Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991 08-12 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AUGUST 12, 1991 7 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Opening Ceremonies 4. Open Forum 5. Council Reports 6. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda -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 form the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. 7. Approval of Minutes: *a. July 22, 1991 - Regular Session 8. Planning Commission Items: (7:05 p.m.) a. Planning Commission Application No. 91011 submitted by Sai Rossi is a request for Special Use Permit Approval to Conduct a Home Beauty Shop Operation in the Lower Level of the Home at 3000 Quarles Road -This application was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 25, 1991, meeting. b. Planning Commission Application No. 91012 submitted by Patricia Hill is a request for Special Use Permit Approval to Operate a Dance Studio in the Residence at 6906 Grimes Avenue North -This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 25, 1991, meeting. 9. Ordinances: (7:15 p.m.) a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding General Licensing Regulations (Tobacco Products) -This item was first read on July 22, 1991, published in the City's official newspaper on July 31, 1991, and is offered this evening for a second reading. 1. Resolution Amending City Council Resolution No. 87- 31 Regarding the Schedule for Various License Fees -This amendment would increase license fees for the sales of cigarettes and other tobacco related products. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- August 12, 1991 b. An Ordinance Fixing Certain Compensation to be Paid to the Elected Officials of the City of Brooklyn Center -This item was first read on July 22, 1991, published in the City's official newspaper on July 31, 1991, and is offered this evening for a second reading. C. An Ordinance Fixing Council Salaries -This item is offered this evening for a first reading. d. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Allowable Size of Space for Lease Real Estate Signs -This item was first considered by the City Council at its July 8, 1991, meeting as part of the consideration of Planning Commission Application No. 91 -008 submitted by Welsh Companies, Inc. requesting a sign variance for' various real estate signs. The City Council tabled consideration of the first reading on an ordinance amendment and directed staff to prepare various modifications. The modifications were made and a first reading was held on July 22, 1991. This ordinance is offered this evening for a second reading. e. An Ordinance Vacating Drainage and Utility Easements in Olson's Island View Terrace (Atkins Property - southeast corner of 66th Avenue and T.H. 252) -This ordinance was first read on July 8, 1991, published in the City's official newspaper on July 17, 1991, and is offered for a second reading this evening. f. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 12 of City Ordinances Extending the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Code to Include Commercial and Industrial Properties -In addition to extending the maintenance provisions of the housing maintenance and occupancy ordinance to all commercial and industrial properties, the proposed ordinance recommends adding a re- inspection fee and also provisions requiring rental dwelling license holders to prevent disorderly activities on their premises. This item is offered this evening for a first reading. 10. Discussion Items: a. Professional Services Procurement Policy b. Water Slide Proposal C. National Civic League Conference in Minneapolis 11. Resolutions: *a. Authorizing Expenditure of Drug Forfeiture Funds CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- August 12, 1991 b. Accepting Bid and Awarding Contract for Phase I Improvements (Soil Correction in Palmer lake Segment of 69th Avenue, Compensating Storage and Wetland Mitigation) Improvement Project No. 1990 -10, Contract 1991 -I c. Accepting Proposal for Phase III Archaeological Studies, 69th Avenue Improvement No. 1990 -10 *d. Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Richard J. Ploumen *e. Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Shade Trees (Order No. DST 08/12/91) *f. Creating a Certificate of Indebtedness Fund and Separate Water and Sanitary Sewer Funds g. Awarding the Sale of $3,000,000 General Obligation State Aid Street Bonds, Series 1991B; Fixing Their Form and Specifications; Directing Their Execution and Delivery; and Providing for Their Payment h. Relating to Funding of the City of Brooklyn Center, $3,000,000 General Obligation State Aid Road Bonds, Series 1991B *i. Authorizing Mayor and City Manager to Execute Third -Party Agreement for Year XVII Urban Hennepin County Community Block Grant Program -This is an agreement between the Brooklyn Center City Council and Brooklyn Center EDA for implementation of the Year XVII Scattered Site and Housing Rehab programs. *j. Authorizing the Purchase of Two Micro Computers and Amending the 1991 General Fund Budget k. Approving Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for One (1) Compact Cargo Van for the Liquor Stores 12. Performance Bond Reduction: *a. Twin View Development Inc., 51st and France Avenues North 13. Final Plat Approval: *a. Registered Land Survey - Rearrangement of RLS 1191 -This RLS covers a rearrangement of property lines at the Midas Muffler site in Brookdale. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -4- August 12, 1991 *b. Lunacek Addition -This plat covers a rearrangement of property lines etc. at the Apartment area west of Xerxes Avenue at 52nd Avenue. 14. Motion to Authorize Execution of Quit Claim Deed -Lot 1, Block 1, Brooklyn Farm - Brookdale Corporate Center 15. Class B - Liquor License for Chi -Chi's Restaurant *16. Licenses 17. Adjournment 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 JULY 22, 1991 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 :02 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, City Engineer Mark Maloney, Assistant EDA Coordinator Tom Bublitz, EDA Coordinator Brad Hoffman, Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, and Council Secretary Ann Odden. OPENING CER EMONIES Al Johnson offered the invocation. OPEN FORUM Mayor Paulson noted the Council had received two requests to speak regarding the design of the 69th Avenue North/Indiana Avenue North Intersection. As this was item 8 on the agenda, they agreed to defer their remarks until that portion of the meeting. There was no one else who wished to address the Council, and he continued with the regular agenda items. COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Paulson announced that residents Jane Walker and Theodore Anderson were local winners of the Hennepin Recycling Contest. Mayor Paulson urged the Council to consider increasing their number of meetings per month from two to four. He noted the regular meetings frequently ran late and making decisions at a late hour became difficult. He felt thorough public discussion of items was important. The existing policy of excused absences and occasionally canceling meetings would still be in effect. Councilmember Pedlar concurred with his remarks and suggested the Council look at nearby cities to see how they handled the matter. 7/22/92 - 1 - Councilmember Cohen suggested one of the four meetings be set aside as a work session for the Council. The Council concurred to discuss the matter at a later date. Councilmember Pedlar reported the first meeting of the Financial Task Force was scheduled to meet on July 29, 1991, with Dennis Kelly as the Chair. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Paulson inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items be removed from the consent agenda to which Councilmember Cohen requested removal of item 11e. APPROVAL OF MINUTES JULY I1. 1991 - WORK SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to approve the minutes of the July 11, 1991, work session as printed. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION N0. 91 -180 Member Dave Rosene introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 07/22/91) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 91 -181 Member Dave Rosene introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED SHADE TREE REMOVAL COSTS, PUBLIC UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES, DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY ACCOUNTS, AND DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL COSTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 91 -182 Member Dave Rosene introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: m 7/22/91 - 2 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SUB - RECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to approve the following list of licenses: ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Jerry's NewMarket 5801 Xerxes Ave. N. St. Alphonsus Fun Fair 7025 Halifax Ave. N. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS R & L Heating and A/C 1605 Wilson Ave. Residential Heating & AIC, Inc. 19000 Easton Rd. RENTAL DWELLINGS Renewal: B.F. Dabrowski 5001 Ewing Ave. N. Kathryn D. Hess 1329 68th Lane N. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES JULY 8, 1991 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the minutes of the July 8, 1991, regular session. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Pedlar abstained. PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL HEARING REGARDING DESIGN OF THE 69TH AVENUE NORTH/iNDIANA AVENUE NORTH INTERSECTION The City Manager reviewed the staff report on this item, and the Director of Public Works presented slides of the various proposed alternative layouts. Alternate 1: Cul -de -sac on June and Indiana. Alternate 2: Close June and Indiana, with a service road between the two. 7122/91 -3- - n Alternate 3: Cul -de -sac on June, restricted access at Indiana, providing for right turn out only. (No right turns onto Indiana.) The Director of Public Works felt the Council had expressed a preference for Alternate 3 at the previous meeting. Mayor Paulson indicated no formal consensus had been taken. The Council briefly discussed the traffic counts, and the Director of Public Works recommended the number 1,756 be used as a more correct figure than the range stated for Indiana Avenue on alternate 3. Councilmember Cohen stated he previously supported the closing of Indiana, but based upon the proposed alternatives, he felt Alternate 3 presented a reasonable compromise option. Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing regarding design of the 69th Avenue North/Indiana Avenue North intersection at 7:20 p.m. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. Written comments received from John LaChance, 6912 Halifax Avenue N.; James & Sue Perrault, 6912 Indiana Avenue N.; and C. W. Bloomquist, 6930 Indiana Avenue N. were noted for the record. All supported the Alternate 3 plan. Chris Carlson, 7000 Halifax Avenue N., was recognized and questioned the Council about the possibility of a three -way stop at 70th and Halifax which had been discussed at the previous Council meeting. He urged Council consideration of a three -way "T" intersection at the location. In regard to the closing of Indiana, Mr. Carlson did not feel it would have a substantial impact. Owen Kosloski, 6930 Halifax Avenue N., was recognized and concurred with Mr. Carlson's remarks. He felt a three -way stop was important because of the proximity to a school. Steve Novak, 6936 Halifax Avenue N., was recognized and concurred with the previous speakers about the need for a three -way stop at 70th and Halifax. He also felt the closing of Indiana would not have a substantial impact. Jim Perrault, 6912 Indiana Avenue N. was recognized and stated he favored Alternate 3. He felt the closing of Indiana would make the situation worse. Mr. Bloomquist was also present at the meeting, and echoed his written remarks, indicating he favored Alternate 3. 7/22/91 -4- There was no one else who appeared to speak, and Mayor Paulson entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to close the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Cohen questioned whether the three -way stop discussed by the residents had been reviewed earlier. The City Manager responded staff's recommendation had been that no stop sign be installed, as cut throughs would be diminished when the proposed improvement is completed. He suggested the matter be referred to the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee. Councilmember Pedlar felt a three -way stop should be considered at 70th and Halifax due to the proximity to a school. Councilmember Cohen commented he had no objection to a three -way stop at that location, but felt a basis from staff would be needed in order to justify the decision. Councilmember Scott favored a three -way stop at that location and concurred to have the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee review the matter to develop an appropriate rationale. Councilmember Rosene concurred. There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Scott to refer the matter of a three -way stop at 70th and Halifax to the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee, to report back to Council by the next meeting. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO, 91 -183 Member Dave Rosene introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING APPROVED ALIGNMENT /GEOMETRIC LAYOUT PLAN FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF 69TH AVENUE AT INDIANA AVENUE NORTH The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar. Mayor Paulson thanked the public for their input and felt it was important to balance all considerations. Councilmember Cohen felt the citizen's needs had been properly addressed and the proposed action was a reasonable compromise measure. Vote: Four ayes, one nay. The motion passed. Mayor Paulson voted nay. 7/12/91 -5- ORDINANCES The Personnel Coordinator reviewed An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding General Licensing Regulations. She explained a section defining a tobacco- related product had been added, also restrictions on self - service merchandising. In regard to progressive revocations, she indicated the Council might want to consider a case - by -case basis to give more flexibility. Raising the license fee was recommended, and a resolution had been drafted for this purpose to be considered in conjunction with the ordinance's second reading. Notices had been sent to all current license holders. In response to Councilmember Scott's question, the Personnel Coordinator commented there had been no response to date from current license holders regarding the restriction on no sales by persons under 18 years of age. The City Manager indicated "quick marts" were most apt to have a problem with this portion of the ordinance, as it might jeopardize teen jobs. Councilmember Scott indicated she had two calls from people in this situation. Frequently, these jobs paid only minimum wage making them difficult to fill with older persons. In regard to paragraph 1, on page 3, Councilmember Pedlar questioned the phrase "or otherwise dispose of," indicating he felt it was vague. The City Attorney indicated the verbiage was. meant to prevent people from bartering, trading, or giving away the items in addition to selling them. Councilmember Rosene suggested that portion be reworded "or otherwise dispense" and the gg P P City Attorney concurred. Councilmember Cohen questioned whether the City's three largest supermarkets had been contacted in regard to the changes in the proposed ordinance. The Personnel Coordinator responded they had not and indicated staff could send out a copy of the ordinance with another notice. In response to Councilmember Rosene's questioning of the $50 license fee, the Personnel Coordinator indicated the fee had been estimated and was an attempt by the City to recover increased enforcement costs. The Council discussed that a license should be conspicuously posted, which would make enforcement easier. Councilmember Rosene commented alcoholic beverages were allowed to be sold at "quick marts" in Wisconsin, and he assumed it would be illegal for minors to sell the product. Therefore, he felt the City should consider reviewing how they handled the issue of no sales by minors, as it related to the proposed ordinance. In regard to City liquor stores, the City Manager indicated there were occasional problems with getting employees, although the positions paid more than minimum wage. 7/22191 -6- Councilmember Rosene questioned why individually packaged items were separate, and the Personnel Coordinator responded these smaller items were more prone to shoplifting or employee theft. Mayor Paulson opened the meeting for the purpose of an informal public hearing on the first reading of An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding General Licensing Regulations. No public hearing was required, but there were members of the audience who wished to address the Council on this item. John Olson, a representative of the Minnesota Grocers Association, which represents retail and wholesale grocers and convenience stores, objected to the proposed ordinance. While he did not object to the intent of the ordinance, which was to limit sales to minors, he objected to the approach. He felt minors should be punished for possessing or attempting to buy the products, rather than putting the entire burden on the stores. He commented a State law was already in e�stence, with a penalty for selling to minors. Clerks were warned of the laws when hired and were given training in how to identify minors. If repeated incidents of selling to minors occurred, the clerks were terminated. Mr. Olson stated many stores were already voluntarily taking action to prevent sales to minors. He felt the City should enforce the current state laws and add a penalty to minors for attempted. purchase. In response to Councilmember Cohen's question, the City Attorney indicated the City could add a penalty clause for minors. However, he stated the practice had been tried in other cities and was not widely used as most concluded it was mis- directed law enforcement. Mayor Paulson commented he did not favor penalizing minors. Dennis Carlson, director of operations for IGA Foods, concurred with the remarks of Mr. Olson. He felt family -owned stores with various ages of person employed, and stores where younger clerks were cross - trained might have a problem with the ordinance. Councilmember Rosene commented a clerk under 18 should never be supervising the establishment alone, so an adult would always be present. Therefore, the ordinance would still be applicable. The City Attorney felt the Council should make the ordinance more specific where "individually packaged" or "tobacco products" were referenced to make their intent clear. Councilmember Scott concurred and suggested it be reworded to make it clear any clerk selling any tobacco product was intended. David Johnson, of the Association of Non - Smokers, spoke in favor of the proposed ordinance and felt it was a step in the right direction. He felt the ordinance should include an amendment requiring an adult to be present whenever the products were sold. He 7/22/91 -7- �� den from the indicating it shifted the bur opposed putting in a penalty clause for children end ca o g PP P g P tY sellers. He felt tobacco and alcohol were both major problems for youth and should be treated equally. Councilmember Cohen commented he did not feel that 16 and 17 year -olds were "children ", and they should be expected to take some responsibility for their actions. Councilmember Pedlar indicated it was against the law for minors to possess alcohol. Mr. Carlson indicated many 14 and 15 year -olds were intimidating because of their language, actions and sometimes, violence. He cited a case where a clerk who requested identification was struck by a minor and store property destroyed. He felt the ordinance was an awkward approach to preventing shoplifting. Councilmember Rosene commented he eferred to leave progressive civil penalties as P codified. He felt if the rules and consequences were specifically spelled out in advance, enforcement would be more fair. Councilmember Cohen supported the intent of the ordinance and felt the Council should consider holding a public informational meeting on the matter to generate more input. He felt that would be preferable to waiting until the ordinance's second reading, as Council would have more opportunity to incorporate suggestions into the final draft. He suggested Council make changes to the ordinance as discussed, circulate the revised draft, and hold a public informational meeting on the matter as soon as feasible. Councilmember Rosene concurred. Mayor Paulson recommended the Council approve the first reading prior to proceeding with other possibilities. The Council concurred with changing the phrase "dispose of" to "dispense" in all cases and to specify "any person who sells a tobacco product" as discussed with the City Attorney. There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Cohen to approve for first reading An Ordinance (as amended) Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding General Licensing Regulations and setting a public hearing date of August 12, 1991, at 7:15 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Paulson informally closed the public hearing at 9:00 p.m. There was a motion b Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to Y have staff review the penalty provision and the matter of enforcement in regard to minors and report back by the next meeting. The motion passed unanimously. 7/22/91 -8- RE SS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 9 p.m. and reconvened at 9 :20 p.m. The Council concurred to hear item 10b next due to members of the public present. DIS SSION ITEMS STAFF REPORT REGARDING DRAINAGE PROBLEMS IN THE 63RD AVENUE/INDIANA AVENUE AREA The Director of Public Works reviewed the report and concluded the area frequently flooded, causing water to back up into rear yards and flood basements of residents. No overland drainage was available. He reviewed seven possible remedies proposed by staff. Staff had evaluated the alternatives and recommended two possible options, with the recommendation that Option 2 be considered. Option 2 provided for: Include the study of this problem area as a specific assignment of the consultant who will be hired to develop the City -wide local storm water management plan which the City is required to complete by July 1, 1993. It is noted that, while the total plan may not be completed until 1993, it is certainly possible to require completion of specific segments of such a plan at an earlier date. It would appear to be possible to require this consultant to complete the study of this portion of the system in time to allow implementation of a solution in 1992. Councilmember Rosene concurred with Option 2. He suggested the possibility of creating a retention pond which would function as a park. The Director of Public Works indicated not all storm sewer ponds were wet ponds and felt the combined use was a good idea. Councilmember Pedlar felt there was urgency to the problem, as some residents were reluctant to leave their homes due to the potential flooding. He thanked the Director of Public Works for being responsive to the problem. The Director of Public Works suggested the City could install a check valve or manual valve immediately, as a stop -gap measure and seek a better long -term solution. However, residents of the area would need to be responsible for the manual valve, as there would not be time for City crews to reach the site in the event of flooding. A check valve could also be installed, but there were concerns that it could become plugged or fail to operate correctly. Floyd Anderson, 9208 West River Road had previously lived at 6313 Indiana for 21 years. His son now occupied that home. He felt Pearson Construction (the developer) had failed to meet their obligations and were responsible for the flooding problems. He supported the idea of a retention pond, and felt it would be an amenity for the area. Mr. Anderson also suggested a retention pond be connected to the storm sewer on 65th Avenue. 7/12/91 -9- 9 Mayor Paulson thanked Mr. Anderson for his good ideas, and the Director of Public Works indicated he would review the matter to see if the outlet was adequate. Homer Carey, 6307 Indiana Avenue, stated the problem had been ongoing for 33 years. He had replaced carpeting four times in the past 15 years. In regard to a manual valve, Mr. Carey was reluctant to accept the responsibility for a valve, as he preferred a better long- term solution. He indicated he would not oppose the idea if a better solution were pursued in a timely manner. There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene and seconded by Councilmember Scott directing staff to pursue Option 1 and authorizing funding from the storm sewer utilities and authorizing staff to work out the details of a temporary solution with the affected property owners. The motion passed unanimously. STAFF REPORT REGARDING 57TH AVENUE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS The Director of Public Works reviewed this item. and showed slides of the affected area. He indicated the grade was half of that recommended, and therefore, there was not proper drainage. He indicated the problem needed to be solved, but it was not a high priority. He recommended the City wait until 57th Avenue was reconstructed (scheduled for 1993 or 1994) and incorporate this action into that project. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to approve staff's recommendation that storm sewer improvements be constructed in coordination with a complete street improvement project for 57th Avenue; and that the reconstruction of 57th Avenue, along with the storm sewer system improvements be programmed for implementation in 1993 or 1994. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Rosene suggested residents of the area be informed of the proposed action. ORDINANCE The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Allowable Size of Space for Lease Real Estate Signs. It was noted the City Council had tabled consideration of the first reading previously on an ordinance amendment and directed staff to prepare various modifications to the ordinance. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained the modifications which had been made to keep the ordinance simple and easier to enforce. He noted all signs would require dates to be P ut on them to aid in enforcement of time limits. 7/22/91 _10- Councilmember Cohen questioned whether a six-plex would be allowed to have a sign, under the proposed ordinance. The Director of Planning and Inspection indicated it would. Councilmember Cohen objected to this provision. In response to Councilmember Cohen's question, the City Attorney indicated the Council would not be locked in to a policy if they decided to change their minds at a later date. The "temporary" title left the matter up to Council discretion. The Council discussed relating signage to the size of the building, and discussed the possibility of striking the real estate section of the ordinance and proposed new language for multiple - dwelling facilities. Mayor Paulson indicated he had admired the constraint of 'the previous policy. Councilmember Cohen indicated the City had a history of being conservative in regard to signs. Councilmember Scott concurred. Mayor Paulson felt large signs did not have a significant impact on the business on which they were placed and that they were unsightly. Councilmember Cohen felt business had certain economic problems and that the Council should be sensitive to their needs. He suggested the time frame be changed from two years to one year to allow the Council to supervise more closely. Mayor Paulson felt the City was better served by the status quo. He did not feel the minimal impact on businesses was great enough to offset the negative aspect for the City. There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Rosene to modify as discussed, including changing the time frame to one year, taking out multiple residential buildings, and reducing the 15 feet above ground to 10 feet and approving for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Allowable Size of Space for Lease Real Estate Signs and setting a public hearing date of August 12, 1991, at 7:15 p.m. Vote: Four ayes, one nay. The motion passed. Mayor Paulson voted nay. REC There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Scott to recess the Brooklyn Center City Council at 11:35 p.m. for the purpose of convening the Economic Development Authority. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 11:35 p.m. and reconvened at 12:58 a.m. ORDINANCE The City Manager presented An Ordinance Fixing Certain Compensation to be Paid to the Elected Officials of the City of Brooklyn Center. The item related to the establishment of per diem pay for the Mayor and Councilmembers. 7/22J91 Mayor Paulson commented that communities frequently went to a per diem pay when the number of meetings per month were increased. He felt the Council should consider additional monthly meetings, and therefore, a per diem pay would be an appropriate solution. Councilmember Cohen felt the Mayor position, especially, should have a higher salary, as it was lower than that of surrounding communities. He suggested the possibility of raising the salaries of the Mayor and Councilmembers by $500/year apiece. Councilmember Pedlar felt it would be fair to increase the salaries of the Mayor and Councilmembers to that of surrounding communities, but recognized that times were tough from an economic standpoint. He indicated.he would support per diem pay on the basis that it had specific value to the community. He suggested citizen input on the matter. Mayor Paulson indicated he appreciated Councilmember Cohen's remarks and felt people should not be penalized for public service. He had given the matter a lot of thought and felt a salary increase was justified for the positions of Mayor and Councilmembers. In response to Councilmember Scott's question, the City Manager indicated the City Council would approve the per diem requests. Councilmember Rosene commented that as a teacher, he is allowed one personal leave day each year, after which he must pay a substitute. He supported an increase in part so that he would be able to attend as many functions as possible. There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve for first reading An Ordinance Fixing Certain Compensation to be Paid to the Elected Officials of the City of Brooklyn Center and setting a public hearing date of August 12, 1991, at 7:15 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE The City Manager presented An Ordinance Fixing Council Salaries. This item would increase the salaries of the Mayor and Councilmembers effective January 1, 1993. The Council discussed the possibility of increasing the number of meetings per month. Councilmember Scott favored increasing the number from two to three, with the added meeting being set aside solely for discussion items. She felt this would free a substantial amount of time at other Council meetings. She felt it was important to take action to alleviate the lateness of the meetings as was currently the case. The Council discussed that the Brooklyn Park Mayor's annual salary was $11,700 and the Brooklyn Park Councilmembers' annual salary was $7,800, for comparison purposes. The Brooklyn Center Mayor and Councilmembers salaries are currently $7,000 and $5,000, respectively. 7/22/91 -12- l _ Mayor Paulson felt reviewing salaries every other year would be appropriate. Previously, the matter had not been addressed for 10 years. He suggested reviewing staffing functions and consider having the Financial Task Force review the matter also. In regard to additional monthly meetings, Councilmember Cohen suggested salary not be directly tied to the number of meetings per month. Councilmember Scott felt the City had an obligation to future Councils to increase salaries and felt it should not be an imposition to be a Councilmember. The Council concurred to table the item until the next Council meeting. There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to table first reading of the proposed ordinance until the next Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) RESOLUTION NO. 91 -184 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR REPLACEMENT OF SIDEWALK SECTIONS ALONG BROOKLYN BOULEVARD, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1991 -04, CONTRACT 1991 -E The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO, 91 -185 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1991 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO ADJUST FOR THE ANTICIPATED SECOND REDUCTION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AIDS (LGA) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 91 -18b Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO WRITE -OFF UNCOLLECTIBLE CHECKS 7/22/91 -13- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave Rosene, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO, 91 -187 Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT A PROPOSAL FROM DCA, INC. TO PROVIDE COBRA ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR EMPLOYEES AND FORMER EMPLOYEES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dave Rosene. The City Manager noted that providing the insurance was mandated. Councilmember Rosene asked that the cost be listed under the record of mandated costs. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Rosene, and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 1:46 am. Deputy City Clerk Todd Paulson, Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Ann J. Odden Northern Counties Secretarial Service 7122/91 -14- i . MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION JULY 25, 1991 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairperson Molly Malecki at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Ella Sander, Wallace Bernards, Lowell Ainas, Bertil Johnson, Kristen Mann and Mark Holmes. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planner Gary Shallcross. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 27, 1991 Motion by Commissioner Sander seconded by Commissioner Mann to approve the minutes of the June 27, 1991 Planning Commission meeting and submitted. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioners Ainas and Johnson. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 91011 (Sai Rossi) Following the Chairperson's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for special use permit approval to conduct a home beauty shop operation in the lower level of the home at 3000 Quarles Road. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 91011, attached). The Secretary added that a very important aspect of all home occupations is that they always be incidental and secondary to the residential use of the property. Commissioner Mann inquired as to the other home occupation that had a nonresident employee at 63rd and Xerxes. She asked whether it was no longer in business. The Secretary answered in the affirmative. The Planner stated that it was his belief that that person had moved. The Secretary explained that the purpose of that employee was so that the resident could get her shop license over a period of time. Commissioner Sander asked about other cases of an employee being approved for a home occupation. The Secretary noted that there had been another beauty shop in the central neighborhood that was actually a two chair operation, but that that went out of business. He also noted that Dr. Lescault on Brooklyn Boulevard has an employee to fill in, similar to what is being proposed in this case. Commissioner Bernards asked for clarification that no directional signs would be allowed on other 7 -25 -91 1 properties. The Secretary agreed that no other signs would be allowed. Chairperson Malecki then asked the applicant whether she had anything to add. Mr. Ron Christensen then introduced himself and stated that he would be willing to answer questions on Mrs. Rossi's behalf. Chairperson Malecki asked whether customers would be able to park in the driveway. Mrs. Rossi responded that some people like to park on the street and that she would like to give them that option. Chairperson Malecki asked whether any comments had been submitted regarding this home occupation. The Secretary stated that he had a few conversations with a neighbor, but that there were no significant concerns regarding the home occupation. The Secretary added that he did not feel parking should be allowed on old Xerxes Avenue since that is too narrow to accommodate parking and traffic. Commissioner Bernards stated that he had seen the property and that up to two cars in front of the house should not be a problem. Chairperson Malecki then inquired as to the hours of operation. Mrs. Rossi stated that the hours that she had listed in her application were the hours that she would be available, but that she would not be busy that number of hours. She estimated that she would probably work between 30 and 35 hours a week. Chairperson Malecki asked whether the other employee would fill up the remaining hours. Mr. Christensen responded in the negative. Commissioner Sander expressed concern about the nonresident employee and about the number of hours involved. Chairperson Malecki stated that it was the applicant's intent only to use the nonresident employee when she was gone. Mr. Christensen added that it might be in cases where she was ill or there was some emergency. He added that it would not be a regular employment of another person on the property. He stated that other home occupations probably operate in this manner without seeking actual approval. He stated that the applicant wanted to be up front about the use of a nonresident employee on an irregular basis. The Secretary stated that the conditions can spell out the use of the nonresident employee. Mr. Christensen again reiterated that the nonresident employee would not be used on a regular basis. There followed a brief discussion between Commissioner Sander and Mrs. Rossi about the nonresident employee. Mrs. Rossi again stated that she would only use the nonresident employee in cases where she would be unable to make an appointment that had been previously scheduled. She added that she would operate on an appointment only basis. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No 91011) Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing no one, she called for a motion to close the public hearing. 7 -25 -91 2 Motion by Commissioner Johnson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO 91011 (Sai Rossi) There was a motion by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 91011 subject to eight conditions. While the motion was on the floor, Commissioner Holmes discussed the matter of the hours of operation. The Secretary stated that the hours of operation are the outer limits of the home occupation and are intended to allow flexibility to the applicant. He again stated that home occupations have to be incidental and secondary to the residential use of the property. He stated that hours could be limited in some way to the hours worked if the Commission desired that. He stressed again that the home occupation should operate on an appointment only basis. Commissioner Ainas stated that limiting the hours worked would be too hard to monitor. Commissioner Holmes asked if the application would be reviewed annually. The Secretary explained that the application would not be brought back to the Planning Commission, but that it would be monitored if there were complaints or if other problems were noticed with the home occupation. Commissioner Holmes asked about the problem of lighting in the winter time. The Secretary stated that it would be up to the applicant to provide adequate light for people that park on or in front of her property. He stated that her homeowner's insurance would have to reflect the increased risk associated with the home occupation. The above motion to recommend approval of Application No. 91011 was seconded by Commissioner Johnson and the motion was made subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is granted only for a one chair home beauty shop as proposed in the applicant's letter dated June 27, 1991. The use may not be altered or expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this special use permit. 2. The beauty shop shall operate on an appointment -only basis. Hours of operation shall be from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. 3. The applicant shall provide the City with a current copy of the State shop license prior to issuance of the special use permit. 4. The applicant shall obtain required permits for plumbing and ventilation work. 5. The applicant shall install a 10 lb. fire extinguisher in the room of the beauty shop. 7 -25 -91 3 I i 6. There shall be no more than 10 people in the basement area at any given time. 7. Special use permit approval acknowledges parking of up to two cars associated with the home occupation on Quarles Road in front of the house. All other parking associated with the home occupation shall be on improved space provided by the applicant. B. Special use permit approval acknowledges the employment on the property of one nonresident employee who shall work on an irregular, emergency basis to fill in when the applicant is unable to make an appointment due to sickness or vacation. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Ainas, Johnson, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 91012 (Patricia Hill The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for special use permit approval to operate a dance studio in the residence at 6906 Grimes Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 91012, attached). The Secretary added that the hours of operation are again an outer limit and are not intended as total time for the operation to be conducted. Commissioner Holmes asked what would happen to Grimes Avenue North when the 69th Avenue North improvement project is completed. The Secretary stated that there would be an intersection at 69th and Grimes, but that there would be no median opening in 69th so that left turns would not be possible. Commissioner Bernards asked what was the age of the students. He stated that he did not want morning classes to conflict with school. The Secretary directed that question to the applicant and stated that recitals should perhaps be held in another location to avoid on- street parking. Chairperson Malecki then asked the applicant whether she had anything to add. Mrs. Hill stated that she would like to be able to have adult classes for people in the neighborhood. In response to a question from Commissioner Holmes regarding parking, the Secretary stated that the conditions limit parking to being on the driveway. He reviewed briefly the history of parking provisions in the home occupation ordinance. He stated that it would be better for customers to park on the driveway than on the street even if there were a number of cars. Chairperson Malecki inquired whether the other dance studio that had been approved in 1984 was still in operation. The Planner stated that he was not sure, that it had been in operation in Northbrook Shopping Center for awhile, but that they may have returned to the home occupation status. 7 -25 -91 4 Commissioner Bernards asked the applicant what training she had in dance. Mrs. Hill briefly reviewed the people that she had received training from. Chairperson Malecki asked regarding the age of the students. Mrs. Hill stated that they would be between 2 1/2 and 4 years old. Mr. Ruan Hill who had accompanied Mrs. Hill stated that it was his understanding that a 6 sq. ft. sign would be allowed for the home occupation once it becomes a corner lot. The Planner responded in the affirmative, noting that once it abuts 69th Avenue North it will be on a major thoroughfare. PUBLIC HEARING A lication 91012 ( p� L Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public hearing P g P 9 and noted that there was no one present to speak regarding the application. She called for a motion to close the public hearing. Commissioner Bernards asked whether there would be a berm and a sidewalk along 69th Avenue North when the improvement project is completed and whether this would affect the visibility of the sign. The Secretary stated that the sign would have to be on their property and could not be on the boulevard next to the street. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Sander to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 91012 (Patricia Hill Motion by Commissioner Sander seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 91012, subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is granted only for a home dance studio as proposed in the applicant's submittal of July 9, 1991. The use may not be altered or expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this special use permit. 2. The dance studio shall involve instructions in dance in classes not to exceed 10 people. 3. Hours of operation shall be between 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 9:00 a.m. and noon on Saturdays. 4. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off - street on improved space provided by the applicant. 5. The applicant shall install a 10 lb. fire extinguisher in the room used for classes. r 6. Noise from the dance classes shall not be perceptible beyond the property lines of the lot on which the classes are conducted. 7 -25 -91 5 Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Johnson, Ainas, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. There was a brief discussion of previous applications that had gone to the City Council. The Secretary updated the Commission on their status and pointed out that he was still working on a real estate sign ordinance. There was also a brief discussion of garage sales. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Mann to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Chairperson 7 -25 -91 6 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 91011 Applicant: Sai Rossi Location: 3000 Quarles Road Request: Special Use Permit The applicant requests special use permit approval to conduct a home beauty shop operation in the lower level of the home at 3000 Quarles Road. The property in question is zoned R1 and is bounded on the east by old Xerxes Avenue North, on the south by Quarles Road, and on the west and north by single - family homes. A home beauty shop is a special use home occupation in the Ri zoning district. Applicant's Submittal The applicant has submitted a letter describing the proposed home occupation (attached). In it, she states that she has the proper cosmetologist Manager license from the State of Minnesota. The salon is to be located in a room in the lower level, four steps down from the entry to the split -level home. (A sketch is attached.) There is space for four cars to park on the driveway. Nevertheless, Mrs. Rossi requests approval of on- street parking as a courtesy to her customers. The home is located in an area that has little, if any, through traffic. Also, there is considerable street frontage as this is a corner lot. Mrs. Rossi states that the hours of operation would be from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. She plans to work on an appointment only basis. Mrs. Rossi also requests approval of a non - resident employee to serve on a part -time, temporary basis when she is gone. It is our understanding that there will only be one chair in the salon. The employee is not intended to expand the business, but rather as a fill in cosmetologist. Mrs. Rossi states she may install a 2.5 sq. ft. sign to let customers know they are at the right address. She also notes that there is a smoke detector in the furnace room. Staff Comments We have viewed the driveway serving the property and, while it may qualify for a two car wide driveway, it is not generous. Parking cars side by side in the driveway may not be comfortable for customers. On- street parking is generally not allowed with this type of home occupation. Widening the driveway is feasible, but somewhat complicated by the slope of the ground. In lieu of the isolated nature of this neighborhood, there would be little traffic hazard in allowing on- street parking. We would recommend that the Commission consider allowing on- street parking of one car at a time in this case. However, due consideration should be given to the sentiments of neighbors in the area. The Zoning Ordinance allows for the possibility of on- street parking based upon a consideration of the special use standards and of the following: 7 -25 -91 1 Application No. 91011 continued a) The amount of the applicant's street frontage. b) The rights of adjacent residents to park on the street. C) Preservation of the residential character of the neighborhood. With respect to these points, the applicant's property has ample frontage and the parking of one or even two cars on the street should not impede other people's rights or threaten the residential character of the neighborhood. The Commission may wish to discuss this matter in light of public testimony and make a judgment as to whether on- street parking would be acceptable in this case. As to a temporary part -time employee, the City, within the last five years, allowed a non - resident employee at another home beauty shop at 63rd and Xerxes Avenue North. That employee was allowed for a limited period of time until the applicant received her shop manager's license from the State. In this case, it is our understanding that the non - resident employee would not be employed on the premises on a regular basis, but would fill in when Mrs. Rossi could not make an appointment because of a trip or other absence. This seems like an acceptable arrangement as long as the salon remains a one -chair operation. Again, we would urge the Commission to discuss this matter in light of testimony and render a judgment as to whether a temporary, part -time employee is acceptable in this case. We will be prepared to develop language for conditions on these two issues should the Commission elect to recommend granting these two provisions. Another concern may be the number of hours being proposed - 58. This is a high number of hours if the business is constant, which is not likely. It may be that Mrs. Rossi will wish to utilize her temporary, part -time employee on a more regular basis for some of these hours. This should be explored with the applicant. What must be stressed in the conditions is that the salon operate on an appointment only basis. Recommendation Altogether, the application is generally in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is granted only for a home beauty shop as proposed in the applicant's letter dated June 27, 1991. The use may not be altered or expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this special use permit. 7 -25 -91 2 Application No. 91011 continued 2. The beauty shop shall operate on an appointment -only basis. Hours of operation shall be from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. 3. The applicant shall provide the City with a current copy of the State shop license prior to issuance of the special use permit. 4. The applicant shall obtain required permits for plumbing and ventilation work. 5. The applicant shall install a 10 lb. fire extinguisher in the room of the beauty shop. 6. There shall be no more than 10 people in the basement area at any given time. 7. Parking 8. Employee Submitted by, Gary ShalLross ,Planner Approved by, .. CA* Ronald A. Warren Director of Planning and Inspection 7 -25 -91 3 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 91012 Applicant: Patricia L. Hill Location: 6906 Grimes Avenue North Request: Special Use Permit The applicant requests special use permit approval to operate a dance studio in the residence at 6906 Grimes Avenue North. The property in question is zoned Ri and is bounded on the west by Grimes Avenue North and on the north, east and south by single - family homes. This house will become a corner lot on 69th when the 69th Avenue North upgrade project is completed. Group lessons are classified as a special use home occupation under the City's Zoning Ordinance. Applicant's Submittal The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which she briefly describes her proposed home occupation. She proposes to open a dance studio for children, but states that no on- street parking will be necessary since students will be dropped off and picked up by their parents. Total actual class time would be 10 -15 hours per week. No more than six (6) children at a time would be in a class. She anticipates that she will have 25 to 50 students enrolled during the first year which would begin September 1, 1991. Classes would be held in a 24' x 24' family room that was added on to the back of the house in 1986. The room was formerly used for a home photography studio which received special use permit approval in 1985. No retail sales would be involved and no loud music used. Staff Comments The applicant has indicated on the application form that classes would be held from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon, two mornings a week and from 4:00 p.m to 8:00 p.m. two to three evenings per week. We would simply recommend limiting hours to between 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. to give the applicant flexibility in arranging her schedule of classes. Section 35 -406 of the Zoning Ordinance limits classes to 10 students at a time. The applicant's proposal lives within this limit. Since these classes are for children, cars will not stay parked at the residence during the classes. Therefore, on- street parking should not be a problem. There is a large, two -car driveway on the property. A similar home occupation in the southeast neighborhood was approved in 1984. Recommendation Altogether, the proposed home occupation appears to be consistent with City ordinance and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 7 -25 -91 1 Application No. 91012 continued 1. The special use permit is granted only for a home dance studio as proposed in the applicant's submittal of July 9, 1991. The use may not be altered or expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this special use permit. 2. The dance studio shall involve instruction of children in dance in classes not to exceed 10 children. 3. Hours of operation shall be between 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. exclusive of Sundays. 4. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off - street on improved space provided by the applicant. 5. The applicant shall install a 10 lb. fire extinguisher in the room used for classes. 6. Noise from the dance classes shall not be perceptible beyond the property lines of the lot on which the classes are conducted. Submitted by, Gary Shallcross Planner A proved by, Ronald A. Warren Director of Planning and Inspection 7 -25 -91 2 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8/12/ Agenda Item Number 30-, REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: Planning Commission Application No. 91011- Sai Rossi ********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection ******************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attache • Planning Commission Application No. 91011 is a request for special use permit approval to conduct a home beauty shop operation in the lower level of the home at 3000 Quarles Road. Minutes, information sheet, drawings, and a map of the area are attached for the Council's review. Recommendation This application was considered by the Planning Commission at its July 25, 1991 meeting and approval was recommended subject to the eight conditions listed on pages 3 and 4 of the minutes from that meeting. MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION JULY 25, 1991 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairperson Molly Malecki at 7 :30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Ella Sander, Wallace Bernards, Lowell Ainas, Bertil Johnson, Kristen Mann and Mark Holmes. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planner Gary Shallcross. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 27, 1991 Motion by Commissioner Sander seconded by Commissioner Mann to approve the minutes of the June 27, 1991 Planning Commission meeting and submitted. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioners Ainas and Johnson. The motion passed. A PPLICATION NO. 91011 (Sai RossiZ Following the Chairperson's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for special use permit approval to conduct a home beauty shop operation in the lower level of the home at 3000 Quarles Road. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 91011, attached). The Secretary added . that a very important aspect of all home occupations is that they always be incidental and secondary to the residential use of the property. Commissioner Mann inquired as to-the other home occupation that had a nonresident employee at 63rd and Xerxes. She asked whether it was no longer in business. The Secretary answered in the affirmative. The Planner stated that it was his belief that that person had moved. The Secretary explained that the purpose of that employee was so that the resident could get her shop license over a period of time. Commissioner Sander asked about other cases of an employee being approved for a home occupation. The Secretary noted that there had been another beauty shop in the central neighborhood that was actually a two chair operation, but that that went out of business. He also noted that Dr. Lescault on Brooklyn Boulevard has an employee to fill in, similar to what is being proposed in this case. Commissioner Bernards asked for clarification that no directional signs would be allowed on other 7 -25 -91 1 properties. The Secretary agreed that no other signs would be allowed. Chairperson Malecki then asked the applicant whether she had anything to add. Mr. Ron Christensen then introduced himself and stated that he would be willing to answer questions on Mrs. Rossi's behalf. Chairperson Malecki asked whether customers would be able to park in the driveway. Mrs. Rossi responded that some people like to park on the street and that she would like to give them that option. Chairperson Malecki asked whether any comments had been submitted regarding this home occupation. The Secretary stated that he had a few conversations with a neighbor, but that there were no significant concerns regarding the home occupation. The Secretary added that he did not feel parking should be allowed on old Xerxes Avenue since that is too narrow to accommodate parking and traffic. Commissioner Bernards stated that he had seen the property and that up to two cars in front of the house should not be a problem. Chairperson Malecki then inquired as to the hours of operation. Mrs. Rossi stated that the hours that she had listed in her application were the hours that she would be available, but that she would not be busy that number of hours. She estimated that she would probably work between 30 and 35 hours a week. Chairperson Malecki asked whether the other employee would fill up the remaining hours. Mr. Christensen responded in the negative. Commissioner Sander expressed concern about the nonresident employee and about the number of hours involved. Chairperson Malecki stated that it was the applicant's intent only to use the nonresident employee when she was gone. Mr. Christensen added that it might be in cases where she was ill or there was some emergency. He added that it would not be a regular employment of another .person on the property. He stated that other home occupations probably operate in this manner without seeking actual approval. He stated that the applicant wanted to be up front about the use of a nonresident employee on an irregular basis. The Secretary stated that the conditions can spell out the use of the nonresident employee. Mr. Christensen again reiterated that the nonresident employee would not be used on a regular basis. There followed a brief discussion between Commissioner Sander and Mrs. Rossi about the nonresident employee. Mrs. Rossi again stated that she would only use the nonresident employee in cases where she would be unable to make an appointment that had been previously scheduled. She added that she would operate on an appointment only basis. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 91011) Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing no one, she called for a motion to close the public hearing. 7 -25 -91 2 Motion by Commissioner Johnson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 91011 (Sai Rossi) There was a motion by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 91011 subject to eight conditions. While the motion was on the floor, Commissioner Holmes discussed the matter of the hours of operation. The Secretary stated that the hours of operation are the outer limits of the home occupation and are intended to allow flexibility to the applicant. He again stated that home occupations have to be incidental and secondary to the residential use of the property. He stated that hours could be limited in some way to the hours worked if the Commission desired that. He stressed again that the home occupation should operate on an appointment only basis. Commissioner Ainas stated that limiting the hours worked would be too hard to monitor. Commissioner Holmes asked if the application would be reviewed annually. The Secretary explained that the application would not be brought back to the Planning Commission, but that it would be monitored if there were complaints or if other problems were noticed with the home occupation. Commissioner Holmes asked about the problem of lighting in the winter time. The Secretary stated that it would be up to the applicant to provide adequate light for people that park on or in front of her property. He stated that her homeowner's insurance would have to reflect the increased risk associated with the home occupation. The above motion to recommend approval of Application No. 91011 was seconded by Commissioner Johnson and the motion was made subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is granted only for a one chair home beauty shop as proposed in the applicant's letter dated June 27, 1991. The use may not be altered or expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this special use permit. 2. The beauty shop shall operate on an appointment -only basis. Hours of operation shall be from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. 3. The applicant shall provide the City with a current copy of the State shop license prior to issuance of the special use permit. 4. The applicant shall obtain required permits for plumbing and ventilation work. 5. The applicant shall install a 10 lb. fire extinguisher in the room of the beauty shop. 7 -25 -91 3 6. There shall be no more than 10 people in the basement area at any given time. 7. Special use permit approval acknowledges parking of up to two cars associated with the home occupation on Quarles Road in front of the house. All other parking associated with the home occupation shall be on improved space provided by the applicant 8. Special use permit approval acknowledges the employment on the property of one nonresident employee who shall work on an irregular, emergency basis to fill in when the applicant is unable to make an appointment due to sickness or vacation. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Ainas, Johnson, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 91012 (Patricia Hill) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for special use permit approval to operate a dance studio in the residence at 6906 Grimes Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 91012, attached). The Secretary added that the hours of operation are again an outer limit and are not intended as total time for the operation to be conducted. Commissioner Holmes asked what would happen to Grimes Avenue North when the 69th Avenue North improvement project is completed. The Secretary stated that there would be an intersection at 69th and Grimes, but that there would be no median opening in 69th so that left turns would not be possible. Commissioner Bernards asked what was the age of the students. He stated that he did not want morning classes to conflict with school. The Secretary directed that question to the applicant and stated that recitals should perhaps be held in another location to avoid on- street parking. Chairperson Malecki then asked the applicant whether she had anything to add. Mrs. Hill stated that she would like to be able to have adult classes for people in the neighborhood. In response to a question from Commissioner Holmes regarding parking, the Secretary stated that the conditions limit parking to being on the driveway. He reviewed briefly the history of parking provisions in the home occupation ordinance. He stated that it would be better for customers to park on the driveway than on the street even if there were a number of cars. Chairperson Malecki inquired whether the other dance studio that had been approved in 1984 was still in operation. The Planner stated that he was not sure, that it had been in operation in Northbrook Shopping Center for awhile, but that they may have returned to the home occupation status. 7 -25 -91 4 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 91011 Applicant: Sai Rossi Location: 3000 Quarles Road Request: Special Use Permit The applicant requests special use permit approval to conduct a home beauty shop operation in the lower level of the home at 3000 Quarles Road. The property in question is zoned Rl and is bounded on the east by old Xerxes Avenue North, on the south by Quarles Road, and on the west and north by single- family homes. A home beauty shop is a special use home occupation in the R1 zoning district. Applicant's Submittal The applicant has submitted a letter describing the proposed home occupation (attached). In it, she states that she has the proper cosmetologist Manager license from the State of Minnesota. The salon is to be located in a room in the lower level, four steps down from the entry to the split -level home. (A sketch is attached.) There is space for four cars to park on the driveway. Nevertheless, Mrs. Rossi requests approval of on- street parking as a courtesy to her customers. The home is located in an area that has little,, if any, through traffic. Also, there is considerable street frontage as this is a corner lot. Mrs. Rossi states that the hours of operation would be from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. She plans to work on an appointment only basis. Mrs. Rossi also requests approval of a non - resident employee to serve on a part -time, temporary basis when she is gone. It is our understanding that there will only be one chair in the salon. The employee is not intended to expand the business, but rather as a fill in cosmetologist. Mrs. Rossi states she may install a 2.5 sq. ft. sign to let customers know they are at the right address. She also notes that there is a smoke detector in the furnace room. Staff Comments We have viewed the driveway serving the property and, while it may qualify for a two car wide driveway, it is not generous. Parking cars side by side in the driveway may not be comfortable for customers. On- street parking is generally not allowed with this type of home occupation. Widening the driveway is feasible, but somewhat complicated by the slope of the ground. In lieu of the isolated nature of this neighborhood, there would be little traffic hazard in allowing on- street parking. We would recommend that the Commission consider allowing on- street parking of one car at a time in this case. However, due consideration should be given to the sentiments of neighbors in the area. The Zoning Ordinance allows for the possibility of on- street parking based upon a consideration of the special use standards and of the following: 7 -25 -91 1 Application No. 91011 continued a) The amount of the applicant's street frontage. b) The rights of adjacent residents to park on the street. C) Preservation of the residential character of the neighborhood. With respect to these points, the applicant's property has ample frontage and the parking of one or even two cars on the street should not impede other people's rights or threaten the residential character of the neighborhood. The Commission may wish to discuss this matter in light of public testimony and make a judgment as to whether on- street parking would be acceptable in this case. As to a temporary part -time employee, the City, within the last five years, allowed a non - resident employee at another home beauty shop at 63rd and Xerxes Avenue North. That employee was allowed for a limited period of time until the applicant received her shop manager's license from the State. In this case, it is our understanding that the non - resident employee would not be employed on the premises on a regular basis, but would fill in when Mrs. Rossi could not make an appointment because of a trip or other absence. This seems like an acceptable arrangement as long as the salon remains a one -chair operation. Again, we would urge the Commission to discuss this matter in light of testimony and render a judgment as to whether a temporary, part -time employee is acceptable in this case. We will be prepared to develop language for conditions on these two issues should the Commission elect to recommend granting these two provisions. Another concern may be the number of hours being proposed - 58. This is a high number of hours if the business is constant, which is not likely. It may be that Mrs. Rossi will wish to utilize her temporary, part -time employee on a more regular basis for some of these hours. This should be explored with the applicant. What must be stressed in the conditions is that the salon operate on an appointment only basis. Recommendation Altogether, the application is generally in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is granted only for a home beauty shop as proposed in the applicant's letter dated June 27, 1991. The use may not be altered or expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this special use permit. 7 -25 -91 2 Application No. 91011 continued 2. The beauty shop shall operate on an appointment -only basis. Hours of operation shall be from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. 3. The applicant shall provide the City with a current copy of the State shop license prior to issuance of the special use permit. 4. The applicant shall obtain required permits for plumbing and ventilation work. 5. The applicant shall install a 10 lb. fire extinguisher in the room of the beauty shop. 6. There shall be no more than 10 people in the basement area at any given time. 7. Parking _ 8. Employee Submitted by, Gary Shalcross Planner Approved by, e000_?011�0 C � - Ronald A. Warren Director of Planning and Inspection 7 -25 -91 3 .%ak `t`C�� `,`,i' ` ,, ;\ \`,\ � , `, , — J 1' K ^ / t v �`,1 :: rkt; ` Y ` �` • \ � \ .� \C`� ��;��;`°`;' \�:�`� : \�:;�;;,:`, ' �' "�`'�:•; ;, r �`� Asa �;��;:�• ��;�:��:, tN ` X 's z Ell N' \\ : F �� ® GL �REEWAYi'; Q = Z � ♦' \�\ ♦ \ \` ��� r���',n��s /� � __ __ 'N f '3AV�S3�c 1 1 ' NI \ N I FN illh 'N ' i _J L_-� 0, X N myga p 3nV ObV30 Z C1 JlJJ N OV "I ) �'�`,` z N nY 31AOV10 9NIM3 -- � \ <-- -- i 1�T T I N '3AY 3nV N3U0 _ J A � �- +� A F3 _N !fA AG '3nV ON M.3 - „� 'ld lv2llh N _ 9NIA3 N '3nV 9 - NIM V N 3JNVN Yl T— ` / __ __ —� ; . . Y 3�NYU3 y .. o Z ����tt f as �X R, N -- '3AY SWO / b0 NIlW19 \ ��`i, • O b i i LL :� _ __- _ - _ ._rte r f� N 3nV v rHIONI -- Vj 1 1 ^ 3W y Nyi 3A YNY ,� t A _1 I o dr o oM ��U % ✓�1�� coj1t1 ,Eros, 06y JAA o"l / (p p/� �j QOM 3 p 0 0 f I�/�/���5� I[pAQ (l�,��y�� 0I(L YN C�NSZ/�) /' /,444/. / 5W sr4 PIS UPS T���� c m rr,✓Tfn j r)" P, 4 In CAI N r,-� y COAT C1fA>R � YET rAl��f �YER �l�L VAS - St o S/✓��v�p o�T C Osz l f �R� CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 8/12/9 Agenda Item Number [7 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: Planning Commission Application No. 91012 — Patricia Hill ********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPRO Rona d A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: . No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached x ) Planning Commission Application No. 91012 is a request for special use permit approval to operate a dance studio in the residence at 6906 Grimes Avenue North. Minutes, information sheet, and a map of the area are attached for the City Council's review. Recommendation This application was considered by the Planning Commission at its July 25, 1991 meeting and approval was recommended subject to the six conditions listed on page 6 of the minutes from that meeting. 6. There shall be no more than 10 people in the basement area at any given time. 7. Special use permit approval acknowledges parking of up to two cars associated with the home occupation on Quarles Road in front of the house. All other parking associated with the home occupation shall be on improved space provided by the applicant. 8. Special use permit approval acknowledges the employment on the property of one nonresident employee who shall work on an irregular, emergency basis to fill in when the applicant is unable to make an appointment due to sickness or vacation. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Ainas, Johnson, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. z APPLICATION NO. 91012 (Patricia Hill The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for special use permit approval to operate a dance studio in the residence at 6906 Grimes Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 91012, attached). The Secretary added that the hours of operation are again an outer limit and are not intended as total time for the operation to be conducted. Commissioner Holmes asked what would happen to Grimes Avenue North when the 69th Avenue North improvement project is completed. The Secretary stated that there would be an intersection at 69th and Grimes, but that there would be no median opening in 69th so that left turns would not be possible. Commissioner Bernards asked what was the age of the students. He stated that he did not want morning classes to conflict with school. The Secretary directed that question to the applicant and stated that recitals should perhaps be held in another location to avoid on- street parking. Chairperson Malecki then asked the applicant whether she had anything to add. Mrs. Hill stated that she would like to be able to have adult classes for people in the neighborhood. In response to a question from Commissioner Holmes regarding parking, the Secretary stated that the conditions limit parking to being on the driveway. He reviewed briefly the history of parking provisions in the home occupation ordinance. He stated that it would be better for customers to park on the driveway than on the street even if there were a number of cars. Chairperson Malecki inquired whether the other dance studio that had been approved in 1984 was still in operation. The Planner stated that he was not sure, that it had been in operation in Northbrook Shopping Center for awhile, but that they may have returned to the home occupation status. 7 -25 -91 4 Commissioner Bernards asked the applicant what training she had in dance. Mrs. Hill briefly reviewed the people that she had received training from. Chairperson Malecki asked regarding the age of the students. Mrs. Hill stated that they would be between 2 1/2 and 4 years old. Mr. Ruan Hill who had accompanied Mrs. Hill stated that it was his understanding that a 6 sq. ft. sign would be allowed for the home occupation once it becomes a corner lot. The Planner responded in the affirmative, noting that once it abuts 69th Avenue North it will be on a major thoroughfare. PUBLIC HEARING (Application 91012) Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public hearing and noted that there was no one present to speak regarding the application. She called for a motion to close the public hearing. Commissioner Bernards asked whether there would be a berm and a sidewalk along 69th Avenue North when the improvement project is completed and whether this would affect the visibility of the sign. The Secretary stated that the sign would have to be on their property and could not be on the boulevard next to the street. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Sander to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 91012 (Patricia Hill Motion by Commissioner Sander seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 91012, subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is granted only for a home dance studio as proposed in the applicant's submittal of July 9, 1991. The use may not be altered or expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this special use permit. 2. The dance studio shall involve instructions in dance in classes not to exceed 10 people. 3. Hours of operation shall be between 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 9:00 a.m. and noon on Saturdays. 4. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off - street on improved space provided by the applicant. 5. The applicant shall install a 10 lb. fire extinguisher in the room used for classes. 6. Noise from the dance classes shall not be perceptible beyond the property lines of the lot on which the classes are conducted. 7 -25 -91 5 Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Johnson, Ainas, Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. There was a brief discussion of previous applications that had gone to the City Council. The Secretary updated the Commission on their status and pointed out that he was still working on a real estate sign ordinance. There was also a brief discussion of garage sales. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Mann to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Chairperson 7 -25 -91 6 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 91012 Applicant: Patricia L. Hill Location: 6906 Grimes Avenue North Request: Special Use Permit The applicant requests special use permit approval to operate a dance studio in the residence at 6906 Grimes Avenue North. The property in question is zoned Ri and is bounded on the west by Grimes Avenue North and on the north, east and south by single - family homes. This house will become a corner lot on 69th when the 69th Avenue North upgrade project is completed. Group lessons are classified as a special use home occupation under the City's Zoning Ordinance. Applicant's Submittal The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which she briefly describes her proposed home occupation. She proposes to open a dance studio for children, but states that no on- street parking will be necessary since students will be dropped off and picked up by their parents. Total actual class time would be 10 -15 hours per week. No more than six (6) children at a time would be in a class.. She anticipates that she will have 25 to 50 students enrolled during the first year which would begin September 1, 1991. Classes would be held in a 24' x 24' family room that was added on to the back of the house in 1986. The room was formerly used for a home photography studio which received special use permit approval in 1985. No retail sales would be involved and no loud music used. Staff Comments The applicant has indicated on the application form that classes would be held from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon, two mornings a week and from 4:00 p.m to 8:00 p.m. two to three evenings per week. We would simply recommend limiting hours to between 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. to give the applicant flexibility in arranging her schedule of classes. Section 35 -406 of the Zoning Ordinance limits classes to 10 students at a time. The applicant's proposal lives within this limit. Since these classes are for children, cars will not stay parked at the residence during the classes. Therefore, on- street parking should not be a problem. There is a large, two -car driveway on the property. A similar home occupation in the southeast neighborhood was approved in 1984. Recommendation Altogether, the proposed home occupation appears to be consistent with City ordinance and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 7 -25 -91 1 Application No. 91012 continued 1. The special use permit is granted only for a home dance studio as proposed in the applicant's submittal of July 9, 1991. The use may not be altered or expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this special use permit. 2. The dance studio shall involve instruction of children in dance in classes not to exceed 10 children. 3. Hours of operation shall be between 10:00 a.m. and 8:00. p.m. exclusive of Sundays. 4. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off - street on improved space provided by the applicant. 5. The applicant shall install a 10 lb. fire extinguisher in the room used for classes. 6. Noise from the dance classes shall not be perceptible beyond the property lines of the lot on which the classes are conducted. Submitted by, 0 C Gary Shallcross Planner A proved by, t olo .--.� G. c... Ronald A. Warren Director of Planning and Inspection 7 -25 -91 2 ��,� ,., � � ► 1 ■ . _ 1 / I '����� � try . ���� _off �, .;r�� ' �■ ■ _■ � , ��''1 1 ice. r � _ / /� � i .� ' • ... � .. ■ 1 1111 11 ��►���V ♦ �i ��" ; ,■ � ■■ ■ 11 111 1 z 11 � = �.'����.� a rr:. INN IN Iii 1 �I �+ �: � 111 1►� ; �� .� ; 1 = ��� 111 1 A� %'�.��• 1 , " X11 � 1/ . '��� 1 � � � � - � .. QI/ , uu1 �p�i � gill �:i I ► I N WE. 11 1 " ■111 1 11 1 11 1 1 ,., ., .� ♦ ♦♦ ♦j, . ���., ♦� �;•• ■ ■ 1111 �• ■� �: LE E Ii1 Ilii 1 1 11 1111 1 1 1 1 - i ' 1 11 �11 1� 1 ■ p . • 11 m go 111111 1111 1 long w 11 111 1 �� �� ; 1. • 11 1 JOE „C :: 1 1111 e11 ■::; . 11© �" i ii �► ; ::= 111 1 . ,. 1�1 11 / 1 111 1 I�� 1 1111 111 • _ ► ' � �1 111 1 ��1 1 � / /1 /� �� � r�' , .111111 11 1 1 111 111 C � �i -� • , r����� 1 � 11!�1� 11. 1111 1 111 1 � it •r� �; ►. _ � :1 1 I� i' �,. .. �� �i''��♦ �,� NEW ON 01M NO ON • mom CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8-12 -91 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING GENERAL LICENSING REGULATIONS DEPT. APPROVAL: Geralyn . Barone, Personnel Coordinator * MANAGER'S REVIEW/RECONEMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached ******************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SU MLARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached ) • At its July 22, 1991, meeting, the city council approved for a first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding General Licensing Regulations. Several amendments to the drafted ordinance were made before the ordinance passed for a first reading. A number of issues remain to be discussed further by the council, including whether or not to criminalize the juvenile purchase of tobacco related products, what the penalty section should be, and what license fee to set for sales of tobacco related products. All items are considered in further detail here except the license fee, which is reviewed with the resolution amending the license fee schedule. CHANGES MADE AT FIRST READING With the first reading of the ordinance came the following changes to the original draft of the ordinance submitted in the July 22 council agenda packet. 1. "Dispose of" was changed to "dispense" throughout the ordinance. 2. In places where "tobacco product" was used, this phrase was expanded to read "tobacco related product ". 3. In section 23 -106, the third sentence from the end of the section was amended, with bracketed material deleted and underlined material added: [The] M person [who sells the] selling anX tobacco related product must require identification if he she has any reason to believe that the proposed purchaser is less than 18 years of age. These changes were made in response to Councilmember Scott's request to clarify the intent of the entire section, and also to make the language gender neutral. PROHIBITION ON YOUTH PURCHASING AND POSSESSING TOBACCO RELATED PRODUCTS At the July 22 meeting, the council suggested discussing an addition to section 23 -106 that would criminalize the juvenile purchase of tobacco related products. Such language could read: . It shall be unlawful for any person under the age of 18 to purchase, attempt to purchase, or possess any tobacco related product. Those who favor this language suggest a need exists to make juveniles more responsible for their actions and to remove some of the burden from the vendors. Opponents of this language greatly object to penalizing children for tobacco use. Mr. Roger Toogood, executive director of the Children's Home Society of Minnesota, called the City to voice his concerns about a provision like this, noting he works with many problem kids who might be impacted by this ordinance. He feels the focus should be on dealing with adults who advertise and sell tobacco related products to youth. The council should consider the added burden to the City's police and prosecution services if this language is added to the ordinance. Not only would juveniles be arrested when purchasing the products, but also any other time they are found in possession of them. If the council chooses to add this provision, it should be cautious about avoiding a contradiction by not removing language in the ordinance prohibiting minors from selling tobacco related products. PENALTY SECTION The proposed ordinance provides for revocation and /or suspension of a license for any violation • of the ordinance, in addition to criminal penalties imposed by a misdemeanor conviction. This provides the City with a great deal of flexibility in dealing with specific cases which may vary from unintentional to blatant violations of the ordinance. A progressive penalty section could read: Every such license shall be suspended and /or revoked by the Council for a violation of any provision of this ordinance if the licensee has been given a reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard. For the first offense, there will be a seven -day suspension. For each violation thereafter, there will be at a minimum, a 14 -day suspension, and at a maximum, revocation of the license. The council may wish to discuss other alternatives of varying degrees and severity. LICENSE FEE The proposed license fee is discussed in the agenda item entitled A Resolution Amending City Council Resolution No. 87 -31 Regarding the Schedule for Various License Fees. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION Hold a public hearing and consider for a second reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding General Licensing Regulations. a \ l �) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 12th day f August 19 Y g , 91, at 7:15 p.m. at the City Hall 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to Chapter 23 Regarding General Licensing Regulations. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING GENERAL LICENSING REGULATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: [ CIGARETTES ] TOBACCO RELATED PRODUCTS Section 23 -101. LICENSE REQUIRED. No person shall directly or indirectly or by means of any device keep for retail sale, sell at retail, or otherwise [dispose of] dispense any [cigarette or cigarette wrapper] tobacco related product at any place in the City of Brooklyn Center unless a license therefor shall first have been obtained as provided in this ordinance. Section 23 -102. DEFINITIONS. 3. "Tobacco related product" means cigarettes, cigars cheroots; stogies, granulated, plug cut crimp cut, ready, rubbed and other smoking tobacco• snuff; snuff flower; cavendish plug and twist tobacco; fine cut and other chewing tobaccos; shorts; refuse scrips clippings cuttings and sweepings of tobacco prepared in such manner as to be suitable for chewing sniffing or smoking in a Pipe, rollina paper or other tobacco related devices. 2. "Self- service merchandising" means open display of tobacco related products that the public has access to without the intervention of an employee 3. "Individually packaged" means any package containing only one individually wrapped item Included are single packs of cigarettes single bags of tobacco for rolling, and individual cans of tobacco for chewing or sniffing Not included are cartons containing _ a two or more individually packaged packs ORDINANCE NO. of cigarettes or similar packages containing multiple cans or containers of tobacco suitable for smoking, chewing or sniffing. Section 23- 10(2]3. APPLICATION AND ISSUANCE. Application for such license shall be made to the City Clerk on a form supplied by the City. Such application shall state the full name and address of the applicant, the location of the building and the part intended to be used by the applicant under such license, the kind of business conducted at such location, and such other information as shall be required by the application form. Upon the filing of such application with the Clerk, it shall be presented to the City Council for its consideration, and if granted by the Council, a license shall be issued by the City Clerk upon the payment of the required fee. Section 23- 10(3]4. LICENSE FEE. The fee for every such license shall be as set forth by City Council resolution. Every such license shall expire on December 31 next after its issuance. ["] A fee for the renewal of any license issued under this ordinance shall be paid to the City Clerk prior to the first day of January of the year for which said license fee is required, and in the event that said payment is made after said date, the license fee established by this ordinance shall be increased ten percent (10 %) for each month or portion thereof which has elapsed since said date.[ "] Section 23- 10[4]5. LICENSE SHALL BE DISPLAYED. Every such license shall be kept conspicuously posted about the place for which the license is issued and shall be exhibited to any person upon request. Section 23- 10[5]6. RESTRICTIONS. No license shall be issued except to a person of good moral character. No license shall be issued to an applicant for sale of [cigarettes] tobacco related products at any place other than his established place of business. No license shall be issued for the sale of [cigarettes] tobacco related Products at a movable place of business; nor shall any one license be issued for the sale of [cigarettes] tobacco related products at more than one place of business or applicant. No person shall sell or dispense any [cigarettes or tobacco product, cigarette paper or cigarette wrapper] tobacco related Products through the use of a vending machine. No person shall sell or give any [cigarette, cigarette paper or cigarette wrapper] tobacco related products to any person below the age of 18 years. No person shall keep for sale, sell or [dispose of] dispense any [cigarette] tobacco related products containing opium, morphine, jimsonweed, belladonna, strychnia, cocaine, marijuana, or any other deleterious or poisonous drug except nicotine. It shall be unlawful for any person to offer for sale any individually packaged tobacco related product by means of self- service merchandising ORDINANCE NO. All sales must be made in such a manner that requires the vendee to specifically ask for the tobacco related product and all other sales are unlawful Any person selling any tobacco related product must require identification if he /she has any reason to believe that the proposed purchaser is less than 18 years of age A licensee shall not permit an employee under eighteen (18) years of age to sell or otherwise dispense tobacco related products No Person under eighteen (18) years of age may sell or otherwise dispense tobacco related products Section 23- 1OL617 REVOCATION. Every such license may be suspended and /or revoked by the Council for a violation of any provision of this ordinance if the licensee has been given a reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard. Section 23- 1Of718 PENALTY. Any person who shall violate any provision of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not more than seven hundred dollars ($700) or imprisonment not to exceed ninety (90) days or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1991. Todd Paulson, Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) L CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 5 -12 -91 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 87 -31 REGARDING THE SCHEDULE FOR VARIOUS LICENSE FEES DEPT. APPROVAL: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator MANAGER S REVIEWlRECOnE%IE 4' NDATION. ��'��" �" No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUNDIARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached ) If the city council approves for a seconding reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding General Licensing Regulations, it may wish to amend the license fee schedule to increase the fee for selling tobacco related products. The current annual fee of $15 will continue to cover the administrative costs in granting a license. The proposed increase of $35, to an annual fee of $50, will cover code enforcement expenses which have not been recovered in the past and will most certainly increase with the passage of the proposed ordinance. (The City is looking at ways to better recover the costs for providing City services, and raising license fees is one method of doing so.) Current law involves enforcement efforts solely related to the sale of cigarettes to minors. The proposed ordinance would increase the number of possible violations related to the location of tobacco related products, age of seller, and possibly the age of the buyer. Because enforcement efforts would consume more staff time, the proposed license fee attempts to recover these costs. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION Consider a Resolution Amending City Council Resolution No. 87 -31 Regarding the Schedule for Various License Fees Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 87 -31 REGARDING THE SCHEDULE FOR VARIOUS LICENSE FEES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center adopted Resolution No. 87 -31 on February 9, 1987, which established fees to be charged for various City licenses; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it would be less cumbersome and a better method of ensuring a uniform fee structure to set forth these fees in a fee schedule; and WHEREAS, City ordinances have been amended to authorize the setting of various fees by City Council resolution rather than by ordinance; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 91- amends Chapter 23 regarding general licensing regulations to make sales of tobacco related products more restrictive; and WHEREAS, this amendment creates additional administrative and enforcement costs for the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to increase the license fee for tobacco related products to offset the additional expenses incurred by the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to amend the Schedule for Various License Fees stated in Resolution No. 87 -31 as follows: LICENSE FEE DELETE: Cigarette $15 ADD: Tobacco Related Product $50 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the above changes shall become effective on 19 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 council Meeting Date 5 -12 -91 Agenda Item Number 9 b REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: AN ORDINANCE FIXING CERTAIN COMPENSATION TO BE PAID TO THE ELECTED OFFICIALS OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DEPT. APPROVAL: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator MANAGER'S REVIEW/RECOMMENDATION: �u No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached • SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached ) This item was first read on July 22, 1991, and is offered this evening for a second reading. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION Hold a public hearing and consider for a second reading An Ordinance Fixing Certain Compensation to be Paid to the Elected Officials of the City of Brooklyn Center. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Q Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 12th day of A u oust , 1991, at 7:15 p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway to consider an ordinance fixing certain compensation to be paid to the elected officials of the City of Brooklyn Center. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE FIXING CERTAIN COMPENSATION TO BE PAID TO THE ELECTED OFFICIALS OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The salary schedule as set forth in City of Brooklyn Center ordinance number 89 -05 is established on the basis that the offices of mayor and council member in the City of Brooklyn Center are part -time positions. The mayor and /or council members are sometimes required to attend municipal functions or to take time from their regular employment to perform services beneficial to the City. Effective January 1, 1993, additional compensation shall be paid to the mayor or council members in those areas subject to the following conditions: 1. The activity and number of days for which the mayor or council member is to be engaged shall be approved by the city council prior to his or her participation. 2. The mayor and council member shall be paid $50 per day as supplemental compensation for each day approved and for which the member is in attendance at the approved activity. 3. The maximum number of days for which supplemental compensation will be paid in each calendar year is a follows: Mayor - 24 days per year Council members - 14 days per year Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1991. Todd Paulson, Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 8- I 2 -9I Agenda Item Number n� REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: AN ORDINANCE FIXING COUNCIL SALARIES DEPT. APPROVAL: Geralyn A. Barone, Personnel Coordinator MAN °t AGER S REVIEW/RECOMNIENDATION. �/'� No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: su lemental sheets attached ed PP ) This item was offered for a first reading on July 22, 1991, but was tabled to this evening's meeting pending more discussion by the city council. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION Consider for a first reading An Ordinance Fixing Council Salaries. �C CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1991, at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an ordinance fixing council salaries. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE FIXING COUNCIL SALARIES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Effective January 1, 1993, and thereafter until legally amended the monthly salary for Council members shall be $ and the monthly salary for Mayor shall be $ Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 Todd Paulson, Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8 Agenda hem Number - 1 d REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Allowable Size of Space for Lease Real Estate Signs ********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPRO I/ C - ZA Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection f MANAGERS REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached ********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached This item was first considered by the City Council at its July 8, 1991 meeting as part of the consideration of Planning Commission Application No. 91008 submitted by Welsh Companies, Inc. requesting a sign variance for various real estate signs. The City Council tabled consideration of the first reading on an ordinance amendment and directed the staff to prepare various modifications. Modifications were made and presented to the City Council for consideration on July 22, 1991. The Council decided on some additional changes at that meeting that: 1) did not extend the provisions for these types of real estate signs to multiple residential buildings; 2) limited freestanding real estate signs to a height no greater than 10 feet above ground level (15 feet had been considered previously); and 3) required these real estate signs be removed within one year of the date appearing on the sign as to when it was erected in order that the sign be rejuvenated or replaced and be allowed to be re- erected only if vacancies still exist (two years had been previously considered) . A first reading on the ordinance with the modifications was held on July 22 establishing August 12, 1991 at 7:15 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing. Recommendation The ordinance is offered for a second reading and public hearing at the August 12, 1991 meeting. l� CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 12th day of August , 1991 at 7:15 p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Sign Ordinance regarding real estate signs. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 34 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ALLOWABLE SIZE OF SPACE FOR LEASE REAL ESTATE SIGNS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN' AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 34 -130. PROHIBITED SIGNS 14. Signs painted on a commercial vehicle which is Parked at a commercial premises in such a manner as to constitute a static display advertising a business, product or service to the traveling Public and which is not making a pickup or delivery or being appropriately stored on the premises Section 34 -140. PERMITTED SIGNS 2. Permitted Signs Not Requiring a Permit 1. Real Estate signs as follows: 3. Temporary signs for the purpose of leasing or selling [dwelling units in buildings containing two (2) or more units and temporary signs for the purpose of leasing or selling] portions of commercial or industrial buildings, such as offices or individual tenant areas are permitted only when vacancies exist and are limited to [walls facing public streets] one freestanding or wall sign per street frontage. The size of signs shall be [determined on the basis of wall area and distance from public right -of- way in the following manner:] no greater than 32 sct. ft. and freestanding signs shall be no higher than 10 ground level. ORDINANCE NO. All signs permitted by this section of the ordinance shall be marked with the date on which the sign was erected to be located in the lower right hand corner of the sign Said sign must be removed no later than one Vear from said date and may be re- erected only if vacancies exist and the sign is completely rejuvenated or replaced. Any sign not containing_ the date it was erected is unlawful (a. For buildings with a wall area of 1,000 sq. ft. or less facing a public street, the maximum size sign shall be 10 sq. ft. For buildings with over 1,000 sq. ft. of wall area facing a public street, the maximum size sign shall be 16 sq. ft. b. Buildings eligible for temporary real estate signs under Subsection (a) above shall be entitled to a sign 50% greater in area if the building is over 100 feet from the right -of -way line and 100% greater if the building is over 300 feet from the right -of -way line. 4. Buildings entitled to temporary wall signs as specified in Subsection 34 -140 :2.1 (3) above may utilize up to 10 sq. ft. or 50% of the area (whichever is less) of an existing freestanding identification sign in lieu of all other real estate signs.] Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (3 0) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1991. Todd Paulson, Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) MINUTES COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SALES SIGN MEETING AUGUST 7, 1991 3:30 p.m. Present: Councilmember Phil Cohen, City Manager Splinter, Kent Warden -- Executive Director BOMA, John Kelly - Ryan Construction (President BOMA), William McGrann - attorney BOMA. This meeting was requested by BOMA through John Kelly of Ryan Construction. Mr. Warden pf BOMA expressed the concern whatever actions Brooklyn Center Council might take would influence other communities in the metro area and they were interested in ordinance modifications which would be reasonable but they were willing to work with communities on a reasonable standard. Councilmember Cohen expressed concern the interim freeze on enforcing the current City regulations is producing a possible increase in commercial real estate sales signs and he believed that was unacceptable. BOMA representatives stated that was not their intention. If we note people are taking advantage of this to let them know and they will talk to their members. There was a general discussion over what was a reasonable size sign and what were reasonable type regulations and BOMA representatives stated there was the possibility of different size signs for different size buildings and different commercial uses such as office and retail. Councilmember Cohen expressed the need for the city to have a more thorough review of these type of sign requirements and regulations than was currently possible. He stated it would be his suggestion a modified regulation be created allowing some form of freestanding sign but it be sunset in approximately 12 months. In the meantime the planning commission and staff would review more thoroughly these type requirements. BOMA representatives expressed the interest in working with Brooklyn Center on any of the -type regulations and asked to be included in the review process. City Manager Splinter stated there was a need to keep sign ordinances as simple as possible so it could be easily understood and administered but as you become more specific in your requirements and vary them from land use to land use and from size of building you start to create an additional Complexity. As you increase the complexity of the ordinance, chances are you will require some type of permit process. Representatives of BOMA asked what the proposal would be that would go before the city council on their August 12, 1991, meeting. City Manager Splinter stated pending the city attorney's approval of the proposal, the proposed ordinance would be much like the one which was reviewed at the last council meeting with some changes in height and other requirements but it would have a sunset feature. This feature would void the ordinance after a period of time, probably 12 months. He further stated chances are councilmembers would be interested in a study process during that 12 month period of time and that would involve the city_ staff and planning commission. BOMA expressed interest in working with staff and city council during this period to develop a reasonable regulation process prior to the sunset provision taking effect. • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8/12/9/91 Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: ORDINANCE VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS IN OLSON'S ISLAND VIEW TERRACE DEPT. APPROVAL: Sy Knapp, Direc or of Pu 1c Works MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes The plat OLSON'S ISLAND VIEW TERRACE, recorded in 1961, dedicated drainage and utility easements to the City, along the perimeters of its lots. The owner of a portion of the existing plat, Howard Atkins, is in the process of replatting the property as E & H PROPERTIES ADDITION. The applicant, at this time, is requesting the vacation of the drainage and utility easements which lie along the existing lot lines of OLSON'S ISLAND VIEW TERRACE (see attached map). The proposed plat of E & H PROPERTIES ADDITION will dedicate similar easements, adjacent to replatted lot lines. The private utility companies providing service to the area have reviewed this request and no objections to the proposed vacation have been received. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION This ordinance was first read on July 8, 1991, published in the City's official newspaper on July 17, 1991, and is offered this evening for a second reading. • i CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of at P.M. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider An Ordinance Vacating Drainage and Utility Easements in OLSON'S ISLAND VIEW TERRACE. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3350 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS IN OLSON'S ISLAND VIEW TERRACE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: _ Section 1. That the Drainage and Utility easements over, under and across the East 5 feet of Lot 4• and the East 5 feet of Lot 5• and South 5 feet of Lot 5: and the South 5 feet of Lot 6• and the West 5 feet of Lot 6• and the West 5 feet of Lot 7: all in Block 1 OLSON'S ISLAND VIEW TERRACE according to the recorded plat thereof, are hereby vacated Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of Mayor, Todd Paulson ATTEST: Deputy Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date PROPOSED E &'H PROPERTIES ADDITION cb ,00p h ti O �`tiy m� ti AVEN 86TH -� _ _ o o mh NORiN LINE OF LOt 7 V OF _ �� 55.9 p N. L I N E _ - LO a _ 195.8 'Y+ . EASEMENT 7502 M' gAIMAGE B UTILITY H _ 75. 97 _N 805 f_ 11.29_ 139.0 - - - 1'5 0 - Z 129.16-N 05 ° O —i - r � .60 SI 40 I'7 57 E i f 43 „W — _ = z 25.4 $es °oz o5 W= —�-�� I 1 14 — / F r 100.0 0205 E - 1- pF N0� 1 25 FEET OF I 1J —_ r x.31 -N85° 1:�SOUTN LINE 13.17 -N85 °0205 i1 J'50 LOTS 4 /l cr 1 45 °12'43 W I 110 �y o ul 23.11 - N }5 °37 39 �+ '' A i� ` a 0 r \ r , s0 j 4 - /” 1 1 0 J 50 r 0 to � 7 � o u ! I SE COR. _ _ I w h V1 T Z I j k to / LOCATION OF EASEMENT O I; 1 ? I I TO BE VACATED o 1 w 1 _ 4� I r _ _, J • t I I , Q7 e 1, \ 15 5 1 1 to 1 ` — ., 135.7 t ie8.2 323.513-SB4 °48 30 W- I ' - - -;- r, r� r I Rte. -� I . r i- i. � i 1 `. � / ' w it. r I nS�Oc. d °C L''m ➢ C 1_ 01 7 3 d r ya enue. "o , ? l o n e (� i J7;7 June 19, 1991 x (6 2 v ; 3 Mr. Mark Maloney, P. E. City Engineer City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Re: E & H Properties Addition Merila Project No. 84 -124 Dear Mr. Maloney: I am writing on behalf of Mr. Howard Atkins to request the vacation of a drainage and utility easement. The subject easement was created and dedicated to the City of Brooklyn Center on the plat of OLSON'S ISLAND VIEW TERRACE. The easement is no longer being used and the property is in the process of being replatted for a new use. The drainage and utility easements to be vacated are as follows: The East 5 feet of Lot 4; The East 5 feet of Lot 5; The South 5 feet of Lot 5; The South 5 feet of Lot 6; The West 5 feet of Lot 6; and the West .5 feet of Lot 7; all in Block 1, OLSON'S ISLAND VIEW TERRACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota. I would appreciate if you would put this item on the next available council agenda for discussion. Please advise me if additional information is required and if someone urill need to be present at the meeting. Sincerely yours, MERILA & ASSOCIATES, iNC. Walter J. Gregory, L.S. Vice President WJG:mel Enclosure cc: Howard Atkins File: Letters2 /84- 124.400 ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8/12/9 Agenda Item Number 2/tt REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 12 of the City Ordinances Extending the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Code to Include Commercial and Industrial Properties ********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Lei Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection ********************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X • On the City Council's August 12, 1991 agenda is the consideration of an ordinance amending Chapter 12 of the City Ordinances which would extend the provisions of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance to include commercial and industrial property as well as residential property. Chapter 12 would then be known simply as the Building Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. The reason for this consideration is concern for potential maintenance problems with nonresidential properties. Generally, this has not been a major problem and commercial and industrial property is fairly well maintained. Just like when the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance was adopted in 1975, the concern is to head off potential maintenance problems with nonresidential properties before deterioration and /or blight set in making elimination of these problems even more difficult. We believe the proposed ordinance amendments set some minimum standards for the maintenance of all properties and spell out the maintenance responsibilities of building owners and occupants. S Summary Explanation Page 2 Enforcement of the ordinance would primarily be on a complaint and observation basis although the ordinance does make mention of a recertification of occupancy for nonresidential properties. Such a program would require regular inspections of nonresidential properties on a scheduled basis. It would also require additional personnel for implementation which we are not recommending at this time. Such a program_could be implemented in the future if such a determination is made. The proposed ordinance amendment also comprehends adding a reinspection fee as part of the current rental dwelling licensing program. This would require the payment of a fee for reinspections relating to uncompleted items in compliance orders. For example, if an owner is given 30 complete days to certain maintenance items P listed on a compliance order and an inspection after the 30 day time limit reveals that not all of the items were completed necessitating the need for the inspector to return to reinspect the property to certify completion of all items. This reinspection would trigger a fee for that particular inspection. Such fees could be collected at the time the rental dwelling license fees are due. If this concept is acceptable, a resolution setting the amount of such a reinspection fee would be brought to the City • Council for adoption. Another significant part of this proposed ordinance amendment is the adoption of Section 12 -911 requiring rental dwelling license holders to prevent disorderly activities on their premises. It defines disorderly activities as noisy parties (Noise Abatement); possession, delivery or purchase of controlled substances on the property; disturbing the peace; gambling violations; prostitution or acts relating to prostitution; and firearms violations. The proposal requires the City Manager to give notice to a license holder of violations of the above and direct that person to take steps to prevent further violations. If other disorderly conduct occurs within three months of the first notice, a second notice is sent requiring the license holder to respond in writing as to what actions have been taken and are proposed to be taken to prevent further disorderly use of the premises. If another disorderly instance takes place within three months, the City Manager can take action to have the license denied, revoked or suspended after a hearing by the City Council. This proposed section was submitted to the City Manager by some concerned citizens and has been reviewed and modified by the City Attorney and is being recommended for adoption by the City Council as part of this major amendment to Chapter 12. The Housing Commission has reviewed the proposed ordinance except for the disorderly conduct provisions, and has recommended approval (see memo from Tom Bublitz attached). • Summary Explanation Page 3 Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council consider the recommended ordinance amendments. Because the publication is lengthy and the publications costs high, we recommend that careful consideration be given to the proposal. If the City Council wishes to modify this proposal, we would suggest that it be done before it is published and that the first reading be done only after the Council is collectively comfortable with the proposal. Also, the Council may wish to give the staff some direction if it desires to have special notice given to such interest groups as rental dwelling license holders, the Chamber of Commerce, etc. • • MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection FROM: Tom Bublitz, Assistant EDA Coordinato DATE: August 6, 1991 SUBJECT: Housing Commission Review of Proposed Ordinance Regarding Building Maintenance and Occupancy Chapter 12 At their regularly sched g y led n May 14 1991 the Brooklyn g Y � � n Y Center Housing Commission reviewed the proposed Building Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance (Chapter 12). The only major concern the housing commission had was with the structure of the ordinance and whether there should be a separate section addressing only commercial and industrial property and another section that includes items applicable to residential, commercial and industrial property. After completing their review and discussion of the proposed ordinance, the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission unanimously approved a motion to support the extension of the City's maintenance code to commercial and industrial properties. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1991 at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to Chapter 12 extending the housing maintenance and occupancy code to include commercial and industrial properties. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES EXTENDING THE HOUSING MAINTENANCE AND OCCUPANCY CODE TO INCLUDE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter p er 12 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: CHAPTER 12 - [HOUSING] BUILDING MAINTENANCE AND OCCUPANCY ORDINANCE i Section 12 -101. PURPOSE. The purpose of this ordinance is to protect the public health, safety, and the general welfare of the people of the City. These general objectives include, among others, the following: 1. to 0 pr tect the character and stability of [residential areas] all buildings and property within the City; 2. to correct and prevent [housing] conditions that adversely affect or are likely to adversely affect the life, safety, general welfare and health, including the mental and social - physical, 1 well bein of g persons P occupying [dwellings] buildings within Brooklyn Center; 3. to provide minimum standards for cooking, heating, and sanitary equipment necessary to the health and safety of occupants of buildings; 4. to provide minimum standards for light and ventilation, necessary to health and safety; 5. to prevent the overcrowding of dwellings by providing minimum space standards per occupant for each dwelling unit. 6. to provide minimum standards for the maintenance of existing [residential] buildings, and to thus prevent slums and blight; ORDINANCE NO. 7. to preserve the value of land and buildings throughout the City. With respect to rental disputes, and except as otherwise specifically provided by the terms of this ordinance, it is not the intention of the city council to intrude upon the fair and accepted contractual relationship between tenant and landlord. The city council does not intend to intervene as an advocate of either party, nor to act as an arbiter, nor to be receptive to complaints from tenant or landlord which are not specifically and clearly relevant to the provisions of this ordinance. In the absence of such relevancy with regard to rental disputes, it is intended that the contracting parties exercise such legal sanctions as are available to them without the intervention of City government. Neither in enacting this ordinance is it the intention of the city council to interfere or permit interference with legal rights to personal privacy. Section 12 -102. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE. [Every building and its premises used in whole or in part as a home or residence, or as an accessory structure thereof, for a single family or person, and every building used in whole or in part as a home or residence of two or more persons or families living in separate units shall conform to the requirements of this ordinance, irrespective of when such building may have been constructed, altered, or repaired. This ordinance establishes minimum standards for erected dwelling units, accessory structures, and related premises.] Every building, as well as its premises, and all occupied premises within Brooklyn Center shall conform to the requirements of this ordinance irrespective of when such building may have been constructed altered, or repaired. Section 12 -201. DEFINITIONS. The following definitions shall apply in the interpretation and enforcement of this ordinance: 1. Approved.- acceptable to the jurisdiction having authority, and meeting all applicable codes. [1]2. Accessory structure - a structure subordinate to the main or principal building [dwelling or dwellings and] which is not used nor authorized to be used for living or sleeping by human occupants and which is located on or partially on the premises. [2]3. Building - any structure [erected for the support, shelter, or enclosure of persons, animals, chattels, or movable property of any kind] used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy [3]4. Compliance Official - the city manager and his designated agents authorized to administer and enforce this ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. [4]5. Dwelling - a building, or portion thereof, designed or used predominantly for residential occupancy of a continued nature, including 1- family dwellings, 2- family dwellings, and multiple family dwellings; but not including hotels and motels. [5]6. Dwelling unit - a single residential accommodation which is arranged, designed, used or, if vacant, intended for use exclusively as a domicile for one family. Where a private garage is structurally attached, it shall be considered as part of the building in which the dwelling unit is located. [6]7. Family - any of the following definitions shall apply: -A person or persons related by blood, marriage, or adoption, together with his or their domestic servants or gratuitous guests, maintaining a common household in a dwelling unit; -Group or foster care of not more than six (6) wards or clients by an authorized person or persons, related by blood, marriage, or adoption, together with his or their domestic servants or gratuitous guests, all maintaining a common household in a dwelling unit approved and certified by the appropriate public agency; -A group of not more than five (5) persons not related by blood, marriage or adoption maintaining a common household in a dwelling unit. [7]8. Flush water closet - a approved toilet, with a bowl and trap made in one piece, which is connected to the City water and sewer system or other approved water supply and sewer system. [8]9. Garbage - putrescible animal and vegetable wastes resulting from the handling, preparation, cooking and consumption of food. [9]10. Habitable building - any building or part thereof that meets minimum standards for use as a home or place of abode by one or more persons. [10]11. Habitable room - a room or enclosed floor space used or intended to be used for living, sleeping, cooking, or eating purposes, excluding bathrooms, water closet compartments, laundries, furnace rooms, unfinished basements, (those without required ventilation, required electric outlets and required exit facilities), pantries, utility rooms of less than 50 square feet of floor space, foyers, communicating corridors, stairways, closets, storage spaces, and workshops, hobby and recreation areas in parts of the structure below ground level or in attics. ORDINAMCE NO. 11] 12. Heated water - water heated to a temperature of not less than 120 degrees Fahrenheit, or such lesser temperature required by government authority, measured at faucet outlet. [ 12 ] 13. Kitchen - a space which contains a sink with counter working space, adequate space for installing cooking and refrigeration equipment, and adequate space for the storage of cooking utensils. [13]14. Multiple family dwelling - a dwelling or portion thereof containing three or more dwelling units. 15. Non - residential building - all other buildings or structures other than dwellings or dwelling units [14]16. Occupant - any person (including owner or operator) occupying any structure building or part thereof, dwelling dwelling unit rooming unit or premise [living, sleeping, cooking and eating in a dwelling unit or living and sleeping in a rooming unit]. [15]17. Operator - the owner or agent who has charge, care, control, or management of a building, or part thereof[, in which dwelling units or rooming units are let]. [16]18. Owner - [any person, firm or corporation who, alone, jointly, or severally with others, shall be in actual possession of, or have charge, care or control of, dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit within the City as owner, employee or agent of the owner, or as trustee or guardian of the estate or person of the title holder. Any such person representing the actual owner shall be bound to comply with the provisions of this ordinance to the same extent as the owner] a person, agent, firm, or corporation having a legal or equitable interest in the property [17]19. Permissible [occupancy] occupant load - the maximum number of persons permitted to [reside in a dwelling unit or rooming unit] occupy a building or space within a building. [18]20. Person - an individual, firm, partnership, association, corporation or joint venture or organization of any kind. [19]21. Plumbing - all of the following supplied facilities and equipment in a [dwelling] building gas pipes, gas burning equipment, water pipes, steam pipes, garbage disposal units, waste pipes, water closets, sinks, installed dishwashers, lavatories, bathtubs, shower baths, installed clothes washing machines, catch basins, drains, vents, and any other similar fixtures and the installation thereof, together with all connections to water, sewer and gas lines. [20]22. Premises - a platted lot or part thereof or unplatted parcel of land, either unoccupied or [un]occupied by any [dwelling ORDINANCE NO. or nondwelling] structure[, including such building, accessory structure or other structure] thereon. [21]23. Public Corridor - a hall, corridor or passageway for providing egress from [a dwelling] an occupied [unit] area to a public way and not within the exclusive control of one [family] occupant. [22]24. Refuse - all putrescible and nonputrescible waste solids including garbage and rubbish. [23]25. Rental dwelling or dwelling unit - a dwelling or dwelling unit let for rent or lease. [24]26. Repair - to restore to a sound and acceptable state of operation, serviceability or appearance. [25]27. Rodent harborage - any place where rodents can live, nest, or seek shelter. [26]28. Rooming unit - any room or group of rooms forming a single habitable unit used or intended to be used for living and sleeping, but not for cooking and eating purposes. [27]29. Rubbish - nonputrescible solid wastes consisting of both combustible and noncombustible wastes, such as paper, cardboard, tin cans, grass and shrubbery clippings, wood, glass, brick, plaster, bedding, crockery and similar materials. [28]30. Safety - the condition of being reasonably free from danger and hazards which may cause accidents or disease. 31. Structure - that which is built or constructed an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. [29]32. Substandard dwelling - any dwelling which does not conform to the minimum standards established by City Ordinances. [30]33. Supplied - paid for, furnished by, provided by or under the control of the owner, operator, or agent of a [dwelling] building [31]34. Meaning of certain words - whenever the words "dwelling ", "dwelling unit ", "premises ", "building", or "structure" are used in this ordinance, they shall be construed as though they were followed by the words "or any part thereof ". Section 12 -301. RESPONSIBILITIES OF OWNERS AND OCCUPANTS. No owner or other person shall occupy or let [to] another person occupy any building, [dwelling, dwelling unit or rooming unit] unless ORDINANCE NO. it and the premises are clean, sanitary, fit for human occupancy, and comply with all applicable legal requirements of the State of Minnesota and the City of Brooklyn Center, including the following requirements: Section 12 -302. MAINTENANCE OF SHARED OR PUBLIC AREAS. Every owner of a [dwelling] building [containing two or more [dwelling units] occupants shall maintain in a clean,, [and] sanitary and safe condition the shared or public areas of the [dwelling] building and premises thereof. Section 12 -303. MAINTENANCE OF OCCUPIED AREAS. [Every] All occupants of a buildin d P a, [ welling, dwelling unit -or rooming unit) shall maintain in a clean [and] sanitary and safe condition that part or those parts of the building, [dwelling, dwelling unit] and premises thereof that sLhe occupies and controls. Section 12 -304. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF RUBBISH. [Every] All occupants of a building, [dwelling, dwelling unit or rooming unit] shall store and dispose of all [his] their rubbish in a clean, sanitary, and safe manner as prescribed by Chapter 7 of the City Ordinances. Section 12 -305. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE. [Every] All occupants of a building, [dwelling, dwelling unit or rooming unit] shall store and dispose of all [his] their garbage and any other organic waste which might provide food for insects and /or rodents in a clean, sanitary, and safe manner as prescribed by Chapter 7 of the City Ordinances. Section 12 -306. RESPONSIBILITY FOR STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE AND RUBBISH. Every owner of a multiple family dwelling or non - residential building shall supply facilities for the sanitary and safe storage and[ /or] disposal of rubbish and garbage. In the case of single or two - family dwellings, it shall be the responsibility of the occupant to furnish such facilities. Section 12 -307. RESPONSIBILITY FOR STORM AND SCREEN DOORS AND WINDOWS. The owner of a rental dwelling unit shall be responsible for providing and hanging all screens and storm doors and storm windows whenever the same are required under the provisions of this ordinance, except where there is written agreement otherwise between the owner and occupant. Section 12 -308. RESPONSIBILITY FOR PEST EXTERMINATION. Every occupant of a dwelling containing a single dwelling unit or an occupant of a non - residential building containing a single unit shall be responsible for the extermination of vermin infestations and /or rodents on the premises. Every occupant of a dwelling-unit in a dwelling containing more than one dwelling unit or an occupant of a non - residential building containing more than one unit shall be responsible for such extermination whenever [his] their [dwelling] unit is the only one infested. Notwithstanding, however, whenever infestation is caused by the failure of the owner to maintain a ORDINANCE NO. [dwelling] building in a reasonable rodent -proof or reasonable vermin -proof condition, extermination shall be the responsibility of the owner. Whenever infestation exists in two or more of the [dwelling] units in any [dwelling containing two or more dwelling units] building extermination thereof shall be the responsibility of the owner. Whenever extermination is the responsibility of the owner, the extermination must be performed by a licensed pest control contractor. Section 12 -309. RODENT HARBORAGES PROHIBITED IN OCCUPIED AREAS. No occupant of a [dwelling or dwelling unit] building shall accumulate boxes, lumber, scrap metal, or any other similar materials in such a manner that may provide a rodent harborage in or about any [dwelling or] dwelling unit or building Stored materials shall be stacked neatly [in piles]. Section 12 -310. RODENT HARBORAGES PROHIBITED IN PUBLIC AREAS. No owner of a [dwelling containing two or more dwelling units] building shall accumulate or permit the accumulation of boxes, lumber, scrap metal, or any other similar materials in such a manner that may provide a rodent harborage in or about shared or public areas of a [dwelling] building or its premises. Materials stored by the owner or permitted to be stored by the owner shall be stacked neatly [in piles]. Section 12 -311. PREVENTION OF FOOD FOR RODENTS. No owner or occupant of a [dwelling or dwelling unit] building shall store, place, or allow to accumulate any materials that may serve as food for rodents in a site accessible to rodents. Section 12 -312. SANITARY MAINTENANCE OF FIXTURES AND FACILITIES. Every occupant of a [dwelling unit] building shall keep all supplied fixtures and facilities therein in a clean and sanitary condition and shall be responsible for the exercise of reasonable care in the proper use and operation thereof. Section 12 -313. MINIMUM HEATING CAPABILITY AND MAINTENANCE. In every dwelling unit or rooming unit when the control of the supplied heat is the responsibility of a person other than the occupant, a temperature of at least 68 degrees Fahrenheit, or such lesser temperature required by government authority, shall be maintained at a distance of three feet above the floor and three feet from exterior walls in all habitable rooms, bathrooms, and water closet compartments from September through May. Non - residential buildings shall meet State of Minnesota regulations and statute requirements. Section 12 -314. REMOVAL OF SNOW AND ICE. Every occupant of a dwelling containing a single dwelling unit, and the of a multiple family dwelling or [dwellings] a non - residential building shall be responsible for the removal of snow and ice from parking lots, driveways, steps, and walkways on the premises. Individual snowfalls of three inches or more, or successive snowfalls accumulating to a depth of three inches, shall be removed from ORDINANCE NO. parking lots and driveways within 24 hours after cessation of the snowfall. Individual snowfalls of one inch or more, or successive snowfalls accumulating to a depth of one inch, shall be removed from steps and walkways within eight hours after cessation of the snowfall. Section 12 -315. MINIMUM EXTERIOR LIGHTING. The owner of a [multiple family dwelling or dwellings] building shall be responsible for providing and maintaining effective illumination in all exterior parking lots and walkways. Section 12 -316. MAINTENANCE OF DRIVING AND PARKING AREAS. The owner of a [multiple family dwelling or dwellings] building shall be responsible for providing and maintaining in good condition paved and delineated parking areas and driveways for tenants consistent with Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances. Section 12 -317. MAINTENANCE OF YARDS. The owner of a [multiple family dwelling or dwellings] building shall be responsible for providing and maintaining premises' yards consistent with Section 12 -711. Section 12 -401. MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR BASIC EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES. No person shall occupy as owner, occupant, or let to another for occupancy any dwelling or dwelling unit, for the purposes of living, sleeping, cooking, and eating therein, which does not comply with the following requirements: Section 12 -402. KITCHEN FACILITIES. Every dwelling unit shall have a room or portion of a room in which food may be prepared and /or cooked and which shall have adequate circulation area, and which shall be equipped with the following: 1. A approved kitchen sink in good working condition and properly connected to an approved water supply system and which provides at all times an adequate amount of heated and unheated running water under pressure, and which is connected to an approved sewer system. 2. Cabinets and /or shelves for the storage of eating, drinking, and cooking equipment, and utensils and of food that does not require refrigeration for safekeeping; and a counter or table for food preparation. Said cabinets and /or shelves and counter or table shall be adequate for the permissible occupancy of the dwelling unit and shall be of sound construction furnished with surfaces that are easily cleanable and that will not impart any toxic or deleterious effect to food. 3. A stove or similar device for cooping food, and a refrigerator or similar device for the safe storage of food at or below 40 degrees Fahrenheit which are properly installed with all necessary connections for safe, sanitary and efficient operation. Provided that ORDINANCE NO. such stove, refrigerator, or similar devices need not be installed when a dwelling unit is not occupied and when the occupant is expected to provide same on occupancy, in which case sufficient space and adequate connections for the installation and operation of said stove, refrigerator or similar device must be provided. Section 12 -403. TOILET FACILITIES. Within every dwelling unit there shall be a nonhabitable room which is equipped with an approved flush water closet in good working condition. In a rental dwelling unit, such room shall have an entrance door which affords privacy. Said flush water closet shall be equipped with easily cleanable surfaces, shall be connected to an approved water system that at all times provides an adequate amount of running water under pressure to cause the water closet to be operated properly, and shall be connected to an approved sewer system. Section 12 -404. LAVATORY SINK. Within every dwelling unit there shall be a approved lavatory sink. Said lavatory sink may be in the same room as the flush water closet, or if located in another room, the lavatory sink shall be located in close proximity to the door leading directly into the room in which said water closet is located. The lavatory sink shall be in good working condition and shall be properly connected to an approved water supply system and shall provide at all times an adequate amount of heated and unheated running water under pressure, and shall be connected to an approved 0 sewer system. Section 12 -405. BATHTUB OR SHOWER. Within every dwelling unit there shall be a nonhabitable room which is equipped with a an approved bathtub or shower in good working condition. In a rental dwelling unit, such room shall have an entrance door which affords privacy. Said bathtub or shower may be in the same room as the flush water closet, or in another room, and shall be properly connected to an approved water supply system and shall provide at all times an adequate amount of heated and unheated water under pressure, and shall be connected to an approved sewer system. Section 12 -406. STAIRWAYS, PORCHES AND BALCONIES. Every stairway, inside or outside of a dwelling and every porch or balcony, shall be kept in safe condition and sound repair. [Every flight of stairs and every porch and balcony floor shall be free of deterioration. Every stairwell and every flight of stairs which is more than four risers high shall have handrails approximately 30 inches high, measured vertically from the nose of the stair tread to the top of the handrail. Every porch which is more than four risers high and every balcony shall have handrails approximately 30 inches above the floor of the porch or balcony.] Stairs and handrails shall conform to the Uniform Building Code standards. Every deck porch and balcony which is 30 inches or more above grade shall have a guardrail that conforms to the Uniform Buildinq Code standards Every handrail and [balustrade] guardrail shall be firmly fastened and maintained in good condition. No flight of stairs shall have settled out of its intended position or have pulled away from the ORDINANCE NO. supporting or adjacent structures enough to cause a hazard. No flight of stairs shall have rotting, loose, or deteriorating supports. Excepting spiral and winding stairways, the treads and risers of every flight of stairs shall be uniform in width and height. Stairways shall be capable of supporting a live load of 100 pounds per square foot of horizontal projection. Section 12 -407. ACCESS TO DWELLING UNIT. Access to or egress from each dwelling unit shall be provided without passing through any other dwelling unit. Section 12 -408. DOOR LOCKS. No owner shall occupy nor let to another for occupancy any dwelling or dwelling unit unless all exterior doors of the dwelling or dwelling unit are equipped with safe, functioning locking devices. Multiple family dwellings shall be furnished with door locks as follows: 1. For the purpose of providing a reasonable amount of safety and general welfare for persons occupying multiple family dwellings constructed after May 5, 1969, an approved security system shall be maintained for each multiple family building to control access. The security system shall consist of locked building entrance or foyer doors, and locked doors leading from hallways into individual dwelling units. Dead -latch type door locks shall be provided with lever knobs (or doorknobs) on the inside of building entrance doors and with key cylinders on the outside of building entrance doors. Building entrance door latches shall be of a type that are permanently locked from the outside and permanently unlocked from the inside. 2. Every door that is designed to provide ingress or egress for a dwelling unit within a multiple family building shall be equipped with an approved lock that has a deadlocking bolt that cannot be retracted by end pressure, provided, however, that such door shall be openable from the inside without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort. Section 12 -501. MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR LIGHT AND VENTILATION. No person shall occupy as owner, occupant or let to another for occupancy any dwelling or dwelling unit, for the purpose of living therein, which does not comply with the following requirements: Section 12 -502. HABITABLE ROOM LIGHT AND VENTILATION. Except where there is supplied some other device affording adequate ventilation and approved by the compliance official, every habitable room shall have at least one window facing directly outdoors which can be opened easily. The minimum total of openable window area in every habitable room shall be the greater of [4 %] 10% of the floor area of the room or [four] ten square feet. One half of the required ORDINANCE NO. window area shall be openable. Section 12 -503. NONHABITABLE ROOM VENTILATION. Every bathroom and water closet compartment, and every laundry and utility room shall contain at least 50% of the ventilation requirement for habitable rooms contained in Section 12 -502, except that no windows shall be required if such rooms are equipped with a ventilation system which is approved by the compliance official. Section 12 -504. ELECTRIC SERVICE, OUTLETS AND FIXTURES. Every dwelling unit and all public and common areas shall be supplied with electric service, functioning overcurrent protection devices, electric outlets, and electric fixtures which are properly installed, which shall be maintained in good and safe working conditions, and shall be connected to a source of electric power in a manner prescribed by the ordinances, rules and regulations of the City of Brooklyn Center and by the laws of the State of Minnesota. The minimum capacity of such electric service and the minimum number of electric outlets and fixtures shall be as follows: 1. Dwelling containing one or two dwelling units shall have at least the equivalent of 60- ampere, three -wire electric service per dwelling unit [as a condition of sale]; 2.. Dwelling units shall have at least one branch electric circuit for each 600 square feet of dwelling unit floor area; 3. Every habitable room shall have at least one floor or wall -type electric convenience outlet for each 60 square feet or fraction thereof of total floor area, and in no case less than two such electric outlets provided, however, that one ceiling or wall -type light fixture may be supplied in lieu of one required electric outlet; 4. Every water closet compartment, bathroom, kitchen, laundry room, and furnace room shall contain at least one supplied ceiling or wall -type electric light fixture and every bathroom, kitchen, and laundry room shall contain at least one electric convenience outlet; 5. Every public [hall] corridor and stairway in every multiple family dwelling shall be adequately lighted by natural or electric light at all times at one foot candle at floor level so as to provide effective illumination in all parts thereof. Every public [hall] corridor and stairway in structures containing not more than two dwelling units may be supplied with conveniently located light switches controlling an adequate lighting system which may be turned on when needed, instead of full -time lighting; 6. A convenient switch or equivalent device for turning on a light in each dwelling unit shall be located near the ORDINANCE NO. point of entrance to such unit. Section 12 -601. MINIMUM THERMAL STANDARDS. No person shall occupy as owner, occupant or let to another for occupancy any [dwelling or dwelling unit for the purpose of living therein] building or portion thereof which does not have heating facilities which are properly installed, and which are maintained in safe and good working condition, and which are capable of safely and adequately heating all habitable rooms, bathroom, and water closet compartments in every dwelling unit located therein to a temperature of at least 68 degrees Fahrenheit or such lesser temperature required by government authority, at a distance of three feet above floor level and three feet from exterior walls [at an outside temperature of -25 degrees Fahrenheit]. Gas or electric appliances designed primarily for cooking or water heating purposes shall not be considered as heating facilities within the meaning of this section. Portable heating equipment employing flame and the use of liquid fuel does not meet the requirements of this section and is prohibited. No owner or occupant shall install, operate or use a space heater employing a flame that is not vented outside the structure in an approved manner. Section 12 -701. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS. No person shall occupy as owner, occupant or let to another for occupancy any [dwelling or dwelling unit, for the purpose of living therein,] building or portion thereof which does not comply with the following requirements-, unless specifically exempt Section 12 -702. FOUNDATIONS, EXTERIOR WALLS AND ROOFS. The foundation, exterior walls, and exterior roof shall be substantially water tight and protected against vermin and rodents and shall be kept in sound condition and repair. The foundation element shall adequately support the building at all points. Every exterior wall shall be free of deterioration, holes, breaks, loose or rotting boards or timbers, and any other condition which might admit rain or dampness to the interior portion of the walls or to the exterior spaces of the [dwelling] building The roof shall be tight and have no defects which admits rain, and roof drainage shall be adequate to prevent rain water from causing dampness in the walls. All exterior wood surfaces, other than decay resistant woods, shall be protected from the elements and decay by paint or other protective covering or treatment. If [25% or more of] the exterior surface is unpainted or determined by the compliance official to be paint blistered, the surface shall be painted. If [25% or more of] the exterior surface of the pointing of any brick, block or stone wall is loose or has fallen out, the surface shall be repaired. Section 12 -703. WINDOWS, DOORS AND SCREENS. Every window, exterior door, and [hatchway] other exterior openings shall be substantially tight and shall be kept in sound condition and repair. Every window, other than a fixed window or storm window, shall be capable of being easily opened. Every window, door and frame shall be constructed and maintained in such relation to the adjacent wall construction as to completely exclude rain, wind, vermin and rodents ORDINANCE NO. from entering the building. Every openable window [or other device required by Section 12 -502] shall be supplied with 16 -mesh screens during the insect season and shall be equipped with an approved lock if located less than 6 feet above adjacent grade. Section 12 -704. FLOORS, INTERIOR WALLS AND CEILINGS. Every floor, interior wall, and ceiling shall be adequately protected against the passage and harborage of vermin and rodents, and shall be kept in sound condition and good repair. Every floor shall be free of loose, warped, protruding or rotted flooring materials. Every interior wall and ceiling shall be free of holes and large cracks and loose plaster and shall be maintained in a tight, weatherproof condition. Toxic paint and materials with a lasting toxic effect shall not be used. The floor of every toilet room [and] bathroom [floor surface] and kitchen shall have a smooth, hard, non - absorbent surface and shall be capable of being easily maintained in a clean and sanitary condition. Section 12 -705. RODENT PROOF. Every [dwelling] structure [and accessory structure] and the premises upon which it is located shall be maintained in a rodent -free and rodent -proof condition. All openings in the exterior walls, foundations, basements, ground or first floors, and roofs which have a 1/2" diameter or larger opening shall be rodent - proofed in an approved manner. Interior floors or basements, cellars and other areas in contact with the soil shall be paved with concrete or other rodent impervious material. Section 12-706. 70 FENCE MAINTENANCE. All fences [supplied by the owner or agent on the premises and all fences erected or caused to be erected by an occupant on the premises] shall consist of metal, wood, masonry, or other decay resistant material. Fences shall be maintained in good condition both in appearance and in structure. Wood material, other than decay resistant varieties, shall be protected against decay by use of paint or other preservatives. Paint shall be maintained consistent with Section 12- 12 -702. Section 12 -707. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE MAINTENANCE. Accessory structures or buildings [supplied by the owner, agent or tenant occupant on the premises of a dwelling] shall be structurally sound, and be maintained in good repair and appearance. The exterior of such structures shall be made weather resistant through the use of decay- resistant materials such as paint or other preservatives. Paint shall be maintained consistent with Section 12 -702. Section 12 -708. SAFE BUILDING ELEMENTS. Every foundation, roof, floor, exterior and interior wall, ceilings, inside and outside stair, every porch and balcony, and every appurtenance thereto, shall be safe to use and capable of supporting loads [that normal use may cause to be placed thereon] required by the occupancy Section 12 -709. FACILITIES TO FUNCTION. Every supplied facility, piece of equipment or utility required under City Ordinances and every chimney and flue shall be installed and ORDINANCE NO. maintained and shall function effectively in a safe, sound, and - working condition. Section 12 -710. GRADING AND DRAINAGE. During the period May through October every yard, court, passageway, and other portions [in] of the premises on which a [dwelling] building stands shall be graded and drained so as to be free of standing water that constitutes a detriment to health and safety. Section 12 -711. YARD COVER. Every yard of a premises on which a [dwelling] building stands shall be provided with lawn or combined ground cover of vegetation, garden, hedges, shrubbery, and related decorative materials and such yard shall be maintained consistent with prevailing community standards. Non - residential sites shall be maintained in accordance with an approved City landscape plan and shall be supplied with an irrigation system Section 12 -712. DISCONTINUANCE OF SERVICE OR FACILITIES. No owner, operator, or occupant shall cause any service, facility, equipment or utility which is required under this ordinance, to be removed from or shut off from or discontinued for any occupied [dwelling or dwelling unit let or occupied by him] building or Portion thereof except for such temporary interruptions as may be necessary while actual repairs or alter[n]ations are in process, or during temporary emergencies. Section 12 -713. SCREENING. All outside trash disposal facilities, recycling containers and outside or rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from view by an opaque fence or wall high enough to completely screen the equipment Section 12 -801. MAXIMUM DENSITY, MINIMUM SPACE, USE AND LOCATION REQUIREMENTS. No person shall occupy nor permit or let to be occupied any dwelling or dwelling unit for the purpose of living therein, which does not comply with the following requirements: Section-12-802. PERMISSIBLE OCCUPANCY OF DWELLING UNIT. With the exception of owners occupying a respective dwelling unit prior to June 1, 1975, the maximum permissible occupancy of any dwelling unit shall be determined as follows: 1. For the first occupant, 150 square feet of habitable room floor space and for every additional occupant thereof, at least 100 square feet of habitable room floor space; 2. In no event shall the total number of occupants exceed two times the number of habitable rooms, less kitchen, in the dwelling unit. Section 12 -803. ONE FAMILY PER DWELLING UNIT. Not more than one family, except for temporary guests, shall occupy a dwelling ORDINANCE NO. unit. Section 12 -804. MINIMUM CEILING HEIGHT. In order to qualify as habitable, rooms shall have a clear ceiling height of not less than [six] seven feet, six inches, except that in attics or top - half stories used for sleeping, study, or similar activities, the ceiling height shall be not less than [six] seven feet six inches over at least one -half of the floor area. In calculating the floor area of such rooms in attics or top -half stories, only those portions of the floor area of the room having a clear ceiling height of five feet or more may be included. Section 12 -805. ACCESS THROUGH SLEEPING ROOMS AND BATHROOMS. No dwelling unit built after 1940 and containing two or more sleeping rooms shall have a room arrangement such that access to a bathroom or water closet compartment intended for use by occupants of more than one sleeping room can be gained only by going through another sleeping room, nor shall the room arrangement be such that access to a sleeping room can be gained only by going through another sleeping room. A bathroom or water closet compartment shall not be used as the only passageway to any habitable room, hall, basement or cellar or to the exterior of any dwelling unit. Section 12 -901. LICENSING OF RENTAL UNITS. From and after June 1, 1975, no person shall operate a rental dwelling without first having obtained a license to do so from the City of Brooklyn Center as hereinafter provided. After expiration of an initial licensing period of less than two years as determined by the compliance official, each such operating license shall be issued biennially and shall expire on the anniversary date of issuance. License renewals shall be filed at least 60 days prior to license expiration date. Section 12 -902. LICENSE FEES. License fees, as set forth by city council resolution, shall be due 60 days prior to the license expiration date; in the cases of new unlicensed dwellings, license fees shall be due upon issuance of the certificate of occupancy; in the cases of licensing periods of less than two years, license fees shall be prorated monthly: A delinquency penalty of 5% of the license fee for each day of operation without a valid license shall be charged operators of rental dwellings. Once issued a license is nontransferable and the licensee shall not be entitled to a refund of any license fee upon revocation or suspension; however, the licensee shall be entitled to a license fee refund, prorated monthly, upon proof of transfer of legal control or ownership. A fee, as set by City Council resolution shall be charged for all re- inspections necessary after the first re- inspection The re- inspection fee(s) will be payable at the time of license renewal for the property, in the case of rental housing and at the time of recertification of occupancy for non - residential properties. ORDINANCE NO. Section 12 -903. OWNER OR AGENT TO APPLY. License application or renewal shall be made by the owner of rental units or his legally constituted agent. Application forms may be acquired from and subsequently filed with the compliance official. The applicant shall supply: 1. Name, address, and telephone number of dwelling owner, owning partners if a partnership, corporate officers if a corporation; 2. Name, address, and telephone number of designated resident agent, if any; 3. Name, address, and telephone number of vendee, if the dwelling is being sold through a contract for deed; 4. Legal address of the dwelling; 5. Number of dwelling units within the dwelling; 6. Description of procedure through which tenant inquiries and complaints are to be processed. Every person holding an operating license shall give notice in writing to the compliance official within five business days after any change of this information. Notice of transfer of ownership shall be as described in Section 12 -908. Section 12 -904. RESIDENT AGENT REQUIRED. No operating license shall be issued or renewed for a nonresident owner of rental dwelling units (one who does not reside in any of the following Minnesota counties: Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Scott, or Washington) unless such owner designates in writing to the compliance official the name of his resident agent (one who does reside in any of the following Minnesota counties: Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Scott, or Washington) who is responsible for maintenance and upkeep and who is legally constituted and empowered to receive service of notice of violation of the provisions of the City ordinances, to receive orders and to institute remedial action to effect such orders and to accept all service or process pursuant to law. The compliance official shall be notified in writing of any change of resident agent. Section 12 -905. CONFORMANCE TO LAWS. No operating license shall be issued or renewed unless the rental dwelling and its premises conform to the ordinances of Brooklyn Center and the laws of the State of Minnesota. Section 12 -906. INSPECTION CONDITION. No operating license shall be issued or renewed unless the owner of rental units agrees in his application to permit inspections pursuant to Section 12 -1001. Section 12 -907. POSTING OF LICENSE. Every licensee of a multiple dwelling shall cause to be conspicuously posted in the main ORDINANCE NO. entryway or other conspicuous location therein the current license for the respective multiple dwelling. Section 12 -908. LICENSE NOT TRANSFERABLE. No operating license shall be transferable to another person or to another rental dwelling. Every person holding an operating license shall give notice in writing to the compliance official within five business days after having legally transferred or otherwise disposed of the legal control of any licensed rental dwelling. Such notice shall include the name and address of the person succeeding to the ownership or control of such rental dwelling or dwellings. Section 12 -909. OCCUPANCY REGISTER REQUIRED. Every owner of a licensed rental dwelling containing three or more dwelling units shall keep, or cause to be kept, a current register of occupancy for each dwelling unit which provides the following information: 1. Dwelling unit address; 2. Number of bedrooms in dwelling unit; 3. Names of adult occupants and number of adults and children (under 18 years of age) currently occupying the dwelling units; 4. Dates renters occupied and vacated dwelling units; 5. A chronological list of complaints and requests for repair by dwelling unit occupants, which complaints and requests are related to the provisions of this ordinance; and 6. A similar chronological list of all corrections made in response to such requests and complaints. Such register shall be mad available g e a ilable for viewing or copying by the compliance official at all reasonable times. All non - residential properties shall keep, or cause to be kept a current register of occupancy for each building which provides the following: 1. Building address; 2. List of all tenants occupying building 3. Nature of business conducted by each tenant in building; 4. Contact person for each tenant; 5. Gross floor area leased by each tenant; Section 12 -910. LICENSE SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION. Every operating license issued under the provisions of this ordinance is ORDINANCE NO. subject to suspension or revocation by the city council should the licensed owner or his duly authorized resident agent fail to operate or maintain licensed rental dwellings and units therein consistent with the provisions of the ordinance of the City of Brooklyn Center and the laws of the State of Minnesota. In the event that an operating license is suspended or revoked by the city council for just cause, it shall be unlawful for the owner or his duly authorized agent to thereafter permit any new occupancies of vacant or thereafter vacated rental units until such time as a valid operating license may be restored by the city council. Any person violating this provision shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not more than seven hundred dollars ($700) or by imprisonment not to exceed ninety (90) days or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Each day of each violation shall constitute a separate punishable offense. Section 12 -911. CONDUCT ON LICENSED PREMISES. 1. It shall be the responsibility of the licensee to see that persons occupying the licensed premises conduct themselves in such a manner as not to cause the premises to be disorderly. For purposes of this Section, a premises is disorderly at which any of the following activities occur: a. Violation of Section 19 -1202 (Noise Abatement). b. Violation of Section 19 -1121 (Unlawful Possession, Delivery or Purchase) or violation of laws relating to the possession of controlled substances as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 152.01 Subdivision 4. C. Violation of Section 19 -202 (Disturbing the Peace) . d. The unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor or nonintoxicating malt liquor. e. Violation of laws relating to gambling. f. Violation of laws relating to prostitution as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 609.321 Subdivision 9, or acts relating to prostitution. e Unlawful use or possession of a firearm in violation of Minnesota Statutes Section 609.66 Subdivision la 609 67 or 624.713. 2. The City Manager shall be responsible for enforcement and administration of this ordinance. Authority to take any action authorized under this section may be delegated to the City Manager's authorized designee. 3. Upon determination by the City Manager that a licensed ORDINANCE NO. 0 premises was used in a disorderly manner, as described in paragraph 1, the City Manager shall give notice to the licensee of the violation and direct the licensee to take steps to prevent further violations. 4. If another instance of disorderly use of the licensed Premises occurs within three (3) months of an incident _for which a notice in paragraph 3 was given the City Manager shall notify the licensee of the violation and shall also require the licensee to submit a written report of the actions taken and proposed to be taken, by the licensee to prevent further disorderly use of the premises. This written report shall be submitted to the City Manager within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of disorderly use of the premises and shall detail all actions taken by the licensee in response to all notices of disorderly use of the premises within the preceding three (3) months. 5. If another instance of disorderly use of the licensed premises occurs within three (3) months after any two Previous instances of disorderly use for which notices were given to the licensee pursuant to this section the rental dwelling license for the premises may be denied, revoked, suspended or not renewed. An action to deny, revoke, suspend, or not renew a license under this section shall be initiated by the City Manager who shall give to the licensee written notice of a hearing before the City Council to consider such denial, revocation suspension or non - renewal. Such written notice shall specify all violations of this section, and shall state the date, time, place and purpose of the hearing. The hearing shall be held no less than ten (10) days and no more than thirty (30) days after diving such notice. Following the hearing, the Council may deny, revoke suspend or decline to renew the license for all or any part or parts of the licensed premises or may grant a license upon such terms and conditions as it deems necessary to accomplish the purposes of this section. 6. No adverse license action shall be imposed where the instance of disorderly use of the licensed premises occurred during the pendency of eviction proceedings (unlawful detainer) or within thirty (30) days of notice given by the licensee to a tenant to vacate the premises where the disorderly use was related to conduct by that tenant or by other occupants or guests of the tenant's unit. Eviction proceedings shall not be a bar to adverse license action, however, unless they are diligently pursued by the licensee. Further, an action to deny, revoke, suspend, or not renew a license based upon violations of this section may be postponed or ORDINANCE NO. discontinued at any time if it appears that the licensee has taken appropriate measures which will prevent further instances of disorderly use. 7. A determination that the licensed premises have been used in a disorderly manner as described in paragraph 1 shall be made upon substantial evidence to support such a determination. It shall not be necessary that criminal charges be brought in order to support a determination of disorderly use, nor shall the fact of dismissal or acquittal of such a criminal charge operate as a bar to adverse license action under this section. 8. All _notices given by the City under this section shall be personally served on the licensee sent by registered mail to the licensee's last known address or, if neither method of service effects notice by posting on a conspicuous place on the licensed premises. 9. Enforcement actions provided in this section shall not be exclusive, and the City Council may take any action with respect to a licensee a tenant or the licensed Premises as is authorized by this Code or state law. Section 12 -1001. ENFORCEMENT AND INSPECTION AUTHORITY. The city manager and his designated agents shall be the compliance official who shall administer and enforce the provisions of this ordinance and who is hereby authorized to cause inspections on a scheduled basis for rental dwelling units, and other buildings [or otherwise] when reason exists to believe that a violation of this ordinance has been or is being committed. Inspections shall be conducted during reasonable daylight hours and the compliance official shall present evidence of official capacity to the occupant in charge of a respective dwelling unit. Section 12 -1002. INSPECTION ACCESS. Any owner, occupant, or other person in charge of a [dwelling or dwelling unit] building may refuse to permit free access and entry to the structure or premises under his control for inspection pursuant to this ordinance, whereupon the compliance official may seek a court order authorizing such inspection. Section 12 -1101. UNFIT FOR HUMAN HABITATION. 1. Any [dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit] building or portion thereof which is damaged, decayed, dilapidated, insanitary, unsafe, vermin or rodent infested, or which lacks provision for basic illumination, ventilation or sanitary facilities to the extent that the defects create a hazard to the health, safety or welfare of the occupants or of the public may be declared unfit for human habitation. Whenever any [dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit] building or ORDINANCE NO. Premises has been declared unfit for human habitation, the compliance official shall order same vacated within a reasonable time and shall post a placard on same indicating that it is unfit for human habitation, and any operating license previously issued for such dwelling shall be revoked. 2. It shall be unlawful for such [dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit] building or portion thereof to be used for human habitation until the defective conditions have been corrected and written approval has been issued by the compliance official. It shall be unlawful for any person to deface or remove the declaration placard from any such [dwelling, dwelling unit or rooming unit] building Section 12 -1102. SECURE UNFIT AND VACATED [DWELLINGS] BUILDINGS The owner of any [dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit] building or portion thereof which has been declared unfit for human habitation, or which is otherwise vacant for a period of 60 days or more, shall make same safe and secure so that it is not hazardous to the health, safety and welfare of the public and does not constitute a public nuisance. Any vacant [dwelling] building open at doors or windows, if unguarded, shall be deemed to be a hazard to the health, safety and welfare of the public and a public nuisance within the meaning of this ordinance and shall be made safe and secure immediately. Section 12 -1103. HAZARDOUS BUILDING DECLARATION. In the event that a [dwelling] building has been declared unfit for human habitation and the owner has not remedied the defects within a prescribed reasonable time, the [dwelling] building may be declared a hazardous building and treated consistent with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes. Section 12 -1201. COMPLIANCE ORDER. Whenever the compliance official determines that any building or portion thereof, [dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit,] or the premises surrounding any of these, fails to meet the provisions of this ordinance, [he may issue] a compliance order setting forth the violations of the ordinance and ordering the owner, occupant, operator, or agent to correct such violations shall be issued This compliance order shall: 1. Be in writing. 2. Describe the location and nature of the violations of this ordinance. 3. Establish a reasonable time for the correction of such violation and notify of appeal recourse. 4. Be served upon the owner or [his] agent or [the] occupant, as the case may require. Such notice shall be ORDINANCE NO. deemed to be properly served upon such owner or agent, or upon any such occupant, if a copy thereof is a. Served upon [him] owner, agent or occupant personally, or b. Sent by registered mail to his last known address, or C. Upon failure to effect notice through (a) and (b) as set out in this section, posted at a conspicuous place in or about the [dwelling] building, or Portion thereof, which is affected by the notice. Section 12 -1202. RIGHT OF APPEAL. When it is alleged by any person to whom a compliance order is directed that such compliance order is based upon erroneous interpretation of this ordinance, such person may appeal the compliance order to the city council sitting as a board of appeals. Such appeals must be in writing, must specify the grounds for the appeal, must be accompanied by a filing fee [of $15] as set forth per Council Resolution, in cash or cashier's check, and must be filed with the department of planning and inspection within five (5) business days after service of the compliance order. The filing of an appeal shall stay all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from, unless such a stay would cause imminent peril to life, health, or property. Section 12 -1203. BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION. Upon at least five business days notice to the appellant of the time and place for hearing the appeal, and within 30 days after said appeal is filed, the board of appeals shall hold a hearing thereon, taking into consideration any advice and recommendation from the advisory housing commission. The board of appeals may reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or in part, the compliance order and may order return of all or part of the filing fee if the appeal is upheld. Section 12 -1204. RESTRICTIONS ON TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP. It shall be unlawful for the owner of any building, or portion thereof, [dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit] upon whom a pending compliance order has been served to sell, transfer, mortgage, lease or otherwise dispose thereof to another person until the provisions of the tag or compliance order have been complied with, unless such owner shall furnish to the grantee, lessee, or mortgagee a true copy of any notice of violation or compliance order and shall obtain and possess a receipt of acknowledging. Anyone securing an interest in the building, or portion thereof, [dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit] who has received notice of the existence of a violation tag or compliance order shall be bound by same without further service of notice [upon him] and shall be liable to all penalties and procedures provided by this ordinance. Section 12 -1205. PENALTIES. Any person who fails to comply ORDINANCE NO. with a compliance order after right of appeal has expired, and any person who fails to comply with a modified compliance order within the time set therein, upon conviction therefor shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $700 or by imprisonment not to exceed 90 days or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Each day of such failure to comply shall constitute a separate punishable offense. Section 12 -1206. EXECUTION OF COMPLIANCE ORDERS BY PUBLIC AUTHORITY. Upon failure to comply with a compliance order within the time set therein and no appeal having been taken, or upon failure to comply with a modified compliance order within the time set therein, the criminal penalty established hereunder notwithstanding, the city council may, by resolution, cause the cited deficiency to be remedied as set forth in the compliance order. The cost of such remedy shall be a lien against the subject real estate and may be levied and collected as a special assessment in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, but the assessment shall be payable in a single installment. Section 12 -1301. ALTERNATIVE SANCTIONS. Notwithstanding the availability of the foregoing compliance procedures and the penalties, whenever the compliance official determines that any building, or portion thereof, [dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit] or the premises surrounding any of these fails to meet the requirements set forth in this ordinance, the compliance official may issue a violation tag summoning the responsible person into court or request the issuance of a criminal complaint and arrest warrant. Section 12 -1302. PENALTIES. Any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance by doing any act or omitting to do any act which constitutes a breach of any section of this ordinance, shall, upon conviction thereof by lawful authority, be punished by a fine not to exceed seven hundred dollars ($700) or by imprisonment not to exceed ninety (90) days or both, together with the costs of prosection. Each day that a violation continues shall be deemed a separate punishable offense. No provision of this ordinance designating the duties of any official or employee of the City shall be so construed as to make such official or employee liable for the penalty provided in this section because of failure to perform such duty, unless the intention of the city council to impose such penalty on such official or employee is specifically and clearly expressed in the section creating the duty. Section-12-1401. SEPARABILITY. Every section, provision, or part of this ordinance is declared separable from every other section, provision, or part to the extent that if any section, provision or part of the ordinance shall be held invalid, it shall not invalidate any other section, provision or part thereof. ORDINANCE NO. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (3) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1991. Todd Paulson, Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8/13/91 Agenda Item Number V REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Q NS ERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROCUREMENT POLICY (DISCUSSION ITEM) DEPT. APPROVAL: Sy Knapp, Dire or of Pu 1c Works MANAGER'S REVIEW/RECOMMENDATION: 0 No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes S In accordance with the City Council's request, staff has researched the issue of a policy for the procurement of professional services. A detailed report and a draft policy statement are submitted for review and comment by the Council. TABLE OF CONTENTS August 6, 1991 memorandum to G. G. Splinter regarding Professional Services Procurement Policy Draft Policy For Procurement of Professional Services Appendix A - Brooklyn Center Purchasing Policy Resolution No. 83 -172 Appendix B - Listing of Formalized Guidelines and Manuals Appendix C - Information from other Cities Appendix D - Miscelleanous "Clips" Regarding Consultant Selection M E M O R A N D U M TO: G.G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: S Knapp, pp, Director of Public Works DATE: August 6, 1991 RE: Professional Services Procurement Policy The City Council has requested that an official policy be developed for the procurement of professional services (engineering, architectural and planning services) as needed for various studies, projects and other assignments. This report is an attempt to provide information relating to that issue, and provides a recommended policy for consideration by the City Council. Reference Search In my attempt to obtain information regarding policies for procurement of professional services, I contacted the following sources: • the League of Minnesota Cities • the International City Managers Association's MIS Inquiry Service • the American Bar Association • the American Public Works Association's Inquiry Service • the American Society of Civil Engineers • the Consulting Engineers Council of Minnesota In addition, requests for information regarding this subject were made to the following agencies: • the Minnesota Department of Transportation • 15 "second class" cities (i.e. - between 25,000 and 100,000 population) • 2 first class cities (i.e. - over 100,000 population); and Hennepin County Finally, staff researched our files and professional magazines for information on this subject. The following appendices attached to this report contain the most informative information collected on this subject: Appendix A - the City's current Purchasing Policy, Resolution No. 83 -172 Appendix B - contains a listing of formalized guidelines and manuals Appendix C - contains policy statements adopted by other cities Appendix D - contains miscellaneous "clips" regarding consultant selection. Summary of Information Received In all information reviewed, there is unanimous agreement to the following items: 1. Selection of a consultant should be based on the consultants ability to produce a quality product which best serves the client's long -term interests. The following excerpts from the American Society of Civil Engineers "Guide for the Engagement of Engineering Services" accurately reflect the position expressed repeatedly from many sources: The engagement of a consulting engineer is one of the most important decisions to be made during the development of an engineering project. The accomplishment of the client's objectives and the final capital and life -cycle costs, structural soundness, and suitability of the proposed works for its intended function rest upon the experience, skill, integrity, and judgment of the consulting engineer as well as others on the project team. The consulting engineer's recom- mendations, based on these factors, affect costs and thereby influence the economic feasibility of the undertaking. The cost of the full range of engineering services typically amounts to less than 1 to 2% of the sum of the capital and life -cycle costs of the proposed works. It is, therefore, in the client's interest to engage the most qualified and reputable consulting engineering firm available. It is most advantageous to select a consulting engineer who can serve the project from the conceptional study and report phase through design, construction, and project start -up. Divisions of responsibility are thereby minimized, and the rapport developed between the consulting engineer and the client can add to the success of the project. Qualifications, experience, and reputation are of critical importance in the selection of a consulting engineer. Selection based primarily on compensation factors, with less or no consideration as to competence, can result in unsatisfactory service to the client and in higher overall capital and life -cycle costs. The consulting engineer's competence in specialty fields, performance on other projects of similar nature, interrelationship with the design team members, personnel assign- ments, provision for independent in -house reviews, and quality assurance will all influence substantially the construction, operation, and maintenance costs, insurance and other annual charges, and the resulting total - life -cycle costs of the project. Detailed discussions between the consulting engineer and client, which define adequately the quantity and quality of the engineering services to be provided, are required in advance of agreement upon compensation. Misunderstandings and disappointments can occur when the scope of engineering services to be rendered and the expectations of the client concerning the services and the desired project have not been agreed upon before defining the compensation. -2- 2. When the value of the fees involved will exceed a specified dollar value, the selection of the consultant should be conducted by a selection committee (almost universally a 3- member committee) appointed for that purpose. Between different cities and other agencies, the threshold dollar value which requires activation of a selection committee varies greatly. 3. It is universally recommended that the selection committee use the "Request for Proposals" (RFP) process for selection of a consultant, with some exceptions. The RFP process normally follows the following format: Step l: If the project is very large, and /or the selection committee is not familiar with the selection of consulting firms available for the project, the first step may be to issue a "Request for Qualifications" (RFQ). This simply asks all consultants who are interested to express their interest and to submit a statement of their qualifications. Step 2: Then, the selection committee reviews all submittals and selects a "short list" of 3 to 6 consultants who are then issued a "Request for Proposal" (RFP) which details the work to be completed and requests those consultants to submit detailed proposals. For most projects, where the committee is generally familiar with the qualifications of various consultants, the selection process will start at this step, with the issuance of an RFP to a list of consultants developed by the committee. Step 3: Following receipt and review of proposals, the selection committee then interviews the applicants in detail, then tentatively selects the consultant which the committee believes will best serve the City's needs. Step 4: Following the tentative selection of a consultant, negotiations are then conducted to fully define the scope of services to be provided and to establish a fair and equitable basis for compensation for those services. If the committee believes that the negotiated agreement is in the City's best interests, the committee then recommends approval of that agreement by the client (i.e. - by the City Council). If, alternatively, the committee believes that the scope of services is inadequate, or that the fee structure is unfair or unreasonable, the committee then recommends negotiations with another consultant. -3- Exceptions to the use of RFP process may include specialty services Y P Y which are only available from one consultant and cases where one consultant is considered pre- eminently qualified for a specific project. Regarding Bidding An alternative to the above - described selection procedure is to select consultants on the basis of competitive bids, where the prevailing consideration is the "low bid ". The following excerpt from the ASCE Manual summarizes the position expressed by many sources: Federal and most state legislative bodies, as well as professional engineering and architectural societies, recognize qualifications -based procurement of professional engineering and architectural services as the most productive and preferred method when compared to bidding. In fact, most states and the federal government have adopted laws which require the procurement of professional engineering and archi- tectural services only by a process similar to that described in "Selection Procedure." There are many reasons why bidding for consulting engineering services often produces unsatisfactory results for the client. Principal among these are: 1. Bidding does not recognize professional judgment, which is the key difference between professional services and the furnishing of products. Judgment is an essential ingredient in quality engineering services. 2. It is virtually impossible to completely detail in advance the scope of work of services required for an engineering project, especially for the study and preliminary phases, without lengthy discussions and negotiations with the selected firm. Lacking specifics, the bidding firms must, in order to be competitive, submit a price for the least work envisioned. The resulting work performed is likely to be tailored to fit the minimal requirements of the bid documents and will not necessarily suit the client's needs or expectations. 3. In -depth studies and analyses by the consulting engineer are not likely to be performed. The consulting engineer selected by lowest bid will provide only the minimum services necessary to satisfy the client's scope of work. 4. The engineering designs are likely to be minimal in complete- ness, with the details left to the constructor. This produces a lower first cost design but tends to add to the cost of the completed project. The lack of design details also can, and frequently does, lead to a greater number of change orders during construction and to contract claims at a later date. —4— Brooklyn Center's Use of the Selection Procedure It is noted that the City of Brooklyn Center has used the "Request for Proposal" process for selection of consultants by a selection committee on a number of projects within the past 10 years. These projects include: • the Industrial Park Traffic study • the Sanitary Sewer "Infiltration and Inflow" study • the Water Supply study • the City Hall /Community Center Space Needs study • the West River Road Improvements • the Earle Brown Heritage Center Improvements • the Commercial /Industrial Market study With reference to the Capital Improvement Program which was recently approved by the City Council, it is apparent that numerous projects will require the use of consultants. These will include the following projects: • development of a Surface Water Management Plan • development of a Pavement Management System • design of a water storage reservoir and pumping station • Lift Station No. 1 rehabilitation • City office /Community Center improvements • Replacement of Park Shelter buildings It is therefore appropriate to formalize a selection procedure which will function to the City's benefit for these and other projects. Recommended Policy Attached hereto is a draft policy which is submitted for review and comment by the City Council. As proposed, this policy would supplement the City's existing general Purchasing Policy as defined by Resolution No. 83 -172 (see Appendix A). This proposal describes the purpose of the policy, a generalized policy statement and procedures. In accordance with the Resolution No. 83 -172, the City Manager is authorized to award contracts for professional services under $2000, while the City Council must award contracts over $2000. Accordingly, it is recommended that: -5- • For contracts between $2000 and $15,000, the City Manager proceeds to obtain proposals for the required services, then submits his recommendations for award to the contract to the City Council. • For contracts over $15,000, the City Manager first submits a report to the City Council describing the need for these services and recommending the selection process to be followed. In most cases, this would include the appointment of a selection committee and the use of the RFP process, with the committee submitting its report to the City Council. Under this procedure, the City Council has the opportunity to approve the proposed selection procedure before the procurement process is begun; and, of course, must consider the award of the contract after receiving the final recommendations of the City Manager and /or the selection committee. Regarding 69th Avenue Proiect As you know, the City has employed SEH, Inc. for all phases of the work to date on 69th Avenue, i.e.: the study and report phase, preparation of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet, development of the 4(f) and 6(f) statements regarding work in Palmer Lake, the preliminary design and project development phase, and the final design and construction phase for Phase I construction. The City now needs to obtain consulting services for the final design and construction phase for Phase II construction (i.e. - all remaining construction on this project). 0 Because SEH, Inc. is so thoroughly involved and familiar with all aspects of this project, and because their work to date has been very satisfactory, it is recommended that, for the final phase of this project, we ask SEH, Inc. to submit a proposal for services covering this work. If such proposal is deemed to be fair and reasonable by staff and Council, the contract for these services would then be awarded to SEH, Inc. At this point in time, this is the only ongoing project for which I recommend an exemption from the procedures recommended in the draft policy. However, when implementing the new policy on multi - phased projects, care will need to be taken to deal with this issue "up front" - i.e. - at the time the City Manager's initial report is submitted to the Council. Special care should be used in selecting the consultant for the first phase of a project, even though the costs for that phase may be relatively small, and the costs of future phases may be totally unpredictable at that time. Under these circumstances, staff, the selection committee and the City Council will need to review the process on a continuing basis so that before proceeding with each subsequent phase of the project, an evaluation is completed of the trade -offs between continuing with the same consultant and soliciting proposals from other consultants. Respectfully submitted: Sy Knapp, �irect of Public Works -6- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER POLICY FOR PROCUREMENT OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES I. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR POLICY The City of Brooklyn Center periodically employs consultants to provide the following professional services: Architectural services, Engineering services, Land Surveying services and Planning services. A written policy on the selection and retention of these professional consulting services is deemed desirable to achieve the following goals: 1) The best possible professional services at reasonable cost; 2) Equal and open access to the selection process for qualified consultants; 3) A clearly prescribed and identifiable process for consultant selection and retention; 4) Administrative convenience and flexibility; This policy supplements the City's Purchasing Policy as established by Resolution No. 83 -172. II. POLICY It shall be the policy of the City of Brooklyn Center to solicit, negotiate, and continue agreements reements g for professional consulting services on the basis of demonstrated qualifications, competent performance, and, fair and reasonable compensation. It shall also be the policy of the City to publicly solicit proposals for the provision of professional consulting services when new, or significantly changed, requirements arise. III. PROCEDURE The following procedures are intended to implement the spirit of this policy, but are not meant to be all inclusive: A) All contracts for services of less than $2000, will be awarded by the City Manager based on recommendations from the department head. B) All contracts for services which are greater than $2000 shall be awarded by the City Council upon recommendation from the City Manager. For all such contracts, the following procedures shall be followed: 1) For contracts between $2000 and $15,000, the department head shall obtain one or more proposals for providing those services and shall prepare a report describing the need for these services and describing the process by which the recommended consultant has been selected. If this report is approved by the City Manager, such contracts will then be submitted to the City Council, along with the justification report, for consideration of award by the City Council. 2) For contracts greater than $15,000 no solicitation of proposals shall be commenced until the consent of the City Council to do so is obtained. To initiate the procurement process for these contracts, the department head shall prepare and submit to the City Manager a report describing the need for such services, and recommending the process by which those services should be procured. In most cases, the recommended procurement process should include the issuance of requests for proposals to a specified list of consultants, and the appointment of a 3- member selection committee to review all proposals received and recommend the award of a contract to the selected consultant. In those cases where the recommended process does not include the use of RFP's and a selection committee, the report shall describe the reason for such exception. Possible justifications may include emergency action, sole- source providers, and phased - development contracts. If this report is approved by the City Manager, it will then be submitted to the City Council for their review and consideration. Upon receipt of the City Council's approval, the procurement process will then be conducted in accordance with the procedures approved by the City Council. Upon completion of the approved procurement process, the department head (and selection committee if appropriate) shall submit a report to the City Manager for submittal to the City Council recommending that a contract be awarded to the selected consultant, documenting the procedures which were followed and describing the basis on which the recommendation is submitted. Date: 19 Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager e s APPENDIX A BROOKLYN CENTER PURCHASING POLICY (RESOLUTION NO. 83 -172) Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 83 -1 RESOLUTION AMENDING A CITY PURCHASING POLICY WHEREAS, Section 6.05 of the City.Charter of the City of'Brooklyn Center does direct the City Council to establish and maintain a purchasing policy for the City of Brooklyn Center. BE IT, THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the purchasing policy of the City of Brooklyn Center shall be as follows: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PURCHASING POLICY PURPOSE It shall be the purpose of the Purchasing Policy of the City of Brooklyn Center to: (1) Assure that all purchases are made in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota, the City Charter, and other policies of the City of Brooklyn Center. (2) Assure that all purchases are charged to the proper account. (3) Assure vendors that the purchase is authorized and that their invoices will be paid promptly. (4) Assure uniform purchasing procedures within the City's departments. (5) Assure the City Council and the City Manager that adequate controls over the purchasing function are well established and are adhered to. DEFINITIONS For the purposes of establishing procedures for the City of Brooklyn Center, the followin definitions itions shall apply: PP Y CONTRACT FOR SERVICrS A "contract for services" means an agreement entered into by the City or the use y e u of p rofessional services such as consultants, auditors, legal counsel, and architects. "Contract for services" shall also include an agreement entered into by the City for insurance coverages. C ONTRACT FOR PURCHASES A "contract for purchases" means an agreement entered into by the City for the purchase of supplies, materials, equipment or the rental thereof, or the purchaso, construction, alteration, repair or maintenance of real or personal property. RESOLUTION 110, 83 -172 CONTRACT FOR LI QUOR STORES i4ERCHANDISF PURCHASES A "contract for liquor stores merchandise purchases" means an agreement entered into by the City for the purchase of merchandise for resale in the City's off -sale liquor stores. PROCEDURES For the purpose of establishing purchasing procedures, "contracts for services" and "contracts for purchases" shall be divided into separate purchasing categories according to the real or estimated cost of the services or purchases. The purchasing categories shall be: Category I : $15,000 or more Category II : $5,000 or more, but less than $14,999 Category III $2,000 or more, but less than $5,000 Category IV : Less than $2,000 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES procedures by category shall be as follows: Category I, Category II, Category III ($2,000 or more) Contract awarded by the City Council upon recommendation of the City Manager. Category IV : (Less than $2,000) Contract awarded by City Manager. CONTRACT FOR PURCHASES procedures by category shall be as follows: Category I : ($15,000 or more) a. Awarded by City Council upon recommendation of City Manager. b. Contract awarded by City Council upon receipt of sealed bids in accordance with the Uniform Municipal Contracting Law, M.S.A. Section 471.345. Category II : ($5,000 through $14,999) a. Awarded by City Council upon recommendation of City Manager. b. Contract awarded by City Council in accordance with the Uniform Municipal Contracting Law, M.S.A. Section 471.345 upon either: (1) receipt'of sealed bids. (2) receipt of two or more written quotations when possible. Category III ($2,000 through $4,999) a. Awarded by City Manager. b. Contract awarded by City Manager upon receipt of two or more written quotations when possible. Category IV : (Less than $2,000) a. Awarded by City Manager. b. Contract awarded by City Manager upon receipt of two or more written or oral quotations when possible. PESOLUTION NO. 83 -17 CONTRACT FOR LI2UOR STORES MERCHANDISE PURCHASES Categories I through IV (All amounts) a. Awarded by City Manager. b. Contract awarded by City Manager upon receipt of two or more written or oral quotations when possible. COOPERATIVE PURCHASING contracts for purchases or services entered into through joint purchasing agreements with the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County or other governmental agencies for Categories I through IV shall be considered to meet the requirements of the City Purchasing Policy. GENERAL POLICIES 1. The City Manager shall establish written detailed purchasing procedures which are necessary to supplement the City Council's purchasing policy and which are necessary to maintain adequate controls over the purchasing function. 2. Checks shall be issued regularly on the second and fourth Mondays of each month to pay the City's outstanding warrants, or whenever else necessary to guarantee cash discounts, or whenever else deemed necessary by the City Manager. 3. The City Manager shall have the responsibility to expend funds necessary to assure the continued operations of the City's functions in accordance with State laws, City Charter, this purchasing policy and the City Budget. 4. The City Manager shall keep on file for'public inspection, through the Department of Finance, a listing of all cash disbursements made by the City during the current calendar year. November 7, 1983 Date Ma or , ATTEST: Ifor Clerk T he motie adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. APPENDIX B LISTING OF FORMALIZED GUIDELINES AND MANUALS • MNDOT'S "Guideline Of Steps For Federal Aid In P.E. (Professional Engineering) Where A Consultant Is To Be Used By A City" (copy attached) • "General Engineering Services - A Guide for Engagement of Engineering," published by the Consulting Engineers Council of Minnesota (copy attached) • "Guidelines for Public Agency Selection and Use of Consultants for Engineering and Architectural Services," published by the American Association of Public Works (20 pages available at Engineering Department office) • "Consulting Engineering - A Guide for the Engagement of Engineering Services," published by the American Society of Civil Engineer (48 pages available at Engineering Department office) • "The Model Procurement Ordinance for Local Governments," published by the American Bar Association (26 pages available at the Engineering Department office) f As published by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) GUIDELINE OF STEPS FOR FEDERAL AID IN P.E. WHERE A CONSULTANT IS TO BE USED BY A CITY i Step 1 - Form a consultant selection committee. Suggest City Engineer, District State Aid Engineer and at least one other person who could provide good input into the Committee decisions. Step 2 - The Committee will: a. Consider 3 or more consultants. b. Eliminate down to three for final consideration. c. Request a technical proposal from each of the 3 consultants under final consideration. (by city engineer) d. Review the technical proposals and make a determination based on technical evaluation as to the final selection of consultant. Note: Interviews with representative of the Consultant firms may be necessary in carrying out Steps 2A through 2D. Step 3 - The City Engineer will: a. Send an invitation for submittal of a financial proposal to the selected consultant. Step 4 - The Committee will: a. Review the financial proposal and after resolving any questions or problems, make a determination that the fin- ancial proposal appears to be fair and reasonable. Step 5 - The City Engineer will submit the recommended financial pro- posal to the DSAE with a letter which documents the following: a. Basis of need 1. for the proposed improvement 2. for the use of a consultant b. The procedures carried out under Step 1 through 4 Step 6 - The DSAE will: a. Review the submittal and forward with his concurrence to the State Aid Engineer. Step 7 - The Office of State Aid will: a. Review and make e a a e recommendation and /or comment. b. Send to Consultant Design Unit for final review. c. Send to Audit Section for pre -award audit evaluation. d: If there are no problems, submit to FHWA a request for provisional approval of Federal participation in Prelim- ; inary Engineering with the documention in Step 5, the financial proposal, the letter from Audit, and a draft of the proposed City /Consultant Agreement. Note: At Step 7 C. it is desireable to have a draft of the proposed City /Consultant Agreement available. At Step 7 D. it is required. e. Notify the City Engineer of FHWA provisional approval. Step 8 - The City Engineer will: a. Initiate the execution of the State /City agency agreement and the City /Consultant agreement for preliminary engineer- ing. b. Transmit to the DSAE for review and transmittal to the Office of State Aid five copies of the fully executed City/Consultant-agreement and two copies of the city executed agency agreement. Step 9 - The Office of State Aid will a. Initiate full execution of the State /City agency agreement. b. Submit copies of both the State /City agency agreement and the City /Consultant agreement to the FHWA.with a request for authorization of federal aid in preliminary engineering. c. Notify the City Engineer when FHWA authorization is given. Note: Eligible work done on and after the FHWA authorization date can received federal participation. y `,. 1, �'d J� a 4. �U, ° � a r,•H:�% }, ,r �>•�r itk. #:.ey�wf x. ,4 Hai f�ti R •t .:i'*7r •a. x:. ;,\., ��f i. �. W'.�'! Ip u,a ,., n.:' t., .. .�h 4;'.. .`i9,. d 1. a.'d ;. " � ':w , . sR�...t _'•b r °.q.r •if'' a ..L,.. y...„k'+R' "1;,. r :f: 3: f��' Q , � *wldtiaisJt +�%2xt a ,rr..YAm•!ro+*i wa,s woa u o •' a ia5 q i n s r :t•ec.crrej'c't°� •&e 9RSRS+' °i i*t, a ErY'1 r:v i a r` fp ,t' .� w«. "k, 7a i .,? .y"?`.r ° ., s'"`"za` 'I% a..," �a'•.... II v '"r , `M` }� #g:.4� ri a vy kfPs!� r'•xc a *R,?. .'.�` ' � i7• � t? �: a +. VIP Y I i�lll' r . '�' ?.z+r r „ m '�`_,, il� I .I � r �t ,,...: P ..' Y' .. «';y, lr w t *'! 1 ^# x ':.;J .>i r"q J4a ti :: ?_«.. ' ," �i�Il -r/ r• ,:.j, /y } r ..,:, a. -. Nnn. - d , 1 I 41.7 L >ff ..•,,. ' .,' • «. a.., i,...: .,, r"1, ;•n: , � 5 : u:. =- ^�" " � ,.`f`v �,r X. :' ; ,e' N ;,...; � i, • �:., :a , • +' -'.. :i '» >' i'�`' «x s: 7a...,i ""1. i1 9J«,. yk 4 - 4 �� " II 4 .,x .vS. n „�:vt '> ,.� ) +. � r t � Y.� � �' i 1 ' _ b r f f ,j � ";� k: ': q � t .,r •,'N ��. � *�.•. \�r %� •2•�u .S,, ' I.lj l `- �.t 4.3 +.»: I � It" 1�✓ -(j •�_ I 4 y'+7 ;�:'. �' ry� ° i;. r:,l. •C ,7fC!' \.,�� '<„` 111 IIiI l �r� „11rtt, I �+. .�, _ \ r11. ,r�, r,r:, , ,I rK,r``•6` r .r I ,� .t , yN,rn tt I,I •'S t; . ,'$ �, • F ,lrw a �J,,u I �' ... .,: Y � Y '',a a °+x r . ,� �I .� }• �'�'. 3 ��,� ` ��► _ +f'\ _, XT AIIII� I i x �«< # : S'. l.... 1 - _ . � �'• � , / /; ; �: ` �t .�.�� a { < . �I ►. ;� �Ilr • {::�.. yi y'_'. ' II ; i s 1 --_i , �� •+y a�: 3 � f�� F ` .. a. SM� A: •: ♦ ..... - � /•i��fl/ : .� -.` �F�' 1 .�Y��� . •'a'x�2. I l it ') 11 �� 1 +�',: � Iww - � F %• j / tl // r`r•� I �, v. _ +['� � „t�.t .v: � ,. t'-. ° v 1 • !.rtl,• I���� x .q y ,�i:P!t�,�x "� ,, a .. % P. ,•ix` '��w,.A1 N1� P`�.l a bra i� . C w • �i `�' ' r'F � ` p � .Jt .':;,. x, ..,:. A A'•. � •;'�:.�..::i � '' .., 5 � %.�)• � . >,y' � . ' � R ' � �'y' n.nq 1 ( �I�I s ::> `"'.`�':. �: v q., . y � :, .�arA I .� ii /., r a rt :,"•., 1� (. id• - 1 1111�1�1����1�� fill r l 00 'f � 'r��' �- -• I (I I ".tll 7 0'. w. a., ev:. ' "� ► 'AI .�` � 5 N4'i A \� � � �� � .� � 1 � � :� ,� 5 n�II •II' i ,t •' c i �''3 �P� ig:.<,r,�: w> �:��.« .\' \ `t N � 'v' '.� ��� I�'�x � ( _, ) r , \ , �j�.\ � \ ;1:111���1 c+. ar-. � #• ; i'�,i i ' ` f � ,.. {� k 'f ..�' t. 1,1<'A�'i. ■�� .LtiN ,, 1y . / ' : px� •) 4�I�• !*\ �� x� ,)�( 1 s'1 (^+.. a F t i 1 . yi. . f '. h is♦ a I 11 '_ f 1'�'�` n ti' � , s rll �aiu 1 \ i ` ►I�, � \ C � J eur il� ' Q II II "!IP, � o �\ y\ �t � N1 j'• q '� E 1 i: " , !'/' �� :'�' > � � "'�` Y'• r �� p. � �• 5,� r 5 ` ac:' � „�., t�rl }y,•,,.�n':. \. { .If t „ .`I," \ I•', ,:.'. z . r w .;� ... • \• , \` ,! ti, � \v � � 4 1. T "µ $'t 1�•..� I �.: \ \�r.,. �5.1 ►,� ��� .�� .. \ � .��" ` !`b ' 'w*r''� 'ri •K"h ,,.L :.. - ,vr II' a \� \\\ � \ a'� .pr. ,♦ ti� `'LI'� c � 1 r, Z, 4 � . \ � a �' �� ,,�I�, °�..' � y��r t � i - - �+� � �\r.. ti' ® 'a+ ;, :�` ry "a :: � ' � / / ,,:s,.�. ( ' +i\� i {tj � r i da;.ya.s'� 31`t Y at ° �� �,c. .et.• ��� >� - '�r�G '� �'�:.� ►���t •�I � 'if!t5r' t +y!�;.� � �,► �x t,t+ « ;�" � 3 �„`' �► �, .// ,.,X ♦ �` L },t�'.'1. J .y,,. ys *+:� -e 4 .57+w+N „I. i��•::a .� \t, 1 ��; \.. ��t /•e � }.�L:�L•3 .i.: \�+��:+ ' ,g•�:;�;P. �}� a � :ti�'� _f' "^ 'jt \N 1:��� +��.:.r�t+ A, v �"K'��� �. "kxly.w/�x•+• '\. �i,y. '.? ~ �'�• 3 ,_�, [ ��� v,t w j r; r.' -r ,, �; ,. 9,...: ^..s. ,,. „ - %. f _)u'.. '. . - ve :' t-0G / 1 �'.:': •: •. x ..: :... .. .a4 \ � .Kpx�.. y .r":«" �� :-�!- �t "� +i err /�, •'x°.• . � ' v d ra • r ,+ mo y : . ` . �.' F.�;,,r q _ _ y, \ ,�}. � k •.�, , :.. / ± '�s r ' - C 6r. F >E .a. : d /'k d.r �,{'!r ..v':4} ,5 '. }' i . a � l� , / Q.. .5 •1 + \'. 5 } •�� i ��. r x i >: R;"`w }.A '• .?Jo a:.;. +„ . _x,.., � 't � ... \ .h 'N l ;.,r .. ..,. Nt! ."� w: "' E. t?m r rr.::: Sy .. /'.. ,.�:.• Y �..'' Y. ,.t � t .. a .,a.,.. //� Q. ` .. 'N... k \•' S\ \ .r' < d -- /�� ��••:s F��i A rat:;r,,: .><P > . i' >+ + a1- ::..0 v,+'S.Y , ca`4• ,:;,,Y'.',k1,?.'. /saw a - a a }. k k'4 N + �N ,•::t' \ .► a ",'' �!' „� `: .,r✓' x 5,. ,�wrr -:s r 5;e .?f,�. r • -' � � �, ,�' ems', e.«r° ?" t, !v� }- fl Y { / j , �� ''�.0' t , :.:'''', \ : \hOj Y • �' },tt. ,f' •Y.,fi '41 .w ,r�' v b, y k -+•�: \ TL 9 + '1f� / „ Mw lei,: / /�� '/ „\ _�\ " \` ` _ 'r. •�ir.u. ^}-�4 }.7r, •� .:s 'Fy }.,t'. rt � ,+ e 7 ;' / :!`' f M M: fa I I f r. +I ` 1j • ka,>r..a' 'M <',; 7, ', �t .. �wwr■ !� r \ I�h. /�, ._� �r Fr FF .... I.::; f kid' �•'. ��N +..I•'h' �.� , 'A .+R M a__. � `�� � °gp{/�.t'�r.. tl +\v`�'�), � .. ;d'.,,, b, 1Q► /.��.e nn„nnn'r ti- r% •rT wt•. �� q. •'„ tiy, ,... I i .� :,. hJ y\N''i' r- ♦ < - � +I / d 1 t + ,M,.P�'� A •Tt '•R,b, �' r. ° 6 •',� ,� u 1 /liw _ ! ^� k y .� fr• +,,• ,- '+ F \ �.,� ' •�l - �i Fit � �M S 1 ,� '4 � J�'n%.�k t A'Ft ~ '•.sue n' � �'_ a � � f P E n 'F � xv w w'k � `� �- 7 lJ• ��f arr•. j �+ A y r •e r .� kk���• k �` ffv,A`9"•.t"3 ai .tS • S k �+ g..4 ,' M1�" .,. r ��a^It � nr .+�.,, .: \: \ ' ?4d.�' "„' T • � ° t 3,t�v °' f fi r. w + r ;%' $ i ( :�,. 6t a ' vG. .'� L.. - �.�. ,. � " - �j'..t'• ; p \` "+� r C - �� t "t`. �, • ,7 {.. "kM1....t n �L � ✓, Y: r"' `t 2, +s tx �' '[ Y '.3. }� 1 \. ,• 1z• + 5 � � , Y s ,, fi �,. +,.a: :.. .• � s:. �`�^ .Ti :.; r i aY r ' . 8tl .� ,t � rrr, t):f' xi�e '._ i y� i.ek+;:y ,: .1 ,',;• .; • " 1 .�i..,\„ .A<� a .a: ,f•. Y i '� r r�.'" f>"x. S' - - y�. r.. : r��: .:' '� ; .p���""i ;1„ f"�`',3, P h,�g.t. ,�.: " �i. 1 1 x� ' ^� � i s �} r' ',• -?�i .Y {;fir �, .3°,.�Pxr �, . ,> �.n +�: ":$ »a+l'. ' L.ur•., i• :. .:: ,..: ... • "q� .y ' . . ��, ' y� ,.;`�'','. 1 �$ j 1, I{ .1 p,, �� � . p ''E r tr'#r � p$. �b yy' R�' (.yam nt.. . • t- 1'..r?t ,!Y�,IYr {Y 5r: ` 1 �,,'. •�',':'_'�" ` FP. � � `f `I.+ h `; ; ;S�,s• �ry. my +`�. �"ft j�'...: �.. j. � ,. r . wa i' �,i t 5 . � +te u,. �' ° n ° ,t pw' `R rt^! .�.�. z:L s N.�.y •�5,,�. yy,, �,. E r S ��^: ;`J, t C: �• 'M +�`� �'a .. a rr,: �. ,. ,,: :. , ,u� _,. F. +�•....'`k *. ... � '• ... c ,n f`, �..Fa � .Y� ,..'�, :�' ;.. $,y,; � .� 5. ^E t':d,. i 7 . k ,,. �`'�:,a, :•s'pJ � ». J�•.^+} ,fi��"4�' '� .A.P. r ;L ^ 1Y x... �,"�``'� f S •++ � 1�xt t' ;it ct ,>r ;- un ` r $�, � 6 '1. � „k�59. '�r:.�, � '„t. ', a +'.: ` _ � .•i' ' .•'9r 4 a: .,.,qyy g '.#' .' -,, '. k . ^, •'• t .,: yt .r'., .' ' � :'... ,� '�,I.,,..:t,�. .�x :: -.. r _ � "�"+.'y ` ,F �5s" r{;'{ '; �. riT� _ / ;..+['. I,,:J v 4:. , .., r.. xG, ;.1 k. r n.. / ; j7 ! 1,N ,: ' ?. , .: :} `k•• 7 - ,•',', + � .:4k 7?... .1. ,r . 4 u":. `f� ,�o.. +. ... ,y . -,} �, ,. :!,.,, 1 J_' � � ai ,M T "k�• :�'. k• ;t.. y ,�. !i�,.k . ,�`. '{ ._.!n � l�' , a' *. ;?.x"{. '§s+ ,,: •;d y^,: x..; -^ �. ' . � f' _ .p ,�. �,, � "�� 4 , £. ` a y�•�r f{,K� . ,r,. v. ";R ::;' ° rtj!,`i ...rY�C'k ; ,3'J..�. � _ ... �,,?'Cs:px -. .ar dt S` �,. P:p. d j i f, x�•. /Pn '.v "° „`"' r s� ' �'�, t\': � , t{^,d.,,'`c ,e3.. �, � � ;` ��� #'�r�! :1 ,�s �:.t\• \ \� ,a 'a>v':vk 3 r 5 - ° �: :� A�¢ �d ".s'�;'�L, ''"`.�y r � �y��gt� � :.;.a;;�p $ � ,1 a ,� . +�x �'..rxa�± � f ' t*r \\:\ .�\Z ,,;.� 1, >..4... 'r' t'"p %* / � ri?. �.v °7 ,!'p air = ^,F . ¢ y. ^-: :�. c *.. e "� • . +fi�i .'f Vii& , ,. �. ""' 11� •1 .,.r a." - x / , <T' vL.,k x ,y/ , 4 t :..3�' :tk:. ' a : : x:f j y. .� w ��,. t,. �'1+.FM �f,i. :•. -, ' .X .� ^Y 'S. .EEO �11. A +tr ^p S t,+_3 n h. � i �+ #,+�: \�f: t 3 "�,�,: ;^,. '� � •{��� Fm ': . f gym" +, , .ti 4, s. ^ , o '�lic �"'F Y� ,r. r .. w �� ... " x , ,ak �t�' ?y„ 4 a .��, •� ; .,w�p +_.. �,'f�+'•:'! e �'+ . , " .v... ,. � . .. -` + � ' J,'$ � -'� ,,;,. Af •A b a � +MM t 1" anw "e`.� " a }" '�, ' y r � . } •p 'ti ' ++ � F o ' '� /' �' ) ,a,. • �' . 1 4�. . Y'o, "� # .q f !X"g " " °' ' • Ot M1.F '&�., ti P sr dts « Iw, Y - �,., r��, c 'd. � / Y. _ �k�. �•, � a sue. .�'.3?P�rr�i jar I �i � ,Jla .. �, P k � •� a • �, a ` ` 1 / n�,I ''�'S, F . � , r ..:t' r + �F , .�`,t�"' t+,� y �^ ,65 �n i��' Y� } � a 4 '? .�. 4 • � • , t. • ,� Y.I. +•'6 �J H >�4 'P ��,' ,:.. • � a 9 f „ !• yk TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD 2 SECTION I CONSULTING ENGINEERING PRACTICE 3 SECTION 11 SELECTION OF THE ENGINEER General 4 Selection Committee 4 Policy for Selection 5 6 SECTION Ill SCOPE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES General 7 Basic Services 7 Special Services $ 9 Ownership of Documents 10 SECTION IV COMPENSATION Salary Cost Times a Multiplier (Hourly) 11 Cost Plus a Fixed Payment 12 Fixed Lump Sum Payment 13 Percentage of Construction Cost 13 Special Services 13 SECTION V CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Form of Contract 14 Contract Provisions 14 FOREWORD This Guide is presented with the hope that it may assist in establishing a proper understanding of the relationship between Consulting Engineers and their Clients, so that the best interests of both arties will II be served. The following pages contain information pertaining to the scope of services generally available from Consulting Engineers, suggestions concerning the procedure for selecting a Consulting Engineer and various methods of compensating for engineering services. The continuing change in society's needs and sophistication require professional fees be based on more than simple historic data. This Guide is the result of the judgement and experience of a cross - section of practicing Consulting Engineers from the State of Minnesota. Their efforts are greatly appreciated. Special acknowledgement is also made to the American Society of Civil Engineers, since descriptive information from their Manual No. 45, "A Guide for the Engagement of Engineering Services ", is the basis for a portion of the material contained in this Guide. -2- SECTION 1 CONSULTING ENGINEERING PRACTICE Many engineering projects are designed by engineers employed by various levels of government and industry. Other equally important engineering projects are designed by independent consulting engineering organizations engaged by public or private agencies. Here the employer - employee relationship becomes the formal "Client- Consultant" relationship, which is the principal subject of this manual. "Consulting Engineering ", as the term is used in the United States, includes not only consultation, advice and expert testimony, but also the furnishing of extensive and diversified services by engineering firms organized and maintained for that specific purpose. Such firms draw on the combined talents of design engineers, technical analysts, specification writers, draftsmen, technicians, surveyors, and other specialists. Upon the Consulting Engineer rests the responsibility for conceiving and designing all types of engineering projects. The Consulting Engineer is a professional who must be licensed to practice and has certain obligations, by law, relating to the health and safety of the public. Most projects require compliance with public agency regulations, codes and laws and the engineer needs to be familiar with these requirements to successfully fulfill his obligation to the client. Services offered b Consulting Engineers Y g g eers may include conducting field investigations and collecting engineering data; preparing engineering reports based upon such investigations; furnishing designs, drawings and specifications; securing bids and assisting in the award of contracts; observing construction for general compliance with drawings and specifications; testing and approving equipment for acceptance; making appraisals and other services. The Consulting Engineer may be responsible for the planning which could commit his Client to substantial expenditures. The value of the work resulting from this planning and the suitability of the project's intended function must often be accepted by the Client at face value if he is unfamiliar with thetechnical aspects of such projects. By theirvery nature, then, Consulting Engineering services must be performed on a highly professional level. These services must be carried out in a competent and efficient manner, and in an atmosphere of mutual trust and appreciation between the Client and the Engineer. Failure to meet these requirements may result in dissatisfaction on the part of all parties. In the development of any engineering project, no decision is more important to the Client than that involving the selection of the Consulting Engineer upon whose experience, integrity and judgment rests the suitability and soundness of the project. -3- SECT /ON // SELECTION OF THE ENGINEER GENERAL Consulting firms offer engineering services based upon a variety of experience, capabilities, skills, personnel, and other measures of ability to perform the services. Selection of a Consulting Engineer for a specific project should be the result of a well - considered judgment of the selecting group or individual. A properselection may mean the difference between a well - planned, economical and successful project, or a mediocre one. Qualifications and experience are of critical importance in the selection of a Consulting Engineer. A selection based on price alone, without primary regard to competence which, in turn, is based on experience and qualifications can result in higher over -all project and unsatisfactory service to the Client. Competence ence i p 1 costs other projects of a similar nature, and the caliber and interrelationship of th design teams are important considerations. Moreover, the competence of the design team will influence substantially the construction cost, operation, and maintenance costs, insurance and other annual charges, and total life cycle costs of the project. SELECTION COMMITTEE Within the organization interested in the services of a Consulting Engineer, an administrative policy should be established for designating a person or committee authorized to select or recommend Consulting Engineers for various assignments. The person designated may be an administrator, a department head, a company officer, or other person holding a responsible position. The person or committee empowered to make the selection should be permitted to make an objective evaluation with a minimum of internal and external pressures. For a larger or more complex project, the recommended procedure is to utilize a selection committee of at least thre e ers p ons. Where possible, one or more of the members of the committee should be a professional engineer who i g s famili r ' a with the contemplated Other committee members may be staff persons, elected officials, or citizens at large. The selection group should investigate and make recommendations, holding interviews and inquiries as desirable. -4- POLICY FOR SELECTION The organization considering the engagement of a Consulting Engineer should establish administrative policy for engineer selection in accord with the organization's best interests and that of the public. Overall experience and past performance of the Consulting Engineering firm on similar assignments should be a prime factor in an evaluation of qualifications. Competence and experience of key staff members on similar projects are important considerations in the selection. The firm should have a sound reputation and high professional standing. Principals and other responsible members of the firm must be registered Professional Engineers in accordance with the appropriate laws of the State of Minnesota. If the organization has under contract a consultant on other work and the qualifications of that firm fit those required, it is entirely properthat negotiations be initiated directly with that firm. In general, the suggested procedure is as follows: 1. The organization should appoint a selection committee and then outline the scope of the proposed project and the consulting engineering services desired. 2. The selection committee should compile a list of prospective consultants from the rosters of professional societies, professional directories, orothersources. Names of consulting engineering firms and their areas of expertise may be obtained by contacting the office of the Consulting Engineers Council of Minnesota located in Minneapolis, Minnesota (address and phone number may be found in the back of this publication). 3. A letter outlining the scope of the proposed project and the consulting engineering services desired should be mailed to the compiled list of firms specifically requesting a concise statement of their qualifications and interest. 4. The selection committee should review the submitted information to determine those firms interested and best qualified for further consideration. Usually the committee will select three to six firms for interviews. 5. Prior to the interview the committee should request each firm to submit relevant data with respect to the proposed work plan, the capability of the firm to complete the project within the time allotted and the specific key personnel to be assigned to the project. Each firm should be given equal time to gain additional project information before the interview. On larger projects, a pre - interview conference 0 should be held with all firms. -5- 6. Interviews should then be conducted with the key project personnel from th,e invited firms. Factors which should be considered are competence and capability to meet specific project needs. relevant experience. 7 . Invite the firm that is considered to be the best ualified to appear ppeartofurtherdiscuss the project, the scope of services and to negotiate terms of a contract. Such a procedure will usually result in a mutually satisfactory contract. All SUcr negotiations should be on a strictly confidential basis. 8. If agreement is not reached, the negotiations should be terminatea and the firm notified in writing to that effect. A similar negotiation should then fo!lcw second ranked firm. The compensation discussed with one firm shcu!d disclosed to another. 9. When all engineering matters pertaining to the project have been dafined any e compensation has been determined, a written agreement embodyina ! conditions is then prepared and signed by both parties. Refer to Section V con-,,r-act documents for contract guide lines. -6- SECTION III SCOPE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES GENERAL The engineering services performed by a Consulting Engineer may, for convenience, be grouped into two broad categories: (1) Basic Services for a design -type project; and (2) Special Services. The Basic Services involved in a design -type project generally follows a conventional pattern, while Special Services vary widely in nature and scope. The two basic categories are discussed separately in the paragraphs which follow. BASIC SERVICES Basic Services for a design type project may include a Preliminary Phase, a Design Phase and a Construction Phase. A. The Preliminary Phase may include the following: 1. Collection and interpretation of information affecting the feasibility of proposed project including possible alternative. 2. Evaluation of alternative solutions available and cost thereof. 3. Recommendations regarding feasibility. 4. Requirements of regulatory agencies. 5. Procedures for implentation of the project. B. The Design Phase may include the following: 1. Collection of data necessary for plan preparation through field surveys and inventories of records of existing facilities. 2. Preparation of design plans, specifications and bidding documents. 3. Estimates of construction cost. 4. Preparation of permit applications to regulatory agencies. 5. Assistance in advertising for bids and recommendations on award of bids. -7- C. The Construction Phase may include the following: 1. Periodic observations of work in progress. 2. Preparation of supplementary drawings required to clarify working drawings. 3. Review of detailed shop and equipment drawings to determine compliance with plans and specifications. 4. Review of laboratory, shop and mill tests of materials and equipment done by testing laboratories. 5. Review and make recommendations on requests for partial and final payments to construction contractors. 6. Assistance during construction with interpretation of plans and specifications. 7. Consultation and advice to the client during construction. 8. Final inspection and report of the completed project. SPECIAL SERVICES The development of many projects involve services which may be added to the Basic Services of the Consulting Engineer. Many of these services relate to decisions of the client as to the feasibility, scope and location of a roject. The research, c assembling P 1 b n of engineering data and 9 9 9 acquisition of property may involve many professional specialists. Because Special Services vary greatly in scope, complexity and timing, such services could be furnished either by the Consulting Engineer or by other specialists. These services are usually negotiated when required as separate elements of service. Special Services may include, but are not limited to: 1. Soils investigations, including test borings, related engineering analysis and recommendations. 2. Laboratory and materials testing services and related engineering analysis and recommendations. 3. Land surveys, establishment of boundaries and monuments, preparation of land and easement descriptions and related office computations and drafting. 4. Preparation of data, reports and supplementary information for submission to regulatory agencies. -8- 5. Preparation of applications and supporting documents for governmental grants or advances for public works projects. 6. Architectural, social- economic and environmental research, planning and other interdisciplinary services related to an engineering project. 7. Performance of infiltration and inflow studies in connection with sanitary and storm sewer systems. 8. Preparation of Environmental Assessments and assistance to the client at public hearing related thereto. 9 . Revision of contract drawings resulting from the change in scope of the project by the client. 10. Plotting, computing and filing subdivision plats; staking of lots; related land planning and partitioning functions. 11. Field construction surveys, photogrammetry, and field staking for construction. 12. Resident engineering services and technical observations of construction by a full - time resident engineer or technician and supporting staff, as required. 13. Assist the Client as expert witness in court proceedings. 14. Investigation involving detailed consideration of operation, maintenance and overhead expenses; the preparation of manuals, rate schedules, earning and expense statements; appraisals; and valuation and material audits or inventories required for certification of force account construction performed for the Client. 15. High degree of documentation of construction progress, procedures and material testing on federal projects. 16. Revision of contract drawings to show work actually constructed. -9- I t � i OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS Original documents, plans, design and survey notes represent the product of training, experience and professional skill. Unless there is prior agreement to the contrary, they belong to and remain the property of the Engineer who produced them, regardless of whether the instruments were copyrighted or whether the project for which they were prepared is executed. The Owner may, at his expense, obtain reproducible copies of drawings and copies of other documents, in consideration of which there will be mutual agreement that the Owner will use them solely in connection with the specific project for which they were prepared. -10- SECTION IV COMPENSATION `he method or a combination of methods of compensating for Consulting Engineering Cervices are dependent upon the type and scope of services rendered and the nature of the services. "i he foilcwing methods of compensation with appropriate modifications applicable to specific cases are recommended. SALARY COST TIMES A MULTIPLIER (HOURLY) +iis method is applicable for Basic Services and /or Special Services for all types of ;)rejects, allowing maximum latitude for investigation of alternatives and analysis of client's - �rcmems. Compensation for engineering services on this basis shall be the salary cost of ` "e work times an agreed multiplier plus direct non - salary expenses. ::glary Cost-sometimes referred to as Direct Personnel Expense, is defined as the cost of aiaries including sick leave, vacation, holiday and incentive pay applicable thereto of minaers, technicians, draftsmen, surveymen, clerks, etc. for time directly chargeable to I"ne Project; plus unemployment, excise and payroll taxes, contributions for social security, .:reemployment compensation insurance, workmen's compensation, retirement benefits, a insurance, and medical and surgical benefits. multiplier which is applied to salary cost is a factor which compensates the Consulting `ngineer for overhead costs and profit. ^i "ie overhead costs and profit compensated for by the multiplier include the following: 1. Provisions for office space, utilities, depreciation allowance or rental for furniture, equipment, instruments and normal office supplies. 2. Business taxes and insurance other than those included as salary -cost. 3. Professional and business expenses. =. Legal, accounting and management costs. 5. Readiness to serve. o. Reasonable margin of profit. '. Continuing education. -11- Direct non -salary expenses are items such as: 1. Living and traveling expenses away from the home office. 2. Long distance telephone, cable and postage directly connected to the project. 3. Volume printing. 4. Special services such as surveying, material testing, soil investigation, computer and similar services performed by others. A service charge of 10 %- 15% is normally added to the direct non -salary expenses to compensate the Consulting Engineer for-the bookkeeping, accounting and paper work involved. COST PLUS A FIXED PAYMENT The cost plus a fixed payment basis requires, as a prerequisite to equitable negotiations, that the Client -and the Consulting Engineer define as fully and completely as possible and agree upon the scope of services the Consulting Engineer is to perform. This definition of the scope of work is essential for the Consulting Engineer to estimate costs accurately and to propose an equitable fixed fee. The scope of work, estimate of costs, and fixed fee should be incorporated in the Client- Engineer agreement. This method can also be used when the Consulting Engineer is required to start work before the detailed scope can be determined, subject to several provisions in the agreement: 1. The general scale and intent of the project should be fairly well defined even if the full scope is indeterminate; as an example, the number, size, and character of buildings or other facilities, the type of utilities, and other essential information should be available. 2. The types of services to be performed by the Engineer should be agreed on and fully set forth in the contract. Such agreements should also provide for appropriate adjustments in the fixed payment, in the event that the physical scope of the project, time for completion, or the services required are materially increased over that contemplated during the negotiations. Provisions should be made in this type of agreement that in the event the scope of services is substantially changed, that an appropriate adjustment in fixed payment will be made. -12- FIXED LUMP SUM PAYMENT This is generally used when the sope of services can be clearly and fully defined and the cost of services can be accurately determined. The lump sum compensation for engineering services is the direct development of the various elements of engineering cost plus a reasonable margin of profit all expressed as a single lump sum. Where compensation is undertaken on a lump sum basis, the agreement should contain a clearly stated scope of service and time limit during which the services will be performed, and a provision for additional compensation for services in excess of that stated. In design assignments, there should be a provision for changes required after the approval of preliminary designs, with a clear understanding as to where the final approval authority of of the preliminary design lies. PERCENTAGE OF CONSTRUCTION COST The percentage of construction cost, or often referred to as the fee curve method, has had a long historyof use. This long history of use reflects the ease with which this method is administered. Historical records indicate a relationship between project size and the total percentage fee required to adequately compensate the engineer for his services. While this method is easy to administer, no single curve or pair of curves can adequately reflect the great number of variables which the engineer must consider in providing the client with a fee estimate for the project. Therefore, while this method remains as a viable fee compensation method, the fee should be negotiated with the engineer on the individual project after the scope has been clearly defined. Often times, it is desirable to proceed with the preliminary or feasibility studies on an hourly basis. Following the completion of preliminary phase, both the client and the engineer have a clear understanding of the project complexities and scope. At this time, a fee percentage can be negotiated. SPECIAL SERVICES Soil explorations, pilot plant studies, laboratory tests and other special services may be conducted under separate contract. Such services, if conducted by others, are generally placed under the direction of the Consulting Engineer. The decisions made by a Consulting Engineer affect the initial cost, the longterm operating cost and the overall quality of a project. The savings in these items to be derived from the proper engineering of the project can far exceed the total engineering fee. Therefore, it is in the best interest of the Client to carefully select an engineer on qualifications, experience and references. -13- SECTION V CONTRACT DOCUMENTS The relations of the Consulting Engineer with his Client should be clearly defined by a written instrument before starting the engineering services. Whether this is expressed by an exchange of letters or by a more formal legal document is immaterial, so long as all terms are clearly defined. It should state the parties to the contract and clearly define the extent and character of the work to be performed as well as conditions relating to any time limitations which may be involved. The payment and terms for the various services should follow. FORM OF CONTRACT Many engineering organizations, governmental agencies and business firms have developed standardized printed forms of engineering contracts. Some of these forms are lengthy, but when carefully completed, they serve a useful purpose. The Engineer's Joint Contract Documents Committee and the American Institute of Architects offer sample forms of contracts between Client and Engineer and where practical, it is suggested that these forms be utilized. CONTRACT PROVISIONS The following check list contains the essential provisions to be considered in preparing any agreement for engineering services, whether executed in precise legal form or by an exchange of letters: 1. Effective date of agreement. 2. Names and descriptions of the parties to the agreement with their addresses and, in the case of a corporate body, the legal description of the corporation. 3. Nature, extent, character and location of the project. 4. Basic and special services to be rendered by the Consulting Engineer. (Include here all applicable services required from Section III "Scope of Service ".) 5. Services and data to be provided by the Client. (Include here also the applicable services, if any, from Section III "Scope of Service ".) 6. Compensation for services rendered by the Consulting Engineer, including times and methods of payment on account, interim payments, and final payment in full settlement. -14- 7. The time schedule for the execution of engineering services. 8. A statement that the design drawings and specifications are the instruments of service and remain the property of the Consulting Engineer, unless specifically agreed otherwise. 9. Provision for termination of the Engineer's services before final completion of the work. 10. Provision for interest on delayed payments. 11. Additional compensation for redesign after approval of preliminary phase documents; for change in scope of project; for preparation of alternate designs, drawings and construction documents; for delays by others causing expense to the Consulting Engineer and for any additional services to be rendered. -15- APPENDIX C INFORMATION FROM OTHER CITIES B -1 Summary Listing of Cities Contacted and Their Replies (attached) B -2 City of Burnsville's Policy Statement (copy attached) B -3 City of Eagan's Policy Statement (copy attached) B -4 City of Minneapolis' Policy Statement (copy attached) B -S Hennepin County's Policy Statement (copy attached) Summary Listing of Cities Contacted, and their Replies to the question: "Does your City have an established policy for the procurement of professional services (i.e. the selection of consultants for engineering and architectural services)? If so, please describe and /or send a copy . . . CITY REPLY NOTES MAPLE GROVE Use 3 consultants on a day to day basis and for special projects they select 5 from a short list of firms that have done work for them in the past and send RFP's to them. On occasion they do advertise. EAGAN Have a written policy and will send Received it. EDEN PRAIRIE Left message - they will get back. Never returned calls. RICHFIELD Use OSM exclusively and have for years. They shop around for traffic projects. FRIDLEY For specialized projects they send out RFP's to firms they have used in the past. Selection is based on experience and price. ST. CLOUD Have a written policy and will send Never received. it. ST. LOUIS PARK Work from an established list, select 5 or 6 consultants and sent RFP's to them. MINNEAPOLIS Have a written policy and will send Received. it. GOLDEN VALLEY Do most of their work in- house. The project must be very specialized for them to use consultants. They rely on consultants about once every five years. If necessary, a committee of three pick three consultants to interview and submit RFP's. COON RAPIDS Retain 2 firms for normal projects. For special projects they send RFP's to firms based on the Engineer's knowledge of their reputations. They do not advertise. CITY REPLY NOTES 0 ROCHESTER Most of their special projects are subdivisions and they require the owner of the subdivision to take care of everything. City staff does all routine work and for specialized projects they interview and send RFP's based on Engineer's recommendation. Their Council tends to favor the 4 local civil engineering firms. BLOOMINGTON Do not have a policy. Selection process, when necessary, relies on word of mouth. They do not advertise. MANKATO Checking it out and will send policy Never received. if they have one. COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Are in the process of trying to establish a policy. They have a "very unofficial" list they use. They just received a manual from the Wisconsin Assoc. of Consulting Engineers - "Selecting a Consulting Engineer" that they hope to use as a guideline. BURNSVILLE Have a written policy and will send Received. it. HENNEPIN COUNTY Have a written policy and will send Received. it. EAU CLAIRE, WISC. Left message. No response. Brian Amundson SHOREVIEW Left message. No response. Chuck Ahl �' ✓�' �/7f U / /fQ POLICY NUMBER 1.300 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONSULTANT SELECTION AND RETENTION I. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR POLICY The City of Burnsville frequently employs consultants - to provide specialized and /or licensed professional services. They operate as independent contractors in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract they have individually negotiated with the City of Burnsville. A written policy Qn., the selection and retention of professional consulting services is deemed desirable to achieve the following goals: 1) The best possible professional services at. reasonable cost; 2) Equal and open access to the selection process for qualified consultants; 3) A clearly prescribed and identifiable process for consultant selection and retention; 4) Administrative convenience and flexibility; 5) A required and formalized annual performance review of all consultants POLICY It shall be the policy of the City of Burnsville to solicit, negotiate, and continue agreements for professional consulting services on the basis of demonstrated qualifications, competent performance, and, fair and reasonable compensation. It shall also be the policy of the City to publicly solicit proposals for the provision of professional consulting services when new, or significantly changed, requirements arise. Fur- thermore, it shall be the policy of the City to annually review the individual performance of each consultant as a predicate to renewal or continuation of that relationship. III EXCEPTIONS This policy and procedures do not apply to the follow- ing categories of professional service contracts: A) Agreements signed by the City but administered by another party POLICY NUMBER 1.300 PAGE TWO B) Emergency situations IV. PROCEDURE The following procedures are intended to implement the spirit of this policy, but are not meant to be all - inclusive: A) Registration Professional consultants are encour- aged to submit statements of interest, current qualifications, and performance data for registration and reference purposes. These statements will be retained by the City and utilized in the selection process. The City will periodically purge its files of outdated, or inaccurate information and shall not be responsible for updating consultant submissions. B) Selection A review of currently registered consult - tants shall be made when the City Manager determines that there is a need to retain professional consulting services. Contract opportunities will be publicly advertised in accordance_, with existing laws and in other situations at the discretion and judgment of the City Manager. As a general guideline, at least three (3) of the pro- spective consultants should be selected for interview purposes. These selectees shall be asked to submit a detailed statement of qualifications for the specific project or service under consideration, and, a general rate structure for the services to be provided. A preference ranking process shall be developed and applied to the qualifications submission and to the inter- views. For the purpose of selecting and ranking interviewees, the following factors shall be used for measurement. Relative weights for each factor shall be determined by the interviewers on a case -by -case basis: 1) Expressed interest of the consultant to supply the desired services; 2) Professional qualifications required for satisfactory performance of the desired service objective(s); 3) Nature and extent of consultant's experience with the performance of the desired service objectives(s); 4) Consultant's capacity to perform desired services within time requirements; POLICY NUMBER 1.300 PAGE THREE 5) Consultant's familiarity with the specific project or service under consideration; 6) Consultant's past performance on Burnsville pro- jects; 7) Consultant's past performance and reputation for similar projects or services; 8) Any other factor pertinent to the specific proposed project or service and which is capable of objective measurement or evaluation Negotiation of a service contract shall be initiated with the top ranked firm. In the event that satisfactory terms are not reached, negotiations shall be terminated and initiated with the next highest ranked consultant, in descending order until a satisfactory agreement is reached. Contract negoti- ations shall be conducted' with regard to a definite scope of work and time period for performance. The negotiations should include estimates of attendant staffing, material, and services. Established fee schedules or curves are to be used only for comparative purposes. To the extent feasible, all contracts shall be memori- alized in a standard format with uniform terms and conditions, including a renewal clause. When required by law, contract awards shall be authorized by the City Council upon recommenda- tions of the City Manager. C) Performance Review and Renewal The performance of each professional consultant shall be annually evaluated with reference to standards and procedures developed by the City Manager. Whenever feasible, the act of evaluation should be conducted by the Department Director most closely associated with the consultant's work and should occur prior to the close of the calendar year. Evaluation information shall be retained for future reference and shall be available for public inspec- tion. The Consultant shall be provided with copies of the evaluation information and be provided an opportunity to comment or correct any errors or omissions. The City's consultant agreement shall permit an annual automatic renewal of the agreement, provided that the annual performance evaluation is satisfactory; the terms and conditions are substantially similar; and, the City Manager assents to a continuation of the relationship. POLICY NUMBER 1.300 PAGE FOUR D) Annual Report: The City Manager shall annually prepare a report for the City Council which lists professional consulting services expected to be used by the City during the year. The report shall provide information deemed appro- priate to adequately inform the City Council of the nature of the professional consulting services used by the City. V. RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY The City Manager is responsible for assuring compliance with this policy. Submitted by Date 17 Reviewed by !!:.��; '/ �� �F l _ '�" l� f �e:%� Date EAGAN CITY POLICY FOR ENGAGING PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES Professional consulting services such as engineering, legal, architectural and planning do not fall under the state or city competitive bidding process due to the subjective nature of the service provided. Cities, therefore, have latitude to define which vendor or consultant best meets their particular needs and are not constrained to the lowest responsible bid. The public interest should be served, however, through a mechanism which will insure quality service for the dollar spent. The public interest is also served by the maintenance of ongoing relationships with reputable and qualified consultants. Nothing in this policy is intended to limit the ability of the City to solicit services and undertake projects in an expeditious manner, presuming that due care is taken to insure a reasonable price for the service provided. I. REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL A Request for Proposal (RFP) should be utilized whenever consulting services are retained by the City of Eagan in the following circumstances: 1. A new or previously undefined service, the cumulative value of which exceeds $15,000 in any twelve month period. 2. A regularly retained service (legal, planning, etc.) at least once every three to five years. 3. A significant individual project, the service for which exceeds $100,000, if not previously identified in the current scope of work for the RFP for that retainer. A Request for Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) may be used to define an appropriate pool of consultants from which an RFP will be advertised or solicited under the procedures used in the competitiva bidding process. An RFP will not be required for significant projects (in excess of $100,000) if a pool of qualified consultants has been retained by Council action and such pool is regularly reconsidered through an RFP process every three to five years. II. CONSULTANT WORK ORDER REQUEST /AUTHORIZATION FORM A Consultant Work Order Request /Authorization Form may be substituted for the RFP /SOQ process whenever consulting services are required by the City and: 1. The dollar amount does not meet the levels listed above, 2. The highly specialized services are required for which the qualified firms are relatively few and well known, 3. The City Council has previously approved the firm as a part of the pool of service providers in the desired discipline through an open selection process or 4. Time constraints prevent the use of the ordinary RFP /SOQ process. In cases J1 -2, City staff will complete the form, forward it to the Consultant and to the Council for subsequent approval. In case #3, the consultant will be deemed to be authorized at the selection of the pool by the Council and the approval of the specific project. In case #4, staff must request prior approval from the City Council to utilize the form and request subsequent approval when arrangements have been completed. Approved: City Council Action Date: March 19. 1991 � PROCEDURES MANUAL OBTAINING PERSONAL SERVICES PURCHASE ORDERS FORMAL CONTRACTS � REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS PURCHASING DIVISION, CONTRACTING SEPTEMBER 1990 t 0 o - 0 � a� GARY WARNBERG o DIRECTOR, PURCHASING l y/ okoz MEMORANDUM September 5, 1990 TO: All City Departments FROM: Gary Warnberg RE: Personal Services Contract Procedures Attached for your information and future reference, is a procedures man --* for - Personal Services Contracts. This manual has been cc: -_..ad to assist departments in obtaining personal services by c -- mining the necessary steps required to enter into Personal Services Contracts. In addition, a Contract Coordinator, Sue Dufloth, is available to assist departments in understanding and following these procedures. Please review carefully and if you have any questions or need additional copies contact Sue Dufloth, Contract Coordinator, at 673 -2973. Thank you. OFFICE OF PURCHASING, 250 SOUTH 4th STREET, ROOM 414, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55415 -1326 612- 673 -2500 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGES INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I. REQUESTING CONTRACTS UNDER $15,000 . . . . . . . . 2 -3 II. REQUESTING CONTRACTS OVER $15,000 . . . . . . . . 4 -6 III. RFP GUIDELINES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 -8 ATTACHMENT A - CONTRACT SIGNATURE AUTHORITY. . . . 9 ATTACHMENT B - P.O. PERSONAL SERVICE CONDITIONS. . 10 ATTACHMENT C - CIVIL RIGHTS REVIEW REQUIREMENTS. .11 -12 • INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to provide the necessary steps to enter into a Personal Service contract on behalf of the City and to inform departments of the assistance available from the Contract Coordinator in the preparation of Request for Proposals and other required forms. Procedures for Personal Service contracts have been established for two categories; those under $15,000 and those exceeding $15,000. In order to facilitate processing, departments MUST contact the Purchasing Division, Contract Coordinator (Sue Dufloth, 673 -2973) BEFORE beginning the process. This will ensure that proper procedures are followed and the correct determinations are made as to whether a request should be a purchase order bid or contract entered into with a request for proposal. In addition, a review as to appropriate policy committee approval will be made at this time. All requests that are controversial in nature or projects without pr funding must be brought before the appropriate policy c- .tee before the process begins. Straight- forward requests wa expedited with the new procedures, and with the assistance o� the Contract Coordinator. On March 16, 1990 a Resolution was passed by City Council regarding the authority for signing contracts. (A copy of this Resolution is Attachment A of this document). -1- I. REQUESTING PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS UNDER $15,000 If the service required by the department is less than $15,000, the department has the option to enter into a contract or requisition for the service on a Purchase Order. The preparation of an RFP is encouraged in either situation. (Guidelines on preparing an RFP are included in Section III.) NOTE: DUE TO LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, CHECK REQUESTS SHOULD NOT BE ISSUED FOR PERSONAL SERVICES. PURCHASE ORDERS 1) The department develops a description of the services required. 2) An RFP is prepared by the department and sent to the Contract Coordinator for review. The Department then sends the RFP to known consultants /contractors who are able and available to perform the needed service. 3) A consultant/ contractor is selected by the department based cn pre - determined criteria. Use of the Emerging Small ssiness (ESB) directory for solicitation of businesses is .icouraged. (Copies of the directory may be obtained from the ESB Office at 348 - 7161). 4) If it is anticipated that the services required could exceed $15,000 in a consecutive twelve month period the department MUST go to their appropriate committee at this time for approval to enter into a formal contract (see Section II on REQUESTING PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS OVER $15,000.) If the same contractor/ consultant is used in consecutive years for the same or different services, a review should also be requested by the Human Resources Department for conformance with Civil Service and labor contract provisions. 5) The department submits a requisition to the Purchasing Division with the following information included: • Complete name and address of vendor. • Specific description of services required (or attached letter outlining services being provided). • Compensation schedule and amount NOT TO EXCEED. • Dates of service and whether it is a blanket order. • Tax identification or social security number. • The department monitor that will actually oversee the services being provided and their telephone number. • Remittance address if different from the vendors- business address. 6) The Purchasing Division prepares a purchase order in accordance with state law and City ordinances. A "Personal Services Conditions" sheet is attached and becomes part of the purchase order. (A copy of these conditions is Attachment B of this document). 7) The purchase order is then sent to the Finance Department for -acumbrance and signature. 8) The purchase order is returned to the Purchasing Division who then separates and returns the department copy and the consultant /contractor copy to the department. 9) When payments against this purchase order are requested, the purchase order number must be referenced. -3- II. REQUESTING PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS OVER $15,000 If the service required by the department will exceed $15,000 in a twelve month period, the department MUST enter into a formal contract. An RFP is necessary in this procedure to determine the best possible consultant /contractor. 1) The department must determine the need for providing a service that the department is unable to perform with its own employees. These services may be contracted for only if they cannot be provided by current employees in the Civil Service system and the services will not be permanently required by the City. If there are any questions regarding Civil Service or labor contract provisions, the Human Resources Department should be contacted. 2) The department determines who in the department will oversee and monitor the contract. This person's official title and name must be included in the specifications. 3) The department develops a detailed scope of services or set of specifications which will be included in the Request for Proposal. 4) The department develops a Request for Proposal (Guidelines are in Section III). The RFP must include applicable City requirements such as performance bonds, nondiscrimination clauses, prevailing wage clause, worker's compensation clause, non- collusion clause, etc. This information can be obtained from the Contract Coordinator. The RFP will also detail the City's plan for monitoring the performance of the contractor. 5) The department develops a set of criteria to be used in selecting the best proposal which will be included as part of the RFP. The department selects an evaluation committee who will review the proposals when returned. 6) The department sends a file copy of the RFP to the Contract Coordinator for review. 7) The department sends the RFP• to all known consultants /contractors capable of providing the required service. Use of the ESB directory for solicitation of businesses is encouraged. (Copies of the directory may be obtained from the ESB Office at 348 - 7161). A cover letter should be attached which includes applicable conditions, such as number of copies to submit and time and place to send proposals. -4- 8) The evaluation committee reviews proposals and decides who to recommend. THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE HAS THE RIGHT TO NOT RECOMMEND ANY PROPOSAL. 9) The department submits a letter to the appropriate Council committee to request permission to enter into a contract with the selected consultant /contractor. The letter must include the dollar amount and the proper fund and appropriation numbers. 10) If the total contract amount is expected to exceed $50,000, the department must send the name of the recommended consultant/ contractor to Civil Rights for approval. Although a consultant/ contractor has been pre- approved and is listed in the most recent Contractor List, the department is still required to notify the Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights. ( See memo dated January 11, 1990 sent to Department Heads from the Department of Civil Rights and included as Attachment C). 11) The department submits the RFP and the recommended proposal to the City Attorney for development of a legal contract, performance bond, and certificate of insurance forms. When completed they are returned to the department. 12) The department sends original and 3 copies of contract, performance bond, and certificates of insurance to the consultant /contractor for signature. If performance bond or insurance expire before the duration of the contract, it is the responsibility of the department to obtain current documents and forward a copy to the Finance Department, Disbursements Division to be filed with the City's official copy. 13) Once approved by the full City Council, clip the published Council action from Finance and Commerce, attach it to the contract copies and resubmit to the City Attorney for approval and signature as to legality. 14 ) When the contracts have been returned from the City Attorney's Office, the following routing order and procedures should be used when obtaining official signatures on contracts: • Deliver to the Mayor's Office for signature. A copy of the Council action must be attached for the Mayor's reference. • The department must complete a Contract Encumbrance Form (Form #230). Attach it to the packet of contracts and deliver it to the City Clerk's Office -5- for signature. The department may either pick the packet up from the City Clerk's Office and deliver it to Finance, or a staff person from the City Clerk's Office will forward it to the Finance Department, Disbursements Division. • The Finance Department, Disbursements Division staff checks the contract for completeness, encumbers the funds, and has the Finance Officer sign it. A contract number is then assigned. • Department and consultant /contractor copies are returned to the department for appropriate distribution. The original copy is kept in the Finance Department as the City's official copy. If you need further information or have questions, please contact Sue Dufloth, Contract Coordinator at 673 -2973 -6- III. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL RFP GUIDELINES WHAT IS AN RFP? A Request for Proposal ( RFP ) is a document which explains in detail the services being requested for a specific project or job. It should include an opening statement as to what is expected as well as background information. Additional detailed information which should be included is outlined below. WHEN DO I USE AN RFP? An RFP should be prepared whenever possible when requesting personal services. Departments are strongly encouraged to solicit proposals to perform services for the City from as many consultants /contractors as feasible. This is true even if the service requested is under $15,000. HOW DO I WRITE AN RFP? To write an RFP you need to determine the specific services required. These should be spelled out in detail so that potential consultants /contractors have a clear understanding of what is .—:::ted. The following is a guideline of what to include: INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE CITY - COVER LETTER - OPENING STATEMENT (background, summary description of services requested, etc.) - CITY'S SPECIFICATIONS OF SERVICES REQUESTED (expected products and deliverables, timing, etc.) - DESIRED FORMAT OF RESPONSES - PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT - PROPOSED EVALUATION CRITERIA (selection committee, weighting, etc.) - CITY CLAUSES AND PROVISIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED IN ALL CITY CONTRACTS i.e. HOLD HARNESS, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, NONDISCRIMINATION. (FOR SPECIFIC LANGUAGE CONTACT SUE DUFLOTH AT 673 -2973) - INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS - PREVAILING WAGE STATEMENTS, WHEN APPLICABLE - CITY'S PLAN FOR MONITORING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE CONTRACT (meetings, monthly reports, etc.) - NAME, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF DEPARTMENT'S CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR - PROPOSAL DUE DATE AND DESIGNATED LOCATION FOR SUBMISSION -7- INFORMATION REQUESTED FROM CONSULTANT /CONTRACT - REQUEST FOR CONSULTANT /CONTRACTOR REFERENCES AND QUALIFICATIONS (contact names, phone numbers, etc.) - REQUEST FOR CONSULTANT /CONTRACTOR'S APPROACH TO THE TASK - PROPOSED COST OF SERVICE AND E %PLANATION OF HOW DOLLAR AMOUNT WAS CALCULATED (direct costs, billing rates, persons assigned to project, hours, etc.) - CONSULTANT /CONTRACTOR PAYMENT AND BILLING SCHEDULE When the RFP has been completed, send a copy to Sue Dufloth, Contract Coordinator, Room 414 Public Health Center for review. �.a_tments may then send RFP's to potential C_r.Z::ltant /contractors. Upon request by the department, RFP's can be advertised in Finance and Commerce by the Purchasing Division. ' -8- Attachment A CONTRACT SIGNATURE AUTHORITY RESOLUTION NO. 90R107 Passed by City Council March 16, 1990 Whereas, the City Council of the City of Minneapolis has accepted a report submitted to it from the Purchasing Steering Committee; and Whereas, said report identified unauthorized contracts purporting to bind the City as a potential source of problems; and Whereas, the City Council desires to clarify the manner in which the City may enter into a contract; Now Therefore Be It Resolved, By the City Council of the City of Minneapolis: That contracts, agreements, letter of understanding and all other documents which purport to bind the City shall be signed only by those persons specifically authorized to do so by the City Council. Emergency contracting for goods or services shall be accomplished through the Purchasing Agent. All documents executed by unauthorized personnel shall not be binding upon the City. All unauthorized signatures of such documents shall be considered not to be part of the signers scope of duties with the City. This policy shall be made part of and included in the "Purchasing and Contracting Procedures Manual" to be developed by the Purchasing Steering Committee. -9- Attachment B ADDITIONAL PERSONAL SERVICES CONDITIONS FOR PURCHASE ORDERS 1. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Nothing containing in this Contract is intended to, or shall be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of employer/ employee between the parties. Seller shall pay all of its unemployment insurance premiums, FICA, retirement, life and medical insurance, workers compensation insurance premiums and income tax withholdings for itself and its employees as it is an Independent Contractor. 2. DATA PRACTICES. Seller agrees to abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. 13, as amended. Seller agrees to maintain in strict confidence all records and data to which it is privy as part of this Contract. Selle- ;.; rees not to reveal any private or confidential information to an,; sources not approved by the Minneapolis City Attorney's Office. 3. LOCAL LAWS. Seller shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, statutes and codes of the federal, state and local governments including those dealing with an affirmative action and nondiscrimination. 4. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS. All documents and materials developed by the Seller or Buyer shall become the property of the City. 5. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. No officer, official or employee of the City shall have personal or pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in this Contract or the proceeds thereof. 6. INDEMNITY.- Seller agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers and employees, from any liability, clam , damage, cost judgment, or expense, including attorney's fees, resulting directly or indirectly from an act or omission of Seller and its employees in this Contract and against all losses by reason of Seller to fully perform, in any respect, all obligations under this Contract. 7. LAW GOVERNING. This Contract shall be governed by and construed according to the laws of the State of Minnesota. 8. TERMINATION. This Contract may be terminated at will by either party with five day written notice given to the other party. 9. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR. All communications relative to this Contract shall be directed to the Contract administrator as indicated in the body of the attached Purchase Order. -10- Attachment C CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS Department of Civil Rights M E M 0 R A N J U M TO: Department Heads and City of Minneapolis Contracting Agencies FROM: Emma Hixson, Executive Direct0�)L DATE: January 11, 1990 RE: Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights Certified Contractor List Enclosed is a list of contractors who have certified affirmative action plans on file with the Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights. These contractors have been approved by the Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights to enter into contractual relationships with the City of Minneapolis for a period of one year from the date their particular affirmative action plan has been approved. This list is provided to inform City contracting agencies of contractors who have been through the Department's preaward compliance review process and have an acceptable affirmative action plan on file with the Department as of December 31, 1989. This information should help to expedite the affirmative action approval crocess for those contractors who are on the certified list. It is important that contracting agencies and their designated representatives understand that even if a contractor is on the certified list the contracting agency will still be required to notify the Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights of all prospective contracts, bids or applications for City funds in excess of $50,000 (on forms provided by the Department) prior to the contracting agency submitting the prospective contractors for approval by the Minneapolis City Council or appropriate '-uncil Committee. The Department will, upon notification the Cor,tractin A of the e certified contractors, a 9 Agency Y tract notify the Contracting Agency to proceed with the award of the bid and /or contract. The Department will reserve the right to conduct a preaward compliance review on any contractor, regardless of the contractor's certification status, if there is reason to believe that said contractor. or prospective contractor has not complied with the provisions of their affirmative action plan, the Minneapolis Civil Rights Ordinance or the Contract Compliance Rules and Regulations and /or other information the Department has ascertained as the result of an on -site review or other compliance procedures. The Minneapolis Civil Rights Ordinance provides the Department with 30 days to conduct such a review. -11- If a prospective contractor is not on the certified list, then the Contracting Agency is required to provide the Department with the time required to conduct a preaward compTiance review and follow the established notification procedures. As always, the Department will make every effort to expedite the prelward compliance review process. - If you have any questions regarding the certified list or the notification procedures, please contact Gary Cunningham or Richard Kelley at 673 -3012. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. EH:nf cc: Mayor Fraser Minneapolis City Council Minneapolis Commission on Civil Rights I THE CERTIFIED LIST OF CONTRACTORS IS CONTINUOUSLY BEING UPDATED. TO OBTAIN A CURRENT LIST CONTACT THE CIVIL RIGHTS OFFICE AT 673 -3012. i -12- t­ te PROCESS FOR SELECTION OF CONSULTANT ENGINEERING, /PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE BUREAU OF PUBLIC SERVICE I. Puroose The purpose of the selection process is to ensure that the most qualified firms/ individuals are selected through fair and equitable procedures which afford equal opportunity for all consultants. II. Aonlicability /Determination of Need Process is to be used on capital projects when the estimated cost is mnre than 5400,0(10 or on enoineerinq /envirnnmental projects when the estimated frrq are more than $40,000. This process for selection of consultants is to he used on1Y for pro which will he under the direction and supervision of departments within the Bureau of Public Service. The need for consultant services initially will be identified and det , ,rmi tle; by the user department head a:ith review and approval by the Associate County Administrator of the Bure of Public Service and the County Administrator. Consultant services will be requested when 1) technir?1 expertise is not available within the Bureau of Public Service penman - it staff, 2) staff workload will nit permit project to be co- mpleted wit ;ii the time frame, and /or 3) need to accomplish a specialized study for +•:!rich it would be uneconomical to use staff or employ part -time staff. III Establishment of Com A Hennepin County Designer Selection Committee shall be established be advisory to the Associate Cou! Administrator of the Bureau of Puhlir Service, the County Administrator and the County Board. Due to the fart that the use of consultant sere' is to he on the basis of need and uuirau U rue)i1L service Consultant.Selection Process Page 2 consultant services may not be needed in a given calendar year, a Designer Selection Committee shall be established at the time of each determination of need for the project(s) or study(s) involved. A. Membership The committee shall consist of the following individuals. 1. Each of the following oroanizations shall nominate one individual whose name and qualifications shall he submitted to the County Administrator for conside- ation: 1) consulting Engineers Council of Minnesota, and 2) Hernepin County Capital Budgeting Task Force. The County Administrator shall apooint the two named individuals to the committee or may rniect any individual nominated and rrmif- t a second nomination. Ea--h member shall serve on the committe- until such time as a selected consultant is approved for the specific p roject(s) or study(s) involved. 2. One or more representatives of the user department appointed h.v the Department Head and apprnved by the Associate County Administ--itc- of the Bureau of Public SQrvice and the County Administrator. 3. Other members of the committee may be: a. The District State -Aid Engineer of the Minnesota Departn;e r{ Transportation ( when Federal hight..ay funds are ucn _o finance a project /study), or b. Representative from a major utility company when a solid resource recovery proiect /study is to he accomplished (nor to be made by the administrative head of the company), anri c. A representative of a state, regional, city or industrial. conmiercial organization which is financially or otherwise responsible in the corpletion of the project /study (nominatic to be made by the administrative head of the agency or cornanv). uureau or ruoiic zervice — _ Consultant Selection Process Page 3 i B. Duties 1. To establish selection and rating criteria. 2. To identify and determine the most effective selection process to be used on a given project /study (e.g., a formal RFP requirinn detailed proposal or invitational interviews, the number of firms to be interviewed, etc.). 3. To conduct interviews with consultants. 4. To select the three (3) trust quafflfiEd firms and rank them to ord- r of qualification. 5. To submit the names of the three (3) firms, the qualification rliliirc. and the committee recommendation for award of contract to the Department Head who shall then make his recommendation for the a of contract to the Associate County Administrator of the Bure;u of Public Service, the Coun�.% Administrator, and the County BoarJ. C. Committee Organization, Meet Quorum 1. The County Administrator shall select a chairman for each committee established. 2. The committee shall meet at the call of the chair or at the rP1�iest of any two (2) members. 3. The quorum shall consist ^f three members of the committee. business shall be transarted without a quorum. D. Restraints . 1. Committee memhers shall lnt discuss with the candidate firms matters relating to the pi o'ects /studies excep during schedul� J P 9 interviews before the co1l-littee. 2. No candidate firms in which a member of the committee has a currP►,t financial interest will he selected. i APPENDIX D MISCELLANEOUS "CLIPS" REGARDING CONSULTANT SELECTION C -1 LMC Conference 1991 (Notes) "Hiring Contract Professionals" C -2 "Guidelines for Selecting A Professional Consultant" (copy attached) C -3 "Getting the Right Consultant for Your Project: Quality is Job 1 (copy attached) C -4 "How to Get the Most Out of Your Consultant" (copy attached) C -5 Managing Consultants on the Job (copy attached) # LMC Conference 1991 "Hiring Contract Professionals" Riverview C 2:15 -3:30 p.m. Thursday Normally Engineers receive two types of RFP's for public sector work: A. For an individual project, or B. To serve the city as consulting engineer on an ongoing basis. An RFP for an individual project should consist of: A. Explain the purpose of your RFP. B. Background - Tell some history about the project. C. Project Scope - Explain where you expect the consultant to take over the project through what you expect at the conclusion. D. RFP instructions 1. Specify the due date and time. 2. Address receiving proposals. 3. Number of copies. 4. Contact person with telephone number. E. Proposal format - An example would be: 1. Company history. 2. Project work plan and objectives. 3. Project timetable. 4. Project team with organizational chart and resumes of the project team. 5. Client reference list with phone numbers. 6. Related project examples. F. Selection Criteria - An example might be a point system assigned to: 1. Professional capabilities. 2. Specialized experience. 3. ..Work plan. 4. Past performance on contracts with respect to cost control, quality of work and performance schedules. An RFP for consulting engineering services on an ongoing basis should consist of: A. Background - Tell some history of your city and its infrastructure, such as age and ongoing problems experienced by your residents or public works director. B. Explain your expectations of the consulting engineering firm. 1. Attendance at council meetings. 2. Experience in design of projects similar to those you may have in your capital improvements program. 3. Explain lain the city's definition of conflicts of interest. C. RFP Instructions 1. Specify the due date and time. 2. Address receiving proposals. 3. Number of copies. 4. Contact person or persons, with telephone numbers. D. Proposal Format - An example would be: 1. Company history 2. Scope of services. 3. Staff to be assigned to your city with organizational chart and resumes. 4. Client reference list with phone numbers. 5. Related project examples. E. Selection Criteria - An example might be a point system assigned to: 1. Professional capabilities of the firm. 2. Qualifications of staff assigned to the city. 3. Experience in projects similar to those in your capital improvements program. 4. Past performance on contracts with respect to cost control, quality of work and performance schedules. r 1 SMPS -TWIN CITIES PANEL PRESENTATION "HOW TO WRITE AN RFP" DO'S AND DON'TS DO: -- Develop a pre - Qualification process, so that only qualified firms will receive the RFP. -- Be as specific as possible in describing the project, the site, and the work to be performed. -- State your selection criteria, and indicate the relative weight you are giving to each. -- Have someone available to answer questions about the RFP, arrange site tours, etc. -- Recognize how much time, effort, and money most firms put into responding to an RFP. -- Consider using a Qualifications Based Selection (QBS) process vs. fee -based selection (35 other states require this). DON'T: -- Use generic, "boilerplate" RFPs, unless you want to receive generic, "boilerplate" proposals. -- Make firms guess what your real concerns about the project are. -- Forget to include information relevant to key subconsultants (geotechnical, surveyors, etc.). -- Ask for a firm's complete list of project experience if you're only concerned about a particular type of experience. -- Require a microscopically detailed breakdown of person -hours /days and costs unless you have provided an equally detailed breakdown of the scope of work. -- Forget the "Do's ". As presented at the Municipal Clerks and Finance Officers Conference March 20, 1991. Food for thought: Are cities well served when they spend most of their time and effort worrying about resources spent on design services (approximately 5 -10% of construction costs) which influence initial construction costs (100 %) and lifetime operation and maintenance costs (200 - 500 %)? Cities are best served when their selection procedures follow those used by federal and many state agencies in their procurement practices -- as outlined in the Brooks and mini - Brooks laws. Under these recommended procedures, design professionals submit statements of interest and qualifications in response to an owner's invitation and statement of requirements for a specific project. The responses are evaluated by the owner according to previously announced selection criteria. Often, an owner conducts personal interviews with the three design professionals who appear to be most qualified for the assignment. After the design professional is selected on the basis of qualifications to meet project requirements, contract negotiations between the owner and design professional are initiated. During these negotiations, scope of services, schedule, compensation, and other contractual matters are defined, agreed upon, and documented in a written contract. If the owner and design professional are unable to reach agreement, then the negotiations are terminated and the owner initiates negotiations with the next most qualified design professional. The selection procedure allows an owner to select the design professional best suited to fulfill the specific project requirements, provides an opportunity for the parties to develop cooperatively a project- specific scope and schedule of services and time schedule, and provides a compensation program that is tailored to the scope of services and time schedule and that is fair and agreeable to both parties. The best agreement results from establishing a fee after the full scope of services is understood by all parties. This may require extensive discussions utilizing the experience and knowledge of the owner, the design professional, and their advisers. Reprinted with Permission ASCE References: "Quality in the Constructed Project. A Guide for Owners, Designers and Constructors" Volume 1 (American Society of Engineers Manual No. 73) Chapter 5. Other information on this subject can be found in: "The Institute for Municipal Engineering of the American Public Works Association" "Qualifications Based Selection Procedure" by the Consulting Engineers Council of Minnesota (612) 922 -9696. Contact Dave Oxley. Provided courtesy of Schoell & Madson, Inc. (612)546 -7601. Contact Tom Schottenbauer. _// Y` Gui lines for Selectin a g Professional Consultant By John M. Patriarche, Professional Engineer, State of Michigan Occasionally, municipalities need tional backgrounds and work experi- viewed individually for at least an the services of professional consul- ences. The resume should especially hour, depending on the scope of the tants like engineers, architects, plan - include a list and description of project. The municipal staff people ners, landscape architects and land projects they have undertaken and who reviewed the proposal should surveyors. How do you obtain the completed, particularly ones similar also conduct the interviews. The best professional services for a to the one proposed. professional consultants' presenta- project? If other professionals will be sub- tions should include examples of The key is to hire a firm you be- contracted, they should be identified their work utilizing techniques such lieve is the most qualified by techni- and their qualifications listed. as slides, photographs, a videotape, cal knowledge, experience and spe- It is not considered proper to re- drawings or other visual aids. cial skills to design the project to fit quest professionals to submit their These interviews should reveal your specific requirements. The pro- lowest bids. Responses received which professional staff person will cedures outlined here will guide you would probably not bring the best be assigned the project, the location to successfully obtain the services of results and reputable consultants re- of the principal offices of the firm, a qualified professional. consultant. gard this procedure as unprofes- the nearest office, if applicable, and Consider the Project. It is im- sional and therefore unacceptable. whether the local office will be han- portant to consider the nature of the When the price or fees are not men- dling the project The method of project and write out a general tioned in the notice or project pro- billing should be discussed. Some description of it. Include enough de- posal, professionals will realize they consultants charge a total amount tail so that there is no question are competing only on the basis of on completion of a project. Others about the scope of the project, but professional competence and experi- issue monthly billings based on pro - don't be so specific a professional ence. A notice which does not ini- gress reports or a percentage of work firm would be unduly limited or in- tially request a fee estimate will also completed. hibited from using its ingenuity. Be satisfy the legal requirements for Final Selection- On completing sure you are familiar enough with municipalities to be open and com- the interviews, a final selection the project to answer questions from petitive. Questions on the proposal should be completed as quickly as consultants regarding requirements. from consultants should be directed possible. The professional consul- Request for Proposal. Next, to one person on the staff who is fa- tants' references should be checked miliar with the project. This will en- to confirm the consultants skills and prepare a proposal notice including sure that all inquiries receive the abilities - to perform- If necessary, the description of the project, a same information. Answers to ques- visit the sites of projects similar to deadline for the proposal to be re- eons requiring technical information yours on which the consultant has ceived, the name and address of the or detailed reply should be put in worked. official to whom the proposals are to writing and mailed to all consultants Final selection will depend on be sent and the name and telephone who have submitted a proposal for comparison of the professional con - number of the person requesting the the project sultant's experience, ingenuity, suffi- proposaL This notice should be pub - ciency or adequacy of staff, availa- . lished in a local or state newspaper The Preliminary Selection. bility or accessibility of staff, and in trade magazines. The project When the deadline for receipt of personalities and time to complete proposal and a copy of the proposal proposals has passed, they should be the job. Once the consultant- is se- notice should be mailed to consul- thorouglsl_r reviewed and the most lected, the next step is to negotiate a _ tants the municipality would like to qualified consultants selected for f have consider the project. It's in the further consideration. Preferably, at Basis for Estimating Fee. A municipality's best interest to at- least three staff people should re- project's fee depends on its complex - tract as much attention to the proj- view the proposals and arrive at a ity. If the proposed program is less ect as possible so that many propos- consensus list complex than average, the fee will be als will be submitted. Interviews. On completing a. lower. Conversely, if more than the Request a corporate resume with preliminary list, at least three con- usual amount of services are re- the project proposal. It should in- sultants should be invited for an oral quired, the fee will be higher. Other clude information about the consult- interview. The interview is an oppor- determining factors are frequency of ing firm and its staff such as the tunity for the consultants to elabo- site visits, whether there will be ex- principals in the organization, who rate on their professional .expertise tra charges for site visits and ex- the staff is, the firm's size, educa and ingenuity. Each should be inter- penses for which the consultant would expect reimbursement in ad- dition to the stated fee. These nego- nations should take place before a HENSLEY - SCHMIDT, INC. contract is signed. If the community and the professional consultant can- ENGINEERS •MANAGERS •SURVEYORS not agree on a fee, the second best qualified consultant should be contacted. Valdosta. GA Atlanta, GA Duluth, GA 1708 N. Ashley Street 120 Interstate North Parkway 3525 Mail Boulevard A written agreement should spec- Suite 450 Suite SEE ify the scope of the work, fees, pay- (912) 247 -2773 (404) 952 -8861 (404)497- 1121 ment schedule and the manner of providing for additional services. Af- ter a contract is signed by both par- E.R. S N ELL CONTRACTORS, INC. ties, it is customary to send a letter to all other professionals who sub- Bridge Building mitted proposals and thank them for General Concrete Highway Construction their interest. In conclusion, consideration of Concrete Culverts— Ditch Paving several consultants is beneficial to a municipality. It offers opportunity to SNELLYILLE, GA. 40� -97Z -3204 compare the work of professional consultants to determine which can do the job fastest and most cost ef- WOLFE & ASSOCIATES, Inc. festively. It also places specific saga- Management Consultants bilities of a number of firms in the city's files for future references.. SPECIALISTS IN HIGH QUALITY From the beginning everyone un- EXECUTIVE RECRUITMENT derstands only one professional con- FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS sultant will be retained for the proj- Albuauerwo Austin Juneau ' ect. This process gives each Anchor costa Mesa Las Angeles =a' Atlanta Denver seattJe 7c professional an opportunity to be L' c Contact Either considered. Municipalities also have - a duty to allow all interested to pre- Robert E Stavin or James L Mercer Wolfe & Associates, Inc. Wolfe & Associates, Inc. sent themselves. These procedures Tarzana Financial Center 1100 Johnson Ferry Road _ are used often and are workable and 18801 Ventura Boulevard -4211 Suite 200 f satisfactory. Los Angeles, California 91356 Atlanta, Georgia 30342 Additional information is availa- (818) 345 -7100 (404) 255 -9060 _ ble to help communities understand Other connitting specialties indude Organization Analysis, Organization Deveicornent the basis for consultant fees and fee and Training. Productivity Improvement, ktkin, tion Systems and Data Processing, Teiecommuncations and Strategic Plamirg. negotiation. The American Society of Civil Engineers publishes A Guide For the Engagement of Engineering Services, ASCE Manual No. 45. ALBANY— ATHENS — ATLANTA— AUGUSTA — DUBLIN Copies are available by writing to GAI NESVILLE— HAPEVILLE—MACO N —NEWNAN —NORCROSS 345 East 47th Street, New York, NY ROM E— SANDERSVILLE— THOMASVILLE— TIFTON— VALDOSTA 10017. Part of the book is devoted to generally accepted fee curves for BEARINGS AND DRIVES, INC. projects of average complexity. The p American Institute of Architects, Bearings and Drives Specialists , American Consulting Engineers Fafnir Bearing Co. New Departure )Master Electric Motors Council, the American Institute of MRC'Bearings Andrews Falls Corp. Planners, the American Society of ATB Bearings Co. Hyatt Diamond Chain Co. Landscape Architects and the Na- Hoover Bearing RBC Jeffrey Mfg. Co. tional Society of Professional Engi- Timken Bunting Globewoven Belting veers have information available as Dodge - Timken Dodge Mfg. Corp. Reliance Motors National Oil Seal Ohio —Gear Reeves Pulley Co. well. Slit= Industrials Dayton Rubber Co. Joy Idlers Llnk -Bell Screw Conveyor Corp. John M. Patriarche is a former Executive Director of the Michigan l Lubricant Application Equipment Municipal League and a former city BEARINGS \ manager of East Lansing, Mich. — DRIVES 607 LOWER POPLAR — 743 -6711 The article is reprinted from the MACON, GEORGIA January /February 1986 issue of Michigan Municipal Review. / PUBLIC WORKS PRO-VIEWS I M EP � I 3RD QUARTER 1990 IME 90-3 Produced by the INSTITUTE FOR MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING of the American Public Works Association, 1313 E. 60th St, Chicago, IL 60W Getting the Right Consultant for Your P Quality i Job 1 "The effec selection and use ofcons forarchi" oaztunal and engineering services presents a major pmfeo niona|ohoJ!enge:' That's according uoa new APm4Apub|ica- Uon.Guktolineubnthe8electionandUneo/Conoultanuxfor V Education & experience of team members Engineering and Architectural Services. |ME members agree. "Most capital projects start out asaconcept of what you want V Demonstrated track record uoaccompUoh:' says Joe Sunday, director of road program management for Fairfax County, Virginia. "You're hiring a V Adequate number of staff assigned to the job consultant uo help you translate your conception into reality. 4 Ability to work with agency personnel If you could draft a perfect set of plans and specs, you wouldn't need the consultant at a||:' V Knowledge of local conditions, if appropriate But the road from conception uo reality can be rocky. The proposed APVYA guidelines, which update a version orig(' Involvement with related projects noUy published in19M, are intended 0o smooth the way by ' offering concrete help in three areas: the selection process, Abffity to keep on schedule contractual agreements, and contract management. Among other recommendations, the APVVAguidelines Ability to stay within budget suggest that: ^ouality should bethmparamount consideration inselect- Demonstrated interest by the consultant in ingan/VE consultant. "There are certain factors such uuex- prMous projects pehnnne, organizational structure, consultant staff qua<ifica- ^ Vono, and personality that must be considered bohuro the |ouu| purchasing officials. State and Local Government Pur- ogennyoanbeneaooneb|yocxishodthouivaoxpectationawiU chasing, published by the National Association of State pur- be/u| chasing Officials, says that cost of services should bepan* phc� and method of payment should baneo �ha$ad �e�» mount �� sometimes h b| with only r mpv "Purchasing �vm�om mou avvpm problems �heconuu�m�'aqusdificabona have been firmly established. capital projects, which involve multi-year financing, and with The APY%A position reflects similar policies adopted bythe the fact that you can't write standard specs for design American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and other pro- conoukants:' says Ron Norris, director of design &conuuuc' f hon for the State of Missouri. |n most jurisdictions, hocnndn' partofgood engineering practice, theAPYVA guidelines ueo. the public works or comparable department serves oo suggest that it's important for another reason ao well: good the lead agency for capital projects. / management is good government. The effective no|eption |[NE members agree that cost is important, but that the and use cf consultants saves tax money in the long run and question becomes one uf "pay now orpay later." Brion strengthens public confidence in the agency's ability to Amundson of Eau Claire believes that an initial emphasis on perform. "To u certain extent, ASCE and other professional cost hurts the selection process inag least two ways. "You organizations may be viewed by outsiders aa protecting o have uu develop o very clear and specific scope of work uo vested interest gmup:' says Brian Amundson, city engineer receive comparable bido:'he warns. "And o tightly written of Eau Claire, Wisconsin. "But APVVXu fundamental purpose scope is self-defeating because the limits may discourage iuuo improve the effectiveness of public wor agenu{eo.^For some bright consultant from submitting new and different that reason, ho suggests, its recommendations should ba solutions to your problem. greeted with less skepticism than are those of other ongoni- Competitive bidding also knocks some potential players zationo. -_ out of the game altogether. "Except for very limited situations, Maybe eo, but the emphasis on quality aothe primary we're reluctant to bid nompohdvo|\<' ouyn Charlie Baker, factor runs counter to the position held hy many state and continued on page 8 -• Quality Should Be First, Foremost, and Always on Your List ... continued from page 1 thinks that public works agencies are getting smarter about senior vice - president of HDR Engineering, Inc. and former asking pointed questions. "The consultant has to answer member of the APWA Consultant- Govemment Relations without any baloney," he says. Baker also says that a Council. The reason? "Competitive bidding doesn't serve the growing number of his potential clients wantto see the project client very well," he says. "It's a huge risk. If you ask 100 team during the presentation, a trend that he welcomes. engineers to solve a problem, you may end up with 100 "After all, these are the folks you're going to have to live with," designs with varying levels of detail. Any money that you he adds. save on the design fee will more than likely be transferred to • Don't underestimate the amount of time necessary to the construction process." select a consultant and manage the contract For major • Specific safeguards should be in place to assure the projects, the selection process should take hours of prepara- se/ection of qualified consultants. Once a project has been tion time to clarify the scope, establish selection criteria, and approved, most agencies issue a request for proposal (RFP) negotiate the contract. Once the ink is dry, procedures must or more commonly, a request for qualifications (FIFO). Once be in place the monitor the contract and guarantee that the RFPs or RFOs have been reviewed against a predeter- deliverables are provided on schedule and within budget. mined list of criteria [see page 11, a short list of eligible The new APWA guidelines are intended to help municipal candidates is invited for interviews. officials do just that. The document is now under review by There are some ways to strengthen the interview process. a wide range of IME members, consultants, and other ex- h "Don't be afraid to ask questions," advises Fairfax County's perts. To get a review cc call-Judy-Reeves at 312/667 - Joe Sunday. Based on his experience, Charlie Baker of HDR 2200 [ext. 5301. IFME FUM Building ilding for the Future! CONGRESS Preserving our Heritage Ottawa, Ontario — May 27 -31, 1991 � Here's why you should plan to attend PLkr °~ m •" • To participate in an international meeting with colleagues from Europe, the Far East and Australia _ '' ` { • To attend three solid days of technical programs on such i issues as solid waste, transportation, development, _ and water resources _ • To see displays of the latest technology and equipment Rebukfng d Padfwterg Ohara (1917 • To visit a city that embodies the Congress theme "Building for the Fu=vPreserving our Heritage." Sponsored by the International Federation of Municipal Engineers, in cooperation with the Canadian Public Works Assomation and the International Public Works Federation. Registration fees are 5235 (U.S.) or $165 (Canadian). For more information and registration material, call Judy Reeves at APWA, 3121667 -2200 (ezt. 530) AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION Non Profit org U.S. Postage 00 PUBLIC WORKS PRO —VIEWS Paid Chicago. IL 1313 E. 60th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637. 312 - 667 -2200 ' Permit No. 4446 RECEI ti cU JAN 1 7 1991 ,r iyl v_.i ? {.n �c:j . )7 1 1 Di 0 IME 90 -3 i How to Get the Most Out of Your Consultant by George P. Barbour, Jr. Vice President PMC Associates, Palo Alto, California L ate one evening after a particularly long and tumultuous city council meeting, the mayor accompanied by the city manager and a planning consultant was taking a short- cut across the city hall courtyard to a nearby bar for a night cap. As they strolled along the dimly lit courtyard (an energy management consultant had recommended the removal of every other light fixture to reduce energy cost), they tumbled into an open construction pit. Fortunately for the three, it was filled with sand which cushioned their fall. Somewhat dazed, but unhurt, the three brushed themselves off and began to contemplate their situation. The walls of the pit were at least 15 feet tall and slick with wet mud. They obviously needed assis- tance to get out. After assuring each other that they were all right, the For you see, while the report did not get them out of mayor suggested that they begin to holler for help. the pit, it did give them a solution to discuss. "Surely," she said, "our voices will be heard by some- one passing by." So in unison they yelled for help. Whenever I hear that a consultant didn't do a "good And they yelled and they yelled. But no one heard job" or was a "waste of money or time" or both, I can them. For you see, the courtyard was deserted. A se- think of only two basic reasons: either fraud on the curity consultant's report had recommended that the part of the consultant or mismanagement on the part courtyard be closed to the public after business hours of the client. Since this is an article on managing the as a safety and cost reduction measure. The report consulting process, let me quickly dispense with the had noted that the few people who needed access to first reason. I'm sure that there have been frauds and the city hall could use the side entrance. shady deals relating to consultants, but the evidence in the literature on consulting indicates that most dis- It now fell upon the city manager to come up with a satisfaction comes from lack of performance, not out - solution to get them out of the pit. He quickly seized right fraud. In fact, in a 1979 study conducted among the initiative. "Obviously," he asserted, "this has to be local officials in Alabama, Kentucky, and Wisconsin, a team effort." His organization had recently hired 97 percent voted the value of consultants as "usually an organization development consultant to assist the valuable" (60 %) or "sometimes valuable" (37 9 Not a manager and his top staff to communicate more ef- bad rating for the second oldest profession in exist- fectively and to develop more meaningful goals and ence. objectives. Then why is mismanagement the only reason left? But try as they might, the team in the pit could not Well, quite simply because the consulting process, to - get out. The mayor stood on the manager's shoulders be effective, must be managed not by the consultant but couldn't reach the top. Then the manager and but by the organization itself. From the perception of consultant tried boosting the mayor to the rim. Again, the problem, through the selection of the consultant too short. Finally, in frustration the mayor and man- and the monitoring of the progress, to the evaluation ager turned in unison to the consultant. "You solve and acceptance of the final product, the process is or the problem!" they gasped. should be under the control of management. Aha! The challenge was his. He put his jacket back on In my view a consultant should not be expected to and dusted the sand off his vest. Straightening his tie, have "the solution." It's appropriate for the consul - he reached into his briefcase for his pocket calcula- tant to prepare alternatives and to evaluate them as tor. With all the precision of a Price - Waterhouse ac- to cost, benefit, and implementation. The manager countant, the authority of a Hoover Institute Fellow, must select and implement. and the certitude of a vice president from Arthur D. Little, he calmly stated, "Let us assume we have a With that philosophy as background let me share ladder "` " °`x with you a bag full of tips on how to manage the next consultant you select so that you won't have to spend The next morning, the construction foreman found any more uncomfortable nights down at the bottom the trio still at the bottom of the pit, a little cold, but of a pit filled with sand. quite happy discussing the three - phased, four tier, multicolored consultant's report. 2 Public Management/ April 1981 I have divided my comments into the following cate- in advance can help you to introduce the idea con - gories: structively by having concerned department heads participate in the selection and informing the organi- • :Make wav for the "out -of- town" wonder zation of the impending study or analysis. • Choosing the "expert" If you are selecting a consultant to work • Signing on the dotted line with several departments, it is wise to form a selection committee made up of •Riding herd representatives of each department. Their collective interests and insights will be •Making sense out of the product valuable in making a recommendation to Make way for the "out-of-town" wonder you. Usually, most of the effort that any organization ex- Choosing the "expert" pends, at this point, is to write a "request for pro- posal" (RFP). Often the process can culminate in not First you need to send the RFP to as many outside hiring a consultant. That's good, too. The explicit task consultants as reasonable. Use your staff to suggest of putting on paper what you want may convince you names. Also call some colleagues as well. Once you that you don't need a consultant. Here are some tips have the responses, then in reviewing the proposals on how to write an RFP. keep the following in mind: • Try to be brief and to the point. • Be sure the consultant's work process is compatible • Write the RFP as if you had to answer it. with your organization's style. • Pass a draft along to a friend or two in the organi- • Check references. Call them up for a critique. zation. Ask them to interpret your needs. • How involved will the consultant be with your staff? Is the demand for staff support consistent with • If you have a cost limit, say so. your goals? Having staff work with a consultant may be good staff development. • If you have a -time requirement, say so. • Determine the time, caliber, and exertise of persons • Give a reasonable deadline,.3 to 4 weeks to respond. assigned to the project. Is the mix appropriate? It is a good rule of thumb to remember that if you fix Finally, evaluate the cost estimate. the price, don't fix the product and vice versa. By that I mean if you ask for a complete pay and classifi- It is better to select the best firm to do the job and cation study for your organization, don't also demand then negotiate price. Most firms will be delighted to one for a set price. The scope of work and price will negotiate price and level of effort. be determined by size of workforce, number of classi- fications, how old the current classifications are, and If you are selecting a consultant to work with several other factors. If you only have $5,000 to spend, then departments, it's wise to form a selection committee ` ask for a proposal to cover as many classifications as made up of representatives of each department. can be studied for the set price. If the scope of work Their collective interests and insights will be valuable is less defined, such as an organizational study or in making a recommendation to you. program evaluation, then a stated cost limit can be ef- fectively used by the consultant to gauge actual level of effort. If at this point you are not willing to trust Signing on the Dotted Line the judgment of a consultant, then you should seri- ously question using one. Once selection has taken place, the contract should be prepared incorporating the consultant's basic work Besides writing an RFP, a manager needs to begin plan and schedule. In addition to your normal city preparing the organization for the use of a consul- contract requirements here are a few tips on what to tant. Anytime you introduce someone from the out- include. The more specifics you include, the less like - side into an organization there will be some negative lihood for misunderstandings. reaction. Consultants can be a threat to the organiza- tion, step on some people's toes, and otherwise give " • Always name who will administer the contract and the organization a case of the "jitters." Knowing this provide liaison to the consultant. Public Management /April 1981 3 for • Include the payment schedule, budget, and is valuation. he acttual mplemen at on of re ommended deliverables. changes. There are other criteria as well, some hard • Schedule the work and significant milestones, i.e., and some soft. draft reports completed, review, city council presen- • Did staff learn new skills or insights to problem rations. solving? • Determine the amount of time the staff will contrib- •Did policy or processes improve as a result of the ute, if significant. consultant's intervention? • Specify format for invoices and to whom. • Has the organization gained the necessary tools or If you require performance bonds, liability insurance, plans to take action now and in the future? and /or workers compensation, this should be noted of th surest w of in the RFP as well as in the contract. succe s probably r or lure is your will ngne sto use the con- I t is a good rule of thumb to remember sultant again. that if you fix the price, don't fix the Conclusion product. There is really nothing magic about getting your Riding Herd money's worth out of a consulting contract. The com- monly accepted tools of project management cer- In order to get a useful product, the organization tainly would apply. The hardest point is to get man - must be willing to contribute time, energy, and re- agers to admit and then accept responsibility for the overall process. We all, at times, are looking for that sources to assist the consultant. Consultants need to "expert to solve the problem" when in fact, the an- touch base, receive direction and obtain feedback. All swers are right there in the organization. All a "good the advantages of objectivity and technical expertise consultant" can do is help you find them. While this will soon be squandered if these energies are may sound simple, do not underestimate the value of misdirected. Don't minimize the need for constructive such a service. oversight. If you, the client, are "too busy" to see the consultant, then don't expect too much from the con sultant. Some of the following tips may help in moni- Epilogue toring the consultant's efforts: There is another ending, a more constructive one, to • Schedule periodic progress reports. the beginning story. It goes something like this. • When the consultant is in town, make it a point to The mayor, manager, and consultant had read this is- visit with the consultant. sue of Public Management and liked what they read. When the mayor and manager turned to the consul- * Actively participate in the product review process. tant after they had worked on getting out of the pit, they said, "We know what the problem is. It is clear • On large projects, it may be wise to have the work we want out of the pit. Our goals and objectives are common ones. We need your help to find a way out. reviewed in phases by the same team that selected ' the consultant. Such steering committees can be ef- fective sounding boards. The consultant thought for a moment. "I understand the task and see the urgency of the time limit. It is • Inform the consultant of major organizational late and the bar will soon be closing." changes that may affect the work. He looked around the pit and then broke into a smile. "The solution is right here with us," he said. With It's clear that monitoring is a two-way street. Your ac- that, he placed his briefcase on the ground. With the tive interest in the consultant will only foster and en- added height, the manager was able to boost the courage a more effective working relationship. mayor out of the pit and she went for help. Makin- Sense out of the Product Later that evening over drinks, the three discussed • • the possibility of opening up a consulting firm. is I believe that if you follow all the above advice, then this will be the easiest step in managing the process. Obviously, the clearer the assignment, the easier the 4 Public Management/ April 1981 Managing Consultants on the Job There are many similarities between managing con- proach is to have the consultant develop a draft table sulting activities on a project and managing regular of contents and thoroughly discuss the scope of the local government staff. It should be recognized, how- documentation that will be prepared under each ele- ever, that the motivational forces underlying a con- ment. sultant's response and behavior differ in important ways from those of staff members. The consultant Reporting. The progress reports to be submitted by obviously has a different kind of interest in minimiz- the consultant should be clearly defined as to scope, ing economic risks —in some cases, this may be sim- timing, and format. A local government should limit ply to ensure maximum profitability; in others, it may the amount of written progress reporting required, be a matter of professional survival. The consultant is since every person -hour spent developing reports is rewarded for successful performance by opportuni- taken away from ongoing project work. Oral reports ties for additional engagements with the local govern- with a summary written report are usually adequate. ment or for similar work elsewhere. It is important to the consultant's reputation that he or she successfully Payment. Prompt payment of invoices is very impor- deliver the service to the client's satisfaction. The tant to the consultant. It should be recognized that consultant also has a need for the engagement to be the consultant must normally borrow funds for pay - professionally stimulating. roll expenses of work in progress. Delay in receipt of client payments is a direct cost that reduces profit - A client local government must manage its relation- ability and causes considerable anxiety. ships with consultants taking the above factors into account; it also must manage them in such a way as Contract. The consulting contract or agreement to preserve the consultants' independence, objectivity, should be very specific regarding project timetables, and creativity. Useful techniques include the follow- products, and financial arrangements. To avoid mis- ing. understandings, it is also important to define mutual expectations about resource commitments and other Detailed Work Plan. The consultant, before starting matters. the work, should be.expected to provide a detailed work plan outlining the tasks to be performed and Visibility. If possible, the consultant should be given significant performance milestones. At this point, the access to top management of the department or local nature and scope of interactions between consultant government. The consultant will appreciate this op- and client staff should be discussed in detail. The cli- portunity and will perform best if he or she knows ent government should make firm commitments of that top management is aware of the work and ap- staff and resources on which the consultant can rely. preciative of the potential results. An occasional lun- Failure in this commitment is the most significant cheon with top management during the course of the risk factor —in terms of both quality of project out- project or an opportunity for the consultant to come for the client and economic loss for the present his or her final report to a general staff meet- consultant —in the entire engagement. ing or governing body are excellent motivational vehi- cles. Another incentive is the opportunity for the con - On -Site Presence. Many local governments insist that sultant to obtain outside visibility for his or her a certain amount of the consultant's working time be work —for example, through collaborating with the spent on site, so that they may observe the work and project director on an article for a local government monitor person- hours. However, when the consultant magazine or making a presentation at a public inter - is from out of town it is appropriate that substantial est group or professional organization meeting. portions of the work be performed in his or her own office. Consultants obviously have personal lives and extensive periods of absence from them can be a Conclusion hardship. In engagements where consultants are ex- pected to tap the specialized personnel resources of Consultants can, in appropriate circumstances, be a their firm and cannot afford to bring such people on significant asset to local government. A successful site, the project will benefit by their spending a good project requires management expertise from both deal of time in their own offices. Some monitoring of consultant and client government. But it depends ulti- such work can be effected by requiring documenta- mately on the government's skill in managing the tion of time devoted by task and output. consulting resource —on the extent to which the local government manager applies good management prin- Project Director. A local government project director, ciples of planning, organization, staffing, reporting, with authority to make decisions regarding the per- and budgeting to the management of consultants and formance of the work, should be specific as the point at the same time recognizes the particular of contact with the consultant. The project director motivational forces affecting them. A consulting en- should be professionally qualified in the general field gagement so managed can be a most productive, involved and, if possible, have a "personality fit" with stimulating, and rewarding experience for all parties the consultant's project manager. involved. Deliverables. At the start of the engagement, the — Raymond Olsen deliverables— project reports or other Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. documentation — should be defined. A useful ap- excerpted from the 1979 Municipal Year Book Public \lanagement /April 1981 13 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date - 7 / Agenda Item Numbe • REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION YYYY# YY## YY## YYY# Y### YY# acYYY## YYYYY# YY# YY####### YYYY# YYYY# YYYY # # # # # #Y # #Y # # #YY # #Y #YYYYYYYYYYY! ITEM DESCRIPTION: WATER SLIDE PROPOSAL YYY # #YYYYY #%c # #YYYYYacYY>F # #:I:Y% sic * *YicYrcM # * *# sic # *M # # *M *�CMM1iC #Y� *icYMYMYK 1k k # # #Y # # # *ac #MYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY DEPT. APPROV Arnie Mavis, Director of Recreation YY###H cYYYY# YYYY# Y# YYY# YY *Y #YYY:k # #YYYYYk #YYYYY # #YYY #YY Y Y #YY# t YYYYYYYYYYYYYYY MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report omments below /attached #K KM # #K # #k>kK>F # # #K #k ic Mac # # #:ic:KMrt #ic>KK%K #Ic:K:K NK # #HcN#Hc�acMMMKM #MK M>'FYK # #1c sic A: %M *Y * # #K # #YY # # #Y #Y #Y #Y #Y # # #Y SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Over the past several years, the attendance at the community center pool, especially of young people (ages 6 to 15) has dropped drastically, and as expected, revenue has done the same while the cost of operating the community center has gone up. During the late 1970's and 1980's, the birth rate has dropped drastically, and attendance has also dropped markedly at area pools. Pools that had been making money during the 70's and early 80's suddenly were facing red ink. Early pools built by the cities were designed with the expectation that the participant was coming to actively swim. A final realization was made by the managers of these public facilities that these participants really go to these facilities not to actively swim, but to play, have fun and relax. With this change in philosophy meant the birth of the water slide and other water attractions to attract the user back to the water. In 1972 the attendance at the community center was 186,808, and in 1973 it was 172,383, while in 1990 it was 118,942. The addition of a water slide is the way to get people back into the pool. We have tried many other programs to bring in swimmers (refer to previous literature you received), but without a lot of success. The cost of putting a water slide at the Brooklyn Center Community Center is estimated at $233,000. $200,000 for water slide • 15,000 heat exchanger (to provide extra hot water) 15.000 to expand concession area 3,000 start up costs (buying bracelets, etc.) If the community center pool is to have a future with increased attendance and thus more revenue, the *water slide is the answer based on what is happening in other communities. In looking at the supplemental sheets attached, you will see that in 1990 it cost the city $194,401 to operate the community center which includes the pool, sauna, exercise room, arts and crafts room, gameroom, constitution hall, and the parks and recreation department offices. In the 1992 budget it is proposed the revenue without a water slide would be $311,836 and the expenses $472,171 thus costing the City $160,335. If we were to add a water slide the expected revenue would be $517,963 while expenses would be $572,097 thus costing the City $52,134. By having a water slide in place in 1992, we would cut the City cost by $108,201. The Brooklyn Center Community Center is a valuable asset to the City, but if we don't do something to make it pay for itself, we could be faced with the prospect of closing this facility. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION Direct staff to prepare a project approval and funding resolution. • Water slide Hour Winter Mon - Wed -Fri 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Sat 1:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. Sun Noon to 8:00 P.M. September thru May 38 weeks (2 weeks for cleaning) Summer Mon - Wed -Fri 1:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. Sat 1:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. Sun Noon to 8:00 p.m. June thru August 12 weeks Admission Single Admission 2 -5 $ .75 6 -14 $2.00 15 -17 $2.25 18 -61 $2.75 62 & OVER $2.00 $1.00 more for unlimited water slide Memberships 1992 One month 3 months 6 months 1 year Family $36 $ 94 $160 $264 with water slide $54 $141 $240 $396 Individual $22 $ 55 $ 87 $147 with water slide $33 $ 72 $130 $220 Senior $12 $ 28 $ 56 $112 (BC Resident) with water slide $18 $ 42 $ 84 $168 Revenue (Single Admission) 5 days per week for 38 weeks = 190 day 190 days at $900 revenue per days = $171,000 7 days per week for 12 weeks = 84 days 84 days at $900 revenue per day = $75,600 Total revenue = $246,600 Expense Lifeguards 3 extra guards when water slide is open - $25 per hr Winter 31 hours per week 38 weeks X 31 hours = 1,178 1,178 hours x $25 = $29,450 Summer 56 hours per week 12 weeks at 56 hours = 672 672 hours x $25 = $16,800 Lifeguard Total = $46,250 Cashier Winter 31 hours per week 38 weeks x 31 hours = $1,178 1,178 hours at $8.00 = $9,424 Summer 56 hours per week 12 weeks at 56 hours = 672 672 hours at $8.00 = $ 5,376 Other Total = $14,800 (ERP86S) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET COMPARISON OF PROJECTED 1992 COMMUNITY CENTER BUDGET WITH AND WITHOUT WATER SLIDE RECREATION PROGRAM BUDGET YEAR: 1992 ACTIVITY: COMMUNITY CENTER RECREATION NO. 66 --------------------- ---- -- ESTIMATED REVENUE APPROPRIATIONS NET COST (OR O MEANS NET REVENUE) PRINTERSET: I21 ------ ---- ------- ----- --- --- --- - -- ----- ----- ----- -- -- --- ---- -- - - - --- ---------------------------------- 1992 REQ 1992 REQ 1992 REQ 1992 REQ 1992 REQ 1992 REQ 1990 1991 W/O WATER W WATER 1990 1991 W/O WATE W WATER 1990 1991 W/0 WATER W WATER PROG NO PROGRAM ACTUAL ADOPTED SLIDE SLIDE ACTUAL ADOPTED SLIDE SLIDE ACTUAL ADOPTED SLIDE SLIDE - --- ----- ----- ------- ----- --- - ----- ---- - -- - - - ---- -- - - --- - ------ - - - - - -- - - ----- -- - - -- --- ---- --- - - -- - -- - --- - -- ---- - - --- -- 365 MEMBERSHIPS (FAMILY) 15,174 20,000 16,000 22,000 0 0 0 0 (15,174) (20,000) (16,000) (22,000) 366 MEMBERSHIPS (INDIVIDUAL) 38,226 46,000 35,000 52,000 0 0 0 0 (38,226) (46,000) (35,000) (52,000) 367 GENERAL ADMISSIONS (INDIV) 75,479 90,000 80,000 246,600 2 0 0 0 (75,477) (90,000) (80,000) 246,600) 368 GENERAL ADMISSIONS (GROUP) 4,554 6,000 6,000 8,000 0 0 0 0 (4 554) 6 000 6 0 ( ) ( 00 (8,000) 369 SWIM LESSONS 56,159 50,000 57,000 57,000 34,580 33,356 36,872 36,872 (21,579) (16,644) (20,128) (20,128) 370 SWIM CLUB 25,393 25,020 26,236 26,263 24,082 25,020 26,236( 26,263 (1,311) 0 0 0 371 LOCKER RENTAL 8,638 10,000 8,000 12,000 0 0 0 1 0 (8,638) (10,000) (8,000) (12,000) 372 BABY SITTING 1,390 2,500 2,500 2,500 8,385 6,393 6,446 6,446 6,995 3,893 3,946 3,946 373 CONCESSIONS 51,792 44,000 50,000 60,000 42,933 32,000 38,000 45,000 (8,859) (12,000) (12,000) (15,000) 375 LIFEGUARDING 0 0 0 0 55,186 60,820 63,247 109,497 55,186 60,820 63,247 109,497 376 POOL MAINT & WATER 0 0 0 0 7,046 16,000 16,000 1 20,000 7,046 16,000 16,000 20,000 377 GENERAL SUPERVISION 0 0 0 0 24,266 25,912 25,516 25,912 24,266 25,912 25,516 25,912 378 CLERICAL 0 0 0 0 74,442 61,303 63,834 76,103 74,442 61,303 63,834 76,103 379 SPECIAL EVENTS 12,167 9,500 11,000 9,500 18,384 11,900 10,718 10,718 6,217 2,400 (282) 1,218 380 GAME ROOM 7,451 10,000 8,000 10,000 301 0 0 f 0 (7,150) (10,000) (8,000) (10,000) 381 MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 7,411 7,000 5,000 7,000 10,811 6,000 4,000 1 4,000 3,400 (1,000) (1,000) (3,000) 382 ART GALLERY 0 0 0 0 0 300 300 300 0 300 300 300 383 PROGRAM SUPPL & EQUIPMENT 0 0 0 0 14,063 11,000 12,000 12,000 14,063 11,000 12,000 12,000 384 ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION 0 0 0 0 4,961 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,961 4,000 4,000 4,000 385 CASH OVER /SHORT 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (24) 0 0 0 386 BUILDING ATTENDENTS 0 0 0 0 23,918 26,492 28,112 28,000 23,918 26,492 28,112 28,000 387 CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 25,902 10,398 6,736 6,736 25,902 10,398 6,736 6,736 388 CLEANING SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 14,304 12,000 14,000 17,000 14,304 12,000 14,000 17,000 389 BUILDING REPAIR 0 0 0 0 16,383 13,000 13,000 15,000 16,383 13,000 13,000 15,000 390 UTILITIES 0 0 0 0 82,522 85,000 86,200 106,250 82,522 85,000 86,200 106,250 393 UNSCHEDULED 0 0 0 0 477 0 0 0 477 0 0 0 394 CONSTITUTION HALL RENTAL 3,097 5,000 7,000 5,000 0 0 0 0 (3,097) (5,000) (7,000) (5,000) 395 GIFT CERTIFICATE 0 100 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 (100) (100) (100) 392 CUSTODIAN (P /T) 0 0 0 0 18,408 15,978 16,954 20,000 18,408 15,978 16,954 20,000 TOTAL 306,955 325,120 311,836 517,963 501,356 456,872 472,171 570,097 194,401 131,752 160,335 52,134 le. C, j MEMORANDUM TO: Brooklyn Center City Council FROM: Todd Paulson, Mayor DATE: August 8, 1991 SUBJECT: 97th National Conference on Governance Sept. 19 - 21 "Civics and Politics in the 1 90: Creating Community for Everyone" This conference will be held this fall in Minneapolis. I believe this offers a unique opportunity to gain access to some very interesting speakers on issues affecting Brooklyn Center. Attached is a copy of a tentative agenda for the conference. I hope you can attend this conference on Friday and Saturday. At a convention earlier this year I contacted a number of individuals who would be interested in meeting with Brooklyn Center people during this conference and sharing some of their expertise and information. One of these people is Deanne Butterfield, a council member from the City of Boulder, Colorado, who has some interesting information on citizen participation strategies. I have also contacted Cilla Bosnak, superintendent of neighborhood affairs for the City of Dayton, Ohio. In Dayton, Ohio they have an elaborate and effective neighborhood committee system, portions of which could be very applicable to Brooklyn Center. I also became acquainted with a Christopher T. Gates, vice President of the National Civic League and he made a very interesting presentation on citizen democracy and public /private partnership that I also believe would be helpful for Brooklyn Center to review. I would propose that Brooklyn Center sponsor these three individuals in separate sessions coordinating with their appearances at the league conference. Tentatively it appears Deanne Butterfield would be available on Thursday evening, September 19th to present "Citizen Participation Strategies "; Cilla Bosnak would be available Thursday morning, September 19th regarding "Neighborhood Committees and Groups "; and Wednesday evening, September 18th Christopher Gates would be available for a presentation on "Citizen Democracy and Public /Private Partnership ". I would envision these presentations being made at the Heritage Center. The group size for the presentation would be in the vicinity of 15 to 20 people. The council members, staff and advisory commission members would be important people to have in attendance. At this time, staff believes a "trade out" with Atrium can be arranged. By doing this there would be no cost for the two days and Atrium would be allowed to use the facility for their needs when it is necessary. The only thing we would be losing is potential revenue if someone else wanted to rent the facility during those times. However, dates and times for trade -outs are mutually agreed upon. According to staff this arrangement has been made in the past and it is beneficial to both the City and Atrium. At this point in time some of the presenters have offered their services without charge, and others would probably expect a small honorarium. I am in the process of pinning down those costs. Please call me if you have any questions or suggestions. Tentative Agenda: 97th National Conference on' Governance "CIVICS AND POLITICS IN THE 1 90s: CREATING COMMUNITY FOR EVERYONE" September 19 -21 1991 Hyatt Regency on rticallet ,Mall Minneapolis, Mi Tha rsday. September I9 `3 National Civic League AFFILIATE CROUP MEETINGS (1 pm -- 4:30 pm)_ All- America City Award Program Briefing Representatives of recent All- America City Award recipients South Saint Faul, Minnesota and Dayton, Ohio will brief participants on the application process and what it has meant to win the Award. Dr. Lenneal J. Henderson, Chairman of the 1991 Screening Committee, and Fay H. Williams, member of the 1991 Jury, will discuss the application, screening and selection processes. - • Regional Civic Organization (RCO) Meeting Representatives of regional civic organizations -- including citizen leagues, chambers of commerce, municipal leagues, economic development groups, and city clubs -- will gather to share information on their activities and discuss possible joint projects. The meeting will be facilitated by William R. Dodge, Strategic Parnerships Consulting. Conference Registration Continues throughout the Day. Prn -- 7 pm Early Bird Reception in Exhibition Hall ftid September 20 S am Registration 9 am Opening Plenary " Building 1n C itizen D emocracy: emocrac . Rethi y nk;ng Power and Citizenship for the ; 21st Century" . Speaker: Frances Moore Lapp6, co- Director, Institute for the Arts of Democracy, Moderator: Henry G. Cisneros, former Mayor, San Antonio, Texas and outgoing Chairman, National Civic League 10:15 am -- 21 :30 am - Breakout Sessions I ll•i "'f y '�' �" �_ 1 JUJ ��J:.% =111U5 w , JU *29 i 15:0'_ PINT ' L _ I'��.' I I LEAGUE : ?0? 1t tlt P A. "Community Education for Informed Participation" Speaker: Susan Lederman, President, League of Women "voters of the United States B. "Civic Leaders and Local Journalists: Toward a New Social Contract for the Media" Speaker: Jay Rosen, Gannett Foundation Media Center, Columbia University 12:15 pm Luncheon Plenary 2 pm -- 3:05 pm Interactive Workshops I 1. "The Voting Rights Act and Redistricting/Reapportionment" Presentor: Dr. Lenneal J. Henderson, Senior Fellow, William Donald Schaefer Center, University of Baltimore 2. "Family Policy and Community" Presentor: Dr. Richard Kordesh, Institute of Policy Research and Evaluation, Pennsylvania State University 3. "Grant Writing Fundamentals" Presentor: Rebecca Wells, Director of Development, National Civic League 4. "Strengthening Regional Governance: New Strategies for Intercommunity Problem Solving and Service Delivery" Presentors: William R. Dodge, Strategic Partnerships Consulting, Dr. Allan D. Wallis, Graduate School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado at Denver 3 :15 pm -- 4:20 pm Interactive Workshops II 1. "Using Periodical Publications to Promote the Programs and Values of Your Organization" Presentor: David Lampe, Editor, NATIONAL CIVIC REVIEW, National Civic League 2. "Collaborative Process and Community Dialogue as a Strategy for Confronting Change" Presentor: Tyler Norris, Director, Civic Assistance Program, National Civic League 3. "Catalysts for Change: 'Community' and Leadership" Presentors: David Crislip, American Leadership Forum, TUL 29 "'1 1 i•IHT'L C:I "..If- LEAGUE: _ 4005 F 4/5 _ 5 Andrea 'Williams, consultant in leadership and collaboration, Denver, Colo. 4. "How to Frame an Issue" Presentor: Robert McKenzie, University of Alabama 5 "Reconnecting Citizens with Political Institutions" Presentor: Richard C. Harwood, The Harwood Group, Bethesda, Md. 4.30 pm -. 10 pm Picnic Reception /Minnesota Twins Game Buses will begin loading outside the Hyatt Regency at 4 :30 pm to transport conference participants to the Hubert Humphrey Metrodome for an informal dinner followed by an evening baseball game matching the Minnesota Twins with the Texas Rangers. The cost of transportation, food and beverage, and the baseball game are included in the price of conference registration. ' Tickets are required for this event (enclosed in registration packet ); extra tickets for guests and /or spouses may be purchased at the registration desk for $30. SOtutdav, Senrember 21 9 am Plenary Session /NCL Annual Membership Meeting "The Public vs. the Political System" Speaker: David Mathews, President, Kettering Foundation Moderator: Henry G. Cisneros, former Mayor, San Antonio, Texas and outgoing Chairman, National Civic League 10;75 am -- 11:30 am Breakout Sessions A. "Reforming Political Advertising Practices" Speaker: William Hillsman, President, North Woods Advertising B. "Corporate Philanthropy" Speaker: Laurisa Sellers, Manager, Community Relations C "Competitiveness vs. Choice" Speaker: Neal R. Peirce, syndicated columnist, Washington Post Writers Group 12 NOON Luncheon Plenary Speaker: Harlan Cleveland, President, 1 303 832 4005 TUL E9 "31 1 - 5 :OF*5 idAT'L CI /IC LEAGUE : P 5; World. Academy f Art ri and Science 2pm -- 4 pm Breakout Sessions A. "The Good City, the Good Life and the Good Citizen" Speaker: Daniel Kemmis, author and Mayor, Missoula, Mont. B. "Perspectives on Redistricting in 1991" Speaker: Arturo Vargas, Director, Outreach and Policy Program, MALDEF, Margaret Tinsman, Iowa State Senator C "A New Approach to Citizen Participation: Redesigning the g g Public Hearing Process " Speakers: Larry Boyte, Senior Fellow, Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota at Minneapolis, Peg Michels, Project Public Life, Humphrey Institute, John Kari, Planner, Metropolitan Council 5;30 pm Closing Reception 6:30 pm Banquet /Political Competitiveness Debate Invited Participants: Arne Carlson, Governor, State of Minnesota John Fund, columnist, Wall Street Journal Walter Mondale, former U.S. Senator, Minnesota Paul Wellstone, U.S. Senator, Minnesota .Moderator: Jan Smaby, I£TCA -TV s CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 08/12/91 Agenda Item Number ,— REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION s ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1991 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM DRUG FORFEITURE MONIES DEPT. APPROV -ems Ja es ndsay, Chief of Polic MANAGER'S VIEW/RECONIlVIENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached yes) At this time, the police department has over $2,000 available in forfeiture monies. The department's forfeiture committee has met to consider the requests and has made recommendations to me for expenditures of these funds. I concur with the recommendations and am submitting the following request for City Council authorization. The first item is the purchase of five spare microphones for officers' Nandi- talkies. Because of the extended use of these microphones by all officers, we do have a breakdown factor. These five spares allow for immediate replacement of the broken mike to the officer. It then allows time to either get the broken mike repaired or replaced without any downtime for the officer. The next item is a portable telephone to be used by the captains. Most department vehicles now have mobile phones installed in them. It was decided it would be advantageous for the captains to have a phone available for use. The portable telephone has advantages over the mobile in that the captain using the phone can take it inside to meetings, et cetera and can be available whenever they have the phone with them. The phone does have the capability of being switched into a silent mode where it does not ring out loud, but flashes with an incoming call. It is believed this phone would be of more efficient use by the three captains than one hard -wired into their vehicle. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION The City Council approve the resolution amending the 1991 General Fund Budget and approving the purchase of equipment and authorizing the transfer of funds from drug forfeiture monies. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1991 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM DRUG FORFEITURE MONIES WHEREAS, Section 7.08 of the City Charter does provide for the increase of a budget appropriation by the City Council if the actual receipts exceed the estimates, but not to exceed the actual receipts; and WHEREAS, the actual receipts for the drug forfeiture account #3897 do exceed the estimates by $1,049; and WHEREAS, 1988 Laws of Minnesota C.665 provides for seizure and forfeiture of property used in commission of crime and proceeds of crime and contraband; and WHEREAS, said laws require that said property kept under said laws may be used only in the performance of official duties of the appropriate agency and may not be used for any other purpose; and WHEREAS, 700 of the sale of property may be used by the Brooklyn Center Police Department as a supplement to its operating fund for use in law enforcement; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by the adoption of Resolution No. 88 -195 on November 21, 1988; did authorize the Director of Finance to appropriate said proceeds to the Police Department Budget as they are received to the extent that said proceeds exceed five thousand dollars in any calendar year and then said excess will be reported to the City Council for its appropriation; and WHEREAS, the City Manager and the Chief of Police have recommended the purchase of 5 microphones for handi- talkies and 1 portable telephone; and have further recommended that these costs be appropriated from the balance of the drug forfeiture money. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to authorize the transfer of $400 for the purchase of microphones for handi- talkies and $649 for the purchase of one portable telephone; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED to authorize an appropriation of $1,049 for these purchases and costs; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED to amend the 1991 General Fund Budget as follows: RESOLUTION NO. Increase the Estimated Revenues from Forfeited Drug Money (01 -3897) by $1,049. Increase Department 31, Police Protection, 4220 General Operating Supplies by $400. Increase Department 31, Police Protection, 4552 Other Equipment by $649. 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 Council Meetin Date 8/12/91 • Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS (SOIL CORRECTION IN PALMER LAKE SEGMENT OF 69TH AVENUE, COMPENSATING STORAGE AND WETLAND MITIGATION) IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1990 -10, CONTRACT 1991 -I DEPT. APPROVAL: Sy Knapp, ector of Public Works Y MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: A4 s No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes On June 24, 1991 the City Council approved plans and specifications and directed advertisement for work which will include the soil corrections in the segment of the 69th Avenue project which traverses the south edge of Palmer Lake Park, and the wetland mitigation which is required under our permits from the U.S. Corps of Engineers and from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. All approvals necessary to proceed with this project have now been received, i.e.. • a permit from the U.S. Corps of Engineers • a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • plan approval from the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission • plan approval from the State Aid Division of the Minnesota Department of Transportation The plans and specifications for the project require the contractor to comply with all conditions of the permits, with the exception of the following conditions which must be meet separately by the City: • • Following completion of work included in the current contract, a separate contract must be developed to plant replacement trees and shrubs in the "forested wetland" portions of the wetland mitigation areas. It is estimated that the total costs for that work will be approximately $28,000. (Note: This estimate is increased from our earlier estimate of $20,000, based on our current evaluation of permit requirements). • The Corps of Engineers' permit requires that the City conduct a "Phase III" archaeological study in conjunction with the construction. To meet this requirement, the City needs to hire an archaeologist to conduct this study (see separate item on Council agenda). • The MNDNR permit provides that, on or before November 30, 1996, the two wetland mitigation sites will be "evaluated for success" by a team including representatives from DNR Division of Fish and Wildlife DNR Division of Waters, City of Brooklyn Center, U.S. Corps of Engineers and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. This team "...shall determine whether the results of the two created wetland areas are acceptable and, if not, shall define an appropriate course of remedial action." Bid for work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications were received and opened on July 25. As shown in the resolution, 7 bids were received, with the lowest bid of $614,937.30 being submitted by Ames Construction Inc. That figure compares to SEH's estimate of $953,800.00. Although Ames • Construction has never held any contracts for construction, they are a very large construction company with a responsible history on many projects. All reference checks indicate they are competent and reliable (see attached letter from Sue Mason of SEH, Inc.). Accordingly, we recommend award of the contract to Ames Construction Inc. A resolution for that purpose is provided for Council consideration. It is noted that the resolution provides a 15% contingency. While our practice on other contracts is to provide a 5% contingency at the time of contract award, we recommend a 15% contingency on this contract because of the always unpredictable nature of soil correction procedures. Regardless of the amount of study and design which is expended to forecast the amount of settlement which will occur, it must be recognized that we're dealing with up to 50 feet of peat. While it is also possible that the actual project costs may underrun the contract amount, we believe that it is proper to anticipate a possible overrun. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION A resolution awarding the contract for construction is provided for consideration by the City Council. Note Attached also is a "news release" which describes the work to be done under this contract. If the Council adopts this resolution, copies of this news release will be distributed to the press with a request for coverage, and this • will be published in the next City newsletter. In addition, copies will be sent to property owners within one block of the project limits. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS (SOIL CORRECTION IN PALMER LAKE SEGMENT OF 69TH AVENUE, COMPENSATING STORAGE AND WETLAND MITIGATION) IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1990 -10, CONTRACT 1991 -I WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1990 -10, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer, on the 25th day of July, 1991. Said bids were as follows: Ames Construction, Inc. $ 614,937.30 Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. $ 664,120.00 Park Construction Company $ 696.025.15 Imperial Developers, Inc. $ 748,593.05 C.S. McCrossan Inc. $ 820,965.40 Veit & Company, Inc. $ 869,129.70 Carl Bolander & Sons Company $ 1,088.556.70 WHEREAS, it appears that Ames Construction, Inc, of Burnsville, Minnesota, has submitted the lowest bid. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract, for the amount of $ 614,937.30, with Ames Construction, Inc. of Burnsville, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1990 -10 according to the plans and specifications approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the bid security submitted with their bid, except that the bid securities of the successful bidder and next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been executed. 3. The estimated costs and funding sources of Phase I of Improvement Project No. 1990 -10 (Soil Correction in Palmer Lake Segment of 69th Avenue, Compensating Storage and Wetland Mitigation), Contract 1990 -I, as per low bid are as follows: RESOLUTION N0, Phase I Estimate Project Costs As Per Low Bid Construction Contract $ 614,937.30 Contingency 92,240.00 Future Landscaping 28,000.00 Subtotal Construction $ 735,177.30 Professional Services $ 90,000.00 Staff Engineering (2%) 14,700.00 Legal & Admin. (2%) 14,700.00 Total Est. Project Cost $ 854,577.30 Phase I Estimate Project Fund Sources As Per Low Bid Local MSA Fund JJ2611 $ 42,700.00 Regular MSA Fund #2613 811,877.30 Total Est. Project Funding $ 854,577.30 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. AW ANIV Am W ENGINEERS ■ ARCHITECTS ■ PLANNERS 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, ST PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 612 490 -2000 August 6, 1991 RE: BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 69TH AVENUE - PHASE I CONSTRUCTION PROJECT SEH FILE NO: 90277.01 Mr. Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 On Thursday, July 25, 1991, at 11:00 a.m., bids were received for the 69th Avenue - Phase I construction project for the soil correction and wetland mitigation phase of the 69th Avenue reconstruction project. Seven bids were received that ranged from $1,088,556.70 to $614,937.30. The Engineer's estimate was $953,800.00. The summary of all bids can be seen on the attached bid tabulation. The low bidder is Ames Construction of Burnsville, Minnesota. Ames Construction is a large grading contractor that has completed many Mn /DOT highway projects and enclosed is a submittal of projects completed by Ames Construction in the last five years. We have also checked their references and find that they are a competent and reliable contractor capable of completing this project. Based upon the information available to us, we recommend the City Council consider award of the 69th Avenue - Phase I construction project to Ames Construction at their bid of $614,937.30. If you have any questions, please call me. Sincerely, Susan M. Mason, P.E. 0 SMM /cih Enclosure SHORT ELLIOTT ST PAUL, CHIPPEWA FALLS, HENDRICKSON INC. #, MINNESOTA WISCONSIN !: ;;1 Phase I Work Begins on 69th Avenue Project Work will begin shortly on Phase I of the City of Brooklyn Center's 69th Avenue street improvement project. This initial phase of the project will continue through Spring, 1992, when actual street construction will begin. The improvement project, which extends from Brooklyn Boulevard to Shingle Creek Parkway, will widen 69th Avenue, and realign it to the north. Between Shingle Creek Parkway and West Palmer Lake Drive, a new roadway will be built through the southern edge of Palmer Lake Park. The Phase I project will correct soil conditions in the Palmer Lake portion of the project, and will build new, replacement wetlands and compensating flood storage. Soil Correction The soil in the area of the park where the new road will be built is unstable marl and peat. Trees and brush in the area of the new roadway will be removed, and a special geotextile fabric will be laid on the ground. Then, a process called "surcharging" will be used to compact the soil and make it suitable for construction. Over 73,000 tons of sand will over the next several months be placed on top of the fabric. The weight of the sand will compress the soil, making it more solid and less likely to settle after completion of the project. Next spring, the excess sand will be removed, and the roadway constructed. Surcharging is less disruptive to the area around the construction zone and is more economical than is removing the unstable peat and marl and replacing it with better soil. Wetland Mitigation Palmer Lake Park contains protected wetlands under the jurisdiction of the Department of Natural Resources and the US Corp of Engineers. As a condition 0 of their approval of this street project, the City of Brooklyn Center has agreed to mitigate the loss of wetlands by constructing new, replacement wetlands in two separate locations. Permits from these agencies were granted after extensive review of the roadway and mitigation plans by other state and federal agencies. In one location the City will actually recreate a wetland which had previously been filled. This "mitigation site" is located in the Palmer Lake Nature Area in the southern area of the park, between the parking lot and the lake. The trail and the lake overlook will remain. Wetlands will also be created along Shingle Creek between Shingle Creek Parkway and 69th Avenue, between the City Maintenance Garage and the Shingle Creek Plaza office building. Bicycle /pedestrian trails in the area will be relocated. At both sites the City will establish wetland vegetation of the same type as the vegetation which is being disturbed by the roadway construction project. Additional trees will be planted in the mitigation areas and along the roadway. These plantings will be made in accordance with the specifications of the DNR and the Corps permit approval conditions. Flood Storage The project will also create what is called "compensating storage" for storm water. Because the area of the park in the construction zone is currently a storm water "holding area," new storage must be created elsewhere. This compensating storage will be provided in the same area (the south end of Palmer Lake) as the wetland mitigation. This design has been approved by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Organization. Construction Traffic on 69th Avenue should be only minimally affected by construction of Phase I. The bicycle /pedestrian trail in the area of the soil correction will be temporarily relocated througout the duration of Phase I. LA w' �`v A ` X ` r ` . > N. PALAER IOLE `. PAW c� ;ti • f�7 ' 6 s R K k . '. PALIE4�. , X N. z ; , ?�, IAQC y� Ave X A . ,. A PAVER LAKE ► 1 PALTER LAKE —'" � ' ,' ' ' ' '� 70TN AVE. N. R - ROAD = - - =_ = WETLAND ' x REALIGNMENT MITIGATION 1 69TH. AVE. N. "" � SITES •'. — /FA � "� ' ' • ' PARKIN LOT ti bp N ® j t • •'•;•• a TRAIL OVERLOOK - - - •. GR IAE Z `` 68TH. AVE. N. cc \` -- -- ,. r � k. < �w .... � 87TH w �• �V' ----- - - - - - -- \ TH. A N < �RL ,S BID TABULATION BROOKLYN CENTER, KINNESOTA 69TH AVENUE - PHASE I CONSTRUCTION S.A.P. 109 - 125 -05 CITY PROJECT NO. 1990 -10 CONTRACT NO. 1991 -1 SEE FILE No. 9027)•01 SHAPER CONTRACTING PARR CONSTRUCTION INC IMPERIAL CARL BO LARDER i AMES CONST., INC. CO., . COMPANY DEVELOPERS, INC. C.S. MCCRO SSAN [NC VlIT L CO., INC. LS T. VNIT TOTAL VNIT SONS COMPANY NO. ITEM TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UN I2 TOTAL UKIT TDTA PRIG! L UNIT TOTAL UNIT T07AL UNIT QTY. PH CE - PRICE PRICE PACE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE ____ _____ ___ _____ _______ __ PRICE 20 21.501 MOBILIZATION _____ ___ L•S• 1 3050: -00 ] 30000.00 10000.00 35000.00 35000.00 17500.00 17500.00 30000.00 30000.00 14245. S0 14245 50 45800 00 45800-00 2101.501 CLEARING ACRE 2 2000.00 1000,00 ]000.00 ' 2301.302 CLEARING TREE 6000.00 4100.00 6200.00 2500.00 $000.00 1900.00 5800.00 3000.00 6000.00 1250.00 22 200.00 4400.00 100.00 2500.00 2101.306 GRUBBING 2200.00 200.00 4400.00 75.00 1650.00 200.00 4400.00 75.00 1650.00 65.0 1 0 430.00 ACRE 0.3 2000.00 600.00 7000. 00 2101.507 GRUBBING 900.00 2100.00 690.00 2000.00 600.00 2900.00 870.00 9000.00 2700.00 2600.00 80.00 2104.503 REMOVE BITUKINOUS BIRL TRAIL TREE 22 250.00 5500.00 100.00 7 2200.00 170.00 3740.00 75.00 1650.00 200.00 4400.00 75.00 1650.00 80.00 S.F. 7400 0.50 7]00.00 0.50 1760.00 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION III 3700.00 0,35 2590.00 1.00 1400.00 0.20 1480.00 0.10 740.00 0.25 C.T. 18735 2.75 5 1521.25 3.00 1850.00 210S. 507 SUBCRADE EXCAVATION IF , 3675.00 2.50 46837.50 2.85 53]94.75 2.00 ]7470.00 1.41 16978.40 5.50 103042.50 C.Y. CY 2165 2.75 650].75 3.00 2105.521 GRANULAR 80RROY 11825.00 2.SO 5912.50 2.85 6740.25 3.30 7804.50 2.00 4130.00 5.50 13007.50 IL.V.) C.Y. 26400 4.60 121440.00 3.50 2105.3!3 SALVAGED TOPSOIL 92400.00 4.75 125100.00 ]. 45 91080.00 5.23 138600.00 7.11 187704.00 5.00 132000.00 )C.V.) C.Y. 1250 1.00 375.00 7.00 ]75000 0103.603 SPECIAL EXCAVATION 1250.00 1.50 5625.00 1.60 2000.00 4.00 5000.00 3.50 4. 7.70 1625.00 .00 5.00 0103.604 SL C.Y. 18111 4.00 72414 LL CT GRANULAR BORROW Bi MOO. 90555.00 6.20 112288.20 7.25 131304.75 9.50 172054.50 8.00 1 / /0e 0. 00 17.70 ]20564. ]O TON 71080 2.70 19)]16.00 2.30 0 103.601 ORGANIC PEAT BOA ROY 182700.00 3.00 219210.00 4.04 295241.20 3.77 275511.60 5.12 ]]A 369. 60 4.60 1J61b8.00 C.Y. 1 5. 0 189 2.00 e378.00 0 0105.609 GEOT LX TI LL FABRIC TYPE SPECIAL 20945.00 7.25 13614.25 3.90 36337.10 4.00 16756.00 1.00 0178.00 6.70 286 06.30 S.Y. 15928 2.10 ]6674.40 2.75 2110.501 WATER FOR DUST CONTROL 43802.00 2.30 36674.40 2.50 79820.00 7.50 55748.00 2.25 35838.00 2.15 14245.20 M GA L. 10 100.00 1000.00 20.00 0403.601 LEVEL CONTROL STRUCTURES 200.00 50.00 500.00 30.00 300.00 30.00 300.00 50.00 500.00 30.00 C_S. 3 6400.00 b400.00 10000.00 10000.00 7800.00 7000.00 5000.00 500000 1000.00 1000.00 5000.(10 700.00 2 14 SPAR R . C P3PC ARCH APRON EACH 5000.00 1100.00 2 670.00 1340.00 800.00 3100.00 25 0]•521 14' SPAN RC PIPE ARCR SLVCR CL II -A L.F. 96 71.0 0 1600.00 1150.00 2100.00 1400.00 $800.00 510.00 1020.00 900.00 1000.00 800.00 7200.00 70.00 1600.00 6720.00 107.00 30272.00 58.00 5568.00 85.00 8160.00 100.00 9600.00 81.00 7776.00 506.301 CONSTRUCT ORAI NA GC S2A UC., DE5 207. 7CN C L.P. 7.8 283.00 240 300.00 2340.00 586.00 4570.80 100.00 1404.00 185.00 341].00 200.00 1560.00 220.00 2121.511 2' BIT UM SM OUS TRAIL S.F. 5010 1.40 7056.00 1.20 1716.00 0 521.511 TEMPORARY BITUMINOUS TRAIL 6040.00 1.50 7560.00 2.00 10080.00 1.20 6048.00 0.55 S.P. 9200 1.40 12880.00 1.20 2]72.00 0.85 4284.00 0511.601 V000 GRIP VA LX L.F. 510 6.50 1315.00 2.00 1010.00 7.00 15]0.00 11040.00 1.50 13800.00 2.00 18400.00 1.10 10120.00 0.55 5060.00 0.85 7820.00 0563.601 THAI 'C CONTROL 4.00 2040.00 12.00 6120.00 1.47 749,70 /.]5 L.S. 1 4500.00 4500.00 10000.00 2218.50 2 4' SOLID LINO -KITE EPDXY 10000.00 5000.00 5000.00 1000.00 1000.00 5000.00 5000.00 4500.00 4500.00 7800.00 7800.00 L.P. 1330 2.20 3926.00 2.25 0564 60 3 FLI SIGN PANELS, TYPO C 2992,50 2.25 2992,50 2.50 3315.00 2.16 3138.80 2.50 1325.00 2.35 S.F. IB 10.50 333.00 20.00 7125.50 257 +501 BALE CHECKS 360.00 30 .00 510.00 22,00 396.00 30 .00 510.00 27.00 EACH 60 7.00 420.00 10.00 414.00 20.00 360.00 600.00 7.70 138.00 9.00 540.00 7.35 411.00 7.50 150.00 7,Op 1 420.00 0 0 0 BID TABULATION BROOKLYN CENTER. MINNESOTA 69TH AVENUE - PHASE I CONSTRUCTION S.A.P. 109 - 125 -05 CITY PRO.IECT NO. 1990 -10 CONTRACT N0. 1991-I SEH FILE NO. 90277.01 - I SBAPEA CONTRACTING PARK CO RSTRUCTION IMPERIAL CARL 60 LAND ER i AMCS CONS 7., INC. CO., INC. COMPANY DEVELOPERS, INC. C.S. MCC RO SSAN INC VEIT S CO.. INC. SONS COMPANY [S T. UXIT TOTAL Vk[T TOTAL ONiT NO. TOTAL UNIT T074L URii TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT ___-- _____ TOTAL ITEM UNIT QTY. PRI CL PRICE PRICE PRICE P PR[CC PRtCC PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE __ _____________ _____ 7].502 SILT FENCE, HEAVY DUTY ___________ _______________________________ _______________________ L.F. 1650 2,60 9490.00 ]. 50 12775.00 0675.501 SEEDING SLED MIXTU RL 500 2.70 9855.00 7.00 10950.00 2.73 9964.50 2.50 9125.00 2.75 10017.50 ACRE 1 950.00 950.00 1000.00 3000.00 990.00 0 575.501 SLIDING SLCD MIXTURE 3100 990.00 1200.00 1200.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 ACRE 1.1 050.00 935.00 1000.00 o' 7 5.501 SEEDIXC SELO NIX TURL TYPO SPECIAL ACRE 310.00 090.00 979.00 1100.00 1210.00 900.00 990.00 900.00 990.00 900.00 990.00 3 1550.00 4630.00 1550.00 46550.00 1601.00 4000.0 1800.00 5400.00 1650.00 4950.00 1650.00 4950.00 1600.00 4000.00 25]5.505 SODDING TT P[ LRO SION CONTROL S.Y. 1030 1.75 7167.50 1.75 1 7167.50 1.90 739.0 2.00 3620.00 1.65 1348.50 1.25 2262.50 1.60 3258.00 2375.523 WOOD FIBER BLANKETS. TYPE ALGU [.AR S.T. 1320 1.50 1960.00 1.50 1980.00 1.60 2112.00 2.00 2640.00 1.60 2112.00 1.25 1650.00 1.60 2112.00 TOTALS: $614,937.30 $664.120.00 $696,025.15 $748,593.05 $820,965.40 5869,129.70 51,088,556.70 0.05 0.3G CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8/12/91 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR PHASE III ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES, 69TH AVENUE IMPROVEMENT NO. 1990 -10 DEPT. APPROVAL: Sy Knapp, irector of Public Works MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes As noted in the report regarding award of the contract for construction of Phase I improvement for the 69th Avenue project, the City's permit from the U.S. Corps of Engineers requires the City to conduct a Phase III archaeological study during the progress of construction. This process is intended to assure that if unexpected items of archaeological interest are found during construction, they will be properly salvaged and preserved. At our request four proposals have been received for this work from firms who are on a list of contract archaeologists approved by the Minnesota Historical Society. The lowest cost proposal was submitted by Robert G. Thompson, with a proposal to do all basic work required for $5640, plus construction monitoring at a cost of $100 per day (although the number of days of monitoring required will not be known until work progresses we now estimate this will be between 5 and 10 days). Because Mr. Thompson is approved as a contractor for this type of work by the Minnesota Historical Society, we concur with SEH's recommendation to award the contract for this work to him. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION A resolution awarding the contract for this work to Robert G. Thompson is provided for consideration by the Council. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR PHASE III ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES, 69TH AVENUE IMPROVEMENT NO. 1990 -10 WHEREAS, the permit which the City has received from the U.S. Corps of Engineers for construction of Phase I improvements on 69th Avenue North, Improvement Project No. 1990 -10 requires the City to conduct a Phase III Archaeologic study; and WHEREAS, the following proposals have been received to conduct the study in compliance with the permit requirements: Charges for Cost for Construction Contractor Basic Services Monitoring Robert G. Thompson $5640 $100 /day Institute of Minnesota $9399 to $11,061.30 "reimbursable cost Archaeology basis" Impact Services Inc. $14,140 $200 /day BRW Inc. $58,396 AND WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has estimated that the number of days on which construction monitoring will be required will be 5 to 10 days; and WHEREAS, Robert G. Thompson is included on a list of approved contract archaeologists provided by the Minnesota Historical Society. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The proposal of Robert G. Thompson is hereby accepted. 2. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract with him on the basis of his proposal. 3. All costs for this work shall be charged to the Municipal State Aid fund. RESOLUTION N0, 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. W NGINEERS 1 ARCHITECTS I PLANNERS 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, ST PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 612 490 -2000 August 6, 1991 RE: BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA PALMER LAKE BASIN ARCHEOLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY PROPOSALS Mr. Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 The Minnesota Historical Society determined that the Palmer Lake Basin Archeological Native American site met their criteria for the National Register of Historic Places. Since the area of highest concentration will be disturbed by the 69th Avenue roadway construction and cannot be avoided, a data recovery plan must be implemented so that the project can be evaluated as having no adverse effect. The data recovery plan includes excavating 20 to 30 square meter pits, recovering artifacts, preparing a report and monitoring the site during construction. SEH sent out Requests for Proposals from a list of approved contract Archeologists provided by the Minnesota Historical Society. Included with the Request for Proposal was the Phase II report prepared by the Institute of Minnesota Archeologists in the fall of 1990 and also the scope of work for the data recovery plan prepared by the Minnesota Historical Society. We received four proposals for the archeological project at the Palmer Lake site. BRW submitted a ro 0 1 for p p sa o $58,396. Impact Services submitted a proposal for $14,140 with a $200 per day charge for construction monitoring. We received a proposal from the Institute of Minnesota Archeology which ranged from $9,399 for 20 square meters of excavation to $11,061.31 for 30 square meters depending on the actual amount of excavation required by the State Historical Preservation Office. They proposed to have their construction monitoring charged on a cost reimbursable basis. The final proposal was received from Robert G. Thompson for a cost of $5,640. The construction grading monitoring would be at a cost of $100 per day. 0 SHORT ELLIOTT ST PAUL, CHIPPEWA FALLS, HENDRICKSON INC. MINNESOTA WISCONSIN 'i'w� Mr. Sy Knapp August 6, 1991 Page #2 Since all four consultants received the same information regarding the site and had an opportunity to review the information and site, we recommend the Council award the contract for the archeological data recovery to Robert Thompson of St. Paul, Minnesota. I have checked his references and found that he has completed past work that was satisfactory and acceptable to the Minnesota Historical Society Office. Sincerely, -. � Sus M. Mason, P.E. SMM /cih Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF RICHARD J. PLOUMEN WHEREAS, Richard J. Ploumen was hired by the City of Brooklyn Center as Superintendent of Public Works on July 11, 1985, and continued to serve in this capacity until July 15, 1991; and WHEREAS, he was a member of the Minnesota Street Superintendents Association since 1978, and the American Public Works Association since 1978 where he served on the Board of Directors from 1988 to 1989; and WHEREAS, Richard passed away on July 16, 1991, after 6 dedicated years of service to the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, his public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that his service to the community should be recognized and expressed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the dedicated public service of Richard J. Ploumen is hereby recognized and appreciated by 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. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 08/12/91 • Agenda Item Number 11, REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED SHADE TREES ************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Sy Knapp, ' ector o blic Works ************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * ** ** * MANAGER'S REVIEW/RECOMNIENDATION: ' No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached ************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** • SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached 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 all as new trees are marked. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION It is recommended the Council adopt the attached resolution. • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 08/12/91 ) 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, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The diseased trees at the following addresses are hereby declared to be a public nuisance: TREE PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS NUMBER ---------------------- - - - - -- ----------------------- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- BERTHA HOLMES 6019 HALIFAX AVE N 196 PATRICIA SEVERSON 6025 JUNE AVE N 197 CITY OF B.C. NORTHPORT PARK 198 CITY OF B.C. BEACH PARK 199 THE CROPMATE CO. 3129 49TH AVE N 200 VIRA NIELSEN 4707 AZELIA AVE 201 TIMOTHY & LYNN OLSON 5123 XERXES AVE N 202 TIMOTHY & LYNN OLSON 5123 XERXES AVE N 203 TIMOTHY & LYNN OLSON 5123 XERXES AVE N 204 PATRICK & RENEE THOMAS 6933 MAJOR AVE N 205 THOMAS PIETRZAK 5715 FREMONT AVE N 206 BLANCHE RADIL 4948 ZENITH AVE N 207 ROBERT & CHERYL JECHOREK 5400 MORGAN AVE N 208 CORY & JODI CUSTER 5525 MORGAN AVE N 209 BLANCHE RADIL 4948 ZENITH AVE N 207 ROBERT /CHERYL JECHOREK 5400 MORGAN AVE N 208 CORY & JODI CUSTER 5525 MORGAN AVE N 209 STEVEN & JEAN HEGARTY 2906 MUMFORD RD 210 LEO & DALLAS SEDLACEK 5912 WASHBURN AVE N 211 EDWARD & RENEE BRADLEY 5701 BROOKLYN BLVD 212 DEBRA SCHLICK 6727 PERRY AVE N 213 RICHARD JUDGE 6715 PERRY AVE N 214 WILLIAM & IRENE BARTRAM 6107 BROOKLYN BLVD 215 NORMAN CHAZIN 1308 69TH AVE N 216 NORMAN CHAZIN 1308 69TH AVE N 217 NORMAN CHAZIN 1308 69TH AVE N 218 DONALD & SHIRLEY BOLTER 6418 HUMBOLDT AVE N 219 WILLIAM / CHARLOTTE PHILLIPS 5936 YORK AVE N 220 FRANK & BLANCE PIETRZAK 5925 YORK AVE N 221 HOWARD & JEANETTE MEYER 5036 FRANCE AVE N 222 CHRIS KOHN /SUSAN KOPPI 4001 52ND AVE N 223 RESOLUTION NO. NEIL & TONNIA WHITE 5261 E TWIN LAKE BLVD 224 CHURCH OF ST. ALPHONSUS 7031 HALIFAX AVE N 225 NORMAN GENSMER 5606 IRVING AVE N 226 ROBERT CIENIK 1508 55TH AVE N 227 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 231 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 232 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 233 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 234 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 235 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 236 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 237 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 238 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 239 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 240 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 241 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 242 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 243 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 244 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 245 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 246 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 247 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 248 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 249 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 250 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 251 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 252 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 253 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 254 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 255 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 256 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 257 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 258 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 259 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 260 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 261 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 262 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 263 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 264 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 265 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 266 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 267 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 268 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 269 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 270 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 271 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 272 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 273 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 274 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 275 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 276 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 277 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 278 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 279 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 280 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 281 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 282 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE 283 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 284 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 285 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 286 RESOLUTION NO. MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 287 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 288 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 289 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 290 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 291 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 292 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 293 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 294 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 295 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 296 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 297 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 298 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 299 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 300 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 301 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 302 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 303 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 304 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 305 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 306 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 307 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 308 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 309 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 310 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 311 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 311 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 312 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 313 MONYCOR 6637 HUMBOLDT AVE N 314 RESOLUTION NO. 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owner(s) will receive a second written notice providing five (5) business days in which to contest the determination of the City Council by requesting, in writing, a hearing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. All removal costs, including legal, financing, and administrative charges, shall be specially assessed against the property. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. (REQUESTI) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date Agenda Item Number_ • REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION CREATING A CERTIFICATE OF INDEBTEDNESS FUND AND SEPARATE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER FUNDS DEPT. APPROVAL: Charles Hansen, Assistant Finance Dire or NANAGERIS REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Certificates of indebtedness were sold to finance capital outlays in the 1991 General Fund Budget. These act somewhat like bonded debt with the differences being that they have shorter maturities and are sold to the City's investment trust fund instead of the public. A specific part of the property tax levy for the next three years has been designated for the repayment of these certificates. This debt service fund is needed to demonstrate that the taxes collected for repayment of debt are being properly expended for only that purpose. The Public Utilities Fund accounts for both water and sanitary sewer operations. It is reported in the annual financial report as a single fund followed by supplemental schedules showing water and sewer separately. Essentially, our reporting is doubled because water and sewer are shown on both a consolidated and individual basis. Most other cities report water and sewer only as separate funds. This change will bring us closer to standard accounting practice and simplify our reporting. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION Passage of the attached resolution creating the new funds. • (RESFUND2) Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CREATING A CERTIFICATE OF INDEBTEDNESS FUND AND SEPARATE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER FUNDS ------------------------------------------------- WHEREAS, Section 7.11 of the City Charter provides the City Council with the authority to order the creation of such funds as may be needed to properly account for the financial activities of the City; and WHEREAS, the sale of certificates of indebtedness to finance the 1991 General Fund budget creates the need to account for debt service activities arising from these certificates separate from other debt service activities; and WHEREAS, although the City has had a combined water and sewer fund up until now, the most common accounting practice is to have separate funds to account for water and sanitary sewer activities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that additions to the classification of funds shall be made as follows: 1. Certificate of Indebtedness debt service fund. 2. Water fund. 3. Sanitary Sewer fund. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 1 ! Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF $3 GENERAL OBLIGATION STATE AID STREET BONDS, SERIES 1991B; FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota (City) as follows: Section 1. Sale of Bonds 1.01. The bid of (Purchaser) to purchase $3,000,000 General Obligation State Aid Road Bonds, Series 1991B (Bonds) of the City described in the Official Terms of Offering thereof is determined to be the highest and best bid received pursuant to duly advertised notice of sale and is accepted, the bid being to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest to date of delivery, for Bonds bearing interest as follows: Year of Maturity Interest Rate Year of Maturity Interest Rate 1992 2000 1993 2001 1994 2002 1995 2003 1996 2004 1997 2005 1998 2006 1999 Net effective interest rate: 1.02. The sum of $ being the amount bid by the Purchaser in excess of $2,955,000 is credited to the Debt Service Fund hereinafter created. The City Deputy Clerk is directed to retain the good faith check of the Purchaser, pending completion of the sale of the Bonds, and to return the good faith checks of the unsuccessful bidders forthwith. The Mayor and City Deputy Clerk are directed to execute a contract with the Purchaser on behalf of the City. 1.03. The City will forthwith issue and sell the Bonds in the total principal amount of $3,000,000, originally dated September 1, 1991, in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, numbered No. R -1, upward, bearing interest as above set forth, and which mature serially on April 1 in the years and amounts as follows: f Year Amount Year Amount 1992 $115,000 2000 $205,000 1993 135,000 2001 220,000 1994 145,000 2002 230,000 1995 150,000 2003 245,000 1996 160,000 2004 265,000 1997 170,000 2005 285,000 1998 180,000 2006 305,000 1999 190,000 1.04. motional Redemption The City may elect on April 1, 2000 and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after April 1, 2001. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City shall determine and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par and accrued interest. Section 2. Registration and Payment 2.01. Registered Form The Bonds shall be issued only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, is payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 2.02. Dat es; Interest Payment Dates Each Bond will be dated as � of the last interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which inter - est on the Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case such Bond shall be dated as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest payment date, in which case such Bond will be dated as of the date of original issue. The interest on the Bonds is payable on April 1 and October 1 of each year, commencing April 1, 1992, to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. 2.03. Registration The City will appoint, and shall maintain, a bond registrar, transfer agent, authenticating agent and paying agent (Registrar).. The effect of registration and the_ rights and duties of the City and the Regis- trar with respect thereto are as follows: (a) Register The Registrar must keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond register in which the Registrar provides for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b) Transfer of Bonds Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly execut- ed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registra- tion of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds When Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. (d) Cancellation Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange will be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer When a Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond until the Registrar is satisfied that the endorsement on the Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name a Bond is registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes, and payments so made to a registered owner or upon the owner's order will be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes, Fees and Charges For a transfer or exchange of Bonds, the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds If a Bond becomes mutilated or is destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it and as provided by law, in which ,both the City and the Registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds so sur- rendered to the Registrar will be cancelled by the Registrar and- evidence of such cancellation must be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it is not necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. (i) Redemption In the event any of the Bonds are called for redemp— tion, notice thereof identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first class mail (postage prepaid) not more than 60 and not less than 30 days prior to the date fixed for redemption to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the Regis— trar and by publishing the notice in the manner required by law. Failure to give notice by publication or by mail to any registered owner, or any defect therein, will not affect the validity of any proceeding for the redemption of Bonds. Bonds so called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided that the funds for the redemption are on deposit with the place of payment at that time. 2.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar The City appoints , , Minnesota, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Deputy Clerk are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation is authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar upon 30 days' notice and upon the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar must deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and must deliver the bond register to the 0 successor Registrar. 0 n or before each principal o u g l r interest due date w' p p � without further order of this Council, the Finance Director must transmit to the Registrar r mone s sufficient for e g y the payment of all principal and interest then due. 2.05. Execution, Authentication and Delivery The Bonds will be prepared under the direction of the Deputy Clerk and executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the Deputy Clerk, provided that all signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. In case any officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such signature or facsimile will nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if the officer had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, a Bond will not be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on each Bond is conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this Resolution. When the Bonds have Bo s h e been so re ared executed and authenticated the Finance Director P p r ctor shall deliver the same to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the Purchaser is not obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. 2.06. Temporary Bonds The City may elect to deliver in lieu of printed definitive Bonds one or more typewritten temporary Bonds in substantially the form set forth in Section 3 with such changes as may be necessary to reflect more than one maturity in a single temporary bond. Upon the execution and delivery of definitive Bonds the temporary Bonds will be exchanged therefor and cancelled. Section 3. Form of Bond 3.01. The Bonds will be printed in substantially the following form: [Face of the Bond] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER GENERAL OBLIGATION STATE AID STREET BOND, SERIES 1991B Date of Rate Maturity Original Issue CUSIP September 1, 1991 No. $ The City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal corporation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received promises to pay to or registered assigns, the principal sum of $ on the maturity date specified above with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable April 1 and October 1 in each year, commencing April 1, 1992, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft by , Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Paying Agent, Transfer Agent and Authenticating Agent, or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respec- tively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. The City may elect on April 1, 2000, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds of this issue due on or after April 1, 2001. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City shall determine and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par and accrued interest. The City Council has designated the Bonds as "qualified tax exempt obliga- tions" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) relating to disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions and within the $10 million limit allowed by the Code for the calendar year of issue. Additional provisions of this Bond are contained on the reverse hereof and such provisions shall for all purposes have the same effect as though fully set forth in this place. This Bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon has been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minneso- ta, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile signatures of the :Mayor and City Deputy Clerk and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. Dated: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA (facsimile) (facsimile) City Deputy Clerk Mayor CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. By Authorized Representative [Reverse of the Bond] This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of. $3,000,000 all of like original issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date, redemption privilege, and interest rate, all issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on August 12, 1991 (the Resolution), for the purpose of providing money to defray the expenses incurred and to be incurred in the establishing, locating, relocating, constructing, reconstructing and improving state -aid roads within the City, pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, and the City's home rule charter, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 and Section 162.18, and the principal hereof and interest hereon are payable primarily from the City's annual allotments from the state of Minnesota's Municipal State -Aid Road Fund, as set forth in the Resolution to which reference is made for a full statement of rights and powers thereby conferred. The full faith and credit of the City are irrevocably pledged for payment of this Bond and the City Council has obligated itself to levy additional ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City in the event of any deficiency, which taxes may be levied without limitation as to rate or amount. The Bonds of this series are issued only as fully registered Bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof of single maturities. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner's attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED RECITED COVENANTED D AGREED that hat all acts conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota and the City's home rule charter to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required, and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional, statutory or charter limitation of indebtedness. (Form of certificate to be printed on the reverse side of each Bond,, following a full copy of the legal opinion.) I certify that the above is a full, true and correct copy of the legal opinion rendered by bond counsel on the issue of Bonds of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, which includes the within Bond, dated as of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds. (Facsimile Signature) City Deputy Clerk The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM -- as tenants UNIF GIFT MIN ACT Custodian in common (Cust) (Minor) TEN ENT -- as tenants by entireties under Uniform Gifts or Transfers to Minors JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of survivorship and Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . not as tenants in common (State) Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Notice: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change whatever. Signature Guaranteed: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a national bank or trust company or by a brokerage firm having a membership in one of the major stock exchanges. The Bond Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the infor- mation concerning the assignee requested below is provided. Name and Address: (Include information for all joint owners if this Bond is held by joint account.) Please insert social security or other identifying number of assignee 3.02. The City Deputy Clerk is authorized and directed to obtain a copy of the proposed approving legal opinion of Holmes & Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis, Minnesota, which shall be complete except as to dating thereof and cause the opinion to be printed on each Bond, together with a certificate to be signed by the facsimile signature of the Deputy Clerk in substantially the form set forth in the form of Bond. The Deputy Clerk is authorized and directed to execute the certificate in the name of the City upon receipt of the opinion and to file the opinion in the City offices. Section 4. Payment: Security: Pledges and Covenants 4.01. The Bonds are payable from the General Obligation State Aid Road Bonds, Series 1991B Sinking Fund (Debt Service Fund) hereby created. There is hereby irrevocably pledged and appropriated to the Debt Service Fund an amount of the moneys allocated or to be allocated to the City from its account in the Municipal State Aid Street Fund sufficient to pay the principal of and the interest of the Bonds as they respectively become due, which amounts are set out in detail on Exhibit A attached hereto. If any payment of principal or interest on the Bonds shall become due when there is not sufficient money in the Debt Service Fund to. pay the same, the Finance Director will pay the principal or interest from the general fund of the City, and the general fund will be reimbursed for such advances from the moneys next received by the City from the construction or maintenance account in the Municipal State Aid Road Fund which are not required to be paid into the Debt Service Fund. There is hereby appropriated to the Debt Service Fund all capitalized interest financed from Bond proceeds, if any, and any amount over the minimum purchase price of the Bonds paid by the Purchaser and all accrued interest paid by the Purchaser upon closing and delivery of the Bonds. 4.02. It is hereby determined that principal of and interest on the Bonds will be payable in the first instance wholly from the allocations to the City from its accounts in the Municipal State Aid Street Fund. No general tax levy will be spread for payment of principal and interest at this time, but the City is be obligated to provide moneys for the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as they mature and the City Deputy Clerk shall report to the City Council annually as to any amount required to be levied to meet current or anticipated deficits in the Debt Service Fund. 4.03. The City Deputy Clerk is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Director of Property Taxation and to obtain the certificate required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.63. 4.04. The City shall use proceeds of the Bonds for improvements to 69th Avenue between Brooklyn Boulevard to Shingle Creek Parkway in accordance with the provisions of law and applicable rules of the transportation commissioner. Section 5. Authentication of Transcript 5.01. The officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies of proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial condition and affairs of the City, and such other certificates, affidavits and transcripts as may be required to show the facts within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and under their control, relating to the validity and marketability of the Bonds and such instruments, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the facts stated therein. 5.02. The Mayor and City Deputy Clerk are authorized and directed to certify that they have examined the Official Statement prepared and circulated in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that to the best of their knowledge and belief the Official Statement is a complete and accurate representation of the facts and representations made therein as of the date of the Official Statement. Section 6. Tax Covenant 6.01. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions, and that it will take or cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative action within its power that may be necessary to ensure that such interest will not become subject to taxation under the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations, as presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds. 6.02. The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds under Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods for investments, limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Bonds, and the rebate of excess invest— ment earnings to the United States. 6.03. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of the Bonds or to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the Bonds to be "private activity bonds" within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the Code. 6.04. In order to qualify the Bonds as "qualified tax — exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, the City makes the follow— ing factual statements and representations: (a) the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as defined in Section 141 of the Code; (b) the City hereby designates the Bonds as "qualified tax — exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code; (c) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax- exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds, treating qualified 501(c)(3) bonds as not being private activity bonds) which will be issued by the City (and all subordinate entities of the City) during calendar year 1991 will not exceed $10,000,000; and (d) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City during calendar year 1991 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b) (3) of the Code. 6.05. The City will use its best efforts to comply with any federal procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by this section. 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. I � II STATE OF MINNESOTA } COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. CITY OF BROOKLYN ) CENTER ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held on Monday, August 12, 1991 with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full, true and correct copy of the minutes insofar as they relate to the issuance and sale of $3,000,000 General Obligation State Aid Road Bonds, Series 1991B of the City. WITNESS My hand officially as such Deputy Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this day of 1991. City Deputy Clerk Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (SEAL) B2:BR291- 91.RAW 4 EXHIBIT A DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO FUNDING OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, $3,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION STATE AID ROAD BONDS, SERIES 199IB WHEREAS, the City Brooklyn Center, has issued and sold bonds, dated September 1, 1991, in the amount of $3,000,000 exclusively for the purpose of establishing, locating, relocating, constructing, reconstructing or improving its State Aid Roads in accordance with law; and WHEREAS, said City has irrevocably pledged to the sinking fund from which said obligations are payable that amount of their future State Aid allotments as is permissible by law and needed to pay the principal and interest thereon, which principal payments shall be made from the regular construction account of such State Aid Fund and the interest payments made from the regular State Aid maintenance account, detailed as follows: Year Date Principal Year Date Principal (See Attachment A) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Commissioner of Trans— portation be and is hereby requested to keep a bond record in his office for the City of Brooklyn Center. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Commissioner of Transportation be and is hereby requested upon receipt of this resolution to annually certify the State Commissioner of Finance the sum of money required for the principal and interest on said bonds. 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. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. CITY OF BROOKLYN ) CENTER I hereby certify` that the foregoing resolution is a true and correct copy of the resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota, at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the 12th day of August, 1991, as shown by the minutes of said meeting on file and of record in my office. Dated this day of 1991. Deputy Clerk City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (SEAL) B2:BR291.RAU CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Mcetiog Date 8-12 -9I e Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: Resolution Authorizing Mayor and City Manager to Execute Third -Party Agreement for Year XVII Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program DEPT. APPROVAL: Tom d Bublitz, Assistant EDA 16dordinator MANAGER'S REVIEW/RECOABIENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SLNDL4,RY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes • This resolution would authorize execution of a third -party agreement between the City Council and EDA for the purpose of establishing the EDA as the provider of program activities for the Year XVII Community Development Block Grant Program. Essentially, by approving the agreement, the City Council is agreeing the EDA will administer the CDBG Program activities. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION Staff recommends approval of the Resolution. • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THIRD -PARTY AGREEMENT FOR YEAR XVII URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center by Resolution No. 91 -182 has authorized a subrecipient agreement with Hennepin County for the Year XVII Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center serves as the Provider of Community Development Block Grant Program activities in the City of Brooklyn Center. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that its Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute a third -party agreement between the City of Brooklyn Center and the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center for the purpose of implementing Year XVII Community Development Block Grant Program activities. 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. THIRD PARTY AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM This agreement made and entered into by and between the CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER (City) and BROOKLYN CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (Provider). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City is a cooperating unit in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) by virtue of a joint coopera- tion agreement executed between the City and Hennepin County pursuant to MSA 471.59, and WHEREAS, the City has executed a Subrecipient Agreement with Hennepin County which allocates $215,761 from the FY 1991 Urban Hennepin County CDBG program for the purpose of supporting the activities as identified in Exhibit 1, attached and made a part of this agreement, hereinafter referred to as "activ- ities." NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties hereto mutually agree to the following terms and conditions: 1. The Uniform Administrative Requirements in 24 CFR 570.502 issued by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), shall apply to activity. 2. The Provider shall be responsible for procurement of all supplies, equipment, services, and construction necessary for implementation of the activity. Procurement shall be carried out in accordance with the OMB Circular A -110. The Provider shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, all advertisements, negotiations, notices, and documents; enter into all contracts; and conduct all meetings, conferences, and interviews as necessary to insure compliance with the above described procurement requirements. 3. The Provider shall be responsible for carrying out any acquisi- tions of real property necessary for implementation of activity. The Provider shall conduct all such acquisitions in its name and shall hold title to all properties purchased. The Provider shall be responsible for preparation of all notices, appraisals, and documen- tation required in conducting acquisition under the latest appli- cable regulations of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 and of the CDBG Program. The Provider shall also be responsible for providing all relocation notices, counseling, and services required by said regulations. 4. The Provider shall comply with the acquisition and relocation requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 as required under 24 CFR 570.606(a) and HUD implementing regulations at 24 CFR Part 42; the requirements in 24 CFR 570.606(b) governing the residential anti - displacement and relocation assistance plan under section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (the Act); the relocation require- ments of 24 CFR 570.606(c) governing displacement subject to section 104(k) of the Act; and the requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(d) governing optional relocation assistance under Section 105(a)(11) of the Act, as pertaining to the activity. 5. The Provider shall maintain records for the expenditure of all CDBG funds it receives, such records to be maintained in accordance with OMB Circular A -110 and A -122, as applicable. All records shall be made available, upon request of the City for monitoring by the City. The City shall have authority to review any and all procedures and all materials, notices, documents, etc., prepared by the Provider in implementation of activity, and the Provider agrees to provide all information required by any person authorized by the City to request such information from the Provider for the purpose of reviewing the same. 6. The Provider shall take all necessary actions required to implement activity and to comply with any related requests by the City, it being understood that the City has responsibility to Hennepin County for insuring compliance with such requirements. The Provider also will promptly notify the City of any changes in the scope or character of activity. 7. The Provider does hereby agree to release, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from and against all costs, expenses, claims, suits, or judgments arising from or growing out of any injuries, loss or damage sustained by any person or corporation, including employees of Provider and property of Provider, which are caused by or sustained in connection with the tasks carried out by the Provider under this Agreement. 8. The City agrees to provide the Provider with CDBG funds in such amounts as agreed upon in this Agreement to enable the Provider to carry out activity. It is understood that the City shall be held accountable to Hennepin County for the lawful expenditure of CDBG funds under this Agreement. The City shall therefore make no payment of funds to the Provider and draw no funds from Hennepin County on behalf of Provider, prior to having received from the Provider a request for reimbursement including copies of all documents and records needed to insure that the Provider has complied with all appropriate requirements. 9. The Provider shall maintain the environmental review record on all activities. The Provider shall be responsible for providing necessary information to the Subrecipient to accomplish this task. 10. The City shall be responsible for the preparation of all requests to Hennepin County for HUD wage rate determinations on activity. The Provider shall notify the City prior to initiating activity, including advertising for contractual services which will include costs likely to be subject to the provisions of Federal Labor Standards and Equal Employment Opportunity and related implementing regulations. 11. The City agrees to provide technical assistance to the Provider in the form of oral and /or written guidance and on -site assistance regarding CDBG procedures and project management. This assistance will be provided as requested by the Provider, and at other times, at the initiative of the City, when new or updated information concerning the CDBG Program is received by the City from Hennepin County and deemed necessary to be provided to the Provider. 12. In accordance with the provisions of 24 CFR 85.43, suspension or termination of this Agreement may occur if the Provider materially fails to comply with any term of this Agreement. This Agreement may be terminated for convenience in accordance with 24 CFR 85.44. The Agreement may be terminated with or without cause by either party hereto by giving thirty (30) days written notice of such termination. CDBG funds allocated to the Provider under this Agreement may not be obligated or expended by the Provider following such date of termination. Any funds allocated to the Provider under this Agreement which remain unobligated or unspent following such date of termination shall automatically revert to the City. 13. Any material alterations, variations, modifications or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement approved by Hennepin County through its Office of Planning and Development and properly executed by the authorized representatives of the parties. All amendments to this Agreement shall be made a part of this Agreement by inclusion in Exhibit 2 which shall be attached at the time of an amendment. 14. All data collected, created, received, maintained or disseminated for any purpose by the Provider in the performance of this Agreement is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minne- sota Statutes, Chapter 13, and all other statutory provisions governing data privacy, the Minnesota Rules implementing such act now in force or hereafter adopted, as well as federal regulations on data privacy. 15. During the performance of this Agreement, the Provider agrees to the following: In accordance with the Hennepin County Affirmative Action Policy and the County Commissioners' Policies Against Discrimination, no person shall be excluded from full employment rights or participation in, or the benefits of, any program, service or activity on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status, affectional /sexual preference, public assistance status, ex- offender status, or national origin; and no person protected by applicable federal or state laws against discrimination shall otherwise be subjected to discrimination. 16. The effective date of this Agreement is July 1, 1991. The tion date of this agreement is December 31, 1992, or at such time as activity is satisfactorily completed prior thereto. Upon expira- tion, the Provider shall relinquish to the City all program funds unexpended or uncommitted for the activity. 17. Any program income as a result of the activity shall be returned immediately to the City upon receipt and the provisions of 24 CFR 570.504 shall apply. 18. Any real property acquired or improved as a result of activity, in whole or in part, using CDBG funds in excess of $25,000 shall either be: a. Used to meet one of the national objectives in 24 CFR 570.208 until five years after expiration of this Agreement; b. Disposed of in a manner that results in the City being reimbursed in the amount of the current fair market value of the property less any portion of the value attributable to expenditures of non -CDBG funds for acquisition of, or improvement to, the property. 19. The following standards shall apply to real property acquired or improved as a result of activity, in whole or in part: a. The Provider shall inform the City at least thirty (30) days prior to any modification or change in the use of the real property from that planned at the time of acquisition or improvements, including disposition. b. The Provider shall reimburse the City in an amount equal to the current fair market value (less any portion thereof attribut- able to expenditures of non -CDBG funds) of property acquired or improved as a result of activity that is sold or transferred for a use which does not qualify under the CDBG regulations. Said reimbursement shall be provided to the City at the time of sale or transfer of the property. 20. The Provider agrees to provide City or Urban County with an annual audit report consistent with OMB Circular A -110, Uniform Requirements for Grants to Universities, Hospitals and Non - Profit Organizations and OMB Circular A -122 Cost Principles for Non - profit organizations. a. The audit report is to be provided to City on July 1 of each year this Agreement is in effect and any findings of non- compliance affecting the use of CDBG funds shall be satisfied by Provider within six (6) months of the provision date. b. The audit may not be paid from CDBG funds. C. City reserves the right to recover from Provider the full amount of any CDBG funds found to be improperly expended or otherwise disallowed. 21. The Provider shall comply with the general condition of 24 CFR 570.200, particularly sections; (f) (Means of Carrying Out Eligible Activities); and (j) (Constitutional Prohibitions Concerning Church /State Activities). 22. The Provider as appropriate shall comply with the Lead -Based Paint notification, inspection, testing and abatement procedures estab- lished in 24 CFR 570.608. 23. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the Provider, to any n for influencing o Y P r attempt- ing to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. 24. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influ- ence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement Provider will complete and submit Standard Form -LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. Provider, having signed this Agreement, and the City of Brooklyn Center having duly approved this Agreement on , 1991, and pursuant to such approval the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and affixed their seals this _ day of 9 1991. Upon proper execution, this Agreement will be legally valid and binding. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER STATE OF MINNESOTA By Mayor and Its City Manager PROVIDER: BROOKLYN CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY Its President and Its Executive Director Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TWO MICRO COMPUTERS AND AMENDING THE 1991 GENERAL FUND BUDGET WHEREAS, the City's Data Processing Committee has recommended the purchase of two micro computers for the Public Utilities Clerical /Bookkeeping staff; and WHEREAS, the MIS Coordinator estimates that the desired computers and software can be purchased for $5,030; and WHEREAS, the existing workstation terminals used by these staff are recommended to be transferred for use by Assessing and Administration staff; and WHEREAS, these terminals were purchased by the Public Utilities Fund and have a depreciated value of $880; and WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available in the Data Processing Division 1991 capital outlay budget to purchase these terminals from the Public Utilities Fund. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The purchase of two micro computers and software for the sum of $5,030 is hereby authorized. All costs of this purchase are to be charged to the Public Utilities Fund. 2. The sum of $880 is allocated from the existing appropriation for Object #4551, Division 20,. for the purchase of two workstation terminals from the Public Utilities 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. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 8 - I2 -9 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR DELIVERY OF ONE (1) COMPACT CARGO VAN DEPT. APPROVAL: � I n-1. p Patrici A. Page, Deputy City Cl k MANAGER'S REVIEW/RECOAAIENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached ) • Attached are specifications for a compact cargo van requested by the Liquor Stores. If the specs are approved I would advertise for bids and open them on September 4, 1991. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION I recommend approval of the attached resolution. T • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR DELIVERY OF ONE (1) COMPACT CARGO VAN BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center that the specifications for the delivery of one (1) compact cargo van are hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise for and receive bids for the delivery of one (1) compact cargo van in accordance with said specifications. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution as declared duly passed and adopted. CALL FOR BIDS FOR ONE (1) COMPACT CARGO VAN Sealed proposals endorsed with the title of the equipment and the bidder's name will be received at the office of the City Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota up to 11 a.m. on Wednesday, September 4, 1991, at which time bids will be opened and read. The equipment to be furnished consists of the following as called for in the specifications: One (1) Compact Cargo Van Proposed forms of contract documents, including the forms and specifications therefore, are on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota where they may be examined. Specifications and proposal blanks may be had for the contractor's individual use by applying to the City Clerk. No bidder may withdraw his bid within thirty (30) days after scheduled time of opening bids without the consent of the City. Bids must be made on the basis of cash payment for the equipment. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk prior to the closing time for receiving bids. The City Council reserves the right to waive any informalities in any bids received and reject without explanation any or all bids received. Mailed bids should be addressed to: City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 By order of the City Council P.A. Page, Deputy Clerk Date: August 12, 1991 (Published in the Brooklyn Center Post August 21, 1991) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 PROVISIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR ONE (1) COMPACT CARGO VAN 1. GENERAL All bids must be received at the office of the City Clerk on or before 11 a.m., September 4, 1991, and shall be submitted on the enclosed proposal form in a sealed envelope plainly marked "Bid for Compact Cargo Van." It is also understood that the City Council reserves the right to reject any or all bids, to waive informalities, and to award the contract to the best interest of the City. The vans proposed and delivered to the City of Brooklyn Center shall be complete in every respect and ready for operation in accordance with these specifications, with certificates of service, and inspection submitted at the time of delivery. Manufacturer's reference, trade name, brand, or description mention in this proposal are descriptive, but not restrictive, and used only to indicate type and standard of material or equipment desired. The van the bidder proposes to furnish must be of a current production. Obsolete equipment is not acceptable. Catalog information showing make, model, and complete specifications of the van the bidder proposes to furnish shall accompany the vendor's bid. Insufficient descriptive information shall be cause for rejection of the bid. The bidder must give assurance to the City of Brooklyn Center in regard to patent infringements and in case of suits against the City by other parties. He must defray all cost in connection with such suit and save the City harmless in all actions. 2. GUARANTEE The bidder shall furnish a manufacturer's standard new car warranty as a minimum and shall guarantee the equipment as to the specified capacity and satisfactory performance and to be free of defects in design, material, and workmanship. All defective parts, material, and labor shall be replaced free of cost to the City of Brooklyn Center. 3. DELIVERY DATE The successful bidder shall schedule delivery to the City of Brooklyn Center for the earliest date possible. 4. AWARD OF CONTRACT Award of contract by the City of Brooklyn Center will be based on, but not necessarily limited to, the factors of price, delivery date, parts and service, as well as analysis and comparison of specifications and performance. 5. OBJECTIONS TO SPECIFICATIONS Any objections to the specifications must be submitted to the City Clerk in writing five (5) days prior to the opening of bids. 6. PROOF OF WORKER'S COMPENSATION Each bid shall be accompanied by proof that the bidder has Worker's Compensation Insurance in force. Such proof shall be in the form of a copy of the bidder's current insurance certificate or certificate of exemption from the State Insurance Commissioner. GENERAL The vehicle and /or equipment called for herein shall be a new Compact Cargo Van currently advertised model incorporating all the latest available changes and features, including all the safety devices and tools to make a satisfactory operating unit. They shall meet the requirements of Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry, Division of Accident Prevention, and the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. BODY Compact Cargo Van w /Rustproofing SEATING Two (2) bucket seats, vinyl upholstery, full foam padded seats MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT Cigarette lighter Tinted glass throughout Factory air conditioning Left and right outside mirrors approximately 6 x 8 Speedometer Tilt steering wheel Front and rear bumpers painted Left and right visors CHASSIS Wheel Base: 109" minimum. Brakes: Power disc front Drum rear Transmission: Automatic transmission. Differential: Front /rear wheel drive configuration. Suspension: Standard duty Steering: Power assisted. Wheels and Tires: Belted radial tires /All season design tread Spare: Full -sized tire & rim Engine Compartment: Engine 6 cyl. F. I. design, 3 liter displacement minimum, higher cooling capacity radiator - heavy duty P Y vY Y transmission cooler, heavy duty fuel filter, oil filter, aire cleaner, etc. ELECTRICAL Heavy Duty Battery: Heavy duty (70 amp hour minimum) Generator: 80 amp minimum Radio: Standard. Lights: All lights to meet Minnesota Vehicle Code. COLOR Manufacturer's standard color to be selected at bid opening. MANUAL One (1) Parts Manual and One (1) Service Manual to be provided. PROPOSAL ONE (1) COMPACT CARGO VAN TO: City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Gentlemen: We propose to furnish and deliver one (1) compact cargo van according to the specifications at the following bid price: 1. Total Bid Price 2. Delivery Charge (For those dealers in excess of a 50 mile radius of Brooklyn Center) 3. Delivery Date (calendar days) Signed: Firm Name: Address: Date: Bid Opening: September 4, 1991, 11 a.m. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8/12/9 Agenda Rem Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: Performance Guarantee Reduction ********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attache The following performance guarantee is recommended for reduction as specified: 1. Twin View Meadows 51st and France Avenues North Planning Commission Application No. 90028 Amount of Guarantee - $62,500 Obligor - Twin View Development, Inc. The grading and fencing work for this project are completed. The value of these two work items was $23,500. Recommend reduction of guarantee to $40,000 at this time. Submitted by, Gary Shalcross Planner CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 08/12/91 • Agenda Item Number I 3 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - REGISTERED LAND SURVEY (Midas Muffler /Brookdale) DEPT. APPROVAL: Sy Knapp, Dir for of Public Works MANAGER'S REVIEW/RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes • Previous City Council Action On July 8, 1991 the City Council approved Planning Commission Application No. 90013, preliminary Registered Land Survey for the Midas Muffler Property /Brookdale. Approval of the preliminary Registered Land Survey was subject to the conditions outlined on the attached memorandum. It is noted that Condition No. 3 of the approval limits the development rights of either parcel of the proposed Registered Land Survey to those which were apportioned in the existing Brookdale owners association agreements. At the time of filing, the Registered Land Survey will be assigned a unique number by Hennepin County, and the City will be notified of such. Staff Recommendation This Registered Land Survey is recommended for approval with recognition of Condition No. 3, which states that no separate development rights accrue to either parcel apart from the collective development rights of the Brookdale Shopping Center. • CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE: 569 -3300 C ENTER FAX: 569 -3494 EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE Mark J. Maloney, P.E. 911 City Engineer DATE: August 6, 1991 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works RE: Final Plat - REGISTERED LAND SURVEY for Midas Muffler Property Q Brookdale Conditions adopted for the preliminary Registered Land Survey b the City Council at its Jul 8 P P Y g Y Y Y � Y 1991 meeting were as follows: 1. The final RLS is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final RLS is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. No separate development rights accrue to either parcel apart from the collective development rights of the Brookdale Shopping Center. The property owners were referred to the Brookdale owners association for settlement of the apportionment of development rights within the complex. I have reviewed the proposed Registered Land Survey in accordance with Minn. Statutes, Chapter 508, and with the provisions of the City Ordinance. It should be noted that, consistent with Chapter 508, no public dedication of right -of -way or easements is indicated on the drawing. Additionally, Condition No. 3 above, relating to development rights, limits the City's interest in the proposed Registered Land Survey. Accordingly, I recommend approval of the final Registered Land Survey for the Midas Muffler Parcel. Sincerely, Mar J. Maloney, , City Engineer �,TYN REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA I, I1�_T F1 40.00 S.89 ° 09'08' W. Oct ° a �? a, N.28 °44'04'W. 43.04 0 - 0 m o a om F 4300 r- -a m a _� S.28'44'04 of LL_ AI 2 100.49 A, � � N.85 °08'11"W. , 24 spike ad. S.89 °09'08 "W. 42.92 _ = 152 q 633" W 68.73' / ' fI 25'43' 6' 134.97 � �. rK N.11 �. -- R= 978.93 84.19 S.07 °03'06 "W. 24 / ,� 0 0. .> ?��. PK Neu n - _ 0 53 N.66 °33'50 "W. 100.00 c 20.7 \ \ \ lo N � � 1 0. \/ 6j 9$ BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASSUMED o DENOTES IRON MONUMENT s �1 loo Bolton & Menk Inc. 0 100 200 Consulting Enghrccrs and Land Surveyors scale in feet cuccr � nc � c1aFC 7C CITY OF BROOKLYN CEN'T'ER Council Meetin Date 08/I2/9I • Agenda Item Number / REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - LUNACEK ADDITION DEPT. APPROVAL: Sy Knapp, irector Public Works MANAGER'S REVIEW/RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes . Previous City Council Action On February 25, 1991 the City Council approved Planning Commission Application No. 91004, preliminary plat of LUNACEK ADDITION. Approval of the plat was subject to the conditions outlined on the attached memorandum. In addition to the "regular" conditions, approval of the plat was conditioned on the approval of the rezoning Application No. 91003. A public hearing was held at the March 25, 1991 meeting, and action on the second reading of the rezoning ordinance was tabled for lack of "documentation ". In addition to the above conditions, the City Engineer has requested that a minor revision be made to the drawing. The applicant has agreed to these revisions. Staff Recommendation The final plat of LUNACEK ADDITION is recommended for approval, subject to the approval of rezoning Application No. 91003. CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 BROOKLYN TELEPHONE: 569 -3300 C ENTER FAX: 569 -3494 EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE Mark J. Maloney, P.E. 911 City Engineer DATE: August 6, 1991 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works RE: Final Plat - LUNACEK ADDITION Conditions adopted for the preliminary plat by the City Council, at its February 25, 1991 meeting were as follows: 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. Approval of preliminary plat Application No. 91004 is subject to approval of rezoning Application No. 91003. As part of my review, I've requested that the portion of Xerxes Ave. No. adjacent to Lot 2, Block 1, be shown as 33.02 feet wide, as it is immediately north and adjacent to Lot 1. The applicant's Land Surveyor has assured me that it wouldn't be a problem. Accordingly, I recommend approval of the final plat - LUNACEK ADDITION, subject to the above conditions. Sincerely, Mark J. M ey, PE City Engineer �YN »esuian s s s LUNACEK ADDITION AN r 3 M ADDITION LOT 2 7 :u Nor h tip -- tip 1E 2 6 ^ = -• 33 40 0 to too p p , ------ 30 -Y • W 3 SCALE W FEET e6 0 • a. a0c: o BEARING NOTE: ; r` tv 134.1 FOR PURPOSES OF THIS PLAT, THE S,•V BLOCK o 1 WEST o EN :u EAST LINE OF SECTION 10, lJil TOWNSHIP 11R, RANGE 21 IS ASSUMED R.R. McCH�S ?•1�•f ~ V) .� TO BEAR S02 - E p 33.02 1y ry 2.20 30.02 iti x LOT 1 1 M£5T WEST w 1� tl menument Set A ana E capped c with a a PlaStle tap home.. I—d wther \ \\ r Y� �■ Z Y 7� ' • aerates found l ire. monument op�oog AND SONS \ \\ \ \ NON - EXCLUSIVE /'�'-- �� 8S ` •._ \ �\ UTILITY EASEMENT V) • \ \ 00C. NO. 886691 \ 253.34 134.98 30.02 .... •y. 0 1 5.00 -•" ---- 165.00 6 ;1.0RTH x N ¢9 "E S .08'30 "E WEST 30 \. ?•>a Anomn ?• J I tam ' n M an t ' ar na .at» u rut a ��.33 ••� ` �� M MdlrMttl pl. [e d twe ,wet.�.tT :1r I � Ou.erU V ftctge q fowww ne. e�int y ^' i r � ct raro.[a caurrr, r..rute �! C7 '• i j LOT 2 y �1. I I � ' I CNERRIER LAND SURVEYORS, INC. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS 8fUExr 3 or 3 BffEn" HOLMES & GRAVEN CHARTERED 470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 CHARLES L. LEFEVERE (612) 337 -9300 Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337 -9215 337 -9262 July 12, 1991 Mr. Brad Hoffman City of Brooklyn Center 6300 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Re: Brookdale Corporate Center Dear Brad: Attached is a copy of a letter from the attorney for Northwestern National Life Insurance Company (NWNL). Mr. Bogart is requesting that the City and HRA execute quit claim deeds to Lot 1, Block 1, Brooklyn Farm. He has also attached proposed quit claim deeds for the City and the HRA. This case involves part of the property which was the subject of a redevelopment agreement dated December 19, 1985. Under that development agreement, the developer was obligated to develop a project on the real estate described in the attached quit claim deeds. Basically, this project has never gotten off of the ground. The mortgagee, NWNL, has foreclosed on the property. As mortgagee, NWNL is interested in cleaning up the title to the property so that the property can be marketed more easily. Under the development agreement, the City and HRA had certain limited rights. Most of these rights have already been taken care of or have lapsed by the passage of time. For example, the agreement required an easement for, and construction of, a storm water holding pond on part of the property. Sy Knapp informs me that this right has already been taken care of by dedication on the plat of the storm water holding pond. The City and the HRA were also given a right to require a parking area to be constructed if a need was demonstrated for such parking. However, this was to occur, if at all, prior to June 1, 1989. Since no need was demonstrated prior to that date, and no notice was given to the developer requiring it to construct the parking area, this right on the part of the City and HRA has lapsed. The redevelopment agreement provides that the rights of the City and the HRA are very limited in the case of a mortgagee in foreclosure such as NWNL. Basically the only remaining rights with the City or HRA might argueably have is a covenant that the owner will not use the property except as specified in the redevelopment agreement without the written approval of the City. However, the City is required to approve development of the property if (i) it is in accordance with the redevelopment plan, and (ii) the development is in accordance with trip generation standards contained in an exhibit to the redevelopment agreement. With the respect to the requirement that development be in accordance with the redevelopment plan, it must be noted that the redevelopment plan is very unspecific. It basically shows a map of the property with a proposed footprint of a building to be constructed on the property. However, even that plan does not necessarily mean that the City could enforce the construction of a building only having the footprint specified in the plan. Therefore, this requirement really adds very little to the City's general authority to regulate* the construction of improvements on the site. With respect to the requirement that development be in accordance with the trip generation standards contained in Exhibit k to the redevelopment agreement, you have indicated that given the development of the surrounding area and the zoning for this property, it is highly unlikely that any development of the property will result in a generation of excessive vehicle trips. It should also be noted that there is some ambiguity in the language of the redevelopment agreement and the deed of conveyance from the HRA to the developer which could make it difficult for the City to enforce these restrictions in any case. Therefore it does not seem worthwhile to oppose NWNL s efforts to clear title on the property. The City would incur legal expenses in an effort to do so, and that effort might not be successful. Even if it were successful, it is questionable whether the City secures any significant advantage from these remaining restrictions on development. If the City and .the HRA agree with this analysis, I would recommend that both the City and the HRA authorize the execution and delivery of quit claim deeds to NWNL for Lot 1, Block, Brooklyn Farm. I believe that action by a simple motion recorded in the minutes would suffice for this purpose. I realize that the EDA is the successor to the rights and obligations of the HRA. However, since the contracts are still technically in the name of the HRA, I would recommend that, for purposes of simplifying this matter, the action simply be taken by the HRA. Finally, before executing a quit claim deed, the legal description (Lot 1, Block 1, Brooklyn Farm) should be checked to assure that this is property in which the City and HRA do not have any other interest (such as utility easements, roadway easements, and the like) so that we do not I inadvertently surrender any substantial property right in Lot 1, Block 1. If you have any questions about any of these matters, please give me a call. Very truly yours, r Charles L. LeFevere CLL /cmm BR291 -119 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 08/12/91 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: CLASS B ON -SALE AND SUNDAY INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR CHI -CHI'S DEPT. APPROV Jame in say, Chief of Pol MANAGER'S REVIEW/RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUNIlV][ARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached ,es) • Attached lease find the completed background investigation in application for a Class B and P P g g PP Sunday On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for GBM of Brooklyn Center, Incorporated d /b /a Chi - Chi's Brooklyn Center. GBM of Brooklyn Center, Inc. is in the process of purchasing the La Casita Restaurant located at 2101 Freeway Boulevard in Brooklyn Center. You will note in the background that the City has received a signed copy of the purchase agreement for the property between the two parties. The final closing date and signing of the other legal documents is pending the approval of the various licenses needed for the establishment. The department finds nothing in the background investigation which would preclude issuance of this license. A request was made to waive the probationary license for the establishment. In support of the request, documentation of the food /liquor split information for 1990 at the Chi -Chi's in Brooklyn Park was submitted. The owners also stated that the menu would be the same as in Brooklyn Park and stated they would not be requesting to change the seating and /or lounge size currently in the La Casita Restaurant. The Chief did waive the probationary period for the establishment based on this information. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION The City Council approve the Class B and Sunday On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licenses for GBM of Brooklyn Center, Incorporated d /b /a Chi -Chi's Brooklyn Center, subject to submittance of final paperwork to the police department. • r" The following will be a report concerning a background investigation for a liquor license application for the corporation of GBM of Brooklyn Center Incorporated to operate DBA Chi -Chi's Brooklyn Center at the address of 2101 Freeway Blvd, Brooklyn Center, MN. This previous restaurant operating under the name of La Casita. This investigation is conducted under case file number 91- 09771. This report and investigation is conducted by Investigator Robert DIRKS and is transcribed and typewritten by Velma THROLDAHL, Police Secretary, for the Brooklyn Center Police Department. REASON: The applicants are applying for a liquor license to be operated under the business name of GBM of Brooklyn Center Incorporated, which is a limited partnership, and will operate using the name of Chi -Chi's Restaurant Brooklyn Center. The applicants are requesting the background investigation as they have entered into and have submitted a signed purchase agreement dated July 30, 1991 between GBM of Brooklyn Center Incorporated and SAH Incorporated the current ownership and operating managers of La Casita Restaurant, operating at 2101 Freeway Blvd., Brooklyn Center, MN. Contingent upon this sale is the approval of a liquor license for GBM of Brooklyn Center. The current address for GBM of Brooklyn Center Incorporated thus will be 2101 Freeway Blvd., Brooklyn Center, MN, this being the business operating address for the limited partnership. APPLICANT: GBM of Brooklyn Center Incorporated A general partnership operating as DBA Chi -Chi's Brooklyn Center. Address of 2101 Freeway Blvd., Brooklyn Center, MN. Contact person for the corporation being John P. BOOSALIS, President. Address 1200 Marion Lane West #1206, Minnetonka, MN 55343, 612- 542 -2229, work number 561 -0550. CORPORATION BACKGROUND: GBM of Brooklyn Center Incorporated, 2101 Brooklyn Blvd Brooklyn Center, MN 55430, is the general partner of a limited partnership which is made effective as of June 20, 1991 where as the partners I Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 2 wish to form a limited partnership under the laws of the State of Minnesota for the purposes of owning and operating a restaurant at 2101 Freeway Blvd., Brooklyn Center, MN, initially as a Chi - Chi's Restaurant. Subject to certain terms and provisions of a limited partnership agreement. The managing limited partners are John. Peter BOOSALIS, business address of 2101 Freeway Blvd., Brooklyn Center, MN 55430; home address 1200 Marion Lane West #1206, Minnetonka, MN 55343; home phone 542 -2229; business phone 561 -0550. Also as managing partner Nicholas George GRAMMAS; business address 2101 Freeway Blvd., Brooklyn Center, MN 55430; home address 10415 29th Avenue North, Plymouth, MN 55441; home phone 546 -9781; business phone 646 -1888. GBM Incorporated and limited partnership was formed solely for the purpose of acquiring the La Casita Restaurant owned by SAH Incorporated to operate said property as a Chi -Chi's Restaurant in the City of Brooklyn Center. The managing partners have considerable experience in the restaurant/ liquor business, in that they operate corporations or limited partnerships in the City of Brooklyn Park presently, that being GBM Incorporated Brooklyn Park operating Chi -Chi's Restaurant. As well as operating Sports Restaurants Incorporated DBA Benchwarmer Bob's. located in Brooklyn Park, MN. And GBM Incorporated operating the Chi -Chi's Restaurant in Hawaii. As stated this limited partnership and incorporation has been formed for the purposes of acquiring the La Casita Restaurant and to operate a Chi -Chi's Restaurant in Brooklyn Center by the managing partners John BOOSALIS and Nicholas GRAMMAS. INVESTIGATION OF PROPERTIES CURRENTLY MANAGED OR OWNED BY THE MANAGING PARTNERS IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: In investigating this liquor license background, Investigator DIRKS had opportunity to make contact with the Brooklyn Park Police Department and Brooklyn Park City Offices in regards to the liquor licenses held in their community by those corporations associated with Mr. Nicholas GRAMMAS and Mr. John BOOSALIS. In talking with Director PARKER of the Brooklyn Park Police Department, DIRKS learned that there has been little problems in Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 3 regards to either of these liquor establishments owned in their community, that being Chi -Chi's Restaurant located at 7355 Regent Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, MN; or Benchwarmer Bob's also located in Brooklyn Park. Director PARKER informed DIRKS that the calls that they have had to the restaurant have been typical liquor establishment types of calls, and that there has been nothing significant or that would be related to their liquor license. Director PARKER informed DIRKS that he has had few problems in reference to either of these establishments and indicates that both are well managed restaurants in their community. Director PARKER indicated that the management of these establishments have been cooperative in regards to any problems that they have had, and have aided the police department in the investigation of any kind of incidents that required their attention at these establishments. According to PARKER there has been no problem with any kind of liquor violation or other violations which would impact upon these establishments' liquor licenses. In questioning PARKER in reference to the recently done background on Benchwarmer Bob's, as that restaurant had opened in the year of 1990, DIRKS was informed that those records are available to me and copies of the background by the Brooklyn Park Police Department was supplied to this investigator. In review of that background, DIRKS found that both Nicholas GRAMMAS as well as John BOOSALIS at that time were found to have clear records without any kind of criminal problems. That all of the information supplied to the Brooklyn Park Police Department had been verified and checked out to be correct according to Officer PANAZA's background. DIRKS would point out that a civil check was done in reference to civil lawsuits with the Hennepin County Courts and it was learned that there had been six civil cases filed naming GBM, that being Chi -Chi's or the Golden Fox as respondents, dating back to 1974 and as recent filing in 1990. All of these had been successful settled excluding that most recent filing. According to Director PARKER when DIRKS discussed this with him, each of these civil cases appeared to be minor situations dealing with trip or fall type situations not unusual to a public establishment. Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 4 It should be noted that in reviewing the documents from the Brooklyn Park Police Department both Mr. GRAMMAS and Mr. BOOSALIS had been long time businessman in that community. It was indicated by Director PARKER that they have been an asset to the community, from his perspective, as far as restaurant operators. In review of the financial documents that were provided at the time of the Benchwarmer Bob's application to Brooklyn Park, DIRKS has been able to confirm substantial financial assets for both John Peter BOOSALIS and Nicholas George GRAMMAS from the documents provided. In checking on the liquor licensed establishments currently operated by the applicants at this time, DIRKS has found no negative comments in regards to their liquor and restaurant operation in the State of Minnesota. INDIVIDUAL APPLICANTS: As a general partnership operating as GBM of Brooklyn Center Incorporated there are two managing partners as already stated. The first being John Peter BOOSALIS of 1200 Marion Lane West #1206, Minnetonka, MN 55343; home phone 542 -2229; current business phone 561 -0550. The second managing partner is Nicholas George GRAMMAS of 10415 29th Avenue North, Plymouth, MN 55441; home phone 546 -9781; business phone 646 -1888. As managing partners the two listed applicants had complete backgrounds done on them in regards to criminal histories, reference checks, and financial verification of their interest in this limited partnership. Additionally there were backgrounds done on two of the limited partners who are non managing partners, but own in excess of 5% of this limited partnership. The first is James Ralph WHITMAS, DOB 7/24/45; home address 5555 Vagabond Lane, Plymouth, MN 55446; home phone 478 -6692; business phone 560 -5773. The amount investment in this limited partnership by Mr. WHITMAS is $100,000.00. The second limited partnership is Michael Thomas Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 5 CALLAS, DOB 11/8/35; home address 5701 Camelback Drive, Edina, MN 55436; home phone 936 -9000; business phone 936 -9000. Amount of his investment in this property $50,000.00. Each of these applicants had a background investigation done to include criminal history and verification of their financial resources for the investment. CRIMINAL HISTORIES: Criminal history checks were done in reference to the applicants, John Peter BOOSALIS, DOB 7/26/44, as well as his wife Karen Gulas BOOSALIS, DOB 8/26/54, with the following jurisdictions: Criminal histories and wants were checked with the City of Brooklyn Center, the Hennepin County Warrant Office, The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, and MINCIS. As well as a Minnesota driver license where it was found that John Peter BOOSALIS had a valid license with no violations, class C. Karen BOOSALIS had a valid license with glasses, no violations, class C. Also checks were done with individual police departments of Minnetonka, Edina, Minneapolis, Brooklyn Park, St. Paul, as well as the State of Hawaii on both. All of these having negative results. In reference to Mr. and Mrs. BOOSALIS no criminal record of any kind could be determined. Criminal history checks were also done on Nicholas George GRAMMAS, DOB 3/21/36, as well as his wife Nancy Lynn GRAMMAS, DOB 4/12/46. As well as warrant checks in the following locations: City of Brooklyn Center, the Hennepin County Warrant Office, the State of Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, and MINCIS, as well as Minnesota driver license checks. It was found that Nicholas George GRAMMAS had a limited status license due to an apparent arrest for driving under the influence under Implied Consent Law Minnesota dating April 12, 1991, which at time is still pending in court. Nancy Lynn GRAMMAS has a valid driver license with glasses, class C, with no violations. Also checked were police records with the following communities. Plymouth, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Brooklyn Park, and the State of Hawaii. All of the criminal checks indicating no criminal history for either Mr. or Mrs. GRAMMAS. Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 6 In reference to the criminal history checks and background information throughout other police agencies in reference to the managing partners, DIRKS has found nothing negative other than the pending traffic arrest involving Nicholas GRAMMAS on an alcohol related offense in regards to an Implied Consent case. In reference to the limited partners without management authority, DIRKS on Mr. James Ralph WHITMAS and his wife Renate Lee WHITMAS, DOB 10/21/46, did checks with the following: Brooklyn Center Police Department, Hennepin County Sheriff's Office (Criminal History and Warrant Division), the State of Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, and MINCIS. The State of Minnesota driver license where it was found that James WHITMAS had a valid drivers license, class C, which showed a prior alcohol related offense for driving while under the influence which lead to a suspension and later reinstatement of his driving privileges. Renate WHITMAS showed a valid driver license, class C, with no violations. Also checked were the police records of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Plymouth Police Department. There was no record found for Mrs. WHITMAS, and there was a record found for Mr. WHITMAS with Minneapolis dating to 1983. The record indicated was that of a disorderly conduct and ticket scalping offense. And upon checking with Minneapolis records in regards to the disposition of this case, DIRKS learned that the charges were dismissed in this case and no formal charges were brought in regards to this incident. In reality DIRKS has only been able to find one violation in reference to Mr. WHITMAS that was substantiated, which is also listed in his application, that being an arrest for driving while under the influence which occurred on July 2, 1986. Since that time Mr. WHITMAS shows no similar arrests of any kind dating this five years previous to the application for this liquor license. Criminal history checks were next done with the limited partner and non managing partner Michael Thomas CALLAS, DOB 11/8/35, as well as on his wife Judith Ann CALLAS, DOB 2/13/39. In reference to both of these parties checks were done with the Brooklyn Center Police Department, The Hennepin County Warrant Office and Criminal Record Units, the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 7 Apprehension, and MINCIS, as well as the State of Minnesota driver license. In reference to the driver license it was found that Michael Thomas CALLAS had a valid driver license, class C, with one prior for speed in November of 1987. It was found that Judith Ann CALLAS had a valid license, class C, with no violations. Criminal history checks were also done with local police departments those including Minneapolis, Edina, Bloomington. All of the criminal history checks which were done in regards to both Mr. and Mrs. CALLAS came back with no criminal histories being found. In reference to the criminal history checks that were both done with the managing partners Mr. GRAMMAS and BOOSALIS, and the limited partners Mr. WHITMAS and Mr. CALLAS the only kind of records found was in regards to Mr. GRAMMAS' April alcohol related driving offense as well as Mr. WHITMAS' 1986 alcohol related driving offense. At this time this investigator does not find anything of significant criminal history that would affect the issuance of a liquor license to GBM of Brooklyn Center Incorporated. FINANCIAL: In regards to the financial investment each of the limited partners, including the management partners, are making a considerable financial investment. Mr. BOOSALIS investing a $100,000 and a guarantee of the lease and note. This being a personal guarantee. As well as Mr. GRAMMAS making a $100,000 investment and a personal guarantee of the lease and note. The limited non managing partner Mr. WHITMAS is making $100,000 financial investment, and the limited non managing partner Mr. CALLAS is making a $50,000 financial investment. To verify the funds available for this investment in the purchase of this restaurant from SAH Incorporated, DIRKS requested letters from their banks or investment houses verifying the funds available for the purchase. DIRKS did receive a letter dated July 25, 1991 to Chief James Lindsay from John BOOSALIS from First Bank Private Banking, from Private Banking Representative Cheryl SLIGER. She indicated that Mr. BOOSALIS currently has a Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 8 balance of $100,000 plus dollars in a money market savings account at First Bank National, which would be sufficient to cover his portion of the investment necessary to complete the sale between GBM of Brooklyn Center Incorporated and SAH Incorporated. DIRKS has also received a handwritten memo from Nick GRAMMAS indicating that the funds to make the purchase between GBH of Brooklyn Center and SAH Incorporated will come from his account with Kidder PEABODY. Included with that memorandum are account balances in reference to Mr. GRAMMAS' portfolio which indicate balances well in excess of his $100,000 investment, also making him capable to meet the obligation of the purchase agreement between GBM Brooklyn Center Incorporated and SAH Incorporated. In reference to Mr. James WHITMAS, DIRKS did receive from him a letter from Charles SCHWAB & Company Incorporated indicating a liquidation of money market funds from a share account in the amount of $49,533. As well as a copy of his statement for a portfolio with Craig & Halm Incorporated, dated March 31, 1991 showing a current account equity of $482,000 plus dollars. This will be sufficient enough to cover the $100,000 investment of Mr. WHITMAS towards the purchase agreement between GBM Incorporated and SAH Incorporated. Additionally DIRKS received a handwritten memorandum from Mr. CALLAS which indicated that the funds for his contribution to this limited partnership and the completion of the deal between GBM Incorporated and SAH Incorporated would come from his Kidder PEABODY account. In reference to the account balance for his portfolio I find that the total amount of both his accounts are in excess of $350,000, which shows financial assets to meet the obligation of his financial commitment of $50,000 in this limited partnership of GBM Incorporated to complete the sale with SAH Incorporated. It is apparent in review of the letters provided by each of the limited partners and managing partners, as well as the financial information that had previously been gathered by the Brooklyn Park Police Department, that all of the investors in this case Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 9 have sufficient assets to finalize the sale as described in their purchase agreement. This investigator would point out, as previously stated, that the managing partners have significant experience in the restaurant and liquor industry. Having operated restaurants in the north suburban area dating back to the early 1970's. INDIVIDUAL BACKGROUNDS ON THE MANAGING PARTNERS: The first being John Peter BOOSALIS. Mr. BOOSALIS is a businessman who has operated a restaurant and liquor establishment in the Brooklyn Park area as early as 1973, that being the Golden Fox Restaurant which was later opened as a franchise for the Chi -Chi's Restaurant chain involving GBM Incorporated of Brooklyn Park. Mr. BOOSALIS since that time has opened and operated Chi -Chi's Restaurants in the State of Hawaii as a franchise, as well as opening under Sports Restaurants Incorporated Benchwarmer Bob's Restaurant in the City of Brooklyn Park. All of these have been operated under corporations, and one of the interested parties in these corporations has been Nick GRAMMAS the other applicant in this case in these other ventures. It should be noted that these ventures according to the Brooklyn Park Police Department have been operated successful) an p y d with few ro p blems for local law enforcement authorities. ie It was also mentioned previously that the operations of these restaurants has found management to be very cooperative with the law enforcement officials in regards to any problem areas. In reference to the applicant, BOOSALIS, DIRKS requested references from him and had opportunity to speak with the three references listed. The first was Bill FISHER care of Corroon and Black of Minnesota, 100 North 6th Street, Suite 650 C, Butler Square Building, Minneapolis, MN 55403; phone 333 -3182. The second was James MURPHY, 7301 Ohms Lane, Suite 450, Edina, MN 55439; home phone 831 -1887. The third was the Reverend Anthony CONIARIS care of St. Mary Greek Orthodox Church, 3450 Irving Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN phone hone 825 -9595. The first interview was conducted with Mr. Bill FISHER who has known fir. BOOSALIS since the college days of 1965 through 1967 where he referred to himself and Mr. BOOSALIS as university Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 10 mates. Mr. FISHER indicated that he has also known Mr. BOOSALIS since 74 -75 as he had supplied pp d insurance to him in reference to his earlier partnership in the Golden Fox Restaurant operated in Brooklyn Park now known as Chi - Chi's. Mr. FISHER indicated that his relationship has been both one of business, as well as social between Mr. BOOSALIS. He indicated that Mr. BOOSALIS as Mr. GRAMMAS, who he also knows, were very good and careful businessmen in that they knew much about their industry. Mr. FISHER indicated that Mr. BOOSALIS was a person of very high ethics and morals, and what he described as a straight arrow. In that he indicated that he was very conscious of safety and loss control measures and would act upon any suggestions he made as an insurance agent promptly. He also indicated that as a customer whom he provides a service that he finds Mr. BOOSALIS to be very timely in the paying of his obligations. In DIRKS questioning Mr. FISHER if he had anything negative to say about Mr. BOOSALIS, he indicated that he had not. He indicated that Mr. BOOSALIS and his wife are very sweet and dear friends and very conscience businessman who would be an asset to our community. DIRKS next had opportunity to speak with Mr. James MURPHY who indicated that he had known Mr. BOOSALIS since approximately 1984. In that he has been providing accounting services to both Mr. BOOSALIS and GRAMMAS in their businesses. As well as preparing their individual tax returns since approximately 1984. Mr. 14URPHY indicated that he is a certified public accountant and that he had dealt with the GBM Incorporated, as well as Sports Restaurant Incorporated in preparing the financial statements for these companies. Mr. MURPHY indicated that it has been a business relationship mostly with both Mr. BOOSALIS and GRAMMAS, but that he has found them to be extremely ethical and conscience businessmen and that he could see no negative aspects to their ownership of a liquor license establishment in our community. When asked if could provided any negative comment of any kind about Mr. BOOSALIS, Mr. MURPHY indicated that he could not give any. Mr. MURPHY during the interview did indicate that he had information in regards to Mr. GRAMMAS and DIRKS did discuss GRAI-11-IAS with Mr. MURPHY as well. Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 11 DIRKS next had opportunity to speak with Anthony CONIARIS who indicated that he has known Mr. BOOSALIS all of his life as he has been a member of their church since his birth. Mr. CONIARIS indicated that he has been pastor of this church for 42 years, therefore, Mr. BOOSALIS has grown up within the church. Mr. CONIARIS indicated that John BOOSALIS has been a past youth director in the church, and that he for years worked at the church's summer camp working with youths as a youth counselor. Mr. CONIARIS indicated that Mr. BOOSALIS currently services on the board of trustees of the church, and that he is a very honored and trusted friend of the church and of his personally. Mr. CONIARIS had nothing but the highest of regards in regards to the moral character of Mr. BOOSALIS and indicated that he was an extremely competent and responsible human being. That BOOSALIS operated his business, in his estimation, in the same fashion as was demonstrated to his commitment and involvement with the church and the way that he professionally helped the church in it's operations. Mr. CONIARIS indicated that the operation of a business by Mr. BOOSALIS in any community would be an asset as he was a very honorable man and would be more than happy to assist in solving any problem areas should such a situation ever evolve. When asked if could come up with any negative comment in regards to Mr. BOOSALIS, Mr. CONIARIS indicated there was nothing negative and as clergy he stated he would be critical. In talking with Mr. CONIARIS, DIRKS also learned that he had information in regards to Mr. GRAMMAS in that Mr. GRAMMAS also is a member of this church and has been so for many years as well. I refer the reader to Mr. GRAMMAS' personal reference section. In completion of the reference checks of Mr. BOOSALIS, DIRKS received nothing but rave reviews in regards to his professional attitude in the way that he operates his businesses, as well as his ethical and moral background. It should be noted DIRKS has personal knowledge of Mr. BOOSALIS as a businessman in the nearby community of Brooklyn Park and must concur with the information that has been provided by these references. The personal references were next checked on Nicholas GRAMMAS which had been provided, which included Mr. Bill FISHER, address previously given. A Dale HARRIS care of Firstar Shelard Bank, 400 P Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 12 South County Road 169, St. Louis Park, MN 55426; home phone 546- 6811. Jerry BERTHIAUME; address 4560 Olson Lake Terrace, Oakdale, MN 55109; phone 777 -0363. In reference to making contact with these references, DIRKS was only able to make contact with Mr. William FISHER as it was determined that Dale HARRIS was out of town and not to return until August 12. Numerous attempts at contacting Mr. BERTHIAUME met with negative results. In talking with tor. FISHER, DIRKS had been informed that he knew Mr. GRA14MAS through the Golden Fox Restaurant and his partnership in that restaurant back to 1974. Mr. FISHER indicated that he had met Mr. GRAMMAS through his friend Mr. BOOSALIS, who is also in partnership in that restaurant, in that he had provided insurance to them through his insurance agency back to that time. Mr. FISHER indicated that he has a business and social relationship with Mr. GRAM1-1AS since that time, more so business than social. But that he has gotten to know him in providing business services to him in the way of insurance, as well as socializing due to his friendship with Mr. BOOSALIS. Mr. FISHER indicates that he has found Mr. GRAMMAS to be a very astute businessman, in that he has found him to have considerable business expertise in regards to the restaurant and liquor industry. As well as the food industry in that he runs a food supply company known as Sparta Foods Incorporated, also known as La Conasta. Mr. FISHER indicated that his knowledge of Mr. GRAM14AS is that he is a very good businessman and that he is very committed to running operations which are successful and become an asset to the community. Mr. FISHER indicated that he found Mr. GRAMMAS to be of high ethics and moral value, and again what he described as a straight arrow. Mr. FISHER stated that he found Mr. GRAMMAS to also be concerned with safety and loss control when issues of that nature have been pointed out to them by their insurance company. And that he has taken those steps to assure a safe working place for their employees and the customers they serve. When asked by DIRKS of any negative comments, Mr. FISHER indicated that he had none for Mr. GRAMMAS. Y S' Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 13 As stated DIRKS was only able to make contact with fir. Bill FISHER of the listed reference for Nick GRAMMAS. It should be noted that in talking with the reference of Mr. BOOSALIS, however, it became apparent that the reference listed for him also knew Mr. GRAMMAS. In discussing Mr. GRAMMAS with Mr. James MURPHY, DIRKS was to receive information from fir. MURPHY similar as to that with Mr. BOOSALIS. Indicating the relationship to be a business relationship in that he prepares personal taxes for him, as well as their financials for the companies that they operate. Mr. MURPHY indicated that he has found Mr. GRAMMAS to operate a very effective business enterprise and that he is very successful in what he does. Mr. MURPHY indicated that he knows of no problems of any kind with fir. GRAMMAS. In regards to examining the financial records, DIRKS question any problems that may have come up there, and he indicated that he has never found anything improper and states that fir. GRAMMAS is a very moral and ethical businessman. DIRKS also had opportunity to talk with Reverend Anthony CONIARIS about fir. GRA1 and learned from him that fir. GRAMMAS has been a member of their church for a long period of time, dating back to his youth. Mr. CONIARIS indicated to DIRKS that fir. GRAMMAS also was an outstanding member of the church as he had described Mr. BOOSALIS, in that both of them were great assets to his church and church community and he felt that they would be the same to our business community in operating this restaurant. In reference to personal reference checks, DIRKS found nothing negative in regards to Mr. GRAMMAS, but as stated I was unable to make contact with two of those listed references that he provided but did receive information from two additional ones supplied by Mr. BOOSALIS. CONCLUSION: As already indicated in the attached documentation and application for this liquor license, both fir. BOOSALIS and Mr. GRAMMAS who are the operating managers of GBM Brooklyn Center a limited partnership have considerable experience in the food and beverage industry. They operate restaurants at two locations in Brooklyn Park, that being Chi -Chi's Brooklyn Park, as well as 4 f Resume by Investigator Dirks Case No. 91 -09771 Page 14 Benchwarmer Bob's. As well as operating a Chi -Chi's Restaurant in the State of Hawaii. Additionally Mr. GRAMMAS operates Sparta Foods Incorporated which is a food wholesale company operating as La Conasta which makes salsa and chips and other food products supplied to various mexican restaurants. In examining the financials of both of these gentlemen appears that the have y sufficient assets to fulfill their obligations as guaranteed in the paperwork supplied in the sale of this restaurant by SAH Incorporated to GBii Incorporated Brooklyn Center. That they also bring to the deal the necessary business expertise to provide for a successful restaurant operating in the City of Brooklyn Center. In reference to the limited partnerships of Mr. CALLAS and Mr. WHITMAS it appears that they have the financial resources to support their investment, and due to the fact that they have no managing say in the corporation that is the only essential concern we have in regards to their investment other than criminal backgrounds which shows to be negative. Based on the information that has been gathered in this background investigation ation and g the supporting documentation, at on pp g , DIRKS feels there is no reason to withhold a license from being issued to the corporation of GBM Incorporated. DIRKS would point out that this should be contingent, however, upon completion and closing of this sale at which time signed and completed documents should be provided to the City f Brooklyn Center for Y Y inclusion in this file. It should be noted that as of the writing of this report a signed purchase agreement or copy thereof has been supplied and is attached, but that all other documents according to fir. BOOSALIS cannot be submitted until conditional approval of the liquor license at which time they can then close their transaction for the sale of the restaurant from SAH Incorporated to GBM Brooklyn Center Incorporated. At which time signed final documents can be supplied. At this time a license is recommended by this investigator. Licenses to be approved by the City Council on August 12, 1991: FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Nutrition World 1271 Brookdale Center ' Sanitarian GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLE Aagard Sanitation 875 Prior Ave. N. Block Sanitation 6741 79th Ave. N. Hilger Transfer, Inc. 8550 Zachary Lane Nitti Disposal, Inc. 3291 Terminal Drive Randy's Sanitation Route 342 Twin City Sanitation 279 Meadowood Lane Waste Control 95 West Ivy Avenue ; �1 Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc. 4000 Hamel Road Sanitarian��� ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Brooklyn Center Lions 5312 N. Lilac Drive 'I- Sanitarian� MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Citywide A /C, Htg., & Refrig. 2529 7th Avenue Midwest Equipment Co., Inc. 300 West University Minnesota Mechanical, Inc. 509 Front Avenue Building Official F-� RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Ralph T. Guimont 5903 Halifax Place Ray A. Zawislak Jr. 5543 Judy Lane Michael Shapiro 5115 E. Twin Lk. Blvd. Renewal: Howard and Harriet Oien 5809 Brooklyn Blvd. i Fred and Judie Swenson 5340 -44 Russell Ave. N. ( In, 1,)-z if Director of Planning n and Inspec SIGN HANGER Signcrafters Outdoor Display 7775 Main Street NE t_ t r !Y{ Building Official ali TAXICAB Town Taxi 2500 Washington Ave. N. Cl�ief of Police GENERAL APPROVAL: -D. p ack — , 0 P. Page, Dep y Clerk