Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011 01-24 CCP Regular Session AGENDA CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION January 24, 2011 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. 1. City Council Discussion of Agenda Items and Questions 2. Miscellaneous 3. Discussion of Work Session Agenda Items as Time Permits 4. Adjourn CITY COUNCIL MEETING City of Brooklyn Center January 24, 2011 AGENDA 1. Informal Open Forum with City Council — 6:45 p.m. — provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes, it is not televised, and it may not be used to make personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Open Forum will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made but, rather, for hearing the citizen for informational purposes only. 2. Invocation — 7 p.m. 3. Call to Order Regular Business Meeting —The City Council requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. 4. Roll Call 5. Pledge of Allegiance 6. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda —The following items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Council Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes 1. January 10, 2011 — Study Session 2. January 10, 2011 — Regular Session 3. January 10, 2011 — Work Session b. Licenses C. Resolution Accepting a Feasibility Report and Calling for a Public Hearing, Improvement Project Nos. 2011 -01, 02, 03, and 04, Palmer Lake East Neighborhood Street, Storm Drainage and Utility Improvements d. Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed and Calling for a Public Hearing on Proposed Special Assessments for Improvement Project Nos. 2011 -01 and 02, Palmer Lake East Neighborhood Street and Storm Drainage Improvements e. Resolution Accepting a Feasibility Report and Calling for a Public Hearing, Improvement Project No. 2011 -05, Unity Avenue Street Improvements f. Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed and Calling for a Public Hearing on Proposed Special Assessments for Improvement Project No. 2011 -05, Unity Avenue Street Improvements CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- January 24, 2011 g. Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids, Improvement Project No. 2010 -16, Shingle Creek Restoration Improvements h. Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1, Improvement Project Nos. 2010 -01, 02, 03, and 04, Contract 2010 -A, Dupont Avenue Street and Utility Improvements i. Resolution Adopting the Hennepin County All- Hazard Mitigation Plan j. 2010 Pay Equity Compliance Report Review and Acceptance 7. Presentations /Proclamations/Recognitions /Donations a. Proclamation Declaring February 4, 2011, to be Go Red for Women Day Requested Council Action: —None. Mayor will read proclamation. b. Proclamation Declaring February 5, 2011, as City of Brooklyn Center Centennial Day Requested Council Action: None. Mayor will read proclamation. 8. Public Hearings a. Proposed Amendment of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 1. Resolution Adopting Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 Requested Council Action: — Motion to open Public Hearing. — Motion to take public input. — Motion to close Public Hearing. — Motion to adopt resolution. 9. Planning Commission Items —None. 10. Council Consideration Items a. Mayoral Appointment of Member to Serve on Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Advisory Commission Requested Council Action: — Motion to ratify Mayoral appointment. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- January 24, 2011 b. Hearing for Kelly McDole, 7219 Major Avenue North, Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration Requested Council Action: — Motion to open hearing. — Receive testimony from appellant. — Motion to close hearing. Motion to uphold or reverse the decision and findings of the Animal Control Review Panel. C. Hearing for Humboldt Properties, LLC, Valley Investments and Management, Inc., Regarding Rental Property Located at Humboldt Square Apartments (6737 and 6743 Humboldt Avenue North) Requested Council Action: — Receive staff report. — Motion to open hearing. — Receive testimony from applicant. — Motion to close hearing. — Motion to direct Staff to prepare a resolution for the next City Council meeting with findings of fact to either suspend or revoke the rental license for property located at Humboldt Square Apartments. d. Hearing for Hyder Jaweed, Holdingford Investments, LLC, Regarding Rental Property Located at Brookhaven Apartments (3907, 3909, and 3911 65th Avenue North) Requested Council Action: — Receive staff report. — Motion to open hearing. — Receive testimony from applicant. — Motion to close hearing. — Motion to direct Staff to prepare a resolution for the next City Council meeting with findings of fact to either suspend or revoke the rental license for property located at Brookhaven Apartments. 11. Council Report 12. Adjournment Agenda Items Tabled or Continued An Ordinance Amending Chapter 4 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter, Sections 4.01 and 4.02 —This item was first read on April 12, 2010; was published in the official newspaper on April 22, 2010; and the Public Hearing was continued at the May 10, 2010, meeting until such time as the Charter Commission makes its recommendation to the City Council. Resolution Establishing Fees for Community Garden Plots in the City of Brooklyn Center —This item was tabled at the May 10, 2010, meeting. City Council Agenda Item No. 6a • • Office of the City Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager Sharon Knutson City Clerk �4A FROM: Sha �Aw DATE: January 21, 2011 SUBJECT: Councilmember Kleven: Requested Changes to January 10, 2011, Work Session Minutes Councilmember Kleven requested the following changes to the Work Session minutes of January 10, 2011: PAGE 4 RE: Mr. Roder,rental license The secretary has the wrong names for support of reconsideration of the rental license. Script indicates Lasman, Ryan, and Mayor/President Willson Should be Lasman, Kleven, and Mayor/President Willson ALSO INCORRECT IS not in support of reconsideration is stated as Roche and Kleven Should be Roche and Ryan Not mentioned and should be is: Councilmember/Commissioner Lasman stated that she did not believe that it would cause a precedent setting and that it would be made clear in the phrasing they would use to explain why they were supporting reconsideration. Not mentioned and should be is: Mayor/President Willson said to Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven that she would be the deciding factor as up to then it was 2 to 2. Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven voted for supporting reconsideration and also commended Councilmember/Commissioner Lasman on her statement and agreed totally with what she said and thanked her for making it clear. They would reconsider in April MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION JANUARY 10, 2011 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Carol Kleven, Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Director of Fiscal and Support Services Dan Jordet, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, and Chris Moksnes, Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF AGENDA ITEMS AND QUESTIONS Councilmember Roche requested the following correction to the Regular Session minutes of December 13, 2010: Page 14 Mayor Willson reported on his attendance at the following: • Brooklyn Center Taxpayers Association's annual CEAP breakfast where unwrapped gifts were donated. He advised this group will net be disselved an "'"' still meet on an informal annual basis. It was the majority consensus of the City Council to accept the correction of the December 13, 2010, Regular Session minutes. Councilmember Roche requested discussion on Item 10h Amend 2011 City Council Meeting Schedule, to set the date and time for a Special Work Session. Mayor Willson suggested the timing of the discussion be decided upon by the City Manager as he would know when the information needed for that Work Session would be ready. City Manager Curt Boganey advised that the requested information is available and suggested the Council discuss the meeting date during the Study Session. It was the majority consensus of the City Council to schedule the Special Work Session to discuss Shingle Creek Crossings on January 20, 2011, at 6:00 p.m. The meeting will be held in the Council Chambers. 01/10/11 -1- DRAFT Mr. Boganey stated it is not anticipated, but a portion of this meeting may go to Executive • Session. MISCELLANEOUS Councilmember Roche noted the 100'' birthday of Brooklyn Center is upcoming. He questioned whether the City would like to extend an invitation to all elected officials. This would include the City's federal, state, and county representatives, senators, congressmen/women, and the President. Councilmember Lasman advised that the invitations have already been sent. She will bring this request before the Centennial Committee to extend the invitation to the federal level; however, it may be too late. Councilmember Lasman commented there was mention of the sports facility receiving $304,000 and asked for what use these funds are designated. Mr. Boganey explained it is for an extension on the high school. Mr. Bogany noted that two agenda items are related to the same topic of trail alignment as recommended by the Park and Recreation Commission and suggested several alternatives in the timing of the discussion. It was the majority consensus of the City Council to discuss this item at this point in the meeting. DISCUSSION OF WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEMS AS TIME PERMITS TWIN LAKE REGIONAL TRAIL (TLRT) ALIGNMENT Councilmember Roche stated he felt the proposal of the trail alignment should give the City a reboot and a rebrand to become a multi -modal community. He had fundamental concerns about the recommendation that, in his opinion, was not in sync with the Twin Lakes Regional Master Plan or mission statement. He felt it would be a failure to support the recommendation to align the trail on the south side of 57th Avenue and stated he does not believe it will help rebrand the community because it is not user friendly. He stated the greenway owned by Xcel would be much more complimentary and provide a safe route with the least number of driveway crossings and utility poles. Mayor Willson asked whether the City owns the greenway land. Councilmember Roche stated it is owned by the electric company, not the City, and the Three Rivers Park District or staff could speak to that issue. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to close the Study Session at 6:44 p.m. 01/10/11 -Z- DRAFT 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 JANUARY 10, 2011 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 6:45 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Carol Kleven, Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Director of Fiscal and Support Services Dan Jordet, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, Police Chief Kevin Benner, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Chris Moksnes, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. • Mayor Tim Willson opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum. mP p Craig Hunter, 6500 Brooklyn Boulevard, informed the Council of code issues related to his C -1 zoned multiple tenant office property and unsuccessful attempts to resolve those issues with staff or through an administrative hearing. In addition, vegetation on the abutting property to the north has encroached to the point that a fence cannot be constructed nor adequate parking spaces provided as required by City Code. Mr. Hunter stated his opinion there may have been some unfair retaliation efforts that have impacted his ability to use his private property. Diane Sannes, 7006 Willow Lane, commented on the efforts of Earle Brown, in 1911, to start the Village of Brooklyn Center and noted that after consideration of tonight's appointments, all of the City's Commissions will be filled. She wished all a Happy Birthday, in this new year, and stated the citizens are ready to celebrate its centennial in many ways. Shanell McCoy, 7817 Arlington Avenue N., Brooklyn Park, representing the Brooklyns' Youth Council, described the purpose of their organization and areas of focus for 2011. Katherine Shermoen, 8809 Inverness Terrace, Brooklyn Park, requested placement on a future Council agenda to present more information on the Brooklyns' Youth Council and invited the City Council to the Blue Jean Ball, a gala event on Friday, January 21, 2011, from 5:30 to 10 p.m. at the Edinburgh Clubhouse. 01 /10 /11 -1- DRAFT Mike Elliott, 3355 Oliver Avenue N., Minneapolis, representing the Brooklyns' Youth Council was also present. • Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to close the Informal Open Forum at 6:57 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 2. INVOCATION Councilmember Roche requested 30 seconds of silence for Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and personal reflection as the Invocation. ADMINISTER CEREMONIAL OATH OF OFFICE City Clerk Sharon Knutson administered the oath of office to Carol Kleven and Dan Ryan for the position of Brooklyn Center Councilmember /Commissioner and to Tim Willson for the position of Brooklyn Center Mayor /Chair/President. 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 7:04 p.m. 4. ROLL CALL • Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Carol Kleven, Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Director of Fiscal and Support Services Dan Jordet, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, Police Chief Kevin Benner, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Chris Moksnes, TimeS "aver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, as amended, with amendments to the Regular Session minutes of December 13, 2011, and the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. December 13, 2011 — Study Session 2. December 13, 2011— Regular Session 01/10/11 -2- DRAFT 6b. LICENSES BOWLING ALLEY AMF Earle Brown Lanes 6440 James Circle N. FIREWORKS - PERMANENT Big Lots 5930 Earle Brown Drive Cub Foods 3245 County Road 10 GASOLINE SERVICE STATION Christy's Auto Service 5300 Dupont Avenue N. Qwest Communications 6540 Shingle Creek Parkway Royalty & Sons, Inc. 6044 Brooklyn Boulevard Two Rivers Investment, Inc. 6840 Humboldt Avenue N. MECHANICAL Aaztec Heating & Air 9741 Humboldt Avenue S., Bloomington Arctic Mechanical 5255 Edinburgh Way, Big Lake Aspen Air Heating & Cooling 308 SW 15 Street, Forest Lake Bloomington Heating & Air 640 West 92 Street, Bloomington Fireplaces by Design 73066 235 Street, Dassel MacDonald Heating & Air 11848 305 Avenue, Princeton . Schnapp Plumbing & Heating 682 125 Lane NE, Blaine PUBLIC DANCE AMF Earle Brown Lanes 6440 James Circle N. Oak City 2590 Freeway Boulevard RENTAL — CURRENT RENTAL STANDARDS INITIAL (TYPE II — two-year license) 3613 54 Avenue N. Konrad Wagner 5600 Lilac Drive N. Sue Xiong (passed w /weather deferral) 6937 Morgan Avenue N. Dao Yang 5025 Zenith avenue N. Van Cooley RENEWAL (TYPE III —one-year license) 7018 Brooklyn Boulevard Nelia Schaff RENEWAL (TYPE II —two-year license) 1300 67 Avenue N. Anda Construction (Brookside Manor Apartments) 5347 -53 Brooklyn Boulevard Randall Cook 5550 Girard Avenue N. Restart, Inc. • 7100 Kyle Avenue N. Michael Birchard 01/10/11 -3- DRAFT 7007 Newton Avenue N. Ting Sui Zheng (passed w /weather deferral) , RENEWAL (TYPE I — three-year license) 6221 Shingle Creek Parkway Amcon (View Pointe at Shingle Creek) 5329 -33 Brooklyn Boulevard Tech Ung 3 813 61" Avenue N. Dhaneshwarie Himraj 3125 65 Avenue N. Sa Xiong 419 67 Avenue N. John Stalock 6701 Bryant Avenue N. Tim Xiong 6607 Drew Avenue N. Jeffrey Davis 5818 Humboldt Avenue N. Richard Olson 3601 Woodbine Lane Christina Kline SECONDHAND GOODS DEALER CD Warehouse 6072 Shingle Creek Parkway SIGN HANGER Boo Doo Signs 29021 Feldspar Street, Princeton TAXICAB Yohannes Bedecha 1145 50 Avenue, Columbia Heights TOBACCO RELATED PRODUCT • Brookdale Foods Market, Inc. 5808 Xerxes Avenue N. Cub Foods 3245 County Road 10 Mussab, Inc. 6930 Brooklyn Boulevard Oak City 2590 Freeway Boulevard Royal Tobacco 5625 Xerxes Avenue N. Royalty & Sons, Inc. 6044 Brooklyn Boulevard Two Rivers Investment, Inc. 6840 Humboldt Avenue N. 6c. RESOLUTION NO. 2011-01 DESIGNATING OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER 6d. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -02 DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES OF CITY FUNDS 6e. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -03 APPROVING BROOKLYN CENTER REPRESENTATIVES TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND /OR BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH, FIVE CITIES SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS, HENNEPIN RECYCLING GROUP, LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, NORTH METRO MAYORS ASSOCIATION, NORTHWEST HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL, NORTHWEST SUBURBS CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, • 01/10/11 -4- DRAFT PETS UNDER POLICE SECURITY, PROJECT PEACE, TWIN LAKES JOINT POWERS ORGANIZATION, AND VISIT MINNEAPOLIS NORTH 6f. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -04 APPOINTING MUNICIPAL TRUSTEES TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER FIREFIGHTERS RELIEF ASSOCIATION BOARD OF TRUSTEES 6g. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -05 RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF ETHNIC POPULATIONS AND HERITAGE CELEBRATIONS 6h. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -06 GRANTING CORPORATE AUTHORITY FOR TRANSACTIONS OF FINANCIAL BUSINESS MATTERS 6i. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -07 ESTABLISHING THE INTEREST RATE FOR 2011 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 6j. RESOLUTION NO. 2011-08 ESTABLISHING 2011 STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT RATES 6k. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -09 ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011-11,18, AND 19, CONTRACT 2010 -D, 2010 TRAIL, PARKING LOT, AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS • 61. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -10 CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED USE OF 2011 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS 6m. APPROVING APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR TEMPORARY ON- SALE LIQUOR LICENSE SUBMITTED BY CHURCH OF ST. ALPHONSUS, 7025 HALIFAX AVENUE NORTH, FOR AN EVENT TO BE HELD FEBRUARY 12, 2011 Motion passed unanimously. 7. PRESENTATIONS / PROCLAMATIONS /RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS 7a. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -11 EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF MARK YELICH FOR HIS DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE AS COUNCIL MEMBER Mayor Willson presented a resolution of appreciation and plaque to Mark Yelich for his dedicated public service to the City of Brooklyn Center. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to approve RESOLUTION • NO. 2011 -11 Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Mark Yelich for his Dedicated Public 01 /10 /11 -5- DRAFT Service as Council Member. Motion passed unanimously. • 7b. PROCLAMATION DECLARING FEBRUARY 4, 2011, TO BE GO RED FOR WOMEN DAY Mayor Willson introduced the proclamation. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve Proclamation Declaring February 4, 2011 to be Go Red for Women Day. Motion passed unanimously. 7c. PROCLAMATION DECLARING FEBRUARY 5, 2011,- AS CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER CENTENNIAL DAY Mayor Willson introduced the proclamation. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded to approve Proclamation Declaring February 5, 2011 as City of Brooklyn Center Centennial Day. Motion passed unanimously. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS - None. 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -12 SUPPORTING THE TWIN LAKES REGIONAL TRAIL MASTER PLAN Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel introduced the item and history of the provide easements for the Cooperative Trail Agreement with the Three Rivers Park District to p trail corridor. Ann Rexine, Three Rivers Park District Planner, formally presented the Twin Lakes Regional Trail Master Plan, three trail alignments from the Robbinsdale boat launch to the North Mississippi Regional Park that had been vetted by the Task Force, and guiding principles used to evaluate and recommend the 57 Avenue alignment. She advised that the Park District takes directive from the City so the trail alignment is the initiative of the City Council. Ms. Rexine • 01/10/11 -6- DRAFT stated tonight is the formal presentation of the Master Plan and pending the outcome of tonight's • meeting it will be forwarded to the Three Rivers Park District Board of Commissioners in February and then the Metropolitan Council in March of 2011. Councilmember Ryan noted a potential "choke point" on 53 Avenue where it turns to the north to the service road (Old Osseo Road) and asked if the design is intended to accommodate a sidewalk section in that location. Ms. Rexine stated that question was raised in the past and the District's consultant, SRF, looked at each segment of the existing Twin Lake Regional Trail and recommended the trail be to the back of the curb or a restricted element. Councilmember Ryan asked about the City's ability to address design elements that become problematic in the future if the Council signed off on this Master Plan. Ms. Rexine explained that once easements have been obtained and turned over to the Park District, the District will operate and maintain the trail as is. Then, as opportunities arise, the District will upgrade existing segments that don't meet its standards. The District will also monitor those pinch point areas to determine if it is a perceived or real safety concern. Councilmember Roche stated it is his opinion that 57 Avenue does not meet the standards of the Master Plan and he would like feedback from the Park District on areas he identified during the Study Session. He asked about the opportunity to improve the trail along the greenway located 100 feet north of 57 Avenue, if the Park District had funding in place, and if it envisioned the streetscape of 57 Avenue to be different than that of France Avenue. • Boe Carlson, Three Rivers Park District Associate Superintendent, explained that the Master Plan involves a long -term planning phase to identify the proposed route and all agencies involved have the opportunity to coordinate projects (i.e., street reconstruction) going forward. He noted that portions of the trail already exist and those easements will pass to the Park District. The City Council will be the decider of future trail alignments and the Park District would provide operations and maintenance of the trails. Mr. Carlson stated the Park District identifies as many funding opportunities as possible. At this point, the Park District does not have money budgeted within its CIP to push forward this trail development but once the Master Plan is adopted, the trail can be included in its CIP and funding sources identified. Ms. Rexine referenced Pages 68 to 69 that outlined alternatives in how the trail along 57 Avenue may look from Highway 100 to the Mississippi Regional Park, recognizes the difference in right -of -way from 60 feet to 50 feet, and depicts what the trail will look like when it is built out. She explained they want to keep all options open, to still allow for traffic, a 10 -foot regional trail, and clear zones. Councilmember Roche asked if the Park District envisions opportunity to include iconic streetscape on 57 Avenue in the near future or if it will appear as France Avenue. Ms. Rexine stated they have identified trail amenities including areas of respite, signage, and other spaces within the streetscape. Councilmember Roche referenced Page 64 third paragraph, addressing reconfiguration of the • street and utilities for 57 Avenue. Ms. Rexine stated that section outlines one of the options, 01/10/11 -7- DRAFT the most intense option, which is not the case with all options. Councilmember Roche stated that it is a component of the Master Plan and as a Councilmember he needs to raise awareness of it. • Councilmember Kleven referenced Page 14 indicating 57 Avenue is the most direct alignment to the North Mississippi Regional Park; however, the greenspace is a more direct route without curvature. She referenced Page 15 that listed constraints, noting 57` Avenue is a busy street with 14 residential driveways, one commercial driveway, and one alleyway. Those residential driveways abut the trail and she had noticed that one driveway had four cars and two garbage cans, which may pose a safety concern. Councilmember Kleven pointed out that the Xcel corridor (greenway) has no driveways, which is very important and a deciding factor. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Kleven seconded to not approve a Resolution of Support for the Twin Lakes Regional Trail Master Plan. Councilmembers Lasman and Ryan and Mayor Willson voted against the same. Motion failed. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2011-12 of Support for the Twin Lakes Regional Trail Master Plan. Councilmember Ryan stated, with all due respect to the significant issues raised by his colleagues regarding 57 Avenue, a modification of the actual design is a key component of the Master Plan process, as needed. In addition, the City would need to acquire approval from Xcel for use of its greenway right -of -way. Councilmember Ryan stated he would be open to that option as well. • Mayor Willson welcomed a working relationship with Three Rivers Park District, having more discussions, and seeing these trails improve to offer recreational opportunities for the citizens of Brooklyn Center. Councilmember Roche stated the Council has a chance to brand Brooklyn Center as something other than what it is today and it is his opinion this body failed to take that opportunity. He suggested that a trail on 57 Avenue would be nothing more than a glorified sidewalk, there is no funding available, and a greenspace is available just 100 feet from 57` Avenue. Councilmember Roche stated his family will not use 57 Avenue, a better choice is available, and he does not believe 57 Avenue was representative of the Master Plan intention. Councilmembers Kleven and Roche voted against the same. Motion passed. Mr. Boganey noted the trail alignment had previously been considered by the City Council and the Park and Recreation Commission had unanimously recommended the 57` Avenue alignment. Councilmember Roche felt this assignment should have also been considered by the Planning Commission because of its strategic importance to the redevelopment of the City. 10b. SELECT PRESIDING OFFICERS — MAYOR/PRESIDENT PRO TEM AND 01 /10 /11 -8- DRAFT ACTING MAYOR/PRESIDENT PRO TEM • Councilmember Kleven moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to ratify the Mayor's nomination of Kay Lasman as Mayor/President Pro Tem and Dan Ryan as Acting Mayor/President Pro Tem for 2011. Motion passed unanimously. 10c. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -13 DECLARING COMMITMENT TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER CITY CHARTER Mayor Willson read in full the resolution and noted this is an annual declaration. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2011-13 Declaring Commitment to the Brooklyn Center City Charter. Motion passed unanimously. 10d. MAYORAL APPOINTMENTS OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO SERVE AS LIAISONS TO CITY ADVISORY COMMISSIONS AND AS CITY REPRESENTATIVENOTING DELEGATES FOR OTHER ORGANIZATIONS FOR 2011 • Mayor Willson announced the following appointments to serve as liaisons to City Advisory Commissions and as City RepresentativeNoting Delegates for Other Organizations for 2011. Financial Commission: Tim Roche Housing Commission: Carol Kleven Park and Recreation Commission: Dan Ryan Crime Prevention Program: Kay Lasman Brooklyn Center Special Events Committee: Kay Lasman; Tim Willson — Alternate Earle Brown Days Committee: Dan Ryan; Tim Willson — Alternate North Hennepin Area Chamber of Commerce: Carol Kleven Metro Cities: Tim Willson; Dan Ryan — Alternate League of Minnesota Cities: Tim Willson; Tim Roche — Alternate Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to ratify the above Mayoral Appointments. Motion passed unanimously. 10e. CONSIDERATION OF TYPE IV 6 -MONTH PROVISIONAL RENTAL LICENSE FOR 5903 EMERSON AVENUE N. i 01/10/11 -9- DRAFT Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning advised that this property was inspected and 22 property code violations were cited and • ultimately corrected. In addition, there was one validated police incident/nuisance call. This property qualifies for a Type IV six -month provisional rental license based on the number of property code violations found during the initial rental license inspection. The property owner is also required to submit a mitigation plan and report monthly on the progress of that plan. Staff has reviewed that mitigation plan and held discussion with the property owner and recommends, approval based on meeting standards in the mitigation plan. Mayor Willson noted the staff memorandum indicates an individual's name on the renewal application but the mitigation plan names a different individual. Ms. Schleuning stated she will have to determine the relationship between the two parties. Mayor Willson stated he is prepared to consider approval subject to that clarification. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to open the hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to close the hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve the issuance of a Type IV six -month provisional rental license and mitigation plan for 5903 Emerson Avenue N., • with the requirement that the mitigation plan must be strictly adhered to before a renewal rental license would be considered, and subject to clarification of ownership. Motion passed unanimously. 10L . CONSIDERATION OF TYPE IV 6 -MONTH PROVISIONAL RENTAL LICENSE FOR 5640 FREMONT AVENUE N. Ms. Schleuning advised that this property was inspected and 16 property code violations were cited and ultimately corrected. There had been no police incident/nuisance calls. This property qualifies for a Type IV six -month provisional rental license based on the number of property code violations found during the initial rental license inspection. The property owner is also required to submit a mitigation plan and report monthly on the progress of that plan. Staff has reviewed that mitigation plan and held discussion with the property owner and recommends approval based on meeting standards in the mitigation plan. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to open the hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to close the hearing. • 01/10/11 -10- DRAFT Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve the issuance of a Type IV six -month provisional rental license and mitigation plan for 5640 Fremont Avenue N., with the requirement that the mitigation plan must be strictly adhered to before a renewal rental license would be considered. Motion passed unanimously., 10g. CONSIDERATION OF TYPE IV 6 -MONTH PROVISIONAL RENTAL LICENSE FOR 6116 ALDRICH AVENUE N. Ms. Schleuning advised that this property was inspected and 11 property code violations were cited and ultimately corrected. This property qualifies for a Type IV six -month provisional rental license based on the number of property code violations found during the initial rental license inspection. The property owner is also required to submit a mitigation plan and report monthly on the progress of that plan. Staff has reviewed that mitigation plan and held discussion with the property owner and recommends approval based on meeting standards in the mitigation plan. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to open the hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to close the hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve the issuance of a Type IV six -month provisional rental license and mitigation plan for 6116 Aldrich Avenue N., with the requirement that the mitigation plan must be strictly adhered to before a renewal rental license would be considered. Motion passed unanimously. 10h. AMEND 2011 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE Mr. Boganey requested the Council set a Special Work Session date to consider the proposed redevelopment of Brookdale Shopping Center by Gatlin Development Company. He advised that staff and City consultants have reviewed the financial information provided, asked questions about the potential public subsidy request, and now have information to present for Council's consideration. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to schedule a Special Work Session on January 20, 2011, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. 01/10/11 -11- DRAFT Mr. Boganey noted it has been the Council's policy to not receive public comment during a Work Session until after Council's deliberations have been concluded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Roche reported that Dave Droogsma, resident of the southeast neighborhood, had fallen off a ladder while removing snow from his roof, suffered a back injury, and was just released from the hospital. He encouraged residents to attend the following meetings: • Street and utility improvement informational meeting on January 11, 2011, starting at 6:30 p.m. for East Palmer Lake residents. • Utility improvement informational meeting on January 12, 2011, starting at 6:30 p.m. for Unity Avenue residents. • January 20, 2011, Special Work Session, starting at 6:00 p.m. for residents interested in learning more about the redevelopment of Brookdale. Councilmember Roche stated he is hopeful about the possibility of this development but remained concerned with the request for public financing. He felt that Shingle Creek should receive more significance if this development is called "Shingle Creek Crossings." Councilmember Lasman reported on her attendance at the following: • January 5, 2011, Gateway Commons open house that showcased its new community center building containing a workout facility and pool. She stated the Gateway Commons ownership has done wonderful work at this apartment complex. • January 5, 2011, Centennial Meeting where plans are moving along with great excitement. The Birthday Party scheduled on February 5, 2011, will be the kick -off event and many more events are planned for the coming year. She noted that City Watch outlines activities coming up and encouraged residents to attend, to meet as a community, to celebrate Brooklyn Center. • January 6, 2011, Special Events Committee to plan the Parry of the Century, the 100` birthday party on February 5, 2011. She reported that a limited number can attend and tickets are going fast. Councilmember Lasman thanked the Brooklyn Center Foundation for donating the funds remaining in its treasury to schools in Brooklyn Center. She also thanked the City's Street Department for the great job done in the last 40 days to clear snow from the City's streets and assure they are open for emergency services. Councilmember Lasman commented that all working together is what makes Brooklyn Center a great community to live in and 2011 will be a great year. Councilmember Kleven stated another Centennial Celebration event will be "Go Red," held on February 4, 2011, when ladies are encouraged to wear red to promote heart health for women. She p P ry encouraged residents to pick u free promotional information at the Community Center. g P Councilmember Ryan reported on his attendance at the following: • January 5, 2011, the Brooklyn Center Centennial Celebration Committee meeting where plans continue for celebrating Brooklyn Center's 100th birthday. He noted that on 01 /10 /11 -12- DRAFT February 11, 1911, a meeting was held in a barn in Brooklyn Center where discussion was • held about incorporating as a village. He stated that much has changed and this year the City will celebrate its first 100 years with a year full of great events including Earle Brown Days and concluding with Holly Sunday. He referenced the special edition of City Watch that was printed in an "old style" and included the web address for the Brooklyn Center Centennial Celebration where you can view the calendar of events, historical vignettes, and footnotes to learn more about the City's history. • January 8, 2011, fundraiser to raise money for important initiatives to improve sanitation in Liberia. He thanked Sherman Washington for hosting the bowling tournament to raise those funds. Councilmember Ryan stated he had been invited to attend a strategic planning session for District 286 this Friday and Saturday. He encouraged Palmer Lake residents to attend the January 11, 2011, 6:30 p.m. informational meeting about the street utility project and Unity Avenue residents to attend the January 12, 2011, 6:30 p.m. information meeting to learn about utility projects planned for their neighborhood. Mayor Willson noted the City Watch does not contain a list of every activity during the Centennial year but the website calendar does include additional activities for the celebration. 12. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Roche seconded adjournment of the City • Council meeting at 8:26 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 01/10/11 -13- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER • IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA WORK SESSION JANUARY 10, 2011 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Work Session called to order by Mayor/President Tim Willson at 8:38 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor/President Tim Willson and Councilmembers /Commissioners Carol Kleven, Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building & Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, and Chris Moksnes, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO.3 • City Manager Curt Boganey explained the Council had seta p ublic hearing to consider Tax Increment Finance (TIF) No. 3 and the purpose of the discussion tonight is to provide additional detail prior to the public hearing. Jenifer Wolfe, Senior Project Manager with Springsted Incorporated, the City's financial consultant, presented the impacts of removing 13 Brookdale area parcels from TIF District No. 3 and the decertification of TIF District No. 2, which is in its final year. It was noted that the current tax capacity for the Brookdale parcels is less than the original tax capacity so these parcels do not create increment. When removed, the captured tax capacity in the District will increase in payable 2012. The captured tax capacity of $521,004 will be split between the - Robbinsdale and Brooklyn Center School Districts. With regard to the decertification of TIF District No. 2, the captured tax capacity estimated for Pay 2011 is $670,138, creating a positive impact. Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel explained that if not approved, there would likely be an annual shortfall. Ms. Wolfe concurred and explained that if the Council elected to not remove the Brookdale properties from the District, the projected cash flow from that District would not be sufficient to annually pay off the bonds. Mr. Boganey stated this information is based on assumptions and new construction and increase in tax capacity could alter the assumptions but he believed this was a better option. • 01 /10 /11 -1- DRAFT Councilmember /Commissioner Ryan stated the problem is the tax capacity does not provide the • cash flow to pay off the debt but since TIF District No. 2 is retiring, it will relieve that pressure and allow an opportunity to remove these 13 parcels. Councilmember /Commissioner Roche stated the goal is to ensure the financial stability of the City, so he would favor removing the 13 Brookdale parcels from TIF District No. 3. Mr. Boganey explained that if the City provides any TIF assistance to the Shingle Creek redevelopment project, it would require the creation of a new district so the Brookdale parcels would have to be removed from the current District. However, even if no new development was proposed, staff would recommend these parcels be removed from TIF District No. 3. Mayor/President Willson noted the removal of these parcels positions the City well for redevelopment of the Brookdale area. He stated he is looking forward to conversation with the developer of Shingle Creek Crossings. STERLING SQUARE — JOHN RODER Mr. Boganey noted this item was added to the agenda at the Council's direction. Mr. Roder's license was revoked for a year, ending April 2011. At the December 13, 2010, open forum, Mr. Roder requested the Council revisit the revocation. Mayor/President Willson noted the staff report provides information the Council had requested. John Roder, Sterling Square Apartment owner, indicated he put a site manager in place last October. The site manager is on premise to keep things in control while the property is in transition. He provided a list detailing improvements made thus far and indicated he would meet with the Police Chief to address any of their concerns. He asked the Council to reconsider and reinstate his rental license. Mayor/President Willson pointed out the financial obligations have been met and property maintenance issues were being worked on. He recalled that the criminal activities have been reduced; however, there continues to be a large volume of police calls. Mayor/President Willson asked Mr. Roder how he planned to mitigate the number of police calls. Mr. Roder explained the on -site manager will play a big part in correcting those activities and he has also hired on on -site caretaker to minimize property issues. He commented on the difficulty in evicting a resident if their rent is paid, yet he has evicted some residents due to activities. Mr. Roder assured the Council that the rent up plan was a solid plan going forward and would also be beneficial to him because it will assure better residents. Police Chief Benner stated the Department prepares monthly status reports on this property and there has been a reduction in calls but he is also mindful there has been a reduction in the population as well. He noted the Department has dedicated officers to this property, which is one of the few properties afforded this attention. He pointed out there is a 16.67% decline in calls, but the population has decreased 30% so the proportion of calls is not yet acceptable. 01/10/11 -2- DRAFT Mr. Boganey explained that if the Council determines to move forward with reconsideration, assuming all issues are addressed, the license renewal application could be considered before April 26, 2011, when the revocation expires. Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning stated staff will do what it can to meet the timeframes set by the Council; however, it is dependent on the property owner meeting the requirements. Mayor/President Willson commended Mr. Roder for working with the City to provide affordable housing that is maintained and not a drain on City services. He stated he remains concerned with the situation but would not be opposed to discussing the item at a March meeting. Councilmember /Commissioner Roche reminded the Council that the last time this matter was discussed, the City Attorney had spoken of precedent setting in terms of the efforts the City has made with rental licensing. He believed the City needed to be consistent and preferred to get the City Attorney's opinion prior to considering this request. Mr. Boganey explained the process would include a hearing and determination of findings by the Council that would lay out the argument and the basis for reconsideration of the revocation in this specific case. To the extent that the findings are unique, a precedent would not be established. Councilmember /Commissioner Lasman recalled the last meeting included a lengthy conversation • and asked whether this is typically the method used when reconsidering a revocation. Mr. Boganey responded that this situation could be somewhat unique. His understanding is that the resolution didn't preclude staff from accepting a rental application and beginning that process. Councilmember /Commissioner Lasman also commended Mr. Roder for his work to improve this rental property. She asked if he would expect the calls for service to stay low even when fully occupied. Mr. Roder responded that he does not anticipate the number of calls getting higher and he does not intend to harbor anyone that is not following the rules. Councilmember /Commissioner Roche commended Mr. Roder for constructing fencing around the property but noted there have been a high number of calls for service. Mr. Roder explained he does not want his employees to be placed in danger and would pay close attention to the recommendations made by the Police Department. Councilmember /Commissioner Ryan noted that despite the fact that it was financial challenging, Mr. Roder had evicted tenants which indicated his commitment to having the right tenants in place. Councilmember /Commissioner Ryan suggested means to screen tenants. Mr. Roder responded he does screen applicants but there are a lot of other factors, such as tenants bringing in others that are not listed on the application. Councilmember /Commissioner Ryan stated he had not been in favor of the 12 month revocation but did agree with a six month revocation. He acknowledged that because the owner was in i 01/10/11 -3- DRAFT arrears on taxes and utilities, some penalties had been in order. Councilmember /Commissioner • Ryan stated the Council does not intend to be punitive, but does strive to have an appropriate penalty. He indicated he would favor considering an application for licensure based on the meeting tonight. Mr. Boganey informed the Council of the process that would occur. The Council would first hold a hearing to reconsider the revocation and make the findings upon which the license would no longer be revoked. Mr. Roder would be required to submit a new application and depending on the type, may require a mitigation or action plan. Mayor /President Willson polled the Council whether they would consider early termination of the revocation of this license. Councilmembers /Commissioners Lasman and Ryan, and Mayor/President Willson indicated they would support reconsideration subject to all requirements being met. Councilmembers /Commissioners Roche and Kleven indicated they would not support reconsideration. Councilmember /Commissioner Roche stated he remained deeply concerned about precedent setting and believed reconsideration would undermine the basic process staff has performed over the past year. He would also prefer an opinion from the City Attorney before taking any action. Mayor/President Willson clarified staff was being asked to bring back more information and the City Attorney would be present at the next meeting for discussion. Councilmember /Commissioner Kleven stated the applicant has proven that he has worked on the issues, but she believed it would be helpful to wait the entire year to allow the applicant to prove himself. Mr. Boganey stated staff would assemble a report, consult with the City Attorney, and provide an indication of what the next step options would be. This information will be brought to the next meeting for Council consideration. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember /Commissioner Ryan moved and Councilmember /Commissioner Kleven seconded adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at 9:37 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 01/10 /11 -4- DRAFT City Council Agenda Item No. 6b • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: January 24, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Vickie Schleuning,Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards SUBJECT: Removing Rental Properties 5548 Dupont Ave N and 6813 Humboldt Ave N unit B201 from Council Agenda Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council remove the rental properties 5548 Dupont Ave N and 6813 Humboldt Ave N Unit B201 from Consent Agenda Item 6b. Background: Staff will be following up on the background of these properties pertaining to the license category and submit to Council for consideration of rental license approval at a future date. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Strategic: 3. We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods issrrrn:Ensuring an attractive.clean,sufc coinmunizv that enhances the ruts thy,o f'life a ndprcverves ttrepublic trim rp °,ate ,.,u i :..:« ;,�;, ,«.s, "� ; •"' g : .s"}; ``'" "« °" i Tns ,.. Ys '.a,G� � ,�,. •..°erg '� � `.& �s �; ,� � �; .ar ,� rah:- a s .: y Current Rental Standards 1506 71st Ave N Single FamilyT65 Initial Y _ Gregory Lang 0 II N/A II OK OK 5711 Camden Ave N Single Family Initial Alma Sybrant 0 ll N/A 11 OK OK 6418 Colfax Ave N Single Family Initial Shawn Cha 0 II N/A II OK OK 5000 Howe La Single Family Initial Kristen Blincoe 3 II N/A II OK OK 6807 Humboldt Ave N C102 Single Family Initial Raymond Charest 0 II N/A II OK OK 6807 Humboldt Ave N C201 Single Family Initial Raymond Charest 0 II N/A II OK OK 6807 Humboldt Ave N C303 Single Family Initial Raymond Charest 0 II N/A II OK OK 6437 Kyle Ave N Single Family Initial Sheng Lee 3 II N/A II OK OK 5637-39 Girard Ave N 1 Passed w/Weather Deferral Two Family(2) Renewal Earl and Evalyn Krueth .5/Unit 1 0 1 OK OK 3328 49th Ave N Single Family Renewal Sherman Yih Feng Kho 0 1 0 1 OK OK 515 62nd Ave N Single Family Renewal Jeffrey Agness 0 1 0 1 OK OK 4213 62nd Ave N Single Family Renewal Brannon Ciora 0 1 0 1 1 OK OK 5935 Dupont Ave N Single Family Renewal Gina Dumas 0 1 0 1 OK OK 4701 Eleanor La Single Family Renewal Charles Bright 0 1 0 1 OK OK 5307 Emerson Ave N Single Family Renewal Jeff Theisen 0 1 0 1 OK OK 6343 Emerson Ave N Single Family Renewal Michael Meyer 0 1 0 1 OK OK 6728 Grimes Ave N Single Family Renewal Charles Bright 0 1 0 1 OK OK 6212 Kyle Ave N Single Family Renewal Kristine Rousseau 0 1 0 1 OK OK 4207 Lakeside Ave#224 ISingle Family Renewal Marina Feldman 0 1 0 I 1 OK OK * CFS=Calls For Service for Renewal Licenses Only(Initial Licenses are not applicable to calls for service and will be listed N/A.) ** Final License Type Type I=3 year Type 11=2 year Type III=1 year Type IV=6 mos COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: January 18, 2011 TO: Curt Bo ane City Manager g Y� Y FROM: Maria Rosenbaum, Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT: Licenses for City Council Approval Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the following licenses at its January 24, 2011, meeting. _ Background: The following businesses /persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each business /person has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective licenses, submitted appropriate applications, and paid proper fees. Applicants for rental dwelling licenses are in compliance with Chapter 12 of the City Code of Ordinances, unless comments are noted below the property address on the attached rental report. MECHANICAL Noah Acquisitions /dba Benjamin Franklin Plumbing 14243 d Street N, Minneapolis Patton Heating and Air 589 Swan Lake Lane NW, Cedar Ryan Plumbing and Heating 811 University Avenue W, St. Paul RENTAL See attached report. SIGN HANGER VEO Sign, LLC 6353 Martin Avenue NE, Otsego TOBACCO RELATED PRODUCT Regal Dollar and Tobacco, Inc. 615 66 Ave N Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe conununio that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Rental License Category Criteria Policy — Adopted by City Council 03 -08 -10 Property Code and Nuisance Violations Criteria • License Category Number of Units Property Code Violations per Based on Property ( p rtY Inspected Unit P Code Only) Type 1— 3 Year 1 -2 units 0 -1 Type II — 2 Year 1 -2 units Greater than 1 but not more than 4 Type III — 1 Year 1 -2 units Greater than 4 but not more than 8 Type IV — 6 Months 1 -2 units Greater than 8 a S i �r& License Number of Units Validated Calls for Disorderly Conduct Category Service & Part I Crimes (Calls Per Unit/Year) No Category 1 -2 0 -1 Impact ll*' . �� �, � ��� MNII;. 5 or more units 0 -0.35 Decrease 1 1 -2 Greater than 1 but not more than 3 Category S" `-e4, , emu at m 5 or more units Greater than 0.35 but not more than 0.50 Decrease 2 1 -2 Greater than 3 x r a Categories or more units Greater than 0.50 Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust x [ w ���� Current Rental Standards M. 1606 71st Ave N Single Family Initial Gregory Lang 0 II N/A II OK OK 5711 Camden Ave N Single Family Initial Alma Sybrant 0 II N/A II OK OK 6418 Colfax Ave N Single Family Initial Shawn Cha 0 II N/A II OK OK 5000 Howe La Single Family Initial Kristen Blincoe 3 II N/A II OK OK 6807 Humboldt Ave N C102 Single Family Initial Raymond Charest 0 II N/A II OK OK 6807 Humboldt Ave N C201 Single Family Initial Raymond Charest 0 II N/A II OK OK 6807 Humboldt Ave N C303 Single Family Initial Raymond Charest 0 II N/A II OK OK 6437 Kyle Ave N Single Family Initial Sheng Lee 3 II N/A II OK OK 5637-39. Girard Ave N 1 Passed w /Weather Deferral Two Family (2) Renewal Earl and Evalyn Krueth .5 /Unit 1 0 1 OK OK 3328 49th Ave N Single Family Renewal Sherman Yih Feng Kho 0 1 0 1 OK OK 515 62nd Ave N Single Family Renewal Jeffrey Agness 0 1 0 1 OK OK 4213 62nd Ave N Single Family Renewal Brannon Ciora 0 1 0 1 OK OK 5548 Dupont Ave N Single Family Renewal John Lindahl 0 1 0 1 OK OK 5935 Dupont Ave N Single Family Renewal Gina Dumas 0 1 0 1 OK OK 4701 Eleanor La Single Family Renewal Charles Bright 0 1 0 1 OK OK 5307 Emerson Ave N Single Family Renewal Jeff Theisen 0 1 0 1 OK OK 6343 Emerson Ave N Single Family Renewal Michael Meyer 0 1 0 1 OK OK 6728 Grimes Ave N Single Family Renewal Charles Bright 0 1 0 1 OK OK 6813 Humboldt Ave N 8201 Single Family Renewal Stephanie Ford 0 1 1 1 OK OK 6212 Kyle Ave N Single Family lRenewal Kristine Rousseau 0 1 0 1 OK OK 4207 Lakeside Ave #224 Single Family lRenewal Marina Feldman 0 1 0 I OK OK * CFS = Calls For Service for Renewal Licenses Only (Initial Licenses are not applicable to calls for service and will be listed N /A.) ** Final License Type Type I = 3 year Type 11 = 2 year Type III = 1 year Type IV = 6 mos City Council Agenda Item No. 6c • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: January 18, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer S f'A- SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting a Feasibility Report and Calling for a Public Hearing, Improvement Project Nos. 2011 -01, 02, 03 and 04, Palmer Lake East Neighborhood Street, Storm Drainage and Utility Improvements Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval the resolution accepting a feasibility report and calling for a public hearing, Improvement Project Nos. 2011 -01, 02, 03 and 04, Palmer Lake East Neighborhood Street, Storm Drainage and Utility Improvements. If approved by the City Council, legal notice would be published, and all property owners who could potentially be assessed for improvements would receive a Notice of Public Hearing via certified mail. Background: The project was established by the City Council on August 9, 2011, by Resolution 2010 -114, and August 23, 2010, by Resolution 2010 -119 for the residential neighborhood area commonly referred to as the Palmer Lake East Neighborhood. This action was taken in accordance with the Capital Improvement Program, which identifies the Palmer Lake residential areas for street and • utility reconstruction during the 2010 construction season. The attached feasibility report provides a summary of the project evaluation process and preliminary layout of street and utility improvements. The report also includes the results of a resident questionnaire that was mailed to all property owners within the project area. A public information meeting was conducted on January 11, 2011, to provide project information to residents within the project area and gain additional input from the public. The informational meeting was generally positive in nature with the majority of questions and concerns relating to design details, special assessments and project schedule. A formal presentation of the feasibility of the project is planned at the public hearing. Budget Issues: The project cost is estimated to be $7,338,000. Funding sources for the project are proposed from a variety of sources as described in the feasibility report. Council Goals: Strategic: 5. We will continue to maintain and upgrade City infrastructure improvements Ongoing: 6. We will ensure the City drinking water is high quality and that the storm water is properly managed Mission. Ensuring an attractive, clean, sale community that enhances the qu ali(v of life rand preser es the public trust its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AFEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01, 02,03 AND 04, PALMER LAKE EAST NEIGHBORHOOD STREET, STORM DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council, by Resolution Nos. 2010 -114 and 2010 -119, directed the preparation of a feasibility report regarding proposed improvements to the streets, storm drainage system and public utilities in the Palmer Lake East neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared said report and recommends that the proposed improvements be considered; and WHEREAS, a portion of the cost of street and storm drainage improvements for said project is proposed to be assessed against properties within the project area; and WHEREAS, the project cost is estimated to be $7,338,000 and the project funding sources are currently estimated to be: • Special Assessments $1,802,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility $1,330,000 Water Utility $1,056,000 Storm Drainage Utility $1,028,000 Street Light Utility $ 150,000 Street Construction Fund $1,972,.000 Total $7,338,000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The Engineer's Feasibility Report for the Palmer Lake East Neighborhood Street Storm Drainage and Utility Improvements is received and accepted. tY p 2. A hearing shall be held on the 14th day of February, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard to p P p assfu on said improvement project and at such time and place all improvements will be given an .persons owning property affected by s aid p vements g opportunity ortuni to be heard with reference to said improvements. • RESOLUTION NO. 3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the hearing to be published in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. January 24, 2011 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member • and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. C ityaf Public Works Dept BROOKLYN Engineering Division CENTER Phone: 763 -569 -3340 , FAX: 763 -569 -3440 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR PALMER LAKE EAST STREET AND UTILI T Y IMPRO VEMENTS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 - 01 03 and 04 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA • January 14, 2011 I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota Steven L. Lillehaug, P. E. Reg. No. 41866 January 14, 2011 Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements Page 1 I. BACKGROUND In 2011, the City of Brooklyn Center will be entering the 18 year of its long -range infrastructure rehabilitation program often referred to as the Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Program. This program has consisted of a systematic rehabilitation and/or replacement of the City's aging streets, water main, sanitary sewer, storm sewers, sidewalks and street lights. The City's Capital Improvement Program identifies the Logan area residential neighborhood and the East Palmer Lake neighborhood for 2011. The projects are adjacent to each other, have been combined into one project and are proposed to be constructed in one year. The proposed project includes roadway and utility improvements within the project limits shown on Figure 1. The improvement area consists of properties bounded between Humboldt Avenue North and Palmer Lake, from 69' Avenue North to 73` Avenue North. This report was prepared in response to City Council Resolution Nos. 2010 -114 and 2010 -119 dated August 9 and August 23, 2010, respectively, directing staff to prepare a feasibility report and collect public input for the proposed project. Staff conducted a public informational meeting with residents and property owners located within the project area on January 11, 2011. A resident questionnaire was also distributed as part of the project evaluation process. A summary of resident comments is provided Appendix A. The 2011 project area consists of approximately 4.3 miles of streets and utilities. The project's neighborhoods consist of approximately 395 single family residential properties and one multi- family property. Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements Page 2 0 73RD AVE N i i 2ND AVE 7 2ND AJE N NJ 1 a � 1 t a z EZ w a J m fC I 0TH AVE N 1 i �t f 69TH AVE N TT CITY of Pubiicworks Project Area � 3ROOKLYN CENTER Engineering Department rna, q ca,ry December20. 2010 Palmer Lake East Figure 1 II. STREET IMPROVEMENTS A. EXISTING CONDITIONS • The majority of the local streets within the proposed project area were most recently improved between 1961 and 1967 resulting in the existing street pavement being in service for more than 40 years. The existing streets are generally 30 feet wide, which is typical for most low volume residential streets in Brooklyn Center. The roadways within the project area are very flat and do not have concrete curb and gutter. Concrete sidewalk exists along the west side Oliver Avenue from 69"' Avenue to Penn Avenue and generally along the extension of 72 ❑d Avenue from Oliver Avenue to Humboldt Avenue. The roadways' bituminous asphalt pavement has aged and is showing significant fatigue and distress, particularly along the unprotected edges. The typical service life for bituminous pavement is approximately 30 years. Generally, it is no longer cost - effective to routinely maintain these streets with seal coating or thin overlay procedures. Complete reconstruction is warranted. A geotechnical investigation was performed within the project area to obtain and analyze soil samples below the street pavement. Soil borings primarily indicate good soils containing sand and gravel to depths of 14 feet or more below the pavement surface. Groundwater was noted at depths of 4.5 to 15 feet below the pavement surface in several areas. Traffic within the project area is generally limited to local traffic access to residential properties within the neighborhood with the exception of the roadways such as Oliver, Logan, Morgan and Newton Avenues that experience higher levels of traffic destined to other areas by using these streets as their cut - through routes. The remaining roadways generally do not provide regional connection to other neighborhoods or commercial areas and, therefore, do not experience high volumes of cut - through or collector -type traffic. Traffic volumes • on streets within the project area are not anticipated to significantly increase in the future. B. PROPOSED STREET IMPROVEMENTS Based on the age and condition of the existing bituminous asphalt pavement surfaces and the proposed replacement of underlying utilities in certain locations, complete replacement of the street surface is warranted. Proposed street improvements include full depth reconstruction for the existing streets to a width of 30 feet for all streets within the project area. The existing soil material will provide a stable foundation to support the proposed street and utility improvements. The roadway subgrade consists of good soils and is planned to be reclaimed (recycled) in place to be reused as the new aggregate base for the proposed street section. The installation of concrete curb and gutter is proposed with the reconstruction of the streets within the project area. Concrete curb and gutter will assist in conveying storm water runoff to storm sewer catch basins. The improved drainage benefits derived from the installation of curb and gutter will significantly extend the service life of the new pavement. The existing street grades will also be designed to provide improved drainage to the storm sewer system. The proposed street reconstruction does not include substantial changes to the roadway width, alignment or elevation. Other improvements include the installation of concrete driveway aprons, replacement of trees that are impacted, replacement of landscaping elements and irrigation systems that are impacted and deficient segments of sidewalk are proposed to be repaired as warranted or impacted. No new sidewalk or trail segments are proposed with this project. Traffic calming issues and concerns that have been identified by residents are currently scheduled to be evaluated and addressed by the Administrative Traffic Committee. Should any improvements or modifications be warranted, they will be addressed during the final design stages or separately from this project. • Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements Page 4 III. STREET LIGHTING SYSTEM • A. EXISTING CONDITIONS The neighborhood improvement program has historically included the replacement of free - standing street lights located within the neighborhood. Free - standing street lights are defined as lights mounted on poles, which do not contain any other overhead utilities attached to them. There are currently 26 free - standing street lights within the project area. These lights consist of older style wood utility poles that have been in service for many years, most likely dating back to the original construction of the neighborhood. The existing free- standing street lights have overhead power services with cobra -head type light fixtures. Other street lights in the neighborhood exist on multiuse -type poles, which are unable to be removed and therefore are not planned to be replaced. The City's Street Light Policy states that street lights may be provided at street intersections and at mid - block locations where the distance between intersections exceeds 700 feet. Street lights are currently located at all intersections and at most of the longer blocks that exceed 700 feet with a few exceptions. B. PROPOSED STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS The recommended street light improvements include replacement of the 26 existing free standing street lights with fiberglass poles, cut -off type light fixtures and underground power services. Other street lights that are mounted on multiuse transmission/distribution poles within the neighborhood are not proposed to be modified. Staff received inquiries and requests for additional street lights from a few residents through the public • outreach efforts of the project. In accordance with City policy, midblock streetlights may be installed where the block exceeds 700 feet in length upon receipt of a petition signed by a majority of the residents on the block, including signatures of the residents adjacent to the specific location where such midblock light is requested. Should the appropriate petition be received, additional lighting will be included in the project lighting improvements. IV. STORM DRAINAGE AND TREATMENT SYSTEM A. EXISTING CONDITIONS The project area is located within the Shingle Creek Watershed and West Mississippi River Management Commission areas and flow to Shingle Creek and the Mississippi River, respectively. The existing storm drainage system in the project area consists of a network of storm sewer pipes installed between 1961 and 1967 and is fairly well developed. Generally, the major water divide lies between Newton and Morgan Avenues. The storm water to the west of this water divide flows to the west via underground piping into City storm water ponds (35 -004 and 35 -003) and the Palmer Lake wetland, to Palmer Lake and eventually into Shingle Creek. The storm water east of the water divide flows east via underground piping, eventually and directly discharging into the Mississippi River. A televising inspection of the existing mainline storm sewer was conducted during the summer of 2010. The existing underground pipe network in this area was found to be in fair to good condition with some isolated issues identified in several areas of piping and inlet structures that warrant repair. Several isolated areas exist that experience localized flooding due to lack of storm inlets and due to the flat topography of the project • area. Several comments from area residents indicated this lack of adequate drainage facilities within the neighborhood and were mostly related to standing water along the edge of the street and at driveways. Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements Page 5 However, no significant isolated or major flooding issues have been identified. Additionally, a moderate amount of debris and sediment has accumulated within some of the larger diameter trunk storm sewers and g • in the ponds located adjacent to Palmer Lake. Cleaning of these pipe segments will be conducted separately from the proposed project. Dredging of the sediments in the ponds will be performed as warranted and determined during final design of the project. B. PROPOSED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Storm sewer improvements will be made to the existing system that includes replacing/repairing catch basins and laterals where necessary. In several areas as indicated, the storm sewer system is somewhat underdeveloped. A more complete system is proposed to be installed including multiple new trunk and lateral lines and catch basins in several areas (see Appendix B, Street and Storm Sewer Improvements Figure). This expansion of the drainage system and installation of additional pipes and catch basin structures will alleviate localized drainage problems. Proposed water quality improvements include installing underground water treatment structures (grit chambers) that will remove sediment, litter and other suspended contaminants prior to discharging from the project area. One structure is proposed to be located along 71"Avenue west of Humboldt Avenue, and four grit chambers are being evaluated for locations at the outlets to Palmer Lake along Penn and Oliver Avenues. Additionally, infiltration basins (rain gardens) will be.incorporated on City property and throughout the project area within the boulevard areas where adjacent property owners volunteer and agree to these gardens. An infiltration basin consists of a relatively small area of plantings within a constructed depression located behind the street curb. Rainwater is routed to the areas from the street gutter and infiltrates naturally by plants and soils in the garden. This infiltration process removes nutrients and pollutants. By acting as a small detention pond, the rain garden plants and soils also provide a natural way of reducing the amount of runoff water that flows from rooftops, lawns, driveways and streets directly into the storm sewer system. The underground treatment chambers and infiltration basins are recommended for this project in certain areas to help meet the City's storm water treatment requirements. V. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM A. EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing sanitary sewer collection system within the project area consists primarily of eight -inch diameter vitrified clay pipe and plastic truss pipe sewer mains. A majority of the sanitary sewer system was installed between 1961 and 1965. A portion of PVC sewer pipe was installed on the east end of Irving Lane in 1978. Due to the age and materials used in the original construction of the sanitary sewer, a large portion of the sanitary sewer mains within the project area are subjected to frequent issues with root intrusion. Public Works crews must perform root sawing and jetting on an annual basis to maintain the system conveyance capacity and avoid sewer back -ups in many locations (see Figure 3). During the project planning phase, all public sanitary sewer pipes were inspected with remote televising equipment. These inspections confirmed that portions of the sanitary sewer have moderate to severe problems with root intrusion, sags, and sections of cracked and broken pipe along pipe joints and at many services. In many areas where there is plastic truss pipe, the pipe walls are becoming worn and in some areas have worn entirely through the inner pipe wall. Surveys received from residents also indicate some Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements Page 6 occurrences of sewer service line blockage that are often attributed to root penetration of the service pipe joints and connection points. Figure 2 illustrates a typical section of sewer pipe with moderate root intrusion problems. The project contains many segments of sanitary sewer that are in likewise or worse condition. Fi ure 2. Sanita Sewer Line, Oliver Avenue — Tree Root Intrusion • B. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Complete replacement of the sanitary sewer trunk lines within the project area is recommended due to the extent of root intrusion, sags and cracked pipe within the collection system (see Appendix B, Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Improvements Figure). Isolated replacement of the problem areas is not cost effective. In accordance with past City construction practice, individual service lines between the sewer main and the property line would also be replaced. • Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements Page 7 A - 73RD AVE N M Z z 2 w � 9 L Z WOODBINE LN 0 z w w Q LL w.. z 72ND AVE N z 72ND AVE N 72ND WE N ti w o > 1 Q z AMY LN b O A � z z z A 71ST AVE N < - -2 — � - 71ST VEN > a z ° O z z w O j x ¢ ~ O a r o m z JO z a > 00 70TH AVE N z = S � - 7 70TH AVE N 70TH AVE N y I IRVING LN N -- a � Legend i 'Nater Main Breaks - 14 Locations d0 � I — 'Haler Main —� Sanitary Root Sawing Not Needed Sanitary Root SawAreas 66FH AVE N T CITY o f Watermain Breaks and Root Saw Locations BROOKLYN CENTER J.. ��^ Palmer Lake East Project Area } Figure 3 VI. WATER SYSTEM • A. EXISTING CONDITIONS A majority of the water main within the project area consists of 6 -inch and 8 -inch diameter cast iron pipe installed between 1961 and 1969. Water records indicate that 14 water system breaks have occurred within the project area. The majority of the breaks have occurred in a limited area around 70 and Knox Avenues (see Figure 3). Minor water quality issues have been reported by residents that are typically mitigated by the periodic flushing of hydrants. Generally, the cast iron water main is considered to be in good condition with an estimated 30 to 40 years of remaining service life. B. PROPOSED WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS Recommended watermain improvements include replacement of the existing cast iron water main with new ductile iron watermain in areas where there has been a significant history of water main breaks and where the replacement of the adjacent sanitary sewer is deeper than three feet below the existing watermain, which would undercut and impact the adjacent water main. Generally, water main is subject to higher rates of failure when undermined during construction, which would lead to a shorter service life. Due to the service life of the watermain not yet being reached and the limited amount of watermain issues in a large portion of the project area, only certain sections of watermain are proposed to be replaced (see Appendix B, Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Improvements Figure). The proposed improvements also include the replacement of most valves, hydrants and water services extending from the watermain in the street to the water curb stop located at the front property line. Replacement pipe materials include ductile iron pipe, which is more resistant to corrosion than cast iron pipe, and copper service pipe. • VII. RIGHT -OF -WAY AND EASEMENTS Generally, all public infrastructure owned, maintained and operated by the City throughout the project area is located within City easements and/or right -of -way. It is not anticipated that the City will need to obtain any additional easements for this project. VIII. ESTIMATED COSTS AND FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS The total estimated cost of the proposed project is $7,338,000. Table 1 provides a summary of the estimated project costs and recommended funding amounts from the various sources as indicated. Funding for the project is further described below. A. FUNDING FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS The estimated project cost of roadway improvements for all streets in this project area is $3,350,000. This preliminary estimate includes the cost for project administration, legal, engineering and construction contingency. Special assessments for street improvements are proposed in accordance with the 2011 rates adopted by the City Council. The standard 2011 residential street assessment rate is $3,559 per R1 zoned residential property. This rate would be assessed to all benefitting single family residential properties within the project area (see Figure 4). The multifamily property located at 6925 Humboldt Avenue North zoned R5 would be assessed based on an acreage basis. An "A" zone benefit includes the area abutting the street to be • improved, extending to a depth of 200 -feet and a "B" zone of lesser benefit for the remainder of the property area. The "A" zone rate is based on assessing 70 percent of the total street project cost deemed to benefit the Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements Page 9 property and the `B" zone rate is based on 30 percent. A total estimated special assessment amount of $1,378,165.41 would be levied for street improvements. The remaining street construction costs would be • funded from the Street Reconstruction Fund. A summary of the proposed special assessments for street improvements is provided in Appendix C. B. FUNDING FOR STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS The total estimated cost for storm drainage improvements within the project area is $1,452,000. This preliminary estimate includes the cost for project administration, legal, engineering and construction contingency. Special assessments for storm drainage improvements are proposed in accordance with the 2011 rates adopted by the City Council. The standard 2011 storm drainage special assessment rate is $1,068 per R1 zoned single family residential property within the project area (see Figure 4). Storm sewer assessments for the multifamily residential property located at 6915 Humboldt Avenue have been computed similarly to the street assessments. On this basis, a total estimated special assessment amount of $424,118.87 would be levied for storm sewer improvements. A summary of the proposed special assessments for storm drainage improvements is provided in Appendix C. C. FUNDING FOR UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS The estimated cost of sanitary sewer improvements is $1,330,000; the estimated cost for water main improvements is $1,056,000; and the estimated cost for street light replacement is $150,000. As previously noted, these total cost estimates include the costs for project administration, engineering and construction contingency. All costs for water, sanitary sewer and street light improvements will be funded by their respective utility funds in accordance with established policy for such improvements. • i Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements Page 10 • i • o.: Table 1. Cost and Funding o Improvement Project Nos. 2011 -01,02 -03,04 2010 Palmer Lake East Area Improvements January 14. 2011 Sanitary Water Storm Street Estimated Streets Sewer Main Drainage Lights Total Estimated Expenditures Estimated Constructio Co st Street 8 Utility $2,900,739.70 $1,151,354 80 $913,965.00 $1,257,386.50 $130,000.00 $ 6,353,446.00 Contin encies ) $145,036.99 $5',567741 $45,898.25 $62,869.33 $6,500.00 $317,872.30 Administration, Engineering, Legal (10%) $304,577.67 $1120,892.251 966.33 $132,025.58 $13,850.00 $867,111.83 z Total Estimated Project Costs (Feasibility) $3,350,354.35 $1,329,814.79 $1,055,829.58 $1,452,281.41 $150,150.00 $7,338,230.13 Estimated Revenue Street Special Assessments __. _ . _ $ 1,378,165.41 - - $1,378,165.41 Storm Drainage Special Assessments $424,118.87 $424,118.87 o Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $1,329,814.79 $1,329,814.79 Water Utility Fund $1,0$5,629.58 $1,055,829.58 - ---- ---- -- - - -- - — -- -- Storm Drainage Utility Fund $1,028,182.54 $1,028,162.54 Street Light Utility Fund $150,150.00 $150,150.00 Street Reconstruction Fund $1,972,188.94 $1,972,188.94 otaI Estimated Revenue (Feasibility) $3,350,354.35 S1,329,814.79 $1,055,629.58 $1,452,281.41 $150,150.00 $7,338,230.13 'b 73RD AVE N UQ 7242 724 1<42 ' 7 247 t ; 124.1 .. . 7142 7243 7242 7243 O-� N lytg 7237 S 72 371 7 237 1 (7236 y /237 7238 1237 7236 7237 7230 7231 7230 7231 1230 7231 7270 7231 Z 7214 7225 7224 1225 7230 7231 1224 7225 7224 1225 ^' " :° 72+9 1218 7219 7278 7219 724 7� N - - - - - CD `3 7218 7219' 7 WOODBINE LN — J �?7 7212 1213 7212 72131 7222 7219 3 7212 7213 =i =+ t F 1206 7207 Z 7206 7207 CD 817201 W 721$ 720 l � 7200 7241 Q 1200 7201 d r v m m m 1140 114+ 1+42 71 2 1200 7 201 71491 7zas 7207 N 8 a N } b li N 25 C>•] ', i 7148 7149 Q 7148 43 71 P 7200 7201 7136 7137 7136 7131 72N DAVE N m w '' '� 7132 7137 _ 72ND AVE N 7130 7131 7130 7131 7+36 7137 1 ^' ^' m Q a a I to 7124 7126 g ' w 7b t� N ° CD tv 7124 1126 1124 7126 7130 773+ 7118 1119 v 'r 'O 7118 7119 7118 7119 ,r — - . 7120 7721 + 7027 in 'm w CD b 711 7713 1112 7113 7112 11+3 x106 7107 " "' W 7108 1107 7106 7107 Z w'i 7100 7101 m N lf4 25 N i 2106 210o 2008 2000 1908 1900 71 A w a SS 7042 7037 7030 7031 7030 7031 ~ Q o 1 2107 2iot 2001 200 7038 7037 " P 10367031, � 0: J ? Ta 7025 W 70 1024 1026 TIM ; < ' m3o 703, tai° 7°31 X 7 70t a ro +s > 2 a T02s 7024 1025 7 024 D 1026 7012 UJ 1012 7013 W 1018 O 7019 7018 7619 Tole 7019 7008 �Rr Taos 1007 ' TOOS 7007 Q 7012 C 0 7013 7012 7613 7012 7013 7008 4 $ 7 01$ 7000 i 7001 7000 7007 Z S N 1001 7pps 7007 7006 ! 7007 7000 Z3 7031 N N 2100 1006 100+ 7000 1001 707 — ,� 70TH AVE N 8937 HAVE N p 6942 6943 6942 $943 V $ 11981 lm M N c6 I 1 6936 6931 8936 $931 $938 ' I R ^ M ^ E' .c o $ 6926 B8J0 I+ �� 6930 8933 1830 :600 6825 6924 8925 6924 6926 0924 8927 6919 8� _ 0918 M19 6918 8819 8918 6921 � 6913 1 m a o o m l c 6907 8912 6913 6912 6913 69+2 8916 r69M 8908 6907 8906 6907 6906 8967 2da 6000 2100 6900 8901 6900 6901 Legend 69TH AVE N Proposed Single Assessment tv Proposed Multi Assessment � Comer Lot Opt on TT CITY OF Assessment Ma _1 Previously Assessed �BROOKCYN CENTER P ^� CRY Prcperty Palmer Lake East t i s 0 • IX. RECOMMENDED PROJECT SCHEDULE • Table 2 is the preliminary schedule for the project. Table 2. Palmer Lake East Neighborhood Project — Schedule Action Target Date City Council Receives Feasibility Report Declares Cost to be January 24, 2011 Assessed and Calls for Public Hearings Council Holds Public Hearing, Authorizes the Project and Orders February 14, 2011 Preparation of Plans and Specifications City Council Approves Plans and Specs, Authorizes Advertisement February 28, 2011 for Bids City Receives and Opens Project Bids March 31, 2011 City Council Considers Award of Contract April 11, 2011 Start Project Construction May 2011 Construction Substantially Complete October 2011 X. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The overall condition of the City's street and utility infrastructure systems is critical to the operation, safety, welfare and economic health of the entire community. As a result of the infrastructure needs described and the proposed solutions and estimated costs provided in this report, the proposed project is considered to be necessary, cost effective and feasible. Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements Page 13 • Appendix A Resident Comments i • Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements QUESTIONNAIRE • 2011 Palmer Lake E Street & Utility Project This questionnaire will help the City of Brooklyn Center engineering staff to better understand the infrastructure needs and issues in your neighborhood. Please return this survey by January 11, 2011. You may also contact us at 763 -569 -3340 to discuss these issues. Thank you for your cooperation. 1. Our televised sewer inspections typically identify sanitary sewer services with moderate to severe root infiltration. Have you experienced any problems with sanitary sewer service, such as the line plugging or having the service cleaned out to the street? How often? • 2. Typically, improvements to the storm drainage system are needed. Do you have a problem with drainage or flooding in the street, your yard or your basement? 3. Do you experience problems relating to the water distribution system such as water pressure, taste, odor or color? • (OVER) • 4. Do you have a lawn irrigation (or sprinkler) system located within your property? Please circle one Yes No 5. Do you have a sump pump in your basement? Please circle one: A. Yes, my sump pump runs frequently (at least once every day) B. Yes, my sump pump runs less frequently C. No, I do not have a sump pump or do not use my sump pump 6. What other concerns, comments and /or issues do you have pertaining to the streets, sidewalks, utilities, etc., in your neighborhood? i Should you have questions or need more information, please contact the engineering division at 763- 569 -3340. Your name: Address: Please return by January 11, 2011 to: Engineering Division City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 FAX 763 -569 -3440 Email: publicworks @ci.brooklyn - center.mn.us • Summary of Resident Survey PALMER LAKE EAST PROJECT ( PALMER LAKE E AND LOGAN NEIGHBORHOODS) Street Sanitary Storm Water Sprinkler Sump Pump Comments/ ConcernsiIssues re: streets, -T- System sidewalks, utilities, etc. Unknown Address No No Black water No No Not Applicable occasionally. Year? Long ago. One time. No No (except after City No No NA flushing operation Not sever drain back up. No lNo No NA I'm very concerned about losing our boulevard trees. On Morgan Ave, trees line the streets on both sides. We lost a lot of trees in the storm of 2005 and that was a hue loss already. No INo iSometimes pressure. jNo iNo lWill trees close to the street be removed? Amy Ln One time No Only when system is Yes No Overgrown trees and shrubs on comer properties flushed (City) affecting visibility while driving. FROM MEETING: May want to widen driveway lifpossible. No No No No No lNone No lNo jNo INo jNo None Jiving Ave Once No No No No NA. FROM MEETING: Contact homeowner pertaining to tree removal of tree by driveway. No No No. I have a whole No No I don't like how many times I have power surges or house filter system power loss. My power will go but across the street because when we moved they never lose their power. Lost power Christmas in to this house 18 years Day and Eve. Was told it was underground fuse ago, the water was like but across the street they had power. swamp water. Bad odor, yellow color and coffee was not drinkable. Looked like oily swamp water. So we got whole house filter system. Could not drink water before that. No jNo Yes, odor and color. iNo No None 1 1/18/2011 Summary of Resident Survey Street Sanitary Storm Water Sprinkler Sump Pump Comments/ Concerns /Issues re: streets, System sidewalks, utilities, etc. No Only if the Drain is covered by Once in awhile odor No No Not Applicable snow as it was this year because the plow left a 3-4 foot layer of snow out that far from the curb, over the drain. I chopped for hours to get it uncovered. The plowing on our street has been the worst I have seen in 37 years of living in Brooklyn Center. I've wondered if the individual has not plowed before and is just learning! Irving Ln We have had the service cleaned No problems on property. Occasional odor and No No We have a daycare business in home and worried out to the street two times in thirty Street floods occasionally at color. about construction and customer entry. Like to see years. Sometimes slow to drain. east elbow turn. more street lights. Can I have my driveway replaced at same time as curbs. I always get a lot of roots from a No I have a lot of rust in Yes No Will I be able to have contractors replace my maple tree in front yard clogging line. I believe it has driveway at same time as curbing. Which trees will my sewer line. I have to have it disabled my water be removed along roadway and how far back do I cleaned out at least every other softener. have to move sprinkler lines from street. ear. No Low spot in street at the end of No No No We could use a streetlight in front of house. Too driveway - results in big puddle dark at night. Need one in middle of block not just after rain. at ends. James Ave N No At times street drainage No No No How many trees are you going to take in our yard problem during serious storms. and why? Wife needs access to house from car. She has cerebral palsy. FROM MEETING: Tree marked for removal. Please check on other options. No problems. About ten years ago, None No Yes, runs less Would like to thank snow plow drivers for the ran a "cutting" snake out to street. frequently - only excellent job they do. Very prompt after snow Cutting head came back with bits when roof gutters falls. Thank You! - and to all who work thru of tree root. Not serious. All pipes clog. summer, maintaining services that often go un- drain excellent. noticed by residents! Knox Ave N No No No No No We would request a rain garden if that is a Possibilitv. FROM MEETING: Handicapped resident. Pay i special attention to access. 2 • • 11011 • • i Summary of Resident Survey Street Sanitary Storm Water Sprinkler Sump Pump Comments/ Concerns/Issues re: streets, System. sidewalks, utilities, etc. Line plugged with tree roots In 35 years there has never None Yes No None 02/2000 and 05/2002. Since then, been a problem with any of the preventative maintenance has been above. performed yearly. No finther roblems. No No Yes, water pressure. Yes No We are concerned about water quality during the street/water improvement process. Also how far back from the street does the City replace drivewa s. None - never - since 1993. No - never - since 1993. Only in extreme drought No No None. type conditions or when fire hydrants are flushed. Log an Ave No problems No problems No No No We hope sidewalks are not installed. Yes. Once, last year. Roto Rooter No No No No It seems like we always have power failure in the had to go all the way out to the summer. The houses across the street always seem street. The service man said that to have power when we don't. It happens way too there were a lot of roots in the often. system. Yes, about once per year. Had No Occasional drops in No No Need street lights. Roto- Rooter camera it last year. water pressure. Use Roots are getting in where City water softener and pipe joins pipe from house near drinking water filters to the street. get rid of taste, odor and color. The water here is i No problems If there are leaves or other No noticeable problems. No No Street paving noticeably deteriorated. material blocking or partially blocking storm drain grates, heavy rain will result in some minor floodine in the street. I had it cleaned out once. No A slight odor in Yes No NA bathroom sinks. I have the main cleaned each year None noticed. None noticed. No No We need a couple streets with stop signs from 73rd on a routine basis. thru 69th due to fast traffic from cars using Logan as a thru street due to back up on Humboldt Ave. Lots of children on Logan and don't want to see M hit by cars. Are we on Logan Ave going to be having our street done first in the spring? Also, how long will this project take? Please respond. We have had the sewer back up Just in 1997. No No No None. twice but unclogged it ourselves. 3 1/18/2011 Summary of Resident Survey Street Sanitary Storm Water Sprinkler Sump Pump Comments/ Concerns/Issues re: streets, System sidewalks, utilities, etc. IN PERSON 1/12/11: Would like tree on 72nd removed if possible. No Unsure cause re: basement No No No No sidewalks on mailbox sides of streets. We already have enough problems with mail tampering without having a lot of people walking past the RURAL (at the street) mailboxes. Too many garbage trucks ruin new streets. No issues No issues No issues No No 1. Sidewalk connection on Newton - need sidewalk that parallels Newton connecting two crosswalks. 2. Need to connect sidewalk and trail system on Oliver north of 71st Ave. I have had two plugged lines. Roto Bottom of my driveway Water bad taste. No No Need access to my house throughout the day. Can I Rooter took care of it. collects waters after rain. get in and out? Vandalism has occurred and mail boxes have been opened and theft has occurred. No No No No No Where will parking be when you do the street? No No No No No I feel this is a terrible time to redo streets in this bad economy. Many of us are elderly and cannot afford the enormous cost for us. It creates severe hardships on top of the high property taxes. I also do not relish having my mail 2 blocks away, which I feel is risky due to theft and inconvenient. No Just what is under line. Taste, odor and dryness No No None of water. FROM MEETING: Tree marked with "T'. Resident does not want it removed. Check for other - options. Ma be 2 times since 1960 None None No No INA Morgan Ave N No problems No flooding Slight odor, pressure No No None, but curbs and gutters would be nice. could be a little higher. None None Color when lines are No No Not Applicable flushed; have been experiencing bad odor since fall. Not out to the street issues, just Just pooling of water at No No No Neighbors across street park in front of my house, within house lines. driveway /street. causing erosion of my slope, yard and the street asphalt breaking up. Gas access is in the middle of my driveway. Once a year. In 2010, our water No Just once in 2010. off No No NA was " "; our line backed up. color water, gram y. Yes, once about 3 -5 years ago. iNo iNo JNo INo iNo curbs or sidewalks. 4 . • 1/4911 • • • Summary of Resident Survey Street Ssnitay Storm Water Sprinkler Sump Pump Comments/ Concerns/Issues re: streets, S stem sidewalks, utilities, etc. FROM MEETING: Tree marked for removal has special meaning. Please check if there are other options. We had new pipe laid about 3 No No No No No. We are very concerned about our ability to get years ago. We have periodic clogs in and out during this project, as we and a couple that need to be cleaned out maybe of neighbors are elderly and/or handicapped- every 6 years or so. I don't remember sDecifics. No No No No No The street in front of my house is breaking up. I did call and they filled in a good sized pot hole that retained water. My concern is my special needs daughter rides Metro Mobility for work and socially. What happens when the road closes? Newton Ave Tree roots about every 2 to 3 years Not Applicable Not Applicable No No Not Applicable No. I have had the sewer pipe No Once in awhile there is No No None cleaned once in 30 years. an odor, meaning maybe once a year. No No No No No NA No. However, I've only owned Not that I'm aware of Not that I'm aware of No No None this house for 2 years. NA NA Occasional odor. No No NA Believe it's been fine. Never In front of our driveway, it fills Never No No None cleaned out to street. up with 3 or 4 inches built up whenever it rains. See attached info See attached info No never No No None. There are no sidewalks in my neighborhood and have never been. I am never out on the street so I do not know if there are ever any sanitary sewer service problems; 2. 1 do not know of any problems with drainage or flooding in the street, my yard since I am never outside and I am unable to go to my basement very often, but I do not know of any drainage or flooding in my basement I have had the line cleaned twice No No No No Please put sidewalk on the opposite side of street in the last 5 years because of from my house. roots. Yes, once a year, 100 feet from No Odor is a problem and No No NA house. color as well, with downstairs main drain foul odor with washing. 5 1/18/2011 I Summary of Resident Survey Street T Sanitary Storm Water Sprinkler Sump Pump Comments/ Concerns/Issues re: streets, system sidewalks, utilities, etc. Oliver Ave Yes, maybe once a year or less. None No No No Lights - how much. Driveway flat at end of driveway when done. No ridge. No frequent problems. Clean line No No Yes No NA about every 10 years. My sewer has plugged every year No No No No None for the last 8 years in the late fall. Every plumber tells me it's at the street hub connection causing the problem. The block is always about 70 to 80 feet out. Roots Never No No Yes No Mainly my underground sprinkler system which is on the boulevard plus yard, None None None No No None No Yes. The water pools at the end No No No We need speed bumps on Oliver. The ball players of my driveway and will not go too fast and we have more young families with flow down the street to the children moving in. storm sewer. Yes, once a year ago had the line No No No No If the curbs are done, can I get some concrete work cleaned out it had roots. done at my rope ? None of these but we had a line No Color. Sometimes water Yes No Wish we could have more street lights (it gets plugging in the house. comes out with dirt. pretty dark on our street). Service cleaned out to the street No No No No Hopefully many of the trees can be saved if the once about 18 years ago. project is implemented. Concerning the holding pond across the street (East Palmer) was told when it was installed that trees (wild) would be trimmed or removed annually around the pond to visibly be able to see the whole field as it was before the pond. Safety - myself and neighbors always watch for problems across the street and now we can't see over there on the trails or field in the summer. Many kids throw rocks at the ducks, etc. that use the pond and we were able to stop them prior. Root infiltration - every six None None No No Don't want a sidewalk through my front yard. months. Main line problems. Cost ? ?? FROM MEETING: Owner request to remove tree marked with a "T'. Change this to an "V. SEE GENERAL COMMENTS AREA FOR E- MAIL AND MEETING COMMENT. FROM MEETING: Labor Day Party /50th Annivers 6 • • 11011 • • Summary of Resident Survey Street Sanitary Storm Water Sprinkler Sump Pump Comments/ Concerns/Issues re: streets, S stem sidewalks, utilities, etc. The line plugged one time in 47 No No No No Cost to homeowner. Access to our property years (about 10 years ago). No throughout construction. U.S. Mail deliveries. I problems since. would like to see you work from one side to the other and complete as you go. Other words, do not tear un the whole nroiect at once. Oliver Cir N No INo INo INo JNo JNot Applicable Penn Ave N First, rarely watch TV so was not Only place we really have a Recently have noticed No No I do NOT want any mature trees removed or aware of said inspections. Second, problem with for drainage is at some water pressure harmed during this project. I am also curious if the we have had a single instance the end of our driveway where issues - primarily with Palmer Lake Park walking path has ever been where one sink was plugged and it meets the road A large pool toilets. High mineral groomed for cross country skiing during winter - or required chemicals to remove. We of water forms there. deposits have also been at least part of it - instead of clearing the path. have not required the services of a noted even with a water SEE GENERAL COMMENTS FOR E -MAIL profession al. softener installed COMMENT. Woodbine LA Twice In street only when heavy rains No No No Will home be accessible during work? Will you try plug drain with leaves and to save our trees in front yards? sticks. No No No No No I do not see any problems. We do not need improvements. Please do not move forward with this project. A tax increase would be a severe burden on my household. I already have neighbors that are leaving their homes to foreclosure because of their monetary problems during this recession. Please do not force more people to leave Brooklyn Center due to tax increases. Yes, we had our line cleaned out No, our soil is sandy so we No issues with No No I've heard rumors that curb and gutter additions are in approximately 2005. There haven't had issues with distribution system. being considered for our area (Woodbine). I'm were roots in the line at that time. drainage, flooding, in any wondering what the benefit would be in areas that location. don't have drainage or flooding issues. Line occasionally runs slow and Comer intersection will No No No We do not want sidewalks added The front it's been many years since it as sometimes pond with water boulevard tree was hit by an out of control car and been cleaned When would be best during heavy rains. Perhaps should be removed as the bark is now, many years time to have it cleaned out? another drain should be added. later, split up 3+ feet and the tree is dying out. We would like larger pieces for firewood if possible. 72nd Ave N 0 Two times recently. No No No JNo lNeed curbs. 7 1118/2011 Summary of Resident Survey Stmt Sanitary Storm Water Sprinkler Sump Pump Comments / Concerns/Issues re: streets, System sidewalks, utilities, etc. No. We have lived here for 11 No No No No Our home value has dropped $70,000. We can't years and have never had a sell it - we owe too much and you want to add a problem special assessment ?! You can't get blood out of a turnip. We'll walk away and give the house back to the bank before I pay for a curb that I don't want or need 11 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable No No NA Three times in last month. No No No No We need a concrete curb. I don't know. No No No No NA Mine is in working order There is no problem as Water pressure is Yes, but it No It seems to be fine and have other concerns in my mentioned above. working fine. does not community, work or no longer works. 71st Ave N No problems. No No No No We have lost power in storms. Trees falling on p ower lines. Yes, we have this problem, every NA NA NA NA NA year having the service cleaned. No Our street and yard flood when lNo No No What is the time line on this job from start to there is a rain storm. finish? Never No No No (just No Don't need anything, just repavement of street. lines FROM MEETING: Would like stop sign at intersection of Morgan and 71st Ave. No No No Yes No Please do not cut down any trees. FROM MEETING: One tree marked with "T' and one marked for removal. Do they have to be removed? 70th Ave N No JNo JNo JNo JNone No JNo JNo No JNo JNone g • 1/•11 • 0 • Summary of Resident Survey Street Sanitary Storm Water Sprinkler Sump Pump Comments/ Concerns/Issues re: streets, System sidewalks, utilities, etc. GENERAL COMMENTS OLIVER AVE Via e-mail: After going to the meeting on January 11 th and seeing what is going to take place I am encouraged and looking forward to the project. The one concern I have is the storm sewer situation. What is the storage capacity of Palmer Lake? Having living on the here for 47 years we have seen the lake slowly silting is. About a third of what was open water when we moved here is now cattails. The viewing areas that where built on the edge of the open water are now buried in cattails. When the bridge on 69th was reconstructed things have changed. When the clear spillway was replaced with one of big rocks covered with blown concrete it has turned in to a catch all for everything coming down the creek. Last summer the creek was plugged up under the bridge most of the time causing the lake to back up for an extended period of time. It never gets cleaned out until natures does it. Years ago when we had heavy rains and the lake would go up but in a couple days it would be back down. Now it stays up for many days. When after very heavy rains I look in the catch basin on the corner and see the lake backed up to a level higher then my basement floor I begin to worry that if it doesn't go down shortly it will be only a matter of time before water table reaches my basement. The sediment pond that was built in the park a few years ago is already filling in with willow trees and cattails. If these are not maintained how can they be useful? PENN AVE: Via e-mail: I am very concerned about the overall health of the environment both locally and globally. While I may or may not be able to attend tonight's meeting I would like to voice my opinion about the mature tree population we are lucky to have in Brooklyn Center. I do NOT wish to see any of these mature trees harmed or removed in any way. In fact, I would love to promote more trees being planted within the city. I am also curious about the possible implications of installing curbs as I have heard rumored. How would different curb installation options affect the homeowner's taxes? Would there be additional out of pocket costs for the homeowner? What would happen should the homeowner be financially unable to meet these costs forced upon them? Thank you for your time and effort with improving the infrastructure of the city and in particular our neighborhood. NA = No Answer 9 1/18/2011 • Appendix B Project Drawings • • Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements Aw -'� j «•mot < —,t< —« t— «— « —t <--< « —<t '' « = «� 73 N »c• - » »- >; » N — » —•� " <t— « <t —t< —« ►-- _ r � � % ry' , 1 ff 1� S ,vs 1 , I� »'1' +'! ,I a . � y�+ �/ I a � i � 6 ,'... • 1 !s i . "-1's I s, '+ ' � ( I �.ii[' ., <K R - • A l } � � 1. - r- �� �• � � � � `� 1 �- ri, ' ! " A o. ` ttt g .< }a iy }� f^ a •F 1 d p o y . ?i 1 +. 1 . fir: !� � : � -*� �' v 9' - � .. � 1 `. ..� 'saw - ^ " "'*"' �L.,.... `�.'• ' r,- t �'y� , -- 1 �'� � , i- r - rp . , � IA lamp tZ 1 F' ` 1 C c 49 f 72N AVE N ' r T i I a . } � N � , sue' � r i« f Z 11-r S" p f r t6 # X K Z n j i •,.. 4 7p Y , t' V – . � � Q Yr s ` •�' e � • I � ! � »._ -s –fi ) S 1 / 1 �. _ i 7 r ; / T F 1 1 • � = An P 4 - < _ > —�: --• >7 ,yam `, "1. ,. y . . p d III t 'kq tow. • 1 / s . B.c r-a. ^: i.�' /• z 1, _ r. A j. .. / KEY PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB AND — <<— PROPOSED STORM SEWER PIPE GUTTER 0 AND STORM STRUCTURES PROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVEWAY EXISTING STORM SEWER PIPE - -- APRON ! AND STORM STRUCTURES TO REMAIN IN PLACE PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK • PROPOSED STREET too too 200 CONSTRUCTION SCALE FEET Index N0. Mir M Rfl'610N 1 Maw COMY RMT INS PIAK SPECMA K W n/r OR RrPORT wS PRUWW By M OR LOWER LOWER w a *C L OIN W 1 n A n«r 1 AM A our /I PROFESSIONAL PROFESSIONAL CITY PROJECT PALMER LAKE PROJECT AREA m. CITY OF wc. LOA" EU LOA" w as E mnr I.et � eI soTA R ru BROOKLYN CENTER somyu DATE toll –o5 000 YLL STREET AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA pRNim NYYE: STE%G L LILLENAUG M NO. 41886 eAS � NORTH OF 71ST AVE N. ;- a s 1: f ' J r� " Z'►#- -- ;f_ +men 4 { f Y Y v R i r y r : 1 4r Ufa ->> > > i { Iz i q ; 1 I SS ' y r# r ..r _ , - , - � ;. f 7 • •• � a� -: _ � ^-- „ wtw�'1� '..1 r .. ! = - • 1rr ;'"� ' ,� 1 r I � < � r� : � � , Q tT ; Aft , � ..l . . '.r. �. � - ..' � !! Js .r �. - raj, f 's f . + - �. •� ux 70TH AVE N ir 4 Mo n AR ._,_;4 �4 '.. is 4 1 • A c. f ! _ r • r � T r ,�' IRVING LANE N. •t i.G Y�� (; ?• -._ , r, r Y^s ` �. .N- ^AI - } — !� � �i k .� r ''• - j ' �fi � X111 1't '9!+ I :., � .% .•} r t' III .. _�,� _l L xdMNe ) �I ._} g....-)g.•-»_..:.}).___: yT.._- g g...__ 33---) 3"- 33—:. _g.g 33 ^- - 's3 »_._ »)3 -_al) »...,....})....- - - -gi -•: ))- ^})- ." > }-. >.. .W111 AVE N. ..° KEY PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB AND — «— PROPOSED STORM SEWER PIPE GUTTER AND STORM STRUCTURES PROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVEWAY EXISTING STORM SEWER PIPE APRON AND STORM STRUCTURES TO REMAIN IN PLACE PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK Ej PROPOSED STREET �� '� zoo • CONSTRUCTION SCMP FEET Index mm MiE W Mom i KABr OWifI rrMr DO PM SPECIi1EATX)r4 OR REPORT VAS PREPMM M rt CITY OF Di "�""" 1w 91 WTH S "O "r" °"`E `Y`°"�' P"°'°101N1 CITY PROJECT PALMER LAKE PROJECT AREA orirm unor u Rr lw a Err sup[ a w�a+aa s or BROOKLYN CENTER SIGNATURE: M7E 2011 —OS � or tAf_ � STREET AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS HENNEPW COUDAY, 1NNNESOTA PRINTED NAME: STEVEN L ULLENMJC LIC• NO. 41M SOUTH OF 71ST AVE N. �� --- ' - - - - -- ---- `--- - - - -- % ` - s--- - - - --, ---- --- - - - - � -- - -__ - - - - -- 73ND AVE -N _ - - -- a Ile Q - a - - -= v I — �� —n —n— I wm rt oj�T % I - ®- ° = -Q 4 ' IWOyNE N N. 1 � KL Q _ -- E3 EI_ -_ -_ -_ -�' °- -- ' I w I I II 1 I � � � isn � IIY 1 I '""' I ua »oe II \\ U u —_ ❑ _ i s l IFI ° ^ ° 1 I �� H p .' � I I II — ) ). Z Z AVE y Q i ❑ III .� X11 - -� �____ b [ 72N D! 1 [J g R A A 1 _ .11 4 J 1 1 1 I �+I—� I I 1 I I ° i i II 1 I - - -.❑ Q__ ir�Y� ❑- - -�- - - - - -- ❑- F, ,w, 11 I uM II 1 R EQ �� \ —_ —❑ Q-- _ % — X — % �_ I I 1 1 I I A N 9 4 f\ ti V — II LL11 tt ® 1 j� N X 1-% 4 b° l0 1 g %-% __ ❑_ � r 1 1 1 1 I Il I ,a 6 v l— I _ �� 1 <. I i —Al I K � I.I ? -J.1 X I '� sa < PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER PROPOSED HYDRANT (REMOVE EXISTING) KEY PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB AND MAIN LINE REPLACEMENT m PROPOSED GATE VALVE (REMOVE EXISTING) GUTTER (REMOVE EXISTING) — PROPOSED WATERMAIN REPLACEMENT (REMOVE EXISTING) PROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVEWAY • PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER EXISTING HYDRANT TO REMAIN IN APRON MANHOLE REPLACEMENT (REMOVE PLACE EXISTING) EXISTING GATE VALVE TO REMAIN PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK <— EXISTING SANITARY SEWER TO IN PLACE PROPOSED STREET REMAIN IN PLACE EXISTING WATERMAIN TO REMAIN • CONSTRUCTION SANITARY MANHOLE TO REMAIN IN PLACE too ,00 Zoo IN PLACE SCALE Index No. DATE LTY REVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT TW PLAN. SPECOCATION. OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME CITY OF WIDER MY DIRECT 5 OPERYWON AND i UL AT I AN A DY UC£HSED PROrESSO4 CITY PROJECT PALMER LAKE PROJECT AREA n"Am UNDER THE LAWS Ix THE STATE OF MMMIESOTA nmGN a 2011 -05 BROOKLYN CENTER SIGNATURE: DATE: e �� SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PRINTED NAME: STEVEN L LILLEHAUG LIC, No. 41866 NORTH OF 71ST AVE N. v — CI a - -_ L �°' "" �I �'_ '�. «�• "" �° �7 II - � z -�- R I I � A � ,,,, e Mzr •mo ,-{ ,�ee1 - - - -) > > > > > > -Lj > ,� I — i j- r "T° L$� >bav I �' -� I - -z- �___❑ ^ I �f I ^ I RI - n- n -n -n- I I ii ¢ —z�z ® ^ I�I v ILL ^ J titi Z �_ Z w . El El- ET:ii T C ;_ - — S I, .-. 4 El L II p 1. fl a -0 [ l� � p � N g 6 r °N °0• Lem R R n l ° � E 55 � I I I I I I I I I ) a - -- _ I I > -� TIM � I ❑ ❑ I 1 5 x p � [❑ � O ^ � I _ • -n -n —n , o , I I� we mo � as � I�iu•� I rr I ,� �� L—..r-I I II E3 _ -- -- Q - -- I '� NC I .IN. 0 aws — L__L — -- -- I x- - F, r { J I � _LJ — �= I — C - -- ILJI pn I I I U na Ia •m I I _ LJ O - cK - �€ c l ❑ o - moo I I -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - M — _ —��__ �--_ - - -- -- - - - - -- — — — — 69TH AVE N. k KEY PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB AND PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER PROPOSED HYDRANT (REMOVE EXISTING) GUTTER MAIN LINE REPLACEMENT PROPOSED GATE VALVE (REMOVE EXISTING) (REMOVE EXISTING) PROPOSED WATERMAIN REPLACEMENT (REMOVE EXISTING) PROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVEWAY C PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER EXISTING HYDRANT TO REMAIN IN APRON MANHOLE REPLACEMENT (REMOVE PLACE EXISTING) EXISTING GATE VALVE TO REMAIN PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK EXISTING SANITARY SEWER TO IN PLACE PROPOSED STREET REMAIN IN PLACE EXISTING WATERMAIN TO REMAIN 100 10o zoo CONSTRUCTION SANITARY MANHOLE TO REMAIN IN PLACE • IN PLACE SCALE FEET Index N0. DATE BY REVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY TINT DOS PLAN, SPECIFICATION. OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME Ary CITY OF OR ND ME LAWS OSUPERV TH F M AND E O 1 E DULY LCENSED PROFESSONAL I z CITY PROJECT PALMER LAKE PROJECT AREA ENp NIXI? NEER UNDER R ME LAWS E STALE M IN N r 2011 -05 BROOKLYN CENTER SIGNATURE: DATE: a "� A& SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PRINTED NAME: STEVEN L ULLEHAUG LIC. N0. 41866 SOUTH OF 71ST AVE N. • Appendix C DRAFT Proposed Pending Assessment Roll I� • • Feasibility Report 2011 Palmer Lake East Improvements CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL • January 24, 2011 2011 PALMER LAKE EAST AREA RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02 O PROPERTY ID HOUSE STREET NAME LEVY# STREET LEVY # STORM NOTES 2611921340001 6913 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921340002 6907 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410002 1600 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410004 1700 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410006 1706 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410007 7222 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410008 7130 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410009 7131 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410010 7121 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410011 7120 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410015 7221 HUMBOLDT AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 Corner 2611921410016 1506 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410017 1713 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410018 1707 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410019 1701 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410020 1619 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410021 1613 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410022 1607 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410023 1601 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410024 1513 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410025 1507 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410026 1501 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 Corner 2611921410027 1500 71 STAVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 Corner 2611921410028 1506 71ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410029 1512 71ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410030 1600 71ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410031 1606 71ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410032 1612 71 ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410033 1618 71ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410034 1700 71ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410035 1706 71 ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410036 1712 71 ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410037 1713 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410038 1707 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410039 1701 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410040 1619 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410041 1613 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410042 1607 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410043 1601 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410044 11513 72ND AVE N 117870 1 $ 3,559.00 117871 $ 1,068.00 • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL January 24, 2011 2011 PALMER LAKE EAST AREA RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02 O PROPERTY ID HOUSE STREET NAME LEVY# STREET LEVY # STORM NOTES 2611921410045 1507 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410046 1501 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 Corner 2611921410047 1500 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 Corner 2611921410048 1506 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410049 1512 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410050 1600 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410051 1606 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410052 1612 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410053 1618 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410054 1700 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410055 1706 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410056 1712 AMY LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410057 1713 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410058 1707 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 A AQ11921410059 1701 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 1921410060 1619 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410061 1613 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410062 1607 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410063 1601 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410064 1513 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410065 1507 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 1 $ 1,068.00 2611921410066 1501 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 Corner 2611921410067 1500 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 Corner 2611921410068 1506 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410069 1512 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410070 1600 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410071 1606 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410072 1612 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410073 1618 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 . 2611921410074 1700 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410075 1706 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410076 1712 72ND AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410077 7207 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410078 7201 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410079 7200 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410080 7208 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 611921410081 7137 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 11921410082 7136 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 1 17871 $ 1,068.00 611921410083 7107 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 117871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410084 17 IKNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 117871 $ 1,068.00 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL • January 24, 2011 2011 PALMER LAKE EAST AREA RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02 O PROPERTY ID HOUSE STREET NAME LEVY# STREET LEVY # STORM NOTES 2611921410085 7108 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410086 7100 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410087 7219 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410088 7213 JKNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410089 7218 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410090 7224 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $, 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410091 7225 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410095 1618 IWOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410096 1612 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1 2611921410097 1606 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410098 7230 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410099 7236 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410102 7237 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410103 7231 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410104 1712 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410105 7236 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921410109 1512 WOODBINE LA 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420002 7237 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420003 7231 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420004 7225 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420005 7219 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559,00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420006 7213 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420007 7207 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420008 7201 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420009 7200 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420010 7206 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420011 7212 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420012 7218 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420013 7224 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420014 7230 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420015 7236 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420017 7149 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420018 7143 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420019 7137 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420020 7131 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420021 7125 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420022 7119 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420023 7113 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420024 7107 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420025 11900 71 STAVE N 117870 $ 3,559.00 117871 $ 1,068.00 • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL January 24, 2011 2011 PALMER LAKE EAST AREA RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02 O PROPERTY ID HOUSE STREET NAME LEVY# STREET LEVY # STORM NOTES 2611921420026 1906 71 STAVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420027 7106 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420028 7112 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420029 7118 ILAORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420030 7124 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,,068.00 2611921420031 7130 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420032 7136 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420033 7142 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420034 7148 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420035 7149 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420036 7143 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420037 7137 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420038 7131 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420039 7125 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 611921420040 7119 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 11921420041 7113 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420042 7107 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420043 2000 71 ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420044 2006 71ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420045 7106 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420046 7112 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420047 7118 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420048 7124 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420049 7130 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420050 7136 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420051 7142 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420052 7148 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420054 7237 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420055 7231 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420056 7225 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420057 7219 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420058 7213 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420059 7207 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420060 7201 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420061 7200 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420062 7206 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420063 7212 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 11921420064 7218 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 611921420065 7224 INEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420066 7230 INEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 117871 1 $ 1,068.00 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL January 24, 2011 2011 PALMER LAKE EAST AREA RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02 O PROPERTY ID HOUSE STREET NAME LEVY# STREET LEVY # STORM NOTES 2611921420067 7236 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420070 7237 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420071 7231 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420072 7225 IN EWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420073 7219 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420074 7213 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420075 7207 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420076 7201 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420077 7200 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420078 7206 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420079 7212 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420080 7218 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420081 7224 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420082 7230 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420083 7236 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420085 7141 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420086 7133 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420087 7125 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420088 7119 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420089 7113 INEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420090 7107 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420091 2100 71 ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420092 2106 71 ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420093 7106 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420094 7112 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420095 7118 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420096 7124 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420097 7132 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420098 7140 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420100 7237 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420101 7231 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17,871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420102 7225 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420103 7219 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420104 7213 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420105 7218 PENN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420106 7224 PENN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420107 7230 PENN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921420108 7236 PENN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430001 6933 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430002 16927 LOGAN AVE N 117870 $ 3,559.00 117871 $ 1,068.00 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL January 24, 2011 2011 PALMER LAKE EAST AREA RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02 O PROPERTY ID HOUSE STREET NAME LEVY# STREET LEVY # STORM NOTES 2611921430003 6921 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430004 6915 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430005 6907 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430006 6901 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430007 6900 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430008 6906 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430009 6912 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430010 6918 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430011 6924 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430012 6930 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430013 6931 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430014 6925 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430015 6919 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430016 6913 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 11921430017 6907 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 11921430018 6901 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430019 6900 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430020 6906 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430021 6912 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430022 6918 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430023 6924 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430024 6930 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430025 6931 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430026 6925 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430027 6919 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430028 6913 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430029 6907 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 .17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430034 6912 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430035 6918 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430036 6924 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1 2611921430037 6930 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430038 6925 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430039 6919' OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430040 7037 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430041 7031 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430042 7025 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 611921430043 7019 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 11921430044 7013 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 611921430045 7007 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430046 17001 1 LOGAN AVE N 117870 1 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL • January 24, 2011 2011 PALMER LAKE EAST AREA RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02 PROPERTY ID HOUSE STREET NAME LEVY# STREET LEVY # STORM NOTES 2611921430047 6943 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430048 6937 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430049 6936 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 26`11921430050 6942 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430051 7000 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430052 7006 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430053 7012 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430054 7018 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430055 7024 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430056 7030 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559,00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430057 7036 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430058 2001 71 STAVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430059 7031 MORGAN AVE N ' 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430060 7025 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430061 7019 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430062 7013 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430063 7007 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430064 7001 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430065 6943 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430066 6937 MORGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430067 6936 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430068 6942 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430069 7000 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430070 7006 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430071 7012 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430072 7018 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430073 7024 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430074 7030 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430075 2007 71 ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430076 2107 71 ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430077 2101 71 STAVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430078 7031 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430079 7025 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430080 7019 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430081 7013 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430082 7007 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430083 2100 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430084 2108 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430085 2114 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430086 12120 70TH AVE N 117870 $ 3,559.00 117871 $ 1,068.00 • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL January 24, 2011 2011 PALMER LAKE EAST AREA RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02 O PROPERTY ID HOUSE STREET NAME LEVY# STREET LEVY # STORM NOTES 2611921430087 7000 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430088 7004 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430089 7008 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430090 7012 OLIVER CIR 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430091 7016 OLIVER CIR 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430092 7020 OLIVER CIR 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430093 7024 OLIVER CIR 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430094 7028 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430095 7032 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430096 2119 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430097 2113 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430098 2107 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430099 6937 NEWTON AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430100 7001 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 & 611114310101 92 6937 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 11921430102 6931 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430103 6906 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921430105 6900 OLIVER AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 '2611921440004 7042 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440005 7036 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440006 7030 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440007 7024 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440008 7018 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440009 7012 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440010 7006 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440011 7030 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440012 7024 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440013 7018 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440014 7012 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440015 7006 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440016 7000 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440017 7037 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440018 7031 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440019 7025 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440020 7019 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440021 7013 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440022 7007 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 11921440023 7001 KNOX AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 611921440024 1801 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440025 11807 170TH AVE N 117870 1 $ 3,559.00 117871 1 $ 1,068.00 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL • January 24, 2011 2011 PALMER LAKE EAST AREA RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02 O PROPERTY ID HOUSE STREET NAME LEVY# STREET LEVY # STORM NOTES 2611921440026 1815 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440027 6942 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440028 7024 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440029 7018 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440030 7012 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440031 7006 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440032 7000 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440033 7031 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440034 7025 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440035 7019 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440036 7013 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440037 7007 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1;068.00 2611921440038 7001 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440039 1701 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440040 1707 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $- 1,068.00 2611921440041 1713 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440042 1719 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440043 7031 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440044 7025 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440045 7019 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440046 7013 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440047 7007 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440048 7001 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440049 1601 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440050 1607 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440051 1613 70TH AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440052 7030 JAMES AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440053 7000 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440054 7006 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440055 7012 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440056 7018 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440057 7024 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440058 7030 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440059 1511 71ST AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440060 1507 71 STAVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440061 7037 HUMBOLDT AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 Corner 2611921440070 6915 HUMBOLDT AVE N 17870 $ 18,627.41 17871 $ 16,142.87 50 Unit Apt Bldg - R5 zoning 2611921440071 1618 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440072 1619 IRVING LAN 117870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440074 11700 JIRVIN G LA N 117870 1 $ 3,559.00 117871 $ 1,068.00 • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL January 24, 2011 2011 PALMER LAKE EAST AREA RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02 PROPERTY ID HOUSE STREET NAME LEVY# STREET LEVY # STORM NOTES 2611921440075 1701 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440077 1708 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440078 1707 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440080 1800 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440081 1720 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440082 1714 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440083 1721 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440084 1715 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440085 1801 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440089 1820 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440090 6936 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440091 1830 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440092 1821 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440094 6900 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 11921440095 6906 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 11921440096 6912 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440097 6918 LOGAN AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440098 6939 IRVING AVE N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440099 1610 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440100 1600 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440101 1601 IRVING LA N 17870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1 ,068.00 2611921440102 1607 1IRVING LAN 117870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 2611921440103 1613 1IRVING LA N 117870 $ 3,559.00 17871 $ 1,068.00 Total Assessments $ 1,378,165.41 $ 424,118.87 • City Council Agenda Item No. 6d • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: January 18, 2011 • TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer S� SUBJECT: Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed and Calling for a Public Hearing on Proposed Special Assessments for Improvement Project Nos. 2011 -01 and 02, Palmer Lake East Neighborhood Street and Storm Drainage Improvements Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the resolution declaring costs to be assessed and calling for a public hearing on proposed special assessments for Improvement Project Nos. 2011 -01 and 2011 -02, Palmer Lake East Neighborhood Street and Storm Drainage Improvements. Background: The attached resolution declares certain project costs to be assessed for the Palmer Lake East Neighborhood Improvement Project and calls for a public hearing on the proposed special assessments on February 14, 2011, immediately following the improvement hearing. Staff recommends that the Council consider holding the special assessment hearing immediately following the project hearing. • The purpose of holding the special assessment hearing prior to beginning the project is to assure that any objections to or appeals of the assessments are known prior to entering into a construction contract or issuing bonds to finance the assessed portion of the project. The established assessment rate would set the maximum levy amounts, guaranteeing property owners of the final cost they will pay for the project. Special assessments for this project have been calculated in accordance with the City's Special Assessment Policy Budget Issues: The project cost is estimated to be $7,338,000. The total special assessments for this project are estimated to be $1,378,000 for street improvements and $424,000 for storm drainage improvements. The Draft Special Assessment Levy Roll for Improvement Project Nos. 2011 -01 and 2011 -02 is included in Appendix C of the project's feasibility report. Council Goals: Strategic: 5. We will continue to maintain and upgrade City infrastructure improvements Ongoing: 6. We will ensure the City drinking water is high quality and that the storm water is properly managed • .'Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe communin that enhances the quality of fife and presen-es the public trust its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01 AND 02, PALMER LAKE EAST NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council has accepted the Engineer's Feasibility Report for Improvement Project Nos. 2011 -01 and 02, Palmer Lake East Neighborhood Street and Storm Drainage Improvements; and WHEREAS, the total cost of the street and storm drainage improvement portion of said project is estimated to be $4,802,000; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has prepared a proposed assessment roll showing the proposed amount to be specifically assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: • 1. That portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners for street improvements included in City Improvement Project No. 2011 -01 is declared to be $1,378,000. That portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners for storm drainage improvements included in City Improvement Project No. 2011 -02 is declared to be $424,000. 2. A hearing shall be held on the 14 day of February, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers at 7 :00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard to pass upon such assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. 4. The City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. • • RESOLUTION NO. January 24, 2011 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • • City Council Agenda Item No. 6e • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: January 18, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting a Feasibility Report and Calling for a Public Hearing, Improvement Project No. 2011 -05, Unity Avenue Street Improvements Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the resolution accepting a feasibility report and calling for a public hearing, Improvement Project No. 2011 -05, Unity Avenue Street Improvements. If approved by the City Council, legal notice would be published, and all property owners who could potentially be assessed for improvements would receive . a Notice of Public Hearing via certified mail. Background: On August 9, 2010, the City Council established the Unity Avenue Street Improvement project by Resolution 2010 -115. This action was taken in accordance with the Capital Improvement Program, which identifies Unity Avenue for street reconstruction during the 2011 construction season. The attached feasibility report provides a summary of the project evaluation process and • preliminary layout of street and utility improvements. The report also includes the results of a resident questionnaire that was mailed to all property owners within the project area. A public information meeting was conducted on January 12, 2011, to provide project information to residents within the project area and gain additional input from the public. The informational meeting was generally positive in nature with the majority of questions and concerns relating to design details, special assessments and project schedule. A formal presentation of the feasibility of the project is planned at the public hearing. Budget Issues: The project cost is estimated to be $422,000. Funding sources for the project are proposed from a variety of sources as described in the feasibility report. Council Goals: Strategic: 5. We will continue to maintain and upgrade City infrastructure improvements Ongoing: 6. We will ensure the City drinking water is high quality and that the storm water is properly managed • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, saft cuwnntunhtY that enhances the yualitv of life and preserves the public trust its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2011-05, UNITY AVENUE _ STREET IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council, by Resolution No. 2010 -115 directed the preparation of a feasibility report regarding proposed improvements to the streets on Unity Avenue; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared said report and recommends that the proposed improvements be considered; and WHEREAS, a portion of the cost of street improvements for said project is proposed to be assessed against properties within the project area; and WHEREAS, the project cost is estimated to be $422,000 and the project funding sources are currently estimated to be: Special Assessments $205,000 • Sanitary Sewer Utility $ 19,000 Water Utility $ 6,000 Storm Drainage Utility $ 24,000 Street Light Utility $ 13,000 Street Construction Fund $ 155,000 Total $422,000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The Engineer's Feasibility Report for the Unity Avenue Street Improvements is received and accepted. 2. A hearing shall be held on the 14 day of February, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard to pass upon said improvement project and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by said improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to said improvements. • RESOLUTION NO. 3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the hearing to be published in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. January 24, 2011 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: • and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • • CVyof Public Works Dept BROOKLYN Engineering Division CENTER Phone: 763 -569 -3340 FAX: 763 -569 -3440 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR UNITY VENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2011-05 • CITY OF BROOKL YN CENTER, MINNESOTA January 14, 2011 I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota sue. Steven L. Lillehaug, P.E. Reg. No. 41866 January 24, 2011 • Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements Page I I. BACKGROUND In 2011, the City of Brooklyn Center will be entering the 18 year of its long -range infrastructure • rehabilitation program often referred to as the Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Program. This program has consisted of a systematic rehabilitation and/or replacement of the City's aging streets, water main, sanitary sewer, storm sewers, sidewalks and street lights. The City's Capital Improvement Program identifies Unity Avenue for reconstruction in 2011. The proposed project includes roadway improvements along Unity Avenue from 69 Avenue to 73` Avenue (see Figure 1). This report was prepared in response to City Council Resolution No. 2010 -115 dated August 9, 2010, directing staff to prepare a feasibility report and collect public input for the proposed project. Staff conducted a public informational meeting with residents and property owners located within the project area on January 12, 2011. A resident questionnaire was also distributed as part of the project evaluation process. A summary of resident comments is provided in Appendix A. The 2011 project area consists of just over one -half mile of streets. The project area consists of approximately 318 residential (R3) units. II. STREET IMPROVEMENTS A. EXISTING CONDITIONS Unity Avenue exists as a two -lane road that functions for both local access and a through traffic route from 69 Avenue to 73` Avenue in Brooklyn Park. Unity Avenue was originally constructed in 1978, resulting in the existing street pavement being in service for more than 30 years. The roadway, as it currently exists, has concrete curb and gutter and is 30-feet wide. The curb and gutter is in fair to good condition with minimal locations where settlement/heaving and concrete cracking has occurred. The roadway's bituminous asphalt pavement has aged and is showing significant fatigue and distress. The typical service life for bituminous pavement is approximately 30 years. Generally, it is no longer cost - effective to routinely maintain these streets with seal coating or thin overlay procedures. Complete reconstruction is warranted. A geotechnical investigation was performed within the project area to obtain and analyze soil samples below the street pavement. Soil borings were taken to a depth of 4 feet and primarily indicate good soils containing sand and gravel below the pavement surface. Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements Page 2 • __ -L. 73RD AVE N ---- r- ..— ..— _._..— .. —.. —._ . —_._. poNDS DR N �,� � WINGARD pL r c /R W 71ST AVE N i — 70TH AVE N Z Z w F ui — -- Legend — O �� P Boundary W i - i Propoerties to be Assessed Private Roads • No Construction Construction Area { 1 1 L i City Bader j c►rY of Public Works Project Area BROOKLYN CENTER Engineering Department Fig ure 1 ��,. wm January 5, 2010 Unity Avenue North + g Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements Page 3 B. PROPOSED STREET IMPROVEMENTS Street Improvements • Based on the age and condition of the existing bituminous asphalt pavement surface, complete replacement of the street surface is warranted for the entire length of Unity Avenue. The existing concrete curb and gutter has not exceeded its life expectancy and can be suitably rehabilitated with spot repairs. Approximately 15 percent of the curb and gutter is estimated to be replaced due to heaving/settling issues, cracked concrete and impacts by other construction (e.g. storm sewer replacement). The roadway subgrade consists of good soils and is planned to be reclaimed (recycled) in place to be reused as the new aggregate base for the proposed street section. The existing roadway width will be maintained and is proposed to be constructed to 30 feet. Concrete curbing through driveways will be rehabilitated and replaced as necessary due to heaving/settling issues and impacts by other construction. The proposed street reconstruction does not include changes to the roadway width, alignment or elevation. Tragic Calming The proposed street design is sufficient to accommodate the current traffic levels. Significant changes in local traffic patterns are not anticipated as a result of the proposed reconstruction of the roadway. However, due to past concerns with higher volumes of traffic, speeding issues, and pedestrian safety issues, several speed humps were installed as a traffic calming management tool through this corridor. In an effort to preserve this element of traffic calming, 4 -inch high speed tables are proposed to be reconstructed in the same areas that the existing speed humps are located (see Appendix B). III. STREET LIGHTING SYSTEM A. EXISTING CONDITIONS • The neighborhood improvement program has historically included the replacement of free standing street lights located within the neighborhood. "Free standing" street lights are defined as lights mounted on poles that do not contain any other overhead utilities attached to them. There are currently 11 free standing street lights within the project area, three that might possibly be private lights and are currently incorrectly listed as public City lights. The lights consist of older style wood utility poles that have been in service for many years, most likely dating back to the original construction of the neighborhood. The existing free standing street lights have overhead power services with cobra -head type light fixtures. The City's Street Light Policy states that street lights may be provided at street intersections and at mid - block locations where the distance between intersections exceeds 700 feet. Street lights are currently located at all intersections and in midblock locations as appropriate. B. PROPOSED STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS The recommended street light improvements include replacement of the eight public free standing street lights with fiberglass poles, cut -off type light fixtures and underground power services. Staff will be working with Xcel Energy to determine which lights are private /public and to have them properly designated as such. Regardless of the private /public classification, all will be requested to be replaced by Xcel Energy under Xcel Energy's street light replacement program. • Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements Page 4 IV. STORM DRAINAGE AND TREATMENT SYSTEM • A. EXISTING CONDITIONS The project area is located within Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission area and is a direct watershed tributary to Shingle Creek. The existing storm drainage systems within the project area consist of a network of storm sewer pipes, ponding areas and waterways installed during the 1970's. This network eventually discharges to the Shingle Creek. The storm sewer system is well developed with all the storm sewer water flowing into five privately owned storm ponds (43 -002, 43 -003, 43 -004, 44 -01 and 44 -02) that are interconnected and flow into Shingle Creek. The existing underground pipe network in this area was found to be in good condition with some minor issues identified in inlet structures that warrant repair. A visual inspection of the sheet pile weir of the storm sewer crossing in the area just south of 70 Circle showed signs of excessive corrosion. A televising inspection of the existing mainline storm sewer was conducted during the summer of 2010. The existing underground pipe network was found to be in fair to good condition. Some debris and sediment has accumulated within the larger diameter trunk storm sewers. Cleaning of these pipe segments will be conducted separately from the proposed project. Throughout the project area, no significant isolated or major flooding issues have been identified. B. PROPOSED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Minor storm sewer improvements will be made to the existing system that includes replacing/repairing catch basins and laterals where necessary. Repairs will be made as necessary to the existing sheet pile weir. With the existing storm water detention and treatment ponds in the area designed for the project area when the road was constructed, no storm water treatment improvements are proposed. V. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM A. EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing sanitary sewer collection system within the project area consists primarily of 8 -inch diameter PVC sewer mains. A majority of the sanitary sewer system was installed in 1977. During the project planning phase, all public sanitary sewer pipes were inspected with remote televising equipment. These inspections confirmed that the sanitary sewer has minimal issues with sags and no root intrusion along pipe joints and services (see Figure 2). Surveys received from residents also indicate no occurrences of sewer service line blockage issues. The sanitary sewer is in good condition due to the relatively young age and good materials used in the original construction of the sanitary sewer, and there have been no maintenance issues of the sanitary sewer system in this area. • Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements Page 5 Fi ure 2. Sanitary Sewer Line, Unit Avenue — PVC pipe 9:29:00 AY u 81412010 BroaWyn Canter. Yn 5 MH44-015 T W38 08.04. 10 LC 1' (172,10 fl B. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Only minor miscellaneous sanitary sewer repairs are proposed including the replacement of manhole castings and adjustment rings with external seals as part of the City's sanitary sewer infiltration and inflow program • to minimize clean rainwater from entering the sanitary sewer. VI. WATER SYSTEM A. EXISTING CONDITIONS The watermain system within the project area consists primarily of 10 -inch and 8 -inch diameter ductile iron pipe installed in 1977 and 1978. Water records indicate that three breaks have occurred within the project area (see Figure 3). Minor water quality problems have been reported by residents that are typically caused by hard water issues and are mitigated by the periodic flushing of hydrants. Generally, the ductile iron water main is considered to be in good condition with an estimated 40 to 50 years of remaining service life. B. PROPOSED WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS Only minor miscellaneous repairs are planned for hydrants and valves that will be determined in the final design of the project. No watermain pipe replacement is recommended for this project. • Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements Page 6 T3 RD VONOS DR N I T- Ll I (L GIR W (715TArE N _J I �'TH IVE -� +� �� x W 0 Legend -J, Water Main Breaks- 3 Locations Water Main Root S aw Locati ons - N one WTH AT - Sanitary Root Swing Not Needed cyry or Water Main Breaks & Root Saw Locations Figure 3 Unity Avenue North • Feasibility Report 201 1 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements Page 7 VII. RIGHT -OF -WAY AND EASEMENTS • Generally, all public infrastructure owned, maintained and operated by the City throughout the project area is located within City easements and/or right -of -way. It is not anticipated that the City will need to obtain any additional easements for this project. VIII. ESTIMATED COSTS AND FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS The total estimated cost of the proposed project is $422,000. The preliminary estimate includes the cost for project administration, engineering and legal fees (15 percent) and construction contingency (15 percent). Table 1 provides a summary of the estimated project costs and recommended funding amounts from the various sources as indicated. Funding for the project is further described below. A. FUNDING FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS The estimated project cost of roadway improvements for Unity Avenue is $ 359,000. This preliminary estimate includes the costs for project administration, legal, engineering and construction contingency. Special assessments for street improvements are proposed in accordance with City policy and have been computed based on a partial reconstruction of the roadway with full -depth pavement rehabilitation. The rate is based on the average cost of similar resurfacing projects, multiplied by the Council's designated proportion to be assessed. Based on past projects and typical assessments (e.g. 2010 Dupont Avenue project assessment amount of $2,576 per R1 zoned residential property), increased by the annual construction price index of 3.6 percent, which was the rate increase used for the full reconstruction assessment rate increase for • 2011, the proposed assessment amount for a partial reconstruction for a R1 property would be $2,669. The properties on Unity Avenue between 69 Avenue and 73` Avenue are zoned R3 within the project area (see Figure 4). In accordance with the City's assessment policy, the rate is based on the R1 unit assessment divided by 75 feet to determine the front footage rate. Based on the total development front footage and 318 units within the project area, which includes all properties and units on Unity Avenue, 70 Circle, 71 Circle, 72 Circle and Ponds Drive, the R3 assessment rate is computed and proposed to be $644.07 per unit. A summary of the proposed special assessments for street improvements is provided in Appendix C. The total assessed amount to all properties would be $204,814.26. B. FUNDING FOR UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS The estimated cost of sanitary sewer improvements is $19,000; the estimated cost for water main improvements is $6,000; the estimated cost for storm sewer improvements is $24,000; and the estimated cost for street light replacement is $13,000. As previously noted, these total cost estimates include the costs for project administration, engineering and construction contingency. All costs for water, sanitary sewer and street light improvements will be funded by their respective utility funds in accordance with established policy for such improvements. • Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements Page 8 o- Table 1. Cost and Funding Improvement Project Nos. 2011 -05 0 2011 Unity Area Improvements January 15. 2011 Sanitary Water Storm Street Estimate_ d Streets 1 Sewer Main Drainage Lights Total Estimated Expendlures _ - Estimated Construction Cost Street& Utility $271,825.00 S 14,025.0 0 S4900.00 $18,350.00, $10,000.001 c Contingencies (15 0 /6) $40,773.75 S2,103.75 S735.00 $2,752.50 $1,500.00 $47,865.00 Administration. Engineering. Legal (15%) _ $46,889.81 $2,419.31 S84525 $3,165.38 $1,725.00 $55,044.75 C x.00 Total Estimated Pr oject Costs (Fea sibility) _ $359488.56 $18,548.06 $6,480.25 $24,267.88 $13,225.00 $422,009.75 fo f° Estimated Revenue f r o Street Special Assessments i $204814.26', _ _ - $204,814.26 Storm Drainage Special Assessments $0.00 C Swn ary Sewer Utility Fund $18,548.06 $18,548.06 s Water Utility Fund _ — 48025 $6.480.25 p Storm Drainage Utility Fund $24,267.88 $24.267.88 Street Light Utility Fund $13,225.00 $13,225.00 b Street Reconstruction Fund $154.674.30 5154.674.30 Z 0 ofel Estimated Revenue (Feasibility) $359,488.56, $ $6,480.25 - - - $24,267.88 $13,225.00 $422,009.75 b oa Figure 4. Unity Avenue Street Reconstruction — Assessment Map 73RD AVE N r . ��� • PoNDs DR N l w 1NGAHfl P1- Y `C l/R w 1 I 71STAVE N • � � 1 7oTH CORN 1 -- i 70T HAVE N ; Z IZ Z w 4- w o u Legend I _ W 3 Project Boundary 1 _ J Propoenies to be Assessed LJ Private Roads - No Construction 69TH AVE N I J Construction Area w L - 36 City Border cry OF Assessment Map Public Works nano Ki rro crN�ra Engineering Department :Th � l� 011,fs�,. Unity Avenue North January 5, 2010 Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements Page 10 IX. RECOMMENDED PROJECT SCHEDULE • Table 2 contains the preliminary schedule for the project. Table 2. Unity Avenue Project — Schedule Action Target Date City Council Receives Feasibility Report, Declares Cost January 24, 2011 to be Assessed and Calls for Public Hearings Council Holds Public Hearing, Authorizes the Project February 14, 2011 and Orders Preparation of Plans and Specifications City Council Approves Plans and Specs, Authorizes Advertisement for Bids February 28, 2011 City Receives and Opens Project Bids April 25, 2011 City Council Considers Award of Contract May 10, 2011 Start Project Construction May 2011 • Construction Substantially Complete August 2011 X. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The overall condition of the City's street and utility infrastructure systems is critical to the operation, safety, welfare and economic health of the entire community. As a result of the infrastructure needs described, and the proposed solutions and estimated costs provided in this report, the proposed project is considered to be necessary, cost effective and feasible. • Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements Page I1 Appendix A Resident Comments • • Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements QUESTIONNAIRE • Unity Ave Street Project This questionnaire will help the City of Brooklyn Center engineering staff to better understand the infrastructure needs and issues in your neighborhood. Please return this survey by January 12, 2011. You may also contact us at 763 -569 -3340 to discuss these issues. Thank you for your cooperation. 1. Our televised sewer inspections typically identify sanitary sewer services with moderate to severe root infiltration. Have you experienced any problems with sanitary sewer service, such as the line plugging or having the service cleaned out to the street? How often? • 2. Typically, improvements to the storm drainage system are needed. Do you have a problem with drainage or flooding in the street, your yard or your basement? 3. Do you experience problems relating to the water distribution system such as water pressure, taste, odor or color? I • (OVER) • 4. Do you have a lawn irrigation (or sprinkler) system located within your property? Please circle one Yes No 5. Do you have a sump pump in your basement? Please circle one: A. Yes, my sump pump runs frequently (at least once every day) B. Yes, my sump pump runs less frequently C. No, I do not have a sump pump or do not use my sump pump 6. What other concerns, comments and/or issues do you have pertaining to the streets, sidewalks, utilities, etc., in your neighborhood? • Should you have questions or need more information, please contact the engineering division at 763- 569 -3340. Your name: Address: Please return by January 12, 2011 to: Engineering Division City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 FAX 763 -569 -3440 Email: publicworks @ci.brooklyn - center.mn.us • • • i Summary of Resident Survey UNITY AVENUE M I No No Water pressure normal. Yes No Power outages occur frequently due to above Taste appears normal. ground utility lines. Sidewalks are not applicable. Odor and color a few They don't exist in front, nor around my property. times when City drain NOTE: THIS SURVEY CAME BACK WITH cleaning/extinguishers NO ADDRESS ON IT. NO ENVELOPE WITH were flushed. Nothing ADDRESS EITHER. unusual No No No Yes No None. NOTE: THIS SURVEY CAME BACK WITH NO ADDRESS ON IT. ENVELOPE HAD NO ADDRESS ALSO. I Mains are jetted annually. No Taste and color No No Unity Avenue North isn't wide enough. No sometimes noticed. sidewalks. Taste is bad and color ellowish. No, no problems. No, no basement. No No No What improvements are you planning? The only problems I know about (too narrow, no sidewalks, hard to see pedestrians in the dark, no place to put all the snow) - cars with loud music - are not likely to be solved by a street improvement project. No No No Yes No The streets could use some resurfacing. We don't have any sidewalks. No No Some problems with Yes No None odor. No never No No No No How much is it going to cost? No No No Yes No While I understand the need for period updates /repairs, my main concern at this time is what this will meant o me costwise. I look forward to a comprehensive explanation of specific improvements needed, alternate ways of attending to these needs, total costs and invidivdual assessment costs and how these costs will be met. Also, a summary of the January 12 meeting would be appreciated by those who could not attend. No lNo JNo JNo JNo No (sidewalks) No JNo JNo JNo JNo None 1 1/18/2011 Summary of Resident Survey UNITY AVENUE No problems have been Poor yard drainage on southeast No problems Yes No Main concern is cost/assessment amount. experienced. I have lived here for comer of my home when there 8 years. is a very heavy rain. Mainly due to land settling. No flooding experienced in basement. Not applicable. The drain right in front of our Our tap water doesn't Yes No NA mailbox typically backs up and taste very good and it floods the street. Leaves may has a slight odor. be part of the problem and the tree with most of the leaves is gone now. I think the drain across the street also backs up. No Lower leve - two to three times No Yes No NA in 24 years. Toilet will plug up about once or No No Yes No Not applicable. twice a week. Plunger will unplug it. No No No Yes No NA No problems at all. No problem at all. No problems at all. Yes. No No concerns /comments /issues. Maintained by Homeowners Association. No Heavy snow melt leaves large No Yes No Mail boxes knocked down six times in fifteen puddle in street outside of years. I feel there's need for another hump/bump driveway - 6905 Unity. prior to autos reaching "stop sign" at 69th. 70th No No No Not sure Not sure NA No No No Not sure Not sure NA NA NA NA Yes No 31 years in my home in BC. I live on a "private (townhome street" off Unity. I pay taxes but City doesn't area) provide certain services as paving, snow removal. 2 • • 1/1� • • • Summary of Resident Survey UNITY AVENUE MME, WE Yes, once in 2009 first time in 18 No No Yes No NA Years of occu anc . No problems. No No Yes No None - frequently have power outages. townhome No No No Yes No None 72n .< No No No No No None None None No No No NA I have had no problems with I have no problem with I have no complaints I have no I have no basement. I am happy with the way the City takes care of any sanitary sewer service. drainage or flooding in the about the water system. irrigation street problems such as snowplowing, fixing street or yard. system on potholes, patroling parking violations, etc. Due to my property. sprained ankle I was not able to attend the 1/12/11 meeting. None None None No No I do not see a problem with the sewer at all. And cannot afford any assessments. NA NA NA No Not applicable. The sidewalk/pathways are non - existent along the Unity Ave roadway (70, 71 and 72nd Circles). High risk of injury for non - motorized "traffic" i.e. pedestrians. It would be convenient to have parking (metered ?!) allowed in some areas and others op sled as no parking anytime. iw� WRI 9 . NA = No Answer 3 1/18/2011 Appendix B Project Drawings • Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements W Z w a UNITY AVENUE 01 m 200 210 -205 LD Q9 U o S 2 jq o h O 4 r" N� ti WJ � t CZJi N I r • LEGEND Q PAVED ROADWAY _ CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER REPAIR / REPLACEMENT ® SPEED TABLE UNITY AVENUE F . y ' u . 4 U ^� n i Z Inereer cerefr toot tnia pan aPectnoonon.or report STATE AID PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER os repore y a e a or naer my ao-ect Pervialon ana 109 -I09 -073 D. BERUBE iM1at p Ian GWy licenwp Profeaaional Enpineer unaer the wra of the state of Mtaweota. DESIGNED BY CONSULTING �Oe Print N— JONATHAN MCPHERSON D.BERUBE ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION CITY PROJECT NO CHECKED BY . SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY &UNITY AVENUE n\9 NO DATE BY CKD APPR REVISION 2011 -OS J.MCPHERSON GROUP, INC. .. \7328 _I cy03. dqn Date License • 47160 COMM. NO. 7328 Appendix G DRAFT Proposed Pending Assessment Roll i • • Feasibility Report 2011 Unity Avenue Neighborhood Improvements CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL January 24, 2011 • UNITY AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2011 -05 0 PROPERTY ID HOUSE NO. & STREET LEVY# STREET NOTES PID: 2811921420010 7121 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420011 7125 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420012 7129 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420013 7133 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420014 7137 1 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420015 7141 JUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420016 7145 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420019 7120 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420020 5326 71 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420021 5332 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420022 5408 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420023 5414 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420024 5420 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420025 5426 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420026 5432 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420027 5438 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420028 5444 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420031 7152 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420032 7156 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420033 7160 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420034 7164 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420035 7168 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420036 7172 IUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420037 7176 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420038 7180 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420039 7184 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420040 7188 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420041 7192 JUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420042 7196 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420044 5447 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420045 5441 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420046 5435 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420047 5429 172ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420048 5423 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420049 5417 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420050 5411 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420051 5405 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420052 5359 172ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 • PID: 2811921420053 5353 172ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420054 5347 72ND CIR 117872 $ 644.07 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL • January 24, 2011 UNITY AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2011 -05 O - PROPERTY ID HOUSE NO. & STREET LEVY# STREET NOTES PID:2811921420055 5341 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420056 5335 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420057 5329 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420058 5323 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420059 5317 172ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420060 5311 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420061 5305 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420062 5304 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420063 5310 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420064 5316 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420065 5322 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420066 5328 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420067 5334 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420068 5340 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 ID:2811921420069 5346 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 :2811921420070 5352 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 ID:2811921420071 5358 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420072 5364 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420073 5370 72ND CIR 17872 $ 544.07 PID:2811921420074 5404 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420075 5410 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420076 5416 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644 .07 PID: 2811921420077 5422 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420078 5428 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420079 5434 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420080 5440 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420081 5446 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420082 5452 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420083 5458 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420084 5464 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420085 5470 72ND CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921420 08 7 7149 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420088 7153 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420089 7157 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420090 7161 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420091 7165 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 ID: 2811921420092 7169 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 : 2811921420093 7173 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 I PID:2811921420094 7177 JUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420095 17181 UNITY AVE N 117872 $ 644.07 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL January 24, 2011 • UNITY AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2011 -05 0 PROPERTY ID HOUSE NO. & STREET LEVY# STREET NOTES PID: 2811921420096 7185 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420097 7189 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420098 7193 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420099 7201 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420100 7205 JUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420101 7209 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420102 7213 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 P10:2811921420103 7217 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420104 7221 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921420264 7256 IUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 72,135.84 112 units x $644.07 PID: 2811921430047 6900 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430048 6904 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430049 6908 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430050 6912 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430051 6916 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID 2811921430052 6920 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 • PID: 2811921430053 6924 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430054 6928 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430055 6932 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430056 6936 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430058 6901 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430059 6905 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430060 6909 JUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430061 6913 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430062 6917 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430063 6921 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430064 6925 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430065 6929 1 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430066 6933 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430067 6937 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430074 7000 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430075 7004 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430076 7008 1 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430077 7012 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430078 7016 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430079 7020 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430081 5431 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430082 5425 170TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 • PID:2811921430083 5419 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430084 5413 170TH CIR 117872 $ 644.07 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL • January 24, 2011 UNITY AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2011 -05 PROPERTY ID HOUSE NO. & STREET LEVY# STREET NOTES PID: 2811921430085 5407 170TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430086 5401 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430087 5343 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430088 5337 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430089 5331 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430090 5325 170TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430091 5319 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430092 5313 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430093 5307 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430094 5301 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430095 5300 170TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430096 5306 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430097 5312 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430098 5318 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430099 5324 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 :2811921430100 5330 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 1 5 1 5336 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430102 5342 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430103 5348 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430104 5354 170TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430105 5400 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430106 5406 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430107 5412 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430108 5418 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430109 5424 170TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430110 5430 70TH CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430111 7001 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430112 7005 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430113 7009 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430114 7013 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430115 7017 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430116 7021 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430118 7033 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430119 7037 IUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430120 7041 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430121 7045 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 ID: 2811921430122 7049 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 D. 2811921430123 7053 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 I F ID: 2811921430125 7064 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 ID: 2811921430126 17068 JUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL • January 24, 2011 UNITY AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2011 -06 mso o PROPERTY ID HOUSE NO.& STREET LEVY# STREET NOTES PID: 2811921430127 7072 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430128 7076 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430129 7080 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430130 7084 IUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430131 7100 JUNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430132 7104 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430133 7108 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430134 7112 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430136 7057 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430137 7061 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430138 7065 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430139 7069 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430140 7073 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430141 7077 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430142 7081 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430143 7085 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 • PID: 281192.1430144 7101 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430145 7105 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430146 7109 UNITY AVE N 17872 - $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430147 7113 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430148 7117 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430150 7116 UNITY AVE N 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430152 5433 171ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430153 5427 71 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430154 5421 71 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430155 5415 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430156 5409 71 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430157 5403 171 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430158 5357 171ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430159 5351 71 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430160 5345 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430161 5339 71STCIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430162 5333 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430163 5327 171 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430164 5321 71 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID :2811921430165 5315 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430166 5309 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430167 5303 71STCIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430168 5302 171 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430169 5308 171 ST CIR 1 17872 $ 644.07 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PROPOSED PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL • January 24, 2011 UNITY AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2011 -05 PROPERTY ID HOUSE NO. & STREET LEVY# STREET NOTES PID: 2811921430170 5314 71 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430171 5320 71 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 P10:2811921430172 5338 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430173 5344 71 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID:2811921430174 5350 171 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430175 5356 71ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 PID: 2811921430176 5402 171 ST CIR 17872 $ 644.07 Total Assessments $204,814.26 • City Council Agenda Item No. 6f • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: January 18, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer SAp SUBJECT: Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed and Calling for a Public Hearing on Proposed Special Assessments for Improvement Project No. 2011 -05, Unity Avenue Street Improvements Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the resolution declaring costs to be assessed and calling for a public hearing on proposed special assessments for Improvement Project No. 2011 -05, Unity Avenue Street Improvements. Background: The attached resolution declares certain project costs to be assessed for the Unity Avenue Street Improvement Project and calls for a public hearing on the proposed special assessments on February 14, 2011, immediately following the improvement hearing. Staff recommends that the Council consider holding the special assessment hearing immediately following the project hearing. The purpose of holding the special assessment hearing prior to beginning the project is to assure • that any objections to or appeals of the assessments are known prior to entering into a construction contract or issuing bonds to finance the assessed portion of the project. The established assessment rate would set the maximum levy amounts, guaranteeing property owners of the final cost they will pay for the project. Special assessments for this project have been calculated in accordance with the City's Special Assessment Policy. Budget Issues: The project cost is estimated to be $422,000. The total special assessment for this project is estimated to be $205,000 for street improvements. The Draft Special Assessment Levy Roll for Improvement Project No. 2011 -05 is included in Appendix C of the project's feasibility report. Council Goals: Strategic: 5. We will continue to maintain and upgrade City infrastructure improvements Ongoing: 6. We will ensure the City drinking water is high quality and that the storm water is properly managed • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, sclfe communrtr that enhances the yualitt` of life and preserves the public trust its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved • . RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2011 -05, UNITY AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council has accepted the Engineer's Feasibility Report for Improvement Project No. 2011 -05, Unity Avenue Street Improvements; and WHEREAS, the total cost of the street improvement portion of said project is estimated to be $422,000; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has prepared a proposed assessment roll showing the proposed amount to be specifically assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: • 1. That portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners for street improvements included in City Improvement Project No. 2011 -05 is declared to be $205,000. 2. A hearing shall be held on the 14 day of February, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard to pass upon such assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. 4. The City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. • R • RESOLUTION NO. January 24, 2011 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • City Council Agenda Item No. 6g • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: January 18, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer 9 4 SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids, Improvement Project No. 2010 -16, Shingle Creek Restoration Improvements Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the attached resolution approving plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids, Improvement Project No. 2010 - 16, Shingle Creek Restoration Improvements. Background: On August 9, 2010, the City Council ordered the improvements and directed staff to prepare plans and specifications for the Shingle Creek Restoration project. Construction plans, specifications and contract documents have been prepared for this project by Wenck Associates, Inc. Staff is prepared to begin the project bidding process upon authorization from the City Council. The bidding process would involve advertisement of the project in the City's official newspaper • and in the Construction Bulletin magazine. Sealed bids would be collected, opened on a scheduled bid opening date, and tabulated by the City Clerk and City Engineer. Staff anticipates that the bid results will be presented to the City Council for consideration on February 28,2011. Budget Issues: The total project cost is estimated to be $510,000. Funding sources for the project are the Shingle Creek Watershed Commission ($127,500), the Clean Water Legacy Grant ($105,237), Hennepin County ($23,000) and bond proceeds from the City's Tax Increment Financing District 2 ($254,263). Council Goals: Strategic: 6. We will respond to increased public awareness and interest in environmental sustainability and green community issues Ongoing: 6. We will ensure the City drinking water is high quality and that the storm water is properly managed • � Mission' Ensuring an attraCiire, clean vale co mmunitr fhat enhances the qualiti. Of �lifi and preserves the public frust Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2010 -16, SHINGLE CREEK RESTORATION IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council, by Resolution No. 2010 -108, ordered Improvement Project No. 2010 -16, and authorized the preparation of plans and specifications for the Shingle Creek Restoration Improvements; and WHEREAS, said plans and specifications have been prepared under the direction of the City Engineer: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The plans and specifications for Improvement Project Nos. 2010 -16- are hereby approved and ordered filed with the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids for the • making of such improvements in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, shall specify the work to be done and shall state the time and location at which bids will be opened by the City Clerk and the City Manager or their designees. Any bidder whose responsibility is questioned during consideration of the bid will be given an opportunity to address the Council on the issue of responsibility. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City of Brooklyn Center for 5 percent of the amount of such bid. January 24, 2011 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. a R CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR ,F r SHINGLE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT SHINGLE CREEK - BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA JANUARY 2010 �L SHNGLE CREEK RESTORATION LOCATION ,.33d �1L .sy ...• "'71 R6SHINGLE TORA CREIX TION LOGTION � 9 •NKAtWY 10 ^^t 1 N 0A 1 INDEX OF SHEETS `a`s' ! ��'1T{ 5 I.`. Cr' DI nne ANO w0. sNEEr 0-102 O ERAU PUN 9 8 +00 yy ✓ i 7' ay 4�'' �, - C -103 PLAN AND PROiRE STA I6 +00 - 27+00 7RS ,f gk7 i { _,yy k Ap I _° yam . ,"�. C -101 PLAN AND P M LF STA. 2] +00 30+35 C -toy PLAN AND PROFILE $TN 10+00 M +00 C - 106 PLAN ANO PROFILE STA. 16+00 - 53+69 c -10] PLAN AND PROAa PLAN S 0+00 8 +00 (FORK OF MAIN CREEK) c -t08 PLAN AND PROFILE TA. 8+00 - 15+28 (FORK OF MNN CREEK) 'v t C -109 STORMMATER OETENTIW PONO mss,. T-101 TREE INVENTORY (MM CREEK) STA 0+00 -17l80 i -10] 1REE IN�ENigtY (MAN fAEEN) STA 1] +80 -30+]5 VICINITY MAP 7-103 TREE INVENTORY (FORK OF MNN GREEK) STA 0 +00 - 15 +28 11 W TREE INVENTORY (MAN CREEK) STA. 10+00 - 53.69 0 -101 DETAILS 0 -102 DETAILS 0 -103 DETNLS 9wnc scNE w wlu 0 -1 W DETAILS 0 -106 a LS D -106 DETAILS Np�o' q PROJECT LOCATION MAP g FiNIE CONSULiwNT PNWECf TRl£ SHIN= C SNEEf nRE mN.. TN.T 1M Ar �] o'er RESTORATION PROJECT TITLE HE Wenck SHINGLE CREEK DwN 9r cNKD Aw•o Dwc ONE NOV. 2010 a � BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA cvE OJu sDNE As sltowN j 1=R M C9Y 12/2{/10 p,. , u.,a. w yW ny.,wyu PPWC<i n0. SHER N0. N Re. DN OCS M—N DNN .P 1z -]3 -la ,,,� N 13x66 t266 -M G -101 r C z N loft'. .4 A k �3 p , ' J311111 , �►' �•+ i w �•'•••� S`� Eli ,;y- i 'nwwnw��r�ww .� _ , Fi� ,F • -w ~ • • `� ' � � •+. ,ma �� � OIQI LM SM City Council Agenda Item No. 6h • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: January 18, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works /City Engineer sf SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1, Improvement Project Nos. 2010 -01, 02, 03 and 04, Contract 2010 -A, Dupont Street and Utility Improvements Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the resolution Approving Change Order No. 1, Improvement Project Nos. 2010 -01, 02, 03 and 04, Contract 2010 -A, Dupont Avenue Street and Utility Improvements. Background: On May 10, 2010, the City Council awarded a contract to Nodland Construction Company, Inc., of Alexandria, Minnesota for the Dupont Avenue Street and Utility Improvements Project. The project began in June 2010, and was anticipated to be completed by the beginning of October 2010. The following represents originally unanticipated items and are included in Change Order No. 1 that is recommended to amend the Contract to complete the project. 1. Repair intrusion into storm sewer - CenterPoint energy televised the storm sewer and found a sanitary sewer service line running through an existing segment of storm • sewer line. Work was performed by the contractor to eliminate this sewer line conflict. This work was not originally anticipated and was not included in the contract. The contractor P erformed this work material on a time and basis. Additional Cost: $4,697.50 2. Lower storm sewer structure — The sanitary sewer line was found to be lower than originally surveyed and designed, and storm sewer structure No. 8 was revised to avoid this utility conflict. The contractor performed this work on a time and material basis. Additional Cost: $3,105.00 3. Fabricate and weld new water service corporation sleeves — During installation of the new water services, a number of the existing corporation threaded sleeves that are tapped into the City's existing 30 inch trunk watermain had significant corrosion and with signs of possible failure. New sleeves were fabricated and welded onto the existing trunk line. The contractor performed this work on a time and material basis. 28 water services were evaluated, 12 were repaired. Additional Cost: $17,075.00 • :Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe coinrnunatV that enhances the clualitj of life �rand preserves the public trust r r COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM 4. Trees — Trees were not included in the contract as a bid item and were planned to be • installed under a separate contract. However, the contractor agreed to install trees at the same unit price as obtained for the planned trees on the City's Twin Lake North project at a unit price of $169.00 per tree. 24 trees. Additional Cost: $4,056.00 5. Lower storm sewer structures to avoid utilities During the storm sewer construction, utility conflicts were discovered that were originally not anticipated with a fiber optic vault and the Nustar gas pipeline at the intersection of 59 Avenue with Dupont Avenue and with the Nustar gas pipeline at the intersection of 641' Avenue with Dupont Avenue. Two storm sewer structures were lowered and revised to avoid these conflicts. The contractor performed this work on a time and material basis. Additional Cost: $2,023.25 Total Change Order No. 1: $30,956.75 Budget Issues: The attached resolution authorizes Change Order No. 1 for the project. The original contract amount was $2,489,652.24. Change Order No. 1 increases the contract amount to $2,520,608.99. The total amount of Change Order No. 1 ($30,956.75) represents approximately 1.2 percent of the original contract amount and is within the project's budgeted contingency amount. Council Goals: Strategic: • 5. We will continue to maintain and upgrade City infrastructure improvements Ongoing: 6. We will ensure the City drinking water is high quality and that the storm water is properly managed • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, srtte communitc that enhances the c/ualitV of life andpreserves the public trust Member introduced the following resolution and moved • its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2010 -01, 02, 03 AND 04, CONTRACT 2010 -A, DUPONT AVENUE STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Nodland Construction Company, Inc., of Alexandria, Minnesota, was instructed to complete additional work as itemized on Change Order No. 1 for Contract 2010 -A; and WHEREAS, said additional work was not included in the original Contract, but is deemed necessary to properly complete the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that Change Order No. I in the amount of $30,956.75 for Contract 2010-A is hereby approved and the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the approved change order. The revised contract amount is as follows: Original Contract Amount $2,489,652.24 • Change Order No. 1 $ 30,956.75 Revised Contract Amount $2,520,608.99 January 24, 2011 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • City Council Agenda Item No. 6i • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM I TO: Curt Bo ane City Manager g Y� Y g FROM: Lee Gatlin, Fire Chief DATE: January 17, 2011 SUBJECT: 2010 Hennepin County Hazard Mitigation Plan Recommendation: I am requesting that the City Council approves the 2010 Hennepin County Hazard Mitigation Plan that each city must adopt in order to be eligible for Federal Disaster Funds in the future. Background: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) determined in the Mitigation Act of 2000 that each city must have a mitigation plan. Hennepin County received a grant to write a hazard mitigation plan to cover every city and township in the county. There was a process for extensive city and public input and participation. The City Of Brooklyn Center participated in this plan and the plan was adopted by the city council in February of 2004 and must be adopted every 3 years. The Hennepin County Mitigation Plan of 2010 has been revised and delivered to all participating cities and townships. If a jurisdiction does not have a mitigation plan, disaster fund may be limited. Each city must adopt the Hennepin County Mitigation Plan of 2010 as part of its' own emergency operations plan. The final document is 228 pages and covers plans for all hazard mitigation incidents. This plan content has been reviewed and found accepted by staff. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider for the plan; only council resolution to approve the 2010 Hennepin County Mitigation. Council Goals: Strategic: 1. We will ensure a safe secure community. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE HENNEPIN COUNTY ALL - HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has participated in the hazard mitigation planning process as established under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, and WHEREAS, the Act establishes a framework for the development of a multi - jurisdictional County Hazard Mitigation Plan; and WHEREAS, the Act as part of the planning process requires public involvement and local coordination among neighboring local units of government and businesses; and WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Plan includes a risk assessment including past hazards, hazards that threaten the County, an estimate of structures at risk, a general description of land uses and development trends; and WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Plan includes a mitigation strategy including goals and objectives and an action plan identifying specific mitigation projects and costs; and • WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Plan includes a maintenance or implementation process including plan updates, integration of the plan into other planning documents and how Hennepin County will maintain public participation and coordination; and WHEREAS, the Plan has been shared with the Minnesota Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management and the Federal Emergency Management Agency for review and comment; and WHEREAS, the Hennepin County All - Hazard Mitigation Plan will make the county and participating jurisdictions eligible to receive FEMA hazard mitigation assistance grants; and WHEREAS, this is a multi jurisdictional Plan and cities that participated in the planning process may choose to also adopt the County Plan. • • RESOLUTION NO. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Brooklyn Center supports the hazard mitigation planning effort and wishes to adopt the Hennepin County All- Hazard Mitigation Plan. January 24, 2011 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan a, NBC' O Q) m cB E aA ° Z c6 w O v o +J �o * .1 (D Q1 /. - 4r Q Q) U (2) O E a� z U ca c ,. 0 • STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CLERK OF THE BOARD I, Deputy Clerk of the Board of the above named County, do hereby certify that I have compared the papers writing, to which this certificate is attached, with the original Resolution No. 10-0488, adopted by the County Board of Commissioners on November 16, 2010 as the same appears of record and on file in the said Clerk of the Board's office, at the Government Center in said Hennepin County, and find the same to be true and correct copy thereof. IN TESTOMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County at the City of • Minneapolis, this 18` day of November A.D. 2010 YOLANDA C. MC CRARY Deputy Clerk of the Board by: eputy or Clerk of the and QASAgenda \State of MiN.Certification Form.doc Hennepin County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 10 -0488 [2010] wvww.htanvpin,a: The following Resolution was offered by Public Works, Energy & Environment Committee: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners approve the Hennepin County Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan, as on fle with the Clerk of the Board; that the Chair of the Board be authorized to sign the Plan on behalf of Hennepin County; and that staff be directed to submit the adopted Plan to the Minnesota Division of Homeland Security & Emergency Management. The question was on the adoption of the resolution and there were 6 YEAS and 0 NAYS, as follows: County of Hennepin Board of County Commissioners YEAS NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT Mike Opat X Mark Stenglein X Gail Dorfman X • Peter McLaughlin X Randy Johnson X Jan Callison X Jeff Johnson X RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON 11116/2010 I ATTEST: Deputy/Clerk to the County Board • 1 Generated 11/17/2010 10A1:37 AM NOpllldll GAdI MIIMsINl MM Introduction SECTION '1 Hennepin County • INTRODUCTION Mitigation Plan Introduction • Hennepin County Multi - Jurisdictional All - Hazards Mitigation Plan Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction 1.1 Executive Summary Page 3 1.1.1 About the Plan Page 3 1.1.2 Scope Page 3 1.1.3 Authority Page 3 1.1.4 Funding Page 3 1.1.5 Purpose Page 3 -5 1.2 Community Profile Page 6 -33 Section 2: The Planning Process 2.1 Hennepin County Working Group Page 34 2.2 Hennepin County Planning Team Page 34 2.3 Jurisdiction Participation Page 34 -35 2.4 Additional Planning Input Page 36 2.5 Public Involvement Page 36 -37 Section 3: Risk Assessment • 3.1 Risk Assessment Process Page 38 3.1.1 Identifying Hazards Page 38 -41 3.1.2 Eliminated Hazards Page 42 3.1.3 Profiling Hazards Page 43 -44 3.1.4 Inventory Assets Page 44 3.1.5 Estimate Losses (results forthcoming) Page 45 3.1.6 Hazard Profiles Page 45 3.1.7 Summary— Impact of Hazards Page 45 -46 3.2 Hazard Profiles Page 46 -134 3.2.1 Dams Page 47 -50 3.2.2 Drought Page 51 -56 3.2.3 Earthquakes Page 57 -59 3.2.4 Extreme Temperatures Page 60 -67 3.2.5 Flooding Page 68 -73 3.2.6 Hazardous Materials Page 74 -83 3.2.7 Infectious Diseases Page 84 -88 3.2.8 Radiological Page 89 -93 3.2.9 Terrorism Page 94 -95 • 3.2.10 Thunderstorms Page 96 -105 Page 1 Mitigation Plan Introduction 3.2.11 Tornado Page 106 -110 • 3.2.12 Transportation Page I11 -125 3.2.13 Winter Storms Page 126 -134 Section 4: Vulnerability Assessment 4.1 Vulnerability Assessment Page 135 -168 4.1.1 Inventory Assets Page 135 -155 4.2 Future Land Use - Development Trends Page 156 -159 4.3 Assessing Future Vulnerability Page 160 -161 4.4 Repetitive Loss Structures Page 162 4.5 Capability Assessment Page 163 -168 Section 5: Mitigation Strategies 5.1 Mitigation Goals Objectives, Strategies Page 169 -196 5.1.1 2004 Mitigation Goals Page 169 -175 5.2 2010 Mitigation Actions Page 176 -185 5.3 Cost Benefit Review Page 176 5.4 Participation in the NFIP Page 177 -179 5.5 Continued Participation in the NFIP Page 180 -181 5.6 Mitigation Action Items Page 185 -196 Section 6: Plan Maintenance 6.1 Plan Maintenance Page 197 -200 6.1.1 Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating Page 197 The plan 6.1.2 Plan Monitoring Page 197 6.1.3 Plan Evaluation Page 197 -198 6.1.4 Plan Updates Page 198 6.1.5 Implementation through Existing Programs Page 198 -199 6.1.6 Continued Public Involvement Page 199 -200 Section 7: Plan Review Crosswalk Page 2 Mitigation Plan Introduction 1.1 Executive Summary Mission: To identify measures that will prevent loss of life and damage to property while reduc- ing future risks in Hennepin County. 1.1.1 About the Plan The Hennepin County Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan is a guide for all com- munities that have participated in the preparation of this plan. The municipalities that partici- pated in the development of this plan include: Bloomington, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Corcoran, Crystal, Dayton, Deephaven, Eden Prairie, Edina, Excelsior, Golden Val- ley, Greenfield, Greenwood, Hanover, Hopkins, Independence, Long Lake, Loretto, Maple Grove, Maple Plain, Medicine Lake, Medina, Minneapolis, Minnetonka, Minnetonka Beach, Minnetrista, Mound, New Hope, Orono, Osseo, Plymouth, Richfield, Robbinsdale, Rogers, Shorewood, Spring Park, St. Anthony, St. Bonifacius, St. Louis Park, Tonka Bay, Wayzata and Woodland. The plan fulfills the requirements of the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA 2000) as administered by the Minnesota Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (HSEM) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 1.1.2 Scope The scope of the Hennepin County Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan is the mu- . nicipalities and unincorporated areas within Hennepin County. The plan addressed all hazards deemed to threaten property and persons within the county. Both short and long -term mitiga- tion strategies are addressed, implementation tasks assigned, and funding alternatives identified. 1.1.3 Authority Section 409 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Public Law 93 -288, as amended), Title 44 CFR, as amended by Section 102 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, provides the framework for state and local governments to evaluate and mitigate all natural hazards as a condition for receiving Federal disaster assistance. A major requirement of the law is the development of a local natural hazard mitigation plan. 1.1.4 Funding The Minnesota Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management awarded a $109,875 Pre - Disaster Mitigation Grant to Hennepin County for the preparation of this plan in November of 2009. 1.1.5 Purpose Hazard mitigation is any action taken to permanently reduce or eliminate long -term risks to people and their property from the effects of hazards. Natural hazards come in many forms in- cluding: tornadoes, floods, severe storms, drought, earthquakes, winter storms, or dam failures resulting from natural disaster crises. Communities can take steps to prepare and implement mitigation techniques for almost any type of hazard that may threaten its citizens, businesses Page 3 Mitigation Plan Introduction and institutions. • Hazard mitigation plans can identify a range of structural approaches to lower the costs of fu- ture disasters by meeting the unique needs of the community. For example, structural mitiga- tion projects could include the design of new buildings, roads, dams, and other infrastructure and the strengthening and retrofitting of old struc- Elevite tures. Mitigation strategies can also involve non- E•M•• structural initiatives, such as educational programs to inform the community about the risks the public and its property faces in order to encourage them to purchase flood insurance or educate themselves on,�,� severe weather awareness. Non - structural mitiga -,, Y: �,� S�;¢9 tion programs can also include developing and en- ' forcing regulations to prevent construction in haz- ard areas, or to ensure that development that does Elevating electrical boxes is a form of a Non - occur will be resistant to the hazards threatening the structural mitigation measures. area. Mitigation programs and projects serve to lessen a community's vulnerability to the hardships and costs of disasters. The implementation of mitigation programs is a key component to achieving a sustainable community, on in which the economic and — • social needs of people, businesses, and institutions coexists with natu- ral environment constraints and are protected from the disruptions and impacts of emergencies and. disasters. Hazard mitigation planning must be closely coordinated with a community's overall planning and development efforts. The most effective way for a community to ini- tiate this objective is through a comprehensive local mitigation plan- e=.. ning program, as presented here. Comprehensive planning can pro- vide Hennepin County citizens a safe, health and prosperous place in i which to live and work. The purpose of the Hennepin County Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan is to develop a unified approach among its local gov- windstorm Mitigation ernment for dealing with identified natural hazards and hazard man- Manual is an example of a agement problems. The process followed a methodology prescribed source for structural miti- b FEMA. It began with the formation of a Mitigation Planning gation measures. Y g g g Team comprised of key County, city, and stakeholder representatives. The planning process examined the recorded history of losses from natural hazards, and analyzed future risks posed to the county by these hazards. Hennepin County is vulnerable to several natural hazards that are identified, profiled, and ana- lyzed in the plan. The plan puts forth several mitigation goals and objectives that are based on the results of the risk assessment. To meet identified goals and objectives, the plan also in- cludes specific recommendations for actions that can mitigate future disaster losses. This plan Page 4 Mitigation Plan Introduction has been formally adopted by each participating entity and is required to be updated a minimum of every five years. This plan serves as a guide for local governments in their ongoing efforts to reduce vulnerabil- ity to the impacts produced by natural hazards. Further, this plan seeks to accomplish the fol- lowing additional purposes: • Establish an ongoing natural hazard mitigation program; • Identify and assess the natural hazards that pose a threat to life and property; • Evaluate additional mitigation measures that should be undertaken; and; • Outline procedures for monitoring the implementation of mitigation strategies. Page 5 N909011 come" IIItlosINn PI'll Introduction Hennepin County • COMMUNITY PROFILE Mitigation Plan Introduction 1.2 Community Profile Hennepin County Hennepin County was established by the territorial legislature of Minnesota in 1852, six years before Minnesota became a state. The County was formally organized on the 21 st of October, 1852. Eleven days previous, an election was held at the house of John H. Stevens at which sev- enty -three votes were polled, representing about one -half of the voters residing in the county. Another voting place was fixed in Mendota, for the accommodation of those living along the Minnesota River. Previous to the election a mass meeting was held, at which the following ticket was nominated, irrespective of party: Dr. A.E. Ames, Representative; Alexander Moore, John Jackins and Joseph Dean, County Commissioners; John T. Mann, County Treasurer; John H. Stevens, register of deeds; Warren Bristol, district attorney; Tssac Brown, sheriff, David Gorham, coroner; Joel B. Basset, judge of probate; Charles W. Christmas, county surveyor; Edwin Hedderly, Eli Pettijohn, S.A. Goodrich, assessors; George Parks, road commissioner. The entire ticket was elected without opposition and the parties named became the first officers of Hennepin County. The first meeting of the board of county commissioners was held on the 21 st of October and Alexander was chosen chairman. Father Louis Hennepin's name was cho- sen as he originally named Saint Anthony Falls and recorded some of the earliest accounts of the area for the Western world. The name Snel- ling was inserted in the original bill for orga- R04[RSr "WON nizing the county by John H. Stevens, by NAN►IN NRDDAN TMIIS a whom it was drafted; by the suggestion and NyvtN strong support of Hon. Martin McLeod, the D EMENIp IUNIUNAN � IW'Ik GNVYt - DROORIrN PAM Snelling was struck out and Hennepin WAD inserted. Hennepin County's early history is "R RCTTO wMSTAL LO closely linked to the establishment of the cities NEDNA RODDNSDN[ INK PENDf Nif NYAIONIR NURF S7.A ONY of Minneapolis and St. Anthony. MN Nf D4,NF 1"t GOLDEN LONE.WIf 1Vry ... ORONO MYZATA VIWAPO1K Geography WDODI AND NNNETONKA fMINETWNA sv l UIIK DARN WNETRISU WACO DEPRAVER NUUNU ROyNDfi IUNNA Henne Coun is located within the Twin ER WLRS DAwRFENNNOD Y SNOREWOOOX,4s" tUNA ... .. . NS► Cities Metropolitan Area. The upper Missis- IDCNTNLD A"OR" 41. sippi River flows through Minneapolis and de- IDIN YRAIAT CNANNISSEN `SN[LLI fines the northeastern boundary of the county. DLOOYINGTON The Minnesota River runs across the south end of the county while the Crow River makes up the northwest side. Hennepin County is com- prised of 45 cities, one township, and one unorganized territory. The county encompasses 611 square miles with 200 lakes larger than 10 acres and numerous parks and trails providing rec- reational opportunities and community amenities to residents. Page 6 Mitigation Plan Introduction Demographics City •• • % of 1 -17 18-65 65+ Total County Bloomington (2) 20,945 47,228 12,696 80,869 7.09% Brooklyn Center 8,704 14,452 4,215 27,371 2.40% Brooklyn Park (4) 25,819 40,226 3,927 69,972 6.13% Champlin 7,996 13,382 815 22,193 1.95% Corcoran 2,006 3,369 255 5,630 0.49% Crystal 5,544 13,950 3,204 22,698 1.99% Dayton 1,571 2,906 222 4,699 041% Dee haven 1,246 2,191 416 3,853 0.34% Eden Prairie (5) 25,783 32,183 2,986 60,952 5.34% Edina 12,821 22,200 10,284 45,305 3.97% Excelsior 522 1,504 367 2,393 0,21% Fort Snellinq 0 166 276 442 0.04% Golden Valley 4,448 11,109 3,978 20,281 1.78% Greenfield 920 1,527 97 2,544 0.22% Greenwood 195 464 70 729 0.06% Hanover 487 805 63 1,355 0.12% Hassan Township 871 1,484 108 2,463 0.22% Hopkins 3,651 11,011 2,483 17,145 1.50% Independence 1,042 1,929 265 3,236 028% Long Lake 503 1,132 207 1,842 0.16% Loretto 180 329 61 570 0.05% Maple Grove 23,143 34,957 2,484 60,584 5.31% Maple Plain 662 1,193 233 2,088 0.18% Medicine Lake 85 244 39 368 0.03% Medina 1,374 2,353 277 4,005 0.35% Minneapolis (1) 106,630 232,275 33,928 372,833 32.68% Minnetonka 14,179 28,760 6,989 49,928 4.38% Minnetonka Beach 198 358 58 614 0.05% Minnetrista 1,374 2,665 321 4,358 0.38% Mound 2,446 6,144 845 9,435 0.83% New Hoe 4,860 12,308 3,705 20,873 1.83% Orono 2,212 4,650 676 7,538 0.66% Osseo 535 1,373 526 2,434 0 21 % Plymouth (3) 23,905 40,869 5,328 70,102 6.14% Richfield 8,715 19,092 5,455 33,262 2.92% Robbinsdale 3,339 8,307 2,477 14,123 1.24% Rockford 1,191 2,127 166 3,484 031% Rogers 1,253 2,146 189 3,588 0,31% Saint AnthonV 1,572 4,431 2,009 8,012 0.70% Saint Bonifacius 573 1,179 121 1,873 0.16% Saint Louis Park 8,916 28,702 6,478 44,126 387% Shorewood 2,471 4,343 586 7,400 0.65% Spring Park 182 987 548 1,717 0.15% Tonka Bay 412 928 207 1,547 0.14% Way ata 859 2,397 857 4,113 0.36% Woodland 149 274 1 57 480 0.04% County Total 1273.025 1551.321 99.901 1.140.988 100% Page 7 Mitigation Plan Introduction • Demographics (continued) With an estimated population of 1.1 million people, Hennepin County is the largest county in Minnesota. The county has added new residents over the last 15 years and population projec- tions forecast more growth. One -third of the county's population (373,943) lives in Minneapo- lis with the remaining 746,954 residing in suburban Hennepin County. Both the city and subur- ban populations are growing, with the outer ring suburbs growing at the fastest rate. More than one -fifth (22 percent) of the state's population live in Hennepin county. Hennepin is one of the most racially and ethnically diverse communities in the state with more than 257,000 residents identifying themselves as non -white or Latino. More than 40 percent of the state's non -white population and over 46 percent of the state's foreign -born population lives in Henne- pin county. Over the last ten years the county has seen especially large increases in people from Africa and Latin America. Total 1,130,110 White Alone 884,272 Black or African American alone 115,779 • American Indian and Alaska native alone 8,255 Asian alone 61,050 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 234 Some other race alone 33,832 Two ore more races: 26,688 Two races including Some other race 2,155 Two races excluding Some other race, and three or more races 24,533 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2005 -2007 American Community Survey The following maps provide a visual of the ethnic diversity of Hennepin County and what com- munities of the county different ethnic backgrounds reside in. Included in these maps are Afri- can American, Asian, Caucasian, Hispanic, Native American, and Pacific Islander. • Page 8 I' Mitigation Plan Introduction Ahican Amefican Demogiaphics ^yJ 0- 10 persons i 11 - 35 pe rs ons 38 - 78 persons T7. 158 persons 150+ persons :5 r I A sk J F- _rte- �_ -•__ •y, 1 African American Demographics Page 9 Mitigation Plan Introduction Asian Demogiaphics 0- 4 persons L ^y 'J 5 17 persons ol v� lI i 18. 48 persons 49 - 136 persona _ 137+ persons I❑ i - I 1 CI � �- r L Asian Demographics Page 10 Mitigation Plan Introduction Caucasian Demographics 0.39 pe (sons , ^ yJ I 40 - 120 persons II I 121. 297 persons M 298. 838 persons -839 + persons "� v L t f ti Caucasian Demographics • Page 11 Mitigation Plan Introduction Hispanic Demogi 7phics D• 8 persons 9- 34persons 35. 92 persons 93 - 186 persons — — j - 187+ persons J �l Hispanic Demographics • Page 12 Mitigation Plan Introduction Native Ameilcan Demogiaphics 0 - 2 persons 3. 11 persons 12 - 54 persons "A W. 178 persons 179+ persons 1 7 �---- --III � � ' L Native American Demographics • Page 13 Mitigation Plan Introduction Pacific Islandel Demoglaphics 1 0 persor I ^y 'J 1 persom 2. 3 person 4 B person 7+ persom F F I-- � I Pacific Islander Demographics Page 14 Mitigation Plan Introduction Economy • Hennepin County remains one of the wealthiest counties in Minnesota with an average per cap- ita income of $31,000 and median family income of $75,000 compared to a statewide median family income of $62,500. Despite the economic success of most Hennepin County residents, approximately 9 percent of the population - almost 100,000 people had income during 2004 at or below the poverty line. An even greater percentage of children, just over 11 percent, were in families with incomes at or below poverty. It is estimated that almost one in five (19.8 percent) of single female headed households with children under 18 years of age earned income at or below the poverty line. From 1999 to 2006, only two racial groups in Hennepin County with data available from the Census Bureau showed increases in the percent of individuals in poverty; Black/African Ameri- cans increased from 26.6 percent in poverty in 1999 to 34.6 percent in 2006 while whites in- creased from 4.5 percent in poverty in 1999 to 6.5 percent in 2006. Racial disparities in poverty and per capita income can be partially explained by racial /ethnic differences in factors such as family types, income distribution, and a number of children per family. While not an exhaus- tive list, some recent examples from Hennepin County that could affect poverty status or per capita income across racial /ethnic groups include: in 2006 a higher proportion of Hennepin County's American Indian and Black/African American families were single female parent families than white, Latino, and Asian families, while income distribution varied widely across racial/ethnic groups in 2000, income inequality was highest in Hennepin County Black/African American households, and in 2000, Asian families in Hennepin County had the largest average family size (4.2), while white families had the smallest (2.9). One of the contributors to economic success in the region is the highly educated workforce. High school graduation rates continue to be above 90 percent for Hennepin County residents. These results vary drastically, however, among location and socioeconomic status. Poverty and Income by Race and Ethnicity Figure 5. Percent in poverty and per capita income by race /ethnicity, Hennepin County, 4006 Individuals below poverty by race /ethnicity Per capita incorre by race /ethnicity 1- -i 19.196 Asian '2Y,5311­1 Black or 34.6% African $1%033 H Arre nc an F-- 119.196 Latino ;15,260 H White H6.4K (non- 039,Q4H f� Lat irro ) 'S All races and et hnic it ies 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 540,000 $50,000 Percent of individuals below poverty Per capita income source: u. . c9g5J5 sur�QU Page 15 Mitigation Plan Introduction Household Income Distribution $0- $20,000 $20,001440,000 o I $40.001460,000 _ $60,001 - $80,000 _ $80,001+ - r i 2007 Hennepin County Household Income Distribution by Jurisdiction Page 16 Mitigation Plan Introduction Hennepin County Income Distribution - 2007 w Less than $10,000 25.0% 20.7% ■ $10,000 - $14,999 20.0%-/ 14 . 7 % 14.2 p $15,000 - $24,999 a� 15.0% 9 3 %0.0°/ u $25,000 - $34,999 10.0% 8 ° '� $% 4.0 %3.5% ■ $35,000 - $49,999 e 5.0% 0 $50,000- $74,999 0.0% ■ $75,000- $99,999 Less than $25,000- $75,000- Greater p $100,000 - $149,999 $10,000 $34,999 $99,999 than $200,000 ■ $150,000- $199,999 Income ■ Greater than $200,000 Business Climate Hennepin County is home to many of Minnesota's largest employers including Target Corpora- tion, UnitedHealth Group, University of Minnesota, Cargill, Best Buy Company, SuperValu, US Bank and General Mills. Seven of the top ten revenue gen- • erating companies of 2005 are headquartered in the County. Along with a strong employer base, Hennepin County residents form a well- educated and professional workforce. Over 87 per- • cent of Hennepin County's workforce is employed in the service V� sector with over 57 percent concentrated in three industry classi- fications: Trade, Transportation and Utilities (21 percent), Pro- fessional and Business services (18 percent). Approximately 10.5 percent of the workforce is employed in manufacturing jobs. Hennepin County's unemployment rate is consistently below national and state rates. In 2004, the average unemployment rate within the county was 4.5 percent. General Mills Headquarters, Land Cover Golden Valley, Minnesota Hennepin County's land cover is broken down into the following categories: artificial surfaces and associated areas, planted or cultivated vegetation, forests, woodlands, shrublands, herbaceu- ous, nonvascular vegetation, sparse vegetation, and water. The following map shows a visual of the land cover across Hennepin County. Page 17 Mitigation Plan Introduction ' WCCS Inventory Not Completed Yet :.: - Artificial Surfaces and Associated Areas 1 ... ; f-`ir -'. � �/, ,. -•• Planted or Cultivated Vegetation M Forests • T.. Woodlands MShrublands Herbaceous Nonvascular Vegetation J+ M Sparse Vegetation _ Water * '.�(. � '+fi �'� �' •• ��' • 2007 Hennepin County Land Cover Page 18 Mitigation Plan Introduction Watersheds • A watershed is an area of land that catches rain and snow (any form of water) and drains to a lake, stream, wetland or groundwater. In Hennepin County we have 12 major watersheds. Wa- tersheds come in all different shapes and sizes. Smaller watersheds drain into larger water- sheds, much like a creek drains into a river. Some watersheds cross county, state, and even in- ternational borders. 1 P . i f I � w1 • ! � -J i t WEST �. ELM CREEK r �� l RIVER SIPPI a f i 4 -_..a SHINGLE CREEK , ! PIONEER -SARAH CREEK i r-I-r— 1 -r- V BASSETT CREEK I I is" _________ MINNEHAHA CREEK �_�� -�� 1 1 ! i ti 1 J y ------------ - - ------------------ - - - - - �! NINE r 1 1 — MILE CREEK RILEY - - - - -1 1 — - - -•'� i PURGATORY J RICHFIELD- / !BLUFF CREEK r BLOOMINGT,OI 4 X f I i LOWER MINNES IVER 12 Hennepin County Watersheds • Page 19 Mi tigation Plan Introduction • Local Jurisdictions Bloomington Bloomington is the fifth largest city in Minnesota. Located on the north bank of the Minnesota River above its confluence with the Mississippi River, Bloomington lies at the heart of the southern metro area, 10 miles (16 km) south of downtown Minneapolis. The city's population was 85,172 in the 2000 Census and was estimated at 80,869 in 2006. Bloomington was established as a Post -World War II housing boom suburb connected to the urban street grid of Minneapolis and serviced by two major highways, Interstate 35W and Inter- state 494. Bloomington's residential areas include upper -tier households in the western Bush Lake area and traditional middle -class families in its rows of single - family homes in the central to eastern portions. Large -scale commercial development is concentrated along the Interstate 494 corridor. Besides an extensive park system, with over 1,000 square feet (93 m of parkland per capita, the city's south border with the Minnesota River is buffered by the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. �+ Bloomington has more jobs per capita than either Minneapolis or St. Paul. Its M�— economy includes headquarters of major companies such as Ceridan, Health - -- a4 Partners and Toro. The city is a hospitality and retail magnet, recognized na- tionally for the United States' largest enclosed shopping center, Mall of America. Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Center lies on the west bank of the Mississippi River on the northwest border of Min- neapolis in Hennepin County. Brooklyn Center is one of the oldest inner -ring suburbs of Min - neapolis-St. Paul, with about 3.2 million residents. The U.S. Census Bureau estimated the city's population at 27,488 in 2007. Formed as the center of local trade in Brooklyn Township since 1873, the -- — rural area farmed market gardening for the nearby growing population of Minneapolis. The village incorporated in 1911, splitting from Brooklyn 0 Township, to avoid annexation from the expanding city of Minneapolis. The city became a bedroom community and industrial job center following post- war growth. Brooklyn Center is known its regional mall Brookdale Center, and the headquarters of Caribou Coffee moved into the city in 2004. Brooklyn Park Brooklyn Park lies on the west bank of the Mississippi River upstream from downtown Min- neapolis in northern Hennepin County. Brooklyn Park is the fourth - largest suburb of Minnea - polis/St. Paul. The U.S. Census Bureau estimated the city's population at 71,394 in 2007. The city is known for Edinburgh USA Golf Course, North Hennepin Community College and a • campus of Hennepin Technical College. A traditional bedroom community of both major cities, Page 20 Mitigation Plan Introduction Target Corporation is currently expanding its Northern Campus into a $1.78 • billion dollar office, retail, and housing city center providing 26,600 jobs. Once Brooklyn Township, the township split in 1860 with the southeastern ° village incorporating into Brooklyn Center and Crystal Lake. Champlin The city of Champlin is located along the Mississippi River, surrounded by the cities of Anoka, Dayton, Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove and Coon Rapids, about 18 miles northwest of Minnea- polis. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 8.8 square miles, of which, 8.2 miles of it is land and 0.6 square miles is water. The average elevation is 875 feet above sea level. The population was 22,193 at the time of the 2000 Census. k. The settlement of the Champlin area began when Father Louis Hennepin, a _ 4 Franciscan priest from whom Hennepin County gets its name, Michael Accult and Peter Dulay were captured by the Sioux Indians. An Indian trading post ° was eventually established in the area. Charles Miles created the first perma- nent settlement in what came to be called the Marshall Township. In 1859, it was split into two towns, Champlin and Dayton. Chanhassen Chanhassen is located in both Hennepin and Carver counties. The population was 20,321 at the • 2000 Census, with a 2006 estimated population of 23,530. The original Y name comes from the Dakota word chanhasen, meaning "sugar- maple- tree" (chan, tree; haza, a tree with sap). U.S. Route 212 and Minnesota State - Highway 5 and 41 are three of the main routes in the city. Chanhassen is --- C4 home to the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, the Chanhassen Dinner Thea- ters, and Paisley Park Studios. Corcoran Corcoran was settled in 1855 and was organized on May 11, 1858. The city is named after Pat- rick B. Corcoran, the first schoolteacher, merchant, and postmaster of the town. The city of Corcoran was incorporated on December 4, 1948. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 35.9 square miles, and the census of 2000 was at 5,630 people. b • Page 21 Mitigation Plan Introduction • Crystal Crystal's population was 22,698 at the 2000 Census. According to the Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 5.9 square miles. The city is bordered on the north by the city of Brooklyn Park, on the east by Brooklyn Center and Robbinsdale, on the south by Golden Valley and on the west by New Hope. Crystal has been awarded the "Minnesota Star City" designation for economic development. Minnesota { State Highway 100 and County Road 81 are two of the main arterial routes in the city. Crystal Airport, a small general aviation field, is also located within the city limits. Dayton Dayton is located in both Hennepin and Wright counties. The population was 44,699 at the 2000 census. It is the northernmost city in Hennepin County. The city of Dayton, platted in 1855, is named for city founder Lyman Dayton. Through t, his finances, Lyman Dayton was instrumental in bringing the railroad into -_ - Minnesota and development of the Lake Superior and Mississippi Railroad, v of which he was President until 1865. t Deephaven Deephaven is located on the shores of Lake Minnetonka. It is 16 miles from Minneapolis and had a population of 3,853 at the 2000 census. According to the U.S. Cen- sus Bureau, the city has a total area of 2.4 square miles. Minnetonka_ Boulevard serves as a main transportation route for the city. Deephaven is home to the Minnetonka Yacht Club and the historic Cottagewood General 4 Store. Eden Prairie Eden Prairie is a suburb 12 miles southwest of downtown Minneapolis. The city lies on the north bank of the Minnesota River, upstream from the confluence with the Mississippi River. Eden Prairie is the seventh largest suburb and is composed of large lakes and ponds, and has more than 170 miles of multi -use trails, 2,250 acres of parks, and 1,300 acres of open space. The city is home to more than 2,200 businesses and headquarters of SuperValue, ADC Telecommunications, MTS Systems Corporation and the Minnesota Vikings. Regionally known ° for Eden Prairie Center, it is also the hub for South West Transit, serving • public transportation to three adjacent suburbs. As of the 2000 census, Page 22 Mitigation Plan Introduction there were 54,901 people and the city has a total are of 35.2 square miles. • Edina Edina is a first -ring suburb situated immediately southwest of Minneapolis. Edina began as a small farming and milling community in the 1860's and is today 95 percent developed metro- politan community. The population was 47,425 at the 2000 census. Edina began as part of Richfield Township 1850's. In 1888, the residents of the township held a meeting to hi r founding idea a new village, was favorably t separating themselves d b those within the m Richfield Town --- T p• p Y -- community and a committee was established to oversee the transition. Many major highways run through or are close to Edina, making it accessible to all within the metropolitan area. Minnesota State Highways 62 and 100 divide the city into four sections. U.S. Route 169 and Minnesota State Highway 100 extend north and south. Interstate 494 and Minnesota State Highway 62 east and west. Excelsior Excelsior was founded in the 1850s as a destination for vacationers, primarily from the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Throughout the years, Excelsior's Water Street t has been the home to many businesses, including hotels, restaurants, and merchants. The.population of Excelsior was 2,393 at the 2000 census. Ac- c cording to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 0.7 square, • miles, of which, 0.6 miles of it is land and 01. square miles of it is water. .� f Minnesota State Highway 7 serves as a main transportation route. Golden Valley Golden Valley is a western suburb of Minneapolis and is the main corporate headquarters of General Mills and Pentair. The population was 20,281 at the 2000 census, however, more than 30,000 people work in Golden Valley due to the presence of large employers such as General Mills, Honeywell, and 9 Pentair. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 10.5 square miles. Interstate 394, U.S. Route 169, and Minnesota State High- ways 55 and 100 are four of the main arterial routes in the city. Greenfield Greenfield sits along the Crow River in Hennepin County. The Village of Greenfield, now known as the City of Greenfield, was set apart by the Hen- nepin County Commissioners on April 10, 1858. It encompassed that por- tion of Township 119, range West, lying east of the Crow River. The origi- nal name, Greenwood, reflected the appearance of the terrain, which was r commonly referred to by native Sioux, Chippewa and Ojibeway as "Big` • Page 23 Mitigatio Pla Introduction Woods ". According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 21.5 square miles and had a population of 2,544 people at the 2000 census. Greenwood Founded in 1956, Greenwood is located 20 minutes west of Minneapolis on Highway 7. At the 2000 census bureau, the population of Greenwood was 729. Greenwood has a total area of 0.6 square miles . 0 Hanover Hanover is located in both Wright and Hennepin Counties, just a few miles southwest of St. Mi- chael /Albertville. The North Crow River flows right through the downtown district and serves as the dividing line between Hennepin and Wright county. The population of Hanover during the 2000 census was 1,355. According to the U.S. Census - -- Bureau, the city has a total of 5.1 square miles. County Road 19 serves as a 1 - main route of transportation for Hanover. Hopkins The first settlers of Hopkins arrived in 1852 as land surroundin g Minneapolis was opening up and being explored by members stationed at Fort Snelling. However, the roots of the town be- gan in 1887 with the building of the Minneapolis Threshing Machine Company, later called Minneapolis — Moline, to make farm equipment. At this time, the name of the community was West Minneapolis. In 1928, the name of the village was changed to Hopkins after Harley H. Hopkins, who was among its first homesteaders and was the community's first postmaster. . .7 s �. Hopkins is approximately four square miles in size and is surrounded by the - t� larger, western suburban communities of Minnetonka, St. Louis Park, and Edina. Hopkins is about 98% developed with little remaining vacant land. The population was 17,145 at the 2000 census. U.S. Route 169 and Minnesota State Highway 7 are two of the main arterial rotes in the city. Independence Independence Township was organized on April 11, 1858, and became the �3 Village of Independence on January 8, 1957, and the city of Independence on April 9, 1974. Independence is located on the western edge of Hennepin County with a population of 3,700 people. Two major Three River parks; Rebecca and Baker, can be accessed directly from Independence and the Page 24 Mitigation Plan Introduction popular Luce Line recreation trail crosses the south side of the city. According to the U.S. Cen- sus Bureau, the city has a total of 34.6 square miles. U.S. Route 12 serves as a main arterial route to the community. Long Lake Long Lake was established in 1855 and was called Cumberland Town. The city itself only covers roughly 0.9 square miles, according to the U.S. Census - Bureau, and the population as of the 2000 census was 1,842 people. U.S. Route 12 serves as a main route of transportation for the city. . a Loretto` Loretto, originally a Soo Line railway village, was founded in 1886 and set- tled by German and Dutch immigrants. Loretto was named for a Roman Catholic mission for refugees of the Huron Indians near Quebec, Canada, called Lorette, and for the village of Lo- retto, Kentucky, where a society of Catholic "Sisters of Loretto at the. Foot of the Cross" was founded in 1812. The original source of the name is Loreto, a small town in Italy, which has a noted shire of pilgrimage. The city of Loretto was incorporated in 1940, has a total area of 0.3 square miles and a population of 570 people, according to the 2000 census. County Roads 11 and 19 are the two major routes of transportation for the city. Maple Grove Winnebago Indians were the only inhabitants in the area of Maple Grove until 1851 when Louis Gervais arrived and settled. Four years later, in 1855, city growth included a church, town hall and many homes. The city was known for its large stands X. of maple trees and was, therefore, a significant source for maple syrup. _ With the completion and major upgrades to Interstates 94/694, 494, and U.S. Route 169, Maple Grove has grown at a rapid pace since the 1970's. The population of Maple Grove was 50,365 during the 2000 census. The city has a total area of 35 square miles Maple Plain Maple Plain is located 25 miles west of Minneapolis on Route 12 and is named for the many sugar maples in its surrounding forests. Early settle- ment of the area started in 1854 and revolved around lake Independence to its north, and its outflow Pioneer Creek. In 1868 and 1869, the St. Paul, Pa- 9 cific and Manitoba Railroad was built through Maple Plain. The city was incorporated as a village in 1912. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 1.1 square miles and the population was listed at Page 25 Mitigation Plan Introduction 2,088 at the time of the 2000 census. Medicine Lake The city of Medicine-Lake is nestled in the western suburbs on the large _ peninsula within Medicine Lake, the second largest lake in the Twin Cities. The city is completely surrounded by the city of Plymouth, and forms a pen- , insula stretching into the lake that is its namesake. According to the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 0.3 square miles and a popu- lation of 368. Medina Medina is located 16 miles west of Minneapolis and according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total of 26.9 square miles. The population of r - Medina was 4,005 during the 2000 census. Polaris Industries, a snowmobile _ and ATV manufacturing company, is based in the city of Medina. Minne- sota State Highway 55 serves as the main route of transportation for the city. Minneapolis • Minneapolis is the largest city in Minnesota and is the county seat for Hennepin County. The city lies on both banks of the Mississippi River, just north of the river's confluence with the Minnesota River, and adjoins Saint Paul, the state's capital. The city is abundantly rich in water with over twenty lakes and wetlands, the Mississippi riverfront, creeks and waterfalls, many connected by parkways in the Chain of Lakes and Grand Rounds Scenic Byway. Minneapolis was once the world's flour milling capital and a hub for tim- ber, and today is the primary business center between Chicago, Illinois and _ Seattle, Washington. Minneapolis is nicknamed the "City of Lakes and "Mill City". The U.S. Census Bureau estimated the city's population at - `} 377,392 people in 2007. Minneapolis has numerous routes of transportation including Interstate 494 and 694, Interstate 35W, Minnesota State Highway 62 and 77, U.S Route 169 and Minnesota State Highway 100 to name a few. Minnetonka Located just 8 miles west of Minneapolis, Minnetonka is a fully developed suburban commu- nity of 51,480 residents, making it the 14th largest city in Minnesota. Minnetonka has a long and interesting history, from when the land was first settled by Dakotah and Ojibway Indians, to • its inclusion in the 1803 Louisiana Purchase, to its first recorded exploration by European set - Page 26 Mitig Plan � a Introduction tlers in 1822, to its mid -to -late 1800s reputation as a center for saw and flour mills and the -- -_ buildin of the Burwell House to its progression from a g p �' ! township to a village, and finally to city. The word "Minnetonka" comes from the Dakota Indian mni tanka meaning great water". *— Minnetonka Beach _ 1 T.. I Minnetonka Beach can be traced back as early as 1855, with records listing early settlers. However, the Village was not officially opened for settlement until 1872. The present area of the Village was surveyed, platted and named Minnetonka Beach in 1883. Con - struction of the first road through the Village in 1887, further insured the popularity of Minne- tonka Beach as a resort area for the rich and famous of the time. The Village of Minnetonka Beach was incorporated in 1894, with a resi- dent population of 209. In 1922, by adoption of the present home rule charter, the Village was incorporated as a city of the fourth class. Now, ti officially The City of the Village of Minnetonka Beach, the Beach remains - -- }-- — g'� of the of the smallest incorporated cities in the state. The population as of the 2000 census was at 614 with 230 homes. A boot - shaped peninsula jut- t 1 ting out into the center of the waters of Lake Minnetonka, the Village is r �- comprised of a total area of some 296 acres, less than a half section of land. Minnetrista On April 10, 1858, Hennepin County Commissioners set apart Town 117, range 24 as German Home Township, named for the large number of residents of German stock. In 1859, the town government was organized when voters met in Mathias S. Cook's log cabin. During this meet- ing, there were several proposals to change the name of the town and the name "Minnetrista" was chosen. Minnetrista Township continued until 1960, when the govern- ment was adopted municipal structure and became known as the Village of -� Minnetrista. In the early 1970s Minnetrista was formally incorporated as a statutory city. 0 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 30.8 square miles and a population of 4,358 (2000 Census numbers). County Roads 15, 44, and 110 are the three main transportation routes for the city. Mound At the 2000 census, Mound had a population of 9,453 people and according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 4.9 square miles, with 2.0 square miles is water. Mound de- rived its name from the Indian mounds once found within the present day limits. They were not built by the Dakota Indians, but made by prehistoric Indians. Mound is also the birthplace of the Tonka truck, which is named after Lake Minnetonka. The " Tonka " To s headquarters was Y q • Page 27 Mitigation Plan Introduction • originally located in Mound, until business picked up and they needed a more suitable location for supplies to be delivered to. Considering Mound - - -- r is half water, it was very hard to navigate. - -- -- - - - -Y. New Hope New Hope was originally a farming community in Crystal Lake Township. In 1936 the city of Crystal, Minnesota was incorporated, taking up all of former Crystal Lake Township. The farmers in the western part of the city broke off and =w formed New Hope Township. In 1953 with suburbia moving in and farm- ers moving out, New Hope was re- incorporated as a borough. According - -- to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 5.1 square miles and - -- the population at the time of the 2000 census was 20,873 people. L Orono • Orono Township was created in 1889 and incorporated in 1955. Located approximately 15 miles west of downtown Minneapolis on the north shore of Lake Minne- tonka, Orono has a total area of 24 square miles; land area is 16 square r miles, with 8 square miles of lakes. At the time of the 2000 census, the population of Orono was 7,538. .� 0 Osseo The City of Osseo is located in the northeastern part of Hennepin County. Originally, Osseo was under the government of the townships of Brooklyn Park and Maple Grove. In the spring of 1875, by an act of the state legislature, Osseo became incorporated. It is said that Osseo is a Native American name, "Waseia" meaning `there is - light'. According to the 2000 census, Osseo has a population of 2,434 1 people and the city has a total area of 0.8 square miles of land. U.S. Route` 169, County Road 81, and Central Avenue /Old Jefferson Highway are the three main arterial routes in the city. Plymouth Plymouth's history can be traced back to the pre - Columbian period, 1400 -1500 A.D. The origi- nal inhabitants were the Dakota. Their encampment was at the north end of Medicine Lake. Medicine Lake is derived from the Native American word "Mdewakan ", meaning "Lake of the Page 28 Mitigation Plan Introduction Spirit ". The Dakota named it after a warrior overturned his canoe and his body was never re- covered. As the new settlers came to the area, they decided to organize. The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners named the new settlement Plymouth. As the community began to evolve, so did local government. Plymouth became incorporated as a village on May 18, 1955. Plymouth became a statutory city on Febru- ary 7, 1974. Plymouth is the seventh largest city in Minnesota. Located 15 miles north- west of Minneapolis, the city is the third largest suburb of Minneapolis. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 35.3 square miles and the population at the 2000 census was 65,894 people. Interstate 494, U.S. Route 169, and Minnesota State Highway 55 are the main transportation routes of the city. Richfield Long before suburban homes were built here, Richfield was characterized by its abundance of rich farmland (hence the name) as the Minneapolis and St. Paul area was beginning to grow. In 1908, Richfield officially became a city by adopting a President/Trustee form of government. However, residents of Richfield held town meetings dating back to May • 11, 1858 —the date on which Congress admitted Minnesota into the Union. Richfield is an inner -ring suburb and is bordered by Minneapolis to the north, Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport to the east, Bloomington a to the south, and Edina to the west. The population was 34,439 at the 2000 census. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total of 7.1 square miles. Interstates 35W and 494 and Minnesota State Highways 62 and 77 are the four main arterial routes for the city. Robbinsdale Once property of the Village of Crystal, Robbinsdale became a village on April 19, 1893 after a special election was held to dissolve the Village of Crystal. The geographical area of Robbins- dale has remained at 2.9 square miles since that time. Robbinsdale was also the first suburb of Minneapolis and was named for Andrew Robbins, an entrepreneur who purchased 90 acres of land for the purpose of making the area a suburban town. Robbinsdale has a total area of 2.9 square miles according to the U.S. Census Bureau and has a population of 14,123 (2000 census). Robbinsdale is home to North Memorial Medical Center, which is one of the state's Level 1 Trauma Center and also operates "Airfare ", an air medical Page 29 Mitigatio Pla Introduction • transport service. Minnesota State Highway 100 and County Road 81 are the two main transportation routes of the city. Rockford L Rockford Village was formally incorporated on October 21, 1881, by an act of the Minnesota Legislature. The community remained small, num- bering a few hundred, for most of its existence. In the 1970s it passed 1,000 in population as the Twin Cities suburban area continued to expand and people from this area started to com- mute to the metropolitan area for work. By 1980, the population had more than tripled from a 1970 figure of 730 to 2,408. The April 6, 2006 population estimate is 3,603. Rockford is located in both Hennepin and Wright counties. Minnesota State Highway 55 is the main route in the city. 9 Rogers Rogers became incorporated on February 17,1914 and was named after Thomas Rogers. This followed a fashion of the time in the growing villages and towns of the new states to name towns after individual or family names. The growth of Rogers from a vil- lage to a town was based on manufacturing, distribution and service industries. The City of Rogers now has a population of approximately 6,000 people and accord- ing to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 5.0 square miles. Hassan Township encircles the City of Rogers. Interstate 94 and Minnesota State Highway 101 are the main transportation routes for Rogers. a` Shorewood The City of Shorewood, once a part of Excelsior Township, was organ- ized as a Village in 1956 and became a statutory city in 1974. Today the City of Shorewood incorporates 3,600 acres and is 6 miles long and 1 mile wide. The City sits on the shores of Lake Minnetonka and also somewhat surrounds the city of Excelsior. The population of Shore- wood was 7,400 during the 2000 census. Minnesota State Highway 7 serves as the main transportation route to the city. Spring Park �— Spring Park is located on Lake Minnetonka and has over 4 miles of shore- line while being less than a 1/2 square mile in area. Spring Park was incor- porated in 1951 and at that time had a population of a little over 200. Page 30 Mitigation Plan Introduction Spring Park fronts West Arm Bay, Black Lake, and Spring Park Bay. As • of the census of 2000, there were 1,717 people in Spring Park, MN. 1 a St. Anthony St. Anthony is located in both Ramsey and Hennepin counties. The City is a "first- ring" suburb of Minneapolis and as such is part of the metropolitan area. It is located 5 miles northeast of downtown Minneapolis and eight miles northwest of downtown St. Paul. The population was 8,012 during the 2000 census. About 6,000 residents live in the large Hennepin County part of the city, with about 2,000 resi- dents in the Ramsey County portion. St. Anthony was also the name of the older twin city of Minneapolis, located across from downtown Minneapolis on the east bank of the Mississippi River. Minneapolis and St. Anthony merged in 1872. St. Anthony has a total area of 2.4 square miles and is easily accessible via 1 -35W, I -694, and Minnesota State Highway 10. St. Bonifacius • St. Bonifacius is located about 25 miles west of Minneapolis and is cen- tered around Minnesota State Highway 7 and County Road 92. The popu- lation was 1,873 during the 2000 census and was estimated to be around i 2,326 in 2006. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total o. area of 1.1 square miles. St. Bonifacius is completely surrounded by the city of Minnetrista. -- St. Louis Park St. Louis Park is a "first- ring" city located immediately west of Minneapolis. The 1860s village that became St. Louis Park was originally known as Elmwood, which today is a neighborhood inside the city. St. Louis Park was incorporated into the Village of St. Louis Park on November 19, 1886. The name St. Louis Park was derived from the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway that ran through the area. As of the 2000 census, St. Louis Park had a population of 44,126 people and according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has an area of 10.9 square miles. Interstate 394, U.S. Route 169, and { State Highways 7 and 100 are the four main transportation routes in the city. • Page 31 Mitigation Plan Introduction • Tonka Bay Tonka Bay was incorporated as a village on September 11, 1901. The city, which has an area of about one square mile, is located between the upper and lower bodies of Lake Minnetonka. It has more Minnetonka shoreline than any other city of its size. Tonka Bay made history long before 1901. In 1853, Peter Gideon staked out a claim of 160 acres in what is now Tonka Bay and where Gideon's Bay still bears his name. Gideon successfully propagated his first apples, "The Wealthy," named for his wife, before he died in 1899. Wayzata The name Wayzata is derived from the American Indian word Wazyata, which had almost mys- tical connotation to the Sioux tribes who originally inhabited the area. In 1852, pioneers began to settle in what is now the present site of Wayzata. A town site was laid out and several establishments sprang up, among -- them a general store, a sawmill, a post office, and a log schoolhouse. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the City of Wayzata has a total ° area of 3.2 square miles and the population as of 2000 was 4,113 people. U.S. Route 12 serves as the main transportation route of the city. Woodland Woodland is part of the "Big Woods" that once stretched from Owatonna to St. Cloud. The first dwelling was constructed in Woodland in 1867. Woodland was settled in 1882 by year -round residents. The Village of Woodland was incorporated in December 1948. The area of Woodland is 0.8 square miles, approxi- mately 3.6 miles of public roads and 5.9 miles of shoreline on Lake Minne- tonka. As of the 2000 census, the population of Woodland was 480 peo- ple. Hassan Township Hassan is the only remaining township in Hennepin County. Hassan is located along the south bank of the Crow River and bisected by Interstates 94, approximately 20 miles northwest of downtown Minneapolis. The City of Rogers lies entirely within the original township. The township has a total area of 21.3 square miles and a population of 2,463 people. • Page 32 Mitigation Plan Introduction Fort Snelling • Fort Snelling, originally known as Fort St. Anthony, is a former military fortification located at the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers in Hennepin County. The original in- stallation was constructed between 1820 and 1824 as Fort St. Anthony. It received its current name upon its completion in 1824 in honor of Colonel Josiah Snelling, who commanded the regiment that built it, and oversaw its construction. The 2000 census listed Fort Snelling as an unorganized territory (a desig- nation it has carried since it was founded) with a total population of 442 people. As of the 2000 census, there were 442 people residing in the un- organized territory. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the unorgan- ized territory has a total area of 6.7 miles. Additionally, 4.65% of the total ` area of Fort Snelling is covered by water. Page 33 NNIINlImh■nMIINatlNPlan Planning Process SECTION 2 • Hennepin County PLANNING PROCESS Mitigation Plan The Planning Process The Planning Process Documentation of the planning pro- I 2.1 Hennepin County Working Group (HCWG) cess, including public in- volvement, is required to meet DMA 2000 (see In order to efficiently begin the planning process, Hennepin 44CFR §201.4(c)(1) and §201.6(c)(1)). County formed a working group consisting of personnel from the The plan must include a description of County Emergency Preparedness Division and Minneapolis the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, Emergency Preparedness. The HCWG began meeting in August who was involved in the process and of 2008 and continued to meet until December of 2008. Their how other agencies participated. A de- primary goal was to set objectives for the update of the Ap- scription of the planning process should roved 2005 Hennepin County Multi - Jurisdictional All- Hazard include how the planning team u c as p p ty mittee was formed, how input was � Mitigation Plan, with a focus on: enhancing hazard identifica- sought from individuals or other agen- tion, hazard event profiles, describing future land -use and devel- cies who did not participate on a regu- opment trends, and development of a coherent strategy to ad- lar basis, what the goals and objectives of the planning process were, and how dress the relevant risks for the communities. Also, with the help the plan was prepared -The description of a GIS Coordinator, Hennepin County also began to look at the can be in the plan itself or contained in third and fourth step in the Risk Assessment Process, Inventory- the cover memo or an appendix. ing Assets and Estimating Losses. The GIS Coordinator would work with County data and FEMA HAZUS -MH software to effectively project infrastructure losses in the case of a flood. During the four HCWG meetings, they established objectives and created a timeline for when those objectives would be accomplished. 2.2 Hennepin County Mitigation Planning Team (HCMPT) In August of 2009, the HCWG met to discuss the formation of a Hennepin County Mitigation Planning Team (HCMPT). The Planning Team consisted of representatives from the following agencies /departments/businesses: Minnesota Department of Homeland Security & Emergency Management (HSEM), the National Weather Service, Hennepin County Environmental Services, Hennepin County Management Information Systems (MIS), the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the City of Maple Grove, the City of Rogers, Washington �g�L County Emergency Management, Wells Fargo, Medica, Ameriprise Financial, Hennepin County i Public Affairs, City of Eden Prairie, City of New Hope, City of Corcoran, Hennepin County Public Works, City of Wayzata, Metropolitan Airports Com- mission, Augsburg College, Minneapolis Red Cross, and the City of Minneapolis. 2.3 Jurisdiction Participation With the exception of Chanhassen, Hanover and Rockford, each municipality participated in the development of the plan. Hanover and Rockford sit in both Hennepin and Wright Counties and passed resolutions to be covered under the Wright County Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and the City of Chanhassen passed a resolution to be covered under Carver Page 34 Mitigation Plan The Planning Process i County's Hazard Mitigation Plan. The roles of the municipalities who were part of the planning process were to provide input into the each section of the mitigation plan. This included the updates to the Risk Assessment (Hazard Profiles and with the Inventory Assets and Estimated Losses) sections as well as the Community Profile and the Mitigation Measures section. However, not all the jurisdictions were part of the Planning Team themselves. Since the municipalities in Hennepin County are divided into Planning Groups, each group provided a liaison to act as a voice for their Planning Group. Since this was an update to the plan and not a complete re- write, the responsibilities of the planning team consisted of: reviewing the hazard profiles, community profile, future land use and development trends, inventory assets and estimated losses, and coming up with mitiga- tion projects. HCMPT agreed to meet three times before the submittal of the updated plan. The first meeting of the HCMPT was held at the Medina Public Works Building in Medina, MN on October 21, 2009. The meeting consisted of reviewing the update to the Community Profile and step two of the Risk �,......A,� Assessment Process which is profiling hazards events. At this meeting the consensus was that another hazard profile, Transpor- tation, be created and included in the plan. The Transportation : �...... Profile would include Air, Roadway, Rail/Transit and Pipeline. Members of the Mitigation Planning Team were given all pro- filed hazards to review and provide comment before the next • meeting.w---- -r .rr ..rrr.rsrrrr.r wr.,.r.ww.n.www p rrrrr+es+..,r ra The second Mitigation Planning Team meeting was held on Feb - ruary 24, 2010 at the Medina Public Works Facility. The meet- ing consisted of reviewing all hazard profile information that had been updated since the October 21 st meeting. The group also reviewed the new Transportation Hazard Profile as well as the future land trends section of the Introduction section. The pri- New Transportation Profile mary focus of the second Mitigation Planning Team meeting was to look at the Inventory Assets and Estimated Losses section of the Risk Assessment that had been completed by the cities and Hennepin County GIS Division. Gathering information from both County GIS data and specific city information, the following Hennepin County cities identified critical assets in the floodplains: Bloomington, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Corcoran, Eden Prairie, Edina, Excelsior, Greenfield, Lo- retto, Maple Grove, Medicine Lake, Medina, Minneapolis, Minnetonka, Orono, Plymouth, Shorewood, St. Louis Park, and Wayzata. The final Mitigation Planning Team meeting took place on April 4, 2010 at the Medina Public Works Facility. The meeting consisted of reviewing the entire update to the Hennepin County Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan. The group also looked at Hennepin County's 2010 Mitigation Goals as well as the previous mitigation measures and what had been accom- plished and what was still a priority. Page 35 Mitigation Plan The Planning Process 2.4 Additional Planning Input • As stated under the Hennepin County Mitigation Planning Team (HCMPT) section above, the planning team consisted of members of neighboring communities, governmental agencies, busi- nesses, academia, and other non - profit interests. This representation was purposely planned so that Hennepin County could would have input from all disciplines which would in turn help to create a more comprehensive mitigation plan. 2.4 Public Involvement Public participation is a key component of strategic planning processes. Since hazards may af- fect the entire community, it pays to get as many citizens as possible involved in identifying them, and in planning, designing and implementing hazard mitigation strategies. Public in- volvement builds support and ensures a strong base for future mitigation activities. The value of public involvement lies in sharing responsibility with those who will strongly influence the success or failure of the mitigation effort. Public participation also offers the residential and business community the opportunity for inclusion of their interests and concerns into the proc- ess. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requires public input during the devel- opment of local hazard mitigation plans. For Hennepin County's Multi- Jurisdictional All - Hazards Mitigation Plan update, the public was invited to participate via the internet. The plan was hosted online at http: //hennepin.us for six weeks during the January through March time - frame. Since the Plan was in draft form and prior to it being approved, the mitigation measures section of the plan was not posted due to the stages of the planning process. Micr �:1 Home — Hennepin County, Minnesota - .. File EdR jw Farorms Toole Help ' sear �r�q © Back J i_J LJ 'A,, / ch * FavOrr es f i • s (� I__d It address j] htip: //www.m,hermeph.rm.us/ -- Hennepin County, Minnesota rvot'ce S. n -Up 1 Countf News I Contact I Site Map ; Search - 1 Have 14 Is who Where I re Is? HOME RESIDENTS BUSINESS PUBLIC SAFETY & LAW GOVERNMENT ABOUT Popular Links Public Comment Sought for MINI Fl. Disaster Mitigation Plan Emergency Resources i Public safer s a i y i primary concern of Service Canters government, and Hennepin is seeking input from the public about it's plan to respond and Libraries - recover to a broad range of disasters. - Drop -Off Sites: Online Services R Household He ardous Read more about Public Input Needec for Waste & Recycling Property Information Disaster Plan Search Hennepin County Budget Documents In Custody & Inmate County News Search Waiting Children Pothole Reporting < • ' For County Employees Multimedia County Board Featured videos Commissioner &District Slideshows I n�.tnr Page 36 Mitigation Plan The Planning Process To advertise the plan, the Hennepin County Public Affairs Office created a press release for multiple media outlets, giving information on why we need the public's assistance, why the county needs a mitigation plan and a definition of what is hazard mitigation. This press release was done in conjunction with the Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazard Mitiga- tion Plan being posted to the County Hennepin County News website. 1- Atten9 • at: -�saa • — -.11 1­11 street, mnra3aooirs, - —1-- Jam 27, 2010 Contacts: DanBovitz, Emergency Preparedness: 612 -596 -0249 LuAnn Schmaus, Public Affairs: 612 - 348 -7865 Hennepin seeks public Input on steps to mitigate hazards Have you ever wondered how you or your neighborhood would survive a disaster such as a flood a tornado or an accident involving a hazardous material? Staff in Hennepin County's Emergency Preparedness unit do, and they want your ideas. You're invited to go to Hennepin's website at http:7hennepin.us and review the county's "Multi - Jurisdictional All - Hazards Mitigation Plan." The plan outlines how the county and its partners — from The Hennepin County Public Affairs Office sent out a news release to multiple media outlets adver- tising the Draft Plan. • Page 37 Nonne In D County Mitlgadon Plan Risk Assessment SECTION 3 • Hennepin County • RISK ASSESSMENT • Nennepin COOM MiCgadon Plan Risk Assessment • 3.1 Risk Assessment Process Risk Assessment is the process of measuring the potential loss of life, personal injury, eco- nomic injury, and property damage resulting from natural hazards by assessing the vulnerability of people, buildings, and infrastructure to natural and man -made hazards. Risk assessment pro- vides the foundation for the rest of the mitigation planning process. The risk assessment proc- ess focuses your attention on areas most in need by evaluating which populations and facilities are most vulnerable to natural hazards and to what extent injuries and damages may occur. It tells you: • The hazards to which your community is susceptible; • What these hazards can do to physical, social, and economic status; • Which areas are most vulnerable to damage from these hazards; and • The resulting cost of damages or costs avoided through future mitigation projects. The Hennepin County Mitigation Working Group (HMWG) used a risk assessment Identity process consistent with procedures and steps presented in the Federal Emergency rd s • Management Agency's (FEMA) How -To Guide "Understanding Your Risks: Identi- BSSeSS azard file fying Hazards and Estimating Losses." risks HMWG used the four -step risk assessment process shown in Figure 1. 3.1.1 Identifying Hazards assets 7 Hazard identification is the process of iden- tifying hazards that threaten an area includ- ing both natural and man -made events. A :: , natural event causes a hazard when it 4 harms people or property. Such events would include flooding, tornadoes, winter Figure 1 —FEMA Four -Step Risk Assessment storms, drought, thunderstorms, and ex- treme temperatures that affect populated areas. Man -made hazard events are caused by human activity and include technological hazards and terrorism. Technological hazards are generally accidental and /or have unintended consequences (for example, an accidental hazardous materi- als release). Approaches to collecting historical hazard data include researching newspapers and other records, conducting a planning document and report literature review in all relevant haz- ards subject areas, gathering hazard- related GIS data, and engaging in conversation with rele- vant experts from the community. Even though a particular hazard may not have occurred in Page 38 Ne01e111 County mmuldon Plan Risk Assessment recent history in Hennepin County, it is important during the hazard identification stage to con- • sider all hazards that may potentially affect the study area. The HMWG reviewed hazards listed in the How -to Guide and determined the prevalence of each hazard in Hennepin County and whether each hazard should be included in the plan. They include: avalanche, coastal storm, coastal erosion, dam failure, drought/water supply, earth- quake, expansive soils, extreme heat, flooding, hailstorm, house/building fire, land subsidence, landslide, liquefaction, severe winter storm, tornado, tsunami, wildfire, windstorm, and vol- cano. Although not required by the FEMA Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, manmade hazards such as hazardous materials release and terrorism were also reviewed by the HMWG. In the hazard identification stage, the HMWG determined hazards that potentially threaten Hen- nepin County. The hazard screening process involved narrowing a comprehensive list of haz- ards to those most threatening to Hennepin County. The all- inclusive list included: dams, droughts, earthquakes, extreme temperatures, flooding, hazardous materials, infectious diseases, karst topography, radiological, solar storms, terrorism, thunderstorms, tornadoes, transportation and winter storms. After reviewing the comprehensive list, the HMWG came up with a final list of hazards that would be included in the plan. Table 1 identifies the final list of hazards included in the plan and includes the data collected for hazard identification and the justification for the inclusion in the plan. Hazard Data Collected for Hazard Identificatioit histification for IncluS1011 • Dams . Minnesota Dam Safety Program • Two Hennepin County dams • Minnesota Division of Waters are rated at High hazard level DNR GIS • History of dam incidents NATDAM . Several dams exist through- out Hennepin County Downstream development Droughts . National Climatic Data Center • History of drought in Henne- • Minnesota State Climatology Office pin County. • U.S. Drought Monitor . Hennepin County has a wide variety of agriculture types (row crops, dairy, horse farms, hobby farms, cattle) that would be subject to drought. Earthquakes . University of Minnesota • General knowledge of Min- * Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale nesota earthquake history Proximity to the New Madrid Fault . Page 39 Ilonnouln County NNIS lon Plan Risk Assessment Extreme Tem- . Minnesota State Climatology Office • Continental Polar (cP) air peratures . National Climatic Data Center mass dominates the Upper National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- Midwest ministration (NOAA) • Special populations at risk The Zunis Foundation due to extreme temperatures Flooding . National Climatic Data Center • Both river flooding and flash • Minnesota Climatology Office flooding can occur on a • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- yearly basis in Hennepin ministration (NOAA) County National Severe Storms Laboratory • Flash floods are the #1 (NSSL) weather killer in the U.S. • Several rivers and creeks have flood history Past occurrences of ice jams Hazardous . Minnesota Duty Officer • Extensive history of hazard - Materials . Minnesota Homeland Security and ous material spills in Henne - • Emergency Management (HSEM) pin County • Maple Grove Fire Department • Several fixed facilities lo- 0 National Response Center cated around Hennepin County Many transportation corri- dors are arteries for hazard- ous materials Infectious Dis- . Center for Disease Control (CDC) • History of infectious diseases eases . Hennepin County Public Health Depart- in Hennepin County in- ment cludes: Lyme Disease, West Nile Virus, Pandemic Influ- enza, and Tuberculosis. Radiological • U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission • Hennepin County sits in the • University of Minnesota 50 Mile Ingestion Pathway • Minnesota Homeland Security and Zone of the Monticello Nu- Emergency Management (HSEM) clear Generating Plant Several fixed facilities with radiological materials . Table 1: Hazards Included in the Plan Page 40 Nennauin County EN18091 Plan Risk Assessment Hazard Data Collected for Hazard Identification Justification for Inclusion Terrorism . Code of Federal Regulations • History of domestic terrorism • Minnesota Joint Analysis Center at the University of Minne- (MNJAC) sota • The federal and state govern- ments have advised every jurisdiction to consider the terrorism hazard • Heightened security concerns after September 11, 2001 Thunderstorms . National Climatic Data Center • Thunderstorms and their haz- • Minnesota State Climatology Office ards have caused millions of • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- dollars in damage to Henne - ministration (NOAA) pin County National Severe Storms Laboratory • Thunderstorms are a county - (NSSL) wide hazards Hennepin County GIS Division • Injuries and death have oc- curred due to thunderstorms in Hennepin County Tornadoes . National Climatic Data Center • Millions of dollars in damage • • Minnesota State Climatology Office have occurred due to torna- • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- does in Hennepin County. ministration (NOAA) . Hennepin County has seen • National Severe Storms Laboratory both injuries and death from (NSSL) tornadoes • Hennepin County GIS Division • Hennepin County has seen over 40 tornadoes since 1820 Transportation . MNDOT . Yearly car accidents Metropolitan Airports Commission • I -35 Bridge Collapse • National Pipeline Mapping System • History of airline incidents Hennepin County Transportation Sys- • Daily transport of hazardous tems Plan. materials thru the county Winter Storms • National Climatic Data Center • Continental Polar (0) air • Minnesota State Climatology Office mass causes winter storms • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- • Utility disruption due to win - ministration (NOAA) ter storms is a common oc- currence • Page 41 Hennepin Ceunri NNISUen Plan Risk Assessment 3.1.2 Eliminated Hazards During the hazard screening, the HMWG determined that a number of hazards would not be included in the profiling step because they were not prevalent hazards within the County, were found to pose only minor or very minor threats the county compared to the other hazards. Ta- ble 2 gives a brief description of those hazards and the reason for their exclusion from the list. Table 2: Summary of Hazards Excluded from hazard Profiling Hazard I)escription Reason for Exclusion Wildland Fire Fire in forests, grasslands, prairies, or other Wildland fires are a seldom oc- natural areas, not involving structure fires currence in Hennepin County (although wildland fires may threaten struc- tures or vice versa) Karst Topogra- Karst topography is landscape created by Although Hennepin County has phy groundwater dissolving sedimentary rock a number of springs, and cov- . such as limestone. This creates land forms ered karst with more than 100 such as shafts, tunnels, caves, and sink- feet of sediment on top. There holes. have been no incidents of groundwater pollution as a re- sult of karst topography in re- cent years. Solar Storms Solar flares are intense, temporary releases The frequency of flares is very of energy. The energy arrives into Earth low. and effects technological systems such as power grids, satellites, and radio communi- cations. Minnesota Karst Lands ween.in p vx ..N .an 1YOYaMw.uw w..wi.w.c ww...e.YM Y ..n....Y.rw.wa wn Y�.M.wMY.F.MwYwn.. Hazards such as Wildland Fires, solar storms, and Karst Topography have been eliminated from the 2010 Hennepin county Mitigation Plan Page 42 Nennepin County Mit UMOR Plan Risk Assessment 3.1.3 Profiling Hazards A hazard profile asks the question: What is the potential impact of identified hazards on the community? The hazard profile helps determine how each haz- ard will affect the community, how often each hazard may oc- cur, and where the hazards might take place. We began the haz- ard profiles by looking up information on past occurrences _ throughout the county. Sources of information of information for past occurrences came from a wide variety of areas such as:..�.. "� the Minnesota State Climatology Office, the National Climatic Data Center, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admini - 'r ' stration (NOAA), the Minnesota Department of Natural Re- _ -.�.,. sources (DNR), the Minnesota Division of Homeland Security ••�°•�:.,� �� • e� & Emergency Management, the National Response Center, lo- cal fire departments..etc. These hazard histories developed dur- ing this step provides more extensive information with details about how each historical event actually affected the commu- Hazard Profile Example nity. The second part of the hazard profile is to assess the likelihood of occurrence and the potential impact of each hazard. Some hazards are more likely to occur in a particular community than others. Each Hennepin County municipality assessed the likelihood of occurrence and potential • impact of each hazard identified. A likelihood of occurrence is not an actual prediction but basted on regional data and local historical evidence. Potential impact is a combination of size of effected area, potential for causing casualties, economic effects, and speed of onset. For the size of effected area, each hazard will be different. For example, a blizzard might affect an en- tire state or even several states, while a flood might only affect a portion of a county or munici- pality. Although the size of the affected area is not always indicative of the destructive poten- tial of the hazard (a tornado is a good example), generally the larger the affected area, the more problematic the hazard event is to a community. Potential for causing casualties simply refers to the number of casualties (deaths or injuries) that can be ex- pected if a particular hazard event occurs. The economic ef- fects are the monetary damages incurred from a hazard event and include both public and private damage. Direct physical damage costs, as well as indirect impact costs such as lost busi- ness and tax revenue, are included as part of the monetary dam- ages. Finally, the speed of onset takes into account how much warning time is available before an event takes place. Spring flooding in Dayton, MN Page 43 nenneain County mmoadon Plan Risk Assessment • Once all Hennepin County municipalities came up with a score for their hazards (likelihood of occurrence and potential impact), the HMWG separated the score sheets by Emergency Plan- ning Group and their scores were divided by the number of cities and categories to find a me- dium score. The Emergency Planning Groups break down as follows: Lake Minnetonka Planning Group: Corcoran, Deephaven (Woodland), Greenfield, Mound, Orono (Long Lake, Minnetonka Beach and Spring Park), Medina (Loretto), Minnetrista (St. Bonifacius), South Lake Minnetonka (Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood and Tonka Bay), Wayzata, West Hennepin (Maple Plain and Independence), Hennepin County Sheriff s Office, and Three Rivers Park District). North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Dayton, Golden Valley, Hassan Township, Maple Grove, Medicine Lake, Osseo, Plymouth, Robbinsdale, Rogers, St. Anthony, West Metro Fire (Crystal and New Hope), and Hennepin County Sheriff's Office. South Hennepin Planning Group: Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport, Minnetonka, Richfield, St. Louis Park, and the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office. Minneapolis Planning Group: Minneapolis • 3.1.4 Inventory Assets Steps one and two of the risk assessment process determine whether a community might experi- ence various types of intensities of hazards, what the level of impact those hazards might have, and where within the community those hazards are likely to oc- cur. Step three helps answer the question: "What will be af- 11 Oity of Edna fected by the hazard even " "�"y t? The first task in this step involves ■ creating a list and description of assets located throughout the - v community, identifying each one on the map, and tallying up �°- the total most of assets. Particularly important to identify are + ' z the community's critical facilities that are necessary for the health and safety of the population. Lifeline utilities and other "'' y +' infrastructure should also be listed, including water systems, - .. communication lines and energy services. Hennepin County a ' used three sources to gather the asset information: FEMA's 45► HAZUS MH software, Hennepin County GIS data sets and city data. - Both County and city data helped to identify critical assets in the floodplains. Page 44 Hennepin County mm anon Plan Risk Assessment 3.1.5 Estimate Losses The fourth step in the risk assessment process answers aw EARTkHU - WIND - the question: "What could the community lose in a hazard event ?" In this step, (results forthcoming) _ . . Hennepin County estimates losses using dollar E s ti ma ti ng P ' amounts that indicate how the community could be _ impacted economically by the various hazards that ` threaten it. HAZUS -MH (Hazards United States - Multi- Hazard), the loss estimation software produced by FEMA, has been useful in carrying out this process. A loss estimate assesses the level of damage that could happen to each individual asset in the inventory from each type of hazard, for Hennepin County, that hazard is flooding. This in- volves calculating the losses that could occur to each structure, based on the building's replace- ment value. The loss to the contents of each structure is also added to the calculation if possi- ble. When added together, these various figures provide an estimated total loss for assets in the community if a natural hazard event occurs. The loss estimation step of the risk assessment provides one more piece of information illustrat- ing the community's level of vulnerability. The ultimate goal is to reduce that vulnerability; knowing exactly what is at stake can help develop the most appropriate mitigation strategies for • achieving that goal. exactly what is at stake can help develop the most appropriate mitigation strategies for achieving that goal. 3.1.6 Hazard Profiles A hazard profile is a description of the physical characteristics of a hazard and a determination of various hazard descriptors, including likelihood of occurrence, size of affected area, potential for causing causalities, economic impacts, and speed of onset. The hazard data that were col- lected in the hazard identification process were mapped to determine the geographic extent of the hazards in each jurisdiction in Hennepin County and the level of risk associated with each hazard. The hazards were then given a risk level of high, medium or low depending on several factors unique to the hazard. The hazards identified and profiled for Hennepin County, as well as the data used to profile each hazard are presented in this section. The hazards are presented in alphabetical order, and this does not signify level of importance to the Hennepin County Working Group (HCWG). 3.1.7 Summary— Impact of Hazards When identifying the overall impact of our hazards, the cities were asked to score them across four categories: size of affected area, potential for causing casualties, economic impacts, and speed of onset. The columns on the table represent the following: Page 45 NOnnepin 890W NNIBUOn Plan Risk Assessment . Size of Affected Area - Each hazard affects a geographic area. For example, a blizzard might affect an entire state or even several states, while a flood might only affect a portion of a county or municipality. Although size of the affected area is not always indicative of the destructive potential of the hazard (a tornado is a good example), generally the larger the affected area, the more problematic the hazard event is to a community. Potential for Causing Casualties - Potential for causing casualties refers to the number of casualties (deaths or injuries) that can be expected if a particular hazard event occurs. Economic Effects - Economic effects are the monetary damages incurred from a hazard event and include both public and private damage. Direct physical damage costs, as well as indirect impact costs such as lost business and tax revenue, are included as part of the total monetary damages. Speed of Onset - Speed of onset takes into account how much warning time is available before an event takes place. Impact of Hazards Table Potential • Square Impact Speed of for Annual Impact Miles on Onset Causing Economic Hazard Chance Location Affected Property Casualties Impact Dams 1% Communities NA Low High Low Low Drought 18% Countywide 606.80 Low Low Low Moderate Earthquakes 1% Countywide 606.80 Low High Low Low Extreme Temperatures 33% Countywide 606.80 Low Low Low Low Flooding 40% Floodplains 109.05 Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Hazardous 606.80 Materials 100% Communities Low High Low Moderate Infectious 606.80 Diseases NA Countywide Low Low Low Low Radiological 1% Countywide 606.80 Low Moderate Low Low Terrorism 1% Communities 606.80 Low High High Moderate Thunderstorms 100% Countywide 606.80 Moderate Low Low Low Tornado 32% 1 Countywide 606.80 High Moderate Moderate Low Transportation 100% Communities 606.80 1 Low I High High Low Winter Storms 100% Countywide 606.80 1 Low Low Low Low 3.2 Hazard Profiles Page 46 Honnopin County Mwoatlon Plan Risk Assessment • enne in Coun p y tes • Dams Radiological Drought Terrorism Earthquake Thunderstorms Extreme Temperatures Tornadoes Flooding Transportation Hazardous Materials Winter Storms Infectious Diseases • Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Dam Facts • Minnesota's Dam D a m S Safety Program was created in F 1978 in response 3.2.1 Hazard Description to the federal ` Dam Safety Act. Dams provide many benefits and are an important part of our civil works ♦ Minnesota Stat- infrastructure. They are built for a variety of reasons, including utes, Section maintenance of lake levels, flood control, power production, and water 103G.515 author- supply. Dams fail due to inadequate design, improper operation, izes the DNR inadequate maintenance, earthquakes, or unusually large floods. Dam commissioner to failure can result in the quick release of all the water in the reservoir; the inspect dams and rapid and unexpected flooding downstream can cause loss of life and issue orders di- significant property damages. recting dam own- ers to make nec- Dam owners have a clear responsibility to properly maintain, repair, and essary changes. operate their dams. Existing dams may also have to be improved to meet current dam safety criteria. If development downstream raises the hazard • Minnesota associated with a potential failure, the owner may be required to bring the dam into compliance with a higher standard commensurate with the new conditions. Hennepin County has 20 dams listed in Minnesota's component of the national computerized dam inventory database called NATDAM. DEPARTMENT OF NATDAM was developed in cooperation with the Federal Emergency NATURAL RESOURCES Management Agency and the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, • Dams designated and presently includes information only on those dams meeting the as High Hazard threshold of state dam safety rules. NATDAM can store information on are inspected an- dam name, location, purpose, hazard classification, structural condition, nually and lower and about 30 other data elements. hazard dams are Below is a table of the dams in Hennepin County, which includes dam inspected less name, location of the dam and hazard rating. A map of the dam locations frequently by is on page 3. The hazard rating scale ranges from High (H) to Significant DNR dam safety (S) to Low (L). The ratings are given by the Minnesota Dam Safety engineers. Program of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. • Page 47 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Dam Facts Dam Failure • The owner of a History dam could be Coon Rapids Coon Rapids S found liable for Hennepin County Elm Creek Champlin S damages incurred has had two dam Lake Minnetonka Minnetonka L Lock & Dam #1 Minneapolis H from a failure or incidents since 1980. Mac Pond 2 Bloomington L misoperation. In 1987 a lower dam Medicine Lake Plymouth L The DNR com- powerhouse collapse Mills Pond Minnetonka L missioner may resulted in a Morris T Baker Reserve Medina L make grants to temporary local units of Nine Mile Creek Bloomington L drawdown of the Normandale Lake Bloomington L government for upper pool at the St. Plymouth Creek Plymouth L dam repair, re- 'Plymouth Creek Pond mouth L construction, or Anthony falls dam, y Plymouth removal. Fund- and in 1999 a Purgatory Creek Eden Prairie L ing for repair or leaking air bladder Rice Lake Maple Grove L removal is pro- was identified and Riley Creek Eden Prairie L the le Rile Lake Eden Prairie L vided by g patched at the Coon Silver Lake Shorewood L islature through Rapids Dam. Snelling Lake Outlet Bloomington L state bonding ap- propriations. Helping to mitigate St. Anthony Falls Lower Minneapolis . S • Hennepin County the chances of dam St. Anthony Falls Upper Minneapolis H has seen two dam failures within the incidents since county is the 1980; one oc- Minnesota Dam Safety Program. The Minnesota's Dam Safety Program curred in 1987 at was created in 1978 in response to the federal Dam Safety Act. A series of the St. Anthony major dam failures killed scores of people in the 1970's and prompted Falls Dam and Congress to pass the act to improve dam safety nationally. the other at the Coon Rapids Minnesota's program includes enabling legislation, agency rules for Dam in 1999. construction and operation, creation of a dam database, permitting requirements, regular inspections, repair of state -owned dams, and cost— share grants for dam repair by local units of government. The Dam Safety Program regulates the repair, operation, design, construction, and removal of dams. Both privately and publicly owned dams are regulated. The program sets minimum standards for dams Coon Rapids, MN Dam regarding safety, design, construction, and operation. These standards are implemented through inspections, permitting, and correcting deficiencies. Page 48 i Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Hennepin County Water Hazards Dams, Floodplain Areas, Lakes & Streams Dam LocatlonlRelative Hazard RaUng: Dams data gathered from the Department of Natural ® High Resources' (DNR) Dam Safety Division. Lakes and streams . Significant datasets gathered from the ON R. Floodplain zones gathered Q Low from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Streams Lakes FEMA Floodplain Areas - 100 -year Floodplain } " _ 500 -year Floodplain g9` ELM CREEK r COON RAPIDS � � CE LAKE t � . •.. g ' r r • ^_— k SPLYMOUTH CREEK POND MORRIS, BAKER RESERVE t PLYMOUTH CREEK e ` MEDICINE LAKE' t . - 111 7 f XILLS��D STANTHONYFAL LS- UPPER w y �..•_ t 14f ST ANTHONY FALLS - LOWER rMINNETONKA 1 LOCK AND DAM NO !1 p; �f ' SILVER LAKE SNELLING LAKE OUTLET MAC POND 2j t' �NORMANDALELAKE PURGATORY CREEK -L U R! LEY LAKE A � Q NINE MILE CREEK RI LEY CREEK' N Map created by the Hennepin County EP Division a January 29, 2010. Hennepin County makes no 1.25 2.5 5 warranty, representation, or guarantee asto the content, accuracy, timeliness, or completeness I t t t 1 t t t I of any of the information provided herein Mlles • Page 49 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Dam Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact Hi h Im act Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact I High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact Hi h Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Im act Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact Hi h Im act Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Page 50 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment t . rC 5'. Hennepin County Drought Facts D r o u h t The drought of - z' 1988 had wide- I spread impacts, 3.2.2 Hazard Description including $40 billion in $40 A drought is defined as a period of abnormally dry weather sufficiently mated direct eco- prolonged for the lack of water to cause serious hydrologic imbalance in nomic losses and the affected area. In easier to understand terms, a drought is a period of costs in the U.S. unusually persistent dry weather that persists long enough to cause serious problems such as crop damage and/or water supply shortages. The • During the severity of the drought depends upon the degree of moisture deficiency, drought of 1910, the duration, and the size of the affected area. Droughts can kill crops, only 11.54 inches grazing land, edible plants, and even in severe cases, trees. If the drought of rain fell on the is brief, it is known as a dry spell, or partial drought. A partial drought is Twin Cities the usually defined as more that 14 days without appreciable precipitation, entire year. whereas a drought may last for years. • During 1988, The most commonly used drought definitions are based on temperature at meteorological, agricultural, hydrological, and socioeconomic effects: the Minneapolis/ St. Paul Airport Meteorological - is a measure of departure of precipitation from normal. exceeded it de- Due to climatic differences, what might be considered a drought in one grees Fahrenheit location of the country may not be a drought in another location. on 44 days, 8 Agriculture — Refers to a situation where the amount of moisture in the days more than soil no longer meets the needs of a particular crop. the old record set back in 1936. Hydrological — Occurs when surface and subsurface water supplies are below normal. • Since 1980, ma- jor droughts Socioeconomic — Refers to the situation that occurs when physical water within the U.S. shortages begin to affect people. alone have re- sulted in costs exceeding $100 Drought History billion (National Data There have been several droughts that have affected Hennepin County in Climatic Center years past, some more damaging than others. One of the most significant droughts to affect the County was the drought of 1976 -1977. The 1976- 77 drought was widespread and by some measures was exceeded only by Page 51 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Hennepin County Drought Facts the severity of conditions during the 1930's. In spring of 1976, the general lack of precipitation was statewide. Shallow residential and farm wells ♦ During the 1863 began to go dry in June. Some municipalities also were affected. drought, all com- g � Precipitation continued to be much less than normal for the rest of 1976 mercial naviga- and gradually returned to normal during the summer of 1977. Minnesota's tion was sus- State Climatology P Office records show the precipitation total for the Twin pended on the Cities to be 16.50 inches well below the 27 inch a based on the Mississippi River ow average in St. Paul. The Twin Cities Monthly & Yearly Twin Cities Total Average). levels were so low; cattle could Another severe drought that had an impact on Hennepin County was the be seen wading drought of 1988. A nationwide event, the Drought of 1988 intensified in across the river June with Minneapolis receiving only 0.22 inches of rain, making it the north and south driest June ever recorded in the metro area. The June average temperature of the city. for Minneapolis was 74.4 degrees Fahrenheit, which equaled the second ♦ Drought is a nor - Warmest June ever. Statewide temperatures ranged from 6 to 9 degrees mal part of the above normal. By the end of June most of the state was classified as either climatic cycle. in "severe" or "extreme" drought. Total ProcgNotiaR O 2008 .1Wyuo128. 1— N. 28. 2008 Nab 1 G. G. XI08 The drought continued into July with temperatures six degrees above r,r.,r,ra normal in Minneapolis and rainfall 1.5 to 3 inches below normal. Soil moisture level reached record lows at most University of Minnesota s ac ed eco d o ty Experiment Stations. In the Minneapolis area, maximum temperatures of s 90 degrees or greater were recorded 17 days, a record high for July. Most r.a locations reported maximum temperatures exceeding 100 degrees at least ua once during the month. aRw Giwwrlryy ORrr aMR MMrrr Minnesota's total By August, the drought began to subside but not after severe agricultural precipitation depar- damage was caused and several records were broken across Hennepin ture from normal County and the State of Minnesota: during the 2006 ➢ June precipitation averaged 1.40 inches statewide, replacing the old drought. record low of 1.50 inches set in 1910. )0- May through August average temperature at 69.7 degrees was ♦ The driest August on record for the nearly 2 degrees higher than the old record set in 1936. Twin Cities is .20 ➢ Minneapolis -St. Paul Airport had 44 days with 90 degrees or more. (two tenths of an The old record has been 36 days in 1936. inch) in 1925. ➢ The Palmer Drought Index dropped below -7 in northwest Minnesota for the first time since record keeping began at the turn- Page 52 I SEgnoNONE Risk Assessment Hennepin County Drought Facts of -the- century. The old record had been -6 in September 1934. ♦ Legislation en- ➢ Groundwater levels throughout the state reached new record low acted in 1990 levels. mandated the De- partment of Natu- ➢ The Mississippi River at St. Paul reached low levels previously ral Resources to experienced only in 1934 and 1976, prompting the first total prepare a drought sprinkling ban in Minneapolis and St. Paul. plan. (Minnesota Statues, section The 1988 Drought (based on the Drought Severity Classification). 103G.293). 1988 A deteriorating crop during the 2007 Minne- sota drought. • • Between 1963 and 1965, the federal govern- ment spent $3.3 billion on drought response. (National Science Foundation, June Perhaps the most devastating weather driven event in American History, the 1984). drought of the 1920's and 1930's significantly impacted Minnesota's ♦ The winter of economic, social, and natural landscapes. Abnormally dry and hot growing 1986 -1987 was season weather throughout the better part of two decades turned Minnesota one of the warm- farm fields to dust and small lakes into muddy ponds. The parched soil was est and driest in easily taken up by strong winds, often turning day into night. The drought Minnesota's re- peaked with the heat of the summer of 1936, setting many high temperature corded history, records that still stand today. with tempera- tures 12 degrees above normal from Dec. through Feb. Page 53 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Hennepin County Drought Facts ♦ The Palmer Drought Severity Index was cre- ated by Wayne Palmer in the 1960's and uses INN temperature and — - - - -- rainfall informa- tion in a formula to determine dry- ness. It has be- come the semi- official drought index. View of the St. Croix River during the drought of 1931. The Drought Severity Classification • Drought intensity categories are based on six key indicators and numerous supplementary indicators. The accompanying drought severity classification f` table shows the ranges for each indicator for each dryness level. Because the A farmer checks the ranges of the various indicators often don't coincide, the final drought remains of his farm category tends to be based on what the majority of the indicators show. The near Appleton, MN analysts producing the map also weighs the indices according to how well during the summer of they perform in various parts of the country and at different times of the year. 1936. Also, additional indicators are often needed in the West, where winter snowfall has a strong bearing on water supplies. To look at the Drought ♦ FEMA issued an Severity Classification map, please go here. Emergency Dec - laration on June 17, 1976 due to East Central Minnesota (Twin Cities) Annual Precipitation the drought year (Disaster #3year Seasonal variability occurs, as different air masses are dominant. Nearly two - thirds of Minnesota's annual precipitation falls during the growing season of May through September, a period during which Gulf of Mexico moisture is often available. Dry spells occur when this moisture source is obstructed or when atmospheric patterns divert storm systems around Minnesota. When hot, dry air prevails, increased evaopotransportation combines with deficient rainfall to create drought conditions. Drought can occur in all areas of Page 54 SECTIONo Risk Assessment Hennepin County Drought Facts Minnesota; however it is more likely in western and northwestern areas more distant from Gulf of Mexico moisture. Below is a graph of East Central Minnesota's annual precipitation from 1830 to 2000. The drought years are identified by the dots closest to the horizontal (Year) portion of the scale. East Central Minnesota Annual Precipitation Protesting farmers bring a starving cow and horse 44 to the steps of the capital 40 04--40.44 inches (1811) to dramatize the desper- 3 • a. '• • ate conditions during the 32 • • 1930's Dust Bowl. 28 . • . + . . �• •• • •• • r • . • .. . • � 24 • •• . ••a • a a • • _ 20 M • a • * •a a a • • a • • ♦ The National 2 a + a Drought Mitiga- 1 tion Center $ 10.21 inches (1810)x. 6 yearmoving average (NDMC) helps o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m v un LO i. m M o ry m 'Cr Ln co r• m M o people and insti- m M m M M m M M rn m m M m M M m M CO tutions develop Year and implement measures to re- duce societal vul- nerability to drought. I Farmers Holiday Asso- ciation Works Progress Administration Reps meet to discuss the 1936 drought conditions. • Page 55 l SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Drought Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact • Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: P g Y g g : 1? High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact • Page 56 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Earthquake Facts • A strong earth- E a r t h q u a k e s quake on Febru- ary 28,1925, cen- tered in the St. 3.2.3 Hazard Description P OUTER c o RE Lawrence River LowER region near la Earthquakes are produced by INNER CORE MANTLE Malbaie, Quebec, movement of rock in the earth's Canada, was felt interior. Most earthquakes widely in the occur when solid rock masses, called tectonic plates, move past on Northeastern another along fracture planes called faults. The fault movement creates a U.S. The shock series of waves through the earth's crust, and we perceive these waves at was lightly felt in the surface as the shaking of an earthquake. Minneapolis. Earthquake History • The first earth- The Midwest of the United States is far from any plate margin, but even quake in Minne- here, earthquakes do occasionally happen. Although the earthquake - sota was in 1860. generating mechanism in the Midwest is not completely understood, it Although the ex- may be related to the westward drift of the North American plate away • act date is un- from its spreading center, the Mid - Atlantic ridge, toward the subduction known, the shock and transform zones along the Pacific coast. This westward drift sets up a was fairly strong subtle but pervasive compression that is orientated roughly east -west for in the central part most of North America, and this stress can reactivate minor movement of the State. along some ancient faults. • The largest earth- In general, earthquakes in the Midwest are less frequent and much smaller quake ever to oc- than those that occur near plate margins. cur in Minnesota However, there is one area, the New Madrid was near Morris seismic zone between St. Louis, Missouri, and in Stevens Memphis, Tennessee, that has the potential for County, with a generating major earthquakes. Such an earthquake Magnitude of 4.6 sequence occurring today would be devastating to and an Intensity nearby cities, but probably not cause as much of VI. major damage as far north as Minnesota. New Madrid 1811 Mer- • More than anvil- Minnesota has one of the lowest occurrence levels calli Intensity Scale lion earthquakes of earthquakes in the United States, but a total of occur around the 19 small to moderate earthquakes have been documented since 1860. world each year. Minnesota earthquakes, like those elsewhere in the Midwest, are • Page 57 SECTIONo Risk Assessment Earthquake Facts attributed to minor reactivation of ancient faults in response to modern k stresses. The two largest earthquakes in Minnesota were in Staples in 1917 and in Morris in 1975 at 4.6 and 4.8 on the Richter scale. If earthquakes l larger than 5.5 magnitude were to occur in Minnesota, it is likely that their 1 rate of recurrence would be many hundreds or perhaps thousands of years. The last earthquake to be felt in Hennepin County was the 1993 Dumont earthquake. The magnitude of the Minnesota Seismic Dumont Hazard Map earthquake was a ♦ Tremors were felt 4.1 on the Richter in Minneapolis scale, was felt over on November 1, 69,600 square o s ow 1935, after a kilometers (about S` p , P strong earthquake 27,000 square . ' . �En e occurred near miles), and was P. My Timiskaming, associated with 0 0 ry Canada. intensity V -VI DII_m ♦ Minnesota earth- near the epicenter. .... • quakes are of sci- Hennepin County entific interest received an because they pro- intensity of II -III vide information on the Modified Mercalli Intensity on crustal struc- Mercalli intensity or isoseismal map of the Dumont, ture and the re - scale. The MN earthquake of June 4, 1 993• The different intensity gional stress Modified Mercalli levels include the following effects. field. Intensity Scale gives an Intensity II- III — Sensation of light vibrations or move- * Earthquakes indication of the ment, felt most commonly by people at rest indoors. strike suddenly, intensity of the without warning. earthquake, while Intensity IV — Dishes rattling, creaking in upper floors Earthquakes can the Richter scale of house, sensation like a heavy object striking building occur at any time refers to its or a heavy truck rolling by. of the year and at magnitude. Intensity V— Pictures swinging on walls, small or un- any time of day stable objects being upset, very minor cracking in weak or night. masonry, such as plaster. • Page 58 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Earthquake Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability L Lo w Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability • Low Im act Moderate Impact High Impact Page 59 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Extreme Temp Facts ♦ The all -time daily Extreme high temperature in Hennepin Temperatures County was in Minneapolis on July 14, 1936 3.2.4 Hazard Description with a high of 108 degrees The air mass that dominates the region where Hennepin County is located Fahrenheit. makes the county susceptible to extreme temperatures. An air mass is a large body of air of relatively similar temperature and humidity that ♦ The hottest day covers thousands of square miles. Typically, air masses are classified ever recorded in according to the characteristics of their source region or area of formation. Hennepin County The air mass that dominates Hennepin County is the continental polar was in Minnea- ( polis on July 13, 1936 with a high A continental polar (cP) air mass originates from the snow covered of 105 and a low regions of northern Canada, and has characteristics of very low dewpoints, of 86, averaging cold temperatures, and a high degree of stability during the winter months. out to 96 degrees. Although continental polar air masses are also around during the summer months, they are less cool than during the winter. During these summer months, a weakening jet stream and strong southerly winds `O bring in very hot and A O 84, humid air, and less o MP stable conditions. CP ' This continental • The all -time daily MP low temperature polar air mass makes for extreme in Hennepin Coun was in temperature swings ty from summer to Minneapolis on C T mT winter. + January 21, 1888 mT mT OF=ti>I o with a low of —41 degrees Fahren- heit. r Hennepin County's weather extremes are due to the conti- nental polar air mass that dominates the Upper Midwest. • Page 60 SECTIONoNE Risk Assessment Extreme Temp Facts Extreme Temperature History t • The coldest day Extreme Cold ever recorded in Hennepin County has had a strong history of Hennepin County extremely cold temperatures. Due to the was in Minnea- continental polar air mass, each winter can polis on January bring the chance of seeing sub zero weather 22, 1936 with a conditions. On January 13, 1994 an arctic air mass settled over Hennepin high of —17 de- County. From January 13 to January 19, temperatures dropped from -10 grees, a low of — on January 13 to -27 on January 19. The high temperature on the January 34 degrees, for an 18 was -16 below. The University of Minnesota on the Twin Cities average of -26 campus closed on the 18' due to the cold and the governor closed all degrees. public schools. • Then longest pe- On January 31, 1996, some of the coldest weather to ever hit Hennepin riod of below County settled over the area and remained entrenched through February 4. zero temperatures Minneapolis set three new record low temperatures as well as recording the was 186 consecu- second coldest day on record on February 2. A mean temperature of 25 tive hours from degrees below zero was measured that day with a high of -17 and a low of 8:00 p.m. De- 32 degrees below zero. This was within two degrees of tying the all -time cember 31, 1911 record low temperature set in the Twin Cities and the coldest temperature through 1:00 p.m. recorded this century. The temperatures were so cold that the governor January 8, 1912. closed all schools that day. Another extreme cold event took place on December 24, 1996. A strong low pressure system that deposited heavy snow over northern Minnesota also brought down very cold Canadian air. Temperatures fell to 15 to 35 degrees below zero. In addition, the high temperature on Christmas Day in Minneapolis was only 9 degrees below zero. Combined with the record Ip '`» low temperature that morning of -22 degrees Fahrenheit, the mean temperature for Christmas Day was 16 degrees below zero. Christmas Day, 1996 set a new record for being the coldest day on record for the Twin Cities metro going back to when modern day records began in 1871. The temperature in Minneapolis fell to -27 degrees below zero. When you talk about extreme cold you also need to talk about wind chill. The wind chill temperature is how cold people feel when outside. Wind chill is based on the rate of heat loss from exposed skin caused by wind and cold. As the wind increases, it draws heat from the body, driving Page 61 SECTIONoNE Risk Assessment Extreme Temp Facts down skin temperature and eventually the internal body temperature. • The longest pe- Finding out the coldest wind chill ever in Hennepin County is tricky riod of 100 de- because in November 2001, the formula on how to calculate the wind chill grees Fahrenheit was changed. Perhaps the coldest wind chill Hennepin County has seen was or higher was 5 -67 degrees Fahrenheit with the new formula ( -87 with the old formula) consecutive days back on January 22, 1936. The temperature was -34 with a wind speed of from July 10 through July 14, 20 mph. All traffic in the Minneapolis area was severely hampered and a 1936. number of fatalities were caused by the cold. ♦ The longest pe- Ol NWS W i n d c h i l l Chart =..., -- riod of overnight Temperature (*F) minimum tem- peratures of —20 36 31 25 19 13 7 1 5 -11 -16. degrees Fahren- 34 z7 21 ,s 9 3 a -lo -ls heit or below was 32 zs 19 13 6 0 7 -13 20 30 24 17 11 4 2 9 -15 6 consecutive 2g z3 16 9 3 a -11 -17 nights, and oc- curred twice. ze 21 la 7 o a -la From February 7- 27 20 13 e ' s -ls 45 2a 19 12 s 2 • is 12, 1899 and so 26 19 l z 4 -3 -10 -17 • 0 January 30 - 55 zs is 11 4 3 11 February 4, 1996. 60 2s n l0 3 4 -11 ■ • The coldest monthly average Where,T Air Temperature (-F) V= Wind Spetc! (mph) Mai- 1 7/01/01 in the history of NWS Wind Chill Chart as of November 1, 2001 Hennepin County was January Wind Chill Teinperature Conipariwn 1912, with an average tempera- ture of —2.7 de- grees I F V_ 0 10 20 30 40 50 6D 70 80 9D 1DD 110 .. A Comparison of the Old Wind Chill Chart and the New Page 62 SECTIONo Risk Assessment Extreme Temp Facts Extreme Heat ♦ The earliest au- Extreme heat is when temperatures are 10 degrees, tumn freeze (or or more, above the average high temperature for the region, and last for temperatures at several weeks. Humid or muggy conditions, which add to the discomfort of or lower than 32 high temperatures, occur when a "dome" of high atmospheric pressure traps degrees) was hazy, damp air near the ground. September 3rd, 1974. Heat kills by pushing the human body beyond its limits. Under normal conditions, the body's internal thermostat produces perspiration that ♦ Heat waves are prolonged peri- evaporates and cools the beyond. However, in extreme heat and high ods of excessive humidity, evaporation is slowed and the body must work extra hard to heat, often com- maintain a normal temperature. bined with exces- Most heat disorders occur because the victim has been overexposed to heat or sive humidity. has over exercised for his or her age and physical condition. Other conditions that can induce heat - related illnesses include stagnant atmospheric conditions and poor air quality. Extreme heat can be just as deadly as other natural hazards due to the nature of the event. Extreme heat doesn't immediately impact people when it sets in, instead it is when the periods of extreme heat • - ��' - last for days and weeks that it takes its toll on people. The elderly are at ♦ In a normal year, particular risk. approximately When talking, you need to mention the heat index. The Heat Index is 175 Americans sometimes referred to as the "apparent temperature ". The Heat Index, given die from extreme heat. Young in degrees Fahrenheit, is a measure of how hot it feels when relative humidity children, elderly is added to the Temper ('F) people, and those actual air 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106 108 110 40 80 81 83 85 88 91 94 97 101 who are sick or temperature. So, 45 80 82 84 87 89 93 96 100 104 109 114 119 124 136 137 overweight are what about the 50 81 83 85 88 91 95 99 103 108 113 118 124 131 137 more likely to 66 81 84 86 89 93 97 101 106 112 117 124 130 137 highest heat index 2" 60 82 84 88 91 95 100 105 110 116 123 129 137 become victims. ever reached in 86 82 85 89 93 98 103 108 114 121 128 136 ♦ Temps that hover Hennepin County? 70 83 86 90 95 100 105 112 119 126 134 10 degrees above The highest heat 75 84 88 92 97 103 109 116 124 132 80 84 89 94 100 106 113 121 129 the average high index value ever 85 85 90 96 102 110 117 126 135 temp for the re- recorded in the 90 86 91 98 105 113 12 131 gion and last for Twin Cities is 96 86 93 100 108 117 several weeks are 1 1100 187 95 103 112 1 defined as ex- believed to be 115 Likelihood of Heat Disorders with prolonged Exposure or Strenuous Activity treme heat. degrees, occurring Caution 6dreme Caution ■ Danger ■ Extreme Danger on July 12, 1995. The National Weather Service's Heat Index • Page 63 SECTIONo Risk Assessment i Extreme Temp Facts There have been several past instances of extreme heat in Hennepin County. The earliest records of extreme heat include the "Dust Bowl' of the 1930's. • Sweltering heat The "Dust Bowl" years of 1930 -36 brought some of the hottest summers on and humidity cli- record to the United States, especially across the Plains, Upper Midwest and maxed on July 12th and 13th, Great Lake States. For the Upper Mississippi River Valley, the first few 1995 with dew- weeks of July 1936 provided the hottest temperatures of that period, points around 80 including many all -time record highs. degrees. Com- bined with tem- From July 5, through July 18, 1936, Minneapolis received the longest period peratures in the of 90 degree temperatures with 14 consecutive days. Also, from July 10, upper 90's pro- through July 14, 1936, Minneapolis received the longest period of 100 duced heat indi- degrees or higher, with 5 consecutive days. Minneapolis set their all -time ces in the 105 to record high on July 13, 1936 with a temperature of 105 degrees. 120 degree range in Minneapolis. Another extreme heat instance occurred in the summer of 1995. July 10 ♦ Hennepin through the 14' saw high temperatures between 91 and 101 degrees. County's warm- 1996 Heat Wave: MinneapolisiSt. Paul est monthly aver- Heat Inds _ 13 1996 vs. 1961 1995 Average For July Index: July g 13 age occurred in July 1936 with 120 Dan Brous Zone • an average tem- 1 04 108 g Very High Risk Zone 98 97 peratures of 81.4 100 degrees. Risk zone 78 61 83 83 81 uL 80 77 67 Moderate Risk <;�• -„ 60 0 40 • Frostbite is the medical condi- 20 ■ 1961 --1919 90 July 0 A ® Average tion wherein lo- calized damage is 0 caused to skin 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 and other tissues AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM due to extreme The Heat Index values on this chart are derived from airport weather cold. station readings, carried out in thee shade, away from sunlight and other radiant heat. In July of 1999, two consecutive heat waves hit Hennepin County. The first Page 64 SECTIONoNE Risk Assessment Extreme Temp Facts occurred from July 23 through July 25. A massive upper ridge over the central and eastern United States enabled heat to build into Minnesota. Heat indices ♦ 1936 wasn't just ranged from 95 to 110 the afternoon of the 23, 90 to 105 on the 24, and an extremely hot climaxed at 95 to 115 on the 25th before a cold front moved in. Indices only year; it was also a dropped into the 70s the mornings of the 24th and 25th. Dew points in the year of extremely middle and upper 70s were common, along with temperatures topping out in cold tempera- tures. On Janu- the lower and middle 90s. ary 22nd, 1936 Less than one week after the first heat wave, central and south central Minneapolis broke a record Minnesota were belted with even greater heat, especially on the 30th. The for the coldest morning of the 29th started with lows in the 70s and dew points in the middle wind chill ever 60s to middle 70s, producing heat indices from 70 to 85. With afternoon highs recorded at —67 well into the 90s, and dew points ranging from the middle 60s to upper 70s, degrees. heat indices climbed to the 95 to 114 range. Southern Minnesota bore the brunt of the heat this day with numerous triple digit indices. By 0900 CST on the 30th, the heat index had already climbed past 100 at Minneapolis /St. Paul and many other locales. High temperatures soared into the middle and upper 90s. Dew points neared 80, and some spots even exceeded 80. At 0755 CST, • Minneapolis /St. Paul (MSP) tied an all -time record high dew point of 84 (equaling a mark set in 1995). ♦ January is Hen- nepin County's Two more consecutive heat waves occurred in Hennepin County in the coldest month summer of 2001. The first wave hit on July 30 and lasted through August I s ` with an average Temperatures on July 30 soared into the upper 80s and lower 90s across a temperature of large portion of central and southern Minnesota, while dew points climbed only 22 degrees into the middle 70s to lower 80s, resulting in triple digit heat indexes during Fahrenheit. De- cember ranks the afternoon and evening. second with an During the early morning hours of the July 31, dew points remained in the average high of 70s, therefore nighttime heat indexes only dropped to the upper 70s and lower 26 degrees Fahr- 26 eit. 80s. In fact, from 1000 CST July 30 to 1600 CST July 31 inclusive, Minneapolis -St. Paul (MSP) set a record with 31 consecutive hours during which the dew point was equal to or greater than 74 (the previous record was R 25 hours in July 1977). On July 31, temperatures climbed slightly higher, while dew points remained in the middle 70s to lower 80s. Heat index values reached triple digits prior to noon in most areas. The second extensive heat wave persisted for five days (August 4 -8th), and resulted in five fatalities in Hennepin County. Hot weather and tropical -like humidity pervaded the region, as virtually all stations registered highs in the • Page 65 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Extreme Temp Facts 90's all five days. Most locales noted highs in the middle and upper 90s, but there were two places which topped out in triple digits. Minneapolis -St. Paul • From July 9 (MSP) reached 98 or 99 three straight days (August 5 -7) when highs were through July 17, 2005 the tem- 98, 99 and 98 respectively; the highs at MSP on August 6 and August 7 set perature re- records. Record low minima at MSP were also established three straight mained above 90 days: on August 6 when the low was only 80, on August 7 when the low was degrees for 9 only 76, and again August 8th when the low only dropped to 77 degrees. consecutive days. This extended period of extreme heat ranks as the 3rd longest streak of at or above 90 degree highs since 1891 in Minneapolis. • Heat stroke is a life - threatening condition. The victims tempera- • ture control s Y s- tem, which pro- duces sweating to cool the body stops working. The body tem- perature can rise so high that brain damage and death may result if the body is not cooled quickly. Use A fat to lower [I wAw fttt temperaturc APWV Cdd tyy ,., cwc nubs MAW the p— Iw d—n • Page 66 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Extreme Temperatures Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact I High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability • Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact I High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Im act Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability • Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Im act Page 67 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Flood Facts ♦ Just 6 inches of F 1 o o d i n g . rapidly moving _ - water can knock _ a person down. 3.2.5 Hazard Description ♦ 66% of flood A flood is an overflow or inundation _A deaths occur in that comes from a river or other body --� —�_ vehicles, and of water and causes or threatens most happen damage. Flooding may happen with only a few inches of water, or it may when drivers cover a house to the rooftop. Flooding is caused in a variety of ways: make the fatal winter or spring rains, couple with melting snows, can fill river basins too mistake trying to quickly. Torrential rains from training or slow moving thunderstorms can navigate through g g also produce river flooding. The most dangerous flood event, the flash flood waters. flood, happens quickly with little or no warning; other flooding events occur over a long period and may last days, weeks, or longer. Precipnatlon Totals Aprlll - 2001 PRELIM IM INAR INARY Here in Hennepin County, we need to worry about two kinds of flooding; river flooding and flash flooding. A river flood occurs when water levels rise in a river due to excessive rains from persistent thunderstorms over . the same area for extended periods of time, combined rainfall and snowmelt, or an ice jam. 4 3 Y A flash flood is a rapid rise of water along a stream or low -lying area. Flash flooding occurs within minutes of a significant rain event and is usually caused by intense storms that produce heavy rainfall in a short Heavy rains from amount of time. Excessive rainfall that causes rivers and streams to swell April i through rapidly and overflow their banks is frequently associated with large April 21, 2001 led to clusters of thunderstorms. Flash floods can occur with little or no spring flooding. warning. Flash flood damage and most fatalities tend to occur in areas Some areas received immediately adjacent to a stream or arroyo, with rapidly rising water over 4 inches of reaching heights of 30 feet or more. rain. ♦ Flash floods are Flood History one of the most common hazards Hennepin County has a strong history of flooding within its borders. Both in the United river flooding and flash flooding have impacted the County in the past, States. causing major damage to both public and private infrastructure. • Page 68 SEVIONONE Risk Assessment Flood Facts In spring of 1965, after a winter of heavy snowfall, spring rains helped to ♦ In November create a great flood in Hennepin County. Although the main event took 1997, the Min- place south of the County, Hennepin saw their fare share of flooding. On neapolis City April 18, along the Mississippi River in Minneapolis, rapidly advancing Council adopted a nine -year flood flood waters tore into pier 7 of the Stone Arch Bridge causing it to sag and mitigation pro- drop stone pieces into the river. Along the 22 mile -long Minnehaha Creek, gram aimed at I from Lake Minnetonka down through Edina, Hopkins, St. Louis Park to preventing future South Minneapolis, dikes had to be built around private residence to keep flooding caused the flooding out. This flood event led to a Presidential Disaster by undersized Declaration ( #188). storm drains. The city's goal is The 1997 Midwest Floods was another event that affected Hennepin to provide equal County. After a harsh 1996 -1997 winter, heavy spring rains caused one of levels of drainage the worst floods in Minnesota history. Although the main event took place protection up in the Red River of northwestern Minnesota, these floodwaters began to throughout Min- neapolis. make their way south towards Hennepin County. ♦ A mere 2 feet of From late March through early May, flood waters along the Mississippi moving water can and Crow Rivers of Hennepin County began to rise. The Crow River at float a large vehi- Rockford crested at 14.4 feet on cle or even a bus. April 4 which was the fifth Precipitation (preliminary) g In 1955 the Min- highest crest ever recorded. April 5 -6, 1997 ♦ nesota Legisla- Dayton, Champlin, Brooklyn ture established Park and Brooklyn Center also the Minnesota reported flooding along the Watershed Dis- riverbanks. Fort Snelling State trict Act to help Park, which borders the manage water Minneapolis /St.Paul Airport, 3 resources and to educate about had to close due to rising flood z erosion, flooding waters. and other issues U tied to land uses Flash floods have also been an values in inches and waterways. occurrence in Hennepin County's past. On July 23 & 24, ♦ Flash floods are the #2 weather 1987 thunderstorm rains created killer in the an area over 93 square miles of state Climatology Office, DNR Waters. April 1997 United States. 10 inches of rain or more and an 1 997 spring rains across Minnesota area 574 square miles of 6 inches added more trouble after a heavy or more of rainfall. An estimated 1996 -1997 snow year. Page 69 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Flood Facts 7,000 homes were reported with water damage and an estimated $25 million pin Count y s s • In 1911, dollars in damage was done. saw the most precipi- tation ever for one year, with ,Counties - - - -- _Townships 40.15 inches or Municipalities I • °• "' "" _ -- j rain. Records , = _ 1 date back to r .• ;; :, •�•° I AMOK' CO • Flash floods are -, �w,..., also caused by - - - - -- •— — ' WASNNI6TON CO ice jams on rivers in conjunction • °° NENNff 4 �t �.: ` N i it ' with winter or I spring thaw, or i w :: ��� ,,,•'.. occasional) even �� `1�'" y KAN f.Y CO Y �••- . r I . i i a dam break. Z - - -- �- Weighing., ti Rain Gauge - �.� , ,�.. _ - r . . • ( --- #•K� —_ .K r•+ .., � .� -- -dam I . � � ,nO�KC►� . I SCO CO. Flooding around the •_^^° '�• a___ �_•_ _� _ • i__� -, �_____ �� Crow River in Day- i ^ "'� - i• •• ton, M N. I w I �-C ° I •" r:, i a,,,u.n j-- _-- J_ —_ —__1 The July 23 rd & 24th' 1987 thunderstorm event that dropped over io inches ♦ Electrocution is a of rain to much of Hennepin County. Source: Minnesota State Clima- major cause of tology Office. death during floods. This hap - Another event occurred on July 1, 1997 severe thunderstorms deposited pens due to elec- very heavy rainfall on portions of Hennepin County. Rainfall amounts in trical currents less than one hour included 4 inches in Brooklyn Center, 3.5 in St. Louis passing through Park and 2.9 inches in Minneapolis. Portions of Interstates 94, 494, and 35 the water from downed power flooded in Minneapolis, floating cars and stranding motorists. Stores inside lines and electri- the Mall of America were also flooded and $5 million dollars in damage cal wires. was done to Edison High School in Minneapolis. The Minneapolis /St. Paul • Page 70 SECTIONoNE Risk Assessment Flood Facts Airport had to close for 90 minutes due to the severe weather. ♦ The Flood Dam- age Reduction On June 24 & June 25, 2003. County wide flooding from extreme rainfall, Grant Assistance with rain totals between 5 -10 inches caused flash flooding along the south Program was cre- shore of the Crow River, where ., ated by the Min- property damage was reported. nesota Legisla- The highest rainfall totals were on ture in 1987 to the north end of the County, provide technical assistance to lo- including reports of 10 inches in cal government Rogers and Hassen Township. for reducing the damaging effects When we talk about floods we of floods. need to talk about floodplains. A floodplain is a nearly flat land adjacent to a stream or river that experiences occasional or periodic flooding. It includes the floodway, which consists of the stream channel and adjacent areas that carry Heavy rainfall in Hennepin • Localized flooding flood flows, and the flood fringe, County on June z4 & z5, zoo3 in Minneapolis due which are areas covered by the flood, but which do not experience a strong to heavy rains. current. Page 5 shows a map of both the 100 & 500 year flood zones within Hennepin County. ♦ On April 6, 2006 heavy rain over a three hour period caused flash flooding in Bloomington. .•' Interstate 494 was closed for several hours due to the flooding and drainage problems. Parts of I -494 in Bloomington inundated with floodwaters after heavy rainfall on July 23 1 9 8 7. Page 71 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Watershed Facts Watersheds ♦ The Bassett Creek Watershed A watershed is an area of land that catches rain, exceeds 40 snow, and any other forms of water and drains to a square miles and lake, stream, wetland or groundwater. Watersheds is divided by four come in all different shapes and sizes. Smaller major subwater- watersheds drain into larger watersheds, much like sheds. a creek drains into a river. Some watersheds cross ♦ Nine Mile Creek county, state, even international borders. Watershed Dis- trict is approxi- The major watershed districts in Hennepin County are: Bassett Creek mately 50 square Watershed Management Commission, Elm Creek Watershed management miles in surface Commission, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District, Mississippi River area and encom- Watershed Management Organization, Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, passes the land Pioneer -Sarah Creek Watershed Management Commission, Richfield - area tributary to Bloomington Watershed Management Organization, Riley Purgatory Bluff Nine Mile Creek. Creek Watershed Commission, Shingle Creek Watershed Management ♦ Elm Creek Wa- Commission, West Mississippi River Watershed Management Commission. tershed is part of the Blue Thumb • Program, an out- reach program to meet water qual- J ity'goals and to F- -! I WEST �. meet the federal !+ i ELM CREEK MISSISSIPPI RIVER Clean Water Act ._ mandates. f i-- _ -_ -_- SHINGLECREEK 1 PIONEER -SARAH CREEK - - - -- _ `4 �.V YN� ! zt --f ! BASSETTCREEK MIDDLE, , ! 4 "'fir Ii3i15 SI SSIPPI RIVER PUV IYL FOa ClfdN MA9fR .. i MINNEHAHACREEK ♦ The Pioneer- 1 -- i Sarah Creek Wa- tershed covers !} ; i y - NINE a pp roximatel J MILE CREEK 70 -5 square miles RI LEY PU RGATORY- RIC'b - CRE BLUFF EK•, BL6` GTOk and lies within i i , - -_- _� � , ! -- -_ .�,, western Henne- pin County ` LO W ERMINNEilb A iI R Hennepin County Watershed Districts Page 72 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Flooding Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact • Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact I High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability . Low Im act Moderate Impact High Impact Page 73 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment & Hazmat Facts w: ♦ From 1993 -2006 Hazardous Materials the top seven hazardous mate - rials involved in 3.2.6 Hazard Description releases were: re: 1) flammable Chemicals are found everywhere. They flammable corrosive purify drinking water, increase crop materials, poi- production, and simplify household son materials, 4) chores. But chemicals can also be hazardous to humans or the infectious sub- environment if used or released improperly. Hazards can occur during stances, 5) com- production, storage, transportation, use, or disposal. The environment is bustible liquids, at risk if a chemical is used unsafel y or released in harmful amounts 6) non- where people live, work, or play. flammable com- Hazardous materials are chemical substances, which, if released or pressed gases, misused can pose a threat to human health and safety and the and 7) miscella- environment. These chemicals are used in industry, agriculture, medicine, neous hazardous research, consumer goods, and in the home. Hazardous materials may be materials. in the form of explosives, flammable and combustible substances, • ♦ From 1991 to poisons, and reactive materials. Hazardous materials are routinely 2006 there were transported through the county via truck, railroad, waterway, and 560 hazardous pipelines. The majority of chemical accidents occur in the home from materials releases misuse of flammable or combustible materials; however, these are reported to the typically small -scale accidents affecting individuals. Larger incidents National Re- involving hazardous materials typically occur because of accidents at sponse Center for industrial facility or during transportation. k_. Hennepin The presence of a hazardous material may or may not be readily evident. County. Some hazardous materials do not have an odor or taste. Some hazardous ♦ The hazardous materials can cause immediate physical reactions such as nausea or material involved watering eyes. in most releases History for Hennepin County between Of the hazardous materials releases within the county, none resulted in 1991 and 2006 immediate fatalities and most injuries were minor in nature. Most was Oils incidents happened at fixed sites, but incidents involving transported (Hydraulic, cool- materials tends to be more complex and potentially dangerous, since they ing, motor). occur in less controlled environments. Page 74 SERIONO Risk Assessment Hazmat Facts From 1991 to 2006 there were 560 hazardous materials releases reported to • The 2008 Emer- the National Response Center for Figures gency Response Hennepin County. In addition Guidebook is pri- to the hazardous materials marily a guide to aid first respond- reports to the National ers in quickly Response Center, the Year Hazmat Reports identifying the Minnesota State Duty Officer In Hennepin specific or ge- also reports hazardous neric hazard of materials spills from fixed 2008 455 the materials in- facilities and transp ortation volved in the in- p 2007 493 cident, and pro- incidents. Figure 1 shows 2006 569 tecting them- hazardous materials spills in selves and the Hennepin County since 2000. 2005 692 general public 2004 565 during the initial From 1991 to 2006 the g hazardous materials involved 2003 446 response phase of 302 the incident. in releases listed in order of 2002 frequency is provided in the 2001 353 - —. Ilner�ency = 2 g i graph below. "The frequency 347 of natural gas line leaks/breaks 2000 is under reported. Maple Grove and Plymouth report a combined total of 90 gas line hits per year between -4 -� 2001 and 2006 as a result of contractors or homeowners striking gas f • Varying quanti- line of various sizes. This ties of hazardous number is probably higher materials are across the entire county. stored, used and manufactured at an estimated 4.5 million facilities Maple Grove Fire Department at a recent in the United Hazardous Materials Training States. • Page 75 Hennepin County Hazardous Materials Releases (1991 -2006) in Order of Frequency • Hazmat Facts ♦ Chemical manu- facturers are one source of hazard- Product Hazard Class according to ous materials, but there are many Oils (Hydraulic, cooling, motor) Not regulated as hazardous mate - others, including service stations, Gasoline Flammable liquid hospitals, and q hazardous mate- Anhydrous Ammonia Non - flammable compressed gas rials waste sites. Natural Gas ** Flammable compressed gas ♦ Hazardous mate- Chlorine Poison gas rials in various Fuel Oil Combustible liquid forms can cause Transformer Oil with PCB's Miscellaneous Hazardous Materi- death, serious injury, long- Waste Water Not regulated as hazardous mate - lasting health ef- fects, and dam- age to buildings, Sodium Hydroxide Corrosive homes and other Caustic Potash Corrosive property Copper Sulfate Penta Hydrate Miscellaneous Hazardous Materi- • Cupric Sulfate Miscellaneous Hazardous Materi- 'POISOl1,� . Ethylene Glycol Not regulated as a hazardous ma- ♦ Hazardous mate- Ethylene Oxide Poison gas rials come in the Herbicides Not regulated as a hazardous ma- form of explo- sives, flammable Hydrochloric Acid Corrosive and combustible Milk Not regulated as a hazardous ma- substances, poi- sons, and radio- Paint Not regulated as a hazardous ma- active materials. These substances are often released Pesticides Poison material as a result of Propane Flammable gas transportation Refrigerant gases Non - flammable compressed gas incidents or Sulfur Flammable Solid chemical acci- dents at plants. Trichloroethylene Toxic substance • Page 76 SECTIONoNE Risk Assessment i SARA Title III Facts 302 Facilities ♦ Title III of SARA Any facility that has reported an amount equal to or greater than the addresses con- Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) of any "Extremely Hazardous cerns about emer- Substance" covered by EPCRA (also known as the Superfund gency prepared - Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986) must cooperate in the ness for hazard- preparation of the community emergency plan for hazardous materials. ous chemicals. It EPCRA later became known as SARA Title III, and in Minnesota an establishes re- enabling order incorporating the provisions of SARA Title III into state quirements for law was created. federal, Tribal/ State, local gov- The primary purpose of SARA Title III is to require facilities that have ernments, and especially hazardous or toxic substances to publicly identify themselves industry, regard- ing emergency and develop detection systems and emergency response plans for an planning and accidental release, and also to require communities where such facilities "community- are located to have hazardous material emergency response plans, as well. right -to- know" Each state, including Minnesota, is required to have a state emergency reporting on haz- response commission to oversee implementation and enforcement of ardous and toxic SARA Title III requirements. Each commission is allowed to appoint local chemicals. This committees to assist. In Minnesota, seven Regional Review Committees legislation em- phasizes: helping were formed to assist by communities reviewing city and county meet their re- emergency response plans to sponsibilities in assure they meet SARA preparing to han- requirements. dle chemical emergencies; and The following maps on pages increasing public (5 -9) show all 302 facilities knowledge and located in Hennepin County access to infor- (Gathered data includes 302 mation on haz- facilities as defined by the ardous chemicals present in their Minnesota Division of communities. Homeland Security & Emergency Management). The maps include an overall county map and then by each individual planning group (Lake Minnetonka, Minneapolis, North, and South Groups). Specific 302 facility information is located within each planning group. • Page 77 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment 302 Facilities Q 302Pacilites Hanover, Rockford and Chanhassen Hennepin COUnty HaZard Materials Lake Minnetonka Emergency Planning And ReviewCommi$ee Hazardous materials data gathered from the Emergency Planning & Minneapolis Community R ig ht-t o- Know A ct (EPCRA). Gathered data includes 303 facilities as defined by Minnesota Homeland Security North Hennepin Emergency Planning Group Emergency Management (HSEM). South Hennepin Emergency Mangement Planning Group Q � © Q Q f °Q p Q ie urm e opt" e Gm. OP V4 I C Q 1 �aC3 Q' Q ©.y © ri'ti�aijQ faQ^lYd QEO �"Q Map created bythe Hennepin County EP Civision August 3, 2009. Hennepin Countymakes no warranty, repre sentation, or guarantee as to the 0 t 2 4 content, accuracy, timeliness, or completeness I i i i I i I I I of any ofth a info rn otion proud ed herein . Mi Page 78 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment s 3 acilities 30 Ha nover ,tie= nover, Rockford and C Ina nh ass en Hennepin County Hazardous Materials Lake MinnetonkaEmergencyPIanning And ReviewCommiHee Hazardous materials data gathered from the Emergency Planning & Minneapolis Community R ig ht-t o- Know A ct (EPCRA). Gathered data includes 302 facilities as defined by Minnesota Homeland Security - North Hennepin Emergency Planning Group Emergency Management (HSEM). fy South Hennepin Emergency Mangement Planning Group F ° ° I I °'e © ° i � ° _ ° e Page 79 SECTIOMONE Risk Assessment 342 Facilities ° Hanover. 7 Zr (�' �/ Hanover, Rockford and Chanhassen Hennepin ` ountJ Hazardous Materials Lake Minn etonk a E me rgency Planning And Review Committee Hazardous materials data gathered from the Emergency Planning & Minneapolis Community Right- to-KnowAct(EPCRA) Gathered data includes 302 facilities as defined by Minnesota Homeland Security North Hennepin Emergency Planning Group Emergency Management (HSEM). South Hennepin Emergency Mangement Planning Group � o © Q Q Q i Q Q Q A QS © r is Q Q Q - -- Q © — Q°— Q Q © Q Q 4 Q Q' Q Q Q p ° Q © Q a Q © Q3 Q • Page 80 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment F302 cilities Q 302 Facilites Hanover, Rockford and Chanhassen n County Hazardous Materials Lake Minnetonka Emergency Planning And Review Committee erials data gathered from the Emergency Planning & Minneapolis Community Right-to- KnowA ct (EP CRA). Gathered data includes 302 facilities as defined by Minnesota Homeland Security North Hennepin Emergency Planning Group Emergency Management (HSEM). South Hennepin Emergency Mangement Planning Group Q fJ p3 ° Q Q i EQ ° E OAA '44 Q {0!� Q Qi Qom e ° '� ms•°. .ry.� : a Page 81 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment ! F 3 0 2 Facilities ° Hanover, Rockford and Chanhassen nepin County Hazardous Materials Lake Minnetonka Emergency Planning And Review Committee dous materials data gathered from the Emergency Planning & Minneapolis Community Right- to- KnowAct (EPCRA). Gathered data includes 302 facilities as defined by Minnesota Homeland Security North Hennepin Emergency Planning Group Emergency Management (HSEM). South Hennepin Emergency Mangement Planning Group © Al © ' 00 to ° ° °Q° �© �Q 1 ©*� © 4 . �a ,° e s .r Q°L -° - © © ° ° ©�,, ° 63 © �© a ©° ° o ° ell, ° ° iq ..t � I i rr � ° Page 82 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Hazardous Materials Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability Higk Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact . Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact I Moderate Impact I High Impact Page 83 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment K Lyme Disease Facts Infectious Diseases • Lyme disease gets its name 3.2.7 Hazard Description a from the town of An infectious disease is a disease Lyme, Connecti- caused by a pathogen which enters the cut, where the illness was first body and triggers the development of identified in the an infection. Infectious diseases have a United States in range of causes, and they can be found all over the world. These diseases 1975. are considered contagious or communicable, meaning that they can be • One of the signs passed from person to person. It is also possible for such diseases to of Lyme disease spread indirectly through unhygienic conditions, or from animals to is a skin rash, people, in which case they are known as zoonotic diseases. that is in the form Lyme disease of a red circular patch about 2 Lyme disease is a tick -borne illness that causes signs and symptoms inches in diame- ter that appears ranging from rash, fever, chills and body aches to joint swelling, weakness and expands and temporary paralysis. Lyme disease is caused by the bacterium around the site of Borrelia burgdorferi. Deer ticks, which feed on the blood of animals and • the tick bite. The humans, can harbor the disease and spread it when feeding. center may clear as it enlarges, History resulting in a "bulls -eye" ap- This table pearance. The shows the Year Number of Hennepin County rash may be number of Lyme Disease Cases warm, but it usu- Hennepin 2007 196 ally is not painful County cases or itchy. of Lyme 2006 127 ♦ Lyme disease can disease from 2005 113 be treated with 2000 -2007. 2004 149 antibiotics. 2003 66 Without treat- To date there ment, Lyme dis- have been no 2002 113 ease can cause Lyme disease 2001 69 serious, long- deaths in 2000 68 term health prob- Hennepin lems. County. • Page 84 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Tuberculosis Facts Tuberculosis • Most persons in- Tuberculosis (TB) is a potentially serious infectious disease that primarily fected with TB affects your lungs. Tuberculosis is spread from person to person through bacteria never tiny droplets released into the air. Most people who become infected with develop TB dis- the bacteria that causes Tuberculosis don't develop symptoms of the ease. If TB dis- disease. ease does de- velop, it can oc- History cur 2 to 3 months after infection or This table Year Number of Hennepin County years later. shows the Tuberculosis Cases number of ♦ In most cases, TB disease can be Hennepin 2007 114 cured with antibi- County cases 2006 95 otics. Treatment of 99 usually involved Tuberculosis 2005 a combination of from 2000- 2004 104 several different 2007. 2003 118 drugs. Because • TB bacteria die To date, there 2002 128 very slowly, anti- have been no 2001 140 TB drugs must be deaths in 2000 104 taken for 6 Hennepin months or longer. County • Only active TV associated disease of the with Tuberculosis. lungs or voice box is conta- gious. The con- tagious period West Nile virus varies from per- son to person, but West Nile Virus (WNV) is transmitted by mosquitoes. If you become usually from infected with West Nile virus, you may not experience any signs of when the symp- symptoms or you may only experience minor ones such as a skin rash and toms begin until headache. However, some people who become infected with West Nile the person has virus develop a life - threatening illness that includes inflammation of the completed sev- brain. eral weeks of treatment. Wet Nile virus is common in areas such as Africa, West Asia and the Middle East. It first appeared in the United States in the summer of 1999 • Page 85 SECTIONoNE Risk Assessment 0 West Nile Virus Facts and since then has been found in all 48 contiguous states. Exposure to mosquitoes where West Nile virus exists increases your risk of getting West people infect ♦ About one ct ed d Nile virus. Protecting yourself from such exposure, such as by using with WNV will mosquito develop severe repellent and illness. The se- wearing vere symptoms clothing that Year Number of Hennepin County can include high covers your West Nile Virus Cases fever, headache, skin, can 2007 12 neck stiffness, reduce your disorientation, risk. 2006 5 tremors, vision 2005 2 loss, numbness History and paralysis. 2004 0 These symptoms This table 2003 3 may last several shows the 2002 4 weeks, and neu- number of rological effects Hennepin may be perma- County cases nent. • of West Nile virus from 2002 -2007. West Nile virus was not discovered in ♦ Most often, Minnesota until 2002. To date there have been two deaths associated with WNV is spread West Nile virus in Hennepin County. by the bite of an infected mos- quito. Mosqui- toes become in- Pandemic Influenza fected whey they feed on infected A pandemic is a global outbreak. A pandemic flu is a virulent human flu birds. Infected that causes a global outbreak, or a pandemic, of serious illness. A flu mosquitoes can pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus emerges for which people then spread have little or no immunity, and for which there is no vaccine. This disease WNV to humans. spreads easily person -to- person, causes serious illness, and can sweep ♦ People typically across the country and around the world in very short time. The U.S. develop symp- Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been working toms between 3 closely with other countries and the World Health Organization (WHO) to and 14 days after strengthen systems to detect outbreaks of influenza that might cause a they are bitten by pandemic and to assist with pandemic planning and preparation. the infected mos- quito. Most recently, health professionals are concerned by the possibility of an avian (or bird) flue pandemic associated with a highly pathogenic avian H5N1 virus. Since 2003, avian influenza has been spreading through Asia. • Page 86 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Pandemic Facts A growing number of human H5N1 cases contracted directly from • Vaccine against handling infected poultry have been reported in Asia, Europe, and Africa, ordinary flu will and more than half the infected people have died. There has been no not protect against pandemic sustained human -to -human transmission of the disease, but the concern is flu. However, that H5N1 will evolve into a virus capable of human -to -human getting your an- transmission. nual flu shot is one of several History things you can do 1918 -1919 Spanish Flu (HINT). This flu is estimated to have sickened 20- to keep yourself 40% of the world's population, and over 20 million people died. Between healthy. September 1918 and April 1919, 500,000 Americans died. It spread ♦ Three pandemics rapidly; many died have occurred in within a few days of the last 90 years, infection, others from in 1918, 1957, secondary and 1968. Scien- tists predict that complications. The another pandemic attack rate and will happen, al- mortality was highest • though they can- among adults 20 -50 not say exactly years old, although when. They also the reasons for this . do not know if are uncertain. the next pan- demic will be 1957 -1958 Asian Flu mild, moderate, (H2N2). This virus was A very familiar scene during the 1918 Spanish or severe. quickly identified due to Flu Pandemic • Antiviral drugs advanced in technology, are likely to be in and a vaccine was produced. Infection rates were highest among school limited supply children, young adults, and pregnant women. The elderly had the highest during the next rates of death. A second wave developed in 1958. In total, there were pandemic and will have a d about 70,000 deaths in the United States. Worldwide deaths were used to best ef- estimated between 1- 2,000,000. fect according to 1968 -1969 Hong Kong flu (H3N2). This strain caused approximately how the disease develops. 34,000 deaths in the U.S. and 700,000 + deaths worldwide. This virus was first detected in Hong Kong in early 1968 and spread to the United states later that year. Those over 65 were most likely to die. • Page 87 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Infectious Diseases Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact I High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact • Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability • Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Page 88 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Ionizing Radiation Facts Radiologica AAA More than 80 R % of the radiation we are exposed 3.2.8 Hazard Description to comes from such natural The term radiation refers to such sources as visible light, radio waves, sources as micro waves, as well as to ionizing radiation. In terms of this hazard, we sunlight, soil, and are looking at ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation can produce charged certain types of particles (ions) in any material it strikes. These charged particles can rocks. cause damage to molecules, cell or tissues. Atoms that emit ionizing radiation are unstable, or radioactive. Radioactivity is the process in • Beta particles which atoms attempt to become stable by emitting radiation. travel through the air for several The three types of ionizing radiation of concern are Alpha particles, Beta feet but the pene- particles and Gamma rays. Alpha particles are high energy charged trating power is particles that move only a couple of inches in air and are unable to limited. Like Al- penetrate the skin. Internally alpha particles can cause significant pha particles, damage. Beta particles are high speed, charged particles with a moderate . Beta particles penetrating power. Beta particles can travel several feet in air and require cause the most about 1/8 inch of so of aluminum to stop them. Some highly energetic serious effects if betas may penetrate skin and tissue and are considered to be an internal swallowed or in- and external hazard. haled. Gamma rays are pure energy and can travel tens of meters at the speed of • Radioactive con- light. Gamma rays and X -rays are identical in nature once they leave the tamination occurs atom. Gamma rays originate in the nucleus of the atom and X -rays when radioactive originate from the Aluminum Los& material is depos- electron shell. Paw roil 0010 0 ited on or in an Gamma rays are the object or a per- most penetrating Alpha DO type of radiation and are considered saw m ®c oo • • The three ways to both an internal and particle reduce your ex- external hazard. Gamma tiY posure to radia- tion are time, dis- tance and shield - The penetrating power of Alpha, Beta, and Gamma radiation ing. • Page 89 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Ionizing Radiation Facts A person's exposure to radiation is measured in units called millirem. A millirem measures the effects of radiation on the human body much as • A person exposed degrees measure temperature. In the United States, a person's average to radiation is not exposure to radiation is about 360 millirem per year. Roughly 300 millirem necessarily con- come from natural sources of radiation, and 60 millirem come from man - taminated with made sources, primarily medical procedures. radioactive mate- rial. A person Sources of radiological material can be found in many locations include who has been fixed facilities (examples: industries, clinics, labs and universities), exposed to radia- tion has had di transportation routes, dirty bombs, and nuclear power plants. The dioactive waves Monticello and Prairie Island Nuclear Power Plants are both located within or particles pene- 50 miles of Hennepin County. This means that we are located in the trate the body, Ingestion Pathway Zone of both facilities. The principle sources of like having an x- exposure from an accident would be the ingestion of contaminated food ray. and water. Page 4 of this profile shows a map of the 50 -mile Ingestion • In order for there Pathways. Ingestion _r to be a radioac- exposure remains a tive release into longer -term problem the environment because vegetables, from the Monti- fruit trees, and grains - J cello Nuclear may take up Generatin g Plant radionuclides from the three barriers'' need to be bro- soil. They may also be :a►, ken: the Reactor ingested by wild game * ^ Fuel Cladding, and fish that may in the Primary turn, be eaten by Coolant System, humans. and the Contain- Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant in Monticello, MN. Another source of radiological materials could come from a radiological ' dirty bomb or radiological dispersal device (RDD), which consists of radioactive material combined with conventional explosives. They are designed to use explosive force to disperse the radioactive material over a large area, such as multiple city- blocks. Around the world, there are many sources of radioactive material that are not secure or not accounted for. Rogue nations and/or terrorist groups can obtain these materials for dirty bombs. These explosive weapons may initially kill a few people in the immediate area of the blast but are used primarily to produce psychological Page 90. SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Ionizing Radiation Facts rather than physical harm by inducing panic and terror in the target population. Their use would also result in costly cleanup for ♦ Hennepin County L decontamination. hosts a Reception Center at Rogers Fixed facilities and road/rail transportation routes can also be sources of High School for radioactive materials Fixed facilities such as Honeywell, the University of evacuees of Sher- Minnesota, the Hennepin County Medical Center, and Northern States burne and Wright Counties during a Power all have sources of radiation that could potentially cause exposure radiological re- problems. lease at the Mon- ticello Nuclear Aw Generating Plant. ♦ Amounts of ra- diation released in the environ- ment are meas- ured in units Nt sOTA ,.: called curies. However, the dose of radiation that a person re- • ' ; ceives is meas- ured in units called rem. ♦ Because of other Companies and universities are required to manage radioactive materials in factors, it is not compliance with Title 10, part 20 of the Code of Regulations. This is one of uncommon for a many fixed facilities in Hennepin County. person to receive far more than the Road/rail transportation routes can be a source of radioactive materials. average of 360 Because strict packaging requirements are used in the shipment of millirem per radioactive materials, accidental spills or releases of these substances year. Things that seldom occur. can affect a par- ticular person's Radiological History annual radiation exposure level To date, there have been no large scale radiation incidents in Hennepin include airplane County. travel, dental and medical x -rays, and occupation. „ Page 91 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment 50 Mile Ingestion Pathway Zones (IPZ) T o o f f C 50 4 .30� _ - n a y io J eilo —� r N � t P 1 a k v ! a Prairie Zslan NSP Monticello & Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plants Page 92 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Radiological Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability • Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability • Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact page 93 SECTIONoNE Risk Assessment Terrorism Facts ♦ Terrorists often T rrorism use threats to: i create fear among the public, try to 3.2.9 Hazard Description convince citizens = that their govern- Following a number of serious international and domestic terrorist ment is powerless -A > ^ • . to prevent terror- incidents during the 1990's and ism, and get im- early 2000's, citizens across the United States have paid increased mediate publicity attention to the potential for deliberate, harmful terrorist actions by for their causes. individuals or groups with political, social, cultural, and religious motives. There is no single, universally accepted definition of terrorism, and it can E • High risk targets be interpreted in a variety of ways. However, terrorism is defined in the a. for acts of terror- Code of Federal Regulations as "...the unlawful use of force and violence ism include mili- against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the tary and civilian civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or government fa- social objectives" (28 CFR, Section 0.85). cilities, interna- tional airports, The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) further characterizes terrorism • large cities, and as either domestic or international, depending on the origin, base, and high profile land- objectives of the terrorist organization. Domestic terrorism involves marks. groups or individuals whose terrorist activities are directed at elements of our government or population without foreign direction. International ♦ Acts of terrorism terrorism involves groups or individuals whose terrorist activities are include threats of foreign -based and/or directed by countries or groups outside the United terrorism, assas- States or whose activities transcend national boundaries. sinations, kidnap- pings, hijackings, However, the origin of the terrorist or person causing the hazard is far less bomb scares and relevant to mitigation planning than the hazard itself and its consequences. bombings, cyber Terrorists utilize a wide variety of agents and delivery systems. attacks, and the Terrorism History use of chemical, biological, nu- Due to security concerns regarding past events in Hennepin County, this clear, and radio- information can be requested and may be supplied upon approval. logical weapons. • Page 94 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Terrorism Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Im act Moderate Impact High Impact :L0W1 w Prability Low Probability Low Probability ac t Moderate Impact High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability • Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low !LOWl:om Prability Low Probability Low Probability ac t Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability • Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact I Moderate Impact High Impact Page 95 SECT18NONE Risk Assessment Thunderstorm Facts Thunderstorms ♦ Thunderstorms may occur singly, in clusters, or in 3.2.10 Hazard Description lines. ♦ About 10 percent Thunderstorms are by- products of of thunderstorms atmospheric instability and occur from are classified as cumulonimbus clouds. The are severe—one that basically rain showers accompanied by lightning and thunder. An average produces hail at thunderstorm is 15 miles in diameter and lasts for an average of 30 least one inch in minutes. At any given moment, there are roughly 2,000 thunderstorms in diameter, has progress around the world. It is estimated that there are 100,000 winds of 58 miles thunderstorms each year; about 10% of these reach severe levels. per hour or higher, or pro- Three basic ingredients are required for a thunderstorm to form: moisture, duces a tornado. rising unstable air (air that keeps rising when given a nudge), and a lifting mechanism to provide the "nudge ". Thunderstorms are a unique hazard because they are sometimes accompanied by heavy rain, gusty winds, hail and can, under the right atmospheric conditions, spawn tornadoes. . Thunderstorm Lifecycle c f �2 -50 A severe thunder- 40 a 10 storm approaches 6 •30 s St. Louis Park, MN. q •20 6 - �o ♦ o °c_ - -- o °c _ . o °c - - - - -- 0 4 i.. Warm, humid =- -� conditions are 10 highly favorable 2 for thunderstorm 0- �­5-8 krn 9-10 development Developing Stage Mature Stage Dissipating Stage • There are about 2,000 thunder- The developing stage of a thunderstorm is marked by a cumulus cloud that storms occurring is being pushed upward by a rising column of air (updraft). The cumulus at any moment cloud soon looks like a tower (called a towering cumulus) as the updraft across the world. continues to develop. There is little to no rain during this stage and the stage itself lasts about 10 minutes. Page 96 SECTIONoNE Risk Assessment Thunderstorm Facts The thunderstorm enters the mature stage when the updraft continues to feed the storm, but precipitation begins to fall out of the storm, and a • The average downdraft begins (a column of air pushing downward). When the height of a thun- downdraft and rain - cooled air spreads out along the ground it forms a gust derstorm is front. The mature stage is the most likely time for hail, heavy rain, 35,000 feet. Se- frequent lightning, strong winds, and tornadoes. vere thunder- storms can reach Eventually, a large amount of precipitation is produced and the updraft is heights of 65,000 overcome by the downdraft beginning the dissipating stage. On the feet. ground, the gust front moves out a long distance from the storm and cuts off the warm moist air that was feeding the thunderstorm. Rainfall decreases in intensity, but lightning remains a danger. Thunderstorm History The recording of thunderstorms is highly dependent on if weather ♦ During severe observation stations are in the path of the storm. In regards to Hennepin thunderstorms, County, there are two main reporting stations; the Minneapolis St. Paul updrafts can Airport and in Chanhassen, where the National Weather Service staff and • reach speeds of technology house out of. The official reporting station is still the 100 mph. Down- Minneapolis /St. Paul Airport so that it can maintain the climatological drafts can often record. Other stations around Hennepin County are located at the attain even following airports: Minneapolis Flying Cloud Airport in Eden Prairie and greater speeds than that. the Crystal Airport in Crystal, MN. ♦ On July 23 & As far as weather observations away from airport stations, these July 24, 1987, a observations are more dependent on the public's (Skywarn Spotters) thunderstorm sat observation or local law enforcement. The Minnesota State Climatology over Hennepin Office reports that Hennepin County sees on average, 37.6 thunderstorms a County and year, based on a 67 year average. The highest numbers come during the dropped over 11 months of June and July and November through March being on the low inches of rain in 24 hours. Two end of the scale. men drowned in the storm, one in his car and an- other after his basement col- lapsed. • Page 97 SECTIONo Risk Assessment Windstorm Facts ♦ Derechos are as- sociated with a line of thunder- storms that are often "curved" in shape. These bowed out storms are called "bow echoes ". Winds during derechos can exceed 100 mph. fi v A thunderstorm towers over Rogers, Minnesota A "bow- echo" ap- • proaches Hennepin County. �I ♦ On August 6, 1996 a strong W i n d s t o r m s windstorm with winds of 65 mph Another hazard that comes with hit Brooklyn thunderstorms is windstorms. Many Park, MN caus- times when storm damage occurs to ing major dam- age to 20 -30 buildings, trees or other objects, homes and up- people automatically say it was a tornado. Although difficult for many to rooted trees in a understand, in most years, thunderstorm winds cause more damage, and are three block area. more frequent than tornadoes (in 2004, thunderstorm winds produced an One person was estimated $5.5 million in property damage, according to the publication injured from fly- Storm Data). Thunderstorms winds can exceed 100 mph while most ing glass. common tornadoes winds are generally not this strong. • Page 98 SECTIONo Risk Assessment Thunderstorm Facts Thunderstorm winds come in many forms, sometimes from squall lines of thunderstorms and other times in the form of downburst winds. The most ♦ A downburst is frequently encountered type of damaging winds is called straight -line created by an winds. These thunderstorm winds are associated with the leading edge of area of signifi- the rain - cooled outflow, known as the gust front. Although most cantly cooled air thunderstorm outflow winds range from 30 to 50 mph, on occasion these that, after hitting winds can exceed 100 mph. the ground, Downburst winds are another form of windstorm. A Downburst is created spreads out in all by a column of sinking air that, after hitting the ground level, spreads out in directions pro- all directions and is capable of producing damaging winds over 150 mph. ducing strong The damage produced by Downburst winds are similar to, but winds. distinguishable from, that caused by tornadoes. Downburst- producing storms often give little advance indications of the imminent danger on weather radar or to the spotter, so warnings are difficult to issue. Another wind event associated with thunderstorms is a Derecho. A Derecho (pronounced similar to "deh- REY -cho" in English) is a widespread and long lived windstorm that is associated with a band of rapidly moving showers and thunderstorms. An image of a clas- Windstorm History sic downburst from a thunderstorm. Hennepin County sees windstorms on a yearly basis. One of the biggest windstorms to hit the county was a wind - driven hail event that took place ♦ The September on May 15, 1998. A severe line of thunderstorms entered Hennepin 25, 2005 wind- County from the southwest and — storm that hit caused significant damage to northern Henne- trees, private residence, and pin County public infrastructure. Nothing caused $130 mil- seemed to be spared in this storm with damage done to automobile lion dollars in dealers in Bloomington and + �` damage. damage to airplanes at the ♦ On July 17, 1997 Minneapolis /St. Paul Airport. a severe thunder- Wind speeds ranged from 55 -70 storm with winds mph knocking down thousands of in excess of 60 trees in the south metro. An mph caused estimated $450 million dollars in $88,000 in dam- damage was done during the 1 age to homes in storm. Minnetrista and — Independence. Straight -line winds enter Hennepin County in 1998, causing extensive dam- age due to both wind and hair. Page 99 SECTIOMoNE Risk Assessment Windstorm/ Hailstorm Facts Another windstorm event took place on September 25, 2005 as a large storm system swept across the northern portion of Hennepin County. Tens • A very heavy lo- of thousands of trees were downed, including some snapped a few feet off calized wind- the round. Some neighborhoods were out of power for more than a 8 g p week storm hit Min- as crews had to make massive numbers of repairs. The property damage neapolis report of $130 million dollars covers all wind and hail reports. Damage to (especially areas trees and private residence was reported in Brooklyn Park, Rogers, Hassan of Lake Calhoun, a houn, Township, Dayton, Champlin, Osseo, Minneapolis, Maple Grove, New Lake of the Isles, Hope, Golden Valley, and in Crystal, where several hangers at the Crystal and Harriet Lake) Airport had metal siding and roofs ripped off. City officials in Brooklyn on June 16, 2006. Park estimated at least 10,000 trees were downed. One person was killed Two people were during the storm; a 45 year old man in the north part of Minneapolis died injured and major when a large branch landed on him when he left his car. tree and property damage was For a graphic map of the windstorm events that have affected Hennepin done. Several County, please click look at page 8. sail boats were tipped over on Lake Calhoun. • On August 24, 2006 a hailstorm hit Dayton, MN causing $20 mil- lion dollars in damage. Hail H a i 1 2.75 inches in diameter dam- Hail is precipitation that is formed when updrafts in thunderstorms carry aged homes, raindrops upward into extremely cold areas of the atmosphere. Hail begins businesses and as tiny ice pellets that collide with water droplets. The water droplets attach vehicles. themselves to the ice pellets and begin to freeze as strong updraft winds toss • The largest hail- the pellets and droplets back up into the colder regions of the upper levels of stone ever recov- the cloud. As the attached droplets freeze, the pellets become larger. In all ered was in cases, the hail falls when the thunderstorm's updraft can no longer support Aurora, Nebraska the weight of the ice. The stronger the updraft the larger the hailstone can with a diameter grow. of 7 inches and a There are various sizes of hailstones, all dependent on the updrafts. Below circumference of is a table for estimated size and average diameter: 18.75 inches. • Page 100 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Hail Facts ♦ June 11, 2001 114" Pea featured a mas- sive line of hail- 112" Plain M &M storms with hail 314" (Severe Criteria) Peniry 3 inches in di- 70' Nickel ameter in St. 1" Quarter Bonifacius. This widespread hail 1 114" Half Dollar event also in- 1 12" Walnut-Ping Pang Ball cluded the cities 114" Golf Ball of Bloomington, 2" Hen Egg.-Lime Mound, Eden Prairie, Long 2 17' Tennis Ball Lake, and Edina. 2 314" Baseball $25 million dol- 3" Teacup Large Apple lars in damage was done during 4.. Grapefruit the event. 4 17' Softball 4 34"- 5" Computer CD -DVD • Hail History The National Climatic Data Center shows that Hennepin County has had Hail has been known an extensive history of hail storms since records began to be recorded back in 1956. Since that time, over 300 hail events have been recorded with an bi reach diameters as estimation of $505 million dollars in damage. A map of these hail reports big as softballs. can be seen on page 9. • Large hailstones can fall at speeds faster than 100 mph. Lightning Lightning is a gigantic electrostatic discharge (the same as electricity that can shock you when you touch a door knob) - between the cloud and the " �9 ground, other clouds, or within a cloud). Scientists do not Page 101 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Lightning Facts know exactly how it works or how it interacts with the upper atmosphere or • Most lightning the earth's electromagnetic field. Lightning is one of the oldest observed fatalities and in- natural phenomena on earth. It has been seen in volcanic eruptions, juries occur when extremely intense forest fires, surface nuclear detonations, heavy people are caught outdoors in sum- snowstorms, in large hurricanes, and obviously, thunderstorms. mer months dur- Lightning is an electrical current. Within a thunderstorm, many small bits of ing the afternoon ice (frozen raindrops) bump into each other as they move around in the air. and evening. All of those collisions create an electric charge. After a while, the whole cloud fills up with electrical charges. The positive charges or protons from ♦ The air near a the top of the cloud and the negative charges or electrons form at the bottom lightning strike is of the cloud. Since opposites attract, that causes a positive charge to build heated to 50,000 up on the ground beneath the cloud. The ground's electrical charge degrees - concentrates around anything that sticks up, such as mountains, people, or heft, 6 timmes es hot- single trees. The charge coming up form these points eventually connects ter than the with a charge reaching down from the clouds, and that is when you see the face of the suun. n. lightning strike. • The rapid heating and cooling of the air near the Lightning History lightning channel causes a shock Lightning is a usual occurrence in thunderstorms across Hennepin County • each year. It is more prevalent during the late spring and summer months. wave that results g p g in thunder. The National Climatic Data Center states that there has been $700,000 dollars in damage and 6 injuries due to lightning strikes in Hennepin County • Lightning can since August of 1995. According to Storm Data, Minnesota ranks 32 (out occur from of 50 states) in lightning deaths from 1998 -2008. cloud -to- cloud, within a cloud, cloud -to- ground, or cloud -to -air. ;s Lightning strikes a northern portion of Minneapolis. • Page 102 SECTIONo Risk Assessment Hennep ('OUnt`' "lilt S pee d «uid Speed in Knots I Unknown Speed from 1955 through 2006 50 to 60 knots Wind speeds were recorded at National Weather Service (NWS) weather data centers. [. 61 to 70 knots The following map utilizes representation to show all of the recorded wind speed. 71 to 90 knots The location may not directly correspond with the record but is located within the area of a weather data center. i� r; DAYTON OOER,SS m HASSAN TVVSP I I CLAM 1 CREENFIEI- I s I b I I I I 116 CORgORAI BROOKLYN PARK I i BVCKFORD I I "LE GROVE I I � I BROOKLYN - -- - - -- I CENTER �RE�fTO PLYMOUTH - - - - -^-- � .dE'vV� I I 1� MEDINA HOPE :, ST.PfJTHOtJY �J R6�6INSCALE� �DEPEPJDENCE I I M AP . I I I � 11 �DICIN � I �- *5EN VALLE', I I LOT') I I I I fv11NNETP,ISTA. � 1 - -- - - I a - -- MINNEAPOLIS I I 1rYZATA ' �ff ¶ LOU S PARK VV00DL'r�D F I r M * �MI NNE TON KAEIEA � SPRING P'+RK DE P ,F T 14!' 01 KA8 S ONIF.4Clus II ED I I NA , SHOREVWG�E OG —, NE TONKA I =II �II IEDIfN ,A RRIE i I PoCHFIEL CHANHASSE ,I I l BLLOOOAIIJGTON I I I I I I I I Map createdbythe Hermepin CamtyFP Division 4 Octob er 12, 2009. Henrepin C aunty makes m wanardy, represerdation, cr guarantee as to tle 0 1.25 2.5 5 corlbn , accuracy, tumbress, or completeress I i i I I I I I I �cSar9rofthe ixdoneiatianpmvided hesin Mles • Page 103 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Hennepin County Hail Diameter Had Dimetel in Inches U 0.75 - 1.00 fi•o 1950 throtloh 2008 0 1.01 - 2.00 Hail diameter were recorded at National Weather Service (NWS) weather data centers. ® 2.01 - 3.00 The following map utilizes representation to show all of the recorded hail diameters. The location may not directly correspond with the record but is located within 3.01 - 4.00 the area of a weather data center. OUO DAYTON HASS AAI TVVSP CHAMP LI N ;REENFIEL A t� SE� vl\ CORCORAN Q I"' BROOKLYN PARK �k 4, Z a - O i A - - - -- - - - L�— MAP LE G U O TH a NEW PLYM ' I �? PTO L� MEDIN �OPE ST. ANTHONY A l f INDEPENDENCE I !` RbBBINS l� L, i -� - - - -- QZ�MEDICINE L Lot ?KEI �j1 L� OLD N VALLEY LA -- - - - -L' - KES[ f/ - -Q , - n � •',' L MINNETRISTA �PONO Z ` ?WAYZATA "- � ? T LOUIS PARK{ MINNEAPOLIS /\ WpODLhA1D L] L1 !� MOUN, E7JPIKABEAf}H - i .�� DE EPI -AeN K 1 l HOP 1 d -� NKA.BrY �} S ®O I IUS p� MOOD EDINA _ . A REVVOO`�'- MINNETONKA 21Q - - - - -- o EDEN PRAIRIE CHANHASSE RICHFIELD - L� t. Q A G BLOOMINGTON n s G1 o v � ° V u Map cteabed bythe Her¢epin County EP Division <>- Octcb er 12, 20Q9 Her n pan C a mty nnlms m warnky, represerdahor� or guarantee as to the D 1.25 2.5 S mrderd, accuracy, tiimhmss, mcornpletemss I of any of the ir£arnation provided herein Nlil B 5 • Page 104 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Thunderstorms i Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact I High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Page 105 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Hennepin County Tornado Facts T O r n a d 0 The September 16, 2006 tornado that hit the city of 3.2.11 Hazard Description Rogers was on the ground for 8 A tornado is a violently rotating miles, was at its column of air extending between, and in contact with, a cloud and the maximum, 100 surface of the earth. Literally, in order for a vortex to be classified as a yards in width, and caused width, tornado, it must be in contact with the ground and the cloud base. million in prop- Tornadoes are nature's most violent storms. Spawned from powerful erty damage. p p thunderstorms, tornadoes can cause fatalities and devastate a neighborhood in seconds. A tornado appears as a rotating, funnel- shaped cloud that extends from a thunderstorm to the ground with whirling winds that can reach up to 200 miles per hour. Damage paths can be in excess of one -mile wide and 50 miles long. Every state is at some risk from this hazard. Some tornadoes are clearly visible, while rain or nearby low- hanging Radar Image of the clouds obscure others. Occasionally tornadoes develop so rapidly that Rogers Tornado little, if any, advance warning is possible. The September The United States has the highest incidence of tornadoes worldwide, with 21, 2005 Brook- lyn Park tornado more than 1,000 occurring every year. This is due to the unique touched down geography that brings together polar air from Canada, tropical air from the just west of the Gulf of Mexico, and dry air from the Southwest to clash in the middle of intersection of the country, producing thunderstorms and the tornadoes they spawn. Oxbow Creek Dr & Kyle Ave. Tornado History There have been over 40 tornado touchdowns in Hennepin County since 1820. Of those tornadoes, the most significant was the May 6 tornado outbreak of 1965. A map of Hennepin County tornado touchdowns can be found on page 4. The 1965 Twin Cities tornado outbreak occurred in and around Hennepin The Brooklyn Park tor- County and is nicknamed "The Longest Night" and is most often nado on September 21, remembered for the two EF4 tornadoes that hit Fridley, MN. Thirteen 2005. people were killed in the six tornadoes that touched down that day. Four tornadoes were rated F4, one was rated F3, and the other was rated a F2. Page 106 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Hennepin County Tornado Facts This event caused more dollar damage than any single weather event in Minnesota history at the time. It was also voted a tie for the "fifth most • Tornadoes have significant Minnesota Weather Event of the 2& Century" with the 1965 produced more Mississippi & Minnesota River Flooding by the experts convened by the than $190,000 in Minnesota Climatology Office. property damage to Hennepin Another outbreak of tornadoes struck on July 18, 1986 in Brooklyn Park. County since Known as the "Television Tornado ", the Brooklyn Park tornado would January 1, 1960. eventually strike Brooklyn Park before entering into Anoka County and The worst tor- hitting the cities of Fridley, Spring Lake Park, Arden Hills, and Coon nado outbreak in Rapids. the history of the Twin Cities oc- The Brooklyn Park tornado was a fully televised event, covered by KARE- curred on May 6, 11 helicopter pilot Max Messmer and his cameraman Tom Empey. Both 1965 and in- staff members were already in the air en route to another story when the F2 cluded Hennepin began to develop in Brooklyn Park. The tornado itself was an F2 and County. The cit- moving slowly (no faster than 10 to 15 miles an hour), allowing the ies of Deephaven, Min- cameras to capture images that would later be studied by scientists to better netrista, Golden understand the qualities of the tornado. • Valley, and Min- There were no deaths and there was relatively little damage during the neapolis were all hit. In Hennepin tornado. The worst damage was at Springbrook Nature Center in Fridley. County alone, 6 The tornado spent more than 10- minutes in the nature center, uprooting people were 5,000 to 10,000 trees, including thousands that were a century old. killed and 138 Damage there was estimated as high as $250,000. Portions of the park injured. damage were left to help teach about the destructive power of tornadoes. Total property damage from the storm was estimated at $650,000. The Fujita Scale r-r The original Fujita Scale was devised in 1971 by Dr. Ted Fujita of the University of Chicago. It gave ratings of FO to F5 based upon the type and Photo of the Fridley tor- severity of damage that the tornado produced. At that time there were very nado on May 7, 1965. few actual measurements of tornado wind speeds that he could relate to the One of six tornadoes that damage, but he used them together with a lot of insight to devise touched down in the Twin cities that day. approximate wind speed ranges for each damage category. In subsequent years, structural engineers have examined damage from many tornadoes. They use knowledge of the wind forces needed to i Page 107 SECTIANoNE Risk Assessment Hennepin County Tornado Facts damage or destroy various buildings and their component parts to estimate the wind speeds that caused the observed damage. What they found was • On June 18, 1939 that the original Fujita Scale wind speeds were too high for categories F3 a destructive tor- nado struck Cor- and higher. This may have led to inconsistent ratings, including possible coran, Maple overestimates of associated wind speeds. Grove, and With these inconsistent ratings in mind, a panel of meteorologists and Champlin, before crossing into engineers convened by the Wind Science and Engineering Research Center Anoka County. at Texas University, devised the new Enhanced Fujita Scale, which became In all, 200 people active as of February 1, 2007. The EF Scale incorporates more damage were injured and indicators and degrees of damage than the original F Scale, allowing more 9 lives were detailed analysis and better correlation between damage and wind speed. taken. The enhanced Fujita map can be found below. • A tornado ap- pears as a rotat- ing funnel- shaped cloud that extends from a thunderstorm to i the ground with • whirling winds that can reach 200 mph. Dam- age paths can be in excess of one mile wide and 50 miles long. • Some tornadoes - are clearly visi- ble, while rain or nearby low - hanging clouds obscure others. Occasionally, Y tornadoes de- velop so rapidly Picture of a tornado crossing just to the west of the junction of Highway that little, if any, 7 and 101 on May 6, 1965. advance warning is possible. 0 Page 108 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Hennepin County Tornadoes from 1820 through 2009 -- � Touchdowns with Fujita Ranking Generalized tornado path with EF ranking from NOAA --V- Very generalized tornado path with EF ranking based on T. Grazulis publication i i I .ROGERS� DAYTON _I HASSAN TWS( CHAMPLIN GREENFIE 0 0 CORCORAN - BROOKLYN PARK Fh r MAPLE ¢ROVE ; —.- B; R L • -- — _ -- --- - -T— NT RE - &. NE — MEDIfJ PLYMOUTH HOP Y�' - INDEPENDENCE ).i BINS E ONY MEDICIN E, MINNEAP N -- - LA1�E — -_ - — _ ,GOLDEN VALLT � r *h jETRISTA L- if bT LOUISPARk a . , Avel y t HOP!!INS_! _ L EDI MINNETONKA l RICHFIELD CHANHA t EDEN PRAIRIE � - 64 BLOOMINGTON u e Ma created by the Hennepin County ivisim w 1 � Sep ber 16, 2009. Hennepin Co makes no 0 1.5 s 3 6 warranty, representation, or g ee as to the content, accuracy, timeli , or completeness I i of any ofthe inform providedherein Mlles Page 109 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Tornado I Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low I pact Moderate Impact High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact I Moderate Impact I High Impact • Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact • Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Page 110 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Air Line Facts • In 2008 MSP Trans p ort at ion(Air, roadway, served 34 million railway /transit, and passengers and accommodated pipeline) , 450,044 landings and takeoffs. 3.2.12 Transportation Description Transportation systems available in • MSP ranks 16th Hennepin County include air, rail, in North America roadway, pipeline, and transit. All of for the number of these systems and supporting transportation resources provide services on travelers served a national, regional, and local basis and are critical to local, regional and and has the 12th national commerce. While highway traffic accidents are a daily busiest airfield in occurrence, transportation accidents with impacts to local commerce or the United States. resulting in transportation diversions are fairly rare. ♦ MSP is a valu- Air able economic generator, sup- Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport porting more than 150,000 jobs, On average, approximately a half - million landings and $10.7 billion in takeoffs (aircraft operations) occur at Minneapolis /St. - business revenue, Paul International Airport (MSP) every year. In 2008, $6 billion in per- MSP accommodated just under that with 450,044 - = sonal income, operations. Most operations occur during daytime $1.3 billion in hours, however, to accommodate cargo business and Mai local purchases, flight schedule changes, some overnight operations are and $626 million necessary. Regarding MSP Airport (technically, it's partially in Hennepin in state and local County and partially in Ramsey County), there has never been an airplane taxes. crash involving an air carrier. There have been two military aircraft accidents dating back to the 1950s Incident History On Tuesday, June 5, 1956, an Air Force F89 Scorpion fighter jet carrying Page 111 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Air Line Facts 104 live rockets crashed into a car on a road adjacent to what is now ♦ The Minneapolis/ known as Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. A 38- year -old St. Paul Airport Minneapolis woman and her 5- is also home to the Minneapolis/ year -old daughter were killed. St. Paul Joint Air Four days later on Saturday, June Reserve Station, supporting both 9, 1956, a F9F4 Jet crashed into ' - y — Air Force Re- a row of homes north of the of serve Command Wold Chamberlain field at 9:30 p and National a.m. The jet left a military - -: Guard Flight Op- formation to make an r erations. k � ` emergency landing and hit the ♦ The Minneapolis/ street in front of 5804 and 5808 St. Paul Airport Forty Avenue S, near the Firefighters rushed to extinguish a fire in one of has two termi- main gate of the Navy base. the houses hit by debris (Minneapolis Star nals, both of which are named The plane then bounced into the photo) for famous Min- home of Donald and Jane nesotans: The Garles of 5820 Forty-Sixth and exploded, sending the plane and fuel • Lindbergh Ter- over the neighborhood. In urinal (named after aviator all, six people were killed, Charles Lind- and nine others wounded. z bergh) and the Humphrey Ter- At a press conference at minal (named for - - former US Vice Navy headquarters, Col. _ President Hubert Frank F. Gill, Humphrey). commanding officer of the naval air stations, explained that Armstrong Before the 1960s, numbers and arrows were some- -. and two other pilots had times added to photos to help explain what hap - taken off on a tactical pened. Here's the original caption from this Min- training mission. According neapolis Star photo: Jet plane struck the ground (1), Aerial view of MSP In to Gill, the pilot appeared to bounced and struck again (2), then crashed into ternational Airport be having some trouble with house (3). the plane and was breaking formation to head back to the airport. • Page 112 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Air Line Facts • Flying Cloud Some 20 or more children were at play when the plane crashed, some Airport is classi- of them were littered with debris and flaming fuel. Five of them were fied as a "minor" reported in "very critical" condition with burns. One other child was by the Metropoli- taken to the same hospital with less severe injuries. Three more were tan Council and taken to the Navy infirmary at the airport. is one of six re- liever airports in the Twin Cities Flying Cloud Airport metropolitan area. Flying cloud Airport is located in south central Eden Prairie. The general aviation airport that serves single engine piston, twin- " engine piston, turboprop and Overhead shot of Flying corporate turbojet aircraft is owned and operated by the Metropolitan Cloud Airport in Eden Airports Commission (MAC). Flying Cloud is classified as a "minor" Prairie, MN. airport by the Metropolitan Council and is one of six reliever airports in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The airport has three runways ♦ Flying Cloud Airport was first and each year has approximately 120,000 take -offs and landings. The used during following is the number of take -offs and landings over the past five World War II to years: train U.S. Navy • 2004 - 163,470 pilots. Navy • 2005 - 157,712 planes that were stationed at • 2006 - 144,178 Wold- • 2007 - 118,178 Chamberlain • 2008— 116,696 Field used the grass strip to make practice Incident History approaches. Flying Cloud Airport has witnessed a number of aviation crashes over the years. Below is a list of the crashes that were provided to us by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). e • On October 5, 2009 at 1233 central daylight time, a twin- engine Temco D -16 -A, N124N, sustained substantial damage when it impacted trees and terrain near Eden Prairie, MN, after a loss of • Page 113 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Airline Facts Crystal Airport is power of one engine during an en route climb. A post - impact fire ♦ a reliever airport consumed part of the airplane. Non - Fatal. of the Metropoli- tan Airports ♦ On August 12, 2009 at 1138 central daylight time, a Beech El BS, s Commission and N3038C, collided with the terrain following a loss of control while has three paved runways, one turf circling the Flying Cloud Airport in Eden Prairie, MN. Both the runway, and two commercial rated pilot and the student pilot passenger were fatally non- precision injured. The airplane was substantially damaged by impact forces instrument ap- and post impact fire. 2 Fatal. proaches. ♦ On July 15, 2007 at 9005 central daylight time, a Mooney M -20J, N4785H, collided with the terrain following a loss of control during takeoff at the Flying County Airport, Eden Prairie, MN. The private pilot received minor injuries. The airplane was substantially damaged. Non - fatal. An Aerial shot of Crystal Airport in Crystal MN ♦ On October 9, 2004, about 0822 central daylight time, an experimental amateur -build Buss Roterway Exec helicopter, ♦ The Metropolitan N82DR, operated by a commercial pilot, sustained substantial Airports Com- damage on impact with terrain while on its base leg to runway 28L mission operates at Flying Cloud Airport. Non - Fatal. six general avia- tion airports known as ♦ On July 2, 2003, at 2242 central daylight time, an experimental reliever air- amateur - built, Debay Dragonfly Mark II, N25JD, owned and ports" because piloted by a private pilot, sustained substantial damage when it they help relieve congestion relieve impacted trees and terrain near Flying Cloud Airport (FCM), Eden at MSP. Prairie, Minnesota. Non - Fatal. g'PO��s S9'Hr ♦ On July 19, 2001, at 1730 central daylight time, a Mooney M -20R, i� t N2HW, owned and operated by a private pilot, was destroyed T t when it impacted trees and a road in a residential area 1 1/2 miles T co qot, �l 1 /RPORtg G west of the Flying Cloud Airport (FCM), Eden Prairie, Minnesota. , � t �" ° A post -crash fire ensued. 1- Fatal. ♦ On November 25, 1988, at 1839 central standard time, a Piper PA- Page 114 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Airline Facts The Humphrey 28 -R200, N2988R, was substantially damaged when it swerved off ♦ Terminal used to the runway during a full stop landing and impacted the VASI handle all inter- lights. The private pilot and two passengers were not injured. Non - national arrivals, Fatal. but is now used mostly for charter airlines and other • On September 8, 1988, at 1900 central daylight time, a Culver - carriers, includ- Revolution Mini 500, N6269R, piloted by a private pilot, was ing Sun Country, substantially damaged when it collided with the ground shortly AirTran, and after a total loss of power while hovering. Non - Fatal. Southwest. • Airlines out of Minneapolis /St. ♦ On November 25, 1988, at 1839 central standard time, a Piper PA- Paul Airport 28 -8200, N2988R, was substantially damaged when it swerved off serve 131 non- stop markets the runway during a full stop landing and impacted the VASI from MSP, in- lights. The private pilot and two passengers were not injured. Non - cluding 116 do- Fatal. mestic and 14 • international markets. Com- • On February 8, 1998, at 1440 central standard time, a Beech C -23, pared to other N18766, piloted by a private pilot, was substantially damaged metropolitan ar- during a collision with a hangar, chain link fence, ditch and eas in the United highway during a go- around maneuver following a bounced States, only Den- ver serves landing on runway 18 (2,691'X 75', dry asphalt) at the Flying slightly more Cloud Airport, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. Non - Fatal. non -stop markets per capta. ♦ On September 8, 1996, at 1655 central daylight time a Cessna 182, N5401 B, sustained substantial damage during a forced landing. i, The pilot reported a loss of engine power and attempted to reach the runway, however he landed short of the runway. Non - Fatal. • On August 21, 1996, at 1330 central daylight time, a Beech C -23, N18780, operated by General Aviation Services, sustained substantial damage during a hard landing at the Flying Cloud Airport, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. Non - Fatal. ♦ On December 10, 1995, at 2330 central standard time, a Beech Page 315 i Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Transportation Facts B90, N551 SS, operated by Executive Aviation, Eden Prairie, County Roads Minnesota, collided with a hangar during taxi from landing at the ♦ generally serve Flying Cloud Airport, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The airplane was cities with popu- substantially damaged. Non - Fatal. lations under 5,000 population ♦ On February 13, 1994, at 1633 hours central standard time, a Piper and they carry low levels carry traf- Tomahawk PA -38 -112, N23797, operated as a rental aircraft by fic volumes. Ap- Thunderbird Aviation, Inc., of Minneapolis, Minnesota, impacted proximately 40 static lines between power poles on final approach to Runway 27R centerline miles of the county at Flying Cloud Airport. A section of the right wing leading edge roadway system and upper surface departed the aircraft. The aircraft came to rest are designated as approximately 300 feet further on the flight path and was county road. destroyed. The pilot was seriously injured. Non - Fatal. ♦ The economic vitality and the • On December 23, 1993, at 1207 central standard time, a Beech overall quality of C23, N9228S, operated by General Aviation Services, collided life in the county with the terrain during a forced landing following a loss of engine are linked to the power. The power loss occurred while the airplane was circling to i provsion of ex- provision land on runway 27L at the Flying Cloud Airport, Eden Prairie, transportation Minnesota, while on an instrument training flight. Non - Fatal. systems includ- ing roadways, ♦ On April 22, 1990, at 20:45 central standard time, a Lake, transit systems and facilities, N9309N, while attempting to land, collided with a deer during the trails /paths, and landing flare. The right wing was sheared off, with the gear walkways. attached and the aircraft cart wheeled to a stop. Non - Fatal. • Based on statis- tics of the Metro- ♦ On April 16, 1990, at 1845 central standard time, a Cessna 210, politan Council, N6182R, attempted to land under gusty, variable wind conditions Hennepin County when the private pilot lost directional control and veered off the accounts for al- runway. The pilot attempted a go- around, but the aircraft bounced most half of all trip ends made in several times and the wing struck the terrain and cart- wheeled. the region. Non Fatal. Page 116 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Transportation Roadway/Bridges w _ Facts _ Roadway -q ♦ Principal arterials include interstate -- highways and Hennepin County is likely to 45 - certain major experience an increase of IkN state trunk high- accidents along our highways as ways. Principal arterials serve congestion increases. Many y major centers of accidents involved rain, high speeds, and heavy traffic. These activity, the cor- conditions are certainly not unique, as rain, snow, and fog are ridors having the common, especially during the winter months, while heavy traffic and highest traffic volumes, and the high speeds are common throughout the year. Currently, Hennepin longest trip County has over 2,000 lane miles and it is estimated that motorists lengths. traveled 2.0 billion miles on the county highway system in 2008. .i Crash data is obtained annually from the Minnesota Department of • Public Safety. Basic statistical analysis includes the review of countywide crash rates and comparisons to other crash rate trends. Table 1 shows the historical crashes and crash rates for Hennepin Example of a principal County. Beginning in 1998, crashes within the City of Minneapolis arterial would be High- were added to the county totals (about 55% of all county crashes occur way 100. This picture is in Minneapolis). taken just south of Glen- wood Avenue. Hennepin County Crashes & Crash Rate 10.00 9.00 , w ♦ Minor arterials make up the class .6? S 7.00 m� of roadways in- 6.00 cludin a few g E e 5.00 minor state high- 2L 2 4.00 ways, most A 3.00 county roads, and . 2.00 some major city U 1 streets. 0.00 p p . � Cautdy Role (ExcL MOO Ytar ...r.. Canty Rile (wah lips) Taw Craehl/! 1,000 • - -•- -Total Crashes hNth Mph l Table 1 Page 117 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Bridge Facts i ♦ The Lowry Ave- Bridges k s nue Bridge, an important trans- Based on data provided by the Mn/ portation corridor DOT Bridge Office, Hennepin and neighbor- County has 873 bridges. However, hood connection in Minneapolis this data neglects about one -third closed in 2008 of the bridges in the county since and new con- these bridges are based on bridges struction is an- with a span of 20 feet or longer. ticipated to begin in 2010, with a reopening date of Bridge Collapse/Deficiency History November of 2011. On Wednesday, August 1, 2007 the eight- lane,1,907 foot -long I -35W highway bridge over. the Mississippi River in Minneapolis experienced a catastrophic failure in the main span of the deck truss. As a result, 1,000 feet of the deck truss collapsed, with about 456 feet of the main f span falling 108 feet into the river below. The collapse resulted in 13 deaths and 145 people injured. Major safety issues identified in the • The Hennepin investigation included insufficient bridge design firm quality control Avenue Bridge is procedures for designing bridges and insufficient Federal and State officially the Fa- procedures for reviewing and approving bridge design plans and ther Louis Hen- calculations, lack of guidance for bridge owners, and lack of inspection honor of the 17 nepin Bridge guidance for conditions of gusset plate distortion. Century explorer Louis Hennepin Following the collapse, Mn/DOT conducted an extensive survey of who discovered bridges across Minnesota, including Hennepin County. Of the 873 Saint o falls a short Anthony y bridges across Hennepin County 86.1 /o were rated structurally tance downriver. sufficient, while 54 bridges were rated structurally deficient. The average age of Hennepin County bridges is 34 years. A bridge's sufficiency rating provides an overall measure of its condition and its also used to determine eligibility of federal funds. A bridge sufficiency rating involves a number of factors including (but not limited to) structural condition, traffic volume, number of lanes, roadway width, clearances, and importance of national security and public use. The structural condition of the bridge accounts for a majority of the rating. Page 118 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Transit Facts Metro Transit Bridges are considered "structurally deficient" if primary load - carrying • ridership for elements are in "poor" condition. Being classified as "structurally 2004 was 53.9 ` deficient" does not imply that a bridge is unsafe (an unsafe bridge million, 2005 would never be allowed to remain in service). In order to remain in was 61.8 million, service, a structurally deficient bridge usually requires significant 2006 was 64.4 million, 2007 maintenance and may have its load capacity reduced. was 77 million, and 2008 was 81.8 million. Railway &Transit :..... ♦ There are 937 busses, 2,660 em- Railway ployees, and eleven major fa- There are several railroad cilities associated with Metro Tran- companies that carry freight sit. through Hennepin County, and those include: Canadian Pacific, ♦ Each weekday Soo Line, and Burlington Northern (Santa Fe). These lines pose the • customers board Metro Transit greatest risk to Hennepin County due to the fact that they transport buses an average hazardous materials through the county on a yearly basis. of 240,000 times. ♦ The Hiawatha History Corridor is con- nected to some of Typically railroads move about 1.7 to 1.8 million carloads of hazardous Minnesota's materials yearly, with roughly 105,000 of these carloads being toxic highest traffic inhalation hazard (TIH) materials, such as chlorine and anhydrous generators in- cluding down- ammonia. Over 64 percent of TIH materials are currently transported town Minneapo- by rail. The railroads have an outstanding record in moving all goods lis, U of M, air- safely. The vast majority of hazardous materials shipped by rail every port, and the Mall year arrive safely and without incident, and train accidents involving a of America. release of hazardous materials that cause death are rare, even while trail traffic volumes have increased steadily. Railroad companies typically do their own routing assessments and for the most part, MNDOT does not have hard data on the kinds of hazardous materials that are transported through the county, but it is assumed that a large majority of the hazardous materials do come through the county. 0 Page 119 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Transit Facts Transit ♦ There is no fare _ required between the Lindbergh The inherently open nature of = a= and Humphrey P Y public transportation systems, Terminals sta- the quantities of people they _ 1 ' tions on the Hia- watha Line. Ser- transport each day, and the vice operates 24- diverse and often times hours a day be- heavily populated areas tween the airport through which they operate, make such systems viable targets for stations. various criminal activities including acts of terrorism. The terrorist • In its first five attacks of September 11, 2001 and the nation's continuing "war on years of opera- terrorism" has created an environment of heightened risk throughout tion (June 2004 the nation and has further increased the need for security hardening gh May through within the nation's public transportation systems. boarded the Hia- watha light -rail Metro Transit Bus System trains 42.9 mil- lion ti Rid- • tmes. d- lion in Metro Transit is the regional transit authority formed under Minnesota totaled 10.2 mil- Statute 473.405, tasked to develop and operate a high capacity lion - 12.3 per- transportation system, including Metro Transit bus services, the cent higher than Hiawatha Light Rail system, and Northstar commuter rail. Metro 2007 and the first time annual rail Transit is the nation's 11th largest bus system, providing roughly 90 ridership has percent of the 81.8 million bus trips taken annually in the Twin Cities. topped the 10 million mark. Hiawatha Light Rail Transit System Metro Transit provides light rail transportation services to customers within the Twin Cities metropolitan area through the existing Light Rail Line. At present, the Hiawatha Light Rail line is the only LRT in the area. The Light Rail Line provides rail service within the Hiawatha Corridor, originating in downtown Minneapolis, through a 1.8 tunnel under the Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport to the Mall of America. Page 120 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment • Transit Facts • The Northstar Northstar Commuter Line Commuter Line began service The Northstar Commuter Rail line is a 40.1 mile commuter rail line from Big Lake to from Minneapolis to Big Lake, Minnesota including a 4 -block downtown Min- extension to the existing Light Rail Transit (LRT) line. There are six neapolis on No vember 16, No- (6) passenger stations along the commuter line located at Big Lake, Elk River, Anoka, Coon Rapids, Fridley, and Minneapolis. Northstar • The Northstar commuter trains share the tracks with freight trains and Amtrack Commuter Rail passenger trains. trains share exist- ing BNSF Rail- way tracks with Potential Future Route freight trains be- VA Medicall tween Big Lake Center and downtown St. Clo Minneapolis. Current Proposal • The Northstar Commuter Rail • routes directly MEW _ through the 10- mile Emergency Planning Zone _.. (EPZ) of the Monticello Nu- clear Generating Plant. St, Paui Bus Routes 16 and 50 �It00[VpO�i Bus Route 94 VA Medical Potential Station Locations Center Hawatha Unz % i� The Northstar Com Commuter Rail International Airport INIMN muter Rail in Big Lake, Mall of America Minnesota. Northstar Commuter Line route from Big Lake to Minneapolis. Page 121 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Transit Facts The Northstar Transit History ♦ Commuter Rail project began in Below is a listing of the accidents and deaths that have occurred since May of 1997 the Light Rail Transit (LRT) System began in 2005. when 30 coun- ties, cities, town- ship and regional 2005 - In 2005 there were six (6) LRT vs. pedestrian accents and three rail authorities (3) LRT vs. vehicle accents. There were also three (3) created the joint suicide by train attempts. 1 fatality. powers board known as e th Northstar the 2006- In 2006 there was one (1) LRT vs. pedestrian and six (6) LRT dor li 1 f Development vs. vehicle accidents. fatality. ty. Authority (NCDA) to ad- 2007- In 2007 there were three (3) LRT vs. vehicle accidents and 1 dress the in- creased need for other unspecified accident. 0 fatalities. additional trans- portation solu- 2008- In 2008 there were four (4) LRT vs. pedestrian accidents and tions between St. two (2) LRT vs. vehicle accidents. 1 fatality. • Cloud and Min- neapolis. 2009- In 2009 there were nine (9) LRT vs. vehicle accidents and four ♦ There are six sta- (4) LRT vs. pedestrian accidents. There were also two (2) bus tions along the accidents. 4 fatalities. Northstar Com- muter Line and those include: Big Lake, Elk River, Anoka, Coon Rapids - Riverdale, Fridley, and Tar- get Field. - - — N ORTH_STAR' _ COMMUTER.RA,IL-, Page 122 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment • Pipeline Facts ♦ The Minnesota Pipeline Pipeline CAER (Community Pipeline incidents present some of the most Awareness and dangerous situations an emergency Emergency Re- responder may encounter. Pipelines contain sponse) Associa- tion is a collabo- flammable, hazardous and even deadly ration of pipeline petroleum gasses, liquids, and other operators in the chemical products that present a myriad of hazards and risks that vary state, working to depending on the topography, weather, and properties of the material. prevent incidents, promote public awareness and Hennepin County has hundreds of miles of pipeline and those include pipeline safety. both gas transmission pipelines and hazardous liquid pipelines. There ♦ Pipeline leaks are several companies that own these lines including: CenterPoint repaired per mile Energy, Koch Pipeline Company, L.P., Magellan Midstream Partners, were reduced by L.P., Northern National Gas Company, NuStar Pipeline Operating 30% from the Partnership L.P., and Xcel Energy. A map of the transmission years 2001 through 2004. pipelines across Hennepin County is on page 14 of this profile. • ♦ The Minnesota Pipeline History Office of Pipeline Safety is affili- Pipeline leaks can and have occurred on a yearly basis. Although ated with Gopher State One -Call as Hennepin County pipeline data was not available, the Minnesota the enforcement Office of Pipeline Safety states that state -wide, an average of seven authority for the federal reportable incidents /accidents have occurred per year, and staff "Call Before You have investigated an average of 200 reported events per year since Dig" law, Minne- sota Statutes 1999. Despite expanded education efforts, the leading cause of 216D. pipeline leaks and other underground facility failures remains damage by excavation activity. To continue to help mitigate these incidents, the Minnesota Office of Pipeline Safety is affiliated with the Gopher State One -Call as the enforcement authority for the "Call Before You GOPHER STATE Dig" law. To further help secondary effects of transportation ONE CALL accidents DOT for interstate operators. Inspections include and evaluation of the operator's policies, procedures and training qualification records, in conjunction with field observations of various practices and conditions. • Page 123 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Hennepin County Transmission Pipelines The Transmission Pipelines dataset is compiled by the Pipeline and Hazardous Transmission Pipelines Materials Safety Administration and gives the extent ofgas transmission Gas Transmission Pipelines pipelines and hazardous liquid pipelines in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Hazardous Liquid Pipelines Fug_ ER.> DAYTON HAS SAN TWSP. CHAMPLIN DOVER OSSEO CORCORAN MAPLE GROVE BROOKE PARK GREENFIELD RO FORD BROOKLYN CE T R LORETTO MEDINA NEWHOP RYSTAL • INDEPENDENCE PLYMOUTH ROBBINSDALE sT ANT - IN' , MAPLE PLAIN - - - MEDICINE LAKE "i.0, GO ALLEY LONG LAI.E ORONO `NAYZATA MINNEAPO S VN'JODLAND ST UIS PARK: MINNETRIST'. MINNETONKABEACH MOUNDSPRING PARK DEEPHAV JETONKA HOPKIN TONKA BAY ST ONIF IUS GREENWC� E IOR SHOREWYOOD 'NA FF MSP INTL Al PO RICH LD d FT SNELLLO3 RR , -HA ASSEN ++ EDEN PRAIRIE BLOOMI M E Map created by the Hennepin County EP Division W � November 13, 2009 Hennepin County makes no s warranty, representation, or guarantee as to the 0 1 2 4 content, accuracy, tunelmess, or completeness l I l of any ofthe information provided herein. Miles Page 124 Mitigation Plan Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Transportation Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: g g y ae g g P High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Page 125 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Winter Storm Facts Snow totals be- Winter S t o r m s tween 7 and 9 inches fell on De- 3.2.13 Hazard Description cember 8, 2005 in Minneapolis, Winter storms are among nature's most E cancelling 100 impressive weather spectacles. They can flights at the range from moderate snow over a few hours to blizzard conditions with Minneapolis /St. blinding wind - driven snow that last several days. Some winter storms Paul Airport. also contain freezing rain that falls on roads and power lines creating extensive damage and hazardous conditions. Some winter storms may be Minnesota's first large enough to affect several states while others may affect only a single winter storm community. There are three basic ingredients necessary for a winter warning was is- storm to develop: cold air, moisture, and lift, such as a front. sued by the U.S. Army Signal Winter storms can be accompanied by strong winds creating blizzard Corps on Novem- conditions with blinding wind - driven snow, severe drifting, and dangerous ber 8, 1870. wind chills. Strong winds with these storms can knock down trees, utility poles, and power lines. These winds can put pedestrians at risk to Winter storms are frostbite, if outdoors for a longer period of time. known as decep- tive killers be- Winter storms can also contain freezing rain. Heavy accumulations of ice cause most can bring down trees, electrical wires, telephone poles and lines, and deaths are indi- communication towers. Communications and power can be disrupted for rectly related to days while utility companies work to repair the extensive damage. Even the storm. Peo- small accumulations of ice may cause extreme hazards to motorists and ple die in traffic pedestrians. accidents on icy roads and from Winter storms also contain heavy snow, which can immobilize a region hypothermia and paralyze a city, stranding commuters and stopping the flow of from prolonged supplies. Accumulations of snow can collapse buildings and knock down exposure to cold. power lines. In rural areas, homes and farms may be isolated for days, and unprotected livestock may be lost. The cost of snow removal, repairing damages, and loss of business can have large economic impacts on cities and towns. Page 126 SECTION Risk Assessment Winter Storm Facts There are various types of winter precipitation that accompanies winter • A very heavy storms. Snow can fall as flurries, which is light snow falling for short winter storm durations, to heavy snow which can fall in bursts and be accompanied by dropped 12 inches of snow strong winds. When those strong winds reach 35 mph, blizzard conditions across Hennepin exist with blowing snow reducing visibility to near zero. Sleet is also a County on March form of precipitation in winter storms. Sleet is rain drops that freeze into 9, 1999. The ice pellets before reaching the ground. One of the most hazardous forms of heaviest bands dropped between precipitation in winter storms is freezing rain, which is rain falling onto 14 and 17 inches surfaces with temperatures below freezing, causing the rain to freeze on in the southern contact and form a coating or glaze of ice. half of the county. A strong low pressure system moved up ; a ,,,,,," through Wiscon- sin on March 1, • . 2007, dropping more than a foot of snow across o ° ° +►oo .!yr... C ° o ° O the county. 18 r '0000 °8 ° `� M inches fell in""'• ' "� = c ; o o cae � 0 .w OOI�c. Minnetonka. The ; ' 'a' ;' ,`'' a ', ° �° ' •• Jq r . ,s , o 0 0 : *s storm closed hun- j j 'a „' a ao 0 O dreds of schools Forma d o,kip�•tan Ordinary 5 t" 0 'CO oo n ii n 9..e &*W ve+as SFA)*- an" min Amma ptu.l (kOpn Bain) W&L ") Ilk" ory"Is due to roads be- ing impassable. A diagram of the different forms water has at certain temperatures. • A winter storm with very heavy snow hit Henne- pin County on Winter Storm History Dec 14, 1996, bringing 14 Hennepin County has had a significant history of winter storms in the past. inches to Rock- ford, and 7 to 10 These storms range from snow storms, blizzards, and ice storms. The inches across the following pages list the history of blizzards and ice storms, including a link rest of the to some of the worst winter storms in the history of Hennepin County. county. Page 127 SECT18NONE Risk Assessment 0 Ice Storm Facts • Freezing precipi- tation has caused over $16 billion in property losses 7 T in the U.S. alone 7=' and accounts for 20 percent of all ; I r v , winter - related injuries. r • The average vic- tims susceptible to ice storms are males over 40 years old. ♦ Insured property losses from ice A worker removes snow at the Minneapolis /St. Paul International Air- - storm events in port in Minneapolis on Thursday, March r, 2007. the U.S. averages 326 million dol- lars per year in , damages. I c e S t O r rn ♦ The weight of ice on a power line fora 300 foot Hazard Description span of power lines that are 1" _ thick coated with Ice storms, produced by freezing rain, '`- 1/4 inch of ice, are one of the most dangerous weather adds I I7lbs of occurrences in the world. Freezing rain accounts for a quarter of all winter weight to the ob- ject. related events in the United States and half of these develop into ice storms. Ice storms are classified by their structural damage or by the approximate ♦ Accumulations of accumulation of 0.25 inches or more. Minor glazes of ice is hazardous for ice can increase traffic and pedestrians, but the real severity of ice storms are seen in full the branch weight of trees by 30 effect by the extensive power outages, halted air and ground transportation, times its original and considerable property damage. weight. Two essential elements are required to generate freezing rain: a deep warm • Page 128 SECTION Risk Assessment Ice Storm Facts The average an- layer (above freezing) over a shallow cold layer at the surface that has ♦ nual property temperatures below freezing. Whether the precipitation is rain or snow, as it damage loss in passes through the warm layer, it is converted into rain. Then as the rain ice storms based passes through the cold shallow layer just above the surface, its internal on an 8 year pe- temperature drops below the freezing point of water, however, the raindrop riod is 226 mil- lion dollars and remains liquid; a phenomenon called supercooling. When this supercooled accounts for liquid water drop hits surface that has a temperature below freezing, it about 60% of immediately freezes upon contact. winter storm damages. ♦ Ice accumulates Cold ' Inc "'" � when super- u� eay.non cooled rain freezes on con- • , 1 tact with sur- • , faces, such as Deep • tree branches, Warm that are at or be- low the freezing ! point. f • An ice storm cow layera__' warning is issued 25 F 3Z'F by the National , F Weather Service when freezing rain produces a The process of how freezing rain occurs in the atmosphere. significant and possibly damag- ing accumulation Ice Storm History of ice. The crite- ria for this warn- Here is a listing of ice storms that Hennepin County has seen in the past: ing varies from state to state, but typically will be May 1, 1935. An unusually late snow, sleet and ice storm over east central issued any time Minnesota. The heaviest ice was between St. Paul and Forest Lake and more than 1/4 of westward through Hennepin County. Ice accumulations of 1 to 1.5 inches ice is expected to were observed on wires. accumulate in an area. November 8, 1943. Severe ice storm in the Twin Cities with heavy snow Page 129 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Ice Storm Facts A freezing rain concentrated over southwest Minnesota. Many telephone poles came down ♦ advisory or freez- due to the ice and one Minneapolis man died from shoveling. ing drizzle advi- sory is issued November 30, 1945. Ice storm hits southern two- thirds of Minnesota. s when a small Freezing drizzle in the Twin Cities where about 1 /4 of an inch of ice amount of icing possible. accumulated damaging trees and power lines. ♦ Sleet is more dif- January 14, 1952. Sleet and ice storm hits Minnesota from St. Cloud south ficult to forecast than freezing rain into Iowa. 1,100 Northwestern Bell telephone lines collapsed due to ice because it devel- thickness 1 %2 inches. Minneapolis General Hospital treated 81 people, victims ops under more of falls on icy streets. specialized con- ditions. It is very January 16, 1967. A quick blizzard on January 16 sent temperatures similar to freez- ing rain in that is plummeting to record lows and caused the deaths of 7 Minnesotans in the causes surfaces to severe cold, while shoveling snow, or in auto wrecks. Eight days later, on the become very 24th, a rare January lightning storm changed over to freezing rain. One inch of slick, but is dif- ice in the Twin Cities brought down power lines and tree limbs, leaving 10,000• ferent because its easily visible. homes without power. ♦ Sleet forms when January 17, 1996. An extended period of rain and freezing rain resulted in rain passes significant icing conditions over parts of east central and southern Minnesota. through a cold layer of air and Over 1 inch of rain occurred over much of the area resulting in street flooding freezes into ice due to snow clogged sewers. 1/2 to 1 inch thick ice accumulations over much pellets. This oc- of the Minneapolis /St. Paul metro area resulted in significant tree damage and curs most often power outages. More than 180,000 in the winter, _ when warm air is metro residents were without power for forced over a some part of the storm. Red Cross layer of cold air. shelters were opened in the metro area . , b _ to assist people who were forced from x their homes due to a lack of heat. . B l i z z a r d Sleet accumulates on a deck Hazard Description • Page 130 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Blizzard Facts • The "Halloween Blizzards are dangerous winter storms that are a combination of blowing Blizzard" of 1991 claimed the lives snow and wind resulting in very low visibilities. While heavy snowfalls and of 20 Minneso- severe cold often accompany blizzards, they are not required. Sometimes tans due to traffic strong winds pick up snow that has already fallen, creating a ground accidents or heart blizzard. attacks from dig- ging out after the storm. Officially, the National Weather Service defines a blizzard as a storm which contains large amounts of snow or blowing snow, with winds in excess of • The Armistice 35 mph and visibilities of less than' /4 mile for an extended period of time Day Blizzard of Day sec- (at least 3 hours). When these conditions are expected, the National and on the Min- Weather Service will issue a "Blizzard Warning ". When these conditions nesota Climatol- are not expected to occur simultaneously, but one or two of these conditions ogy office's top are expected, a "Winter Storm Warning or "Heavy Snow Warning" may be five weather issued. events of the 20th century. Only • the 1930's dust Blizzard conditions often develop on the northwest side of an intense storm bowl outranks it. system. The difference between the lower pressure in the storm and the The Armistice higher pressure to the west creates a tight pressure gradient, or difference in Day Blizzard pressure between two locations, which in turn results in very strong winds. killed 49 people These strong winds pick up available snow from the ground, or blow any in Minnesota be- snow which is falling, creating very low visibilities and the potential for tween Nov 11 significant drifting snow. and 12, 1940. Blizzard History On Halloween morning, a low- pressure system developed over Southeast Texas and moved rapidly northeast, reaching its maximum intensity just east of LaCrosse, WI on the afternoon of November 1 This storm Finding shelter during became known as the "Halloween Blizzard" in most of Minnesota, and the the Armistice Day Bliz- "Halloween Ice Storm" in Iowa and portions of Southeast Minnesota. zard in Minneapolis. The "Halloween Blizzard" of 1991 was a three day event: on October 31 St , rain and sleet began to change to all snow, November 1 St was an all -day snow and wind event, and by November 3 temperatures fell to -3 degrees • Page 131 I 'I SE&MON Risk Assessment Blizzard Facts Fahrenheit. • The blizzard that struck the Twin The Halloween Blizzard of 1991 broke the following Twin Cities records: Cities on Novem- ber 19th, 1981 ➢ Biggest Twin Cities storm: 28 inches (October 31 -Nov 3, 1991) dropped over a Old record: 20 inches (Jan 22 -23, 1982) foot of wet snow ➢ Deepest Twin Cities 24 -hour snowfall: 21 inches (Oct 31 -Nov 1, that caused the 1991). Old record 18.5 inches (Jan 23, 1982) inflated fabric of the Hubert H. ➢ Most snow in Twin Cities on Oct 31 St: 8.2 inches (1991). Humphrey Met- Old record: 0.4 inches (1954). rodome to col- ➢ Most now in Twin Cities on Nov 1 18.5 inches (1991). lapse and rip. Old record: 3.6 inches (1941). • White out condi- ➢ Earliest autumn below -zero low: 1991 -3 degrees (Nov 4, 1991). �. tions occur most Old record: -1 degrees (Nov 11, 1986). often with major ➢ Most snow in Twin Cities in October: 8.2 inches (1991). storms that pro- Old record: 5.5 inches (1905). duce drier, more powdery snow. • Wind chill tem- • perature is only defined for tem- peratures at or ti below 50 degrees Fahrenheit and wind speed above 3 mph. Bright R sunshine may increase wind T r chill temperature 32 81 by 10 to 18 de- 28 71 grees Fahrenheit. 24 61 20 51 16 41 12 30 8 20 4 '10 0 0 In cm Minnesota "Halloween Blizzard" Snowfall Page 132 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Blizzard Facts On November 10 Another significant blizzard in the Twin Cities history was the Armistice Day ♦ and 11, 1975, a G Blizzard on November 11, 1940. The weather was relatively benign the blizzard with morning of the November 11, 1940. Many people were outdoors, taking winds of 71 mph i advantage of the mild holiday weather. The weather forecast that morning was created waves up for colder temperatures and a few flurries. Few people were prepared for what to 15 feet on Lake Superior, was to come. The storm started with rain, however the rain quickly turned to sinking the Ed- snow. By the time the blizzard tapered off on the 12th, the Twin Cities had mund Fitzgerald. received 16.7 inches of snow, Collegeville 26.6 inches, and 20 -foot drifts were reported near Willmar. In all 49 Minnesotans lost their lives in this storm, ' many of them hunters trapped by the sudden turn of events. f • A severe blizzard is considered to AVA have tempera- tures near or be- low 10 degrees Fahrenheit, winds exceeding 45 mph, and visibil- ity reduced by snow to near zero. ♦ Blizzards in Min- Excelsior Boulevard, west of Minneapolis after the Armistice Day Storm nesota typically occur between October and Rated by the National Weather Service as Minnesota's "Storm of the Century", April; however, (January 10, 1975) a severe blizzard blasted the entire state with 1 to 2 feet of they occur with snow, winds as high as 80 mph, and below -zero temperatures. Drifts reaching the most fre- quency from 20 feet in height closed virtually every road in the state —some for as long as early November 11 days —to all traffic except snowmobiles. The storm center tracked from through the end south to north across the state, sending the barometer to record lows at of March. Rochester (28.63 "), Minneapolis (28.62 "), and Duluth (28.55 ", a state record). A train with 168 aboard was trapped near Willmar, 6,000 homes lost power in western Minneapolis, 15,000 head of livestock froze, and the Red Cross ® sheltered 16,672 people. The snow and cold claimed 35 lives. Page 133 SECTIONONE Risk Assessment Overall Hazard Ranking: Winter Storms Lake Minnetonka Regional Emergency Management Preparedness Planning and Review Committee: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact North Suburban Emergency Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact South Hennepin Emergency Management Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Minneapolis Planning Group: High Probability High Probability High Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Moderate Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact Low Probability Low Probability Low Probability Low Impact Moderate Impact High Impact • Page 134 Hennepin NOW Mi heal Plan Vulnerability Assessment S ECTION 4 • Hennepin County VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Nonnopin come" UNIOUon Plan Vulnerability Assessment 4.1 Vulnerability Assessment Vulnerability describes how exposed or susceptible to damage an asset is, and depends on an asset's construction, contents and economic value of its functions. This vulnerability analysis predicts the extent of damage that may result from a hazard event of a given intensity in a given area on the existing and future build environment. Like indirect damages, the vulnerability of one element of the community is often related to the vulnerability of another. Indirect effects can be much more widespread and damaging than direct effects. For example, damage to a ma- jor utility line could result in significant inconveniences and business disruption that would far exceed the cost of repairing the utility line. 4.1.1 Inventory Assets Hazards that occur in Hennepin County can impact facilities located in the County. A critical asset is defined as a facility in either the public or private sector that provides essential prod- ucts and services to the general public, is otherwise necessary to preserve the welfare and qual- ity of life in the County, or fulfills important public safety, emergency response, and/or disaster recovery functions. In order to inventory assets, Hennepin County used County data that listed all assets in the floodplains. This information was then sent to all the cities to confirm that no assets had been missed. Below is a table and map of the cities that have assets in the floodplains. • Asset Address GA Zip Code Normandale Lake Dam NA Bloomington NA Nine Mile Creek Dam NA Bloomington NA Ameribest Home Care LLC 7420 Brooklyn Blvd Brooklyn Center 55429 Center Park Senior Apart- 5415 69th Ave N Brooklyn Center 55429 ments North Residential Hospice 4201 Bass Lake Rd Brooklyn Center 55430 Riverwood Estates 215 65th Ave N Brooklyn Center 55429 BAPS Minneapolis LLC 2300 Freeway Blvd Brooklyn Center 55429 Page 135 NaNNONIN call" NNNIMBN Plan Vulnerability Assessment Asset Address city Zip Code Tornado Siren 10320 Zane Ave N Brooklyn Park 55443 Coon Rapids Dam NA Brooklyn Park NA Brooklyn Park Evan Free 7901 W Broadway Ave Brooklyn Park 55445 Amas Incorporated 3617 77th Ave N Brooklyn Park 55433 Fresenius Medical Care 12339 Champlin Dr Champlin 55316 Purgatory Creek Dam NA Eden Prairie NA Riley Lake Dam NA Eden Prairie NA Riley Lake Dam NA Eden Prairie NA • Southwest Metro Transit Sta- 14405 W 62nd St Eden Prairie 55346 tion Calvin Christian Academy 4015 Inglewood Ave S Edina 55416 ALC Edina High School Al- 6754 Valley View Rd Edina 55439 ternative IS Orthopedic Institute Surgical 8100 W 78th St Edina 55439 Center Home Instead Healthcare 4445 West 77th St Edina 55435 Berry Patch Colonial Child- 6200 Colonial Way Edina 55436 care Excelsior Methodist Church 881 3rd Ave Excelsior 55331 Highway 7 & Water Street Highway 7 & Water Street Excelsior 55331 Siren Colonial Acres Healthcare 5825 Saint Croix Ave N Golden Valley 55422 Center Page 136 Nn a ne In Cou Mltl edon Plan ulnerabili Assessment Asset Address City Zip Code v N9118011 Iltll u tv Heritage House Assisted Liv- 5825 Saint Croix Ave N Golden Valley 55422 ing The Caring Sisters Healthcare 6166 Olson Memorial High- Golden Valley 55433 way Rice Lake Dam NA Maple Grove NA Medicine Lake Dam NA Medicine Lake NA Morris T Baker Reserve Dam NA Medina NA River Services Inc Railway Minneapolis NA Facility De La Salle High School 1 De La Salle Dr Minneapolis 55401 St. Anthony Falls Upper Dam NA Minneapolis NA St. Anthony Falls Lower NA Minneapolis NA • Dam Lock & Dam no. 1 NA Minneapolis NA Lake Minnetonka Dam NA Minnetonka NA Minnetonka Public Works 11520 Minnetonka Blvd Minnetonka 55305 Hennepin County Shop Facil- 11522 Minnetonka Blvd Minnetonka 55305 ity Bantas Point Lift 12425 Bantas Point Road Minnetonka 55391 Crosby Lift 2565 Crosby Road Minnetonka 55391 West 34th Street Lift 9920 Lahti Lane Minnetonka 55305 Green Circle (Opus Lift) 5644 Green Circle Drive Minnetonka 55343 • Page 137 Nonnopin County NNNI lon Plan Vulnerability Assessment Asset Ad (I ress Citv Zip Code Green Circle (Opus Lift) 5644 Green Circle Drive Minnetonka 55343 Wells 6 & 7 10701 Greenbrier Road Minnetonka 55305 Plymouth Creek Dam NA Plymouth NA Plymouth Creek Elementary 16005 41 st Ave N Plymouth 55446 Cornerstone Assisted Living 3750 Lawndale Ln N Plymouth 55446 Cornerstone Home Living 3750 Lawndale Ln N Plymouth 55446 Plymouth Creek Dam NA Plymouth NA Sliver Lake Dam NA Shorewood NA . Westwood Healthcare Center 7500 W 22nd St St. Louis Park 55426 Cedar Manor Elementary 9400 Cedar Lake Rd St. Louis Park 55426 Common Ground Broadcast- NA St. Louis Park 55416 ing Methodist Hospital 6500 Excelsior Blvd St. Louis Park 55426 Carefocus Corporation 5811 Cedar Lake Rd St. Louis Park 55416 SCA License Corporation NA St. Louis Park 55416 Melrose Elementary 3525 Monterey Dr St. Louis Park 55416 Amedisys Home 5000 36th St W St. Louis Park 55416 Shadeway Group Home 522 Shadyway Rd Wayzata 55391 • Page 138 N9 County Mltlgatl0n Plan Vulnerability Assessment City of Bloomington Dams Infrastructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 100 -year Floodplain The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depict ed as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). - 500 -year Floodplain MINNETONKA ' � s MIhINEAPOLIS LEFT. SNELIMG�1TE ss r .? 2212 i 6? �i 6? 62 ED INA - -- MSP INTL. AIRPORT 100 � RICHFIELD ! FT. SNEI;LING TERR� I t � � �r FT. SNELLING TERRI I _ j 5 00 Normandale Lake Dam W ED RAIRIE 4r� Nine Mile Creek Dam n GTON Map created bythe Hennepin Courts' EP Dhriion October 29,20M. Hennepin Count/ mares no 0 2 warm*,, representation, or guarantee a to the content accuracy, timeliness, or completeness Many ofthe information provided herein. _ Mlles • Page 139 Hennepin County mWeadon Plan Vulnerability Assessment © Churches fra City of Brooklyn Center Healthcare Instructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zane Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 100 -year Floodplain The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted 500 -year Floodplain as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). OOKLYN PARK s2 Ameribest Home Care LLC I J I l" Center Park S enlor Apartments �sz SAPS Minneapolis LLC r Riverwood Estates I f BROOKLYN G North Residential Hospice CRYSTAL �— — l ll MINNEAPOLIS t 11 I � goo ROBB INSDALE Map created by the Hennepin County EP Dias ion O October 29, 2009, Hennepin County makes no /y,l warranty. representation, or guarantee as to the content accuracy, timeliness, or completeness Mil of arty of the information provided herein. • Page 140 Ne nnep in colon Mltl11men Plan Vulnerability Assessment r Cinf i r ' a y of Brooklyn Park struc ture within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone ¢{ Dams oodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Siren Location The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). © Churches Healthcare CHAWLIN 100 -year Floodplain X00 -year Floodplain f 10320 Zane Ave N Siren I ► MAPLE GROVE ' Coon Rapids Dam i i sw l L Lj_ 610 w � + -- / 2 52 L OSSEO t l , t . • L 'BROOKL'YN r I Brooklyn Pak Evan Free Church Amas Incorporated 1 MAPLE GROVE I r 1 BR LYN CENTER r 100 PLY M�O,UTH NEW HOPE — CRYSTAL tog Map created bythe Hennepin county EP Division O 1 octobe r 28, 2008. H en ne pin C o unIV mak es n o / warranty, representation, or guarantee as to the r content accuracy, timeliness, or completeness YY I I I I I I of arty of the Of or mation proni ded herein. Mlles Page 141 Nennepin County MffigWon Plan Vulnerability Assessment F of Champlin tructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone ® Healthcare, n zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or wlll be depicted 100 -year Floodplain as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM. - 500 -year Floodplain I I i . Fresenlus McJcal Care k DAYTON x k k AA+1PLN MAPLE GROVE l - SROOKLYNPARK I 1 Map created bythe Hennepin County EP Division O October 28, 2008. Hennepin County mak es no / L�� ware nty, representation, or guarantee as to the - V I I I I I I I I content accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of any ofthe information provided herein. Mlles Page 142 - i Hennepin County mmor lon Plan Vulnerability Assessment A Dams City of Eden Prairie Bus Facilities Infrastructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone - 100- yearFloodplain Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMAI. The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted 500-year Flood lain as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). y P i SHOREWOOD MINNETONKA I 62 62 -� Southwest Metro Transit Station EDINA Q - _ S � 2 12 �f � i 0 �� i �'CH A- JEN 3 i L 512 312 • EDENPRAIRIE Purgatory Creek D 169,t Rlley Lake Dam � t �. Riley Lake Dam BLOOMI GTON ti X 212 '198 i Map created 20 Hennepin County eion w Nemb es 1 17, 20D3. Hennepin County makes makkes s s no 0 1.4 warranty, representation, or guarantee as toih• content aoouracy, timeliness, or completeness of arry of the information pr"ded herein. Mlles • Page 143 Nonnopin County Mltl®atlon Plan Vulnerability Assessment F ty of Edina astructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone Childcare Centers Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted ® Healthcare as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Public Schools I Private Schools i - O HOPKINS f ST .,LOUIS PARK 100 - year Floodplain 500 - year Floodplain , Calvin Chnstian Academy 1� � MINNEAPOLIS • r W MINNETO A Berry Patch - Colonial Childcare 6? - 1 2' �p 62 1r \ ALC Edina Hlgh School Alternative - IS RICHFIELD EDEN PRAIRIE 0 " j j Orthopedic Institute Surgical Center Home Instead Healthcare i 1 BLOOMINGTON Map created bythe Hennepin County EP Division November 20, 2008. Hennepin County makes no warranty, representation, or guarantee as to the -- YY content ny ac p , or completeness MIIeS of a of the iMormation ion provi ded herein. Page 144 Nennepin County Mltlgatlon Plan Vulnerability Assessment City of Excelsior ® Siren Location Infrastructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone © c hurches Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 100 -year Floodplaln The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted as part of FEIVIA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). 500 -year Floodplain SHOREWOOD �! TONKA BAY /r \ r \` GREENWOOD i EXCELSIOR Exelsior Methodist Church i r Highway 7 and Water Street Siren 3; 7 7 \ Map created bythe Hennepin County EP Division O O November 20, 2008. Hennepin County makes no wawa My, representation, or guarantee as to the - I I content accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of any of th a information provided herein. Miles Page 145 Nannepin County Mi foam Plan Vulnerability Assessment i City of Golden Valley ® Healthcare Facilities Infrastructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone 100 -year Floodplain Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA. The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted - 500 -year Floodplain as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) ` I I i — IJ ........ I CRYSTAL — " "— ROBB INSDALE I j Leo � I NEW HOPE j I i I . I PLYMOUTH I Heritage House Assisted LMng Colonial Acres Healthcare Center 1 I I I The Caring Sisters Healthcare i GOLDS VA EY loo 55 a 55 M1 TONKA r i MINNEAPOLIS - -- ST LOUIS PA _ i I MINTTONKA Map created by the Hennepin County EP Dlaision 0 0. 6 December 4, 23X* Hennepin County mak es no warranty. representation, or 9ua rantee as to tie content accur acy, time liness, or complete nez of any of the information proN ded herein. Mlles Page 146 Ilonnepin Counri Mffigatlon Plan Vulnerability Assessment City of Maple Grove ! i t Dams Infrastructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 100 -year Floodplain The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). 500 -year Floodplain HASSAN TWSP DAYTON CHAWLIN t f16 I Rice Lake Dam BROOKLYN PARK4 CORCORAN cto g OSSEO . LE GROVE ( r l +.r BROOKL R N PARK 169 1 x NEDINA � — PL-YivIO[JTH, NEW HOPE< H Map created by the Hennepin Cou EP Drtr "sign r December 17,2009. Hennepin County makes no (y` 0 warranty, representation, or guarantee as to the -, `- r oo Ment, accuracy, timeliness, or completeness Y I 1 11 I 1 I of any ofthe information provided herein. Mlles Page 147 Ilonnouln Coin Mldn atlon Plan Vulnerability Assessment F ies of Medina and Loretto structure within the 100 & 504 -year Flood Zone i Dams Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 100 -year Floodp lain The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). 500 -year Floodplain I I I GRE =FIELD CORCORAN MAPLE GROVE •- --• 55 - �� - - - - - -- -- � i L0RE — TT o INDEPEENDE CE j • INpI O i I PLYOUTH i MAPLE P IN i Morris T Baker Reserve Dam i L ORONO INDEPENDENCE I LONG LAKE - r r Map created bythe Hennepin County EP Dnrkion NcoembeiV,2000. Hennepin Countymakes no 0 0 � 8 warranty, representation, or guarantee as tothe {YYr I I I I content accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of a r9' of th a information provided herein. Mil • Page 148 NennOpin Coum 11iidu8tion Plan Vulnerability Assessment City of Minneapolis j %j Dams Infrastructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 0 Private Schools The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). Railway Facilities BFJOKLsY� NCENTER 100 -year Floodplain 500 -year Floodplain j IN - --I " LL ~CRYSTAL? 7 k ROBB INSDALE -- River Services Y r—' Inc Railway Facility J r1 NEW, HOPE GOLDEN VALLEY I De LaSalle 55 St. Anthony Falls Upper Dam St. Anthony Falls • 65 - Lower Dam I�� _OLIS �a 65 700 ST. LOUIS PARK 7 I - -- 1 Lock and Dam No 1 HOP K INS j HOPS t' ! 00 f r f : ED ss zt T ss FT S 62 62 00 21 62 77 .� / ICHFIELD MSP INTL. AIRPORT s Map created by the Hennepin County EP Division N ovemb er 27, 2009. H e nn epi n C ounty makes no 1 . 4 warranty, representation, or guarantee as to Me { content accur acy, ti me liness, or completeness 1 1 I I 11 1 I I of any ofthe information provided herein. Miles • Page 149 89006011 County MIQu atlon Plan Vulnerability Assessment City of Minnetonka 0% Dams Infrastructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone Critical Infrastructure Floodplain zones data gathered *am the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 100 -year Floodplain The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIR". - 500 -year Floodplaln Ss ORON` - —� PLYMOUTH ss --GO-EDEN-VALLEY _ Bantas Poiq Lift \, i WAY-ZATA f Crosby Lift -- Lake Minnetonka Dam ` Wells 6 & 7 1 ST. LOUIS PARK WOODLAND , Minnetonka Public Works Minnetonka BIW Lift 1 -- DEEPHAVEN ? i MINNETONKA i HOPK INS i I 7 7 Green Circle (opus Lift) C/ i J EDINA', SHORWOOD a 62 ,. 101 212, i EDEN•PRAIRIE t � i212' Map created by the Hennepin Cou my EP Doris ion 0 1 December 23, 2009. Hennepin County makes no warranty,, i epres entation, or guarantee as to the - content accura , timeliness, or complete ness accuracy, P afany ofthe information prom ded herein. Miles • Page 150 Nennepin County owyatlon Plan Vulnerability Assessment r ty of Orono j} Dams rastructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone 100 - year Floodplain Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted 500 -year Floodplain as part of FENIA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). MAPLlE PLAIN I MED INA i PLYM EPENDENGE j LONG LAKE Mills Pond Dam r _ ,. -- i _12 -' _ ry IND MINNETRISTA ORONO WAYZATA 1 • i WOODLAND MINNETONK BEACH i SPRING +PARK DEEPHAVEN MOUND r � I • ti_ r -- - t - `•______� TONKA BAY JJ SHO�REWObD —� SHOREWOOD + I % SHOREWOOD MINNETRISTA / GREENWOOD i 7 1 _, "'EXCELSIOR t 7 Map created by the Hennepin County EP Divsion November 27, 2009. Hennepin County makes no 0 1.6 warranty, representation, or guarantee as to the - <>- I I I I content accuracy, timeliness, or completeness YY I I I of a ny of th a info_ mation provi ded her ein. M • Page 151 Hennepin cool" mWermon Plan Vulnerability Assessment F es of Plymouth and Medicine Lake structure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone a Healthcare Facilities Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted S Public Schools as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). 100 -year Floodplain CO RAN MAPLE GRf 500 -year Floodplain � I Plymouth Creek Dam Plymouth Creek Elem i r ,NE 7j HOPE MED INA • PLYMOU ti Cornerstone Assisted Living Cornerstone Home Living \, i + i Plymouth Creek Dam �11ED:I`M L -AKE - r t f, r-. G EN VALLEY ORONO Medicine Lake Dam : I r �,s r l`12 ;z 'L WAYZATA �I� MINNETONKA ST. LOUIS PARK Map created by the Hennepin Cou My EP Dwis ion N ooemb er 27, 2009. H e nn epin County makes no 0 0.8 warranty, representation, or guarantee as to the accuracy, timeliness, or completeness YYY I I I I I I I of arty of the information proNded herein. Miles Page 152 Nenneuin County mmoadon Plan Vulnerability Assessment C Ci n it y of Shorewood{ Dams frastructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone 100 -year Floodplain Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). — 500 -year Floodplain The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). MINNETRISTA I !' j ORONO WAYZATA j '\ 1 MIN ETONK 1 - ' 4 9PRING -PAR +K i i DEEPHAVEN MOUND � � � ` - -- ^ - -�• �• � i - -� —� °— —# TONKA BAY j GREENWOOD �� I v �- — ti r ` �• �: —..\ 7 MINNETONKA MINNETRISTA gI0REW00D EXCELSIOR — 7 Ai Silver Lake Dam EDEN PRAIRIE wr CHANHASS s EDEN PRAIRIF Map created bythe Hennepin Cou my EP D'nraion NVVember Z7.2009. Hennepin County makes no 0 1 warranty. representation, or guarantee as tothe -- -tent accuracy, timeliness, or completeness YYY I I I I I I I 1 of a W of th a information provided herein. Mi Page 153 Nonnopin County offlor ion Plan Vulnerability Assessment FFIoo dplaip pnes Saint Louis Park * Critical Infrastructure ture within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone �6 Communications Facilities data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted Healthcare Facilities as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 1 Public Schools PLYMOUTH 100 -year Floodplain 500 -year F loo dpl — GOLDEN VALLEY - i rf Westwood Healthcare Center ! i r SCALIcense Corporation I__ `i `169 MINNETONKA Common Ground Broadcasting r 169'. Melrose ST LOUIS PARK j, Municipal Service Center Amedisys Home Japs -Olson Corporation I , i i wo 7 ,..k I HOPKINS L� it — —" Methodist Hospital I t EDINA too Map created by the Hennepin County EP D h s ion January 5, 2010. Hennepin C ou my m ar es no /� 0 0. 8 warranty, representation, or guarantee as to the {Y content accuracy, timeliness, or completeness I I I I of arty of the information prohnded herein. Mlles Page 154 Hennepin coal" Nwoodon Plan Vulnerability Assessment City of Wayzata Infrastructure within the 100 & 500 -year Flood Zone 100- year Floodpla in Floodplain zones data gathered from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The floodplain zones dataset is a collection of flood hazard areas that are or will be depicted 500 -year Floodplain as part of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). I I I PLYMOUTH l ORONO I LCMG\LAK E SlnaclwayGroup Home WAYZATA n I WOODLAND r I MINNETONKA I I I I DEEPHAVEN I Map created bythe Hennepin County EP D'nrsion November 77,2009. Hennepin County makes no 0 0.6 warunty, representation, or guarantee astothe' content accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of any ofthe information provided herein. Mlles 0 Page 155 nonnopin coal" Mltlnadon Plan Vulnerability Assessment 4.2 Future Land Use & Development Trends Existing (2005) Land Use The exiting land use data for Hennepin County comes from the Metropolitan Council. The Metropolitan Council is the regional planning agency serving the Twin Cities seven - county metropolitan area and providing essential services to the region. State Statutes 473 grants au- thority to the Metropolitan Council (Met Council) to plan for the Twin Cities area. The Council works with local communities to provide these critical services: operates the region's largest bus system, collects and treats wastewater, engages communities and the public in planning for future growth, provides forecasts of the region's population and household growth, provides affordable housing opportunities for low and moderate income individuals and families, pro- vides planning, acquisitions and funding for a regional system of parks and trails, and provides a framework for decisions and implementation for regional systems including aviation, trans- portation, parks and open space, water quality, and water management. Today, Hennepin County has over 350,000 individual parcels of land. Over 85 percent of these parcels are classified as a type of existing or future residential use. Hennepin County land use categories are Residential, Mixed Use, Commercial, Industrial, Parks, Recreation & Preserves, Major Vehicular Rights -of -Way, Airports, Agriculture & Undeveloped, and Open Water. Table 1 provides a breakdown of the major land use types in the county database and Figure 2 pro- vides a map of the current land use throughout Hennepin County. Change 2000 Total 2005 Total 2000-2005 Land Use Categories (in acres) (in acres) 0 Residential Total 127,131 131,026 3,895 . +3% Single Family Residential 108,752 111,859 3,108 +3% Farmsteads 2,838 2,167 -670 -24% Multi- family Residential 15,542 16,999 1,457 +9% Mixed Use 1,169 1,695 526 +45% Commercial 12,853 13,053 199 +2 Industrial Total 15,585 15,795 210 +3 Industrial & Utility 13,380 13,788 408 +3% Extractive 1,363 1,232 -131 -10% Railway 842 776 -67 -8% Institutional 11,590 12,240 650 +6% Parks, Recreation & Preserves 45,927 49,521 3,593 +13% Major Vehicular Rights -of -Way 9,138 9,669 530 +6 Airports 3,674 3,794 120 +3 Agriculture & Undeveloped Total 126,405 116,636 -9,769 -8% Agriculture 51,996 49,567 -2,430 -5% Undeveloped Land 74,155 67,069 -7,085 -10% Agricultural & Vacant N/A N/A N/A N/A Industrial Parks not Developed N/A N/A N/A N/A Public & Semi - Public Vacant N/A N/A N/A N/A Open Water 34,485 34,514 28 +0 Total 387,958 387,941 -16 _0% Table 1 - Current Land Use Categories Page 156 HORROPIN come" Ml ormon Plan Vulnerability Assessment N Hennepin County 2005 Landuse ' pn...J,mill Inp r , 4 � : - LAND USE Recreatlona ' Vacant (No Top Generation),R Instuhonal Indusinal Medical •`- _ •�' ,Agriculture Office Residential - _T_ } • • . Commercial- Retail Lodging jw 111F '� •, .. 7 an f1 �• ' #1' i win ` t 'r'" A te. ! ,• •���i�i s. dL a AIL) Ir �+� -±� > r is ° ��., n � ' P.. f yn si���•� `: �.^/�r t • � �} ,'�'�- 4 �■ ! T Table 2 - Current Land Use Map Page 157 Ilennapin call" NWIIAon Plan Vulnerability Assessment • Future Development Trends Future development trends are identified in the Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan (HC -TSP) and incorporates much of the regional thinking of Mn/DOT, the Metropolitan Coun- cil and the State Planning Agency. The principal guide in the forecasting of future land use de- velopment was the comprehensive plans of the individual cities. All 45 cities and the Township of Hassan were asked to provide future land development information on what types of land uses and intensities of development they would expect over the next twenty years. Parcel land use maps were provided to each city identifying vacant parcels as defined by the tax i assessor's records. In return, the cities reviewed the maps identifying buildable parcels by sub- tracting those areas designated as park land, having steep unbuildable slopes or areas designated as wetlands. The cities were asked to estimate the expected phasing of development between now and 2030. The cities provided the marked -up parcel maps with their comments. The com- ments and expected developments were quantified and summarized. The 20 -30 HC -STP uses a "Bottom -Up" process where the land uses are accrued from the com- prehensive plans of the 45 cities and the Township of Hassan. Hennepin County does not have land use classification or zoning powers. These powers reside in the individual cities. How- ever, the county is involved in the plat reviews of developments adjacent to its roadway system and it is part of the comprehensive planning process that involves all metropolitan counties and • cities. The future forecast of the 2030 HC -TSP are based on expected land use development patterns. Land uses are classified by type such as residential, commercial, office and industrial type uses. These uses are generally quantified in terms of the number of dwelling units, building square footages or acres of development. Land use as an indicator for future development potential contrasts with the regional forecasting process that relies on socio- economic data such as population, households and employment. Although the 2030 HC -TSP builds on the regional process, this is one area where an alternate approach is used. Figure 3 shows the 2030 Hennepin County Future Land Use map, which was taken from the Hennepin County Transportation systems Plan (HC -TSP). • Page 158 Nonnopin cool" Nwormon Plan Vulnerability Assessment N Hennepin County 2030 Landuse l LAND USE Recreational ` . %• i n t Vacant (No Trip Generation I Instutional 'r • `:', Industrial - Medical .Agriculture Office .� Residential .Commercial - Retail Lodging ,■� Lw•wxe.wm.E •p p.r•..•.nwr.n x<..•x•.• �� • r ��- � .; � �17�� • : • wrmerw •.. mxen oi.e•prwNO '.. ,/ �•� ,�� '� t idi ; t 6 •� � 9awM..•w,V.....xr..r�«.wr.bnwb ■ . '' �_ 1�..• ,�, � - � •!.a••rm nti +Maro..mMw•r. dsn .� ji Old 5 3 S � ■ f - Y wl.x T .-. •R. r IF - 1 6 r ,t iZc_ Y•? .ice,; % ./� • VIE . all ,, Hennepin County 2030 Future Land Use Map Page 159 Honnopin County Mld®adon Plan Vulnerabilitv Assessment 4.3 Assessing Future Vulnerability In addition to identifying existing critical assets, FEMA also states the importance of document- ing future buildings, infrastructure or critical facilities within identified hazard areas. The Hen- nepin County Transportation Systems Plan identifies future land use trends. The principal guide in the forecasting of future land use development was the comprehensive plans of the 45 individual cities and the Township of Hassan. Parcel land use maps were provided to each city identifying vacant parcels as defined by the tax assessor's records. In return, the cities reviewed the maps identifying buildable parcels by subtracting those areas designated as park land, hav- ing steep unbuildable slopes or areas designated as wetlands. The cities were asked to estimate the expected phasing of development between now and 2030. The table and map describe the categories of future land use (agriculture, residential, industrial, lodging, and recreational) that will be built or utilized within the floodplains in Hennepin County. Hennepin County Future Land Use Flood Vulnerability 2030 Laiid Use Total Acreage/ Affected Acreage/ 'Yo Acreage/ • Agriculture 31,463 16,502 52.45% Residential 487,886 32,160 6.59% Industrial 4,220 291 6.90% Lodging 138 10 7.25% Recreational 28,033 18,941 67.57% Page 160 Nonnopin County Mltigadon Plan Vulnerability Assessment N Hennepin County 2030 Landuse ■-. 11--d.11111 Till t LAND USE lRecteational •e` „ ,:� ■ Vacant (No Trip Generation), Instutional Industrial .Medical t� a` ®Agriculture .016ce JIM ••F Residential ■Corn mercial -Retail �. Lodging ' FEMA Floodplain Areas It .01 %Annual Flood Probability ' ft' l _ .002% Annual Flood Probability .eaw wr <w...u»ronm,on cwmr •+ '� / •n ilEn•0 V'."•iv fW.MecF•eauro �: � M � � �� I ...•en M.s.e �vwer s �l 11 MA M n ufn�c' ,� � � 1 � . • � r . >nnemor wnn eoe. Iw ■. ' 1 ; • Ink Ai Will t 1 6 �■ A � • Page 161 /6108/10 Comm Mltlnednn Plan Vulnerability Assessment 4.4 Repetitive Loss Structures In recent years, FEMA has developed a concept to highlight the impact that repetitive flooded structures have on the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The term "repetitive loss" as applied to the NFIP, refers to any property for which two or more flood insurance claims in ex- cess of $1,000 each in a 10 -year period of time has been paid. About 1 percent of the 4.4 mil- lion properties currently insured by the program are considered to be repetitive loss properties. A report on repetitive loss structures completed by the National Wildlife Federation found that 20 percent of these structures are listed as being outside of the 100 -year floodplain. According to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), (February 2009 report) Hennepin County has 32 repetitive loss structures. Of those 32 structures (which are single - family homes or nonresidential structures), 13 have been mitigated and 6 are insured. Below is a map of the location of Hennepin County's repetitive loss structures. Hennepin County Repetitive Losses ® RepeMive Losses Repetitive Losses referto properties that have had a history 1m year Floadplain of losses throughout Hennepin County. M DO year Fbodplain • i Iq T e: -, 1 k A i—_ a< �AA _ WDa..IM Yy H.Z.P.nCW4EPDl.. J.n ary 5,Z He l Cwrly . x 0mw ,s wt, Q 1.25 2.5 5 wei Ny. .premirbn, m th u.oJ.1YMIn.a.wopRpN I 1 I d.nr am. Manwa, prowd.d n..ti. Mlles ` • Page 162 N901911e County NN18091 Plan vulnerability Assessment 4.5 Capability Assessment A capability assessment is an integral part of the planning process in which we identified, re- viewed and analyzed what Hennepin County is doing to reduce risk. A capability assessment also allows us to identify a framework that is in place or should be in place for implementation of new mitigation actions. A capability assessment has two components: an inventory of our jurisdictions existing planning and regulatory tools; and an analysis of our capability to carry them out. The assessment process helps identify existing gaps, conflicts or weaknesses that may need to be addressed through future mitigation planning goals, objectives and actions. It will also highlight the positive measures in place or already being performed that should con- tinue to be supported and enhanced through future mitigation efforts. For this assessment, we evaluated our governmental struc- ture, political framework, legal jurisdiction, fiscal status, policies and programs, regulations and ordinances, and re- t. source availability. These factors were evaluated with re- spect to their strengths and weaknesses in preparing for, re- sponding to and mitigating the effects of the profiled haz- ards. Our assessment would not be complete without con - sidering the municipalities. Local municipalities have their own governing body, enforce their own rules and regula- tions purchase their own equipment, maintain their own infrastructure and manage their own ,P g • resources. In many ways, Hennepin County is only as good as the capabilities of its municipali- ties. As such, this assessment does not consider Hennepin County as a lone entity, but evalu- ates it in the light of the various characteristics and differences of and between its forty-five municipalities. As a result, this assessment takes a comprehensive look at mitigation strategies within the county without focusing on specific projects currently in place. Page 163 0 • s Plannino / Re(yulatory In Department / Agency Effect on loss Reduction P4 P, S(rongly Helps Facilitate Tool Place No Responsible Comments M Supports O Hazard Mitigation Plan X County Emergency X Approved in 2005 and updated in 2010. O Comprehensive Land Use X CD O C Disaster Recovery Plan X Stormwater Management X Hennepin County X Plan Permits Open Space Management Three Rivers Park Each municipality has their Plan District/ own Open Space Management X Municipalities X Plan as well as Three Rivers Continuity of Operations X County Emergency X Plan Economic Development Housing, Commu- X The County has a Comprehen- Plan X nity Works & Tran- sive Economic Development sit/Municipalities C Strategy (CEDS) that is updated � Historic Preservation Plan X Capital Improvements Plan X X Both the municipalities and the cr Emergency Operations Plan County Emergency X Plan is updated yearly. Ln Debris Management Plan X Municipalities & X CD b Ln ara Effect on l Reduction Regulat Planning / Place Responsible Supports Zoning Ordinance X Municipalities X CD Solid Waste & Hazardous X Environmental X C C Materials Regulations Services National Flood Insurance X Municipalities X 3 Program (NFIP) NFIP Community Rating X Municipalities System m Building Code/Permitting X Municipalities X Soil Erosion Ordinance X Municipalities X CD cr CD CD b � i • � Effect o n l R esources ' - m Place Responsible Supports O Emergency Mangers X County Emergency X Municipalities and County have _ emergency managers in place. CD Floodplain Manager X C Land Surveyors X X GIS Personnel X X Municipalities and County have p� emergency managers in place. CR O Building Officials X X Municipalities and State officials Public Information Officer Hennepin County X m CD ar N 110 v� as CD ON s Effect on loss Reduction In Department / Agency P, stronabs Helps Facilitate 0 Proarains No Comments Place Responsible e Supports Skywarn Program (Storm Municipalities/ Yearly training is provided to Spotters) X National Weather X first responders as well as com- C Mutual Aid Agreements X Municipalities X Radiological Emergency Municipalities/ Yearly training to all municipali- Preparedness (REP) County Emergency ties and county personnel in- X Preparedness/Public X volved in the program. e Regional Evacuation County Emergency This region has a Metro Evacua- Management/ tion Traffic Management Plan 0 Programs X MnDOT Redevelopment Authorities X Municipalities X I CD c' W W CD b � va CD HORROPIN CONN" MR198"On Plan Vulnerability Assessment Accessible Financial Resources i use Community Development Block Grants Yes Capital Improvements Programming Yes Special Purpose Taxes (or taxing districts) Yes Gas/Electric Utility Fees Yes Water /Sewer Fees Yes Stormwater Utility Fees Yes Development Impact Fees Yes General Obligation, Revenue and /or Special Yes State sponsored grant programs such as Yes Hazard Mitigation Grant Program or Pre - Storm Emergency Financial Assistance Yes • Page 168 RelaednCoougIMItl08tlMPlan Mitigation Strategy - SECTIONS Hennepin County • MITIGATION STRATEGIES Nonnoaln Conroy Mltloatlon Plan Mitigation Stratus . Section 5 Mitigation Goals, Objectives and Actions 5.1 Overview This section of the Hennepin County Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan de- scribes the mitigation goals, objectives and actions. Up to this point in the planning process, the HCWG, with input from all Hennepin County jurisdictions, have assessed natural and tech- nological hazards. Profiles of Hennepin County's hazards as well as our vulnerability to them resulted from this effort, which is documented in the preceding chapters of this plan. The re- sulting goals, objectives and mitigation actions were developed based on this profile. 5.1.1 2004 Mitigation Goals There were several mitigation projects identified in the 2004 Hennepin County Hazard Mitiga- tion Plan. The overarching goal was to identify measures that would prevent loss of life and damage to property, while also reducing future risk in Hennepin County. Strategies were not prioritized due to each jurisdiction setting its own priorities. To prioritize, when funds became available, the Mitigation Steering Committee at the time had input on county-wide priorities. The following is a list of the 2004 mitigation goals, objectives and strategies, along with an up- date on what has or has not been accomplished. • Hazard: Flooding Goal l: To prevent flood damage. Objective 1.1.1 To prevent spring runoff flood damage to property. Strategies: 1) Identified areas of repetitive loss (City of Dayton berm building, City of Champlin flood areas due to ice buildup, Hassan Township County Road 116 and the Crow River Bridge. 2) Prioritize possible projects within communities and make initial contact with elected offi- cials. * Implementation Update: Repetitive loss structure in Hassan Township was purchased at auction in 2005 with the knowledge of its repetitive loss history. Current owners rebuilt the home to withstand repetitive flooding and lessen the damage associated with it. The Crow River Bridge in Hassan Township was rebuilt and raised so that future flood damage does not occur. The City of Dayton and the City of Champlin will not be moving forward with mitigation actions. • I I Page 169 Nennenla County Mltl®atlan Plan Mitipation Strategies Objective 1.2.2: To prevent damage to property from flooding due to heavy rain events. Strategies: 1) Identify areas that flood during heavy rain (City of Medina at Tamarack Road and Elm Creek, Hassan Township at Tucker and Bechthold Road, County Road 144 and Willan- dale, City of Greenfield at County Road 50 north of entrance to Rebecca Park, Vernon and Basswood, Greenfield Road and 78th Lane, Greenfield Road just north of Highway 55). 2) Prioritize possible projects within communities and make initial contact with elected offi- cials. * Implementation Update: County Road 50 continues to flood when the Crow River has high years. Vernon and Basswood were mitigated after construction of the roads a few years back. There has been no mitigation implemented for Greenfield Road and 78th and Highway 55. No mitigation has occurred at Tucker and Bechthold Road or County Road 144 off of Willandale. Flooding did occur in 2010 causing County Road 144 to flood. A mitigation project that would lift the road is in talks. Medina has not implemented any mitigation at Tamarack Road and Elm Creek. Objective 1.3.3: To prevent damage to property from flooding due to inadequate infrastruc- ture. Strategies: • 1) Map areas of flooding due to inadequate infrastructure (City of St. Anthony at Silver Lake Rd and St. Anthony Blvd, City of Osseo in areas of 1st Ave NW south to Highway 81). 2) Educate citizens about how to avoid this type of flooding. A) promote installation of back - flow valves and B) promote value of elevating furnace, water heater and other basement machinery. * Implementation Update: We currently use our GIS Specialist to provide mapping of repeti- tive flooding that have been identified by our cities. We have not educated citizens on the in- stallation of backflow valves since the issue has not been a concern of our citizens. Objective 1.4.4: To prevent damage caused by dams or levee failure. Strategies: 1) Make sure dams and levees are properly maintained. 2) Ensure that those living in proximity to dams and levees have an emergency plan. * Implementation Update: We will continue to partner with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Dam Safety Program since they ensure dams are safe, properly maintained, and are removed when they become obsolete. Most dams in Hennepin County do not pose a • Page 170 I SRUNl■ Oslo" MItlMME Plan Mitigation Strategies significant threat to the general public so this mitigation measure has been eliminated. Hazard: Thunderstorms/Tornadoes Goal 2.1: To prevent wind damage to persons and property from tornadoes, windstorms, straight line winds, and thunderstorms. Objective 2.1.1: To prevent damage to persons and property from tornadic activity. Strategies: 1) Help citizens realize the strength and danger of tornadoes through severe Weather Aware- ness Week. 2) Promote safe rooms through testimonials from those who have benefited from a safe room and by urging local builders to put safe rooms in structures with no basements, especially slab on ground townhomes. 3) Pass ordinances that require community shelters in developments that have slab on ground housing. * Implementation Update: Severe Weather Awareness week continues to be an ongoing yearly education effort by our department. We handed out FEMA 320: Taking Shelter from the • Storm: Building a Safe Room inside Your Home to City of Rogers officials following the 2006 tornado. We also gave city officials the Windstorm Mitigation Manual for Light Frame Con- struction during the reconstruction efforts. Ordinances have not been passed that require com- munity shelters in developments that have slab on ground housing. Objective 2.1.2: To prevent damage to persons and property from windstorms and straight -line winds. Strategies: 1) Educate the public on the dangers of straight -line winds by occupying booths at local juris- dictions celebrations and handing out brochures at special events. 2) Promote safe rooms. * Implementation Update: Promotion of safe rooms began after the 2006 Rogers tornado. The Windstorm Mitigation Manual for Light Frame Construction was given to Rogers officials during the reconstruction efforts. Hazard: Winter Storms Goal 3.1: To mitigate losses to people and property during severe winter weather (blizzards and extremely cold temperatures). • Objective 3.1.1: Urge the public to heed winter weather warnings and advisories when posted. Page 171 Ne10e110 8911" ON18091 Plan Mitigation Strategies 1) Promote winter survival kits during Winter Weather Awareness. • * Implementation Update: Winter Weather Awareness is an ongoing yearly effort that helps to get the general public ready for winter storms. Included in the Winter Weather Awareness brochures and webpage's is information on winter survival kits, winter weather advisories, and winter storm warnings. Hazard: Drought/Extreme Temperatures Goal 4.1: To mitigate losses to people and property during drought or extreme heat. Objective 4.1.1: Review community water plans and update as needed. Objective 4.1.2: Check with local social service organizations to those are susceptible to heat - related illness (elderly and the very young) and map possible shelters that could be opened if need be. * Implementation Update: In 2006 a regional task force (SuperHot) was established to imple- ment a warning system to alert people of dangerously hot temperatures and information on shelters. Water plans are the responsibility of the municipalities and are updated as needed. Hazard: Infectious Diseases/Terrorism Goal 5.1: To mitigate losses to people and property in the event of an infectious disease out- • break or terrorist incident. Objective 5.1.1: To help residents survive an infectious disease outbreak. Strategies: 1) Plan with Hennepin County's Public Health officials on subjects such as quarantine and identifying mass clinic sites and what it will take to equip and staff them. 2) Educate the public on precautions to take concerning infectious diseases. Objective 5.1.2: To help the community survive a terrorist incident. Strategies: 1) Ensure that first responders are properly equipped and trained. This can be done through grant money and yearly refresher training. 2) Give public information on basic measures that can be taken to protect themselves. Infor- mation should be basic, easy to follow, and designated to not cause panic and ridicule. * Implementation Update: Since 2005, Hennepin County has been using Urban Area Security Initiative Grants (UASI) to equip first responders with the necessary equipment to respond to terrorist attacks. Several of those dollars have also gone to yearly training of first responders. . Page 172 NNNNONIN Colin MIdNNWN 1"N Mitigation Strategies In the past three years Hennepin County Public Health has established mass distribution sites that would be used to transfer and store mass prophylaxis to prepare for a public health emer- gency. Hazard: Earthquake/Karst Topography Goal 6.1: To mitigate the effects of an earthquake or incident caused by karst topography. Objective 6.1.1: Be aware of the geology in the community and know if these hazards exist there. Objective 6.1.2: Avoid placing sensitive structures in areas where earthquakes or karst features could cause structural damage. * Implementation Update: Due to the limited karst topography in Hennepin County, this miti- gation measure was eliminated. Through the University of Minnesota Morris and the United States Geological Survey, we are able to identify areas in Hennepin County that have experi- enced earthquake waves (Mercalli Intensity). However, due to the rare history of earthquake activity in Hennepin County, this mitigation measure was eliminated. Hazard: Solar Storms Goal 7.1: To lessen the effects of solar storms on people and property. Objective 7.1.1: Keep current on the frequency of sun spot cycles. Objective 7.1.2: Harden sensitive communications equipment to the effects of geomagnetic or solar storms. * Implementation Update: In between the 2005 and 2010 update to the Hennepin County Multi- Jurisdictional All - Hazards Mitigation Plan, the hazard of solar storms was eliminated due to the low intensity of sun spots. Hazard: Radiological Goal 8.1: To lessen the effects of radiological incidents or releases on people and property. Objective 8.1.1: To eliminate exposure to radiological sources. Strategies: 1) Train first responders on time, distance, and shielding principles. 2) Enhance ability to detect radiological sources. Objective 8.2.2: To have a trained cadre to monitor exposure to radiation. Strategies: Page 173 Nennepin Ceu Mweaden Plan Mitigation Strate 1es 1) Hennepin County Public Health staff will be trained in radiological monitoring. i 2) Hennepin County Public Health will practice survey and decontamination procedures at the Rogers Reception Center drills and exercises and through yearly training. * Implementation Update: Hennepin County hosts a Reception Center for the off-site re- sponse to an incident at the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant. Hennepin County currently has staff trained to perform all the survey and decontamination procedures. Trained staff in- cludes Rogers Fire, Dayton Fire, Minneapolis Fire, Brooklyn Center Fire, Hennepin County Public Health, Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness, and Minneapolis Health & Family Support. Reception Center staff are trained on a yearly basis with FEMA evaluated exercises occurring every three years. Drills usually occur every two years and include set -up training. Hazard: Hazardous Materials Goal 9.1: To lessen the effects of a hazardous materials release on people and property. Objective 9.1.1: Know and map all fixed facilities located in Hennepin County. Strategies: 1) Acquire a list of all 302 facilities in Hennepin County from the Minnesota Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (HSEM) every year. 2) Make site visits to those facilities that pose the most threat. Objective 9.1.2: Have copies of 302 facility plans in the emergency management office and/or the city fire departments. Objective 9.1.3: Work with facility coordinators so that they are aware of local capabilities and vice versa. Strategies: 1) Train with the coordinators of the 302 facilities. 2) Exercise with the coordinators of the 302 facilities, through site - specific scenarios. * Implementation Update: Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness currently has an up- dated list of all 302 facilities and they have also been mapped into the Hennepin County Plan- ning Groups using GIS (See the Hazardous Materials Hazard Profile). Fire departments make site visits to 302 facilities on an ongoing basis and 302 facility plans are kept on file in the city fire departments. Hazard: Dams Goal 10.1: To ensure proper maintenance of dams to provide safety to residents and to prevent Page 174 NeNNaNIN County Ml andon Plan Mitigation Strategies . property damage. Objective 10.1.1: Use existing state and federal dam safety programs to ensure safety of dams. * Implementation Update: MN Dam Safety Program oversees the maintenance and struc- tural integrity of dams. This is an ongoing mitigation effort. Hazard: Water Supply Contamination Goal 11.1: To lessen or eliminate negative effects of water supply contamination. Objective 11.1.1: To keep the water supply safe by locking doors on water facilities, requiring proper identification for access into facilities, extra security for orange (or higher) alerts, and safeguarding aquifers by maintaining a strong wellhead protection program. Objective 11.1.2: Have alternate water supply options. Strategies: 1) Share water supply with neighboring counties. 2) Identify sources of potable water. Objective 11.1.3: Conserve water. Strategies: 1) Update community water plan as needed. 2) Identify triggers for implementation of water conservation measures. * Implementation Update: Identifying sources of potable water is an ongoing planning activ- ity of the municipalities. Community water plans are updated as needed and all Hennepin County municipalities have odd/even water day restrictions in place for water conservation. Water Supply Contamination was a hazard that was eliminated from the Hennepin County Multi - Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan. Page 175 Nannapin call" mmondan Plan Mitigation Strate les 5.2 2010 Mitigation Actions 0 During the 2010 update to the Hennepin County Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan, several new mitigation actions were identified in addition to the original 2005 actions. Below is a listing of the measures including the responsible agency and cost benefit. The miti- gation actions may fall under one or more of the following six broad categories: Prevention - Government administrative or regulatory actions or process that influence the way land and buildings are developed and built. These actions also include public activities to reduce hazard losses. Examples include planning and zoning, building codes, capital improvement programs, open space preservation, and storm water man- agement regulations. Property Protection - Actions that involve the modification of existing buildings or infrastructure to protect them from a hazard, or removal from the hazard area. Exam- ples include acquisition, elevation, relocation, structural retrofits, flood proofing, storm shutters, and shatter - resistant glass. Public Education & Awareness - Actions to inform and educate citizens, elected offi- cials, and property owners about potential risks from hazards and potential ways to miti- gate them. Such actions include outreach projects, real estate disclosure, hazard infor- mation centers, and school -age and adult education programs. Natural Resource Protection - Actions that, in addition to minimizing hazard losses also preserve or restore the functions of natural systems. These actions include sedi- ment and erosion control, stream corridor restoration, watershed management, forest and vegetation management, and wetland restoration and preservation. Structural Projects - Actions that involved the construction of structures to reduce the impact of a hazard. Such structures include storm water controls (e.g., culverts), flood walls, seawalls, retaining walls, and safe rooms. 5.3 Cost Benefit Review Priority mitigation projects will only be implemented if the benefits are maximized and out- weigh the associated costs of the proposed projects. Projects should be evaluated for eligibility and feasibility including social impact, environmental impact, technical feasibility, and other criteria that measure project effectiveness. Further project implementation will be subject to the availability of FEMA grants and other sources of funds from year -to -year. Page 176 N9109 1 11 Comm ' i i n r i p IItY aadon Plan Mlt fat o St ra t � . Hazard: Dams Goal 1: Maintain continued structural integrity of dams located in Hennepin County. Objective 1.1.1: Ensure dams are maintained and functioning properly. Strategies: 1) Continue to use existing state dam safety programs (Minnesota Dam Safety Program) that maintain and oversee the structural integrity of dams. Responsible Agency: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Hennepin County Emer- gency Preparedness, and the municipalities. Cost: Staff time Time: Ongoing Hazard: Flooding 5.4 Participation in the National Flood Insurance Program The United States Congress established the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) with the passage of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. The NFIP is a Federal program enabling property owners in participating communities to pur- chase flood insurance as a protection against flood losses in exchange for State and community floodplain management regulations that reduced future flood damages. Participation NATIONAL FLOOD in the NFIP is based on an agreement between communities and the Federal Government. If a community adopts and en- I NSURANCE PROGRAM forces a floodplain management ordinance to reduce future flood risk to new construction in floodplains, the Federal Government will make flood insurance available within a community as a financial protection against flood losses. This insurance is designed to provide an insur- ance alternative to disaster assistance to reduce the escalating costs of repairing damage to buildings and their contents caused by floods. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Community Status Book Report, there are currently 41 Hennepin County cities participating in the National Flood Insur- ance Program. A detailed table that shows each of the cities Initial FHBM and FIRM dates as well as Current Eff Map Date and Reg Emerg Date is included below. i Page 177 Nonnopin County Mld®adon Plan Mitigation Strategies Identified Identified Map Date Date Bloomington 275230 NA 9/8/72 9/2/04 9/8/72 Brooklyn Center 270151 11/9/73 2/17/82 9/2/04 2/17/82 Brooklyn Park 270152 4/12/74 5/17/82 9/2/04 5/17/82 Champlin 270153 11/02/73 07/18/77 09/02/04 07/18/77 Corcoran 270155 06/07/74 01/06/81 09/02/04 01/16/81 Crystal 270156 11/30/73 06/01/78 09/02/04 06/01/78 Dayton 270157 01/04/74 02/01/78 09/02/04 02/01/78 Deephaven 270158 06/07/74 09/02/04 09/02/04 12/26/78 Eden Prairie 270159 03/01/74 09/27/85 09/02/04 09/27/85 Edina 270160 02/01/74 05/01/80 09/02/04 05/01/80 Excelsior 270161 05/31/74 12/01/77 09/02/04 03/20/81 Golden Valley 270162 03/08/74 02/04/81 09/02/04 02/04/81 Greenwood 270164 05/31/74 09/02/04 09/02/04 12/26/78 Hassan Township 270678 02/10/78 03/16/81 09/02/04 03/16/81 Hopkins 270166 11/09/73 05/05/81 09/02/04 05/05/81 Independence 270167 06/28/74 01/06/83 09/02/04 01/06/83 Long Lake 270168 06/07/74 09/02/04 09/02/04 02/20/79 Loretto 270659 01/24/75 09/20/04 09/02/04 06/22/84 Maple Grove 270169 03/22/74 04/17/78 09/02/04 04/17/78 Page 178 Ilannapin County Emeatl ®n Plan Mitig Strategy .. Identified Identified Mal) Date Date Maple Plain 270170 05/03/74 09/02/04 09/02/04 06/22/84 Medicine Lake 270690 12/17/76 04/15/82 09/02/04 04/15/82 Medina 270171 06/28/74 09/03/80 09/02/04 09/03/80 Minneapolis 270172 03/22/74 01/18/81 09/02/04 02/18/81 Minnetonka 270174 06/07/74 09/02/04 09/02/04 06/22/84 Beach Minnetonka 270173 08/23/74 05/19/81 09/02/04 05/19/81 Minnetrista 270175 01/13/78 09/27/85 09/02/04 09/27/85 Mound 270176 06/07/74 09/29/78 09/02/04 09/29/78 I New Hope 270177 09/06/74 01/02/81 09/02/04 01/02/81 • Orono 270178 08/16/74 10/17/78 09/02/04 10/17/78 Osseo 270658 01/10/75 09/02/04 (NSFHA) 12/21/78 Plymouth 270179 02/08/74 05/15/78 09/02/04 05115/78 Richfield 270180 05/17/74 09/02/04 (NSFHA) 08/24/81 I Robbinsdale 270181 03/29/74 08/01/77 09/02/04 08/01/77 Shorewood 270185 05/31/74 12/04/79 09/02/04 12/04/79 Spring Park 270186 06/07/74 05/01/79 09/02/04 05/01/79 St. Bonifacius 270183 06/07/74 09/02/04 09/02/04 12/26/78 St. Louis Park 270184 05/25/73 06/01/77 09/02/04 06/01/77 Tonka Bay 270187 06/07/74 05/01/79 09/02/04 05/01/79 Wayzata 270188 06/21/74 11/01/79 09/02/04 11/01/79 Woodland 270189 05/31/74 08/01/79 09/02/04 08/01/79 • Page 179 Nen0e110 Caunt]I Midgatlan Plan Mitip-ation Strategies 5.5 Continued Participation in the NFIP • All Local Mitigation Plans approved by FEMA after October 1, 2008 must describe each juris- dictions participation in the NFIP and must identify, analyze and prioritize actions related to continued compliance with the NFIP. Basic compliance NFIP actions could include, but are not limited to: 1. Adoption and enforcement of floodplain management requirements, including regulating all and substantially improved construction in Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs); 2. Floodplain identification and mapping, including any local requests for map updates, if needed; or, 3. Description of community assistance and monitoring activities. The flood mitigation goals listed below include identified NFIP related actions (highlighted in green) that will help the municipalities continue compliance with the NFIP. Goal 2: Ensure that 100 year flood risks are addressed by all county municipalities in their land use, land use planning and management. Objective 2.1.1: Ensure floodplain- zoning ordinances are in compliance with state and federal • regulations. Strategies: 1 county/city /ci Encourage participation in FEMA's Community Rating System program. ty t3' P 2) Participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). 3) Ensure building code compliance inspections are conducted on new construction projects. 4) Update land use plans to identify areas where development should be restrictive. 5) Enforce floodplain management rules requiring new structures be elevated above the BSE (Base Floodplain Elevation). 6) Obtain and maintain NFIP FIRMS to identify community flood plains. 7) Require floodplain and shorelines ordinances to comply with MN DNR requirements. 8) Continue to enforce zoning and permit regulations in the floodplains. 9) Continue to comply with drainage and erosion control plans. 10) Monitor construction, improvements, alterations, and development in the floodplains. • Page 180 NeNNeaIN Colin Ml usuen Plan Mit44ation Strategies • 11) Continue to work with the watershed management commissions on all proposed projects impacting floodplain areas. 12) Continue to enforce stormwater management ordinances that address land- disturbing activi- ties. Goal 2.1: Identify and mitigate flood prone structures and infrastructure in the county. Objective 2.1.2: To reduce the impact of flooding on new buildings and infrastructure Strategy: 1) Identify and improve roads and streets that are repeatedly flooded and washed away with improvements that include modifying and raising roads /streets, providing improved drain- age and storm water removal, and creating buffers. 2) Municipalities should adopt or update floodplain ordinances as needed. 3) Map areas of repeated flooding in the county. 4) Potential buyout of structures in hazard areas. 5) Elevating structures to reduce flood loss • 6) Improving drainage capacity of ditches. Responsible Agency: Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness & the municipalities Cost: Staff time Time: Ongoing Goal 2.2: Improve the readiness of the county in the event of flooding. Objective 2.2.2: Ensure that the county and local municipalities are prepared for potential flooding. Objective 2.2.3: Ensure that there is adequate warning of rising waters throughout the river and stream network. Strategy: 1) Develop a resource list of available sandbag distributors. 2) Encourage continued compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and encourage non - participating cities and townships to apply. 3) Educate the public on practices and programs that assist in diminishing the effects of flood- . ing. Page 181 Ne119111 8011141 Offlowon Plan Mitijzation Strategies 4) Discuss future river gauges with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) • and the United States Geological Survey (USGS). Responsible Agency: Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness and the municipalities. Cost: Staff time Time: Ongoing Hazard: Hazardous Materials Goal 3: Work to ensure that emergency personnel and other potentially affected parties are informed about hazardous materials /waste located in and transported through Hennepin County. Objective 3.1.1: Support policies aimed at reducing hazardous waste spills on transportation routes. Objective 3.1.2: Ensure new technologies are used to improve the county's ability to respond to a disaster. Objective 3.1.3: Support policies and programs that assist in creating factual and timely infor- mation about hazardous materials /waste stored in or transported through Hennepin County. Strategy: • 1) Continue to use city and county Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to map and update locations of fixed facilities using hazardous materials /waste and associated transportation routes in a timely manner. 2) Increase coordination with the State Duty Officer for highway spills. 3) Work with city, state, federal agencies and private industries to share information on types and locations of hazardous material that have the potential to affect the county and region. 4) Ensure that all essential first responder agencies have the latest edition of the Emergency Response Guidebook. Responsible Agency: Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness, Hennepin County GIS De- partment, and the municipalities. Cost: Staff time Time: Ongoing Hazard: Infectious Diseases Goal 4: Reduce the threat of infectious diseases through education, training and preparedness. • Page 182 NORROBIN County Efflut Ion Plan Mitigation Strategies Objective 4.1.1: Collaborate with partner agencies to prevent, detect, and control infectious diseases. Objective 4.1.2: Maintain and update resources, materials, plans, and agreements that address coordinated infectious disease response. Objective 4.1.3: Educate the public through disease information designed to prevent and con- trol disease transmission. Strategy: 1) Develop an education program that provides useful and factual information to the public about infectious diseases and vaccinations. 2) Continue to work with Public Affairs to disseminate information about infectious diseases and prevention 3) Maintain links to other sources of reliable information about infectious diseases and preven- tion. 4) Utilize state, federal and local resources to prevent and control infectious disease in the county. 5) Continue to partner with local/regional hospitals and clinics in developing plans and roles in infectious disease response, including quarantine. 6) Continue to partner with the Minnesota Department of Health on the receipt and dispensing of the Strategic National Stockpile. Responsible Agency: Hennepin County Public Health and the municipalities Cost: Staff time Time: Ongoing Hazard: Thunderstorms/Tornadoes Goal S: To protect people and public infrastructure. Objective 5.1.1: To reduce the impact of thunderstorms /tornadoes on new buildings and infra- structure. Strategy: 1) Encouraging new power lines to be buried to reduce power outages. 2) Promoting enhanced building techniques to reduce structural damage due to high wind damage (example: Windstorm Mitigation Manual for Light -Frame Construction). Page 183 88118/10 Canty Mldgsd,n Plan Mitigation Strategies Responsible Agency: Wright - Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association. Cost: Grant funding and staff time. Time: Ongoing Goa! 5.2: Improve severe storm warning systems for a quicker and more efficient notification of county residents. Objective 5.2.2: Research and assess new technology that will enable county sirens to be acti- vated through the new National Weather Service (NWS) Storm -Based Polygon Warning Sys- tem. Objective 5.2.3: Improve access to real -time weather data. Objective 5.2.4: Improve citizen access to severe weather warnings. Strategy: 1) Use Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) dollars to fund the upgrades to the radios and decoder boards on the sirens, in an effort to not only reach compliance with the new FAA narrow banding standards, but as well as to implement a new Storm -Based Polygon Warn- ing System. 2) Improve citizens' understanding of the available communications from the National weather Service (NWS) for notification of severe weather watches and warnings such as NOAA Weather Radios. 3) Assess and upgrade the city /county warning system as necessary. 4) Evaluate the use of private subscription -based weather alert services and purchase if cost effective. 5) Promote the use of weather radios and when possible, purchase additional radios for the mu- nicipalities. 6 Improve access to real -time weather data such as temperatures, windspeed, direction and p p � P storm conditions for emergency personnel. 7) Identify ways to increase access to emergency information for campgrounds, cities, and pro- vide information in a timely manner. 8) Create severe weather awareness campaigns for citizens that covers siren information, NOAA Weather Radio, how the National Weather Service (NWS) issues warnings, and the hazards that affect Hennepin County. 9) Promote the use of NOAA weather Radio for early warning and post event information in Page 184 Nonnouln County Emst lon Plan Mitigation Strategy • government -owned facilities, child care centers, and for vulnerable populations. 10) Achieve certification in the National Weather Service's (NWS) StormReady program. The StormReady program has been developed to provide communities guidelines to improve the timeliness and effectiveness of hazardous weather - related warnings for the public. 11) Public education and awareness of severe weather. Responsible Agency: Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness, Hennepin County Sheriff's Office & the municipalities. Cost: Grand funding available and staff time. Time: Ongoing 5.6 Mitigation Action Items Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(iv) of the Local Multi - Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance states that all multi jurisdictional plans must have identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit for the plan. The action items listed in this section of the Hennepin County Multi - Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan are both hazard specific • (e.g., strategies for flood mitigation) and multi - hazard (i.e., cuts across all specific hazards). The mitigation actions are also short and long -term strategies meant to reduce the risk to Hen- nepin County from both natural hazards and man -made hazards. Below are the individual mu- nicipality action plans under their respective planning groups. Lake Minnetonka Planning Group City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Time Line Responsible Agency Corcoran 1. Create severe weather awareness campaigns for citizens. Staff Time Ongoing Corcoran Police Deephaven 1. Enforce burning restrictions $100 3 Years Deephaven Fire 2. Maintain, enforce, and update zoning ordinances $700 5 Years Planning Commission 3. Revise /update local emergency operations plans $700 2 Years Deephaven Police 4. Dispense educational materials to citizens about potential $300 1 Year Deephaven Police disasters. Page 185 Honnopin County Midgatlon Plan Mitigation Strategies Lake Minnetonka Planning Group City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Time Line Responsible Agency Greenfield 1. Citizen public education and awareness of severe weather Staff time Ongoing Greenfield Emergency Management Mound 1. Ensure building code compliance inspections are con- Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development ducted on new construction projects 2. Encourage city /county participation in FEMA's Commu- Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police nity Rating System program. 3. Participate in the National Flood Insurance Program Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police 4. Identify and improve streets that are repeatedly flooded Staff Time Ongoing Mound Public Works and washed away with improvements that include modify- ing and raising roads /streets, providing improved drainage and storm water removal, and creating buffers. 5. Municipalities should adopt or update floodplain ordi- Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development nances as needed. 6. Educate the public on practices and programs that assist Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police in diminishing the effects of flooding. 7. Develop a resource list of available sandbag distributors Staff Time Ongoing Mound Public Works 8. Work with city, state, and federal agencies and private Staff Time Ongoing Mound Fire industries to share information on types and locations of hazardous material that have the potential to affect the county and region. 9. Continue to use city and county GIS to map and update Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police locations of fixed facilities using hazardous materials /waste storage and associated transportation routes in a timely man- ner. IO.Ensure that all essential first responder agencies have the Staff Time Ongoing Mound Fire latest edition of the Emergency Response Guidebook. 11. Continue to partner with local/regional hospitals and Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police clinics in developing plans and roles in infectious disease response, including quarantine. 12. Maintain links to other sources of reliable information Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police about infectious diseases and prevention 13. Continue to work with Public Affairs to disseminate Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police information about infectious diseases and prevention. 14. Encouraging new power lines to be buried to reduce Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police power outages. 15. Promoting enhanced building techniques to reduce struc- Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police tural damage due to high wind damage 16. Improve citizens' understanding of available communi- Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police cations from the National Weather Service for notification of severe weather watches and warnings such as NOAA Weather Radios. Page 186 Nenneuln DOOR" Mltlgaden Plan Mitigation Strate ies Lake Minnetonka Planning Group City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Time Line Responsible Agency Mound 17. Create severe weather awareness campaigns for citizens. Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police (continued) 18. Promote the use of NOAA Weather Radio for early Staff Time Ongoing Mound Police warning and post event information in government -owned facilities, child care centers, and for vulnerable populations. Orono 1. Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police Program. 2. Update land use plans and identified areas where develop- Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police ment should be restricted. 3. Continue to use city GIS to map and update locations of Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police fixed facilities using hazardous materials. 4. Ensure that all essential first responders have the current Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police version of the Emergency Response Guidebook. Woodland 1. Enforce burning restrictions $100 3 Years Deephaven Fire 2. Maintain, enforce, and update zoning ordinances $700 5 Years Planning Commission 3. Revise /update local emergency operations plans $700 2 Years Deephaven Police 4. Dispense educational materials to citizens about potential $300 1 Year Deephaven Police disasters. ong Lake 1. Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police Program. 2. Update land use plans and identified areas where develop- Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police ment should be restricted. 3. Continue to use city GIS to map and update locations of Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police fixed facilities using hazardous materials. 4. Ensure that all essential first responders have the current Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police version of the Emergency Response Guidebook. Minnetonka Beach 1. Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police Program. 2. Update land use plans and identified areas where develop- Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police ment should be restricted. 3. Continue to use city GIS to map and update locations of Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police fixed facilities using hazardous materials. 4. Ensure that all essential first responders have the current Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police version of the Emergency Response Guidebook. Spring Park 1. Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police Program. 2. Update land use plans and identified areas where develop- Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police ment should be restricted. 3. Continue to use city GIS to map and update locations of Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police fixed facilities using hazardous materials. 4. Ensure that all essential first responders have the current Staff Time Ongoing Orono Police version of the Emergency Response Guidebook. Page 187 nennapin 89000 Mldnadon Plan Mitigation Strategies Lake Minnetonka Planning Group City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Time Line Responsible Agency Medina 1. Well head protection plan $30,000 Ongoing City of Medina 2. Maintain Inter County roads $230,000 Ongoing City of Medina 3. Establish multi jurisdictional partnership to reduce runoff $200,000 5 Years City of Medina Loretto 1. Well head protection plan $30,000 Ongoing City of Loretto 2. Maintain Inter County roads $230,000 Ongoing City of Loretto 3. Establish multi jurisdictional partnership to reduce runoff $200,000 5 Years City of Loretto Minnetrista 1. Obtain and maintain NFIP FIRMS to identify community Staff time Ongoing Minnetrista Police flood plains. 2. Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Pro- Staff Time Ongoing Minnetrista Police gram 3. Map areas of repeated flooding in the county. Staff Time Ongoing Minnetrista Police St. Bonifacius 1. Obtain and maintain NFIP FIRMS to identify community Staff time Ongoing Minnetrista Police flood plains. 2. Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Pro- Staff Time Ongoing Minnetrista Police gram 3. Map areas of repeated flooding in the county. Staff Time Ongoing Minnetrista Police Excelsior 1. Achieve certification in the National Weather Services Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD StormReady Program. 2. Promote the use of NOAA Weather Radios for early warn- Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD ing and post event information. 3.Create a severe weather awareness campaign for our citizens. Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD Greenwood 1. Achieve certification in the National Weather Services Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD StormReady Program. 2. Promote the use of NOAA Weather Radios for early warn- Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD ing and post event information. 3.Create a severe weather awareness campaign for our citizens. Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD Shorewood 1. Achieve certification in the National Weather Services Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD StormReady Program. 2. Promote the use of NOAA Weather Radios for early warn- Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD ing and post event information. 3.Create a severe weather awareness campaign for our citizens. Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD Tonka Bay 1. Achieve certification in the National Weather Services Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD StormReady Program. t 2. Promote the use of NOAA Weather Radios for early warn- Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD ing and post event information. 3.Create a severe weather awareness campaign for our citizens. Staff Time Ongoing South Lake PD • Page 188 Nennopin County Mf usuen Plan Mitigation Strate les Lake Minnetonka Planning Group City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Time Line Responsible Agency Wayzata 1. Enact an building code ordinance which will ensure new $1,000 1 Year Building Inspections construction exceeding a predetermined number of square footage will have adequate in- building coverage for the 800 MHz trunked radio system. 2. Public outreach through several vehicles to include city Staff Time Ongoing Wayzata Police website, city newsletter, email and text message alerts, police department newsletter, and educational presentations to school age children as well as adults. Maple Plain 1. Disaster Response Training Staff Time Present Year West Hennepin PS 2. Review /update local emergency plans Staff Time Present Year West Hennepin PS 3. Well head protection $5,000 2 -3 Years Planning 4. Replace undersized sewer Staff Time 1 -4 Years Public Works 5. Install water impervious manhole covers Staff Time 1 -3 Years Public Works Independence 1. Disaster Response Training Staff Time Present Year West Hennepin PS 2. Review /update local emergency plans Staff Time Present Year West Hennepin PS 3. Back up city files to an offsite location $3,500 1 -2 Years West Hennepin PS 4. Install siren warning systems $100,000 7 Years West Hennepin PS 5. Install water impervious manhole covers Staff Time 1 -3 Years Public Works North Suburban Emergency Planning Group City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Tine Line Responsible Agency Brooklyn Center 1. Create a smoke detector program that would provide smoke $5,600 5 Years Brooklyn Center Fire detectors to the general public for free. Brooklyn Park 1. Review /update local emergency operations plan Staff Time Ongoing Brooklyn Park Police 2. Designate equipment/personnel for tornado response Staff Time July 2010 Brooklyn Park Police 3. Train local emergency disaster responders Staff Time Fall 2010 Brooklyn Park Police 4. Maintain list of shelters for evacuation. Staff Time Fall 2010 Brooklyn Park Police 5. Develop /update /publicize city evacuation plans. Staff Time 2011 Brooklyn Park Police 6. Continue to use city and county GIS to map and update loca- Staff Time 2011 Brooklyn Park Police tions of fixed facilities using hazardous materials /waste and associated transportation routes in a timely manner. 7. Work with city, state, federal agencies and private industries Staff Time 2011 Brooklyn Park Police to share information on types and locations of hazardous mate- rial that have the potential to affect the county and region. • Page 189 Nonnopin Doug" mmuldon Plan Mitig Strategies North Suburban Emergency Planning Group City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Time Line Responsible Agency Champlin 1. Well Head Protection Plan $20,000 2014 Planning & Zoning 2. Mill Pond Dam Stream Stabilization Project $550,000 2011 Planning & Zoning 3. Mill Pond Dam Safety Improvement Project $1.5 -4 M 2012 Planning & Zoning 4. Development of Mill Pond Reservoir $2.5 -5M 2018 Planning & Zoning 5. Run -off Reduction Plan/TMDL $50,000 2014 Planning & Zoning 6. Elm Creek watershed Run -off Reduction Plan $100,000 2016 Planning & Zoning 7. Flood management training $15,000 2011 Planning & Zoning 8. Back -up location for city records $15,000 2012 Anoka Champlin Fire 9. Wild Fire Protection Plan $10,000 2012 Anoka Champlin Fire 10. Sand Bag Plan for residents subject to floodway $5,000 2013 Champlin Police 11. Elm Creek (Lower) Channel Study $100,000 2014 Planning & Zoning 12. Stream Bank Restoration Plan $100,000 2016 Planning & Zoning Dayton 1. Renovate and update the storm shelter at Daytonna Mobile $10,000 5 years Dayton Police Home Park 2. Promote the purchase of flood insurance for all residents in Staff Time Ongoing Dayton Police the high risk area 3. Promote community participation in the National Flood In- Staff Time Ongoing Dayton Police surance Program 4. Enforce burning restrictions. Staff Time Ongoing Dayton Fire 5. Encourage citizens to purchase and use smoke detectors. Staff Time Ongoing Dayton Fire 6. Update Dayton's warning (siren) system $15,000 5 Years Dayton Police 7. Maintain sandbags and floodlighting equipment Staff Time Ongoing Dayton Police Golden Valley 1. Continue to replace undersized sere and stormwater pipe, and 1.1 million Ongoing GV Public Works extend pipes to areas receiving new curb and gutter. 2. Continue to install water impervious manhole covers $50,000 Ongoing GV Public Works 3. Continue to monitor construction, improvements, alterations, Staff Time Ongoing GV Public Works and development in the floodplain 4. Continue to work with watershed management commissions Staff Time Ongoing GV Public Works on all proposed projects impacting floodplain areas. 5. Continue to enforce floodplain management rules requiring Staff Time Ongoing GV Public Works new structures be elevated above the BFE. Hassan Township 1. Clear and deepen ditches $4,500 Annually Hassan Township Emer- 2. Subdivision ordinance on retention basins $1,000 2010 gency Management 3. Develop and implement watershed studies and implement $5,000 Annually watershed plans. 1 • Page 190 NonnoulN County Mltlgatlon Plan Mitigation Strategies North Suburban Emergency Planning Group g Y g P City Project (In Priority Order) Cost TimeLine Responsible Agency Maple Grove 1. Continue to use Maple Grove and Hennepin County GIS Staff Time 2011 Maple Grove Fire to map and update locations of fixed facilities using hazard- ous materials and associated transportation routes in a timely manner. 2. Ensure that all essential city departments (police, fire, Staff Time Ongoing Maple Grove Fire public works) have the latest edition of the Emergency Re- sponse Guidebook. 3. Assess, augment, upgrade the city outdoor warning sys- $25,000 2012 Maple Grove Fire tem to achieve >98% coverage of the city geography with outdoor sirens. 4. All siren activation radios converted to narrow band capa- $25,000 2012 Maple Grove Fire & ble radios by first quarter 2012. Emergency Prepared- ness Medicine Lake 1. The City of Medicine Lake will encourage public aware- Staff Time Ongoing Medicine Lake Fire ness through: promoting NOAA Weather Radios, improving awareness of risks, encouraging purchases of smoke detec- tors, and increase awareness of household hazardous materi- is als. 2. Medicine Lake will improve property damage by: repair- Staff Time Ongoing Medicine Lake Fire ing structurally weak homes, trimming trees around utility poles to reduce outages, designate debris removal site. Osseo 1. Continue to educate the public using several safety pro- Staff Time Ongoing Osseo Police grams. Plymouth 1. Assess and upgrade the city/county warning system as $22,000 Ongoing Plymouth Police necessary. 2. Ensure that all essential first responder agencies have the $300 Ongoing Plymouth Police latest edition of the Emergency Response Guidebook. Robbinsdale 1. Update and publicize city evacuation plans. Staff Time Ongoing Robbinsdale Police 2. Promote safe rooms in schools and community facilities. Staff Time Ongoing Robbinsdale Police 3. Continue to enforce snow removal policies and ordi- Staff Time Ongoing Robbinsdale Public nances Works St. Anthony 1. Install a warning siren to cover new park on the north end $25,000 5 Years St. Anthony Fire of St. Anthony. 2. Backup /store city files and records in alternate location Staff time 5 Years St. Anthony Fire 3. Replace undersized storm water pipes (ongoing with Staff Time 5 Years St. Anthony Public street construction) Works Page 191 Nennepin County Midgaden Plan Mitip-ation Strategies North Suburban Emergency Planning Group • g Y g City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Time Line Responsible Agency Rogers 1. Install three (3) outdoor warning sirens $85,000 2 years Rogers Fire 2. Develop a CERT Program $10,000 1 Year Rogers Fire 3. Establish a recreational area storm shelter $200,000 4 Years Rogers Fire 4. Bury three (3) phase power lines along Hillplace Drive $400,000 5 Years Rogers Public Works Crystal 1. Participate in the National Flood Insurance Program. Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development 2. Create a severe weather awareness campaign for citizens Staff Time Ongoing Crystal Emergency that covers siren information, NOAA Weather Radios, how Preparedness the National Weather Service issues warnings and the haz- ards that affect Hennepin County. 3. Ensure building code compliance inspections are con- Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development ducted on new construction projects. New Hope 1. Continue to use the Surface Water Management Plan ap- Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development proved by both the Bassett Creek and Shingle Creek Water Manageme n t Commissions. Com. Development 2. Update and enforce zoning ordinances Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development 3. Limit recreational fires and prohibit open burning Staff Time Ongoing New Hope Fire 4. Continue to trim boulevard trees NH Public Works 5. Require developers/builders to provide retention ponds as Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development part of their stormwater management plan. 6. Upgrade existing retention ponds as needed $530,000 Ongoing Com. Development 7. Require and inspect to confirm that all sump pump dis- Staff Time Ongoing NH Public Works charges groundwater to daylight. 8. Require developers to provide areas for snow storage. Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development 9. Bury overhead power lines whenever possible. Staff Time Ongoing NH Public Works 10. Replace and upgrade sewer and stormwater pipes in con- 1.3 M Ongoing NH Public Works junction with street projects. 11. Continue with the established sewer maintenance pro- Staff Time Ongoing NH Public Works gram of jetting pipes. 12. Update local emergency plans as needed. Staff Time Ongoing West Metro Fire 13. Work with neighboring cities on overall plan as to how Staff Time Ongoing West Metro Fire New Hope impacts them and vice versa. f s • Page 192 nonnopin County MINOR Plan Mitigation Strategies South Hennepin Planning Group City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Time Line Responsible Agency Bloomington 1. Use Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) dollars to fund $80,000 2 Years Hennepin Emergency the upgrades to the radios and decoder boards on the sirens, Preparedness & Sher - in an effort to not only reach compliance with the new FAA iff s Radio narrow banding standards, but as well as to implement a new Storm -Based Polygon Warning System. 2. Assess and upgrade the city/county warning system as $15,000 Ongoing Bloomington Fire necessary. 3. Increase coordination with the State Duty Officer for Staff Time Ongoing Bloomington Fire highway spills. 4. Work with city, state, and federal agencies and private Staff Time Ongoing Bloomington Fire & industries to share information on types and locations of Bloomington Public hazardous materials that have the potential to affect the Health county and region. 5. Ensure that all essential first responder agencies have the Staff Time Ongoing Bloomington Fire latest edition of the Emergency Response Guidebook. 6. Maintain links to other sources of reliable information Staff time Ongoing Bloomington Public about infectious diseases and prevention. Health 7. Continue to partner with local/regional hospitals and clin- Staff Time Ongoing Bloomington Public ics in developing plans and roles in infectious disease re- Health sponse, including quarantine. Eden Prairie 1. Continue to enforce zoning and permits in the floodplains Staff Time 5 years Buildings and zoning 2. Ensure building code compliance and inspections are con- Staff Time 5 years Buildings and zoning ducted 3. Enforce floodplain management Staff Time 5 years Buildings and zoning 4. Update land use plans. Staff Time 5 years Buildings and zoning 5. Ensure that all first responders agencies have the latest Staff time Ongoing Eden Prairie Fire edition of the Emergency Response Guidebook 6. Initiate dialog with the State Duty Officer on increase Staff Time Ongoing Eden Prairie Fire coordination on spills for highway and rail accidents involv- ing hazardous materials 7. Create a strategy to work with city, state, and federal Staff Time Ongoing Eden Prairie Fire agencies as well as private industries to share information on known types and locations of hazardous material that have the potential to affect the City of Eden Prairie, County and region. 8. partner with local/regional hospitals and clinics in devel- Staff Time Ongoing Eden Prairie Fire oping plans and procedures in infectious disease response, including quarantine contingencies. 9. Page 193 Nennapin County Midgatlan Plan Mitigation Strate ides AML South Hennepin Planning Group —7 City Project (In Priority Order) Cost TTine Line Responsible Agency Eden Prairie 9. Work with the Minnesota Department of Public Health on Staff Time Ongoing Eden Prairie Fire dispensing of the Strategic National Stockpile. 10. Promote the use of NOAA Weather Radios Staff Time Ongoing Eden Prairie Fire 11. Develop an awareness campaign for citizens on: How Staff Time Ongoing Eden Prairie Fire the National Weather Service issues warning and hazards that affected Hennepin County, and siren information as well as NOAA Radios and their use. Edina 1. Develop /update /publicize city evacuation plans Staff Time 2012 Edina Police 2. Review /update local emergency operations plan Staff Time 2011 Edina Police 3. Maintain/update hazardous materials emergency plan Staff Time 2011 Edina Police 4. Maintain/update plan to contact utility companies Staff Time 2013 Edina Police Richfield 1. Assess and upgrade the city/county warning system as $40,00- 1 Year Richfield Department necessary which includes: purchasing CODE RED alerting $50,000 of Public Safety system, determining the replacement schedule for outdoor warning sirens, placing weather radios in public buildings, and moving towards making Richfield StormReady certi- fied. 2. Develop an education program that provides useful and Grant Ongoing Richfield Department factual information to the public about infectious disease Funding of Public Safety & vaccinations. This will include: Contracts in place with Bloomington Public Bloomington Public Health to provide educational material Health along with vaccination clinics, training for employees in public buildings on infectious diseases along with preven- tion and containment of spreading the disease, developing press releases on "ECHO" to reach the immigrant commu- nity, and compiling statistic data on who has received vacci- nations to determine what areas need to be reached in the future. 3. Work with city, state, and federal agencies and private Grant 2 -4 Years City of Richfield, Hen. industries to share information on types and locations of Funding nepin County, and the hazardous materials that have the potential to affect the Federal Government county and region. This will include: Have provided up to date mapping concerning location and type of hazards mate- rial listed, further training with public safety personnel on hazardous material containment and notification procedures. Another component would be to test jurisdiction response to a chemical spill at a large complex by having a full scale exercise involving Hennepin County's WMD team, 55th Civil Support Unit, and Richfield Fire Department. - Page 194 19119911 County Mltl®at19n Plan Mitigation Strateles South Hennepin Planning Group City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Tine Line Responsible Agency Hopkins 1. Develop a public awareness campaign for citizens on how Staff time Ongoing Hopkins Fire the National Weather Service issues warnings and the haz- ards that affect Hennepin County. Also to include informa- tion on siren activation as well as the importance of NOAA Weather Radios. 2. Prevention: Continue to enforce zoning and permit regu- Staff Time Ongoing Planning lations in the floodplains. 3. Property Protection: Enforce floodplain management Staff Time Ongoing Planning rules and guidelines requiring new structures be elevated above Base Floodplain Elevation. Minnetonka 1. Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Staff Time Ongoing Minnetonka Fire Program (NFIP) 2. Ensure that all essential first responders have the latest Staff Time Ongoing Minnetonka Fire edition of the Emergency Response Guidebook 3. Continue to maintain it's National Weather Service Staff Time Ongoing Minnetonka Fire StonnReady certification. Saint Louis Park 1. Use Urban Area Security (UASI) dollars to fund the up- $15,000 2012 Hennepin County EP & grades to the radios and decoder boards on the sirens, in and Hennepin County Sher - effort to not only reach compliance with the new FAA nar- iff's Office row banding standards, but as well as to implement a new Storm -Based Polygon warning System. 2. Encourage new power lines to be buried to reduce power Staff Time Ongoing St. Louis Park Fire outages. 3. Promote the use of weather radios and when possible, Staff Time Ongoing St. Louis Park Fire purchase additional radios for the city. 4. Continue to use county and city GIS to map and update Staff Time Ongoing St. Louis Park Fire locations of fixed facilities using hazardous materials /waste and associated transportation routes in a timely manner 5. Update land use plans to identify areas where develop- Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development ment should be restrictive. 6. Utilize state, federal and local resources to prevent and Staff Time Ongoing St. Louis Park Fire control infectious diseases in the City. 7. Ensure that all first responder agencies have the latest Staff Time Ongoing St. Louis Park Fire edition of the Emergency Response Guidebook. 8. Ensure building code compliance inspections are con- Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development ducted on new construction projects. 9. Continue to enforce zoning and permit regulations in the Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development floodplains. 10. Continue to comply with drainage and erosion control Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development plans. 11. Monitor construction, improvements, alterations, and Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development development in the floodplains. Page 195 Nen1e111 County mWelden Plan Mitifzation Strategies South Hennepin Planning Group -7 City Project (In Priority Order) I Cost Tine Line Responsible Agency St. Louis Park 12. Continue to use existing state dam safety programs Staff time Ongoing Minnesota DNR (Minnesota Dam Safety Program) that maintain and oversee the structural integrity of dams. 13. Continue to work with watershed management commis- Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development sions on all proposed projects impacting floodplain areas. 14. Continue to enforce stormwater management ordinances Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development that address land disturbing activity. 15. Encourage county /city participation in FEMA's Com- Staff Time Ongoing Com. Development munity Rating System Program 16. Increase coordination with State Duty Officer for high- Staff Time Ongoing St. Louis Park Fire way spills. 17. Continue to work with Public Affairs to disseminate Staff Time Ongoing St. Louis Park Fire information about infectious diseases. 18. Maintain links to other sources of reliable information Staff Time Ongoing St. Louis Park Fire about infectious diseases and prevention. 19. Continue to partner with local /regional hospitals and Staff Time Ongoing St. Louis Park Fire clinics in developing plans and roles in infectious disease response, including quarantine. Minneapolis Planning Group City Project (In Priority Order) Cost Tine Line Responsible Agency Minneapolis 1. Use UASI funds dollars and other sources to fund the $50,000 2012 Hennepin County Sher - upgrades to the radios and decoder boards on the sirens in an iff s Radio effort to not only reach compliance with the new FAA nar- row banding standards, but as well as to implement a new Storm -Based Polygon Warning System. 2. Encourage new power lines to be buried to reduce power Varies Ongoing Electric Companies outages. 3. Continue to use GIS to map and update locations of fixed Staff Time Ongoing GIS Department facilities using hazardous materials /waste and associated transportation routes in a timely manner Page 196 11011R6dI1C0Utl11Efflla1NlPlan Plan Maintenance - SECTION 6 • Hennepin County PLAN MAINTENANCE Mitigation Plan Plan Maintenance 6.1 Plan Maintenance The Hennepin County Multi - Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan should be considered a living document. The plan will be reviewed every five years as required by FEMA. Periodic revisions and updates of the Hennepin County Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan are required to ensure that the goals of the Plan are kept current, taking into account potential changes in hazard vulnerability and mitigation priorities. In addition, revisions may be neces- sary to ensure that the Plan is in full compliance with applicable federal and state regulations. 6.1.1 Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan Hennepin County will continue to use their Hennepin County Mitigation Planning Team (HCMPT) to review the plan progress on an annual basis as part of its mitigation activities. This workgroup will continue to be coordi- nated by Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness and include all important stakeholders. Each participating agency is expected to maintain representation on the committee which shall fulfill the monitoring, evaluation and updating responsibilities set by the Fed - eral Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). .J/ 6.1.2 Plan Monitoring During each year, the Planning Team will meet to discuss the mitigation projects and any up- • dates to the plan. Contacting the departments, agencies, or organizations involved in imple- menting mitigation projects or activities, or conducting meetings with persons responsible for initiating and/or overseeing the mitigation projects to obtain progress information will be the responsibility of Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness. Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness may use the progress reporting forms, Worksheets #1 and #3 in the FEMA 386 -4 guidance document, to facilitate collection of progress data and information on specific mitiga- tion actions. Funding will drive most projects, therefore, low or no -cost recommen- dations have the greatest likelihood of succeeding. An example would be pursuing the goal of achieving "Storm Ready Certification' by the wCi National Weather Service (NWS). These efforts would lead to long- standing changes in vulnerability and can be initiated at very little cost, while promoting public education throughout the county. 6.1.3 Plan Evaluation During the annual Planning Team meeting, the Plan will be evaluated to determine the effec- tiveness of programs and to reflect changes in land development or programs that may affect mitigation priorities. The Planning Team will also review the goals and action items to deter- mine their relevance to changing situations in the County, as well as changes in state or Federal regulations and policy. The Risk Assessment portion of the plan will also be reviewed to deter- mine if this information should be updated or modified, given any new available data (new dis- Page 197 Mitigation Plan Plan Maintenance • asters or incidents throughout Hennepin County). Any updates or changes necessary will be collected by Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness for inclusion to the Plan. 6.1.4 Plan Updates Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness is the responsible agency for updates to the Plan. All Mitigation Planning Team participants will be responsible to provide Hennepin County with jurisdictional updates to the Plan when/if necessary as described above. Every five years the updated plan will be submitted to the Minnesota Department of Homeland Security and Emer- gency Management (HSEM) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for re- view. 6.1.5 Implementation Through Existing Programs Another important implementation mechanism that is highly effective but low -cost is taking steps to incorporate the recommendations, and equally important, the underlying principles of this Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan into other community plans such as Com- prehensive City Plans. Mitigation is most successful when it is incorporated within the day -to -day functions and priorities of government and development. This integration is accomplished by a constant, pervasive and energetic effort to network and to identify and highlight the multi- objective, "win -win" benefits to • each program and the community. This effort is achieved through monitoring agendas, attending meetings, and promoting a safe, sustainable community. It is the intent of Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness and the Hennepin County Mitigation Planning Team to incorporate mitigation planning as an integral component of daily government operations. Both Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness and members of the Planning Team to work with local government officials to integrate the newly adopted hazard mitigation goals and actions into the general operations of government organi- zations. Although it is recognized that there are many possible benefits to integrating components of this Plan into other local planning mechanisms, the development and maintenance of this stand- alone Multi- Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan is deemed by Hennepin County Emer- gency Preparedness to be the most effective and appropriate method to ensure implementation of local hazard mitigation actions at this time. Listed on three is a matrix of possible existing plans where mitigation could be incorporated into. Page 198 Mitigation Plan Plan Maintenance Process Action Implementation of Plaii Administrative Departmental Work Plans/ ' Radiological Emergency Preparedness (REP) Procedures/Policies Program Plan • Planning • Business and Economic Development • Building/Engineering Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan Solid Waste Management Master Plan Continuity of Operations Plan Administrative Municipality Plans Z Include reference to this plan in risk manage- ment plans section of Planning Group Emer- gency Plans. Z Include references in creation of ordinances/ resolutions or public education campaigns. Include reference in watershed district plans. Include reference in County storm water man- agement plan. Three - Rivers Park District Regional Parks Pol- icy Plan 2030 Regional Parks Capital Improvement Pro- gram :Z Municipal Debris Management Plans Met Council's 2030 Regional Development Framework • Regulatory Ordinances and other Z Comprehensive planning - institutionalize haz- directives ards mitigation techniques for new home con- struction (Windstorm Mitigation Manual) Zoning and Ordinances Building Codes - enforcement of codes or higher standard in hazard areas. Z National Flood Insurance Program - Continue to participate in this program and increase par- ticipation throughout the county in the Commu- nity Rating System Program. Continue to implement storm water manage- ment plans. Z Municipality shoreline ordinances 6.1.6 Continued Public Involvement Hennepin County is dedicated to involving the public directly in review and updates of the Plan. The Hennepin County Mitigation Planning Team will be responsible for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the Plan as described earlier in this section. During all phases of plan maintenance the public will have the opportunity to provide feedback via the Hennepin County website. A press release requesting public comments will also be issued directing people to the website where the public can review proposed updated versions of the Plan. This will provide the public and outlet for which they can express their concerns, opinions, or ideas about any - updates /changes that are proposed to the Plan. • Page 199 Mitigation Plan Plan Maintenance • A copy of the plan will be publicized and available for review on Hennepin County Emergency management's website homepage. In addition, copies of the plan will be catalogued and kept at all of the appropriate agencies in the county. The plan will also be kept on file at all Henne- pin County libraries for easy access to the public. • Page 200 Nonnopin Counts mmul lon Plan Plan Review Crosswalk Z SECTION7 Hennepin County • PLANT REYIEw CROSSWALK • 0 0 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota Local Mitigation Plan Review and Approval Status Jurisdiction: Hennepin County Title of Plan: Hennepin County Multi- Date of Plan: 6 -2010 Jurisdictional All- Hazards Mitigation Plan Local Point of Contact: Address: Dan Bovitz 1600 Prairie Drive Title: Medina, MN 55340 -5421 Deputy Director Agency: Public Works Administration / Emergency Preparedness Division Phone Number: E -Mail: 612 - 596 -0250 Daniel. Bovitz co.Hennepin. mn.us State Reviewer: Title: Date: Jennifer Nelson Asst SHMO 6 -10 -2010 FEMA Reviewer: Title: Date: Tom Smith Community Planner 7 -23 -2010 Date Received in FEMA Region Insert # Plan Not Approved Plan Approved Date Approved DFIRM NFIP Status* In Plan NOT in Plan Y N N/A CRS Jurisdiction: Class 1. Hennepin Coun 2. Bloomington X 3. Brooklyn Center X 4. Brooklyn Park X 5. Champlin X JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 1 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota DFIRM NFIP Status* In Plan NOT in Plan Y N N/A CRS Jurisdiction: Class 6. Corcoran X 7. Crystal X 8. Dayton X 9. Dee haven X 10. Eden Prairie X 11. Edina X 12. Excelsior X 13. Fort Snelling X 14. Golden Valley X 15. Greenfield X 16. Greenwood X 17. Hassan Township X 18. Hopkins X 19.Independence X 20. Long Lake X 21. Loretto X 22. Maple Grove X 23. Maple Plain X 24. Medicine Lake X 25. Medina X JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 0 0 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota DFIRM NFIP Status* In Plan NOT in Plan CRS Jurisdiction: Y N N/A Class 26. Minneapolis X 27. Minnetonka X 28. Minnetonka Beach X 29. Minnetrista X 30. Mound X 31. New Hoe X 32. Orono X 33. Osseo X 34. Plymouth X 35. Richfield X 36. Robbinsdale X 37. Rogers ?? 38. St. Anthony X NSFHA 39. St. Bonifacius X 40. St. Louis Park X 41. Shorewood X 42. Spring Park X 43. Tonka Bay X 44. Wayzata X 45. Woodland X JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 3 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota * Notes: Y = Participating N = Not Participating N/A = Not Mapped JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) A- 4 LOCA ITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Henne p y in Count , Minnesota LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY The plan cannot be approved if the plan has not been formally adopted. Each Please check one of the following for each requirement. requirement includes separate elements. All elements of the requirement must be rated "Satisfactory" in order for the requirement to be fulfilled and receive a score of N - Needs Improvement: The plan does not meet the minimum for the "Satisfactory." Elements of each requirement are listed on the following pages of the requirement. Reviewer's comments must be provided. Plan Review Crosswalk. A "Needs Improvement" score on elements shaded in gray (recommended but not required) will not preclude the plan from passing. Reviewer's S - Satisfactory: The plan meets the minimum for the requirement. comments must be provided for requirements receiving a "Needs Improvement" Reviewer's comments are encouraged, but not required. score. Prerequisite(s) (Check Applicable Box) NOT MET MET Mitigation Strategy N S 1. Adoption by the Local Governing Body: 13. Local Hazard Mitigation Goals: §201.6(c)(3)(i) X §201.6(c)(5) OR 14. Identification and Analysis of Mitigation Actions: X §201.6(c)(3)(ii) 2. Multi- Jurisdictional Plan Adoption: §201.6(c)(5) X 15. Identification and Analysis of Mitigation X AND Actions: NFIP Compliance. §201.6(c)(3)(ii) 3. Multi- Jurisdictional Planning Participation: §201.6(a)(3) X 16. Implementation of Mitigation Actions: X §201.6(c)(3)(iii) 17. Multi- Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions: X Planning Process N S §201.6(c)(3)(iv) 4. Documentation of the Planning Process: §201.6(b) and §201.6(c)(1) X Plan Maintenance Process N S 18. Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan: X Risk Assessment N S §201.6(c)(4)(ii) 5. Identifying Hazards: §201.6(c)(2)(i) X 19. Incorporation into c Estng Planning X § O( xi )(i) i Mechanisms: 6. Profiling Hazards: §201.6(c)(2)(i) X 20. Continued Public Involvement: §201.6(c)(4)(iii) X 7. Assessing Vulnerability: Overview: §201.6(c)(2)(ii) X 8. Assessing Vulnerability: Addressing Repetitive Loss X Additional State Requirements' N S Properties. §201.6(c)(2)(ii) 9. Assessing Vulnerability: Identifying Structures, Insert State Requirement X Infrastructure, and Critical Facilities: §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(B) Insert State Requirement 10. Assessing Vulnerability: Estimating Potential Losses: X Insert State Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(B) 11. Assessing Vulnerability: Analyzing Development X Trends: §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(C) 12. Multi- Jurisdictional Risk Assessment: §201.6(c)(2)(iii) X LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN APPROVAL STATUS PLAN NOT APPROVED `States that have additional requirements can add them in the appropriate sections of the Local Multi - Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance or create a new section and Plan Not Approved Pending Adoption modify this Plan Review Crosswalk to record the score for those requirements. PLAN APPROVED SCORING SYSTEM JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 5 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota PREREQUISITE(S) 1. Adoption by the Local Governing Body Requirement §201.6(c)(5): [The local hazard mitigation plan shall include] documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan (e.g., City Council, County Commissioner, Tribal Council). Location in the SCORE Plan (section or NOT Element annex and page #) Reviewer's Comments MET MET A. Has the local governing body adopted new or N/A updated Ian? B. Is supporting documentation, such as a resolution, N/A included? SUMMARY SCORE N/A N/A 2. Multi - Jurisdictional Plan Adoption Requirement §201.6(c)(5): For multi jurisdictional plans, each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that it has been forma lv adopted. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or NOT Element annex and page #) Reviewer's Comments MET MET A. Does the new or updated Ian indicate the Section 1 The Ian indicates that 43 municipalities participated in the p P P P specific jurisdictions represented in the plan? Subsection formulation of the plan. Three municipalities did not 1.1.1, page 3 participate. The cities of Hanover and Rockford sit in both and Section 2, Hennepin and Wright Counties and passed resolutions to be X Subsection 2.3, covered under the Wright County Hazard Mitigation Plan and page 34. the City of Chanhassen passed a resolution to be covered under Carver County Mitigation Plan. B. For each jurisdiction, has the local governing Adoption pending FEMA review and approval. X body adopted the new or updated Ian? C. Is supporting documentation, such as a resolution, Adoption pending FEMA review and approval. X included for each participating jurisdiction? SUMMARY SCORE X 3. Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Participation Requirement § 201.6(a)(3): Multi jurisdictional plans (e.g., watershed plans) may be accepted, as appropriate, as long as each jurisdiction has participated in the process ... Statewide plans will not be accepted as multi jurisdictional plans. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or NOT Element annex and page #) Reviewer's Comments MET MET A. Does the new or updated plan describe how each Section 2, The county created planning teams that represented the X jurisdiction participated in the Ian's development? Subsection 2.3, various jurisdictions. The responsibilities of the plannin JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 6 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota page 35. team consisted of: reviewing the hazard profiles, community profile, future land use and development trends, inventory assets and reviewing estimated losses, and proposing mitigation projects. B. Does the updated plan identify all participating Section 2, The only jurisdictions that did not participate are those jurisdictions, including new, continuing, and the Subsection 2.3, jurisdictions that participated in the HM plans of adjoining X Jurisdictions that no longer participate in the Ian? a e 34. Jurisdictions. SUMMARY SCORE F PLANNING PROCESS: §201.6(b): An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan. 4. Documentation of the Planning Process Requirement §201.6(b): In order to develop a more comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the planning process shall include: (1) An opportunity for the public to comment on the plan during the drafting stage and prior to plan approval; (2) An opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as businesses, academia and other private and non - profit interests to be involved in the planning process; and (3) Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information. Requirement §201.6(c)(1): (The plan shall document] the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was involved. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page # Reviewer's Comments N S A. Does the plan provide a narrative description of the Section 2, The county established a working group that focused on: process followed to prepare the new or updated plan? Subsection 2.1, enhancing hazard identification, hazard event profiles, p. 34 describing future land -use and development trends, and the development of a coherent strategy to address the relevant risks. Also, with the help of a county's GIS X Coordinator, the working group began to look at the risk assessment process: inventorying assets and estimating losses. The GIS coordinator worked with county data and FEMA HAZUS -MH software to effectively project infrastructure losses in the case of a flood. B. Does the new or updated plan indicate who was Section 2, In addition to the working group described above, the involved in the current planning process? (For Subsection 2.2, county established a planning team. The planning team example, who led the development at the staff level and page 34. consisted of representatives from: Minnesota Department were there any external contributors such as of Homeland Security & Emergency Management X contractors? Who participated on the plan committee, provided information, reviewed drafts, etc.?) (HSEM), the National Weather Service, Hennepin County Environmental Services, Hennepin County Management JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 1 7 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota 4. Documentation of the Planning Process Requirement §201.6(b): In order to develop a more comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the planning process shall include. (1) An opportunity for the public to comment on the plan during the drafting stage and prior to plan approval; (2) An opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as businesses, academia and other private and non - profit interests to be involved in the planning process; and (3) Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information. Requirement §201.6(c)(1): [The plan shall document] the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was involved. SCORE Information Systems (MIS), the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the City of Maple Grove, the City of Rogers, Washington County Emergency Management, Wells Fargo, Medica, Ameriprise Financial, Hennepin County Public Affairs, City of Eden Prairie, City of New Hope, City of Corcoran, Hennepin County Public Works, City of Wayzata, Metropolitan Airports Commission, Augsburg College, Minneapolis Red Cross, and the City of Minneapolis. C. Does the new or updated plan indicate how the public Section 2, The public was invited to participate via the internet. The was involved? (Was the public provided an opportunity Subsection 2.4, Hennepin County Public Affairs Office created a press X to comment on the plan during the drafting stage and pp.36 -37 release for multiple media outlets, providing information prior to the plan approval ?) on the need for the plan and the need for public input. D. Does the new or updated plan discuss the Section 2, The county created a planning team that included private opportunity for neighboring communities, agencies, Subsection 2.2, agencies, universities, non - profits and local governments. X businesses, academia, nonprofits, and other interested page 34. p arties to be involved in the planning process? E. Does the planning process describe the review and Section 6, The county has analyzed the opportunities to integrate incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, Subsection the plan into existing plans, ordinances, and county and X reports, and technical information? 6.1.5, page 199 local regulatory ro rams. F. Does the updated plan document how the planning Section 2, pp. The planning group focused on updating records of team reviewed and analyzed each section of the 34 -37 previous disasters and events, advancing the risk plan and whether each section was revised as part assessment though use of HAZUS, and updating of the update process? mitigation strategies. Evidence of the review and analysis X of the earlier document is seen throughout the document. SUMMARY SCORE X JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 8 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota RISK ASSESSMENT §201.6(c)(2): The plan shall include a risk assessment that provides the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy to reduce losses from identified hazards. Local risk assessments must provide sufficient information to enable the jurisdiction to identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from identified hazards. 5. Identifying Hazards Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i): [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the type ... of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. . Location in the SCORE Plan (section or N S Element annex and page #) Reviewer's Comments A. Does the new or updated plan include a description Section 3, pp. The plan profiles the following potential hazards: dam of the types of all natural hazards that affect the 47 -134 failure; drought; earthquakes; extreme temperature; jurisdiction? flooding; hazardous material spills; infectious diseases; radiological releases; terrorism; thunderstorms; X tornadoes; transportation infrastructure failure; and winter storms. SUMMARY SCORE X 6. Profiling Hazards Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i): [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the ... location and extent of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page # ) Reviewer's Comments N S A. Does the risk assessment identify the location (i.e., Section 3, pp. The risk analysis includes maps of dam locations, geographic area affected) of each natural hazard 47 -134 locations of facilities handling hazardous materials, past addressed in the new or updated plan? tornado paths through the county, maps illustrating communities damaged by high winds, and maps X illustrating communities at risk from radiological releases from nuclear power plants. B. Does the risk assessment identify the extent (i.e., Section 3, pp. The county's four planning teams were asked to rate magnitude or severity) of each hazard addressed in the 47_134 hazards in terms of the magnitude and severity of X new or updated plan? impacts on communities within the county. C. Does the plan provide information on previous Section 3, pp. Two dam failures since 1980 (p. 48); severe droughts in occurrences of each hazard addressed in the new or 47 -134 1978 and 1988 (pp. 51 and 52); extreme cold and heat updated plan? events (pp.61 -66); 560 hazardous material spills between X 1991 -2006 (p.75); severe flooding in 1965, 1987, and 1997 (pp. 69-71); 38 thunderstorms per ear; and JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 9 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota extensive histories of ice storms (pp.129 -130) and blizzards .131 -132. D. Does the plan include the probability of future events Section 3, pp. Some hazards — extreme temperatures, thunderstorms, (i.e., chance of occurrence) for each hazard addressed in 47 -134 and winter storms were rated "highly probable" in terms of the new or updated plan? future events. Other hazards - tornadoes, hazardous material spills, and transportation incidents were rated as X highly probable events but only for certain portions of the county. The plan rates other hazard events as either a moderate probability or a low probability. SUMMARYSCORE X 7. Assessing Vulnerability: Overview Requirement § 201.6(c)(2)(ii): [The risk assessment shall include a] description of the jurisdiction's vulnerability to the hazards described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section. This description shall include an overall summary of each hazard and its impact on the community. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page # ) Reviewer's Comments N S A. Does the new or updated plan include an overall Section 3, The county's risk assessment combines consideration of summary description of the jurisdiction's vulnerability to Subsection the probability of different hazard events, potential each hazard? 3.1.7, pp. 45 -46 impacts, a consideration of life- safety issues, and an estimation of potential warning times. This analysis is X done for each type of hazard and this assessment describes the overall vulnerability of the jurisdiction to different hazards. B. Does the new or updated plan address the impact of Section 3, pp. The plan describes impacts in terms of low, moderate, each hazard on the jurisdiction? 47 -134 and high categories. These categories were established X by the planning team. SUMMARY SCORE X 8. Assessing Vulnerability: Addressing Repetitive Loss Properties Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii): [The risk assessment] must also address National Flood Insurance Program (NF/P) insured structures that have been repetitively damaged floods. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page #) Reviewer's Comments N S JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 10 is • i LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota A. Does the new or updated plan describe vulnerability in Section 4, According to the plan, there are 32 repetitive loss terms of the types and numbers of repetitive loss Subsection 4.4, properties within the county. According to the plan, 13 of properties located in the identified hazard areas? page 162 these structures have been mitigated and 6 are currently X insured. SUMMARY SCORE X 9. Assessing Vulnerability: Identifying Structures Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(A): The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of the types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified hazard area ... . Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page # ) Reviewer's Comments N S A. Does the new or updated plan describe vulnerability in Section 4, The plan includes an assessment of the vulnerability of terms of the types and numbers of existing buildings, Subsection 4.1- infrastructure and critical facilities located within special infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the 4.2, pp. 135- flood hazard areas. The plan includes a list of all critical identified hazard areas? 155 facilities located within the 100 year flood plain and the X plan includes maps showing the location of major infrastructure and critical facilities within the flood plain. B. Does the new or updated plan describe vulnerability in Section 4, The plan includes some rough estimates of future land terms of the types and numbers of future buildings, Subsection 4.2, use at risk for flooding given some development infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the pp, 156 -161 assumptions between now and the year 2030. The plan identified hazard areas? estimates that 6.5% of new residential development is at X risk for flooding, that 6.9% of new industrial development is at risk, and that 7% of new lodging facilities are at risk. SUMMARY SCORE 10. Assessing Vulnerability: Estimating Potential Losses Requirement § 201.6(c)(2)(ii)(B): [The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of an] estimate of the potential dollar losses to vulnerable structures identified in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) of this section and a description of the methodology used to prepare the estimate ... . Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page # Reviewer's Comments N S A. Does the new or updated plan estimate potential There are no estimates of potential dollar losses. X dollar losses to vulnerable structures? B. Does the new or updated plan describe the Since there are no estimates, there is no methodology. X methodology used to prepare the estimate? SUMMARY SCORE X JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 11 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota 11. Assessing Vulnerability: Analyzing Development Trends Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(C): (The plan should describe vulnerability in terms ot] providing a general description of land uses and development trends within the community so that mitigation options can be considered in future land use decisions. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page # ) Reviewer's Comments N S A. Does the new or updated plan describe land uses and Section 4, The plan provides a detailed breakdown of existing land development trends? Subsection 4.2, use within Hennepin County and it describes a method pp. 156 -161 for estimating future land use. The plan provides a map of X current land use (2005) that can be compared and contrasted with the 2030 land use map. SUMMARY SCORE X 12. Multi-Jurisdictional Risk Assessment Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(iii): For multi jurisdictional plans, the risk assessment must assess each jurisdiction's risks where they vary from the risks facing the entire planning area. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page # Reviewer's Comments N S A. Does the new or updated plan include a risk Section 3, pp. The risk assessment divides the county into four planning assessment for each participating jurisdiction as 47 -134 areas —Lake Minnetonka area, North Suburbs, South X needed to reflect unique or varied risks? Hennepin, and Minneapolis —and risks are assessed for each of these planning districts. SUMMARY SCORE X MITIGATION STRATEGY §201.6(c)(3): The plan shall include a mitigation strategy that provides the jurisdiction's blueprint for reducing the potential losses identified in the risk assessment, based on existing authorities, policies, programs and resources, and its ability to expand on and improve these existing tools. 13. Local Hazard Mitigation Goals Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(i): [The hazard mitigation strategy shall include a] description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long -term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page # Reviewer's Comments N S A Does the new or updated plan include a description Section 5, The plan establishes goals specific to the hazards of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long -term Subsection identified in the plan. vulnerabilities to the identified hazards? 5.1.1, X 169 -175 JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 12 s s s LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota SUMMARY SCORE X 14. Identification and Analysis of Mitigation Actions Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii) : [The mitigation strategy shall include a] section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce the effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page # ) Reviewer's Comments N S A. Does the new or updated plan identify and analyze a Section 5, Mitigation actions are identified specific to the comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions Subsection 5.2, pp. hazards identified in the plan. X and projects for each hazard? 176 -185 B Do the identified actions and projects address Section 5, The plan calls for a variety of actions by local reducing the effects of hazards on new buildings and Subsection 5.6, pp. jurisdictions to update land -use plans, zoning infrastructure? 185 -196 ordinances, and building regulations. These actions X are all directed toward reducing the effects of hazards on new buildings. C. Do the identified actions and projects address Section 5, Most of the action items are directed towards the reducing the effects of hazards on existing buildings Subsection 5.6, pp. protection of existing buildings. X and infrastructure? 185 -196 SUMMARY SCORE X 15. Identification and Analysis of Mitigation Actions: National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance Requirement: §201.6(c)(3)(ii): [The mitigation strategy] must also address the jurisdiction's participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), and continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page #) Reviewer's Comments N S A. Does the new or updated plan describe the jurisdiction Section 5, The plan identifies 41 local jurisdictions that participate (s) participation in the NFIP? Subsections 5.4 in the NFIP and it summarizes information about the and 5.5, pp. 177- status of the community's flood maps. X 182 B. Does the mitigation strategy identify, analyze and Section 5, The plan calls for local jurisdictions to consider prioritize actions related to continued compliance with Subsection 5.5, participating in the CRS program, it calls for all local the NFIP? pp. 180 -182 jurisdictions to keep up their flood plain maps, and it calls for local jurisdictions to mitigate against future X losses for those buildings currently located within designated flood plains. JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 13 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota SUMMARY SCORE X 16. Implementation of Mitigation Actions Requirement: §201.6(c)(3)(iii): [The mitigation strategy section shall include] an action plan describing how the actions identified in section (c)(3)(ii) will be prioritized, implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or N S Element annex and page #) Reviewer's Comments A. Does the new or updated mitigation strategy include Section 5, The plan states that priorities were established by the how the actions are prioritized? (For example, is there Subsection 5.3, participating jurisdictions. However, the plan does a discussion of the process and criteria used ?) page 176 state that cost/effectiveness is a top priority and that the benefits should be maximized and outweigh the associated costs of the proposed projects. The plan X further states that projects should be evaluated for eligibility and feasibility including social impact, environmental impact, technical feasibility, and other criteria that measure project effectiveness. B. Does the new or updated mitigation strategy address Section 5, The plan identifies a lead agency for each mitigation how the actions will be implemented and administered, Subsection 5.6, action, in many cases it estimates the timeframe including the responsible department , existing and pp. 185 -196 required to implement actions, and it identifies X potential resources and the timeframe to complete resources or potential resources required to each action? accomplish the action. C. Does the new or updated prioritization process include Section 5, The plan states that cost - benefit review will be an emphasis on the use of a cost - benefit review to Subsection 5.3, conducted as projects go forward. The plan states the X maximize benefits? vacie 176 cost effectiveness is the county's top priority. D. Does the updated plan identify the completed, deleted Section 5, The county provides an implementation update for or deferred mitigation actions as a benchmark for Subsection 5.1. each of its each off its major mitigation strategies. progress, and if activities are unchanged (i.e., pp. 169 -175 These updates are highlighted within the document. X deferred), does the updated plan describe why no changes occurred? SUMMARY SCORE X 17. Multi - Jurisdictional Mitigation Actions Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iv): For multi jurisdictional plans, there must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan. Location in the SCORE JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) \- 14 s • • LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota Element Plan (section or Reviewer's Comments N S annex and page # A Does the new or updated plan include identifiable action Section 5, Action items are specific to the jurisdictions that items for each jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval of Subsection 5.6, participated in the county's four regional planning X the plan? pp. 185 -196 teams. B. Does the updated plan identify the completed, deleted or Section 5, The plan is clear regarding what actions have deferred mitigation actions as a benchmark for progress, Subsection 5.1. been taken since the earlier plan and it clarifies X and if activities are unchanged (i.e., deferred), does the pp, 169 -175 that some strategies have been abandoned since updated plan describe why no changes occurred? adoption of the initial plan. SUMMARY SCORE X PLAN MAINTENANCE PROCESS 18. Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(i): [The plan maintenance process shall include a] section describing the method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a five -year cycle. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or Element annex and page #) Reviewer's Comments N S A. Does the new or updated plan describe the method and Section 6, The Hennepin Emergency Preparedness Agency schedule for monitoring the plan, including the responsible Subsection 6.1.2, will be the lead agency for monitoring the plan and department? page 196 for monitoring implementation of the plan. The X Ian calls for annual assessments of the plan. B. Does the new or updated plan describe the method and Section 6, The plan calls for the Hennepin Emergency schedule for evaluating the plan, including how, when and by Subsection 6.1.3 preparedness Agency to evaluate the plan whom (i.e. the responsible department)? and 6.1.4, pp. 197- annually and the local planning teams to do the X 198 same when necessary. The plan states that the evaluation will be based primarily on consideration of changing circumstances in the county. C. Does the new or updated plan describe the method and Section 6, The plan commits the county to updating the plan schedule for updating the plan within the five -year cycle? Subsection 6.1. 4, within five years. X p age 198 SUMMARY SCORE X JULY 7, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 15 LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW CROSSWALK: Hennepin County, Minnesota 19. Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(ii): [The plan shall include a] process by which local governments incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or N S Element annex and page #) Reviewer's Comments A. Does the new or updated plan identify other local planning Section 6, The plan includes an analysis of the opportunities mechanisms available for incorporating the mitigation Subsection 6.1.5, to implement the plan through existing requirements of the mitigation plan? page 199 administrative, planning and regulatory X mechanisms. B. Does the new or updated plan include a process by which Section 6, The plan calls for integrating the hazard mitigation the local government will incorporate the mitigation strategy Subsection 6.1.5, goals in to local plans, policies, administrative and other information contained in the plan (e.g., risk page 199 procedures and regulations. X assessment) into other planning mechanisms, when appropriate? C. Does the updated plan explain how the local government Section 6, The plan simply highlights areas where mitigation incorporated the mitigation strategy and other information Subsection 6.1.5, goals could be implemented —the process is the X contained in the plan (e.g., risk assessment) into other page 199 responsibility of the 43 participating jurisdictions. p lanning mechanisms, when appropriate? SUMMARY SCORE X Continued Public Involvement Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(iii): [The plan maintenance process shall include a] discussion on how the community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process. Location in the SCORE Plan (section or N S Element annex and page # Reviewer's Comments A. Does the new or updated plan explain how continued Section 6, Once adopted a copy of the plan will be public participation will be obtained? (For example, will Subsection 6.1.6, publicized and available for review on Hennepin there be public notices, an on -going mitigation plan page 200 County Emergency Management's website committee, or annual review meetings with stakeholders ?) homepage. In addition, copies of the plan will be X catalogued and kept at all of the appropriate agencies in the county. The plan will also be kept on file at all Hennepin County libraries for easy access to the public. SUMMARY SCORE X JULY 1, 2008 (W / D F I R M) 16 City Council Agenda Item No. 6j COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: January 13, 2011 • TO: Curt Bo ane , City Manager g Y Y g FROM: Kelli Wick, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: PAY EQUITY COMPLIANCE REPORT - 2010 Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council review and accept the Pay Equity Compliance report. After review and acceptance the report will be forwarded to the State of Minnesota Pay Equity Coordinator. Background: The Minnesota Department of Management and Budget notified the City of Brooklyn Center in its e-mail dated November 22, 2010 that we must submit our Pay Equity Information as required by the Local Government Pay Equity Act. Our jurisdiction was found in compliance based on our 2008 report and the next regular report is due January 31, 2011. This report must show data in place as of December 31, 2010. State law (M.S. 471.991- 471.999) and Minnesota Rules (Chapter 3920) requires all public jurisdictions to eliminate any sex -based wage inequities in compensation. Pay Equity is a method of eliminating discrimination against women who are paid less than men for jobs requiring comparable levels of expertise. This goes beyond the familiar idea of "equal pay for equal work" where men and women with the same jobs must be paid equally. A policy to establish pay equity usually means: 1) that all jobs will be evaluated and given points according to the level of knowledge and responsibility required to do the job; and 2) that salary adjustments will be made if it is discovered that women are consistently paid less than men for jobs with similar points. In conducting preliminary reports of our pay equity data it appears that we are in compliance. The report reviews the total number of male and female employees listed for each job class including part-time employees who work at least an average of 14 hours per week and 67 days per year. It determines if male and female dominated classes are being paid in a manner that eliminates discrimination against women. The compensation for female- dominated classes should not be consistently below the compensation for male - dominated classes of comparable work value. Jurisdictions are found in compliance if they achieve an underpayment ratio of 80 % or more. The city has an underpayment ratio of 116.28 %. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Ongoing: 1. We will provide streamlined, cost effective, quality services with limited resources Mission: Ensuring an attractive. clean, safe community that enhances the quality q, f life and preserves the public trust Pay Equity Implementation Report 1/13/2011 Part A: Jurisdiction Identification Jurisdiction: Brooklyn Center Jurisdiction Type: CITY - City • 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Contact:Kelli Wick Phone: 763 -569 -3300 E -Mail: kwickQci.brooklyn- HR Director center.mn.us Part B: Official Verification 1. The job evaluation system used measured skill, effort 3. An official notice has been posted at: responsibility and working conditions and the same City Hall & Employee Bulletin Boa rd system was used for all classes of employees. (prominent location) The system used was: Consultant's System informing employees that the Pay Equity Description: Hay Implementation Report has been filed and is available to employees upon request. A copy of the notice has been sent to each exclusive representative, if any, and also to the public library. The report was approved by: City Council 2. Health Insurance benefits for male and female classes of (governing body) comparable value have been evaluated and: Tim Willson there is no difference. (chief elected official) Mayor (title) 0 Part C: Total Payroll ® Checking this box indicates the following: - signature of chief elected official - approval by governing body $9,894, 3 6 7 - all information is complete and accurate, and is the annual payroll for the calendar year just ended - all employees over which the jurisdiction has December 31. final budgetary authority are included Date Submitted: 1 / 2 4 / 2 0 11 Compliance Report Jurisdiction: Brooklyn Center Report Year: 2011 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Case: 1 - 2011 DATA (Private (Jur Only)) i s Brooklyn Center MN 55430 Contact: Kelli Wick Phone: (763) 569 -3300 E- Mail: kwick @ci.brooklyn- center.mn.us The statistical analysis, salary range and exceptional service pay test results are shown below. Part I is general information from your pay equity report data. Parts II, III and IV give you the test results. For more detail on each test, refer to the Guide to Pay Equity Compliance and Computer Reports. I. GENERAL JOB CLASS INFORMATION Male Female Balanced All Job Classes Classes Classes Classes # Job Classes 43 35 8 86 # Employees 136 57 22 215 Avg. Max Monthly Pay per employee 4,782.65 3,734.44 4,456.78 11. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS TEST A. Underpayment Ratio = 116.28 Male Female Classes Classes • a. # At or above Predicted Pay 23 21 b. # Below Predicted Pay 20 14 c. TOTAL 43 35 d. % Below Predicted Pay 46.51 40.00 (b divided by c = d) *(Result is % of male classes below predicted pay divided by % of female classes below predicted pay.) B. T -test Results Degrees of Freedom (DF) = 191 Value of T = 0.939 a. Avg. dill. in pay from predicted pay for male jobs = $34 b. Avg. diff. in pay from predicted pay for female jobs = ($44) III. SALARY RANGE TEST = 94.89 . (Result is A divided by B) A. Avg. # of years to max salary for male jobs = 5.22 B. Avg. # of years to max salary for female jobs = 5.50 IV. EXCEPTIONAL SERVICE PAY TEST = 0.00 (Result is B divided by A) A. % of male classes receiving ESP 2.33 B. % of female Gasses receiving ESP 0.00 *(If 20% or less, test result will be 0.00) Brooklyn Center Job Class Data Entry Verification List LGID 490 Case: 2011 DATA Job Class Nbr Nbr Class Jobs Min Mo Max Mo Yrs to Max Yrs of Exceptiona• N br Title Males Females Type Points Salary Salary Salary Service Service Pay 1 Custodian 5 0 M 82 $2,308.00 $2,809.00 5.50 0.00 2 PT Custodian (CARS) 1 0 M 82 $1,704.00 $2,073.00 5.50 0.00 3 PT EBHC Set up Crew 1 1 B 82 $1,790.00 $2,178.00 5.50 0.00 4 Lead Custodian 1 0 M 90 $2,744.00 $3,339.00 5.50 0.00 6 PT Liquor Store Cashier 1 8 F 122 $1,662.00 $2,023.00 5.50 0.00 7 PT Lifeguard 2 5 F 125 $1,662.00 $2,023.00 5.50 0.00 8 EBHC Crew Chief 2 0 M 144 $2,425.00 $2,951.00 5.50 0.00 9 Police Cadet 1 0 M 144 $1,976.00 $2,404.00 5.50 0.00 10 Golf Asst. Mgr (PT) 1 0 M 144 $2,291.00 $2,788.00 5.50 0.00 11 PT Community Service OH 7 1 M 144 $1,976.00 $2,404.00 5.50 0.00 12 PT Golf Maint. 1 1 B 144 $1,622.00 $1,974.00 5.50 0.00 13 PT EBHC Setup Crew Chir 1 1 B 144 $2,235.00 $2,720.00 5.50 0.00 14 PT EBHC Maintenance 1 0 M 144 $2,291.00 $2,788.00 5.50 0.00 15 Recreation Clerk 0 1 F 144 $2,744.00 $3,339.00 5.50 0.00 17 Seasonal Maint. Workers 14 0 M 144 $1,544.00 $1,879.00 5.50 0.00 18 PT Aquatics Supervisor 0 1 F 151 $3,006.00 $3,658.00 5.50 0.00 19 EBHC Maint Cust. 2 0 M 160 $3,029.00 $3,686.00 5.50 0.00 20 Liquor Store Office Assista 0 1 F 169 $2,744.00 $3,339.00 5.50 0.00 21 EBHC Secretary/Receptior 0 1 F 169 $2,744.00 $3,339.00 5.50 0.00 22 Permit Technician 0 1 F 169 $2,955.00 $3,596.00 5.50 0.00 24 Customer Service Rep. 0 1 F 169 $2,744.00 $3,339.00 5.50 0.00 25 Maintenance Custodian 2 0 M 170 $3,600.00 $4,381.00 5.50 0.00 26 Utilities Tech. II 0 1 F 173 $3,029.00 $3,686.00 5.50 0.00 27 Accounting Tech II 0 1 F 173 $3,104.00 $3,778.00 5.50 0.00 29 Property Technician 0 1 F 173 $3,029.00 $3,686.00 5.50 0.00 30 Police Records Technician 0 9 F 177 $3,029.00 $3,686.00 5.50 0.00 31 Night Service Person 1 0 M 177 $4,079.00 $4,079.00 0.00 2.00 • 23 Crime Prevention Specialk 0 1 F 183 $3,600.00 $4,381.00 .5.50 0.00 33 Central Garage Adm Tech 0 1 F 183 $3,029.00 $3,686.00 5.50 0.00 34 Public Works Adm Tech 0 1 F 183 $2,812.00 $3,423.00 5.50 0.00 35 Recreation Secretary 0 1 F 183 $3,029.00 $3,686.00 5.50 0.00 37 BCS /BD Adm. Assistant 0 1 F 183 $3,029.00 $3,686.00 5.50 0.00 38 Adm. Sec. /EBHC Billing C 0 1 F 183 $3,029.00 $3,686.00 5.50 0.00 32 PW Adm Assistant 0 1 F 187 $3,261.00 $3,969.00 5.50 0.00 36 HR/Benefits Specialist 0 1 F 187 $3,261.00 $3,969.00 5.50 0.00 39 Police Adm. Assistant 0 1 F 187 $3,261.00 $3,969.00 5.50 0.00 40 Deputy City Clerk 0 1 F 187 $3,261.00 $3,969.00 5.50 0.00 41 Payroll /HR Technician 0 1 F 187 $3,261.00 $3,969.00 5.50 0.00 42 Maint. 11 20 0 M 192 $4,079.00 $4,079.00 3.50 0.00 45 Police Crime Analyst 1 0 M 194 $3,600.00 $4,381.00 5.50 0.00 43 Mechanic 3 0 M 197 $4,246.00 $4,246.00 0.00 15.00 44 Sales Manager 1 1 B 203 $3,711.00 $4,516.00 5.50 0.00 46 Fire Adm. Coordinator 0 1 F 212 $3,343.00 $4,068.00 5.50 0.00 47 Appraiser Tech 0 1 F 215 $3,690.00 $4,491.00 5.50 0.00 48 Code Enforcement Inspect 2 0 M 218 $4,175.00 $5,081.00 5.50 0.00 87 Season Code Enf. Insp. 1 1 B 218 $2,724.00 $3,315.00 5.50 89 Fire Inspector PT 1 0 M 218 $1,386.00 $1,386.00 0.00 1.00 88 Assistant Liquor Store Mar 1 0 M 233 $3,361.00 $4,090.00 5.50 49 Sales Director 0 1 F 238 $4,303.00 $5,237.00 5.50 0.00 50 Maintenance Supv. 1 0 M 238 $4,096.00 $4,984.00 5.50 0.00 51 Eng. Tech III 2 2 B 250 $3,877.00 $4,718.00 5.50 0.00 52 Police Support Services M 0 1 F 252 $4,531.00 $5,514.00 5.50 0.00 53 EBHC Operations Director 1 0 M 252 $4,521.00 $5,502.00 5.50 0.00 54 IT /GIS Technician 1 0 M 252 $4,496.00 $5,471.00 5.50 0.00 55 Appraiser 1 0 1 F 262 $4,175.00 $5,081.00 5.50 0.00 56 Bldg. Inspector 2 0 M 262 $4,279.00 $5,208.00 5.50 0.00 57 Golf Course Supervisor 1 0 M 262 $3,362.00 $4,158.00 5.50 0.00 58 Liquor Store Manager 2 0 M 275 $4,096.00 $4,984.00 5.50 0.00 1 Brooklyn Center Job Class Data Entry Verification List LGID 490 Case: 2011 DATA . Job Class Nbr Nbr Class Jobs Min Mo Max Mo Yrs to Max Yrs of Exceptional Nbr Title Males Females Type Points Salary Salary Salary Service Service Pay 59 Police Officer 28 5 M 280 $3,848.00 $5,659.00 3.00 0.00 Longevity 60 Detective 3 2 B 280 $6,024.00 $6,024.00 0.00 5.00 Longevity 61 Eng Tech IV 1 0 M 301 $4,963.00 $6,039.00 5.50 0.00 62 City Clerk 0 1 F 301 $4,644.00 $5,652.00 5.50 0.00 63 Supervisor of Street & Pai 1 0 M 320 $5,374.00 $6,540.00 5.50 0.00 64 Supervisor of Public Utilitie 1 0 M 320 $5,374.00 $6,540.00 5.50 0.00 65 Accountant 0 1 F 332 $4,750.00 $5,780.00 5.50 0.00 66 Comm. Development Spec 1 0 M 342 $5,115.00 $6,225.00 5.50 0.00 68 Building Official 1 0 M 362 $5,115.00 $6,225.00 5.50 0.00 90 Housing & Comm. Stand.: 1 0 M 362 $5,115.00 $6,225.00 5.50 0.00 69 Recreation Program Super 1 2 B 366 $4,521.00 $5,502.00 5.50 0.00 70 Sergeant 5 1 M 382 $6,829.00 $6,829.00 0.00 17.00 71 City Assessor 0 1 F 411 $6,247.00 $7,601.00 5.50 0.00 72 Liquor Operations Mgr 1 0 M 432 $5,659.00 $6,887.00 5.50 0.00 73 EBHC Manager 1 0 M 432 $5,659.00 $6,887.00 5.50 0.00 74 Commander 4 0 M 449 $7,326.00 $7,670.00 1.00 0.00 75 Asst. Finance Dir. 0 1 F 465 $5,374.00 $6,540.00 5.50 0.00 76 Deputy Public Works Dir 2 0 M 525 $5,932.00 $7,219.00 5.50 0.00 78 Fire Chief/Marshall 1 0 M 561 $6,462.00 $7,972.00 0.00 3.00 79 CARS Director 1 0 M 573 $6,404.00 $7,901.00 0.00 16.00 80 Human Resources Directo 0 1 F 588 $6,247.00 $7,601.00 5.50 0.00 81 IT Director 0 1 F 588 $6,247.00 $7,601.00 5.50 0.00 77 Asst City Manager /Dir of B 0 1 F 608 $6,483.00 $8,002.00 0.00 2.00 82 Director of Business & De% 1 0 M 611 $6,483.00 $8,006.00 0.00 3.00 83 PW Director/City Engineer 1 0 M 732 $7,627.00 $9,427.00 0.00 2.00 84 Police Chief 2 0 M 739 $7,627.00 $9,427.00 0.00 1.00 85 Dir of Fiscal & Support Se, 1 0 M 754 $7,627.00 $9,427.00 0.00 6.00 86 City Manager 1 0 M 1,192 $10,521.00 $10,521.00 0.00 4.00 Job Number Count: 86 2 Predicted Pay Report for Brooklyn Center 1/13/2011 Case: 2011 DATA 12000 _ 10000 8000 ■ ♦ f 6000 ■ 4000 2000 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Points ♦ Male Jobs ■ Female Jobs • Balanced Jobs Predicted Pay - - --- Line Continuation (Min) --- - - -- Line Continuation (Max) • City Council Agenda Item No. 7a PROCLAMATION DECLARING FEBRUARY 4, 2011, TO BE GO RED FOR WOMEN DAY WHEREAS, Heart disease is the #1 killer of women over age 20 and one in three American women dies of heart disease; and *HEREAS, Diseases of the heart are the nation's leading cause of death and stroke is the third leading cause of death; and WHEREAS, More women die of heart disease than the next four causes of death combined, including all forms of cancer; and WHEREAS, Cardiovascular disease claims the lives of over 430,000 American females each year, approximately one death per minute; and WHEREAS, Cardiovascular disease, including heart disease and stroke, claims the lives of 5, 000 Minnesota women each year, or about 14 each day; and WHEREAS In 2010, the direct and indirect cost of cardiovascular diseases in the U.S., including stroke, is estimated at $503.2 billion; and WHEREAS, Ninety percent of women have one or more risk factors for developing heart disease. However, only one in five women consider cardiovascular disease their greatest health risk; and WHEREAS, The risk factors for heart disease are smoking, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, overweight /obesity, physical inactivity, diabetes, a family history of early heart disease, and age; and WHEREAS, Eighty percent of cardiac events in women may be prevented if they make the right choices for their hearts, involving diet, exercise and abstinence from smoking; and WHEREAS, February is designated as American Heart Month; and WHEREAS, Go Red For Women® is the American Heart Association's national call to increase awareness about heart disease- ' the leading cause of death for women -and to inspire women to take charge of their heart health to reduce that risk; and WHEREAS, All women should learn their own personal risk for heart disease, using tools such as the American Heart Association's Go Red For Women® Heart Check up, Go Red For Women ® Better U and by talking to their healthcare provider; and WHEREAS, Keeping women healthy and promoting awareness of women's health issues, including heart health, is an important responsibility and depends on the actions of many organizations and groups in our community; and WHEREAS, Women's health remains a priority for families, communities, and government, and our commitment to keeping women healthy is stronger than ever; and WHEREAS, Minnesota women need to take action to make heart health a priority for themselves and their families, become aware of their heart disease risk, and take action to control their risk. NOW THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of Minnesota, with the consent and support of the Brooklyn Center City Council, recognize the importance of the ongoing fight against heart disease and stroke and do hereby proclaim Friday, February 4, 2011, to be Go Red for Women Day in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. We urge all citizens, businesses, and d organizations to show their support for women and the fight against heart disease by wearing g Red an p romotin g Go Red initiatives throughout the city. By increasing awareness of the risk factors for this devastating disease and taking actions to reduce them, we can save thousands of lives each year. January 10, 2011 �C Date Mayor �fvm f CouncA'l Members 7-TEST.�� J City Clerk City Council Agenda Item No. 7b S PROCLAMATION DECLARING FEBRUARY S, 2011, AS CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER CENTENNIAL DAY WHEREAS, the City Brooklyn Center is a first -ring suburb of Minneapolis located in the Northwestern part of Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, early foot trails, rivers, railroads, and finally highways brought travelers to Brooklyn Center, which was incorporated as a Village in 1911; and WHEREAS, on November 8, 1966, the voters approved a City Charter amendment and the village became a city; and WHEREAS, the community has emphasized growth, family values, and industry and balanced a small town character while promoting economic prosperity and growth; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center is the northern gateway to the Twin Cities and affords residents and visitors opportunities to live, shop, and work in a safe and growing community; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center has embraced a community of residents who are as diverse as the world and as committed to making their community successful and representative of the world we live in; and WHEREAS, A Great Place to Start.....A Great Place to Stay is truly a befitting description of the City of Brooklyn Center as it celebrates its Centennial throughout 2011. NOW, THEREFORE, 1, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROO KLYN CENTER State of Minnesota, with the consent and support of the Brooklyn Center City Council, do hereby proclaim February 5, 2011, as City of Brooklyn Center Centennial Day in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, and urge all citizens to join in this special observance. January 10, 2011 Date Mayor ouncil embers ATTEST.• ( �� V City Clerk City Council Agenda Item No. 8a COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: January 19, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development SUBJECT: Resolution Adopting Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Tax Increment District No. 3 (Removal of Brookdale Parcels) Recommendation: It is recommended that the following the public hearing that the City Council consider adoption/approval of the Resolution Adopting Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Tax Increment District No. 3 (Removal of Brookdale Parcels) Background: On December 13, 2010, the City Council adopted a resolution which authorized the setting of a public hearing for January 24, 2011 to consider an amendment to Tax Increment District No. 3 which would remove the 13 parcels identified as the Brookdale parcels. The attached draft amendment to Tax Increment District No. 3 has been mailed to Hennepin • County, the Brooklyn Center School District and the Robbinsdale School District as required by the TIF regulations and a public notice has been published in the official newspaper. As of the date of this memorandum, the City has not received any comments from either the County or School Districts on the proposed amendment. On January 10, 2011, the City's Financial Consultant, Springsted Financial, presented their report on the analysis Tax Increment District No. 3, the effects of the loss in valuation of the Brookdale parcels, the effects of removing these 13 parcels from the Tax Increment District, and the effects of the decertification of Tax Increment District No. 2 in 2011. This analysis illustrated that a combination of the proposed amendment to Tax Increment No. 3 and the scheduled decertification of Tax Increment District 2 would accomplish the following: 1. A savings to all residential, commercial and industrial properties within the city. 2. A stabilizing of the TIF 3 revenue stream to meet debt service. 3. Additional funds to the TIF 3 Housing Account. 4. The building of a fund balance that could enable the early retirement of this TIF district. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe conu unity that enhances the duality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Attached for you reference is a copy of the staff memorandum and Springsted's PowerPoint • presentation that were presented at the January 10, 2011 Council Work Session. Budget Issues: The financial consultant's analysis illustrates savings to all residential, commercial and industrial properties within the City, stabilizes the TIF 3 revenue stream to meet debt service, and provides additional funds to the TIF 3 Housing Account. Council Goals: Ongoing: 2. We will ensure the financial stability of the City. • f i Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clear:, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO.3 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council ") of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the "City "), as follows: Section 1. Recitals 1.01. The Board of Commissioners (the "Board ") of the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority (the "EDA ") and the City have, by a resolution approved December 19, 1994, established Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 (the "TIF District ") and approved a tax increment financing plan ( "TIF Plan") for that TIF District. It has been proposed that the EDA and the City adopt a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan Modification "), all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 to 469.1081, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, all inclusive, as amended, (the "Act ") all as reflected in the TIF Plan Modification, and presented for the Council's consideration. • 1.02. The EDA and City have investigated the facts relating to the TIF Plan Modification and have caused the TIF Plan Modification to be prepared. 1.03. The EDA and the City have performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the adoption and approval of the proposed TIF Plan Modification, including, but not limited pp p ro p to, notification of Hennepin County and Independent School Districts Nos. 286 (Brooklyn Center) and 281 (Robbinsdale), having taxing jurisdiction over the property to be included in the TIF District, and the holding of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law. 1.04. The City is not modifying the boundaries of Redevelopment Project Area No. l but is removing from the TIF District 13 parcels with current market values below the frozen values. Section 2. Findings for the TIF Plan Modification The Council hereby reaffirms the original findings for the TIF District and findings made in connection with modifications approved April 28, 1997, including that when the TIF District was established, Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 was a redevelopment district. Section 3. Public Purpose The adoption of the TIF Plan Modification conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will help provide opportunities for additional redevelopment and will improve the tax base. These public purposes and benefits exceed any benefits expected to be received by private developers, who will receive assistance only in the amount needed to make each proposed development financially feasible. RESOLUTION NO. • Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Modifications 5.01. The TIF Plan Modification is hereby approved, and shall be placed on file in the office of the Executive Director of the EDA. Approval of the TIF Plan Modification does not constitute approval of any project or a development agreement with any developer. 5.02. City staff is authorized to file the TIF Plan Modification with the Commissioner of Revenue, the Office of the State Auditor and the Hennepin County Auditor. 5.03. City staff, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the TIF Plan Modification and for this purpose to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council for its consideration all further modifications, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose. January 24, 2011 • Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • Brooklyn Center Economic Qevelopment Authority, Minnesota Modification No. 3 " to the Tax Increment Financin Plan , For R� �� : 5-7 Tax Increment Firancn (Redevlelopment) U . District No. 3 ., Original Plan Adopted ,December 1�9 1994 Modification No l D� $ 1397 Modlflcatior No 2[ed: April 28; 1`997 , Ad min�s rative amendments vc�ete completed in 2004 and 2008 .: K, Modification No gated: December 13, 2010 (DRAFT) Modifi�catllon App dved: January 24, 2011 (planned) Prepared by: SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED 300 Jackson Street, Suite 300 St. Paul, MN 55101 -2887 (651) 223 -3000 WWW. SPRINGSTED. COM Introduction • The purpose of Modification No. 3 to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 is to remove 13 parcels within the TIF District (within Site B — Brookdale Area) for which the tax capacity has declined below the frozen values reducing the captured tax capacity within the District. The City cannot currently service annual debt service on their TIF obligations with the available increment generated by the District. Once the 13 parcels have been removed from the District, the frozen value of the District will decline and the projected captured tax capacity will increase and is projected to generate increment sufficient to annually service the City's debt service. Additionally, the contributions to the Housing Fund will increase with the increase in annual increment (15% of TIF receipts are deposited into the Housing Fund). u The sections specifically modified are Section D, DescriptionPr ©perty in District No. 03, and Ah Section M, Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions. In all other respects, all findings are as set out in thd plan dated ;December 19, 1994 and those modified by Modification No. 1 dated Aptl 28, 1997 and Modification No. 2 dated April 28, 1997. NR A s • �� l ar y � R x n. f a x , � • TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page(s D. Description of Property in District No. 3 �w .•... ••••••••••••••••••......••••••• 1 M. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions......... .... :: ....... ..............................2 Exhibit A q s MiR a ,. R Y� :r 'N Y IJ R: Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority, Minnesota D. Description of Property in District No. 3 The following 13 parcels are to be removed from District No. 3: Site B (Brookdaie Area) School District #286 (Brooklyn Center) Parcel ID 02- 118 -21 -31 -0055 Y 02- 118 -21 -31- 0056 " �f 02- 118 -21 -31 -0049 School District #281 (Robbinsdale)�,v , Parcel ID 03- 118 -21 -44 -0026 03- 118 -21 -41 -0024 03- 118 -21 -14 -0032 . 02- 118 -21 -32 -0017 02-118-21-327Q �� • 02- 118- 213,2f)0,9 .. 02-1184 231 �2- 0010 02 118=2�'�32 -0011, 02-1 AK 02 -11 M1 23 -0023 47-'34s a All other parcel( ©r replatted�arcel s) w'ithr�i IhTIF District as per Modification No. 2 are to nc remain m thDistrtr, fA mad luded in Exhibit I identifying the entire district (first page) and Site B W, h the parcels o be re d identified with hash marks (second page). springsted A` Page 1 Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority, Minnesota i M. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions Although this modification does not increase the amount of captured tax capacity identified in Modification No. 2, the removal of the parcels will have an impact on the other taxing jurisdictions based on the current tax capacity within the District (with Pay 2011 estimates). The current tax capacity within the District is much less than the Original and Modified plans anticipated. The removal of the Brookdale parcels from District No. 3 will t roperties from the TIF calculation and the Districts frozen value will be readjo, resulting in a reduction in market value to be realized by the taxing jurisdictions becaw�ethetaent values are below the frozen values.' The parcels to be removed from District No. 3 haves ,frozen tax capacity of $953,264 and a current tax capacity of $432,260 (with Pay 2011 estir`b tes). The difference'b6tween the frozen and the current is $521,004 ($479,656 in ISD #281; and $41,348, in ISD #286) f�,!! captured tax capacity is projected to increase b this amount. p tY � p j Y The taxable net tax capacities of the taxing jurisdictioi't f decline when the removal of the parcels from the Districts takes affecJ, (.Pay 2012), wher",c�empared to the amount available in Pay 2010. NO The chart on the following page identifie§ the h tax ate increase that would result from this loss of taxable net. tax capacity; , assuming day 2010 fax rates and taxable net tax • capacities, and estimated 2fl1�'�tax- capacities vvitlfn tfie TC [is ict No. 3. :,. h , ¢ �' RX i Spring sted Paget Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority, Minnesota Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions Re a rt Aff City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Modification to Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment No. 3 Removal of Brookdale Parcel4 ' FU i w , Impact of Parcel removal (City, County and Scifool Distric�rily) Without Modification ,� With Modification and :Parcel Removal Projerttl, �. 200912010 2009/2010 ted New Hypothetical Hypothetical Taxable 2009/2010 Taxable Gptured Taxable Increase to Total Taxing Net Tax Local Net Tax Not Tax Net Tax Local Local Jurisdiction Capacity (1) Tax Rate >aaperty (1) + Capacity = Capacity Tax Rate ( *) Tax Rate ( *) o Q City of Brooklyn Center 17,960,128 52.412 � ,� 17,96ti,1,28, . , 17,439,124 1.566% 53.978% Hennepin County 1,439,645,193 42 64p% 1 39,645 J3 ` (521,004) 1,439,124,189 0.015% 42.655% ISD #281 88,612,938 �7 28.621°/q 88, iti 938 (479,656) 88,133,282 0.156% 28.777% 4 - M•�t� � � a ISD #286 5,691 835 51.17. ° /o 5,63$35 ($41,348) 5,650,487 0.374% 51.547% ma x. Totals ISD #281�12t�6 r� ,� 1.737% 125.410% ISD #286 4`25% 1.956% 148.181% "V * Statement 1 The�removal of the parc411 from TIO No. 3 would result in a lowering of the TNTC available to the taxing jurisdictions N rsizl ing in a hypothetical in�cr`ease to t)ie Local Tax Rate as shown above. The above is calculated based on the pay 2010 tax levy. Whellessuming the same toWle�vy, the reduced TNTC resulting from the proposed modification would require each taxing envy to increase their 16 Max rate. (1) Taxable net tax capacity = total net tax capacity b pptured T F fiscal disparity contribution, if applicable. i i rtt' Page • City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Renewal and Renovation) District No. (The Shingle Creek TIF Project) Time Schedule - Modification of TIF 3 (Draft 212 -08 -2010) A ..>,. Date of Event Modification Monday, December 13, 2010 City Council is for pub i _ aring @ 7:00 PM for M;lanuary 24,2 consider modificati" IF District No. 3 (rein l of parcels) (resol rovided by Kennedy & Gra�r+�) Tuesday, December 14, 2010 County Commis " eG r ins notification letter of modification District No. 3 30 days i' publication notice kk On /Before December 23, 2010 oun "a of Dist`' e, ceive impact letters " Modification • sen pringsted) days prior to public hearing Thursday, January, 2011 ation of notice of public hearing on Deadline: Tues., J� modification of TIF No. 3 "(arrangements made by Springsted) �r - 10 -30 days prior to public hearing : > onday, January24, City Council holds public hearing, and adopts resolution P m qk' consentin 9 to modification of TIF District No. 3 @��OR � (resolution provided by Kennedy &Graven) Monday a 11 EDA adop resolution modifying TIF District No. 3 Y p Y Following City C e: °'' Meeting (resolution provided by Kennedy & Graven) After January 24, 2011 Filing of TIF District Modification (completed by Springsted) Page 1 Housing Development and Redevelopment Project No. 01 Project Areas 1 9S §t If I's h 1, 11 11 ii, 11.1 1 1 il'A if it if 1 1;1 il'i 1- 11 it If ill It I I I I I I A B C D E P ER LAKE PARK LOCAL STREET 4 -J INDEX ME 6 TIF 3 Area Before Modification TIF 3 Parcels to be Removed Project Area Boundary N W+ E o 0.25 0.5 Brooklyn Center GIs Tax Increment Financing District No. 03 Site B (Brookdale Area) EWING AVE N Z z 59TH AVE N � I I 58 1/2 AVE N 58TH AVE N ADMIRAL LN N ry O O O o_ NORTHPORT PARK Z - OO����1� 56TH AVE N z ERICON DR w ORT SCHOOL � / Q SCHOOL `L z w N O 55TH AVE N 55TH AVE N N LIONS z J ° WATER `� PARK Z w 54TH AVE N O� _ ro °ER f� Q Z L z z Q LU 54TH AVE N CENTERBR w z ¢ ¢ G 53RD PL N / CO OLF URSj U) z z ¢ O / LILAC DR N D w a LOU, O O t a 0 Q LU 53RD AVE N 53RD AVE N \ 53RD AVE N z w z l / z Q LU `- 11 w U Q z w X L w z X w w Q � O 1STAVE N PARK HAPPY HOLLOW \ w ®Brookdale properties to be removed z o w O 50T / 0 50TH AVE N Z � m �G 49TH AVE N City of 41 BROOKLYN s CENTER - - -� Brooklyn Center GIS 0 oos of oa - — —• MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE: January 5, 2011 • TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development SUBJECT: Presentation of the Tax Increment Report Relating to the Removal of the Brookdale Properties from Tax Increment District No. 3. Recommendation: Jenifer Wolfe, Senior Project Manager with Springsted Incorporated, the City's Financial Consultant, will have a power point presentation on their analysis of removing the Brookdale parcels from Tax Increment District No. 3 and the 2011 decertification of Tax Increment District No. 2. The purpose of this work session item is to inform and prepare the City Council for the January 24 public hearing on the amendment to TIF District No. 3. No formal action is required. Background: On December 13, 2010, the City Council adopted a resolution which authorized the setting of a public hearing for January 24, 2011 to consider an amendment to Tax Increment District No. 3 (removal of the Brookdale parcels). The December 7 th staff memorandum which accompanied the request to schedule this proposed tax increment plan amendment included the following exhibits which have also been attached for your reference: • Springsted's analysis of the removal of the Brookdale parcels from Tax Increment District No.3 and the effects of the 2011 decertification of Tax Increment District No, 2, • The draft amendment to Tax Increment District No. 3 which has been forward to Henn. County and the two School Districts, as required by TIF regulations, 0 Copy of the legal notice that has been published in the official newspaper, • Copy of the map which identifies the Brookdale properties as all of the properties located east of Xerxes Ave., South of Bass Lake Road, and North/Northwest of Hwy 100, with the exception of the Holiday Service Station site. Springsted's power presentation will illustrate the results of their analysis and their projections that a combination of the these two actions will result in savings to all residential, commercial, and industrial properties within the City, stabilizes the TIF 3 revenue stream to meet debt service, and provides additional funds to the TIF 3 Housing Account. Policy Issues: • 1lission: Ensuring an attractive, clew:, safe conuntenitp that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust MEMORANDUM COUNCIL WORK SESSION Does the City Council wish to have additional information prepared for the January 24, 2011 • public hearing to consider the removal of the Brookdale parcels from Tax Increment District No. 3? Council Goals: Ongoing: 2. We will ensure the financial stability of the City • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe cornnucnity that enhances the quatit of life and preserves the public trust Tax Increment Financing District No. 03 Site B (Brookdale Area) EWING AVE N z 59TH AVE N )% J ( 58 1/2 AVE N �o 58TH AVE N j ADMIRAL LN N a p NORTHPORT PARK �.1�� 56TH AVE N z z ERICON DR > NORTHPORT Q SCHOOL w z o I' 55TH AVE N 55TH AVE N N o 0 LIONS z , �O N TOWER `! PARK w z W - �54TH AVE N _ No.3 I Q z UJ Z CENTERBR ! J > Q W W z 54TH AVE N GOLF' w Q z Q Q Q 53RD PL 'N / LAC DR N CoUR �; c w w w z [� � J � 53RD AVE N j 1 53RD AVE N 53RD AVE N z w_- z / z a �� w Q � w �% Q C7 z z w w 4. V > — w z ¢ x w W C7 1STAVE N HAPPY HOLLOW P \ W ® Brookdale properties to be removed z w 50T / _ >¢ 50TH AVE N 49TH AVE N N c jwo BROOKEYN Brooklyn Center GIS — o aos al wr. r 1 J COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: December 7, 2010 . TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development SUBJECT: Resolution Calling for a Public Hearing by the City Council on the Proposed Amendment of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 3. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the Resolution calling for a public hearing by the City Council on the proposed amendment of the tax increment financing plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 Background: Tax Increment District No. 3 was established in 1994 to P rovide assistance to various commercial redevelopment and housing development projects within the District. • The District is a scattered site district within three principal areas: the Brooklyn Boulevard /69th Area, the Brookdale Area, and the Willow /252 Area and included the following objectives: - To enhance the tax base of the City - To provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City, for development by private enterprise, - To better utilize vacant or underdeveloped land - To attract new businesses - To acquire blighted or deteriorated residential property for rehabilitation or clearance and redevelopment, - To develop housing opportunities for market segments underserved by the City including housing for the disabled and elderly. The district consisted of 221 parcels of land, 174 of which contained existing houses and structures with a 1994 base tax capacity of $2,290,408. The current tax capacity in 2009 is $3,447,706, creating an incremental tax capacity of $1,197,208. The outstanding debt in TIF #3 includes two bond issues: • GO Tax Increment Bonds 2004D sold in the amount of $17,245,000. The outstanding principal on these bonds is $14,310,000 as of December 31, 2009. The final payment on these bonds will be made on February 1, 2020. • GO Tax Increment Bonds 2008A sold in the amount of $4,335,000. The ?Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM outstanding principal on these bonds is $2,665,000 as of December 31, 2009. • The final payment on these bonds will be made on February 1, 2018. While both of these Bonds wer e based on projected tax increments exclusive of the Brookdale Mall properties; an issue that continues to be monitored is the diminishing valuation of the Brookdale Mall properties and their effects on the District's ability to generate sufficient tax increment to meet annual debt service. The 1994 base tax capacity for the Brookdale Mall Properties was $929,426, calculated from a base market value of $46,621,300 which included the Applebee's and Kohl's parcels. The current tax capacity, as recently stipulated by Hennepin County, is $424,450 or $504,976 less than the base value, a loss of 54.33 %. This reduction below the original base tax capacity is offset by the balance of the District before increment is generated; the tax capacities from the other properties within the District are used to cover the shortfall caused by the Brookdale properties tax capacity loss. In January, the Council received a Tax Increment Update on the 3 remaining tax increment districts. This report, attached for your reference, identified that the removal of the Brookdale parcels from Tax Increment District 3 would have a financial impact on the general tax base and levy; unless corresponding tax base were added to the general tax base at the same time. At the November 22, 2010 Council Work Session, the Council was informed that staff was • continuing to work with our financial consultant on mitigating the impact of dropping the Brookdale properties from TIF 3 with the additional tax base from expiration of TIF 2 in 2011. Proposed Amendment to Tax Increment District 3 Attached is a memorandum from Springsted, the City's financial consultant, which illustrates the effects achieved through a combined action of dropping of the Brookdale properties from TIF 3 and the decertification/expiration of TIF 2. Page 2 of this memorandum summaries the hypothetical tax impact analysis on residential, commercial /industrial, and apartments, with attachments 2, 3, and 4, detailing the tax effects on the City, County, School District # 286 (Brooklyn Center), and School District # 281 (Robbinsdale), for the following events: Attachment # 2 The Removal of the Brookdale Parcels from Tax Increment District 3 Attachment # 3 The Decertification of Tax Increment District #2 Attachment # 4 The Combination of both the Removal of Brookdale parcels and decertification of District #2. The cash flow analysis on attachment #S illustrates the effects on the annual cash flow with the Brookdale properties remaining. The January TIF Update did indicate that the City does have a • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM debt service reserve account to address shortfalls in tax increment to make scheduled debt payments in the near term. Attachment # 6, illustrates the effects to the District 3 cash flow with the removal of the Brookdale properties. Specifically, the estimated tax increment increases by approximately $700,000 a year, which has a positive effect on the District's housing fund and provides an annual surplus that would allow an early retirement of this Tax Increment District. The removal of the Brookdale parcels from TIF 3 is considered a major plan amendment and requires a public hearing with copies of the amendment provided to the affected school districts and Hennepin County. The attached resolution authorizes the scheduling of a public hearing for the January 24, 2011 City Council Meeting and the distribution of the TIF amendment. A work session item will be scheduled for the January 10, 2011 Council Meeting at which time the City's financial consultant will provide a presentation on their analysis, the proposed amendment to Tax Increment District # 3 and answer Council questions. Budget Issues: The financial consultant's analysis illustrates savings to all residential, commercial, and industrial properties within the City, stabilizes the TIF 3 revenue stream to meet debt service, • and provides additional funds to the TIF 3 Housing Account. Council Goals: Ongoing: 2. We will ensure the financial stability of the City Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe toms ucnity that enhances the quality of life anti preserves the public trust Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 3 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council ") of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the "City "), as follows: Section 1. Public Hearing This Council shall meet on January 24, 2011, at approximately 7:00 P.M., to hold a public hearing on the proposed amendment of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 (the "Amendment "), all pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 to 469.134, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, inclusive, as amended, to remove certain parcels from the Tax Increment Financing District. Section 2. Notice of Public Hearing Filing of Amendment . City staff is authorized and directed to work with the City's consultants to prepare the Amendment and to forward the same to the appropriate taxing jurisdictions including Hennepin County, Independent School District No. 281 and Independent School District No. 286. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause the Notice of the Public Hearing attached hereto as Exhibit A, together with an appropriate map as required by law, to be published at least once in the official newspaper of the City not later than 10, nor more than 30, days prior to January 24, 2011, and to place a copy of the Modification on file in the City Manager's office at City Hall and to make such copy available for inspection by the public. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, State of Minnesota (the "City "), will hold a public hearing on January 24, 2010, at approximately 7:00 P.M. at the City Hall, 6301 Single Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, with respect to a proposal to amend the Tax Increment Financing Plan ( "TIF Plan ") for Tax Increment Financing District No 3 ( the "TIF District ") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, to remove certain parcels from the TIF District. Copies of the proposed Amendment are on file and available for public inspection at the office of the City Manager at City Hall. The TIF District is located within Development District No. 1 in the City. A map of • Development District No. 1. and the TIF District, as proposed to be amended is show below. All interested persons may appear at the hearing and present their views orally or prior to the meeting in writing. [INSERT MAP of Development District No. 1 and the TIF District No. 11 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA City Clerk Springsted Incorporated • 380 Jackson Street, Suite 300 springsted Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2887 Tel: 651 - 223 -3000 Fax: 651- 223 -3002 www.spdngsted.com MEMORANDUM TO: Gary Eitel, Business and Development Director City of Brooklyn Center, MN FROM: Jennifer Wolfe, Senior Project Manager Tom Denaway, Analyst DATE: December 7, 2010 SUBJECT: Impacts Removal of Parcels From TIF No. 3 Plus Decertification of TIF No. 2 The City requested an impact analysis relative to the proposed removal of the Brookdale parcels from TIF District No. 3 and the impact of TIF District No. 2 decertification (2011 is final collection year). We have also analyzed the coverage on the existing TIF obligations within TIF No. 3 with the proposed removal of the Brookdale parcels that would result in an increase of the annual collections within the district. When TIF District No. 3 was created the base value of the District was frozen at the 1994 market value (with a portion at 1997 levels based on approved modifications). The current value of the Brookdale parcels proposed to be removed from TIF No. 3 is lower than the frozen value of the District, which has mitigated the impact of the recent reduction in market value on the properties. As a result the tax base for the local taxing jurisdictions was not affected by this change in market value. See Attachment #1 for the list of parcels to be removed. The removal of the Brookdale parcels from TIF No. 3 will take out these properties from the TIF calculation and the Districts frozen value will be readjusted, resulting in a reduction in market value to be realized by the taxing entities because the current values are below the frozen values. The modification to the TIF District will reduce the taxable net tax capacity (TNTC) on which the local levies are spread, resulting in higher tax rates in comparison to the parcels remaining in the existing TIF District No. 3 (when assuming no change to the levy amount). This change in tax rates is illustrated on the impact charts as Event 1. The change would not occur until taxes payable year 2012. See Attachment #2 for the impa ct chart detailing the event of removing the parcels from TIF No. 3. Additionally, proposed for 2012, is the decertification of the existing TIF District No. 2. The decertification of an existing TIF district allows for the local taxing jurisdictions to benefit from the increased market value which was 101 Public Sector Advisors City of Brooklyn Center, MN Impacts - Removal of Parcels From TIF No. 3 Plus Decertification of TIF No. 2 • December 7, 2010 Page 2 previously captured within the TIF district. The effect of the proposed decertification of TIF No. 2 is an in crease to the TNTC on which the local levies are spread, which would result in lower tax rates compared to before the District was decertified (again assuming no change to the levy amount). This change in tax rates is illustrated on the impact charts as Event 2. This change would also not occur until taxes payable year 2012. See Attachment #3 for the impact chart detailing the event of decertification of TIF District No. 2. The combination of both events is illustrated on Attachment #4. This chart illustrates the net effect of both the removal of parcels from TIF District No. 3 and the decertification of TIF District No. 2. The net impact of both events would result in an increase of the TNTC and a reduction in tax rates compared to the previous year, for the City, County and ISD #286 (Brooklyn Center). ISD #281 (Robbinsdale) is impacted by the removal of parcels from TIF District No. 3, but is not impacted by the decertification of TIF District No. 2. A reduction in tax rates is shown as an annual decrease in the property tax bill. Ali impacts are illustrated using Pay 2010 tax rates, taxable net tax capacity, and offsetting TIF adjustments based on Hennepin County provided current and frozen values for each TIF district for payable 2011. The impacts would not be realized, however, until the pay 2012 tax year. • The chart below summarizes the estimated impacts by taxing jurisdiction for the combination of Event 1 and Event 2 as described previously. This information is included on the chart in Attachment #4. City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Summary of Hypothetical Tax Impact Examples - Combined Events Estimated Annual Reduction /increase in Tax Bill By Property Type Total ISD Total ISD °'' City of ISD 281 ISD 286 281 386 Brooklyn Hennepin (Project (Project (Project (Project ? Property Type Center County 2148) 2149) 2148) 2149 $150,000 Home $6 $0 $2 $76 $4 $83 $200,000 Home $9 $0 $3 $102 ($6) $111 $250,000 Home $11 $0 $4 $127 $7 $138 $300,000 Home $13 $0 $5 $153 ($8) $166 Per $1,000,000 C/I $83 $1 $30 $980 $54 $1,064 Per $500,000 Apartments ($27) ($0) $10 ($318) ($18) ($345), • Hypothetical Tax Rate - 0.4316% - 0.0044% 0.1558% - 5.0908% 42803% 0.0000 %0 Increase /Decrease ATTACHMENT #4 City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Prepared 1217/2010 s ted °?��mb�nr� "}t <�oua..r�dl �rcjls f�+' 1 Year (a): 2010 2010 2010 2010 Total Total Entity (a): City County SD #281 SD #286 Impact ;(g) Impact (g) Existing Tax Rate (a): 52.412% 42.640% 28.621% 51.173% 123.673% 146.225% Existing TNTC (a): $17,960,128 $1,439,655,262 $88,612,938 $5,691,835 for Property for Property: Calculated Levy (b): $9,413,262 $613,869,004 $25,361,909 $2,912,683 Located within Located within Adjustment to Captured TIF (c) ($149,134) ($149,134) $479,656 ($628,790) City, County City, County ' Hypc)thcitcal ° r�l CSC() .1`10 A 9,3$ E t, ,39 t30�t,39G 8133 �1 � => '`.. $t(, O i25', and 1SD' 281 and ISD 286 3 ti e 6 Estimated Net Tax Value (f) Capacity Homestead Residential $150,000 $ 1,500 ($6) ($0) $2 ($76) ($4) ($83) 175,000 1,750 ($8) ($0) $3 ($89) ($5)! ($97) 200,000 2,000 ($9) ($0) $3 ($102) ($111) 225,000 2,250 ($10) ($0) $4 ( 1 ($124) 250,000 2,500 ($11) ($0) $4 ( ($7) ($138) 275,000 2,750 ($12) ($0) ( 4) ($8) �,. ($152) 300,000 3,000 ($13) ($153) 8), ($166) Commercial /Industrial ca $300,000 $ 5,250 8 ($15) ($290) 375,000 6,750 ($0) 1 ($ ($19) ($373) 450,000 8,250 1 4 0) ($0 1 ($420) ($23) ($456) 500,000 9,250 ($40) $14 ($471) ($25) ($511) ci 1,000,000 19,250 $30 ($980) ($54) Apartments (4 or More Units) $ 200,000 $ 2,500 ($11) ($0) $4 ($127) ($7) ($138) 275,000 3,438 ($15) ($0) $5 ($175) ($10) ($190) 350,000 4,375 ($19) ($0) $7 ($223) ($12) ($242) 425,000 5,313 ($23) ($0) $8 ($270) ($15) ($294) 500,000 6,250 ($27) ($0) $10 ($318) ($18) $345) NOTES: (a) The existing tax rate and taxable net tax capacity (TNTC) has been provided by Hennepin County for taxes payable 2010. Complete data for Pay 2011 not yet available. (b) The calculated levy equals the tax rate multiplied by the taxable net tax capacity (TNTC). The de crease in captured tax ca pacity is a combination of the two events: an increase with the removal of parcels from TIF No. 3, offset by a decrease with the decertification of TIF No. 2. c s p P (d) The hypothetical taxable net tax capacity ( TNTC) y 9 TNTC is calculated b increas the amount of tax capacity that was released by decertification of TIF No. 2 in excess of that tax capacity that was c it decreased from removing parcels from TIF No. 3. (e) The tax rate increase is derived by dividing the hypothetical new TNTC by the calculated, and subtracting the existing tax rate. (0 Estimated market value is the basis from which the net tax capacity is calculated. This value is not necessarily the price the property would bring if sold. (g) Total Impact does not include miscellaneous taxing entities. The impacts shown above would be realized in Pay 2012. Public Sector Advisors 0 • ATTACHMENT #5 City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment) District No. 3 Estimated Cash Flow beginning Taxes Payable 2011 Scenario 1: Total District - Brookdale Remains Annual Less Estimated $2,470,000 $17,245,000 $4,335,000 Transfer Out Future Additional Total Cumulative Net Admin Net GO Tax Ref GO TIF Bonds, GO Tax TIF Pooling Project Future TIF Surplus / Year Tax Inc Fee Increment Series 20048 Series 2004D Series 2008A Afford. Hsg Costs Obligations Obligations (Deficit) 15% 1 2 (3 ) (4 5 (6 ) (7 8 9 10 11 13 2011 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,431,213 167,125 250,697 1,849,034 r (177,722) 2012 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,833,213 161,938 250,697 2,245,847 (752,257) 2013 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,839,313 156,750 250,697 2,246,759 u * (1,327,705) 2014 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,852,325 150,813 250,697 2,253,834° (1,910,227) 2015 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,856,775 144,875 250,697 2,252,347 (2,491,262) 2016 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,877,900 138,250 250,697 2,266,847 (3,086,797) 2017 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,870,900 131,625 250,697 2,253,222 y (3,668,707) 2018 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,900,400 250,697 2,151,097 (4,148,492) 2019 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,892,250 250,697 2,142,947 � ,} ►�$ (4,620,127) 2020 1,671 312 0 1,671 312 250,697 250,697 (3,199,512 18 0 18,882,459 433 17,771,125 1,223,000 2,832,369 0 0 22,259,754. # Projected Tax Increment does not include changes to future tax rates, class rate, or market values. Pay 2010 Tax Rates used for each project within TIF No. 3. No assumptions included on use of fund balance. Cash flow demonstrates ability of annual increment to cover annual obligations. Public Sector Advisors ATTACHMENT #6 City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment) District No. 3 Estimated Cash Flow beginning Taxes Payable 2011 Scenario 2: Total District - Brookdale Parcels Removed Annual Less Estimated $2,470,000 $17,245,000 $4,335,000 Transfer Out Future Additional Total Cumulative Net Admin Net GO Tax Ref GO TIF Bonds, GO Tax TIF Pooling Project Future TIF Surplus / Year Tax Inc Fee Increment Series 2004B Series 2004D Series 2008A Afford. Hsg Costs Obligations Obligations (Deficit) 15% x.r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 z 13 2011 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,431,213 167,125 250,697 1,849,034 _ m . ( 177,722) 2012 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,833,213 161,938 355,004 2,350,154 $ (161,185) 2013 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,839,313 156,750 355,004 2,351,066 (145,561) 2014 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,852,325 150,813 355,004 2,358,141 (137,011) 2015 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,856,775 144,875 355,004 2,356,654 (126,974) 2016 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,877,900 138,250 355,004 2,371,154 (131,437) 2017 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,870,900 131,625 355,004 2,357,529, (122,275) 2018 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,900,400 355,004 2,255,404 , (10,988) 2019 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,892,250 355,004 2,247,254 108,449 2020 2 0 2 355 004 355,004 2,120 136 25 0 25,140,869 433 17,771 125 1 3,771 130 0 0 20 851,392 Ma Projected Tax Increment beginning in 2012 includes increased captured tax capacity resulting from the removal of the Brookdale parcels. Projected Tax Increment beyond 2012 does not include changes to future tax rates, class rate, or market values. Pay 2010 Tax Rates used for each project within TIF No. 3. No assumptions included on use of fund balance. Cash flow demonstrates ability of annual increment to cover annual obligations. Cumulative cash flow does not include any interest assumptions. I Public Sector Advisors r . • f MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE: January 7, 2010 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Dan Jordet, Director of Fiscal and Support Services Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development SUBJECT: Update on Tax Increment Finance Districts COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: The status report of these three tax increment districts is being presented as information only: The data is intended to inform the Council of the current status of each of the three active Tax Increment Districts and the potential opportunities to assist in achieving Council goals. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2: Tax Increment District No. 2 was established in 1985, as a redevelopment district, to remedy conditions of economic obsolescence, physical blight, under utilization of land, extensive soil corrections which the private sector has not been willing or able to accomplish and correction of numerous traffic hazards and pedestrian conflicts. In 1994, the district's project area was enlarged to include the geographic boundaries of the city and the following additional objectives were added: • To enhance the tax base of the City. • To provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City, for redevelopment by private enterprise. • To better utilize vacant or undeveloped land. • To attract new businesses. • To acquire blighted or deteriorated residential propriety for rehabilitation or clearance and redevelopment. • To develop housing opportunities for market segments underserved in the City, including housing for the disabled and elderly. The District consisted of 61.59 acres located east of Shingle Creek Parkway, north of John Martin Drive and west of Earle Brown Drive and had a base tax capacity of $ 350,282. The 2009 tax capacity of the 11 commercial retail, office, and residential land uses is $999,947, which results in an incremental tax capacity of $ 649,665 or approximately 185% growth since the district was created. In 2008, the 6.15 acres Embassy Suites site was removed from the District This district has a fund balance of $1,919,954.66 as of 12- 31 -09. 1 The district is scheduled to expire in 2011 and is projected to generate $1,743,000 in • additional tax increment revenue which is $1,663,117 in present day value. The City's TIF consultant, Briggs & Morgan, is recommending that a formal budget o e other governmental units be amendment, including public hearing and notifications t th oth g , gp g completed prior to use of this $3.6M+ of additional funds. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO.3 Tax Increment District No. 3 was established in 1994 to provide assistance to various commercial redevelopment and housing development projects within the District The District is a scattered site district with three sites, the Brooklyn Boulevard /69th Area, the Brookdale Area, and the Willow /252 Area and included the following objectives: To enhance the tax base of the City - To provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City, for development by private enterprise, To better utilize vacant or underdeveloped land To attract new businesses - To acquire blighted or deteriorated residential property for rehabilitation or clearance and redevelopment, - To develop housing opportunities for market segments underserved by the City including housing for the disabled and elderly. The district consisted of 221 parcels of land, 174 of which contained existing houses and , structures with a 1994 base tax capacity of $2,290,408. The current tax capacity in 2009 is $3,447,706, creating an incremental tax capacity of $1,197,208. Special state legislation associated with the creation of this Tax Increment District included provisions which required that 15% of the revenues generated from tax increment in any year is deposited in the housing development account of the authority and expended according to the tax increment financing plan. Additionally, the legislation included certain time constraints for the expenditure of the tax increments on planned activities /acquisitions /capital improvements. Special legislation extended the initial 10 year deadline to 13 years. and on May 15, 2008, this district moved to a debt service mode (ie. with the exception of the 15% housing fund, all new increment is limited to paying off the existing debt of the district In 2008, the last bond sales allowed within this district occurred which provided the funding for the Xerxes Ave. Streetscape Improvements and the James Ave. water trunk realignment The balance of the loan proceeds is $ 2,134,069, of which $1.8M has been allotted to the 2010 Bass Lake Road Streetscape Improvement Project Additionally, $250,000 of these funds have been identified as a funding source for the City's portion of a potential grant associated with a restoration project of Shingle Creek. Also, in 2008, the EDA adopted Resolution No. 2008 -05 which amended the budget to 2 include the following activities to address foreclosure issues and the 57th and Logan Ave. dry cleaner vapor study: - Acquisition of single and multi- family housing - Rehabilitation of single and multi - family housing - Environmental remediation of single family and multi- family housing properties The Housing Fund has a balance of $3,154,154 as of December 31 , 2009. In January, 2009, the City Council approved the Renew Loan and Remove & Rebuild Foreclosure Programs and allotted $1.6M form this TIF Housing Account. Currently, the Renew Loan Program has used $635,000 of its $1M budget and the Remove and Rebuild Program has used #300,000 of its $600,000 budget. This 15% housing fund will continue to funded by the annual tax increments through the expiration of this district in 2021. Presently, approximately $300,000 a year is placed into this fund which over the remaining 12 years could amount to an additional $3.6 M for housing related activities. The outstanding debt in TIF #3 includes two bond issues: Go Tax Increment Bonds 2004D sold in the amount of $17,245,000. The outstanding principal on these bonds is $14,310,000 as of December 31, 2009. The final payment on these bonds will be made on February 1, 2020. GO Tax Increment Bonds 2008A sold in the amount of $4,335,000. The outstanding principal on these bonds is $2,665,000 as of December 31, 2009. The final payment on these bonds will be made on February 1, 2018. Both Bonds were based on projected tax increments exclusive of thc Brookdale Mall properties. $3,432,586.63 of the total $8,720,809.82 cash balance in TIF # 3 is reserved as payment for these debts. An issue that continues to be monitored is the diminishing valuation of the Brookdale Mall properties and their effects on the District's ability to generate sufficient tax increment to meet annual debt service. The 1994 base tax capacity for the Brookdale Mall Properties was 929,426, calculated from a base value of $46,621,300 which included the Applebee's and Kohl's parcels. The current tax capacity, as recently stipulated by Hennepin County, is 424,450 or 504,976 less than the base value, a loss of 54.33 %. This loss is currently absorbed by the entire TIF #3 district before an increment is calculated and lowers the overall increment available fr Y om TIF #3 by more than $700,000 ($715,565.85 at a 142.099% tax extension rate). This presents three challenges to the City's economic development efforts: 3 1. The ability is is reduced b leaving to generate sufficient funds to make dept payments tY g P P Y� Y g the Brookdale P arcels in the TIF #3 district. • 2. The availability of any additional funding for economic development incentive or assistance for the Brookdale parcels is curtailed until TIF #3 is decertified in 2021. 3. The removal of the Brookdale parcels from TIF #3 would improve the increment generation of the district and could provide opportunities for the reformation of the Brookdale parcels into a new economic development or tax increment district that could facilitate redevelopment opportunities for the mall properties and surrounding area. However, the action would reduce the general tax base by 504,976 or about 2.16% unless corresponding tax base were added to the general tax base at the same time. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO.4 Tax Increment District No. 4 is a soils district that was established in 1999 to assist in certain public redevelopment costs associated with the Twin Lakes Business Park The district consists of 29.26 acres and had a base tax rapacity of $37,762. The 2009 tax capacity of the 3 industrial lots (Wickes Furniture - now Wagner Spray Technology, Baker Furniture /Toro, and Caribou) is $ 312,450, a 725% growth of the tax capacity of the district. In 2009, the district generated $399,404 in increments,(after fiscal disparity deductions). Of that amount, 97.5% was used to pay off a $1,666,143 note issued in 1999 and a $758,056 note issued in 2002. • The outstanding debt in this district is held by Joslyn Manufacturing and Twin Lakes Business Partnership. It is retired on pay -as- you -go basis using only 97.5% of the increments actually paid in the district each year to a maximum of the outstanding note plus interest The pay -as- you -go notes, totally $2,424,199, were issued with an interest rate of 8 %. The obligation matures when the district is decertified in 2020 and any unpaid principal remaining at that time is canceled. 12 -31 -2009 cash balance is $173,043.61 Of that amount, $165,459.46 will be paid to Joslyn Manufacturing and Twin Lakes Business Partnership on February 1, 2010, leaving a net balance of $7,584.15. COUNCIL POLICY ISSUES: The future identification and prioritizing of eligible acquisitions and /or capital improvements that the Council wishes to include in a potential $3.6M + budget amendment to Tax Increment District No. 2. The consideration of the future removal of all or portions of the Brookdale Mall properties from Tax Increment District # 3. 4 Public Sector Ad visors k� 3 �Y v �� � ter" i�ir�, � �@ any @�l�, "` � v •c- iw�. OY4AZ:A�•i �tUa. Y S �°'i �jr '. s� y`#'KS2 � �. ., 3 �".Y f .:: . T� .. YS a d sa fi i City of BROOKLYN CENTER Impact of Parcel Removal from:TIF No. 3 Plus Decertification of TIF No. 2 , January 10 2011 PRESENTER: Jenny Wolfe, Senior Project Manager ngSfed Public S*r Advisors • �.� � Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 • Scattered Site TIF District, established in 1,994 in Redevelopment Project No. 1 • Three distinct areas with special legislation to.. pool for affordable housing Site A (Brooklyn B — Site B (Brookdale Area) — Site C (Willow Lane /252 Area) Public Sector Advisors 2 Spilngsted Housing Development and Re development Project No. 01 Project Areas oL L s%kL 3 �aL a h LLI i irLLI i&F IIII3: 1i. is j hL1 � � ,�,�� � r Mai of . . ........ &f % Redevelopment r .. . Pis, . t N o. Project TIF District a, X, E C N o. 3 ,"1, 41, 'w . . . . . . . . . j3 � ... � TIE 3 Area Before Modification i £ TIE 3 Parcels to he Removed PtojectAre. Boundary aftn n,e<ue.r.�o%a I I Public Setclslsrs z` Ow Tax Increment Financing Dis trict Nth 03 Site B (Brookda a Area a � B _ Properties Al ....... ... �VX t .... ....... ' nesnxrwaac � �1��, r ✓ ,�� ', 6�1f14td, r to be f ...... �f0, . .... . ...... .... - Removed 53TrtAV� nc � ,� � TO AM N .. • T�J - _ n v�r A'VE H., 53R.[}AlTEM o- f i 9I,r I �G 4:/ f 5 !f' Srookdate properties to be removed .... V�w . ,t 49TH" k .... BRlTDKLY..V CE.LTER s� r _ Pudic Sector Advises 4 Springsted Current Status of TIF No. 3 • Capture 15% of increment annually for affordable housing,: fund • Balance of :increment used to retire: G0 Bonds • Current tax capacity for Brookdale parcels: for removal (13 parcels) less than original t Public Seor Advisors � S*gSted Adwk . 3 Parcels to be Re TIF N o PARCELS TO BE REMOVED: TIF Project No. 2149 (Brooklyn Center SD #286) PAYABLE 2011 BASE Parcel ID Description Market Value Tax Capacity Market Value Tax Capacity 02- 118 -21 -31 -0055 Mall Parking 824,000 16,480 1,812,900 36,258 02- 118 -21 -31 -0056 Kohl's 3,375,000 67,500 3,765,000 75,300 02= 118 -21 -31 -0049 Boulevard's - 726,000 13,770 Subtotal 4,199,000 83,980 6,303,900 125,328 Captured (2,104, 900) (41, 348) TIF Project No. 2148 (Robbinsdale SD #281) PAYABLE 2011 BASE Parcel ID Description Market Value Tax Capacity Market Value' Tax Capacity 03- 118 -21 -44 -0026 Sears 4,300,000 85,250 7,810,000 155,450 03- 118 -21 -41 -.0024 Applebee's 960,000 19,200 - 03- 118 -21 -14 -0032 Midas 48.3,000 8,910 540,900' 10,068 02- 118 -21 -32 -0017 Mall Common Areas and Parking 4,927,000 97,790 17,909,100 358,182 02- 118 -21 -32 -0014 Mervin's 1,800,000 36,000 5,276,000 104,770 02- 118 -21 -32 -0009 Penney's 1,906,000 38,120 4,698,300 93,966 02= 118 -21 -32 -0010 'Penney's Auto 49,000 980 472,000 8,690 02- 118- 21 -32- 0011 °Macy's 3,000,000 59,250 4,875,000 96,750 02- 118 -21 -23 -0021 314 Square Feet 1,000 20 3,000 60 02- 118 -21 -23 -0023 Vacant Lot 138,000 2,760 1 - - Subtotal 17,564,000 348,280 41,584,300 827,936 Captured (24,020,300) (479, 656) E ✓ u.- r �:e:. r{^ i s., ors >;_.. \"`t�'" �✓ri. r ..'+^ �'.; s'r;. ;,.�,-� .�,. r:s .,c✓ �: ;'. ✓' F ` l aw ! ✓� 1 .%PE 4 4 � ✓ , .: 4. tx1 r � � ... yl�s ;: � � ,. hr (� � r �� � ",�`� '�: °, Yh . ���� ��� , s,., Public bfic Sector Advisors 6 r std Impact of Parcel Removal • The captured tax capacity will increase in the TIF District • The, taxable net tax capacity will decline for the taxing jurisdictions • Impact will be realized in, Pay 201.2. • The $521,0.04 of tax capacity shown represents $479,656 in the Robbinsdale SID and $41,34$ in the Brooklyn: Center, SID • We have assumed that the entities levy same dollars, and the :loss of tax capacity results in increase in tax rate • The hypothetical annual increase in property tax bill is shown on following slide. Public Seer Advisors • S*gSted Hypothetical Tax Increase - Mod of TIF No. 3 Year (a): 2010 2010 2010 2010 Total Total Entity (a): City County SD #281 SD #286 Impact (g) Impact (g) Existing Tax Rate (a): 52.412% 42.640% 28.621% 51.173% 123.673% 146.225% Existing TNTC (a): $17 $1,439,655,262 $88,612,938, $5,691,835 for Property for Property Calculated Levy (b): $9,413,262 $613,869,004 $25,361,909 $2,912,683 Located within Located within Adjustment to Captured TIF (c) $521,004 - $521,004 $479,656 $41,348 City, County City, County gyp 6 , H o heti'cal TNTC d $17,439,x-24 $1,439,134,258 `,.' 88 and ISD 281 and ISD 286 r Y '. d':r,.: b u, 4 a �015I. Q 6 0374 as 7"N7`,�U ax I�aten��as (e) � �1,561,a,� v�2 � � � �. ° Estimated Net Tax Value (f) Capacity Homestead Residential $150,000 $ 1,500 $23 $0 $2 $6 $26 429 175 „000 1 „750 $27 $0 $3 $7 $30 34 200,000 2,000 $31 $0 $3 $7 a-9 x $39 225,000 2,250 $35 $0 $4 8 $44 250,000 2,500 $39 $0 $4 $ $43 $49 275,000 2750 $43 $0 A 2 $59 0 48 $54300,000 3; ,000 $47 $0 $11 ' Commerciallindustrial d I t $300,000 $ 5,250 $ 8 1 $8 �qr $91 $103 Y �Y 375,000 6,750 $� 6' 1 . $11 25 $117 $132 450,000 8,250 $t29 $ g � 30 $31 $143 $161 500,000 9,250 $145 �k: $� , $14 $35 $161 $181 1,000,000 19,250 $301 '$ $30 $72 $334 $376 Apartments (4 or More Units) $ 200;000 $ 2,500 $39 $0 $4 $9 $43 $49 275,000 3,438 $54 $1 $5 $13 $60 $67 350,000 4,375 $69 $1 $7 $16 $76 $86 425,000 5,313 $83 $1 $8 $20' $92 $104 500,000 6,250 $98 $1 $10 $23 $109 $122 Public Sector Advisors $ ' Sp ring ste d Hypothetical Tax Increase Assumptions a) Impacts are based on Pay 2010 tax rates and taxable net tax capacity (TNTC) b) Calculated levy is tax rate X taxable net tax capacity (TNTC). c) Adjustment to captured TIF (increase) reduces the taxable net tax capacity (TNTC) of the1ndividual jurisdictions. Est. amount from county for Pay 2011. d) Hypothetical taxable net tax capacity (TNTC) = existing TNTC Minus adjustment amount. e) Tax rate increase is new tax rate (calculated levy divided by hypothetical new TNTC) minus existing tax rate. f) Est. market value is the basis from which net tax capacity calculated. g) Total Impact adds individual impacts and do not include miscellaneous taxing entities. Impacts distributed to County and School Districts for Public Hearing Public Seo Advisors • SAgsted Decertification: of TIF No. 2 • Final year for TIF District No. 2 is 2011 (decertification) • The decertification of an existing T1F district allows for the local, taxing jurisdictions to benefit from the increased market value which was previously captured within the TIF district. • The captured tax capacity estimated for Pay 2011 is $670,138 • Increased taxable net tax capacity a(Iows tax rate to decline assuming same levy amount Public Sector Advisors 10 SpfIC1CJStE'C) Hypothetical Tax Decrease — Decert of TIF No. -2 Year (a): 2010 2010 2010 Total Total Entity (a): City County SD #286 Impact (g) Impact (g) Existing Tax Rate (a): 52:412 42.640% 51,173% 123.673 % 146.225 Existing TNTC (a): $17,960,128 $1,439,655,262 $5,691,835 for Property for Property Calculated Levy (b): $9,413,262 $613,869,004 $2,912,683 Located within Located within Adjustment to Captured TIF (c): ($670,138) ($670,138) ($670,138) City, County City, County HYp and ISD 281 and ISD 286 6th�ticaT TNTC (d) ,ttE. $ gs30,26 yf.. E...,. $1;440,35;40 $6,31,973 j 0.:. a a � , Estimated Net Tax' > Value (f) Capacity Homestead Residential $150,000 $ 1,500 ($28) ($0) ($81) ($29) {$109) 175,000 1,750 ($33) ($0)- ($94)6 ($128) c e 200,000 2,000 ($38) ($0) ($� 08) 3 : ($146) 225,000 2,250 ($42) ($0) ($,'21) ($43) ($164) 250,,000 2 ($47) $,0), ($48) ($182) 275,000 2,750 ($52) ($148) ($52) ($201) 300,000 3,000 $)� ($1) ($162) l ($57)_ ($219) Commercial /Industrial T. $300 000 ($99) )_ 8 ($100) ($383) 375;000 7 ($ 4 �J7 f 1 ) ($ ($129) ($492) 450,000 8,250 $2) ($445) ($157) ($602) 500,000 9,250 (1 4) ($2) ($499) ($176) ($675) 1,000,000 19,250 ($363) ($4) ($1,038) ($367) ($1,404) Apartments ,(4 or More Units) $ 200,000 $ 2,500 ($47) ($0) ($135) ($ ($182) 275;000 3,438 ($65) ($1) ($185) ($65) ($251) 350,000 4,375 ($82) ($1) ($236) ($83) ($319) 425,000 5,313 ($100) ($1) ($286) ($101) ($388) 500,000 6,250 ($118) ($1) ($337) ($'119) ($456) Public Se* Advisors Sp l Tax Imp act Hypot�ietica Combined Year (a): 2010 2010 2010 2010 Total Total Entity (a): city County SD #281 SD #286 Impact (g) Impact (g) Existing Tax Rate (a): 52.412% 42.640% 28.621% 51.173% 123.673% 146.225% Existing TNTC (a): $17,960,128 $1,439,655,262 $88,612,938 $5,691,835 ' for Property for Property Calculated Levy . (b): $9,413,262 $613,869,004' $25,361,909 $2,912,683 Located within Located within Adjustment to Captured TIF (c) ($149,134) ($149,134) $479,656 ($628,790) City, County City, County �_ 133,282 ...> " - ...',.$6,6,25 «s' „ and ISD 281 and ISD 286 H pothetIca17 NTC (d) 320; ...,,; , $18,109,262 $1,43J(804,396 $88, „�„ � - .'�J • .� ::,i . � ° z it d � TNTC T�KRatecrease 5.051 �° ...`� <.. Estimated Net fax Value'( Capacity Homestead Residential $150,000 $ 1,500 ($6) ($0) $2 ($76) ($ ($ 175,000 1,750 ($8) ($0) $3 ($89) ($5) ($97) 200;000 2;000 {$9) ($0) $3 ($102) ($6 ($111) 225,000 2,250 ($10) ($0) $4 ( 6) ($138) 250,000 2,500 ($11) ($0) $4 ) 275,000 2;750 ($12) ($0) $4 ) ($8) ($152) 300;000 3,000 ($13) ($0) A s , 50- ? ' FIE, ($153) $8) E ($166) Jai . Commercial /Industrial _ 'm t ($15) ($290) $300,000 $ 5,250 ( NO) $8 67)� 375,000 6750 Y $$ �,x 3 � ($ ($19) ($373) 450,000 8,250 ti6) ($0) a (' 1 ($420) ($23) ($456) 500,000 9,250 ($ A Hsu �> $14 ($471) ($2 ($511) 1,000,000 19,250 a « ,,. x:($`41 $30 ($980) ($54) ($1,064) (. 8 ��� � Apartments (4 or More Units)' $ 200,000 $ 2,500 ($11) ($0) $4 ($127) ($7) ($138) 275,000 3,438 ($15) ($0) $5 ($175) ($10) ($190) 350 4,375 ($19) ($0) $7 ($223) ($12) ($242) 425,000 5,313 ($23) ($0) $8 ($270) ($15) ($294) 500,000 6,250 ($27) ($0) $10 ($318) ($18) ($345) Pudic Sector Advisors 12 Springs Summa Table • The combined impact would reduce total tax bill for properties located in either School District ( #286- Brooklyn Center or #281— Robbinsdale) although Robbinsdale SD is not impacted by decertification: of'T,lF District No. 2 Estimated Annual Reduction /Increase in Tax Bill By Property Type Total ISD Total ISD City of ISD 281 ISD 286 281 286 Brooklyn Hennepin (Project (Project (Project (Project Property Type Center Count 2148) 2149) 2148) 2149) $150,000 Home ($6) ($0 ) $2 $76 $4 $83 I $200,000 Home $9) $0 $3 $102 $6 ($111 $250,000 Home ($11 ($0 ) $4 ($127 ) ($7 ) ($138 $300,000 Home' _ $13) $0 $5 $153) $8) $166) Per $1 C/I $83) $1 $30 $980) $54) $1,064 Per $500,000 Apartments ($27) 1 ($0) $10 ($318) ($18) ($345) Hypothetical Tax Rate 0.4316% - 0.0044% 0.1558% - 5.0908% - 0`2803% - 5.5268% Increase /Decrease mar Public Seo advisors Std Impact to, TIF District, No. 3 • The removal of parcels from TIF No. 3 Will increase captured tured tax capacity within the district I P • Current annual tax increment after 15 %o set -aside is less than the total annual debt service by approximately $580,000 /year I , • Estimated increase in annual tax increment is $695,379 based on Pay 2 tax rates Public Sector Advisers 14 SpCInC]St @d Impact to TIF District No. 3 (Cont'd) • With Modification to TIF No. 3— • annual tax increment is expected to cover the annual debt service (increase of $591,072) • annual deposit to affordable housing fund expected to increase $104,3 to $355,004 • Beginning in Pay 20 • Total increased deposit to affordable housing fund is $938,000 • Cash flows follow Public Seo Advisors � S*CJSt @d TIF District No. 3 Cash Flow Before Removal Estimated Cash Flow beginning Taxes Payable 2011 Scenario 1 Total District - Brookdale 'Remains Annual Less Estimated $2,470,000 $17,245,000 $4,335,000 Transfer Out Total rfu '1R Cumulative Net Admin Net GO Tax Ref GO TIF Bonds, GO Tax TIF Pooling TIF r Surplus / Year Tax Inc Fee Increment Series 20048 Series 2004D Series 2008A Afford. Hsg Obligations �, fi�it (Deficit) 15% (1') ( ( ( ( ( ( (8) (11 } (1) ( 13 2011 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,431,213 167,125 250,697 1,849 034 (77,72 (177,722) 2012 1,671,312 0 1,671;312 1,833,213 161,938 250,697 2,245 8475753 (752,257), 2013 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,839,313 156,750 250,697 2,246759 7447 (1,327,705)' 2014 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,852,325 150,813 250;697 2,253,834 585 (1,910,227) 2015 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,856,775 144,875 250,697 2,252,347y8,03� (2,491,262) 2016 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,877,900 138,250 250,697 2,266,847s5553v);` (3,086,797)' 2017 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,870,900 131,625 250,697 2,253,222 6't,91a (3,668,707) 2018 1,671,312 0 1,671;312 1,900,400 250,697 2,151,09747785' (4,148,492) 2019 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 1,892,250 250,697' 2,142,947 = y 835} (4,620,127) 2020 1,671,312 0 1,671,312 250,697 250 (3,199,512),_ 18,882,459 0 18,882 433,260 17,771,125 1,223,000 2,832,369 22,259,754 (3 ,99�1 r, Projected Tax Increment does not include changes to future tax rates, class rate, or market values. Pay 2010 Tax Rates used for each project within TIF No. 3. No assumptions included on use of fund balance. Cash flow demonstrates ability of annual increment to cover annual obligations. Pudic Sector advisors 16 `i std �a TIF District No.3 Cash Flow With Removal II Estimated Cash Flow beginning Taxes Payable 2011 Scenario 2- District - <Brookdale Parcels Removed Annual Less Estimated $2,470,000 $17,245,000 $4,335,000 Transfer Out Total Cumulative Net Admin Net GO Tax Ref GO TIF Bonds, GO Tax TIF Pooling TIF rplus Y X Surplus / Year Tax Inc Fee Increment Series 2004B Series 2004D Series 2008A Afford. Hsg Obligations eff)t (Deficit) 15% (1) (2) (3) ( (5) (s) ( ( (13) 2011 1;671,312 0 1,671,312 1,431,213 167,125 250,697 1,849,034 X117 (177,722) 2012 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,833,213 161,938 355,004 2,350,154 (161,185) 2013 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,839,313 156,750 355,004 2,351,066 „ 6� (145,561) 2014 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,852,325 150,813 355,004 2,358,141 $ 550 s (137,011) 2015 2,366;691 0 2,366;691 1,856,775 144,875 355,004 2,356,654, 10 0 (126,974) 2016 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,877,900 138,250 355,004 2,371,154 x (131,437) 2017 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,870,900 131,625 355,004 2,357i529 5 ,16 (122,275) 2018 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,900,400 355,004 2,255,404 111,26 M , 10,988) 2019 2,366,691 0 2,366,691 1,892,250 355,004 2,247,254 „ 108;449 2020 2 0 2,366,691 355,004 355,0046 2,120,136 25,140,869 0 25,140,869 433,260 17,771,125` 1,223,000 3,771,130 20,851,392 Projected Tax Increment beginning in 2012 includes increased captured tax capacity resulting from the removal of the Brookdale parcels. Projected Tax Increment ,beyond 2012 does not include changes to future tax rates, class rate, or market values. Pay 2010 Tax Rates used for each;proj in TIF No. 3. No assumptions included on use of fund balance. Cash flow demonstrates ability of annual increment to cover annual obligations. Cumulative cash flow does not include any interest assumptions. S009sted Public Se4k- Advisors � 5� Next Steps • Public hearing at City Council on January 24, 2011 for Modification of TIF No. 3 • Close public hearing and consider resolution to approve modification • EDA meeting'' eeting to consider approval follows City Council action • File modification with County and State • No action required on decertification of TIF No. 2 Public Sector Advisors 18 -3 SpC1t1g5t @d Questions Jenny Wolfe, Senior Project Manager 651 - 223 -3085 Springsted.Incorporated 380 Jackson. Street,. Suite :300 Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2887 Public Seo Advisors � ,�,. Sa1CJSted I City Council Agenda Item No. 10a COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: January 20, 2011 T Curt Bo ane it Manager O C g y, City g FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk SUBJECT: Mayoral Appointment of Member to Serve on Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Advisory Commission Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider ratification of the Mayoral appointment of LeRoyce Walker, 7237 Oliver Avenue North, to the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Advisory Commission with term to expire December 31, 2012. Background: The Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council is a human services planning and coordinating agency serving the cities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Corcoran, Crystal, Dayton, Golden Valley, Hanover, Hassan, New Hope, Maple Grove, Osseo, Plymouth, Robbinsdale, and Rogers since 1972. The goals of the Council are to improve access to human services for area residents, raise awareness of human service needs, and coordinate and assist in planning for needed human services in the community. The Advisory Commission is composed of citizen representatives appointed for two -year terms by their respective City Council. Brooklyn Center appoints two members. As an Advisory Commissioner, representatives are asked to attend one Advisory Commission meeting per month and serve on one Commission committee or task force during the year. There is one vacancy on the Commission. Notice of vacancy on the Commission was posted at City Hall and Community Center and on the City's website and aired on Cable Channel 16 beginning November 19, 2010. Announcement was made in the December 1, 2010, edition of Brooklyn Center Sun -Post. A letter was sent to those persons who previously had submitted an application for appointment to a Brooklyn Center advisory commission informing them of the vacancy and requesting that they call the City Clerk if they are interested in applying for the Commission. They were given the choice of either submitting a new application or having their application previously submitted considered. Notices were also sent to current advisory commission members. Copies of the applications received were forwarded to City Council Members in the January 7, 2011, update. Attached for City Council Members only are copies of the applications received: Nathan Lackner 5300 Girard Ave N LeRoyce Walker 7237 Oliver Ave N • Hission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, Safe community that enhances the qualitp of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM An e -mail was sent to each of the applicants notifying them that their application for appointment would be considered at the January 24, 2011, City Council meeting Mayor Willson recommends appointment of LeRoyce Walker. As previously requested by the City Council, the City Advisory Commission Bylaws are not included in the materials but can be found on the City's web site at r and clicking on Mayor/ Council/ Commissions/ Charter, then www.cit ofbrookl center.o is Y Yn g g Y Advisory Commissions. The membership roster is also available at this site and in the City Council Reference Book. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. i • • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clears, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the Public trust City Council Agenda Item No. 10b COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk JJ 1 4AAM4"( DATE: January 10, 2011 SUBJECT: Hearing for Kelly McDole, 7219 Major Avenue North, Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council open the hearing, receive testimony from appellant, close the hearing, and consider upholding the decision of the Animal Control Review Panel, which found there was sufficient evidence to declare Mr. McDole's dog a potentially dangerous dog. Background: Attachment 1 City Code Sections 1 -250 through 1 -300 regarding potentially dangerous and dangerous dogs. Attachment 2 On October 17, 2010, the Police Department issued a notice of potentially dangerous dog declaration and microchipping order to Kelly McDole, 7219 Major Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, for his dog Elvis (attached is a copy of both orders and the police incident report). Attachment 3 On October 18, 2010, a letter was mailed to Mr. McDole notifying him of the potentially dangerous dog registration requirements, as well as the appeal process. Attachment 4 On October 18, 2010, Mr. McDole appealed the potentially dangerous dog declaration and requested a hearing by the Animal Control Review Panel to determine whether the designation is justified. Attachment 5 On November 9, 2010, Assistant City Attorney Mary Tietjen, Kennedy & Graven, mailed a letter to Mr. McDole, acknowledging his request for a hearing and notifying of the date and time of hearing. On November 30, 2010, the Animal Control Review Panel (Mayor Tim Willson and Jerry Low) held Mr. McDole's hearing, which was moderated by Assistant City Attorney Mary Tietjen. Attachment 6 On December 7, 2010, a letter was mailed to Mr. McDole from the Animal Control Review Panel outlining its decision and findings for the potentially dangerous dog hearing. The panel upheld the potentially dangerous dog declaration. • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Hearing Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration • Page 2 Attachment 7 On December 21, 2010, Mr. McDole appealed the decision of the Animal Control Review Panel and requested a City Council appeal hearing. Attachment 8 On January 3, 2010, Mr. McDole was notified of the date and time of the City Council appeal hearing. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. • Attachment 1 Hearing Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ANIMALS CHAPTER 1 SECTIONS 1 -250 TO 1 -300 Section 1 -250. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of Sections 1 -250 through 1 -280, the terms defined in this Section shall have the meaning given them. Terms not defined in this Section shall have the meaning given them in Section 1 -101 of this Code. 1. Dangerous doh Dangerous dog means any dog that has: a. without provocation, inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being or domestic animal on public or private property; b. been found to be potentially dangerous. and after the owner has notice that the dog is potentially dangerous, the dog aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals; or C. been determined to be a dangerous dog by the City or any other governmental jurisdiction. 2. Potentially dangerous dog_ Potentially dangerous dog means any dog that: a. when unprovoked, has inflicted a bite on a human being or domestic • animal on public or private property; b. when unprovoked, has chased or approached a person, including a person on a bicycle, upon the streets, sidewalks, or any public or private property, other than the dog owner's property, in an apparent attitude of attack; C. has a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, causing injury or otherwise threatening the safety of humans or domestic animals; or d. has been determined to be a potentially dangerous dog by any other governmental jurisdiction. 3. Proper Enclosure. Proper enclosure means securely confined indoors or in a securely enclosed and locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the animal from escaping and providing protection from the elements for the dog. A proper enclosure does not include a porch, patio, or any part of a house, garage, or other structure that would allow the dog to exit of its own volition, or any house or structure in which windows are open or in which door or window screens are the only obstacles that prevent the dog from exiting. City of Brooklyn Center 1 -1 City Ordinance • 4. Owner. Owner means any person, firm, corporation organization, or department possessing, harboring, keeping, having an interest in, or having care, custody, or control of a dog. 5. Great bodily Great bodily harm means bodily injury which creates a high probability of death, or which causes serious permanent disfigurement, or which causes a permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ or other serious bodily harm. 6. Substantial bodily harm. Substantial bodily harm means bodily injury which invokes a temporary but substantial disfigurement, or which causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or which causes a fracture of any bodily member. 7. Animal Control Officer. Animal Control Officer means an individual who has been designated for animal control operations within the jurisdiction of the City. 8. City Manager. City Manager means the City Manager or the City Manager's designee. 9. Provocation. Provocation means an act that an adult could reasonably expect may cause a dog to attack or bite. Section 1 -255. DECLARATION OF DANGEROUS OR POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOGS. 1. Adoption by Reference. Except as otherwise provided in Sections 1 -250 to 1- 300, the regulatory and procedural provisions of Minn. Stat. § 347.50 to 347.565 are adopted by reference. 2. Declaration by Police or Animal Control. A police officer, community service officer, or Animal Control Officer may declare a dog to be dangerous or potentially dangerous. 3. Exceptions. a. The provisions of Sections 1 -250 to 1 -300 do not apply to dogs used by law enforcement officials for police work. b. Dogs may not be declared dangerous or potentially dangerous if the threat, injury or danger was sustained by a person who was: i) committing a willful trespass or other tort upon the premises occupied by the owner of the dog; ii) provoking, tormenting, abusing or assaulting the dog, or who can be shown to have a history of repeatedly provoking, tormenting, abusing, or assaulting the dog; or, iii) committing or City of Brooklyn Center 1 -2 City Ordinance attempting to commit a crime. • 4. Notice to Owner. If a dog is declared potentially dangerous or dangerous according to the criteria in Section 1 -250 (1) or (2), the Animal Control Officer will give notice, by delivering or mailing it to the owner of the dog, of intent to declare the dog potentially dangerous or dangerous. Such notice shall inform the owner of this designation, the basis for the designation, the procedures for contesting the designation as described in Section 1 -255 (2) (a) and the result of the failure to contest the designation as described in Section 1 -255 (2) (b). Upon receipt of notice of intent, the dog owner must comply with the requirements of Section 1 -270.1 and continue to comply with such requirements until the dog is dead or removed from the City, or the City has determined that the dog is not dangerous or potentially dangerous. The owner shall be informed of this requirement in the notice of intent. 5. Contesting Declaration of Dangerous or Potentially Dangerous Dogs. a. If the owner of a dog has received a notice of intent under Section 1 -255 (1), the owner may request that a hearing be conducted to determine whether or not such a designation is justified. Such request must be made in writing and delivered to the City Manager within 14 days of receipt of the notice of intent. b. If the owner fails to contest the notice of intent within 14 days, the owner forfeits the right to a hearing and the declaration of the dog as potentially dangerous or dangerous is final. The City Manager will then issue a declaration to the owner and the owner must comply with all applicable requirements of this Section or cause the dog to be humanely destroyed or removed from the City limits. 6. Hearing Procedure. Within ten days after receiving the owner's request for a hearing, the City Manager will notify the dog owner of the hearing date. The hearing will be scheduled within forty -five days. The hearing will be conducted by the Animal Control Review Panel, which will consist of three members, as appointed by the Mayor. The owner may call witnesses and present evidence on his or her behalf. A simple majority of the members of the Panel is necessary for a finding that the dog is either dangerous or potentially dangerous. The Panel WILL inform the owner of its decision in writing and must state the reasons for its decision. 7. Effect of Findings. If the Panel finds that there is a sufficient basis to declare the dog potentially dangerous or dangerous, the owner must immediately comply with all applicable requirements of Section 1 -265 to 1 -270 or immediately cause the dog to be humanely destroyed or removed from the City limits. City of Brooklyn Center 1 -3 City Ordinance 8. Appeal. If the owner of the dog disputes the decision of the Panel, the owner may appeal the decision of the Panel to the City Council. An appeal to the City Council must be in writing and submitted to the City Manager within 14 days of the Panel's decision. The owner may appeal the decision of the City Council in accordance with procedures under state law. Section 1 -260. REVIEW OF DECLARATION. Beginning six months after notice is given of intent to declare a dog to be potentially dangerous or dangerous, an owner may request annually that the Animal Control Review Panel review the designation. The owner must provide evidence that the dog's behavior has changed due to the dog's age, neutering, environment, completion of obedience training that includes modification of aggressive behavior, or other factors. If the Panel finds sufficient evidence that the dog's behavior has changed, it may rescind the potentially dangerous or dangerous designation. Section 1 -265. REGISTRATION. 1. Requirement. No person may own a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog in the City unless the dog is registered as provided in this Section. 2. Certificate of Registration. The City Manager will issue a certificate of registration to the owner of a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog if the owner presents sufficient evidence that: a. a proper enclosure exists for the dog and all accesses to the premises are posted with clearly visible warning signs issued or approved by the Animal Control Officer, that there is a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog on the property; b. in the case of a dangerous dog only, a surety bond to be held by the City Clerk has been issued by a surety company authorized to conduct business in this state in a form acceptable to the City Clerk and the City Attorney in the sum of at least $300,000, payable to any person injured by the dangerous dog, or a policy of liability insurance has been issued by an insurance company authorized to conduct business in this state in the amount of at least $300,000, insuring the owner for any personal injuries inflicted by the dangerous dog; C. the owner has paid the annual registration fee as provided for in this Section; and d. the owner has had microchip identification implanted in the dangerous dog or potentially dangerous dog as required under Minn. Stat. § 347.515. 3. Warning Sign. If the City issues a certificate of registration to the owner of a potentially dangerous dog or dangerous dog under Section 1 -265 (2), the City will • City f Brookl o n Center 1 -4 City Ordinance y provide, for posting on the owner's property, a copy of a warning symbol to inform children that there is a dangerous dog on the property. The City may charge the dog owner a reasonable fee to cover its administrative costs and the costs of the warning symbol. 4. Fee. The City will charge the owner an annual fee to obtain a certificate of registration for a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog. 5. Tai• A potentially dangerous or dangerous dog registered under this Section must have a tag, issued by the City, identifying the dog as potentially dangerous or dangerous. This tag must be affixed to the dog's collar and worn by the dog at all times. Section 1 -270 POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOGS; ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. 1. Enclosure and Proper Restraint. An owner of a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog shall keep the dog, while on the owner's property, in a proper enclosure. If the dog is outside the proper enclosure, the dog must be muzzled and restrained by a substantial chain or leash and under the physical restraint of a responsible person. The muzzle must be made in a manner that will prevent the dog from biting any person or animal but that will not cause injury to the dog or interfere with its vision or respiration. • 2. Registration Renewal. An owner of a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog must renew the registration of the dog annually until the dog is deceased. If the dog is removed from the jurisdiction, it must be registered as a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog in its new jurisdiction. 3. Death or Transfer. An owner of a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog must notify the City Manger in writing of the death of the dog or its transfer, and must, if requested by the City Manager, execute an affidavit under oath setting forth either the circumstances of the dog's death and disposition or the complete name, address, and telephone number of the person to whom the dog has been transferred. 4. Sterilization. The Animal Control Officer shall require a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog to be sterilized at the owner's expense. If the owner does not have the animal sterilized within 30 days, the Animal Control Officer shall have the animal sterilized at the owner's expense. The owner may contest and appeal a decision requiring a dog to be sterilized in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 1 -255 (5) (a). 5. Rental Property. A person who owns a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog and who rents property from another where the dog will reside must disclose to City Brookl n Center 1 -5 Cit Ordinance • �v f y � the property owner prior to entering the lease agreement and at the time of any lease renewal that the person owns a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog that will reside at the property. A dog owner, who is currently renting property, must notify the property owner within 14 days of City notification if the dog is newly declared as dangerous or potentially dangerous and the owner keeps the dog on the property. 6. Sale. A person who sells a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog must notify the purchaser that the dog has been declared as potentially dangerous or dangerous. The seller must also notify the City Manager with the new owner's name, address, and telephone number. Section 1 -275. SEIZURE. 1. Immediate Seizure. a. The Animal Control Officer or any police officer or community service officer may immediately seize any potentially dangerous or dangerous dog if. (1) after 14 days after the owner has notice that the dog is potentially dangerous or dangerous, the dog is not registered as required under • Section 1 -265 and no appeal has been filed; (2) in the case of a dangerous dog, after 14 days after the owner has notice that the dog is dangerous, the owner does not secure the proper liability insurance or surety coverage as required under Section 1 -265 (2) (b); (3) the dog is not maintained in the proper enclosure; (4) the dog is outside the proper enclosure and not under physical restraint of responsible person as required under Section 1- 270.1; (5) after the owner has been notified that the dog is potentially dangerous or dangerous, the dog bites or attacks a person or domestic animal; or (6) the dog is not sterilized within 30 days pursuant to Section 1- 270.4. b. If an owner of a dog is convicted of a crime for which the dog was originally seized, the court may order that the dog be confiscated and destroyed in a proper manner, and that the owner pay the costs incurred in confiscating, confining, and destroying the dog. City Brookl n Center 1 -6 Cit Ordinance �v f v � 2. Reclaimed. A potentially dangerous or dangerous dog seized under Section 1 -275 (1) may be reclaimed by the owner of the dog upon payment of impounding and boarding fees, and presenting proof to the Animal Control Officer that the requirements of Section 1 -265 and Section 1 -270 will be met. A dog not reclaimed within seven days of seizure may be disposed of as provided in Minn. Stat. § 35.71, subdivision 3. The owner is liable to the City for costs incurred in confining and disposing of the dog. 3. Subsequent Offenses. If a person has been convicted of a misdemeanor for violating a provision of Section 1 -265 or 1 -270, and the person is charged with a subsequent violation relating to the same dog, the Animal Control Officer must seize the dog. If the owner is convicted of the crime for which the dog was seized, the court shall order that the dog be destroyed in a proper and humane manner and the owner is responsible for paying the cost of confining and destroying the animal. If the person is not convicted of the crime for which the dog was seized, the owner may reclaim the dog upon payment to the City of a fee for the care and boarding of the dog. If the dog is not reclaimed by the owner within seven days after the owner has been notified that the dog may be reclaimed, the dog may be disposed of as provided under Minn. Stat. § 35.71, subdivision 3. The owner is liable to the City for the costs incurred in confining, impounding and disposing of the dog. 4. Disposition of Seized Dogs. i a. Right to a Hearing_ The owner of any seized dog has the right to a hearing by the Animal Control Review Panel. The notice and hearing requirements in Section 1 -255 will apply to a hearing requested under this section. Any hearing requested under this section will be held within 14 days of the request. In the event that the seizure is upheld by the Panel, actual expenses of the hearing up to a maximum of $1,000 will be the responsibility of the dog owner. The Panel will issue a decision within ten days after the hearing. The decision will be hand- delivered to the dog's owner or delivered via registered mail as soon as practical and a copy will be provided to the Animal Control Officer and City Manager. b. Securi1y. A person claiming an interest in a seized dog may prevent disposition of the dog by posting security in an amount sufficient to provide for the dog's actual cost of care and keeping. The security must be posted within seven days of the seizure inclusive of the date of seizure. Section 1 -276. RESTRICTIONS ON DOG OWNERSHIP. I 1. Dog ownership prohibited. Except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Section, no person may own a dog if the person has been: City of Brooklyn Center 1 -7 City Ordinance • a. convicted of a third or subsequent violation of Sections 1 -265 or 1 -270 or Minn. Stat. § 347.515; b. convicted of 2 degree manslaughter due to negligent or intentional use of a dog under a violation under Minn. Stat. § 609.205, clause 4; C. convicted of a gross misdemeanor harm caused by a dog under Minn. Stat. § 609.226, subdivision 1; d. been convicted of a violation under Minn. Stat. § 609.226, subdivision 2; e. had a dog ordered destroyed under Section 1 -280 and been convicted of one or more violations of Section 1 -265, 1 -270, Minn. Stat. § 347.515 or 609.226, subd. 2. 2. Household members. If any member of a household is prohibited from owning a dog under paragraph 1, unless specifically approved with or without restrictions by the City, no person in the household is permitted to own a dog. 3, Dog ownership prohibition review. Beginning three years after a conviction under Section 1 -276 (1) that prohibits a person from owning a dog, and annually thereafter, the person may request in writing to the City Manager that the Animal Control Review Panel review the prohibition. The Panel may consider such facts as the seriousness of the violation or violations that led to the prohibition, any criminal convictions, or other facts that the Panel deems appropriate. The Panel may rescind the prohibition entirely or rescind it with limitations. The Panel also may establish conditions a person must meet before the prohibition is rescinded, including, but not limited to, successfully completing dog training or dog handling courses. If the Panel rescinds a person's prohibition and the person subsequently fails to comply with any limitations imposed by the City or the person is convicted of any animal violation involving unprovoked bites or dog attacks, the Panel may permanently prohibit the person from owning a dog in this state. Section 1 -280. DESTRUCTION OF DOG IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. 1. Circumstances. Notwithstanding Sections 1 -265 to 1 -276, a dog may be ordered destroyed in a proper and humane manner by the Animal Control Officer if the dog: a. inflicted substantial or great bodily harm on a human being on public or private property without provocation; b. inflicted multiple bites on a human being on public or private property Cit Brook Center 1 -8 Cit Ordinance ry o f y � without provocation; • C. bit multiple human victims on public or private property in the same attack without provocation; d. bit a human on public or private property without provocation in an attack where more than one dog participated in the attack; or 2. Hearinsz. The Animal Control Officer may not destroy the dog until the dog owner has had the opportunity for a hearing before the Animal Control Review Panel. Section 1 -300. PENALTY. 1. Any person violating the provisions of Sections 1 -265 or 1 -275, shall, upon conviction thereof, be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to penalties specified for misdemeanors in Minn. Stat. § 609.03, as amended from time to time. Each day that a violation exists shall constitute a separate offense. 2. It is a misdemeanor to remove a microchip from a dangerous or potentially dangerous dog, to fail to renew the registration of a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog, to fail to account for a dangerous dog's death or change of location where the dog will reside, to sign a false affidavit with respect to a dangerous dog's death or change of location where the dog will reside, or to fail to disclose ownership of a dangerous dog to a property owner from whom the person rents property. 3. A person who is convicted of a second or subsequent violation of paragraphs (1) or (2) is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. 4. An owner who violates Minn. Stat. § 347.542 or Section 1 -276 of this Code is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. 5. Any household member who knowingly violates Minn. Stat. § 347.542, subdivision 2, or Section 1 -276 of this Code is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. City of Brooklyn Center 1 -9 City Ordinance i • Attachment 2 Hearing Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration .,c �• psi. �:cTr,.�_ : =.: .: �= F,��°'::- -'a•�. � -® . - _ __ ` • - _. 3- +..,.. -. —. �•+w -w -- -- a• _ ._.W^ph+s.i�as`!Y�'W�iMMfl4�`• . . .. - .. - _ �.._. - - .s ' .r — - - _•_ — - - — -- - Notice of Potentially Dangerous Dog Brooklyn Cenur Police Dgmrtm eim� R- 10 6645 Humboldt Ave. N IL _ j t Tuosw S � - B CaLbw, MN -%430 -1&53 Dom: ._.__1 --1- - (763) 569'3333 DM Z .._JL o . -Rel Adams: - • 2 62 � I L l D u it peS X Asir- rCOLM COWSN - - • 'snodfied tf�d *O above lined dog 6s boa &ds to be a `Pabm� � as by 'ILO abar+re Gsted dog oanar is hertby b bond Vm (past ar once m9► bai Stmste34730.'ILisacitlds _ — - hb�e(s� m ahamaa ardsss aaa�ai m I �i> p` RepatNombtr M e dog has, wbim o�pMmk4 �d °r R the o`N • is u of attack - iddswdist, or nq Public or paitata pcopsaty. asfser ._ RepoitNumbw _ the dog ho a isaassra propasaitjr, �7. or m swank 34750. th @" af� ft , be saran matt b dog id be to be a witbia t}ae ioeanisg . mod as socb smd s ar maw as ngosed by the Mats' sod MFW to be 1. p wbasta W bo fthsmi alt a hasaft beiM (a) Z a dome & l Pion while off* awaes'Y p�ioPat,Y. (� lo t o ddly �gnrms, ft dog Bas bem h and to be pooe�lh► tad watt *o awaes L mum buns, atocks. osr u da Bra saR4j► athmaem recdpt 69 t t _ _ -_ _ - - __-= =-=- - = =_ - _ - -.. • Nom. �- ochippb g Order Bmatm center Police Dgwtneat 6645 Humboldt Ave. N r i I c� Brooldpa Center, MN 55430-1853 Datm j 1 = �'�' — i Chy; �� ' z S !5q3o- Phow(ww* Name of Doi _ p V ► S x e a R., 'I A AA •� t x AW ,�1;.._ Y N- cows) 13 ,,,rn,� • - ' • - io have Waochip dtm impiaom~d blra . As required by � 347.513, do above >� dog owner is ► �.:. vets ioi en above listad dog. under (1 ofthe miczoep • � The dog bas been declared '�Poteatlaliy �6a'°� �� The Tafti�a nnp�8 6a mmabe r, and (4) std. n and (7) the aaoc Ws serial ID mombat, and (3) nmst fM m his&wn mk address, Center Police mdieated. be impla Md and ttre pick eapg of tl>n � o f - u p B and/or. a - Far'lmre tD do so . amimmeanoP ° E h rxw ep to 90 days. ❑ The dog has been dedared - Dantorov'.nnder Min Mfr 347- be3oa+: (I} t Mw of the miaro�p Tha ve ahMeM hi3pWItio8 the � kbAcama io the area nnrnber, and (4) sign rni 's saint ID ` and (3) wnt = in , • a ' m and (2) the , to Cooler PORM must be implafed mod rbe pink copy of this whore .The . Faibore to do so is a Pie to S1,000 eh&or Depsrem �'' "—"� —� the same t,o >�Pm Cam► in order m oa®plebe the for np m 90 days. You will also have to p�wtde . _ • . . dam �B • • �. I hereby r e c eipt of the above order. . iK— &9 G ,: • G ttaa� � (S�tasea[Da�s - mud Numberd Try' Phrase: Address • - Ra+►1?A1 Case # 10 -5634 Brooklyn Center Police Department MNO270200 Incident Dog Bite INCIDENT REPORT Offense Code 1 Offense Code 2 Offense Code 3 Offense Code 4 Location 7219 Major Ave N city /State/Zip Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Date Committed ' 10/08/10 Time Committed 1530- 1600hrs Date Reported 10/11/10 Time Reported 1300h rs _7 Reporting Officer- -Reviewed DateioieReport Made _ 1014M 160 Bruce #3279 Assigned To Reference Other Case Transcriptionist DISPOSITION Arrest Pending Inactive Unfounded Exceptionally Cleared (Adult or Juvenile) 77 T� Last Name First Middle DOB/ C Nelson, Irven Arthur Address City /State/Zip 8631 Prestwick LN N Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 Home Phone Work Phone Sex Race 763.424.6808 M W Other Juv Last Name, First, Middle DOB/ Address City /StateJZip Home Phone Work Phone Sea Race Other Last Name, First, Middle DOB/ Mcdole, Kelly Eugene Address 7219 Major Ave N 3'n city/statetzip Brooklyn Center MN 55430 Phone (H) 763.560.4889 Phone (VV) 612.743.4856 " s Sex Race Ht Wt Build Hair EYE Last Name, First, Middle DOB/ Address City/Statemp Phone (H) Phone (W) AKA's Sex Race Ht Wt Build Hair Eyes License # Year state Make/Model/ Style Make (cont) Color Veh Impounded (Y/N) Veh Involved In A R Property Sheet (Y/N) Crime Lab (Y/N) Technician Prints? Photos' Other Total Value of Loss: I, Ben Bruce, a Community Service Officer for the Brooklyn Center Police Department received • a call from dispatch that an individual was at the Brooklyn Center Police Department to file a dog bite report that had occurred on October 8 t ', 2010 which was three days before the individual decided to report the incident. I arrived at the police department and spoke with the victim of the dog bite identified as Irven Arthur Nelson that resides 8631 Prestwick Ln N, Brooklyn Park. He handed me a sheet of paper that had all the contact information of the individual that owned the dog that bit him and a short synopsis of what had happened on that day. When I asked NELSON what had happened on October 8 t `, 2010 he stated that he was out delivering - doorhangers - for his cliurch at residence of 7219 Major Ave N, Brooklyn Center and that is where he got bit. He said that he had his back turned to the yard when he was on the front door step of that residence and when he turned around he saw the dog coming at him. He placed his hand out for protection and the dog bit his left hand. He then said that the dog owner came around the corner and saw his hand bleeding and tried to gather some bandages for him. Nelson told me that he had went to the Park Nicollet Urgent Care where he needed to get three stitches to close up the wound. When he was at the police station, his hand was wrapped up so I could not see the wound. He said that the dog owners insurance company has been involved and that the dog owners have been very cooperative with him. I ask NELSON why he wanted to make a police report three days after it had happened and he said that he wanted the police to be informed to try and prevent a kid from being bit. • Due to the high volume of calls I had to handle on Oct 11 2010 I was not able to get time to go to the residence of 7219 Major Ave N, Brooklyn Center to follow up with what NELSON had told me. I asked another Community Service Officer to attempt and make contact for me since I was not scheduled to work until the following Sunday, October 17 2010. I was told by Community Service Officer Matt Bozowski that he had made contact with the dog owner on October 13 2010 and has written a supplemental report to this one. He informed the owner of the 10 day quarantine. He did not deem the dog at the time of contact with the individual because I informed Bozowski I would do it after getting the other side of the story to make my determination. Under the Circumstances of the situation, I will be deeming the dog potentially dangerous. I will make contact with the dog owner on my next shift and explain to the owner what needs to be done. END REPORT Brooklyn Center Case # 10 -5634 Police Department z MNO270200 Typist Reviewed By/Date MN MTB Supplemental Narrative I Assigned To Reference Other Case# Date/Time Report Made 10/ 13/10 1720 Reporting Officer CSO BOZOVSky Complainant Name (Last, First Middle) )013 Address City /stateimp Cleared ❑Adult DISP-OST-I'ION_ -.__ __ Arrest ______® Pending._ _ _❑ Inactive_ _._ ❑Unfounded []Exceptionally -_ -___ _...- ❑Juvenile Narrative: On 10/13/10 at approximately 0600 hours I CSO Bozovsky received an email from CSO Vojta about some follow up with a dog bite that occurred over the. weekend. In the email is stated that CSO Bruce took a report of a dog bite on Monday that occurred over the weekend. CSO Bruce said that he needed someone to stop out at the house where the dog lives which was 7219 Major Ave N in Brooklyn Center to get the owners and dog information. I went out to the house at approximately 1700 hours and made contact with a male who was identified as MCDOLE, Kelly Eugene with a phone number of 763 -560 -4889. MCDOLE stated that he was the homeowner and that he owns the dog. I advised MCDOLE that I was there because of a dog bite incident that happened over the weekend. MCDOLE advised me that the incident happened on Friday afternoon of last week around 345pm. MCDOLE advised me that he was walking out to his garage and thought that the dogs were br inside the house already so he didn't shut the gate. MCDOLE said that while he was in the garage that his dog which is a White/Brown/Black Male Bulldog/Boxer mix approximately 7 years old got out through the open gate and bit a guy who was on their front step putting up a flier. MCDOLE stated that they didn't see the incident happen and only know what the guy told them. I asked MCDOLE if the dog in question was up to date on its rabies vaccination and he said he was. MCDOLE gave me information off of the rabies to g on the collar of the dog and I wrote it down. The information from the date is Compassionate Care Animal Hospital (Also known as Funks) with a phone number of 763-3154200 of 8741. I advised MCDOLE that as of right now the - -4200 and a number 315 tag , t n investigation is continuin g and explained about the deeming process of a Potentially Dangerous Dog. I advised MCDOLE that the dog is being deemed at this time and that CSO Bruce will decide when he is in next what he would like to do. I advised MCDOLE that due to the bite that occurred that we would have to quarantine the dog for a period of then days. I advised MCDOLE that since the incident occurred five days ago that there would only be five days left of the quarantine process since it goes by the date of the incident. I explained to MCDOLE the rules that the dog would have to be kept separate from other animals and be monitored when outside and brought in right away and wouldn't be able to go on walks during those five days. MCDOLE said that he understood. I asked MCDOLE if he had any questions and he advised me that he didn't. I gave MCDOLE a business card with CSO Bruce's information on it and put my name and number on the back of it and advised MCDOLE to call if he has any questions. I advised MCDOLE that we would be back out on the 18"' of October to do the ten day check and he said he understood. Once back at the PD I contacted Compassionate Care Animal Hospital to obtain a copy of the rabies information. While on the phone I learned that he dogs name was "Elvis ". The female I spoke to faxed the information over and it is attached to this report. Nothing further at this time. CSO Bozovsky #3273 .Oct, 13 .10 03:50p Funk tinimal Hosp 7634255145 P.2 Compassionate Care Animal Hospital 7425 Jolly Lane Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 (763) 3154200 Rabies Certificate Patient ID: M591001 Client ID: 135910 Patent Name: Elvis - Client Name. Pam McDole Species: Canine Address: 7219 Major Ave N _ . Bulldog, , _. _ _ - -- — - - -- -- -- - Breed:_ dog American Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 Sex: Neutered Mate Color. Brawn & White Phone: (763)560 -4889 Markings: Birthday: 10/10/2003 Weight: 65.30 pounds on 4/13/2010 Tag Number. 8741 Vaccination Date: 4/13/2010 Lot Number. Expiration Date: 4113/2013 Producer. RABDO K / MLV: Killed Virus Staff Name: Cornerstone License Number. Brooklyn Center Case # 10 -5634 Police Department N NO270200 Typist Reviewed By/Date MN Supplemental Narrative Assigned To Reference OtherCaseiY Daterrime Report Made 1324 Reporting Officer 10.11-,0 Bruce #3279 DOB Complainant Name (Last, First Middle) Address City /State/Zip 7219 Major Ave N I Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 DISPOSITION:____. - ❑ Arrest FlPending ❑Inactive DUnfounded ❑Exceptionally Cleared [ Juvenile Narrative: I, Ben Bruce, a Community Service Officer for the Brooklyn Center Police Department, followed up with a'dog bite case that occurred on October 8, 2010 at 7219 Major Ave N, Brooklyn Center involving the dog "Elvis" at this residence. I spoke with the KELLY EUGENE MCDOLE who is the owner of Elvis and informed that I was at his residence today to deem his dog potentially dangerous for the event that occurred on October 8 t ', 2010. I gave MCDOLE the signed notice of a potential dangerous dog form, the signed micro chipping order form, and explained to him the process of deeming ELVIS potentially dangerous. MCDOLE was informed that he could appeal the process if he thought it was necessary. I told MCDOLE that he had until November l 2010 to get the potentially dangerous dog requirements completed. I asked MCDOLE if he had any questions before I left the scene and he had none. . END REPORT • Attachment 3 Hearing Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration • Office of the City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community Sharon Knutson, MMC City Clerk • October 18, 2010 Mr. Kelly Eugene McDole 7219 Major Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 RE: Notice of Potentially Dangerous Dog Dear Mr. McDole: The City has received your Notice of Potentially Dangerous Dog dated October 17, 2010. Enclosed is a copy of City Ordinance Sections 1 -250 through 1 -280 relating to the regulation of potentially dangerous dogs. As owner of a potentially dangerous dog, you must comply with the requirements of Section 1- 270(1) and continue to comply with such requirements until the dog is dead or removed from the City, or the City has determined that the dog is not dangerous. REGISTRATION PROCESS 1. Complete the Registration Application for Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Dog, 2. Submit photos showing that a proper enclosure exists for the dog and that "Beware of the Dog" signs have been posted at every entryway to the premises (your photos will be returned to you or you can e-mail digital photos to sknutson (aci.brooklM- center.mn.us) 3. Submit proof that the dog has had microchip identification implanted; and 4. Submit $35.00 registration fee. • Required application materials are due within 14 calendar days from the date of this letter. Once the required application materials have been received, the City Manager will issue a certificate of registration, along with a tag identifying the dog as dangerous or potentially dangerous, which must be affixed to the dog's collar and worn by the dog at all times. The City will also provide for posting on the owner's property one "Beware of the Dog" sign. Potentially Dangerous Dog Registrations expire September 30, and an owner must renew the registration of the dog annually until the dog is deceased. CONTEST /APPEAL THE DANGEROUS DOG DECLARATION Particular attention should be given to Section 1- 255(5)(a) of the City Code of Ordinances, which provides that if an owner of a dog has received a notice of intent, the owner may request that a hearing be conducted to determine whether or not such a designation is justified. Such request must be made in writing and delivered to the City Manager within 14 calendar days of receipt of the notice of intent. Questions regarding the registration of potentially dangerous dogs should be directed to me at 763 -569 -3306 or e- mail sknutson (a)ci.brooklyn- center.mn.us Sincerely, Sharon Knutson, ivuviC City Clerk Enclosure 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD NumbFW Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org i Attachment 4 Hearing Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration i 0 r t { - fa E ; - _-_ . - - - -- I, - - -- -- _ - - - -- i3 Y - -- - - - - -- --C -- i i i f II� I , i it Attachment 5 Hearing Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration i i Offices in 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis Minneapolis, MN 55402 Saint Paul (612) 337 -9300 telephone (61 fax $t. Cloud www. w.kginneenned y-g - graven.com C H A R T E R E D Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer MARY A TIETJEN Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337 -9277 Email: mtiet en@kennedy- gmven.com November 9, 2010 Mr. Kelly McDole 7219 Major Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 RE: Dangerous Dog Hearing Dear Mr. McDole: On October 18, 2010, the City of Brooklyn Center Police Department issued a notice to you that your dog has been declared "potentially dangerous" under state law and city ordinances. In a letter from you to the City of Brooklyn Center which they received on October 18, 2010, you requested a hearing to determine whether this designation is justified. The City has convened a panel for the hearing. The hearing will take place on November 30, 2010, • in the All- America conference room at Brooklyn Center City Hall. Please arrive at City Hall by 6:20 p.m. Please feel free to bring any information to the meeting that you feel may be helpful to the panel in reaching its decision. If you have questions, you may contact me at 612- 337 -9277 or Sharon Knutson, City Clerk, at 763 -569 -3300. Sincerely, Mary D. Tietjen MDT:peb cc: Mayor Willson (incident report enclosed) Robbie Hiltz (incident report enclosed) Jerry Low (incident report enclosed) CSO Benjamin Bruce #3279 Sergeant Peggy Labatt, Brooklyn Center Police ,,/Sharon Knutson, City Clerk Charlie LeFevere, City Attorney i 377191v1 MDTBR291 -265 • Attachment 6 Hearing Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community ecember 7, 2010 • Mr. Kelly McDole 7219 Major Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 RE: Dangerous Dog Hearing Dear Mr. McDole._ This letter is the Panel's decision and findings for the dangerous dog hearing that was held on November 30, 2010. The panel members reached a unanimous decision. If you disagree with the Panel's decision, you have the right to appeal to the Brooklyn Center City Council. The appeal must be in writing and submitted to the City Manager within 14 days of the date of this letter. Factual Background Police reports indicate that on October 8, 2010 your dog, Elvis, bit an individual who was at your residence delivering door hangars. The individual reported that Elvis bit him in the left hand and that he received medical treatment, including three stitches to close the wound. Based on the reports and the description of the incident, it appears that a dog bite did occur. City Ordinance • Under Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 1 -250, a potentially dangerous dog is "any dog that: a) when unprovoked, inflicts bites on a human or domestic animal on public or private property; ... Panel Decision Based on the evidence, including your testimony at the hearing, the Panel finds that: 1. The incident on October 8, 2010, involved a dog bite to a human. 2. You did not present any evidence to refute that the bite occurred or that Elvis was provoked in any way. 3. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence under City Code Section 1 -250 to declare Elvis a "potentially dangerous dog." 4. The Notice of Potentially Dangerous Dog dated October 17, 2010, is valid and you must comply with all applicable requirements of the City's ordinance and take steps to register the dog with the City. 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Nu Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityotbrooklyncenter.org Mr. Kelly McDole Page 2 Please keep in min that under Section 1-260 of the City's ordinance you may request that the City review the potentially dangerous dog designation in six months If there i evidence tha your dog's behavior has changed and no other incidents have occurred the Panel m ay rescind the d esignation. Feel free to contact Sharon Knutson at (763) 569 -3300 at the City of Brooklyn Center if you have any questions about this letter or the Panel's decision. Ms. Knutson's October 18, 2010, letter (copy enclosed) to you outlines the procedures and requirements for registering your dog with the City. Sin a Tim Willson Je cc: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk Mary D. Tiet en, Assistant City Attorney Center Police Labatt Brooklyn Sergeant Peggy Cen • Attachment 7 Hearing Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration 72 % 9 x4ffj ap- 14r , 2 EQ uES7 t1 1L(EETi 4 Lk) 1-�- f C ,Ty Ca c.IAICI L VGA Ey24Z X �5 _i • Attachment 8 Hearing Regarding Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration OPT City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community January 3, 2010 Mr. Kelly McDole 7219 Major Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 RE-0 Potentially Dangerous Dog Hearing . Dear Mr. McDole: On October 17, 2010, the City of Brooklyn Center Police Department issued a notice to you that your dog Elvis had been declared "potentially dangerous" under state law and City Ordinances. On October 18, 2010, you requested a hearing to determine whether this designation is justified. On November 30, 2010, the City's Animal Control Review Panel held a hearing, at which you were present. On December 7, 2010, a letter was mailed to you of the Animal Control Review Panel's findings that there was sufficient evidence to declare Elvis a potentially dangerous dog. By letter from you dated December 21, 2010, you appealed the Panel's decision and requested a City Council appeal hearing. The Brooklyn Center City Council will hear your appeal on Monday, January 24, 2010, at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in the City Hall Council Chambers, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430. Please feel free to bring any information with that be you directed a to be me at to 763 569 -3306 or in reaching its decision. Questions s hould sknutson@ci brooklyn- center.mn.us Sincerely, I �A 60 ( 4 Sharon Knutson, MMC City Clerk i 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD'Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityo fbrooklyncenterorg City Council Agenda Item No. lOc COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: January 18, 2011 • TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk SUBJECT: Hearing for Humboldt Properties, LLC, Valley Investment & Management, Inc., Regarding Rental Property Located at Humboldt Square Apartments (6737 and 6743 Humboldt Avenue North) Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Receive Staff report. 2. Open the hearing to receive applicant testimony. 3. Close the hearing. 4. Direct Staff to prepare a resolution for the next City Council meeting with findings of fact to either suspend or revoke the rental license for Humboldt Square Apartments. Background: City Code Section 12 -901, subd. 9, states, "Licensees with three or more units must be current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines, penalties, or other financial claims due • to the City on the licensed property and any other rental real property in the City owned by the license holder at all times. Licensees with less than three units must be current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines, penalties, or other financial claims due to the City on the licensed property and any other rental real property in the City owned by the license holder prior to issuance or renewal of a license. In the event a suit has been commenced under Minnesota Statutes, Section 278.01 - 278.03, questioning the amount or validity of taxes, the City Council may on application waive strict compliance with this provision; no waiver may be granted, however, for taxes or any portion thereof that remain unpaid for a period exceeding one (1) year after becoming due." The property located at 6737 and 6743 Humboldt Avenue North is an apartment complex known as Humboldt Square Apartments (2 buildings with 18 units). • City and County taxpayer records indicate owner as Humboldt Properties, LLC, Valley Investment & Management Inc., Central Bank Building, 5995 Oren Avenue North, Stillwater, MN 55082 • City rental dwelling license application records indicate owner as Humboldt Properties, LLC (officers Timothy B. Keenan and Mary Jo Keenan), 5995 Oren Avenue North, Stillwater, MN 55082 • August 24, 2009 — City Council approves issuance of renewal rental dwelling license for Humboldt Square Apartments with expiration date of May 31, 2011 • November 27, 2010 — City Assessor notifies City Clerk that Humboldt Square Apartments has delinquent second half 2010 property taxes i Mission: Ensurin an attractive, clean, safe cominunit) that enhances the quality of life and preserves the Itralrtic trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • November 27, 2010 — City Clerk inquires and Utility Billing Clerk notifies that utilities were not current ($3,586.73 total) • • November 29, 2010 — City Clerk sends letter to Humboldt Properties, LLC, Valley Investment & Management, Inc. notifying of delinquent taxes and utilities • December 13, 2010 — City Clerk notifies City Prosecutor that property taxes and utilities were still not current (taxes $2,240; utilities $1,282.26) • December 20, 2010 — City Prosecutor mailed letter and notice of proposed license action • January 13, 2011 — Hennepin County confirms that payment was made on January 5, 2011, and property taxes are current • January 13, 2011 — Utility Billing Clerk confirms that payment was made on January 10, 2011, and utilities are current History of Unpaid Property Taxes and City Utilities At its May 24, 2010, Work Session, the City Council requested that Staff identify the frequency of offenses to help the Council determine any sanctions. Since 2008, there have been no prior delinquencies in property taxes or City utilities for Humboldt Square Apartments. Information prior to 2008 is not available. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: • Strategic: We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods i :Mission: Ensuring an attractive, dean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM EXCERPT FROM MAY 24, 2010, CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES APARTMENTS WITH DELINQUENT PAYMENTS POLICY City Manager Curt Boganey reviewed the Council's past discussion whether rental property owners should be allowed to avoid the revocation or suspension hearing by making payments prior to the schedule hearing. The Council also questioned whether there should be additional penalties /fines to cover the City's costs to publish and mail notice of the hearing. Additional issues are whether all violators should be treated the same or consideration given to first -time offenders as opposed to repeat offenders. Mr. LeFevere stated the Council can also consider whether it wants to treat nonpayment of taxes and nonpayment of utilities at the same level of seriousness. He reviewed the details of his May 20, 2010, e -mail to City Manager Boganey that listed issues to consider in the formulation of a policy on the imposition of sanctions on rental properties that are not current in payment of taxes and/or utilities. Mr. LeFevere clarified that imposition of monetary penalties is not applicable to payment of taxes because that is County matter. The City currently charges penalties for nonpayment of utilities through an administrative penalty process. He explained the Council needed to look at this matter in the context of the Housing Ordinance; aesthetic violation versus life /safety violation, so the most serious penalty imposed is for violations deemed to be the most serious. The Council discussed each of the six issues put forward by Mr. LeFevere and reached the following consensus: L Does the Council wish to establish a reminder and grace period for payments? The Council discussed whether a 30 -day grace period was warranted and it was noted that the current process already includes a grace period. The Council agreed that the goal is to create responsible ownership of rental properties and creating a grace period would result in additional staff "babysitting" and overhead costs. 2. Does the Council wish to impose an administrative fine to encourage compliance without a hearing? g Mr. LeFevere advised that the fine cannot be imposed the same day because all of the processes take some time. He asked when does the liability occur and if it should be one day after payment is due. He described several options for consideration, such as sending a reminder for the first violation with no consequence if paid in a week, no grace period if a second violation, and imposition of an administration penalty with a hearing if not paid within a certain period of time. In addition, if a hearing is scheduled for a first -time offender, there may be a different penalty depending on the number of violations with the same person. Following discussion, the consensus of the Council was to impose an administrative fine to encourage compliance and that the fine be set at a level to cover the City's costs and provide sufficient incentive to pay the utility bill as opposed to other bills. i __. ... Mission: F•nsurtng an attractive,, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM 3. Once the policy calls for setting a hearing, the notice of hearing should inform the licensee of any relevant policy provisions. • The consensus of the Council was to support Question #3 because it allows the Council if desired, to consider past violations when imposing a penalty. 4. If the licensee pays before the hearing, does the Council wish to cancel the hearing? Mayor Willson suggested cancellation the hearing if payment is made in advance of the hearing. He asked what would be considered at the hearing if the violation had been remedied. Councilmember Lasman spoke against canceling the hearing because some rental owners make the payment after the City has expended costs to schedule and notice the hearing. She stated it is her opinion that administrative fines weaken, not strengthen, the situation. Mayor Willson asked why a hearing would be needed if guidelines are adopted. Mr. LeFevere explained the City has to hold the hearing to gather evidence from staff to prove that the violation occurred and hear from the property owner. He noted the ordinance requires the Council to state rationale and findings. Mayor Willson noted the hearing can only be held after payment if there is an ability to impose an administrative fine to cover staff and hearing costs. Following further discussion, the consensus of the Council was to not cancel the hearing if the violation is remedied prior to the hearing date. 5. If the matter proceeds to a hearing, the Council should take into consideration whether the licensee paid the delinquent amount before the hearing. The consensus of the Council was to remain firm on ordinance enforcement and to hold rental owners accountable; however, leniency may be considered for first -time violators. 6. If the matter proceeds to hearing, the Council may wish to consider including a guideline about the imposition of penalties. It was noted that establishing guidelines and policies on the consequences would protect the City and create a better position to defend the City should a lawsuit claim unfair treatment. Mr. LeFevere agreed that if the City has a policy, it removes the argument by someone that they are not being treated the same. Mr. LeFevere advised that a late payment resulting in a sanction of a six -month to one -year revocation, may result in rental owners being quick to bring legal challenges. That is why staff needs specific direction, to assure consistency so if legally challenged it can be proven that everyone has been treated the same way. • Alission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe conrrnunity that enhances the yualitp of life and preserves the public trust w COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Mayor Willson stated the last sentence indicating "that evidence introduced at the hearing ... may • result in the imposition of a greater or lesser penalty" has some merit. He noted the rental owner is provided with the ordinance when the license is pulled so he did not understand why the City had to consider leniency. Mr. LeFevere advised that under the Code the Council can consider a range from doing nothing to a one -year revocation. If the Council establishes guidelines for the future, then all know what happens with first, second, or third violations. However, there may be some cases where the facts may find those guidelines are not appropriate. He explained if the City follows that guideline, it is considered to be acting reasonably and rationally. If not using the guideline, the City would need to cite rationale. Mayor Willson asked whether the Council would still consider revocation if payment is made the day before or the day of the hearing. Mr. LeFevere advised that the rental owner paying the day before means they are no longer in violation; however, the owner was in violation when the hearing was noticed. He pointed out that most of the time, when the Council considers revocation or suspension of the license, it may be after the violations were cured. The offense does not stop just because it is corrected, and the City can sanction the behavior. If challenged, the court will decide whether the Council's action was a reasonable response under the City Code based on the nature and seriousness of the offense. The Council discussed the options and agreed that it is difficult to impose a law to achieve automatic compliance. However, the Council can take one step at this point and determine to hold the hearing even if payment is made. With regard to consideration of repeat violators, it was indicated that will be determined by the Council upon hearing the case and receiving staff's report on the history of the property. It was noted that whether a first -time or repeat violator, the hearing will be held but the Council's response could be different. Mr. LeFevere recapped the Council's discussion that the start of the process will not change up to the point of giving notice. Staff will assure those procedures are routine and consistent and all are treated the same. Once it goes to a hearing, the notice of hearing will indicate that the hearing will be held even if the violation is resolved and also identify the frequency of offense. During the hearing, all offenses would be addressed by the Council when considering whether to impose a penalty. Mr. LeFevere advised that staff and the prosecuting attorney are in agreement that if imposing more severe sanctions for repeat violators, those violations need to be listed in the notice of hearing. The notice will indicate the Council will consider imposition of sanctions, list the violations, and that hearing will be held whether or not payment is made prior to the hearing. .Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust Hennepin County Property Information Page 1 of 1 Hmnelxn Countv, N WWW. - ~ * HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER • A600 Government Center Minneapolis MN 55487- 0060 Property Tax Information The Hennepin County Property Tax web database is updated daily (Monday - Friday) at approximately 9:15 p.m. (CST) Property ID No.: 35- 119 -21 -11 -0002 Property Address: 6737 HUMBOLDT AVE N BROOKLYN CENTER Owner Name: HUMBOLDT PROPERTIES LLC Taxpayer Name and Address: VALLEY INVESTMENT & MNGT INC CENTRAL BANK BUILDING 5995 OREN AVE N There are no prior year taxes due on this property. It is anticipated that 2011 Taxes will be available on this web site approximately March 1, 2011. • i https: / /wwwl6.co.hennepin.nm.us /taxpayments /taxesdue.jsp ?pid= 3511921110002 01/12/2011 Office of the City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community Sharon Knutson, MMC City Clerk November 29, 2010 ORDINANCE VIOLATION NOTICE Humboldt Properties LLC Tim and Mary Jo Keenan Valley Investment & Management Inc. 14524 61 st Street Ct N Central Bank Building Stillwater, MN 55082 5995 Oren Avenue North Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Rental Property Located at: Humboldt Square Apartments 6737 and 6743 Humboldt Avenue North PID# 35- 119 -21 -11 -0002 Dear Property Owner: Section 12- 901(9) states that licensees with three or more units must be current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines, penalties, or other financial claims due to the City on the licensed property and any other rental real property in the City owned by the license holder at all times. City records indicate that there are both taxes and utilities owed for this property. Property taxes and utilities must be paid in full to retain a rental dwelling license. Please submit payment for utilities to the City of Brooklyn Center and payment for taxes to Hennepin County Government Center, 300 S 6th Street, Administrative Tower A -600, Minneapolis, MN 55487- 0060, within 10 calendar days of the date of this letter. Failure to keep current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines, penalties, or other financial claims due to the City on the rental property will result in legal prosecution by the City. FAILURE TO COMPLY AND BE CURRENT ON PROPERTY TAXES AND UTILITIES BY DECEMBER 9, 2010, WILL RESULT IN A HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, WHEREBY SANCTIONS MAY BE IMPOSED WHETHER OR NOT PAYMENT OF THE PROPERTY TAXES AND UTILITIES ARE MADE PRIOR TO THE HEARING. If payment has been made, please disregard this notice, as I will consult with the City Assessor after your due date. Any questions regarding taxes may be directed to Hennepin County at 612- 348 -3011. Questions regarding utilities can be directed to the City utility billing division at 763 -569 -3390. Sincerely, U 1!!V r� Sharon Knutson City Clerk 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone &TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www. cityo fbrooklyncenter. org 20 December 2010 By Certified Mail and U.S. Mail Humboldt Properties, LLC Valley Investments and Management, Inc. 5995 Oren Avenue N. _ Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Tim and Mary Jo Keenan 14524 61 Street, Court N Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 RE: Notice of proposed license action Dear Sir, • Enclosed herewith and served upon you is a notice of proposed action against your rental license for that premises known as Humboldt Square. The only exception to an action based upon failure to pay real property taxes in a timely manner is a lawsuit maintained by you challenging the amount and/or validity of the tax. You must make an application to the Council for relief, if such a lawsuit is pending. You are further advised that an action against the license is not the sole or exclusive remedy available to the City and the City reserves the right for further proceedings. You are still further advised that payment of the tax, utilities and other amounts due, prior to the hearing, will not cause the hearing to be stricken. Sincerely, CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER William G. Clelland Prosecuting Attorney cc City Manage, Assistant City Manager LeFevere NOTICE OF PROPOSED LICENSE ACTION You are hereby notified, pursuant to Section 12 -910 of the ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center, that a hearing before the City Council shall be held on the 24 th day of January 2011 at 7:00 pm o'clock at the Brooklyn Center City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430, at which time the City Council shall consider the revocation, suspension or non renewal of the rental license held by Humboldt Properties, LLC and Tim and Mary Jo Keenan for that apartment complex known as Humboldt Square, located at 6737 and 6743 Humboldt Avenue N. Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. The grounds for this license action are the failure of the licensee to completely pay the year 2010 real property taxes, now due and overdue in the principal amount of $2,000, together with applicable penalties in the amount of $240 and failure to pay city- provided utilities now overdue and delinquent in the total amounts of $1,282.26, together with any applicable interest and penalties. Section 12 -901 subd 4 provides that as a condition of acquiring a rental license and maintaining a rental license, the licensee must be current on payments for all assessments, taxes and utilities. Section 12 -910 provides for the revocation, suspension or non renewal of a rental license for, inter alia, failure to operate or maintain the license premises in conformity with all applicable state laws and codes and the City Code or Ordinances and any other violation of Chapter 12. YOU ARE ADVISED THAT PAYMENT OF THE TAXES, UTILITIES, PENALTIES AND INTEREST PRIOR TO THE HEARING WILL NOT CAUSE THE HEARING TO BE STRICKEN. YOU SHOULD BE PREPARED TO ADDRESS THIS VIOLATION OF THE i CITY CODE AT THIS HEARING. • City Council Agenda Item No. 10d COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM r DATE: January 2011 �'y , TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk jww4u* SUBJECT: Hearing for Hyder Jaweed, Holdingford Investments, LLC, Regarding Rental Property Located at Brookhaven Apartments (3907, 3909, and 3911 65th Avenue North) Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Receive Staff report. 2. Open the hearing to receive applicant testimony. 3. Close the hearing. 4. Direct Staff to prepare a resolution for the next City Council meeting with findings of fact to either suspend or revoke the rental license for Brookhaven Apartments. Background: . City Code Section 12 -901, subd. 9, states, "Licensees with three or more units must be current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines, penalties, or other financial claims due to the City on the licensed property and any other rental real property in the City owned by the license holder at all times. Licensees with less than three units must be current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines, penalties, or other financial claims due to the City on the licensed property and any other rental real property in the City owned by the license holder prior to issuance or renewal of a license. In the event a suit has been commenced under Minnesota Statutes, Section 278.01- 278.03, questioning the amount or validity of taxes, the City Council may on application waive strict compliance with this provision; no waiver may be granted, however, for taxes or any portion thereof that remain unpaid for a period exceeding one (1) year after becoming due." The property located at 3907, 3909, and 391165 th Avenue North is an apartment complex known as Brookhaven Apartments (3 buildings with 54 units). • City and County taxpayer records indicate owner as Holdingford Investments LLC, P.O. Box 120728, St. Paul MN 55112 • City rental dwelling license application records indicate owner as Hyder Jaweed, Holdingford Investments, LLC, 3 Blue Spruce Court, North Oaks MN 55112 • Secretary of State business records indicate Holdingford Investments LLC is located at 3 Blue Spruce Court, North Oaks MN 55112; original date of filing 11/13/2007 • August 2, 2010 — Hyder Jaweed submits renewal rental dwelling license application (current license to expire October 31, 2010) Mission: Insuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the gualitY of life and preservers the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • August 3, 2010 — City notifies Hyder Jaweed that application is received and applicant must be current on taxes and utilities • November 27, 2010 — City Assessor notifies City Clerk that Brookhaven Apartments has delinquent first half and second half 2010 property taxes • November 27, 2010 — City Clerk inquires and Utility Billing Clerk notifies that utilities were not current ($9,048.42 total) • November 29, 2010 — City Clerk sends letter to Holdingford Investments LLC notifying of delinquent taxes and utilities • November 30, 2010 — City Clerk calls Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department to inquire about 2010 property taxes for Brookhaven. A payment was made on July 19, 2010, in the amount of $30,200.53 and another payment of $30,200.53 was made on August 5, 2010; however, the checks were NSF (Non - Sufficient Funds) on July 27 and August 16, respectively. • December 13, 2010 — City Clerk notifies City Prosecutor that property taxes and utilities were not current and no payment had been made since the notification letter was mailed (taxes $62,063.48; utilities $9,948.42) • January 7, 2011 — City Prosecutor mailed letter and notice of proposed license action • January 18, 2011 — Hennepin County confirms 2010 property taxes plus penalties and interest are unpaid in the amount of $63,698.17, a violation of City Code Section 12 -901 ( • January 18, 2011 — Utility Billing Clerk confirms that utilities are not current in the • amount of $9,953.26 ($3,739.48 for 3907 65th; $3,041.67 for 3909 65th; $3,172.11 for 3911 65th), a violation of City Code Section 12 -901 (9) History of Unpaid Property Taxes and City Utilities At its May 24, 2010, Work Session, the City Council requested that Staff identify the frequency of offenses to help the Council determine any sanctions. Following is the history for Brookhaven. First Half 2008 Property Taxes (due May 15) June 6, 2008 — City mailed notification letter for unpaid taxes. Taxes were paid prior to Council hearing notification. Second Half 2008 Property Taxes (due October 15) January 29, 2009 — City mailed notification letter for unpaid taxes. Taxes were paid prior to Council hearing notification. First Half 2009 Property Taxes (due May 15) June 11, 2009 — City Prosecutor mailed letter and notice of proposed license action. Hearing was scheduled and on the Council agenda for July 13, 2009; however, on July 13, 2009, Brookhaven's attorney notified that property taxes and City utilities had been paid, so hearing was canceled. :Alission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe com►nunity that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Second Half 2009 Property Taxes (due October 15) January 19, 2010 — City mailed notification letter for unpaid taxes, as well as unpaid City utilities. On March 1, 2010, City Prosecutor mailed letter and notice of proposed license action. Hearing was scheduled and on Council agenda for April 12, 2010; however, on April 12, 2010, City Prosecutor was notified by Brookhaven's attorney that property taxes and City utilities had been paid, so hearing was canceled. First Half 2010 Property Taxes July 6, 2010 — City mailed notification letter for unpaid taxes, as well as unpaid City utilities. Taxes and City utilities were paid prior to Council hearing notification. It should be noted that the check was returned as Non - Sufficient Funds on July 27, 2010; however, the City was not aware of this until checking to confirm the second half taxes 2010 were paid and current. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Strategic: We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM EXCERPT FROM MAY 24, 2010, CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES APARTMENTS WITH DELINQUENT PAYMENTS POLICY City Manager Curt Boganey reviewed the Council's past discussion whether rental property owners should be allowed to avoid the revocation or suspension hearing by making payments prior to the schedule hearing. The Council also questioned whether there should be additional penalties /fines to cover the City's costs to publish and mail notice of the hearing. Additional issues are whether all violators should be treated the same or consideration given to first -time offenders as opposed to repeat offenders. Mr. LeFevere stated the Council can also consider whether it wants to treat nonpayment of taxes and nonpayment of utilities at the same level of seriousness. He reviewed the details of his May 20, 2010, e -mail to City Manager Boganey that listed issues to consider in the formulation of a policy on the imposition of sanctions on rental properties that are not current in payment of taxes and/or utilities. Mr. LeFevere clarified that imposition of monetary penalties is not applicable to payment of taxes because that is County matter. The City currently charges penalties for nonpayment of utilities through an administrative penalty process. He explained the Council needed to look at this matter in the context of the Housing Ordinance; aesthetic violation versus life /safety violation, so the most serious penalty imposed is for violations deemed to be the most serious. The Council discussed each of the six issues put forward by Mr. LeFevere and reached the • following consensus: 1, Does the Council wish to establish a reminder and grace period for payments? The Council discussed whether a 30 -day grace period was warranted and it was noted that the current process already includes a grace period. The Council agreed that the goal is to create responsible ownership of rental properties and creating a grace period would result in additional staff "babysitting" and overhead costs. 2. Does the Council wish to impose an administrative fine to encourage compliance without a hearing? Mr. LeFevere advised that the fine cannot be imposed the same day because all of the processes take some time. He asked when does the liability occur and if it should be one day after payment is due. He described several options for consideration, such as sending a reminder for the first violation with no consequence if paid in a week, no grace period if a second violation, and imposition of an administration penalty with a hearing if not paid within a certain period of time. In addition, if a hearing is scheduled for a first -time offender, there may be a different penalty depending on the number of violations with the same person. Following discussion, the consensus of the Council was to impose an administrative fine to encourage compliance and that the fine be set at a level to cover the City's costs and provide sufficient incentive to a the utility bill as opposed to other bills. to p ay Y pP Alission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the pecblic. trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM 3. Once the policy calls for setting a hearing, the notice of hearing should inform the licensee of any relevant policy provisions. The consensus of the Council was to support Question #3 because it allows the Council, if desired, to consider past violations when imposing a penalty. 4. If the licensee pays before the hearing, does the Council wish to cancel the hearing? Mayor Willson suggested cancellation the hearing if payment is made in advance of the hearing. He asked what would be considered at the hearing if the violation had been remedied. Councilmember Lasman spoke against canceling the hearing because some rental owners make the payment after the City has expended costs to schedule and notice the hearing. She stated it is her opinion that administrative fines weaken, not strengthen, the situation. Mayor Willson asked why a hearing would be needed if guidelines are adopted. Mr. LeFevere explained the City has to hold the hearing to gather evidence from staff to prove that the violation occurred and hear from the property owner. He noted the ordinance requires the Council to state rationale and findings. Mayor Willson noted the hearing can only be held after payment if there is an ability to impose an administrative fine to cover staff and hearing costs. Following further discussion, the consensus of the Council was to not cancel the hearing if the violation is remedied prior to the hearing date. 5. If the matter proceeds to a hearing, the Council should take into consideration whether the licensee paid the delinquent amount before the hearing. The consensus of the Council was to remain firm on ordinance enforcement and to hold rental owners accountable; however, leniency may be considered for first -time violators. 6. If the matter proceeds to hearing, the Council may wish to consider including a guideline about the imposition of penalties. It was noted that establishing guidelines and policies on the consequences would protect the City and create a better position to defend the City should a lawsuit claim unfair treatment. Mr. LeFevere agreed that if the City has a policy, it removes the argument by someone that they are not being treated the same. Mr. LeFevere advised that a late payment resulting in a sanction of a six -month to one -year revocation, may result in rental owners being quick to bring legal challenges. That is why staff needs specific direction, to assure consistency so if legally challenged it can be proven that everyone has been treated the same way. Mission: Busuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Mayor Willson stated the last sentence indicating "that evidence introduced at the hearing ... may result in the imposition of a greater or lesser penalty" has some merit. He noted the rental owner is provided with the ordinance when the license is pulled so he did not understand why the City had to consider leniency. Mr. LeFevere advised that under the Code the Council can consider a range from doing nothing to a one -year revocation. If the Council establishes guidelines for the future, then all know what happens with first, second, or third violations. However, there may be some cases where the facts may find those guidelines are not appropriate. He explained if the City follows that guideline, it is considered to be acting reasonably and rationally. If not using the guideline, the City would need to cite rationale. Mayor Willson asked whether the Council would still consider revocation if payment is made the day before or the day of the hearing. Mr. LeFevere advised that the rental owner paying the day before means they are no longer in violation; however, the owner was in violation when the hearing was noticed. He pointed out that most of the time, when the Council considers revocation or suspension of the license, it may be after the violations were cured. The offense does not stop just because it is corrected, and the City can sanction the behavior. If challenged, the court will decide whether the Council's action was a reasonable response under the City Code based on the nature and seriousness of the offense. The Council discussed the options and agreed that it is difficult to impose a law to achieve automatic compliance. However, the Council can take one step at this point and determine to hold the hearing even if payment is made. With regard to consideration of repeat violators, it was indicated that will be determined by the Council upon hearing the case and receiving staff's report on the history of the property. It was noted that whether a first -time or repeat violator, the hearing will be held but the Council's response could be different. Mr. LeFevere recapped the Council's discussion that the start of the process will not change up to the point of giving notice. Staff will assure those procedures are routine and consistent and all are treated the same. Once it goes to a hearing, the notice of hearing will indicate that the hearing will be held even if the violation is resolved and also identify the frequency of offense. During the hearing, all offenses would be addressed by the Council when considering whether to impose a penalty. Mr. LeFevere advised that staff and the prosecuting attorney are in agreement that if imposing more severe sanctions for repeat violators, those violations need to be listed in the notice of hearing. The notice will indicate the Council will consider imposition of sanctions, list the violations, and that hearing will be held whether or not payment is made prior to the hearing. Mission: Fusuring an attractive., clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust Hennepin County Property Information Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County, MN • %VWW,' - u HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER A600 Government Center Minneapolis MN 55487- 0060 Property Tax Information The Hennepin County Property Tax web database is updated daily (Monday - Friday) at approximately 9:15 p.m. (CST) Property ID No.: 34- 119 -21 -31 -0081 Property Address: 3907 65TH AVE N BROOKLYN CENTER Owner Name: HOLDINGFORD INVESTMENTS LLC Taxpayer Name and Address: HOLDINGFORD INVESTMENTS LLC PO BOX 120728 ST PAUL MN 55112 Property has prior year delinquent taxes. Call (612) 348 -3011 for amount due. It is anticipated that 2011 Taxes will be available on this web site approximately March 1, 2011. https: / /www l 6. co.hennepin.nm.us /taxpayments /taxesdue.j sp ?pid= 3411921310081 01/12/2011 BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS INQUIRY - VIEW ENTITY Page 1 of 1 Onrine Aee" -s DA Home UCC Business Services Account Session Briefcase Help /FAQs About Login BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS INQUIRY - VIEW ENTITY Filing Number: 2586854 -2 Entity Type: Limited Liability Company Original Date of Filing: 11/13/2007 Entity Status: Active Entity Date to Expire: Chapter: 322B Good Standing: 2009 (date of last annual filing) Name: HOLDINGFORD INVESTMENTS, LLC Registered Office 3 Blue Spruce Ct Address: North Oaks, MN, 55127 Home State: MN Agent Name: No Agent Filed ........... ......___........._............ Additional Detail ,; Return to Search List New Search DA Home I OSS Home I Contacts I Privacy Policy I Terms & Conditions Use of this site and services indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use. ©Copyright 2001 , Minnesota Office of the Secretary of State. All Rights Reserved. http: / /da.sos. state .mn.us /minnesota/corp_inquiry- entity .asp ?:nfiling_pumber = 2586854 -2... 01/12/2011 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE RENEWAL License Nbr: 01005171 City of Brooklyn Center Applicant: 293 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway ty of • Brooklyn Center MN 55430 763 -569 -3300 BR YN IN STRUCTIONS: To renew license(s): make any necessary corrections, sign form and return to theCity of Brooklyn Center, along with Hyder Jaweed the license fees by 8/1/2010. Make check 3 Blue Spruce Court payable to: City of Brooklyn Center. St. Paul MN 55127 License Expires: 10/31/2010 RENTAL LICENSE Issued To: Hyder Jaweed Descrip Fee Tyne Lic Units Amount Complex: Multi Family - Rental (Bldg) Prim 3 $600.00 Address: 3907 65th Ave N Multi Family - Rental (Units) Scnd 54 $972.00 Total: $1,572.00 Phone: z���c . � 8 (�, � y� �-1�,- - 639 � Complex: Brookhaven Apts 3907 -09 -11 65th Ave N License Location: 3907 65th Ave N • Resident Mgr.: Phone: Caretaker: Phone: Q . - PID: 34- 119 -21 -31 -0081 _.._.__.._ Primary Units: 3 Secondary Units: 54 "I will schedule a rental license inspection and have submitted the necessary fees to the City cf Brooklyn Center as required by the City Ordinances and have complied with all the requirements necessary far obtaining this license. I certify that the information provided is accurate and complete to the best cf my knowledge. 1 therefore make application to operate a rental dwelling license subject to all conditions and provisions ofsaid Ordinances" Information collected to determine eligibility for license. Failure to provide information requested /' Signature of Applicant City Use Only: Date Rec.• Acd Na 4205 0 Insp. Date: Check No. Re: 6 0504 CC Date: City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community August 3, 2010 Hyder Jaweed 3 Blue Spruce Court St. Paul, MN 55127 RE: 3907 65` Ave N Dear Rental Dwelling License Applicant: The City has received your rental dwelling license application and license fee. Please keep in mind that the submittal of the license application and fee is only the first step in the licensing process. The property must pass a health and safety inspection conducted by the City's Housing Inspector. If you do not already have an inspection scheduled, please call inspections at 763.569 -3344 to schedule an inspection or an and time of the inspection. inspection will automatically P ins Y be scheduled and you will be notified of the P in If you have not already submitted your Phase I Crime Free Housing Program certificate, you are required to complete Phase I of the Crime Free Housing Program and submit a copy - of the completion certificate to the City Clerk's office. To find out the training schedule for the Crime Free Housing Program, contact the Minnesota Crime Prevention Association at 651- 793 -1109 or visit: www.mncpa.net. As owner of rental property, you are responsible for ensuring that taxes and utilities are current on all property you own within the City of Brooklyn Center. Even if your lease agreement with your tenant indicates that the tenant is responsible for payment of taxes and/or utilities, you, as owner and applicant for a rental dwelling license, are responsible for ensuring that taxes and utilities are current on the rental • property. Section 12 -901 of the City's Code of Ordinances requires that the owner of rental property be current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines, penalties, or other financial claims due the City on the property and any other rental real property in the City owned by the license holder. Prior to the issuance of a rental license, verification will be made to ensure that all utility fees, takes, assessments, fines, penalties, or other financial claims due the City are current on the property. To check on the status of the City's utilities, please call Public Utilities at 763 -569 -3390. To check on the status of property taxes and assessments, please call Assessing at 763 -569 -3310. Sincerely, L,m &1a as,44� Maria Rosenbaum Deputy City Clerk Enclosures to NEW APPLICANTS: • Copy of Rental Dwelling Application • Landlords and Tenants: Rights and Responsibilities Booklet • Fundamentals of Rental Property Management in Minnesota Booklet • Rental Property Maintenance Checklist Brochure 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Numb Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 Cit y Hall & TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityof brooklyncenterorg Office of the City Clerk City of Brooklyn Center VT A Millennium Community Sharon Knutson, MMC City Clerk November 29, 2010 ORDINANCE VIOLATION NOTICE Holdingford Investments LLC Hyder Jaweed P.O. Box 120728 3 Blue Spruce Court St. Paul, MN 55112 St. Paul, MN 55127 RE: Rental Property Located at: Brookhaven Apartments, 3907 -09 -11 65th Ave N PID# 34- 119 -21 -31 -0081 Dear Property Owner: Section 12- 901(9) states that licensees with three or more units must be current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines , penalties, or other financial claims due to the City on the licensed d other rental real property in the City owned b an an oth p P Y Y Y the license holder at all times. property Y City records indicate that there are both taxes and utilities owed for this property. Property taxes and utilities must be paid in full to retain a rental dwelling license. Please submit payment for utilities to the City of Brooklyn Center and payment for taxes to Hennepin County Government Center, 300 S 6th Street, Administrative Tower A -600, Minneapolis, MN 55487- 0060, within 10 calendar days of the date of this letter. Failure to keep current on the payment of all utility fees, taxes, assessments, fines, penalties, or other financial claims due to the City on the rental property will result in legal prosecution by the City. FAILURE TO COMPLY AND BE CURRENT ON PROPERTY TAXES AND UTILITIES BY DECEMBER 9, 2010, WILL RESULT IN A HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, WHEREBY SANCTIONS MAY BE IMPOSED WHETHER OR NOT PAYMENT OF THE PROPERTY TAXES AND UTILITIES ARE MADE PRIOR TO THE HEARING. If payment has been made, please disregard this notice, as I will consult with the City Assessor after your due date. Any questions regarding taxes may be directed to Hennepin County at 612- 348 -3011. Questions regarding utilities can be directed to the City utility billing division at 763 -569 -3390. Sincerely, jrvw Sharon Knutson City Clerk i 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www. cityo f brooklyncenterorg 7 January 2011 By Certified Mail and U.S. Mail Holdingford Investments, LLC Post Office Box 120728 St. Paul, Minnesota 55112 Hyder Jaweed 3 Blue Spruce Court North Oaks, Minnesota 55127 RE: Notice of proposed license action Dear Sir, Enclosed herewith and served upon you is a notice of proposed action against your rental • license for that premises known as Brookhaven. The only exception to an action based upon failure to pay real property taxes in a timely manner is a lawsuit maintained by you challenging the amount and/or validity of the tax. You must make an application to the Council for relief, if such a lawsuit is pending. You are further advised that an action against the license is not the sole or exclusive remedy available to the City and the City reserves the right for further proceedings. You are still further advised that payment of the tax, utilities and other amounts due, prior to the hearing, will not cause the hearing to be stricken. Sincerely, CARSON, CLELLAND & SCHREDER William G. Clelland Prosecuting Attorney cc City Manager, Assistant City Manager LeFevere , receiver NOTICE OF PROPOSED LICENSE ACTION You are hereby notified, pursuant to Section 12 -910 of the ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center, that a hearing before the City Council shall be held on the 24 th day of January 2011 at 7:00 pm o'clock at the Brooklyn Center City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430, at which time the City Council shall consider the revocation, suspension or non renewal of the rental license held by Holdingford Investments, LLC for that apartment complex known as Brookhaven, located at 3907, 3909 and 391165"' Avenue N., Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. The grounds for this license action are the failure of the licensee to pay the first and second half year 2010 real property taxes, now due and overdue in the principal amount of • $63,698.17 which includes current penalties and failure to pay city - provided utilities now overdue and delinquent in the total amounts of $ 9,953.26, together with applicable interest and penalties. Section 12 -901 subd 4 provides that as a condition of acquiring a rental license and maintaining a rental license, the licensee must be current on payments for all assessments, taxes and utilities. Section 12 -910 provides for the revocation, suspension or non renewal of a rental license for, inter alia, failure to operate or maintain the license premises in conformity with all applicable state laws and codes and the City Code or Ordinances and any other violation of Chapter 12. YOU ARE ADVISED THAT PAYMENT OF THE TAXES, UTILITIES, PENALTIES AND INTEREST PRIOR TO THE HEARING WILL NOT CAUSE THE HEARING TO BE STRICKEN. YOU SHOULD BE PREPARED TO ADDRESS THIS VIOLATION OF THE • CITY CODE AT THIS HEARING. AGENDA CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WORK SESSION January 24, 2011 • Immediately Following Regular City Council and EDA Meetings Which Start at 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers City Hall A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Minn. Stat. 273.128 4d Rental Properties — Annual Report 2. Sterling Square Rental License Revocation Update 3. Joint Meeting with Commissions 4. Housing Improvement Association Draft Procedures 5. Shingle Creek Crossings PENDING LIST FOR FUTURE WORK SESSIONS Later /Ongoing 1. Junk and Inoperable Vehicles Update — Back Yard Parking — February 2. Hwy 252 Update — February 3. Progress Reports on Achievement of Strategic Goals One through Six — February 4. Sister City Update 5. Strategic Outcome Reports 6. Neighborhood Designations 7. Department Year End Reports 8. Active Living Program 9. Community Schools Update 10. Graduated Sanitary Utility Rate Study 11. Garbage Hauler Organized Collection Update i • Work Session Agenda Item No. l MEMORANDUM -- COUNCIL WORK SESSION i DATE: January 19, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Kevin Benner, Chief of Police SUBJECT: 4d.Rental Properties Update Recommendation: There are no recommendations to the City Council with this update report. Background: On January 12, 2009, Gateway Commons (formerly Center Pointe), Unity Place and Garden City were classified as 4d properties recognized by the City Council as properties in excess of �08 25% olice calls for service avera e. This was in com liance with the ilot roject of the p g p p p Minnesota Session Law Chapter 366, Article 6, Section 48. As of today,'the only property that currently qualifies under the 4d regulations to complete the Crime Free Multi - Housing -(CFMH) program is Unity Place. Unity Place - completed all three phases of the Crime Free Multi Housing program on January 13, 2011. Unity Place: Two managers have completed the Phase I training. Phase II, CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) was completed on January 11, 2010. Unity Place also participated in National Night Out and one other tenant /management meeting in 2010, which is the requirement of Phase IIl. They will be having a certification ceremony in the Spring of 2011. In the last 12 months, police calls for service are down 33% to Unity Place. Gateway Commons: No longer a 4d property. Garden City: Does not exceed the 25% police calls for service criteria. Management has completed the Phase I training, and on December 29, 2010 a security assessment was completed. Policy Issues: None Council Goals: Strategic: 1. We will ensure a safe and secure community • Mission: Ensuring an attractim, clean, safe comnumity that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust • Work Session Agenda Item No. 2 Y MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE: January 20, 2011 TO: City Council FROM: Curt Boganey, City Managg,rp$ SUBJECT: Sterling Square Apartments Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider providing direction to staff regarding the license revocation of Sterling Square Apartments. Background: At the last City Council meeting staff was directed to consult with the City Attorney and provide options for the City Council to consider regarding the current revoked rental license at Sterling Square Apartments. The City Attorney has prepared the attached memo that outlines issues and alternatives regarding the issue of amending the Council decision to revoke a rental license. As stated in the memo several options are available to the Council. Each option has it pros and cons. The City Attorney will be at the worksession on Monday to elaborate if needed. • Policy Issues: Is the public interest served by amending the license revocation at Sterling Square Apartments? If an amendment is to be considered, what process best serves the public interest? Council Goals: a s. Select not more than two. Strategic: 1. We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods • Hiission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe conwwniry that enhances the quality of life andpreserves the public trust Curt Boganey From: LeFevere, Charlie L. [clefevere @Kennedy - Graven.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 5:10 PM • To: Curt Boganey Cc: Vickie Schleuning Subject: Sterling Square Apartments Curt, You have asked for comments on the city council's options in responding to the request by John Roder that the council reconsider the revocation of the license for Sterling Square Apartments. order revoking the license for Sterling Square Apartments. Under the hearing, h i council issued its o q P Following a hea t e c 9 9 9, city 9 order, the city council will not consider a license renewal until April of this year. The time to appeal that decision to the courts has expired. There is no provision in the city's code for reconsideration of such a decision and no standards that the city council would apply in such a reconsideration. However, the city council has the authority to make a decision imposing license sanctions, such as revocation. Therefore, it seems to me that the council has the inherent authority to change that decision, providing the change is lawful and does not violate the constitutional rights of the licensee. Although there is no procedure under city code for reconsideration of such a decision, the licensee has requested the council to do so. In response to this request, the city has a number of options. These include: 1. Do nothing and allow the revocation period to run and consider an application for renewal on its merits after the revocation period has expired. 2. Ordinarily, applications are not brought to the city council until the licensee's property is in compliance with the requirements of city code. Therefore, even if the city council decided that it was willing to consider shortening the* time of the revocation, the application for a new license would not come to the council until the licensee qualified. Therefore, a second option would be to wait until the applicant meets all of the requirements for a new license and decide at that time whether it wishes to consider shortening the revocation period. 3. A council member could move to amend the resolution so that it provided, for example, for a 10 -month revocation rather than a one -year revocation. A council member might wish to make such a motion, for example, if he or she believed, on the basis of the original record, that a 10 -month revocation was more appropriate than a 12 -month revocation given the nature and seriousness of the offenses committed by the licensee. A decision on this basis would not require a new hearing and no new evidence would be required. According to the minutes of the last council work session, there was a concern about setting a precedent by the city council's decision in response to Mr. Roder's request. I do not believe that a decision in this case would create a precedent that would be legally binding on the city council in future cases. However, in fairness to all parties, licensees who are similarly situated should be similarly treated by the city council. Therefore, if the city council were to reduce the revocation period from 12 months to 10 months for the offenses in this case, another licensee might reasonably be expected to be given the same treatment. That is, a licensee who failed to make prompt payments of taxes or utilities under circumstances similar to those in this case, might reasonably expect to be treated no more harshly than a 10- h revocation mont period. p 4. A fourth option would be to reconsider the sanction based on events that have occurred and the conduct of the licensee since the revocation began. That is, the council might shorten the period of the revocation based on a finding that the applicant had promptly paid bills and taxes and otherwise substantially complied with city code during the period of the revocation. As noted above, there is no provision for this in the city code, no procedures are specified, and there is no guidance as to the factors that the city council might evaluate in deciding whether to shorten the revocation period. It should be noted that the best case is that the applicant would have complied with all requirements of law during the period of the revocation. However, this is the expectation that the city council has of all licensees, so the council would be amending its decision on revocation based on a determination that the licensee was doing what he was legally required to do. On the other hand, if the licensee fails to comply with the city code during the time of revocation, those offenses could be a basis for a decision by the city council not to renew the license in April of this year. If the council determines that complying with the law 1 entitles the licensee to shortening of the revocation, but the city council decides not to shorten the revocation because there were code violations during the period of the revocation, one might argue that the licensee is subject to punishment twice for violations occurring during the period of revocation (once by not having the original revocation shortened and again by a decision by the city council not to renew the license in April because • of violations that occurred during the revocation). The one -year revocation was determined by the city council to be an appropriate sanction for the licensee's conduct in 2009. If the city council wishes to revise that decision on the basis of the landowner's conduct in 2010, 1 would not know how to advise the council how to weigh the compliance or lack of compliance with city code requirements during 2010 in making that decision. As noted above, the action of the city council in this case may not create a legally binding precedent, but may create expectations on the part of licensees that they will be treated similarly. Under option 3 above, the only expectation that could be created would be that a licensee who committed the same offenses as the licensee in this case might expect a 10 -month revocation rather than a 12 -month revocation. However, if the city council decided to shorten the period of revocation not on the basis of the offense but on the basis of the landowner's conduct and compliance with city code during the following year, the expectations created could be much more open- ended. That is, a licensee committing any offense might expect to have a suspension or revocation shortened on the basis of later conduct, but without any standards for reviewing such conduct or guidelines for determining what kind of conduct should result in amendment to the sanction imposed by the council. I will be present at the work session on Monday if the city council has any questions about my comments. Charlie Charles L. LeFevere Kennedy and Graven, Chartered 470 U. S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 ephone: (612) 337 -9215 (612) 337 -9310 clefevereft kennedy- Qraven.com 2 DATE: January 10, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Mannager i FROM: Vickie $chleuning, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards SUBJECT: Status of Sterling Square Apartments Recommendation: Review the license revocation status as requested by the owner John Roder. 1 Background: On December 13, 2010, Mr. John Roder, owner of Sterling Square Apartments asked the Council to consider early reinstatement of the rental license. City Council requested .staff provide an update regarding the status of Sterling Square Apartments for review. The rental license had previously been revoked for one year until April 27, 2011 due to delinquent property tax payments. Resolution #2010 -77 revoking the rental license is attached for your information. The following is a brief summary of the actions and status of Sterling Square_' Apartments as of January 5, 2010: 1. Financial Obligation s. Since April. 26, 2010, the date the rental license for the Sterling Square Apartment Complex was revoked as a result of delinquent property taxes, both property taxes and city utility payments have been kept current. The next payment for property taxes in the amount of $18,487.36 is due May 15, 2011. The next payment for city utilities is due January 26, 2010 in the amount of $3,807.20. 2. Property Maintenance. By ordinance, properties 'without a rental license are still required to meet all code requirements. Since the rental license was originally scheduled to expire December 31, 2010, the owner submitted his application for the renewal of his rental license and inspections were conducted to ensure minimum health and life safety standards were being maintained. If all requirements are met, the license renewal application would be brought forward for Council consideration in April 2011. Property inspections were conducted on October 25, 2010 and December 15, 2010. An additional inspection(s) will be required to ensure compliance of certain code violations as follows: • Exterior violations exist that include repairing stucco, decks, block walls, a walkway slope; removing volunteer trees; and repairing soffits. Because of the nature of these repairs, a weather deferral for compliance has been given until May 15, 2011. • • In some buildings /units, repairs are needed to mechanical systems, plumbing, sub floor, and the roof in one building. The roof will require further assessment to determine the scope of the problem and actions needed to correct the leaks. Applicable permits will be required for these items. • Other violations that are generally easier or have shorter compliance times include repairing and/or replacing fire extinguisher box, interior wall, window trim carpeting, light globe, kitchen cabinet, bath fan, toilet lid, range hood filter, and patio door rollers; designating non - sleeping rooms; removing graffiti, and pest extermination. A reinspection date for these items is scheduled for January 31, 2011. Based on the number of property code violations, the property will qualify for a Type III license. Validated police calls will be considered when the license application is able to be considered by the Council that could result in a Type IV depending on the results. 3.. Criminal Activities and Police Calls. Since April 26, 2010 ten disorderly nuisances as defined in 12 -911 occurred. These incidents included two burglaries, two narcotics, three damage to properties, one curfew, one theft and one weapon incident. Total calls for service from April 26, 2010 to January 5, 2011 were 124 calls, compared to 154 from April 26, 2009 to January 1, 2010, a decrease of 19.4 %. Please note that the property has not been at full occupancy. Communication with the property management has improved with a recent hiring of an onsite manager. As part of the license process, other preventative measures will be reviewed and required as appropriate. 4. Other Property Information. �• On approximately December 28, 2010, staff was advised that the mortgage company, Beal Nevada Service Corporation, has contracted with Steven Scott Management to assess the condition and operations of the property. Policy Issues: What are the code considerations for license revocation and reinstatement? What are the policy and precedent implications? Council Goals: Strategic : - 1. We will ensure a safe and secure community 3. We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods Attachments: Council Resolution 2010 -77 i Member Timm ltocbe Wmdmedibofoiiowingmsoiutionandinoved its adoption: A RESOLUnONNO. L010 -77 RESOLU nON lt+l (3 FINDINGS OF FACT AND ORDER RELATiNOr TO ST PW SQ U ARE APARTMEM 14 .00 AND 14011 67TH AVMES NORTH AND 6W AND 6700 HUMBOLDT AVENIUM NORTH A headng was heldby the Bmklyn Cwter Cq Countit an the 12th day ofkpr% 2010, at 7'00 PM the Dxwkbu Cenftr City. Hall on the mailer ofthe renal licem of John Paul Rader for Sterling, Squm Apainmnts (1440 and 1401 67th Avenue North and 6640 SW 6700 Hun b0ldt Avenue North) pursuant to 'Sections 1 2.901 and 12 -914 of tt Brooklyn Center City 00&. C ity std p enting the alleg ed viola a I'eP im was rawated by William G. Clef d, Esq., Carson, ClaUnd. & SEchreder, Brooklyn Center„ Minnesota. The liownee did not appm, I . Having head ad dais' considered the wn*denm pracod at the boWn and having gin endue re-fwd I to the fmquemy and seriousness of the violation, the ease whin wWch thevicrl on cowd h4ve been j cured or avoided and good ft h elm to comply, the Council makes the follom*VIND1 'OS OF FACT and ORDER: Fink B40S OF FACT 4 1 JdWaul Roder is the holder of arwnlar rental licem forpmperfles located at 1400 and 1401— 671h Avenue North and 6640 and 67€16 Humboldt Avenue Nortls. 2. City Code Section 12 -901, paragiraj* 9 pwides that at all times during the term of a .tol lip, the licensee shall be current in ptymeats of ft=% aftes, and assessments. 3. Notio of this proposed Vi se awn was mailed to John Pmd Roder. 4. Received in evidence was a ropy of the W fice of proposed lioewe action and aloe left service the notice, and copies of Rmepin Camay tox payment swus and utik biWhS History. ' 5. The City Cletk testified that utility pqmelft totem over Ten 'Tlwumz dd DGUM ($14,d4t1iS) that had bm w4mid and deli rat at the timo of giving notice of the hearing had been paid by ft me and time of the hearing on April 12.20 1 0. except for .a bulance rernOning of $14,35 and that real estatg time's in the aw0wt of S35,055.41 win mpaid and delinquoni at the time and date of the heang. i . • TO RESOLUTION No. 2010- BASM UPON MM FNMOS the My Cecil nOW Msk" ft fOlOwmg ORDER 1, The mntdh'ousWz lice held by Jobn bul Roder far the remW dwelbp at 1400 aid 1441 — 67th Avmm Nor md 6640 mod, 6700 l dt Avenue North is heiaby wdk6t 146 app&afion it a raw lid sh l bee - gmted unlem a H payments am wftx m in acwr&m with CiV Cade, Sectim 12-901 v pmwWh9, NO appEc 1f►r a new 0cem wM be oossidered bY rise City Council unuI ApT47 lI , 2. This re~tocation applks to all parts of 1400 aftd 140!1 -- 67th Avenue Nam and 6640 and 6700 Humb Idt A.vmw NordL 3. Revocation si , be efee&e c* m Ap 27, 2010.4 C -� 4. The City Clerk is dire d W m04 a copy offt Resolution to the licensee, S __ m Hcamm is abbed that Bra ok �m Cent a MY Cm* x$12-910, P nMh 5, 'bits the reletom rend oraoupmcy ofren€a1 umis that vae a t t t cif onend/ xrtbathecomevac�t duringthe pedod oftcvocagonaduatil the lieensee has a.Va ud law Vie. . 6, The liomee ig ft&w aarlvi l tW Bmoldyn meter Cit Code, Suction 12 paragraph 8 also p ivides that iavmflon sbaP n*t ;the owner from e i'a ace with adf tamofstd law andcodes and the City Code ofO Land a$ =Y wilts in the & ily m oemoed: Fan tea comply *ith alt the term of the City Cow meter 12 daing the Um of bo *VOCOWn is amisdemeanror and g g rouwU for a docision not to issae a new limw. l ricneFR'CI Ynlr. PP3'r31A � e�nrmr. �irrrn�•rusrra.,urnam+r*m�r�� ueeern.ira�r �� •�•� m�a.>D.n+re4 �n>tx+u rr�7�'rtt+r 2 at'e�ry H2�- n+r..�nrsr r n.rem r r nR•* e � r PM ' NO, 20 -77 By r €tr City of a City of0r0*W Cenwr this 26th day of April., k 2010, , Date ATTEST'. Clly Oak ljo motion for e adoption of the hMojag iu tm vts ddy sewnded Y member di y Lziue and upon vote being taken thftOD, the follOydnig VOW iu fayOr dxemfi Tin Will - SQU, !Kay tastaa Tia Itbeheo DAM RYM, aid k aod the f voted aonA ft 0= a ; whereupon uid moludon was declared MY passed fend adapted. 4 • Work Session Agenda Item No. 3 • MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION • DATE: January 19, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk SUBJECT: Joint Meeting with Commission Members Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council discuss setting a date and time to meet with the City Advisory Commissions and Charter Commission. Background: On April 6, 2010, the City Council met in joint session in a reception -style setting with the City Advisory Commissions (Financial, Housing, Park and Recreation, and Planning) and Charter Commission. The meeting was held in Constitution Hall at the Community Center from 6 to 8 p.m. Each Commission Chair gave a five- minute presentation on what they accomplished in the last year and informed how they would like to contribute to the Council's adopted strategic goals. There was general consensus to continue to meet in joint session with commissions. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. • . Mission: Ensuring; an attractive, cleats, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust • Work Session Agenda Item No. 4 City of Brooklyn Center • Housing Improvement Area Policy 1. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is toes#ablish the City's position relating to the use of Housing Improvement Area (HIA)financing for private hopsin I mproveme nts.This policy shall be used as a guide in processing and reviewing_ applications requesting HIA financing, The City shall have the y of amending or waiving sections of this polic when determined necessary or appropriate. 2.AUTHORITY The City of Brooklyn Center has the authority to establish HIAs under Minnesota Statutes, sections 429A.11 to 428.21.Such authority expires June 30, 2013, subject to extension by future legislation. Within a HIA,the City has the authority to A. Define and assist in the financing of housing_ improvements for owner- occupied housing in the City. • B. Levy housing improvement fees. C. Issue bonds or advance funds through an internal loan to pay for housing improvements. The City Council has the authority to review each HIA petition,which includes scope of improvements, association's finances, long term financial plan and membership support. 3. ELIGIBLE USES OF HIA FINANCING As a matter of adopted policy,the City of Brooklyn Center will consider using HIA financing to assist private property owners only in those circumstances in which the proposed private projects address one or more of the following goals; A.To promote neighborhood stabilization and revitalization by the removal of blight and/or the upgrading of the existing housing stock in a neighborhood, B. To correct housing or building code violations as identified by the City Building Official. • City of Brooklyn Center HIA • C. To maintain or obtain FHA mortgage eligibility for a particular condominium or townhome associa tion or single family home within the designated HIA. D. To increase or prevent the loss of the tax base of the City in order to ensure the long terra ability of the City to provide adequate services for its residents. E, To stabilize or increase the owner occupancy level with a neighborhood or association. 4.HIA APPROVAL All HIA financed through the City of Brooklyn Center should meet the following minimum approval criteria. However, it should not be presumed that a project meeting these criteria would automatically be approved. Meeting these criteria creates no contractual rights on the part of any Association with the City. A. The project must be in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances, required changes in the Plan and Ordinances must be under active consideration by the City at the time of approval. • B. The HIA financing shall be provided within applicable state legislative restrictions, debt limit guidelines and other appropriate financial requirements and policies. C. The project should meet one or more of the above adopted HIA Goals as stated in Section 3 of this policy. D. The application for the creation of the HIA shall be from the Home Owner's Association (HO Aj. - , � E. The term on the HIA should be the shortest term possible while still making_ r s, the annual fee affordable to the Association members. If the HIA is financed through issuance of bonds, the bonds will mature in no later than 15 years. If the HIA is financed through a loan of other funds,the terms of the loan will be determined based on the facts of circumstances of that HIA. F. The Association in a HIA should provide adequate financial guarantee to ensure the repayment of the HIA financing and the performance of the 'L administrative requirements of the development agreement. Financial guarantees may include, but are not limited to the pledge of the Association's assets including reserves, operating funds and/or property. City of Brooklyn Center HIA G. The proposed project, including the use c of HIA financing, should be supported • by a petition of at least 56%of the owners within the Association requesting the creation of the HIA.The Association should include the results of any membership votes along with the petitions to create the area. H. The Association must have adopted a financial plan, prepared by an Independent third the party mutually acceptable to the Association, City Finance Director and HRA staff,that provides for the Association to finance maintenance and operations o the common elements with the Association and a long-range plan to conduct and finance capital improvements therein,which does not rely upon the subsequent use of the HIA tool. I. HIA financial assistance is considered 'last resort financing' and should not be Provided to projects that have the financial feasibility to proceed without the benefit of HIA financing. Evidence that the Association has sought other private financing for the project will be required and should include an explanation and verification that an assessment by the Association is not feasible along with at least two letters from private lenders or other evidence indicating a lack of financing options. J. The Association will be required to enter into-a development agreement and disbursement agreement, which may include, but is not limited to the following terms.: • Establishment.of a reserve fund Conditions of disbursements Required dues increases • Notification to new owners of levied fees • Staffing requirements for the Association related to third party involvement annual reporting requirements K. The improvements financed through the HIA should primarily be exterior improvements and internal improvements integral to the operation of the project, e.g. boilers. The improvements must be of a permanent nature.The Association must have a third party conduct a facility needs assessment to determine and prioritize the scope of improvements. L. HIA financing will not be provide d to those projects that fail to meet the goals and criteria set forth in this policy, as amended from time to time. M.The financial structure of the project must receive a favorable review by the City's Financial Advisor and Bond Counsel.The review will include a review of performance and level of outstanding debt of previous HIAs.. City of Brooklyn Center HIA • N,The average market value of units in the Association should not exceed the maximum home purchase price for existing homes under the State's first time homebuyer program, (in 2009,the metro amount is$29$,125). The Association will be required to pay all third, party costs incurred by the City of Brooklyn Center in connection with the HIA if the HIA does not go forward for any reason. If the HIA does party costs from the administrative charges described in section 5. - The Association will be required to enter into contracts for construction of the housing improvements, subject to review and approval of designs and specifications by the C it -y or BCHRA as the implementing entity, The Association will be required to demonstrate that it obtained at least three bids for work on the housing improvements and all contracts must be with contractors who are licensed and insured, 5 HIA FINANCING Appropriate methods for funding the improvements in an HIA include; AI City issued bond I -y i B. Existing City fund balances C. Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority fund balances The Association will pay the City an assessment fee of 29-6 of the total amount of project or the total amount of all third party costs,which is ever greater to c over minis Arative 04 costs.This a fee, or the City may elect mount maybe financed over by adding to the �y to finance the administrative charge through proceeds of bonds or an internal loan. The division of the costs for the proposed improvements (i.e how the fee is a d spre . to -- unit owners)shall follow the method utilized in the Association's by and declarations call for the fee to be imposed on a basis other than tax capacit y or square ' footage,the City Council must make a finding that the alternative basis is more fair and reasonable. 6.0 BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Staff from the Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority(BCHRA) along with the Cit y o Brooklyn Center Finance Director will be the primary staff persons . working on HIA requests. BCHRA funds may be utilized to fund the improvements to take place in a HIA if both t he City Council and the BCHRA Boards authorize the use of such funds. If it is determined that BCHRA funds will be used,the City Council will still be required to make the findings of need, regarding the creation of the HIA, adopt an ordinance establishing the HIA and designate the BCHRA as the implementing agency. City of Brooklyn Center HIA If the BCHRA is designated as the implementing agency, and once the appeal period • expires,the BCHRA Board shall hold a public hearing and consider the adoption of a fee resolution that divides the costs of the improvements to the individual owners, except that if the fee is imposed on a basis other than tax capacity or square footage,the City Council must make the finding described in section 5 of this policy. Adopted by the City of Brooklyn Center,on the Day of 2010 • • City of Brooklyn Center HIA T Y . the needs of the market. Mr. Boganey advised that is typically the way organized collection is carried out by a city. Councilmember/Commissioner Lasman supported first finding out whether organized collection was cost effective before spending staff time to develop a strategy. Mayor/President Willson stated it was the majority consensus of the Council/EDA to move forward and look further at the option of organized collection. Mr. Boganey stated staff will develop a strategy and method to determine cost comparisons for consideration by the Council/EDA at a future meeting. CITY HALL RETREAT Mr. Boganey requested Council/EDA direction on a date for the annual Council/Staff retreat when goals will be set and orientation provided for the newly elected Member. He stated staff would like to present year-end results at the Council/EDA's January Work Session. The Council/EDA discussed available dates and it was the majority consensus to schedule the annual Council/Staff retreat on either Saturday, February 12 or 26, 2011. The Council/EDA agreed with the suggestion of Mr. Boganey to use Mr. Salverda as the facilitator since he was already familiar with the City and would provide continuity. • Councilmember/Commissioner Roche suggested topics for discussion including the Opportunity Site redevelopment, City-wide open house working in tandem with the Minneapolis Realtors Association, and whether the Brooklyn Center school district should be folded. He noted the school district has had seven failed referendums and low test scores so it may be better for Brooklyn Center to align itself with a more successful school district. HOUSING IMPROVEMENT AREA POLICY Mr. Boganey requested Council/EDA direction regarding establishing a policy to govern the use of Housing Improvement Areas in the City. The creation of a district would allow the City to fund the cost of improvements to common elements of housing structures. He advised that the Mallard Creek Homeowners Association expressed an interest in establishing a Housing Improvement. Area. Mr. Boganey reviewed recent changes in the State Statute that raised threshold requirements and minimized the chance the project would not move forward. If approved, staff recommended 'a requirement for a 56% petition and waiver of veto rights to assure the project cannot be vetoed after the City has invested significant time and expense. It was noted this legislation will sunset in June of 2013. Mr. Boganey reviewed the process that would be used, noting it was fairly involved with strict time frames. The project would be funded through the sale of bonds and the costs assessed against the individual property owners to be paid with their taxes. If not paid, the assessment would become a lien against the property. Mr. Boganey noted that many of the City's 11/08/10 -2- townhomes are aging and this method may be the only option for some townhomes to finance • this type of improvements, especially in today's credit environment. Mayor/President Willson asked how the City would recoup staff and administration costs since multiple associations may request this program. Mr. Boganey advised those costs are fully recoverable and would be paid by the association by requiring the posting of a security or bond. Mayor/President Willson asked whether City staff would handle the administration of this process and purchasing bonds. If so, he asked what other tasks staff would not have time to do. Mr. Boganey stated an option is to hire a professional to handle the administration instead of using City staff. Bob Thistle introduced himself and stated this process provides an option for associations who have not put aside sufficient maintenance costs. However, the process is labor intensive, specific, and the statutes are very prescriptive in terms of what has to happen and deadlines. He explained that some cities have determined a flat percentage to cover administrative costs that is applied to the project. Another approach is to set it up as an independent cost center and track all staff time, but is more difficult. Mr. Thistle advised that the statutes are clear that an independent financial study must be completed that ascertains the association does not have the financial wherewithal in the normal market and"but for" the City's assistance, the project could not go ahead. He explained the process that would be followed once the financial study was completed. Mayor/President Willson asked who would qualify for the improvement and about units that have been foreclosed or under bank ownership. Mr. Thistle speculated that someone would still • have the ownership, even if the bank, and the City could levy a special assessment against that unit which would be paid when the unit is sold. He clarified that the assessment is against the property unit,not the individual. Mr. Boganey stated that the significant costs at the beginning of the process for the financial analysis and independent inspection would be borne by the association up front and not incurred by the City. He recommended the City indicate which firms could be used for the financial analysis. It was noted that the City's expenses would not start until later in the process. Mr. Thistle stated the association would be required to provide specific information on unit ownership. He explained that some cities fund the project through a housing fund or community development fund with repayment through assessments while other cities issue bonds. He indicated it would probably not have an impact on the City's bond rating. Mr. Boganey noted it is not unlike the City's typical street reconstruction projects where bonds are sold and the costs assessed. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated there is an interest in maintaining the City's housing stock, which includes townhomes and rental units, and asked if these projects could be funded through TIF District- 43. Mr. Boganey answered in the affirmative. Mr. Thistle stated the question is whether that is the best use of those TIF funds. • 11/08/10 -3- Councilmember/Commissioner Lasman asked how the Council/EDA would be assured the project is a good investment and the units were not in need of additional maintenance. Mr. Thistle explained a cost benefit analysis would assure a comprehensive inspection of all units, noting they can only use this method of funding once. Mayor/President Willson asked if an ordinance is needed for each association. Mr. Thistle stated an ordinance would cover an area that may include more than one association. Mayor/President Willson asked if there would be an impact to the City's total bonding authority. Mr. Boganey stated these projects will not have such an impact. Mr. Thistle concurred and advised this would use housing authority revenue bonds that would not count against the City's general obligation tax capacity unless the City has to put money into the project because people were not paying. Councilmember/Commissioner Yelich noted that most townhome associations have an organizational structure to collect and set aside funds to cover property maintenance issues. He asked if some townhome associations were irresponsible or their business model flawed. Councilmember/Commissioner Yelich noted that some projects the City has undertaken, like the Center Pointe property, have not been positive and he was hesitant for the City to get involved with an association that was not well managed. In addition, he was skeptical about financial analysts who speculate and make assumptions on what the future will bring but just want to get the project funded. Councilmember/Commissioner Yelich asked whether the City should be involved at all and if a private resident could request general obligation bonds to put new siding on their house. • Mr. Thistle explained that to participate in this program, the townhome associations would be required to give up its ability to be independent, an independent financial analysis would be required, and the City would decide if the project would move forward. In addition, each year of the assessment, the association is mandated, by statute, to prepare and submit independent financial studies to the City. Since the assessment is a lien against the property the City would be paid,even if someone"walks away,"when the property is resold. Councilmember/Commissioner Yelich expressed concern that the City will have to wait for payment, impacting cash flow, due to the high number of units on the market. Mr. Thistle explained that the unit owner has to make payment for four years or the property would go to the City and banks have historically paid the taxes because it doesn't want to lose the property. Mr. Boganey stated if the Council/EDA decides to move forward with this program, it would be for the purpose of preserving the City's housing stock and may achieve a second strategic goal of preserving the neighborhood. Councilmember/Commissioner Roche asked if the association is empowered to take the unit owner to court and file a lien if an individual owner is not current with payments. Mr. Boganey stated the association may have some rights if an owner is not meeting its obligation but that is aside from the assessment which would be paid through taxes. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated both Mr. Thistle and Mr. Boganey have indicated that the City has means of recovering cost through assessments as long as a 56% petition and 11/08/10 -4- waiver of veto rights is required. He felt it was not a matter of past failures but the need to assure maintenance of the City's housing stock and avoiding blighted conditions. • Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated on that basis, and subject to obtaining more specific information,he is willing to consider this program. Councilmember/Commissioner Lasman stated there is always some risk involved in this type of project but she supported moving forward, to operate it conservatively with checks and balances in place, noting it will avoid larger problems later on. She suggested consideration of a higher percentage requirement, 60%,to assure unit owners were more committed,became stakeholders, and were committed to the project. Mayor/President Willson stated his support to move forward subject to addressing concerns to not subsidize, assure the City can recoup all costs,and not put the City at risk. Councilmember/Commissioner Yelich stated he remains very hesitant, felt it would be better to let the market deal with these issues, and did not think assumptions were necessarily true. He did not believe the City should be getting in the business of providing financial services because private companies already provide financing. Councilmember/Commissioner Yelich stated it is the City's business to put standards in place, impose and enforce those standards, but not to finance them. Mr. Thistle stated if authorized, the next step would be for staff to review the policies of other cities to be sure the expectations are clear from both sides. He acknowledged that questions remain to be answered including the matter of associations that have a high percentage of rentals. • Mr. Boganey stated the "but for" test is very important and gets to the concerns expressed by Councilmember/Commissioner Yelich. He clarified that if the private sector will respond to the. need,the Statute indicates the City cannot move forward with that project. It was the majority consensus of the Council/EDA to direct staff to draft a policy to govern the I se of Housing Improvement Areas, established under Minnesota Statutes, Section 428A for consideration by the CounciVEDA. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember/Commissioner Lasman moved and Councilmember/Commissioner Roche seconded adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at , 9:01 P.M. Motion passed unanimously. • 11/08/10 -5- • STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) ss. Certification of Minutes CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER) The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota, certifies: 1. That attached hereto is a full, true, and complete transcript of the minutes of a Work Session of the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center held on November 8,2010. 2. That said meeting was held pursuant to due call and notice thereof and was duly held at Brooklyn Center City Hall. 3. That the City Council adopted said minutes at its November 22,2010, Regular Session. City Clerk Mayor i 11/08/10 -6- MEMORANDUM- COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE:November 4,2010 i TO: City Council FROM: Curt Bogariey,City Manarrl�$ SUBJECT: Housing Improvement Area Recommendation: It'is recommended that the City Council consider providing direction to staff regarding establishing a Policy to govern the use Housing Improvement Areas in the City Of Brooklyn Center.. Background: Several months ago I met with the Mallard Creek Homeowners Association, which expressed.an. interest in have the City establish a Housing Improvement Area established under Minnesota Statutes, Section 428A. The creation of a district would allow the City fund the cost of improvements to the common elements of housing structures in the area. The association indicating that there primary interest was in gaining a way to fund siding for the housing in the association. If a district is established the City would be authorized to sell bonds and to collect repayment as an assessment on the properties benefiting. I have attached a copy of an overview of the law.This law was recently amended in 2010,so that the • petitioning percentages have increased. The law has also been extended to sunset in 2013. As you can see this is fairly extensive set of procedures with very strict time frames. Most critical in our view is that the Statute allows for an ordinance veto by 45%of the owners long after significant effort and costs have been incurred. For this reason we recommend a 566/6 petition and a waiver of veto rights requirement from at least 56%of the area owners. Policy Issues: 1. Is the policy needed in order to achieve the Council strategic goal of stable improved neighborhoods? 2. If a policy is adopted,what should be the minimum petition requirements? 3. Should there be a waiver of veto requirement? 4. Are there additional procedural requires needed? Council Goals: Strategic Goal supported by this consideration: We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods I enclosures i Mission:Ensuring an attractive,clean,sole community that enhances the quality of life and preserver the public trust • HOUSING RAPROVEMENT AREAS C. The 1996 Minnesota State Legislature enacted a law intended to provide cities with a means of assisting homeowners associations,and the owners of housing units within the associations,in paying the costs of housing improvements made to the common elements of the development. In order for a city to provide such assistance,the City Council must first designate the area in which the improvements are to be made as a Housing Improvement Area. Toe law,Minnesota.Statutes, Sections 428A.11 to 428A.21 (copy enclosed),can seem complex at tunes. The following-information is intended to assist in the understanding of that legislation and the process that must be followed if a Housing Improvement Area is to be designated. 1. What is a Housing Improvement Area. A Housing Improvement Area is a designated portion of the City in which housing improvements are financed,in whole or in part,. with public hinds that are repaid by fees imposed against the benefitted housing units much in . the same manner as property taxes or special assessments. The law is designed to assist areas where common elements of a development are maintained by condominium or home owners associations. 2. What types of improvements can be included. The enabling law seems to intend that the improvements are to be made to the common elements of the housing structures, although under proper circumstances the City Council may consider including other common • elements such as common,private drives,provided those elements constitute a necessary part of C the development. "Common Elements"are those maintenance and capital improvement items which are the.responsibility of the association and not the individual home owners. 3. When is a Housing Improvement Area designation appropriate. The City Council can establish a Housing Improvement Area only if it finds: a. That the proposed improvements to the common elements are immediately necessary to maintain and preserve the housing units. b. The home owners association treasury balance is grossly inadequate to finance the needed improvements and no other financing tool is reasonably available to the association or the individual owners of the housing units. 4. Steps an association should take to be considered for Housing Improvement Area designation. a. The first step is for the association membership to meet and determine to the extent reasonably possible,the needed improvements to the common elements. b. The next step is to obtain a reasonable estimate or estimates of the total costs of those improvements. c. Once the costs have been estimated,the association should investigate all - reasonable means of financing the improvements including any balance in the association treasury,additional fees imposed on the unit owners,private financing by the association and/or the individual owners,and any other possible housing improvement assistance. d. If all other means of financing the improvements are unsuccessful,a petition i signed by the owners of at least 25%of the housing units to be included in the proposed • area may be filed with the City Clerk requesting the City to designate the development as Area. The petition should also request a public hearing on the a Housing Improvement p req. imposition of a fee to pay for those improvements. A suggested petition form is enclosed. 5. What happens after an adequate petition is filed. a. The petition is presented to the City Council who determines whether it contains all the required elements under the law and whether it contains at least the minimum number of required signatures. If the petition is found to be adequate,it is accepted by the City Council and a date for a public hearing is set. b. Prior to the public hearing,the city staff prepares a preliminary listing of the improvements proposed to be made. This list will require City employees to view and , inspect the property and discuss the problems with owners and/or members of the. association. c. At the hearing staff will present its findings-and owners will have an opportunity to present relevant testimony and issues relaxed to the proposed area_ The heming-is intended to assist the City Council in determining the proper boundaries of the area,the extent of the necessary improvements,and that there are no other available financing methods. The hearing may be continued over several meetings if necessary. d. If the City Council makes the required findings of need,it,will adopt an ordinance establishing a Housing Improvement Area. The ordinance will,among other things;.designate the area,establish the improvements to be made,and determine the .basis for the imposition of the fees. Fees may be based on the tax capacity-of each unit, the_square footage of each.unit or some other method as determined by the.City Council such as per unit. Pursuant to the Brooklyn Center City Charter,the ordinance is. introduced at a Council meeting and then cannot be adopted for at least seven days after it is introduced. Under the State law,the ordinance takes effect 35 days after adoption. The ordinance must be adopted within six months of the close of the public hearing. e. After the ordinance is adopted,the City will work with the association to determine through estimates,bids, and similar methods the costs of the improvements.. The.association is required to follow the Uniform Municipal Contracting Law,Minn. Stat. Section 471.345. The City will consult with the association on these requirements. .. as needed. f. Once the costs have been determined to the extent possible a second public hearing is held at which time the owners may discuss the proposed fees in general,or . they.may question the fee proposed to be imposed against their individual unit. Within six months of the closing of this public hearing,the City Council will adopt a resolution imposing the fee. This fee may not exceed the amount stated in the hearing notice,but it may be less. The fees to be imposed are to be at a rate,term or amount sufficient to produce revenues required to make the improvements. The resolution takes effect 45 days after it is adopted The fees will include an administrative charge and will be collected along with property taxes for the number of years established in the resolution- . The fee may,however,be prepaid in full to avoid the payment of interest. E' ,� i 6. Recourse of Owners who disagree with the designation of the area or the imposition of the fee. a. Before the ordinance is adopted,any owner may file a written objection claiming that the owner's property may be in the area or subject tothe fee. The City Council then has 60 days to make a determination on this objection The Council's determination maybe appealed to the District Court. b. After an ordinance or fee resolution is.adopted,if owners of 350K of the l o properties located in the designated area file an objection to the ordinance or the fee 'resolution before the effective date,the ordinance or the resolution does not become effective. For this reason,the City will want to be assured that the fees will be imposed before proceeding with the improvements. 7. Obligations of the owners and the association after designation of a Housing Improvement Area. a. Obviously,all parties need to cooperate with each other so the improvements can be made or constructed in a timely fashion b. The State law requires that before the City Council may adopt a fee resolution, the association must submit a financial plan to the City. This plan has to be prepared by an independent third party acceptable to both the association and the City. A plan prepared by the association does not meet the requirements of the law. This plan must demonstrate how the association will be able to finance the maintenance and operation of the common elements of the development,and also demonstrate how the association will • be able to conduct and finance capital improvements in the future. Without-this plan the City would not proceed with the improvements. Owners should be aware that compliance with the plan may result in higher association payments in addition to the fees. Failure to comply with the program could be grounds for disqualifying the area from future assistance in this program. c. On or before August 15'h of each year,the association must provide the City with a copy of its audited financial statements. The City,as part of the original ordinance,may require the submission of additional information as.well. 8: How long does a Housing Improvement Area designation last? The State law is not clear as to when and if a Housing Improvement Area designation expires. The law does currently provide that no new Housing Improvement Areas can be created after June 30,2013 unless the City receives special legislation authorizing establishment of the area. The area will remain in effect at least as long as the term of the payment of fees. However,the requirement of a financial plan under §428A.14 of the law seems to suggest that the intent of the Legislature was to provide a tool to be used to assist an association only during a particularly tough time but it is not'to be'used several times at the same location Questions regarding Housing Improvement Areas maybe addressed to: • DRAFT CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING IMPROVEMENT AREAS PROCEDURES 1. RECEIVE PETITION --Signed by owners of at least 56%(50%Statutory Minimum)of housing units within proposed area --Obtain names and addresses of all owners in the area(Assessing) ` —Notify Finance Department Notify Inspections 2. PLACE PETITION ON NEXT COUNCIL AGENDA --Memo to Council with map of the area --Prepare public hearing notices re: establishment of the area --Individual in charge of project to contact Inspections 3. COUNCIL ACCEPTS PETITION AND ORDERS PUBLIC HEARING --Mail hearing notice to all owners $ Notice to include: time,date and place of hearing and statement that all persons subject to the fee will be heard $ Attach map of the boundaries of the proposed area $ "Owners"are those persons shown on records of County auditor,or • equivalent,but other records may be used $ at least 1.0 days before hearing $ include that Association will contact for the work $ include City intends to loan the association funds to complete the project and loan will be repaid by property owners in the improvement area. $ that the terms of the loan will be disclosed prior to the passing of the ordinance establishing the HIA $ that all City costs will be paid by the Association --Publish notice of hearing $ Notice to include: time,date,and place of hearing and statement that all persons subject to the fee will be heard $ At least 7 days before hearing 4. PREPARE ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH AREA FOR PUBLIC HEARING --Ordinance to include: $ Description of portion of the city included in the area $ Basis for the imposition of the fees. . $ Number of years fees will be in effect $ A fmcling that without the Housing Improvement Area the improvements could not be made . $ A finding the designation is necessary to preserve the units • • 5. COUNCIL HOLDS PUBLIC HEARING C --Hearing is to include $ Listing of necessary improvements $ Identify the improvements to the common elements $ List of units where the improvements have been made and are exempt from the fee 6. COUNCIL INTRODUCES ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE AREA 7. COUNCIL ADOPTS ORDINANCE --At least 7 days after introduction --Memo to Council --Majority of all members(3)needed to adopt --Must be adopted within six months after hearing is closed --Effective daze is 45 days after adoption 8. COPY OF ORDINANCE(OR SUMMARY)SENT TO EACH OWNER —Within 5 days after adoption. --Include notice that ordinance can be vetoed if owners of at least 45%o of the units file written objections with the City Clerk before the ordinance takes effect. 9. COPY OF ORDINANCE SENT TO STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE • --Within 30 days after adoption C 10. DETERMINATION OF CONTRACTORS AND LIAISON --Association works with Inspections 11. FINANCIAL PLAN "Prepared for the Housing Improvement Area by independent third party acceptable to City --Include: $ Method for financing the maintenance and operation of the common elements $ Long range plan to conduct and finance future capital improvements --Must be completed before fee resolution can be considered 12. DETERIyiINE AMOUNT TO BE COLLECTED BY FEES (ASSESSMENTSI --Total amount of contracts --City assessment fee(2.4%but not to exceed$500 per unit) --Amount to be paid by each unit —Interest rate(current special assessment rate) 13. COUNCIL SETS DATE FOR HEARING ON FEES --Resolution and memo to Council i 14. PREPARE NOTICE OF HEARING --Date,time,and place of hearing --Estimated total cost of improvements --amount to be charged to each unit --Right to pay entire fee :Number of years fee will be in effect --Interest rate --Statement that initial petition requirements of M.S. §428A.12 have been met or do not apply -Right of all interested parties to be heard 15. MAIL NOTICE TO OWNERS --At least seven days before hearing 16. PUBLISH HEARING NOTICE --At least seven days before hearing 17. PREPARE FEE RESOLUTION --Include list of units subject to fees and amount attributable to each unit --Memo to Council 18. COUNCIL CONDUCTS HEARING ON FEE RESOLUTION --Take citizen comments and rules on objections • 19. COUNCIL ADOPTS FEE RESOLUTION --Within six months after close of hearing --Copy to owners within five days of adoption --Include notice that resolution can be vetoed by the owners of at least 45%of the units file objections with the City Clerk before effective date --Effective date is 45 days after adoption 20. PROCEED WITH PROJECT --After fee resolution takes effect --May be sooner if owners of more than 55%of the units sign waivers of veto rights 21. PROJECT FINANCING --After all components of an approved project have been contracted for the City, --may issue obligations for financing total project cost --Obligations are paid out of fee charge the member of the Associations or through special assessments. --City may use full faith and credit of the City to secure the obligation --Such obligations are not consider net debt of the City 7 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2010 428A.12 (2)in the case of operating and maintenance services,the maximum service charge to be imposed in any year and the maximum number of years,or a statement that the service charge will be imposed for an indefinite number of years,the service charges will be imposed to pay for operation and maintenance services. The resolution may provide that the maximum service charge to be imposed in any year will increase or decrease from the maximum amount authorized in the preceding year based on an indicator of increased cost or a percentage amount established by the resolution: History: 1988 c 719 art 14 s 10; 2009 c 88 art 6 s 11 428A.101 DEADLINE FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT UNDER GENERAL LAW. The establishment of a new special service district after June 30,2013,requires enactment of a special law authorizing the establishment. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 6;2000 c 493 s 4; 2005 c 152 art 1 s 10;2009'c 88 art 2 s 27 HOUSING IMPROVEMENT AREAS 428A.11 HOUSING IMPROVEMENT AREAS;DEFINITIONS. Subdivision 1.Applicability.As used in sections 428A.11 to 428A.20,the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them. Subd.2. City. "City" means a home rule charter or statutory city. Subd. 3.Enabling ordinance."Enabling ordinance"weans the ordinance adopted by the _ • city council establishing the housing improvement area. C Subd. 4. Housing improvements. "Housing improvements" has the meaning given in the city's enabling ordinance.Housing improvements may include improvements to common . elements of a condominium or other common interest community. Subd. 5.Housing improvement area."Housing improvement area" means a defined area within the city where housing improvements are made or constructed and the costs of the improvements are paid in whole or in part from fees imposed within the area. Subd. 6.Housing unit. "Housing unit"means real property and improvements thereon consisting of a one-dwelling upit, or an apartment or unit as described.in chapter 515, S 15A,or 515B,respectively,that is occupied by a person or family for use as a residence. Subd. 7. Authority. "Authority"means an economic development authority or housing and redevelopment authority created pursuant to section 469.003,469.004,or 469.091 or another entity.authorized by law to exercise the powers of an authority created pursuant to one of those sections. Subd. 8. Implementing entity. "Implementing entity" means the city or authority designated in the enabling ordinance as responsible for implementing.and administering the housing improvement area. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 7, 1999 c 11 art 3 s 13,14;2000 c 490 art 11,s 2,3 428A.12 PETITION REQUIRED. No action may be taken ender sections 428A.13 and 428A.14 unless owners of 50 percent or more of the housin g J units that would be subject to fees in the proposed housing improvement i State of Minnesota.All Rights Reserve the visor of Statutes Bh d.the Office of a Re ,S Copyright®2 Ol 0 b y ffi 8 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2010 428A.13 area file a petition requesting a public hearing on the proposed action with the city clerk.No action may be taken under section 428A.14 to impose a fee unless owners of 50 percent or more of the housing units subject to the proposed fee file a petition requesting a public hearing on the proposed fee with the city clerk or other appropriate official. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 8; 2010 c 389 art I s 22 428A13 ESTABLISHMENT OF HOUSING BIPROVEMENT AREA. Subdivision 1. Ordinance.The governing body of the city may adopt an ordinance establishing one or more housing improvement areas.The ordinance must specifically describd the portion of the city to be included in the area,the basis for the imposition of the fees, and the number of years the fee will be in effect.In addition,the ordinance must include findings that without the housing improvement area,the proposed improvements could not be made by the condominium associations or housing unit owners,and the designation is needed to maintain and preserve the housing units within the housing improvement area.The ordinance shall designate the implementing entity.The ordinance may not be adopted until a public hearing has been held regarding the ordinance. The ordinance may be amended by the governing body of the city, provided the governing body complies with the public hearing notice provisions of subdivision 2. Within 30 days after adoption of the ordinance under this subdivision,the governing body shall send a copy of the ordinance to the commissioner of revenue. Subd. Ia.Prerequisites for establishing.Prior to establishment of a housing improvement area,the governing body of the city must: (1)provide full disclosure of public expenditures,as well as the terms of any loans;bonds, or other financing arrangements for housing improvement area projects; and • (2)determine whether the association or the implementing entity will contract for the housing improvements, and ensure that any contracts made by the implementing entity are subject to section 471.345: Subd.2.Public hearing.The notice of public hearing must include the time and place of hearing, a map showing-the boundaries of the proposed area, and a statement that all persons owning housing units in the proposed area that would be subject to a fee for housing improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard at the hearing.Notice of the hearing must be given by publication in the official newspaper of the city.The public hearing must be held at least-seven days after the publication.Not less than ten days before the hearing,notice must also be mailed to the owner of each housing unit within the proposed area.l~or the purpose of giving mailed notice,owners are those shown on the records of the county auditor.Other records"may be used to supply the necessary information. At the public hearing'a person owning property in the proposed housing improvement area may testify on any issues relevant to the proposed area. The hearing may be adjourned from time to time. The ordinance establishing the area may be adopted at any time within six months after the date of the conclusion of the hearing by a vote of the majority of the governing body of the city. Subd.3.Proposed housing improvements.At the public hearing held under subdivision 2, the proposed implementing entity shall provide a preliminary listing of the housing improvements to be made in the area. The listing shall identify those improvements, if any,that are proposed to be made to all or a portion of the common elements of a condominium.The listing shall also identify those housing units that have completed the proposed housing improvements and are proposed to be exempted from a portion of the fee.In preparing the list the proposed implementing • Copyright 0 2010 by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota-All Rights Reserved 9 M iNESOTA STATUTES 2010 428A.14 entity shall consult with the residents of the.area and the condorninium associations. Subd. 4. Benefit; objection.Before the ordinance is adopted or at the hearing at which it is to be adopted,the owner of a housing unit in the proposed housing improvement area may file a written objection with the city clerk asserting that the owner's property should not be included in the area or should not be subjected to a fee and objecting to the inclusion of the housing unit in the area,for the reason that the property would not benefit from the improvements. The governing body shall make a determination of the objection within 60 days of its filing. Pending its determination,the governing body may delay adoption of the ordinance or it may adopt the ordinance with a reservation that the landowner's property may be exchided from the housing improvement area or fee when the determination is made. Subd. 5.Appeal to district court.Within 30 days after the determination of the objection, any person aggrieved,who is not precluded by failure to object before or at the hearing,or whose failure to object is due to-a reasonable cause,may appeal to the district court by.sery 9 a notice upon the mayor or city clerk.The notice shall be filed with the court administrator of the district court within ten days after its service.The city clerk shall furnish the appellant.a ceriified copy of the findings and determination of the governing body.The court may affirm the action objected to or,if the appellant's objections have merit,modify or cancel it.If the appellant.does not prevail upon the appeal,the costs incurred are taxed to the appellant by the court and judgment entered -for them.All objections are deemed waived unless presented on appeal. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 9;2000 c 490 art 11 s 4,3;2009 c 88 art 2 s 28 428A.14 D PROVEMENT FEES AUTHORITY; NOTICE AND HEARING. • Subdivision 1.Authority.Fees may be imposed by the implementing entity on the housing units within the housing improvement area at.a rate,term, or amount sufficient to produce- revenue required to provide housing improvements in the area to reimburse the.implementing entity for advances made to pay for the housing improvements or to pay principal of,interest on,and premiums;if any,on.bonds issued by the implementing entity under section 428A.16. The fee can be imposed on the basis of the tax capacity of the housing unit,or the total amount of square footage of the housing unit,or a method determined by the council and specified in the resolution.If a fee is imposed on a basis other than the tax capacity or'square footage of the housing unit,:the council must make a finding that the alternative basis for the fee is more fair and reasonable.Before the imposition of the fees,a hearing must be held and notice must be published in the official newspaper at least seven days before the hearing and shall be mailed at least seven days before the hearing to any housing unit owner subject to a fee.For purposes of this section,.the notice must-also include: (1) a statement that all interested persons will be given an.opportunity to be heard at the hearing regarding a proposed housing improvement fee; (2)the estimated cost of improvements including administrative costs to be paid for in... whole or in part by the fee imposed under the ordinance; (3)the amount to be charged against the particular property; (4)the right of the property owner to prepay the entire fee; (5)the number of years the fee will be in effect; and (6) a statement that the petition requirements of section 428A.12-have either been met or do not apply to the proposed fee: C Copyright 0 2010 by the Office of the Revisor.of Statutes,State of Minnesota.All Rights Reserved. 10 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2010 428A.17 Within six months of the public hearing,the implementing entity may adopt a resolution imposing a fee within the area not exceeding the amount expressed in the notice issued under this section. Prior to adoption of the resolution approving the fee,the condominium associations located in the housing improvement area shall submit to the implementing entity a financial plan prepared by an independent third party, acceptable to the-implementing entity and associations, that provides for the associations to finance maintenance and operation of the common elements in the condominium and a long-range plan to conduct and finance;capital improvements. Subti.2.Levy limit.Fees imposed under this section are not included in the calculation of levies or limits on levies imposed under any law or charter. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 10,2000 c 490 art 11 s 6,2009 c 88 art 2 s 29 428A.15 COLLECTION OF FEES. The implementing entity may provide for the collection of the housing improvement fees according to the terms of section 428A.05. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 11; 2000 c 490 art 11 s 7 428A.16 BONDS. At any time after a contract for the construction of all or part of an improvement authorized under sections 428A.I I to 428A.20 has been entered into or the work has been ordered,the implementing entity may issue obligations in the amount it deems necessary to defray in whole or in part the expense incurred and estimated to be incurred in making the improvement,including . every item of cost from inception to completion and all fees and expenses incurred in connection . with the improvement or the financing. The obligations are payable primarily out of the proceeds of the fees imposed under section 428A.14,or from any other special assessments or revenues available to be pledged for their payment under charter or statutory authority,or from two or more of those sources.The governing body of the city,or if the governing bodies are the same or consist of.identical membership, the authority may,by resolution adopted prior to the sale of obligations,pledge the full faith, credit,and taxing power of the city to bonds issued by it to ensure payment of the principal and interest if the proceeds of the fees in the area are insufficient to pay the principal and interest.The obligations must be issued in accordance with chapter 475,except that an election is not required, and the amount of the obligations are not included in determination.of the net debt of the city under the provisions of any law or charter limiting debt. E History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 12; 2000 c 490 art 11 s 8 ' i 428A.17 ADVISORY BOARD. The implementing entity may create and appoint an advisory board for the housing improvement area in the city to advise the implementing entity in connection with the planning and construction of housing improvements. In appointing the board,the implementing entity shall consider for membership members of condominium associations located in the housing improvement area. The advisory board shall make recommendations to ttie implementing entity to provide improvements or impose fees within the housing improvement area.Before the �.. adoption of a proposal by the implementing entity to provide improvements within the housing Copyright®2010 by the 0ficx of the Revisor of Statutes,State of Minnesota All Rights Reserved. F 11 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2010 428A.21 • improvement area,the advisory board of the housing improvement area shall have an opportunity to review and comment upon the proposal. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 13;2000 c 490 art 11 s 9 -428A.18 VETO POWERS. Subdivision 1. Notice of right to file objections.The effective date of,any ordinance or resolution adopted under sections 428A.13 and 428A.14 must be at least.45 days after it- is adopted.Within five days after adoption of the ordinance or resolution,a summary of the . ordinance or resolution shall be mailed to the owner of each housing unit included in the multiunit housing improvement area.The mailing shall include a notice that owners subject to a fee have a right to veto the ordinance or resolution by filing the required number of objections with the city clerk before the effective date of the ordinance or resolution and that a copy of the ordinance or resolution is on file with the city clerk for public inspection.. Subd.2.Requirements for veto.If residents of 45 percent or more of the housing units in the area subject to the fee file an objection to the ordinance adopted by the city under section 428A.13 with the city clerk before the effective date of the ordinance,the ordinance does not become effective.If owners of 45 percent or more of the housing units'tax capacity subject to the fee under section 428A.14 file an objection with the city clerk before the effective date of the resolution,the resolution does not become effective. History- 1996 c 471 art 8 s 14; 2010 c 389 art 1 s 23 428A.19 ANNUAL REPORTS. Each condominium association located.within the housing improvement area must,by �- August 15 annually,submit a copy of its audited financial statements to the implementing entity. The city may also,as part of the enabling ordinance,require the submission of other relevant information from the associations. History: 1.996 c 471 art 8 s 15;2000 c 490 art 11 s 10 428A.20 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. Within a housing improvement area,the governing body of the city may,in addition to the fee authorized,in section 428A..14,special assess housing improvements to benefited property. The governing body of the city may by ordinance adopt regulations consistent with this section. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 16 428A.21 DEADLINE FOR HOUSING IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS UNDER GENERAL LAW. The establishment of a new housing improvement area after June 30;2013,requires enactment of a special law authorizing the establishment of the area. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 17;2000 c 490 art Hs 11; 2005 c 152 art 1 s 11;2009 c 88 art 2s30 : Copyright 0 2010 by the 0 pe of the Revisor of Statntes;State of.Minnesota.All Rights Reserved. Work Session Agenda Item No. 5 MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION . DATE: January 21, 2011 TO: City Council FROM: Curt Boganey, City Manae .4 SUBJECT: Shingle Creek Crossings Redevelopment Project Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider providing direction to staff regarding the outlined Public Assistance Arrangement tentatively reached with Gatlin Development Company for the redevelopment of Brookdale Mall. Background: Frank Gatlin of Gatlin Development is the owner of the old Macy's building and has a purchase agreement to buy the balance of Brookdale Mall except for the Sears Building and Midas Building. Mr. Gatlin has prepared a draft redevelopment proposal for a new and renovated retail shopping center that would replace the existing Mall. This redevelopment includes demolition of the • Macy Building and all of the older sections of the mall. The draft redevelopment plan includes a Walmart Super Center and several Junior Box stores. In addition the plan includes several smaller retail and restaurant sites in a "Town Center" layout. The plan also includes a shingle creek day lighting element,trials and ornamental street lighting and streetscaping Mr. Gatlin will be at the worksession and he will provide a brief overview of the current draft plan. Over the last several weeks staff along with our consultants from Springsted reviewed the financial data and we have determined that the project does meet the "but for'test to qualify for econmic assistance. The basis for this conclusion is that the developer at this time has one certain tenant. All other tenants are speculative at this point. Given the inherent market risks,the developer has determined it would be imprudent to proceed with the project as it is designed without public assistance. The primary purpose of the proposed assistance is to assure timely completion of the project and to assure that certain public benefit elements are included in the project such as the creek day-lighting,town square design, streetscape improvement, and trails. Policy Issues: Is the proposed economic assistance reasonable and necessary? Are there improvement to economic assistance outline needed? Council Goals: Hission:Ensuring an attractive,clean,safe community that enhances the quality of life andpreserves the public trust MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION Select not more than two. • Strategic: 1. We will aggressively proceed with implementation of City's redevelopment plans • Mission:Ensuring an attractive,clean,safe community that enhances the qualih,of life andpreserves the public trust • Factors Involved in the Structuring of a Tax Increment Assistance Package • Springsted's analysis: a three year build out will generate approximately$12.5 M during the life of a 16 year Renewal &Renovation District. This increment has a current value of$7 M. • This analysis includes the city retaining 10 percent (approximately$1.4 M) over the life of the District. • The Renewal and Renovation District includes the opportunity to capture an additional 15%of the increment from this development (which occurs within the first five years) that could be used by the EDA for other projects. • The 1St phase development Wal-Mart, the Mall Renovation, and base land value at$5 per sq. ft.,will generate sufficient revenues to cover a G.O. TIF Bond in the range of$2.2 to $2.5 M(pending tax status of the bond). • The developer will provide financial assurance that the annual bonds will be paid. • The City has sufficient reserves within TIF 2 to advance/loan $2 M for the redevelopment of the Brookdale Site. Framework of the Assistance Package: The proposed assistance package includes 3 components: 1. EDA provides $3.3 M for public purpose costs to ensure the timely redevelopment of the site and completion of the features prioritized by the EDA. Eligible costs are being further defined; however, payment of these funds will be to reimburse specific costs (non-WalMart lot and building costs) such as: a) Day lighting of the Creek&relocation of the Shingle Creek Regional Trail b) Interior access drives and streetscaping to shape the image of a Town Center: Walkways and trail Street &Pedestrian lighting Boulevard Treatment & Site Landscaping c) Redevelopment costs (non-WalMart lot and building costs) such as: - extraordinary soil corrections, extraordinary demolition and environmental clean up costs - sanitary sewer&water utilities, - storm water runoff/management - and other site improvements approved by the EDA 2. A collateralized $1 M forgivable loan having a term of five years with an interest rate of 6% (City's CIP assessment rate). The loan amount will be available upon the execution of the Tax Increment Development Agreement which will limit the use of these funds to eligible • public purpose costs and acquisitions, exclusive of WalMart related costs. After five years the total percentage of the project that has been developed will be deducted to determine the amount of the loan repayment. Interest is then calculated on the remaining balance of the loan. (i.e. if 80 percent of the project is completed, then 80% of the loan will be forgiven with the developer repaying the remaining 20% of the loan ($200,000) and five years of interest— [6%x $200,000=$12,000 x 5 years=$60,000] or a total of$260,000.) This loan is an inter-fund loan which is reimbursed to the EDA from the Tax Increment revenue generated from the 2"d phase of the Shingle Creek Crossing Development. 3. The EDA's lot will be included in the development of Shingle Creek Crossing PUD using the following formula: - A purchase price based on the current appraised value of the lot(assuming 90 days of market exposure). - The appraised value (i.e. $300,000) is considered a deferred loan that would be forgiven in the event the developer is successful in acquiring and including the Midas site into this overall PUD concept. - In the event the Midas site has not been incorporated and developed as part of the PUD within 5 years (as either additional building or required parking) the developer agrees to pay the EDA the previous appraised value and interest at 6 percent. The sales/conveyance of this lot will occur after the developer has provided and the EDA has approved a specific commercial use and site development plans. • • p F +� Be y y' �F 1� qw l� � e F Shingle Creek Crossing (Brookdale Mall Redevelopment) Financing Gap Analysis City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota DRAFT January 10, 2011 I Table of Contents 1 PURPOSE..........................................................................................1 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................2 3 THE PROJECT....................................................................................3 i 4 PROJECT COSTS...............................................................................5 5 ASSISTANCE REQUEST............................. :..........................8 6 TAX INCREMENT REVENUE PROJECTIONS..=. 9 7 PROJECT FINANCING........... ......... .................................. '.,.........11 a.s 8 INTERNAL RATE OF RETURN ANALYSIS :: b .............12 10 CONCLUSION ........... .........v :F . . ........ ..............15 APPENDIX I--TIF ASSUMPTIONS AND PROJECTIONS �. • APPENDIX II--GR NFIELD G 1 ANALYSIS.............................................18 `? $z ` a.. a.;. :: ... qa4 y: Mission Statement Springsted provides high quality, independent financial and management advisory services to public and non-profit organizations, and works with them in the long-term process of building their communities on a fiscally sound and well-managed basis. i Purpose 1. Purpose The report and findings that follow evaluate the proposed redevelopment of the Brookdale Mall by Gatlin Development Company (the "Applicant") and their request for Tax Increment Financing(TIF) assistance to determine the existence of a financing gap. The Brooklyn Center City Council will need to make a finding that "the proposed redevelopment would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future," if they desire to establish a Tax Increment Financing District befitting the proposed project. The existence of a financing gap could provide justification for this required statement to establish a Tax Increment Financxn '(TIF)District. x. �t �£: Y V� ', 9�=v n .. Y City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. Executive Summary 2 2. Executive u • S mmary Gatlin Development Company (the "Applicant') proposes to redevelop the Brookdale Mall, excluding the Sears department store, for a total estimated development cost of $100,325,178. They estimate their costs will total $51,379,942; the remainder of the costs will be borne by Walmart and third parties constructing restaurants. The Applicant has requested $10 Million in assistance. The projected return without assistance is 10.64%. We have concluded that the proposed project would need some level of public assistance to proceed,given the speculative nature of the retail and the marginal return without assistance. We believe a return greater than 11.50% would not be unreasonabterto attract the required capital. n The proposed TIF district supports $7 Million of assistance',-A'—be calculated return with$7 Million of public assistance 41s 11.95%;;which exceeds=11.50%as a reasonable minimum return for the propQSd project. This level of assistance is supported by the projected tax increment=-generated by the proposed TIF district. Based on this, the $7 Million of assistant that provides an 11.95% return would provide suffcent assistance toeoplete the proposed project and would • address any projected financtng;gap z r • City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. The Project 3 3. The Project The proposed Project would redevelop the Brookdale Mall, excluding the Sears department store, demolishing the three anchors and all but 130,355 s.f, of the mall space. The Applicant also desires to purchase property owned by the EDA (former Boulevards) for construction of a restaurant. The City has estimated a price of$554,000 assuming an appraisal is completed. Once complete the Project is estimated to include a Walmart Supercenter (152,015 s.£),three junior anchors (122,324 s.£), seven restaurant pads (48,082 s:£), six retail stores (53,628 s.£), plus 130,355 s.f. of renovated mall space (total retail space 506,404 s.£). The Applicant is also purchasing the existing leases for the Kohl's and Applebee's, which when included increase the total retail to 586,273 s.£ The Project will also include improvements to Shingle Creek by day-lighting the portion of the creek rurinmg through the site. The Applicant has a purchase contract fox the Mall and has already closed on the Macy's property. The Applicant's purchase of the Mall is contingent upon receiving an amendment to the PUD providing a lot and site plan approval for the Walmart site (approximately 16.41 acres],T"e Applicant will then sell the lot to Walmart. The Applicant�Aantwi,pates commencing demolition and site- Ii _. grading around May 1, 2011. Walmarf will pay_directly for the costs of demolition and site grading necessary to d6livor their site. The construction of the Walmart store world-begin in latesurrimer or'early fall and is estimated to be complete and open by the fill of 2012:3 The Applicant does not.h ave ariy letters of interest or commitments for any of - � s.,T, �vci er the retail�sp�ce 4jn the r<existing Mall"or for new buildings, other than the Walruart. They anticipate completing exterior improvements to the remaining Mall Iarea once the site-,work is�substantially complete. The Applicant plans to construct'°:and lease the xetail and junior anchor buildings, to own and lease the mall space, ,and to grdiznd lease the restaurant parcels, with a third party constructing fhebu>ldrngs. The Applicant anticipates completing the entire redevelopment within three years, as shown below: ■ The Mall space will be fully occupied over a three year period to capacity by May 1,2014; ■ Five retail stores occupying 48,528 s.f. and one junior anchor occupying 57,671 s.f. will be constructed in 2012 and open around February 1,2013; ■ A second junior anchor occupying 36,532 s.f. will be constructed in 2012/2013 to open around May 1,2013; ■ Four restaurants occupying 24,598 s.f.will begin construction in 2013; • City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. The Project 4 • One retail store occupying 5,100 s.f, and a third junior anchor occupying 28,121 s.f will be constructed in 2013 and open for business around November 1, 2013; and • Three restaurants occupying 23,484 s.f will be constructed in 2014. =fin �s W k Ar ff, �' ...s Yc iwk �4 • City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota,Financing Gap Analysis Report. Project Costs 5 • 4 Project Costs The total costs of the project are shown below, as estimated by the Applicant. The TIF-eligible column represents the Applicant's estimate of eligible cost items under the TIF statute: Total Walmart Third Balance TIF Use of Funds Cost Contribution' Party Cost Gatlin Cost Eligible Land/Building Acquisition Mall 7,611,250 0 0 7,611,250 3,642,693 Macy's 1,750,000 0 0 1,750,000 EDA Owned Parcel 554,000 0 0 554,000 Subtotal $9,915,250 $0 $0 $9,915,250 $3,642,693 Architecht&Eng.(A&E)• Entitlement 500,000 184,465 0 315,535:;.; On-Site&Off-Site Costs 1,500,000 _ 553,395 0 946:665, 946,605 Subtotal $2,000,000 $737,860 $0 $1262,140 $946,605 On-Site Costs` Site Grading/Erosion Control 3,574,920 1,318,895 0 2,256,025 - 2,256,025 Demolition 5,220,090 1,925,847 0` 3,294,243 ^ 3,294,243 Storm 711,000 262,309 R 448,691 448,691 Utilities/Franchise Utilities 1,772,208 653,820 v 11118,388 J(,11 18,388 Concrete Curbs and Paving 459,900 169,671 0 290,229 290,229 AC Paving 3,376,215 1,245,587 0 2 130,628 2,130,828,. Landscape and Irrigation 981,000 361,920 0 419,080 619,080' General Conditions and Other 180,000 66,407 '0 R.• 1 13,593 113,593 Overhead and Profit(O&P) 1,627,533 600,446 0 " -'1,027,088 1,027,088 Contingency 1,790,287 660,400., 0 :. E£., 1,129,796 884,796 Subtotal $19,693,153 $7,265,392 $0 $12,427,761 $12,182,761 Off-Site Costs' v, .A Shingle Creek Daylighting 650,000 162,773 s -0• - 487 227 487,227 • Walls and Fences 162 000 40,568 9 121,432 121,432 Overhead and Profit(0&P) 81,200 �. q .20,334 0 .60,866 60,866 Contingency 89320' ?,,,22,367 0 66,953 66,953 Subtotal $982,520 $246;042 $0 $736,478 $736,478 Muncipal Development Fees $400,000 , $0O , $0 $400,000 Buildings Wal-Mart z 1$„241800 18,241,800 0 0 Existin Mall �y 9 3,400 000 0 0 3,400,000 Outparcels - 5,769,640 0 5,769,840 0 i Retail Buildings ;� � 5,362 600^- - �. 0 0 5,362,800 Junior Anchors Fr, 9,785920 ,,,• :x0 0 9,785,920 Arch/Eng for Retail Bldgs/Jr.Anchors, 1,225 228 0 0 1,225,228 Pilings for Retail Bldgs/Jr Anchors 1,266 854 0 0 1,266,854 1,266,854 Subtotal a•„$45,052442tl$18,241,800 $5,769,840 $21,040,802 $1,266,854 Tenant Improvements Existing Mall 5;214.200'_ 0 4,562,425 651,775 Retail Buildings 2,413,260 0 1,876,980 536,280 Junior Anchors 4,281,340 0 4,281,340 0 Subtotal $11,908,800 $0 $10,720,745 $1,188,055 $0 Leasing Expenses Existing Mall 521,420 0 0 521,420 Outparcels 305,000 0 0 305,000 Retail Buildings 375,396 0 0 375,396 Junior Anchors 733,944 0 0 733,944 Legal Expenses 300,000 0 0 300,000 Subtotal $2,235,760 $0 $0 $2,235,760 $0 Financing&Soft Costs Soft Costs(exc.Financing) 660,510 0 0 860,510 200,000 Construction Loan Fee/int 1,493,250 0 0 1,493,250 Permanent Loan Fee 415,461 0 0 415,461 Developer Fee 2,000,000 0 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 Contingency 750,000 0 0 750,000 Preferred Return 2,618,032 0 0 2,618,032 Subtotal $8,137,253 $0 $0 $8,137,253 $2,200,000 Total Project Costs $100,325,178 $26,491,094 $16,490,585 $57,343,499 $20,975,391 Inc.Walmart Purchase $5,718,557 $0 ($5,718,557) Inc.Outparcel Contribution $245,000 ($245,000) Final Costs $100,325,178 $32,209,651 $16,735,585 $51,379,942 $20,975,391 Walmart Cont.-36.89%forA&EIDn-site @ 16.41 acres of total44.48 acres(excludes existing)-25.04%for Off-site @ 16.41 acres of total 65.53(Includes existing) City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report Project Costs 6 Below we describe each of the individual cost items in more detail, paying . particular attention to those costs to be borne by the Applicant(column labeled "Balance Gatlin Cost" shown on page 5). Land/Building Acquisition: The Applicant has purchased the Macy's and has a purchase contract for the Mall property contingent on approval of the re-plat and site plan for Walmart. The total cost is reflective of the executed agreement. The EDA has identified a cost of$554,000 for the 1.06 acre parcel they own. Architectural and Engineering: The budgeted amount of $500,000 for entitlement and $1.5 Million for on-site and off-site costs is partially based on executed agreements (survey, Phase I & II, geotechnical and entitlement processing), and partially based on historical soft datakf'Thoe total expenditure of $2 Million represents about 10% of the hard costs Jricluding the contingency. This is a reasonable estimate. Walmart will contnbtte an-estimated$737,860 of this cost based on the size of their site. " On-Site & Off-Site Costs: The On-site, : ff-site costs are estimated to total $20,675,673 with $13,164,239 borne by the Applicant and art estimated $7,511,434 covered by Walmart,"based on the:"s�z'e of their site. We requested more detail on the source for tho estimate for all the site costs. The Applicant responded that their in-house construction,consultant (licensed architect and contractor) prepared the,estimates with mptit from data from Kimley Horn & Associates, local contractor:_cost estimating andlistorical Applicant data. • Kimley Hom hasE`,been involved iii many Walmart developments; local contractors were consulted ir the assembly of the project and cost values; with the results compared to historf6dVilataArom completed Applicant projects. The budgeted" motncludea 10% added contingency. We cannot provide any opimon,on the reasnableriessyof these costs.We address this issue further in the report�n Section 8(Internal Rate.of Return Analysis). Municipal Development=Fees: The Applicant has estimated$400,000 for all the fees due the Cif far completion of the project. The City will examine the reasonableness o the`estimated amount. Building Construction: The building construction estimates by building type are as follows: $120/s.f. for Walmart (152,015 s.f); $120/s.f. for restaurant pads; $100/s.f for retail buildings; and $80/s.f for junior anchor buildings. Only the retail buildings and junior anchor costs are relative to the financial analysis since the other building costs will be born by third parties. Additional costs include Architect and Engineering at $4.00/s.f. for the retail and junior anchor buildings; plus an estimated $7.20/s.f for the cost of pilings required for the retail and junior anchor buildings. These costs are shown in the column labeled "Balance Gatlin Cost"on page 5. We have consulted RSMeans Square Foot Costs for estimated construction costs for the proposed types of buildings (without addressing the cost of the pilings). City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. Project Costs 7 The data provides a range of estimated costs of low, medium, and high. The data indicates the Developer's costs for the retail and junior anchor buildings of $84 to $104 per s.f, are below the reported low range of$129 per s.£ Without detailed building plans we cannot comment on whether this variance would materially change our analysis. Tenant Improvements (TI):The estimated expenditures for tenant improvements by building type are as follows: $40/s.f. for the mall space; $45/s.£ for the retail buildings; and$35/s.f. for the junior anchor buildings. The Applicant anticipates completing a small portion of the TI to attract the lease rates as follows: $5/s.f. for the mall space; $10/s.f. for the retail buildings; and $0/s.f. for the junior anchor buildings. The balance of the TI costs are shown in the column labeled 'Td Party Cost"on page 5. Tenant Lease Expenses:The Applicant expects to incur broker commissions and legal expenses to lease the mall space, retail,lu ldings,juniors anchor buildings and ground lease the restaurant pads for,a'�total cost of $,;235,760. The expenses are estimated based on building s.f. and.estimated pad,site lease payments. The legal expenses are estimatddltased on-the overall total s.£ Based on our review of other retail projects we feed-these expenses are slightly above average. Financing and Soft Costs: The soft-,costs tbo(at$ 60,51`0 and include costs for appraisal, title insurance°legal, real estate taxes, insurance,project management and inspection fees.,Financm'tosts include: construction loan origination fee of $271,500 equafAo,1% of the-�'expected construction loan of $27.15 Million; construction loan interest assuinng ,average outstanding balance of $13.575 Million �($0°l0 of�totaF,Jban) at 6% bi'an 18 month period; permanent loan origination fee of $4,15,461:.equal to 1% of the expected permanent loan of $41 54(1 Million Alsip, included is a Developer fee of $2 Million which is expected.;Io cover over ead and staff costs for the developer for a three year period (this"fee is 4% of the Applicant's total costs); a soft cost contingency of $750,000 (90/o.Of the fi ancing and soft costs); plus $2,618,032 for preferred return to equity investors. Other than the preferred return to equity investors,the costs above are reasonable. We will exclude the preferred return to equity investors of $2,618,032 when determining the Applicant's internal rate of return,since the expense is returned as revenue. City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. Assistance Request 8 5. Assistance Request 40 The Applicant has requested TIF assistance of $10,000,000 on a present value basis provided through a pay-as-you-go TIF note. The Applicant does not intend to market the TIF note to a lender to capitalize the proceeds and plans to utilize equity and proceeds from construction loans to complete the TIF reimbursable costs. The Applicant will bear the full risk of repayment from tax increment for eligible costs plus interest. The Applicant provided TIF projections assuming a total market value of $85 Million for the completed Project. They estimated that the $85 Million would generate $1,316,051 by 2015 (three year build-out) assuming 90% of the available tax increment. The $85 Million was*based on project costs without consideration for the appropriate propert' Aax assessment of retail development. They indicate their projected TIF revenue stream (@90%) would support $10 Million of principat'Awlith a 6% per',annum interest component. "o, gxri f r R ffi �?5„ ,fir✓ �.�: n x< :,.l Z i x • City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report Tax Increment Revenue Projections s 6. Tax Increment Revenue Projections Springsted has prepared Tax Increment Revenue Projections utilizing City provided value estimates for the Applicant provided projected build-out. The Applicant provided a three-year build-out schedule,which we feel is aggressive especially without known retailers other than Walmart. The information below details the total values by type and year. All new development excluding development on the EDA owned lot has been assumed included within the proposed TIF district. Projected Redevelopment Values*and Timing" I x Proposed Buildout within School District#281(Robbinsdale) Square Value Projected AssessmentYea . Footage PerS F Value 2012 2013`; 26 2015 Walmart 152,015 $77 11,705,155 2,926,289 11, 0 ,155 11,705,155,,; 11,705,155 Mall Portion 130,355 125 16,294,375 4,073,594 .=12'220 781 16,294,375 ',',,16,294,375 Retail J(Jr Anchor) 57,671 $85 4,902,035 0 4,902,035 %`&'4,902,035 `x4,902,035 Retail N(Jr Anchor) 28,121 $90 2,530,890 0V 2,530,890 2,530,890 p. , Retail L 5,100 $175 892,500 ao p 892,500 892,500 Retail M 6,500 $175 1,137,500 " 0 ;a 1,137,500 „ 1,137,500 1,137,500 Retail 0/Q 13,770 $175 2,409,750 0 2,409 750 2,409,750 2,409,750 • Retail P 5,300 $175 927,500 0 927,500 927,500 927,500 Retail R 15,353 $175 2,686,775 0 2,686,775 2,686,775 2,686,775 Restaurant 3,530 $325 1,147,210' `"+ 0 1,147,250 1,147,250 Restaurant B 7,700 $325 2,502,500`< 0 0 2,502,500 2,502,500 Restaurant D 9,018 $325 2,9301850 q 0. 'w; -" 0 0 2,930,850 Restaurant G 8,533 $32502 778,275 0 0 0 2,773,225 Restaurant U 5,813 $325 118891225, 0 0 1,889,225 1,889,225 Restaurant V 7,555 $325 W, 2,455,375 4:, 0 0 2,455,375 2,455,375 Total SD#281 456,334 $57,184,905 $6,999,883 $35,989,496 $51,480,830 $57,184,905 Proposed Buildout within School District#286(Brooklyn Center) Square Value Projected Assessment Year Footage Per S F Value 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retail(Jr Anchor) 36,532 $90 $3,287,880 0 1,643,940 3,287,880 3,287,880 Retail F 7,605 $175 $1,330,875 0 1,330,875 1,330,875 1,330,875 I' Total SD#286 44,137 $4,618,755 $0 $2,974,815 $4,618,755 $4,618,755 fatal EnIF Dstrrct '? 50U 4�1 6�`8Q3 G64� GJ99 $3 -38964 31 5099SS41,$03;660r A-;.y ,.w,-. 5.:Sk3.,�:9.aR ;.+».,i... :y,:.''�.ru1. »sm.::. .5 m.�Y-:.a'H�'f '.S �.Lix.�,.y. �d�. 2yv'4 i ..s#�.?L:!'::aw..r-e..:d» YF AefS i.-•Y>. . d.,w�"✓n:.p ..n .a:�Y/,».:.=.L.l..y.e......Y. * Provided by City **Provided by Applicant City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota,Financing Gap Analysis Report. Tax Increment Revenue Projections 10 The a Increment Financing District is estimated at • b se value for the Tax In em g $12,645,000. With demolition occurring first, we assume an increase in captured value would not occur until construction year 2012. The proposed TIF District qualifies as a Renewal and Renovation TIF District which has a total term of 16 years (15 years after the first receipt). In order to maximize the TIF revenue stream we suggest the EDA delay the receipt of increment until tax collect year 2014.We have included a 1%market value inflation upon build-out completion. We believe including a 1% annual inflation is a reasonable assumption and given that the assistance will be provided on a pay-as-you-go basis, does not impose any repayment risk to the City. Assuming a 6% discount rate, the net tax increment revenue (90%) would generate a present value of approximately$7 Million from a date of 1/1/2012. Appendix I includes the TIF assumptions and annual-projections. As shown on the previous page, the City has projected $61.$ Million of total market value generated by the Project;; Qr approximately 30%AO than the Applicant's$85 Million in their estimates .Y • City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. Project Financing 7. Project Financing As previously stated, the Applicant has requested $10,000,000 of assistance in the form of pay-as-you-go TIF. The Applicant has estimated the structure of the overall financing will include investor equity, construction loans and permanent loans at stabilization. As of the date of this report, they have not secured any financing commitments for the project, although reportedly have secured equity to complete the acquisition (combination of Applicant funds and outside investor funds). The Applicant estimates that 53% of their costs will be paid from the proceeds from a construction loan,with the remainder of the costs paid from investor equity. They believe the investor equity will require a minimum 9%preferred return. They project the construction loan will carry a 6% annual interest rate. Upon project stabilization, they expect to secure perrriane'i, cing estimated at 75% loan to value with an estimated 7% annual interest it payments payments amortized over a 25 year period. The proceeds From the permanetitloan will be utilized to pay-off the construction loan"and to retuT.,,equity to investors. It is likely that the permanent lender (or any lender),wrll seek an assignment of the payments under any TIF note, if,executed. The'"risk for repayment of any portion of any loan supported b� th %TIF reven%will rest solely with the Applicant. a x The Applicant has rep6 ted that they have riot secured any equity or debt funds necessary to begin ;On-Site and Off-Site work for the Project. Springsted has not made any representations thax the Applicant has the capacity to secure the required debt and equity,tca complete the proposed project. s r� :z City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota,Financing Gap Analysis Report. Internal Rate of Return Analysis 12 8. Internal Rate of Return Analysis • We have calculated an internal rate of return for the proposed project to evaluate whether a need for public assistance exits. We have approached this determination based on the Applicant's proposed project plans regarding redevelopment costs, outcomes, financing, and timing, to develop a measure of the Applicant's level of return when compared to the amount of risk. If a project is owned and operated as an investment, a measure of return is calculated considering the time value of money, and involves an assumed re- sale of the property at a price appropriate in the market place. The final determination is based on whether or not a potential return is reasonable without the requested public assistance,within the current,marketplace and at the present time. The internal rate of return calculation utilizes,expected _project costs and offsetting revenues to evaluate the cash,' W from the project. During construction, negative cash flow is shown as uses of cash,, and once operational, positive cash flow is shown as sources,,�Iof cash. We";gsume that at an overall rate that the private investment is all "equity" andzeturned factors in the timing of the.-inflows and outflows. The private dollars (investment) is $38,738,680 ands is-.<calculatedy subtracting the subsidy request of $10,000,000 from the total'AppJicanf",cost of $48,738,680. We include the final cost of $51,379; 42 shoi� m,the "Balance Gatlin Cost" column on page 5,and then we subtitle$2,618;632 as"Preferred Return" • since the expeusewould enue. This is considered an un- leveraged returh4teating all private investment equally whether actually paid for from loan proceeds orqulty proceeds. We have chosen this approach since the Applicant has'not secured any financing for the project. The applicant provided an estimate of Project expenditures by year for a three �pax eriod be nnin with May 1 2011, as well as Project operating year,,P g g Y j P g revenue byyear up to:project stabilization, commencing in year 4 (May 1, ° 2014). We in'clude the°offsetting projected financial assistance (TIF revenue) in the third year The Applicant has projected triple net lease revenue -for buildings they construct (six retail buildings and three junior anchors); they project ground lease payments for the restaurant pads, as well as the continued payments under the Kohl's and Applebee's leases. We believe their lease revenue assumptions to be reasonable when researching current listings. They project offsetting expenses including a 4% management fee, 10% vacancy on mall and retail space and reserve deposits.These are reasonable expenses. We prepared a 10-year operating cash flow (11 total years with construction beginning in year 0). We added a rent escalator of 5% beginning in the 6`h year based on market expectations, excluding the Kohl's and Applebee's leases. City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. Internal Rate of Return Analysis 13 • In addition to measuring the annual cash flows, we also include a hypothetical sale of the asset (the project owned by the Applicant, including the revenue generated by the ground leases). We have valued the sale of the asset using the net operating income or NOI in the year of the sale and applied a capitalization rate of 8.5%. This resulting sale price is reduced by 3% for the cost of the sale and the net proceeds are shown as available cash flow in this final year. The internal rate of return is the interest rate received for an investment consisting of payments(uses of cash) and income(sources of cash)that occur at regular periods(annually). We have calculated the internal rate of return IRR`'with and without the requested public assistance of$10,000,000(TIF) The IRR without TIF is 10.64% and the ERR with TIF 010,000,000 is 12.38%. We feel that a reasonable rate of return should range between 10% and 15% for the proposed project and`iii,Vd tment taking-,r to account current market conditions. However, since tW 1,p. ro posed,projector°;lacks any known retail tenants beyond Walmart, a returif"'o 1064 0 isy likely"too low to attract the private capital. Therefore, it is notbnreasonable.to conclude that a return greater than 10.64° ""'would 11e necessary„to attract capital, and that some level of public assistance is necessary for completion of the proposed project with the proposed costs and uses '7(e b`elieveiV return greater than 11.50% would not be unreas'o"nable ta'attract the required capital. We also have calculated the applicant's expected return on investment(ROI) with tlie4"stabilized NQI_.divided by the private investment, with and without the $10 Million subsidy;. The ROI without TIF is 10.7% and the ROI with TIF of $l0;fJ00,000 t 13.4%. This ROI calculation does not factor in the time value of money a Since a determination has been made that public assistance is necessary to attract the capital to complete the project, the amount of assistance will depend on many factors, including the ability for the project to generate tax increment. We have estimated that the proposed project would only support a subsidy of around$7 Million,depending on interest rate and timing. We have recalculated the IRR with a reduced subsidy of$7 Million. With less assistance, the IRR declines to 11.95%. We consider this level of return to be acceptable given the speculative nature of the retail. The ROI would decline to 12.5%. Next we address the lack of precision in regard to the cost estimates and their impact on the calculated returns. Other than the cost to acquire the City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. Intemal Rate of Retum Analysis 14 properties, all additional expenditures are estimates with varying degrees of precision. Specifically we have added $1,765,341 of costs or subtracted $2,212,493 of costs based on 10% savings in the leasing expenditure line item,and either 10%more or 10%less for the on and off-site cost items. The internal rate of return calculation is based on project costs and offsetting revenues. If the estimated costs are overstated/understated, all other things equal,the calculated return would increase/decrease. We provide revised calculations assuming the Applicant's investment is adjusted as described above,with and without a$7 Million subsidy,shown in the table below. Cost Sensitivity Table Projected Costs Costs Costs -?educed by`',"` , Increased by Without TIF,F.- l --'$2,212,493 -'$1,765,341 MF Total Applicant Costs $48,738,680 $4, 187 $50,504,021 IRR 11.24% 10.18% ROI 1>1,.2% 10.3% -_-.-�.mod_ ., c_i .._ ,» v,:: •_. _,.v.': ,... - - Amount of Subsidy $7,000Q00 ,< 7,�100,0'00 $7,000,000 Total Applicant Costs $41,738,680 ,a' $39,526,187 $43,504,021 • IRR x,11 95%ztiT 12.60% 11.45% ROIx���, � 12 5% �. 13.1% 11.9% re The results m'tl e�Cost`Sensthvity Table indicate that the calculated IRR with C. adjustments would A,4 11 outside a reasonable range. Of note would be that e on and off bite costs`are likely to be TIF reimbursable items and therefore;if cost savings occur,the contract could allow for a reduction in the subsidy.w. The calculated`IRR with $7 Million of public assistance is 11.95%, which exceeds 11.50% as a reasonable minimum return for the proposed project. This level of assistance is supported by the projected tax increment generated by the proposed TIF district. We have also calculated the financing gap to bring the proposed site to "greenfield" status. This is a common exercise when assembling sites for redevelopment; to determine the cost to get the site to the same competitive position as vacant land elsewhere and compare that to the resulting value. This calculation is shown in Appendix II. The estimated gap is$6,176,063. • City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. Conclusion 15 • 10.Conclusion The proposed project involves the redevelopment of a vacant and underutilized retail mall site. The Applicant has requested that a Tax Increment Financing District be established to provide assistance necessary for redevelopment of the site. They have requested$10 Million in assistance. The projected return without assistance is 10.64%. We have concluded that the proposed project would need some level of public assistance to proceed given the speculative nature of the retail and the marginal return without assistance. We believe a return greater than 11.50% would not be unreasonable,,.--to attract the required capital. The proposed TIF district supports $7 Million of assistance. The calculated return with $7 Million of public assistance is 11° 5%, which exceeds 11.50% as a reasonable minimum return for the propose&h eject. This level of assistance is supported by the projected tavJncrement generated by the proposed TIF district. ` M5 Based on this, the $7 M>lhon'=of assistance supported by the projected tax increment district would provide sufficient assistance to complete the . proposed project and would at r e s s any"pr 9"J ted financing gap. ' kt_ w 6, City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. Appendix I—TIF Assumptions and Projections 16 • Assumptions Report City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota Tax Increment Financing District(Renewal&Renovation) Brookdale Mall Redevelopment Project(Shingle Creek Crossing) TIF Plan Scenario-R&R District-$61.8M EMV-3 year build-out Type of Tax Increment Financing District Renewal&Renovation Maximum Duration of TIF District 15 years from 1st increment " Projected Certification Request Date 06/30/11 "• Decertification Date 12/31/29 (16 Years of IncrerYen) 2010/2011 Base Estimated Market Value $12,645,000 Original Net Tax Capacity $248,210 Assessment/Collection Fear 2011/2012 2012/2013x " 2013/2014 ., 2014/2015 2015/2016 Base Estimated Market Value $12,645,000 $112,645,011.0 $12`4&000 $12,645,000 $12,645,000 Increase in Estimated Market Value �26419,391 43 454,585 49,204,848 Total Estimated Market Value 12,645000 12,645,000 38,964,311 56,099,585 61,849,848 Total Net Tax Capacity $248 210248,210 $777,786 $1,120,492 $1,235,497 City of Brooklyn Center ,F , 412% 52.412% Hennepin County 2640% 42.640% School District )SD#281r"* 28-.-621% 51.173% ISD#286 Other 8.219% 8.219% Local Tax Capacity Rate ' 131.892% 154.444% 2009/2010 ISD#281 ISD#281 Fiscal Disparities Contribution From TIF District 35.5239% Administrative Retainage Percent(maximum=10%) 10.00% Pooling Percent 0.00% PV Net Revenue Date&Rate $7,003,002 01/01/12 6.00% Notes Projections assume no future changes to tax rates or tax capacity classification rates, An 1%annual market value inflator is included after the entire project is built. Current base parcel value information as provided by Hennepin County. Development scope and buildout timeline are as provided by Developer.See separate schedule Projected future market value provided by the City.See separate schedule Assume City elects to start TIF Clock in payable year 2014 City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. Appendix I-TIF Assumptions and Projections 17 Projected Tax Increment Report City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota Tax Increment Financing District(Renewal&Renovation) Brookdale Mall Redevelopment Project(Shingle Creek Crossing) TIF Plan Scenario-R&R District-$61.8M EMV-3 year build-out Taxing District 2148 Taxing District 2149 Less: Less: Retained Times: 2148 Less: Less: Retained Times: a 21;48 Total Less: Less: Annual Total Original Fiscal Captured Tax Annual Total Original Fiscal Captured Tax,3 Anrfflaf� Annual State Aud. Admin. Annual Period Net Tax Net Tax Disp.@ Net Tax Capacity Gross Tax Net Tax Net Tax Disp.@ Net Tax Capacity Gross_r Gross Tax Deduction Retainage Net Ending Capacity Capacity 35.5239% Capacity Rate Increment Capacity Capacity 35.5239% Capacity a: ia1e Increment Increment 0.360°4 10.00% Revenue (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) r, ;=(12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) 12/31/12 232,460 232,480 0 0 131.892% 0 15,730 15,730 0 O 154.444% 0 0 0 0 0 12/31/13 232,480 232,480 0 0 131.892% 0 15,730 15,730 0 Q ,4".154.444h 0 0 0 0 0 12/31/14 719,040 232,480 172,845 313,715 131.892% 413,765 58,746 15,730 15,281 27,735 "°'I54 4q'4% -'' 42,836 456,601 1,644 45,496 409,461 12/31/15 1,026,867 232,480 282,908 513,479 131.892% 677,237 91,625 15,730 26,98t 48,934 14'4444k 75,576 752,813 2,710 75,010 675,093 12/31/16 1,142,848 232,480 323,434 587,034 131.892% 774,251 92,549 15,730 27289`, 49,530 154444% 76,496 850,747 3,063 64,768 762,916 12/31/17 1,154,385 232,480 327,497 594,408 131.892% 783,977 93,482 15,730 27620;` '-„'59,132 154.4441% 77,426 861,403 3,101 85,830 772,472 12/31/16 1,165,936 232,480 331,600 601,856 131.892% 793,800 94,424 15,730 27955$=,; 50739.;;;:,154.444% 78,364 872,164 3,140 86,902 782,122 12131/19 1,177,603 232,480 335,745 609,378 131.892% 803,721 95,376 15,730 28,293 51,353'n�454 4,44% 79,311 883,032 3,179 87,985 791,868 12/31/20 1,189,387 232,480 339,931 616,976 131.892% 813,742 96,337 15,739 , „ 28,635 51,97-7 154444°/q 80,268 894,010 3,218 89,079 801,713 12/31/21 1,201,288 232,480 344,158 624,650 131.892% 823,664 97,308 15;7$,0 "28,960 52 59$, 154.4444 "' 81,235 905,099 3,258 90,184 811,657 12/31/22 1,213,309 232,480 348,429 632,400 131.892% 834,084 98,289 15,730 28,328 53;231 154.444% 82,211 916,295 3,299 91,300 821,696 12/31/23 1,225,449 232,460 352,741 640,226 131.892% 844,410 99,279,,,:,15,730 29;680 53;869 154.444% 83,197 927,607 3,339 92,427 831,841 12/31/24 1,237,711 232,480 357,097 648,134 131.892% 854,637 100,279 A5,730 301635 54,514 154.444% 84,194 939,031 3,381 93,565 842,085 12131/25 1,250,096 232,480 361,497 656,119 131.892% 865,368 101,290 15;730 "0 394 55,166 154.444% 85,200 950,568 3,422 94,715 852,431 12131/26 1,262,604 232,480 365,940 664,184 131.892% 876,006 102,310 15;730 30757 55,623" 154.444% 86,215 962,221 3,464 95,876 862,881 12/31/27 1,275,238 232,480 370,426 672,330 131.892% 886,749 '103 341 y 15,730° 31,123 56,4$8 154.444% 67,242 973,991 3,506 97,049 873,436 12/31/28 1,287,998 232,480 374,961 680,557 131.892% 897,600 104,381 15,730 31,492 57,159 154.444% 68,279 985,879 3,549 98,233 884,097 -, 12131/29 1,300,885 232,480 379,539 688,866 131.892% 908 559 105,433 .15,730 � '�31,666 57,837 154.444% 89,325 997,884 3,592 99,429 894,663 ' $12,851,970 $1,277,375 $14,129,345 $50,865 $1,407,848 $12,670,632 Assumptions regarding base values,projected values and timing shown on separate page ! `resant �( 6�k ysQ31( „F A M City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. Appendix II—Greenfield Gap Analysis 18 Greenfield Gap Analysis sis We have evaluated the financial gap to bring the proposed site to "greenfield" status, a common practice when redeveloping areas with existing building and other improvements. This gap is calculated as the difference between the cost to assemble and clear the site for redevelopment(get to "greenfield") and the estimated value of the site for future retail use.We have also included the cost of day-lighting Shingle Creek. We have utilized the Applicant's redevelopment costs, including the estimated cost to day-light Shingle Creek,shown below in our calculation,with adjustments as noted. 45ategor�r 50 �a�..� , Acquisition 99 5,2 A&E Entitlement/On &Off-Site x,262,140 Municipal Development Fees 400,000 On-Site Costs* 8,170,656 On-Site General Conditions** 4:3 65 On-Site OH&P/Contingency** 1,734,814; Soft Costs/Excl. Financing 860,510 Dev Fee 5%hard costs` 599,723 Soft Cost Contingency 750,000 Construction Interest/Fees «„ ,,,V 392,000 Preferred Return 997,313 Total Costs 25,172,770 Less Walmart Purchase $5,718,557 Net Cost for"Greenflid $19,454,213 Plus Day-lighting of Shingle Creek xy. 736,478 Total Cost ° ° $20,190,691 lfalue T Value ** k App licant4LI Area (27.0 cres)valued at$5.03/s.f. 5,918,075 Mall space(1301355 sf)valued at$40/sf 5,214,200 Kohl's/Applebee's;,Capit talizet'Annual Revenue 2,882,353 Total Value Estimate � $14,014,628 Resulting�nancial'Ga� � ;.. 3,. "`` $ ,176,063 *The on-site costs include all hard costs except only a portion of the AC paving line item. This line item has been estimated by the City at$144,000 assuming required drives in three locations=1,800 If @ a cost of$80/lf.; **The General Conditions has been pro-rated based on the hard costs;the Overhead/Profit is calculated at 10%of the on-site costs shown, and the contingency adds another 10%; *** The City has estimated the per sf value for the Applicant area at$5.03/sf. assuming a blended value for the site,factoring in areas with soil conditions, among others; the City has estimated the Mall value at$40 1sf.; the Kohl's/Applebee's capitalizes the reported annual lease revenue from the Applicant. City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota.Financing Gap Analysis Report. O 1100 x ttot N!N IT ► ►1» • �� aOo -, it .. .,...,.,., . ^�• OOO O A �`�. ��".s. ,:� �' �� .:, <7 \fr/+%'Afl♦Ct \1\gtr,I+l.pra ".i.,+. �� a `!✓+Y.�+'.p.. `� .�I ty�� •"�lM �..r, c4��1 \ .. ,»aN 91 t pip w ���� �� OOOOC� OOO n000 .'� 000 000047 O�JOQO 0 ' PROPOSED 000 000 000 - COUNTY ROAD NO. 10 PROPOSED MONUMENT ' . •. `L PYLON SIGN SIGN PROPOSED PYLON` PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN O SIGN+.. J 1 PROPOSED MONUMENT J 7. SIGN i Cr F EXISTI N.10011 ......... .....� y t.6a5O A S EXISTING _. KOHL'S Tow f 7 RIFFLES AND WALL ` � d" M IMPROVEMENTS- ..F`. 7.47537 .yaA PROPOSED SHINGLE CREEK REGIONAL TRAIL> *� 1 Or PROPOSED DAYLIGHTED v SHINGLE CREEK M \'�� #" 1�1' f EXf __ ` � � , � / 3 as a \ .>•/r ,fir,. sir' • •� � �' APP ' / p PROPOSED FREEWAY ` PROPOSED— R \` , a7.2aca MONUMENT � � � 4 PYLON SIGN � 'Or \ SIGN / 1} •i ' i "4 \ EXISiINC (' TRAIL CONNECTION I � BUILDING • RETAIL 0 TO EXISTING BRIDGE \ SHOPS Walmart:': ' ' �, fit.jowl 3 � \ STORE 85625-00 G150-SGL-NO � I, Z 152,036 S.F.(APPROX.) • S• LU EXISTING SHINGLE CREEK BOX CULVERTiy f . .� EXISTING � .?�• \ SEARS // • (NOT IN GCHTHI.CTJ i �y[ PROPOSEDFRFFWAY W PYI°"S'G" SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING X _ fy" 7t O' V JANUARY 2011 L fy 1 A PROPOSED MONUMENT V` SIGN i 0 60 120 241 Fr / w ,r -� Kimley-Horn GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY and Associates, Inc. 101 South Main Street �. Dickson,Tennessee 37055 M, Tel 615-446-7104 Fax 615-446-7105 PROPOSED PYLON SIGN RIFFLES&WALL IMPROVEMENTS IV �'• TRAIL V MAIN CHANNEL STONE PYLONS& \ FENCE CREEK AT BUILDING SECTION ® 0 5 10 20 PATIO BLDG O� SPECIAL PAVEMENT WITH BRIDGE ELEMENTS PROPOSED SHINGLE CREEK REGIONAL TRAIL t i BLDG TRAIL V MAIN CHANNEL CREEK SECTION 0 5 10 20 • r EXISTING PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE v SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SHINGLE CREEK DAYLIGHT CONCEPT JANUARY 2011 KimleyHorn GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY and Associates,Inc. 101 South Main Street Dickson,Tennessee 37055 0 15 30 60 Tel 615-446-7104 Fax 615-446-7105 • x. • .,_ f� r e. v3 �rJ Y Will woo e ARCHITECTURAL H I NGLE CREEK CROSSING ATLINDEVEL M S G DEVELOPMENT COMPANY