HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 07-10 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
JULY 10, 1995
7 p.m.
�yl. Call to Order
Roll Call
Opening Ceremonies CL Km m gX� 0 CA S) 56 C'HJl`
Council Report k/o NF_
Presentation - N16 e n l q d„ k'A - 6 ' "Ck_u tli
Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda 451< j LIqlu /
-The following items are considered to be route e 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.
Approval of Minutes ��-
Councilmembers not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from
the vote on the minutes.
I. June 19, 1995 - Special Sessiong u
2. June June 19, 1995 - Special Work Session �_-/rA41 a-�—
I June 20, 1995 - Special Session /'
Resolution Appointing Cam Andre to the Executive Committee of the Five
Cities Senior Transportation Project 6/G 11cr -( A_✓t '--`-- A? 57 S - :�
Resolution Appointing Cam Andre to the Board of Directors of Hennepin
Recycling Group � )G �jC, .c / t,,,,� -�._ j Y— r s" 3
Resolution Appointing Cam Andre as Director to the Board of Directors of
LOGIS d �� �(� �� 5-- / s y
Resolution Acknowledging ai}d Congratulating
tp
Ruth Dickson as the City of —
Brooklyn Center Employee of the Quarter, Second Quarter 1995 and J S�
Congratulating All Second Quarter 1995 Nominees
Approval of Bond Survey Questions ( 5 �- ^--t U.11
Resolution Accepting Work Performed and Approving Final Payment for 1994
Diseased Tree Removal Program, Improvement Project No. 1994 -22, Contract
1994 -C
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- July 10, 1995
Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of
Diseased Trees (Order No. DST 07/10/95
Licenses �C `t,t
Open Forum t
Public Hearing:
Administrative Hearing for a Water & Sewer Utility Bill at 7201 Ma
Avenue North IzC /3 //a se
Counc;l Consideration Items
h. Planning Commission Application No. 95009 submitted by the City of Brooklyn
Center. Request for rezoning from I -1 and C -2 to PUD /I -1 and approval of
a Planned Unit Development to accommodate appropriate common parking
areas for the properties located northwesterly of the intersection of Shingle
Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of this application on June 29, 1995, through Planning
Commission Resolution No. 95 -1.
` . Resolution Regarding the Disposition � f Planning Co �'ssion�
Z7
Application No. 95009 the
by the City of Brooklyn Center
S�
An Ordinance Amend
Cha ter Q
�5 of the City r
C p ty O dinances Re �
the Zoning Classification of Certain Land k/ 13
b. Planning Commission Application No. 95010 submitted by Robert L. Adelman.
Request for Special Use Permit to install and operate a propane tank at
Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North. The Planning Commission
reco end approval of thisapplication at its June 29, 1995, meeting.
G /cam
07 / r7 4-U)
Resolution Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated l,s�
Public Service of the Earle Brown Days Committee
i. Discussion of Tabled Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding Contract,
Improvement Project No. 1995 -11, Contract 1995 -E, Corrugated Metal Pipe
Sanitary Sewer Trunk Relining
e. Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
10. Adjournment
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- July 10, 1995
EDA AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
JULY 10, 1995
(following adjournment of City Council meeting)
I. Call to Order 757
2. Roll Call C�� ,(% �! �L/`� j 'Lfe Pj 6� � C 0- 6 f f ' � /Zt)
3. Approval of Agenda and Consent A � ,�C U. Yl
-The following items are considered to be routine y the conomic Development
Authority and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion
of these items unless a Commissioner so requests, in which event the item will be
removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end
of Commission
Consideration Items.
a. Approval of Minutes: June 26, 1995 - Regular Session / /CC [ c may_ 6
Commissioners not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining om the
vote on the minutes.
4. Commission Consideration s derati
on Items
a. Resolution Approving a Request for Development Proposal for the Area of
69th Avenue North and Brookl Boulevard and Authorizing the Advertising
of the Same
5. Adjournment
��/ Aq u 6
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
JULY 10, 1995
7 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Opening Ceremonies
4. Council Report
5. Presentation - None
6. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda
-The following items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be
enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless
a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the
consent agenda and considered at the end of Council Consideration Items.
a. Approval of Minutes
- Councilmembers not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from
the vote on the minutes.
1. June 19, 1995 - Special Session
2. June 19, 1995 - Special Work Session
3. June 20, 1995 - Special Session
b. Resolution Appointing Cam Andre to the Executive Committee of the Five
Cities Senior Transportation Project
C. Resolution Appointing Cam Andre to the Board of Directors of Hennepin
Recycling Group
d. Resolution Appointing Cam Andre as Director to the Board of Directors of
LOGIS
e. Resolution Acknowledging and Congratulating Ruth Dickson as the City of
Brooklyn Center Employee of the Quarter, Second Quarter 1995 and
Congratulating All Second Quarter 1995 Nominees
f. Approval of Bond Survey Questions
g. Resolution Accepting Work Performed and Approving Final Payment for 1994
Diseased Tree Removal Program, Improvement Project No. 1994 -22, Contract
1994 -C
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- July 10, 1995
h. Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of
Diseased Trees (Order No. DST 07/10/95)
i. Licenses
7. Open Forum
8. Public Hearing:
a. Administrative Hearing for a Water & Sewer Utility Bill at 7201 Major
Avenue North
9. Council Consideration Items
a. Planning Commission Application No. 95009 submitted by the City of Brooklyn
Center. Request for rezoning from I -1 and C -2 to PUD /I -1 and approval of
a Planned Unit Development to accommodate appropriate common parking
areas for the properties located northwesterly of the intersection of Shingle
Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of this application on June 29, 1995, through Planning
Commission Resolution No. 95 -1.
1. Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission
Application No. 95009 Submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center
2. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding
the Zoning Classification of Certain Land
b. Planning Commission Application No. 95010 submitted by Robert L. Adelman.
Request for Special Use Permit to install and operate a propane tank at
Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of this application at its June 29, 1995, meeting.
C. Resolution Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated
P b b
Public Service of the Earle Brown Days Committee
d. Discussion of Tabled Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding Contract,
Improvement Project No. 1995 -11, Contract 1995 -E, Corrugated Metal Pipe
Sanitary Sewer Trunk Relining
e. Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
10. Adjournment
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- July 10, 1995
EDA AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
JULY 10, 1995
(following adjournment of City Council meeting)
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda
-The following items are considered to be routine by the Economic Development
Authority and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion
of these items unless a Commissioner so requests, in which event the item will be
removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Commission
Consideration Items.
a. Approval of Minutes: June 26, 1995 - Regular Session
Commissioners not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from the
vote on the minutes.
4. Commission Consideration Items
a. Resolution Approving a Request for Development Proposal for the Area of
69th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard and Authorizing the Advertising
of the Same
5. Adjournment
Council Meeting Date July 10, 1995
31 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number V Q.
For Council Request o Coun Co nsideration
® Item Description: City Council Minutes
June 19, 1995 - Special Session
June 19, 1995 - Special Work Session
June 20, 1995 - Special Session
Department Approval:
4
Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk
e V
Manager's Review /Recommendation:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
• Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes )
June 19, 1995 - Special Session
All Councilmembers were present.
June 19, 1995 - Special Work Session
All Councilmembers were present.
June 20, 1995 Special Session
All Councilmembers were present.
k
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY
OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
SPECIAL SESSION
JUNE 19, 1995
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special session and was called to order by Mayor
Myrna Kragness at 6:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Barb Kalligher, Kristen Mann, Debra Hilstrom, and
Kathleen Carmody. Also present were Director of Community Development Brad Hoffman and
Council Secretary Carla Wirth.
DISCUSS INTERIM CITY MANAGER POSITION
Mayor Kragness requested the Council address the interview process for the Interim City
Manager which will take place at 5:30 p.m. on June 20, 1995. She advised both Sy Knapp and
Cam Andre have expressed interest; however, John Brandl has declined due to a full schedule
through September of 1995.
Councilmember Hilstrom reviewed information she obtained when she and Councilmember
Carmody attended a League Conference. She advised they highly recommend using the 100
point scale when hiring, especially when dealing with Veterans Preference. They also
recommend using the same set of questions for each applicant and cautioned against asking
questions which raise human rights issues (residency in Brooklyn Center, age, race, etc.).
Councilmember Carmody asked if residence in Brooklyn Center can be a requirement.
Councilmember Hilstrom explained the past City Manager's job description said he would
become a resident of Brooklyn Center within one year.
The Director of Community Development advised this requirement is not part of the City's
Charter and since that time there have been court decisions which now preclude the City from
requiring residency.
Mayor Kragness requested the Council members address the Interim Manager interview process.
She informed she spoke with Sy Knapp today and he indicated he would like to move forward
and would be available for questions. She further informed Mr. Knapp recommends the Council
consider hiring a professional search company who is aware of the best candidates and knows
6/19/95 - 1 -
A
the right questions to ask. He believed this process would "weed out" candidates and present
the Council with the "cream of the crop" for final interviews. Mayor Kragness added that Mr.
Knapp cautions against acting hastily and that the Council be sure they are all committed to the
decision being made. Mayor Kragness noted the Acting City Nlanager also supports hiring a
professional search company.
Councilmember Hilstrom asserted the decision on whether to use a professional search company
should be handled as a totally separate issue. She suggested the Council conclude action to hire
an Interim City Manager before deciding whether to hire a search company.
Mayor Kragness stated she believes this issue does need to be addressed at this time because the
Council will be looking at suggestions from the Interim Manager candidates on how to move
forward in the process. She pointed out she has not asked Mr. Andre about his opinion on this
issue.
The Councilmembers then reviewed the seven interview questions as drafted by the Acting City
Manager. Mayor Kragness asked if the Councilmembers should like to elaborate on any of the
questions or add more detail.
Question l: Briefly describe to us vour background education and experience as it relates to
municipal government.
The Director of Community Development commented on the background of each candidate,
noting their involvement with City government.
Councilmember Hilstrom advised the League recommended the Council place a limit on the
amount of background given to avoid a situation where so much background is given that the
employer can determine the candidate's age, etc. She suggested a time frame, such as the past
five or ten years.
The Director of Community Development explained that due to the two candidate's known
background, perhaps it would be better to place a time limit such as five minutes.
Consensus was reached to limit the candidate's reply to Question 1, description of their
background, to five minutes.
Question 2: Describe to us how you would assist the Council in managing operations if selected
as an Interim Citv Manager for Brooklvn Center.
No change.
Ouestion 3: What would you envision your schedule or availability to be if you were appointed
Interim City Manager.
No change.
Q uestion 4: What urocess do you use in solving problems.
6/19/95 - 2
Councilmember Kalligher indicated perhaps Question 4, the process they use in solving
problems, is too broad.
Councilmember Hilstrom concurred and suggested they be asked what method they use in
problem solving.
Councilmember Carmody suggested that perhaps the type of problem should be better identi tied,
i.e., Council issues versus personnel issues.
Mayor Kragness asked if they should indicate how they would prioritize problems.
Councilmember Kalligher stated her preference for an Interim Manager that is not biased one
way or the other and would come in with a new attitude. She concurred with the importance
of not rushing the hiring process.
Mayor Kragness stated the Interim Manager should stabilize activity until the permanent
Manager is hired, and the Interim Manager will not make major decisions which would be better
left to the permanent Manager.
Councilmember Kalligher noted the Tnterim Manager will have to deal with issues involving the
budget and several litigation cases.
Mayor Kragness noted that the Acting City Manager will probably continue working with the
• City Attorneys on the litigation issues.
The Director of Community Development concurred the litigation issues will probably continue
to be handled by the Acting City Manager. He suggested that perhaps the Council should
consider the method of communication between the Manager and themselves, at what point he
would make the Council aware of issues, and how he relates to the Council.
Councilmember Carmodv suggested Question 4 be eliminated and allow the candidate to spend
more time on Question "5.
Council consensus was reached to delete Q uestion 4.
Ouestion 5: Brieflv discuss how you would work with Council and /or staff in resolving
problems.
Councilmember Carmody asserted that in answering Question 5, the applicant will indicate the
process they use (Question 4) in problem solving.
Mayor r Q suggested fr om
� o Kra ness su ested the candidate be asked what type of support the would expect m o
y � �� YP PP Y P
the Council.
Councilmember Carmody suggested this be included as part of Question 5.
6/19/95 - 3 -
Council consensus was reached to revise Question 5 to indicate: Briefly discuss how you
would wort: with Council and /or staff in resolving problems. What are your expectations
from Council.
Question 6: What do you see your role is in facilitating the Council and assisting them in
selection and recruitment of a new City Manager.
No change. (Note: Question 6 was reworded later in the meeting.)
Question 7: If the Council asked you to work with them in recruitment of the City Manager not
using a consultant or search firm how would you assist them in this process
No change. (Note: Question 7 was reworded later in the meeting.)
Mayor Kragness questioned the length of interview for each candidate.
Council consensus was reached to allow 45 minutes for each candidate.
Mayor Kragness asked each Councilmember to prepare a brief statement about what they are
looking for in an Interim Manager. She believed the key word is "trust ". She emphasized the
staff will have to know this Interim Manager is someone they can look up to and work with on
a day -to -day basis.
The Director of Community Development stated his opinion that staff will have no problem with
either of the two candidates under consideration.
Councilmember Hilstrom reviewed additional information she received at the League Conference
and su a question be added regarding the candidates strong and weak points.
Question 8: What do you consider to be your outstandin strong— Doints and /or weak points for
this position. and how will this effect your performance
Council consensus was reached to add this question.
I
Councilmember Hilstrom advised the League made it clear that notes taken by Councilmembers
during the interview process have the potential of becoming public information.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked if the City has policies in place for dealing with a personnel or
discipline issue. The Director of Community Development explained these issues are covered
in the Personnel Policy which contains procedures and steps to follow.
Councilmember Hilstrom requested a copy of this Plan for review, and possible review by the
applicant to make sure they feel comfortable with enforcing those rules.
Mayor Kragness concurred and suggested this be addressed in a question to the candidates.
6/19/95 - 4 -
Councilmember Hilstrom commented on the need for someone who is comfortable with abiding
by already established policies.
Councilmember Mann stated she would like the Interim Manager to feel comfortable with
making suggestions if he finds something that should be changed.
Councilmember Hilstrom suggested that a potential change should come before the Council
based on its merit.
The Director of Community Development pointed out the Interim Manager will probably not be
making those types of changes, but may offer them as suggestions for consideration to the
permanent Manager. He reported on a past action in Hopkins where an Interim Manager hired
a new Financial Director, much to the dismay of the permanent Manager. He explained that
typically the Personnel Policy contains standard procedure for providing a certain number and
type of warnings prior to disciplinary action. He indicated the Council could ask the candidates
� P P Y
what their philosophies are regarding discipline and see if it is compatible with what the Council
desires.
Councilmember Carmody stated she does not want the Interim Manager to change a lot of
established policies.
Mayor Kragness stated since the Interim Manager will be dealing with a lot of staff activity and
different departments, it is important that he be knowledgeable of those issues.
Councilmember Hilstrom noted the candidate will robabl come from a city with a hierarch
P Y Y Y
and will be highly qualified in knowing the inner workings of city government and chain of
command.
Councilmember Kalligher left the meeting at 6:35 p.m.
Ouestion 9: Would you feel comfortable with following policies previously established by the
Council.
Council consensus was reached to add this question.
Councilmember Hilstrom noted that the meeting tonight is a public meeting, but the Council has
been asked to place their questions in a sealed envelope.
Councilmember Kalligher returned to the meeting at 6:37 p.m.
The Director of Community Development explained staff will retype the questions and provide
them for Council's use during the interview process tomorrow night.
Councilmember Hilstrom suggested the candidate be asked "what exceptional skills do you
believe you will bring to the position ".
6119/95 - 5 -
I
01
Council consensus was reached to ask this question.
Councilmember Hilstrom noted this position has the potential to work under pressure situations
due to litigation, etc., and suggested they be asked how well they work under pressure.
Mayor Kragness believed this topic (pressure situations) will be addressed under Question 8,
what are your strong and /or weak points.
Question 10: Is there anvthina else you would like to share with us that may effect our decision
Council consensus was reached to add this question.
Councilmember Hilstrom pointed out allowing five minutes per question will fill the 45 minute
interview time slate.
Councilmember Carmody asked if Questions 6 and 7 are somewhat redundant or if they should
be combined and restated.
Council consensus was reached to change Questions 6 and 7 as follows:
Question 6: What do you see your role is in facilitating the Council and assisting them in
selection and recruitment of a new City Manager if they determine to not use a consultant or
search firm.
Question 7: What do you see your role is in facilitating the Council and assisting them in
selection and recruitment of a new City Manaaer if they determine to use a consultant or search
firm.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked if the Council will receive each candidate's resume.
Mayor Kragness stated they will, and perhaps Sy Knapp will want to make some changes to his
resume.
Councilmember Hilstrom questioned the process for negotiating a contract with the candidates
and consideration of the terms being requested.
Councilmember Carmody stated she would like to see the contract requests being made by each
candidate.
The Director of Community Development explained the Council will probably select one of the
candidates and then try to negotiate a contract.
Mayor Kragness asked who should be interviewed first, Sy Knapp or Cam Andre.
6/19/95 - 6 -
t
It was decided to flip a coin with Cam Andre being "heads" based on alphabetical order. Based
on the coin toss, it was determined that Sy Knapp would be interviewed first, unless there are
i extenuatina circumstances.
OTHER BUSINESS
Councilmember Kalligher questioned the level of July activity at the Earle Brown Heritage
Center.
The Director of Community Development advised July is one of the slower months for the
Heritage Center, but he believed some activities would still be scheduled in the next few weeks.
Mayor Kragness suggested Councilmember Kalligher call Judith Bergeland who has indicated
a willingness to answer questions and give a tour of the facility. Mayor Kragness advised she
also works with special event bookings and concurred mid -July has historically been a slow
month.
The Director of Community Development advised, in terms of revenue, that March of 1995 was
the best month they have ever had. He commented on the capital improvement expenditures
which were made "up front ".
ADJOURNMENT
The Brooklyn Center City Council was adjourned by Mayor Kragness at 6:47 p.m.
•
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
Recorded and transcribed by:
Carla Wirth
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial
6/19/95 -7 -
1�IINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY
OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
SPECIAL WORK SESSION
JUNE 19, 1995
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor
Myrna Kragness at 7 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Barb Kalligher, Kristen Mann, Debra Hilstrom, and
Kathleen Carmody. Also present were Director of Public Services Diane Spector, Finance
Director Charlie Hansen, five members of the Financial Commission (Donn Escher, Ned Storla,
Phillip Roche, Lee Anderson, and Jay Hruska), and Council Secretary Barbara Collman.
A sixth member of the Financial Commission, Ron Christensen, arrived after the meeting had
begun.
REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR UTILITY BILLING
The Finance Director indicated he would be presenting two ideas in order to find out if the
Council had an interest in pursuing them.
The Finance Director stated the usual procedure for collecting delinquent utility bills is to shut
off the water service to the property. This method is effective but generates anger on the part
of the resident and involves extra work and an unpleasant situation for the City maintenance
workers. An alternate collection method would be to certify the delinquent bill to the property
tax. This method is used successfully in many other cities.
The other idea presented involves rental properties. The system has been to allow owners of
rental properties to have the utilities billed directly in the name of the renter. However,
according to State law, the owner is ultimately responsible for payment of the bill. An alternate
procedure would be to require the utility service to be kept in the name of the property owner
because collection would then be easier and there would be less confusion.
Councilmember Mann noted she liked the idea regarding keeping utility bills in the owner's
name but would prefer for the City to continue to have the option of shutting off the water at
some point if necessary. The Finance Director agreed he would not want to lose the option of
shutting off the water, but the shut -off should not be the primary method of collection. He
6119195 - 1 -
mentioned if the tax method were used, there would probably be hundreds of bills certified each
year. Usually, approximately 50 properties have water shut off each year.
Councilmember Mann asked if delinquent bills were certified to taxes what would happen in the
case of a property which does not pay taxes, like a church. The Finance Director agreed that
concern would need to be considered.
Councilmember Mann asked whether the sanitary sewer is shut off as well. The Finance
Director stated the only service which can be shut off is the water service.
Mayor Kragness expressed concern that certifying hundreds of bills would require even more
work than the current system. The Finance Director stated the issue is a toss -up
administratively. He noted it would be a gain for maintenance workers to not be required to
perform water shut -offs. The task itself is unpleasant and the workers fear harm from the angry
residents whose water is being shut off. In addition, with the tax method, the maintenance
workers would be freed for other duties.
The Director of Public Services noted certifying special assessments would result in more work
for the Engineering Department. She reviewed statistics relating to the issue.
Mayor Kragness asked what happens when water is being shut off in winter. She mentioned
there is State law regarding discontinuing heat in the winter. The Finance Director stated if a
resident tells the City the property is heated with hot water heat, the City does not shut off the
water.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked whether a property is considered uninhabitable without water.
The Finance Director stated a property without water would legally not qualify for a Certificate
of Occupancy. However, it is usually not a factor as an occupant will either pay immediately
or vacate the property when the water is shut off.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked whether there would be costs involved with doing tax
certification. The Finance Director said there would be mailing and miscellaneous costs.
However, the City charges a fee beyond the utility amount owed in order to cover costs. The
amount of the fee would be set to equal the cost of certifying the tax.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked the Director of Public Services whether there would be adequate
staff to handle the additional paperwork. The Director of Public Services said the workload
would probably not be too difficult since it would be done via computer database. However,
it is not possible to foresee how many delinquent bills would require certification processing.
She noted the threat of water shut -off is very effective in getting payment of the bill. The threat
of taxes is not as effective. Certifying taxes would mean less cashtlow for the City as opposed
to actual collection of the bill. The difference in monetary amount would not be huge but would
have some impact.
6/19/95 - 2 -
Councilmember Hilstrom asked how many bills on one property could be certified. The
Director of Public Services indicated special assessments are rolled over to Hennepin County
once each year, so there could be a year's worth of bills.
The Director of Public Services noted the City should reserve the right to shut off the water in
order to handle repeat delinquent accounts. There could be a set number of times a bill could
be delinquent before a shut -off would take place.
Mayor Kragness mentioned only 50 are usually shut off as compared to hundreds which would
need to be certified if the new method were adopted. The Finance Director explained some
property owners might allow the bill to become delinquent and be certified to taxes but they
would not be as likely to allow it to happen if shut off was threatened.
Mayor Kragness noted with certification the City might not actually receive the money for two
years. She asked whether the County would take a portion of the assessment. The Finance
Director said the County does not keep any of the money. All fees and interest are added to the
delinquent bill amount, so the City would not lose any money.
Mayor Kragness stated the City could receive payment in only 90 days if the shut -off method
were used. The Finance Director said that is a true statement. The issue must be weighed
against the resident being displeased with the City for shutting off water service.
The Director of Public Services noted the shut -off method also has a negative impact on new
residents as it appears to be an overzealous collection process.
Mavor Kragness stated she would like to see the tax assessment process in writing. She
expressed concern over cashflow as the current method provides the money to the City sooner.
She noted the tax assessment method appears to be more labor- intensive for the City.
There was a consensus to have Staff present written reports on both ideas presented by the
Finance Director.
JOINT DISCUSSION WITH FINANCIAL COMMISSION
BUDGET CALENDAR
The Finance Director noted the Financial Commission requested that the budget calendar be on
every agenda but there are not particularly any issues regarding it at this time. He also noted
the position of City Manager usually plays an important role in the budget calendar and Council
should be aware Staff will be attempting to move ahead in the process regardless of the status
of the City Manager position. Staff intends to stay on schedule with regard to the budget
because the tax levy process will take place in August.
Councilmember Mann asked whether the November and December budget calendar dates will
be filled in sometime later. The Finance Director said he received notice from the State of the
6/19/95 - 3 -
dates for November and December on Friday and he was not able to get them printed on the
calendar before this meeting but they will be included in the next edition of the calendar.
PRELIMINARY 1996 BUDGET
The Finance Director indicated all City departments have turned in budget requests and his
office is in the process of entering the data onto the computer. At this meeting, the City Council
needs to discuss goals, principles, and larger budget items in order to ensure Staff is aware of
the Council's opinion and can incorporate its intentions into the budget.
Councilmember Mann noted there could be quite a few funds which could be shifted around,
depending on priorities. She stated the Council needs to define the role of the City. She
suggested a discussion of this topic at the next Council work session.
Councilmember Kalligher noted by the time of the next Council work session an interim City
Manager will have been engaged. Councilmember Mann agreed and added Council will also
have access to budget requests from all departments at that time.
Councilmember Mann discussed examples of the necessity of the Council knowing goals of the
City.
There was a discussion concerning the City's involvement in the liquor store business. The
alternative of licensing private stores was discussed. The Finance Director noted the issue was
studied a couple of years ago. The Council asked for a new report on the issue, including a
study of implications of licensing which have been discovered by other cities which have
instituted such an arrangement
Councilmember Mann referred to Items #28 and #113 in the City Manager's portion of the
budget, which is an expenditure for dues and subscriptions. She said the Council should see an
itemization and determine which particular items it wants the City Manager to be involved with.
She mentioned there should be a breakdown of what the North Metro Mayors Association
membership goes for. The Finance Director agreed to prepare a report.
Mr. Escher noted the City Manager's membership in such organizations benefits all citizens of
Brooklyn Center, not just the City Manager.
Mayor Kragness commented she would like to know the breakdown of costs of memberships and
subscriptions.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked about the memo item titled "Financial Impact of Bonding." The
Finance Director said the figure of $100,000 is a ballpark estimate until the bond issue is
written.
Councilmember Hilstrom commented there is no annual plan in place. The Finance Director
said there is the Neighborhood Street Improvement Plan.
6/19/95 -4-
The Director of Public Services stated last year's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) included
10 years' worth of projects. The projects for the first five years are covered in detail. Projects
for the second five -year period are not specified but an amount of funding is given. She
discussed the role of special assessments in reducing the burden on the tax levy over a period
of time.
Councilmember Carmody asked what the financial impact would be if the bond rating falls to
a lower rating.
Councilmember Mann left the meeting at 7:40 p.m.
The Finance Director stated if the rating went from Al to A, the effect would probably be not
more than a tenth of one percent, which does add up over ten years.
Councilmember Mann returned to the meeting at 7:41 p.m.
Mayor Kragness asked whether the City's rating might be affected by the situation regarding the
City Manager, which might indicate a lack of stabilization. The Finance Director indicated
many factors, which are not revealed by Moody's Investors Service, are used in determining the
rating. The stability of the City's government could be a factor but it would only be one factor
Of many. Even if the recent controversy affects the rating adversely, it will not be evident if
the rating drops since it is impossible to know which factor caused the drop.
Mayor Kragness asked how the rating is determined and what criteria are used. The Finance
Director said this information is not made available to the City.
Councilmember Kalligher asked whether, if the tax levy were begun at $100,000, it could
increase with inflation. The Finance Director explained that, when the bonds are set, the terms
and conditions are permanently set based on status on that date. However, the subsequent years
construction and bonding costs would be affected by inflation.
The Director of Public Services said there would be some net impact. A careful review is
necessary and that is why early identification of future projects is very beneficial.
Councilmember Hilstrom noted the CDBG, HACA, and street improvement projects are a
priority. The Council should be proactive and see that the projects continue without a change
in the tax levy.
Councilmember Carmody asked whether there will be more information available on the CDBG
funding at the July Council work session. The Finance Director said it is possible but it
depends on Congress setting the federal budget, which could be delayed until late in September
or early in October.
6/19/95 -5 -
Councilmember Hilstrom mentioned she has heard these programs will be on the chopping block
every year. Therefore, the Council should address the issue and have a plan in case there is a
mid -year change in funding. The Director of Public Services noted funding can be rescinded
at any time of the year.
Councilmember Carmody suggested the issue be evaluated in depth at the July work session.
Councilmember Carmody asked what kind of fees are included in non - property tax revenues.
Councilmember Kalligher left the meeting at 7:50 p.m.
The Finance Director listed some of the fees and noted the City does not have total freedom but
should review fees.
Councilmember Carmody asked which fees are a substantial portion. There appear to be
conflicting goals involved, such as a desire for redevelopment versus strenuous licensing fees.
The Finance Director commented a comparison should be done with other cities.
Councilmember Kalligher returned to the meeting at 7:51 p.m.
The Director of Public Services noted the issue of recreation fees is complicated. It is especially
important with the City's demographics that fees be as low as possible.
Councilmember Kalligher left the meeting at 7:52 p.m. 0
Councilmember Mann stated non - resident recreation fees are a possibility.
Councilmember Hilstrom suggested a reciprocal agreement be made with the City of Crystal
concerning the Crystal gym and the Brooklyn Center pool. An assessment could be made of
programs which could complement each other between the two cities. The Director of Public
Services stated non - resident fees are charged for team sports but not for the use of City facilities.
The Finance Director explained that, due to fixed costs, the City still makes money from a non-
resident using the pool. He urged caution that adding fees might discourage non - residents from
using the pool facility at all.
The Director of Public Services stated accessibility needs to be considered when evaluating a
cooperative arrangement as was suggested by Councilmember Hilstrom.
Councilmember Carmody left the meeting at 7:55 p.m.
Mayor Kragness noted there would have to be an agreement on splitting revenues.
6/19/95 - 6-
The Finance Director stated the City does have some cooperative projects with other cities, but
further review could be done.
Councilmember Carmody returned to the meeting at 7:56 p.m.
Mayor Kragness referred to an item regarding salaries for maintenance custodians. She asked
whether the item is due to part-time positions being changed to full -time positions. The Director
of Public Services explained the part -time positions provided flexibility in light of a 24 -hour
need. However, it is difficult to hire people for part -time jobs with no benefits on a permanent
basis. Often, after an employee has been trained he or she leaves for full -time work. Also,
more time is now taken up with maintenance of an aging building. It is believed that offering
a part-time employee some benefits might make the part -time position more attractive. She
noted the hiring philosophy of the 1980s is not working today.
The Finance Director elaborated by stating that, during the recession of the 1980s, qualified
workers were willing to accept part-time positions with no benefits. Now, conditions are
different and it is not possible to hire qualified employees under those terms. He added the
Acting City Manager is studying this issue at this time.
Mr. Escher asked whether there is a policy of pro -rated benefits in place. The Finance Director
said there is no such g g
roram but the Actin City Manager is researching one. Mr. Escher
P � ID Y b
suggested the Acting City Manager review the existing State program.
The Finance Director stated the Fire Department is requesting a full-time fire inspector as more
time is needed to perform the inspections of aging facilities. Inspections are currently conducted
by volunteer firefighters on a part -time basis. Also, the number of firefighters available during
the day is declining as older ones retire and it is difficult to attract younger firefighters to work
on the day shift.
Mayor Kra g
�ness asked whether the firefi are paid for the time spent on inspections. The
Finance Director said they are.
Mayor Kragness commented those firefighters are also City employees. The Finance Director
Y � � Y
stated five or six of them are City employees. They could possibly retire as firefighters and
continue as City employees.
Mayor Kragness agreed something must be done to attract volunteers. She stated it may be
necessary to pay firefighters in the future. The Finance Director stated firefighters will be more
exp ensive even if payment is only partial.
P P Y YP
Mavor Kragness asked whether there are incentives offered to firefighters. The Director of
Public Services said an idea being considered is to award points on a job application like the
Veterans Preference points. It is unknown whether such an action would be legal.
6/19/95 -7-
i
Mayor Kragness commented it is important to follow through on this item.
Councilmember Hilstrom commented she attended a League of Minnesota Cities workshop shop on
service values. She obtained a checklist of service analysis and suggested Staff should review
it.
Mr. Christensen noted the City used such a checklist a few years ago. He suggested the Council
might want to review the study which was done.
Mr. Escher explained the process which was used in 1993. Employees were asked to rate City
services. The document is good but would need to be updated.
Mr. Christensen said Council should review the document and have the Finance Director explain
it. The issue might merit revisiting, but the existing document is a good beginning place.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked whether the study included a consideration of services of the
future. Mr. Christensen said he thought future services were considered in the process.
The Director of Public Services described some of the questions on the survey. She noted the
survey was from the viewpoint of reducing costs rather than of planning for the future.
The Director of Public Services stated a great effort has been made already to reduce the budget
and there is not much "fat" remaining to be cut. Therefore, the Council should be aware that
any more changes in the budget would affect City services. Changing services is the only 0
method left to reduce the budget.
Mr. Christensen asked the Director of Public Services if she was suggesting a reduction in staff.
The Director of Public Services replied she did not say that as such; however, personnel is the
largest part of the budget.
Mr. Christensen commented reducing staff requires an adjustment of work to someone else.
The Finance Director noted the new format for the budget document should be advantageous in
the decision - making process.
DISCUSSION OF SECOND DRAFT OF BOND SURVEY QUESTIONS
Councilmember Carmody explained the information in Question Nos. 32 -54 is important but
does not pertain specifically to a bond issue. Therefore, 23 questions could be omitted from the
survey or rewritten in a more concise manner.
Councilmember Hilstrom agreed. She commented she had had the same impression and it
appeared that the questions jump around from issue to issue.
6/19/95 - 8 - 0
The Director of Public Services said the survey was designed to include a community survey on
issues, which is helpful in budget planning. However, piggybacking the bond survey with the
community survey does complicate the survey. It would be possible to conduct the community
survey separately, but there would be additional cost.
Mr. Escher asked whether a survey might be part of the image campaign program. If so, some
of the community issues questions could fit in with that process. Mayor Kragness noted such
a survey could come out of the Community Nights program scheduled later this year, but it is
too far in the future to know.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked how many questions should be cut from the bond survey in
order to stay within the limits which had been set out. The Director of Public Services said
Decision Resources recommends the bond survey have 60 to 80 questions. Staff has had a goal
of 75 questions. In that case, a reduction of 13 questions would bring the document in line.
Councilmember Hilstrom stated she knew of 12 questions which she believed could be cut from
the survey.
Councilmember Carmody asked what kind of follow -up consultation the City will receive from
Decision Resources. The Director of Public Services stated the type of consultation depends
upon the results of the survey. It depends on the comfort level the City has with the material
and whether or not assistance is desired.
Mayor Kragness noted the $11,000 charge for the survey will be paid out of the Capital
Improvements Fund. The Director of Public Services verified her statement.
Councilmember Carmody expressed concern about the length of time required to complete the
survey.
Councilmember Carmody noted she believed 90 percent of Question Nos. 32 -54 could be
dropped. Also, five questions regarding City Hall should be added to the survey.
Councilmember Hilstrom outlined changes she would make. She suggested eliminating Question
Nos. 32 and 33, as well as 42 and 43. Question Nos. 41 and 44 should be combined. Question
Nos. 77, 78, and 79 should be combined also. Instead of Question Nos. 80, 81, and 82, the
survey could simply state: "Please list the ages of the people living in the household."
Councilmember Hilstrom also asked why it is necessary to ask the respondent's gender. The
information isn't necessary unless it is relevant to a statistic generated by the survey. The
Director of Public Services said that, after the survey is completed, the gender proportion
becomes part of the consideration of whether the sample truly represents the community. There
are also questions regarding age, etc. which are also present to verify whether the sample is a
good representation.
6/19/95 - 9 -
Mr. Christensen noted if the Council wants the questionnaire re- designed it would be important
to have the experts in the field help in the re- designing.
Mr. Escher asked whether the questions were written by Staff or by Decision Resources. The
Director of Public Services explained the City provided a block of information to Decision
Resources and they developed the questions.
Mr. Escher commented if the survey is to include questions regarding the City Manager and City
Staff, it should also include questions concerning the Mayor and the City Council in order to be
consistent.
I
The Director of Public ervice S s mentioned the survey could include questions to determine ways
to rearrange City Hall.
Mr. Roche noted it is more realistic to survey people regarding services at City Hall at the time
they come into City Hall. The Director of Public Services agreed a self -survey is a good idea,
but that it is not as reliable as a randomly sampled survey.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked whether, in the case that the questions on the survey are cut and
then it is decided to not carry out a bond issue, anything will have been learned.
Mayor Kragness asked what the timeline is for the survey. The Director of Public Services
stated Decision Resources had reserved a June timeslot to conduct the survey but it is now too
late to use it. Once the survey questions are finalized, Decision Resources will need to schedule
the survey into a timeslot. The results will be available six to eight weeks following the dates
the survey is conducted.
Councilmember Carmody stated Question Nos. 40 -47 and 48 -54 are redundant. instead of
separating the two sections, Question No. 49 could begin, "On your last contact with City
Hall...." She said she did not like the area concerning City Hall. The Director of Public
Services said it could be dropped.
Councilmember Carmody said it cannot be dropped as Councilmember Hilstrom has expressed
interest in the information which will come out of it. The Director of Public Services said there
is a difference between visiting City Hall and calling City Hall.
Councilmember Carmody asked why questions starting with Question No. 58 do not include the
upstairs of City Hall. The Director of Public Services said there are not really any proposals
for work in the upstairs of City Hall except for energy efficiency items such as replacing the
roof, lighting, etc.
Councilmember Carmody asked where in the survey a resident might have an opportunity to
register a complaint about the sound quality in the Council Chambers. She said she has received
calls concerning this. The Director of Public Services stated there is money which has been
6/19/95 - 10-
earmarked for use to improve the Council Chambers. The previous City Council was
• uncomfortable with spending the money.
Councilmember Carmody stated citizens have said they cannot hear the City Council proceedings
either on television or when present in the room.
Mayor Kragness asked whether button microphones might be helpful.
There was a general discussion of the acoustics in the Council Chambers. It was expressed that
there is a problem and concern was shown over whether the issue should be included in the
survey.
Mr. Roche commented the City should provide good communication and high quality just as a
general procedure. It isn't necessary to ask the residents when it should just be a standard to
have quality communication.
Mr. Escher agreed. He stated it is common knowledge that the acoustics are a problem. The
problem should be addressed without surveying residents.
There was also discussion about the lighting in the Council Chambers and it was stated the
lighting should be remedied.
The Director of Public Services explained the previous Council did not deal with these issues
• as some believed any action would be self - serving and also at some point the television broadcast
might be discontinued and /or the Chambers relocated.
The Finance Director commented the bond issue must be completed before anything concerning
relocation could be known.
The Director of Public Services commented Question Nos. 50 -54 could be condensed into one
general question. She suggested saying: "How would you characterize the last contact you had
with City Hall? Did you get what you needed ?"
Mayor Kragness asked whether the general opinion is to condense the questions. The
Councilmembers agreed that it is.
Mayor Kragness asked how soon the survey questions must be finalized. The Director of Public
Services said there is no set date.' The longer it takes to finalize the survey, the later the survey
and, ultimately, the bond referendum, is pushed back.
Several members of the Financial Commission left the meeting at 9:06 p.m.
There was a consensus to complete the reduction of survey questions at this meeting in order
to move the process forward.
6/19/95
The City Council recessed at 9:08 p.m.
Mayor Kragness reconvened them in it
y e meet b of the City Council at 9:19 p.m.
The Director of Public Services began a review of the survey questions. She mentioned keeping
Question Nos. 4, 5 and 6. Also, Page 2 is alright as it stands. Question Nos. 32 and 33 are
to be dropped. She questioned whether Question Nos. 34 and 35 should be combined and the
respondent asked to prioritize. The Finance Director suggested allowing Decision Resources to
make the determination. The Council agreed. There was a discussion of Question No. 36, but
it was not removed from the survey.
The Director of Public Services noted she does not like the choices offered in Question No. 37
because people often just choose "about right." It was decided to phrase the question, "How
would you rate..." without giving choices.
Councilmember Hilstrom stated Question Nos. 42 and 43 should be deleted and Question No.
41 should be combined with Question No. 45.
The Director of Public Services said it needs to be determined what exactly the Council wants
to know in this area.
Councilmember Hilstrom noted a change in customer service has already been planned.
Mayor Kragness suggested eliminating the choices from Question No. 40. .
The Director of Public Services noted the information really desired is whether the resident
received the service he or she wanted and was treated courteously.
There was a general discussion regarding extended hours for City Hall.
Councilmember Hilstrom stated Question Nos. 42 and 43 should be combined into one question.
The Director of Public Services stated even if they are combined there will still be two pieces
of information required to answer it.
v as ��
Mayor Kra Hess su e ted h
y � _ _111 s t e question read: What important services would you need to
Y
access during extended hours of Citv Hall ?"
Councilmember Hilstrom discussed the issue of on -line services. The Director of Public
Services noted the City has been contacted by Freenet and did express an interest in
involvement. There '
e ar factors to be considered but on -line service is surely in the future.
Councilmember Hilstrom commented on -line services would mean that full staff would not be
necessary outside of regular hours. The Director of Public Services commented control needs
to be maintained. The cost of providing the information will need to be changed.
6/19/95 - 12 -
t
The Director of Public Services noted Question Nos. 40 -54 could be condensed as stated
• previously, such as "during your last contact...." She added the question might state: "If
obtaining the service was inconvenient, what would be more convenient ?" There was a
consensus of agreement.
There was a consensus decision to eliminate Question No. 66.
Councilmember Mann suggested Question No. 66 could be replaced with: "Addition of a fishing
pier on Twin Lakes."
There was a discussion of the term and meaning of a "family services center" versus a
"community center."
Councilmember Hilstrom again noted Question Nos. .77, 78, and 79 should be condensed into
one question. The Council agreed.
Councilmember Hilstrom suggested condensing Question Nos. 80, 81, and 82 and just asking
for a list of household members. She believed grouping from school -aged to age 55 was too
large a grouping. The Finance Director noted Decision Resources might need the information
to evaluate the survey results. It was decided to delete the item.
Councilmember Hilstrom suggested deleting the gender category. It was decided to keep it.
Councilmember Hilstrom mentioned it may be necessary to address the issue that some residents
may say they have already paid for an ice arena. The ice arena was never built as funding ran
out after the pool was built.
There was a general discussion on the previous approval of an ice arena. The Director of Public
Services noted the residents will need to be educated on the facts of the issue.
There was a motion by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the meeting.
The Director of Public Services noted a new survey draft will be submitted to the Council
following more consultation with Decision Resources.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked that the survey be presented again at the next City Council
meeting possible, but not at a work session.
Councilmember Carmody noted the survey should be reduced now to 73 questions.
Councilmember Mann asked whether the other Councilmembers agree that the Council should
study the City's goals. There was a general discussion regarding the timing and scheduling of
a meeting to discuss goals. It was decided, by consensus, to schedule a Council Special Work
• 6/19/95 - 13 -
Session on July 5, 1995, at 6 p.m. to discuss the role of the City. Participants should bring a
"brown bag" dinner. It will be decided at a later date what Staff should be in attendance. •
The Director of Public Services suggested Councilmembers review the Year 2000 report to the
meeting as it is a good starting point for discussion. She also suggested using the City's mission
statement.
The Director of Public Services asked whether Staff will need to prepare any documents for the
meeting.
Councilmember Hilstrom noted ultimately there will need to be a public hearing on budget cuts.
Councilmember Hilstrom commented the Councilmembers should be willing to bring anything
to the Council table at the goal- setting meeting.
Councilmember Carmody suggested there should probably be someone present at the meeting
who can clarify regulations in regard to proposed budget cuts. The Director of Public Services
stated just considering the big issues would be plenty of work for the session and budget cutting
should be held off to a follow -up session. She then asked whether the Council's desire would
be to simply brainstorm at the session without being concerned about whether implementation
would be legal, etc.
Councilmember Carmody said the session should not be only brainstorming. Something should
be accomplished. Ideas should be kept within the realm of possibility.
Councilmember Hilstrom commented the Director of Public Services should be at the meeting.
Mayor Kragness also noted the Acting City Manager, the Finance Director, and the Director of
Community Development should be present at the meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Mann seconded the earlier motion by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the
meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at
10:02 p.m.
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
Recorded and transcribed by:
Barbara Collman •
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial
6/19/95 - 14-
• MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY
OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
SPECIAL SESSION
JUNE 20, 1995
CONFERENCE ROOM A, CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special session and was called to order by Mayor
Myrna Kragness at 5:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Barb Kalligher, Kristen Mann, Debra Hilstrom, and
Kathleen Carmody. Also present were Director of Community Development Brad Hoffman and
Council Secretary Carla Wirth.
INTERVIEW PROCEDURE
City Council reviewed the ten interview questions as drafted by staff based on its input and the
suggested interview process. Consensus was reached to follow the seven -step interview process
as suggested by the Acting City Manager in her June 20, 1995, memorandum.
Councilmember Hilstrom noted the July 5 City Council work session which has been scheduled
to discuss the role of the City and future plans. She indicated she would like to ask the
candidates about their comfort level should the Council determine cuts, etc. need to be made.
Mayor Kragness suggested each candidate be asked whether they would be available to attend
the July 5 work session if selected.
Mayor Kragness requested each candidate be asked to review and sign the Release of
Information form and Release to Contact Employers form.
INTERVIEW FOR INTERIM CITY MANAGER POSITION - SYLVESTER KNAPP
Sy Knapp provided the Council with the signed Release of Information forms.
Ouestion 1: Briefly describe to us your background, education, and experience as it relates to
municipal government.
Mr. Knapp stated he received a B.S. in Civil Engineering Degree in 1955 and a M.S. in
Engineering Degree in 1956 from the University of Minnesota. In 1956, he served as the
Assistant City Engineer for St. Cloud until 1964 when he was appointed as the St. Cloud City
6120/95 - 1 -
Engineer and Director of Public Works. He served in that capacity until July of 1979 when he
was appointed to serve as the Interim City Administrator. After six months in that capacity, the .
Mayor of St. Cloud asked Mr. Knapp to accept the position of City Administrator, but he
declined and again served as Director of Public Works until 1979 when he accepted a position
with Brooklyn Center. Mr. Knapp stated he served as the Brooklyn Center Director of Public
Works until he retired under the Early Retirement Plan in January of 1994. During the last one
and one -half years he spent 14 months working on a one -half time basis with Howard Needles
Tammen and Bergendoff (HNTB), a consulting engineering firm, as Chief Municipal Engineer
responsible for marketing engineering services. Mr. Knapp explained HNTB had contracts with
County and State engineering but was not set up to go into municipal engineering. Because of
that, Mr. Knapp told the company they did not really need his services and he left the company.
Since that time, he has been searching for other job opportunities and during the last month
began the process for starting his own public works management consulting business. Mr.
Knapp stated currently he has no clients and if he accepted this assignment, he would put his
business plans on "hold ".
Question 2: Describe to us how you would assist the Council in managing operations if selected
as an Interim City Manager tanager for Brooklyn Center.
Mr. Knapp stated his first priority would be to become knowledgeable about current programs
and projects that the City is involved with. One of the immediate priorities would be the 1996
budget process and to meet those time lines. He stated he would intend to meet with each
department head and ask that they identify priorities and issues. Mr. Knapp stated he would also
request to meet with each Councilmember individually and request that they identify what they
see as priorities and where the City is going.
Mr. Knapp stated he believes one area in need of a great deal of attention is Community
Development and to assure those projects keep moving forward, including the negotiations with
Brookdale Center. Another priority project would be the Brooklyn Boulevard project since a
lot of dollars are involved as well as federal grants with time lines. Mr. Knapp noted that he
was heavily involved in this project while employed with Brooklyn Center, but he would need
to be updated.
Mr. Knapp stated he does not know what personnel issues there may be but this issue could be
discussed with each department head to determine if there are any issues that need to be dealt
with on an immediate basis.
Mr. Knapp stated he has worked in public employment for 38 years and found whenever there
is a lull in leadership, that may be the time personnel issues arise. Because of this trend, be
believed it helps if staff gets the message that there is strong leadership.
Mr. Knapp stated he is aware the Council just recently went through goal setting and he expects
to be part of supporting those established goals. He indicated his main focus will be to keep
activities progressing.
6/20/9 -2 -
Ouestion 3: What would you envision your schedule or availability to be if you were appointed
• Interim Citv Manager.
Mr. Knapp stated he would regard this as a full -time position. He explained the reason his
proposal contains some conditions is because of his inclination to become a workaholic and his
promise to his wife that he would not accept a position that resulted in spending 65 -70 hours per
week on the job. Mr. Knapp stated his intention to make this a full -time commitment and
expectation that the first four days of the week would probably be 10 -hour days so he may want
to take off some part-time Fridays unless there is a priority that needs to be addressed.
Question 4: Briefly discuss how you would work with Council and /or staff in resolving
problems. What are , our expectations from Council.
Mr. Knapp noted he knows each department head and has worked with them while employed
by Brooklyn Center but he would need the opportunity to be updated on current issues and
identify priorities. He stated he expects to utilize department heads to identify what issues are
and to make recommendations on solutions, and would base his decision on that information plus
input from others on staff. Mr. Knapp indicated he would rely heavily on the Acting City
Manager for personnel issues and the City Attorney as a "sounding board". He explained how
he has found the use of additional expertise, such as a psychologist or the City Employee
Assistance Program to be most helpful in assisting employees with special problems. He advised
his use of those resources over a number of years has resulted in being able to restore a number
of employees who were good employees but due to personal problems were "going down the
tubes".
• With regard to expectations from the Council, Mr. Knapp stated he would hope each
Councilmember would be willing to meet with him, if appointed, and provide commentaries on
what is happening in Brooklyn Center and what they believe are the priorities. He stated his
belief in the importance of communications and philosophy that 95 % of all serious problems are
a result of incomplete communication.
Mr. Knapp pointed out that regardless of the amount of communications, there may be issues
everyone does not agree on but communication allows each party to better understand other's
point of view and where they are coming from. He pointed out since this is a City Manager
form of government, he expects to operate under that form with most of the important
communications from Council to staff going through the City Manager's office. He noted there
are areas that can be covered by direct communication but the City Manager cannot do the job
unless he /she knows what is happening so it is important that communication be funneled
through the City Manager's office.
Ouestion 5: What do you see vour role is in facilitating the Council and assisting them in
selection and recruitment of a new Citv Manager if they determine to not use a consultant or
search firm. -
Mr. Knapp stated he would recommend the Council hire a search firm for the principle reason
that the Interim City Manager will be very busy with other issues and the search for the
permanent City Manager will demand a great deal of time. He also believes an independent
6/20/95 -3 -
search firm can be more independent and work with the Council to determine what it feels is
important in hiring. •
Mr. Knapp stated if the Council decides not to use a professional search firm, he would work
with the Council in the process but would expect that some outside experts or a panel of experts
P P
would be involved to provide the benefit of independent opinions. Mr. Knapp stated either way,
he would be happy to work with the Council in reviewing proposals for search firms but if the
Council decides not to use one he does not see it to be a totally in -house procedure but would
involve some outside assistance.
uestion 6: What do you see vour role is in facilitatin the Council and assistin-2 them in
selection and recruitment of a new City Manager if they determine to use a consultant or search
firm.
Mayor Kragness noted Mr. Knapp has already answered this question so the Council moved on
to Question 7.
Question 7: What do you consider to be vour outstanding strong points and /or weak points, and
how will this effect your performance?
Mr. Knapp stated his strongest point is 39 years of experience in City government, working with
different forms of government, and involvement with a lot of projects. Mr. Knapp stated
another strong point is his strong commitment to his employer and he does not believe any
employer would say he gave anything less than 100% to the job.
Mr. Knapp stated his weak point may be his workaholic tendency and ability to be somewhat •
stubborn on occasion. He advised he tends to focus on issues and is tenacious about trying to
come up with solutions.
Question 8: Would you feel comfortable with following_ policies previously established by the
Council?_( . , Personnel Polic)
Mr. Knapp stated he has no problem in following those policies and is not aware of any policies
Council has adopted that he has issue with.
Question 9: What exceptional skills do you believe you will bring to the position?
Mr. Knapp stated he is someone who always seeks consensus. He stated he has worked with
many committees and task forces as a member or chair and is able to focus on keeping the
committee on track and focused on what its real task is and bringing it to a point of conclusion.
He concluded one of his strong skills is working with people and groups.
Question 10: Is there anvthina else you would like to share with us that would affect our
decision?
Mr. Knapp stated he is a good friend of former City Manager Jerry Splinter and would not want
to be involved in any discussion or decision as to what happened. He stated it would be out of
place for him to become involved or make judgement on anything that happened on that issue.
6/20/9 -4- •
Mr. Knapp stated he would also like to advise he does not hide his opinions and his agenda is
• always on the table so the Council will always know where he is coming from.
Council's Input Regarding Its Expectations of an Interim City Manager.
Mayor Kragness stated the Council all wants to be comfortable in working with the Interim City
Manager and the Interim City Manager with the Council. She stated she wants no surprises
from the Council or the Interim City Manager. Mayor Kragness stated the Council does not
need to know everything that is happening but certain things that are important should be told
to the Council. Also, when the Council comes to the Interim City Manager for information it
should receive as much information as there is to give. Mayor Kragness concluded she wants
openness and honesty between the Interim City Manager and Council.
Mr. Knapp stated he sensed this and included in his cover letter the need to make that
commitment to work together. From staff's standpoint, he expects to furnish as much
information in advance as possible but requested Council's advance request if they need more
information. If staff is unable to provide enough information, he indicated he would suggest the
matter be tabled until everyone is comfortable with the information available.
Mr. Knapp asked, to the extent possible, that Council control Open Forum issues to standard
procedure where issues are presented, referred to staff for research, and discussed in detail at
the following meeting. Mr. Knapp noted that in the past there has been occasion where the
Council decided to discuss, at length, an Open Forum issue without the benefit of staff research
and recommendation. He agreed there may be times when it is not possible to follow procedure
• and an item needs to be discussed. Mr. Knapp concurred with the philosophy of "No Surprises
Please ".
Councilmember Carmody stated the specific things she expects from an Interim City Manager
is to keep up on the budget process, the hiring process with the permanent City Manager, and
to stabilize government.
Mr. Knapp stated his number one priority would be to keep the wheels moving as smoothly as
possible.
Councilmember Mann concurred with points stated by Mayor Kragness and Councilmember
Carmody and stated she envisions the Interim City Manager assisting the Council in hiring
negotiators to deal with the newly formed bargaining unit for department heads. She explained
the Council has scheduled a work session on July 5 to better define the role of the City and
asked Mr. Knapp if he would be available.
Mr. Knapp stated he will be available.
Councilmember Hilstrom stated her agreement with previous comments, and she hopes the
Interim City Manager will keep things moving forward. She stated she does not want the City
to remain stagnant during the term of the Interim City Manager.
6/20/95 -5 -
Councilmember Kalligher concurred with the need to move on and not focus on what happened
in the past. She asked if Mr. Knapp is able to promote Discover the Center.
Mr. Knapp stated he is available and interested in promoting Discover the Center. He asked the
Council if it had questions on the proposed compensation agreement.
Councilmember Hilstrom requested that discussion on the agreement be delayed until both
candidates are interviewed and explained that the City Attorney will be involved with negotiating
the terms of the agreement.
Mayor Kragness explained the Council will make a decision tonight and she will contact each
candidate regarding that decision. She did not see anything in Mr. Knapp's proposed agreement
that is out of the ordinary.
Mr. Knapp advised the terms of the agreement are somewhat negotiable and he is willing to
accept the suggestions made by the City Attorney. Mr. Knapp thanked the Council for the
opportunity to be considered for this position.
At this point, Mr. Knapp left the Conference Room and Councilmembers completed the Oral
Interview Rating Form.
INTERVIEW FOR INTERIM CITY MANAGER POSITION - CAMILE ANDRE
Cam Andre provided the Council with the signed Release of Information forms. The Mayor and •
Councilmembers each introduced themselves to Mr. Andre.
Question 1: Brieflv describe to us vour background education and experience as it relates to
municipal government.
Mr. Andre stated he has a varied background both as a consultant and administrator. He stated
he was the City Manager of Oak Lawn, Illinois, for seven years and St. Louis Park for eight
years. He served as Deputy City Manager of Kansas City, Missouri, for two years, Director
of Environmental Control for the City of Minneapolis for one year, and Interim Director of the
League of Nfinnesota Cities for one year. Mr. Andre stated he then served as the Chief
Administrator of the Metropolitan Transit Commission for ten years. He added when he was
first out of the military he acted as a consultant.
Question 2: Describe to us how you would assist the Council in managing of)erations if selected
as an Interim Citv Manager for Brooklvn Center.
Mr. Andre stated he will report to the Council in regular fashion about activities and issues and
recommend, whenever possible, solutions to those issues that have come up. He stated he will
also keep the Council informed continually as to successes and also difficulties encountered in
municipal work.
Question 3: What would you envision your schedule or availability to be if you were appointed
Interim Citv Manager.
6/20/9 - 6 -
I
Mr. Andre indicated he is available immediately but has scheduled a vacation to Honduras in
• December.
Question 4: Briefly discuss how you would work with Council and /or staff in resolving
problems. What are your expectations from Council.
Mr. Andre stated it takes a period of time to develop staff and he does not think an Interim City
Manager will have a great opportunity to do that in the limited period of time he will be on
board. He stated he suspects Brooklyn Center has good staff that is reliable and if there is some
apprehension, the best the Interim City Manager could do is to give them some comfort that
everything is alright and to stabilize operations. Mr. Andre stated with the Council it would
take time to become acquainted and get a better picture about what it really wants.
Question 5: What do you see your role is in facilitating the Council and assisting them in
selection and recruitment of a new City Manager if they determine to not use a consultant or
search firm.
Mr. Andre stated he would be perfectly willing to assist the Council and has some ideas on a
process to be used, but whether or not to use a search firm is the Council's decision. Mr.
Andre stated if he were to participate he would not go about it as elaborately as an executive
search firm and would suggest the following steps:
1. Develop an idea as to what the Council wants in way of a permanent City Manager and
draft a list of those parameters before interviewing activity.
2. Advertise, presumably nationally.
® 3. Process initial inquiries and applications with the Council developing guidelines on how
to cut down the number into something that is workable.
4. Make a list of the top ten to twelve candidates and have Council review those, in light
of the specifics they set forth in step #1, and reduce the number down to three to five
for personal interview.
5. Conduct personal interviews and check more broadly into their experience and
background, and the applicant's expectations.
Question 6: What do you see vour role is in facilitating the Council and assisting them in
selection and recruitment of a new Citv Mana¢er if thev determine to use a consultant or search
firm.
Mr. Andre stated he would be happy to serve as a liaison between the Council, search consultant
and candidates. He explained the candidate usually interviews the City at the same time and
someone needs to introduce them to department heads and give them an indication about issues
in Brooklyn Center.
Question 7: What do you consider to be vour outstanding strong points and /or weak points and
how will this effect your performance?
Mr. Andre stated he gets along with people very well and his management style is flexible but
principled.
6/24/95 -7-
Mr. Andre stated his weak point would be he does not come on as strong on some issues that
maybe he should.
Question 8: Would you feel comfortable with following policies previously established by the
Council? (i.e. Personnel Policy
Mr. Andre stated Council establishes policy and the City Manager carries it out, and if the City
Manager does not carry out those policies as Council directs, then the City Manager has the
choice to resign. Mr. Andre stated you have to realize that the Council establishes policy in all
areas and then the City Manager carries it out.
Question 9: What exceptional skills do you believe you will bring to the position?
Mr. Andre stated his exceptional skill would be his varied experiences in many, many
municipalities, both as administrator and as a consultant, combined with a strong talent for
getting along with people and relating with people.
Question 10: Is there anvthina else you would like to share with us that would affect our
decision?
Mr. Andre stated he had nothing more to add but would like to ask the Council what they are
looking for from the Interim City Manager. He asked if they wanted someone to carry over
until the permanent City Manager is hired. If so, he stated he would suggest the possibility of
appointing Acting City Manager Nancy Gohman as Interim City Manager.
Council's Input Regarding Its Expectations of an Interim City Manager.
Mayor Kragness stated the Council is looking for a relationship with an Interim City Manager •
where there are no secrets. She stated when the Council asks for information, they want as
much as is available on that subject and not to be by- passed in the process. She stated she wants
an honest relationship.
Councilmember Carmody stated basically she would like to see an Interim City Manager who
keeps business and staff on track and gets things done. She stated issues like the budget and
hiring the Permanent City Manager need to move forward, goals that were set need to be
started, and things kept on an even keel.
Councilmember Kalligher stated the Interim City Manager needs to help with negotiations for
the new bargaining unit of department heads. Mr. Andre stated he has worked with this in the
past. Councilmember Kalligher explained that 17 department heads, supervisors, and
confidential employees are in the process of unionizing.
I
Councilmember Hilstrom advised the Council has scheduled a work session for July 5 to define
the role of the City and where the Council wants to take Brooklyn Center in the future. She
noted this may involve difficult decisions and she wants an Interim City Manager to keep the
Council moving rather than keeping on hold while looking for the permanent City Manager.
6/20/95 - 8 -
Councilmember Kalligher agreed and added the City is also involved with Brookdale, and the
Interim City Manager needs the ability to work with the Director of Community Development
• on current issues.
Mr. Andre cautioned the Council about the Interim City Manager's ability to provide all the
things the Council is wishing for. He explained this involves a team effort and the Interim City
Manager will have to rely on the department heads in working together. He also noted the
Interim City Manager does not have a lot of strength in being aggressive to get things done
Y g b g g
because everyone knows he will not be around for long.
Mr. Andre stated he believed it was a wise decision to sit down and try to have some plans for
the City, but not to think you will find it particularly easy to accomplish those things during the
next five to six months. He suggested this is one aspect the Council may want to include when
developing specifications for the permanent City Manager and to perhaps give that aspect some
weight to assure the person will be interested in that particular issue.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked Mr. Andre if he is available to attend the July 5 Work Session.
Mr. Andre indicated he is available.
Councilmember Hilstrom clarified she does not want to "fix it all" within six months but also
does not want to stand still but to continue to move forward. Mr. Andre commented it is good
to know the Council has interest in moving forward.
Mayor Kr gn a g
a o a� ess advised the Council will be makin the decision toni and she will call each
Y � b
• candidate about that decision. She added the City Attorney will be involved in negotiating the
contract.
Mr. Andre stated his preference for a simple contract and wished the Council good luck in every
respect.
At this point, Mr. Andre left the Conference Room and Councilmembers completed the Oral
Interview Ratin Form.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF CANDIDATES
Councilmember Mann stated she rated both candidates high but gave Mr. Andre more credit for
job experience. She stated she sees pros and cons with either one and would be comfortable
with either one, but personally is leaning towards Mr. Andre because of his experience in City
Administration.
Councilmember Kalligher stated she also rated both high but supports hiring Mr. Andre because
she prefers his style of presentation.
Mayor Kragness stated she believed Mr. Knapp provided more detailed information which was
very concise and to the point.
6/20/9 - 9 -
L
i
Councilmember Carmody stated considering where the Council is in its working relationship
with each other, she believes it would be easier to work with Mr. Andre and that he would be
better at keeping the Council on track than Mr. Knapp would be. She advised she rated both
candidates almost the same.
Mayor Kragness stated her preference for Mr. Knapp since he already knows staff and the
workings of the City and it would be easier for him to work with staff. She also believed staff
would not feel intimidated in working with Mr. Knapp. Mayor Kragness stated the Council
needs to be sure staff is very comfortable and secure in working with the Interim City Manager.
She pointed out Mr. Andre would need to learn what is going on in each department so it could
take some time before he feels comfortable in making decisions.
Councilmember Carmody believed Mr. Andre had enough experience from his working with
other cities.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked the Director of Community Development if be believed staff
would feel uneasy with either candidate.
The Director of Community Development responded that he, personally, would not have a
problem with either candidate and did not think the department heads would either. He pointed
out any Interim City Manager will be very dependent on department heads to keep him advised.
The Director of Community Development believed the difference between the two candidates
gets down to Mr. Knapp being more familiar and perhaps able to move projects faster than Mr. •
Andre but Mr. Andre has very extensive experience in City Mana and has probably seen
it all.
Councilmember Kalligher noted that Mr. Knapp has worked with the City so is able to provide
more detailed answers and be more specific.
Councilmember Hilstrom stated she wished she would have asked Mr. Knapp if he feels he is
able to be objective since he has not been gone very long. She stated she thinks Mr. Knapp
could be objective but she wants to make sure Mr. Knapp thinks he can be.
Mayor Kragness questioned Mr. Andre's ability to come in and assist with development of the
City when he is not as familiar.
The Director of Community Development pointed out Mr. Andre has worked in municipal
government and been involved in similar projects. As a department head, he explained he needs
a "sounding board" and believed either candidate would provide the stability desired by the
Council.
Councilmembers Carmody, Hilstrom, Kalligher, and Mann all indicated a preference for hiring
Mr. Andre contingent upon negotiation of a contract that is mutually agreeable to both parties
6/20/95 - 10-
(candidate and City). Mayor Kragness consented this is a majority and she would so advise the
candidates of Council's decision to offer the position to Mr. Andre.
Councilmember Hilstrom asked if it would be appropriate to invite Mr. Andre to City Hall to
be introduced to department heads, etc. The Director of Community Development noted that
Mr. Andre may want this opportunity to get acquainted with department heads and staff.
The Mayor and Councilmembers submitted their signed rating sheet and notes for City files.
Consensus was reached to direct Mayor Kragness to offer the position of Interim City Manager
to Mr. Andre (pending satisfactory agreement), inform Mr. Knapp of this decision, to direct the
City Attorney to negotiate a mutually satisfactory contract with Mr. Andre, to direct staff to
invite Mr. Andre to meet department heads, and to place this matter on the next Council agenda
for action.
ADJOURNMENT
The Brooklyn Center City Council was adjourned by Mayor Kragness at 6:58 p.m.
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
•
Recorded and transcribed by:
Carla Wirth
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial
• 6/20/95
Council Meeting Date / 7/10/95
City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number
Request For Council Consideration
• Item Description:
Resolution Appointing Cam Andre to the Executive Committee of the Five Cities Senior Transportation
Project
Department Approval:
J�Ww
Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk
Manager's Review /Recommendation: •
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
Pass Resolution Appointing Cam Andre to the Executive Committee of the Five Cities Senior
Transportation Project.
Summary Explanation: su ortin documentation attached N
� PP g o )
The joint powers agreement for the establishment of the Five Cities Senior Transportation Project
requires all members of the Executive Committee to be appointed by resolution by the governing body
of the member City.
•
�6
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPOINTING CAM ANDRE TO THE EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE OF THE FIVE CITIES SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center entered into a joint powers agreement
for the establishment of the Five Cities Senior Transportation Project on June 18, 1985; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1 of the joint powers agreement establishes an Executive
Committee; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.2 of the joint powers agreement requires the governing
body of each of the member Cities to appoint its City Manager as a member of the Executive
Committee to administer the Senior Transportation Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that Interim City Manager Cam Andre be appointed to represent
the City of Brooklyn Center on the Executive Committee of the Five Cities Senior
Transportation Project.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Deputy 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.
Council Meeting Date / 7/10/95
City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number y
Request For Council Consideration
• Item Description:
Resolution Appointing Cam Andre to the Board of Directors of Hennepin Recycling Group
Department Approval:
J �n /I �e�
Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk
Manager's Review /Recommendation: •
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
Pass Resolution Appointing Cam Andre to the Board of Directors of Hennepin Recycling Group.
Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached No )
• The Hennepin Recycling Group joint powers agreement requires all members of the Board of Directors
to be appointed by resolution by the governing body of the member City.
•
�c
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPOINTING CAM ANDRE TO THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF HENNEPIN RECYCLING GROUP
WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution No. 88 -24 authorizing Brooklyn
Center's membership in a joint powers group known as the Hennepin Recycling Group with
Crystal and New Hope to implement joint recycling programs; and
WHEREAS, the joint powers agreement requires the governing body of the City
to appoint a representative to the Board of Directors of Hennepin Recycling Group.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED b the i C ou nci l y Cit Cou c 1 of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that Interim City Manager Cam Andre be appointed to represent
the City of Brooklyn Center on the Board of Directors of Hennepin Recycling Group.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Deputy 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.
Council Meeting Date / 7/10/95
City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number
Request For Council Consideration
• Item Description:
Resolution Appointing Cam Andre as Director to the Board of Directors of LOGIS
Department Approval:
Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk
Manager's Review /Recommendation:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
Pass Resolution Appointing Cam Andre as Director to the Board of Directors of LOGIS.
Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached No )
• The joint and cooperative agreement for LOGIS requires all members of the Board of Directors to be
appointed by resolution by the governing body of the member City.
•
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPOINTING CAM ANDRE AS DIRECTOR TO THE BOARD
OF DIRECTORS OF LOGIS
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center entered into a joint and cooperative
agreement with other governmental units of the State of Minnesota to create Local Government
Information Systems (LOGIS) on May 1, 1972; and
WHEREAS, as stated in Article IV, Section 1, of the joint and cooperative
agreement of LOGIS, each member shall be entitled to one director who shall have one vote;
and
WHEREAS, the joint and cooperative agreement requires the governing body of
the City to appoint a director to the Board of Directors of LOGIS.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that Interim City Manager Cam Andre be appointed to represent
the City of Brooklyn Center as director on the Board of Directors of LOGIS.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Deputy 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.
Council Meeting Date 7 -10-95
3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda item Number � E
Request For Council Consideration
• Item Description:
Resolution acknowledging and congratulating Ruth Dickson as the City of Brooklyn Center Employee
of the Quarter, Second Quarter 1995 and congratulating all Second Quarter 1995 nominees.
Department Approval:
Terri Swanson, communications coordinator
Manager's Review /Recommendation:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
Pass a resolution acknowledging and congratulating Ruth Dickson on being selected City of Brooklyn
Center Employee of the Quarter, Second Quarter 1995 and congratulating all Second Quarter 1995
nominees.
• Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached
On April 24, 1995 the city council approved a request by the Employee Action committee to implement
an Employee of the Quarter and Employee of the Year program. On June 30, 1995, the first Employee
of the Quarter was chosen by a subcommittee of Employee Action Committee members. Ruth Dickson
from Administration was selected Employee of the Quarter because of her coordination and
administration of Realtor Day 1995. Ruth went above and beyond her normal administrative duties to
help plan, coordinate and implement what was a highly successful program. For her efforts, Ruth will
receive a rotating plaque for her work area, a certificate, a photo plaque with her name to hang in city
hall for the quarter, and recognition in city and community publications. Ruth is also a candidate for
Employee of the Year.
Other candidates for the Second Quarter 1995 Employee of the Quarter were: Dolores Narey,
administration; Joyce Gulseth, public services; John Bentzen, public works; and Bill Vetter, public
works.
All candidates should be congratulated for their hard work and efforts during the quarter.
•
�E
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING AND CONGRATULATING RUTH
DICKSON AS THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER EMPLOYEE OF THE
QUARTER, SECOND QUARTER 1995, AND CONGRATULATING ALL
SECOND QUARTER NOMINEES
WHEREAS, Ruth Dickson was selected Employee of the Quarter, Second Quarter
1995 by the Employee Action Committee;
WHEREAS, Dolores Narey, Joyce Gulseth, John Bentzen and Bill Vetter were
also nominated for Employee of the Quarter, Second Quarter 1995;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center that Ruth Dickson, Dolores Narey, Joyce Gulseth, John Bentzen and Bill Vetter
be acknowledged and congratulated for their hard work and efforts during the quarter.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Deputy 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.
Council Meeting Date 7/10/95
City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Numbe
Request For Council Consideration
• Item Description:
Approval of Bond Survey Questions
Department Approval:
(� �_O�
Diane Spector, Directo f Public Services
Manager's Review /Recommendation:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
Approve by motion the survey questions.
Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes )
• Attached is the final draft of the survey questions regarding the proposed bond issue. With Council approval,
Decision Resources can pre -test the questions July 12 -14, with the actual survey to take place July 17 -28. A
report of the survey findings should be available by mid - September.
•
612- 929 -6166 DECISION RESOURCES 862 P02 JUL 05 '95 10:.
Decision Resources, Ltd. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
3128 Dean Court RESIDENTIAL SURVEY
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 FINAL DRAFT VERSION
Hello, I'm of Decision Resources, Ltd., a polling firm
located in Minneapolis. We I've been retained by the City of
Brooklyn Center to speak with a random sample of residents about
issues facing the city. The survey is being taken because your
city council and staff are interested in your opinions and sug-
gestions. I want to assure you that all individual responses
will be held strictly confidential; only summaries of the entire
sample will be reported. (DO NOT PAUSE)
1. Approximately how many years have you lived in Brooklyn
Center?
2. A s things s stand , g how long in the future do you expect to
now
live in Brooklyn Center?
3. How would you rate the quality of life in Brooklyn Center
excellent, good, only fair, or poor?
4. What do you like most about living in Brooklyn Center?
5. What do you like least about it?
6. What do you consider to be the most serious problem facing
the City of Brooklyn Center?
.14 Moving on....
7. In comparison with nearby suburban areas, do you consider
property taxes in Brooklyn Center to be very high, somewhat high,
about average, somewhat low, or very low?
As you may know, the City share of the property tax is about
twenty percent, or about $19 per month for a typical Brooklyn
Center home.
S. When you consider the property taxes you pay and the quality
of city services you receive, would you rate the general value of
city services as excellent, good, only fair, or poor?
I would like to read you a list of a few city services. For each
one, please tell me whether you would rate the quality of the
service as excellent, good, only fair, or poor?
9. Police protection?
10. Fire protection?
11. Pavement repair and patching on city streets?
12. Storm water run -off control and flooding in your neighbor-
hood?
13. Snow plowing?
14. Park maintenance?
1
612- 929 -6166 DECISION RESOURCES e62 P03 JUL 05 '95 10:
15. Trail maintenance?
16. Recreational programs?
17. Code enforcement, such nuisances as junk cars or poorly
kept up houses?
IF "ONLY FAIR" OR "POOR" IN QUESTIONS #9 - 417, ASK:
18. Why did you rate as (only fair /poor)?
19. How would you rate the general appearance of your neighbor-
hood -- excellent, good, only fair, or poor?
20. Why did you rate your neighborhood appearance as only
fair or poor?
Moving on....
21. During the past year, have any members of your household
participated in organized activities sponsored by the City of
Brooklyn Center? (IF "YES," ASK:) What were they?
IF "YES," ASK:
22. Were you generally satisfied or dissatisfied with the
program(s)?
23. How would you rate park and recreational facilities in
Brooklyn Center -- excellent, good, only fair, or poor?
24. Do you feel that the current mix of recreational facilities
I?ax in the City meets the needs of members of your household?
25. And, do you feel that the current mix of recreational facil-
ities in the City meets the need of the community?
IF "NO" IN EITHER OF TWO PREVIOUS QUESTIONS, ASK:
26. What additional recreational facilities would you like
to see the City of Brooklyn Center offer residents?
The City of Brooklyn Center is considering a multi - purpose bond
referendum for facility needs in the community. Part of this
referendum proposal might include additions and improvements to
the park system. I would lake to read you a short last of poten-
tial components of the bond referendum. For each one please tell
me whether you would strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat
oppose, or strongly oppose a property tax increase for that
purpose. If you have no opinion, just say so.... (ROTATE LIST)
27. Replacement and improvement of dated playground equipment in
neighborhood parks?
28. Reconstruct park shelter buildings in larger city parks?
29. Acquisition of the Joslyn Property in Southwest Brooklyn
Center adjacent to Twin Lake for development of trails, athletic
fields, and preservation of wetlands?
2
612 -929 -6166 DECISION RESOURCES e62 PO4 JUL 05 1 95 10:1
30. Completion of the trail system to connect all neighborhoods
across the city?
The City of Brooklyn Center and area school district are consid-
ering the construction of an ice arena facility. The arena
would be used jointly by the City and by the school districts
serving Brooklyn Center. As you may know, there is a need for
more ice sheets in this area because of federal mandates requir-
ing equal opportunity for participation by both boys and girls.
31. Would you favor or oppose the construction of an ice arena
in Brooklyn Center, to be used"jointly by the City and school
districts? no you feel strongly that way?
Turning to the issue of public safety in the community....
I would like to read you a short list of public safety concerns.
32. Please tell me which one you consider to be the greatest
concern in Brooklyn Center. If you feel that none of these
problems are serious in Brooklyn Center, just say so. (READ
LIST)
33. Which do you consider to be the second major concern in the
city? Again, if you feel that none of the remaining problems are
serious in the city, just say so. (DELETE FIRST CHOICE AND RE-
READ LIST)
Violent crime
Traffic congestion
Drugs
Youth gangs
Business crimes, such as shoplifting and check fraud
Residential crimes, such as burglary, theft, and vandalism
ALL EQUALLY
NONE OF THE ABOVE
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED
34. Do you feel that crime in Brooklyn Centex has increased,
decreased, or remained about the same during the past five years?
35. How would you rate the amount of police patrolling the
police department does in your neighborhood?
26. During the past few years, have you or members of your
household had the occasion to contact the Brooklyn Center Fire
Department for emer gency vi "YES," r enc sex I�' YE ASK:
p g Y ce. ( S, ) How would
you rate their response time -- excellent, good, only fair, or
poor?
37. During the past year, have you had any contact with Brooklyn
Centex City Hall, either by telephone or in person?
IF "YES," ASK:
3
612 -929 -6166 DECISION RESOURCES e62 P05 JUL 05 '95 10:20
Thinking about your last contact by telephone or in
person....
38. Which Department did you contact -- the Police Depart-
ment, Utility Billing, Assessor's Office, Plannin g and
Inspections, ns Engineering,
p
or Administration?
39. Were you generally satisfied or dissatisfied with the
assistance and /or information you received?
40. Were you treated courteously,'or not?
.t
41. How convenient for you are the current hours of operation of
City Hall -- very convenient, somewhat convenient, somewhat
inconvenient, or very inconvenient?
42. If you could make one change or improvement in the hours of
operation or the location of City services, what would it be?
The City is also reviewing space needs in the Civic Center and
the two Fire Stations serving the community.
Let's talk about changes and improvements in City Hall and the
Fire Stations first. I would like to read you a list of
components which might be included in a bond referendum proposal.
For each one, please tell me if you would strongly support,
somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose a property
tax increase for that purpose. If you do not have an opinion,
just say so.... {ROTATE LIST}
43. Improved handicapped accessibility in both City Hall and the
Community Center?
44. Expansion of Police Department office space to allow for
more space for detectives, locker rooms for female police offic-
ers, space for programs such as DARE, senior TAP, crime preven-
tion, and other programs?
45. Expansion of the holding cell and interview areas, to permit
separation of adult and juvenile offenders, men and women, and
victims and the accused?
46. Completion of energy efficiency projects at City Hall, such
as roofing, lighting, and window replacement?
47. Expansion of the two Fire Stations to provide more efficient
storage of fire- fighting equipment and training facilities,
adding locker rooms for our female firefighters, and providing
space to station an ambulance from North Memorial Hospital?
48. Replacement of some aging fire engines and rescue /salvage
vans?
49. During the past year, have you or other household members
visited the Brooklyn Center Community Center swimming pool or
another activity in the Community Center?
50. Have you or any household member visited another city's
Community center?
a
612 -929 -6156 DECISION RESOURCES 862 P06 JUL 05 1 95 10:20
IF "YES," ASK:
51. Which city's community center have you visited?
A second area of identified needs at the Civic Center involves
remodeling and renovation of the Community Center, I would like
to read you a list of components which could also be included in
a bond referendum. For each one, please tell me if you would
strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly
oppose a property tax increase for that purpose. If you do not
have an opinion, just say so.... (ROTATE LIST)
.t
52. Construction of an indoor playground?
53. Addition of a gymnasium?
54. Construction of a senior citizen drop -in center?
55. Expansion of the competition -type swimming pool into a
family - oriented pool area, with accessibility for young children,
sensors, and the handicapped, shallow depth areas, and water
fountains?
56. Construction of additional community meeting rooms?
Now, let's talk for a moment about all of the bond referendum
proposals we have discussed. Suppose the City of Brooklyn Center
were to propose a bond referendum for six different types of
facility needs at the next election -- park improvements; a
combination ice arena and youth activities center; Police Depart -
ment addition; Fire Station additions; City Hall remodeling for
• energy efficiency; and, Community Center remodeling.
57. How much would you be willing to see your MONTHLY property
taxes increase to fund this entire package? Let's say, would you
support a tax increase of $ per month.? (CHOOSE RANDOM START-
ING POINT; MOVE UP OR DOWN DEPENDING ON RESPONSE) How about $
per month? (REPEAT PROCESS)
PRICE POINTS: Nothing, $4.00, $8.00, $12.00, $16.00, $20.00
1 would like your reaction to a specific referendum proposal....
Suppose the City proposed a ten million dollar bond package,
which included these six components. If approved, owners of a
$60,000 homes in the city would see their property taxes increase
by about $6.70 per month or $80.00 annually for fifteen years.
58. If the bond referendum were today, would you support or
oppose it? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way?
59. Could you tell me one or two reasons for your decision?
Let's talk about the six components for a few more minutes. To
review, the six different types of improvements were: park im-
provements; a combination ice arena and youth activities center;
Police Department addition; Fire Station additions; City Hall
remodeling for energy efficiency; and, Community Center remodel -
ing.
5
612 -929 -6166 DECISION RESOURCES 862 P07 JUU 05 '95 10:21
60. Which, if any, of the six types of improvements is most
• important to you? (ROTATE AND READ LIST)
61. Which, if any, of the five remaining components would you
rank second highest? (ROTATE, DELETE FIRST CkICE, AND READ
LIST)
62. Is there any of the six Components you would definitely
oppose in a bond referendum? which one? (RE -READ LIST, IF
NECESSARY)
63. Is there a second component you Mould definitely oppose?
(RE -READ LIST, OMIT'T'ING PREVIOUS CHOICE)
FRST SCND OPP1 OPP2
Police Department Addition 1 1 1 1
Park improvements 2 2 2 2
Fire Station Additions 3 3 3 3
Ice Arena and Youth Activities
Center 4 4 4 4
Community Center Remodeling 5 5 5 5
City Hall remodeling for energy
efficiency 6 6 6 6
ALL EQUALLY (VOL) 7 7 7 7
NONE OF ABOVE (VOL) 8 a 8 6
DON'T KNOW /REFUSED 9 9 9 9
Moving on....
64. And, what is your primary source of information about City
government and its activities?
65. If you could choose, how would you prefer to receive infor-
mation about City government and services?
Now, just a few more questions for demographic purposes....
Could you please tell me how many people in each of the following
age groups live in your household. Let's start with the oldest.
Se sure to include yourself.
66. First, persons 65 or over?
67. Adults between the ages of 45 and 64?
68. Adults between the ages of 18 and 44? _
69. Children between the ages of 5 and 17?
70. Children under the age of 5 years old?
71. What is your occupation and, if applicable, the occupation
of your spouse or partner?
M: F.
72. Do you own or rent your present residence?
6
u:.ob
612 -929 -5166 DECISION PESOUPCES SG2 P @S JUL 05 1 95 15:2
73. What is your age, please?
• (READ CATEGORIES, IF NEEDEID)
And now, for one final question, keeping in mind that your
answers are held strictly confidential....
74. Could you tell me your approximate pre -tax yearly household
income. Does the income lie....
p- ANGES: UNDER $12,500, $12,500, - $25,000, $25,001 - $37,500,
$37,501 - $50,000, $50,001 - 862,500, $ 62,501- $75;000, OVER $75,000,
DON'T KNOW REFUSED
75. Gender (DO NOT ASK)
Thank you very much for your time.
75. REGION OF CITY (FROM LIST)
7
Council Meeting Date 07 /10/95
31 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number 6
Request For Council Consideration
• Item Description:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR
1994 DISEASED TREE REMOVAL PROGRAM, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -22,
CONTRACT 1994 -C
Department Approval:
6ZW�V�\ -
Diane Spector, Dire o of Public Services
Manager's Review /Recommendation:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
A resolution accepting work performed and authorizing final payment to Outside Services is attached
• for Council consideration.
Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached )
Improvement Project No. 1994 -22 has been completed by Outside Services, Inc. The City Council
accepted their proposal per Resolution 94 -82, and a contract was subsequently executed. The actual
value of work performed is $3,080.19 more than the original contract of $19,920.00 due to an
underestimation of quantities. Staff recommends acceptance of the work performed and authorization
to make final payment to Outside Services, Inc.
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT
FOR 1994 DISEASED TREE REMOVAL PROGRAM, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994-
22, CONTRACT 1994 -C
WHEREAS, pursuant to written contract signed with the City of Brooklyn Center,
Minnesota, Outside Services, Inc. has satisfactorily completed the following improvement in accordance
with said contract:
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -22, 1994 Diseased Tree Removal Program,
CONTRACT 1994 -C.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center, Minnesota that:
1. The work completed under said contract is accepted and approved.
2. The actual value of work erformed is $3,080.19 more than the original contract
P b
value, due to an underestimation of quantities.
• 3. 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 $23,000.19.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Deputy 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.
Council Meeting Date 07/10/955
3 City of Brooklyn Center A genda Item Number b
Request For Council Consideration
Item Description:
RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF
DISEASED TREES
Department Approval:
, r k VkK - 51 - ne,D
e Spector, Dire t of Public Services
lift
Manager's Review /Reconunendation:
`r
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
It is recommended the Council adopt the attached resolution.
•
Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached
Y P ( PP g ..� — )
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:
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE
REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 07/10/95 )
WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and Diseased Tree Removal Agreement
has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of Brooklyn
Center giving the owners twenty (20) days to remove diseased trees on the
owners' property; and
WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of these diseased trees by
declaring them a public nuisance:
NOW, THEREFOR, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that:
1. The diseased trees at the following addresses are hereby declared
to be a public nuisance:
TREE
PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS NUMBER
---------------------- - - - - -- ----------------------------- -- - - - - --
• RIVERWOOD TOWNHOMES ASSN. 6601 CAMDEN DR 35
JERRY & MARY JONES 6707 EWING AVE N 45
JOHN & SHIRLEY LAUSEN 6818 BEARD AVE N 48
KEVIN & KIMBERLEE BOYD 3307 49TH AVE N 49
CRAIG WENDT 3312 49TH AVE N 50
JANET HUNGERFORD 4931 BEARD AVE N 51
EUGENE & ETHEL PETTMAN 4919 BEARD AVE N 52
R. SMITH, JR. & S. JAAKOLA 512 53RD AVE N 53
DANIEL SOLT 6030 KYLE AVE N 54
IONE GERTZ 3412 WOODBINE LA 55
RALPH CALLANDER 7019 PALMER LAKE DR W 56
RICHARD & CAROLE LONKEY 7031 PALMER LAKE DR W 57
DUANE & CATHLEEN HERME 5439 KNOX AVE N 58
STEVE LINDMAN 5419 MORGAN AVE N 59
D. DUNHAM 5600 COLFAX AVE N 60
CITY OF B.C. 69TH & ZENITH 61
CITY OF B.C. 69TH & ZENITH 62
CITY OF B.C. 69TH & ZENITH 63
CITY OF B.C. 69TH & ZENITH 64
CITY OF B.C. 69TH & ZENITH 65
CITY OF B.C. 69TH & ZENITH 66
CITY OF B.C. W PALMER LAKE PARK 67
CITY OF B.C. BROOKLYN BLVD /CEAP 68
CITY OF B.C. BROOKLYN BLVD /CEAP 69
CITY OF B.C. KYLAWN PARK 70
CITY OF B.C. NORTHPORT PARK 71
CITY OF B.C. NORTHPORT PARK 72
CITY OF B.C. NORTHPORT PARK 73
RESOLUTION NO.
• 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property
owner(s) will receive a second written notice providing five (5)
business days in which to contest the determination of the City
Council by requesting, in writing, a hearing. Said request shall
be filed with the City Clerk.
3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a
hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. All removal
costs, including legal, financing, and administrative charges,
shall be specially assessed against the property.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
• and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
i
Council Meeting Date / 7/10/95
3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number +�
Request For Council Consideration
• Item Description:
Licenses
Department Approval:
b )O— , M *
Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk
Manager's Review/Recommendation:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
Approve attached list of licenses.
Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes )
•
•
31 City of Brooklyn Center
Licenses to be approved by the City Council on July 10, 1995:
AMUSEMENT DEVICES - OPERATOR
K -Mart 5930 John Martin Drive
Scoreboard Pizza 6816 Humboldt Ave. N.
Toys R Us 5425 Xerxes Ave. N.
City Clerk
AMUSEMENT DEVICES - VENDOR
Just Kiddie Rides 12 -2 Dubon Court, New York
City Clerk
GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION
Aagard Sanitation P. O. Box 21248, St. Paul
Aspen Waste Systems, Inc. 2523 Wabash Ave.
Browning Ferris Industries 9813 Flying Cloud Drive
Darling & Co. P. O. Box 12785, New Brighton
Hilger Transfer 8550 Zachary Lane
Midwest Grease Buyers, Inc. P. O. Box 26, Redwood Falls
Nash and Sons Hauling 2301 93rd Way
T & L Sanitation Service, Inc. P. O. Box 34695, Blaine
Twin City Sanitation 279 Meadowwood Lane
United Waste Transfer 95 West Ivy Ave. Q
Walz Bros. Sanitation, Inc. P. O. Box 627, Maple Grove }CJ
City Clerk
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
Carver Heating & A /C, Inc. 109 East 3rd Street
Excel Air Systems 2075 Prosperity Road e a r��9 -hYl
Building Official
POOL AND BILLIARDS TABLES
Chi - Chi's, Inc. 2101 Freeway Blvd. '✓�L
v
City Clerk OL
RENTAL DWELLINGS
Initial:
Jeannette M. Mattson 6801 Bryant Ave. N.
Renewal:
Leslie G. Reinhardt 5713 Humboldt Ave. N.
Sherry Ward 6915 Indiana Ave. N.
William O'Dell 4201 Lakeside Ave. N. #108
Hearthstone Properties 6012 Zenith Ave. N.
Jay Beyer - Kropuenske 3129 49th Ave. N.
Jay Beyer - Kropuenske 3135 49th Ave. N.
Myrna Hubert 5300 70th Circle
Director of /Q 1
Community Development
Council Meeting Date 7/10/95
3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number g a,
Description: Item Descri P
Request For Council Consideration
r
Administrative Hearing for a Water & Sewer Bill at 7201 Major Ave. N.
Department Approval:
Charlie Hansen, Finan ector
Manager's Review /Recommendation:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
Discussion of the issue following Mr. Haugstad's appearance. The staff doesn't recommend giving any
kind of discount or moratorium on the billing in these situations.
Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes )
• The City has received the attached "Speed Message" from Mr. Michael Haugstad requesting an
administrative hearing regarding his request that 7201 Major Ave. N. be removed from the list of
accounts to be shut off for non payment of utility bills. This "Speed Message" is the first and only
communication the staff has received from Mr. Haugstad, so we are having to guess at what issues he
will raise at the July 10th meeting.
We did receive a phone call on July 5th from Mrs. Haugstad. She said they are in the process of
divorce and that Mr. Haugstad moved out over a year ago. She moved out on May 1, 1995.
Ownership of the property and the utility bill have been in the name of Mr. Haugstad.
Some background on this account is that the house is for sale. An Edina Realty Home Profile is
attached. It was apparently listed for $81,900 around May 1 and reduced to $79,900 after a month on
the market. A taxpayer inquiry report from the Assessor's office is also attached indicating that we
have the property valued at $74,200 for tax purposes. Major Avenue is under construction as part of
the Woodbine Neighborhood Improvement.
The utility bill in question was mailed out on April 21 and covered the period of January 19 through
April 19, 1995. We measure water usage in 1,000 gallon units. The residents sent in a self read meter
card indicating the 14 units of water was used which is more than the 10 unit minimum bill. The bill
was for the following amounts:
• Water $12.04
Sanitary Sewer 42.50
Storm Drainage 7.50
Recycling 6.45
TOTAL $68.49
Request For Council Consideration page 2
This bill was due on May 17th. A 10% non - payment penalty was applied on May 24th in the amount
• of $6.85. On June 22 a letter was sent requiring Mr. Haugstad to either agree to a payment plan or
the water service to the property would be shut off. This administrative hearing was requested as Mr.
Haugstad's response to the letter.
Based on passed experience with other accounts, I can anticipate some possible arguments that might
be presented Monday night. First is that the house is vacant and for sale, therefore is using no utilities.
For the January to April time which this bill applies to, that is incorrect. The house was occupied and
more than the minimum amount of water was used. We have always resisted this argument in the past.
The utilities are available to use even if the house is left vacant and in fact utilities get used in houses
that are up for sale. The only times we have discontinued billing is when the water is shut off.
Another argument could be that the street construction is hurting efforts to sell the house. This may
be true, but street construction inconveniences everyone. Think of where a precedent will lead before
you start compensating people.
The other likely argument is that the bill should have been in Mrs. Haugstad's name. He allowed the
billing to go on in his name for a year without ever calling the City to change the name. Mrs. Haugstad
has now moved out and we have no way to require her to pay or to determine if she really should be
the one to pay. Legally, the bill belongs to the property and Mr. Haugstad apparently is the owner.
•
•
' / -
To `1 I �
Date 6- /�/
From
Subject
vVk 0 ()e
Wilson Jones Company
CRAYUNE FORM 64999 2 PART Signed-,---'
-f=� z .-C
1983 •PRINTED IN U.5 A. -
_7 lC3 l —' v '
Aj s��V3 86
j�
F{AUG201fe 55492017 1695 06/26/95
NOTIFY SENDER OF NEW ADDRESS
HAUGSTAD'MICHAEL
7,531 170TH AVE NW
RAMSEY MN 55303 -3545
f
lilt' III/ �UI" 1�� runl�ur��u�r�rr�u�r�r�rrr��urr��rr��r)
RECEIVED JUN
&,0
til lrlr lrl rr�rr�rr� lrll rrrrrlrlrrr �ll r lr�lrlt rli�rrr rrllrrf ill
A Family Tradition Since 1955 "" 7%9 00
7201 Major Ave. No., Brooklyn Center, MN ,
Offered by
p fyyf t
Jackie Heinen
Edina 50th & France Office
3930 West 491 Street i r
Edina, MN 55424
Bus: (612) 924 -8773
Res: (612) 922 -4244
€, J
Highlights
Wonderful 3 Bedroom, 2 Bath home in Finished Size/Fin. Sq. Ft.... 996/1500 • Year Built .............. 1958
convenient location near schools, parks,
shopping and the freeway system! This • Living Room ............. 17x12 • Taxes ................ $1076
home is in move -in condition and has
many updates. Informal Dining Area ........ 09x06 Lot Size .............. 75x131
The front entry has a hall closet and is • Kitchen ............... 1 Ix08 • Life Time Warranty Omni Windows
open to the spacious living room. You
will love the kitchen with its many 1st Bedroom ............. 11x12 • Fenced Yard
updates including dishwasher and
microwave. The bright and cheery • 2nd Bedroom ............. 11x11 • Double Car Garage with Opener
informal dining area is large enough for
a family and has a quaint cafe booth! 3rd Bedroom ............. 12x09 • Gas Forced Air Furnace
There are three bedrooms and one bath
on this level. One bedroom is currently Amusement Room ......... 23x11 • Central Air
used as a formal dining room with
sliding glass doors onto a deck • Den ................. 14x11 • NSP: $53.00 /mo.
overlooking the beautiful fenced yard!
• Kitchenette ............. 17x08 • Minnegasco: $39.00 /mo.
The partially finished lower level has an
amusement room, den, kitchenette and • Inclusions:
full bath! —(2) Stoves
—(2) Refrigerators
1 0ruly a house you will be happy to call — Dishwasher'
home! — Microwave
— Washer & Dryer
Q! ER 979F3 ( 9 ,192) Information deemed reliable but not guaranteed.
PROPERTY DATA SYSTEM
TAXPAYER INQUIRY CURR 319
PROPERTY ID NEXT
27- 119 -21 -32 -0047
Pt.Con: Mt.Adr:
USE# FRACTION STREET NAME UNIT ZIP +4 Front: 75 Back:
*201 l/ MAJOR AVE N 55429+ Right: Left:
Ownerl: HAUGSTAD MICHAEL A Owner3:
Owner2: Owner4:
Zoning: Rl Prim /sec: Yr.blt: 1958 Area: 9825 Acres: .00
Sch.Dst: 279 Wshd: 00 Gr /Os /Ex: Subrecs: 01 Width: Depth: 131
Mkt -Land Mkt -Bldg Mkt -Mach Mkt -Tot Tx Capacity Hd PT %Own
1995: 19500 54700 74200 H R 100
1994: 19500 53600 73100 H R 100
1993: 19500 53900 73400 H R 100
Legal Description: LOT 6 BLOCK 3
NORTHBROOK MANOR 2ND ADDITION
Type PID or ADDRESS: press ENTER; or Fl, F2, F8
Council Meeting Date 7 -10-95 q
3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number /
Request For Council Consideration
Item Description:
Planning Commission Application No. 95009 submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center.
Department Approval:
4,ja---6�
Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning S 'alist
Manager's Review /Recommendation:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
This application was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission through Resolution No.
95 -1 at its June 29, 1995 meeting. Attached for City Council action are:
• 1. Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 95009
submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center.
2. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Zoning
Classification of Certain Land.
Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached )
Planning Commission Application No. 95009 submitted by the City of Brooklyn is a request for
rezoning from I -1 and C -2 to PUD /I -1 and approval of a Planned Unit Development to accommodate
appropriate common parking areas for the properties located northwesterly of the intersection of Shingle
Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard. This application was considered by the Planning Commission
at its June 29, 1995 meeting. Attached are minutes, information sheets and maps from that meeting.
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION REGARDING DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION
APPLICATION NO. 95009 SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF BROOKLYN
CENTER
WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 95009
submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center proposes rezoning from
I -1 (Industrial Park) and C -2 (Commerce) to PUD /I -1 and approval
for a Planned Unit Development to accommodate appropriate common
parking areas for the properties located northwesterly of the
intersection of Shingle Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, this proposal includes the rezoning of the
properties addressed as 6601 and 6707 Shingle Creek Parkway
(Tract G, RLS 1572 and Tract A, RLS 1564 respectively); 6601 and
6701 Parkway Circle (Tract A, RLS 1572 and Tract B, RLS 1564
respectively); 2000, 2100 and 2200 Freeway Boulevard (Tract B,
RLS 1619, Tract A, RLS 1619 and Tract B, RLS 1572 respectively);
and the north and south portions of the central parking lot
(Tract C, RLS 1564 and Tract C, RLS 1572 respectively) and the
development of a new agreement for the purpose of creating
certain parking, driveway and access rights upon the above stated
properties; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public
hearing on June 29, 1995, when a staff report and public
testimony regarding the Rezoning and Planned Unit Development
were received; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of
Application No. 95009 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution
No. 95 -1 on June 29, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered Application No. 95009
at its July 10, 1995 meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered this Rezoning and
Planned Unit Development request in light of all testimony
received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in
Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of
the Planned Unit Development ordinance contained in Section 35-
355, and in light of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Brooklyn Center that Application No. 95009 submitted by
the City of Brooklyn Center be approved in light of the following
considerations:
Resolution No.
1. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposals are
compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of
the Planned Unit Development section of the City's
Zoning Ordinance.
2. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal will
allow for the utilization of land in question in a
manner which is considered compatible with,
complimentary to and of comparable intensity to
adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on
surrounding land.
3. The utilization of the property as proposed under this
Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal will
conform, for the most part, with City Ordinance
standards. Variation from the parking requirement for
the Holiday Inn allowing it to relinquish its rights to
65 parking spaces allocated to it in the central
parking lot is justified based on a double counting of
the parking requirement and the experience of
approximately ten years which indicates no need for the
additional 65 parking spaces. A lesser parking
standard can be permitted also on the grounds of the
complementarity of peak parking demands by the uses
within the PUD.
4. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are
considered compatible with the recommendations in the
City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the City.
5. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development appear to be
a good utilization of the central parking facility and
access road and can be considered to be in the best
interest of the community.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center that the approval of Application No. 95009 be
subject to the following conditions and considerations:
1. The Sixth Amendment to Easement Agreement and
Modification of Declaration for Parking shall be
executed by all parties and be filed with the titles to
the property with the Register of Titles at Hennepin
County.
2. Approval of this Planned Unit Development acknowledges
the following uses within the district:
a. a 20 percent office /80 percent industrial
occupancy of the Shingle Creek 11 building located
at 6707 Shingle Creek Parkway;
Resolution No.
b. a 100 percent office occupancy of the RCM
Plaza building located at 6707 Parkway Circle;
c. the development of an 80,000 sq. ft. office
industrial building for General Litho approved
under Planning Commission Application No.
95004 at 6601 Parkway Circle;
d. a 60 percent office /10 percent clinic /30
percent industrial occupancy of the building
known at Parkway Place, 6601 Shingle Creek
Parkway;
e. a hotel, restaurant, nightclub, meeting room
and ballroom use of the Holiday Inn, 2200
Freeway Boulevard;
f. a 100 percent office occupancy use for the
Minnesota State High School League office
building, 2100 Freeway Boulevard;
g. a restaurant use as proposed by Country
Harvest Buffet approved under Planning
Commission Application No. 94014 at 2000
Freeway Boulevard;
h. and a parking lot use of Tract C, RLS 1564 and
Tract C, RLS 1572.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Deputy 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:
where upon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
9�
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of
1995, at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the
City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
regarding the zoning classification of certain land.
Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in
advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES
REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is
hereby amended in the following manner:
Section 35 -1190. COMMERCE DISTRICT (C -2).
The following properties are hereby established as being within the (C -2) Commerce District
zoning classification:
[Tract B, R.L.S. No. 1572]
Section 35 -1200. INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT (I -1).
The following properties are hereby established as being within the (I -1) Industrial Park
District zoning classification:
[Tracts A, B, and C, R.L.S. No. 1564]
[Tracts A, C, and G, R.L.S. No. 1572]
[Tract A, R.L.S. No. 16191
Section 35 -1240. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PUD).
The following properties are hereby established as being within a (PUD) Planned Unit
Development zoning classification:
3. The following properties are designated as PUD /I -1 (Planned Unit
Development / Industrial Park): Tracts A B and C R.L.S. No. 1564• Tracts
A B C and G R.L.S. No 1572• Tract A and B, R.L. S. No. 1619.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30)
days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of , 1995
Mayor
ATTEST:
Deputy Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.)
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 95009
Applicant: City of Brooklyn Center
Location: Northwest Quadrant of Shingle Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard
Request: Rezoning and Planned Unit Development Approval
The City, along with various property owners, is seeking rezoning from I -1 (Industrial Park)
and C -2 (Commerce) to PUD /I -1 and approval for a Planned Unit Development to
accommodate and acknowledge appropriate common area parking for various developments
in the area located northwesterly of Shingle Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard. The
properties in question include 6601 and 6707 Shingle Creek Parkway (Parkway Place -Tract
G, RLS 1572 and Shingle Creek 11 -Tract A, RLS 1564 respectively); 6601 and 6701
Parkway Circle (General Litho site - Tract A, RLS 1572 and RCM Plaza -Tract B, RLS 1564
respectively); 2000, 2100 and 2200 Freeway Boulevard (vacant land -Tract B, RLS 1619,
Minnesota State High School League Office -Tract A, RLS 1619 and the Holiday Inn,
formerly Ramada Hotel -Tract B, RLS 1572 respectively); and the north and south portions of
the central parking lot -Tract C, RLS 1564 and Tract C, RLS 1572 respectively.
The area under consideration has operated under a Special Use Permit granted by the City
Council, which comprehended off -site accessory parking in a central parking lot to allow
flexibility in developing various office /industrial sites in this area. The plan also provided
for a private, non - public access road to be created to provide access to various development
parcels that were otherwise landlocked around the central parking lot . The first easement
agreement was executed and filed with the Register of Titles on February 5, 1982 creating
certain parking, driveway and access rights over the properties in this area. The easement
agreement is a complex document that has been amended numerous times over the years with
the most recent amendment being the 5th Amendment to Easement Agreement and
Declaration dated December 1, 1988. These amendments have reflected changing parking
allocations from the central parking lot to various properties as well as other elements related
to the central parking and access road.
The 6th Amendment will reflect new ownership of the central parking lot as well as new and
existing ownerships of the various properties in the area. Currently the site designated in the
agreement as proposed building No. 12 (Tract A, RLS 1572) has an incumbrance on it to
provide up to 153 parking spaces in a "proof of parking" for the sole use of the RCM Plaza
property (Tract B, RLS 1564). This incumbrance makes it impossible for the General Litho
development to go forward. General Litho was granted approval for an industrial building
under Planning Commission Application No. 95004 subject to a modification of the parking
agreement to lift that restriction. Their plan still calls for 20 parking stalls to be retained on
the General Litho site for the sole use of the RCM Plaza building.
At the time the Special Use Permit was originally granted for off -site parking allocations, the
ZD
City did not have provisions in its ordinances for a Planned Unit Development. The use of a
Planned Unit Development would have been the best way to acknowledge a development
is -29 -95 1
The new proposed agreement, in addition to making new central parking allocations, would
also have First Industrial, L. P. take over ownership of and the responsibility to administer,
operate, maintain and regulate the central parking area. First Industrial has also acquired the
ownership of: RCM Plaza, or proposed building No. 10 (Tract B, RLS 1564);
Shingle Creek 11, proposed building No. 11 (Tract A, RLS 1564); and Parkway Place
proposed building No. 14 (Tract G, RLS 1572). The agreement would, based on experience
and a new allocation of parking, eliminate the requirement for a ramp agreement; would
allow, if necessary, the construction of at least 25 parking spaces in the landscape area;
would acknowledge that the Holiday Inn Property, Tract B RLS 1572, no longer needs an
allocation of 65 parking stalls in the central parking lot; would provide an additional 47
parking spaces on the outer perimeter of Parkway Circle; and would eliminate traffic control
signal agreements on Shingle Creek Parkway because they are no longer needed.
Attached for the Commission's review are an area map, an old area plan showing the
affected properties in the central parking lots, Exhibit B from previous easement agreements
and declarations showing the existing parking allocation, a drawing showing proposed
parking for 47 cars on the perimeter of Parkway Circle adding to the number of parking
spaces to be allocated and also showing 20 parking spaces on the General Litho site for RCM
Plaza's use. Also a copy of the 6th Amendment to Easement Agreement and Modification of
the Declaration for Parking. Particular attention should be made of that agreement's Exhibit
B showing new ownership and allocations to the central parking lot.
The new ownership listed in Exhibit B are as follows: RCM Plaza or proposed building No.
10 (Tract B, RLS 1564) - First Industrial; Shingle Creek 11 or proposed building No. 11
(Tract A, RLS 1564) - First Industrial; the General Litho site or proposed building No. 12
(Tract A, RLS 1572) - currently Shingle Creek Land Company; Parkway Place or proposed
building No. 14 (Tract G, RLS 1572) - First Industrial; The Holiday Inn, formerly Ramada
Hotel (Tract B, RLS 1572) - Plaza Real Estate Partners; and the central parking lot (Tract
C, RLS 1564 and Tract C, RLS 1572) - First Industrial.
It is believed that the elimination of the ramp agreement, the credit for proof of parking for
25 stalls over the landscaped area, the perimeter parking on Parkway Circle and the
relinquishment of 65 parking spaces allocated to the hotel are justified based on the
experience up to this time. The hotel's parking formula does not acknowledge some double
counting of parking. For instance, part of the formula is based on dining and drinking seats
and employees for these operations. Some 20 seats are breakfast room seats, which are
never used while the restaurant and night club are in use. Also, a number of guests in rooms
utilize dining and nightclub facilities. Parking for guests are counted in the 172 parking
spaces for rooms (one space per room). The ballroom and meeting rooms also will, to a
great extent, be utilized by guests already there. Finally, the hotel has never had to utilize
any of the 65 parking spaces from the central parking lot allocation.
The 47 spaces on the perimeter of the road should not create problems as there is enough
room to accommodate parallel parking on the outer perimeter. The drive lane is 40 ft. wide,
6 -29 -95 2
while parallel parking requirements are 8 ft. wide with a 24 ft. wide drive lane.
Planned Unit Developments are Rezoning Applications. Attached is a copy of Section
35 -208 of the city ordinances relating to the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review
guidelines. It is the policy of the city that zoning classifications must be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and rezoning proposals shall not constitute "spot zoning" defined as a
zoning decision which discriminates in favor of a particular land owner, and does not relate
to the Comprehensive Plan or to accepted planning principles. Rezoning proposals should be
considered on their merits and measured against the above policy and various guidelines
listed should be weighed collectively or individually as deemed appropriate by the city.
The first guideline questions if there is a clear public need or benefit. It is believed that
there is a public need or benefit with the approval of the PUD designation and the revised
development agreement. It simplifies to a great extent a very complex set of agreements and
understandings. It also will free up a 153 car parking lot incumbrance on the General Litho
site, which will allow this development to go ahead consistent with the zoning ordinance
regulations.
The proposed zoning is consistent and compatible with surrounding land use classification.
In fact, a parcel of land at the very northwest corner of Freeway Boulevard and Shingle
Creek Parkway was rezoned to PUD /I -1 for development of a County Harvest Buffet. That
proposal has not gone forward, however, the PUD /I -1 Zoning designation has been
established. Also, the existing developments which include office /industrial buildings,
straight office buildings and a hotel are all consistent with and compatible with surrounding
land use classifications.
It appears that all permitted uses in the new proposed PUD /I -1 zoning classification can be
contemplated for development of the subject properties. These buildings have been in
existence for a number of years and the new development agreement will adequately reflect
the needed parking allocations for these uses.
It appears that with this City initiated rezoning proposal, there is a broad public purpose, that
being the allowing of the development of a substantial vacant parcel of land consistent with
the city zoning regulations. Also, it should be noted that based on previous plan approvals,
such as the General Litho approval, we can safely say that the subject property will bare
fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning districts. With respect
to these comments, it is believed that this Planned Unit Development proposal is consistent
with Section 35 -208. the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guideline.
Also attached for the Commission's review is a copy of Section 35 -355 regarding Planned
Unit Development. It is believed that this proposed Planned Unit Development is consistent
with the development standards contained in Subdivision 3. Particular notice should be taken
of Subdivision 3d relating to parking. Parking is to be consistent with the parking
requirements contained in Section 35 -704 unless it can be demonstrated that a lesser standard
6 -29 -95 3
should be permitted on the grounds of complimentary peak parking demands by the uses
within the PUD. The agreement would relieve the hotel of its requirement for an allocation
of 65 parking spaces in the central parking lot. As indicated previously, it can be stated that
there is some double counting of parking spaces already calculated in the parking
requirement and experience has shown that there has been no need for the hotel to utilize off -
site parking in the central parking lot. Existing uses of the land under their current
categories are all that is acknowledged by the approval of this Planned Unit Development.
Any changes to previously approved plans or new development such as on the Country
Harvest site will require an amendment to the Planned Unit Development prior to the
development or redevelopment of these properties.
As previously mentioned, this PUD /I -1 proposal is a rezoning with a specific development
agreement in hand. As such, it must go through the normal rezoning process. Generally,
rezonings are referred to neighborhood advisory groups. In this case, the Planning
Commission is the advisory group for this industrial park area. A public hearing has been
scheduled and notices have been sent. The Planning Commission should determine whether
or not they are prepared to make recommendations with respect to this Planned Unit
Development proposal at this meeting or if additional time and consideration is needed.
All in all, we believe the development agreement to be in order and I will prepare a draft
Planning Commission Resolution for the Commission's consideration at Thursday evening's
meeting. This resolution will outline the Commissions consideration of this matter and also
site recommended considerations for recommending approval of this PUD rezoning.
A ublic hearing has been scheduled and a notice of this consideration has appeared in the
P g PP
Brooklyn Center Sun /Post. Notice was mailed to affected properties and neighboring
properties within 350 ft.
6 -29 -95 4
�' � .1111 1111 X1111 �i� Q� a '� .■ = ��� ♦♦ �� ♦ • � � = �.� .0
1 111 /'�♦ ♦ �..'� ♦ ♦������1♦ ♦ ♦♦�•
m� ' ri1� mm a■
1� 1111 11111 mill ■ _ -
' 1111 " �11 1"'� �• ,,,
- -► 11 11111111 111 ►s'r"�■ ��;�� ■�•
- - 11 •' 111 ' i ► '� .. �...,�,� �„ .. � '
11 1•�` �•'1� 11��'' �� r VII ► � �: ,�.�..�.�
� 11 1 � �� � �,� � 1 1 '�I'' �• iii _ � _
�: � 11.x. �.....� ��''��`;��,:��' \� � a � ° �`� �•`��.•� � � I � ► �' � ff � -'' ; -''��®
v �
■
1111111: � �� • �
'1111111 aii 1111 �� :•' ,• .�
111 111111
■
111'1 j 1111 11 ",,,, t�■
t 1111 � :: � � ` tr:111 ■''��
,, , � 11 1 ®■ 111 , `� � ®. ,.: .i : _ - ' �
It Ili � 111 ■�� ���..� 11111 ��� ' 1 %1% 1 1111; ������.�:�:�.�♦��� ■ ••,
11 , � ; . � •, ,� � 111 • ►������ , �����j � � • -
it
` r 6801
MTC — — - -- - - -- --
-� 'RCM PLAZA'
'SHINGLE CREEK
ELEVEN
Nq
RTITt(1 I IRtm rrf nirrtrrrn;r tnitrn � •r .,� �� .� ;. 1.. . n,niuirriruinr � ; ,;3t1 ' I
„ 111 tu 11
� .
CENT a
FARKINGr r = ,! —PA P LACE
FUTURE - _
- ;SPEC 12 BUILDING' 1
\ OMBARD PLAZ } �_
- - •• "'IV11111 :I 1 111 C -' � '
��t;;;TI1ifTilt(itTitiC -
PARKING `
Poi' 2
Y't 1 / � � \�'�� / �
=` ' cr'rl!i N41Hi�llth�' 1'1
t
v FUTURELr l i
Z5PFICE TrT m
- BUILDING , r'
tT
T - i "'_1 I � �l T`T - F - 1
i A Spate[ 13 800Ces
�O
ffi spaces
9 PARKING
STALL (TYP.)
N
p M
G
A
A
y,_ M
I
I
u
0
R
n
i
r
o
n
N
l
PARKWAY CIRCLE
et
4 spaces 7 spates
8'x22' PARKING STALL (TYP.)
00 1 %OU1
11 7
r
(Q�1�miN-utY OnaAJ149
c
F 7
T7�
cam,
R
I NS
LdL
f
"Mo
C`
EXNIBLT B
Pursuant to Ili of Exhibit B, attached to and made a part of the instrument entitled, "Second Amendment to Easement
Agreement and Declaration," dated August 11, 1984, filed as Document No. 1597790, Piles of the Registrar of Titles
( "Second Amendment "), said Exhibit B of the Second Amendment is hereby amended to read as follows:
Central Parking;
Total Area:
Current Central On -Site S Total. Pro -Rata
(Name of Location & Amount: Parking Area Total Present City C.P.A. - Building Share of
Buildin Proposed g) Parcel reel Of -
f Site Par -
Parking Allocation On Site Parking or Other Proposed Costs S
Ow r
Buildin No. of Land Other than C.P. Mad }lereb Park n R
---- - i e u i r em en Off-S ite S uare P e
�___Y_�- -- Pz� e t
(RCM Plaza) 10 Tract B Part of Tract A 0 176 329 329 74,699 0
Shingle Creek RLS 1564 RLS 1572
Plaza II, a - 153
Minnesota general partnership
(Shingle Creek 11 Tract A 0 102 50 152 152 70,246 35%
II) Shingle Creek RLS 1564
Rleven, a Minnesota general partnership
(N /A) 12 Tract A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shingle Creek RLS 1572
Land Company, a
Minnesota general partnership
(Parkway Place) 14 Tract G 0 121 156 277 277 70,000 42%
Shingle Creek RLS 1572
Plaza II,
a Minnesota general partnership
(Ramada Notel) Hotel Tract B 0 65 428 493 493 - 23%
Plaza Real Site RLS 1572
Estate Partners, a
Minnesota general partnership
TOTALS 153 288 810 1,251 1,251 - 100%
(Tract C, RLS 1564 and Tract C, RLS 1572 - owner is: Shingle Creek Land Company, a Minnesota general partnership).
774211/KU:jc /10.19.87
SIXTH AMENDMENT TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT 6/9/95
AND MODIFICATION OF DECLARATIONS FOR PARKING
THIS SIXTH AMENDMENT TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT AND MODIFICATION
OF DECLARATIONS FOR PARKING (sometimes hereinafter called the "Sixth Amendment to
Easement Agreement ") entered into this _ day of . 1995, by and among the City of
Brooklyn Center, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota (hereinafter called the
"City "); Shingle Creek Land Company, a Minnesota general partnership (hereinafter called "Land
Company "); First Industrial, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (hereinafter called "First ");
Plaza Real Estate Partners, A Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership (hereinafter
called "PREP "); and Minnesota State High School League, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation
(hereinafter called "League ").
RECITALS:
A. Land Company, First, PREP, and League (hereinafter collectively sometimes referred to
as the "Owners" and individually as an "Owner ") or their predecessors in interest in
ownership or control of the land legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof have heretofore entered into that certain Easement Agreement dated
February 5, 1981, filed as Document No. 1414568, Files of the Registrar of Titles, that
certain Amendment to Easement Agreement and Declaration, dated March 9, 1984, filed
as Document No. 1572021, Files of the Registrar of Titles, that certain Second
Amendment to Easement Agreement and Declaration (herein sometimes referred to as the
"Second Amendment "), dated August 13, 1984, filed as Document No. 1597790, Files of
the Registrar of Titles, that certain Third Amendment to Easement Agreement (herein
sometimes referred to as the "Third Amendment "), dated July 21, 1986, filed as
Document No. 1748866, Files of the Registrar of Titles, that certain Fourth Amendment
to Easement Agreement and Declaration (herein sometimes referred to as the "Fourth
Amendment "), dated May 1, 1987, filed as Document No. 1830199, Files of the Registrar
of Titles, and that certain Fifth Amendment to Easement Agreement and Declaration
(herein sometimes referred to as the "Fifth Amendment "), dated December 1, 1988, filed
as Document No. 2036563, Files of the Registrar of Titles (all of said documents being
hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Easement Agreement "), all for the purpose of
creating certain parking, driveway and access rights upon certain lands situated in the
County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota, more fully described therein.
B. Pursuant to the Easement Agreement, there was created a Central Parking Area consisting
of Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 1564 and Tract C, Registered Land Survey No.
1572, all in Hennepin County (herein and in the Easement Agreement referred to as the
"Central Parking Area "), allocated and assessed to Tracts A and B, Registered Land
Survey No. 1564, and Tracts A, B and G, Registered Land Survey No. 1572, all in
Hennepin County. As set forth on Exhibit B to the Fifth Amendment, currently the
Central Parking Area is allocated to Tract A. Registered Land Survey No. 1564, and
Tracts B and G. Registered Land Survey No. 1572, all in Hennepin County, with 65
parking spaces in the Central Parking Area allocated to Tract B. Registered Land Survey
No. 1572. Also, currently under the Easement Agreement, Land Company, which, as set
forth on Exhibit A to the Fifth Amendment, previously owned the real property upon
which the Central Parking Area is located, has the responsibility for administering and
operating and maintaining the Central Parking Area and assessing to the benefitted parties
the costs and expenses of the Central Parking Area.
C. The Fourth Amendment, as amended by the Fifth Amendment, created a landscape
easement h
erein and nd in the Fourth ourth Amendment referred as the
Landscape Easement")
over, under, and across a portion of the Central Parking Area in favor of the City for
landscaping purposes.
D. The Third Amendment created a driveway easement (herein and in the Third Amendment
referred to as the "New Driveway" and also known as "Parkway Circle ") over and across
portions of Tracts A, B, C, D, F, and G, Registered Land Survey No. 1572, and Tract C,
Registere
Land Survey o. 1564 Registered
Land Surve y � y, Hennepin County, as set forth
more fully in the Third Amendment, for the use and the benefit of the owners of all or
portions of what are now Tracts A, B, C, and G, Registered Land Survey No. 1572,
Tracts A. B, and C, Registered Land Survey No. 1564, and Tracts A and B, Registered
Land Survey No. 1619, Registered Land Survey, Hennepin County. Currently under the
Easement Agreement, Land Company has the responsibility for administering and
maintaining the New Driveway and assessing to the benefitted parties the costs and
expenses of the New Driveway. Currently, the Fire Department of the City has posted
"No Parking" signs on the New Driveway
a
E. Land Company and the City have made and entered into that certain Declaration and
Contract for the Construction of a Parking Facility (herein and in the Easement
Agreement referred to as the "Ramp Agreement "), dated August 6, 1984, filed as
Document No. 1597791, Files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
The Ramp Agreement permits the City to require Land Company to construct 185
additional parking spaces (a net of 157 spaces after loss of stalls used in construction) in
a parking ramp facility on the Central Parking Area.
F. Land Company, the City, and First, or their predecessors in interest in ownership or
control, have made and entered into that certain Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions
and Easement for Parking Purposes (herein referred to as the "Parking Declaration "),
dated December 16, 1987, filed as Document No. 1896176, Files of the Registrar of
Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The Parking Declaration permits the City to require
Land Company to construct 153 parking spaces on a portion of Tract A, Registered Land
Survey No. 1572, Hennepin County, owned by Land Company, for the benefit of Tract
B, Registered Land Survey No. 1564, now owned by First.
G. Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1572, Hennepin County, owned by PREP, is no
longer in need of any of the 65 parking spaces allocated to it under the Central Parking
Area pursuant to Exhibit B to the Fifth Amendment.
H. upon PREP relinquishing its rights to use the Central Parking Area, First will be the
owner of all property bent and sharing the cost of the parking located on the Central
Parking Area. In addition, Land Company has no further interest in the parking located
on the Central Parking Area. Therefore, Land Company desires to relinquish
administration of the Central Parking Area and convey the Central Parking Area to First
and First is willing to assume administration of the Central Parking Area and accept
conveyance of the Central Parking Area. In connection therewith, separately Land
Company shall convey/ the Central Parking Area to First.
I. In view of the relinquishment of the 65 parking spaces referred to above and the
additional approximately 47 street parking spaces to be located on the New Driveway as
set forth below, the City is willing to release (i) the obligation to construct a parking ramp
on the Central Parking Area under the Ramp Agreement and (ii) the obligation to
construct additional parking on a portion of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1572,
Hennepin County, under the Easement Declaration, provided that (a) Land Company
grants a perpetual, exclusive, parking easement for 20 parking spaces over a portion of
Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1572 in favor of Tract B, Registered Land Survey
No. 1564, now owned by First, and (b) First provides proof of parking for approximately
25 parking spaces in the area now set aside as the Landscape Easement. In view of the
combination of the Central Parking Area, the 20 space parking easement, and the new
substitute proof of parking, upon First providing the 25 parking spaces in the area now
set aside as the Landscape Easement, the City will release the Landscape Easement.
J. In view of the above, First desires to provide for a new allocation of the parking spaces
and the costs associated with the Central Parking Area which will be set forth on a new
Exhibit B attached hereto.
K. In view of the conveyance by Land Company to First of the Central Parking Area, Land
Company desires to relinquish administration of the New Driveway and First is willing
to assume administration of the New Driveway. In view of the revisions to the proof of
parking, the City is willing to allow parking on the outer portion of the New Driveway,
also known as Parkway Circle, which will permit parking for approximately 47 vehicles.
L. League is willing to join in this instrument with respect to the changes to the
administration of the New Driveway.
M. The City has determined that a certain traffic control signals is not necessary or
convenient and is willing to release that certain hereinafter specified declarationA
regarding a traffic control signals affecting a portions of the property described on
Exhibit A attached hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises, the mutual covenants
and agreements herein contained and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by each of the parties hereto, the parties agree,
covenant and declare as follows:
Y
Central Parking Area
1. Administration of Central Parking Area From and after the Effective Date (as
hereinafter defined), First assumes and agrees to perform all obligations and undertakings
and shall exercise all the rights of Land Company which it had prior to the Effective Date
under the Easement Agreement to administer, operate, maintain, and regulate the Central
Parking Area (subject to the reimbursement of costs and expenses provided therein) and
Land Company shall have no further obligations and undertakings and rights with respect
to the Central Parking Area.
2. New Allocation of Parking The parties agree that as of the Effective Date the allocation
of parking and pro rata share of costs and expenses upon the Central Parking Area shall
be as set forth in Exhibit B which is attached hereto and made a pan hereof by reference.
From and after the Effective Date, neither Land Company nor any future owners of Tracts
A or B, Registered Land Survey No. 172, Hennepin County, shall have any rights to
allocation of any of the parking upon the Central Parking Area. Any future alteration or
change to the allocation of parking in the Central Parking Area from that set forth on
Exhibit B attached hereto or any other change to the Easement Agreement regarding the
Central Parking Area may be effectuated by an instrument executed solely by First, its
successors and assigns, owner(s) of Tracts A, B, and C. Registered Land Survey No. 1564
and Tracts C and G, Registered Land Survey No. 1572, Hennepin County and the City
and the joinder of any other owner of real property described on Exhibit A attached
0 hereto shall not be required. The Central Parking Area shall be expanded or modified as
provided in Paragraph n7 of this Sixth Amendment and any additional parking spaces
added thereby shall be allocated as provided in this Paragraph and Exhibit B attached
hereto or by further amendment to the Easement Agreement as provided in this paragraph.
New Drivewav
3. Administration of New Driveway From and after the Effective Date, First assumes and
agrees to perform all obligations and undertakings and shall exercise all rights of Land
Company under the Easement Agreement to administer, operate, maintain, and regulate
the New Driveway (subject to the reimbursement of costs and expenses provided therein)
and Land Company shall have no further obligations and undertakings and rights with
respect to the New Driveway Area (except as an Owner of a Benefitted Parcel (as defined
in the Third Amendment)).
4. City Permission for Parking in the New Driveway The City hereby acknowledges
and agrees that it will permit parking on the outer portion of the New Driveway (also
known as Parkway Circle), subject to the limitations contained in the ordinances of the
City generally regarding on- street parking (but in no event shall there be less than 47
allowed parking spaces), and will cause the Fire Department to remove the "No Parking"
signs on the outer portion of the New Driveway.
uw
4
New Proof of Parkins
5. Termination of Parking Declarations
(a) The City and Land Company hereby release and terminate the Ramp
Agreement and neither Land Company nor any future owner of the Central Parking Area
(including First) shall have any further obligation under the Ramp Agreement to construct
a parking ramp on the Central Parking Area.
(b) The City, Land Company, and First hereby release and terminate the
Parking Declaration and neither Land Company nor any future owner of Tract A,
Registered Land Survey No. 1572. Hennepin County, shall have any obligation under the
Parking Declaration to construct parking for the benefit of Tract B, Registered Land
Survey No. 1564, Hennepin County.
6. Parking Facility on Tract A. Registered Land Survey No. 1572 Land Company,
as owner of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1572, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
hereby grants and conveys unto First, as owner of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No.
1564, Hennepin County, Minnesota, for the benefit of said owner, its tenants, and invitees,
an exclusive, perpetual easement for parking purposes over and across that portion of
Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1572, Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally
described on Exhibit C attached hereto. On or prior to June 1, 1996, the City, at its
expense, shall construct 20 parking spaces on said easement parcel (First hereby granting
a temporary easement to the City for said construction). First, as owner of Tract B,
Registered Land Survey No. 1564, shall maintain said 20 parking spaces. At any time
hereinafter, upon the request and at the sole expense of First, Land Company, shall
execute and deliver to First a quitclaim deed to the real property described on Exhibit C
attached hereto. Nothing..<contained herein shall deemed to constitute a' consent or
approval of the City to such conveyance.
7. Construction of Parking on Landscape Easement First, as owner of the Central
Parking Area, including the Landscape Easement, at any time may remove the landscape
furniture, plantings, and appurtenances located in the Landscape Easement and construct
25 parking spaces upon the Landscape Easement. In addition, First shall do so within
three (3) months of notice of certification by the City that the then - current parking spaces
available to parcels benefitted by the Central Parking Area are inadequate to
accommodate parking of motor vehicles of all persons using the facilities which are
constructed upon Tracts A and B, Registered Land Survey No. 1564 and Tract G,
Registered Land Survey No. 1572, Hennepin County. Said parking shall be constructed
in accordance with all applicable ordinances and regulations of the City. First shall bear
all costs and expenses for removal of the landscape furniture, plantings, and
appurtenances and for construction of said parking spaces. Upon completion of
construction of said parking spaces, said parking spaces upon the Landscape Easement
shall be deemed part of the Central Parking Area for all purposes and the City and the
First shall execute a further amendment to the Easement Agreement terminating and
releasing the Landscape Easement.
:Mw
5
Miscellaneous
8. Effective Date The Effective Date of this Sixth Amendment shall be ,
1995.
9. League. League, as owner of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1619, Hennepin
County, hereby consents to and joins in this Sixth Amendment with respect to Paragraph
3 hereof only.
10. Consent of Citv The City hereby consents and agrees to the terms of this Sixth
Amendment to Easement Agreement.
11. Stripping of Parkwav Circle First, at its expense, shall cause the stripping of the
parking spaces on Parkway Circle and a cross -walk on the North side of Parkway Circle.
12. Release and Indemnification of the First Land Company hereby releases and shall
indemnify First and Travelers Insurance Company ( "Travelers ") from any claims or causes
of action of Land Company against First's predecessor in interest, ATravelersn, for or
relating to costs or expenses of the Central Parking Area or the New Driveway for the
period prior to First acquiring an interest in the properties benefitted by the Central
Parking Area or the New Driveway;. provided, however, that in the event that Travelers
commences litigation or other legal proceedings against Land Company; Land Company
reserves the right to defend and raise any counterclaims against Travelers.
13. Termination of Declaration of Covenants Regarding Traffic Control Signals The
City hereby releases and terminates the Declaration of Covenant, and Construction
Agreement for a Traffic Control Signal, dated October 3, 1983, filed April 12, 1984, as
Document No. 157202211.
14. No Merger This Sixth Amendment to Easement Agreement shall not merge with any
deed or instrument of conveyance and shall survive the same.
15. Incorporation of Recitals The recitals contained in this Sixth Amendment to Easement
Agreement are hereby incorporated by reference herein as if fully set forth.
16. Conveyance of Central Parking Area Simultaneously with the execution and delivery
of this Sixth Amendment to Easement Agreement, Land Company shall execute and
deliver a warranty deed to First conveying marketable title to the Central Parking Area.
17. Acknowledgement by City The City hereby acknowledges and states that there are no
outstanding obligations to the City in the form of payment of monies or the construction
of improvements by First or Land Company by or because of ownership of any real
property described on Exhibit A attached 'hereto or the Central Parking Area, except as
specifically set forth in this Sixth Amendment to Easement Agreement and except for
taxes and special assessments now or hereinafter due. In addition, the City hereby
acknowledges that the properties owned by First described on Exhibit A attached hereto
=M ` -,= 6
are as of the Effective Date in compliance with the zoning and parking laws and
ordinances of the City.
18. Consent of Mortgagee The First National Bank of Chicano, holder of a mortgage
on the properties described on Exhibit A attached hereto owned b}' First, hereby joins in
this Sixth Amendment to Easement Agreement and agrees to be bound by all of the
terms, covenants, conditions and easements contained in this Sixth Amendment to
Easement Agreement, and consents thereto.
19. Pavment by Land Companv to First upon execution of this Sixth Amendment to
Easement Agreement, Land Company shall pay to First the sum of $47,000.00.
20. No Other Changes Except as specifically provided in this Sixth Amendment to
Easement Agreement, the Easement Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force
and effect.
21. Representation of Ownership The parties hereto, except the City, hereby covenant
and represent to each of the parties hereto that they are the record owners of the real
property as set forth and described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof
by reference, and that said real property is not subject to any mortgages, deeds of trust,
or contracts for deed, except as set forth in Exhibit A.
22. Covenants Run With the Land This Sixth Amendment to Easement Agreement shall
run with the land as described in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and made a part
hereof by reference, and shall be for the benefit of and binding upon the parties hereto,
their respective successors and assigns, including mortgagees of the property subject
hereto upon foreclosure, deed in lieu or foreclosure or other acquisition of ownership of
any such property, but the parties hereto, their respective successors or assigns, shall
accrue and bear personal liability for the performance of the obligations and covenants
set forth herein or in the Easement Agreement only during such times that they hold title
to the respective tracts of land described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and all such
liabilities and obligations incurred after any transfers thereof shall accrue solely to the
transferee.
23. Notices Any notice, demand request or other communication which may or shall
be given or served by any party hereto to or on another party hereto shall be deemed to
have been given or served on the date the same is deposited with a nationally recognized
overnight courier or in the united States mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid, in
either case addressed as follows:
If to City: City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55429
==:_ = ,= 7
With a Copy to:
Charles L. LeFevere, City Attorney
s
Holmes & Graven, Chartered
470 Pillsbury Center
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
If to Land Company: Shingle Creek Land Company
c/o Brookstone Real Estate Services, Inc.
3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 207
Edina, MN 55435
With a Copy to:
James Richardson & Sons, Ltd.
Richardson Building
One Lombard Place
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3BOY 1
Canada
Attention: David Fraser
If to First: First Industrial, L. P.
c/o First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc.
7615 Golden Triangle Drive, Suite N
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Attention: General Manager.
With a Copy to:
Barack, Ferrazzano, Kirschbaum &
Perlman
333 West Wacker Drive, Suite 2700
Chicano, Ill. 60606
Attn: Howard A. Nagelberg and Suzanne
Bessette -Smith n
If to PREP: Plaza Real Estate Partners
c/o Brookstone Real Estate Services, Inc.
3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 207
Edina, MN 55435
With a Copy to:
James Richardson & Sons, Ltd.
Richardson Buildlne
One Lombard Place
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3BOYI
Canada
Attention: David Fraser
or to such other address as the respective parties may from time to time designate by
notice given ten (10) days prior to the effective date of such change of address, in the
manner above provided.
_= - 9
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be duly
executed as of the date first written above.
SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY, a MINNESOTA STATE HIGH SCHOOL
Minnesota general partnership LEAGUE. a Minnesota non - profit
corporation
By
Its General Partner By
Its
FIRST INDUSTRL4L, L.P., a Delaware
limited partnership
THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF
By: First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc., CHICAGO
a Maryland corporation and
its sole general partner
By
By Its
Its
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
By
Its Mayor
By
Its City Manager
PLAZA REAL ESTATE PARTNERS, A
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Minnesota
limited partnership
By
Its
STATE OF )
} SS.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _day of 1995, by
the general partner of Shingle Creek Land Company, a general
partnership under the laws of Minnesota, by and on behalf of said partnership.
Notary Public
STATE OF )
) SS.
COUNTY OF }
The.foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this - day of 1995, .
by the of First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc..,; a
Maryland corporation, the sole general partner of First Industrial, L. P., a limited partnership
under the laws of Delaware, by and on behalf of said partnership.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUMI - Y OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1995;
by and , the Mayor and City Manager, respectively,
of The City of Brooklyn Center, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, by and
on behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
_vh - . 1
STATE OF }
SS.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 1495, by
the general partner of Plaza Real Estate Parmers, a limited partnership under
the laws of Minnesota, by and on behalf of said partnership.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA }
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPLIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1995,
by the of Minnesota State High School League, a non -profit
corporation under the laws of Minnesota, by and on behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF }
SS.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this - day of. 1995,
by , the of The First National Bank of Chicago, a corporation under
the laws of the United States, by and on behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
This document drafted by:
HOLMES & GRAVEN, CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury Center
Minneapolis, MN 55402 (LMW)
BR 305 -46
-_:_
12
EXHIBIT A
LA'_vDS D REGISTERED LAND SURVEY
NO. 1564. REGISTERED LAND SURVEY
NO. 1572, A ND REGISTERED LAND SURVEY
NO. 1619 OWNED BY THE PARTIES AS OF THE
DATE OF THIS SIXTH AMENDMENT TO EASEMENT
AGREEMENT AND MODIFICATION OF DECLARATIONS
OF PARKING
FIRST INDUSTRIAL, L.P. Tracts A. B, and C, Registered Land Survey
No. 1564; Tracts C and G, Registered Land
Survey No. 1572
SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY Tract A. Registered Land Survey No.
1572; Tract B, Registered Land
Survey No. 1619
PLAZA REAL ESTATE PARTNERS, A
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1572
MINNESOTA STATE HIGH SCHOOL
LEAGUE Tract A, Registered Land Survey No.
1619
MORTGAGEES
CITICORP REAL ESTATE, INC. Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1572
COMMERCIAL STATE BANK LNT ST. PAUL Tract A, Registered Land Survey No.
1619
THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CHICAGO Tracts A, B, and C, Registered Land
Survey No. 1564; Tracts C and G,
Registered Land Survey No. 1572
EXIIIBIT 11
Pursuant to III of Exhibit I3, attached to and made a part of the instrument entitled, "Second Amendment to Fasement
Agreement and Declaration," dated August 13, 1984, filul as Document No. 1597790. Files of the Registrar of 'Titles
( "Second Amendment "), said Exhibit 13 of the Second Amendment is hereby amended to read as follows:
Current Central 'Total Central Parking;
Proposed Parking; Area Building; Area: Pro -Rata
Name of Building No. Parcel of Allocation Proposed Share of Costs
Building; (honer land Made hereby Square Feet and Expenses
(RCM Plaza) lU 'Tract 13 118 74,699 41%
First Industrial, L.P. RLS 1.564
(Shingle Creek II) 11 Tract A 49 70,246 17%
First Industrial, L.P. RLS 1564
(N /A) 12 'Tract A 0 0 0
Shingle Creek Land RLS 1572
Company, a Minnesota
general partnership
(Parkway Place) 14 'Tract G 121 70,000 42%
First Industrial, L.P. RLS 1572
(Ramada Ilotel) Ilotel Site Tract 13 O 0
Plaza Real Estate Partners, a RLS 1572
Minnesota general
partnership
TO'T'ALS 288 100%
('Tract C, RLS 1564 and "Tract C, RLS 1572 - owner is: First Industrial, L.P.
EXHIBIT C
PARKING EASEMENT OVER A PORTION OF TRACT A.
REGISTERED LAND SURVEY N0. 1572, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MLN NESOTA
CONSENT AND JOD DER
Commercial State Bank in St. Paul, holder of a mongage on a portion of the property
subject to the foregoing instrument, hereby consents and joins in the foregoing instrument so as
to subject it interest thereto.
COMMERCIAL STATE BANK IN
ST. PAUL
By
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
SS.
COUNTY OF }
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
1995, by , the of Commercial State Bank in St. Paul, ,a
banking corporation under the laws of Minnesota, by and on behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
:: -4 . 16
CONSENT AND JOD� DER
Citicorp Real Estate, Inc., holder of a mortgage on a portion of the property subject to the
foregoing instrument, hereby consents and joins in the foregoing instrument so as to subject it
interest thereto.
CITICORP REAL ESTATE, INC.
By
Its
STATE OF )
SS.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
199 by the of Citicorp. Real . Estate,. -Inc., a
corporation under the laws of , by and on behalf of said
corporation.
Notary Public
17
Section 35 -208 REZONING EVALUATION POLICY AND REVIEW GUIDELINES.
1. Purpose
The City Council finds that effective maintenance of the comprehensive planning and land use
assifications is enhanced through uniform and equitable evaluation of periodic proposed
Zoning Ordinance, and for this purpose, by the adoption of Resolution No. 77 -167, the City Council has
established a rezoning evaluation policy and review guidelines.
2. Policy
It is the policy of the City that: a. zoning classifications must be consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan, and b. rezoning proposals shall not constitute "spot zoning ", defined as a zoning decision, which
discriminates in favor of a particular landowner, and does not relate to the Comprehensive Plan or to
accepted planning principles.
3. Procedure
Each rezoning proposal will be considered on its merits, measured against the above policy and
against these guidelines, which may be weighed collectively or individually as deemed by the City.
4. Guidelines
a. Is there a clear and public need or benefit?
b. Is the proposed zoning consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classifications?
0 C. Can all permitted uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the
subject property?
d. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in the area since the subject
property was zoned?
e. In the case of City- initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident?
f. Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed
zoning districts?
g. Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district, with
respect to size, configuration, topography or location?
h. Will the rezoning result in the expansion of a zoning district, warranted by: 1. Comprehensive
Planning; 2. the lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district; or 3. the best
interests of the community?
i. Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual
parcel?
Section 35-208
Revised 2 -95
Section 35 -355 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
Subdivision Z Purpose.
The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) district is to promote
flexibility in land development and redevelopment, preserve aesthetically
significant and environmentally sensitive site features, conserve energy and
ensure a high quality of design.
Subdivision 2. Classification of PUD Districts; Permitted Uses; Applicable
Regulations.
a. Upon rezoning for a PUD, the district shall be designated by the letters
"PUD" followed by the alphanumeric designation of the underlying zoning
district which may be either the prior zoning classification or a new
classification. In cases of mixed use PUDs, the City Council shall,
whenever reasonably practicable, specify underlying zoning
classifications for the various parts of the PUD. When it is not
reasonably practicable to so specify underlying zoning classifications,
the Council may rezone the district, or any part thereof, to "PUD -
MIXED."
b. Regulations governing uses and structures in PUDs shall be the same as
those governing the underlying zoning district subject to the following:
1. Regulations may be modified expressly by conditions imposed by the
Council at the time of rezoning to PUD.
2. Regulations are modified by P Y implication only to the extent necessary
to comply with the development plan of the PUD.
3. In the case of districts rezoned to PUD - MIXED, the Council shall
specify regulations applicable to uses and structures in various
parts of the district.
C. For purposes of determining applicable regulations for uses or
structures on land adjacent to or in the vicinity of the PUD district
which depend on the zoning of the PUD district, the underlying zoning
classification of PUD districts shall be deemed to be the zoning
classification of the district. In the case of a district zoned PUD -
MIXED, the underlying zoning classification shall be deemed to be the
classification which allows as a permitted use any use which is
permitted in the PUD district and which results in the most restrictive
regulation of adjacent or nearby properties.
Subdivision 3. Development Standards.
a. A PUD shall have a minimum area of one acre, excluding land included
within the floodway or flood fringe overlay districts and excluding
existing rights -of -way, unless the City finds that at least one of the
following conditions exists:
35 -355
1. There are unusual physical features of the property or of the
surrounding neighborhood such that development as a PUD will conserve
a physical or terrain feature of importance to the neighborhood or
community;
2. The property is directly adjacent to or across a public right -of -way
from property which previously was developed as a PUD and the new PUD
will be perceived as and function as an extension of that previously
approved development; or
3. The property is located in a transitional area between different land
uses and the development will be used as a buffer between the uses.
b. Within a PUD, overall density for residential developments shall be
consistent with Section 35 -400 of this ordinance. Individual buildings or
lots within a PUD may exceed these standards, provided that density for
the entire PUD does not exceed the permitted standards.
C. Setbacks, buffers and greenstrips within a PUD shall be consistent with
Section 35 -400 to 35 -414 and Section 35 -700 of this ordinance unless the
developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser
standard should be permitted with the addition of a screening treatment or
other mitigative measures.
d. Parking provided for uses within a PUD shall be consistent with the
parking requirements contained in Section 35 -704 of this ordinance unless
the developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser
standard should be permitted on the grounds of the complementarity of peak
parking demands by the uses within the PUD. The City may require
execution of a restrictive covenant limiting future use of the property to
those uses which will continue this parking complementarity, or which are
otherwise approved by the City.
Subdivision 4. General Standards.
a. The City may allow more than one principal building to be constructed on
each platted lot within a PUD.
b. A PUD which involves only one land use or a single housing type may be
permitted provided that it is otherwise consistent with the purposes and
objectives of this section.
c. A PUD may only contain uses consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
d. All property to be included within a PUD shall be under unified ownership
or control or subject to such legal restrictions or covenants as may be
necessary to ensure compliance with the approved development plan and site
plan.
35-
355
e. The uniqueness of each PUD requires that specifications and standards
for streets, utilities, public facilities and the approval of land
subdivision may be subject to modifications from the City Ordinances
generally governing them. The City Council may, therefore, approve
streets, utilities, public facilities and land subdivisions which are
not in compliance with usual specifications or ordinance requirements
where it is found that such are not required in the interests of the
residents or of the City.
Subdivision 5. Application and Review.
a. Implementation of a PUD shall be controlled by the development plan.
The development plan may be approved or disapproved by the City Council
after evaluation by the Planning Commission. Submission of the
development plan shall b�- made to the Director of Planning and
Inspection on such forms and accompanied by such information and
documentation as the City may deem necessary or convenient, but shall
include at a minimum the following:
1. Street and utility locations and sizes;
2. A drainage plan, including location and size of pipes and water
storage areas;
3. A grading plan;
4. A landscape plan;
5. A lighting plan;
6. A plan for timing and phasing of the development;
7. Covenants or other restrictions proposed for the regulation of the
development;
8. A site plan showing the 'Location of all structures and parking
areas;
9. Building renderings or elevation drawings of all sides of all
buildings to be constructed in at least the first phase of
development; and
10. Proposed underlying zoning classification or classifications.
Such information may be in a preliminary form, but shall be sufficiently
complete and accurate to allow an evaluation of the development by the
City.
35 -355
e. Prior to construction on any site zoned PUD, the developer shall execute
a development agreement in a form satisfactory to the City.
f. Applicants may combine development plan approval with the plan approval
required by Section 35 -230 by submitting all' information required for
both simultaneously.
g. After approval of the development plan and the plan approval required by
Section 35 -230, nothing shall be constructed on the site and no building
permits shall be issued except in conformity with the approved plans.
h. If within 12 months following approval by the City Council of the
development plan, no building permits have been obtained or, if within
12 months after the issuance of building permits no construction has
commenced on the area approved for the PUD district, the City Council
may initiate rezoning of the property.
i. Any major amendment to the development plan may be approved by the City
Council following the same notice and hearing procedures specified in
this section. An amendment shall be considered major if it involves any
change greater than that permitted by subdivision 5d of this section.
Changes which are determined by the City Council to be minor may be made
if approved by the Planning Commission after such notice and hearing as
may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission.
Member Commissioner Booth introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 95 -1
RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 95009 SUBMITTED BY
THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 95009
submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center proposes rezoning from
I -1 (Industrial Park) and C -2 (Commerce) to PUD /I -1 and approval
for a Planned Unit Development to accommodate appropriate common
parking areas for the properties located northwesterly of the
intersection of Shingle Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, this proposal includes the rezoning of the
properties addressed as 6601 and 6707 Shingle Creek Parkway
(Tract G, RLS 1572 and Tract A, RLS 1564 respectively); 6601 and
6701 Parkway Circle (Tract A, RLS 1572 and Tract B, RLS 1564
respectively); 2000, 2100 and 2200 Freeway Boulevard (Tract B,
RLS 1619, Tract A, RLS 1619 and Tract B, RLS 1572 respectively);
and the north and south portions of the central parking lot
(Tract C, RLS 1564 and Tract C, RLS 1572 respectively) and the
development of a new agreement for the purpose of creating
certain parking, driveway and access rights upon the above stated
properties; and
WHEREAS the Planning ommission held a duly called
g Y
public hearing on June 29, 1995, when a staff report and public
testimony regarding the Rezoning and Planned Unit Development
were received; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the
Rezoning and Planned Unit Development request in light of all
testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings
contained in Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the
provisions of the Planned Unit Development ordinance contained in
Section 35 -355, and in light of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center
Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council
that Application No. 95009 submitted by the City of Brooklyn
Center be approved in light of the following considerations:
1. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development
proposals are compatible with the standards,
purposes and intent of the Planned Unit
Development section of the City's Zoning
ordinance.
0
Planning Commission Resolution No.
2. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal
will allow for the utilization of land in question
in a manner which is considered compatible with,
complimentary to and of comparable intensity to
adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on
surrounding land.
3. The utilization of the property as proposed under
this Rezoning and Planned Unit Development
proposal will conform, for the most part, with
City Ordinance standards. Variation from the
parking requirement for the Hol P g q lid y Inn allowing
it to relinquish its rights to 65 parking spaces
allocated to it in the central parking lot is
justified based on a double counting of the
parking requirement and the experience of
approximately ten years which indicates no need
for the additional 65 parking spaces. A lesser
parking standard can be permitted also on the
grounds of the complementarity of peak parking
demands by the uses within the PUD.
4. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal
are considered compatible with the recommendations
in the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of
the Citv.
5. The Rezoning and Planned Unit Development appear
to be a good utilization of the central parking
facility and access road and can be considered to
be in the best interest of the community.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning
Advisor Commission to recommend commend to the City Council
Y that th e
Y
approval � h•
Of Application lication No. - 9009 be subject �.o the following
conditions and cons
1. The Sixth Amendment to Easement Agreement and
Modification of Declaration for Parking shall be
executed by all parties and be filed with the
titles to the property with the Register of Titles
at Hennepin County.
2. Approval of this Planned Unit Development
acknowledges the following uses within the
district:
a. a 20 percent office /30 percent industrial
occupancy of the Shingle Creek 11 building
located at 6707 Shingle Creek Parkway;
b. a 100 percent office occupancy of the RCM
Plaza building located at 6707 Parkway Circle;
c. the development of an 80,000 sq. ft. office
industrial building for General Litho approved
under Planning Commission Application No.
95004 at 6601 Parkway Circle;
d. a 60 percent of percent clinic /30
percent industrial occupancy of the building
known at Parkway Place, 6601 Shingle Creek
Parkway;
e. a hotel, restaurant, nightclub, meeting room
and ballroom use of the Holiday Inn, 2200
Freeway Boulevard;
f. a 100 percent office occupancy use for the
Minnesota State High School League office
building, 2100 Freeway Boulevard;
g. a restaurant use as proposed by County Harvest
Buffet approved under Planning Commission
Application No. 94014 at 2000 Freeway
Boulevard;
h. and a parking lot use of Tract C, RLS 1564 and
Tract C, RLS 1572.
Date Chairperson
ATTES .
Secretary
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by Commissioner Reem and
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: CC Chairperson Willson, Commissioner Reem, Commissioner Booth
and the follo voted against the same:
where upon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Commissio I r Booth stated on that remises he has n b'
p 0 objection to the motion on the
floor.
The motion passed unanimously.
The Secret noted that this matter will be referred to the City Council at the July 10, 1995,
meeting, H invited all to attend the Council meeting and thanked them for coming tonight
to provide ' put.
PLI AT . 95009 F BROOKLYN CENTE
Chairperson Willson introduced the next item of business, a request from the City of
Brooklyn Q nter for a rezoning from I -1 and C -2 to PUD/1 -1 and approval for Planned Unit
Development to accommodate appropriate common parking areas for the properties located
northwester of the intersection of Shingle Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard.
The Secre presented the staff report, used overhead transparencies to show the location
and detail see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 95009,
attached).
The Secre4ry advised this type of request is usually referred to the appropriate
Neighborho d Advisory Group; however, in this case the Planning Commission is the Group
for the Industrial Park Area. He further advised negotiations have been going on for some
time. This matter has been reviewed by the City Attorney and staff recommends approval
of the propcsed resolution.
Commission r Boeck questioned Page 5 which indicates the City will construct 20 parking
spaces. The Director of Community Development explained this is on the northeast corner
and part of he General Litho Plant. He clarified if the City does construct the parlang
spaces, the cost would be assessed to the General Litho Plant.
PU BLIC N G (APPLICATION No 9
Chairperson Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request for
rezoning fro I -1 and C -2 PUD/I -1 and approval for Planned Unit Development at 10;229
p.m.
There was a notion by Commissioner Boeck and seconded by Commissioner Booth to open
the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously,
Chairperson Willson asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the
Commission d called for any questions for the applicant or for anyone else to speak at the
public hearing. No one appeared to address this item.
C LOSE PQ LI C HEARIN
There was a raotion by Commissioner Booth and seconded by Commissioner Reem to close
the public he iring at 10:29 p.m. The motion passed unanimously,
6 -29 -95 9
i
ACTION RECOMMENDING A PPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 95009
(CI TY OF
BROOKL NTER
Commissiorler Booth introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption;
RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 95009 SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF
BROOKE CENTER
The Motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
Commissio r Reem and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Chiirperson Willson, Commissioners Booth, Reem, and Boeck, and the following
voted again , the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
The Secretay noted that the application will be referred to the City Council at the July 10,
1995 mee ting. g. The applicant is required to be present at the City Council meeting. If any
changes or n Lodifications are made to the plans prior to City Council consideration, they may
have to be brought back before the Planning Commission for review.
THER Bj" SS
Commission ,-r Reem questioned the debris pile by St. Alphonus Church. The Secretary
advised this is the staging area and part of the street reconstruction P ro'ects in the
Woodbine aid 71st Avenues area.
Chairperson Willson reported a violation in outdoor display at the SuperAmerica Store on
Highway and requested staff to inform the manager of the proper location.
Commissioner Booth questioned whether a permit was issued for the parking lot
improvement at Earle Brown Elementary, The Secretary explained it was not nece
since that the other construction projects,
pr )jest was approved as part of
Commissioner Reem questioned the standards or code requirements for maintenance of
commercial arking lots. The Director of Community Development advised staff has been
inspecting par 3dng lots.
Commission r Reem requested staff check the four foot deep hole by the LTA Theater which
has an unsta le fence. The Secretary advised this area is for the skimming device and staff
will determine whether/how it was to be fenced.
E
There was motion by Commissioner Boeck and seconded by Chairperson Willson to
adjourn the�ecting of the Planning Commission. The motion assed
Planning Co mission adjourned at 10:37 p.m. p unanimously, The
Chairperson
Recorded and transcribed by:
Carla Wirth
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial
6 -29 -95
10
i
3
Council Meeting Date 7 -10.95
City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Numbe
Request For Council Consideration
Item Description:
Planning Commission Application No. 95010 submitted by Robert L. Adelmann.
Department Approval:
Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zonin Sp i st
Manager's Review /Recommendation: •
No comments to supplement this report Comments
below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
• This application was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its June 29,
1995 meeting subject to conditions of approval.
Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached )
Planning Commission Application No. 95010 submitted by Robert L. Adelmann is a request
for Special Use Permit to install and operate a propane tank at Duke's Mobil, 6501
Humboldt Avenue North. This application was considered by the Planning Commission at
its June 29, 1995 meeting. Attached are minutes, information sheets and maps from that
meeting.
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 95010
Applicant: Robert L. Adelmann
Location: Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North
Request: Special Use Permit
The applicant is seeking a Special Use Permit to install and operate a propane tank at Duke's
Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North. The property in question is zoned C -2 (Commerce)
and is bounded on the north and west by R -5 (Multiple Family Residence) zoned property
containing the 102 unit Pines Apartment complex; on the east by Humboldt Avenue with the
Brooklyn Center High School on the opposite side; and on the south by Freeway Boulevard
with the Days Inn on the opposite side. A gas station, repair garage, car wash and
convenience store such as Duke's Mobil is a Special Use in the C -2 zoning district.
The applicant's proposal is to install and operate a propane tank and construct an opaque
enclosure for screening purposes. He proposes to locate the approximate 22 ft. by 10 ft.
enclosure on the green strip between the two drive ways along Humboldt Avenue. The plan
shows the edge of this green strip to be approximately 37 ft. from the property line. The
enclosure will be set back 25 ft. from the property line and be approximately 4 ft. 2 in. high.
Some shrubs will need to be relocated so that the enclosure can be located on the island.
Reinforced steel poles will need to be placed around the perimeter of the tank (but inside the
enclosure) to protect the tank from being struck by vehicles. The structure cannot be totally
enclosed, meaning there should be no top on the structure and some space around the lower
portions to allow proper ventilation of the propane.
The applicant has not indicated the material to be used for screening, however, it should be
compatible with the site. The location of the tank is such that attendants can see it from
inside the station. Personnel will need to be trained in all safety aspects of dispensing and
handling propane, which is highly volatile. Attendants will fill smaller propane tanks used
for barbecues, campers, etc. The applicant has met with the Fire Chief and further review
and approval of the plan by the Fire Chief is necessary prior to issuance of permits for the
location of the propane tank. The facility is similar to one located at Neil's Conoco on 69th
and Humboldt Avenues North.
Attached is a copy of the standards for Special Use Permit, Section 35 -220 Subdivision 2 of
the zoning ordinance. The granting of a Special Use Permit is to be consistent with these
standards. We do not believe that this proposal conflicts with these standards provided
proper screening and safety measures are provided by the applicant.
A public hearing has been scheduled for this application and notices have been sent.
6 -29 -95 1
RECOMMENDATION
The requested Special Use Permit appears to be in order and approval is recommended
subject to at least the following conditions:
1. The Special Use Permit is granted to the applicant to install and operate a propane
tank and dispensing facility with an opaque enclosure at 6501 Humboldt Avenue
North as provided in the plans submitted Any expansion or alteration of this
proposal shall require an amendment to this Special Use Permit.
2. The Special Use Permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and
regulations. Any violation, thereof, could be grounds for revocation.
3. Final building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official
with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of building permits.
4. The plans for the location and various safety items are subject to the review and
approval of the Fire Chief prior to the issuance of permits.
5. The enclosure is for the purpose of screening the propane tank and shall not have
signs affixed to it other than directional or warning signs specifically approved by
the Building Official or Fire Chief.
i
6 -29 -95 2
D ui L-01 t
New
bL + 0
�. NANDI� AMP —
7
w y
-- E W -1 Sure,
AU
nN
I
F K f Af Fv Cr d t+ :.7 L I16i H l !
Aoie
All � r
}� U M e7 e2 AV tl e N 0 STN
�ojZ-T�
�OpoL Dhc� i PT ► ot� I i �c�T- n� i
MNJUo elH
l U Low
o I,
!11 IIIIIii iii / /Ii /i111 /I /111■ "'
"�' X11111 Iir" ' ■ ��rii /I /111 /1 /■
/
r� �/� lilt /1���11 ■����■ ,,,
��■ /
V 4
MINE
m moll
MIN
ON
ON m
MIN
•
NO
I � • ,'�) ���' � 1 /. ��� ■■ ® ■■ ■ '111 1
-- ..,�„�,•.,J.,.__..._ * ���q
���' 1111 IIIl /�i ► ♦ ♦�♦ � _ _ ,.
��� � �♦� ♦� � �..� � / '_' 1111 111111 11111111]
11 /I 1 �♦�♦ ♦♦♦ � ♦ ♦♦ � ■, •�! _ � E�1 111■ r��111�■ : /'
•� t1 11i 111 ♦ ♦♦ ♦�� ♦��
., , ► ♦ ♦�� ♦♦ ; �� ♦ ♦�j ...,,, ..., � 111111! ■�����■ ■�r�
11.11111 ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦� i►�I ' ■1.11 1111 ■1111111■ NO "
� 11� ' ' � ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦' '��� 111111 � � i1�� �i11 ■ 111' /.� ii
■ r1 1111 ♦ ♦� ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�� ♦�,� ♦� 111 11 1 /
;��� ' ....... i /iii � Iii 111111 � ♦♦
1 11 1111 IIIO � t1r Iii ' ;,/
11'
looms
111111 '♦ °♦ ♦ 111,��
Mol
.: 1111 _ •�•�.�► ■
-11111 �■ 1 /II /i 111 /iii . , ., 11 •� : +� � .::: :,; .
■�i1 �� �i iii i
7 • � 1 �ii�Mnnvwac t ,1, ' • 1 ,
• Sri/ .. -. -
_ 1.. L49e of x14('
n
�
lu
-WALK' rA
HAN
-
I .
- 1
r - -
t +• +
Tr
L �_�-� - -- No�T14
I RTy.M30L DhG�I�(IoP1CKiTI NI:µ' - I? j
L�
0
Ta (AL ro I1J T Sl.O
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
•
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
JUNE 29, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairperson
Willson at 7 30 p.m,
ROLL CAL.9
Chairperson Tim Willson, Commissioners Donald Booth, Dianne Reem, and Graydon
B eck.
o Alsc present were the Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning and Zoning
Specialist Ronald Warren, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, Director of
Community evelopment Brad Hoffman, and Planning Commission Recording Secretaryy
Carla Wirth
Commission rs Mark Holmes, Robert Mickelson, and Kathryn Palm were excused from the
meeting.
ALFROVAI OF MINUTES - JU 15, 1995
There was motion by Commiss$oner Booth and seconded by Commissioner Reem to
approve the ninutes of the June 15, 1995 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. The
motion passed
C ' - R Q N 'S EXPLANATI
Chairperson Willson explained the Planning Commission is an advisory body. One of the
Commission 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 firal decisions in these matters.
The Secretary noted Agenda Item 7, 69th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard
Information eeting, has been published to begin at 8 p.m. He suggested, perhaps, Agenda
Items 6 and 7 can be reversed, if necessary, to meet that time schedule. The Planning
Commission concurred,
APPLI ATI N N . 95010 BERT L. ADE MAN
/ Chairperson Willson introduced the first item of business, a request from Robert L.
Adelman for a Special Use Permit to install and operate a propane tank at Duke's Mobil,
6501 Humbo dt Avenue N.
The Secret presented the staff report, used overhead transparencies t show p es o ow the location
. and detail (fee Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 95010,
attached).
6 -29 -95 1
r
i
Commissioner Booth ucstioned the number and laccmcnt of the steel re 9 p euzfor ement posts.
The Secretaiy advised it may be necessary to place them closer together and explained their
purpose is to prevent having a car .run into the propane tank. He suggested the Fire Chief
be asked for a recommendation prior to issuance of the permit.
Commissioner Boeck questioned on -site traffic movements and expressed concern the area
between the gas pump island and propane tank is not wide enough to accommodate traffic
movement us parking. The Secretary clarified the traffic sign currently posted on this
property are advisory directional signs at the owner's discretion. He suggested perhaps a
customer w" I park by the convenience store to alert the attendant they want to purchase
propane. 71 e attendant will then fill their propane tank and return to the convenience store
to make payment.
Chair Willson advised there are two painted designated parking spots by the propane
enclosure, The Secretary suggested a no parking area be designated along the propane tank
area. Co issioner Boeck stated he would support this suggestion.
Commissioner Boeck questioned off-site traffic movement attempting to turn from
Humboldt Avenue and Freeway Boulevard into this property and potential for accidents.
The Secret pointed out there is a turn lane for northbound Humboldt Avenue traffic.
. Commissioner Reem asked if the Fire Department is involved with training the propane
attendant, if the propane tank can be shut off from inside the building, or if the attendant
uses a key, e Secretary explained there is no training provided by the Fire Department.
The station ttendant will be trained by the employer to the industry standard on procedure
for filling the propane tanks. He clarified this is not a self -serve propane operation and the
windows in t�e convenience store will provide the station attendant with a line of visibility
to the propane enclosure.
Commission , r Reem asked if staf;: has received a response from any of the surrounding
residents. e Secretary advised notices were sent to the property owners, not the
apartment residents. He reviewed a similar propane operation which has operated
successfully and without incident for over ten years at Niel's Service Station.
PU HEAZINGIAPPLICATTON
Chairperson Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request for
Special Use ermit to install and operate a propane tank at Duke's Mobil, 4501 Humboldt
Avenue No , at 7:55 p.m.
There was a i lotion by Commissioner Boeck and seconded by Commissioner Booth to open
the public h ' g. The motion passed unanimously.
Chairperson Willson asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the
Commission.
Robert Adelman, applicant, explained how the propane dispensing system operates and that
this is not a �4 -hour operation but will take place only during normal convenience store
b -29 -95 2
i
• hours. He clarified the tank enclosure will be locked at all times and e valve is enclosed
within a cabinet so it cannot be accessed.
Chairperson Willson questioned whether the two designated parking spaces by the propane
enclosure can be eliminated and this area posted as a "Fire Lane ". Mr Adelman stated be
would have no objections to this and commented on the importance for having an open
circulation around the island areas. With regard to the steel reinforcement posts, Mr.
Adelman stated he will put in as many as recommended by the Fire Chief.
Chairperson Willson called for any more questions for the applicant or for anyone else to
speak at the public hearing.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
There was a motion by Commissioner Boeck and seconded by Commiss Reem to close
the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. The motion passed unanimously.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL O APPLI I N No. 95010 ERT
L. LMAN)
There was a motion by Commissioner Boeck and seconded by Corr missioner Booth to
recommend approval of Application No. 95010 submitted by Robert L Adelman subject to
the following conditions:
• 1. The Special Use Permit is granted 'to the applicant to i tall and operate a
propane tank and dispensing facility with an opaque enclosure at 6501 Humboldt
Avenue North as provided in the plans submitted. Any exp nsion or alternation
of this proposal shall require an amendment to this Special Use Permit.
2. The Special Use Permit is subject to all applicable co es, ordinances and
regulations. Any violation, thereof, could be grounds for revocation.
�. Final building plans are subject to review and approval b y he Building Official
with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of bu Iding permits.
4. The plans for the location and various safety items are subject to the review and
approval of the Fire Chief prior to the issuance of permits.
5. The enclosure is for the purpose of screening the propane ta. k and shall not have
$in$ gfixqd to it other than directional or warning signs sp cifically approved by
the Building Official or Fire Chief.
6. The area adjacent to the propane tank enclosure, between t e curb and the pump
island service area, shall be kept open for vehicle circulation and signed "No
Parking Fire Lane."
Voting in favor: Chairperson Willson, Commissioners Boeck, Booth and Reem. The
f motion passed unanimously.
6 -29 -95 3
The Secretary noted that this matter will be refcrred to the City Council at the July 10, 1995,
. meeting. 'jhe applicant is required to be present at the City Council meeting. I£ any
changes or r}rodifications are made to the plans prior to City Council consideration, they may
have to be nought back before the Planning Commission for review.
69TH A E NORTH AND BROOKLYN BOULEVARD INFORMATIONAL
MEETING
Chairpersor Willson introduced the second item of business, an informational meeting to
review plani for widening of Brooklyn Boulevard between I -94 and just north of 70th
Avenue No th and to also discuss and review a draft Request for Development Proposals
for the 69th Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard area.
The Secretary reported about 200 informational notices were sent out to people who will be
effected by 'ght -of -way acquisition, may potentially be effected by redevelopment proposals,
and may be within the area effected by the PUD and rezoning that will be necessary.
The Secretary explained the City has retained a consultant who will be looking at a request
for development proposals, once authorized by the Council, to seek developers for
redevelopm nt of three potential areas around Brooklyn Boulevard. He reviewed the three
areas identi led for redevelopment and reported staff has been approached by one group
interested ' senior housing on a portion of the St. Alphonus Church property.
The Secretary then introduced Tony Heppelmann, BRW, who provided a detailed
• explanation of the Brooklyn Boulevard improvements proposed by Hennepin County
estimated at $3 million. He explained there is $1.6 million from a Federal Grant and the
remaining $ .4 million will be funded by Hennepin county, Mn/DOT and Brooklyn Center.
He further cxplained there is also an enhancement project estimated to cost $500,000.
Chairperson Willson questioned why the east side is being considered for right -of -way
acquisition illstead of the west side. Mr. Heppelmann advised the primary considerations
are economi s, viability of existing business, and the ability to redevelop the property once
acquired.
In response to Commissioner Boeck, Mr. Heppelmann advised Hennepin County is the
jurisdictional agency and the City will be responsible for initiating negotiations for
acquisition Of right -of -way agreements and handle the enhancements along Brooklyn
Boulevard. If it is determined condemnations proceedings are required, Hennepin County
will be resporisible for that process.
Mr. Heppel ann reviewed the anticipated time schedule with the environmental assessment
being completed in 1995, right -of -way acquisition beginning in 1996, and construction
starting in 1997. One year has been provided for right -of -way acquisition.
The Secretarr advised it is a concern of the City to have as much time as possible to deal
with negotiat n and acquisition. He explained the Council will probably retain a consultant
• to negotiate ith property owners.
6 -29 -95 4
Council Meeting Date 7/10/95
City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Itcm Nwnber G
Request For Council Consideration
is Item Description:
Resolution Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of the Earle
Brown Days Committee
Department Approval:
&AJX I&AA)�N
Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk
Manager's Review/Recommendation: 4K
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
Pass a Resolution Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of the
Earle Brown Days Committee.
summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes
PPo g )
After Council approval of the attached resolution, each committee member will receive a Council
recognition certificate.
1995 Earle Brown Days Committee members
Judith Bergeland Bruce Neilson
Lori Buse Mary Nelson
Phil Cohen George Nerburn
Tony Ditty Dean Nyquist
Henry Dorff Sarah Pollock
Jackie Graham Larry Roen
Pat Holcomb Tom Slupske
Myrna Kragness Mary Welch
Kristen Mann Joelien Zastrow
•
�G
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATIONFOR
THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF THE EARLE BROWN DAYS
COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, the main goal of the Earle Brown Days Committee is to organize,
coordinate, and plan the activities of the Earle Brown Days celebration; and
WHEREAS, the Earle Brown Days Committee has been vital in the continuation
and success of the Earle Brown Days celebration; and
WHEREAS, their public service and civic effort for the betterment of the
community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and
WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that their service to the community should
be recognized and expressed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED b the City Council of the City of
Y Y Y
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the dedicated public service of the Earle Brown Days
Committee is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Deputy Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in
favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
i
Council Meeting Date 7/10/95
3 City of Br ooklyn Center Agenda Item Number
Request For Council Consideration
• Item Description:
DISCUSSION OF TABLED RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT,
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -11, CONTRACT 1995 -E, CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
SANITARY SEWER TRUNK RELINING
Department Approval:
Scott A. Brink, City Engineer
Manager's Review /Recommendation: • WW ow, w4ftw
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
Recommended City Council Action:
No recommended course of action is provided at this time.
• Summary Explanation: (supp documentation attached P ( pp g No )
Bids were previously opened for the above referenced project and considered at the June 26, 1995
City Council meeting. At that time, staff recommended that a contract be awarded to the second
low bidder, Insituform Central, Inc. in the amount of $788,791.20. This recommendation was
challenged by the low bidder, Lametti and Sons, Inc. The City Council subsequently tabled any
action on this contract until the July 10, 1995 City Council meeting, requesting further review by
the City Attorney and City staff.
Since that time, the City Attorney and staff have been working together and with Lametti and Sons.
Staff and the City Attorney have been reviewing all available information and working to attain as
much information as possible relating to the low bidder and their proposed product to be installed.
At this time, reliable and verifiable information regarding the low bidder's product reliability and a
satisfactory past performance record of their subcontractor (installer) have not yet been attained. No
recommended course of action is therefore provided at the time of this writing. Staff intends to
meet with the City Attorney and the low bidder again prior to the Council meeting and will provide
more information at that time regarding any recommended course of action.