HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 11-09 CCM Regular Session MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY
OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
NOVEMBER 9, 1992
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 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Todd Paulson, Councilmembers Celia Scott, Jerry Pedlar, Dave Rosene, and Philip
Cohen. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy
Knapp, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren,
City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, Public Works
Coordinator Diane Spector, and Council Secretary Nancy Berg.
OPENING CEREMONIES
A moment of silence was observed.
OPEN FORUM
Mayor Paulson noted the Council had received no requests to use the open forum session
this evening. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council.
There being none, he continued with the regular agenda items.
COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Paulson reported a letter from Village Properties has been received requesting the
City Council delay action on the request to convert up to eight two- bedroom apartment sets
to three - bedroom and one - bedroom units because the owners of Village Properties are out -
of -town. The Council agreed to delay action until December 14, 1992.
Mayor Paulson announced the winners of the October recycling awards. He congratulated
Jan Scholla, Rod Johnson, Donald Kermeen and Robert Marcus.
Councilmember Rosene reported he met with the City Manager and the Police Chief last
Wednesday in regard to the citizen's forum on public safety. Councilmember Rosene further
stated ro ress is being made and a
P g good plan will be implemented
i
g n the near future.
g .
P
11/9/92 - 1 -
APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Paulson inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items be removed from the
consent agenda. Councilmember Scott requested item 7b be removed from the Consent
Agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
OCTOBER 26. 1992 - REGULAR SESSION
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to
approve the minutes of the October 26, 1992, meeting as printed. The motion passed
unanimously.
NOVEMBER 3. 1992 REGULAR SESSION
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Cohen to
approve the minutes of the November 3, 1992, meeting as printed. The motion passed: four
ayes, one abstain. Mayor Paulson abstained from voting.
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -252
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED, APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT,
AND APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH BONDING COMPANY FOR
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1990 -03 AND
1990 -03N AND REPLACEMENT OF ENTRANCE DRIVE TO LIFT STATION #1,
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1992 -11, CONTRACT 1992 -H
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave
Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -253
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH EVERGREEN
DEVELOPMENT GROUP
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave
Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously.
11/9/92 -2-
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -254
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION STATE AID DIVISION PROVIDING FOR REIMBURSEMENT
OF COSTS INCURRED FOR CERTIFICATION OF CITY PERSONNEL
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave
Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -255
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AMENDING BROOKLYN CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION
BYLAWS
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave
Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously.
LICENSES
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to
approve the following list of licenses:
CHRISTMAS TREE SALES LOT
P.Q.T. Company 5616 - 101st Avenue N.
5040 Brooklyn Boulevard
Jerry's NewMarket 5801 Xerxes Avenue N.
GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLE
K & S Sanitation 24 Crossway Drive
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
D J's Heating and Air Cond. 6060 Lebeaux Avenue
S.B.S. Mechanical, Inc. 7160 Madison Avenue W.
RENTAL DWELLINGS
Renewal:
Gar -Nan Management Co. Humbolt Courts
Walt Halberg 1326 - 67th Lane N.
Marlyn and Gayle Kruse 2101 - 71st Avenue N.
The motion passed unanimously.
11/9/92 -3-
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
The City Manager introduced Planning Commission Application No. 92014 submitted by the
50's Grill restaurant requesting site and building plan approval Q g g p pp to construct an approximate
12'x40' addition to the south side of the 50's Grill restaurant at 5524 Brooklyn Boulevard. I
This application was considered by the Planning Commission at its October 29, 1992,
meeting and approval was recommended.
The Director of Planning and Inspection used transparencies illustrating elevations of the
building, a survey of the property, and a map of the area. He explained the addition will
be for kitchen expansion, but not for additional customer seating. The Director of Planning
and Inspection informed Council the Planning Commission recommended approval of this
application subject to five conditions: listed on pages two and three of the October 29, 1992,
Planning Commission minutes.
Mayor Paulson asked if this application required an ordinance amendment. The Director
of Planning and Inspection answered yes, the ordinance amendment was effective on
November 5, 1992.
Councilmember Scott asked if there will be extra fire protection on the south wall. The
Director of Planning and Inspection answered there will be. See A
There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to
approve Planning Commission Application No. 92014 submitted by the 50's Grill restaurant
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, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval
by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount
to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance
of permits to assure completion of all approved site improvements.
4. The building addition is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing
system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring
device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
5. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City
Ordinances.
Councilmember Rosene stated he hoped the ordinance amendment would not change the
look of our community.
11/9/92 -4-
The motion passed unanimously.
See B.
The City Manager introduced Planning Commission Application No. 92003 submitted by
Phillips 66 Company. This application is a companion to Application No. 92001. Explained
that originally, it was a setback variance; now, it is a greenstrip variance. This application
was tabled by the City Council at its February 10, 1992, meeting with the applicant's consent.
This application was reconsidered by the Planning Commission at its October 29, 1992,
meeting and denial was recommended.
The City Manager then introduced ty g ommission Application No. 92
Planning pp 001 submitted
by Phillips 66 Company requesting site and building plan approval to construct a gas
station/convenience store /car wash at 6901 Brooklyn Boulevard. This application was tabled
by the City Council at its February 10, 1992, meeting with the consent of the applicant and
direction to pursue a study of Brooklyn Boulevard which should guide consideration of this
proposal. The applicant has submitted revised plans which, under City Ordinance, must be
reviewed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission reconsidered this
application at its October 29, 1992, meeting and approval was recommended subject to the
adoption of an ordinance amendment.
The City Manager then introduced Planning Commission Application No. 92002 submitted
by Phillips 66 Company requesting preliminary plat approval. This application was also
tabled by the City Council with the applicant's consent at its February 10, 1992, meeting, but
did not have to be reconsidered by the Planning Commission. Approval of this application
is also recommended.
The City Manager recommended the Council consider all three applications together. He
stated these applications were tabled by the City Council on February 10, 1992, following
review of the applications and review of a recommendation by the Planning Commission to
deny Application No. 92001 and Application No. 92003. He further explained the Planning
Commission had recommended approval of the preliminary plat, Application No. 92002,
subject to three conditions of approval.
The Director of Planning and Inspection further explained the three applications to the
Council, and used transparencies to further clarify the current proposal from Phillips 66
Company. He stated the Planning Commission had recommended denial of the variance,
and recommended approval of the development plans contingent on an ordinance
amendment being adopted to allow the Council an option other than the 15 foot greenstrip.
,Mayor Paulson questioned why this matter was before the Council prior to the completion
of the Brooklyn Boulevard study. The Director of Planning and Inspection answered the
applications are back for reconsideration at the applicants request because they have offered
revised plans.
11/9/92 -5-
Jon Baccus, Phillips Petroleum Company, explained approximately two years ago Phillips
developed a design plan which would function well from customer and operational
standpoints, and would meet all city code requirements. He further explained, thereafter,
Phillips was advised by City staff that 18 feet along 69th Avenue was needed for possible
future widening of 69th Avenue. Mr. Baccus stated the additional 18 feet does not allow
Phillips to meet all greenstrip requirements. He showed Council an illustration of the
landscaping proposed by Phillips which would include a keystone wall similar to what has
been utilized along 69th Avenue. Mr. Baccus informed Council that Phillips is agreeable
to using brick on its building instead of the stone they normally use as requested by the City.
Mayor Paulson asked if the reason for Phillips' request for Council to decide this matter
before the completion of the Brooklyn Boulevard Study, was because of the frontage road
possibly being proposed. Mr. Baccus answered no.
The City Manager stated the frontage road is only in the discussion stages. He explained
the road being discussed is really not a frontage road, but really an access drive going from
business to business. The City Manager also stated the consultant, Timothy J. Griffin of
Dahlgren Shardlow and Uban, and the Planning Commission recommended the City
continue to enforce the setback of 50 feet.
Councilmember Rosene asked if the individual businesses agree to have an access road, who
would pay for it -- the businesses to share, or just the City? The City Manager answered
discussions are in the preliminary stages, and the question of financing has not been looked
at.
The Director of Planning and Inspection stated with respect to the Brooklyn Boulevard
Study, the consultants were recommending the City maintain the 50 -foot setback at this time
which might accommodate an access drive if needed.
Councilmember Cohen asked staff to illustrate on the map the possible site for the access
road. The Director of Planning and Inspection showed Council the location, and explained
in the current comprehensive plan, the whole triangular area currently, b 69th ,
Y
Y
Lee and Brooklyn Boulevard is recommended for commercial land use in the future.
Mayor Paulson suggested the Council delay action on this matter until the Brooklyn
Boulevard Study is complete. See C. The Planning Commission did not believe the
standards for variance were met in this case. The Planning Commission further suggested
if the Council is going to vary, do not vary in the setback, just in the 15 -foot greenstrip.
Mayor Paulson asked the Director of Planning and Inspection for his recommendation. The
Director of Planning and Inspection replied (See D) follow the Planning Commission's
recommendation and amend the zoning ordinance to allow this kind of consideration
imsimilar situation.
11/9/92 -6-
Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 92003 submitted by Phillips 66 Company, is a request for a
variance from Section 35 -700 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow less than a 15' greenstrip
along 69th Avenue North and along Brooklyn Boulevard at 6901 Brooklyn Boulevard;
Planning Commission Application No. 92001 submitted by Phillips 66 Company, a request
for site and building plan approval to construct a gas station/convenience store /car wash; and
Application No. 92002 submitted by Phillips 66 Company, a request for preliminary plat
approval at 8:16 p.m. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the
Council.
Randy Rau, 6849 Brooklyn Boulevard, stated he owns the Holiday Station, and the Phillips
proposal is too large for the property. Mr. Rau stated he does not agree with a 3 -foot
keystone wall as a replacement for grass, and the 18 -foot dedication is important to the local
businesses. He asked the Director of Planning and Inspection to show where the car wash
will be located, and asked if the car wash will have air- powered doors, as they are very loud
and will disturb the neighbors, or electric doors which do not make much noise. The
Director of Planning and Inspection showed the proposed location of the car wash, and
answered he did not know what type of doors Phillips was planning on using.
Bob Grosshans, 6920 Lee Avenue North, stated the site is too small, and recommended the
City Council deny the applications.
Gene Wright, owner of the four -plex next to the proposed car wash, which houses Northwest
Residence requested a visual and sound barrier be established between the applicant's
property and his property.
Mayor Paulson asked the Director of Planning and Inspection if there was a provision for
visual and sound barriers. The Director of Planning and Inspection answered there is a
proposal for a 6 -foot wood fence along the north and west property lines.
Mr. David Nelson, Phillips 66 consultant, stated he would like to know more about the plans
for an access road. He further stated Phillips 66 plans to install benches along the sidewalk
because of the loss of greenstrip, and the doors on the car wash will be electric doors. Mr.
Nelson stated this application is an opportunity to make something of Brooklyn Boulevard,
to develop Brooklyn Boulevard without the City expending any money. Mr. Nelson urged
the Council to consider Phillips proposal.
Don Lowry, 6914 Lee Avenue North, stated he owns the property at the tip of the triangle.
He explained he is against this proposal because of the noise and appearance.
Mr. Wright asked Mr. Baccus why Phillips wants this property, and why Phillips purchased
it prior to receiving approval to build. Mr. Baccus responded when Phillips began working
on the site, the building met all requirements -- the property is zoned for a gas station.
11/9/92 -7-
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to
close the public hearing at 8:35 p.m. The motion passed unanimously.
Councilmember Scott stated there are many problems with this application including the 15-
foot greenstrip minimum. She pointed out if Phillips erects a keystone wall, there will not
even be one foot of greenstrip in some areas. Councilmember Scott stated as a City Council
we have an obligation to other business owners who have complied with our ordinances.
She stated she believes the applicant can alter the plans to meet the requirements and that
the 15 foot greenstrip is a minimum requirement for a Brooklyn Boulevard study.
Councilmember Cohen respected Councilmember Scott's comments. He explained, however,
in Brooklyn Center's RFP, this City Council did make the development proposal for 6901
Brooklyn Boulevard a high priority. He stated this property needs to be developed, and the
City has an applicant who will develop the property with their own dollars, not with City
money. Councilmember Cohen further stated if the Council wants to move forward with the
Brooklyn Boulevard beautification, this proposal meets the requirements. He believed the
applicant has brought forward a plan, and it is possible it could be improved upon. He
further stated he was in favor of this application.
Councilmember Pedlar recalled the Council tabled this matter and asked the consultant to
look at this application and the application by the 50's Grill. He stated the 50's Grill has
now be dealt with. He further stated he agrees with both Councilmembers Scott and Cohen.
Councilmember Pedlar expressed concern about the lack of progress on Brooklyn Boulevard.
He reminded Council this is an opportunity to move forward. He agreed there are issues
to be dealt with such as the noise and the upkeep of property. Councilmember Pedlar asked
the applicants to work with the abutting property owners to alleviate these problems.
Councilmember Pedlar read the following statement from the consultant's report:
"Apparently by design, the Phillips and Amoco sites are not interested in achieving such a
relationship, but rather only stating their corporate identity and presence." He asked for an
explanation. The Director of Planning and Inspection answered the consultant was
suggesting Phillips follow the architecture north of 69th Avenue, and to use some
imagination with their. See E.
Mayor Paulson agreed with many of the concerns of Councilmember Scott. He stated the
Council has not really received an answer as to why the applicant brought these applications
to the Council before the completion of the Brooklyn Boulevard Study. Mayor Paulson
stressed the importance of looking at the existing businesses and what this will do to them.
He asked the Council to have some patience in this matter stating Council has been
consistent in approving anything that comes before us. Mayor Paulson pointed out the
opposition from residents and from the consultants. He quoted the consultant:
11/9/92 -8 -
"The purpose of the Brooklyn Boulevard Study is to prepare a plan for the economic
preservation and redevelopment of Brooklyn Boulevard. To that end DSU has been
commissioned to prepare a plan which integrates economic development requirements
and regional and local transportation needs with urban design principles that will create
a sense of place that is Brooklyn Boulevard. If the study is to be successful, it will have
to do away with rubber stamp development prototypes and relentless traffic regulations,
while retaining their economic and planning integrity. Then, through the creative
application of urban design principles and civic priorities, a distinctive environment for
Brooklyn Boulevard will be created that meets the respective and not necessarily
incompatible objectives of an aesthetic landscape, successful commerce and the efficient
movement of multi -modal traffic."
Mayor Paulson stated he has no problem with a gas station eventually going on this
property; but he believed the applicant should comply with the City's regulations.
Councilmember Rosene stated there is no single correct vote; there are excellent arguments
on both sides. He agreed until some of these problems are worked out, it is not possible
to vote on this matter. Councilmember Rosene suggested the applicant agree to continue
this matter until the Brooklyn Boulevard Study is complete, and work with the neighboring
residents to work out the noise and visual barrier problems.
The City Attorney asked the Director of Planning and Inspection what the limitations are
in the zoning ordinance upon which City Council would act on these kinds of applications.
The Director of Planning and Inspection reported under the zoning ordinance, there are
certain time limits. He further explained the Planning Commission has up to 60 days to
make its recommendation, which it has, and then the City Council has another 30 days after
that to make a final decision.
The City Attorney stated unless the Brooklyn Boulevard Study is going to be completed and
implemented within 30 days, the applicant can insist on a decision on these applications
within that time limit; however, the applicant is free to waive this time limit.
Councilmember Rosene summarized the Planning Commission has made their
recommendation to approve two of the applications with the third application recommended
for approval contingent upon the City Council adopting an ordinance amendment to allow
a Council approved substitute for the 15 -foot greenstrip requirement adjacent to public
right -of -way. Councilmember Rosene asked if the ordinance is changed, will the Council
be within the 30 -day requirement. The City Attorney answered no, because the Planning
Commission then would need to publish the proposed ordinance change a two public
hearing would need to be held by the Council following publication of the amendments.
Councilmember Scott stated the real question for the Council is the variance request for the
greenstrip. She stated the site plan cannot be approved if the variance is not approved.
11/9/92 -9-
The City Attorney stated everything is contingent upon the plat approval. He explained the
Council can legally approve or disapprove. The Director of Planning and Inspection
suggested if Council denies these applications, that Council direct staff to prepare a
resolution outlining Council's reasons for denial to be brought back for the Council's
consideration.
Councilmember Rosene expressed his uneasiness about doing this sort of creative platting
and asked if it is common for an applicant to request such changes. The Director of
Planning and Inspection stated the Council cannot ignore the 18 -feet right -of -way requested
by Hennepin County. Councilmember Cohen asked if the 18 -feet dedication is required
right now. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained Hennepin County has advised
staff it will need, at a minimum, 18 feet to widen 69th Avenue. The Director of Public
Works advised Council, in his opinion, these improvements to 69th Avenue and the
replanting causes the need for the rights of why dedication will take place in 5 to 10 years.
There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Mayor Paulson to direct
staff to prepare a resolution for denial of Planning Commission Application No. 92002
submitted by Phillips 66 Company is a request for preliminary plat approval. Vote on the
motion: three ayes, two nays. The motion passed. Councilmembers Cohen and Pedlar voted
nay.
There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Scott
directing staff to prepare a resolution for denial of Planning Commission Application No.
92003 submitted by Phillips 66 Company. Vote on the motion: four ayes, one nay. The
motion passed. Councilmember Pedlar voted nay.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Rosene
directing staff to prepare a resolution for denial of Planning Commission Application No.
92001 submitted by Phillips 66 Company.
Councilmember Cohen opposed the motion stating this application is an opportunity for
Brooklyn Center. He explained it is not going to be easy to develop the properties on
Brooklyn Boulevard.
Councilmember Scott stated she has no problem with the concept of a filling station on this
property, however she stated she will not approve the variance.
Councilmember Cohen agreed a variance is not the way to go, however the Planning
Commission did give Council an option. He stated he would like to reserve the right to
introduce a resolution to approve an ordinance change as recommended by the Planning
Commission. The City Attorney suggested staff prepare findings for Council's review at the
next Council meeting.
1119/92 - 10 -
Councilmember Cohen again suggested Council carefully consider these applications. The
City Attorney pointed out the Council will not be voting on these resolutions until the next
Council meeting on November 23, 1992.
Councilmember Scott asked the City Attorney if the applicant submitted a revised plan,
would it have to go back to the Planning Commission prior to going before the Council.
The City Attorney answered if the changes made were not substantial, then it would not
have to be referred back to the Planning Commission. He further explained in this case,
however, if the applicant came back with a proposal which did not require a variance, then
the Council would have to decide if this public hearing would be adequate or if it should go
back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration.
Vote on the motion: three ayes, two nays. The motion passed. Councilmembers Pedlar
and Cohen voted nay.
There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to
directing staff to prepare an ordinance amendment as recommended by the Planning
Commission to allow a Council approved substitute for the 15' greenstrip requirement
adjacent to public right -of -way.
Councilmember Scott stated the timing is totally wrong. She explained the City paid a great
deal of money for a consultant and now the Council is not listening to the consultant's
advice.
Councilmember Rosene stated he is not comfortable with ordinance amendments which take
things out of the realm of being clear cut and put them in the realm of Council's opinion.
He explained whenever Council takes things out of a strictly- written ordinance and puts it
into Council's opinion, it is a dangerous area.
Vote on the motion: three ayes, two nays. The motion passed. Mayor Paulson and
Councilmember Scott voted nay.
RECESS
The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 9:40 p.m., and reconvened at 9:50 p.m.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
STAFF REPORT REGARDING ICE CONTROL PRACTICES
The City Manager presented the staff report regarding ice control practices stating a
suggestion was made during the Financial and Service Prioritization Process to move toward
using straight salt for street ice control rather than the current 80 percent sand/20 percent
salt mixture.
11/9/92
The Director of Public Works explained cities have recognized using the sand /salt mixture
has a number of disadvantages including: sand provides traction, but does not assist in
removing ice which is bonded to pavement; sand fills and blocks catch basins and storm
sewers or remains on the streets, necessitating extensive cleanup of streets, sewers, and catch
basins each spring; and sand collected during cleanup must be disposed of, and opportunities
for disposal are becoming less available and more costly.
The Director of Public Works further explained if this policy change is approved, street
maintenance staff would use this winter, 1992 -93, as a test period. He also explained salt
is considerably more expensive than sand, but much less salt is needed to provide effective
ice control.
Councilmember Scott asked the Director of Public Works to clarify the city would be using
slightly more salt, but no sand. The Director of Public Works answered yes.
The City Manager stated there is an increasing cost for disposal of the sand as it has an
environmental impact and cannot just be disposed of in a landfill.
Councilmember Rosene observed the sand is never completely cleaned up in the spring, and
he would like to reduce the amount of sand on the streets. He asked if salt will damage
boulevards as much as the sand does. The Director of Public Works said as much damage
occurs to boulevards from heavy sand as from the salt accumulation.
Councilmember Rosene asked if the City has a mitigation technique to use cattails in storm
water ponds. The Director of Public Works replied yes.
Councilmember Cohen explained his property has a county road on one side and a city road
on the other, and the city side, on which sand was used, was worse than the county side, on
which salt was used.
There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to
approve the proposed policy change to use salt for street ice control. The motion passed
unanimously.
STAFF REPORT REGARDING PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM REGARDING
ABATEMENT OF WATER POLLUTION
The City Manager presented the staff report regarding a public education program regarding
abatement of water pollution. He explained the Storm Drainage Utility annual budget
includes $5,000 for public education programs; and at its July 27, 1992 meeting, the Council
approved the concept of publishing education material regarding storm drainage and water
pollution abatement, and the concept of a coloring contest.
11/9/92 -12-
The Director of Public Works stated the coloring contest and picture will be published in
the City's newsletter. He explained the total cost of the campaign including materials and
prizes will total $670, and all costs will be charged to the Storm Drainage Utility.
Councilmember Pedlar compared the coloring contest to the D.A.R.E. program and the Fire
Prevention Program in that these programs are all targeted at children ages 5 to 8, and he
believes targeting this age has contributed greatly to their success.
There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
approve the implementation of the coloring contest, and authorize the expenditure of funds
for materials and prizes.
Councilmember Rosene suggested staff consult first, second, and third grade teachers to
simplify the wording, and to perhaps improve the sketch of "Stormie."
The motion passed unanimously.
STAFF REPORT RE: RATES AND POLICIES FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES
The City Manager presented the staff report in regard to rates and policies for public
utilities.
Councilmember Pedlar asked if the Financial Commission has reviewed these proposed rates
and policies. The City Manager answered yes.
Diane Spector, Public Works Coordinator presented the issue of water restrictions. She
explained it is recommended the Council approve a policy of automatic, annual water
restrictions to encourage water conservation. The restrictions would be a ban on lawn and
garden sprinkling during all hours of the day, on an odd -even basis from May 1 to
September 30.
Councilmember Cohen asked how well the old restriction between 3 to 8 p.m. worked. The
Director of Public Works answered it worked well, but this restriction is only used in
drought conditions. The odd -even system would help keep peak water demands within the
water supply system's capacity, and would allow the postponement of construction of a two
million gallon reservoir and pumping station.
Councilmember Pedlar asked if residents will still be allowed to use their own wells, and if
so, does this cause a problem with the aquifer. The City Manager answered yes, residents
may use their own wells, and no it does not cause a problem with the aquifer as the private
wells are at a different level than the City's.
The Public Works Coordinator presented the issue of water shutoffs. She explained it is
recommended the shut off and collections policy be as follows:
11/9/92 - 13-
1. Continue the policy of issuing red tags and shutting off water to residential and
commercial customers who are resident at the property and who are in arrears.
2. Amend the current shut off procedure to provide for a public hearing prior to
water shut off.
3. Certify as a special assessment all rental property utility accounts more than 60
days past due.
4. Certify as a special assessment all closing bills more than 30 days past due.
5. Certify special assessments for utility service accounts quarterly, rather than
annually.
Councilmember Scott agreed with the recommendations and specifically agreed with
certifying special assessments for utility service accounts quarterly rather than annually.
The Public Works Coordinator presented the issue of water connection surcharges. The
Department of Health has begun billing water utilities a $5.21 per water connection
surcharge to fund water testing by the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. She explained the
Council has two options to consider in collecting the Water Connection Surcharge. The first
option is to charge each customer the $5.21 yearly, regardless of consumption. The second
option is to add the surcharge to the overall revenue requirements in determining future
utility rates. Diane Spector stated staff recommendation is for Council to adopt the second
option as it is fairer than option 1 and is consistent with treatment of other testing costs.
Staff further recommended the water charge resulting from the surcharge be a separate line
item and identified as a state- mandated charge.
Councilmember Pedlar asked if senior citizens are generally lower water consumers. The
City Manager answered ten years ago an extensive study of senior citizen consumption was
completed, and they did use significantly less water. The Director of Public Works added
the study was reviewed two years ago and the water consumption pattern for senior citizens
remained the same.
Councilmember Rosene emphasized if this surcharge is adopted, the City must heavily
publicize the reason for the surcharge. The Director of Public Works explained notes will
be sent to all residents.
Councilmember Cohen agreed the public must be informed, and recommended also putting
the notice right on the utility statement.
The Public Works Coordinator presented the issue of water rates. She explained the
Council annually reviews established rates for their adequacy and makes adjustments as
necessary. She further stated it is recommended that permanent water conservation
11/9/92 -14-
measures be implemented, starting in 1993; and also the water connection surcharge be
included in the rates, rather than passed directly on to customers.
Councilmember Rosene stated the rates have gone up due to capital improvements, and he
asked if once the capital improvements are completed will the rates go down. The Public
Works Coordinator answered it might be possible, in the future, to slow the rate of increase.
The Public Works Coordinator presented the issue of water fees and charges. She stated
staff has recommended two fee changes: to increase the water meter fee from $40 to $50;
and to change the delinquent meter reading fee to $2 the first and second consecutive time,
$5 the third time, and $10 the fourth time.
The Public Works Coordinator presented the issue of sanitary sewer rates. She explained
substantial outlays were made in 1991 and 1992 on four major projects including:
construction of new lift station #2; replacement of sanitary mains under I94/694 and near
the Brookdale Shopping Center; and the sanitary main improvements associated with the
69th Avenue street improvement project. Diane Spector stated staff has recommended the
Council consider a rate increase which would be sufficient to support some portion of the
capital improvement program.
The Public Works Coordinator presented the issue of sanitary sewer fees and charges. She
explained no increase is recommended on the fees and charges portion of the water utility
rate schedule.
The Public Works Coordinator presented the issue of storm drainage utility rates. She
stated the City Council, on October 7, 1991, adopted Resolution 91 -246, which established
storm drainage utility rates for 1992 and 1993, and the Council annually reviews established
rates for their adequacy and makes adjustments as necessary. She further stated the Council
has determined that a high priority improvement project is the 63rd/Halifax/Indiana Avenues
area, and in order to accomplish this project and any other projects identified for 1993, it
is necessary to increase the rates.
The Public Works Coordinator presented the issue of water and sanitary sewer hookup rates.
She explained the water hookup rates are adjusted annually to account for inflation, and for
1993 that increase will be 3.2 percent.
Diane Spector, in summary, stated the overall rate increase will be 14.2 percent. She
cautioned that the rates should be looked at in context of how they compare to other cities
in the area, and overall Brooklyn Center is below average.
There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
approve the automatic odd -even sprinkling ban from May 1 to September 30 of each year.
The motion passed unanimously.
11/9/92 - 15-
I I
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to
amend the water shutoff policy to clarify that shut off for delinquent bills applies only when
the responsible person p p o currently resides or is in business at the property. The motion passed
unanimously.
i
There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
approve including the water connection surcharge in the rates, and the surcharge be a
separate line item and identified as a state - mandated charge on the utility bills. The motion
passed unanimously.
Councilmember Pedlar recommended the Financial Commission take a look at the proposed
increase to the water rates from $0.64 to $0.73 per 1000 gallons. He was concerned the
rates are consistently being increased.
Councilmember Cohen stated the City needs to collect the money from the users. He
further explained the user of the product should bear their fair share of the cost.
Councilmember Pedlar stated there is no incentive for consumers to conserve water. He
said the City must look at all financial options, and look at costs. Councilmember Pedlar
expressed the need to do more with less funds. He asked if the overall increase will be 14.2
percent. The Public Works Coordinator answered yes.
Councilmember Cohen reiterated the $5.21 increase is due to State mandate, and it is
important the citizens be informed of this. He agreed the Financial Commission should take
a look at the rates and policies for public utilities.
The Director of Public Works explained the City is dealing with a $5.21 mandate on the
water rate and also the newly imposed State sales tax. He also stated the Financial
Commission has recommended interest earnings not be used to subsidize utility rates.
Implementation of that policy results in rate increases. The Director of Public Works
further explained during the prioritization process, the number of issues that were addressed
within the public utility system did in fact reflect a reduction in cost.
Councilmember Rosene stated the Council has been following the recommendations of the
Financial Commission and staff, and if not for their ood work the rates might have been
g g
even higher.
I
There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to
increase the water rates from $0.64 to $0.73 per 1000 gallons. The motion passed: four ayes,
one nay. Councilmember Pedlar voted nay.
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -256
Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
11/9/92 - 16-
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE WATER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave
Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously.
There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Cohen to
increase the quarterly residential charge from $35.75 to $40.00. The motion passed: four
ayes, one nay. Commissioner Pedlar voted nay.
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -257
Member David Rosene introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE SANITARY SEWER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Philip Cohen, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -258
Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave
Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -259
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING WATER AND SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP RATES
FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1993
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Philip Cohen, and the motion passed unanimously.
JOINT DISPATCHING VENTURE
The City Manager presented the joint dispatching venture explaining this is a proposal to
consolidate the City's public safety answering and dispatch operations for the cities of
Brooklyn Center, Crystal, Golden Valley, New Hope and Robbinsdale. He further explained
the joint facility is proposed to be built in Golden Valley by expanding the lower level of the
current public safety facility there or in a separate existing building in Crystal. The City
Manager also reviewed for Council the possible timetable for this project.
Councilmember Pedlar expressed the need to look at both the dollars and the quality of
service. He asked staff to provide Council with a financial pro forma and five -year projection.
11/9/92 -17-
I
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -260
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION OF INTENT RELATING TO JOINT PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHING
i
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry
Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Cohen asked that a copy of Resolution No. 92 -260 be provided to the
Governor.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott, and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to
adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council
adjourned at 11:25 p.m.
PoftrL L Ping.
Deputy City Clerk Todd Paulson, Mayor
Recorded and transcribed by:
Nancy :Berg
Northern Counties Secretarial Services
11/9/92 - 18 -