The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1994 09-26 CCP Regular Session 4 au CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SEPTEMBER 26, 1994 7 p.m. 1. Call to Order . 2. Roll Call 3. Opening Ceremonies M77 4. Open Forum 5. Council Report 6. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda t -All items listed with an asterisk 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 in its normal sequence on the agenda. 7. Approval of Minutes: a. September 12, 1994 - Regular Session * b. September 13, 1994 - Special Session 8. Appointment of Election Judges. * a. Additional Election Judges for November 8, 1994, General Election ; 9. Public Hearing: (7 p.m.) a. Continued Public Hearing Regarding 1994 Proposed Special Assessment 1. Public Hearing Regarding Special Assessment for Knox /James & 54th Avenues Street Improvement Project No. 1994 -01 a. Resolution Certifying Special Assessment for Knox /James & 54th Avenues Street Improvement Project No. 1994 -01 to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls 10. a. Presentation and Discussion of Senior Housing Market Study (7:30 p.m.) 1. Resolution Accepting Senior Housing Market Analysis and Demand -� Estimates for Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 11. Planning Commission Items: a. Planning Commission Application No. 94010 submitted by BIMB, Inc. Request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into a lot and an outlot the 14+ acre site located on the west side of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of Hennepin County Library /Service Center. This application was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 15, 1994, meeting. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- September 26, 1994 b. Planning Commission Application No. 94011 submitted by Enterprise Rent -A -Car. Request for a special use permit to operate an automobile rental and leasing operation at the Boulevard Shopping Center 6211 through 6227 Brooklyn Boulevard. This application was recommended for approval by the Planning , Commission at its September 15, 1994, meeting. C. Planning Commission Application No. 94012 submitted by Robert L. Adelmann. Request for site and building plan approval and a special use permit to construct a 284 square foot addition to Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North. This application was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 15, 1994, meeting. 12. Discussion Items: a. North Metro Mayors Association Legislative Report b. 1995 Public Utility Rate Studies 1. Resolution Adopting the 1995 Water Utility Rate Schedule t . 2. Resolution Adopting the 1995 Sanitary Sewer Utility Rate Schedule 3. Resolution Adopting the 1995 Storm Drainage Utility Rate Schedule 4. Resolution Adopting the 1995 Water and Sanitary Sewer Hookup Rates S. Resolution Adopting the 1995 Recycling Rates C. Continued Discussion of Possible 1995 Bond Issue 1. Resolution Accepting Proposal for a Benchmark Survey and Other Services Relating to the Proposed 1995 Bond Issue d. Continuation of Discussion on Pilot Project as Requested by Councilmember Rosene for Public Call -In Line e. Discussion of Community Oriented Policing, Humboldt Substation, and School Liaison Officer Update 13. Resolutions: * a. Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Sergeant David Werner * b. Authorizing the Transfer of Cash and Investments from the General Fund and the Special Assessment Debt Service Fund to the Central Garage Internal Service Fund to Cover Unfunded Past Depreciation Resulting from Inflation * C. Authorizing the Transfer of Funds from the Capital Improvements Fund to the Economic Development Authority Fund CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- September 26, 1994 * d. Declaring Heritage Festival as a Civic Event from November 7 through 12, 1994 e. Approving Contract for School Liaison and D.A.R.E. Officer Services between the Anoka - Hennepin School District Number Eleven and the City of Brooklyn Center f. Amending Special Assessment Levy Roll Nos. 13131 and 13132 to Provide for the Award of Assessment Stabilization Grants ' * g. Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Calling for a Public Hearing, Improvement Project No. 1994 -19 (Shingle Creek Parkway Mill and Overlay) , * h. Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Trees (Order No. DST 09/26/94) * i. Providing for Deferment of One Special Assessment and Deleting that Assessment from Levy #13131 * j. Resolution Approving Purchase Agreement for Improvement Project Nos. 1992 -29 (Storm Water Treatment Pond) and 1993 -18 (MTC Park and Ride) * 14. Licenses E, 15. Adjournment Council Meeting Date September 26, 1994 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Numbe Request For Council Consideration Item Description: City Council Minutes - September 12, 1994 - Regular Session City Council Minutes - September 13, 1994 - Special Session Department Approval: Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk Manager's Review/Recommendation: g s No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Y P � Pp b ) F � r MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL O F THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN TIIE COUNTY OF HENNTEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 12, 1994 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Todd Paulson at 7:06 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Todd Paulson, Councilmembers Celia Scott, Dave Rosene, and Barb Kalligher. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, Finance Director Charlie Hansen, Community Development Specialist Tom Bublitz, City Attorney Charlie L.eFevere, and Council Secretary Barb Collman. Councilmember Kristen Mann was excused from tonight's meeting. OPENING CE REMONIES A. moment of silence was observed. OPEN FORUM Mayor Paulson noted the Council had received no requests to use the ope forum session this q v P e He inquired $• q ued if there was anyone resent who wished to address e p ess th Council. There being none, he continued with the regular agenda items. COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Paul son suggest Y ed the Council consider designating gnating a Community Spirit Night," to which Councflmembers and Staff could wear apparel from a local school or Brooklyn Center event. There was discussion on the matter. There was a motion by Mayor Paulson and seconded by Councilmember Scott to have Staff select a scheduled meeting to be designated "Community Spirit Night." The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGE NDA Mayor Paulson inquired if any Couneilmcmbcr rcqucstcd any items be removed from the consent agenda. No requests were made. 9/12/44 _ 1 _ i There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to approve the September 12, 1994, agenda and consent agenda as printed. The motion passed unanimously. APP S AUG T 22, 1994 - RE rI7T A 1 SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to approve the minutes of the August 22, 1994, regular session as printed. The motion passed unanimously. PROCLAM,4'I NS Member Celia Scott introduced the following proclamation and moved its adoption: PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPTEMBER 25 THROUGH OCTOBER 2,1994, AS MINNMSOTA CITIES WEEK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing proclamation was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. Member Celia Scott introduced the following proclamation and moved its adoption: PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPTEMBER 17 THROUGH 23, 1994, AS CONSTITUTION WEEK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing proclamation was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously: RESOLUTIONS RESOL N NO 94 179 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPOINTING CHARLIE HANSEN AS ALTERNATE TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF LOGIS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. 9/12/94 - 2 - RESOLUTION NO, 94 -180 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QUOTE AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO, 1994 -27, CONTRACT 1994 -N, ANNUAL SANITARY SEWER TV INSPECTIONS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOL.i 7TTON NO 94-181 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REJECTING BID FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994-15, ADA TRAIL, CURB CUTS AND PEDESTRIAN RAMPS, AND IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -23, MISCELLANEOUS SIDEWALK AND MEDIAN REPLACEMENT, CONTRACT 1994 -M The motion for the adoption of the. foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO .94-182 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -26, MODULAR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT REPLACENf NT AT LIONS, ORCHARD LANE, AND FIREHOUSE PARKS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO 94 -183 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption; RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROJECT, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -33, CONTRACT 1994 -P, MISCELLANEOUS REMOVALS, EXCAVATION AND CONCRETE CURBING The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. 9/12194 -3 RESOLUTION NO-94-184 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REQUESTING Mn/DOT TO MAKE IMPROVEMENT TO T.H. 252 0 WITHIN THE CITIES OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND BROOKLYN PARK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NQ, 94 -185 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 49/12/94) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO, 24 -185 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE AGREEMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROTECT NOS. 1992 -29 (STORM WATER TREATMENT POND) AND 1993 -18 (MTC PARK AND RIDE) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. Y RESOLUTION NO, 94 -187 Member Celia Scott introduced the following esoluti on and moved its adoption: ado g p RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO WRITE -OFF UNCOLLECTIBLE CHECKS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. I E There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to approve the following Iist of licenses: GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES Aspen Waste Systems, Inc. 2523 Wabash Avenue Walters Recycling and Refuse Service F.O. Box 49128, Blaine 9/12/94 -4- MEMANICAL SYSTEMS LBP Mechanical, Inc. 315 Royalston Avenue N. Northern States Power 414 Nicollet Mall Preferred Mechanical Services 712 W 77 1/2 Street Sharp Heating & A/C, Inc. 4854 Central Avenue NE RENTAL DWELLING Renewal: Joseph Brauer 6315 Brooklyn Boulevard Timothy Pfngsten 6706 Grimes Avenue N. Northwest Enterprises, Inc. 5533 James Avenue N. Delores Hanson 7210 Perry Court E. Michael Shapiro 5115 E. Twin Lake Blvd. Gregory Ray 3713 Urban Avenue N. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL. OF MINUTES - CONTTNUED AUGUST 15, 2994 - SPECIAL WORK SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to approve the minutes of August 15, 1994, special work session as printed. The motion passed. Councilmember Rosene abstained. AUGUST 19. 1994 - EMERGENCY SPECIAL SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to approve the minutes of August 19, 1994, emergency special session as printed. The motion passed. Mayor Paulson abstained. MAYORAL APPOIN'T'MENTS AD HOC COMMUNICATIONS TASK FORCE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR Mayor Paulson thanked. Dawn Sommers, who has resigned as chair of the ad hoc communications task force, for her work. He noted Member Bernie Gaffney has volunteered to assume the duties of chair and recommended his appointment. There was a motion by Councilmember Kalligher and seconded by Councilmember Scott to appoint Member Bernie Gaffney as chair of the ad hoc communications task force. The motion passed unanimously. 9112/94 -5- PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO THE T ATMENT OF UNITY PLACE (FORMERLY "TFiE PONDS" AS A LEASEHOLD COOPE ATIVE The City Manager recommended the public hearing be opened and then adjourned indefinitely until details on the matter can be completed. Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on the treatment of Unity Place (formerly "The Ponds ") as a Leasehold Cooperative at 7:11 p.m. There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Scott to adjourn the public hearing indefinitely pending completion of final documents. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 2 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter. Eileen Oslund, Chairperson of the Brooklyn Center Charter Commission, noted a first reading of the ordinance could be accomplished tonight but an ordinance can only pass by a unanimous vote of five and there are not five councilmembers present to vote. The City Attorney indicated he would have comments which the Council, Planning Commission, and City Charter Commission should review before adopting the ordinance. He also noted a public hearing is required but a first reading of the ordinance could be done at this meeting. Ms. Oslund stated the amendment to the charter would provide guidance on the selection process for vacant Council seats. She discussed the specific wording changes proposed to Section 2.05 of the City Charter. She also noted Subcommittee Chairperson Tony Kuefler and the councilmembers were consulted during the preparation of the proposed amendment. Councilmember Kalligher commented filling a vacancy by a special election would be an additional cost. Ms. Oslund explained the provision for a special election is currently part of the City Charter, so it is not a change. Councilmember Scott questioned Section 2.05b, No. 1. She expressed concern that 21 days Lu submit an application may not allow enough time to set up interviews before the interview schedule must be posted at the 25 -day marls. Ms. Oslund answered it is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application and obtain an interview schedule at whatever cost is necessary. 9/12/94 -6- Councilmember Scott stated at least a week should be planned for scheduling interviews as someone may be difficult to contact. It would be unfair for an applicant not to receive an interview. There was a discussion concerning whether scheduling of interviews could take place while applications were still being accepted. Since no waiting is required before scheduling interviews, it would be an ongoing process rather than a rushed attempt in four days. Councilmember Rosene concurred with Councilmember Scott it would be more appropriate to post the interview schedule after 28 days rather than 25 to allow for a group of applicants submitting applications at the last minute. Mayor Paulson noted, regarding Section 2.05b, No. 3(e), the counciimembers should be given freedom with regard to follow -up questions. Ms. Oslund commented careful structuring of the core questions should prevent an interviewer from feeling bound. Mayor Paulson said it is a good idea to have uniform questions but people have individual styles of questioning which should be allowed. Ms. Oslund explained an interviewer cannot revise a core question during the course of an interview; however, the interviewer can add to the core question and then each applicant must be revisited with that part of the question. She noted since the interviews will be open to the public, the questions will be public knowledge. Mayor Paulson asked whether First Amendment issues should be considered. The City Attorney said there is not a concern with the First Amendment, but there is a concern with the practicality of returning to other applicants with new questions. The City Attorney asked whether the measure of an unexpired term being one year or longer, as indicated in the amendment, is based from the time the vacancy occurs or the time the vacancy is declared by the Council. Ms. Oslund said that, generally speaking, if the unexpired term is longer than one year, it should be filled via an election. The City Attorney indicated it should specifically say the term is from the time the Council declares the vacancy. The City Attorney asked whether it was the City Charter Commission's intention for the amendment to take away the current discretionary choice of the City Clerk to call an election. Section 2.05 a. should specify the City Council rather that the City Clerk as calling a special election. He also expressed concern that if the Council were deadlocked and neither called an election or filled the vacancy, the City Clerk would be required to wait 45 days before calling the election. Currently, the charter outlines a deadline so this can't happen. Ms. Oslund said the City Charter Commission had not considered the Council might not act in either option. 9112/94 -7- The City Attorney questioned who would prepare the uniform application (Section 2.05 b. (1). Ms. Oslund said the Council would prepare it, possibly with input from the City Charter Commission. 0 The City Attorney recommended adding the requirement that the uniform application be approved by the City Council. There was a discussion of what conditions make applicant information non - public information and therefore protected under the Minnesota Data Practices Act. The City Attorney said race and age can be released under certain conditions. He suggested adding the statement that data requested is only data which would be published if the applicant were a City employee. In regard to Section 2.05 b., the City Attorney observed the deletion of Item No. 2 would address the issue of timing discussed earlier and would not upset the timelines outlined. He recommended the charter not specify a deadline for scheduling the interviews. Then, more latitude is allowed but the final schedule can still be met. The City Attorney spoke about the concept of core questions. He suggested a re -write to this portion of the amendment; for example, 'To the extent reasonably possible, questions posed shall be uniform." Ms. Oslund said the intention was to give flexibility to the interviewers but that the applicants should know what to expect. It would be an applicant's responsibility to obtain a list of core questions prior to the interview. The City Attorney expressed concern with Section 2.05 b. (4) because it says only one vote .can be cast by a councilmember. He indicated there could be a tie with no majority and a compromise would be needed. Ms. Oslund said the intent was to not eliminate an applicant. The City Attorney agreed to provide language to clarify that portion of the amendment. There was more discussion of the voting process and the elimination process. Ms. Oslund stated there should be language to handle both a small field of applicants and a large field of applicants. There was a motion by Couneilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to approve first reading of An Ordinance Amending Chapter 2 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter and to table the ordinance pending wording changes by the City Attorney and the City Charter Commission. The motion passed unanimously. 9/12/94 _ 8 - DISCUSSION ITEMS 1995 CITY MANAGER'S PRELIMINARY BUDGET AND PROPERTY TAX LEVY REPOR� The Finance Director reviewed the proposed 1995 budget calendar and outlined the report, including the factors which contribute to its complexity. He also reviewed the report of the Financial Commission. The City Manager presented a Resolution to Adopt the 1995 Preliminary Budget. There was a motion by Councilmember Kalligher to approve a Resolution to Adopt the 1995 Preliminary Budget. The motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Kalligher questioned the cost per household over a 12 -month period if an amount of approximately $100,000 were added to fund a police car and two officers. The Finance Director said a typical household would be charged $4.20 to support the $100,000 addition. The City Manager noted the total of $100,000 is derived from listing a police officer at $55,000, a police car at $20,000, and a code enforcement officer at $24,000. He reminded the Council a tax levy can be reduced later but cannot be increased later. Councilmember Kalligher indicated her preference was to set the amount higher at this point and reduce it later, if necessary. She felt the police car, police officer, and code enforcement officer need to be .included in the budget_ RESOLUTION NO, 94 -188 Member Barb Kalligher introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption with an amendment to add $100,000 to the total a-nou.nt: RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1995 PRELIMINARY BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave R n ose c. Mayor Paulson commented there are items he would like to see added to the budget. He added it is difficult to decide whether to raise the amount, as he would prefer there be a zero percent increase. Councilmember Rosen.- said his understanding is there is little room for play among the items currently on the budget. In other words, there is no fat to be cut. He suggested starting by raising the amount and then whittling it down since it is necessary, timewise, to take action. 9/12/94 , 9 _ Mayor Paulson said it is not possible to be certain since the actual budget is not yet available. He added he is eager to see the budget in the new format being used, which shows programs. He recommended amending the resolution to direct Staff to attempt to budget trim the dg at a later date. Councilmember Kalligher said it had been her intention that trimming would take place. Mayor Paulson said he would like to have the motion amended to include Staff should look for cuts which would bring the budget to a four percent increase or below. The City Manager said the purpose of the resolution is to set preliminary amounts, but details will be considered as the budget process is completed. Councilmember Kalligher stated the motion is to set the figure at $140,000 more than it is. Staff and Council will then study and attempt to cut it down. Mayor Paulson said he meant that Staff should recommend cuts. The motion passed unanimously. Therc was a motion by Councilmember Kalligher and seconded by Councilmember Rosone to adjourn the meeting of the City Council to be reconvened following a short meeting of the Economic Development Authority (EDA) and a short meeting of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA). The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 8:17 p.m. Mayor Paulson announced the City Council will canvass the primary election results on Tuesday, September 13, at 9 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Mayor Paulson reconvened the meeting of the Brooklyn Center City Council at 8:20 p.m. The City Manager presented a Resolution to Authorize a Preliminary Tax Levy for 1995 Appropriations for the General Fund, the Street Improvement Debt Service Fund, the EDA Fund, and the HRA Fund Budgets. $ESOLT -MON NO. 94 -189 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its .adoption: RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A PRELIMINARY TAX LEVY FOR 1995 APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND, THE STREET IMPROVEMENT DEBT SERVICE FUND, THE EDA FUND, AND THE HRA FUND BUDGETS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. 912/94 -10- ' The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving a Preliminary Tax Capacity Levy for the Purpose of Defraying the Cost of Operation, Providing Informational Service, and Relocation Assistance Pursuant to the Provisions of MSA 469.001 through 469.047 of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center for the Year 1995. RESOLUTION NO, 94-190 Member Barb Kalligher introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY TAX CAPACITY LEVY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PROVIDING INFORMATIONAL SERVICE, AND RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469.001 THROUGH 469.047 OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE YEAR 1995 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. FINAL 1995 BUDGE' CALENDAR There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to approve the 1995 Budget Calendar which schedules the original public hearing on the budget for Wednesday, December 7, 1994, and the reconvened public hearing date as Wednesday, December 14,1994, and also schedules Monday, December 19,1994, as the date of adoption of the final 1994 tax levy and final 1995 operating budget. The motion passed unanimously. PL;BLIC HEARING REGARDING 1994 PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSW.NTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL .COSTS The Director of Public Services explained these costs are associated with removals from 1993. There are two categories of levies — one where the total cost for removal is less than $300, and one where the total cost for removal is more than $300. Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing regarding special assessments for diseased tree removal costs at 8.23 p.m. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. Walter and Janelle Collier of 2319 Brookview Drive stated they are being assessed $1,409 for tree removal. The tree was removed in October 1993, but they purchased the property on March 15, 1994. Ms. Collier further indicated the previous owner of the property may have been in foreclosure. The Department of Veterans' Affairs took possession of the property on November 27, 1993. 9/12J94 Ms. Collier stated the tree may have been hit by lightning. She said the City had been taking care of the property. t Mr. and Ms. Collier commented they had no knowledge of the diseased tree and do not feel they have an obligation to pay for the tree removal as it was not their responsibility. Councilmember Scott asked whether it would be possible to bill the previous owner rather than the present owners. The City Manager said it is. He added it is probable that when the title to the property was exchanged there was not a check done for pending assessments. Ms. Collier said the Department of Veterans' Affairs administrator had taken over at that point. The City Manager suggested the Colliers' property be excluded from the Special Assessment Roll until farther information can be obtained. It is a property buyer's responsibility to research pending assessments. The role of the Department of. Veterans' Affairs in this matter is unclear and needs to be investigated. The Director of Public Services recommended Mr. and Ms. Collier review their house closing papers in regard to a special assessment search, then contact the firm which handled the closing. Ms. Collier said the Department of Veterans' Affairs did pay part of the assessment. The City Manager stated the City would be happy to work with the Colliers and to investigate the matter. Wanda Williams, 5524 Morgan Avenue North, said she also purchased her property from the Department of Veterans' Affairs and has experienced the same situation. Mayor Paulson told Ms. Williams the same coarse would be followed with her as with the Colliers. There was a motion by Councilmember Kalligher and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to close the public hearing at 8 :30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. RE OLUTION NO. 94191 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CBRTIFYINCz SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb KalIigher, and the motion passed unanimously. 9/12 -12. PUBLIC REARINQ REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DE_ LINQUENT PLIBLIC UTILITY REPAIR ACCOUNTS Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing regarding special assessments for delinquent public utility repair accounts at 8:32 p.m. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. No one came forward. There was a motion by Councilmember Kalligher and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to close the public hearing at 8:32 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Delinquent Public Utility Repair Accounts to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. RESOLUTION ION NO, 94 -192 Member Dave Rosene introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY REPAIR ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalli er and the motion d � passe unanimously. PUBLIC FEARING REGARDING SPEC ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS The Director of Public Services said the listed accounts are delinquent as of July 1, 1994. Thirty days were allowed to pay; some paid and some did not. The levies are for one year. Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing regarding special assessments for delinquent public utility service accounts at 8:33 p.m. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. No one came forward. There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to close the public hearing at 8:34 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Delinquent Public Utility Service Accounts to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. 9/12/94 - r RESO UTI N NO, 94 -193 Member Dave Rosene introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FQR WEED REMOVAL COSTS Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing regarding special assessments for weed removal costs at 8:35 p.m. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. Walter and Sanelle Collier, 2319 Brookview Drive, asked that the assessment on their property be reconsidered because, as with the assessment for diseased tree removal, they did not own the property at the time of the removal. Mayor Paulson said they could be removed from the roll pending further investigation. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to close the public hearing at 8:35 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Weed Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. 0 RESO UTION NO. 94194 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYL'vG SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES The City Manager said the charges are based on standard rates, but in this case the amount is lower because it was deferred. Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing regarding special assessments for public utility hookup charges at 8:36 p.m. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. 9/12/94 -14- No one came forward. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to close the public hearing at 8:36 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Public Utility Hookup Charges to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. RESOLUTION NO. 94-195 Member Dave Rosene introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEAEING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE NORTHWEST° STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO 1994 11 The Director of Public Services explained this .assessment relates to the area north of 69th Avenue North and west of Brooklyn Boulevard (near Willow Lane School), where work is in the final stages. The amount has been certified and notices sent. She noted this assessment is for street improvements, not utility improvements. The properties being assessed include one school, one park, and the rest residential. The assessment amount for residential properties is $1,550. Thirty -five applications for assessment stabilization grants have been received from residents, totalling 16 percent of the proposed assessment amount. Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing regarding special assessments for the Northwest Area Street Improvement Project No. 1994 -11 at 8:40 p.m. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. No one came forward. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to close the public hearing at 8:40 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for the Northwest Area Street Improvement Project No. 1994 -11 to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. 9112/94 RESOLUTION NO, 94 -196 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTHYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE NORTHWEST AREA STREET I_IN2ROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -11 TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL AS ESSMENTS FOR KNOX/JAMES & 54TH AVENUES STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NQ 1994 -01 The Director of Public Services stated these assessments are, again, for street improvements only. in this case, all the properties are residential so they are assessed $1,550 each. The City has received 21 applications for assessment stabilization grants, which accounts for 20 percent of the assessment amount. The City Manager noted the contractor has not completed satisfactory stump removal on one property. Councilmember Kalligher requested the removal of the mentioned property from the roll. Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the pu -pose of a public hearing regarding special assessments for Knox/James & 54th Avenues Street Improvement Project No. 1994 -01 at 8:43 p.m. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. No one came forward There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to close the public hearing at 8:44 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Knox/James & 54th Avenues Street Improvement Project No. 1994 -01 to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. RESOLUTION NO, 94 -197 Member Barb Kalligher introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR KNOXtJA fES & 54TH AVENUES STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NQ, 1994 -01 TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously. 9/12194 -16- 3 Mayor Paulson noted there will be a national clean -up week in October and suggested scheduling a community drive in conjunction with the program. He mentioned the Adopt -A Park program could be involved. The City Manager said he will contact Mayor Paulson concerning the matter. Al2SOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Kalligher and seconded by Councilmember Scott to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Todd Paulson, Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Barb Collman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 9/12/94 -17- 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 SEPTEMBER 13, 1994 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special session as an election canvass board and was called to order by Mayor Todd Paulson at 10:17 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Todd Paulson, Councilmembers Celia Scott, Dave Rosene, Barb Kalligher, and Kristen Mann. Also present was Deputy City Clerk Sharon Knutson. CANVASS OF ELECTION RETURNS The Brooklyn Center City Council proceeded to canvass the City election returns from the various City precincts, reporting ballots cast in the City of Brooklyn Center contests as follows: Office of M Ballot Count Myrna Kragness 1,545 Bob Peppe 1,459 Rod Snyder 978 Bill Hawes 404 Joe Tanner 281 Office of City Councilmember Ballot Count Debra Hilstrom 1,931 Phillip Roche 1,548 Kathleen Carmody 1,236 Bob Hock 1,069 Diane Lerbs 1,008 Michael A. Schwartz 730 Mary Ziskovsky 603 RESOLUTION NO. 94 -198 Upon completing the election canvass, member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REGARDING CANVASS OF SEPTEMBER 13, 1994, PRIMARY ELECTION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Barb Kalligher, and the motion passed unanimously. 9/13/94 -1- ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Barb Kalligher and seconded by Councilmember Kristen Mann to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council meeting adjourned at 10:18 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Todd Paulson, Mayor 9/13/94 -2- Council Meeting Date September 26, 1994 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Numbe Request For Council Consideration Item Description: Appointment of Additional Election Judges for November 8, 1994, General Election Department Approval: Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk Manager's Review/Recommendation: ��ti No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Appoint the following list of persons to serve as election judges for the 1994 General Election. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached . No ) The general election will be conducted on November 8, 1994. Precinct 1 Precinct 5 D- Loretta Huberty R -Roger Johnson D- Vickie Nurmi Precinct 6 Precinct 2 D- Deloris Cooper D- Vickie Harris Precinct 7 Precinct 3 R -John Andraschko R -Lois Holmes Precinct 8 Precinct 4 R- Thomas Jarvis R -Robert Ecklund R- Leontine Torkelson R -Ardis Fairchild R -Roger Peterson D -Dale Velander i Council Meeting Date 9/26/94 31 City 9 of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number / a/ • Request For Council Consideration Item. Description: PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR KNOX /JAMES & 54TH AVENUES STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -01 Department Approval: 6 � � � Diane Spector, Direct f Public Services Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended Cit y Council Action: Approve the resolution certifying the additional assessment. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached No ) The City Council at its September 12, 1994 conducted a public hearing regarding proposed special assessments for Improvement Project No. 1994 -01, Street Improvements, James /Knox and 54th. Following the public hearing, the Council removed one proposed assessment from the levy roll prior to adopting and certifying the roll. This assessment was against the property located at 5415 Knox Avenue N. The City's contractor and its subcontractor had not satisfactorily completed work relating to the removal of a tree stump, and had not replaced fill and laid sod. The contractor has completed all work to the satisfaction of the City and the property owner. I recommend the following procedure: 1) Council discussion 2) Continue public hearing to consider amending the adopted levy roll to add this assessment 3) If there are any further substantive objections to this proposed assessment, table further consideration of the assessment until a future date, pending further staff and Council review 4) If there are no objections to the proposed assessment, close the hearing and consider the resolution certifying this assessment to the Hennepin County Auditor q KJ'Q„ Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR KNOX /JAMES & 54TH AVENUES STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -01 TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed Special Assessment Levy No. 13131 for the following improvement: KNOX /JAMES & 54TH AVENUES STREET IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -01 WHEREAS, Special Assessment Levy No. 13131 was on September 12, 1994 approved by the City Council; and WHEREAS, one proposed special assessment had been removed from the levy roll pending satisfactory completion of work by the City's contractor, said work now being 0 complete and accepted. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. Special Assessment Levy No. 13131 is hereby amended to add the following assessment: PID # Amount 02- 118 -21-44 -0021 $1,550.00 This shall constitute the special assessment against the land named herein. Said tract of land is hereby found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten (10) years as indicated on the assessment roll. The first of the installments to be payable with ad valorem taxes in 1995, and shall bear interest at the rate of nine (9) percent per annum for a period of fifteen months from October 1, 1994 through December 31, 1995. RESOLUTION NO. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he or she may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15, or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Date Todd Paulson, 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 9/26/94 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number 0 0- Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF SENIOR HOUSING MARKET STUDY Department Approval: Tom Bublitz, Community Development Specialist Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) I Earlier this ear, the Brooklyn Center y to City Council authorized the Maxfield Research Group, Y Y P> Inc., to conduct a market study to assist the City in determining the potential demand for senior rental housing in the City. The stud addressed the potential for senior housing at two specific sites the Willow Y Y P g P Lane area north of I -694 and south of 66th Avenue North, and the 69th Avenue /Brooklyn Boulevard redevelopment area. Maxfield Research Group, Inc., has completed the market study, a copy of which is included with this request for council consideration, and will be presenting the findings of this study at the September 26, 1994 City Council meeting. A resolution formally accepting the market y p g stud is also included with this request form. Y q Recommended City Council Action: Staff recommends approval of the Resolution Accepting Senior Housing Market Analysis and Demand Estimates for Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING SENIOR HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS AND DEMAND ESTIMATES FOR BROOKLYN CENTER MINNESOTA WHEREAS, by City Council Resolution No. 94 -8, the Brooklyn Center City Council accepted a proposal from the Maxfield Research Group, Inc., to prepare a market study to address the demand for moderate rent senior housing in the City of Brooklyn Center, including a focus on the suitability of senior housing in the south Willow Lane area of the City; and WHEREAS, Maxfield Research Group, Inc., has submitted to the City of Brooklyn Center a market study titled "Senior Housing Market Analysis and Demand Estimates for Brooklyn Center, Minnesota"; and WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council has reviewed the market study prepared by the Maxfield Research Group, Inc. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the recommendations contained in the senior housing market study prepared by the Maxfield Research Group, Inc., and titled "Senior Housing Market Analysis and Demand Estimates for Brooklyn Center, Minnesota" are hereby accepted. Date Todd Paulson, 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. 1 1 1 ,1 Senior Housing Market Analysis 1 and Demand Estimates for 1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota i i 1 1 Prepared for.- i City of Brooklyn Center 1 June 1994 1 MAXFIELD 1 RESEARCH GROUP 1 1 E 1 620 KICKERNICK, 430 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 1 i 1 o a„ A N j June 28, 1994 Mr. Tom Bublitz City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 ' Dear Mr. Bublitz: We are pleased to present to you the attached study of senior housing need for the City of Brooklyn Center completed by Maxfield Research Group, Inc. Our research ' indicated substantial growth in the senior household base in Brooklyn Center through 2000, with additional growth likely after that. This will result in a need for additional senior housing in Brooklyn Center to serve seniors with a wide range of needs and desires, particularly since existing senior projects in the market are at full occupancy. We project that Brooklyn Center could support an additional 125 to 175 units of ' senior housing units from 1995 to 2000, depending on the level of market rate senior housing construction in the remainder of the study area. The primary demand seg- ments are seniors with low- to middle- incomes, most of whom could afford moderate ' or middle- market rents. Based on this, we believe that development of between 60 and 90 units of moderate -rent housing with few services is most appropriate at this time. A second project geared to more frail seniors and with higher rents could be considered instead, and in any case, should be developed by the end of the decade. Recommendations are presented in the Conclusions and Recommendations section at the end of the report. ' The site located in the proposed Willow Lane redevelopment area is not well - suited for development of senior housing. The potential for senior housing is greater in the proposed 69th Avenue /Brooklyn Boulevard redevelopment area due to closer proximi- ty to retail and community services. ' We have enjoyed completing this study for the City of Brooklyn Center and are avail- able to answer any questions you may have regarding our research. Please feel free ' to contact me if we can be any further assistance. Sincerely, ' MAXFIELD RESEARCH GROUP, INC. ' Thomas R. Melchior Director of Research f 1 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this study is to examine the demographic and market factors that 1 affect demand for senior housing in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota and recommend the types of housing product, if any, most appropriate to meet demand. 1 The scope of this study includes an analysis of growth trends and the demographic composition of the senior population and household base; interviews with social ser- vice workers and housing professionals; and an analysis of the local senior market 1 including data on rents, vacancies, and available services and amenities and pending senior housing projects in the area. Recommendations focus on senior housing de- 1 mand in Brooklyn Center. This report includes both primary and secondary research. Primary research includes community interviews and market data on the individual senior projects. Secondary 1 research is credited to the source when used, and is usually data from the U.S. Cen- sus or the Metropolitan Council. Secondary research is always used as a basis for analysis, and is carefully reviewed in light of other factors that may impact projections 1 such as residential building permit data or migration trends. All of the information on rental housing projects was gathered by Maxfield Research Group, Inc. and is accurate to the best of our knowledge. i 1!r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 METROPOLITAN SETTING History The development of the Twin Cities (Minneapolis -St. Paul) Metropolitan Area began during the 1820's with the establishment of Fort Snelling, a regional military outpost and gateway to the west. The region was inhabited prior to this time for thousands ' of years by Native Americans, primarily the Mdewakanton Dakota. During the 1850's and 1860's, St. Paul developed as a river port for goods being transported from the south because of its location on the Mississippi River. Minneapolis grew industrially ' by harnessing the power of St. Anthony Falls a few miles upriver from St. Paul. Minnesota was developed because of its natural resources. Forests supplied much of ' the lumber that helped build distant cities like Omaha and St. Louis. Agribusiness later assumed a greater importance economically, as virgin forests grew scarce after 1910. Aided by railroad development during the late 1800's, a grain and flour milling empire was established in the Twin Cities. Minneapolis became a destination point for grain distribution throughout the Upper Midwest and was the largest flour milling city in the world from the 1880's to the 1920's. The presence of two transcontinental railroads and access to river commerce helped the Twin Cities become a major wholesale distribution center serving as far away as the Pacific Northwest by the early 1900's. A substantial industrial base emerged as well, which helped fuel growth in the Twin Cities. Quality of Life Scandinavian and German immigrants, who replaced the French fur traders, settled in ' Minnesota and are often credited with fostering the conservative and hard - working at- mosphere of the Twin Cities. These traditions have resulted in a quality of life not found in many other large metropolitan areas across the country. ' Minnesota and the Twin Cities consistently rank near the top in national quality of life surveys. In both 1992 and 1993, studies conducted by Northwestern National Life Insurance Company ranked Minnesota as the healthiest state in America. In 1990, Working Mother magazine cited quality child care, good public schools, and abundant job prospects as three characteristics that make the Twin Cities "best for families" ' among major metropolitan areas in the United States. ' Economic and Business Climate Minneapolis -St. Paul began as an agribusiness center serving the Upper Midwest and ' the Pacific Northwest. The key industries economically were grain and flour milling, and many firms headquartered in the region -- such as Cargill, Farmer's Union Cen- tral Exchange, General Mills, International Multifoods, Land O' Lakes, Peavey, and ' Pillsbury -- now serve national and international markets. National League of Cities ' 2 ' and World Trade magazine ranked the Twin Cities among the top twenty metropolitan areas in the United States for international companies to do business and /or expand ' in North America in 1993. Minneapolis -St. Paul ranked seventh nationally among major metropolitan areas in the number of Fortune 500 industrial firms in 1993. Deluxe Check, General Mills, 3M, Honeywell, International Multifoods are a few selected firms headquartered in the region. Fortune Service 500 listed 17 local firms -- including Dayton- Hudson, Northern ' States Power, Norwest Bank, and First Bank System -- in 1992. Forbes 400 listed 10 local privately -held firms -- including Cargill (the nation's largest private company), Northwest Airlines (the nation's fourth largest airline), Carlson Companies, Holiday Companies, and National Car Rental -- in 1992. Many of the jobs at these firms are non - manufacturing jobs, and particularly administrative services jobs. ' Minneapolis -St. Paul has grown and will continue to grow because of its role as the financial center of the Upper Midwest. A number of nationally recognized companies are headquartered in the region including IDS, Minnesota Mutual Life, Northwestern National Life, and The St. Paul Companies. Minneapolis is also home to the Ninth Federal Reserve District. The growing regional and national importance of the local financial sector has kept the local economy expanding at or above the national rate, while insulating it from major economic slowdowns. Cray Research, Ceridian (previously a part of the former Control Data Corporation) and Unisys are among the largest manufacturers in the Twin Cities. They comprise a portion of the substantial base of high -tech companies in the region. Although total employment in the industry has declined slightly over the past several ears, employ- Y g Y P Y ment in research and production facilities has stemmed industry losses. St. Jude Medical, Medtronic Incorporated, and the University of Minnesota Hospital are developing medical technologies and providing health care in the Twin Cities that is recognized throughout the United States. Other start -up companies are also being created in the region, and medical technology entrepreneurs are featured quite often in local and national news publications. In addition, the world- renowned Mayo Clinic ' is in nearby Rochester. Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) were pioneered in Minnesota and covered roughly one - fourth of the state's population in 1993, ranking second in the nation to California. Only seven percent of the state's population lacked health insurance in 1992. A national survey of health insurance costs in fifteen large cities conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1992 found that only Seattle, Washington had lower per employee health costs than Minneapolis -St. Paul. The metropolitan area also has a strong retail environment. Mall of America (which ' is located in Bloomington), the nation's largest retail /entertainment complex, will be two years old in August 1994. The "mega mall" has over four million square feet and ' is anchored by Bloomingdales, Macy's, Nordstrom, and Sears. It also features an amusement park with 20 rides, a multi -plex theatre with 14 screens, 22 restaurants, and nearly 400 stores. An estimated 35 to 40 million people visited the "mega mall" in its first year of operation (August 1992 to August 1993). 3 i Minneapolis -St. Paul and their surrounding suburbs will remain the economic heart of Minnesota in the foreseeable future, growing faster than the state average through the ' rest of the 1990's and into the 2000's. In addition, the local economy is expected to grow faster than the national average (at least in the short - term). The metropolitan area should continue to drive economic growth in the Upper Midwest. Transportation Minneapolis -St. Paul is a regional transportation center for the Upper Midwest. As noted previously, railroads and river commerce greatly influenced early development ' in the Twin Cities. Today, the metropolitan area is served by air, barge, rail, and ground transportation. The Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport is a modern facility located within fifteen minutes of both downtown areas. On weekdays, roughly 650 to 700 scheduled domestic and international flights are available out of the airport. Another terminal building recently opened which serves a considerable number of chartered domestic and international flights. The airport served 23.4 million passengers and accommo- dated over 322,000 metric tons of cargo in 1993. Northwest Airlines (based locally), fourteen other airlines, and ten regional /commuter airlines provide passenger service from the Twin Cities. The Mississippi River runs through the metropolitan area. The central continental river system provides access to Pennsylvania to the east, Nebraska to the west, and Louisiana and the Gulf of Mexico to the south. At last count, ten barge lines had offices in the Twin Cities. (Some may go under as a result of the Flood of 1993). Soo Line Railroad maintains its headquarters in Minneapolis, and Burlington North- ern was founded in and still maintains major facilities in St. Paul. Burlington North- ' ern, in terms of market value and profitability, ranks among the top three railroads in the United States. Twelve other railroads also have offices in the Twin Cities. Minneapolis -St. Paul is located at the junction of two major interstate highways. Interstate 35 runs north -south from Duluth, Minnesota to Laredo, Texas. Interstate 94 connects with Interstate 90, which runs east -west from Seattle, Washington to Bos- ton, Massachusetts. Several trucking firms serve the metropolitan area, providing overnight service to other midwestern cities and five day service to coastal markets. Employment ' Table 1 shows the number of jobs in the seven- county Twin Cities Metropolitan Area for nine sectors from 1980 to 1992. Total covered employment grew by approximately 242,600 jobs (over 23.0 percent) during the 1980's, to roughly 1,282,400 jobs in 1990. The largest numerical increases occurred in Services and Trade (116,000 and 56,000 jobs, respectively), while the rate of increase was greatest in Services (52.7 percent) and Agriculture (50.0 percent). FIRE (Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate) also ex- perienced rapid growth. Services passed both Manufacturing and Trade during the 4 ' decade -- primarily because of growth in health care and business /personal services -- and is now the largest sector in the region. Total covered employment fell slightly during 1991 but rebounded during 1992, particularly in Services. TABLE 1 SEVEN - COUNTY TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA COVERED EMPLOYMENT (000's) 1980 to 1991 Change 1980 -1992 Sector 1980 1985 1990 1991 1992 No. Pct. Agriculture 4.6 5.6 6.9 6.9 7.0 2.3 50.0 Mining 0.7 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.4 -0.3 -42.9 Construction 44.3 44.4 47.6 45.0 44.7 3.3 7.4 Manufacturing 244.4 250.1 250.9 2493 247.0 4.9 2.0 TCU 54.8 60.0 69.5 70.1 70.2 15.3 27.9 Trade 264.1 287.6 320.1 313.5 316.5 49.4 18.7 FIRE 68.5 81.8 94.3 97.2 99.8 28.7 41.9 Services 220.2 266.8 336.2 334.2 354.0 114.0 51.8 Government 138.2 136.1 156.4 159.5 161.7 21.3 15.4 Total 1,039.8 1,133.2 1,282.4 1,276.1 1,301.3 236.2 22.7 ,• Unemployment Rate 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.5 4.4 N/A N/A 1 TCU - Transportation, Communications, Utilities Z FIRE - Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate Sources: Research Statistics Office, Minnesota Department of Jobs and Training Maxfield Research Group, Inc. Table 1 shows the annual average unemployment rate in the seven - county Twin Cities Metropolitan Area from 1980 to 1992. The local average has consistently been below ' the national average, generally fluctuating around four percent. After reaching a high of 6.4 percent in 1983 due to lingering effects of the national recession in 1981 -1982, the unemployment rate dropped to 4.2 percent in 1990. The unemployment rate was 4.4 percent in 1992. Minnesota ranks sixth nationally in growth of high -tech jobs since 1980, and more ' than one -third of the total work force is currently employed in "white collar" manage- ment or service jobs. The state's labor force is one of the most highly educated in the country, with more than four- fifths of all workers having completed high school. 5 Education 1 • Minnesota prides itself on having a strong education system, one of the finest in the nation. The state has the highest high school graduation rate in the country (89.5 percent in 1992), and its students consistently outperform their U.S. counterparts on the Scholastic Aptitude Test and the American College Test. Minnesota is nationally known for its open - enrollment program which permits students to attend school in a participating district outside the one in which they live. There are two dozen colleges and universities within a one -hour radius of the Twin Cities. The University of Min- nesota has one of the largest campuses in the country, and its professional programs (including the law and medical schools) are considered among the best in America. Sports /Recreation Minnesota is known for its strong support of college and professional sports. The three professional teams are the Minnesota Vikings (football), the Minnesota Twins (baseball), and the Minnesota Timberwolves (basketball). The Hubert H. Humphrey ' Metrodome (located in Downtown Minneapolis) guarantees warm football and cool baseball weather inside its climate - controlled dome. Target Center (also located in Downtown Minneapolis) is the home of the Timberwolves, although it is occasionally used for neutral -site games by the National Hockey League. Several semi -pro teams are also based in the Twin Cities, including baseball's St. Paul Saints. lie In addition to spectator sports, the metropolitan area boasts a wide variety of sports activities for people of all ages. There are more golfers per capita in Minnesota than any other state, and the Twin Cities reflects this with over 100 golf courses. Both residents and visitors enjoy water sports, hiking, biking, and picnicking at the 1,247 lakes and nearly 150,000 acres of public land set aside for parks, trails and wildlife management in the Twin Cities. In the winter, there are hundreds of outdoor rinks for ice skating and other ice sports, and there are over twenty downhill ski areas and miles of groomed cross - country ski and snowmobile trails within a one -hour radius of the Twin Cities. ' Special recreation facilities include Valleyfair Amusement Park (in Shakopee), the Minnesota Zoo (in Apple Valley), Knott's Camp Snoopy (at Mall of America), and Como Park Zoo (in St. Paul). Seasonal festivals include the St. Paul Winter Carnival, the Minneapolis Aquatennial, and the Renaissance Festival. 1 Cultural ' Minneapolis -St. Paul boasts hundreds of cultural attractions including repertory and dinner theaters, art galleries, dance and music companies, and museums. Some of the larger metropolitan -wide organizations include the Minnesota Orchestra, the Walker Art Center, and the Minneapolis Institute of Arts in Minneapolis; and the St. Paul Chamber Orchestra, the Minnesota Opera Company, and the Schubert Society in St. Paul. Theaters that delight residents year -round include the Guthrie, the Orpheum, ' the Cricket, the State, and the Ordway. The Minneapolis Planetarium and the Bell ' 6 ' Museum at the University of Minnesota are located in Minneapolis, while the Science • Museum of Minnesota (including one of the largest Omnitheaters in the world) and the Children's Museum are located in St. Paul. The New York Times has noted that outside of New York, the Twin Cities has the finest cultural scene in America. ' The State Theater hosted Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat and the Ordway Theater hosted Phantom of the Opera in 1993. Combined, the two produc- tions had an estimated economic impact of $39.4 million on the Twin Cities. Other shows were also hosted by both theaters, but these two productions were the most popular and had the largest economic impact. Population, Household, and Employment Growth Trends As designated by the Bureau of the Census, the Twin Cities Metropolitan Statistical ' Area (MSA) is an eleven- county area with a population of about 2.5 million persons in 1990. For land use and development control, the Metropolitan Council oversees a seven- county area which accounts for over ninety percent of the population in the ' MSA: Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott and Washington Counties. Table 2 shows population, household, and employment figures for the seven - county 1 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area from 1970 to 2020. The seven- county metropolitan area accounts for over half of the state's population and is the center of the state's wealth and industry. The region had a population of '. roughly 2,288,720 persons (up 15.3 percent from 1980) and a base of roughly 875,500 households (up 21.4 percent from 1980) in 1990. Employment in the region was esti- mated at over 1,294,700 persons in 1990 (up 21.1 percent from 1980). Hennepin. and 1 Ramsey Counties, the two most populous counties in the state, are the core counties of the region. Minneapolis (the state's largest city) is located in Hennepin County. St. Paul (the state's capital and second largest city) is located in Ramsey County. ' Altogether, they comprised about 66 percent of the population, 70 percent of the households, and 80 percent of all employment in the seven - county Twin Cities Metro- politan Area in 1990. ' About 220,000 jobs were created in the seven- county metropolitan area during both the 1970's and 1980's. Another 205,000 jobs should be created during the 1990's, but a nationwide slowdown in job growth should result in only 140,000 jobs being created between 2000 and 2020. For the past two decades, household growth has reflected employment growth. About 1.50,000 households were formed in the seven- county met - 1 ropolitan area during both the 1970's and 1980's. Another 125,000 households should be formed during the 1990's, but only 105,000 households should be formed between 2000 and 2020. ' With a high quality of life and a diverse and growing economic and business climate, the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area continues to be the major regional commercial, fi- nancial, health services, educational, and cultural center of the Upper Midwest. • ' 7 TABLE 2 • METROPOLITAN AREA POPULATION, HOUSEHOLDS AND EMPLOYMENT 1 1970 to 2020 County 1.970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 ' Population Anoka 154,694 195,998 243,641 284,540 312,200 337,120 1 Carver 28,331 37,046 47,915 62,620 73,650 84,310 Dakota 139,808 194,279 275,227 341,980 394,530 443,280 Hennepin 960,131 941,411 1,032,431 1,109,120 1,164,220 1,202,270 Ramsey 476,152 459,784 485,765 504,610 516,450 526,160 ' Scott 32,423 43,784 57,846 76,910 95,800 114,530 Washington 82,964 1.13,571 145,896 180,180 207,050 236,990 ' Total 1,874,503 1,985,873 2,288,721 2,560,000 2,765,000 2,945,000 households Anoka 36,639 60,716 82,437 100,660 116,200 131,460 Carver 8,050 12,011 16,601 22,590 28,010 33,740 Dakota 37,511 64,087 98,293 127,170 154,540 181,100 Hennepin 309,610 365,536 419,060 454,210 485,040 511,560 Ramsey 148,878 170,505 190,500 201,600 211,210 218,180 Scott 8,876 13,501 19,367 27,000 35,770 45,290 Washington 21,347 35,088 49,246 64,350 78,310 93,400 �• Total 570,917 721,444 875,504 1,000,000 1,110,000 1,21.5,000 Employment 1 Anoka 31,787 60,040 82,956 102,260 111,740 114,770 Carver 4,563 9,220 18,230 24,360 28,790 30,410 Dakota 33,914 61,530 106,491 142,960 160,820 167,350 1 Hennepin 505,424 617,840 725,816 822,740 870,900 885,280 Ramsey 254,183 278,660 297,650 327,490 341,040 345,440 Scott 7,395 12,890 20,035 26,330 30,160 31,280 Washington 16,027 28,850 43,526 55,020 62,150 63,5 Total 853,293 1,069,030 1,294,704 1,500,000 1,605,000 1,640,000 1 Sources: Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population (1970, 1980, and 1990) Metropolitan Council: Forecasts of Population, Households, and Employment 1 2000 -2010 (August 1992) Maxfield Research Group, Inc. i 1 • 1 ��1 11■ / C MINNIE E • E ' C EMMONS 11 " iiil I ■ � o 1111 ■ .'�'�' 1 1/� � I I ICI 1 1 ��j�j�y ��.� rt ■ / � � ��I�IICI. � /1t // o/� �� 1/ //11111 �.:.•. ' = •.;... .. , , ...� 1/11 �� E�1'1� %I � ..._.. ICI. 1,1 � • •:�i•.:::•:� ,.,��1 Irr/ • � ElEiii''�'•. IIE F.�"ICIIC� E: 111111 � it r 1r I �!•'•'�'- il //111 �I/11111 1 1 ICe 111 r11� ililii • / /� �� r/1� �� llnll 111111 / r r /// r" 1 =1 � Il�� .////Ir Ii/ /Ir. , ♦..�.• , � .- / /Inl /1r11/ ///I/�•• 1..111 ■... C�..�,Z • : ; c mil/ 1 �1 10111 CC111C1. nr///r/�Inr/ i� ::n //11111 .111. t /tIt •/• 11 11 / 111111r 1111/ •• trrl - -- 1/11//// iii ili ...•, lr�� •,�; � 1111111/. 11 11111111 /rl.:! :.� ~ �� .� r illli�� •,__ � ----. �1 1 -- 11 A. 11 `j jii� •� ( _ �"' ' .'' !� ii ' 111 1 �E�� i'i ` ►� 11■. mom � ■�� 1111. ��, ��1C 1 - S , \!�.��,� 1 • _ •• �11� 111111 Access and Visibility Access to the site would be from Willow Lane which connects with Highway 252 via ' 66th Avenue North, the northern border of the redevelopment area. Highway 252 is a major north -south four -lane thoroughfare which intersects with Interstate Highways ' 94 and 694 directly west of the site. These limited- access freeways provide convenient access to the entire Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Major thoroughfares that inter- sect with I -694 include State Highways 100, 47 (University Avenue) and 65 (Central ' Avenue). Visibility of the site is excellent from Highway 252 and the I -694 exit ramp to Highway 252. Proximity to Health Care, Retail and Community Services The redevelopment area is not located close to any major commercial areas, churches or health care facilities. This is a major drawback of the site as a senior housing location. A fire station is located at the intersection of 66th Avenue North and ' Dupont Avenue North, roughly four blocks from the site. This will provide for rapid emergency response and is an asset to the site. The Brookdale commercial area is a short drive from the site, located less than two miles away via I -94 and Shingle Creek Parkway. In addition to Brookdale Mall, a large regional shopping center, this area includes many other retail stores in several strip malls and freestanding buildings. Also, there is a branch of Park Nicollet Medi- cal Center, a public library and a number of family restaurants and fast food outlets. The close proximity of this commercial district to the site is a plus for housing devel- opment, including senior housing. Several churches are also located within a two mile ' radius of the site. Appropriateness of the Site for Senior Housing The primary advantages of the site are the convenient access, the attractive single- family neighborhood to the east and north and the proximity to the Brookdale com- mercial district. The major drawback of the site is its perceived isolated location with the only access point on the north end of the redevelopment area. In addition, the lack of any retail, churches or community services (other than the fire station and Super America store) close to the site will be a negative to many seniors considering moving to alternative housing. As such, a senior project developed on the site would deed some other characteristic to draw seniors, such as an affiliation with a well -known health care organization or a large church or religious body. Without this, even a project positioned as an indepen- dent senior building may have difficulties filling or maintaining occupancy. 11 Alternative Development Site: Brooklyn Boulevard Redevelopment Area There is a second location that is being considered for development of senior housing 1 in Brooklyn Center. This site is part of a proposed redevelopment district located in the northwest quadrant of 69th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. In addition 1 to the senior housing, up to 120,000 square feet of retail may be developed in the district. 1 Existing land use on the site is commercial (including a small strip retail center) and residential with single family homes on June Avenue and along 69th Avenue. Sur- rounding land use south of the site is primarily auto - related uses with several car dealerships and auto - service businesses. East and north of the site is primarily single family residential. St. Alphonsus Church, a potential sponsor of the senior housing, is located adjacent to the proposed redevelopment area at 70th Avenue and Halifax Avenue North. Access to the site will be excellent from Brooklyn Boulevard which intersects with Interstate 94 two blocks south of the site. A variety of retail services are available along Brooklyn Boulevard with two major grocery stores and a Target store (as well as smaller shops) located approximately two miles northwest of the site. The pro - posed retail component of the redevelopment will provide most, if not all, of the 1 basic convenience goods and services desired by seniors. In addition, the Brookdale Center retail district is located just one and one -half miles southeast of the just east of Brooklyn Boulevard and south of County Road 10. Besides the retail development 10 of Brookdale and surrounding centers, this area includes a variety of restaurants and medical clinics. Brooklyn Center City Hall and a branch of the Hennepin County Public Library system is also located nearby on Shingle Creek Parkway just south of 1 Interstate 94 less than two miles from the site. This site would be an excellent location for senior housing given the proposed retail ' redevelopment. The site would be located on the edge of a residential neighborhood near to a variety of retail stores and community services. Access would be excellent and the intersection is well known to area seniors. Overall, this site has more of the essential characteristics for senior housing development than the Willow Lane redevel- opment district. 1 i 1 ' 12 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS Study Area Definition This section of the report examines growth trends and demographic characteristics in a study area defined as the primary draw area for senior housing located in Brooklyn Center. The study area includes the developing cities of Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, Plymouth, and Medicine Lake; and the fully developed cities of New Hope, Crystal, Robbinsdale and a small portion of Minneapolis (the Camden community), Columbia Heights, Fridley, Hilltop and Spring Lake Park in addition to Brooklyn Center. The study area is shown on the following map. The study area was defined based on highway patterns, natural and man -made geographic barriers, municipal boundaries and our knowledge of the draw areas for senior housing. For comparison purposes, tables in this section of the report include data for the Twin Cities Metro- politan Area. Population and Household Growth Introduction Tables 3 and 4 show o ulation and household growth trends for the stud area from Pp g Y 1980 to 2010. The data for 1980 and 1990 is from the U.S. Census. The forecasts for 2000 and 2010 were made by the Metropolitan Council. We believe that they are reasonable based on trends that affect growth in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. ' Population Trends The study area's population grew by 41,887 persons or 15.0 percent from 1980 to ' 1990. In comparison, the metropolitan area's population grew by 15.3 percent from 1980 to 1990. Brooklyn Center had a population of 31,230 persons in 1980 and 28,887 persons in 1990, or a loss of 2,343 persons (7.5 percent) during the 1980's. ' Brooklyn Center's population loss reflects trends in the fully developed area which posted a 4.6 percent population decrease during the 1980's. This modest decline contrasts with tremendous growth in the Developing Area, particularly in the second- ring suburbs of Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, and Plymouth. In its entirety, the De- veloping Area increased by 50,230 persons (50.8 percent) during the 1980's, to a pop- ulation of 149,095 persons in 1990. The rapid population growth exhibited in Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, and Plymouth is attributable to several factors that have led to urban sprawl throughout the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area: * older, first -ring suburbs (including Brooklyn Center) became fully developed and newer, second -ring suburbs with more vacant land became the primary focus for development; ' 13 i � I. �` ao t< r �— ��rd'r� N „nYl, ' ::I� i !`( (�I� • �'> Y> � � °`' �e�[ not I ` J i (S k all ^ - )�..�1"rt`Ti1t2C�,- -� �• 3 C) � v ..:(� �Ilr�� il�� (� ,I' a :t , � _:('Z:: ;� ,u I - ,�, :a _ `W�fl h) :Y(.) (• 'I air °IS YI r� t � 1. � * ♦y �� y •)j, Is Jt �^tlav` � i S ;. il,� N �'�1 II � Sr i '� '�' r I U { • `� � r . �` \~Y ... � �� • ; p (( !n)i I Ilt) 'I I . 1 r It . ”, � o u IS { ° Illili,! "UQ1(i �I t 1." klulil � � � °, i ,!✓4ti1 i �� l - �,:'. IIVT"917 i � ✓, F R )' \\ in T7T. U tJ ^` ti v { t L P.Q , I � ,Y '�• h � i S � „v t) /url i •• J `Inr 4 I.�. � � � (, f0 - I 1 �� , ; ... .� f '� �✓ 2� r � 4 ° ,.Y �' ,• <(?� r `�' t �,.� J• 1 �..,u7379 � 3 1:. ") �' 4Yx�'b I di � v �I^ r " ,.q. �` ro S* , � �'I ��..�WiTGx x�. �I h i: nvX � �• . i I _ F ......, f Oi. x {, .::• ,� (■ '_: fTi �'Y �f7f'�+(v;'� /y' �. . i} � 1 }^....:` � ::SVt� �' , o Fill 111 �, � b '' •, f m�1W"�6' �1��7 � Y, m j ° �� t� j �' u. w 11:5 ♦�• °` � g rvY, ., „ � �,In nt din •� l:: "fib < ;,' d I UI'� .rr 'UI;V "WU wI U�JU�r UD i III } 4 .i ♦) 1.: N a J i. YTxY�'rYr'vN `� J N �.i v7AA9r I, �. • n i ~ ,11. I • 1MYY IYYI��.v 4 � � .• s� r r 11 a • 1: 1 � � Y v4ul'Y Y I,N I � N ' N I * new highways made second -ring suburbs more accessible and thus more desirable for persons commuting to work (for example, the completion of Interstate 94 through Downtown Minneapolis and Brooklyn Park in the early 1980's); and * baby boomers (persons born between 1946 and 1964) left home and created independent households, often in second -ring suburbs. * the desire for newer, larger homes by both move -up and first -time buyers fueled demand in the developing areas. TABLE 3 POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1980 to 2010 --- -------------------- Change ------------------------- --- U.S. Census -- - - - -- Forecast - - -- 1980 -1990 1990 -2000 2000 -2010 1980 1990 2000 2010 No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. FULLY DEVELOPED AREA 1 Brooklyn Center 31,230 28,887 29,000 30,500 -2,343 -7.5 113 0.4 1,500 5.2 New Hope 23,087 21,853 23,300 24,200 -1,234 -5.3 1,447 6.6 900 3.9 Crystal 25,543 23,788 23,800 24,300 -1,755 -6.9 12 0.1 500 2.1 Robbinsdale 14,422 14,396 15,100 15,600 -26 -0.2 704 4.9 500 3.3 & pring Lake Park 6,477 6,532 6,750 6,590 55 0.8 218 3.3 -160 -2.4 Fridley 30,228 28,335 28,500 29,000 -1,893 -6.3 165 0.6 500 1.8 Columbia Heights 20,029 18,910 19,600 19,600 -1,119 -5.6 690 3.6 0 0.0 Hilltop 817 749 750 750 -68 -8.3 1 0.1 0 0.0 Minneapolis - Camden Community 28,736 28,776 29,000 29,200 40 0.1 224 0.8 200 0.7 Subtotal 180,569 172,226 175,800 179,740 -8,343 -4.6 3,574 2.1 3,950 2.2 DEVELOPING AREA Osseo 2,974 2,704 2,700 2,650 -270 -9.1 -4 -0.1 -50 -1.9 Brooklyn Park 43,332 56,381 65,500 71,000 13,049 30.1 9,119 16.2 5,500 8.4 Maple Grove 20,525 38,736 50,500 58,500 18,211 88.7 11,764 30.4 8,000 15.8 Plymouth 31,615 50,889 62,000 67,000 19,274 61.0 11,111 21.8 5,000 8.1 Medicine Lake 419 385 370 360 -34 -8.1 -15 -3.9 -10 -2.7 Subtotal 98,865 149,095 181,070 199,510 50,230 50.8 31,975 21.4 18,440 10.2 Study Area Total 279,434 321,321 356,870 379,260 41,887 15.0 35,549 11.1 22,390 6.3 Metro Area Total 1,985,873 2,288,271 2,560,000 2,765,000 302,848 15.3 271,279 11.9 205,000 8.0 Sources: Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population and Housing 1980 & 1990 P g( ) Metropolitan Council: Forecasts of Population, Households, and Employment (August 1992) Maxfield Research Group, Inc. 15 These factors, along with other trends, will continue to influence future population growth in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Brooklyn Center's population is forecast to remain stable during the 1990's, with 29,000 persons in 2000. The population of the Fully Developed Area is expected to grow by only 2.1 percent, adding 3,574 persons during the 1990's, to 175,800 persons in 2000. The population of the Developing Area is expected to grow by 21.4 percent with an increase of nearly 32,000 persons during the 1990's, to more than 181,000 persons in 2000. As a whole, the study area's population is forecast to increase by 11.1 percent from 1990 to 2000, slightly lower than the metropolitan area's forecast increase of 11.9 percent from 1990 to 2000. ' The study area is forecast to continue enjoying strong population growth from 2000 to 2010, but it will not be as strong as it was during the 1990's. Once again, the most rapid increases should occur in the developing second -ring suburbs of Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, and Plymouth. A slowdown is anticipated after 2000 as the supply of buildable land dwindles through 2010, similar to what happened in the Fully Devel- oped Area during the 1970's and 1980's. Thereafter, development will shift to more distant communities. It is also important to note that population growth in the J ro met - ro olitan area as a whole is projected to decelerate due to lower birthrates and the r � aging of the baby boom out of their childbearing years. Household Trends Household trends are a better indicator of housing demand than population trends since households are occupied housing units. The study area had 120,590 households in 1990, an increase of 22,508 households or 22.9 percent from 1980. Brooklyn Cen- ter had 10,751 households in 1980 and 11,226 households in 1990, or a gain of 475 households (4.4 percent) during the 1980's. The Fully Developed Area overall added 3,241 households to 68,148 households in 1990, a growth of 5.0 percent. This com- pares to a growth rate of 58.1 percent in the Developing Area with an additional 19,267 households during the decade, to 52,442 households in 1990. The fastest per- centage growth occurred in Maple Grove (more than doubling its household base), while much slower growth occurred in Crystal and Camden. This reflects the afore- mentioned shift from full devel first -ring suburbs to developing s econd-ring � y p b p gs gsub - urbs. In comparison, the metropolitan area's household base increased by 21.4 per- cent during the 1980'x. Tables 3 and 4 reveal that the rate of household growth was greater than the rate of population growth during the 1980'x. This is the result of trends such as couples hav- ing fewer children and a gradual shift from traditional households (married couples with children) to non - traditional households (persons living alone, married couples without children, and single- parent families) that began during the 1960's. This re- flects social and lifestyle changes such as waiting longer for marriage, lower birth rates, and higher divorce rates. Although these trends will continue, the difference 1 between population and household growth rates will be much less disparate as the baby boom generation matures and divorce rates continue to level off. This indicates 16 TABLE 4 0 HOUSEHOLD GROWTH TRENDS BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1980 to 2010 ----------------------- Change ------------------------- ---U.S. Census -- - - - -- Forecast - - -- 1980 -1990 1990 -2000 2000 -2010 1980 1990 2000 2010 No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. FULLY DEVELOPED AREA Brooklyn Center 10,751 11,226 11,300 11,800 475 4.4 74 0.7 500 4.4 New Hope 7,627 8,507 9,100 9,450 880 11.5 593 7.0 350 3.8 Crystal 8,977 9,272 9,300 9,450 295 3.3 28 0.3 150 1.6 Robbinsdale 5,705 6,008 6,300 6,500 303 5.3 292 4.9 200 3.2 Spring Lake Park 1,992 2,343 2,540 2,690 351 17.6 197 8.4 150 5.9 Fridley 10,416 10,909 1.1,000 11,100 493 4.7 91 0.8 100 0.9 Columbia Heights 7,343 7,766 8,050 8,050 423 5.8 284 3.7 0 0.0 Hilltop 453 410 410 410 -43 -9.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 Minneapolis - Camden Community 11,643 11,707 11,800 11,850 64 0_5 93 0_8 50 0,4 Subtotal 64,907 68,148 69,800 71,300 3,241 5.0 1,652 2.4 1,500 2.1 DEVELOPING AREA Osseo 1,015 995 1,050 1.,100 -20 -2.0 55 5.5 50 4.8 Brooklyn Park 15 268 20 386 Y 24,200 27,500 5,118 33.5 3,814 18.7 3,300 13.6 Maple Grove 6,239 12,531 17,000 21,200 6,292 100.8 4,469 35.7 4,200 24.7 Plymouth 10,491 18,361 23,700 28,000 7,870 75.0 5,339 29.1 4,300 18.1 edicine Lake 162 169 170 180 7 4.3 1 0.6 10 5.9 Subtotal 33,175 52,442 66,120 77,980 19,267 58.1 13,678 26.1 11,860 17.9 Study Area Total 98,082 120,590 135,920 149,280 22,508 22.9 15,330 12.7 13,360 9.8 Metro Area Total 721,444 875,504 1,000,000 1,110,000 154,060 21.4 124,496 14.2 110,000 11.0 Sources: Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population and Housing (1980 & 1990) Metropolitan Council: Forecasts of Population, Households, and Employment (August 1992) Maxfield Research Group, Inc. lower household growth over the next decade, as baby busters replace larger numbers of baby boomers and become the driving force behind household formations during the 1990's. Today, baby boomers are having their own children and the ensuing baby boomlet (persons born since 1977) will cause a surge of household formations after 2000. Brooklyn Center is forecast to add only 74 households during the 1990's, reaching 11,300 households in 2000, although growth could be greater if new construction in redevelopment areas creates more housing opportunities. The household base of the Fully Developed Area is expected to increase by 1,652 households (2.4 percent) dur- ing the 1990's, to 69,800 households in 2000. The household base of the Developing Area is expected to increase by 13,678 households (26.1 percent) during the 1990's, to 17 66,120 households in 2000. The number of households in the study area overall should grow by 12.7 percent from 1990 to 2000, compared to 14.2 percent household growth forecast for the metropolitan area. The study area is forecast to continue enjoying healthy household growth from 2000 to 2010, but it will not be as strong as it was during the 1990's. As with population, ' most household growth will be concentrated in developing second -ring suburbs rather than fully developed first -ring suburbs due to the availability of buildable land. Employment Growth Trends Typically, employment growth fuels household growth and therefore housing demand. A healthy housing market overall will enable seniors to sell their homes and move to alternative housing. Table 5 presents employment growth trends in the study area from 1980 to 2010, with the actual and forecast number of full -time and part -time jobs calculated by the Metropolitan Council. The study area experienced job growth of about 49,500 jobs (excluding the Camden Community in Minneapolis) from 1980 to 1990, a growth rate of 53.9 percent. Dur- ing the same period, the metropolitan area experienced job growth of 21.1 percent. Brooklyn Center added more than 6,200 jobs (57.5 percent) for a total of 17,000 jobs in 1990. Osseo and Columbia Heights were the only ci t y 's in the stud area that lost � g Y Y Y jobs during the 1980's (down 5.5 percent from 3,300 jobs in 1980 to 3,120 jobs in � 1990). Plymouth had by far the largest increase, adding 18,103 jobs during the 1980's and by 1990 had the largest job base in 1990 among the study area communities. Fridley had the second largest job base in 1990 with employment of 23,800 followed by Brooklyn Center. The study area is projected to experience job growth with of 25.5 percent (an addi- tional 37,000 jobs) during the 1990's. In comparison, the metropolitan area should experience job growth of 15.9 percent during the 1990's. Brooklyn Center's job base is forecast to grow by 20.0 percent during the 1990's, to 20,400 jobs in 2000. Plym- outh, Brooklyn Park, and Maple Grove are expected to comprise the bulk of job growth in the study area. The number of jobs in the Fully Developed Area is expect- ed to increase by nearly 12,600 jobs (15.8 percent) during the 1990's, to nearly 92,200 jobs in 2000. The study area is forecast to continue enjoying strong job growth from 2000 to 2010, but it will not be as strong as it was during the 1990's. This slowdown in job growth corresponds with the aforementioned slowdowns in population and household growth. The study area is forecast to add about 19,200 jobs between 2000 and 2010, a growth rate of 10.5 percent. The rate of employment growth will continue to exceed the rate of growth in the metropolitan area which is forecast to post a 7.0 percent increase during the 2000's. 18 TABLE 5 EMPLOYMENT GROWTH TRENDS BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1980 to 2010 ----------------------- Change------------------- - - - - -- ------ Actual- - - - - -- - - - -- Forecast - - -- 1980 -1990 1990 -2000 2000 -2010 1980 1990 2000 2010 No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. FULLY DEVELOPED AREA Brooklyn Center 10,800 17,006 20,400 21,900 6,206 57.5 3,394 20.0 1,500 7.4 New Hope 9,400 14,149 17,200 18,600 4,749 50.5 3,051 21.6 1,400 8.1 Crystal 6,000 6,019 6,550 6,800 19 0.3 531 8.8 250 3.8 Robbinsdale 3,200 6,813 7,800 8,200 3,613 112.9 987 14.5 400 5.1 Spring Lake Park 1,900 3,000 4,000 4,500 1,100 57.9 1,000 33.3 500 12.5 Fridley 22,000 23,800 27,000 28,500 1,800 8.2 3,200 13.4 1,500 5.6 Columbia Heights 5,100 4,500 4,800 5,000 -600 -11.8 300 6.7 200 4.2 Hilltop 310 330 370 380 20 6.5 40 12.1 10 2.7 Minneapolis- Camden Community N/A N/A 4,037 4,085 NIA NIA 60 1.5 48 1.2 Subtotal 58,710* 79,594 92,157 97,965 16,907 * 28.8 * 12,563 15.8 5,808 6.3 DEVELOPING AREA Osseo 3,300 3,120 3,550 3,800 -180 -5.5 430 13.8 250 7.0 Brooklyn Park 7,800 16,592 22,300 25,000 8,792 112.7 5,708 34.4 2,700 12.1 Maple Grove 1,900 7,750 14,600 19,000 5,850 307.9 6,850 88.4 4,400 30.1 Plymouth 20,000 38,103 49,500 55,500 18,103 90.5 11,397 29.9 6,000 12.1 edicine Lake 50 50 70 70 0 0.0 20 40.0 0 0.0 Subtotal 33,050 66,615 90,020 103,370 32,565 98.5 24,405 37.2 13,350 14.8 Study Area Total 91,760* 145,209 182,177 201,335 49,472 * 53.9 * 36,968 25.5 19,158 10.5 Metro Area Total 1,069,030 1,294,704 1,500,000 1,605,000 225,674 21.1 205,296 15.9 105,000 7.0 Totals for 1980 and change figures from 1980 to 1990 do not include the Minneapolis portion of the study area. Sources: Metropolitan Council: Forecasts of Population, Households, and Employment (1980 -2020) Maxfield Research Group, Inc. Senior 65+ Population and Household r Senior ( 65+) P Growth Tables 6 and 7 show population and household growth trends for seniors (persons age 65 and over) in the study area from 1980 to 1990, from the U.S. Census. The tables include data for persons in two cohorts: younger seniors (age 65 to 74) and older seniors, age 75 and over. Senior Population Trends The study area had a senior o ulation of 28 463 persons in 1990 an increase of p P p , 8,763 persons or 44.5 percent from 1980. The senior proportion of total population ' 19 TABLE 6 SENIOR (65 +) POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1980 and 1990 1 -------- - - -65+ Persons-------- - -- Number of Persons Persons Change Percent of 65+ Persons Age 65 -74 Age 75+ 1980 -1990 All Persons 1980 1990 1980 1990 1980 1990 No. Pct. 1980 1.990 FULLY DEVELOPED AREA Brooklyn Center 1,962 3,546 1,295 2,299 667 1,247 1,584 80.7 6.3 12.3 New Hope 1,773 3,119 691 1,222 1,082 1,897 1,346 75.9 7.7 14.3 1 Crystal 1,779 2,950 1,167 2,007 612 943 1,171 65.8 7.0 12.4 Robbinsdalc 2,473 2,947 1,491 1,509 982 1,438 474 19.2 17.1 20.5 Spring Lake Park 156 365 120 254 36 111 209 134.0 24 5.6 Fridley 1,371 2,210 880 1,467 491 743 839 61.1 4.5 7.8 Columbia Heights 1,987 2,909 1,249 1,741 738 1,168 922 46.4 9.9 15.4 Hilltop 128 98 95 63 33 35 -30 -23.4 15.7 13.1 Minneapolis- Camden Community 5,086 4,395 2,846 2,375 2,240 2,020 -691 -13.4 17.7 14.8 Subtotal 16,715 22,539 9,834 12,937 6,881 9,602 5,824 34.8 9.3 13.0 DEVELOPING AREA Osseo 499 531 204 210 295 321 32 6.4 16.8 19.6 Brooklyn Park 1,045 1,873 741 1,357 304 516 828 79.2 2.4 3.3 Maple Grove 341 940 234 696 107 244 599 175.7 1.7 2.4 Iftlymouth 1,064 2,543 744 1,786 320 757 1,479 139.0 3.4 5.0 �� cdicine Lake 36 37 25 26 11 15 1 2.8 8.6 9.6 Subtotal 2,985 5,924 1,948 4,075 1,037 1,853 2,939 98.5 3.0 4.0 Study Area Total 19,700 28,463 11,782 17,012 7,918 11,455 8,763 44.5 7.0 8.8 Metro Area Total 188,207 225,133 105,479 125,635 82,728 99,498 36,926 19.6 9.5 9.8 Sources: Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population and Housing (1980 & 1990) Maxfield Research Group, Inc. increased from 7.0 percent in 1980 to 8.8 percent in 1990. This was a lower senior proportion than in the metropolitan area where 9.8 percent of the population was 65 or over in 1990. In Brooklyn Center, the number of seniors increased substantially during the 1980's, adding 1,584 persons for a total of 3,546 persons in 1990, a growth rate of 80.7 per- cent. Seniors comprised 12.3 percent of Brooklyn Center's population in 1990, nearly twice the senior population proportion as in 1980. The table shows that the Fully Developed Area had a much higher proportion of seniors in 1990, 13.0 percent, than the Developing Area, 4.0 percent. This is because communities in the Fully Developed Area were settled after World War II and i 20 TABLE 7 . SENIOR (65 +) HOUSEHOLD GROWTH TRENDS BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1980 and 1990 ---- - - - 65+ Households----- - -- Number of Percent 65+ Households Households Change of All 1 Households Age 65 -74 Age 75+ 1980 -1990 Households 1980 1990 1980 1990 1980 1990 No. Pct. 1980 1990 FULLY DEVELOPED AREA Brooklyn Center 1,183 2,354 813 1,509 370 845 1,171 99.0 11.0 21.0 1 New Hope 674 1,623 392 755 282 868 949 140.8 8.8 19.1 Crystal 1,019 1,829 716 1,256 303 573 810 79.5 11.4 19.7 Robbinsdale 1,590 1,983 971 954 619 1,029 393 24.7 27.9 33.0 Spring Lake Park 101 258 78* 177 23* 81 157 155.4 5.1 11.0 Fridley 753 1,362 555 933 198 429 609 80.9 7.2 12.5 Columbia Heights 1,302 2,003 831 1,167 471 836 701 53.8 17.7 25.8 Hilltop 92 80 70* 54 22* 26 -12 -13.0 20.3 19.5 Minneapolis - Camden Community 3,510 3,221 1,790 1,643 1,720 1,578 -289 8.3 30.1 27.5 Subtotal 10,224 14,713 6,216 8,448 4,008 6,265 4,489 43.9 15.8 21.6 DEVELOPING AREA Osseo 187 206 135* 115 52* 91 19 10.2 18.4 20.7 Brooklyn Park 653 1,237 469 890 184 347 584 89.4 4.3 5.9 aple Grove 185 571 137 424 48 147 386 208.6 3.0 4.6 Plymouth 619 1,567 443 1,121 176 446 948 153.2 5.9 8.5 Medicine Lake 21 24 15 15 6 9 3 14.3 13.0 14.2 Subtotal 1,665 3,605 1,199 2,565 466 1,040 1,940 116.5 5.0 6.9 Study Area Total 11,889 18,318 7,415 11,013 4,474 7,305 6,429 54.1 12.1 15.2 Metro Area Total 118,323 144,507 68,153 80,701 50,170 63,806 26,184 22.1 16.4 16.5 * These figures are estimated. Sources: Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population and Housing (1980 & 1990) Maxfield Research Group, Inc. 1 residents have now aged into the 65 and over cohort. The Developing Area has ex- perienced substantial overall growth since 1970 and should see very large senior in- creases during the next 20 years. In general, younger seniors are independent and prefer to stay in their single- family home for as long as possible. On the other hand, older seniors are often frail and require housing that offers support services. 21 ' In the Fully Developed Area, growth was nearly equal among the younger and older senior categories. In the Developing Area, much greater growth occurred in the younger senior cohort. Demand for housing with services will be much greater in the Fully Developed Area, which had more than five times as many older seniors than the Developing Area. ' Senior Household Trends As mentioned previously, household trends are a better indicator of housing demand than population trends because households represent actual occupied housing units. There were 18,318 senior households in the study area in 1990, 6,429 more house- ', holds than in 1980, translating to a growth rate of 54.1 percent. The senior house- hold proportion of all householders was 15.2 percent in 1990, up from 12.1 percent in 1980. The growth rate was much faster during the 1908's in the Developing Area, 116.5 percent, compared to the Developing Area, 43.9 percent, although the Fully De- veloped Area posted a numerical senior household increase of 4,489 households, more than twice the increase in the Developing Area. Brooklyn Center experienced the largest numerical increase during the 1980's, an increase of 1,171 senior households, or growth rate of 99.0 percent, Maple Grove experienced the largest percentage in- crease, growth rate of 208.6 percent during the 1980's. Some study area communities had higher growth rates attributable to the construction of senior housing, but senior household growth was fueled primarily by an aging population. l ie Older Adult (55 +) Age Distribution Table 8 presents the age distribution of older adults age 55 and over by sex in the study area in 1990, from the U.S. Census. The table focuses on five -year cohorts: age 55 to 59, age 60 to 64, age 65 to 69, age 70 to 74, age 75 to 79, age 80 to 84, and age 85 and over. The data is used later in this section of the report to forecast the size of the senior base in the study area in 1995 and 2000. The study area had a total of 53,866 older adults in 1990, 44.0 percent of whom were male (23,722 persons) and 56.0 percent of whom were female (30,144 persons). The table reveals that females outnumbered males in every listed cohort in Brooklyn Cen- ter and the study area, except for persons age 55 to 59 in the remainder of the De- veloping Area. More important, the table shows that each successive age group is smaller than the previous one and that the disparity increases until the age 85 and over cohort. The numbers of persons in the age 60 to 64 cohort is 90 percent of the number in the age 55 to 59 cohort, while the number of persons in the age 80 to 84 cohort is 70 percent of the number in the 75 to 79 cohort. This reveals that the older senior population will grow more rapidly during the 1990's than the younger senior popula- tion. The same trend holds true for Brooklyn Center. 22 TABLE 8 S OLDER ADULT (55 +) AGE DISTRIBUTION BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1990 Remainder Brooklyn of Fully Developing Study Center Developed Area Area Area Total Age No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. 55 -59 Male 807 45.3 3,475 48.9 2,298 50.9 6,580 49.1 Female 974 54.7 3,632 51.1 2,217 49.4 6,823 50.9 Total 1,781 100.0 7,107 100.0 4,515 100.0 13,403 100.0 60 -64 Male 839 49.2 3,266 47.7 1,685 49.0 5,790 48.3 Female 868 50.8 3,583 52.3 1,755 51.0 6,206 51.7 Total 1,707 100.0 6,849 100.0 3,440 100.0 11,996 100.0 65 -69 Male 643 48.0 2,702 45.7 1,244 49.1 4,589 46.9 Female 696 52.0 3,205 54.3 1,291 50.9 5,192 53.1 Total 1,339 100.0 5,907 100.0 2,535 100.0 9,781 100.0 70 -74 Male 432 45.0 1,985 42.0 682 44.3 3,099 42.9 Female 528 55.0 2,746 58.0 858 55.7 4,132 57.1 Total 960 100.0 4,731 100.0 1,540 100.0 7,231 100.0 75 -79 Male 224 38.4 1,254 36.1 405 43.2 1,883 37.7 Female 359 61.6 2 3 < 56 7 _ ,2l C 6 3 ..� 5_2 _ .8 3,10 62.3 Total 583 100.0 3,470 100.0 937 100.0 4,990 100.0 ' 80 -84 Male 134 35.4 784 30.7 196 35.4 1,114 32.0 Female 245 64.6 1,772 69.3 357 64.6 2,374 68.0 Total 379 100.0 2,556 100.0 553 100.0 3,488 100.0 85+ Male 67 23.5 436 20.9 114 31.4 667 22.4 Female 218 76.5 1,843 79.1 249 68.6 2,310 77.6 Total 285 100.0 2,329 100.0 363 100.0 2,977 100.0 Total 55+ Male 3,146 44.7 13,952 42.3 6,624 47.7 23,722 44.0 Female 3,888 55.3 18,997 57.7 7,259 52.3 30,144 56.0 Total 7,034 100.0 32,949 100.0 13,883 100.0 53,866 100.0 Note: Some percentages may not add to 100.0 due to rounding. Note: Fully Developed Area includes Minneapolis- Camden Community. r Sources: Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 1990 Maxfield Research Group, Inc. 23 i Senior (65 +) Population and Household Forecasts Table 9 presents forecasts of senior population and households for 1995 and 2000. These forecasts were calculated by Maxfield Research Group, Inc. based on the age distribution in Table 8 and age /sex cohort survival rates for Minnesota in 1990. The forecasts assume no net change due to migration although previous research has shown that some younger seniors leave the area for retirement communities, while older seniors tend to move to the area to be near children when they become less ' mobile. The table shows that the study area will continue to post large increases in senior population and households. The study area is projected to add about 9,300 seniors during the 1990's to 37,755 persons in 2000, roughly one -third move than in 1980. Brooklyn Center is projected to have a senior population of approximately 5,100 per- , sons in 2000, an increase of 1,567 persons or 44.2 percent. Senior household growth rates will continue to be greater than population growth ' rates due to longer life spans (one spouse living longer) and greater efforts to main- tain seniors' independence. The study area is forecast to add nearly 7,300 senior households in the 1990's, an increase of 39.7 percent. Brooklyn Center is projected to add nearly 1,300 senior households, for a total of 3,625 households in 2000, a growth rate of 54.0 percent. It is interesting to note that senior growth is stabilizing in Brooklyn Center and that lie increases are projected to be smaller in the 1990's compared to the 1980's for the remainder of the Fully Developed Area. Household growth in the Fully Developed Area (including Brooklyn Center) will be greater among older seniors in the 1990's i than younger seniors. This indicates continuing demand growth for senior housing since older seniors are more likely to prefer, and need, alternative housing. Brooklyn Center is forecast to add 540 households 65 to 74 and 731 households age 75 and over, growth rates of 29.0 and 86.5 percent, respectively, from 1990 to 2000. Senior (65 +) Household Type Table 10 shows study area senior households age 65 and over in three household type ' categories in 1990, from the U.S. Census. The table includes family households (most often married couples), persons living alone (males /females), and other non - family households (such as roommates). The table also shows the number of seniors living in group quarters, generally residents of nursing homes. This data is important be- cause senior family households tend to own a single- family home, while senior non - family households, particularly older seniors living alone, are more likely to consider alternative housing. 24 TABLE 9 SENIOR (65 +) POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD PROJECTIONS BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1980 to 2000 --------------- Change ------------- -U.S. Census- - -- Forecast - -- 1980 -1990 1990 -2000 1.980 1990 1995 2000 No. Pct. No. Pct. ' Senior Population Trends Brooklyn Center Age 65 -74 1,295 2,299 2,826 3,084 1,004 77.5 785 34.1 Age 75+ 667 1,247 1,521 2,029 580 87.0 782 62.7 Subtotal 1,962 3,546 4,347 5,113 1,584 80.7 1,567 44.2 Remainder of Fully Developed Area Age 65 -74 8,539 10,638 11,834 12,240 2,099 24.6 1,602 15.1. Age 75+ 6,214 8,355 8,663 9,850 2,141 34.5 1,495 17.9 Subtotal 14,753 18,993 20,497 22,090 4,240 28.7 3,097 16.3 Developing Area Age 65 -74 1,948 4,075 5,544 7,048 2,127 109.2 2,973 73.0 Age 75+ 1,037 1,853 2193 1504 816 78.7 1,651 89.1 Subtotal 2,985 5,928 7,937 10,552 2,943 98.6 4,624 78.0 Study Area Total Age 65 -74 11,782 17,012 20,204 22,372 5,230 44.4 5,360 31.5 Age 75+ 7,918 11,455 12,577 15,383 3,537 44.6 3,928 34.3 Total 19,700 28,467 32,781 37,755 8,767 44.5 9,288 32.7 Senior Household Trends Brooklyn Center Age 65 -74 813 1,509 1,865 2,049 696 85.6 540 29.0 Age 75+ 370 845 1,101 1,576 475 128.4 731 86.5 Subtotal 1,183 2,354 2,966 3,625 1,171 99.0 1,271 54.0 Remainder of Fully Developed Area Age 65 -74 5,403 6,939 7,776 8,101 1,536 28.4 1,162 16.7 Age 75+ 3,638 5,420 5,752 6,876 1,782 49.0 1,456 26.9 Subtotal 9,041 12,359 13,528 14,977 3,318 36.7 2,618 21.2 Developing Area Age 65 -74 1,199 2,565 3,580 4,678 1,366 113.9 2,113 82.4 Age 75+ 466 1,040 1,451 2,307 574 123.2 1,267 121.8 Subtotal 1,665 3,605 5,031 6,985 1,940 116.5 3,380 93.8 Study Area Total Age 65 -74 7,415 11,013 13,221 14,828 3,598 48.5 3,815 34.6 Age 75+ 4,474 7,305 8,304 10,759 2,831 631 3,454 47.3 Total 11,889 18,318 21,525 25,587 6,429 54.1 7,269 39.7 • Sources: Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population and Housing (1980 & 1990) Maxfield Research Group, Inc. 25 TABLE 1.0 SENIOR (65 +) HOUSEHOLD TYPE BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1990 ------------- Non - Family------- - - - - -- --- Living Alone - -- Group Total Family Male Female Other QiEL Number of Households FULLY DEVELOPED AREA Brooklyn Center 2,354 1,411 163 751 29 100 New Hope 1,623 596 147 868 12 959 Crystal 1,829 1,139 118 548 24 171 Robbinsdale 1,983 982 135 838 28 143 Spring Lake Park 258 133 21 100 4 0 i Fridley 1,362 830 125 385 22 179 Columbia Heights 2,003 1,004 167 805 27 117 Hilltop 80 20 21 37 2 0 Minneapolis- Camdcn Community 3,093 1,450 292 1,292 59 79 Subtotal 14,585 7,565 1,189 5,624 207 1,748 DEVELOPING AREA Osseo 206 102 16 80 8 235 Brooklyn Park 1,237 709 95 415 18 0 Maple Grove 571 413 37 112 9 0 Plymouth 1,567 1,036 108 404 19 73 Medicine Lake 24 14 3 7 0 0 Subtotal 3,605 2,274 259 1,018 54 308 Study Area Total 18,190 9,839 1,448 6,642 261 2,056 ' Percent of all Households FULLY DEVELOPED AREA Brooklyn Center 100.0 59.9 6.9 31.9 1.2 - -- New Hope 100.0 36.7 9.1 53.5 0.7 - -- Crystal 100.0 62.3 6.5 30.0 1.3 - -- Robbinsdale 100.0 49.5 6.8 42.3 1.4 - -- Spring Lake Park 100.0 51.6 8.1 38.8 1.6 - -- Fridley 100.0 609 9.2 28.3 1.6 - -- Columbia Heights 100.0 50.1 8.3 40.2 1.1 Hilltop 100.0 25.0 26.2 46.2 2.5 - -- Minneapolis- Camdcn Community 100.0 46.9 9.4 41.8 1_9_ Subtotal 100.0 51.9 8.2 38.6 1.4 • 26 TABLE 10 SENIOR (65 +) HOUSEHOLD TYPE BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1990 (Continued) ------------- Non - Family------- - - - - -- --- Living Alone - -- Group 1 Total FigiL Male Female Other trs.* Percent of Households (Continued) DEVELOPING AREA Osseo 100.0 49.5 7.8 38.8 3.9 - -- Brooklyn Park 100.0 57.3 7.7 33.5 1.5 __- Maple Grove 100.0 72.3 6.5 19.6 1.6 Plymouth 100.0 66.1 6.9 25.8 1.2 - -- Medicine Lake 100.0 58.3 12.5 29.2 0_0 - Subtotal 100.0 63.1 7.2 28.2 1.5 Study Area Total 100.0 54.1 8.0 36.5 1.4 - -- * These figures represent persons, not households. Note: Some percentages may not add to 100.0 due to rounding. Sources: Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 1990 Maxfield Research Group, Inc. The study area in 1990 had 9,839 senior family households (51.9 percent of the total, the largest group in the study area), 1,448 finales 65 and over living alone (8.9 percent of the total), 6,642 females 65 and over living alone (38.6 percent of the total, the second largest group in the study area), and 261 other non- family households (1.4 per - cent of the total). These figures exclude 2,289 seniors living in group quarters, more than 40 percent of whom lived in New Hope. Osseo had the second largest concen- tration of seniors in group quarters, 235 persons, among all of the study area commu- nities. Brooklyn Center had 100 seniors in group quarters. It is noteworthy that the proportion of senior family households was highest in the developing second -ring sub - 1 urbs of Maple Grove and Plymouth. The proportion of seniors living alone is often higher in older urban communities, where seniors are generally older because they are aging in place (this is particularly apparent in New Hope and Robbinsdale). The vast majority of females living alone are widows, because males have shorter life expec- tancies than females. Just like the study area, the two largest senior household types in Brooklyn Center in 1990 were family households (1,411 households or 59.9 percent of the total) and females living alone (751 households or 38.6 percent of the total). The number of seniors living alone in the study area should increase in the future, given the age distribution of persons age 65 and over in 1990. 27 Household Income ' • Data on senior household incomes is important to determine what rent levels are affordable to seniors in the area including the number of seniors with middle and upper incomes who could support market rate senior housing. Table 11 presents esti- mates of the number of seniors in six household income categories in 1994. The data is estimated by Claritas, a national demographic services company and is broken out by seniors age 65 to 74 years old and seniors age 75 years and older. The total household figures are lower than our forecasts in Table 9 because a portion of the Camden Community in Minneapolis was not included due to difficulties in defining this neighborhood based on census tracts. The standard of affordability used in this analysis is an income allocation of 40 per- cent for housing. While this is higher than the 30 percent income allocation utilized by the Department of Housing and Urban Development to set rents for subsidized i projects, experience has shown that seniors will pay a higher proportion of their in- come for market rate housing that meets their needs. In some cases, seniors will spend in excess of 50 percent of their income for housing offering support services and in the case of assisted living projects, will even spend down their assets in order to receive the level of care provided in a non- institutional setting by these facilities. The table shows that younger seniors (age 65 to 74) have higher incomes than older seniors (age 75 and over), primarily because of two factors. First, younger seniors are more likely to continue working, at least part time. Second, younger senior house- holds are more likely to be couples with two pensions and /or two incomes from so- cial security. In the study area, an estimated 51.9 percent of younger seniors have in- comes of $25,000 or more per year while only 32.2 percent of older seniors have in- comes of $25,000 or more. Seniors with incomes of $25,000 or more per year can afford to pay rents of at least $833 per month (based on the 40 percent of income allocated to housing) and could therefore afford market rate senior housing. In Brooklyn Center, there are an esti- mated 1,223 households in this category, more than half of all of Brooklyn Center's senior households. About two - thirds of these households are younger seniors, how- ever, those less likely to move to alternative senior housing. There are an estimated 360 senior households age 75 and over with incomes of $25,000 or more per year, roughly 40 percent of seniors in this age group. Seniors who have incomes of $15,000 to $24,999 may be able to afford market rate senior housing (particularly if they own a single family home without a mortgage), but are more likely candidates for moderate rent housing, particularly if they do not need the services offered by congregate projects with higher rents. Seniors with incomes in this range should afford rents between $500 and $833 per month, based on a 40 per- g cent income allocation to housing. In Brooklyn Center, there are an estimated 563 Y households in this category, the largest of any senior income group. About 60 per- cent of seniors in this income group are younger senior households and 40 percent are older senior households. • 28 I 'I TABLE 11 SENIOR (65 +) HOUSEHOLD INCOME DISTRIBUTION BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1994 Total Age 65 -74 Age 75 & Over 65 & Over No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. Brooklyn Center Under $10,000 112 7.7 153 17.2 265 11.3 $10,000 - $14,999 146 10.0 150 16.9 296 12.6 $15,000 - $24,999 338 23.2 225 25.3 563 24.0 $25,000 - $34,999 301 20.6 146 16.4 447 19.0 $35,000 - $49,999 300 20.6 121 13.6 421 179 $50,000 and Over 262 17.8 93 10.5 355 15.1 Total 1,459 100.0 888 100.0 2,347 100.0 Remainder of Fully Developed Area Under $10,000 916 13.7 1,670 28.8 2,586 20.8 $10,000 - $14,999 799 11.9 1,093 18.9 1,892 15.2 $15,000 - $24,999 1,681 25.2 1,325 22.9 3,006 12.2 $25,000 - $34,999 1,224 18.4 757 13.1 1,981 15.9 $35,000 - $49,999 1,055 15.8 511 8.8 1,566 12.6 $50,000 and Over 989 14.8 441 7.6 1.,430 11.5 Total 6,664 100.0 5,797 100.0 1,2461 100.0 Fully Developed Area Total Under $10,000 1,028 12.7 1,823 27.3 2,851 19.3 $10,000 - $14,999 945 11.6 1,243 18.6 2,188 14.8 $15,000 - $24,999 2,019 24.9 1,550 23.2 3,569 24.1. $25,000 - $34,999 1,525 18.8 903 13.5 2,428 16.4 $35,000 - $49,999 1,355 16.7 632 9.5 1,987 13.4 $50,000 and Over 1,251 15.4 534 8.0 1,785 12.1 Total 8,123 100.0 6,685 100.0 14,808 100.0 Developing Area Total Under $10,000 200 7.8 345 33.2 545 15.1 $10,000 - $14,999 290 11.3 93 8.9 383 10.6 $15,000 - $24,999 659 25.7 178 17.1 837 23.2 $25,000 - $34,999 449 17.5 114 11.0 563 15.6 $35,000 - $49,999 412 16.1 152 14.6 564 15.6 $50,000 and Over 555 21.6 158 15.2 713 19.8 Total 2,565 100.0 1,040 100.0 3,605 100.0 ' Study Area Total Under $10,000 1,228 11.5 2,168 28.1 3,396 18.4 $10,000 - $14,999 1,235 11.6 1,336 17.3 2,571 14.0 $15,000 - $24,999 2,678 25.1 1,728 22.4 4,406 23.9 $25,000 - $34,999 1,974 18.5 1,017 13.2 2,991 16.2 $35,000 - $49,999 1,767 16.5 784 10.1 2,551 13.9 $50,000 and Over 1,806 169 692 9.0 2,498 13.6 Total 10,688 100.0 7,725 100.0 18,413 100.0 Note: Percentages may not add to 100.0 due to rounding. Sources: Claritas, Inc. Maxfield Research Group, Inc. Senior households with incomes of less than $15,000 per year are a market for subsi- dized housing, unless they have substantial home equity which could be invested after ' the sale of their home with the resulting income used for housing. Nearly one quar- ter of Brooklyn Center's seniors and more than one -third of seniors in the remainder of the fully developed area have incomes of less than $15,000 per year. This reflects the demand for subsidized senior housing which is examined in the next section. Lower income seniors tend to be in the older senior cohort; 54.0 percent of Brook- lyn Center's low income seniors, 61.7 percent of low income seniors in the fully Bevel - ' oped area and just less than half of lower income seniors in the developing area are older seniors. Since these are persons who are more likely to need or desire alterna- tive housing, monthly rents become an important factor in supplying affordable hous- ing. Many of these seniors end up utilizing the proceeds from the sale of their home, again an indication of their willingness to spend a substantial amount of their income for housing. r For the study area as a whole, there are nearly 6,000 senior households who would be a market for subsidized housing (including about 3,500 older senior households), 4,400 who are a market for moderate rent housing (including more than 1,700 older senior households) and more than 8,000 who could afford market rate housing (in- cluding about 2,500 older senior households). Since these figures do not include the income from the proceeds of the sale of a single family home, it is certain that the potential base of seniors who would be a market for moderate rent and market rate senior housing is larger than indicated above while the base of seniors who need sub- sidized housing is lower. It is important to note, however, that seniors with higher incomes have more options than lower- income seniors, including money available for 1 0 r assistance with lawn work, personal care needs, etc. Senior Household Tenure Table 12 shows the number of seniors who owned and rented their housing in 1990. This data is important in that it indicates the size of the household base who may desire to sell their single - family home and move to alternative housing. Seniors who own their housing typically have a large amount of equity which, if invested upon sale of the home, would generate supplementary income to support alternative housing. The table shows that nearly three quarters of study area seniors owned their housing, a slightly higher proportion than in the metropolitan area where 70.2 percent of sen- iors were homeowners. The Fully Developed Area had a slightly lower proportion of senior owners than the Developing Area due to the greater supply of rental housing (including senior rental units) there. In Brooklyn Center, 71.2 percent of senior households owned their housing in 1990, the lowest senior owner proportion among study area communities except for New Hope, Osseo and Spring Lake Park. Table 12 also shows the tenure of younger versus older senior households in 1990. Older seniors are more likely renters than younger seniors, since older seniors are more inclined to shed the cost and responsibilities of single- family home maintenance. In addition, older seniors are a larger market for specialized housing with support ' services than younger seniors. ' 30 TABLE 12 SENIOR (65 +) HOUSEHOLD TENURE BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1990 ------ - - - - -- - Total 65 & Over------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- -Age 65 - 74---------- - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- -Age 75 & Over----------- - ---- Own - - -- - - -- Rent - -- - - -- Own - - -- - -- Rent - -- - - -- Own - - -- --- Rent - -- Total No. Pct. No. Pct. Total No. Pct. No. Pct. Total No. Pct. No. Pct. FULLY DEVELOPED AREA Brooklyn Center 2,354 1,677 71.2 677 28.8 1,509 1,219 80.8 290 19.2 845 458 54.2 387 45.8 New Hope 1,623 550 33.9 1,073 66.1 755 448 59.3 307 40.7 868 102 11.8 766 88.2 Crystal 1,829 1,478 80.8 351 19.2 1,256 1,065 84.8 191 15.2 573 413 72.1 160 27.9 Robbinsdale 1,983 1,442 72.7 541 27.3 954 798 83.6 156 16.4 1,029 644 62.6 385 37.4 Spring Lake Park 254 179 70.5 75 29.5 175 139 79.4 36 20.6 79 40 50.6 39 49.4 Fridley 1,362 1,114 81.8 248 18.2 933 817 87.6 116 12.4 429 297 69.2 132 30.8 Columbia Heights 2,003 1,436 71.7 567 28.3 1,167 962 82.4 205 17.6 836 474 56.7 362 43.3 Hilltop 80 69 86.3 11 13.7 54 45 83.3 9 16.7 26 24 92.3 2 7.7 Minneapolis - Camden Community 3,221 2,719 84.4 502 156 1,643 1,456 88.6 187 11.4 1,578 1,263 80.0 315 20.0 Subtotal 14,709 10,664 72.5 4,045 27.5 8,446 6,949 82.3 1,497 17.7 6,263 3,715 59.3 2,548 40.7 DEVELOPING AREA Osseo 206 146 70.9 60 29.1 115 83 72.2 32 27.8 91 63 69.2 28 30.8 Brooklyn Park 1,237 891 72.0 346 28.0 890 695 78.1 195 21.9 347 196 56.5 151 43.5 Maple Grove 571 503 88.1 68 11.9 424 380 89.6 44 10.4 147 123 83.7 24 16.3 Plymouth 1,567 1,298 82.8 269 17.2 1,121 944 84.2 177 15.8 446 354 79.4 92 20.6 Medicine Lake 24 23 95.8 1 4.2 15 14 93.3 1 6.7 9 9 100.0 0 0.0 Subtotal 3,605 2,861 79.4 744 20.6 2,565 2,116 82.5 449 17.5 1,040 745 71.6 295 28.4 Study Area Total 18,314 13,525 73.9 4,789 26.1 11,011 9,065 82.3 1,946 17.7 7,303 4,460 61.1 2,843 38.9 Metro Area Total 144,507 101,375 70.2 43,132 29.8 80,701 62,948 77.3 17,753 22.7 63,806 38,127 60.2 25,379 39.8 Sources: Bureau of the Census: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 1990. Maxfield Research Group, Inc. In the study area, 82.3 percent of younger seniors owned their housing in 1990, com- pared to 61.1 percent of older seniors. Although the proportion of younger seniors who own is similar in both the Fully Developed and Developing Areas, the proportion of older seniors who own is much lower in the Fully Developed Area primarily be- cause of the much larger supply of senior housing, both subsidized and market rate, in the Fully Developed Area. In 1990, there was no market rate senior housing in the Developing Area and only one subsidized senior project. This compares to 16 senior buildings in the Fully Developed Area in 1990. Single - Family Home Sales Table 13 presents single - family home sales in the study area in 1992 and 1993, from the Regional Multiple Listing Service (MLS). Sales through the MLS generally in- cludes over ninety percent of all resale transactions in the metropolitan area. The table lists the number of sales, median selling price, average selling price, and average market time. Each other MLS district experienced growth in sales volume from 1992 to 1993, ex- cept for Fridley, Columbia Heights, Hilltop and Spring Lake Park, cities on the east side of the Mississippi River. All of these communities posted small declines in num- ber of resales. The largest number of sales and the most growth occurred in develop - ing second -ring suburbs of Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove (which includes Osseo) and Plymouth. Maple Grove, for example, had 312 sales in 1992 and 508 sales in 1993. 10 More limited growth occurred in fully developed first -ring suburbs such as Crystal, Brooklyn Center, and Robbinsdale. Brooklyn Center had 165 sales in 1992 and 190 sales in 1993. The median selling price is a more accurate reflection of value than the average sell- ing price, since averages can be skewed upward by a few very high - priced homes. ' With the exception of Brooklyn Center and Robbinsdale, each study area MLS district posted a higher median selling price in 1993 compared to 1992. The largest price increases occurred in New Hope, which went up from $85,000 in 1992, to $91,900 in 1993 (an increase of 6,900 or 8.1 percent) followed by developing second -ring suburbs such as Maple Grove /Osseo and Plymouth. The median selling price in Maple Grove /Osseo went up from $109,250 in 1992 to $113,900 in. 1993, or an increase of $4,650 (4.3 percent). The larger increases in sales volume and the median selling price in developing second -ring suburbs reflect higher residential construction volume in recent years in those communities. Comparatively little residential construction occurred in the Fully Developed Area. r Along with increases in sales volume and the median selling price, the average market time fell in each study area MLS district from 1992 to 1993 except for Brooklyn Cen- ter and Robbinsdale. Average market time in Brooklyn Center rose from 64 days in 1992 to 72 days in 1993. The largest drops occurred in developing second -ring sub - urbs of Maple Grove /Osseo and Plymouth. The length of time it takes to sell a home in Maple Grove /Osseo fell from 57 days in 1992 to 44 days in 1993. Similarly, 32 TABLE 13 SINGLE - FAMILY HOME SALES BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1992 and 1993 Average Median Average Market Number Selling Selling Time District Year of Sales Price Price Mims) Brooklyn Center (363) 1992 165 $77,400 $79,067 64 1993 190 77,000 78,908 72 New Hope (362) 1992 345 $85,000 $88,461 51 1993 385 91,900 92,848 49 Crystal (361) 1992 191 $78,900 $81,513 60 1993 199 79,900 80,886 51 Robbinsdale (360) 1992 125 $77,900 $80,774 57 1993 158 77,000 78,884 186 Spring Lake Park (771) 1992 125 $82,500 84,726 56 1993 111 84,900 88,671 49 Fridley (768) 1992 187 $83,500 $86,987 64 1993 170 87,000 92,321 68 Columbia Heights and Hilltop (770) 1992 227 $72,000 $75,667 75 1993 212 73,500 74,293 76 Brooklyn Park (364) 1992 684 $89,900 $95,349 63 1993 826 90,150 96,837 61 Maple Grove and Osseo (365) 1992 312 $109,250 $121,935 57 1993 508 113,900 129,367 44 Plymouth and Medicine Lake (374) 1992 758 $150,000 $163,847 59 1993 858 153,552 173,293 49 Total 1992 3,119 $102,100* $109,241 60 1993 3,617 105,600* 114,729 61 * Study Area medians are estimated based on a weighted average of individual district medians. Sources: Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota (MLS) Maxfield Research Group, Inc. 33 the smallest drops occurred in fully developed first -ring suburbs such as New Hope and Crystal (in addition, the average market time remained stable in Brooklyn Park). The length of time it takes to sell a home in Crystal, for example, fell from 60 days in 1992 to 51 days in 1993. This data illustrates the strength of the local economy and lower interest rates which have fueled home sales as well as increasing the supply of homes due to a significant amount of residential construction over the past several years. The for -sale market relates to demand for senior rental housing because many seniors live in single- family homes that must be sold before they move into senior rental housing. In general, seniors have substantial equity in their single- family home which can be invested upon sale to produce income for rent payments. If a senior living in the study area sold their single- family home for the estimated study area median selling price of $105,600, they would receive roughly $98,200 after selling costs (estimated at seven percent). Based on a 5.0 percent return, this translates to a monthly income of roughly $410. If a senior in Brooklyn Center sold their home for the median selling price of $77,000, they would receive roughly $71,600 after selling costs. Based on a 5.0 per- cent return on investment, they would have additional income of roughly $300. Residential Construction Table 14 presents data on residential units built in the study area from 1980 through �. 1993. The table shows that there were 36,234 new residential units constructed dur- ing the period, an average of nearly 2,600 per year. The Developing Area accounted for nearly 90 percent of new construction, reflecting the availability of land for new housing development. The Fully Developed Area (including Brooklyn Center) had a much higher proportion of multifamily construction than the Developing Area. The lack of land in these communities necessitates more high density construction in smaller sites or in redevel- opment areas. The Developing Area is the focus of new single - family construction. 34 TABLE 14 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT DATA BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA 1980 to 1993 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Total Brooklyn Center Single- Family 8 5 4 4 6 6 7 6 1 4 1 7 15 7 91 Duplex Units 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 - -- - -- - 6 Multifamily 0 0 0 41 it 0 144 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 361 Subtotal 18 9 4 145 17 6 151 6 68 4 1 7 15 7 458 Remainder of Fully Developed Area Single- Family 134 96 121 271 222 150 140 100 78 56 63 41 36 38 1,554 Duplex Units 90 20 10 22 16 33 0 0 4 0 0 - -- - -- - -- 203 Multifamily 6 234 352 115 216 385 357 669 90 0 75 0 0 88 2,587 Subtotal 230 358 483 408 454 576 498 769 168 56 138 41 36 126 4,346 Developing Area Single- Family 1,424 1,366 1,468 2,148 1,605 2,021 2,823 1,995 1,989 1,534 1,311 1,267 1,539 1,701 24,191 Duplex Units 48 72 56 86 100 78 36 48 33 24 10 - -- - - -- 591 Multifamily 0 78 72 306 799 801 1,028 816 656 709 632 325 329 97 6,648 Subtotal 1,472 1,516 1,596 2,540 2,504 2,900 3,887 2,859 2,678 2,267 1,953 1,592 1,868 1,798 31,430 Study Area Total Single - Family 1,576 1,467 1,593 2,423 1,833 2,185 5,852 2,101 2,068 1,594 1,375 1,315 1,590 1,746 25,836 Duplex Units 138 104 66 108 116 ill 36 48 39 24 10 - -- - -- - -- 800 Multifamily 6 312 424 562 1,026 1,186 1,529 1,485 811 709 707 325 329 185 9,596 Total 1,722 1,883 2,083 3,093 2,975 3,482 7,417 3,634 2,918 2,327 2,092 1,640 1,919 1,933 36,234 II Notes: "Single-Family "Townhouses Townhouses " from 1980 to 1993. "Multifamily" includes "Condominiums" from 1980 to 1993. "Multifamily" includes "Duplexes" after 1990. Sources: Metropolitan Council: Residential Building Permits Issued in the Twin Cities Metro Area, 1980 -1993 Maxfield Research Group, Inc. r SENIOR HOUSING MARKET REVIEW i Introduction The potential for senior housing in a given area is a function of the potential demand for such housing influenced primarily by the size and growth of the senior population base in the area, as presented in the Demographic Review section, and the existing and potential future supply of housing to meet that demand. This section examines the current supply of senior housing in the study area as well as the possible future supply, based on projects currently in the planning process. The first part of this section provides an overview of the different types of senior housing and the overall t market situation in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area followed by an examination of the existing supply of market rate senior housing, subsidized senior housing and finally pending senior developments in the study area. Overview of Senior Housing in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Historic Trends The first large -scale development of senior projects were the result of the need for t such housing by low income seniors. Beginning in the 1960's and continuing into the 1980's, large numbers of units were developed by local and state government organ- ' zations as well as private developers with assistance from the federal government through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Financing for such projects as well as deep rental subsidies for low income seniors were provided. Rent subsidies were typically provided under HUD's Section 8 program where low income residents would pay just 30 percent of their adjusted gross income for rent. Funds for these projects were significantly reduced during the Reagan era and fewer projects of this type have been built in the past ten years. Now local governments are relying on alternative financing mechanisms (such as tax credits, TIF and Essential Function Bonds) to provide moderate -rent senior housing. The first projects were constructed in the inner cities and first ring suburbs, where the senior population was concentrated in the 1960's and 1970's. As these populations aged and began to shrink in Minneapolis and St. Paul, demand for subsidized senior housing in the central cities began to decline. This occurred at the same time as the increase in development of market rate senior housing. By the early 1990's, a greater and greater proportion of public housing units were occupied by non - senior handi- capped persons. This trend will continue in Minneapolis and St. Paul and will even- tually emerge in the first -ring suburbs. The first market rate senior projects developed in the metropolitan area were geared to the frail elderly. Usually associated with nursing homes (as many, new projects are today), these buildings were marketed to seniors who needed support services but who did not require the medical services or daily monitoring of a nursing home. Although ® still somewhat independent, these frail seniors required some level of assistance such as housekeeping, daily check -in or transportation to stores and medical or personal 36 business appointments. Activity programs, one or more meals, health checks and other supportive services were usually included in the rent. Although high in cost, this type of housing was (and still is) considerably cheaper than nursing home care and far more fulfilling to seniors who still desire some independence. Unlike most board and care or board and lodging facilities, these projects offered complete private apartments. The first Twin Cities senior project opened in 1965 under the sponsorship of Heritage of Edina nursing home. Today this complex has a total of 214 units in three build- ings and offers assisted living services as well. Sutton Place, affiliated with Presbyteri- an Homes and located on their campus in Arden Hills, was the first market rate congregate apartment building in the St. Paul area with occupancy in 1980. Minneap- olis already had several such facilities by 1980 including 7600 York in Edina (a limit- ed- equity cooperative built in 1978), Friendship Village in Bloomington (a life -care cooperative completed in 1979) and St. Therese in New Hope (rental apartments completed in 1979 and affiliated with the Catholic- sponsored St. Therese Home). During the mid- and late- 1980's the supply of senior housing units increased dramati- cally in the Twin Cities with greater product choice and geographic distribution. Initially, nearly all projects performed well due to pent up demand from seniors seek- ing an alternative to their single - family home. Ownership projects (cooperatives and condominiums) comprised a large proportion of the units but only the original proj- ects sold well. Since older seniors (the primary market for senior housing) didn't see the benefits of ownership any longer and generally preferred the flexibility of renting �. their housing, ownership projects completed after 1985 often struggled to maintain high occupancy rates. A burst of construction of rental units from 1986 to 1988 re- sulted in an overall glut of senior housing by the end of the decade. The oversupply of senior housing was reflected in high vacancy rates in all areas of the Twin Cities, including Brooklyn Center. Although many projects were able to maintain full occupancy rates, nearly all of these were unable to increase rents due to competitive pressures. The result was a virtual halt to senior housing construction from 1989 through 1992. Seeking to tap new markets and unmet demand from lower income segments, the construction that did occur was primarily at opposite ends of the service- provision spectrum: either moderate -rent "adult" projects offering virtually no services, or expensive assisted living projects geared to the very frail elderly. Today there are more than 10,000 units of market rate senior housing, including as- sisted living developments and projects with financing subsidies geared to moderate- income seniors in the metropolitan area. The assisted living projects have attracted a very frail senior group who previously would have had to receive extensive in -home services or move to a nursing home. (For low - income seniors who cannot afford the cost of these projects, nursing homes remain their only alternative). The modest rent buildings have provided a new alternative to lower income seniors who desire to sell their home but cannot afford the high rents of the congregate projects developed in 1 the 1980's. • Table 15 shows the distribution of each type of market rate senior housing in the 1 northwest quadrant (where Brooklyn Center is located) and in the metropolitan area 37 as of the first quarter of 1994. Construction during 1994 will increase the number of senior units to nearly 11,000. The table shows that the northwest quadrant had more than 2,500 market rate senior housing units in early 1994, or nearly one - quarter of the metro area total. The largest group of units in the northwest quadrant are in the Congregate /Service Intensive category, slightly more than one -third of the total, fol- lowed by the Congregate /Optional services category with one - quarter of the units. TABLE 15 DISTRIBUTION OF MARKET RATE SENIOR HOUSING AND VACANCY RATES BY SERVICE LEVEL TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA/NORTHWEST QUADRANT First Quarter, 1993 & First Quarter, 1994 ' --- Metro Area - -- ------ - - - - -- Northwest Quadrant ------------ lst Quarter '94 1st Quarter '93 1st Quarter '94 No. of Vacancy No. of Vacancy No. of Vacancy III Service Level Units Rate Units Rate Units Rate "Adult "/Few Services 1,123 3.8 376 0.8 575 4.3 Congregate /Optional Services 2,936 3.4 614 1.8 613 2.8 Congregate /Service Intensive 2,788 3.5 861 3.0 843 1.1 Assisted Living 670 14.2 135 1_5 273 25.6 Subtotal 7,517 5.2 1,936 2.1 2,304 5.3 *Ownership 2,331 N/A 471 5.5 224* 6.3* Total 9,848 N/A 2,457 2.7 2,528* 5.4* * Two ownership projects surveyed in 1993 were unreachable and were not included in 1994 totals. 1 Source: Maxfield Research Group, Inc. Market Rate Senior Housing Project Types For analytical purposes, Maxfield Research Group, Inc. groups market rate rental ' projects into four categories based on the level of services available or included in the rent. Ownership projects (other than life -care, which are often cooperatives) are grouped separately since they attract a specific market interested in owning, usually younger seniors. Life -care projects are included with the rental projects since the entry fee functions primarily as a pre -paid nursing care package. The four categories ' are 1) "Adult" /Few Services, 2) Congregate/ Optional Services, 3) Congregate /Service Intensive, and 4) Assisted Living. Senior housing projects fall along a continuum and as such, a given project may not fall distinctly into one category. In particular, there have been a number of different types of assisted living projects developed. The ' divisions listed in Tables 1.5, 16 and 17 was developed to simplify the categorization • of specific projects and relationship between projects. The following is a brief de- scription of these categories. 38 "Adult" / Few Services projects are geared to younger (60's and early -mid 70's) seniors • who are still very healthy and independent. As indicated by the name, these build- , ings offer few, if any services but are still age- restricted, usually to persons age 55 and over. Prospective residents are more likely to cross -shop general occupancy buildings rather than congregate buildings since these seniors desire security and want to rid themselves of home maintenance, but do not need or want any services. "Adult" /Few Services buildings often have more common areas than general occupan- cy buildings and may have special features geared to seniors such as an emergency call system. However, these buildings generally have fewer common areas than con - t gregate buildings. The few services available in buildings in this category usually include only an activities or transportation program. Rental rates for "Adult" /Few Services projects are the lowest of all the senior housing types, and are often similar to, or just slightly higher than, general occupancy buildings. Brookwood Estates and Brookwood Manor are both this type of project. ' A number of projects of this type have been built in the past several years, usually with creative financing that requires a certain percentage of the units to be occupied by low /modest income households. Since these requirements are liberal enough for most seniors to qualify, these buildings are still considered market rate projects. Besides the two Brookwood projects, examples of this type of building in the north- west uadrant are: Calibre Chase and The Crystal (Crystal), q ry ( ry , The Anthony James ) (New Hope), and Autumn Woods (St. Anthony). Except for Autumn Woods, these projects are all also located in the study area. Another project of this type in the �• study area is also the only projected converted to senior housing from general occu- pancy. This is Waterford in the Park in Brooklyn Park. Formerly Cedarbrooke Apartments, The Waterford in the Park was renovated in 1993 with financial assis- tance from Brooklyn Park's Economic Development Authority (EDA). The building is now owned by a limited partnership, with the EDA having 49 percent ownership. In addition, the building is now restricted to seniors (age 55 and over). 7 r Congregate�Optional Services projects are geared to healthy seniors, over age 70 (most would be at least 75) who may not be as mobile as younger seniors and desire some supportive services but want the option to choose only the services they need. Meal programs exist at nearly every project in this category, although usage among residents may be only 20 to 30 percent on a given day. Some other services such as housekeeping and laundry services may be offered on an optional (extra fee) basis. Assisted living services at Congregate /Optional Services projects, if available, are geared to meet the needs of current residents aging in place rather than to new pros- pects. An affiliation with a health care organization is not uncommon, however a location adjacent (or attached to) a nursing home tends to position a project in the service - intensive category. Within the northwest quadrant, there are 613 units at Congregate /Optional Services projects, or 26.6 percent of the quadrant's senior rental housing in 1994. Only 13 ' units were vacant at the time of our metro -wide survey in the first quarter of 1994, a vacancy rate of 2.8 percent. Earle Brown Commons in Brooklyn Center is an exam- ple of this type of project. 39 Congregate /Service Intensive projects attract older seniors, generally in their late 70's or older. These persons may not be completely independent, but nor are they in need of regular supervision either. Buildings that include meals or other services (i.e. housekeeping or laundry services) in the rent are characteristic of this type of project which typically has a strong health care orientation, such as those attached to nursing homes. Assisted living programs are often available on an optional basis. Maranatha Place in Brooklyn Center and St. Therese and North Ridge in New Hope are exam- ples of this type of project in the study area. Because of the level of services includ- ed in the rent, these projects tend to be more expensive than either the "Adult" /Few Services or the Congregate/ Optional Services buildings. 1 In the first quarter 1994 update of senior rental housing in the northwest quadrant, there were 843 Congregate /Service Intensive units, 9 of which were vacant. This translated to a vacancy rate of 1.1 percent. r Assisted Living facilities are the most service- intensive of senior projects, positioned just a step below a nursing home. While the target market is frail seniors age 75 and over, the vast majority of residents in assisted living projects are age 80 and over. Many services are included in the monthly fee, although the specific services included can vary significantly between assisted living projects. Most include all utilities (ex- cept telephone), two meals per day and housekeeping in addition to basic services such as programmed activities and transportation. Others will also include three meals per day, medication reminders, unlimited personal care, and escorts to meals or tray service. The level of services included in the monthly fee is typically reflected by '® the amount of the fee. The Evergreens at Earle Brown Farm in Brooklyn Center and Copperfield Hill are two of the newest assisted living projects in the Twin Cities area. In addition, Maranatha Place and North Ridge have areas specifically designat- ed for assisted living and several other projects offer assisted living packages. Within the northwest quadrant, a total of 273 assisted living units were surveyed. The vacancy rate was a high 25.6 percent and reflected unleased units at the recently added assisted living units at Copperfield Hill in Robbinsdale. Of the 84 units that were added, 20 units were occupied and 35 units were leased at the time of our metro -wide survey in the first quarter, although occupancy has since increased. Table 15 shows the vacancy data for each type of project in the metropolitan area for the first quarter of 1994 and in the northwest quadrant for the first quarter of 1993 and 1994. As of the first quarter of 1994, there were more than 2,500 market rate senior housing units in the Twin Cities' northwest quadrant, including some units with moderate income restrictions. The table shows that vacancy rates have increased, in part due to new units that were added to the market late in 1993. Overall, the va- cancy rate for rental units went from 2.1 percent in 1993 to 5.3 percent in 1994. Study Area Senior Housing Market Situation Market Rate Senior Projects • Brooklyn Center was one of the first communities to see development of market rate 40 senior housing in the early 1980's. All of these projects had some difficulty in their initial lease -up period reflecting region -wide trends of overbuilding in the mid and late 1980's. Not all of the these problems stemmed simply from the oversupply of market rate units, however. Maranatha Place was positioned as a building for frail seniors, yet had a large proportion of two - bedroom units which experienced an ex- tended lease -up. Frail seniors tend to be single women who prefer smaller units. Brookwood Estates was developed as a condominium project and experienced slow initial sales and was converted to rental in spring 1985. It filled within 18 months after that. Today, Brooklyn Center has four market rate senior projects, not including the new Evergreens at Earle Brown Farm assisted living complex. These four proj- ects were at stabilized occupancy (95 percent or higher) at the time the survey of study area senior projects was completed in May 1994. Tables 16 and 17 present market data on all of the market rate senior housing proj- ects in the study area, including one ownership project, Lee Square in Robbinsdale. Table 16 presents information on unit mix, sizes, rents and features while Table 17 presents data on services and building amenities offered at the projects. There are a total of 1,561 units in these buildings, 29 of which are vacant for a vacancy rate of only 1.9 percent. A vacancy rate of 5.0 percent is acceptable in a stable rental mar- ket to allow for turnover and consumer choice. the very low vacancy rate in the study area suggests a need for more units, particularly since demand is increasing as the population ages. The Adult /Few Services projects have a total of 470 units with five vacancies at the ,• time of the survey, a vacancy rate of 1.5 percent. Monthly rents for one - bedroom units are typically in the $550 to $650 range with the Anthony James having slightly higher rents. Monthly rents for two - bedroom units range from $635 to $700 with ' slightly higher rents at Anthony James and slightly lower rents at the Waterford. The Waterford's two - bedroom rents are lower in part because of the very large supply of this unit type relative to one - bedroom units. On a per square foot basis, rents range from $.64 to $.82, the lowest of all the senior housing project types. Heat is included in the rent at these projects with the tenant paying electric. All of the projects ex- cept the Crystal and the Waterford have emergency call systems in the units and all offer balconies, patios or three season porches. The Congregate /Optional Services projects have a total of 425 units with five vacan- cies at the time of the survey, a vacancy rate of 3.8 percent. Two of the projects (Earle Brown Commons and Chardon Court) have unit rents similar to the Adult/ - Few Services buildings while Copperfield Hill has rents about $150 per month higher. ' The units are smaller at all of these projects, however, resulting in higher per square foot unit rents. These projects also have larger amounts of common space as shown in the last column in Table 17. i While the Adult /Few Services buildings offer virtually no services beyond a limited activities program, the Congregate /Optional Services projects all offer optional meal programs and housekeeping services as well as transportation to shopping on a regular basis. Meal programs are typically available in packages but can also be purchased on an individual basis at Earle Brown Commons and Copperfield Hill. 41 • *E 16 UNIT COMPARISON STUDY AREA SENIOR PROJECTS May 1994 ----- - - - - -- - Unit Sizes /Rents -- -- Unit Features - -- - --- Occup. No. of No. Construction Rent Per Emer. Proiect Name /Location Date Units Vacant Type No. - - Type - - -Size- -- Monthlv Rent - Square Foot - Utilities - Call A/C Balcony Other Adult /Few Services Brookwood Estates 10/84 73 0 5 -story, 15 1BR 750 $615 S.82 All except Yes Cent. Yes d.w., disposal, w/d 62nd North Lilac Dr. mid -rise 10 1BR /D 895 695 .78 elec. incl. hook -ups, utility Brooklyn Center 48 2BR 950 720 .76 in rent room Brookwood Manor 7/84 65 0 3 stories, 33 1BR 700 $550 $.79 All except Yes Wall Yes d.w., disposal North Lilac Dr. low -rise 6 1BR /D 845 610 .72 elec. incl. unit Brooklyn Center 26 2BR 905 635 .70 in rent Anthony James 12/86 73 3 3 stories 51 1BR /1Ba 830 670 .81 All except No Wall No d.w., disposal, 3- 6100 W. Broadway 4 1BR /1Ba 933 675 .72 elec. Incl. unit season porch, New Hope 18 2BR /IBa 1,123 750 .67 in rent storage room 2BR /2Ba 1,184 760 -780 .64 -.66 The Crystal 11/86 39 0 3 -story, 31 1BR 707 -776 $546 S.70 -S77 All except No Yes Yes d.w., disposal, 5755 W. Broadway wood frame 7 2BR 1,082 700 .65 elec. incl. screen porch in Crystal w /brick face 1 3BR 1,390 710 S1 in rent some units Calibre Chase 10/88 76 0 3 -story w/ 27 1BR 800 5579 S.72 Heat incl., Yes Yes Yes d.w., disposal, 55th Ave. N. & Douglas Ave. underground 12 1BR 900 624 .69 tenant pays BR, microwave Crystal parking 31 2BR 1,103 -1,065 704 .70 -.66 electric Ba 6 2BR /D 1,166 749 .64 The Waterford 1993 144 4 3 -story 35 1BR 736 $514 S.70 Heat incl., No Yes Yes 7000 62nd Avenue wood frame, 108 2BR 1,025 616 .60 tenants pay Brooklyn Park brick face 1 2BR /Hdcp. 1,025 616 .60 electric Subtotal 470 7 (1.5 %) Con, egate /Optional Services Earle Brown Commmons 9/87 140 7 11 53 1BR 600 -627 $550 -5610 $.92 -S.97 All except BR, Unit No d.w. (some 6100 Summit Drive N. stories 29 1BR /D 725 -850 660-695 .82-91 elec. incl. Ba cent. units) Brooklyn Center 58 2BR 850 -1,070 710-860 .80-84 in rent Copperfield Hill 7/87 157 0 5 stories, 109 1BR 625 -658 $755 -$795 $1.20 -$1.21 All except Yes Unit No storage, 4200 40th Ave. N. central 48 2BR 868 -920 950-995 1.08-1.09 elec. incl. BR, cent. garbage disp. Robbinsdale atrium in rent Ba Chardon Court 11/85 128 9 6 stories 118 1BR 645 -694 $575 -$600 $.86 -S.89 All except Yes Unit No d.w., walk -in 5700 Boone Ave. 5 1BR /D 975 750 .77 elec. incl. cent. closets New Hope 6 2BR 1,036 800 .77 in rent (North Ridge) Subtotal 425 16 (3.8 %) r r r■ r �r rr � ■r� r r �r rr rr r r r rr rr ri • TE 16 • UNIT COMPARISON STUDY AREA SENIOR PROJECTS May 1994 (Continued) ------- - - - - -- — - -Unit Sizes /Rents-- - - - - -- Unit Features----- - Occup. No. of No. Construction Rent Per Emer. Proiect Name /Location Date Units Vacant �T pe No. --T -- Size -- — Monthly Rent Square Foot — Utilities Call A/C Balcony Other Congregate- Service Intensive Maranatha Place 9/88 65 0 4 -story, 7 EFF 390 $620 $159 All except Yes Wall Some storage, garbage 5415 69th Ave. N. wood frame 23 1BR 634 -659 735 -760 1.15 -1.16 A/C incl. unit units disp. Brooklyn Center 16 1BR 796 -858 875 -920 1.07 -1.10 in rent (opt.) ( Maranatha Care Center) 19 2BR 898 930 -945 1.04 -1.05 Boulevard 12/84 77 1 3 -story 55 1BR 660 $647/80 5.98/1.12 All except Yes Wall No none 4458 Reservoir Blvd. wood frame 22 2BR 850 859/1,054 1.01/1.24 elec. incl. unit Columbia Heights in rent (Crestview Lutheran) North Ridge 10/83 180 4 4 -story 28 EFF 460 5680 $1.48 All incl. Yes Unit No d.w. (some units) 5500 Bonone Ave. N. concrete 131 1BR 590 -640 800 125 -1.36 in rent cent. New Hope 21 2BR 900 1,030 1.14 (North Ridge Care Center) St. Therese 9/79 220 0 7 stories 162 1BR 590 $740 S122 BR, Wall No none 8008 Bass Lake Rd. 53 2BR 860 960 1.08 Ba unit New Hope 5 2BR+ 1,450 -1,720 1,380 -1,725 .92-97 (St. Therese Home) Subtotal 542 5 (0.9 %) Ownership /Co -op /Condo Lee Square 10185 124 1 Low -rise, 49 1BR 546 -622 $248 -280 5.40 -.45 All incl. Yes Yes Some 4400 36th Avenue N. 3- stories 42 1BR /D 696 -737 321 .44 -.46 in assoc. Robbinsdale 33 2BR 872 -902 400 .44 -.46 except electric & phone Total 1,561 29 (1.9 %) I Originally built in 1972, rehabbed and converted to senior in 1993. 2 Lower rents at the Boulevard require a non - refundable entry fee $8,500 (113R) and $12,500 (213R) 3 Association fees per month 4 Association fees per square foot Source: Maxfield Research Group, Inc. TABLE 17 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES /AMENITIES COMPARISON COMPARABLE CONGREGATE SENIOR PROJECTS May 1994 -------- -- - - -- --- ------ Services-- --- --- — -- - -- - - -- - - Amenities --- -- -- -- - ---- Proiect Name - - -- Transportation Activities - --- - -- - Meal Program - - - - -- Housekeepinz — Health /Miscellaneous -- -- Parking -- - --ecurit - -- Laundry Storage --- Other — Adult /Few Services Brookwood Estates none mgr. none none monthly B.P. checks underground, phone common, included community & coord- incl. in rent entry coin crafts room inates Brook - wood Manor none mgr. none none monthly B.P. checks underground, phone common, included community & coord- incl. in rent entry coin crafts room, inates exercise rm., whirlpool, sauna Anthony James lx /wk. mgr. none none none underground, intercom ea. fl., in unit community & for shop. organ- incl. in rent entry coin crafts room, $1.25; & izes billiards, ex- special ercises room, events whirlpool, sauna The Crystal none none none none none underground, phone ea. fl., avail. on community & $35/mo. extra entry coin ea. fl. . exercises rooms, whirlpool Calibre Chase bus avail. resi- none none none underground, intercom ea. fl., non community & for special dent 1 space incl. entry coin crafts room events council in rent Waterford van mgr. none none none detached, intercom ea. fl. in some community room, coord- incl. in entry coin units hobby room, bil- inates rent liards, guest suite, PA. avail. for $20 per night. Con zregate /Optional Services Earle Brown Commons 1 -2X full- opt. noon ($2.70) & eve. optional monthly BP check 78 ramp spaces; intercom 4 comm. incl. in library, card weekly to time (84.35) M -F; packages 1 space incl. entry laundries rent room, patios, TV Brookdale direc- available in rent room, whirlpool, grocery for barber /beauty shop Copperfield Hill daily full- opt. eve. meal, M -S, Sun. optional monthly health checks 52 underground intercom ea. fl., 84/ library, sundeck, to time brunch ($4.75); also, from visiting nurse spaces, S35 /mo. entry free mo. billiards, hobby retail 87.00 /mo. meal charge rm., exercise rm., coffee shop, whirl- pool, guest suites TABLE 17 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/AMENITIES COMPARISON COMPARABLE CONGREGATE SENIOR PROJECTS May 1994 (Continued) - -- - -- -- -------------- -- -- --- --- Services------- --- ------- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - -- -- — — Amenities---- - -- -- -- -- Project Name - -- Transportation Activities - - - - - -- - Meal Prog Housekeeping - -- Health /Miscellaneous - -- - - -- Parking ----- --Se n — Laundry Storage — Other -- Congregate /Optional Services (Continued) Chardon Court 5x /wk to yes 3x /wk. ($70 /mo.) or optional affiliated w /North Ridge 40 underground 24 -hr. ea. fl., not Sundeck, crafts retail, 6x /wk. (5140 /mo.) S12 /wk. Care Center spaces S30 /mo., recept. coin avail. room, garden, sr. ctr. plug-ins S15 /mo. "I'm ok" program Cono-regate /Service Intensive Boulevard 2x /wk. no opt. eve. meal, M -S incl. weekly BP checks, attached 16 underground intercom ea. fl., not library, sundeck, to shop- staff (54.75), lunch in rent to Crest View Lutheran spaces S35 /mo. entry coin avail. wkshp., mini -store ping ($1.00 -2.25) Home barber /beauty shop Maranatha Place Weekly part- free cons. bkfst.; opt. lunch bath & attached to 10 detached recept. ea. fl. inc. in comm. room, grocery trip, time opt. lunch (53.50) and kitchen Maranatha Care Ctr., spaces avail. linen rent crafts room, events coord- dinner (55.00) cleaned A.L. program available for S20 /mo. service lounge w /fire- inator weekly 5995 /mo. +rent, personal 511.50 /hr. place, garden, care avail. for $12.50 /hr. guest suite St. Therese lx /wk. full- min. of 10 meals /mo. every 2 adjacent to St. Therese 65 underground recept. $35 /lb. not comm. rm., green - to shop- time required (55.75 ea.) wks. incl. Home spaces S30 /mo. avail. house, library, ping plus in rent terrace, monthly exercise, sauna, events pharmacy, chapel North Ridge 3x /wk to full - 20 meals /mo. optional home health available 77 underground intercom common, not comm. rm., shopping time mandatory for $120; through attached spaces S30 /mo. entry free avail. several lounges, & events direc- 30 meals are $165, North Ridge Care Ctr. crafts rm. for Served eve.; lunch is 53.00 Source: Maxfield Research Group, Inc. Con gre gate /Service Intensive projects are the most service intensive except for assisted • living facilities (which are not examined in this study) and are usually located adjacent to nursing homes. There are four projects in this category in the study area with a total of 542 units. Only five units were vacant at the time of the survey, a vacancy rate of 0.9 percent. Rents range from $735 to $920 for one - bedroom units and from $930 to $1,034 for two - bedroom units. (The Boulevard in Columbia heights offers an entry fee option which allows for lower monthly rents if the resident pays $8,500 for a one- bedroom unit or $12,500 for a two - bedroom unit up- front. These fees are not refundable.) All utilities except phone are included in the rent at these projects. A number of services are available or included in the rent at these projects and two of them, St. Therese and North Ridge, require a minimum number of meals be pur- chased each month. Housekeeping is included in the rent at all of the projects ex- cept North Ridge and other services are available from the adjacent nursing homes. Because these projects are positioned for frail seniors, they have a higher proportion of one - bedroom units than the other, less service- intensive projects and the units tend to have less square footage. Two projects, Maranatha and North Ridge, even have efficiency units. This category of project tends to have the most common space to encourage participation in activities and socialization as well as to provide services. Many of these projects offer areas such as libraries, crafts rooms, and several lounges and some offer specialized areas such as the chapel at St. Therese (a Catholic -spon- sored building) or the mini store at the Boulevard. Barber /beauty shops and garden areas or a greenhouse /solarium are also common. Few parking spaces are included in these projects reflecting the frailty of residents, most of whom no longer drive. The variety of types of projects available in Brooklyn Center and the study area as a whole indicate that seniors seeking specialized housing have alternatives to meet their ' needs. The very high occupancy rates at most of these projects (nine of the 13 proj- ects had no vacant units or just one vacant unit at the time of the survey) indicates that many seniors desiring to move to rental housing will need to wait or move out of ' the area to find housing. Since seniors prefer to remain in their communities, it is clear that pent -up demand exists for new market rate senior rental housing. Ownership senior projects (condominiums /cooperatives) have been built throughout the metropolitan area, but their are only two in the study area. A small townhouse project in Brooklyn Center, Brookwood Townhomes (32 units that were built as part of the Brookwood complex and which has had few resales) and Lee Square in Robbinsdale. Ownership projects were initially successful because they were among the first types of senior housing built in the early- and mid- 1980's. As more types of housing became available, however, a number of these projects had difficulty in selling out or in unit re- sales. Over time, the market clearly was driven by demand for rental housing. Seniors who have made the decision to sell their single - family home and move to specialized senior housing are generally older and no longer see the benefits of ownership. Younger seniors who prefer to own are a market for non- age- restricted condominiums and townhouses without services. The experience of Lee Square is indicative of these trends since it had difficulty sell- ing out and a planned second phase was put on hold indefinitely. It is a very attrac- t tive building with a housing concept similar to a Congregate/ Optional Services ' 46 project. At the time of the survey, there was just one unit available for sale. Be- cause this is an ownership project, it would not be competitive with new senior rental development in the study area. Subsidized Senior Projects Table 18 presents data on the four subsidized senior projects in the study area. Gen - erally these projects also are open to younger residents who are physically handi- capped, although research indicates that less than 10 percent of the units in these projects are occupied by non- seniors. These projects have a total of 375 units and there were no vacant units at the time of the survey. All of the projects are subsi- dized under HUD's Section 8 program where tenants pay 30 percent of their adjusted gross income (AGI) for rent. TABLE 18 SUBSIDIZED RENTAL HOUSING SENIOR PROJECTS BROOKLYN CENTER STUDY AREA May 1994 Year ---- Number - - -- Project Name Built Units Vacant Prottram Type 19 Brooklyn Park 13rook's Landing 1979 110 0 HUD Section 8 (rent is 30% of AGI). Columbia IIeights Heights Manor 1977 85 0 MHFA/HUD Section 8 (rent is 30% of AGI). Parkview Villa 1974 146 0 Public Housing (rent is 30% of AGI). Subtotal 231 0 Fridley Village Green 1978 103 0 MHFA/HUD Section 8 (rent is 30% of AGI). Spring Lake Park Osborne Apartments 1982 60 0 HUD 202/Section 8 (rent is 30% of AGI). New Hope North Park Plaza 1982 106 0 HUD 202, Section 8 (rent is 30 % of AGI). 1 Robbinsdale Lilac Parkway Apartments 1991 49 0 HUD Section 8 (rent is 30% of AGI). Robbins Landing 1977 110 0 HUD Section 8 (rent is 30% of AGI). Subtotal 159 0 Total 769 0 Sources: Metropolitan Council: Directory of Subsidized Rental Housing g in the 'Twin Cities Metro Area Maxfield Research Group, Inc. 47 In addition to these projects, there are 78 units for low income persons in Shingle Creek Tower in Brooklyn Center not reserved for families that have a number of 1 senior residents. Rents are subsidized under IIUD's Section 236 program where ten- ants pay 30 percent of their AGI between a minimum basic rent ($289 for one - bedroom units or $350 for two - bedroom units) and a maximum market rent ($350 for one - bedroom units or $428 for two - bedroom units). There were no vacancies at this project. The lack of available units for seniors in the subsidized buildings indicates that de- j mand exists for senior rental housing for low income seniors. Some g overnmental organizations have addressed this need through programs that operate similar to the HUD 236 program. The Dakota County I - IRA, for example, has built a number of projects in cities throughout the county in the past four years which are geared to low and moderate income senior households, those with incomes at or below 60 percent of the area's median household income. The income limits are $27,800 per year for a one - person household and $31,750 for a two - person household. Since seniors tend to have low incomes as they no longer work, the vast majority of seniors can qualify for these units. Basic rents are $260 for one- bedroom units and $360 for two-bed- room units while market rents are $530 for one- bedroom units and $620 for two -bed- room units. Pendin Senior Housing Projects in h Pending g o� s the Study Area In order to evaluate th e competitive senior housing market situation in the future g Maxfield Research Group interviewed c it y official in the stud area communities s P Y Y to determine if any projects are planned or under construction. Discussion of the two potential projects under consideration in the proposed Brooklyn Center redevelopment areas is excluded. According to these interviews, there were no pending senior devel- opments in Brooklyn Park, Columbia Heights, Crystal, Medicine Lake, New Hope or 1 Robbinsdale. The six projects listed have a total of about 550 units although at this time, only two of these projects with a total of 150 units are likely to be available by the end of 1995. Maple Grove Elm Creek Village had been proposed as a project for moderate - income seniors and families by Podawiltz Development of St. Cloud. It would have included 47 units for seniors and 48 units for families. The project was rejected by the City Council after protests by a vocal group of citizens concerned about possible negative effects of addi- tional low- income residents in their community. This decision has been challenged in court by the developer and the suit is not yet resolved. In the meantime, a second project (without the senior housing component) called Maple Leaf Village has been proposed and received preliminary approval from the city. Final approvals will not be given until the suit with Podawiltz Development is resolved. i Farr Development has tentative plans for a moderate rent senior housing project on a site at Rice Lake Road and Maple Knoll Way on Rice Lake. The site is located in a Tax Increment Financing District and the city has planned that it be used for senior 48 housing. Shore land zoning issues must be resolved with the Department of Natural Resources before this project can move ahead. Detailed information is not yet avail- able and construction would not begin until at least 1995. Plymouth The City of Plymouth will own and manage a project being developed by Walker Management and Development at a site near the intersection of 37th Avenue North and Plymouth Boulevard. It will consist of 99 units and is expected to be completed in October of 1994. Rents will be based on income between a minimum basic rent and maximum market rent. Market rents will range from $585 to $635 for one -bed- room units and $690 to $740 for two - bedroom units. All of the units have been re- served and there are 350 names on a waiting list. Freemans'. Inc. has had tentative plans for a number of years to develop senior hous- ing at a site near the intersection of 35th Avenue North and Nathan Lane, west of Highway 169. Current plans call for 204 units and the project now has approval from the City of Plymouth. The developer is attempting to secure financing. No support services would be offered and the rents would range from about $700 to $1,100 per month, including a garage space but excluding heat. If financing can be obtained, the project will begin construction in late summer 1994 with completion expected about one year later. Fridley • Norwood Square is a 51 -unit project being developed by Westminster Corporation (affiliated with the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis) behind Moon Plaza just west of University Avenue and adjacent to St. Williams Catholic Church. The project is being assisted by HUD with Section 202 funding and Section 8 rental assistance. All of the units will have one bedroom except for a two - bedroom caretaker unit. Services will not be offered by the building management but will be referred by West- minster Residents Services to the appropriate agency. There will be very little com- mon space in this project which will be geared to low income residents. Spring Lake Park Ark Development is planning a 105 -unit moderate -rent senior project at the corner of Highway 10 and Pleasant View Drive. The project has all city approvals and pending financing, construction on the building is expected to begin in fall 1994. 49 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction Senior Growth Trends Demographic data for 1980 and 1990 as well as forecasts for the 1990's indicate that the senior population and household base is expanding rapidly in Brooklyn Center and the study area. Brooklyn Center experienced an increase of nearly 1,600 persons age 65 and over during the 1980's, a growth rate of 80.7 percent. Senior households also experienced very strong growth with a doubling of the 65 and over household base during the decade. Forecasts indicate a slowing of growth in Brooklyn Center and the remainder of the Fully Developed Area, but large increases are still expected. The senior household base in Brooklyn Center is forecast to grow by 1,271 house- holds between 1990 and 2000, an increase of 48.7 percent. The remainder of the Fully Developed Area is projected to have an increase of 2,618 senior households, or 21.2 percent, while the Developing Area is forecast to add 3,380 senior households, an increase of 93.8 percent. This strong expansion of the senior household base points to the need for additional senior housing to meet the needs of seniors who desire to sell their single - family homes and who may need support services. Market Considerations �• The market for market rate senior housing has been stable in the study area for the past several years and the current vacancy rate is only 1.9 percent. Several senior projects have only one vacant unit or none at all and only one project has a vacancy L rate above the 5.0 percent rate acceptable in a stable, healthy rental market. This indicates that pent -up demand exists, reflecting growth in demand from the expanding senior population and household base discussed above. Site Considerations There are two potential sites for a new senior development in Brooklyn Center, both are part of proposed redevelopment areas. Both sites were reviewed in the Site and Location Analysis section earlier in this report and one of these sites, located east of Highway 252 on Willow Lane south of 66th Avenue North, was examined in detail. Based on our analysis, this site would be better utilized as general occupancy rental housing rather than for seniors as it is not close to virtually any retail or community services, although it does have excellent access and good visibility. In order to make the Willow Lane site suitable for development of senior housing, we believe it would be necessary to provide some of the essential amenities for seniors not currently available close by. These include a neighborhood retail center either in the same redevelopment district or across Highway 252 that would have tenants such as a grocery store, pharmacy, hardware store, liquor store, and other convenience stores. In addition, due to the site's relatively isolated location, we recommend you secure a strong religious sponsor, preferably a large church nearby with a substantial senior membership. A transportation program for seniors who no longer drive is also ' 50 recommended. Finally, a connection to the Mississippi River is recommended if pos- sible. This would provide an attractive natural amenity for residents of the project i The other site is located in a redevelopment area in the northeast quadrant of Brook- lyn Boulevard and 69th Avenue North. A new development in this area may include a new retail development and there is a church close by that would like to sponsor a senior project. Based on our review of this site, it would appear to be more appro- priate for senior housing development than the site on Willow Lane. Senior Housing Demand Demand for senior housing was forecasted based on results from previous surveys conducted by Maxfield Research Group, Inc. and other private consulting firms and non - profit agencies. These studies consistently show that about 4.0 to 5.0 percent of the senior household base is interested in moving to housing in the short -term. Sur - ve s b our firm in senior household a Y Y o dicate that 15 percent o£ the non- subsidized se e o base P has an interest in moving to alternative housing with 30 percent of this group desiring to move in the short term (15% x 30% = 4.5 %). This demand proportion was re- flected in a study by the Wilder Foundation conducted in 1991 in conjunction with the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities ( "Older People in the Twin Cities Metro- politan Area: Results From the Minnesota Senior Study For Region XI", July 1991). Although surveys indicate a long -term interest in senior housing of 15 percent, this lie penetration level has not been achieved in any area of the Twin Cities. We believe that this reflects seniors' intentions to move someday to senior housing and not that they actually make such a move. As a result, this method of estimating demand as- ' sumes a long -term penetration rate of 10.0 percent. Table 19 shows the calculation of senior housing demand by this method. The de- mand has been divided into two categories, current demand as of 1995 and the in- crease in demand from 1995 to 2000 based on senior household growth. A portion of the existing supply of senior units has been subtracted from total potential demand to derive current demand. Only 70 percent of the existing supply has been subtracted with the other 30 percent assumed to have satisfied demand from seniors outside the study area. Current demand in 1995 is estimated at 42 units in Brooklyn Center, 521 units in the reminder of the Fully Developed Area and 391 units in the Developing Area. Adding in the estimated demand growth from 1995 to 2000 results in total demand of 72 units in Brooklyn Center, 586 units in the remainder of the Fully De- veloped Area and 479 units in the Developing Area. The reader should not assume that these figures indicate that only 72 units are sup - 1 portable in Brooklyn Center. The entire study area should be viewed as a market for senior housing, particularly the remainder of the Developing Area where the potential for new multifamily housing is limited. In addition, the lack of new housing proposed ' for these communities is further indication that a project in Brooklyn Center could satisfy demand generated by seniors residing in the other fully developed communities. 51 Another method of demand estimation utilizes the age /income - qualified senior house- hold base in the market area. For purposes of this study, we have used incomes of $15,000 or more as income - qualified. This translates to an affordable rent of at least $500 per month, assuming seniors will allocate 40 percent of their income to housing. For age qualification, we have used the entire base of older senior (age 75 and over) and one -half of the base of younger senior (age 65 to 74) households. Fewer younger senior households are included since these are households who typically do not see the value of moving to senior- specific housing and if they do, prefer housing with few services. An industry standard is that one percent of the age /income qualified group will move to market rate senior housing in any given year, up to a maximum of be- tween 15 and 20 percent. While we prefer to rely on the first method described above and shown in Table 19, the age /income qualified method would yield an annu- al demand estimate of 12 units in Brooklyn Center, 55 units in the remainder of the Fully Developed Area and 16 units per year in the Developing Area. From 1995 to 2000, this results in total demand of 72 units in Brooklyn Center, 330 in the remain- der of the Fully Developed Area and 96 units in the Developing Area. TABLE 19 SENIOR HOUSING DEMAND CALCULATIONS June 1994 Remainder Brooklyn of Fully Developing lie Center Developed Area Area senior households -1995 2,966 13,528 5,031 less subsidized* - 150 - 800 - 110 market base =2,816 = 12,728 =4,921 times long -term potential x 10 % x 10% x 10% = long -term demand = 282 - 1,273 = 492 less existing units+ - 240 - 752 - 101 equals 1995 demand = 42 = 521 = 391 1995 -2000 forecast senior household growth 659 1,449 1,954 times short -term potential x 4.5 %o x 4.5% x 4.5% equals 1995 -2000 demand = 30 = 65 = 88 Total Demand 72 units 586 units 479 units * subsidized units are estimated + 70 percent of existing units are assumed to have met demand from the total senior market; 30 percent are assumed to have met demand from seniors moving from outside the area. Source: Maxfield Research Group, Inc. 0 52 i Development Recommendations • Project Size Us Although demand from seniors in Brooklyn Center appears to be somewhat limited, it i is important to consider the potential from seniors in the reminder of the Fully De- veloped Area as well as the Developing Area. Since little additional market rate sen- ior housing is planned in these communities, we believe that Brooklyn Center could support between 125 and 175 units of market rate senior housing (including moderate- rent units) between 1995 and 2000. This is about 15 percent of the demand calculat- ed for the entire study area during the remainder of the decade. This figure could be somewhat higher or lower depending on what projects come on -line in the remain- der of the study area during the forecast period. Of the total supportable units indicated above, half of the units could be built imme- diately, or between roughly 60 and 90 units. The demand from Brooklyn Center sen- iors alone, 72 units, falls in this range and is thus an appropriate range of number of units for an initial project. Housing Concepts i There are two types of housing concepts for seniors that would fill the demand for senior housing. The first is a moderate rent project that would fall into the "Adult " / Few Services category, the second, a project geared to frail seniors that would be a Congregate/ Optional Services project. The "Adult" /Few Services project is recom- mended for development first, but a strong religious or health care sponsor could be enough of a draw to support the congregate project first. Both projects are recom- mended to have between 70 and 90 units, with the second project built later in the decade depending on market conditions and the level of construction of senior proj- ects in the remainder of the study area. The following describes each recommended product type. The "Adult /Few Services project should have a mix of about one -half one - bedroom units and one -half one - bedroom plus den or two - bedroom units. Rents (in 1994 dol- lars, including heat) should range from about $500 to $650 for one - bedroom units, $625 to $700 for one - bedroom plus den units and $700 to $900 per month for two- bedroom units. The lowest -rent units (of each type) should be reserved for moderate income senior households, those with incomes below 60 percent of the area median. The higher rent units should be larger in size and appeal to middle - income seniors. These suggested rents are meant as guidelines based on our knowledge of the market in the area; actual rents for a specific project would need to be evaluated consider- ing specific location, building type, amenities, unit sizes, etc. Parking should be provided at a ratio of 0.8 to 1.0 spaces per unit and rent for an extra $35 to $40 per month. Units should include in -unit washers and dryers if possi- ble. Common space should be limited to a community room, multi- purpose lounge (for cards, meetings, etc.), crafts room and screened porch. Additional common areas . such as exercise room, library, T.V. lounge and game room are attractive features but ' typically are not utilized much by residents, particularly the younger senior group that 53 would be a market for this project. Services should be limited and include only coor- dinated activities by the manager and some type of transportation program. The Con gre a�te/Optional Services project should have a mix of about two - thirds one - bedroom units and one -third one- bedroom plus den or two - bedroom units. The larger proportion of one - bedroom units reflects the greater level of demand from single seniors, particularly widows, for this category of housing. Rents ranging from $625 to $750 for one - bedroom units, $700 to $775 for one - bedroom plus den units and $800 to $1,000 for two - bedroom units could be supported. These suggested rents are meant as guidelines; actual rents would need to be evaluated considering specific project characteristics such as location, services and amenities offered, unit sizes, etc. Optional services should be available which emphasize a supportive yet independent living environment. One meal per day, housekeeping, medication reminders, a daily check ( "I'm Okay" program) and laundry and linen service are services characteristic of this type of project that should be offered. These services could be offered by building management or coordinated with outside service providers. If the project is less than 80 units, these services will need to be provided from an outside source since it will not be cost effective for building management to provide them for such a small number of units. Van transportation to stores and for special events is very important for this project and an organized activities program should be offered as well. Parking should be included in a ratio of about 0.7 to 0.8 stalls per unit. Initially, this t. may not appear to be sufficient as seniors prefer to keep their cars when they first move to alternative housing. After a period of adjustment, many residents will realize they no longer need their car and the parking ratio suggested above will be sufficient. Underground parking is suggested and should be provided at a cost of $35 to $40 per month. t Common space should be similar to what is suggested above for the "Adult" /Few Services building, with some additional space to accommodate the needs of more frail seniors. A small office that can be used by visiting nurses or for doctors appoint- ments should be included. This room could also be utilized for small group activi- ties /meetings when not needed for health checks. The community room should be large enough to accommodate half of the residents for dining and should have an adjacent catering kitchen. i i 1 54 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 9 -26 -94 Agenda ftem Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS DEPT. APPROVAL: 'e ea - RONALD A. WARREN, PLANNING & ZONING SPECIALIST MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:�G / No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached ) • Attached are the Planning Commission minutes of September 15, 1994. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION: MLN =S OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING CONWISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNBPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 15, 1994 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairperson Willson at 7:33 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Tim Willson, Commissioners Donald Booth, Mark Holmes, and Dianne Reem. Also present were the Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning and Zoning Specialist Ronald Warren, and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Ruth McLaurin. Commissioner Robert Mickelson was excused from the meeting. Commissioner Ella Sander arrived at 1 :35 p.m., and Commissioner Debra Hilstrom arrived at 7:45 p.m. APPROVAL 4F MT - AUGUST 11, 1994 There was a motion by Commissioner Holmes and seconded by Chairperson Willson, to approve the minutes of the August 11, 1994, Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Commissioners Reem and Booth abstained. Commissioners Sander and Hilstrom absent at time of vote. Motion passed. t WRPFRSQ,N'S FAT NATIO -- - n, 1vt. Chairperson Willson explained the Planning Commission is an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. APPLICATION NQ 94009 (EV_ NGELICAL LU`T'H'r -RAN CHCJRCH OF H M ASTER) Chairperson Willson introduced the first item of business, a request from Evangelical Lutheran Church of the Master for rezoning and d plan approval for a Planned Unit Development involving the Church located at 1204 69th Avenue North and the three apartment buildings located to the east at 1100 69th Avenue North, 1147 Emerson Lane and X6907 Dupont Avenue North. The Secretary presented the staff report, used overhead transparencies to show the location and detail (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 94009, attached). 9 -15 -94 1 Commissioner Hilstrom inquired if the church after developing the buildings for their use decided to sell, would they be able to sell the buildings individually. The Secretary noted the church would be required to combine the property into one lot through replatting. This would make it impossible to sell portions of the property without replatting the property again. Commissioner Booth indicated the requirement of one acre is necessary for the PUD, he inquired if that applies to this application. The Secretary indicated the Church property alone exceeds this requirement with currently just under five acres, and with the additional buildings would exceed five acres. Commissioner Reem questioned if the Church is the landlord to the three apartment buildings, is there a problem with tax liability. The Secretary explained it was his understanding that since it is a business, even though owned by the Church, it is still responsible for takes. The Secretary added, when the property is no longer multiple residential, and is incorporated into the functions of the Church, it would then become tax exempt. Commissioner Holmes inquired as to the contract for deed held on the property, which restricts necessary are major construction. The Secretary indicated minimal changes m'Y for the first phase and falls within the restrictions. The Secretary added the Church feels one -third of the contract would be paid and the one building could be removed from the restrictions and, therefore, able to meet all requirements necessary for the change in occupancy. Chairperson Willson inquired as to when the completion of the project is proposed. The Secretary indicated the proposed date is set for 1997 for all.phases to be completed. Commissioner Sander questioned of the three buildings, how many are occupied currently Y by residents. The Secretary indicated two of the three buildings are still multiple residential, with the third currently being prepared for use by the Church. PUBLIC HEARING (APPLICATION Na_ 94009 Chairperson Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request from Evangelical Lutheran Church of the Master for rezoning and development plan approval for a Planned Unit Development involving the Church located of 1200 69th Avenue North and the three apartment buildings located to the east at 1100 69th Avenue North, 1107 Emerson Lane and 6907 Dupont Avenue North at 8:15 p.m. There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom 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. 9 -15 -94 2 The applicant, Pastor Rober< Cottingham of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of the Master, came forward thanking the commissioners for the opportunity to speak. Pastor Cottingham indicated that currently the empty building is being painted and cleaned in preparation for use, but is not being used in any capacity. Pastor Cottingham expressed a willingness to comply with any requirements set forth. Ms. Diane Ristrom of 6819 Noble Avenue N., indicated efforts to assist any handicap person will be available until a lift or any other accessibilities are added to the building. Ms. Ristrom indicated, if necessary, any handicapped person could be taught in the main church building, which is fully accessible. The Secretary indicated a meeting of the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group could be held at the Church. Chairperson Willson indicated a more neutral site might be more appropriate so as to avoid any conflict of interest. The Secretary indicated there are optional sites, and perhaps even the Brooklyn Center High School could be used if available. Chairperson Willson called for any more questions for the applicant or for anyone else to speak at the public hearing. There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner Booth to table Application No. 94009 and refer it to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group I or additional review and comment and to leave the public hearing open. The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO 94010 MIMB PvC.} Chairperson Willson introduced the next item of business, a request from BINS, Inc. for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into a lot and an outlot the 14+ acre site located on the west side of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of the Hennepin County Library/Service Center. The Secretary presented the staff report, used over head transparencies to show the location and detail (see Planning Commission L Sheet for Application No. 94010, attached). Commissioner Sander questioned if this application was a matter of rezoning or were there purchases involved. The Secretary indicated this application was for replatting of the property only and that any subsequent requests for rezoning or plan approval would have to be considered on their own merits at a future date. Commissioner Sander inquired if this would reduce the tax responsibility. The Secretary indicated this would be the case if the City accepted a conveyance or gift of the proposed outlot. 9 -15 -94 3 Commissioner Booth questioned the location of the bike trails. The Secretary pointed out the location and indicated the trails are not on this property but on adjoining park and open space property. Commissioner Holmes inquired as to the opinion of the City Council on this application and gift. The Secretary indicated he believes there will no objection. Chairperson Willson questioned if the City Council had seen the application. The Secretary indicated they had not, the commission was the first to see this application. Commissioner Sander inquired, if the city owned this parcel, could the city develop it The Secretary indicated the city could, although the development would be restricted due to the constraints placed on the use of the land due to its wetland land and flood plain designations. PUBLIC HEARING 4PPLIC nTTON NO 940 Chairperson Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request from BIMB, Inc. for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into a lot and an outlot the 14+ acre site located on the west side of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of the Hennepin County Library /Service Center at 8:45 p.m. There was a motion by Commissioner NAstrom 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. Dick Grones a representative of the applicant canoe fdrward to answer questions, Mr. Grones indicated the an cant is pro o' to q P p p g gift the outlot and that the proposed Lot 1 might be sold to the County for a future expansion of that facility. Chairperson Willson called for any more questions for the applicant or for anyone else to speak at the public hearing. ,OSE PUBLIC HEARING There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner R--em, to close the public hearing at 8:4 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. A N RE 1 NDTN APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NQ, 94 010) There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner Holmes to recommend approval of Application No. 94010 submitted by BIMB, Inc. for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into a lot and an outlot the 14+ acre site located on the west side of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of the Hennepin County L"brary/Service Center subject to the following conditions: 9 -15 -94 4 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The existing 50' wide driveway easement and the 30' wide drainage casement shall be continued and be shown on the final plat for this property. 4. Approval of this preliminary plat does not commit the City to a future rezoning of the property or to a site plan and platting. These matters will need to be pursued through the appropriate Planning Commission applications when such plans are finalized. Voting in favor: Chairperson Willson, Commissioners Booth, Hilstrom, Holmes, Reem, and Sander. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary noted that the application will be referred to the City Council at the September 26, 1994, meeting. The applicant is required to be present at the City Council meeting. If any changes or modifications are made to the plans prior to City Council consideration, they may have to be brought back before the Planning Commission for review. APPLICATION NO 94011 t = N=- RPRISE RENT -A -CAR Chairperson Willson introduced the next item of business, a request from Enterprise Rent - A -Car for a special use permit to operate an automobile rental and leasing operation at the. Boulevard Shopping Center. The Secretary presented the staff report, used overhead transparencies to show the location. and detail (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 94011, attached). Comriissioner Hilstrom questioned hours of operation. The Secretary believed the hours to be typical business hours, but referred to the applicant. Commissioner Hilstrom questioned if additional security, or lighting had been added to parking lot for the cars. The Secret did not believe e this �o Secretary be so and indicated this not to be a problem. Commissioner Hilstrom inquired as to any screening for surrounding properties for the washing of cars. The Secretary felt this not to be a problem, since washing would be done indoors. Commissioner Sander questioned if there was a limited to cars, and recommended 25 to be the maximum. The Secretary indicated this condition could be added 9 -15 -94 S s Commissioner Reem inquired as to any other locations of this company in the state. The Secretary believed there were additional locations, but referred to the applicant. PUBLIC ART1yG {AppLICATION NO 94011} Cbai person Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request from Enterprise Rent -A -Car for a special use permit to operate an automobile rental and leasing operation at the Boulevard Shopping Center at 9:09 p.m. There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner Holmes, to open the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Willson asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the Conunission. Mr. Spencer Cook, of 9432 Willow Lane, Woodburn, came forward to represent the applicant. Mr. Cook indicated the hours would be 8:00 a.m to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 12 noon on Saturdays. Mr. Cook indicated there are currently 14 locations in the state with 20 proposed for the metro area and additional locations in Rochester and Duluth. Motion by Commissioner Holmes inquired if this location would be a 24 hour drop off for vehicles. Mr. Cook indicated drop offs would only be allowed during business hours, although drop offs at repair locations are available. Motion by Commissioner Hilstrom inquired as to security, Mr. Cook indicated they had no concern at this tune, Commissioner Sander inquired as to the maadmum of cars, would it be 25 cars on the lot or in inventory. Mr. Cook indicated it would be rare that all 25 parking spots would be taken, so no more than 25 parking spaces would be occupied. Chairperson Willson called for any more questions for the applicant or for anyone else to speak at the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HARING There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner Holmes, to close the public hearing at 9:15 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner Booth to add a condition #6 limiting the parking of vehicles and modify condition #3 to require that cleaning of vehicles indoors only for consideration. The motion passed unanimously. 9 -15 -94 6 ACTION RECOMME_ ING APPROVAL OF APPLICATIQN _NQ 4011 (>EN=RPRI E RENT -A -CAR) There was a motion by Commissioner Booth and seconded by Commissioner Hilstrom, to recommend approval of Application No. 94011 submitted by Enterprise Rent -A -Car for a special use permit to operate an automobile rental and leasing operation at the Boulevard Shopping Center subject to the following conditions: 1. The Special Use Permit is granted for an automobile rental and leasing operation with incidental outside storage of vehicles and a hand washing and vacuuming service bay only. Any change in the use of the operation not comprehended by this application or permitted under the zoning ordinance will require approval of an amendment to this Special Use Permit. Z. Building plans for tenant remodeling and an overhead door shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Official prior to the issuance of building permits. I There shall be no service, repair or maintenance of leased or stored vehicles on the site other than the indoor hand washing and vacuuming of vehicles comprehended under the approval of this Special Use Permit. 4. No banners, pennants, streamers, balloons or other attention attracting devices may be used in conjunction with the storage and display of vehicles on this site other than that which is authorized under administrative permits. 5. The Special Use Permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations. Any violation thereof may be grounds for revocation. . 6. The maximum parking spaces to be occupied by vehicles to be rented or leased shall not exceed 25. Voting in favor: Chairperson Willson, Commission.rs Booth, Hilstrom, Holmes, Reem, and Sander. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary noted that the application will be referred to the City Council at the September 26, 1994, meeting. The applicant is required to be present at the City Council meeting. If any changes or modifications are made to the plans prior to City Council consideration, they may have to be brought back before the Planning Commission for review. Chairperson Willson called a recess at 9:20 p.m. Commissioner Hilstrom left at 9:38 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:40 p.m. Chairperson Willson, noting the applicant for the next item had not yet returned, stated the commission would move on to other business. 9.15 -94 7 OTHER BUSINESS Chairperson Willson indicated the Northeast Task Force had recently listed its members and their attendance, Chairperson Willson had missed three meetings and was asked to be removed from the Task Force. Chairperson Willson wished to inform the commission of this and inquired as to any interest of the commissioners to replace him on the Task Force. after discussion the commissioners felt with only two meetings left to the Iife of the Task Force, it would not be beneficial for any of the commissioners to attend. Chairperson Willson indicated an additional item regarding the SuperAmerica along Highway 252 and 66th. Chairperson Willson indicated a Mini -Donut machine in the parking lot had progressed to a vendor van and he felt this perhaps had not been approved and referred to the Secretary. The Secretary indicated this to be true but noted such vending and sale is only allowed through Administrative Permits. He indicated a request to do this on a permanent basis has been denied. Commissioner Sander inquired as the requirements of the Fire Lanes at gas stations, could they be marked more noticeably. The Secretary indicated this is not currently an ordinance and the additional man Bower to enforce it is not available, but he would talk to the Fire Chief. Commissioner Booth updated the commission on the New Brighton Sign Ordinance appeal and that the court had ruled in favor of New Brighton regarding opinion signs. Chairperson Willson indicated return to item number 8. APP UCATION No 94012 RT ADEL ) � i� Chairperson Willson introduced the next item of business, a request from Robert L. Adelmann for site and building plan approval and a special = permit to construct a 284 square foot addition to Duke's Mobil 6501 Humboldt n Av North. orth. The Secretary presented the staff report,, used overhead transparencies to show the location and detail (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 9401 PP 2, attached). Commissioner Booth inquired as to the location of the screened garbage area required for the site. The Secretary could not recall at this time and referred it to the applicant. Commissioner Booth indicated perhaps additional shrubbery could be placed in front of the transformer located on the cast greenstrip. Commissioner Sander expressed concern that with the improvements it might be encroaching on the fire lane. The Secretary indicated that even with the improvements there is still enough room to get around the site if a fire lane is maintained. 9 -15 -94 8 PUBLTC ; t : . AR G LAPP TC` NO 940121 Chairperson Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request from Robert L. Adelmann for site and building plan approval and a special use permit to construct a 284 square foot addition to Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North at 10:28 p.m. There was a motion by Commissioner Booth and seconded b C ommiss io ne r y Comm�ss one Holmes, to open the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Willson asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the Commission. The applicant Mr. Robert L Adelman came forward. Mr. Adelman indicated a willingness to comply with all requirements. Mr. Adelman indicated trash could be located on the west side of the property. Commissioner Booth inquired if the applicant would help with the enforcement of the fire lane. Mr. Adelman indicated that in the past managers and employees have tried to keep the fire lane clear and asked persons to remove their vehicles and they would continue to do so. Commissioner Booth commented perhaps two handicap ramps would better serve the entrances. 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 FsoImes and seconded by Commissioner Booth, to close the public hearing at 10:32 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO 94012 (ROBERT L. ADELMA_ NN_) There was a motion by Commissioner Booth and seconded by Commissioner Reem, to recommend approval of Application No. 94012 submitted by Robert L Adelma.nn for site and binding plan approval and a special use permit to construct a 284 square foot addition to Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North subject to the following conditions: 1. Binding plans are subject to review and approval by the building official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to a final review and approval by the city engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. �. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the city manager) shall be submitted prior to issuance of permits. 9 -15 -94 g 4 . Any outside trash disposal facilities, including the storage of discarded tines, shall be appropriately screened from view. co 5. The building addition is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected by a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinance. 6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 7. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving lanes. 8. The area to the east and south of the new building addition shall. be signed as a "no parking fire lane" area as determined by the Fire Chief. 9, The amended special use permit is granted to the applicant for an expanded gasoline service station, repair garage, car wash, and convenience store at 6501 Humboldt Avenue Forth as contained in the plans submitted. Any expansion or alteration of the use shall require additional amendments to the special use permit. 10. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations, any violation thereof could be grounds for revocation. Voting in favor; Chairperson Willson, Commissioners Booth, H2strom, Holmes, Reem, and Sander. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary noted that the applicaron will be referred to the City Council at the September 26, 1994, meeting. The applicant is required to be present at the City Council meeting, If any changes or modifications are made to the plans prior to City Council consideration, they may have to be brought back before the Planning Commission for review. Commissioner Reem requested to be excused from the October 13, 1994 meeting. ADJOUR'VME�V'I' There was a motion by Commissioner Sander and seconded by Commissioner Booth to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The - Planning Commission adjourned at 10:36 p.m. Chairperson Recorded and transcribed by: Ruth McLaurin TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 9 -15 - 10 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 9L 26/94 Agenda hem Number It Q/ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: Planning Commission Application No. 94010 submitted by BIMB, Inc. DEPT. APPROVAL: t o#000000 2r - � L'J'G !— 4 Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Specialist MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached ) Planning Commission Application No. 94010 is a request for preliminary plat approval to • subdivide into a lot and an outlot the 14+ acre site located on the west side of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of the Hennepin County Library/Service Center. This application was considered by the Planning Commission at its September 15, 1994 meeting. Attached are minutes and information sheets from that meeting, a map of the area, and a survey relating to the proposed preliminary plat. - RECOMMENDATION This application was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 15, 1994 meeting. e Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 9401 Applicant: BIMB, Inc. Location: West side of Shingle Creek Parkway at John Martin Drive Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant is seeking preliminary plat approval to subdivide into a lot and an outlot the vacant property located along the west side of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of the Hennepin County Library/Service Center. The property in question is zoned R7 (Multiple Family Residence) and is bounded on the north by the Hennepin County Library/Service Center; on the east and southeast by Shingle Creek Parkway; and on the west by public property containing Shingle Creek and a bike and pedestrian trail. Access to the Shingle Creek Trailway is at the very southerly tip of the property in question. The current legal description of the property is Tract B, Registered Land Survey 1543. The new legal description is proposed to be Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A, Amcorp Addition. Outlot A is proposed to be 10.89 acres and is primarily wetland and woods. The boundary of the 100 year flood zone for Shingle Creek (843.8 feet) is, for the most part, located within the proposed Outlot A. Lot 1 is proposed to be approximately 3.35 acres and, for the most part, is above the 100 year flood boundary for Shingle Creek. This higher ground is, depending on soil tests and analysis, considered buildable. There is a low circular area below the. 843 foot elevation at the northeasterly portion of Lot 1 that may have to be left undisturbed depending on a determination of whether or not it is considered wetland. This will have to be looked at in the future at a time when this property is reviewed for development purposes. In discussion we have had with a representative of the applicant, we have been informed that they are proposing to dedicate, or gift, the proposed outlot to the City. The City Council has not yet indicated a willingness to accept the land, however, it is believed we would be interested as a means of preserving this wetland and wooded area in relationship to the adjoining creek, trails and open space. The applicant has apparently had some discussion with Hennepin County regarding the County's interest in the proposed Lot 1 for some possible future expansion of the Library/Service Center. There currently is a 50 foot wide driveway easement over the northeasterly portion of the property serving as one of the accesses to the Hennepin County Library/Service Center. This lines up directly across Shingle Creek Parkway with John Martin Drive. Hennepin County improved this area when the Library /Service Center was built in 1980 -81 and is responsible for its maintenance. This easement will continue with the new plat and should be shown on the final plat. A thirty foot wide drainage easement runs east/west through the proposed Outlot A. This easement has no pipes within it but serves as an outfall or overflow for a 54" storm sewer located in Shingle Creek Parkway. This easement will also continue and should be shown on the final plat. 9 -15 -94 -1- Planning Commission Information Sheet The preliminary plat survey shows a median opening in Shingle Creek Parkway ust easterly of Y Y the drainage easement. This opening does not exist and the City will consider no median openings in this area. Full access to this site will be at the John Martin Drive /Shingle Creek Parkway intersection. It should be noted that this preliminary plat in no way commits the City to a future rezoning or a site plan (other than the existing access) with respect to the future use of the proposed Lot 1. These matters will have to be addressed at the time of a proposed development. It should also be noted that the density for an R7 development is significantly reduced with this proposed division as the wetland and the flood plain areas could be used as land for density purposes with a multiple family dwelling development. The R7 zoning district does not limit the height of buildings and high rise residential development such as the Shingle Creek Towers and the Earle Brown Commons was, subject to soil conditions, anticipated for this property. The former City Engineer recommended that any watershed plans and approvals be undertaken at the time of development of the proposed Lot 1. If the County does acquire the proposed Lot 1 in the future and wishes to proceed to expand the Library/Service Center by utilizing this land, they will need to rezone this property to a zoning designation consistent with the Library/Service Center site (CIA) and combine the proposed Lot 1 with the County property through platting or Registered Land Survey prior to commencing such a project. A public hearing has been scheduled with this preliminary plat application and notices of the Planning Commission consideration have been published in the Brooklyn Center Sun /Post. Recommendation This preliminary plat appears to be in order and is recommended for approval subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The existing 50' wide driveway easement and the 30' wide drainage easement shall be continued and be shown on the final plat for this property. 4. Approval of this preliminary plat does not commit the City to a future rezoning of the property or to a site plan and platting. These matters will need to be pursued through the appropriate Planning Commission applications when such plans are finalized. 9 -15 -94 -2- INS � 1111 111 ��'� a ♦C :. �� ♦ • � �/ � 1 - 1 . 111 %�� :::'� �� ♦� ♦• ♦ ♦ = �! 0. :� �� :, � �• : ►1 �►1 �♦ � =- 1 1111 ' �I� :::' •: _• .�� E ��s un uun 1/ 11111 /111 111 �s �'�' .... •• •�� " Rm NAM NN NO 17, WN IBM pp- .rei 4 ♦` t. yam SON •i /11111 �Ic:� ►i�:; f�.7 - . - 1111111 ' � �� •• 'i %i /111 X11 1111 ►� _ , , ' � � � � - � 111 11 1111 , .� �� 111 11 1 1111 ■ �� f{ { t z �. A Lii x hit O �� E z o t Q / r PMUMNARY PLAT i ; L AMCORPAMMON a rMOM =w '• N�..f 6O.i6.q R/.R174 RAM.Q ti Tie applicant, Pastor Robert Cottingham of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of the Master, came forward thanking the commissioners for the opportunity to speak~. Pastor Cottingham indicated that currently the empty building is being painted and cleaned in preparation for use, but is not being used in any capacity. Pastor Cottingham expressed a willingness to comply with any requirements set forth Ms. Diane Ristrom of 6819 Noble Avenue N., indicated efforts to assist any handicap person will be available until a lift or any other accessibilities are added to the building. Ms. Ristrom indicated, if necessary, any handicapped person could be taught in the main church bolding, which is fully accessible. The Secretary indicated a meeting of the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group could be held at the Church. Chairperson Wy;llson indicated a more neutral site might be more appropriate so as to avoid any conflict of interest. The Secretary indicated there are optional sites, and perhaps even the Brooklyn Center High School could be used if available. Chairperson Willson called for any more questions for the applicant or for anyone else to speak at the public hearing. There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner Booth to table Application No. 94409 and refer it to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group r r d o additional al re the view and comment and to leave tn„ public hearing open. T"ne motion passed unanimously. ! APPLICATION NO 94410 CB INQ Chairperson Willson introduced the next item of business, a request from BIMB, Inc. for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into a lot and an outlot the 14+ acre site located on the west side of Shingle C-reek Parkway, south of the Hennepin County Library/Service Center. The Secretary presented the staff report, used overhead transparencies to show the location and detail (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 94010, attached). Commissioner Sander questioned if this application was a matter of rezoning or were there purchases involved. The Secretary indicated this application was for replanting of the property only and that any subsequent requests for rezoning or plan approval would have to be considered on their own merits at a fixture date. Commissioner Sander inquired if this would reduce the tax responsibility. The Secretary indicated this would be the case if the City accepted a conveyance or gift of the proposed outlot. 9 -15 -94 3 Commissioner Booth questioned the location of the bike trails. The Secretary pointed out the location and indicated the trails are not on this property but on adjoining park and open space property. Commissioner Holmes inquired as to the opinion of the City Council on this application and gift. The Secretary indicated he believes there will no objection. Chairperson Willson questioned if the City Council had seen the application. The Secretary indicated they had not, the commission was the first to see this application. Commissioner Sander inquired, if the city owned this parcel, could the city develop it. The Secretary indicated the city could, although the development would be restricted due to the constraints placed on the use of the land due to its wetland land and flood plain designations. PUBLIC HEARING PPT TCA T'TON NO 94010) Chairperson Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request from BIMB, Inc. for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into a lot and an outlot the 14+ acre site located on the west side of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of the Hennepin County Lib racy /Service Center at 8:45 p.m. There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom 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. Dick Grones a representative of the applicant cane forward to answer questions. Mr. Grones indicated the applicant is proposing to gift the outlot and that the proposed Lot 1 :night be sold to the County for a future expansion of that facility. Chairperson Willson called for any more questions for the applicant or for anyone else to speak at the public hearing. CLOSE PGBLIC A_RTN( There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner R---.M, to close the public hearing at 8:47 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NQ, 94010) There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner Holmes to recommend approval of Application No. 94010 submitted by BIMB, Inc. for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into a lot and an outlot the 14+ acre site located on the west side of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of the Hennepin County Lbrary/Service Center subject to the following conditions: 9 -15 -94 4 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The existing 50' wide driveway easement and the 30' wide drainage easement shall be continued and be shown on the final plat for this property. 4. Approval of this preliminary plat does not commit the City to a future rezoning of the property or to a site plan and platting. These matters will need to be pursued through the appropriate Planning Commission applications when such plans are finalized. Voting in favor: Chairperson Willson, Commissioners Booth, Hilstrom, Holmes, Reem, and Sander. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary noted that the application will be referred to the City Council at the September 26, 1994, meeting. The applicant is required to be present at the City Council meeting. If any changes or modifications are made to the plans prior to City Council consideration, they may have to be brought back before the Planning Commission for review. APPLICATION NO 94011 (QN7ERPRISE RENT A CARS Chairperson Willson introduced the next item of business, a request from Enterprise Rent - A -Car for a special use permit to operate an automobile rental and leasing operation at the Boulevard Shopping Center. The Secretary presented Lary p ted the staff report, used overhead transparencies to show the location and detail (see Planning Commission Infonmation Sheet for Ao lication N attached;. . P o. 94011, Conunissioner Hilstrom questioned hours of operation. The Secretary believed the hours to be typical business hours, but referred to the applicant. Commissioner Hilstrom questioned if additional security, or lighting had been added to parking lot for the cars. The Secretary did not believe this to be so, and indicated this not to be a problem. Commissioner Hilstrom inquired as to any screening for surrounding properties for the washing of cars. The Secretary felt this not to be a problem, since washing would be done indoors. Commissioner Sander questioned if there was a limited to cars, and recommended 25 to be the maximum. The Secret indicated this condition could be added. ded. 9 -15 -94 5 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 9r 26 /94 Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: Planning Commission Application No. 94011 submitted by Enterprise Rent -A -Car. ********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Specialist **************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: �&Pd No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached ) Planning Commission Application No. 94011 is a request for a special use permit to operate an • automobile rental and leasing operation at the Boulevard Shopping Center 6211 through 6227 Brooklyn Boulevard. This application was considered by the Planning Commission at its September 15, 1994 meeting. Attached are minutes and information sheets from that meeting, a map of the area, and various plans relating to the proposed special use permit. RECOMMENDATION This application was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 15, 1994 meeting. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 94011 Applicant: Enterprise Rent -A -Car Location: Boulevard Shopping Center Request: Special Use Permit The applicant is seeking a Special Use Permit to operate an automobile rental and leasing operation including the out -of -door storage of vehicles at the Boulevard Shopping Center, which is located along the west side of Brooklyn Boulevard in the 6200 block. This shopping center includes the addresses of 6211 thru 6227 Brooklyn Boulevard. The property in question is zoned C -2 (Commerce) and is bounded on the north by a former Union 76 gasoline station and auto repair operation (which is now only an auto repair operation); on the east by Brooklyn Boulevard with the city's liquor store, west fire station and a pump house, along with various single family homes on the east side of Brooklyn Boulevard; on the south by the Bridgeman's restaurant; and on the west by Ewing Avenue with R -4 zoned property containing the Ewing Square Townhomes on the west side of Ewing Avenue. Automobile rental and leasing operations are listed as special uses in the C -2 zoning district. (Note - leasing offices only are considered a permitted use in both the C -1 and C -2 zoning districts.) The applicant's representative, Mr. Spencer Cooke has submitted a letter co attached PP P � P � (copy ) describing the proposed auto leasing operation. They would occupy approximately 1200 sq. ft. at the northeast corner of the shopping center building surrounded by Nicollet Watch and Diamond and Beloved Rings and would employ six to eight full time employees. They have indicated a need to store an average of 5 to 10 cars daily on the site with a maximum of 25 cars at any one time. They also propose to utilize approximately 450 sq. ft. at the southeast corner of the building for the cleaning of vehicles at this location. Their letter indicates this space would be used for hand washing the exterior and the vacuuming of the interior of cars stored there. No servicing of vehicles will be done on the site. We have been informed that no power washing equipment would be utilized. A hose, water, cleaning detergents and a standard vacuum cleaner would make up the bulk of the equipment utilized in this area. An overhead door would need to be installed along the west side of the building. The applicant has provided a site plan of the shopping center showing their proposed locations and also the location of parking stalls they plan to use. The letter points out that the Boulevard Shopping Center currently has a surplus of on site parking spaces given the city's parking requirement of 5.5 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area of a building. The center has 20,120 sq. ft. and is required to have 111 parking spaces. There are 164 spaces on site, thus, a surplus of 53 parking spaces. Sufficient parking, therefore, exists to accommodate the extra 25 parking spaces needed for the maximum number of vehicles proposed to be stored by Enterprise Rent -a -Car at any one time in this location. It should be noted that these additional 25 parking spaces for storage purposes now expands the parking requirements for the Boulevard Shopping Center to 136 and this number of parking spaces will need to be provided for as long as Enterprise Rent -A -Car occupies space at the center. This has some limiting effect on the owner's plans to convey land along the north side of the property to the adjacent service center site. (A matter which has been discussed with the staff about a year ago.) Attached for the Commission's review is a copy of Section 35 -220, Subdivision 2 of the city ordinances containing the standards for Special Use Permits. We find no conflict between the applicant's proposal and the standards. It does not appear that the operation will have a detrimental effect on the general public welfare, be injurious to surrounding property, nor impede the normal and orderly development or redevelopment of surrounding property. Adequate measures are being taken to provide necessary on site parking and the applicant will be required to meet all necessary building code regulations with respect to tenant remodeling and the construction of an overhead door. One area that needs to be addressed and should be indicated in the Conditions of Approval relating to this application involves sales and display of vehicles. The Special Use Permit is being granted for a rental and leasing operation only with incidental storage and cleaning of vehicles allowed. Vehicles should not be displayed with banners, pennants, streamers, balloons, or other attention attracting devices other than what may be allowed through the issuance of administrative permits (limited to two such per permits per calendar year, not to exceed ten consecutive days in duration). Regular sale of vehicles is also not a part of the acknowledged Special Use Permit. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent to surrounding property owners. Recommendation All in all it appears that this application is in order and the standards for Special Use Permits are met. Approval is, therefore, recommended subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The Special Use Permit is granted for an automobile rental and leasing operation with incidental outside storage of vehicles and a hand washing and vacuuming service bay only. Any change in the use of the operation not comprehended by this application or permitted under the zoning ordinance will require approval of an amendment to this Special Use Permit. 2. Building plans for tenant remodeling and an overhead door shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 3. There shall be no service, repair or maintenance of leased or stored vehicles on the site other than the hand washing and vacuuming of vehicles comprehended under the approval of this Special Use Permit. 4. No banners, pennants, streamers, balloons or other attention attracting devices may be used in conjunction with the storage and display of vehicles on this site other than that which is authorized under administrative permits. 5. The Special Use Permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations. Any violation thereof may be grounds for revocation. 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. �. The existing 50' wide driveway ease . e plat for this 0 property. drainage easement shall be continued and be shown on the final P P P rty. 4. Approval of this preliminary plat does not commit the City to a future rezoning of the property or to a site plan and platting. These matters will need to be pursued through the appropriate Planning Commission applications when such plans are finalized. Voting in favor: Chairperson Willson, Commissioners Booth, Hilstrom, Holmes, Reem, and Sander. The motion passed unanimously, The Secretary noted that the application will be referred to the City Council at the September 26, 1994, meeting. The applicant is required to be present at the City Council meeting. If any changes or modifications are made to the plans prior to City Council consideration, they may have to be brought back before the Planning Commiss on for review. APPLICATION NO 94011 (ENTERPRISE RENT -A -CAR Chairperson Willson introduced the next item of business, a request from Enterprise A -Car for a special use permit to operate an automobile rental and leasing operation at the Boulevard Shopping Center. The Secretary presented the staff report, used overhead transparencies to show location and detail (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 94011, attached). Commissioner Hilstrom questioned hours of operation. The Secretary believed the hours to be typical business hours, but referred to the applicant. Commissioner Hilstrom questioned if additional security, or lighting had been added to parking lot for the cars. The Secretary did not believe this to be so, and indicated this not to be a problem. Commissioner Hilstrom inquired as to any screening for surrounding properties for the washing of cars. The Secretary felt this not to be a problem, since washing w b • wo uld do n _ oe indoors. g Commissioner Sander questioned if there was a limited to cars, and recommended 25 to be the maximum. The Secretary indicated this condition could be added. 9 -15 -94 5 Commissioner Re .,m P _ inquired as to any other locations of this company in the state. The Secretary believed there were additional locations, but referred to the applicant. PUBLIC HEA APPLICATION kTO. 94011 Chairperson Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request from Enterprise Rent -A -Car for a special use permit to operate an automobile rental and leasing operation at the Boulevard Shopping Center at 9.09 p.m. There was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner Holmes, to open the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Willson asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the Commission. Mr. Spencer Cook, of 9432 Willow Lane, Woodbury, came forward to represent the applicant. Mr. Cook indicated the hours would be 8:00 a.m to 6.00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9 :00 a.m. to 12 noon on Saturdays. Mr. Cook indicated there are currently 14 locations in the state with 20 proposed for the metro area and additional locations in Rochester and Duluth. Motion by Commissioner Holmes inquired if this location would be a 24 hour drop off for vehicles. Mr. Cook indicated drop offs would only be allowed during business hours, although drop offs 'at repair Iocations are available. Motion by Commissioner H istrom inquired as to security, Mr. Cook indicated they had no concern at this time. Commissioner Sander inquired as to the maximum of cars, would it be 25 cars on the lot or in inventory. Mr. Cook indicated it would be rare that all 25 parking spots would be taken, so no more than 25 parking spaces would be o=,ipied. 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 Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner Holmes to close the public hearing at 9 :15 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. 'Mere was a motion by Commissioner Hilstrom and seconded by Commissioner Booth to add a condition #6 limiting the parking of vehicles and modify condition #3 to require that cleaning of vehicles indoors only for consideration. The motion passed unanimously. 9 -15 -94 ACTION RECOMMENL?I APPROVAL OF APPLICATI)W NO 94011 (Ei�RISE EN -A -CAR) There was a motion by Commissioner Booth and seconded by Commissioner Hilstrom, to recommend approval of Application No. 94011 submitted by Enterprise Rent -A -Car for a special use permit to operate an automobile rental and leasing operation at the Boulevard Shopping Center subject to the following conditions: 1. The Special Use Permit is granted for an automobile rental and leasing operation with incidental outside storage of vehicles and a hand washing and vacuuming service bay only. Any change in the use of the operation not comprehended by this application or permitted under the zoning ordinance will require approval of an amendment to this Special Use Permit. ? Budding plans for tenant remodeling and an overhead door shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 3. There shall be no service, repair or maintenance of leased or stored vehicles on the site other than the indoor hand washing and vacuuming of vehicles comprehended under the approval of this Special Use Permit. 4. No banners, pennants, streamers, balloons or other attention attracting devices may be used in conjunction with the storage and display of vehicles on this site other than that which is authorized under administrative permits. 5. The Special Use Permit is subject to all applicable codes ordinances and J PP regulations. Any violation thereof may be grounds for revocation. 6. The maximum parking spaces to be occupied by vehicles to be rented or leased shall not exceed 25. Voting in favor: Chairperson Willson Commissioners e s�on.rs Booth, H�Istrom, Holmes, Re„m, and Sander. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary noted that the application will be referred to the City Council at the September 25, 1994, meeting. The applicant is required to be resent at the Cit n PP � P ty Cou il c meeting. If any changes or modifications are made to the plans prior to City Council consideration, they may have to be brought back befare the Planning Commission for review. Chairperson Willson called a recess at 9:20 p.m. Commissioner Hilstrom left at 9:38 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9 :40 p.m. Chairperson Willson, noting the applicant for the next item had not yet returned, stated the commission would move on to other business. 9.15 -94 7 i f • � � "■ ii i� i ■� ii ■i �� 111 /111 /11111 /1 � - � Q i■ ■�■� ■ ■� :■ ■■ 111 ` � .. ' �� i ■ "'■ ■i =� ■ �■� ■■ 111 ■) 11 � �o• _ _ _ `' � ■■ ■i ■■ �■� ■�� ■ ■■ 1111 11/ � I ion uu � °�� . � � = � � ■■ �� rl, - 1111 1 MIN �►��►,��, ri �� ,. �" �►� 111 11111 1111 " i _ �.�.♦ �♦ ♦� ��1 ♦��© �" ■■ �`�i` ��► %� 1 III .1 I. - �' �!��♦ ;m•- ■■ , p�1 IIII 11111 1111 ��i . i � �� ■■ " ♦ � � .' a � �111� 1/1111/111 ` 1 ' ./ ' - = = . �� ►_ .� �� _ = �I;� X1111 / i� % i� �� '�' ■� '�� '}i"' �� •■ 1111! /11111!1 ■� ■ 111 � � � I�rf Im � _ � 11 11 111 , . ■�i © '� /// ��E��s ��! ! . �!1 ■= �! 111!1! ` . .,,,;� ; ,'' '' , ��,�. ��: � ■:: i " 111 111111 � ► �� i� ' - ..• ■� : ` " 1111 i II/ � .l / /11 / � 1 • �1.� � /11� "� ��1� I�� 11�"�� 11 � 1- �// ® ,� ,, : ' 'i �>>�• III �� .� - �� /1111��1 " ,. •, .- as •,r: � ♦ � �� ! 11 � /// '� / � ■ �■ i ins ■�i� ■mot 111 111�t ■ �i rr ■ T, r ��, '�- �� / � �! �� ■�� ■ � i �� err lfiil�il 11 n � � !li11 �� + - : •� .• p � :■ � � %��r �'' ►�� l � �� = - 1/111111 rte• . �r ! .... • .� �� •��ttt ♦ � . ■ t Ga � X11111 .. � . ♦ • �.� � � � 1//11 111 . 111 ill 11 •• �• � r . D// � �� ■ 1� 1 i■ � =� iii �, �I�i'11 // �� ■ �� /1/ 11! 111 : ■� 111 ��A /111111 ■ .. ■ ■ IIIIIIIi1� 1111111 1�� ,. ■ ..■. �� 11 //1 /1111 lD�� ii1111 111 /// X111 /�i _ _�� • ----- - EWING AM " �O£+a�lort m� � - O Fri I x .• 1 '\ } �jy fi�I1i 1 2 3 4 3 _ - _ 7c le gat Ciescrown D '—_ " -- /�. —_.. 4l w 11I rIM ... i•1. MY lw .wlln a..rilY ,. W C L—sit-e in forma tio n t SITE AREA 2.22 ACMS • 96,841 SF 0 � , •, OUILDiNG AREA 20,120 SF O ; �r GROSS LEASABLE AREA 20.120 SF MKING SPACES PROVIDED 184 n U site flan , /� ✓ N ,! Q).,I O 20 AO 6n O 2_ -_ --fr -�-� m r -s m ; f (p r,rte 1 (� Lr [�Yt �i , u,q- .E�NDERB ©N RFALTY COMPANY j b o u t �1 r V a p� `�' G 1! DFv"KwPmE6w • LEASING • nWAG.B�:rrr �roo b1',rd. & f 3rc� nve, no. brooklyn cente innesota s .• ... =1994 0654 ° ` ° FROM • 'MARRIOTT x MARQUIS `TO 916126280161 " P:08 SEP -01 �� w " �'. ua � �..�.. r tk�x�e.�.: >, . %��fi� Y✓ v:'Fr +�. w 'fj+ SOUARB , 1 LOWELL #S AUTOMOTIVE SPECIALISTS 8,418 2 SPECIAL SIZE SHOP 4,002 3 CLEAN 'N' PRESS 2,000 4 LITTLE BROOKLYN 2,000 5 & 7 NICOLLET WATCH & DIAMOND- & BELOVED RINGS 2,500 6 1,200 Revised 2/1/94 TENLSST /blvd Section 35 -220. SPECIAL USE PERMITS 2. Standards for Special Use Permits A special use permit may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following are met: (a) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. (b) The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. (c) The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. (d) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. (e) The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. 3. Conditions and Restrictions The Planning Commission may recommend and the City Council may impose such conditions and restrictions upon the establishment, location, construction, maintenance and operation of the special use as deemed necessary for the protection of the public interest and to secure compliance with requirements specified in this ord- inance. In all cases in which special use permits are granted, the City Council may require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as part of the conditions stipulated in connec- tion therewith. 4. Resubmission No application for a special use permit which has been denied by the City Council shall be resubmitted for a period of twelve (12) months from the date of the final determination by the City Council; except that the applicant may set forth in writing newly discovered evidence of change of condition upon which he relies to gain the consent of the City Council for resubmission at an earlier time. 5. Revocation and Extension of Special Use Permits When a special use permit has been issued pursuant to the pro- visions of this.ordinance, such permit shall expire without further action by the Planning Commission or the City Council unless the applicant or his assignee or successor commences work upon the sub - ject property within one year of the date the special use permit is granted, or unless before the expiration of the one year period the applicant shall apply for an extension thereof by filling out and submitting to the Secretary of the Planning Commission a "Special Use Permit" application requesting such extension and paying an additional fee of $15.00. Special use permits granted pursuant to the provisions of a prior ordinance of Brooklyn Center shall expire within one year of the effective date of this ordinance if construction upon the sub- ject property pursuant to such special use permit has not commenced within that time. In any instance where an existing and established special use is abandoned for a period of one year, the special use permit re- lated thereto shall expire one year following the date of abandon- ment. ____ ENTERPRISE --- .RENT -A -CAR Group Headquarters September 1, 1994 City of Brooklyn Center Attn: Mr. Ronald Warren 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Mr. Warren, Our application for a Special Use Permit is to allow Enterprise Rent -A -Car to operate a rental Branch to service the residents of Brooklyn Center. This location would employ approximately 6 -8 full -time employees, would handle the needs of 20 -25 customers per day and would require the storage of an average of 5 -10 cars overnight with a maximum of 25 cars at anyone time. All overnight parking would be in spaces of the existing parking area designated in such a way as to always insure easy access to the center by all residents. (See attached. site plan for designated parking.) These spaces would not require any additional parking to be constructed thereby not causing any of the existing neighborhood environment to change. By City Code there must be a minimum of 5.5 parking spaces per every 1,000 square feet of leasable building space. Boulevard Shopping Center's 20,120 square feet requires a minimum of 110 parking spaces. The center has 164 spaces in existence today thereby creating a surplus of approximately 54 spaces The site,. Boulevard Shopping Center, Brooklyn Boulevard and 63rd Avenue, has a total area of 2.22 acres or 96,841 square feet with a building area existing of 20,120 square feet. The applicant will occupy approximately 1,650 square feet of this existing building. (See attached site plan, bay #6 and part of #1 highlighted.) We also propose to improve the site to facilitate the cleaning of our vehicles inside at this location. This would only include hand washing the exterior and vacuuming the interior of the car. No servicing of vehicles will be done on site. The level of activity that will exist will only mirror the washing and vacuuming needs of the day. On the whole this level will usually be low. All construction will be completed by a city approved firm in a timely manner. We intend to protect both the integrity and value of our community by creating a clean and safe environment in which to operate. 2484 North Cleveland Ave. Roseville, Minnesota 55113 612 -628 -9000 Enterprise Rent -A -Car is committed to conform to applicable regulations of the district. Our mission is to provide excellent service to the residents of Brooklyn Center at a reasonable cost. We pledge to be a long term partner in the future of Brooklyn Center and always work to enhance our new Community by creating a strong and vibrant entity, Enterprise Rent -A -Car, to service its needs. Sincerely, Spe�icer R. Cooke City Rental Manager SRC /nbw CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 9/26/94 Agenda Item Number _1 l REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: Planning Commission Application No. 94012 submitted by Robert L. Adelmann. DEPT ROYAL: ' Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Specialist ' MANAGER SREVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached ) Planning Commission Application No. 94012 is a request for site and building plan approval and • a special use permit to construct a 284 square foot addition to Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North. This application was considered by the Planning Commission at it September 15, 1994 meeting. Attached are minutes and information sheets from that meeting, a map of the area, and various plans relating to the proposed site and building plan and special use permit. RECOMMENDATION This application was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 15, 1994 meeting. Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 94012 Applicant: Robert L. Adelmann Location: Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North Request: Special Use Permit/Site and Building Plan Approval The applicant is seeking Site and Building Plan approval and an amendment to his Special Use Permit to construct a 284 square. ft. addition to the existing 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 b Humboldt Avenue with Brooklyn :P Y n Y 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 plan is to expand the building approximately four to six feet along a portion of the east and south sides with a. solarium type addition that will add approximately 284 square feet to the building. This relatively small addition will allow the applicant to rearrange and expand somewhat the sales area and remodel and create a handicap accessible unisex bathroom facility on the site. A new 4 ft. wide concrete sidewalk with curb, gutter, and a handicap ramp will also be added surrounding the new building addition. Ac P cess/ arlang The plan calls for no change to the access and parking on the site. Access is gained from a driveway along Humboldt Avenue and a driveway along Freeway Boulevard. There are 25 parking spaces shown on the site plan with 17 of those along the north property line, which serve primarily as parking for the three service bays along the north side of the building. Circulation to the drive - through car wash on the westerly end of the building is in a counter clockwise fashion. The building addition and concrete sidewalk leave approximately 18 feet between the edge of the sidewalk and the pump islands. This is tight, but workable provided this area is signed as "no parking, fire lane ". The arki p ng requirement for such a facility is 11 spaces for the first 2,000 square feet of retail space, three spaces per each service bay, one space for each service bay employee, plus at least two spaces for service vehicles. This comes to 25 on site parking spaces without giving any consideration to pump island parking. The site will be tight, but should work. Grading /Drainage /Utilities There are no alterations being made with respect to this site regarding change in grading, draining or utilities. Landscaping The site is fairly well landscaped and maintained currently. The applicant has submitted a landscape plan in response to the landscape point system used to evaluate site landscaping. The plan shows existing and proposed landscaping. This site is less than two acres and, therefore, requires only 80 landscape points. The proposed plan, which takes into account existing landscaping with the addition of three new maple trees along the west side has a point value of 81 points. Building The building addition exterior is primarily double insulated tempered glass solarium with the lower portion being an approximate 3 ft. 4 in. face brick wall to match the existing wall. Trash /Lighting There are no changes to the site lighting proposed with this building addition. With respect to trash, it should be noted that at the northwest corner of the site, the applicant has stored discarded tires and a dumpster in an unscreened area. There is an approximate 6 ft. high metal screen wall along the north and west property lines that provides sufficient screening from the abutting residential property to the west and north. However, an appropriate screening device should be provided for trash and the discarded tires per city ordinance requirements. Special Use Standards A public hearing has been schedule for this special use permit and notices have been sent. Attached for the Commission's review is a copy Section 35 -220 containing the five standards for special use permits. This is an existing facility and, for the most part, it is believed this addition is compatible with the standards for special use permit. One item that needs to be addressed by the applicant involves a tire display rack located at the very northeast portion of the building. The Zoning Ordinance states that no merchandise may be displayed for sale outside the principal building of a gasoline service station except within four feet of the building or in pump islands. This tire rack appears to exceed this four foot limitation. It is also in an area that, with the expansion of the building, may make this site more congested with the building being closer to the pump islands. The applicant should take the appropriate measures to bring this matter into compliance with the city ordinances. Recommendation All together the plans appear to be in order and the special use permit standards can be meet provided the trash and display matters are corrected. Approval is, therefore, recommended subjected to at least the following conditions: 1 Building plans are subject to review and approval by the building official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to a final review and approval by the city engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee ( in an amount to be determined by the city manager) shall be submitted prior to issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities, including the storage of discarded tires, shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building addition is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected by a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 7. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving lanes. 8. The area to the east and south of the new building addition shall be signed as a "no parking fire lane" area as determined by the Fire Chief. 9. The amended special use permit is granted to the applicant for an expanded gasoline service station, repair garage, car wash, and convenience store at 6501 Humboldt Avenue North as contained in the plans submitted. Any expansion or alteration of the use shall require additional amendments to the special use permit. 10. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations, any violation thereof could be grounds for revocation. OTHER BUSINESS Chairperson Willson indicated the Northeast Task Force had recently listed its members and their attendance, Chairperson Willson had missed three meetings and was asked to be removed from the Task Force. Chairperson Willson wished to inform the commission of this and inquired as to any interest of the commissioners to replace him on the Task Force. A-tcr discussion the commissioners felt with only two meetings left to the Iife of the Task Force, it would not be beneficial for any of the commissioners to attend. Chairperson Willson indicated an additional item regarding the SuperAmerica along Highway 252 and 66th. Chairperson Willson indicated a Mini -Donut machine in the parking lot had progressed to a vendor van and he felt this perhaps had not been approved and referred to the Secretary. The Secretary indicated this to be true but noted such vending and sale is only allowed through Administrative Permits. He indicated a request to do this on a permanent basis has been denied. Commissioner Sander inquired as the requirements of the Fire Lanes at gas stations, could they be marked more noticeably. The Secretary indicated this is not currently an ordinance and the additional man power to enforce it is not available, but he would talk to the Fire Chief. Commissioner Booth updated the commission on the New Brighton Sign Ordinance appeal and that the court had ruled in favor of New Brighton regarding opinion signs. Chairperson Willson indicated return to item number 8. APPLICATION NO 94012 (ROBERT ADELMA tNl Chairperson Willson introduced the next item of business, a request from Robert L. Adelmann for site and building plan approval and a special use permit to construct a 284 square foot addition to Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North. The Secretary presented the staff repor+, used overhead transparencies to show the location and detail (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 94012, attached). Commissioner Booth inquired as to the location of the screened garbage area required for the site. The Secretary could not recall at this tims and referred it to the applicant. Commissioner Booth indicated perhaps additional shrubbery could be placed in front of the transformer located on the east greenstrip. Commissioner Sander expressed concern that with the improvements it might be encroaching on the fire lane. The Secretary indicated that even with the improvements there is still enough room to get around the site if a fire lane is maintained. 9 -15 -94 8 PUBLIC jE ARINQ ( N NO 94 12) Chairperson Willson asked for a motion to open the public hearing on the request from Robert L. Adelmann for site and building plan approval and a special use permit to construct a 284 square foot addition to Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North at 10:28 p.m. There was a motion by Commissioner Booth and seconded by Commissioner Holmes, to open the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Willson asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the Commission. The applicant Mr. Robert L. Adelman came forward. Mr. Adelman indicated a willingness to comply with all requirements. Mr. Adelman indicated trash could be located on the west side of the property. Commissioner Booth inquired if the applicant would help with the enforcement of the fire lane. Mr. Adelman indicated that in the past managers and employees have tried to keep the fire lane clear and asked persons to remove their vehicles and they would continue to do so. Commissioner Booth commented perhaps two handicap ramps would better serve the entrances. Chairperson Willson called for any more questions for the applicant or for anyone else to speak at the public hearing. CLOSE P TBLI LNG i here was a motion by Commissioner Holmes and seconded by Commissioner Booth, to close the public hearing at 10 :32 p.m. The motion passed unanimously, ACTION RECOMMEINDING APPROVAL, OF APP!,IJ"TION NO 94012 (ROBERT T ADF_.t M_A NNI There was a motion by Commissioner Booth and seconded by Commissioner Reem, to recommend T ~nmen approval of Application ho. 94012 submitted by Robert L. Adelmann for site and building plan approval and a special use permit to construct a 284 square foot addition to Duke's Mobil, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the building official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to a final review and approval by the city engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. �. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the city manager) shall be submitted prior to issuance of permits. 9 -15 -94 g 4. Anv outside trash disposal facilities, including the storage of discarded tires, shall be appropriately screened from view. S. The building addition is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected by a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinance. 6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. ?. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving lanes. 8. The area to the east and south of the new building addition shall. be signed as a "no parking fire lane" area as determined by the Fire Chief. 9. The amended special use permit is granted to the applicant for an expanded gasoline service station, repair garage, car wash, and convenience store at 6501 Humboldt Avenue North as contained in the plans submitted. Any expansion or alteration of the use shall require additional amendments to the special use permit. 10. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations, amn violation thereof could be grounds for revocation. Voting in favor: Chairperson Willson, Commissioners Booth, H2strom, Holmes, Reem, and Sander. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary noted that the application will be referred to the City Council at the September 26, 1994, meeting. The applicant is required to be present at the City Council meeting. If any changes or modifications arc made to the plans prior to City Council consideration, they may have to be brought back before the Planning Commission for review. Commissioner ReCm requested to be excused from the October 13, 1994 meeting. ADJOUR'v` There was a motion by Commissioner Sander and seconded by Commissioner Booth to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:36 p.m. Chairperson Recorded and transcribed by: Ruth Mciaurin TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 9 -15 -94 10 ■� I�fi111 ■i11 = 1■■■ ii 1■11 ■■ ■i ii ■ i %� Q" �i /1111/ ■ i ■ , r�■� ,111 ■ 1 �N� , :.. � � -1111 11111■ 111 111 • � � tl1 IE!■ - 1111111 � �� 1111 1111 � ��►��0�� . ■ 1 ' , 1111 11111, 111111 �] ' 1111 � 1 1111 1 ' ' �� __ _ ( � �1 1!'J■ 111111 ■ . � 11. 11 , 111' �� ' �� 1 111111! ■ 111/ ■� �� ' � 1111111 1► �� ; �� .. 1 �. �1 , .. 1� ■ 111:/ == , 11■ 11 11111 ♦�♦ ♦�♦ ■111111 ' ►��♦ ♦�� ♦ r� - ■1 ■ /11 1111 ■ ...�■ 1 1 1 11 / /1/ ► 1/� �� 1// 1111; ■ ■ i1 ■■ I■■i11 111' ■■ . , 1 111 1 ■ ��5� 111 �11111�■ ■ 1/ 1111 = 11 111111 i ��m I 1N ■ ■111 11111111 11 ►��i � � �■ © ■1111 �� : I It■ : ■ ., 1 1111 1 IIIWI�' ni � �"""" 1111 111/ 111 111■ ►♦ ♦• ,. 111111 / �� • � ��'� ��/111� �: 11 111 111 1 1 111 ■ 1/ ., :1 �� ■11111 1 ., 1111 11111 I �I 11111 I � .■ 11 �.,,,� : •`f � �: �■ �1- 11111 11111 IL'■. 1 . ■1111 1 : .. "�' •� �, . i 1 '111111 1111 111. 111111 X11111 r■ .., . 11111 /1 ■ 111 ` /11111 I■ ■ ■ 1 1 .III It11 1 I "' 11■ " 1 1 11 III 1 111 11/ 1 i 1111 � ; - - - _ � -�- .. •_ ��• Z � .■ �� . ...._ - - � !� 1_.11 1� ,.■ . <, ,.•�,� ,�1 `, 11� � � \t1 111 /111 . ■ 11� 4 � `�• ' � � �� 1 16 _ �x��'�� . � � "Ax,�,��'•�.1� 111 � " .. -, ��1 ■111 t-w nLE = FFF 71, - -- � �� exl�t raaNt • - - . - �. - I• L H - c Or Cacl4( P C eWAX _ / t I�NA. iL; Cam 1AN KS��4 ex q tr Ex i - TFVIN = — ra,C, ,4,rr= r =-E� Y �o�TH d i —�-.�( �M7�OL — D�.�G I Ici�t ��c'<K.•t i �;;c.'i' , �:3. � - it r F-U O UY. i I` fr 3 I 1 2A, o ,� 2 . r � - =GILo� AR$O v17�• �(s'y I — Lo .. s1 /v1AnL — t�h -aO, p - y n I l � Section 35 -220. SPECIAL USE PERMITS 2. Standards for Special Use Permits A special use permit may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following are met: (a) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. (b) The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. (c) The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. (d) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. (e) The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. 3. Conditions and Restrictions The Planning Commission may recommend and the City Council may impose such conditions and restrictions upon the establishment, location, construction, maintenance and operation of the special use as deemed necessary for the protection of the public interest and to secure compliance with requirements specified in this ord- inance. In all cases in which special use permits are granted, the City Council may require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as part of the conditions stipulated in connec- tion therewith. 4. Resubmission No application for a special use permit which has been denied by the City Council shall be resubmitted for a period of twelve (12) months from the date of the final determination by the City Council; except that the applicant may set forth in writing newly discovered evidence of change of condition upon which he relies to gain the consent of the City Council for resubmission at an earlier time. 5. Revocation and Extension of special Use Permits When a special use permit has been issued pursuant to the pro - visions of this ordinance, such permit shall expire without further action by the Planning Commission or the City Council unless the applicant or his assignee or successor commences work upon the sub- ject property within one year of the date the special use permit is granted, or unless before the expiration of the one year period the applicant shall apply for an extension thereof by filling out and submitting to the Secretary of the Planning Commission a "Special Use Permit" application requesting such extension and paying an additional fee of $15.00. Special use permits granted pursuant to the provisions of a prior ordinance of Brooklyn Center shall expire within one year of the effective date of this ordinance if construction upon the sub- ject property pursuant to such special use permit has not commenced within that time. Ln any instance where an existing and established special use is abandoned for a period of one year, the special use permit re- lated thereto shall expire one year following the date of abandon- ment. Council Meeting Date 9/26/94 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Numbe Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: North Metro Mayors Association Legislative Report Department Approval: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Discuss the North Metro Mayors Association legislative /policy- administrative planning timetable and legislative agenda. Consider authorizing staff to invite City Council candidates and others the City Council believes would be interested to the North Metro Government Summit. Because a majority of the City Council may be in attendance at this meeting, the City Council should instruct staff to post • proper notices of this meeting. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) Attached please find copies of the proposed North Metro Mayors Association legislative /policy- administrative planning timetable. Also attached for your information is a copy of the North Metro Mayors Association 1995 legislative agenda worksheet. As a part of this legislative timetable, the City Council should have recently received an invitation to a North Metro Government Summit to be sponsored by the North Metro Mayors Association on Wednesday, October 5, 1994, 7:30 to 8:45 p.m. at the Holiday Inn North Ballroom in Brooklyn Center. The City Council should have received invitations in the mail, and I have enclosed a copy of the invitation for your information. Mayor Thompson of Coon Rapids, Legislative Advisory Committee Chair, has asked City Council's to consider inviting candidates for upcoming City Council elections to this summit so they can be informed on North Metro Mayors Association issues. • Memorandum To: Legislative Advisory Committee j Mayor William Thompson, Chair From: Joseph D. Strauss Sarah M. Nelson Phil Cohen Date: July 27, 1994 Subject: NNIMA Legislative ,/Policy- AdministrativePlanning Timetable SuQaest that the following legislative planning timetable be adopted, to wit: 1. August - Lecislative,/Policy- Administrative brainstorming and objective setting for'95 V 2. September - Finalize objectives - Present to NMtiIA's Board Review with state /metro agencies Review with candidates for legislature and governor �. October - Continue review with candidates and agencies 4. November - Begin drafting legislative proposals - Present to ��ILLa's Operating Committee Attempt to get consideration in Governor's budget proposal 5. December - Finalize legislative proposals Finalize detailed action plan for'95 Session - Present to NNEM 's Board North Metro Mayors Association 1995 Legislative Agenda Worksheet Average Ranking (White Packet) Categories Average Position Ranking 1. Fiscal Disparities 1.41 Lead 2. Highway/Bridge & Transit Funding 1.47 Lead - Supportive (Numerous organizations) 3. Economic Development/Redevelopment 1.71 Supportive Tax Increment Financing (MN Solutions) 4. Orneld Legislation 1.75 Lead 5. Economic Development/Redevelopment 1.76 Lead - Supportive Housing (AN) 6. LGr1,'HACA Formula 1.82 Lead - Supportive 7. Leap Frog Development 1.88 Supportive (State Issue/League) 8. Tax Reform 1.88 Supportive (State Issue) 9. Economic Development/Redevelopment 2.06 Supportive Polluted Lands (NIN Solutions) 10. State Tax on Local Government 2.18 Supportive Purchases (State Issue./League) 11. State Mandate 2.29 Supportive (State Issue/League) 12. Wetland Replacement Policy 2.53 Supportive (Urban Wetland Coalition) 13. Ethics Law 2.59 Supportive (To be determined) 14. Information Infrastructure Systems 2.65 Supportive (League Sub - Committee) ISO No.. Ale fro -'S;E!��illmmlt ....... ...... . . ........... .............. , N ORTH METRn MAYORS ASSOCIATION T ie N ord -feiro Government Summit sponsored by the Nort� Metro Mayors Association. i ts purpose is to inform decision- makers of the acts regarding the im b alance between the Nortl Metro area and the south west suburbs. F acts presented will reveal the astonishing disparities e%isting in poverty concentration, Rousing, education, allocation of in l ras tructuxe dollars and more. North Afetro Government Summit Tednesda octcber j 1994 7:30 - 8:45 p.m. Holiday Inn Nortl - Ballroom SDingle Cree-6 ParLway and 1-694 �- e -.r"n llelowi BroAl Center Minnesota 4 i I P!eaae contact the Narth Metm N( \ ssoc i a ti on , at 6 1 . 2) -' 0 3 Z- I 15 [or more inio rma tio n. Did you know ... I V I orih.' suburDs° have the lowest property tax b ase per household in the region - signit less than the affluent South/west suburbs. S chool districts of the N ortn Metro are gaining poor children, as a percentage of total enrollment, ; aster th an any other part o� the metro area. III.-ner-ring SUOUrDs captured only 191// of new iobs during 1980-90 -- the southwest suburbs gained 01 %. Dunng the last aecade, 851, of reL /0 Zhwav construction dollars were spent in blie sout I h/ west metropolitan area. T he entire metro region unfairl subsidizes Soutlh/ Wes Lszub uA an sewer growth. T I orth Metro Ll avors :�;sociation members are asked to formally convene their individual City Council meetings and participate in the summit. Listed below are the Association members: Andover Dayton Anoka Ham Lake Blaine Minneapolis Brooklvn Center New Brighton Brooklyn Park. New Hope Columbia Heights Oaiz Grove Coon Rapids Ro bb insdale Crystal Spring Lake Park Circle Pines P resentations will be made b the following individuals: Mayor William Thompson - Moderator - City of Coon Rapids Mayor Elwyn Tinklenberg - City of Blaine Representative Myron Orfield - District 60B Senator Don Betzold - District 48 Mayor Edward Erickson - City of New Hope enator S teve Nova - District 52 Council Meeting Date 9/26/94 3 City of Br oo klyn Center Agenda Item Number Request For Council Consideration Item Description: 1995 PUBLIC UTILITY RATE STUDIES Department Approval: S Diane Spector, Director of Public Services Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: WATER UTILITY Resolution 93 -176 increased the rates from $0.82 per 1000 gallons in 1994 to $0.86 in 1995. This rate increase is adequate to fund operating costs, and I recommend that the Council reaffirm this rate. A resolution establishing the 1995 water utility rate schedule is provided for Council consideration. SANITARY SEWER UTILITY Resolution 93 -177 increased the residential quarterly rate from $40.00 in 1993 to $42.50 in 1994, and the non - residential rate from $1.60 per 1000 gallons to $1.70 per 1000 gallons. I recommend that the Council maintain this rate for 1995. These rates are sufficient to meet utility financial goals only if the Council considers using GO revenue bonds to finance the major capital outlays expected in the next few years. I recommend that the Council consider: 1) Maintaining the 1994 rate, resulting in no increase in 1995; and 2) Directing staff to, at such time as the lift station #1 and Garden City trunkline projects are initiated, prepare a financing plan for said improvements utilizing GO revenue bonds. A resolution establishing the 1995 sanitary sewer utility rate schedule is provided for Council consideration. STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY Resolution 93 -178 increased the residential quarterly rate from $6.75 per lot to $7.50 per lot and the base rate from $27 per REF acre to $30 per REF acre. These rates are sufficient to meet utility financial goals. Request For Council Consideration Page 2 I recommend that the Council consider: 41 1) Reaffirming the 1995 rates. A resolution establishing the 1995 storm drainage utility rate schedule is provided for Council consideration. UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES Resolution 93 -179 states charges are increased annually based on inflation. I recommend increasing charges 2.9 percent, based on the increase in the CPI from July 1993 to July 1994. A resolution establishing the 1995 utility hookup charges is included for Council consideration. RECYCLING UTILITY Resolution 93 -180 established a rate of $1.25 per month per household for recycling services beginning January 1, 1994. Changes in the Hennepin County Recycling (HRG) and a decrease in funding from Hennepin County will result in some significant changes in the recycling fund for 1995. Hennepin County will decrease to $.75 per household per month, from $1.75 per month, the recycling rebate currently refunded to all HRG communities. This decrease was in response to increased dumping charges for all Hennepin County haulers. HRG has indicated that the above changes will necessitate an increase in residential recycling rates from $1.25 per household per month to $2.25 per household per month. A resolution establishing the 1995 recycling rate is included for Council consideration. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Ye P ( PP g s ) The City Council annually reviews water, sanitary sewer, recycling and storm drainage utility rates to ensure that the utilities' financial goals are met. Attached to this item is the 1995 rate review. The rates of each of the four utilities are reviewed in individual papers. A fifth paper addresses the water and sanitary sewer hookup charges. The Council in 1993 reviewed rates and established rate increases for both 1994 and 1995. It is my recommendation that the Council adopt the following 1995 rates. These rates are necessary for a number of reasons. Although utility staff strive to operate and maintain the utility systems as efficiently as possible, the cost of materials such as water treatment chemical continues to rise, as does the cost of electricity used to power well and lift station pumps and natural gas to heat well houses. ® A program of capital projects intended to increase capacity or maintain the integrity of the systems continues to draw down cash reserves. In the Sanitary Sewer adn Storm Drainage utilities, these capital outlays are projected to be of such magnitude over the next two to four years that rate increases can only be held to a reasonable level through consideration of issuing general obligation (GO) revenue bonds to "even out" capital expenditures. Request For Council Consideration Page 3 ■ A policy change was recommended by the City's auditor, and approved by the Council three years ago. This change phases out the long - standing policy of subsidizing rates by using some interest earnings to pay operating costs. This phase out won't be complete until 1996, when rates will fully fund operating costs. Until that time, rates will continue to rise a little faster than expected. If the recommended rates are adopted the annual utility bill of the average residential customer would increase about 6.2 percent, or roughly $20.84. The annual bill of the average senior customer would increase about 8.4 percent, or about $15.00. Table 1 AVERAGE ANNUAL UTILITY COSTS, TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS 1994 RATES COMPARED TO RECOMMENDED 1995 RATES Residential Senior 1994 1995 1994 1995 Recycling $15.00 $27.00 $15.00 $27.00 • Water $104.96 $110.80 $28.00 $28.00 Sanitary Sewer $170.00 $170.00 $93.60 $93.60 Storm Drainage $27.00 $30.00 $27.00 $30.00 TOTAL $316.96 $337.80 $163.60 $178.60 Percent Increase 6.2% 8.4% BROOKLYN CENTER WATER UTILITY . 1995 RATE REVIEW BACKGROUND The City Council on October, 13, 1993 adopted Resolution 93 -176, which established water rates for 1994 and 1995. The Council annually reviews established rates for their adequacy and makes adjustments as necessary. In 1992, the Council approved a policy change regarding the use of interest earnings to subsidize rates. Previously, one half of interest earnings were used to offset operating costs; starting in 1992, this subsidy is being phased out 20 percent per year. The phase out of this subsidy will be complete in 1996. For 1995, 10 percent of interest earnings will subsidize rates. WATER UTILITY FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE, 1993 AND 1994 The water utility's financial performance in 1993 was about as expected: because of the wet Summer, projected incomes were less than expected. Expenditures were also lower in 1993 because: 1) the reduction in the demand for water reduces the cost - electricity, chemicals, etc. - of producing water; and 2) a vacant Maintenance II position in the water /sanitary sewer utilities, created when that person was promoted to Public Utilities Supervisor, has not been refilled. The resulting net operating income, (operating revenues minus operating expenditures) was about $36,935. It. is estimated that revenues and expenditures in 1994 will be about as projected. While it is estimated that operating costs will be up slightly, revenues should be sufficient to cover the increases, the net impact is an expected operating balance of about $30,500 CAPITAL OUTLAYS The major capital improvement projects of the past year have been the final completion of water main improvements associated with the 69th Avenue street project, improvements associated with the street improvements in the southeast and northwest neighborhoods and water main improvements at 1 -94 and Dupont. RATE REVIEW, 1994 AND 1995 PROJECTED EXPENSES Personnel and utility expenses are projected to increase at three percent per year, while other operating expenses are projected to increase five percent per year. A new expense for 1994 is vehicle operations cost. In previous years, the General Fund subsidized the operation and maintenance of utility -owned vehicles. In 1993, a reimbursement for fuel use was added to the General Fund budget. The cost shown on the rate - setting schedules is an estimate of both the vehicle operations (fuel and maintenance) and rental (depreciation, insurance, license, etc.) costs generated by the vehicles considered to be assets of the water utility. Table 1 on the following page details the program of capital improvements outlined in the Capital • Improvements Program. RATE SETTING CONSIDERATIONS The schedule at the end of this report labeled Option 1 shows the projected effect of the existing rate schedule. No rates for 1995 or 1996 have been officially established, so the schedule shows the rates continuing at even increases. This option meets all utility financial requirements; no other options have been identified for consideration RECOMMENDATION ND ION To preserve flexibility and to provide for a revenue cushion, it is recommended that the Council adopt the rates shown on Option 1. This would result in an increase in rates in 1995 from $0.82 per 1000 gallons to $0.86 per 1000 gallons. IMPACT OF RECOMMENDED RATE INCREASE Table 2 below illustrates the impact the recommended rate increase would have on the summer water bills of various types of customers. The summer bill is typically the highest bill of the year. TABLE 2 IMPACT OF RECOMMENDED WATER BASE RATE INCREASE SUMMER WATER BILLS OF VARIOUS CUSTOMERS Type of Customer 1994 1995 Charge Charge RESIDENTIAL Low Use (Minimum) $7.00 $7.00 Average Use (38) 31.16 32.68 High Use (116) 95.12 99.76 Apartment, 36 Units (630) 516.60 541.80 CMMERCiAL Car Dealership (235) $192.70 $202.10 Heavy Commercial Use (864) 708.48 743.04 • • • TABLE 1 - Capital Improvement Program - Detail of Capital Outlays Water Utility .,;. 21 -Sep-94 .:9.9� EXPENDITURES: WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 69th Avenue, Beard to Shingle Creek Pkwy 125,000 0 69th Avenue, Shingle Creek Pkwy to Dupont 300,000 WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM 2 MG Reservoir & Pumping Station 3,300,000 Construct Well #11 1,000,0 MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS New Electric Controls at Wells 5, 6, 7 90,000 0 1694 & Dupont (South) 24" steel main 54,000 0 Emergency tie -in to Brooklyn Park 225,000 0 WATER TOWERS Paint Tower #1 166,000 Paint Tower #2 150,000 0 Paint Tower #3 158,000 0 Landscape Tower #1 10,000 MISCELLANEOUS 0 Routine Well Maintenance 20,000 50,000 50,000 55,000 55,000 275,000 Cathodic Protection 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 125,000 SCADA Hardware & Software Update 20,000 0 SCADA Replacement 125,000 FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT City Garage Remodelling 250,000 112,500 Central Garage: Unfunded Depreciation 40,420 Computer Equipment 4,000 13,000 10,000 Emergency Utility Van 30,000 Drill Rig 25,000 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 1995 MSA 100,000 1996 MSA 100,000 1997 MSA 25,000 Neighborhood Street Improvements 310,000 100,000 140,000 100,000 120,000 750,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $829,420 $574 $598,500 $740,000 $200,000 $5,741 Table 4 is a summary of 1995 water rates per 1000 gallons for a number of Metro area cities. • Brooklyn Center continues to have one of the lower rates in the area. TABLE 4 1995 WATER RATES OF VARIOUS METRO AREA CITIES CITY PER CITY:PER 1000 G X000 G'' Minneapolis $1.59 Minnetonka $0.95 Bloomington 1.50 Anoka 0.85 Robbinsdale 1.37 Brooklyn Park 0.85 Richfield 1.37 Plymouth 0.75 Crystal 1.34 BROOKLYN 0.86 CENTER Golden Valley* 1.25 Fridley 0.65 Maple Grove 0.90 Blaine 0.65 OTHER FEES AND CHARGES The water utility rate schedule contains a number of fees and charges in addition to rates for service. The following list describes each fee or charge and its current level; one is recommended for change. FEES A. 5/8" x 3/4" WATER METER Property owners are currently charged $50.00 for a water meter when a water account is opened with the City. The City then buys the water meter from the property owner when the water account is closed, and the new owner is then charged for the water meter when the new account is opened. Since most of the water meters in the City are of this size, it is administratively convenient to charge the same fee to all accounts. • B. 3/4" OR LARGER WATER METER Property owners requiring water meters larger than the standard residential water meter are charged the cost of the meter plus a $2.00 administrative fee. Since there are far fewer of the larger meters, it is not as difficult to administer the buy -back of the water meters. C. FIRE PROTECTION INSPECTION Property owners with fire sprinkler systems are charged an annual fire inspection fee of $50.00 to test the fire sprinkler system. D. PRIVATE RI ATE FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE Property owners who have privately owned fire hydrants located on their property are billed the cost of labor, materials, equipment and overhead whenever the City performs maintenance of their fire hydrants. CHARGES A. DELINQUENT ACCOUNT CHARGE The present delinquent account charge is $3.00 or 10 percent of the utility bill, whichever is greater. It applies to the bill as a whole. B. CERTIFICATION TO TAXES The special assessment service charge for delinquent accounts recovers the cost of certification with the County Auditor of the delinquent amounts to taxes. It is recommended that this fee remain at $30.00, which is consistent with the certification fee for diseased tree and weed destruction. C. RESTORATION OF SERVICE - MONDAY TO FRIDAY, EXCEPT HOLIDAYS, BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:30 A.M. TO 3:00 P.M. The restoration of service charge during working hours is $25.00, and includes the cost of one hour labor, labor additive, and vehicle rental. It is charged in all instances where a customer's water has been turned off, whether by a customer's request or for non - payment of utility bills. D. RESTORATION OF SERVICE - ANYTIME SATURDAYS, SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS AND BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 3:00 P.M. AND 7:30 A.M. ON MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY EXCEPT HOLIDAYS Restoration of service during off hours is much more expensive because Public Utility employees are called back to work for a minimum of two hours at overtime pay. The restoration of service charge is $75.00 during these hours. E. DELINQUENT METER READING The delinquent meter reading charge is designed to motivate water customers into reading their own meter and forwarding the meter reading card to the City for billing. The current charge is: $2.00 the first and second consecutive time a reading card is not returned. The charge increases to $5.00 the third time, and to $10 the fourth time. After four quarters, the customer must either submit a reading card or schedule a meter reading, or face water shutoff. F. WATER HOOKUP CHARGE i Properties that have never been assessed, or not fully assessed for water are charged a hookup charge when water hookup is requested. The charge is intended to cover the cost of the lateral water main, supply, and trunk capital investment in the water system. It is calculated on a per lot basis for single family residential and on a linear foot plus square foot basis for • all other properties. It is established annually by resolution. G. HYDRANT METER CHARGES The hydrant meter charges are for meters that attach to fire hydrants used as a temporary water connection, usually for construction projects. The City has two sizes of hydrant meters, 5/8" x 3/4" and 2t/2 ". The charges for the smaller meter include $100.00 deposit, $1.00 per day rental, $20.00 minimum charge, and the cost of the water used at the prevailing water rate. The charges for the larger meter include $700.00 deposit, $7.00 per day rental or $100.00 per month rental, $35.00 minimum charge and the cost of water used at the prevailing water rate. H. CURB STOP STAND PIPE REPAIR City crews are called on to repair curb stop stand pipes for private properties due to damage or settling. In cases where the curb stop stand pipe is bent or otherwise damaged, a substantial amount of time can be involved in repair. A standard charge of $40.00 is charged for each curb stop stand pipe repair. e:\eng\pubud1\rates\watrat95 WATER *ILITY RATE STUDY: 1995 01WN 1: i Publutillwatrat95 08-Sep-95 :i::: > <;...... 99 ............:........... ..9393......:..:..::.:......... 199. 4......................... 1. 99. 5......................... 19�> 3................ ..........�.5�97............... .............1.998............. EXPENDITURES 1) Operations Personal Service 348,313 317,283 324,083 330,845 344,079 357,842 368,577 Contractual 173,799 144,216 148,542 152,999 157,589 162,316 167,186 Supplies & Materials 105,388 68,699 90,000 92,700 95,481 98,345 101,296 Heat, Light & Power 134,905 128,901 135,346 142,113 149,219 156,680 164,514 Interest on Debt 1,855 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle Operating Costs 39,414 43,218 45,000 49,000 54,000 State Connection Surcharge 0 0 46,100 46,100 46,100 46,000 46,000 Depreciation Expense 233,447 267,279 246,500 260,000 297,000 325,000 339,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $997,707 $926,378 $1,029,986 $1,067,975 $1,134,468 $1,195,184 $1,240,573 REVENUES 2) Billing Revenues $843,697 $772,401 $943,000 1,032,000 1,080,000 1,128,000 1,164,000 Water in MGAL 1,320,000 1,150,0 1,150,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 : I�AT�::: f?Lt�:; 1© :�#�:`.t3�t� >' > >':.: > >c »:: >:::: 5£L. S� .....:.............. ��t2:��.....................SQ. Q.��.. .... . .............. £�:.�7;. :................................................................................. ............................... ............................................................................................................. ............................... 3) Miscellaneous Operating 53,160 75,733 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 4) Miscellaneous Non - operating 30,050 30,921 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 5) 1/2 Interest Earnings (Phased Out By 1996) 114,600 84,258 47,529 21,953 0 0 0 TOTAL REVENUES $1,041,507 $963,313 $1,060,529 1 $1,123,953 $1,150,000 $1,198,000 $1,234,000 PRAJEGTE .D::�N�C3.M>".:�1R: �, ...............:.....:.....:......:..............:.................. E........._........................ �...................................................:................ �.................:..::.........:. ..,.......................::..: ��'....: �6:. ::.::........:...f..:�,��3J 6) 1/2 Interest Earnings (100% By 1996) 171,901 196,602 190,115 197,578 216,509 213,061 203,105 :2`16 7tZ '.< > > <233 X37::::::: >: >: >.2'20 G�.i9 " >: ": >': X53' °556 ><'.' 23` Q4. 1`::>:: : >:::.;::5`>8::::; >i >... 5�:: U. : . ofG ................................................................................. ............................... .. t...................... ....... �...................... ........ R.......... ................. e............. ...................�........... ... r..... ....................Y.......... <........... .......(99�i ..... .........#. ...... . ......... 99;<....: ...... ......1998......... ............ ...................... EFFECT ON CASH & INVESTMENTS: 7) Start of Year Cash & Inv $4,450,204 $4,665,394 $4,752,886 $4,390,625 $4,330,181 $4,261,222 $4,062,100 8) Capital Outlay (188,958) (413,324) (829,420) (574,000) (598,000) (740,000) (200,000) 9) Net Income or Loss 215,701 233,537 220,659 253,556 232,041 215,877 196,532 10) Bond Debt Retired (45,000) 11) Depeciation Add -back 233,447 267,279 246,500 260_,000 297,000 325,000 339,000 x,65 3 3 >9 o #.:.Y..ear..Cash. &...Inu 544... $4 7 �v 3Q X25 >9A 33p .... 1 . ............................................................................ ............................... t........ t...................... f........ i....................... i.. ........Y...................... �.......... F........................i ........ i.......................... t.......... t................... .......�..........�............ ::. 3 . 700 000 ::........::::.3700 000::::.......:::::3,700,000 .::......:::::. 000.::........:.::3::::. 0,000_ ::............. ".. ................. .. Restricted Inv ,700, 3,700,000 3,700,000 Unrestricted Inv 965,394 1,052,886 690,625 630,181 561,222 362,100 697,632 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1995 WATER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, a municipal Public Utilities Division exists for the purpose of providing and maintaining water and sanitary sewer facilities for the citizens of the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is a requirement of the City Charter that the Public Utilities Division be a self - sustaining entity through revenue provided by a uniform schedule of rates, fees and charges; and WHEREAS, City of Brooklyn Center Ordinances state, "The City Council shall adopt by resolution schedules of water and sanitary sewer rates, fees, and charges which schedules shall be known as the Public Utilities Rate Schedule"; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that it is necessary to restrict $3.7 million of reserved investments within the Public Utilities Fund for the purpose of partial o payment of the cost of constructing a water treatment facility. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the following Water Utility Rate Schedule be adopted with the first increase effective for all billings issued after January 1, 1994 and successive increases effective for all billings issued after January 1, 1995. WATER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE 1. WATER RATES BASE RATE AMOUNT PER YEAR 1,000 GALLONS 1993 $0.73 1994 $0.82 1995 Proposed $0.86 RESOLUTION NO. QUARTERLY MINIMUM RATE 1994 QUARTERLY 1995 METER SIZE MINIMUM CHARGE CHARGE 5/8" x 3/4" $ 7 Same 3/4" $ 11 " 1 " $ 14 " 1 1/2" $ 18 " 2'1 $ 35 " 3 It $ 70 " 4" $119 6" $273 " 8" $515 it 10" $686 " 2. FEES PRESENT PROPOSED Water Meters 5/8" x 3/4" $40.00 Same 3/4" or larger Cost Plus $2.00 Same Fire Protection Inspection $50.00 Same Private Fire Hydrant Maintenance Labor, Materials Same Equipment and Overhead 3. CHARGES PRESENT PROPOSED Delinquent Account Greater of Quarterly $3.00 or 10% Same Certification to Taxes Per Account $30.00 Same Restoration of Service Monday to Friday Except Holidays • Between the Hours of 7:30 A.M. and 3:00 P.M. $25.00 Same RESOLUTION NO. �. CHARGES (continued) PRESENT PROPOSED Restoration of Service Anytime Saturday, Sunday and Holidays and Between the Hours of 3:00 P.M. and 7:30 A.M. on Monday Through Friday Except Holidays $75.00 Same Delinquent Meter Reading $2.00 1st & 2nd qtr. Same Per Account $5.00 3rd quarter $10.00 4th quarter (consecutive) Curb Stop Stand Pipe Repair $ 40.00 Same Hydrant Meters 5/8" x 3/4" Deposit $100.00 Same Daily Rental $ 1.00 Same Minimum Rental $ 20.00 Same 2 1/2" Deposit $700.00 Same Daily Rental $ 7.00 Same Monthly Rental $100.00 Same Minimum Rental $ 35.00 Same Date Todd Paulson, Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded m ember P b g g Y Y 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. BROOKLYN CENTER SANITARY SEWER UTILITY 1995 RATE REVIEW BACKGROUND The City ouncil on October 13 1994 adopted Resolution 93 -176 which established sanitary Y � P � sewer rates for 1994 and 1995. The Council annually reviews established rates for their adequacy and makes adjustments as necessary. In 1992, the Council approved a policy change regarding the use of interest earnings to subsidize rates. Previously, one half of interest earnings were used to offset operating costs; starting in 1992, this subsidy is being phased out 20 percent per year. The phase out of this subsidy will be complete in 1996. For 1995, 10 percent of interest earnings will subsidize rates. SANITARY SEWER UTILITY FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE, 1993 AND 1994 The sanitary sewer utility's financial performance in 1993 was better than expected, due to an underestimation of billing revenues, coupled with lower than anticipated charges for MCWS services, which are the largest portion of the sanitary sewer expenditures. • Operating costs in 1994 are expected to be slightly less than anticipated, due mainly to decreased personnel costs. A vacant Maintenance H position in the water /sanitary sewer area has not been filled. Revenues for 1994 are coming in as expected and should be sufficient to cover to cover expenditures. CAPITAL OUTLAYS Substantial outlays were made in 1992 and 1993 for the completion of Lift Station #2, for the repair of two segments of CMP trunk sewers, and for the sanitary main improvements associated with the 69th Avenue street improvement project. Projects for 1994 were mainly associated with the street improvements in the southeast and northwest quadrants. REVIEW OF ESTABLISHED RATE INCREASES, 1994 AND 1995 PROJECTED EXPENSES Personnel an ex t per year while other d utility expenses are projected to increase at three percen p y a , operating expenses are projected to increase five percent per year. The MCWS charge for 1994 is estimated to increase at five percent. Table 1 on the following page details the program of capital improvements outlined in the Capital Improvements Program. TABLE 1 - Capital Improvement Program - Detail of Capital Outlays Sanitary Sewer Utility XX 2 -Sep- 1 ;;>;>; t.; ::..::.:.... :::::`: >:;:<. I; >;;;> .;;:::;:.` L: 9. 7... .::::..::::::::'i:9!.a.$.:::;;: ;.:::..:.9:;.:2430 3:: EXPENDITURES: LIFT STATIONS Replace Lift #1 and Forcemain 400,000 800,000 0 Replace Lift #s 10 & 11 100,000 120,000 SEWER REPLACEMENT: Trunk line, 69th Avenue to Lift Station #1 1,000,000 0 Neighborhood Street Improvements 275,000 200,000 300,000 200,000 300,000 1,250,000 MISCELLANEOUS Annual Televising Program 5,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 10,000 50,000 1/1 Remediation Program 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 INTRAC Replacement 125,000 FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT City Garage Remodelling 250,000 112,500 Central Garage: Unfunded Depreciation 92,570 Computer Equipment 13,000 10,000 Truck mounted vactor (1/2 total cost) 67,500 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 1995 MSA 25,000 1996 MSA 25,000 1997 MSA 25,000 Neighborhood Street Improvements 275,000 200,000 300,000 200,000 300,000 1,250,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $965,070 1 $1,854,000 1 $1,579,500 1 $564,000 1 $630,000 $2,895,000 RATE SETTING CONSIDERATIONS The schedule at the end of this report labelled Option 1 shows the projected effect of the existing rate schedule. No rates for 1996 or 1997 have been officially established, so the schedule shows the rates continuing at even increases. The most important consideration regarding the sanitary sewer rates is the need for capital improvements. The sanitary sewer fund has financed several major capital improvements in the past few years, and several major projects are contemplated for the coming few years. Each of these projects are necessary improvements. While in preparing a capital improvement program they may be moved from one year to another, these major projects must be undertaken in order to maintain the integrity of the system. Among these improvements are the reconstruction or replacement of another aging lift station and replacement, or re- lining in place, of considerable sections of corrugated metal sewer main. This main is of the same type as that collapsed near lift station #1 and which was replaced under 194/694 and near Brookdale Shopping Center. As Option 1 indicates, existing rate increases are more than adequate to meet operational financial goals if operations were the only consideration. However, with the very large capital outlays expected in the next few years, such a strategy would result in capital reserves falling precariously low. Complicating the matter is that the two major capital improvement projects identified for the next two to four year period are very costly compared to the rest of the capital improvement program. As • Table 1 indicates, an "average" year of capital improvements can range from $300,000 - $1,500,000. If rates were raised high enough to finance the improvements while monitoring cash reserves, then when capital outlays are "over the hump" the rates would generate much more revenue than could be justified. To even out capital expenditures over the next ten years, staff recommends General Obligation (GO) backed revenue bonds be sold to finance the cost of these two projects. RECOMMENDATION Given the policy discussion above, it is recommended that the Council adopt the rate schedule detailed in Option 1. This option would provide adequate protection for the utility cash reserves. This would result in no increase in rates for 1995. • TABLE 2 • SANITARY SEWER UTILITY BASE RATE SCHEDULE RATE- SETTING OPTIONS YEAR Option 1 : Current Rates Residential Per 1000 Per Qtr. Gal 1994 (current) $42.50 $1.70 1995 42.50 1.70 1996 45.00 1.80 IMPACT OF RECOMMENDED RATE INCREASE Table 3 below illustrates the impact the recommended rate increase would have on the summer sanitary sewer bills of various types of customers. The summer bill is typically the highest of the four quarters. TABLE 3 IMPACT OF RECOMMENDED SANITARY SEWER BASE RATE INCREASE SUMMER QUARTERLY UTILITY BILLS OF VARIOUS CUSTOMERS Type of Customer 1994 Charge 1995 Charge '. RESIDENTIAL Senior $23.40 $23.40 Residential 42.50 42.50 Apartment, 36 Units 1,071.00 1,071.00 COMMERCIAL. Car Dealership $399.00 $399.50 Heavy Commercial Use 1,468.80 1,468.80 • Table 4 is a summary of 1994 or 1995 sanitary sewer rates per 1000 gallons for a number of Metro • area cities. Brooklyn Center is in about the middle of the range of rates in the area. TABLE 4 1995 QUARTERLY SANITARY SEWER CHARGES OF VARIOUS METRO AREA CITIES (CONVERTED TO QUARTERLY RATE WHERE NECESSARY) CITY PER CITY PER QUARTER QUARTER Hopkins $61.60 Blaine 36.90 Minneapolis 46.80 Crystal 36.30 New Hope 44.50 Minnetonka 35.70 New Brighton 43.10 Richfield 34.00 Plymouth 42.38 Brooklyn Park 32.00 BROOKLYN 42.50 Bloomington 27.75 CENTER • Fridley 41.15 Golden Valley 28.00 Anoka 40.00 Robbinsdale 23.60 OTHER FEES AND CHARGES The sanitary sewer utility rate schedule contains a number of fees and charges in addition to rates for service. The following list describes each fee or charge and its current level and describes any recommended amendment. FEES The only fee for sanitary sewer service is the SAC (Service Availability Charge) unit charge, which is established by Metropolitan Council, Waste Services. This fee goes directly to MCWS. CHARGES A. DELINQUENT ACCOUNT CHARGE The present delinquent account charge is $3.00 or 10 percent of the utility bill. It applies to S the bill as a whole. • B. CERTIFICATION TO TAXES The special assessment service charge for delinquent accounts recovers the cost of certification with the County Auditor of the delinquent amounts to taxes. The charge is currently $30 which matches the certification fee for diseased tree and weed destruction accounts. C. LINE CLEANING CHARGE The line cleaning charge recovers the cost of cleaning City sanitary sewer lines due to misuse by the property owner. The most common infraction is grease build -up due to improper sewering of restaurant greases. The charge is actual labor, materials, equipment, and overhead. D. SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP CHARGE Properties that have never been assessed, or not fully assessed for sanitary sewer, are charged a hookup charge when water hookup is requested. The charge is intended to cover the cost of the lateral sanitary sewer main and is calculated on a linear foot basis. It is established annually by resolution. e:\eng\pubud1\rates\sewrat95 SANITA EWER RATE STUDY: 1995 0P* 1: PURates \. -t9 09-Sep- .................................................................................:..:::::::::::::::::::::; i> �9�� 3: 986.:•::;•;:.;:.::.:;.:; •::;:•;;:: 1: 9�. 7:.;:«.>:.;:.;:.;:.;:.;:;.;:.:.:<. >;:.;:<i.999.;:.;::.;:<.::.:;.: EXPENDITURES 1) Operations Personal Service 199,990 182,430 187,903 200,798 206,822 213,027 219,417 Contractual Service 71,898 75,240 79,002 82,952 87,100 91,455 96,027 Supplies & Materials 12,995 13,999 14,699 15,434 16,206 17,016 17,867 Heat, Light, & Power 16,889 17,762 18,650 19,583 20,562 21,590 22,669 Vehicle Operating Costs 60,000 68,237 75,000 83,000 91,000 Depreciation Expense 194,879 126,055 133,000 152,000 198,000 244,000 259,000 Subtotal: City O &M Expense $496,651.00 $415,486.00 $493,253.95 $539,003.60 $603,688.97 $670,086.98 $705,980.80 MCWS Charges $1,411,582.00 $1,364,719.00 $1,341,312.00 $1,394,964.48 $1,450,763.06 $1,508,793.58 $1,569,145.32 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,908,233.00 $1,780,205.00 $1,834,565.95 $1,933,968.08 $2,054,452.03 $2,178,880.56 $2,275,126.12 REVENUES 2) Billing Revenues $1,920,796 $2,114,429 $2,229,978 $2,237,415 $2,340,541 $2,479,453 $2,539,945 Residential Accts 6 845 6,827 6,650 6,610 6,480 6,455 6,430 ativarEe flMmr a $367�a - 4Ii �b �1,.5fl . .... ::...::.:::...::.::.:..:.,::;.::;:.;:......:::.::..::::;::,;;;.:<:.;;::.::::.:.,.:.......... ............................... :... 54�.13Q....................... 4ti.i�.. Senior Accts ................................ ...:..................:........ 1,625 2,170 2,100 2,150 2,000 2,025 2,050 i:;;`:'::':2`''"::'.::'':::2 %.i:: <::::::::i:::: ?: : 2 ::::::::: :::: i:::::::::: <::::::::;:: :::., ;::::::::::: ::i::: ?::::::;::;::;::: ;::;:;::::; ':::i;:;S::; Y.......... 8 .............. ............................... :................$... : 66..........:...:............... .....:.Q..................:.... Z3....... ..................... t1................ ;::<. >::::::::..: . :::::.......................................................................::.:::::.::.:.::.:..........................$. ...................:.:.:.:.:::: $.7 ......................... . ................ ............................... Apartment Accts 3,523 3,545 3,515 3,515 3,510 3,510 3,500 Quarterly Charge $25.03 $28.00 $29.75 $29.75 $31.50 $33.25 $33.95 Non- residential Water 234,600 285,000 285,000 290,700 296,500 302,400 308,400 AA ..................:... Ai .::::::::::::.:................ ......................$ 2..43 .............:..::::::::: x.9.60 ................ 51 ;7t2 ...................:...:::: ;: i. .4.:::::::::::................. ...................................................................::::. �:.::::::. �::.:::.:::.;;;;:.:.;.;.:................................................. .........:.::.:::::.::::::�1..[ 311:..::.. �::::;.:.:. �. 3:. �Q ;;;::;;.;:.::. 1:..94:.: 3) Miscellaneous Operating 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4) Miscellaneous Non - operating 560 921 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5) Interest Earnings (Phased Out By 1996) 88,619 60,327 33,225 15,265 TOTAL REVENUES $2,009,975 $2,175,677 $2,264,202 $2,253,680 $2,341,541 $2,480,453 $2,540,945 oil 6) Interest Earnings (100% By 1996) 132,928 140,764 132,899 137,382 190,401 211,521 206,889 .:..,'..`.;..::` ::.:. .:....:...... ..:::s>:<:`.,, ....; : >: ::<z:: >:: »:`•:::::s:... • :; ;::>' } • . .::::::>::::: i:> s>:>::::' . "::: >:: >:::<: >: »:: >::":> ::":' ::::.;..:...::> : ::::::::::� 62> r<<; 2 ............. ...::::::::::::::......:::::::: t 893.......... ................... �:::. _:..::............. EFFECT ON CASH & INVESTMENTS 7) Start of Year Cash & Inv $3,566,312 $3,060,463 $3,322,469 $3,052,934 $3,808,028 $2,644,018 $2,586,111 8► Capital Outlay (935,398) (400,285) (965,070) (1,854,000) (1,579,500) (564,000) (630,000) 9) Net Income or Loss 234,670 536,236 562,535 457,094 477,490 513,093 472,708 10► Debt Service 2,000,000 (260,000) (251,000) (268,500) X. 11 De reciation Add -back 1 194 879 P 126,055 133,000 152,000 198,000 244,000 259,000 >1 ..... « < >» >>> `;, >:; . <:•>;`: >:,; >. :.' ,, >: ;. 3 ,.: : ,:< ; :. !;;:::; 1..........c� #..Ys............ h.:8� En. 1! ......... ............................... it1 X18 ...:...... 3 4 r�, . + ......... ...6.::::<:::::::::. fly: : ��.} p�Sp f1 qqtty� .............................................................. ............................... . f............................ F....... ...Y........................... .. r +Y i.".............v. 4F.Y.S7............. i? .. . : .................................................................. ..........................::::: ................................................................ ............................... .} ............... .....................r......... f...................... �1 1�. 1. !rF............�.IF �S7M 1.1.. .. ........ .. .. Restricted Investments 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 Unrestricted Investments 2,760,463 3,022,469 2,752,934 3,508,028 2,344,018 2,286,111 2,119,319 is 6 a Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1995 SANITARY SEWER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, a municipal Public Utilities Division exists for the purpose of providing and maintaining water and sanitary sewer facilities for the citizens of the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is a requirement of the City Charter that the Public Utilities Division be a self - sustaining entity through revenue provided by a uniform schedule of rates, fees and charges; and WHEREAS, City of Brooklyn Center Ordinances state, "The City Council shall adopt by resolution schedules of water and sanitary sewer rates, fees, and charges which schedules shall be known as the Public Utilities Rate Schedule "; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that it is necessary to restrict $300,000 of reserved investments within the Public Utilities Fund for the purpose of paying the cost of unanticipated capital improvement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the following Sanitary Sewer Utility Rate Schedule be adopted with the proposed rate effective for all billings issued after January 1, 1995. SANITARY SEWER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE 1. RATES QUARTERLY RESIDENTIAL RATES SINGLE SENIOR YEAR FAMILY APARTMENT CITIZEN 1994 $42.50 $29.75 $23.40 1995 Proposed $42.50 $29.75 $23.40 RESOLUTION NO. NON - RESIDENTIAL RATES PER 1,000 FIXTURE YEAR GALLONS UNITS 1993 $1.60 $2.50 1994 $1.70 $2.65 1995 Proposed $1.70 $2.65 2. FEE PRESENT PROPOSED SAC Charge Set by MWCC Set by MWCC 3. CHARGES PRESENT PROPOSED Delinquent Account Greater of Quarterly $3.00 or 10% Same Certification to Taxes Per Account $30.00 Same Line Cleaning Charge Labor, Materials Labor, Materials Equipment and Equipment and Overhead Overhead Sanitary Sewer Hookup Established Established Annually by Annually by Resolution Resolution Date Todd Paulson, 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. BROOKLYN CENTER STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY S 1995 RATE REVIEW BACKGROUND The City Council on October 13, 1994 adopted Resolution 93 -176, which established storm drainage utility rates for 1994 and 1995. The Council annually reviews established rates for their adequacy and makes adjustments as necessary. The City's consultants, Bonestroo, Rosene, and Anderlik (BRA) have finalized their Phase I study of the City's storm drainage system. A Phase II study needs to be initiated and with council approval, will be completed on an as needed, per project basis. An essential part of this process will be the development of a financial plan, which will be implemented in 1995 and subsequent years. Some major projects have already been identified. The Council has already determined that a high priority project is addressing the severe drainage problems in the 63rd /Halifax /Indiana Avenues area. The Council has already approved the construction of a storm drainage pond in the southwest quadrant of the I -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard interchange. This project includes extending additional storm sewer to serve the Marlin Park area. Storm drainage components of several street improvement projects have also been identified. Table 1 on the following page details the program of capital improvements outlined in the Capital Improvements Program. OPTIONS The schedule labeled Option 1 shows the financial impact of the existing rate schedule. This schedule includes few specific Local Plan projects, but identifies certain categories of improvements and provides for a budgeted amount. One large project currently under way is the construction of the "Brooklyn Gateway" pond and park at 1 -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard, as described above. One project currently under investigation is the "Brookdale Pond" which is intended to provide for storm drainage and water quality improvements for the Brookdale commercial area. It is currently estimated that construction of improvements for that commercial area could cost $2 million; it is also currently estimated that up to three quarters of that amount could be levied as special assessments. These are very preliminary estimates. GO revenue bonds have been issued to "even out" the cost of financing the "Gateway Pond" and drainage improvements. One recommendation of the local plan which requires further definition and exploration, is the construction of additional regional detention and treatment ponds. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the rate increase established for 1995 in option 1, be implemented as planned, Rates for the various classes of property would be increased as follows: TABLE 1 - Capital Improvement ogram - Detail of Capital Outlays . Storm Drainage Utility 21- Sep -94 3 �9fa <197 :: > <';9...� EXPENDITURES: STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM Water Quality Improvements 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 $500,000 Regional Ponds 250,000 275,000 $1,375,000 Brooklyn Gateway Pond and Park 425,000 830,000 $0 Brookdale Pond 2,000,000 $0 FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT Trenchbox Truck mounted vactor (1/2 total cost) 67,500 Sweeper 85,200 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 69th Avenue, Beard to Shingle Creek Pkwy 30,000 1995 MSA 350,000 1996 MSA 75,000 1997 MSA 125,000 Neighborhood Street Improvements 655,000 200,000 150,000 200,000 200,000 $1,375,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,177,500 $3,430,000 $275,000 $710,200 $525,000 1 $3,250,000 FUND SOURCES: Storm Drainage Utility 197,500 1,600,000 275,000 710,200 525,000 3,250,000 Revenue Bonds 980,000 830,000 Special Assessments /Other 1,000,000 TOTAL $1,177,500 1 $3,430,000 $275,000 $710,200 $525,000 $3,250,000 • TABLE 2 RECOMMENDED QUARTERLY 1995 STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATES Classification/Land Use 1994 1995 BASE RATE $27.00 $30.00 1: Cemeteries, Golf Courses 6.75 7.50 2: Parks 13.50 14.85 3: Single Family, Duplex, Townhouse 6.75/lot 7.50 /lot 4: Schools, Government Buildings 33.75 37.50 5: Multiple Family, Churches 81.00 90.00 6: Commercial and Industrial 135.00 150.00 7: Vacant Land As As Assigned Assigned Table 3 below details the 1995 quarterly storm drainage charges of several area cities for residential properties. S TABLE 3 1995 RESIDENTIAL STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATES CITY QUARTERLY CITY QUARTERLY RATE RATE Bloomington $8.7 New Hope $3.75 Hopkins 9.50 Robbinsdale 3.00 Richfield 7.55 Crystal 2.60 BROOKLYN CENTER 6.75 Fridley 1.75 Roseville 4.38 Golden Valley 1.00 Note: Cities on the lower end of the quarterly rate scale typically fund only their watershed district dues, and in some cases some other minor operational costs for the utility. Cities on the upper end are actively constructing storm drainage improvements from the fund. • e: \eng \pubuWVates\sdurat95 •• 0 • STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATE STUDY: 1995 OPTION 1: PURATES:sdurat95 .................. . 09-Sep-95 >::::« :i::::':' :::>::>:>:::::> :::::<:::<:: >:::...: ...,.:......; »::;;:: >::::: P ,. 9. ..� ......................:.:'E X93.::::::::.::::..::.::.:::::: 1: 99. .............................J. 5. :::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::.. .:::........................... ... .................::.....::::... .::::::::::. EXPENDITURES 1) Operations $204,025 $166,729 $154,000 $159,228 $163,000 $164,000 $165,000 Storm Sewer Maintenance 62,388 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 Street Sweeping 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Watershed District Dues 34,868 33,581 45,000 47,500 50,000 50,000 50,000 Local Plan 66,213 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle Operating Costs 6,685 7,000 9,728 11,000 12,000 13,000 Public Education 556 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Depreciation 29,000 114,000 121,000 136,000 2) Capital Outlay $3,402 $394,662 $1,177,500 $3,430,000 $275,000 $710,200 $525,000 Repair or Replace Defective Sections 0 10,000 100,000 550,000 100,000 300,000 200,000 Water Quality Improvement Projects 3,402 20,000 0 0 0 0 0 Facilities & Equipment 0 10,000 67,500 0 0 85,200 0 Improvement Projects 0 300,000 1,010,000 2,880,000 175,000 325,000 325,000 TOTAL EXPENDI $207,42 $561,391 $1,331,50 $3,618,228 $552,000 $995,200 $826,000 REVENUES 3) Billing Revenues $494,456 $639,837 $702,000 $780,000 $832,000 $858,000 $884,000 REF Acres 6,500 6 500 6,500 6,500 6,500 6,500 6,500 AS> P€tIGiE $18 ? X24 QQ 527 Utf SQ Oa _ $22x01 0(I $34 t?Q:i: .. ............ ....:. s Residential rate per lot $4.50 $6.00 $6.75 $7.50 $8.00 $8.25 $8.50 Schools & govt buildings per acre $22.50 $30.00 $33.75 $37.50 $40.00 $41.25 $42.50 Multiple family & churches per acre $54.00 $72.00 $81.00 $90.00 $96.00 $99.00 $102.00 Commercial and industrial per acre $ 90.00 $120.00 $135.00 $150.00 $160.00 $165.00 $170.00 4) Interest Earnings 1 14,030 28,138 16,035 1 21,365 82,191 27,757 9,354 TOTAL REVENUES 1 $508,486 $667,975 $718,035 1 $801,365 $914,191 1 $885,757 $893,354 PCi4,fT17.IMCgM]C pR �!a.5.,9. >;; ::: • .:.:> : 1 t?6 r31; 4.E`i5 :.:..:. f ... >: �i:. iii:•::. ii :: ....................:: :.:::::::: .: ..: ....... " "......�'�.,.:.: ::. iii: ii: i: i::::: i:: i::':: ii::: �: isi::::;::;:: �:;:!; �::: 2::::::::::::::::::::::::: i:,•':::: t; ty:::;:;:::;::::::!! i:::::; n_ ..: �:::::: .: .. :....:::::.:::: _. _: :. i:. i :................:................................. ......:........:............... . EFFECT ON CASH & INVESTMENTS 5) Start of Year Cash & Inv $19,649 $320,708 $427,292 $1,643,827 $114,959 $346,965 $116,928 6) Net Income or Loss 301,059 106,584 (613,465) (2,816,863) 362,191 (109,443) 67,354 7) Debt Service 1,830,000 (241,005) (244,185) (241,595) (243,520) 8) Special Assessment /Other 1,500,000 9) Depreciation Add Back 29,000 114,000 121,000 136,000 1C� .end a €. Year; :dash..8i'Ct1ti`. >:::::: >i;:.::: » >; :: :.. i .:... . .........:.. ..:::::::..:..:::::...::....... .................... 53:2Q 78 :..: >::> ;::. 427 '29 . >:: >:::: >::;::: < ,.. <; :: >:::: >:::; >:::. 1 ................................... ....................:.......... 2.............5.1.6: .8...... .... t ........ ..............................t .........:. :............5.1.1 &. 82;3...................#7G 7 )gb3 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1995 STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, it is a requirement of the Brooklyn Center City Charter that Brooklyn Center's municipal utilities be self - sustaining entities through revenue provided by a uniform schedule of rates, fees, and charges; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Services has reviewed the financial requirements of the Storm Drainage Utility and has developed a recommended rate schedule. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the following schedule of Storm Drainage fees will be in effect as of January 1, 1995: CHARGE PER QUARTER PER ACRE Classification/Land Use 1994 1995 BASE RATE $27.00 $30.00 1. Cemeteries, Golf Courses 6.75 7.50 2. Parks 13.50 14.85 3. Single Family, Duplex, Townhouse 6.75 /lot 7.50 /lot 4. Schools, Government Buildings 33.75 37.50 5. Multiple Family, Churches 81.00 90.00 6. Commercial and Industrial 135.00 150.00 L 7. Vacant Land As Assigned As Assigned RESOLUTION NO. Date Todd Paulson, 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. • WATER AND SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP RATES BACKGROUND Utility hookup rates are adjusted annually to account for inflation. This year the change in the Twin Cities Consumer Price Index was 2.9 percent. Accordingly, the proposed water and sanitary sewer hookup rates for calendar year 1995 have been increased 2.9 percent. RECOMMENDATION Approve the following hookup rates: Current Rates Proposed Rates Type of Property/Assessment 1994 1995 WATER HOOKUP Single Family Residence With $3,314.10 $3,410.20 Service Single Family Residence Without 2,533.50 2,607.00 Service Frontage (front 135 feet) $33.75 per front foot $34.75per front foot Area (area outside front 135 feet) $10.50 per 100 square feet $10.80 per 100 square feet Service Hookup $780.60 $803.25 SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP Frontage 19.63 front f per fro foot 2 g $ 20.0 per f ront foot $ P P Service Hookup $780.60 $803.25 r �D.tl Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1995 WATER AND SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP RATES WHEREAS, Resolution Nos. 74 -45 and 77 -113 provided for the annual adjustment of water assessment rates for non - single - family residential and single- family residential rates, respectively; and WHEREAS, said adjustment in water hookup rates is to be effective January 1 of each year; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 88 -05 changed the month from which the annual price index change is to be calculated from October to July; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported to the City Council that the change in the w T in Cities Consumer Price Index from July, 1993 to July, 1994 was an increase of 2.9 percent; and WHEREAS, City policy, based on Village policy established in April, 1956, is to calculate the cost of sanitary sewer hookup based on the average cost of a lateral system of sanitary sewers for a standard Village lot. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the water and sanitary sewer hookup rates effective January 1, 1995 shall be as follows: Type of Pro e /Assessment 1994 Rate P m' WATER HOOKUP Single Family Residence with Service $3,410.20 Single Family Residence without Service $2,607.00 Frontage (front 135 feet) $34.75 per front ft. Area (area outside front 135 feet) $10.80 per 100 sq. ft. Service Hookup $803.25 SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP Frontage $20.20 per front foot • Service Hookup $803.25 RESOLUTION NO. Date Todd Paulson, 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. BROOKLYN CENTER RECYCLING UTILITY 1995 RATE REVIEW BACKGROUND The City Council on October 13, 1994 adopted Resolution 93 -176, which established recycling utility rates for 1994. The Council annually reviews established rates for their adequacy and makes adjustments as necessary. RECYCLING FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE The recycling fund is primarily comprised of fees paid to Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG) for recycling services and, the charges to individual households to cover those costs. Some incidental expenditures and revenues are included for container sales and supplies. The recycling utility's financial performance was about as expected for 1993 with net operating income (revenues minus expenditures) ending at $2,669. Performance for 1994 is projected to provide for a net operating income of $1,600. RATE REVIEW 1995 • Changes in the Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG) and a decrease in funding from Hennepin County will result in some significant changes in the recycling fund for 1995. Hennepin County will decrease to $.75 per household per month, from $1.75 per month, the recycling entitlement currently given to all HRG Communities. HRG has indicated that the above changes will necessitate an increase in residential recycling rates from $1.25 per household per month to $2.25 per household per month. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the rate increase established for 1995 in table 1, be implemented as planned, Rates would be increased as follows: TABLE 1 RECOMMENDED RECYCLING UTILITY RATES Recycling Rate Per Month 1994 1995 Residential Households (Per Month) $1.25 $2.25 Residential Households (Annual) $15.00 $27.00 1a65 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1995 RECYCLING RATES WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is a member of the Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG), which is a joint powers group formed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, 1987, Section 471.59• and WHEREAS, the purpose of the joint powers agreement was to create an organization by which the member cities may jointly and cooperatively provide for the efficient and economical collection, recycling, and disposal of solid waste within and without their respective corporate boundaries, all in compliance with Minnesota Waste Management Act, Minnesota Statutes, 1987, Chapter 115A; and WHEREAS, the HRG has established a curbside recycling program for its member cities to meet the requirements of Hennepin County Ordinance No. 13, Solid Waste Source Separation for Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center Ordinance No. 89 -11 authorizes the City to establish rates for recycling services; and WHEREAS, the HRG has established a rate of $2.25 per month per household for recycling services beginning y g g � January 1, 1995; and WHEREAS, the rates for recycling services established by the HRG reflect the amount needed to fund the City's curbside recycling program after the projected reimbursement of recycling program costs from Hennepin County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the above described rates established by the HRG for recycling services are hereby approved. Date Todd Paulson, 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 9/26/94 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number 107 C- • Request For Council Consideration Item Description: CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE 1995 BOND ISSUE Department Approval: Diane Spector, Direc or Public Services Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approve the resolution retaining the firm Decision Resources, Inc. to provide a benchmark survey and bond issue development services, at a cost not to exceed $11,000. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) The City Council has on several occasions discussed the possibility of a 1995 bond issue to finance park and building improvements. In August, the Council asked for more detail regarding the items to be considered for possible inclusion. Staff was also authorized to obtain a proposal from Decision Resources, Inc. and any other firms which do similar work, to provide for opinion and bond packaging services. Opinion Surveys and Bond Packaging Several staff have made contact with their counterparts at other cities which have conducted successful bond campaigns, to identify potential consultants. All contacts who have obtained services such as this have used Decision Resources. This firm is considered to be "the" firm to use; they have an extremely successful track record. Other firms are certainly capable of conducting opinion surveys. However, few have the specialized background of knowing which questions truly tap into taxpayers' feelings regarding potential bond issues, and how those responses should shape the City's packaging of proposed improvements. Since we did not receive even one reference for another qualified firm, I have obtained a proposal only from Decision Resources. I had previously estimated that the cost of obtaining services from DRI would be $8,000- 10,000. I have attached DRI's lengthy proposal because it provides an excellent description of the various public opinion and public information phases of the bond referendum process. In summary, DRI proposes to provide a "benchmark" survey of a sample of 400 households in Brooklyn Center. The price quoted is $7,200 for a base minimum length survey of 60 questions, with a cost of $100 per additional question. Given the several areas which are proposed for improvements (parks, police, fire, Community Center), and the number of options available for each, I would expect that the survey would need to consist of more than 60 perhaps 70 -75. The cost of a 75 question survey would be $8,700. This benchmark survey would be crucial to the bond process because it should provide information on what types of improvements residents would like to see, and how much as taxpayers they are willing to spend. Request For Council Consideration Page 2 DRI also provides additional services, such as assistance in campaign development, development of informational material, facilitating brainstorming sessions, etc. These services are available at a cost of $100 per hour. Finally, DRI can also provide a tracking survey, done typically about three weeks prior to the election, to project the success of the campaign, and suggest corrective action, if necessary. This type of abbreviated survey would cost $3,500. It is my recommendations that the Council authorize DRI to conduct a benchmark survey. It is also my recommendation that the Council authorize staff to work with DRI and the Council on additional activities necessary to develop a potential bond package. I believe these activities - a benchmark survey, brainstorming sessions with the Council and community and campaign leaders, information development - could be accomplished at a total cost not to exceed $11,000. If down the road the Council believes it is in the City's interest to retain DRI to complete a tracking survey, or to provide additional miscellaneous services, an additional appropriation could be made. Additional Information Attached is a large packet of information regarding identified needs. These are organized into four parts: 1) Parks (green paper); 2) Community Center (blue paper); 3) Fire Stations (red paper); and 4) Civic Center (gold paper). This information includes excerpts from past studies and updated identifications of needs. Where possible, we have attempted to make a rough estimate of the cost of the items. Inclusion with or exclusion from the information does not mean that some particular option or item should or should not or could or could not be considered. Future Council Action When the benchmark survey defines community desires and identifies a level of support, at some point in the near fixture the City will need to retain one or more architects or construction managers to further develop building plans and provide more reliable cost estimates, and landscape architects to help define park needs. At that time, the Council would formally establish various improvement projects, and declare its intent to finance those improvements through bond proceeds. It is my understanding that any costs incurred after that formal action but before the actual approval and sale of the bonds, such as the cost of developing architectural plans, could be reimbursed from bond proceeds. 0 its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR A BENCHMARK SURVEY AND OTHER SERVICES RELATING TO THE PROPOSED 1995 BOND ISSUE WHEREAS, the City's Park and Recreation Commission has requested that the City Council consider a bond referendum in 1995 to finance improvements to the City's parks and Community Center; and WHEREAS, staff have identified space needs in the Police Department and at the East and West Fire Stations; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes it is in the City's interest to commission a survey of taxpayer opinions regarding these issues; and WHEREAS, a proposal has been received from Decision Resources, Inc., to conduct a benchmark survey and to provide other services related to the development of a possible 1995 bond issue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The proposal as submitted by Decision Resources, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota is hereby accepted and the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract, in an amount not exceed $11,000, with Decision Resources, in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center. 2. All costs relating to this project shall be charged to the Capital Improvements Fund. Date Todd Paulson, 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. NO Dec goo R September 19, 1994 Ms. Diane Spector Direct or Public Services City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 - 2199 Dear Ms. Spector: Decision Resources, Ltd., is pleased to present this proposal for survey research to the City of Brooklyn,Certer. it is primarily based upon your request for proposal letter and our discussions yyi the City Council and City Staff We feel confident that the program outlined below will meet your objectives in a timely and cost - effective manner. This prospectus wi11 first discuss imme- diate research needs, and then, develop p lan • p p of action. ASSESSING THE ENVIRONMENT Voters ultimately base their opinions about city capital propo- sals, particularly recreational r esources and community centers, on a number of factors -- several, at times, beyond the control of the city leadership and staff. Percep -t bzwY " ?, ; . .� P of aggregate tax wens, un..app_ness with completely unrelated "local issues or Personalities, competing nearby facilities, and differing priori - ties have doomed proposals -- even those not requiring referenda -- in other localities. As a result, simply gauging support or Opposition to a proposed policy cat overlook critically important decision - making considerations. ;here may be a need to dispel misconceptions or explain existing cit policies and services Prior to the announcement of a capital expenditure. We have found that addressing any environmental negatives well in advance of the policy adoption greatly strengthens the chances of support among the citizenry. The following general issues should be addressed in this re- search: A. How do residents feel about the adequacy of current park facilities? Do they see the need for expansions and /or improve- ments? Are they will to underwrite a bond issue for them?' t- �,� (612) 920 -433 FzX � 5I2? 9296166 S. If the city were to renovate its community center, what type of facilities would attract citizens? How much would citizens be willing to pay in hi taxes for these new offerings? Would an expansion attract further users and, thereby, increase "stake- holders?" C. Do residents agreed with the need for expanded Police Depart- men" facilities? How they like to approach an expansion? Are they currently satisfied with police services? D. Similarly, would residents support increased property taxes to expand and modernize both fire departments? Are they current- ly satisfied with fire services? E. Do residents have an "internal „ priorit hierarchy" • �. a p and hie, a.. ch r Y f cap? ��. �-, Y o_ improvements; t � �. P s; Ana,, i s, what wound they prioritize first in light of finite tax increases? F. How much will residents trust lutely essential ingredient? a package assembled by "City Leaders ?" Will grassroots support be a supplement or an abso- issues more specific to a bond referendum would include; �. For what facilities are residents willing to vote to increase their taxes, if any? What would be -he composition of the "ideal package for passage by the electorate? 2. On various components in a package, are there "pockets" of intense support or opposition.? 3. What is the ro - p µ (residents who are undecided F- � of t ers��adables �- �, at pres 4 P } What a of the proposal are partic larly important to this group? What some? aspects are highly trouble- Y• On average, how much more in property taxes would residents be willing to pay for capital im rove u men and unacceptable trade -offs be facilities h and a property t tax e increases? S. Would the inclusion of certain construction projects fluence decisions, either positively or negatively? The answers to the second set of questions would permit the determination of the feasibility of any referendum proposal. It is critical that these queries be answered before any proposal is brought to the electorate, Once this benchmark assessment has been completed, specific recommendations can be made on both policy and timing. The next section discussed this initial study more fully. 2 Decision_ Resources, Ltd., proposes to conduct a telephone survey of 400 randomly selected 'households in Brooklyn Center. A random sample of this size would provide results projectable to the entire city within + 5.0 percent in 95 out of 100 cases. The questionnaire would ne administered by DRL trained and supervised Personnel. The computer analysis would be obtained from the DRL remote job entry facility to the University of Minnesota CYBER system and the company's own MENTOR ANALYSIS PROTOCOL, insuring both access to the most current statistical analysis programs and confidentiality of the data set. The City of Brooklyn Center would be presented with two bound copies fli the final report highlighting all the major findings of the study. DRL will also speak to any major differences from and similarities with other completed referendum marketing studies undertaken for Cottage Grove, Woodbury, Shoreview, and Maplewood. A volume of all statisticall•v significant cross tabulations and multivariate analysis will also be provided to the City. in addition, the findings would be presented by me at meetings with staff, City Council, and /oz citizen commissions. The components of the proje a the proposed time schedule is outlined below: L. 1. One flr two planning meetings with you and other designated pa= t- c'pants to establish topics for questions. This activity _ i y to be completed withi two weeks of the initiation of the contract. Structuring of uaestions and . i ir_a1. G rov A a nstrument . These activities ' fi ' � �p _ of the �urvey T ac ivities ..o be completed within two weeks of the initiation of she contract. S. Final ,determination of the field dates for the interviews. 4 . Pre - testing and, if needed, approv Of resulting xevl T his activ + + Si017S . i ty to be completed by the second,day of fieldwork. 5. Computer analysis and preparation of the written report. Frequencies of responses Will provided to the City within ten days after the completion of all fieldwork. All statistical analysis and cammer_taxy will be available two to three weeks after completion oy the fieldwork. a. Meetings with you and designated participants to explain and discuss surve results. This prl eiminary discussion can be arranged at a time convenient for the City staff, after delivery of the written analysis. 7. Meet ' and,o.. 5ta�f in either a work t� ;* �_ W... City Counci and/or rr session or formal r present :. ation to explain n and � discuss the results o the survey. The final presentation and discussion session can be arranged at a time convenient for Council members and /or staff after delivery o£ the written report. 3 IDRL personnel would be available as needed for additional meet- ings and /or telephone conversations to answer questions about the survey, its findings, and its implications. Because of the nature of this study, combining both city assess- ment and campaign objectives, 1 would act as Principal Investiga- tor for the survey. In addition, my partner, Diane Traxler, who possesses extensive local level participation in referenda elec- tions, would serve as Project Director, overseeing all phases of the research. Cost of survevs are based upon two factors: size of the sample and number of questions contained on the instrument. The 400 households sample size would provide a reliable degree of accura- cy. It would also be sufficiently large to permit the further breakdown of the city residents into groups of potential interest -- area of residence, occupati.cn, income, renter.or owner, and the like. The base minimum survey length that DRL recommends is 60 question units, although several city polls of this type have contained nearly 80 units. The cost-of a sixty question unit, 400 household sample is $7,200.00. Each additional question is $100.00. As company policy, DR-L requires one -half of the cost prior to the commencement of fieldwork; the remainder is due upon delivery of the final written report. For contractual purposes, we will Present the City Attorney with a coPY of our standard municipal aareemrnt for any revisions he /she would require to conform with city practices. If the survey reveals a complex and Potentially hostile electoral environment, DRL could develop a complete referendum campaign Plan. This document would include: enumeration_ and discussion of campaign goals and the strategies and tactics to achieve each; a recommended campaign organizational structure, including the roles bi major actors and community - .used organizations; a de- tailed time schedule for the accomplishment of all tactics; and, a campaign budget prioritized to permit changes due to cash flow. The campaign plan_ development might also require DRL to undertake interviews with key ccmmunity leaders, in order to assess avail- able resources. In addition, a "brain- storminc" session with a group of selected citizens could prove essential. The cost of writing a campaign plan would be dependent upon the amount of additional research requ-4 red and is charged for a pre- approved number Of hours at $100.00 per hour. If the initial survey indicates that a combination of general campaign activities and targeted efforts will be required for success, DRL will work with designated staff, Brooklyn Center residents, and other interested parties in developing communica- tions doc 4 .:ments. In the past, we have developed brochures and tabloids, written direct mail letters to key groups, assisted in 4 the development or neig'nborhood meetings or "coffee parties," aided in the identification, management, and monitoring of volun- teer committees, and designed ancillary materials for fundraising purposes. Since this type of work is sa variable, DRL charges a flat rate Of $100.00 per hour, plus incurred expenses. Normally, the firm will agree beforehand to a series of projects and specify a number of hours not to be exceeded in their completion. If turnout is found to be a key variable in the referendum, DRL can help design and implement a voter identification and mobili- zation system. The extent of our participation depends upon community resources, particularly volunteers willing to come to phonebanks for an evening. DRL will write a script for the phoners, either advocacy or straight identification, for the first wave of calls. After completion of that setup, a letter to favorables can be combined with either a letter to undecideds or another advocacy call to that latter group. A final system can then be designed to insure maximum positive turnout. Depending upon volunteer availability, DRL can also complete the G4TV e£rcy. using company phoners and facilities. In any case, the cost is dependent upon_ our involvement. If a complete pack- age is required, the company would bit it, as such; if only components are needed, the hourly consulting rate would prevail. In highly ccmpetitive referenda, we recommend a tracking survey to check progress. That study is mu -�h briefer that. the benchmark and takes place about three weeks prior to the election. The survey is geared toward judging the success of mobilizing the i �. majo suppor,. coalition. The results provide the basis for any "last minute" targeted appeals or tactical charges. The abbreviated questionnaire contains a maximum of twenty quer- ies and contacts 250 likely voters The analysis focuses upon the differences between the projected voter support in key groups and the actual standing at that point in time. It, thus, provides an excellent information base for corrective action. The complete cost would be $3,500.00 DRL deliberately structures its potential services as a "cafeter- ia menu" in order to provide the greatest cost - effective flex y 4 _L to our clients. But, once again, in order to make in- formed decisions on campaign needs, a benchmark study is indis- pensable. I hope this overview sufficiently covers all the information you require. In addition, I have also enclosed some further informa- tion about the company and its past clients. Let me assure you that we believe we can provide you with timely and reliable information. In light - of cur previous experiences, DRL is par- ticularly sensitive to the implications -- both policy and polit- 5 ical -- of the capital improvement referendums. I hope that we will he able to work together. But, in any case, best of luck with your efforts. Sincerely yours, e Gilliam D. Morris, Ph.D. President WDM:bbk encls. i 6 MEMORANDUM Date: September 14, 1994 To: Diane Spector From: Jim Glasoe Subject: Park Needs /Imp 'ement Ideas Attached please find the final version of the potential park improvement ideas for a possible bond issue this Spring. The final figure is somewhat larger than the preliminary draft, as staff felt all basketball courts should be redone and the costs detailed for park shelters were too low, as they did not include the cost of demolition of current structures. It was the overwhelming opinion of all involved, that the city parks are an invaluable community resource. One that must be continually updated and properly maintained. A quality park system attracts residents, keeps property values high and provides a "close to home" leisure alternative for all citizens. PRELIMINARY ARBORETUM ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building Playground Equipment Clean Up Pond $70,000 Tennis Courts Rinks Fencing Backstops Trash enclosures Satellite enclosures Drinking Fountains $1,500 Landscape updates $10,000 Charcoal Grills $500 ADA Trails $2,000 $ , . 001. . BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY BELLVUE ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Playground Equipment $35,000 Ball Diamonds Bleachers $2,000 Tennis Courts Rinks Fencing Backstops $600 Basketball Court Update $10,000 Satellite enclosures Drinking Fountain $1,500 Picnic Equipment $1,500 Additional Parking $20,000 ADA Trails $6,000 BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY BROOKLANE ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $15,000 Playground Equipment Ball Diamonds Tennis Courts Rinks (lights) $1,500 ! Fencing Backstops Trash enclosures Satellite enclosures Other ADA $1,000 BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY CENTRAL PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building Concession w /storage $100,000 Playground Equipment $30,000 Ball Diamonds $20,000 Tennis Courts $20,000 Rinks Fencing $5,000 Baseball Field Lights $50 Bleachers $20,000 Satellite enclosures Park Updates, General $20,000 Fountains (2) $2,600 ADA Trails $8,000 BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY EVERGREEN PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Playground Equipment Ball Diamonds Press Box Update $15,000 Bleachers (10 sets) $35,000 Lights $100,000 Tennis Courts $3,500 Rinks $40,000 Fencing $53,000 Backstops Basketball Court Update $10,000 Satellite enclosures $5,000 Other: Trail tights $7,000 Two storage buildings $10,000 Grills $1,000 Fountains (2) $3,600 Picnic Areas (4) $2,800 ADA Trails $5,000 Ramps $300 Satellite enclosure $5,000 BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY i FIREHOUSE PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Playground Equipment Ball Diamonds Basketball Court Update $10,000 Rinks Fencing Charcaol Grill $500 Drinking Fountain $1,300 Bleachers $2,000 Other: Trail lights $7,000 ADA Trails ? Ramps $300 BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY FREEWAY PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building Playground Equipment Ball Diamonds Tennis Courts Rinks $5,000 lighting $1,500 Bleachers $2,000 Charcoal Grill $500 Drinking Fountain $1,300 Upgrade Basketball Court $10,000 Other: Trail lights $7,000 ADA Trails ? BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY i GARDEN CITY PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building S5,000 Playground Equipment $35,000 Tennis Courts Rinks $5,000 . Lights $1,500 Drinking Fountain $1,300 Charcoal Grill $500 Trash enclosures Upgrade Basketball Court $10,000 Other: Enlarge parking lot $30,000 ADA Trails ? BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY GRANDVIEW PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED S MA TED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Playground Equipment $45,000 Ball Diamonds Lights $100,000 Sprinkling System $10,000 Bleachers $25,000 Tennis Courts $1,200 Rinks $17,000 2 Fountains $2,600 Charcoal Grills (2) $1,000 Trash enclosures Upgrade Basketball Court $10,000 Other: Trail lights $7,000 ADA Trails $14,000 Ramp $300 BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY HAPPY HOLLOW ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $70,000 Playground Equipment $35,000 Drinking Fountain $1,300 Tennis Courts Rinks $5,000 Fencing Charcoal Grill $500 Picnic Equipment $2,800 Upgrade Basketball Court $10,000 Other: Trail lights $7,000 ADA Trails ? BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY KYLAWN PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Playground Equipment $35,000 Ball Diamonds $50,000 Tennis Courts $50,000 Rinks $5,000 Hockey Rink Lighting $50,000 Fencing $1,000 Picnic Equipment $5,200 Trash enclosures Satellite enclosures Other: Redo basketball $7,000 court Charcoal Grill $500 Drinking Fountain $1,300 ADA Tr-ails $10,000 Ramp $400 BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY LIONS PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Playground Equipment Bail Diamonds Tennis Courts $5,000 Rinks $5,000 • Basketball Court Upgrade $10,000 Drinking Fountain $1,300 Picnic Equipment $2,800 Charcoal Grill $500 Other ADA Trails $1,500 Ramp $500 rG BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY MARLIN PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $60,000 Playground Equipment $35,000 Ball Diamonds Drinking Fountain $1,300 Rinks Charcoal Grill $500 Backstops Trash enclosures Satellite enclosures Other ADA Trails $5,600 i BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY • NORTHPORT PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Picnic Shelter $85,000 Playground Equipment Upgrade Basketball Court $10,000 Tennis Courts $50,000 Rinks $5,000 Fencing $1,500 Drinking Fountains (2) $2,600 Charcoal Grills $1,000 Picnic Equipment $7,000 Other: Trail lights $14,000 Two storage bldgs $10,000 ADA Trails Ramp $300 • BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY ORCHARD LANE PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Playground Equipment Ball Diamonds Upgrade Basketball Court $10,000 Rinks $6,500 Picnic Equipment $2,800 Drinking Fountain $1,300 Charcoal Grill $500 Satellite enclosures Other: Trail lights $7,000 ADA Trails $2,000 Ramp $300 ;RAN© BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY E PALMER LAKE PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Playground Equipment $35,000 Ball Diamonds $5,000 Bleachers $2,000 Tennis Courts Rinks $1,500 Drinking Fountain $1 Charcoal Grill $500 Upgrade Basketball Court $10,000 Satellite enclosures Other: Trail lights $7,000 ADA Trails $6,000 Ramp $300 'CRA Q BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY W PALMER LAKE PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $90,000 Playground Equipment $40,000 Ball Diamonds $2,500 Bleachers $12,000 Tennis Courts $2,000 Rinks (lights) $1,500 Drinking Fountain $1,300 Picnic Equipment $2,800 Charcoal Grill $1,000 Upgrade Basketball Court $10,000 Other: Practice boards $400 2 storage bldgs $10,000 Trail lights $7,000 ADA Trails Ramp PALMER LAKE NATURE AREA ITEM DESCRIPTION= ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $80,000 Playground Equipment $35,000 Ball Diamonds • Tennis Courts BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY Rinks Drinking Fountain $1,300 Charcoal Grill $500 Picnic Equipment $2,800 Satellite enclosures Other: enlarge parking lot $5,000 ADA Trails $26,000 BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY i RIVERDALE PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $85,000 Playground Equipment $35,000 Ball Diamonds Bleachers $2,000 Upgrade Basketball Court $10,000 Rinks Picnic Equipment $2,800 Drinking Fountain $1,300 Charcoal Grill $500 Satellite enclosures Other ADA $4,000 Trails BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY TWIN BEACH PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Playground Equipment $35,000 Fishing Pier w /parking $64,000 Tennis Courts Rinks Drinking Fountain $1,300 Charcoal Grill $500 Picnic Equipment $2,800 Upgrade Basketball Court $10,000 Other Extend trail from TH100 $7,500 ADA Trails $4,000 BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY WANGSTAD PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building Playground Equipment $15,000 Ball Diamonds Basketball Court Upgrade $10,000 Rinks Drinking ountain 1 9 $, 300 Charcoal Grill $500 Trash enclosures Satellite enclosures Other ADA Trails $1,100 BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY WILLOW LANE PARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Shelter Building $200,000 Playground Equipment Ball Diamonds - lights $50,000 Tennis Courts Rink- lights $5,000 • Drinking Fountain $1,300 Charcoal Grill $500 Picnic Equipment $2,800 Satellite enclosures Other: Practice boards $500 Trail lights $7,000 ADA Trails $11,000 • BOND95.XLW PRELIMINARY OTHER ITEMS ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Hockey Arena $4,000,000 Park & Rec Storage at Central G $200,000 Golf Dome $200,000 Aquisition /Dev of Joslyn Site $500,000 . Twin Lake Trail $450,000 Twin Lake Aqui /Dev $300,000 Park Signage $100,000 SUBTOTAL, OTHER ITEMS $5,750,000 GRAND TOTAL ALL PARKS 10,208,900 AND ITEMS BOND95.XLW MEMORANDUM Date: September 1, 1994 To: Diane Spector From: Jim Glasoe f Subject: Community Y Improvement, Cent f /Cit Hall Identified Needs I In a meeting this morning attended by Arnie Mavis, Mike Schlosser, and myself, the following items were identified as potential and /or needed improvements to the community center. They are listed in no particular order and cost estimates are included in their most primitive form. These items are intended to be in addition to the current plan for city hall redesign and the proposed public safety addition. It was felt that the these changes and /or additions would allow us to better serve our senior population, make certain all facilities meet current A.D.A standards, increase activity alternatives for families and individuals, and create a central service /leisure resource for all citizens. Addition to the Community Center which would include the following components; - Senior Center with facilities that would allow for congregate dining. - Wood /fix it shop - Activity center that would include fitness center, running track, gymnasium, day care space, storage and other multi -use areas. - A zero depth entrance pool for toddlers that would include a mushroom fountain and additional waterplay equipment. - Playground adjacent to the toddler pool. - A whirlpool area for adults. - Handball and racquetball courts. - A ground floor reception area. - Family locker room space As Estimated Cost : $3,000,000 To coincide with the above addition the following renovation items were discussed; - Redesign/expand current locker areas to meet A.D.A. standards. - Install elevator to comply with A.D.A. standards. - Replace current pool filtration system with "ozone system". - Renovate current sliding glass doors and add screens. - Turn diving boards, create diving well. - Create additional aquatic office space under waterslide. - Redesign current space to include pre - school area. - Renovate current concession stand. - Redesign current " with music game room space into "family lounge" g o e g P Y g T.V. games, etc. - Replace handrails on waterslide with stainless steel rails. - Upgrade current security systems - Replace carpet as needed. Estimated Cost $1,500,000 Finally, the following items were identified for purchase; - Diaper changing equipment in all rest rooms. - Paddle boats /canoes for Shingle Creek - Shed for rental of canoes, and boats. Estimated Cost $5,000 DRAFT SPACE PRO G R AM: WEST FIRE STATION • Brooklyn Center Fire Department September 11, 1989 Ron Bowman, Fire Chief Space Existing Needed Increase Apparatus Room 2875 sf 3320 sf 445 sf Recreation Room 445 sf 600 sf 155 sf Watch / Company Room 223 sf 400 sf 177 sf Sleeping Rooms 98 sf 600 sf 502 sf Meeting Room 667 sf 900 sf 233 sf Men's Toilet & Shower 68 sf 200 sf 132 sf Women's Toilet & Shower -0- sf 200 sf 200 sf Kitchen 132 sf 132 sf -0- sf Hose Tower 76 sf 76 sf -0- sf District Chief -0- sf 130 sf 130 sf Storage -0- sf 500 sf 500 sf Locker Room -0- sf 450 sf 450 sf P.E. Room -0- sf 225 sf 225 sf PROGRAM AREA 4584 sf 7733 sf 3149 sf Circulation, Structure, Mechanical and Service (25 %) 785 sf 1933 sf 1148 sf I TOTALS 5369 sf 9666 sf 4297 sf [E0yr SrFP 12P-1 s ........ . ..... . .._ ................ ... ....... • � t ..... ..... .... e - l . t OPERTY LfNE . i 1 EXI TIN 'EXISTING WEST PUTURE LIQUOR FIRE STATION ADOITIDN STORE ti 1 I i t `` i I c 1 1 t i j S 1 _1 i .O XISTIN EXISTING PUMP 44 ✓ CHLORINE I �,j' HOUSE - o ROOM SP PROGRAM: EAST FIRE STATION Brooklyn Center Fire Department September 11, 1989 Ron Bowman, Fire Chief No. _ Space Existin Needed Increase -- Assistant Chief -0- sf 130 sf 130 sf -- District Chief -0- sf 130 sf 130 sf 7 Training (2 Officers) 235 sf 300 sf 65 sf 3A Inspectors 248 sf 570 sf 322 sf -- Public Education -0- sf 130 sf 130 sf 8 Watch / Company Room 230 sf 400 sf 170 sf -- Sleeping Rooms (6) -0- sf 600 sf 600 sf -- Locker Room -0- sf 450 sf � 450 sf 3 Meeting / Training 610 sf 1200 sf 590 sf 13 Apparatus Room 4494 sf 6054 sf, 1560 sf -- S.C.B.A. -0- sf 300 sf 300 sf -- Dive Area -0- sf 150 sf 150 sf 2 Storage 116 sf 500 sf 384 sf 4 Kitchen 87 sf 225 sf 138 sf 10 Men's Toilet & Shower 133 sf 200 sf 67 sf 5 Women's Toilet & Shower 33 sf 200 sf 167 sf 1 Recreation Room 605 sf 605 sf -0- sf 12 Nose Tower 123 sf 123 sf -0- sf 9 Janitor 38 sf 38 sf -0- sf PROGRAM AREA 6952 sf 12305 sf 5353 sf 6 Circulation, Structure, Mechanical and Service (25 %) 1750 sf 3076 sf 1326 sf TOTALS 8702 sf 15381 sf 667 sf SEP •1 12 PRO'FERTY LINE ................ . .......... ........................ .............. . . . ............ . .. .. . .............. . . CURB` NEW STAL fA MC ( ............. . . ...... NE IV qU 52; 0" EL-'JSC It GA EXISTING EAST F I RE STATI .. .... .... a � o . ... . ... ............... ............... ............ . ...... .. ............... ................. .. ........ . .......... .... ... . . ............ ..... .......................... . .... ......... . ...... ... .......... .......... . . ................. .......... ... .... .......... .... .......... ---------- ---- - ------- . ....... . .. . .. . .......................... . . . ......... -- . ............ ..... .......... ................. .. ------- - - - .......... • ............ ...... . ................. .... ..................... I. .. . ......... .. ............ .... .......... . . ........... ............. 65th AVENUE NORTH ... . ........ . ........................... ......... ..... 5 '2 1 51TF- PLAN 1 = 20'. i J MJORUD ARCHITECTURE 12400 12th Avenue North, Minneapolis, MN 55441 - 4612 612- 544 -3871 December 22, 1992 Mr. Ron Boman, Fire Chief City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 RE: Cost Estimate Update for East & West Fire Stations Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Dear Chief Boman, Here are the cost estimate updates pda es you requested for both fire stations starting with the last estimate dated February 19, 1990. These new estimates are based on bidding both projects in the summer of 1993 with an approximate inflation decrease /o 0 per Y of 1.3% to February of 1992 and a projected P ro'ected increase of 4 year thereafter. EAST FIRE STATION: Previous range between $482,000 -540,000 (February 19, 1990) Updated range between $504,000 - 565,000 (Bid: July, 1993) WEST FIRE STATION: Previous range between $280,000 - 316,000 (February 19, 1990) Updated range between $293,000 - 331,000 (Bid: July, 1993) The projected cost range for new construction on these projects is $75 to 84 per square foot for the East Fire Station and $67 to 75 for the West Fire Station. For comparison, our current fire station under construction (a budget driven project) was bid in September of 1992 and the overall cost per square foot was $67. Remodeling work or additions often cost slightly more. Sincerely, MJORUD:ARCHITECTURE Al Mjorud, AIA AM:vip Enclosure: - Copy of February 19, 1990 Construction Cost Estimate. - Historical Building Cost Indexes from Dodge Cost Systems as reported in the Architectural Record for the first quarter of 1992. - Current cost of Fire Stations from R. S. Means (December 1992) as reported in Building Design and Construction. Copy: Sy Knapp CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE Project #89117 February 19, 1990 Refer to Site Constraint Study Drawings SCI and SC2, dated February 14, 1990 and Space Program, dated September 11, 1989. East Fire Station Selective Demolition $8,300 - $9,600 Remodeling Existing Building $55,500 - $69,000 Building Addition ($56. - $62. /SF) $374,000 - $413,000 SubTotal $438,000 - $492,000 Cost Adjustment of March 1990* 10% $44,000 - $48,000 EAST FIRE STATION TOTAL $482,000 - $540,000 West Fire Station Selective Demolition $5,000 - $6,800 Remodeling Existing Building $22,100 - $30,600 Building Addition ($52. - $57. /SF) $227,600 - $2 SubTotal $255,000 - $287,000 Cost Adjustment of March 1990* 10 1 , 1 0' $25,000 - S29,000 WEST FIRE STATION TOTAL $280,000 - $316,000 GRAND TOTAL $762,000 - $856,000 * Cost estimate based on 1988 R.S. Means Publications. Cost adjustment 10 ( 2 years at 5 %) for inflation. Practice .' "ltstAW 9 0ii Costs Still far below the rate of inflation for other goods Marked by Modest Rise and services, construction -cost rises in the first =t quarter reflect increasing construction volume. This report on the first quarter of 1992 The largest gains, ranging between 20 and Data supplied by Dodge Cost Systems Jumps ahead three quarters from the previ- 29 percent, were in the Northeast and one of Marshall + Swift ous construction -cost roundup in February the smallest gains (10 percent) was in the [RECORD, page 301. That earlier report, entr West. While cost rises in the Northeast were tled Construction Costs in the Doldrums, mostly above average, the West had the showed costs for the 12 months ending in highest rise (see below). Charles K. Hoyt the second q 991 actually falling b almost a 1 quarter of 1 y /2 percent. This was despite the fact that the second quarter was the U.S. Summary of Building Construction Costs (in per cent) start of a slow but steady recovery in con- 1 / 1992 4/1991 1977 struction volume, which was to continue #Metro TO TO TO - until now. Clearly, falling costs were too DISTRICTS Areas 4/1992 4/1992 4/1992 good to go on. And they were. EASTERN U.S. Costs for the 12 months ending in the first METRO NY -NJ ....................... 18 0.05 0.56 2013.10 NEW ENGLAND STATES...... 33 0.26 0.88 1874.40 quarter of this year have more than made up NORTHEASTERN STATES ... 120 0.22 1.03 1773.17 for lost ground by rising in excess of a 1/2 SOUTHEASTERN STATES.... 106 0.11 0.40 1833.02 percent, although the pace is slowing -from AVERAGE EASTERN U.S..... 277 0.17 0.74 1823.72 .35 percent in the last three months of 1991 to .19 in the first three months of 1992. WESTERN U.S. How do the regions stack up to the usual WEST CENTRAL STATES..... 122 0.30 1.08 1721.36 supply-and-demand reaction? According to PACIFIC COAST STATES ...... 106 0.09 0.10 1809.38 the F. W. Dodge report on construction Vol- AVERAGE WESTERN U.S.... 228 0.20 0.62 1762.28 . ume for the quarter, "all major regions of the nation showed substantial improvement UNITED STATES: AVERAGE 505 0.19 0.69 1795.98 over last year's construction activity." *USING ONLY CITIES WITH BASE YEAR OF 1977. Historical Building Costs Indexes Average of all Nonresidential 1977 average for each city = 1000.0 Building Types, 21 Cities Metropolitan 1982 area 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 10 Atlanta 2098.6 2078.0 2360.6 2456.7 2448.7 2518.3 2561.9 2580.9 2697.3 2740.4 2711.3 2740.2 2728.1 Baltimore 1446.5 1544.9 1639.5 1689.7 1703.7 1743.8 1765.2 1780.2 1849.1 1886.8 1895.2 1862.1 1867.6 Birmingham 1407.2 1469.9 1468.1 1535.7 1594.7 1565.7 1587.4 1542.6 1612.5 1643.0 1634.5 1650.2 1655.3 Boston 1283.7 1432.5 1502.0 1569.9 1646.0 1721.0 1773.6 1883.0 1921.6 1917.2 1918.4 1915.7 1924.3 Chicago 1323.6 1344.7 1425.8 1439.5 1476.7 1528.0 1599.9 1591.4 1636.5 1672.8 1690.9 1735.9 1735.6 Cincinnati 1385.2 1350.4 1362.6 1430.8 1484.5 1486.6 1499.4 1510.9 1526.8 1560.7 1552.3 1554.9 1552.9 Cleveland 1388.2 1459.5 1511.4 1475.9 1464.0 1474.1 1525.7 1541.8 1550.7 1556.3 1526.1 1517.3 1515.0 Dallas 1481.9 1750.6 1834.3 1925.9 1958.0 1963.3 1973.9 1947.2 19272 1877.3 1837.0 1828.5 1826.4 Denver 1487.4 1632.2 1679.1 1800.1 1824.3 1821.8 1795.8 1732.7 1725.3 1725.9 1663.7 1654.8 1668.2 Detroit 1447.4 1580.3 1638.0 1672.1 1697.9 1692.6 1696.6 1689.3 1734.4 1751.2 1737.4 1736.8 1725.8 Kansas City 1233.2 1323.4 1381.8 1407.5 1447.1 1472.5 1484.7 1493.7 1505.6 1518.8 1510.8 1525.6 1530.2 Los Angeles 1387.5 1474.3 1503.3 1523.9 1555.1 1571.0 1609.7 1675.1 1789.5 1813.7 1800.9 1749.2 1743.8 Miami 1380.6 1369.1 1392.1 1467.6 15222 1540.6 1566.2 1589.2 1625.2 1641.3 1638.8 1642.7 1644.3 Minneapolis 1327.7 1442.6 1576.8 1624.6 1640.4 1661.0 1674.0 1677.0 1690.6 1712.5 1676.0 1652.0 1654.8 New Orleans 1505.7 1572.7 1616.9 1650.5 1691.4 1762.5 1760.2 1699.8 1707.3 1685.0 1695.3 1726.3 1732.5 New York 1319.4 1419.2 1491.8 1672.5 1747.2 1806.7 1899.9 1980.9 2065.3 2157.2 2126.2 2105.5 2098.8 Philadelphia 1539.5 1660.7 1769.4 1819.5 1922.1 1967.9 1992.7 2023.5 2171.4 2244.3 2249.0 2217.3 2220.7 Pittsburgh 1341.7 1493.2 1479.5 1497.2 1576.1 1611.0 1665.8 1647.3 1700.3 1721.3 1688.7 1708.5 1709.8 St. Louis 1320.0 1397.3 1451.2 1524.9 1625.5 1641.8 1647.4 1653.5 1705.7 1761.1 1732.5 1769.5 1768.9 San Francisco 1644.8 1776.4 1810.1 1856.8 1935.3 1961.8 1995.5 1992.0 2090.9 2114.3 2156.0 2169.3 2151.3 • Seattle 1616.8 1814.9 1962.7 1979.0 1948.9 1937.9 1925.3 1874.7 1968.0 1987.0 2017.6 2027.4 2042.4 Costs in a given city for a certain period may be compared with costs in another period by dividing one index into the other, if the index for a city for one period (200.) divided by the index for a second period (150.0) equals 133 %, the costs in the one period are 33% higher than the costs in the other. Also, second period costs are 75% of those in the first period (150.0 divided by 200.0 = 75 %) or they are 25% lower in the second period. 34 Architectural Record July 1992 - i 4 BD &C C • Buildin and material � g s cost information from R.S. Means Co. --- �- Metropolitan cost comparisons 1 - < Construction costs per square foot for various building types across the nation One -story, 24,000- sq. -ft. auditorium with a One -story, 6,000- sq. -ft. fire station with a 24 - ft. story height; precast concrete exterior 14 - ft. story height; face brick with concrete it-all; steel frame. block back -up; steel joists. i One -story, 20,000- sq. -ft. gymnasium with a Two -story, 22,000- sq. -ft. library with 14 -ft. 25 -ft. story height; reinforced concrete block; story heights; face brick with concrete block I laminated wood arches. back -up; reinforced concrete frame. Cost Comparisons Per Square Foot j Auditorium Fire station Gymnasium Library i Atlanta 78.87 58.24 66.61 68.28 Baltimore 86.02 63.51 72.64 74.47 Boston 104.49 77.16 88.25 90.46 Chicago 93.95 69.37 79.34 81.34 Cleveland 94.64 69.88 79.93 1 8 .94 Dallas 75.65 55.86 63.88 65.49 Denver 80.70 59.59 68.15 69.87 Detroit 95.69 70.66 80.81 82.84 Houston 79.66 58.82 67.27 68.96 Kansas City 85.67 63.26 72.35 74.17 Los Angeles 99.96 73.81 84.42 86.54 NOTE: Costs as shown are for the Miami 76.78 56.69 64.84 66.47 basic building and do not include: Minneapolis 87.93 64.93 74.26 76.13 1. sitework (site clearing and grad New Orleans 75.82 55.98 64.03 65.64 ing, utilities, paving, landscaping, site improvements); 2. land costs; New York City 118.09 87.19 99.73 102.23 3. development costs; 4. speciairy finishes or equipment. Phoenix 79.66 58.82 67.27 68.96 Square foot costs vary signifi. Pittsburgh 89.85 66.34 75,88 77,79 candy from project to project due Portland 87.67 64.74 74.04 75.90 to qualirv, complexity and eco- St. Louis 89.50 66.09 75.59 77.49 nomic climate. Each project should be examined individually. For a de- San Diego 94.91 70.08 80.15 82.17 railed list of building components included in these figures, see Means • San Francisco 110.24 81.40 93.10 95.44 Square Foot Costs. Seattle 91.16 67.31 76.99 78.92 R.S. Means Co. Tampa 76.43 56.43 64.55 66.17 100 Construction Plaza Washington, D.C. 84.80 62.61 71.61 73.41 P.O. Box 300 Winston /Salem 70.59 52.12 59.62 61.11 Kingston. MA 02364 (617) 585 -7880 (800) 448 -8182 December, 1992 Buildine Design & Conscrucrioro25 MEMORANDUM September 22, 1994 TO: G. G. Splinter FROM: Diane Spector � ✓ �� SUBJ: City Hall Needs City Hall was constructed about 25 years ago. While over the years we have maintained its physical systems to the best of our ability, many of its mechanical systems are simply aging. Most of the mechanical systems are far less energy efficient than today's models. The roof is insulated only to R- 5, and leaks. Some of the materials, such as the single -pane windows, were chosen during construction for their low cost, not for their durability or energy efficiency. I have listed below a number of needs which will need to be addressed at City Hall in the near future. Obviously it would be most cost - effective to complete many of these improvements as a part of a larger construction or remodelling project. Should the Council decide to pursue a space needs solution for the Police Department which involves building or leasing a building of site, these needs will still have to be addressed, and should be considered as part of that project cost. MECHANICAL NEEDS Assumes Police Department needs would be ( met b P Y new construction or remodelling) • Replace roof on City Hall (Community Center roof replaced in mid -'80s) • HVAC system (it is expected that these improvements could improve energy efficiency by 20 -30 percent on annual utility bills of $120- 150,000) - replace chillers and boilers - add zone controlling to allow for differences in heating and cooling for.different operations - replace air intakes and filtering system - separate boiler supply for swimming pool makeup water • Upgrade ambient lighting to energy efficient lighting • Upgrade or replace Council Chambers to make it accessible and improve AV equipment Underground fuel tanks (under the front entrance walkway and stairs) must by law be replaced by 1997 Page 2 • Front walk is not ADA compliant - grade is too steep • Replace single -pane windows and improve wall insulation (currently foam board over concrete block) • Improve security by replacing locks, installing security cameras • Install ADA- compliant strobing fire alarm system, automatic doors • Add storage, high- density filing, electronic file storage and imaging It is difficult to estimate the cost of these improvements, as it would vary based on whether it was being done in conjunction with another project, the nature of the other project, and when it was done. For example, if the Police Department were expanded into a major City Hall addition, the replacement HVAC system would be a slightly high capacity system to account for the increase P Y Y building rea than if the he chillers and boilers were to serve the existing buildings. Also, if there was a possibility of future additions, then the replacement would be of a type which is relatively easy to YP Y Y upgrade using "modules." Pg g SPACE NEEDS We've discussed on several occasions the need to provide additional space for the Police Department. That department needs roughly twice as much space as it currently has available. Three options for eetings ace needs on a permanent basis are obvious: P • Enter into a long -term lease to use existing space elsewhere in the city, and relocate all but the jail and dispatching facility to that site. Those functions would remain because it would be very costly to reconstruct those facilities as leasehold improvements elsewhere. • Construct a new building on a site somewhere in the City, and relocate the entire police function to that building. At current per foot prices, construction would cost an estimated $3- 4 million (cost of construction, architectural services, furnishings, site improvements), plus the cost of acquiring and clearing land. Assuming a minimum 2 acre parcel, prime commercial land could cost $500,000 - $1,250,000, plus cost of demolition and clearing of existing structures. Raw commercial land, such as Cl zoned land, could cost $200,000. An additional, unknown cost would be the cost of relocating the police /public works radio transmitters and the radio tower, plus the cost of relicensing the base stations. • A third option would be constructing an addition to City Hall to house police activities. The current building was not structurally engineered to accommodate additional floors, so building up is not an option. Because of site constraints (chiefly poor soils), the only good place for an addition would be filling in the area between City Hall and the Community Center, where the stairs and the chlorine storage building are now. This option has been studied in some depth by a previous architect, who believes it could meet our needs. Page 3 Operating Costs It is important to bear in mind operating costs when evaluating alternatives for meeting space needs. Both the off -site options would carry very high operating costs. These sites would require cleaning and maintenance. Much of this could be contractual, but there is always a need for basic maintenance such as changing light bulbs, moving furniture, fixing minor problems with the mechanical systems, taking care of grounds, etc. It is unlikely that current staff would be able to meet these needs, when travel time and other considerations are taken into account. Thus there would be a need for additional maintenance personnel, as well as increased costs for additional maintenance contracts on the chillers and boilers, and janitorial service. The new facility would also need a phone system, and would have to be added as a remote site to the City's Local Area Network and LOGIS' Wide Area Network. Finally, there would be the utility cost of electrical, gas, heating oil (for interruptable service), emergency power, and alarm system. The 911 system would have to be moved. Based on the mechanical needs of the existing building and the operational costs of moving off site, constructing an addition to City Hall would be the most economical solution to the Police department space needs. PROJECT 1988 -16 1 City of Brooklyn Center Civic Center Space Needs Stud p Y FILE COPY - DO NOT REMOVE Prepared By: Carlson Mjorud Architecture Ltd, #' 4100 Excelsior Boulevard r Minneapolis, Minnesota In Association With: Mjorud Architecture Rudin Structures Braun Engineering a 3111 -6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following outline answers the three basic questions asked by the City Council. How Much Space is Needed? Approximately 95,000 square feet of additional space would have to be constructed to accommodate the facilities and activities requested. New Space Existing Totals Areas Community Activities Center 99,200 SF 39,000 SF Areas to form Building Connections & Entries 7,500 SF -0- Public Safety Facilities 19,500 SF 9,000 SF City Hall 26,300 SF 15,000 SF Specialized Maintenance Areas 3,400 SF -0- Enclosed Garage 1,500 SF -0- TOTAL AREAS 157,400 SF 63,000 SF Difference 94,400 SF Can These New Facilities Fit on the Existing Civic Center Site? The answer is, yes. While the site has many geological and physical constraints, the new facilities can be added in a logical and pleasing manner. How Much Will it Cost? The construction of new space and the remodeling of existing space will cost approximately $11,000,000. If approached in a three phase process the cost per phase will be: Phase One - Space Needs Study (completed) = $ 17,000.00 Phase Two - Preliminary Design, Approvals and Presentations for Citizens = $ 118,000.00 Phase Three - Final Design, Bidding and Construction = Community Activities Center $ 1,958,000 Fitness Center $ 3,935,000 Connecting Links $ 390,000 City Hall $ 1,542,000 Public Safety Facility $ 1,349,000 Specialized Maint. Areas $ 187,000 Enclosed Garage $ 52,500 Sitework $ 245,000 Furnishings $ 500,000 Arch /Engineering Fees $ 677,500 $10,836,000.00 SEA OKA •nA •n,& •n1. $10 ,971,000.00 4 •RA •N,& ONA ONA ONA Site Constraints BALL `� AM AM GIYMLL \ \ \\ FOOTBALL POQTHALL f deep I ✓. / �� SNiMGtE CREEK TRAAYIAT r PEDES PAL estimated 6 gem with no peat\\ =�/ 7� :'�:::.•:.::.::::: ISLAM a -. \ air HALL 19 ONA • =A OKA OKA ORA LO cn cu - - --- ` f I ii.;y •�. {•. I r,A■ / f,` �1'. ti'•' :it ?i: :ti tt : ?j.: �� ?:ttt:: ?::?:'� ? y / �� i itii�i � ?ii�ii• ?? ?�' ii:� '� ?4 ?tiitii ?iit ?�i:iti. ✓ � `\ '':i?.tiit'tr °;C: i:. • :i;k �:' � t ?� is ° i " .? ?i. �' (� � t ?, t.;' i . ti ?:'ti ? ?� •� . ?' / 'I. . ` •t:....;i ty ii ;ta 'si ....::..::... :....::...::::.... itt•:E:::Y.::, ' 1 '��, t77 � i.:ti�.';i� : ? :..::rig : .. '�.. ....: ::::.:...t .. :, . i iiit: ::;a•:.3t.•.; ?.�, ... ?iii s...... .... iiii:iii:.. ::: ;i••: 44 / t \ \ 41 qv J � �► ..� + OW 1w w w ap w OKA Oil OKA OKA OVA Site Constraints SHINGLE CREEK TRAILWAY j� PEDESIRtk /�, \ BRIDGE CENTRAL K PLAGZ14 NEW FITNESS CEN Floor at upper Ieye1 � -.• with extgting suGface � nde e b u ild v 1 P ! AN ED RFACE RK N / PAN V / 11 � A1J111 T CE f 1 PARKRIG % L - . y . �' NTRY CO T Driv - Dro ff � COttMUNM /i CI TY, 1tt11t►fift►llttttlltitfttttl!' EXPANSION CE ` ��ri,►1}}ti►tl► tutu ►pffltUt - Twa tories noW11 �� \structured for two :? dditionat- '� Relocated Pony Crry SM1191e U.eK pa(KWDY �. Site Concept 3( Oi.1. *NA Oil. OiJ► OiI. OKA OKA OKA OKA OKA Cost Estimate SUMMARY OF COSTS Community Activities Center 1,958,000 Meeting Room Fixit Shop Kitchen Expansion Classroom Aerobic /Exercise Room Pre - School Expansion of Existing Programs Fitness Center 3,935,000 Gymnasium Track Handball Courts Locker Rooms Public Square Connecting Links 390,000 City Hall 1,542,000 Public Safety Facility 1,349,000 Specialized Maintenance Areas 187,000 Enclosed Garage 52,500 Site Work 245,000 Furnishings Allowance 500,000 Architectural /Engineering Fees 812,500 TOTAL $10,971,000 ORA •RA OKA OKA OKA OKA •EA, OKA SEA OKA Cost Estimate COST BREAKDOWN COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES CENTER Existing Space to be Remodeled 4,000 SF @ $ 35. = $ 140,000 New Construction 20,000 SF @ $ 90. = $1, 818,000 TOTAL COMMUNITY CENTER $1,958,000 FITNESS CENTER New Construction 40,000 SF @ $ 80. = $3,200,000 TOTAL FITNESS CENTER $3,935,000 PUBLIC SQUARE 4,900 SF @ $150. = $ 735,000 TOTAL PUBLIC SQUARE $ 735,000 CONNECTING LINKS New Construction 2,600 SF @ $150. = $ 39 0,000 TOTAL CONNECTING LINKS $ 390,000 CITY HALL Existing Space to be Remodeled 15,000 SF @ $ 35. = $ 525,000 New Construction 11,300 SF @ $ 90. = $1,017,000 TOTAL CITY HALL $1,542, 000 PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY Existing Space to be Remodeled 9,000 SF @ $ 35. = $ 315,000 j New Construction: Jail 2,240 SF @ $130. = $ 291,200 Safety Facilities 8,260 SF @ $ 90. = $ 743,400 TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY $1,349,OOU SPECIALIZED MAINTENANCE AREAS New Construction 3,400 SF @ $ 55. = $ 187,000 TOTAL SPECIALIZED MAINTENANCE AREAS $ 187,000 ENCLOSED GARAGE AREAS New Construction 1,500 SF @ $ 35. _ $ 52,500 TOTAL SPECIALIZED MAINTENANCE AREAS 52,500 SITE WORK Pond Relocation $ 70,000 Additional Surface Parking $ 175,000 TOTAL SITE WORK 245,OOC TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS = $ 9,658,50C Furnishings Allowance = $ 500,OOC SubTotal = T10,158,50C Architectural, Engineering, Soils Surveying, Construction Laboratory Testing, Document Reproduction Fees @ 8% _ $ 812,50C TOTAL FACILITIES COSTS 10,971,OOC 3 ' OKA OKA SEA •EA •aA I Camcil Meeting Date 09/26/94 31 City of Brooklyn Center A hem Nom /a d Request For Council Consideration Item Description: Continuation of Discussion on Pilot Project as Requested by Councilmember Rosene for Public Call -In Line Department Approval: - ___/ 41 Nancy Pohman, Assistant City Manager Manager's Review /Recommendation: r No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approve Option 1 for Pilot Call -In Program for the Month of November • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached YES 1 Councilmember Rosene has requested having a pilot call -in program that would allow residents /viewers to call city hall with their comments regarding Council meetings. The attached memorandum outlines two possible options as well as cost estimates relating to this program. Below is a synopsis of the two options. Both options would have staff lace the Council agenda on the City's cable TV station prior to the P P g Y • Council meeting, along with a phone number residents /viewers could call with their comments. Option 1 would have current staff members receive and record the comments which would then be given to the city manager prior to the Council meeting. The cost for Option 1 would be minimal since staff would take time during their regular work day to record the messages /comments received. Option 2 would have a definite time frame during the Council meeting when calls would be received, i.e. 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. One phone line would be used by a temporary staff person to receive and record the incoming comments. A listing of the comments would then be forwarded to the city manager during the Council meeting. The cost for Option 2 would be approximately $53.75 per Council meeting, allowing for staff time at $21.50 per hour x 2.5 hours. Option 1 seems to be the better choice until we see what, if any, reaction is received to a call -in comment line. This option could run as a pilot program for the November Council meetings and then an analysis could be done to see if the program seems to be successful. City of Brooklyn Center Memorandum TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Nancy Gohman, Assistant City Manager DATE: September 21, 1994 SUBJECT: Council Meeting Call -In Pilot Program Options As you recall, Councilmember Rosene asked if it would be possible to put together a pilot program allowing residents /viewers to call in comments regarding Council meetings. Listed below are two options relating to this matter and cost estimates for each option. Option 1 n r cable TV station, listing all Council agenda items agenda o ou Staff will lace full Council g Sta p g to that tin This agenda will also state h Monday Council meeting. prior to g by the Thursday p y g residents /viewers are encouraged to call their comments in to the City of Brooklyn Center regarding the Council agenda no later than 4:30 p.m. on the Monday of the Council meeting. I g g g A phone number to call would also be aired at this time, and messages g would be taken by staff or left on voice mail for after hours calls. Comments about the agenda that have been called in to the City would be placed in writing and given to the city manager Council meeting. r prior to the Monday p y g would be minimal. Staff who currently Cost -Staff cost for Option 1 wo Y work in the organization could take time during their day to record messages/comments received. Option 2 agenda/Council items during a certain regarding the Council a g Staff would take incoming calls egar g g time frame. For example, a phone would be set up to receive calls from the start of a meeting through 8:30 p.m. on that evening. Staff would record incoming comments from 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. After 8:30 p.m., a listing of the comments would be forwarded to the city manager at the Monday night Council meeting. • Cost (Assuming use of one person from the temporary staff service to take incoming calls on one phone line only) - The cost for such service is $21.50 per hour x 2.5 hours = $53.75 per Council meeting. This cost estimate assumes that staffing is limited to 6:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., allowing for setup to take calls. Recommendation Between the two options described above, I recommend we start with Option 1 to see if there is any reaction to a call-in comment line concerning our Council meetings. Option 1 can run as a pilot program for our November meetings, allowing time for analysis after the pilot program. Council Meeting Date 9 -26-94 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item rrut b r Request For Council Consideration Item Description: Discussion of Community Oriented Policing, Humboldt Substation, and School Liaison Officer update. Department Approval: \,,& \,� N,�S� Scott W. Kline, Acting Chief of Police Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: The Council review attached documents and discuss relative issues. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached yes Acting Chief Scott Kline concurs with all recommendations and findings contained in the Community Oriented Policing Committee Recommendation. y Community Oriented Policing Recommendation of Evaluation Committee September 26, 1994 Community Oriented Policing (C.O.P.) should be the philosophy of the whole department. Everyone should be involved to a limited degree with the selection of a number of slots on each shift to handle specific problems or details. By selecting the designated slots on each shift to handle C.O.P. details, officers can select from a group of those details which are ongoing or spread over a long period of time. The shorter details can be given out to the other officers to keep them involved in the process. C.O.P. projects and activities are secondary to the needs of patrol. The department cannot lose sight of the fact that its primary function is to respond to calls for service from citizens and when there is an opportunity, the C.O.P. projects and activities can be worked without putting any strain on the department's ability to respond for calls to service. C.O.P projects should be scheduled, as often as possible, far enough in advance so that personnel can be allocated without causing a shortage on the shift. All of the planned and ongoing contacts with commercial establishments, apartment complex owners and managers, Humboldt Substation, and functions of this nature can be fitted around the normal scheduling of the shift so that officers do not feel that they are placing the street operation in jeopardy by handling a C.O.P. project. The evaluating committee does not feel it is necessary to assign a specific amount of time on C.O.P. details. The time spent should be left to the discretion of the officer or the shift supervisor. Through a continual feedback and evaluation process, a given officer and shift supervisor can evaluate and reallocate time for particularly difficult details and possibly move a detail to another time period by a scheduled duty change to more effectively be able to handle the problem and bring it to a successful solution. Assignment of projects and time allocated should be at the discretion of the shift supervisor. By having each shift supervisor coordinate the C.O.P. projects on their given shifts, they will be better able to allocate personnel and coordinate with the other shift supervisors the projects and possibly move a given project from one shift to another to more efficiently handle it. C.O.P. officers should be assigned to handle specific problems that cannot be handled by routine patrol, such as defined proactive details. These could also be handled by short term assignment of officers to special proactive shifts which has been done so successfully in the past by the department. Community Oriented Policing Recommendation of Evaluation Committee September 26, 1994 Page 2 C.O.P. assignments and selection should not interfere with the normal shift bidding process. Officers interested in working on long term projects can express an interest for the shift they bid. By using the bidding process to determine the officers who will handle the bulk of the C.O.P. details, one can be more assured that the officer will spend the maximum amount of time and energy needed to accomplish each detail successfully. Officers will be available to be moved to assist on C.O.P. projects on other shifts. As is the case with other tasks, officers will be able to be moved on a short term basis to handle a particularly difficult or convoluted project so that the hours spent on the project can be handled in the most efficient manner freeing the officer up to get back to other duties. The committee stressed that they felt that the entire department had to become involved in the C.O.P. concept and that each and every member, at least on a limited basis, must have some responsibilities along this line and that all C.O.P. projects could be handled by good coordination through shift supervisors on the street. Respectfully submitted by: Officer Kevin Benner Officer Keith Carlson Officer Walter Filson Officer Richard Fryer Officer Robert Heilman Investigator M. Catherine Hennessv Ser David Werner School Liaison Officer September 26, 1994 The assignment posting is currently being finalized along with the joint powers agreement. It is anticipated that both governing bodies will be able to review and act on the agreement by mid October. Humboldt Substation September 26, 1994 The Humboldt Substation will be staffed by Community Oriented Policing (C.O.P.) officers assigned to the strip mall as well as those assigned to surrounding apartment complexes. A set time will be established for officers to be at the substation so that area residents can be assured that there will be someone there to talk to at a consistent time period each day. In conversations with area residents they felt that consistency in the time of day that an officer would be there was more important than the length of time they were there. Council Meeting Date 9 -26-94 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number G(/ Request For Council Consideration Item Description: Resolution expressing recognition of and appreciation for the dedicated public service of Sergeant David Werner. Department Approval: Scott W. Kline, Acting Chief of Police Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: The Council approve a resolution expressing recognition of and appreciation for the dedicated public service of Sergeant David Werner. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached ) • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF SERGEANT DAVID WERNER. WHEREAS, Sergeant David Werner has served the City of Brooklyn Center as an outstanding member of the law enforcement community since December 13, 1965 and will retire from City employment on September 26, 1994; and WHEREAS, Sergeant Werner has successfully fulfilled the roles of patrol officer, investigator, sergeant, as well as captain; and WHEREAS, Sergeant Werner was key in organizing Brooklyn Center's Emergency Operations Unit and did supervise the unit for several years; and WHEREAS, Sergeant Werner served as the first Community Oriented g y Policing Sergeant and was instrumental in the development and implementation of the Community Oriented Policing philosophy within the department; and WHEREAS, Sergeant Werner has been a leader -by- example to the department with proactive approaches to policing issues; and WHEREAS, Sergeant Werner has distinguished himself as a graduate of the Federal Bureau of Investigation National Academy; and WHEREAS, Sergeant Werner has garnered the praise of the citizenry, his peers, and the police administration for his faithful execution of police responsibilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of David Werner is recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center and that the City wishes him a long and fulfilling retirement. Date Todd Paulson, 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 Scot 26, 1994 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF CASH AND INVESTMENTS FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEBT SERVICE FUND TO THE CENTRAL GARAGE INTERNAL SERVICE FUND TO COVER UNFUNDED PAST DEPRECIATION RESULTING FROM INFLATION Department Approval: Charles Hansen, Finance Director Manager's Review /Recommendation: — N m No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Passage of the attached resolution. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached ) On September 27, 1993, the City Council passed Resolution 93 -161 which created the Central Garage • Internal Service Fund. On December 20, 1993, the City Council passed Resolution 93 -224 which transferred cash from funds which previously owned vehicles to the Central Garage so that there would be funds in reserve equal to the past depreciation on those vehicles. Such a reserve is needed so that when the garage purchases replacement vehicles, it doesn't end up in a deficit position. Due to the short time available, the analysis of this reserve was limited to the original purchase price of the vehicles. In purchasing new vehicles this year, we have found replacement prices to be far higher than the funds in the reserve. This is due to both inflation and the fact that the City has been charged sales tax on most vehicles since June 1992. We have done a new analysis of the amount that should be in the reserve for depreciation. The replacement cost of each vehicle was ascertained and multiplied by the percent of its expected life which has already past. The resulting amount of $2,643,282 was set as the past depreciation which ideally should be in the depreciation reserve. This exceeds the amount transferred in for the General Fund vehicles by $1,007,845. The $650,000 transfer in the attached resolution will fill most of this gap. The remainder will be covered by appropriations from the General Fund as each vehicle comes up for replacement. Such appropriations will occur in each budget for the foreseeable future because of both this funding gap and because of the fact the vehicles are sometimes replace by a unit more capable and expensive than its predecessor. Current rental rates are being adjusted for inflation to minimize this problem in the future. A transfer of $450,000 from the Special Assessment Debt Service Fund removes virtually all remaining • surplus from that fund. Just enough money will be left to make future debt service payments. The transfer of $200,000 from the General Fund was settled on because we feel there is a good chance that the General Fund's operating surplus for 1994 will equal or exceed that amount. Such a surplus would bolster the City's hold on its A+ Moody's Bond Rating for 1995 bond sales. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF CASH AND INVESTMENTS FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEBT SERVICE FUND TO THE CENTRAL GARAGE INTERNAL SERVICE FUND TO COVER UNFUNDED PAST DEPRECIATION RESULTING FROM INFLATION WHEREAS, Section 7.11 of the City Charter does provide the City Council with full authority to make transfers between all funds which may be created, provided that such transfers are not inconsistent with the provisions of related covenants, the provisions of the City Charter, or State Statutes; and WHEREAS, the City Council, on December 20, 1993, approved Resolution 93- 224 which created a Central Garage Internal Service Fund and estimated the unfunded past depreciation to be $1,635,437 on vehicles operated by the General Fund; and WHEREAS, a more accurate determination has now been made, including the effects of inflation and the imposition of sales tax on the purchase of city vehicles, which show that an additional amount of S1,007,845 should be set aside for past depreciation; and WHEREAS the + - amounts of S200,000 in the General Fund and $- ��0,000 in the Special Assessment Debt Service Fund are available for transfer to the Central ,Garage Fund. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that cash and investments will be transferred to the Central Garage Fund to cover past depreciation as follows: General Fund $200,000.00 Special Assess Bonds of 1987 450,000.00 S650,000.00 e Date Todd Paulson, Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 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 Dale City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Nwnber / G Request For Council Consideration is Item Description: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FUND Department Approval: CC'AAt.t.4 k a^� Charles Hansen, Finance Director 4 Z7 Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Passage of the attached resolution. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached ) This year's activities in area such as acquiring and demolishing blithed apartment buildings have seriously depleted the financial resources of the Economic Development Authority. In the past those resources have consisted of unreserved operating fund balance of about $1,000,000 and $1,000,000 reserved in a dedicated housing account, off of which only the interest is to be spent. Projects in 1994 have spent the unreserved balance down to about $600,000. To be able to provide the resources necessary for projects approved and anticipated, without dipping into the dedicated housing account, an additional source of funds is needed. One possible resource is a reserve account in the Capital Improvements Fund which isn't considered to be a general resource of that fund. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FUND WHEREAS, Section 7.11 of the City Charter provides the City Council with full authority to make transfers between all funds which may be created, provided that such transfers are not inconsistent with the provisions of related covenants, the provisions of the City Charter, or State Statutes; and WHEREAS, there now exists accumulated cash surpluses of $470,000 being held in reserve in the Capital Projects Fund; and WHEREAS, there are redevelopment projects anticipated or underway in the Economic Development Authority Fund in need of additional funding. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to transfer the amount of $470,000 from the Capital Projects Fund to the Economic Development Authority Fund. Date Todd Paulson, 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 , 9 , /2 6/94 3 City of BTOOyR CEllt81' Agenda Its Number Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Resolution Declaring Heritage Festival as a Civic Event from November 7 through 12, 1994 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 a Resolution Declaring Heritage Festival as a Civic Event from November 7 through 12, 1994. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached No ) • • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING HERITAGE FESTIVAL AS A CIVIC EVENT FROM NOVEMBER 7 THROUGH 12 1994 WHEREAS, the purpose of the Heritage Festival is to encourage a climate within our communities that is sensitive and welcoming to a changing and diversified population, and to offer an opportunity whereby all residents can experience a sense of belonging and ownership within their community, and to celebrate the myriad of activities already happening that promote cooperation between various cultures; and WHEREAS, residents, the city community civic groups, and businesses participate in the annual civic event to celebrate the diversity of the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, in order for the Heritage Festival to schedule certain events requiring City - issued administrative land use permits, it is necessary for the Heritage Festival to be declared a civic event. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the Heritage Festival is declared a civic event from November 7 through 12, 1994. Date Todd Paulson, 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 9 -26-94 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number Request For Council Consideration Item Description: A resolution approving contract for School Liaison and D.A.R.E. Officer Services between the Anoka - Hennepin School District Number Eleven and the City of Brooklyn Center. Department Approval: P PP \\� , x \,., Scott W. Kline, Acting Chief of Police Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: The City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into the Contract for School Liaison and D.A.R.E. Officer Services between the Anoka - Hennepin School District Number Eleven and the City • of Brooklyn Center. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached ves ) The above named contract has been submitted to the City of Brooklyn Center formalizing an agreement between the City and the Anoka- Hennepin School District Number Eleven. The terms of said contract are July 1, 1994 to June 30, 1995 which covers the District fiscal year. Service under the contract will be provided to Evergreen Park Elementary School. • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT FOR SCHOOL LIAISON AND D.A.R.E. OFFICER SERVICES BETWEEN THE ANOKA - HENNEPIN SCHOOL DISTRICT NUMBER ELEVEN AND THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER. WHEREAS, the Anoka - Hennepin School District Number Eleven desires to enter into a contract with the City of Brooklyn Center for the provision of school liaison and D.A.R.E. officer services; and WHEREAS, the School Liaison Officers in the D.A.R.E. ro ram in the P g elementary school will present the approved prevention program which is a part of the fifth grade Health curriculum; and WHEREAS, the Police and City Administration recommend this program and the City Council agrees with this recommendation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into the Contract for School Liaison and D.A.R.E. Officer Services between the Anoka - Hennepin School District Number Eleven and the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Todd Paulson, 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. SCHOOL BOARD: noka Michael Sullivan, Chair Educational Service Center John Peterson, Vice Chair 11299 Hanson Boulevard NW Maureen Gaalaas, Clerk Ronald Manning, Treasurer ennepin Coon Rapids Minnesota 55433 1 " Mark Temke, Director (612) 422 -5500 Leon Ulferts, Director Independent School District 11 (612) 422 -7804 FAX Douglas Otto, Superintendent September 8, 1994 Mr. Gerald Splinter City Manager Brooklyn Center City Hall 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Brooklyn Center, MN 55445 Dear Mr. Gerald Splinter: RE: Police Liaison D.A.R.E. Officer Services Another school year has begun and it is once again time to renew the districts' Police Liaison - D.A.R.E. Program contracts. Once again I will be responsible for the administration of these contracts. Program administration will be the responsibility of the building principal to which you have agreed to provide services to. I look forward to working with you this year and have enclosed the following to help you administer the contract with the school district. 1. Copy of the contract for the 1994 -95 school year. Please return an executed contract no later than September 30, 1994. 2. Estimated revenue available for the city during the fiscal year 7 -1 -94 through 6- 30 -95. 3. Contract and program administration information. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, / n , r David A. Buck Director of Business Services DAB /tc /wpb Enclosure Equal opportunities for education and employment printed on recycled paper Contract for School Liaison and D.A.R.E. Officer Services Between the Anoka- Hennepin School District No. 11 and the City of Brooklyn Center This contract by and between the City of Brooklyn Center (hereafter referred to as "City ") and Anoka- Hennepin Independent School District No. 11 (hereafter referred to as "District ") is entered into under Minnesota law. 1. DEFINITIONS. Police Officers working in the District will be engaged in two authorized programs. The School Liaison Officers in the middle schools and high schools will serve students and staff primarily in the area of crime prevention. Officers in the D.A.R.E. program in the elementary schools will present the approved prevention program which is a part of the fifth grade Health curriculum. 2. OFFICER EMPLOYED BY CITY. City shall employ (or assign) in accordance with applicable state statutes a police officer or officers to serve as D.A.R.E. officer(s) in District schools. The selection or assignment of such officers shall be done by City. City shall assume all obligations and payments with regard to officers' salaries and benefits including workers compensation, PERA, withholding taxes, etc. District will reimburse City as defined in Part 10 of this document. 3. TERM OF CONTRACT The term of this contract shall be July 1, 1994 to June 30, 1995, District fiscal year. 4. ADMINISTRATION RESPONSIBILITIES Law enforcement services rendered to District shall be at the sole direction of City. Standards of performance, discipline of the officer assigned, and other internal matters, shall be under the authority of City. If requested, District shall provide City with an appraisal of the services received. 5. LEVEL OF SERVICE The officer will respond to emergency calls within the boundaries of City and attend police training and special duties as assigned by City while fulfilling the requirements of this contract. Time spent on emergency calls, police training, etc. shall not be considered to be time spent as a D.A.R.E. officer. Time in excess of eight hours per day shall be paid according to the officers' contract, providing such additional time has been approved in advance by City and District. Blanket approvals will not be accepted. 6. DUTIES OF OFFICER The list of basic duties and work schedule of the officer(s) shall be cooperatively developed between City and District. 7. CLOTHING, EQUIPMENT, AND SUPPLIES City hall provide an required d y p y eq d clothm uniforms, vehicle, necessary equipment and supplies for officer to perform law enforcement duties. 8. SCHOOL CALENDAR District shall provide City with a school calendar. 9. TERMINATION Either party may terminate this agreement upon ninety (90) days written notice of such termination. All payment due hereunder shall be prorated in the event of such termination. 10. DURATION AND COST For and in consideration of the provision of D.A.R.E. Officer services in accordance with the terms of this contract, District shall pay City the sum of 50% of the levy allocation upon the preliminary notification by City that officer has been assigned and there is proof of service. This should be completed by October 1, 1994. The remaining amount shall be calculated and paid to City after January 1, 1995. Proof of service shall be considered to be the successful scheduling and implementation of the D.A.R.E. program in each of the schools listed in this contract. 11. SERVICE TO SCHOOLS The following elementary school shall receive D.A.R.E officer program services as a result of this contract: Evergreen Park 12. SCOPE It is agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained herein and that this agreement supersedes all oral and written agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunder to set their hands City of Brooklyn Center Anoka- Hennepin School District No. 11 by: by: its Superintendent 0 its Date: Date: CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION FORM Contacts at the school district for the City of Brooklyn Center Contracted Administration: David A. Buck, Director of Business Services Anoka - Hennepin ISD #11 Educational Service Center 11299 Hanson Blvd NW Coon Rapids, MN 55433 -3799 Telephone No: 422 -5507 Pro 9 ram Administration: Kenneth Berg Evergreen Park Elementary 561 -0270 Payment Procedures: Pursuant to section 10 of the agreement, the City should submit a bill to the address above. Fifty percent will be paid after October 1, 1993 and the second half will be paid after January 1, 1994. CRIME LEVY ALLOTMENT FOR FY 95 CITY OR COUNTY SCHOOL PROJ. ENR PROJ. ALLOC. BROOKLYN CENTER EVERGREEN PARK 107 TOTAL $784 PER CONTRACT FY94 APPROVED BY 09/08/94 Council Meeting Date 9/26/94 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number / 3 F Request For Council Consideration Item Description: RESOLUTION AMENDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY ROLL NOS. 13131 AND 13132 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AWARD OF ASSESSMENT STABILIZATION GRANTS Department Approval: Dian pector, Directo of blic Se ices Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approve the resolution awarding assessment stabilization grants. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached ) The attached resolution represents assessment stabilization grants for Levy Nos. 13131 and 13132. Additional grants are anticipated and will be forwarded for Council action. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY ROLL NOS. 13131 AND 13132 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AWARD OF ASSESSMENT STABILIZATION GRANTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed Special Assessment Levy Nos. 13131 and 13132 for the following improvements: KNOX /JAMES & 54TH AVENUES STREET IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -01 NORTHWEST AREA STREET IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -11 WHEREAS, Special Assessment Levy Nos. 13131 and 13132 were on September 12, 1994 approved by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted an Assessment Stabilization Program to provide economic assistance to low income property owners in the form of grants to reduce or pay in full their special assessments for street improvement projects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. Certain property owners are eligible for a grant to pay the entire amount of their special assessment. Special Assessment Levy No. 13131 is hereby amended to delete the following assessment: PID # Amount 02 -118 -21-44 -0011 $1,550 02- 118 -21-44 -0022 $1,550 02- 118 -21-44 -0056 $1,550 02 -118 -21-44 -0125 $1,550 02- 118 -21-44 -0127 $1,550 02- 118 -21-44 -0128 $1,550 RESOLUTION NO. Special Assessment Levy No. 13132 is hereby amended to delete the following assessments: PID # Amount 28- 119 -21 -43 -0008 $1,550 28- 119 -21 -43 -0024 $1,550 28- 119 -21 -44 -0027 $1,550 28- 119 -21 -44 -0032 $1,550 28- 119 -21 -44 -0044 $1,550 28- 119 -21 -44 -0052 $1,550 28- 119 -21 -44 -0065 $1,550 2. Certain property owners are eligible for a grant to pay some part of their special assessment. Special Assessment Levy No. 13131 is hereby amended to reduce the following assessments as noted: Previous PID # Amount Reduced To 02- 118 -21 -44 -0055 $1,550 $903 02- 118 -21 -44 -0093 $1,550 $645 02- 118 -21 -44 -0099 $1,550 $1,032 02- 118 -21 -44 -0109 $1,550 $564 02- 118 -21 -44 -0124 $1,550 $387 02- 118 -21 -44 -0129 $1,550 $618 Special Assessment Levy No. 13132 is hereby amended to reduce the following assessments as noted: Previous PID # Amount Reduced To 28- 119 -21-41 -0135 $1,550 $141 28- 119 -21-41 -0137 $1,550 $258 28- 119 -21-43 -0018 $1,550 $1,455 28 -119 -21-43 -0020 $1,550 $927 28- 119 -21-43 -0021 $1,550 $903 28- 119 -21-43 -0027 $1,550 $258 28- 119 -21-44 -0015 $1,550 $516 28- 119 -21-44 -0029 $1,550 $1,032 28- 119 -21-44 -0037 $1,550 $258 28- 119 -21-44 -0040 $1,550 $282 28 -119 -21-44 -0046 $1,550 $129 28 -119 -21-44 -0049 $1,550 $1,419 28 -119 -21-44 -0051 $1,550 $423 RESOLUTION NO. 3. All costs associated with these grants shall be funded from Local State Aid Account #2900. Date Todd Paulson, 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 9/26/94 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number Request For Council Consideration Item Description: RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -19 (SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY MILL AND OVERLAY) Department Approval: Dia a Spector, Di ect of Public Services Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: It is hereby recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution to hold a public hearing • on these special assessments. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) The purpose of this resolution is to order a public hearing on Monday, October 24, 1994, at 7 p.m. local time, to hear and pass upon all objections, if any, to the proposed special assessments for the cost of the mill and overlay project on Shingle Creek Parkway. An improvement hearing on these projects was held on June 13, 1994. The contract was let on August 22, 1994. Work will be substantially complete by October 15, 1994. In accordance with the City Council's policy regarding-improvement projects in commercial areas, proposed assessments would recover 2/3 of the entire cost of the improvement project. These costs are distributed according to parcel area. Further council actions include the public hearing at the specified date and adoption of the resolution to certify the special assessment levy roll with Hennepin County. • F la Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -19 (SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY MILL AND OVERLAY) WHEREAS, a contract was let for Street Improvement Project No. 1994 -19, Shingle Creek Parkway Mill and Overlay; and WHEREAS, the cost to be assessed to the benefitted properties is estimated to be $189,494; and WHEREAS, the Deputy City Clerk, with the assistance of the Director of Public Services, has prepared a proposed assessment roll showing the proposed amount to be specifically assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that: 1. That portion of the cost to be assessed against benefitted property owners is declared to be $189,494.00. 2. A hearing shall be held on the 24th day of October, 1994, in the City Hall Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. to pass upon such assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 3. The Deputy City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. 4. The Deputy City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. Date Todd Paulson, 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. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OVERLAY (94 -19) MUNICIPAL CODE NO. 22 OWNER ADDITIONAL NOTIFICATION D Name Name PROPERTY ASSESSED LEVY PROPERTY ADDN. NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. AMOUNT Address Mailing Address Mailing Address 35- 119 -21 -14 -0008 89772 $11,551.52 1800 Freeway Blvd. ST. PAUL PROPERTIES 385 Washington Street St. Paul, MN 55102 35- 119 -21 -14 -0007 89772 $3,965.14 6540 Shingle Creek Pkwy. US WEST /NW BELL c/o Klaus Cox 6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 770 North Englewood, CO 80111 35- 119 -21 -14 -0006 89772 $6,146.34 6660 Shingle Creek Pkwy. NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE c/o Universal Mortgage Co. 744 North 4th Street Milwaukee, WI 53203 35- 119 -21 -13 -0020 04001 $9,486.92 2200 Freeway Blvd. SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY Brookstone Real Estate Service 3300 Edinborough Way Suite 207 Edina, MN 55435 35- 119 -21 -13 -0017 02256 $10,269.00 6601 Shingle Creek Pkwy. PROVOST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 150 North Wacker Drive, Suite 150 Chicago, IL 60606 35- 119- 2.1 -12 -0005 89778 $7,302.96 6700 Shingle Creek Pkwy. MEDTRONIC INC. 7000 Central Avenue NE Minneapolis, MN 55432 35- 119 -21 -12 -0004 89778 $10,223.15 6800 Shingle Creek Pkwy. MEDTRONIC INC. 3055 Old Hwy. #8 P.O. Box 1453 Minneapolis, MN 55440 35- 119 -21 -12 -0003 89778 $3,315.48 6800 Shingle Creek Pkwy. LUTHERAN BROTHERHOOD 625 Fourth Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55415 35- 119 -21 -12 -0002 89778 $12,817.23 6820 Shingle Creek Pkwy. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE CO. OF AMERICA 1 Prudential Plaza Tina Zambo, Suite 1300 Chicago, IL 60601 -6217 35- 119 -21 -12 -0013 01998 $7,352.37 6707 Shingle Creek Pkwy. PROVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHP 150 North Wacker Drive, Suite 150 Chicago, IL 60606 b CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OVERLAY (94 -19) MUNICIPAL CODE NO. 22 OWNER ADDITIONAL NOTIFICATION PROPERTY ASSESSED Name Name LEVY PROPERTY ADDN. Mailing Address NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. AMOUNT Address Mailing Address g 35- 119 -21 -12 -0008 01199 $16,117.89 6801 Shingle Creek Pkwy. JOHN & REBECCA ALLEN 2358 West Lake of the Isle Minneapolis, MN 55405 35- 119 -21 -21 -0003 89776 $10,465.26 6840 Shingle Creek Pkwy. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE CO. OF AMERICA 1 Prudential Plaza Tina Zambo, Suite 1300 Chicago, IL 60601 -6217 35- 119 -21 -21 -0002 89764 $12,085.95 6844 Shingle Creek Pkwy. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 35- 119- 21 -22- 0007 00584 $6,324.62 6850 Shingle Creek Pkwy. EQUITEC R E INVESTORS 7677 Oakport Street P.O. Box 2470 Oakland, CA 94614 35- 119- 21 -22- 0005 00584 $16,938.11 6850 Shingle Creek Pkwy. EQUITEC R E INVESTORS 7677 Oakport Street P.O. Box 2470 Oakland, CA 94614 35- 119 -21 -21 -0004 89782 $22,412.86 6845 Shingle Creek Pkwy. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT CORPORATION 560 6th Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55411 -4398 35- 119 -21- 24- 0006 00584 $4,782.99 6853 Shingle Creek Pkwy. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 35- 119 -21 -23 -0001 89779 $6,275.21 2700 Freeway Blvd. PROVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 150 North Wacker Drive, Suite 150 Chicago, IL 60606 35- 119 -21 -22 -0051 04019 $11,661.00 6870 Shingle Creek Pkwy. SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY Brookstone Real Estate Service 3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 207 Edina, MN 55435 $189,494.00 Council Meeting Date 09/26/94 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number 1 3___h Request For Council Consideration Item Description: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES Department Approval: Diane Spector, it for of Public Services Manager's Review /Recommendation: 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 3 h moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 09/26/94 ) 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 ddresses are hereby declared 9 Y to be a public nuisance: TREE PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS NUMBER ---------------------- - - - - -- ----------------------- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- GARY BRUMMER 607 70TH AVE N 167 WANDA WILLIAMS 5524 MORGAN AVE N 168 LAWRENCE & YVONNE ROSS 6825 ZENITH AVE N 169 CITY OF B.C. W. PALMER LAKE PARK 170 CITY OF B.C. W. PALMER LAKE PARK 171 CITY OF B.C. W. PALMER LAKE PARK 172 CITY OF B.C. W. PALMER LAKE PARK 173 CITY OF B.C. W. PALMER LAKE PARK 174 JOHN & PRICILLA WERNER 6827 COLFAX AVE N 175 PAULA VAN -BRUNT 6742 SCOTT AVE N 176 MICHAEL SUNDSTROM 6261 BROOKLYN DR 177 NORM CHAZIN 1308 69TH AVE N 178 THE CROPMATE CO. 3129 49TH AVE N 179 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owner(s) will receive a second written notice providing five (5) business days in which to contest the determination of the City Council by requesting, in writing, a hearing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree'(s) shall be removed by the City. All removal costs, including legal, financing, and administrative charges, shall be specially assessed against the property. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk i The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Council Meeting Date 9/26/94 31 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number 13; Request For Council Consideration Item Description: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR DEFERMENT OF ONE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND DELETING THAT ASSESSMENT FROM LEVY #13131 Department Approval: ' b i la - Zie Spector, Direct "o Public Services Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approve the resolution deferring one assessment and deleting it from the already- enacted levy roll. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached No The City's special assessment policy allows property owners whose property fronts on two streets (for example, a corner lot) to choose which street improvement they wish to be assessed for. This choice was given to all residents in the James /Knox and Northwest areas who were eligible to defer their assessment. Information provided to them stated that deferral carried with it a risk, that future assessments could be costlier than current assessments. One property owner, 5449 James Avenue N, chose to defer being assessed until such time as 55th Avenue was improved. • 131 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR DEFERMENT OF ONE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND DELETING THAT ASSESSMENT FROM LEVY #13131 WHEREAS, City street improvement special assessment policy provides single - family residential property owners fronting on two streets a choice of which street improvement projects for which they wish to be assessed; and WHEREAS, such a choice was offered to eligible property owners proposed to be assessed for street improvement project 1994 -01; and WHEREAS, one property owner has chosen to defer his assessment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the. special assessment for the following property is hereby deferred, and deleted from the levy roll: Name Address Amount Deferred PID # Walter Schatzley 5449 James Avenue North $1,550.00 02- 118 -21 -44 -0126 Date Todd Paulson, 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. Camoil Medmg Date 09/26!94 31 City of Brooklyn Center w g enaa Item N 13 • Request For Council Consideration Item Description: Resolution Approving Purchase Agreement For Improvement Project Nos. 1992 -29 (Storm Water Pond) and 1993 -18 (MTC Park and Ride) Department Approval: Diane Spector, Direct o f Public Services Manager's Review/Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached PP Recommended City Council Action: Approve a resolution ratifying the purchase agreement. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached No Evergreen Land Services has negotiated a purchase agreement with the property owners at 6521 Brooklyn Boulevard, David and Renee Paulat. This agreement is based on a appraised value of $81,000. This offer is acceptable to the property owners, and they have signed the agreement. The date of the closing is set for September 29, 1994. The City Attorney is working with Evergreen, Conworth, Inc., and Public Services staff to schedule the closing, review information, and finalize all details. Previous Council Action The Council on March 14, 1994, approved a resolution which provided for the negotiated purchase of real property for projects 1992 -29 and 1993 -18. This resolution authorized the City Manager to negotiate with the owners of the properties to be acquired for this project, and directed him to offer to the owners the amount determined by appraisal and review appraisal. Such purchase agreements are subject to approval and ratification by the City Council. • l3' J Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1992 -29 (STORM WATER TREATMENT POND) AND 1993 -18 (MTC PARK AND RIDE) WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 93 -105 adopted on June 28, 1993, the City Council ordered the construction of a storm water pond in the southwest quadrant of I94 and Brooklyn Boulevard, Improvement Project No. 1992 -29; and WHEREAS, by Resolution 93 -188 adopted on October 25, 1993, the City Council ordered construction of a Park and Ride Facility on behalf of Metropolitan Transit Commission, on the northwest corner of Brooklyn Boulevard and 65th Avenue North; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 94 -53 adopted on March 14, 1994, the City Council authorized the City Manger to negotiate the purchase of these properties, and directed the City Manger to offer to the property owners the amount determined by appraisal and review appraisal; and WHEREAS, the owners of the property at 6521 Brooklyn Boulevard have accepted the City Manager's offer of the appraised value, and have executed a purchase agreement to that effect. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The terms of the purchase agreements are hereby approved. 2. The City Manager is directed to proceed with the purchase of the property at 6521 Brooklyn Boulevard. 3. The City Manager and Mayor are authorized to execute the purchase agreements. Todd Paulson Ma Date , or Y 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. Camoil Meeting Date 9/26/94 3 City of Brooklyn Center A g enda Item Number / Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Licenses Department Approval: . Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk Manager's Review/Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approve list of licenses. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) • City of Brooklyn Center l Licenses to be approved by the City Council on September 26, 1994: AMUSEMENT DEVICES - OPERATOR n Chi -Chi's 2101 Freeway Blvd. Z�} City Clerk COMMERCIAL KENNEL Brooklyn Pet Hospital 4902 France Ave. N. City Clerk GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES , Nash and Sons Hauling 2301 93rd Way _ City Clerk MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Air One Mechanical Corporation 6317 Welcome Ave. N. Master Mechanical, Inc. 901 E. 79th Street J} Sheetmetal Services 30 Northwest Main, Bethel l . • a • �a1C Building Official, RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Shirley Kay Noren 7218 Logan Ave. N. Renewal: Pow -Bel Company Hi -Crest Apartments Gary Lyons Humboldt Courts Eugene Sullivan 5329 -33 Brooklyn Blvd. Group H. Inc. 6451 Brooklyn Blvd. Rosella Korman, Joseph Korman and Michael Korman 5321 Morgan Ave. N. Allan and Vicki Olson 7111 Riverdale Road Richard R. Dawson 3955 69th Ave. N. Director of SIGN HANGER Community Development American Installers 9154 Parkington Circle NE _` n • n • LJL4 � Building Official General Approval: Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center Amended 9/26/94 Licenses to be approved by the City Council on September 26, 1994: AMUSEMENT DEVICES - OPERATOR Qj Chi -Chi's 2101 Freeway Blvd. X� City Clerk Ak- COMMERCIAL KENNEL Brooklyn Pet Hospital 4902 France Ave. N. 2 - A - City Clerk Ak- GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES 1 , Nash and Sons Hauling 2301 93rd Way City Clerk ALL MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Air One Mechanical Corporation 6317 Welcome Ave. N. Master Mechanical, Inc. 901 E. 79th Street Sheetmetal Services 30 Northwest Main, Bethel Building Official Ak RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Shirley Kay Noren 7218 Logan Ave. N. Renewal: Pow -Bel Company Hi -Crest Apartments Gary Lyons Humboldt Courts Eugene Sullivan 5329 -33 Brooklyn Blvd. Group H. Inc. 6451 Brooklyn Blvd. Rosella Korman, Joseph Korman and Michael Korman 5321 Morgan Ave. N. Allan and Vicki Olson 7111 Riverdale Road Richard R. Dawson 3955 69th Ave. N. Director of ,A- Community Development SIGN HANGER American Installers 9154 Parkington Circle NE 1.39. central .Q. Building Official AA_ 0 General Approval: Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk 31 City of Brooklyn Center Amended 9/26/94 Licenses to be approved by the City Council on September 26, 1994: AMUSEMENT DEVICES - OPERATOR Q Q� Chi -Chi's 2101 Freeway Blvd. City Clerk COMMERCIAL KENNEL �— Brooklyn Pet Hospital 4902 France Ave. N. City Clerk GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES Q� , Nash and Sons Hauling 2301 93rd Way 1 City Clerk ALL MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Air One Mechanical Corporation 6317 Welcome Ave. N. Master Mechanical, Inc. 901 E. 79th Street Sheetmetal Services 30 Northwest Main, Bethel • Q • �a Building Official AU- RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Shirley Kay Noren 7218 Logan Ave. N. Renewal: Pow -Bel Company Hi -Crest Apartments Gary Lyons Humboldt Courts Eugene Sullivan 5329 -33 Brooklyn Blvd. Group H. Inc. 6451 Brooklyn Blvd. Rose'_•la Korman, Joseph Korman and Michael Korman 5321 Morgan Ave. N. Allan and Vicki Olson 7111 Riverdale Road Richard R. Dawson 3955 69th Ave. N. Director of ,A- Community Development SIGN HANGER American Installers 9154 Parkington Circle NE .Q . Building Official Alle- General Approval: Sharon Knutson, Deputy City Clerk