Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 04-12 CCP Regular Session Public Copy AGENDA • CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION April 12, 2010 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. 1. City Council Discussion of Agenda Items and Questions 2. Miscellaneous 3. Discussion of Work Session Agenda Items as Time Permits 4. Adjourn • • CITY COUNCIL MEETING City of Brooklyn Center • April 12, 2010 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 —The City Council requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. 4. Roll Call 5. Pledge of Allegiance • 6. 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 considered at the end of Council Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes 1. March 22, 2010 — Study Session 2. March 22, 2010 — Regular Session 3. March 22, 2010 — Work Session b. Licenses C. Approval of Application and Permit for Temporary On -Sale Liquor License Submitted by The Church of St. Alphonsus, 7025 Halifax Avenue North, for an Event to be Held May 1, 2010 (Cinco de Mayo Celebration) d. Resolution Designating 2010 Planting List of Allowable Boulevard Tree Species • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- April 12, 2010 • e. Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Professional Services Agreement with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. for In- Construction Services, Improvement Project No. 2010 -01, Dupont Area Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvements 7. Presentations/ Proclamations /Recognitions/Donations a. Tree City USA/Arbor Day and Arbor Month 1. Resolution Recognizing the Designation of Brooklyn Center as a Tree City USA for the Eighteenth Consecutive Year Requested Council Action: — Motion to adopt resolution. 2. Proclamation Declaring April 30, 2010, Arbor Day and May 2010 Arbor Month in Brooklyn Center Requested Council Action: — Motion to adopt proclamation. b. Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week and Earth Day 1. Proclamation Declaring April 17 -24, 2010, as the Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week Requested Council Action: — Motion to adopt proclamation. 2. Proclamation Declaring April 22, 2010, as Earth Day in Brooklyn Center Requested Council Action: — Motion to adopt proclamation. 8. Public Hearings a. Proposed Special Assessments for Delinquent Public Utility Service Accounts —This item was continued from March 8, 2010, for 7120 Logan Ave N 1. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Delinquent Public Utility Service Accounts to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls Requested Council Action: — Motion to re -open Public Hearing. — Motion to take public input. — Motion to close Public Hearing. — Motion to adopt resolution. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- April 12, 2010 • b. An Ordinance Relating to an Administrative Penalty System, Adding Sections 18- 201 to 18 -211 to the Brooklyn Center City Code —This item was first read on February 8, 2010; was published in the official newspaper on March 11, 2010; and is offered for Public Hearing on April 12, 2010. Requested Council Action: — Motion to open Public Hearing. — Motion to take public input. — Motion to close Public Hearing. — Motion to adopt ordinance. 9. Planning Commission Items a. Planning Commission Application No. 2010 -005 Submitted by Welsh Construction, LLC Requesting Planned Unit Development Approval to Allow Construction of a 63,362 sq. ft. Addition to the Adult Education Building, a Three Story Parking Structure, a Redesign of Access and Internal Movement Within the Parkin g Y Lot of the Earl Childhood Learning Center and Access Improvements from 71 Avenue North. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its March 25, 2010, meeting. 1. Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission • Application No. 2010 -005 Submitted by Welsh Construction (Northwest Family Services Center — CEAP & ISD 279) Requested Council Action: — Motion to adopt resolution. 2. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Code of Ordinances Regarding the Zoning Classification of Certain Land (Southwest Quadrant of Brooklyn Boulevard and 71 st Avenue) Requested Council Action: — Motion to approve first reading of ordinance and set second reading and Public Hearing for May 10, 2010. 10. Council Consideration Items a. Mayoral Appointment to Housing Commission Requested Council Action: — Motion to ratify Mayoral appointment. • i CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -4- April 12, 2010 • b. Hearing for Hyder Jaweed, Holdingford Investments, LLC, Regarding Rental Property Located at Brookhaven Apartments (3907, 3909, and 3911 65th Avenue North) Requested Council Action: — Receive staff report. — Motion to open hearing. — Receive testimony from applicant. — Motion to close hearing. — Motion to direct Staff to prepare a resolution for the next City Council meeting with findings of fact to either suspend or revoke the rental license for property located at Brookhaven Apartments. C. Hearing for John Paul Roder, Sierra- Sterling Investments, LLC, Sierra Properties, Inc., Rapahar Properties, Inc. Regarding Rental Property Located at Sterling Square Apartments (1400 and 1401 67th Avenues North and 6650 and 6700 Humboldt Avenues North) Requested Council Action: — Receive staff report. — Motion to open hearing. — Receive testimony from applicant. • — Motion to close hearing. — Motion to direct Staff to prepare a resolution for the next City Council meeting with findings of fact to either suspend or revoke the rental license for property located at Sterling Square Apartments. d. Election Related Ordinance Amendments 1. An Ordinance Relating to Municipal Elections; Amending City Code Sections 29 -401, 29 -402, and 29 -403 Requested Council Action: — Motion to approve first reading of ordinance and set second reading and Public Hearing for May 10, 2010. 2. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 4 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter, Sections 4.01 and 4.02 Requested Council Action: — Motion to approve first reading of ordinance and set second reading and Public Hearing for May 10, 2010. 3. An Ordinance Relating to Campaign Signs; Amending City Code Section 34 -140 Requested Council Action: — Motion to approve first reading of ordinance and set second • reading and Public Hearing for May 10, 2010. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -5- April 12, 2010 • e. An Ordinance Relating to the Definition of the Clear View Triangle; Amending City Code Section 25 -802 Requested Council Action: — Motion to approve first reading of ordinance and set second reading and Public Hearing for May 10, 2010. f. Resolution Approving the Labor Agreement for Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS) Local 86 (Police Commanders and Sergeants) and the City of Brooklyn Center for the Calendar Year 2010 Requested Council Action: — Motion to adopt resolution. g. Agenda Items Tabled Requested Council Action: — Motion to remove from the table agenda items tabled. 11. Council Report [The City Council may elect to adjourn to closed Executive Session under the attorney- client privilege to discuss pending litigation — Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 3 (b)] 12. Adjournment Agenda Items Tabled Proposed Special Assessments for Delinquent Weed Removal Costs 1. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Delinquent Weed Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls —This item was tabled from March 22, 2010, for 6233 Scott Ave N • AGENDA CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WORK SESSION April 12, 2010 . Immediately Following Regular City Council and EDA Meetings Which Start at 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers City Hall A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Major Plan Amendment to the Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission's Second Generation Watershed Management Plan Amendment 2. Connections at Shingle Creek — A Corridor Study PENDING LIST FOR FUTURE WORK SESSIONS Later /Ongoing 1. Sister City Update — Curt 2. 57th and Logan Update 3. Strategic Outcome Reports • a. Prosecutor Services 4. Community Schools Update 5. Ordinance Amendments — Farmers Market 6. 2011 Brooklyn Center Celebration Update 7. Crime Free Housing Update 8. Neighborhood Designations 9. Junk and Inoperable Vehicles Update — Back Yard Parking 10. Minn. Stat. 273.128 4d Rental Properties — Annual Report 11. 6101 Beard -6037 Brooklyn Blvd Update — May 12. Local Government Aid Policy 13. Brookdale Mall Update 14. Joslyn/City Property Remediation Update 15. Prosecutor's Contract 16. Department Year End Reports 17. Community Garden Program 18. Active Living Program 19. RER — Howe Fertilizer Update 20. Garbage Hauler Report is City Council'Agenda Item Na. 6a • • MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION MARCH 22, 2010 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 6:17 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, Dan Ryan, and Mark Yelich. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Fire Chief Lee Gatlin, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, and Carla Wirth, Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Also present: Hennepin County Commissioner Mike Opat and State Representative Debra Hilstrom. • WELCOME BY MAYOR WILLSON Mayor Willson welcomed Hennepin County Commissioner Mike Opat to the meeting. It was noted that Senator Scheid was unable to attend and Representative Hilstrom would arrive late as the Legislature was in session. GENERAL DISCUSSION Mayor Willson addressed the issue of funding shortfalls and funding available through the Recovery Act Bonds. He stated a developer is working on an FBI building so the City will lobby for that project. City Manager Curt Boganey explained the County's allocation is $40 million and the developer is lobbying for $25 million. Commissioner Opat explained they are still learning about the allocation and the County's role. Hennepin County is aware of this project but unclear whether bonds can be used when the federal government is a tenant. The Council discussed the history of the FBI building project and renegotiation due to difficulty in obtaining funding. Commissioner Opat stated he will advocate for FBI building project funding as much as he can and asked Mr. Boganey to forward project information to him. Commissioner Opat acknowledged the success of the Joint Community Police Partnership and that all sides are thrilled with the program. He stated funding is in place through this year and he • 03/22/10 -1- DRAFT will support it to continue; however, some of his colleagues consider it to be a municipal program. • Commissioner Opat stated there is some roadside enhancement money for Bass Lake Road. Councilmember Roche stated his support for this project since it dovetails infrastructure and suggested it be extended beyond Highway 100 to Logan and 57 Avenue. He also felt enhancements were needed on Humboldt Avenue from 53 to 57 Avenues, and Brooklyn Boulevard from I -94 to Highway 100. Commissioner Opat indicated that extending Bass Lake Road to Logan is an interesting proposition. Mr. Boganey stated the City needs to identify funding for cost sharing and will then approach the County about this option. Commissioner Opat noted that Humboldt Avenue was an ambitious project, many meetings were held, and it was clear that Brooklyn Center was not interested in participating. That decision had t support a new project at been made when times were good and he doubted the County would pp this time. Commissioner Opat stated with Brooklyn Boulevard, roadside enhancements were completed in some areas through a partnership. He indicated there are not a lot of roadside enhancement funds available but this is what the inner ring needs so he may be able to make ground with that project. Councilmember Lasman stressed the importance of fixing the washboard section of Brooklyn Boulevard, which is an important corridor. She stated when she ran for office, people told her that they cannot afford to wait and while some progress has been made, she felt the County now needs to finish it. Commissioner Opat and the Council discussed the Brooklyn Boulevard area north of 69 • p Yn Avenue. Mayor Willson stated the City has purchased homes in that corridor and the overlay has always identified the homes being removed and creating a business corridor instead of mixed residential/business as currently exists. Commissioner Opat stated the County can help with a roadside enhancement project and in the near future maybe such a project can be considered if the boundaries and matching funds can be identified. Councilmember Ryan stated that tonight the Council will consider adopting the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and those studies are mentioned in that Plan. He stated the Council will discuss with the City Manager that there may be some qualitative differences, businesses have closed, and will take those things into account when determining the overall objectives. Commission Opat stated he would welcome that discussion. Commissioner Opat provided an update on County's actions with the Shingle Creek Daylighting S tud Study and questioned the status of Brookdale Center. Mr. J Y and Joint C Enhancement S Creek Enhan ment Y q Boganey agreed that what happens with Brookdale Center will significantly influence what happens with other properties. He stated the City will know more in the next 30 to 45 days. Councilmember Roche raised the issue of appointment to the Library Board and stated his support to appoint an advocate from Brooklyn Center to represent District 1. He stated Brooklyn Center has a regional library and he would support a local library at 69 and Zane Avenues. Commissioner Opat pointed out that not many places have a regional library but Brooklyn • 03/22/10 -2- DRAFT • Center has one. He stated there may be a new library across the street from North Hennepin, a location in a walkable community and, hopefully, along an LRT line. He stated the County supports diverse representation and suggested the Council encourage its residents to make application for the Library Board, since not many apply from Brooklyn Center. Commissioner Opat and the Council discussed the need to form a network for group home operators to assure adequate maintenance of those properties. They also discussed how to prevent foreclosure of properties. Commissioner Opat commented on the need to support joint legislation to allow a small levy to establish a watershed district to undertake small capital projects to improve the water quality of Twin Lake and Crystal Lake. Commissioner Opat stated the second round of applications for Youth Sports Funds is due on March 29, 2010. The School District had made some requests; however, they did not fit the criteria. He encouraged the City to work with the School District to submit a grant to improve youth and amateur sports facilities. State Representative Debra Hilstrom apologized for her late arrival and provided an update on the Legislature's debate and actions to reduce the budget, attempt to hold education harmless, and shift unallotments. Mayor Willson and the Council thanked Commissioner Opat and Representative Hilstrom for . their representation of Brooklyn Center and attending tonight's Study Session. Representative Hilstrom advised she is carrying a homeowner lender mediation bill that would require mediation prior to a property being foreclosed. Councilmember Ryan stated his thanks to Representative Hilstrom for addressing this issue, which has devastated areas of Brooklyn Center. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Willson closed the Study Session at 7:05 p.m. i 03/22/10 -3- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY • OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION MARCH 22, 2010 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL Due to the Council Study Session running late, Council consensus was reached to delay the Informal Open Forum until the end of the meeting. 2. INVOCATION Mayor Willson requested a moment of silence and personal reflection as the Invocation. 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 7:05 p.m. 4. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Excused Absence: Councilmember Mark Yelich. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Fire Chief Lee Gatlin, Business and Development Director Gary Eitel, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Carla Wirth, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, as amended, to consider the Informal Open Forum at the end of the agenda, amend the Regular Session minutes of March 8, 2010, to indicate the invocation was offered by Councilmember Ryan, and the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. March 8, 2010 — Study Session 2. March 8, 2010 — Regular Session 3. March 8, 2010 — Work Session 03/22/10 -1- DRAFT 6b. LICENSES GARBAGE COLLECTION VEHICLE LePage & Sons, Inc. 3118 162 Lane NW, Andover MECHANICAL B & D Plumbing Htg & Air 4145 MacKinzie Court, St. Michael Burnomatic Mooney & Redlir 2925 Garfield Avenue S., Minneapolis Comfort Matters Heating 10981 4 th Street, Hanover DeZiel Heating and Air, Inc. 1612 3rd Avenue NE, Buffalo Erickson Plumbing & Heating 147192 d Lane NE, Blaine Gilbert Mechanical 4451 West 76 Street, Edina Hinding Heating & Air, Inc. 915 West 78 Street, St. Paul Kevin's Heating and Cooling 6474 20 Avenue S., Hugo Lane Valente Industries 5395 Jackson Drive, Mounds View Pierce Refrigeration 19202 nd Avenue, Anoka Quality Refrigeration, Inc. 6237 Penn Avenue S., Richfield Residential Heating & Air 1815 East 41" Street, Minneapolis SCR, Inc. 604 Lincoln Avenue NE, St. Cloud Seasonal Control Mechanical Div. 6225 Cambridge Street #29, St. Louis Park Sedgwick Heating & Air 8910 Wentworth Avenue S., Bloomington Southside Heating & Air 10314 Harriet Avenue S., Bloomington . PUBLIC DANCE Brooklyn Center Grill, LLC 2590 Freeway Boulevard RENTAL INITIAL 130468 TH Lane Samuel Holloway 5918 Admiral Lane Emeka Okeakpu RENEWAL 6037 Brooklyn Boulevard NB Properties LLP 3614 -16 50 Avenue N. Kjirsten Bjerke -Keenan 4703 68 Avenue N. Bernard McDonough 1706 71" Avenue N. Patricia Sandeen 3901 Burquest Lane Edwin Ngang 5801 Dupont Avenue N. John & Joan Ford 5325 Humboldt Avenue N. Linda Mitchell 4825 Twin Lake Avenue Rena Chrysler TOBACCO RELATED PRODUCT Brookdale Foods Market, Inc. 5808 Xerxes Avenue N. • 03/22/10 -2- DRAFT 6c. AMEND 2010 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE (MOVES CANVASS OF CITY PRIMARY ELECTION FROM SEPTEMBER 15 TO . AUGUST 11) 6d. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -61 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2010 -01, 02, 03, AND 04, DUPONT AREA NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 6e. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -62 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2010 -05, 06, 07, AND 08, TWIN LAKE AREA NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 6f. RESOLUTION NO. 2010-63 AMENDING WATER UTILITY RATES Motion passed unanimously. 7. PRESENTATIONS / PROCLAMATIONS /RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS 7a. 2009 ANNUAL REPORT FIRE DEPARTMENT — FIRE CHIEF LEE GATLIN Fire Chief Lee Gatlin narrated a Power Point presentation detailing the 2009 Fire Department Annual Report. • Councilmember Ryan thanked Fire Chief Gatlin for his leadership and the fire fighters for their outstanding service to the community. He asked Fire Chief Gatlin to explain the difference between the duty and non -duty call summary. Fire Chief Gatlin explained a duty crew staffs the West Station and responds to a good majority of the calls received. The duty crew comprises two to three fire fighters and they schedule in probationary fire fighters so they also get experience. Councilmember Roche asked about the new weekend duty crew program. Fire Chief Gatlin stated fire fighters have full time jobs and since calls come in at all times of the morning, a fire fighter may respond to a fire call at 4 a.m. and then have to go to their day job. He explained an average of 2.5 to 3 calls per shift are received so they are working through some issues. Councilmember Lasman stated her appreciation to Fire Chief Gatlin for addressing citizen complaints related to recreational fires. Fire Chief Gatlin advised of recruitment efforts that will be made in 2010 to promote the department to women candidates, target candidates with daytime availability, and to explore a Junior Firefighter Program. He then presented the findings of the citizens' survey conducted by Decision Resources, Ltd. indicating the community's satisfaction with the Fire Department. Mayor Willson stated the commitment and dedication of the fire fighters is very strong and they • 03/22/10 -3- DRAFT take seriously their duties, which impacts home owner's insurance rates. Councilmember Ryan • agreed it results in a significant savings to tax payers and the City appreciates their professionalism and dedication. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded to accept the 2009 Fire Department Annual Report. Motion passed unanimously. 8. PUBLIC HEARING 8a. PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL COSTS City Manager Curt Boganey introduced the item, discussed the history, and stated the purpose of the proposed resolution. Mr. Boganey explained that at the March 8, 2010, meeting the Council had requested additional information for residents who appealed their assessments. It was noted that staff recommended one change clue to the timing of the re- inspection and closing of the property. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded to re -open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Paul Yang, 6233 Scott Avenue N., stated he received an assessment of $400, did not receive notice of the lawn mowing done in July, and he did not buy the property until September 11, 2009. He did not believe it was fair to ask him to pay this assessment since the City knew the property was owned by Wells Fargo. Mr. Yang stated the Title Company indicated there were no assessments owing on this property, otherwise they would not let him close on the sale of the property. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Boganey stated staff did send an invoice to the property owner of record but he was not sure if it was sent to Wells Fargo or the person who had the property in their name. With regard to 7007 Drew Avenue N., Mr. Boganey advised that the $305.76 had been paid and then the property owner came forward to appeal the assessment. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -64 Certifying Special Assessments for Delinquent Weed Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls to dismiss the assessment on 6233 Scott Avenue N. and to sustain 03/22/10 -4- DRAFT the assessments on 4013 65 Avenue N., 7007 Drew Avenue N., 5424 Fremont Avenue N., and 5834 Fremont Avenue N. • Councilmember Ryan noted that during the closing of a property, the purchaser is supposed to receive notice of amounts owing but, in this case, it did not occur. He asked if there had been a breakdown in the closing process of 6233 Scott Avenue N., since Mr. Yang was not notified. City Attorney LeFevere explained why this cost may not have been identified during an assessment search. Councilmember Roche stated with 7007 Drew Avenue N., the cost occurred prior to the purchase so he believed a refund should be made to Wendy Larson and the City obtain payment from the person who owned the property when the violation occurred. Mr. LeFevere noted the purchase agreement may have indicated the buyer was to pay the amount or money may have been escrowed from the sale to make payment. Councilmember Lasman indicated her motion did not dismiss the 7007 Drew Avenue N. assessment because evidence was not put forth to indicate payment was not part of the purchase agreement. Mayor Willson agreed there may have been a timing issue and, as Mr. LeFevere has indicated, there may be a contract issue or timing issue when the amount due was not identified in a search. Mr. LeFevere clarified that the assessment for 7007 Drew Avenue N. has already been paid so it does not make sense to assess that cost. If the property owner felt they had a claim for a refund, it would not impact the action tonight to assess the costs. Mr. Boganey reviewed the timing for the costs incurred at 6233 Scott Avenue N. and advised that anyone who wants to find out if anything is owed against a property just has to contact the City and ask. The City's records will reflect there is a pending assessment. Historically, the City has not accepted responsibility if the new owner did not know or find out about an assessment. Mr. Boganey clarified it is an assessment against the property and the property owner is responsible, even after the property changes hands. However, in this particular case, both the inspection violation notice and sale to the current owner occurred on September 11, 2009, so there had not yet been an opportunity to invoice the previous owner and append it to the assessment. He explained that since Mr. Yang had no realistic way to know about the $100 pending assessment, it is reasonable to not hold Mr. Yang responsible for the $100 inspection fee. But if someone had asked, they had the ability to know about the $305 assessment. Mr. Boganey stated that to the best of his knowledge, the City has never failed to assess a property simply on the basis that the assessment occurred when someone else owned the property as long as the person who purchased it had the ability to find out about the assessment. He indicated that passage of the motion on the floor would set a different policy going forward. Councilmember Lasman stated she would like cases to be treated in a like manner and asked if passage of the motion on the floor would result in a policy change. Mr. LeFevere explained that a legally binding precedence would not be made in a decision of this kind. He agreed that people expect to be treated the same if similarly situated. Mr. LeFevere explained if the Council makes • 03/22/10 -5- DRAFT a decision and then decides it was not appropriate, it does not take away the ability of this or • future Councils from changing the policy. However, the Council would not want to arbitrarily change back and forth. Councilmember Lasman stated she watched the last meeting proceedings and feels her motion should stand because it is fair and if it had happened to her, that is how she would appreciate being treated. She stated she wants to think that this is an unusual case and not often considered. Councilmember Ryan asked if it is generally classified as part of the title search process and obligation of the buyer to research the status of the title and possible liens or assessments against the property. Mr. LeFevere advised that the City's process ignores the ownership because these are liens against the property and obligations of the property. That is why, when buyers and sellers enter a purchase agreement, it indicates who will pay pending and/or levied assessments. If it is not indicated, then the purchaser will have to pay the assessment if it becomes due after the closing. He noted that sometimes a purchaser will not want the seller to pay the cost because they would rather reduce the purchase price by that amount and make payments over time as an assessment through property taxes. Councilmember Ryan stated he is sensitive to the issue of fairness but it seems, on more careful examination, that there is an issue of how these transactions are generally conducted and if the purchaser overlooks an obligation, they assume the obligation upon purchasing the property. Mr. LeFevere stated this action relates to weed removal and nuisance activities but the same principles apply in the case of public improvements for streets or utilities. He pointed out that if • the City did not assess because the cost was not actually certified it would be a very costly policy for the City to establish. In the case of delinquent water bills, there is a basis for different treatment since it involves the consumption or use of water that does not benefit the purchaser. The assessments being considered tonight relate to improvements that actually enhance the property. Mayor Willson stated he cannot support the motion in its entirety. He stated he supports certification of the assessments on 4013 65 Avenue N., 7007 Drew Avenue N., 5424 Fremont Avenue N., and 5834 Fremont Avenue N. But, with regard to 6233 Scott Avenue N., he supports assessment of $305.76 as a valid charge the owner should pay or seek judgment against the previous owner. Council consensus was reached that Mr. Yang did not have the opportunity to learn of the September 11, 2009 inspection fee of $100. Councilmember Ryan withdrew his second to the motion. Councilmember Lasman stated that after hearing from legal counsel, she would support a motion amendment to "split the difference," which may be a more amenable motion. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -64 Certifying Special Assessments for Delinquent Weed Removal Costs to the • Hennepin County Tax Rolls for assessments and amend the motion to split the $305 assessment 03/22/10 -6- DRAFT on 6233 Scott Avenue N. so the owner of the property would pay half and be forgiven half, and to sustain the assessments on 4013 65 Avenue N., 7007 Drew Avenue N., 5424 Fremont • Avenue N., and 5834 Fremont Avenue N. Councilmember Ryan and Mayor Willson voted against the same. Motion to amend failed. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -64 Certifying Special Assessments for Delinquent Weed Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls for assessments on 4013 65 Avenue N., 7007 Drew Avenue N., 5424 Fremont Avenue N., and 5834 Fremont Avenue N. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to table consideration of the assessment for 6233 Scott Avenue N. to the next meeting. Motion passed unanimously. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS 9a. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -65 ADOPTING THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel provided an overview of the City's • consideration of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and advised the Planning Commission's unanimous recommendation for adoption of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Willson stated the Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay Plan is mentioned in this Comprehensive Plan and offered to provide a copy for review. Councilmember Ryan asked what are the significant changes in this Plan when compared to the previous iteration. Mr. Eitel stated the Land Use Plan is consistent since Brooklyn Center is a developed community so there are no major changes but, rather, a re -focus and re- attention to planning issues. Councilmember Ryan stated it seems the next extension of the trail is yet to be fleshed out. Mr. Eitel stated when doing public improvements, more attention will be given by staff to look at the corridors and how to accentuate other modes of travel to the park system and neighborhoods.. Councilmember Roche stated this Plan relates to the future of the community and it would have been nice if more people had attended the seminars held by City staff. He noted that the Evergreen Park borders are acknowledged in the City's plans and maps. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -65 Adopting the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update for the City of Brooklyn Center. • 03/22/10 -7- DRAFT Mayor Willson asked if this data is posted to the City's website. Mr. Eitel stated the draft Plan is • posted on the City's website and the entire Plan will be posted upon adoption. Motion passed unanimously. 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -66 AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES, RECREATION AND SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO APPLY FOR GRANT FUNDING THROUGH THE HENNEPIN YOUTH SPORTS PROGRAM Mr. Boganey introduced the item, discussed the history, and stated the purpose of the proposed resolution. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -66 Authorizing the Community Activities, Recreation, and Services Department to Apply for Grant Funding through the Hennepin Youth Sports Program. Motion passed unanimously. lOb. RESOLUTION NO. 2010-67 AMENDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 17589, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2010 -01, DUPONT AREA NEIGHBORHOOD STREET IMPROVEMENTS Director of Public Works/City g g Engineer Steve Lillehau introduced the item, discussed the history, and stated the purpose of the proposed resolution to approve the request by the property owner of 5837 Dupont Avenue N. to amend the certified special assessment levy roll for his property to pay for the current Dupont Avenue project in the amount of $2,576. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -67 Amending Special Assessment Levy No. 17589, Improvement Project No. 2010- 01, Dupont Area Neighborhood Street Improvements. Motion passed unanimously. 11. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Lasman reported on her attendance at the following events: • March 17, 2010, Crime Prevention Program Meeting. • March 18, 2010, Special Events Committee meeting to discuss the Brooklyn Center Centennial Birthday Parry event in February of 2011. Councilmember Lasman announced the April 21, 2010, Awards Ceremony that will be held at the Brooklyn Center Community Center. She also announced the May 21, 2010, golf fund raiser and advised that cosponsorships are needed. She indicated the Neighborhood Watch Block Captain Workshop was well attended and a success. 03/22/10 -8- DRAFT Councilmember Roche reported on his attendance at last week's Housing Commission meeting. • He announced that on April 3, 2010, another Round Table discussion will be held at the Embassy Suites and is open to the public. The guest speaker, Hennepin County Commissioner Stranglin, will address the Victory Memorial Drive project. Councilmember Ryan reported on subjects covered at the National League of Cities training conference and indicated he looks forward to sharing that training experience with his colleagues at a Work Session. He encouraged residents to promptly respond to the census, noting it will be used to determine federal aid through the County and may affect representation in Congress. Mayor Willson reported on his attendance at the following events: • March 12, 2010, Police Sergeant's induction and honorarium to Police Chief Bechthold. • March 15, 2010, Cable 12 interview on the State of the City. • March 16, 2010, dangerous dog hearing. Mayor Willson encouraged residents to make sure they have control of their pets. • March 17, 2010, Visit Minneapolis North Board meeting. Mayor Willson added his encouragement to residents to return the census, noting the importance to the City. Councilmember Roche announced the Saturday, March 27, 2010, Northwest Suburban Remodeling Fair that will be held at the Crystal Community Center and offers free admission and workshops. • i 12. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Roche seconded adjournment of the City Council meeting at 8:30 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 8:31 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Excused Absence: Councilmember Mark Yelich. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Carla Wirth, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. i 03/22/10 -9- DRAFT Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded to open the Informal Open • Forum at 8:31 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Mayor Tim Willson opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum. William Butler, New Hope, Minnesota, stated he had registered a complaint about a data privacy violation with Police Department and opined it is being ignored. Mayor Willson referred the matter to the City Manager. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to close the Informal Open Forum at 8:33 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. • 03/22/10 -10- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER • IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA WORK SESSION MARCH 22, 2010 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Work Session called to order by Mayor/President Tim Willson at 8 :41 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor/President Tim Willson and Councilmembers /Commissioners Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Excused Absence: Councilmember /Commissioner Mark Yelich. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, and Carla Wirth, Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. MAJOR PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE SHINGLE CREEK AND WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION'S SECOND GENERATION WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN . Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug introduced the item, presented the capital improvement projects, and estimated project costs as contained in the Single Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Plan. The Council discussed the determination that the Watershed's budget was not to exceed $500,000 per watershed. Mr. Lillehaug drew the Council's attention to the shifting of the projects to future years and recommendation from the Commission's Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to move forward with the projects even though it exceeded the threshold of $500,000. The Council noted several mathematical errors in the Capital Improvement Program chart and expressed concern that an indication of approval for the Major Plan Amendment would, in effect, approve a budget beyond the $500,000 threshold. Mr. Lillehaug explained that a public hearing is required for each project so the City has the ability to provide comment prior to committing to move forward. Mr. Boganey and the Council discussed the terms of the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) that gave the Watershed the exclusive right to ask the County to tax for a project without City approval yet the Watershed Board has indicated its intention to keep it to a maximum of $500,000 each year. Mr. Lillehaug stated he and City representative Della Young attend Watershed District meetings and will keep an eye on this matter. He assured the Council that the Watershed Commissioners . 03/22/10 -1- DRAFT are aware of the City's concerns, in tune with the policy to stay within the $500,000 threshold, . and not interested in asking the County to levy a $4 million project against the cities. Following discussion of potential capital improvement projects, the majority consensus of the City Council was that the threshold of $500,000 per year per watershed is a cap, not a guideline. Mr. Lillehaug stated he hears the Council's valid concerns, will get clarifying information on the dollar amounts that were incorrect, and suggested Della Young be invited to a Work Session so the Council can address its concerns and provide direction. The majority consensus of the City Council was to table further discussion of the major plan amendment to the Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission's Second Generation Watershed Management Plan to a future Work Session meeting when staff will provide additional information and corrected capital improvement project dollar figures. EBHC LINK UPDATE City Manager Curt Boganey updated the Council on staff's discussion with Seth Oliver, Oliver Companies. It was noted this project was in default and not entitled to tax abatement unless the default is cured by building the link. Mr. Boganey advised that staff will meet with Mr. Oliver to address open issues. The Council discussed its concern that Oliver Companies had reneged on its agreement and • desire that a mutually beneficial agreement be reached. Mr. Boganey stated there are specific remedies as it relates to the link and hotel. The only other issue is the lease, which is not part of the development agreement. Mr. Boganey noted the design of the link was based upon the lease so, since there is currently no lease, maybe a different link design will be considered. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember /Commissioner Lasman moved and Councilmember /Commissioner Ryan h i Council/Economic Development Authority seconded adjournment of the C p Work Session at J City 9:53 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. • 03/22/10 -2- DRAFT City Council Agenda Item No. 6b • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: April 6, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Maria Rosenbaum, Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT: Licenses for City Council Approval 1 � Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the following licenses at its April 12, 2010, meeting. Background: The following businesses /persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each business /person has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective licenses, submitted appropriate applications, and paid proper fees. Applicants for rental dwelling licenses are in compliance with Chapter 12 of the City Code of Ordinances, unless comments are noted below the property address on the attached rental report. MECHANICAL • Assured Htg, AC & Refrig 13571 Balsam Lane, Dayton Faircon Service Company 2560 Kasota Avenue, St. Paul Heating & Cooling Two Inc. 18550 County Road 81, Maple Grove Horwitz, Inc. 4401 Quebec Avenue N, New Hope North Suburban Heating & A/C 19066 Vasper, Anoka Recher HVAC, LLC 1119 Madison Avenue, Isanti Thermal Force Mechanical P. O. Box 670, Osseo MOTOR VEHICLE DEALERSHIP Cars with Heart 6121 Brooklyn Blvd RENTAL See attached reports. SIGN HANGER Signation Sign Group 6840 Shingle Creek Pkwy Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. • :vision: rnsurin; an attractive, clean.:sa% connnunity that enhances the guatitt• rtjdifia and preserves the psrfilr'c tr r.a ' ..a Rental Standards Prior to March 6, 2010 6605 Camden Dr Single Family Initial Javier Estrada None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK 5828 Fremont Ave N Single Family Initial Hamid Safdari None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK 4746 Lakeview Ave Single Family Initial Brian Meltzer None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK 5607 Lyndale Ave N Single Family Initial Timothy Quam None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK 6012 Pearson Dr Single Family Initial Michael Haase None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK 6900 Regent Ave N Single Family Initial Houa Her None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK Passed with Weather Deferral 5406 Sailor Ln Single Family Initial James Waters None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK 5842 Washburn Ave N Single Family Initial Daniel Pryde None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK Passed with Weather Deferral 6100 Summit Dr Multi Family Renewal Earle Brown Terrace Apts 1 Burglary, 1 Theft (.01 per 12 -913 Ordinance) OK OK 1 Bldg/140 Units 2926 53rd Ave N Single Family Renewal Nita Morlock None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK 7101 France Ave N Single Family Renewal Luanne Thompson None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK Passed with Weather Deferral 4113 Lakebreeze Ave N Single Family Renewal Pamela Grover Passed with Weather Deferral None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK OK 6913 Regent Ave N ISingle Family Renweal IThao Thu Lai None per 12 -911 Ordinance OK I OK w:. Current Rental Standards i 7024 Newton Ave N Single Family Renewal Troy Pfingsten 0 1 0 I OK OK Brian Hamilton/ 5312 Queen Ave N Single Family Renewal Ryan Wellenstine 1 I 0 I OK OK Type I = 3year Type II = 2 year Type III = 1 year Type IV = 6 mos City Council Agenda Item No. 6c • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: April 6, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk SUBJECT: Application and Permit for Temporary On -Sale Liquor License Submitted by The Church of St. Alphonsus, 7025 Halifax Avenue North, for an Event to be Held May 1, 2010 Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the application and permit for temporary on -sale liquor license submitted by The Church of St. Alphonsus, 7025 Halifax Avenue North, for an event to be held May 1, 2010. Background: The Church of St. Alphonsus, 7025 Halifax Avenue North, has submitted an application and permit for temporary on -sale liquor license for an event to be held May 1, 2010. The applicant has satisfied the City's requirements, submitted the $25 fee for each day of the license, along with a certificate of coverage for liquor liability insurance, and has existed as a . religious organization for at least three years. After Council review, the application and permit will be forwarded to the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division for approval. City Ordinance Section 11 -107 6 Temporary On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License. This license may be issued only upon receiving the approval from the Commissioner of Public Safety. The license may be issued only in connection with a social event within the city that is sponsored by a club or charitable, religious, or other nonprofit organization that has existed for at least three years or to a brewer who manufactures fewer than 3,500 barrels of malt liquor in a year. The license may authorize the sale of intoxicating liquor to be consumed on the Premises for not more than three consecutive days, and the City shall issue no more than twelve days' worth of temporary licenses to any one organization or for any one location within a 12 -month period. The temporary license may authorize the sale of intoxicating liquor to be consumed on Premises other than Premises the licensee owns or permanently occupies. The temporary license may provide that the licensee may contract for intoxicating liquor catering services with the holder of an On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License issued by any municipality. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. • „' " Alission: Ensuring, an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust c1 nip of c�e yo � WB �� Minnesota Department of Public Safety S ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT DIVISION ; P� 444 Cedar Street Suite 222 St. Paul MN 55101 -5133 `TT,ar�OF M ' " " 651. 201 -7507 Fax 651 297 -5259 TTY 651 282 -6555 "• "� W W W.DPS.STATE.MN.US APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR A 1 TO 4 DAY TEMPORARY ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE TYPE OR PRINT INFORMATION NAME OF ORGANIZATION DATE ORGANIZED TAX EXEMPT NUMBER The Curch of St Alphonsass. 2/28/1959 ES 32045(MN) STREET ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE 7025 Halifax Ave N Brooklyn Centerl MN 55429 NAME OF PERSON MAKING APPLICATION BUSINESS PHONE HOME PHONE Fr. Patrick J. Grile, C.Ss.R. (763 56 ( � 1 -5100 sa me DATES LIQUOR WILL BE SOLD May 1, 2010 TYPE OF ORGANIZATION CLI B CHARIT A BLE ELIGIOUS OTHERNONPR ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME ADDRESS Rev. Patrick J. Grile, C.Ss.R. same as above ORRANIZ TIO�N OFFICER ADDRESS ORGANIZATION O CER'S NAME ADDRESS Location license will be used. If an outdoor area, describe Parish school gym. Will the applicant contract for intoxicating liquor service? If so, give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service. no Will the pp ar li or li bility insurance? If so, please provide the carrier's name and amount of coverage. Ca l i c 1u u �l o Omaha APPROVAL APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED Bl' CITY OR COUNTY BEFORE SUBMITTING TO ALCOHOL & GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT IT COUNTY 1 DATE APPROVED CITY FEE AMOUNT 0 166 LICENSE DATES DATE FEE PAID SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OFFICIAL APPROVED DIRECTOR ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT NOTE: Submit this form to the city or county 30 days prior to event. Forward application signed by city and /or county to the address above. If the application is approved the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division will return this application to be used as the License for the event PS -09079 (12/09) Certificate of Coverage Date: 3/22/2010 Certificate Holder This Certificate is issued as a matter of information only and Archdiocese of St. Paul- Minneapolis confers no rights upon the holder of this certificate. This certificate Chancery Office does not amend, extend or alter the coverage afforded below. 226 Summit Avenue St. Paul, MN 55102 Company Affording Coverage THE CATHOLIC MUTUAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF AMERICA Covered Location 10843 OLD MILL RD Church of St. Alphonsus OMAHA, NE 68154 7025 Halifax Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 -1394 Coverages This is to certify that the coverages listed below have been issued to the certificate holder named above for the certificate indicated, notwithstanding any requirement, term or condition of any contract or other document with respect to which this certificate may be issued or may pertain, the coverage afforded described herein is subject to all the terms, exclusions and conditions of such coverage. Limits shown may have been reduced by paid claims. Type of Coverage Certificate Number Coverage Effective Coverage Expiration Date Date Limits Property Real & Personal Property General Claims Made Liability General Aggregate Products - Comp /OP Agg r Occurrence Personal & Adv Injury 8589 7/1/2009 7/1/2010 Each Occurrence 500,000 Tire Damage (Any one fire) Med Exp (Any one person) Excess Liability 8589 7/1/2009 7/1/2010 Each Occurrence 500,000 Other Each Occurrence Description of Operations /LocationsNehicles /Special Items Coverage is verified with regard to the Covered Location's Cinco de Mayo Celebration, to be held on parish grounds, May 1, 2010. Includes Liquor Liability. Holder of Certificate Cancellation Should any of the above described coverages be cancelled City of Brooklyn Center before the Creek Parkway 0 expiration date thereof, the issuing company will 601 Shin e ee endeavor to mail days written notice to the holder of Shingle Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 certificate named to the left, but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents or representatives. F Authorized Representative / 0111002188 City Council Agenda Item No.,6d • MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL ITEM DATE: April 6, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer S �' SUBJECT: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING 2010 PLANTING LIST OF ALLOWABLE BOULEVARD TREE SPECIES Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the attached resolution designating the 2010 planting list of allowable boulevard tree species. Background: In 1990 City residents and Council members expressed strong support for an improved city forestry program. Staff was directed to develop a Community Forestry Work Plan and policies regarding public tree care. In February 1992, Chapter 20 of the Code of Ordinances regarding trees was adopted by the City Council. Section 20 -402 of the ordinance states that the City Council shall annually adopt a resolution designating allowable boulevard tree species. This section is included in the ordinance to emphasize the importance of maintaining a variety of species to reduce the impact of future tree disease and to assure that all boulevard trees be located so as to avoid creating future sight • distance problems. Attached is a resolution designating the 2010 planting list of allowable boulevard tree species along with a copy of the boulevard permit that residents are required to complete and submit before the planting of boulevard trees. Budget Issues: Staff time for inspections is minimal. There are no other significant budget issues. Council Goals: Strategic: 6. We will respond to increased public awareness and interest in environmental sustainability and green community issues • 4j,_ .rut: • I_n : r „c J, :, r , ..nrn: urlih ! /.r:t c•rtJnurrr” t/rc rr;rulita of fib the jrtrhlic Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING 2010 PLANTING LIST OF ALLOWABLE BOULEVARD TREE SPECIES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center promotes a diverse urban forest so as to minimize the spread of tree disease; and WHEREAS, Section 20 -402 of the ordinances provides for an annual listing of allowable boulevard tree varieties. NOW AFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the - CityounciT of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the following trees are hereby designated as allowable boulevard_ tree species for 2010: Crabapple (Flowering) & cultivars Linden (American) Birch (River, Paper) Oak (Pin) Elm (Accolade) Oak (White, Bur, Swamp) Ginko (male tree only) Oak (Northern Red) Hackberry Maple (Autumn Blaze) Honeylocust (Imperial, Shademaster, Maple (Red) & cultivars Skyline, Thornless) Maple (Sugar) & cultivars • Kentucky Serviceberr Coffeetree Y Linden (Littleleaf) April 12, 2010 Date Mayor I 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: n resolution was declared dul passed and whereupon said adopted. p YP City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway • Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Phone 763 -569 -3340 PERMIT BOULEVARD TREE PLANTING PROPERTY ADDRESS: IN 11 OWNER NAME: ADDRESS: CITY, STATE, ZIP: PHONE: DAY OTHER VARIETY OF TREE: TO BE PLANTED (COMMON NAME) • APPROXIMATE DATE OF PLANTING: Please stake or otherwise indicate your preferred tree location as soon as possible I have called or will call Gopher State One Call at 651 -454 -0002 to obtain underground utility locations Owner Signature Date * * * ALLOW 48 HOURS FOR PROCESSING City use only: Initial and date each item checked Variety At least 5' from underground utilities Sight Distance At least 10' from overhead utilities Approx. width of Blvd. Proposed distance from edge of street Sidewalk? Proposed distance from edge of sidewalk • ALL REQUIREMENTS MET: Signature Title Date urtb Du • \ W. BEFORE G r L ME � YOU 92 li fet{it� PLANT • • The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center has adopted an ordinance to establish policies for the care of boulevard trees. The ordinance contains very specific information regarding where boulevard trees may be planted. Please read the following information before you plant a boulevard tree. A copy of the complete ordinance is available at City Hall. Section 20 -200. PUBLIC TREE CARE IN GENERAL • Subdivision 3. Plantin g may Boulevard Trees. No tree y be p lanted on the boulevard except by permit obtained from the director of public works or designee. The City may move, remove, or trim or cause or order to be moved, removed, or trimmed any boulevard tree not planted by permit, or any boulevard tree which is not in compliance with this code. This section does not prohibit the planting of boulevard trees by adjacent property owners providing the selection, location, and care of said trees are in accordance with the provisions of this code. The purpose of a permit is to ensure that all requirements are met, most especially those relating to sight distance, both at corners and near driveways, sidewalks, alleys, etc. The following is the list of allowable boulevard trees for 2010: Crabapple (Flowering) & cultivars Linden (American) Birch (River, Paper) Oak (Pin) Elm (Accolade) Oak (White, Bur, Swamp) Ginko (male tree only) Oak (Northern Red) Hackberry Maple (Autumn Blaze) Honeylocust (Imperial, Shademaster, Maple (Red) & cultivars Skyline, Thornless) Maple (Sugar) & cultivars • Kentucky Coffeetree Serviceberry Linden (Littleleaf) • City Council Agenda Item No. 6e COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: April 6, 2010 • TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Professional Services Agreement with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. for In- Construction Services, Improvement Project No. 2010 -01, Dupont Area Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvements Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the attached Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Professional Services Agreement with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. for In- Construction Services, Improvement Project No. 2010 -01, Dupont Area Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvements Background: On January 11, 2010, the City Council authorized the execution of. a professional services agreement for design services with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. Coordination efforts are continuing with the project for the planned construction to commence in early spring 2010. City staff interviewed two consultants that would be able to provide the professional services needed for in- construction services for this project — WSB and Associates, Inc. and SRF Consulting Group, Inc. Based on qualifications, project delivery, work plan, schedule and cost, staff is • recommending SRF Consulting Group, Inc. provide the needed professional services during the construction stage of the project. SRF Consulting, Inc. is available to continue and start immediately to progress with the construction management elements of this project. Budget Issues: The contract amount of $191,586 with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. for in- construction services (see attached contract) is within the 2010 budgeted project amount, Council Goals: Strategic: 5. We will continue to maintain and upgrade City infrastructure improvements Ongoing: 6. We will ensure the City drinking water is high quality and that the storm water is properly managed • 'l•, i: l r,:,,. .. .:., ,,: , ,rir, , . li, ,iri, iii i ; urir'�irrrn: , the ol/b/ir oli'; Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. • RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECTUION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SRF CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR IN- CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2010 -01, DUPONT AREA NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the Capital Improvement Program for the City of Brooklyn Center identifies street, storm drainage and utility improvements along Dupont Ave North from 53` Ave North to 73` Avenue North; and WHEREAS, public bids for the construction of the Dupont Area Neighborhood street and utility improvements are currently being solicited; and WHEREAS, the City desires to complete the proposed improvements for the Dupont Avenue North corridor in 2010; and WHEREAS, City staff has negotiated a professional services agreement with SRF Consultants, Inc. to provide the in- construction engineering and inspection services for said project; and NOW, THE$,F„F'ORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of • Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the City Manager er is hereby authorized to execute an agreement for professional services with SRF Consultants, Inc., in the amount of $191,586 to provide in- construction services for Improvement Project No. 2010 -01, Dupont Area Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvements. April 12.2010 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. • • Professional Services Agreement Page 1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT This Agreement is made on the 13th day of April, 2010 between the CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 ( "City ") and SRF Consulting Group, INC., One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447 ("Consultant"). Preliminary Statement The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth terms and conditions for the provision of professional engineering services by the Consultant for the City. The City and Consultant agree as follows: 1. Consultant's Services. The Consultant agrees to provide professional services as described in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. Consultant agrees to use the City's standard specifications in any bidding documents prepared under this Agreement. The requirements of this section may be waived by the City if the City Engineer determines that they are not necessary for the successful • completion of the project. Consultants requesting a requirement to be waived must have written authorization from h n the Engineer. 2. Time for Performance of Services. The Consultant will endeavor to perform the services outlined in the work program within the prescribed days from the date of the contract award. Any changes in this schedule must be approved in writing by the City. 3. Compensation for Services. City agrees to pay the Consultant for services as described in Exhibit A, attached and made a part of this Agreement and may be amended from time to time by mutual agreement by City and Consultant. 4. Method of Payment. The Consultant must submit itemized bills for services provided to the City on a monthly basis. Bills submitted will be paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City. For work reimbursed on an hourly basis, the Consultant must indicate for each employee, his or her classification, the number of hours worked, rate of pay for each employee, a computation of amounts due for each employee, the total amount due, the original contracted amount, the current requested amount, and the total amount. Consultant must verify all statements submitted for payment in compliance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.38 and 471.391. For reimbursable expenses, the Consultant must provide such documentation as • reasonably required by the City. Professional Services Agreement Page 2 • 5. Audit Disclosure. The Consultant must allow the City or its duly authorized agents reasonable access to such of the Consultant's books and records as are pertinent to all services provided under this Agreement. Any reports, information, data, etc. given to, or prepared or assembled by the Consultant under this Agreement which the City requests to be kept confidential must not be made available to any individual or organization without the City's prior written approval All finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, and reports prepared by the Consultant will become the property of the City upon termination of this Agreement, but Consultant may retain copies of such documents as records of the services provided and may reuse standard portions of such documents in the normal course of its business. 6. Term. The term of this Agreement will be from April 13, 2010 through December 31, 2010, the date of signature by the parties notwithstanding. This Agreement may be extended upon the written mutual consent of the parties for such additional period as they deem appropriate, and upon the terms and conditions as herein stated. 7. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by City by seven day's written • notice to Consultant delivered to the address written above. Upon termination under this provision, the Consultant will be paid for services rendered and reimbursable expenses until the effective date of termination. 8. Subcontractor. The Consultant must not enter into subcontracts for any of the services provided for in this Agreement without the express written consent of the City. 9. Independent Contractor. At all times and for all purposes hereunder, the Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. No statement herein shall be construed so as to find the Consultant an employee of the City. 10. Assignment. Neither party will assign this Agreement, nor any interest arising herein, without the written consent of the other party. 11. Services not Provided for. No claim for services furnished by the Consultant not specifically provided for herein will be honored by the City. 12. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. if any portion hereof is, for any reason, held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such decision will not affect the remaining provisions of the Agreement. 13. Entire Agreement. The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties • Professional Services Agreement Page 3 relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement will be valid only when expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties unless otherwise provided herein. 14. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. In providing services hereunder, the Consultant must abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to the provision of services to be provided. Any violation will constitute a material breach of this Agreement and entitle the City to immediately terminate this Agreement. 15. Equal Opportunity. During the performance of this contract, the Consultant must not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, or age. The Consultant must post in places available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this non - discrimination clause and stating that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment. The Consultant must • incorporate the foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts for program work. 16. Waiver. Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement will not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement. 17. Indemnification. The Consultant must indemnify and hold harmless the City, its employees and agents, for all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including, but not limited to, attorney's fees, which they may suffer or for which they may be held liable, as a result of, and to the extent of, the negligent or wrongful acts of the Consultant, his employees, or anyone else for whom he is legally responsible in the performance of this Agreement. 18. Insurance. During the term of this Agreement, Consultant must maintain a general liability insurance policy with limits of $1,500,000 for each occurrence and aggregate, for both personal injury and property damage. This policy shall name the City as an additional insured for the services provided under this Agreement and shall provide, as between the City and the Consultant, that the Consultant's coverage shall be the primary coverage in the event of a loss. If the Consultant is providing either architectural or engineering services, the Consultant must also maintain during the term of this Agreement a • professional liability insurance policy with the same limits as for general liability. A certificate of insurance on the City's approved form which verifies the existence Professional Services Agreement Page 4 • of these insurance coverages must be provided to the City before work under this Agreement is begun. 19. Governing Law. This Agreement will be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota. 20. Whole Agreement. This Agreement embodies the entire agreement between the parties including all prior understanding and agreements, and may not be modified except in writing signed by all parties. Executed as of the day and year first written above. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SRF Consulting Group, INC. By: By: Steven L. Lillehaug, Public Works Director • Date: Its: Date: By: Cornelius Boganey, City Manager Date: • 1 v� WORK TASKS AND -HOUR ESTIMATE &E 1 CLIENT: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER CONSULTANT: SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC. SUBCONSULTANT: PROJECT: DUPONT AVE RECONSTRUCTION FROM 57TH TO 73RD IN- CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ° PERSON - HOURS ° "` ESTIMATED TASK NO. WORK TASK DESCRIPTION PRINCIPAL ASSOCIATE SR, PROF. E_PQF• TECHNICAL CLERICAL TOTALS E 1.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION Assume a six month construction duration (May 15 to Oct. 15, 2010). Assume construction 5 days per week, 8 hours per day. 1.1 Provide in construction observation throughout the duration of construction. One 0 0 0 1000 0 0 1000 person, full time. 1.2 Provide in construction observation, halftime throughout the duration of 0 0 0 420 0 0 420 construction. One person, half time. 1.3 Provide design support during construction, including design revisions and re- 0 4 20 0 0 0 24 issuance of plan sheets. Also, review and approve shop drawings. SUBTOTAL - TASK 1 0 4 20 1420 0 0 1444 $101 2.0 IN CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING I � Assume a survey crew on site half time during construction. Assume 2 person crew. 2.1 Provide in construction surveying throughout the duration of the project. Provide 0 16 500 0 S00 8 1024 line and grade for sewer and water lines, locations for catch basin and manholes, and curb stakes for roadway grading. SUBTOTAL - TASK 2 0 16 425 0 425 8 1024 $75,884 3.0 AS GUILTS 3.1 Provide as builts in AutoCAD, PDF and hard copy format of city utilities. 0 0 0 8 32 0 40 SUBTOTAL - TASK 3 0 0 0 8 32 0 40 $3,280 x H H H SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC. C:11_KMJ SWTProposals\Dupont Ave In BC1Dupont Ave-in Construckn - Work SCOpe 120809idsx ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS MINNEAPOLIS, MN. 12/17/2009 WORK TASKS AND PERSON -HOUR ESTIMATE PAGE 2 CLIENT: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER CONSULTANT: SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC. SUBCONSULTANT: PROJECT: DUPONT AVE RECONSTRUCTION FROM 57TH TO 73RD IN- CONSTRUCTION SERVICES — ESTIMATED PERSON - HOURS" ESTIMATED TASK NO. WORK TASK DESCRIPTION PRINCIPAL ASSOCIATE SR. PROF. PROF. TECHNICAL CLERICAL TOTALS LEE i j TOTAL ESTIMATED PERSON -HOURS 0 20 445 1428 457 8 2508 AVERAGE HOURLY BILLING RATES $160 $139 $87 $70 $85 $70 ESTIMATED LABOR AND OVERHEAD $0 $2,780 $38,715 $99,960 $38,845 $560 . $180,860 ESTIMATED DIRECT NON - SALARY EXPENSES $5,363 TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE 5186,223 . pii�tit ESTIMATE OF DIRECT NON - SALARY EXPENSES: MILEAGE: (assume 60 miles per day per INSPECTOR) 9750 Miles @ $0.55 $5,363 s0 RECORDING FEES: $0 COMMUNICATIONS: (Cell Phone Charges) $0 SUBCONSULTANTS: ESTIMATED DIRECT NON-SALARY EXPENSES $5,363 s�xaasz I I I I i SRF TING GROUP. INC. C:\l StulPProposslsOupont Ave in BC1Dupont Ave-in Construction - Work Scope sx ENGINEERSIWNERS MINNEA N. • City Council Agenda Item No. 7a i COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: April 6, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer SUBJECT: Resolution Recognizing the Designation of Brooklyn Center as a Tree City USA for the Eighteenth Consecutive Year and Proclamation Declaring April 30, 2010, .Arbor Day and May 2010 Arbor Month in Brooklyn Center Recommendation: it is recommended that the City Council consider approval of a resolution recognizing Brooklyn Center as a Tree City USA and approval of a proclamation declaring Arbor Day and Arbor Month in Brooklyn Center. Background: For each of the past eighteen years, Brooklyn Center has strived for and achieved designation as a Tree City USA by the National Arbor Day Foundation (see attached letter dated March 19, 2010). This national award recognizes communities with effective community forestry Programs. The City's forestry program includes the following: • Care for and planting of park and boulevard trees. • Diseased and nuisance tree removal program. • Mandatory tree contractor registrations requiring certain minimums of liability insurance. • Boulevard tree planting permits requiring proper placement of tree and selection of tree species. • A tree ordinance specifying proper standards of care for all trees. • An Arbor Day and Month program which travels between elementary schools in Brooklyn Center providing teaching resources, learning activities, and an Arbor Day event to plant one or more trees. Budget Issues: The Sons of the American Legion have indicated they desire to provide a $150 contribution to cover the expenses for the Arbor Day event. Funding requirements for other event supplies is expected to be less than $150 and is included in the 2010 Budget under the Public Works Park Division operating budget. Council Goals: Strategic: 6. We will respond to increased public awareness and interest in environmental sustainability and green community issues • rnIP"7jrII��r �h;�� - nl�,rn; � f1l r - iu11ii1 o !i b rti�d p�'esrrrc�� �h� pnhhr n rr Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. is RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE DESIGNATION OF BROOKLYN CENTER AS A TREE CITY USA FOR THE EIGHTEENTH CONSECUTIVE YEAR WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is committed to preserving and enhancing its urban forest; and WHEREAS, the National Association of State Foresters and the US Department of Agriculture Forest Service have recommended that the City of Brooklyn Center be designated as a Tree City USA in recognition of 2009 forestry activities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The Council hereby recognizes and accepts the designation of Tree City USA for the eighteenth consecutive year on behalf of the residents of Brooklyn Center. 2. The Council reaffirms its commitment to urban forestry, and directs staff to, within the constraints of existing resources, continue its reforestation efforts. • 3. The Council commends Brooklyn Center residents and staff for their work in maintaining and enhancing Brooklyn Center's urban forest. April 12, 2010 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. • • PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 30, 2010 TO BE ARBOR DAY AND MAY 2010 TO BE ARBOR MONTH IN BROOKLYN CENTER r vital resource in Minnesota today, enriching our lives b WHEREAS, Tr ees are an increasingly vt o y, g Y purifying air and water, helping conserve soil and energy, serving as recreational settings, providing habitat for wildlife of all kinds, and making our cities more livable; and WHEREAS, Trees in our city increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community; and WHEREAS, Human activities such as pollution, as well as drought, disease and insects threaten our trees, creating the need for concerted action to ensure the future of urban and rural forests in our state, country, and world; and WHEREAS, People can contribute to the environmental stewardship of our community by locally planting trees and ensuring that these trees are nurtured, protected, and wisely used in the years ahead; and • The t Brooklyn Center desires to continue its tree management efforts. WHEREAS, e Ct y of ement e y g NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BR OOKL YN CENTER, State of Minnesota, with the consent and support of the Brooklyn Center City Council, do hereby proclaim: 1. April 30, 2010 to be Arbor Day. 2. May 2010 to be Arbor Month in the City Brooklyn Center. 3. I urge all citizens to support efforts to care for our trees and woodlands and to support our city's community forestry program. April 12, 2010 Date Mayor Council Members • ATTEST: City Clerk Arbor Pa Foundation Foundatio 211 N. 12th St. • Lincoln, NE 68508.888- 448 -7337 • arborday.org We inspire people to plant, nurture, and celebrate trees. March 19, 2010 Mayor Tim Willson Mayor of the City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 j i Dear The Honorable Tim Willson, The Arbor Day Foundation congratulates Brooklyn Center on being named a Tree City USA® community for 2009. Residents of Brooklyn Center should take pride in the fact that they live in a community where planting and nurturing trees is a priority. You already know that trees are a vital. component of the infrastructure in cities and towns, providing environmental and health benefits for your citizens. In fact, trees are a rare component of a community's infrastructure in that they actually increase in value and service over time from a modest investment. Enclosed is a ress release for our convenience as you prepare to contact your local media • P Y Y P to share this commendable achievement with the public. We hope you are excited to share the significance of this accomplishment. If you wish to receive this press release in electronic form, please email Mark Derowitsch, Public Relations Manager of the Foundation, at mderowitsch(d-)arborday.org We will send it to you within one business day. The Tree City USA program is sponsored in cooperation with the National Association of State Foresters and the USDA Forest Service. Today, more than 3,400 cities and towns have been recognized as a Tree City USA community. State foresters are responsible for the presentation of the Tree City USA flag and other materials. We will forward your awards to Don Meuller in your state forester's office. They will be coordinating the presentation with you. It would be especially appropriate to make the Tree City USA award a part of your community's Arbor Day ceremony. Again, we celebrate your diligence in improving the quality of life for the citizens of Brooklyn Center and thank you for creating a healthier, more sustainable world for us all. Best regards, John Rosenow Chief Executive cc: John Harlow • Enclosure �r� ruw - SO Y INK City Council Agenda Item No. 7b COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: April 6, 20 1,0 • TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer 5 SUBJECT: Proclamations Declaring April 17 -24, 2010 as the Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week and April 22, 2010 as Earth Day in Brooklyn Center Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider adoption of a proclamation declaring April 17- 24, 2010 as the Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week and a proclamation declaring April 22, 2010 as Earth Day in Brooklyn Center. Background: Brooklyn Center and five other cities that make up the Shingle Creek Watershed will celebrate Earth Day 2010 with the 9th annual "Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup ". Beginning Saturday, April 17, 2010, through Saturday, April 24, 2010, hundreds of volunteers from Plymouth to the Mississippi River will line the banks of Shingle Creek, as well as city parks, trails and streets, picking up everything from pop cans and auto parts to building materials and household appliances. The "Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup" meets one of the public involvement and • participation requirements of the federally mandated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPDES p ermit for Brooklyn Center. The event not only educates people cates eo le that trash and Y � )p Y Y other contaminants in the streets, parks and shorelines eventually end up in our lakes, rivers and streams but also provides opportunities for the public to become involved in the protection of water quality. Many of the 33 groups affiliated with the Brooklyn Center Adopt- a- Park/Trail /Street programs will concentrate on a cleanup f their assigned sites during the week. Groups and individuals not p � g p already connected with a park, trail or street will be assigned to a nearby park, creek, open space or parkway to pick up trash and debris. On Saturday, April 24, 2010, Brooklyn Center City officials, commissioners and employees will be distributing trash bags and cotton gloves as well as coffee, juice and pastries at the Brooklyn Center Community Center to kick off the official clean up. More than 300 volunteers are expected to participate in the week -long event. Budget Issues: Funding requirements for the event supplies is expected to be less than $150 and is included in the 2010 Budget under the Strom Drainage Utility operating budget. Council Goals: Strategic: 6. We will respond to increased public awareness and interest in environmental sustainability and green community issues • Ongoing: 6. We will ensure the City drinking water is high quality and that the storm water is properly managed PROCLAMATION • DECLARING APRIL 17 -24, 2010 TO BE THE GREAT SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED CLEANUP WEEK WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is dedicated to preserving and protecting the water resources in our watersheds; and WHEREAS, litter and trash can be washed into our lakes, rivers, and streq s, . polluting the water and clogging the City's storm water drainage system; and WHEREAS, citizens can take an active role in protecting water resources by picking up litter and trash and keeping our streets, parks, neighborhoods and community clean; and WHEREAS, the Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commissions' annual event "The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup " will take place April 17 -24, 2010. NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKL YN CENTER, State of Minnesota, with the consent and support of the Brooklyn Center City Council, do hereby proclaim: • 1. April 17 -24, 2010 to be The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week. 2. The City Council hereby reaffirms its commitment to protecting and preserving our water resources and encourages residents, businesses and institutions to use The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week 2010 to help prevent water pollution and preserve our watersheds by participating in a Cleanup Event or by using this time to pick up trash and clean up our homes, businesses, streets, neighborhoods and community. April 12, 2010 Date Mayor Council Members ATTEST: • City Clerk • PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 22, 2010 TO BE EARTH DAY IN BROOKLYN CENTER WHEREAS, a sound natural environment is the foundation of a health society and a robust economy; and WHEREAS, local communities can do much to reverse environmental degradation and contribute to building a healthy society by addressing such issues as energy use, waste prevention and sustainable practices; and WHEREAS, Earth Day 2010 offers an unprecedented opportunity to commit to building a healthy planet and flourishing communities. NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BR OOKL YN CENTER, State of Minnesota, with the consent and support of the Brooklyn Center City Council, do hereby proclaim: 1 April 22, 2010 to be Earth Day in Brooklyn Center. 2. The City o Brooklyn Center commits itself to undertaking p and • tJ' .f l Y .� g P g projects that enhance the community's natural environment. 3. The City Council hereby reaffirms its commitment and encourages residents, businesses and institutions to use Earth Day 2010 to celebrate the Earth and to commit to building a sustainable society by initiating or expanding existing programs which improve energy efficiency, reduce or prevent waste and promote recycling. April 12, 2010 Date Mayor Council Members A TTEST. • City Clerk • - City Council Agenda . Item No. 8a COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM . DATE: 6 April 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Daniel Jordet, Director of Fiscal & Support Services SUBJECT: Continuation of Hearing: Assessment of Unpaid Util ies Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council reopen the hearing continued form the 8 March 2010 meeting concerning the assessment of unpaid utilities for Karen Beelen, 7120 Logan Avenue North. Background: At the 8 March 2010 regular Council meeting, Ms. Beelen appeared before the City Council during the public hearing held prior to the assessment of unpaid utilities. She asked that she be allowed to make payments on her overdue bill of $ 239.88 and complete payment of the overdue amount without it being assessed against her taxes. The Council continued the hearing on her individual property pending a recommendation from City Staff. Since that time, I have spoken with Ms. Beelen on four occasions. In order to bring her account fully up to date she will be required to pay $ 75.00 per month by the 20 of each month in order to clear her account. If that is done, her proposed assessment will be paid off before August. She will then be • expected to continue payments to keep her account current through the end of the year. She has indicated that she has found a source of income to allow this payment and will agree to the arrangement. Staff suggests that the Council has two alternatives at this time. The first is to assess the amount against the property taxes for 7120 Logan Avenue. If this is done, the mount could be paid in full within 30 days of the assessment without interest. After that time, interest would be charged at the rate of 6% per annum. The amount would be required to be paid in full if paid in advance of its transmission to Hennepin County for collection. The second alternative is to make a payment arrangement with Ms. Beelen to leave the overdue amount on her account, collect $ 75.00 per month by the 20 1h of each month toward the paym ent of the account, and have the amount paid off with the fourth month's payment. From that pint onward Ms. Beelen will continue to pay the $ 75.00 per month to clear any additional amounts due that have not yet been subject to assessment which will bring her account to paid -in -full status prior to the next consideration of assessable accounts in the fall. At the $ 75.00 per month level, this will be accomplished as long as utility consumption remains in the historical range for this property. If the first alternative is chosen, the attached resolution should be adopted. If the second alternative is chosen, a motion to remove the assessment from the proposed roll is in order. Budget Issues: Collection will be effected in either case so there are no significant budget issues in this matter. 3fission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the tlualdty of life and preserves the public trust Motion passed unanimously. Mayor Willson noted the City has hired a private contractor for this work so the City may have already incurred cost. If that is the case, he did not support the City subsidizing the cost. Mr. • Boganey advised the City has already incurred all of the costs identified on the special assessment. 8b. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS City Manager Curt Boganey introduced the item, stated the purpose of the Public Hearing, and options for payment. Should there be substantive objections, he recommended Council continue the public hearing for that particular property and direct staff to provide -a report. Discussion ensued that the grand total is $224,650.61, an upward trend from past years, and requested staff provide a history report. Councilmember Yelich moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Caren Beelen, 7120 Logan Avenue N., addressed the Council and read an appeal requesting her e n taxes so she can begin o m e men s o rin i a overdue water bill of 239.88 not pace o g P Y current, which she cannot do if certified to taxes. She explained that she has paid her water bill for the past 21 years, was currently unemployed, but hoped to gain employment in 2010. Councilmember Ryan stated he has also been downsized and empathized with Ms. Beelen's . situation. He stated the Council will take this under consideration and if itooes go onto taxes, the actual amount may be manageable. Councilmember Yelich referenced Ms. Beelen's a ment history, from 2004 to 2008 she had p Y r3', g been able to pay the water bill Ms. Beelen stated she has paid hQr bills on time from 1988 to 2008 but in 2009 she lost her job and had to cut back. City Attorney LeFevere clarified that if Council certified this amount to taxes, it woul not be collected until taxes in 2011 so Ms. Beelen would have time to set money aside. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -58 CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS Councilmember Yelich moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -58 Certifying in Special Assessments for Delinquent Public Utility Service Accounts to the p q Hennepin County Tax Rolls and to continue the public hearing for the following ro ert p ty p g g p P Y• 7120 Logan Avenue North pending recommendation from City staff. • Motion passed unanimously. 03/08/10 -7- Member introduced the following resolution and moved • its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNT TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the records of the Public Utilities Department list certain accounts as delinquent as of January 1, 2010; and WHEREAS, the owner of record of the property serviced by the delinquent account has been notified of the delinquency according to legal requirements; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 444.075 and City Ordinances, Section 4 -105 and 4 -102 authorize certification of such delinquent accounts to the County tax rolls for collction; and WHEREAS, a proposed special assessment for 7120 Logan Avenue North was set aside from the roll resented March 8 2010 and the public hearing thereon was continued for additional p � P g Council consideration; and • WHEREAS, as requested, staff has considered the facts presented concerning the proposed assessment and developed alternatives for the Council to consider and the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for delinquent public utility accounts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The special assessment proposed for 7120 Logan Avenue North is hereby adopted for inclusion in Levy No. 17595. 2. The special assessment as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2011, in one annual installment with interest thereon as six (6.0) percent per annum and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from May 12, 2010 through December 31 2010. 3. The owner of the property may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the entire assessment to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid before May 11, 2010. After May 11, 2010, the owner may pay the total assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from May 12, 2010, through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close -of- business November 29, 2010, or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. • RESOLUTION NO. • 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County, and such t nded on the proper ty, County Auditor to be ex er tax lists of the C e Co ty P P assessments shall be collected and P aid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. April 12, 2010 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. 8b COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: April 12, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Vickie Schleuning, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building & Community Standards SUBJECT: An Ordinance Relating to an Administrative Penalty System; Adding New Sections to the Brooklyn Center City Code Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Brooklyn Center City Council consider approving an ordinance amending. Chapter 18, adding an administrative fine and penalty system. Background: The City Council passed the first reading of the ordinance on February 8, 2010. At the March 8, 2010 City Council meeting, the public hearing and second reading was continued to April 12. The legal notice was published in the official newspaper on March 11, 2010. Please refer to the attached Council Item Memorandum dated February 8, 20.10 for more • information about the proposed administrative penalty system. Based on feedback from the City Council, City Attorney and staff, the only change to this version of the proposed code is 18 -210 d, the removal of the language regarding the late payment fee from the ordinance and placing it in the fee resolution. Placing fees in one location, the resolutions, is more user - friendly and prevents potential conflicts between ordinances and resolutions. Budget Issues: The program is not designed to be a revenue generator. However, after initial setup, it may reduce the city's cost of enforcement through the administrative penalty fee. Council Goals: Strategic: 1. We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods Ongoing: 1. We will provide streamlined, cost effective, quality services with limited resources Attached: Attachment I- Proposed Code Ordinance Subchapter 18 -200 . Attachment II- January 25, 2010 Council Memorandum, excluding proposed ordinance Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER . Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 12th day of April, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an Amendment to Chapter 18 of the City Code of Ordinances adding new sections relating to an administrative penalty system. 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 RELATING TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY SYSTEM, ADDING SECTIONS 18 -201 TO 18 -211 TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 18 is amended to add the following new Sections: ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES Section. 18-201 PURPOSE. • The City Council finds that there is a need for alternative methods of enforcing the city code. The criminal process is not always the most effective or efficient option for addressing city code violations Accordingly, the City Council finds that the use of administrative citations and the imposition of civil penalties is a legitimate alternative method of enforcement for certain tunes of city code violations This method of enforcement is in addition to any other legal remedy that may be pursued for city code violations. Section 18 -202 ADMIPIISTRATIVE CITATIONS AND CIVIL PENALTIES. This subchapter governs administrative citations and civil penalties for violations of the city code. Section 18 -203 DEFINITIONS Person — means any individual firm - partnership association corporation company, or organization of and Property Owner — those shown to be the owner or owners on the records of the Hennepin County Department of Proper Taxation; those identified as the owner or owners on a vacant building registration form a holder of an unrecorded contract for deed, a mortgagee or vendee in ORDINANCE NO. possession, a mortgagor or vendor in possession an assignee of rents a receiver, an executor, a • trustee a lessee other person firm or corporation in control of the freehold of the premises or lesser estate therein An owner also means any person, partnership association, corporation, or fiduciary having a legal or equitable title or any interest in the property or building. This includes any partner, officer, or director of any partnership corporation association or other legally- constituted business entity. Responsible Person — means in the cases of offenses related to real property, an owner, occupant enjily or person acting as an agent for the owner who has direct or indirect control or authority over the building or r real property upon which the building is located. Any party having • legal or equitable interest in the propert.Responsible party may include but is not limited to • realtor, service provider, mortgagor, leasing agent management company or similar person or epfiiy. Ci . T Manager — Means the City Manager or designated ted agent. Section 18 -204 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSES: SCHEDULE OF FINES AND FEES. A A violation of M provision of the city code maybe desi agn ted by resolution as an administrative offense which maybe subject to an administrative citation and civil penalties . pursuant to this Subchapter. Each day a violation exists constitutes a separate offense. B An administrative offense may be subject to a civil penally not exceeding $2,000. C The City Council must adopt by resolution a schedule of recommended fines and fees for offenses subject to an administration citation. D The City Council may adopt a schedule of fees to be paid to administrative hearing officers. E The City Manager must adopt written procedures for administering the administrative citation program. Section 18 -205 ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION. A A person authorized to enforce provisions of the city code may issue an administrative citation upon belief that a code violation has occurred. The citation must be issued in person or by first class mail to the person who violated the code or a responsible person or posted at the property or attached to the motor vehicle in the case of a vehicular offense. The citation must state the date time and nature of the offense the identity of the person issuing the citation, the . amount of the scheduled fine and the manner for paying the fine or appealing the citation. ORDINANCE NO. B The persons receiving the citation must either pay the scheduled fine or request a hearing within ten (10) days after issuance of the citation. Payment of the fine constitutes admission of the violation A late payment fee per the scheduled amount will be jMNsed in accordance with Section 18 -210. Section 18 -206 REQUESTS FOR A HEARINGAAPPEAL A A person served with an administrative citation may file a notice of appeal in person or postmarked within ten (10) calendar days from the date of the administrative citation. Failure to comply with such time limit shall be deemed to waive the right to a hearing. B The notice of appeal shall be made in writing, filed with the City official identified on the administrative citation, and contain `the following information: 1 The reasons the appellant believes the administrative citation is objectionable to that a violation did not exist or occur. 2. The name address and telephone number of the appellant. 3 The name address and telephone number of any person in addition to the appellant who will be attending the hearing. • 4. The signature of the appellant. C A hearing request deposit fee shall be paid simultaneously_ with the filing of the notice of appeal The hearing request deposit fee will be in the amount adopted by resolution by the Cjty Council The fee is refundable as provided in the hearing officer's decision. Section 18 -207 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING. A The City Manager must periodically approve a list of persons, from which the Cjty determine a Manager or designated agent will randomly select a hearing officer to hear and g �g y � o matter for which a hearing is requested A person who has been issued a citation has the right to request no later than five days before the date of the hearing, that the assigned hearing officer be removed from the case One such request for each case will be granted automatically by the Cjty Manager or desj - ang ted agent A subsequent request must be directed to the Cjty Manager who will decide whether the altemate hearing officer can fairly and objectively review the case. If such a finding is made the Manager must remove that officer from the case, and the City Manager or desi agn ted agent must assign another hearing officer. The hearing officer is not a judicial officer but is a public officer as defined by M.S. Section 609.415. The hearing officer must not be an employee of the city. The CitM anager or designated agent must establish a • ORDINANCE NO. procedure for evaluating the competency and neutrality of the hearing officers, including • comments from citizens and city staff. B Upon the hearing officer's own initiative or won written request of an interested party demonstrating the need the officer may arrange for issuance of a subpoena for the attendance of a witness or the production of books, _papers records or other documents that are material to the matter being heard The party requesting the subpoena is responsible for serving the subpoena in the manner rovided for civil actions and for paying the fees and expenses of any witness. A person served with a subpoena may _file an objection with the hearing officer promptly but no later than the time specified in the subpoena for compliance The officer mM cancel or modify the subpoena if it is unreasonable or oppressive A person who without just cause, fails or refuses to attend and testify or to produce the required documents in obedience to a subpoena is subject to penalties provided by law. Alternatively, the party requesting the subpoena may seek an order from district court directing compliance. C Notice of the hearing must be served in person or by mail on the person responsible for the violation at least ten (10) days in advance unless a shorter time is accepted by all parties. At the hearing, the parties will have the opporgjWV to present testimony and question any witnesses but strict rules of evidence do not apply The hearing officer must record the hearing and receive testimony and exhibits The officer must receive and ivy e weight to evidence, including reliable hearsay evidence that possesses probative value commonly accepted by reasonable and prudent people in the conduct of their affairs. D The hearing officer has the authority to determine that a violation occurred, to dismiss a citation to impose the scheduled fine and to reduce stay all or part of the scheduled fine either unconditionally or upon compliance with appropriate conditions. When imposing a penalty for a violation the hearing officer may consider any or all of the following factors: 1. The duration of the violation; 2. The frequency or recurrence of the violation; 3. The seriousness of the violation; 4. The history of the violation; 5. The violator's conduct after issuance of the notice of hearing; 6. The good faith effort by the violator to comply; 7. The economic impact of the penalty on the violator ORDINANCE NO. 8. The imipact of the violation upon the communi • and • 9. AU other factors appropriate to a just result. E. The hearing officer may exercise discretion to impose a fine for more than one day of a continuing violation, but only _upon a finding that the violation caused a serious threat of harm to the public health, safety or welfare or that the accused intentionally and unreasonably refused to comply with the code requirement. The hearing officer's decision and supporting reasons must be in writing. F. The failure to pay the fine or request a hearing within ten (10) days after the date of the citation, or the failure to attend the hearing constitutes a waiver of the violator's rights to an administrative hearing and is an admission of the violation. A hearing officer May waive this result upon good cause shown. Examples of good cause include: death or incapacitating illness of the accused; a court order requiring the accused to appear for another hearing at the same time; and lack of proper service of the citation or notice of the hearing. "Good cause" does not include forgetfulness and intentional delay. If the accused violator fails to attend a hearing without good cause the fee for the hearing will not be returned to the accused. G. The decision of the hearing officer is final without any further right of administrative appeal, except for matters subject to administrative review under Section 18 -208. In a matter . subject to administrative review under Section 18 -208, the hearing officer's decision may be appealed to the City Council by submitting a request in writing to the City Manager or designated agent within ten 00) days after the hearing officer's decision. Section 18 -208 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW. A. The hearing officer's decision in any of the following matters may appealed by the person responsible to the City Council for administrative review: 1. An alleged failure to obtain a permit license, or other approval from the City Council as required by an ordinance; 2. An alleged violation of a permit license other approval, or the conditions attached to the permit, license, or approval, that was granted by the City Council; and 3. An alleged violation of re ations og verninga person or entity who has received a license granted by the City Council. B. The appeal must be heard by the City Council after a notice has been served in person or by registered mail at least ten (10) dys in advance. The parties to the hearing must have an . opportunity to present oral or written arguments regarding the hearing officer's decision. ORDINANCE NO. • C The City Council must consider the record the hearing officer's decision, and anv additional arguments before making�a determination The Council is not bound by the hearing officer's decision but may adopt all or part of the officer's decision. The Council's decision must be in writing. D If the Council makes a fmding of a violation it may impose a civil penalty not exceeding $2,000 per dgy per violation and may consider anv or all of the factors contained in Section 18- 207(D) The Council may also reduce stay, or waive a fine unconditionally based on reasonable and appropriate conditions. E In addition to imposing a civil penalty the Council may suspend or revoke anv city issued license permit or other approval associated with the violation if the procedures in the city code have been followed. Section 18 -209 JUDICIAL REVIEW. An aggrieved party may obtain judicial review of the decision of the hearing officer or the City Council in accordance with state law. Section 18 -210 RECOVERY OF CIVIL PENALTIES. • A. If a civil penalty is not paid within the time specified, it constitutes: 1. A personal obligation of the violator in all situations, and 2 A lien upon the real property upon which the violation occurred if the property or improvements on the property were the subject of the violation and the property owner was found responsible for that violation. B A lien may be assessed against the property and collected in the same manner as taxes. C A personal obligation may be collected by any appropriate legal means. D A late payment fee per unpaid fine or portion thereof will be assessed per the schedule of fees. E During the time that a civil penalty remains unpaid no city approval will be granted for a license permit or other city approval sought by the violator or for property under the violator's ownership or control. F Failure to pay a fine is grounds for suspending, revoking dming, or not renewing a i license or permit associated with the violation. ORDINANCE NO. Section 18 -211 CRIMINAL PENALTIES. • The following are misdemeanors, punishable in accordance with state law: A. Failure, without szood cause to pay a fine or request a hearing within 10 (ten) days after issuance of an administrative citation. B. Failure to pay a fine imposed by a hearing officer within 10 (ten) dgys after it was imposed, or such other time as may be established by the hearing officer, unless the matter is appealed under Section 18 -208. C. Failure to pay a fine imposed by the City Council within 10 (tend) da s after it was imposed, or such other time as may be established by the City Council. Section 18 -211 APPLICABLE LAWS. Where differences occur between provisions of this subchapter and other applicable code sections, this subchapter applies. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. • Adopted this day of , 2010. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication: Effective Date: (U nderline indicates new matter; seout indicates matter to be deleted.) • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: February 8, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Vickie Schleuning, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building & Community Standards SUBJECT: An Ordinance Relating o an Administrative Penal System; Adding ew g Penalty Y g Sections to the Brooklyn Center City Code Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Brooklyn Center City Council consider approving on first reading an ordinance amending Chapter 18 to add an administrative fine and penalty system and scheduling a second reading and Public Hearing for March 8, 2010. Background: The draft ordinance was discussed at the City Council Work Session on January 11, 2010, and feedback incorporated into the current proposed ordinance. The City Attorney and Prosecuting • Attorney have reviewed this proposed ordinance as well. The following changes have been made since the January 11; 2010 Council Work Session: • Added definitions of "Person" and "Property Owner" • Updated definition of "Responsible Person" to be similar to the definition in the vacant building ordinance • Change language from "hearing fee" to "hearing deposit fee" • Changed time requirements under criminal penalties from 30 days to 10 days to be consistent with time frame throughout subchapter • Some minor grammatical changes (i.e. which to that, fine to citation, person to party, etc.) In the November 2008 general election, voters approved a referendum amending the City Charter. The Charter amendment requires the City to establish an administrative penalty system, which requires an ordinance be adopted. A draft ordinance is presented that prescribes procedures for imposing administrative penalties and establishes the process for collecting such penalties. The administrative penalty system would provide an alternative for staff and citizens to use in lieu of the criminal enforcement system for certain types of city code violations. Need for Additional Corrective Tools Staff is in the process of reviewing current ordinances, enforcement tools and processes. With • the increased concerns about neighborhood livability issues and property codes, the need for additional and creative corrective tools has increased. The majority of enforcement is achieved through the Hennepin County Criminal Court system, which is saturated with a variety of other crimes that may be considered by judges as more important. Further, there is pressure by the • court system to provide other means for cities to address city livability issues in lieu of the criminal court system. Other considerations for the criminal court system is the amount of time required to process code violations, the costs of criminal prosecution, and the citizen dissatisfaction often associated with the length of time to achieve compliance. Quick Glance at the Process for fines An administrative citation is a civil penalty that is issued by the City for violating a City ordinance. If a person is issued an Administrative Citation, the person will have the opportunity to appeal the citation to a hearing officer within 10 days of the fine being issued. If the violation is not corrected, additional citations can be issued with an additional fine amount each occurrence. Another option is to have a continuing violation citation, which requires the person cited to attend a hearing. The fine structure and amounts will be presented in a resolution to the City Council for adoption as part of the process for establishing the administrative penalty program. An administrative hearing is held at City Hall and the citation case is heard by a hearing officer, which is a neutral person contracted by the City, and meeting established criteria. Typically, other cities use attorneys as their hearing officers. The hearing officer must determine if the alleged violation was in fact a violation of the • ordinance. The hearing officer may impose, dismiss, reduce, or stay the citation. If the person does not appeal the fine or loses the appeal, the fine amount must be paid to the city. If fines are not paid, they may be specially assessed to a property, if the violation occurred on the property and the property owner was a responsible party. The city would still have the option to proceed criminally or use other corrective methods, or use other collection methods. Uses An administrative penalty system would be used for neighborhood, property and nuisance issues under the purview of the City. In general, it may not be used for violations that are under the purview of the State of Minnesota. An administrative penalty system is another option to use, where appropriate, to gain compliance and address livability issues. The next steps in the process of establishing an administrative penaltsystem include: • First reading of the proposed administrative penalty ordinance by the City Council for review and approval. Typical ordinance adoption requirements apply. • Fee structure and amounts brought forth to the City Council for consideration and approval in resolution format. • Program documents, manuals, processes and procedures created and established in • accordance with the adopted ordinance. • Internal and external training conducted. • Administrative penalty system rolled out to public. Budget Issues: Once implemented, some costs may be recovered by the administrative penalty fee. Attached: Attachment I- Proposed Code Ordinance Subchapter 18 -200 An Ordinance Establishing an Administrative Penalty System -2nd Re ' Present6d't : f ; Vickie SchleuMng Assistant City Manager/ Director Building & Community Stan City of Brooldyn Center City Council Meeting April 12, 2010 Agenda • Background • Overview of Propo r Penalty System • Revisions Since 1 • Q &A *Ilk 04/12/2010 2 1 i Background • City charter amended by referendum in the 2008 general election. • Charter amendment enable ementa of an administrative penalty syste by the City 1 • Options researched for administrative pe system/ t . Presently, all violations regardless of type a everity processed through the Criminal system • Reviewed at City Council Work Session o a 11, 2010. • 1st Reading on Feb 8, 2010 • 2nd Reading and Public He ` in on r 1 010 a 04/12/2010 3 Overview of Administrative Penalty System • A civil system, an alterna " MWOO criminal court system • Provides additional corective to for certain types of code'vi6lations • Prescribed process for administe the administrative penalty system " ing' due p rocess 04/12/2010 4 2 Revisions to Draft since 1 st Reading on Feb. 8, 2010 • 18 -206 B- typo changed from "to" MW " • 18 -206 C- clarified op earing request fee and refun • 18 -207 D- added an for cor "or" sentence structure r; f: t I 04/12/2010 5 Items to Complete If Ordinance Adopted • Establish fees by resolution . Requires City Council A% • Develop systems, pro ,, sses and procedures • Develop information:. rriaterials f • Training • Rollout to public- tenative`,su 04/1212010 6 3 ■Q &A Thank You``; 04/12/2010 7 4 City Council Agenda. Item No 9a IE E{ F" Vv ` 1 APR 1 1 71 l a� f �i r GI � a l w� , Dom. U l.- dt- C..¢.� ��� COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: April 7, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development� SUBJECT: Planning Commission Application No. 2010 -005 (Northwest Family Service Center — CEAP & ISD #279) Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2010 -005 Submitted by Welsh Construction (Northwest Family Services Center — CEAP & ISD 279). It is further recommended that the City Council approve the V reading of the attached ordinance amendment and schedule the 2 nd reading and public hearing for May 10, 2010. Background: On the April 12, 2010 City Council Agenda is Planning Commission Application No. 2010 -005 submitted by Welsh Construction, LLC requesting Planned Unit Development approval to allow construction of a 63,362 sq. ft. addition to the Adult Education Building, a three story parking • structure, redesign of access and internal movement within the parking lot of the Early Childhood Learning Center, and access improvements from 7 V Avenue North. This matter was considered by the Planning Commission at their March 25, 2010 meeting and was recommended for approval. Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning Commission Application No. 2010 -005 and also an area map showing the location of the property under consideration, the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter and other supporting documents. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Strategic: 1. Will aggressively proceed with implementation of the City's Redevelopment Plans 5. Will improve the image of the City with Citizens and those outside of the City's border. • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING THE DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2010 -005 SUBMITTED BY WELSH CONSTRUCTION (NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES CENTER — CEAP & ISD 279) WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 2010 -005 submitted by Welsh Construction LLC, on behalf of CEAP, Inc. and Independent School District 279, proposes rezoning from C -1 (Service /Office) and R -1 (One Family Residence) to PUD /C -1 and PUD/R1 (Planned Unit Development/Commerce) of four contiguous lots located in the Southwest quadrant of the intersection of Brooklyn Boulevard and 71 st Avenue North and addressed as 7051 Brooklyn Boulevard, 4813 71 Avenue North, 4819 71 Avenue North and 7020 Perry Avenue North; and WHEREAS, the proposal comprehends the rezoning of the above mentioned property and development plan approval for the second phase expansion of the Adult Education Building, including the construction of a 63,362 sq.ft. addition, a three story parking structure, redesign of access and internal movement within the parking lot of the Early Childhood Learning Center, and access improvements from 71 Avenue North; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on March • 25, 2010 when a staff report and public testimony regarding the rezoning and development plan were received; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 2010, the Planning Commission moved to recommend approval of Application No. 2010 -005 with the following conditions: 1. Execution of a PUD development agreement as prepared by the City Attorney. 2. Completion of the Replatting of the Northwest Family Services Center Addition. 3. Approval of a final site plan by the Planning Commission and City Council 4. Hennepin County approval of the improvements to the 71 Avenue/Brooklyn Boulevard signalized intersection. 5. City approval of a street improvement project to 71 Avenue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that Application No. 2010 -005 submitted by Welsh Construction, LLC be approved based upon of the following considerations: 1. The Planned Unit Development proposal is compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section of the City's Zoning Ordinance. • RESOLUTION NO. • 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 the Planned Unit Development Rezoning is considered a reasonable use of the property and will conform with ordinance standards except for allowing interior structure and parking setbacks and location of standard drainage and utility easements along interior side lot lines. These modifications from the Zoning Ordinance standards are justified on the basis of the development being an appropriate redevelopment of this area and that they are offset or mitigated by various factors contained in the approved development plan. 4. The Planned Unit Development proposal is considered consistent with the recommendations of the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the city. 5. The Planned Unit Development proposal appears to be a good long range use of the existing land and this redevelopment can be considered an asset to the community. 6. Based upon 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 the proposal is, therefore, in the best interest of the community. Y April 12 2010 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 10` day of May, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Zoning Classification of Certain land (Southwest Quadrant of Brooklyn Boulevard and 71 st Avenue North) Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763 -569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND (SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF BROOKLYN BOULEVARD AND 71" AVENUE NORTH) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 35 -1240- PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PUD). The following properties are hereby established as being within a (PUD) Planned Unit Development District zoning classification: 1. The following properties are designated as PUD/R -1 (Planned Unit Development/One Family Residential): • Lot 1 Block 1 Center Brook Addition; Lot 4, Block 1, Replat of Block 2 Lance Addition-, and Lot 2 Block 1, Osseo Willow Lane Addition. 7. The following properties are designated as PUD /C1 (Planned Unit Development/Service /Office): Lot 3, Block 1 Osseo Schools Willow Lane Addition Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 2010. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Strikeouts indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) • • Application Filed on 2 -18 -10 City Council Action Should Be Taken B Y 4 -19 -10 (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 2010 -005 Applicant: Welsh Construction. LLC Location: Southwest Quadrant of Brooklyn Boulevard and 71st Avenue North (7051 Brooklyn Boulevard) Request: Rezoning/Development Plan Approval - PUD/Mixed (R -1 and C -1) The applicant, Welsh Construction, LLC, on behalf of CEAP, Inc. and Independent School District 279 are seeking the necessary approvals to proceed with an expanded 2 °d phase of the District's Adult Education Building located at 7051 Brooklyn Boulevard. The application consists of a PUD/Rezoning (Planned Unit Development) of the following properties: Lot 1, Block 1, Center Brookdale Addition (R -1 residence /vacant lot) Lot 4, Block 1, Replat of Block 2 Lang Addition (R -1 residence /vacant lot) Lot 2, Block 1, Osseo Willow Lane Addition (R -1 former elementary school) • Lot 3, Block 1, Osseo Willow Lane Addition (C -1 Adult Ed Building) The accompanying development plan illustrates the future construction of a 63,362 sq. ft. addition to the Adult Education Building, a three story parking structure, redesign of access and internal movement within the parking lot of the Early Childhood Learning Center, and access improvements from 71 Avenue North. BACKGROUND INFORMATION On November 8, 2004, the City Council accepted the Planning Commission's recommendation and granted the following approvals to facilitate the phased development of a three story, 48,600 sq. ft. office /service building on a 3.63 acre site: • Planning Commission Application No. 2004 -010, the platting of Osseo Schools Willow Lane Addition created a 3.63 acre developable lot and reconfigured the Willow Lane Elementary School lot and the Willow Lane Park to facilitate the development of a stormwater management pond associated with the planned development by the School District and CEAP. i • Planning Commission Application No. 2004 -011, the rezoning of this 3.63 acre site from R -1, R -2, and R -4 to C -1 (Service /Office District). • Planning Commission Application No. 2004 -012, site and building plans for the 3 -25 -10 Page 1 construction of a three story, 48,600 sq. ft. office /service building with 226 surface • parking stalls. The first phase provided for the construction of 25,000 sq. ft. for the School District's Adult Education Program and core, facilities that would facilitate the future construction of the second phase. This phase completed the site improvements within the southern 2/3 of the overall site. The second phase of the development was planned as a shared use with a non - profit user, such as CEAP (Community Emergency Assistance Program), which would complement the services of the District's Adult Education Program (to assist under educated, disadvantaged and new immigrant population) and included a building expansion of 23,600 sq. ft., an additional 37 parking stalls, lighting for the northern 1/3 of the site, and landscaping along Brooklyn Boulevard and 71 Avenue North. Phase I improvements were completed in 2007 and a Certificate of Occupancy was issued on June 8, 2006. ZONING The School District's and CEAP's properties consist of 11.98 acres with the following current zoning classifications and proposed land uses: • The Early Family Education Building (former Willow Lane Elementary School) is zoned R -1 and is allowed as a special use in this district. • The Adult Education Building and the building pad for Phase H expansion is zoned C -1 • (Service /Office District) is a permitted office use. Attached is a copy of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 2004 -011 which included the responses to the guidelines for evaluating rezoning and recommendations to proceed with the rezoning of this lot to C -1. • The two residentiallotswe-zoned R -1 and will be used for the access improvements, buffer area and open space /front yard building setback. on 35 -355 of the Zoning Ordinance provides for Planned Unit Developments (PUD) to promote flexibility in land development and redevelopment, preserve aesthetically significant and environmentally sensitive site features, conserves energy and ensures a high quality of design. The proposed use of a PUD allows the use of perimeter setback standards to provide green and open space from the existing neighborhood, flexibility in the location of interior lot lines, parking and structured parking setbacks, and the ability to deviate from the dedication of the standard side yard drainage and utility easements. 3 -25 -10 .,,.,. , • Page 2 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The following minimum C -1 development standards for perimeter setbacks have been used in preparing this PUD development plan: • Building setback from Brooklyn Boulevard — 35 ft. • Parking setback from Brooklyn Boulevard — 35 ft. • Building setback from 71 Avenue North — 25 ft. • Parking setback from 71" Avenue North —15 ft. The parking ratio used is for office buildings of this size is one space per 235 sq. ft. PUD APPLICATION AND REVIEW PROCESS The PUD provisions require that a development include sufficient information and details which allows the evaluation of the plans to address the following criteria: 1. Compatibility of the plan with the standards, purposes and intent of the PUD ordinances. 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. 4. The adequacy of internal site organization, uses, densities, circulation, parking • facilities, public facilities, recreational areas, open spaces, buffering, and landscaping. Attached for you review is a copy of development plan and components of the future building plans which address the information required under Section 35 -355, Planned Unit Development, Subdivision 5, Application and Review. 1. Street and utility locations and sizes. The preliminary plat identifies the street and utilities. The site plan identifies the recommended changes of the Brooklyn Boulevard entrance to restrict north bound egress movement and full access to the both sites from the signalized intersection of 71 s ` Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard. The overall development plan also illustrates the closure of the school's parking lot unto Perry Avenue North. 2. A drainage plan, including location and size of pipes and water storage areas. The plan illustrates the location of the existing storm sewer which services the property, the existing stormwater management pond, additional stormsewer for the access drive and Phase II addition, and changes to the outlet storm sewer to the Brooklyn Boulevard trunk line. • 3 -25 -10 Page 3 E- ay 3. A rg ading,_plan including temporary and permanent erosion control provisions. The grading plan provides construction notes for erosion control during construction. 4. A landscape plan. A site demolition plan indicates which trees from the first phase development will be removed as a result of building the parking structure. The landscape plan illustrates the replacement of these trees and additional landscaping and buffering associated with Phase II. 5. A lighting _plan. A photometric plan has been provided. 6. A plan for timing and phasing of the development. The schedule for this project is a 2010 construction. 7. Covenants or other restrictions proposed for the regulation of the development. The development plan includes common access easements and use agreements for the improved access from 71 Avenue traffic improvements. The development will also be proceeding with the future division of the building into a condominium with the necessary documents for maintenance and replacement. 8. A site plan showing the location of all structures and parking areas. The development plan illustrates the Phase II addition, the replacement of the surface • parking with a parking structure, the redesign of the school's parking lot to accommodate internal bus movement with a closure of Perry Avenue access points. 9. Building renderings or elevation drawings of all sides of all buildings to be constructed in at least the first phase of development. The Phase II building improvements are consistent with the existing Adult Education Building. 10. Proposed underlying zoning oning classification or classifications. The planned improvements are consistent with the underlying zoning classifications. The PUD provisions do require a site plan approval pursuant to Section 35 -230 Plan Approval of the zoning ordinance to ensure that the future developments are consistent with the approved development plan. A final site plan review and preliminary plat are scheduled for the April 15, 2010 Planning Commission meeting to facilitate the potential of commencing construction this Spring. 3 -25 -10 i Page 4 • RECOMMENDATION Motion to recommend approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2010 -005, Rezoning/Development Plan Approval — PUD/Mixed (R -1 and C -1) subject to the following conditions: 1. Execution of a PUD development agreement as prepared by the City Attorney. 2. Completion of the Replatting of the Northwest Family Services Center Addition. 3. Approval of a final site plan by the Planning Commission and City Council. 4. Hennepin County approval of the improvements to the 71" Avenue/Brooklyn Boulevard signalized intersection. 5. City approval of a street improvement project to 71 Avenue. I i I 3 -25 -10 Page 5 Northwest Family Service Center Addition • 7051 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 Project Description History In 2005, Independent School District #279, (Osseo Schools), constructed the Adult Education Center at the above address to be home to the Adult Basic Education Program. The location was selected because of its central location, access to public transportation and the fact that the property was owned by the School District. At that time an addition was planned for a three story addition to accommodate Community Emergency Assistance Program, Inc., (CEAP) and have space available for partner service organizations. The planned addition would have doubled the size of the original building. The full project (original building plus addition) was submitted and approved by the. City of Brooklyn Center Planning Commission and City Council. In the intervening time that the Adult Basic Education Program has -been • functioning it has become clear that the locatIbn''and facility are both very successful. The Osseo Schools has since moved its Enrollment Center into the facility to help facilitate efficient processing of new students and intra - district transfers. The Proposed Northwest Family Service Center concept was developed in a collaborative effort of Osseo Schools, CEAP, and Hennepin County Human Services and Public Health Department, (HCHS). HCHS joined the partnership recognizing that the facility and location can provide a home for a new service model which centralizes services and creates a user friendly environment. All of the partners visualize improved service to clients that are common to each. Planned Unit Development The project is being proposed as a Planned Unit Development to address the unique demands of the facility on the area. Parcels included in the PUD include: Willow Lane site Adult Education Center site and the two house lots purchased by CEAP. The Northwest Family Service Center will operate under a condominium • agreement which will provide the ownership and operational guide for the Northwest Family Service Center, parking structure and grounds. Proposed Addition The proposed addition is a three story facility constructed to compliment the existing facility by utilizing the same materials and details used in the original construction. Exterior materials will include: face brick (colors and shapes to match existing), aluminum windows and doors, tinted glass (vision and spandrel), and exterior insulation finishing system (upper portions of building). Due to the need for additional space needed to house HCHS the size of the addition has increased from what was proposed originally (23,700 SF) to what is needed for the programs now (64,000 SF +/- ). A three level parking structure is proposed which will provide entry points to the building on both the second and third floors. The parking structure is proposed as a precast structure finished in materials and colors to compliment the building The number of parking spaces required by City ordinances, based on the building occupancies is 379 spaces. The actual number of spaces proposed (400 • has been based on the anticipated building usage. I Site Development The site design has been developed to minimize the impact of vehicle traffic onto Brooklyn Blvd. CEAP has chase two h immediately west of the site y purchased o ouses y along 71 Ave. N. which will provide the space needed for a'driveway connecting the new parking lot, and the Willow Lane ECFE parking lot to the controlled intersection at Brooklyn blvd. and 71' Ave. N. ISD #279 has agreed to close the two curb cuts onto Perry Ave. N. and route all traffic to and from the willow lane facility via the new roadway. Landscaping will utilize similar species and sizes of vegetation used in the original design. ATS ore ee _ IfMb ...... ....' .... ♦ r M4M W foon nnaM1 .� ypx sYh .t.001..1 xML .YI "a ro.-r Y ... � Jx' Am¢aM .xuawel �xn nwx uxc � .P x� .r mm bO1�peyy7a - R W UR1 Ilxlq Un[ CW4 } xe0 an:enr .w en...c 4,."� �� w.oc.+xoiP nwx An..nml -,� - nomxcx[cx wrAM rend wen K : t� eeex srt Door a: .�.. `• n . 1 ly. .. :r•� shams i .� \, wo-n ":ls.s acre. Nlx ewpq \ , � :x' xx4MC axrcc I. N m[[ r.ro iii j IIm:O ,Cia �� i r I m u to n us ca / L . I xmrs u:m .ax ro k .x - � t pax sncxs� , xa YuxM:e ........ 1 nuquT, ........:..... _._._._. t w I : y 3 j ; ■wx " 5 xxuxuwunun ar or o' 1 1 ewe I 1 ar / 1 �P sex swine anu+< A xunns Ia I I. 4 ' M «u7er+r. I n!ewRV M tole Y xe xYr s,rz uroux cuu . t SIIE LAYOUT PLAN RO .rain. nfY a..« nm •mu ,YU 1 slrl •. .unrrr Y M / // / 4nYa000 // « may _ /✓ \ Tn r• / \ . z vaav o � I � T Z m A fD IvY«.wrfwx•ner nw.y�. s. \ \ / _ i.. %\ s.r •rs.w.r - .. ' N rwo � (� ewe vr+a YYIOr t«wt • ]a aro' ®x w . - � i� � ~ _ :--� ` /� [//��/7 � pp .�i rrr Iola a mt r «ro>+ a ra wr nl r trmwi �rw. / / fn «W ��� Iw+ ... .. ♦ ... •. +AI` .. may' ...._ -: 0�.... \ � Y•r 1r YY «ars r wmtsnu al ar.ar w r„Yr. e ,..y.;,,. rrrY Nrd �es�il y d r:�w •Nl lwmilre u n� •�M -s > � s .rw. ' dwygmdr r+r rawlrrr ramw�M arr.. .vrur...:.r / " ) ., ✓ whoa rrY«s weyuw arlrr � .. .r• ..�...rs / .. H' ,,fir . JAl'��OY vr.l r rwc r w. s+Y �m e n LI f adelarr � J / - remrLlnrtrwwortmwtrrdYtsor a'r♦arr I a�w O L 1�1 i Y [Ib iiY - 3 '�-, .. ..� 1 ao f •n d rr fo swr4 darrm aflod iar a ' • r. w �« • /" ., nr.r f f . 9 ", •� I �...� \.e..� mla.ar a.� rawe w '4fflt ff m nu vra au Ya sin � �, � � ' :N.. ( • i' i ' •.� �l -�•° � .......... .r. y au -awr Ylwrw rr fl leNesri Y' YY >o •>w.d«1 �•�•� r-• tr dY�rsf rw d mo wa ]IIfOOa b aY carat Yrr tnrn)o M 9wewu ',R }« YfY . [+y�mLLWri � � � '�� p Y -- IO.Y>� .YrY.« 'faY el«YS 1r9Or Yrwl d .w ®1 r0•br M dsu awnoY wtr iW ®v � ui /w N •« n 1o0aa ' y . e®10r flsl OINd d WY w M rrrr w - a rir:il I. amn M i«waarl .nnr . tfrx i) dYW YO 1ap� � -r j J YrrY r w 4w1 YY«• w 1:RU . m t�i, � n" No � r Yrlt M Y r w• MYN Y L/N rONw _ fl late lrl r01 allYey «1 �..� �• . °. J URU. mu RU YM rY Mr «w -away � _':5 aw•wrr.rrrrra fal aq n. auYt .��� �� � •«� � m aarvf Ater rr - assrYt.! w W 'M M a• rm[I lmo rwe« MYI« 1w - rl rl Yr�r pYarrw w h v I®1m�0 'Y I« mr� ra - w lsr YYalrOw w h s trq ml seat alWw rw - w« YA1w.f Nr _ :sxw aNwa 0:) S' lV r Way .aaaa •/.ww,wY. a, ..YiYCOO TLLM1YM ud Z . i A lbhto ...... � � Iwwss /a YN Iw A • tw9.1wY�r• � . .:. w � � -..;� � 4, �. � J w0• WO YwIaOY O:wa. • T !Iw YN ®A .S "mil" —.�. it N Tw• Y6 al IL. Y awf M w dt{ •a1 Il• Y YOiYY >W Yntvl � •�� • IO�t 014 � i I....'• ..... • ... .. > ...�.... ..... q•..'..... sw atlNwssa a wa�a ir•u a0 ewaa a � N ' � � . wafi . a'� iww� a.or onoa ww m �e.w mr.r � � t roa wwa d a•o ss.• awa >W w •s `. �.. :: d YY.utl loa Wr ii iW � a ,. •.ww �. ®,+.^° . �..:.�.� .. s :- M- "_....... .� 700 a ` : •w � gg aY lwaar •w waw aw NSSa iMY1.0• . � f : i � �� ' }Yaa Nw wWM SY 1ti :W 1® a A• i„; lllw•I w au1• au Ys M lY lO1 w A ,th / ws.YwW • .•— .• ' I•M w'W 'ass • 1CwYl1 sw N m. wm m/ow wra .. rwa n s•aYS . asmn w sou Iwu eaua ••w m. • yy _k s.�.a�.. t.' - 1 s: : i.01a O —mw. oe r'n nulwo srw Yawwm wYSS aw � _. _ _ kiss m aq owra• w Ywso . ♦ t j� -4 - � � � .. Y . Wa.•o w+/ N.w su tlnu • mu s•u uae alt Y.: sin � a Z - . ' wns aw lo/w r aw n s.YY aW v W >t Is•s au w . -. —.- l V3aV ww l � 'dAL a r � `I' � : r /iWw a.w. W uw ®aW aW o evi 4. 3w o .ws�+ Y••s. at.rorwo . _•••. arm .w W aww ww luuvo W mau o m r rn: w , - a.r ww lauaaow ma. W waam. wYOa aw W w mu sr m u A aas Yw pa�I W imo ppyyOpry s rs w w •IY w•IYwY UY•� • nW11 wI wiwaO N 'IiSHI wl � r Tw s d w O% s• s � y Wawaaw4lsi Wws>W 1nu • •rru Sw � OOwd+w pw1 ap YI1 • w M • wa•a Ia• lows lwala• YWnv.m ww. tW at •a.w aY w. T . vrsu • mu rw ow. N a•. s.. - aY•e ar al/•• all M Www w w w• SW >t tr au w l � 4N3731 w•WYI Yy m tliWaau i h l® aYY'W L w w a W4 sm .a.ml waww .W - ois w >•Y.wa wp away Yrww Nt - w Yw m (HUlaaa w h Y wW ml IY ten.w .N - w11 ww W W IN awnaow w h a Wq aw aOYS Ymw:.aY - �530DJ 9MNtl3M9 los. Ask now w X-L COVERNM CODES: AREA r e.aen eYei oa pea i •/ YI Yel.tlem er re. eem AY - a tleaen n[ er pr a ., r neropl>t an r l lYee91• Retlwe m eerlwa r am - aY a.mY lo•.w a: aae i w .l na ca M tlmwa - a�a � s+a om�ma he r.rr IECEND: �tl�m m � r r eAYO W nY ewe. ,•-- W K Wa nay nele . rlup Yi �- R •eeW K it I Y.Awe0. rJ rlF,aeY sewe el neaio� a Y W K oco rlw�rel neam w s All�u�' •nun a•n w c arse _ A ea rpeY.e 0 eoeella IWa • nla reernrin n.m s mac ew >.rww Renee :s alp.r nm.a .o�o oevr Ae am�aA aeaw W pfleele lbw nY rKVYOn eYrei YrewlP r•aG r em:s r w rY fQruo�w�m nwee!e W OQeYN (elan far M Ul olenert ,.. i • per l'Wlarr K I • •. .,J • it • 1 A n[ K rr/Ea�R ne f W W O1n00�� IIQ ARarR 1a ..' M NM WI •4 L•eur A , KK �� nW� y11 K ewpe wi er.la s a , K �; iiii �, . �, /yy 1vP - - - - - a' °'" e.lar ee•a em. eY. ra e.. • am � � i ' � ..p„, �T*' -" • >k -- me A Wr ee AAK l apf: uda am Aa M A YeIOW I meal 1R O!•i eper eele W eer mall[ W Y eel. IR a MY , �. � 2 A' ' ^� •+ E •�,.:. -. roYrs n'erruarar mli ewwraa ' �' f eel W ®I ln 14 m lletlp mY 1p..11e. . •_ ..: ma olW am Mar aapaesaeaurg .•.. ^•�• :.- .1.....dt.. $r :..........�:..wr is a marl lAe r • uRa a r Ao as UT m ra �l aat IrYW • � L � " Yetl Wee @e le pela aeeAl Y W—... k Amr (ear 0 Oeela 9atle9 YK Yelae ewee eoeee rreeA sr eeeen J , rm ,: '. s�'°" 'F•. E'���y�y�'''''' .:� fl0 owY� /� -yt�p � M/V � A en aM ae a llt a1a A Ml i R'm JrM� .. +... >...... . ... / LPL. —. —.— L._._rlmrltl rrntls relei C > . F� � /—m4 ••lr ael�r r � m xt . emo eeewll aw4 rsa N 'C ... .. �. ._. .. _ o m /e. nr alr� U n g ... km < Z / � m Z i 1ol,e $ s rA Z/ AREA 2. wmrwwrwr G� \ Cni euer+IR.� paanen *s pYa nme moc Ywuss nnl �� , a/ �( � cpoe .Y.w.sls • a4 I RYIe Ol00► A1.6 _. - - - - -- ----- .— . —. - -- - -- —. - '11: Y Nrw N ' — — 14 �wrt� hIIM.M RlW1tlM V ;'[fl[110114MIION w1 ry R m LL � ^ Y - - --------- A TT w] vn M] e 0 Z ----- .— . —. -1— —. —. —_ - - - -- cpl- f [rl[R011 R(WMN Crt� •.�.1K OOOfM• exn.w. ue.•.n+ � [MROR p(MnON wr A4.2 �� I� �� =�!�' � A ®ICI ®I ®� ;� C! I ■' � j`��; � ' C IG�ail. �i it - - as ■� �� ■! �� �:�� i ; it i�€I� , ';_�■� ®■ � . IP III � � '�€ q I �.'� fir: €��I4 ®I■ti� i �• m aa� INS INS ��Zll Ingo 1=1 �a17 Jivara, ema■■�■ � Ail pal Ima NMI i im i�I 10112 1 i I� E � ai , ��" �i' 111, eei■ � �� '� " I � i � �� ih'I '.II "wI ■I al Wl W ii 11.1 P WWI Y • 1I 1 : J i l l I maim r ®mm■ ,f IN mir ■I' �■ NO I ■ � `� _ ■ I IC I I F�•' I ®a�rsro.ale �'�� �_'� � � � _ - ; I� '� ®Illi■'il � ,il li , it i��i ■ s �■ m■ma ■I� : �■ �I '■ ■ E r ' a� ■■Iem■■■ ON ON M 111111 t ; i " 10111a€®■■■ OWN I i i ■a�a�r ®■.■ No ui OI INS Rol i mail, li 1111 ■I B■ ■I M IN: ��I' Ie it Immmums ME ; : ®t1 .I NO it �, �© I�IIf ■Iam OF I I � i ®9tl ®f® � I . ■o =■ i i I IN _ ■II I NN I man INE =III minim i I "�.�._ ■1 1 ■t 1 ■1 M INS 10 908 0 14.90. IdWIV I IIIIIIIIII II II III IIIIII/ & CD 0 10 ---------------- --------- err 4 1 -- '�VTT7T777 * W- A SIT ® aa E® 00000 ®0000 0000000 x go Oil I Jill Q sill 1�: HIS s 1; 11 1 1 Northwest Family Services Center D Phase 11 Facility 7051 Brooklyn Blvd. IN15N 8 Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 G ENERAL NOT CASTING SCHEDULE t]tSL� CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE NE T SIZE CRATE TYPE wee C84H l00 R- 2571 -A 48' CBMdf 10f R- 2571 -A 48' tar.er rin CS 102 R- 3067 -V 48' s +:� & . i CB 200 R- 3067 -V 4B' RELOCATED SKIMMER SALVAGED GRATE EXISTING err+w wraw. ew n. taimn -. STIAH 300 R -1737 48' EXISTING CS R -1733 EXISTING VAA...e mr u a..a. ie'° agar rim v ' a;s r v i a �wuu ' aWta UURDINO ' cxopogo : , �t ;, Nor GRADING � • (q i FiE 06].1 - m tM "a M t °° aiY � � �iw° v R - uenl • e � , ' '�°- � ' ` • i w sem .mn un w. •�°, °.. k '-.. S •m y r M� f _ __ ,/ wu.�ea�w. ly �.� - u N a saAu BUD WIND to 2 I'm u I®.vu r '•. 'rSuc' ' ai C N men. r nlewe _ _ wwu.wa a . ua w< ur.0 taut iO.nn s nwa m �`\\ GO 1100 aO � tall 1111 1 Z 17 is SS me. a.. a a ✓ mn BUI v • ww.o ... a. -� '....✓ I' ,t Ali r p .e ®.w.s. ExKOHG 0 waao enw< wwwn ELENENTARI SCHOOL f BUILDING l,- - .. s I I � �ij <H<buob. 9GRADING DRAINAGE AND ER051ON CONTROI "PAN tj II L5.0 Al -A ---------------------------- )> I Z y y X, s. —j lift; T 0 "F OM Bit '� �� �� ��° �� � �� ����� ��� zi � � 'A BPI A� P� pff q �� � i � ���� �A ��� zt A go Northwest Family Services Center Phase 11 Facility 7051 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center, MIN 5429 %i i 1• " °l:ra�el:���JI' Y o0• s l :��� g Y "" f EF� " @F q i it9 �Sl�r 11 It ( EF pp j pt :. i i ' "� € 1�� $ r p a�� i •� A "r °r � • rE ;I 'E 9 1 :.; r :" � 6 Ez #fig TI 1 . ti� 1. 1a rrrrrrr „r,rrr,rrrrrrl ��l 1 � t °Bitpf�Tad . �, d,� ;. a�€ 1 , � # # #r # # #rr # t d r a E 3 l 4 EE r ii d° l f E $ ���� -aa�� gg�r � � d A ��E� �$ A t i p ![ pEpgd 7p5 p c 9 t ______ -__I_ 1__ ___ - -- C. - -- - - � 1 C . -- ,` .-1511 ?Sig 1� I g` -- - - .. - 1' AE 't'A• � _ 1 •AH � � ti i o t , 1 r• a 4 �' A� t i f C Northwest Family Services Center E�� Iq Phase II Facility ` ii A t 4 7051 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 (t ” R la [ afed mi Mimi aam. mean � aaa.R.R•AxR R «,M, , � ms faa � mms �� R9 RI 91'[ x �Y+ „ rYK, w• m[ Ma mmE mmR , Vx RftRMYFWUw•Mw.« f f f w n CRY. r ass f..a amm mmf O ,•o«rs.a,..n a.Y.,« w +,.. m , ma,.,«„:,«asRs bi - , �; 'Y•,ua .:...:.::: ::..::: ::.::..:. ::.::: j .:......::: .«.,...Y. L' .. t , .. I � t r .. :. .. � _ �•� s f G I • Application Filed on 9 -30 -04 City Council Action Should Be Taken By 11 -29 -04 (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 2004 -011 Applicant: ATS & R, Inc. (On Behalf of Osseo Area Schools) Location: Southwest Quadrant of Brooklyn Boulevard and 71st Avenue North Request: Rezoning The applicant ATS & R, Inc. on behalf of Osseo Area Schools (ISD 279) is requesting rezoning from R -1 (One Family Residence), R -2 (Two Family Residence) and R -4 (Multiple Family Residence) to C -1 (Service /Office) of a proposed 3.63 acre site located at the southwest quadrant of Brooklyn Boulevard and 71 Avenue North. The parcel will be created through a replatting of this area (See Planning Commission No. 2004 -010) by combining the northeast portion of the Willow Lane School site along with two vacant multiple residential parcels (R -2 and R -4) immediately to the north. The proposed new lot would abut Brooklyn Boulevard and 71 Avenue North. I � The property in question is bounded on the north by 71 st Avenue; on the east by Brooklyn Boulevard and the Willow Lane Apartments (zoned R -5); on the south by R -1 zoned lane that is Willow Lane Park; and on the west by R -1 zoned property for the Willow Lane School and single • family homes facing 71 Avenue North. RACKGRO ND The Osseo School District has for some time been searching for a new location for their adult education program that is being displaced by a redevelopment project in Brooklyn Park. The School District has recently acquired two abutting vacant parcels of land (Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Center Brook Addition) located adjacent to and northerly of their Willow Lane Early Childhood Center (formerly Willow Lane Elementary School). Lot 2 is currently zoned R -2 (Two Family Residence), is .34 acres and is a corner lot abutting 71 Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. Lot 3 is currently zoned R -4 (Multiple Family Residence), is .64 acres, and is an interior lot fronting on Brooklyn Boulevard between Lot 2 and the School District site. Their plan is to divide off a portion of the Willow Lane property and combine it with the two newly acquired lots to create a 3.63 acre parcel of land to house their adult education facility. The School District has also been discussing a joint use of a proposed building on the site with an area non - profit service group (CEAP), which might include some day care facilities as well as other services. The newly created lot would be created through a replat (Application No. 2004 -010) and would include Lots 2 and 3, the Willow Lane Earle Childhood Center property and all of the Willow Lane Park property owned by the City. They also are seeking site and building plan approval and a special use permit (Planning Commission Application No. 2004 -012) for a 48,600 sq. ft. three story service /office building to be constructed in two phases to house their adult education facility and the service /office occupancy for CEAP. Page 1 10 -18 -04 Educational uses including post secondary schools, business schools, trade schools and the like, • but excluding public and private elementary and secondary schools (K -12) are allowed special uses in the C -1 zoning district. Service office uses are permitted uses in the C -1 zone as well (see Section 35 -320, Subdivisions 1 -3, attached). This is why the applicant is seeking the rezoning of the proposed new parcel to C -1. A C -1 parcel of land supporting an allowable service /office use is required to have a minimum of 150 ft. of frontage and, if located abutting a major thoroughfare such as Brooklyn Boulevard, have a minimum lot area of one acre. The proposed new lot will have approximately 510 ft. of frontage on Brooklyn Boulevard and will be 3.63 acres in area. CTT TTT E .TNF.S FOR F.V AT .T TA TTNCT R F7.ONTNC'TS All rezoning applications are reviewed in light of the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines contained in Section 35 -208 of the city's zoning ordinance (attached). The Planning Commission must review the proposal in light of the Policy and Review Guidelines. The policy states that zoning classifications must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and must not constitute "spot zoning ", which is defined as a zoning decision which discriminates in favor of a particular land owner and does not relate to the Comprehensive Plan or accepted planning principals. Each rezoning proposal must be considered on its merits and measured against the City's policy and against the various guidelines, which have been established for rezoning review. The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which they comment specifically on each of the guidelines contained in Section 35 -208. The following is a listing of • the guideline, the applicant's comments and staff response to each of the guidelines: a. Is there a clear public need or benefit? The applicant indicates that their proposed new facility on the proposed rezoned land has programs that are directed towards residents that need assistance with language skills, completing a high school education, and developing work skills. They note that approximately 20 percent of the customers using these services live within walking istance of the proposed site. Approximately 15 percent of the g P P PP Y P -Willow Lane Early Childhood Center customers are also customers of services proposed for the facility. The staff would note that the proposed rezoning is necessary to accommodate the facility proposed by the School District. Adult education uses are allowed generally within the commercial zones (C -1 and C -2). A distinction is made in the zoning ordinance between elementary and secondary educational uses and other educational uses. Elementary and secondary educational uses are not allowed in commercial zoning districts generally because of the need for open space such as playground and recreational facilities. In order for the School District to provide adult education and similar facilities, they need to find commercially zoned land. The acquired two parcels combined with the excess Page 2 10 -18 -04 • land from the old Willow Lane School site accommodate this need. It can, therefore, be argued that by providing the necessary zoning to accommodate the school's need for an adult education facility is meeting a public need and providing a public benefit. b. Is the proposed zoning consistent and compatible with the surrounding land use classifications? The applicant indicates that the proposed C -1 district would be compatible with other service /office properties located along Brooklyn Boulevard. We would generally concur with the applicant's comments about the compatibility with surrounding land uses. The Willow Lane Early Childhood Center and Willow Lane Park are located on R -1 zoned property and are allowable institutional and recreational uses in this zoning district. The Willow Lane Apartments, which is zoned R -5, will abut the new proposed rezoned land. Single family residential homes would be located to the west of the facility. On the opposite side of Brooklyn Boulevard are commercial service/office uses and an off site parking lot for a church. The plan presented later by the applicant will show that they can meet the requirements of the C -1 zone. Of even more significance is the compatibility of the proposed C -1 zoning designation with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan with respect to redevelopment along Brooklyn Boulevard recommends eliminating inappropriate • single family uses along Brooklyn Boulevard and replacing them with either commercial and service /office uses on sites that are large enough to provide g gn P adequate circulation and good site design or high and medium density residential uses. The two vacant multi residentially zoned parcels and the excess school district property, although not containing single family residential uses, can be considered infill redevelopment of the nature suggested for commercial redevelopment along Brooklyn Boulevard. The two multi residential sites, one being R -2 and the other being R4 would, for all practical purposes, need to be combined into a single multi residential lot for some kind of development. This .would mean rezoning one to R -2 or the other to R -4 to accommodate a unified multi residential development. The site would be approximately once acre in area and could accommodate at the maximum a multi residential development of approximately 12 units. This is not a highly desirable type of redevelopment for this area. A service /office commercial redevelopment would seem to be more appropriate and coupled with excess school district property makes an appropriate service /office site. The Comprehensive Plan further sites this area as a possible mid - density residential development if incorporated into a larger redevelopment area. The Brooklyn Boulevard Amenities Study of 1994 cited two possible development concepts for this area, one of which indicated the two parcels in question for a commercial service /office use. It is, therefore, believed that the proposal for a C -1 rezoning of this area is consistent with an compatible with not • Page 3 10 -18 -04 only surrounding land uses but the City's Comprehensive Plan as well. • C. Can all proposed uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the subject property? The applicant notes that the anticipated uses are allowed or permitted in the C -1 district and the also note the possibility a non- rofit childcare facility being y of p ty g a part of the project at a later date. We would note that all of the uses comprehended in the C -1 zoning district can be contemplated for development on this site and be compatible with surrounding land use classifications. The more specific proposal presented by the School District can also be accommodated within the proposed zoning change. d. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in this area since the subject property was zoned? The applicants note that along Brooklyn Boulevard there have been a number of office, service and retail developments. They note that there has been an effort to move single family and small multi family residential properties away from Brooklyn Boulevard and that their proposal is consistent with that goal. We would concur with the comments and again note the Comprehensive Plan • g P general guideline for eliminating single family residential uses along Brooklyn Boulevard and to infill with service/office commercial particularly and some mid and high density residential uses in appropriate locations. There have been some rezoning applications, particularly with respect to Planned Unit Developments at the northeast comer of Brooklyn Boulevard and 69` Avenue and the Brookdale Mitsubishi redevelopment site along Brooklyn Boulevard to the north. These have accommodated commercial developments and expansion of commercial uses in the area as part of redevelopment projects. It is anticipated that in the future .more rezoning proposals particularly along Brooklyn Boulevard will come forward. As long as these proposal's prdve consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, it is believed that the City should accommodate the proposed classification changes. e. In the case of City initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? The applicants indicate that this is not a City initiated rezoning proposal. We would comment that although it is not a City initiated rezoning proposal but rather a School District initiated proposal that a broad public purpose may be • Page 4 10 -18 -04 • considered evident in the rezoning request in that it will accommodate a needed expansion of School District services. L Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning district? Again, the applicant responds with a yes to this question. We would comment that the proposed School District facility will have to conform to all applicable zoning requirements of the proposed C -1 zoning district. It appears, as will be shown later with the development plans, that this guideline can be met as well. g. Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district with respect to size, configuration, topography or location? The applicant notes that sites on Brooklyn Boulevard are not suitable for residential development. They also point out that the intended density for the existing multi family residential zoning would require multiple access points to Brooklyn Boulevard. They point out as well that locating single family residential . units along Brooklyn Boulevard is not desirable and this location is a good location for their proposed use. We would note that the two lots recently acquired by the School District that are zoned multi residential (R -2 and R -4) can be considered generally unsuited for multi residential development purposes. To be developed separately, one as a two family dwelling and the other as an approximate 8 unit story and a half apartment do not seem feasible. Even if developed, separate accesses to the sites would be needed to accommodate the uses. This is not a desirable proposition for the County in terms of access to Brooklyn Boulevard. The combination of the site and, as will be shown later with the development proposal, a shared access with -the Willow Lane Apartments to the south means one access point will service this -area. This is more desirable from the County's perspective for access points on Brooklyn Boulevard. Multiple family residential development is not the most desirable redevelopment possibilities from the City's perspective. A service /office use seems much more appropriate. The size, configuration, location and access arrangement proposed with this combination and rezoning of the site seems to be the best possible configuration for the redevelopment of the vacant property. h. Will the rezoning result in an expansion of a zoning district warranted by: 1. Comprehensive Planning; 2. Lack of developable land in the proposed • zoning district, or; 3. The best interest of the community? Page 5 10 -18 -04 The applicant notes that the rezoning of these lots to C -1 is consistent with the • Comprehensive Plan and other properties along Brooklyn Boulevard. They further note that the location of the project works well for them and the visibility on Brooklyn Boulevard is a positive as well as proximity to bus routes. We would concur with the applicant's comments and note that the proposed rezoning appears to be in the best interests of the community. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, which calls for service/office commercial infill or mid- density or high- density residential infill along Brooklyn Boulevard. With respect to the lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district, there is little developable land in the city other than such vacant parcels as those in question. Multi family residential uses are considered to be plentiful within the city and the City's practice has not been to rezone property for that particular use. The City has encouraged C -1 or service /office developments along Brooklyn Boulevard for many years and this proposed zoning would be consistent with this philosophy. The proposed zoning would allow for the rational use of the land in question and does appear to be in the best interest of the community. L Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? The applicant notes that the service provided b this project to the communi • PP P Y P J community should have a positive effect on the quality of life. We would comment that we believe this proposal does demonstrate merit beyond just the interests of an individual owner by providing public benefits with the expanded school district facility. In as much as the proposal furthers valid zoning objectives, it also demonstrates merit beyond just the interests of the School District. The Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines also note that the City policy is that zoning classifications must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and rezoning proposals must not constitute "spot zoning" defined as a zoning decision that discriminates in favor of a particular land owner and does not relate to the Comprehensive Plan or accepted planning principles. We find no significant conflicts with this policy as noted above in our review of the guidelines for rezonings. This proposal is, we believe, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is also consistent with good planning principles with the proposed use being consistent and compatible with existing surrounding land uses. We find no conflict with the proposal in this regard. pROCT-DI TRF Page 6 10 -18 -04 • It has been the City's practice with respect to zoning applications for the Planning Commission to refer them to Neighborhood Advisory Groups for additional review and comment. Mandates in the State Statute require the City to complete reviews within 60 days and to give applicants an answer within that time frame. Because of the notice requirements for publication and public notice, we require applications to be submitted four weeks prior to their review by the Planning Commission. The clock, however, begins on the date the application is accepted. Therefore, the zoning decision must be made by the City Council no later than November 29, 2004. Almost 30 days of the required 60 day time frame will have expired before the Planning Commission's pubic hearing is even held. This requirement makes it difficult for the City to hold the Neighborhood Advisory Group meetings we normally have. The Planning Commission instituted a procedure because it still with still wishes to receive Neighborhood Advisory Group p respect to these rezoning applications. We have invited the Northwest Neighborhood Advisory Group members to the Planning Commission meeting and are encouraging their comments and participation. A staff report will be delivered to the Neighborhood Advisory Group members at the same time that it is delivered to the Planning Commission members. Hopefully, they will have an opportunity to review the matter and to make comments at Thursday evening's meeting. i with neighboring It should be noted that representatives of the Osseo School Dis trict have met gh g property owners with regard to their proposal to rezone and provide an adult education facility on the subject property. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent to surrounding property owners and a notice of the Planning Commission's consideration of this request has also appeared in the • Brooklyn Center Sun/Post. AF.ND A TTON We believe this application is in order and would recommend approval of the rezoning acknowledging its consistency with the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines contained in the zoning ordinance. Attached for the Commission's review is a draft Planning Commission Resolution regarding the recommended disposition of Application No. 2004 -011 submitted by ATS & R, Inc. on behalf of Osseo Area Schools. Page 7 10 -18 -04 PC� -gyp ao�b -ooS February 18, 2010 • Mr. Gary Eitel Director of Business and Development City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Re: Northwest Family Services Center Addition, aka CEAP Dear Mr. Eitel, With regard to our re- Zoning application and in response to the requirements outlined by the City we provide the following information. a. Is there a clear public need or benefit? Yes. In addition to the existing Adult Basic Education services provided by ISD #279, CEAP and Hennepin County Human Services and Public Health Department will occupy the majority of the building addition. CEAP is a community based, non - profit agency that partners with other resources to assist people in need by providing emergency support and facilitating personal skill building and self sufficiency. Hennepin County Human Services provides a number of services oriented toward strengthening individuals, • families and communities by promoting self - reliance and a livable income, assuring that people's basic needs are met, and protecting children and vulnerable adults. b. Is the proposed zoning consistent and compatible with the surrounding land use classifications? Yes. The zoning is consistent with the existing property and other properties located along Brooklyn Boulevard. The proposed rezoning is directly related to making the existing site accessible via a route that is safer and more compatible with traffic patterns on Brooklyn Boulevard. c. Can all proposed uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the subject property? Yes. Thep sed uses are permitted and consistent with the current zoning designation. d. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in this area since the subject property was zoned? Yes. Brooklyn Boulevard has experienced a number of changes in terms of commercial development and an effort to move single family residences away from Brooklyn Boulevard. e. In the case of City initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? This is not a City initiated rezoning proposal. • f. Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning district? Yes. All restriction will be met and/or satisfied. g. Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district with respect to size, configuration, topography or location? The existing site with a single access point on Brooklyn Boulevard is unsuitable for further expansion or development (even as previously approved) due to the traffic constraints and safety concerns. h. Will the rezoning result in an expansion of a zoning district warranted by: 1. Comprehensive Planning; 2. Lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district, or; 3. The best interest of the community? We believe the rezoning is consistent with the intent of the current Comprehensive Plan, and the long term use of the existing site. i. Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? The entire community will benefit from having the services provided CEAP, ISD #279, and Hennepin County Human Services combined in one location. • Sincerely, Mike Schraad Vice President Welsh Construction, LLC MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION • OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION MARCH 25, 2010 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Rahn at 7:08 p.m. ROLL CALL Chair Sean Rahn, Commissioners JoAnn Campbell- Sudduth, Kara Kuykendall, Stan Leino, Carlos Morgan, and Michael Parks were present. Also present were Director of Business and Development, Gary Eitel, and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Rebecca Crass. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — MARCH 11, 2010 There was a motion by Commissioner Parks, seconded by Commissioner Kuykendall, to approve the minutes of the March 11, 2010 meeting as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. CHAIR'S EXPLANATION Chair Rahn explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, • the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. APPLICATION NO. 2010 -005 WELSH CONSTRUCTION, LLC Chair Rahn introduced Application No. 2010 -005, a request for PUD/Rezoning and Site and Building plan approval to facilitate the Phase II construction of the Adult Education Building located at 7051 Brooklyn Boulevard and transportation improvements of 71" Avenue North. Mr. Eitel presented the staff report describing the location of the property and the proposal. (See Planning Commission Information Sheet dated 3 -25 -10 for Application No. 2010 -005, attached.) He further explained that the accompanying development plan illustrates the future construction of a 63,362 sq. ft. addition to the Adult Education Building, a three story parking structure, redesign of access and internal movement within the parking lot of the Earl Childhood Learning Center, and access improvements from 71 Avenue North. Mr. Rich Kodchlein, T S & R Architects, displayed a visual demonstration of the proposed addition to the building. He explained that the materials used would match what is currently on the building. He added that the parking ramp would be three levels, with the first level on the ground and the plan includes a skyway from the parking ramp to the building. 3 -25 -10 Page 1 • Commissioner Parks asked what the size of the building would be. Mr. Eitel responded that this proposed plan is a total of 83,000 sq. ft., which includes the parking ramp. The building addition will be a total of 63,000 sq. ft. PUBLIC HEARING — APPLICATION NO. 2010 -005 There was a motion by Commissioner Kuykendall, seconded by Commissioner Parks, to open the public hearing on Application No. 2010 -005 at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Rahn called for comments from the public. Mike Schraad, representing Welsh Construction, 4350 Baker Road, Minnetonka, introduced himself to the Commission. Commissioner Parks asked Mr. Schraad about a drive lane giving access to the building. Mr. Schraad responded that there is approximately a 14 ft. clearance in the drive lane and they have been working with the Fire Department to assure there is proper access for emergency vehicles. Chair Rahn asked if the property has any security on site. Mr. Schraad responded that there is no security planned. Ms. Terry McDevitt, 7007 Perry Avenue North, asked about the expected length of time for construction on the site. Mr. Schradd stated they expect construction to last ten months with an anticipated start in the summer of 2010. • Mr. Eitel asked for clarification for parking on the site during construction. Mr. Schraad responded that in cooperation with the school district, they have worked out a plan with the Brooklyn United Methodist Church along Noble and Brooklyn Boulevard, to allow parking of construction workers and they will keep traffic off the residential neighborhoods. Ms. Diane Sannes, 7006 Willow Lane, member of United Methodist Church, stated she is excited to have CEAP back in Brooklyn Center. She asked for clarification on the access on the south side. Mr. Eitel stated that the site plan addresses a safe access to the site utilizing the signalized intersection of 71 Avenue North and restricts northbound traffic movement from the current driveway. Ms. Sannes asked if there will be an extra lane added on Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Eitel responded that Hennepin County has jurisdiction over Brooklyn Boulevard and they are reviewing that and looking at possibilities of a right hand turn lane opening to this site. He also added that the improvements to the 71" Avenue intersection will include changes to the sidewalk to assure safe pedestrian movement, enhancements to the neighborhood entrance and enhancements to the Willow Lane Early Childhood and the proposed Northwest Family Services Center. Commissioner Leino arrived at 7:37 p.m. Mr. Schraad added clarification that there was a traffic study done that looked at traffic movements and they determined that there would be no significant impact on traffic along • Brooklyn Boulevard. That study is being reviewed by the City's Engineering Department. 3 -25 -10 Page 2 Ms. McDevitt asked about the potential increase in the volume of use of the building due to an . increase in services available as far as the number of people at the site and the traffic impacts. Mr. Schraad responded that all the users of the site have done projections in terms of staff members, clients and customers and based on that projection at peak demand, it comes out to about 360 people. Mr. Schraad added that the parking ramp holds 400 vehicles and the traffic study contemplated that number of users coming in and out of the site. Mr. Daniel Engstrom, Assistant County Administrator for Hennepin County Human Services and Public Health, stated that the County began looking at planning a regional hub site in Hennepin County to improve services to their clients. He added that today most clients have to go downtown for services and they are planning to create six additional hub sites similar to the one proposed in Brooklyn Center. These hub sites would include all available services including social services, housing, children and family services as they move to an integrated approach. Commissioner Campbell- Sudduth asked Ms. McDevitt if she has noticed a change in traffic flow since the Adult Education building was constructed. Ms. McDevitt stated that she has not noticed a change but expects that with this addition, an increase in traffic will be noticeable. Commissioner Joann Campbell- Sudduth asked how late classes will conducted. Mr. Schraad responded that classes will end by 9:00 p.m. • Mr. Byron Lahner, Executive Director of CEAP in Brooklyn Park, stated that at their current location they have 45 parking spaces and schedule 33 families for food shelf visits on a daily basis. He added that they also serve meals on wheels, car loan programs and make food runs two to three times a day. They are not planning on adding additional staff or services in this building; however, have noticed a tremendous increase in a need for services and in 2009 they served 566 families. Commissioner Parks asked how moving into this building will change CEAP's operations. Mr. Lahner stated that they expect to be much more efficient in providing service to their clients. He added that this building is modeled by one in Anoka County that combines human services, work force and different social services — all of which are often accessed by the same people with similar needs. Mr. Dale Magnuson, 4830 71 Avenue North, asked about the access along 71 Avenue North and stated that he felt it was creating a lot of traffic cutting through the neighborhood. Mr. Eitel responded that there was more of a concern about traffic coming southbound off the interstate than off 69 unto Perry Avenue North. Mr. Magnuson replied that it is a concern for the neighborhood. Mr. Eitel responded that the traffic studies did not show traffic shortcutting through the neighborhood off 69 Avenue and felt that the approach proposed would keep the integrity of the neighborhood intact. 3 -25 -10 Page 3 • Mr. Jim Skiff, 7014 Brooklyn Boulevard, stated his concern with this being a hub for this type of activity with other blight and empty buildings in the city, including Brookdale, not being utilized. He also stated that he understands that this process includes the acquisition of two single family homes and he wants to know who paid for the properties and will they be removed from the tax rolls. Mr. Eitel responded that two lots were acquired by the applicant and they would be taken off the tax roll and the City acquired 4800 71 Avenue and will be taken off the tax roll. Mr. Eitel referenced the past planning within the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor, noting that the City has acquired other properties consistent with these plans. These acquisitions will remove blighting influences along Brooklyn Boulevard, promote streetscape improvements and redevelopment opportunities which will result in a better image of the corridor, entrances to our neighborhoods and the residential values within the neighborhoods that will significantly outweigh the loss of these individual property values from the tax rolls. Mr. Eitel pointed out that while the subject property may not pay taxes, it does employ many people which will eventually increase trade in the area and other activity that will have positive impact on the economy. No other persons from the public appeared before the Commission during the public hearing on Application No. 2010 -005. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING • There was a motion by Commissioner Campbell- Sudduth, seconded by Commissioner Parks, to close the public hearing on Application No. 2010 -005 at 8:13 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The Chair called for further discussion or questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Parks stated that what Gary Eitel explained is an important part of the city's future development in relation to access off and on the freeway which makes the area more attractive for development. The Commissioners interposed no objections to approval of the Application. ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 2010-005 — WELSH CONSTRUCTION, LLC There was a motion by Commissioner Parks, seconded by Commissioner Kuykendall, to recommend to the City Council that it approve Application No. 2010 -005, submitted by Welsh Construction, LLC a request for PUD/Rezoning to facilitate the Phase 11 construction of the Adult Education Building located at 7051 Brooklyn Boulevard and transportation improvements of 71" Avenue North subject to the following conditions: 1. Execution of a PUD development agreement as prepared by the City Attorney. . 2. Completion of the Replatting of the Northwest Family Services Center Addition. 3 -25 -10 Page 4 3. Approval of a final site plan by the Planning Commission and City Council. • 4. Hennepin County approval of the improvements to the 71" Avenue/Brooklyn Boulevard signalized intersection. 5. City approval of a street improvement project to 71" Avenue. Voting in favor: Chair Rahn, Commissioners Campbell- Sudduth, Kuykendall, Leino, Morgan, and Parks. The motion passed unanimously. The Council will consider the application at its April 12, 2010 meeting. The applicant must be present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Planning Commission will require that the application be returned to the Commission for reconsideration. APPLICATION NO. 2010 -004 WELSH CONSTRUCTION, LLC Chair Rahn introduced Application No. 2010 -004, a request from Welsh Construction, LLC, for Preliminary Plat approval to combine two residential lots with Lot 3, Block 1, Osseo Schools Willow Lane Addition and dedication of right of way for the realignment/improvements to 71 Avenue North to allow for a development under a Planned Unit Development (PUD). Mr. Eitel presented the staff report describing the location of the property and the proposal. • (See Planning Commission Information Sheet dated 3 -25 -10 for Application No. 2010 -004, attached.) Mr. Eitel explained that the applicant is also seeking Rezoning and development plan approval though the PUD (Planned Unit Development) process under Planning Commission Application No. 2010 -005 to facilitate the Phase II construction of the Adult Education building located at 7051 Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Eitel explained that changes to the Preliminary Plat have resulted in a delay in completing the City's and County's review of the proposed plat and staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue this public hearing until its April 15, 2010 meeting. PUBLIC HEARING — APPLICATION NO. 2010 -004 There was a motion by Commissioner Parks, seconded by Commissioner Campbell- Sudduth, to open the public hearing on Application No. 2010 -004 at 8:25 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Rahn called for comments from the public. No persons from the public appeared before the Commission during the Public Hearing on Application NO. 2010 -004. 3 -25 -10 Page 5 • CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING There was a motion by Commissioner Leino, seconded by Commissioner Parks, to continue the public hearing on Application No. 2010 -004 until April 15, 2010. The motion passed unanimously. Voting in favor: Chair Rahn, Commissioners, Campbell- Sudduth, Kuykendall, Leino, Morgan, and Parks. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission will continue the public hearing for Application No. 2010 -004 to the April 15, 2010 meeting. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Eitel reminded the Planning Commission that on April 6, 2010 a joint meeting with the City Council and all Advisory Commissions and the Charter Commission will take place. Mr. Eitel explained that this is an opportunity to discuss how the Commission wants to proceed with this since there is a full Commission in attendance. Commissioner Kuykendall stated that she would like to use the two goals suggested by Mr. Eitel at the last meeting. Gary explained that the Commission should identity two strategic goals that they could identify with. There was further discussion about the Council's six strategic and six ongoing goals and what would be addressed by the Planning Commission at the joint meeting. • There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Leino, seconded by Commissioner Parks, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:46 p.m. Chair Recorded and transcribed by: Rebecca Crass 3 -25 -10 Page 6 r r' �. +a AF ON :auuorrurruuurururrrurr.�: „�” s 1 I- � 1 m� • City Council Agenda Item No. 10a COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: April 5, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk SUBJECT: Housing Commission Appointment Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider ratification of the Mayoral appointment of Tracy Groves to the Housing Commission. Background: The Housing Commission is composed of a chairperson and six members. There is currently one vacancy on the commission. Notice of vacancy on the Commission was posted at City Hall, Community Center, and on the City's website and aired on Cable Channel 16 since February 23, 2010. Announcement was made in the Brooklyn Center Sun -Post on March 11, 2010. A letter was sent to those persons who previously had submitted an application for appointment to a Brooklyn Center advisory commission informing them of the vacancy and requesting that they call the City Clerk if they are interested in applying for the Commission. They were given the choice of either submitting a new application or having their application previously submitted considered. Notices were also sent to current advisory commission members. A copy of the application received was forwarded to City Council Members on April 2, 2010. Attached for City Council Members only is a copy of the application received: Tracy Groves 5337 Girard Ave N An e -mail was sent to the applicant notifying her that her application for appointment would be considered at the April 12, 2010, City Council meeting. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Mission: Ensuring an attractive., clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust City of Brooklyn Center Housing Commission Geographical Distribution (Chairperson and Six Members) Current Members April 5, 2010 ` "��� Neighborhoods Current Members ,� " " "�; � � , � � �, �� Southeast 00", �._. Northeast Northwest Kathie Amdahl Chereen Norstrud West Central Kris Lawrence- Anderson Central Judy Thorbus Southwest Ephraim Olani James Richards One vacancy. City Council Agenda Item No. lOb COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: April 6, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk SUBJECT: Hearin g Y g for H der Jaweed, Holdingford Investments, LLC, Regarding Rental Property Located at Brookhaven Apartments (3907, 3909, and 3911 65th Avenue North) Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Receive Staff report. 2. Open the hearing to receive applicant testimony. 3. Close the hearing. 4. Direct Staff to prepare a resolution for the next City Council meeting with findings of fact to either suspend or revoke the rental license for Brookhaven Apartments. Background: The property located at 3907, 3909, and 391165"' Avenue North is an apartment complex known as Brookhaven Apartments (3 buildings with 54 units). • • City and County taxpayer records indicate owner as Holdingford Investments LLC, P.O. Box 120728, St. Paul MN 55112 • City rental dwelling license application records indicate owner as Hyder Jaweed, 3 Blue Spruce Court, North Oaks MN 55112 • Secretary of State business records indicate Holdingford Investments LLC is located at 3 Blue Spruce Court, North Oaks MN 55112; original date of filing 11/13/2007 • March 23, 2009 — City Council issues renewal rental license for Brookhaven Apartments with expiration date of October 31, 2010 • January 15, 2010 — City Assessor notifies City Clerk that Brookhaven Apartments has delinquent second half 2009 property taxes (second half property taxes were due October 15, 2009) • January 15, 2010 — City Clerk inquires and Utility Billing Clerk notifies that utilities were not current ($9,941.44 total) • January 19, 2010 — City Clerk sends letter to Holdingford Investments LLC notifying of delinquent taxes and utilities • February 3, 2010 — City Clerk notifies City Prosecutor that property taxes and utilities were not current (second half 2009 taxes due $34,739.91) • March 1, 2010 — City Prosecutor mailed letter and notice of proposed license action • April 6, 2010 — Hennepin County confirms second half taxes 2009 plus penalties are unpaid in the amount of $35,601.19 a violation of Section 12 -901 (9) • April 6, 2010 — Utility Billing Clerk confirms that utilities are not current ($2,223.64 for . 3907 65th; $1,555.06 for 3909 65th; $1,888.56 for 3911 65th for a total of $5,667.26) Rlission: Fasuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Budget Issues: • There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Strategic: We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods • • ,Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public. trust Office of the City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community Sharon Knutson, MMC O X City Clerk January 19, 2010 Hyder Jaweed 3 Blue Spruce Court St. Paul, MN 55127 RE: Rental Property Located at: Brookhaven Apartments, Brooklyn'Center Dear Property Owner: Section 12 -901 of the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances states "prior to issuance or renewal of a license and at all times during the license term, a license holder must be current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, and assessments due on the licensed property and any other rental real property in the city owned by the license holder." City records indicate that there are both taxes and utilities owed for this property. Property taxes and utilities must be paid in full to retain a rental dwelling license. . Please submit payment for utilities to the City of Brooklyn Center and payment for taxes to Hennepin County Government Center, 300 S 6th Street, Administrative Tower A -600, Minneapolis, MN 55487- 0060, within 10 calendar days of the date of this letter. Failure to keep current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, and assessments due on the rental property will result in legal prosecution by the City. If payment has been made, please disregard this notice, as I will consult with the City Assessor after Y Y4 regarding may our due date. An questions re ardin taxes be directed to Hennepin County at 612 - 348 -3011. Y Sincerely, Awzt Sharon Knutson City Clerk • 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 w w w. cityo fb rooklyncenter. org NOTICE OF PROPOSED LICENSE ACTION You are hereby notified, pursuant to Section 12 -910 of the ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center, that a hearing before the City Council shall be held on the 12 day of April 2010 at 7:00, pm o'clock at the Brooklyn Center City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430, at which time the City Council shall consider the revocation, suspension or non renewal of the rental license held by Holdingford Investments, LLC for that apartment complex known as Brookhaven, located at 3907, 3909 and 391165 1h Avenue N., Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. The grounds for this license action are the failure of the licensee to pay the second half year 2009 real property taxes, now due and overdue in the amount of $35,027, together with applicable interest and penalties and failure to pay city- provided utilities now overdue and • delinquent in the total amounts of $9,941.44, together with applicable interest and penalties. Section 12 -901 subd 4 provides that as a condition of acquiring a rental license and maintaining a rental license, the licensee must be current on payments for all assessments, taxes and utilities. Section 12 -910 provides for the revocation, suspension or non renewal of a rental license for, inter alia, failure to operate or maintain the license premises in conformity with all applicable state laws and codes and the City Code or Ordinances and any other violation of Chapter 12. • Hennepin County Property Information Yage I or i Hennepin County M • ter. - • . HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER A600 Government Center Minneapolis MN 55487- 0060 Property Tax Information The Hennepin County Property Tax web database is updated daily (Monday - Friday) at approximately 9:15 p.m. (CS7) Property ID No.: 34- 119 -21 -31 -0081 NON - HOMESTEAD Property Address. 3907 65TH AVE N BROO KLYN CENTER Owner Name: HOLDINGFORD INVESTMENTS LLC Taxpayer Name and Address: HOLDINGFORD INVESTMENTS LLC PO BOX 120728 ST PAUL MN 55112 2010 TAXES TAX PENALTY TOTALS 1 st Half Tax (Due Date May 17) $27,706.91 2nd Half Tax (Due Date October 15) $27,706.91 Penalty $0.00 Total Payable $55,413.82 $0.00 $55,413.82 Net Paid - YEAR TO DATE $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Due $55,413.82 $0.00 $55,413.82 Property ID No.: 34- 119- 21 -31- 1st Half Tax Due through 05/17/2010 $27,706.91 0081 Note: If you are using this page in 2nd Half Tax Due through 10/15/2010 F] $27,706.91 lieu of Hennepin County payment stub to remit payment; after printing the page, please check the box in front of the payment amount that you Total Due - 2010 Tax $55,413.82 are remitting. Property has prior year delinquent taxes. Call (612) 348 -3011 for amount due. 341132 .310081 https: / /www l 6.co.hennepin.nm.us /taxpayments /taxesdue.j sp ?pid= 3411921310081 04/06/2010. Created Date/Time: 04/06/2010 05:01:52 PM Customer Number. 00033044 - • Account Number. 0030070001 Service Address: 3907 65TH AVE N Mailing Address: SUNRISE APT LLC 3907 65TH AVE N BROOKLYN CENTER MN 55429 -2175 Customer /Account Transaction History Trans Date Transaction Amount Balance 03/17/2010 0:00 Penalties -Water $41.77 $2,223.64 03/17/2010 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $8.32 $2,181.87 03/17/2010 0 :00 Penalties -Sewer $97.21 $2,173.55 03/17/2010 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $54.85 $2,076.34 03/09/2010 0:00 Certification Sewer Write -Off ($1,673.41) $2,021.49 03/09/2010 0:00 Certification Storm Write -Off ($944.03) $3,694.90 03/09/2010 0:00 Certification Water Write -Off ($695.90) $4,638.93 03/09/2010 0:00 Certification Street Write Off ($140.99) $5,334.83 02/10/2010 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 03/10/2010 $1,679.06 $5,475.82 02/05/2010 0:00 Certification Ad min Fee $30.00 $3,796.76 • 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light $140.99 $3,766.76 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($140.99) $3,625.77 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Sewer $1,673.41 $3,766.76 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($1,673.41) $2,093.35 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage $944.03 $3,766.76 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage ($944.03) $2,822.73 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Water $665.90 $3,766.76 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Water ($665.90) $3,100.86 12/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Water $66.59 $3,766.76 12/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $14.10 $3,700.17 12/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $167.34 $3,686.07 12/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $94.40 $3,518.73 11/12/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 12/09/2009 $1,636.04 $3,424.33 09/16/2009 0:00 Penalties -Water $31.22 $1,788.29 09/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $6.71 $1,757.07 09/16/2009 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $79.69 $1,750.36 09/1612009 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $44.95 $1,670.67 08/12/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 09/09/2009 $1,625.72 $1,625.72 06/11/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,636.04) $0.00 05/13/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 06/10/2009 $1,636.04 $1,636.04 03/12/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,620.56) $0.00 02/11/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 03/11/2009 $1,620.56 $1,620.56 02/02/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($3,879.27) $0.00 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Street Light $137.97 $3,879.27 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($137.97) $3,741.30 • 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Sewer $1,654.13 $3,879.27 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($1,654.13) $2,225.14 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage $917.26 $3,879.27 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage ($917.26) $2,962.01 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Water $817.25 $3,879.27 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification -Water ($817.25) $3,062.02 12/1712008 0:00 Penalties - Water $81.72 $3,879.27 12/1712008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $13.80 $3,797.55 12/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $165.41 $3,783.75 12/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $91.73 $3,618.34 11/12/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 12/10/2008 $1,560.17 $3,526.61 09/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $49.75 $1,966.44 09/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $6.57 $1,916.69 09/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $78.77 $1,910.12 09/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $43.68 $1,831.35 08/13/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 09/10/2008 $1,787.67 $1,787.67 08/01/2008 0:00 Payment - Check ($3,915.91) $0.00 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Street Light $152.44 $3,915.91 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($152.44) $3,763.47 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer $1,831.64 $3,915.91 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($1,831.64) $2,084.27 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage $1,011.30 $3,915.91 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage ($1,011.30) $2,904.61 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Water $564.54 $3,915.91 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Water ($564.54) $3,351.37 06/18/2008 0:00 Penalties -Water $56.45 $3,915.91 . 06/18/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $15.24 $3,859.46 06/18/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $183.16 $3,844.22 06/18/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $101.14 $3,661.06 05/14/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 06/11/2008 $1,480.17 $3,559.92 05/14/2008 0:00 Estimation Fee $35.00 $2,079.75 03/19/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $30.87 $2,044.75 03/19/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $7.89 $2,013.88 03/19/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $94.91 $2,005.99 03/19/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $52.22 $1,911.08 03/11/2008 0:00 Certification Water Write -Off ($554.21) $1,858.86 03/11/2008 0:00 Certification Street Write Off ($131.54) $2,413.07 03/11/2008 0:00 Certification Sewer Write -Off ($1,613.68) $2,544.61 03/11/2008 0:00 Certification Storm Write -Off ($854.99) $4,158.29 02/13/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 03/12/2008 $1,511.42 $5,013.28 02/13/2008 0:00 Estimation Fee $35.00 $3,501.86 02/08/2008 0:00 Certification Admin Fee $30.00 $3,466.86 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Water $524.21 $3,436.86 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification -Water ($524.21) $2,912.65 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Street Light $131.54 $3,436.86 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($131.54) $3,305.32 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer $1,613.68 $3,436.86 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($1,613.68) $1,823.18 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage $854.99 $3,436.86 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage ($854.99) $2,581.87 12/19/2007 0:00 Penalties - Water $52.42 $3,436.86 • 12/19/2007 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $13.15 $3,384.44 12/19/2007 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $161.37 $3,371.29 12/19/2007 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $85.50 $3,209.92 11/15/2007 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 12/12/2007 $1,480.96 $3,124.42 08/15/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $149.41 $1,643.46 09/11/2007 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($3,343.82) $1,494.05 08/15/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,494.05 $4,837.87 05/16/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $3,343.82 05/16/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $301.26 $3,313.82 05/16/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,434.55 $3,012.56 02/14/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $143.46 $1,578.01 03/13/2007 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($1,595.99) $1,434.55 02114/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,434.55 $3,030.54 11115/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $1,595.99 11/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $142.36 $1,565.99 Converted Billing Code 1 11/15/2006 0:00 Co $ , 423.63 $1, 423.63 9 10/23/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,608.73) $0.00 08/16/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $146.25 $1,608.73 08/16/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,462.48 $1,462.48 08/02/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($3,565.14) $0.00 05/17/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $324.10 $3,565.14 05/17/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,510.21 $3,241.04 02/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $157.35 $1,730.83 03114/2006 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($3,449.59) $1,573.48 02/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,573.48 $5,023.07 11/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $3,449.59 11/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $310.87 $3,419.59 11/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,439.99 $3,108.72 08/17/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $151.70 $1,668.73 • 09/13/2005 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($3,046.23) $1,517.03 08/17/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,517.03 $4,563.26 05/1812005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $3,046.23 05/18/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $274.20 $3,016.23 05/18/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,340.48 $2,742.03 02/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $127.41 $1,401.55 03/15/2005 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($2,810.95) $1,274.14 02/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,274.14 $4,085.09 11/17/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $2,810.95 11/17/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $252.81 $2 11/17/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,263.78 $2,528.14 08/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $114.94 $1,264.36 08/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,149.42 $1,149.42 08/10/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($162.40) $0.00 07/06/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,624.00) $162.40 05/19/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $162.40 $1,786.40 05/19/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,149.42 $1,624.00 02/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $43.14 $474.58 03/09/2004 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($1,271.04) $431.44 02/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $431.44 $1,702.48 i Created Date/Time: 04 /06/2010 05:02:53 PM • Customer Number. 00033044 Account Number. 0030080000 Service Address: 3909 65TH AVE N Mailing Address: SUNRISE APT LLC 3909 65TH AVE N BROOKLYN CENTER MN 55429 -2176 Customer /Account Transaction History Trans Date Transaction Amount Balance 03/17/2010 0 :00 Penalties - Water $35.84 $1,555.06 03/17/2010 0:00 Penalties -Street Light $8.32 $1,519.22 03/17/2010 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $97.21 $1,510.90 03/09/2010 0:00 Certification Water Write -Off ($1,094.25) $1,413.69 03/09/2010 0:00 Certification Street Write Off ($140.99) $2,507.94 03/09/2010 0:00 Certification Sewer Write -Off ($1,673.41) $2,648.93 02/10/2010 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 03/10/2010 $1 125.82 $4 322.34 Y 9 > 02/05/2010 0:00 Certification Admin Fee $30.00 $3,196.52 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Water $1,064.25 $3,166.52 • 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Water ($1,064.25) $2,102.27 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light $140.99 $3,166.52 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($140.99) $3,025.53 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Sewer $1,673.41 $3,166.52 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($1,673.41) $1,493.11 12/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Water $106.43 $3,166.52 12/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $14.10 $3,060.09 12/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $167.34 $3,045.99 11/12/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 12/09/2009 $1,289.70 $2,878.65 09/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Water $58.05 $1,588.95 09/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $6.71 $1,530.90 09/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $79.69 $1,524.19 08/12/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 09/09/2009 $1,444.50 $1,444.50 06/11/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,391.61) $0.00 05/13/2009 0:0.0 Cycle Billing Due: 06/10/2009 $1,391.61 $1,391.61 03/12/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,271.64) $0.00 02/11/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 03/11/2009 $1,271.64 $1,271.64 02/02/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($2,678.06) $0.00 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification -Water $642.50 $2,678.06 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Water ($642.50) $2,035.56 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Street Light $137.97 $2,678.06 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($137.97) $2,540.09 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Sewer $1,654.13 $2,678.06 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($1,654.13) $1,023.93 12/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $64.25 $2,678.06 . 12/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $13.80 $2,613.81 12/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $165.41 $2,600.01 11/12/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 12/10/2008 $1,193.38 $2,434.60 09/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $27.50 $1,241.22 • 09/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $6.57 $1,213.72 09/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $78.77 $1,207.15 08/13/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 09/10/2008 $1,128.38 $1,128.38 08/01/2008 0:00 Payment - Check ($3,333.73) $0.00 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Water $1,046.59 $3,333.73 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Water ($1,046.59) $2,287.14 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Street Light $152.44 $3,333.73 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($152.44) $3,181.29 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer $1,831.63 $3,333.73 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($1,831.63) $1,502.10 06/18/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $104.66 $3,333.73 06/18/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $15.24 $3,229.07 06/18/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $183.17 $3,213.83 05/14/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 06/11/2008 $1,143.38 $3,030.66 05/14/2008 0:00 Estimation Fee $35.00 $1,887.28 03/19/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $65.60 $1,852.28 03/19/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $7.89 $1,786.68 03/19/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $94.90 $1,778.79 03/11/2008 0:00 Certification Water Write -Off ($639.88) $1,683.89 03/11/2008 0:00 Certification Street Write Off ($131.54) $2,323.77 03/11/2008 0:00 Certification Sewer Write -Off ($1,613.68) $2,455.31 02/13/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 03/12/2008 $1,413.38 $4,068.99 02/13/2008 0:00 Estimation Fee $35.00 $2,655.61 02/08/2008 0:00 Certification Admin Fee $30.00 $2,620.61 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Water $609.88 $2,590.61 • 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Water ($609.88) $1,980.73 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification -Street Light $131.54 $2,590.61 i ation - Street Light 131.54 $2 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification g ($ ) , 459.07 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer $1,613.68 $2,590.61 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification -Sewer ($1,613.68) $976.93 12/19/2007 0:00 Penalties - Water $60.99 $2,590.61 12/19/2007'0:00 Penalties - Street Light $13.15 $2,529.62 12/19/2007 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $161.37 $2,516.47 11/15/2007 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 12/12/2007 $1,172.59 $2,355.10 08/15/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $107.50 $1,182.51 09/11/2007 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($2,881.50) $1,075.01 08/15/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,075.01 $3,956.51 05/16/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $2,881.50 05/16/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $259.23 $2,851.50 05/16/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,130.94 $2,592.27 02/14/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $132.85 $1,461.33 03/13/2007 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($1,291.85) $1,328.48 02/14/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,328.48 $2,620.33 11/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $1,291.85 11/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $114.71 $1,261.85 11/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,147.14 $1,147.14 10/23/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,725.83) $0.00 08116/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $156.89 $1,725.83 08/16/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,568.94 $1,568.94 08/02/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($2,842.08) $0.00 • 05/17/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $258.37 $2,842.08 • 05/17/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,255.92 $2,583.71 02/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $120.71 $1,327.79 03/14/2006 0:00 Certified.to Taxes - Conv ($2,606.48) $1,207.08 02/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,207.08 $3,813.56 11/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $2,606.48 11/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $234.23 $2,576.48 11/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,072.20 $2,342.25 08/17/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $115.46 $1,270.05 09/13/2005 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($2,632.95) $1,154.59 08/17/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,154.59 $3,787.54 05/18/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $2,632.95 05/18/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $236.63 $2,602.95 05/18/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,149.24 $2,366.32 02/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $110.64 $1,217.08 03/15/2005 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($2,435.49) $1,106.44 02/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,106.44 $3,541.93 11/17/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $2,435.49 11/17/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $218.68 $2,405.49 11/17/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,058.74 $2,186.81 08/18/2004 0:00Y Converted Billing Code $102.55 $1,128.07 08/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,025.52 $1,025.52 08/10/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($111.54) $0.00 07/06/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,115.41) $111.54 05/19/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $111.54 $1,226.95 05/19/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,012.03 $1,115.41 04/02/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,033.82) $103.38 02/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $103.38 $1,137.20 02/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,033.82 $1,033.82 Created DatelTime: 04/0612010 05:03:42 PM Customer Number. 00033044 • Account Number. 0030060002 Service Address: 3911 65TH AVE N Mailing Address: SUNRISE APT LLC 3911 65TH AVE N BROOKLYN CENTER MN 55429 -2177 Customer /Account Transaction History Trans Date Transaction Amount Balance 03/1712010 0:00 Penalties -Water $66.15 $1,888.56 03/17/2010 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $8.32 $1,822.41 03/17/2010 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $97.22 $1,814.09 03/09/2010 0:00 Certification Water Write -Off ($950.29) $1,716.87 03/09/2010 0:00 Certification Street Write Off ($140.99) $2,667.16 03/09/2010 0:00 Certification Sewer Write -Off ($1,673.41) $2,808.15 02/10/2010 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 03/10/2010 $1,443.40 $4,481.56 02/05/2010 0:00 Certification Admin Fee $30.00 $3,038.16 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification -Water $920.29 $3,008.16 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Water ($920.29) $2,087.87 • 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light $140.99 $3,008.16 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($140.99) $2,867.17 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification -Sewer $1,673.41 $3,008.16 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification -Sewer ($1,673.41) $1,334.75 12/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Water $92.03 $3,008.16 12/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $14.10 $2,916.13 12/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $167.34 $2,902.03 11/12/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 12/09/2009 $1,338.72 $2,734.69 09/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Water $40.51 $1,395.97 09/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $6.71 $1,355.46 09/16/2009 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $79.69 $1,348.75 08/1212009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 09/09/2009 $1,269.06 $1,269.06 06/11/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,238.10) $0.00 05/13/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 06 /10/2009 $1,238.10 $1,238.10 03/17/2009 0:00 Transfer Balance ($741.86) $0.00 03/17/2009 0:00 Reconcile Balance To Street $741.86 $741.86 03/12/2009 0:00 Payment -Check ($392.98) $0.00 02/11/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 03/11/2009 $1,201.98 $392.98 02/02/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($3,900.11) ($809.00) 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Water $1,018.00 $3,091.11 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification -Water ($1,018.00) $2,073.11 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Street Light $137.97 $3,091.11 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($137.97) $2,953.14 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification -Sewer $1,654.13 $3,091.11 01/14/2009 0:00 Certification -Sewer ($1,654.13) $1,436.98 • 12/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $101.80 $3,091.11 12/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $13.80 $2,989.31 • 12/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $165.41 $2,975.51 11/12/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 12/10/2008 $1,329.63 $2,810.10 09/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $49.25 $1,480.47 09/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $6.57 $1,431.22 09/17/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $78.77 $1,424.65 08/13/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 09/10/2008 $1,345.88 $1,345.88 08/01/2008 0:00 Payment - Check ($2,998.61) $0.00 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Water $741.94 $2,998.61 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Water ($741.94) $2,256.67 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Street Light $152.44 $2,998.61 07103/2008 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($152.44) $2,846.17 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer $1,831.63 $2,998.61 07/03/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($1,831.63) $1,166.98 06/18/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $74.19 $2,998.61 06/18/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $15.24 $2,924.42 06/18/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $183.17 $2,909.18 05/14/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 06/11/2008 $1,135.88 $2,726.01 05/14/2008 0:00 Estimation Fee $35.00 $1,590.13 03/19/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $38.59 $1,555.13 03/19/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $7.89 $1,516.54 03/19/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $94.90 $1,508.65 03/11/2008 0:00 Certification Water Write -Off ($588.47) $1,413.75 03/11/2008 0:00 Certification Street Write Off ($131.54) $2,002.22 03/11/2008 0:00 Certification Sewer Write -Off ($1,613.68) $2,133.76 02/13/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 03/12/2008 $1,148.38 $3,747.44 • 02/13/2008 0:00 Estimation Fee $35.00 $2,599.06 02/08/2008 0:00 Certification Admin Fee $30.00 $2,564.06 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification -Water $558.47 $2,534.06 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Water ($558.47) $1,975.59 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Street Light $131.54 $2,534.06 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($131.54) $2,402.52 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer $1,613.68 $2,534.06 01/18/2008 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($1,613.68) $920.38 12/19/2007 0:00 Penalties - Water $55.85 $2,534.06 12/19/2007 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $13.15 $2,478.21 12/19/2007 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $161.37 $2,465.06 11/15/2007 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 12/12/2007 $1,123.80 $2,303.69 08/15/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $107.26 $1,179.89 09/1112007 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($2,588.55) $1,072.63 08/15/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,072.63 $3,661.18 05/16/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $2,588.55 05/16/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $232.60 $2,558.55 05/16/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,123.80 $2,325.95 02/14/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $109.29 $1,202.15 03/13/2007 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($1,238.13) $1,092.86 02/14/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,092.86 $2,330.99 11/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $1,238.13 11/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $109.83 $1,208.13 11/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,098.30 $1,098.30 • 10/23/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,154.41) $0.00 08/16/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $104.95 $1,154.41 08/16/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,049.46 $1,049.46 08/02/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($2,429.63) $0.00 • 05/17/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $220.88 $2,429.63 05/17/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,025.04 $2,208.75 02/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $107.61 $1,183.71 03/14/2006 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($2,568.46) $1,076.10 02/15/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,076.10 $3,644.56 11/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $2,568.46 11/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $230.77 $2,538.46 11/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,041.17 $2,307.69 08/17/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $115.14 $1,266.52 09/13/20050:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($2,448.88) $1,151.38 08/17/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,151.38 $3,600.26 05/18/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $2,448.88 05/18/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $219.90 $2,418.88 05/18/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,021.91 $2,198.98 02/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $107.01 $1,177.07 03/15/2005 0:00 Certified to Taxes - Conv ($2,408.54) $1,070.06 02/16/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,070.06 $3,478.60 11/17/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $30.00 $2,408.54 11/17/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $216.23 $2,378.54 11/17/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,075.34 $2,162.31 08/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $98.82 $1,086.97 08/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $988.15 $988.15 08/10/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($111.40) $0.00 07/06/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,113.96) $111.40 05/19/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $111.40 $1,225.36 • 05/19/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,016.18 $1,113.96 04/02/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($977.77) $97.78 02/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $97.78 $1,075.55 02/18/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $977.77 $977.77 • City Council Agenda Item No. 10c COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: April 6, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk SUBJECT: Hearing for John Paul Roder, Sierra - Sterling Investments, LLC, Sierra Properties, Inc., Rapahar Properties, Inc. Regarding Rental Property Located at Sterling Square Apartments (1400 and 1401 67th Avenues North and 6640 and 6700 Humboldt Avenues North) Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Receive Staff report. 2. Open the hearing to receive applicant testimony. 3. Close the hearing. 4. Direct Staff to prepare a resolution for the next City Council meeting with findings of fact to either suspend or revoke the rental license for Sterling Square Apartments. Background: The property located at 1400 and 1401 67th Avenues North and 6640 and 6700 Humboldt • Avenues North is an apartment complex known as Sterling Square Apartments (4 buildings with 54 units). • City taxpayer records indicate owner as Sierra Properties, Inc., 1818 Bryant Ave N #3, Minneapolis, MN 55411 • County taxpayer records indicate owner as Sierra - Sterling Investments, LLC, Rapahar Properties, c/o Sabre Enterprises, Inc., 1818 Bryant Ave N #3, Minneapolis, MN 55411 • The rental dwelling license application indicates owner as John Paul Roder, 6700 Humboldt Ave N #104, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 • January 26, 2009 — City Council issues renewal rental license for Sterling Square Apartments with expiration date of December 31, 2010 • January 15, 2010 — City Assessor notifies City Clerk that Sterling Square Apartments has delinquent second half 2009 property taxes (second half property taxes were due October 15, 2009) • January 15, 2010 — City Clerk inquires and Utility Billing Clerk notifies that utilities were not current ($9,047.03 total) • January 19, 2010 — City Clerk sends letter to John Roder notifying of delinquent taxes and utilities • February 3, 2010 — City Clerk notifies City Prosecutor that property taxes and utilities were not current (second half 2009 taxes due $34,075.84) • March 1, 2010 — City Prosecutor mailed letter and notice of proposed license action • March 8, 2010 — letter received from John P. Roder requesting temporary relief against the proposed rental license action Mission: Ensurin an attractive, clean, ,safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • March 15, 2010 — City Prosecutor mailed response to the March 8, 2010, letter submitted • by John P. Roder • April 6, 2010 — Hennepin County confirms second half property taxes 2009 plus penalties are unpaid in the amount of $35,055.41, a violation of Section 12.901 (9) • April 6, 2010 — City Utility Billing Clerk indicates $79.65 CREDIT balance for 1400 67th Ave N; $30 balance for 1401 67th Ave N; $30 balance for 6640 Humboldt Ave N; and $30 6700 for Humboldt Ave N Budget Issues: I There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Strategic: We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods I • i i w ,mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of Life and Preserves the Public trust Office of the City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community Sharon Knutson, NMC O City Clerk January 19, 2010 e�- vrned� b vSPs John Roder N � � jej; a ' `' 6700 Humboldt Ave N #104 1 '- `$ Qr arv, Avc'j Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 � k5 y 65q RE: Rental Property Located at: Sterling Square Apartments, Brooklyn Center Dear Prop Owner: P Y Section 12 -901 of the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances states "prior to issuance or renewal of a license and at all times during the license term, a license holder must be current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, and assessments due on the licensed property and any other rental real property in the city owned by the license holder." City records indicate that there are both taxes and utilities owed for this property. Property taxes and utilities must be paid in full to retain a rental dwelling license. • Please submit payment for utilities to the City of Brooklyn Center and payment for taxes to Hennepin County Government Center, 300 S 6th Street, Administrative Tower A -600, Minneapolis, MN 55487- 0060, within 10 calendar days of the date of this letter. Failure to keep current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, and assessments due on the rental property will result in legal prosecution by the City. If payment has been made, please disregard this notice, as I will consult with the City Assessor after your due date. Any questions regarding taxes may be directed to Hennepin County at 612 - 348 - 3011. Sincerely, Sharon Knutson City Clerk 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org I 1 March 2010 By Certified Mail and U.S. Mail John Roder Sierra - Sterling Investments, LLC Sierra Properties, Inc. Rapahar Properties, Inc. 1818 Bryant Avenue N, Apartment 3 Minneapolis, Minnesota 5541 -3272 RE: Notice of proposed license action Dear Sir, Enclosed herewith and served upon you is a notice of proposed action against your rental • license for that premises known as Sterling Square. The only exception to an action based upon failure to pay real property taxes in a timely manner is a lawsuit maintained by you challenging the amount and/or validity of the tax. You must make an application to the Council for relief, if such a lawsuit is pending. You are further advised that an action against the license is not the sole or exclusive .remed Y City City available to the Ci and the Ci reserves the right for further proceedings. Sincerely, CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER William G. C lelland Prosecuting Attorney cc City Manager Le Fevere, City Clerk • • NOTICE OF PROPOSED LICENSE ACTION You are hereby notified, pursuant to Section 12 -91.0 of the ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center, that a hearing before the City Council shall be held on the 12` day of April 2010 at 7:00 pm o'clock at the Brooklyn Center City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430, at which time the City Council shall consider the revocation, suspension or non renewal of the rental license held by John Roder and Sierra- Sterling Investments, LLC for that apartment complex known as Sterling Square, located at 6640 Humboldt Avenue N., 6700 Humboldt Avenue N., 1400 67` Avenue N., and 1401 67`h Avenue N., Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. The grounds for this license action are the failure of the licensee to pay the second half • year 2009 real property taxes, now due and overdue as follows: $9,957.71 for 6640 Humboldt Avenue N., $9,968.36 for 6700 Humboldt Avenue N., $7,423.32 for 1400 67` Avenue N., and $7,423.32 for 1401 67` Avenue N., together with applicable interest and penalties and further for failure to pay city- provided utilities now overdue and delinquent as follows: $2,734.63 for 6640 Humboldt Avenue N., $2,821.84 for 6700 Humboldt Avenue N., $2,088.13 for 1400 67' Avenue N., and $2,427.13 for 1401 67"' Avenue N., together with applicable interest and penalties. Section 12 -901 subd 4 provides that as a condition of acquiring a rental license and maintaining a rental license, the licensee must be current on payments for all assessments, taxes and utilities. Section 12 -910 provides for the revocation, suspension or non renewal of a rental license for, inter alia, failure to operate or maintain the license premises in conformity with all applicable state laws and codes and the City Code or Ordinances and any other violation of Chapter 12. Sabre Asset Management, LLC Property Management Services for The Rapahar Properties Group 1818 Bryant Avenue North, Unit 3 Minneapolis, MN 55411 • 612- 325 -2500 Date: Monday March 8, 2010 Re: Sterling Square Apartments Dear Council Members and City Manager and Staff: Owner and Management of Sterling Square Apartments located at 6640 and 6700 Humboldt Ave. N. and 1400 and 1401 67th Ave. N., have received the various correspondence from City Clerks and Legal Counsel for the City of Brooklyn Center regarding the property rental license, unpaid water bills and unpaid property taxes for the location. This letter serves notice of the following: 1. The Owner is in the process of challenging the amounts of taxes payable on the property. 2. The Owner does request temporary relief against the proposed rental license action. It is the intention of the Owner to work through all of the issues related to the property and again maintain current status with regard to payment. Having had the same Owner in principal since June, 2000 the Owner does request some latitude in working to correct the present situation, given the lengthy period of ownership with what is believed to be a generally acceptable operation of the complex. Regardless of the property tax question, today's rental market is creating significant challenges for most owners during these unprecedented economic times. As a direct indication on the part of the Owner to correct the situation going forward, a cashier's check drawn directly on US Bank has been posted in the amount of $9,951.73 for a� outstanding water bills for the property, (not including the present usage period). It is anticipated all present financial issues, tax related or otherwise, will be settled going forward as the present plan is to complete refinance work in August or September of this year. It is also of note that Management and Owner continue to maintain the same standards with respect to background checks prior to occupancy and general unit repair. At this time, the 6700 Humboldt building does have an existing city repair order pending that is overdue for repair /replacement of failing stucco on the building. The Owner does intend to proceed with this work and a permit application will be submitted prior to the end of March. Respectfully, it is the request of the Owner to the Council to accept from the Owner: 1. Action to resolve the property tax matter in a timely manner. 2. Recognition of the underlying intent to correct indicated by the certified funds payment of delinquent water bills. 3. A condition the requested relief be granted on condition the Owner does undertake the necessary building code repair work at the 6700 building as evidenced by initially causing the permit to be applied for prior to it. the end of March and as evidenced by closure of that s ame building p erm Sincerely John P. Roder Owner/Management Representative • I 15 March 2010 By Certified Mail and U.S. Mail John Roder Sierra- Sterling Investments, LLC Sierra Properties, Inc. Rapahar Properties, Inc. 1818 Bryant Avenue N, Apartment 3 Minneapolis, Minnesota 5541 -3272 RE: Notice of proposed license action Dear Sir, city staff. Your letter states an intention to I have read your letter to the council and ty challenge property taxes but does not state that an action to do so has been comme nced. City ordinance 12 -901 provides that if "suit" to challenge property taxes has been commenced under Minnesota Statutes Sections 278.01 to 278.03, the council may find that a basis for deferring license action. Sections 278.01 provide for a challenge in the district court by filing a petition and serving the petition upon the county auditor, county attorney, county treasurer and county assessor. Section 278.03 also requires payment of some tax unless specifically excused during the pendency of the petition. If you have commenced such an action, please provide me with copies of the petition and proof of service. Absent the commencement of this action under Chapter 278, you do not qualify for any exceptions. Sincerely, y, CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER William G. Clelland Prosecuting Attorney • cc City Manager Hennepin County Property Information - Page 1 of 1 Hennepin ounty MN !w W.. - • :. M HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER • A600 Government Center Minneapolis MN 55487- 0060 Property Tax Information The Hennepin County Property Tax web database is updated daily (Monday - Friday) at approximately 9:15 p.m. (CST) Property ID No.: 36- 119 -21 -22 -0039 NON - HOMESTEAD Property Address: 1400 67TH AVE N BROOKLYN CENTER Owner Name: SIERRA - STERLING INVST LLC Taxpayer Name and Address: SIERRA - STERLING INVST LLC 6700 HUMBOLDT AVE N #104 BROOKLYN CENTER MN 55430 2010 TAXES TAX PENALTY TOTALS 1 st Half Tax (Due Date May 17) $6,935.99 2nd Half Tax (Due Date October 15) $6,935.99 Penalty $0.00 Total Payable $13,871.98 $0.00 $13,871.98 • Net Paid - YEAR TO DATE $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Due $13,871.98 $0.00 $13,871.98 Property ID No.: 36- 119- 21 -22- 1st Half Tax Due through 05/17/2010 F $ 6,935.99 0039 Note: If you are using this page in 2nd Half Tax Due through 10/15/2010 E] $6,935.99 lieu of Hennepin County payment stub to remit payment; after printing the page, please check the box in front of the payment amount that you Total Due - 2010 Tax F $13,871.98 are remitting. Property has prior year delinquent taxes. Call (612) 348 -3011 for amount due. 3511921220039 $-7 M3,67 https: / /wwwl6.co.hennepin.mn.us /taxpayments /taxesdue.jsp ?pid = 3611921220039 04/06/2010 Hennepin County Property Information Page 1 of 1 Hennepin Count', M • ,Ww. _ # . ups HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER A600 Government Center Minneapolis MN 55487- 0060 Property Tax Information The Hennepin County Property Tax web database is updated daily (Monday - Friday) at approximately 9:15 p.m. (CST) Property ID No.: 36- 119 -21 -22 -0044 NON - HOMESTEAD Property Address: 1401 67TH AVE N BROOKLYN CENTER Owner Name: SIERRA - STERLING INVST LLC Taxpayer Name and Address: SIERRA - STERLING INVST LLC 6700 HUMBOLDT AVE N#104 BROOKLYN CENTER MN 55430 2010 TAXES TAX PENALTY TOTALS 1st Half Tax (Due Date May 17) $6,935.99 2nd Half Tax (Due Date October 15) $6,935.99 Penalty $0.00 Total Payable $13,871.98 $0.00 $13,871.98 Net Paid - YEAR TO DATE $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Due $13,871.98 $0.00 $13,871.98 Property ID No.: 36- 119- 21 -22- 1st Half Tax Due through 05/17/2010 $6,935.99 0044 Note: If you are using this page in lieu of Hennepin County payment 2nd Half Tax Due through 10/15/2010 $6,935.99 stub to remit payment; after printing the page, please check the box in front of the payment amount that you Total Due - 2010 Tax. $13,871.98 are remitting. Property has prior year delinquent taxes. Call (612) 348 -3011 for amount due. 3511921220044 • https: / /wwwl6.co. hennepin. mn. us /taxpayments /taxesdue.jsp ?pid= 3611921220044 04/06/2010 Hennepin County Property Information Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County, M ter, H HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER • A600 Government Center Minneapolis MN 55487- 0060 Property Tax Information The Hennepin County Property Tax web database is updated daily (Monday - Friday) at approximately 9:15 p.m. (CST) Property ID No.: 36- 119 -21 -22 -0043 NON - HOMESTEAD Property Address: 6640 HUMBOLDT AVE N BROOKLYN CENTER Owner Name: SIERRA - STERLING INVST LLC Taxpayer Name and Address: RAPAHAR PROPERTIES C/O SABRE ENTERPRIESES INC 1818 BRYANT AVE N # 35430 2010 TAXES TAX PENALTY TOTALS 1st Half Tax (Due Date May 17) $9,234.91 2nd Half Tax (Due Date October 15) $9,234.91 Penalty $0.00 Total Payable $18,469.82 $0.00 $18 • Net Paid - YEAR TO DATE $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Due $18,469.82 $0.00 $18,469.82 Property ID No.: 36- 119- 21 -22- 1st Half Tax Due through 05/17/2010 F $9,234.91 0043 Note: If you are using this page in 2nd Half Tax Due through 10/15/2010 - E] $9,234.91 lieu of Hennepin County payment stub to remit payment; after printing the page, please check the box in front of the payment amount that you Total Due - 2010 Tax $18,469.82 are remitting. Property has prior year delinquent taxes. Call (612) 348 -3011 for amount due. , 361192122(X143 • ►0 03g • b� https: / /wwwl6.co. hennepin. mn. us /taxpayments /taxesdue.jsp ?pid= 3611921220043 04/06/2010 Hennepin County Property Information Page 1 of 1 Hennepin 'outer M . tea. H .0 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER A600 Government Center Minneapolis MN 55487- 0060 Property Tax Information The Hennepin County Property Tax web database is updated daily (Monday - Friday) at approximately 9:15 p.m. (CST) Property ID No.: 36- 119 -21 -22 -0038 NON - HOMESTEAD Property Address: 6700 HUMBOLDT AVE N BROOKLYN CENTER Owner Name: SIERRA - STERLING INVST LLC Taxpayer Name and Address: RAPAHAR PROPERTIES C/O SABRE ENTERPRIESES INC 1818 BRYANT AVE N # 35430 2010 TAXES TAX PENALTY TOTALS 1 st Half Tax (Due Date May 17) $9,243.68 2nd Half Tax (Due Date October 15) $9,243.68 Penalty - $0.00 Total Payable $18,487.36 $0.00 $18,487.36 Net Paid - YEAR TO DATE $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Due $18,487.36 $0.00 $18,487.36 Property ID No.: 36- 119- 21 -22- 1st Half Tax Due through 05/17/2010 $9,243.68 0038 Note: If you are using this page in 2nd Half Tax Due through 10/15/2010 $9,243.68 lieu of Hennepin County payment stub to remit payment; after printing the page, please check the box in front of the payment amount that you Total Due - 2010 Tax $18,487.36 are remitting. Property has prior year delinquent taxes. Call (612) 348 -3011 for amount due. 3611g2122(J038 4 • lb 0 • 40 https: / /wwwl6.co.hennepin.mn.us /taxpayments /taxesdue.jsp ?pid= 3611921220038 04/06/2010 Created Date/Time: 04 /06/2010 05:15:21 PM Customer Number. 00033430 • Account Number: 0059890009 Service Address: 1400 67TH AVE N Mailing Address: JOHN RODER 1818 BRYANT AVE N #3 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55411 -3272 Customer /Account Transaction History Trans Date Transaction Amount Balance 33.57 $915.65 4/06/2010 0:00 Transfer Balance $ 0 ( ) 04/06/2010 0:00 Reconcile Balance To Street $33.57 $949.22 03/31/2010 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/28/2010 $995.30 $915.65 03/22/2010 0:00 Payment -Check ($109.65) ($79.65) 03/08/2010 0:00 Payment - Check ($2,058.13) $30.00 02/05/2010 0:00 Certification Admin Fee $30.00 $2,088.13 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties -Water $67.57 $2,058.13 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $7.62 $1,990.56 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $90.46 $1,982.94 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $21.45 $1,892.48 • 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light $49.24 $1,871.03 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification -Street Light ($49.24) $1,821.79 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Sewer $584.37 $1,871.03 01112/2010 0:00 Certification -Sewer ($584.37) $1,286.66 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage $138.61 $1,871.03 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage ($138.61) $1,732.42 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Water $192.98 $1,871.03 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Water ($192.98) $1,678.05 12/30/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/27/2010 $905.83 $1,871.03 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties -Water $17.54 $965.20 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $4.48 $947.66 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $53.13 $943.18 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $12.60 $890.05 09/30/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 10/28/2009 $877.45 $877.45 Y 9 07/23/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($856.81) $0.00 07/01/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 07/29/2009 $856.81 $856.81 04/30/2009 0:00 Payment -Check ($913.57) $0.00 04/10/2009 0:00 Manual Billing Due: 04/29/2009 $913.57 $913.57 04/10/2009 0:00'Bill Cancellation ' ($863.26) $0.00 04/01/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/29/2009 $863.26 $863.26 01/23/2009 0:00 Payment -Check ($1,048.85) $0.00 12/31/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/28/2009 $1,048.85 $1,048.85 11/26/2008 0:00 Payment -Check ($122.64) $0.00 11/12/2008 0:00 Payment -Check ($1,226.35) $122.64 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties -Water $53.50 $1,348.99 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $4.38 $1,295.49 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $52.51 $1,291.11 • 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $12.25 $1,238.60 10/01/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 10/30/2008 $1,226.35 $1,226.35 07/18/2008 0:00 Payment -Check ($1,222.60) $0.00 07/02/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 07/30/2008 $1,222.60 $1,222.60 04128/2008 0:00 Payment - Check ($1, 846.21) $0.00 04102/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/3012008 $872.60 $1,846.21 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $19.38 $973.61 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $4.38 $954.23 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $52.51 $949.85 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $12.24 $897.34 01/03/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/30/2008 $885.10 $885.10 10/18/2007 0:00 Payment - Check ($906.16) $0.00 10/02/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $906.16 $906.16 07/25/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($828.81) $0.00 07/04/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $828.81 $828.81 05/02/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($931.15) $0.00 04/04/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $931.15 $931.15 01/30/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($806.20) $0.00 01/03/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $806.20 $806.20 10/31/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($811.12) $0.00 10/04/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $811.12 $811.12 08/07/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($814.45) $0.00 07/05/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $814.45 $814.45 05/04/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($756.73) $0.00 • 04/05/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $756.73 $756.73 02/01/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($787.81) $0.00 01/04/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $787.81 $787.81 12/14/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($78.90) $0.00 11/10/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($788.96) $78.90 10/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $78.90 $867.86 10/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $788.96 $788.96 07/21/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($845.67) $0.00 07/06/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $845.67 $845.67 04/25/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($859.58) $0.00 04/06/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $859.58 $859.58 01/25/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($847.81) $0.00 01/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $847.81 $847.81 10/18/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($834.20) $0.00 10/06/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $834.20 $834.20 07/19/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($762.57) $0.00 07/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $762.57 $762.57 04/22/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($820.70) $0.00 04/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $820.70 $820.70 01/20/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($784.37) $0.00 01/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $784.37 $784.37 • Created Date/Time: 04/06/2010 05:16:11 PM Customer Number. 00033430 • Account Number: 0059860002 Service Address: 1401 67TH AVE N Mailing Address: JOHN RODER 1818 BRYANT AVE N #3 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55411 -3272 Customer /Account Transaction History Trans Date Transaction Amount Balance 03/31/2010 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/28/2010 $1,087.76 $1,117.76 03/08/2010 0:00 Payment - Check ($2,397.13) $30.00 02/05/2010 0:00 Certification Admin Fee $30.00 $2,427.13 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties - Water $109.19 $2,397.13 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties -Street Light $6.93 $2,287.94 02103/2010 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $82.28 $2,281.01 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $19.52 $2,198.73 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light $49.24 $2,179.21 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($49.24) $2,129.97 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Sewer $584.37 $2,179.21 • 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($584.37) $1,594.84 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage $138.60 $2,179.21 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage ($138.60) $2,040.61 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification -Water $333.47 $2,179.21 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Water ($333.47) $1,845.74 12/30/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/27/2010 $1,073.53 $2,179.21 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties -Water $30.32 $1,105.68 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $4.48 $1,075.36 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $53.13 $1,070.88 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $12.59 $1,017.75 09/30/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 10/28/2009 $1,005.16 $1,005.16 07/23/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,005.16) $0.00 07/01/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 07/29/2009 $1,005.16 $1,005.16 04/30/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,065.79) $0.00 04/10/2009 0:00 Manual Billing Due: 04/29/2009 $1,065.79 $1,065.79 04/10/2009 0:00 Bill Cancellation ($949.69) $0.00 04/01/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/29/2009 $949.69 $949.69 01/23/2009 0:00 Payment -Check ($1,020.10) $0.00 12/31/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/28/2009 $1,020.10 $1,020.10 11/26/2008 0:00 Payment -Check ($1,043.74) $0.00 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $25.75 $1,043.74 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties -Street Light $4.38 $1,017.99 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $52.51 $1,013.61 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $12.25 $961.10 10/01/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 10/30/2008 $948.85 $948.85 Y 9 07/18/2008 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,083.85) $0.00 • 07/02/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 07/30/2008 $1,083.85 $1,083.85 04/28/2008 0:00 Payment - Check ($2,055.34) $0.00 04/02/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/30/2008 $1,022.60 $2,055.34 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties -Water $24.75 $1,032.74 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $4.38 $1,007.99 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $52.51 $1,003.61 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $12.25 $951.10 01/03/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/30/2008 $938.85 $938.85 10/18/2007 0:00 Payment - Check ($947.81) $0.00 10/02/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $947.81 $947.81 07/25/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($958.52) $0.00 07/04/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $958.52 $958.52 05/02/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($885.93) $0.00 04/04/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $885.93 $885.93 01/30/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($993.03) $0.00 01/03/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $993.03 $993.03 10/31/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($874.39) $0.00 10/04/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $874.39 $874.39 08/07/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($934.33) $0.00 07/05/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $934.33 $934.33 05/04/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($812.23) $0.00 04/05/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $812.23 $812.23 02/01/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($928.78) $0.00 01/04/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $928.78 $928.78 12/14/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($90.13) $0.00 . 11/10/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($901.31) $90.13 10/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $90.13 $991.44 10/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $901.31 $901.31 07/21/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($839.25) $0.00 07/06/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $839.25 $839.25 04/25/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($908.80) $0.00 04/06/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $908.80 $908.80 01/25/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($875.63) $0.00 01/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $875.63 $875.63 10/18/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($887.13) $0.00 10/06/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $887.13 $887.13 07/19/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($823.82) $0.00 07/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $823.82 $823.82 04/22/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($901.67) $0.00 04/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $901.67 $901.67 01/20/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($788.52) $0.00 01/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $788.52 $788.52 Created Date/Time: 04/06/2010 05:16:57 PM Customer Number. 00033430 • Account Number. 0059870001 Service Address: 6640 HUMBOLDT AVE N Mailing Address: JOHN RODER 1818 BRYANT AVE N #3 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55411 -3272 Customer /Account Transaction History Trans Date Transaction Amount Balance 03/31/2010 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/28/2010 $1,210.95 $1,240.95 03/08/2010 0:00 Payment - Check ($2,704.63) $30.00 02/05/2010 0:00 Certification Admin Fee $30.00 $2,734.63 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties -Water $99.79 $2,704.63 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $9.25 $2,604.84 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $109.81 $2,595.59 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $27.03 $2,485.78 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage $179.81 $2,458.75 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage ($179.81) $2,278.94 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Water $309.34 $2,458.75 • 01 /12/2010 0:00 Certification - Water ($309.34) $2,149.41 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light $61.55 $2,458.75 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($61.55) $2,397.20 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Sewer $730.46 $2,458.75 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($730.46) $1,728.29 12/30/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/27/2010 $1,177.59 $2,458.75 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties -Water $28.12 $1,281.16 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties -Street Light $5.60 $1,253.04 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $66.41 $1,247.44 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $16.34 $1,181.03 09/30/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 10/28/2009 $1,164.69 $1,164.69 07/23/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,169.85) $0.00 07/01/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 07/29/2009 $1,169.85 $1,169.85 04/30/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,229.19) $0.00 04/10/2009 0:00 Manual Billing Due: 04/29/2009 $1,229.19 $1,229.19 04/10/2009 0:00 Bill Cancellation ($1,129.86) $0.00 04/01/2009 0;00 Cycle Billing Due: 04129/2009 $1,129.86 $1,129.86 01/23/2009 0:00 Payment -Check ($1,192.48) $0.00 12/31/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/28/2009 $1,192.48 $1,192.48 11/26/2008 0:00 Payment -Check ($126.87) $0.00 11/12/2008 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,268.73) $126.87 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties -Water $39.87 $1,395.60 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $5.47 $1,355.73 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $65.64 $1,350.26 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $15.89 $1,284.62 • 10/01/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 10/30/2008 $1,268.73 $1,268.73 07/18/2008 0:00 Payment -Check ($1,186.23) $0.00 • 07/02/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 07/30/2008 $1,186.23 $1,186.23 04/28/2008 0:00 Payment -Check ($2,672.46) $0.00 04/02/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/30/2008 $1,201.23 $2,672.46 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties -Water $46.75 $1,471.23 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $5.48 $1,424.48 02106/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $65.64 $1,419.00 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $15.88 $1,353.36 01/03/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/30/2008 $1,337.48 $1,337.48 10/18/20070:00 Payment -Check ($1,129.77) $0.00 10/02/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,129.77 $1,129.77 07/25/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,163.09) $0.00 07/04/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,163.09 $1,163.09 05/02/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,065.51) $0.00 04/04/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,065.51 $1,065.51 01/30/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,089.31) $0.00 01/03/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,089.31 $1,089.31 10/31/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,032.47) $0.00 10/04/2006 0 :00 Converted Billing Code $1,032.47 $1,032.47 08/07/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,134.59) $0.00 07/05/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,134.59 $1,134.59 05/04/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,062.44) $0.00 04/05/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,062.44 $1,062.44 02101/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,113.50) $0.00 01/04/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,113.50 $1,113.50 • 12/14/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($106.74) $0.00 11/10/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,067.41) $106.74 10/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $106.74 $1,174.15 10/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,067.41 $1,067.41 07/21/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,058.85) $0.00 07/06/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,058.85 $1,058.85 04125/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,108.07) $0.00 04/06/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,108.07 $1,108.07 01/25/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,060.99) $0.00 01/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,060.99 $1,060.99 10/18/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,061.99) $0.00 10/06/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,061.99 $1,061.99 07/19/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,016.32) $0.00 07/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,016.32 $1,016.32 04/22/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,090.02) $0.00 04/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,090.02 $1,090.02 01/20/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,002.82) $0.00 01/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,002.82 $1,002.82 • Created Date(Time: 04/06/2010 05:17:37 PM Customer Number. 00033430 Account Number: 0059880000 Service Address: 6700 HUMBOLDT AVE N Mailing Address: JOHN RODER 1818 BRYANT AVE N #3 - MINNEAPOLIS MN 55411 -3272 Customer /Account Transaction History Trans Date Transaction Amount Balance 03/31/2010 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/28/2010 $1,264.93 $1,294.93 03/08/2010 0:00 Payment - Check ($2,791.84) $30.00 02/05/2010 0:00 Certification Admin Fee $30.00 $2,821.84 02103/2010 0:00 Penalties - Water $110.19 $2,791.84 02/0312010 0:00 Penalties -Street Light $9.08 $2,681.65 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $107.74 $2,672.57 02/03/2010 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $26.79 $2,564.83 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light $61.54 $2,538.04 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Street Light ($61.54) $2,476.50 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification -Sewer $730.45 $2,538.04 • 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Sewer ($730.45) $1,807.59 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage $181.70 $2,538.04 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification - Storm Drainage ($181.70) $2,356.34 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification -Water $347.65 $2,538.04 01/12/2010 0:00 Certification- Water ($347.65) $2,190.39 12/30/2009 O:QO Cycle Billing Due: 01/27/2010 $1,216.70 $2,538.04 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties - Water $31.60 $1,321.34 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties -Street Light $5.59' $1,289.74 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $66.40 $1,284.15 11/04/2009 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $16.53 $1,217.75 09/30/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 10/28/2009 $1,201.22 $1,201.22 07/23/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,192.19) $0.00 07/01/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 07/29/2009 $1,192.19 $1,192.19 04/30/2009 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,268.30) $0.00 04/10/2009 0:00 Manual Billing Due: 04/29/2009 $1,268.30 $1,268.30 04/10/2009 0:00 Bill Cancellation ($1,181.87) $0.00 04/01/2009 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/29/2009 $1,181.87 $1,181.87 01/23/2009 0:00 Payment -Check ($1,354.14) $0.00 12/31/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/28/2009 $1,354.14 $1,354.14 11/26/2008 0:00 Payment -Check ($126.29) $0.00 11/12/2008 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,262.89) $126.29 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $39.13 $1,389.18 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $5.48 $1,350.05 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties -Sewer $65.64 $1,344.57 11/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $16.04 $1,278.93 • 10/01/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 10/30/2008 $1,262.89 $1,262.89 07/18/2008 0:00 Payment - Check ($1,329.14) $0.00 • 07/02/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 07/30/2008 $1,329.14 $1,329.14 04/28/2008 0:00 Payment - Check ($2,862.94) $0.00 04/02/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 04/30/2008 $1,285.39 $2,862.94 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Water $56.25 $1,577.55 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Street Light $5.47 $1,521.30 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Sewer $65.64 $1,515.83 02/06/2008 0:00 Penalties - Storm Drainage $16.05 $1,450.19 01/03/2008 0:00 Cycle Billing Due: 01/30/2008 $1,434.14 $1,434.14 10/18/2007 0:00 Payment -Check ($1,283.63) $0.00 10/02/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,283.63 $1,283.63 07/25/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,172.96) $0.00 07/04/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,172.96 $1,172.96 05/02/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,168.20) $0.00 04/04/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,168.20 $1,168.20 01/30/2007 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,142.02) $0.00 01/03/2007 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,142.02 $1,142.02 10/31/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,164.88) $0.00 10/04/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,164.88 $1,164.88 08/0712006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,249.24) $0.00 07/05/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,249.24 $1,249.24 05/04/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,114.93) $0.00 04/05/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,114.93 $1,114.93 02/01/2006 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,152.67) $0.00 01/04/2006 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,152.67 $1,152.67 • 12/14/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($111.81) $0.00 11/10/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,118.06) $111.81 10/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $111.81 $1,229.87 10/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,118.06 $1,118.06 07/21/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,021.76) $0.00 07/06/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,021.76 $1,021.76 04/25/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,196.17) $0.00 04/06/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,196.17 $1,196.17 01/25/2005 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,149.09) $0.00 01/05/2005 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,149.09 $1,149.09 10/18/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,040.58) $0.00 10/06/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,040.58 $1,040.58 07/19/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($958.58) $0.00 07/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $958.58 $958.58 04/22/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($1,028.13) $0.00 04/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $1,028.13 $1,028.13 01/20/2004 0:00 Converted Payment Code ($977.27) $0.00 01/07/2004 0:00 Converted Billing Code $977.27 $977.27 City Council Agenda Item No. lOd COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: April 6, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk SUBJECT: Election Related Ordinance Amendments Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of first reading and set second reading and Public Hearing for May 10, 2010, for the following ordinances: 1. An Amending City Code Section 29 -401 , 29- Ordinance Relating to Municipal Elections; Am O g p g Y 402, and 29 -403 2. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 4 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter, Section 4.01 and 4.02 3. An Ordinance Relating to Campaign Signs; Amending City Code Section 35 -140 Background: On March 3, 2010, Governor Pawlenty signed a bill to move the date of the State Primary Election from September 14 to August 10, which also moves the City's Primary Election. With the state primary date move, there were several other election activity dates that were also changed, such as filing dates and campaign sign placement. 1. An Ordinance Relating to Municipal Elections; Amending City Code Section 29- 401, 29 -402, and 29 -403 Chapter 29 of the City Code of Ordinances regulates City elections. An Ordinance amendment has been drafted to reflect the change in Minnesota Statutes 205.065, subdivision 1 and 205.13, subdivision 1 a. The Ordinance amendment also includes some housekeeping amendments, including the City Charter language regarding filing by fee or by petition and gender neutral language. 2. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 4 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter, Section 4.01 and 4.02 Chapter 4 of the City Charter also regulates City elections. An Ordinance amendment has been drafted to reflect the change in Minnesota Statutes 205.065, subdivision 1 and 205.13, subdivision 1 a. The Ordinance amendment also includes some housekeeping amendments updating the terminology for elections to be consistent with state law. The draft Ordinance amendment has been forwarded to the Charter Commission for review. • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clears, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preservers the public. trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM 3. An Ordinance Relating to Campaign Signs; Amending City Code Section 35 -140 • Chapter 34 of the City Code of Ordinances regulates signs. An Ordinance amendment has been drafted to reflect the change in Minnesota Statutes 211B.045 regarding noncommercial sign exemptions, moving up the date for which campaign signs can be placed during a state general election year. For 2010, campaign signs may be placed during the timeframe June 25 through November 12. City Attorney Charlie LeFevere has reviewed these ordinance amendments. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust . CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 10th day of May 2010 at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider An Ordinance Amending Relating to Municipal Elections; Amending City Code Sections 29 -401, 29 -402, and 29 -403. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763 -569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS; AMENDING CITY CODE SECTIONS 29 -401, 29 -402, AND 29 -403 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 29 -401 of the City Code of Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended to read: Section 29 -401. FILING FOR MUNICIPAL OFFICE. At least twefAy {20) two weeks before the � °'°^ first day to file affidavits of candidacy, the city clerk shall cause to be published in the official newspaper a notice of filing for municipal office. The notice of filing shall designate the officer to be elected, the period during which affidavits of candidacy may be filed, and the time and place for filing such affidavits. The city clerk shall post a similar notice at least ten (10) &3 Ls before the first day to file affidavits of candidacy. Not more than ei ghteen (1 8) weeks 84 days nor less than si g i teen (1 6) we 70 days before the r-egul municipal np • mary election any person who is eligible and desires to become a candidate for a municipal office shall file an affidavit of candidacy with the city clerk. The affidavit shall be substantially the same form as required of candidates for state offices. Upon payment of a filing fee of twenty -five dollars ($25) by potential candidate or filing by the petition of fifty ( 0) registered voters on behalf of the candidate to the eity ^'°rv the clerk shall certify the eligibility of the candidate and place the name of the candidate Mon the dal election ballot without partisan designation. Section 2. Section 29 -402 of the City Code of Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended to read: Section 29 -402. MUNICIPAL PRIMARY MUNICIPAL —ELECTION. In the event more than twice the number of persons to be elected to a municipal office file for the nomination thereof, there shall be a municipal primary election which shall be held on the Est second Tuesday after the seee d r,r,,nday in £eptemb August The number of candidates equal to twice the number of persons to be elected to the municipal office, who receive the highest number of votes, shall be the nominees for the office named. The city clerk shall give at least two (2) weeks previous notice of the time and place of holding such municipal p rimary election ORDINANCE NO. and of the officers to be elected by posting in at least one (1) public place in each voting precinct • and by one (1) publication in the official newspaper, but failure to give such notice shall not invalidate the election. At least one (1) week before the election the city clerk shall publish a sample municipal primary ballot in the official newspaper and he shall post a sample ballot in his the city clerk's office for public inspection. Section 3. Section 29 -403 of the City Code of Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended to read: Section 29 -403. MGULAR MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION. The r-egul municipal eg neral election shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. The city clerk shall give at least two (2) weeks previous notice of the time and place of holding such r -ep! municipal general election and of the officers to be elected by posting in at least one (1) public place in each voting precinct and by one (1) publication in the official newspaper, but failure to give such notice shall not invalidate the election. At least one (1) week before any municipal election, the city clerk shall publish a sample ballot in the official newspaper and he shall post a sample ballot in his the city clerk's office for public inspection. Section 4. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 2010. • Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication: Effective Date: (Stfikeeu indicates matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) • • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 10th day of May 2010 at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider An Ordinance Amending Chapter 4 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter, Sections 4.01 and 4.02. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763 -569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4 OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER CITY CHARTER, SECTIONS 4.01 AND 4.02 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 4.01 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter is hereby amended as follows: Section 4.01. MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION. A Fegul municipal general election shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of even- numbered years at such place or places as the City Council may designate. The City Clerk shall give at least two (2) weeks previous notice of the time and place of holding such election and of the officers to be elected and such other matters to be voted upon by posting in at least one public place in each voting precinct and by publication at least once in the official newspaper, but failure to give such notice shall not invalidate such election. Section 2. Section 4.02 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter is hereby amended as follows: Section 4.02. MUNICIPAL PRIMARY ELECTION£. On the second Tuesday *' °��+ �i° «' weeks in a&aaee -or the r-eg l in August of the year in which a municipal eg neral election is to be held there shall be a municipal primary election for the selection of two nominees for each elected office at the fegul municipal eg neral election unless no more than two nominees file for each elective office. When two vacancies exist on the Council and the number of candidates is more than four, the four candidates receiving the highest number of votes shall be the nominees for the offices named. The City Clerk shall give at least two (2) weeks previous notice of the time and place of holding such election and of the officers to be elected by posting in at least one (1) public place in each voting precinct and by publication at least once in the official newspaper, but failure to give such notice shall not invalidate such election. Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and ninety (90) days following its legal publication. ORDINANCE NO. Adopted this day of 2010. . Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication: Effective Date: ( Stfikeeut indicates matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) • I i • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 10th day of May 2010 at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider An Ordinance Amending Relating to Municipal Elections; Amending City Code Sections 29 -401, 29 -402, and 29 -403. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763 -569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO CAMPAIGN SIGNS; AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 34 -140 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 34- 140.2.f of the City Code of Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended to read: Section 34 -140. PERMITTED SIGNS. • 2. Permitted Signs Not Requiring a Permit. f. Portable and freestanding campaign signs for a period of not more than sixty (60) days before and ten (10) days after an election provided no one sign is greater than sixteen (16) square feet in area, except that there shall be no limitation on the size of campaign or other noncommercial signs during the period from Aag-d } forty -six (46) days before the state primary in r a state general election year until ten (10) days following the state general election. Freestanding campaign signs may be installed only upon private property with the permission of the property owner who shall be responsible for removal thereof. The candidate whose candidacy is promoted by an improperly placed or otherwise illegal campaign sign shall be held responsible therefor. Signs must be at least ten (10) feet back from the back of the curb or improved edge of a roadway and at least two (2) feet back from the improved edge of a trail or sidewalk and outside of the sight triangle defined in Section 35 -560. ORDINANCE NO. Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 2010. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication: Effective Date: (keeu4 indicates matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) • • • City Council Agenda Item No. 10e i COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: April 6, 2010 • TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer�� SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF THE CLEAR VIEW TRIANGLE; AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 25 -802 Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of an ordinance relating to the definition of Clear View Triangle; amending City Code Section 25 -802. Background: Attached for consideration is an Ordinance amending Section 25 -802 of the City Ordinances regarding the definition of the Clear View Triangle. The proposed amendment establishes that based on engineering judgment and discretion, certain objects may remain in the Clear View Triangle if there are other circumstances limiting or minimizing risk at an intersection. Attached is a supporting Memorandum dated April 28, 2009, from Kennedy & Graven as well as the Clear View Triangle Diagram. Consistent with the City Charter, a first reading to establish a date for a second reading and • public hearing to consider the proposed ordinance is requested for May 1.0, 2010. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Ongoing: 1. We will provide streamlined, cost effective, quality services with limited resources • lh.s'4011: £.nourir{" till ;ru 'wlirl' s;; :"n»i1n1nriil /hat riihan, ("v lhi yuahtV n/ life and premrrcc-1 the pl;hlir Mt,,' CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 10th day of May, 2010, at 7 p.m. or • as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an ordinance relating to the definition of the clear view triangle; amending City Code Section 25 -802. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763 -569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF THE CLEAR VIEW TRIANGLE; AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 25 -802 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 25 -802 of the City Code of Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended to read: Section 25-802. CLEAR VIEW TRIANGLE DEFINED. On any property which is located at a street intersection, the Clear View Triangle is defined as that triangular area formed by connecting the following three points: the point of intersection of the adjacent curb lines extended, and a point on each adjacent curb line 55 feet from such point of intersection. If there are no curbs, • the edge of the traveled portion of the street or road shall be used instead of the curb line. On any property which is located at an intersection of an alley with a street, the triangular area is formed by connecting points 20 feet from such point of intersection. Nothing may be allowed within the Clear View Triangle to materially impede vision between a height of two and one -half feet and 10 feet above the centerline grades of the intersecting streets. However, certain objects may remain in the Clear View Triangle if, based on engineering judgment and discretion there are other circumstances that limit or minimize risk at the intersection Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 9 2010. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication: • Effective Date: (Stfikeett indicates matter to be deleted; underline indicates new matter.) Kennedy 19 % tt PlS _'Iki ,S,�ulh tii�tli tilrcci Nlimwapolk MN 55402 cC MID 33702 7 7 telephone Graven 1 612, 337,931,1 nn �etjen(ri l:rnneJ> - rarcu.eoni pup:; %gym �� �� .t:rnncdy- gia',rn.com CHARTERED MEMORANDUM To: Charlie LcFcverc - i From: Mary T'ictjcn i Date: April 28, 2009 Re: Brooklyn Centel Clear View Triangle Ordinancu'Liability Issues • I his is in response to Steve L.illchaug's email related to the City's Clear \�'ie\y Triangle ordinance. The subject of sight obstructions and signage at intersections is a common theme ua several Minnesota cases where courts have held that goyer11111crat entities are entitled to Immunll�'. Issue. Would the City of Brooklyn Center be entitled to immunity i f an accident occurred at an intersection where the City departed from the ordinance requirement prohibiting visual obstructions within the "Clear Vice' Triangle ?" Discussion. Minnesota appellate courts have Consistently held that cities: to\yns and counties are entitled to st�ttu101*y immunity From liability For claims arising out of intersection accidents where the accident was caused by the governmm's Failure. to take some action haled on a clisCreticnaary policy. Scc Rie(/e/ a•. (ootltrin. 574 N.W.2d 75 757 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998), rc•r. dcnicd Odinn.Apr.30, 1908). In addition. official immunity has been applied to the negligent acts ol' public officials, such as engineers, whose decisions regarding sionaie at intersections are based on the exercise of judgment and discretion. We lrcicn d v. Crows Nc i Yac•his. hic•., 552 NAV.2d 269 (Wren. Ct. App. 19061 For example, in Riedel, the county had a policy to movw tall grass along county roads Or traffic visihility. High-volume roads were prioritized Oyer low - volume roads, based on time and resources constraints. The county failed to mow a low- volume road and an accident occurred at an intersection, possibly as a result of the failure to cut the grass. "Ile Mbnnesota Court of Appeals held that the cow" was entitled to statutory irmrtunity beCaUSC tl,c Failure to nat?w was based un policy cunsidcratiuns. Ri<r/rl: 574 N.1\'?d at 757. • Riolcl, however. did not involve all ordinance or a statute that goNcrnrd the lilo in,.; cif cowity roads. It only involved a county policy. After Riedel, the Court of :\ppolk considered another case involving an Interseckm accident Nvhcre visibility Was an Issue. AltA-;11c•: "! 1. Eric•ksou. %Cite• o II'7iitc /fear Like, 1999 NkA. 1 138524 Q1inn.;�pp.. I)cc. 14, 1999). In Sollis. it was alleged that a tree obstructed the views of both drivers and contributed to the accident. The city of White Bear Lake had an ordinance that prohibited any structure or planting within a dctined "triangular area." as well as an ordinance that limbs of trees he at least eight feel above grade w4hin the public right-of-way. The U was not \within the Sight trian�lle, but it was undisputed that it was in violation of the latter ordinance. Although the Court acknowledged that this case ryas di flercnt from Ricdcl because Riedel did not involve an ordinance and this case slid, the (" nl was not compelled to distinguish the cases and held that the city of \N*hhC Bear Lake was entitled to immunity. The Court's rationale in Soltis w'as that the ordinance was not hinding on the city and the city had All exercised its discretion based on police considerations: The city correctly points out that the ordinance imposes a requirement on lro )crty owners to keep their trees and shrubs from violating, the, ordinance. The ordinance is not enforceable against the city.. The city has exercised its discretion. based on numerous policy considerations, and has determined that it will not trim trees outside of si`. ht . u for trarllc visibility purposes unless a U'ee is brought to t he city's ) 's attention as a dangerous condition. That policy decision, which was lollowcd by the city ill thcprescllt case, is entitled to statutory Illllllrllllty. ' l ' o hold othClA6SC would have the perycrsc Cl lect ofdisMUMUUNg cities front adoptin_-7 safety ordinances. • ht at * (emphasis added). Brooklyn Centel ordinance defines "Clear View Triangle" and provides that "nothing play be allowed within the Clew' View Triangle to materially impede vision The question posed was whether the City would be liable if an accident occurred at an intersection where the City allowed an obstruction in the clear vice- triangle based on en�_1illCCring judgrilcnt that siUht lines were not an issue under certain circumstances. Based on the reasoning ill S011is, it' the City's decision to allow the ohstruction was based on policy considerations, it seems likely that inrnlullo�' would apply. I have some reservation about I on an unpublished case, but the decision seclils consistent with the rcasollill in many of the published opinions. My recommendation to the City would he to document the need or policy considerations involved in any situation where they decide to depart from the I of the ordinance. I would also rcalnnnuul that the City consider amending its ordinance to provide that certain ,ject may remain in the clear yicv\ t if, based on criginccrin�g judgment and discretion, ct� s � � r - ll1CrC al - e other CIl C11111staIlCCs that 1111111 or minim risk at the intersection. I believe this would give the City more protection in the event of a tort claim regarding the failure to follow the ordinance. • CLEAR V I EW T R I ANG L E CORNER LOT CLEAR V IE W TRIANGLE .. :.. .. R/W LINE �� : .., 1 3 •�U� • LINE - - :- I ` City Council Agenda Item No'. 100 COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: April 5, 2010 • TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Kelli Wick, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LABOR AGREEMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES (LELS) LOCAL 86 (POLICE COMMANDERS AND SERGEANTS) AND THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2010 Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council adopt resolution approving the labor agreement between the City of Brooklyn Center and Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS) Local 86 for the period January 1, 2010 — December 31, 2010. Background: The current contract with LELS 86 (Police Commanders and Sergeants) expired on December 31, 2009. The City and the Union have met and negotiated in good faith to reach a settlement on all issues of concern. This labor agreement covers police commanders and police sergeants for a total of eight employees. The ,attached agreement has been approved by a vote of the members and upon adoption by the • City Council will establish wages and working conditions for 2010. The Articles affected by these negotiations include the following: Article 9 — Seniority Agreed to language change in 9.4 that states shift bidding will occur in January (rather than annually) and within 30 days of any permanent change in the work schedule. Also agreed to change the vacation bidding period from April to January of each year. Article 19 — Severance Agreed to add new language that allows employees participating in a Health Care Savings Plan to receive 40% sick leave severance that is paid into their Health Care Savings Plan. Employee's not eligible to participate in the Health Care Savings Plan will receive one -third of sick leave severance. Article 27 — Sick Leave Agreed to add a new section that would allow employees who have accumulated 960 hours of sick leave and who use not more than the equivalent of two regularly scheduled shift's worth of sick leave hours in a calendar year to receive a wellness incentive equal to one of the employee's regularly scheduled shifts' compensation at the employee's regular rate of compensation. .Mission: Ensuring an attractive. clean, safe community that enhances the duality af'life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Article 28 — Insurance • Increase the insurance contribution by $40 to $858. Also, provide an incentive of $40 for those employees participating in a high deductible health plan. Article 29 — Wage Rates 0% increase for 2010. Existing scheduled pay steps will be processed accordingly. Article 36 — Duration One year labor agreement January 1— December 31, 2010. Budget Issues: The cost of the increase in the City's insurance contribution equals $7,680 if all employees elect a high deductible health plan. The estimated cost of the step movements is $1,237. The proposed 2010 budget appropriates sufficient funds to cover this expense. Council Goals: Ongoing: 1. We will provide streamlined, cost effective, quality services with limited resources Mission: Ensuring an attractive. clean, safe community that enhances the quality of fife and preserves the public trust adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved its • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CONTRACT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES (LELS) LOCAL 86 AND THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2010 WHEREAS, Section 2.07 of the City Charter for the City of Brooklyn Center states that the City Council is to fix the salary or wages of all officers and employees of the City; and WHEREAS, the City has negotiated in good faith with LELS Local 86 (Commanders /Sergeants) for a contract for the year 2010 as attached. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the attached contract with LELS Local 86 (Commanders /Sergeants) for calendar year 2010 with such language changes as may be necessary to clarify any terms, provided such language changes do not change the substance or monetary compensation set forth in the attached contract. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that authorized wage and benefit adjustments shall • become effective according to the schedule of the agreement which commences January 1, 2010. April 12, 2010 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. • Master Labor Agreement Between City of Brooklyn Center And • Law Enforcement Labor Services, Local Number 86 January 1, 2010 - December 31, 2010 • TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE PAGE 1 Purpose of Agreement 1 2 Recognition 1 3 Definitions 1 4 Employer Security 1 5 Employer Authority 2 6 Union Security 2 7 Savings Clause 2 8 Constitutional Protection 2 9 Seniority 2 10 Work Schedules 3 11 Discipline 4 12 Employee Rights — Grievance Procedure 4 13 Overtime (Sergeant Classification) 6 14 Court Time 7 15 Call Back Time 8 16 Working Out of Classification 8 17 Standby Pay 8 • 18 Leaves of Absence 8 19 Severance 9 20 Injury on Duty 9 21 False Arrest Insurance 9 22 Training 9 23 Post License Fees 10 24 Uniforms 10 25 Holiday Leave 10 26 Vacation Leave 11 27 Sick Leave 11 28 Insurance 12 29 Wage Rates 13 30 Benefits for Retirees 13 31 Mileage and Expense Reimbursement 13 32 Light Duty 13 33 Retiree Health Savings Plan (RHSP) 13 34 Agreement Implementation 15 35 Waiver 15 36 Duration 16 ARTICLE 1- Purpose of Agreement This Agreement is entered into between the City of Brooklyn Center, hereinafter called the Employer, and Law Enforcement Labor Services, "Local No. 86 ", hereinafter called the Union. • It is the intent and purpose of this Agreement to: 1.1 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes concerning this Agreement's interpretation and/or application; and 1.2 Place in written form the parties' Agreement upon terms and conditions of employment for the duration of this Agreement. ARTICLE 2 - Recognition 2.1 The Employer recognizes the Union as the exclusive representative, under Minnesota Statues, Section 179A.03, Subdivision 6, for all police personnel in the following job classifications: Sergeant; Commander 2.2 In the event the Employer and the Union are unable to agree as to the inclusion or exclusion of a new or modified job class, the issue shall be submitted to the Bureau of Mediation Services for determination. ARTICLE 3 - Definitions 3.1 Union: Law Enforcement Labor Services, Local No. 86. 3.2 Union Member: A member of Law Enforcement Labor Services, "Local No. 86." 3.3 Department: The City of Brooklyn Center Police Department. 3.4 Employee: A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining unit. 3.5 Employer: The City of Brooklyn Center. 3.6 Chief: The Chief of the Brooklyn Center Police Department. 3.7 Union Officer: Officer elected or appointed by Law Enforcement Labor Services, "Local No. • 86." 3.8 Overtime: Work performed at the express authorization of the Employer in excess of the employee's scheduled shift. 3.9 Scheduled Shift: A consecutive work period including rest breaks and a lunch break. 3.10 Rest Breaks: Period durin g g P the Scheduled Shift during which the employee ee remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties. 3.11 Lunch Breaks: A period during the Scheduled Shift during which the employee remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties. 3.12 Regular Base Pay Rate: The employee's hourly or monthly base pay rate. 3.13 Strike: Concerned action in failing to report for duty, the willful absence from one's position, the stoppage of work, slowdown, or abstinence in whole or in part from the full, faithful, and proper performance of the duties of employment for the purposes of inducing, influencing, or coercing a change in the conditions or compensation or the rights, privileges, or obligations of employment. ARTICLE 4 - Employer Security The Union agrees that during the life of this Agreement the Union will not cause, encourage, participate in, or support any strike, slowdown, or other interruption of or interference with the normal functions of the Employer. • -1- ARTICLE 5 - Employer Authority . 5.1 The Employer retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all personnel, facilities, and equipment; to establish functions and programs; to set and amend budgets; to determine the utilization of technology; to establish and modify the organizational structure; to select, direct, and determine the number of personnel, to establish work schedules, and to perform any inherent managerial function not specifically limited by this Agreement. 5.2 Any term and condition of employment not specifically established or modified by this Agreement shall remain solely within the discretion of the Employer to modify, establish, or eliminate. ARTICLE 6 - Union Security 6.1 The Employer shall deduct the wages of employees who authorize such a deduction in writing an amount necessary to cover monthly Union dues. Such monies shall be remitted as directed by the Union. 6.2 The Union may designate employees from the bargaining unit to act as a steward and an alternate and shall inform the Employer in writing of such choice and changes in the position of steward and/or alternate. 6.3 The Employer shall make space available on the employee bulletin board for posting Union notice(s) and announcement(s). 6.4 The Union agrees to indemnify and hold the Employer harmless against any and all claims, suits, orders, or judgments brought or issued against the Employer as a result of any action taken or not taken by the Employer under the provisions of this Article. ARTICLE 7 - Savings Clause This Agreement is subject to the laws of the United States, the State of Minnesota, and the City of Brooklyn Center. In the event any provision of the Agreement shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction from whose final judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within the time provided, such provisions shall be voided. All other provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. The voided provision may be renegotiated at the written request of either party. ARTICLE 8 - Constitutional Protection Employees shall have the rights granted to all citizens by the United States and Minnesota Constitutions. ARTICLE 9 - Seniority 9.1 Seniority shall be determined by continuous length of service in the job classification covered by this Agreement. Employees promoted from the classification covered by this Agreement to a position outside the bargaining unit will continue to accrue seniority under this Agreement until the completion of their promotional probationary period or for no longer than twelve (12) . months. The seniority roster shall be based on length of service in the job classification covered by this Agreement. Employees lose seniority under this Agreement under the -2- following circumstances: resignation, discharge for cause, or transfer or promotion to a classification not covered by this Agreement after completion of the promotional probationary period or for no longer than twelve (12) months after transfer or promotion. 9.2 There shall be an initial probationary period for new employees of twelve (12) months. During the a be discharged at the sole probationary period, a newt hued or rehired employee m g P �'YP � Y Y discretion of the Employer. During the probationary period a promoted or reassigned employee may be replaced in their previous position at the sole discretion of the Employer. 9.3 A reduction of work force will be accomplished on the basis of seniority. The Employer shall give the Union and the employees at least two (2) weeks written notice in advance of any layoff. Employees shall be recalled from layoff on the basis of seniority. An employee on layoff shall have an opportunity to return to work within two (2) years of the time of the layoff before any new employee is hired. 9.4 Senior qualified employees shall be given shift assignment preference after twelve (12) months of continuous full -time employment. Except as noted in the preceding sentence, shift assignments shall be bid on the basis of seniority at least annually in January and within 30 days of any permanent change in the work schedule. Employees will not be subject to shift rotation more often than every four (4) months. If a special assignment's position is created, assignment to such position shall be opened for bidding on the basis of seniority for up to a two -year assignment in such position. A person shall not be eligible to bid or be assigned to such special assignment position more often than two years out of any six continuous year periods. [A special assignment position is one out of the normal shift rotation with primary emphasis on patrol management.] • 9.5 One continuous vacation period shall be selected on the basis of seniority until January 31 of each calendar year. 9.6 The Employer shall recognize seniority as the primary factor when authorizing holiday leave and compensatory time leave. 9.7 No time shall be deducted from an employee's seniority accumulation due to absences occasioned by an authorized leave with pay, any military draft or government call -up to Reserves or National Guard, or for layoffs of less than two (2) years in duration. ARTICLE 10 - Work Schedules 10.1 The normal work year is two thousand and eighty (2,080) hours to be accounted for by each employee through: a. hours worked on assigned shifts, b. holidays, C. assigned training, and d. authorized leave time. 10.2 Authorized leave time (including holiday hours) is to be calculated on the basis of the actual hours used for such leave based on the time that the employee would otherwise have been • scheduled to work. -3- 10.3 Nothing contained in this or any other Article shall be interpreted to be a guarantee of a • minim or maximum number of hours the Employer may assign employees. ARTICLE 11- Discipline 11.1 The Employer will discipline employees for just cause only. Discipline will be in one or more of the following forms: a_ oral reprimand; b. written reprimand; C. suspension; d. demotion; or e. discharge. 11.2 Suspension, demotions, and discharges will be in written form. 11.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension, and notices of discharge which are to become part of an employee's personnel file shall be read and acknowledged by signature of the employee. Employees and the Union will receive a copy of such reprimands and/or notices. 11.4 Employees may examine their own individual personnel files at reasonable times under direct supervision of the Employer. 11.5 A single disciplinary action for failure to attend training, court or tardiness will be removed from the personnel file after 18 months if, during that time, the single incident of discipline for • failure to attend training, court or tardiness, is the only occurrence of discipline during that 18 month period. 11.6 Discharges will be preceded by a fiv e (5 ) day suspension without pay. 11.7 For PniP oses of discipline, a day will mean eight (8) hours. P 11.8. Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation of proposed disciplinary action against the employee being questioned unless the employee has been given an opportunity to have a Union representative present at such questioning. 11.9 Grievances relating to this Article shall be initiated by the Union in Step 3 of the grievance procedure under Article 12. ARTICLE 12 - Employee Rights — Grievance Procedure 12.1 Definition of a Grievance - A grievance is defined as a dispute or disagreement as to the interpretation application of the specific terms and conditions of this Agreement. rP or PP P 12.2 Union Representatives - The Employer will recognize Representatives designated by the Union e resentatives of the bargaining unit having as the grievance r g the duties and responsibilities representatives g established by this Article. The Union shall notify the Employer in writing of the names of such Union Representatives and of their successors when so designated as provided by 6.2 of this Agreement. -4- 12.3 Processing of a Grievance - It is recognized and accepted by the Union and the Employer that the processing of grievances as hereinafter provided is limited by the job duties and responsibilities of the Employees and shall therefore be accomplished during normal working • hours only when consistent with such Employee duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved Employee and a Union Representative shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in pay when a grievance is investigated and presented to the Employer during normal working hours provided that the Employee and the Union Representative have notified and received the approval of the designated supervisor who has determined that such absence is reasonable and would not be detrimental to the work programs of the Employer. 12.4 Procedure - Grievances, as defined by Section 12. 1, shall be resolved in conformance with the following procedure: Step 1. An Employee claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement shall, within twenty -one (2 1) calendar days after such alleged violation has occurred, present such grievance to the Employee's supervisor as designated by the Employer. The Employer - designated representative will discuss and give an answer to such Step 1 gr ievance within ten 10 calendar days after t. A grievance not resolved in Step 1 and P ( appealed to Step 2 shall be placed in writing setting forth the nature of the grievance, the facts on which it is based, the provision or provisions of the Agreement allegedly violated, the remedy requested, and shall be appealed to Step 2 within ten (10) calendar days after the grievance not appealed in answer in Ste 1. An PP final Y � Em to er- designated representative's P P Y waived. dar da s shall be considered writing to Step 2 by the Union within ten (10) Galen y Step 2 . If appealed, the written grievan ce shall be presented by the Union and discussed with • representative. The Employer-designated Ste 2 re rese representative shall the Employer-designated P P give the Union the Employer's Step 2 answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 2 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 2 may be appealed to Step 3 within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer - designated representative's final Step 2 answer. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waive. Step 3. If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with the Employer - designated Step 3 representative. The Employer - designated representative shall give the Union the Employer's answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 3 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 3 may be appealed to Step 4 within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer - designated representative's final answer to Step within ten 10 calendar days Baled in writing to Ste 4 b the Union ( ) Y 3. Any grievance not app g P Y shall be considered waived. Step 3a. If the grievance is not resolved at Step 3 of the grievance procedure, the parties, by mutual Agreement, may submit the matter to mediation with the Bureau of Mediation Services. Submitting the grievance to mediation preserves timeliness for Step 4 of the grievance procedure. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 4 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days of mediation shall be considered waived. -5- Step 4. A grievance unresolved in Step 3 or Step 3a and appealed to Step 4 by the Union shall be submitted to arbitration subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations •Act of 1971 as amended. The selection of an arbitrator shall be made in accordance with the Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances as established by the Bureau of Mediation Services. 12.5 Arbitrator's Authority a. The arbitrator shall have no right to amend, modify, nullify, ignore, add to, or subtract from the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The arbitrator shall consider and decide only the specific issue(s) submitted in writing by the Employer and the Union, and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other issue not so submitted. b. The arbitrator shall be without power to make decisions contrary to, or inconsistent with, or modifying or varying in any way the application of laws, rules, or regulations having the force and effect of law. The arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days following close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later, unless the parties agree to an extension. The decision shall be binding on both the Employer and the Union and shall be based solely on the arbitrator's interpretation or application of the express terms of this Agreement and to the facts of the grievance presented. C. The fees and expenses for the arbitrator's services and proceedings shall be borne equally by the Employer and the Union provided that each party shall be responsible for compensating its own representatives and witnesses. If either party desires a verbatim • record of the proceedings, it may cause such a record to be made, providing it pays for the record. If both parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings, the cost shall be shared equally. 12.6 Waiver If a grievance is not presented within the time limits set forth above, it shall be considered "waived." If a grievance is not appealed to the next step within the specified time limit or any agreed extension thereof, it shall be considered settled on the basis of the Employer's last answer. If the Employer does not answer a grievance or an appeal thereof within the specified time limits, the Union may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that step and immediately appeal the grievance to the next step. The time limit in each step may be extended by mutual written Agreement of the Employer and the Union in each step. ARTICLE 13 — Overtime (Sergeant classification) 13.1 Employees will be compensated at one and one -half (1 /z) times the employee's regular base pay rate for hours worked in excess of the employee's regularly scheduled shift. Changes of shift do not qualify an employee for overtime under this Article. 13.2 Overtime will be distributed as equally as practicable. 13.3 Overtime refused by employees will for record purposes under Article 13.2 be considered as • unpaid overtime worked. -6- 13.4 For the purpose of computing overtime compensation, overtime hours worked shall not be pyramided, compounded, or paid twice for the same hours worked. 13.5 Overtime will be calculated to the nearest six (6) minutes. • 13.6 Employees have the obligation to work overtime or call backs if requested by the Employer unless unusual circumstances prevent the employee from so working. 13.7 When employees have less than twelve (12) hours of duty -free time between assigned shifts, they will be compensated at a rate of one and one -half (1 1 /2) times the employee's regular base, ay rate for the next shift. For purposes of this Article, shift extensions, elected overtime, P . voluntary changes of shifts, City - contracted work, training, and court time are considered as duty -free tune. The twelve (12) hour requirement may be waived by mutual Agreement between the Employee and the Police Administration. 13.8 As an option to monetary compensation for overtime, an employee may annually elect compensatory time off at a rate of one and one -half (1 /2) time. An employee's compensatory time bank shall not exceed forty (40) hours at any time during a calendar year. On or about December 1 of each year, the City will pay off by check the balance of compensatory time accumulated by each sergeant. No compensatory time will be accumulated or used during the month of December. Special overtime duty assignments made available to all employees by the Chief of Police at the employee's rate of compensation will not be eligible for compensatory time. Compensatory time off shall be granted only at the convenience of the Employer with prior approval of the Employer- designated supervisor. • 13.9 Employees given less than sixteen (16) hours notice of a sc heduled duty change other than their regularly scheduled work period shall be compensated at one and one -half (1 1 /2) times the employee's regular pay rate for hours worked outside of the scheduled work period. 13. l OPolice Commanders are only eligible for overtime pay for privately funded and grant funded projects (Safe and Sober, etc...) and are otherwise ineligible for overtime. ARTICLE 14 - Court Time An employee who is required to appear in court during their scheduled off -duty time shall receive a a at one and one -half 1 %2 times the employee's inimum of three (3) hours pay ( ) base pay rate. An P Y extension or early report to a regularly scheduled shift for court appearance does not qualify the employee for the three (3) hour minimum. Employees shall not be required to work office or street duty to qualify for the court time minim An employee who is required to appear in court during their scheduled off -duty time shall be given 12 hours prior notification of cancellation of the court appearance. If the notification is not given 12 hours prior to the scheduled court time, the employee will receive the three (3) hour court time minimum. 14.1 Any employee, who is on their scheduled days off and is canceled from a court appearance with less than twelve hours notice, shall receive the short notice provision of Article 14. • -7- 14.2 Any employee, who is canceled from a court appearance with less than twelve hours notice • during their scheduled work week, shall not be eligible for the short notice provision of Article 14. 14.3 Any employee who appears in court during their scheduled work week shall be paid the Article 14 minimum or the actual time spent, whichever is greater. 14.4 Any employee who is placed on stand -by for court should retain a copy of the notice placing them on stand -by, or obtain the name of the person placing them on stand -by. The employee will be paid the Article 14 minim or Article 17 pay, whichever is greater. ARTICLE 15 - Call Back Time An employee who is called to duty during their scheduled off -duty time shall receive a minimum of two (2) hours pay at one and one -half (1 V2) times the employee's base pay rate. An extension or early report to a regularly scheduled shift for duty does not qualify the employee for the two (2) hours minim ARTICLE 16 - Working Out of Classification Employees assigned by the Employer to assume.the full responsibilities and authority of a higher job classification shall receive the salary schedule of the higher classification for the duration of the assignment. ARTICLE 17 - Standby Pay • Employees required by the Employer to standby shall be paid for such standby time at the rate of one hour's pay for each hour on standby. ARTICLE 18 - Leaves of Absence 18.1 In cases of demonstrated need and where sick leave has not been abused, the Employer shall grant to employees a leave of absence without pay for extended personal illness after the accumulative sick leave has expired. Such leaves of absence shall not exceed ninety (90) calendar days. Upon granting such unpaid leave of absence, the Employer will not permanently fill the employee's position and the employee's benefits and rights shall be retained. 18.2 An employee called to serve on a jury shall be reimbursed the difference between the amount paid for such service (exclusive of travel and expense pay) and compensation for regularly scheduled working hours lost because of jury service. 18.3 Employees ordered by proper authority to National Guard or Reserve Military Service not fifteen 15 working days in an calendar exceeding Y g Y Y ear shall be entitled to leave of absence without loss of status. Such employees shall receive compensa tion from the Employer eq ual to the difference between his/her regular pay and the lesser military pay. 18.4 Employees called and ordered by proper authority to active military service in time of war or other properly declared emergency shall be entitled to leave of absence without pay during such • service. Upon completion of such service, employees shall be entitled to the same or similar -8- employment of like seniority, status, and pay as if such leave had not been taken, subject to the specific provisions of Chapter 192 of the MN Statutes. 18.5 Members of the bargaining unit will receive such additional leaves as provided for under State • or Federal law, as the same laws may be amended from time to time. 18.6 Additional leaves of absence may be granted in the City Manager's discretion upon the same terms and conditions as then applicable to non -Union employees pursuant to the City's Personnel policy applicable to non -Union employees at the time of application for a leave of absence. ARTICLE 19 - Severance 19.1 An employee shall give the Employer two (2) weeks notice in writing before terminating his employment. 19.2 Severance pay in the amount of one -third (1/3) the accumulated sick leave employees have to their credit at the time of resignation or retirement, times their respective regular pay rate, shall be paid to employees who have been employed for at least five (5) consecutive years. If discharged for just cause, severance pay shall not be allowed. 19.3 Employees electing to participate in a Health Care Savings Plan will receive 40% of sick leave severance paid into the Health Care Savings Plan. Employees not eligible to participate in the Health Care Savings Plan will receive one -third of sick leave severance. ARTICLE 20 - Injury on Duty Employees injured during the performance of their duties for the Employer and thereby rendered unable to work for the Employer will be paid the difference between the employee's regular pay and Workers "Compensation insurance payments for a period not to exceed 720 hours per injury, not charged to the employee's vacation, sick leave, or other accumulated paid benefits, after a three (3) working day initial waiting period per injury. The three (3) working day waiting period shall be charged to the employee's sick leave account less Workers' Compensation insurance payments. ARTICLE 21 - False Arrest Insurance The City of Brooklyn Center shall maintain liability insurance that includes a provision for unlawfully detaining an individual when an employee is acting within the scope of their duties on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center. ARTICLE 22 — Training 22.1 The Employer shall reimburse each employee who is required to maintain a license as a law enforcement officer under Minnesota Statutes, Section 626.84, et sea., for actual expenses of tuition, meals, travel, and lodging incurred in meeting the continuing education requirements of the Minnesota Police Officers Standards and Training Board, not to exceed 48 hours of such training every three (3) years. The Employer need not make such reimbursement for attendance at a course located less than sixty (60) miles from the City of Brooklyn Center and such reimbursement shall not exceed similar allowances for state employees. If the Employer provides in- service training to its employees which meets the continuing education • requirements of the Minnesota Police Officers Standards and Training Board, and if the -9- Employer provides its employees with an opportunity to attend such in- service training courses, to the extent that such opportunity is provided to each employee, the obligation of the • Employer to reimburse such employee for expenses incurred in attending continuing education courses shall be reduced. 22.2 The Employer shall pay each employee their regular salary while attending continuing education courses whether or not such courses attended are in- service training courses or courses given by instructors other than the Employer. The obligation of the Employer to pay such salaries shall not exceed a total of forty -eight (48) hours every three (3) years. ARTICLE 23 - Post License Fees The Employer shall pay up to $90 for the cost of POST license fees for all employees requiring such license during each licensing period. ARTICLE 24 - Uniforms The Employer shall provide required uniform and equipment items. In addition, the Employer shall pay to the uniformed officers a maintenance allowance of $155 per year. Plainclothes officer(s) shall be paid a clothing allowance of $590 per year. ARTICLE 25 - Holiday Leave 25.1 Employees shall receive eight (8) hours of holiday leave per month. Ninety -six (96) of holiday leave shall be advanced to employees on January 1 St of each calendar year beginning on January 1 St 2002. In the event an employee is not employed for the entire calendar year, the employee's holiday leave shall be reduced by eight (8) hours for each full month that the • employee will not have worked in that calendar year. 25.2 Employees may use holiday leave with the approval of the Employer. 25.3 An employee who works on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, or Labor Day shall receive time and one -half (1' /2) employee's regular pay rate for all hours actually worked during the named holiday. 25.4 An employee who works on New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day, or Christmas Day shall receive two times the employee's regular pay rate for all hours actually worked during the named holiday. 25.5 Except as provided in 25.3, overtime pay shall not be authorized for employees for hours worked on holidays when such work is part of the planned schedule. 25.6 An employee may request a holiday off, which he /she is required to work, prior to fourteen calendar days before the holiday. The Employer shall post the open holiday shift to be filled by another employee at the holiday rate of pay. The employee making the request for the holiday off is responsible for working the holiday if the posting is not filled five (5) days prior to the holiday. • 25.7 Employees beginning employment after January 1 St of a calendar year shall receive eight (8) hours of holiday leave per month beginning on the first month in which they are working as -10- of the first day of that month. Such employees shall receive an advance of holiday leave hours equal to eight (8) hours multiplied by the number of whole months they will work through December of the year in which they were first employed. • 25.8 Any holiday leave not used on or before December 31 'c of each year will be deemed forfeited and shall not carry over into the next calendar year. ARTICLE 26 — Vacation Leave 26.1 Permanent full -time employees shall earn vacation leave with pay as per the following schedule: 0 through 10 years of service - one hundred twenty (120) hours per year (accrued at 4.62 hours per pay period) eight (8) additional hours per year of service to a maximum of one hundred s' 160 hours after fifteen 15 ears of service 11 years - 4.92 hours per pay period 12 years - 5.23 hours per pay period 13 years - 5.54 hours per pay period 14 years - 5.85 hours per pay period 15 years - 6.15 hours per pay period 26.2 Employees using earned vacation leave or sick leave shall be considered working for'the purpose of accumulating additional vacation leave. • 26.3 Vacation may be used as earned, except that the Employer shall approve the time at which vacation leave may be taken. Employees shall not be the v Y permitted to waive vacation leave and receive double pay. 26.4 Employees with less than five (5) years of service may accrue a maximum of one hundred twenty (120) hours of vacation leave. Employees with more than five (5) but less than fifteen (15) consecutive years of service (uninterrupted except for layoff not exceeding two (2) years duration in any single layoff period) may accrue a maximum of one hundred sixty (160) hours of vacation leave. Employees with fifteen (15) consecutive years or more of service (uninterrupted except for layoff not exceeding two (2) years duration in any single layoff period) accrue a maximum of two hundred thirty (230) hours of vacation leave. Y P ) ma Y 26.5 Employees leaving the service of the Employer in good standing, after having given the Employer fourteen (14) day notice of termination of employment, shall be compensated for vacation leave accrued and unused. ARTICLE 27 - Sick Leave 27.1 Sick leave with pay shall be granted to probationary and permanent employees at the rate of eight (8) hours per month or 96 hours per year (computed at 3.69 hours per pay period) of full -time service or major fraction thereof, except that sick leave granted probationary employees shall not be available for use during the first six (6) months of service. -11- 27.2 Sick leave shall be used normally for absence from duty because of personal illness or legal quarantine of the employee, or because of serious illness in the immediate family. • Immediate family shall mean brother, sister, parents, parents -in -law, spouse, or children of the employee. Sick leave may be used for the purpose of attending the funeral of immediate family members plus brothers -in -law, sisters -in -law, grandparents, grandparents -in -law, and grandchildren of the employee. 27.3 Sick leave shall accrue at the rate of eight (8) hours per month or ninety -six (96) hours per year until nine hundred sixty (960) hours have been accumulated (shall be computed at 3.69 hours per pay period). Effective January 1, 1994, after nine hundred sixty (960) hours have been accumulated, sick leave shall accrue at the rate of four (4) hours per month or forty - eight (48) hours per year (computed at 1.85 hours per pay period), and simultaneously vacation leave in addition to regular vacation leave accrual, shall accrue at the rate of two a (2) hours per month or twenty -four (24) hours per year (computed at .9 25 hours per pay period). Employees using earned vacation or sick leave shall be considered to be working for the purpose of accumulating additional sick leave. Workers' Compensation benefits shall be credited against the compensation due employees utilizing sick leave. 27.4 In order to be eligible for sick leave with pay, an employee must: beginning a. notify the Employer prior to the time set for th e of their normal scheduled shift; b. keep the Employer informed of their condition if the absence is of more than three (3) days duration; c. submit medical certificates for absences exceeding three (3) days, if required by the • Employer. 27.5 Employees abusing sick leave shall be subject to disciplinary action. 27.6 An employee who accumulated 960 hours of sick leave and who uses not more than the equivalent of two regularly scheduled shift's worth of sick leave hours in a calendar year shall receive a wellness incentive equal to one of the employee's regularly scheduled shifts' compensation at the employee's regular rate of compensation. ARTICLE 28 - Insurance 28.1 2010 Full -time employees Effective 1 /l /10, the City will contribute payment of eight hundred fifty eight dollars ($858) per month per employee for use in participating in the City's insurance benefits. For 2010 employees electing to participate in a high deductible health plan will receive an incentive of $40 per month. 28.2 Life Insurance and Balance of Cafeteria Funds: The City of Brooklyn Center will provide payment for premium of basic life insurance in the amount of $10,000. The employee may use the remainder of the contribution (limits as stated above) for use as provided in the Employer's Cafeteria Benefit Plan. The Employer will make a good faith effort to provide the following options for employee selection: group dental, supplemental life, long -term disability, deferred compensation or cash benefits. The Employer will be excused from the -12- requirement of offering a particular option where such becomes unfeasible because of conditions imposed by an insurance carrier or because of other circumstances beyond the City's control. • ARTICLE 29 - Wage Rates Sergeant- Date Sergeant Rate I/1/10_0% $39.40/hour Commander — Date Commander Rate I/1/10_0% $7,326 - $7,670 /month New hires in the Commander classification will be paid at minimum starting wage, be on probation for one year and after successful completion of probation will receive a pay increase to the maximum pay. ARTICLE 30 - Benefits for Retirees Retirees at the time of retirement shall receive the same options and level of City contribution for insurance coverage upon retirement as are provided by the City's Personnel Policy covering non- • Union employees as such options and contributions may be changed by the City from time to time. ARTICLE 31 - Mileage and Expense Reimbursement Employees shall receive the same mileage and expense reimbursement rates upon the same terms and conditions as generally provided in the City's Personnel Policy covering non -Union employees as such policy may be changed by the City from time to time. ARTICLE 32 - Light Duty will be eligible for temporary light du assignment Members of the bargaining unit g p ary gh t3' upon approval of the City Manager upon such terms and conditions as would apply to non -Union employees of the City as set forth in the City's personnel policy, as the same may be amended from time to time by the City. ARTICLE 33 — Retiree Health Savings Plan (RHSP) e The Retiree Health Savings Plan (RHSP) is established to help defray the cost of med ical expenses p es and health insurance premiums for employees, spouses and dependents after the employee leaves employment with the City of Brooklyn Center. 1. Participation Eligibility Regular full -time benefit earning employees may have contributions made on their behalf I into the RHSP. Participants must be 21 years of age or older. Unless noted otherwise in this policy, the • minimum period of service required to participate in the plan is 60 days. -13- Every eligible employee in an employee group is required to participate in the RHSP for their group as outlined in this applicable labor agreement. 2. RHSP Contributions When appropriate, each employee will have an account established in his or her name. Unless specifically noted otherwise, contributions (and earnings) to an employee's RHSP account are not taxable income. 3. Accessing Funds a. Employees may access the funds in their RHSP account when they are eligible to retire under the Public Employees Retirement Association's (PERA) rules. b. Unless prohibited by the IRS, employees leaving employment with the City prior to being eligible for retirement through PERA, for the reasons noted below, may make withdrawals on a tax -free basis for eligible health- related expenses. ■ Upon termination of employment. ■ If employee is collecting a disability. ■ If employee is on a medical leave (six months or longer) ■ If employee is on a leave of absence (one year or longer) If the employee returns to work and is earning medical benefits, they are no longer eligible to make withdrawals from their RHSP account. The IRS does not allow these funds to be rolled into any other type of plan, including • an IRA. C. Access following death. The surviving spouse and eligible dependents continue to access the account for eligible expense reimbursements until the RHSP account is exhausted. Such reimbursements are not taxable. Unless prohibited by the IRS, reimbursements may also be made to a beneficiary other than a surviving spouse or eligible dependent. However, such reimbursements would be taxable to the recipient. 4. Eligible Expenses Reimbursed by Plan Funds in a RHSP account may be used to reimburse: 1. Insurance premiums (health insurance premiums, Medicare supplemental insurance premiums, Medicare Part B insurance premiums, COBRA and Chapter 488 insurance premiums, long term care insurance premiums (not long term care expenses), and dental insurance premiums. 2. Most qualifying medical expenses as defined in Internal Revenue Code Section 213 (i.e. medical costs that would otherwise be deductible to the employee on his or her individual income tax return). A third -party claims administrator hired by ICMA -RC will handle claims administration. 5. No Opt -out Employees and retirees in groups covered by the RHSP program are not permitted to opt -out -14- of the program. Participation is mandatory. 6. Program Administration Along with the Human Resources Division, the ICMA Retirement Corporation will administer the RHSP program. The employee controls how the money is invested similar to his or her Section 457 deferred compensation program. The employee receives an account statement each quarter from ICMA for his or her RHSP account. 7. Administrative Fees Please contact ICMA for current administrative and mutual fund fees. 8. Plan Modifications The details of ICMA -RC's administration of the RHSP as well 'as other features of the plan are set forth in the RHSP materials provided by ICMA -RC. These details and IRS regulations regarding the RHSP may be revised, necessitating the revision to this policy or other agreements between employee groups and the City. The City reserves the right to modify its policy to comply with any other regulations regarding the plan and to add contribution requirements. 9. Contribution Formulas 1. Election for Pre -Tax Contributions from Compensation. Employees may elect to contribute up to 25% of their compensation. This is a one -time, irrevocable election. Employees must make this decision during the open enrollment period • 2. Severance Pay. Employees who qualify to receive severance pay and vacation pay upon retiring or in good standing, defined b leaving the city Y the current Labor Agreement, will g tY g g 0 0 o it ed in the individual m 100 /o in 10 /o increments to be la designate from 0 /o to ( ) P RHSP accounts at the time of retirement or resignation. This is an irrevocable election. Employees must make this decision during the open enrollment period prior to the beginning of the year in which they will retire. ARTICLE 34 - Agreement Implementation Employer shall implement the terms of this Agreement in the form of a resolu tion. If the implementation of the terms of this Agreement require the adoption of a law, ordinance, or charter amendment, the Employer shall make every reasonable effort to propose and secure the enactment of such law, ordinance, resolution, or charter amendment. ARTICLE 35 - Waiver 35.1 Any and all prior Agreements, resolutions, practices, policies, rules, and regulations regarding terms and conditions of employment, to the extent inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, are hereby superseded -15- 3 5.2 The parties mutually acknowledge that during the negotiations which resulted in this Agreement, each had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands and proposals • with respect to any term or condition of employment not removed by law from bargaining. All Agreements and understandings arrived at by the parties are set forth in writing in this Agreement for the stipulated duration of this Agreement. The Employer and the Union each voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives the right to meet and negotiate regarding any and all terms and conditions of employment referred to or covered in this Agreement or with respect to any term or condition of employment not specifically referred to or covered by this Agreement, even though such terms or conditions may not have been within the knowledge or contemplation of either or both of the parties at the time this contract was negotiated or executed. ARTICLE 36 - Duration This Agreement shall be effective as of January 1, 2010 and shall remain in full force and effect until the thirty -first (3 1) day of December 2010, as noted in the contract. IN WITNESS THERETO, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed this day of , 2010. FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES NO. 86 • Business Agent Union Steward Union President FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Mayor City Manager -16- City ouncil Agenda Item No.10 ty g g COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: April 12, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City yy Manager FROM: Vickie Schleuning, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards SUBJECT: Special Assessment Hearing Appeal Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the attached resolution certifying a special assessment for delinquent weed removal costs to the Hennepin County tax rolls. Background: At the City Council Meeting on March 22, 2010, the City Council tabled the resolution for certifying the special assessment for the property located at 6233 Scott Ave N. Please see the attached previous City Council Reports for more information. A copy of a standard purchase agreement is attached that indicates that either the buyer or seller, as determined by the form, is responsible for any outstanding special assessments. According to • the City Attorney, real estate purchase agreements usually address levied and pending special assessments and responsibility for payment. As soon as the city incurs a cost, it is considered a special assessment regardless of the timing of the purchase. Pending special assessments are available to the public for viewing, and in most cases, special assessment searches are conducted at the time of sale and the designated party pays the bills. Issues to consider: • Should the $100.00 for the reinspection fee that occurred on the day of the ownership transfer be removed? • Should the general public be responsible for paying for city activities associated with properties not maintained in compliance with city ordinances? • Should the general public be responsible for paying special assessments for property owners who failed to identify outstanding financial obligations associated with the property? Budget Issues• The Most of the fees appealed were directly related to cost that the city incurred as a result of hiring a contractor to correct the violations at the property. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Council Goals: • Strategic: We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods Ongoing: We will provide streamlined, cost effective, quality services with limited resources Attachments: Resolution Levy Roll Purchase Agreement Example March 22, 2010 City Council Memo March 8, 2010 City Council Memo • i s Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust • Member introduced the following resolution and moves its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the Weed Inspector of the City of Brooklyn Center has caused noxious weeds and tall grass to be cut down on properties within the City under the authority of Minnesota Statutes Section 18 -78 and City Ordinance Section 19 -1601 through 19 -1604; and WHEREAS, ON March 22, 2010, certain weed destruction accounts for removal of said weeds and tall grass remained unpaid; and WHEREAS, The following list of unpaid accounts from 2009, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where an unpaid weed destruction account is to be assessed, with the amounts to be assessed; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute authorizes the certification of delinquent weed destruction accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and • WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for weed destruction costs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of unpaid weed destruction accounts incurred during the year 2009 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 17598. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2011, in one annual installment with interest thereon at six (6) percent per annum and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from May 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 30, 2010. After April 30, 2010, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from May 1, 2010, through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close of business November 29, 2010 or interest will be charged through December 31 oft he succeeding year. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this i assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. 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: whereon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • • Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (GrassMeeds) 2009 Weed Destruction Municipal Code No. 22 Capital Special Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Levy No. Owner Name(s) Tproperty Address Property ID Amount Charge Charge Certified 33- 119- 21-43- 17598 Xai Lor Paul Yang 6233 Scott Ave N 0058 $405.76 $10 $30 $445.76_ • • Attachment- Purchase Agreement Example ' but not f hed to "3 including am fi xtirree on the following Property, it say, owned by Sailer and used and located en said property. Inckdhng 14 garden bulbs, giants. shrubs and trees. storm salt, storm doors. screens and awnings, window shades, Wink, tmvoras and curtain and I5. drapery rods; attached lighting factures and bulbs; plumbing foxwree, water hater. leaa*4 plaihb (with ants fnaners. tanlu, stokWe and other ; S sleatrodc air filter water aofbnsrOOWM®itMfr�lr equipment used in connection therewith), halt-in emeondidornirq equprment, ter) t7. built=m humidifier and dehumidifier. squid gas tank and controls Of the property of Seger), sump Pte, attached television antenna. IS. cable TV jacks and wiring; BUILT_Ms: duahwashen, garbs been �Pa�• o�• cook -top stoves, mbrowa" gv.,W hood fons, Wteraoms; ATTACFED: arpadn6 ;' mYron; Wrap@ door openwa and all controls; smoke detectors; firepfecs.scra" - -- --_ -.- 20. doors and hoWintom; AND: the following personal Progeny 21. . 22. ) 23. all of which property Seller has this day agreed to sell to Buyer for sum of _ Dollars, 24. 25. which Buyer agrees to pay in to following manner cash down payment of at least _.pacarht I%) of the sale price, which kroludes the Samoa 26. money, and financing, the total amount secured against this property to fund this purchase, not to d a perrIen financi f the ee Sale Price 27. Such financing will be fchsek one) [3 a fist mnrkpoga or�ao�Mr�aa ft t for deft or C) a first mmtgaYa 28. described in tiha attached Addendum: C] Ca a e E) na on [:] D fa n sou it �n C1 caneaat for Dead E3 odas 29. The date of do** dean be • 30. This Purchase ApnsmsM❑ 16 ❑ Ill NOT subjM to a Continge afe ncy Addendum for s of Buyers WOP Of eah* le ea attached 31. of Mhawer b LS Mr, the closing of Buyer s property, if anti, may still affsot Buyers ability to obtain financing. If financing applic".) 32. This Purchase Agrame❑ rd IS ❑ 16 NOT subject to a oencellation of a pmviduey written Pu Agreement dated 33. Of answer is IS, said cancellati "I be obtained no istsrthen . 20_._.. If said cancellation is not obtained by said date, this 34. Purchase Agreement M cancelled. Buyer and Builder shell Immediately sign s Cancellation of Purchase Agreem ant rxenfirming sold 35. cancellation and directing all eemeat money paid hesundsrto be Wmndsd to Buyer.) 36. This Purdwe Agro me O W ill NDT subject to a Vacant Lend Addendum. (If answer is M see attached Addendum.) Buyer has been 37. made swam of the avallabilky of property Inspectlons. Buyer ❑ i]eote ❑ Deef lea to have a Property insPaotian Per<anted at Buyers • 3S. expense This Purchase Agreement 13 ❑ IS NOT abut to an inspection Addendum. (H eerier k IS, we attached addarndum ) an 39. D�APAWABLE TITLE: Upon performs Buyer, Sailer shelf deliver a ❑ Waratty Dead or[- d OM) Dad 40. joined In by spouse, N any, conveying marketable tide, abject to: 47. (A) building and zoning Iowa and ordinances, skits and federal regulations; (B) restrictions relating to use or Impr of the property witiwut 42. effective fw%kure Provislons; (C) reservation of any mineral rights by the Stoke of Minnesota: (D) udigty end drainage asee rwris which do not 43. interfere with existing Improvements; (E) rights of tenants as fogoaas (unless specified, not abject to tenernefss) 44. 45. in Others (Must be specified in wddng): 46. ❑BUYER SHALL PAY �r u en SHALL PAY on date of dosing any destate d real estate tats le g, Green Acura W-) or special 47. asmwnents, payment o which b rerNired as a re" of the dosing of this sale. 4& ❑ BUYER AND SIg M SHALL PRDRA AS OF T IM DATE OF CIASWO ❑ SELLER SHALL PAY ON DATE OF C, DOM all Idook d 49. k irbinments of specie assessments cetifled far PeYmorrt, with to red stab teas due and Pay" III the Veer of doshp. 50. ❑ KnIM MME ❑ id SELLER SHALL PAY on data of dosing all other would assessments levied as of the dab of des Agreenhsnt. IM a E hu ❑ SELLER SH PROVIDE FOR PAYMEN OF apso aspsomwrt a e p of the deb of this 51. C3 BUYER SHALLASSU ahsdr err 1 1 Into 52. • Agreement for improvements that have been ordered by any Weaseling authorities. (senses Pin payment shall be by payment 5& escrow of two (2) times the estimated amount of the assessmen or Mss, as required by Buyer's lender.) 54. Buys, shah Pay any ninpaid spooW aaepmsms payable in the year following dosing and therosfter, the payment of which M not otherwise 55. herein provided. 5& As of the dab of this Agreement. Seiler represents that SAW ❑ HA ❑ HAS NOT received a rhotke regar arW new improvement -fdmwk con) 57. project from any aseesstng authoritiee, the coots of which project may be -- I I agdnat this Property- Any such notice received by Seller 5& after the data of this Purchase Agreement and betas dosing shelf be provided to Buyer immediately. If such notice M INUed after the date of 59. this Purchase Agreement and on or bere fo the data of dodng, than the Parties may agree in writing, on or before 00 deb of dosing, to Pay, 60. Provide for the payment oL or swume ti» 09011111 atheaMmnm In the absence of Mich agmemant, either Party may dsdare lids Purchase Bt. Agm ffwnt een"Had by written notice to the other party, or Beaune a representing or aslaft the other Party. In whleh o this Purchase 82. Agreament Is cenoafisd H akher party dadares this Purchase Agreement osrtaegsd, Buyer-and Seller shag immediately elfin s Cancellation of S3. Purchase Agreement confirming said cancellation and ditsatinp erg earned money paid hen underto be refunded to Buyer. MN:PA- 1(9)04) • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: March 17, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH: Vickie Schleuning, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards FROM: Jesse Anderson, Housing and Community Standards Supervisor SUBJECT: Assessment Hearing Appeals Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval/adoption of the enclosed resolution. Background: At the City Council Meeting on March e, 2010 council requested additional information for certain persons who appealed their assessments. All of the appealed assessments were the results of one or more grass abatements and/or reinspection fees that were issued in the summer of 2009. The property owners at the time of the violations were given notice to correct the long grass violations at their property and all fees were processed as a pending special assessment. The pending special assessment amounts are available to the public, including title companies when a is • • ProP�y urchased. P Please see the attached assessed certification roll for these properties. One change is recommended due to the timing of the reinspection and closing of the property. Budget Issues: Most of the fees appealed were directly related to cost that the city incurred as a result of hiring a contractor to correct the violations at the property. Council Goals: Strategic: 3. We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods Ongoing: 1. We will provide streamlined, cost effective, quality services with limited resources Attachments: Summary of Appealed Properties Resolution Assessed certification roll Miralon. E navrieg an asradtm dean, saf corm nfty that enhances the gaelky of lTje andpreserves the pubUc twist COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • • 6233 Scott Ave N Xai LOdPaul Yang Appellants Appeal: Paul Yang was concerned that he never received the violation notices for the long grass. (Mr. Yang would not have received the violation notices because he was not the owner at the time of the violations) Findin s: There were two long grass violation cases at this property in the summer of 2009 prior to the current owner purchasing the property. One resulted in an abatement conducted by the city and an inspection fee as a result of a repeat violation at the property. (The property owner purchased the property prior to the pending assessment being processed for the $100.00 2 n4 inspection fee) The timeframe on the reinspection fee was so close to the purchase date that it would not have shown up on the pending assessment list for the closing company. Due to the timing of the purchase and the inspection fee we believe the$100.00 reinspection fee could be dismissed. Action Dates Violation Type Action Fees 6/92009 Long Grass Violation Notice • 6222009 Long Grass Cut By City Owner Invoiced/Pending 7/12009 Long Grass Assessment for Abatement $305.76 9/102009 Long Grass Inspection 9/112009 Long Grass Violation Notice Property Sold to Current 09/112009 Owners Invoiced/Pending 9212009 Long Grass Assessment Inspection Fee $100.00 ♦• iq • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • 4013 65 Ave N Gao Qiang Liu Aonellants Appeal: Ting Lin Liu (speaking on behalf of her father Gao Qiang Liu) stated that during the time of the violations her entire family was in china as a result of a family member's illness and a. funeral. Ms. Liu stated they were unaware of the grass requirement and would have obtained mowing service while they were gone if they had known about the requirement. Findings: The property had two long grass violation cases during the summer of 2009. In both . cases the grass was cut by the city contractor. Also an inspection fee was charged as a result of a repeat violation at the property. The property is currently a license rental property. The current property owner purchased the property before the violations and abatements were conducted. Action Dates Violation Type Action Fees 07/0112009 Long Grass Violation Notice 07/1212009 Long Grass Cut By Ci • Owner Invoiced /Pending 07/28/2009 Long Grass Assessment for Abatement $294.28 • 09/02/2009 Lon Grass Violation Notice 09/02/2009 Long Grass Ins on 09/14/2009 Long Grass Cut By Ci Owner Invoiced/Pending 09/22/2009 Long Grass Assessment for Abatement $282.26 Owner Invoice/Pending 09/22/2009 Long Grass Assessment for Inspection Fee $100.00 • Mission: Ensuring an a&adiv4 demg safe conumni V that enhances the gwaltfV of life aid preserm the public duct • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORAND UM • 4013 65 Ave N (Pictures) • 08/31/2009 • Mission: Ensuring an aaracd dean, safe mmmumiV shat enhaneea she quaft of hfe and preserves she pubft bust • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • 7007 Drew Ave N Wendy Larson Appellants Apceal: Wendy Larson stated that she did not own the property until November 20, 2009 and believes that she should not be responsible to pay this fee. Findinas: The property is currently owner occupied and had one long grass violation case which resulted in the grass being cut by the City. The current ro rty owner purchased the property after the violations and abatements p l� were conducted. The property had pending assessment when the owner purchased the property. The $305.76 abatement fee is not on the certification list because it has b een paid by the current owner. Action Dates Violation Type Action Fees 06/1612009 Long Grass Violations Notice 06/2612009 Long Grass Cut By Ci Owner Invoiced/Pending 07/01/2009 Long Grass Assessment for Abatement $305.76 F`# t r ,tl Srt, Z: ti r lNhdox. Exxtrft Qq a&edivA dean, safe conum ni[f that eXha"M ae quaw of fife and preserves the public meal i • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • • 5424 Fremont Ave N Luxor Properties LLC Appellants Appeal: Bill McCrum stated that he was unable to sell the house due to the market, so he decided to rent the property. Mr. McCrum stated he was unaware the city had mowed the lawn because he had been out of town for a while. Mr. McCrum requested that the fee be waived due to financial hardship. Findinas: The property had two long grass cases in the summer of 2009. One of the cases resulted in the city cutting the grass and the other resulted in an inspection fee and the owner having the grass cut. The current property owner was issued violation notices and invoiced for the abatement and inspection fee. • Action Dates Violation Type Action Fees 05/152009 Long Grass Violation Notice 05272009 Long Grass Cut By City • Owner Invoked/Pending 06/032009 Long Grass Assessment for Abatement $257.83 06/302009 Long Grass Inspection 06/302009 Long Grass Violation Notice 07/092009 Long Grass Cut By Owner Owner lnvokxKWending 07/142009 Long Grass Assessment for Ins on Fee 1 $100.00 • blic MUdeff: Ensuring an auracdm die, safe coxu mu* that enhanea the quaff ofNfe and praava the pa dust r COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM 5424 Fremont Ave N (Pictures) I i r I I 05/14/200 ilk to v: 06/30/2009 Nbsion: Ensuring an a unredve, dean, safe conum nNy that enhances the quality ojlife and preserves the publk bus[ I COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • 5834 Fremont Ave N Loraine Miller i Appellants Appeal: Arnold Miller (speaking on behalf of his Mother Loraine Miller) attempted to cut the grass after the violation notice was received however the lawn mower broke and it took two days to fb(. During that time the city had cut the grass. He also stated that the grass wasn't long and just the dandelions were long. Findings: The property had one long grass violation case in the summer of 2009. This case resulted in the grass being cut by the city contractor. The current property owner owned the property during the time of the enforcement actions and was sent a notice and invoice. Action Dates Violation Type Action Fees 5115/2009 Long Grass Violation Notice 5/27/2009 Long Grass Cut BY C' Owner lnvoiced ending 0610312009 Long Grass Assessment for Abatement $269.81 f I y, eTy SOIL' E'nm ing an a&adfMC dea,4 Soft wmmu 1bag exha_ the q_nty Of afe m-d pretava Ott pabUc *so COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: March 8, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City �M anger FROM: Viclde Schleuning Assistant City Managermirector of Building and Community Standards SUBJECT: Public Hearings on Proposed Special Assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs, Delinquent Weed Removal Costs, Nuisance Abatement Costs and Administrative Vacant Building Registration Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council conduct the subject public hearings and consider approval of the attached resolutions certifying special assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs, Delinquent Weed Removal Costs, Nuisance Abatement Costs and Administrative Vacant Building Registration Costs. Background: Four public hearings are scheduled for March 8, 2010 to consider certification of proposed special assessments. The Council called for a March 8, 2010 public hearing at its February 8, 2010 meeting. All potentially affected property owners have been notified by certified mail of the date of the public hearing and the amount of the proposed special assessments. At this time, • no appeals have been made to city staff since the February 8, 2010 Council meeting. The following is a brief summary of the minimum process involved in city- facilitated abatements. • A written compliance notice is provided to the owner of record. In addition to notifying the owner of record, in certain cases, properties may be posted or other responsible parties may be notified • A follow up inspection is conducted to verify compliance. • If compliance is not achieved, the city will take corrective actions to remove the public nuisance or hazard • The City bills the owner of record for the portion of costs the city has incurred directly relaxed to the abatement action. A service charge is applied to help recover city costs associated with the Mire abatement process- inspections, notifications, invoicing, administrative systems, etc. • The direct costs of the abatement are recorded as pending special assessments and this information is available to the public. When a property is sold, agencies or parties often conduct property searches to determine the pending and levied special assessment • amounts. Mission: Ensuring an a&acdm dean. s•fe Qonmudly that enlm+ma the quality ofufe and pm— the pubic dust I COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Recommended Council Procedure • Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the hearings concurrently. The attached resolutions certifying the assessments to the Hennepin County tax rolls are provided for Council consideration upon closing of the public hearings. If any additional property owner files an appeal with the City Clerk prior to the public hearing, or should any person appear at the hearing and object to an assessment, staff recommends that the Council refer an substantive ob to staff for repo back to the Council at a continued y � � hearing. An example might be an issue whereby staff would need to research the history of a particular complaint and assemble documentation. The Council should consider removing the objection related assessment from the proposed levy roll and adopting the remaining proposed assessments. If an appeal for a specific property is actually filed within district court, the City Attorney will advise the Council of options for handling the dispute and potential litigation issues. Payment Options available to Property Owners Once an assessment roll is adopted by the Council, the owner of each property has the following options: 1. Pay the entire amount of the special assessment, without interest, between March 9, 2010 . and April 30, 2010. 2. From May 1, 2010 tbrough November 29, 2010, the property owner may pay the total • assessment, with 6.0 percent interest calculated from May 1, 2010 to the date of payment. 3. If payments are made with property taxes, the first payment will be due with taxes in 2011. The total principal will be payable in annual installments for the period stated on the levy roll and as indicated below. Interest of 6.0 percent is accrued on the unpaid balance. Diseased Tree Removal Costs Five Years Delinquent Weed Removal Costs One Year Delinquent Abatement Removal Costs One Year i Administrative Vacant Building Registration One Year Partial prepayments (such as paying half now and certifying the balance) are not allowed under current assessment policy. Budget lasses: The levy roll for delinquent weed removal costs totals $33,899.07. The levy roll for diseased tree removal totals $21,618.17. The levy roll for delinquent abatement removal costs totals $8,925.00. The levy roll for administrative vacant building registration costs totals $800.00. . bmbsim Fwur a ea awacdm dean, We m mw-y that =haaces the qua* a1a!e -di thePub& bast r COUNCIL ITEM ME MORANDUM • Attachment: Resolutions- Weeds and Tall Grass Diseased Tree Removal Public Nuisances Administrative Vacant Building Registrations List of Levied Properties- will be updated based on payments made Council Goals: Strategic: 1. We will ensure a safe and secure community 2. We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods 3. We will respond to increased public awareness and interest in environmental sustainability and green community issues Ongoing: 1. We will provide streamlined, cost effective, quality services with limited resources i i • Mission: Ensuring an a0a dive clean, sage community that enhances the quality of life and preserves Ike public dust Member introduced the following resolution and moves its adoption: • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has caused abatement removal on certain properties within the City during 2009 under the authority of City Ordinance Section 12- 1504 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 429 and by written agreement with the owners of such property-, and WHEREAS, on March 3, 2010, certain abatement accounts remained unpaid; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll for unpaid accounts from 2009, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where abatement costs are to be assessed, together with the amounts proposed to be assessed to each property; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute authorizes the certification of delinquent abatement accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council . has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for abatement costs. • i NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of abatement costs incurred during the year 2009 is here by adopted and certified as Levy No. 17599. - 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2011, in one annual installment with interest thereon at six (6) percent per annum and shall bear merest on the entire assessment from May 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the i assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 30, 2010. After April 30, 2010, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from May 1, 2010, through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close of business November 29, 2010 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. . • 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member I and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • i i i i i Member introduced the following resolution and moves its adoption: • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRATION COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has caused Administrative Vacant Building Registration costs for certain properties within the City during 2009 under the authority of City Ordinance Section 12 -1504 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 429 and by written agreement with the owners of such property; and WHEREAS, on March 8, 2010, certain Administrative Vacant Building Registration costs remained unpaid; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll for unpaid accounts from 2009, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where Administrative Vacant Building Registration costs are to be assessed to each property; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute authorizes the certification of delinquent Administrative Vacant Building Registration accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and • WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council • has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for Administrative Vacant Building Registration costs. NOW, THEREFORE BE TT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of Administrative Vacant Building Registration costs incurred during the year 2009 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 17601. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2011, in one annual installment with interest thereon at six (6) percent per annum and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from May 1, 2010.through December 31, 201L 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 30, 2010. After April 30, 2010, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from May 1, • 2010, through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close • • of business November 29, 2010 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith traasmit a certified duplication of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the some manner as other municipal taxes. 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: whereon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. i • Member introduced the following resolution and moves its adoption: • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the Weed Inspector of the City of Brooklyn Center has caused noxious weeds and tall grass to be cut down on properties within the City under the authority of Minnesota Statutes Section 18-78 and City Ordinance Section 19 -1601 through 19 -1604; and WHEREAS, ON March 8, 2010, certain weed destruction accounts for removal of said weeds and tall grass remained unpaid; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll for unpaid accounts from 2009, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where an unpaid weed destruction account is to be assessed, with the amounts to be assessed; and WHEREAS, Mmnesota State Statute authorizes the certification of delinquent i weed destruction accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and i WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council • i has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for weed i destruction costs. I • Ci NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by th e ty Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Mmnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of unpaid weed destruction accounts incurred during the year 2009 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 17598. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2011, in one annual installment with interest thereon at six (6) percent per annum and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from May 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 30, 2010. After April 30, 2010, he or she may pay the j total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from May 1, 2010, through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close interest will be charged through of business November 29, 2010 or hang ugh December 31 of the succeeding year. • I i r . 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. 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: whereon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted j • Member introduced the following resolution and moves its adoption: I RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS I WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has caused the removal of trees on certain properties within the City during 2009 under the sirthonty of Minnesota Statutes, Section 180.13 and by written agreement with the owners of such property; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where tree removal costs are to be assessed, together with the amounts proposed to be assessed to each proles and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for tree removal costs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that- 1 - The special assessment roll of tree removal costs incurred during the year • 2009 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 17597. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable in equal • annual installments with interest thereon at six (6) percent per annum, extending over a period of five years. The first of the installments shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2011, and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from May 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 30, 2010. After April 30, 2010, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from May 1, j 2010, through the date of payment Such payment must be made by the close of business November 29, 2010 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. If the owner wishes to pay off the balance at some point in the future, such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31, of the suing year. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this . • • . assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over m the same manner as other municipal taxes. 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: whereon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • i • r Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Trees) 2009 Tree Removal Printed March 01, 2010 Municipal Code No. 22 bevy Runs Five Years 1r1i" figodd Tstd Pading LtNFAIt Amt &MUN 1 DUK.NM11 M ZuwnftAdd= zMWxWM AalaM s'rrargtl Lbas CacOW 17597 Thmmm Fats 5715 Dupont Ave N 01- 118 -21- 23.0023 1,006.53 30.00 30.00 1,066.53 17597 Earl Kmotb . 5637 Girard Ave N 01- 118 -21 -32 -0078 951.56 30.00 30.00 1,011.56 Evelyn Krudh 17597 U S BANK N A 58001rving Ave N 02- 118 -21 -14 -0068 2,347.81 30.00 30.00 2,407.81 17597 Gary Jolmeou 5512 Judy I.a 02- 118 -21-42 -0087 476.00 30.00 30.00 536.00 17597 Chace Bundy $542 Judy La 02- 118 -21-42 -0092 477.50 30.00 30.00 537.50 17597 Indra Gobs dhen 5801 Drew Ave N 03- 118 -21- 134)029 545.00 30.00 30.00 605.00 17597 Angus Moanohecn 5800 HaHh x Ave N 03- 118- 21 -24. 0089 545.00 30.00 30.00 605.00 17597 Nancy Wilcox 4705 Lakeview Ave 10- 118-21 - 32.0012 1,011.88 30.00 30.00 1,071.88 17597 Julie Thompson 4816 Twin Late Ave 10. 118- 21 -32- 0060 245.00 30.00 30.00 305.00 17597 Daniel Dropps 7113 Halih x Ave N 27- 119 -21 -31 -0076 1,054.63 30.00 30.00 1,114.63 Svdl ma Dropp 17597 Luis Hanaodez 6907 Grime Ave N 27- 119 -21 -34 -0082 343.91 30.00 30.00 403.91 Sandra Atamtsr 17597 Joel Van Dan Boom 6907 Palma Was Dr W 27- 119 -21- 43-0102 1,111.88 30.00 30.00 1,171.88 Kathleen Van Dan Boom 17597 Michael Malkr 6801 Drew Ave N 34-119-21-124)047 445.00 30.00 3000 505.00 Breada Miller 17597 David Glamd a 3300 Qtwln Rd 34119 -21- 14.0071 2,073.75 30.00 30.00 2,133.75 Sherry Glewitz 17597 Vincent Lhnas 6126 June Ave N 34119-21 - 34.0001 453.50 30.00 30.00 513.50 Ellen Usual 17597 Scott Egan 4106 62nd Ave N 34119 -21- 340046 445.00 30.00 30.00 505.00 Bisoca Morales -Egan 17597 Jodbaaa Kidd 6225 France Ave N 34119 -21- 34.0091 878.28 . 30.00 30.00 938.28 17597 M Donald Blom 6301 Brootlyn Blvd 34119 -21.42 -0007 311.00 30.00 30.00 371.00 17597 Too Yea Yang 3219 Lawronce Rd 34-119-214"113 1,058.44 30.00 30.00 1,118.44 17597 Sandra Majis Abrogo 6418 Brooklyn Dr 35- 119 -21 -31 -0001 2,180.00 30.00 30.00 2,240.00 Sandra Gohalez aW otBroekbm CoMw- 6301 Skieeb made Pa kwey- Brooklyn CeaW MW 55430 Peye l of 2 Amended special Asst CeitiSed Roll (frees) 2009 Tree Removal Printed March 01, 2010 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs Five Years CA" BMW Toni Pmdla h&M AEA=md AnaM LMN& II Arcot Clum Ckun fAOd 17597 James Bunton 6400 Ghard Ave N 36- 114 -21- 32.0050 028.00 30.00 30.00 1,388.00 AWk Wuw ' 17597 Anna Domah 6224 Dupont Ave N 36- 119 -21- 34-0074 1,008.50 30.00 30.00 1,068.50 Total: 21,618.17 I Cky arD nekbe CaoOer -6301 Sbi%bCraak Pansy - Omoktya Ccdw M N SSM Fop 2 of 2 Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (GrrantWceds) 2009 Wad Destruction Printed March 01, 2010 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year CA" 392M mad Zman lotind Amm mlmt Aoatut TAUNaL Aoabot Dales QUO CAMd 07598 TCF National Book 5935 Lyndale Ave N O1- 118 -21- 12.0014 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 i 07598 Soon hmesu 505 61st Ave N O1- 118 -21 -12 -0026 19238 10.00 30.00 232.38 Thomm Jim n 07598 Greater Me4opolitao Hoeing Corp 6012 Dupont Ave N O1- 118- 21 -21. 0051 600.58 10.00 30.00 640.58 07598 Federal Hama Lon Mug Corp 5948 Fremont Ave N 01-1 10-21-22-M 40630 10.00 30.00 44630 07598 Lorsios Millar 5834 Fremont Ave N O1- 118 -21 -23 -0082 269.81 10.00 30.00 309.81 07598 Amos (luar 5800 Dupont Ave N 01- 118 -21- 24-0025 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 Marie Guar 07598 Harold Scott 5750 Bryaat Ave N O1- 118.21- 24-0043 552.02 10.00 30.00 592.02 07598 Edwin Hempel 5631 Aldrich Ave N O1- 118 -21- 31.0086 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 Arlene Hempol 07598 Chase Hans Finance LLC 910 55th Ave N 01- 118 -21 -31 -0117 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 07598 Berisp Betuto 5548 (Brand Ave N 01- 118 -21- 324)037 23428 10.00 30.00 27428 Dams Bekuto 07598 Greeter Metropolitan Housing Corp 5300 Girard Ave N 01- 118 -21- 33-0016 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 07598 C1wog Vaog 5415 Girard Ave N O1- 118- 21 -33. 0059 257.83 10.00 30.00 297.83 Tai an VMS 07598 Helen Evans 5447 Dupont Ave N O1- 118 -21 -33 -0075 257.83 10.00 30.00 297.83 07598 1 properties LLC 5424 Fremont Ave N O1- 118 -21 -33 -0169 357.83 10.00 30.00 397.83 07598 Bent ofAmerica N A 819 55th Ave N O1- 118 -21- 34-0046 257.83 10.00 30.00 297.83 07598 Carla Tmjo 5340 CoMm Ave N O1- 118 -21- 34.0067 306.30 10.00 30.00 346.30 Jennifer Wersel 07598 Houropheng Bou iavoth $438 Dupont Ave N O1- 118 -21- 34-0109 846.35 10.00 30.00 886.35 07598 MWC Beneficial Lan A Thrift Co 5614 Camden Ave N O1- 118 -21- 42.0032 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 07598 Kung Yang Vang 5311 Qum Ave N 02- 118 -21- 34-0048 300.00 10.00 30.00 340.00 07598 AqdwEmwVdMLLC 5556 Logan Ave N 02- 118 -21 41- 0099 40630 10.00 30.00 446.30 07598 Jack Booffim 5331 Morgan Ave N 02- 118 -21- 43-0060 281.79 10.00 30.00 321.79 07598 do Best Assets Inc See ofHousiog A Urban 5301 Humibokit Ave N 02- 118 - 21.440032 588.56 10.00 30.00 628.56 Dmelopment Cky of amoklyn Coder -6301 gdw* Cn& Pekwar-enaklrr, c®rQ MN S$430 r ye t a 5 i • Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2009 Wood ne sUmdon Printed March 01, 2010 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year fA" INEW I" ZmAbig IxA" AMMMIN Aunt IiAVy Nn. l ANON own ab= fAdw 07598 Walla Faro Baal N A 5309 Humboldt Ave N 02- 118.21440034 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 07598 MichselBlite 53181rviogAveN 02- 118 - 2144.0041 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 07598 14010me8oro00 LLC 6006 York Ave N 03- 118 -21- 11.0045 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 07598 Rnakwell Investments LLC 5918 Admiral La 03- 118- 21 -12- 0099 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 07598 4addined Lean Ser U S BANK N A 4006 61st Ave N 03- 118 -21 -21 -0112 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 07598 Luring APaogoe 3906 Barquest La 03- 118 -21-31 -0029 393.78 10.00 30.00 433.78 07598 Cie Vang 3818 Bella; Dr 03- 118- 21 -31- 0068 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 walmo vaog Be Vang Pdorpha 07398 Ahod Sobom 5649.Brooklyn Blvd 03- 118 - 2142.0016 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 07598 Robert Bade 5655 Brooklyn Blvd 03- 118 - 2142.0017 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 07598 do M Joln mxk) ft 3324 53rd Ave N Lod 3524 53rd Ave N 03- 118 -21-43 -DOSS 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 Trost 07598 Aurora Loa Sav MGRS INC 5247 Drew Ave N 10- 118 -21 -12 -0012 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 07598 RdarocaPan 5025 Draw Ave N 10- 11821- 13 -0048 269.81 10.00 30.00 309.81, 07598 Rueroll Smhl 4937 Brooklyn Blvd 10- 119 -21- 14-0012 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 07598, Ulynen Boyd 4807 Amlia Ave N 10- 118 -21 -32 -0065 366A2 10.00 30.00 406.42 B Lasts Boyd 07598 Lash Rae ScWo ddder 7225 Bryant Ave N 25- 119.21- 314048 257.83 10.00 30.00 297.83 07598 Haory Willisms 7113 Fremont Ave N 25- 119 -21- 32-0045 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Naomi Robats 07598 Carrigpoo Mtg Ser Deutsche BankNd Trst Co Tr 7243 Dupont AveN 25- 119-21 -32 -0097 293.78 10.00 30.00 333.78 07598 David Evans= 720 69th Ave N 25- 119 -21- 34-0008 , 366.42 10.00 30.00 406A2 07598 Wdls Fargo BukN A 1501 Amy L 26- 119 -21 414026. 100.00 10.00 30.00 14000 07598 L VMS 1612 72nd Ave N 26. 119 -21. 414072 293.78 10.00 30.00 333.78 Mee Hang 07598 Todd Ban um 1618 Woodbine L 26. 11921 -41 -0095 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Pameht Boman Coy orarorkbeChia- 6101M 6a1r61arkPrkaey- BNeWaeksre MNSWO Pyr2ds Amended Special AssessroM Cmifled Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2009 Weed Destruction Printed March 01, 2010 I Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year cum fQALdd Tahl Pwlllaa ioOnd Aumd DENERWOM E p Alma L'itwn paten jound 07598 Comm Vasquez 6900 Olim Ave N 26- 119 - 2143-0105 354.40 10.00 30.00 394.40 Jesdca Vasquez 07598 Zoas 1607 70th Ave N 26 -119- 21-44-0050 270.23 10.00 30.00 31023 Chao Moue W598 HSBC Mortgage Corp HSBC M w " Service 1708 69th Ave N 26-l1 6 119 -21.44 -0079 624 21 10.00 30.00 664.21 Ine W598 Bobbie Morlock 7236 HWHA Ave N 27- 119- 21 -31- 0031 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 07598 Donald Slohndw 4213 Woodbine La 27- 119,21 -31 -0100 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 07598 Naam Koursh 7225 Indiana Ave N 27- 119 -21 -31 -0103 306.30 10.00 30.00 346.30 Douglas Gatlin Sr 07598 Zar Yang 7207 Indiana Ave N 27- 119 -21 -31 -0106 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 Va Her W598 Luis Hernandez 6907 Chimes AveN 27- 119 -21- 34.0 2 564.09 10.00 30.00 604.09 Snadm AksaW 07598 Gumenteed Funding LLC 4825 71st Ave N 28- 119 -21-41 -0137 564.09 10.00 30.00 604.09 07598 Than NV4 6913 Regan Ave N 23- 119 -21- 43.0005 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 Clnmg Nguyen W598 Long Her 7037 Regent AveN 28. 119 -21. 43-0026 246.19 10.00 30.00 286.19 W598 Doug Wald 7030 Ragan Ave N 28 -119- 21.44-0057 21928 10.00 30.00 259.28 07598 My Hone Soome LLC 6701 Quail Ave N 33- 119 -21- 11-0079 306.30 10.00 30.00 346.30 07598 US BANK NA 5312 67th Ave N 33- 119 -21 -12 40036 29428 10.00 30.00 33428 07598 Trish Nguyen 6612 Unity Ave N 33- 119 -21 -1344 269.81 10.00 30.00 309.81 07598 Kevfrt Opahl 6530 Or bard Ave N 33- 119 -21- 144002 39428 10.00 30.00 434.28 07598 Xai Lax 6233 Scott Ave N 33- 119 -21- 43.0058 • 405.76 10.00 30.00 445.76 Fad Yang W598 Wills Fargo Bank N A Trustee 6125 Ferry Ave N 33- 119- 21.444M 269.81 10.00 30.00 309 81 07598 Suohwt Mortgage Inc 6818 France Ave N 34- 119 -21- 124)071 294.28 10.00 30.00 33428 07598 Carina Wagwvisk 3408 66th Ave N 34- 119 -21- 13-0013 576.54. 10.00 30.00 616.54 07598 Calvin Smith 6606 Chowat Ave N 34- 119 -21- 13.0014 624.63 10.00 30.00 664.63 Eva Smith Cityd'11,oakb%CeW - 63018liosls cm* pmkway amotlya cMtw MN 53430 Hqo 3 d s Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2009 Weed Destruction Printed March Ol, 2010 • Municipal Code No. 22 Lavy Runs One Year �Ihl no" TWA1 ?wWW Land AMEMM AMU 07398 Joan 0bon 6538 Ewing Ave N 34119-21 -13. 0042 282.26 1000 30.00 322.26 07598 JUNIft Leo 6612 Swing Ave N 34119 -21 -1344 306.30 10.00 30.00 346.30 07598 AdolfZydowicz 3112 671h Ave N 34119 -21 -14 -0004 564.09 10.00 30.00 604.09 Amu Zydowicz 07598 Brume Pans Sods 4213 Wlatbeger La 34119 -21- 244044 29428 10.00 30.00 334.28 NaWsRuiz 07598 US BANK HOME MORTO U S BANK NA 6307 France Ave N 34119- 21 -31- 0020 269.81 10.00 30.00 309.81 07598 Ono QMS Liu 4013 65th Ave N 34119- 21 -31-=S 576.54 10.00 30.00 616.54 07598 Jotasy Boucher 6407 Lee Ave N 34119 -2132 -0007 294.28 10.00 30.00 33428 07598 Joseph Schom 6401 Lee Ave N 34119- 21 -324M 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Sdsdta Schom 07598 Associates Fiosmial CWMWtgage lac 6342 Lee Ave N 34119.2132- 0091 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 07598 TO Phan 6437 J Ave N 34119 -21- 32.0093 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Tracy vu 07598 QrcLoopha Hsgm 6217 Major Ave N 34119 -21- 33.0065 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 El msor Hsgm 07598 Jmaffier I.ayman 3000 64th Ave N 34 -119 -21.41 -0017 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 07598 XayXieng 3107 6S1b Ave N 34119 -21.41 -0112 564.52 10.00 30.00 604.52 07598 Duc Mich Troony 6142 Brooklyn Blvd 34119 -21- 434037 624.63 10.00 30.00 664.63 07598 Phong KY Ngeyan 6749 Humboldt Ave N 35- 119 -21 -11 -0018 414.52 10.00 30.00 454.52 07598 Demis Smell 6319 Brooklyn Dr 35- 119 -21- 3240052 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 07598 Ma" Gum n 2819 Obeary Rd 3S- 119-21 32-0094 31833 10.00 30.00 358.33 07598 Nicole Rocklin 2807 661h Ave N 35- 119 -21- 32-0115 394.28 10.00 30.00 434 28 07598 Welcome Herne Builders, hrc. 6812 Aldrich Ave N 36- 119.21 -21 -0122 552.11 10.00 30.00 592.11 07598 Vona Lao 6843 Dupont Ave N 36- 119 -21- 224)002 576.11 10.00 30.00 616.11 i D= Xiwg 07598 Crr]MORTGAOB INC 6737 Dupont Ave N 36-119-21-22-0011 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 07598 Madam Fmmbkn 6643 Bryant Ave N 36- 119 - 2124-0082 293.78 10.00 30.00 333.78 07598 Wells Fargo Bank N A 6407 Colour Ave N 36- 119 -21-31 -0008 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 Pye4 d S thy eflooBys Codw-6301 S9%%Cn* Psknay- BnAbs Caber MN 53430 Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Orass/Weeds) 2009 Weed Destnlction Printed March 01, 2010 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year Eudlra hAKwt AMMM t AUMM 07598 Richad Her 6342 Dupont Ave N 36. 119 -21- 31.0015 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 07598 Daps Soft 6413 Dupont Ave N 36- 119 -21- 32.0017 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 Daum Barley 07598 Carla Nelson 6214 Use Dr 36- 119 - 21-33- 0006 258.21 10.00 30.00 298.21 07598 JPMOROAN CHASE BANK Bank of America 6131 Emmon Ave N 36- 119 -21 -33 -0032 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 07598 Sia Lee 6118 Fremont Ave N 36- 119 -21- 33.0040 282.26 1800 30.00 322.26 07598 OnyHobson 81061stAveN 36.119 -21- 34-0097 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 j 07598 Wills Faro Beak NA 6252 Bryant Ave N 36- 119 -21 -34 -0098 684.75 10.00 30.00 724.75 Total: 33,899.07 j QuyofewoktoCeo..630tahis*Cn*P.kw.r- Smokr•ckoWMN55e30 r+yesas Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Abatement) 2009 Abatement Printed March Ol, 2010 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year Co" 39011101 Taw P.own ham dot Am00mt LAMEL QMK3A=W anwan amount Lim am Cadflad 17599 Magaus Padni me 710 58th Ave N 01- 118 -21- 244=2 310.00 10.00 30.00 350.00 Louise Padmore 17599 Aerie Zee► 5850 Roux Ave N 02- 118 -21- 14-0016 420.00 10.00 30.00 460.00 17599 lackBooiLiree 5331 MorgauAveN 02- 118 -21- 43.0060 1,125.00 10.00 30.00 1,165.00 17599 Speeialiaed luau Ser U S BANK N A 4006 61st Ave N 03. 118 -21 -21 -0112 295.00 10.00 30.00 335.00 17599 Keodall Beeps 5737 Halift Ave N 03- 118.21 - 74-0001 300.00 10.00 30.00 340.00 17599 HSBC Mo%" Service Inc 5213 Bwiog Ave N 10- 118.21 -12 -0061 315.00 10.00 30.00 355.00 17599 RebecesPats 5025 Draw Ave N 10- 118 -21- 134)048 315.00 10.00 30.00 355.00 17599 L41 VMS 1612 72nd Ave N 26. 119 -21- 41-0072 295.00 10.00 30.00 335.00 Mee Haag 17599 admortgage lee 7019 Morgan AveN 26.11921 -43 -0061 265.00 10.00 30.00 305.00 17599 HSBC Mortgage Cap HSBC Mortgage Services 1708 691h Ave N 26.119- 21.44.0079 650.00 10.00 30.00 690.90 Inc 17599 Lois Hesoaodez 6907 Grimes Ave N 27- 119 -21- 344082 290.00 10.00 30.00 330.00 Sandra Alcaatar 17599 ]Gong We 5112 701h Ave N 28 -119- 21-434)033 250.00 10.00 30.00 290.00 Scog Yea 17599 US BANK NA 5312 67th Ave N 33-119-21-12-M 230.00 10.00 30.00 270.W 17599 Sbmm virmoer 6707 Regent Ave N 33- 119 -21 -12 -0103 370.00 10.00 30.00 410.00 Bruce Burseind 17599 HDoa Xloog 5224 Vrmdm w La 33- 119 -21 -13 -0019 380.00 10.00 30.00 420.00 See Vang 17599 Doc Mom 3125 661h AveN 34- 119 -21 -14 -0060 315.00 10.00 30.00 355.00 Tang Moua 17599 Allen wataen 4318 65th AveN 34119 -21- 234)063 250.00 10.00 30,00 290.00 wina waron 17599 Bvahome Mortgage Co HSBC Bank USA Trustee 3105 Lawrence Rd 34119- 2144-0105 515.00 10.00 30.00 555.00 17599 Phoog KY Ngoyen 6749 Humboldt Ave N 35- 119- 21 -11- 0018 440.00 10.00 30.00 480.00 17599 X01 rwag 6342 CHrard Ave N 36-119-21- 32 -Ml 355.00 10.00 30.00 395.00 Houa Vang Coy orBmo*nComer- 6301We& Oak pskwr- CmlarDAQssm POr1or2 Amended special Assessment Certified Roll (Administrative vacant Building Registration) 2009 Administrative Vacant Building Registration Printed March 01, 2010 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year tiilll�ttl saffild Tatal i JAMM Aummmt Aomat JIM&& 95MKENNO Z mmILAddlsal Pcmerl M Amnut Llama S.l= Colsad 17601 Jack Bonlfwe 5331 Morgan Ave N 02- 118 - 21.43- 0060 400.00 10.00 30.00 410.00 17601 Melba Rvaason 800 6916 Ave N 25- 119 -21- 344)007 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 17601 Luis Hamadoz 6907 (crimes Ave N 27- 119 -21 -3444 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 Sandra Akcarar Took 1,320.0* CityorarooWP C=W -6301 N iqb Cmok halo y -amokys CmgrMN 53430 Pop I of 1 Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Abatement) 2009 Abatement Printed March 01, 2010 I, Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year cow foal Tao Isuft hand AmmoM AMEN LffyN& 2MOMA AWAVU f= fib= Cdtftd 17599 Web Farts► Baer NA 6252 Bryaet Ave N 36. 119 -21. 340098 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 TOUL 8,l25.�0 i cuyd&ooklyo CmW -6701 S dqb Creek r rk r y- R ookhe Csolw M a SSW hp 2 act i Amended SpocW Assessment Certified Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2009 Weed Destruction Printed March 08, 2010 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year 1 laid Ttdal rtlod n 719=12 Affinmot AM IN i"T Nar 1'1<9Ye�r.A4drsat > @ ARWO EMM Qaw Lwtftd 17598 TC F Natioml Bank S935 Lyn" Ave N 01 -118- 21.12.0014 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 17598 Federal Home Loan Mig Corp 5948 Fmmoot Ave N 01- 118- 21 -22. 0028 40630 1&00 30.00 446.30 17598 Amos CJaar 5800 Dupont Ave N 01- 118 -21- 24.0025 294.28 10.00. 30.00 33428 Marie (imur 17S98 Harold Soon 5750 Bryant Ave N 01- 118.21 - 244043 $52.02 10.00 30.00 592.02 17598 Bdwh1 Hempel 5631 Aldrich Ave N 01- 118- 21 -31. 0086 28226 10.00 3040 322.26 Arleen Hemrrpel 17398 Chase Home Finance LLC 910 55th Ave N 01- 118 -21 -31 -0117 29428 10.00 30.00 33428 17598 Chang Vag 5415 Girard AveN 01- 118 -21- 33-0059 257.83 10.00 30.00 297.83 Teri CbsYang 17598 Helen Evans 5447 Dupont Aw N 01- 118 -21- 33-0075 257.83 10.00 30.00 297.83 17598 Cados Tt4yo 5340 Col&x Ave N 01- 118 -21- 341067 306.30 10.00 30.00 346.30 Jenoif r wertal 17598 Hounpheag Boaosevath 5438 Dupont Ave N 01- 118.21 - 34-0109 84635 10.00 30.00 88635 17598 HSBC Beneficial Lean dt Thrift Co 5614 Camden Ave N 01- 118 -21. 42-0032 29428 10.00 30.00 33428 17598 Kong Yang Vasg 5311 Qwu Ave N 02- 118.21- 34-0048 300.00 10.00 30.00 340.00 17598 Aspim Eamprises LLC 5556 Logaa Ave N 02 -118- 2141 -M 406.30 10.00 30.00 44630 17598 JackBooifin 5331MorpsAveN 02- 118.21- 43-0060 281.79 10.00 30.00 321.79 17598 C/o Bod Assels Inc Sec otHondng Bt Utbm 5301 Humboldt Ave N 02- 118 -21- 44-0032 588.56 10.00 30.00 628.56 Development 17598 Wd b Fargo Book N A 5309 Humboldt AveN 02- 118-21-44-0034 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17598 Michael Blake 5318 hying Ave N 02- 118 -2144. 0041 262.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 17598 MAWmoSovme LLC 6006 Ya'k Ave N 03- 118 -21- 11-0045 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17598 Lataiaot Azaague 3906 Bwquen La 03- 118 -21- 31.0029 393.78 10.00 30.00 433.78 Cimyof bveddyn Cesht- 63018Yo*Cn ek hrkway- Bmookbi Cmlc MN 35430 Pane 1 d 4 i • • Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2009 Weed Destruction Printed March 08, 2010 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year CuWl 8pAII1 Taal LavV rid del Zit ELK @ Amok am am lrNIMIld 17598 Ge Vang 3818 Bckbwg Dr 03- 118- 21 -31. 0068 29428 10.00 30.00 33428 Waken Vo Be Yang Pow Ph& 17598 Abavel Sdeea 5649 Brooklyn Blvd 03-118 -21-42 -0016 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17598 Robert Baas 5655 Brooklyn Blvd 03- 118 -21- 42.0017 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17598 o%M JobwarANbbs 3524 53rd Ave N Lewd 3524 53rd Ave N 03- 118 -21- 434055 28226 10.00 30.00 322.26 Trust ' 17398 Amon Loan Sery MGRS INC 5247 Draw Ave N 10- 118 -21- 12.0012 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17598 Rebeocs Pn rra 5023 Drew Ave N 10- 118 -21- 13-0048 269.81 10.00 30.00 309.81 17598 Roo" Smith 4937 Brooklyn Blvd 10- 118 -21- 14-0012 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17598 Ulyssem Boyd 4807 Ardis Ave N 10. 118 -21- 3241065 366.42 10.00 30.00 406.42 B Larne Boyd 17598 Henry Williams 7113 Fremont Ave N 25-1 19.2132.0045 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Naomi Roberts 17598 Catrkpon Mtg Ser Deu%dw Bank Nd Tma Co Tr 7243 Dupont Ave N 23- 119 -21- 32-0097 293.78 10.00 30.00 333.78 17598 David Bvamon 720 69th Ave N 25- 119 - 2134.0008 366A2 10.00 30.00 406A2 17598 Wells Fargo Bank A 1501 Any La 26.119- 2141.0026 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17598 La Vaag 1612 72nd Ave N 26- 119.21. 414072 293.78 10.00 30.00 333.78 Meofw g 17398 Todd Batson 1618 Woodbine La 26. 119- 21.414*95 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Pamela Henn 17598 Oeouo Vasquez 6900 Oliver Ave N 26.119- 21-43 -0105 354AO 10.00 30.00 39440 Jessica Vapuez 17598 Zoos )Gong 1607 700e Ave N 26. 119 - 2144-0050 270.23 10.00 30.00 31023 Chao Moue 17398 HSBC Mortgage Corp HSBC Motgage Services 1708 696 Ave N 26- 119,2144-0079 624.21 10.00 • 30.00 664.21 Inc 17598 Bobbin Moluck 7236 HdUbx Ave N 27- 119 -21 -31 -0031 270.23 10.00 30.00 31023 17595 Donald Stefieske 4213 Woodbine Ls 27- 119 -21 -31 -0100 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 OWefbodcga t: sneer - 6301 S do& Qm* PwkmW. Brooklyn C®wr MN SSM Patel or4 Amended Special Assessment CetffW Roll ((im& Weeds) 2009 Weed Destruction Printed March 08, 2010 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year DwiW Bodd mmd Im>e7t N& QMWLfigMgA P Psadiara h t ud A m od AM= Doga Omm CAMd 17598 Neural Kam* 7225 ladiaoa Ave N 27- 119 -21 -31 -0103 306.30 10.00 30.00 34630 Douglas Galin Sr 17598 Zar Yang • 7207 htdlane Ave N 27- 119 - 2131 -0106 28126 10.00 30.00 322.26 Va Her 17598 Luis Hemandez 6907 Grimes Ave N 27- 119 -21- 34-0082 564.09 10.00 30.00 604.09 Sandm Ake 17598 Gauantend Fgnft LLC 4825 71st Ave N 28- 119 -21.41 -0137 564.09 10.00 30.00 604.09 17598 Chmrg Mm 6913 Regem Ave N 28- 119- 21.4341M 270.23 10.00 30.00 .310.23 17598 Long Her 7037 Regent Ave N 28- 119.21.43-OM6 246.19 10.00 30.00 286.19 17598 US BANKNA 5312 M Ave N 33- 119 21- 12.0036 294.28 10.00 30.00 33428 17598 Triah Nguyen 6612 Unity Ave N 33- 119 -21- 13-0094 269.81 10.00 30.00 309.81 17598 Kavm OpmW 6530 Orchard Ave N 33- 11921- 14-0002 394.28 10.00 30.00 434.28 I 17598 WOOS Fargo Bmmk N A 7koA t 6125 Perry Ave N 33- 119 - 214440044 269.81 10.00 30.00 309.81 17598 StmWet Mortgage Inc 6818 France Ave N 34- 119.2142.0071 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 17598 Carien Wdurviak 3408 661h Ave N 34119.21- 13-0013 576.34 10.00 30.00 616.54 17598 Calvin Saitb 6606 Chowm Ave N 34119- 21 -13- 0014. 624.63 10.00 30.00 664.63 Eva Smim 17598 Joan Olson 6538 Ewing Ave N 34119.21- 13-0042 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 17598 hodfrr Lee 6612 Ewing Ave N 34119- 2143. 0085 30630 10.00 30.00 34630 17398 AdolfZydowicz 3112 67th Ave N 34119 21 -14. 0004 564.09 10.00 30.00 604.09 Arms Zydowicz 17598 Bnmo Perez Sour 4213 Winchester La 34119 - 2124-0044 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 Natalia Ruffs 17398 do Best Amts inc Sac of Hag do Urban 6307 Fiance Ave N 34119 -21- 31.0020 269.81 10.00 30.00 309.81 Develpmmt 17398 Jeraby Boucher 6407 Lae Ave N 34119 -21- 32-0007 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 MY atemoklye Coma -6301 WOO CMA Prkwey. emo mye C NN 33430 Peae3d4 Amended Special Assessment CatiBed Roll (GmWWeeds) 2009 Weed Desttucdion Printed Match 08, 2010 Mlmicipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year Q*81 ,9rte id Taw Esol W 1MM AtmuM Amp= i f �lsoe(al zMaKwAddMi Awmat 0alxs S.hm lkdod 17598 Joaaph Sehorn 6401 Lee Ave N 34119 -21 -32 -0008 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Sandta Schorr 17598 ChblopborRegan 6217btq* Ave N 34- 119 -21- 334)065 29428 10.00 30.00 33428 Eleanor Hagan 17598 Jeooifa Layman 3000 64th Ave N 34119 -21 -41 -0017 100.00 11100 30.00 140.00 17598 Xay Xiottg 3107 65th Ave N 34119 -21-41 -0112 564.52 10.00 30.00 604.52 17598 Phoog KY Nguyen 6749 Humboldt Ave N 35- 119 -21- 11-0018 414.52 10.00 30.00 454.52 17598 Dennis Small 6319 Brooklyn Dr 35- 119 -21 -32 -0052 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17398 Markel Chn man 28190beay Rd 35. 119.21 -32 4094 31L33 10.00 30.00 35833 17598 Nicole Fmnklin 2807 661h Ave N 35-119-21-32-0115 394.28 10.00 30.00 434.28 17598 Welcome Home BWMw% Inc. 6812 Aldrich Ave N 36- 119 -21 -21 -0122 552.11 10.00 30.00 592.11 17598 Yaua Lee 6843 Dupont Ave N 36- 119 -21- 224002 576.11 10.00 30.00 616.11 Dan X-8 17598 MORTGAGE INC 6737 Dupont Ave N 36- 119 -21 -22 -0011 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 17598 Mariam R abirn 6645 Bryant Avo N 36. 119 -21- 24-0052 293.78 10.00 30.00 333.78 17598 Richard Her 6342 Dupont A" N 36- 119.21 - 31.0015 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 17598 D Ba l y 6413 Dupont Ave N 36. 119 -21 -32 -0017 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 17598 Carla Neh n 6214 Lilac Dr N 36- 119-21 -33. 0006 258.21. 10.00 30.00 298.21 17598 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK Bad[ of Amuica 6131 Emerson Ave N 36.119.21 -33 -0032 270.23 10.00 30.00 • 310.23 17598 Sialm 611 &FremontAveN 36- 119.21 -33- 0040 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 17598 Glary Hoban 810 61dAve N 36-119-21-344W7 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 17598 Welk Fargo Bank NA 6252 Bryant Ave N 36- 119.21- 34-0098 684.75 10.00 30.00 724.75 Total: $27,534.97 Cilyef BwAbs Coofar-6301are glaCm*t omy-BmowyocadetMN15t30 r.V4a.e RE MENT AGREEMENT This Settlement Agreement and Release ( the "Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the City of Brooklyn Center ("City," "Plaurtifl or "Counterclaim Defendant"), and Famaz Toussi (" Toussi," "Defendant," `or "Counterclaim Plaintiff. The Agreement shall be effective when signed by all parties. WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota, by and through the City of Brooklyn Center, commenced a criminal action against Toussi entitled State of Afinnesota, City of Brooklyn Center v. Farnaz Toussi, Court File No. 27 CR 09- 1198 (Hennepin County District Court), alleging that Toussi violated City Ordinances by renting her property at 5800 Logan Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota after the expiration of her rental lousing Hcense; WHEREAS, the City commenced a civil action against Toussi entitled City of Brooklyn Center v. Farnaz Toussi, Court File No. 27 -CV -10 -1301 (Hennepin County District Court) (the "Lawsuit"); alleging that Toussi violated City Ordinances by renting her property at 5800 Logan Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota after the expiration of her rental housing license, and seeking payment of the penalty set by City Ordinances of 5 0 /9 of the annual license fee, WHEREAS, in response to the Lawsuit, Toussi asserted claims and counterclaims against the City alleging that the City enforced City Ordinances in an unconstitutional manner, WHEREAS, the City denies Toussi's claims and counterclaims but wishes to avoid the uncertainty, expense and inconvenience associated with litigation; WHEREAS, Toussi believes that her claims and counterclaims have merit but wishes to avoid the uncertainty, expense and inconvenience associated with litigation; and WHEREAS, Toussi, pimat to the terms of the parties' Stipulation of Facts (attached hereto as Exhibit A), has agreed to submit the criminal charge to the Court in State of Minnesota, City of Brooklyn Center v Fm?= Toussi, so that the Court may determine her guilt or lack of 1 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, agreements, and releases set forth herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the City and Toussi hereby agree to finally resolve this Lawsuit, including all claims and counterclaims, in accordance with the following terms of agreement: 1. Toussi agrees to submit the criminal charge to the Court in State of Murriesota, City of Brooklyn Center v Fw7m Toussi, Court Ple No. 27 CR 09 -1198 (Hennepin County District Court) on March 30, 28Kpursuant to the terms of the Stipulation of Facts. 2. Within 10 days of the criminal court's determination of Toussi's guilt or lack of guilt, the parties shall file the fully executed stipulation for dismissal with prejudice with the Hennepin County District Court to dismiss the Lawsuit and counterclaims with prejudice. The stipulation is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 3. In exchange for the consideration herein defined, the City, its officials, attornays, employees, and other agents, successors, and assigns shall be completely released, acquitted, and forever discharged from any and all claims, counterclaims, demands, actions, suits, causes of action, including claims for attorneys fees and costs, that Toussi had or now has on account of the acts or omissions of the City, its officials, attorneys, employees, and other agents, successors, and assigns pertaining to the . Lawsuit and counterclaims. 4. In exchange for the consideration herein defined, ToussL and her partners, officials, attorneys, employees, other agents, successors, and assigns, shall be completely released, acquitted, and forever discharged from any and all claims, demands, actions, suits, causes of action, including claims for attorneys fees and costs, that the 2 City had or now has on account of the acts or omissions of Toussi, her partners, officials, attorneys, employees, other agents, successors, and assigns pertaining to the Lawsuit and counterclaims. 5. A finding of not guilty or a finding of guilty in State of Minnesota, City of Brooklyn Center v. Far= Toussi, Court File No. 27 CR 09 -1198 (Hennepin County District Court), shall not nullify this Agreement as long as Toussi submitted the criminal charge to the Court pursuant- to the terms of the Stipulation of Facts. 6. This Agreement shall be null and void should the criminal court decline to accept the Stipulation of Facts, including Toussi's waiver of jury trial and her waiver of the right of confrontation, and decline to make a finding of guilty or not guilty according to the terms set forth in the Stipulation of Facts. 7. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees. 8. Either party may commence suit against the other for breach of this Agreement. 9. Toussi agrees that this Agreement shall not be deemed or construed to be an admission or evidence of any violation of any statute or law, or of any liability or wrongdoing by any person or entity, including, without limitation, the City, or of the uth ms o of any of the claim allegations contained in the Lawsuit, and counterclaim and evidence thereof shall not be used directly or indirectly, in any way, whether in the Lawsuit or in any other action, proceeding or lawsuit except in an action to enforce any obligation or right under this Agreement. 10. This Agreement shall be governed according to the substantive b and interpreted ac g y tarp laws of the State of Minnesota without regard to its choice of law or conflict of laws principles. 11. This Agreement, along with its exhibits, constitutes the entire Agreement between 3 Toussi and the City pertaining to the settlement of the Lawsuit and counterclaims and supersedes any earlier drafts or communications between Toussi and the City. 12. This Agreement may not be modified or amended except in writing executed by Toussi and the City. 13. This Agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the successors, heirs, agents, assigns, attorneys, employees, members and parmers, and former members and partners, of Toussi and upon all employees, attorneys, elected officials, departments, commissions and subdiNmons of the City. 14. Neither Toussi nor the City shall be considered to be the drafter of this Agreement or any of its provisions for the purpose of any statute, case law, or rule of interpretation or construction that would or might cause any provision to be construed against the drafter of this Agreement. Dated: , 2010 City of Brooklyn Center BY Its Dated: 3� 3 2010 Farmm Toussi:' Farnaz Toussi 4 r STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Court File 27 CR 09 -1198 State of Minnesota, City of Brooklyn Center, Plaintiff STIPULATION OF FACTS V. Famaz Toussi, Defendant For the purposes of the presentation of pre -trial issues, the State and Defendant stipulate to the following facts: 1. Defendant is the owner of that residential real property located at 5800 Logan Avenue, N. Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 2. Brooklyn Center Ordinance 12 -901 provides that no owner may rent or let a residential dwelling without first possessing a residential rental license issued the by City of Brooklyn Center. 3. Defendant previously held a residential rental license for 5800 Logan Avenue N which expired on 31 July 2008. 4. Defendant applied for a renewal license on 30 May 2008 and was advised by 4 e 2008 that an inspection of the dwellin g Center City staff b letter dated Jun Brooklyn C ty y p� was required prior to any approval of the new license. Said letter is attached and incorporated herein. That letter scheduled an inspection appointment for 17 June 2008. 5. The dwelling at 5800 Logan was inspected by Housing Inspector Paul Swett on 08 July 2008 and code violations were detected and a compliance and correction order was issued to Defendant on 8 July 2008 requiring correction of the violations not later than 29 August 2008. Defendant's husband and agent was present at the inspection and was given a copy of the compliance and correction notice. A copy of the Correction Order History is attached hereto and incorporated herein. 6. Inspector Swett re- inspected the premises on 29 August 2008 but could not gain access to the premises because the Defendant was not present. 7. Defendant's husband and agent called the City and asked to reschedule the inspection for the end of September, 2008. Defendant's husband and agent called the City again asking to reschedule the re- inspection to 17 October 2008. Defendant's husband and agent then called to re- schedule the. inspection for 22 October 2008. The inspection was conducted on 22 October 2008 with Defendant and several violations remained at the property. 8. After the expiration of the rental license on 31 July 2008, Defendant rented and let tenants occupy the dwelling at 5800 Logan Avenue N. 9. Defendant's renewed rental license was not issued until 13 July 2009. Copies of the license documents are attached hereto and incorporated herein. 10. After the expiration of Defendant's rental license on 31 July 2008 and prior to issuance of the renewed rental license on 13 July 2009, Defendant rented apartments to tenants in 5800 Logan Avenue N. 11. The parties agree that if the Court finds Defendant guilty, there should be a stay of imposition for one year. If Defendant complies with all City ordinances during that one 03/26/2010 13:36 IFAZ FAX@GR- ESPEL.COH X005/009 03/26/2010 FRI 12:46 FAX 952 851 9510 villaume & Schiek PA 0005/009 year time period, and pays a fine of $500 plus a surcharge of $78.00 (check made payable to Hennepin County District Court) and a rental penalty of $1,000 (check made payable to the City of Brooklyn Center), both payable within 6 months of conviction, the parties further agree that the finding that Defendant is guilty of the crime charged should automatically be vacated at the end of the one year period. 12. If the Court finds Defendant guilty, this finding of guilt does not constitute a License Category Criterion for purposes of Defendant's license renewal in 2010 for the 5800 Logan Avenue property pursuant to Chapter 12 of the City's Building Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. 13. The parties agree to execute a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice with respect to all claims and counterclaims in City of Brooklyn Center v. Farnaz Toussi, Hennepin Court File No. 27 -CV -10 -1303 (see Exhibit A) and will file such stipulation pursuant to the terms of the parties' settlement agreement (see Exhibit B). 14. Defendant, upon and with the advice of her attorney, waives her right to a jury trial and confrontation of witnesses and agrees the court shall determine guilt or lack of guilt based upon this stipulation and attachments. Philip G. Vi aurae Attorney for Defendant lq Attorney Registration Stipulating with the consent of Defendant thi S� arnaz Toussi .i 1Ie Q0 006/ 09 L .eli(26 /2010 13:36 IFAX FAX @GR- ESPEL.COM 03/26/2010 FRI 12.46 FAX 952 851 9510 Villaume Schiek PA U Wjjjj W jaimn G OCle n d pttomey Brooklyn Center Prosecuting 0 Anomey Regis of the State e consent Stipulating h with t Step g of March 2010 Dated this Y 03/26/2010 13:36 IFAZ FAaOCR- ESPEL.COY Q007/009 03/26/2010 FRI 12:46 FAX 952 851 9510 Villaume & Schiek PA 0007/009 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNIEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type: Other Civil City of Brooklyn Center, a municipal Case No. 27 -CV -10 -1303 corporation, Plaintiff, JOINT STIPULATION V. OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Famaz Toussi, Defendant. Pursuant to Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 41.01(a)(2), Plaintiff City of Brooklyn Center and Defendant Farnaz Toussi hereby stipulate that the above- captioned action may be dismissed with prejudice, and that all claims and counterclaims by or against any party to this case are hereby dismissed with prejudice, without costs or attorneys' fees to any party. Dated: March 26, 2010 VILLAUM HIE ,.P.A. B wl::: re e lip a Villaume ( #11 859) Jeffrey D. Schiek ( #305455) 2051 Killebrew Drive, Suite 611 Bloomington, MN 55425 Telephone: (952) 836 -2606 03/26/2010 16:09 IFAX FA%OGR- ESPEL. CON 19003/004 Mar 26 10 12:40P William G Clelland 505 820 6943 P•3 03/26/26 P8I i2n�6 10 PAZ 952 851 9510 vilia i Schick Ph BOOB /009 Dated: March 26, 2410 LAND & DER By William G. Clelland (#0017280) 6300 Shingle Creek Parkway, Suite 305 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55430 Telephone: (762) 561 -2800 and GREENE ESPEL, P.L.L.P. 13y &W� Robin M. Wolpert ( #310219) 200 S. Sixth Street, Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 373 -0830: Attorneys for Plaintiff City of Brooklyn Center ACKNOWLEDGMENT The undersigned hereby acknowledges that costs, disbursements and reasonable attorney and witness fees may be awarded pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 549211, subd. 2, to the party against whom the allegations in this pleading are ass td 1(� _ . W 04 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The undersigned hereby acknowledges that costs, disbursements and reasonable attorney and witness fees may be awarded parmmat to Minn. Star. § 549211, subd. 2, to the party against whom the allegations in this pleading are asserted. 'p G. vilffame 2 Dated: March , 2010 CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER Alit or By t/ W' am G. Clelland (#0017280) P 6300 Shingle Creek Parkway, Suite 305 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55430 Telephone: (762) 561 -2800 and GREENE ESPEL, P.L.L.P. By Robin M. Wolpert ( #310219) 200 S. Sixth Street, Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 373 -0830 Attorneys for Plaintiff City of Brooklyn Center ACKNOWLEDGMENT The undersigned hereby acknowledges that costs, disbursements and reasonable attorney and witness fees may be awarded pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 549.211, subd. 2, to the party against whom the allegations in this pleading are asserted. Robin M. Wolpert ACKNOWLEDGMENT The undersigned hereby acknowledges that costs, disbursements and reasonable attorney and witness fees may be awarded pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 549.211, subd. 2, to the party against whom the allegations in this pleading are asserted. ' 'p G. Villiume 2 • ACKNOWLEDGMENT The undersigned hereby acknowledges that costs, disbursements and reasonable attorney and witness fees may be awarded pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 549.211, subd. 2, to the party against whom the allegations in this pleading are assqted. _ A 0 _ _ _ - t.,► illiam G. Cle and • • AGENDA CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WORK SESSION April 12, 2010 Immediately Following Regular City Council and EDA Meetings Which Start at 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers City Hall A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Major Plan Amendment to the Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission's Second Generation Watershed Management Plan Amendment 2. Connections at Shingle Creek — A Corridor Study PENDING LIST FOR FUTURE WORK SESSIONS Later /Ongoing 1. Sister City Update — Curt 2. 57th and Logan Update 3. Strategic Outcome Reports • a. Prosecutor Services 4. Community Schools Update 5. Ordinance Amendments — Farmers Market 6. 2011 Brooklyn Center Celebration Update 7. Crime Free Housing Update 8. Neighborhood Designations 9. Junk and Inoperable Vehicles Update — Back Yard Parking 10. Minn. Stat. 273.128 4d Rental Properties — Annual Report 11.6101 Beard -6037 Brooklyn Blvd Update — May 12. Local Government Aid Policy 13. Brookdale Mall Update 14. Joslyn/City Property Remediation Update 15. Prosecutor's Contract 16. Department Year End Reports 17. Community Garden Program 18. Active Living Program 19. RER — Howe Fertilizer Update 20. Garbage Hauler Report • • Work Session Agenda Item No. 1 r MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION • DATE: April 6, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steven Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer SUBJECT: Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission's Second Generation Watershed Management Plan Amendment Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council evaluate and provide comments pertaining to a proposed major plan amendment to the Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management J P g pp g Commission's Second Generation Watershed Management Plan. No formal action is required. Background: On March 22, 2010, the City Council discussed the referenced watershed plan amendment and requested additional information pertaining to Brooklyn Center's financial commitment, levy amounts and clarifications on the CIP table. The attached spreadsheet provide a summary of the levy amounts per City within the watershed and breakout of the yearly CIP amounts per the Shingle Creek and the West Mississippi Watersheds. Also attached is a memo provided by the Watershed's engineer explaining the levy and assessment process used by the watershed and the County for the watershed projects. • Council Policy Issues: Does the City ouncil sup the Major Plan Am n m Y pp Major d ent 9 . Does the City Council support exceeding the maximum annual levy guideline for 2010? Budget Issues: The Watershed's plan update is consistent with the City's CIP. Council Goals: Strategic: 5. We will continue to maintain and upgrade City infrastructure improvements Ongoing: 6. We will ensure the City drinking water. is high quality and that the storm water is properly managed • �lniurl: f.uurrrr� at,, at"! a< %Ir.: 1, �uh% , n.mnrun llua r III aurrn ilw rltralhl' o/ lilt am presrrre.� tht Imblic 1ra.Nl Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commissions Proposed 2010 -2013 CIP; Levy Impacts $f11t1C. -reek 1�t SHINGLE CREEK CIP PROJECTS Total Other Total Other Total Other Project Partners Commission Project Partners Commission Project Partners Commission 2010 Project Cost Share Share Grants 2011 Pro ect Cost Share' Share 2012 Pro ect Cost Share' Share Wetland 639W $ 570,000 $ 127,500 $ 142,500 $ 300,000 Pond P57 $ 648,000 $ 486,000 $ 162,000 Pond P -33 $ 574,000 $ 430,500 $ 143,500 New Hope Pond $ 550,000 $ 252,500 $ 137,500 $ 160,000 B Park Shingle Cr $ 750,000 $ 562,500 $ 187,500 Pond P -55 $ 855,000 $ 641,250 $ 213,750 B Center Shingle Cr $ 430,000 $ 217,263 $ 107,500 $ 105,237 Meadow Lake $ 100,000 $ 75,000 $ 25,000 Bass Creek Stabil $ 70,000 $ 52,500 $ 17,500 M Is Flood Area 5 $ 4,000,000 $ 3,750,000 $ 250,000 TOTAL $ 5,550,000 $ 4,347,263 $ 637,500 1 $ 565,237 f $ 1,498,000 1 $ 1,123,500 1 $ 374,500 TOTAL $ 1,499,000 $ 1,124,250 $ 374,750 "Including any future grants 'Including any future grants Property owners in 2009 Tax % of Share of Pft-kl ners in 2009 Tax % of Share of Property owners in 2009 Tax % of Share of Communit Capacity Total Lev • Community Ca aci Total Le Communit Ca�ci Total Lev nter Brooklyn Center 17,568,347 11.3% $ 72,068 B17,568,347 11.3% $ 42,336 Brooklyn Center 17,568,347 11.3% $ 42,365 Brooklyn Park 38,843,789 25.0% $ 159,343 Brk 38,843,789 25.0% $ 93,606 Brookl n Park 38,843,789 25.0% $ 93,668 C stal 11,622,042 7.5% $ 47,675 C 11,622,042 7.5% $ 28,007 C stal 11,622,042 7.5% $ 28,026 Maple Grove 28,215,831 18.2% $ 115,746 M 28,215,831 18.2% $ 67,995 Ma le Grove 28,215,831 18.2% $ 68,040 Minnea olis 12,105,330 7.8% $ 49,658 M 12,105,330 7.8% $ 29,172 Minneapolis 12,105,330 7.8% $ 29,191 New Hoe 13,391,982 8.6% $ 54,936 New Hoe 13,391,982 8.6% $ 32,272 New Hoe 13,391,982 8.6% $ 32,294 Osseo 2,223,546 1.4% $ 9,122 Osseo 2,223,546 1.4% $ 5,359 Osseo 2,223,546 1.4% $ 5,362 Plymouth 21,127,274 13.6% $ 86,667 Plymouth 21,127,274 13.6% $ 50,913 Plymouth 21,127,274 13.6% $ 50,947 Robbinsdale 10,307,930 6.6% $ 42,285 Robbinsdale 10,307,930 6.6% $ 24,840 Robbinsdale 10,307,930 6.6% $ 24,857 TOTAL 155,406,071 $ 637,500 TOTAL 155,406,071 $ 374,500 TOTAL 155,406,071 $ 374,750 Proposed County Levy $ 637,500 Proposed County Levy $ 374,500 Proposed County Levy $ 374,750 Levy per $1 Net Tax Capacity $ 0.0041022 Levy per $1 Net Tax Capacity $ 0.0024098 Levy per $1 Net Tax Capacity $ 0.0024114 `Reported by City Assessors, actual would use most current value 'Based on 2009, actual would use most current value 'Based on 2009, actual would use most current value Total Total Total Tax One -Time Tax One -Time Tax One -Time Taxpayer Capacity Tax Tax a er Capacity Tax Tax a er Capacity Tax $150,000 home $ 1,500 $ 6.15 $150,000 home $ 1,500 $ 3.61 $150,000 home $ 1,500 $ 3.62 $250,000 home $ 2,500 $ 10.26 $250,000 home $ 2,500 $ 6.02 $250,000 home $ 2,500 $ 6.03 $500,000 multifamily $ 6,250 $ 25.64 $500,000 multifamily $ 6,250 $ 15.06 $500,000 multifamily $ 6,250 $ 15.07 $500,000 C/I $ 9,250 $ 37.94 $500,000 C/I $ 9,250 $ 22.29 $500,000 C/I $ 9,250 $ 22.31 i Shingle Creek and West Mississippi WMC Proposed 2010 CIP 313012010 z9Shingle Creek\ManagementPlan\2010\Levy Calcuiation:xls Page 1 dfs • WEST MISSISSIPPI CIP PROJECTS Total Other Total Other Total Other Project Partners Commission Project Partners Commission Project Partners Commission 2010 Project Cost Share' Share 2011 Pro ect Cost Share' Share 2013 Project Cost Share' Share Champlin Stream Sta $ 500,000 $ 375,000 $ 125,000 Woods Trail Rain Gat $ 180,000 $ 135,000 $ 45,000 Oak Creek Outfall $ 20,000 $ 15,000 TOTAL 1 $ 500,000 $ 375,000 $ 125,000 TOTAL $ 180,000 $ 135,000 1 $ 45,000 TOTAL $ 20,000 $ 15,000 $ 5,000 'Including any future grants *Including any future grants 'Including any future grants ProfflPark39,501,884 t17,466,041 % of Share of Property owners in 2009 Tax % of Share of Property owners in 2009 Tax % of Share of Com Total Lev ' Community Capacity Total Le Communit Capacity Total Lev Brooklyn 10.7% $ 13,348 Brooklyn Center 7,195,754 10.7% $ 4,805 Brooklyn Center 7,195,754 10.7% $ 534 Brooklyn 58.6 % $ 73,273 Brook) n Park 39,501,884 58.6 % $ 26,378 Brook) n Park 39,501,884 58.6% $ 2,931 Cha 25.9% $ 32,398 Cham lin 17,466,041 25.9% $ 11,663 Cham lin 17,466,041 25.9% $ 1,296 Ma 3.3% $ 4,084 Ma le Grove 2,201,892 3.3 % $ 1,470 Ma le Grove 2,201,892 3.3% $ 163 Oss 1.5% $ 1,897 Osseo 1,022,179 1.5% $ 683 Osseo 1,022,179 1.5% $ 77 TOTAL I 67,387,750 125,000 ITOTAL 67,387,750 44,9991 ITOTAL 67,387,750 5,001 Proposed County Levy $ 125,000 Proposed County Levy $ 45,000 Proposed County Levy $ 5,000 Levy per $1 Net Tax Capacity $0.0018549 Levy per $1 Net Tax Capacity $0.0006678 Levy per $1 Net Tax Capacity $ 0.0000742 `Reported by City Assessors, actual would use most current value 'Based on 2009, actual would use most current value 'Based on 2009, actual would use most current value Total Total Total Tax One -Time Tax One -Time Tax One -Time Tax a er Capacity Tax Taxpayer Ca aci Tax Tax a er Capacity Tax $150,000 home $ 1,500 $ 2.78 $150,000 home $ 1,500 $ 1.00 $150,000 home $ 1,500 $ 0.11 $250,000 home $ 2,500 $ 4.64 $250,000 home $ 2,500 $ 1.67 $250,000 home $ 2 $ 0.19 $500,000 multifamily $ 6,250 $ 11.59 $500,000 multifamily $ 6,250 $ 4.17 $500,000 multifamily $ 6,250 $ 0.46 $500,000 C/I $ 9,250 $ 17.16 $500,000 CA $ 9,250 $ 6.18 $500,000 C/1 $ 9,250 $ 0.69 SHINGLE CREEK + WEST MISSISSIPPI CIP PROJECTS Total Total Total Project City Commission Project City Commission 2012 Pro"e Project City Commission 2010 Projects Cost Share Share 2011 Pro acts Cost Share Share cts Cost Share Share Shingle Creek $ 5,550,000 $ 4,347,263 $ 637,500 Shingle Creek $ 1,498,000 $ 1,123,500 $ 374,500 Shingle Creek $ 1,499,000 $ 1,124,250 $ 374,750 West Mississi i $ 500,000 $ 375,000 $ 125,000 West Mississi i $ 180,000 $ 135,000 $ 45,000 West Mississi i $ 20,000 $ 15,000 $ 5,000 TOTAL $ 6,050,000 $ 4,722,263 $ 762,500 TOTAL 5 1,678,000 $ 1,258,500 $ 419,500 TOTAL $ 1,519,000 $ 1,139,250 $ 379,750 Shingle Creek and West Mississippi WMC Proposed 2010 CIP 313012010 ZAShingle Creek \ManagementP1an12010 \Levy Calculation.xls Page 2 dfs I this page left intentionally blank Shingle Creek and West Mississippi WMC Proposed 2010 CIP 3/30/2010 Z \Shingte CreekWanagemenlPlanQ0101Levy Calculatian.xls Page 3 d[s Total Other Project Partners Commission 2013 Project Cost Share' Share Cham lin VWnnetka P $ 200,000 $ 150,000 $ 50,000 TOTAL $ 200,000 $ 150,000 $ 50,000 'Including any future grants Property owners in 2009 Tax % of Share of Communi Capacity Total Levy* Brooklyn Center 7,195,754 10.7% $ 5,339 Brooklyn Park 39,501,884 58.6% $ 29,309 Champlin 17,466,041 25.9% $ 12,959 Maple Grove 2,201,892 3.3% $ 1,634 Osseo 1,022,179 1.5% $ 759 TOTAL 1 67,387,7501 1 50,000 I Proposed County Levy $ 50,000 Levy per $1 Net Tax Capacity $ 0.0007420 'Based on 2009, actual would use most current value Total Tax One -Time Tax a er Ca aci Tax $150,000 home $ 1,500 $ 1.11 $250,000 home $ 2,500 $ 1.85 $500,000 multifamily $ 6,250 $ 4.64 $500,000 CA $ 9,250 $ 6.86 Total Project City Commission 2013 Pr&cts Cost Share Share Shingle Creek $ $ - $ West Miss issi i $ 200,000 $ 150,000 $ 50,000 TOTAL $ 200,000 $ 150,000 $ 50,000 Shingle Creek and West Mississippi WMC Proposed 2010 CIP 3/30/2010 Z1Shingle Creek \ManagementP1an\2010 \Levy Catculatio As Page 4 dfs Memorandum VV el)(_ i 1800 Pioneer Creek Center, Maple Plain, MN 55359rlCl;nerr • `=;:: er ± st: • Phone: 763-479-4200 Fax: 763-479-4242 To: Shingle Creek/West Mississippi WMO Member Cities From: Ed Matthiesen, P.E. Diane Spector Date: March 29, 2010 Subject: Proposed 2010 Major Plan Amendment Revising the CIP Additional Information The Brooklyn Center City Council requested additional information regarding the proposed revisions to the Commissions' CIP. This information is being provided to all member cities to assist in their review and comment on the proposed Major Plan Amendment. Brooklyn Center asked for the share of the proposed levies on property in Brooklyn Center. The attached spreadsheet shows, for each year of the proposed CIP, the amount of the proposed projects and the proposed Commission share and total resulting proposed levy if those projects are ordered and a capital levy certified to Hennepin County. These tables show Shingle Creek and West Mississippi separately, with a summary table at the bottom. • The levy is made by Hennepin County on all property within the watershed based on net tax capacity. The attached 11x17 spreadsheet shows the net tax capacity reported to the Commissions by City Assessors in 2009 for the purpose of allocating member assessments for 2010. The actual levy would be based on net tax capacity at the time the tax is levied. Therefore, the table showing the levy on property by member community is illustrative only, as net tax capacity and its distribution changes yearly. Brooklyn Center also asked: 1) What is the levy period; 2) total amount levied per residential property; and 3) amount per month on property taxes. The capital levies are one -time levies, so the levy period is one year. The total amount levied is based on net tax capacity.. For example, the proposed 2010 tax 2011 levy of $637,500 divided by the 2009 estimated watershed net tax capacity of $155,406,071 results in a levy of $0.0041 per dollar of net tax capacity. For a home assessed at $150,000 with a tax capacity of $1,500 the total one -time tax would be about $6.15. That would be about $0.51 per month for one year. This amount is included in the "Other special taxing districts" line of the property tax statement. The tax statement is limited in the number of other special taxing districts that can be shown, and since the special county capital levy is less than other special levies (such as Met Council, Three Rivers Park District, etc.), it is generally not shown as a separate line item. Transmitted to City Clerks via USPS and email City Managers } City Engineers } via email SC /WM Commissioners /Staff } • ZAShingle Creek \ManagementPlan \2010 \M - additional 2010 MPA information.doc $hinC reek Watershed Management Commission 3235 Fernbrook Lane N • Plymouth, MN 55447 1 1lII t Tel: 763.553.1144 • Fax: 763.553.9326 +� Email: iudie ct iass.biz • Website: www.shinglecreek.org February 12, 2010 Cities and Review Agencies: Enclosed please find for your review and comment a proposed Major Plan Amendment to the Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commissions' Second Generation Watershed Management Plan. The Commissions will take public comment on this Major Plan Amendment until 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, April 13, 2010. The purpose of this Major Plan Amendment is to revise the Capital Improvement Program to add seven projects including, for the first time, four projects in West Mississippi. Other projects are proposed to be rescheduled to other years at the request of the respective cities. Please note that this Amendment does not include consideration of a Cost Share Program to supplement the CIP, which will pursue a separate track. With the proposed revision the capital levy in 2011 for 2010 projects is estimated to be $762,500, exceeding the $500,000 maximum annual levy guideline. Three of the five 2010 projects have been awarded significant grant funding. Of the $1,550,000 estimated total cost for the Wetland 639W, 45th Avenue Pond, and Brooklyn Center Shingle Creek restoration projects, $588,125 will be funded by grants and $387,500 is proposed to be funded by Commission cost share, with the balance funded by the respective cities. The proposed Minneapolis project would be eligible for up to $250,000 of Commission cost share, with the balance funded by the city. All these projects are TMDL implementation projects. One of the proposed 2010 projects is in West Mississippi, in Champlin. Any levy for projects in Shingle Creek is applied only to property in Shingle Creek, while any levy for projects in West Mississippi • is applied only to property in West Mississippi. As part of the CIP and budget project review process, the Commissions' Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) will review the projects and make a cost share recommendation to the Commissions. The Commissions would appreciate your comment on the potential for the Hennepin County capital levy on behalf of Shingle Creek to exceed $500,000 in 2011. In 2010 that levy is $100,000; in 2009 it was $107,500; and in 2008 it was $340,625. Please note that this Major Plan Amendment proposes to revise the CIP only and does not commit the Commissions or the member cities to undertake any of the projects contained therein. Each project must be considered at a public hearing prior to being ordered. A public hearing will be held on this proposed Major Plan Amendment Thursday, May 13, 2010 at the Commissions' regular meeting time of 12:45 p.m. Prior to that date a notice of public hearing will be published as well as sent to you in accordance with statutory requirements. Please submit' comments to Judie Anderson at JASS, 3235 Fernbrook Lane, Plymouth, MN 55447, or Judie @iass.biz We appreciate your review and look forward to your comments. Sincerely, TGwa Garstews Tina Carstens, Chair Cc: BWSR — Brad Wozney, Jim Haertel City of Brooklyn Park Commissioner DNR — Charlotte Cohn Shingle Creek WMC, West Mississippi WMC Dept. of Agriculture - Becky Balk Dept. of Health — Art Persons, Terry Bovee Cc: Commissioners Metropolitan Council - Judy Sventek TAC Members MPCA — David Johnson, John Hensel, Denise Leezer City Managers MnDOT - Beth Neuendorf, Nick Tiedeken City Engineers Hennepin County - Joel Settles • Commission Staff Hennepin Conservation Dist. - Kim Boyce Three Rivers Park District - Randy Lehr Z: \Shingle Creek \ManagementPlan \2010 \L - conveying 2010 CIP Major Plan Amendment to cities and review agencies.doc Brooklyn Center • Brooklyn Park • Champlin • Crystal • Maple Grove • Minneapolis • New Hope • Osseo • Plymouth • Robbinsciale • Work Session Agenda Item No. MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION • DATE: April 6, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steven Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer SUBJECT: Connections at Shingle Creek — A Corridor Study Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council evaluate and provide comments pertaining to the Connections at Shingle Creek — A Corridor Study. No formal action is required. Background: In 2008 Hennepin County, jointly with the Cities of Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park and with the Shingle Creek Watershed Commission, proceeded with a study to assess opportunities for ecological restoration of Shingle Creek from Regent Avenue to Noble Avenue. This study is part of the county's broader initiative for promoting and "daylighting" the streams within the County, similar to the Daylighting Shingle Creek Framework Plan that was prepared for a section of Shingle Creek downstream within Brooklyn Center. The corridor study is complete (see attached) and an overview of the study will be presented by representatives from the County, the County's consultant and the Shingle Creek Watershed District. • Council Policy Issues: Does the City Council support the Corridor Study? Does the City Council support the study's Implementation strategies? Budget Issues: There are no direct budget issues. Council Goals: Strategic: 5. We will continue to maintain and upgrade City infrastructure improvements 6. We will respond to increased public awareness and interest in environmental sustainability and green community issues 1iic,cifrrr: f7r,cvrritrn wr atrrtr t, re, c r air, ;rfe rattrruuriirp tkrrt c ;tr'tenree,c the gtruiitr of life and preserves the public trut l Brook Iy ................................................................. ............................... ...._. ► 1 1 i 1 SHINGLE CRE IN BROOKLY PAR & BROOK CENTER Shingle Creek, historically a quiet and meandering creek winding through open prairie on its way to the Mississippi River, changed " dramatically as agriculture and then urbanization altered its water- shed. As a natural stream, it accommodated both wet and dry cycles . and sustained plant and animal life. However as land uses intensified around it, Shingle Creek was transformed into a functional channel, whose primary purpose was to collect and convey stormwater. This led to significant degradation of the stream as a healthy, natural system. The current study explores strategies to improve a targeted area of Shingle Creek, optimizing potential for private investment, enhancing surrounding property values, and reclaiming the natural corridor of the g . 7 4i creek as an amenity. Hennepin County, in partnership with numerous communities, developed an interdisciplinary initiative to explore ways to improve the county's In 2007, Brooklyn Park and the Brooklyn Park Economic Development water -based corridors, like Shingle Creek. Through their commitment to Authority (EDA) purchased the Huntington Pointe site adjacent to improving water quality and biodiversity in streams, the County benefits Shingle Creek at Regent Avenue for redevelopment and undertook in multiple ways: a clean stream becomes an amenity, and this amenity a community-based visioning process to establish guidelines for attracts and becomes an integral feature of development. Together, they redevelopment, reflecting their values as a community, priorities for build stronger and more stable communities in the County. new land uses, and the relationship between land use and open space. The cities of Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center have successfully completed recent projects that feature Shingle Creek and provide P URPOSE OF THIS STUDY context for this study. Brooklyn Park developed a master plan in 2000 Specifically, the purpose of this study is to explore alternatives for creek restoration in relationship to various development options, with for the Village Creek area, which lies immediately upstream of the current study area. The build -out of that plan is underway and is an emphasis on the following outcomes: a testament to the potential of Shingle Creek as a community amenity and focus for private investment. Brooklyn Center partnered with ►Create a more public creek including trails and amenities Hennepin County to develop the Daylighting Shingle Framework Plan ►Connect potential trails with the network of existing trails in 2008. This study focused on strategies for daylighting and implementing environmental enhancements to a segment of Shingle Creekwithin the 0-Improve wildlife habitat and biodiversity City of Brooklyn Center. The Brooklyn Center City Council unanimously 00-Improve water quality approved the Framework Plan as a development guide and planning lo-Optimize redevelopment potential tool for redevelopment. awdAlk MOIL % Ab. Jr ................................................................................................................ ............................... DECEMBER 2009 I t C A ND RECOMMENDATIONS Shingle Creek has the potential to again be beautiful and functional, through simple design interventions that begin to return it to a more natural condition. A revitalized stream will improve the attractiveness of parcels of land that adjoin it or are nearby, thus "setting the table" Regent for reinvestment with an eye toward creating a more complete Redevelopment community. Segment To achieve the goals of this study, which evolved with input from the Regent Ave/ - I community, staff from Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park and Hennepin Brooklyn Blvd Pork Center Segment Segment County, will require collaboration between the public and private 7 3 4 " sectors and leadership at all levels. This study recommends that future j „y public and private action and investments focus on achieving the 02 The (rossing following ten priorities: STUDY + FOCUS AREAS © Preserve Shingle Creek in its current channel to optimize the The study area is organized into four Focus Area components: redevelopment potential of adjacent undeveloped or underdeveloped 1. Regent Redevelopment Segment — The site of the 12 -acre former properties. Huntington Pointe housing development, this segment of Shingle © Link Brooklyn Boulevard to Shingle Creek with a linear green Creek was enhanced when Village Creek was developed immediately space at the Regent Redevelopment Site, terminating in a special upstream and is very similar in character to that area. The trail from feature along the creek shoreline. Other similar green connections upstream currently ends at 73rd Avenue. should be explored in the future. 2. Regent Avenue /Brooklyn Boulevard Segment — Extending from © Introduce water and /or the potential for greater infiltration into Regent Avenue to the point where Shingle Creek and Brooklyn Boulevard redevelopment sites to improve water quality in the stream. converge, this segment is primarily auto dealerships east of the creek ® Introduce a variety of in- stream improvements to improve both and housing to the west. water quality and biodiversity. 3. The Crossing — The point where Shingle Creek and the natural © Develop a trail system that links Village Creek with Noble Avenue corridor along the creek intersect Brooklyn Boulevard. following the creek alignment. In the near term, use an at -grade crossing of Brooklyn Boulevard at Regent Avenue. In the long term, construct 4. Park Center Segment — Adjacent to the high school property, this a pedestrian /bicycle overpass where Shingle Creek passes beneath segment has the unique potential of offering access for educational Brooklyn Boulevard. purposes as well as providing trail access to parks and neighbor- hoods in both directions. 0 Open views to the creek from Brooklyn Boulevard with extensive clearing of understory vegetation. Extend streetscaping on Brooklyn Boulevard from Noble Avenue on the south to Regent Avenue on the north to accentuate the point where Shingle Creek passes beneath Brooklyn Boulevard and to create a "greener" street. 0 Introduce an internal public road into the Regent Redevelopment Site (paralleling Brooklyn Boulevard) to subdivide the site into smaller ,« u„ parcels, optimizing flexibility for new development. 1 ©Create a smooth transition from the more manicured character of Shingle Creek at Village Creek to a mix of more natural and limited manicured landscape downstream to Brooklyn Boulevard. X4 '.5 m Take advantage of the educational opportunities of the creek at Park Center High School, allowing direct access to the water for conducting science experiments, etc. CREEKSIDE AMENITY, VILLAGE CREEK x a 4 , f R . f x , Forme iagq, <� w Pointer�i a BROOKLYN BLVD � F i `- 3 Potential i Future �{I _ Redevelopment "' � f_ J � � �•�7 r rt '# #T r A � � J a 3 PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN THE PREFERRED SCENARIO on the west side of the creek will remain. In- stream improvements will The Preferred Scenario envisions Shingle Creek as a healthier stream include removal of debris, stabilizing the stream banks and introducing and an important community amenity, with improved water quality and strategies to improve water quality and biodiversity. increased biodiversity. This will be achieved by implementing the ten priorities listed previously. More specifically, the Preferred Scenario THE CROSSING AND PARK CENTER SEGMENTS envisions the following enhancements to each segment. At Brooklyn Boulevard, vegetation will be cleared and the stream will be easily seen from cars, bicycles and pedestrians crossing over. REGENT REDEVELOPMENT SEGMENT Brooklyn Boulevard itself will become a much greener street with land- , At the Regent Redevelopment site, Brooklyn Park has already scaping and tree planting extending in both directions. Finally, as the b asses a o enhanced Shingle Creek by cleaning out debris, introducing aeration stream p y Park Center High g School, it will again be opened A techniques, visually opening the creek to the public and constructing a to the school site to allow students to study it and learn about stream e trail alongside its banks. Stream improvements were contained within ecology. the existing channel, maximizing the land area available for private T investment. In the Preferred Scenario, the Regent Redevelopment site shows subdivision by a green visual and pedestrian connection from Brooklyn Boulevard to the creek and a new road (extending Village Creek Parkway) 3.5 a c will be located approximately halfway between the creek and Brooklyn 2 .5 ae Boulevard. This creates four discrete parcels of land that can be devel- oped incrementally. The road can extend alongside the creek past the current car dealership sites should future development benefit from it. REGENT AVENUE /BROOKLYN BOULEVARD SEGMENT 1. 5 a C -- In this segment, the creek will transition to a more natural character, .5 ac with large pockets of naturalized landscape interspersed with openings to provide visual and physical access. Screening for housing FOCUS AREA 1 - PARCEL PLAN ........................................................................................................................ ............................... AA GH SC 0 L . '' ~r ti rl (5 ' ; r 4K t s FOCUS AREA 3 - TRAIL CONNECTION CONCEPT PLAN THE CROSSING AND PARK CENTER SEGMENTS - CONT The Preferred Scenario envisions a trail along the entire length of Brooklyn Boulevard, creating a safe and visible crossing of the road. the stream through the study area, linking 73rd Avenue North with In the short-term, an at -grade crossing at 73rd Avenue, a signalized Noble Avenue on the east. A new pedestrian /bicycle bridge will span intersection, will provide safe crossing of the road. R4� Prepared for: Prepared by: ao'of AWenck BROOKLYN lklh Engineers • Scientists i s � • i • "T" • Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center • Connections at in gle Cree A orridor Study i!� U 3 wa ® � r ' M r b *� Make ypur marN �� p kty pprkl 1 Development t .., Opportunity 0V purchasing pr g Site, ressfh ,o ugA Bde Gq . n- ' creaung proyro rveloRmznt s Illy i�5'�i� 4 763-493-8050 w II " -,, p • • Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center • C 1 OWN Ak Cio or BROOKLY exoaara CENTER PARK Wenck -�.� Engineers • Scientists • • • • • Table of Contents • • Prologue: Executive Summary .. . .. . . .. . . .. .... ... . .. . .. . . . . . 6 • • Chapter One: Introduction + Context ........................... . 13 • Chapter Two: The History of Shingle Creek .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . 21 • Chapter Three: Precedent + Framework ........................... 25 • Chapter Four: Implementation Strategies .......................... 29 • • Chapter Five: Conclusions .. ...... .......................... 45 • • Appendix A: Restoration Technical Memo . ....................... . 51 Appendix B: Preference Survey Results ........................... 65 • • • • • Prologue: Executive Summary . Introduction • _- - - - - -- Shingle Creek, historically a quiet and meandering improve a targeted area of Shingle Creek, optimizing The cities of Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center have • creek winding through open prairie on its way to the potential for private investment, enhancing surround- successfully completed recent projects that feature • Mississippi River, changed dramatically as agriculture ing property values, and reclaiming the natural corridor Shingle Creek and provide context for this study. Brook- • and then urbanization altered its watershed. As a natu- of the creek as an amenity. lyn Park developed a master plan in 2000 for the Village • ral stream, it accommodated both wet and dry cycles Hennepin County, in partnership w numerous com- hiith Creek area, which lies immediately upstream of the cur - and sustained plant and animal life. However as land rent study area. The build -out of that plan is underway • uses intensified around it, Shingle Creek was trans- munities, developed an interdisciplinary initiative to formed into a functional channel, whose primary pur- explore ways to improve the county's water -based cor- and is a testament to the potential of Shingle Creek as • pose was to collect and convey stormwater. This led ridors, like Shingle Creek. Through their commitment a community amenity and focus for private investment. to significant degradation of the stream as a healthy to improving water quality and biodiversity in streams, Brooklyn Center partnered with Hennepin County to de- natural system. This document examines strategies es the County benefits in multiple ways: a clean stream velop the Daylighting Shingle Creek Framework Plan in 0 for reviving the aesthetic and ecological character of becomes an amenity, and this amenity attracts and be- 2008. This study focused on strategies for daylighting a portion of the creek within Brooklyn Park and Brook- comes an integral feature of development and neigh- and implementing environmental enhancements to a lyn Center. The current study explores strategies to borhood recreation. Together, they build stronger and segment of Shingle Creek within the City of Brooklyn more stable communities in the County. Center. The Brooklyn Center City Council unanimously Shingle Creek in Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center approved the Framework Plan as a development guide • and planning tool for redevelopment. By investing in the current study to explore stream restoration in Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park, the In 2007, Brooklyn Park and the Brooklyn Park Econom- - ; �,►= County is recognizing the value that a healthy, clean is Development Authority (EDA) purchased the Hun- , `* m stream can contribute to two redeveloping inner ring tington Pointe site adjacent to Shingle Creek at Regent suburbs. The study area lies along Brooklyn Boule- for redevelopment and undertook a community-based vard, a corridor that is extremely well - served by tran- visioning process to establish guidelines for redevel- { sit. Together, the components of transit, an improved opment, reflecting their values as a community, priori- • •':'�� environment and economic development are building ties for new land uses, and the relationship between �, f blocks of a complete and more sustainable community. • p Y land use and open space. • • Purpose of This Study Planning Process This study, Connections at Shingle Creek: A Corridor The planning process was iterative: the staffs of both • Study focuses on the health and character of Shingle Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center were engaged nu- Creek as it passes through a small portion of Brook- merous times for input and feedback and two open lyn Park and Brooklyn Center. A series of strategies houses reached out to the broader community. This for improving the stream are recommended, with cost process included the following steps: estimates identified. While neither community nor the • county has commitments in place to fund these strate- 'Project Informants— Gather available data, analyze and evaluate the information and establish design gies at this time, this document is designed to be a parameters for the work to follow • road map, providing approaches for making system- atic improvements to the creek that can set the stage • Scenarios — Develop concept alternatives and for or be integrated with future redevelopment. test them against precedents and best manage- ment practices Specifically, the purpose of this study is to explore al- Reaching consensus — Solicit and synthesize feed - ternatives for creek restoration in relationship to vari- back and develop a preferred concept based on ous development options, with an emphasis on the input following outcomes: • Develop technical criteria to analyze the creek's systems and establish cost implications for near- •Create a more public creek including trails term and long -term enhancements • and other amenities • Connect potential new trails with the network For this study, three levels of stream enhancement wereR of existing trails developed as a way of comparing the balance of creek -Improve wildlife habitat and biodiversit improvements with available land for redevelopment. P Y P -Improve water quality The options were categorized as, simple, moderate or -Optimize redevelopment potential extensive. As the titles suggest, these are increasing interventions which can be introduced into the stream • corridor or nearby. As enhancements get more exten- • sive, the land area required likewise grows. There is, • p therefore, a direct relationship between the amount of land area required and the complexity of enhance- • WO O ments. • r Focus Areas The study area is organized into four components: • Regent Study Area 1. Regent Redevelopment Segment — The site of ." Redevelopment f the 12 -acre former Huntington Pointe housing devel- NO • Segment l opment, this segment of Shingle Creek was enhanced when Village Creek was developed immediately up Regent Ave/ stream and is very similar in character to that area. The • Brooklyn Blvd - - -- Park Center trail from upstream currently ends at Regent Avenue. • = -Fk a , Segment Segment 2. Regent Avenue /Brooklyn Boulevard Segment . `a Extending from Regent Avenue to the point where . The Crossing Shingle Creek and Brooklyn Boulevard converge, this o I o segment is primarily auto dealerships east of the creek • b . o • m v _ and housing to the west. • Study + Focus Areas • • • • • • • • • 3. The Crossing —The point where Shingle Creek and Brooklyn Park, and Hennepin County representatives, • the natural corridor along the creek intersect Brooklyn will require collaboration between the public and private L , • Boulevard. sectors and leadership at all levels. This study recom- mends that future public and private action and invest- 4. Park Center Segment — Adjacent to the high ments focus on achieving the following ten priorities:w • school property, this segment has the unique potential`° of offering access for educational purposes as well as 0 Preserve Shingle Creek in its current channel to providing trail access to parks and neighborhoods in optimize the redevelopment potential' of adjacent un- �� tt both directions. developed or underdeveloped properties. • Conclusions and Recommendations © Link Brooklyn Boulevard to Shingle Creek with y F • Shingle Creek, portions of which have been degraded a linear green space at the Regent Redevelopment • over the years, has the potential to again be beauti- site, terminating in a special feature along the creek 'a r • ful and functional, through simple design interventions shoreline. Other similar green connections should be that begin to return it to a more natural condition. A re- explored in the future. • vitalized stream will improve the attractiveness of par- in i or nearby, thus "setting © Introduce water and /or the potential for greater • cels of land that ado t o y, g 4 infiltration into redevelopment sites to improve water • the table" for reinvestment with an eye toward creating • a more complete community. quality in the stream. • Achieving the goals of this study, which evolved with 0 Introduce a variety of in- stream improvements to • input from the community, staff from Brooklyn Center, improve both water quality and biodiversity. • • • • © Develop a trail system, with amenities, that links 0 Extend streetscaping on Brooklyn Boulevard from 0 Create a smooth transition from the more mani- Village Creek with Noble Avenue following the creek Noble Avenue on the south to Regent Avenue on the north cured character of Shingle Creek at Village Creek to a alignment. In the near term, use an at -grade crossing to accentuate the point where Shingle Creek passes be- mix of more natural and limited manicured landscape of Brooklyn Boulevard at Regent Avenue. In the long neath Brooklyn Boulevard and to create a "greener" street. downstream to Brooklyn Boulevard. term, construct a pedestrian /bicycle overpass where Shingle Creek passes beneath Brooklyn Boulevard. ' Introduce an internal public road into the Regent W Take advantage of the educational opportunities 0 Redevelopment Site (paralleling Brooklyn Boulevard) of the creek at Park Center High School, allowing di- Open views to the creek from Brooklyn Boulevard to subdivide the site into smaller parcels, optimizing rect access to the water for conducting science experi- with extensive clearing of understory vegetation. flexibility for new development. ments, etc. * y • The Preferred Scenario •� The Preferred Scenario envisions Shingle Creek as a U airs • healthier stream and an important community amenity, 0 with improved water quality and increased biodiversity. • This will be achieved by implementing the ten priorities S $, • listed previously. More specifically, the Preferred Sce- nario envisions the following enhancements to each segment. 0 .. , lA.. Regent Redevelopment Segment • Shingle Creek has already been enhanced by clean- 0 r ••LY * . ing out debris, introducing aeration techniques, visu- • ally opening the creek to the public and constructing • 1 • • • • • • • • • a trail alongside its banks. Stream improvements are The Preferred Scenario envisions a trail along the en- The range of recommendations produced during this • contained within the existing channel, maximizing the tire length of the stream through the study area, linking study acknowledges the importance of Shingle Creek • land area available for private investment. Regent Avenue with Noble Avenue on the east. A new to residents and other constituents. The Preferred • pedestrian /bicycle bridge will span Brooklyn Boule- Scenario supports their desires for a physically im- • Regent Avenue /Brooklyn Boulevard Segment vard, creating a safe and visible crossing of the road. proved stream and amenity as well as their recognition • In this segment, the creek will transition to a more nat- In the short-term, an at -grade crossing at Regent Av- of the need to balance these improvements with the • ural character, with large pockets of naturalized land- enue, a signalized intersection, will provide safe cross- economic value of maintaining flexibility in the uses, • scape interspersed with openings to provide visual ing of the road. siting, design and densities of development along its • and physical access. Screening for housing on the banks. • west side of the creek will remain. In- stream improve- ments will include removal of debris, stabilizing the Former 'FfUntingtQn . . �` •� zti • stream banks and introducing strategies to improve Pointe Site ,.., �.! • ., «;.. �r�l �; water quality and biodiversity. " BROWN BLVD • 'al The Crossing and Park Center Segments Future !� •I Redevelopment At Brooklyn Boulevard, vegetation will be cleared and the stream will be easily seen from cars, bicycles and \� pedestrians crossing over. Brooklyn Boulevard itself \ I r ^ � - *� will become a much greener street with landscaping \ �\� �r _ "Wil • and tree lantin extending in both directions. Finally, • as the stream passes by Park Center High School, it will again be opened to the school site to allow stu- �' �'6 it . dents to study it and learn about stream ecology. '` • PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN • • • _ �, `�� �� 'y!k.• s, -,: a � _ _ _ ice.. .z � '' � �� .... �.4` \ . � ,� \� �A� R �a � - • 1 ;� : �Itrl !� �� ^ :^t � ;j .p /�/ � .% f�Gi/ I / �� I ' _� � . ��� . _ 11 ,�w.,,. jj �`\• �� �+ �'' , .t ' ' �/` (� I s' j1a 'f . in�� ) ? 1 / 1 ? I t rp • _..�_ ...•,._ .— { y Iii t , ,��i _ � r ..� t� r� � ✓ ��, n r �4 I >MY � � , 1 � k i�� ��J•p.. z • �6Allm- ::', PW , N 1� - �- �. .� ••; .,t�JM�► :: ., � .. -,'" .,,. • _ �� ., ...�a _ •r4 •'� '4' a S. w a �F - ' t, r � ro h a . . _•• .. .i�� -�..: �'�` � ,��►�•< �^ .J`" � ' �'�,°" -�', A• 1 � - r sr ',�,... tn ilhl� � #.1i •' d♦' ,. 'r,., tit \ _ �q�. ) ./�'�2 •'� i • V {{ e �••�� / v { iV E . F e and riffle reek b as of thf 61 k rede i p am • 1t Chapter 1: • Introduction + Context . Backgrou In 2008 Hennepin County, in conjunction with the cities This study provides another link in the chain of re- • of Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center, embarked on a • Y Y claimed and restored segments of the Shingle Creek study to assess opportunities for ecological restoration corridor` • of Shingle Creek as it passes through a portion of the • two communities. The broader initiative, which Hen- purpose and Priorities • nepin County is promoting for three county streams` The purpose of this study is twofold: 1) to explore al- - Shingle Creek, Bassett Creek and Bridal Veil Creek ternatives for Shingle Creek restoration in relationship ' • — is called " Daylighting." Daylighting is a process of • to various development options, and 2) to develop an removing streams from culverts or revealing "hidden' overall vision for improvements to a segment of Shin- creeks, typically in a degraded condition, exposing gle Creek within Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center. them to sunlight and allowing water to flow on the sur- These improvements must enhance options for long- face. This process, along with improved infiltration and term land use changes and redevelopment within the additional environmental interventions, results in: corridor. Specifically, the following goals are empha- • Environmental and ecological improvement sized: -An attractive community amenity - Greater re- investment potential for adjacent • Create a more public creek including trails and other amenities • properties • • Connect potential new trails with the network of existing trails The cities of Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center have a Improve wildlife habitat and biodiversity worked to develop best management practices and encourage smart redevelopment when opportunities • Improve water quality have been available. By often partnering with Henne- � *Optimize redevelopment potential pin County, the cities' work has advanced all three of these outcomes in several locations along the creek. ego 132 - The Study Area - The Shingle Creek corridor and adjacent land on both sides are the main focus of this study. The study st .. :.fir 4 • also includes Brooklyn Boulevard from Noble Avenue 61 17th ' Ave- N' to Unity Avenue and the properties between the two Jill parallel corridors. Because the creek is embedded in • • d an urbanized landscape, its health and character are • EL cr > wedded to and interdependent with existing and future • development patterns. • d Ra ass Lake nC � "" f : �'" �' Focus Areas r + mac+ -.� The study area is organized into four components: - .wee • # t �� °• �4 Qz 1. Regent Redevelopment Segment — The site of E' the 12 -acre former Huntington Pointe housing devel- • .,' n opment, this segment of Shingle Creek was enhanced • when Village Creek was developed immediately up- Shingle creek stream and is very similar in character to that area. The • Watershed trail from upstream currently ends at Regent Avenue. • Hennepin . caumy Downtown a. • Minneapolis Watershed Boundaries I• �• • • • • • • Segment 2. Regent Avenue /Brook) n Boulevard Se • 9 Y 9 d. n • — Extending from Regent Avenue to the point where Shingle Creek and Brooklyn Boulevard converge, this •'W segment is primarily auto dealerships east of the creek 3 •� ma .,.„ and housing to the west., • 3. The Crossing — The point where Shingle Creek • and the natural corridor along the creek intersect Y • Brooklyn Boulevard. W `' Regent Study Area Redevelopment • 4. Park Center Segment — Adjacent to the high Segment' • school property, this segment has the unique potential • of offering access for educational purposes as well as Regent Ave/ • providing trail access to parks and neighborhoods in Brooklyn Blvd «. Park g r • Segm1>" Se melt both directions. • + .. gip. • �, The Crossing • m`m Study + Focus Areas • • • • •I • • • •i • • • Approach and Previous Planning • This study examines the creek from a technical and • environmental perspective, focusing on its improve- • ment, while also exploring how creek restoration can • improve adjacent land use and development scenar- • ios. The work builds on previous planning studies in • both Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park. • yFl a .. • Brooklyn Park's Village Creek site, which lies immedi- • ately upstream of this study area, has been successful • on many levels. Planned in 2000, the project is partially • complete and has been well- received by the commu- • nity. Its fundamental urban design proposal is to link • Brooklyn Boulevard to Shingle Creek with a new road, • Welcome Avenue, which becomes a "main street" for • - the new neighborhood. Welcome Avenue is anchored • at the creek with a new amphitheater and pavilion, im- portant new amenities for the area. A physical and • visual connection is therefore made from Brooklyn • Boulevard to the creek, an important move to raise awareness of its presence. • • • • • • • • The improvements to Shingle Creek and surrounding A, open space account for the majority of the public realm %�' , at Village Creek. With a new trail segment and over , , • looks facing the stream, it has become a celebrated, addition to the City's open space and recreational sys- tem. There is significant interest in extending this ap- proach and integrating a greater focus on water quality • and ecological value, both in the Village Creek seg- ment and downstream. Nr • This same idea led to the "ladder concept" shown in • the adjacent diagram. It proposes linking Brooklyn Boulevard to Shingle Creek at several locations, much • like Welcome Avenue does at Village Creek. Expanding on that successful idea will draw even more attention to I the hidden stream corridor. The "rungs" on the ladder, • therefore, become important new pedestrian routes • and /or view corridors that can be further highlighted • using public art and special creek -side spaces at the termini. Combined Concept Diagram In January 2009, Brooklyn Center's City Council ad- with Brooklyn Park's planning, the Framework casts a Corridor Housing Initiative/Twin Cities LISC and the • opted the Daylighting Shingle Creek Framework Plan vision for a revitalized mixed -use district that integrates broader community to produce a document that ad- • which addresses very similar issues downstream from a daylighted Shingle Creek into the redevelopment, dressed economic development and land use in the • this site, but in an even more urbanized condition. As primarily as it winds through sports fields and near City City of Brooklyn Park (Brooklyn Park/Huntington Pointe Hall and County Government Center. By restoring the Site: Development Guidelines, May 2008. The results Y � 0 stream as an environmentally enhanced amenity and of that work were carefully considered as this study • centerpiece of the district, new development in Brook- was prepared. 0 lyn Center will be able to contribute to the quality of the • stream by adopting sustainable practices for both the The Village Master Plan/ 0 site and architecture. Shingle Creek Corridor Plan 0 Both the Village Creek Master Plan and Brooklyn `_ '�"' • romeuuork an Center Framework developed through the partner- ship and cooperation of Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn r : City of Brooklyn Park, Minnesota " Center augment the Hennepin County Da I i htin ini- t tiative. The success of Village Creek is testament to C Snrnnxtp R4xka k zxn:'! < h �PtNMwr1 F. . �.,_ Brooklyn Parts FDA - the value that can be created by investing in creeks'" cu ningham croup • Wenk As"cutes as ecological resources and amenities. In addition to �" ` T ear` Ag°°°'gtg' • these plans, in 2008 Brooklyn Park's Economic Devel- opment Authority partnered with Hennepin County's , • Housing, Community Works and Transit division, the Y z Q J m H U. W J J J Q z O F- z w F- z_ w C7 Q a •••••••••a►�•.�• • 2 a. t � } - W l -Y° f / 1. ° '. • v `• f •, - , i " t -- air di Or fv ol ;fit 4 0 6 41t I— IW W W w t JW � y -- — ! ! ! ! ! Chapter Two: The History f Shingle Creek o . Current Challenges ! Shingle Creek through the Study Area has been from land alteration and development can be useful in As the farms of Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center fundamentally altered. Redevelopment provides identifying ways to improve and restore the creek. gave way to residential and commercial development, . an opportunity to restore water quality and make the new impervious surfaces — highways, roads, park- ecological improvements while retaining the ability From Prairie Stream to Urban Channel ing lots, roofs, sidewalks, and other hard surfaces ! to convey stormwater. Restoring and improving ur- Prior to European settlement, the drainage area of — generated more stormwater runoff. The rapidly de- ! ban streams such as Shingle Creek can be complex Shingle Creek was mostly an open prairie dotted by veloping city required a way to efficiently eliminate this ! due to their challenging hydrology. Because they trees and small woods -- a landscape called "oak runoff, and Shingle Creek was straightened, widened ! are part of the urban storm drainage system, such openings" by the early settlers. Stormwater runoff was streams are often "flashy," rising almost immediate- minimal, with most precipitation captured and infiltrat- " • ly during a rain event as networks of storm sewers ed by the long- rooted prairie plants or intercepted and ! discharge runoff from streets and parking lots into evapotranspi rated by the dense vegetation. Shingle • the stream, and falling nearly as quickly as that run- Creek historically was a narrow, highly meandered ! off flows downstream. To carry these high volumes creek that likely was shallow or even dry during the • of flow, urban streams are often altered and engi- summer months. As the prairie gave way to agri- neered to maximize flow efficiency, at the expense of culture, many prairie streams were straightened and ! water quality and the integrity of its ecology. Under- ditched to provide for more efficient drainage, but up • standing conditions that were in place prior to settle- until the late 1950s, Shingle Creek through the Study ! ment and the impacts to Shingle Creek resulting Area retained its historic meandered nature. ! ! ! and dredged deeper to maximize its ability to carry the creek, there are also times when there is little or no • runoff. The City's storm sewer system captured runoff water in the creek. • from this new impervious surface and conveyed the • new flow to Shingle Creek through a network of pipes These two extremes create a very unforgiving habitat as the flora and fauna that would inhabit this type of • and open channels. Following rainstorms, the storm • �1 p sewers carried increasingly large volumes of runoff to environment must tolerate extreme flooding and pol- . the Creek, which would rapidly rise and convey that luted runoff, as well as severe drought and dry con - • ditions. The majority of plants that can survive these runoff at high velocities downstream to the Mississippi • extreme conditions or that spread rapidly enough to fill River. • in the open ground tend to be invasive species. Before development in r h amount f im ervi - increased the a ou t o P ous surface Consequently, Shin le Creek has been designated b i u ace in the area, most stormwater soaked into 9 9 Y } ¢� the ground, or infiltrated. Some of that infiltrated water the State of Minnesota as an Impaired Water due to • • e percolated down to deep groundwater, but a signifi- excessive levels of chloride from road salt; low levels cant portion infiltrated to shallow groundwater, where it of dissolved oxygen; and an impaired fish and mac - could discharge into the Creek. This shallow ground- roinvertebrate community. The Creek's status as an • water provides a "base flow" in the Creek, so that there Impaired Water requires that a special study, currently • is some water in the Creek even during periods of little underway by the Shingle Creek Watershed Manage- • rain. All those new hard surfaces prevent rainwater ment Commission and the Minnesota Pollution Control • from soaking into the ground, so there is less ground- Agency, be completed to diagnose the causes of the • water available to provide base flow. As a result, in impairments and to identify implementation actions to • addition to times when there is an excess of water in improve water quality and to restore ecological integrity. • • Those diagnostics and recommendations are not in- utilizing adjacent infiltration areas. Finally, creating a successful, bucolic environment, and an amenity. This • cluded in this study as it is not yet completed. more natural habitat will allow for native riparian spe- will help encourage redevelopment of underutilized • cies to develop mature habitats and creates an invit- lands and increase home values in adjacent and other • The outcome of these forces is that the creek has be- ing, attractive greenway that encourages recreational nearby areas. To gain a better understanding of how • come a drainage ditch; a liability; hidden away behind use and exploration of the corridor. Shingle Creek and adjacent lands might interrelate, buildings. Near stream and in- stream reconstruction using stormwater as an amenity for new development, • and restoration will help to recharge groundwater, While there will still be "flashiness" to the stream and the consultant team explored a number of local prec- • keeping water in the channel for more of the year It pollutants from runoff, it is possible to mitigate these edent projects that have dealt with these same issues • will help reduce stormwater volumes and pollution by enough to make the Shingle Creek corridor a thriving, in different ways. A ' rV Y s 1 y� • ... VQ' y 9 Figure 1. This photo from June 2009 shows Shingle Creek at low Figure 2. This photo was taken just a few hours after it started rain- Figure 3. This photo was taken just two hours after the previous water. The creek is on average about six inches deep, typical of late ing. The creek has risen 3 -4 feet in just a few hours photo. The line of debris on the bank in the center of the photo • summer conditions. indicates creek elevation just a few hours previous. • • • 1 Y _ • , r s • �I d tl t ��. ♦t `F`,p7F. ... 1 r _ , _ _ — _ Y ...d.,_...o..._. ...f rx € b. , �{ s .. l • nll�ill NOW _ ILI , J7 � a� r +9✓ r _ w= �4" Vit age Creek,i*awn amphitheatre, an amenity and focal point of the redevelopment upstream from the study area. • • • • • • Chapter Three: • • Precedent + Framework • Managing stormwater is becoming an increasingly im- Centennial Lakes, Edina • portant aspect of land development. Even in the recent At Centennial Lakes, land uses were organized around • past, it has been acceptable to drain water off private a series of linked stormwater ponds. The ponds are • property to the public storm sewer system, where it is a successful amenity, improving surrounding land val- - nu�llln °i • quickly removed from the surface and piped to rivers, ues and becoming a visual attraction in summer and • lakes and streams. Environmental degradation was accommodating skating in winter. While land uses are • the inevitable outcome of this practice. segregated at Centennial Lakes (this development pre -dated current thinking about mixing uses both hor- • Innovative stormwater management gained traction in izontally and vertically) this model is relevant because • this region as far back as the 1980's when Centennial stormwater is the "glue" that holds the development • Lakes in Edina was developed. Since then, numerous together. The ponds are shared by all land uses. • new developments have integrated water manage- ment into their designs. This study explored Centen- Heritage Park, M a nial Lakes and three additional relevant projects: Heri- Heritage Park takes innovation a step further by creat- • tage Park in North Minneapolis, Excelsior and Grand ing a "working" park that is designed around the man- in St. Louis Park and Upper Landing Housing on the agement of water. In fact, stormwater from outside the pm • Saint Paul Riverfront. watershed is introduced into Sumner Field, cleansed • in a series of steps, and then piped to the river. The Portion • • • • • • • • • • • • • park also has a large field for active recreation and The green connection, a parking street with a central ment, streets along the river's edge are intentionally infiltration. Similar to Minnehaha Creek in South Min- landscaped area, brings visitors to an amphitheater at broken in two places and block -long "infiltration lawns" • neapolis, this model is important because it is part of the entrance to the park. The model is important be- are located where the street would normally have been. • a larger, linear system and connects parks, neighbor - cause it demonstrates how a highly urbanized, mixed- These lawns are part of a "treatment train," which takes hoods and open spaces together. In addition, it is very • use development can successfully interrelate with runoff from the streets and adjacent housing develop - innovative with its water management. open space and parks, and how stormwater can be ment and brings it into a first bay of naturalized land- Excelsior and Grand, St. Louis Park • accommodated in the landscape. scape, then into the large multi -use lawn, where infil- At Excelsior and Grand in St. Louis Park, a broad linear tration takes place. A former Superfund site that once , green space connects Excelsior Boulevard to Wolfe Upper Landing Housing, Saint Paul piped polluted runoff directly into the river, this model is • Park, about two blocks to the north. Wolfe Park ac- The last of the precedents is a recent Saint Paul riv- important because it demonstrates the transformation cepts stormwater from the urban development and, erfront development located just below Irvine Park on of a damaged site into a working, multi - purpose land - like Centennial Lakes, uses the ponds as a summer- the edge of downtown, which introduces another ap- scape that integrates new land use with environmental time visual amenity and winter skating area. proach to stormwater management. At this develop- improvements. • • fi . w • A significant green connection links Excelsior Blvd with Wolfe Park. In St Paul, a recreational space doubles as a stormwater infiltration area. • • • • Each of these precedents has different strengths. All pedestrian paths, view corridors, lush landscaping • were considered to be valuable models when discuss- and public art — creating the "rungs on the ladder" — • ing how stormwater, water features and land use might Shingle Creek's presence can be enhanced and land • best integrate at Shingle Creek. We are referring to between the creek and roadway becomes more valu- • these models as shown below. I able. The green connection also provides an excellent - way to treat stormwater before it gets to the creek. • With staff and community input, it was determined that • �'° �o the Excelsior and Grand model —The Green Corridor The Green Corridor model shows how land and water — was most compatible with the study area at Shingle l o can interrelate at Shingle Creek. But the quality of the • Creek, and specifically the Regent Redevelopment stream itself must also be addressed if it is to become • • Site Segment. Like Excelsior and Grand, the water re- Excelsior and Grand - Green Corridor a true amenity and if land values are to be improved. • source is about two blocks from the arterial road and There are numerous strategies for accomplishing this, • few, if any, are aware of its existence. By emphasiz- which are outlined in the following chapter. • ing the connections between the two corridors with be ii • � e � a • Upper landing Housing- Broken Grid Centennial Lakes - Internal Amenity Heritage Park- Linear, Connected Amenity I } » Vr PW A 4!1 %, Vw r ., t t j • ws t 4 , R t r x � Kati '��r�. "• M ; .r y en, 1 d s A �� 3 s "�"%P'r', 5 ' -. o- � ... •,,.:. _ r. � ^ ; r r N Gr X,� ^, IA n G t Rock vanes and amenities upstream from the study area in vlllage,Qreek Chapter Four: Implementation Strategies • Hennepin County and the cities of Brooklyn Cen- Simple Enhancements Moderate Enhancements • ter and Brooklyn Park worked closely to pursue Shingle Creek remains in its existing channel for this As improvements become more significant, the re- the study goals and maintain a focus on both the option, retaining the maximum land area for poten- sult is a greater focus on Shingle Creek as a major • technical challenges of improving the creek and the tial adjacent redevelopment. This approach does site amenity. Shingle Creek is more integrated with • impacts for future development. Shingle Creek has not diminish the potential for a development project adjacent sites and redevelopment, while keeping • the potential to become a new "front door" if it is em- to make significant environmental changes on their the original streambed intact. For example, deeper ' braced and cared for. property; the use of infiltration basins or raingar- pools are suggested, providing better habitat for fish ' C reek Enhancement Options dens is to be encouraged as a way of benefiting the and other species, plus providing a better opportu- - stream's base flow of water and water quality. nity for over - wintering. The pools can be natural or For this study, three levels of stream enhancement urban in character, depending on the development. were developed as a way of comparing the balance The key enhancement strategies for the simplest ap- As a result, more developable land is committed to of creek improvements with available land for rede- proach include: the creek corridor and park -like surroundings (much velopment: simple, moderate or extensive. • like Village Creek immediately upstream). • As the titles suggest, these are increasing interven- -Providing a modest amount of enhanced habitat -Providing aeration features within the existing Key enhancement strategies include: tions which can be introduced into the stream corri- 9 • dor or nearby. As enhancements get more extensive, stream corridor -Providing a modest amount of new enhanced • the land area required likewise grows. There is, there- -Adding riffle and habitat features at key places for visual interest habitat, using root wads and fish Junkers for fish • fore, a direct relationship between the amount of land and invertebrates. • area required and the complexity of enhancements. • -Providing aeration for water quality within the lands in the stream, simulating its pre - development -Constructing an expanded, meandering stream • existing stream corridor with connected pools, creating a very expansive • character. Wetlands and pools are both part of the -Developing the offline pool to provide high flow open space and park -like amenity formula. With such an ambitious approach, there • and winter refuge -Aeration and bank stabilization may be issues with keeping the base water flow in- • -Improved habitat Extensive E nhancements tact; concerns were expressed about the potential of • As one would expect, pulling out the stops for creek having a more expansive, but dry, creek. For a more detailed explanation of the three ap- enhancement consumes the greatest amount of ad- proaches to creek enhancement, see Appendix A. jacent land, reducing its flexibility to accommodate a The key enhancement strategies for the most com- • large user, such as a medical or corporate campus. plex approach include: Everyone involved with this project agrees that Shin- • Still, this approach creates more meanders and is- gle Creek needs improvement. It is cluttered with de- • bris, lacks good water quality, is often invisible and Ct r inaccessible, and does a poorjob of sustaining plant • and animal life. Yet it Is doing the job it was designed • +. to do: it is transporting volumes of stormwater down- • Log vane � - _Boulder toe Y f j 1 stream to the Mississippi River with minimal damage • Pool - add depth .r Riffle �' `' F ' M• Lunkers _ R e Root wads Rock vane Rock vane to surrounding properties. It is an abused natural • ffl l ow) Rock vane i r system in need of attention and care. The stream • improvements at Village Creek have demonstrated • that the creek can be transformed from a ditch to an Root wads h " �° ti Riffle (} • Rock armor a { a logs Add overstory and willo amenity. But much work remains to be done. • w s a root wads Add gravel point Riffle to create overhanging Convert o and into deep . substrate to vegetation p p channel -- -- ffline pool for habitat SIMPLE ENHANCEMENT PLAN • Process limit development potential (and therefore tax base), it River, which has received renewed interest and appre- • In keeping with the policies of both the County, Brook- was probably a combination of these reasons that led ciation from cities along its length, Shingle Creek is a • lyn Park and Brooklyn Center, public outreach was a participants to conclude that they want an attractive, rediscovered asset. It is exciting to imagine this mod- key component of the process. City, County and pub- but controlled amenity. est stream successfully functioning along its entire • lic participants were asked to respond to surveys and length as a working waterway that also attracts people list personal priorities as a way to help the consultant Outcome to its banks and inspires them to protect it. team move forward. There were diverse opinions, of Village Creek has demonstrated that paying attention course, but a significant degree of consensus was to — and investing in — a natural resource like Shingle Each of the four focus areas has something different evident when participants were canvassed. The study Creek can jump -start redevelopment. The outcome is to contribute to the whole. Together, they become key process is described more fully in Appendix B. a triple win, with the creek getting healthier, the real components of a larger picture that exists upstream in estate becomes more attractive for private investment, Brooklyn Park and downstream in Brooklyn Center and In general, those polled preferred that Shingle Creek and the community enjoys it more. Like the Mississippi Minneapolis. remain in its current alignment. Yet it was clear that the majority is in favor of a healthier stream; those in Brooklyn Park are especially comfortable with im- provements similar to Village Creek. Those in Brook- e • Iyn Center, at least along this portion of the creek, are • equally at ease with a more naturalized stream. , a . Whether it is the realization that a meandering creek ti . ., • consumes more adjacent land and may be occasion -. - w •�,,, ,�.�,, ry ally dry, or the fact that a more natural stream might M ' s • �_ �• M • . • • • • • • Focus Area 1: • Regent Redevelopme S ite • on the street." Regardless of the type of development • that ultimately occurs at the Regent site, attention must be paid to creating a porous site plan that allows • m Study Area public use of the public realm and good access to the • creek. Even at Centennial Lakes, in Edina, where the • amenity is internalized, it is ringed by public walks and Regent the street system crosses it on bridges. • Redevelopment _ • Site The favored plan for the Regent site bisects it in both • directions: a public street (extending Village Creek Parkway southeast) is recommended through the cen- • o� ter of the parcel, and a green corridor — also public — is recommended from Brooklyn Boulevard to the creek • The site of the former Huntington Pointe housing com- transit on Brooklyn Boulevard and access to the Inter- (very similar to the Green Corridor model of Excelsior • plex, this property is currently vacant with the excep- state system is also good. A wide range of uses could and Grand, in St. Louis park). The site is therefore cut • tion of some mature trees that were retained. It is a easily be developed here. into quadrants of 1.5, 1.5, 2.5 and 3.5 acres p s now a blank ate respec- large parcel — a su erblock — that i n tively. A developer could acquire one or all parcels. slate. P Brooklyn Park is interested in a high - quality redevelop- Superblocks, once common in multi - family housing This provides the most flexibility for the site and retains ment, and there have been numerous inquiries about planning, have recently fallen out of favor. Evidence the option of mixing uses. It also provides opportuni- • the parcel. Shingle Creek, which asses on the south- ties for stormwater management, a key consideration • p g p points to the benefits of a finer - grained pattern of • west side, was improved with the Village Creek stream streets and blocks, with buildings and windows front - for creek enhancement. enhancement project. The site is very well served by ing onto public sidewalks and roads, providing "eyes • • • • • • • • • • • • • • v = � �, -- lines or zoning restrictions can give teeth to this goal and flowers and some trees and shrubs. A canopy of • #? , j and should be considered by both cities. Additional cover of 25 -75% is desirable for warm -water streams 2.5 ac 3.5 ac in- stream im provements can also be made (see Ap- such as Shingle Creek, to provide areas of shaded, • • d pendix A) to add value to the enhancements that have cooler water and as a source of leaves and twigs that • already been made. are food to macroinvertebrates. Existing and newly • planted trees could be supplemented as necessary aci ` . 5 aC, Actions + Estimated Cos ts with a goal of achieving mature canopy coverage in • Near -term that range. Twenty trees at $500 each, total estimated • `�' ® cost = $10,000. • FOCUS AREA 1 - PARCEL PLAN 1. The dense tree canopy that previously screened the • Strategies Creek from view was removed as a part of the Village 2. Habitat for fish and macroinvertebrates could be • Significant improvement has already been made to Creek restoration of Shingle Creek from Zane Avenue enhanced by adding wood to the stream. This could • Shingle Creek in Focus Area 1 as part of the Village to Regent Avenue, and the steep streambanks were be achieved by installing a few strategically placed • Creek project. The Creek remains in its current chan- re- graded and planted with a mix of native grasses root wads. A root wad is a 10 -12' length of tree trunk • nel in this plan, and additional actions are identified in • the plan to add value to the enhancements that have Focus Area 1 Actions: • already been made. Developers must be expected • Build a "green corridor" that optimizes site for redevelopment • to do their part to fully realize environmental improve- • Extend Village Creek Parkway through redevelopment site • ments to benefit Shingle Creek by minimizing new • Add canopy cover and root wads to improve water quality + habitat • impervious surface, reducing runoff, and adding infil- • Encourage infiltration and minimize runoff in new development • tration opportunities into their developments. Guide- • Develop sustainability principles for site redevelopment • • • • • with attached root plate that is drilled into the stream- Long -term sustainable design, a walkable, transit - connected, en- • bank at an angle, with the root mass exposed. Trees 3. Encourage developers to add infiltration features vironmentally healthy redevelopment. . downed by storms or removed for other reasons can and minimize creation of new impervious surface. • be used, minimizing cost. Estimated cost of installing These actions will, over time, reduce peak flows and 5. Build a green corridor into the redevelopment link- • 4 -5 root wads = $3,000 - 5,000. stress on Shingle Creek, and will help to recharge the ing Shingle Creek to Brooklyn Boulevard through a • surficial aquifers that provide base flow in the Creek. series of public and green spaces. This will be a park- • The potential cost of these actions would vary based ing street with a central landscaped area. Ponds, • on the nature and extent of development and rede- fountains or other water features will be included in • velopment and the type of project. Another method the space as well as accommodation of stormwater • of achieving these goals at minimal public cost is treatment and retention. This will extend the reach of • through development credits. Some cities and coun- Shingle Creek as a water resource and amenity, con- • ties have added flexibility n heir zoning code to pro- nectin it to Brooklyn Boulevard. Estimated cost of ty tot o g p g y *: vide developers with various public value credits if they developing green corridor = $ 1.5 - 2 million • j incorporate significant water quality, volume reduction, • s and natural resource protection improvements into 6. Extend Village Creek Parkway as a new road their developments and redevelopments. through the Regent Redevelopment Site, parallel to • both Brooklyn Boulevard and Shingle Creek. This _ 4. Develop a set of sustainability principles for the site, would create better access and divide the site into perhaps using the state's B -3 guidelines or the soon preferable sized parcels better suited for phased rede- to be published LEED -ND standards. With this ap- velopment. Estimated cost of extending Village Creek proach, the Focus Area 1 could become a model of Parkway = $50,000 • • • Focus Area 2: • • Boulevard S Re entAvenue Brookl n g y • housing across the stream from objectionable views • " of the back lots of the dealerships may be lessened with new, more compatible land uses. The input pro- s •��� Study Area cess led to a clear recommendation: make this por- tion of the creek a combination of natural pockets with • • fewer manicured areas, thereby creating a transition • � ' ri � Regent Aver'`` ��-'�� �,� , • �y - from the more highly manicured landscape of Village Brook( 914 • � � Creek to a more natural landscape in Brooklyn Center. Agrnent • �` Strategies • 4 - UM The goals of Focus Area 1 are also applicable to Focus •�° Area 2, but the template of strategies and recommen- • dations are more extensive because the Village Creek • There are few land uses that have as little pervious just above the intersection of the creek and parkway. stream work did not extend to this part of the Creek. • surface as car dealerships. Acres of asphalt and en- Because the parcel narrows northwest to southeast As noted before, the car dealerships and parking lots • closed showroom space leave the sites virtually de- the parkway is proposed to run along the creek, with contribute a significant amount of stormwater runoff to • void of plant life and space for infiltration. If the dealer- the trail located between (the same relationship at Vil- Shingle Creek and mitigation of that runoff will have • ships remain, steps should be taken to better manage lage Creek). This arrangement is similar to the Linear, substantial benefits to the creek. No redevelopment • stormwater on their properties to improve the health of Connected Amenity at Heritage Park. scenarios are suggested for this focus area at this • the creek. Future land uses on the dealership sites might be an Point other than creek enhancements. • The plan for this focus area extends Village Creek Park- extension of the Regent land uses or something very • way through the site, linking with Brooklyn Boulevard different. The importance of protecting the existing • • • • • �lii • • • • The strategies for Focus Area 2 are an effort to en- As Focus Area 2 includes two city jurisdictions, a col- Depending on resource availability, this work could be • hance the health and character of the stream without laborative approach to the site redevelopment would completed when time, equipment, and funding are • sacrificing developable land, including: be necessary. Additional consideration for the existing available, and the woody debris chipped for use else- • residential homes on the opposite side of the creek where in the park system. Some of the removed mate- . •Bank stabilization through native vegetation buffers would be critical as well as the transition between pub- rial may be suitable for reuse upstream (see Village • and tree canopy management lic and private spaces and screening activities. Creek Recommendations, page 42). The cost of haul - • -Alteration of the stream channel cross - section to ing and disposing of brush and smaller woody debris • better accommodate high- and low- flow conditions. Creek restoration for water quality, ecological and would be dependent on the amount removed from the • -Creation of infiltration basins (raingardens, habitat value is not dependent upon a larger site rede- site. Estimated staff, equipment, and hauling cost = • bioswales, etc.) to reduce runoff and recharge the velopment within this focus area and could be imple- $10,000. • stream via groundwater • mented in conjunction with other upstream mitigation -Creation of "natural" in- stream aeration (riffles, efforts. 2. The tree thinning in #1 above, should be conducted • pools, etc.) to increase oxygen for fish and inverte- r _ with an eye to preserving an adequate screen between • brate life. Actions + Estimated Costs the residential properties to the south of the Creek and • Near -Term Actions the commercial properties to the north. If necessary • the remaining tree coverage could be supplemented • 1. A canopy of cover of 25 -75% is desirable for warm- to provide an adequate transition between the land a, water streams such as Shingle Creek. Selectively re- uses and to replace invasive species with native tree • move some existing trees in areas with dense canopy, and shrub species. Twenty trees at $500 each, total • and remove invasive or undesirable species and trees estimated cost = $10,000. • that are unstable, leaning, or otherwise at risk of loss. e ey k • • 3. Planting a native vegetation buffer that extends a mini- The Cities of Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center will of sustainable design, a walkable, transit-connect- mum of 20 feet from the top of bank would filter runoff and need to produce a development plan for this stretch of ed, environmentally healthy redevelopment. • enhance infiltration. Depending on whether seed or plugs the creek corridor and craft an agreement about goals, • are used, buffer establishment could be $5,000 — 10,000/ maintenance and funding. 7. Extend the pedestrian trail along the east side of the . acre or $30-50 per linear foot per streambank side. creek. The bituminous path will accommodate both • 5. Similarly, a development framework will need pedestrian and bicycles either through striped lanes • Long Term to be crafted for Focus Area 2 preferred land -use or separated paths. Connecting the trail network both • 4. Encourage developers to minimize creation of new guidelines to direct any future redevelopment ef- upstream and down will depend on this segment. Es- impervious surface. These actions will over time reduce forts. timated cost of trail extension = $150,000 - 200,000 • peak flows and thus stress on Shingle Creek, and will Additional developed amenities along the path includ- • help to recharge the surficial aquifers that provide base 6. Develop a set of sustainability principles for the ing concrete, benches, or small walls = $20- 40,000 flow in the Creek. The potential cost of these actions site, perhaps using the state's B -3 guidelines or the • would vary based on the nature and extent of develop- soon to be published LEED -ND standards. With this • ment and redevelopment and the type of project. An- approach, the Focus Area 2 could become a model • other method of achieving these goals at minimal public • cost is through development credits. Some cities and Focus Area 2 Actions: • counties have added flexibility into their zoning code to • Extend pedestrian /bike trail along east side of Shingle Creek • provide developers with various public value credits if • Plant bank - stabilization and vegetative buffers to protect creek • they incorporate significant water quality, volume reduc- • Manage canopy cover and preserve screening of residential areas • tion, and natural resource protection improvements into • Draft a development framework and sustainability principles for site • their developments and redevelopments. • Encourage infiltration and minimize runoff in new development • • • Focus Area 3: • The Crossing creek passes beneath the road. This would require a • pedestrian- activated flasher and is not favored by ei- • ther the County or cities for safety reasons. Study Area tp The outcome of the evaluative process recommended a near term resolution that would bring the trail across s , . Brooklyn Boulevard at Regent Avenue, then head • e Crossing southeast alongside Park Center High School and • ��. � • � Th turn east at the creek on the south edge of the high • •"$ school roe The referred Ion term resolution is • P P rtY� p 9 the bridge; it is visible and therefore safer, and also has • 44 the potential to be an iconic feature for both cities — if • not a literal gateway, certainly a memorable piece of • There was consensus about completing the missing quired, so either grade- separated solution would • infrastructure, not unlike the Midtown Greenway bridge trail link between Regent Avenue and Noble Avenue. take time to implement. • over Hiawatha Avenue in South Minneapolis. The major hurdle is crossing Brooklyn Boulevard. • Four options were presented and the two that pro- Two other options were also studied and evaluated: Strategies • moted a grade separated crossing were favored. one suggested crossing Brooklyn Boulevard at either The connection of a new creekside trail to local ameni- The caveats, however, are the expense and techni- Regent Avenue or Noble Avenue, both of which are ties and the regional trail network will increase pedes- • cal requirements to bring the trail beneath Brook- signalized intersections. These would be less expen- trian and bike traff ic and necessitate a safe crossing • lyn Boulevard or build a pedestrian /bicycle bridge. sive and could be implemented much sooner. The point at Brooklyn Boulevard. See additional photos of • Funding would need to be secured and land ac- second looked at a mid -block crossing where the precedent bridge crossings on page 49 • • • • • • As noted earlier, the bridge is the preferred configura- Actions + Estimated Costs 3. Research possible funding sources for potential • tion for crossing Brooklyn Boulevard and linking the Near -Term Actions grade separated trail crossing alignments. • new trails to the existing regional trail network. It re- 1. Phasing could allow the trail to be developed in the quires a greater expense to complete but creates a near -term, using alignments along the roadway edge 4. Upgrade streetscape along Brooklyn Boulevard and existing signalized intersection for crossing, re- grade- separated condition for crossing, which is con- from Noble Avenue to Regent Avenue; Street trees in • sidered the safest of the options. It may be also be ducing the cost of establishing the connections and structural soils, planted boulevards, decorative con- eligible for federal funding through TEA -21 or other increasing the safety of the crossing. crete intersections, attractive streetlights, and upgrad- similar federal, state and county sources due to the ed furnishings. This will help to calm traffic, act as a regional significance of the trail connections. buffer for pedestrian and off - street retail environments, • Long -Term Actions create a 'greener' street and increase real estate val- . A bridge at this location also would have potential for 2. Further develop grade separated trail crossing con- ues. Estimated costs of extending landscaping, light- unique design characteristics that serve both as a region- cepts with the cities of Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, ing, and other features along Brooklyn Boulevard — al landmark and a gateway between the cities of Brook- and Hennepin County. Research crossing precedents, $1.2 - 1.8 million. • lyn Park and Brooklyn Center. Special lighting along the configuration options and potential trail alignments. path and of the bridge itself, extensive landscaping along Brooklyn Boulevard as one approaches the creek from either side, the inclusion of public art and "revealing the Focus Area 3 Actions: • resource" of Shingle Creek would all be additional ben- • Develop grade separated trail connection concepts • efits to the construction of a bridge connection. • Research potential funding sources for connection • Upgrade streetscape along Brooklyn Boulevard While the overpass configuration is preferred, commu- . Clear understory vegetation to open views to the creek from Brooklyn nity feedback recommended further evaluation of the Boulevard underpass concept as well. • • • Focus Area 4: • Park Center Seg • Provide access for high school students to conduct • AW 'I water- related experiments and learn about urban • Par Study area= Eenterl -Replace impervious paving with pervious to infil- • Se meet • trate water and support base flow in the stream. { Strategies • The preferred concept extends the trail along the creek • A�Z As as to Noble Avenue and connects to the existing trail net- • t work of Brookdale Park, Palmer Lake Environmental • • Preserve and Shingle Creek Trail. The approach to the trail integration is a minimally disruptive alignment • Shingle Creek, as it passes by Park Center Senior High The plan for this focus area recommends selected which allows the naturalistic environment surrounding • School, is a missed opportunity. A hidden resource, it clearing along the schools side of the creek to accom- the creek to remain intact. Best Management Prac- • fails to take advantage of its educational and recre- modate: tices for the creek and adjacent buffer zones would be • ational potential. Parking, service buildings and active applied as adopted by the respective cities of Brooklyn • recreation fields face the creek, while single family -Construction of the trail connection from Noble Park and Brooklyn Center (as the extension crosses housing occupies the land across the stream from the Avenue west and north to Regent Avenue the city boundary.) The creek channel in this section high school. The "natural" quality of the stream pro- • Equipment to clean debris, stabilize the streambed would be left alone and minimal disruption is preferred. vides a buffer for the housing, which is desirable for and allow in- stream improvements to be made homeowners. • • • • • • Actions + Estimated Costs the commercial property and high school to the north. 4. Research and design path alignment and connec- • Near -Term Actions If necessary the remaining tree coverage could be tions to existing trail networks. • 1. A canopy of cover of 25 -75% is desirable for warm- supplemented to provide an adequate transition be- . water streams such as Shingle Creek. Selectively re- tween the land uses and to replace invasive species 5. Develop a municipal agreement between Brooklyn • move some existing trees in areas with dense canopy, with native tree and shrub species. Ten trees at $500 Park and Brooklyn Center regarding goals, mainte- • and remove invasive or undesirable species and trees each, total estimated cost = $5,000. nance, and funding. • that are unstable, leaning, or otherwise at risk of loss. • Depending on resource availability, this work could be 3. Planting a native vegetation buffer that extends a • minimum of 20 feet from the top of bank would filter completed when time, equipment, and funding are • runoff and enhance infiltration. Depending on whether available, and the woody debris chipped for use else- • where in the park system. Some of the removed ma- seed or plugs are used, buffer establishment could • terial may be suitable for reuse upstream (see Village be $5,000 — 10,000 /acre or $30 -50 per linear foot per • streambank side. Creek Recommendations, page 42). The cost of haul- • ing and disposing of brush and smaller woody debris • would be dependent on the amount removed from the . site. Estimated staff, equipment, and hauling cost = Focus Area 2 Actions: $10,000. • Research and design path alignment and trail connections i • Manage tree canopy cover and replace invasive species • 2. The tree thinning in #1 above should be conducted • Preserve screening of existing residential areas with an eye to preserving an adequate screen between • Plant bank- stabi Iization and vegetative buffers to protect creek • the residential properties to the south of the Creek and • Provide connection to High School for trail use and creek research w Village Creek Supplemental Recommendations + locations in the city (such as from storm debris) could General Recommendations St be added to the stream to provide a woody substrate. 1. Evaluate the City's planning and zoning ordinances, • Village Creek has been successful on many levels, Additional enhancement could be gained by harvest- guidelines, and practices to determine if modifications • however, additional work must be done to increase ing live stakes from the willows and other woody spe- could be considered to reduce impervious surface; • water quality and ecological value. Habitat in the re- cies planted on the restored reach from Hampshire abstract or infiltrate runoff above the Shingle Creek • developed segment of the Village Creek area could be to Brooklyn Boulevard. The stakes could be planted . Watershed Management Commission's requirement enhanced by providing more varied substrate —the sur- between the boulder toes and rip rap to add substrate • of 0.5" of runoff; and otherwise encourage low impact faces that organisms and aquatic vegetation attach to variety and overhanging vegetation. This option would and grow on. In the upstream restored reaches boul- have a less manicured look and may not be desirable development principles. • der toes and rock were used to stabilize the stream- in the Zane Avenue to Regent Avenue segment. Esti- banks, resulting in a uniform rocky substrate. Large mated staff and equipment cost = $5,000. 2. Incorporate water quality treatment and runoff vol- woody material (root wads and large logs) harvested ume management on city projects to increase infiltra- • from the downstream, unimproved reach or from other tion in the watershed and help restore baseflow. • • �F 1 • y a t m :- r k s • 1 y • • • • 3. Work closely and early with developers to incorpo- egies include reducing impervious surface, incorporat- improves conditions throughout the Creek, or until • rate design standards into development and redevel- ing infiltration basins, rain gardens, vegetated swales, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) de- • opment along Shingle Creek. and other abstraction Best Management Practices termines the Creek should be evaluated on a smaller • (BMPs) as opportunities such as development and re- scale. The most likely scenario is that the Creek would • Watershed, near - stream, and in- stream strategies development and public improvement projects arise. be classified into two segments: upstream of Palmer • should be considered to address issues related to hy- These BMPs are generally beyond the scope of the Lake, and downstream of Palmer Lake. • drologic regime. These are strategies that are intend- Study Area, but should also inform any development • ed to overtime moderate the flashiness of the Creek by and redevelopment with the Study Area. • reducing the peak flows and increasing the base flow. • These are most effectively implemented at the water- In general, future development layouts that limit Creek • shed or near - stream level. Watershed level strategies improvements to the existing or slightly widened cor- • are long -term efforts that likely will take many years ridor could achieve at most modest water quality and • to result in measurable impacts in the Creek. Near- biotic benefits, while those opening up the corridor to • stream and in- stream strategies focus on activities that more extensive restoration work could achieve signifi- . could provide localized improvement or mitigation until cantly improved water quality and biotic conditions. It • the accumulative impacts of the watershed -wide strat- is important to note that the Impaired Water designa- • egies provide relief. tions on Shingle Creek apply to the entire eleven mile • length of Shingle Creek. Even if individual restora- Within the Shingle Creek drainage area, implement im- tion projects result in significant water quality and bi- • provements that would reduce runoff volume, reduce otic recovery, the Impaired Water designations will not • peak runoff rates, and increase infiltration. These strat- change until the cumulative impact of many projects d � ° r , A y f ff y n n r z , w t 1� t Y � . e h � e M :r ae. ""�1r �^" ' �Ip ^ � �.:u'.,� `r � ✓ a rf ` .vim .+" , ... a T. T FIT' 71 ORA. I l MC ( AO I y " i n 44 Creek overlook upstream of Regent Redevelopment site; part of the Village Creek redevelopment.• • • • • • • Chapter Five: Conclusions • These conclusions summarize the goals of the study. mends that future public and private action and invest- a pedestrian /bicycle overpass where Shingle Creek • While neither community or the county has commit- ments focus on achieving the following ten priorities: passes beneath Brooklyn Boulevard. ments in place to fund these strategies at this time, this • document is designed to be a road map, providing ap- 0 Preserve Shingle Creek in its current channel to 0 Open views to the creek from Brooklyn Boulevard • proaches for making systematic improvements to the optimize the redevelopment potential of adjacent un- with extensive clearing of understory vegetation. • creek that can set the stage for or be integrated with developed or underdeveloped properties. • future redevelopment. 0 Extend streetscaping on Brooklyn Boulevard from Over time, Shingle Creek has been relegated to a sin- © Link Brooklyn Boulevard to Shingle Creek with Noble Avenue on the south to Regent Avenue on the north • gular role: convey stormwater to the Mississippi River a linear green space at the Regent Redevelopment to accentuate the point where Shingle Creek passes be- • and accommodate the "flashy" surges that heavy rains site, terminating in a special feature along the creek neath Brooklyn Boulevard and to create a "greener" street. • bring. Shingle Creek once contained clean water and shoreline. Other similar green connections should be • was a haven for plant and animal biodiversity. It has the explored in the future. Introduce an internal public road into the Regent • Redevelopment Site (paralleling Brooklyn Boulevard) potential to again be beautiful and functional, through • © Introduce water and /or the potential for greater to subdivide the site into smaller parcels, optimizing simple design interventions that begin to return it to a • infiltration into redevelopment sites to improve water flexibility for new development. more natural condition. A revitalized stream will improve the attractiveness of parcels of land that adjoin it or are quality in the stream.;r • 0 Create a smooth transition from the more marn � nearby, thus "setting the table" for reinvestment with an • eye toward creating a complete community. 0 Introduce a variety of in- stream improvements to cured character of Shingle Creek at Village Creek to a e mix of more natural and limited manicured landscap • improve both water quality and biodiversity. ,f d • Achieving the goals of this study, which evolved with downstream to Brooklyn Boulevard. • input from the community, staff from Brooklyn Center, © Develop a trail system that links Village Creek with • Brooklyn Park and Hennepin County representatives, Noble Avenue following the creek alignment. In the G) Take advantage of the educational opportunities of will require collaboration between the public and private near term, use an at -grade crossing of Brooklyn Bou- the creek at Park Center High School, allowing access • sectors and leadership at all levels. This study recom- Ievard at Regent Avenue. In the long term, construct to the water for conducting science experiments, etc. • 6 • The Preferred Scenario • The Preferred Scenario envisions Shingle Creek as a destrian connection from Brooklyn Boulevard to the • healthier stream and an important community ame- creek and a new road (extending Village Creek Park- . .µ. .. fl nity, with improved water quality and increased bio- way) will be located approximately halfway between • • diversity. This will be achieved by implementing the the creek and Brooklyn Boulevard. This creates four • ten priorities listed previously. More specifically, the discrete parcels of land that can be developed incre- r Preferred Scenario envisions the following enhance mentally. The road can extend alongside t h e creek • • • ments to each segment. past the current car dealership sites should future • development benefit from it. Regent Redevelopment Segment At the Regent Redevelopment site, Brooklyn Park Regent Avenue /Brooklyn Boulevard Segment • • has already enhanced Shingle Creek by cleaning In this segment, the creek will transition to a more out debris, introducing aeration techniques, visually natural character, with large pockets of naturalized opening the creek to the public and constructing a landscape interspersed with openings to provide trail alongside its banks. Stream improvements are visual and physical access. Screening for housing contained within the existing channel, maximizing on the west side of the creek will remain. In- stream • ' the land area available for private investment. improvements will include removal of debris, stabiliz- • ing the stream banks and introducing strategies to • . In the Preferred Scenario, the Regent Redevelop improve water quality and biodiversity. • • : • • • : • ment site is subdivided by a green visual and pe- �i i • • • • • • • p! W '� • ., • "�£ cc • Former hfuntingt n • Pointe Site " -Y (5 BROOKLYN BLVD / • � " - _ e Potential Future • ` I ,R Redevelopment wi Af 41, K51 4 4 . _ . F �}p7•�"x'�. ,. ^lr i "'fi .. re • PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN • • • • � x Regent Ave N }tee 31 0 IA O cn io E jx _ v S h . 1 D o r, r • _ -_ The Crossing and Park Center Segments vard, creating a safe and visible crossing of the road. In At Brooklyn Boulevard, vegetation will be cleared and the short-term, an at -grade crossing at Regent Avenue, • t �` --� _ the stream will be easily seen from cars, bicycles and a signalized intersection, will provide safe crossing of • �� �� pedestrians crossing over Brooklyn Boulevard itself the road. 2.5 ac 3.5 ac will become a much greener street with landscaping t and tree planting extending in both directions. Finally, The range of recommendations produced during this as the stream passes by Park Center High School, it study acknowledges the importance of Shingle Creek to will again be opened to the school site to allow stu- residents and other constituents. The Preferred Scenario { .5 ac a 1.5 ac dents to study it and learn about stream ecology. supports their desires for a physically improved stream • and amenity as well as their recognition of the need to The Preferred Scenario envisions a trail along the en- balance these improvements with the economic value of • Fi h ACS > o ` tire length of the stream through the study area, linking maintaining flexibility in the uses, siting, design and den- g • ° / Re ent Avenue with Noble Avenue on the east. A new sities of development along its banks. FOCUS AREA 1 - PARCEL PLAN pedestrian /bicycle bridge will span Brooklyn Boule- - • oil + • • • • a 1 • n ' 3� a- e - • • • W m3 s sm� ate'' . ff•'yd i p, .+._ _ -/ 1r,.� r ,.+rwn • ,.�, -J • ! ♦ .,+ �; � �, 1' � � � 4: � �� jam;. , s � • , $ r fir �!` v 7 '. ,. �1f ` rte"♦ L" Iw. ..may 'i!+ � •..Y � w a .t A 4 0 qt if y ..Q X r !'! • .r i � �' ,top It LO • • • • • Appendix A: • • Creek Restoration Technical Memo • To: CLOSE Landscape Architecture + to ri That TMDL stud is current) underway b the from those options, and design standards to • p 9 tY� Y� Y Y Y guide fu- P 9 9 • Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission ture development and redevelopment depending on • From: Diane Spector, Ed Matthiesen, P.E. and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Prelimi- the nature and extent of development. These design nary results indicate that the water quality and ecologi- standards can be thought of as a "palette" from which • Date: August 3, 2009 cal status of Shingle Creek is currently limited by two to draw design components appropriate to unique de- primary factors: altered hydrology and flow regime; velopment requirements. • Subject: Huntington Pointe Study Area and the lack of suitable habitat for both aquatic and • terrestrial organisms. ALTERED HYDROLOGY • Potential Water Quality and Ecological Improve- ments to Shingle Creek Hennepin County and the cities of Brooklyn Park and Shingle Creek has been fundamentally altered from its • Brooklyn Center as well as the Shingle Creek Wa- predevelopment hydrology. Prior to European settle- Design Standards for Future Development and tershed Management Commission are interested in ment, the area which drained to Shingle Creek was • Redevelopment capitalizing on development and redevelopment op- an open prairie dotted by trees and small woods- a portunities along the Shingle Creek corridor to achieve landscape called "oak openings" by the early settlers. • improvements to Shingle Creek. The Connections at Stormwater runoff was minimal, with most precipita- • Shingle Creek in Northwest Hennepin County is a Shingle Creek Study Area, defined as the corridor from tion captured and infiltrated by the long- rooted Arai - • highly altered urban stream that serves primarily to Unity Avenue to Noble Avenue, provides an opportu- rie plants or intercepted and evapotranspirated by • convey stormwater to the Mississippi River. Shingle nity to explore different types and levels of develop- the dense vegetation. Shingle Creek at the time of • Creek has been designated by the State of Minnesota ment options and the type and magnitude of Creek the initial Public Land Survey in the 1850s was a nar- • as an Impaired Water due to excessive levels of chlo- improvement that might be achievable. row, highly meandered creek that likely was shallow or • ride from road salt; low levels of dissolved oxygen; even dry during the summer months. As the prairie • and an impaired fish and macroinvertebrate commu- This memo provides a short description of the current gave way to agriculture, many prairie streams were • nity. The Creek's status as an Impaired Water requires impacts to Shingle Creek, potential general improve- straightened and ditched to provide for more efficient that a special study called a Total Maximum Daily Load ments that could be made both in the Connections at drainage, but up until the late 1950s, Shingle Creek • (TMDL) be completed to diagnose the causes of the Shingle Creek Study Area as well as throughout the through the Study Area retained its historic meandered • impairments and to identify implementation actions Shingle Creek corridor, the expected water quality and nature. By that time it was likely that the Creek carried • to improve water quality and to restore ecological in- ecological improvements to Shingle Creek resulting increased flow from agricultural ditches. • • As the farms of City of Brooklyn Park gave way to This surficial groundwater provides a "base flow" in the conditions. These periods of low flows are exacerbat- • residential and commercial development, the new Creek, providing some water in the Creek even during ed by the channel morphometry, or shape and dimen- • impervious surfaces — highways, roads, parking lots, periods of little rain. As development increased runoff sions. To convey those high flows, Shingle Creek in roofs, sidewalks, and other hard surfaces — generated and reduced the amount of stormwater infiltrated, it re- the Study Area was widened and deepened, and the • more stormwater runoff. The rapidly developing city duced the amount of groundwater available to provide channel was reconstructed and dredged into a trap- • required a way to efficiently eliminate this runoff, and base flow. ezoidal cross section, with a wide, flat bottom. This Shingle Creek through the Study Area was straight- channel shape is efficient at carrying high flows, but ened, widened and dredged deeper to maximize its Problem during low flows the much lower volume of water is ability to carry runoff. The City's storm sewer system spread out only inches deep across the wide bottom. captured runoff from this new impervious surface Change in hydrologic regime has resulted in issues Stream velocity, which is a function of the shape and i and conveyed the new flow to Shingle Creek through both from too much flow and not enough flow. Flashy dimension of the channel, falls very low and is insuf- a network of pipes and open channels. Flow in the streams are more susceptible to streambank instability ficient to retain sediment suspended in the flow. As • Creek — its "hydrologic regime" — became increasingly and bank failure, both from the erosive force of water the velocity drops, the sediment it is carrying drops out • flashy. Following rainstorms, the stormsewers carried conveyed at high velocity and also from the repeated of suspension and is deposited on the creek bottom, • increasingly large volumes of runoff to the Creek, and and prolonged wetting of the bank as the Creek level filling pools that fish and macroinvertebrates need for • flow in the Creek would rapidly rise and be conveyed rises and falls. Shingle Creek in the Study Area has refuge and feeding and spawning habitat. The lower at high velocities downstream to the Mississippi River. experienced erosion and mass wasting of the stream- velocity also reduces the ability of the streamflow to bank that is likely directly related to flashy events. retain dissolved oxygen that those fish and macroin- Another significant impact of development is the re- However, Shingle Creek is an integral part of the storm vertebrates need to sustain life. duction in the amount of water infiltrating from the sur- drainage system, and thus it must be able to convey • face through the soil to the groundwater. Before devel- stormwater up to the 100 -year, or one percent chance, General Improvement Strategies • opment increased the amount of impervious surface event from a sizable developed watershed while main- • in the area, most stormwater soaked into the ground, taining a stable streambank. Watershed, near - stream, and in- stream strategies • or infiltrated. Some of that infiltrated water perco- should be considered to address issues related to hy- • lated to deep groundwater, but a significant portion Due to changes in the amount of base flow, Shingle drologic regime. These are strategies that are intend - infiltrated to surficial groundwater, where the shallow Creek in the Study Area can also experience periods ed to over time moderate the flashiness of the Creek by surface aquifers express groundwater into the Creek. of very low flows, shallow depths, and near -dry to dry reducing the peak flows and increasing the base flow. • • These are most effectively implemented at the water- infiltration in the hyporrheic zone, or the area immedi- In- Stream shed or near - stream level. Watershed level strategies ately adjacent to the Creek where important ground- In- stream strategies should address the high -flow con- are long -term efforts that likely will take many years water - surface water interactions occur. These are ditions as well as the low -flow conditions. These are • to result in measurable impacts in the Creek. Near- strategies that can be incorporated into the Connec- strategies that can be incorporated into the Connec- stream and in- stream strategies focus on activities that tions at Shingle Creek Study Area, and all would have tions at Shingle Creek Study Area, and would have an could provide localized improvement or mitigation until an immediate beneficial albeit localized impact on the immediate beneficial impact on the Creek, although the accumulative impacts of the watershed -wide strat- Creek. the effect would be limited to the immediate area. egies provide relief. Biorestoration techniques such as streambank sta- • Near - stream stabilization includes: bilization using live stakes, brush mattresses, native • Watershed plants, root wads and biologs can effectively protect • Adding 10 -20 foot wide stream buffer areas of long- streambanks from all but the most erosive of forces, • Within the Shingle Creek drainage area, implement im- rooted native vegetation to reduce mass wasting of and would be most effective if combined with a wider • provements that would reduce runoff volume, reduce streambanks; native plant buffer as included in the near - stream im- peak runoff rates, and increase infiltration. These strat- Thinning existing tree canopy where excessive shad- provements described above. Riprap and other hard egies include reducing impervious surface, incorporat- ing prevents the establishment of stabilizing woody structures would most effectively be used only where ing infiltration basins, rain gardens, vegetated swales, and herbaceous native vegetation; and those forces are the greatest, such as on the outside and other abstraction Best Management Practices of bends or on the bank opposite a stormsewer outfall. • (BMPs) as opportunities such as development and re- Removing existing streambank trees that are not well- development and public improvement projects arise. rooted and stabilized to prevent undermining and Low flows can be accommodated through reshaping • These BMPs are generally beyond the scope of the eventual tree and streambank loss. the channel bottom. A new, narrower low -flow channel • Study Area, but should also inform any development can be meandered along the Creek bottom to provide • and redevelopment with the Study Area. Near - stream infiltration can be accomplished through for a sustained flow during all but the driest conditions. • the incorporation of buffer areas and other infiltration This low -flow channel reshaping can be incorporated Near - Stream practices such as infiltration basins, rain gardens, and into the existing channel through the judicious use of vegetated swales within 50 -100 feet of the stream. excavation, rock vanes, and plantings as described Near - stream strategies include Best Management below in the design standards section of this memo. Practices to stabilize the near -banks and to increase BIOTIC INTEGRITY far upstream, so once swept away that population is habitat for birds, insects, and mammals as well as a • lost until it can be replaced. The fish community is protected travel corridor for a variety of species. Ur- . Stream biotic integrity, or the ability of the Creek to repopulated mainly from upstream lakes such as Bass banization often results in the removal or minimization • support a wide variety of fish, macroinvertebrate, and Lake and Eagle Lake, when fish are carried over the of near -bank vegetation; incision of the channel that • other aquatic and terrestrial life, has also been fun- lake outlet structures and into Bass and Eagle Creeks, makes access to the stream difficult for smaller organ - damentally altered by development. Straightening, whose confluence form Shingle Creek. Macroinver- isms; and disconnection of the stream corridor from widening, and dredging the stream has eliminated the tebrates with flight capability can repopulate by flying other green spaces resulting in fragmentation of habi- pool- riffle structure of a natural stream, and stream- upstream. Some aquatic species have the ability to tat. Several significant ecologic areas are upstream bank armoring, native vegetation removal, and heavy burrow into the sediments for protection, while others and downstream of the Study Area: the Palmer Lake • tree canopy have reduced the amount and variety of rely on their ability to cling to substrates such as rocks, Basin, which is designated by the Minnesota DNR as • habitat available to support a stable biotic community branches, gravel and cobble on the stream bottom, a Regionally Significant Ecological Area and the site of • This physical alteration has also limited stream reaera- and overhanging vegetation. These periodic high historic sightings of threatened Blanding's turtles, and • tion and resulted in low dissolved oxygen levels in the flows are very disruptive, and the resulting community the Regionally Significant Ecological Area adjacent to • water, which is exacerbated by the sediment and nutri- is made up only of those species with high survival Shingle Creek on the south end of the North Hennepin • ent s transported to the Creek by the network of chan- skills. Low flows are also stressful for aquatic organ- Community College. nel and stormsewers, increasing the turbidity of the isms. Where streams periodically go very low or dry, water. The amount of dissolved oxygen in the Creek such as Shingle Creek within the Study Area, organ- Problem often falls below the minimum required to sustain life. isms can live only in the remaining pools or burrowed into the wet sediments. The channelization of Shingle Creek in the Stud Area g Y The poor biotic integrity of Shingle Creek is related has reduced physical habitat for aquatic and terrestrial • to the lack of structural habitat and the low dissolved Terrestrial organisms are also stressed b urbaniza- organisms. The stream lacks pools and riffles variety 9 Y 9 P oxygen conditions and the changes in flow regime tion. Some organisms such as frogs and turtles re- in substrate, overhanging vegetation, access to the • Y9 9 9� 9 g 9� 9 9 . outlined above. Flashy streamflows stress the biota as quire both aquatic and terrestrial habitat for different streambank, and refugia to provide protection from well as streambanks. High flow conditions can cause parts of their life cycle, and for hunting and feeding. high and low flows. The corridor and near -bank area fish and macroinvertebrates and other aquatic life to They also require a variety of vegetation in the near- lacks buffer and is disconnected by stream crossings. be literally swept away from upstream to downstream. bank area, as well as access to the stream. Vegetated There are few opportunities for reaeration to increase Many organisms do not have the ability to move very stream corridors provide nesting, hunting and feeding dissolved oxygen in the stream. • The lack of suitable habitat and low dissolved oxygen Near - Stream In- Stream levels cannot support the type of fish and macroinver- • tebrate community expected in a typical stream. The The Shingle Creek corridor through the Study Area In- stream strategies should provide both structural • urban conditions have also limited habitat for aquatic had been developed with a variety of retail, office, habitat and water quality improvement. Riffle -pool and terrestrial organisms that would typically be found institutional, and single- and multi - family residential structures provide important feeding habitat for fish in a natural stream corridor. uses. Generally, the corridor is narrow and confined to and macroinvertebrates as well as serve as both high • the stream banks and a narrow adjacent buffer. The and low flow refugia. Aquatic organisms require a General Improvement Strategies banks and near - stream area have been allowed to variety of stream bottom conditions, including areas . become densely wooded, and the shady canopy has of coarse sand, gravel, and cobble. Creating a se- Near-stream and in- stream strategies should be prevented the growth of desirable woody and herba- ries of boulder /cobble riffles followed by deeper pools • ceous vegetation. Buckthorn, box elder, cottonwood, considered to address issues related to ecological would improve habitat, increase variety of substrate, grass and other undesirable species improvement and biotic integrity. These strategies in- unmowed turf g and help reaerate the stream as water pours over the • clude some of the same Best Management Practices dominate the buffer. riffle. These features are missing from the Creek in its • addressing flow regime. It is important to note that current configuration, and incorporating these strate- • Incorporation of buffer areas of long- rooted native while these strategies are intended to improve habi- gies should make the reach through the Study Area vegetation and a native species tree canopy of 25- tat and water quality conditions, aquatic and terres- 75% shade would provide habitat for a variety of or- more attractive for colonization by macroinvertebrates, trial organisms are living beings that may or may not ganisms, and overhanging vegetation would provide which are an essential component of stream biotic in- • choose to colonize the improved corridor. In addition, both fish and macroinvertebrate habitat and a carbon tegrity. • adjacent reaches of Shingle Creek are also impaired, source from leaves, twigs, and vegetation fragments and improvements may be necessary upstream and As noted above, low flows can be accommodated that provides food for macroinvertebrates. Invasive downstream of the Study Area to remove barriers and through reshaping the channel bottom. A new, nar- and nonnative species should be removed and exist- • promote colonization. For example, downstream of ing trees selectively thinned. rower low -flow channel can be meandered along the • Noble Avenue, outside of the Study Area, there is a Creek bottom to provide for a sustained flow during It is also important that improvements incorporate a two -foot drop structure on Shingle Creek in Brookdale variety of passages for wildlife, including streambank all but the driest conditions. This sustained flow helps Park. That drop structure prevents upstream fish mi- slopes that provide easy access from the top of the keep sediment in suspension, reduces the loss of oxy- • gration from fish spawning areas in Palmer Lake. gen from the stream, and provides a refuge for aquatic • streambank to the water and wildlife passages under stream crossings or through culverts. organisms during dry periods. This low -flow chan- • • • • • • • nel reshaping can be incorporated into the existing To assist in the community visioning process, CLOSE quality and biotic conditions. It is important to note • channel through the judicious use of excavation, rock Landscape Architecture + prepared several illustrative that the Impaired Water designations on Shingle Creek • vanes, and plantings as described below in the design site layouts for the Study Area, and Wenck Associates apply to the entire eleven mile length of Shingle • standards section of this memo. The rock vanes and developed potential Creek and corridor improvements Creek. Even if individual restoration projects result in • plantings would also reoxygenate the stream. that could be incorporated into each site layout. These significant water quality and biotic recovery, the Im- layouts were intended to illustrate the scope and na- paired Water designations will not change until the cu- When Shingle Creek was straightened and recon- ture of improvements rather than to provide specific mulative impact of many projects improves conditions structed as a ditch, natural habitat was lost and the site and corridor designs. These layouts fall into three throughout the Creek, or until the Minnesota Pollution macroinv r - erteb ate and fish communities became limit general categories: site plans that assume that the Control Agency (MPCA) determines the Creek should ed to those that had high survival skills. Habitat struc- Creek would be maintained in its existing channel be evaluated on a smaller scale. The most likely sce- • tures could be added back into the stream, such as and corridor; site plans that assume the Creek cor- nario is that the Creek would be classified into two seg- • root wads and constructed lunkers to provide lurking ridor could be widened or relocated somewhat, and ments: upstream of Palmer Lake, and downstream of • opportunities, refugia, and substrate for macroinverte- the Creek channel modified and potentially relocated Palmer Lake. . brates. These features would reduce biotic mortality within that corridor; and site plans that assume the . rates during stressful conditions, and could lead to corridor could be relocated anywhere on the redevel- Improvements within the Existing Channel and • successful colonization by the more sensitive organ- opment sites and the Creek could be reconstructed in Corridor isms that are typically found in natural systems. any number of ways, for example including water fea- tures, wetlands, or multiple channel threads. Flow re- This option could provide a modest amount of new DESIGN STANDARDS gime and ecological /water quality improvements can or enhanced habitat and some reaeration within the be made at any scale, although the amount and extent existing stream corridor and result in localized biotic • The Connections at Shingle Creek Study investigated of benefit would vary. and water quality improvement within this sub - reach. • a variety of redevelopment options, with Shingle Creek Creek improvements should include at a minimum all options ranging from improvements within the existing In general, site layouts that limit Creek improvements to of the following design standards: • stream corridor between Unity and Regent Avenues, to the existing or slightly widened corridor could achieve • total reconstruction of the stream from Unity to Noble Av- at most modest water quality and biotic benefits, while Construct a low -flow channel meandering across the enue with the opportunity to incorporate offline pools, a those opening up the corridor to more extensive resto- existing streambed using excavation, rock vanes, and widely re- meandered channel, and awide natural corridor ration work could achieve significantly improved water vegetation (see conceptual cross section). • Add riffles where the grade allows and habitat fea- Thin existing trees to maintain a 25 -75% canopy, re- If possible, provide an off -line pool for a high flow and • tures such as root wads for biotic and water quality move undesirable species and unstable trees. Plant winter refuge. • improvement and for visual interest. new trees set back from the streambank to provide • Thin existing trees to maintain a 25 -75% canopy, and shade and habitat in open areas. Add root wads, logs and lunkers to provide fish and • invertebrate habitat. remove undesirable species and unstable trees. . Plant a minimum 20 foot wide vegetated buffer to sta- Plant a minimum 20 foot wide vegetated buffer to sta- bilize the streambanks and promote filtration and in- bilize the streambanks and promote filtration and infil- filtration. Where more bank stability is necessary use • tration. boulders planted with live stakes root wads, buried • logs. • Improvements within a Wider Corridor • • This option could provide a more natural, curved or Conceptual Crass Section, 5h ind3le Creek meandered reach and an opportunity to incorporate more aeration and habitat features. Improvements • should include as many of the following features as .. ° Buffer 100 year elevation possible: i Buffer �" •' t Planted point bar" 3 • 4 ti [, �,; r Y a k Jet t ° srrrrr•rsrssrsrrrrrrrrsasr srrr••srrrrs••s.rrr••r Construct a low -flow channel meandering across the existing streambed by excavation, rock vanes, and vegetation (see typical cross section.) -- .......r........ WPt1Ck -- � � New Add riffle /pool structures, and use rock vanes to direct flow fch 2005 low-flow • into the central channel to provide reaeration and habitat. EX15ti ncj Channel channel Simple Enhancements • OF _ Log vane '. Boulder toe { �� f _• � ,.. - i Pool - add depth r _o Riffle Lunkers Riffle Rock vane Rack vane i Root wads ; ! Rock vane • O a 6 �.. e r • F • — Root wads ? Riffle Q Rock Buried logs • �. Add overstory and willows gravel point of wads Riffle .----� armor Add i to create overhanging -�— =` -- and ro vegetation Convert pond into deep substrate to offline pool for habitat channel I and refuge II Ilyf f.. - CHANNEL DESIGN 100 -year elevation .. - , t ppp Buried log and root wad ` Bankfull Flood lain °-• - vegetation - Low flow g x c channel C- - FL Tl' Riffle Fish lunker Rock vane • i • • This option shows Shingle Creek remaining in its ex- isting channel with minimal enhancements. The re- development potential of the Regent Redevelopment • site is therefore optimized, with no land reclaimed to further enhance the stream. The diagram suggests that water could be integrated into the Regent Rede -"` ° velo ment site if appropriate; it could be part of an ... • overall rainwater management strategy, promoting infiltration and supplying groundwater to the creek. It could also be an "off line" feature, completely inde- pendent from the stream. • This option is quite similar to the Excelsior and Grand model discussed in Chapter Three. In addi- — 0 tion, the extension of a "green- finger" from the creek 0 to Brooklyn Boulevard establishes another "rung J c • on the ladder," paralleling Welcome Avenue to the L `' north. The intersection of the green finger with the creek is also an opportunity to create a special gath - 0 ering space, smaller then the development at Village #- ' 0 Creek but equally refined.' f t The key enhancement strategies for the creek in ►, 1 �,� re elude the following: • Modest amount of enhanced habitat 0 -Aeration features within the existing stream corridor •Riffle and habitat features are added near �'� ► �� e the overlook for visual interest k The land use shown in this option is similar to the �� 11 layout of a typical office campus, with similar build- 0 ings surrounding parking (surface and /or struc- . tured). The scheme also proposes to extend Village Creek Parkway through Focus Area 1, breaking the _ superblock into smaller blocks. - 0 • • • • Moderate Enhancements I t CY • � ., .�,,ti • Root wads and Junkers in offline �} + Q� • pool to provide habitat V � and retugia _ • Boulders whh € Buried logs / a Root wads live stakes (both sides) Excavate Root wads � III pools ¢ and logs Boulders with n Boulders WAh live stakes (both sides) Boulders 0 live W"1(1% live slakes r ' \\ slakFS and d root wds � • RiffleLi I / rnkers „ -� Riffle Po b Create of ; - ,_ `- _ � .�—. series •. � u .... .W�. -. r tr � (;r � - - , � _,�,,; • � ", As stream narrotivs, velocity /.. 1ti increases_ Riffles promote m te 0 P a redirect flow e l stakes Brush mattress to center • \ Riffle 4 - • r �� Boulders with '� � ¢ � � � Rootvrads a„ 4 .ari R ,t ad live slakes and s root wads ! • __�YC � 4 v mm , ,r �I I i i << w� • Buried log and root wad FLOW RLDa �A -N[E' I'.17'M < • c.65� AND 5::.1'9 I • • •• � � � £ f • L Riffle Fish lunker Fascines and brush mattress Rock vane • • This alternative shows a single -use building with an unbroken connection to the major amenity from the ` w. a OW - development. Like the Enlarged Amenity Framework • in Chapter Four, emphasis is placed on the pedes- .�;, -�. ti dr trian rather than the car, and vehicle access and parking is kept to one side. The creek and associ- ated water features and small amphitheater provide a park -like space that is essentially an extension of the it • existing park at Village Creek. This concept features a more aggressive treatment • of the stream with a natural, meandering reach and a large, off -line water feature. More land area is given 1 over to parkland and open space, limiting the devel- K �, /� opment potential of Focus Area 1. Key improvements include: v,, � v. 1, -�-�; �._o�,' � L • •Creation of a natural, meandering reach -Use of riffles for aeration -Use of boulders planted with live stakes and , root wads, and by buried logs for bank stability • -Creation of a deep, off -line pool providing IN • high flow and winter refuge. The land use shown in this option is a fitness cen- ter, a single building with a more compact footprint. Surface parking is typically associated with these fa- cilities as shown. Village Creek Parkway is extended into the site only to access parking and the building drop -off area. Additional access drives enter the site r►1� • from Brooklyn Boulevard.' • This concept, like Concept D, shows the auto dealer- ship land vacant, suggesting potential future devel- opment potential. i • • Extensive Enhancements • i 4? L . Plant with emergent wetland natives. In --' °� high water this area will serve as flood storage Q� Root wads and ! and backwater habitat and refuge. It will be v! • It will be difficult to sustain this on- Junkers in offline difficuIt to sustain open water here. Boulders with root wads _ line open water pool. It will pool to provide habitat I and live stakes provide 'V i accumulate sediment and likely and reh,gia % stability V will become stagnant in late surnrner ' flock weirs set at Rork vanes direct .. l r • --�.� bankfulf e v ) flaw into culverts leation r 'fie Fop of weir set at bankfull elevation f I �^ . r ' - e.�a:.. .... i* .. As stream narrows. vuloaty R s increases R iffle s promote - ' � ft re aeration Boulders with ', v f yr �1 .. ~' Rock vanes direct flow t tart c1 nfilr -pool !, quence AL ' live stakesVY P,iffie Root wads into center of channel Root wad, yi • • �sr � ' �.. . r. Buried log and root wad _ — • rre�ro•�.•x_rm�u•.c�uwosu:KS ` rr_ • Y p . ;J tr�,111 r 1 e-K f_L E_zi/.TY`N It K14 - y,.!"`� �z .: uy: ..r .vu ±'` 't. .rT"� vvr, new, •, - FLOW Riffle Fish lunker Emergent wetlands are home to fish, frogs, Rock vane i • turtles, birds and other wildlife. • The alternative is similar to the Adjacent Amenity Framework, significantly expanding the creek into • _ « �; 'z Focus Areas 1 + 2 and locating the extension of Vil- lage Creek Parkway along it. The ample park and xYZ xti OoU 7(YZ wetland space allows for numerous sites to be de- i y ..' - veloped on the stream banks, creating a series of "pearls" that enhance opportunities to experience _ the creek without competing with Village Creek's site " =® — enhancements. • The option shows the maximum manipulation of • Shingle Creek and the surrounding land. In addition to the creation of a natural, meandering reach and two large online ponds, the stream is aerated and • banks stabilized. There are issues with sustaining • f the amount of water shown in this scheme, suggest - "• ` _ — ing that a more modest approach might be best. The ` '�--- scheme emphasizes park -like amenities dominated fi--- - - by water, but results in the least available space for • ...,. t , i s .I development. e The main stream improvements include: -Constructing an expanded, meandering • `'��� I' . r ` ° ? r t stream with connected pools, creating a very expansive open ace and ark -like ` 011 fi r, rY P P P P ✓s-- :..:�i` /. �, y °�� � � � f �1, "� � amenity -Aeration and bank stabilization • °� /9 '° ► �- -Improved habitat The land use suggested in this option is a simple • -+ .} 1/ r'�� office /warehouse /retail mix. This land use does not • .- , ,; "° ° require extensive parking so it is often handled on '` .,��.,,. smaller, surface lots as shown. The lots shown along '- n` Brooklyn Boulevard are fairly typical of this building R OY - �"' � ,� � �� . • type, but a more urban resolution of parking within the • block is also possible. � _ 4411 Ir A jail i A la.r w , a a, � { 4 `, i 9 x'y 9 r PS � ae � TI Y & gg F • • • • Appendix B: • Preference Survey Results • Attendees of the open house in May, 2009 were creek too much runs a high risk of having portions remain dry not necessarily mutually exclusive although at first take they ap- • asked to evaluate six options for enhancing Shingle much of the time. pear to be. The importance of making strong local connections to • Creek and four options for the "connection" where the resource is also a top priority. Of secondary priority is ensur- • shingle Creek and Brooklyn Boulevard intersect. Gateway Options ing greatest flexibility for future development, enhancing regional • The preferred schemes are noted on the accompa- Options 3 and 4 received the most first place and second place connections and enhancing the natural character of portions of votes. Both options: the creek. Hying pages. • -Create a grade- separated condition, the safest condition for Respondents also felt that the investment in Village Creek should In addition, participants were asked to prioritize fif- crossing • teen criteria to help us understand which approach- • Involve greater expense to complete, but may be eligible for fed- be respected as the primary "pearl" in the district but that other • es to improving Shingle Creek are the most impor- eral funding through TEA -21 or other similar federal, state and special places should be developed in support of that redevelop- • tant. Only the top vote - getters are ranked. county sources due to the regional significance of the trail ment district. The gateway feature was also part of this third tier of • Propose extensive landscaping along Brooklyn Boulevard as one priority as was the idea of some creek / amenity expansion. City taff from both Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Cen tY - approaches the creek from either side • ter were asked to do the same exercise, which gave -Clearing vegetation at the creek crossing to "reveal the resource" Miscellaneous Notes. The following notes were taken from respon- • us a wider range of opinions and preferences. dents' sheets: - Noteworthy: Phasing could allow the trail to be developed in the •Opportunity to emphasize fitness— exercise stations, etc. Open House #1 near -term, using alignments along the roadway edge and existing • Like a mix of natural and manicured — needn't be one or the other • creek Enhancements signalized intersection for crossing (or a new, but more contro- • Like emphasis on Village Creek but with other pearls • Concepts 2 and 3b were the highest rating ( #1 choice). Both versial, mid -block crossing). Comments were also made that the -Some public art good, don't need to go overboard • options: "gateway" is really more about the creek crossing, because the -Significant gateway feature not needed • •Preserve the creek in its current channel City gateways are not necessarily at this exact location. -Space for recreation and collaboration both good • Introduce water into the remainder of the site • Need both local and regional connections • • Retain the maximum space and flexibility possible for redevel- Additional input suggests that the pedestrian /bicycle bridge over . Keep native / natural vegetation in some places • opment Brooklyn Boulevard presents a great opportunity for safe crossing -Blend natural and manicured • -Introduce a new internal road and could be visually nice. Underpass is great for safely crossing .A well- engineered stream can look "natural" while enhancing -Extend a linear green space to Brooklyn Boulevard the road buy may have security issues. At -grade crossing were water quality considered less safe. •Don't keep creek a channel; make it have some character • Noteworthy: Concept # 5 received 2 first choices and 6 second •Include both recreational and public purpose • choices. This suggests that there is a willingness to explore do- Noteworthy: Improving visual access to and interaction with the ing more with the creek and surrounding parkland even with the creek is a high priority, as is improving habitat — emphasizing sacrifice of developable land. A comment was that expanding the natural systems and decreasing human intervention. These two are • • • Agree Disogree Neulrul, Ranking A - Landscape character ,� • 6 ' . C ate a native and na tural landscape - not mowntrougher • s i appearance, low mainmenance, no irrigation ... emphasis aq • tom` j • l 2. Improve visual and physical access - o creek edge - lawn i and horticultural landscape, rnown!nianicured, higher : maintenance, sprinkler systeri ... em- pnasis on arp� k or �• � 9= en ctiarac - :- • B - Shingle Creek restoration andior • 2 enhancement • ;. lirpr�rv habitat (bio- diversit; :; - test practicefscience t�aserf i tech-liques to establish s:at;ile, sus :ainahle flora and fauna • ... eziWas1 ural s y.s:ems._vAtt Aa caasjna huMan • 4. Improve water qualit� - construction and management ; ��;, • techniques rely :ed :o cua^ -* jf .vater. rain water, infiltration and water - treatment that - Ml ensure measurable positive results . emphasis on invearated Starsnnte nr n na rlt- • solutions p Guidelines and monitoring • Top ranked criteria votes were tallied and ranking is shown in red in the "Ranking" column. • i Agree Daagree Nuiial Ranking C -Land area used for either redevelopment � - ' ,�• P • or creek improvements 5. Restore historic alignmer- ar�d previous character of the creek — natural' meanders use some site area .. ernph • on e xpanded natura l;�;)uhlic arienity intenra'ed within fu`ure site develo r�_= ner;: ' S. Ens're flexi:)ilily for future redeve loprien -- straight ('url,an'i ty , 4 stream channel maximizes develoDable square fo . emphasis on natu public amenity contained within exiting ' F corrido D - Land use, urban form and public amenity 7. Acknowledae'Village CreeK and'YVelcome.Avenue as the signature centerpiece for Brooklyn ::'ark — new development and streamside amenities should not detract from or dilute this 'sense of place' ... emphasis on one location — the 'toe,n center' r S. Acknowledge Village Creek and Vvelcome Av enue as a prnmar; amenity in this'district — new development and r streamside improvements should complement, enhance or i add to other district features ... emphasis on multiple nodes _ 'pearls on the necklace' :fi • • • • ADree Dii aV" Neutral Ranldngng E - Connections r ., • A. L r�k: tine Shingle reek corridor to adjacent neighborhoods, � �� �� • 3 - -__ • Brooklyn Boulevard, and nearby destinations and amenities via safe, inviting, pedestrian - scaled streetscape . _ . t r, emphasis on local connections - t 10.. Lint existing and proposed trails to city-wide and regional parks. trails and open space systems ... emphasis on _r gi ,l connections F - Rrea Use and Public Purpose f ec • 1 11. Expand recreational opportunities along the corridor to • include both active and passive uses. . ennphasis on • dispersed amenities including siI areas. overlooks L71a.!L • play (tot lots), picnic shelters etc, ' • 12- Expand opportunities for additional public celebration, • performance or other large group: special events use ... • j emphasis on r�gionallj recognized civic oath VenLe • • Evaluate and Prioritize Project Components • Agree Disagree Neutral Ranking G - Other District Components to Consider 13. integrate public art instaNations with infrastructure ihl , ,tge, railing, pavement), or stand -alone icons along the creek: and th the distnc- .. feature not an afterthouch + ' h +'� • 14. Preserve and protect remaining vegetation and tree canopy • emphasis on the value of existincl trees both on -site an • aloha the creek • � o w � � 8 ; F. Create significant gateway feature - must highlight Wth - { cities (two sided the creek and the district. .. emphasis oo • co nnections, aesthetics and identit r - " Evaluate and Prioritize Project Components • • • • • • . �r ` � � � I .e a ! ♦ � r• �_�' � ��{!� v .rr ` Ply ,�„ � i � ;''� •�'� 4 w b u ,�� x < . °,,. sx rn • t - • , s a�F mss -� ,..9As `^ ✓ ' is • � �r..W I+ _� -mo � — . - M_ - � • aR'�#d '��—�j ft � ' .. � .��'� a� _- � � r ��,' ' • �¢— � i � t , �i i= �.z r� � n th � ��• _ �� �" . ^'w� „ or z v + « »3 ti F a / " rc r .�m..a �, `�, \ h, �r ,- �...�• E •� �, ;% _ __ � -°� i� .-fir' ,. ,� • r ; A. `'� `' � � ` <,. _ _ -�_.. •- �`[�` /,, � - �—~ - �. � .fir • /b�y�_:.. :o r'F' .,mac ,,.^ - '.._i'�1 tl r' ��._ \, _ C.• i, ��ti9`. ,:>�_ -� ': ♦1"'*•.+ ` 4 e dpi , .,a►► • Creek enhancement options were ranked from the six options shown. The top rated options as shown with asterisks. • i • • • • • • ,�* i� �. �a �a. � .� + r ^ � ,� �� ✓ 1 ''F '7 ��i•� �i * ,. r fl 'C { � .,.�':,R r! 1 _ ,fad. ��... *� ,¢ \ \ \\ `" '• P v`r S!' , - °•„ M� . - a s l la{' i., w � � ter. r "�'.. -'/'� i C v • 1 � _ ti i� vie I Nil 1B • - r i ] % - ! ~ ♦ � } d er I� k i € ' 1 . 1� i • ' -' B }'n .' e. r iC' �• -.J' .c-''; . ?`',�' y z .� r _ c u aa __f ' € ti_- `lam -.7 #sly r , y, •fit! `a :� i �r,�_t.� l� � Q ;.'�A -` .�,. ' _ - �� %y� i• 1 � �� £� ,' c PIP , .•• P mow-' tic AN AM i1 C • �,t ''+!e � '? f ,c . .� "� a6►'' Al • � v. � i �` _ 11 1 A I i u f t • • • Four Options for the connection at Shingle Creek abd Brooklyn Boulevard were also ranked. Bold numbers illustrate preference. • • • • s • • Community Meeting #2 • • Evaluation Survey Which is the most appropriate landscape charac- — Active recreation (informal open space for Fris- • Open House #2 - August 27th, 2009 ter along Shingle Creek? (check one) bee, etc., small play areas) • — Focus on trail recreation (walking, biking, roller • — Very natural character (keep trees and understory) blading) Rank the following from 1 =most important to — Manicured and much more physically and visu- — Passive recreation (picnicking, bird - watching, ed- 4 =least important ally accessible (like Village Creek) ucational uses, sitting areas) — Manicured only at a few use areas (such as picnic — Provide expanded opportunities for civic gather- • — Improving water quality and biodiversity (focus on areas) ings, larger groups • the creek) — Transition from manicured at Village Creek to nat- — Quiet footpath only - keep as natural as possible • — Narrowing down development options (focus on ural at Noble Avenue • specific land uses) There was a clear preference for focusing on trail- - Linking the Village Creek Trail to the Shingle Creek The highest vote - getters were for maintaining a very related recreation through the corridor, rather than Trail (making connections) natural creek, but several respondents also empha- accommodating active recreation or larger group • — Maximizing redevelopment potential (keep the sized that increasing visual and physical access to gathering areas. This would include walking and bi- i most land available) the stream was important. This suggests that the cycling. A number of respondents indicated that a • — Maximizing recreational opportunities (activities stream character might transition from Village Creek's quiet footpath would also be a good alternative. . along the creek) more manicured appearance to a more natural creek in Brooklyn Center. The transition area would be pri- Rank the following from 1 =most preferred to • Improving water quality ranked highest of these op- manly natural with a few manicured areas to provide 4= least preferred • tions, followed by linking Village Creek Trail with access. . Shingle Creek Trail. It is apparent that constituents — The trail should cross Brooklyn Boulevard at a • are concerned about the health of the creek, but also Prioritize your preferences for recreational and signalized intersection (least expensive) • support its use as a recreational amenity connecting public use alongside the creek from 1 =most pre- — The trail should cross at a mid -block crossing, re- both cities. ferred to 5 =least preferred quiring a pedestrian light — The trail should go under a new bridge on Brook- • • • • • • • lyn Boulevard, with the creek (most expensive) There was a lot of interest in making improvements in Please add any additional comments you have: • — The trail should cross on a new pedestrian bridge the near -term rather than waiting for development or • Make sure in planning process not to interrupt ani- over the roadway putting them off for an extended period. One respon- mals and foliage along the creek. dent wanted everything as soon as possible; another Create a park at the Huntington Pointe site. • A pedestrian bridge over Brooklyn Boulevard gar- wanted a park at the former Huntington Pointe site I need to know more to make a choice. • nered the most support in this series of options, as right away; a third wanted no change for the long- The City should request stimulus money based on • it did in the first open house. The grade- separated term. these "green" alternatives. I hope this moves quickly! • crossing is safest, and an overpass is more visible • Thanks for your hard work! from the street, making it more secure as well. An un- Please rank the following in order of importance This is a super idea for the creek and B.P. derpass was of interest to several respondents, but for near -term investment from 1 =most important I think the creek is fine the way it is. Spend money • the construction costs would be higher than for an to 5 =least important on higher priority issues. Do nothing to the creek • overpass. that would have an adverse effect on the many shal- • — Protect remaining vegetation and tree canopy low wells people use to water their lawns. • When should the cities proceed with these rec- — Acquire land along the creek edge to insure future • My main concern is to preserve the natural status ommendations from the project? — trail development of the creek, which may mean some restoration ac- 1. In the next 1 -5 years — Clear vegetation at the Brooklyn Boulevard cross- tivities - erosion abatement and elimination of buck- • 2. wait for development ing to open views to the creek thorn and other non - native species. 3. long -term — Begin to develop plans for "greening" Brooklyn . 4. On- street trail connection Boulevard from Regent to Noble • — Invest in public art to bring more attention to the Trail connection along creek creek and engage local artists Trail connection over Brooklyn Blvd Enhancements to Shingle Creek The favored actions were to protect existing vegetation • Additional creek enhancements at and tree canopy and begin to acquire land along the • Village Creek creek to insure that trail development can take place. Prepared for: Prepared by: City of • BROOKLYN X W �'nck/ • P CENTER RK UNDSCREARCN[TECTUV Engineers • Scientists A r f �r • Y Development � 1 Opportunity 3 8050 �. �r .. Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center Connections at Shingle Creek: A Corridor Study DOSE c KLYN 4� �r y Pnck BROOKLYN TER PARK Engineers • Scientists oon Rapids Blaine 2 005: Hennepin • cos eO g i ~� ��+ in Lake Brookhm Park P{�, B oard . • • • � II Shingle Creek -- -,Otmds View M aple race %I initiative t exp __. Fridley da ylighting ¢T I Broakl }n - I Center ew B Bassett .. 0 J L Columbia p Shingl C ree k _ Heig$ts New Hope Crystal r o �Itobbinsdale, Br • C ree k o Plymouth , L ] St AntLO}►v Bassett Creek Bassett Creek {North Fork) Bridal Veil Creek T o genera b J , i Of l f C,olden Valley f e nvir o nmental b enefits s \1anneapolis . • econom �C Q � StI Pau Minnetonka 1 o L J, . L i j - ° ° St. Louis Park deve a 01 cr ee k Hapkius 1 • • • N Presentation to Brooklyn Center City Council, April 12, 2010 a 2007: "Bassett Creek Stream and Habitat Restoration -Am Implementation Plan, in E6 A partnership with Cit of _ -1 Minneapolis: + i lni cE 2B � .y OO N iRAC PARK _ 2008: "Dayl ighti ng Shingle Creek Framework Plan" in partnership with oP� p p City of Brooklyn Center Hmngin l OK pp,,. • '< LION -J• r . 11C�,C PARK - , 1 r Multidisciplinary consultant team: Bob Close, Close landscape Architecture Diane Spector, Wenck Associates Shingle Creek WP-- a ow- .0-■ Na. Hennepin 2009: "Connections at Shingle Creek: A Corridor Study," in partnership with Cities of Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park ' Restoring. Shingle Creek A Corridor Study h '' T Hennepin AP t r ' ~ Development a Opportunity i \ 3 -8050 Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center y v Connections at Shingle Creek: A Corridor Study Presentation Topics Item 1 - Study Process Overview Item 2 - District Opportunities Item 3 - Study Area Framework Diagrams Item 4 - Huntington Pointe Site Land Use Scenarios Item 5 - The Connection Item 1 Study Process Overview • Community Goals • Study Goals • Study Components (focus areas) I, . . . explore alternatives for creek restoration in relationship to various development options, with an emphasis on the following: • create a more public creek • connect with existing trails • improve wildlife habitat • improve bio- diversity ' • improve water quality • optimize redevelopment potential a f C 1 M n w 5 • +...sue _ ,: _ a ^ a r 3 f { ' �.. Regent Study Area r Redevelopment Segment Regent Ave Brooklyn Blvd Park Center _ — Segment Segment AWL IL , V C, The Crossing :. se am 0 0 o• a I Focus Areas Item 2 District Opportunities • Existing Conditions and Recent Initiatives • Shingle Creek (restoration + enhancement) • Green Armature (parks + trails + streetscape) • The 'Ladder Concept' and I Pea ris -on- the - Necklace' i - i The Village Master Plan/ Br ooklyn Shingle Creek Corridor Plan City of .. ramewor an -, a� i ,_ � Do li htin Shin le Cree Existin C • • Initi A Aims. . r U Figure 1. This photo from June 2009 shows Shingle Creek at low Figure 2. This photo was taken just a few hours alter it started rain- Figure 3. This photo was taken just two hours after the previous water. The creek is on average about six inches deep, typical of late ing. The creek has risen 3-4 feet in just a few hours photo. The line of debris on the bank in the center of the photo summer conditions. indicates creek elevation just a few hours previous. ,.. � #►fir,.. ��.�. � 1r .,. lI ^ t� A A E Al ♦ iqq. bl Fl b +�� ti t �a _ .,�,... � .,�M4 u" w e e-' _ r .�• - -�q � �; _ _� .fig,• � 4 ♦ �. w .. : aK v _ #� i The 'Ladder Concept' and 'Pearls -on- the - Necklace' Item 3 Study Area Framework Diagrams + Precedent and Development Models - Excelsior and Grand (St. Louis Park) - Centennial Lakes (Edina) - Heritage Park (Minneapolis) - Upper Landing Village (Saint Paul) Internal Amenity Centennial Lakes 1 Lin ear , . - - . Amenity Heritage Park Broken Grid Upper Landing Housing ,��.�` ., g . •�: .;..�'. �/ r r, Green C orrido r Exc elsior and Grand Preferred Framework �'c • ID . No I Item 4 Huntington Pointe Site Land Use Scenarios + Variety of Development Strategies + Shingle Creek Enhancement Options .... .. 4 ail 11 1 - I p • � ma `: � �% >: of WAS r i i g 1 d 4' N 1rir .. W Cross section. 5hinc3le Creek ' �Ffr r 1 QO year elevation r - buffer 1 : Planted point bar i ��►'► ,� ,. ,�, -4 1 � ♦w �� A 000/0 a 90 a 09. g a l a 009 0000009000990909 4odbWemk 1 New deb 2005 low-flow EXiSting channel c hannel Creek Cross - Section ••v 1 />I � r s 'Yti ,- �• toe � Log vane Boulder _ Pool - add depth Riffle Riffle Rock vane Rock vane Lunkers Root wads Rock vane . e •• 0 0. • Q + 1 • a o 0o e. .e e o Ja s• (f}�� e`eeoo • iee ol_ti.r� e oe i 1 Root wads. Riffle d Rock Buried logs Add overstory and willows Add gravel armor and root wads , - -. Riffle I to create overhanging ' substrate to point vegetation Convert pond into deep , = 40 k offline pool for habitat channel ` �•: and refuge 4 — CHANNEL DESIGN 100-year elevation _ ....... ......... .............. . ...... Bankfull . .. Bwwd log and root wa ....... d _.._.... -.._ e ....... . elevation �.... •..,..,. .— Floodplain Low-flow ' _ vegetation :.. channel y a 414{:- !' -C IVA 'W, RQ4 Ae Fish lunker Rod* vane Simple Enhancements � } � Root wads and lunkers in offline • pool to provide habitat and refugis Boulders with Buried logs l Root wads Ilve stakes r' (both skies) Excavate / / / Rootwads ! + pools I / ! - live stakes and logs Boulders with _ -- i� Boukt with (both sides) u a Boulders with live live stakes � - stakes and root wads O O w Riffle Lunkers Riffle v Create pool j series I ,,_- Nk M }� As stream narrows, velocity ! a' increases. Rifles promote + 4 r 14 Q r �.� o = ` - _ i � � � y � te aetaliun. J -vane to l �. redirect flow Riffle ` T Boulders with Brush mattress to center J�� live stakes - i S Boulders with Rout wads Rock van /es Root wads t live stakes and ' '�► � ! / / ! ! � ` J♦Ill` � � root wads J iN&W Jog and root wad I1 / l• 4 FLOW Rrdlde Fish hunker Fascines and brush mattress Rock vane Moderate Enhancements Plant with emergent wetland natives. In h high water this area will serve as flood storage Root wads and 1 and backwater habitat and refuge. It will he Junkers in offline diffiadt to sustain open water here Boulders with root wads It will be water pool to provide habitat to sustain the on- n ' and live stakes provide line open water pool- It will ' � - .Y- — [° -- fx accumulate sediment and likely arid refugia stability will become stagnant in late summer r Rock weirs set at Rock vanes direct --- --�_.. � _ Lunkers J bankfull elevation flow into culverts Top of weir set at bankfull elevation Riffles �0 i �I _ i ) O Tl •� . J 11,, ,i. / G � , 7 1�' • As stream narrows. velocity I �F� 10 J• V/ /, o r • 8 . • increases. Riffles promote I[ r � re- aeration. L ` •.. Boulders with tt J 11^� Rock vanes direct flow Start of rifle -pool sequence III stakes, Riffle ! Root wads into center of channel Root wads Ilt- t Buned log and roof wad FIOA Ride Fish Junket Emergent wetlands are home to fish, frogs, turd", birds and other wildlife. Rm* vane Extensive Enhancements .. - -. •cam - -_- +,M 1 p�.-� ,-; -- _ . _ / � ' Gar i � ` �E; '-y. ..,� � ,l ,mil '!tir � �`• � � .i � `_-r � aim �Gi^ -' 'r .. � ' <. � .� •.; 8 f - . . r f A Pit Vill Owl ��. A4 �1 , �� ° -C. �•�� Y 7�,'F��Y z �. �.•' -� � r- � , ' � ` ":1u s w. gyp r. —`-��j � '�'- N i/?r n .� •. �\ �/ ,� p ` � r . -,7� .f�t� i'� �s;.r ?r.�, ..ta.�' � ` ' ., n � �� - ��N 0 �'k�'. `+� Jv. � C ' ., k, -� !. � tie i�•,+;TJ ! - .<i. S .i. lif IVA • `� .,.w... `� JD`s:., lna'wY1'i"a.�. - . . ' �• w wA ,� � r'[ ' ��- '���_ -�� ��� �� ' A����- `nt�', .� ( :� _ i ii .•+�• � 4 `�� � �' ;yp � — _ - _— �•-_ .. ��' -_ -- �j� � �'�' ��,/.'�" _ ,I�, -fan i w A �F�, 1•! i 1 ` C: e - s.,. `��- ��Tf9'% �. T�J• .M"-.i / fry r y i - iy t' �NCL. t �1✓ - "5a k r — c� �" p,`t " @A yq'y- 1 P . it •'' �.� ` /kf 7e � Ti ..... .... � ,� � � � •'' ��' c Y ` -�' - q tr a _ g t ° �' � f ♦ •w►�w I � J 4 ?( ` ' � 'DIY► - {� i �1 . � i . r "' .�Y � .� w I t - ,` +? y !,- 1000' t Former Huntington Pointe Site - B_ R00KLYN BLVD - -- - _ - -- _ ___~--� ; • _ / ��, �' ? �) Potential Future Redevelopment ✓+ • jr .f - PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN Item 5 The Brooklyn Park + Brooklyn Center Gateway + Existing Conditions + Objectives + Design Options and Implications I r:- Regent Study Area Redevelopment Segment Regent Av Brooklyn Blvd Y Pork Center ...... ._Segnr ..., .. . � rw _ Segment A. V C, The Crossing 0 0 m m b tc , . � � ,.�• 4:f a0. a. �t I ' \ ^i .may W - 1 -' • -'� � rwr i. � N'e1rL a ... _; � 'd.' - - •nrwr r. r • EF � �' � - - Existing Conditions - ya wn 0 4 • Trail Crossing - at -grade - overpass - underpass • Gateway - Shingle Creek (reveal + cross) - Physical /Visual Landmark - Streetscape & other visual cues - Land Use + Urban Form (buildings fronting street) - Public Art \ a l n P / r��qM • own I owl' RZ ri M= � � c !i. . R \:rfr!rl•rrr�r � I� ,I a� . 1 qn "Y 4 � - i Option 1 - Crossing at Existing Signalized Intersection T - De !� - "' �. � �' x �'- r r r - mac; � �k _ y r t � '�.• MIt R t6 fi �3Rq�� �` • � r � . L �Y�44i.�k� '• � � � /.i' ...rl . 1r'� �� -� d t \N •�P \ • ✓ b . r'. I • r' to t , • d ti �F 1 _ • Option 2 - At -Grade Crossing k f r , '7 I lk uT w nmr i 1� a { �! � *� �� � � "� _ �•. - � - A�,� ( � ice. T 1 � w Option 3 - Overpass Z Z 7 tl t I' i r �l-�. A.I. y- � � � '� A - � 1 f � Y \ w, `•� � `0 - ` li 1 WO IL , 1+ ry � It IM �• 4t Z tA, p �'� �� � � • �I s �. � lry 1, Q ��..° • ��l ' �l � v ' ��► � 1 � ` \ i � Option 4 - Underpass :> 1 3 . i y �y �M� - '� � �,• � /,� a i Jaya � i% Vo d` EXISTING N r.,A� L `,• �r All 1 -� SHORT TERM P — TRAIL CROSSING i `•. l � ALONG BROOKLYN B 1 � • �'< 3A .,..`: r • J,//► ONG RA E PLAN ol ' ft TRAIL OVERPASS ONNECT WI a �E ING TRP.� { 4t �. 7 3 - •.r i NEAR TERM TRAIL CONNECTION _ LONG TERM TRAIL CONNECTION • USE ALIGNMENTS ALONG THE ROADWAY EDGE AND EXISTING CREATE A GRADE — SEPARATED CONDITION, THE SAFEST SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION FOR CROSSING CONDITION FOR CROSSING • ADD EXTENSIVE LANDSCAPING ALONG BROOKLYN BOULEVARD SEEK FEDERAL, STATE AND COUNTY FUNDING SOURCES AS ONE APPROACHES THE CREEK FROM EITHER SIDE EMPHASIZING THE REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE TRAIL • CLEAR VEGETATION AT THE CREEK CROSSING TO "REVEAL THE RESOURCE"