Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 05-28 CCP Regular Session 20th copy CITY COUNCIL AGENDA • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER May 28, 1996 7 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Opening Ceremonies 4. Council Report 5. 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 13, 1996 - Regular Session 2. April 15, 1996 - Board of Equalization (correction to Page 5) b. Resolution Approving a Contract with BRW, Inc. for Planning Consulting Services Relating to the Updating of the Comprehensive Plan C. Forfeiture Fund Purchases d. Hennepin p County Cooperative Agreement for Engineerin g Services e. Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Trees (Order No. DST 05/28/96) f. Resolution Accepting Bid and Authorizing Purchase of One (1) Four Wheel Drive Tractor g. Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1, Accepting Work Performed and Approving Final Payment for Improvement Project No. 1996 -11, Reforestation of 1994 and 1995 Street Improvement Project Areas • h. Certification of Local Performance Measures for Local Performance Aid Payable in 1997 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- May 28, 1996 • i. Resolution o Making Negative Declaration on the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Shingle Creek Regional Pond (Brooklyn Center Improvement Project No. 1995 -03) j. Licenses 6. Open Forum 7. Planning Commission Items a. Planning Commission Application No. 96006 submitted by Cross of Glory Lutheran Church. Request for Preliminary Plat approval to subdivide the Cross of Glory Lutheran Church property into five lots consisting of three single - family lots, one large lot for the church and one outlot. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its May 16, 1996, meeting. • Requested Council Action: - Approve Planning Commission Application No. 96006 submitted by Cross of Glory Lutheran Church subject to the conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission. b. Planning Commission Application No. 96007 submitted by American Brake Service. Request for Special Use Permit to operate an auto repair facility and remodel existing space at 5810 Xerxes Avenue for use as an American Brake Service Store. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its May 16, 1996, meeting. • Requested Council Action: - Approve Planning Commission Application No. 96007 submitted by American Brake Service subject to the conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission. 8. Council Consideration Items a. Report by Financial Commission Chair Donn Escher Regarding Required Biennial Salary Survey and Recommendation • Requested Council Action: - Financial Commission Chair Donn Escher will make verbal report. b. Proposed Policy and Procedure on Requests for Proposals for Financial Professional Services • Requested Council Action: - Council discuss procedure and adopt policy. • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- May 28, 1996 • C. Resolution Authorizing the Execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement Between the City of Brooklyn Center and Hennepin County for Continued Participation in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program • Requested Council Action: -Adopt resolution. d. Set Dates for Council Work Sessions for June 3, July 1, and July 15 • Requested Council Action: - Motion to set Council Work Sessions for June 3, July 1, and July 15 at 7 p.m. in Conference Room B, City Hall. e. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances Regulating the Use of Skateboards and Roller Blades; Adding New Sections 19 -1501 and 19 -1502 -This ordinance is offered for a first reading. • Requested Council Action: - Introduce first reading of ordinance. f. 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 is offered for a first reading. • Requested Council Action: - Introduce first reading of ordinance. 9. Adjournment • r MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL • OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION MAY 13, 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. McCaulley, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Assistant City Manager Nancy Gohman, Community Development Specialist Tom Bublitz, Financial Commission Member Donn Escher, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. OPENING CEREMONIES A moment of silence was observed. COUNCIL REPORT APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve the May 13, 1996, agenda and consent agenda as printed passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve minutes of the April 15, 1996 -Board of Equalization; April 22, 1996 - Regular Session; April 29, 1996- Special Work Session as printed passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96-95 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING A GIFT FROM THE LIONS CLUB OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM AND AMENDING THE 1996 GENERAL FUND BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. • 05/13/96 _ 1 _ RESOLUTION NO 96 -96 • Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF BADGER GT -486N RUGGED COMPUTERS AS MOBILE COMPUTING DEVICES (MCD'S) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96-97 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING SURPLUS PROPERTY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. REPORT ON COUNCIL COMPENSATION SURVEY A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve the report on the Council compensation survey passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -98 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 96-61 APPROVING PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS FOR 1996 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -99 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT, 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 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. 05/13/96 -2- RESOLUTION NO. 96-100 • Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QUOTE AND AUTHORIZING PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF ONE (1) DUMP BODY AND HYDRAULIC SYSTEM, AND REALLOCATION OF FUNDS WITHIN THE 1996 CENTRAL GARAGE BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96-101 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QUOTE AND AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF ONE (1) HOPPER TYPE SANDER, ONE (1) UNDERBODY REVERSIBLE PLOW AND ONE (1) HYDRAULIC SYSTEM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -102 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QUOTE AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1993 -18, CONTRACT 1996 -K, NATIVE GRASS AND WILDFLOWER INSTALLATION, BOB CAHLANDER PARK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -103 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 05/13/96) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -104 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON 69TH AVENUE NORTH 05/13/96 -3 - BETWEEN SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY AND 1,100 FEET EAST OF SHINGLE CREEK . The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -105 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT, CASS SCREW MACHINE PRODUCTS COMPANY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. LICENSES A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve the following list of licenses passed unanimously: MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Anderson Heating and A/C 4347 Central Ave NE Louis DeGidio, Inc. 6501 Cedar Ave S Hokanson Plumbing & Heating 9174 Isanti Street NE Minnesota Heating & A/C 10701 93rd Ave N, Suite B • O'Brien Sheetmetal 144 Glenwood Ave E.A.H. Schmidt & Associates, Inc. 3245 Winpark Drive Sedgwick Heating & A/C Co. 8910 Wentworth Ave S Ward Heating & A/C, Inc. 2830 235th Ave NW Ray Welter Heating & A/C 4637 Chicago Ave S MOTOR VEHICLE DEALERSHIP -CLASS A Brookdale Dodge 6800 Brooklyn Blvd RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: James Wiensch Georgetown Park Townhouses Gregory Lutgen 7216 Brooklyn Boulevard Daystar Investments 1513 Humboldt Place Daystar Investments 1549 Humboldt Place Thomas and Lorraine Mylan 6907 West Palmer Lake Drive Renewal: Jon Veard The Pines of Brooklyn Center CHDC Ltd Partnership Unity Place 05/13/96 -4- Northport Properties 5401 Brooklyn Blvd • Jay Showalter 6742 -44 France Ave N Brett Parker 5242 Lakeside Place Harshad Bhatt 7206 -12 West River Road Maurice Moriarty 2825 67th Lane N OPEN FORUM No requests were submitted and/or made to utilize the open forum session this evening. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING AN ORDINANCE VACATING PART OF STREET EASEMENT (JAMES CIRCLE NORTH) IN REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NUMBER 1482, HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA The City Manager informed Council that respective documents- -letter of vacation from the owner, final plat documents including requirements set forth by the Planning Commission- -and associated fee have been received. It was staffs recommendation to hold the public hearing this evening. Location of the project at hand is by the Olive Garden with the request being vacation of the street right -of -way. The City Manager added plans have changed in that a cul -de -sac is no longer needed. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to open the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. passed unanimously. PUBLIC INPUT No public input was offered. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Nichols to close the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 96 -05 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE VACATING PART OF STREET EASEMENT (JAMES CIRCLE NORTH) IN REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NUMBER 1482, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS SET DATE FOR DINNER MEETING WITH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Councilmember Mann inquired about the Gift Law and how this would apply to Council. The City Manager clarified payment for the dinner would be "Dutch," thereby eliminating any conflict with the law. 05/13/96 -5- A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to set the Council dinner meeting with the Chamber of Commerce for Tuesday, May 28, 1996, from 5 to 7 p.m. at the Comfort Inn passed unanimously. SET DATE FOR FACILITATED COUNCIL WORKSHOP A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to set the date for a facilitated Council workshop for Thursday, May 30, 1996, at 1:30 p.m. at the Heritage Center passed unanimously. RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RE-ESTABLISHING CITY PURCHASING POLICY The City Manager stated the current City purchasing policy appears to have been a restatement of Minnesota Statutes Section 471.345. Council is being requested to direct City staff to follow the MN Uniform Municipal Contracting Law statute. This would allow for more stringent dollar, spending amounts resulting in a less competitive nature. The Financial Commission has expressed its approval of the revised policy and accompanying resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 96 -106 Member Charles Nichols introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RE- ESTABLISHING CITY PURCHASING POLICY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. REPORT ON CODE COMPLIANCE INITIATIVE The City Manager talked about areas included in the initiative and targeted timelines. He also shared information contained in a memo dated May 8, 1996, from Sgt. Hennessy, coordinator of the project, as follows: approximately 1,180 addresses have been covered; 135 compliance letters have been sent from the initial target area; 40 specific complaint letters from outside the target areas have resulted; the most common violation is rubbish, garbage and trash; the second most common violation is unlicensed/inoperable vehicles. Two telephone numbers are available for citizens to inquire or report information relating to the project: Sgt. Hennessy (569- 3378); voice mail hotline (569- 3339). Mayor Kragness expressed appreciation for the project's success and thanked those who have participated. INTEREST RATES FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS The City Manager explained a policy was being proposed to Council which would set forth an analysis which would be used each year to determine the special assessment and internal loan interest rates. It was being suggested that an additional two percent would be added to bond interest rates to cover any administrative costs and finance any improvement projects. 05/13/ • 96 - 6 - Councilmember Mann questioned what the interest rate would be based on the current sale rate of bonds. The City Manager answered approximately seven percent. Councilmember Mann questioned the interest rate for the Golf Course. The City Manager answered five percent; this has always been the same rate. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to adopt the special assessment and internal loan rate policy passed unanimously. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3 -101 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE A motion by Councilmember Nichols and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve first reading of An Ordinance Amending Section 3 -101 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Minnesota State Building Code and setting public hearing date for June 10, 1996, passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to adjourn the meeting at 7:19 p.m. passed unanimously. • City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial • 05/13/96 -7- 5S- 3 a City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Myrna Kragness Councilmember Kathleen Carmody Councilmember Debra Hilstrom Councilmember Kristen Mann Councilmember Charles F. Nichols, Sr. FROM: Michael 1. McCauley, City Manager DATE: May 15, 1996 SUBJECT: April 15, 1996, Board of Equalization Minutes At the top of page 5 the phrase "based on the rationale that this includes a recommendation for reduction" was an error in the minutes. This error was brought to my attention the afternoon of May 13, but I did not have time to prepare a revised page 5 for your consideration in time for the meeting. Thus, I am requesting that the revised page 5 which is attached hereto be approved as a correction of the minutes of the Board of Equalization for April 15, 1996, that were approved at the May 13, 1996, meeting. I apologize for any inconvenience. Attachment 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer CORRECTION A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to support an valuation of $389,900 for PID #35- 119 -21 -11 -0002, passed unanimously. D. Robert E. and MargaretL Davis, 5415 Fremont Avenue North PID #01- 118 -21 -33 -0162 Robert and Margaret Davis were not present. To allow an opportunity for them to attend, Council determined to delay consideration until later in the meeting. E. William R. Kennv 7036 Willow Lane North PID #25- 119 -21 -44 -0023 William R. Kenny, 7036 Willow Lane North, thanked the Board for the opportunity to appear regarding this issue. He explained he owns an unusual property with 22 feet of river frontage and asserted that part of the problem in determining valuation is that the year built is incorrect. He advised his house, formerly owned by Robert and Erma Sheer, was constructed on an existing basement in 1958, and is significantly older than others in the neighborhood. Mr. Kenny explained a building permit was not pulled so it is difficult to determine age, but the basement is at least ten years older than the home. Councilmember Mann noted Mr. Kenny if Y P urchased in 1991 for $ 000 and asked he does not believe the value has increased to $110,200. Mr. Kenny stated this is a significantly older house with brick deterioration problems. Since the brick cannot be replaced, he questioned whether the property itself is increasing in value. Also, there is a slope towards the outside of the house which he believes effects marketability. Councilmember Mann inquired if the slope of the house appeared after Mt. Kenn purchased the Kenny Mr. Kenny answered it did not. A motion was made by Councilmember Mann to support a valuation of $110,200 for 7036 Willow Lane N., PID #25- 119 -21 -44 -0023. Mr. Kenny pointed out the comparable homes used by the City Assessor were newer homes and he believes a better comparison is the similar next door home (which has larger river frontage) which sold in July of 1995 for $93,000. Councilmember Hilstrom asked if the year built is indicated on the title. Mr. Kenny advised he purchased the home on a contract for deed. Councilmember Carmody pointed out that most buyers do not purchase a home based on the year built but, rather, based on the condition of the property and square footage. She noted Mr. Kenny purchased this property in 1991 for $109,000 and now it is valued at $110,200. Councilmember Carmody seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 04/15/96 -5 - • MEMO To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager From: Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Speci ist.G w Subject: Resolution Approving a Contract with BRW, Inc. for Planning Consulting Services Relating to the Updating of the Comprehensive Plan Date: May 22, 1996 On the May 28, 1996 City Council agenda is a resolution approving a contract with BRW, Inc. for planning consulting services relating to the updating of the City's Comprehensive Plan and authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to enter into said contract. We have been seeking professional planning services for the Comprehensive Plan Update and have gone through a process of reviewing qualifications of professional consulting services. Following the interviewing of six consulting firms and recommendation by a committee made up of Council Member Debra Hilstrom, Planning Commission Chair Tim Willson, Brad Hoffman • and myself, the City Council directed the staff to seek an acceptable agreement with BRW, Inc. for the necessary planning consulting services including a work plan and compensation for this project. Such an agreement has been reached and the attached contract including a work program, task breakdown and compensation rate is recommended to the City Council for approval. The cost of the project and services to be rendered is projected to be $40, 280. The project should begin within 30 days of the signing of this contract. • • SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made effective as of the day of 1996, by and between the City of Brooklyn Center ('Client ") and BRW. Inc., also known as BRW Planning, Transportation and Engineering Inc. ( "BRW "), a Wyoming corporation. RECITALS WHEREAS, Client desires to retain BRW to provide certain services with respect to Client's project known as the City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan (the "Project "); WHEREAS, BRW agrees to provide such services upon the terms and conditions contained herein. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Services BRW agrees to perform in a good and professional manner the tasks described on Exhibit A, Project Work Program, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and such additional tasks as may be described on an Addendum executed by the parties hereto in substantially the form of Exhibit E attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. (The tasks, whether described on Exhibit A hereto or in an Addendum. are individually referred to hereinafter as a "Task" and are collectively described as the "Services. ") BRW shall perform the Services as an independent contractor and shall not be deemed, by virtue of this Agreement and the performance thereof, to have entered into any partnership, joint venture or other relationship with the Client. 2. Staffing 00 — by BRW The Services shall be performed on behalf of BRW by William Weber and Suzanne Rhees. BRW may, in its discretion. assign additional individuals to assist in the performance of the Services. • =as7 1 3. BRNA "s Representations BRVd hereby represents that it or its employees • and agents have all necessan- licenses to perform the Services and are qualified to perform the Services. 4. Client's Responsibilities Client shall do the following in a timely manner so as not to delay the services of BRW: a. Desi`nate in writing a person to act as the Client's representative with respect to the Services. The Client's designee shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information. interpret and define the Client's policies and decisions with respect to the Services. b. Furnish BRW with all information, criteria, schedules and standards for the Project and the Services. C. Arrange for access to the Property as required for BRW to perform the Services. d. Examine all studies. reports, sketches, and other documents prepared by BRW and render decisions regarding such documents in a timely manner to prevent delay of the Services. >. Fees BRW shall erform the Services for the fees s specified on Exhibits B. Project Budget and Exhibit C, Schedule of Hourly Addendu Rates, attached hereto and made a art hereof P ( or as specified in an m) plus Reimbursable Expenses as hereinafter defined. As used herein, Reimbursable Expenses include but are not limited to the following expenses incurred by BRW in the interest of the Project: transportation in connection with the Project. photocopying and printing, overnight delivery and messenger delivery. BRW shall prepare and send the Client an invoice once each month for the Services performed and Reimbursable Expenses incurred during the previous month. If the Client fails to make full payment within sixty (60) days after the date of BRW's invoice therefore, the amount ' s due BRW under the invoices shall bear interest at the rate of 15 percent per annum or the maximum perniissible by applicable law, whichever is less, from the thirtieth day following the date of the invoice until paid. Any retainer paid by the Client hereunder shall be credited to BRW's last invoice for Services rendered. BRW shall be entitled to recover all costs and attornevs' fees incurred in the collection or attempted collection of any amounts due under this Agreement. At BRW "s option, BRW may cease to perform the Services if invoiced amounts are unpaid seventy -five (7-5) days after • -ae' the date of the invoice. In such event, BRW shall not be liable for anv damages or expenses of the Client resulting from such work stoppage. 6. Time for Performance BRW shall perform the Services in accordance with the schedule attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by this reference or in an Addendum. provided there is no change in the scope of the services as currently described in Exhibit A. 7. Additional Services From time to time hereafter, the parties hereto may agree to the performance by BRW of Additional Services with respect to the Property. Any such agreement shall be set forth in Writing in an Addendum in substantially the form of Exhibit E and shall be executed by the respective parties prior to BRW's performance of any Services thereunder, except as may be provided to the contrary in Section 3 hereof Upon proper completion and execution of any such Addendum. such Addendum shall be incorporated into this Agreement and shall have the same force and effect as if the terms of such Addendum were a part of this Agreement as originally executed. The performance of Services pursuant to an Addendum shall be subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement except where the Addendum provides to the contrary, in which case the terms and conditions of any such Addendum shall control. In all other respects, any Addendum shall supplement and be construed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 8. Performance of Additional Services Prior to Execution of Addendum The parties hereby agree that situations may arise in which services other than those described on Exhibit A are desired by Client and the time period for the completion of such Services makes the execution of an Addendum impractical prior to the commencement of BRW's performance of the requested Services. BRW hereby agrees that it shall erform such Services upon the oral request of P P q Client, pending execution of an Addendum, at the hourly rates specified on Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The invoice procedure for any such Additional Services shall be as described in Section 5 of this Agreement. 9. Ownership and Use of Documents Documents, diagrams. sketches. surveys, designs, calculations. working drawings and any other materials created or otherwise prepared by BRW as part of its performance of this Agreement will be owned jointly by the client and BRW and may be used by each party independent of the other. The Client will indemnify BRW against any damages. fees, claims or expenses resulting from unauthorized alteration of the work products or from the Client's use of such work products for a purpose or project other than that intended by this Agreement. - ;G% J 10. Termination and Suspension Either party may terminate this Agreement upon not less than seven (7) days' written notice if the other party fails substantially to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of the party terminating the Agreement. Failure of the Client to make payment as provided herein shall be considered substantial nonperformance and cause for termination. If the Client suspends the Services for more than thirty (30) consecutive days. BRW shall be compensated for Services performed prior to the notice of such suspension. When the Services are resumed, BRW's compensation shall be equitably adjusted to provide for BRW's expenses resulting from the interruption and resumption of the Services. BRW shall be compensated for Services performed prior to termination, together with Reimbursable Expenses then due, together with BRW's expenses which are directly attributable to termination and which are not otherwise paid. 11. Insurance BRW shall be responsible for maintaining, during the term of this Agreement and at its sole cost and expense, the types of insurance coveraees and in the amounts described below. BRW shall furnish evidence upon request of all such policies. During the term hereof, BRW shall take out and maintain in full force and effect the following insurance policies: a. Comprehensive public liability insurance, including automobile and property damage, insuring BRW against loss or liability for damages for personal injury, death or property damage arising out of or in connection with the performance by BRW or its obligations hereunder, with minimum liability limits of 51.000,000.00 combined single limit for personal injury, death or property damage in any one occurrence. b. Such workers' compensation and other similar insurance as may be required by law. C. Professional liability insurance with minimum liability_ limits of S 1,000.000. 12. Notices All notices or communications permitted or required to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been�duly given if delivered in person or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, for mailing by certified mail, return receipt requested, and addressed. if to a part of this Agreement, to the address set forth next to such pam's signature at the end of this Agreement. or if to a person not a party to this Agreement, to -, 4 the address designated by a part to this Agreement in the foregoing manner. Arm party may change his or its address by giving notice in writing, stating his or its new address, to other party. 13. Assignment Neither party to this Agreement shall assign any right or obligation hereunder in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the other party hereto. No assignment or transfer of any interest under this Agreement shall be deemed to release the assignor from any liability or obligation under this Agreement. or to cause any such liability or obligation to be reduced to a secondary liability, or obligation. 14. Amendment, Modification or Waiver No amendment, modification or waiver of any condition, provision of term of this Agreement shall be valid or of any effect unless made in writing, signed by the party or parties to be bound. or such party's or parties' duly authorized representative(s) and specifying with particularity the nature and extent of such amendment, modification or waiver. Any waiver by any part or any default of the other party shall not affect or impair any right arising from anv subsequent default. Nothing herein shall limit the remedies or rights of the parties hereto under and pursuant to this Agreement. 15. Severable Provisions Each provision of this Agreement is intended to be severable. If any provision hereof is illegal or invalid for any reason , ,N-hatsoever, such illegality or invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement. 16. Entire Agreement This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the parties hereto in respect to the transactions contemplated hereby and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings between the parties with respect to such subject matter. 17. Captions. Headings and Titles All captions, headings or titles in the paragraphs or sections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall not constitute a part of this Agreement or act as a limitation of the scope of the particular paragraph or sections to which they apply. As used herein, where appropriate, the singular shall include the plural and vice versa and masculine, feminine and neuter expressions shall be interchangeable. Interpretation or construction of this Agreement shall not be affected by any determination as to who is the drafter of this Agreement, this Agreement having been drafted by mutual agreement of the parties. 18. Counterparts This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be one and the same Agreement and shall become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by of the parties and delivered to the other party. :451 J 19. Parties in Interest This Agreement shall be binding upon. and the benefits and obligations provided for herein shall inure to and bind. the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. provided that this section shall not be deemed to permit any transfer or assignment otherwise prohibited by this Agreement. This Agreement is for the exclusive benefit of the parties hereto and it does not create a contractual relationship with or exist for the benefit of any third party, including contractors. subcontractors and their sureties. 20. Applicable La«y This Agreement and the rights of the parties hereunder shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota; provided, however. that it is agreed and understood that any applicable statute of limitations shall commence no later than the substantial completion by BRW of the Services. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed effective the day and year first set forth above. CLIENT By Its , Dated BRW, INC. 700 South Third Street Minneapolis. Mir' 5541-5 By Its Dated Reviewed ��- 6 EXHIBIT A Work Program for the 1996 Comprehensive Plan Update May 13, 1996 PHASE ONE: ANALYSIS and STRATEGIC PLANNING 1.0 Zoning Ordinance Revisions. Develop an overlay district for the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor addressing redevelopment and design issues, based upon the recently completed Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Study. Prepare a Shoreland Zoning Ordinance using the model ordinance supplied by the DNR. 2.0 Analysis of Issues and Conditions 2.1 Issues. Identify important issues identified in previous neighborhood workshops and Housing Study: update based on staff information. Develop preliminary list of issues to be addressed in both strategic and comprehensive plans. 2.2 Conditions. Based on existing demographic and housing data, aerial photos, information provided by staff, and limited fieldwork, produce a brief profile of the City in mid - decade, to be used as a basis for discussion in workshops. Demographic information will include population, household and employment data; housing and neighborhood information will be based on an update of the 1989 Maxfield study. Information to be mapped will include existing land use, redevelopment areas, parks and open space, traffic flows and transit routes, and other information needed for the various elements of the comprehensive plan. 3.0 Strategic Plan Development 3.1 Workshops. Hold three workshops with a task force, to include City Council and Planning Commission representatives, neighborhood, business and institutional representatives, and interested members of the public (workshops would be open to the public as well). A nominal group process will be used, in which participants identify issues, group them and set priorities. 3.2 Issue Analysis and Plan Development. We will analyze the issues identified in the workshops, discuss resources and barriers for addressing each one, and work with City staff to develop strategies to deal with each issue. Based on this analysis, we will produce a draft strategic plan: a concise, focused document that summarizes approaches to resolving identified issues. Some of the issues identified in the strategic plan will be addressed in more detail in the comprehensive plan: others may be addressed outside of the comprehensive plan process (not by BRW). I PHASE TWO: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4.0 Goals and Objectives. Using the strategic plan as a point of departure, we will work with City Council, Planning Commission and staff to develop a set of broad goals and more specific objectives in each of the categories the comprehensive plan \vill address. Goals and objectives will be refined further throughout the planning process. 5.0 Land Use Plan Prepare land use plan and policies based upon issues, existing conditions. and goals. Since Brooklyn Center is largely developed. the plan is likely to include only minor changes from the present development pattern, relating to redevelopment and improvements in specific areas: residential neighborhoods, central commercial and residential core, certain road corridors. and commercial and industrial areas. 6.0 Transportation The transportation plan will include a summary of existing traffic conditions and projected trends, transportation issues, and policies in the following areas: • Roadways (including recommended function, jurisdiction and capacity) • Brooklyn Boulevard corridor study recommendations (integrate into transportation system) • Transit • Bicycle and pedestrian policies • Potential future corridor studies • Travel demand strategies for congested highwav corridors • Neighborhood traffic problems and applicable traffic calming techniques • .Aviation system considerations 7.0 Parks and Open Space Plan Plan will include analysis of major reprogramming needs. criteria for accepting or seeking additional parkland, and opportunities for greenways and other pedestrian/bicvcle linkages between parks and schools, neighborhoods. etc. City park and planning staff will play a�major role in providing information and setting priorities. The plan will monitor the proposed regional Humboldt Avenue Greenwav, linking the Brookdale Mall, the Shingle Creek valley, and surrounding neighborhoods.. 8.0 Neighborhoods and Housing Plan Review the 1959 Housing Market Anahsis. Revie�y each neighborhood in terms of its infrastructure, parks and open space. circulation patterns. Recommend strategies that are specific to each neighborhood to renew infrastructure and address problem areas in the residential neighborhoods. 9.0 Redevelopment Plan The plan will identify high- priority locations for redevelopment and infill development and include general design guidelines for these sites. 10.0 Surface Water Management Plan The City has already done a considerable amount of work on surface eater management in conjunction with the Watershed Management Organization. Therefore. the Cite will be reponsible for providing to BRW text and maps) that can be included in the final document for copyin 11.0 Sanitary Sewer System Plan Because Brooklvn Center is largely developed, its sewer system is unlikely to change much through the 2020 time period. However, the Metropolitan Council does require information on projected flows (based on land use), and control of inflow and infiltrate a on in the exi tin ). s system. This section of the plan will consist of a summary of this information. The City will be responsible for all text and maps ready for BRW to include in the final document. 12.0 eater Supply Plan The City has already prepared and submitted this plan to the Metropolitan Council. Therefore, it will likely require only minor changes and inclusion in the comprehensive plan in summary form. This section of the plan will consist of a summary of this information. The Cite will be responsible for all text and maps ready for BRW to include in the final document. 13.0 Draft Report, Review and Revisions 13.1 The draft plan will be presented to the City Council and the Planning Commission for initial review and revisions. This phase will also include some type of informal public presentation and public comment period. The City will be responsible for submitting the plan for the required Metropolitan Council review. Any additions, corrections or changes required by the Metropolitan Council to meet their requirements will be perfonned on an hourly basis above and beyond this contract. 14.0 Final Report and Summary Document BRW will prepare 30 copies of the full - length Comprehensive Plan, in a wire binder. A plan summary document that can be reproduced by the City will be prepared. 15.0 Additional Meetings: Up to 5 meetings with the Plan task force and up to 3 meetings with the Planning Commission and /or Council are included in this Work Program. Additional meetings will be charged over and above the contract amount. at a rate of $325 per meeting. BROOKLYN CENTER Graphics / BRW TASKS Weber Rhees Heppelmann Horn Clerical Subtotal Task Total 1.0 Zonin Ordinance Revisions 2 32 2,250 2250 2.0 Analysis Issues 2 10 820 Condition _ - - - 2 _ 40 _ _- 80 6,370 7190 3.0 Strategic Plan Workshops (3) 18 18 2,700 Issue Analysis 18 1,170 Pla Development 24 4 1,740 5610 4.0 Goals /Obj 4 12 1,120 1120 5.0 Land U se 4 24 40 3,700 3700 6.0 Transportation 4 16 16 16 3,460 ____Meeting__ _ - - 4 g 4 2 1,290 4750 7 Parks /O. Spac 4 16 8 1,740 1740 8.0 N'hoods /Housin _- .— .- _- - - - -., - - -_ - -_4 24 _ _ 24 2,980 2980 9.0 Redevelopment 4 16 8 1,740 Meeting_ 4 4 4 780 2520 11.0 W ater Management 4 2 350 350 12. Sew er System 4 2 350 350 13.0 Wa S upply 4 - - - -_ 2 350 350 14.0 Draft Report Review 4 24 16 2,620 _ Meeting 4 8 2 950 3570 15.0 Final Report 16 16 1,760 Mee ting - - - _ _ 4 8 860 2620 Project Mgmt g 0 680 Totals 76 330 20 0 226 Hourly Rates $85 65 85 85 45 Labor Charges 39,780 39,780 Direct Charges (photocopies, etc) 500 Budoet 6,460 21.450 1.700 0 10,170 40.280 May 13, 1996 EXHIBIT C Hourly Rates BRW Hourly Charge Rates, 1996 Principal S 120.00 Vice- President 10 - 5 .00 Senior Associate 95.00 Associate 85.00 Senior Consultant 75.00 Consultant II 6-5.00 Consultant I X5.00 Staff Level V 55.00 Staff Level IV X0.00 Staff Level III 45.00 Staff Level I1 35.00 Staff Level I 30.00 9 EXHIBIT D 0 Project Schedule Initiation: The Project will be started within 30 days of receiving a signed agreement from the Client. Completion: It is preliminarily anticipated that BRW's work on the Project can be completed within 12 months of the time a signed contract is received by BRW unless unforseen delays are requested by the Client. If the project can not be completed within 18 months through no fault of BRW, the compensation due to BRW will be renegotiated. »� 10 EXHIBIT E Addendum No. to r Seri ices Agreement t� This Addendum to that certain Sen ices Aareement dated 199_, is made effective as of , 199 by and between the undersigned parties. The Addendum immediately preceding this Addendum was dated 199 1. Services to Be Provided 2. Fees 3. Schedule 4. Exxcept as amended hereby. the Service Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. By Its Dated BRW, INC. 700 South Third Street Minneapolis, MINT 5 - 415 By Its Dated 11 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH BRW, INC. FOR PLANNING CONSULTING SERVICES RELATING TO THE UPDATING OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center has determined the need to utilize professional planning consulting services for the purpose of updating the City's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has sought and received interest from planning consulting firms through a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process; and WHEREAS, six potential firms were interviewed regarding their qualifications to provide said consulting services by an interview panel; and WHEREAS, the City Council, following a recommendation by the interview panel, directed the staff to negotiate a contract with BRW, Inc. for said planning consulting services; and WHEREAS, a contract with BRW, Inc. has been prepared and presented to the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to approve a contract with BRW, Inc. to provide planning consulting services relating to the updating of the City's Comprehensive Plan at an estimated cost of $40,280. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into said contract. 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. �C BROOKLYN CENTER eAO�KLYM POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager Michael McCauley FROM: Chief of Police Scott Kline \X DATE: May 22, 1996 SUBJECT: Forfeiture Fund Purchases The Brooklyn Center Forfeiture Fund has accumulated to the level of $30,194 at this time. I have convened the forfeiture committee consisting of representatives from the various departments within the police department and they have agreed on a series of purchases to use forfeiture monies for police department use. These purchases consist of four different groupings. The first of them is the purchase of MP -5 tactical carbines for use in the squads in place of the 12 gauge shotguns currently used by the department. The purchase of a surveillance transmitter and receiver for undercover operations. The hardwiring of two interview rooms within the police department so that all interviews with suspects can be audio recorded easily by department personnel. Lastly, the purchase of five specialized seats for the squad cars to attempt to eliminate the obvious back discomfort brought on by the factory seating in the Ford Crown Victorias which the police department has experienced recently. The first item, which is also the largest expenditure, would be for enough MP -5's to equip all the squads and the necessary equipment and training costs involved in training all officers to use the new weapons as well as providing enough ammunition to take us through the rest of the year and replace the gun locks in all squads. The total expenditure would be $19,191. The second expenditure would be for a transmitter and receiver for undercover work that would appear to be a working pager as well as a radio transmitter which avoids the problem of taping or fastening a body bug somewhere on a person's body. The cost for these items would be $2,420. The next item would be the purchase of recording equipment and installation in the investigative interview room and the booking area. The cost for these recorders, microphones, and actual installation would be $2,278. The last purchase would be five brand name Pro Copper heavy duty ergonomic seats for the squad cars with mounting brackets. The cost for the purchase of five seats would be $4,745. Included with this memorandum are four addendums outlining the individual costs for each. SK:kh ITEM #1 Item Cos Quantity Final Cost MP5 A2 SF $1,110.00 11 $12,210.00 30 round magazines 33.50 14 469.00 Magazine clamps 31.00 11 341.00 Tactical forestock light #629 159.00 11 1,749.00 1 collapsible stock 226.00 1 226.00 TOTAL $14,995.00 Practice ammunition, 250 rounds per officer 11,000 rounds $1,545.50 Range rental (3 days) 1,200.00 Duty ammunition, 1,000 round Federal 115 grams 300.00 10 Federal electronic gun locks 1.150.00 TOTAL $4,195.50 ITEM #2 1. Model TX -560 Pager Voice Transmitter CAT# 95 280 Vendor: Westinghouse A.I.D. $1,995.00 $2,124.68 2. LEA 6540 Micro -Mini Surveillance Recorder Vendor: LEA (Law Enforcement Association) $295.00 ITEM #3 The costs outlined by Precision Business Systems are as follows: Two (2) Sony BM -850 professional dictation and recording devices. $1,198 ($599 each) Two (2) CM -20 professional microphones Included Two hour installation charge (includes cable) $ 130 Two professional telephone recording adapters 100 SME D -704 microcassette to microcassette high speed 850 duplicater (Saul Mineroff Electroncis - catalog price) TOTAL $2,278 ITEM #4 5 Pro Copper Heavy Duty Ergonomic Seats For The Squad Cars $4,745.00 with Mounting Brackets ($949 each) 56 ��pOKLYN CEgT BROOKLYN CENTER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: City Manger Michael McCauley FROM: Chief of Police Scott Kline DATE: May 20, 1996 SUBJECT: Hennepin County Cooperative Agreement For Engineering Services Attached you will find a cooperative agreement with Hennepin County Radio Service to do an engineering appraisal of the viability of a digital microwave system linking the Brooklyn Center Police Department with the Hennepin County Sheriff's Radio station. This agreement only commits the city to spending $3,800 for an engineering study to determine the feasibility of a direct microwave link with the Hennepin County Radio system in Golden Valley and the Brooklyn Center City Hall complex. It does not in any way commit Brooklyn Center to the actual construction of the microwave link. This decision would be made sometime down the road when it is determined exactly what would be carried by the microwave link and how valuable it would be to the Brooklyn Center Police Department. The engineering survey would be conducted to determine a line of sight path between the Brooklyn Center radio tower and the Golden Valley radio tower operated by the county. The actual engineering would be done by Ron Vegemast and Company. The cost for the survey can be taken from 4400 contractual services in the police budget. SK:kh i I l klinddigmicm.mem AA Code: Contract No.: A16006 Tax ID No./Soc Sec No.: Vendor No.: COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE DESIGN OF AN 800 MHz TRUNK RADIO AND DIGITAL MICROWAVE SYSTEM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, a body politic and corporate, under the laws of the TAT erred to as the S E OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter ref "COUNTY," A -2300 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, and the City of Brooklyn Center, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430, acting by and through its duly authorized officers, hereinafter referred to as the "CITY ". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, an effective public safety two -way radio communications system is a critical element in providing emergency services and protecting lives and property; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY, a body politic and corporate, has the power, pursuant to Minnesota Statute, to adopt and supervise the implementation of a county -wide public safety radio communication system for Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has determined that in order to perform its duties to implement a county -wide public safety radio communication system, it is necessary to enter into a contract for design of such a system; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY entered into an agreement with Ronald Vegemast Engineering, Inc. (CONSULTANT) to finalize design for a county -wide public safety radio communication system; and WHEREAS, the agreement entered into between the COUNTY and CONSULTANT permits the COUNTY to engage the CONSULTANT in additional tasks, which essentially are those tasks associated with local municipal microwave connection to the county -wide backbone system; and WHEREAS, the CITY desires to purchase the services of CONSULTANT for final design services for the CITY's microwave connection to the system; and WHEREAS, the CITY will contract with the COUNTY for payment of design services contemplated herein, and the COUNTY will direct the CONSULTANT to provide these services. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements hereinafter set forth, the COUNTY and the CITY agree as follows: ARTICLE I. PURPOSE 1.01 The purpose of this Agreement is to define the rights and obligations of the COUNTY and CITY with respect to the planning, design and management of the services contemplated under this Agreement. ARTICLE II. COOPERATION 2.01 The COUNTY and the CITY will cooperate and use their best efforts to ensure that the various provisions of the Agreement are fulfilled. The parties agree in good faith to undertake resolutions of disputes, if any, in an equitable and timely manner and in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. ARTICLE III. TERM 3.01 This Agreement will commence upon the date of the last Board approval of each of the governmental units and terminate on December 31, 1996, or upon completion of the work contemplated under this Agreement, whichever occurs later, unless terminated earlier pursuant to Article XIII or XIV of this Agreement. ARTICLE IV. SCOPE OF SERVICES 4.01 The COUNTY shall direct the CONSULTANT to provide the microwave path engineering and site evaluation work in accordance with task 1 of Exhibit A for the CITY's participation as a 9 -1 -1 dispatch center in the county- wide 800 MHz Trunked Radio System. Conditional upon execution of a future agreement on or before September 1, 1996 between the COUNTY and the CITY whereby the CITY agrees to commit to construction and payment of microwave equipment and maintenance costs, the COUNTY will incorporate such microwave equipment in the final system bidding specifications. The COUNTY shall provide the CITY with one copy of the CONSULTANT's site evaluation report and microwave path (2) engineering data. Upon request, the COUNTY will provide the CITY with one copy of final microwave system bidding specifications. ARTICLE V. COMPENSATION 5.01 The total compensation payable to the COUNTY under this Agreement for services performed by the CONSULTANT as listed in the Exhibit A shall be Three Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars ($3,800). It is mutually agreed by the COUNTY and the CITY that the total price of the work as shown in the Exhibit A is based on the work effort and expense level established by a negotiation between COUNTY and the CONSULTANT. ARTICLE VI. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES 6.01 The CITY shall make full payment to the COUNTY within thirty (30) days of the execution of Agreement by both parties. The CITY's payment is non - refundable. ARTICLE VII. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR 7.01 Each party is, and shall remain, an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. Each party shall select the means, method, and manner of performing their respective services herein. Nothing is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co- partners between the parties hereto or as constituting either party as the agent, representative, or employee of the other for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. Each party represents that it has or will secure at its own expense all personnel required in performing their respective services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of either party or other persons engaged in the performance of any work or services under this Agreement shall have no contractual relationship with the other party, and shall not be considered an employee of any other party. Any and all claims that may or might arise under the Unemployment Compensation Act, the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota, or any other applicable Federal or State law, rule, or regulation on behalf of said personnel, arising out of employment or alleged employment, including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against either party, its officers, agents, contractors, or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the other party. Each party shall defend, indemnify, and hold the other party, its officers, (3) agents, and employees harmless from any and all such claims. Such personnel or other persons shall neither require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the other party, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Re- Employment Insurance, disability, severance pay, or PERA. ARTICLE VIII. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE 8.01 Each party agrees that it shall be responsible for its own acts and the results thereof, to the extent authorized by the law, and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other party and the results thereof. The COUNTY's and the CITY's liability is governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. The COUNTY and the CITY each warrant that they are able to comply with the aforementioned indemnity requirements through an insurance or self - insurance program. ARTICLE IX. DATA PRIVACY 9.01 COUNTY and CITY each agree to abide by all applicable State and Federal laws and regulations concerning the handling and disclosure of private and confidential information concerning individuals and /or data including but not limited to information made non - public by such laws or regulations. ARTICLE X. MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN AND SEVERABILITY 10.01 The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations and performance obligations between the parties herein. ARTICLE XI. RECORDS - AVAILABILITY 11.01 COUNTY agrees that the CITY, the State Auditor, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to (4) the accounting practices and procedures of COUNTY and involve transactions relating to this Agreement. ARTICLE XII. MERGER AND MODIFICATION 12.01 a. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. All items referred to in this Agreement are incorporated or attached and are deemed to be part of this Agreement. b. Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties hereto. ARTICLE XIII. CANCELLATION 13.01 The CITY shall have the right to terminate this Agreement at any time for any reason by giving written notice to the COUNTY of such termination and specifying the effective date therefore at least sixty (60) days before the effective date of such termination. In the event of cancellation, the CITY shall forfeit all fees paid to the COUNTY. The COUNTY will remove the microwave equipment intended for the CITY's use from the design specifications. ARTICLE XIV. DEFAULT 14.01 If COUNTY shall fail to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement properly and timely, or if COUNTY shall violate any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this Agreement, thereupon the CITY shall have the right to terminate this Agreement if the default has not been cured within thirty (30) days from the date on which the COUNTY received written notice specifying the default. This Agreement may then be terminated by the CITY giving at least ten (10) days written notice to COUNTY of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. A. It is agreed that any right or remedy provided for herein shall not be considered as the exclusive right or remedy of the CITY for any default in any respect by COUNTY, but such right or remedy shall be considered to be in addition to any right or remedy (5) hereunder or allowed by law, equity, or statute. B. The CITY's failure to insist upon strict performance of any covenant, agreement, or stipulation of this Agreement or to exercise any right herein contained shall not be a waiver or relinquishment of such covenant, agreement, stipulation, or right, unless the CITY consents thereto in writing. Any such written consent shall not constitute a waiver or relinquishment in the future of such covenant, agreement, stipulation or right. ARTICLE XV. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION 15.01 In order to coordinate the services of COUNTY with the activities of the CITY so as to accomplish the purposes of this Agreement, the following individuals or their designees shall manage this Agreement on behalf of the COUNTY and CITY. COUNTY: Roger Laurence Hennepin County Radio Communications Manager 9300 Naper Street Golden Valley, MN 55427 CITY: ARTICLE XVI. PAPER RECYCLING 16.01 The COUNTY encourages CITY to develop and implement an office paper and newsprint recycling program. ARTICLE XVII. NOTICES 17.01 Any notice, report or demand which must be given or made by a party hereto under the terms of this Agreement or, any statute or ordinance shall be in writing, and shall be sent registered or certified mail. Notices to the COUNTY shall be sent to the County Administrator and contract administrator at the addresses given in the opening paragraph and contained in Article XV to this Agreement. Notice to CITY shall be sent to the contract administrator at the address as given in Article XVII. (6) COUNTY BOARD APPROVAL COUNTY, having signed this contract, and the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this contract on the day of , 19 , and pursuant to such approval, the proper COUNTY officials having signed this contract, the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Approved as to form. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA By: Assistant County Attorney Chair of Its County Board Date: Date: And: Associate /County Administrator Approved as to execution. ATTEST: Deputy Clerk of County Board " Assistant County Attorney Date: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER The Brooklyn Center City Council duly approved this Agreement on the day of , 1996. Approved as to form CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER and legality: By: Brooklyn Center City Attorney Its Mayor And: Its City Manager ::CIVIL$:[C0NTRACT]AGREE.EB9;1 (7) MEMORANDUM • DATE: April'), 1996 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Diane Spector, Director of Public Services, 01. 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 Diseased Tree Removal. 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. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: is RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 05/28/96 ) 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 i 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 ---------------------- - - - - -- ----------------------- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- • HANH LE - 5819 DUPONT AVE N 13 ALAN & DEBORAH THIELEN 7028 OLIVER AVE N 14 DENNIS & BONNIE KUENG 1012 72ND AVE N 15 CITY OF B:C. 7012 HUMBOLDT AVE N 16 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owner(s) will receive a second written notice providing five (5) business days in which to contest the determination of the City Council by requesting, in writing, a hearing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. All removal costs, including legal, financing, and administrative charges, shall be specially assessed against the property. RESOLUTION NO. • Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • 5F • MEMORANDUM DATE: May 20, 1996 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: David Peterson, Public Works, Superintendent SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting Bid and Authorizing Purchase of One (1) Four Wheel Drive Tractor The 1996 Central Garage budget included $28,000 for the replacement of City Vehicle #256. This tractor is used primarily by the Park Department for maintenance of athletic fields, trails, turf maintenance and mowing. It is used for ice maintenance during the skating season. The following bids were received for purchase of one (1) four wheel drive tractor: CompanX Price Scharber & Sons $29,079.83 Greenberg Implement, Inc. $26,619.68 • We recommend accepting the bid of Greenberg Implement, Inc. and authorizing purchase of one (1) four wheel drive tractor. • Member introduced the he followin g resolution and moved its • adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF ONE (1) FOUR WHEEL DRIVE TRACTOR WHEREAS, $28,000 was appropriated in the 1996 Central Garage budget for the replacement of City Vehicle #256, a four wheel drive tractor; and WHEREAS, the following bids were submitted for the purchase of one (1) four wheel tractor: Co =any Erige Scharber & Sons $29,079.83 Greenberg Implement, Inc. $26,619.68 WHEREAS, Greenberg Implement, Inc. appears to have submitted the lowest responsible bid in the amount of $26,619.68. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The bid of Greenberg Implement, Inc. is hereby accepted, and the purchase of one (1) four wheel drive tractor is hereby approved. l i Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: • whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MEMORANDUM • DATE: May 22, 1996 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Scott Brink, City Engineer' SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1, Accepting Work Performed and Approving Final Payment for Improvement Project No. 1996 -11, Reforestation of 1994 and 1995 Street Improvement Project Areas At the time this project was set up, a letter was sent to all property owners who had a tree removed because of a street improvement project, informing them of their eligibility for a replacement tree or trees. The contract was awarded on the basis of the responses we had received to that date, and called for 82 trees to be planted. Expecting that we would hear from the rest of the eligible property owners, the contract stipulated that up to 24 more trees could be I added at the City's discretion, at the contract unit cost. We in fact did get late responses from the remaining property owners, which added 22 more trees to the list to be replaced. • Since these property owners were eligible to have their trees replaced, we recommend that the Council approve Change Order No. 1 to the contract in the amount of $4,035.00, representing the planting of an additional 22 trees. This would bring the total project cost to $18,175.00, which is still substantially less than the Engineer's Estimate of $33,400.00. • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its • adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1996 -11, REFORESTATION OF 1994 AND 1995 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AREAS WHEREAS, due to late responses from property owners, the items shown on attached Change Order No. 1 were added to the contract and have been completed by North Metro Landscaping, Inc. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. Change Order No. 1 is hereby approved. 2. Twenty-one (21) trees were installed over the bid quantity. The total cost of Change Order No. 1 is $4,035.00. 3. The work completed under said contract is accepted and final payment is approved according to the following schedule: • Special Assess. (35%) GO Bond (65%) Imp Proj No. 1994 -01,02 $ 650 $ 1,040 Imp Proj No. 1994 -11,12 $ 560 $ 1,040 Imp Proj No. 1994 -05,06 $ 280 $ 520 Imp Proj No. 1995- 07,08,09 $4.87 0 9 1 Total $6,360 $11,815 4. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $18,175.00. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: • and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Project No. 1996 -11 • Final Payment Voucher For Period Ending: May 22, 1996 City of Brooklyn Center to: North Metro Landscaping, Inc. 11050 Lamont Avenue P.O. Box 9 Hanover, MN 55431 -0009 Ph. 497 -4898 Amount of Contract: $14,140.00 Date Approved: February 19, 1996 Project Description: Reforestation of 1994 and 1995 Street Reconstruction Project Areas Value Less Less Funds of Work Charges 5 Less Net Project Account Encumbered Certified and Percent Previous Amount Number Number To Date To Date Deducts Retained Payments Due 1996 -11 6411 -4560 $18,175.00 $18,175.00 $0.00 $13,433.00 $4,742.00 *Change Order No. 1 $4,035.00 This is to certify that work items shown on this statement of work certified herein have been actually furnished for the referenced project in accordance with plans & specifications approved and that the total work is 100% complete. Date: • City Engineer CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER CERTIFICATION This is to certify that I have reviewed this final voucher and, to the best of my knowledge, information & belief, the quantities and values of work certified herein represent the final quantities and values of this project. Date: CONTRACTOR I hereby recommend payment of this voucher. Date: Director of Public Services CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Date: City Manager CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Hold check and call when ready. _ Send check to address shown above. • Sh-1 • REFORESTATION OF 1994 AND 1995 North Metro Landscaping Inc. STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AREAS 11050 Lamont Avenue P.O.Box 9 FINAL PAY VOUCHER Hanover, Mn 55341.0009 For period ending May 22, 1996 Ph . 497 -4898 Improvement Project 1996 -11 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Item Bid Quantity to Additional Unit No. Description Size Unit Quantity Unit Price Date Extension Units Price Extension 1 Crabapple, Flowering (Springsnow) Malus 2" 8 -8 Each 4 $ 150.00 4 $ 600.00 1 s 150.00 $ 150.00 2 Crabapple, Flowering(Spdngsnow) Malus 3" B -B Each 4 $ 200.00 4 $ 800.00 3 Crabapple, Flowering (Prairifire) Malus 2" B -B Each 6 $ 150.00 6 $ 900.00 1 s 150.00 $ 150.00 4. Crabapple, Flowering (Prairifire) Ma /us 3" B -8 Each 2 $ 220.00 2 $ 440.00 3 s 220.00 $ 660.00 5 Linden, Littleleaf Tilia cordata (Greenspire) 2" 8 -8 Each 15 $ 160.00 15 $ 2,400.00 4 s 160.00 $ 640.00 6 Linden, Littleleaf Tilia cordata (Greenspire) 3" 8 -B Each 15 $ 170.00 15 $ 2,550.00 2 S 170.00 $ 340.00 7 Sugar Maple Acersaccharum (Greenmountain) 2" B -B Each 5 $ 140.00 5 $ 700.00 1 $ 140.00 $ 140.00 8 Sugar Maple Acer saccharum (Greenmountain) 3" B -B Each 16 $ 180.00 16 $ 2,880.00 2 s 180.00 $ 360.00 9 White Oak Quercus alba 2" B -B Each 3 $ 185.00 3 $ 555.00 5 $ 185.00 $ 925.00 10 White Oak Quercus alba 3" B -8 Each 2 $ 320.00 2 $ 640.00 1 S 320.00 $ 320.00 11 Japanese Tree Lilac Synnga reticulata 1 112" single Each 7 S 175.00 7 $ 1,225.00 2 S 175.00 $ 350.00 B -B 12 Japanese Tree Lilac Syringa reticulata 1 112" dump Each 3 $ 150.00 3 $ 450.00 • BB TOTAL 82 82 22 CERTIFIED TO DATE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 1996 -11 $ 14,140.00 $ 4,035.00 FINAL PAYMENT AMOUNT $ 18,175.00 EAENG�RWECT=NTRACTt IIFIN • Page 1 i .rH 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 DATE: May 23, 1996 SUBJECT: Certification of Local Performance Measures The legislature this past legislative session established Local Performance Aid (LPA). This is aid payable in 1997 to cities that either have developed or are in the process of developing a system of performance measures for City services. The requested action of the Council is to approve certification of local performance measures for Local Performance Aid payable in 1997 by indicating that the City is in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance measures. The preliminary estimate of local performance Aid payable in 1997 to the City of Brooklyn Center would be approximately $31,000. • Staff will be reviewing he legislation and making proposals in connection with the development of g g gP P P the 1997 budget for the creation and implementation of the required performance measurement system. • MINNESOTA Department of Revenue Property Tax Division Mail Station 3340 St. Paul, MN 55146 -3340 Phone(612)296 -5141 Fax(612)297 -2166 April 22, 1996 TO: ALL CITY CLERKS, ADMINISTRATORS, MANAGERS, AND FINANCE DIRECTORS RE: CERTIFICATION OF LOCAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR LOCAL PERFORMANCE AID PAYABLE IN 1997 Laws 1996, Chapter 471, Article 3, Section 48 provides for anew state aid for all qualifying counties and cities beginning in calendar year 1997. This new aid is called Local Performance Aid (LPA). In order to qualify for this new aid, your city must have a system of performance measures for services provided by the city, and must regularly compile and present these measures to the city council at least once per year. If there is currently no system of performance measures in place, your city may still qualify for this aid if it is in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance measures. However, eligibility based upon being in the process of development may not be used for more than two consecutive years. For the purpose of the enclosed certification form, "in the process" may include having the subject of performance measures on the agenda of the city council. The city should then use the time period between this year's certification and next year's certification to develop basic measures such as "workload," unless it has already moved beyond this stage. The second year of "in the process" must be used to move to a higher level of performance measurement, such as measuring efficiency and effectiveness. All cities should be able to qualify to receive LPA in the first year of the aid program. This new aid will be determined as follows for calendar year 1997: The total amount of aid available for cities is 5441,735 plus $1 times the most recent population of each qualifying city. A per capita aid amount is then determined by dividing the total aid available by the total population of all cities that qualify for the aid. Each qualifying city would then receive an aid amount based on its population times the per capita aid amount. It should be noted that the X441,735 is appropriated from the general lurid, and the additional amount ($1 times the most recent population of each city) is a permanent reduction in each city's homestead and agricultural credit aid (HACA). The HACA reduction applies whether or not the city is eligible to receive LPA. Distribution of this new aid will be based on yearly certifications for each qualifying city. Cities will be required to submit an annual certification in order to receive LPA payable in calendar year 1997 and subsequent years. LPA will be paid in two equal installments on July 20 and December 26 of each year, beginning in 1997. Qualifying cities will receive a certification of their 1997 LPA by July 31, 1996. • (continued) An equal opportunity employer TDD: (61 Z) 21 -0069 Page 2 As mentioned above, your city may qualify for LPA by (1) having a system of performance measures in place, or (2) by being in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance measures. If your city qualifies for LPA by either criteria, and your city wishes to participate in the distribution of this aid for calendar year 1997, your city must fill out the enclosed certification and return it to our office by June 30, 1996. Please note: if our office does not receive a certification from your city by June 30, 1996, your city will not be eligible to receive this aid in calendar year 1997. If you have any questions regarding the completion of this form, please feel free to call me at (612) 296 - 5141. Sincerely, Larry L. Bewley V Research Analysis Specialist Property Tax Division Enclosure • Form LPA - Cl Certification of Local Performance Measures for Local Performance Aid Payable in 1997 Complete and return to: Minnesota Depa of Revenue. Property Tax Division. Mail Station 3340. St. Pau!, Minnesota 55146 -3340 Phone: (612)296 -5141 Name and mailing address of governmental unit Name of person filling out form Telephone County of location 1. Does your city have a system of performan measures for services provided by the city, and are 'nese measures regularly compiled and presented to the city council at least once eac,n year? YES NO 2. If the ansv er to question 1 above is no, is your city in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance meE sures? YES NO This form must be returned to the Minne!.ota Department of Revenue, Property Tax Division, by .tune 30, 1996 in order for your city to be eligible to receive Local Performance Aic payable in 1997. v r y .•.hw, y .; rr fY„`..r :r v, • .:{.•'r' • 'Stiy, •::ro wk + ... +?}:.•.'.:S' • •.. ',.,:{+ v,:'}.',•4.v.;a,+•y •.t; •.;in;:v:M1 . {; r,^.,; . Note: City certifications must be signed by the Mayor and by a member of the City Council. rr Si We do hereby certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, the facts presented in this certification are true and correct. of Mayor Signature of C' ncil Member Date is I Now �i MEMORANDUM • DATE: May 22, 1996 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Scott Brink, City Engineer5lv SUBJECT: Resolution Making Negative Declaration on the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Shingle Creek Regional Pond (Brooklyn Center Improvement Project No. 1995 -03) Summary The City's consultant, SEH, Inc., and a multi - agency team led by Brooklyn Center are continuing work on preliminary design of the Shingle Creek Regional Pond project. As previously reported on March 18, 1996, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared for the above improvement project. Although not specifically required by regulations for projects of this size, completion of an EAW was deemed advisable to assure that all issues and potential problems are adequately addressed. The EAW explains the purpose for this project, and addresses potential effects and issues related to the proposed pond. These issues include • impacts on water resources, fish and wildlife, land use, water quality, erosion, infrastructure i needs, and other potential impacts. The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) has published specific procedures to be followed in the preparation of an EAW. The EAW was published in the Mn/EQB Monitor and was available for public comment for a 30 day period. The EAW was made available at several public facilities, and copies were also sent to all appropriate public agencies for comments. The 30 day comment period ended on April 24, 1996, and all comments have been received, noted, and addressed. Attached to this memorandum are copies of the comments received, and responses to the comments as prepared by the project's consulting engineer, SEH, Inc. In accordance with the standards and procedures established by the EQB, a decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must now be made. An Environmental Impact Statement differs from an EAW in that it analyzes the project and its impacts in far greater detail than an EAW. It is usually required when a project will result in significant environmental impact, and mitigation is required, or when some agency believes a potential impact should be studied more closely. Of the comments we received from the various agencies, all have been addressed and answered appropriately, or will be addressed in more detail upon completion of final design of the project. It should be emphasized that a technical advisory group, consisting of members of all appropriate commenting agencies has been meeting on a monthly basis since January of 1996. This has been instrumental in streamlining development of • the project by keeping all agencies abreast of all issues throughout development of the EAW and • design, as well as incorporating their input and advice. None of the commenting public agencies declared a need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for this project. Recommendation Based upon the comments received and resulting responses, it is recommended that the Council approve the attached resolution making a negative declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Shingle Creek Regional Pond. Project Update At this time, efforts are proceeding to complete the feasibility report for the Shingle Creek Regional Pond. The feasibility report will include design options, costs, and address other construction related issues. The staffs of the Cities of Minneapolis and Brooklyn Center, along with SEH Consulting Engineers have been working together cooperatively on this report, and we expect to have a draft feasibility report completed within the next 2 -3 weeks. In addition, the technical advisory group, consisting of the other affected regulating agencies has been continuing to meet and provide input during completion of this phase of the project. As you are aware, funding for this improvement suffered a significant setback when the project was deleted from the State's public works bonding bill. However, the staffs of both Minneapolis and Brooklyn Center have subsequently met to discuss any available alternatives, including i other potential funding sources, staging the project in segments, extending the project schedule for certain portions, etc. Upon completion of the feasibility report and further discussions with Minneapolis, staff intends to provide a more detailed report outlining possible courses of action to continue development and subsequent completion of this project. • Member introduced the following resolution and moved • its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION MAKING NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) FOR THE SHINGLE CREEK REGIONAL POND (BROOKLYN CENTER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -03) WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is the regulating governmental unit (RGU) in the processing of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Shingle Creek Regional Pond, located within the City of Minneapolis, in an area south of 53rd Avenue North and west of Upton Avenue North, and within the City of Brooklyn Center, in the area of Centerbrook Golf Course; and WHEREAS, the EAW has been prepared by Short- Elliott - Hendrickson Inc., Consulting Engineers; and WHEREAS, the EAW has been prepared in full cooperation with the City of • Minneapolis; and WHEREAS, the EAW considers water quality and water quantity issues from both local and regional perspective for both cities; and WHEREAS, the EAW has been prepared in close cooperation with all appropriate public commenting agencies; and WHEREAS, the City has submitted a copy of the EAW to all publications on the EAW distribution list, provided a press release to local newspapers, and published a notice of EAW availability in the EQB Monitor, providing for a 30 day comment period ending on April 24, 1996, all of which were done in accordance with State Statutes; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center acknowledges the responses from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council, and the Minnesota Historical Society, and the fact that Brooklyn Center City staff has collected said responses with discussion presented to the City Council for review; and WHEREAS, all comments received have been noted and addressed; and WHEREAS, none of the commenting public agencies declared a need for an EIS on the proposed project. • • RESOLUTION NO. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, r, Minnesota, that a negative declaration is made on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the Shingle Creek Regional Pond Improvement Project, identified as City of Brooklyn Center Improvement Project No. 1995 -03. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded p g g o s duly on ed 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. • • Shingle Creek Regional Pond J City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota _l Environmental Assessment Worksheet Comments & Responses City Brooklyn y f n Center y A great place to start. A great place to stay. - May 8, 1996 • 7► APR- 29 -199G 15:34 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 612 569 3494 P.09/09 �I b1wnsoT.x HISTORIC.41 SOCIETY a April 4, 1996 Mr. Scott Brink City Hall 6301 shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn center, Minnesota 55430 Dear Mr. Brink: Re: Construct regional storm water facility, SW /4 s2 and E/2 S3 in A Brooklyn Center and NW /4 Sll in Minneapolis, T118, R24, Hennepin County SHPO Number: 96 -1362 Thank you for providing this office a copy of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the above- referenced project. It has been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given to the Minnesota Historical society by the Minnesota Historic sites Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act and / through the process outlined in Minnesota Rules 4410 .1600_ There are no properties in the project area that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places or included in our inventory. In the absence of reported properties, we have also evaluated the likelihood that unreported historic or archaeological properties may be present. Although we cannot state with certainty that there are no significant unreported historical or archaeological properties within the project area, we feel that the probabil- ity of such properties being present is low. Therefore, in our opinion, the "no" response to question 26a is appropriate. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Sec- tion 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CF'R800, Pro - _ cedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the assisting federal agency. Please contact Dennis Gimmestad at 612 -296 -5462 if you have any questions regarding our review of this project. acerely, � . o�, I-. to L. Bioomb g Deputy State Historic Preservation f cer BLB:dmb i 345 KELLOCC B OULEVARD WEST / & NT PAUL. NIIN;NESOTA S;IO2..1got. i TELEPHONE: e) APR -29 -1996 15:31 CITY CF BRCCKLYN CENTER 612 569 3494 P.02i09 OF tiONN� 9 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources o N rn W � U a � 500 Lafavctta Rj)4(J �OFHdTttRP�Q S(. P:(ul, blinnrs<n;t 53 1.55 -30 _ April 19, 1996 Scott Brink, City Engineer City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Re: Environmental Asse ssment s ssment Worksheet (EAW) for Shingle Creek Regional Pond Dear Mr. Brink: The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has reviewed the above - referenced document and provides the following comments for your consideration. As you know, staff from our Metro Regional Office have been attending multi- agency planning meetings regarding this project. We commend the city for making a conscientious effort to get input and suggestions from the regulatory agencies early in the process. Overall, the project concept is good and should provide better water quality treatment in the area and • will restore some of the resource values in the wetland portions of the treatment pond. The preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required in our opinion. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. We Iook forward to receiving your record of decision and response to comments. Minnesota Rules, part 4410.1700, subparts 4 & 5, require you to send us your Record of Decision within five days of deciding this action. If you have questions regarding these comments, please contact Ken Wald of my staff at (612) 296 -4790. Sincerely, Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor Natural Resources Environmental Review Section Office of Planning c: Steve Colvin Gre Downing, g, EQB Pete Otterson Lynn Lewis, U.S. F &WS Ellen Heneghan Kathleen Wallace, Reg. 6 960255 -01 DN R Information: 6 t'_- 't(6 - 1 ? I - StN >- 7n6 -G! H111 - TTY (i ' ' _ ' 84. 1 800 (:17.392 Aa ELI=i UP�,s. .... F.atrlm r( A I'i trHitl nt: kPC Clcil !'alt'_'.rm:nnitl� Will, Vaia.• t Pay- !'.•n,�ua'r \1a.;i - APR - 29 -1996 15:31 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Metropolitan Counc 612 569 3494 P.03i09 - Working far the Re9iorl, Piannirlg �for �Fulu� • April 24, 1996 Scott Brink 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 5 5430 -2199 RE: Environmental gssessmeat Worksheet (EAW) Shingle Creek Regional Pond City of Brooklyn Center F Metropolitan Council District 2 Dear Council staff has reviewed this EAW to determine how adequately and accurately it addresses regional concerns. The following comments deal with specific items. Item 6 - Project Description The EAW does not state what will be built as a minimum in The EAW states that the actual Project may conjunction with the overall project. . components- Those components include on - sit facilities on the Brookda a Mall site, , a number n of Ponds off -site, expansion of Centerbrook Golf Course de _, new treatment or construction. of a regional stormwater pond within Po egraded wetland epmpleac. However, the 1 EAW does not provide any information on either the mall or golf course site proposals --only partial information concerning the proposal to direct runoff to the wetland complex. The EAW does not contain any delineation information concerning the wetland complex or the grit chamber identifie r unoff. as presumably been nc d n Exhibit 4 that h iluded to provide pretreatment to the influent storm water runoff. Itern 12 - Physical Impacts on Water Resources The EAW states that ap proximately PP ely 6 acres of wetlands will be impacted by the proposed project. . The EAW neither states where rubble fill materials proposed to be removed from wetlands on the site will ultimately be disposed, nor the type of permit(s) that will be required for such a deposition. The removal of rubble fill materials from the degraded wetland area could be considered restorative in nature, except for the associated plan to route stormwater through the wetland complex (j Insufficient information has been presented in the FAW to justify statements made that introduction of the new 30 -inch and 72 -inch storm sewer lines into the wetland complex will improve the quality of the wetlands. The EAW has not discussed the amount of bounce that could be tolerated by the forested wetland complex without jeopardizing its ecological integrity_ The conversion this wetlan of d habitat . complex to stormwater treatment basins should necessitate mitigation for its projected loss of wetland Item 18 - Water Quality - Surface Water Runo • Council staff recognizes the obvious merits of a proposed project to collect and treat storm water 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul. Minnesota 5 5101.1634 (612) 291.8359 Fa ' ax . 9 t -6550 TDD/= 291 -0904 APR -29 -1996 15:32 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 612 569 3494 P.04ZO9 runoff from as urbanized area of a • Staff is also aware PProAtnately 67S acres prior to its discharge into Shingle Creek that one of the sites chosen to provide preliminar Wetland complex that is degraded � a result of past indirect runoff' d treatment de of the runoff is a fill. deposition of rubble The -E A�V states that the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Co design total sus 1 PeIIded solid removal effirieac3► for new /redevelo P meat p � Q um acceptable Council's Interim Strntegy to Reduce NO int Source p r o ject s percent. The the Nationwide Urban Runoff Prag on gram's POdudon to all Me&0po� Waters has adopted criteria as its (NURP) wet detention basin desi z criteria s minimum acceptable stormwater treatment g° removal efficiency &5 Percent removal of total suspended solids as a mini criteria. NURP wet basin Council stag questions the validity of removal efficien minimum acceptable desi treatment system. cy modellin of this value. g type of hybrid stotmwater Even following =cavatiott of rubble to operationally meet triaII �, the wetland complex shown on Exhibit 4 will most likely fail Spectfic�y, the basin will have acceptable NURl' wet detention bas' sertlin � an inadequate hen h to in design criteria. g and retention of sediment, flow width cbnfiguration to promote proper d iminishing its estimated efficien be able to easily short-circuit from inlet to outlet r ecological irate �, maintenance to remove sediment will be difficult, and the RAW has not qty Of the wetland will be lost in its conversion to a stormwater treatme t basin Il effectiveness oProvided either in� information comp that would confirm t Mte the expected design Pollutant removal Po Pot e ntial "on-sit Ponds", etc.) or the overall treatment system. (grit chamber, first wet cell, other Po a The 1=AW has not provided sufficient basic facts, reasonable 'alternati concerning the proposed project for Councils or mitigation m easures project's construction does not have the potenti agree with the EAW's determination that the If si gni f icant (negative) environmentai effect. you have any questions, Please contact Jim Larsen at 291 -6404. Sincerely, Helen A $Oyer Division Director X� Environmental Services cc' Bill Schreiber, Council member District 2 Keith Buttleman, Director of Environmental Planni Carl Schenk, Alex- Edmund Daminten, Lynda Voetro E l an Po o uncil staff Ur- tskUOKLYN CENTER 612 569 3494 P.05/09 li Minnesota P ollution Contro • I Agenc � y q� Apnl 2 4, 1996 Mr. Scott Brink City Engineer g City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 554;0 12E: Shin gle Creek Regional pond, D Enviroaental I Assessment Worksheet t Dear Mr_ Brink; rn Thank You for the o in the city ppo �ty to review and co tY of Brooklyn Center, He comment on the. above - mentioned project to be Environmental Assessmentorksheeptn County Based on the ' built • staff information contained ' Put together the followin «, the E nvironmental Phannin In the g comments and concerns. g and Review Offi l • Y1em 6 indicates es t ha t3 35 Od cubic yards excavated and r of material that includes concrete debri exand emoved. The document should indicate where ns wulI be that it will be disposed of in accordance with soli l be disposed thus material of demolition material. d waste wil rules regarding the disposal �• Item 8 indicates that a Co sPs °f Engineers Nationwide permit will be 1equired indicates while that six acres of wetland Engineers Nationwide a will be impacted. 1t a Item 12 wetland permit would not be a ap �elY that a Corps of 3rd that an individual 404 applicable to aproject impacting six acres of required, an individual 401 water permit would be required If an Pollution Control quality certification would fi ne d f l h e e Agent uld be permit is r equired ui Q red from file Minnesota • Itern 12 indicates that and oche at this time, Mitigat other n eat g for features the si we snot ant tlaad alterati anti cipated. It should be noted that the t r e quirement for miti ration to storm water pond, etermined and thi as not been finally- d issue will be g 4 - In Item 18 ation pan of the permitting decision. R and other places, there is not enough detail about pond de " _ to determine the most a 1 await PPropriate pond layout and desig signs and the watershed fuuther discussion with the interage n Specific pond desig • a ncy broup working on this issue. ° n should 520 Lafayette Rd.'N.; St. Paul, MN 55155 -4194; (612 2g . Regional Offices Duluth • g I 6 63(X (voice); Equal Opportunity Emplo ar erd • Detroit Lak (612) 282.5332 (�Y) Yen • Printed on recycled Paper containin e3 • MSrShail - g at yeast Rochester 10% fibers trom fi f paper recycled Dv ( —I TY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 612 569 3494 P,p6�p • Scott Brink • P age Two April 24, 1996 We Iook forw eed to n for a 1 eceiving the required responses n Env ironmental Impact Statement. to our comments Ietter please contact Kevin f you have ' and Your decision on the in J, Its of mY staff at 612 ? any questions regar�g our co Sincerely, ) 96 - 74,2. mment &-Z a ll &- y Paul Hof Director Environmental Planning Admi nistrative Se °and Review Office Vices Division PH jf t I f } e P f • i ti SHINGLE CREEK REGIONAL POND City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (� EAW Comments and Responses i) Minnesota Historical Society (MHS) No response necessary Concluding Comment: "Therefore, in our opinion, the 'no' response to question 26a (archeological, historical or architectural resources) is appropriate." Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR No response necessary i Concluding Comments: "Overall, Overall, the project concept is good and should provide better water quality treatment in the area and will restore some of the resource values in the wetland portions of the treatment pond." "The preparation of an environmental impact statement required in our opinion." (EIS) is not Metropolitan Council Comment 1: "The EAW does not state what will be built as a minimum in con overall project." J with the Response: The exact alternative to be built will be determined during the design phase of the project. At a minimum, it will include expansion of the golf course open water area currently being used for treatment of stormwater and reshaping and r landscaping of the wetland in the Minneapolis portion of the project. d Comment 2: "The EAW does not contain any delineation information concerning the wetland � complex or the grit chamber identified on Exhibit 4 that has presumably been included to provide pretreatment to the influent storm water runoff." Response: A report "Wetland Delineation - Shingle Creek Wetland Project, Minnea • Minnesota" was prepared for the area on December olls, ber 30 Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH File A- MPLS05403.00) , 1994 by Short Elliott I Comment 3: • The EAW neither states where rubble fill materials proposed to be removed from wetlands on the site will ultimately e disposed, nor Y p the type of permit(s) that will be required for such a deposition." Response: The location of a rubble fill materials disposal site has yet been identified. It is anticipated that the material would first be removed to a temporary staging area (site not yet determined). At the staging area the rubble material would be analyzed and a determination would be made if it is salvageable to be crushed into base material for roads and storm sewer installations. If not, it would be placed in an appropriate landfill site. All applicable permits will be applied for and complied with after a determination is made of the type of material removed. Comment 4: "The removal of rubble fill materials from the degraded wetland area could be considered restorative in nature, except for the associated lan to route stormwater through the wetland complex." p Response: ` All stormwater into the Minneapolis wetland complex will be pretreated. Direct runoff from local storm sewers in Minneapolis will be connected to grit chambers prior to discharging into the wetland. All flow from the Brooklyn Center system • will be pre- treated in the ponds located on the golf course. Comment 5: "Insufficient information has been presented in the EAW to justify statements made that introduction of the new 30 -inch and 72 -inch storm sewer lines into the wetland complex will improve the quality of the wetlands." Response: It is believed that the project will improve the degraded wetland by adding more diversity into the system. The primary goal of this project is to provide a treatment "system" to improve the water quality of runoff from the commercial and industrial areas in Brooklyn Center and Highway 100. Pre - treatment of the i stormwater prior to discharge into the wetland complex is an essential component of the project. The existing wetland complex is to be modified to provide final water quality improvements, and yet be an amenity to the area. Comment 6: "The EAW has not discussed the amount of bounce that could be tolerated by the forested wetland complex without jeopardizing its ecological integrity." Response: The City of Minneapolis will have a landscape expert analyze the existing and i Proposed vegetation to determine appropriate species in the area during the final planning stages of the project. A preliminary field inspection of the area as indicated that many of the current species are intrusive in nature and would be removed as part of the project. Comment 7: "The conversion of this wetland etland complex to stormwater treatment basins should necessitate mitigation for its projected loss of wetland habitat." Response: The need for mitigation g on will be determined after the design phase and during the permitting process. Comment 8: "Council staff questions the validity of removal efficiency modelling of this type of hybrid stormwater treatment system." Response: The validity of the removal efficiency modelling will further be studied during the design phase of the project. Comment 9: "The EAW has not provided any information that would confirm the expected design pollutant removal effectiveness of either individual components (grit chamber, first wetland cell, other potential 'on -site ponds', etc.) or the overall treatment system." Response: The expected design pollutant removal effectiveness of individual components or the overall treatment system will determined during the design phase. Comment 10: "The EAW has not provided sufficient basic facts reasonable alternatives, or mitigation measures concerning the proposed project for Council staff to agree with the EAW's determination that the project's construction does not have the potential for significant (negative) environmental effect." Response: The design phase will gather data, examine alternatives, and consider mitigative measures necessary to prevent significant (negative) environmental effect. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (1TCA) Comment 1: "Item 6 indicates that 35,000 cubic yards of material that includes concrete debris will be excavated and removed. The document should indicate where this material will be disposed of and that it will be disposed of in accordance with solid waste rules regarding the disposal of demolition material." Response: The location of a rubble fill materials disposal site has yet been identified. It is anticipated that the material would first be removed to a temporary staging area . (site not yet determined). At the staging area the rubble material would be analyzed and a determination would be made if it is salvageable to be crushed into base material for roads and storm sewer installations. If not, it would be placed • in an appropriate landfill site. All applicable permits will be applied for and complied with after a determination is made of the type of material removed. J Comment 2: "It appears likely that a Corps of Engineers Nationwide permit would not be applicable to a project impacting six acres of wetland and that an individual 404 permit would be required. If an individual 404 permit is required, an individual 401 water quality certification would be required from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency." r Response: The applicable permits and certifications will be acquired as per agency (J requirements. j Comment 3: "It should be noted that the requirement for mitigation has not been finall determined and this issue will be part of the permitting decision." y Response: Mitigation will be provided for as per permitting decisions. Comment 4: "There is not enough detail about pond designs most appropriate pond layout and design. Specfic pond design determine houl a the further discussion with the interagency g n d d await g y group working on this issue." Response: Specific pond design will be developed during the design phase of the project and will incorporate interagency discussion. i l City of Brooklyn Center 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 May 28, 1996: AMUSEMENT DEVICES - OPERATOR Brooklyn Center Community Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Fuddruckers 5800 Shingle Creek Parkway Humboldt Square Police Substation 6828 Humboldt Ave. N. Lynbrook Bowl 6357 Lilac Drive N. AMUSEMENT DEVICES - VENDOR American Amusement Arcades 850 Decatur Ave. N. B & K Music and Sales 133 Spring Valley Circle D. V.M.. Inc. DBA Dahlco 296 North Pascal GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION Hilger Transfer 8550 Zachary Lane Waste Management - Blaine 10050 Naples St. NE MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Cronstrom's Heating and A/C 7201 West Lake St. Pierce Refrigeration 1920 2nd Ave. S. Twin City Furnace Co., Inc. 1464 Selby Ave. RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Matthew Albrecht 7230, 7240, 7250 West River Road Renewal: Michael and Amy Desparois 5301 Dupont Ave. N. James Shoultz 4214 Lakeside Ave. N. Roland Scherber 7212 Newton Ave. N. Hogenson Properties 3813 Urban Ave. N. Tracy Rice 5836 Xerxes Ave. N. SIGN HANGER Performance Signs and Display, Inc. 8616 Xylon Ave. N. TAXICAB Minnesota Taxi, #121 7786 Upper 145th Court. W. Town Taxi, #125 7000 57th Ave. N. Licenses continued Page 2 TOBACCO RELATED PRODUCTS Value Food Market 6804 Humboldt Ave. N. General Approval: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk • 7o. • MEMO To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager From: Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Spec' ist i -n Subject: City Council Consideration Item - Plannin g PP Commission Application No. 96006 Date: May 21, 1996 On the May 28, 1996 City Council Agenda is Planning Commission Application No. 96006 submitted by Cross of Glory requesting �S' PP Lutheran Church re uestin Preliminary Plat approval to subdivide the Cross of Glory Lutheran Church property into five lots consisting of three single family lots, one large lot for the church and one outlot. Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning Commission Application No. 96006 containing an area map showing the location of the property under consideration, a survey, and a drainage, grading, utility and parking plan. Also attached are the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter. This matter was considered by the Planning Commission at their May 16, 1996 meeting and, • following public hearing el" g p and deliberation, was recommended for : g � approval It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the application subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. • Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 96006 Applicant: Cross of Glory Lutheran Church Location: 5929 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests Preliminary Plat Approval to subdivide the existing Cross of Glory Lutheran Church lot into five lots consisting of one lar lot for the church, three new single family lots and one outlot. The property in question is zoned R -1 and is bounded on the north by Admiral Lane; on the east by Brooklyn Boulevard and C -1 zoned property including the Brookdale West Professional Building (5901 Brooklyn Boulevard) and anon- conforming single family home at 5837 Brooklyn Boulevard: on the south by a single family home at 5830 Drew Avenue North and 58 '' /z Avenue North; on the west by Ewing Avenue including two single family homes at 5916 and 5920 Ewing Avenue North. The church property was replatted in 1990 -91 into its current configuration. It's legal description is Lot 2, Block 1, Cross of Glory Addition. The proposed new legal description is Lots 1, 2, 3) and 4, Block 1 and Outlot A, Cross of Glory Second Addition. These lots would have the following characteristics: Lot Width Depth Area Use 1 IRREGULAR 199,840 sq. ft. (4.587 A) Church and Parking Lot 2 84' 113.75' 9,555 sq. ft. (.219 A) Single Family Interior Lot 3 93' 113.75' 10,579 sq. ft. (.243 A) Single Family Corner Lot 4 75' 177' 13,275 sq. ft. (305 A) Single Family Interior Lot Outlot A 57.66' 90.57' 5,222 sq. ft. (.120 A) Unbuildable/Future Sale & (Appros) Combination Minimum lot requirements for sin family residential lots are 75 ft. in width and 9,500 sq. ft. in area for interior lots, and 90 ft. in width and 10,500 sq. ft. in area for comer lots. The outlot is set up for possible sale or conveyance to an adjoining property. It is unbuildable until combined with another property. The new residential lots created face Ewing Avenue and 58 1 /z Avenue. Sanitary sewer and water lines are available in both Ewina and 58 '/2 Avenues. Storm sewer is also located in 58 'V Avenue. Five ft. wide drainage and utility easements should be shown around the side and rear lot lines for the new residential lots and a 10 ft. drainage and utility easement along the front property lines. y The creation of the new single family lots abutting the church parking lot will require the need to establish buffer and screening provisions by the church. A minimum 15 ft. greenstrip is required • before parking or drive lanes can be established. This area is also to contain a screening device. Evergreen trees are used for screening between the church parking lot and the existing single family residence at 5920 Ewing Avenue. The church will establish a 15 ft. greenstrip along the area where it abuts with the single family lots. They will provide curb and gutter in this area as 5 -16 -96 Pagel well. Acceptable screening will also have to be established and should be acknowledged by the Planning Commission. • Currently there are drainage problems in the area where the new lots are to be created and an existing lot is located. The church is proposing to tie into existing storm sewer in 58 % Avenue to drain this area. The City Engineer will be review, ing this proposal to provide appropriate drainage for this site. The proposed division will not require review by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission. The Cross of Glory Church will be reconfiguring their parking lot because of the creation of the new lots. This will result in the loss of parking, however, this is an area seldom used for church Parkin-. There currently is an existing agreement between the church and the Brookdale West Professional Building to share parking facilities at different times. Even without the shared parking, the church will be able to provide adequate parking for its own purposes. The parking requirement for the 630 seat church is 210 parking spaces (one parking space for every three seats). Even with the reconfigurated parking, they will be able to provide approximately 230 parking spaces. It should be noted that the church is planning an expansion to their existing facility and will be presenting a Site and Building Plan for that proposal to the Planning Commission in the near future. We would still recommend the execution of a performance agreement and financial guarantee as part of the platting process to assure completion of the required buffer, screening and curb and gutter improvements. This could be included in a subsequent performance agreement and financial guarantee if the building plans for the church facility go forward. • A g ublic hearing has been scheduled d P � an notic appeared m the Brooklyn Center Sun/Post. The Preliminary Plat appears to be in order and is recommended for approval subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances, including the need for a subdivision agreement regarding costs for utility service lines and hook -ups. 3. The applicant shall enter into a performance agreement and provide a financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined) to assure completion of all required buffer, screening and curb and gutter improvements. This performance agreement and financial guarantee shall be posted prior to the release of the final plat for filing with Hennepin County. 5 -16 -96 Page 2 L f RAl1(E j�vt) ►+LLt_lL —J - - - - — - Of I r ^ + _ yE _ r 4 - I RAL PL. + i 'K .r. x ,'� ) .�G y X = rG AVE N. b DREW AVE. c _ - a l OREW Q ` ITITI Pod r tz I i p 3 a. we LJ IUJO N f�l 1n- 1i AVE. L� �. T \ :\ _ � - � L1_LL1J ABBOTT AYE. • N. iTfNiTll AV i- l�.l ^ IV Tn i _.._ —_ E.1 - -_ -. • tea �. � . - J ... _. �. — b IERI�S .AVE. T .- —• -- _ � a WAS11VNA N. - - _.. -- � � ��' /,� � .,•�� � � OPT &t �ti� \ \ \ � \� .� Y •- � ��. � .•t��j il l. G >�L'a /• �`` � (-I Uu OuE EN AVE N. j - -- �---- �I111_ _ _� ���� �• � ¢ma I AVE_,l � f l `' OLIVE AVE lam_ N r LA. — LpRCAN AVE OR SUWIT � / J PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CROSS OFGLORY 2ND ADDITION CROSS O GLORY LUTHERAN CHURCH : '�` — __•?ir. _` = '�:.�• -: -�` 592P Brooklyn Blvd. Brookl n Cenler,Minn. y It f TLO O ��; _ � �_--- � r �.[ I t ,� � � ,,,� ' �= •."�'i.'•.,' � , jam �, { { r _ ,,.... .. .. W.a�' uLL'.un�o.. t , ...�./ ' v wv/ ''� _ •' - t )s 'i �F..{.. i� - I ` .r.. —c �. T,.� —+ 1`A Imo:.— TC.l�`�Y fIY /N6 AYEN(/E NGI - (\r � i !'. � / i 1' , i � , - • � cwiir — - • -- ' � � / p 1 `3'3"x.{ wa , ♦T.' a � I i t , VI l.. •' 'i•'"r r^•z;;':.l.•"`: l/Yr•j LIIr. r � -` a -.7D� I.f /o /a BROO,f -LYN BL YO• ��� I •a . ...s. r.. 41 W fnz P F lit t - I' ,� . � 1 ;,� • _ ., _, > > .rn rr i i I ' IOUTLOT A J;� =ro•a Deer .rw» I., r e.oc. r, twoss a ,: 'M-r �: — f�..`.. -!'.. _ _^ • �3 {. _ _ �- .�'i I:� .. 11;'.� ncw,Er.1. co »rr.. ..um. ',. __ -(T —_ '— - ---- - i n' a n a � ! ' , - � � ��� i...... � I- i• t :I ice— �--- — z� J .I -.TI • I — .. � "Z:. .I u..e•..rc.. ,ara ....�.. � ',` '.�, � � i W � ui J cc I :I : Ix o � u.e O Fi l � �� I I a c9 a.r a_ - --- - -- - -- ... ... ` t '. '_+".�—_-s r I r I I _ --•___ ..�._ -.--- —._._. _.._._— ..-_.,_ ° u EfY /.YG A!r /E ' i1'O MEMORANDUM DATE: May 15, 1996 TO: Ron Warren, Planning and Zoning Specialist FROM: Scott Brink, City Engineer SUBJECT:. PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SITE PLAN CROSS OF GLORY LUTHERAN CHURCH A review of the proposed preliminary plat and site plan have been conducted, and the following comments are presented. The preliminary plat was dated April 25, 1996 and the site plan dated May 13, 1996; both prepared by Merila and Associates. 1. Drainage and utility easements must be provided along all property lines. A minimum 5 ft. drainage and utility easement must be provided along all interior property lines and a 10 foot easement must be provided along all property lines bordering street right of way or roadway. The easements must be shown clearly on the preliminary plat. 2. Repeated drainage problems in the southern portion of this property have been reported by neighboring property owners; particularly around and at the southeast corner of 5920 Ewing Avenue ® North. The applicant is providing additional storm sewer in this area to connect with existing storm sewer located under 58 1 /- , Avenue North. In addition, the applicant has proposed some filling and grading to assist in accommodating runoff more effectively. The applicant must coordinate this grading with the property owner at 5920 Ewing since fill material is also proposed to be placed on that property. The existing storm sewer catch basin at the southern end of the property currently carries the majority of all drainage on the Church property, and will continue to do so according to the proposed plan. The proposal to convert about 0.80 acres of the property from parking Iot to residential property should assist in reducing the amount of runoff, and along with the added storm sewer, should improve the existing situation. However, it is recommended that the applicant evaluate the effectiveness of the existing catch basin and assure that its capacity is sufficient. In addition, it is recommended that as a condition of final plat approval, the following be required to be completed within a reasonable time frame as established by the City: A. The proposed Lots 2, 3, 4 shall be removed of pavement surface and turf established. B. The proposed storm sewer shall be installed. A hook -up permit shall be secured with the City prior to connection with the existing storm sewer. C. The applicant shall work and cooperate with neighboring properties to complete grading as proposed on the plan. • 3. Additional concrete curb and gutter is proposed for the revised portions of the parking lot. It is recommended that the applicant consider completing the remaining portions of the parking lot with curb and gutter as well. 4. Sanitary sewer and water main currently exist within Ewing Ave. N. And 58 Vf± Ave. N. The applicant will be responsible for service connections to the main, including restoration of the street surface and base, and water and sanitary hook up fees as applicable. 5. The proposed site plan will be subject to any additional conditions and requirements of private utilities. 6. An erosion and sedimentation control plan must be provided prior to final approval. 7. A standard utility and maintenance agreement with the City will be required as a condition of final approval. i • 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 MAY 16, 1996 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairperson Willson at 7:38 p.m. ROLL CALL Chair Tim Willson, Commissioners Donald Booth, Mark Holmes, Dianne Reem, and Graydon Boeck were present. Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning and Zoning Specialist Ronald Warren and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Arlene Bergfalk. Commissioner Palm telephoned she is unable to attend this meeting and was excused; however, no word was received from Commissioner Mickelson. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - APRIL 25. 1996 i Chair Willson requested that page 4, of the April 25 minutes be amended to read as follows: "Chair Willson noted that recent legislation that would have helped Brookdale Mall with future state funding was vetoed by the governor." There was a motion by Commissioner Booth seconded by Commissioner Holmes to approve the minutes of the April 25, 1996 Planning Commission meeting as amended. The motion passed unanimously. CHAIRPERSON'S EXPLANATION Chair Willson explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the 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. 96006 Commissioner Boeck excused himself from consideration of Application No. 96006 at 7:40 p.m. to avoid any possible conflict of interest. He returned at 8:35 p.m. after discussion concluded and action was taken on the Application, to participate in the remainder of the meeting. Chair Willson introduced Application No. 96006, a request for approval of a preliminary plat from Cross of Glory Lutheran Church to subdivide the existing church lot at 5929 Brooklyn Boulevard into five lots consisting of one large lot for the church, three new single family lots and one outlot. • 5 -16 -96 1 The Secretary presented the staff report and used overhead transparencies to show the location and • preliminary plat subdivision of the Cross of Glory 2nd Addition. (See details in Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 96006 dated 5 -16 -96 attached.) The Secretary presented the City Engineer's report on the proposed preliminary plat and site plan dated May 15, 1996. The report reviews required drainage and utility easements, grading and catch basin issues, and recommends conditions for final plat approval. The engineer's review included discussion with church representatives and neighbors adjacent to the site. PUBLIC HEARING (APPLICATION NO. 96006) Chair Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide the existing. Cross of Glory Lutheran Church lot. There was a motion by Commissioner Holmes seconded by Commissioner Booth to open the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Willson opened the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. and invited comments from the public. Mr. Jim Merila, representing Merila & Associates (consulting engineer for the project), stated he had no further comments to add to the Secretary's presentation, but would answer Commissioners' questions. Commissioner Holmes inquired about the church's plans for future expansion. Mr. Merila explained that this project includes construction of a fellowship hall and internal remodeling to provide additional office space. A separate site and building plan for that proposal will be presented to the Commission in the near future. Chair Willson requested further description of the proposed landscaping and screening. Mr. Merila explained the church's preference for five greenery, detailed the locations of additional evergreen trees and hedge shrubbery planned for the plat. Size of the trees will be at least the minimum required height and planted on- center to provide for growth to produce maximum screening. He noted additional fencing would be used only as a last resort. A new storm sewer, curb and gutter, adequate greenstrip, and berming will be installed. Commissioner Reem complimented the use of evergreen trees and inquired about the chains between the church and the Brookdale West Professional Building. Mr. Merila explained the long- standing agreement between the church and the Professional Building owner for shared use of the existing parking facility for mutually eneficial u Y purposes. Commissioner Booth recommended staggered planting of evergreen trees on the 15' greenstrip to provide maximum screening. Commissioner Holmes inquired about ownership of the existing evergreen trees and fence. Mr. Merila stated the trees are owned and maintained by the church, however, an existing fence installed by a neighbor encroaches on church property. An agreement between the resident and the church • allows the fence to remain and rovides procedures for its removal if appropriate. P P 5 -16 -96 2 Commissioner Reem inquired whether neighbors' comments have been solicited. Mr. Merila reported • that discussions with the city engineer and Messrs. Switzer and Carlson have taken place. Concerns have been resolved and issues, responsibilities, and maintenance clarified. The Commissioners generally accepted the landscaping and screening plans proposed by the applicant. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chair Willson called for further comments from the public. There was a motion by Commissioner Reem seconded by Commissioner Booth to close the public hearing on Application No. 96006, at 8:25 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO 96006 Chair Willson requested that the City Engineer's recommendations be included in the conditions for approval of the proposed preliminary plat and site plan application. There was a motion by Commissioner Booth seconded by Commissioner Reem to approve Application No. 96006 submitted by the Cross of Glory Lutheran Church, subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer with the following conditions: - Drainage and utility easements must be provided along all property lines and shown clearly • on the preliminary plat. - The applicant must coordinate grading with the property owner at 5920 Ewing and effectiveness of the existing catch basin and adequacy of its capacity be evaluated. - The following must be completed within a time frame established by the City as conditions for final plat approval: a. The proposed Lots 2, 3, 4 shall be removed of pavement surface and turf established. b. The proposed storm sewer shall be installed. A hook -up permit shall be secured with the City prior to connection with the existing storm sewer. C. The applicant shall work and cooperate with neighboring properties to complete grading as proposed on the plan. - The applicant should consider completion of the remaining portions of the parking lot with curb and gutter. - The applicant will be responsible for service connections to the existing sanitary sewer and water main within Ewing Avenue North and 58 -1/2 Avenue North including restoration of • the street surface and base and hookup fees as applicable. 5 -16 -96 3 • - The proposed site plan will be subject to any additional conditions and requirements of private utilities. - An erosion and sedimentation control plan must be provided prior to final approval. - A standard utility and maintenance agreement with the City will be required as a condition of final approval. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances, including the need for a subdivision agreement regarding costs for utility service lines and hook -ups. 3. The applicant shall enter into a performance agreement and provide a financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined) to assure completion of all required buffer, screening and curb and gutter improvements. This performance agreement and financial guarantee shall be posted prior to the release of the final plat for filing with Hennepin County. 4. Required screening along the west property line where the Church parking lot abuts R -1 zoned property may be landscaping consisting of evergreen trees at least six feet high, planted 20 feet on center. Required screening of the parking lot on the south side of 58 '/2 Avenue should consist of berming and landscaping 3 '/2 to 4 feet in height. Voting in favor: Chair Willson, Commissioners Booth, Holmes, and Reem. The motion P assed • unanimously. The Council will consider the recommendation at its May 28 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. APPLICATION NO. 96007 Chair Willson introduced Application No. 96007, a request from American Brake Service for a special use permit to operate a facility that specializes in brake service and repair in the former St. Paul Book and Stationary tenant space in the retail center at 5810 Xerxes Avenue North. The Secretary presented the staff report and used overhead transparencies to show the location and preliminary leasehold and site plans. (See details in Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 96007, dated 5 -16 -96 attached). Mr. Warren pointed out that while the applicant is not contemplating performing under the hood service and oil change service at the present time, the Commissioners may wish to consider approval of adding those services to this application. Commissioner Holmes inquired about the adjacent businesses. Commissioner Reem inquired whether the existing food service business would be detrimentally affected by vehicle emissions. Mr. Warren explained there should be no problem because there is appropriate separation in the building. Commissioner Reem inquired whether there will be hoists, pits, and ramps. Mr. Warren stated hoists 5 -16 -96 4 7b MEMO To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager ' From: Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Sped ist .C,.b6 Subject: City Council Consideration Item - Planning Commission Application No. 96007 Date: May 21, 1996 On the May 28, 1996 City Council Agenda is Planning Commission Application No. 96007 submitted by American Brake Service requesting Special Use Permit approval to remodel existing space at 5810 Xerxes Avenue North for use as an American Brake Service Store. Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning Commission Application No. 96007 containing an area map showing the location of the property under consideration and various site and building plans for the proposed development. Also attached are the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter. • This matter was considered by the Planning Commission at their May 16, 1996 meeting and, following public hearing and deliberation, was recommended for approval. It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the application subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Information Sheet • Application No. 96007 Applicant: American Brake Service Location: 5810 Xerxes Avenue North Request: Special Use Permit The applicant, Mr. Gar Matson, on behalf of American Brake Service (ABS), is seeking a Special Use Permit to operate an automotive repair facility specializing in brake service and repair in the former St. Paul Book and Stationary tenant space in the retail center located at 5810 Xerxes Avenue North. The ro e p p rtY in question is zoned C -2 (Commerce) and is bounded on the north by Northway Drive with the Summerchase Apartments (formerly Four Courts Apartments) on the opposite side of the street; by the Norwest Bank facility on the east; by JoAnn Fabrics and Twin City Federal on the south; and Xerxes Avenue North on the west. Gasoline service stations, motor vehicle repair and auto washes are special uses in the C -2 zoning district provided they do not abut R -1, R -2, or R -3 zoned property including abutment at a street line. The Summerchase Apartments are zoned R -5 , therefore, no abutment problems exist with this proposed use. Mr: Matson has submitted various written information relating to the operation and a site plan showing the proposed location. He claims ABS Centers specialize in automotive • brake service and other under car services such as suspension, steering and constant velocity joints. He notes ABS Centers do not perform under hood services such as tuneups. Their plan is to remodel the approximate 5,200 sq. ft. tenant space into a four bay service operation, customer waiting area, auto display area, sales counter, parts storage room and office area. The propose ose to provide two overhead Y P P P service doors one on the north wall and the other on the east wall, at the northeast corner of the building. This will eliminate at least four, possibly five, parking spaces in this location. PARKING This 14, 743 sq. ft. retail center is required to have 81 parking spaces based on the parking standards of 5.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area. There currently are 90 spaces provided in the parking lot for this facility. Eliminating five spaces for the American Brake Service proposal leaves a total of 85 parking spaces available. The parking requirement for auto repair is three parking spaces per enclosed service bay plus one parking space for each day shift employee. The formula also calculates space for vehicles. ABS proposes to have no service vehicles. Based on this parking formula, the approximate 2,400 sq. ft. devoted to service bays would require 16 parking spaces. The retail parking formula for the same space requires 13 spaces (2.4 X 5.5 = 13.2), a deficiency of three spaces. The total of 85 parking spaces will cover the deficiency, in fact, there will be a surplus of one parking space. 5 -16 -96 Page 1 • SPECIAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS The applicant has submitted a written statement indicating how he believes they meet the standards for Special Use Permits contained in Section 35 -220, Subdivision 2a through e (attached). A Special Use Permit can be granted based on compliance with these standards. The applicant indicates that American Brake Service is a clean, efficient after market auto service company specializing in brake service repair, suspension and other under car services. They believe these services will enhance the general welfare of the community and they will not be detrimental to or endanger the public welfare. They believe their service provides and creates a positive impact on the communities in which the are located. The o on Y Y o indicate that the believe that Y 9 their color scheme for their tenant space will be pleasant and attractive. They note that their hours of operation are between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. on Saturday. They claim there is no outside storage required for the operation and cars left overnight will be pulled indoors. They further claim the business has light traffic and will not generate congestion or place any financial strain on the neighborhood or surrounding properties. They go on to indicate that ABS will compliment the other service oriented businesses in the' surrounding area. They indicate that the parking lot and circulation for the center will be very functional. They conclude by indicating that they will conform to all other applicable regulations in the district. We generally agree with the applicants comments relating to the standards for Special Use Permits, however, the possibility of open service doors and ossibl outside P Y display and storage could have a detrimental effect on the neighboring residential area to the north. We would, therefore recommend conditions o s of approval aimed at preventing noise and visual pollution from this use. There should be absolutely no outside storage of parts, equipment or trash. The applicant has not indicated on the plan their need for an outside trash disposal facility. Apparently all trash will be confined to inside the building. The display of merchandise should be limited to that which can be accomplished through the administrative permit process. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent to surrounding property owners. RECOMMENDATION All in all, it appears that this application is in order and that the standards for Special Use Permits can be met. Approval is, therefore, recommended subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The Special Use Permit is granted to the applicant for an automotive repair facility specializing in brake services and repair including under car services, 5 -16 -96 Page 2 • such as suspension, steering and constant velocity joints. Any change in the use of the operation not comprehended by this application or permitted under the zoning ordinance will require approval of an amendment to this Special Use Permit. 2. Building plans for tenant remodeling and overhead doors shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 3. There shall be no service, repair or maintenance of vehicles out of doors and all vehicles being so serviced and maintained shall be done so inside the building with the overhead doors closed. 4. Any outside trash disposal facility and rooftop or on ground mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. There shall be no outside display or storage of merchandise on this site other than that which is authorized under Administrative Land Use permits. 6. The Special Use Permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations. Any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 5 -16 -96 Page 3 _ LI id RAL ­ r I L. I N ELJ aL. r - - -�'N •7A.3�NVU - _��� _ _1 —! SC f "- X Y )_�� � _� _ N '3AY _ -- r� — >- >_ a `` y � jl� '� l� :C ,� / � 1 M IG _ AVE. N. � -- �`P�j b D gw AVE. V I j Dq GREY q ���� - C� �U u \Yo LA Ut AVE. I �, , �, -I' /I ✓ I x TM ITTIN T /1, "1 I VE.1 I I x x x I's. i \ � ABEtoT7 _AVE.• N. �\ �' t HT A JA , z 70, 7 �f_1 = - -= �� -0 2 VI AVE. N. J '� Y r -- . �>` �� C] o V � TT A VE. N. �y(� z 3 CD fl Ir c L rrr - 9 ) 0 -11 LL UPT66 AGE . IX MjWSSCLL AVE N. 4 h -TT OL R AVE CD R RM: i� i� __ - 1 !jl�r �4AVEd D ? � - ` _ MORGAN AVE ff- 11 -- su 11 DR. - - - 1 - 1 T --- " [T � �• ma 'rt•� ,,,,�J Udw-iy �nrya , - li— _ �o aC, I� �inorrlv MAN — — — — — — — r`\ O�� — —� �r+11 ►l�lyt -! �-- - -��Ir� fN71yVd — =` �— — - c�i.� ZI 1 o�yy ' I CJrrr� Q 44, I ,i I _ 0 — {-- i —I - - - - -- — r 4— c y I �� `� �: '� '1 )+w1f.L 11t� ll�n�i� •".4� .. { V -1 Al 41(1'd ^r^ D ;' o` �1 U I ❑ r di — r ,1 �(iJl +lu+rtllf� g 41f o �� 4 _ Fj '1 Urx� 11 F Tp j L 0 ur, 4 �— -- _ — I lhl',l� Z � �✓)r;yo `' 4i � n ___ ,sr� T . � f�� r l 1 j r� {'r t�� i ❑ ' � �N�r� � � t � 0',5 - A I / � � �� ���. •lam V ?rI1C11• {7 bi 4v o: bl �o Gil'tr'd� � /,, / of � , #1 _ / /� '; � - t - - -- i1 lrrj l'r�'7YIJYW {,v Ur1n�1�9N'YJ N��11�F+ :Y'1fJv i `91N(I __ °l II / 1�1 Ic •� 1 r �7 �tV r rll I II 4. O - r I Taro '�in•rbi� .�. _ -�: I r !ss^cc� —__ - -- • 1 SI KS NI . 1'nl , . Icrnnl'1 • tOZ'n ^$ . g a+y Clo _ bz E Ir�o Pi �"( (vitro tnIu." -ko c , rb • J•t • N 09 �rn3Y �c�d 0 0 44 � '�3 I �p+(1 rlo.rtivr 4b yl J- �d f 11 w 1 iIyd _-'i ► "1II� N otkT{ 1 W,nY t? Ki ve> ' PJttUtv}p�1 2e'•o 1�- �Cl� / �Lf ✓/ I i i DK4 Ve ar <gh, � Nc GAre�t OA)fC DRav� �'-M1° VP Cv" �3 C-x I STl N �� 1'�!' — ►�C� MoRrll i / • ' r I y I / , f 3 - ',' .1 t - •� ..�. '� �� ���SL;,{� .�.ar ;. i{ * ;`}��u: n f •r I • .�lr`��, `` _ .�.,, i J('�' ii.• — — — — , '� t • .!�•��. :�• � ,��' r. -'� ��t�,�,�'��, , g yi<. •1 '..'Y `•�'�•.. ����. !41114 J�I�. ��,• � •.��,'' I ;A f� {J j r• ��,�. . a . . tl(.' ,y:.. �-,°r•' — - — { - y �• �, N ... ; sy.'';1'. Fi � �'.:' �;� '~. , � h ,~�. � 1 '- - -' <f'• � � .. .; �/�.,'1 alW — ` �1 µ r - :.. — - — — — � — ju ''� r�rl}' t .f..i t:j;•J�I, ��, :':,.�`:r. Pt`c. ,•`. , t 1 %'. 1. rbbl IyYI �•'N ' 1 l ytil _rI'11' : :;. t i'gl- �rV'�(jiOndrk• �;9 0"7 .,o Kr _�,i3O • �S� S��thuy(f �.. - -_ -- ; -r? vSa ila�.d Q - " • DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS STRUCTURE -- - " - - "" Sub- Chapter S Corporation STATUS Start-Up Operation, Automotive After Market Franchise INTRODUCTION American Brake Service (ABS) expansion program is being done through area developers marketing directly to Franchisees. Gar Matson and Bonita Klein are the area developers bringing this franchise opportunity to the State of Minnesota. BUSINESS PRODUCTS AND SERVICES American Brake Service Centers specialize in automotive brake service. ABS, Inc.'s years of experience in this industry have evolved into a highly efficient system for troubleshooting, selling services, shop operations and the overall management of the business. ABS Centers also provide other undercar services that compliment the Brake Specialist theme such as: suspension, steering and constant velocity joints. ABS Centers do not perform under hood services, i.e. tune ups. ABS Centers are clean modern and designed with production in mind. Most centers have four bays, a customer waiting area, sales counter with office, parts storage room and a well laid out shop area. American Brake Service Centers are finished in an attractive color scheme, attractive exterior signage, appropriate landscaping and efficient point of sale interior signage. By utilizing ABS techniques, purchasing power and other marketing skills, American Brake Service Centers are highly price competitive in the marketplace. Most parts and services carry a lifetime guarantee. The goals of American Brake Service is to accommodate, service and satisfy the customer. • 5 810 Xerxes Avenue North Our plan is to remodel the former St. Paul Book and Stationary space which will house American Brake Service and MTR, Ltd corporate offices as shown on the attached plans. American Brake will service between eight (8) and twelve (12) cars per day with approximately one -half (1 /2) waiting. An additional three -six (3 -6) cars will stop in for information and estimates. ABS will employ approximately (4) employees. MTR, Ltd. offices will employ (3) people. Development and construction of this space will start in mid -June, 1996, with anticipated completion at the end of July, 1996 • BASIC INFORy1ATION ABOUT THE BUSINESS THE FRANCHISOR IS: American Brake Service, Inc. 3715 Northside Parkway, N.W. Bldg. 300, Suite 500 Atlanta, GA 30327 Tel: 404- 262 - 7005/800 -362 -7005 Fax: 404 -262 -0810 THE FRANCHISEE IS: Garfield ;Matson Bonita Klein MTR, ltd. MTR, ltd. 8443 University Ave. NE 8443 University Ave. NE Spring Lake Park, ifY 55432 Spring Lake Park, .-\ 55432 Tel.: 612- 786 -7606 Tel.: 612- 786 -7606 Fax: 612 - 786 -7 1 ')15 Fix: 612- 736 -7;15 THE FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION # IS: 41- 1781558 THE BUSINESS OWNER IS: Garfield Matson Bonita Klein 4575 Oakview Lane 8904 Fallon Ave. NE Plymouth, Minnesota 5544 Monticello, Minnesota 55362 612- 550 -1817 612- 295 -5043 SOCIAL SECURITY # IS: 468 -38 -2367 471 -56 -7685 PERCENTAGE OF BUSINESS OWNED: 50% 50% Mr. Matson and Ms. Klein will be actively involved in the daily operation of the business as Managers and Franchise Owners. Their Personal Financial Statements are Exhibit C. • 2. Standards for Scee:al use Permits A special use permit may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following are met: • (a) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. (b) The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. (c) The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses Permitted in the district. (d) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. (e) The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. 3. Conditions and Restrictions The Planning Commission may recommend and the City Council may impose such conditions and restrictions upon the establishment, location, construction, maintenance and operation of the special use as deemed necessary for the protection of the public interest and to secure comoliance with requirements specified in this ord- inance. In all cases in which special use permits are granted, the Citv Council may require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as part of the conditions stipulated in connec- tion therewith. 4. Resubmission No application for a special use permit which has. been denied by the City Council shall be resubmitted for a period of twelve (12) months from the date of the final determination by the City Council; except that the applicant may set forth in writing newly discovered evidence of change of condition upon which he relies to gain the consent of the City Council for resubmission at an earlier time. 5. Revocation and `xtension of Special Use Permits When a special use permit has been issued pursuant to the pro- visions of this ordinance, such permit shall expire without f action by the urther Planning Commission or the City Council unless the applicant or his assignee or successor commences work upon the sub- ject property within one year of the date the special use permit is granted, or unless before the expiration of the one year period the applicant shall aooly for an extension thereof by filling out and submitting to the Secretary of the Planning Commission a "Special Use Permit" application requesting such extension and paying an additional fee of $15.00. Special use permits granted pursuant to the provisions of a Prior ordinance of arooklyn. Center shall expire within one year of the effective date of this ordinance i_° construction upon the sub - ject property pursuant to such special use permit has not commenced within that time. • Ln any instance where an existing and established special use is abandoned for a period of one year, the special use permit re- ment. lated thereto shall expire one year following the date of abandcn- • • IF A. American Brake Service is a clean, efficient aftermarket auto service company specializing in'brake repair, suspension and other under car services. These services will enhance the general welfare of the community by helping motorists maintain and obtain safe automobile performance at reasonable prices and high quality. All services will be performed within the premises, therefore ABS's presence will not be detrimental to or endanger the public welfare. ABS runs a first class operation, is proud of the service they provide and creates a positive impact on the communities in which they are located. B. The color scheme of light gray with blue and red provides a pleasant and attractive look. We believe our appearance and ad campaign will help offer a positive impression of our building, area, and Brooklyn Center. American Brake Service's hours are 8:00 to 5:30 Monday through Friday and 8:00 to 2:30 on Saturday. At its present location, it averages 12 -17 cars (customers) a day. There is no outside storage required for the operation of the business, and cars still requiring service will be pulled inside in the evening. The business has light traffic, will not fill up parking lots, generate congestion or place any financial strain on the neighborhood or surrounding properties. Our shops nationally and in Spring Lake Park are clean and neat. We try very hard to break the stereotype feeling of auto service stores being dark and dirty. C. American Brake Service will only complement the other service - oriented business in the surrounding area, for it too provides a needed and valued service to communities. This part of the community is well defined and built up. Our prices are very competitive, our reputation excellent and we would like to be a part of Brooklyn Center business community. D. The parking lot for 5810 Xerxes is already in place and very functional. The store will employ 3 to 4 persons. The office area will house Gar Matson, Bonita Klein and an office person at a later date. Often the east side of the parking lot that can park approximately 3 1 cars is vacant, so parking should not be an issue. There are two ingress's /egresses located on Northway Drive. These are more than adequate to service the extra one to two cars an hour that will be visiting American Brake Service. E. American Brake Service will conform to all other applicable regulations in the district. 10650 CounLy Road -81 - Suicel05 - Osseo. MN - ;,1 2-- 24-4505 • - The proposed site plan will be subject to any additional conditions and requirements of private utilities. - An erosion and sedimentation control plan must be provided prior to final approval. - A standard utility and maintenance agreement with the City will be required as a condition of final approval. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances, including the need for a subdivision agreement regarding costs for utility service lines and hook -ups. 3. The applicant shall enter into a performance agreement and provide a financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined) to assure completion of all required buffer, screening and curb and gutter improvements. This performance agreement and financial guarantee shall be posted prior to the release of the final plat for filing with Hennepin County. 4. Required screening along the west property line where the Church parking lot abuts R -1 zoned property may be landscaping consisting of evergreen trees at least six feet high, planted 20 feet on center. Required screening of the parking lot on the south side of 58 '/z Avenue should consist of berming and landscaping 3 '/2 to 4 feet in height. Voting in favor: Chair Willson, Commissioners Booth, Holmes, and Reem. The motion passed unanimously. The Council will consider the recommendation at its May 28 meeting. The applicant must be present. Major changes to the application as reviewed b the Commissioners will require that the application Y q PP be returned to the Commission for re- consideration. APPLICATION NO. 96007 Chair Willson introduced Application No. 96007, a request from American Brake Service for a special use permit to operate a facility that specializes in brake service and repair in the former St. Paul Book and Stationary tenant space in the retail center at 5810 Xerxes Avenue North. The Secretary presented the staff report and used overhead transparencies to show the location and preliminary leasehold and site plans. (See details in Planning Commission Information Sheet for ZD Application No. 96007, dated 5 -16 -96 attached). Mr. Warren pointed out that while the applicant is not contemplating performing under the hood service and oil change service at the present time, the Commissioners may wish to consider approval of adding those services to this application. Commissioner Holmes inquired about the adjacent businesses. Commissioner Reem inquired whether the existing food service business would be detrimentally affected by vehicle emissions. Mr. Warren • explained there should be no problem because there is appropriate separation in the building. Commissioner Reem inquired whether there will be hoists, pits, and ramps. Mr. Warren stated hoists 5 -16 -96 4 • and ramps are included, but there are no pits. Commissioner Holmes inquired whether the noise would interfere with the other businesses. Mr. Warren explained that adequate insulated walls exist in the building to separate the business operations. Commissioner Boeck expressed concern about exterior exhaust and pollution, and Commissioner Willson inquired about safe disposal of liquids and trash. Mr. Warren indicated that federal and state standards for air exchange and mechanical operations must be met by the applicant. Commissioners Reem and Holmes inquired about the exterior design and color noting the City's efforts to encourage consistency in that regard. A color photograph of the proposed exterior plan was circulated. In response to Commissioner Holmes' inquiry about signage, Mr. Warren described the signage allowed under the City's code. PUBLIC HEARING (APPLICATION NO 96007) Chair Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request for a special use permit for American Brake Service. There was a motion by Commissioner Boeck seconded by Commissioner Holmes to open the public hearing. The motion was approved unanimously. Chair Willson opened the public hearing at 8:55 p.m. and invited comments from the public. Mr. Gar Matson, the franchisee, operating as MTR, ltd., 8443 University Ave. N.E., Spring Lake Park, MN, stated he is available to answer Commissioners' questions. Mr. Matson responded to questions about the company, described some physical aspects of the interior and exterior of the building, assured compliance with federal and state environmental regulations, and described details of customer service and hours of operation. Commissioner Booth oot recommended that approval of under the hood and oil change services be included in the approval of this application. Chair Willson su nested that reference to outside trash PP g0 disposal facility be deleted from the proposed conditions for approval since no outside trash containers will be used. Chair Willson also suggested that the conditions make specific reference to compliance to the City's signage code. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chair Willson called for further comments from the public. There was a motion by Commissioner Holmes seconded by Commissioner Boeck to close the public hearing on Application No. 96007 at 9:15 p.m.. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 96007 There was a motion by Commissioner Boeck seconded by Commissioner Booth to approve Application No. 96007 submitted by American Brake Service subject to the following conditions: 1. The Special Use Permit is granted to the applicant for an automotive repair facility specializing in brake services and repair including under car services such as suspension, steering and constant velocity joints, and under the hood services such as serpentine belts, and oil change services. Any change in the use of the operation not comprehended by this application or permitted under the zoning ordinance will require approval of an amendment to this Special Use Permit. 5 -16 -96 5 2. Building plans for tenant remodeling and overhead doors shall be reviewed and approved by • the Building Official prior to the issuance of building permits. J. There shall be no service, repair or maintenance of vehicles out of doors and all vehicles being so serviced and maintained shall be done so inside the building with the overhead doors closed. 4. Any rooftop or on ground mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. There shall be no outside display or storage of merchandise on this site other than that which is authorized under Administrative Land Use permits. 6. The Special Use Permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations. Any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 7. The Special Use Permit is limited to only the signage. allowed in Chapter 34 of the City Ordinance and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. Voting in favor: Chair Willson, Commissioners Boeck, Booth, Holmes, and Reem. The motion passed unanimously. The Council will consider the recommendation at its May 28 meeting. The applicant is required to • be present. Major changes to the application as considered by the Commission will require the application to be returned to the Commission for re- consideration. OTHER BUSINESS a. Brookdale 76, 5710 Xerxes Avenue North Mr. Warren described the plans of the lessee /operator of Brookdale 76 to eliminate its vehicle repair /mechanical service and remodel the existing building to expand its retail/convenience store offerings and possibly install car washing equipment. Review of the proposed plans by city staff indicates that formal review and consideration by the Planning Commission is not necessary since alterations can be accomplished under normal building permit regulations. The consensus of the Commissioners, following brief discussion, was that administrative action is sufficient to rescind the mechanical repair business of Brookdale 76 and accommodate the building renovation through the building permit process. Any expansion to the building will require the submission of a formal site and building plan and special use permit amendment. DISCUSSION ITEMS There was brief discussion regarding current projects within the City. A Planning Commission study session is scheduled for May 30, 1996. i 5 -16 -96 6 U t MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Myrna Kragness Councilmember Kathleen Carmody Councilmember Debra Hilstrom Councilmember Kristen Mann Councilmember Charles F. Nichols, FROM: Michael J. McCauley, City Manage / -_ DATE: May 22, 1996 U SUBJECT: Report by Financial Commission Chair Donn Escher Regarding Required Biennial Salary Survey and Recommendation Donn Escher, Chair of the Financial Commission, will make a verbal report to the Council regarding the Financial Commission recommendation regarding the City Council salary survey. g g tY rY • • City Council approved by • motion on 1 -10 -94 POLICY AND PROCEDURE ON MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER TOTAL COMPENSATION I. NEED FOR POLICY: The community is entitled to a clearly articulated, written description of the policy and procedure for establishing the total compensation of local elected officials. U. POLICY: 1. Service on the City Council is a civic obligation and an honor. The total compensation of the Mayor and Council Members should, therefore, not encourage candidacies based on monetary rather than public service objectives. However, the compensation of Brooklyn Center elected officials shall be fair and equitable in order to attract qualified candidates for local elective office. 2. The propriety of the compensation levels of the Mayor and Council Members shall be evaluated through comparisons with compensation paid to similar officials within the seven county metropolitan area. 3. The compensation levels of elected officials should be regularly reviewed and g Y adjusted to ensure compliance with the objectives of this policy and to avoid the need for drastic or sudden compensation adjustments. 4. Compensation set pursuant to this policy and procedure shall be deemed to be the total compensation for elected officials of the city with the exception of expense reimbursement which shall be the same as provided all other city employees. III. PROCEDURE: 1. The City Manager shall biennially conduct a survey of compensation paid to elected officials of comparably sized municipalities with similarly sized budgets and tax bases in the seven county metropolitan area. Surveys prepared by the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities or the League of Minnesota Cities may be utilized in lieu of the City Manager's survey. 2. The City Manager shall biennially prepare a compensation report that contains an analysis of the survey information. The report shall compute the average amounts paid to Mayors and Council Members and correlate survey results to the current compensation of Brooklyn Center elected City officials. • • 3. The City Manager shall submit the compensation report to the City Council and the Financial Commission prior to June 1, for information pertaining to the applicable calendar year. 4. The Financial Commission shall biennially review the City Manager's compensation report and discuss possible budgetary and public perception impacts of the indicated changes. Prior to July 1, of the same year, the Commission shall recommend to the City Council that the compensation of the Mayor and Council Members either remain the same or be changed to some specific amount in the manner prescribed by law. 5. Consistent with the City Charter, Section 2.07, the Mayor and Council Members may, after conducting public hearings, set their compensation by ordinance. No change in compensation shall be in effect until January 1, following the next succeeding general election. IV. AUTHORITY: The authority for establishing compensation for the Mayor and Council Members is found in Minnesota Statutes 415.11 and the City of Brooklyn Center Charter, Section 2.07. 199.6 Population Mayor Council WITEZLI 000_P_OP_ULATL Mayor Council Coon Rapids 55,991 513,000 S9,000 apple Valley 39,185 S8.400 56.000 Brookvn Park 58,1171 513,356 53,904 Richfield 35, S7,762 56,035 Plymouth 51,391 55.600 56,300 Roseville 33,67 S7,800 56.000 M Maple Grove 113.542 55,500 36,500 Lakeville 32.973 S9,130 57,956 aine 11,653 59,576 57.008 Maplewood 32.903 59. 153 58,05-1 Apple Valley 39,138 58,400 56,000 Woodbury _ 28,637 5 5 4.200 Richfield 35,261 57,763 56.025 Brookl.n Center 28.J8.1 5;,700 , - S5.700 Roseville 33.6711 S7,900 56,000 rieiev sZs, IU4 J),4uu Jo, tuu Lakeville 32,978 S9,180 S7,956 Cottage Grove 26,675 S7,800 S6,000 Maplewood 32,903 59,153 58,054 Shoreview 25,957 S7,740 S5,736 Woodbury 25.627 55,600 S4.200 Crystal 23,703 57,610 55,313 Brooklvn Center 28,484 S7,700 S5. New Hope 21,651 S8,960 56. 31 1 r rialey _8, iu4 JJ,4UU Jo, tW Golden Valley 30,947 58,009 56.815 Cottage Grove 26,675 S7,300 S6,000 AVERAGE 39,039 $8,009 $6,311 Shoreview 25,957 57,740 55,736 iti1EDI.kN 25,434 $7,300 $6,000 Crystal 23,703 57,610 55,813 New Hope 21,651 S8,960 56,341 Brookivn Center as o of Average: Golden Valley 20,947 S9, 105 S6,315 Population ylavor Council Robbinsdale 14.255 57,590 56,072 97.92 96.140 91.7S 7o AVERAGE 34,3.10 $3,675 56,554 JIEDI.A.N 32,903 $3,400 $6.100 Brookvn Center as o of Median: Population Mayor Council Brooklyn Center as C of average 100.0 0 98.7 0 95.0 BQIzulation yla= cQUnC i 83 % 88.76 0 o J6..7 0 Brookyn Center as o of Median: • Population flavor Council 86.57 91.6 "0 93.= o SURROUNDING CITIES 1-K6 Pop lation �ia�Qr CQUnt l Coon Rapids 58,991 512,000 59,000 Brooklyn Par: 58,471 S13,356 S8.904 Plymouth 57,391 S8,600 56,300 Maple Grove 23,5-42 S8,500 56,500 Blaine 1 S9,576 S7,008 Brooklvn Center 28,X58.4 S7.700 S5, 700 rlclev _�, J6,4uu. Jo, ivu Crystal 3,703 S, 610 55.813 New Hope 21,651 53,960 S6,341 Golden Valley 20,947 S9,105 S6.815 Robbirsdale 14.255 57.590 56.072 AVERAGE 36,109 $9.21S 56,77S lIEDLkN 25,434 $3,600 S6,341 Brooklvn Center as e of average l:ti4n�1a,YOS Council 78.83 C 833.5,, % 811.100 Brookvn Center as o of Median: Population Mayor Council • 100.000 89.53C 59.390 S City of .Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. • MEMORANDUM TO: Financial Commission Members FROM: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager DATE: April 15, 1996 SUBJECT: Salary Survey Attached please find the salary survey that was conducted by the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. This survey will serve to comply with the policy requirement to provide a salary survey by June 1 of even numbered years. Attachment • • 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, ,LIN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative _fiction /Equal Opportunities Employer -- 6 MEMO To: Michael I McCauley, City Manager auk. From: Nancy Gohman, Asst. City Manager/Personnel Coor . Subject: Mayor and Council Salary Survey Date: March 14, 1996 Attached is a salary survey for Mayor and Council for 1996 and 1997. The survey is of metro suburbs over 25,000 in population as listed in group V of the Stanton survey. Also included are our neighboring cities of New Hope, Golden Valley and Robbinsdale who have populations lower then 25,000. AMM completes a elected officials salary survey which is published in May each year. Attached is the AMM 1995 survey for elected officials. Please inform me if you you need additional information on this matter. • • 7 Salary Survey - Mayor & Council Apr -96 • 1996 1997 City Population Mayor Council Mayor Council Bloomington 86,683 S 16,000 S 1 01 S 16,000 S 10,000 Coon Rapids 58,991 $ 12,000 S 9,000 $ 16,000 $ 9,000 Brooklyn Park 58,471 $ 13,356 $ 8,904 unknown at this time Plymouth 57,391 $ 8,600 S 6,300 S 8,600 S 6,300 Eagan 54,957 $ 9,000 S 6,480 S 9,000 S 6,480 Burnsville 54,525 S 9,240 S 6,540 S 9,240 S 6,540 Minnetonka 49,285 $ 8,400 $ 5,604 8400 5604 Edina 46,841 $ 7,000 $ 5,100 S 7,000 $ 5,100 Eden Prairie 44,189 $ 7,200 S 6,000 unknown at this time St. Louis Pk 43,641 $ 10,790 S 7,202 unknown at this time Maple Grove 43,542 $ 8,500 $ 6,500 no change proposed at this time Blaine 41,658 $ 9,576 $ 7,008 S 9,864 S 7.224 Apple Valley 39,188 S 8,400 S 6,000 S 8,400 $ 6,000 Richfield 35,261 $ 7,762 S 6,025 unknown at this time Roseville 33,674 $ 7,800 S 6,000 unknown at this time Lakeville 32,978 $ 9,180 S 7,956 $ 9,444 $ 8,184 Ma lewood 32,903 $ 9,153 S 8,054 unknown at this time Woodbury 28,627 S 5,600 S 4,200 S 5,600 S 4,200 Brookl n Ctr 28,484 $ 7,700 S 5,700 unknown at this time fridley 28,104 $ 8,400 S 6,100 S 6,900 for councilmember at large, no change 97 • Cottage Grove 26,675 $ 7,800 S 6,000 unknown at.this time Shoreview 25,957 S 7,740 S 5,736 unknown at this time . Crystal 23,703 $ 7,610 S 5,813 $ S 6,00o New Hoe 21,651 $ 8,960 S 6,341 S 9,219 S 6,525 Golden Valle 20,947 S 91105 S 6,815 no change proposed at this time � R 0bbinsdate 14,255 $ 7,590 IS 6,072 unknown at this time Average $ 8 6,594 The survey is of metro suburbs over 25,000 in population as listed in group V of the 1995 Stanton Survey. Also included are our neighboring cities who have a population lower than 25,000. Population statistics are from the 1996 Directory of League of Minnesota Cities. • 8 Salary Survey - Mayor & Council Apr -96 • 1996 1997 City Population Mayor Council Mayor Council Apple Valle 39,188 $ 8,400 $ 6,000 $ 8,400 $ 6.000 Blaine 41,658 S 9,576 $ 7,008 $ 9,864 $ 7,224 Bloomington 86,683 $ 16,000 $ 10,000 S 16,000 $ 10,000 Brooklyn Ctr 28,484 S 7,700 S 5,700 unknown at this time Brooklyn Park 58,471 $ 13,356 $ 8,904 unknown at this time Burnsville 54,525 $ 9,240 S 6,540 $ 9,240 S 6,540 Coon Ra Is 58,991 S 12,000 $ 9,000 $ 16,000 $ 9,000 Cotta a Grove 26,675 $ 7,800 $ 6,000 unknown at this time Crystal 23,703 $ 7,610 $ 5,813 S 7,800 S 6,000 Eagan 54,957 $ 9,000 $ 6,480 $ 9,000 S 6,480 Eden Prairie 44 ,189i 7,200 $ 6,000 unknown at this time Edina 46,841 $ 7,000 S 5,100 S 7,000 S 5,100 Fridley 28,104 $ 8,400 S 6,100 S 6,900 for councilmember at large, no change 97 Golden Valley 20,947 S 9,105 S 6,815 no change proposed at this time Lakeville 32 $ 9,180 $ 7,956 $ 9,444 $ 8,184 Maple Grove 43 2 S 8,500 $ 6,500 no chan a ro 0 osed at this time Ma lewood 32,90T $ 9,1.53 $ 8,054 unknown at this time Minnetonka 49,285 $ 8,400 S 5,604 8400 5604 New Hoe 21,651 S 8,960 S 6,341 S 9,219 S 6,525 Plymouth 57,391 S 8,600 $ 6,300 S 8,600 $ 6,300 Richfield 35,261 S 7,762 $ 6,025 unknown at this time Robb' insdale 14,255 S 7,590 S 6,072 unknown at this time Roseville 33,614 $ 7,800 ( $ 6,000 1 unknown at this time Shoreview 25,957 S 7,740 S 5,736 unknown at this time St. Louis Pk 43,641 S 10,790 $ 7202 unknown at this time Woodbury 28,627 1 S 5,600 1 S 4,200 S 5,600 $ 4,200 Average 1 $ 8,684 $ 6,594 The survey is of metro suburbs over 25,000 in population as listed in group V of the 1995 Stanton Survey. Also included are our neighboring cities who have a population lower than 25,000. Population statistics are from the 1996 Directory of League of Minnesota Cities. • 9 1995 Elected cials. CITIES WIT NDER 2 500 • POPULATION 1993 REG. SP. ANNUAL SALARY OF MAYOR ANNUAL SALARY OF CNCLMBRS. ESTIMATE PER MTG/ M`i'G MUNICIPALITY METRO COUNCIL MO. 1995 1994 1993 1995 1994 1993 Bethel 430 0 $ 0 $ 960 $960 $ 0 $720 $720 Birchwood Village 1,024 1 800 * 400 Catver 773 1 50/30 900 900 900 600 600 600 Coates 184 1 500 500 500 300 300 300 Cologne 567 2 20 600 600 600 480 480 480 Dellwood 896 1 2 0 0 $1 $1 0 Excelsior 2,377 2 1,200 1,200 1,200 600 600 600 Elko 246 1 1,080 720 720 540 * 480 Gem Lake 446 1 1,700 1,700 1,70 0 728 728 728 Greenfield 1,564 2-1- 35 1,200 1,200 1,200 600 600 600 Greenwood 643 1 3,600 * * 2,400 Grey Cloud Island Twnshp. 414 1 600 480 Ifamburg 503 1 25 600 600 600 480 480 480 Hampton 383 1 190 720 740 * 540 * 540 Hanover 329 2 30 1,200 * 1,200 900 * 900 Hilltop 749 2 3,000 3,000 3,000 2,400 2,400 2,400 Lakeland 2,006 1 * 3,000 3,000 * 2 { 300 2,300 Lakeland.Shores 320 1 -2 none none 920 none none none Lake St. Croix Beach 1,127 1 10 960 960 960 720 .720 720 Landfall 624 1 4,200 * * 2,100 Lilydale 542 1 2,700 * 2 1 * 1,020 (1) • CITIES WIT I&OPULATION UNDER 2,500 • POPULATION 1993 REG. SP. ANNUAL SALARY OF MAYOR ANNUAL ESTIMATE PER MTG/ MTG. SALARY Or C27CLMBRS. MUNICIPALITY METRO COUNCIL MO 1995 1994 1993 1995 1994 Long Lake 1 980 1993 2 3,000 3,600 3,600 2,400 Loretto � 3 3,000 477 1 65/50 800 800 800 600 600 600 Maple Plain 2,117 2 3 600 � 2,400 2,400 1,200 1,200 1,200 Marine on St. Croix 608 1 480 * . 1,250 480 * 500 Mayer 513 1 15 600 600 600 480 480 480 Minnetonka Beach 575 1 0 0 * 0 0 New Germany 367 1 15 600 480 480 480 360 360 New Market 227 1 15 1,200 1,200 600 * 600 Norwood 1,377 1 20 720 720 720 480 480 480 Pine Springs 435 1 0 0 0 - St. Bonifacius 1,195 2 10 1,500 . 1,500 1,500 1,200 1,200 1200 Spring Park 1,757 2 ' 2,400 2,,400 2,400 1,800 1,800 1 800 Tonka Bay 1 466 ' 2 100/75 2,400 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1 I I Vermillion 510 1 200 780 600 by attendees 720 600 540 540 Watertown 2 .2 2 M45; 1,170 1,215 1,080 1,040 1,080 Woodland 4 cc40 960 84 1 40 40 40 20 20 20 Young America 1,427 1 60 7 20 1,320 1,320 720 720 720 ��1 CITIES II POPULATION FROM 2 500 TO 10 000 POPULATION 1993 REG. SP. ANNUAL SALARY OF MAYOR ANNUAL SALARY OF CNCLMBRS. EST / M`i'G. tdUNICIPALITY METRO COUNCIL I,,IOG 1995 1994 1993 1995 1994 1993 Afton 2,829 1 900 $1,£300 $1,800 600 $1,200 $ 1,200 Arden Ifi11s 9,x}93 2 3,600 3,600 3,600 3,180 3,180 3 Bayport 3,195 1 . 3,300 2,700 2,700 2,700 2,100 2 Circle Pines 4,779 2 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,450 1,450 1,125 Dayton 4,740 2 1,750 1,750 1,750 1,250 1,250 1,250 Deephaven • 3,646 2 � 3,600 2,400 2,400 2,400 600 600 Past Bethel 8,471 2 3,300 2,700 2,700 2,700 2,400 2 Falcon Ileigtit;s 5,348 2 4,500 4,500 4,500 3,600 3 3 Farmington 6,574 2 3,000 3,000 3 3,000 3"000 � 3,000 Forest Lake 6,242 2 3,600 1,200 1,500 3,000 1,000 1 Forest Lake Twnstip. 7,164 2 35 * Liam Lake 9,462 2 4,700 4,000 4,000 4,000 3 200 � � 3,200 Hugo 5,030 2 * 1 2,160 2,160 * 1,800 1,II00 Independence 2,951 2 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,200 1,200 .Jordan 1,200 3,003 2 3,696 3,300 3,300 2,496 1,800 1,800 Lake Elmo 6,057 2 2,400 2,400 2,400 1,800 1,800 1 800 Lauderdale 2,7.10 2 2,456 2,456 * 1,376 * 1,376 Little Canada 9,134 2 4 4 4,080 3,180 3,180 3,180 �3� CITIES WI'1 POPULA'I' FROM 2 500 TO 10 000 0 • POPULATION 1993 REG. SP PER MTG/ . ANNUAL SALARY Or MAYOR ANNUAL SALARY OF CNCLMDRS. MUNICIPALITY METRO ESTIMATE MO. MTG 1995 1994 1993 1995 1994 1993 Mahtomedi. 5,966 2 1,800 1,800 1,000 1,500 1 1,500 Medina 3 2 2,700 2,700 * 1,800 � 1,800 1,800 Minnetrista 3,574 2 2,400 2,400 2,400 1,800 � 1,840 840 Mound 9, 643 3 4,500 1,800 1,800 3,000 1,200 1,200 Newport 3,756 2 3 3,000 3,000 2,400 2 2 New Prague 2,520 2 1,800 2,400 2,400 1,500 � 1,800 1;200 North Oaks 3,602 1 180 1II0 1II0 120 120 120 Oak Grove 5,924 2 300 * 250 Oak Park IIeigtits 3 2 3,000 3,000 3,000 2,400 2,400 2 400 Orono 7,323 2 � � _ 3,600 3,600 3,600 2,900 2,900 2,900 1 Osseo 2,638 2 1,200 1,200 1,800 1,020 1,020 1,200 St. Anthony 0,019 2 5 4,600 4,500 3,360 3,120 3,000 St. Francis 2,727 2 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,200 1,200 � 1,200 St. Paul Park 5,091 2 3,300 3,300 3,300 2,700 2,700 � 2,700 Shorewood 6,430 2 3,000 3,000 3 000 . � 2,400 2,400 2,400 Spring p g Park 6 2 4,200 !1,200 4 3,600 3,600 3 600 Victoria 2,833 2 � , .2, 275 . 2,275 2, 275 1,635 1,635 1,635 Waconia 3,920 2 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,000 2 000 � 2,000 Wayzata 3,830 2 3,600 3,600 3,600 2,400 2,4'00 2 YOYU ON FROM l0 000 TO 20 000 • POPULATION 1993 REG. SP. ANN SALARY OF ri • ESTIMATE PER MTG.' MTG MAYOR. ANNUAL SALARY OF CNCLld[3RS. MUNICIPALITY METRO COUNCIL MO. 1995 1994 1993 1995 1994 1993 Andover 18,304 2 $4,200 $4,200 $4,200 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 Anoka 171481 2 20 4,200 4,200 4,200 3,570 3,570 3 Champlin 18,565 2 4,976 4,976 4,976 3,971 3,971 3,971 Chanhassen 13,388 2 6,000 3,600 3,600 4,800 2,400 � 2,400 Chaska 13,012 2 -3 4,500 3 3,600 3,600 3 3,000 Columbia Heights 18,999 2 9,000 .9,000 13,800 7,800 7,800 7 Hastings 16,143 2 400 4,800 4,800 300 3,600 3 Hopkins 16 3 5,200 5,200 5,200 4,000 4,000 4,000 Lino Lakes 11,193 193 2 40max 4,500 4,500 3,500 .3,600 3,600 2,600 Mendota Ileiglits 10,466 2 2 3,600 * * 2,400 * Mounds View 12 611 _ , 2 reg /1 sp. * 5,100 3,600 * 4,500 3,300 '1 north St. Paul 12,730 2 4,200 5,400 4,200 3,000 4,200 3,000 Prior Lake 12,072 2 4,200 4,200 4,200 3,000 3,000 3 Ramsey 14,081 2 6,000 6,000 6,000 4,500 4,500 4,500 Robbinsdale 14,410 2 7,590 6,600 6,600 6 5,280 5 Rosemount 10,478 2 20 4,200 * * 3,600 * * Savage 12,889 2 5,100 5,100 5,100 4,200 4,200 4 Shakopee 12,732 2 � � 6,120 6,120 6,120 5,100 5,100 5100 Stillwater 15,001 2 � 7,200 7,200 7 6 6 6 Vadnais Heights 11,638 2 4,800 3,600 3,600 3,600 2 400 2,400 L'lest St. Paul 19,304 2 4,620 , 4,200 4,200 3,960 3 3 (5) CI`T'IES F If POPULATION OVER 20 000 POPULATION 1993 REG. SP. ANNIJAr SALARY OF MAYOR ANNUAL SALARY OF C11CL11BRS . ESTIMATE PER. MTG/ MTG MUNICIPALITY METRO COUNCIL MO. 1995 1994 1993 1995 1994 1993 Apple Valley 38,261 2 8,400 $8,400 $8,400 6,000 6,000. 6,000 Blaine 40,814 2 9,250 9,024 8,724 6, � 765 6,600 6,372 Bloomington 86,818 3 16,000 15,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Brooklyn Center 28,533 2 7,500 7,300 7,150 5,500 5,300 5,150 Brooklyn Park 58,125 4 1.3,224 13,140 12,900 8 8,760 8,580 Burnsville 53,363 4 9,120 9,000 8,700 6,480 6,420 6,180 Coon Rapids 58,833 2 10,000 10,000 10,000 9,000 9 9 Cottage Grove 25,752 2 6,600 6,600 6,600 4,800 � 4,800 4,800 Crystal 23,807 2 7,421 7,421 7,421 5,626 5,626 5 Eagan 53,004 2 9,000 9 7,200 6,480 6 5 _ Eden Prairie 42,442 2 21irs25 7,200 7,200 7,200 6 000 - 1 - 2 50 ' 6,000 6,000 Edina 46,984 2 7,050 7,050 7,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 Fridley 28,287 2 8,400 8,400 8,300 6 6,900 6,100 Golden Valley 21,029 2 50 /mo 9,105 9,105 9 ' 105 6,8 max /150 6,815 6,815 Inver Grove heights 24,332 2 7,500 7,500 7,000 6,000 6 6 Lakeville 30,149 2 25(11RA) 9,000 8,400 7,800 7,800 7 6 Maple Grove 42,682 2 8,500 8,000 8,000 6,500 � 6,.000 6,000 Maplewood 32,394 2 8,921 � II 68 6 8,458 7,850 7 44 7,644 Minnetonka 49,285 4 8,800 8,400 8,400 � 5,604 5,604 04 New Brighton 22,355 � 5,604 ,3�5 2 7,200 7,200 7 5,500 5,580 5,580 �6� • CITIES WITIT POPUI AT0 OVER 20 POPULATION 1993 REG. SP. ANNUAL SALARY OF MAYOR ANNUAL SALARY OF CNCLMBRS. ESTI / M'PG. MUNICIPALITY METRO COUNCIL M0� 1995 1994 1993 1995 1994 1993 New hope 21,758 2 25 ..8,720 .8,280 8,078 6,171 6 5 Oakdale 22,192 2 .6,000 6,000 6,000 5 5 5 Plymouth 55,137 2 8,600 8,600 8,600 6 6,300 6 Richfield 35,538 2 7,762 7,573 7 6,025 5 , 878 5 878 Roseville 33,487 2 � 7,800 7,800 7,200 6,000 6 5,400 St. Louis Park 43,764 2 10,000 9,000 9,601 7,200 7,200 7,202 Shoreview 25 2 6,492 6,492 6,492 4,872 4 4,872 South St. Paul 20,235 2 8,400 , 7,200 7,200 5,400 4,200 4,200 White Bear. Lake 24,979 2 4,800 4,800 4,800 3,600 3,600 3,600 Woodbury 25,875 2 5,600 , 4,920 4,920 ,4,200 3,600 3,600 *No Response J l �� S City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. i 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 DATE: May 10, 1996 SUBJECT: Proposed Policy and Procedure on Requests for Proposals for Financial Professional Services Attached please find a proposed policy and procedure that has been prepared to place financial services contracts on a schedule. The proposed schedule would go through the year 2002. This i schedule could be revisited as experience warranted. When this was submitted to th e Financial Commission, they recommended omission of the specific schedule. Staff however prefers to keep the schedule attached as part of the proposed policy and procedure so that a specific time table will be included. Inclusion of the specific time table creates substance in the implementation of the proposed policy. The proposed schedule staggers major financial services so that we are not faced with the potential change in service providers in more than one major S p a or Cate o in a ear. A significant amount of staff J category year. time is involved in working with a new provider of services. Thus, the proposed schedule allows sufficient time to achieve the benefits of having financial advisors familiar with the City while placing the services out for competitive proposals at reasonable intervals. Attachment 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer POLICY AND PROCEDURE ON • REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS FOR FINANCIAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES I. NEED FOR POLICY: The City needs a policy and procedure to provide for the orderly conduct of requesting proposals for professional services for handling financial affairs, to ensure that all services will be periodically reviewed, and that the proper balance will be maintained between cost and quality of services. TI. POLICY: 1. All professional services in the area of city finances will be periodically let out for request for proposals according to an established schedule. 2. Service levels will be monitored by the City Council and Staff and if unsatisfactory service is received, that contract will be re- advertised Y rior to the year set in the P schedule. 3. Quality of service will be the primary factor in awarding a contract for professional service, but cost will also be a determinant. III. PROCEDURE: 1. A schedule shall be established for the conduct of R.F.P.s. The schedule should be adhered to unless there is a performance problem or other justification for an earlier R.F.P. Going to the market too frequently with R.F.P.s expends staff time, requires extensive orientation of new professionals, and discourages quality firms from submitting proposals at their most attractive price since they will expect to only have the contract for a short time. 2. Specifications tailored to the professional service to be advertised will be prepared b staff, reviewed b the Financial Commission and approved b the City Y Y � PP Y Y Council. • 3. A review committee made up of the City Manager and Finance Director shall • review proposals for Banking Services, Insurance Agent, Risk Management Consultant, and Custodian for investment securities. Proposals for Auditor and Financial Advisor shall be initially screened by staff, and then reviewed by a committee of City Council members and Financial Commission members appointed by the Mayor in consultation with the Chair of the Financial Commission, with the approval of the City Council, which committee shall also include the City Manager and Finance Director. 4. The specifications will emphasize the abilities, qualifications, and experience of the applicant firms to provide high quality service to the City. Price will be considered after one or more applicants have been identified as providing the desired quality of service. When appropriate, the specification shall require prices q P to be submitted in a separate, sealed envelope to be opened after applicants have been ranked according g o quality. 5. The City Manager shall make a recommendation to the City Council of a provider to be appointed to a multi -year engagement. It shall be written in the engagement that the appointment may be terminated earlier. This policy was adopted by the City Council on • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SCHEDULE OF REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS INTERVAL BETWEEN LAST SCHEDULE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE R.F.P.s R.F.P. 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Financial Advisor for bond sales 4 - 6 years Fin Advis Fin Advis Banking Services 3 years Bank Bank Insurance Agent 4 years 1990 Ins Agent Risk Management Consultant 4 years 1988 Risk Mgmt Risk Mgmt Custodian for investment securities 6 years 1993 Custodian Auditor 4 - 6 years 1994 Auditor SCHEDULEALS 5/23/96 • MEMORANDUM Date: May 22, 1996 To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager From: Tom Bublitz, Community Development Specialist ! Subject: Resolution Authorizing Joint Cooperation Agreement Between the City of Brooklyn Center and Hennepin County for Continued Participation in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program During the past 21 years, Hennepin County has qualified as an urban county to receive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds as a result of creating a partnership with Hennepin County communities. The key element in the process is the execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement between the County and each city within Hennepin County that wishes to participate in the program and become eligible to receive CDBG funds from the County. Every three years, Hennepin County must be recertified by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as an urban county to continue to receive an annual entitlement grant through the CDBG program. The joint cooperation agreement presented for the City's approval and attached to this memorandum would gain certification for fiscal years 1997, 1998, and 1999. Included with this memorandum is a draft grey -line copy of the agreement which details all revisions to the current agreement. One of the more significant changes is the pooling of funds for communities receiving annual planning allocations of less than $50,000. This provision does not affect the City of Brooklyn Center. In order to continue to participate in the Urban Hennepin County program, the City must execute the Joint Cooperation Agreement by May 31, 1996. • • • H enne n I o unt An Equal Oppoetunity Employer James M. Bourey, County Administi April 25, 1996 Mr. Michael McCauley City Manager City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 I Dear Mr. McCauley: Accompanying for your review and execution is the Urban Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Agreement for FY 1997 -99. The agreement sets forth broad shared powers for carrying out • housing and community development activities. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires the agreement in order for Hennepin County to qualify as an urban county and be the recipient of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and the HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) entitlement funds. The agreement can be automatically renewed at the end of FY 1999, following notification by the county of each community's option to remain in the program. A draft grey -line copy of the agreement is enclosed, which details all revisions to the current agreement. The most significant changes are the pooling of funds for communities receiving annual planning allocations of less than $50,000 and the elimination of programmatic requirements which are repeated in the annual subrecipient agreements. As a community participating in the Urban Hennepin County program, your city would not be eligible in FYI 997-99 to apply for grants under the small cities or state CDBG programs. Your community will automatically participate in the Hennepin County HOME program and will not be eligible to receive HOME funds through the state or other consortiums. Please execute the city signature page of agreement (page 8) to indicate your continued participation in the Urban County Program. Return only an original copy of the city signature page with the city seal and a copy of the authorizing resolution by MAY 31, 1996. Office Of Planning & Development Development Planning Unit Recycled Paper 10709 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 260 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55305 (612) 541 -7080 FAX: (612) 541 -7090 Mr. Michael McCauley April 25, 1996 Page 2 A sample council resolution is enclosed. A copy of the county signature page will be provided after it has been executed by the county. Please contact me at 541 -7083 if you have any questions about the agreement or the Urban County Program. I look forward to continuing our cooperative efforts in addressing suburban Hennepin County housing and community development needs. Sincerely, Barbara Hayden Administrative Manager Enclosures: Cooperation Agreement FY 97 -99 Draft grey line agreement Sample resolution cc: Brad Hoffman Member introduced the following resolution and moved its • adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, and the County of Hennepin have in effect a Joint Cooperation Agreement for purposes of qualifying as an Urban County under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) programs; and WHEREAS, the City and County wish to execute a new Joint Cooperation Agreement in order to qualify as an Urban County for purposes of the Community Development Block Grant and HOME programs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the current Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and the County be terminated and a new Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and County be executed effective October 1, 1996, and that the Mayor and the City Manager be authorized and directed to sign the Agreement on behalf of the City. 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. • Contract No. • JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," A -2400 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55487, and the cities executing this Master Agreement, each hereinafter respectively referred to as "COOPERATING UNIT," said parties to this Agreement each being governmental units of the State of Minnesota, and made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59: WITNESSETH: COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree that it is desirable and in the interests of their citizens that COOPERATING UNIT shares its authority to carry out essential community development and housing activities with COUNTY in order to permit COUNTY to secure and administer Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership funds as an Urban County within the provisions of the Act as herein defined and, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutually agree to the following terns and conditions. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that by the execution of this Agreement that it understands that it: 1. May not also apply for grants under the State CDBG Program from appropriations for fiscal years during which it is participating in the Urban County Program; and 2. May not participate in a HOME Consortium except through the Urban County. I. DEFINITIONS The definitions contained in 42 USC 5302 of the Act and 24 CFR §570.3 of the Regulations are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof, and the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them: A. "Act" means Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). B. 'Regulations" means the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act, including but not limited to 24 CFR Part 570. C. "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. D. "Cooperating Unit" means any city or town in Hennepin County that has entered into a cooperation agreement that is identical to this Agreement, as well as Hennepin County, which is a party to each Agreement. i E. "Consolidated Plan" means the document bearing that title or similarly required statements or • documents submitted to HUD for authorization to expend the annual grant amount and which is developed by the COUNTY in conjunction with COOPERATING UNITS as part of the Community Development Block Grant program. F. "Metropolitan City" means any city located in whole or in part in Hennepin County which is certified by HUD to have a population of 50,000 or more people. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize COUNTY and COOPERATING UNIT to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking, community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing and authorizes COUNTY to carry out these and other eligible activities for the benefit of eligible recipients who reside within the corporate limits of the COOPERATING UNIT which will be funded from annual Community Development Block Grant and HOME appropriations for the Federal Fiscal Years 1997, 1998 and 1999 and from any program income generated from the expenditure of such funds. III. AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement is for a period commencing on October 1, 1996 and terminating no sooner than the end of the program year covered by the Consolidated Plan for the basic grant amount for the Fiscal Year 1999, as authorized by HUD, and for such additional time as may be required for the expenditure of funds granted to the County for such period. COUNTY may notify COOPERATING UNIT prior to the end of the Urban County qualification period that the Agreement will automatically be renewed unless it is terminated in writing by either party. Either COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT may exercise the option to terminate the Agreement at the end of the Urban County qualification period. If COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT fail to exercise that option, it will not have the opportunity to exercise that option until the end of a subsequent Urban County qualification period. COUNTY will notify the COOPERATING UNIT in writing of its right to elect to be excluded by the date specified by HUD. This Agreement must be amended by written agreement of all parties to incorporate any changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in the Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for the year in which the next qualification of the County is scheduled. Failure by either party to adopt such an amendment to the Agreement shall automatically terminate the Agreement following the expenditure of all CDBG and HOME funds allocated for use in COOPERATING UNIT's jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this Agreement may be terminated at the end of the program period during which HUD withdraws its designation of COUNTY as an Urban County under the Act. This Agreement shall be executed by the appropriate officers of COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY pursuant to authority granted them by their respective governing bodies, and a copy of the authorizing resolution and executed Agreement shall be filed promptly by the COOPERATING UNIT in the Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development, and in no event shall the Agreement be filed later than 199 . is COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall take all actions necessary to assure compliance with the applicant's certifications required by Section 104(b) of the Title I of the Housing and Community Development 2 Act of 1974, as amended, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Fair Housing Act, Section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; and other applicable laws. IV. ACTIVITIES COOPERATING UNIT agrees that awarded grant funds will be used to undertake and carry out within the terms of this Agreement certain projects involving one or more of the essential activities eligible for funding under the Act. COUNTY agrees and will assist COOPERATING UNIT in the undertaking of such essential activities by providing the services specified in this Agreement. The parties mutually agree to comply with all applicable requirements of the Act and the Regulations and other relevant Federal and /or Minnesota statutes or regulations in the use of basic grant amounts. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to lessen or abrogate COUNTY's responsibility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act, including the development of the Consolidated Plan, pursuant to 24 CFR Part 91. COOPERATING UNIT further specifically agrees as follows: A. COOPERATING UNIT will in accord with a COUNTY- established schedule prepare and provide to COUNTY, in a prescribed form, requests for the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds consistent with this Agreement, program regulations and the Urban Hennepin County Consolidated Plan. B. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that, pursuant to 24 CFR §570.501 (b), it is subject to the same requirements applicable to subreci ients including the requirement for a written Subreci Tent 9 PP P � g q P Agreement set forth in 24 CFR §570.503. The Subrecipient Agreement will cover the implementation requirements for each activity funded pursuant to.this Agreement and shall be duly executed with and in a form prescribed by COUNTY. C. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that it is subject to the same subrecipient requirements stated in paragraph B above in instances where an agency other than itself is undertaking an activity pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. In such instances a written Third Party Agreement shall be duly executed between the agency and COOPERATING UNIT in a form prescribed by COUNTY. D. COOPERATING UNIT shall implement all activities funded for each annual program pursuant to this Agreement within Twenty-Four (24) months of the authorization by HUD to expend the basic grant amount. 1. Funds for all activities not implemented within Twenty-Four (24) months shall be transferred to a separate account for reallocation on a competitive basis. 2. Implementation period extensions may be granted upon request in cases where the authorized activity has been initiated and /or subject of a binding contract to proceed. E. COOPERATING UNIT will take actions necessary to assist in accomplishing the community development program and housing goals, as contained in the Urban Hennepin County Consolidated Plan. F. COOPERATING UNIT shall ensure that all programs and /or activities funded in part or in full by grant funds received pursuant to this Agreement shall be undertaken affirmatively with regard 3 to fair housing, employment and business opportunities for minorities and women. It shall, in . implementing all programs and /or activities funded by the basic grant amount comply, with all applicable Federal and Minnesota Laws, statutes, rules and regulations with regard to civil rights, affirmative action and equal employment opportunities and Administrative Rule issued by the COUNTY. G. COOPERATING UNIT that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes action by COUNTY to comply with its fair housing certification shall be prohibited from receiving CDBG funding for any activities. H. COOPERATING UNIT shall participate in the citizen participation process as established by COUNTY in compliance with the requirements of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. I. COOPERATING UNIT shall reimburse COUNTY for any expenditure determined by HUD or COUNTY to be ineligible. J. COOPERATING UNIT shall prepare, execute, and cause to be filed all documents protecting the interests of the parties hereto or any other party of interest as may be designated by the COUNTY. K. COOPERATING UNIT has adopted and is enforcing: 1. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in nonviolent civil rights demonstrations; and 2. A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such nonviolent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction. COUNTY further specifically agrees as follows: A. COUNTY shall prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies, on an annual basis, all plans, statements and program documents necessary for receipt of a basic grant amount under the Act. B. COUNTY shall provide, to the maximum extent feasible, technical assistance and coordinating services to COOPERATING UNIT in the preparation and submission of a request for funding. C. COUNTY shall provide ongoing technical assistance to COOPERATING UNIT to aid COUNTY in fulfilling its responsibility to HUD for accomplishment of the community development program and housing goats. D. COUNTY shall, upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer local housing rehabilitation grant programs funded pursuant to the Agreement, provided that COUNTY shall receive Twelve percent (12 %) of the allocation by COOPERATING UNIT to the activity as reimbursement for costs associated with the administration of COOPERATING UNIT activity. E. COUNTY may, at its discretion and upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to • administer for a possible fee other programs and /or activities funded pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. 4 F. COUNTY may, as necessary for clarification and coordination of program administration, develop • and implement Administrative Rules consistent with the Act, Regulations, HUD administrative directives, and administrative requirements of COUNTY. V. ALLOCATION OF BASIC GRANT AMOUNTS Basic grant amounts received by the COUNTY under Section 106 of the Act shall be allocated as follows: A. COUNTY shall retain Ten percent (10 %) of the annual basic grant amount for the undertaking of eligible activities. B. The balance of the basic grant amount shall be made available by COUNTY to COOPERATING UNITS in accordance with the formula stated in part C and the procedure stated in part D of this section for the purpose of allowing the COOPERATING UNITS to submit funding requests. The allocation is for planning purposes only and is not a guarantee of funding. C. The COUNTY will calculate, for each COOPERATING UNIT , an amount that bears the same ratio to the balance of the basic grant amount as the average of the ratios between: 1. The population of COOPERATING UNIT and the population of all COOPERATING i UNITS. 2. The extent of poverty in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of poverty in all COOPERATING UNITS. 3. The extent of overcrowded housing by units in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of overcrowded housing by units in all COOPERATING UNITS. 4. In determining the average of the above ratios, the ratio involving the extent of poverty shall be counted twice. D. Fund will e in f this Funds b made available to communities utilizing the formula specified � C o s ection S s g p in the following manner: 1. COOPERATING UNIT qualifying as a Metropolitan City (having populations of at least 50,000) will receive annual funding allocations equal to the HUD formula entitlement or the COUNTY formula allocation, whichever is greater. 2. Other COOPERATING UNITS with COUNTY formula allocations of $50,000 or more will receive funding allocations in accordance with the formula allocations. 3. COOPERATING UNITS with COUNTY formula allocations of less than $50,000 will have their funds consolidated in a pool for award in a manner determined by COUNTY. Only the COOPERATING UNITS, whose funding has been pooled, will be eligible to compete for these funds. • 5 E. The COUNTY shall develop these ratios based upon data to be furnished by HUD. The • COUNTY assumes no duty to gather such data independently and assumes no liability for any errors in the data furnished by HUD. F.. In the event COOPERATING UNIT does not request a funding allocation, or a portion thereof, the amount not requested shall be made available to other participating communities, in a manner determined by COUNTY. VI. METROPOLITAN CITIES Any metropolitan city executing this Agreement shall defer their entitlement status and become part of Urban Hennepin County. VII. OPINION OF COUNSEL The undersigned, on behalf of the Hennepin County Attorney, having reviewed this Agreement, hereby opines that the terms and provisions of the Agreement are fully authorized under State and local law and that the Agreement provides full legal authority for COUNTY to undertake or assist in undertaking essential community development and housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing. Assistant County Attorney i • 6 • VIII. HENNEPIN COUNTY EXECUTION The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on 199 , and pursuant to such approval and the proper County official having signed this Agreement, the COUNTY agrees to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Upon proper execution, this COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA Agreement will be legally valid and binding. By: Chair of its County Board And: Deputy /Associate County Administrator Assistant County Attorney Attest: Date: Deputy County Auditor APPRO`GEIIS TO EXECU ION: Assistant County Attorney L,--' Date: 12 3 7 • IX. COOPERATING UNIT EXECUTION COOPERATING UNIT, having signed this Agreement, and the COOPERATING UNIT'S governing body having duly approved this Agreement on , 199 , and pursuant to such approval and the proper city official having signed this Agreement, COOPERATING UNIT agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Joint Cooperation Agreement, contract CITY OF By: Its And: Its CITY MUST CHECK ONE: The City is organized pursuant to: Plan A Plan B Charter U: \C00PAGRE.97UT000P.FIN April 23, 1996 • 8 Contract No. • JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY .OF HENNEPIN, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," A -2400 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55487, and the cities executing this Master Agreement, each hereinafter respectively referred :to as "COOPERATING UNIT," said parties to this Agreement each being governmental ,units of the State,-Of Minnesota, and made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59: WITNESSETH: COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree that rt is desirable and:.in the interests of their citizens that COOPERATING UNIT shares its authority to carry out'esse tial community° Development and housing activities with COUNTY in order to permit COUNTY to secure and adtnizuster-Cnmmunity Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership funds as an Urban County withiriahe`provisions of the Act as herein defined and, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutually agree to the following terms and conditions'. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that by the execution of this Agreement that it understands that it: 1. May not also app 161 grants under the State CDBG Program from appropriations for fiscal years during which :if is participating in the Urban County Program; and 2. May not participate in a HOME Consortium except through the Urban County. I. DEFINITIONS The :definitions contained in 42 USC 5302 of the Act and 24 CFR §570.3 of the Regulations are incorporated, herein�by °,reference and made a part hereof, and the terms defined in this section have the meanings given their. A. "Act" means Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). B. 'Regulations" means the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act, including but not limited to 24 CFR Part 570. C. "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. D. "Cooperating Unit" means any city or town in Hennepin County that has entered into a cooperation agreement that is identical to this Agreement, as well as Hennepin County, which is • a party to each Agreement. E. " ons0.1clate 'tan" means the document • bearing that title or similarly required statements or documents submitted to HUD for authorization to expend the annual grant amount and which is developed by the COUNTY in conjunction with COOPERATING UNITS as part of the Community Development Block Grant program. F. "Metropolitan City" means any city located in whole or in part in Hennepin County which is certified by HUD to have a population of 50,000 or more people. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize COUNTY and COOPERATING UNIT to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking, community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing and authorizes COUNTY to carry out these and other eligible activities for the benefit of eligible recipients who reside within the corporate limits of the COOPERATING UNIT which will be funded from annual Community Development Block Grant and HOME appropriations for the Federal Fiscal Years 19941x, 199 8 and 19969 and from any program income generated from the expenditure of such funds. ... M. AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement is for a period commencing on 0*6.toE r<1 < 99 6 and terminating no sooner than the end of the program year covered by the S tatemen t e f n :; o « `e.s �;a P - ajeetea Use of F unds Ean)itta>ln for the basic grant amount for the Fiscal Year 19969!, as authorized by HUD, and for such • additional time as may be required for the expenditure of funds granted to the County for such period. COUNTY sll 2notify COOPERATING UNIT prior to the end of the Urban County qualification period that the Agreement will automatically be renewed unless it is terminated in writing by either party. Either COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT may exercise the option to terminate the Agreement at the end of the Urban County qualification period. If COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT fail to exercise that option, it will not have the opportunity to exercise that option until the end of a subsequent Urban County qualification period. COUNTY will notify the COOPERATING UNIT in writing of its right to elect to be excluded by the date specified by HUD. in the Urban Geuwy QuaiifieAti This Agreement must be amended by written agreement of all parties to incorporate any changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in the Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for the year in which the next qualification of the County is scheduled. Failure by either party to adopt such an amendment to the Agreement shall automatically terminate the Agreement following the expenditure of all CDBG and HOME funds allocated for use in COOPERATING UNIT's jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this Agreement may be terminated at the end of the program period during which HUD withdraws its designation of COUNTY as an Urban County under the Act. This Agreement shall be executed by the appropriate officers of COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY pursuant to authority granted them by their respective governing bodies, and a copy of the authorizing resolution and executed Agreement shall be filed promptly by the COOPERATING UNIT in the Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development, and in no event shall the Agreement be filed later than 199 . • 2 COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall take all actions necessary to assure compliance with the applicant's certifications required by Section 104(b) of the Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Fair Housing Act, Section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; The .4 mor -ipAw; WithA of 1-990; and other applicable laws. IV. ACTIVITIES COOPERATING UNIT agrees that awarded grant funds will be used to undertake and carry out within the terms of this Agreement certain projects involving one or more of the essential activities eligible for funding under the Act. COUNTY agrees and will assist COOPERATING UNIT in the undertaking of such essential activities by providing the services specified in this Agreement. The parties mutually agree to comply with all applicable requirements of the Act and the Regulations and other relevant Federal and /or Minnesota statutes or regulations in the use of basic grant amounts. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to lessen or abrogate COUNTY's responsibility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act, including the development of the Sta4effieI4 ef QbjertiVeS Mid PFejerted USO Of FUR i ias a .. pursuant to 24 CFR X54. 00 et- se q. - COOPERATING UNIT further specifically agrees as follows: A. COOPERATING UNIT will in accord with a COUNTY- established schedule prepare and provide to COUNTY, in a prescribed form, are annual requests for the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds consistent with this Agreement, program regulations and the Urban Hennepin County Statement of Qbjeetives 0 " :`. fl a­'edt;PJ* B. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that, pursuant to 24 CFR §570.501 (b), it is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including the requirement for a written Subrecipient Agreement set forth in 24 CFR §570.503. The Subrecipient Agreement will cover the implementation requirements for each activity funded pursuant to this Agreement and shall be duly executed with and in a form prescribed by COUNTY. C. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that it is subject to the same subrecipient requirements stated in paragraph B above in instances where an agency other than itself is undertaking an activity pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. In such instances a written Third Party Agreement shall be duly executed between the agency and COOPERATING UNIT in a form prescribed by COUNTY. D. COOPERATING UNIT shall implement all activities funded for each annual program pursuant to this Agreement within Eighteen). Twenty -Four (24) months of the authorization by HUD to expend the basic grant amount. 1. Funds for all activities not implemented within Ei ghteen (4) Twenty -Four (24) months shall be g firansferted tea a agate a cduht ft�r reailc3cattari n a certh etit v. basis; 5e#?. 2. Implementation period extensions may be granted upon request 1 :1 cases where the authorized activity has been initiated and/or subject of a binding contract to proceed. 3 GOOPERAT-Pig 6 Perh aetiviv shall have a budget ef s4 least Seventy five 14 PellaFs ($7,500.00), or- the tetal amount ef the planning alleeatien of GOOPERAT-PiG UNIT i less than Seventy - five I4nndred Bellefs - ($7 90.00). A f`09129D 4TWINCO U414 may ass l them Sevefity Five Hundred DellaFs ($7,500.00) te vhen the aetivity is ene that is e,d b a t le ethe.. GOOPE A TIN T TTTTT a nd a dministe..e,d by o nly one budget is m least Seventy five HufidFed Deilafs ($7,590.00). E. COOPERATING UNIT will take actions necessary to a: :` accomplish the community development program and housing assistance goals, as contained in the Urban Hennepin County GBRIPFOheasive Housing A fF ..d ;t,, St«..te (CHAc4 F. COOPERATING UNIT shall ensure that all programs and/or activities funded in part or in full by grant funds received pursuant to this Agreement shall be undertaken affirmatively with regard to fair housing, employment and business opportunities for minorities and women. It shall, in implementing all programs and /or activities funded by the basic grant amount comply, with all applicable Federal and Minnesota Laws, statutes, rules and regulations with regard to civil rights, affirmative action and equal employment opportunities and Administrative Rule issued by the COUNTY. G. COOPERATING UNIT that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes action by COUNTY to comply with its fair housing certification shall be prohibited from receiving CDBG funding for any activities. H. COOPERATING UNIT shall participate in the citizen participation process as established by COUNTY in compliance with the requirements of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. 1. COOPERATING UNIT shall eem with a ll o f the admi n i stFative gu ideli n e s o f the GQ N4:Y- retxnlsurse C(31J'f 5� fttr a3� d�dtr�ietetm ::..::::.......:. .....:..........:..:.......:::::::.:.............:.............. ..:.:...:.....::::............. OJT) yr €t<tv> >le' J. COOPERATING UNIT shall prepare, execute, and cause to be filed all documents protecting the interests of the parties hereto or any other party of interest as may be designated by the COUNTY. K. COOPERATING UNIT has adopted and is enforcing: 1. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in nonviolent civil rights demonstrations; and 2. A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such nonviolent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction. 4 COUNTY further specifically agrees as follows: • A. COUNTY shall prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies, on an annual basis, all plans, statements and program documents necessary for receipt of a basic grant amount under the Act. B. COUNTY shall provide, to the maximum extent feasible, technical assistance and coordinating services to COOPERATING UNIT in the preparation and submission of 44e "A request for funding. C. COUNTY shall provide ongoing technical assistance to COOPERATING UNIT to aid COUNTY in fulfilling its responsibility to HUD for accomplishment of the community development program and housing assistane goals. D. COUNTY shall, upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer local housing rehabilitation grant programs funded pursuant to the Agreement, provided that COUNTY shall receive Twelve percent (12 %) of the allocation by COOPERATING UNIT to the activity as reimbursement for costs associated with the administration of COOPERATING UNIT activity. E. COUNTY may, at its discretion and upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer for a possible fee other programs and/or activities funded pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. F. COUNTY may, as necessary for clarification and coordination of program administration, develop and implement Administrative Rules consistent with the Act, Regulations, HUD administrative directives, and administrative requirements of COUNTY. • V. ALLOCATION OF BASIC GRANT AMOUNTS Basic grant amounts received by the COUNTY under Section 106 of the Act shall be allocated as follows: A. COUNTY shall retain Ten percent (10 %) of the annual basic grant amount for the undertaking of eligible activities. B. The balance of the basic grant amount shall be armed r€e ;a by COUNTY to I. ... .. . ..... ....:: . .:::...:.:: COOPERATING UNITS in accordance with the formula stated in part C i&d the � r� .: s ... ta ..........:...:...... ; :. ;:..::. <: a of this section for the purpose of allowing the COOPERATING UNITS to make Mlb t f i . requests. f. ~ the use of fu nds se appeFtiened. The allocation is for planning purposes only and is not a guarantee of funding. C. Is >t?ll calltry <or each COOPERATING UNIT will e� b b a target f ^' ^ ^° as T des, an amount that bears the same ratio to the balance of the basic grant amount as the average of the ratios between: 1. The o ulation of COOPERATING UNIT and the population of all COOPERATING P P P P UNITS. • 2. The extent of poverty in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of poverty in all COOPERATING UNITS. 5 3. The extent of overcrowded housing by units in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of overcrowded housing by units in all COOPERATING UNITS. • 4. In determining the average of the above ratios, the ratio involving the extent of poverty shall be counted twice. l3> : >upds.v�l€ b rnae aunFtable tc� imt{ittas utttng�rmul spei>ieri ;t :cif th�ectton t� tote f�l:ko�iritg �.ri�� CE7 PERA'It"a : . UNi`I` uaia as IuSeta Ittatl Ct atrt tt�ns ol" at bast Qf3t1Q wttl r�u anr�uai futttngaiicca> ids: >eciait tl [ soua enttttment ...................... ........ . tt CE�UN fa�iriiallet�nfer is t;�. offie C ©P1 C ©Ult�uia adltatta a # x(30 o re i�.;::::::`::..;>':;:::::::iii:::::::;::::>' :: ::: ::;.�: : ::::._ :: :.: t <:rec ve.xm d o . actin 'anMOW.: ....... ... e:vi'# t..:....r » �da kvca tong ........ >:i >i:<:>ii.::.:: >::.: ..: ; t P �A�t�"S�'.: rmufa atll cm Mesa that ws 1�a tile; >fupdsc€l�tlal ii: .... .... .......... aQl litw t attttet d�r,ted+y CfCtY #only fi[ f F v�rhM I; ticlm by =fit# i Ile: tc c n e ..:..:::.::. ..... ... ... .....: .. .:::::;::..::::.;.::: �o�: eke :: fi�tad E. it is the intent ef this seetien theA said planning alleee4iea utilize the safne basie elements fer- 6 of A a set f fth i 24 CPR §579 The COUNTY shall develop these ratios based upon data to be furnished by HUD. The COUNTY assumes no duty to gather such data independently and assumes no liability for any errors in the data furnished by HUD. • F. In the event COOPERATING UNIT does not request its planning aunt allocation, or a portion thereof, the amount not requested shall be b e8fiditiens ef this Agreement. tie . to .. tp�pautg cprntbtazte, . a tnaruace ...... ............... ,ems 'Inec€ > VI. FINANCIAL MATTERS A. Reimbursement to the COOPERATING UNIT for expenditures for the implementation of activities funded under the Act shall be made upon receipt by the COUNTY of Summary of Project Disbursement form and Hennepin County Warrant Request, and supporting documentation. B. All funds received by COUNTY under the Act as reimbursement for payment to COOPERATING UNITS for expenditure of local funds for activities funded under the Act shall be deposited in the County Treasury. C. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall maintain financial and other records and accounts in accordance with requirements of the Act and Regulations. Such records and accounts will be in such form as to permit reports required of the County to be prepared therefrom and to permit the tracing of grant funds and program income to final expenditure. D. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree to make available all records and accounts with • respect to matters covered by this Agreement at all reasonable times to their respective personnel 6 and duly authorized federal officials. Such records shall be retained as provided by law, but in • no event for a period of less than three years from the last receipt of program income resulting from activity implementation. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall perform all audits, as may be required, of the basic grant amount and resulting program income as required under the Act and Regulations. E. COOPERATING UNIT shall inform COUNTY of any income generated by the expenditure of CDBG funds it has received and shall pay to COUNTY all program income generated except as derived from activities with an approved revolving account. When program income is generated by an activity that is only partially assisted with CDBG funds, the income shall be prorated to reflect the percentage of CDBG funds used. 1. COUNTY will retain Ten percent (10 %) of all program income paid to COUNTY to defray administration expenses. 2. The remaining Ninety percent (90 %) of the program income paid to COUNTY shall be credited to the grant authority of COOPERATING UNIT whose project generated the program income and shall be used for fundable and eligible CDBG activities consistent with this Agreement. 3 !`OOPEl? A TDT T ilT d GO iTV are ,.+t,.. i t a de 1igib,le eet' 't' i fi a6698 W ith a ll C`DBG FeElH as tl,e..... «1., • A GOOF ~D ATTA G UMT shall maintain a Fe ..;ate r _r"dS - ._..d Ma ke F e...e..ts t CQIP PT as may b.e nee t o efi able C t .liter. Mi d ,. ff tE, R P an the use ef - a fly 5. Any p d%# i-.'; en hand of: r-eeeived subsequent to the elOSeeUt OF ehange-ffl a i . All r-eimbur-sements fef: ineligible e*peftditiar-es shall be added to the Re*t annual basie a afflOHF . a b rQy V ., d ..lt ,...tea e _ .._a:. g to th p „ea,.. set f l4h i n a nd ..1. wi 'te Re t s A g en unless dee..eed ethe b Fede« 1 ." r , a ll d' i aYe t � J b' 2. When it is deteFmiaed by the GgtNP,� that gFmt 4inds have been expended an an eligible aect v r y,a»d through nA 1Fa»4 9 f the - r'c.91:'l RAT -P Q 6-NIT, the pfejeet fails eF is H- leagef— eligi +k r-e f g ran t 4 in d s till b e r-ea i n the smfie fRaRFIe aS C t' 37T 1r f thi A e a ~ e nt u nle ss d„ eed ethe a b a Fede ..1 1 t 1, d b A i d t et;e eF ., ...-t e f e .rr J °te sd;et; 3,q4. REM. PROPER-TV ACQUISMON OR 1AVROVEME Th e f e ll ew i H g Pf S • y b 7 Of real -- prepet�' €rerri Chet - planned M- the time e€- eequisitie afflt, a • Elispesitien, and eemply with 24 CPR §970.505. gaalif3' under the GDBG regalatiWIS. Said Feifabtrr-semeat -shall ie -pe"'ided to GQUNPi at the tie}e -Of SaW er trans €er ei' the= PFepfftT. c o ...�....�e...e.,, Shall 9t b e r - e d if t seetie t/T B `.F this A g t VIII. METROPOLITAN CITIES Any metropolitan city executing this Agreement shall defer their entitlement status and become part of Urban Hennepin County. IX. OPINION OF COUNSEL • The undersigned, on behalf of the Hennepin County Attorney, having reviewed this Agreement, hereby opines that the terms and provisions of the Agreement are fully authorized under State and local law and that the Agreement provides full legal authority for COUNTY to undertake or assist in undertaking essential community development and housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing. Assistant County Attorney • s • X. HENNEPIN COUNTY EXECUTION The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on 199 , and pursuant to such approval and the proper County official having signed this Agreement, the COUNTY agrees to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Upon proper execution, this COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA Agreement will be legally valid and binding. By: Chair of its County Board And: Deputy/Associate County Administrator Assistant County Attorney Attest: Date: Deputy County Auditor APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: Assistant County Attorney • Date: • 9 XI. COOPERATING UNIT EXECUTION • COOPERATING UNIT, having signed this Agreement, and the COOPERATING UNIT'S governing body having duly approved this Agreement on , 199 , and pursuant to such approval and the proper city official having signed this Agreement, COOPERATING UNIT agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Joint Cooperation Agreement, contract CITY OF By: Its And: Its Date: CITY MUST CHECK ONE: The City is organized pursuant to: Plan A Plan B Charter • U: \COOPAGRE.97VTCOOP.AGR April 23, 1996 • 10 8d • 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 DATE: May 22, 1996 SUBJECT: Set Dates for Council Work Sessions for June 3, July 1, and July 15 I would request that the Council set the following dates for work sessions: -June 3 -July 1 -July 15 Work sessions will be held in Conference Room B, City Hall, and begin at 7 p.m. SF �RpOKLYN CENT�9 BROOKLYN CENTER • 4 POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager Michael McCauley FROM: Chief of Police Scott Kline X� DATE: May 22, 1996 SUBJECT: Skateboarding and Rollerblading Ordinance In recent years, the city staff has noted a tremendous increase in young people on skateboards and rollerblades using the sidewalk area in and around the two buildings which comprise the Civic Center complex, the City Hall and the Community Center. This has raised some concerns • since there is a great deal of pedestrian traffic with seniors and adults coming and going from both City Hall and the Community Center and a great number of small children coming and going from the Community Center to the day care facility and other activities such as the pool. In addition to the complex with the pedestrian traffic, there has also been a great deal of damage noted to the plantings and the railings found adjacent to these two buildings. The ordinance clearly designates only the area around the Civic Center as the area to be posted and in no way limits the normal usage of rollerblades or skateboards in the entire park trailway and lot system throughout Brooklyn Center, nor is there any intention to expand beyond the current areas. If in the future it should become necessary to expand beyond the current language in the ordinance, it would be necessary to return to the council to get approval at that time. SK:kh skatwnimem 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 19 of the City Ordinances regarding the use of skateboards and roller blades. 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 ROLLER BLADES; 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 TNF TTSF OF SKATFRO RT)S AND RCPT T FR RT ADFS Section 19 -1501 SKATEBOARDING AND ROI T FR Rr ADINC. PROHIBITED No person shall ride or propel ckatebo rdc, roller blades or roller skates on the "Posted" areas at the City Civic Center Cnmrflax, e xc nt in connection with an exhibition, commercial venture-, organized Dl l nr similar organized event authorized by permit issued by the City lnager. The term "Posted" areas shall mean areas that ar cl arty designated by cignage, the use of ckateho rdc, roller blades, or roller skates_ Sectinn 19-1502 PFNA TY Any p erson violating the 1)rovisjon of Section 19-1502 may, upon conviction th .r .nf, he nmriched by a fine of not more than han c even hundred dollars ($700) or imprisonment of not to exceed nine' (90, davg, or hoth, tin ether with the costs of I rncecution 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.) O �pOKLYN CFgT� BROOKLYN CENTER POLICE DEPARTMENT � POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager Michael McCauley FROM: Chief of Police Scott Kline DATE: May 22, 1996 SUBJECT: Abatement of Noise Ordinance With the recent proliferation of extremely powerful sound generation stereo equipment in very small containers such as the modular stereo home entertainment centers and the car stereos, there has been a subsequent increase in complaints of noise coming from both dwelling units and motor vehicles where the complaining is a p g party t such a great distance from the origin of the sound that they cannot accurately pinpoint where the sound is coming from. Additionally, officers are totally dependent because of the current state law on disturbing he peace to have someone else be disturbed before they can take any action in these cases. Subdivision 2 quickly and easily sets a guideline for any and all persons to understand to determine whether the sound being generated is legal or illegal, and it should help the department to control some of these obvious nuisances. SK:kh imisaordmem 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 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 Al204 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: Se rtinn 19 -120' RADIOS, TAPE AND DiSC PLAYERS, ETC- Subdivision 1- No nermnn shall nlay ure, or operate on�nuhlic or pri_vatc property any radio, tape or disc nlaver, m psi al instnim nt, �honpgran , nr nth machine or device for the nrndnrtion or amnlificatinn of sound in such a manner, ennsidering the time and 01ace and the =�mose for which the sound is modured, as to unreas rh the I)ec quiet,_ nr renoce of a person or nersnns of nrdinary sensihili>t Subdivision 2 The lay use, or operation of any radio, tap or disc 1� musical instniment, :phnnn nr other machine or de vice for the = production nr amnlificatinn of sound in such a manner ac to he plainly audible at a distance of fifty (501 feet from said machine or d ice shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this s rtion Subdivision I When sound violating this section is nr odured by a machine ^r device that is located in nr nn a v hi 1 the yell le owner is not nr s n ,the person in charge of the vehicle at thf time- iC nnilhv of the vinlatinn Suhdivisinn 4 Thigsaction shall not annly to sound 1god ced by the fnllnsv;nn• s r • a_ Amm plVing_Tipment tnsed in connection with a tivi i C for whirl Hermits have been ranted, ORDINANCE NO • b_ Anti -theft devices• and c- Machines or devices for the nroduc ion of sound on or in authorized emergency v .hi 1 _s_ Section 19- 1204_ PENALTY Any =son violating the I mvisinnc of Sections 19 -1201 thmnuh 19 -1201 shall, upon convirtinn, h_e�ntinish �hv i fine of not more thqn seven hundred dollars n_ r_imj)nsnnment not to exePM ninety_(901 davc or hoth, together with the costs of nrnserntion 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 Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) i