Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999 10-25 CCP Regular Session AGENDA CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION . • �EPB 1999 6:00 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM B 1. City Council discussion of agenda items and questions. 2. Discussion of Joslyn Water Hook Up Charges 3. Discussion of AMM (Association of Metropolitan Municipalities) Legislative Policies 4. Discussion of process and timing for City Manager evaluation 5. Miscellaneous 6. Adjourn City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. To: Mayor Kragness and Council Member ilstrom, Lasman, Nelson and Peppe From: Michael J. McCauley City Manager Date: October 21, 1999 Re: Joslyn Water Connection In the process of platting the Joslyn Development, approximately $100,000 + in water hook up fees have been identified since the property would be divided into 3 parcels. As a superfund site, you are aware that re- development of this site involves extraordinary costs that we are attempting to overcome through tax increment and substantial grants from the State and Metropolitan Council. $100,000 + in water hook up fees negatively impacts that effort. We are proposing for the Council's consideration 2 options to overcome this problem: 1) Amend the tax increment agreement to increase the amount of tax increment by the amount of the hook -up fees. 2) Waive the hook -up fees based on the unique nature of the development in a superfund site recognizing the extraordinary obstacles to its development. Hook -up fees were created back in the 1950's and 1960's when mains were installed. Some properties were not required to pay the full hook up fees back in the 50's. The owners who received partial deferment are no longer the owners of many of these properties. Hook up fees have also been imposed for additional connections beyond the original. Staff is reviewing all of the potential sites subject to these fees. A number of properties have been identified and issues with those properties that indicate that these fees may be an impediment to redevelopment. The fees do assist the utility, but do not greatly impact the utility. This is because future main replacement is funded through current utility rates and not through charges against specific properties. We anticipate recommending a revision of hook up fees generally. Revisions would reduce or remove impediments to development or redevelopment generally. Those revisions will probably include a recommendation to remove the hook up fees from in -fill residential lots and small commercial lots along Brooklyn Boulevard. Larger commercial sites and potential residential developments would have lower flat fees than the current results of long term deferral. A recommendation and report on the overall approach should be ready next Spring. 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 A great place to start. A great place to stay. To: Mayor Kragness an ncil Members Hilstrom, Lasman, Nelson and Peppe From: Michael J. McCaul City Manager Date: October 21, 1999 Re: AMM Legislative Policies Attached is a copy of the AMM Legislative Policies. The AMM has requested that the Council collectively identify its top 5 priorities for the next Legislative session. This item is on the Study Session Agenda to have the Council identify your collective priorities to be reported back to the AMM. 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 Z Anfi vi W Association of Metropolitan Municipalities DATE: October 19, 1999 TO: AMM City Managers/Administrators FROM: AMMStaff RE: Draft 2000 AMM Policies & Policy Priorities List Please distribute the enclosed draft of the AMM's 2000 Legislative Policies to your mayor and council. The full membership will have the opportunity to debate and adopt the policies at the Policy Adoption Meeting scheduled for Wednesday, November 17, 1999 at the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) building from 5 -7 p.m. More details regarding the Policy Adoption Meeting will be mailed to you soon. Also, we would appreciate your help in determining the AMM's policy priorities this session. Please ask your city council to review the Policy Priorities List on the back of this memo and indicate the city's official top five priorities -- please only submit one form on behalf of your city. You may bring this list to the Policy Adoption Meeting or fax (651 - 281 -1299) the city's response to the AMM office. Thank you for your assistance! C/ p65 /poldoe/bulletin/polbul100.p65 145 University Avenue West Saint Paul, Minnesota 55103 -2044 Telephone: (651) 215 -4000 Fax: (651) 281 -1299 E -mail: amm @amm145.org CITY: 2000 AMM COMMITTEE POLICY PRIORITIES Please review the following list of priorities submitted by the AMM's four standing committees and indicate the top five priority policies you think the AMM should spend much of its time and resources on during the 2000 Legislative Session. (Please only submit one form on behalf of your city) (1 = highest priority; S = lowest priority) I -A Levy Limits (Revenue) I -B /C LGA/HACA (Revenue) I -J Revenue Diversification (Revenue) I -K Class Rate Tax System (Revenue) I -L Limited Market Value (Revenue) II -A Mandates & Local Authority (General Legislation) III -B State Housing Policy (Housing & Econ. Dev.) III -E Family & Elderly Housing (Housing & Econ. Dev.) III-G Tax Increment Finance (Housing & Econ. Dev.) III -K Business Subsidy (Housing & Econ. Dev.) IV -E Growth Management Strategy (Metropolitan Agencies) IV -J Restructuring of Metropolitan Agencies (Metropolitan Agencies) IV -L Parks & Open Space: Operation & Maintenance Capital Funding (Metropolitan Agencies) IV -M Surface & Groundwater Management (Metropolitan Agencies) V -A Transportation Funding (Transportation) V -B Regional Transit System (Transportation) V -G Motion Imaging Recording System (M.I.R.S.): Traffic Law Compliance (Transportation) Other: Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMID 145 University Avenue W., St. Paul, MN55103 ♦Fax: (651- 281 -1299) ♦Phone: (651 -215 -4000) c' r January 2000 DRAFT Legislative 0 C �s Association of Metropolitan Municipalities 145 University Ave. W. ♦ St. Paul, Minnesota 55103, -2044 Phone: (651) 215 -4000 ♦ Fax: (651) 281 -1299 E-mail.-amm@amm145.org Table of Contents Municipal Revenue & Taxation (1) Levy Limits (I -A) 1 Local Government Aid (I -B) 1 Homestead & Agricultural Credit Aid (I -C) 1 Tax Exempt Property (I -D) 1 Sales Tax on Local Government Purchases (I -E) 2 Development Access Fees (1 -F) 2 Price of Government (I -G) 2 Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution (I -H) 2 Personal Property Taxation: Electric Utility (1 -I) 2 Revenue Diversification (I -J) 3 Class Rate Tax System (I -K) 3 Limited Market Value (I -L) 3 Funding Shifts (I -M) 4 City Revenue Stability & Fund Balance (I -N) 4 General Legislation (II) Mandates & Local Authority (II -A) 5 Public Right -of -Way (II -B) 5 County Plat Approval Authority (II -C) 5 911 Telephone Tax (11 -D) 5 800 MHz Radio System (II -E) 6 2000 Legislative Policies i Table of Contents Permit Approval: Zoning (II -F) 6 Witness Fee Costs (II -G) 6 Elections: Alley System Authority (II -H) 6 Housing & Economic Development (III) Livable Communities Act (III -A) 7 State Housing Policy (III -B) 8 Housing Preservation (III -C) 9 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Appropriation (III -D) 9 Family & Elderly Housing (III -E) 10 Economic Development Responsibilities (III -F) 10 Tax Increment Financing (III -G) 11 Property Tax Reform Impact on TIF (III -H) 13 Development Tools (III -1) 13 Welfare Reform/ Workforce Readiness (III -J) 14 Business Subsidy (III -K) 15 Building Permit Fee Surcharge (III -L) 16 Group Homes (III -M) 17 Metropolitan Agencies (IV) Introduction: Metropolitan Governance Structure 19 Purpose of Metropolitan Governance (IV -A) 20 Regionally Provided Services: Funding (IV -B) 20 Regional Systems (IV -C) 20 Coordination of Local & Regional Plans (IV -D) 21 Growth Management Strategy (IV -E) 22 Local Plan Implementation (IV -F) 22 Metropolitan Council Focus on Planning (IV -G) 23 ii 2000 Legislative Policies Table of Contents Budget Process & Work Program Evaluation (IV -H) 23 Criteria for Extension of Metropolitan Governance Authority (IV -I) 24 Restructuring of Metropolitan Agencies (IV -J) 24 Metropolitan Council: Method to Select Members (IV -K) 25 Parks & Open Space: Operation & Maintenance Capital Funding (IV -L) 26 Surface & Groundwater Water Management (IV -M) 27 Water Supply (IV -N) 28 Regional Wastewater (Sewer) Treatment System (IV -O) 28 Waste Stream Management (IV -P) 28 Transportation (V) Transportation Funding (V -A) 31 Regional Transit System (V -B) 31 Motion Imaging Recording System (M.I.R.S.): Traffic Law Compliance (V -C) 32 Transportation Utility (V -D) 32 Highway Turnbacks & Funding (V -E) 32 '3C' Transportation Planning Process: Elected Officials Role (V -F) 33 Airport Noise Mitigation (V -G) 33 Committee Rosters (VI) 1999 -00 Housing & Economic Development Committee 35 1999 -00 Metropolitan Agencies Committee 36 1999 -00 Municipal Revenue & Taxation Committee 37 1999 -00 Transportation & General Government Committee 38 2000 Legislative Policies iii I o Municipal Revenue & °D Taxation (1) Levy Limits (1 -A) The AMM strongly opposes levy limits and urges the legislature to not re -enact them for 2001 or beyond. The AMM also opposes the imposition of artificial mechanisms such as valuation freezes, payroll freezes, reverse referenda, super majority requirements for levy, or other limitations to the local government budget and taxing process. Local Government Aid (I -B) Local Government Aid (LGA) returns a portion of statewide resources to supplement local property taxes. The AMM supports its continuation with an annual inflation index, along with additional state resources to further reduce the reliance on the property tax. In addition, any LGA formula changes considered by the legislature must have a positive impact on the metropolitan area. Homestead & Agricultural Credit Aid (I -C) The Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA) equals about 40 percent of the total local aid and should be continued as part of the local fiscal relationship, with an inflation or increased household growth factor restored for cities. The AMM strongly opposes the conversion of city HACA to school aid. Tax Exempt Property (I -D) The AMM encourages the legislature to authorize cities to establish a program of payments in lieu of taxes by tax exempt governmental and non - governmental organizations, except constitutionally exempt property (churches and schools) for the cost of services such as police, fire and streets to their facilities. 2000 Legislative Policies Revenue & Taxation Sales Tax on Local Government Purchases (I -E) The legislature should reinstate the sales tax exemption for all local government purchases without requiring a reduction in other aids. Development Access Fees (1 -F) The AMM supports authorization for cities to impose Development Access Fees for roads and stormwater control. In order to fairly provide for major street and stormwater improvements of primary benefit to a particular subdivision development but not directly assessable and to allocate cost so that new growth pays its fair share, the legislature should authorize cities to establish at their option a road and /or stormwater development access charge to be collected at the time that subdivisions are approved and /or at the time building permits are issued similar to park dedication fees. Price of Government (1 -G) The price of government calculation in regard to local governments should be based on (1) changes in the sum of the levy and state aids, and (2) examination of long -term trends, not single year events. In addition, consideration should be given to service provision transfers between governmental units, increased demand for services by citizens and legislative mandates or tax rate changes. Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution (1 -H) The AMM opposes the use of fiscal disparities to fund social or physical metropolitan programs since it results in a metropolitan -wide property tax increase hidden from the public. Personal Property Taxation: Electric Utility (1 -1) The AMM opposes proposals for exempting the Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs) from the personal property tax. Under no circumstances should local units of government and their taxpayers be required to shoulder the burdens of tax relief for IOUs. 2 ' 2000 Legislative Policies Revenue & Taxation The personal property tax is a significant portion of the metropolitan fiscal disparity pool and, if eliminated, would have a metropolitan -wide property tax impact. Revenue Diversification (W) The AMM supports revenue diversification for cities to reduce the reliance on local property taxes. Some examples include authorization for local sales taxes, payments in lieu of taxes, franchise fees, deed taxes to remain with city, development impact fees, or the creation of a separate income/ sales tax fund that would grow with the economy. The AMM opposes legislated reduction or limitation on various license fees, development fees, or other general fees which would force increased property tax to pay for related services. Class Rate Tax System (I -K) The AMM opposes a change from the class rate tax system to a market value system, which would cause tremendous shifts of tax burden between classes of property, or applying future levy increases to market value, since this would further complicate the property tax system. Limited Market Value (I -L) The AMM strongly opposes further extension of artificial limits in valuing property at market for property taxation purposes. Limiting market value increase on existing property to a non - market index or set rate will cause various property tax system problems. Similar properties will be taxed differently if new or sold and improvements will be discouraged. Tax shifts will occur mainly on lower valued homes and the ability to issue bonds may be adversely affected. Finally, it will be politically difficult as well as costly to persons owning long -term capped properties when it becomes necessary to sunset due to vast differences in tax liabilities for like properties. The AMM believes that enhanced targeting for special circumstances such as low- income persons better serves the tax system. 2000 Legislative Policies 3 Revenue & Taxation Funding Shifts (I -M) The AMM requests the legislature to continue to reduce the imbalance of aids versus revenue between metropolitan and outstate cities and to consider how this distribution of resources affects the economic growth and vitality of the metropolitan area, and thus the entire state. Currently in the metropolitan area, about 66 percent of the state revenue is collected, while only about 49 percent of the aids and credits are redistributed. City Revenue Stability & Fund Balance (I -N) The legislature should not attempt to control or restrict city fund balances. These funds are necessary to maintain fiscal viability to meet unexpected or emergency resource needs of city governments, to purchase capital goods and infrastructure, provide adequate cash flow and to maintain high -level bond ratings. 4 2000 Legislative Policies l General legislation (II) Mandates & Local Authority (II -A) The AMM opposes statutory changes which erode local control and authority or create mandated additional tasks requiring new or added local costs without a corresponding state appropriation or funding mechanism. New unfunded mandates cause increased property taxes which impedes the ability to fund traditional service needs. Public Right -of -Way (II -B) The AMM supports the continued effort of the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) to protect the authority of cities to maintain jurisdiction over municipal public rights -of -way, to establish relevant criteria and to obtain reasonable compensation for its degradation. County Plat Approval Authority (II -C) Cities oppose county authority over plat approval for plats that are contiguous to existing or proposed county roads. While counties have a valid interest in right -of -way and access decisions, this does not warrant a transfer of approval authority. 911 Telephone Tax (II -D) The AMM supports the current distribution of the 911 - access fee and the limit of 30 cents per line per month to offset basic maintenance costs and enhanced upgrade. Any fee granted legislatively in excess of 30 cents should be returned directly to the municipality or public safety answering provider (PSAP) where collected. Fee increases granted by the legislature should be a specific amount not a general authorization and only for a specific purpose. Phase 2 Wireless enhanced 911 costs should be recovered from a direct charge to cell phone users. 2000 Legislative Policies 5 General Legislation 800 MHz Radio System (II -E) The AMM supports the continuation of the Metropolitan 800 MHz Radio System legislation and board, as long as cities are not forced to modify their current systems or become part of the 800 MHz Radio System until they so choose. The system should provide a phased transition guaranteeing uninterrupted service and be technically capable of allowing communities the flexibility to form various coordinated arrangements for dispatching and service provision. In that one of the prime advantages of this system is the fact that local public safety agencies and other units of local government throughout the region will be able to communicate with each other, regional funding of the entire system should be considered. Any such funding should take into account the reasonable useful life of current systems. Permit Approval: Zoning (II -F) The permit approval statute delineating time limit requirements should be modified so that in the case of a rezoning application, a motion which requires a simple majority vote that extends action beyond the 60- or 120 -day time requirement, constitutes a denial not an approval in order to uphold the super majority requirement of the zoning statute. Current law provides automatic approval if no action is taken. Witness Fee Costs (ll -G) Since one -third of fines for city - related prosecutions remain with the county and adequately fund this cost, the AMM opposes shifting witness' fees from counties to cities for these actions. Elections: Alley System Authority (11 -H) The AMM supports permissive authority for statutory cities to adopt an alley system for filing for city council seats. 6 2000 Legislative Policies I Housing & Economic Development (III) - - -- Livable Communities Act (III -A) The 1995 Legislature enacted the Livable Communities Act (LCA) to stimulate housing and economic and community development in the metropolitan area. The act permits cities to access about $11.0 million in funding for pollution clean -up, housing and redevelopment. As a participant, a city must adopt affordable and life cycle housing goals and a plan to achieve the goals. Since its inception, the Metropolitan Council has been responsible • for program implementation, including the completion of an annual progress report. The report for the 1996 calendar year indicates progress toward achieving the stated goals but also raises concern regarding the preservation of affordable housing, particularly the demolition of housing units. The AMM has maintained that the LCA should not be amended until there are progress reports and experience with the LCA. Based on the reports and experience of cities, the AMM recommends: ♦ The LCA should be continued. ♦ The LCA should be amended to eliminate the requirement that a city annually elect to be a participant in the act and require by November 15 that a resolution to withdraw be approved. ♦ The state should appropriate funds for the LCA. The appropriation should not replace the current funding sources but should be in addition to them. ♦ The Metropolitan Council, in cooperation with the LCA participants, should develop a benchmark to measure a city's efforts to provide affordable housing. The benchmark should 2000 Legislative Policies 7 Housing & Economic Development replace the Affordable Life Cycle Housing Opportunity Amount (ALHOA). State Housing Policy (III -B) The AMM recognizes and is encouraged by the efforts of the legislature regarding the production and preservation of affordable housing. Over the past several sessions the legislature has provided the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) with additional funds to address housing issues. For example, the 1999 Legislature significantly increased the MHFA's biennial appropriation for housing production programs. While the state of Minnesota continues as a partner with local government in addressing housing issues the federal government, the traditional leader in housing policy development, has decreased its involvement in the issue. The federal government's lack of commitment has caused the other partners -- state and local governments -- to increase their housing commitments. The state and local efforts have made an impact but without a strong federal presence, the state and local efforts will be limited. Therefore, the AMM strongly encourages the federal government to be actively engaged in housing policy and programming. To continue the expansion of the state's economy, the governor and legislature should recognize the importance of housing to economic vitality and family stability and should adopt policies that preserve existing housing, permit the production of safe affordable housing and provide resources to produce and preserve housing. The AMM recommends the following: Land Use Standards and State Incentives ♦ Minnesota cities are responsible for and should retain the authority to regulate the location, size and amount, and type of housing within their boundaries. Minnesota cities, where the county has capacity, should partner with the county to provide affordable housing. ♦ The state, in an effort to encourage more affordable housing, should authorize cities on a voluntary basis and provide incentives for such concepts as density bonuses and mixes of housing types and price ranges. The incentives can be, but not 8 2000 Legislative Policies Housing & Economic Development be limited to, property tax class rates and sales tax exemptions for construction materials. ♦ State funding provided for the incentives should not reduce existing programs. ♦ Historically, the federal government has provided funding for housing production and rent subsidies. Over the last decade the federal government has reduced its funding commitment and has caused a shortage of affordable housing. Therefore, the AMM recommends that the federal government increase its participation and funding in housing. Housing Preservation (III -C) Housing preservation includes the maintenance of the existing rental and owner occupied housing, as well as the retention of affordable units that were formerly subsidized by federal programs. The state should: ♦ Continue and increase funding the housing preservation program for federalIv subsidized housing that could be converted to market rate housing. ♦ Expand efforts to provide resources for housing rehabilitation. ♦ Provide a sales tax exemption for construction supplies and materials used in the construction or substantial rehabilitation of affordable housing. ♦ Exempt public agencies from paying the mortgage and deed tax when developing or providing for affordable housing and redevelopment. Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Appropriation (III -D) The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's (MHFA) biennial general fund appropriation approximates $78.0 million. (The 1999 Legislature increased the general fund appropriation to $115.0 million.) The agency uses the funds for several housing programs including rental and homeownership. For the next biennium the agency should: 2000 Legislative Policies 9 Housing & Economic Development ♦ Have its appropriation increased and the increase be used primarily for housing preservation, housing production and homeless prevention programs. ♦ Redesign, if warranted and with city input, the Community Rehabilitation Program to encourage additional participation from the metropolitan area. The redesign, if needed, could include modification of the area designation, and appropriation set aside, a multiple year funding commitment, recognition of local needs, the timing of the application process, and a linkage to the LCA. Family & Elderly Housing (III -E) Demographic trends indicate that Minnesota's population is aging. For example, the Metropolitan Council projects that the region's population age 65 and older will nearly double from the year 2000 to 2020. Since most of the population owns single family housing and they will be smaller households there could be a demand for smaller housing units. The elderly population will also be older than their predecessors. In the metropolitan area, the Metropolitan Council reports that the number of persons age 75 and over will increase from approximately 110,000 in the year 2000 to 180,000 in 2020. Being aware of the trends, the legislature should: ♦ Provide additional resources to serve the low income elderly. Resources should include housing as well as related services. ♦ Direct state agencies to provide information and technical assistance to local governments regarding the population changes and their impacts on public services. ♦ Develop policies that encourage the development of housing for the elderly that is affordable and provides an attractive alternative to current housing and preserves the current housing. Economic Development Responsibilities (111 -F) The state should continue to recognize cities as the primary unit of government responsible for implementing economic development 10 2000 Legislative Policies Housing p & Economic Development policies and land use controls. New or amended economic development programs designed to address specific economic circumstances with cities or counties should use problem definition as the criteria rather than geographic location, city size or similar criteria. Tax Increment Financing (III -G) The 1999 Minnesota Legislature made several changes to the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Act. Among them were amendments relating to pooling, the use of increment for public facilities and the impact of property tax changes on TIF. Pooling ♦ Clarify that any tax increment districts approved between 1979 and 1982 have the same authority to pool increments as districts certified after 1982 and prior to April 1, 1990. ♦ Allow districts approved after April 1, 1990 to pool increments for affordable housing or pollution remediation. Local Effort ♦ Eliminate the LGA /HACA penalty or allow an exception from levy limits. If the penalty is not eliminated, the restrictions on the source of payment should be removed. ♦ Authorize the use of federal grants and other local funds for local contributions. TIF Use ♦ Exempt redevelopment districts from the five -year rule. ♦ Reaffirm that cities alone should be authorized to approve city initiated tax increment districts and that counties and school districts should continue to have the ability to review and comment on TIF. ♦ Permit all cities to establish housing replacement (scattered site) districts and allow TIF to be used for historic preservation. 2000 Legislative Policies Housing & Economic Development Housing ♦ Modify the housing district income qualification requirements to allow the levels to vary according to individual regions of the state or counties. ♦ Remove the LGA /HACA penalty imposed on housing districts established between 1990 and 1993. Reporting ♦ Authorize the publication of TIF financial information in a format so that it provides taxpayers with useful information. ♦ Clarify that the Office of State Auditor (OSA) must give cities 60 days to respond to a violation of the TIF law prior to sending a notice of the violation to the county attorney. The notice to the city must also state that at the end of the 60 -day period any resolved issues will be sent to the county attorney for possible action. ♦ Require the county attorney to decide on action regarding violation within ninety days of receipt of the notice from the OSA. ♦ Authorize the OSA to conduct a compliance review of a tax increment district within 12 months of the date the district is decertified or the increment is completely expended, whichever is later. The State Auditor, upon completion of the review and resolution of outstanding issues, must issue a certification that the district is complete and not subject to further actions by the office. ♦ Clarify that an error of a non - substantive manner is not a violation of the law and therefore the city should not be formally cited for a violation of the reporting provisions of the TIF Act. ♦ Require that the OSA provide reporting entities with a checklist of specific items that will be part of a compliance or final review of a district. 12 2000 Legislative Policies Housing & Economic Development ♦ Redraft the reporting section of the TIF law to simplify the TIF reporting forms, consolidate reports and request similar information for the reports submitted annually to the State Auditor. Property Tax Reform Impact on TIF (III -H) During the past two legislative sessions, the property tax class rates have been compressed and as a result commercial industrial property taxes should decrease. The decrease could also result in revenue shortfalls in TIF districts. The shortfalls could impact bond payments and other contractual obligations. Being aware of the impact, the 1997 Legislature authorized a $2.0 million grant program to be administered by the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the 1998 Legislature authorized cities to establish special service districts to offset possible shortfalls. Being aware of the impacts, the legislature should: ♦ Authorize the grant program for 1998 tax change impacts in addition to the 1997 tax changes. ♦ Provide additional funding for the program and extend the sunset to the year 2003. ♦ Include the changes in class rate definitions such as maximum market value limits and number of parcels per class in the calculations to determine class rate compression impacts. ♦ Move the application and payment dates to coincide with the city budget time frames. ♦ Permit city councils to transfer funds from one city development agency to another to prevent shortfalls due to property tax changes or TIF law changes that would result in a deficit in paying outstanding contracts or obligations. Development Tools (III -1) Over the past several sessions, the legislature has provided cities with development tools to redevelop property, clean up polluted sites and encourage business retention and expansion. The tools include, but are not limited to, TIF, tax expenditures and loans and 2000 Legislative Policies 13 Housing & Economic Development grants. Many of the state tools have supplemented local efforts. To continue this state local relationship, the legislature should: ♦ Continue the Minnesota Investment Fund. ♦ Support increased funding for the pollution clean -up program administered by the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development (DTED). ♦ Require condemnation commissioners to consider the cost of correcting pollution problems in determining the final value of property. ♦ Establish an indemnification fund to provide financial security for institutions and individuals as they invest in developing and clean -up of polluted sites. ♦ Eliminate the requirement to match a portion of the clean -up grant program with local general funds. ♦ Make permanent the Redevelopment Fund established in 1998. Welfare Reform/Workforce Readiness (III -J) In developing workforce policies, the legislature has considered the impact of such factors as the robust economy and federal welfare reform. The economy has produced employment opportunities in several business sectors that are not being satisfied due to the lack of skilled workers. To address this issue the legislature has responded by restructuring and expanding its workforce programs to meet the needs of the state's employees. With the passage of federal welfare reform and enactment of Minnesota's new welfare program - the Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP), public policy is placing an emphasis on work and job readiness. The purpose of MFIP is intended to support work and not to replace income when people are not working. To accomplish the goal of getting people to work Minnesota has adopted a work first program that expects, supports and rewards work. 14 2000 Legislative Policies Housing & Economic Development Among the program elements established by the legislature to implement MFIP are jobs training, transportation, medical assistance and housing. As MFIP is being implemented statewide, the state is experiencing record low unemployment and economic growth, and as a result there are now employment opportunities. If the economy, however, declines, employment opportunities for MFIP participants will decrease and the state's human service system could be over extended. Being aware that a trained work force is a major part of an economic development strategy the legislature should: I ♦ Provide state funding to match the maximum amount of available federal training funds. ♦ Continue and increase funding for state job training programs including Pathways and the Job Training Partnership. ♦ Modify the Pathways Program to provide public agencies with the flexibility to contract with training programs of employers, as well as those of public institutions. ♦ Continue and increase funding for the transportation and childcare programs including sliding fee daycare. ♦ Examine the delivery system for state services (training, daycare) to determine and ensure that administrative procedures are implemented uniformly throughout the state. ♦ Continue the policy of nor reducing a person's or household's MFIP monthly grant if they are residents of the public or section 8 housing. Business Subsidy (III -K) The Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development (DTED) and local governments provide financial incentives to businesses to relocate, expand or remain in the state or specific city. The provision of the incentives is usually part of a development agreement between the business and the public entity. The agreement contains a description of the incentive and the type of development to be completed in terms of market value or square 2000 Legislative Policies 15 Housing & Economic Development footage and penalties for non - performance. The agreements also contain job and wage goals as required by current Minnesota law. In reviewing the issue of corporate subsidy the legislature should: ♦ Clarify the reporting requirements in terms of time frames and reporting entity. ♦ Exclude redevelopment and housing TIF districts from the reporting requirements of current law. ♦ Maintain the reporting of job and wage goals in current law but do not require a specific wage amount. ♦ The Business Subsidy Law approved by the 1999 Legislature will need to be amended during the 2000 Session. The amendments are needed so that DTED and the cities can implement the act. Among the amendments that should be adopted by the legislature are: 1. The exclusion of tax exempt revenue bonds issued on behalf of a non - profit entity. The bonds are used to finance such facilities as health care and housing and the bonds are not included in the existing federal bond limits. 2. Clarify that pollution clean -up, soils projects and rehabilitation of buildings exempted as a business subsidy does not need to submit a report to DTED. 3. Define that the rehabilitation of buildings does not include the rehabilitation of housing. 4. Eliminate the requirement that the business receiving the subsidy must continue to operate at the same site for at least five years. 5. Provide DTED with an appropriation to implement the law. Building Permit Fee Surcharge (III -L) Local governments collect a half - percent surcharge on building permits. The proceeds of the surcharge are paid to the state and are used to support the State Building Codes and Standards Division. 16 2000 Legislative Policies Housing & Economic Development Prior to 1991, any excess proceeds were remitted on a prorate basis to the local governments. To help with the development of affordable housing it is recommended that: ♦ The proceeds from the building permit surcharge fee be paid to the MHFA for the support of affordable housing and that the building codes and standards division be funded from the state general fund. Group Homes (ill -M) ♦ State and county agencies must provide timely notification to cities of facility license requests and renewals and provide adequate opportunity to respond. Cities must also be aware of the special care needed by residents of such facilities in case of public safety emergencies. ♦ Clustering of community residential facilities because of economic, geographic or other factors should be avoided. Standards of non - concentration for state or county- issued Requests for Proposals (RFPs) should be established. ♦ There must be an ongoing screening process, particularly in the correction area, to insure that persons placed in a residential facility will benefit from such an environment and will not be a danger to themselves or others. The licensing authority must be responsible for removing any person found incapable of living peacefully in such an environment. ♦ Facilities licensed by the corrections department should not be exempt from reasonable local land use regulations. ♦ A fair share concept should be considered within the metropolitan area. However, this concept should consider other factors including transportation facilities, job availability and other needed support services. ♦ The licensing authority and /or legislature should allow cities to participate in the search for facility locations in order to meet needs of the providers, facility residents and the neighborhood. 2000 Legislative Policies 17 Metropolitan Agencies Introduction: Metropolitan Governance Structure The Metropolitan Council was established in 1967 to coordinate "the planning and development" of the seven county metropolitan area. To fulfill its responsibilities, the Metropolitan Council has worked with local governments to establish policies regarding growth and development in the region. Over the years, the Metropolitan Council has been authorized by the legislature to be involved in the development of regional parks and the operation of regional services. In the following y e ars the Metropolitan Council was mostly advisory, but was given responsibility for regional policy development and coordination in the areas of wastewater treatment, transportation and airports. The Metropolitan Council was given limited approval authority for development proposals, which were of metropolitan (regional) significance but was not given direct operational authority. The Metropolitan Council's responsibilities have been expanded over the years. The Metropolitan Council was given direct operational responsibility for regional transit and wastewater treatment in 1994. In the following year, the legislature directed the Metropolitan Council to implement the Livable Communities Act (LCA). The Metropolitan Council's role with the LCA is to negotiate affordable and life cycle housing goals for cities and provide grant funds for the clean -up of polluted lands and demonstration projects that foster a mix of land uses and housing types. The Metropolitan Council's role has evolved since its inception to long -range planning and the operation of regional services. 2000 Legislative Policies 19 Metropolitan Agencies Purpose of Metropolitan Governance (IV -A) The AMM affirms its support for the existence of a metropolitan governance system to deal with appropriate regional issues and concerns. The purpose of the metropolitan governance system should be: ♦ To facilitate region -wide planning with the cooperation and consideration of the affected local units. ♦ To provide certain region -wide services that do not duplicate those that can be provided by local governmental units, either individually or jointly. ♦ To fulfill other specific responsibilities mandated by the state and federal governments. Regionally Provided Services: Funding (IV -B) The Metropolitan Council should continue to fund its regional services and activities through the existing combination of user fees, property taxes, and state and federal grants. The current revenue system provides better visibility to the customers. The Metropolitan Council should be responsible for determining user fees. The fees should be consistent with regional system plans and goals assure that the service quality can be of high quality as measured by industry or public policy standards and be established by an open, visible procedure including, but not limited to, public notice and hearings. A clear linkage between revenue and service should be maintained. Fee proceeds from one service should not be used to fund another regional service. Regional Systems (IV -C) The regional investment in metropolitan systems must be maintained and preserved by preventing adverse impact because of the lack of integration and coordination between regional and local planning. 20 2000 Legislative Policies Metropolitan Agencies Regional system designation should only be approved if there is a compelling metropolitan problem or concern that can best be addressed through the designation. Prior to requesting legislative approval for a system, the Metropolitan Council must discuss the proposal with the region. Coordination of Local & Regional Plans (IV -D) The regional planning process must, on a continual basis, have the input of local government officials. To ensure input, the Metropolitan Council should hold hearings and provide public notice and copies of proposals regarding amendments to the Metropolitan Development Guide. Metropolitan system plans must be specific in terms of locations, capacities and timing to allow for consideration in local comprehensive planning. System plans should clearly state the criteria by which the local plans will be judged for consistency. The system plans should also clearly state the criteria that will be used to find that a local plan has a substantial impact on or contains a substantial departure from the metropolitan system plans. The Metropolitan Council should continue to offer assistance to cities. The assistance should include but not be limited to staff support, research, policy guidelines, system statements and procedures for the review and evaluation of plans and amendments. The Metropolitan Council, in its review of local plan amendments, must have a procedure that will: ♦ Recognize that the Metropolitan Council's role is to review and comment, unless there is a substantial impact on or departure from the system plans. ♦ Establish an open dialogue between cities and the Metropolitan Council, including public meetings and public hearings. ♦ Be aware of the statutory time constraints imposed by the legislature on plan amendments and development applications. 2000 Legislative Policies 21 Metropolitan Agencies ♦ Provide for immediate effectuation of plan amendments, which have no potential for substantial impact on systems plans. ♦ Require the information needed for the Metropolitan Council to complete its review, but not prescribe additional content or format beyond that is required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act (MLPA). Growth Management Strategy (IV -E) The Metropolitan Council should continue its flexible guided growth policy regarding Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) expansion requests as outlined in the Regional Blueprint. The Metropolitan Council in cooperation with State Planning and the counties adjacent to the region should develop growth management strategies for the collar counties. The strategies should focus on policies that can be implemented by local governments within the adjacent counties and state agencies rather than extending the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Council to additional counties. All strategies should complement and recognize growth policies being implemented within the region. ♦ If regional services are to be extended to the collar counties, the services should only be extended if there is a specific problem (environment or transportation) that can be best resolved by extending the service. The area receiving the services must pay for the service extension and agree to growth management strategies consistent with those of the metropolitan area. ♦ In developing and providing incentives for implementing its regional objectives, the Metropolitan Council should consider and give credit for a city's experience in implementing its comprehensive plan and the Metropolitan Council's Regional Blueprint. Local Plan Implementation (IV -F) Local governments are responsible for zoning. These zoning decisions should not be conditioned upon approvals by the Metropolitan Council or other governmental agency. The AMM is open to the use of alternative dispute resolution procedures prior to judicial remedies. 22 2000 Legislative Policies Metropolitan Agencies Alternative dispute resolution could reduce costs and time for all parties involved in the dispute. The AMM strongly opposes the creation of an appeals board that could supersede city planning or zoning decisions. Metropolitan Council Focus on Planning (IV -G) Long -range planning should continue to be the primary function of the Metropolitan Council. In conducting long -range planning, the Metropolitan Council should periodically update and revise the vision for the region. As part of its long -range planning, the Metropolitan Council should include analysis of trends, plans, policies and programs that could impact or link the regional growth centers in Greater Minnesota to the metropolitan area. In addition to its long -range planning function, the Metropolitan Council should maintain and expand its technical and research services to cities. The services should assist cities in completing its planning mandates but also in conducting special studies and projects. For cities to meet their planning mandates, the Metropolitan Council must ensure that its planning, data collection and dissemination functions are fulfilled in a timely manner and are consistent with its statutory obligations. Budget Process & Work Program Evaluation (IV -H) The Metropolitan Council's annual budget should present revenue and expenditure budgets by the services provided. Mandated and non - discretionary projects should be identified along with their funding sources. Previous year's history should also be provided. The annual budget should maintain linkages between expenses and revenues. In addition, the funds or reserve funds raised for a particular service should not be used or commingled with the funds raised for any other service or activity. The Metropolitan Council's work program should meet four tests: ♦ The issue or problem identified is important to the region's well - being. 2000 Legislative Policies 23 Metropolitan Agencies ♦ Metropolitan Council intervention or activity will produce a positive result. ♦ The Metropolitan Council's action does not duplicate or serve as a substitute for a state level program or effort or what should be a state level activity. ♦ The Metropolitan Council is the most appropriate agency to intervene or perform the activity. Criteria for Extension of Metropolitan Governance Authority (IV -1) The legislature, if granting the metropolitan governance structure additional responsibility or authority, should be specific in the grant. New or expanded authority should be considered only when one or more of the following exist: ♦ The service, function or activity has been shown to be needed and it can be demonstrated that it cannot or is not being effectively or efficiently provided through existing general purpose units of government. ♦ The service, function or activity is not an appropriate state level or local government level activity or function. ♦ Regional intervention is needed for protection of the region's investment in an existing metropolitan system. Restructuring of Metropolitan Agencies (IV -J) The Sports Facilities Commission and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) are currently metropolitan commissions. The legislature should make the sports facility commission a local commission if the back -up tax is limited to one city or is expanded to additional cities. If the tax is extended to other cities, the commission should be restructured to have membership from those cities. The legislature should clarify the status of the MAC so that it becomes either a metropolitan or state directed agency. The determining factor in the agency decision is the nature of the commissions back -up tax. If the tax will be a metropolitan area tax, its membership hould come from the metropolitan p po tan area. If the 24 2000 Legislative Policies Metropolitan Agencies back -up tax is statewide, then the MAC should have statewide representation. In selecting membership on the MAC board, the governor should give primary consideration for representation from communities impacted by the operations of the MAC airports. Metropolitan Council: Method to Select Members (IV -K) The legislature has debated proposals to amend the process to select Metropolitan Council members. Proposals to elect the members directly or to elect county commissioners as Metropolitan Council members have been discussed but not enacted into law. The AMM has studied the governance issue and has released a separate "Metropolitan Governance Report" (October 1998). The report notes that there is no regional crisis that requires a governance change, but did recommend that Metropolitan Council members serve fixed, staggered terms. The AMM further recommends that no changes be made to the Metropolitan Council unless a governance proposal meets a set of criteria. The intent of the criteria is to fashion a regional governance structure that has a distinct mission, but does not establish a political subdivision with local government powers or one that is a state agency. The Metropolitan Council should have a distinct mission of long -range planning and operation of legislatively - authorized regional services. The criteria include: Terms of Office Members should serve fixed, staggered terms. Metropolitan Council Pozoers The Metropolitan Council should continue to be a long- range, planning agency and potentially an operator or oversight agency for regional services. As such, the Metropolitan Council must maintain planning, coordinating and local assistance as a high priority. 2000 Legislative Policies 25 Metropolitan Agencies Additional Powers New powers must not expand or override city responsibilities, especially land use regulation authority. The Metropolitan Council must not become an agency with general local government powers. State Role The legislature should focus on broad oversight of the Metropolitan Council's mission and services. Local Government Local elected officials must be involved in the selection process of Metropolitan Council members and there must be a mechanism to facilitate meaningful dialogue and input between the Metropolitan Council and cities. Collar Counties The metropolitan region clearly includes the seven designated counties and the adjacent eleven Minnesota counties, as well as three Wisconsin counties. The needs of the entire metropolitan region beyond the current seven county region must be addressed. Metropolitan Council Members The selection process must strive to appoint Metropolitan Council members who have an understanding of and will be responsive to the district represented, as well as be responsive to the best interests of the region. The selection process should limit the potential influence and support (including financial) of special interests. Parks & Open Space: Operation & Maintenance Capital Funding (IV -L) The governor and the legislature should continue to appropriate funding for the operation and maintenance of regional parks. The level of funding should be equal to the statutory goal of 40 percent of the total budget. Regional parks essentially serve the role of state parks in the metropolitan area and the acquisition, development and improvement of the parks should continue to be funded, in part, with state resources. 26 2000 Legislative Policies Metropolitan Agencies Surface & Groundwater Water Management (IV -M) If legislation is considered for surface water management, it should be based on the following principles: ♦ The legislature should provide full funding if it mandates additional water management planning or implementing activities by local units of government. ♦ Local units of government should continue to be responsible for the organization and operation of surface and groundwater management, since they are the closest to the problem. Therefore, legislation enacted in 1999 limiting representation on boards of Water Management Organizations (WMOs) should be repealed. ♦ New state requirements should not add to local costs and duplicate reviews/ approvals should be reduced or eliminated. The AMM would support the following initiatives/ action: ♦ A state grant program similar to those currently administered by the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BOWSR) should be established to assist WMOs in the metropolitan area to implement their plans. ♦ The legislature should clarify that the joint power WMOs can, with the approval of its participating governments, separately levy a tax for its programs. ♦ A thorough assessment of the BOWSR structure and authorities to ascertain if it should continue to be the approval and oversight agency for surface water management planning and activities in the metropolitan area. ♦ A thorough assessment of the metropolitan area surface water management planning and permitting process with the objective of developing improvements in conflict resolution, better coordination between state and local agencies, and streamlining the project permit approvals process. ♦ Compliance by local units of government located outside of the metropolitan area with the same standards and requirements 2000 Legislative Policies 27 Metropolitan Agencies for surface water management as those imposed on local units within the metropolitan area. ♦ A technical evaluation of the impact of 2:1 wetland replacement in the urbanized area on the goal of greater urban densities as stated in the Metropolitan Council's Regional Blueprint. Water Supply (IV -N) Additional legislation pertaining to local or regional water supply planning is not warranted. If legislation, however, is proposed it should be based on the following principles: ♦ Local units should retain the basic responsibility for water supply planning and management as in current law. ♦ The state should fund additional mandates. ♦ Potable water should not be designated a regional system. Regional Wastewater (Sewer) Treatment System (IV-0) The regional wastewater treatment system has improved the water quality of the region's major river and lakes. The system should not be permitted to break up or to diminish its effectiveness. Since all users benefit equally, the regional user rates should be uniform by type of user. Waste Stream Management (IV -P) The legislature should enact legislation which will: ♦ Establish goals to reduce, recycle and reuse packaging materials and establish fees, taxes or deposits to encourage accomplishment of the goals. The revenues would be waived when the goals are met. Available revenues would be used to promote or enhance local programs to achieve the goals. ♦ Continue the Office of Environmental Assistance (OEA) as an agency that primarily assists local governments to manage waste effectively. 28 2000 Legislative Policies Metropolitan Agencies ♦ Continue the role of cities in waste stream management unless a state or metropolitan system is established to achieve the same goal. ♦ Distribute all proceeds from any funding system for solid waste management activities and require distribution of funds to all entities involved in the system. ♦ Provide that host communities for solid waste facilities will not have a financial liability for costs associated with operating and monitoring the facility. Such costs should be borne by the operator and in the absence of regulations should be assumed by the state. ♦ Maintain, at a minimum, the current compensation level permitted through surcharge fees and increase the level as well as making the compensation available to all types of solid waste facilities. ♦ Define municipal solid waste not to be a hazardous substance. The definition would enhance the ability of local governments. 2000 Legislative Policies 29 Trans ortation p (V) Transportation Funding (V -A) The AMM strongly supports increased funding for transit and highways, both of which are a critical need in the metropolitan area. In addition, funding for mass transit including transit ways, light rail or heavy rail in existing corridors should be dedicated in a manner consistent with current highway funding. Funds allocated to the metropolitan area should be flexible so that the most efficient and cost effective transportation solution may be chosen and the main metropolitan problem (congestion relief) can be addressed. The AMM opposes any reduction to the sources of current constitutionally dedicated transportation funds including auto license tab fees, unless equivalent replacement funding is also constitutionally dedicated to the current or a new multimodal transportation fund. If an alternative to the transit property tax in the metropolitan area is adopted, current opt -out transit systems should continue to be funded at comparable levels. Regional Transit System (V -B) In order to reduce congestion and automobile dependency the Regional Transit System should be a combination of integrated traffic management systems which include use of HOV lanes, express buses, exclusive transit ways, light rail transit, and commuter rail corridors built to connect residents to job, retail and commercial centers, plus a variety of other transit modes, including taxi, bus, pedestrian and bicycle. The AMM supports an increase in Metropolitan Transit Funding of at least $3.7 million for the current biennium so that the present system can be maintained. 2000 Legislative Policies 3 Transportation Park - and -ride facilities for mass transit modes adequate to connect the regional centers, major trip generators and communities, both urban and suburban, should have integrated feeder systems to accommodate local buses, automobiles, van pools, bicycles, as well as walking facilities. The Metropolitan Council should work with local units of government to encourage appropriate land use controls along designated transit corridors to promote transit ridership. Motion Imaging Recording System (M.I.R.S.): Traffic Law Compliance (V -C) The AMM requests legislative action authorizing utilization of motion imaging recording system technology for governmental units, including cities, on streets and highways to assist promotion of safety and traffic law compliance enforcement. The technology has been proven and is currently used for law enforcement by numerous states, municipalities and other countries. The state should consider a pilot project on municipal streets in the metropolitan area. Transportation Utility (V -D) The AMM requests the legislature to authorize cities to establish a transportation utility for street maintenance and reconstruction of aging infrastructure, similar to the existing storm water utility, so that costs of improved facilities can be more fairly charged to the users rather than the general population as a whole. Highway Turnbacks & Funding (V -E) The AMM supports jurisdictional reassignment or turnback of roads on a phased basis using functional classification and other appropriate criteria subject to a corresponding mechanism for adequate funding of roadway improvements and continuing maintenance. Cities do not currently have the financial capacity other than significant property tax increase gn p p t ease to absorb the additional roadway responsibilities without new funding sources. The existing municipal turnback fund is not adequate based on contemplated turnbacks. 32 2000 Legislative Policies Transportation '3C' Transportation Planning Process: Elected Officials Role (V -F) The AMM supports continuation of the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB), a majority of local elected officials membership on the TAB itself and the TAB process, which was developed to meet federal requirements for designation of the Metropolitan Council as the Metropolitan Planning Organization that is responsible for the continuous, comprehensive and cooperative (3C) transportation planning process to allocate federal funds among metropolitan area projects. This process requirement was reinforced by the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and the 1998 Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century (TEA21). Airport Noise Mitigation (V -G) In 1996, the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) was charged with developing a mitigation package for legislative consideration in 1997, but the package was never developed. Costs associated with all types of noise mitigation should be borne by the airport (MAC) and the state since the airport is considered a statewide facility and provides tremendous economic benefit to the region. That benefit does not come without responsibility to those adversely impacted. The airport and state should seek additional funding mechanisms on a yearly basis. Funding may include, but is not limited to, those funds recommended by the 1999 -2000 Governor's Community Stability Funding Task Force. Equitable noise mitigation programs need to be developed to address the increased traffic and noise due to the expansion of the MSP International Airport. Impacts, including environmental and low frequency noise, must be identified at all MAC airports and applicable mitigation measures implemented by MAC. By 2003, the year the new North/ South runway will be operational, the Environmental Quality Board should establish guidelines for airport noise (including low frequency) in consultation with the MAC, Metropolitan Council, MSP Noise Mitigation Committee and affected cities. Noise mitigation programs should not only be implemented as soon as possible to the 60 DNL —as enacted by the legislature in 1996, but extended as far as the 55 DNL. 2000 Legislative Policies 33 Committee Rosters (VI) Housing & Economic Development Craig Waldron (Chair), Administrator, Oakdale Janis Callison, Councilmember, Minnetonka Dave Callister, Clerk- Administrator, Osseo Mike Campbell, IGR Director, St. Paul Tom Goodwin, Councilmember, Apple Valley Regina Harris, HRA Director, Bloomington Andrea Hart Kajer, IGR Director, Minneapolis Brian Herron, Councilmember, Minneapolis Nancy Mancino, Mavor, Chanhassen Lonni McCauley, Mayor, Coon Rapids Joan Molenaar, Councilmember, Champlin Ron Rankin, Community Development Director, Minnetonka Don Rye, Planning Director, Prior Lake Char Samuelson, Councilmember, New Brighton Mark Sather, Manager, White Bear Lake Betty Sindt, Councilmember, Lakeville Kathy Thurber, Councilmember, Minneapolis Jerry Turnquist, Councilmember, Oak Park Heights Liz Workman, Councilmember, Burnsville 2000 Legislative Policies 35 Committee Rosters Metropolitan Agencies Sandra Krebsbach (Chair), Councilmember, Mendota Heights Mary Anderson, Mayor, Golden Valley Bill Barnhart, Government Relations Representative, Minneapolis Kevin Batchelder, Administrator, Mendota Heights Cathy Busho, Mayor, Rosemount Joan Campbell, Councilmember, Minneapolis W. Peter Enck, Mayor, New Hope Matt Fulton, Manager, New Brighton Ken Hartung, Administrator, Bayport Susan Hoyt, Administrator, Falcon Heights Anne Hurlburt, Director of Community Development, Plymouth Marvin Johnson, Mayor, Independence Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator, Prior Lake Larry Lee, Director of Community Development, Bloomington Tom Link, Director of Development & Prot. Serv., Inver Grove Heights Paul Malone, Councilmember, Arden Hills Lynn Moratzka, Councilmember, Hastings Mark Nagel, Manager, Anoka Dave Schaaf, Mayor, Oak Park Heights Terry Schneider, Councilmember, Minnetonka Charlotte Shover, Councilmember, Burnsville Russ Susag, Councilmember, Richfield Chuck Whiting, Administrator, Mounds View Donn Wiski, Councilmember, Roseville I 36 2000 Legislative Policies Committee Rosters Municipal Revenue & Taxation Frank Boyles (Chair), Manager, Prior Lake Karen Anderson, Mayor, Minnetonka Leslie Anderson, Director of Finance, Burnsville Larry Bakken, Councilmember, Golden Valley Curt Boganey, Manager, Brooklyn Park Edward Burrell, Treasurer & Finance Director, Roseville Thomas Burt, Administrator, Rosemount Dave Childs, Manager, Minnetonka Tom Cran, Budget Analysis, St. Paul Dan Faust, Finance Director, Maplewood John Gretz, Administrator Apple Valley Terri Heaton, Chief Finance Officer, Bloomington Jon Hohenstein, Administrator, Mahtomedi James Keinath, Administrator, Circle Pines Nancy Mancino, Mayor, Chanhassen Peter Meintsma, Mayor, Crystal Tom Melena, Administrator, Oak Park Heights John Moir, Finance Officer, Minneapolis Mike Mornson, Manager, St. Anthony Jim Norman, Administrator, Ramsey Steve O'Malley, Deputy City Manager, Burnsville Ryan Schroeder, Administrator, Cottage Grove Jerry Splinter, Manager, Coon Rapids Deb Sturdevant, Councilmember, Champlin Kathy Thurber, Councilmember, Minneapolis Gene Van Overbeke, Finance Director, Eagan 2000 Legislative Policies 37 Committee Rosters John Wallin, Finance Director, Edina John Weaver, Councilmember, Anoka Jim Willis, Administrator, Inver Grove Heights Transportation & General Government Veid Muiznieks (Chair), Councilmember, St. Paul Park Dick Allendorf, Councilmember, Minnetonka Gene Anderson, Councilmember, St. Paul Park Bill Barnhart, Government Relations Representative, Minneapolis Lyle Berg, Engineer Traffic & Transportation, Bloomington Scott Botcher, Manager, Chanhassen Bob Bruton, Councilmember, North St. Paul Mike Campbell, IGR Director, St. Paul Charlie Crichton, Councilmember, Burnsville Dan Donahue, Manager, New Hope Jerry Dulgar, Manager, Crystal Wayne Houle, Assistant Engineer, Edina Barbara Johnson, Councilmember, Minneapolis Steve Larson, Councilmember, New Brighton Charles Lenthe, Director of Public Works, Blaine Jan LeSuer, Councilmember, Golden Valley Sandra Masin, Councilmember, Eagan Mark McNeill, Administrator, Shakopee Dore Mead, Councilmember, Minneapolis Jerry Newton, Councilmember, Coon Rapids Dave Schaaf, Mayor, Oak Park Heights Ceil Smith, Assistant to City Manager, Edina James Snuth, Councilmember, Independence 38 2000 Legislative Policies Committee Rosters John Weaver, Councilmember, Anoka Dawn Weitzel, Community/ Special Project Assistant, Richfield Donn Wiski, Councilmember, Roseville Bret Woodson, Assistant City Manager, Prior Lake Duan Zaun, Mayor, Lakeville 2000 Legislative Policies 39 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. McCauley City Manager Date: October 21, 1999 Re: Evaluation This item is on the agenda to discuss the format and timing for my annual evaluation and salary review. Attached is a copy of the form that was used last year, the format of reporting I used last year regarding the Council goals and major projects, and a spreadsheet of salary comparisons using the same group of cities used by the Financial Commission to review Council salaries, along with an article regarding the starting salary for the new manager in Richfield. I would like to have the Council determine how it wishes to proceed with the evaluation process. That is: - do you want to use the same form for council? - when and how do you wish to meet regarding the evaluation? - do you want a recap from me similar to last year prior to your review, or would you like different or additional information? I 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 EVALUATION FORM 1. City Council goals: - Has the City Manager worked to implement and facilitate adopted City Council goals? Generally Yes Partially No Comments: 2. Administrative Support for City Council: - Has the City Manager provided the City Council with background and other information to allow the Council to make informed decisions? Generally Yes Partially No Comments: - Has the City Manager assisted the City Council in clarifying complex issues and understanding administrative, legal and procedural requirements? Generally Yes Partially No Comments: 3. Chief Administrative Officer duties: - Has the City Manager provided administrative oversight and direction in the following areas: - City Fiscal affairs (budget, expenditures) - City operations - City projects - City Enterprise operations Generally Yes Partially No Comments: 4. Community Issues - Has the City Manager worked effectively with other governmental bodies (legislature, school districts, etc.) and responded to citizen service needs? Generally Yes Partially No Comments: 1999 Cities in Compensation Policy Comparison for City Council Salaries Population Mayor Council City Manager Car Allowan Total w /car Golden Valley 20,870 $9,642 $7,217 $102,960 $435 $108,180 Maplewood 34,008 $9,625 $8,470 $98,712 $450 $104,112 Fridley 28,267 $8,400 $6,100 $99,528 $278 $102,864 Richfield 35,120 $7,762 $6,025 $96,000 $350 $100,200 New Hope 21,698 $9,459 $6,694 $94,140 $650 $101,940 Roseville 34,014 $7,800 $6,000 $95,004 $275 $98,304 Crystal 23,667 $7,956 $6,120 $91,764 $425 $96,864 White Bear Lake 26,017 $7,680 $5,400 $93,096 $300 $96,696 Brooklyn Center 28,484 $8,220 $6,165 $88,000 $300 $91,600 Shoreview 26,118 $7,740 $5,736 $86,544 $275 $89,844 Average $8,428 $6,393 $94,575 $374 $99,060 Median $8,088 $6 $94,572 $325 $99,252 Brookl Ce a per ce nt o I Average 97.53% 96.44% 93.05% 93.63% 92.47% Median 101.63% 100.90% 93.05% 92.31% 92.29% was u.u11— _ - which is collecting donations for a n si nr that if Minnesotans want- Ventura initiated the fund, Bugg the could donate ed a new stadium for the Twins or Vikings, Y ����i money from their sales- at he rebates. ould � contributi grto trs�ngea _ ` " Ventura announced th b id for with p rivate funds, not alf of the peote killed in rah crashes ;> >: his belief that a stadium should be pa drn seat baits, the peroentagd of. drl `_::. state funds. has not increasedin �?.X ar On Tuesday, the commission received 50 checks, totaling iveyafaatbeltusage;eachAugst $9,102.66, bringing total contributions to the stadium fund to $28,290.0 from 203 individuals. —lay Weiner - Richfield is step closer to new manager <:. complete the hiring of The Richfield City Council is expected to comp Samantha orduno as city man ager tonight. NOW= Y` `' ` The council voted 5 -0 Monday to offer a salary of $96,000 a year ` er of Carpinteria, Calif. The council then to Orduno, the city manag continued its meeting until 6 p.m. today, when a response from expected, said Steve Devich, acting city manager. Orduno is If the deal is approved, she would begin her new lob in mid- ;.:..:. October. o f Car interia for four yeazs. 1 has been city manager P worked more Orduno, 5 ,- Public safety officials say other Before decade for Twin Cities states have seen belt use increase -are. a suburbsShe�was trator in Mounds View, assistant to the city manager of New than a by 10 to 15 percent after passing officers stop vehicles B and management assistant in Fridley. with Jaws letting offi Bngh ro i commercial solely to check seat -belt usage. A sad co Richfield has more than 34,200 residents and is s truggling bill to allow such stops in Minne- several redevelopment issues, 35W and 494 and no se- related housing sota failed last session. area near Interstate Hwy Beers said the state fine for not removal and reconstruction near Minneapolis -St. Paul Internation using a be is $25, but additional Da Wascoe Jr. local fees can bring the total fine to about $70,' City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. To: Mayor Kragness and Council Members Carmody, Hilstrom, Lasman and Peppe From: Michael J. McCaule City Manager Date: August 24th Re: Evaluation 1. Goals. The following is a re -cap of major projects /events for the period October 1997 through September 1998. BROOKDALE • met with Talisman representatives a number of times • worked with Springsted in analyzing several sets of financial information from Talisman • special legislation for special taxing district • meetings with Interfaith Action • numerous telephone conversations with Talisman, Springsted etc. • meetings with Metro Transit, including meeting at Legislature • new bond counsel • Regional Pond - ground breaking, and grand opening • meetings with Hennepin County and legislative staff POLICE/FIRE BUILDINGS • final open house in October • passage of bond referendum • sale of bonds - retention of bond rating - Mr. Remiarz issues on bond sale • construction management/architect design • site acquisition from EDA LEGISLATURE • numerous meetings and conversations from beginning of year into April • respond to 4d property issues, right to know proposed legislation, & proposed limited market value for commercial property 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 BUDGET • 5 year Capital Improvement Program • 5 year plan for utilities • 5+ year plan and reconfiguration of debt service for golf course • beginning of process for 5 year general fund • continuation of improving format for budget EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER • legislation providing $2.5 grant: numerous meetings (including with City of Mpls. etc.) • work on project upon passage of legislation 53RD AVENUE PROJECT • meetings with neighborhood group • 2 neighborhood meetings • design of houses and plat, planning commission • meetings with other governmental unit representatives FINANCIAL COMMISSION RELATED • attended meetings and involved in several policy drafts • council salary survey /policy • selection of financial advisor process and recommendation PERSONNEL • selected new police chief • issues regarding captain's selection process with union • Community Activities Recreation and Services Department position filled and started • experiment on reducing staffing in administration and moving permits to front counter • John Barlow: press conference when charged, special attorney hired, meetings etc. 252 & WILLOW LANE: PROPOSED SENIOR BUILDINGS • several meetings with neighborhood representatives • meetings with potential developer • 2 neighborhood meetings THEATER PROPOSAL ON 252 • work on numerous issues related to proposals and Brookdale, Holiday etc. SHINGLE CREEK TOWERS • several meetings and assembly of information • 2 special council meetings in addition to discussions at regular meetings 69TH & BROOKLYN BOULEVARD • development agreement BROOKLYN BOULEVARD • meetings with staff and Hennepin County • draft agreement with more favorable terms • limited progress on Hennepin County: Phase I environmental completed, Hennepin County did not perform true appraisal CITY HALL /COMMUNITY CENTER PLANNING • work begun with architect to develop overview scenarios • timetable deferred on public input/action to 1999 due to police & fire projects CODE ENFORCEMENT • structured neighborhood liaison approach • follow up on building maintenance • re- drafted compliance letters • meeting with Dominion to interface police and inspections to address problems at Summerchase OTHER PROJECTS/MAJOR EVENTS: • shooting on Martin Luther King Day: press etc. • street projects • fatal fire on Knox • MPRS lawsuit matters • removed tobacco from golf course • MFHA grant for 4 -plex removal on 57th • Housing Resource Center opened with City participation • June /Indiana plat - neighborhood meeting - meeting with developer etc. • Jane Chambers set up tours for civics classes • TCF bank robbery and hostage • Joslyn site meetings • Realtor's Day • change of auction for City equipment • Robbinsdale and Osseo Schools meetings • switched to private beer vendor for Dudley (removing City from sales) • senior transportation study for Council and medical transportation • coordination of historical marker at EBHC • Agness sewer back up claim • D'Amico contract negotiations • Teamster's labor contract • move liquor out of fire recommendation to Council and implementation • point of sale ordinance changes and discussions with/for Council • 2nd hand goods ordinance • meetings and planning for regional meeting of human rights commissions and city councils • Highway 100 Council meetings • North Metro Mayors board and operating committee meetings 2. ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT FOR COUNCIL Between September 29, 1997 and October 1, 1998, support will be provided for: 24 Regular City Council Meetings 5 Special City Council Meetings ( at Brookdale, 2 Shingle Creek Towers, Truth in Taxation, Referendum Canvas, Board of Review) 14 Work Sessions 2 City Council Retreats Updates have been provided on a weekly basis for most weeks. City Council has been contacted regarding major items such as shooting etc. 3. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER DUTIES City continues to operate within budget. Street projects and other projects are pursued. Projects identified by Council as having priority are receiving priority in staff allocation. 4. COMMUNITY ISSUES A great deal of time was spent with the legislature this past year. I attended several Chamber meetings. Citizen service requests have been handled expeditiously by staff in most instances. Overview by City Council goals: 1. General work has occurred in the areas of 5 year planning. Less than what I had hoped occurred with the General Fund last year, but significant progress was made in several other areas and the General Fund process was started. 2. In discussions with the Council, this goal was modified to provide that it would occur as time permitted and opportunities presented themselves. Several changes have occurred or experiments tried relating to staffing. 3. This goal has not been addressed as time has not permitted and other needs appear more pressing at this time. 4. Addressed in 1. above. 5. This goal is going forward to construction of the police and fire facilities. This is a major user of staff time. My time commitment was much higher in the planning stage and is less intense currently. Ms. Chambers has assumed day to day oversight of the process. 6. This is a Council goal for itself. 7. Goal number 7 has consumed a major portion of my time. These projects are going forward as circumstances will allow. 8. Code enforcement continues to be refined and approaches modified to better achieve the Council's goals. 9. This goal is generally a Council goal for itself, but with the number of work sessions to meet the development issues and budget issues, the Council and staff have not had much time to implement additional meetings. 10. This goal was modified to reflect construction schedule for police and fire and has begun at a less intense pace. 11. Liquor has been implemented. Heritage Center goal of operating cash flow has been met in 1997 and being targeted in 1998. Capital funding was sidetracked by change in tax capacity which eliminated the anticipated method of approach. Work has focused on the grant at this time. Edition 108 November1997 Ci! • atch A newsletter for residents of the City of Brooklyn Center City Council adopts goals for 1998 At the October 14 City Council meet- Goal No. 5. Implement fire and Goal No. 11. Implement those study ing, the Council adopted the following police plans: either build with bond recommendations adopted by Coun- goals and objectives for 1998: proceeds or seek betterment of fac- cil for liquor store and Earle Brown Goal No. 1. Develop plan for providing ilities if no bond monies are available. Heritage Center. operating and future capital needs funds Goal No. 6. The City Council will Bond election results for the golf course, liquor stores and be more active in regional issues Earle Brown Heritage Center. affecting the City. On November 4, 1997, Brooklyn Goal No. 2. Review City's departmental Center voters supported a $7.9 structure with analysis of needs and Goal No. 7. Continue to work on Million bond referendum for police identification of opportunities for im- redevelopment issues with emphasis and fire buildings. Voter turnout was proved service delivery. on Brookdale, Brooklyn Blvd., and approximately 30 %. Ballots cast in 53rd Ave., while being able to respond the eight precincts totaled as follows: Goal No. 3. Establish contingency option to other opportunities. 3,497 YES votes forCouncil in the event of funding losses. Goal No. 8. Continue code enforce- 834 NO votes Goal No. 4. Establish long -range fin- ment with Council review of process ancial plan for City: and goals with staff to refine the code C ity Counci • Five year enforcement effort. • Ten to twenty -year appendix of ma- Thanks vot Goal No. 9. Meet with commission jor future needs and possible approaches for addressing these needs. chairs to develop updated goals We would like to thank all of and missions for each of the City's the people who were involved in commissions. the successful bond election to meet our police and fire build - Inside this edition Goal No. 10. Develop a plan to ing needs and all of the people address building needs at City Hall/ who turned out to vote and ex- 1998 Goals 1 Community Center for handicapped press their opinions. We appre- Bond election 1 accessibility, roofing, heating, ven- ciate the efforts of the citizens tilation, air conditioning, removal of who took time to go through the Voter thank you 1 police functions, and citizen access to facilities during the open houses, Brookdale 2 service. the Financial Commission sounds stem Which reviewed the proposed • Council chambers Police Chief recruitment 2 ( s ystem, bond financing nd made recom- lights, etc.) g Hi hWa 100 2 mendations for the p roject , the 9 Y P � , ADA accessibility volunteer citizens who worked Holly Sunday 2 • Roof on a committee sup the PP g CO detectors 3 • Entrances bond referendum, and the many BC commissions 4 • Community Center City staff and volunteers who • Heating, ventilation and air- worked at the open houses. conditioning Superintendents Dr. Antoinett e J ohns i x Brooklyn n Cente r School h I District . 6 1,041 ......:...::: 1 a I Y ud .4. l, ' IT IL INGFOR i y „Y v j Dr. Roger Giroux . ✓,,m . Anoka - Hennepin School District Dr. L. Chris Richardson Osseo School District A collab planning session led by. Superintendents from .. Community Education & Services ' • ka-Hennepin and Osseo School districts 11200 93rd Avenue North Maple Grove, Minnesota 55369 ” .. . Saturday, November 6, 1999 from 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 noon Brooklyn Center Community Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway im portant We Will continue the . d creatin .. The n ts' schools strategies in our 5� t :. �: ; Schedule of the day. Ass uth ,r "���., 8:30 a.m. Coffee and bagels 9:00 Introductions and overview by the Superintendents ,n x Dr. Antoinette Johns, Brooklyn Center A A {3*g,��u,,,"„� e . i ; • t "x,.�yyyj �yk�:'.�W. .�C.J't`?F °r f. d:7J a'e�, : >' -. Dr. Roger Giroux, Anoka-Hennepin n �`M �I' ".t� Dr. L. Chris Richardson Osseo i ; "_`:- x . ' =tom V� bx :�% t�.§:; h x"..�..',�fi".' 8k.`' 1; '.' • �s ` s -:'S<` 9:15 Assets 101 by Judy Taccogna from the Search Institute 9:45 Small g roup discussion :';." ,'µ. .y,pt. g,;,..;.,;.,,•'..'; <, r w '» 10:30 BREAK .:,t la r °.ni rnunt r vY::... 10:45 Grou p g g rou p s, s form into three larg rou ; ° Vim, m; �.� 1 '41 .� _�., yU. • r . ;p.;" " :- ap AhS ..i� �:'A ���;b,:SJ. . ; <. 1. n .�.gUf� ' � (Y "' � n• .E,� each facilitated b a sup erintendent «..; >.... ¢;: sj „ =S 'in i::Ceek:.ParCw ';iirk1ei e 11:30 Three groups report to the large group ::, th t�184 at S ii'1 1: -:re `Bul'evet 11:4 Planning or action g ''• "�, =:r.` "#�!'pri", >,- '�,°:.:*�. ° da,�,`- r��`y�.� i ^�� . :.',1 =:�; �i ::i: `;qr..i,�' ^= ,;;,,• '�-" : "�'e,�,..; = ",,,,. �iv'�.�' r: -ar;'" ��,' 12:00 ADJO � ��:. tiwir��ia�'`: f� '�ii�i= �.f�� °- r:i`'*ww':s.w"+r� wl iii %:w "ri«rr °.r ' ii = i`wC.w;nii i.i•�rr � "ri'r�ir.":.w�,i:.�'wi >'w.r "'aii' air " wr � The process will be militated by Candace Gordon. Registration for Superintendents' Summit Name Goals of the Day: Address Identify A what's already working Ciry A ways communities can help schools A ways schools can help communities School District A ways to b down barriers Phone (home) (work) Create A strategies to make it happen I am representing: ❑Agency ❑ School District _ ❑ Parent ❑ Youth Asset Building is a way parents, youth, schools and communities work ❑ Other together to instill the 40 developmental assets into our youth. The developmental assets are 40 opportunities, skills, relationships, values and Please return this form to ISD 279, Community Education, self - perceptions that all young people need to succeed. by mail: 11200 93rd Avenue North, Maple Grove, MN 55369 by fax: 612 - 391 -7082 by e -mail: LarsonCarol @0sseo.k12.mn.us or call in your registration to 612 -391 -7114 ® CITY COUNCIL MEETING Ci ty Y of Brooklyn Center October 25, 1999 AGENDA 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. 3. Call to Order Regular Business Meeting 4. Roll Call 5. Council Report • 6. Appearances - Recognition of Charter Commission Member Eileen Oslund -Pat Milton: Youth Summit 7. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda -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 q g 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. October 11, 1999 - Study Session 2. October 11, 1999 - Regular Session b. Licenses C. Resolution Amending Special Assessment Levy Roll Nos. 14565 and 14566 to Provide for Deferment of Special Assessments i • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- October 25, 1999 8. Public Hearings a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the Brooklyn Center City Ordinances by Adding New Sections 23 -2301 Through 23 -2314 Thereto Establishing License Regulations for Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments -This item was first read on September 27, 1999; published in the official newspaper on October 6, 1999; and is offered this evening for a second reading and public hearing. Resolution Establishing Fees for Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishment Licenses and Investigations Thereof - Requested Council Action: -Open the public hearing. -Take public input. -Close the public hearing. - Motion to adopt ordinance and resolution. ® 9. Planning Commission Item a. Planning Commission Application No. 99009 Submitted by Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc. Request for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment to construct a 122 unit, three story Motel 6 complex on vacant property west of the Extended Stay America site. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its October 14, 1999, meeting. Resolution Regarding Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 99009 Submitted on Behalf of Motel 6 Operating LP - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. 10. Council Consideration Items a. Proclamation Declaring November 21 -28, 1999, to be Bible Week - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt proclamation. b. Resolution Adopting Goals for 2000 - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. • I • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- October 25, 1999 c. Resolution Authorizing Submission of a MetroEnvironment Partnership Grant Application for Proposed Palmer Lake Improvements - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. d. 2000 Public Utilities Rate Study - Resolution Adopting the 2000 Water Utility Rate Schedule - Resolution Adopting the 2000 Sanitary Sewer Utility Rate Schedule - Resolution Adopting the 2000 Storm Drainage Utility Rate Schedule - Resolution Adopting the 2000 Recycling Rates - Resolution Adopting the 2000 Water and Sanitary Sewer Hookup Rates - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolutions. e. Resolution Providing for the Competitive Negotiated Sale of $1,585,000 General • Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1999A - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. f. Resolution Amending 1999 Pay Plan, Authorizing Personnel Changes in Police Department - Requested Council Action: - Motion to adopt resolution. 10. Adjournment Certt t * cate o reciattoon j Presented to L Eileen Oslund i In recognition of your dedicated service to the City of Brooklyn Center as a member of the f - Charter Commission i May 8, 1991- May 8, 1999 Myrna Kragness, Mayor City Council Agenda Item No. 7a . 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 OCTOBER 11, 1999 CONFERENCE ROOM B CALL TO ORDER STUDY SESSION The Brooklyn Center City Council met in study session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Debra Hilstrom, Kay Lasman, Ed Nelson, and Robert Peppe. City Manager Michael J. McCauley, Police Chief Joel Downer, and Recording Secretary Maria Rosenbaum. DISCUSSION ON AGENDA ITEMS AND QUESTIONS • Council discussed several items on the agenda. Councilmember Nelson requested to table agenda item 8c, Resolution Adopting Goals for 2000. MISCELLANEOUS City Manager Michael McCauley discussed off - street parking. Councilmember Hilstrom abstained from this discussion. It was noted the next City Watch should contain an article regarding the regulations for parking on City streets. Council discussed the area of Woodbine Lane and Noble Avenue North. Councilmember Hilstrom requested information to follow -up from an article that was published in the Sun Post. Mr. McCauley shared with the Council the latest information received from Talisman regarding the redevelopment of Brookdale. Council discussed their concerns and comments on the redevelopment. Council discussed the ordinance regulating the size of accessory structures relating to an issue of a resident requesting to install a three car garage. 10/11/99 -1- DRAFT i Mayor Kragness informed the Council she had received a complaint from Donald Rzeszutek, 5501 Knox Avenue North, regarding the quality of his grass after a construction project was finished in his neighborhood. Mr. McCauley will have staff check into this issue. ADJOURNMENT The Council adjourned the study session at 6:52 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 10/11/99 -2- DRAFT e 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 OCTOBER 11, 1999 CITY HALL 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM The Brooklyn Center City Council met in study session at 6 :00 p.m., and continued to the informal open forum. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Debra Hilstrom, Kay Lasman, Ed Nelson, and Robert Peppe. Also present: City Manager Michael McCauley, Public Works Director Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Recording Secretary Maria Rosenbaum. No on appeared at the informal open forum. ADJOURN INFORMAL OPEN FORUM A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn informal open forum at 6:52 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 2. INVOCATION Father Shannon, St. Alphonsus Parish, offered the invocation. 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 7:03 p.m. 4. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Debra Hilstrom, Kay Lasman, Ed Nelson, and Robert Peppe. Also present: City Manager Michael McCauley, Public Works Director Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Recording Secretary Maria Rosenbaum. 10/11/99 -1- DRAFT PRESENTATION -Todd Paulson, Metropolitan Council Representative Todd Paulson, Metropolitan Council Representative, addressed the Council to inform them that the Metropolitan Council would like to be more involved in communities and is offering assistance to help develop better communities. Mr. Paulson shared a few things happening with the Metropolitan Council at this time. 5. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Lasman reported that she, along with Mayor Kragness and Councilmember Nelson, attended the year 2000 Celebration Committee's meeting on October 5, 1999. Councilmember Lasman shared that the plans are progressing and that the event will be very memorable. Councilmember Nelson suggested that anyone interested in participating in the planning process of this celebration get involved. Councilmember Peppe reported that he attended the Financial Commission meeting on October 7, 1999. Mayor Kragness reported that she, along with Public Works Director Diane Spector, attended the dedication of the storm water pond in Minneapolis that is part of the system connected to the ponds at Centerbrook. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Nelson requested to have council consideration item 8c, Resolution Adopting Goals for 2000, removed and tabled to October 25, 1999. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Nelson to approve the agenda and consent agenda as amended. Motion passed unanimously. 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Nelson to approve the minutes from the study and regular sessions on September 27, 1999. Motion passed unanimously. 6b. LICENSES A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Nelson to approve the following list of licenses. Motion passed unanimously. 10/11/99 -2- DRAFT ® MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Modern Heating and Air Conditioning, Inc. Minneapolis, MN RENTAL Renewal: 6845 Willow Lane David Wagtskj old Initial: 3813 61st Ave N Shawn Va Yang 6c. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -21 CONTRACT 1999 -N, MISCELLANEOUS SIDEWALK/RETAINING WALL /CURBING REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT RESOLUTION NO. 99 -153 Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -21 CONTRACT 1999 -N, MISCELLANEOUS SIDEWALK/RETAINING WALL /CURBING REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT • The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded b Councilmember p g g _ Y Y Nelson. Motion passed unanimously. 6d. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES RESOLUTION NO. 99 -154 Councilmember Lasman 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 Nelson. Motion passed unanimously. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 10/11/99 -3- DRAFT 7a. AN ORDINANCE VACATING A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT IN DALE AND DAVIES 3RD ADDITION City Manager Michael McCauley discussed this vacation relates to the Joslyn Addition plat and that within the underlying plat, DALE AND DAVIES 3RD ADDITION, there is an existing 20 foot drainage and utility easement which the property owner has requested that the easement be vacated. A motion by Councilmember Peppe, seconded by Councilmember Nelson to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. No one wished to address the Council. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 99 -16 Councilmember Nelson introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE VACATING A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT IN DALE AND DAVIES 3RD ADDITION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Councilmember Lasman. Motion passed unanimously. 7b. RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY CERTIFICATION TAX RATE INCREASE Mr. McCauley discussed the City Council passed Resolution No. 99 -145 on September 13, 1999, which sets a preliminary tax levy for the year 2000. Hennepin County has reported that the preliminary tax levy for 2000 does represent a higher levy certification tax rate than the 1999 levy certification tax rate. Pursuant to the legislation passed, this resolution would approve a levy certification tax rate increase for property taxes payable in the year 2000. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Nelson to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. No one wished to address the Council. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. 10/11/99 -4- DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 99-155 e Councilmember Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY CERTIFICATION TAX RATE INCREASE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded b Councilmember p g g Y Y Hilstrom. Motion passed unanimously. 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 8a. PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER TO BE NATIONAL BREAST CANCER AWARENESS MONTH AND OCTOBER 15, 1999, TO BE NATIONAL MAMMOGRAPHY DAY A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to adopt proclamation declaring October to be National Breast Cancer Awareness Month and October 15, 1999, to be National Mammography Day. Motion passed unanimously. 8b. RESOLUTION ELECTING TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATING IN THE LOCAL HOUSING INCENTIVES ACCOUNT PROGRAM UNDER THE METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT Mr. McCauley discussed that each year the City can participate and be eligible to receive grants or loans under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act or el igible to receive certain polluted sites cleanup funding from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development if the City is participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under Minnesota Statutes section 473.254. This resolution would authorize the City to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program under the Minnesota Livable Communities Act during the calendar year 2000. RESOLUTION NO. 99 -156 Councilmember Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ELECTING TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATING IN THE LOCAL HOUSING INCENTIVES ACCOUNT PROGRAM UNDER THE METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Nelson. Motion passed unanimously. • 10/11/99 -5- DRAFT i 8c. RESOLUTION ADOPTING GOALS FOR 2000 • This resolution was tabled to the October 25, 1999, City Council meeting. 8d. REPORT ON FINANCIAL PAYROLL AND HUMAN RELATIONS SOFTWARE COMPARISONS Mr. McCauley reported that staff had been reviewing software options for the City's major financial operations. Earlier this year staff had assembled information from non - Logis cities of similar size to Brooklyn Center regarding financial, payroll, and human resources software. After receiving information regarding their vendors, usage, and satisfaction, staff began requesting information from vendors to gauge approximate costs of these systems. The information received was compiled into a summary for the Council to review. Logis was the service that was determined to be the best value. Council discussed the summary and the options included with staying with Logis. Mr. McCauley requested a motion from the Council to continue us Logis for Financial, Payroll, and Human Resources. A motion by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to continue with Logis. Motion passed unanimously. 8e. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPT 3 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING AND INSPECTION FEES Mr. McCauley discussed this ordinance amending Chapter 3 of the City Ordinances regarding the Minnesota State Building Code reflects a change in the computation of plumbing permit fees. In the past, certain types of plumbing permit fees were based on a charge per fixture. To be consistent with the computation of all permit fees, plumbing permit fees would be based on 3 percent of the valuation of work being done for all permits. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to approve first reading of ordinance and set November 8, 1999, for second reading and public hearing. Motion passed unanimously. A resolution amending the schedule for planning and inspection fees was also included with the materials. Mr. McCauley requested to table the resolution until the ordinance was passed since the resolution relates to the ordinance amendment. 10/11/99 -6- DRAFT A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to table resolution to November 8, 1999. Motion passed unanimously. 8f. ADMINISTRATIVE TRAFFIC COMMITTEE REPORT RE: 5700 BLOCK OF JUNE Public Works Director Diane Spector reported on the Administrative Traffic Committee's report regarding traffic issues on June and Indiana Avenues since the two streets were connected from the approval of the TWIN LAKE OVERLOOK plat and redevelopment. Winding road signs with a 15 mph advisory to warn drivers of curves south of the new street construction were installed last fall. There had been no signs of increased or cut through traffic or a speeding problem and no complaints since the streets were connected. Ms. Spector gave an overview of the results for speed and traffic. Council discussed the concern that was once raised about the curve in the area. Ms. Spector informed the Council that there had been a couple of trees trimmed; however, there is little right -of -way at the location to do anything more. 8g. REPORT ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS Mr. McCauley reported that the Council previously adopted a change for special assessments for delinquent utility bills. Since the change, the adjustments are about the same and there is reduced hostility from residents. Council discussed the assessments and the differences since the change. Finance Director Charlie Hansen will be reporting further refinement of the assessments in a written report to the Council at a later date. 9. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Nelson to adjourn the meeting at 7:54 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. i City Clerk Mayor ® 10/11/99 -7- DRAFT i i i City Council Agenda Item No. 7b I i I 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: October 20, 1999 V/ I �� 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 October 25, 1999: MECHANICAL Nielsen's Equipment & Design, Inc. 6318 Lakeland Ave N, Brooklyn Park Total Heating & Air Cond, Inc. 3307 Vera Cruz Ave N, Crystal ® RENTAL Renewal: 4220 Lakeside Ave N Richard Arntson • 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. 7c i MEMORANDUM DATE: October 20, 1999 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM:. Diane Spector, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Resolution Amending Special Assessment Levy Roll Nos. 14565 and 14566 to Provide for the Deferment of Special Assessments On September 13, 1999, the City Council by Resolution 99 -136 approved Special Assessment Levy Nos. 14565 and 14566 for Southeast Neighborhood Street and Storm Drainage Improvements. The attached resolution amends the respective levy rolls to provide for the deferment of special assessments on two properties where qualifying persons are eligible because they are at least 65 years of age or older and whose households meet certain financial characteristics. • • I mo— -- adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved its RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY ROLL NOS. 14565 AND 14566 TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed Special Assessment Levy Nos. 14565 and 14566 for the following improvements: SOUTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD STREET IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -01 SOUTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -02 WHEREAS, Special Assessment Levy Nos. 14565 and 14566 were on September 13, 1999, approved by the City Council; and ® WHEREAS, the City Council has established a program to defer a portion of the special assessments of qualifying persons who are at least 65 years of age or older or who are retired due to permanent and total disability whose households meet certain financial characteristics. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. Certain property owners are eligible to defer a portion of their special assessment. Special Assessment Levy No. 14565 is hereby amended to reduce the previous amount of $2,120.00 from the following assessments to the new amount as noted: Pi d# Amount 01- 118 -21 -32 -0114 $1,848.54 01- 118 -21 -32 -0101 $1,721.06 Special Assessment Levy No. 14566 is hereby amended to reduce the previous amount of $630.00 from the following assessments to the new amount as noted: Pi d# Amount 01- 118 -21 -32 -0114 $573.66 • 01- 118 -21 -32 -0101 $519.03 O 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 and adopted. • City Council Agenda Item No. 8a 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 DATE: October 21, 1999 SUBJECT: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the Brooklyn Center City Ordinances by Adding New Sections 23 -2301 Through 23 -2314 Thereto Establishing License Regulations for Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments At its September 27, 1999, meeting, the City Council approved first reading of An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the Brooklyn Center City Ordinances by Adding New Sections 23 -2301 Through 23 -2314 Thereto Establishing License Regulations for Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments and set October 25, 1999, for second reading and public hearing. If the ordinance is adopted by Council on October 25, the effective date is December 3, 1999. Sections 23 -2305 (License Fee) and 23 -2306 (Investigation Fee) of the Ordinance provide for fees to be established by City Council resolution. A fee survey was conducted of the cities whose ordinances relating to tattoo/body piercing establishments were reviewed by the City Attorney's office. Attached is a copy of the survey results. Also attached is a draft resolution setting fees for tattoo/body piercing establishments. Attachments • 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 Survey of Cities Annual License Fee for Tattoo/Body Piercing Establishments City Investigation Fee Business License Personal License Fee Fee Belle Plaine 873 -5553 None $200 initial $200 initial $100 renewal $100 renewal Bloomington 948 -8700 None $450 None Calumet 218- 247 -7542 None $75 None Inver Grove Heights 651 - 450 -2500 No fee established. No fee established. No fee established. Minnetonka 939 -8200 None $100 None Rosemount $1,500 $250 $25 Shakopee 445 -3650 $345, plus $315 None $55 /employee • St. Paul 651- 266 -8989 None $164 None West St. Paul 651 -552 -4100 None $50 $50 The following three agencies were listed on the matrix composed by the City Attorney's office; however, they now indicate they do not license tattoo/body piercing establishments. *The City of Anoka (576 -2710) does not license tattoo/body piercing establishments, although Anoka's ordinance prohibits all types of home tattoo salons. *Sherburne County (241 -2700) does not regulate tattoo/body piercing establishments. *The City of Rockford (477 -6565) does not have an ordinance regulating tattoo/body piercing establishments. • G:\DEPTS\ADMIN\KNUTSON\GENERAL\TATTFEE.WPD Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FEES FOR TATTOO AND BODY PIERCING ESTABLISHMENT LICENSES AND INVESTIGATIONS THEREOF WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has adopted an ordinance regulating tattoo and body piercing establishments; and WHEREAS, the ordinance states that licenses must be obtained to operate such establishments; and WHEREAS, the ordinance states these fees will be set by City Council resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the following fees are hereby established. Tattoo or Body Piercing Establishment License $450 year Personal Service License to perform tattoo and /or body piercing services $50 year Investigation Fee $1,500 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the above fees shall become effective on December 3, 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. ® CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 25th day of October, 1999, at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the Brooklyn Center City Ordinances by Adding New Sections 23 -2301 Through 23 -2314 Thereto Establishing License Regulations for Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please notify the City Clerk at 612 -569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER CITY ORDINANCES BY ADDING NEW SECTIONS 23 -2301 THROUGH 23- 2314 THERETO ESTABLISHING LICENSE REGULATIONS FOR TATTOO AND BODY PIERCING ESTABLISHMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended by adding new Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 as follows: Section 23 -2301. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. The purpose of this section is to regulate the business of t attooing and /or body piercing in order to protect the general health. safe and welfare of the community. a. The City. Council finds that the experience of other cities indicates that there is a connection between tattooing/body piercing and hepatitis and other health problems. b. The Citv Council finds that stringent regulations governing tattooing and bodv piercine can minimize the hepat and disease risk and therefore protect the general health. safetv. and welfare of the community. C. It is not the intent to prohibit tattoo and/or body piercing establishments from having a reasonable opportunitv to locate in the City. Section 23 -2 302. DEFINITIONS. The following word and terms when used in Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314_ sh have the following meaning unless the context clearly_ indicates otherwise: a. Bodv Piercing; Penetratin or making a hol in or through the human bodv to place iewelry or obiects of metal. plastic. wood. bone. or other foreign material on any for cosmetic niirposes. . ORDINANCE NO. b. Branding: The use of heat. cold. or any chemical compound to imprint permanent markings on human skin by any means other than tattooing. c, Clean: The absence of dirt., grease. rubbish. garbage. and other offensive. unsightly. or extraneous matter. d. Operato Any person who perfor or practices the art of tattooing and/or body piercing on another person in connection with the operation of a tattoo and /or body piercing establishment and receives compensation from the owner of the business or its patrons. e. Good Repair: Free of corrosion. breaks. cracks. chips. pitting. excessive wear and tear. leak obstructions. and sim ilar defects so as to constitute a sanitary. workable. and sound condition. f. Issuing Authority: The City Mana eg r or t he Manager's designee. g, Owner: Any indi vidual. fir . com pany. corporation. or association that owns an establishment where tattooins, and/or body piercing is performed. h. Scarificati The cutting or tearin of human skin for the purpose of creating a permanent mark or design on the skin. i. Tattoo. Tattooing: The marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them throug puncture of the skin. Section 23 -2143. BUSINESS LICENSE REQUIRE No person. partnership. or corporation shall ope any establishment where tattooing and/or body piercing is practiced. nor enga in the practi of tattooing and/or body pierci w ithout being licensed under Sections 23- 2301 through 23 -7 314. Jewelry stores and. accessory sto res that exclusively ear piercing_ services using piercing guns shall be exempt from this license agreement. The application for a tattooing and/or body p iercing establishment business license shall be submitted on a form provided by the Cit and shall include: a. If the appl is an individual, the name, resid ence. phone number. and birth date of the applicant If the applicant is a partn ership. the name. residence. phone number. and bi rth date of each general and limited nartner. If the applicant is a comoration. the names., residences phone numbers, a nd birth dates of all those persons holding • more than five (5) percent of the issue and outstanding stock of the corporation. i ORDINANCE NO. b. The name. address. phone nrxmber. and birth date of the manaa_er of such establishment. if different from the owners. C. The address and legal description of the premises where the tattoo and/or body piercing establishment is to be located. d. A statement detailing; any conviction relating to tattooing and/or body piercing or the oneration of a tattoo and/or body piercing establishment by the applicant or manager and whether or not the applicant or manager has ever applied for or held a license to operate a similar type of business in other communities. In the case of a corporation. a statement detailing a felony convictions by the owners of more than five (5) percent of the issued and outstanding stock of the corporation and whether or not those owners have ever applied for or held a license to operate a similar type of business in other communities. e. The activities and types of businesses to be conducted. f. The hours of operation. g_ The provisions made to restrict access by minors. h. A building plan of the premises d etaili ng alf internal operations and activities. i. Whether the applicant has previously denied a license of this ty by @ny other government unit. ,j_ The names. street addresses. and business addresses of three (3) residents of Dakota. Hennepin. R amsey. Ano ka ; , Washington, Scott. or Carver Counties who are of good moral character and who are not related to the applicant and not holding any ownership in the premises or business. who may be referred to as to the a_pp_ licant's character. k. Whether all real estate and personal property taxes that are due and payable for the premises to be licensed have been paid and if not paid. the years and amounts that are unpaid. 1. All applications for a license under Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 shall be signed and swo to. If the application is that of a natural person. it shall be signed and sworn to by such person: if t hat of a c orporation. by an officer thereof: if that of a partnership. by one of the general p artners: and if that of an unincorporated association. by the manager or managing officer thereof. Anv_ falsification on a license app lication shall result in the deni of a license. ® ORDINANCE NO. All annlic ations shall be referred to the Issuing Authority for verif ication and investigation of facts set forth in the appli includingg)r any necessary criminal background checks to assure, compliance wi Sections -- --01 through 2 _- — —. T a pplication shall be issued or denied by the Issuing Auth ority in accordance with Sections 23 -230 through 23 -2314. Section 23 -2304, P ERSONAL SERVICE LICENSE. No operator shall perform tattoo, and/or body pierci services within the City without bein lg icens d as provided in this section. Any person desiri a personal service license shall file a written applicat on a form provided by the City. The app lication shall include the fo llowing information: a. The business address and a], I telephone numbers where the service is to be practiced or based. b. The name. birth date. complete home address. and telephone number of the applicant. C. The tattoo and/or body piercing business history and experience. including but not limited to whether or not the applicant. in previously operating in this or another city or state under license or permit, has ha.d such license or hermit denied. revoked. or susnended and the reason. therefor. and the business activities or occu_nations subseq to such actio of denial, suspe nsion, or revocation. d. All criminal convictio other th an misdemeanor traffic violations. fully disclosing the iurisdiction in which convicted or arrested and the circumstances thereof. e. All a nnlications for a li cense under Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 shall be signed and sworn to by t applicant. An y falsification on a license annlication shall result in the denial of a license. All applications shall be re ferred to the Issuing Authorit for verification and investi ation of facts s et forth in the application. including any necessary crimi background checks to assure comnliance wi Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -23 14_ The an lication, shall be issued or denied by the Issui Authority in accordance wit Sections 23- _2301 through 23 -2314. Section 23 -2305. LICENSE FEE. a. The annual license fee is set by City Council resolution. b. Each application for a license shall be s ubmitted to the Citv Clerk and navment made to the Citv. Each appl ication fo r a license shall . be accompanied by navment in full of the required license fee. TJpon rejection of any application for a license. the applicant may be refiznded a portion of the license fee in accordance with the fee II • ORDINANCE NO. resolution. except where rejection is for a willful misstatement in the license application. C. All licenses shall expire on. the last day of December in each year. Each license shall be issued for a period of one (1) year except that if a portion of the license year has elapsed when application is made. a license may be issued for the remainder of the vear for a prorated fee. In computing such fee. any fraction of a month shall be counted as one (1) month. d. Once a license has been granted, no na of th e fee paid by anv licensee shall be refunded, except that a prorated portion of the fee shall be refunded in the event of the complete closure of the busin and cessat of business activities for any of the following reasons and upon application to the City Clerk within thirty (30) days from the happening of the event. provided that such event occurs more than thirty (30) days before the expiration of the license: 1. Destruction or damage of the licensed premises by fire or other catastrophe. 2. The licensee's illness. 3. The licensee's death. 4. A change in the legal status making it unlawful for licensed business to continue. e. Each application shall contain . a provision on the application indicating that any withhold of information or the p roviding of f alse or misleading information will be grounds for denial or revocation of a license. Any changes in the information provided on the application or provided during the investigation shall be brought to the attention of the Cijy Clerk by the a pplicant o r licensee. If said changes take place during the investi ation said data shall be provided to the Police Chief or the City_ Clerk in writing. Section 23- 23 06. INVESTIGATION FEE a. At the time of the original appl.i.cation for a license. the applicant shall deposit the investigation fee set by City Council resolution. Section 23 -2307. GRANTING OF LICENSE S a. The Issuing Authoritv shall co mplete his/her i nvestigation within thirty (30) days after the City Clerk receives a c omplete applicat and all license and investi ag tion ORDINANCE NO. fees. b. If. after such investigation. it @.ppears that the applicant and the place proposed for the business are eligible for a license under the criteria set forth in this section. then . the license shall be issued by the City Council within thirty (301 d v _ _ y _ a_ s after the investigation is com leted. Otherwise. the license shall be denied. C. Each license shall. he issued to the � only and shall not be transferable to another holder. Each license shall he issued only for the premises described in the application. No license may be transferred to another premise without the approval of the Citv Council If the licensee is a partnership or a corporation. a chance in the identity of any of the rind als of the partnership or corporation shall be deemed a _ _ p . � _p _ p rp transfer of the license. Anv tattoo and/or bodv piercing establishment existing at the adoption of Sections 23 -. ?301 through 23 -2314 shall be required to obtain an annual license. d. If the license is denied. the applicant may request a hearing before the City Council by filing a written request therefor with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) days after the applicant has received written notice of denial. If the license application is denied by the Citv Council after a hearing. the applicant may appeal the decision to the appro court of competent jur isdiction. If a tattoo and /or bodv piercing establishment is lawfullv in existence at the time of the adoption of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2 314, the tattoo and /o r body piercing establishment may continue in business until the cou action is co mpleted. Otherwise. the applicant may commence doin business until t he judicial action has been finallv resolved. Section 23 -2308. PERSONS INELIGIBLE FOR LICENSE. No license under Sections 23- 2301 through 23 -2314 sha be issued to an applicant who is a natural person: general or managing partner of a partners or manager, proprietor. or agent of a corporation or other organization if such applicant: a. Is a minor at the time the application is filed. b. Has been co nvicted of any crime directly related to the occupation licensed as prescribed by Minnesota Statutes. Section 364.03. Subd. 2. and has not shown competent evidence of sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties of the licensed occuna as nrescribed by Minnesota Statutes. Section 364.03. Subd. 3. e. Who is overdue or whose spouse is overdue in his or her payment of City. county. • or state taxes, fees., fines or penalties assessed ag ainst them or imposed upon them. • ORDINANCE NO. d. Who has been denied a license by the Cit or any other Minnesota municipal comoration to operate a tattoo and/or body piercing establishment or whose license has been suspended or revoked within the preceding twelve (12) months. or who is residing with any such person. e. Who has not paid the license and investigation fees required by this section. f Is not of good moral character or repute. Section 23- 23 09. PLACES INELIGIBLE FOR L ICENSE a. No license shall be granted or renewed for operation on anv_ property on which taxes. assessments. or other financial claims of the state. county. school district. or city are due. delinquent. o unpaid. In the e vent a s nit has been co mmenced under Minnesota Statutes. Section 278 .0 - 278.0.3 questioning the amount or validitv of taxes. the Citv Council may on application waive strict compliance with this provision: no waiver may be granted. however_ for taxes or any portion thereof which remain unpaid for a period e xceeding one (1) year after beco due. b. No license shall be granted or renewed if the property is not properly zoned or does not qualify as a legal . nonconfor use for tattooing_ and/or body piercing_ establishments. C. Premises L icensed For Alcoholic Beverages. No li cense shall be granted or renewed if the prem is licensed for the furnish of alcoholic beverages or is an adult establishment pursuant to Section 35 -2182. d. No license shall be granted if the premises is within 300 feet of a church. school. day care center. hospital. on -s liquor establishment. halfway house. currency exchange operation. theater. residence_ pawnshop. secondhand goods dealer. or massage parlor. Section 23 -2310. CONDITIO OF LICENSE. E very license shall be granted subiect to the followin conditions and all other provisions of Sections 23 -2 301 through 23 -2314. and of any applicable sections of the Ci , Code. the City's zoning ordinan the Building Code. the Fire Code. the City's health regulations, and all provisions of state and f ederal law. a. No person sh tattoo o r pierce any person unde the age of eighteen (18) except in the presence of. and with the written permission of. the parent or legal guardian of such minor. Th consent must include bot the custodial and non - custodial parents, where applicable. ® b. The license granted under Sections 2.3 -2301 through 23 -2314 is for the owner and the ORDINANCE NO. premises or operator named on the approved license application. No transfer of a license shall be permitted from place -to -place or from person -to- person without first complving with the reauirements of an oriainal application. except in the case in which an existing non - corporate licensee is incorporated and incorporation does not affect the ownership. control. and interest of the existina licensed establishment., e. All licensed premises shall have the license posted in a conspicuous place at all times. d. A licensee under Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 shall not be open for business for tattooin and /or body piercing before 7:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m. e. The tattoo and /or body piercing establishment license is only effective for the compact and contiguous space snecified in the approved license application. If the licensed p remise is enlarged, altered, o r extended. the licensee shall inform the Issuing Authority. No person shall engaae in the practice of tattooing and/or bodv piercing at any place other than the place or location named or described in the application and license. A separate room shall be reauired for bodv piercing and tattooing services. The applicant shall submit a drawina_ to scale of the tattoo and/or, bodv piercing facilities. f. No person shall solicit business or offer to perform tattooing and /or body services while under license suspension or revocation by the City. g, The licensee shall be responsible for the conduct of the business being_ operated and shall at all times maintain conditions of order. h. The licensee sh pr ovide to the I ssuing Authority a list of operators who perform tattooina and/or bodv piercing at the licensed establishment and shall verifv that each operator has received a copy of Health and Safety Requirements and Sanctions for License Violations as a ppear in Sections 23 -2301 t hrough 23 -2314. i. All licensees shall have at all times a valid certificate of insurance issued by an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota indicating that the licensee is currently covered in the tattoo and/or bodv piercina business by a liability poliev. The minimum limits of coveraa_ e for such insurance shall be: 1. Each claim. at least Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200.000). 2. Each group of claims. at least Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500.000) ORDINANCE NO. Such insurance shall be kept in force during the term of the license and shall provide for notification to the City nrior to termination or cancellation. A certificate of insurance shall be filed with the Citv. j.. Inspections. 1. City Initiated. The Issuing Authority or designated health professionals shall. at minimum. conduct one (1) randomly scheduled inspection of each licensed facility each year to determine compliance with Citv requirements. 2. Compliance Certificatio A health professional w ho is retained by the licensed operator and acceptable to the Issuing Authoritv shall inspect the licensed premises in the month of November of each calendar vear. Said inspection is to determine compliance with City requirements and a written report documenting findinas shall be submitted to the Issuing Authority within fifteen (15) days from the date on which the inspection took place. k. Branding and Scarification are prohibited in the City of Brooklyn Center. i Section 23 -2311. H EALTH AND SANIT ATJON REQUIREMENTS. No person shall engage in the practice of tattooing and /o body piercing at anyplace i n the Citv complying with the following regulations: a. Every place where tattooi and/or body_ piercing_ i s practiced shall be equipped with an adeauate and conveniently located toilet room and hand lavatory for the accommodation of em ployees and patrons. The h and lavatory shall be supplied with hot and cold running water under pressure: shall be maintained in good repair at all times: and shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. Toilet fixtures and seats shall be of a sanitary open front design and readily cleanable. Easilv cleanable. covered receptacles shall be provided for waste materials. Every lavatory facility shall be provided with an ad equate supply of han cleansing compound and single service sanitary towels and hand drving devices. b. No person having any communicable blood or skin infection or other communicable diseases of the blood or skin shall practice tattooing and/or body or shall be tattooed or body pierced. C. All disposable needles. razor blades. sharps. or other eauipment utilized for penetrating the skin shall be individually_ pre - packaged and pre- sterilized and stored in a self - sealing sterilizing vouch. No such eauipment shall be used for more than ® one customer. Tools an supplies must be sto rer3 in a dust -free container. All bio- hazardous waste shall be disposed of in accordance with law. and disposal procedures ORDINANCE NO. shall be ann rwed by the Issuing Authori Sterilizing solutions and methods may be used for the purpose of sterilizing instruments other than needles. razor blades.. sharps. o r other equipment utilized for penetrating the skin when such s terilizing solutions and methods are approved by the Issuing Authority. d. The following procedures Shall be used for skin preparation: 1. Each operator shall wash his or her hands thoroughly with soap and water and then dry them with a clean towel before and after each tattoo or bodv piercing. Operators with skin infections of the hand shall not perform any tattooing or bodv piercing services. 2. Whenever it is possible to shave the skin. tire- packaged. pre- sterilized.. disposable razor blades shall be used. 3. The skin area to be tattooed or pierced shall be thoroughly cleaned with germicidal soap. rinsed thoroughly with water. and sterilized with an antiseptic solution approved by the Issuing Authority. Only sing_ le service towels and wipes shall be used in the skin cleaning process. • 4. All bandages and surgical dressings used in connection with th _ g e tattooing and/or body piercing of any person shall be individually pre - sterilized. and disposable. e. All tables. chairs. furniture, or area, on which a patron receives a tattoo or bodv pierce shall be covered by single service disposable paper or clean linens. or in the alternative. the table. chair. or furniture on which the patron receives a tattoo and /or body pierce shall be impervious to moisture and shall be properly sanitized after each tattoo or body pierce. Tables and counter tops shall be industrial grade Formica or similar material. Dron cloths made of two -ply paper and plastic shall be available for use as needed. f. Every operator shall provide single service towels or wipes for each customer or, person and such towels and wipes shall be stored and disposed of in a manner acceptable to the Issuing Authority. g. Every ope rator shall wear clean washable garments and protective latex disposable gloves w hen engaged in the practice of tattooing and bodv piercing. If garments are contaminated with blood or body fluids. such garment shall be removed and changed and cleane or disposed of in a manne acceptable to the Issuing Authoritv. • h. Pigments used in tatto shall be 12 ade and commercially prepared and free ORDINANCE NO. from bacteria and noxious agents and substances including mercury. The pigments used from stock solutions for each customer shall be placed in a single service receptacle. and such receptacle and remaining solution shall be discarded after use on each customer in accordance with procedures approved by the Issuing Authority. i. Jewelry for the other parts of the body shall be made of implant grade. high - aualitv stainless steel (300 seri solid 14K and 18K g old. niobium. titanium. platinum. or a dense. low- porosity plastic such as monofilament nylon. acrylic. or Lucite. Ear studs or other iewelry designed for earlobe piercing are not appropriate iewelry for other body parts. Jewelry shall bave no nicks. scratches. or irregular surfaces. which might endanger the tissues. Jewelry shall be pre- sterilized and in a sealed package. j_ There shall not be less than one hundred fifty (150) square feet of floor space at the place where the practice of tattooing and/or body piercing is conducted. and said place shall be so lighted and ventilated as to comply with the standards approved bv_ the Issuing Authority. k. No person shall practice tatto and/or body p iercing while under the influence of alcoholic beverages or illicit drugs. No customer shall be tattooed and /or body • pierced while under the influence of alcoholic beverages or illicit drugs. 1. The operator shall p rovide the person tattoo and/or bodv pierced with printed instructions on the approved care of the tattoo and/or body pierce during the healing, process. m. No place licensed as a ta ttoo and /or body Diercing establishment shall be used or occupied as living or sleeping quarters. Section 23 -2312. PENALTY. a. Anv person violating any provision of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 is guilty of a misdemeanor anal, u pon conviction shall be punished no t more than the maximum penalty for a misdemeanor as prescribed by law. b. The City Council may. upon ten (10) days written notice to the operator and following a public hearin revoke the license or sus pend the license if the licensee submitted false information or omitted material information in the license process required by Sections 23 -230 through 23 -2314 The Citv Council may revoke the license or suspend the license for a violation of.. S 1. Anv provision of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 or anv other local law governing the same activity during the license period. ORDINANCE NO. i 2. Anv criminal law during the license period which adversely affects the ability to honestly. safely. or lawfully_ conduct a tattooing_ and /or body piercing business. Section 23 -2313. HINDR,A Any person hindering_ the efforts of Citv_ officials to investigate possible vio lations of Sections 23 -9301 through 23 -2314 shall be guil of a misdemeanor. Section 23 -2314. CONFLICT OF PR OVISIONS . In any case where a provision of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -23 is found to be in conflict with t he provision of any zoning. building. fire. safetv, or health ordinance or code in the City the provision wh ich estab lishes th higher standard for the prom and protection of the health and safety o f the people shall prevail. In any case where a provi of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 is f ound to be in conflict with a provision of anv other or dinance or code of the Ci , existing on t he effective date of this ordinance which established a lower standard for the promotion and protection of t he health and safety of the property. the pr ovision of Sections ? 3 -7301 t hrough 23 -2 314 shall be deemed to prevail. The determination of the applicability of this ordinance in light of the above rules of intern_ retation shall. be made by the Citv and its determination shall be final. i Section 2. This _ ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of .1999. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Strikeout indicates matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) e City Council Agenda Item No. 9a MEMO To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager From: Ronald A. Warren Planning nd Zoning S ecialist 7!- g g P Subject: City Council Consideration Item - Planning Commission Application No. 99009 Date: October 20, 1999 On the October 25, 1999 City Council Agenda is Planning Commission Application No. 99009 submitted by Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc. for approval of a Planned Unit Development Amendment to construct a 122 unit, three story Motel 6 complex on vacant property west of the Extended Stay America site. Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning Commission Application No. 99009 and also an area map showing the location of the property under consideration, various site and building plans for the proposed development, the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter, Planning Commission Resolution No. 99 -03 and other supporting documents. This matter was considered by the Planning Commission at their October 14, 1999, meeting and was recommended for approval by the Commission through the adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 99 -03. It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the application. A draft resolution has been prepared for City Council consideration. Application Filed On 9 -21 -99 City Council Action Should Be Taken By 11 -20 -99 (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 99009 Applicant: Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc. (On Behalf of Motel 6 Operating LP) Location: 2741 Freeway Boulevard Request: Planned Unit Development Amendment The applicant, Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc. on behalf of Motel 6 Operating LP, is seeking an amendment to the Planned Unit Development approved in conjunction with the Extended Stay America proposal in order to construct a 120 unit, three story Motel 6 complex on a 2.62 acre site that is legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Shingle Creek 5th Addition. The property is more commonly identified as 2741 Freeway Boulevard and is the southerly of two parcels located west of the Extended Stay America site. The property is zoned PUD/I -1 and is bounded on the south by Interstate 94/694; on the west by Xerxes Avenue; on the north by vacant property described as Lot 1, Block 1, Shingle Creek 5th Addition; and on the east by the Extended Stay America site. Freeway Boulevard borders the vacant parcel to the north and the Extended Stay to the east. • A Planned Unit Development rezoning of this property as well as the other two properties contained in the Shingle Creek 5th Addition from I -1 to PUD /I -1 along with the first phase site and building plan approval for the Extended Stay America was approved by the City Council under Resolution No. 98 -47 on March 23, 1998. Attached for the Commission's review is a copy of that resolution containing the various findings, considerations and conditions of approval for that proposal (Planning Commission Application No. 98005). It was noted at the time of this approval that other developments for Lots 1 and 2 would be subject to review and approval under the Planned Unit Development process when such proposals came forward. Motel 6 Operating LP has acquired the land and wishes to pursue its development of Lot 2 at this time. Subsequent development of Lot 3 will require approval through the PUD process as an amendment at such time as a proposal is put forth. As the Commission is aware, the PUD process involves a rezoning of land to the PUD designation followed by an alpha numeric designation of the underlying zoning district. This underlying zoning district provides the regulations governing uses and structures within the Planned Unit Development. The rules and regulations governing that district (in this case I -1) would apply to the development proposal. One of the purposes of the PUD district is to give the City Council the needed flexibility in addressing development and redevelopment problems. 10 -14 -99 Page 1 Regulations governing uses and structures may be modified by conditions ultimately imposed by the City Council on the development plans. The PUD process involves a rezoning of land and, therefore, is subject to meeting the city's rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines that are contained in Section 35 -208 of the city's zoning ordinance. Also, proposals must be consistent with Section 35 -355 of the city's zoning ordinance which addresses Planned Unit Developments. Attached for the Commission's review are copies of 35 -208 and 35 -355 of the city's zoning ordinance. The rezoning of the property to the Planned Unit Development designation was accomplished with the March 23, 1998, approval and it was anticipated at that time that other freeway oriented businesses such as hotels and restaurants would in all likelihood seek approval for development on the remaining parcels. Findings as to the appropriateness of these developments have been made generally for the two remaining parcels. Approval of any development plan should acknowledge compatibility with the policy and review guidelines of Section 35 -208 and the provisions of Section 35 -355 of the zoning ordinance. The applicant has submitted a letter addressing Section 35 -208 (attached) and we have also received a letter from Mr. Randy Lee of Motel 6 indicating how they believe Motel 6 will fit into and be compatible with existing land uses around the site. There has been in the past some concern about over building or over saturation of the hotel /motel market in this area. Mr. Lee's letter addresses these concerns from the prospective of the developer. Their market analysis indicates such uses are not over built in the area and that the Shingle Creek Parkway area in • Brooklyn Center is the primary lodging and hospitality interchange in the northwest quadrant of the Twin Cities area. He notes also that the Twin Cities area continues to post higher room rates and occupancy levels than other major cities throughout the Midwest. He indicates that they do_ not believe a new Motel 6 will have a negative effect on the existing limited service lodging supply in Brooklyn Center but, rather, will enhance the opportunity to provide accommodations for what they believe to be increasing numbers of clients coming into this area. The Commission's attention is also directed to the letter submitted by Naeem Qureshi which specifically addresses each of the points contained in the city's rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines. The staff generally concurs with the comments made with respect to the guidelines and notes that this is the anticipated type of development expected for the remaining parcels of land when they were rezoned to the PUD designation in March of 1998. We also believe the proposal will be consistent and compatible with surrounding land uses such as the Extended Stay and the Country Inn and Suites and T.G.I.Friday's complex as well as other freeway oriented businesses in the immediate area. We believe, as will be shown in the site and building plan portion of this report, that the subject property will bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed development and that the proposal appears to be a good long range use of the existing land and can be considered to be in the best interests of the community. e 10 -14 -99 Page 2 SITE AND BU ILDING PLAN PROPOSAL The proposed plan calls for a three story, 122 unit motel that would be located in the approximate middle of a 2.62 acre site. The building will be an L shaped building with the main entrance and lobby area being approximately in the northeast corner of the building. ACCESS/PARKING Access to the site will be gained via a shared access on Freeway Boulevard. A cross access easement giving Lot 2 access over Lot 1 to Freeway Boulevard was developed as a condition of the replatting of this property at the time of the Extended Stay America proposal. The City Engineer in a September 30, 1999, memo regarding this proposal (attached) notes that the plan shows the driveway shifted from the original location and that the drive lane leading to the Motel 6 site is no longer located within the easement area. The driveway opening will have to be relocated to line up with the driveway on the opposite side of Freeway Boulevard and the drive lane either relocated or the easement modified to reflect the new location. No other access driveways will be allowed between this one and Xerxes Avenue. The drive lane across Lot 1 ties into the motel site at the northeast corner. The drive lane circles the motel building and 90' parking is located around the entire building. The plan provides 129 parking spaces each meeting he min' ix handicap spaces are being g minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance. S p p g provided, four to the east and two to the west of the main entrance into the building. The parking requirement for this motel facility is based on the number of rooms and employees at the O maximum shift. The parking requirement is one parking space per room and one per employee at the maximum shift. With 122 rooms and 7 employees as indicated on the site plan, a total of 129 parking spaces are required. Again, the plan provides 129 parking spaces. All driveways servicing parking areas meet the minimum requirements and standards set forth in the zoning ordinance. A circular turn around or drop off area is located immediately north of the main entrance to the building and a canopy extends out over that area to provide cover for patrons unloading and loading vehicles. B -612 curb and gutter is required to be provided around all parking and driving areas. GRADING /DRAINAGE/UTILITIES The drainage plan proposes draining the parking lot into seven catch basins located at various points around the hotel building in the parking lot. Storm water will be collected in these catch basins and carried to a connection to existing storm sewer at the southeast corner of the site which will convey water into an existing storm water retention pond at the east end of the Extended Stay America site. This pond is sized to accommodate storm water run off for all of the property located in the Shingle Creek 5th Addition. After treatment in the pond, storm water will be discharged into the adjacent MN/DOT ditch along Interstate 94. The Commission's attention is directed to the City Engineer's memo relating to comments about the storm water system. He indicates that there appears to be no further reviews or approvals required of the 10 -14 -99 Page 3 Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission as this was accomplished at the time of the original proposal. The City Engineer notes that a maintenance and utility agreement will need to be required of the Motel 6 property and because the site is over one acre in size and creates more than one acre of new impervious surface, Motel 6 is required to obtain and NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and must also provide adequate erosion control. Sanitary sewer will be connected to the building at the northeast corner and tied into existing sanitary sewer within Freeway Boulevard right -of -way. The sanitary sewer will extend over a portion of Lot 1 in order to reach the Freeway Boulevard location. Appropriate utility easements or private covenants will be needed for this to be accomplished. A looped water system will be provided around the building tying into a stub extended from the Extended Stay America site. LANDSCAPING The applicant has submitted a landscape plan in response to the landscape point system utilized by the Planning Commission to evaluate such plans. This 2.62 acre site requires a total of 196 landscape points. The applicant proposes to meet this requirement, and in fact well exceeds this requirement, by providing a variety of plantings including 36 shade trees (Red Oak, Sugar Maple, and Green Ash), 39 coniferous trees (Upright Yew and Blue Spruce), 13 decorative trees (Crab Apple) and 144 shrubs (Spreading English Yew, Bridal Wreath Spirea, Cardinal Red Dogwood and Dwarf American Cranberry Bush). The total amount of points provided on the landscape plan is 685.5 which is over three times the minimum required by the landscape point system. The plan itself calls for an intermixing of Red Oa Green Ash and Blue Spruce around the perimeter green strips of the site. Sugar Maple, Crab Apple, Upright Yew and Blue Spruce are provided around the building and Green Ash and Sugar Maple are located on a landscape island area in the parking lot. Upright Yew border the main entrance to the building. Shrubs such as Spreading English Yew, Bridal Wreath Spirea, Cardinal Red Dogwood and Dwarf American Cranberry Bush are foundation plantings around the perimeter of the building. Underground irrigation is required in all landscaped areas. BUILDING The building elevations indicate the exterior of the Motel 6 to be a PC plaster with special coating and composition shingle roof. The color will be an English Linen (white) and Maizon Blanche (beige). Accent colors include blue, blue green and blue heron. LIGHTING /TRASH The applicant has submitted a lighting plan showing eight parking lot lights surrounding the facility. Our main concern is that these parking lot lights be shielded and directed down onto the site so as not to create glare off of the site. ® 10 -14 -99 Page 4 . The plan indicates that a trash enclosure will be located at the northwest corner of the property. Details indicate that the enclosure will be 8 ft. 8 in. high and consist of a split face concrete masonry unit. The gates for the enclosure will be cedar slats attached to a metal gate frame. The plans as a whole, with some modifications appear to be in order. DIRECTIONAL SIGN Although signery is typically not part of the review process for a PUD, we have some comments and recommendations we would like the Planning Commission to consider. Motel 6 is concerned about possible confusion among potential customers using the shared access drive off Freeway Boulevard. They desire to have a sign at that location. Such a sign would be an off premise sign which is not permitted under the sign ordinance. The primary reason for not allowing off premise identification or advertising signs is to prohibit billboards. There has been precedent set, in at least three situations, to allow off premise directional signs in cases where access is gained to one site over another property. The cases include Brookdale Ford through the Brookdale Square site; the Cinema Theater over the Perkin's property; and various commercial and industrial buildings that are accessed via Parkway Circle which is a private roadway on a separate parcel of land. In all cases, variances were approved to allow off premise directional signs as approved to off premise advertising or identification signs on the basis of uniqueness and hardship. Such signs were limited to no more than 16 square feet in area and no more than 15 feet in height. The same principles apply in this situation and it is recommended that approval of this PUD also authorize an off premise directional sign no greater than 16 square feet in area and 15 feet in height at the shared access serving the subject site as well as Lot 1, Block 1, Shingle Creek 5th Addition. PROCEDURE As pointed out previously, this proposal is an amendment to the Planned Unit Development proposal already approved for this area. The first phase of the PUD was the Extended Stay America site. Approvals for the other two lots require a Planned Unit Development Amendment. As such, the proposal is required to follow the procedures contained in Section 35 -355 regarding Planned Unit Developments. This requires a public hearing which has been scheduled. Notices have been sent and notice has been published in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post. The Planning Commission serves as the neighborhood advisory group for development proposals within the industrial park area. This matter, therefore, can be reviewed and recommended at Thursday evening's meeting if the Planning Commission deems it appropriate. All in all, the staff believes this plan is in order and, therefore, would recommend approval of the amendment for the development of the Motel 6 project. Approval of this application should acknowledge findings, considerations and conditions that are comparable to those made in City 10 -14 -99 Page 5 . Council Resolution No. 98 -47. A draft Planning Commission Resolution is offered for the Planning Commission's consideration. This resolution outlines the Planning Commission consideration of this matter and also sites recommended considerations and conditions for approval. • • 10 -14 -99 Page 6 MEN �ii lN .1111 • �. . �� . = � ��� � �♦ ♦ �� � � ,. �:� I X11/ � . �� � 1111 �I� .... ■ ■� ,,, � �� �� _ ° _ - 1 .��.� 11l�'' ♦�' �i ; OR o son IS IM M 0& v L 16 �` v 1 111 /1 1111 � 111 1 1 '' n armod introduced the following Kathleen C y $ resolution and moved its adoption: Member P RESOLUTION NO. 98 -47 RESOLUTION REGARDING DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 98005 SUBMITTED BY EXTENDED STAY AMERICA, INC. WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 98005 submitted by Extended Stay America, Inc. proposes rezoning from I -1 (Industrial Park) to PUD /I -1 of a 7.28 acre parcel of land located at the southeast quadrant of Xerxes Avenue North and Freeway Boulevard, bounded by Freeway Boulevard on the north and east; by I -94 on the south; and Xerxes Avenue North on the west; and WHEREAS, this proposal comprehends the rezoning of the above mentioned parcel and site and building plan approval for a three story, 104 unit efficiency hotel on the easterly portion of the aforementioned site; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on March 12, 1998, when a staff report and public testimony regarding the rezoning and site and building plan were received; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 98005 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 98 -01 on March 12, 1998; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered Application No. 98005 at their March 12, 1998 meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered this rezoning and site and building plan requests in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's zoning ordinance, the provisions of the Planned Unit Development ordinance contained in Section 35 -355, the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Planning Commission's recommendation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that Application No. 98005 submitted by Extended Stay America, Inc. be approved in light of the following considerations: 1. The rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section of the City's zoning ordinance. 2. The rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal will allow for the utilization of Resolution No. the land in question in a manner which is compatible with, complimentary to and of comparable intensity to adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on surrounding land. - .3. The utilization of the property as proposed under this rezoning and site and building plan will conform with city ordinance standards and is considered a reasonable use of the property. 4. The rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are considered compatible with the recommendations of the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the city. 5. The rezoning and site and building plan appear to be a good long range use of the existing land and an asset to the community. 6. In light of the above considerations, it is.believed that the guidelines for evaluating rezonings as contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's zoning ordinance are met and that the proposal is, therefore, in the best interest of the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that approval of Application No. 98005 be subject to the following conditions and considerations: I. The building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans as well as appropriate utility easements for adjoining properties are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee in an amount to be determined based on cost estimates shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or on- ground mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The buildings are to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the city ordinances. 6. An underground gro nd irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to 40 facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery, which is subject to Chapter 34 of the city ® Resolution No. 98 -47 ordinances. 8. B -612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines prior to the release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter into an easement and agreement for maintenance and inspection of utility and storm drainage systems, prior to the issuance of permits. 11. The plans shall be modified to provide either a reduced size access where a shared access is to be provided between this property and the adjoining property to the west or the installation of a concrete delineator as approved by the City Engineer. 12. All work performed and materials used for construction of utilities shall conform to the City of Brooklyn Center standard specifications and details. 13. Ponding areas required as part of the storm drainage plan shall be protected by an approved easement. The easement document shall be executed and filed with Hennepin County prior to the issuance of building permits. 14. The applicant shall provide appropriate erosion and sediment control devices on the site during construction as approved by the City's Engineering Department. 15. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Brooklyn Center to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to the issuance of permits. 16. Approval of this Planned Unit Development acknowledges "efficiency or extended stay hotels" offering transient lodging accommodations for periods of longer than one week as being comparable in intensity and use as transient lodging defined in the Brooklyn Center zoning ordinance and, therefore, an allowed use in this Planned Unit Development. Ma rc 3, 19 4 Date Mayor ATTEST: Jk, City Clerk . Resolution No. 98 -47 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded b member P Y Y r Ka Lasman Y and u vote ote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Myrna Kragness, Kathleen Carmody, Kay Lasman, and Robert Peppe; and the following voted against the same: Debra Hilstrom whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • ® Following the review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, the City Council shall consider the proposed amendment and may, by resolution of two- thirds of its members, amend the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Coordination with Other Agencies. In the performance of its planning activities, the Planning Commission shall consult with and coordinate the planning activities of other departments and agencies of the municipality to insure conformity with and to assist in a development of the comprehensive municipal plan. Furthermore, the Planning Commission shall take due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government and other affected public agencies. Section 35 -208. REZONING EVALUATION POLICY AND REVIEW GUIDELINES. 1. Puroose The City Council finds that effective maintenance of the comprehensive planning and land use classifications is enhanced through uniform and equitable evaluation of periodic proposed changes to this Zoning Ordinance; and for this purpose, by the adoption of Resolution No. 77 -167, the City Council has established a rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines. 2. Polic It is the policy of the City that: a) zoning classifications must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and b) rezoning proposals shall not constitute "spot zoning ", defined as a zoning decision which discriminates in favor of a particular landowner, and' does not relate to the Comprehensive Plan or to accepted planning principles. 3. Procedure Each rezoning proposal will be considered on its merits, measured against the above policy and against these guidelines which may be weighed collectively or individually as deemed by the City. 4. Guidelines a. Is there a clear and public need or benefit? b. Is the proposed zoning consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classifications? 35 -3 C. Can all permitted uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the subject property? d. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in the area since the subject property was zoned? e. In the case of City- initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? f. Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning districts? g. Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district, with respect to size, configuration, topography or location? h. Will the rezoning result in the expansion of a zoning district, warranted by: 1) Comprehensive Planning; 2) the lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district; or 3) the best interests of the community? i. Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? Section 35 -210. REZONING APPLICATION PROCEDURES AND RECONSIDERATION. The following rules shall govern applications for amendments to the Zoning Ordinance hereinafter referred to as "Rezoning Applications ": 1. Procedures a. A rezoning application may be initiated • by the City Council, the Planning Commission, or by the owner of the subject property. Any such application shall be referred to the Planning Commission for public hearing, study, and report and may not be acted upon by the City Council until it has received the recommendation of the Commission, or until seventy -eight (78) days have elapsed from the date of referral of the application without a report by the Planning Commission. The date of referral is defined as .the date of the public hearing. b. The applicant or his authorized agent shall fill out and submit to the Secretary of the Planning Commission a zoning application", copies of which are available at the municipal offices, together with a fee in an amount as set forth by City Council resolution. The application shall be filed with the Secretary of the Planning Commission at least seventeen (17) days before the date of the public hearing. .35 -4 c. Accessory uses incidental to the foregoing principal uses when located on the same property with the use to which it is accessory but not including any business or industrial uses. Such accessory uses to include but not be restricted to the following: 1. Off -street parking. 2. Public recreational buildings and parks, playgrounds and athletic fields. 3. Signs as permitted in the Brooklyn Center Sign Ordinance. Section 35 -355. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) district is to promote flexibility in land development and redevelopment, preserve aesthetically significant and environmentally sensitive site features, conserve energy and ensure a high quality of design. Subdivision 2. Classification of PUD Districts; Permitted Uses; Applicable Regulations. • a. Upon rezoning for a PUD, the district shall be designated by the letters "PUD" followed by the alphanumeric designation of the underlying zoning district which may be either the prior zoning classification or a new classification. In cases of mixed use PUDs, the City Council shall, whenever reasonably practicable, specify underlying zoning classifications for *the various parts of the PUD. When it is not reasonably practicable to so specify underlying zoning classifications, the Council may rezone the district, or any part thereof, to "PUD - MIXED." b. Regulations governing uses and structures in PUDs shall be the same as those governing the underlying zoning district subject to the following: 1. Regulations may be modified expressly by conditions imposed by the Council at the time of rezoning to PUD. 2. Regulations are modified by implication only to the extent necessary to comply with the development plan of the PUD. .3. In the case of districts rezoned to PUD - MIXED, the Council shall specify regulations applicable to uses and structures in various parts of the district. • 35 -45 c. For purposes of determining applicable regulations for uses or structures on land adjacent to or in the vicinity of the PUD district which depend on the zoning of the PUD district, the underlying zoning classification of PUD districts shall be deemed to be the zoning classification of the district. In the case of a district zoned PUD - MIXED, the underlying zoning classification shall be deemed to be the classification which allows as a permitted use any use which is permitted in the PUD district and which results in the most restrictive regulation of adjacent or nearby properties. Subdivision'). Development Standards. a. A PUD shall have a minimum area of one acre, excluding land included within the floodway or flood fringe overlay districts and excluding existing rights -of -way, unless the City finds that at least one of the following conditions exists: 1. There are unusual physical features of the property or of the surrounding neighborhood such that development as a PUD will conserve a physical or terrain feature of importance to the neighborhood or community; 2. The property is directly adjacent to or across a public right -of -way from property which previously was developed as a PUD and the new PUD will be perceived as and function • as an extension of that previously approved development; or 3. The property is located in a transitional area between different land uses and the development will be used as a buffer between the uses. b. Within a PUD, overall density for residential developments shall be consistent with Section 35 -400 of this ordinance. Individual buildings or lots within a PUD may exceed these standards, provided that density for the entire PUD does not exceed the permitted standards. C. Setbacks, buffers and greenstrips within a PUD shall be consistent with Section 35 -400 to 35 -414 and Section 35 -700 of this ordinance unless the developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser standard should be permitted with the addition of a screening treatment or other mitigative measures. d. Parking provided for uses within a PUD shall be consistent with the parking requirements contained in Section 35 -704 of,this ordinance unless the developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser standard should be permitted on the grounds of the complementarity of peak parking demands by the uses within the PUD. The City may require execution of a restrictive covenant limiting future use of the property to those uses which will continue this parking complementarity, or which are otherwise approved by the City. • 35 -46 • Subdivision 4. General Standards. a. The City may allow more than one principal building to be constructed on each platted lot within a PUD. b. A PUD which involves only one land use or a single housing type may be permitted provided that it is otherwise consistent with the purposes and objectives of this section. C. A PUD may only contain uses consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. d. All property to be included within a PUD shall be under unified ownership or control or subject to such legal restrictions or covenants as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the approved development plan and site plan. e. The uniqueness of each PUD requires that specifications and standards for streets, utilities, public facilities and the approval of land subdivision may be subject to modifications from the City Ordinances generally governing them. The City Council may, therefore, approve streets, utilities public facilities and land subdivisions which are not in compliance with usual specifications or ordinance requirements where it is found that such are not required in the interests of the residents or of the City. • Subdivision 5. Application and Review. a. Implementation of a PUD shall be controlled by the development plan. The development plan may be approved or disapproved by the City Council after evaluation by the Planning Commission. Submission of the development plan shall be made to the Director of Planning and Inspection on such forms and accompanied by such information and documentation as the City may deem necessary or convenient, but shall include at a minimum the following: 1. Street and utility locations and sizes; 2. A drainage plan, including location and size of pipes and water storage,areas; 3. A grading plan; 4. A landscape plan; 5. A lighting plan; 6. A plan for timing and phasing of the development; 7. Covenan ts or other restrictions proposed for the regulation of the development; • 35 -47 8. A site plan showing the location of all structures and parking areas; 9. Building renderings or elevation drawings of all sides of all buildings to be constructed g g in at least the first phase of development; and 10. Proposed underlying zoning classification or classifications. Such information may be in a preliminary form, but shall be sufficiently complete and accurate to allow an evaluation of the development by the City. b. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the development plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be published in the official newspaper and actual notice shall be mailed to the applicant and adjacent property owners as required by Section 35 -210 of this ordinance. The Planning Commission shall review the development plan and make such recommendations as it deems appropriate regarding the plan within the time limits established by Section 35 -210 of this ordinance. c. Following receipt of the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the City Council shall hold such hearing as it appropriate regarding the matter. The City Council shall act upon the development plan within the time limits established by Section 35 -210 of this ordinance. Approval of the development plan shall constitute rezoning of the property to ® PUD and conceptual approval of the elements of the plan. In addition to the guidelines provided in Section 35 -208 of this ordinance, the City Council shall base its actions on the rezoning upon the following criteria: 1. Compatibility of the plan with the standards, purposes - and intent of this section; 2. Consistency of the plan with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 3. The impact of the plan on the neighborhood in which it is to be located; and 4. The adequacy of internal site organization, uses, densities, circulation, parking facilities, public facilities, recreational areas, open spaces, and buffering and landscaping. The City Council may attach such conditions to its approval as it may determine to be necessary to better accomplish the purposes of the PUD district. d. Prior to construction on any site zoned PUD, the developer shall seek plan approval pursuant to Section 35 -230 of this ordinance. In addition to the information specifically required by Section 35 -230, the developer shall submit such information as may be deemed necessary or convenient by the City to review the consistency of the proposed development with the approved development plan. • 35 -48 The plan submitted for approval pursuant to Section 35 -230 shall be in substantial compliance with the approved development plan. Substantial compliance shall mean that buildings, parking areas and roads are in essentially the same location as previously approved; the number of dwelling units, if any, has not increased or decreased by more than 5 percent; the floor area of nonresidential areas has not been increased or decreased by more than 5 percent; no building has been increased in the number of floors; open space has not been decreased or altered from its original design or use, and lot coverage of any individual 'building has not been increased or decreased by more than 10 percent. e. Prior to construction on any site zoned PUD, the developer shall execute a development agreement in a form satisfactory to the City. f. Applicants may combine development plan approval with the plan approval required by Section 35 -230 by submitting all information required for both simultaneously. g. After approval of the development plan and the plan approval required by Section 35 -230, nothing shall be constructed on the site and no building permits shall be issued except in conformity with the approved plans. h. If within 12 months following approval by the City Council of the development plan, no building permits have been obtained or, if within 12 months after the issuance of building permits no construction has commenced on the area approved for the PUD district, the City Council may initiate rezoning of the property._ i. Any major amendment to the development plan may be approved by the City Council following the same notice and hearing procedures specified in this section. An amendment shall be considered major if it involves any change greater than that permitted by subdivision 5d of this section. Changes which are determined by the City Council to be minor may be made if approved by the Planning Commission after such notice and hearing as may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. 35 -44 Z` - J , 6 MOTEL 6 Operating L.P. 14651 Dallas Parkway Suite 500 Dallas, TX 75240 Tel: (972) 386 6161Se Sep tember 28, 1999 infoCdrnotel6.com p . Mr. Ron Warren Planning and Zoning Specialist 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 RE: Motel 6 Prototype 2000 Development 1 -694 / Shingle Creek Pkwy Brooklyn Center, MN Dear Mr. Warren: In anticipation of becoming a member of the Brooklyn Center business community Motel 6 was pleased to learn that in considering the above referenced development, the Planning Commission and City Council would be concerned with potential over- building of hotels in Brooklyn Center. While seeking opportunities across the US for Motel 6 development we have seen over - building on many occasions however this is not the environment we have found in Brooklyn Center. Motel 6's decision to develop a property in Brooklyn Center is underwritten by the following: 1. Brooklyn Center at Shingle Creek Parkway is the primary lodging and hospitality interchange in the NW quadrant of the Minneapolis St. Paul MSA. This serves both the long and short- term goals of owning and operating a hotel. We take comfort in recognizing the solid presence of hotels and restaurants at this location. 2. The Minneapolis St. Paul MSA while experiencing limited service lodging increases continues to post much higher Room Rates and Occupancy Levels than other major cities throughout the mid -west. Smith Travel Research reports that demand and supply growth remain equal in the Minneapolis St. Paul MSA. 3. We looked at several sites in the Minneapolis St. Paul MSA along the 1- 694/94 corridor for development. We decided upon Brooklyn Center due to the strong hospitality environment, visibility and ease of access, and most importantly what we have determined to be a good quality of life within the city. It is our intention to build the property for the above reasons keeping in mind that we do not plan to sell it when the market will allow a quick profit. It is the business philosophy of Motel 6 to develop, own and operate properties in primary lodging markets such as Brooklyn Center. Motel 6 and its parent company Accor Economy Lodging own and operate more than 1,100 limited service hotels throughout the US including brands such as Red Roof Inn and Studio 6 our extended stay entity. • r'�CCOR Additionally, Motel 6 will not seek outside financing for this project. We will use the companies operating cash to fund the planned development in Brooklyn Center. We are simply that confident in the market and our project. Directing this letter to why a new Motel 6 will not have a negative effect on the existing limited service lodging supply in Brooklyn Center, we should re- enforce that Motel 6 intends to build a modern 3 story interior corridor property with approximately 121 rooms. The building, Motel 6's "Prototype 2000" is perhaps the limited service lodging industry's most modern and efficient building, designed to meet the expectations of most operating environments. The primary reason why a new Motel 6 will not have a negative economic effect on the existing limited service lodging hotels is the Motel 6 price position and target market segment. Currently, Brooklyn Centers limited service hotels target market segment is business / commercial travel. This is reinforced by room prices above $60.00 per night for basic accommodations not including full service hotel amenities such as meeting rooms, room service, on premise restaurant and catering. In the future, in as long as two years due to development and construction time requirements, Motel 6 plans for an initial price of approximately $40.00 per night targeting the leisure travel segment and senior citizens as a core business. Motel 6's nationwide business mix is approximately 70% leisure travelers, 15% senior citizens with the remaining being religious, educational and a small percentage of loyal business travelers. As you may know, a significant number of limited service hotel rooms oriented to leisure travel will ® leave the market in Bloomington, MN. Today, Bloomington is the primary leisure travel lodging market in the Minneapolis St. Paul MSA. Currently the Motel 6 the Excel Inn and other hotels with an estimated 900 rooms will be removed from the landscape in Bloomington in the next 12 to 24 months due to the widening of 1-494 or expansion of the airport. This enhances the opportunity for Motel 6 and The City of Brooklyn Center to host leisure travelers and senior citizens who are not only visiting the immediate area, but may also be visiting either the Mall of America, Minneapolis city center attractions and events as well as the leisure travel created north of downtown in Arden Hills, Fridley and Maple Grove. Today, leisure travelers in these markets look primarily to the Bloomington area for lodging not only due to its geographic location but also due to the availability of limited service lodging supply oriented to the leisure traveler. It is my understanding that you will forward this letter onto members of the Planning Commission for their review of our project. I look forward to talking to you in the future as our project moves along. I plan to be at the Planning Commission Hearing and City Council Meeting when our project is presented for approval. If you have any questions or concerns please call me any time at 972 - 702 -6823. Thank you. Sin rely, • Randy Lee Director of Real Estate & Development Motel 6 Operating L.P. Progressive Consulting Engineers Inc. • 6120 Eade Brown Drive, Suite 629, Minneapolis,,MN 55430 -2581 (612) 560 -9133 FAX (612) 560 -0333 September 14, 1999, Ron Warren City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy. - Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 RE: PUD Amendment-Block 1, Shingle Creek 5 Addition Motel 6 is proposing a 122 unit motel on Lot 2 along with other facilities such as a pool and parking area. a) Is there a clear and public need or benefit? The property is part of a PUD which maximizes the freeway exposure for the properties. -The proposed 120 unit Motel 6 project will add to the City tax base. b) Is the proposed zoning consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classifications? _ The project is part of a PUD. The property is adjoining an "Extended Stay America" lodging facility. As such, the proposed zoning is consistent with surrounding land use classification. C) Can all permitted uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for - development of the subject property? The subject property is an approved PUD in a general industrial area. The proposed use is compatible with the approved PUD. d) Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in the area since the subject property was zoned? The present PUD involved 3 lots in an industrial zoned area, which is a zoning change. e) In the case of City - initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? Not applicable. Civil Structural • Water Supply Municipal • f) Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance. development restrictions for the proposed zoning districts? The subject property' will meet all the development restrictions for the proposed zoning district. No variances will be needed for set back and parking requirements. No new curb cut will be needed on Freeway Boulevard as both the replatted Lots 1 and 2 will share the same driveway. An easement for egress and ingress will be provided for Lot 1. g) Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district, with respect to size, configuration, topography or location? The subject property is a good use of the exposure provided by the freeway. The size and configuration of the proposed development is compatible with the topography and the site orientation. h) Will the rezoning result in the expansion of a zoning district, warranted by: 1) Comprehensive Planning; 2)' the lack of developable land in the pro_ posed zoning district; or 3) the best interests of the community? The PUD in an industrial zone is approved and is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The City is generally fully developed. The proposed project is a permitted use in a PUD - and will result in an increase in the'tax base of the City. It is a good use of the freeway exposure and such is in the best interest of the City. i) Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? The proposal meets all the criteria for development and does not require any variances except for signage. It is compatible with existing PUD and use of adjoining properties. We appreciate a favorable consideration for the rezoning of the property. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Naeem Qureshi, P.E. NQ /ah _ _ • MEMORANDUM DATE: September 30, 1999 TO: Ron Warren, Planning and Zoning Specialist FROM: Scott Brink, City Engineer SUBJECT: Motel - Pro Proposed Site Plan and Preliminary Comments P �'Y The plan for a proposed Motel 6 facility located on Freeway Boulevard has been reviewed. The site, grading and drainage, and utility plans reviewed were prepared by PCE, along with a property survey by Lot Surveys Company, Inc. The following review comments are offered at this time. • The proposed project involves the construction of a hotel facility on a site of approximately 2 acres. The property site (Lot 2, Block 1, Shingle Creek 5th Addition) was previously reviewed by the Shingle Creek Watershed just over 1 year ago as part of a comprehensive review of the entire Shingle Creek 5th Addition plat. Some modifications to the site plan will be made to direct the drainage from the site to an existing storm drainage system and treatment pond that was designed to accommodate the entire plat. Therefore, it appears that there will be no further reviews or approvals required of the Watershed. However, a maintenance and utility agreement will still be required from the Motel 6 property. In addition, because the site is over ® 1 acre in size and creates more than 1 acre of new impervious surface, the developer is required to obtain an NPDES permit and provide adequate erosion control. • A cross access easement /agreement was previously required and approved by the City to enable access to this property. This site plan shifts the location of the planned driveway so it no longer is contained within that easement, and it is now not located directly opposite the driveway across the street. The site plan should be amended so that the driveways are directly opposite each other, and the cross access easement /agreement reviewed to assure that it still accurately describes the location of the driveway. • Sanitary sewer is available from Freeway Boulevard. The plan shows connection to an existing service extending from across Freeway Boulevard. However, in order to reach the service stub, the service line will slice through portions of Lots 1 and 3. Appropriate utility easements or private covenants as appropriate will be needed. • Water service was installed and looped around the Extended Stay Site with 8 inch diameter stubs extended to Lots 1 and 2. During the approval process of the Extended Stay site, this design was required to provide for water service to these two lots, along with a joint utility agreement or covenant as appropriate. • The -driveway serving Lot 2 must also serve Lot 10oint access driveway required as approved previously). No additional driveways to Freeway Boulevard or Xerxes Avenue from Lot 1 will be allowed. t These are the comments I have at this time. Additional comments from the Public Works Department may be forthcoming prior to final approval of the site plan and approval of permits. : •S•,• .._..... - ::N21 "E • 193.12 -• ',� - :�a"•_N27!_ sc g_.149.6z '°"''�'•�•.. *^'w' SC N recT 0 30 60 - _ =, .m „ :�;�-:.:50� - 3157 .�• I . � -- w - -- �' /� N9• p71 1 _ �j j,� ( ORWR a amNn - Roma own" tr w I I _ , _ • t Sul[ 7N - � • � -''_. � ' � � SpA,iIIIC't oz -vi11 .. � f • • pJ; : � � ww • ' 4JIS ; z_ 91.01 � p»r� wJt A00 ..1 , -1, ' f f�i w, �,. r 1 ; ; ' r,, M . ..! N S C ' wM�I. 1Y 91.01 lRtw SIN ARNIM ;1 Z •' _ mrw. 11LN . 200022 sari psf ACRES) SO1TNt• Siwnr .10 Taal to N Imm a. OT or sNOOran CENT a j 1 FY / i 11Gj. �� �• ' :$ • ..� ' ! I ri a.o a »..ww. 6. _ so t � rs:nf swss.0 3T � � ` • [ : : N q - t f �, � tN.rS ,K. n1[[a 0.M ! »rwsM N . •! , «, i+ N I o k r r rsA OS g q � � swww..+ yn <M 1 r V. 1 7=1 w r rw ... ; , t« •wl« w. owl atr.rOr . ti• i r • Qy ;, � j M' wm N» 1 , M. »• t i 1 � } J ST. .,[PrIMONMr M YW LI�(FY `... ,� " ` \ • • ' � „ � . ,Kyt�Jy: y • ys • / ��F a.aw�..1 eM �+a t[ �w atNiailcN V y 0 M 01e. 'ws 3pixSJx wM H6fe7p Z � ^• � � r� � I p / r«raer � ow .. « erww r.r I r•• ,� i'� r o• 1s1i1 1aM0NL _ .i� ^V �uew.wn. .N<aw4 Ipwne�. .. v�« 4 mT STworp ' • V Mr• ws.« .. Ylit> Ca.s«i<. = � 7.«. .. w � . — ' �',�' w ' •: ; 88 ' °i _. � ;� , • / • •� .w wrNr., sW....... Caoa: ^w.. +�� Few F«rww l.. � : .... � _ ^. ___ _ s• � A `..•• > * � • iI v •��.', L f f <� nNwrbf:•iMJ•M AOORIR' ,'•, - Y� - -- I ' / H«a •NawaNyir.rW41 r..w «N.fN _•_..,wa„ * 1 . v+l ... .. _ _ .M:nr .J / . //' . _ ... .� �_ — • 4 �: ___... _....�.} _ -_ _.. -_. v.xrnr•_•f -_._ -. „�rY -_- -r .Sk. , aN.nwb MlJ1.lMNdwatryryrwe+arwer4atl . wr.w : q.<w+ «. P. ...«... . ». �` � "--- -. ._. -_� •'• «/! ../ +Vr.r«ti1.N.i..w wuit111wrrw<s rw rwr» J,•w .,r•• a.NyA.rl..lrJ.lswA l,pwq.Et#FEf f•' i, .�.1:., �.J".W._"fw.': �.. .^ JKa6..••• "$ f0 y0rA..,...a- ,� f «w41:ie7wr J1 I1rYMw wrm.4 Mr � "bw � I 521'14! 6 4 "W 99.46; x ,,r / wl.NlrJran..,r«r« wlJrw.sllNa.r.t�ff �. •• E ( MM , -J t ) ° �rrw • "; / ♦ A .f' ', • •4 / +w�rM�wwi rca�`.N ti.wf Fr 4 '.:� {� / •"�� W:OIM / ! +:' y �« a�.wwwlrNNNr wrrY w�filrrlwi.flNinflN lJ rrMs ( /r / " / I• fjoJ q wwAdd- i. l:wr VICINTY MAP rt+.i,r :i: « r,rl( �nniRlos EXTEND STAY AMERICA •tr. MOTEL ' r t Mn nN W EN e tmNls it urwras4 n 3SSlit / y a— MSbwltw,W,ra�rr y .ft ; / 1 « wrMrrlrr.r.,w k � •Wrote 1/2• M tka tuna ' • . ¢ • D—tes 1/7• rm Pt. SO i ... _ .. �� r .L! ' sciaN wMw'vw PREPARED trr. i wr.N . ..�.._. R LOT SI�RVEYS OOIP BEd0 10 FEET NY.IIC n. LAID SURVEYORS FEET N IYDTH AND ADA3M10 NOW ! • 7601 73RD AVE. AYE N0. %wAr, ALSO t1ENO 5 FEET N WDTH AND _ - - r)t. 1 r ( tIRWK1YN PMOf ua 5saze is Ik 2, B1o0k 1 SHINGLE Na A T �ss orHFAwnE _ soo tME (51 Sea -b5s CREEK 5TH ADDITION _.,.,. ._. _•,. a. SAW _WFM-,,L,, Rt7. I I .r•± -al I ElJ» scA:L N FEET 0 - �-' w o w oo z LEGEND S PARKING SETBACK UNE —BUILDING SETBACK LINE J ui CYCLONE FENCE I . pOPERTY LINE O LZ -- _ _ _ — — REMOVAL UMITS � U 3 NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS z NOTE: J Y 1. SURVEY WAS PERFORMED BY LOTS SURVEY. 0 2. PARKING STALLS TO BE STRIPED MTN A 4' of A TO BE N AM4IDIWO ACCESS o] nngg \ \yam [� µ�S ro STRI ' ON CENTER AND AT 45' \•��� � 3. CURB�UNtESSNO7�ED 07HERNiSE.TME FACE OF U MOTEL 6 • • r+ / 9 Z Z 9 / z A Lj w z 4 moz ��r ~ 99025 PARKING CALCULATIONS `mo �\ �/' �� i' �,r 9/30/99 BUILDING AREA STALL '*) e CLASSIFICATION IPARKING CRITERIA HOTEL 1 NIT 122 C A^ /Ea. - " "42r \� y '' ' HOTEL 1/EMPLOYEE 7 Cq - \� _ V BD LPI TOTAL STALLS REWIRED 129 - PARKING STALLS PROVIDED 129 '•S}`•'1. /�% y SITE PLAN ADA ACCESSIBLE SPACES REQUIRED 5 ADA ACCESSIBLE SPACES PROVIDED 6 ADA VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACES PROVIDED 2 ' _ !l� . ✓ .ism. ons .w �.urm� m .M msmn x+u.s.r'u. +n•wa�s • - --"'-' -' ""' CYCLONE FENCE LIMITS UNLESS SHO'AN OTHERWISE. 6. REFER TO RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE GEOTECHNICAL z PROPERTY LINE REPORT FOR ANY ADDITIONAL SITE PREPARATION Z i �Z' ----- -- 3SG - - --- EXISTING CONTOURS 3 - CONTRACTORS MUST FIELD VERIFY LOCATION INFORMATION OR REQUIREMENTS. _ AND ELEVATIW IN ALL EXISTING UTIU11E5 -SO' — PROPOSED CONTOURS WHETHER SHOWN ON THE DRAWING OR NOT. 7 HANDICAP AC CESSIBLE PARKING SPACE AND ACCESS == •,..;,!o„ % ii� ""`. X `J^ LOCATIONS MUST BE ESTASUSHED IMMEDIATELY SLOPE SHALL NOT EXCEED 1:50 (2[) IN ALL DIRECTIONS. �', "''�•..- �1 /� m ' ^ •a� i EXISTING ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO CGNSTRUCnCN. J Of X 850 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS W ~ w 4, STATE LAW: 48 HOURS BEFORE EXCAVATING CONTROL MEASURES: t•- `•,\ --- �:`��,�,.,� OR DEMOLISHING BUILDINGS. CALL (651) 454 -0002 EROSION Z _ FOR FIELD LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY 1. PROVIDE SILT FENCE AT CONSTRUCTION LIMITS O L L J LIN Fl (� -� •�'. '�� ,'���•,, •cc;��- Vr � J b ( I service Ixelea utility owned lines PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. SEE DETAIL --�` ��-- -• �. ._�:.`+*. J but not priwte Iinaa). Z 2.PRO\ADE FILTER FABRIC COVER AT ALL AFTER INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURE. ORATES } �''• \�`�� �'• \�' '''"'t J 3.CONTRACTOR SHALL DESIGNATE ONE ENTRANCE AS A —t \�,, �.. \ \\ `�' ������ �^.• >.� CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND RESTRICT ALL Y CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC TO THIS ENTRANCE O CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION O ENTRANCE (SEE DETAIL SHEET G7) WHERE PAVEMENT d' / •.��ti ��_ _. ,'�•'°ea.r ENDS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWEEPING m _ ROADS FREE OF SOIL DEPOSITED BY CONSTRUCTION / "v_. .. \_•�\ 1 _" ^�zz I�F/T /� / TRAFFIC ON A DAILY BASS _ ��•.,__`�•�"^�'-^� `�� \..: • /TI � 4. ALL STORM SEWER CATCH BASINS SHALL BE O •^'o —•4 s:/ I N CONSTRUCTED WITH A SUMP. (SEE DETAIL SHEET C.7) ............ /€ :rrr „+ ¢ A it �h..r ' . ti ' • ',\ �`\ \ •"'• /VO ` 0 �� Z7 i J/ \ •.. > Z J iii: ata •::. /. "'"' \ ' � ; �„« c� ,y � I F O$ " C• b T;� r wu trr l� 99025 ♦ a i _ 9/30/99 BID LP , ,"f uAtA I FEEL GRADING PLAN e b O6 C. 3 y z Q SCALE M FEET NOTE 0 —n—off- 1. SURVEY' WAS PERFORMED BY LOTS SURVEY. tn — h ' a L EGEN D 2 MAINTAIN 8' COVER ON ALL NEW WATERMAIN. z go CYCLONE FENCE T -BUR TELEPHONE 3. ALL CONNECTIONS TO CITY UMUTIES TO BE IN z ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPERTY LINE -6- HYDRANT STANDARDS STORM ® CATCHBASIN '+.,•^•.,._ : : sANITARY 6 CATCHBASIN 4. n pF CONNECTIONS. FOR J W �•�,,. — I — —'— I — WATERMAIN 0 MANHOLE z • `' �— GAS VALVE 8. CONTRACTORS MUST MELD VERIFY LOCATION AND O W ELEVATION OF OF ALL UTILITIES WHETHER SHOWN ON V _ \ �"'�.• P O D THIS DRAWNG OR NOT. LOCATIONS MUST BE V \„� , ESTABLISHED IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. z �••..,,� PLANS moo' 6. INSULATE SANITARY SEWER WHERE COVER IS LESS J THAN 6 FEET. O 7, WHERE W CROSSES SANITARY STORM w S PROM O E E M BENDS AS NECESSARY T TO PROVIDE N 18 vERncAL SEPARATION WHILE MAINTAINING COVEN. m B. SANITARY SEWER CASTINGS SHALT. BE NEENAH R1610 ALK All v , b t pm,b !�' "� '4 / l .gip: � s, ? R a [ `4 /) /gyp' �\ '�•- "rW / k /' VI Z j In t\ ,t tE! i �/ / tom, Ste � ' "�• &� � �� �� � W ♦"�. tai �/ . I ✓ ✓; ,11+ �.i O:7 Z°e moz oza i V V \* 99025 k ,,,�`'°q� �t��, r _'�.�. ° �'y e -°� ,�d' \...• , ..,., 00/94 MFa , � � _� i��\ ab„ e q' r • ,y d1 , ! 3 i' �'`�.• e.r • �t ''ts , . s?��8 ..�M. "' :' '� y �' i SD LPF UTILITY PLAN , C, I • ZMMW- { - 30 - - X e ",. PLANT SCHEDULE F- SCALE N FEET RX CON 1 Ott 1 mrN YN[AOrNCN. YMI[ 9II IrfIMtS ° - �'�. �- o r , r F,Nr Nna �. a.• Munn z 0 >D NI ^Wy wF - . a �TUUf IYCATI1 MIIw0OY MT. z LEGEND �� ®�, `�.. a Nr�YAYYYA �• >�rann CYCLONE FENCE \. `^ -�- Va ' 0, .,,�. a w in s ex, ray aaw (� PROPERTY LINE - ° +ti . on nwrw ,m wa eoaam ar ^a _ n man swaa wank .c J L LJ – – — CONSTRUCTION LIMITS ���° �' r an om_x A"n r-r m H F– % =¢ a wuw.n m.nw wn ee..er . z Soo a .m as , ,? a ae ,uwart uo 0 4J a� . uYaor sar.lr e 11.A v1Ra1 U CONCRETE NOTE MF,` '*•• `/I/ F ''•. arr ,'°'YaE . I. SURVEY WAS PERFORMED BY LOTS SURVEY. O • Y �`�., • + ? I � J u novas n9xrarxrw'r.nlar ci RSmalr Y �� � •-:.'-:'':• -y .�,, m - auwxnwapFttrNaALa 1 rn / • . . . •, "!', '•. ODT 910101 Nrrr .mri.. a1A rarTw as r a(ASM arr A9 y� Dj C—ATM xuL IY SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL .nY1: / YAWN NNnw TrFENa111 Fo1 r1�vr1 rwa Y o Fan ■ v rmn j ` aaruwf TI1m/ m as A V3 s 9 S •�• - �na9miu /1u Tma lure l � "* / mnY, 9r nw n9u rv1 Yaa n/Y,111a a1Y1 mawlm n � � ..'� � C-7 C:, / ` MOT: IO01 A M /{AYI fOfWi 1011 .1CIIY1. �r � ��Y1ddF.�� . (;• \ \V/r`` luwnls a1x1mR1 //,+,F 41 ui – i P W -' L1 ti d �' u 0NZ ozo ac�w- 9ta w l .T 9r a ATtw- rw• �'�,Tf �` ` g :"J r eorwY m 9f. yD � • \ eou.a shwa Trslm n � / �i. Sral AAl n: a m rN drew �RI(' ` = � '..• ✓ I. xor - s aA 9YC • �.sm 99025 a °µO �%' •' �� 9/30/99 ,r rY q ,Y aoaR BD LP Yom eALA rALna rwaluoE m00%" SALL DIAMETER $u ADE LANDSCAPE PL wa9 1+1[ m t M tYe a �.s +t� M lNF M RE TAE SNIE AS oa,m At M r1m1r EI0.51ED AT TIE YNISFRY C • 5 TREE PLANTING DETAIL ° fit✓ �- CONif. TREE PLANTING • • 1 • LEGEND IRRIGATION NOTES: i. 120 VOLT ELECTRICAL POWER OUTLETS FOR CONTROLLERS 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL FLUSH ALL LINES AND ADJUST ALL HEADS I— TO BE PROVIDED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR. THE FOR BEST PERFORMANCE AND TO PREVENT OVERSPRAY ONTO 0 ° FULL CIRCLE TORO 370 SERIES GREEN SPRINKLER CONTRACTOR TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING WALKS. DRIVES. AND BUILDINGS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. THIS (n NOOK - UP FROM OUTLETS TO CONTROLLERS. SHALL INCLUDE THE SELECTION OF THE BEST DEGREE OF ARC W . HALF CIRCLE TORO 570 SERIES GREEN 'aa,, Z ° Q QUARTER CIRCLE TORO 570 SERIES GREEN,. 2. ALL WARE FROM CONTROLLERS TO ELECTRIC VALVES TO BE 7. INSTALL ALL EQUIPMENT AS REQUIRED BY MANUFACTURER. Z_ �,. COPPER OF -14 DIRECT BURIAL USE BLACK FOR PILOT AND M e FULL CIRCLE TORO 370 SERIES BLUE'IIq WHITE FOR COMMON. INSTALL IN COMMON TRENCH WITH MAIN A DO NOT WILLFULLY INSTALL THE SYSTEM AS DESIGNED MEN IT • �,,� LINE WHERE POSSIBLE. PROVIDE MIN. OF IB' COVER. IS OBVIOUS IN THE FIELD THAT UNKNOWN OBSTRUCTIONS OR GRADE tD HALF CIRCLE TORO 570 SERIES BLUE DIFFERENCES EAST THAT WERE NOT KNOWN DURING DESIGN. J • Q QUARTER CIRCLE TORO 570 SERIES BLUE `i:� �` R� �'a PROVIDE 2COVER OVER LL UTERIA LINE PIPING.E PIPING AND I­_ I�-I SUCH CONDITIONS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE OVMFRS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, OTHERWISE THE IRRIGATION Lr.l � CONTRACTOR MUST ASSUME FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY AND Z Q 2 ' ELECTRIC FLOW CONTROL VALVE � �:'s�„ U `'�^. 4. ALL PIPING UNDER PAVED AREAS TO BE PVC SCH. 40. ALL NECESSARY REVISIONS 0 W O 1 1/2 ' ELECTRIC FLOW CONTROL VALVE K INSTALL PRIOR TO PAVING. U t� 5. THIS DESIGN IS DIAGRAMMATIC. EQUIPMENT SHOWN IN PAVED 9. FINAL LOCATION OF AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER TO BE DETERMINED i 'ELECTRIC FLOW CONTROL VALVE V - \''®. AREAS IS FOR DESIGN CLARIFICATION ONLY AND IS TO BE BY OWNER'S AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND /OR LANDSCAPE Z INSTALLED WITHIN THE NEAREST PLANTED AREA WHERE ARCHITECT. J POSSIBLE it tO.THE SYSTEM SMALL BE FULLY R FOR A PERIOD OF ONE O `�'�.�• YEAR. ANY DEFECTIVE MATERIAL L I POOR POOR WORKMANSHIP SHALL O ----- - - - - -- CASING REPLACED OR CORRECTED BY THE E O IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR AT NO � COST TO THE OWNER, / m ZONE Z VALVE INDICATOR j N 11. CONTRACTOR IS TO ADJUST IRRIGATION TO WHERE LIGHTING FIXTURES �VE SIZE AND OTHER UTILITIES OCCURED DI FIELD. `\�.� 12. BUILDINGS CALL J6 HOUR t54- BEFORE EXCAVATING OR 00FOR FIELD LOCATION OF ° 1 JI� � � \ \. IOIN Out UNDERGR t Pri` to linU„) (7A h 4arNe• lOwtss utility owned I I 0 � Z In w� tr C 0 7 { UN O ? FFF Z (� •', ° a.ozR a U tar: f A f f wn � LN J•/ ° f J 99025 ��� ° • i � °.a� ,' ...� 9/30/99 e � ° 2.. Ck7£N ° • ''fie "'-�.�° �.1 Er G ° ° BD LPI 1=3 • ° ' •' • sue= M�`6 xAtE W FEET IRRIGATION PLAR• 0 30 so • o • 0 V) — �NEDWI E -] WUN NO= On4Vt eE z E — IIN➢MAY iNWY a; Nuc /. Y AMA4fNfl ne+4a Z 1 y'W. . Sa sTtN� Y • wuaE anvrn 1 « ( r o J _ p wu m owls rw ,ma Ld L'• caT«'xc ® oamstflvy aoE r _ W • ''4y � U er,ESr . r0tet A c1o0,N iNAO' m m o © m le: `�� r J O rw.uc ,• wuv ma � o ■.mr M•AlIO1fE O r ...:.,... ..... w• IM. r tlwx rw;; saAw nQQ OO m o Co CATCH BASIN (STRU=RE) t t/x• vavlm Q Q .....:. ' ��� • wwsc AOGIESNIE 1Y 11eCn CONCRETE SIDEWALK .. 111/Y - IM 4t nwt atLW6 MOM stun 12331 „� �� ,..� s• -Ism s rGNME (m0s CWAN 0 soap. boor slva fall GRAVEL CONST. ENTRANCE a v I cm w m suemvOE NTS 1 3 NEW PAVING SECTION NTS �s« 3 1Hf Lml IY/C,L AT (sm w1 ADaSSHi rwmm N[Earh➢ M Y m Yd WTiw m=Z O M o YAC6 niNiaa (1A°`) s au a S ® wrrcm IEr rAmvxr � S w wrO1•Z•.=+�`--:' ` � / I I � �r teemnr°nan r � u }>aM jvr ,^. vwaNC YACfS v J awnwo aoiwr lrnvsA V r Aar aaxanE w TA,rm 1tAaOn1 t/r nEVOrtO Nav rLOV � f•nan aa,l vml +ant tors •% +� SECTION l -L W Ma a - zff In sa a tmi twr `I V . _. �eaA s r � s• o TT r-0 smeru x d e 106f (3 W ' ssc eaAwo vw+nm�\ y I I I Q Nun[ soL o f/7 ? it O w ral,o fe HfID ti. 4 . �_ :.:. _; : • ' , ; O Z Z . . METHOD #I Z / PZ '•'•'ta"collpieim'Lti•1•,�, METHOD a U W: OF CONCRIN SECTION K -K pm Omv• METHOD 1) a , L fro. v. o.oaa rlwo ra. a w rows. r IM m«uen a a..aev.r, d .. K K st eam a a urM°a«amw °,a" °'°r m n a. n«) «e — sr wm awevt - � Erin Ew PoA W v«.r lout ar vroM una kw-.w «say Y M � L .. ' rrm Y INIe. ��- .. � t>olriean slfecwee to 1Ne foa«I r a ..an, «i.ue. «sea tans rr a. a..n. yeywN < �' fooEVAU IIeeN ur arm ar netln od awe mist. ,a „ �� METHOD 02 ff ,'-e' I MNM tlr� r a ..ar.atron .ran /aAS ea « ao rw...wt o0o r tw roa • � e•4 � s -r L r -o• CONCRETE PAVEMENT A .,. mwu rrr « rr.. .r rw mn au r «. root r P...e I.re. 99015 NTS ..fm. a. Trfe. 9/50 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN HANDICAP RAMP TYPE EROSION CONTROL BARRIER DETAIL NIS Nib NTS 00 L DETAIL SHE[ C -7 i i • 1 INT£ 9 t aaaaaxsttt�at6:atett §ttita ; _° v ' r t 1 S '• `tI 26o 8ttt § § §tteaittfl @ €attt =_ §tI8 .! +,� • ,` . ; . ; I , i t h a • I s � t � +; t L s + r I + t N 2 I A t ` +r +., t, D D t � I r`• �, -ya m C x mz xrl i�x axz.... 1 a Z Ftm 9R SNF�rNN1 .• D P 3 N 53.1 RIZ2 lIAA f•IV -i � •t 2 p N P N AAVI <D K G1 L l ; D D F, cu N N M. z s l o o m I m b `� D A .mNO. -A I ti 1 + I ( C o ll "W I P Tm G N�N O OL "'p l • R¢ q A -b • mozamNP h a hh w F� N y 9 t = V O dOG O• d ti b 3 .0 .O .C9 S V a-5 mli ilf• §1 ~ 5 ! .°- °�P q - 5 E i NI NON " I ' l l is [ 111pl! � lill v ll a g.s ~I t:t I .! - :4 " I 9:4 .a y d vr.t_ R w- _ ..a •.I F9 s da as 1 81 13 BBa AHA Y PROJECT. I REVISION DATE, I „ A MOTEL 6 - BROOKLYN CTR1 I ; LHL I GHT I #MT6BROOK. AGI 2857 ANODE LANE MOTEL 6 - VALENCIA, CALIFON6A - M6V -FSI - PLOT DATE: 04 -16 -26 17:14 - SCF.66 .. _ ©7996 BY MOTEL 6 OMMATIMO V. ALL COMMON LAW COPTRHVIT AND OTM PROPERTY Nmrs 8E8EEVEO i 1 �---------- - - - -1, I I I 1 n) a Ts I Q Y Y I 1 I j L______ -- - - -- j L J IAIMI - -Py C A4 ; • @Y.O• � — W -' h �I C CA 4t , l/_ I N -n c, 14 'a D -4 o . 44 1 v� m I s 6 e S N _ I � A Z COI `I� n gal 4 I . O 1 - 0 " M 6 l g' R P g� okli me city, okla0om6 Y - X h 73118 4051846 -8549 •• i BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA g b0 Inc. architects & planners UMM 6 - VNMMA. CMYU M► - MGV- 0.N - PLOT CAIC 06 -24-M 12:31 - SW-ft NM BY MAR 9 WMATNO V. ALL CMM LAW CO►TMW AIM VM MOMI TY NMI hGE11Ym ai d: 1� gF - — - — - — - — - — - -- (D E3 G 1 F ° ® —O ^f y E3 E3 1 t A ®® i ®® n — a Gi I j . 13 S i „ ALL ® ® ±i E40 - - -- ,J I -� ---- - - - --© z = • - ® ® ®� ---- - - - --o E - Y „ .�� m ® ® 1 m j ® as - - - - -- - - - -fl 4 m E73 —'" —� b ! ! A L �c l q� a! y! 4 �t! p ® ® ® 41ffoi s — — E3 E3 J 1 D 10 k 1 �I I M n T F LA I I I I I I I I� I I I I�I M g �I ��Y12(�I� N1 9 homi U1v"nk 0 Ord i I Y " � t • OTa 6 - VAIEkW. GUrW cI - IMVXv2 - PLOT 6AT6 63-E4-N m 53 - SOP-66 ®16M IT MOTEL 6 OPERATIVE V ALL 00 - ECM COPTIM6f AND OTM PII PUM FONT! AURAM EE3 11 i § T� s — ® ® - --0 IA i _® S® ® ®/ ® ® A ' . ® ®I -- ds - ® ® S G G E3 E3 NI il E3 E3 E3 E3 E3 ®.� E3 E3 E3 JM E3 E3 „� - --o ® 4 - - -- M E3 ® C& f 75'7s 0 if j d i 4 m �� §I el ilf t it ilaI s. >� • Z r3 I 5 y r ' 4q s 3 ffi � aIg �I� I iA f 1 $ T140 narth"at 63rd it gg I eklak6ma oity, ekla. W p 4I I M 4 TEL 6 73116 �osieae -acts ® Member Rex Newman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99 -03 RESOLUTION REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 99009 SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF MOTEL 6 OPERATING LP. WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 98-47 approved a rezoning from I -1 (Industrial Park) to PUD /I -1 of a 7.28 acre parcel of land located at the southeast quadrant of Xerxes Avenue North and Freeway Boulevard; and WHEREAS, that PUD proposal also included site and building plan approval for the first phase development on a portion of the property for a 104 unit Extended Stay America Motel; and WHEREAS, future development on the remaining two lots was deferred pending submission of a Planned Unit Development amendment; and WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 99009 submitted by Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc. on behalf of Motel 6 Operating LP has been submitted for the development of a three story, 122 unit motel on Lot 2, Block 1, Shingle Creek 5th Addition which is a part of the above mentioned Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on October 14, 1999, when a staff report and pubic testimony regarding the Planned Unit Development amendment were received; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Planned Unit Development amendment request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of the Planned Unit Development ordinance contained in Section 35 -355 and the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 99009 submitted by Progressive Consulting Engineer's, Inc. on behalf of Motel 6 Operating LP be approved in light of the following considerations: 1. The Planned Unit Development Amendment is compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Page 1 2. The Planned Unit Development proposal will allow for the utilization of the land in question in a manner which is compatible with, complimentary to and of comparable intensity to adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on surrounding land. 3. The utilization of the property as proposed under this Planned Unit Development amendment is considered a reasonable use of the property and will conform with city ordinance standards except for allowing an off premise directional sign which is justified on the basis of extensive precedent for such a sign. 4. The Planned Unit Development proposal is considered compatible with the recommendations of the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the city. 5. The Planned Unit Development amendment appears to be a good long range use of the existing land and can be considered an asset to the community. 6. In light of the above considerations, it is believed that the guidelines for evaluating rezonings as contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance are met and that the proposal is, therefore, in the best interests of the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that approval of Application No. 99009 be subject to the following conditions and considerations: 1. The building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans as well as appropriate utility easements for adjoining properties are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee in an amount to be determined based on cost estimates shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or on- ground mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. Page 2 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances with the exception of an off premises directional sign no larger than 16 square feet in area and 15 feet in height which can be located at the shared access on Freeway Boulevard. Said directional sign is justified on the basis of extensive precedent for such sign signs in similar circumstances. 8. B -612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter into an easement and agreement for maintenance and inspection of utility and storm drainage systems as determined by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 11. ervin this roe so that it is Plans shall be modified to relocate the driveways g property riy directly across from the driveway on the opposite side of Freeway Boulevard as required by the City Engineer. The cross access easement providing access from O Freeway Boulevard to Lot 2 shall be modified to reflect the driveway indicated on the site plan. 12. All work performed and materials used for construction and utilities shall conform to the City of Brooklyn Center's standard specifications and details. 13. The applicant shall obtain an NPDES permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and shall also provide adequate erosion control as approved by the City's Engineering Department. 14. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Brooklyn Center to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to the issuance of building permits. Said development agreement shall be filed with the title to the property. 15. The plans shall be modified to provide 132 parking spaces which reflects the ordinance parking requirement for a 122 unit motel with 10 employees on any one shift. Page 3 Date Chair ATTEST: Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member John Whitehead and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Chair Tim Willson, Members Rex Newman, Dianne Reem, and John Whitehead and the following voted against the same: None whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Page 4 • its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 99009 SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF MOTEL 6 OPERATING LP. WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 98 -47 approved a rezoning from I -1 (Industrial Park) to PUD /I -1 of a 7.28 acre parcel of land located at the southeast quadrant of Xerxes Avenue North and Freeway Boulevard; and WHEREAS, that PUD proposal also included site and building plan approval for the first phase development on a portion of the property for a 104 unit Extended Stay America Motel; and WHEREAS, future development on the remaining two lots was deferred pending submission of a Planned Unit Development amendment; and WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 99009 submitted by Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc. on behalf of Motel 6 Operating LP has been submitted for the development of a three story, 122 unit motel on Lot 2, Block 1, Shingle Creek 5th Addition which is a part of the above mentioned Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on October 14, 1999, when a staff report and pubic testimony regarding the Planned Unit Development amendment were received; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 99009 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 99 -03 on October 14, 1999; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered Application No. 99009 at their October 25, 1999, meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered this Planned Unit Development amendment request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezomngs contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of the Planned Unit Development ordinance contained in Section 35 -355, the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Planning Commission's recommendation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of ® Brooklyn Center that Application No. 99009 submitted by Progressive Consulting Engineer's, Inc. on behalf of Motel 6 Operating LP be approved in light of the following considerations: ® 1. The Planned Unit Development Amendment is compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section of the City's Zoning Ordinance. . 2. The Planned Unit Development proposal will allow for the utilization of the land in question in a manner which is compatible with, complimentary to and of comparable intensity to adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on surrounding land. 3. The utilization of the property as proposed under this Planned Unit Development amendment is considered a reasonable use of the property and will conform with city ordinance standards except for allowing an off premise directional sign which is justified on the basis of extensive precedent for such a sign. 4. The Planned Unit Development proposal is considered compatible with the recommendations of the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the city. 5. The Planned Unit Development amendment appears to be a good long range use of the existing land and can be considered an asset to the community. 6. In light of the above considerations, it is believed that the guidelines for evaluating rezonings as contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance are met and that the proposal is, therefore, in the best interests of the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that approval of Application No. 99009 be subject to the following conditions and considerations: 1. The building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans as well as appropriate utility easements for adjoining properties are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee in an amount to be determined based on cost estimates shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or on- ground mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building s to be e quip p ed with an automatic fire exting system to meet g � NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in • accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. An landscaped areas to underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landsca s g g Y P facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances with the exception of an off premises directional sign no larger than 16 square feet in area and 15 feet in height which can be located at the shared access on Freeway Boulevard. Said directional sign is justified on the basis of extensive precedent for such sign signs in similar circumstances. 8. B -612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter into an easement and agreement for maintenance and inspection of utility and storm drainage systems as determined by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 11. Plans shall be modified to relocate the driveway serving this property so that it is directly across from the driveway on the opposite side of Freeway Boulevard as required by the City Engineer. The cross access easement providing access from Freeway Boulevard to Lot 2 shall be modified to reflect the driveway indicated on the site plan. 12. All work performed and materials used for construction of utilities shall conform to the City of Brooklyn Center's standard specifications and details. 13. The applicant shall obtain an NPDES permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and shall also provide adequate erosion control as approved by the City's Engineering Department. 14. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Brooklyn Center to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to the issuance of building permits. Said development agreement shall be filed with the title to the property. 15. The plans shall be modified to provide 132 parking spaces which reflects the ordinance parking requirement for a 122 unit motel with 10 employees on any one shift. • Date Myrna Kragness, Mayor ATTEST: 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. 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 SESSION OCTOBER 14, 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 Rex Newman, 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 Rebecca Crass. Commissions Graydon Boeck, Stephen Erdmann and Sean Rahn were absent and excused. APPROVAL OF MIN(JTES - ATJGUST 12.1999 There was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Whitehead, to approve the minutes of the August 12, 1999 meeting as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. CHAIR'S EXPLANATION Chair Willson explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. APPLICATIO NO. 99009 - PROGRESSIVE CONSU LTING ENGINEERS. INC. Chair Willson introduced Application No. 99009, a request submitted by Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc. (on behalf of Motel 6 Operating LP) for an amendment to the Planned Unit Development approved in conjunction with the Extended Stay America proposal in order to construct a 120 unit, three story Motel 6 complex on a 2.62 acre site. The building will be L shaped with the main entrance in the northeast corner of the building. This application was filed on 9- 12 -99, requiring City Council action by 11 -20 -99 (60 days). Mr. Warren presented the staff report explaining that a Planned Unit Development rezoning of this property was approved by the City Council under Resolution No. 98 -47 on March 23, 1998. At that time, the first phase site and building plan approval for the Extended Stay America was approved. It was noted at the time of this approval that other developments for Lots 1 and 2 would be subject to review and approval. Motel 6 Operating LP has acquired the land and wishes to pursue the development of Lot 2. Mr. Warren directed the Commission to a letter from Mr. Randy Lee of Motel 6 where he • 10 -14 -99 Page 1 • explains how they believe the Motel 6 use will be compatible with existing land uses around the site. Further, their market analysis indicates such uses are not over built in the area and notes that a new Motel 6 will enhance the opportunity to provide accommodations for an increasing number of clients coming into this area. A letter from Mr. Naeem Qureshi of Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc. was reviewed which addresses the city's rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines for such a proposal. Staff concurs that this is the anticipated type of development expected for the remaining parcels of land in this area and is compatible with surrounding land uses such as the Extended Stay America and the Country Inn and Suites. A public hearing on this Application, properly noticed, is scheduled at this meeting. Notices were sent to surrounding property owners and notice was published in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post. A draft Planning Commission Resolution was offered for the Commission's consideration which sites recommended considerations and conditions for approval. Chair Willson asked for clarification on where the shared access /drive lane between Lots 1 and 2 will actually be located. Mr. Warren explained that the shared access lies on an easement which actually shifts further to the east than what is shown on the plan. Chair Willson called for questions /discussion from the Commissioners. Commissioner Reem • inquired about the adequate space left on Lot 1 for future development and inquired about signage for the site. Mr. Warren answered that the remaining lot is approximately 2 acres and the drive lane would be used by Lots 1 and 2. He explained that directional signs would be allowed for both sites as well as one freestanding identification sign. He further explained sign limitations for commercial sites and explained the distinction between identification and directional signs. Chair Willson inquired about there being adequate parking in the area around the dumpster /trash enclosure. Commissioner Reem asked if the gate enclosures could be constructed with spring loaded gates so they will stay closed. This issue was briefly discussed. PUBLIC HEARING - APPLICATION NO. 99009 Chair Willson opened the public hearing for comments on Application No. 99009, at 8:28 p.m. Commissioner Reem inquired about the responsibility for maintenance of the ponding area on the site. Mr. Warren responded that both Extended Stay and Motel 6 share the responsibility for maintenance of the ponding area and it is included in the conditions of approval and various deed restrictions placed on the property. Chair Willson called for comments from the public. Mr. Randy Lee, from Motel 6, described the sign that Motel 6 displays for identification on the site, to include colors and brightness of lighting. He also clarified parking requirements and the formula used based on 7 employees on the site. He added that if the motel were at full capacity 10 -14 -99 Page 2 with guests, there is the possibility of up to 10 employees being on site. Chair Willson stated that if the potential for more than 7 employees exists, the parking must be re- evaluated. Mr. Warren indicated that could be done by increasing the number of parking spaces by three or eliminate rooms from the motel. Mr. Warren identified several locations on the site where additional spaces for parking could be achieved with minor modifications to the plans. With the potential for up to 10 employees during the motel's full capacity, the applicant will submit revised plans showing 132 parking spaces. Mr. Steven Davis, Earle Brown Farm Estates, stated his concerns with the motel being located so close to Xerxes Avenue and potential problems with water runoff and drainage. Chair Willson explained that both sites drain underground away from Xerxes Avenue towards the ponding area to the east of the Extended Stay. Mr. Warren added that the ponding area on the Extended Stay site provides adequate drainage via storm sewer from all three sites into the ponding area and then towards the highway right -of -way. Mr. Davis asked about traffic control on the corner of Xerxes Avenue and Freeway Boulevard and how the redevelopment of Brookdale will affect traffic at this same location. Mr. Warren explained that extensive traffic analysis has been done in the past on major intersections in Brooklyn Center. There will be a larger impact on traffic along Brooklyn Boulevard and County Road 10 but not much traffic change is expected on Xerxes Avenue related to the Brookdale redevelopment. The most intensive bulk of traffic would be affected during peak traffic hours and intersections were developed in such a way as to address this traffic. The Xerxes and Freeway Boulevard intersection was not affected adversely based on the studies. He added that if the need for a signal becomes evident, through traffic warrants, one will be installed. Mr. Davis asked that consideration be given to lighting on the site and assurances that all lighting be directed downward so as not to create glare. Mr. Warren explained that any glare from any lighting will be directed down or towards the building. Mr. Randy Lee offered further explanation on outdoor lighting and well as lighting of signage. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING There was a motion by Commission Reem, seconded by Commissioner Newman, to close the public hearing on Application 99009 at 9:03 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION N CI : 99009 - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT A discussion ensued regarding the application and a draft resolution presented. It was the consensus of the Commission to add a condition to the resolution requiring a plan modification to provide 132 parking spaces which reflects the proper room and employee count for the proposal. Following the discussion, there was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Whitehead, to approve Resolution No. 99 -03 regarding disposition of Planning Commission Application 99009 submitted by Progressive Consulting Engineers, Inc. The • motion passed unanimously. 10 -14 -99 Page 3 Mr. Warren stated that the application will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at their October 25, 1999 regular meeting. He added notices will be sent to surrounding property owners and the applicant's presence is required at the City Council meeting. DISCUSSION ITEMS COMMERCIAL ZONING REORGANIZATION Mr. Warren directed the Commissioners attention to his memorandum dated October 11, 1999. He briefly described the areas that would be potentially affected by a zoning reorganization and the effect on those areas. He explained the impact on the zoning changes in certain areas with various uses es to the Comprehensive Plan . Chair Willson asked about the need to make Chang p with a zoning reorganization. Mr. Warren replied that he did not believe it would be necessary at this time but that would need to be verified. Mr. Warren talked about changes that could occur to the zoning designations and pointed out that consideration must be given to "special uses" currently in commercial zones and how they will be handled in the future. He gave examples of some of the adverse affects on some neighborhood areas of the city based on current zoning issues. Mr. Warren asked the Commission to keep the zoning issues in mind and take a look at potential conflicts that may arise by making changes. Commissioner Newman expressed concern with the C -3 (Highway/Industrial/Business) designation. Commission Reem mentioned the Brooklyn Boulevard Task Force study and how those findings relate to the zoning changes. Further discussion continued relating to zoning and uses along Brooklyn Boulevard and the ability of the City to replace "housing" along Brooklyn Boulevard with commercial property. Mr. Warren suggested that this be discussed further when a full commission is in attendance. A joint meeting with the Planning Commission and City Council will take place after the first of the year to review this zoning reorganization. OTHER BUSINESS Commission Reem shared with the Commission her concerns regarding the construction site for the West Fire Station on 63rd and Brooklyn Boulevard. She explained that there have been a number of issues which have affected the neighborhood during the construction such as debris from the project and the placement of a construction trailer and satellite on the site. The most recent concern was the placement of a large piece of mechanical equipment on the roof at the east end of the building. She noted this was never shown on the plans presented to the Planning Commission for review. She felt this equipment could be moved to a less conspicuous place on the roof or on the ground which would have less visual impact on the neighborhood. She said she has been told only that it will be screened. Mr. Warren stated that details of all mechanical equipment are not normally what is presented to the Planning Commission for review. These details generally come about as the location is determined. He explained that they are dealt with through a general condition that all roof top or on ground mechanical equipment be appropriately screened. Usually a parapet wall will provide the necessary screening; if not, additional i 10 -14 -99 Page 4 • screening will be required. He further explained that from a zoning standpoint, mechanical equipment can be on the roof or on ground as long as it is properly screened from view and what is being done at the fire station is within this parameter. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Newman, seconded by Commissioner Reem, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:58 p.m Chair Recorded and transcribed by: Rebecca Crass r 10-14-99 Page 5 4 , t � 4 IL AN NORTH METRO • MINNEAPOLIS CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU October 20, 1999 Brad Hoffman Community Development City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Brad: This letter is in reference to a newly proposed lodging property being built in Brooklyn Center. Currently, the City of Brooklyn Center has a capacity of 928 sleeping rooms available. Of the 928 sleeping rooms, 390 are in the category of full- service and 538 are classified as limited service. The research we have available to us from the Minnesota Office of Tourism and our internal sources tell us of a trend in greater room capacity in the North Metro area of the Twin Cities. This trend is the result of increased demand for lodging services and overall growth within the North Metro area. Future demand for rooms will come from the following new sources: increased use of the Earle Brown Heritage Center for conferences and meetings, additional promotion of the area targeting visitors, events held at the future MN Orchestra Performing Arts Center, and expansion of business operations throughout the 694 corridor such as Medtronic. Best Regards, John Connelly Executive Director i 6200 Shingle Creek Parkway * Suite 248 612.566.7722 800.541.4364 *e-mail: nmmcvb @northmetrominneapolis.org Minneapolis, Minnesota 55430 FAX 612.566.6526 www.northmetrominneapolis.org City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. 4 To: Mayor Kragness and Council Members Hilstrom, Lasman, Nelson and Peppe From: Michael J. McCauley City Manager Date: October 22, 1999 Re: Motel Attached is additional information regarding lodging tax in response to Mayor Kragness' request for information on the lodging tax receipts. • 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 This report shows the amount collected and distributed to date. Total Taxes Total Taxes Total Taxes Total Taxes Total Taxes Total Taxes Collected YTD Collected YTD Collected YTD Collected YTD Collected YTD Collected YTD 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Americinn 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52,274.58 Baymont Inn 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65,221.92 Brookdale Motel 5,061.37 5,525.49 4,470.76 1,710.98 0.00 0.00 Budgetel 64,753.81 68,164.40 73,350.77 67,785.48 75,222.57 0.00 Comfort Inn 0.00 0.00 16,644.20 55,207.96 55,708.97 48,705.84 Country Inn & Suites 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65,459.02 101,695.48 Days Inn 0.00 94,845.53 83,429.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 Extended StayAmerica 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,107.44 Holiday Inn 167,077.93 182,411.10 192,829.46 40,340.19 37,155.44 102,978.62 Hilton 0.00 0.00 0.00 190,929.73 218,538.37 212,670.77 Inn on the Farm 11,217.05 12,682.78 13,173.20 12,801.23 12,594.95 11,138.81 Park Inn 77,590.33 4,216.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Super 8 50,445.73 53,223.11 57,260.77 55,643.80 59,065.34 62,819.97 Taxes Collected 376,146.22 421,068.85 441,158.50 424,419.37 523,744.66 660,613.43 Convention Bureau Share 178,669.45 200,007.70 209,550.29 201,599.20 248,778.71 313,791.38 City Share 197,476.77 221,061.15 231,608.21 222,820.17 274,965.95 346,822.05 Total Distributed 376,146.22 4 21,068.85 441,158.50 424,419.37 5 23,744.66 660,613.43 Brooklyn Centers hotels and motels collected a 3% tax on lodging from October 4, 1986 to January 31, 1990. Beginning February 1, 1990, a 6% tax on lodging was imposed. The tax must be remitted to the City by the 25th day of the month following collection. The City then has until the 15th of the following month to remit 95% of the first 3% collected to the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau. The City retains 5% of the first 3% collected to reimburse the cost of administering the program. The City also retains the remaining 3% to compensate for limits placed on property taxes by the State Legislature. City Council Agenda Item No. 10a i • i ® PROCLAMATION DECLARING NOVEMBER. 21-2.8 Tn BE BIBLE WEEK WHEREAS, the Bible has been a constant source of moral and spiritual guidance for many people throughout the centuries; and WHEREAS, the Bible has profoundly influenced art, literature, music, and codes of law; and WHEREAS, the Bible has motivated many to acts of compassion and charity; and WHEREAS, the Bible continues to provide inspiration, hope, and comfort for millions of Americans today; and WHEREAS, for fifty-nine years women and men of many faiths have banded together with the National Bible Association to sponsor National Bible Week as a time to be reminded of the Bible's unique place in American life; and WHEREAS, this annual celebration has encouraged the reading of the Bible. NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of Minnesota, do hereby proclaim November 21 to 28, 1999, as Bible Week in the City of Brooklyn Center and encourage interested citizens to participate in this observance. Date Mayor Attest: City Clerk i • CITY OF PHILADELPIJIA OFFICE OF THE MAYOR EDWARD G. RENDELL ROOM 215 CITY HALL MAYOR PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19107 -3295 (215) 686 -2181 FAX (215) 686 -2170 Dear Fellow Mayor: The National Bible Association is sponsoring for the 59th consecutive year the interfaith observance of National Bible Week. It will take place November 21 to 28, 1999. I am privileged to serve as Chair of the Mayor's Committee for this celebration. I ask that you issue a proclamation calling for Bible Week observance. A draft is enclosed for your use. Please adapt this in whatever way you wish. . For National Bible Week, the sponsors are providing the media with materials for a public service advertising campaign designed to remind all Americans of the Bible's importance. Also, nonsectarian biblical materials are being provided for free distribution in local observances throughout the nation. If you send a copy of your proclamation to the Chair of National Bible Week, William E. Simon, it will be displayed at the National Bible Week Interfaith Inaugural Luncheon, which will be held at the Waldorf- Astoria in New York City on Thursday, November 18, 1999. Send your proclamation to: National Bible Association 1865 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, New York 10023 Attention: Mr. William E. Simon National Chair It should reach the office by November 12 to be included in the display at the luncheon. I greatly appreciate your cooperation in this effort. Sincerely yours, Id & EDWARD G. RENDELL • Mayor's Chair National Bible Week 1999 EGR/dmc Enclosure City Council Agenda Item No. lOb Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. • RESOLUTION ADOPTING GOALS FOR 2000 WHEREAS, the City Council met in a facilitated workshop to discuss goals and objectives for 2000; and WHEREAS, the goals set forth in this resolution are the result of the discussions amongst the Council in the course of the facilitated workshop. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the following goals be and hereby are adopted as the official goals of the City Council directing the leadership priorities for City government. Goal 1: Support Brookdale Redevelopment By: • use of tax increment assistance • review and evaluation of land use applications • prompt construction and plan review /inspection • monitoring developer performance Goal 2: Continue and Improve Code Enforcement and Compliance Activities By: • coordinated effort of police and community development departments • focus on high - density areas while continuing neighborhood enforcement • continue to evaluate additional- approaches to achieving improved compliance Goal 3: Increase Proactivity Towards Fighting Crime By: • increased visibility of police in neighborhoods • continue and expand participation rate in neighborhood watch program • include policy safety information in all City newsletters Goal 4: Support and Encourage Northeast Corner of 69th Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard Redevelopment By: • supporting and exploring re onsible and credibly financed development s pp g p Y A proposals • ensuring that plans support the long -term goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan Goal S: Continue Planning for Community Center and City Hall Work By: • developing actual designs and cost estimates for project and improvements Goal 6: Continue and Improve Long -Term Financial Planning By: • • continue five -year planning for utilities and capital improvements • continue /expand five -year planning for other funds • review and develop contingency planning • move toward development of 2 -3 year budget projections for the City RESOLUTION NO. Goal 7: Support and Promote Major Road and Street Improvement Projects: • start Brooklyn Boulevard with the County in the year 2000 (completion in the year 200 1) • Highway 100: - continue support/participation in North Metro Mayors Highway 100 Council - keep project schedule with Mn/DOT - support Highway 694 widening project, with improved sound walls, by Mn/DOT - support other arterial enhancements as opportunities arise Goal 8: Plan for Destination Parks By: • develop plan for destination park improvements in Capital Improvement Plan Goal 9: Support and Expand Joslyn Site Development By: • working with developer to complete phase II and III Goal 10: Continue to Improve Traffic Safety - Focusing on Traffic Calming By: • continuing enforcement efforts through multiple resources • continuing and expanding information to the public on traffic safety and calming efforts Goal 11: Special Visioning Project to Create a Redevelopment Strategy Based on the City's Vision for the Future; and, Developing Opportunities to Promote Inclusion of ALL Residents in Brooklyn Center's Community Life By: • establishing 2 to 4 work sessions and retreats to be conducted during the period of January - March, 2000 to set direction and develop outlines for accomplishing goals Principles to Guide Actions in the Form of Goals: 1. Incorporate Elements to Make City More Visually Appealing Where and as Possible in Projects and Developments 2. Identify Issues that can be Solved by the City Working in Cooperation and Collaboration with Other Jurisdictions 3. Effectively Communicate the City's Achievements and Opportunities to its Residents . 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 and adopted. • I City Council Agenda Item No. 10c MEMORANDUM DATE: October 20, 1999 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Diane Spector, Director of Public Work SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing Submission of a MetroEnvironment Partnership Grant Application for Proposed Palmer Lake Improvements As you know, we have completed a study of the Palmer Lake Basin, and have developed a set of proposed projects intended to improve water quality, reduce sources of non -point pollution, and eliminate problems with trail settlement and trail flooding. We have met with representatives from our consulting firm, the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission, the DNR, and the PCA to review some of these potential projects. These agency representatives are in agreement with the findings of our consultant, and are generally supportive of the proposed improvements. Obviously, they will withhold official comment until they have a permit application and a specific plan to review. We have included $250,000 in the Storm Drainage Utility budget in 2000 to construct the water quality improvements, and $100,000 in the MSA -Local budget to construct trail improvements. The Metropolitan Council operates a grant program, the MetroEnvironment Partnership Grant Program, to improve water quality by helping fund nonpoint source pollution reduction projects. The proposed Palmer Lake improvements fall into that category. We propose to construct two storm water treatment pond systems in the Basin: the first to treat storm water from the 70th Avenue trunk storm sewer on the west side of Palmer Lake, and the second to treat storm water from the local storm sewer outfalls from the neighborhood on the east side of Palmer Lake. The first would involve converting an existing drainage channel from the 70th Avenue outfall into the interior of the basin into a pond system. The second would be to create a two- celled storm water treatment pond system in East Palmer Lake Park, in about the location of two of the existing drainage channels. Portions of the existing channels would be filled in, allowing for some rearrangement of the facilities at East Palmer Lake Park, most specifically the new picnic shelter which is scheduled to replace the old warming house in 2000. This proposal for East Palmer Lake Park was reviewed by the Park and Recreation Commission at its September meeting, and the proposed improvements in the park are acceptable to them. They have requested that the ponds encroach to the minimum extent possible on the existing open space, which is doable. In fact, filling in some parts of the existing channels will create additional usable space in the park. A resolution is attached authorizing staff to submit a grant application. The Met Council staff believe they will be able to announce decisions around December 1. It is expected that the trail improvements portion of this work can be constructed in the spring and summer of 2000. The pond and dredging work will require several permits, a process which requires 6 -9 months, and some of the work is best done after the . ground has frozen. Thus, work on the ponds and any associated dredging would be constructed in fall and winter of 2000. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF A METROENVIRONMENT PARTNERSHIP GRANT APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED PALMER LAKE IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the City's Local Water Management Plan establishes as high priorities: 1) the promotion and development of regional stormwater treatment ponds, to address water quantity and quality issues in a proactive manner; and 2) projects which specifically address enhancing the water quality and aesthetic, recreation or wildlife values of Twin Lakes, Palmer Lake, Shingle Creek, and the Mississippi; and WHEREAS, a comprehensive study of the Palmer Lake Basion has been completed, and several improvements to the Basin are recommended; and WHEREAS, two specific projects to improve water quality by reducing nonpoint source pollution entering Palmer Lake have been identified, and the proposed 2000 Storm Drainage Utility budget includes $250,000 to fund said projects; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council's MetroEnvironment Partnership Grant Program provides financial grants on a competitive basis to projects which improve the water quality of Metro Area lakes and rivers by reducing nonpoint sources of pollution, said grants requiring at least a 25 percent match from the receiving agency. S NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the City Manager is hereby authorized to submit an application to the MetroEnvironment Partnership Grant Program for a grant to assist in funding the proposed Palmer Lake Basin improvements. 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. • , x. " Y ° Y . x , 5 ,t .7 y c W' r I „ " W y ,ry_ fw g y " y �T ffUU `_ � P` "i ... , s �" " "�• III ��x "3 r�' � i.... ' � ° i-. „r 1' V ! �l U , E it S =Q we z » I w•h t M., a - 1 , " ! r AV ` ° �• 4 " ~ 's'; � • � + F ".,s. ~n � _� ~< - �. �^ it':�*.r ��4 y � + A . n� c .%" r d "•g��^' . Vi �} {e ;'�:�'% $n `i `5 �'rf.6y;3^"!'n "G.° �]�q� �. »�q, � 'p„3.�" • " , , S v. ya , ` ^ ,.1 Nt'f. ..�y " '�B.N" {3 9 g t}. 6r�`fi. ��� 11 �� ,, ', S�_.- �. "�t v, _ ...d::" - T ' ^ -::�;. »a,� .y °'. . •; ;�,{� ;b. y:a (, -�"";• •Y. � ^f1 q+:, Eff Au R: ''� +°" ,��" �' �' "�C:• ^�°�r „. ~' `„5, 5R'"�, :,. -, ,may• n ,. „. v a” a ° " ,5'� s .i, F*+Y.; ;9 }' w ,'°+ r x „ '. "' r1 # ", ;1F' ���, ...f' �• ! 4` „s. .a,>:; m 9 J• ffi7J'.. -air' x %w t � '`' i ' .'�"' °4.:,. .. ... .t n + � *�r .' r ya ; •c !S ,y X71` �?:. "i 'K' t • '�" °" t fi ° R L ' �„' a ` .ty. ,� J " .?k. , ..; ��g, y� - ��a," ✓� "„" .� ?..: ,g �.» { „ " ,., �`l, -°Y .^ %i x��!'�T�,r...- '���{ " i' 3 �.,i. .�.iJ �.$ {PR' p • d, .'. .,, `,a �.y, , t "� - ',��z .:� ','":- -. P ...�. a ? � ril ° q��"' :fl, i.!ql�� A�a•,', , „a ' ''+' ' i ��..:,< .M1 ;.''... 'r :,�,- (i �, ,g - �? '; d'" �a a';. "r: .x, � "•�''"� .r ',Fl. 'i4.. :;;+i' ti "n ,e }zX." _ :i .. • �; #4' °S'ry.,.” r' " - �q' , , • /�x �, "� .8.i -a r' �,d; a+= �! +%. • '`�,r " .>"� - ' °q ^ -� ,:r'�"' ,�°^,'.n% "S ._r .`� .3„ : " ��;;33'' ..� . ':•�,�ws.�. :: �. %, _ 1 '�• -t -r'�.' � � '* °�, • `r „�" , Ya "'� =: � •�.C;r.' ��k��: .t°' �'�:.s �' 3 - li 1 I� ,. , y , : + q •'i� - ' ','C°' E4^Y - -'., ., y�+ 9. .�. •% g�.-q . - �;',,, ;' f x ".. %.�.a »."s . .» f '�' 'b�� n %, a. , _; . c' ,.. ;, w .', - �� ,,�q%i ;:fir. , w�•'r�w �,a:,a��y y yy y7�•:h °:_ '� �` t o p ; %- •%" -": "„ r, 3` 3 c y c" »r+„ �'; }., 9:f»w ,�4,.°N', • »"'',f: ` l y sIIe ' .;�e,; �x, pr��: �`�i ": ',x 3°'s � "' - ,. , •n!j", e , y ✓%;$r" ',€ r ,. a: ° ° ,y�. a „ y m "°':$ "F �. y�'` �3 dar >� 2 "A ': " •,'✓f' "' - l°S `n, iS'. v an Ito ,�-�° .'�- ;*' }q" .;�_ .rt, �, ; r };," 4`� ~ ���a, zit, Y . { _g •.� °• " AAA}" "• '��,'.. ;° ��,'' .4. ,.tea -. .gyp.± •L'''J; ,�$ 's'�;r .�4.lS �'2}'r; • .d "� ;.� i "p"c3 - ;'' p, '• r „af” ^,;;a!` ✓• �., .r= "1.'"G r, "L'?'" .i. ^ ` '?,` �>•r` f n'" zb'` ... € �. ," r, .�. ° � " • �-, i " " � mow"' -� -�'X is ���,���,fi �� ° - w�„ �" �*" .! 'rn: " ,.'�: ° »- y Y + �. '�.� .»,ten . %. `� s °� ��.... %_ �.. a! �'... ,,r"z'• . '� : ° � ° _ -' ".< ,!''x.� _ ¢ �. _uc.+... City Council Agenda Item No. lOd MEMORANDUM DATE: October 20, 1999 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM:. Diane Spector, Director of Public Wor SUBJECT: 2000 Public Utilities Rate Study Attached for Council consideration is the 2000 Public Utilities Rate Study. This item was discussed at the Council's October 18 work session. The City Council annually reviews public utility rates to determine their adequacy in meeting financial goals and supporting operations and capital projects. In summary, I recommend the Council consider increasing the water and storm drainage rates, with no change to the sanitary sewer and recycling rates. The recommended rates increase the annual utility bill of the average customer by about 1.8 percent (or $6.70 annually), and of the average senior customer 1.1 percent (or $2.00 annually). By comparison, the annualized inflation rate is currently 2.3 percent, and it has recently been announced that next years' Social Security Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) will be 2.4 percent. . The rates would increase as follows: • Water: from $0.91 per 1,000 gallons to $0.94. Last year, when setting rates for 1999, we had projected that the water rate would have to increase to $0.93 in 2000. The additional increase is due to a closer estimate of capital improvement project costs. • Sanitary sewer: no increase from $47.50 per quarter for a single family residence, or $26.13 for seniors. Last year we had expected to have to increase sanitary sewer rates to $50.00 per quarter. The Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES), has initiated a cost savings program that has enabled the agency to lower the sewage treatment rates charged municipalities, reducing the City's cost and thus eliminating the need to raise rates. • Storm drainage: from $9.50 per quarter for a single family residence to $10.00. Last year we anticipated increasing the rate to $10.00 in 2000, so this is right on target. We believe we now have a pretty good understanding of future storm drainage capital needs, and anticipate small increases in the future for inflation, but no sizable increase. • Recycling: no increase, continue at $6.45 per quarter for a single family residence. In addition, I recommend that the charges to restore service after it has been shut off be increased by $5. Thus the charge to restore service during normal working hours would increase from $25 to $30, ® and when outside of normal working hours from $75 to $80. Also, I recommend an adjustment in the charges for not returning a meter reading for multiple consecutive quarters, from $2 the first and second, $5 third and $10 fourth to $2, $4, $8, and $10. Page 2 What is Driving These Rate Increases? Public utilities are often the target of unfunded mandates. For example, several years ago, the Department of Health enacted a State Water Connection Surcharge to assist the State in paying the costs of meeting federal EPA requirements for water testing for lead and copper. In 2000 this cost is $47,000. The federally mandated Consumer Confidence Report, which must be made available to all users of City water, is an additional cost. We have budgeted $8,000 in printing and postage to prepare and mail this report. This expense will be continuing, as the City is required to update that report every year. A significant force behind the rate increases is the Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Program. Substantial capital outlays have been made and will continue from these funds. Our own prioritization policy is the culprit: we have identified as highest priority for improvement those neighborhoods which have the highest combination of needs. Thus, projects completed to date and those in the 5 year plan all will require substantial improvements in all three utilities. • Water: about 2/3 of the water utility rate supports operations, while the other 1/3 supports construction projects. Many times, this $0.31 or so per 1000 is insufficient to fully fund capital projects, so the difference is made up from interest earnings and fund balance. For an average residential customer, this $0.31 is about $38.75 per year. • Sanitary sewer: about 20 percent of the sanitary sewer utility rate, averaging about $10.50 per quarter over the next five years, is specific to the Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Program. • Storm drainage: about 50 percent of the storm drainage utility rate, averaging about $5 per quarter over the next five years, is specific to the Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Program. Are We Doing All We Can To Keep Rates as Low As Possible? On the operating side, there is little room for savings. Wages are fixed by union contracts. Overtime when expended is generally the result of equipment failure (such as a water main break) or natural causes (during power outages having to shuttle generators between lift stations to pump down the wet wells until power is restored) which need to be responded to immediately to protect public health and safety. Utility staff have found the most cost - effective supplies and applications of chemicals and regularly perform preventative maintenance on all components of the utility systems. The installation of energy- saving adjustable speed drives at six wells is now starting to reduce electric costs, with $30,000 savings budgeted in 2000. Even implementing the Central Garage Internal Service Fund helps by "even -ing out" expenses for equipment. There may be additional small efficiencies yet to • be gained, and utility staff are committed to operating the utilities in as cost efficient, safe a manner as possible. Page 3 On the capital side, there are some options to reduce costs. 1) For the past five years of the Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Program, the water and sanitary sewer utilities have paid the entire cost of their respective improvements. The Council could consider starting to assess some of that cost to the property owners in the project areas. The very significant down side to this is that it would be changing policy in mid stream. 2) The Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Program could be scaled back, which would extend this program even further than the 25 years it is now estimated it will take to complete one improvement cycle. 3) General tax levy funds could be used to subsidize utility rates. If the tax levy is not also increased, this would simply stretch the existing Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Program funds even farther, reducing the street mileage which could be reconstructed in one year. As for other capital improvement projects, virtually all which are proposed are necessary to maintain the integrity of the utility systems, and we rely on the public bidding process to ensure that the work is completed at as low a cost as possible. How Do Brooklyn Center's Rates Compare With Other Cities? Brooklyn Center has historically had one of the very lowest water rates in the entire state, in large part because we do not operate a treatment plant. The table below shows the 2000 water rates of various Metro area cities. Table 1 2000 Water Rates of Various Metro Area Cities Based on Average 100,000 G Annual Consumption CITY PER 1000 G CITY PER 1000 G New Hope $1.95 Crystal $1.35 Golden Valley 1.80 Osseo 1.10 Richfield 1.62 Andover 1.01 Bloomington 1.55 Fridley 1.00 Minneapolis 1.53 Brooklyn Center 0.94 Robbinsdale 1.47 Maple Grove 0.90 • Brooklyn Park 1.42 Plymouth 0.75 Page 4 The sanitary sewer rate has historically been in the middle range of comparable cities. The table below shows 2000 sanitary sewer rates, converted to quarterly where necessary. Table 2 2000 Quarterly Sanitary Sewer Charges of Various Metro Area Cities (Converted to Quarterly Rate Where Necessary Based on 100,000 G Annual Consumption) CITY PER QUARTER CITY Y ...PE . R QUARTER New Hope $65.90 Plymouth $48.75 Fridley 62.50 Brooklyn Center 47.50 Hopkins 62.50 Blaine 44.70 Anoka 59.00 Andover 44.00 Brooklyn Park 55.00 Crystal 42.11 Osseo 52.50 Bloomington 36.54 Robbinsdale 5000 Manle Grove 33.75 Finally, Brooklyn Center has one of the highest Storm Drainage Utility rates. Other cities which have similar rates are also in the process of constructing substantial improvements. Cities with lesser rates are not actively constructing improvements, or assess a much larger share of the cost of improvements to the property owners. Table 3 2000 Residential Storm Drainage Utility Rates of Various Metro Area Cities CnY -:: ... :: PER CITY.; PER QUARTER QUARTER Hopkins $12.00 Crystal $4.59 Brooklyn Center 10.00 Roseville 4.38 Bloomington 9.90 Golden Valley 4.00 Richfield 8.80 Robbinsdale 3.45 New Hone 6.48 Fr idley 2.80 I Page 5 Auditor's Concern RE: `Senior Sanitary Sewer Rate Revenue Loss " Concern had been expressed in the past by our auditor regarding the "cost" of the senior sanitary sewer rate. You will recall that households meeting certain requirements (see attached) are eligible for a reduced rate, which is 55 percent of the single family rate. This is based on the reduced sewage flow generated by many senior households, as demonstrated when we compare water consumption of senior households with water consumption of other households. The auditor has expressed concern about the "loss of revenue' which he believes this reduced rate generates, and that this loss should be calculated and shown as a cost to the utility. Actually, there is no loss to the utility as a result of this reduced rate. Utility rates are set to generate the revenue needed for operations, treatment, and capital outlays, with the total revenue need distributed amongst the various classes of customers. In other words, we do not set rates and then obtain revenue; we determine how much revenue we need, and then set rates to generate it. If there were no reduced rate for seniors, then all rate payers would pay slightly lower rates. For 2000, instead of $47.50, residential customers would pay $44.13, and commercial customers would pay $1.77 per 1000 gallons instead of $1.90. Summary I believe these rates are fiscally prudent and necessary for the sound management of the utilities. • City of Brooklyn Center 2000 Public Utilities Rate Study e The City Council annually reviews public utility rates to ensure their adequacy in meeting financial goals. The Public Works Department strives to meet these goals while keeping rates as affordable as possible. The total utility bill paid by a resident of Brooklyn Center continues to be lower than in most area communities. Water Utility: The schedule labeled Water Utility Rate Study: 2000 shows the projected effect of modest increases in rates for 2000 and subsequent years. With the exception of the periodic painting of water towers and the possible need for a water treatment facility in the future, most capital outlays in the water utility will e main replacements associate with neighborhood street improvements and other Ati2rage Residentialr 2000 infrastructure repair. utility Custdriier :; `Charge < : :Charge It is recommended that the Council adopt a rate 3 0 or an inc from 0. 1 increas .3 increase fr per 9 o % f � $ P 1, 000 allons to $0.94. Recycf >s::::' >' g ate:: ;::: ;:::::$122.2 ©; Major improvement projects scheduled for 2000 include water main replacement associated with the San;taiy sewer :> :$190,00: 00 2000 neighborhood street reconstruction in the e StormOrairiae �:3800 440.00. Garden City Central Neighborhood and with the project, an looping the Brooklyn Boulevard d water - main in West Palmer Lake Circle ...... :.:.... . Aercent Sanitary Sewer Utility: The table S anita ry w r Rat d • 2000 See a Stud Y shows the projected effect of no increase for 2000, followed by modest increases the next four years. Considerable expenditures have been made from this fund in the past several years, however, this cycle of large facility expenditures is coming to an end. Aside from facility improvements, neighborhood street projects have required substantial sanitary sewer main replacements and repairs, and will continue to do so. In most neighborhood projects, the majority of sewer main has been found to be in need of replacement. Capital improvements for 2000 will include: replacement of two small lift stations, and replacement of portions of the sanitary sewer lines as a part of the 2000 neighborhood street improvement program in the Garden City Central Neighborhood. Detailed analysis of future capital needs for all utilities can be found in the Capital Improvements Plan. It is recommended that the Council adopt no rate increase, and maintain rates at $47.50 per quarter (residential rate). Storm Drainage Utility: The table Storm Drainage Utility Rate Study: 2000 shows a 5 % increase in 2000 rates, with similar increases in the following four years. A financial management priority for the storm drainage utility is the accumulation of a minimum cash balance of $540,000. This Average Senior Utility 1999 2000 balance is necessary to provide for adequate Customer . " charge . Charge : cash flow and provide flexibility in programming P ro g g projects. Substantial improvements to the Palmer Lake basin as well as construction of additional regional detention Recycling '': i25::80.> 525:8 0;' ponds are expected to become a p riority over P P P �' Water $28100 528:00 the next several years. Sanitary.:Sewer 5104.52:.::: Capital improvements scheduled for 2000 Storm Drain ge ... $38.0ti' .$40.M. include: storm sewer work associated with the neighborhood street reconstruction in the Garden City Central Neighborhood including 1 Total construction of a pond in Garden City Park, construction of a detention pond and Percent tnerease `:..' 1.t 1 elimination of drainage channels in East Palmer Park area, and dredging and expansion of an existing drainage channel into a detention pond in the southwest corner of Palmer Lake basin to alleviate storage and drainage concerns. It is recommended that the Council adopt a rate increase of S %, or an increase from $9.50 per quarter (residential rate) to $10.00 per quarter. Recycling Utility: _ The Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG) has adopted their budget for 2000 and it maintains current service levels with no increase in fees for 2000. Rates will remain at $2.15 per month, or $6.45 per quarter. Utility Hook Up Charges: Hook up charges are increased annually based on inflation. Charges were increased 2.3% percent, based on the increase in the Consumer Price Index from September, 1998 to August, 1999. Summary: Staff recommends small increases in water, sanitary sewer and storm drainage rates for 2000. If the recommended rates are adopted, the annual utility bill of the average customer would increase by approximately 1.8 %. The annual bill of a senior customer would increase by 1.1 %. This compares to the current rate of inflation of 2.3 percent. WATER ���� UTILITY �� ��'�UU��' ���� n�x �- STUDY: ���� n ' u�v�x�v� 12-Oot-99 Actual Budget Budget Start of Year Cash & Investments EXPENDITURES Operations Personal Service $388.388 $407.157 $414.306 $426.735 $439.537 $452 Contractual Service 217.885 148.897 201 207.231 213.448 219.851 � Supplies &Materials 80.293 100.700 145.000 148 153.831 158.445 Utilities/Insurance 122.795 148 117.100 120 124.231 127.858 Depreciation 255.689 359.100 372 380.000 390.000 400.000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1.075.050 $1.163.854 $1.249.643 $1.283.928 $1.321.047 $1.358 REVENUES Billing Revenues $1.060.832 $1.092.000 $1.128.000 $1.152.000 $1.188.000 $1.224.000 Miscellaneous Operating 118.551 90,000 120.000 120.000 120.000 120.000 yNiaua||aneouoNon'operoUng 71.985 20.000 15.000 15.000 15.000 15.000 TOTAL REVENUES $1.251.388 $1.202.000 $1.263.000 $1.287.000 $1.323.000 | $1.359.000 Net Income o/Loss $175.318 $38.04O $13.357 $3 $1.953 $22 �x Uedo�mAd�8�k | $255.609| $359.1DO| $372.O42| $3MO $390.000 | $400.000 -----------������� � Non Operating Expenditures Capital Outlay $1.078.953 $449.108 $913.909 $678.190 $785.865 $595.180 Debt Service $14.070 $56.300 $56.300 $56.300 $58.300 Non Operating Revenues Interest Earnings $167 $162.251 0150 $128.470 $117.423 $100.703 Total Net Effect mn Fund Balance ($479 $53.989 /$434.610\ ($220 ($332.709) ($94 End of Year Cash & Investments Rninfonntiom Proposed Cash Balance Ta ot $1,700,000 $1,700 $1 $1,700,000 $1,700,000 $1,700 Number of gallons (in 1 000s) 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 SANITARY SEWER RATE STUDY: 2000 12- Oct -99 Actual Budget Start of Year Cash &Investments EXPENDITURES Operations Personal Service $206,760 $190,798 $196,426 $202,319 $208,388 $214,640 Contractual Service 130,100 105,910 130,691 137,226 144,087 151,291 Supplies & Materials 13,748 18,500 17,000 17,510 18,035 18,576 Utilities /Insurance 28,043 29,354 29,250 30,713 32,248 33,861 Depreciation 185,732 209,600 213,024 220,000 225,000 230,000 Subtotal: City O &M Expense $564,383 $554,162 $586,391 $607,767 $627,759 $648,368 MCES Charges $1,468,099 $1,438,737 $1,410,000 $1,395,900 $1,409,859 $1,423,958 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,032,482 $1,992,899 $1,996,391 $2,003,667 $2,037,618 $2,072,326 REVENUES Billing Revenues $2,289,620 $2,413,902 $2,423,924 $2,498,193 $2,572,801 $2,648,560 Miscellaneous Operating 0 0 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Non - operating 12,445 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 TOTAL REVENUES $2,302,065 $2,414,902 $2,424,924 $2,499,193 $2,573,801 $2,649,560 Net Income or Loss $269,583 $422,003 $428,533 $495,526 $536,184 $577,234 Deprecation Add -Back $185,732 ( $209,600 I $213,024 I $220,000 I $225,000 ( $230,000 . :.... ..:..::::..:::::.:..' I.[# 3...::.:::' av::::::<:>:: :: ><:: » >:::...:.:: >::.:.:.:.... k" I ......!..................t).... :........................................................................................................................................................ ............................... Non Operating Expenditures Capital Outlay $435,649 $916,020 $937,700 $535,740 $785,865 $745,180 Non Operating Revenues Interest Earnings $80,723 $63,949 $47,112 $34,660 $45,382 $46,417 Total Net Effect on Fund Balance $100,389 ($220,469) ($249,031) $214,446 $20,701 $108,472 � _�: _r --�. End of Year Cash & Investments .. s �: ,_ 64 _ For Information Proposed Cash Balance Target $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 Residential Accounts ...... ................. ...............................:...::...::....:.....:....................:::...:.....:............................................................................................................................................ ............................... Senior Accounts .;.:.:;:.:; :.::::::::;<:.;::_ 9t#:;:::>::>::>:::<:;>:«::...:: 1 £#: >:: >:<: »:::<: > :............. 't..5... ; >_::::::`::::::: >'::::. ::: >:<::;::•;:.::.;.::.::.: R1kTE.PEI.'13# Intl. �iAL ................:.:::::::::::::::.::::::::. �..............::::.::::::::.:..::.. �...................................$`................................... �................................... �..::. :.::;:: >:: »:;:.;:.::;::::::::.; STORM �T���K� [ � DR AINAGE - ~~' ~^°^ ^°^ = "^"^ ^~�^- ~° " ^^-^ ' ^ RATE `^ ^- ~' ^ ~"�° ^ ' ^-=== 12-Oct'99 actual budget budge Start of Year Cash & Investments EXPENDITURES Operations Personal Service $101.500 $100.000 $100.000 $100.000 $100.000 $100 � Contractual Service 95.435 58.435 52.878 54.782 58 58.797 � Supplies &Materials 1.054 O 1.000 1.000 1.100 1.100 Utilities/Insurance 1.705 2.200 2.200 2.279 2.361 2.448 Depreciation 61.508 93.500 108.868 140.000 145.000 150.000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $261.303 $254.135 $264.946 $298.061 $305.215 $312.343 REVENUES Billing Revenues $840.012 $988.000 $1.040.000 $1.092.000 $1.118.000, $1.144.000 Miscellaneous Operating O O D O O O K8inoeUaneouuNon'openuUng 9.669 20.000 2.500 2.500 2.500 2.500 � � TOTAL REVENUES $949.681 $1.008.000 $1.042.500 $1.004.500 | $1.120.500 $1.146.500 Net Income orLoss $888.479 $753,865 $777.554 $798/09 $815.285 $834.157 � | | | | | | � Dopre�obonAdd'Book � *01.5O8| $S3.50O| $1O8.8O8| $14O�UD| $145.000| s150.000 � Non Operating Expenditures Capita Outlay $487.186 $527.188 $904.230 ' $649530 $548/404 $725 � Debt Service $242.190 $238.957 $240.480 $240.950 $241 $240.540 Non Operating Revenuer Interest Earnings $21.230 $26.359 $14.763 $17 $27.228 Total Net Effect mnFund Balance $10.611 $102.458 ($231.908) $60.723 $180 $45.585 End of Year Cash &Unvestments pormfortnadon Proposed C uhBa|anceTa t $540000 $540000 $540000 $540000 $54U00O $540000 Schools & govt buildings per acre $45.00 $47.50 $50.00 $52.50 $53.75 $55.00 Multiple family & churches per acre $108.00 $114.00 $120.00 $126.00 $129.00 $132.00 Commercial and industrial per acre $180.00 $190.00 $200.00 $210.00 $215.00 $220.00 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2.000 WATER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, a municipal Public Utilities Division exists for the purpose of providing and maintaining water and sanitary sewer facilities for the citizens of the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is a requirement of the City Charter that the Public Utilities Division be a self - sustaining entity through revenue provided by a uniform schedule of rates, fees and charges; and WHEREAS, City of Brooklyn Center Ordinances state, "The City Council shall adopt by resolution schedules of water and sanitary sewer rates, fees, and charges which schedules shall be known as the Public Utilities Rate Schedule". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the following Water Utility Rate Schedule be adopted with the current rate maintained effective for all billings issued after January 1, 2000. WATER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE ® 1. WATER RATES BASE RATE AMOUNT PER YEAR 1.000 GALLONS 1999 $0.91 2000 Proposed $0.94 OUARTERLY MINIMUM RATE 1999 QUARTERLY 2000 PROPOSED METER SIZE MINIMUM CHARGE CHARGE 5/8" x 3/4" $ 7 Same 3/4" $ 11 " 1" $ 14 it 1 1 /z " $ 18 " 2 $ 35 " 3 $ 70 " 4" $119 " 6 $273 it 8 $515 " • 10" $686 " RESOLUTION NO. 2. FEES PRESENT PROPOSED Water Meters 5/8" x 3/4" $50.00 Same 3/4" or larger Cost Plus $2.00 Same Fire Protection $50.00 Same Inspection Private Fire Hydrant Labor, Materials Same Maintenance Equipment and Overhead 3. CHARGES PRESENT PROPOSED Delinquent Account Greater of Quarterly $3.00 or 10% Same Certification to Taxes Per Account $30.00 Same Restoration of Service - Monday to Friday Except Holidays Between the Hours of 7:30 A.M. and 3:00 P.M. $25.00 $30.00 Restoration of Service Anytime Saturday, Sunday and Holidays and Between the Hours of 3:00 P.M. and 7:30 A.M. on Monday Through Friday Except Holidays $75.00 $80.00 Delinquent Meter Reading $2.00 lst & 2nd qtr. $2.00 1st Per Account $5.00 3rd quarter $4.00 2nd $10.00 4th quarter $8.00 3rd (consecutive) $10.00 4th Curb Stop Stand Pipe Repair $ 40.00 Same RESOLUTION NO. 3. CHARGES (continued) PRESENT PROPOSED Hydrant Meters .5/8" x 3/4" - Deposit $100.00 Same Daily Rental $ 1.00 Same Minimum Rental $ 20.00 Same 2 1 /2 11 Deposit $700.00 Same Daily Rental $ 7.00 Same Monthly Rental $100.00 Same Minimum Rental $ 35.00 Same 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. • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2000 SANITARY SEWER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, a municipal Public Utilities Division exists for the purpose of providing and maintaining water and sanitary sewer facilities for the citizens of the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is a requirement of the City Charter that the Public Utilities Division be a self - sustaining entity through revenue provided by a uniform schedule of rates, fees and charges; and WHEREAS, City of Brooklyn Center Ordinances state, "The City Council shall adopt by resolution schedules of water and sanitary sewer rates, fees, and charges which schedules shall be known as the Public Utilities Rate Schedule". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the following Sanitary Sewer Utility Rate Schedule be adopted with the proposed rate effective for all billings issued after January 1, 2000. SANITARY SEWER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE 1. RATES OUARTERLY RESIDENTIAL RATES SINGLE SENIOR YEAR FAMILY APARTMENT CITIZEN 1999 $47.50 $33.25 $26.13 2000 Proposed Same Same Same NON - RESIDENTIAL RATES PER 1,000 FIXTURE YEAR GALLONS UNITS 1999 $1.90 $2.90 2000 Proposed Same Same RESOLUTION NO. 2. FEE PRESENT PROPOSED SAC Charge Set by MCES Set by MCES 3. CHARGES PRESENT PROPOSED Delinquent Account Greater of Quarterly $3.00 or 10% Same Certification to Taxes Per Account $30.00 Same Line Cleaning Charge Labor, Materials Labor, Materials Equipment and Equipment and Overhead Overhead Sanitary Sewer Hookup Established Established Annually by Annually by Resolution Resolution 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. ® its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved I � RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2000 STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, it is a requirement of the Brooklyn Center City Charter that Brooklyn Center's municipal utilities be self - sustaining entities through revenue provided by a uniform schedule of rates, fees, and charges; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has reviewed the financial requirements of the Storm Drainage Utility and has developed a recommended rate schedule. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the following schedule of Storm Drainage fees will be in effect as of January 1, 2000: • CHARGE PER QUARTER PER ACRE Classification/Land Use 1999 2000 BASE RATE $38.00 $40.00 1. Cemeteries, Golf Courses 9.50 10.00 2. Parks 19.00 20.00 1 3. Single Family, Duplex, Townhouse 9.50 /lot 10.00 /lot 4. Schools, Government Buildings 47.50 50.00 15. Multiple Family, Churches 114.00 120.00 6. Commercial and Industrial 190.00 200.00 7. Vacant Land As Assigned As Assigned • 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 and adopted. I Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2000 RECYCLING RATES WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is a member of the Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG), which is a joint powers group formed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, 1987, Section 471.59; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the joint powers agreement was to create an organization by which the member cities may jointly and cooperatively provide for the efficient and economical collection, recycling, and disposal of solid waste within and without their respective corporate boundaries, all in compliance with Minnesota Waste Management Act, Minnesota Statutes, 1987, Chapter 115A; and WHEREAS, the HRG has established a curbside recycling program for its member cities to meet the requirements of Hennepin County Ordinance No. 13, Solid Waste Source Separation for Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center Ordinance No. 89 -11 authorizes the City to establish rates for recycling services; and ® WHEREAS, the HRG has established a rate of $2.15 per month per household for recycling services beginning January 1, 2000; and - WHEREAS, the rates for recycling services established by the HRG reflect the amount needed to fund the City's curbside recycling program after the projected reimbursement of recycling program costs from Hennepin County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the above described rates established by the HRG for recycling services are hereby approved. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk I 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. • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2000 WATER AND SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP RATES WHEREAS, Resolution Nos. 74-45 and 77 -113 provided for the annual adjustment of water assessment rates for non - single - family residential and single - family residential rates, respectively; and WHEREAS, said adjustment in water hookup rates is to be effective January 1 of each year; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 88 -05 changed the month from which the annual price index change is to be calculated from October to July; and WHEREAS, the change in the Consumer Price Index - All Urban Consumers from 1998 to 1999 was an increase of 2.3 percent; and ® WHEREAS, City policy, based on Village policy established in April, 1956, is to calculate the cost of sanitary sewer hookup based on the average cost of a lateral system of sanitary sewers for a standard Village lot. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the water and sanitary sewer hookup rates effective January 1, 2000 will be as follows: Type of Property /Assessment 2000 Rate WATER HOOKUP Single Family Residence with Service $3,846.50 Single Family Residence without Service $2,936.00 Frontage (front 135 feet) $39.15 per front ft. Area (area outside front 135 feet) $12.10 per 100 sq. ft. Service Hookup $910.50 SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP Frontage $22.78 per front foot Service Hookup $910.50 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 and adopted. • MEMORANDUM TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Charlie Hansen, Finance Director DATE: November 10, 1997 SUBJECT: Public Utility Senior Citizen Accounts Background The Brooklyn Center City Council initiated a Senior Citizen sanitary sewer rate by motion in 1978, extended it in 1980 and 1982, and adopted Resolution 83 -124 to put the current program into effect in January, 1984. A study had found that Brooklyn Center senior citizens used only 55% of the average water used by all Brooklyn Center residences. Water is billed based upon consumption as shown by the water meter, but sanitary sewer is billed as a flat rate to all homes. It was decided to create a senior citizen sanitary sewer rate which would be 55 % of the flat rate. To be eligible for the reduced sewer rate, the head of household or spouse must be 62 years of age or older, and no more than two persons may permanently reside in the residence. The maximum limitation of two may be exceeded if the additional persons are at least 62 years of age or disabled. In addition, each household must fill out an Application for Elderly Resident Sanitary Sewer Rate form and return it to the Utility Department by December 31 of each year. Analysis Each year, the Utility Department sends out approximately 2,175 applications to households which are already on the senior citizen rate so they may reapply. We often get comments from the citizens asking why we do this since "I got a year older, not younger!" We also experience a couple of dozen cases each year where for various reasons, the household doesn't return an application to us. We must then take them off the senior citizen rate and put them on the full rate. They become irate when the next bill comes and we must have them fill out the application so that we came put them back on the senior citizen rate. In our experience, the only times when a household does lose the senior citizen status is when the ownership changes or when additional family members move in. We usually find out about ownership changes when they happen because the new owners come in to the Assessing Department to get the property listed in their name. Instances where additional family members move into a home happen less than a dozen times a year and the residents often are honest enough to report them to us prior to that year's application process. Recommendation One of the principles of internal control design is that the internal control shouldn't cost more than the potential loss it is intended to prevent. Considering the postage cost of mailing out 2,175 applications each year, the staff time involved, and the bad public relations caused by dropping from the senior rate two dozen households who didn't return an application, we have concluded that this internal control is costing more that it is worth. I am proposing that the City discontinue the practice of requiring senior citizen households to reapply for that status each year. This would result in a few household staying on the senior rate after an additional family member moves into the house. They would still be required to apply once when they first go on the senior citizen rate. • adoption: Member Kathleen Cprmody introduced the following resolution and moved its RESOLUTION NO. 97 -215 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE POLICY REGARDING THE SANITARY SEWER RAT FOR THE ELDERL WHEREAS, the City Council found it to be in the best interest of the City to initiate a senior citizen sanitary sewer rate in 1978 and to adopt Resolution 83 -124 to put the current program into effect in January 1984; and WHEREAS, the City staff has evaluated the current program and recommended a change in operations to eliminate the requirement for seniors to reapply each year; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that a sanitary sewer rate for the elderly is established as follows: 1. The rate is available to properties being billed residential sanitary sewer rates and where the head of household or spouse has attained the age of 62 years or older and a maximum of 2 persons permanently reside there. ?. The maximum of 2 persons in the residence may be exceeded by any additional persons who are at least 62 years of age or who are disabled. 3. Residents of owner occupied homes applying for this program shall complete an application provided by the city once when entering the program and agree to notify the city of any changes in their household which might change their eligibility for the program. 4. Landlords of rental properties may apply for this program on behalf of their senior renters by annually completing an application provided by the city, agreeing that the benefit of the reduced rate shall flow through to the renter, and agreeing to notify the city of any changes in the rental of the property or the renter's household which might change their eligibility for the program. 5. Falsification of information submitted on the application or failure to notify the city of changes in eligibility shall constitute a violation of Chapter 4 of the City Ordinances and may be prosecuted according to Section 4 -501 of Chapter 4 of the Ordinances. 6. The sanitary sewer rate for the elderly shall be equal to 55% of the rate established annually for single family homes. • RESOLUTION NO. 97 -215 November 24, 1997 ��c.�tlmo . Date � ayor f/ ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Robert Peppe , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Myrna Kragness, Kathleen Carmody, Kay Lasman, and Robert Peppe; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. i . APPLICATION FOR ELDERLY RESIDENT SANITARY SEWER RATE IN RENTAL PROPERTIES The City of Brooklyn Center Public Utilities Division has a reduced sewer rate for elderly residents with the head of household or spouse 62 years of age or older and a maximum of two persons in the household. The maximum of two persons in the household may be exceeded by additional persons who are at least 62 years of age or are disabled. Persons meeting the above requirements may apply for the reduced sewer rate on this form. The rate reduction will take effect on the next billing. Landlords of rental properties may apply for this program on behalf of their senior renters by annually completing this application, agreeing that the benefit of the reduced rate will flow through to the renter, and agreeing to notify the City of any changes in the rental properly or the renter's household which might change their eligibility for the program. CERTIFICATION , hereby certifies that (he, she) lives at Brooklyn Center, MN, and hereby applies for the Elderly Resident Sanitary Sewer Rate. (He, She) further certifies that only the following listed persons permanently reside at this address: _ AGE (CHECK ONE) NAME 62 OR OLDER UNDER 62 Head of Household Spouse (if any) Disabled Persons Other Persons I (we) have completed this application and under penalties of perjury declare the information to be true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. Date Signature Please return to: City of Brooklyn Center Public Utilities Division 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Acct No. Brooklyn Center, MN. 55430 . APPLICATION FOR ELDERLY RESIDENT SANITARY SEWER RATE The City of Brooklyn Center Public Utilities Division has a reduced sewer rate for elderly residents with the head of household or spouse 62 years of age or older and a maximum of two persons in the household. The maximum of two persons in the household may be exceeded by additional persons who are at least 62 years of age or are disabled. Persons meeting the above requirements may apply for the reduced sewer rate on this form. The rate reduction will take effect on the next billing. This application needs only to be completed once when entering the program. The applicant agrees to notify the City of any changes in their household which might change their eligibility for the program. CERTIFICATION hereby certifies that (he, she) lives at Brooklyn Center, MN, and hereby applies for the Elderly Resident Sanitary Sewer Rate. (He, She) further certifies that only the following listed persons permanently reside at this address: AGE (CHECK ONE) • NAME 62 OR OLDER UNDER 62 Head of Household Spouse (if any) ! Disabled Persons Other Persons I (we) have completed this application and under penalties of perjury declare the information to be true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. Date Signature Please return to: City of Brooklyn Center Acct No. Public Utilities Division • 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN. 55430 City Council Agenda Item No. 10e i i ® MEMORANDUM DATE: October 20, 1999 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Charlie Hansen, Finance Director SUBJECT: Resolution Providing for the Competitive Negotiated Sale of $1,585,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1999A A Resolution is attached which provides for the sale of these bonds. Official recommendations prepared by Springsted Inc. are attached to this memo. The bond issue is the General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1999A in the amount of $1,585,000. These will cover the 1999 street reconstruction and storm sewer construction projects. Specific projects funded include the Southeast Neighborhood street ® and storm drainage improvements, Azelia Avenue street improvement, Earle Brown Drive improvement, and the 66th and Camden Avenues street and traffic signal improvement. Special assessments will be -collected over the next - ten years and will be used to make principal and interest payments on the bonds. • 1r�� 17�77 lb: YJf 13K1UU5 MUKUHN 9 b14' ebb .54b4 NO.916 P003/009 EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA HELD: October 25, 1999 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was duly held at the City Hall in said City on the 25th day of October, 1999 at o'clock .M. for the purpose in part of authorizing the competitive negotiated sale of the $1,585,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1999A of said City. The following members were present: and the following were absent: Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATED SALE OF $1,585,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1999A A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue its $1,585,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1999A (the "Bonds ") to finance various improvement projects in the City;; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Springsted Incorporated, in Saint Paul, Minnesota ( "Springsted "), as its independent financial advisor and is therefore authorized to sell these obligations by a competitive negotiated sale in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, as follows: 1097906.1 1�•i •V7 lo: Ur b K1Ubb MUKUHN I t14 Jby 34y4 N0.916 P004/009 (1) Xuthori Findinum The City Council hereby authorizes Springsted to solicit bids for the competitive negotiated sale of the Bonds. (2) Meetin Bid O oening . This City Council shall meet at the time and place specified in the Terms of Proposal attached hereto as Exhibit A for the purpose of considering sealed bids for, and awarding the sale of, the Bonds. The Manager or his designee, shall open bids at the time and place specified in such Terms of Proposal. (3) Terms qf Rro oral The terms and conditions of the Bonds and the negotiation thereof are fully set forth in the "Terms of Proposal" attached hereto as Exhibit A and hereby approved and made a part hereof. (4) Official gtatement In connection with said competitive negotiated sale, the Manager, Finance Director and other officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Springsted and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds, and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and, after full discussion thereof and upon a 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. • :c9�9os.� 2 scr l� » mo r� r ar< i iuKaHn 'y olc Boa J+74 NU. `J' 1b Y005/009 ® STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a full, true and complete transcript of the minutes.of a meeting -of the City Council of said City, duly called and held on the date therein indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to the City's $1,585,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1999A. WITNESS my hand this day of , • 1999. Clerk 1097908.1 3 aV LJ. JJ iu• V I DI�tUUJ 1'JUKUt11V '7 OlG ..rv7 J'i7'f IYU. 71b 1''k�(�b /b�`J' EXHU31T A ® 'CNE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED S ISSUB ON ITS ESE }CA SALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING RAg 9I P P TERMS OF PROPOSAL $1,385,000 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA OENE:RAL OBLIOA71ON IMPROVEMENT SONDE, SERIES 1989A (sooK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the 3onds will be received on noonday, November 22, 1999, until 10:00 A.M., Central Time, at the offlces of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS Proposals may be submitted in a sealed envelope or by fax (651) 223 -3002 to Springsted, Signed Proposals, without final price or coupons, may be submitted to Springsted prior to the time of sale. The bidder shall be responslble for submitting to Springsted the final Proposal price and coupons, by telephone (651) 223 -3000 or fax (651) 223 -3002 for inclusion in the submitted Proposal. Springsted will assume no liability for the inability of the bidder to Teach Springsted prior to the time of sale specified above. All bidders are advised that each Proposal shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder and the City to purchase the Bonds regardless of the runner of the Proposal submitted. - DETAiLS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated December 1, 1999, as the date of original issue, and will bear Interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 2000. interest will be computed on ttie basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30-day months. The Bonds Will mature February 1 In the years and amounts as follows: 2041 $165,000 2005 $180,000 2009 $15510 200 2 $16 2006 $165,000 2010 5150,000 2003 S165,030 2007 $155,000 2004 5160.000 2008 $155,000 Proposals for the Bonds may contain a maturity schedule providing for a combination of serial bonds and term bonds. provided that no serial bond may mature on or after the first mandatory sinking fund redemption dots of any term bond. All term bonds shall be subject to mandatory sinking fund rederription and must conform to the maturity schedule set forth above at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. In order to designate term bonds, the proposal must speoify "Last Year of Serial Maturities" and "Years of Term Maturities" in the spaces provided c►n the Proposal ForTn. BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM The Bonds will be issued by means of a 400k entry system with no physical distribution of • Bonds made to tha public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond, representing the aggregate principal amount or Ina Bonds maturing in as-.h year, will be i 1k7 /l� /7b lb:btt J3K1UU5 MUHURN + bLe 5by 54y4 N0.916 P007/003 registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nomines of The Depository Trust Company ( "DTC "), Now York, New York, which will act as sawritles depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof of a single maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its participants. Principal and intarast are payable by the registrar to DTC or Its nominee as registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest P ayments to participants of DTC will be the responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners by participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial owners. Th n of deliver of the Bonds, will be required to deposit the urc p h assr , as a condition ry Bonds with OTC. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulatlons. The City will pay for the services of the registrar, OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2007, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2008. Redemption may be In whole or in part and If In part at the option of the City and in such manner as the City shall determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued Interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE • The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge Its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special assessments against benefitted property. The proceeds will be used to finance four Improvement projects within the City. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall big for not less than $1,589,150 and accrued Interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit") in the form of a certi or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $15,850. payable to the ortier of the City. if a check is used. It must accompany the proposal, If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to Issue such a bond In the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awardod to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit. its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as Instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central b Time, on the next. business day following the award. if such Deposit is not received y that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the e:Cepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of tha City scheduled for award of the Bonds Is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another data without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5 /100 or 118 of I%. Rates must be in level or ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a • single rate from the dete of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditlonal proposals will be accepted. -II- le'l�iyy 1b :k�tj bK1UaS MORGAN 4 bLe 5by :5494 N0.916 P006/009 AWARb The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal. in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (1) waive non - substantive informelitles of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (11) reject all proposals without cause, and (ili) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Bonds qualiij for Issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such Insurance policy or the Issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Bonds. Any increased costs of Issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of, insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the City has requested and received a rating on the Soncs from a rating agency, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer io issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to the purchaser shall no. constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Bonds. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on _any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSI � Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by th.s purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be dellver8d without cost to the purchaser through DTC in New York, Now York. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an tipproving legal opinion of Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association, of Saint Paul and trlinnaapolis, Minnesota, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement, payment for the E fonds shall be made In federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or Its designee not later than 12 ;00 Noon, "'antral Time. Except as compliance with tho terms of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or Its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the ourchaser•s non - compliance with said terms for payment. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE; On the date of actual Issuance and delivery of the Bonds, the City will execute and deliver a Continuing Disclosure Undertaking (the ^Undertaking ") whereunder the City will covenant for the benefit of the owners of the Bonds to provide certain financial and other information about the City and notices of certain occurrences to information repositories as specified in and required by SEC Rule 15c2- 12(b)(5). i bX 1 lab) MURURN 4 b 1 � bbtl 6474 NO. 916 P009/009 s OFFICIAL. STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing perti Information relative to the Bonds, and sold Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official Statement within V%a meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional Information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 65 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota $5101, telephone (651) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, pencipal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information require -I by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statemenr' of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined In Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or undarwiting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than severs bjslness days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the sonds are awarded 30 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bondo are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter calivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (li) it shall enter into a coritreetual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating UndOrWrlte of the Final Official statement. Dated October 25, 1999 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Sharon Knutson Clark 1011 WOO 12,30 PM • -iv- Recommendations For City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota $1,585,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1999A Presented to: Mayor Myrna Kragness Members, City Council Mr. Michael J. McCauley, City Manager Mr. Charles R. Hansen, Finance Director City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 SPRINGSTED Public Finance Advisors • Study No.: B0207J2 , SPRINGSTED Incorporated October 19, 1999 RECOMMENDATIONS Re: Recommendations for the Issuance of $1,585,000 General Obligation Improvement 9 P Bonds, Series 1999A We recommend the following for the bonds: 1. Action Requested To establish the date and time of receiving bids and establish the terms and conditions of the offering. 2. Sale Date and Time Monday, November 22, 1999, at 10:00 A.M., with award by the City Council at 7:00 P.M. that same evening. 3. Authority and Purpose for the Bond Issue The Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 475 and 429. The proceeds will be used to finance four improvement projects within the City. 4. Principal Amount of Offering $1,585,000. 5. Repayment Term The first interest payment on the Bonds is due August 1, 2000. Principal on the Bonds will be due annually February 1, 2001 through 2010. 6. Sources of Payment The Bonds are expected to be repaid solely from special assessments against benefited property. Special assessments will be filed on approximately November 30, 1999 for first collection in 2000. First half - collections will be used to make the August interest payments with second half- collections and excess first -half collections making the February 1 principal and interest payments. 7. Prepayment Provisions The City may elect on February 1, 2007, and on any day thereafter, to prepay the Bonds due on or after February 1, 2008 at a price of par plus accrued interest. 8. Credit Rating Comments An application will be made to Moody's Investors Service for a rating on the Bonds. The City is currently rated "A1" by Moody's Investors Service. City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota October 19, 1999 • 9. Federal Treasury Regulations Concerning Tax-Exempt Obligations P 9 (a) Bank Qualification Under Federal Tax Law, financial institutions cannot deduct from income for federal income tax purposes, income expense that is allocable to carrying and acquiring tax- exempt bonds. There is an exemption to this for "bank qualified" bonds, which can be so designated if the issuer does not issue more than $10 million of tax exempt bonds in a calendar year. Issues that are bank qualified generally receive slightly lower interest rates than issues that are not bank qualified. This issue is designated as bank qualified. (b) Rebate Requirements All tax - exempt issues are subject to the federal arbitrage and rebate requirements. However, since the City expects to issue less than $5,000,000 in tax - exempt financings in 1999, the City will be exempt from rebating excess earnings on the Bond proceeds to the U.S. Treasury if 100% of the proceeds are expended within 36 months of issuance. (c) Bona Fide Debt Service Fund The City must maintain a bona fide debt service fund for the bonds or be subject to yield restriction. This requires restricting the investments held in the debt service fund to the yield on the Bonds and /or paying back excess investment earnings in the debt service fund to the federal government. A bona fide debt service fund is a fund for which there is an equal matching of revenue to debt service expense, with carry over permitted equal to the greater of the investment earnings in the fund during that year or 1/12 the debt service of that year. (d) Economic Life The average life of the Bonds cannot exceed 120% of the economic life of the projects to be financed. The economic life of the improvements is 20 years. The average life of the Bonds is 5.58 years. Therefore, the issue is within the economic life requirements. (e) Federal Reimbursement Federal reimbursement regulations require . Regulations the City to make a declaration, within 60 days of the actual payment, of its intent to reimburse itself from expenses paid prior to the receipt of bond proceeds. It is our Page 2 City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota October 19, 1999 understanding the City has taken whatever actions are necessary to comply with the federal reimbursement regulations in regards to the Bonds. 10. Continuing Disclosure The Bonds are subject to the continuing disclosure requirements. The SEC rules require the City to undertake an annual update of its Official Statement information and report any material events to the national repositories. Springsted currently provides continuing disclosure services to the City. We have provided City staff with a contract amendment to include this issue. 11. Attachments • Project Listing /Composition of the Issue • Projected Assessment Income Schedule • Debt Service Schedule(s) • Terms of Proposal DISCUSSION The proceeds of the Bonds will be used to finance four improvement projects in various areas of the City. The projects financed by the Bonds and the composition of the issue is shown on page 4. Included in the principal amount of the issue are the costs of issuance and the allowance for discount bidding. The projection of assessment income is shown on pages 5 and 6 of these recommendations. The City expects to file special assessments, totaling $1,587,587 of principal, on or before November 30, 1999 for first collection in 2000. Assessments will be spread over a term of 10 years in even annual principal payments with interest charged on the unpaid balance at a rate of 6 %. The principal repayment structure and projected debt service schedule for this issue are shown on page 7. Columns 1 through 7, show the years and amounts of principal and estimated interest due on the Bonds, including the 5% overlevy. The overlevy is required by state Statute as a protection to the City and the bondholder in the event of delinquencies in the collection of special assessments for repayment of the Bonds. Column 8 shows the projection of assessment income from pages 5 and 6. Column 9 shows the net requirement which will be offset by the cumulative surplus in later years (shown in column 10). The August 1 interest payments are expected to be repaid from first -half assessment collections; second -half collections plus surplus first -half collections are expected to pay the February 1 principal and interest payments. The City does not expect to levy taxes for repayment of the bonds. Respectfully submitted, SPRINGSTED Incorporated mlk ® Provided to Staff: a) Continuing Disclosure Contract Amendments Page 3 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA ESTIMATE OF BONDING NEEDS FOR THE YEAR 1999 SE Neighborhood Azelia Ave Earle Brown 66th & Camden PROJECT Streets /Storm Street Drive Street/Signal TOTALS LEVY NUMBER 14565/14566 14685 14571 14570 Construction Costs 2,537,765 84,470 305,876 621,891 3,550,002 Paid from Cash Reserves and Current Year Revenues 1.465.930 3.000 81.960 79.031 1.629.921 Gross Special Assessments 1,071,835 81,470 223,916 542,860 1,920,081 Deletions 2,120 0 0 0 2,120 Senior Deferral 0 0 0 0 0 Assessments on City property 0 0 0 0 0 Net Special Assessments 1,069,715 81,470 223,916 542,860 1,917,961 Estimated S.A. Prepayments (3096) 320,914 0 67,175 0 388,089 Actual Prepayments 322.184 0 44.990 0 367.174 Special Assess Bond Needs 747,531 81,470 178,926 542,860 1,550,787 , Property Tax Bond Needs 1 0 0 0 0 0 Project Costs to be Financed 747,531 81,470 178,926 542,860 1,550,787 Plus: Costs of Issuance 10,099 1,101 2,417 7,334 20,950 Plus: Allowance for Discount Bidding 7,640 833 1,829 5,548 15,850 Less: Investment Earnings 2j ,587) Total Bond Issue $ 1,585,000 Assessments Special Assess Bond Needs 747,531 81,470 178,926 542,860 1,550,787 W Plus: Costs of Issuance 10,099 1,101 2,417 7,334 20,950 m Plus Allowance for Discount Bidding 7.640 833 1.829 5,548 15.850 .A Total Assessments 765,270 83,404 183,172 555,742 1,587,587 Prepared by City Staff and Springsted Incorporated 10/18/99 City of Broom Center, Minnesota Prepared October 1 899 p � G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1999A By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Page 1 of 2 PROJECTED ASSESSMENT INCOME Southeast Neighborhood Sts Azelia Ave Earle Brown Drive Filing Date: 11/30/1999 Filing Date: 11/30/1999 Filing Date: 11/30/1999 Filing Collect Interest Interest Interest Year Year Principal @ 6.000% Total Principal @ 6.000% Total Principal @ 6.000% Total - - - -- - - - - - -- --- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - - - -- --- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - - - -- --- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - - - -- 1999 2000 76 49,942a 126,469 8 5,443b 13,783 18,317 11,954c 30 2000 2001 76,527 41,325 117,852 8 4 12,844 18,317 9 28,208 2001 2002 76,527 36,733 113,260 8 4,003 12,343 18 8 27,109 2002 2003 76,527 32,141 108,668 8 3,503 11,843 18,317 7,693 26 2003 2004 76 27,550 104 8,340 3,003 11,343 18 6,594 24,911 2004 2005 76,527 22 99,485 8,340 2,502 10,842 18 5 23,812 2005 2006 76 18,366 94,893 8,340 2,002 10,342 18,317 4 22,713 2006 2007 76 13,775 90 8 1,501 9 18,317 3,297 21,614 2007 2008 76,527 9,183 85,710 8,340 1,001 9 18,317 2,198 20,515 2008 2009 76 4,592 81 8,344 501 8,845 18 1,099 19,418 TOTALS 765 256 1,021,835 83,404 27 111,367 183 61,409 244 1 a) Includes interest from filing b) Includes interest from filing c) Includes interest from filing date to 12/31/2000. date to 12/31/2000. date to 12/31/2000. - o v cQ cu M City of Brogyn Center, Minnesota Prepared October 181069 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1999A By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Page 2 of 2 PROJECTED ASSESSMENT INCOME 66th & Camden St /Signal - - - - T 0 T A L - - - - - Filing Date: 11/30/1999 Filing Collect Interest Year Year Principal @ 6.000% Total Principal Interest Total - - - -- - - - - - -- --- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - - - -- --- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - - - -- 1999 2000 55,574 36,268a 91,842 158 103,607 262,365 2000 2001 55,574 30 85,584 158,758 85,730 244,488 2001 2002 55,574 26,6176 82,250 158 76,204 234,962 2002 2003 55,574 23 78,915 158,758 66 225,436 2003 2004 55,574 20,007 75 158 57,154 215,912 2004 2005 55,574 16,672 72 158 47,627 206,385 2005 2006 55,574 13,338 68,912 158,758 38 196,860 2006 2007 55,574 10,003 65,577 158,758 28,576 187,334 2007 2008 55,574 6,669 62,243 158,758 19,051 177 2008 2009 55,576 3,335 58,911 158 9,527 168,293 TOTALS 555,742 186 742,061 1,587,588 532,256 2,119,844 i a) Includes interest from filing date to 12/31/2000. v cQ CD M City of Bryn Center, Minnesota Prepared October 18, 1999 $1,585,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Series 1999A Dated: 12- 1 -1999 Mature: 2- 1 First Interest: 8- 1 -2000 Total Projected Cumulative Year of Year of Principal 105% Assessment Net Cumulative Levy Mat. Principal Rates Interest & Interest of Total Income Requirement Surplus (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) 1999 2001 165 4.15% 86,465 251,465 264,038 262 1,673 0 2000 2002 165,000 4.30% 67,265 232,265 243,878 244,488 0 610 2001 2003 165 4.450 60,170 225,170 236,429 234,962 857 0 2002 2004 160,000 4.550 52,827 212,827 223,468 225,436 0 1 2003 2005 inn non n PRA nr, rn7 nna =A7 n,c one nac nan X60 T.JJD YJ,JT/ LUJ, JY/ LIJ, uLY 411 U14 U 2,056 2004 2006 155 4.75% 38,107 193,107 202,762 206,385 0 5,679 2005 2007 155 4.85 30,744 185,744 195,031 196,860 0 7,508 2006 2008 155,000 4.95% 23,226 178,226 187,137 187,334 0 7,705 2007 2009 155,000 5.050 15 170,553 179 177,809 0 6,433 2008 2010 150,000 5.15% 7 157 165,611 168,293 0 9015 TOTALS: 1,585,000 427,629 2,012,629 2,113,259 2019,844 2 Bond Years: 8,844.17 Annual Interest: 427 Avg. Maturity: 5.58 Plus Discount: 15 Avg. Annual Rate: 4.835% Net Interest: 443 T.I.C. Rate: 5.031% N.I.C. Rate: 5.014% Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant alterations of this schedule. The actual underwriter's discount bid may also vary. w cQ CD THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: • TERMS OF PROPOSAL $1,585,000 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1999A (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Monday, November 22, 1999, until 10:00 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS Proposals may be submitted in a sealed envelope or by fax (651) 223 -3002 to Springsted. Signed Proposals, without final price or coupons, may be submitted to Springsted prior to the time of sale. The bidder shall be responsible for submitting to Springsted the final Proposal price and coupons, by telephone (651) 223 -3000 or fax (651) 223 -3002 for inclusion in the submitted Proposal. Springsted will assume no liability for the inability of the bidder to reach Springsted prior to the time of sale specified above. All bidders are advised that each Proposal shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder and the City to purchase the Bonds regardless of the manner of the Proposal submitted. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated December 1, 1999, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 2000. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 2001 $165,000 2005 $160,000 2009 $155,000 2002 $165,000 2006 $155,000 2010 $150,000 2003 $165,000 2007 $155,000 2004 $160,000 2008 $155,000 Proposals for the Bonds may contain a maturity schedule providing for a combination of serial bonds and term bonds, provided that no serial bond may mature on or after the first mandatory sinking fund redemption date of any term bond. All term bonds shall be subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption and must conform to the maturity schedule set forth above at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. In order to designate term bonds, the proposal must specify "Last Year of Serial Maturities" and "Years of Term Maturities" in the spaces provided on the Proposal Form. BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution of Bonds made to the public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond, representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be Page 8 registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee of-The Depository Trust Company ( "DTC "), New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases . of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof of a single maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of DTC will be the responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners by participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to deposit the Bonds with DTC. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2007, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2008. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part at the option of the City and in such manner as the City shall determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special assessments against benefitted property. The proceeds will be used to finance four improvement projects within the City. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $1,569,150 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $15,850, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany the proposal. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or • 1/8 of 1 %. Rates must be in level or ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. Page 9 AWARD - ® The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the City has requested and received a rating on the Bonds from a rating agency, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Bonds. CUSIP NUMBERS ® If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the_ purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser through DTC in New York, New York. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association, of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, Minnesota, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement, payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE On the date of actual issuance and delivery of the Bonds, the City will execute and deliver a Continuing Disclosure Undertaking (the "Undertaking ") whereunder the City will covenant for the benefit of the owners of the Bonds to provide certain financial and other information about the City and notices of certain occurrences to information repositories as specified in and required by SEC Rule 15c2- 12(b)(5). Page 10 OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the re aration of an Official Statement i p p containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (651) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 30 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated October 25, 1999 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Sharon Knutson Clerk 10/19199 8:46 AM Page 11 City Council Agenda Item No. 10f i • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1999 PAY PLAN, AUTHORIZING PERSONNEL CHANGES IN POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, Resolution No. 98 -243 set wages and salaries for calendar year 1999; and WHEREAS, reorganization of staffmg in the police department to replace one (1) administrative Sergeant position with one (1) Public Safety Communications Supervisor position has been recommended; and WHEREAS, the implementation of the Public Safety Communications Supervisor position, which replaces a Sergeant, will result in an annual estimated savings of $10,000 to $15,000 by having duties not requiring a sworn officer performed by a non -sworn supervisor. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that: 1. The 1999 pay plan is hereby amended as follows: a) Delete one (1) Police Sergeant position. b) Add one (1) Public Safety Communications Supervisor position, pay grade D31. 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. na LYN CEpt� BROOKLYN CENTER S POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager Michael McCauley FROM: Joel Downer, Chief of Police v ' DATE: September 30, 1999 SUBJECT: Public Safety Communications Supervisor I am continuing to assess appropriate staffing levels and assignments for sworn and civilian positions in the Brooklyn Center Police Department. During this assessment, it has become apparent that the function of supervising the public safety dispatchers, maintaining the equipment, and revising procedures are best assigned to a civilian. The dispatchers are currently supervised by a sergeant. The 1999 Brooklyn Center police department budget has seven sergeant positions (five shift supervisors, one administrative sergeant, and one community services sergeant). The year 2000 budget requests six sergeants (five shift supervisors and ofte special assignment sergeant). The special assignment sergeant will serve as the system administrator for mobile computing devices, will serve as the photo- imaging administrator, coordinate crime prevention initiatives and the D.A.R.E. program, and will plan and coordinate special events requiring police personnel including department tours and speaking engagements. The department currently has five sergeants. Cathy Hennessy requested to return to the position of detective in June and Greg Weeks retired in September. The public safety communications supervisor will bring expertise and continuity to the dispatch operation. Their familiarity with policy, procedure, and the utilization of equipment will result in greater efficiency in emergency communications. This position will also serve as a public safety dispatcher when required. The implementation of the public safety communications supervisor position, which replaces a sergeant, will result in an annual estimated savings of $10,000415,000. • JD:kh dispatc l.mem City of Brooklyn Center Memorandum TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Kelli Wick, Human Resources Assistant DATE: September 24, 1999 SUBJECT: Lead Dispatcher - Salary Information Listed is the salary information you requested regarding the Dispatch Supervisor position. The Stanton Survey for 1999 lists an average yearly salary range of $38,472 - $47,316 for a lead dispatch or PSAP Manager position. This position would fall in between D31 (Building Inspector - starting at $18.309/hr) and D32 (no positions listed - starting at $18.76/hour) in our current pay plan. I believe it would be appropriate to slate this position at the D31 pay range ($38,229 - $46,523 /year.) Please let me know if you need more information. cc: Joel Downer, Chief of Police - ane Chambers, Assistant City Manager/HR Director