Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 06-24 CCP Regular Session REVISED • 6/21/96 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER June 24, 1996 7 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Opening Ceremonies 4. Council Report 5. Presentation a. State Representative Phil Carruthers 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 Councilmembers not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from the vote on the minutes. 1. May 20, 1996 - Special Work Session 2. June 10, 1996 - Regular Session b. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 of the City Ordinances Regarding Liquor Licensing; Amending Section 11 -609 by Deleting Paragraphs 6 and 10 -This ordinance is offered for a first reading. C. Resolution Authorizing the City of Brooklyn Center to Enter into an Agreement with the Department of Public Safety for the Weed and Seed Project d. Brooklyn Center Fire Department Relief Association Financial Statements for the Calendar Year Ended December 31, 1995 e. Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Trees (Order No. DST 06/24/96) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- June 24, 1996 f. Resolution Approving Acquisition of Sidewalk Easements, Improvement Project No. 1995 -05, Contract 1996 -C, 69th Avenue North, Shingle Creek Parkway to Dupont Avenue North, Street, Bridge Replacement, Roadway, Drainage, and Utility Improvements g. Licenses 7. Open Forum 8. Public Hearing a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances Regulating the Use of Skateboards and In -Line Skates; Adding New Sections 19 -1501 and 19 -1502 -This ordinance was first read on May 28, 1996, published in the City's official newspaper on June 5, 1996, and is offered this evening for a public hearing and second reading. • Requested Council Action: -Open the public hearing. -Take public input. -Close the public hearing. - Motion to adopt ordinance. b. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances Providing for the Abatement of Noise; Deleting Section 19 -1203 and Adding New Sections 19 -1203 and 19 -1204 -This ordinance was first read on May 28, 1996, published in the City's official newspaper on June 5, 1996, and is offered this evening for a public hearing and second reading. • Requested Council Action: -Open the public hearing. -Take public input. -Close the public hearing. Motion to adopt ordinance. 9. Planning Commission a. Planning Commission Application No. 96005 submitted by North Memorial Health Care. Request for rezoning from R -1 to PUD/R -1 and site and building plan approval through the Planned Unit Development process to provide residential hospice care for more than six clients at 4201 58th Avenue North. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its June 13, 1996, meeting through the adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 96 -01. 1. Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 96005 submitted by North Memorial Health Care CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- June 24, 1996 2. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Zoning Classification of Certain Land (North Hospice) • Requested Council Action: -Adopt resolution. - Introduce first reading of the ordinance. 10. Council Consideration Items a. Mayoral Appointment of Member to Serve on Communications Task Force • Requested Council Action: - Appoint member to serve on Communications Task Force. b. Set Date for Joint Meeting with Brooklyn Park City Council • Requested Council Action: - Council to set date to meet with Brooklyn Park City Council for September 16, 1996, with location and time to be determined. C. Resolution Approving Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Action Plan and Authorizing Submittal of Plan to the Metropolitan Council • Requested Council Action: -Adopt resolution. d. Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of Two (2) Ford Trucks, Cab and Chassis, and Amending the 1996 General Fund and Central Garage Budgets • Requested Council Action: -Adopt resolution. e. Update on Code Enforcement • Requested Council Action: - Council will be presented with a verbal report. f. Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of One (1) Ford Truck, Cab and Chassis, and Amending the 1996 General Fund and Central Garage Budgets • Requested Council Action: -Adopt resolution. 11. Adjournment LETTER OF PROTEST We the citizens signed below agree that the city of Brooklyn center and county of Hennipen that to deem it necessary to make it a CRIMINAL act to have expired tabs on stored or parked vehicial on PRIVATE Property is violation of civil and constitutional rights, and agree that it is an abuse of the local and district court resource's . We also agree that mailing out warnings and tags in the same envelopes as the local police dept uses for junk mail (fund raisers) is a grossl" and miss use of dept letter head. All code violation notices should be sent out in an appropriately marked envelope such as "Dept. of Inspections code violation" . We will state that Mr Dave Comer is not a public nuisance and does infact keep his property in good condition. he has also been active in a neighborhood clean up and helped pay over $350.00 for a dumpster for clean up of the surrounding neighbors. PRINTED NAME SIGNED ADDRESS PHONE DAT / Q Z r A 17 f4, Il V o (j(-k-jj-s, WA pr i 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 SPECIAL WORK SESSION MAY 20, 1996 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, Kristen Mann, and Charles F. Nichols, Sr. Also present were City Manager Michael J. McCauley, Police Chief Scott Kline, and Council Secretary Lorianne Ende. POLICE ORDINANCE REQUESTS The Police Chief pointed out the skateboarders and rollerbladers around the City Civic Center complex are a dangerous situation that needs to be controlled. He proposed an ordinance . amendment to Chapter 19 to regulate the current situation. Councilmember Mann inquired as to where there are facilities for rollerbladers /skateboarders. The Police Chief pointed out there are other alternative sites available within the City, including bike trails and park areas. He stated he would like to see an ordinance considered before the season gets underway. The Police Chief discussed a second proposed ordinance for stereo and boom box noise in motor vehicles and single family dwellings. Councilmember Hilstrom asked if this ordinance would be difficult to enforce in smaller areas or in apartment areas. The Police Chief stated that the ordinance would state what is loud and what is not. GARAGE ON 63RD AVENUE AND BROOKLYN BOULEVARD The City Manager explained the current situation with the City -owned garage on 63rd Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard as it relates to removing the garage or repairing the garage and bringing it up to Code. Discussion followed and it was agreed that stored items should be removed and the building torn down. 5/20/96 _ 1 _ I DRAFT II h 1 LIQUOR STORE ON 63RD AVENUE & BROOKLYN BOULEVARD The City Manager discussed the possibility of a grocery store development on the old Shopper's City 0 site and the potential for relocating the liquor store to that site with the grocery store. He asked the Council if the City should, in fact, explore such an opportunity. Discussion followed regarding square footage, increased traffic concerns, the playground next door, and cost factors. BROOKDALE MOTEL: COMMISSIONER'S AWARD The City Manager discussed the Commissioner's award of $412,000 for the Brookdale Motel and pointed out that the City Attorney recommended not appealing this award as it would not be cost effective. A brief discussion followed regarding TIF funds for the award already set aside. The Councilmembers concurred that the City should not appeal. LOGIS BUILDING SITE QUESTION The City Manager explained LOGIS is proposing to build its own facility rather than lease. One site under consideration is in Brooklyn Center on one of the few pieces of undeveloped commercial property in the city. A LOGIS facility would not pay real estate taxes. The general thought was of neutrality with no interest in issuing onds or providing ncentives to locate a tax-exempt facility in g P g p Y Brooklyn Center. FIRE AND POLICE SPACE NEEDS The City Manager explained he has received documentation g P from each department regarding Fire and Police and City Hall space to begin assessing building needs and will be moving forward with an overview feasibility review with an architect. LOCAL AID PERFORMANCE MEASURES The City Manager reviewed legislative mandates to develop performance measurement systems. He described the performance aid the City can receive if they inform the State of their performance measures. SETTING DATES /SUBJECT CONCENTRATIONS FOR FUTURE WORK SESSIONS The City Manager and Councilmembers discussed dates available in June, July, and August for work sessions. The Council agreed to meet in work session on June 3, 1996, at 7 p.m.; July 1, 1996, at 7 p.m.; and July 15, 1996, at 7 p.m. CHARTER ISSUES There was a short discussion regarding designating Council seats. After this short discussion, it was determined there was no interest in considering changes to the current structure of elective office designation from the at -large system. 5/20/96 -2- " D F T There was discussion regarding the last Charter Commission minutes where the Charter Commission discussed possible revision of the City Charter to remove the requirement that the City Council approve hiring or firing department heads. There was discussion amongst the Council supportive of a review and reconsideration of those provisions of the Charter. The Council directed that there thoughts be conveyed to the Charter Commission by the City Manager in a letter. FIELD ATTENDANTS FOR SOFTBALL GAMES The City Manager discussed how softball games are staffed by the City and budget concerns regarding the softball games. BLOCK PARTY STREET CLOSINGS The City Manager explained the City has received requests from neighborhood block clubs for street closings for block parties. He stated that they need to look at the current Ordinances regarding this issue and then determine a guideline or ordinance. All Councilmembers agreed that they are willing to look at this issue. OTHER ISSUES Councilmember Carmody stated she received an invitation to a barbecue from Northwest Residence. She advised this is a handicapped residence and asked if other members would be attending. A brief discussion ensued regarding recommendations in funding for youth football, park facilities, and park shelters. Discussion was also held regarding the Twin Beach fishing pier, Highway 100, and what impacts there will be on certain communities. BUDGET - GENERAL DISCUSSION Item 1. Goals to be accomplished through the budget The City Manager introduced the different general budget items that the Council needs to look at and asked them how they would like the numbers in the budget presented. The City Manager discussed property taxes levied by the City and showed what effect a three percent increase would have on the City's budget. The City Manager stated that he would like to see the Council set priorities and lay out a plan regarding what they want subsidized while working on the budget. He stated that he would like to have the Council work fund by fund on the budget to develop a view of the budget as a whole. Item 2. Target for 3rd p= contributions The City Manager questioned the Council as to how they wanted to handle requests from outside agencies. 5/20/9 _ 6 3- DRAFT. Councilmember Hilstrom stated that the Council chooses to give donations following the same procedures as it does for social services and all need to be treated the same. The City Manager asked if the Council wants to again leave this issue up to the Human Rights and Resources Commission or use a different process. Councilmember Hilstrom suggested the Council look at certain areas of priority and consider funding programs that deal with those types of issues and make the funding decisions based on the goals set by the Council. A brief discussion followed regarding property tax and budget item goal setting sessions. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by Mayor Kragness at 10:45 p.m. City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Lorianne Ende Timesaver Off Site Secretarial 5/20/96 -4- MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL i OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JUNE 10, 1996 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, Kristen Mann, and Charles F. Nichols, Sr. Also present were City Manager Michael J. McCauley, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, Finance Director Charlie Hansen, Community Development Specialist Tom Bublitz, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Human Rights and Resources Commission Chair Wayde Lerbs and Commission member Char Nesseth, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was offered by Dean Nyquist. • COUNCIL REPORT Mayor Kragness noted two upcoming celebrations: Entertainment in the Park and Earle Brown Days Festivities. She encouraged all interested parties to look for information in local publications and/or on television for further details. PRESENTATION BY HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONER MIKE OPAT Commissioner Opat discussed the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and how it applied to Brooklyn Center. The City is in its 22nd year of participation and recently received $250,000 in CDBG grant monies to address specified improvements throughout the City. Commissioner Opat stated Highway 100 is viewed as a milestone project. Agreement on the roadway's configuration by impacted communities is the project's next step. He mentioned County Road 10 is another project under consideration with the City. Commissioner Opat said decisions regarding storage /placement of removed garbage -- incineration versus land fill -- alternatives are still in debate. Regarding the Brookdale ponding project, Commissioner Opat stated some regrouping will need to occur given the recent vetoed legislation by Governor Carlson to approve project funds. An LCMR application for an interpretive trail around the pond has been submitted; decisions regarding this will 06/10/96 -1- RA I= T ,�J - Y!, , a be made in the fall. He has met with various people from the watershed districts. With respect to the WMO, water planning will be discussed further. Mayor Kragness expressed appreciation to Commissioner Opat for his efforts in representing Brooklyn Center. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA The City Manager noted tonight's agenda and consent agenda was being offered for approval with the removal of Item 6a(l) May 20, 1996- Special Work Session - -for revision and resubmittal at a later date. A motion b Councilmember Carmody and seconded Y secon e b Councilmember Nichols to Y Y approve the June 10, 1996, agenda and consent 1 agenda with the removal of Item 6a passed unanimously. g () P s Y. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Nichols to approve minutes of the May 28, 1996 - Regular Session; June 3, 1996- Special Work Session as printed passed unanimously. i RESOLUTION NO. 96 -113 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING COMPUTER EQUIPMENT TO BE SURPLUS PROPERTY • The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Charles F. Nichols, Sr. and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -114 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 06/10/96) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Charles F. Nichols, Sr. and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -115 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1996 -06, 07, AND 08, CONTRACT 1996 -G, LOGAN, JAMES, KNOX, AND 57TH AVENUES, STREET, STORM DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS • 06/10/96 -2- ! !,RAFT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Charles F. Nichols, Sr. and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -116 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON LOGAN AVENUE NORTH BETWEEN 53RD AVENUE NORTH AND 57TH AVENUE NORTH The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Charles F. Nichols, Sr. and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -117 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1996 -15, SANITARY SEWER RELOCATION AT FREEWAY BOULEVARD, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Charles F. Nichols, Sr. and passed unanimously. • RESOLUTION NO. 96 -118 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FUNDING FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE 69TH AVENUE BRIDGE OVER SHINGLE CREEK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Charles F. Nichols, Sr. and passed unanimously. LICENSES A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Nichols to approve the following list of licenses passed unanimously: GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES Browning Ferris Industries 9813 Flying Cloud Drive Darling & Co. P.O. Box 12785, New Brighton The Mengelkoch Co. 119 NE 14th Street Randy's Sanitation, Inc. P.O. Box 169, Delano Walz Bros. Sanitation, Inc. P.O. Box 627 Woodlake Sanitation Service 9813 Flying Cloud Drive • 06/10/96 -3 - DRAFT MECHANICAL SYSTEMS United Heating and A/C 1295 Hackamore Road RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Lang- Nelson Associates Brookwood Estates, 6201 Lilac Drive N. Lang-Nelson Associates Brookwood Manor, 6125 Lilac Drive N. HCM Investments 5351 Irving Ave. N. Frank Mayers 1425 55th Ave. N. John Schwarz 5401 63rd Ave. N. Renewal: Jay Nelson Battenberg 5235 Drew Ave. N. Steve Loechler 5736 Logan Ave. N. ACR Homes, Inc. 7110 Riverdale Road Richard and Sharon Krawiecki 5209 Xerxes Ave. N. Anna Gullord 2309 54th Ave. N. OPEN FORUM Jane Hallberg, president of the Brooklyn Historical Society, presented Council with a written letter as well as a verbal explanation of concerns regarding demolition of the City -owned garage located on 63rd and Brooklyn Boulevard; Society artifacts are currently stored in this garage. She has identified a potential location referred to as the "tank room" adding it could serve as an alternative place for Brooklyn Historical Society artifacts. Vern Ausen, member of the Brooklyn Historical Society, stated it is very important the Society have adequate storage space for many artifacts, adding that improper storage of some artifacts would eliminate them. Mayor Kragness acknowledged the Brooklyn Historical Society's hard work and stated it is important to preserve City history. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE The City Manager stated approval of the ordinance at hand would provide for identical language as that in the Model Adoptive Ordinance provided in the State Building Code (SBC). No new sections were proposed for adoption. PUBLIC HEARING A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to open the public hearing at 7:28 p.m. passed unanimously. 06/10/96 -4- • 1 N l �. J AJ MT PUBLIC INPUT +m ® There was no public input offered. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Nichols to close the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 96 -06 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS RECOMMENDATION FROM HUMAN RIGHTS AND RESOURCES COMMISSION REGARDING BIAS/HATE CRIME RESPONSE PLAN Human Rights and Resources Commission Chair Wayde Lerbs and Commission member Charlotte Nesseth presented information and answered questions regarding the Bias/Hate Crime Response Plan proposed for Council approval. Mr. Lerbs stated the plan's primary purpose is to operate as a support network for victim's of hate crimes, and to act as a community information outreach. The Commission has been working closely with Police Chief Scott Kline. A discussion ensued regarding support and anonymity of victims; crimes committed on school grounds; and determining classification of bias \hate crimes, reporting procedures, actions, and responses. The City Attorney briefly discussed legal implications of the response plan's wording. The Council recommended scheduling a joint meeting with the Human Rights and Resources Commission to discuss the bias\hate crime response plan. It was determined the Commission would meet with Council during a special work session scheduled for Monday, July 1, 1996. The City Attorney will attend this meeting should it be deemed necessary. Ms. Nesseth requested the City Attorney look at the documents being presented by the Commission this evening, noting any concerns and/or making recommendations accordingly prior to the work session on July 1, 1996. 06/10/96 -5 - D K COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER • 31, 1995 Cliff Hoffman of Deloitte & Touche reviewed several reports which were extracted from the annual financial statement, including a Management Letter which made five recommendations regarding administrative and operating issues. Overall, the City had a good year ending up $800,000 under budget due in part to conservative accounting principles, expenditure controls, employee attrition. Overhead transparencies were presented by Mr. Hoffman which included the following: General Fund Revenues and Expenditures; General Fund Revenues/Expenditures Per Household; Productivity Measures; Selected Performance Ratios; Performance Definitions; Enterprise Funds; Fire Department Relief Association Retirement Obligations; National General Obligation Bond Ratings; Debt Activity; Debt Service Schedule (Principal and Interest) Competitive Advantages, Challenges; What Should Cities and Counties Do Over the Next Five Years to Prepare for the Coming State and Federal Budget Crises; The Next Five Years.... Mr. Hoffman noted the City saves over $1 million each year by having a volunteer fire department. Mr. Hoffman stated less than half of the government bonds in the United States are rated by Moody's. Of those half, the City's are in the upper forty percent. Councilmember Nichols inquired what the National General Obligation Bond Ratings meant to interest rates. Mr. Hoffman indicated there are different rates of interest applied to bonds based on their rating which may be as small as one quarter of one percent. However, their rating also indicates stability of a respective government's infrastructure. Brooklyn Center has good quality of its infrastructure. Barb Dickman of Deloitte & Touche reviewed selected areas from the City's Annual Report. She noted the City has received the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting from the Government Finance Officers Association for the fourteenth year. Less than two percent of cities in the United States receive this designation. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to accept the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report passed unanimously. The City Manager stated the resolution at hand includes the same provisions as discussed before. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -119 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING HENNEPIN COUNTY OFFICE OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TO ADMINISTER THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM AND APPROVING CERTAIN CHANGES TO THE PROGRAM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded b member P g g y y Charles F. Nichols, Sr., and passed unanimously. 06/10/96 -6- UnAFJ, FINANCIAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR CITY COUNCIL SALARIES A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table approval of the first reading of An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 94 -12 Regarding Council Salaries for 1997 -1998 pending discussion at the July 1, 1996, Council work session passed unanimously. SET DATE FOR JOINT MEETING WITH CHARTER COMMISSION A joint meeting between Council and the Charter Commission has been scheduled for September 30, 1996, at 7 p.m. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the meeting at 8:27 p.m. passed unanimously. City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 06/10196 -7- 7 KENNEDY & GRAVEN 66 CHARTERED Attorneys at Law JAMES J. THOMSON 470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 LARRY M. WERTHEIM OBERT A. ALSOP (612) 337 -9300 BONNIE L. WILKINS UCE M. BATTERSON JOE Y. YANG NALD H. BATTY Facsimile (612) 337 -9310 STEPHEN J. BUBUL JOHN B. DEAN DAVID L. GRAVEN (1929.1991) DANIEL J. GREENSWFIG DAVID J. KENNEDY CHARLES L. LEFEYERE OF COUNSEL ROBERT C. CARLSON JOHN M. LEFEVRE, JR. WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL ROBERT J. LINDALL (612) 337 -9215 ROBERT L. DAVIDSON ROBERT C. LONG WELLINGTON H. LAW FLOYD B. OLSON JAMES M. STROMMEN CORRINE H. THOMSON CURTIS A. PEARSON T. JAY SAL,MEN June 3, 1996 Mike McCauley City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 RE: Liquor Code Amendment Dear Mike: Sometime ago, you pointed out that paragraphs 6 and 10 of the Brooklyn Center City Code Section 11 -609 dealing with wine licenses, apparently forbid a licensee from holding more than one liquor license in the City. There is no corresponding prohibition in the sections of the code dealing with intoxicating liquor licenses. I believe that, at one time, state law prohibited a licensee from holding more than one intoxicating liquor license. Now, however, the law now only forbids one licensee from holding more than one off -sale liquor license. I assume that the City code was amended after the state law was amended to allow a licensee to hold more than one license, but that paragraphs 6 and 10 of section 11 -609 were not amended due to an oversight. Attached is a proposed ordinance which world delete paragraphs 6 and 10 from the wine license section of the City liquor code. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Very truly yours, Charles L. LeFevere CLL:cmm Enclosure CLL105533 BR291 -4 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1996, 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 amendment to Chapter 11 of the City Ordinances regarding liquor licensing; amending Section 11 -609 by deleting paragraphs 6 and 10. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING LIQUOR LICENSING; AMENDING SECTION 11 -609 BY DELETING PARAGRAPHS 6 AND 10 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 11 -609 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended by deleting paragraphs 6 and 10 and renumbering subsequent paragraphs accordingly. Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1996. Mayor T A TEST: City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) ��Opltllf N C�NTF� BROOKLYN CENTER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager Michael McCauley FROM: Chief of Police Scott Kline IK DATE: June 19, 1996 The police department has submitted an application requesting funds from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety for the implementation of two programs. The first project would be a fall warrant blitz which would consist of four officers working eight hour shifts for five days and assigned to do nothing but attempt to serve active personal crime warrants on those individuals within our city, and after those were satisfied or disposed of to do felony property crime warrants. The Hennepin County Sheriff's Office has a backlog of several million warrants and since we have found that one in ten persons we come in contact with has an active warrant, it would be more efficient for the department to run a warrant blitz during the year. The costs involved for the warrant blitz would amount to $5,760. The second program is a two- pronged initiative involving the expansion of crime free multi - housing and the neighborhood watch groups. It is felt that by enrolling at least one third of our rental dwelling units in crime free multi - housing, the improved screening and continual cooperative effort with the police department will lead to fewer calls for service. Currently, our multi - family rental base amounts for approximately 20% of all calls for service for the department in a given year. The expansion of our neighborhood watch groups by 25% would help to get more neighborhoods aware and alert to crime occurring in their vicinity, and it would also have a positive impact on calls for service. It is anticipated that 600 hours of a crime prevention officer's time would need to be devoted to handle the expansion of both programs. The costs involved in this two part initiative would amount to $21,600. The amount we are requesting for both the fall warrant blitz and the crime free multi- housing expansion and neighborhood watch group expansion would total $27,360. SK:kh council /projreq.mem adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved its RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY FOR THE WEED AND SEED PROJECT WHEREAS, the Department of Public Safety is sponsoring a Weed and Seed project and will supply funding to cities for approved programs; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is requesting approval to enter into an agreement with the Department of Public Safety for the Weed and Seed Project; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has submitted an application requesting funds totaling $27,360 for the implement of two programs within the Weed and Seed Project; and WHEREAS, the two programs will be a fall warrant blitz and the expansion of crime free multi- housing and neighborhood watch groups; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that: 1. The City of Brooklyn Center be authorized to enter into a cooperative agreement with the Department of Public Safety for the Weed and Seed Project. 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. �d MEMORANDUM 10 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Charlie Hansen, Finance Director C H DATE: June 18, 1996 SUBJECT: Brooklyn Center Fir y e Dep Relief Association P Financial Statements for the Calendar Year Ended December 31, 1995 Attached are the Annual Financial Statements of the Fire Department Relief Association for the Year 1995. This report has been audited by Larson Allen Weishair & Co, certified public accountants. Contained in the report are statements on the balances and activities of the Special Fund (pension), and the General Fund of the Association. In January 1994, the City Council approved changes to the Association's bylaws which provided benefit increases to be effective on January 1 of 1994, 1995, and 1996. These benefit increases raised the liability of the Association. In spite of the benefit increase, the plan has again reached the state of being fully funded. In other words, the net assets available for benefits are greater than the pension benefit obligation. This is an achievement duplicated by few other relief associations in Minnesota and can be viewed with pride by the Association, its board of directors, and the entire City. BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION FINANCIAL STATEMENTS For the Calendar Year Ended DECEMBER 31, 1995 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT For the Year Ended December 31, 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTORY SECTION PAGE Board Members I Treasurer's Letter 2 -3 FINANCIAL SECTION Independent Auditors' Report 4 -5 Special Fund: Statements of Net Assets Available for Benefits .............. Exhibit A 6 Statements of Changes in Net Assets Available for Benefits ....... Exhibit B 7 General Fund: Balance Sheets ................. Exhibit C 8 Statements of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance ... Exhibit D 9 Notes to Financial Statements 10 -17 Required Supplementary Information: PERS Analysis of Funding Progress ... Schedule I 18 ` PERS Revenue By Source and Expenses By Type ............ • • • . Schedule H 19 Other Supplementary Information: Schedule of Pensions and Benefits..... Schedule III 20 Special Fund - Investment Detail ...... Schedule IV 21 -23 BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION �'x�xx�xxxx *yc�cx�F� LISTING OF BOARD MEMBERS AT JANUARY 1. 1996 ELECTED MEMBERS OFFICE FRED STEERS Jr. PRESIDENT CRAIG SWANBERG VICE PRESIDENT MARK SKJOLSVIK TREASURER CURT HALLERMAN SECRETARY TODD BERG TRUSTEE DOUG PETER TRUSTEE EX- OFFICIO MEMBERS OFFICE MYRNA KRAGNESS MAYOR CHARLES HANSEN CITY TREASURER RON BOMAN FIRE CHIEF 1 f & \V q9 BROOKLYN CENTER F FIRE DEPARTMENT 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Emergency Fire 911 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Telephone - 569 -3360 FAX - 561 -0717 TO: Board of Directors, Fire Department Relief Association Members of the City Council City Manager SUBJECT: Fire Department Relief Association Financial Report DATE: May 13, 1996 The Annual Audited Financial Report of the Fire Department Relief Association, General and Special "Pension" Funds as of and for the year ended December 31, 1995 is submitted herewith. During 1993, the Wyatt Company, an actuarial firm, was directed to prepare an alternate benefit level analysis for the fund. Based on the analysis, the City Council approved amendments to the Bylaws of the Brooklyn Center Fire Department Relief Association which granted increased benefits within statutory limitations. The increased benefits are effective January 1, 1994, January 1, 1995, and January 1, 1996. For active members, monthly retirement benefits increased, lump sum benefits increased, and provision was made for members who become full -time employees of the City and members of PERA. Other benefits for active members remained the same. Deferred pensioners, retired pensioners, and survivors were given a 10% pension increase effective January 1, 1994. The normal cost of providing benefits was projected to be $68,698 annually and the annual deposit required to retire the unfunded liability by the year 2000 was projected to be $26,241. Note 6 to the financial statements describes the current plan benefits. Our plan had reached the point of being fully funded as of December 31, 1992. However, adoption of the 1994 benefit plan increased the pension benefit obligation. In the e y ars since the actuarial valuation, the plans funding level dropped below 100% for two years as contributions and investment earnings failed to keep pace with benefits paid and the crediting of additional years of service to members. This 2 reversed in 1995 when the plan again achieved 100 % funding. One of the causes of this swing was the requirement to recognize in 1993 and 1994 that the market value of our portfolio was less than the book value. In other words, if we sold investments, the proceeds would have been less than what we paid for the investment. This is reflected in the entry "Provision for Market Valuation of Investments" on Exhibit B. The entry was negative in 1993 and 1994 as the gap between market and book values widened. It is positive in 1995 as the market value rebounded to be greater than book. Some actual sales of investments resulted in losses. These are reflected in the entry "Net Loss on Sale of Investments" on Exhibit bit B This loss was lamest in 1994, which was a bad year for most investors. It continued for us in 1995 as we liquidated some securities which had lost value in 1994. This elimination of poor performing securities is partially responsible for the total market value of our portfolio rising above the book value for the end of 1995. Real estate taxes in the amount of $42,092 were levied in 1994, to be collected in 1995, to finance the City's share of pension costs. The levy was computed as follows: Required pension contribution $ 94,939 Other costs, (salaries etc.) 11,153 Less State support (estimated) 6( 4.000) Required property tax levy $ 42,092 During 1995, there were no additions to those volunteer fire fighters who were drawing a pension from the Fire Department Relief Association, and one member died, so the total was reduced to twenty four. These pensions ranged from $136 to $453 per month and totaled $68,445 for the year 1995. There was one addition to the surviving spouses, and none died, so the total increased to nine monthly spouse's pensions being paid. These pensions ranged from $139 to $326 per month and totaled $26,199 for the year 1995. One funeral benefit was paid. No disability benefits were paid. Two lump sum distributions were made to retiring fire fighters. These payments were $101,562 and $79,425. Schedule III of this report is a listing of pensions and benefits paid in 1995. Respectfully tfull p y 'Mark K. Skjolsvik Treasurer 3 AlLARSON �'� ALLEN ' I' WEISHAIR & CO. INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT CERTIFIED PUBLIC AccOUNTANTS Board of Trustees City of Brooklyn Center Fire Department Relief Association Brooklyn Center, Minnesota We have audited the accompanying statement of net assets available for benefits of the Special Fund and the balance sheet of the General Fund of the City of Brooklyn Center Fire Department Relief Association (the Association) as of and for the year ended December 31, 1995 and the related statements of changes in net assets available for benefits of the Special Fund and of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balance of the General Fund for the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Association's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. The financial statements of the Association as of December 31, 1994, were audited by other auditors, whose report dated May 15, 1995, expressed an unqualified opinion on those statements. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether e the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Special Fund and General Fund of the City of Brooklyn Center Fire Department Relief Association as of December 31, 1995, and the results of its operations for the year then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying schedules of required supplementary information are presented for the purpose of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. These schedules are also the responsibility of the Association's management. Such schedules have been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, are fairly presented in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying schedules of required supplementary information, for the year ended December 31, 1994, were audited by other auditors, whose report dated May 15, 1995, expressed an unqualified opinion on those supplementary schedules. n in r we have also issued a report dated April 19 1996 on In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, p p , our consideration of the Organization's internal control structure and a report dated April 19, 1996 on its compliance with laws and regulations. LARSON, ALLEN, WEISHAIR & CO., LLP Minneapolis, Minnesota April 19, 1996 sfasset Exhibit A BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION SPECIAL FUND STATEMENTS OF NET ASSETS AVAILABLE FOR BENEFITS DECEMBER 31, 1995 and 1994 95 1994 ASSETS Investments (Note 4): Time Deposits in Commercial Banks $32,107 $38,263 Money Market & Mutual Funds (Net of 925,339 877,044 Valuation Allowance of $109,712 in 1994) United States Government Obligations 719,603 972,460 Corporate Bonds and Debentures 1,040,783 777,396 ---------- - - - - -- ---------------- $2,717,832 $2,665,163 Receivables: Interest Receivable 13,929 15,786 Accounts Receivable 857 10,689 ---------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - -- $14,786 $26,475 ---------- - - - - -- --------------- - Cash $2,954 $2,736 Total Assets $2,735,572 $2,694,374 ---------- - - - - -- --------------- - LIABILITIES Accounts Payable able y $500 $500 Pensions Payable 7,887 Accrued Wages Payable 375 250 Total Liabilities $875 $8,637 NET ASSETS AVAILABLE FOR BENEFITS $2,734,697 $2,685,737 See Notes to the Financial Statements 6 sfchange Exhibit BB BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION SPECIAL FUND STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS AVAILABLE FOR BENEFITS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 and 1994 1995 1994 ADDITIONS Ad Valorem Taxes $42,092 $36,092 State of Minnesota: Fire Insurance Premium Tax 69,299 66,803 Investment Earnings: Interest and Dividends 209,132 203,478 Net Loss on Sale of Investments (90,089) (100,715) Provision for Market Valuation of Investments 109,712 (59,906) ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- TOTAL ADDITION $340,146 $145,752 ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- DEDUCTIONS Membership Benefits: Service Pensions $68,445 $71,592 Lump Sum Distributions 180,987 199,836 Spouses' and Children's Benefits 26,199 24,402 Funeral Benefit 2,500 ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- $278,131 $295,830 ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- Administrative Expenses: Officers' Salaries $4,000 $3,000 Dues 285 750 Audit and Financial 6,609 6,394 Investment Management Fees 2,000 2,000 Office Supplies 161 116 ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- $13,055 $12,260 ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- TOTAL DEDUCTION $291,186 $308,090 ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- NET INCREASE (DEC FA E) $48,960 ($162,338) NET ASSETS AVAILABLE FOR BENEFITS: Beginning of year $2,685,737 $2,848,075 End of Year $2,734,697 $2,685,737 See Notes to the Financial Statements 7 gtbalsht Exhibit C BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEETS DECEMBER 31, 1995 and 1994 1995 1994 AS SETS Investments (Note 4): Money Market Funds f1l $11,715 $2,539 United States Government Obligations, 13,263 ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- $11,715 $15,802 Cash $20,244 $20,379 ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- Total Assets $31,959 $36,181 LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE Fund Balance $31,959 $36,181 Total Fund Balance $31,959 $36,181 Total Liabilities & Fund Balance $31,959 $36,181 See Notes to the Financial Statements 8 gfchange Exhibi BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION GENERAL FUND STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 and 1994 9 REVENUES: Dance $8,542 $9,833 Softball Tournament 11,237 11,698 Interest and Dividends 955 499 Donations 518 141 Miscellaneous Revenue 80 ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- TOTAL REVENUE 21,252 22,251 ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- EXPENDIT R S : . Purchase of Equipment 4,069 2,955 Banquets 7,886 7,128 Supplies 3,467 3,763 Donations and Memorials 1,563 1,642 Repairs and Maintenance 315 47 Service Recognition Awards 6,508 Miscellaneous 1,666 1,289 ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 25,474 16,824 ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- EXCESS OR (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER EXPENDITUR (4,222) 5,427 FUND BALANCE E - JANUARY 1 36,181 30,754 ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $31,959 $36,181 See Notes to the Financial Statements 9 BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies A. Fund Accounting The resources of the Brooklyn Center Fire Department Relief Association (the Association) are accounted for in the following funds: Special Fund: Accounts for the accumulation of resources to be used for retirement, dependency and disability annuity payments. Resources include property taxes, the two percent insurance premium tax from the State of Minnesota, and earnings from investments. General Fund: Accounts for the resources other than those in the Special Fund, consisting of membership dues to be used for the good and benefit of the Association as determined by Association bylaws. B. Basis of Accounting The accounting policies of the Association conform to generally accepted accounting principles. The accrual basis of accounting is used for the Special Fund; the modified accrual basis of accounting is used for the General Fund. C. Investments Securities of the federal government and its agencies and corporate bonds and debentures are carried at amortized cost. Other investments are carried at the lower of cost or market value. Dividends are recognized when received. Interest is recognized when earned. 2. Form of Organization The Association was incorporated on December 5, 1949. It operates under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 69 and 424. It is governed by a board of nine members. Six of the board members are elected by the members of the Association for two year terms. The Mayor, Finance Director and Fire Chief are ex- officio voting members of the board of trustees. 10 3. Financial ReportingEntity The Association has implemented the Governmental Accounting Standards Board pronouncements relating to financial reporting for the entity. For financial reporting purposes the Association's financial statements include all funds, departments, agencies, boards, commissions, and other organizations over which the Association's officials exercise oversight responsibility. 4. Deposits and Investments A. Deposits Minnesota Statutes 118.005 authorizes the Association to deposit cash and to invest in certificates of deposit in financial institutions designated by the governing body. At December 31, 1995, the Association had cash deposits totaling $64,553. Minnesota statutes require that all Association deposits be covered by deposit insurance, surety bond, or pledged collateral. Following is a summary of the combined deposits of the General & Special Funds covered by insurance or collateral at December 31, 1995. Bank Carrying Balances Amount Covered Deposits Insured, or collateralized with securities held by the Association or its agent in the Association's name. $64,553 Collateralized with securities held by the pledging financial institution's trust department or agent in the Association's name. ________ Total covered deposits $64,553 Uncollateralized Total $64,553 $55,305 11 4. Deposits and Investments (continued) B. Investments Minnesota Statutes 69.775 and 11A.24 authorize and define the types of securities available to the Association for investment. The Association's investments are categorized below to give an indication of the level of risk assumed at year end. (A) securities that are insured or registered, or for which the securities are held by the Association or its agent in the Association's name; (B) securities that are uninsured and unregistered and are held by the counter party's trust department or agent in the Association's name; (C) securities that are uninsured and unregistered and are held by the counter party, or by its trust department or agent but not in the Associations P g name. Following is a summary of the carrying values of the Association's investments, categorized into the aforementioned levels of risk, r sk on � g with the market values of the securities, at December 31, 1995. CATEGORY TOTAL II ' -------------- - - - - -- CARRYING MARKET A B C VALUE VALUE Investments Govt.. Obligations $719,603 $719,603 $726,031 Corporate Bonds 1,040,783 1,040,783 1,040,395 $1,760,386 None None $1,760,386 $1,766,426 Money Market & Mutual Funds (lower of cost or market) 937,054 Cash & Time Deposits Note 4- P ( A 55,305 Total Cash, Deposits & Investments $2,752,745 The Association's policy is to hold U.S. Government and U.S. Government guaranteed obligations to maturity. The Association held two investments (other than U.S. Government and U.S. Government guaranteed obligations) throughout the year and at December 31 which represent 5 % or more of the net assets available for benefits. These are the Pilgrim Prime Rate Trust and the Keystone American Strategic Income Fund, which are included in the investment detail in Schedule IV. 12 . 5. Plan Description The Association is the administrator of a single employer public employee retirement system (PERS) established and administered under Minnesota statutes to provide pension benefits for volunteer fire fighters of the City of Brooklyn Center. At December 31, 1995 PERS membership consisted of: Retirees and beneficiaries currently receiving benefits. 33 Terminated employees entitled to benefits but not yet receiving theme 6 Active plan participation: Vested 15 Nonvested 18 Total 72 6. Retirement Benefit An actuarial study was completed during 1993 which developed a schedule of benefit increases which will take effect on January 1, 1994, January 1, 1995, and January 1, 1996. Benefits are less for those members retired prior to that date or for their spouses and children receiving benefits. A. Basic Service Pension for Retired Members Upon approval of an application therefor, a monthly service pension based on Table 1 below per month for each year of active service with the Fire Department shall be paid to each retired member during the remainder of his or her natural life; provided, however, that for purposes of computing such service pension, no retired member shall be given credit for more than 30 years of active service with the Fire Department. Table 1 PER YEAR OF SERVICE Effective Monthly Benefit Lump Sum Date of Retirement Level Level 1/1/94- 12/31/94 $24.50 $3,500 1/1/95- 12/31/95 $25.50 $3,750 1/1/96 - 12/31/96 $26.50 $4,000 B. Basic Service Pension for Previously Retired Member Effective January 1, 1994, the service pension for a previously retired member, and any benefits to a surviving spouse of a member who retired before January 1, 1994, were increased by ten percent (10 %). 13 6. Retirement Benefit (continued) S C. Basic Service Pension for Deferred Pensioner A member who is otherwise qualified for a service pension but who has not reached the age of 50 years may retire from the Fire Department without forfeiting the member's right to such pension. Upon approval of an application therefor, the deferred pensioner shall receive a pension based on Table 1 above multiplied by such person's years of active service with the Fire Department and further multiplied by the decimal equivalent of the applicable percentage determined from the following table: Table 2 Years of Applicable Service Percentage 10 60 11 64 12 68 13 72 14 76 15 80 16 84 17 88 18 92 19 96 20 and beyond 100 D. Permissible Forms of Benefit: Any retired member, deferred pensioner or early retired member may elect to receive any pension benefits provided in the following forms: 1. Straight Life Annuity 2. Lump Sum Distribution 3. Joint and 100% Survivor 4. Joint and 50% Survivor 14 • 6. Retirement Benefit (continued) E. Survivor's Benefit: Upon the death of a participant, an amount equal to the greater of (a) the basic monthly service pension which had accrued or (b) the amount shown in table 3 below, shall be paid to the surviving spouse. In lieu of such payments, a lump sum distribution is also available. Table 3 Effective Dates Survivors Monthly Benefit 1/1/94- 12/31/94 $490 1/1/95 - 12/31/95 $510 1/1/96- 12/31/96 $530 Children's Benefit: Upon the death of a participant who is survived by a spouse and children, an additional benefit equal to 25% of the surviving spouse's monthly benefit shall be paid for each surviving child under the age of 18, not to exceed 100% of the surviving spouse's benefit. No additional benefits shall be paid if a lump sum distribution is elected. F. Funeral Benefit: A funeral expense benefit of $2,500 will be paid upon the death of a participant, except in instances where benefits are in the form of a lump sum distribution. G. Disability Benefit: None, now covered through Fire Department Disability Insurance. 15 7. Funding Status and Progres The amount shown below as "pension benefit obligation" is a standardized disclosure measure of the present value of pension benefits, adjusted for the effects of projected benefit increases, estimated to be payable in the future as a result of employee service to date. The measure is the actuarial present value of credited projected benefits and is intended to help users assess PERS funding status on a going concern basis, assess progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due, and make comparisons among PERS. The measure is independent of the actuarial funding method used to determine contributions to the PERS, discussed in note 8. below. An actuarial update of the pension benefit obligation from a base year valuation study is performed annually. The pension benefit obligation was updated as of January 1, 1996 from an actuarial valuation as of January 1, 1993. Significant actuarial assumptions used include (a) a rate of return on the investment of present and future assets of 5 percent per year compounded annually, and (b) no post retirement benefit increases. At January 1, 1996, the unfunded pension benefit obligation was as follows: Pension benefit obligation: Retirees and beneficiaries currently receiving benefits and terminated employees not yet receiving benefits $1,341,406 Current Employees: Employer- financed vested 1,181, 872 Employer- financed nonvested 191,932 Total pension benefit obligation 2,715,210 Net assets available for benefits 2,734,697 (at carrying value, market equals $2,741,480) ------- - - - - -- Assets in excess of pension benefit obligation $ 19,487 The pension benefit obligation increased by $103,182 because of the additional year of i service credited to plan members. There was an offsetting reduction in the pension benefit obligation of $180,987 due to the payment of lump sum distributions and the death of one beneficiary. The pension benefit obligation had a net reduction of $77,805. 16 8. Contributions Required and Contributions Made PERS funding policy provides for periodic City and State contributions at actuarially determined rates that are sufficient to accumulate sufficient assets to pay benefits when due. City and state contribution rates are determined using the entry age normal cost actuarial funding method. PERS also uses this method to amortize the unfunded liability by 1999. City and State contributions totaling $111,391 were made in accordance with actuarially determined contribution requirements determined through an actuarial valuation performed at January 1, 1993. These contributions are required to fund (a) $68,698 normal cost, (b) $26,241 amortization of the unfunded actuarial accrued liability, and (c) $11,153 administration cost. The State contribution was $5,299 more than budgeted and administrative expenses were $1,902 more than budgeted. Significant actuarial assumptions used to compute contribution requirements are the same as those used to compute the standardized measure of the pension obligation discussed in note 7. above. The computation of the pension contribution requirements for 1995 was based on the same actuarial assumptions, benefit provisions, actuarial funding method, and other significant factors used to determine pension contribution requirements in previous years. 9. Related Party Investments During 1995 and as of December 31, 1995, the Association held no securities issued by the City or other related parties. 10. Ten -Year Historical Trend Information Ten year historical trend information designed to provide information about PERS' progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due is presented in Schedules I and II. 17 schedl SCHEDULE I BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION PERS ANALYSIS OF FUNDING PROGRESS YEARS 1986 THROUGH 1995 (B) - (A) (A) (B) UNFUNDED NET ASSETS (1) PENSION (A) / (B) PENSION FISCAL AVAILABLE BENEFIT PERCENTAGE BENEFIT YEAR FOR BENEFIT OBLIGATION FUNDED OBLIGATION 1986 $1,818,046 $2,012,304 90.3% $194,258 1987 1,946,629 1,955,685 99.5% 9,056 1988 2,086,031 2,385,246 87.5% 299,215 1989 2,300,599 2,469,110 93.2% 168,511 1990 2,409,110 2,554,707 94.3% 145,597 1991 2,538,897 2,568,341 98.9% 29,444 1992 2,679,535 2,662,919 100.6% (16,616) 1993 2,848,075 2,894,711 98.4% 46,636 1994 2,685,737 2,793,015 96.2% 107,278 1995 $2,734,697 $2,715,210 100.7% ($19,487) (1) All amounts for 1988, 1991, and 1993 are based on an actuarial valuation. Amounts for 1986, 1987, 1989, 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1995 are based on an actuarial update of the most recent valuation. Analysis of the dollar amounts of net assets available for benefits, pension benefit obligation, and unfunded pension benefit obligation in isolation can be misleading. Expressing the net assets available for benefits as a percentage of the pension benefit obligation provides one indication of the PERS's funding status on a going concern basis. Analysis of this percentages over time indicates whether the system is becoming financially stronger or weaker. Generally, the greater this percentage, the stronger the PERS. 18 sched2 SCHEDULE II BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION PERS REVENUES BY SOURCE AND EXPENSES BY TYPE YEARS 1986 THROUGH 1995 REVENUES BY SOURCE FISCAL CITY (1) STATE (1) INVESTMENT YEAR CONTRIBUTIONS- CONTRIBUTIONS EARNINGS TOTAL 1986 $41,743 $71,067 $181,543 $294,353 1987 41,743 78,913 114,483 235,139 1988 26,743 83,988 139,797 250,528 1989 23,621 85,015 207,540 316,176 1990 24,621 85,647 160,952 271,220 1991 27,421 70,248 205,350 303,019 1992 20,790 72,110 171,851 264,751 1993 27,790 64,039 180,055 271,884 1994 36,092 66,803 42,857 145,752 1995 $42,092 $69,299 $228,755 $340,146 EXPENSES BY TYPE FISCAL YEAR BENEFITS ADMINISTRATIVE TOTA 1986 $79,241 $14,706 $93,947 1987 86,018 20,538 106,556 1988 91,380 19,746 111,126 1989 95,712 5,896 101,608 1990 154,550 8,159 162,709 1991 158,939 14,293 173,232 1992 111,337 12,776 124,113 1993 87,770 15,574 103,344 1994 295,830 12,260 308,090 1995 $278,131 $13,055 $291,186 (1) Contributions were made in accordance with actuarially determined contribution requirements. • 19 sched3 Schedule III BROOKLYN CENTER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION SCHEDULE OF MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS DURING THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 Spouses' & Per Service Children's Total MONTHLY PE NSIONS Month Pensions Benefits Benefits Brunsell, Francis $244 $2,928 $2,928 Cahlander, Robert 453 $5,436 5,436 Canfield, Clarence 232 2,784 2,784 Cashman, Robert 230 2,760 2,760 Cichoski, Jerome 136 1,632 1,632 Claypatch, Jack W. 151 1,812 1,812 Considine, C. C. 213 2,556 2,556 Cornwell, Ralph R. 173 2,076 2,076 Davis, Henry 244 2,928 2,928 Draisey, Darwin 136 1,632 1,632 Edling, Charles 163 1,956 1,956 Fox, Robert 192 2,304 2,304 Hannay, y, illiam 293 3,516 3 Jacobsen, Mrs. Helen 139 1,668 1,668 Jennrich, Richard 277 3,324 3 , 324 Johnson, Mary P. 232 2,784 2,784 Knight, Richard 190 2,280 2,280 Kolstad, Robert 201 2,412 2,412 Larson, Louis 201 2,412 2,412 Lindman, Allen S. 280 3,360 3,360 Linner, John 271 813 813 Linner, Lucille 271 � 2 439 � ' 439 McKinley, Marion 263 3,156 - 1 , 156 Manderfeld, Joan 266 3,192 3,192 Mason, Ruth J. 326 3,912 3,912 Miller, Irwin 255 3,060 3,060 Nerburne, George 272 3,264 3,264 Owens, Stanley 310 3,720 3,720 Paulson, Dorothy 266 3,192 3,192 Sandgren, Lial 228 2,736 2,736 Sienko Wanda 244 2 2,928 Swing, Carl 256 3,072 3,072 Vaughn, James R. 267 3,204 3,204 Vaughn, William $283 3,396 3,396 Total Monthly Pensions $68,445 $26,199 $94,644 LUMP SUM DISTRIBUTION McClure, James 101,562 101,562 Roehrl, Marlin 79,425 79,425 Total Lump Sums $180,987 $0 $180,987 OTHER BENEFIT • Funeral Benefit, John Linner 2,500 2,500 Total Other Benefits $2,500 $0 $2,500 Totals (To Exhibit B) $251,932 $26,199 $278,131 20 investmt BROOKLYN CENTER SCHEDULE IV FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION Continued next page SPECIAL FUND - INVESTMENT DETAIL DECEMBER 31, 1995 Pool Premium or Book Market Original Cost Basis Distribution Discount Value Value Coupon Maturity Premium or at of Amortized December December Descri i n Rate Date Face Value - Discount Acquisition Pri ncipal to Income 31, 1995 31, 1995 TIME DEPOSITS IN COMMERCIAL BAN Marquette Bank Brookdale S.00. Demand 32,107.31 32,107.31 32,107.31 32,107.31 MONEY MARKET & MUTUAI FUNDS AIM Growth Fund Varies Demand 64,587.13 64,587.13 64,587.13 75,296.87 AIM Value Fund Varies Demand 61,697.93 61,697.93 61,697.93 74,455.33 American New Economy Fund Varies Demand 45,079.79 45,079.79 45,079.79 45,483.58 BEA Income Fund Varies Demand 47,367.40 47,367.40 47,367.40 47,250.00 Common Edison PFD Varies Demand 28,650.00 28,650.00 28,650.00 30,150.00 Income Fund of America Varies Demand 90,803.40 90,803.40 90,803.40 106,735.53 Kemper High Yield Varies Demand 84,280.75 84,280.75 84,280.75 77,075.12 Keystone Global Varies Demand 43,011.84 43,011.84 43,011.84 49,088.45 Keystone Amer Strategic Inc B Varies Demand 51,494.56 51,494.56 51,494.56 45,231.40 Keystone B -2 Custodian Fund Varies Demand 61,723.19 61,723.19 61,723.19 56,075.99 Keystone B -4 Custodian Fund Varies Demand 87,646.95 87,646.95 87,646.95 71,710.14 Keystone K -1 Custodian Fund Varies Demand 24,799.74 24,799.74 24,799.74 27,991.33 RJR Nabisco Cum Pfd Varies Demand 12,500.00 12,500.00 12,500.00 12,937.50 Seilgman Com Stk Fd Varies Demand 54,504.08 54,504.08 54,504.08 55,978.91 Seilgman High Inc Fd Varies Demand 10,065.50 10,065.50 10,065.50 9,665.48 Seilgman Inc Fd Varies Demand 10,461.98 10,461.98 10,461.98 10,031.72 Travelers Corp Cum PF PFD Varies Demand 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 26,125.00 Princor Fund Varies Demand 6,943.15 6,943.15 6,943.15 6,943.15 Principal Financial Securities Varies Demand 856.01 856.01 856.01 856.01 First Montauk Securities Inc Mon Varies Demand 105,554.35 105,554.35 105,554.35 105,554.35 First Montauk Securities Inc Cas Varies Demand 8,311.13 8,311.13 8,311.13 8,311.13 Total Money Market & Mutual Funds 925,338.88 925,338.88 925,338.88 942,946.99 BROOKLYN CENTER SCHEDULE IV FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION Continued next page SPECIAL FUND - INVESTMENT DETAIL DECEMBER 31, 1995 Pool Premium or Book Market original Cost Basis Distribution Discount Value Value Coupon Maturity Premium or at of Amortized December December Description Rate Date Face Value - Discount Aca_uisition Principal to Income 31, 1995 21, 1995 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT OBLIGATIONS OR AGENCIES FHLMC MLTCL Series 1250 7.00% 4/15/20 20,000.00 - 300.00 19,700.00 19.05 19,719.05 20,362.40 FHLMC MLTCL Series 1334 7.00 10/15/06 10,000.00 -50.00 9,950.00 5.60 9,955.60 10,190.60 FHLMC MLTCL Series 1560 -C 5.75% 5/15/23 50,000.00 - 1,000.00 49,000.00 78.92 49,078.92 48,203.00 FHLMC MLTCL Series 1625 6.00% 12/15/08 60,000.00 - 300.00 59,700.00 - 4,596.66 60.95 55,164.29 51,455.62 FHLMC MLTCL Series 1702 5.00% 10/15/16 50,000.00 - 687.50 49,312.50 - 9,505.57 130.70 39,937.63 39,684.38 Fed Natl Mort Assoc 1990 -21 9.00% 3/25/13 9,989.29 - 150.00 9,839.29 - 5,574.57 127.92 4,392.64 4,433.08 Fed Natl Mort Assoc Medium Term 8.01 4/1/05 30,000.00 600.00 30,600.00 -45.82 30,554.18 31,547.10 Fed Natl Mort Remic 1993 -16 CL 7.50% 10/25/19 40,000.00 -50.00 39,950.00 2.48 39,952.48 41,100.00 Fed Natl Mort Remic 1993 -44 CL 6.50% 11/25/22 60,000.00 60,000.00 60,000.00 59,943.60 Fed Natl Mort Remic 1993 -69 CL 5.50% 5/25/23 51,000.00 - 360.48 50,639.52 - 14,945.87 105.63 35,799.28 34,139.14 N Fed Natl Mort Remic 1993 -118 6.50% 10/25/07 40,000.00 200.00 40,200.00 - 35,276.36 - 178.39 4,745.25 4,642.32 N Fed Natl Mort Remic 1993 -210 5.00% 1/25/23 70,000.00 70,000.00 - 31,480.47 38,519.53 36,978.15 Fed Natl Mort GTD 1994 -79 7.00% 6/25/21 30,000.00 6.35 30,006.35 -6.35 30,000.00 29,934.30 Financing Corp FICO Strips 0.00% 10/5/10 63,000.00 - 39,179.65 23,820.35 443.24 24,263.59 24,739.47 Financing Corp FICO Strips 0.00% 1016111 150,000.00 - 96,760.15 53,239.85 1,092.29 54,332.14 54,858.00 G.N.M.A. Remic 94 -3 7.50 1 6 3/16/07 100,000.00 500.00 100,500.00 -56.37 100,443.63 104,750.00 US Treasury Strip 5/15/2015 0.00% 5/15/15 225,000.00 - 174,226.50 50,773.50 14,577.18 65,350.68 68,413.50 Govt. Natl. Mort. Assoc. 2974 8.00% 12/15/03 25,000.00 156.25 25,156.25 - 21,259.78 - 113.52 3,782.95 3,812.39 Govt. Natl. Mort. Assoc. 3481 8.00% 4/15/04 25,000.00 - 1,000.00 24,000.00 - 22,571.18 719.82 2,148.64 2,470.33 Govt. Natl. Mort. Assoc. 6473 8.00% 8 /15 /05 100,000.00 - 2,145.36 97,854.64 - 81,472.81 1,535.96 17,917.79 18,856.88 Govt. Natl. Mort. Assoc. 90174 9.50% 6/15/09 30,095.00 - 677.14 29,417.86 - 25,764.14 370.67 4,024.39 4,628.48 Govt. Natl. Mort. Assoc. 49975 11.00% 6/15/11 50,000.00 701.97 50,701.97 - 41,769.61 - 297.00 8,635.36 9,254.27 Govt. Natl. Mort. Assoc. 219884 9.50% 8/15/17 24,942.25 872.98 25,815.23 - 22,466.14 - 231.93 3,117.16 2,658.52 Govt. Natl. Mort. Assoc. 219912 9.501; 8/15/17 49,933.15 499.33 50,432.48 - 42,582.02 - 136.07 7,714.39 7,886.36 Federal Home Loan Mortgage Bonds 8.00% 3/21/07 97,505.55 - 1,462.56 96,042.99 - 86,900.39 910.20 10,052.80 11,088.98 Total U.S. Government Obligations & Agencies 1,461,465.24 - 314,812.46 1,146,652.78 - 446,165.57 19,115.16 719,602.37 726,030.87 BROOKLYN CENTER SCHEDULE IV FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION Continued from prior page SPECIAL FUND - INVESTMENT DETAIL DECEMBER 31, 1995 Pool Premium or Book Market original Cost Basis Distribution Discount Value Value Coupon Maturity Premium or at of Amortized December December Description Rate Date Face Value - Discount Accruisition Principal to Income 31, 1995 31, 1995 CORPORATE BONDS OR DEBENTURES Bankers Trust 7.50 °% 1/15/02 30,000.00 906.35 30,906.35 -53.80 30,852.55 31,887.50 Bear Stearns Co Nts 6.88% 10/1/05 50,000.00 1,631.35 51,631.35 -15.57 51,615.78 51,490.00 Chiquita Brands Intl 9.13 3/1/04 25,000.00 375.00 25,375.00 -11.83 25,363.17 24,875.00 CM Intl Income Euro 13530 0.00% 9/11/00 25,000.00 - 9,997.20 15,002.80 3,629.37 18,632.17 18,734.22 CM Intl Income Euro 13530 0.00% 9/11/00 35,000.00 - 22,206.08 12,793.92 11,966.49 24,760.41 26,227.98 Commercial Federal Sub Notes 10.25% 12/15/95 43,000.00 43,000.00 43,000.00 41,065.00 Countrywide Funding Ser 1993 -5 7.13°% 12/25/23 40,000.00 - 1,400.00 38,600.00 82.98 38,682.98 40,112.40 Delta Airlines Notes 8.25% 5/15/96 30,000.00 1,531.30 31,531.30 - 1,344.35 30,186.95 30,216.00 N W Financing Corp Fico Strips Ser E 0.00% 5/2/11 40,000.00 - 25,193.65 14,806.35 265.39 15,071.74 15,071.20 Ford Motor Credit Corp 8.38°% 1 /15 /00 30,000.00 639.60 30,639.60 - 119.46 30,520.14 32,695.80 GATOR Series I 0.001 11/15/03 212,000.00 - 80,371.33 131,628.67 2,042.65 133,671.32 135,001.60 General Mills Step Up 8.001 10/31/06 30,000.00 30,000.00 30,000.00 30,784.50 General Motors Acceptance Corp 7.00% 3/1/00 30,000.00 - 1,176.00 28,824.00 214.21 29,038.21 31,181.40 Golden west Fin Corp Sub Notes 6.001 10/1/03 35,000.00 - 2,030.65 32,969.35 89.82 33,059.17 34,386.45 Green Tree Accep Sub Note 10.25% 6/1/02 30,000.00 3,902.80 33,902.80 - 1,149.83 32,752.97 34,500.00 Leucadia Natl Corp SR Sub Note 10.38% 6/15/02 65,000.00 7,802.80 72,802.80 - 2,388.15 70,414.65 70,606.25 MCA 1992 -1 Multi Family 10.251 2/20/01 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 Mcdonnell Douglas Gen Term Notes 7.50% 7/15/00 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 52,922.50 Money Funding Euro #18409 8.25 10/29/96 50,000.00 - 3,747.20 46,252.80 3,108.09 49,360.89 53,000.00 Moore McCormack Bonds 8.88% 7/15/01 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 24,500.00 New England Life Euro Bond 0.00°% 2/1/99 105,000.00 - 44,882.60 60,117.40 24,256.01 84,373.41 67,200.00 Payless Cashways Inc Sub Note 9.13°% 4/15/03 30,000.00 - 5,550.00 24,450.00 18.70 24,468.70 23,475.00 Pepsico Med Term Notes 7.00 10/2/07 55,000.00 672.70 55,672.70 -12.57 55,660.13 56,478.95 Salomon Inc Notes 7.00% 6/15/03 25,000.00 - 726.25 24,273.75 24.23 24,297.98 24,967.25 Salomon Ser G Notes 6.35% 2/15/04 25,000.00 2.80 25,002.80 -2.80 25,000.00 23,824.75 Toyota Motor Credit 7.40% 4/24/02 15,000.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 15,191.10 Total Corporate Bonds & Debentures 1,180,000.00 - 179,816.26 1,000,183.74 0.00 40,599.58 1,040,783.32 1,040,394.85 TOTAL INVESTMENTS (TO EXHIBIT A) 3,104,282.71 - 446,165.57 59,714.74 2,717,831.88 2,741,480.02 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 19, 1996 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Diane Spector, Director of Public Services SUBJECT: Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Trees The City Council by Resolution No. 96 -58 on March 11, 1996 approved plans and specifications for Improvement Project No. 1996 -12, Contract 1996 -D, 1996 Diseased Tree Removal. During a routine inspection of the city parks, the tree inspector marked 24 elm trees for removal in Willow Lane Park. Four of these trees were between 9 -12" in diameter and the other 20 were under 9" in diameter. The large number of markings in one area does not suggest there is an outbreak of Dutch elm disease in our community, but rather serves as a proactive approach. More than half of the 24 trees are diseased and it would only be a matter of time before all would require removal. The four trees marked in Central Park near the north parking lot area are all ash trees that are dead. The attached resolution represents the official Council action required to expedite removal of the trees most recently marked by the City tree inspector, in accordance with approved procedures. It is anticipated that this resolution will be submitted for council consideration each meeting during the summer and fall as new trees are marked. I Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 06/24/96 ) WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and Diseased Tree Removal Agreement has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of Brooklyn Center giving the owners twenty (20) days to remove diseased trees on the owners' property; and WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of these diseased trees by declaring them a public nuisance: NOW, THEREFOR, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The diseased trees at the following addresses are hereby declared to be a public nuisance: TREE PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS NUMBER ----------- ----------- - -- - -- ----------------------- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- CITY OF B.C. TRIANGLE PARK 26 CITY OF B.C. TRIANGLE PARK 27 TIMOTHY & DONNA STODERL 5455 EMERSON AVE N 28 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 29 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 30 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 31 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 32 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 33 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 34 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 35 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 36 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 37 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 38 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 39 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 40 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 41 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 42 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 43 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 44 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 45 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 46 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 47 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 48 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 49 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 50 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 51 CITY OF B.C. WILLOW LANE PARK 52 CITY OF B.C. CENTRAL PARK N LOT 53 CITY OF B.C. CENTRAL PARK N LOT 54 CITY OF B.C. CENTRAL PARK N LOT 55 CITY OF B.C. CENTRAL PARK N LOT 56 RESOLUTION NO. 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owner(s) will receive a second written notice providing five (5) business days in which to contest the determination of the City Council by requesting, in writing, a hearing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. All removal costs, including legal, financing, and administrative charges, shall be specially assessed against the property. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MEMORANDUM DATE: June 14 1996 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Scott Brink, City Engineer`) SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Acquisition of Sidewalk Easements, Improvement Project No. 1995 -05, Contract 1996 -C, 69th Avenue North, Shingle Creek Parkway to Dupont Avenue North, Street, Bridge Replacement, Roadway, Drainage, and Utility Improvements Summary Explanation As part of the final design approval of the 69th Avenue Improvement Project, a sidewalk/bicycle trail along the south side of the roadway has been included. For most of its entire length from Shingle Creek to Dupont Avenue North, the trail falls either within the established right of way or existing sidewalk easements. 69th Avenue is proposed to be widened slightly at Humboldt Avenue to provide for an additional turning lane. The turning lane has been included to provide for the efficient and safe operation of the intersection for both present and future traffic projections. However, the widening will result in the new sidewalk being constructed just outside of the existing right of way. This will require easements from two properties at the southwest corner of Humboldt Avenue North and 69th Avenue North. The properties are Neil's Conoco Station and a portion of property owned by the Humboldt Square Apartments. The attached layouts provide a clearer explanation of the existing and proposed conditions. In order to acquire easements for the sidewalks, fair compensation must be provided. Based upon fair market valuation by the City Assessor and the amount of area to be acquired, it is proposed to compensate the properties as follows: 6807 Humboldt Avenue North (Humboldt Square Apartments) $ 3,410 (682 sq. ft. @ $5.00 /sq. ft.) 1505 69th Avenue North (Neil's Conoco) $13,160 (2,632 sq. ft. @ $5.00 /sq. ft.) The cost of these easements would be included within the overall project cost and funded from Municipal State Aid funds. Recommended City Council Action Approve the attached resolution authorizing an offer of compensation to the above properties in the respective amounts for the acquisition of permanent easement for sidewalk purposes. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING ACQUISITION OF SIDEWALK EASEMENTS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -05, CONTRACT 1996 -C, 69TH AVENUE NORTH, SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY TO DUPONT AVENUE NORTH, STREET, BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the City Council on March 25, 1996 by Resolution No. 96 -78 approved plans and specifications for Improvement Project No. 1995 -05, 69th Avenue (Shingle Creek Parkway to Dupont Avenue), Roadway, Bridge Replacement, Storm Drainage and Utility Improvements, and authorized the preparation of plans and specifications; and WHEREAS, the project plans provide for a trail way along the entire south side of 69th Avenue North from approximately Shingle Creek to Dupont Avenue North; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that permanent sidewalk easements must be obtained from two properties to facilitate the construction of said trailway; and WHEREAS, the City Assessor has determined a fair compensation amount based upon current market values. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The City Engineer is hereby directed to acquire permanent sidewalk easements and offer compensation amounts to two properties as follows: 6807 Humboldt Avenue North (Humboldt Square Apartments) $ 3,410 1505 69th Avenue North (Neil's Conoco) $13,160 2. The City Attorney shall be directed to draft the appropriate legal documents conveying said easements to the City. 3. The cost of obtaining said sidewalk easements shall be funded by the Local State Aid fund. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. - X- 1 i I i 1 i I SCALE 1"=60' EXISTING EDGE OF ROADWAY 1 PROPOSED EDGE OF ROADWAY { I i L E��1 PROPOSED SIDEWALK EASEMENT AREA • F . of t t /^� } - .� 111 - t r T Lt•_:.. _ - 6 t _ f 90H N'':_ 25` iF j � i is • i; .I Ld i F > 1 PARCEL N0. 2 Q ' I (NEIL'S CONOCO) I Q E c o p 1 Lo m I PARCEL N0. 1 (HUMBOLDT SQUARE APARTMENTS) i vr�75 I ® C T T Y OF BROOKLYN CENTER FILE NO. SIDE WALK EASEMENT D C44FF AMCHTECTS S PARCEL NO. 2 City of Brooklyn Center V The following companies /persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each company /person has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective licenses and submitted appropriate applications and paid proper fees. Licenses to be approved by the City Council on June 24, 1996: GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES Environmental Refuse 4123 Russell Ave N Nash and Sons Hauling 2301 93rd Way UWS /Gallagher's 95 West Ivy Ave Walter's Recycling & Refuse Service P. O. Box 67, Circle Pines MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Erickson Plumbing, Htg /Cooling 9212 Isanti Street NE Fireplace Showroom 225 Countv Road 81 LBP Mechanical, Inc. 315 Royalston Ave N RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: William Bartram 6107 Brooklyn Blvd Renewal: KMS Management, Inc. Ryan Lake Apartments Kim La Corporation Ryan Terrace Manor KMS Management, Inc. Shingle Creek Apartments Roland Scherber 5243 Ewing Ave N Robert and Marilyn Cashman 5430 Humboldt Ave N Michael Haase 5328 -30 Queen Ave N Lyle Miller 3513 47th Ave N SIGN HANGER Contact Signs 1803 Victoria Street General Approval: �1'lti1 Sharon Knutson, City Clerk CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 24th day of June 1996, 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 amendment to Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances regarding the use of skateboards and in -line skates. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGULATING THE USE OF SKATEBOARDS AND IN -LINE SKATES; ADDING NEW SECTIONS 19 -1501 AND 19 -1502 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended by adding sections 19 -1501 and 19 -1502 as follows: REGULATING THE USE OF SKATEBOARDS-AND IN -LINE SKATES Section 19 -1501. SKATEBOARDING AND IN -LINE SKATING PROHIBITED No person shall ride or propel skateboards in -line skates, or roller skates on the "Posted" areas at the City Civic Center Complex except in connection with an exhibition commercial venture organized plan or similar organized event authorized by permit issued by the C4 Manager. The term "Posted" areas shall mean areas that are clearly designated by signanag prohibiting the use of skateboards in -line skates, or roller skates. Section 19 -1502 PENALTY Any person violating the provision of Section 19- 1502 may, upon conviction thereof. be punished by a fine of not more than seven hundred dollars ($700) or imprisonment of not to exceed ninety (90) days or both together with the costs of prosecution. Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1996. ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) CITY OF BROOKLYN CEN'T'ER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the � �h day of June 1996, 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 amendment to Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances regarding the abatement of noise. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES PROVIDING FOR THE ABATEMENT OF NOISE; DELETING SECTION 19 -1203 AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS 19 -1203 AND 111204 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended by deleting section 19 -1203 and adding new sections 19 -1203 and 19 -1204 as follows: Sectinn 19 -1201 RAT)TQS, TAPF AND DISC PT a vFRS� FT(" Subdivision 1 No person shall nlnv use, or operate nn rnihiic or private property any radio, tnDe or disc ninye musical instrument nhonnaranh nr other m ^chine or de"vicn for th prnducdan nr amnlifimtion of s_n urd in suc a manner, considering the t ime and mace and th unumns_P for which the sound is pTnri„r -6! r a,s to „nraisnnshly disnlrh the nP f, a_ or repose of a nersnn or persons of ordinary sensihility Subdivision '? The play, use or onemdan of any radio tape or disc plover ? musical instrument = honna anh, or other machine or rievirta. for the nrnduuction nr amplification of sound in cluck a mann r as to he plainly audible at a ristnncet of fifty (50) feet tram said machine nr device shalt he prima facie evidence of a violation of this se inn Sluhdivisinn When sound vinlarina this section is prod iced by n machine nr device that is Incated in or on a vent 1A *he vehi 1 's owne is not prose ' the person in charge of the yphiCip at th time is guilty of th vintatinn Subdivision d This cec�nn shall not apnly tc) - sound produ <o by tho fnllnwina- a.._ Amplifying eq uipment >>c d in onnnec with a *ivi *ies for which rerrii s hnv h �m Cr Tn"gted; - ORDINANCE NO. b_ Anti-theft Hip- es; and c- Machines nr devices for the , production of sound on nr in anthnri7Pri erne?'gency v hi .let_ �~ Section 19 -1204 PENALTY- A ny person violadna the provisions of Section 19 - 1201 through 19 - 120' shail,imon rnnvict;on, he Dunishetri by a fine of npt more then cPyen hundred dollars 0001 or imprisnnm nt nn to exceed ninety (90)days, nr hoth, tngether with the r•osts of prosecution Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1996. Mayor ATTEST: City Cleric Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) • MEMO To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager From: Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Specia ist / ' Subject: City Council Consideration Item - Planning Commission Application No. 96005 Date: June 18, 1996 On the June 24, 1996 City Council Agenda is Planning Commission Application No. 96005 submitted by North Memorial Health Care requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Rezoning from R -1 to PUD/R1 and site and building plan approval through the Planned Unit Development process to provide residential hospice care for more than six clients at 4201 58th Avenue North. Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheets for Planning Commission Application No. 96005 and also an area map showing the location of the property under consideration, various site and building plans for the proposed development and the Planning Commission minutes and a resolution relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter. This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission on April 25, 1996 and referred to the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. The Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group unanimously recommended approval of the application on May 9, 1996. The Planning Commission reconsidered this matter at their June 13, 1996 meeting and recommended approval through Planning Commission Resolution No. 96 -1. It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the application subject to the conditions of the Planning Commission. Attached for the Council's consideration is a draft resolution which would approve the application. Also for the Council's consideration is an Ordinance amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinance which would describe the property being rezoned as being in the PUD/Rl zoning district. This amendment is offered for first reading. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 96005 Applicant: North Memorial Health Care Location: 4201 58th Avenue North Request: Rezoning /Site and Building Plan - PUD /R -1 The applicant is requesting rezoning and site and building plan approval through the Planned Unit Development process, to provide residential hospice care for more than six clients on the property currently addressed as 4201 58th Avenue North. The property in question is approximately 2.1 acres and is zoned R -1 (single family residence). It is located at the north end of upper Twin Lake adjacent to publicly owned open -space property along the south side of County Road 10 (58th Avenue North in this location). Access to the property is provided from County Road 10 by a driveway easement across the publicly owned open -space property. The subject site is bounded on the north by this publicly owned open -space property, on the east by single family residentially zoned property abutting June and Indiana Avenues, and on the south and west by Upper Twin Lake. The property has recently been acquired by North Memorial Health Care and they would like to provide hospice services for up to eight patients. These patients are dying people who are unable to care for themselves in their last few days but do not require fiill hospital services. This type program is considered to be a residential program under the definitions of State Statutes. The City's Zoning Ordinance at Section 35 -310, Subdivision lc, acknowledges licensed residential programs with a license capacity of six or fewer persons required to be permitted by Minnesota Statutes as a permitted use of property in an R -1 zoning district. The hospice will be licensed by the State Department of Health with respect to meeting their guidelines for a certified residential hospice facility. As previously noted, the City's Zoning Ordinance only allows six or fewer persons to be serviced in a licensed residential program within the R -1 zoning district. There are no provisions built into the Zoning Ordinance to allow more than six clients in such a facility. Because North Memorial needs to provide hospice services for eight clients, they are required to seek rezoning of the property to either a higher residential zoning classification or a Planned Unit Development. North Memorial has been encouraged to pursue their hospice proposal through a PUD rezoning because it will allow the City some flexibility in dealing with the number of clients and the redevelopment of the property for the proposed hospice facility. There is rational for allowing this specific use in a residential zone given some unique characteristics of the property in question such as its size, its remote location, and the fact that it is accessed directly to County Road 10 without affecting other surrounding residential streets. The fact that North Memorial is pursuing this application through a PUD process requires the submittal of a site and building plan for approval by the City Council. It appears that the plan submitted by North Memorial can 6 -13 -96 1 accommodate concerns expressed and will allow this facility to exist without much impact on surrounding properties. This matter was first considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on April 25, 1996. Attached for the Commission's review is the Planning Commission Information Sheet prepared for that meeting and the Commission minutes from that meeting. The Planning Commission, following consideration of the application, tabled the matter, continued the public hearing and referred it to the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. The Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group reviewed this matter at a special meeting held on May 9, 1996 at the City Hall. Attached for the Commission's review is a copy of the minutes of that Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting. The advisory group, following public comment and deliberation, recommended to the Planning Commission the approval of the PUD /R -1 rezoning proposal subject to approval of a development agreement. For the most part, there appears to be support for the residential hospice being proposed provided concerns for design of the site, lighting, parking, landscaping and screening can be addressed. SITE AND BUILDING PLAN PROPOSAL The applicants have submitted a somewhat revised and more detailed site and building plan for the proposed hospice facility. They plan to remove the existing home and build an approximate 6,150 sq. ft. residential facility with an attached garage in approximately the same location as the existing home. ACCESS AND PARKING Access to the site would be gained from County Road 10 over an existing driveway easement through the city owned open -space property. Plans indicate that this driveway would be expanded to 20 ft. in width and blacktopped. Brick piers would be placed on both sides of the entrance drive along County Road 10 to create an entrance feature. The base of the pier would be brick with a tapered stucco column to match columns that are to be provided on the building exterior. This monument would contain simply the address for the facility. Similar brick piers would be located on either side of the drive as you enter onto the North Memorial property. As indicated, the driveway would be paved, however, curb and gutter would only be provided once you enter the North Memorial property. It is recommended that as part of the paving that B -612 curb and gutter be provided along both sides of the access drive as well. The plan further provides for a drop off and drive around area around a landscaped island. Eight parking stalls would be provided just northerly of the driveway /entrance /garage area for the facility. This would include one handicapped and van accessible parking space. The plans indicate the ability to expand this parking area by at least three parking spaces. We believe the eight parking spaces should provide adequate on -site parking for the facility. Indications are that 6 -13 -96 at the most three staff members, one nurse and two assistants, would be on duty at the facility. Residents of the hospice will not have vehicles available and the additional five parking spaces should adequately provide parking for visitors. The closest parking formula in the city ordinances relating to this type of facility is one for a nursing home which would require parking on the basis of one space for every four beds, plus one space for every two employees, plus one space for each staff doctor. Such a facility, if it were classified as a nursing home, would require only five parking spaces. Space is also available within the garage and there is a generous turn around area in that location. GRADING /DRAINAGE/UTILITIES The applicant has submitted a proposed grading plan for the site. Because the facility is adjacent to Twin Lake, it is subject to review and approval by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission. Regrading of the site is, for the most part, minimal and involves the area primarily around where the parking facility is to be provided. The plans appear to provide a ponding area off of the parking lot to collect water prior to its run off. The applicant's plan indicates the 100 - year flood elevation to be 855.5 ft. Our flood plain maps show the 100 -year flood elevation of Twin Lake to be 856 ft. This discrepancy will need to be resolved and may have some effect upon either the grading of the site or the location of the building. Any grading or alteration of the site below the 100 -year flood elevation will require the applicant to provide compensating storage for flood waters. The plan also shows the 50 ft. building setback line from the shoreline or the ordinary high water elevation of the 853.10 ft. The applicant's grading plan also denotes the location for a proposed silk fence during construction to control erosion and run off. The site is served with both sanitary sewer and water service which the applicant will tie into. The plan indicates the need to relocate a hydrant that is existing on the property. The building will be required to have a fire extinguishing system that meets NFPA standards. City records indicate that an access easement has been granted over the open -space property to this site. It may be appropriate to define precisely the location of this easement and the applicant's maintenance responsibility for the roadway and file the document with the title to the properties. LANDSCAPING The applicant has submitted a landscape plan which would supplement and enhance the already existing landscaping on the site. The plan and a provided survey show the location of existing trees, both coniferous and deciduous, as well as heavy growths of trees and vegetation. The applicants also propose to provide extensive foundation plants and ornamental trees throughout the site. Specifically, they are proposing to relocate 24 existing spruce trees. These trees are between 12 and 20 ft. in height and would be located and in -filled around the proposed parking area to provide additional screening of that facility from the residential property to the east. This, along with the existing trees should provide more than adequate screening of the site. 6 -13 -96 Approximately five of these relocated Spruce trees would be located close to the water's edge. The landscape plan also calls for four new shade trees such as Red Maple, Norway Maple, Green Ash and /or River Birch, one in the landscaped island area around the drop- off /turn - around drive and three along the shoreline of Twin Lake. Thirty -one new decorative trees such as Crab Apple, Serviceberry, Hawthorn and Amur Maple would be interspersed throughout the site. The plan also shows a 5 ft. bituminous walking path around the property with various seating areas. Two of the areas would provide a seat wall with brick pavers and landscape shrubs. There would also be a bench for seating close to the shoreline and an open sided gazebo close to the shoreline and adjacent to the walk path. The landscape plan also provides for decorative trees and deciduous or evergreen shrubs adjacent to the entrance area to the facility. Foundation plantings made up of deciduous or evergreen shrubs surround the building foundation. The types of shrubs which would be planted would include Spiraea, Compact Cranberry, Ninebark, Rhododendron, Seagreen Juniper and Japanese Yew. Perennials would also be planted around the foundation of the facility including Hosta, Daylilly, Phlox, Sedum and Chrysanthemums. It appears that the proposed landscaping, which makes use of existing and the addition of new landscaping, certainly will meet or exceed the typical landscape plan provided for any facility. The only concern we might have is if the relocated Spruce trees, which are to provide screening of the parking facilities, be replaced if they do not survive the transplanting. BUILDING The applicants have also provided building elevations showing the exterior elevations of the proposed facility. The building is to have a brick base and stucco exterior wall with aluminum trim and asphalt shingles. Tapered stucco columns with a brick base are provided around the building to support the roof overhang. A large deck is located on the lake side of the house adjacent to and accessed from both a four season porch and the living room. The roof line extends out over this deck area. A second deck is provided on the east side of the facility and is primarily open to the morning sunshine. A fenced play area would be located in this part of the site. They propose to have eight residents' rooms in two wings all facing the lake. Each resident room would have its own toilet area and access to a patio just outside of the room. A large dining room is provided as well as a kitchen area, living room with a fireplace, a family area, a whirlpool and patio area. LIGHTING /TRASH The applicant's plans indicate no outside trash storage. Rather the trash facility will be located inside the garage. Some concerns had been expressed about lighting on the site. In response to this, the applicants have indicated minimal liahtina on the site. Two 12 ft. high poles containing a cut off down light maintaining one foot candle would be located in the parking area and two 6 -13 -96 4 ornamental lights would be located on 8 ft. poles in the drive -up area. The entry columns would contain low voltage up lights as well. PUBLIC HEARING/PROCEDURE The public hearing for this PUD/R -1 rezoning and site and building plan has been continued until Thursday evening, June 13, 1996. As indicated previously, the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group has recommended approval of the application to the Planning Commission. We have sent informational notices to those required to receive notice of this zoning proposal. The Planning Commission should take action to request additional input and comment regarding the proposal and then close the public hearing for your deliberation. RECOMMENDATION We believe this proposal has merit and the site plan submitted certainly offsets any concerns which have been expressed. Because the facility is on a large site (in excess of two acres), is secluded and has access to it which does not require traffic through residential areas, we believe it is appropriate to consider allowing a residential facility with up to eight clients, which is in excess of the limit of six established by the R -1 zoning district. This PUD proposal with an R -1 underlying zoning district meets the necessary concerns and justifies this type consideration. It should not create any adverse precedent with respect to other R -1 areas except for PUD /R -1 areas that meet these same qualifications. Attached for the commissions review is a draft resolution regarding the disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 96005, which would recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development Rezoning and a list of conditions relating to this approval. 6 -13 -96 5 V \ \ 1' �� tJ V Y ` � • TK r - -- = ;1- ``` -�_y` ` ,`� , , , ♦ ``,` •♦`� ,`: 1 \ �a , ,`,,`♦� ``� ,`. `, ♦ ,,`♦`, , ♦ ♦ ``; ; `•n�,!�,1`. , ♦ �'�, ♦ '�"► ♦ ' ♦ a'r ♦ _ ♦ , 1; I 1 ♦„ ,.`,``:,,,,�„ „ ,,`,`:.`:,`�,`�`„ ♦��,`,,`, ,,,♦ z MAJOR AVE l u :; ♦•` -, ; `; \,,, `` _ AV E _ `` O 1 Lit JE CD cn a) Y XY jI 1Y11 O O Cl al z Nis � _y r11 - 1tY r.1IA lY7J� • j { 3 _ _ _ _ _ -- - - - - - 1 ,, .I AVE. 1p(t •� ��; � OREIr ' 1 North North NORTH RESIDENTIAL HOSPICE Memorial Memorial Health Health Care Care BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA L GdSd3 _ NORTH CITY SUBMITTAL - 29 MAY '96 RESIDENTIAL HOSPICE TEAM DIRECTORY REGULATORY INFORMATION DRAWING INDEX v "= u+ wva r�uc AD UMU a T OWNER NORTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER — 7 � -- a BMD AIO 1"'(GAA &MMY ' BWUR ARCNTECT9 _.- r p wl N McLMARY CwwoO me6 UwrwC - PL.W 330.0 OAKDALE NORTH o r -- —`- eunu:ru cm n w "' . "" ROBBIN5DALE, MINNESOTA 55421 ' '� .» -" ••�•� ... LI Wr*f"agW 6RC rLMi 612.520 -5200 tiM -- '�" —_ — u lRE I°L.w NZ A] nocw KM A! D(IEACR fl.1NATK1tl ARCHITECT BWSR ARCHITECTS 400 51BLEY STREET, SUITE 500 SAINT PAUL, NINNE50TA 55101 612- 222 - - = LANDSCAPE H0151NGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC. ARCHITECT 13DD METRO BOULEVARD SUITE 525 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNE50TA 55439 612- 835.9960 STRUCTURAL ERICKSEN, ROED2JOIIN5TON-5AHLMAN ENGINEER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH SUITE 420 Orr Fw 4 mA » MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 612 - 342.9210 GENERAL DJ KRANZ COMPANY, NC. SITE LOCATION CONTRACTOR 2033 V--5T BROADWAY -- MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55411 - 612. 522 -6683 MECHANICAL EGAN AND SONS COMPANY ;x+ CONTRACTOR 1100 MEDICINE LAKE ROAD II MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55421 612.544.4131 �- nrury u. ELECTRICAL EL ECTRIC REPAIR i CONTRACTOR CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. �) 4024 WASHINGTON AVENUE NORTH U MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55412 I t 612- 521.6511 �" =� "' AO,1,1 North rn of 1 e Care OW FOOT RDtDiTsdde, Mkw uto "CIO "CIO VEII IICJE DER Ktf ,r wTpNAE r [� NOR rI I r ARY r 7 1P, ,\ L - DEW Tg01J TES MDNLANNY •`� - KMMS vo wO DONVER" .EFT r\r_ DENOTES E)OSTM Dcaowa IM q J _ _r II U NrwTES EMTM WOODS EM MMeln f t -I , • - M.O ES EJOSTEw Q]MY" 0EMo1R EJ""K MAMIM ENOTES • - D YOKMF H - D MF" MMItNO 9J TJYDN.W `(J - POWER Pau ARQMrECIS TA gTE7 EJJSMO POKN .o - DEW 10 E1MTEw a - E - DENOTES nOSTW ETIU�wI)S am EL VA Y. - Ml7.1W too NON ' �` � • ' ' too xAn rtooD nEV. - uas 4u. �� � � •f��_•© •+ ` 1 i - / l ,•� f � N u JE J...r. y..w.. Tw SN. N.,..w D..1. IW.rN1. o..sN • _— I II 1 � �. 1 �, ••� T ' - •'' ' ", M LEA M N W ! fl . M�+a IOM M Y M tl,AM� N .i•A� iwl �M -. - -- � ti I `• . _� '\ i � -- � � � • � - •` ��• � � - �,., Y M N111e11� Mu N3 Erw 14rE� 1] Mw OE fY.rW LM rbr� .t IDEIC MC _ - - t ` , Mw Mw• tl Mr N �ir1.. W.A • iA N JEECG h.t Orw M� N •- � l � \, •wv►.E Y M W Mml w Y� N nw. Y M NI6• N M wyMlr - '• \ ' " E�1 MJ M NM v W�IJ N M WMM M�eM/ ha �`. �. )- .d� D.wnWY N M M�1.11 rrwr N 1/J u li Err iM, N MW N w.Nr � � ' � ,J� M.N 0o wMlr Iwt . rlaw N IOEM TM Mnu MY EJ M.r 00 Mn� ti - •�� iN . Mw• N LEbI 4.F Mew EwM N M... N •ATM 11..1 . AM�.r N !MM MT C R E E K.- +' s+ TOPO(i( SUR1rEY -1 DesowtwE or n1aPnE7y elTl 1 a Awlr. r►..r.. Tr M w..w 0—ft--A ww r µµa�.... r.�..r .... r w W !� w r.w r ♦nn+ w .1.A. u r.., � C 0 � t1rMMM�IW n.♦.r.�r9X�1 MrYMwY ♦PMr rMIw1 Y M M.MM ♦.fy Mw Iti1. A w MAAni rle . Mr M Mlr ►... n.w n r w .rw. w . �' r aaw +.a a.... rw r ♦y.. C O F P, I.tnW w Y M wn N M W u.... u♦ >~'MI ♦.y M Mn r w RoG0itldde, Y Irnaola YMSr9 r.r war{ Mrr. Oil lti Mew \MrwunrM M r �i.r �M Mwl rrM ni♦YMM.rM0.0— R 1) E r S ( IDE 1, � I En. wM M ru M 99rrr r M YP.ay ♦eM M N 111 1 �'�� Q_ww M M 7w�1 �ti r w u n NOTICE w . ♦r... r rsw a..t llrr r n�.�r r &ooilyn Cen(er. saw u Y r sw P.9.1 r 1..�.a r..r y. IYn r r ro. r M Ma I/m E� "[ SWBR AROMTECIS W N. ♦ f J '• �.� % - - •'•q rz K. K.rwuwAl KDrza nE rAwc Clmer2 'l -T.b.0 Mp%1AOC YLa9l \ \ ` � :fib ■ N.aT\T AriD rr.Y r..�1 w A P �I < /,\•. `' D ... / /,' / 1p Iur[f ttws111uGND r - MT. it f9TAU K _ -- `�• Sr _ • -•• ' ..� .•'�! / :. 1 TKLS CMSII�UC1 /M r . a 9f'O W Ii R .t SASH 4 '— ,: .�••,, �. f� - "wT t /'" { >PKTD At i w uu AIO pAIQ T ur.n r rm AL wa..o. _ NG W 1 f001 ICLI CON INTERVAL rw o1 .we E 4 n.crD ax NC4R11CtL DATUI euc urno r 'y, < - c• • 'l A '. — G� ' / - -' .• DDIOK, RON HONUao/t - — T ' •. '"� � - DDgtO piTlq 00NE11a/i lltEL IwiA r • - T19 Y . x' .om 9iwtai a K.a. — ` — `�. W$MU E*ST O DECVUoU3 VICE M+a r a.a 14t wo srfcom —_ ay _ DeM1Tf! 9e11K0 TODD! eD0[ WR7 wane IC war. (}� �� •- •• D0 OWING CDNTWI Y t.AM hi wiu ll.tl rMI r1.1 Lori s/.I. ' ... �/ .• ODIOTC! 043I7110 YANIOIL —>nOw T .\ ~ ��- • 9 % a" •• OCNO70 EOSISIG CATTarAS. rt n sr tl - .� —....+ . DOaGTO [OSIW OOIA7RIL •.. Y+► Q - DDIOTO EXSIINO POVIDWO E ' ,- •vv_•• OD60TO [XST.0 ELECTRICAL l l ly y ' - �n�• - . , • IIDI'aT E-..��..... -_ _. uL] _ DENDIO COSTING !DICE slate. --.. 10' rra GRApMQ P(M - DEMTO PfWOSED ILT FENCE a1l�x I lqs 10' w f —.�--� - DDIOTO PROP030 00NTWII f 9A1T NAr tlt 5 1116C.DIDli 1'tCLK- OAO.MY 3501 •AIOI CCEV. - 03110 ro K — rm L. II.M AT LOG. 1 .s —W w N- —M 100 YEAR fum CITY. - 935.6 490 10 K intD rm w r Tra1 rtnts AT .. IDCI .1 fwKG rtD tT TK nIU[TA. EROSION CONTROL DETAIL LIM No,ll ONE Tom CCHTDUR INTIRVAL Mem l , N" VERn= DAM DENOTES PON MoNik"I DENOTES Da" CONTOUR fleal D"I" rmnw WAM*Ql DCNGU3 EMTM CARAWASM Core" DENOTES fWTM HYDRANT Can DETO DO W CONCRETE Robbinsdule. Winesola la NO0'"0" "ST W ►010WOLZ -4) - ms U=TW.AL Box NOR TI I - OMIES COSTING FU" DENOTES PROPOSED wrim'"" RISIDEN IIAt DENOTES f"OPC*W UNDMOROUND HOSPICE nfcnw_x KAYM DEMOMS PROPOSED W*TAXT SEWA DENOTES PROPOSED WATMAW Ym Typr-& STRM CAMARY HKH WATER a". - SUMP 100 YEAM FLOOD "V. - 008-3 BY49R ARCHTECTS — ------------ 09--- 41 4# N Xw kv 960 -LJUL I/b/m to 955 H4H mw I jw - m & I ad VA 950 jV--j! UTUTY Pt" 2 C-3 North Memorial Health . Care NORTH I RESIDENTIAL j HOSPICE 1 �.. _ � � • .� a � / I �– —"'-- - ( — r ewes AACrrrecrs 1 a • , 1 woo , 1 � I - boll -7e�1 s'"$,vn - � � � ' =t °i %` , 'PE son• � J' ,.. I :goo. • �" AUD : SUED a ). C.) fRMCE XMT b ' � n— - n, P _ T%1W LAKE[ PL N - ,;, , IADDn• • r•, w .. �'•." • 57111 AVE X y . . >_ "s7n 96 m /-_ ii ' —.. .— _ _ __ r..a:.e.c - . ' n '�' I1, .. ....f Y'-'!.}.� ; i __ ri �.r w , IE�fBOWf0005flE PLM I L1 North I Memorial Heafth ► Care \ � 1 � �oo��nsaaie. Mn,esoec I RESIDENTIAL HOSPICE Mirresoto BWBRAACHTECTS J tl q rYYgtta \ 1 W T _tlra� MCEND iffi - - -- _ - -- }- ��. .. \ \��++✓✓ / /�� � WR4 rll ..�Gl ttaK.tO[ai1W![lruaa h YA` L �- ..� � U. WuHwiLL'caa Li,.fh11 �� � Q¢ artGw MIf toLL TO AA.IIJI.NItC Yma .rtA�.b 96-7tl -+_ \ wrtlW O�por.ral t.Atnc.W Ot6t. 0 10 20 60 Ft. L2 North Memorial — - -- -- -- - - - - -- --- - -__ -- =- -- - - -- - - - -- ------ - - - - -- -- -- Health - - – -� Care - RE ��- H0SPICE f �BWBR ARCHTECTB Fill A l I Te TLIV l hw �— -- , 00 ° f4�S a n _ x° TEr Tor • * '___— L- -. - -- i .. �af Mf c CYS p J , 1 _ .. • Tl4T b u, FLOOR PINT A2k..k North Memorial Health Care NORTH Y' nn RESIDENTIAL HOSPICE -EA6T ELEYATION „v BWBR App1TECT9 - >G 44SfiT1 ELEVATION YE @LIL9l @1PE2ELEY91ICH _ - !r ELEVATION Irw itl I' A3 `| /. / ' N (� | � / |-- ' /l0 k u :c cr IV io _ °- /\ \ '^ � " m ik f_ f, � . -- U `'- ' rH � � |-- . . Q+1 " iy `Z � yL/ / Planning Commission Information Sheet • Application No. 96005 Applicant: North Memorial Health Care Location: 4201 58th Avenue North Request: Rezoning/Site and Building Plan - PUD/R -1 The applicant is requesting rezoning and site and building plan approval, through the Planned Unit Development process, to provide residential hospice care for more than six clients on the property currently addressed as 4201 58th Avenue North. The property in question is approximately 2.16 acres and is zoned R -1 (Single Family Residence). It is located at the north end of upper Twin Lake adjacent to publicly owned open - space property along the south side of County Road 10 (58th Avenue North in this location). Access to the property is provided from County Road 10 by a drive -way easement across the publicly owned open -space property. The subject site is bounded on the north by this public open -space property, on the east by single family residentially zoned property abutting June and Indiana Avenues, and on the south and west by Upper Twin Lake. The property has recently been acquired by North Memorial Health Care from the former owners, Mr. and Mrs. Charles Thompson. North Memorial would like to provide hospice services for a limited number of dying patients. These are people who are unable to care for themselves in their last days but do not require full hospital services. This type program is • considered to be a residential program under the definitions of State Statutes. Section 35 -310, Subdivision lc, of the City's Zoning Ordinance, acknowledges licensed residential programs with a licensed capacity of six or fewer persons required to be permitted by Minnesota Statutes as a permitted use of property in an R -1 zoning district. The hospice will be licensed by the Department of Health with respect to meeting their guidelines for a certified residential hospice facility. The City's Zoning Ordinance only allows six or fewer persons to be serviced in licensed residential programs within the R -I zoning district. There are no provisions built into the Zoning Ordinance to allow more than six clients in such a facility. North Memorial needs to provide hospice services for at least eight clients to make it economical. They are, therefore, proposing to be allowed to have a facility that will service between 7 and 16 persons in the facility. In order to accommodate this number of clients, the property must be rezoned either to a higher residential zoning classification or to a Planned Unit Development. We have encouraged North Memorial to pursue their plan through a PUD Rezoning because it will allow flexibility in dealing with the number of clients and the redevelopment of the property for the proposed hospice facility. Also, under the PUD, there will be a development agreement between the City and North Memorial outlining the conditions, development restrictions, and limitations involved with the plan. To simply rezone the property to a more intense /dense • Page 1 4 -25 -96 residential district that would allow more clients in a residential program as a permitted use may • be short - sighted because all other uses allowed in the zoning district would be allowed as well. Pursuing this proposal through a PUD/R -1 rezoning allows North Memorial to prooceed with its plans in a manner that sets P no recedence for other ro erties other than ones that can an meet th pr operti es, e same PUD standards. As will be reviewed later, a number of factors make this particular property more viable and acceptable as a residential program use. Such things as its location, its size, and access make it more acceptable, but at the same time these factors are not common to many properties. The PUD process of rezoning with site and building plan consideration was considered the most appropriate way to address this proposal. REZONING A Planned Unit Development proposal involves a rezoning of land to the PUD designation followed by an alpha numeric designation of the underlying zoning district. This underlying zoning district then provides the regulations governing uses and structures within the PUD. The rules and regulations governing that district ' g m this case R -1 would apply to the development ( elo PP � p proposal. One of the purposes of the PUD district is to give the City Council the needed flexibility in addressing redevelopment problems. Regulations aovemina uses and structures may be modified by conditions ultimately imposed by the City Council on the development plans. The Planning Commission's attention is directed to Section 35 -355 which addresses Planned Unit Developments (attached). • The PUD process involves a rezoning of land and, therefore, is subject to the rezoning procedures outlined in Section 35 -210 of the Zoning Ordinance as well as the rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. The policy and review guidelines are attached for the Commission's review as well. The applicant has submitted a letter g and a written statement e men regarding how they believe their proposal addresses the rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines. A review of those guidelines and the applicant's comments and staff response follows: a. Is there a clear and public need or benefit? A licant - The applicant indicates that there is a clear and public need or benefit in that residential hospice serves a clear need for dying patients who can no longer remain in their own homes. A residential hospice answers a Iona- voiced need by patients and families for a non - institutional, quiet home -like setting in which dying persons may live their remaining days. They add that the use of the property for residential hospice will be a significant benefit to the community and will not negatively impact neighboring properties. Page 2 4 -25 -96 Staff - We do not argue with these observations and note that all of the points mentioned can be o considered public needs and the providing of a residential hospice facility is certainly a benefit to the community. b. Is the proposed zoning consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classifications? Applicant - The applicant answers yes to this particular question and notes that a residential hospice facility is compatible with adjacent residential uses. They add that the facility is approximately 4,550 sq. ft. and will not negatively affect the density of the property or adjacent land uses. Staff - The property in question is surrounded by land designated public open space and single family residential property along with lakeshore. The use and redevelopment of this property as a residential hospice facility can be considered compatible with the surrounding land use classifications. The size of the land (over two acres), its distance from surrounding single family residential property, along with its somewhat remote location should make this property a good neighbor to the surrounding land uses. Access to the site is from County Road 10 over the publicly -owned land and will continue to be in this location. Persons visiting the hospice will not have to enter into the adjoining residential neighborhoods to gain access to this site. .Certainly its relatively quiet location surrounded by open space and the lake make it a quiet and ideal site for a hospice. • c. Can all permitted uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the subject property? Applicant - The applicant's response to this point is yes. They point out that North Memorial Health Care is willing to enter into a Planned Unit Development agreement with the creation of a written development plan. Staff - We believe all of the permitted uses within an R -1 underlying zoning designation could be contemplated for development on the subject property as the property is currently being used as a single family home. The proposed hospice by North Memorial, involving services for between 7 and 16 clients, can be comprehended given the size, location, and access to the property. The site plan which is also being presented will show how other development considerations will be met. The site will have to comply with shore land setbacks of 50 feet and be located above the 100 ft. flood elevation for Twin Lake. North Memorial is proposing to have a larger one -story facility than is currently there but it appears that it can meet all of the development requirements of the City. The Planned Unit Development rezoning gives the City Page 3 4 -25 -96 • the opportunity to allow more clients than what is normally comprehended under an R -1 zoning district because of the flexibility allowed in this particular zoning designation. Also, a development agreement will need to be drawn up establishing the allowed use of the property a nd the conditions, development restrictions, and limitations involved with their proposed plan. d. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in the area since the subject property was zoned? Applicant - N/A Staff - There have been no substantial physical or zoning classification changes made in this area since the property was zoned under its current zoning designation of R -1. For all practical purposes, the use of the property will continue to be an acknowledged residential use. e. In the case of City initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? N/A f. Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed rezoning district? Applicant - Yes, based on the site plan. Staff - The subject property should bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for this proposed PUD/R -1 proposal based on findings that will eventually have to be made by the City Council and a development agreement between the City and North Memorial. The proposal may h ave to be reviewed by the Shingle Creek Watershed tilanagement Commission and is subject to flood and shore land regulations. We also will review the site for appropriate off - street parking for the use and assess screening and landscaping, 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? Applicant - The applicant indicates that the property is suited for residential use. They note that the property meets the State Department of Health Guidelines for a certified residential hospice facility. They also indicate that they heard other interested buyers were interested in subdividing this property thereby increasing the possible property density and adversely affecting adjacent land owners. They note that their proposal maintains the residential character with only a modest change. Page 4 4 -25 -96 • Staff - The subject property is not unsuited for residential utilization as it is currently zoned. The applicant points out correctly that there have been proposals to subdivide the property or to utilize it in a more intense residential use. The former owner, in 1991, had proposed to rezone this property to R -3 in hopes of being able to develop eight townhouses on the property. Also, since the property has been on the market, we have had a number of inquiries about the potential of subdividing the land to create other residential lots, as well. Again, the location, size, and access to this property make it a good site for the proposed hospice use and with the number of clients requested by the applicants. h. Will the rezoning result in the expansion of a zoning district `warranted by: 1. Comprehensive Planning; 2. The lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district; or 3. The best interest of the community? Applicant - The applicant indicates that the land designated for Planned Unit Development is not contrary to neighboring land uses. Staff - The applicant's comment is correct. We would also add that the comprehensive plan is silent with respect to the future use of this land which indicates that a residential use should continue. This residential program is considered a permitted residential use; it is only the • number of clients served that is in question. We believe that it is in the best interest of the community to allow the hospice use of the property. i. Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interest of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? Applicant - The applicant indicates that their proposal sets to rest the future use of this property as well as past concerns of neighboring ZI property owners. They point out again that interested buyers have expressed interest in dividing the property and/or constructing multi - residential housing. Staff - We would concur that this does settle the question about the potential use of this property for an extended period of time. The proposal appears to have merit beyond only the interests of the particular property owner by providing for community needs, and it does appear to have a positive impact on the community. SITE AND BUILDING PLAN PROPOSAL The applicants have submitted a preliminary conceptual plan for the hospice. They plan to remove the existing home and build a new 5,20=1 sq. ft. one -story residential facility with an attached garage in approximately the same location as the existing home. They ha Pa e 5 d considered v , 9 4 -25 -96 using the existing facility by modifying and expanding it, but in order to make it accessible (ADA and handicapped) and usable for their purposes it becomes cost prohibitive. The propose to have eight resident Y P s nt rooms in tw wings P � o all facing g the Iake. Four would be located to one side of the main living room area and four would be to the other side. A deck would be located on the lake side of the house off from the living room area. They propose an outdoor walking path and outdoor seating also. Access to the site would be from County Road 10 over the existing driveway easement through the city owned open space property. A small parking facility showing nine parking spaces is indicated at the northeast corner of the site. We have not determined a set number of parking spaces for the facility. A nursing home's parking requirement is one space for every four beds, plus one space for every two employees, plus one space for each staff doctor. A hospital requires one space for every two beds, plus one space for every two employees, plus one space for each staff doctor. We will need to make a determination regarding appropriate parking based on staff, visitors, etc. The nine spaces might be appropriate. A drop off area and garage entrance are also provided adjacent to the parking area and front entrance. North Memorial proposes a one -story facility for accessibility purposes and also to keep the facility residential in character. The plan does not yet indicate building exterior and finish. There is a setback requirement of 50 ft. from the 353 ft. shoreline elevation. The 100 year flood elevation is also shown on the plan. Grading of the site would be minimal and plans may be • subject to Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission review and approval because the site is adjacent to Twin Lake. The applicants propose to maintain as much of the existing landscaping as possible, and it appears that they propose to add additional landscaping between the facility and the residential properties to the east particularly where the parking lot is to be located. Site lighting has been mentioned but not yet shown. The concern is to meet the need for security lighting and to avoid light glare and shining on adjacent residential properties. PROCEDURE This PUD/R -1 proposal, as previously mentioned, is a rezoning with a specific development plan. As such, it must go through the normal rezoning process. This means that following the Planning Commission's public hearing, the rezoning proposal and the site and building plan should be referred to the appropriate neighborhood advisory group for review and comment. In this case, it would be referred to the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group. We have invited advisory group members to attend the Planning Commission meeting. We will attempt to schedule a meeting of the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group within the next few weeks for the purpose of a formal review. It should be noted that North Memorial has held an informal Page 6 4 -25 -96 meeting with many of the people living in the adjacent neighborhood to initially discuss their • proposed hospice plans. Persons receiving notice of the Planning Commission's public hearing (property owners within 350 ft. of the subject property) and anyone else who desires to be notified will be informed of the date, time, etc. of the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting. The Planning Commission should discuss the proposal, open the public hearing, and then table the application and refer it to the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group for additional review and comment. The Commission may wish to comment on the proposal and give any direction to the Neighborhood Advisory Group that they believe is appropriate for their review. • • Page 7 4 -25 -96 • Amended 5 -20 -96 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION APRIL 25, 1996 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairperson Willson at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Tim Willson, Commissioners Donald Booth, Mark Holmes, Dianne Reem, and Graydon Boeck. Also present were the Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning and Zoning Specialist Ronald Warren, and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Ruth McLaurin Commissioner Mickelson was excused from the meeting and Commissioner Kathryn Palm was absent. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 28 1996 There was a motion by Commissioner Booth and seconded by Commissioner Reem to approve the minutes of the February 28, 1996, Planning Commission meeting as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. CHAIRPERSON'S EXPLANATION Chairperson Willson explained the Planning Commission is 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. 96005 Chairperson Willson introduced the first item of business, a request from North Memorial Health Care for rezoning and site and building plan approval, through the Planned Unit Development process, to provide residential hospice care for more than six clients on the property currently addressed as 4201 58th Avenue North. The Secretary presented the staff report, used overhead transparencies to show the location and detail (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 96005, attached). 4 -25 -96 1 Commissioner Boeck inquired as to the Watershed Commission review. The Secretary noted this • is because the property is adjacent to a water body. Commissioner Boeck inquired if they would review the application. The Secretary indicated although there should not be much to review, they would review any runoff issues. Commissioner Boeck inquired if there was a concern if the property does not stay a hospice. The Secretary noted there could be restrictions on the use of the property as a hospice. Conversion to another use would be subject to City approval. It is anticipated, however, that the hospice would be a long -term use. Commissioner Booth inquired as to who would maintain the access to the property, since it is through City property. The Secretary indicated the access drive would be maintained by the facility. Commissioner Reem inquired if Crystal residents were notified during any informational meetings. The Secretary stated he was not aware of any mailings to Crystal residents, but he was not in charge of the mailings, the North Memorial Health Care people took care of that. Commissioner Holmes inquired as to the status of the property which the City owns over which access to this site is provided. The Secretary indicated the property is owned by the City and a drainage flow thru the site to Twin Lake is maintained. The Secretary indicated the City has no intentions at this time to improve the area any more than trails, or walkways. The property is designated as Public Open Space. Commissioner Boeck inquired nq fired if the area would be filled. The Secretary noted there are strict regulations regarding fill with the 100 -year flood elevation. Commissioner Boeck expressed concern regarding the maintenance of the shoreline. PUBLIC HEARING (APPLICATION NO 96005,E Chairperson Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request for rezoning and site and building plan approval, through the Planned Unit Development process, to provide a residential hospice care facility, at 8:15 p.m. There was a motion by Commissioner Boeck and seconded by Commissioner Holmes to open the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Willson asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the Commission. Mr. Jerry Pedlar, Director of Facilities Management Services for North Memorial Health Care, indicated the property had been donated. He noted notices had been sent to some residents in Crystal inviting them to this neighborhood meeting. He indicated the residential hospice facility should be a win -win situation for both the City and the facility. 4 -25 -96 Commissioner Holmes inquired if there is a Lake Association, that perhaps should be informed of i the upcoming Neighborhood meeting. Commissioner Boeck indicated there is an Association for Twin Lake. Commissioner Boeck inquired as to how many patients there would be per nurse. Ms. Becky Woll, Director of the Hospice Program, noted the ratio would depend upon the level of acuity. There would be one registered nurse and one or two assistants at any one time. A maximum of three persons, 24 -hours a day. She indicated the facility would be licensed by the State of Minnesota and be under all regulations required by the State Health Department. Commissioner Holmes inquired if the applicant was intending on keeping the sanctuary for wildlife. Mr. Pedlar indicated this was one of the attractions of the site. Chair Willson indicated the purpose of this Public Hearing was merely preliminary and the Planning Commission would forward the application to the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group for additional review and comment. Mr. Pedlar commented it is the goal of the facility to be good neighbor. Chair Willson asked for any further comments from the audience. Mr. Kevin Sitter, 5725 June Avenue, inquired as to how many rooms would be available and how many residents would there be. Ms. Becky Woll indicated the regulation set by the State is a limit of eight residents. Mr. Sitter inquired if there would be additional parking needed and if this would change the topography. Mr. Pedlar noted this may be a bit premature because all of the plans are not quite finished yet. Mr. Sinner inquired as to the drive access, would it be black top. The Secretary noted the City does not require this for a single - family residence, but it would be appropriate in this case. Mr. Roger Johnson, 5701 June Avenue, expressed concern for any change in the topography. He noted there are transmission poles on the property. Commissioner Boeck suggested that the City Engineer could contact Northern States Power regarding the poles. Mr. Bill Hawes, 3612 53rd Avenue, inquired if the property would be served by city water and sewer. The Secretary indicated that would be correct. Mr. Hawes encouraged any kind of berming along the property that could be added along with the trees for screening. The Secretary noted it goes back to the Watershed requirements regarding adding any fill to the area. Mr. Hawes also noted adding a dock for boats might be a benefit for the patients. • 4 -25 -96 3 Mr. Pedlar noted in regard to the dock, the facility has no intention of adding a dock, for various ® reasons. Chair Willson noted the Planning Commission will see more definite plans when the application returns to the Commission after review by the neighborhood advisory group. Chairperson Willson called for any more questions for the applicant or for anyone else to speak at the public hearing. TABLE PUBLIC HEARING There was a motion by Commissioner Boeck and seconded by Commissioner Reem to table the public hearing and refer the application to the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. The motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS The Secretary noted the moratorium regarding the Adult Use Code has been extended until November 30, 1996. The Secretary noted the next meeting would be on May 16, 1996 and there is a Preliminary Plat application, and possibly more applications available for the meeting. Chair Willson inquired about the Comprehensive Plan Update. The Secretary noted the contract with BRW should be before the City Council within the next month. Brief discussion was held regarding current projects within the City. Chair Willson noted the recent legislation that would have helped Brookdale Mall with future state funding was vetoed by the Governor. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Boeck and seconded by Commissioner Holmes to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Chairperson Recorded and transcribed by: Ruth McLaurin TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial Minutes Amended 5 -20 -96 4 -25 -96 4 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOUTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD ADVISORY GROUP OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL MEETING MAY 9, 1996 CALL TO ORDER The Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group met in special session and was called to order by Chairperson Hawes at 7:31 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson William Hawes, Members Graydon Boeck, Yvonne Quady, and Bernard Ackerson were present for the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group. Absent was Charles Gellerman. Also present was Planning Commission Secretary Ronald A. Warren. APPLICATION NO. 96005 Planning Commission Secretary Warren explained that the North Memorial Health Care Hospice rezoning and site and building plan approval was referred to the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment from the Planning Commission as reflected in their regular session meeting on April 25, 1996. The Secretary presented the application submitted by North Memorial Health Care as it relates to the property at 4201 58th Avenue North, and explained that North Memorial Health Care is requesting rezoning and plan approval to provide residential hospice care for more than six clients at the above location. The rezoning proposal is for a PUD/R -1 designation. The subject site is bounded on the north by public open -space property which abuts County Road 10, on the east by single family residential zoned property abutting June and Indiana Avenues, and on the south and west by Upper Twin Lake. Access to the property is gained over the publicly owned open -space property from County Road 10. The Secretary used overhead transparencies to show the location and detail of the plans for this one - story residential type facility. The Secretary explained that the property is currently zoned R -1 (Single Family Residence) and the applicants are requesting questma 17 rezomnQ � to PUD/R -1 (Planned Unit Development/Single Family Residence.) The property was acquired by North Memorial Health Care Center from the former owners, Mr. and Mrs. Charles Thompson. North Memorial would like to remove the existing house and build a one - story residential type facility. The Secretary stated that the City believes there is merit in considering the application, but believes it needs the input of everyone involved. 1 PUBLIC HEARING (APPLICATION NO. 96005) . Chairperson Hawes opened the public hearing on the request for rezoning and site and building plan approval, through the Planned Unit Development process, to provide a residential hospice care facility, at 7:45 p.m. Mr. Jerry Pedlar, Director of Facilities Management Services for North Memorial Health Care stated that North Memorial has been looking for a hospice site for some time, and when Charles and Mary Thompson donated this particular property, they decided to look into it as an opportunity for a health care /hospice type facility. He explained why this property would be a good buildable site for the hospice: the access to the property, the lake, the size of the lot, and the seclusion and wildlife. Ms. Becky Woll, Director of the Hospice Program, explained what laws and regulations North Memorial must follow in developing a hospice facility. Those specifications include: (1) that it must be located in a residential area; (2) the facility must resemble a single - family home; and (3) the facility should support no more than eight patients. She stated that this would not be an acute care facility, but a home for terminally ill patients to spend the last weeks or months of their lives. Chairman Hawes noted that one of the questions that has come up is whether or not North Memorial should put berming on the east side of the parking lot for screening. He noted that because the land is not above the 100 year flood elevation the berming cannot be used. He stated the plans are for 8 or 9 parking places, and asked if the need for more parking arises, is there room for 2 or 3 additional cars. The Secretary used overhead transparencies of the site plan to show the location of the parking lot P P P and additional parking options available. Chairman Hawes indicated that currently the access over publicly owned open space to the property from County Road 10 is unpaved, and asked if the hospice is planning on paving that roadway. vlr. Pedlar stated that North Memorial will pave that access area in order to better maintain it and to keep the dust down. Member Boeck noted that the use of a PUD would offer the City more opportunity in controlling what these sites may or may not do, such as the driveway and the draining concerns. Mr. Pedlar stated that there will be a development agreement with the City and North Memorial in terms of the site, the landscaping, paving and parking. He explained that they will try to disturb the setting as little as possible and will not be creating any artificial settings. Member Boeck asked what the sequence would be in how the development plan is presented. The Secretary explained that a report of the Neighborhood Advisory Group recommendations would be given to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will take into consideration the 2 recommendations of the Advisory Group in formulating its recommendations to the City Council. This will be done in the form of a resolution outlining the types of considerations and the framework for the development agreement. The entire rezoning proposal, site and building plan will then be forwarded to the City Council, which makes the final determination on the matter. Chairman Hawes asked if there will be facilities available for family members of the patients wanting to stay at the hospice. Ms. Becky Woll stated that they are required by Federal and stated regulations to allow families 24- hour access, and that there will be sleeping facilities for family members in the patient's private rooms and also in the family room. Member Quady stated that there was a question brought up regarding the facility changing hands. The Secretary noted that concern and said that Staff will be recommending that the development agreement be for a hospice only. He explained the City and North Memorial can't guarantee that the hospice will be there forever, it's possible it could change hands in the future, but that it would have to come back to the City for approval or amendment for a change in use. He stated that the underlying zoning of the roe is sinle -famil residential and if it changed hands it would have P P rtY g ID Y to be consistent with that zoning designation. He also noted that the neighbors would have a voice in that issue in the future should it come back the City. • Member Ackerson asked what the average length of stay is for a client of the hospice. Ms. Becky Woll stated that the average stay is a week to a number of months. Chairman Hawes asked how the hospice will provide additional parking during holidays, special occasions, or entertainment. Member Ackerson noted that there is parking all the way out to County Road 10, and asked the neighbors present if parking was a concern to them. iVlr. George Hnath, a neighbor of the proposed site who lives at 5731 June Avenue stated that they are all in favor of the hospice and believes it will be an asset to their neighborhood. He stated that their concerns are mainly the designing, lighting, parking, and landscaping. Member Ackerson asked what type of lighting will be put in, and if the spill -over lighting will be a disturbance to the neighborhood. Mr. Pedlar stated that because of the 24 -hour operation of the facility, they are in the process of doing a security assessment and lighting issues are part of that assessment. • Chairman Hawes asked about fencing for security purposes, and also stated that the Thompson's had • some fencing put in to keep the wildlife within the confines of their property. Mr. Pedlar believes fencing for security purposes would detract from the beauty of the property, but they will have some fencing for wildlife confinement, in accordance with the agreement the Thompson's have in place with the DNR. The Secretary pointed out that the Watershed District will be brought in to assess the water issues, how the development would impact the lake, the quality of the run off, and those types of issues. Mr. Roger Johnson, 5701 June Avenue, asked if there were surveys being done to make sure the property stays within the one hundred -year flood stage. Mr. Pedlar stated that the surveyors and landscape people have been at the property shooting elevations to make sure they are staying within the flood guidelines so they can then approach the Watershed District. He also noted that someone called to ask him about trees, and stated that they will be moving and transplanting as many trees as possible. Chairman Hawes asked if the proposed facility is going to be closer or further back from the lake. The Secretary used overhead transparencies to show the location of the facility in regard to the flood lines, and discussed the survey of the existing property and what setbacks will be required. The Secretary then used overhead transparencies to show a floor plan of the facility. Member Ackerson asked if the plans include a sanitary sewer or a pump system. Mr. Pedlar stated they are checking on that, but he doesn't believe there is presently a lift station in place. He stated they had the water hydrant on the property tested and the results are pending. The Secretary explained that with regard to the publicly owned open -space property, the City has not made any definite plans for use of that space but there has been consideration of putting some public walking/biking trails in along the lake. Mr. Pedlar stated that they will not be putting a dock in at this time, but would like to keep that possibility open for the future. Chairman Hawes asked what the property taxes currently are for that property, and if the hospice is exempt from paying those taxes. Mr. Pedlar stated that the hospice would be exempt from paying those taxes, however they have a collaborative partnership with all the communities North Memorial serves to provide ongoing training to the fire and police departments without charge. He stated that with regard to the property taxes on the proposed property building site is to have a win/win situation for North Memorial Health Care 4 and the City, and as a tax- exempt organization they don't expect the City to suffer from that, so they ® will continue to work with the City on that issue. Member Ackerson asked when North Memorial expects the hospice to be completed. Mr. Pedlar noted that November is hospice month, and they would like to see the hospice open by that time, mid- to late November. Fern Warren, a resident on June Avenue, asked if this development would affect the wildlife that is currently on the property. Mr. Pedlar stated they do not intend to disturb any of the natural habitat because it is a benefit to a hospice setting. He also noted that the license for wildlife habitat currently in place between the DNR and the Thompson's is transferrable, and North Memorial intends to keep that license intact. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Hawes called for any more questions for the applicant or for anyone else to speak at the Public hearing. No one came forward to speak and the public hearing closed 8:40 p.m. ACTION RECONEV ENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 96005 There was a motion by Member Boeck and seconded by Member Quady to recommend to the City Planning Commission approval of the PUD/R -1 rezoning proposed by North Memorial Hospital for . residential hospice subject to approval of a development agreement. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURN`TVIENT The Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group adjourned at 8:46 p.m. Chairperson Recorded and transcribed by: Lorianne Ende Timesaver Off Site Secretarial 5 `-'•, .• �. � � �•., .. +. 1- 0J -, ':) - -v . , f - r1i7G CJ� MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JUNE 13, 1996 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairperson Willson at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL Chair Tim Willson, Commissioners Graydon Boeck, Donald Booth, and Dianne Reem were present. Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning and Zoning Specialist Ronald Warren and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Arlene Bergfalk. Commissioner Holmes entered the meeting at 7:48 p.m. Commissioner Mickelson was excused. Commissioner Palm did not attend. APPROVAi. OF 7M C' MAY 16 1996 . There was a motion by Commissioner Booth seconded by Commissioner Reem to approve the minutes of the May 16, 1996 minutes as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. CHAIRPERSON'4 EXPLANATION Chair Willson explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. AI'PLZCATION NO 96005 Chair Willson introduced Application No. 96005, a request from North Memorial Health Care for rezoning and site and building plan approval through the Planned United Development (PUD) process to provide residential hospice care for more than six clients on the property at 4201 -58th Avenue North. The Secretary presented the staff report and used overhead transparencies to show the location and revised, more detailed site and building plans for the proposed hospice facility (See details in Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 96005 dated 6 -13 -96 attached). Mr. Warren noted the Application was before the Commission on April 25, 1996 (see minutes and detailed Information Sheet dated 4- 25 -96) and subsequently considered at a special meeting of the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group (see minutes dated 5- 9 -96). 6 -13 -96 1 • During the presentation, the Secretary referenced the City Engineer's June 13, 1996 report reviewing the proposed site and grading plan for this Application. Mr. Warren reported that the Shingle Creek Watershed Commission accepted the applicant's proposal at its June 13 meeting. The Secretary reviewed the considerations and conditions outlined in a draft resolution entitled "Resolution Regarding Recommended Disposition of planning Commission Application No. 96005 Submitted by North Memorial Health Care ". Chair Willson called for questions from the Commission members. Commissioner Boeck inquired whether all utilities will be connected to the City and whether approval of the Resolution includes an occupancy permit. Mr. 'Warren stated all utilities will be connected to the City's service lines and that approval does not include an occupancy permit, which would be issued only after all inspections relating to construction have been completed. UBLIC BARING (AkpLICAII ON NO. 96005 Chair Willson asked for a motion to re -open the public hearing, tabled on 4- 25 -96, on the request for rezoning from R -1 to PUD/R1 and site and building plans approval through the PUD process to provide residential hospice care for more than six clients at the North Residential Hospice, 4201 -58th Avenue North. There was a motion by Commissioner Booth seconded by Commissioner Holmes to reopen the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Willson opened the public hearing at 8:09 P.M., called for additional questions from the Commissioners and invited comments from the public. Mr. Ernie Engel, Vice President of Property and Facilities, North Memorial Health Care, stated he had no further additions to the Secretary's presentation, but would answer Commissioners' questions. Chair Willson inquired whether the required curb and gutter installation on the access drive is acceptable. Mr. Engel stated it will be P rovided. Commissioner Boeck presented a number of questions regarding the proposed site and grading plan that provides for a 100 year flood elevation of 855.5 rather than the actual elevation of 856.0 shown in City and Watershed records. Mr. Paul Page, representing HK Group, Inc., project consultant, explained details of the compensatory volume and surface area to be provided and answered specific concerns expressed by Commissioner Boeck regarding the flood plain area. It was reiterated that the Watershed Commission accepted the Applicant's site and grading plan and that approved plans would have to comply with the 856.0 elevation as the 100 year flood elevation for Twin Lake. Mr. Page responded to Commissioners' concerns regarding the viability of transplantation of trees within the site and replacement and maintenance plans for landscaping on the site. • 6 -13 -96 2 • Following discussion, the Commissioners accepted the site and grading plans submitted by the Applicant. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARrtJry Chair Willson called for further comments from the public. Commissioner Boeck moved and Commissioner Booth seconded to close the public hearing on Application No. 96005, at 8:22 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Boeck recommended clarifying language to condition 3 in the first enumeration in the Resolution regarding the allowed variation from the .Zoning Ordinance; and in the second enumeration to condition 10 regarding Watershed Commission acceptance; and condition 11 in the second enumeration regarding development agreement approvals. The Commissioners agreed to the recommended changes. Commissioner Boeck expressed concern regarding the requirement of curb and gutter installation in the access drive leading to the site from County Road 10 (condition 7). He explained that the extra cost for such installation is not warranted because traffic into the site will be limited and existing drainage is adequate. Further, he strongly supported preserving the area's natural conditions by eliminating unnecessary use of concrete. In response to Commissioner Boeck's concerns, Messrs. Warren and Willson pointed out that such curb and gutter installation is required by Ordinance, therefore consistent administration of regulations is proper. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NQ 96005 Commissioner Boeck introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 96005 SUBMITTED BY NORTH MEMORIAL HEALTH CARE. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner Holmes and upon vote p o being aken thereon the g following voted in favor thereof Char Willson, Commissioners Boeck, Booth, Holmes, and Reem, and none voted against the same, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The Council will consider the recommendation at its June 24 meeting. The applicant must be present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Commissioners will require that the application be returned to the Commission for re- consideration. Chair Willson left the meeting at this point (8:37 p.m.). Commissioner Holmes assumed the position of Chair pro tem. Q_ TIER BUSINESS 6 -13 -96 �, - - -" � - . �- o.)- -, 1 . -- - u, , -, :rev LL;- r - o� The Secretary reported that requests for approval of installation of communication towers /antenna have increased recently. For the Commissioners' information, Mr. Warren reviewed the City's current policy regarding such installations and answered their questions. .A.DJOURIV�ENZ' There was a motion by Commissioner Boeck seconded by Commissioner Booth to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:52 p.m. Chairperson Recorded and transcribed by: Arlene Bergfalk TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 6 -13 -96 4 Member Graydon Boeck introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96 -1 RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 96005 SUBMITTED BY NORTH MEMORIAL HEALTH CARE WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 96005 submitted by North Memorial Health Care proposes rezoning from R -1 (single family residence) to PUD /R -1 of the property located at 4201 58th Avenue North; and WHEREAS, this proposal comprehends the rezoning of the above mentioned property and site and building plan approval for a residential hospice care facility for more than six clients; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on April 25, 1996 when a staff report and public testimony regarding the rezoning and site and building plans were received; and WHEREAS, the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group met to consider this matter on May 9, 1996, at the City Hall and unanimously recommended approval of this Planned Unit Development proposal; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission resumed consideration of this matter on June 13, 1996, received an additional staff report and took further testimony during a continued public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Commission considered the rezoning and the site and building plan request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of the Planned Unit Development Ordinance contained in Section 35 -355, and the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 96005 submitted by North Memorial Health Care be approved in light of the following considerations: 1. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section of the City's Zoning Ordinance. • 2. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal will allow for the utilization of 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 Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal will conform with City Ordinance standards with the exception of the limitation of six or fewer persons being served in a licensed residential program. Variation from this Zoning Ordinance limitation to allow up to eight hospice patients is justified on the basis of the development plan submitted and the unique characteristics of the property under consideration such as its large size (in excess of two acres), its remote and secluded location, and the fact that access to the property does not require traffic to go through adjacent residential neighborhoods. 4. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are considered compatible with the recommendations of the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the City. 5. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development appear to be a good utilization of the property under consideration in that it maintains the residential character of the property and provides for the ability to meet the needs of dying persons who are unable to care for themselves, but do not require hospital or nursing care services. 6. In light of the above considerations, it is believed that the guidelines for evaluating rezonings as contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance are met and that the proposal is, therefore, in the best interests of the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council that approval of Application No. 96005 be subject to the following conditions and considerations: 1. The building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or on ground mechanical equipment • shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 7. B -612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all driving and parking area including the access drive leading to this site from County Road 10. S. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines, prior to release of the performance guarantee. 9. The property owner shall enter into an easement and agreement for maintenance and inspection of utility and storm drainage systems, prior to the issuance of permits. 10. The applicant is subject to the requirements and regulations of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission with respect to this site. The storm drainage system shall be acceptable to the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to the issuance o P f P ermits. 11. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City based on applicable icable ordinances and shall be v' PP reviewed and approved ro ed b the City Attorney, pp ne Y Y Y prior to the issuance of building permits. Said agreement shall acknowledge the use of this site as a licensed residential hospice serving no more than eight clients at any one time, acknowledge all the previous stated conditions of approval and assure compliance with development plans submitted by the applicant. � Date Chair ATT T: Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Mark Holmes and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Chair Tim Willson, Commissioners Mark Holmes, Donald Booth, Dianne Reem and Graydon Boeck • and the following voted against the same: None whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 96005 SUBMITTED BY NORTH MEMORIAL HEALTH CARE WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 96005 submitted by North Memorial Health Care proposes rezoning from R -1 (single family residence) to PUD /R -1 of the property located at 4201 58th Avenue North; and WHEREAS, this proposal comprehends the rezoning of the above mentioned property and site and building plan approval for a residential hospice care facility for more than six clients; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on April 25, 1996 when a staff report and public testimony regarding the rezoning and site and building plans were received; and WHEREAS, the Southwest Neighborhood Advisory Group met to consider this matter on May 9, 1996, at the City Hall and unanimously recommended approval of this Planned Unit Development proposal; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission resumed consideration of this matter on June 13, 1996, received an additional staff report and took further testimony during a continued public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 96005 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 96 -1 on June 13, 1996; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered Application No. 96005 at its June 24, 1996 meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the rezoning and the site and building plan request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of the Planned Unit Development Ordinance contained in Section 35 -355, and the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn • Center that Application No. 96005 submitted by North Memorial Health Care be approved in light of the following considerations: 1. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are compatible with the • standards, purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section of the City's Zoning Ordinance. 2. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal will allow for the utilization of 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 Rezoning and Planned Unit ro Development proposal will conform with City P P P Y Ordinance standards with the exception of the limitation of six or fewer persons being served in a licensed residential program. Variation from this Zoning Ordinance limitation to allow up to eight ent J hospice patients is justified on the basis of the development plan submitted P P and the unique characteristics of the property under consideration such as its large size (in excess of two acres), its remote and secluded location, and the fact that access to the property does not require traffic to go through adjacent residential neighborhoods. 4. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are considered compatible with the recommendations of the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the City. 5. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development appear to be a good utilization of the property under consideration in that it maintains the residential character of the property and provides for the ability to meet the needs of dying persons who are unable to care for themselves, but do not require hospital or nursing care services. 6. In light of the above considerations, it is believed that the guidelines for evaluating rezonings as contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance are met and that the proposal is, therefore, in the best interests of the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to approve Application No. 96005 subject the following conditions and considerations: 1. The building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. • O 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or on ground mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 7. B -612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all driving and parking area including the access drive leading to this site from County Road 10. 8. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines, prior to release of the performance guarantee. 9. The property owner shall enter into an easement and agreement for maintenance and inspection of utility and storm drainage systems, prior to the issuance of permits. 10. The applicant is subject to the requirements and regulations of the Shingle Creek PP J q b g Watershed Management Commission with respect to this site. The storm drainage system shall be acceptable to the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to the issuance of permits. 11. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City based on applicable ordinances and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney, prior to the issuance of building permits. Said agreement shall acknowledge the use of this site as a licensed residential hospice serving no more than eight clients at any one time, acknowledge all the previous stated conditions of approval and assure compliance with development plans submitted by the applicant. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to authorize the Mayor and the City Manager to execute said development agreement on behalf of the City. . Date Mayor • ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of 1996 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 amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding the zoning classification of certain land. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND (NORTH HOSPICE) 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' 5 -1240. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PUD). The following properties are hereby established as being within a (PUD) Planned Unit Development zoning classification: 1. The following properties are designated as PUD/R1 (Planned Unit Development/One Family Residential): Lots 1 through 12, Block 1, and Lots 1 through 13, Block 2, Twin View Meadows. Lot 1, Block 1, Evangelical Lutheran Church of the Master 2nd Addition; Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Brookdale Manor 2nd Addition. That part of Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision No 216 Hennepin County. Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of said Lot 22 thence south 88° 00' west along the south line of said Lot 22 a distance of 505.01 feet to the actual point of beginning of the land to be hereinafter described, thence no 17' 00' east a distance of 158.55 feet thence north 22' 00' west a distance of 285 feet thence south 65' 00' west to the shore of Twin Lake thence easterlv and southerly along' the shore of said Twin Lake to the south line of said Lot 22 thence east along the south line of said Lot 22 to the point of beginning according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Reg'ister of Deeds in and for said Hennepin • County: Except that part which lies westerly of the following described line: • CommencinQ at the southeast corner of said Lot 22 thence south 88' 00' west along the south line of said Lot 22 a distance of 505.01 feet, north 17° 00' east a distance of 158.55 feet, north 22° 00' west a distance of 285 feet thence south 65' 00' west a distance of 316 feet to the actual point of beginning, thence south 23' west to the shore of Twin Lake. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1996. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication _ Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) f Da� MEMORANDUM TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk,A DATE: June 19, 1996 SUBJECT: Mayoral Appointment of Member to Serve on Communications Task Force On May 15, 1996, Julie Doth resigned from the ad hoc City Communications Task Force. Notice of v p Y vacanc the Communications Task Force was p ublished in the Brooklyn Center Sun- . Post on May 22, 1996. Notice was posted at City Hall and Community Center and aired on Cable Channel 37 from May 15 through June 14, 1996. Letters were sent to those persons who previously had submitted an application for appointment to a Brooklyn Center advisory commission or task force informing them of the vacancy and encouraging them to call the City Clerk if they were interested in obtaining an application and more information. Notices were also sent to all current advisory commission and task force members. Attached for City Council members only is a copy of the application received to date: Patrick Laniel Executive Director North Metro Convention and Visitor's Bureau 6155 Earle Brown Drive, 4120 Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 A letter was sent to the applicant informing him that his application would be considered at the June 24, 1996, Council meeting and he was invited to attend. Requested Council Action: - Appoint one member to serve on the ad hoc City Communications Task Force. Attachments • City of Brooklyn Center • Procedures for Filling Commission /Task Force Vacancies Adopted by Council 3/27/95 The following process for filling commission/task force vacancies was approved by the City Council at its March 27, 1995, meeting: Vacancies in the Commission shall be filled by Mayoral appointment with majority consent of the City Council. The procedure for filling Commission vacancies is as follows: 1. Notices of vacancies shall be posted for 30 days before any official City Council action is taken; 2. Vacancies shall be announced in the City's official newspaper; 3. Notices of vacancies shall be sent to all members of standing advisory commissions; 4. Applications for Commission membership must be obtained in the City Clerk's office and must be submitted in writing to the City Clerk; 5. The City lerk shall forward copies of the applications to the Mayor and City tY p pp Y Council; 6. The Mayor shall identify and include the nominee's application form in the City Council agenda materials for the City Council meeting at which the nominee is presented; 7. The City Council, by majority vote, may approve an appointment at the City Council meeting at which the nominee is presented. RESOLUTION NO. 91 -153 RESOLUTION NO. 92 -127 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -191 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -29 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING ABROOKLYN CENTER AD HOC CITY COMMUNICATIONS TASK FORCE AND DEFINING DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council has authorized the creation of an ad hoc task force for the express purpose of reviewing the City's communications efforts and assisting the City Council in formulating priorities related to communications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center City Council that there is hereby established within the City of Brooklyn Center an advisory ad hoc City Communications Task Force as follows: Subdivision 1. TITLE: This organization shall be known as the Brooklyn Center ad hoc City Communications Task Force. i Subdivision 2. SCOPE: The scope of activity of this Task Force shall consist of advising t g g the City Council regarding b matters relevant to the City's 40 communications efforts. Subdivision 3. PURPOSE: The general rP u ose of this Task Force shall be P to evaluate and recommend methods to improve communications between the City of Brooklyn Center and its citizens. Subdivision 4. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: In fulfillment of its purpose, the duties and responsibilities of the Task Force shall be to: (1) Review and evaluate the City's 1990 communications audit prepared by Coleman & Christison, Inc. (2) Evaluate tools to solicit input from citizens, such as town meetings or a professional survey. (3) Evaluate use of personnel and /or consulting services to accomplish communications goals. (4) Evaluate the use of cable television as a method to communicate with citizens. Subdivision 5. COMPOSITION: The Task Force shall be composed of a • chairperson and six (6) members, all of whom shall be appointed and serve as set forth in Subdivision 6. Subdivision 6. MEMBERS METHOD OF SELECTION —TERM OF Is OFFICE — REMOVAL: Chairperson The Chairperson shall be appointed by majority vote of the Ad Hoc Communications Task Force membership. The election shall be conducted at the Communications Task Force's first regular meeting of the calendar year, or, in the case of a vacancy, within two regularly scheduled Communications Task Force meetings from the time a vacancy of the chair occurs. The Chairperson may be removed by majority vote of the Communications Task Force membership. The Chairperson shall assure fulfillment of the following responsibilities in addition to those otherwise described herein: 1. Preside over meetings of the Task Force; 2. Appear or appoint a representative to appear, as necessary, PP P PP � rye before the City Council to present the viewpoint of the Task Force in matters relevant to the City's communications efforts as it relates to business under consideration by the City Council; I Review all official minutes of the City Council and other advisory commissions for the purpose of informing the City Communications Task Force of matters relevant to City communications. Vice Chairperson The Vice Chairperson shall be elected by majority vote of the Ad Hoc Communications Task Force membership. The election shall be conducted at the Communications Task Force's first regular meeting of the calendar year, or, in the case of a vacancy, within two regularly scheduled Communications Task Force meetings from the time a vacancy of the Vice Chair occurs. The Vice Chair may be removed by majority vote of the Communications Task Force membership. The Vice Chairperson shall perform such duties as may be assigned by the Chairperson and shall assume the responsibilities of the chair in the absence of the Chairperson. Members' Term of Office Members of the Task Force shall be appointed by the Mayor with majority consent of the Council. The terms of office shall be for the life of the Task Force as set forth in Subdivision 11. In the event an appointed member suffers from an extended illness, disability, or other activity preventing proper fulfillment of duties, responsibilities, rules and regulations of the Task Force, the member may be temporarily replaced during the temporary leave by an interim member appointed by the Mayor with majority consent of the City Council. • Oualifications for Membership At least four members of the Task Force shall be residents of the City of Brooklyn Center while serving on the Task Force, shall have been residents of said City for at least one year prior to their appointment, and shall represent an interest in the communications of the city. The other Task Force members shall represent local media organizations such as newspapers and cable television or, if these representatives are not available, shall also be residents of the City of Brooklyn Center. Representation Requirements Due regard shall be given by the Mayor in appointing Task Force members with geographical distribution within the City, and the representative nature of the Task Force in terms of gender, religion, ethnic, racial, age, handicapped, employment and employer groups. Conflict of Interest Members shall comply with provisions of the City of Brooklyn Center's business ethics policy. Resignations— Removal from Office — Vacancies Members may resign voluntarily or may be removed from office by the Mayor with consent by majority vote of the City Council. Three consecutive absences from duly called Task Force meetings or absences from a majority of duly called Task Force meetings within one calendar year shall constitute automatic resignation from office. The City Manager shall inform the Mayor of such automatic resignations. Vacancies in the Task Force shall be filled by Mayoral appointment with majority consent of the City Council. Compensation Members shall serve without compensation. Subdivision 7. RULES AND PROCEDURES: The Task Force shall adopt such rules and procedures not inconsistent with these provisions as may be necessary for the proper execution and conduct of business. Subdivision 8. MEETINGS: The initial meeting of the Task Force shall be convened at the call of the Chairperson within thirty (30) days after appointment by the Council. Thereafter, regular meetings shall be held with date and time to be determined by the Task Force. Special meetings may be called by the Chairperson. v Subdivision 9. STAFF: The City Manager shall serve as staff to the Task Force. The Citv Manager, or his designee, shall perform such clerical and research duties on behalf of the Task Force as may be assigned by the Chairperson or the City Manager. Subdivision 10. EX OFFICIO MEMBERS: The Mayor or his or her • Councilperson- appointee shall serve as an ex officio member of the Task Force, privileged to speak on any matter but without a vote, and shall provide a liaison between the Task Force and the City Council. -J- Subdivision 11. TASK FORCE TERM: The provisions of this resolution shall • expire after the final presentation and recommendations have been made to the City Council. -4- /Ob MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Myrna Kragness Councilmember Kathleen Carmody Councilmember Debra Hilstrom Councilmember Kristen Mann Councilmember Charles F. Nichols, Sr. FROM: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager 4 DATE: June 19, 1996 SUBJECT: Set Date for Joint Meeting with Brooklyn Park City Council Curt Boganey, Brooklyn Park City Manager, has advised that the Brooklyn Park City Council would like to meet with the Brooklyn Center City Council. We have tentatively suggested Monday, September 16, 1996, as a meeting date. If this date is acceptable for both Councils, we would finalize the details of the location and time. The starting time would probably be around 5:30 or 6:00 p.m. /00- Memorandum To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager From: Tom Bublitz, Community Development Speciali�/ I Date: June 19, 1996 Subject: Resolution Approving Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Action Plan and Authorizing Submittal of Plan to the Metropolitan Council The Metropolitan Livable Communities Act was passed by the 1995 legislature and is a comprehensive piece of legislation addressing affordable housing in the seven county metropolitan area. The primary goal of the act is to provide a mechanism whereby each community in the seven county metropolitan area addresses the issue of affordable housing. The mechanism is a negotiated agreement with the Metropolitan Council on affordable housing goals for each community. The general definition of affordability used by the Metropolitan Council is that a housing unit is affordable if the mortgage or rent comprises no more than 30% of a family's income. The primary intent of the Act is to increase the amount of affordable housing in the developing suburbs. The communities targeted by the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act are those suburban areas with relatively small amounts of affordable housing. Presently, 100 of the 187 metropolitan cities eligible to participate in the Act have agreed to participate. A summary of key information items relative to the Act and the City of Brooklyn Center's actions to date follows: • The Brooklyn Center City Council elected to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act by passing a resolution to that effect on November 13, 1995. • On December 14, 1995, the City approved the Housing Goals Agreement (see attached) with the Metropolitan Council. Since the City of Brooklyn Center meets or exceeds its goals for affordable housing under the Housing Goals Agreement, no action is required to increase the number of affordable units in the city. • The Action Plan included with this memorandum is a requirement for continued participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. The purpose of the Action Plan is to communicate to the Metropolitan Council how each city will meet the goals set forth in its Housing Goals Agreement. Since the City already meets the goals in the Housing Goals Agreement, the plan focuses largely on the maintenance of the city's housing stock. Memorandum to Michael J. McCauley June 19, 1996 Page Two • One of the benefits to the City for continued participation is eligibility for funding programs such as the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act demonstration account which could provide the City with funds to assist in redevelopment activities. Additionally, the Metropolitan Council is required to report to the legislature on which cities are participating in the Act, and it is possible future legislative funding programs may be tied to participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. • At their May meeting, the City's Housing Commission reviewed an outline of the Plan included with this memorandum and they approved the outline of the Plan which has been prepared for City Council review. I have also sent a copy of the completed Plan to the Housing Commission. Metropolitan Council Review of Municipal Action Plans The Metropolitan Council has prepared guidelines for information to be included in Action P P p g A ion Plans, but there is no absolute requirement for specific elements to be included in the plans. Staff has attempted to follow the guidelines set forth by the Metropolitan Council in preparing the Action Plan. There is no requirement under the Act for the Metropolitan Council to do a formal review of Action Plans, but the Metropolitan Council will do an advisory review of the Plans. Additionally, the Metropolitan Council must prepare an annual report to the legislature regarding municipal participation in the Livable Communities Act, and it is anticipated comments on the Action Plans will be included in this report. If the Council accepts and approves the Action Plan, a resolution to that effect is included with this memorandum for consideration by the City Council at their June 24, 1996, meeting. A t t { : 1 Y, A� .d t � x 1+ + y ^V 'S L i '3 `�'1•5`°� b r! Y rs .W.� Q h � r r, 4 + t f ! Eli Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Action Plan Table of Contents Introduction.................................................................... ..............................1 Existing Housing in the City of Brooklyn Center ....................... ..............................1 City of Brooklyn Center Housing Assistance Programs ............... ..............................4 -Affordable Financing for Home Buyers ..................... ............................... 4 -Rental Assistance Programs /Section 8 Certificate and Voucher Program ........... 4 Housing Development Programs .......................................... ............................... 5 -Programs for Acquisition and Rehabilitation of Multi - Family Housing .............. 5 Single - Family Development Programs ................................... ............................... 6 -Scattered Site Acquisition and Redevelopment Program . ............................... 6 -Habitat for Humanity ............................................ ............................... 6 Housing Maintenance and Rehabilitation Programs ............ ............................... 6 -Building Maintenance Code ................................... ............................... 6 •Rental Licensing Ordinance ................................... ............................... 6 -Community Development Block Grant Housing Rehabilitation Program ............ 7 •Household Outside Maintenance for the Elderly (H.O.M.E.) Program .............. 7 -Association for Rental Management of Brooklyn Center (ARM) ..................... 7 Current and Future Housing Needs ....................................... ............................... 8 -Affordability of Housing for Current and Future Residents ............................ 8 -Analysis of Affordable Rental Housing in Brooklyn Center ............................ 8 -Analysis of Affordable Owner - Occupied Housing in Brooklyn Center .............. 8 -Current Mix of Housing and Potential Land Available for Housing .................. 9 -Comparison of Brooklyn Center's Housing Position with Regard to Neighboring Communities ................. ............................... 9 City of Brooklyn Center Housing Goals ............................... ............................... 10 -Single-Family Development ................................. ............................... 10 -Habitat for Humanity ......................................... ............................... 10 -Single-Family Housing Assistance Programs ............ ............................... 11 -Single-Family and Neighborhood Rehabilitation and Maintenance ................. 11 -Apartment Redevelopment and Maintenance ............. ............................... 12 -Multi- Family Acquisition and Redevelopment ........... ............................... 12 -Potential Housing Redevelopment Areas Currently Being Considered by the City of Brooklyn Center 12 ................... .............................. -Time Frame ................... . 13 -Administration ................................................. ............................... 13 -i- City of Brooklyn Center Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Action Plan Introduction The Housing Goals Agreement approved by the Brooklyn Center City Council on December 14, 1995, was the first agreement required for participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. The Livable Communities Act Action Plan is the second requirement for participation in the Livable Communities Act program. The intent of the Action Plan is to create a plan for achieving the housing goals set forth in the housing goals agreement. Brooklyn Center, like other first -ring suburbs, already meets or exceeds all affordable housing goals established by the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act since the majority of the city's housing is defined as affordable by the standards established by the Act. The Action Plan needed by the City of Brooklyn Center is one that maintains the existing housing stock while also focusing on redevelopment activities to further enhance the city's housing stock. Existing Housing in the i f Brooklyn Center g g eCtyo y e ter One of the primary goals of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act is to provide a mechanism whereby each community in the seven county metropolitan area addresses the issue of affordable housing. The mechanism for accomplishing this goal is a negotiated agreement (housing goals agreement) between the Metropolitan Council and metropolitan communities setting goals for affordable housing in each community. The definition of affordability used by the Metropolitan Council is based on a percentage of a family's income dedicated to housing. If the cost of a housing unit, either owner - occupied or rental, represents no more than 30% of a family's income, then it is considered affordable by the Metropolitan Council. The single - family home ownership affordability level of $115,000 is based on an 80% of median income for a family of four, which is approximately $41,600 based on the most current Minneapolis /St. Paul median income guidelines set in 1995. The rental affordability amount is based on a 50% of median income for a family of four, which in 1990 was approximately $20,000, or an affordability of $500 per month in rent. Currently, in 1996 this amount would be approximately $27,300 in household income and $683 per month for an affordable rent. The following two pages are a summary statistical information providing a profile of housing and related data for the city of Brooklyn Center: -1- i Population Characteristics Total Population 28,887 (1990 census) 31,230 1980 census 28,533 1995 estimate 29,000 2000 projected 30,500 2010 projected Age Distribution (1990 census) Median age 33.7 0 -5 2,597 6 -14 3,264 15 -18 1,382 19 -29 5,270 30 -44 6,408 45 -64 6,420 65 -84 3,261 85+ 285 Total 28,887 (1990 census)' Type of Housing (1996 City Assessor Records) 7,380 Single - family homes' 629 Townhomes 126 Condominium units 108 Duplex units 9 Triplex units 3,225 1 Apartment units 11,477 1 Total 'Of this total, 7,183 are homestead and 197 are non - homestead properties. Single Family 1995 Market Values 1995 Market Value Range No. of Single-Family Homes Under $40,000 72 $40,000 to $60,000 415 $60,001 to $80,000 5,329 $80,001 to $90,000 1,074 $90,001 and over 490 Total" 7,380 Age of Housing (1990 Census) Date of Construction No. Units Percentage 1939 and earlier 329 2.8 1940 to 1949 611 5.2 1950 to 1959 4,729 40.4 1960 to 1969 2,999 25.6 1970 to 1979 2,032 17.4 1980 to 1989 1,013 8.6 Tota1 11,713 The summary profile of Brooklyn Center is of a community that experienced its greatest growth in single - family development in the 1950's, and with the greatest multi - family growth occurring in the 1960's and early- 1970's. Brooklyn Center is a community positioned to attract a great number of first -time home buyers with affordable single - family homes. While attracting young first -time buyers, Brooklyn Center is also home to a significant and growing elderly population. Z lt should be noted that the total number of housing units in the table may vary slightly since the information is extracted from different data bases. 3 1t should be noted that the total number of housing units in the table may vary slightly since the information is extracted from different data bases. City of Brooklyn Center Housing Assistance Programs Affordable a Financing for Home Buyers The City of Brooklyn Center has participated in the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's (MHFA's) Minnesota City Participation Program (MCPP) since 1992. The MCPP is a program designed to provide below market rate mortgages to qualified home buyers. Since 1992, the City of Brooklyn Center has provided over 110 mortgage loans under this program. The City anticipates a continued strong demand for this program in the future, as indicated by the following information: ♦ The house price limit for the MCPP is $95,000 for a single-family home. Over 90% of the g Y single - family homes in the city of Brooklyn Center are valued within the price range eligible for the MCPP. ♦ Real estate sales in the city of Brooklyn Center currently average approximately 350 homes per year with an average $81,418 sale price. The source of this real estate sales data is from the city's assessing department and is based on actual single - family home sales as recorded by Hennepin County. ♦ Data on the age of the city's population shows that over 24 % of Brooklyn Center's population is 55 or over, which is an indication that many of these people will be "turning over" their houses as many change to other living arrangements. In addition to the MCPP, first -time buyers can also obtain below market rate loans from the Minnesota Mortgage Program (MMP). The MMP is also offered by local lenders on behalf of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA). Some of the major differences between the MCPP and MMP is a lower house price limit for the MMP ($85,000) and a lower income eligibility ($34,500 for the MMP versus $43,000 for the MCPP). In 1994, 94 first -time buyer mortgage loans were made under the MMP in Brooklyn Center for a total dollar amount of $6.3 million. In 1995, the MMP created 65 loans for $4.5 million. Rental Assistance Programs /Section 8 Certificate and Voucher Program While the City of Brooklyn Center does not directly fund rent assistance programs, these programs are available to persons and families in Brooklyn Center. The primary rent assistance program is provided by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through the Section 8 rental assistance program. Presently, there are approximately 350 households with Section 8 certificates or vouchers in the city of Brooklyn Center. With Section 8 vouchers and certificates, renters pay approximately 30% of their household income for monthly rent with the federal Section 8 program making up the difference in market rents. -4- In addition to the voucher and certificate program, rental assistance is also provided in the form of project -based Section 8 assistance where the rent assistance goes with the unit (project) rather than an individual, hence the term "project- based" assistance. Presently, there are over 200 project -based Section 8 rental units in four separate complexes in the city. Housing Development Programs Programs for Acquisition and Rehabilitation of Multi- Family Housing The total number of apartment units in the city of Brooklyn Center is approximately 3,225. In the past three years, the following acquisition and rehabilitation projects have been undertaken on a significant portion of the city's multi- family housing. ♦ Unity Place (5300 -5441 Ponds Drive). In 1993, the City of Brooklyn Center approved the issuance of $5.3 million in housing revenue bonds for the acquisition and rehabilitation of Unity Place. The issuance of the housing revenue bonds provided for the continuation and preservation of this affordable rental property in the city of Brooklyn Center. Unity Place is a 112 -unit Section 8 project -based townhouse development. With the 1993 acquisition, the project is now a leasehold cooperative. The leasehold cooperative approach to rental housing provides that the cooperative association and governing board are comprised of residents of the project and that the members of the cooperative can materially participate in the management of the property, including establishing budgets, screening prospective tenants, hiring and supervising a management agent, and other day -to -day management- related functions. The cooperative's participation in the management of the project is regulated by a lease between the owner and the cooperative. A minimum of 40% of the cooperative members must have incomes at or less than 60% of the area median gross income, as determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). ♦ Summerchase Apartments (2802 -2840 Northway Drive). In 1994 and 1995, the Brooklyn Center City Council issued $9.7 million in housing revenue bonds for the acquisition and rehabilitation of 252 apartment units. This project provided over $2,000,000 for rehabilitation of this apartment complex. As required by IRS regulations for housing revenue bond financing, 40% of the residents of this project must have incomes which are no greater than 60% of the area median income. With the issuance of the housing revenue bonds, the City of Brooklyn Center assisted in the preservation of affordable rental housing in this project. ♦ Twin Lakes Manor is a 310 -unit project with 308 one - bedroom and two efficiency apartments. The City of Brooklyn Center supported the buyer of this property in his application for funding under the federal HOME program. The buyer of Twin Lakes Manor was awarded $700,000 in HOME funds which provided funding for the rehabilitation of one of the 12 buildings in the project and ultimately the creation of ten affordable HOME units in the project. The remainder of the acquisition and rehabilitation of this property was funded privately. -5- The acquisition and rehabilitation of these three properties represents a total of 674 units, or more than 20% of the total apartment units in the city. Single - Family Development Programs Scattered Site Acquisition and Redevelopment Program The City of Brooklyn Center, through the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority, conducts a scattered site acquisition program to acquire blighted and deteriorated single - family properties and market the lots for redevelopment of single- family homes. The EDA has acquired 13 properties under this program, nine of which have been redeveloped with new homes. All of these homes have either sold for or are for sale for less than the $115,000 affordability level set for single - family homes under the Livable Communities Act. The City anticipates continuing its scattered site acquisition and redevelopment program, removing blighted properties and redeveloping the lots. Habitat for Humanity Since 1992, the Brooklyn Center EDA has worked with Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity to develop three new single - family homes on lots acquired and cleared by the Brooklyn Center EDA. The Brooklyn Center EDA anticipates continuing its relationship with Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity in the future. Housing Maintenance nce and Rehabilitation Programs Building Maintenance Code The City of Brooklyn Center was one of the first cities in the Minneapolis /St. Paul metropolitan area to adopt a building maintenance code. The city's building maintenance code was adopted in 1975 and was designed to protect the character and stability of all buildings and property within the city, to correct and prevent conditions that adversely affect the welfare of city residents and neighborhoods, to provide minimum standards for maintenance of existing buildings, and to preserve the value of land and buildings throughout the city. The building maintenance code provides a mechanism to establish and enforce neighborhood and community standards for the maintenance of the city's housing stock. Rental licensing Ordinance In 1975, the City of Brooklyn Center adopted a rental licensing ordinance designed to provide for the continued maintenance and upkeep of all rental property in the city of Brooklyn Center. By requiring bi- annual licensing of all rental property in the city, the City of Brooklyn Center is able to assure a minimum standard of maintenance and upkeep of rental property, thereby helping to preserve the rental housing stock and providing decent, safe and sanitary housing for residents. Since the majority of rental housing in the city is affordable, the City's rental licensing ordinance is directly assisting in the preservation of affordable housing in the city of Brooklyn Center. -6- Community Development Block Grant Housing Rehabilitation Program is Since 1979, the City of Brooklyn Center has offered a rehabilitation deferred loan program providing persons of low and moderate income a means to make needed repairs to their homes. Over 230 homes have been rehabilitated under the program since 1979. Over 50% of the 230 rehabilitation projects were completed in the city's southeast neighborhood, which is the city's oldest and most affordable neighborhood. The deferred loans were awarded to persons and families at 60% of median income or less. The types of improvements done under this program are repairs or replacement of major systems in single - family or duplex homes, including plumbing, electrical, mechanical systems, windows, doors, ventilation, exterior, roofing, insulation and numerous other repairs. Household Outside Maintenance for the Elderly (H.O.M.E.) Program The H.O.M.E. program, funded with CDBG dollars, provides persons 60 years of age or older or who are permanently disabled with reduced cost home repair services. The types of repairs done under the H.O.M.E. program include interior and exterior painting, minor home repair including minor carpentry and masonry repair, and installation of grab bars for senior citizens. The H.O.M.E. program is operated by Senior Community Services, a non - profit organization specifically equipped to work with older homeowners. The Senior Community Services staff have the necessary skills and techniques for working with older persons, and part of the philosophy of the program is to maintain independence for elderly living in single - family homes by providing a reasonable access to repair services for elderly clients. The H.O.M.E. program has been in place since 1992 and assists 15 to 20 households per year. Association for Rental management a agement of Brooklyn Center (ARM) In 1992 a rental property owners and managers coalition was formed to address housing issues in the apartment community. The goal of the Association for Rental Management of Brooklyn Center is to improve the apartment community in the city by providing information and education to apartment managers and owners to aid in their professional development and awareness of opportunities for improving the management of their properties. Additionally, the Association of Rental Management of Brooklyn Center has enhanced communication between property managers in the city and with City of Brooklyn Center elected officials and staff. The organization is a cooperative effort between the City and property managers to address problems in the rental community and to enhance the quality of rental property in the city. -7- Current and Future Housing Needs Affordability of Housing for Current and Future Residents The majority of Brooklyn Center's housing stock, both single - family and rental, is affordable under the Livable Communities Act definition. Additionally, the rents in Brooklyn Center are affordable when compared to current Section 8 fair market rent limits. The following table shows a comparison of estimated average rents for various sized units in Brooklyn Center to current Section 8 fair market rents: No. of No. of Units Percentage Average Current Section 8 Bedrooms Rent Fair Market Rents 1996 Studio Units 48 1.4 408 9 36 One BR Units 1497 43.6 475 474 Two BR Units 1562 45.5 600 605 Three BR Units 328 9.5 735 820 Total 3,435 100 Analysis of Affordable Rental Housing in Brooklyn Center The majority f Brooklyn Center's rental housing, compared to Section 8 fair market Y Y g, P rents, is affordable. It is anticipated the rental housing market in Brooklyn Center will continue to remain affordable, particularly since the majority of Brooklyn Center's rental housing market is relatively older, with the majority of the city's rental housing being built in the 1960's and early- 1970's. If Brooklyn Center rents are compared to the Metropolitan Council's standard of affordability, the majority of the rental housing market in the city would also be classified as affordable. The Metropolitan Council standard of affordability for rent is 30% of the 50% level of median income. In other words, a rental unit is affordable if it costs no more than 30% of a person or family earning 50% of area median income. With current median income levels, an affordable rent under this calculation would be approximately $683 per month for a four - person household. Analysis of Affordable Owner - Occupied Housing in Brooklyn Center The great majority of owner - occupied housing in Brooklyn Center is affordable, as defined by the Livable Communities Act. The threshold for affordability under the Livable Communities Act is $115,000 for a single - family home. There are approximately 117 single - family homes in Brooklyn Center valued under $115,000. The 1996 median assessed value for single - family homes in Brooklyn Center is $77,701. The median sale price for single - family homes in Brooklyn Center is $81,418. -8- With present and anticipated future market conditions, it is expected Brooklyn Center will continue to be an affordable single - family home market. Current Mix of Housing and Potential Land Available for Housing Brooklyn Center is a fully developed suburb which experienced most of its development in the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's. Approximately 44% of the city's total land area is developed with single- family detached homes. Townhomes and duplexes account for almost 1.5 % of the city's land area, and multi - family residential accounts for approximately 6 %. The remainder of the city's land area is comprised of commercial, industrial, public property (parks, etc.), utilities and streets. The current estimated amount of undeveloped land remaining in Brooklyn Center is less than 5 %. Most of this remaining undeveloped land is zoned commercial and industrial. There are no large tracts of undeveloped land currently available for residential development. Consequently, the creation of new housing in Brooklyn Center will be largely dependent on redevelopment activities. Comparison of Brooklyn Center's Housing Position With Regard to Neighboring Communities Brooklyn Center, like its immediate neighbors Crystal, Robbinsdale, and parts of Brooklyn Park, is comprised of older entry level homes in large part purchased by first -time home buyers. This general profile also fits first and second ring suburbs in the metropolitan area such as Richfield, St. Louis Park, West St. Paul, South St. Paul, etc. All these cities face the challenge of maintaining a relatively older housing stock and addressing the needs of its elderly residents and non - traditional households, including significant single parent and single adult households. As evidenced by the number of Minnesota Mortgage Program and Minnesota City Participation Program mortgage loans in Brooklyn Center, the city remains a strong entry level housing market. Although some of its elements are becoming somewhat outdated, the city's major housing study completed in 1989, "The Brooklyn Center Housing Market: A Study of Trends and Their Impact on the Community" prepared by the Maxfield Research Group, Inc., is still relevant in addressing Brooklyn Center's future housing needs. The Maxfield Study pointed out that "in order to remain vital, Brooklyn Center will need to be able to compete with entry level homeowners who may find it more desirable to purchase a modest, but new home, in areas such as Anoka, Champlin, Brooklyn Park, Coon Rapids or Maple Grove, where affordable newer starter homes are still available." In the overall assessment of Brooklyn Center's housing market, the city must recognize its common challenges with its inner ring neighbors, but must also address its competition for housing consumers coming from outer ring suburban areas. -9- City of Brooklyn Center Housing Coals Based on the information and programs discussed in the previous pages of this Action Plan, the following activities, strategies and programs are proposed to address the goals set forth in the Housing Goals Agreement between the City and the Metropolitan Council. It is anticipated these activities, strategies and programs may be revised and reassessed from time to time as their effectiveness is monitored and evaluated. Single- Family Development The City's major market analysis of housing in the city of Brooklyn Center, the Maxfield Research Group market study, points out that the City of Brooklyn Center should "remove any deteriorating housing, or housing in areas where the land could be better utilized, by buying back homes as they come up for sale." The Maxfield Study also states that "as a fully developed suburb, Brooklyn Center's potential for additional household growth is constrained by lack of available land." Additionally, "the number of new single- family homes built will be limited by the amount of land available for this purpose. Brooklyn Center's positioning as a starter home community and the value of homes precludes marketing of `executive homes'. Instead, new single- family homes should be designed to complement existing housing, but with designs geared to today's lifestyles." The City's goal for single - family redevelopment has followed the recommendations of the Maxfield report, and the City has a program to replace blighted single- family homes with new single- family development. While the newly developed homes are not "executive homes ", they are solidly above the median value for the neighborhood and serve as a means to enhance the value of other homes in the neighborhood. The Livable Communities Act itself focuses on the need for a mix of housing values, and in its criteria and guidelines supports the efforts of communities that "involve development or redevelopment that mixes incomes of residents in housing, including introducing or reintroducing higher value housing in lower income areas to achieve a mix of housing opportunities. " One of the goals of the City in the single- family redevelopment program is to assure new homes built on city- acquired lots are constructed with materials and designs of high quality which will help strengthen the neighborhood in which they are built. The City intends to continue its single- family redevelopment program, promoting the construction of homes above the median neighborhood value. In most neighborhoods, this would mean new homes priced in the over - $100,000 range. Habitat for Humanity The City has already completed three single - family projects with Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity, and anticipates future single- family home projects will be undertaken with Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity. -10- Single- Family Housing Assistance Programs The City intends to continue participating in the Minnesota City Participation Program (MCPP), the major first -time home buyer program available to cities in Minnesota. Although the Minnesota Mortgage Program (MMP) does not require municipal participation, it is anticipated first -time buyers will continue to access this program in Brooklyn Center. The MCPP and MMP will continue to provide a means to first -time home buyers to access Brooklyn Center's single - family home market. Single- Family and Neighborhood Rehabilitation and Maintenance ♦ The City of Brooklyn Center intends to continue the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) housing rehabilitation program for single - family owner - occupied homes. This program will provide a means for low and moderate income persons and families to obtain needed repairs on their homes. Although the demand for this program exceeds the available funding, the single - family rehabilitation program will be available to rehabilitate those homes where other options are not financially feasible. ♦ The City anticipates future continuation of the Household Outside Maintenance for the Elderly (H.O.M.E.) program. For minor home repair and painting projects, the H.O.M.E. program provides access to reliable and competent minor rehabilitation assistance on a reduced fee basis. The City anticipates completing 15 to 20 projects per year under this program. Hennepin County works with the City of Brooklyn Center in developing programs for use of Community Development Block Grant funds. In 1996, Hennepin County will begin to administer the city's housing rehabilitation program In addition to the CDBG rehabilitation program, the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency offers its own rehabilitation loan programs, including the Fix Up Fund and home energy loan programs. ♦ Hennepin County is currently looking at the possibility of becoming involved with the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's Fix Up Fund. The Fix Up Fund is a longstanding MHFA program which provides up to $15,000 as a loan to homeowners to do a wide variety of rehabilitation projects on their homes. Homeowners with incomes as high as $43,000 can qualify for these loans, and the interest rates float between two and eight percent, depending on income. These loans are intended for homeowners that can afford to pay a loan and target a different population than is targeted with CDBG funds. If the County includes the origination of Fix Up Funds as part of its overall rehabilitation program, this will increase the range of rehabilitation services and potential customers in Brooklyn Center. Building Maintenance Code Enforcement. The City will continue its enforcement of the building maintenance code to address the overall appearance of the city's neighborhoods. The exterior appearance of housing has an impact on neighborhood perception, and subsequent value of properties in an area. Housing maintenance standards are an important factor in overall neighborhood perception. -11- ♦ Street Replacement Program. The City of Brooklyn Center has implemented a street replacement and curb and gutter installation program which intends to replace aging streets at a rate of four to five miles per year. There is a direct relationship between well - maintained streets to housing values and positive neighborhood perception as emphasized in the city's Maxfield Study. Apartment Redevelopment and Maintenance ♦ Rental Inspection and Licensing Ordinance. The City of Brooklyn Center will continue to administer and enforce its rental licensing ordinance to assist in maintaining the city's rental housing stock. The City has dedicated a full -time housing inspector position whose primary duty is to administer and enforce the rental inspection and licensing ordinance. ♦ Housing Revenue Bonds. The City of Brooklyn Center is prepared to assist in the acquisition and rehabilitation of multi - family housing developments through the issuance of housing revenue bonds. Prior to approving the issuance of revenue bonds, the project will be evaluated on the quality of the proposed rehabilitation, quality of the property management, and overall benefit of the project to the neighborhood and community. Multi - Family Acquisition and Redevelopment As evidenced by information previously included in this Plan, the City of Brooklyn Center has a significant amount of affordable rental housing. Additionally, the City, through housing revenue bonds, has helped to preserve a substantial portion of the city's affordable rental housing stock. However, some parts of the city's rental housing stock is in a condition where removal and redevelopment is the most appropriate option. For these properties where maintenance has been largely deferred, the property is at the end of its useful economic or functional life, or where other factors such as obsolete design make it an unlikely candidate for rehabilitation, the City is prepared to consider acquisition removal of these properties for redevelopment. Potential Housing Redevelopment Areas Currently Being Considered by the City of Brooklyn Center 1. Willow Lane and 252 Area. This is an approximate ten acre site located north of I -694, east of Highway 252, and south of 66th Avenue in Brooklyn Center. The City, through the Economic Development Authority, has acquired three parcels in this area: a former gasoline service station, an 18 -unit apartment building, and a 25 -unit motel. The gasoline service station and apartment building have been demolished and the motel is scheduled for demolition in 1996. Both the apartment building and motel were a blighting influence on the surrounding neighborhood. The properties acquired to date represent approximately 50% of the ten acre parcel. In order to gain control of the remainder of the site, the City would have to purchase an additional multi - family property. No specific redevelopment plans have been proposed for the Willow Lane/252 area, but a possible reuse of the parcel could be for medium density housing such as townhomes. -12- 2. Brooklyn Boulevard Redevelopment Area. The city has initiated redevelopment activities along Brooklyn Boulevard in anticipation of a future roadway widening project and in an effort to eliminate nonconforming residential uses along this major traffic artery in the city. Projects with a mix of commercial, retail and office, combined with affordable senior housing, have been considered for a portion of Brooklyn Boulevard, and the inclusion of affordable senior housing in this area remains a realistic possibility and desirable redevelopment option for this area. 3. 53rd Avenue North in Brooklyn Center. 53rd Avenue North is Brooklyn Center's southern border with Minneapolis. It contains some of the oldest and subsequently some of the most deteriorated housing in the city. Potential redevelopment of the easterly portion of 53rd Avenue North could include the acquisition and removal of up to 20 residential properties. The acquisition and removal of these properties would provide an opportunity to introduce higher value single - family housing in the southeast neighborhood, the city's oldest neighborhood. Time Frame Since Brooklyn Center already meets or exceeds the goals set forth in the Housing Goals Agreement and the city's redevelopment activities will be an ongoing process, the time frame of many of the actions and goals set out in this Plan are indefinite. Also, as the city's housing needs and goals change over time, the plan will have to be reexamined and reevaluated from time to time. At a minimum, the plan should be reviewed every five years. Administration The Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center is the public body charged with executing and implementing housing goals and programs for the City. The EDA works in conjunction with other city departments and its governing members are the Brooklyn Center City Council. -13- 0 HOUSL''G GOALS AGREEN EiNu PYIETROPOLITAiN LNA..BLE CO IYLNfMTTIES ACT Principles The City of Brooklyn Center supports: 1. A balanced housing supply with housing available for people at all income levels. 2. The accommodation of all racial and ethnic g roups in the purchase, sale, rental and location of housing within the community. 3. A variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life cycle. 4. A community of well - maintained housing and neighborhoods, including ownership and rental housing. 5. Housing development that respects the natural environment of the community while striving to accommodate the need for a variety of housing types and costs. 6. The availability of a full ran of services and facilities for its residents, and the improvement of access to and linkage between housing and employment. Goals le To carry out the above housing principles, the City of Brooklyn Center agrees to use benchmark indicators for communities of similar Iocatio g affordable and Life cycle housing g nand sta,e of development as Y J J oais for the period 1996 to 2010, and to make its best efforts, given market conditions and resource availability, to maintain an index within the benchmark ranges for affordability, life cycle and density.. Crfiz Index Benchmaxk �aal Affordability Ownership 99% 77% 77 Rental 46% 41-45% 41-45% Life Cycle Type (Non single- 37% 34-41% 34-41 family detached) Owner/Renter Mix , 68/32 % (64- 72)/(28/36) % (64-72)1(28/36)% Density I i g LDetached ingle - Family 2.9 /acre 2.4 -2.9 /acre 2 .4 -2 9 /acre ultifamily I 11 /acre 11 -15 /acre 11 -15 /acre HOUSMG GOALS AGREEIIE',Nq ' NIETROPOLIT.AN LIVABLE CO" A CT PAGE 2 .9 The City's existing affordable housing, as indicated by the city index percentages, demonstrates the City of Brooklyn Center has a supply of affordable housing, both rental and owner - occupied, which exceeds the benchmark/goals recommended by the Metropolitan Council. The City of Brooklyn Center accepts the benchmark percentages as goals, while recognizing a major housing need the city is for higher value hn the Livable Communities Demonstration Account ousing as stated in Article I of the Livable Communities Act that housing i can "involve development or redevelopment that mixes income of residents in housing including introducing or reintroducing higher value housing in lower income areas to , achieve a mix of housing opportunities. " The City of Brooklyn Center also has as a primary housing goal the maintenance and improvement Of existing affordable housing in the city, The City of Brooklyn Center also accepts the 46 o city index number for multifamily housing as an accurate reflection of the 1990 census data in the City of Brooklyn Center, but reserves the right t submit current rental data to the Met Council at a later date with regard to a city index number for rental housing in the city. W o achieve the above goals, the City of Brooklyn Center elects to Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Local Housing Participate in the and submit an Action Plan to the Metropolitan Council by June 30, indiccating prepare actions it will take to carry out the above goals. the Certi, fication May o�'J Off// Date = It City Manager ° l� Date 57Z Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT ACTION PLAN AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF PLAN TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 95 -244 approved the City's participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act; and WHEREAS, by City Council Resolution No. 95 -270 the Brooklyn Center City Council approved the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Housing Goals Agreement; and WHEREAS, submission of an Action Plan to the Metropolitan Council to provide for implementation of the City's Housing Goals Agreement is a requirement of continued participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act program; and WHEREAS, the staff has prepared a Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Action Plan for Council consideration; and WHEREAS, the City's Housing Commission has reviewed and approved the elements of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Action Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Action Plan and has determined it is in the best interest of the City of Brooklyn Center to continue to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center as follows: 1. The City of Brooklyn Center Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Action Plan is hereby accepted and approved. 2. Staff is hereby directed to submit the Action Plan to the Metropolitan Council as per the requirements of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. The motion for the adoption of the following 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. A�6 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 18, 1996 TO: Michael McCauley FROM: Dave Peterson SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of Two (2) Ford Trucks, Cab and Chassis, and Amending the 1996 General Fund and Central Garage Budgets Currently, the Central Garage fleet of large dump trucks consists solely of Ford vehicles. This is as a result of a number of factors. Number one is the fact that Ford has won the State contract for this type of vehicle for the past several years. In addition, staff has found the L8000 series trucks to be dependable vehicles that do not normally require major service work. Service and parts also play a part in fleet consistency. By keeping the trucks the same make, repairs are similar and parts inventories can be kept manageable. The City maintains a fleet of 14 single and tandem axle heavy duty trucks, which see heavy use in a variety of street maintenance activities. The vehicles are normally replaced after approximately 10 years of use. Staff had intended to include the replacement of two single axle trucks ( #'s 93 & 94) as a part of the 1997 Central Garage Capital Outlay Budget. However, Ford Motor is in the middle of retooling their factories to come out with new product lines. What this means for us, is that they will not be manufacturing the L8000 series truck (our standard) in 1997, and are offering a "close out" of sorts on the 1996 model trucks. As a way to allow them to continue their retooling and not lose market share, Ford is offering the L8000 trucks at 1996 prices for delivery and payment in 1997. Staff has estimated that if we took advantage of this offer, this could save the City anywhere from $10- 20,000 for the two vehicles proposed for 1997. However, in order to take advantage of this pricing, Ford has asked that all agencies make commitments by July of this year, six months earlier than normal. The estimated net price (cost - auction proceeds) for each of the two proposed trucks is $80,000. Each year, depreciation funds are set aside in the Central Garage Fund for vehicle replacement. By the end of 1996 each vehicle proposed to be replaced will have accumulated depreciation funds set aside amounting to $62,500 per vehicle, which is not sufficient to fully fund the truck and chassis, box, plows, sander, lights, and other equipment. This is not unusual. When the Central Garage Fund was established, there was insufficient funding available to fully fund the depreciation component. The purchase of equipment generally requires a supplement from other fund sources, and will continue to do so for the next few years until the Fund "catches up." To make up the total $35,000 shortfall between the cost of the trucks and the set aside depreciation, staff proposes some 1996 budget modifications. We have reviewed the approved 1996 budget for areas that might provide unspent funds that could be used in 1997 to fully fund the replacement of the truck box, plows, sander, etc.. The approved 1996 budget included $89,583 for sealcoating of city streets. As a result of favorable bids and a one time reduction in the dimension of the program, we expect that after the sealcoating project is complete and final quantities are known there will be in excess of $36,000 left unspent. Staff proposes to carry forward and redirect the surplus so that the vehicle commitments could be made within current budget constraints. The attached resolution authorizes the acquisition of cabs and chassis for the two trucks, and reallocates $35,000 from the 1996 budget to the Equipment Replacement Fund Balance. The boxes, plows, sanders, and other equipment would be included in the 1997 Central Garage budget and purchased in 1997 by the usual purchasing procedures. Should the Council decide not to go ahead with approval of this purchase, then the following is the alternate action we would take. The State will not include a heavy duty truck in its 1997 cooperative purchasing program because Mn/DOT is taking advantage of Ford's offer and has ordered all the trucks it needs for 1996 and 1997. Hennepin County in its cooperative purchasing venture may or may not include a heavy duty truck. In past years it either did not include that category, or the contract was awarded to another make which we believed was not as reliable as Ford or which did not fully meet our specifications. If Hennepin County included a heavy duty truck in its contract, and if that truck was satisfactory, we would likely purchase off that contract. We would expect the 1997 cost to be higher due to inflation and possibly a lesser discount due to a lower volume of vehicles on the contract. If Hennepin County did not include a heavy duty truck, or if we were not satisfied with the truck on contract, we would write our own specifications and bid the two trucks, at an expected higher cost -- possibly up to $10,000 per vehicle. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TWO (2) FORD TRUCKS, CAB AND CHASSIS, AND AMENDING THE 1996 GENERAL FUND AND CENTRAL GARAGE BUDGETS WHEREAS, in accordance with the City's Equipment Replacement Schedule, staff had intended to include the replacement of two single axle dump trucks ( #'s 93 & 94) as a part of the 1997 Central Garage Budget; and WHEREAS, the Ford Motor Company, through Boyer Ford Trucks, which holds the state cooperative purchasing contract for heavy duty trucks, is offering trucks at 1996 prices, or $46,433 per vehicle for cab and chassis, for delivery and payment in 1997 if the City makes a commitment to purchase by July, 1996; and WHEREAS, by the end of 1996 each vehicle proposed to be replaced will have accumulated depreciation funds set aside amounting to $62,00 per vehicle, which is sufficient to fund the acquisition of the cab and chassis; and WHEREAS, the total estimated net price (cost - auction proceeds) for each of the two proposed trucks is $80,000, requiring that additional funds be appropriated to fund the acquisition of dump box, plows, sander, etc.; and WHEREAS, $3,000 appropriated in the 1996 General Fund Budget for the Sealcoating program is expected to be surplus, due to favorable bids and a much smaller area to be sealcoated than anticipated, and said surplus can be transferred to the Fund Balance to be available in 1997 to guarantee payment for the dump box, plows, sander, etc. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The purchase of two (2) heavy duty trucks from Boyer Ford Trucks, under the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program, in the amount of $46,433 per vehicle, is hereby approved. 2. The 1996 Central Garage Fund Budget is hereby amended as follows: Increase Capital Outlays for the Street Division $92,866 Increase Transfers from Replacement Fund Balance (3990) $92,866 Resolution No. Increase Equipment Replacement Charges (3704) $35,000 Increase Replacement Fund Balance (3990) $35,000 3. The 1996 General Fund Budget is hereby amended as follows: Decrease Street Street and Alley Repair (4384) $35,000 Increase Equipment Replacement Charges (4444) $35,000 4. The budget to be developed for 1997 shall consider allocations for the equipping of these two trucks. 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. ODE e �paKLYN CEgT BROOKLYN CENTER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Scott Kline, Chief of Police DATE: June 17, 1996 SUBJECT: Spring Blitz Update As of June 14, 1996, just over 5,000 dwelling units and businesses have been checked by code enforcement and of the units checked, there were approximately 450 warning letters generated. The follow -ups resulted in 75 citations being issued for non - compliance. These figures show that there has been a slight decline in the percentage of dwelling units generating warning letters and also the warning letters generating fewer citations as we move through the city. The 75 citations represents only about 17% of the warning letters originally sent out. In the accompanying overhead, the areas shown in red are those areas which have received both the letters and citations issued for non - compliance, the yellow is the area that has received letters but the follow -ups have not been completed, and the blue is the area which will be receiving its first check as of the week of June 17, 1996. SK:kh adm intkl ine/cleanupl m em ._.- -- Plpl. or RI - - --� � ''• mow., ( J � J i J L I CD l r ff Cn �• ...... jai .l( r -7iW 1M� x� II r �.��I r w �•,� Iv. It l .' % �/ �� li _ +'� �� C y,r.�rr� , ' {,., rST it rf ll If'IY ;SI•i7ILIISlIT!ISIItSil SYIISIYIf I�Z I1TSIIS•II••S•r Sr SI:T7SSv- tt_S!S!ISCYf S.'S C�� ill !!!!! II l1 �1� l vt !lrr� lt Jrlet »t!tl r � t FP�rh�� h l�llltv»rY1B1 ���> ;�, # 14l �rltil �fJllJft,!# Ill 11# t166�ri!l niil ���i��9rirt 611 11rIttl ln��i #lilrilr�lll!IiTYu�arinr MEMORANDUM DATE: June'- 1, 1996 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Diane Spector, Director of Public Services SUBJECT: Additional Council Item Public Works Superintendent included an item on the City Council's 6/24/96 agenda requesting authorization to purchase two heavy duty dump trucks. We had hoped to include with the agenda and additional item to replace a third dump truck, which had been damaged while snowplowing this year, and which our insurance company had declared a total loss. We had prepared the item, but the final piece of information, the actual amount of the insurance settlement, was not provided to us by the insurance company until after the Council packets had been prepared and had gone out. Please consider requesting the Council to add this item to the 6/24/96 agenda. There is some urgency to this request, as pointed out in the item on the replacement of the two dump trucks. The Ford L8000 model is being "closed out," and there are only about 100 now available nationwide for purchase. Boyer Ford Trucks, which holds the 1996 state contract for heavy duty trucks, has earmarked three single axle trucks for us, and assures us that if we place an order by the end of June it can guarantee delivery. If we cannot place an order, then it will release those trucks for purchase by other agencies. MEMORANDUM DATE: June 18, 1996 TO: Michael McCauley FROM: Dave Peterson SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing the Replacement of One (1) Ford Truck, Cab and Chassis, and Amending the 1996 General Fund and Central Garage Budgets Earlier this year, vehicle #90, a heavy duty dump truck used for routine street maintenance and plowing, was damaged while snowplowing. The frame of the chassis, which was fatigued after eight years of service, was damaged when an underbody plow caught on a storm sewer manhole. This vehicle was scheduled to be replaced in 1998. The truck was reviewed by our insurance company, which declared the truck a total loss. The insurance settlement, net of our deductible, will be $11,000. The plows and sander can be salvaged from the truck, however, the dump box, because it is in poor condition, cannot. We request the Council's authorization to replace this truck cab and chassis. Replacement of the dump box would be requested using regular purchasing procedures. Both these items would be purchased utilizing the state cooperative purchasing contract. The cost of the truck cab and chassis would be $46,434 and the cost of the dump box with installation is expected to be about $14,000, for a total cost of $60,434. (The actual cost of the box with installation won't be known with precision until after the truck is inspected by J -Craft, the firm which has the state contract. Purchase and installation of a dump box on a similar truck was $13,200.) Vehicle 990 has accumulated depreciation funds in the Central Garage Fund of $49,500. With the insurance settlement of $11,000, a total of $60,500 is available to replace the vehicle, which is sufficient to finance the truck and dump box replacement with no additional funding required. A resolution authorizing this purchase is provided for Council consideration. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) FORD TRUCK, CAB AND CHASSIS, AND AMENDING THE 1996 GENERAL FUND AND CENTRAL GARAGE BUDGETS WHEREAS, vehicle #90, a heavy duty street maintenance truck, was damaged earlier this year, causing the City's insurance carrier to declare the vehicle a total loss and to provide the City with a cash settlement of $11,000, net of deductible; and WHEREAS, this vehicle has accumulated depreciation funds set aside amounting to $49,500 per vehicle, which with the insurance settlement results in a total of $60,500 available to finance the acquisition of a new cab and chassis and new dump box; and WHEREAS, it is possible for the City of Brooklyn Center to participate in a Minnesota State Cooperative Program contract to purchase the truck cab and chassis and the replacement dump box; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota State Cooperative contract for heavy duty trucks was awarded to Boyer Ford Trucks. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The purchase of one (1) heavy duty truck from Boyer Ford Trucks, under the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program, in the amount of $46,433, is hereby approved. 2. The purchase and installation of a dump box shall be approved under regular purchasing procedures. 3. The 1996 Central Garage Fund Budget is hereby amended as follows: Increase Capital Outlays for the Street Division $49,500 Increase Transfers from Replacement Fund Balance (3990) $49,500 Resolution No. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.