -_ T 2159 EX 8902 CR890000002769 T 2159 EX 8903 CR890000004127 U 3496 THEFT -MS- BICYCL 0349 4900 EX 8807 CR880000009754 U 3306 THEFT -MS -PURSE U330 4900 EX 8809 CR880000014402 U 3306 EX 8810 CR880000014690 U 3306 EX 8811 CR880000016350 U 3306 EX 8811 CR880000017175 U 3306 EX 8811 CR880000017238 U 3306 EX 8811 CR880000017789 U 3306 EX 8812 CR880000018481 U 3306 EX 8901 CR890000000168 U 3306 EX 8901 CR890000000330 U 3306 EX 8901- CR890000000723 U 3306 EX 8903 CR890000003698 U 3306 EX 8903 CR890000004334 U 3306 EX 8903 CR890000004336 U 3304 THEFT -MS -PURSE U3304 4900 EX 8904 CR890000005032 U 3306 THEFT -MS -PURSE 03306 4900 EX 8903 CR890000004333 J 3500 TRAF- ACCID -MS -D J350 4900 EX 8903 CR890000003310 J 2500 TRAFFIC -GM -DRI J2500 4900 EX 8810 CR880000016038 <*> 49C T 4999 THEFT -250 LESS- T499 4911 EX 8810 CR880000016064 T 2999 THEFT - 251 -2500- T299 4911 EX 8810 CR880000016065 U 3026 THEFT -MS -ISSUE 0302 4911 EX 8807 CR880000010546 <*> 3C B *94 BURG 3 -UNOCC NR B379 4916 EX 8807 CR880000010668 U 3304 THEFT-MS -PURSE U330 4916 EX 8903 CR890000004248 <*> 2C 9 9800 ALL 0TH PUBS 4920 EX 8904 CR890000004847 9 9314 FOUND BIKE 4920 EX 8905 CR890000006377 <*> 2C Y 2230 CRIM AGNST GOVN Y223 4950 EX 8903 CR890000004223 9 9901 WARRANT ARREST 4950 EX 8810 CR880000015175 <It> 2C A 5356 ASLT 5- INFLICTS A535 4951 EX 8808 CR880000012777 <*-> 1C T 4159 THEFT -$250 LESS T415 4960 EX 8807 CR880000010942 <*> 1C P 3114 PROP DAMAGE -MS- P311 4995 EX 8808 CR880000012031 T 2059 THEFT - $251 -$250 T205 4995 EX 8903 CR890000004225 <*> 2C Y 2230 CRIM AGNST GOVN Y223 5000 EX 8810 CR880000016054 9 9200 DAR /DAS /DAC 5000 EX 8810 CR880000014761 9 9200 EX 8812 CR880000018887 9 9200 EX 8903 CR890000003953 J 3500 TRAF- ACCID -MS -D J350 5000 EX 8809 CR880000013332 J 2500 TRAFFIC -GM -DRI J2500 5000 EX 8807 CRESO000009684 9 9901 WARRANT ARREST 5000 EX 8902 CR890000002816 <*> 7C is 314 FOUND BICYCLES 5001 EX 8806 CR880000007712 <*> 1C 9 9905 ASSIST OTHER AGENCY 5005 EX 8812 CR880000018317 ---- ----------------------------------------------------------- -................................. 6/1/88 THROUGH 5/31/89 JUL -06 -99 07:46 From:ST LOUIS PARK PO T -662 P14/08 Jab -480 REPORTS BY ADDRESS CODE CRIME LOCATION DATE CASE -NO B -- -- - BURG 4 -AT FRC -U - -- 5005 EX -------- - - - - -- 8904 CR890000004768 .......... -. - 9 9202 OTHER DL VIOLATIONS 5005 EX 8807 CR880000009634 U 3286 THEFT- MS -SHOPL 03286 5005 EX 8904 CR890000006038 <*> 4C B 3764 BURG 3 -UNOCC N B3764 5007 EX 8904 CR890000005314 <*> 1C F 0070 ARSON -UNK DEG -U F007 5009 EX 8807 CR880000010713 B 3694 BURG 1 -OCC NRES 6369 5009 EX 8811 CR880000016825 P 3130 PROP DAMAGE -MS- P313 5009 EX 8806 CR880000007976 T 2029 THEFT - $251 -$250 T202 5017 EX 8806 CR880000008746 ic 9 9314 FOUND BICYCLES 5025 EX 8806 CR880000009150 9 9740 MENTAL /CRISIS 5025 EX 8811 CR880000017107 9 9808 SUSP /INFO 5025 EX 8812 CR880000018526 T 4059 THEFT -$250 LESS T405 5025 EX 8807 CR880000010411 T 1111 THEFT -MORE $250 T111 5025 EX 8903 CR890000003795 U 3060 THEFT -MS -BY SWI 0306 5025 EX 8809 CR880000014566 <*> 6C C 1212 FORGERY- FE -UTT C1212 5050 EX 8904 CR890000004995 9 9303 LOST PROPERTY 5050 EX 8810 CR880000015589 9 9808 SUSP /INFO 5050 EX 8905 CR890000007964 T 2029 THEFT -$251 -$250 T202 5050 EX 8809 CR880000014066 U 3034 THEFT -MS -BY CRE U303 5050 EX 8902 CR890000001888 U 3306 THEFT -MS -PURSE 0330 5050 EX 8808 CR880000012829 i <*> 6C 107C i 6/1/88 THROUGH 5/31/89 JUL Ur :4r rrom:Jl LUUIJ rAmA ru p I — ou r.uo/ua 400 - 40U REPORTS BY ADDRESS � -1 � � ^ CODE CRIME LOCATION DATE CASE -NO J &0 TRAFFIC GM - DRI J2500 4800 EX 9005 CR900000006271 " --- _._ <*> 1C J 3500 MS - DWI 4808 EX 9005 CR900000007175 T 4150 THEFT -$250 LES T4150 4808 EX 9001 CR900000000611 T 4150 EX 9001 CR900000000612 T 4159 THEFT -$250 LES T4159 4808 EX 9001 CR900000000613 T 4159 EX 9001 CR900000000615 <*> 5C 9 9800 ALL 0TH PUBS 4812 EX 9001 CR900000001126 9 9800 EX 9004 CR900000005156 B 4090 BURG 4 -AT FRC B4090 4812 EX 9005 CR900000006229 U 3994 FRAUD -MS -OTHER U3994 4812 EX 8912 CR890000018377 P 3110 PROP DAMAGE -MS P3110 4812 EX 8909 CR890000014512 9 9901 WARRANT ARR 4812 EX 9001 CR900000001129 <*> 6C U 1015 THEFT -FE -BY CH U1015 4814 EX 8912 CR890000018477 <*> 1C 9 9902 DETOX TRAM 4815 EX 8908 CR890000011914 9 9811 FIGHT 4815 EX 9005 CR900000006988 U 1083 THEFT- MS -DEFET 03083 4815 EX 8908 CR890000012787 U 3306 THEFT -MS -PURSE U3306 4815 EX 9005 CR900000007076 <*> 4C C 1211 FORGERY- FE -UTT C1211 4818 EX 8910 CR890000015282 T 2029 THEFT- $251 -$25 T2029 4818 EX 8909 CR890000013576 U 1062 THEFT -FE -BY SW 01062 4818 EX 8909 CR890000013985 U 1614 THEFT -MS -BY CH U3014 4818 EX 9003 CR900000003818 U 80 THEFT- MS -SHOPL U3280 4818 EX 9002 CR900000002251 U 3284 THEFT- MS -SHOPL U3284 4818 EX 8909 CR890000014893 <*> 6C 6 3794 BURG 3 -UNOCC N 83794 4820 EX 8911 CR890000016650 8 3794 EX 8912 CR890000018285 B 3794 EX 9001 CR900000000759 B 3794 EX 9001 CR900000000753 B 3794 EX 9001 CR900000000763 8 3794 EX 9001 CR900000000761 8 3794 EX 9001 CR900000000754 B 3794 EX 9001 CR900000000757 B 3794 EX 9001 CR900000000758 B 3794 EX 9001 CR900000000762 B 3864 BURG 3 -UNOCC N 83864 4820 EX 9005 CR900000007411 B 3894 BURG 3 -UNOCC N B3894 4820 EX 8911 CR890000016669 A 9600 TERROR - THRT IN A9600 4820 EX 8912 CR890000018494 T 2029 THEFT - $251 -$25 T2029 4820 EX 8908 CR890000012961 T 0021 THEFT -UNK LVL T0021 4820 EX 9004 CR900000004728 <*> 15C U 3306 THEFT -MS -PURSE 03306 4860 EX 8908 CR890000012247 <*> 1C L 7009 CSC 4 -UNK ACT- L7009 4900 EX 9003 CR900000003638 L 7087 CSC 4 -UNK ACT- L7087 4900 EX 9005 CR900000005915 J 3500 MS - DWI 4900 EX 9005 CR900000005925 4 202 0TH DL VIOL 4900 EX 8909 CR890000014490 150 THEFT -$250 LES T4150 4900 EX 8910 CR890000016347 T 4159 THEFT -$250 LES T4159 4900 EX 8907 CR890000010255 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ 6/1/89 THROUGH 5/31/90 JUL -05 -99 07:47 From:ST LOUIS PARK PD T -662 P.07/08 Job -480 REPORTS BY ADDRESS CODE CRIME LOCATION DATE CASE -NO T 59 THEFT -$250 LES T4159 -- - 4900 -- .- EX -- -- -- - - - - -- - 8907 - CR890000010480 .------- - - - - -- T 1159 EX 8908 CR890000012154 T 4991 THEFT -$250 LES T4991 4900 EX 9003 CR900000004019 T 2159 THEFT-$251 -$25 T2159 4900 EX 9003 CR900000003187 T 2159 EX 9003 CR900000003419 U 1302 THEFT -FE -PURSE U1302 4900 EX 9005 CR900000007039 U 3496 THEFT- MS -BICYC U3496 4900 EX 8907 CR890000009863 U 3303 THEFT -MS -PURSE 03303 4900 EX 8906 CR890000008648 U 3303 EX 8910 CR890000016560 U 3303 EX 8912 CR890000018889 U 3303 EX 9001 CR900000000175 U 3304 THEFT -MS -PURSE U3304 4900 EX 8908 CR890000012853 U 3306 THEFT -MS -PURSE 03306 4900 EX 8906 CR890000008527 U 3306 EX 8906 CR890000008772 U 3306 EX 8907 CR890000010867 U 3306 EX 8908 CR890000012583 U 3306 EX 8910 CR890000016245 U 3306 EX 8911 CR890000016767 U 3306 EX 8911 CR890000018104 U 3306 EX 8912 CR890000018426 U 3306 EX 9003 CR900000002827 U 3306 EX 9003 CR900000004166 U 3306 EX 9003 CR900000004167 U 3306 EX 9003 CR900000004169 U 3306 EX 9003 CR900000004168 U f 06 EX 9004 CR900000005313 U 06 EX 9004 CR900000005499 U 3306 EX 9005 CR900000006672 U 3306 EX 9005 CR900000006783 U 0302 THEFT -UNK LVL- UO302 4900 EX 8910 CR890000015887 P 3319 TRESPASS -111S -PR P3319 4900 EX 9004 CR900000005803 <*> 37C 9 9808 SUSP /INFO 4907 EX 8907 CR890000010993 <*> 1C P 3119 PROP DAMAGE -MS P3119 4911 EX 9004 CR900000005549 <*> 1C 9 9313 FOUND PROP 4920 EX 9005 CR900000007247 U 3996 FRAUD -MS -OTHER U3996 4920 EX 8908 CR890000012363 9 9808 SUSP /INFO 4920 EX 9002 CR900000001980 T 2021 THEFT - $251 -$25 T2021 4920 EX 9005 CR900000007246 U 3286 THEFT- MS -SHOPL U3286 4920 EX 8910 CR890000015853 < 8 4090 BURG 4 -AT FRC 84090 4995 EX 9002 CR900000001417 9 9303 LOST PROP 4995 EX 8911 CR890000017885 U 3286 THEFT- MS -SHOPL U3286 4995 EX 8908 CR890000013060 < 9 9215 REGISTRATION 5000 EX 8908 CR890000012288 T 4159 THEFT -$250 LES T4169 5000 EX 9003 CR900000004195 J 2500 , TRAFFIC- GM -DRI J2500 5000 EX 9005 CR900000006962 9 9901 WARRANT ARR 5000 EX 9003 CR900000003837 <*> B4)90 BURG 4 -AT FRC 84090 5001 EX 9004 CR900000004453 9 9200 DAR /DAS /DAC 5001 EX 8912 CR890000019410 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 6/1/89 THROUGH 5/31/90 JUL -06 -93 07:47 From:ST LOUIS PARK PO T -662 P.08/08 Job -480 REPORTS BY ADDRESS CODE CRIME LOCATION DATE CASE -NO U 4 2 - -- THEFT -MS- ISSUE --- - -- 5001 EX -------------- 9002 CR900000002604 - - - - -- <*> 3C 9 9200 DAR /DAS /DAC 5005 EX 8909 CR890000013533 <*> 1C 8 3794 BURG 3•UNOCC N 83794 5007 EX 9003 CR900000003641 8 3794 EX 9004 CR900000004477 U 3496 THEFT -MS -BICYC 03496 5007 EX 9005 CR900000007158 <*> 3C 8 3794 BURG 3 -UNOCC N B3794 5009 EX 9003 CR900000003981 B 3794 EX 9003 CR900000003961 J 3500 MS - DWI 5009 EX 8911 CR890000017232 P 3114 PROP DAMAGE -MS P3114 5009 EX 9003 CR900000002826 T 4029 THEFT -$250 LES T4029 5009 EX 8907 CR890000009810 <*> 5C R 0953 ROBB -UNK LVL -0 R0953 5011 EX 8910 CR890000016492 <*> 1C 9 9902 DETOX TRAN 5015 EX 8908 CR890000012498 <*> ic 8 3794 BURG 3 -UNOCC N B3794 5017 EX 8908 CRB90000012896 T 4021 THEFT -$250 LES T4021 5017 EX 8908 CR890000012236 <*> 2C B 4060 BURG 4 -AT FRC B4060 5025 EX 8906 CR890000008611 M 4104 LIQUOR - POSSE M4104 5025 EX 8906 CR890000008612 T 2029 THEFT - $251 -$25 T2029 5025 EX 8909 CR890000013994 T 2029 EX 8909 CR890000014143 4283 U THEFT- MS -SHOPL U3283 5025 EX 8909 CR890000014881 286 THEFT- MS -SHOPL U3286 5025 EX 8908 CR890000012783 9 9901 WARRANT ARR 5025 EX 8906 CR890000008607 <*> 7C 9 9902 DETOX TRAN 5050 EX 8907 CR890000010950 C 1212 FORGERY- FE -U77 01212 5050 EX 9004 CR900000004727 C 0932 FORGERY -UNK LV C0932 5050 EX 9003 CR900000002914 9 9820 POL M/V TOW 5050 EX 9003 CR900000004232 R 0603 ROBE AGG UNK N R0603 5050 EX 8910 CR890000015170 U 3495 THEFT -MS -BICYC U3495 5050 EX 8906 CR890000008942 < 6C 119C -- - -- - - - - - - -- ---- .... -- ----..........- - --- ------------------------- - - - - 6/1/89 THROUGH 5/31/90 MEMORANDUM June 18, 1999 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager - FROM: Anne Finn, Administrative Specialist SUBJECT: Check- Cashing/Currency Exchange Operations Per your request, I have gathered information relating to check - cashing operations. Attached are the following: • pictures of Money Centers stores located in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Richfield, and Tellers H in St. Louis Park • a memorandum from Tami Leiran, Police Administrative Aid, outlining her discussions with law enforcement offices in Minneapolis, St. Paul, Richfield and St. Louis Park relating to their experiences with the Money Centers/Tellers H stores located in their cities • Internet articles discussing the check - cashing operations industry I contacted Charles Walters, Research Analyst for the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC), and asked if the LMC had produced any reports relating to check - cashing operations. Mr. Walters checked LMC files and reported that he did not find information relating to check - cashing operations. Please let me know if you have questions about the materials or if you need further information. Attachments t � 3 7. ' , Yom. „ z .y. >�'t. �7, 1 � � ` � • � !'rl .a.� . � ��._�n � X aw,lX i . �MVk t.3 f X:, `7i t.:': r. • r„ w� � qv i off A ..,a Y p! ��. ���h u >�4 .,, x'i'� ni� ,���.,�p��,�M. ��`_� �„�.*'�' r'r�t � y ' sr �N. t t+.'�r r � r r - �t�'.' 7 r��a*�4 t t#� ; x , �. r ..'���"k `'�'� �i�' "� � � .:�'.xJ!` ,a .a� + ,c xt � ✓�i ro 4�r� - � ,�` r `$ ry 3 ' ":' r v.. ,_ + T' h�,J � � }� {' ! � , K" s it n ,•+''� .� *''� '' � �+ - a s''�`..L n, .•t 5,,�t k`3xrlj s. .y 7 " st",. , ky. sue i qr t �F �i i j; F> w . . -�' ��, kx i °i =ry', .. '� � � zi� "� ',. a�` :>r� � .� '• ,�,°'',.. �. s'lm '�-, f�...'' i, i+,�- 3 , . t :. , ?e ; � .r��. ..4 4901 Excelsior Blvd., St. Louis Park " x r' s �f= . - - : - - . , . - _ � : ^frt#.� - a�' ••� #u� r�.1�u. � Yi »: t� : 1 f� W 1532 University Ave. W., St. Paul >f ? 6525 Nicollet Ave., Richfield 3� q :� L N CEAre BROOKLYN CENTER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: Anne Finn, Administration Specialist FROM: Tami Leiran, Police Administrative Aide DATE: June 18, 1999 SUBJECT: Money Center's Anne, Here is the information you requested for the Money Centers located in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Richfield as well as the Tellers Two in St. Louis Park. I hope this is what you were expecting to receive, if not let me know. Minneapolis PD - Spoke with Inspector Ken Ziegler 673 -3904 P P g @ Ziegler reported that the Money Center located at 2600 Nicollet Avenue has been renting space in a drug store for about 4 -5 years. He has had no complaints or adverse problems from this business. They have apprehended more criminals through this business for forgeries as well as check thieves. Apparently when a customer walks into the business they are "locked" into the store until it is determined by personnel that the check being cashed is good. If personnel findsa the check to be bad they hold the person until the Police arrive. He does not feel this business is harmful to the community in any way. The Money Center has tried opening other sites but due to zoning issues have been unable to do so at this time. - St. Paul PD - Spoke with Judy in the Fraud & Forgery Unit Judy suggested contacting the records department since her unit is unfamiliar with any problems with the Money Center located at 1532 University Avenue, West #100. Eva in Records reported the following calls they received related to the Money Center: • 1997 - 33 Calls for Service (6 -8 calls for Forgery, the rest were alarms and a couple of domestics). • 1998 - 32 Calls for Service (10 -12 calls for Forgery, 2 calls for Theft, and the rest were alarms, domestics, and disorderly juveniles). • 1999 - 15 Calls for Service (3 calls for Forgery, 1 call for Theft, and the rest were alarms and a fire). Richfield PD - Spoke with Jennifer in Records and Betsy Christianson in Public Safety Betsy reported that the Money Center located at 6525 Nicollet Avenue has been in their City for awhile now and she has not had any trouble or complaints regarding this business. She indicated that the State of Minnesota actually licenses the business, however they are given the opportunity to "bless" the business. She remarked that the operator of the business has not been a problem and is quite professional. Jennifer is records reported the following calls they received to the Money Center: • 1998 - 2 Calls for Service (both were for forged checks). • 1999 - 3 Calls for Service (all were for forged checks). St. Louis Park PD - Spoke with Joan, Administrative Assistant Joan could not provide any comments as far as the operation of the business but did provide the number of Calls for Service they had. She suggested speaking with Officer Joe Hanson or Sgt. Crammer who might be able to provide additional information on the business. Sgt. Crammer (924 -2607) reported they have had a great relationship with the business. He could not say enough good things about them. They are very pro - police. He suggests that if we do allow a check cashing business in Brooklyn Center to make it a condition that the business obtain a thumb print from anyone who cashes a check in addition to the usual form of positive identification. (Sgt. Crammer would be a good source for what to require of a Check Cashing business if they do come to Brooklyn Center.) Tellers II or Tellers li The/My Bank located at 4901 Excelsior Boulevard has had the following calls for service: • 1999 - 1 Call for Service (Theft) • 1998 - 6 Calls for Service (4 calls were for Forgery and 2 calls were for Theft). • 1997 - 4 Calls for Service (all were for Forgery) • 1996 - 7 Calls for Service (2 calls were for Forgery, 2 calls were for Theft, 3 calls were for Alarm). • 1995 - 3 Calls for Service (2 calls were for Forgery and 1 call was for Theft). • 1994 - 1 Call for Service (Forgery) • 1993 - 6 Calls for Service (1 Call was for Forgery and 5 calls were for Theft). • 1992 -11 Calls for Service (6 Calls were for Forgery and 5 calls were for Theft). cc: Joel Downer • Report Shows Fringe Lenders Flood Low ine ... eighborhoods As Banks Continue Their Exit http•//www.consunion.org/finance/pawnshop.htm ; let '-- -- F Cam «Smkft- S4 ..... ..... ... ... Press Release Contact:, July 18,1997 Rob Schneider or Rafael Ayuso (512) 477-4431 Consumers Union Southwest Regional Office Report Shows Fringe Lenders Flood Low income Neighborhoods As Banks Continue Their Exit Finance companies, pawn shops becoming today's low income 'neighborhood banks' AUSTIN, TX -- A report released today by Consumers Union's Southwest Regional Office shows finance companies and pawn shops are continuing their march into low income and minority neighborhoods in Texas at a time when banking institutions -- often affiliated with these profitable lenders -- continue to tam their backs on them. The result is a troublesome, two-tier lending system in which mainstream banking at a lower cost is increasingly unavailable in these communities while fringe lenders with exorbitant rates continue to prosper. The report -- Our Neiahborhood Banks: Hiah Cost Loans for Low Income Borrowers -- includes maps of Houston, Dallas, and Austin that show a majority of finance companies and pawn shops are located in or near predominantly minority neighborhoods and neighborhoods with less than the median household income. barbi Schneider, senior staff attorney for the Southwest Regional Office of Consumers Union, said the report offers a snapshot" of recent shifts in the financial services industry in Texas. "Many Texans now have little choice but to rely on very expensive lenders for routine consumer loans," he said. Schneider added that high interest rates at both pawn shops and finance companies are just the tip of the iceberg. "In the case of finance companies, we found numerous examples of expensive add-ons and unecessary, often harmful refinancings. It appears many finance companies make lots of money by convincing people to make bad economic decisions." The report also found that the marketplace has failed to curb high rates and lending excesses. As a group, consumers with limited financial resources or glitches in their credit history end up paying more in interest, fees, and other charges than their credit risk warrants. , According to the report, finance companies return "solid and sometimes spectacular profits." Often, these returns go to affiliate banking institutions. Ironically, these are the same institutions that shy away from the inner cities and higher risk loan markets. "While the major banks appear to be skittish about serving the low income consumers, they are more than ready to soak up the profits that their finance companies make serving these same customers at substantially higher rates," said Schneider. The report cites major banking corporations such as NationsBank, Norwest and Great Western which attribute a share of their profits to the banks' finance company subsidiaries. ' frniong the report's findings: • Pawnshops are booming today, serving 10 percent of the U.S. adult population. Texas is second only to 11orida in the number of pawnshops statewide, with approximately 1,260 establishments in 1996. Three of the four publicly )ublicly traded national pawnshop chains -- EZ Pawn, Cash America Pawn, and First Cash Pawn -- are based in Texas. 9/1 V00 0- 10 AV Report �I T �l�t l dlst� Ri Aa ti ► h er 1992 to 1996 the nft& "f4 ttR 1 'vfflhop.htm Texas (non -bank lenders, largely finance companies) increased 42 percent to 2,068 statewide. The volume of loans (total amount loaned in a calendar year) grew almost 50 percent between 1992 and 1995. • Texas finance companies and pawn shops primarily locate in neighborhoods below median household income and in minority areas. For example: o Harris County -- most finance companies and pawn shops are located in or near neighborhoods where minorities comprise a majority of the population. o Travis County -- most finance companies and pawn shops are located in or near areas with below median household income. o Dallas County -- most pawnshops are located in or near minority neighborhoods, while finance companies cluster in or near low income areas and about half are in or near minority neighborhoods. • Finance companies typically charge the highest interest rates allowed under the Texas Credit Code. This amounts to an interest equivalent to about 30 percent -- or 90 percent annual percentage rate (APR), depending on the size of the loan - -much higher than the average 15.51 percent APR charged for a personal loan by commercial banks in Texas. • Most pawn loans are made at the maximum allowable rate of 240 percent APR because most of them are eery small loans. The average pawn loan for the EZ Pawn chain in 1996 was $67. For Cash America, with 145 Texas stores, the loan average was $70. • Often, finance companies generate new loans by refinancing existing loans. For example, of the 910,000 Norwest Financial loans nationwide in 1996, 421,000 were refinanced loans with additional funds added. • Finance companies often snare new borrowers with direct mail offers of instant cash. Promotional "lead =ds" offer easy access to loans of $50 to $400. Cash vouchers are not uncommon. "Many working families have been cut off from access to mainstream banks," Schneider said. "This means that they have little choice but to borrow under the terms dictated by'fringe' lenders." i F* ance companies profit handsomely from the difference between the increased rates they charge and the rates they illy need to offset somewhat higher delinquencies. At the same time, unfair marketing practices often hide the auuittonal costs of loans (the extra cost of a refinancing, or the additional charges for credit life insurance). The solution to the situation lies in stronger usury laws, increased oversight and market analysis by state regulators, and better access to mainstream banking services in low and middle income neighborhoods, according to the report, Among the recommendations: • fair maximum interest rates that do not overstate the risk assumed by the lender; • r hi ' l e expected to fu lfill; o brt loan terms and conditions the borrower cannot reasonably b fu l P Y P • prohibit insurance products (like non -filing insurance) that are not fairly priced or in the interest of borrowers;. • disclosure if a refinancing results in higher overall cost to the consumer; • a fair refund of unearned interest using the actuarial method rather than the Rule of 78s; • no new administrative fee added on to refinancings; • adequate court remedies (consumers can pursue lenders under DTPA for abusive lending practices); • subsequent purchasers of loans will be subject to all claims and defenses based on the conduct of the original lender; • mechanisms to ensure pawned goods are returned in the same condition in which they were left; • an independent Office of Access to Financial Services directed to study and recommend changes to improve the personal loan market; programs to improve equity in the financial services market. (For example, banks which own finance companies should have a program to effectively graduate finance company borrowers to lower cort bank loans.) ' [ . ][ . ] Health Finance Food [ Product ] [ Other ] [ About CU ] [ News ] [ Tips ] [ Home ] ^s 4114/000.10 AAA Report.Shows Fringe Lenders Flood Low i'lalt bRP�f '�te %tis V~Lj6nsunion. orv/ contact l ( www. consuniOn .OWfinenoe/pawnshop.htm All information 01998 Consumers Union • • • o _rte 6114100 0.10 AM Check cash in outlets take a bi§ bite — Pittsburgh Business Times — 1997 -10 -13 :// www. amoity. rom/ pittsburgh /stories/1997 /10 /13 /f`or.us2.html free book of al ts PITMURGH BusaBs VIES ..•, kti •,' °- i�s7? ...... BtaVF's�Esi96 •lo3i Y <<fiE;�4k4iat 8&_ ffisif %'�3i • October 13,1997 Check cashing outlets take a big bite Profits are being made in poor neighborhoods Julian Neiser DOWNTOWN -- For some city esidents, paying up to 913 Y percent interest is a way of life. It happens for any number of reasons, but is most common when there's no bank in a neighborhood, or when a person lives paycheck -to- paycheck and can't keep a minimum bank account balance. For those people, and others, check cashing outlets are often a last resort, or a sole option. Currently, the check cashing industry is not regulated by state or federal authorities, which is disconcerting in light of a recent survey that found outlets charge as much as 10 percent to cash personal checks and 6 percent to cash paychecks or Social Security checks. They also offer cash advances on post -dated checks -- with annualized interest rates ranging from 213 percent to 913 percent. _. But what disturbs many local community leaders is that check cashing centers tend to crop up in communities where residents have no other choices -- low- income neighborhoods that banks don't want to serve. "The bankless and the underbanked pay a very high price for the convenience of services sold by check cashing outlets," said lean Ann Fox, director of consumer protection at the Consumer Federation of America, a consumer advocacy group based in Washington, D.C. • "No area of financial services is in greater need of effective consumer protections," she said. Although state and federal authorities are considering stepping in with legislation to address the steep fees charged by most check cashers, there is a grassroots effort under way in many local communities to keep such businesses out 411 croo In•no erF Check cashing outlets take a big bite —Pitt r�� � � M%9 fliist place httpJ/ www.ameity.com/pittsburgWstoTies /1997 /10 /13 /focus2.htmi Pauline Cooper, executive director of the Aliquippa Regional Alliance, said that when National City left, a check cashing company immediately tried to move in to the bank's location. "We felt it was a rip -off for poor people," Ms. Cooper said. "We didn't support it at all." Representatives from QuiCash, the check cashing company involved and the largest chain in the Pittsburgh area, wouldn't return P hone calls about their service. I Instead of using a check - cashing service, town leaders decided instead to create a credit union, so that residents would have a place to cash checks and save money as well. "We were concerned that (check cashing outlets) wouldn't help people get out of the poverty trap," Ms. Cooper said. The credit union in Aliquippa has grown since last winter to more than 400 members and has issued about $200,000 in loans. Another credit union initiative is growing in the East End • (Business Times, July 14). A group of community leaders is working on Project Good Samaritan, a neighborhood credit union that will allow residents a chance to do their banking in low- income neighborhoods where they live, places where banks traditionally haven't served. But not every community can organize and support a credit union. And so, despite the high fees, the number of check cashing outlets nationwide is growing. Although the number of outlets in Pittsburgh (14) pales in comparison to larger cities such as Philadelphia, which has about 300, the national trend shows substantial inroads being made all over. In 1986, there were 2,151 outlets. Today, there are more than 5,400. The industry cashes 150 million checks a year worth $45 billion. While bankers might be squeamish about the idea of residents being forced to use check cashing outlets, they concede that it will happen when there are no nearby banks. i "I think it may be a reasonable business for someone who gets cash in the hands of people who need cash," said David Tritsch, president and director of North Side based Allegheny Valley Bank. But because of the high profitability of check cashing Filcoo 70•(10 A Check cashing outlets take a big bite — PitgNb&sWs Tl selhPgkilf - M wouldn't be su Wged lfinl tcofpiMburgh /stories/1997 /10 /13 /focus2.htm1 loosened banking regulations, to see banks open their own check - cashing subsidiaries in areas they don't have branches. "Banks are in business to make money," Mr. Tritsch said. "So if there is a profit to be made, it wouldn't shock me for them to be in that market." But that cash cow may already have been milked for all it's worth. Local lawmakers and community groups have taken note of the high fees charged by check cashing outfits, and they are planning action. A bill that would impose limits on cashing fees unanimously passed the state House in March. Bill co- sponsor Rep. William Robinson, a Democrat representing Schenley Heights, said he hopes the measure clears the Senate by the end of this year. Rep. Robinson feels that there is more of a need to regulate the check cashing outlets than there is to push banks to operate in low - income neighborhoods. He said he believes that as banks increasingly derive profits from fees, as opposed to interest income, they have become less interested in helping low- income residents, who might only require check - cashing services. Because there is nothing currently on the books that could force banks start serving such areas, Rep. Robinson feels that regulating the check - cashing outlets is the most logical step. :,,: i. r.•: 4+• 4: 4x.. i :........... ......................:........ •• iii,:.,. i:• i• �, i :,.i:,,..,i:•;�i >:;•i�•i >:•iii> iii:• i::<. iiiiii: .::•:;. >iiii:•iiii:.i••ii:• >... .. r:... ...........r................... r •i:;.ti yC: ;:::::: •y::..... r.:::::ii: • i$: G: i4: 4: 4: 4: i4 ; ?•i:4:4i }:viii;•iii }:4i::iiti4 •i �•:i i:,4:4i::v: A::v.•: r:: �::. :: �;: {4;:4; {::.: �; j r• {4i:, •ry•:j• .r : ?• ,y ;?.r:::: r.w.�:: nixii :•::{ ;{ti4,i: ?:i:;:�::yv.}ii:: �'v.....:.:.: w::.� :•.ter::::::::.:., .................. ... ..............................: . ..:::::.:�::.:: . i•:w: i n'•ii ii'.: ?i.'vv:•::• •::•: w: . : "'::::.: �: r:: nvv, : .:::.:i�:.}w: .. :. ... : i :: ... :: :.:.. :.: v.::.:..:::..,.,. r... w .:.... .........v::...i,.r.., ; Y•o+c3€u :.. : Ra�us:Baiiltt�ia:: &:�iraea -- u�cinn �n.nn ea.e villr•com: Survey shows check cas are cashi m 8/26/97 .' 3 t // w '�'Jac�nille.vcom/ta- onEnctstories /082697 /11>4Check.html ackson n_8.,. �►ttP' , .... • ' ag, o eoe:a':;i;i ii.air .din's' sieeaeaeeaaa tlW► j .. a 02 ............. . ....... r.r.r.ww.wrwvn.' %i:r /:l 1A .e A 5 0 N V I >>Y... ....... Tuesday, August 26, 1997 4A NOWNTIM R —'MO Story last updated at 9:50 p.m. on Monday, August 25, 1997 Survey shows check cashers are cashing in -MLY SPEcIM Low - income Americans being hit by high fees Associated Press WASHINGTON - Many low- income Americans, forced by rising bank ±1..:>> fees to turn to neighborhood check cashers, are being gouged by those ik }' businesses for cashing checks and getting short -term loans, a consumer ........ ....................: >,.......: ............:. group said. A trade group representing the growing industry countered that many consumers prefer the convenience of check - cashing outlets, which are "'• . 'VgM =ri<r< often open longer hours than banks. ; The Consumer Federation of America, which surveyed 111 ... '- check- cashing outlets in 23 of the nation's largest urban areas, found that fees for cashing a paycheck ranged from 1 percent to 6 percent and averaged 2.34 percent. Fees for personal checks went from 1.85 percent to 16 percent, averaging 9.36 percent. In a fast - growing business, some check - cashing operations also make loans to consumers on postdated personal checks to tide them over until their next pay day, at interest rates equivalent to 261 percent to 913 percent a year ) the survey found. • {:;"''• A3• ,+� .:+.i�'':: l i.• }:{;j }.;:'tom M INOR . - . 4..ri:' % { }• r .v.. Some 12 million American families can't afford to maintain regular bank accounts, according to the Treasury Department. Stephen Brobeck, executive director of the consumer group, said more than half of .�.,� African- American and Hispanic households either have no accounts or very small deposits with banks, thrifts or credit unions. Ile Increasingly, these people are turning to storefront check cashers, often located in low- income and minority neighborhoods but which have BUSINESSES recently expanded in suburban areas. Only 18 states regulate check cashers and only 12 of them impose caps on the fees they charge, according to the Consumer Federation. 'No area of financial services is in greater need of effective consumer protections," said Jean Ann Fox, the group's director of consumer protection. The trade group cited a poll conducted for the Consumer Bankers _ _ 6/15/99 9:58 AN ]acksonville.eom: Survey showAi tddfflI9h ~W V percent of all check g tt§t&M MW I§Umu IIe/sO r ies/082697/1 b 4C beck.html do business with banks. There are now around 6,000 outlets in the United States, cashing more . than 200 million checks a year worth some $55 billion, according to the group. MAIL , this, start to a friend 4 ....•.v.:mxx;.'.. �dJ��5111 .rrt....wf:aIL.,.,,,„ .. '� k t • a Search - Use + to require word, - to omit. Enter words describing a • concept or keywords. .Sear chi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Story Archives . Breakina News I Karen Brune Mathis I Stock Ouotes I Comvanies News I Community ( Learnine Center Marketplace I Entertainment I Home Metro I Neiahbors ( Opinion Obituaries I Entertainment Business I Daily Special Sports ( Weather Wire About Us ( E -mail Staff I How to Advertise This site, and all its content, 0 The Florida Times -Union 1997 • v� 6/15/99 4:58 AMi City seckc oversi ht of check cashing — Washington Business Journal — 1998 -03 -30 :// www. ameity. com/ washington /sto6es/033098 /story5.htm1 March 30,1998 - City seeks oversight of check cashing Matt Andrejczak Staff Reporter Check- cashing operators beware: The D.C. Council recently approved new regulations that may affect your business. D.C. Bill 12 -338, known as the Check Cashiers Act of 1998, is designed to protect consumers against unreasonable fees charged by the city's liquor stores. The business of check cashing is now unregulated in the District. The new measure will establish maximum fee limits, license application and renewal fees, certain operation requirements, and record maintenance. It also requires check - cashing businesses to be bonded. The bill is making its way to Congress for final approval and is expected to be signed into law by May 9. If that happens, the regulations would take effect later this year. The industry would be monitored by the D.C. Office of Banking and Financial Institutions, which could investigate possible violations and hand down cease- and - desist orders. J. Anthony Romero, OBFI superintendent, said the law most likely would protect low- and moderate - income residents who don't use traditional banking services and instead cash their checks at liquor stores and other outlets. Romero said OBFI frequently receives calls from residents who report paying fees between 20 percent and 25 percent of the total for each check cashed. Some check - cashing operations also require the customer to make a purchase in the store, such as a bottle of liquor and a ® lottery ticket, Romero said. And sometimes, customers don't receive the correct change for those transactions. "It is my belief that most of these operations will disappear when the regulations take effect," Romero said. -- Wa caul tharP nrP ac manv ac 't 50 check - Cashing husinesses 6/15/99 9.59 AM City seeks oversight of check cashing — W h nt t JdF t nd*% * apply t6It9&%, Uldffi.orwwashingWn /swries /033098 /story5.htmI unions, thrifts or building and loan associations, nor to national check - cashing operations. Liquor stores offering check - cashing services contacted for this article said they weren't aware of the proposed regulations and couldn't comment until they received official notification. A local representative of AnyKind Check Cashing, a Richmond -based company with three locations in the District, doesn't think it will be affected. "I don't think we'll be affected since we're a national company," Jennifer Hyatt said. The proposed law would require check - cashing businesses to: Demonstrate $25,000 in minimum liquid assets and maintain capital of $5,000 for secondary locations; Pay a $300 nonrefundable license fee and $150 for each additional location; Secure a $5,000 bond for each location; Not charge fees of more than 10 percent for personal checks or money orders, no more than 5 percent for government or payroll checks, and no more than 7 percent for insurance checks; and Maintain its accounts and records for at least three years. ...i....., r..x :: ;Y, {<:•i::i'v:{ii:'L• ?:i•: «• }: ' =:j.�.•. : {:. <.:::::.:ry ,,..,<.., « <c::.. <,.}r.<.,,. M..,, x,,.,,.,:.. �Y•«. z<, x„«.< w:.,.,,.». e..,.:. a:.,,,..<., x,.>:: :.:<:..s.: <.:3< >i;:i; <;. ? }: «:.; <; <: ;. }::«.:;;;;fi;<;; �: « «:;<.: «: <. ?::...,,:. r r....:..,,.. r...,....,,,..,.:..,. N.,;;::•: «.? }::<:.<:. <;.ii. , v 6/15/99 9:59 AM Banks and se)a IfSiv6m*purposes from the BSA system. These changes reduce the burden impodW :byttre*&*.gov/fincm on banks and at the same time permit more effective use of the remaining reported information. With some exceptions, currency transactions over $10,000 are no longer required to be automatically reported as such if they involve a bank and 1) another bank in the United States, 2) a federal state or local government, 3) a corporation whose stock is listed on the New York or American Stock Exchanges or designated as a Nasdaq National Market Security, or 4) any subsidiary that is consolidated with a listed corporation for federal income tax reporting purposes. (Currency transactions involving such customers may still be required to be reported if they involve suspicious activities under the suspicious activity reporting rules.) (See News Release, Aoril 17.1996) Return to Timeline. :.:hit "•Y }i:. M. bkk. .. ' :' :':.: •.:`:.: '.. ,.: .. :j: }::ii::::::. - •:'•::•::: }: :::::4'iv:v;L;• . .. ::ii: i:;i:•:.:•i:$:. }::::.:;:.:: '•.:'v ?•i:;::;::- :J:j:;:i .. .•. ... .; _ k -v. �'K -r•VS x.r:K•% :PP:K- P:Yi %• :R S: P:Oik•:4:O:J: -0DP:•Y.• : r: 4:; w; ii ;:J:;i;w;:vi'w,':K!C:w<y:Y:>Oj : •. OC:%; Ii. ;1.M- )6.�; %;4 %;O.�F%.P.Jt:. :f. %; %;.+ai:'w:t T;.•`Y;- PROPOSAL ON FOREIGN BANK DRAFTS Proposal would add bank drafts to class of reportable instruments Regulations issued under the BSA have long required that the transportation into or out of the United States of currency or certain monetary instruments exceeding $10,000 must be reported to the Treasury Department. The proposed rule issued by FinCEN as mandated by the Money Laundering Suppression Act of 1994, would expand the class of reportable instruments to include drafts issued or made out by a foreign bank on a dollar account maintained by or in the name of the foreign bank in the United States. The drafts could be in the form of cashier's checks, bank checks or similar instruments, so long as they are drawn on a foreign bank's dollar account in the United States. FinCEN issued an Advisory to banks in September 1996 which focused specifically on Mexican bank drafts and factored third party checks. The Advisory asked banks to give enhanced scrutiny to these instruments and report suspicious activity to law enforcement when warranted. FinCEN received 12 comments in response to the proposed rule adding bank drafts to the class of reportable instruments. The comments, which raise several significant issues, are under review in connection with work on the final regulations. (See News Release, January 16. 1997) MSB REGULATIONS PROPOSED "Money Services Businesses" to be subject to new reporting requirements Through various law enforcement operations, including the geographic targeting orders in the New York metropolitan area, investigators have determined that money launderers are turning to the relatively unsupervised financial services provided by money transmitters, check cashers, retail currency exchangers, and issuers and sellers of money orders and traveler's checks. As mandated by the Money Laundering Suppression Act of 1994, Treasury proposed on May 21, 1997 to register all qualifying money services businesses in a centralized database. This registry will be available to law enforcement and appropriate federal and state regulatory agencies. The proposed registration rule includes within the definition of "money services business" issuers, sellers, and redeemers (for funds) of stored value, commonly called electronic money or e- money. Treasury also proposed to extend the suspicious activity reporting requirement — already in place with respect to banks — to money transmitters and issuers and sellers of money orders and traveler's checks. Because customers of this subset of money services businesses do not maintain account relationships comparable to banks, it is often difficult for these businesses to know their customers well enough to identify suspicious activity. In recognition of this fact, the proposed rule lists as guidance to the i—;i inn r•i dlari frnm hictnricai mnnav launriarinn invactinntinm r/l VQQ ry•in PM Banks and Beyond, Timeline Years httpJ/ www .usbvas.gov /finoenthelpfin.html Finally, Treasury proposed to reduce significantly — from $10,000 to $750 — the threshold for money transmitters to report remittances purchased in cash and going to any place outside the United States. This change is based largely on the experience of the New York GTO, which has confirmed that the money transmitting industry is particularly subject to abuse by organized money launderers. In addition, FinCEN issued the first comprehensive study of money services businesses and their potential vulnerability to money laundering, providing an in -depth examination of this industry's size, services, geographic and transaction attributes. The study was commissioned by FinCEN and conducted by the consulting firm of Coopers & Lybrand. FinCEN estimates that, overall, money services businesses handle transactions valuing approximately $200 billion per year through approximately 160,000 locations nationwide. The study was used to help FinCEN formulate three proposed anti -money laundering regulations which were announced in May 1997. FinCEN hosted five public meetings to give members of the financial services industry an opportunity to review the report and discuss the three proposed regulations. Two meetings were held at FinCEN and the others were held in New York, San Jose, CA, and Chicago. FinCEN received 82 comments on the proposed rule. The comments, which raise a number of significant issues, are under review in connection with work in the final regulations. (See News Releases, Mav 19. 1997 and Julv 28. 1997) CTR FOR CASINOS REVISED New form simplifies reporting for casinos In keeping with regulatory reform goals, FinCEN issued a revised form designed to help casinos report large currency transactions. The new form, known as the Currency Transaction Report by Casinos (CTRC), and its instructions became effective on July 1, 1997. The form has been revised to simplify the reporting of the required information, enhance the value of information provided to law enforcement, and clarify the instructions on how to report large currency transactions. During 1996, casinos filed approximately 150,000 forms reporting large currency transactions exceeding $3.2 billion. These forms have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax and regulatory investigations and proceedings. A copy of the revised CTRC Form 8362 (Rev. July 1997) may be viewed and downloaded from FinCEN's website by clicking here. (See News Release, June 16. 1997) CTR "EXEMPTIONS" STREAMLINED Rules allow financial institutions to focus resources on reporting suspicious activity FinCEN has worked closely with the banking industry over the years to simplify and facilitate numerous regulatory requirements. A remaining problem has been the exemption system, which over time has become increasingly complicated and confusing. FinCEN announced a final rule and a proposed regulation aimed at significantly reducing the number of reports required to be filed by banks for large currency transactions. These two regulations reflect a major effort to re- engineer regulatory and reporting requirements that have been in place for over a quarter of a century. The two regulations concern the process by which banks may exempt retail and other businesses from the requirement to report currency transactions exceeding $10,000. The final rule creates a streamlined exemption procedure that eliminates from reporting all transactions in currency between banks and certain classes of exempt persons. It will make final the interim rule that exempts banks from reporting transactions in currency involving (1) other banks operating in the United States; (2) government departments and agencies, and other entities which exercise governmental authority; (3) corporations listed on the major national stock exchanges; and (4) subsidiaries of such H-feA 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337 -9300 telephone Grave ( 337 -9310 fax C H A R T E R E D http: / /www.kennedy- graven.com CHARLES L. LEFEVERE Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337 -9215 email: clefevere @kennedy- graven.com July 13, 1999 Mr. Mike McCauley City Manager City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center MN 55430 RE: Check Cashing Outlets Dear Mike: Following the City Council's discussion of regulating check cashing operations, I asked one of our clerks to briefly review case law, by computer research, and the Internet, to see whether any materials on check cashing operations were readily available. Attached are copies of the few materials which were found. In the case of Eutaw Entemrises. Inc. v. Baltimore. a copy of which is attached, the court found an ordinance reasonable which prohibited check cashing operations in residential and office use districts because of the number of people patronizing the operation, street advertising, solicitation, and other characteristics of the business which made it unsuitable for these zoning districts. However, we found no material which would suggest any reason why such uses should be excluded from other commercial zones where retail businesses would presumably have the same kinds of impacts on surrounding land uses. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Very truly yours, C — � – �� � Charles L. LeFevere CLL :lh Enclosures CLL- 165485 BR291 -4 I. LAW REVIEWS 1. Anthony D. Taibi, Banking, Finance, and Community Economic Empowerment: Structural Economic Theory, Procedural Civil Rig hts, and Substantive Racial Justice, 107 Harv. L. Rev. 1465, 1510 -11 (1994). In poor neighborhoods, one can find many profitable but marginal, under - regulated, and exploitative institutions that fill this niche -- check- cashing outlets,' pawn shops , finance companies,' rent -to- own stores , and home - repair second mortgage companies'- -but there are few conventional banks.' The data indicate that community lending is no riskier than comparable lending at similar rates of 1 For performing simple financial services, check cashers typically charge from 1.5% to 2% of a check's value. See John P. Caskey, Banks, Check- Cashina Outlets, Pawnshops and the Poor 1 (July 1993) (unpublished manuscript, on file at the Harvard Law School Library) ; see also Mike Hudson, The Povertv Industrv, S. Exposure (Fall 1993), at 16, 17 (asserting that check cashers charge from two to ten percent of a check's value). 2 Pawn shops commonly charge annualized interest rates of up to 240% for small secured loans. High transaction costs limit their profitability, but pawn shops would not exist at all if the poor • had choices in the financial mainstream. Finance companies "serv[e] as high- interest lenders of last resort for borrowers with limited income or shaky credit." In addition to very high interest rates, such lenders typically charge upfront fees, commissions, and points. 4 "Rent -to -own stores have become a $ 3.7 billion- a -yQar business by selling appliances and other household goods by the week or month to low - income customers. " 5 "Second- mortgage companies persuade homeowners who have been turned away by banks" to take out very expensive loans for bill consolidation or home repair. High fees, commissions, and points can create effective annual interest rates of more than 60 %. Banks increasingly buy these loans on the secondary market, and thereby become "holders in due course" without bearing "fault if the deals turn out to be tainted by fraud." Thus, the banks end up loaning to low - income and minority communities, but manage to extract higher than normal profits without getting their hands dirty. 6 In the 1980s, mainstream banks disproportionally closed branches in low - income and non -White communities while at the same time, in response to deregulatory competitive pressures, eliminated the cross subsidy previously granted to small bank accounts and • significantly raised their fees on small accounts or introduced minimum balance requirements. As a result, the percentage of families without bank accounts rose dramatically. PJC- 164609 1 BR291 -4 return.' The lack of interest that banks show toward these markets helps create the demand for fringe banking services; conventional financial institutions then cash in on the fringe banking boom by issuing lines of credit to finance companies, providing transactional services to check - cashing outlets, purchasing high- interest notes from second mortgage companies, and pursuing other such business services. Thus, conventional financial institutions do help service these markets —but in an indirect way that permits unscrupulous operators to extract a middleman's profit while the banks keep their hands clean. To the extent that these alternative financial service businesses' high prices reflect not the actual extra risks of such lending, but rather the transaction -cost effects of cultural biases, this trend represents a cultural tax on low- and moderate - income communities. 2. Brian Ohm, Note, Wisconsin's Environmental Decade, Inc. v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources: The Limited Role of Secondary Impacts in Threshold Determinations under the Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act, 1986 Wis. L. Rev. 585 And so begins the slow deterioration of the physical environment of the central business district. Buildings will be vacated, employment opportunities reduced, tax revenues lost as property values decline, the existing infra - structure will decay as funds become insufficient to make improvements, and the substantial public and private investment in the central business district will be lost through disuse. In addition, the entire social fabric of the central business district will change as second -hand stores, pornography and pawn, shops, s, and second -rate hotels move in to what P P was once the retail core. This change will limit the variety of consumer goods available making life more difficult for persons living near the central business district who lack adequate transportation.. II. MUNICIPAL CODES 1. Minneapolis Code a. 5 522.40 - Definition of Currency exchange. Any person, except bank, trust company, savings bank, savings and loan association, credit union, or industrial loan and thrift company, engaged in the business of cashing checks, drafts, money orders or traveler's checks for a fee. Currency exchange does not include a person who provides these services incidental to the person's primary business if the charge for cashing a check or See. e.a., Woodstock Inst., Sound Lounds for Communities: An ® Analysis of the Performance of Community Reinvestment Loans 1 -2, 15 (1993) (on file at the Harvard Law School Library). PJC- 164609 BR291 -4 draft does not exceed one dollar ($1.00) or one per cent of the value of the check or draft, whichever is greater. b. § 540.1060 - Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the B2S Districts: (20) Currency exchange, when accessory to a food store or automobile convenience facility, provided the total amount of floor area for check cashing does not exceed ten (10) per cent of the floor space of the principal use. P L� P C. § 540.1290 - Conditional use Any use allowed as a conditional use in the B2 Districts shall be allowed in the B3 Districts (unless permitted in section 540.1280) subject to the provisions of Chapter 525, and in addition, the following: 9 Currency exchange, r secondhand ( ) y g p provided no other store, rummage shop, eleemosynary secondhand store, currency exchange, or pawnshop is located within one thousand (1,000) feet measured in a straight line from lot line to lot line, and, in addition, subject to the,. - following conditions: (a) Signage shall be limited to one and one -half (11/2) square feet of sign area per one (1) linear foot of exterior primary building wall that faces a public street, or that faces an accessory parking area and includes a public entrance, subject to the following: 1. The maximum area per sign shall not exceed forty - five (45) square feet. 2. Back - lighted signs, back - lighted awnings, roof signs, portable signs, temporary signs and freestanding signs shall be prohibited. 3. Window signs shall not exceed thirty (30) percent of window area and shall not block views into the building at eye level. (b) The window and door area of any existing first floor facade that faces a public street or sidewalk shall not be reduced, nor shall changes be made to such windows or doors that block views into the building at eye level. (c) For new construction, at least thirty (30) percent of the first floor facade that faces a public street or sidewalk shall be windows or doors of clear or lightly tinted glass that allow views into the building at eye level. (d) The use of bars, chains or similar security devices that are visible from a public street or sidewalk shall be prohibited. PJC- 164609 BR291 -4 (e) The premises, all adjacent streets, sidewalks and alleys, and all sidewalks and alleys within one hundred (100) feet shall be inspected regularly for purposes of removing any litter found thereon. d. 540.1740 - Conditional uses. The following conditional uses may be allowed in the B4 Districts, subject to the provisions of Chapter 525: (8) Currency exchange, provided no other secondhand store, rummage shop, eleemosynary secondhand store, currency exchange, or pawnshop is located within one thousand (1,000) feet measured in a straight line from lot line to lot line, and, in addition, subject to the following conditions: (a) Signage shall be limited to one and one -half (11/2) square feet of sign area per one (1) linear foot of exterior primary building wall that faces a public street, or that faces an accessory parking area and includes a public entrance, subject to the following: 1. The maximum area per sign shall not exceed forty - five (45) square feet. 2. Back - lighted signs, back - lighted awnings, roof signs, portable signs, temporary signs and freestanding signs shall be prohibited. 3. Window signs shall not exceed thirty (30) percent of window area and shall not block views into the building at eye level. (b) The window and door area of any existing first floor facade that faces a public street or sidewalk shall not be reduced, nor shall changes be made to such windows or doors that block views into the building at eye level. (c) For new construction, at least thirty (30) percent of the first floor facade that faces a public street or sidewalk shall be windows or doors of clear or lightly tinted glass that allow views into the building at eye level. (d) The use of bars, chains or similar security devices that are visible from a public street or sidewalk shall be prohibited. (e) The premises, all adjacent streets, sidewalks and alleys, and all sidewalks and alleys within one hundred (100) feet shall be inspected regularly for purposes of removing any litter found thereon. PJC- 164609 BR291 -4 (f) A currency exchange in existence prior to April 25, 1998 that relocates due to termination of a lease or destruction of the building shall be exempted from the one thousand (1,000) foot spacing requirement, to the extent that the use will move to the next closest reasonably available property otherwise in conformity with the Zoning Code for currency exchanges. Under this provision the currency exchange may move up to one thousand (1,000) feet from its current location provided it moves within the existing compact and contiguous zoning district. PJC- 164609 BR291 -4 LEXSEE® 241 MD 686 Page 1 of 9 •, Sources Clients Options History ECLIPSE Sign -Oft Help l!L R Service:LEXSEE® 1 241 MD 686 !New Search =. $�k •. E a r prev Document 1 of 1 . next FOCUS More Like This Text Only I Print. Download. Email. Fax 241 Md. 686, *; 217 A. 2d 348, * *; SHEPARD'SO a 1966 Md. LEXIS 754, * ** EUTAW ENTERPRISES, INC. et al. v. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE et al. No. 203, September Term, 1965 Court of Appeals of Maryland 241 Md. 686; 217 A.2d 348; 1966 Md. LEXIS 754 March 11 1966 Decided PRIOR HISTORY: [***l] Appeal from the Circuit Court of Baltimore City; Sodaro, J. DISPOSITION: Order armed, with costs. CORE TERMS: ordinance, residential, cashing, nonconforming, church, zoning, termination, invalid, street, money changing, incompatible, use district, cease, classification, elimination, tolerance, removal, detrimental, eliminated, cessation, billboards, comfort, validly, residential use, check - cashing, prospectively, amortization, depreciated, five -year, landlord HEADNOTES: Zoning -- Baltimore City -- Ordinances Requiring Cessation Of Check Cashing Services In Residential And Office Use Districts Within Specified Time -- Held Reasonable Under Circumstances Here -- Ordinances Were Not Invalid As To Tenant Or Landlord Here With Respect To Termination Provisions. Baltimore City promulgated two ordinances prospectively excluding check cashing and money changing operations from residential and office use districts, and making such uses already in existence nonconforming ones which must cease within a specified tolerance period. Although the prospective nature of the ordinances was not attacked, the Court found no sound basis upon which there could be such an attack, noting that advisory bodies had agreed that check cashing activities were not a proper use in residential and office use areas because of the numbers of people they caused to congregate upon the streets, and because they bring forth advertising and personal solicitations upon the streets. The City Council reasonably and properly could have believed these things to be inconsistent and [ * * *2] incompatible with uses customary in such a district and validly could have determined that check cashing uses in such districts were detrimental to the public health, comfort and welfare to the degree that they should be excluded, while at the same time feeling that other uses permitted as nonconforming uses which occasionally cash checks for customers need not be eliminated. These considerations also supported as reasonable http: / /www.lexis.com/research /retrieve ?_m= a62e46595Of3761 al daa7f 1 d75ff713c &_fmtstr= FU16 /22 /99cnum= l LEXSEE® 241 MD 686 Page 2 of 9 the provisions of the ordinances requiring an existing use to cease within a specified time. If a use would be incompatible in a residential and office district if commenced after the ordinance was enacted, it is equally incompatible if in existence when the ordinance is passed. The alleged fact that one of the appellants was the only commercial check casher in a residential district when the ordinances were enacted, and that the City Council knew this, did not make them invalid as to this appellant under the circumstances. The Court found no necessity to pass upon the reasonableness of the tolerance period of eighteen months. The check cashing service (the tenant) had had the five -year period which it claimed was necessary and had fully depreciated its investment, [ * * *3] so that the termination provisions were not unreasonable or invalid as applied to it. These provisions were also valid as to the landlord, which had enjoyed the right to receive rent for the five -year period which it claimed it should have, and the affected premises remained rentable for other permitted uses. Statutes -- Or Ordinances -- Title Need Not Be Index To All Contained Therein Nor Set Forth All Exclusions Or Conditions -- Title Is Label Which Need Only Set Forth Its Object, Not Its Product -- Baltimore City Ordinances Relating To Exclusion And Removal Of Check Cashing Operations From Residential And Office Use Districts -- Titles Held Sufficient To Advise Readers Of Objects And Purposes Of Legislation, And What It Was Designed To Accomplish. SYLLABUS: Bill of complaint by Eutaw Enterprises, Inc., and the Pentecostal Faith Church, Inc., against the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore and another, to enjoin the enforcement of two Baltimore City ordinances which would require the complainants to cease operating a check cashing business at a certain location. From an order dismissing the bill and directing the cessation of the business, the complainants appeal. COUNSEL: Nathan [ * * *4] Patz for the appellants. Martin B. Greenfeld, with whom was Joseph Allen, City Solicitor of Baltimore, on the brief, for the appellees. JUDGES: Hammond, Homey, Oppenheimer and McWilliams, JJ., and Raine, J., Associate Judge of the Third Judicial Circuit, specially assigned. Hammond, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. OPINIONBY: HAMMOND OPINION: [ *688] [* *350] The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore promulgated two ordinances which prospectively excluded check cashing and money changing operations from residential and office use districts, made such uses already in existence nonconforming uses and required their cessation within a tolerance or amortization period of eighteen months. The appellants, a check cashing corporation, operating in such a district, and its landlord, a nearby church, having sought unsuccessfully below to have the provisions of the ordinances requiring the discontinuance of the check cashing business within eighteen months declared unconstitutional and inoperative as to them, felt that, although [ *689] their hearts were sick within them, their grief need not be beyond healing if balm could be found in the Gilead of the Court of Appeals. [ * * *5] From 1950 to 1959 Stan's Check Cashing Service operated at 31 Hopkins Place in Baltimore, a commercial area, in order to be very close to the office of the Employment Security Board, at Hopkins Place and Lombard Street, at which each week thousands of unemployment compensation checks were distributed. When the distribution center moved in 1959 to a new building on the west side of Eutaw Place south of Dolphin Street, Stan's followed it, moving its place of operation to the first floor of 1202 Eutaw Place, on the west side of that street just north of Dolphin Street. The 1200 http: / /www.lexis.com/ research /retrieve ?_m= a62e46595Of3761 a 1 daa7f l d75ff713c &_fmtstr= FU16 /22 /99cnum= 1 LEXSEE® 241 MD 686 Page 3 of 9 block of Eutaw Place was then and still is in a residential and office use district. On December 20, 1959, the Zoning Enforcement Officer of Baltimore issued a permit for the use of 1202 Eutaw Place for "14 apartments and first -floor office- insurance and payroll services and check exchange, and one non - illuminated name plate not exceeding one square foot in area attached to exterior of building." The Board of Municipal and Zoning Appeals affirmed this action, and protestants appealed to the Baltimore City Court. On May 23, 1960, Judge Harlan affirmed the Board. He noted that check cashing businesses were [ * * *6] not specifically excluded from residential and office use districts and considered and disposed of a contention that since the ordinance prohibited "a work or pay distribution center" in such a district the business of cashing checks should likewise be deemed to be excluded inasmuch, it was claimed, a pay distribution center and a check cashing service are virtually indistinguishable, saying that alike as the two well may be the literal words of the zoning ordinance must control. Thereupon, after the expiration of the thirty -day period during which an appeal to this Court could have been taken, Stan's sold its check cashing business to the appellant, Eutaw Enterprises, Inc., which, since the very early summer of 1960 has continued to operate it at the same location under the same name. On February 1, 1960, months before the purchase, an ordinance then numbered 433 had been introduced in the City Council to add new §§ 9 (d) (5 -b) and 13 (d -1) to Art. 40 of the [ *690] Baltimore City Code (1950 Ed.), title "Zoning" as said article was revised by Ordinance 711, approved May 21, 1953, to exclude "check cashing, money changing or similar types of agencies" from residential and office [ * * *7] use districts and to require all "check cashing, money changing or [* *351] similar types of agencies situated in residential or office use districts, and in residential use districts at the time this ordinance becomes effective" to remove by June 1, 1960. On March 29, 1960, the Board of Municipal and Zoning Appeals advised the City Council that the removal provision should not be passed inasmuch as the City Solicitor had given an opinion on March 11, 1960, that "a zoning ordinance may require the elimination of certain non - conforming uses but such zoning regulations must allow a reasonable time for such elimination and [that] in his opinion the ordinance * * * would not be reasonable in that respect" in that it would require elimination of check cashing, money changing or similar types of agencies by June 1, 1960, or in some three months from the likely time of passage of the ordinance. The Zoning Commission advised the Planning Commission, preparatory to the latter giving its views to the Council, that it would be desirable "to prohibit check - cashing agencies from the residential and office use districts" because it appeared to the Commission that: "check- cashing agencies, [ * * *8] involving the exchange of money for which a charge is levied, great numbers of people congregating in the streets and coming in and out of buildings, street advertising, solicitation and other enticements, were not anticipated as an appropriate residential and office use nor is it considered a desirable use in this district. It said also that "the original intent and purpose of the residential and office use district was to provide for professional and ordinary business offices, not involving display, sale, exchange or storage, in connection with residential use of buildings." Despite its desire to see check cashing operations out of residential districts, the Zoning Commission felt that the termination period for existing check cashing businesses should be eliminated from the proposed ordinance because detailed and [ *691] comprehensive recommendations for a zoning law as to the control and http: / /www.lexis.conVresearch /retrieve ?_m= a62e465950f3761 a 1 daa7f 1 d75ff7 l 3c &_fmtstr= FU16 /22 /99cnum= l l LEXSEE® 241 MD 686 Page 4 of 9 removal of all nonconforming uses were then under consideration and it would be advisable to deal . with all such uses in a general law. The Planning Commission advised the president and members of the City Council on September 26, 1960, that it approved the proposed amendment to § [ * * *9] 9 of the zoning ordinance and found it reasonable because "had such uses [check cashing, money changing and similar types of agencies] been prevalent when the residential and office use district section was enacted, they probably would have been excluded then." The Commission pointed out that such "types of agencies" "have resorted to various techniques involving large and obnoxious signs, street solicitors, handbills and other enticements [handing out free cigarettes, coffee and Coca -cola to waiting patrons as did Eutaw at a yearly cost of some $ 2,500] * * *" but felt that the termination provisions of § 13 should be eliminated and the closing of existing businesses deferred until enactment of the proposed new comprehensive zoning plan for Baltimore, which dealt with the treatment and elimination of all nonconforming uses generally and in a detailed and sophisticated fashion. The City Council nevertheless, on November 22, 1960, enacted the ordinance as Number 465 and included an eighteen- months' toleration period during which check cashing businesses in residential and office use districts must be closed. On March 22, 1961, the Zoning Enforcement Officer wrote Eutaw notifying [ * * *10] it of the passage of Ordinance 465 and its provisions, including the requirement that check cashing businesses remove from a residential and office use district by June 1, 1962. Eutaw says that it was not until receipt of this letter that it knew anything of Ordinance 465. On April 4, 1962, the City Council enacted a comprehensive zoning law, Ordinance 1162, dealing with all nonconforming [* *352] uses. The removal provisions of Ordinance 465 were repealed and • in lieu thereof the provisions of § 13.F.7 of Ordinance 1162 were made applicable to provide the following: "Termination. Check - cashing, money- changing and similar types of agencies operated primarily for the cashing of checks or changing of money and situated [ *692] in residential and office use districts and residential use districts shall be discontinued and cease not later than June 1, 1962. Provided, further, that when any district is hereafter reclassified as residential and office use or residential use, any such check - cashing, money - changing or similar type of agency situated in such reclassified district shall be discontinued and cease not later than twelve months after the effective date of the [ * * *11] ordinance reclassifying the district." On May 31, Eutaw and the Pentecostal Faith Church, Inc., the landlord of Stan's place of business, filed a bill alleging that Eutaw had bought the check cashing business in reliance on the judicially established right of such a business to operate in a residential and office use district and had paid $ 10,000 for it, "virtually all of which was for good will," that Eutaw pays more rent to the Church than it could get from another tenant and the Church needs the extra money, that Eutaw operates in a law- abiding and quiet manner, that Eutaw was at the time of the enactment of the ordinances and still is the only check cashing business operating in a residential and office use district, that Ordinances 465 and 1162 are unconstitutional as to Eutaw and the Church because they are discriminatory, destroy vested rights, and seek to terminate a use which is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare and because they are directed at but one such business. They asked the court "to judicially • declare, as applied to each of the Complainants herein," that § 13 (d -1) (the termination provisions) of Ordinance 465 and § 13.F.7 (the same provisions) [ * * *12] of Ordinance 1162 are invalid and of no effect. http: / /www.lexis.conVresearch /retrieve ?_m= a62e465950f3761 a 1 daa7f l d75ff7 l3c &_fmtstr= FU16 /22 /99cnum= l i LEXSEE® 241 MD 686 Page 5 of 9 After a hearing, Judge Sodaro on January 28, 1965, held that "Ordinance No. 465 and Ordinance No. 1162, insofar as they apply to the complainants, are valid and constitutional" and added: "In lieu of filing a formal opinion, I am adopting the Memorandum of Law filed by the City Solicitor * * *." Before stating our reasons for agreeing with the conclusions of Judge Sodaro, two preliminary matters may appropriately be mentioned. No point is raised as to the right of Eutaw and the Church to seek relief in a court of equity before they had exhausted [ *693] the administrative remedies under the zoning laws, in all likelihood because their claims were that the ordinances were fundamentally and wholly unconstitutional, and heretofore in such instances direct attacks in a court of equity have been permitted. Poe v. Manor and City Council of Baltimore, 241 Md. 303 (recognizing the rule but finding it inapplicable on the facts). Eutaw and the Church did not pray that the chancellor declare the challenged ordinances unconstitutional on the ground that check cashing agencies could not validly be excluded prospectively from residential [ * * *13] and office use districts, nor do they make this contention here. We see no sound basis on which they could do so. The Zoning Enabling Act, delegating zoning powers to Baltimore, Code (1957), Art. 66B, §§ 1 -9, makes this plain. Section 1 authorizes the Mayor and City Council to "regulate and restrict * * * the location and use of buildings, structures, and land for trade, industry, residence, or other purposes." Section 2 provides that the Council may divide the city into districts "and within such districts it may regulate and restrict the * * * use of buildings, structures, or land. Section 3 provides that such regulations shall be [ made with reasonable consideration, among other things, to the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses * * *." Generally, a law that draws lines or makes classifications is safe from attack on the ground that it discriminates or violates the constitutional requirement of equal protection because the courts consistently have held that the legislative body has the widest discretion in classifying those who are to be regulated and taxed. Only if the grouping is without any reasonable basis, [ * * *14] and so entirely arbitrary, is it forbidden. * * * If any state of facts reasonably can be conceived that would sustain a classification, the existence of that state of facts as a basis for the passage of the law must be assumed. The burden is on him who assails a classification to show that it does not rest on any reasonable basis." Allied American Co. v. Cotnna'r, 219 Md. 607, 623. The same tests have been applied to general classifications made by zoning laws under the delegations of the Enabling [ *694] Act. In Grant v. Citv of Baltimore, 21.2 Md. 301, 316, we said that the City Council could have found that billboards in residential areas so seriously incommoded the health, comfort and general welfare that the benefit to the public good brought about by their removal from such areas substantially outweighed the resulting harm to individuals, and added: "If it does not clearly appear that this legislative finding was unreasonable and arbitrary -- almost demonstrably wrong from the record -- the courts may not disturb it." . In the present case the advisory bodies agreed that check cashing activities were not a proper use in residential and office use areas and gave [***15] as reasons the facts that they cause the congregation of numbers of people on the streets in front of and near their places of operation in the process of their going in and coming out of such places (sometimes as many as six hundred a day in http: / /www.lexis.conV research /retrieve ?_m= a62e46595Of3761 a 1 daa7f l d75ff7 l 3c &_fmtstr= FU16 /22 /99cnum= l LEXSEE® 241 MD 686 Page 6 of 9 Eutaw's case), and that they bring about advertising and personal solicitations on the streets. . Certainly the City Council could reasonably and properly have believed these things to be inconsistent and incompatible with uses customary in a residential and office use district, and validly have determined that check cashing uses were detrimental to the public health, comfort and welfare in such districts to the degree that they should be excluded from them while at the same time feeling that other uses permitted as nonconforming business uses which occasionally cash checks for customers need not be eliminated. Grant v. Citv of Baltimore, sitora: Dobres v. Schwartzman. 191 Md. 19 (denial of right to use part of a home as a beauty parlor upheld); Anne Arundel CounA v. Ward. 186 Md. 330: Jack Lewis, Inc. v. Baltimore, 164 Md. 146; Lipsitz v. Parr, 164 Md. 222. The essence of the complaint of Eutaw and the Church is, first, that [ * * *16] it is impermissible to make a zoning use which is valid under existing law invalid and to order its cessation, and, second, that if it be assumed that this is permissible the tolerance period established was too short. We think that both contentions must fail. In Grant (the holdings of which we expressly reaffirmed in Stevens v. Citv of Salisburv. 240 Md. 556), we held that an ordinance of the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore providing [ *695] that billboards, which were nonconforming uses in residential districts and had been since the start of zoning in Baltimore, must be removed from such districts within five years, was reasonable and constitutional as to the owners of land which was leased to the displayers of the billboards and as to the displayers. We pointed out that billboards were not nuisances per se, and said [* *354] at page 308: "It has become apparent that if nonconforming uses are to be dealt with effectively it must be under the law of zoning, a law not limited in its controls to harmful and noxious uses in the common law sense," and pointed out that many courts had held that legislatures could require that nonconforming uses cease after a reasonable [***17] and appropriate specified time. We noted that uses of property which are under the attendant circumstances detrimental to the health, comfort, safety or welfare of society may be prohibited under the police power, even though the exercise of that power causes inconvenience or loss to various individuals, and added at pages 315 -16: "The distinction between an ordinance that restricts future uses and one that requires existing uses to stop after a reasonable time, is not a difference in kind but one of degree and, in each case, constitutionality depends on overall reasonableness, on the importance of the public gain in relation to the private loss. * ** "There is no difference in kind, either, between limitations that prevent the adding to or extension of a nonconforming use, or provisions that the right to the use is lost if abandoned or if the structure devoted to the use is destroyed, or the denial of a right to substitute a new use for the old, all of which are common if not universal in zoning laws and all of which are established as constitutional and valid, on the one hand, and a requirement, on the other, that an existing non - conformance must cease after a reasonable [ * * *18] time. The significance and effect of difference in degree in any given case depends on circumstances, environment and length of the period allowed for amortization." [ *696] • The holdings of Grant control this case. The ordinances here complained of were constitutional exercises of legislative power. Ordinance 465, when it validly excluded check cashing operations from residential zones from the date of its enactment, necessarily made such operations then already http: / /www.lexis.conVresearch /retrieve ?_m= a62e465950f3761 al daa7f l d75ff713c &_fmtstr= FUI6 /22 /99cnum= l LEXSEE& 241 MD 686 Page 7 of 9 in existence in such zones nonconforming uses. The fact, if it is a fact, that Eutaw was the only commercial check casher in a residential district when the ordinances were enacted and that the City Council knew this, would not make them invalid as to Eutaw. It had no vested right in the zoning classification under which it operated and no right to expect that the classification of the property in which it operated would remain unchanged indefinitely. The ordinances, passed after deliberation and full consideration of expert and professional advice were general in application and drawn to apply in the same way, presently and in the future, to all similarly situated. As Grant suggested, there is no difference [ * ** 19] in kind, merely of degree, between a use which has been nonconforming since zoning began and one that is made nonconforming by a reclassifying ordinance, and, as Grant held, one in existence when zoning began may be required to stop. Because every zoning regulation affects property owned by someone at the time of its enactment, it brings about some curtailment of property rights either by restricting prospective uses or prohibiting existing ones. The prohibition of existing rights may be more likely to impose greater hardship or loss upon affected individuals than the restriction of prospective uses and that is one reason why we said in Grant at page 316: "The significance and effect of difference in degree in any given case depends on circumstances, environment and length of the period allowed for amortization." Consideration of the circumstances and environment shows that the testimony clearly permitted, as the memorandum of the City Solicitor adopted by Judge Sodaro as his opinion suggested and urged, a finding [* *355] that the twelve hundred block of Eutaw Place was essentially a quiet residential block save for the stirs caused daily by the hundreds of patrons of [ * * *20] Eutaw, which in order to attract customers exhibited many of the unattractive occupational traits of check cashing agencies which [ *697] the expert zoning bodies, and presumably the City Council, found incompatible with residential and customary accessory office uses. The testimony similarly permitted further a finding that the thousands of prospective donees of unemployment checks who from time to time lined the sidewalks of Eutaw Street south of Dolphin were in a nonresidential zone, that they did not emanate from, travel through, or enter or affect the twelve hundred block of Eutaw Place except as to the some ten per cent of them, who came to have their checks cashed at Eutaw. The considerations which made valid prospectively the provisions of Ordinance 465 excluding check cashing operations from residential and office use districts support as reasonable the provisions of that ordinance and of Ordinance 1162, requiring cessation of the use made nonconforming within a specified time. If a use would be incompatible in a residential and office district if commenced after the enactment of the ordinance, it is equally incompatible if it is in existence when the ordinance is passed. [ * * *21] We see nothing in the circumstances or environment to invalidate Ordinances 465 and 1162. The tolerance period of eighteen months for the elimination of Eutaw's business is as long as many which have been judicially approved as reasonable. Mile Road Corp. v. City of Boston (Mass.), 187 N. E. 2d 826. appeal dismissed, 373 U.S. 541, 10 L. Ed. 2d 687, upheld an ordinance requiring immediate cessation of the use of land for a dump, as did Hadacheck v. Los Angeles, 239 U.S. 394, 60 L. Ed. 348. of use of land for a brickyard. See also Franklin Furniture Comvanv v. City of Bridvenort (Conn.). 115 A. 2d 435. and City of Seattle v. Martin (Wash.). 342 P. 2d 602 (one year for termination of a use not situated in a building). See also Simr -aeon v. Board of Coin'rs of Shawnee Countv (Kan.). 317 P. 2d 798 (two years for removal of auto wrecking yards and junk yards). In the resent case the reasonableness of the eighteen months' period of race need not be passed on P g P g P as a basis of decision. Because of the length of time the litigation has dragged on, during which http: / /www.lexis.com/ research /retrieve ?_m= a62e465950f3761 a 1 daa7f l d75ff713c &_fmtstr= FUL6 /22 /99cnum =ll LEXSEE® 241 MD 686 Page 8 of 9 Stan's has continued uninterruptedly to cash checks, Eutaw and the Church have had some five and a half years [ * * *22] since November 1960 when Ordinance 465 was passed to enjoy [ *698] and profit from Eutaw's operation at 1202 Eutaw Place. In their bill of complaint, Eutaw and the Church alleged that if the termination provisions of Ordinances 465 and 1162 could constitutionally be enacted, "an extended period of time would have to be permitted for the amortization of the investment and costs and rights, theretofore made and existing, before any such alteration in use or compelled cessation of use could be required, and that such period would, each of these complainants avers, exceed five years from the date of adoption-of any such ordinance." The lease which Eutaw had with the Church when it began to operate Stan's as it owner was for five years with no right of renewal. The 1963 income tax return of Eutaw, offered in evidence, shows that it had depreciated its $ 10,000 purchase price for Stan's at the rate of $ 2,000 a year and by December 31, 1963, the accumulated depreciation was over $ 6,000. In two more years, that is, at December 31, 1965, the entire purchase price would have been fully depreciated. The 1963 return also showed a net loss for the year of $ 364.39. Since Eutaw has had [ * * *23] the five -year period it claimed was necessary and has fully depreciated its investment, the termination provisions of Ordinances 465 and 1162 cannot be said to have been unreasonable or invalid in application to Eutaw. [* *356] The Church is in no better position to complain. It has enjoyed the right to receive rent from Eutaw for the five -year period it claimed it should have (although it voluntarily lowered the rent to help pay the costs of litigation) and the portion of its building Eutaw has used remains rentable for some permitted office or business use or for residential tenants. The termination provisions of the ordinances were valid as to the Church under Grant. The appellants claimed below and claim here that the titles of the ordinances were misleading and deceptive and that, therefore, the ordinances were invalid. In Buck v. Bell. 274 U.S. 200. 208, 71 L. Ed. 1000. 1002. the Supreme Court characterized reliance on the equal protection clause as the "usual last resort of constitutional arguments." We think the characterization often can be applied to claims of unconstitutionality on the grounds of an invalid title, and that this is true in this case. [ *699] [ * * *24] The pertinent part of the title to Ordinance 465 is: providing that check cashing, money changing or similar types of agencies shall be excluded from residential and office use districts, specifying the date when this exclusion shall be effective, and further providing for the manner in which this ordinance will affect check cashing, money changing or similar types of agencies which are nonconforming uses." The title to Ordinance 1162 in pertinent part said: "* * * and to repeal Section 13 of said Article, as last amended by Ordinance No. 711, approved May 21, 1953, and by Ordinance No. 465, approved November 22, 1960, and to ordain in lieu thereof a new Section 13 to stand in place of the section so repealed; • relating generally to nonconforming uses of land, buildings, structures or premises, non- complying lots and non - complying buildings, structures and densities." http: / /www.lexis.com/research /retrieve ?_m= a62e46595Of3761 a 1 daa7f 1 d75ff713c &_fmtstr= FUL6 /22 /99cnum =l < LEXSEEO 241 MD 686 Page 9 of 9 We pointed out in Allied American Co. v. Comm'r. sit ' ora at 615. that "a title to an act need not be an index to all that it contains and need not set forth all of its exclusions or conditions. It is a label and need only set forth its object, not its product." We have no doubt that both [ * * *25] titles were sufficient to advise those reading them of the objects and purposes of the legislation and what it was designed to accomplish. We synopsized the rule in McBYiety ti% Baltimore City. 219 Md. 223. 241: "The title of the ordinance satisfies the charter or constitutional requirement if it fairly advises the City Council and the public of the real nature and subject matter of the legislation sought to be enacted." The titles of the ordinances before us met the tests established by the cases. Order affirmed, with costs. FOCUS More Like This Text Only I Print. Download, Email. Fax prev Document 1 of 1 next Service: LEXSEE® Citation: 241 MD 686 View: FULL Date /Time: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 - 7:22 PM EDT Search I Get a Document I Check a Citation Sources Clients I Orations I History ECLIPSE I Feedback I Sia_ n -Off Heln About LEXIS -NEXIS Terms and Conditions r Coovriaht U 1999 LEXIS- NEXIS, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http: / /www.lexis.conVresearch /retrieve ?_m= a62e46595Of3761 a 1 daa7f 1 d75ff7 l3c &_fmtstr= FUL6 /22 /99cnum =l � Check cashing outlets take a big bite -- Pitt... Page 1 of 3 free book o „ �IS�S PITI T1, OQBtTRCH BIUSINESS EMES October 13, 1997 h c outlets take big i Check cashing ou e a g b to Profits are being made in poor neighborhoods Julian Neiser DOWNTOWN -- For some city residents, paying up to 913 percent interest is a way of life. It happens for any number of reasons, but is most common when there's no bank in a neighborhood, or when a person lives paycheck -to- paycheck and can't keep a minimum bank account balance. For those people, and others, check cashing outlets are often a last resort, or a sole option. Currently, the check cashing industry is not regulated by state or federal authorities, which is disconcerting in light of a recent survey that found outlets charge as much as 10 percent to cash personal checks and 6 percent to cash paychecks or Social Security checks. They also offer cash advances on post -dated checks -- with annualized interest rates ranging from 213 percent to 913 percent. But what disturbs many local community leaders is that check cashing centers tend to crop up in communities where residents have no other choices -- low - income neighborhoods that banks don't want to serve. "The bankless and the underbanked pay a very high price for the convenience of services sold by check cashing outlets," said Jean Ann Fox, director of consumer protection at the Consumer Federation of America, a consumer advocacy group based in Washington, D.C. • "No area of financial services is in greater need of effective consumer protections, she said. Although state and federal authorities are considering http:// www .amcity- com/pittsburgh/stories /1997 /10 /13 /focus2.html 6/16/99 Check cashing outlets take a big bite -- Pitt... Page 2 of 3 stepping in with legislation to address the steep fees charged by most check cashers, there is a grassroots effort under way in many local communities to keep such businesses out of neighborhoods in the first place. Pauline Cooper, executive director of the Aliquippa Regional Alliance, said that when National City left, a check cashing company immediately tried to move in to the bank's location. "We felt it was a rip -off for poor people," Ms. Cooper said. "We didn't support it at all." Representatives from QuiCash, the check cashing company involved and the largest chain in the Pittsburgh area, wouldn't return phone calls about their service. Instead of using a check - cashing service, town leaders decided instead to create a credit union, so that residents would have a place to cash checks and save money as well. "We were concerned that (check cashing outlets) wouldn't help people get out of the poverty trap," Ms. Cooper said. The credit union in Aliquippa has grown since last winter to more than 400 members and has issued about $200,000 in loans. Another credit union initiative is growing in the East End (Business Times, July 14). A group of community leaders is working on Project Good Samaritan, a neighborhood credit union that will allow residents a chance to do their banking in low- income neighborhoods where they live, places where banks traditionally haven't served. But not every community can organize and support a credit union. And so, despite the high fees, the number of check cashing outlets nationwide is growing. Although the number of outlets in Pittsburgh (14) pales in comparison to larger cities such as Philadelphia, which has about 300, the national trend shows substantial inroads being made all over. In 1986, there were 2,151 outlets. Today, there are more than 5,400. The industry cashes 150 million checks a year worth $45 billion. While bankers might be squeamish about the idea of residents being forced to use check cashing outlets, they concede that it will happen when there are no nearby http:// www .amcity.conVpittsburgh/stories /1997 /10 /13 /focus2.html 6/16/99 Check cashing outlets take a big bite -- Pitt... Page 3 of 3 banks. • "I think it may be a reasonable business for someone who gets cash in the hands of people who need cash," said David Tritsch, president and director of North Side -based Allegheny Valley Bank. But because of the high profitability of check cashing outlets, Mr. Tritsch said he wouldn't be surprised, in light of loosened banking regulations, to see banks open their own check - cashing subsidiaries in areas they don't have branches. "Banks are in business to make money," Mr. Tritsch said. "So if there is a profit to be made, it wouldn't shock me for them to be in that market." But that cash cow may already have been milked for all it's worth. Local lawmakers and community groups have taken note of the high fees charged by check cashing outfits, and they are planning action. A bill that would impose limits on cashing fees unanimously passed the state House in March. Bill co- sponsor Rep. William Robinson, a Democrat representing Schenley Heights, said he hopes the measure clears the Senate by the end of this year. Rep. Robinson feels that there is more of a need to regulate the check cashing outlets than there is to push banks to operate in low- income neighborhoods. He said he believes that as banks increasingly derive profits from fees, as opposed to interest income, they have become less interested in helping low - income residents, who might only require check - cashing services. Because there is nothing currently on the books that could force banks start serving such areas, Rep. Robinson feels that regulating the check - cashing outlets is the most logical step. Week of October 13. 1997 1 Focus: Bankina & Finance I Too of the oaoe • http:// www .amcity.com/pittsburgh/stories /1997 /10 /13 /focus2.html 6/16/99 CNNfn - Check cashing outlets are expanding -... Page 1 of 2 i I i I Check cashing outlets move in_ to your neighborhood June 18, 1996 Web posted at: 2:38 p.m. EDT From Correspondent Fred Katayama NEW YORK (CNNfn) -- Have you noticed the new check z -_, 71 % � casher in your neighborhood mall? Check cashing outlets are & ,' ° x s. spreading from cities to suburbs, and growing at a time when ! . banks are shutting down branches. shi In low - income neighborhoods, especially ones that have lost several banking branches, they are filling the void with check -r r t SR yi cashers, like David's Check Cashing in New York City. •'` . A woman entering David's Check Cashing explained how her bank disappeared and was quickly replaced by a check cashing outlet. "It ain't there no more. So this opens up and we've been coming there paying our bills, because it's closer and better, convenient for us," she said. That convenience led users to cash $50 billion worth of checks last year. Nationwide, the number of check cashing outlets has nearly doubled in the past six years, to a current level of about five thousand. Typical customers have household earnings of $20,000 a year. "There's been a widening of the income gap between those on the upper end and those on the bottom end. Check cashing outlets specialize in servicing people who live from paycheck to paycheck and the number of people living from paycheck to paycheck has gone up," said Professor John Caskey of Swarthmore College. So have the number of immigrants, many of whom lack bank accounts. Some customers use check cashers because they're convenient. Customers can buy subway tokens, pay phone bills, and of course cash a check. ', , - Plus, cashers offer face -to -face service at a time when banks .. . ** are pushing teller machines. One customer said, "I don't trust (ATM) machines. I'd rather deal with people." And check cashers don't keep bankers' hours. They open S earlier, close later, and offer Saturday service. "If a community requires us to be open later because there are factories that stay open late http: / /www.cnnfn.com/news /9606 /18 /check_cashing_pkg/ 6/16/99 CNNfn - Check cashing outlets are expanding -... Page 2 of 2 and a night shift gets off, or if we need to open at 5 a.m. or 6 a.m., check cashers throughout the city will open and work whatever hours are necessary to address the needs of our people," said Ira Krell, chief financial officer of David's Check Cashing. But check cashers are more expensive than banks. Consumer advocates say users pay up to ten times more at check cashing outlets. Their fees range from 1 to 5 percent of a check's value. Still, over the next three years, experts predict greater growth for check cashers as they put up shingles in underserved regions like smaller cities, and new outlets such as kiosks in malls and gas stations. But industry watchers predict growth will slow down in the long run. The popularity of electronic deposits will put more money into banks, bypassing check cashers. To compete, check cashing companies say they'll try to form strategic alliances with banks to put teller machines in their own outlets. ......... . _.. _... __ ................. .... x. a =fit:. .. „_ .'. .;.... ... .. _ . _. x .. _ ...,: .:R �a. r-=M Mme' home I contents I search I stock quotes I held Copyright © 1996 Cable News Network, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. • i http: / /www.cnnfn.conVnews /9606 /18 /check_ cashing _ pkg / 6/16/99 The Seattle Times, Today's News: No bank acco... Page 1 of 3 Nation full story The Seattle Times Copyright © 1997 The Seattle Times Company a •' "i �,. t Friday, Aug. 22,1997 TQd' Local News - N atI _ No bank account? You'll pay more to World sports cash checks B�asinas< Lntertanmert„� F at -es.. Background & related info. d�torials;�pin�on 7 h� AF Wirn.: by Tonya Jameson ;bout the srt Knight- Ridder Newspapers RrIo ° y da ,t WASHINGTON - Poor Americans without bank accounts are paying an increasingly heavy toll to cash checks, pay bills and spf -,dai Reports 1 conduct other routine financial transactions, a new study from the P ersona{ Tech Consumer Federation of America shows. The 12 million Americans who use check - cashing services typically pay a fee of more than 2 percent to cash their paychecks. ® That means it costs $7.49 on average to cash a $320 paycheck. That charge is up 44 percent from the average cost reported in a 1987 survey. Lured by the prospect of substantial profits - a 100 percent return on investment was reported in one study - the ranks of check cashers have grown from 2,151 outlets in 1986 to 5,400 today. The industry cashes 150 million checks a year worth $45 billion. "A significant portion of all households are unbanked or underbanked," said Stephen Brobeck, executive director of the consumer organization. "Check- cashing offices have been increasingly meeting those needs." The average fee for cashing a personal check is more than 9 percent, or $14.04 for a $150 check. Many check- cashing services charge hefty fees to pay bills and charge extraordinary interest rates on short-term loans, the study found. The federation surveyed 111 check - cashing outlets in 23 of the largest urban areas of the country. Despite their heavy charges, check - cashing companies have broad • appeal for an array of reasons, said John Caskey, author of "Fringe Banking: Check Cashing Outlets, Pawnshops and the Poor." People with bank accounts use the business to cash checks faster http: / /www.seattletimes.com/ extra /browse /html97 /cash_082297.html 6/16/99 The Seattle Times, Today's News: No bank acco... Page 2 of 3 if they don't have enough money in their accounts. People who don't have accounts say they don't have enough money to maintain an account. Others believe they can't afford the fees at commercial banks, Caskey said. Some companies have expanded beyond cashing checks to "payday loans." Usually, a borrower writes a personal check to the check casher for the amount needed, plus the company's fee. The money is loaned until the next payday, usually up to two weeks. "Consumers who can't pay the fee get caught up in a downward spiral," said Jean Ann Fox, director of Consumer Protection for the Consumer Federation of America. That's what happened to several people in Tennessee who couldn't afford to pay the loan. The consumers began racking up loans at several check- cashing businesses in order to pay debts at another check - cashing company. Some Tennessee borrowers renewed cash - advance loans 20 to 29 times, paying fees of $19 to $24 per $100 loaned. One woman "rolled over" loans 24 times in 15 months, borrowing a total of $400, paying $1,364 and still owing $248, according to the complaint. Spurred by such abuses, some of the Tennessee borrowers are suing check - cashing companies, North Carolina recently passed a law to prevent check - cashing companies from charging exorbitant fees, and Michigan is threatening to sue five companies for making illegal loans. Tre Miller, an executive of Check into Cash, one of the Tennessee check - cashing services being sued, argues that the lending business is misunderstood. Some customers have bank accounts, he said, and use the business as overdraft protection when they don't have sufficient funds in their checking accounts. "We provide a service that is a great need to the public," Miller said. The Consumer Federation of America wants states to prohibit "payday loans," cap check - cashing fees, and require check - cashing companies to post fees and provide itemized receipts. • Backliground & related into. • Check - cashing advice i ! I a http: / /www.seattletimes.com/ extra lbrowse /html97 /cash_082297.html 6/16/99 The Seattle Times, Today's News: No bank acco... Page 3 of 3 Today's News � Go Copyright © 1997 The Seattle Times Company I Permission reouests and information • • http: / /www.seattletimes.com/ extra lbrowse /html97 /cash_082297.html 6/16/99 1 670 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55401 (612) 33 -9300 telephone (A 12) 337 -4310 f v c N n R T R E o http. /1ww- .kcnncdy- gravcn.com t s 1 CHARLES L. LEiF'EVERE -- Attomey at Law Ontct I3+al (612) 337-9215 *r+t°tl. ctefcrerc @kennzdY- groven.com July 21, 1999 Mr. Michael McCauley City Manager City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center MN 55430 3 RE: Moratorium Ordinance Dear Mike: At the last City Council meeting I was requested to provide a letter a ssi legal issues relating to a proposed moratorium which would affect currency exchange busi esces in the city. a f Minnesota Statutes § 462.355, subd. 4, authorizes the city to adopt an 'interim ordinance (commonly called a moratorium) which would prohibit certain development ifor the purpose of protecting the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of its cit zcns if the city is conducting studies or has authorized a study to be conducted or has held or s hcduled a hearing for the purpose of considering adoption or amendment of a compreh i� plan, zoning ordinance or subdivision regulation. A moratorium is used to preserve the st g-quo, to prevent development that may be prohibited by an - ordinance Which is adopted al a later date after ap ro riate hearin s or studies are conducted. t s3 ?he authority of a city to adopt such an ordinance has been upheld ini cases challenging ordinances prohibiting the establishing of adult uses (in the case of Ci ovstal v. l✓antasv House. Inc., (Minn. App. 1997) 569 N.W.2d 225) and pawnshops (in the cas dt Wedemevel, v. Citv of Minneavolis, (Minn. App. 1995) 540 N.W.2d 539). In both of these cases, the city had ordered or conducted studies as required by the statute, and the court found it the ordinances were adopted for legitimate public purposes and not solely for the arbitrary p�� ibse of stopping a particular project. l t However. where the courts have not been convinced that a moratorium ordinance served a legitimate public purpose, such ordinances have been declared invalid. For e�=ple, in the case of Medical Services v. Citv of Shakopee, (Minn. App. 1992) 487 Y%2d 263, the court • determined that the city did not have a legitimate public reason for a morat4iubi prohibiting an l CLL166136 $it291.a i t F F ' F F Mr. Mike McCauley July 21, 1999 € Page 2 of 3 i infectious waste facility, but that the ordinance was adopted for the purpose of stopping a particular project ?n order to adopt a moratorium ordinance, the city must be conducting a study, or authorize a study, or have held or scheduled a hearing for the purpose of considering an F.mfndment to its ordinances. Therefore, the council should determine whether a moratorium or is needed to protect the public and whether it is prepared to commit the money and Itaff resources to conduct appropriate studies. The scope of a moratorium ordinance will be determined by its purpose. S ch an ordinance affects property rights, frustrates landowners' expectations, and may lead to li 'gation. Because of this, it is advisable to identify a legitimate public purpose that would a served by the moratorium and limit the effect of the ordinance to that which is necessary �b accomplish the purpose identified. The prohibition in the moratorium should be broad enou�b to accomplish this public purpose, but no broader than is necessary. For example, if the city is considering rezoning an area of the city froin Commercial to multifamily residential uses, it may be reasonable to impose a morato�uni on all new development until a decision is made. Given these facts, allowing r commercial or re eith residential development to proceed could frustrate orderly planning if the decision, following si p p Y appropriate studies and hearings, were made to limit the use in that area of the o'ity to the other use. On the other hand if the council is considering a rezoning to either R -1 or R -2, it is not necessary to prohibit single family residential development because such development �votild be allowed under any set of foreseeable circumstances (i.e.. in either an R -1 or R -2 zo Wherefore, a moratorium could be imposed on all multifamily residential development) until studies are completed and a final decision is made. When making these decisions, the council should keep in mind the ncel to treat similar businesses in the same way. For example, if the purpose to be served by th nibratorlum is to preserve the status quo in a part of the city while the council is considering p eserving that area of the city for purely neighborhood convenience businesses, and the council 41s. that a currency exchange would not fit into this category because it does not sell convenience products at retail, uses which include currency exchanges could be prohibited by moratorium. However, if this were the purpose stated for the moratorium, it would also be necessary to prohibit other similar uses. For example, it is also true that banks and credit unions do not sell conv inience products at retail so such uses should also be prohibited On the other hand, a different purpose could result in a different trey ent of currency exchanges. For example, if the city council is considering rezoning an area of the city to another use, such as office or residential, any use which generates a higher level of traffic might be thought to be incompatible with such a use. Therefore, it would be logical to prohibit a CLL• 166236 $8291.4 F Mr. Mike McCauley July 21, 1999 Page 3 of 3 E development of any use which could be incompatible with the future potential uses which would be allowed after the ordinances are changed. Therefore, the city might prohib t Al commercial uses, including all retail, as well as all service uses such - as financial s rvltes, currency exchanges, and the like. Any moratorium ordinance can be challenged in court. Often such ordinances tc Challenged on the ground that they are enacted for an improper purpose (i.e., stopping a p cular project) as opposed to a legitimate, broad public purpose. An ordinance which has a v narrow scope, such as one which prohibits a particular kind of business, leaving all other d veolopment to go forward, may be more subject to an inference by the court that it was, in fact, idopted to stop a specific business from corning into town. If so, it may be more important in t1c.case of such a narrowly drawn ordinance to have a fairly well defined public purpose which is served by the ordinance. If the council wishes the studies or hearings to be conducted on land use rr atters relating to currency exchanges or some larger issue which would include currency exchan es, it should give staff direction as to the reasons why such an ordinance is needed or the purpode to be served by such an ordinance, so that staff can prepare an ordinance which will effecty ely preserve the status quo to protect the planning process in a way that is not broader t - lard necessary to accomplish that purpose. Staff should also be directed to conduct appropriate >tudies or prepare requests for proposals for consultants to undertake such studies, or should sch - Rule hearings on proposed ordinance amendments which would address the council's concerns, t For your information I am also enclosing a copy of Minneapolis ordinance provisions regulating currency exchanges in various ways. We found nothing else on the int"t that would be helpful. Please let me know if you have any fu thcr questions. Very truly yours, 4 1 Charles L LeFcvere 1 CLL-1h i CLL 166236 6 P,T�291 -d � xument http /1- wwmunicode,com/CG1- 61N1om is apt... ord= ldg�l ) &iofipagc=Document4y&x =1 = 15 i Currency exchange. Any person, except bank, trust company, savings bank, savings and to n association, credit union, or industrial loan and thrift company, engaged in the business of cashing checks, dra s. Money orders or travelers checks for a fee. Currency exchange does not include a person who provides the services incidental to the person's primary business if the charge for cashing a check or draft does not exceed on dollar (V .00) or one per cent of the value of the check or draft, whichever is greater. Day care facility, A facility, public or private, which for gain or otherwise regularly provides o e oft more persons with care, training, supervision, habilitation, rehabilitation, or developmental guidance on a regul bbisis. for periods of fewer than twenty -four (2d) hours per day, in a place other than the person's own home. Day cdre facilities include, but are not limited to: s ramily day care homes Group family day care homes Day care centers Z Day nurseries Nurse schools Nursery � ac hi e v e m e nt ce nt e r s De velo p m e nt a l ac e e e t ce to s . Day treatment programs Adult day care centers ; Day services Exclusions include: p 1. Day care or residential care provided by a relative to related persons. ! 2. Day care or residential care Provided for a cumulative total of fewer thah thirty (30) days in anj twelve -month Period. 3. Day care provided for persons from a single, unrelated family for any length �f time. t d i s 3 4 I i ; S 7n 1 11: M AM cvmern http:f /--- munuode com/CGt- t3SNJam onl= f 88Rt� } &toftpago= DocumeNd2 &x- 12&y =15 (9) Currency exchange, provided no other secondhand store, rummy a Shop, eleemosynary secondhand store, currency d e , or P p exchang awnsho is located within one thousand (1,000) feet measured in a straight line from lot line to lot line, and, in addition st0j � ect to the following b conditions: (a) Signage shall be limited to one and one -half (1 square feet of 4g ri area per one (1) l in ear f r' primary i wall that faces a public str e4, or that faces an nea foot o exterior p l ary build rig p accessory g parkin area and includes a public entrance, subjE ct. to the following: i . The maximum area per sign shall not exceed forty -five (45) guare feet. 2. Back- lighted signs, back - lighted awnings, roof signs. portable si s. temporary signs and freestanding signs shall be prohibited. 3. Window sig shall not exceed thir (30) percent of window area �nd shall not block views into the building at eye level. (b) The window and door area of any existing first floor facade that faces d ptl6ltc street or sidewalk shall not be reduced, nor sha changes be made to such windows or doors ,hat block views into the building at eye level. • c For new construction, at least thirty 30 percent of the first floor facad2 that faces a public street or sidewalk shall be windows or doors of clear or lightly tinted glass that allow views into the building at eye level. (d) The use of bars, chains or similar security devices that are visibl from a public street of sidewalk shall be prohibited. i I alle i n e The remises. all adjacent streets, sidewalks and alleys. and all s dev�r i k5 and a eys w t hin o e Bred u (00) f eet s h Il be spec re h n i In ted U litter found thereon. a g ularl y for p rp oses of removin 9 ` 00) Repackagin g and labeling of food supplement products for retail sale9 on premises, includinc wholesale distribution. Total area of operation not to exceed ten thousand (10.000) ;gdbre feet. (Code 1960. As Amend., § 276.040; Ord. of 3- 14 -74, § 1: 83-Or -176, § 2.7 -i 5 -83: 85 -Or -102, § 2., 5A 0 - 85; 87 - Or - 101, § 3, 5- 22 -87; 87 -Or -206, § S. 10- 23-87; 88 -Or -116, § 11, 6- 17 -88; 89 -Or -193. § 2, 9 -15 -8 b -Or -061, § 1, 2 -9 -90: 91 -Or -081, 4- 26 -91: 91 -Or -096, § 12. 5-10-91 § 2, 8- 28-92: 94 -Or -056, W4, 5- 13 -94; 95 -Or -181. § 17,12-29-95, 97 -Or -012, § 14.1-2d-97-, 98 -Or -039, § 1, 4- 24 -98) 540.1300. Lot area requirements. The lot area requirements in the 63 Districts shall be A follows: B3-1 District same as 132 -1 District. 133 -2 District same as B2 -2 District, B3.3 District same as B2 -3 District 133 - 4 District same as B2 - 4 District. s PIP OT-22-99 09:38 From - KENNEDY b GRAVEN +6123379310 T -896 P.01/04 F -024 i i KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED ' 470 PILLSBURY CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 r (612) 337 -9300 FAX # (612) 337 -9310 F i NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION This fax contains kfidential information which is legally privileged. The information is for the sole use of the initrnded recipient(s) listed below. Distnbution or disclosure to any individual not so listed is stric. i DATE: July 22. 1999 OUR FILE NO.: BR291 -4 .# Number of paga including cover sheet: 0 . 1 If a problem jriss�s, call Grace at 337 - 9285 or Service CenteF at (612) 337 -9300 s TO: •hael McCauley FAX #: 6 -3494 ,o 6 i FROM: U Lefevere I)i ea Dial #: (612) 337 -9215 COMMENTS: E Attached for your information is a copy of the St. Paul code relating to currency exchange. r Charlie. a f 2 r i t t r T t 5 e' OT -22 -99 09:38 From - KENNEDY & GRAVEN +61233T9310 T -896 P.02/04 F -024 1681.html at www., +aul.gov Page I of 3 t E Chapter 381. Currency Exchanges i Sec. 381.01. Statp l tense required; defi nit r iolt. No person shall gng�ge in the business of a currency exchange in Saint Paul without a license as provided by MinneTta Statutes Chapter 53A. E (C F. No. 94 -46, §, 2 -2 -94) Sec. 351.02. Proceed - es; hearing; fee. . r (a) Proced QPCn receipt of a completed applica from the commissioner of commerce for either a new license or the renewal of an existing license, the matter shall be referred to the Office of License, lnspectipn and Environmental Protection for initiation of a hearing as rctluired by state law within the periodwal wed for the response of the governing body. The hearing shall be for the purpose of taking, to , timony from interested persons, including those in the community in which the applicant is locurgd r is proposing to he located, as required bylaw, and upon grounds or isaues as to which nori4e h;xs een given in oc:eorclance with the requiremems of eeetions 310.05 and 310.06 of the Legislative C9d .. The said office shall publish and give notice as required by law. (b) Hearing. The ;herng shall be held before an independent hearing examiner in confun-nty with the provisions of seatnons 310.05 and 310.06 of the Legislanve Code, and the rules of the office of administrative hepif gs, to the extent such rules are not in conflict with sections 310.05 and 310.06. (c) Fee, cv,t.�. The ppheant shall pay, within fifteen (15) clays following receipt of the application S by the city, a fez co Bring the costs of administering and processing the application in an amount to be established in co >'ormity with the procedures in section 310.09(b) of the Legislative Code. The applicant shall alpo 4imburse the city, within fifteen (15) days following action by the city council on the applicatioq, f rf its costs in condueain; the hearing or hearings prescribed by state law, including publicq�i i costs and the cost of the administrative proceedings and hearing before an independent heudn� examiner. (C.F. No. 94-46, s 2 -2 -94) Sec. 381.03. Groan Is for disapproval, etc. (a) Disapproval. 'rh council may by resolution disapprove an application and, if so, shall state therein its reasons f r so doing. It may adopt in whole or in pan the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the indepedent hearing examiner and may amend the same to conform to its decision on the retord and the teaumony. Notice of the disapproval may be cummunicated to the commissioner of commerce befpreithe effective date of any such resolution where necessary to avoid a presumption of concurrence. (b) Grounds for disc pprovaL Disapproval of an application may be based on one (1) or more of the following ground¢, ja addition to any other ground allowed by law: l (1) Violation of iTy�rovision of the state currency exchange law contained in Chapter 53A. ( 2) A one (1) o lore of the reasons, conditions, or standards for adverse action under section 310.06 of "the Legisl € litive Code. 9 http: / /www.sTpaul�90 dcode/168Lhtml 7/13/99 07 -22 -99 09:38 From- KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T -896 P.03/04 F -024 1081.1itm1 at www.sipaul.gov Page 2 of 3 t (3) Failure of the;aklicam to pay the city fee and cuat� pruscrnbed above. (4) (i) The location �r it new currency exchange as proposed would cause significant adverse consequences or ;macts upon the neighborhoods within three hundred (3tx1) feet of the exchange. Such anticipated e1' ct must be shown by clear and convincing evidence. . r (ii) The existing ency exchange has caused significant adverse consequences or irnpacts upon the neighborhoods wi a three hundred (300) feet of the exchange. (5) Failure of the aj�Iicant to agree to reasonable conditions upon the operation of the business in accordance with they procedures in section 310.05 and the grounds of 310.06. Such conditions could include, but are 11 !limi to hours of operation, off-street parking requirements, bonding in an amount oreater T4ar that required by state law, and annual audits at the licensee's expense. (6) The applicam is ;riot of good moral character and repute and/or is unfit w operate such a business. t (7) The applicarit.isnot at least eighteen (18) years of age. (8) 'rhe apphcanj isi.tot the real parry in interest in the application_ (9) The location of The business for which a new currency exchange license is sought is within one -half mile of an xisting currency exchange licensed by the state. 0 0)) The applicant Pr its proposed business location does not comply with applicable zoning, building, fire arid' h1alth codes. (c) Persons and Oo orations, If an applicant is a partnership, the application may be denied if there is a basis fur denial to any partner. if the applicant is a corporation, the application may be denied if there is a basis fuj denial as to any (i) shareholder holding more than five (5) percent of the outstanding or issue stock of the corporation, or (ii) officer or director of the corporation, or (iii) employee of the ellirprtse having policy or management control over the enterprise. e (C.F. No. 94-46, § : 2 -2 -94) Sec. 381.U4. DetlMilions. The following wordy and/or phrases shall have the following meaning when used in this chapter and in Chapter 310 of tt Legislative Code. (a) Applicant. The t�rm "applicant" includes persons, partnerships, firms and corporations and all other forms of btisigess ventures. It also includes employees who exercise management or policy control over the zrittTprise, general and limited partners, shareholders of more than five (5) percent of the outstanding of tjsued shares of a corporation, and corporate managers, officers and directors. (b) Applicarion. Th� term "application" includes applications for both new and renewal licenses. (c) License. The rertp "license" refers to the state currency exchange license provided for in Minnesota Statutes �Mion 53A.02. (d) Currency exckr e. The term "currency exchange" is defined in Minnesota Statutes Section • 53A.0 1, subdivis#ort 1. Currency exchange means any person, except a bank, trust company, savings bank, savings and Man association, credit union, or industrial loan and thrift company, engaged in the n htrp: / /www.sipaul.,go� /code /ic38 Lhtml 7/13/99 s 3 i 07 -ZZ -99 09:39 From - KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T -696 P.04/04 F -024 1681 hvml at wwvw.gpaul,gov Pave 3 of 3 i business of cashtn? •hecks, drafts, money ordain or travelers' checks for a fee. Currency exchange dots not include rson whu provides these services ineiueni4l to the persun's prim4ry business if the charge for c4hi ig a check or draft does no exceed one doUar ($1.00) or one (1) percent of the value of the check draft, whichever is greater. t (C.F. Nu. 94-46, ; 1,2-2-94) c r f 1 -- , i 1 t 9 . i l E 1 • f s t i c t t F { 's f INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO. MICHAEL MCCAULEY Q FROM: STEPHEN BAKER SUBJECT: CFtECK CASHING FACILITIES - DATE: 07/22/99 Inquiries made of the St. Louis Park Assessor and Hennepin County Assessor's Office indicate that the check cashing facilities located at 4901 Excelsior Blvd. and 6525 Ncollet Ave S have had no measurable impact on the property values of nearby residential property. No actual neighborhood growth numbers were available from the County Assessor. (The County does the Richfield assessment under a contract arrangement) Larry Miller, Principal Appraiser Hennepin County, stated that they had not seen any measurable impact on residential property values from the opening of the check cashing facilities at either the 6525 Ncollet Ave S location or from a second facility located at 76' and Ncollet Ave S. Property values near these facilities had actually increased at the same rate as other similar properties. Mr. Miller also stated that other Richfield departments reported no unusual problems which could be associated with these check cashing businesses. Ms. Debra Lynch of the St. Louis Park Assessor's office reports that the neighborhood adjacent to the check cashing facility at 4901 Excelsior Blvd. is one of the most desirable residential locations in the St. Louis Park. Recent assessed market values in the area adjacent to the Excelsior Blvd. check cashing facility have increased approximately 6% per year for a number of years. While no actual numbers are available back to the 1989 opening of the check cashing facility Ms. Lynch felt that market values in the neighborhood had increased every year since 1989. City Council Agenda Item No. 8b Office of the City Clerk 3 City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. MEMORANDUM TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk la� DATE: July 16, 1999 SUBJECT: Mayoral Appointment to Northwest Hennepin Regional Human Rights Commission The Northwest Hennepin Regional Human Rights Commission is comprised of representatives from the cities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Crystal, Golden Valley, Maple Grove, New Hope, Plymouth, and Robbinsdale. Brooklyn Center currently has one representative and has been seeking another resident to serve on the commission since April 16, 1999. Notice of an opening on the Northwest Hennepin Regional Human Rights Commission was published in the Brooklyn Center Sun -Post on April 21 and June 23, 1999. Notice was posted at City Hall and Community Center and aired on Cable Channel 37 from April 16 through July 9, 1999. . A letter was sent to those persons who previously had submitted an application for appointment to a Brooklyn Center advisory commission informing them of the vacancy and requesting that they call the City Clerk if they are interested in applying for the commission. They were given the choice of either reapplying or having their application previously submitted considered. Notices were also sent to current advisory commission members. Attached for City Council Members only is a copy of the application received: Kira Kieselhorst 7254 Dupont Avenue North A letter was sent to the applicant notifying her that her application for appointment would be considered at the July 26, 1999, City Council meeting. Other attachments include: 1) Procedures for filling commission vacancies adopted by the City Council on March 27, 1995. 2) Memorandum from Mayor Kragness indicating her nomination. Recommended Council Action: Motion by Council to ratify the Northwest Hennepin Regional Human Rights Commission nomination by Mayor Kragness with term expiring December 31, 2001. 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer City of Brooklyn Center Procedures for Filling Commission /Task Force Vacancies Adopted by Council 3 /27/95 The following process for filling commission/task force vacancies was approved by the City Council at its March 27, 1995, meeting: Vacancies in the Commission shall be filled by Mayoral appointment with majority consent of the City Council. The procedure for filling Commission vacancies is as follows: 1. Notices of vacancies shall be osted for 30 days before an official p Y Y City Council action is taken; 2. Vacancies shall be announced in the City's official newspaper; 3. Notices of vacancies shall be sent to all members of standing advisory commissions; 4. Applications for Commission membership must be obtained in the City Clerk's office and must be submitted in writing to the City Clerk; 5. The City erk shall forward copies of the applications to the Mayor and City t3' p PP Y Council; 6. The Mayor shall identify and include the nominee's application form in the City Council agenda materials for the City Council meeting at which the nominee is presented; 7. The City Council, by majority vote, may approve an appointment at the City Council meeting at which the nominee is presented. • PROCEDUR.CC City of Brooklyn Center Office of the Mayor A great place to start. A great place to stay. MEMORANDUM TO: Councilmember Debra Hilstrom Councilmember Kay Lasman Councilmember Ed Nelson Councilmember Robert Peppe FROM: Myrna Kragness, Mayor DATE: July 16, 1990 SUBJECT: Northwest Hennepin Regional Human Rights Commission Nomination As outlined in our policy for filling commission vacancies, I would request ratification from Council Members for the nomination of Kira Kieselhorst, 7254 Dupont Avenue North, to the Northwest Hennepin Regional Human Rights Commission with term expiring December 31, 2001. • • 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer City Council Agenda Item No. 8c Office of the City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. MEMORANDUM TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk �jw� DATE: July 21, 1999 SUBJECT: Resolution Amending the Schedule for Amusement Device License Fees Attached is a copy of S. F. No. 1329 which was signed by the Governor on May 19, 1999, and its effective date is August 1, 1999. With the passage of this legislation, the City is limited in setting fees for amusement devices to $15 per location plus $15 per machine. Currently the license fee for amusement devices is $70 per machine per location and was adopted by Resolution No. 97 -180. Attached is a resolution which amends the schedule for amusement device license fees to come into compliance with State Law. Attachment 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer 3.F No. 1329, 2nd Engrossment http: l /wwwrevisor.leg.statemn.us /cgi bin/ bldbill .pl?bM= Sl329.2&session =lsgl O T KEY: ' n, = old language to be removed underscored = new language to be added NOTE: If you cannot see any difference in the key above, you need to change the displav of stricken and /or underscored language. Authors and Status N List versions S.F No. 1329, 2nd Engrossment: 81st Legislative Session (1999 -2000) Posted on 5/13/99 1.1 A bill for an act 1.2 relating to cities; limiting license fees on coin and 1.3 currency activated amusement machines; proposing 1.4 coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 449. 1.5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: 1.6 Section 1. [449.20] [LIMITED LICENSE FEES ON AMUSEMENT 1.7 MACHINES.] 1.8 ,A home rule charter or statijtory c,t_v may i.mnose by 1.9 ordinance a 1 icenee fee on amusement m achines of no more than 1.10 the demonstrated and veri actual_ cost of issuing the 1.11 ,license or 515 'oer location nl-u-q S1.5 ner machine. • 1 of 1 5125/99 10:47 AM House Bill Status Document Display Document 1 of I http://www.revisor.leg.statemn.us:81/SEAR ... SEARCH+INC+'SF1329'+AND+SESSION._NUMBER+=+C IN low House Bill Status Search Form Senate Bill Status Search Form -1 ................................... ........................................................................... ...... ........ ........... I ........ I ................................................................. ........... ...................................... House Bill Status Document Display Document 1 of I Bill Name: SF1329 B Text Senate Status Revisor Number: 99-2439 House Research Summary Chief Author: Leighton Author: Davids Author- Abrams Author: Milbert Author: Larsen, P. Other authors Companion File: HF1140 Bill Text Senate Status House Status Short Description: License fees on coin and currency activated amusement machines limited. Main Topic: Licenses on c j_DescriiotiQU Unofficial Actions Official Actions: • 1 of 2 5/25/99 10:47 AM Rouse Bill Status Document Display Document 1 of 1 http://www.revisor.leg.statemn.us:gl/SEAR ... SEARCH+INC+'SF1329'+AND+SESSION—NUMBER+=+C ........................................................................................................................ ............. .............................................................. ........................ ........................... :Committee /Description Date Action Call: ............ ............................. ............................... ... ... ................... ....................................... ........ . ............. ................ :04/26/1999; Received from Senate . ............ ............... 999 111S,nate File first reading, referred for : comp ................. .... arison F. 1140 '3194 3194 ....................... . :04/26/1 : H ................................................................. I - ............ ... ........................................................ ...... ..... ...... 04/27/1999 not identical, R/S substitution �10n General Re g.....................> ..............:................ ister ".3204:13204 ............................ ............................................... ............................................... ........... ............................... :3204 Second Second rea :105/10/1999I ...Rule 1.21, placed on Calendar for the Day �M:13885 ............................. .................................................................................................... .......... .............. I ............... I P5/10/1999', '18:9:8:: F3 ......................... .......................................... .......... ..................................................... ........... . . . ... Third reading as amended — 89 - 8: ......................................................................... .. ... ...................................... 0 109-23 : ... �.i ................... ...................... ..................................... .......................... .1 * M& ......................... ............... ......................... :105/12/1999.'.' Concurrence and Repassage 160-1 ............................. .......................... I .................................. ................. ........................... ...... ........ .......... !Signed by Governor ;May 19, 1999 ..................... ....... ............................ .................................... ............ ................................................. ..................... CHAP NUMBER CH 179 ............................. ........................................... .............. ..... ............. ................................................. ....... JEFFECTIVE DATE .. gust 1, 1999 ............................................................. .................................... .... ............................... .................. 14ouse Bill status search Form Senate Bill Status Search Form • 2 of 2 5/25/99 10:47 AM Member introduced the following resolution and moved ® its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SCHEDULE FOR AMUSEMENT DEVICE LICENSE FEES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center adopted Resolution No. 97 -180 on October 14, 1997, relating to a schedule for various license fees; and WHEREAS, in the 1999 Legislative Session, S. F. No. 1329 was passed relating to limiting license fees on coin and currency activated amusement machines; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 449; and WHEREAS, S. F. No. 1329 is effective August 1, 1999; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the schedule for amusement device license fees be amended as follows: Amusement Device Operator $15 /location, plus $15 /device BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the effective date of this resolution is August 1, 1999. 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. • G:\ DEPTS\ ADMIN\KNUTSON \SLK- CC \RESAMUS.WPD City Council Agenda Item No. 8d City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Kragness, Councilmembers 'lstrom, Lasm , Nelson, and Peppe FROM: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager DATE: July 8, 1999 SUBJECT: Facilitated Council Work Session with Carl Neu I would request setting Saturday, September 18, 1999, 8:00 a.m. for a facilitated work session with Carl Neu. 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer City Council Agenda Item No. 8e City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. To: Mayor Kragness and Council Members Hilstrom, Lasman, Nelson and Peppe From: Michael J. McCaule City Manager Date: July 22, 1999 Re: Traffic Study One of the Council's goals for 1999 was to conduct a traffic study through a consultant. In discussing the implementation of the Council's goal, the Council requested a staff review of traffic issues to assist the Council in determining whether it wished to engage the services of a traffic consultant. In response to the Council's direction, the enclosed report has been prepared by Ms. Spector. The item has been placed on the agenda for discussion and review. 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative ActionlEqual Opportunities Employer Report on Neighborhood Traffic in Brooklyn Center City of Brooklyn Center Administrative Traffic Committee C ; 55 � July, 1999 Report on Neighborhood Traffic in Brooklyn Center Executive Summary Traffic on neighborhood streets is second only to code enforcement when neighborhood livability issues are discussed by residents. The most common complaint is too many vehicles driving too fast. As the number of vehicles and drivers increases, and our fast -paced lives are reflected in our driving habits, neighborhood traffic has become an issue nation wide. Traffic calming, or the alteration of the appearance or geometry of a roadway in an attempt to reduce traffic volumes and speeds, is becoming a widely used approach to addressing neighborhood concerns. Aggressive speed enforcement is another tool used to address neighborhood concerns. What is a "neighborhood traffic problem ?" Are there neighborhoods with "traffic problems" in Brooklyn Center? Are physical traffic calming measures necessary? How much is "too much" traffic? This report reviews existing data on traffic speeds and volumes, and concludes that with the exception of a few streets, by technical definitions there is not a "traffic problem" in Brooklyn Center. However, these technical definitions do not take into account neighborhood perceptions, both of what seems to be the problem and also of what seems to be the appropriate solution -- or that anything is being done at all. The Administrative Traffic Committee advises the City Council that speed limit enforcement be' aggressively pursued, and that neighborhood traffic speed and volumes continue to be monitored. Finally, the Committee advises the Council to direct staff to develop an informational program which provides residents with information regarding traffic volumes and speeds, and measures which are most appropriate to address real or perceived problems. i Report on Neighborhood Traffic in Brooklyn Center Traffic on neighborhood streets is second only to code enforcement when neighborhood livability issues are discussed by residents. The most common complaint is too many vehicles driving too fast. As the number of vehicles and drivers increases, and our fast -paced lives are reflected in our driving habits, neighborhood traffic has become an issue nation wide. Traffic calming, or the alteration of the appearance or geometry of a roadway in an attempt to reduce traffic volumes and speeds, is becoming a widely used approach to addressing neighborhood concerns. Aggressive speed enforcement is another tool used to address neighborhood concerns. What is a "neighborhood traffic problem ?" Are there neighborhoods with "traffic problems" in Brooklyn Center? Are physical traffic calming measures necessary? How much is "too much" traffic? Background It is impossible to consider neighborhood traffic issues without first discussing the tremendous overall growth in traffic. The 1990 Travel Behavior Inventory Report, prepared by the Metropolitan Council, summarized the findings of several Metro -wide studies over about four decades of growth. For example, in 1958, a survey revealed that only 20 percent of all households had two or more cars; in 1990, that had grown to 59 percent. Even more staggering is the growth in the actual number of households with multiple vehicles. In 1958, only about 84,000 households had two or more cars; in 1970 that figure was 188,900, and by 1990 it had grown to an astonishing 513,130 households. There are nearly four times as many cars in the Metro area today as in 1958. Table 1 Number of Households Classified by Auto Ownership 1958 1970 1982 1990 No cars 69,000 (17 %) 85,848 (15 %) 72,222 (10 %) 82,730 (9.5 %) 1 car 255,000 (63 %) 298,830 (52 %) 259,999 (36 %) 279,640 (31.9 %) 2 or more cars 84,000 (20 %) 188,902 (33 %) 389,998 (54 %) 513,130 (58.6 %) Source: Reuional Retiort: 1990 Travel Behavior Inventory Summary Report. Metropolitan Council, 1994. July, 1999 Page 2 The 1990 survey found that on average, each person in the Metro area made about 3.87 trips per day, either as a driver or passenger in a car (93 %), a passenger in a school bus or a transit vehicle (6 %), or by other means, such as motorcycle, taxi, etc. (1 %). The 2000 travel behavior survey will likely find that number of vehicles and trips per day have increased even more. This coincides neatly with established statistics used by traffic engineers that single family households on average generate 10 trips per day. Many residents of Brooklyn Center continue to live in the homes they built during the heyday of home construction in Brooklyn Center: 1958 -1964. Many of their children have also bought homes in Brooklyn Center, and are raising their families in neighborhoods which are similar to those in which they grew up. With the explosive growth in the number of automobiles and households with two or more cars, there are many more vehicles in the neighborhoods, from residents and visitors to the neighborhood, to vehicles driving through. Thus, the neighborhood does not seem to be the quiet, kids - playing -in- the - street place it once was. Design Issues There are two important design factors which have an impact on discussions of traffic. First, almost all of Brooklyn Center is laid out in a traditional "grid system," rather than a system of collectors and low- volume non - through streets which typically end in a cul -de -sac. Second, most neighborhood streets do not have sidewalks; the "collector" sidewalk system is mainly located on routes to schools and bus stops, and on busy collector and arterial streets. The Grid System The grid system does a good job of dispersing neighborhood traffic over several streets. There are numerous ways into and out of a neighborhood. On the down side, because of that grid, any vehicle can use that street as a means to get to another street. With the tremendous growth in number of vehicles and number of trips per day, this means that there is more traffic on every street. A more modern suburban layout, with culs -de -sac and U- shaped streets results in local streets with very low traffic counts, generated only by the residences located on that street. This type of design is somewhat more protected from general growth in traffic. However, under that type of suburban layout, traffic is concentrated on the subcollectors and the collectors, resulting in higher volumes on those streets than under the grid system. This transfers the problem from "excess" traffic on local streets to "excessive" traffic on collector streets. The price paid for lower volumes of traffic on neighborhood streets is more congestion on collectors. Sidewalks Most local streets in Brooklyn Center, unless they happen to be located, for example, near a school, do not have sidewalks. When many first ring suburbs were initially constructed in the • July, 1999 Page 3 • late `50s and early `60s, sidewalks were seen as being too urban, as was curb and gutter. As a result, most developments were constructed with no sidewalks and no curb and gutter. In the `60s, the City's policy was to construct sidewalks upon petition from property owners, and to assess the cost. In the early `70s, this policy was revised to provide for a City - financed, City - maintained network of "collector" sidewalks. This system is largely complete. The City's construction policies still provide for the construction of new sidewalks upon petition. As a part of the Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Program, staff routinely inquire if residents see the need for additional sidewalks, using that opportunity to install the sidewalks at no additional cost to the homeowners. No street project neighborhood has requested sidewalk, and no new sidewalks outside of the collector system have been constructed in many years. Aside from providing a mode of transportation, sidewalks play an important role in providing paved play space outside of the street. Residents often complain about traffic volume and speed because they fear for the safety of their children as they learn to ride their bikes, skate, etc., activities which leave the safety of the driveway and require playing in the street. In neighborhoods with sidewalks, those activities take place on the sidewalks and not in the street. Is There a Traffic "Problem" in Brooklyn Center? What is a "traffic problem ?" There is no clear definition, and every person has a different opinion. "Problem" is a very subjective term. There are some relatively clear -cut technical standards: ranges of traffic volumes based on street classifications; 85th percentile speed; accident history; intersection traffic counts. However, these do not take into account perception. The speed limit on a residential street may be 30 mph, but to a mother whose young child is out playing on her bike down at the end of the driveway, 30 mph may seem dangerously fast. Even if 100 percent of the traffic is traveling at or within a few mph of 30 mph, the mother's perception is that there is a speeding problem on that street. A driver who is still shaken from a , close call at an uncontrolled may intersection four Stop at that intersection "before Y d eman d a way p somebody gets killed," when that intersection comes nowhere near meeting the technical requirements for a four way Stop. The first step in determining if there is a traffic "problem" in Brooklyn Center is to conduct a technical review of the traffic system. This includes reviewing traffic counts, speed surveys, and intersection controls. Traffic Counts As a requirement for Municipal State Aid for Road Construction funding, Engineering staff count traffic at 93 MSA- specified locations in the City every two years. An additional 65 locations of City interest are counted regularly every two y ears. Ad hoc traffic counts are also taken at various locations when the need arises. is July, 1999 Page 4 The City's Comprehensive Plan presents five functional classifications for roadways in Brooklyn Center. These functional classifications are determined by the role each street segment plays in the overall Metro traffic system. Street segments of State, Metro, or Regional significance are generally under the jurisdiction of Mn/DOT or Hennepin County. MSA routes are under the jurisdiction of the City, but Mn/DOT has established standards which govern certain technical issues such as street width, parking, number of lanes, etc. Traffic counts play an important role in determining how wide a street can be, how many lanes, etc. These are the five functional classifications and the roadways which fall under each classification (see Appendix A): • Principal Arterial (I -94;1- 94/694; TH 252; TH 100) • "A -minor Arterial - Augmenter" (Bass Lake Road, CR 10) • "A -minor Arterial - Reliever" (Brooklyn Boulevard, CSAH 152) • Collector (69th Avenue W of Brooklyn Boulevard, CR 130; Humboldt/57th Avenue, CR 57; other streets, most of which are designated MSA routes) • Local Street (Balance of street segments) Collector roadways are intended to collect and distribute traffic from neighborhoods and commercial areas to arterials or to connect neighborhoods and commercial areas with each other. Local streets are intended to provide access to adjacent properties. There are few objective standards to evaluate how much traffic is too much traffic, and what standards exist are primarily concerned with carrying capacity rather than impact on adjacent property owners. Various sources indicate that a 30 foot wide two lane roadway with a posted speed of 30 -40 mph can handle up to 10,000 vehicles per day before falling to an unacceptable Level of Service. It is likely that many residents living on a 30 foot wide residential collector with an ADT of 10,000 would object to that volume, as evidenced by the mid `90s bitter debates over improvements to Humboldt Avenue north of 69th Avenue. Appendix B shows the 1997 traffic counts on collector and some local streets in Brooklyn Center. Biennial traffic counts are being taken in Summer, 1999 and will be available by September, 1999. The residential collector streets with 1997 volumes of traffic in excess of 5,000 are as follows. Most of these roadways can be called "major collectors," in that they carry traffic between Brooklyn Center and other communities • 69th Avenue, Brooklyn Boulevard to Humboldt Avenue • Bass Lake Road, Brooklyn Boulevard to West City Limits • 69th Avenue, Brooklyn Boulevard to West City Limits • Humboldt Avenue, 69th to 73rd Avenue • 63rd Avenue, Brooklyn Boulevard to West City Limits 41 July, 1999 Page 5 • Noble Avenue, Brooklyn Boulevard to North City Limits • 57th Avenue, Humboldt to Logan Avenue • 65th Avenue, Humboldt to Bryant Avenue • 53rd Avenue, Humboldt to I -94 • France Avenue, 69th Avenue to North City limits • Xerxes Avenue, CR 10 to I- 94/694 The balance of the residential collectors tend to carry between 1,500 -3,000 ADT. Traffic counts are not routinely taken on local streets, except for some locations which have prompted concerns in the past. Most of the traffic volume data is spotty, but what does exist suggests that there are "subcollector" local streets, or streets which are not designated collectors but which seem to be preferred routes into or out of a neighborhood, or which connect collector routes. These "subcollectors" tend to have traffic counts of between 500 -2,000 ADT. Finally, truly local streets, where traffic counts have been taken, tend to have traffic counts below 500 ADT. Are there any roads with volumes which exceed their classification? There are a few roadways which either currently exceed their classification, or which are approaching this loose identification of limits. Because we do not routinely count traffic on local streets, there may be some local streets of which we are not aware which approach the 500 ADT mark. However, our experience has shown that if residents think there is too much traffic on their street, they will complain to the Administrative Traffic Committee, and a traffic count will be taken. Woodbine Lane, Noble to Halifax. This segment, which falls into the loose category of "subcollector," carries an ADT of about 1,800 in the summer when the "official" traffic counts are taken, but about 2,000 -2,200 when school is in session. Additional traffic is generated due to a) it being a convenient shortcut between two collectors, France Avenue and Noble Avenue; and b) its proximity to Park Center High School/Brooklyn Junior High School. Newton Avenue, 69th to 73rd. This segment, which can be called a subcollector but which really acts as a collector, averages about 2,600 ADT. This results from it being one of the few north- south routes from Brookdale Drive in Brooklyn Park to 69th Avenue in Brooklyn Center. 63rd Avenue, Brooklyn Boulevard to West City Limits. This two lane roadway is approaching its capacity limits. The roadway is currently a convenient bypass to congestion on I- 94/694. Completion of the third lane on I- 94/694 may reduce traffic in the long run; construction on I- 94/694 may increase traffic in the short run, especially when the I- 94/694 bridge over CR 81 is being reconstructed and ramps are temporarily closed. Humboldt Avenue, 69th to 73rd. This two -lane segment was approaching capacity, but appears to have leveled off just short of capacity. Conditions on TH 252 directly influence the volume of traffic on Humboldt. July, 1999 Page 6 Dupont, 57th to 65th. This segment is one of the few residential connections bridging I- 94/694, serving the eastern section of the city. Speed Surveys In general, the Police Department has found very few local streets with a "speeding problem." A street is generally considered to have a speeding problem when its 85th percentile speed exceeds 5 mph over the posted speed limit. The 85th percentile speed means 85 percent of traffic is traveling at that speed or less, and 15 percent are traveling at greater than that speed. This percentage is a nationally accepted guideline. When a complaint regarding a perception of speeding is received by the Administrative Traffic Committee (or by the Police Department through other means), generally the SMART trailer is dispatched to the site to record at least several hours of radar. The trailer performs double duty: it records radar, and it also displays the speed of passing vehicles not only to the driver but also to any observers in the neighborhood. In almost every case, the 85th percentile speed is found to be less than 5 mph over the posted speed limit (sometimes even below the speed limit itself). What is often recorded is the vast majority of vehicles at or below the speed limit, with a few instances of random speeding. There may be two vehicles counted one hour, one the next, at excessive speeds. Overall these speeders are a very small proportion of the overall traffic, and being random, are very difficult to catch. Very often. these few random speeders are the source of residents' complaints that there is a "speeding problem" in the neighborhood. Appendix C includes SMART results for recent complaint areas. There is some anecdotal evidence that observers on the ground routinely overestimate the speed of traffic going by. To an observer standing in his driveway, a passing vehicle traveling at 30 mph looks like it is going faster than it is. One reason for this is the streamlined design of many newer vehicles, which are designed to minimize wind resistance. Vehicles with loud mufflers or engine noise, or loud music can also influence perception of speed. Accident History If streets are becoming more congested, and traffic is increasing in speed, than it can be expected roads would become less safe and that there would be more traffic accidents. The Police Department reports that in 1997 there were a total of 564 personal injury and property damage accidents reported; in 1998 that had fallen to 531. In the first five months of 1999, the number of accidents reported was 232. Conclusion With the exception of a few street segments, when traditional, technical measures are used there is no evidence that there is a "traffic problem" in Brooklyn Center. Traffic data collected over several years shows that traffic volumes have remained relatively stable in Brooklyn Center over t July, 1999 Page 7 the past several years. This does not mean that there aren't, for example, isolated or random speeding concerns, or peak hour volume concerns. In general, what people seem to be reacting to are simply more vehicles on the road in the Metro area, and changes in driver behavior. Traffic Calming As mentioned above, what standards are available measure technical concerns: they do not measure perceptions and do not tally driver behavior. The rise of "traffic calming" came from the perspective that traditional technical measures did not address quality of life issues. The Institute of Traffic Engineers defines traffic calming as "the combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alter driver behavior and improve conditions for non - motorized street users." Examples of the types of driver behaviors most commonly cited as neighborhood problems, aside from speeding, include running traffic lights or Stop signs; rolling stops at Stop signs; not stopping for pedestrians in crosswalks; not stopping for school buses; and lack of tolerance for drivers slowing down, for example, to turn into driveways. The ITE has created a "toolbox" of traffic calming measures which are thought to have the most impact in achieving traffic calming goals. Examples of these are included in Appendix D. An Internet search found several cities nationwide, mostly cities larger than Brooklyn Center, which have formal traffic management or traffic calming programs. Almost all of these traffic calming programs are oriented toward reducing excessive speeds or unwanted volumes of traffic on neighborhood streets. None of these programs address the types of behaviors listed above. Examples of Traffic Calming Elsewhere Portland. OR Portland has a very extensive Traffic Management and Traffic Calming program, with several staff assigned to this program. Generally, the traffic calming measures which are employed are speed bumps and curb extensions, education, and enforcement. Speed bumps or curb extensions are constructed by request and after a public hearing. These measures are only implemented when traffic on a local street averages more than 5 mph over the posted speed limit and when traffic volume is at least 400 ADT or above. The costs are assessed to the abutting property owners. At least two - thirds of the property owners on the street must consent to the installation. The program is currently on hold because of budget cutbacks. Tempe. AZ Tempe has a very detailed set of transportation goals and policies, and a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. Neighborhoods which perceive a traffic problem may petition for a speed r July, 1999 Page 8 hump if the 85th percentile exceeds 6 mph over the posted speed limit, and if the local street exceeds 400 ADT. The City ® ty pays the cost of speed hump installation up to the amount budgeted annually, on a first come, first served basis. 100 percent of the adjacent property owners and 80 percent of the owners of the properties on the rest of the street must consent to the installation. 65 percent of the property owners on adjacent streets which might be impacted by the speed hump installation must consent to the installation. If the local street does not meet the 6 mph/400 ADT standard, a speed hump may still be installed, with the property owners bearing 100 percent of the cost. LRRB Report on Minnesota experience The Local Road Research Board, which is coordinated by Mn/DOT and funded from a special appropriation of 1 /2 of one percent of funds designated for County and Municipal State Aid, recently completed a report entitled "Effective Traffic Calming: Applications and Implementation." Excerpts from the report are included in Appendix E. Anti Traffic Calming There are about as many anti traffic calming Web sites as there are pro traffic calming. Most, such as Save Our Streets and Americans Against Traffic Calming, discuss issues such as noise and air pollution which result from speed humps; impact on emergency vehicles and emergency response; potential injuries resulting from the installation of speed bumps and humps; and impact on maintenance and snow removal. The National Motorists Association "...opposes any measure or regulation that is deliberately designed to inconvenience and hinder the legitimate travel of responsible motorists." Traffic Calming in Brooklyn Center Physical Changes Unity Avenue sp pi eed hums: since h e speed hum the installation of t h s and the reduction in the - - p p speed limit on this very narrow, winding two -lane street, there have been no complaints about speeding or property destruction such as cars hitting mailboxes. Initial comments included observation that the speed humps, which must be striped and signed, were "ugly." Woodbine Lane chokers: after initial comments that it appeared the chokers were having some mitigating effect on speed, more recently the observation is that they have little or no impact. It is likely that over time drivers "got used" to the chokers being there, and they lost their impact. • July, 1999 Page 9 • Basketweave stop signs. 59th/60th Brooklyn Blvd to Xerxes: while the volume of traffic using these streets has fallen since the initial complaints in the mid- 1980's (and also since the Stop signs were installed in 1990), there is no indication that adding the Stop signs have resulted reduction in speed or traffic volume. Traffic volumes in the area overall decreased markedly in the late 1980's and 1990's. ParkinLy null outs. 69th Avenue: no comments have been received. It is unlikely that these pull outs have any impact on speed. Ston signs. Humboldt Avenue and 72nd. 70th: traffic volume has fallen 10 percent following the installation of the Stop signs, however, it does not appear that there has been any impact on speed. During the debate about traffic on Humboldt, it was determined that even on days when traffic flowed well on TH 252 it was on average faster for a driver headed for TH 100 to take Humboldt Avenue rather than TH 252. Drivers also take Humboldt to 65th, then take 65th/66th to TH 252, thus bypassing congestion upstream of 66th. The Stop signs on Humboldt were intended to add time and inconvenience to the use of Humboldt as a cut through. This may have resulted in some decrease in traffic on Humboldt. At the same time, Mn/DOT made improvements to TH 252 and changed signal timing, which also may have contributed to the reduction. After the Stop signs were installed there was a dramatic increase in traffic on Dupont Avenue. That has reduced somewhat, but is still greater than what it was before the Stop signs were installed. Speed Enforcement The Police Department has stepped up speed enforcement, both on arterials and collectors and on local streets. In 1997, a total of 559 speeding citations were issued, while in 1998, 975 citations were issued. In the first 5 months of 1999, 476 citations have been issued. SMART trailer The SMART trailer continues to be used for speed enforcement and education. Brooklyn Center purchased one of the first SMART trailers in the Metro area in 1993, and for the first few years rented the unit out periodically to other jurisdictions. Now, many other cities have purchased their own units, and they are a common sight in the Metro area. Where Do We Go From Here? The following three strategies are most often considered when neighborhood traffic becomes and issue: 1) signage; 2) physical changes; and 3) speed. • July, 1999 Page 10 Signage A common reaction to a perception of speeding traffic is a request for a Stop sign or a series of Stop signs, with the expectation that Stop signs will prevent vehicles from "getting up speed." However, extensive national research has shown that Stop signs do not have any lasting impact on traffic speed. Stop signs tend to reduce speed only in the immediate vicinity of the sign; vehicles are able to accelerate to the previous speed very quickly beyond the Stop sign. One study in Portland installed two and four way Stop signs at various locations, some of which met warrants for installation, and some which did not. Statistics regarding speed, volume, and accidents before and after installation were compared. This study found that in several instances traffic safety was actually reduced, with more accidents occurring at newly installed unwarranted Stop signs than was the case before the signs were installed. A Stop sign has only one function: to indicate which vehicle or vehicles have the right of way, when the regular rules of the road, sight obstructions, or traffic volumes make that unclear or difficult or dangerous to judge. The Uniform Manual on Traffic Control Devices, a publication of the Federal Highway Administration, has been adopted by most state, county, and local governments as a guide to installing traffic control devices so that they are consistently designed, installed, and justified. The UMTCD includes standards for installation of Stop signs which are called warrants. These warrants are based on extensive study of driver behavior and technical concerns such as response time, speed, etc. Because Stop signs play such an important role in traffic control, the UMTCD is very adamant about the need to avoid overuse of them. Excessive use of Stop signs desensitizes drivers to them, not only reducing their effectiveness but also endangering other drivers who assume the other driver will stop at the sign instead of rolling through it. Stop signs are not an effective or recommended means of addressing speed or volume concerns except in very limited situations. Physical Changes Physical changes such as speed humps, chokers, and diverters have had limited success across the Metro area. None of these options is a universal panacea; where they have had a positive impact the type of physical change has been very closely tailored to the unique needs of a situation. The Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement program is the ideal time to make adjustments to neighborhood streets to address speed or volume concerns. Options for these types of physical changes have been presented at neighborhood meetings and discussed in mailings. Except for residents on Woodbine Lane in the Woodbine Neighborhood project area, no neighborhood has yet felt strongly enough about traffic issues to agree to install physical changes. July, 1999 Page 11 Occasionally, residents will ask that their street be "closed off' from a street which they consider • to be the source of a problem such as cut - through traffic. It is important to note that through the platting process, streets are legally dedicated to the public at large. Unless drivers are breaking the law by speeding, or are creating a hazardous condition through volumes so excessive the street is physically unable to handle the traffic, all traffic, even cut - through traffic, has a legal right to use the roadway. The only time a disconnect has been authorized in recent times was the disconnect of Wingard Lane from Brooklyn Boulevard. This occurred in 1985, at a cost of just under $10,000. Average daily traffic on this one block with ten homes was 1,250, including many trucks using Wingard as a short cut to Noble Avenue. Speed Enforcement of speed limits has proved to be the most effective strategy for reducing speed. An increased emphasis has been placed on enforcement, both in continuing "hot spots" such as 63rd and 69th Avenues and on the few residential streets with known speeding problems, such as Woodbine Lane just before and after school lets out. Sometimes, discussion with neighbors complaining about random speeding reveals that the "problem" is actually one or two drivers in a neighborhood, such as a teenager and his or her friends. When this information is available the Police Department will dispatch an officer to p p "have a little chat" with the offender. Administrative Traffic Committee Recommendations 1) Continue vigorous enforcement of existing speed limits. 2) Continue to monitor speeds and traffic counts both at the regular locations and also at the request of residents 3) Create a public informational campaign to advise residents about the issues raised in this report July, 1999 Page 12 Examples of SMART Radar Trailer Results The three SMART trailer results shown here are typical of the types of "ad hoc" radar surveys which are done, either by direction of the Administrative Traffic Committee or the Police Department. If requested by a resident, a copy of the results are provided to the resident, along with the directions shown below on how to read and interpret the results. The report labeled "SB Emerson at 70th" was taken at the request of a resident, who complained there was a high number of speeders on this street. He was concerned about the children who play in the street. As can be seen, the trailer was out on a Wednesday from 7:28 am to 8:34 pm. It recorded 114 total vehicles traveling southbound, with an average speed of 19.3 mph. The 85th percentile speeders, p p was 24 mph. As far as sp ders, one vehicle was recorded at 31 mph, and one was recorded at 40 mph. The report labeled "EB Woodbine at June" is a result of a continuing monitoring program initiated by resident complaints over the past several years. Taken on a Thursday from 9:30 am to 6:43 pm, it recorded 458 vehicles, with an 85th percentile speed of 31 mph. Fifty -seven vehicles were recorded at speeds of 31 -35 mph, and eighteen were recorded at speeds greater than 35 mph. Note that these speeders are distributed across the hours, with one recorded between 9 and 10 am, 1 between 10 and 11 am, etc. Six were recorded between 5 and 6 pm. SMART trailer results are very helpful in pinpointing times when enforcement would be most productive, which in this case would be between 5 and 6 pm. Even then, six speeders over one hour average only one every ten minutes. The report labeled "EB 58th Avenue at Shores Dr" is a location which the police routinely monitor. The speed limit at this location is 35 mph, and the 85th percentile was 39 mph. HOW TO READ THE SMART RADAR TRAILER PRINTOUTS 1. The numbers in the leftmost column, which run from 0 to 23, are the hours of the day, military time. In other words, 8 is 8 a.m., 15 is 3 p.m., 20 is 8 p.m., etc. Traffic counts and speeds are summarized for the entire hour. 2. The column headers, which run from 6 to 95, are miles per hour, in one mile increments. 3. For example, you might start by selecting hour 16, which is the period from 4 p.m. to 5 p.m., and read across to see how many vehicles were recorded during that hour at particular speeds. For example, if you select hour 16 and read across to 20, you will find a number. If it is for example 1, then one vehicle was recorded during that hour going 20 mph. 4. At the bottom of the hourly columns is a total number of vehicles recorded traveling at that speed. Below the total is %ile, which is a cumulative percent of all cars traveling. For example, you might read down the 30 mph column and find the number 83. That means that 83 percent of vehicles recorded were traveling 30 mph or slower. • 5. The final a e shows the total vehicles recorded b hour. At the bottom a table shows Pg Y the total number of vehicles, the minimum speed recorded, the maximum speed recorded, and the average speed recorded. Also shown is the 85th percentile. 85 percent of vehicles recorded were traveling at that speed or slower. It is this statistic that helps determine if a street is considered to have "a speeding problem." If that 85th percentile is greater than 5 mph over the legal speed limit, then increased enforcement is called for. 6. We have done comparisons between unmarked radar results and the SMART trailer radar results. We have found that average speeds decrease by about two miles per hour when the SMART trailer is used versus unmarked radar. • d d • • 111 3'�c:l. 84 Do�• :..'x <: '. ..' L _ ' 81,000 r *t,-., o EE � - � >r, rp;;s:r:: ',_ y . ,�� i 111 1:`�w:.,:� -- ' Ir TH 151 HIIIIIII Il llr rn ,300 0 0 £Oil w; ,° I f 111 1i7 ntiti n ll ll I l l lill O ,11151 a , , Ill 1' .I ° (��11� I�I�III(Illlllllll lli Mu ll. i,lCf171a1� billrll ►IillO'lll ll.: Ca�d.n M•N � v -'- •� I IIILIIII�'� 11 I •' (III IrIIIIIIIIII1111gJ11g111111.$ 'IIfIIII�µy�I��If�INnllln 9 N Camlm AwN y 1 +' - i{I't'!I'!o �O ••.4 I. I uIII {lulll llUllrllllq.11Ll" y'I�'�i 1111 116 -}l =� ".: u,n.le t. �itl' "" "'011,1 °s,� "' �Illllllllllllllll11 11 2,70 0�111ifN lIl[fllfll11 0 IEf{8lflft: o o "_ s ;e,.:N'1M °-11(112�2 I:Illl _,..._:. iflflllllhl -r � - 1 I 3,000 $ N °d >, uul d..•..�lu � �.y NfHB} H�} hnrnnrn�� >�yNK 9h�'orl�rr ► ►'rl� Pga•AwN N�� N g }i�� t�i� }�mlfttrl<; { } "± :i, 1 ill IVIVIIIIIIIIIIIIillllllull$ Hlff'R,l#1' ,Jl y ly U Nl{ti't'1Pl�nnrrnr �!T:;� ,. 1 If1111111I11 J ff111 ° IJlffffffffmil:�'111111Itfl° 13,600 18 S Tflulfll :__ II f 1 U N 141 tiller 10,500 1 ) •ftfl'tte 17 600 �. . _ I 1 {' t Il�t Il�ltt�l Ifll1111[lllI ffftflaull. _. g o 1 r t III O I:.lflo $@ Illlflr111i411fflllllllffffl�Hi A " N _ o o •r r(f1(I(J :'� "�i ....... IIIIIIIIM � I141. IM11118 1HIIHffH1 'lif °' .� " c 1111111 ' : I. , � l `r ..,a - bib. 1= 11111°° ° BIIIIIIIIIIilflllllllllll,� $I: � � � � 1 �= O w e tiI- . Lo r.IF ;.j f �� (ruti�l' IhplllllllllillllfJJ[S118Ir ol: °_ o `� o a O 1 - �� "•; - -- T •' \s - -- -- \ ...__. r r r - - - . f11111(IU11fI1111I1IL�r�l11 - I hAlllllfD °{Illf�'�"?" E —�' SW+gl. C—k Pkwy •• .y uww °1 I: •C s U 1lfllllIDfI1fID111i11f1}II[lll : 1 �,+ } r o ;,Z 0 Z�Z':/ �1 f w f l(1 llfdrYhr. a a a u flTfllUll[fHlAlllll1111111I11 . - -' }}} _; . t �\ r 1� �f`�VV, I damlill: uuluuitgloJ }lru�(l; o�� 1 t. ( o\ o l R . [1C1f1�1 § 1 k11U1 1 °$ ° 1 " • 3 `�� j �% os s� I •. ��•`���� �`[IIA[l11_I' �' W 1 r^>{:. C /�. : - - -- o �,/ ti �''.,� � � '•� ?�I� . F�SLI[lllll o w o II� �; i • . • p � I V sty cr..k .•• j Ifl���l� ,, s ioo lhIl iliI ° � o I `• 6,60 I / ' '9�00011111i111 \ \:I I 1 �...��;:,. ��t ,���, ..�•� , �� 1 �11��fiIf�illll }II �� ��( � \ ` �' I n 3 UU <<,:�r.:1 j i > IIIIIIIIIIiilfi111 � r•! • • • t •- �"ii►1 i l ll�) � >r � .' «.., AwN Wit IITIIIIIIIhI .: ` .> III�� flillu�ll ! // v ( . All Ifll m......a IIIIIIIIIIII. 11: l lfll �f ,TdT l�21,' \� s� •..I(;I�.f /i I{ O o pOp t , I► II Itlll , .11111 tut g00 �\ \ \�1 I I ifill iillllllll:� 00 111111 5, °�ll?�ntg g •. glut Illlllll �t +ti 1. ►1 I . lu Il {JJ) I . o5o 150 ::)III1U; rrus., r r /rb I�� - - -- ,7b1i1jpjJf ,! 1 511 .,. 1—.A"N *" 111 if ri i I lfll►flllo° t'? fi II����" rrl�lrrl }. 4 �� . '1 I—. Av. N Ilu� n :I ' \ O 11111( _I r 111TII���:- �ry6 i. ` 1,16 g n1ll;�I� W ,,,., ,. y►f = _ // 'c �� flll � h �:a'j'.;, dtaa AwN "Iffll[Dll)f[1IIII1fDI vl _ I r a I,t�jrr I I1111[0� llS4I})�III' �i I: , 6I (lilt] fil lI I I� r� lit� l Nr ::. ,:: ' ' <' cxr° v;� IuF►ulj s ' illlil ►r ►I.� !L Jun. AwN lull ��HHlrut � 6 od 1� -' =� — r - ��l IIIII(llllllllll� 11 ';fa 9 ��' - � 1111 muunr r - x ..,.. �•�� : � . :�::'szi:::; : :'i „'. ���rlllllfrl Q1 ' 7000 . , �i r - r:.: 1 . '� {lllllll: = _'If:Il llllt1ti11 IIIIIuTYR Nabk AwN �:- _�.Ilmn�T:a'Itilr�tl -t ... l vilfl IHllllllllrlf I r . T. IllillJl[[lli.fl 1 1g T lllill<., I oo mill ullllull y fill o� { lh'IIIU; I Il�',� eq Will I. ��`� 11 [lul Ililllbltll ;11 rsl 1 I 11 uul tell {Jl[sssl L �ja) IIIi I IIIIIIII 71 - O ��.. �° - (:�jf) ll 1 111181►:.. �: Ir � ° + ���/ { � �'m!R"�! -. �_oa._ •.I I. >' m uuw „nl,l „I' um.l .- m V 00i Aw 1 _! �► w w w IF= • MOON 6 • • !,!,l,l,i, 11 1, i1l,1 1 f it 11ifitit 11 1101,1, 1, 1 111 1.1. I.i.Litit1.It1,1.L1.1,111�161,! I, _ . c 0 ISIS a �9L � A .. � g -113 a 3 Imo✓ eqo a 1617 I '`, �� — l am , K 9' •5 � \/` r sieKar��■ ` 1 • 1 � —r -'� t ` 1 � t 1 i �!! • '11 II11S� 1 � yI d 615 ._. ►` �^�� '.w Nr�` � I ;��` Iii 1 Y l I • r I 1 1 ll I U ` 456 t U LocAL STREET 4 1 11 -j ^ r l .! L' INDEX • _ wru 3 4 1 I ! i _. y ` 4113 I �I If9L�l fl II .'t 1 ••3 ?�,�.— �� / A QTR Of rr S 4 r000 Tae 3000 010 ax BROOKLYN '°w ..� x ~� •' - i ; CENTER -_ 'I \ 345 nulAnrAE 1997 24 HOUR TRAFFIC COUNTS 2489 STATE AID r- 7 WHO I f • • The three SMART trailer results shown here are typical of the types of "ad hoc" radar surveys which are done, either by direction of the Administrative Traffic Committee or the Police Department. If requested by a resident, a copy of the results are provided to the resident, along with the directions shown below on how to read and interpret the results. The report labeled "SB Emerson at 70th" was taken at the request of a resident, who complained there was a high number of speeders on this street. He was concerned about the children who play in the street. As can be seen, the trailer was out on a Wednesday from 7:28 am to 8:34 pm. It recorded 114 total vehicles traveling southbound, with an average speed of 19.3 mph. The 85th percentile was 24 mph. As far as speeders, one vehicle was recorded at 31 mph, and one was recorded at 40 mph. The report labeled "EB Woodbine at June" is a result of a continuing monitoring program initiated by resident complaints over the past several years. Taken on a Thursday from 9:30 am to 6:43 pm, it recorded 458 vehicles, with an 85th percentile speed of 31 mph. Fifty-seven vehicles were recorded at speeds of 31 -35 mph, and eighteen were recorded at speeds greater than 35 mph. Note that these speeders are distributed across the hours, with one recorded between 9 and 10 am, 1 between 10 and 11 am, etc. Six were recorded between 5 and 6 pm. SMART trailer results are very helpful in pinpointing times when enforcement would be most productive, which in this case would be between 5 and 6 pm. Even then, six speeders over one hour average only one every ten minutes. The report labeled "EB 58th Avenue at Shores Dr" is a location which the police routinely monitor. The speed limit at this location is 35 mph, and the 85th percentile was 39 mph. HOW TO READ THE SMART RADAR TRAILER PRINTOUTS 1. The numbers in the leftmost column, which run from 0 to 23, are the hours of the day, military tune. In other words, 8 is 8 a.m., 15 is 3 p.m., 20 is 8 p.m., etc. Traffic counts and speeds are summarized for the entire hour. 2. The column headers, which run from 6 to 95, are miles per hour, in one mile increments. 3. For example, you might start by selecting hour 16, which is the period from 4 p.m. to 5 p.m., and read across to see how many vehicles were recorded during that hour at particular speeds. For example, if you select hour 16 and read across to 20, you will find a number. If it is for example 1, then one vehicle was recorded during that hour going 20 mph. 4. At the bottom of the hourly columns is a total number of vehicles recorded traveling at that speed. Below the total is %ile, which is a cumulative percent of all cars traveling. For example, you might read down the 30 mph column and find the number 83. That means that 83 percent of vehicles recorded were traveling 30 mph or slower. 5. The final page shows the total vehicles recorded by hour. At the bottom, a table shows the total number of vehicles, the minimum speed recorded, the maximum speed recorded, and the average speed recorded. Also shown is the 85th percentile. 85 percent of vehicles recorded were traveling at that speed or slower. It is this statistic that helps determine if a street is considered to have "a speeding problem." If that 85th percentile is greater than 5 mph over the legal speed limit, then increased enforcement is called for. 6. We have done comparisons between unmarked radar results and the SMART trailer radar results. We have found that average speeds decrease by about two miles per hour when the SMART trailer is used versus unmarked radar. • 17> ii C-A Ic- tl I••' ra < C'.4 • e — I C> rx) Irl C.N 4 3 t-.A C, Z> c, rA 17� .-> V.4 <,> - — r^, - — •',r S7 !r - ------ t ^J <:> ul 17 1 1,7 a,. TRAFFIC SUMMARY Pg 2 V I :WD 951008 07.21 ENNO 36 37 38 39 ,T . 4 0 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 - 49 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 A V V IN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ) 0 0' 0 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 f ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1) 0 0 0 0 0 ;4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 v 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1) 0 0 0 11) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 )1 1 ) 0 1 1 ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v 1 ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 0 • Ces 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ) 0 0 0 0 9 99 i9 NO i 100 1 1001 , 100 . t04 L ot L 00 4 4 1 0 Oc 9 A 53 54 5 a N 58 59 60 6 K E 64 65 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A 5 0 0 fl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1) 0 A a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 li 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 0 0 0 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ol 0 v 0 0 0 A 0 16 0 0 0 V 1 0 0 0 0 0 1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1) 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A A 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 P) 0 0 0 v 1 r2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 c �c TRAFFIC SUMMARY Pa 3 STW :WD 15/06!78 07::8 BD :;,u; 05106198 "0:34 66 67 68 6?. 70 71 72 73 74 155 76 77 78 ; a 80 tj 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s; A 0 0 0 0 +} 0 0 0 0 !, 0 J 0 0 3 0 0 0 ;i 0 0 0 0 0 t) J !J 0 v 0 4 0 0 1) .} ?) C 0 0 !} 0 t1 0 0 5 0 !} A 0 0 , . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 t 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 it 3 !} 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ;} t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ?J 0 ?} 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 !) 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 ;) 0 0 0 iJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 1= 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 !) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 18 0 0 A ?) 0 0 0 0 1) 0 0 0 ?J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J 1) 0 0 0 0 !) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V t !) 0 V i ?J v 0 () it v) ;lie 10v' : �� ()0 100 i;iJ 100 NO 101) 100 100 .00 lv!) 1tv 1.00 1 ) "IF 81 82 Sa 84 x; 96 87 9 89 90 41 9'L 5:; 94 x 0 t) ^, iJ tl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i. 0 0 -; 0 0 0 0 0 !} !) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r II 1} 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 ` 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 il 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .3 ) 0 0 1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 ? !j 0 i; 0 0 0 t} 0 0 0 0 0 0 :6 0 0 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ij 0 ,} 0 0 a ,, v 1j ti. v !) ti a tJ :J v _1 t) 0 !J 0. ri un'_ 4 . -. i.;:. i :. :, iAA ..v, iAti iiv. itiA 1N'l * ** TRAFFIC SUMMARY , 2 073 OM=WB V5106/983-34 ' £.s . ! 0 � * 9 - ! _ 6 0 7 6 7 !! m ! . \ { § 5 a 5 m . 'g Q . © . 2 9 . . £ F 114 %need :mfN . . " \e+ < WH - sue 3'F §t!!e@I §@rem 61e24 k%F@baW � I FBI �, . 4 #TRAFF I C SUMMARY Pg i T:TM 47/01/99 09:30 END:THU 01,01199 18:43 HR 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 •- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 2 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0. 0 1 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 2 19 0 0• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cars 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 2 2 2 7 5 7 Zile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 4 5 6 HR 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0• 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 •0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 10 0 1 1 2 2 8 6 5 6. 2 0 1 1 1• .2' 11 3 2 1 2 7 6 0 4 2 0 2 1 1. 0 1 12 1 2 2 4 1 3 4 2 4 5 1 1 1 3 0 13 1 1 6 3 0 4 7 3 5 2 3 1• 0 0 0 14 1 2 3 3 4 2 6 11 2 4 2 3 1 0 0 15 1 1 4 6 1 3 6 10 6 8 1 4 11 2 0 1 0 3 2 3 13 7 2 5 2 1 a 0 1 0 2 5 4 5 7 11 9 11 9 5 5 1 1- 1 0 0 0 4 2 4 5 4 4 0 1 1 4 0 1 1. 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 a 0 a a 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 * TRAFF i C SUMMARY Fg 2 1p :K �C :THU 07/01/99 09:30 END:TW 07 /01/99 18:43 HR 36 37 30 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0/ 10 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 .0 0 11 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 -- 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �} i3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u u z 14 0 0. 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 15 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a' 16 0 0 0. 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 _ ?_,..._..._ -_.._d 0 _.........0...._ _ 1 1 .__ ._ . _ _ 0_ 0 0 18 _.1__..__._.. ._.. 0.� 0 _ ..0 _.._ _ 4._..w. 0 W -0 -- 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ;L." ' 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 d 0 0 ... —. 0._..__0 . 0 ..- 0 ...._ ...- _O_.._.�_ 0 _.__.. 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cars 5 1 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 Xile 97 97 97 98 98 98 98 98 99* 99 99 99 99 99 99 Fit 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 5B 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - - - — - - - - - -- - - -I- - - i #TRAFFIC SUMMARY Pg 3 * ** T:TH1 01/01/99 09:30 END:TH107 /01/99 18:43 A 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cars 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 We 100 loo 100 too 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 loo 100 100 Ht 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0. 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, . 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 is 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 i8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0` 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0` 0 0 0 * JVRAFF I G SUMMARY START:THi107 /01/99 09:30 EM14:THU 07 /01/99 18:43 W Total cars 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 14 10 39 11 36 12 39 13 48 14 47 15 62 16 48 17 85 18 40 0 c 0 21 0 22 0 23 0 Total cars= 45B Min weed= 12 MPH Max speed 51 MPH Avg speed= 26.9 MPH 5th percentile= 27 MPH 85th percentile= 31 MPH Ten file paces 23 to 33 MPH .% IF EMT J. C, C." 0 -- CA — rj N kn G -r_ -r_- C, h7 G I ryl C4 Cr- -r_- -r-- 4::, -> Pa . . . . . . . . G. . • . . . 3 rz- co- c> rh a- ti co ".4 g-- C-- <— C, C> <-- _0 -S. r_n Cr 0- G e 1 -4 Ln 0 - -4 I. C• -r- C4 -r> C : o 4 ' Z4 �?l El c— r� , <> =, -> — - C• I 4- C> IJ L4 S-A Nn -'L'4 T-- c> QI-4 * TRAFFIC SUMMARY Pq 2 :00711219921:11 END: 101112/99 21 :33 36 37 m 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 49 49 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t) 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 3 0 0 0 00 0 \\ 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 !1 0 �0 0 9 21 23 27 14 8 8 b 3 1 2 0 4 0 4 0 10 34 29 21 12 14 5 6 3 2 4 0 0 1 0 0 11 34 40 21 24 9 13 11 2 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 12 29 29 25 6 13 1 10 4 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 41 55 3 15 16 1; 6 5 2 2 0 0 0 1 14 55 43 L 35 ii li a 7 7 4 i i 1 2 15 63 42 46 3-81 29 21 14 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 0 16 00 72 65 37 17 17 10 8 6 10 3 2 1 2 0 li 63 41 V 39 25 ',3 cl 9 6 %) 2 2 U 1 0 13 39 21 30 13 16 4 5 13 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 19 26 .1 21 15 10 5 7 S 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 N 24 16 12 4 5 2 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 21 10 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 !) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cars 519 434 375 Zzkk 169 125 1! 5- b2 Z3 29 14 14 4 4 5 X:le 66 75 E2 E8 91 94 96 97 98 99 99 99 99 1 99 N1? 51 52 q- 54 55 55 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ! }. 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 - 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 lb 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 !} 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 it 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (. 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u !) V u u !) r� u !) 0 ;} !} 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * TRAFFIC SUMMARY Fq 3 START:0 07/12/99 21:11 END:0 07/12/99 11:w 4R 66 51 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 75 77 78 79 80 -I-- -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ?' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C_� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 It" 111) 100 100 100 1Lx) j 100 1CA! ICa) 100 100 1('A) 10-0 W) 100 R 81 82 83 84 85 86 91 88 89 4;) 91 92 93 94 95 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 2 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A v 0 0 12 0 t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -14 0 0 0 0 •0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ;} 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 ;) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :, 0 " 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0} 0 0 Cars 0 :) 0 0 0 ;, 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0. 0 0 Xile 100 I) IN) 1N) 100 i00 I 1':vt 1CIO 1t?:) �c TRAFFIC SUMMARY �t � -MON 07/12199 21:11 END :KN 07112/9921:33 R Total cars 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 251 10 332 11 3 0 12 336 _ 13 444 14 471 15 551 16 681 17 5 18 344 i9 288 c ^165 28 tj 20 Total cars= 4861 Mn soees� U WH Max speed 55 `!PH Avg speed= 35 MPH S �cs bQ 50th percentile= 3! ?PH 85th percentile= 39 MPH Ten mile' 31 to 41 MPH END OF UORT • WHO d • • • TRAFFIC CALMING APPLICATIONS Not only should it be important to the engineer that residents perceive traffic calming devices to be successful, but also that the device be effective. To be effective means that the most appropriate device must be applied. The following list contains the 21 distinct traffic calming applications which were reported in the survey by SRF Consulting Group, Inc., (10) as well as some additional devices. . Information on each device, such as purpose, cost, pros and cons, and effectiveness, is provided and will serve as a "toolbox" to assist engineers in choosing the most effective device. Street width adjustments: Vertical or horizontal realignments: => Street narrowing => Speed hump => Choker Speed bump => Median island Speed table =:> On- street angled parking => Traffic circle => Protected parking bays Roundabout Chicane Traditional traffic control techniques: =:> Vehicle restrictions Route modifications: Turn restrictions => Street closure (cul -de -sac) One -way streets => Diagonal diverter => Variable -speed display board Semi- diverter Trumpet island Marked crosswalks Perceptual enhancements: Stop signs Streetscapeanaterial or landscape plantings => Basket -weave stop signs Change m road surface material or color g 11 STREET WIDTH ADJUSTMENTS • Street Narrowing Narrowing of the roadway can be done in one of two ways. Street narrowing can be done by either moving the actual curb line physically inward or by simply altering the appearance of the roadway width through the use of pavement markings. (8) Purpose The intention of street narrowing is that the loss of pavement width on which drivers are able to drive will cause drivers to slow down. Cost $150 per meter ($50.00 per foot) if narrowed physically, may be more depending on drainage structures. $0.60 per meter ($0.20 per foot) if narrowed using pavement markings. • Pros Can be fairly inexpensive if the roadway is narrowed using pavement markings. Can be accompanied with additional landscaping. Does not increase traffic noise Cons May require some parking removal. Service Provider Enough width should be provided to allow for the easy flow of all service Impacts providers, especially emergency vehicles. Effectiveness Street narrowing has little to no effect on traffic volume and vehicle speed changes are not significant. Street narrowing also has minimal effect on the number of overall traffic accidents. I ` Other By physically taking away part of the pavement structure, there is less room Considerations available for bicyclists and pedestrians. Therefore, sidewalks may need to be added to provide protection from moving traffic. 12 Chokers Chokers, also referred to as bump -outs or curb - extensions, narrow the space through which vehicles must travel. Narrowing can be done either midblock or at intersections, as shown in the diagram to the left. (9) Purpose Chokers are employed to narrow the roadway width through which drivers must T travel, causing drivers to slow down in order to pass through them. Chokers can also be used to facilitate pedestrian.crossings. Cost $5,600 each, depending on drainage facilities, sidewalk or boulevard material, and landscaping. Pros Reduce pedestrian crossing distance and time. Make pedestrian crossing points more visible to drivers. ! Prevent vehicles from passing other vehicles that are turning. May be used to visually enhance the street through landscaping. Cons May require some curbside parking removal. Difficult to accommodate space for both vehicle and bicycle lanes. Service Provider May obstruct snow plow and emergency vehicle movement. Impacts Chokers can enhance transit service by moving the curb so riders can step directly between the sidewalk and bus door. Effectiveness Traffic volumes may be reduced if the street narrowing limits traffic to one direction at a time. Chokers have little effect on vehicle speed, but effectively improve pedestrian safety by reducing the street crossing distance and improving sight distance. They may also slightly influence driver behavior by changing the appearance of the street. Other Where the crowns of the street are steep, curb extensions may actually go "uphill" Considerations because the new curb is higher than the original curb. If poorly designed, this can result in drainage problems both at the curb and on the sidewalk. 13 Median Islands Median islands are small islands in the middle of the street which narrow the vehicle travel lanes. Also referred to as slow points or pedestrian refuges, they can be installed at intersections or midblock. Median islands can be used to enhance pedestrian crossing points and provide a visual narrowing along the roadway. (9) w ... ::.. '•i :. '• ? kt3'nb>c: { {.G :, •o•r:.;} , }• vr ::kk %:: `: ..k n'.; ARr: ti:{;: y; yfr }y'ivi.` %•,`•;•F,y::Si3ti -' - 2S$,s,.'y},n ••.: . >.h�rs�^,.•,.KF;;,.��;+. • ;3 •: �}. fi:�. :•'i:i� v 50 •vii}k,, {:: � . ' 3.. ` �� �ti S. nv ,�'.. . " - " :.v : : � :.;;spy,}•: >T h }3:• ? :; : : :;"' ?�'+'iy '•': F.�}}?�: % •: i. :v ^•:: • • }t: N. q} IS : E t: }•: :' ?: is : Ty .n y •Ge } ?! } : :k'`• %'. '• {:: 'T 'i >x.:::.: .: }:.r �'aiC t �:£c: ;: }:;•'••.'' :, • y. } '''' } 5n 'fsC? + "`• r2k? t ;'%'8'r'::" 5 '>'" h' },v % +:...� �• n3;?;•': r ^ , •M �#, %'p+' k3}�� } f?�� ''> .:�.'.N:� •:..•ft ...�f�,!k:•},.•�?fl! } f : .wwpn Via: .� ..• .�:�..k wrr .,.::: ". 'WiT�rYYM.vs.vyi...Y•: ismW r.r ''w.rt�A'fA'�0"""s": %.S, .- ••,:..5: ..... .. n .ry •::G i Ji • 44:n : •C...;'.�'r / {ni �:'f:':�: } �l' 'SF.S''iik }. f . .+ .• �v.,.. G ,• }: }: riv,�jR' %' i::v { +• .%iy'9 }r, nv: ` S..I �.•i'�>, ti "�• - • - Y ; � " :� .:... }., „o my • ,F �• 5/. , ' : •••' 3��� •t: } 5 { Y,.¢,a.9. :;,? "• •:?�i' %';•.�',"':Y”; .wx; +:,3 {T :;'••$:ti{<$: ?.K. �,T.:S•br, ,•�,z'% � { YY �; S. '•"' , t �,,. {.: •F { ;n ¢•}: rnv: {. %t' > ::.; :•: • }....: i p y,. >7: ., Qy,<<� `L ?1.:3�y, , • } 'y r••'?`. F i ?:;r.;.+F n ': ::• 3:?• : �:'i >':''.••. +Jfi}:!r<•:•�t }Yn :+Ynikl i . wj. } }:y '•:{}T +yti ,: >kvf'•l+ }TftF.vYf:: -• - >ii >L %�t: :?:•s,.t„ .., 4, :}A.,.:} J " t�•>x#s._�'^o ,.rk•:..,,. . x; . a `•:;c::f:':,.•:.:. •: }�5:. y aa•.::•: ; ^4iL••'•F! 0"..}N;: ;3.: ... +Y•:; <•:. {..Lk ;' {i,S;c;r:k:•: 'ii3�3::;r.}••;r. Div:•`:. or,.:-:,:;--- ;c } ?,•'•Y # • • . };k. •:.o y;:;v } �;� . • • � ; ,:;��t3+: v rte: . p.: - ls,;:?:s {:35} r:,; kkµti:':: }:rF, •.,":•#,- {: vn{•.:rFn } 1 ' y y. : :�' +. ?kh;. E' � ' • ;k:: • =•• .... y t}. }v }Y ?-:T.v{Yf. �'� ?v :..}• .. .tki Midblock Intersection Purpose Median islands reduce the roa dway width available to a driver, provide a visual cue rp Y to drivers that they are in a pedestrianized area, and provide a refuge for pedestrians Cost $8,000 - $15,000 Pros Allow pedestrians to cross half of the street, stop in the median island for refuge, and then cross the other half of the street. Make P edestrian crossing points more visible to drivers. 8P Prevent vehicles from passing other vehicles that are turning. May reduce vehicle speeds. Cons May restrict access to property drives. Mid block islands may require some parldng removal on both sides of the street. Service Provider May restrict emergency vehicle access. Impacts Important to leave enough space, for maintenance, transit, and other service. providers to pass through. Effectiveness Median islands are effective pedestrian amenities but have minimal influence on a driver's behavior. Depending on their location, they may result in small to moderate traffic speed reductions. Other Median islands have usually been used to supplement a pre - existing crosswalk as Considerations compared to creating a new crosswalk location. _ _.... .. , ..... 14 • On- Street Angled Parking and Protected Parldng Bays In order to reduce roadway width, parallel, end- to-end vehicle parking can be protected through the use of protected parking bays or, parking can be converted to on- street angled parking. These types of parking changes reduce roadway width, making it more difficult for drivers to maneuver along the roadway, causing them to reduce their speeds. On- street angled parking allows drivers to enter and exit parking stalls more easily than right - angled parking and, like protected parking bays, can be easily incorporated with landscaped chicanes or chokers to enhance the appearance of the street while narrowing its width. Purpose On -street angled parking or protected parking bays reduce roadway widths, causing reduced vehicle speeds. j Cost Minimal, if the only changes are to existing parking; more costly if incorporated with J a chicane or choker. Pros Effectively reduce vehicle speeds by reducing the roadway width. May provide additional parking space. Can be incorporated with environmental enhancements. • Cons Safety of pedestrians and bikers may be reduced by the opening of car doors. Children between parked cars are also very difficult for drivers to see. May reduce the number of parking stalls if there is only enough room to have angled or protected parking on one side of the street. Added parking reduces the space available for pedestrians and bikers. Service Provider May make snow plowing more difficult, if used with chicanes or chokers. Should be Impacts installed only where enough space would still be available for the easy flow of emergency vehicles. Effectiveness Effective at reducing vehicle speeds. I Other Very important to ensure that a sufficient number of parking spaces are made Considerations available. If not enough parking is provided, the level of illegal car parking may be increased. 15 TRADITIONAL TRAFFIC CONTROL TECHNIQUES Vehicle Restrictions Vehicle restrictions can be used to reduce the effects of cut - through traffic. Access may be restricted through the use of DO NOT ENTER signs. (8) .. ......... Purpose Vehicle restrictions are intended to prohibit vehicles from entering a roadway. Cost Minimal. Pros _ Effectively reduce vehicle volumes by diverting traffic to adjacent streets. Can restrict vehicle access while retaining bicycle and pedestrian access. Noise and environmental pollution is reduced on streets which have prohibited access. Safety may be increased on streets which have prohibited access. • Cons Prohibit or limit access and movement. Noise and environmental pollution is increased on streets which serve as alternate routes. Safety may be reduced on alternate routes due to the additional traffic. May be difficult to enforce. Service Provider Emergency vehicle access may be allowed despite the sign restrictions, although Impacts significant thought should be given as to how this can be done effectively and safely. Effectiveness Traffic volumes may be reduced dramatically on streets which have prohibited access, if sign is enforced. Other Signs may be ignored if congestion on alternate routes is too significant. This may I Considerations result in the need for additional law enforcement. 16 Turn Restrictions Regulatory signs, such as 'No Right Turn" and 'No Left Turn," can be used to restrict turning movements, typically from a high - volume street onto a low volume street. vt Purpose - Turn restrictions are intended to p h bit vehicles from entering y, role term a roadway, either all of the time or only during certain specified times. Cost Minimal. l Pros Turn restrictions can be effective in reducing cut-through traffic. Noise and environmental pollution are decreased and safety is increased on the local streets. • Traffic volumes are reduced on local streets. Speeds may be reduced on local streets. Cons Prohibit or limit access and movement. Noise and environmental pollution is increased and safety is decreased on streets which serve as alternate routes. May be difficult to enforce. Alternate .routes will experience increased traffic volumes. Service Provider Service provider access to local streets which are restricted will be limited or altered. Impacts Effectiveness Turn restrictions may be extremely effective where cut-through traffic is a problem. Traffic volumes on streets which have prohibited access will be reduced; however, volume on streets where traffic is diverted to will increase. Other Turn restrictions should be used on the neighborhood boundaries rather than inside Considerations the neighborhood. Signs may be ignored if congestion on alternate routes is too significant which may result in the need for additional law enforcement. 17 One -Way Streets One -way streets can be used to prevent cut - through traffic in residential areas. One -way streets can either diverge and converge at the main thoroughfare, alternate north/south or east/west from one block to the next, or form a one -way pair. A one -way pair couples a residential street with a main thoroughfare to create a passageway for through traffic while diverting traffic from adjacent residential streets. (8) Purpose One -way streets are used to control traffic in residential neighborhoods. Cost $400 per block. Pros Safety is improved since one -ways result in fewer conflicting movements. Parking is increased. Cons One -way streets often result in increased speeds. Residents often feel safety is reduced due to the increased speeds. un act on livability and roe One-way pairing has a negative p ty property rty value on the upgraded residential street. S Service Provider Since one -way streets do not involve any physical barrier to be applied to the street, L Impacts emergency vehicle access is not obstructed. Effectiveness Diverging/converging one -way streets are very effective at reducing traffic volumes. of cut-through traffic. Alternating one -way streets have no effect on volume. One- " way pairing increases volume on one street and decreases volume on adjacent streets. Other One -way streets may be used in combination with other measures which reduce Considerations vehicle speed. Accommodations may be made on one -way streets for bicycle traffic. Residents may object to the limited access created by one -way streets. 18 . Variable -Speed Display Board A variable -speed display board is a temporary device used to educate drivers about speeding. Radar aimed at passing motorists allows drivers to see their actual speed as well as the street's posted speed limit. The display board not only alerts drivers of their speed, but can also be used to record data on traffic volumes and speeds which can be used to determine if a speeding problem actually exists. If so, a permanent traffic- calming device can be installed. Display boards can be designed to stand alone or may be mounted on a trailer, referred to as speed wagons, and can be "run" by the residents, police department, or engineering department. (8) Purpose Display boards are intended to influence driver behavior by alerting drivers of their 1 P P Y 8 actual speed verses the posted speed limit. Cost $2,000 - $11,500 per unit, depending on sophistication. Pros Display boards serve.as a good educational tool to inform the public of their driving behaviors. _ Data collected can be used to target times of the day when additional police enforcement may be needed. Display boards allow police, traffic engineers, and the neighborhoods to work together to reduce vehicle speeds on residential streets. . Cons There is a potential for sudden braking by motorists when they see the display board, which results in biased data. Has no effect on speed when the display board is not present. Service Provider None. Impacts Effectiveness Speeds are reduced only when the display board is present. Display boards have little effect on traffic volumes. ' Other Residents may oppose the use of display boards if they feel it is a form of Considerations "vigilantism." • 19 Marked Crosswalks . Marked crosswalks are a portion of the roadway designated as pedestrian crossings, located by painted lines. By law, vehicles are required to stop for any pedestrians using a marked crosswalk. The markings can be created fairly inexpensively and run the entire width of the roadway. Since motorists generally expect crosswalks to be at intersections, it is recommended that they not be installed mid block. Crosswalk signage should be in accordance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and lighting should be incorporated into the design plan to enhance the visibility and safety of those using the crosswalk. a busy street, alerting drivers . Purpose ._.._. ,__ ....' Provide rotected area for pedestrians to cross . _... ..., . rp p p ross sy t, g that the area is pedestrianized and they should slow down. Cost Minimal. Pros Provides pedestrians with a protected area in which to cross the street. Do not affect bicycle traffic. Cons Pedestrians seem to develop a false sense of security from a marked crosswalk, assuming that traffic will see the crosswalk and will stop. Service Provider Do not affect the movement of transit or emergency vehicles. Impacts ' Effectiveness Very unlikely that marked crosswalks will actually reduce vehicle speeds. Marked , crosswalks can be more effective at reducing vehicle speeds if used in combination f with chokers or pinch points. I Other It is important to remember that a driver's view of the crosswalk will be affected by Considerations road alignment, irregularities in the pavement, weather, and adverse lighting. Pedestrian safety can be increased by incorporating raised medians or signal timing with the marked crosswalks. 20 • Stop Signs Stop signs can be a very effective way to control traffic if used properly. As indicated by various traffic studies, they should not be used to control speeding. An excessive use of stop signs may cause drivers to speed up in between the stop signs as they try to compensate for the time they lost having to come to a stop at each stop sign. Reductions in speed may only occur in the immediate vicinity of the stop sign since some drivers may accelerate rapidly after "stopping, creating an even more dangerous situation. And if there are too many stop signs, drivers may choose to ignore them. Stop signs can also create a false sense of security in pedestrians who assume vehicles will stop. For that reason, it is recommended that stop signs be used to help drivers determine who has the right -of -way and should be installed only where justified or "warranted." According to the set of warrants given in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), stop signs may be warranted at an intersection where one or more of the following conditions exist: 1. Intersection of a less important road with a main road where application of the normal right -of -way rule is unduly hazardous. / 2. Street entering a through highway or street. % 3. Unsignalized intersection in a signalized area 4. Other intersections where a combination of high speed, restricted view, and serious accident records indicates a need for control by the STOP. sign. The MUTCD should be referenced for further important details and conditions. Also found in the manual are additional warrants for installing all-way or 4 -way stops. The installation of an all-way stop is based upon interim use pending signal installation, accident history, or traffic volumes. An alternative to stop signs may be to install yield signs, which are also intended to assist drivers with determining who has the right -of -way at intersections. Studies have found that yield signs have little effect on traffic volumes and can reduce vehicle speeds within approximately 50 feet of the intersection. The installation of a yield sign should be carefully analyzed and installed only if warranted by the MUTCD. • 21 Basket -Weave Stop Signs . Basket- weave stop signs, as opposed to lone stop signs, use a neighborhood or system -wide traffic n management approach by installing stop signs at every other intersection, allowing traffic to pass through one intersection and then stop at the next. (8) : _ Purpose . .. Basket-weave . ._ ... p stop signs allow some control to be placed on traffic as it moves - through a residential area. Cost Cost depends on the area over which the basket weave pattern is implemented. 1 Pros Basket weave stop signs may have a significant impact on accident reduction by reducing driver questions as to who has the right -of -way. Vehicle speeds within 61 meters (200 feet) of the intersection may be reduced. Cons Speed may be increased between stop signs. Noise is increased due to the braking and accelerating of vehicles. Also, is a reduction in air quality due to fumes from automobiles. Service Provider Emergency �P onse.times will increase with the installation of basket weave stop • r8 Impacts signs, especially on routes which initially had no signage. r Effectiveness Extremely effective at reducing traffic accidents. Other Due to the northern climate, basket -weave traffic patterns are not recommended at . Considerations intersections in hilly terrain since they may become icy from the additional starting and stopping of vehicles. 22 VERTICAL OR HORIZONTAL REALIGNMENTS Speed Humps Speed humps are asphalt mounds of pavement which run the full width of the roadway and are typically 76 to 102 millimeters (3 to 4 inches) in height and 2 meters (8 feet) in length. They should be installed on streets less than 12 meters (40 feet) wide with no more than two travel lanes. A minimum of two speed humps should be installed in a series approximately 76 meters (250 feet) between humps. No more than two series of speed humps should be installed per 85 meters (one -half mile). Speed humps should only be installed on "local" streets and should not be installed on collector or arterial streets. (6) Purpose Speed humps are intended to reduce vehicle speeds... Cost $7,000 per pair, may be more depending on drainage. Pros Effectively reduce vehicle speeds. Do not require parking removal. Pose no restrictions for bicycles. Do not affect intersection operations. May reduce traffic volumes. Cons Can possibly increase traffic noise from braking and acceleration of vehicles, particularly buses and trucks. May interfere with drainage. Service Provider Speed humps should not be installed on transit or truck routes. Emergency vehicles Impacts can safely cross properly designed speed humps, although response times may be increased. Slows fire vehicles. Does not affect snow removal. i Effectiveness Speed humps are very effective at encouraging reduced vehicle speeds. Other Speed humps should not be constructed on grades greater than 5 percent. Considerations 23 Speed Bumps Speed bumps should not be confused with speed humps although they have the same objective of reducing motor vehicle speed. Speed bumps are generally 76 millimeters (3 inches) high and are from 203 to 406 millimeters (8 to 16 inches) in length (in the direction of travel) and have a round top. They are typically installed on private roadways and parking lots. (9) Speed humps are generally round or flat - topped with an approximate height of 76 to 102 millimeters (3 to inches) and an approximate length of 2 meters (8 feet) (in the direction of travel) and are typically installed on local streets. SPEED BUMP SPEED HUMP ----- -- -- - - - -- — Purpose Speed bumps are intended to reduce vehicle speeds. a Cost $500 - $1,000 Pros Effectively reduce vehicle speed. Do not require parking removal. Cons Traffic noise is increased from the braking and acceleration of vehicles, particularly buses and trucks. Speed bumps are hazardous for bicyclists and motorcyclists. Service Provider Slows emergency vehicles. Impacts Snow removal and street sweeping are difficult where these devices have been , implemented. Effectiveness Speed bumps are effective at encouraging reduced vehicle speeds. Other Speed bumps result in an abrupt vertical motion for vehicles and occupants at slow Considerations speeds and encourage drivers to keep under 16 kilometers per hour (10 miles per hour). At high speeds, however, speed bumps have less impact on vehicles because __ .._..._.... , suspension systems can absorb the sudden shock. „__.._ _..........,--- .......,,._....� 24 Speed Tables Speed tables are raised road surfaces with a flat top which are intended to reduce vehicle speeds. (9) They are longer than the speed hump in the direction of travel, usually about 4 meters (12 feet), so that both the front and back wheels of a vehicle are on the table at the same time. Since speed tables do not run curbline to curbline, they do not interfere with drainage. They can be crossed comfortably at 24 to 40 kilometers per hour (15 to 25 miles per hour) and because they do not run the full width of the roadway, large vehicles can pass over the table without hindrance. Speed tables also allow enough space for bicyclists to pass along side of the speed table without having to cross over the t6p of the table. They may be implemented on both one -way and two -way streets with two -way streets often having two separate speed tables installed side by side. r::;;:`:' +`rr:�`y . .c`, • }; • e',':�i. %p: Y` Y�' �f3��?: S' 3 t' ii�y ^•';:?:N j� ' %i�x�f��'r. ° .l,:.. •Y�:.. • a1} k.� kv.j}v1...n..}:y/.:i, . }n }i:: �:..; ��'. .'r 'k'Z:4 } ii'k'' { Y ?r ' ,• . •�• j3.�{ .C. �v9}M{',y".. KK .: T SJ ix? } Y q...:.gy}y�h .:.. ..:..aY:•n,''4�'•Jr�. s7 . �'-0?::: , },{L:0}:.};:'h'.w. e •: •. :., yi Y.•k`" .. '•.}.;:y.:.';.:: { ,2J.'., $r, {..,. {•J, • �J.,} a` n,'• {:•::; +f.'�a:�w.,::•ii'iS4ac..,�;• �jq':L�:;:`•nfti'?Y,x }Y.�. : i° y� } ':.. t :;L'":;'r::t'J`S,h lr�`: `oy.?:� ^. .,,c., ., R.. �`..s. ::oY,ci?::ti;r. ?7;1t i' "tv;{ y. r:.• y }.•• frr•,:;•F;•';..+}2gti :': ^ •.:tiy�' x .•:r'; n„`.y ,} •au . 5: .... :;:Y...•.�iJSq:r {�: 'Fi JS } {. %:•L;. ::�r�:}' '',•J: }. ? $`• :3: v. _ W I Purpose Speed tables are intended to reduce vehicle speeds. Cost Less than the cost of speed humps since they do not run the full width of the roadway, nor do they affect drainage. Pros Effectively reduce vehicle speed. May also reduce traffic volumes. Allow for large vehicles to pass over the table without having to slow down. Improves the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists. I Do not interfere with drainage. Cons Traffic noise is increased from the braking and acceleration of vehicles. Requires some parking removal. Service Provider Certain emergency vehicles, large trucks, and buses can pass over the speed table Impacts easily. Also do not interfere with snow removal. Effectiveness Speed tables are effective at reducing vehicle speeds and possibly volumes. • Other Speed tables will be more effective if installed in series so as to avoid the speeding Considerations up of vehicles between tables. Spacing between tables should be about 76 meters (250 feet). 25 Traffic Circles r Traffic circles are raised islands placed in the center of an intersection. They can be landscaped with ground cover, flowers, and street trees. Traffic circles require drivers to slow to a speed that allows them to comfortably maneuver around them. Purpose The primary benefit of traffic circles is that they reduce the number of angle and turning collisions. An additional benefit is that they slow high -speed traffic. Cost $1,500 temporary, $7,000 permanent [4 to 5 meters (12 to 16 feet in diameter)]. Pros Effectively reduce vehicle speeds. Improve safety conditions (for example, there are fewer left-hand crashes involving other vehicles). Can be visually attractive if accompanied by landscaping. O Cons Require some parking removal. Can cause bicycle /auto conflicts at intersections because of narrowed travel lanes. Some noise may be generated by the .deceleration and acceleration of vehicles as they near the traffic circles: Service Provider Transit buses and fire trucks can maneuver around traffic circles at slow speeds, Impacts provided vehicles are not illegally parked near the circles. The installation of traffic circles may interfere with existing utilities in the roadway, such as manholes. Effectiveness Traffic circles are very effective at lowering speeds in their immediate vicinity and reducing turning collisions. Traffic circles are most effective when constructed in a i series on a local service street. Other If well maintained, traffic circles can be very attractive. However, there are also a Considerations lot of traffic control signs and pavement markings associated with circles that are not so attractive. Traffic circles are not effective at T- intersections and difficult to design for offset intersections. A minimum of 9 meters (30 feet) of curbside parking e must be prohibited on the through street at each comer of the intersection. 26 • ............................. ..............................t +.' Roundabout As stated in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program ' (NCHRP) Synthesis 264, (7) the modem roundabout can be defined by j ; 5 f the following operational and design principles: Yield -at -Entry: Also known as off -side priority or yield to -left rule, � x yield -at -entry requires that vehicles in the circulatory roadway have the right -of -way and all entering vehicles on the approaches have to wait It �,r; `• -} for a gap in the circulating flow. To maintain fluidity and high i ..........:. :,., capacity, the entry control is a YIELD sign. Deflection,for Entering Traffic: No tangential entries are permitted, and no traffic stream gets a straight movement through the intersection. Entering traffic points toward the central island, which deflects vehicles to the right, thus causing low entry speeds. Purpose Roundabouts are used at intersections where there is either an insufficient amount of queue space available or the intersection has a high accident rate, especially in terms of cross movements or left turns. In terms of traffic calming, the roundabout can be used to create a change in roadway character prior to entering a community or where a bypass road connects to an arterial. • Cost $10,000 for an existing intersection, $500,000 (including drainage costs) for a roundabout constructed on a state highway. Pros Creates shorter delays. Increased capacity. I, Improved safety. E. Can be visually attractive if accompanied by landscaping. Cons Low volume streets have the advantage, thus causing undue delays on the major street. Construction costs can be very high. May be difficult for drivers to adjust to the roundabout. Absence of clear right -of -way control for pedestrians. Required parking removal. Service Provider Creates new or unusual maintenance procedures. Snow plowing may require Impacts bout is a p special procedures, particularity if the rounds single -lane design. sP P P ty Effectiveness Very effective at reducing the number of accidents, creating shorter delay times, and improving capacity. Other There are no U.S. guidelines currently available for design of the modem Considerations roundabout; however, the Federal Highway Administration has started a two -year study to develop guidelines by the end of 1999. Flares are often used at the entries by adding lanes before the yield line in order to increase capacity. The size of roundabouts can range from 15 meters (50 feet) in diameter to 35 meters (115 .. feet ), depending on the number travel lanes. --- .._..._.,..... _ 27 Chicane • Chicanes are created by islands along alternating sides of the roadway which narrow the width through which vehicles must travel. Motorists are forced to slow down in order to maneuver along the roadway. Despite an unlimited number of design types, chicanes must be wide enough to allow for the easy passage of emergency vehicles which may result in a loss of effectiveness. : :+ea r ?� ?�: . v: ;i�Cti C•'tiv ............ :. • Purpose Chicanes are used to reduce traffic speeds by creating narrowed sections of roadway which the driver must maneuver around. Cost Costs can be ve ry hi gh, depending on drainage structures. Pros Additional landscaping space is created by using chicanes. Chicanes serve as a refuge point for pedestrians crossing the road. 'desi Can make the street look cluttered if not roperly geed. Cons P Noise levels may be increased. Service Provider Chicanes are difficult for motorists and snow removal operators to see in the Impacts winter and may be difficult for emergency vehicles to pass through if not designed wide enough. Effectiveness Chicanes are effective at reducing vehicle speed. I Other Chicanes are not intended for high volume roadways. When installed on local Considerations streets, it is important to accommodate bicycle traffic into the design. _ ...,...._ ....... _..� 28 • ROUTE MODIFICATIONS Street Closure (Cul -de -Sac) Intended to reduce cut-through traffic on residential streets, street closure can either be done at the end of a street or mid block. There are two types of • street closures: a closure near a main thoroughfare which is more effective at reducing traffic volumes; and a second type which allows residents to only have access to the main thoroughfare by having the closure at the far end. (9) • ;��'•'•: Y�•Y:iG'v.Ss'ty:;' i. �.n f•:$ 'fi ''w ; . ...... : "FA. ='• •'?!sae' ec�• e• ' �tiY•ro �i y.::' s' ° •; Purpose Street closures are intended to eliminate cut - through traffic. Cost Costs may be very high, depending on added drainage structures and if necessary, right -of -way acquisition. Pros Since traffic is limited to that which is generated by residents, traffic volumes, speeds, and noise are greatly reduced. Safety is increased on both the closed street and the main thoroughfare. Cons Some residents may view closures as negative since access is limited to only the main thoroughfare. Traffic volumes on neighboring roadways may increase. Service Provider Street closures may affect emergency vehicle and city service routes, although the Impacts center of the cul-de -sac can be used for snow storage in the winter. Emergency vehicle access to the closed street should be analyzed prior to the actual closing. Effectiveness Very effective at reducing traffic volumes and speeds. Other Street closures should be visible to drivers prior to entering the cul-de -sac to avoid Considerations traffic not realizing it is a dead end until they have already entered the cul-de -sac. The capacity of the main thoroughfare should be carefully analyzed prior to any closure. 29 Diagonal Diverters •ff.'s: >�•'•4 z• z _ • : . :, ''' , c V �:' •.•,. - }M �'Y�r`{' - .r:.�:; 0 • { ':.:4� ': } >, ;..: i rr> r? •' >v Diagonal diverters lace a barrier diagonally across an p dlag y y :::.. . }3Sik3•S�; }S•�?^6r':r:•�,; ••7�i -i} >r.S:�' • } :}„ �JN!! - • .4.yrn }9• ' :^ . ' :t`•.- •'•�::.:r: . Eik• }. M. > H:.t 4• •- ' :%+}- •yr „ ?�fC$y''"4 { C(v } :: • 4} } ?� ••••> • inters disconnecting the legs of the intersection. (9) r `r.:' .?� Fr, :, S { _;S { { { r:::'^•'^';?Y3 DSt. £ , y ,okt ':.• ? ?r } : ~ 4�.yi ?• :•'„�++^ r. } ^r ry:_iY'r..•:::; •'a}.��.•!u o >?{•:xa:}: .: °• � }'��x ?L.:.: ?k{•: �}F r a�. h: ' ? w�w..wv. wqr:, ^'"'y9: 'y . ?� •; ;gn.'ry�• iw:••w , _• > y •. r, � + wfS.'t?%: }. I ' •• ' : ,,t r •`rr. ? ?. .J? X:+•'./ S,'•'ik•+':'.W.":4<7crKa+'>:•:: _yy, X. ;:;i: {; ��:r5k2 ?.• }a?> f:''{fi!?�c::4v {?> . ,;,N,y� �`5.�x;`.4?fr t::t. ' h, �'`'•- �'�•}- •.{;�•� }.i;:9*^;::9:.',' : ?: � �e? L : s % > > .:a;�",�y r '' . � >.A ; •� %�` f�}�S, r4�;'• '� ti ^;';p•:y'}i4xo' { }:'tiy k`•': ::Y' r R {.`+,?':. / `:�• "a ?,.;5 :>:, >.;i,''•�'•+;.•:. . � . :r>, .:a � } �::f; ?��� ? <rr }::j^Ykv •• ++3� `�r;+yyr:�.�.n: { ?�•�' `•> iS Purpose Strategically located diagonal diverters reduce traffic volumes by preventing through movements at intersections where installed. T Cost $15,000 - $35,000 ` Pros Effectively reduce traffic volumes. , Can restrict vehicle access while retaining bicycle and pedestrian access. �. Cons While the purpose of a diversion device is to prohibit or limit access and movement, some drivers consider it a disadvantage. Service Provider Generally, the turn restrictions imposed by a diagonal diverter would apply to Impacts emergency vehicles and are typically not used on primary fire response routes. However, diagonal diverters can be designed and installed to provide for emergency vehicle access. Diagonal diverters should not be considered on transit streets. Effectiveness Diagonal diverters are very effective at reducing traffic volumes. Other Diagonal diverters apply to all drivers, including local residents. Very special care Considerations must be taken to consider the availability, capacity, and appropriateness of the alternative routes drivers might use if a diverter is constructed. Provisions should be made to make diverters passable for pedestrians and bicyclists. 30 • Semi- Diverters Semi- or partial- diverters eliminate travel in one direction by reducing the roadway width to only one lane. Semi- diverters can be used at intersections to effectively divert traffic onto an alternate route. Traffic is physically prohibited from turning movements onto the side street. The diverter can then be used for additional landscaping space or as a pedestrian refuge. (9) Purpose Semi- diverters reduce traffic volumes b .. _......... y allowing only one lane of travel. Traffic is then rerouted onto other roadways. Cost $2,500 Pros Traffic volumes are virtually eliminated at the semi-diverter in the closed direction. Volume beyond the diverter is reduced to that generated by the land use of the adjacent properties. Noise pollution is reduced and safety is increased in the closed direction on the . residential streets. Cons Traffic volumes on alternate routes are increased. Service Provider Since turning movements onto side streets are physically prohibited, semi- diverters Impacts should not be considered on transit or primary fire response routes. Extremely effective at reducing traffic volume in the closed direction. Effectiveness y . Other May be helpful to educate residents on its use since it is not a common traffic should only Considerations device. Semi- diverters s y be used on streets designed as local streets and are not intended to be through routes. Also should not be installed on streets which provide access to schools, parks, etc. 31 Median Barriers Median barriers prevent cut-through traffic by rohibitin left turn t::fi'i .y:•.•.:• • 'j:• Vii. • .•:;� 4 :.t} ; }:; ::,v,� •y; . y;;: 4 : {i'� }i' :• } .y: : /l •i. : .}• i:':! �,�; N�.:�:..��T�:.v : movements from a major street onto a local street. Median barriers also :a'<" prevent continuous through travel on the local street. (9) {.. :;�xrz:;'••'f. % ?? a. #:Ti.�'k�' ' S ��.fi'y`.''vS:E'is.:`:3: }`• ";• - ; : •.•;.,. ,y :: }�. % %;a.::a.r :y t,,i; }:•. #:iii.: � . Purpose Strategically located median barriers will reduce traffic volumes on the minor street if there are a significant number of left turn movements onto or off of the local street. Traffic volumes of through traffic on the minor street will also be reduced significantly. Cost $1,500 - $20,000, depending on the need for road widening. Pros Separate opposing vehicle travel lanes. Prevent vehicles from passing other vehicles. Depending on location, may improve safety through access limitations. • Can be designed to provide pedestrian refuges. May be used to visually enhance the street through landscaping. Cons May require major parking removal. Prohibit or limit access and movement (from driveways). Service Provider May have a negative impact on emergency services because of access limitations. Impacts They may also prevent transit service on the blocked street. The turn restrictions imposed by a median barrier would apply to emergency vehicles and are therefore, not typically used on primary fire response routes. Effectiveness Median barriers can be very effective in reducing traffic volumes. Vehicle speeds may also be reduced by reducing through traffic. Other Very special care must be taken to consider the availability, capacity, and Considerations appropriateness of the alternative routes drivers might use if a median barrier is constructed. 32 . PERCEPTUAL ENHANCEMENTS Streets with few changes in physical or visual make -up can often create a sense of monotony, resulting in little attention being given to actual driving behavior. Drivers concentration on the roadway can be increased by creating "obstacles" which the driver must adapt to by changing his or her driving behavior. One of the ways this can be done is through perceptual enhancements which alter the actual road surface material or color. Different road surface materials, such as cobblestone, can be added to the roadway in localized strips to produce a rougher roadway section. This alerts drivers to their surroundings by creating a rumble as they pass over the change in. roadway material. Different colors can also be used to create a separate lane of travel for bicycle or pedestrian traffic, indicating to drivers that the area is pedestrianized and they should slow down. It is important to note that extremely rough materials may be very noisy at high speeds, which can be annoying to residents who live nearby. Surface material changes can also be done to the entire roadway section. This is done primarily in shopping and historic areas. The surface change often results in reduced speeds, particularly for drivers who are unfamiliar with the area. Landscape plantings may be another effective way to alter the behavior of drivers while improving the overall appearance of the street. Often most effective when combined with modifications in roadway geometry, landscape plantings are thought to cause the average driver to pay closer attention to his or her surroundings. If drivers have more to focus on, they will tend-to slow down. Designs should include trees with a certain volume and maturity and a clear stem height of 2.4 meters (8 feet) so that drivers are able to see pedestrians. Bushes and hedges should not be left to grow beyond 0.6 meters (2 feet) so that children are visible to the driver. It is also important to consult a landscape specialist on the type and species of plantings suitable to the climate and to ensure that existing drainage patterns will not be hampered. 33 TECHNOLOGY • An alternative to installing speed reduction treatments to the roadway, such as those mentioned above, may g be through the use of technology. One such technology is the Motion Imaging Recording System (IYURS), which is gaining popularity in over 30 countries throughout the world. Although MIRS is currently not enforceable in Minnesota, it is being employed in 13 states throughout the United States to detect traffic violations. (11) Often used at traffic light controlled intersections to detect red -light running, MIRS uses a camera to photograph the vehicle and license plate once a violation has been detected. The camera is triggered when a driver passes over an inductance loop, which is imbedded into the roadway, after the light has turned red. Once triggered, the camera, which sits atop a pole about 23 meters (75 feet) from the intersection, will take a picture of the vehicle entering the intersection. A second picture is taken approximately one second later as the vehicle leaves the intersection. Drivers are then either issued a warning or a ticket for the violation. With a clear picture of their vehicle license plate and the red traffic light, the offense is hard to dispute. MIRS can also assist police officers with numerous other traffic violations, such as work zone speeding, railroad crossing gate violations, bus -only shoulder and HOV lane misuse, to name just a few. Attributed results of using the cameras are reductions in traffic violations and accidents. Another outcome of MIRS is that it enables police officers to spend less time issuing traffic violations and more time concentrating on more serious crimes. - Offenders may, however, object to the use of MIRS. Some feel that having their picture taken is an invasion of privacy. Drivers are also not given the luxury of trying to explain themselves and face their accuser immediately. Regardless of the position held, drivers who obey the law may in time become violators if they feel enforcement of the law is being ignored. 34 • qppg HN 0 • • S EXAMPLES OF TRAFFIC CALMING IN MINNESOTA Examples of what various cities in Minnesota are implementing. in terms of traffic calming aie included on the following pages. Located on local, collector, and arterial roadways, these projects are intended to serve as a reference for municipalities who are considering the installation of a traffic calming device. Some of the projects were failures, some successes, but all should prove to be an excellent learning tool. Most of the information was provided by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. and was obtained through the survey conducted in early 1997. These projects were not cited in the "'Traffic Calming Activity in Minnesota" report since that report focused maim on higher functioning traffic P Y gh g roads. Residents reactions to the tra calming devices are summarized in the table as positive ( +), negative ( -), or neutral (1). If the reaction is that of an adjacent business owner, the symbol is followed by an asterisk. 35 Traffic Calming Summary Data City Project Location Project Description Date Road Reasons for Actual/Perceived Negative Resident Contact Person Other Comments s Class Project Outcomes Impacts Reaction Scott Erickson: Andover Narcissus St. Temporary speed Aug, Cut- through traffic (612) 755 -5100 between Bunker Lake humps; Street closure; 1996 Temporary speed Blvd. and Round Increased police bumps removed after Lake Blvd. patrols; Extensive 2 weeks at the neighborhood request of the participation. neighborhood. m between Median island; Street Fall, Local Proposed development Chuck Lenthe: 129 Ave, b 612 785 -6188 Blaine ( ) Isanti Rd. and narrowing; One -way 1996 Street included traffic Partially funded by Radisson Rd. streets. calming measures. developer. • street May, Local Accident experience; Improved safety for N Chuck Lenthe: Blaine Jefferson St. between Temporary Y (612) 785 -6188 120 Lane and closure (since 1991 Street Resident non-motorized dissatisfaction with users; Example of Madison St. removed); Stop signs. unwarranted stop street environment. Change the psychological feel sign installation that of the street. seems to have corrected a problem. w Neighborhood Brooklyn Indiana Avenue and Traffic Circle 1983 Local Organize traffic Street entering and exiting meetings were held Center 71 st Avenue North to decide what device St. Alphonsus Catholic Church to implement. Campus on Sundays. Brooklyn Unity Avenue Speed humps 1993 Local Reduce speeding and Residents felt the Speed humps were Center Street cut - through - traffic in a additional signage installed according to multi - family required and the ITE template. residential painting were neighborhood. "unsightly." Brooklyn West River Rd. and Street closures Aug, Local Cut - through traffic Reduction of cut- More difficult -h Park Riverdale Dr. 1992 Street (diverting from through traffic; access for between 73 Ave. TH252); Reduction in emergency vehicles and Brookdale Dr. High vehicular speeds; 'vehicle speeds, and transit. High traffic volumes. Reduction in traffic volumes. Burnsville Knox Dr. between Speed humps Aug, Local Resident Reduction of cut- More difficult + Chuck Ahl: Burnsville Parkway 612 8954544 1996 Street dissatisfaction with through traffic; access for ( ) and 136 St. street environment; Maintenance of emergency, Cut- through traffic; neighborhood maintenance, snow Perception of high character, removal vehicles; vehicle speeds or Reduction in Poor drainage in traffic volumes. vehicle speeds. winter. Traffic Calming Summary Data City Project Location Project Description Date Road Reasons for Actual/Perceived Negative Resident Contact Person & Class Project Outcomes Impacts Reaction Other Comments Duluth Jefferson St. at 17 36' diameter traffic Aug, Local High vehicular speeds; Reduction in More difficult + Bob McCubbin: Ave. E. circle; Speed hump. 1995 Street Cut - through traffic; vehicle speeds, access for (218) 723 -3347 Resident traffic volumes, maintenance and Community is dissatisfaction with collisions, and cut - snow removal; planting flowers in street environment, through traffic; Snow storage the circle. Perception of high Additional impacts. vehicle speeds or greenery, Improved traffic volumes. safety. Eagan Deerwood Drive Converging chevron 1997 Minor Residents petitioned Before/after speed + Pre and post pavement markings, Collector for a stop sign to be studies indicated improvement surveys "30 mph" pavement installed. in the that the 85th were mailed out message, high neighborhood to slow percentile speed access the residential visiblility "wind traffic down. Since limits were reduced perception and spinners" on existing the stop sign did not by 5 -7 mph. 83% of inform them of the speed limit signs, and meet any warrants for the residents felt proposed installation of a installation in the that the pavement improvements. pedestrian crosswalk MUTCD, other markings were the W using pavement methods were used to most effective. J markings. reduce traffic speeds. Eden Prairie Homeward Hills Rd. Prohibition of Major Cut - through traffic; Reduction in cut- { Alan Gray: (612) 949 -8320 between Sunnybrook northbound right turns Collector High traffic volumes; through traffic; Considered an Rd and Anderson during peak AM hour. Traffic management. Reduction in traffic volumes. effective means of Lakes Pkwy. curtailing cut - throu ,h traffic. " Eden Prairie Dell Rd. at Evener Creation of right- Minor Cut - through traffic; Reduction of cut- More difficult N Alan Gray: Way inhight -out situation Collector High traffic volumes; through traffic; access for (612) 949 -8320 at intersection using Traffic management. Reduction in traffic emergency, Recent survey turn restrictions - and a volumes. maintenance, and indicates area trumpet island. left turning residents prefer vehicles. removal. Farmington 187'" St. between Median island; Local Requested by Reduction in Increased + Pilot Knob and Landscaping. Street developers of new vehicle speeds; maintenance costs. English Ave. housing subdivision. Additional greenery. Hopkins Main Street Choker; Protected 1991 Business Additional +* parking bays; dissatisfaction with greenery;. Streetscape materials. street environment; Increased parking. Desire to increase on- street parking. Traffic Calming Summary Data City Project Location Project Description Date Road Reasons for Actual/Perceived Negative Resident Contact Person & Class Project Outcomes Impacts Reaction Other Comments Minneapolis Lowry Hill East Installation of 15 Oct, Minor Resident None trjs�t l Y b + Bill Bruneau: Neighborhood chokers and 6 speed 1996 Collector dissatisfaction with 4,( r4 Z> !, 0 - (612) 673 - 5750 humps as part of street environment, 5 ho uk f oy'0 v a j neighborhood Traffic management. i a f'y repaving project. Minneapolis Intersections of W. Traffic circles at both Sept, Local Perception of high Reduction in None F Jim Daire; ' 612 673 -3244 43 d St. and intersections. 1996 Street vehicle speeds or vehicle speeds; ( ) Washburn S. traffic volumes; Reduction in traffic Funded by `d Ave. ve and Cut - through traffic; volumes; neighborhood. and W. 43 Vincent Ave. S. Resident R eduction of cut - dissatisfaction with through traffic. street environment. Plymouth South Shore Dr. 5 speed humps Jun, Minor Resident Reduction in Dissatisfied + Fred Moore: between 10 Ave. 1995 Collector dissatisfaction with vehicle speeds; residents routinely (612) 509 -5501 and 13 Ave. street environment; Change the honk horns to High vehicular speeds; psychological feel protest. Traffic creates a of the street; barrier to Increased LQ 000 pedestrian/bike community life and movement. vitality. Plymouth Peony Lane and 19 2 speed humps Sept, Minor Resident Reduction in Increased noise at + Fred Moore: Ave. between CR 6 612 1996 Collector dissatisfaction with vehicle speeds; one of the speed ( ) 509 -5501 a, street environment; hnproved safety for humps. Seen as a test project and 20 Ave. for typical residential High vehicular speeds; non - motorized Traffic creates a users; minor collector barrier to Increased streets. pedestrian/bike community life and movement. vitality. Prior Lake Coachman Lane Colored concrete 1992- Local New development, Reduction in Snow storage N Jeffery Evens: between CSAH 21 median islands; 1996 Street Cut - through traffic; vehicle speeds; impacts; (612) 4474230 and Carriage Hills Street narrowing; Perception of high Change the Right- in/right -out Funded by developer. Parkway Landscaping. vehicle speeds or psychological feel access to traffic volumes. of the street; driveways. Additional greenery. Richfield W. 70 St. between Strategies to minimize Nov, Local Cut - through traffic; Reduced collision Unwarranted stop + Tom Foley: Penn Ave. and cut - through traffic on 1996 Street High traffic volumes, frequency and signs and traffic ( 612 ) 861 -9791 Xerxes Ave. W. 70 St.: Stop Accident experience. severity, diversion; signs; Yield signs; Reduction in Opposition from Lett turn arrow at through traffic. residents on 70 signal. diversion routes. Traffic Calming Summary Data City Project Location Project Description Date Road Reasons for Actual/Perceived Negative Resident Contact Person & Class Project Outcomes Impacts Reaction Other Comments Rochester 26 St. NE at Viola Semi - diverter Jun, Local Resident Maintenance of More difficult + David Rossman: Heights Dr. 507 281 -6194 1996 Street dissatisfaction with neighborhood access for public ( ) street environment, character, transit; No Partially funded by High vehicular speeds; Reduction of cut- alternative route developer. High traffic volumes, through traffic; was provided. Reduction in traffic volumes. Rochester I" Ave. SE/NE from On street angle 1993 Local Need for increased Increased parking; Snow storage +* David Rossman: I St. SE to I" St. parking Street parking; Additional impacts. (507) 281 -6194 NE Business greenery. dissatisfaction with street environment; Land use or zoning chan.-es. St. Cloud 25 Ave. N. (1" St. Delineation of parking Jul, Use of parking lanes Steve 55-7 241 to 12 St.); 33` Ave. lanes with paint 1995 as driving lanes, thus (320) 2 255 -7 N. (8 St. to 12' St.) turning a w 2 -lane roadway into a 4 -lane roadway. St. Louis Excelsior Blvd. Street narrowing; Jun, Minor Land use or zoning Change the + Mike R ard i n: 24-5 924 -2555 Park between France Ave. Choker, Landscaping; 1994 Arterial changes; psychological feel ( 612 ) and TH 100 Turn restrictions; Resident of the street; ` Median island; dissatisfaction with Increase in Marked crosswalks; street environment; pedestrian, bike, Protected parking Traffic creates barrier &/or transit use; bays. to pedestrian/bike Additional movement. greenery. St. Louis W. 38 St. between Strategies to minimize Jun, Minor Resident Reduction of cut- Stop sign + Mike Rardin: Park France Ave. and cut - through traffic on 1993 Collector dissatisfaction with through traffic; noncompliance has ( 612 ) 924 -2555 Excelsior Blvd. W. 38 St.: Diagonal street environment; Reduction in traffic increased. diverter, Stop signs. Perception of high volumes; vehicle speeds or Reduction in traffic volumes; vehicle speeds. Cut- through traffic. a i sland; Turn Local Accident experience; Reduction in traffic _ Mike Rardin: St. Louis 3l � St. at Louisiana Trumpet island; Park Ave. restrictions (only Street Traffic management. volumes; ( 612 ) 924 -2555 right- inhight -out from Reduced collision 31 to Louisiana Ave.) frequency and severity. I Traffic Calming Summary Data City Project Location Project Description Date Road Reasons for Actual/Perceived Resident Contact Person & Negative Class Project Outcomes Impacts Reaction Other Comments Minor Perception of high Increase in + Tom St adskl e v: St. Paul Summit Ave. at Median island; (651) 266 -6266 -62 17 7 Ramsey Hill Elimination of one Arterial vehicle speeds or pedestrian, bike, traffic lane. traffic volumes; &/or transit use; Resident Reduction in traffic dissatisfaction with volumes; street environment; Reduction of cut- ' Traffic management. through traffic. �. Tom Stadsklev: St. Paul Highland hland Parkwa Y at Median islands; Aug, Major Perception of high Increase in (651) 266 -6217 Woodlawn Ave. Marked crosswalks; 1996 Collector vehicle speeds or pedestrian, bike, Choker. traffic volumes; &/or transit use; Traffic management; Maintenance of Resident neighborhood dissatisfaction with character, street environment. Change the psychological feel of the street. St. Paul Wabasha St. between Reduction in number Jul, Minor Business Change the None +* To 51) 266 -6099 C) Kellogg Blvd. and 7 of through lanes; 1996 Collector dissatisfaction with psychological feel St. Addition of on -street street environment, of the street; parking; Striped bike New development; Increased lane; Choker (paint); Traffic creates a community life and Marked crosswalks. barrier to vitality, ' pedestrian/bike Increase in movement. pedestrian, bike, &/or transit use. St. Paul Victoria at Goodrich Chokers Aug, Minor High vehicular speeds; Reduction in Complaints of + Tom Stadsklev: Ave. and Fairmount 1994 Collector High traffic volumes; vehicle speeds; unsightly chevron ( 651 ) 266 -6217 Ave. Traffic management. Reduction in traffic signs. volumes; Reduction of cut - through traffic. St. Paul Residential streets Basket weave stop 1983 Local Perception of high Reduced collision { Bill Ragland: Street vehiclespeeds or severity and (651) 266 -6206 throughout city signs. - . p 1993 traffic volumes; frequency, Accident experience; Improved safety for High traffic volumes. non - motorized users; Reduction in vehicle speeds. Traffic Calming Summary Data City Project Location Project Description Date Road Reasons for Actual/Perceived Negative Resident Contact Person & Class Project Outcomes Impacts Reaction Other Comments St. Paul Shields Ave. and Chokers Aug, Local Perception of high Improved safety for Tom Stadsklev: Aldine St. 1992 Street vehicle speeds or non - motorized (651) 266 -6217 traffic volumes; users; Resident Change the dissatisfaction with psychological feel street environment, of the street; Traffic management. Reduction in vehicle speeds. St. Paul Shields Ave. at Fry 12' Traffic circle Aug, Local High vehicular speeds; Reduction in + Tom Stadsklev: St. 1992 Street High traffic volumes; vehicle speeds; (651) 266 -6217 Resident Reduction in traffic dissatisfaction with volumes; street environment. Change the psychological feel of the street. St. Paul Hillcrest Ave. Choker, Street Aug, Local Perception of high Reduction in +* Tom Stadsklev: between Cleveland narrowing; One -way 1995 Street vehicle speeds or vehicle speeds; (651) 266 -6217 p Ave. and Kenneth St. street. traffic volumes; Increase in Included on -street Safety concerns due to pedestrian, bike, bus - parking in nearby school and &/or transit use; protected bay. playground; Reduction in traffic Business volumes. dissatisfaction with street environment. White Bear Bald Eagle Ave. and Street closure of Bald 1 Local Accident experience, Reduced collision More difficult + Mark Burch: 429 -8563 Lake Lincoln Ave. west of Eagle Ave. and Street Traffic management; frequency and access for (651 )429 TH 96/TH 61 Lincoln Ave., which High traffic volumes. severity, emergency vehicles intersection were close to major Reduction in traffic and transit. TH intersection; volumes; Landscaping. Improved safety for non- motorized users. • WHO f • • Tuesday DECEMBER 24, 1996 w . StarThbune Concrete barriers erected at intersections in Minneapolis' Lowry Hill area in an experiment to slow traffic have angered snow - deluged residents. r Calmin ra is i ■ Downtowns p a a tes A ird of five art' L ow i f olkt­ ry, k r s> ' By Bob von Sternberg the safety argument, but it hasn't • Star Tribune Staff Writer even slowed the traffic down. It's an absurdity and a little patron- ' A n attempt by Minneapolis of- izing." ' €icials to calm traffic in the Lowry Mike Monahan, the city's traf- Hill area has•left some neighbors fic chief, has received an earful anything bu t:. g con- weeks,. it about the barriers. "The first few \ ' In about hulkin 's like anytime - you i- �I crate barriers installed in, more change — Oh, my God, you've 1 oj, than a dozen intersections as part ruined this. We find that people of a trial program to slow traffic, either like the change or they residents are inundating City Hall really don't like it at all." with angry phone calls. And they In the six weeks that the barn - say this month's snowfall only ers have been in place, the com- / f : ,o made a bad situation worse_ plaints had dwindled,, only to ' r 033 • "I drive a big - truck, and it's ." spike about a week ago amid the hard to get around them at all — snowfall, Monahan said =_ - ' and with all this snow, it's inipos- sible, ":`neighborhood. resident Nan B" y said "I understand . Turn to STREETS on B5 pnj Laura Goodwin, of Minnea ■ ■ ■ rec -� q 1 Snowmobile kills girl, l5, Go he ai "A lot hungry," said. "A lot of w i n o .. + on street East Bethel tA2Ia p`aq By Anne O'Connor en route to St. Paul- Ramsey Med- a Z Star Tribune Sta ff Writer ical Center. !of The The man who hit her, Randall One minute, Sonia Schlosser, Winger, 42, was in critical condi- - .,[,nt 2u sl 15, was walking down the street tion at St. Paul- Ramsey. Investi- with her twin sister and friends. gators said they suspect that he The next, she was calling home had been drinking. Test results !' hP nuniinhle inn rnunlP of ` the meuicai ex- aLl-1- C ` Cheryl vuuiey, v i�,e �•'a" e el i�• workers in spent a good part for 50 years if I'd eVe b er's office have sp it — is to see the donor tamily be their da last year giving life and joy need,- said each family is made aware of would 191 _ able to look beyond their own in the medical examiner's office, than t Zey of the 1 erican Red Cross hon a eo le's ne The Am ro ram. roach Teen, was born with ored the office last week for work- loss to see °examiners office. She said timing an When d app medical e is crucial, but ultimately, the fam- heart defect. th families to make them sale Pete Palmer, who works with the p tin is months old, she re ins wi lions of donating the ware of the op The Red Cross is one of ily needs to decide if donating nated heart valve. issue from their deceased loved largest with 18 tissue centers tissue bank organizat out right for them. erson to ones. — including throughides "ve to do is say, youngest p The donations e United a. It p 'Have you thought al we ha boue family that le n is surgery. p s r e cor- the Sttes e nation s „ said. If the Y she - one, connective tissue, nearly 25 percent of the lion? Dudley wit Red Cross, and ' skin, b e nea y P explains ho neas and heart valves — can say -eight families who had is interested, she exp a child's life, givhel someone to h their tissue Twenty- eightfami transplantation. YC sight back or p Cmil Some Y' Nell a For temporary cler accountants, audit, see Service Classified section V b t.r Star une- StarTru Y .. .,h k�j�`';. , rte; y _ .a.' `_'.`+sti ° ..�1M•� 'N'' { •` IIII W , �• , I a•'" v r III s • x l i'k4 r+ ° a. .. x , , :f " 4 „ - 'n�=�� �. :ATM ► g JN u. . , - `'-�::.. � "` .... V '.x': �, ' ' ... •r: .. "" - • Holt • Star Tribune Photo by Jerry The are particular " residents irate. y r e have w 0 a t h e 'c k advice r d a a 0 a p M re Traffic "calming" barriers, s Council Member Pat Scott y � � uch as those on W. 22nd St. in Kens d City possible," she said. response to plowing around the barriers, Hill as soon as ' ly angry at the city's resp about traffic calming is to drive through Lowry lanterlike any neighborhood thinking gotiate around the p ;hy EIS Summ Avs. S., has c oncrete structures. One barrier, i_—.1111111000 d from B:1 �� at Irving and d by an errant been knocked over, the drivers have dif ieu y plow or a motorist. dears - Plow Residents said some intersec around barriers unnavigable af- • lions were nearly snow. n av igat ing parkways. ter last week's heavy refer or streets and p Lowry "Plow drivers would p The phone also has been ring- l rovides a look at what could that the traffic circles have to be ins in the office of City CounTel be 1 c oming to other neigh- there, because they who rep lowed around, but it's a minor —iMember Pat Scott, Traffic d circles, speed bumps, plowed " said Brian Lokkesmoe, sents the neighbor hood, t of borho Traffic difficulty majority u used to slow the city's assistant negative, public works Loring Park. "The vast narrowed intersections and me_ director. "They've had to leave the comments are and dians are techniques most were particularly e after the traffic. trailing edges of snow all over, ed with what Kapp Some neighborhoods, such as g oin back now and snow," Scott said. " advice to have embraced the doing somegleanup in the inter- • n sections." ry Hill trial will co changes; others haver Hill en- any neighborhood thinking about Linden Hills, h Lowry The Low n - traffic calming is to drive through A drive throug Lowry Hill as soon as possible." through intersec- tinue through winter, after which h lions that remain spattered with That's not abstract advice. tails snaking residents will decide whether the Minneapolis is experimenting snow. be reached by calming devices will become per as re- with in array of traffic- slowing is couldn't manent features. !coy- devices (a k a "calming' ) se drivers had !, tt,;,r throughout neighborhoods, ma- plows, who ton - V any suburban residents are concerned about the zuTiounLOf trall 1C on their streets, but their growing numbers and more frequent car trips aren't helping matters. • - Suburbanites can't P• .. the traffic ,� :.': By Laurie Slake them. More accurately, they are Star 7rihitrie Striff W1 -hier the traffic. The number of households in (;its have caught III) with (lie the metro area with two or more suburbs of IhcTwin Cilics. cars has doubled since 1986. The in neighborhoods throughout suburban population has grown i tile metropolitan -area, sill)- by about 477,000 over the past 15 urbanites are trying to protect years. And the number of trips t .. ili6r quality of lire from the residents make each day is up, w* r intrusion of passing cars. too. :1 rillne otit to the sub- The residt: Neighborhood i orbs to gel away front file hill) traffic long battled by city rcs- ideals — looms is yet another hull of noise and traffic and con- ge.Stioll, and they UITII around urban problem suburban com- and it's right in their neighbor- munities want to avoid. i hood," said Plymouth Mayor Joy Tierricy. meoutherefor Time to CARS oil AIG Star Tribune Photo by Rita Reed the trees, the open space, the Also oil A16. packs, and they d on 't oil t w in( all — Ways to control traffic. Paul Bach installs reflective arrows on a concrete barrier at 77th St. and Mot- r. this traffic by them." — Population and jobs in the gan Av. S. In Richfield. The barrier will be up for six months to see whether It Bill tile traffic has followed suburbs and Tivin Cities. stems commercial traffic In neighborhoods near Interstate Hwy. 494. Suburbanites Ways to keep traffic under control As traffic problems continue to grow. Twin Cities > Speed Watch: The process can t escape suburbs consider these and other strategies to slow works on a principle similar to Neighborhood Crime and direct Irallic. Watch to create awareness of traffic problems and Taff they're build cooperation in solving them. Letters may be sent cl , >- Speed humps or bumps: Raised areas in the to homeowners asking for their cooperation. There road surface are intended to discourage traffic and may be neighborhood reduce speeds by jarring vehicles and drivers. Bumps adding to it meetings or door-to-door • - are generally 3 to 6 inches high with a length of I to 3 visits. Residents may feet Speed humps are generally 3 to 4 inches high even do their own Searching for ways to respond, radar and 12 feet long. They cost about $2,000 to install. r WATICN., suburban officials are cxl)cri- checks and record r Speed humps and bumps do reduce speed if they nienting with stepped-tip police speeds. The program is enforcement, speed humps, bar- spaced less than 800 feet a part The extent to which intended to slow St..... in cer tain I :--i ridades and street arrowing. the will discourage traffic and encourage drivers neighborhoods. There's no physical impact on I y ivers to "I t ' s all emotionally charged find other routes depends traffic. The cost is low, but neighbors must be able to P upon said Shoreview Public the number and use radar equipment Speeds typically go down during \Vorks Director Mirk Maloney. spacing of humps or the watch, but they may not remain down later. "It's one of the biggest issues bumps. V c f ace. said aid B ll Burnsville city e- >- Speed display signs: A portable speed display gincer Chuck Ahl. Speed hump Speed bump sign is wired to radar equipment aimed at passing cars. It displays the speed limit and the driver's speed 3N at race picks up speed The sign is intended to slow motorists by forcing them Consider the Drach family of >- Traffic circles: A raised island in the cbnter of an to think about how fast intersection typically would be about 20 feet in lills. they are going compared le. Each day David Drich drives diameter. The circles are intended to slow traffic to the speed limit The through an intersection and reduce crashes. Traffic N) Minneapolis to work and then signs cost about $2,000 must negotiate the curves of the circle and mid .l! to night law school classes. to $11,500 per unit Ills wife, Nancy, drives t other cars while going through the intersection. Circles o St. I YOUR -1- _sPEE depending on the Paid to work. Oil her way home cost about $5,000, including curb and gutter and (W sophistication of the 1' , @1C Strips at two Ell y- care centers landscaping. Speeds near the circle decrease. But equipment and whether a 0) pick it speed may pick up near the middle of the block as p her two preschool WUMV traffic-counting computer drivers try to make up for lost tkne. Accidents may be is Included. It requires " Then I usually have to drive reduced poke, traffic engineers oldest son at least once a There is an 0 and neighbors to work increase in P eek to Cub Scouts and twice a together. Data on its football," C� e noise and !k JF I to ' ," she said. effectiveness is still being t, - Du ring it,(! energy week, the Drichs U I & studied tea k. on or more trips to the consum ption : store, books(orc, fabric as vehicles >- Watch for Children signs: glore, library and occasionally the brake and Signs say. Watch for Children, or ` doctor. On weekends, David accelerate through the Slow Children Playing or Slow Child- Drnch typically goes to (lie hard- SLOW -el ren.Requests for signs generally intersection. ware and video stores, and his stem from parents' concerns for Air quality is V,rifc slops it a coffee shop. children's safety. The cost is minimal, l ey ']'lie Drnch family is not ;it( negatively T! but there's little or no effect on The average ]'will Chics"Ilrec'M affected speed or traffic safety. There is no fancily makes 10 to 12 car trips 1 Source: 'Neighborhood Traffic Connor by the Institute indication that these signs achieve CHILDREN • �ay, III) froin eight a day in 1970, of Transportation Engineers, North Central SectIont. desired safety benefits. 4ccording to a travel behavior gIudy by the Metropolitan Colln- : 4,' Y iittetro erfsi',s seven core. •. "We are all very usrd to being 60 percent of neighborhood complicated because liOmCOwIl- could have been a kid," said ible to jump in our car and go properly owners approve of the ers' desire far safety and tranquil- Hallberg. M addition, three cars t iliywhcrc we want at any time," humps and that homeowners pay ity conilicts with an equally have been totaled while parked in �• §'Hitt Shoreview's Maloney. "it's for installation —about $1,500 to strong suburban desire for con - his driveway. When his children kind of ingrained in people in the $2,000, or about $100 per home. venicnt, unfettered car mobility, were young more than 20 years ..,':`.;metro area that they be able to r In Richfield: 'rile city in- officials say. ago, lie said, they "dared *(rive i ;lihake a lot of trips." stalled a concrete barricade to "We get a lot of heat at public their bicycles on that road." • ,.;.: Residents who drive as part of keep commercial traffic out of a meetings from residents, but we But Mallberg's neighbor Vivian :Nta• more active lifestyle and who residential street. get a lot of phone calls all year Herzog hates thesp h ; jtake children to lessons, school r In Plymouth: Mounting coin- long from drivers complaining Since one was installed in !(activities atilt sports events con - plaints about speeders in residen- about the condition o[ the road [toot of her driveway this suni- tribute to the rising traffic levels. tial areas prompted the city to or their ability to move about," trier, she has been bothered by "Quite a few neighborhoods assign two of its 38 police officers said Anoka County engineer Jon the noise of vehicles going over r' are really isolated, ail(] they are exclusively to traffic enforcement. Olson. the hump and by the honking of " d{' conytlaining about themselves," "They spend their entire eight- Competing pressures also residents angry that it's there. •':`l shid Roseville city engineer Karl hour day setting up speed traps come to play. Physical strategies Other traffic - calming tech- T cel. "They and their neighbors in different places throughout the that slaw or discourage traffic piques now being tested include "ii e driving more, and they really city," said Plymouth city engineer also inconvenience and annoy stepped -up police enforcement, t}ave no one to blame hilt Dan Faulkner. drivers and cause other narrowed streets, neighborhood r themselves." Nevertheless, there is a back- problems. speed watches, traffic circles and a; Some residents recognize that. log or requests for residential stop Take speed humps, for ex- barricades to prevent turns. " "We arc a two -car family, and signs, and traffic complaints are ample. wr are hauling kids around all the taking so much of his time that Burnsville has found them ef- She favors lowering IIm ItS time. We are part or the prob- Faulkner is recommending that fictive in stopping cut - through Plymouth's Mayor Tierney is Icm," said Bob Schnell, president tilt city hire a traffic engineer, traffic, and many neighborhoods ready to ask the Legislature to " t: of the Imperial hills Neighbor- t In Shoreview: The city pill are happy with them. adjust the speed laws or give cil 4 ,1 Imod Association in Plymouth. up Watch For Children signs. "Using a number of.hunips in ies the option to enforce lower ": •. Still, there are some instances Maloney, the public works di- a series creates enough of an in- limits on problem stretches. i where commuters take shortcuts rector, said: "Directly north of its convenience for drivers who have "I would like to see a 25 -mile- +� escape backed -up freeways is Lino Lakes and other parts of no business being in the neigh- per-hour speed limit in our and arterial streets. Anoka County that are growing borhood that they stay on the neighborhoods," she said. "We !` "When the freeways are rapidly now. We are seeing traffic roads they are supposed to be are designing our suburban roads `t cingged and there are lines at the increases due to someone 61se's on," said A1il, the city engineer. to be sidewalks as well as streets. meter ramps, they will take a dif- growth, and people are mad But public safety and mainte- So you do walk on the street. You rgrent why through," said Scott about that." Hance vehicles have trouble with do push your baby carriages up Bkink, Brooklyn Center engineer. ile explains to callers that the humps, he said. Firetrucks the street, and you do have little roads are public and that people loaded with water must slow to 5 kids riding their trikes on the A universal concern have a right to use them. "But I miles per hour to cross a speed street. Iiow do you make that Traffic is emerging as a univer- sense ithat) a lot of people don't hump to keep the weight of the compatible with cars? I think low - sal concern for people in commu- like that answer. A lot of people water under control. That costs er speeds." rlities where sidewalks are scarce want to control who is using their time in responding to a fire. Lowering the speed limit t: and children are everywhere. street," he said. Speed humps jar people car- would mean more police enforce- t In Edina: Some neighbor- J► In Circle Pines, Lexington and ried in ambulances. And snow - ment, and that's why some city a M ods have asked the city to Blaine: More than 300 people plow blades often jump over the engineers say a change in drivers' rrzz��ake them gated communities to signed a petition to stop the wid- humps, making it difficult to keep attitudes is essential to control- ' tilt off through traffic. "They ening of Lexington Av. through them free of snow and ice, Ahl ling traffic problems. happens Faulkner, city engineer for said. The same thin p y g w h concept exists and the net g P k o the p I Y neighborhoods. g take an all- are h tree[ sweepers and debris. Plymouth, said it ni. y . . r it s Y saying, 'Well, wouldn't that "It's urban sprawl and another P e y g, P Work?' "said city engineer Fran highway department trying to In Plymouth, where the city is out campaign similar to the effort .. Hoffman, who has nixed the idea. move more cars faster," said Jen- testing speed humps in the Impe- of Mothers Against Drunk Driving r in Burnsville: Nine residen- niter Kromrey, who would lose 60 rial Hills neighborhood, residents to make people slow down in tint streets have been outfitted feet of her Circle Pines back yard have had mixed reactions. neighborhoods. with speed hunips (less jolting to the widening. "If you build it, Dale Mallberg said the humps '1 think people get in their car, than bumps), and another 17 they will cone, and they will, but improved the safety and reduced and they forget they are in some- neighborhoods are considering. we just don't want them." the speed on 19th Av. N. where body. else Is neighborhood that S,. itlstalling the humps. he lives. also has kids," he said. "Their In fact', so many requests have No easy solutions "I had a gazebo wiped out — a attitude changes, and they arc been matte far speed humps that Finding a suitable response to guy drove right through it. And thinking about how =busy and the city now requires that at least public outcry against traffic is i've had a dog killed. That dog harried their lives are." 'PAGE A16 • STAR TRIBUNE ** SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 24. 199E �. Population jobs rising faster in suburbs: i U As jobs and population rise in the suburbs, traffic increases, too. Here's a comparison between the (In millions) 2.5 tc a number of jobs and the population of Minneapolis and SC Paul and the Twin Cities suburbs: 2171,770 �, l e t r • Turin cities Population 2.0 suburbs wow Minneapolis and St Paul' _ 1.5 1,344,692 1,210,740 Jobs ' 1.0 • 641,181 671,000 Population 1 n , . 594,500/ . I )... . . I 0.5. • m 445,500 i Jobs 415,300 I 0 Star Tribune Photo by Stormi Greener 1980 1990 1995 2010 Plymouth Is testing speed humps (less jolting than bumps) In the Imperial ( esttmate) (estimate) Hills neighborhood. Residents have had mixed reactions. Some say the humps have Improved safety; others say It's noisy when cars go over them. Source: Metroportan Council Star Trk)une graphic by lane Friedmann .e••- •r,+:.. fir'