HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989 08-28 CCP Regular Session !e f,
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
AUGUST 28, 1989
7 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Invocation
4. Open Forum
5. Approval of Consent Agenda
-All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be
routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one
motion. There will be no separate discussion of these
items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event
the item will be removed from the consent agenda and
considered in its normal sequence on the agenda.
6. Approval of Minutes:
*a. August 1, 1989 - Continued Session
*b. August 14, 1989 - Regular Session
7. Proclamation:
*a. Declaring September as PTA /PTO Membership Month
8. Mayoral Appointment:
*a. Housing Commission
9. Resolutions:
a. Amending the 1989 General Fund Budget and Accepting
Proposal to Conduct a Study of Space Needs at East and
West Fire Stations, Improvement Project No. 1989 -24
b. Approving Purchase and Accepting Proposal for
Furnishing One Highway Sand /Salt Spreader
-It is proposed to purchase this unit from funds
available within the 1989 budget for the street
maintenance division.
C. Ordering Installation of Sidewalk on West Side of
Humboldt Avenue North between Woodbine Avenue and 73rd
Avenue and Accepting Proposal for Construction,
Improvement Project No. 1989 -20
*d. Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of
Shade Trees (Order No. DST 08/28/89)
e. Amending the 1989 General Fund Budget
-To provide funding for planning and land use study
authorized on July 24, 1989, in the amount of $10,595.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- August 28, 1989
f. Approving Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement
for Bids for Delivery of Telephone System for Brooklyn
Center City Hall and the Earle Brown Heritage Center
10. Planning Commission Items: (7:30 p.m.)
a. Planning Commission Application No. 89021 submitted by
R.L. Brookdale Motors requesting site and building plan
and special use permit approval to construct a 14,565
sq. ft. addition to the Honda sales building at
Brookdale Pontiac - Honda, 6801 Brooklyn Boulevard, to
provide additional service bays, parts warehousing,
office and other functions
-This item was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission at its August 17, 1989, meeting.
b. Planning Commission Application No. 89022 submitted by
R.L. Brookdale Motors requesting special use permit
approval to operate an off -site inventory storage lot
accessory to the Brookdale Pontiac -Honda dealership at
the old American Bakeries site at 4215 69th Avenue
North
-This item was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission at its August 17, 1989, meeting.
11. Public Hearings: (8 p.m.)
a. Public hearing on improvement project 1988 -18, West
River Road between 66th Avenue North and 73rd Avenue
North and Willow Lane between I -694 and 66th Avenue
North
- Notices of this hearing have been published in the
City's official newspaper and individual notices have
been sent to the owners of all properties abutting the
proposed improvement. In addition two public
informational meetings were conducted after mailed
notices of those meetings were sent to all property
owners between West River Road and the Mississippi
River.
City staff and the City's consultant will present an
overview of the proposed project, its impacts, costs,
etc.
Following the public hearing the City Council may wish
to request additional information and /or continued
discussions, or may wish to adopt a resolution ordering
the project. A resolution is provided for
consideration by the Council.
1. Resolution Ordering Improvement in Preparation of
Plans - Improvement Project No. 1988 -18
4/5 vote required for adoption - Roll Call Vote
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- August 28, 1989
12. Discussion Items:
a. Impacts of the Safe Drinking Water Act
-In accordance with discussion at the Council meeting
on August 14, 1989, City staff has submitted a report
on this matter and is prepared to discuss it in more
detail with the City Council. Two resolutions are
submitted for consideration by the council.
1. Resolution Relating to Development of Standards
under the Safe Drinking Water Act
2. Resolution Approving Payment to the AWWA Assessment
Fund
b. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 of the Brooklyn Center
Ordinances
C. League Insurance Trust Institutional Payment to League
of Cities
*13. Licenses
14. Adjournment
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY
OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
CONTINUED SESSION
AUGUST 1, 1989
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Pro tem Celia Scott reconvened the meeting of the City Council which was
continued from July 24, 1989. The meeting reconvened at 7:03 p.m. Mayor Pro
tem Scott explained Mayor Nyquist would be a few minutes late.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Pro tem Celia Scott, Councilmembers Todd Paulson, Jerry Pedlar, and Philip
Cohen. Also present were Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, City Attorney
Charlie LeFevere, and Administrative Aide Patti Page. Mayor Nyquist entered the
meeting at 7:04 p.m.
INVOCATION
The invocation was offered by Councilmember Scott.
RESOLUTION
The Director of Public Works introduced a Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding
Contract for Contract 1989 -F, Alley Improvement Project Nos. 1989 -08, 1989 -15,
1989 -16, and 1989 -17. He explained that on June 26, 1989, the City Council
conducted an improvement hearing on these projects and then ordered the
improvement of the four alleys. He noted in addition to ordering the
improvement, the City Council approved the plans and specifications and
authorized advertisement for bids for these improvements. He noted bids were
opened on July 27, 1989. He stated four bids were received, the lowest bid was
from Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. in the total amount of $137,527.10. He
added the engineer's estimate of contract costs were $139,300. He went on to
review the estimated total costs and estimated special assessment rates based on
the contract costs. He stated staff is recommending award of the contract to
Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. and also adoption of a motion providing that
the assessment rates to be levied for these improvement projects shall not
exceed the engineer's estimate of assessment rates for these projects as quoted
at the June 26, 1989, improvement hearing. Mayor Nyquist inquired what type of
problems have been experienced with this contractor. The Director of Public
Works stated the contractor has completed numerous projects for the City. He
noted the contractor does not always provide high quality supervision for the
subcontractors. He added this project will be handled mostly by Thomas & Sons
Construction, Inc. and added they are concrete specialists.
Councilmember Paulson noted there are a number of people present in the audience
this evening and inquired if there was time for a public hearing. Mayor Nyquist
explained a public hearing has already been held regarding these improvements;
however, the Council is always open for public comment. Councilmember Paulson
inquired why a special session had to be held this evening to discuss the
contract instead of waiting until the next meeting. The Director of Public
Works explained if staff had waited until the August 14, 1989, City Council
8/1/89 -1-
meeting, two valuable weeks of construction time would have been lost.
Mayor Nyquist stated the purpose of the meeting this evening is to award the
contract for the improvement projects. He noted the special assessments would
be levied at a later date at which time there would be a public hearing.
Mayor Nyquist recognized John Kalligher, 5548 Girard Avenue North. Mr.
Kalligher stated he was concerned with the procedures used by the Council in
approving the improvement. He stated he does feel a public hearing was held
properly to begin with and noted the engineer's findings are based on erroneous
facts which would make the public hearing invalid. He noted the neighborhood
expressed their desire to have bituminous installed in the alley, and he feels
they are being cheated because they now have to pay for concrete.
Mayor Nyquist asked the City Attorney if he would comment regarding the
procedures to date for the public hearing. The City Attorney stated he feels
the proceedings to date have satisfied all legal requirements.
The Director of Public Works stated there are safety and health hazards in alley
No. 1. He noted there are several garages along this alley that have a flooding
problem and standing water breeds mosquitos. He noted because of the number of
potholes in this alley, it creates a safety concern because of vehicles trying
to dodge the potholes. He stated he feels the Council's proceedings have
complied fully with the Council's adopted policies regarding consideration of
alley improvements. He then went on to review the slides of alley No. 1 which
were taken a full 24 hours after a normal rainfall.
Mayor Nyquist recognized June Scofield, 5543 Fremont Avenue North. Mrs.
Scofield stated her biggest concern is the fact concrete is being installed
instead of bituminous. She stated she did not understand why bituminous could
not be used. The Director of Public Works stated the grade in alley No. 1 is
very flat and installation of bituminous would not allow for the tight control
of grade which needs to be achieved for proper drainage of the alley. He noted
it is possible to achieve the proper grade by installing concrete. He noted if
bituminous were installed, there would be a number of areas where there would be
puddles, and these puddles would lessen the life expectancy of bituminous. Mrs.
Scofield stated she thought the storm sewer would take care of the drainage
problem. The Director of Public Works stated even with the installation of a
storm sewer, if the grade is too flat, there would not be complete drainage from
the bituminous.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Louie Larson, 5620 Girard Avenue North. Mr. Larson
stated if the improvement goes through, it will be hard enough for the residents
in the area to pay for this improvement without adding the cost of concrete onto
it.
Mayor Nyquist then recognized Steve Smith, 5630 Girard Avenue North. Mr. Smith
stated he is in favor of the alley but wondered if it would be possible to build
the grade up so that bituminous could be installed. The Director of Public
Works stated the bituminous estimate did comprehend bringing in fill to build up
the grade. He noted though regardless of the base, it is impossible to
accurately control the grade with bituminous. He noted with installation of
8 -2-
concrete the grade can be tailored to the situation. Mr. Smith stated if
bituminous were installed and "birdbaths" were created, it would still be a
better situation than the current one. The Director of Public Works agreed with
Mr. Smith but stated he could almost guarantee there would be "birdbaths ". Mr.
Smith stated if "birdbaths" are the only issue, then he feels the Council should
change the improvement to bituminous. Councilmember Scott stated when talking
of "birdbaths" the resident should realize that standing water will cause the
bituminous to rot and come apart which would mean a whole new alley sooner than
expected. Mr. Smith stated he does not want to be assessed for ten years and
turn around and have to replace the alley and be assessed again.
Mayor Nyquist recognized a resident who stated it's obvious the neighbors don't
have much say regarding this improvement. He inquired why the Council bothered
to ask the neighborhood what they wanted if the neighbors opinions meant
nothing. Councilmember Cohen stated when the survey was sent out it was to get
a response from the neighborhood and then the Council would have to make the
final decision. He noted there are many young people in the area who stated
they felt their properties were undervalued because of the unimproved alleys.
He stated there is an ongoing battle in the southeast neighborhood to keep it
from getting rundown. He noted the unimproved alleys are doing a disservice to
the community. He stated he felt the Council should review the assessment
policy at a later date regarding senior citizens and those residents who cannot
afford to pay for the assessment.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Louie Larson, 5620 Girard Avenue North. Mr. Larson
inquired why the Council did not take any action on these alleys when they have
been discussed in the past. Councilmember Scott stated she recalls these alley
improvements being before the Council twice before. She noted the comment has
been made the price for improvement and maintenance would increase, and she
believes staff is telling the Council and the neighborhood that the alleys have
reached a point where it is not possible to maintain the unimproved alley
anymore. Mayor Nyquist stated he would like to remind the Council and those
present of the survey which was recently taken which found 70% of the residents
stated they felt they could affect change within the City. He noted this
indicates the Council is very responsive and responsible to the community.
Mayor Nyquist recognized John Kalligher, 5548 Girard Avenue North. Mr.
Kalligher stated he agrees with Councilmember Cohen that the Council should
review the assessment policy and possibly more of the neighborhood should be
assessed to spread out the cost. The Director of Public Works stated while it
is true the community as a whole does benefit, this is evidenced by the City
paying for the storm sewer which is 25% of the improvement cost. Also other
residents in the area have already paid special assessments for alley
installation. He noted the Council has already approved the assessment area and
would have to start over if the assessment area were to be broadened. He added
the bids have been received, and they reflect installation of concrete. He
noted the contractor would not accept a change to bituminous surfacing at this
point. Mayor Nyquist inquired if the Council reviews the deferred assessment
policy and makes some changes would it be usable for this project. The City
Attorney stated changes could be made in the deferred assessment policy right up
to the time of levying assessments.
8/1/89 -3-
h
ti
Mayor Nyquist then recognized Steve Smith, 5630 Girard Avenue North. Mr. Smith
stated if the Council changed the improvement for installation of bituminous,
then the contractor should be able to come in with new prices. He noted if the
contractor is not able to do this, then maybe the City should find a new
contractor. The Director of Public Works stated if the Council changed this
project to installation of bituminous, he would have to recommend rejection of
all bids to avoid a lawsuit. He stated the projects would have to be rebid and
work would most likely be delayed until 1990. The City Attorney stated the
Council would be opening itself up to a public bidding lawsuit if the contract
were changed even before it was executed. The Director of Public Works added
readvertising would bring on substantial delays which could mean substantial
price increases.
Councilmember Pedlar stated there is no doubt the alleys need to be improved,
and he feels concrete would serve the citizens and City well. He stated he
agrees with the comment regarding review of deferred assessment policies, but he
would like to see it expanded to include young people with low- incomes. The
City Attorney stated there are specific statutory limits to extend deferred
assessments, and he does not recall any provisions for low - income residents. He
stated he would hesitate to comment any further without more review. The
Director of Public Works stated the City Attorney is correct and assessment
deferral is limited to senior citizens and handicapped persons. He noted,
however, there may be some other options which could be used. He stated staff
will review the policy and suggest possible changes before the assessment
hearing.
Councilmember Paulson stated he believes the residents are in a better position
to say what is necessary for their homes than he is. He stated he would like to
find some way the City could make the contractor change the estimate, and if the
project is delayed, so be it. Mayor Nyquist stated if the Council were to
change the project to bituminous, they would have to reject all bids and rebid
the project to avoid any legal problems. Councilmember Scott stated each year
construction costs raise approximately 7 -8 %. She noted if the project were
delayed the cost would rise for all projects involved not just this one alley.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -147
Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR CONTRACT 1989 -F, ALLEY
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1989 -08, 1989 -15, 1989 -16 AND 1989 -17
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Celia Scott, and the motion passed with Councilmember Paulson opposed.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar
to provide that the assessment rates to be levied for improvement project Nos.
1989 -08, 1989 -15, 1989 -16, and 1989 -17 shall not exceed the engineer's estimate
for assessment rates for these projects as quoted at the June 26, 1989,
improvement hearing. The motion passed unanimously.
There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott
directing staff to review the deferred assessment policy and make
recommendations to the Council prior to levying special assessments for these
8/1/89 -4-
I
projects. The motion passed unanimously.
Councilmember Cohen inquired when these assessments would be levied. The
Director of Public Works stated it would not occur until sometime in 1990, and
this would allow plenty of time for staff and Council review.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott
to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center
City Council adjourned at 8 :45 p.m.
City Clerk Mayor
8/1/89 -5-
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
AUGUST 14, 1989
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order
by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Celia Scott, Todd Paulson, Jerry Pedlar, and
Philip Cohen. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of
Public Works Sy Knapp, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and
Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, City Engineer Mark
Maloney, and Administrative Aide Patti Page.
INVOCATION
The invocation was offered by Reverend Bob Cilke, representing the Brooklyn
Center Prayer Breakfast Committee.
OPEN FORUM
Mayor Nyquist recognized Reverend Cilke who stated he felt it would be
appropriate for the City to present an award or some type of recognition to Les
Thurs for his work with the Brooklyn Center Little League. He noted Mr. Thurs
has worked with the Little League for 20 years. Councilmember Cohen stated he
felt this was a good idea, and the Council may want to consider some type of
recognition award on a regular basis. The City Manager stated he would have
staff check into this.
CONSENT AGENDA
A
Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from
the consent agenda. He noted staff has requested item 9f be removed.
Councilmember Cohen requested 8b be removed and Councilmember Pedlar requested
item 9a be removed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 24 1989 - REGULAR SESSION
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson
to approve the minutes of the July 24, 1989, City Council meeting. The motion
passed unanimously.
PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASE - EARLE BROWN BOWL - 6440 JAMES CIRCLE
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson
to release the performance bond for Earle Brown Bowl, 6440 James Circle. The
motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION NO 89 -148
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
8/14/89 -1-
RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS TO THE FINANCE
DEPARTMENT AND WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -149
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING AGENCY AGREEMENT WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -150
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPOINTING ALTERNATE COMMISSIONER TO THE SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -151
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPOINTING ALTERNATE COMMISSIONER TO THE WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -152
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES
(ORDER NO. DST 08/14/89)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously.
LICENSES
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson
to approve the following list of licenses:
GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLE
Block Sanitation 6741 79th Avenue N.
Browning Ferris Industries of MN 9813 Flying Cloud Drive
Metro Refuse 8168 West 125th Street
Robbinsdale Transfer 3601 48th Avenue North
I
8/14/89 -2-
Waste Management -- Blaine 10050 Naples Street NE
ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT
Knights of Columbus 6816 Fremont Place North
c/o Bob Kramer
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
C. 0. Carlson Air Conditioning Co. 1203 Bryant Ave. N.
D. J's Heating 6060 LaBeaux Avenue
The motion passed unanimously.
PRESENTATION - NORTH HENNEPIN MEDIATION PROJECT
Mayor Nyquist recognized Dick Houck, a member of the Board of Directors for
North Hennepin Mediation Project. Mr. Houck stated the North Hennepin Mediation
Project has 38 volunteer mediators and 11 volunteer board members. He stated he
would like to thank the City Council for supporting this program and asked for
their continued support. He explained in addition to being a board member, he
is also a volunteer mediator. He went on to explain some of the types of
situations he has mediated.
Councilmember Pedlar inquired how the percentage of funding is broken down.
Bonnie Lukes, Director of the North Hennepin Mediation Project, stated one -third
of their funding comes from Hennepin County, one -third from municipalities, and
the other third is contributions which the board actively seeks from service
organizations, private individuals, and businesses. Mayor Nyquist inquired if
it would be possible to receive a list of contributors and funders. Ms. Lukes
stated she would send a list to the Mayor.
PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASE - TARGET - 6100 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
Councilmember Cohen stated he would like to see staff look into the issue of
cart storage areas in large parking lots, such as Target and K -Mart.
There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar
to release the performance bond for Target, 6100 Shingle Creek Parkway. The
motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED)
The City Manager presented a Resolution Amending the 1989 General Fund Budget to
Provide for Wage and Salary Adjustments.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -153
Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1989 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR WAGE AND SALARY
ADJUSTMENTS
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously.
The City Manager presented a Resolution Receiving Report and Calling for Hearing
on Improvement Project 1988 -18, West River Road between 66th Avenue North and
8/14/89 -3-
73rd Avenue North and Willow Lane between Interstate Highway 694 and 66th Avenue
North. He noted there are representatives from Short - Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc.
resent this P his eve "
nin to discuss the he feasibility study project. for this ro "ect. He
explained the project p J ct has already had a significant amount of public input, and
there will be a considerable amount of opportunities to work with the property
owners on the issues. Mayor Nyquist inquired what type of concerns can be
expected from the neighborhood.
The Public Works Coordinator, Diane Spector, entered the meeting at 7:35 p.m.
The Director of Public Works stated he expects the concerns to be the same
things which have already been expressed at the other public meetings, those
being speed and traffic through the neighborhood, special assessments, and
bike /pedestrian trails. The City Manager noted everyone seemed to agree that
there is a need for bike /pedestrian trails but they could not agree on the
placement of these trails. The Director of Public Works then introduced Dick
Moore and Glen VanWormer of Short - Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc.
Mr. Moore went on to review the process used for the study and completion of the
report. Mr. VanWormer stated there have been significant traffic changes in the
area since the completion of T.H. 252 and the 610 bridge, noting not all these
changes have been for the better. He noted a study was made of the people
driving through the neighborhood, and this was done b taking license plate
y g 1
P
numbers from the vehicles traveling through the neighborhood. He stated his
firm has spent a great deal of time working with MNDOT to redesign the roadway
so that it will discourage through traffic but make it easy for legitimate local
traffic to travel through the area. He then went on to review the
bike /pedestrian trail. He noted there are two options for this trail, one to
install the trail on the east side of the road and the other being installation
on the west side. He noted the total estimated cost of the east side trailway
would be $1,172,427, and installation of the trailway on the west side would
cost approximately $1,318,848.
Mayor Nyquist inquired if the cities of Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park should
be completing the projects at the same time. The Director of Public Works
explained the City of Brooklyn Park is considerably behind schedule and noted
staff has contacted MNDOT to ask if Brooklyn Center can proceed if Brooklyn Park
is delayed. He noted MNDOT encouraged the City to proceed and noted they would
have no problems with the City doing so.
Councilmember Cohen inquired if assessment figures were available at the public
hearing for these bike /pedestrian trails. The City Manager stated the
assessment is for the roadway and not the trailway. He noted the figures were
available at both public meetings. Councilmember Cohen inquired if the public
accepted the assessment costs. The Director of Public Works stated there was no
severe opposition to the special assessments, only a grudging acceptance. He
explained the assessment would be the same whether there is a trailway or not
regardless of what side of the road the trail is installed on. The Director of
Public Works stated there would be extra charges to the neighborhood for
reconnection of the electrical if the cable is buried.
Councilmember Pedlar inquired if Brooklyn Parks` end of the ro"ect
p J would create
8/14/89 -4-
r
k
more problems for Brooklyn Center, Mr. Moore stated Brooklyn Parks project,
when complete, should enhance Brooklyn Center.
Councilmember Cohen stated he feels the neighborhood should be well informed
regarding the possible cost for assessment before the public hearing. He stated
if staff is confident the neighborhood is well informed, then a public hearing
should be scheduled; but if not, then he feels there is a need for another
public meeting before the public hearing. The City Manager stated because the
City is under no time constraints, the Council could table action on this item
if there are any major concerns.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -154
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION RECEIVING REPORT AND CALLING FOR HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 1988 -
18, WEST RIVER ROAD BETWEEN 66TH AVENUE NORTH AND 73RD AVENUE NORTH AND WILLOW
LANE BETWEEN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 694 AND 66TH AVENUE NORTH
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously.
The Superintendent of Public Utilities, Dave Peterson, entered the meeting at
8:20 p.m.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO 85004 SUBMITTED BY KATHY RAUSCH REQUESTING
AN AMENDMENT TO A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A HOME BEAUTY SHOP AT 3000 63RD AVENUE
NORTH WHICH WAS APPROVED UNDER APPLICATION NO. 85004
The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission at its July 27, 1989, meeting. The Director of Planning and
Inspection directed the Mayor and City Council to pages one and two of the July
27, 1989, Planning Commission minutes. He noted the amendment allows for a
nonresident employee to allow the applicant time to work under supervision to
obtain her own shop license. He noted the applicant must complete 2,700 hours
of supervised time in order to obtain her own shop license. He stated the
amendment would allow a nonresident employee for three more years, and there
would also be a change in the hours of operation of the home occupation. He
explained a public hearing has been scheduled for this evening and notices have
been sent.
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 85004 and inquired if there was anyone present who
wished to address the Council. There being none, he entertained a motion to
close the public hearing.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Cohen to
close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 85004. The
motion passed unanimously.
There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
approve Application No. 85004 subject to the following amended conditions:
8/14/89 -5-
Y
N
S
4. The hours of operation shall be: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Wednesday and Friday, 9
a.m. to 8 p.m. Tuesday and Thursday, and 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. Saturday.
11. Special use permit approval acknowledges the presence of a nonresident
employee until August 15, 1992, for the purpose of the applicant working
toward attaining a shop manager's license from the State Board of
Cosmetology. However, if the applicant receives her shop license prior to
that date, she shall submit a copy of it to the Planning and Inspection
Department and the presence of a nonresident employee shall cease.
The motion passed unanimously.
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 89020 SUBMITTED BY MARY LADD REQUESTING
SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO CONDUCT A COUNSELING BUSINESS IN THE RESIDENCE AT
6941 WILLOW LANE
The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission at its July 27, 1989, meeting. The Director of Planning and
Inspection referred the Mayor and City Council to pages two through four of the
July 27, 1989, Planning Commission minutes. He went on to review the location
of the home and noted the applicant does not own this home but has a purchase
agreement which is contingent upon receiving the permit. He noted the
counseling business would be operated on an appointment only basis between the
hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. He stated there were
many neighbors who attended the public hearing but that none of them objected to
the use. He went on to briefly review the conditions recommended for approval
and noted that a public hearing has been scheduled for this evening.
Mayor Nyquist stated he believes this illustrates how far the City has gone in
issuing special use permits in that the applicant is buying the home contingent
upon approval of the permit. He noted it appears the primary use of the home is
not as a home but as a business.
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 89020 and inquired if there was anyone present who
wished to address the Council. He recognized the applicant, Mary Ladd, who
stated she is currently a homeowner in the Camden area and the have sold ld their
home and are looking for a new home. She stated she and her husband have been
looking for a home that could be utilized for both purposes of living and
counseling activities. Councilmember Scott inquired what percentage of time Ms.
Ladd anticipates counseling in the home. Ms. Ladd stated she is generally not
in her office five days a week, and she does have other office space which would
be utilized for first -time screenings to ensure her and her neighbors' safety.
She noted her clientele consists of persons seeking services for personal,
relational, and family concerns, and she felt a home setting is sometimes more
appropriate for these type of counseling sessions. Councilmember Pedlar
inquired how many patients she would anticipate seeing each week. Ms. Ladd
stated she thought she would be doing approximately 15 sessions per week.
Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else present who wished to address
the Council. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the public
hearing.
8/14/89 -6-
There was a motion b Councilmember Scott and seconded b u
Y y Councilmember Paulson
to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 89020. The
motion passed unanimously.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson
to approve Planning Commission Application No. 89020 submitted by Mary Ladd
subject to the following conditions:
1. The special use permit is granted only for the specific use proposed by
the applicant. The use may not be altered or expanded in any way without
first securing an amendment to this special use permit.
2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and
regulations. Any violation, thereof, may be grounds for revocation.
3. Special use permit approval acknowledges use of an 18' x 24' room and
adjoining half bath as being used for the home occupation. This is deemed
to be an incidental and secondary use of the premises. No greater area
within the home is acknowledged by this permit.
4. Clients shall be served on an appointment only basis between the hours of
8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday.
5. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off - street on
improved space provided by the applicant.
6. The premises shall be inspected by the Building Official and any necessary
safety modifications required by him shall be completed prior to the
issuance of the special use permit.
7. A copy of the applicant's state license as an Independent Clinical Social
Worker shall be filed with the City Planning and Inspection Department.
The motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED)
The City Manager presented a Resolution Ordering Installation of Sidewalk on
West Side of Humboldt Avenue North between Woodbine Avenue and 73rd Avenue and
Accepting Proposal for Construction, Improvement Project No. 1989 -20. The City
Manager explained on July 24, 1989, the City Council approved the concept of
installation of sidewalk along Humboldt Avenue between Woodbine Avenue and 73rd
Avenue. He noted two proposals have been received and staff is recommending
approval of the low bid. The Director of Public Works went on to give a brief
history of the past actions pertaining to this area and slides taken of the
area. He noted because of the traffic count for this area, the number of
pedestrians along here are in danger.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Ralph Dotteiger, 7227 Humboldt Avenue North. Mr.
Dotteiger stated he is concerned that this issue has come up before, and the
residents were told they would be informed before any further action was taken.
He stated he was not informed of anything until he found out by accident. He
8/14/89 -7-
noted there are three residential homes along this area, and no one wants the
sidewalk. He stated his home is 47' from the edge of the roadway, and if the
sidewalk is installed, the edge of the sidewalk would be 25' from his home.
Mayor Nyquist stated he was concerned with the issue of safety. He noted
statistically sidewalks provide safety for pedestrians.
Councilmember Pedlar inquired if it is absolutely necessary to install a 12'
boulevard. The Director of Public Works stated it is the standard approach to
install the sidewalk one foot from the edge of the right of way to allow land
for preserving landscaping and snow storage. He stated residents in the area
may feel this is a prelude to widening of Humboldt Avenue but added staff is not
in favor of widening Humboldt Avenue. He noted 12' is a very generous boulevard
and this could be adjusted somewhat. Councilmember Pedlar stated he feels there
is a definite need for sidewalk in this area but understands the neighbors'
feelings. He stated he feels staff could work with the neighborhood to make
this a win /win situation. The Director of Public Works stated he would
recommend no less than 8' for the boulevard width.
Councilmember Cohen stated he agrees with Councilmember Pedlar that the safety
factor should be considered, but staff should try to accommodate the neighbors
by moving the sidewalk closer to the street. Mayor Nyquist stated there seems
to be a general consensus that there is a need for a sidewalk, but it should be
moved closer to the street. He inquired how this would affect the cost of the
project. The Director of Public Works stated the cost may actually be lower
because there would be less relocation of retaining walls and removal of trees
if the sidewalk is closer to the street. Councilmember Pedlar stated he would
prefer to table the resolution this evening to allow staff time to meet with the
neighborhood and work with them. Mayor Nyquist reminded Councilmember Pedlar
that bids have been taken and should be acted on. The Director of Public Works
stated he was sorry if the wrong impression was given, but the Council does not
have to accept or reject the bids this evening.
There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Cohen
directing staff to contact residents in the area and reach a compromise for
placement of the sidewalk and noting the Council's intent to proceed with the
project. The motion passed unanimously.
RECESS
The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 9 :35 p.m. and reconvened at 9:54
p.m.
The City Manager presented a Resolution Ordering Installation of Sidewalk on
East Side of Xerxes Avenue North between 65th & 66th Avenues North and Accepting
Proposal for Construction, Improvement Project 1989 -21. He explained staff had
pulled this item from the consent agenda because they thought there may be a
problem with obtaining an easement from a property owner. He noted, however,
the property owner had no objection to allowing the easement and the project
will proceed without any problems.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -155
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
8/14/89 -8-
I
RESOLUTION ORDERING INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALK ON EAST SIDE OF XERXES AVENUE NORTH
BETWEEN 65TH AND 66TH AVENUES NORTH AND ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR CONSTRUCTION,
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1989 -21
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Philip Cohen, and the motion passed unanimously.
The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding Contract for
Installation of Traffic Control Signal System on Shingle Creek Parkway at the
Entrance to Brookdale Square (Project 1988 -24, Contract 1989 -G).
RESOLUTION N0. 89 -156
Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC
CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM ON SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY AT THE ENTRANCE TO BROOKDALE
SQUARE (PROJECT 1988 -24, CONTRACT 1989 -G)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -157
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR BROOKDALE SQUARE TURNLANE AND
ENTRANCE MODIFICATIONS PROJECT NOS. 1989 -18 AND 1989 -19, CONTRACT 1989 -H)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Philip Cohen, and the motion passed unanimously.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
WATER SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
The Director of Public Works explained in February 1989, the City Council
authorized the preparation of a study to re- evaluate and update the City's 1984
plans for improvements to the municipal water supply system and approved a
contract with Black & Veatch to conduct that study. He noted the major reasons
for updating the 1984 plan were: to re- evaluate the plan with reference to the
high demands experienced during the drought of 1988; to re- evaluate the
feasibility of providing treatment to the water supply system; and to evaluate
the system's ability to achieve compliance with new water supply standards as
promulgated by the USEPA, in accordance with the amendments to the Safe Drinking
Water Act (SWDA) as adopted by Congress in 1986. In addition it is proposed � to P P
evaluate the feasibility of installing an iron and manganese removal system. He
noted Len Rodman and Jim Lorenz, representing Black & Veatch, are present this
evening to discuss the report. Mr. Lorenz stated in addressing the three issues
explained by the Director of Public Works, the following things were found. He
noted water demands during a drought period similar to the 1988 drought can be
as much as 25% higher than water demands during normal weather conditions. He
explained if water restrictions are implemented during a drought, maximum day
demands will only be about 10% higher than the normal demands. He noted the
report recommends and assumes that the City will continue to impose water use
8/14/89 -9-
ti
restrictions during severe drought conditions. He stated the estimated costs
for construction of an iron and manganese removal treatment plant is $8.05
million. He explained because manganese does not present a health threat, it is
not recommended that a treatment plant be constructed solely for the purpose of
correcting the aesthetic problems caused by the current level of manganese in
the water. He added Brooklyn Center's need to build a treatment plant may be
determined by the requirements of State and Federal regulatory agencies.
Mr. Lorenz stated of the standards currently adopted or proposed by the USEPA
under the SDWA, only the testing of consumer's water at- the -tap could cause the
City some difficulty. He stated it is anticipated that few if any of the other
standards will impact Brooklyn Center's system. He added it is apparent that
the City will be served by continuing to develop its system in a way which would
allow construction of a treatment plant at some future date.
Councilmember Cohen inquired if Black & Veatch could make any recommendations
for the types of businesses which are water use intensive that the City should
try to discourage. Mr. Lorenz stated commercial use does not impact a system as
much as residential use and, therefore, it should not really be necessary to
discourage any commercial type uses. A brief discussion then ensued relative to
the Safe Drinking Water Act. Councilmember Cohen suggested supporting the
staff's efforts by contacting the legislative delegation. He suggested the
Council should show its support with a resolution and then send it on to the
legislature. The City Manager stated he could have a letter prepared for the
Mayor's signature for this purpose. Councilmember Cohen stated he felt a
resolution would be more important. The City Manager stated staff would return
in two weeks with a resolution.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar
directing staff to proceed with the development and design of a new well and to
report back with their recommendations in the near future. The motion passed
unanimously.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR FEE -FOR- SERVICES INSURANCE AGENT
The City Manager noted the City's current insurance agent does not have errors
and omission insurance in the amount of $1 million as required by the City. He
noted staff is recommending sending out requests for proposals to various
insurance agents to see if they would be interested in being selected as
insurance agent for the City. He noted a request for proposal would also be
sent to the current agent. He explained the proposals are being requested on a
fee - for - services basis rather than a commission basis. He stated staff expects
to be able to obtain the same services as the City is currently receiving at an
approximate annual cost of $10,000- 15,000 as compared to $21,000.
There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Cohen
authorizing staff to prepare and issue requests for proposals for a "fee -for-
services" insurance agent. The motion passed unanimously.
The Director of Public Works left the meeting at 11:07 p.m.
Councilmember Cohen stated at the next Council meeting he would like to review
the proposed transfer of funds within the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance
8/14/89 -10-
f .
Trust.
Police Chief Lindsay and EDA Coordinator Brad Hoffman entered the meeting at
11:10 P.M.
SELECTION OF A PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
The City Manager explained a staff committee of five people was appointed to
review the proposals received from 14 law firms. He noted the committee has
reviewed the proposals and is forwarding the names of two firms which could
provide quality prosecution services from the request for proposals submitted.
He stated it is the committee and staff's recommendation to appoint the firm of
Carson and Clelland as the City's prosecuting attorney. Mayor Nyquist stated he
would like to caution the Council against making their decision based upon
rates. He noted there are many differences in the rate structure and how they
are billing their time. He added he would like to see a reasonable annual
maximum dollar amount incorporated into the contract. He inquired if the City
Manager had any type of recommendation for a reasonable maximum dollar amount.
The City Manager stated he would like to have the committee review that point.
He added that particular issue may have to be negotiated between the firm and
the City.
Councilmember Paulson stated from his own personal experience with people from
both firms, he feels they are both well qualified to handle the City's
prosecution services. He added, however, he felt more comfortable with the firm
of Carson and Clelland. Councilmember Cohen stated he concurs with the
recommendation of appointing Carson and Clelland as the City's prosecuting
attorney.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -158
Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF CITY PROSECUTOR
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously.
GROUP HOME LEGISLATION - BROOKLYN CENTER INVOLVEMENT
The City Manager stated he has reviewed with Boland and Associates the
feasibility of its organization developing a work program for the last half of
1989, which would be directed at organizing a multicommunity and agency lobbying
effort to modify group home legislation. He stated he does not believe the
lobbying effort can be organized among interested governmental agencies without
one community taking the lead and hiring someone to organize that effort. He
stated he believes Brooklyn Center should take the lead in attempting this
organization. He stated he is recommending the City Council authorize up to
$5,000 for the legislative work proposed in the Boland and Associates work
program document.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Cohen
authorizing up to $5,000 for the legislative work proposed in the Boland and
Associates work program document contained with this agenda packet. The motion
passed unanimously.
i
8/14/89 -11-
'1
OTHER BUSINESS
The City Manager presented a Resolution Authorizing City Manager to enter into
an Agreement.
RESOLUTION NO 89 -159
Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously.
The City Attorney stated he would recommend all comments and questions regarding
this resolution be directed to the City Manager.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar
to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center
City Council adjourned at 11:32 p.m.
City Clerk Mayor
8/14/89 -12-
PROCLAMATION
DECLARING THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER AS PTA /PTO MEMBERSHIP MONTH
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Congress of Parents, Teachers and
Students is dedicated to the achievement of the best
possible educational opportunities for our children;
and
WHEREAS, there is a need for continued active cooperation of all
those interested in helping to insure for our children
and our future the greatest benefit that an educational
program can provide; and
WHEREAS, these goals of the PTA /PTO are of utmost importance to
our entire society, to the maintenance of human
freedom, to the development and happiness of every
individual, and to the continued progress of our
communities, our state, and our nation.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State
of Minnesota, do hereby proclaim the month of September to be
PTA /PTO Membership Month.
Date Mayor
Seal
Attest:
Clerk
APPLICATION q 6L
FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING COMMISSION
Name John R. Kalligher
(work) 667 -8054
Address Girard Ave. N., Brklyn. Ctr. Telephone 566 -3836
Occupation Attorney - Norwest Corporation
Years lived in Brooklyn Center 1 year, 3 months
I am interested in serving on the Housing Commission as a representative of:
the Northeast Neighborhood the Northwest Neighborhood
the Central Neighborhood the West Central Neighborhood
the Southwest Neighborhood X at large representative or
the Southeast Neighborhood
I have read the Housing Commission Enabling Resolution (Resolution No. 77 -22),
which defines the purpose, authority and responsibility of the Brooklyn Center
Housing Commission and the Neighborhood Advisory Committees.
Yeses No Comments I believe that the objective
of the Commission must be accomplished before housing deterioration
in Brooklyn Center becomes worse, and, perhaps, unmanageable.
I understand the importance of regular Commission /Committee meeting attendance
and participation, and feel I have the time available to be an active
participant.
Yes No Comments I will make a full commitment
to- and he an active participant on the Commission
Additional comments on my interest, experience, background, ideas, etc.
My background and experience has helped me to identify problems
and come_ up with workable solutions In addition, being a res
ident of the Southeast neighborhood I have a personal interest
ncurbin4 the deterioration that is berinnin; to manifest itself
in Brooklyn Center. I hoe I can make:a contribution to the Commission.
P
Signature, Date
Submit to: Mayor Dean Nyquist
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
APPLICATION
FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING COMMISSION
}
r
Name
Address t.' L` Telephone
Occupation
Years lived in Brooklyn Center r
I am interested in serving on the Housing Commission as a representative of:
the Northeast Neighborhood the Northwest Neighborhood
the Central Neighborhood (, the West Central Neighborhood
the Southwest Neighborhood at large representative
I have read the Housing Commission Enabling Resolution (Resolution No. 77 -22),
which defines the purpose, authority and responsibility of the Brooklyn Center
Housing Commission and the Neighborhood Advisory Committees.
Yes No Comments
I understand the importance of regular Commission /Committee meeting attendance
and participation, and feel I have the time available to be an active
participant.
Yes No Comments
G , n . �« �, Lam` S' :Ur - , �✓ c/,��r Z`h 7"
Additional comments on my interest, experience, background, ideas, etc.
44 r,
/� S � z � Cam- • : ^,+'_' .�fT'eA+.....�
Date
Submit to: Mayor Dean Nyquist
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8/28/89
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1989 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND ACCEPTING PROPOSAL TO
CONDUCT A STUDY OF SPACE NEEDS AT EAST AND WEST FIRE STATIONS, IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. 1989 -24
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPROVAL:
* * * * * * * * * * * *** A PP., 6 fR*** oR OF PU B* I C WO R * S, * * **
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes
Explanation
• The Fire Department has requested that a Space Needs Study be conducted relating
to both the East and West fire stations. Accordingly, we have requested the
firm of Carlson Mjorud Architecture Inc. (CMA) to review the fire department's
requests and submit a proposal to conduct a Space Needs Study. This study would
be similar in content to the study which CMA recently completed for the Civic
Center complex; i.e. - it would define the space needs based on the request from
the department and the directions from the City Manager, then evaluate the
feasibility of constructing the proposed improvements on the existing sites, and
develop preliminary cost estimates for those improvements.
pr ents.
A copy of CMA's proposal is attached. Also attached is a copy of Fire Chief
Boman's recommedation. It is recommended that the City accept CMA's proposal
for the first three categories of work, i.e.: 1) Building Program; 2) Site
Constraints; and 3) Cost Estimate. It is recommended that the fourth category
of work, i.e. - the Cody Study, be deferred for future inclusion into detailed
construction plan development - if and when a decision is made to proceed with
the improvements.
Council Action Required
• Review and discuss proposed study and CMA's proposal; and
• adopt resolution.
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1989 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND
ACCEPTING PROPOSAL TO CONDUCT A STUDY OF SPACE NEEDS AT EAST
AND WEST FIRE STATIONS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1989 -24
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that it is necessary and
desirable to conduct a Space Needs Study on the East and West fire stations; and
WHEREAS, Section 7.09 of the City Charter of the City of Brooklyn
Center does provide for a contingency appropriation as a part of the General
Fund budget, and further provides that the contingency appropriation may be
transferred to any other appropriation by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City has received a proposal from Carlson Mjorud
Architecture Ltd. (CMA) to conduct the desired study at a cost not -to- exceed
$4544.00.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
1. That the 1989 General Fund budget be amended as follows:
Increase the Appropriations for the following line items
Government Buildings - No. 19, Object No. 4310 $4544.00
Decrease the Appropriations for the following line items
Unallocated Dept. Expense - No. 80, Object No. 4995 $4544.00
2. That the proposal submitted by Carlson Mjorud Architecture Ltd. is
hereby accepted and approved. The City Manager is hereby
authorized and directed to execute a contract with said firm to
conduct the proposed study in accordance with the proposal.
3. The proposed project will be established as Improvement Project No.
1989 -24.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
� A
CMA 4100 Excelsior Boulevard
Carlson Miorud Architecture Ltd. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416
612/922 -6677
August 7, 1989
Mr. Sy Knapp
Director of Public Works
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, ti1N 55430
Re: Fee Proposal for
Fire Department Space Needs Study
Dear Mr. Knapp:
Carlson Mjorud Architecture Ltd. (CMA) appreciates the opportunity to submit a
proposal to the City of Brooklyn Center. Our understanding of this expansion
project and the scope of work is based on the submittal by your Fire Chief,
Ron Boman, on the "Program Data Questionnaire" sheets and our meeting with
you on August 3, 1989.
It is our understanding that this Fire Department Space Needs Study will be
totally separate from the Civic Center Space Needs Study since it involves two
(2) separate sites. It is also understood that the Fire Department administra-
tive personnel will continue to occupy space at the Civic Center.
The format of this proposal is similar to the previous study and is broken down
into the following four (4) categories: 1) Building Program; 2) Site Con -
straints; 3) Cost Estimate; and 4) Code Study.
It is not known at this time as to whether or not there is adequate land avail-
able at the two (2) Fire Stations sites to accommodate the proposed space
additions by the Fire Chief. The second section entitled Site Constraints will
answer this question as to how the space programs fit onto the two (2) sites
and as to whether or not additional land will become necessary.
The following four (4) categories are then broken down for your selection and
consideration:
1. BUILDING PROGRAM FEE: $1,441.00
The work effort involved would first include a meeting with Ron
Boman and Sy Knapp to review existing and new space needs, per -
sonnel needs, and clarify hich new space be
Y P belongs to the East Fi
re
Station and correspondingly which new space belongs to the West Fire
Station and Liquor Store.
Y
Mr. Sy Knapp
Director of Public Works
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
August 7, 1989
Page Two
A second meeting would be necessary to present the Architect's
written interpretation of the proposed space needs. Then, a third
meeting including Jerry Splinter would be necessary to refine the
space program, determine cut backs, and what would be suitable for
presentation to the City Council.
Office time will include a graphic study of the existing Fire Station
Plans to compare and verify existing use vs. new requests by Ron
Boman. Time will be needed to prepare and refine a Building Pro-
gram for each of the two (2) Fire Stations plus a Building Program
for new facilities that could be added to either site.
This fee includes appropriate documentation and clerical support for
the above work.
2. SITE CONSTRAINTS FEE: $1,280.00
Since both of the sites under consideration have buildings on all
sides, the Architect did not include any additional costs for pre-
liminary soil investigations. If the City accepts the premise that no
soil investigation would be necessary, then the first step would be to
gather the appropriate data including site plans and surveys from the
previous building projects.
A small scale site plan of each of the sites would then be prepared.
The Architect would check with City Planning regarding the zoning
ordinance application to setbacks, parking, height restrictions, land
coverage, etc.
Based on the building programs prepared above, it will be necessary
to determine the parking needed to accommodate the new space pro-
posed. The design team will then determine if the building program
will fit on each site. Mr. Boman should make a decision in regard to
which site would most easily accommodate the program space desig-
nated for either site.
It is anticipated that one (1) additional meeting with the Owner will
be needed during this phase of the work. Appropriate documentation
and Drawings will be prepared for each site.
3. COST ESTIMATE FEE: $1,323.00
A preliminary Cost Estimate would be prepared after parking lots,
sidewalks, curbs, site amenities, and site disturbance has been
established under section two above, Site Constraints. New building
construction as well as identified remodeled areas would be included
in this Cost Estimate.
The cost figures would be based on square footage costs currently
being paid to obtain the level of quality matching or exceeding the
current facilities.
Mr. Sy Knapp
Director of Public Works
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
August 7, 1989
Page Three
4. CODE STUDY FEE: $1,553.00
Clay Larson and Ron Boman would first be contacted to discover
whether or not there are any pending code violations or code correc-
tive work previously identified. A complete set of construction
documents for each of the two (2) structures would be required in
order to conduct this investigation.
Each building would be classified in accord with the current edition of
the Minnesota State Building Code Existing spaces not scheduled for
remodeling but found to be nonconforming to the current code may
not require updating. Since the law does not mandate correction in
this instance, it would be the City of Brooklyn Center's decision as
to whether or not these spaces would be updated.
This Code Study would include but not be limited to an investigation
of the existing exit systems, sprinklers, construction type, allowable
area, area separation walls, and general conformance to the Building
Code.
This Code Study will not include a structural analysis, an energy
evaluation nor a detailed report based on job site observations. The
Study will be based on documents furnished to the Architect by the
City of Brooklyn Center.
The (construction) cost of Code Study update requirements will be
identified to reflect those items discovered and included in this
portion of the Study.
Based on your direction, this Study will not include work on the Liquor Store
or the Liquor Store parking lot.
It is expected that Reimbursable Expenses for plans, reports and correspond-
ence will be less than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00).
Thank you for the opportunity to serve the City of Brooklyn Center.
Very truly yours,
CARLSON MJORUD ARCHIT CTURE D.
Bru a M. Carlson, AIA
1 Mj.orud, IA
Managing Ar hitect
BMC /AM;jmj
TO: JERRY SPLINTER CITY MANAGER
FROM: RON BOMAN FIRE CHIEF D,�
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SPACE STUDY NEEDS AT THE
EAST AND WEST FIRE STATIONS
DATE: AUGUST 22, 1989
I am requesting that we have space needs study done at both the
East and West Fire Stations, this would be to have an Architect
look at list of space needs members of Fire Department addressed
during the past few months. This committee reviewed the need for
additional space at both the East and West Fire Station, taking
into consideration what our needs would be for the next 10 ,years.
They subimitted the needs to me and I have reviewed them and
agree with their assessment of our critical shortage of space at
both stations.
When you take into account that the West station was constructed
in 1959 and the East Station was constructed in 1970, we need to
have a study done, as both buildings are in much need of space
additions and major remodeling.
WEST STATION: 6250 BROOKLYN BLVD.
The West Station does not have adequate sleeping quarters for the
firefighters on duty, 2 men have to occupy a small bedroom for
sleeping in, also this bedroom has only 1 fire exit in violation
of our fire code. During storms ect. when we require more
firefighters to stay over night at the station they have to
sleep on cots or on the floor which sometimes makes working at
their regular job the next day difficult. We should have the
ability to sleep at least 6 firefighters at the West Station.
We also do not have any storage room at this station with the
exception of a couple of cabinets and what we store along the out
side walls of the apparatus room, also we have only one lavatory
at this station which is totally inadequate for the number of
people using this building.
This Station should have some major remodeling and additions to
be brought into compliance with current Fire and Building Codes.
EAST STATION: 6500 DUPONT AVE. NO.
The East station could use another apparatus room bay for storage
of mobile equipment as we are cramped for space now, in addition
we have the same lack of storage space at this station as we have
at the West Station total lack of space except for some wooden
cabinets we built and a small storage room which is overpacked
now, we also store equipment along the outside walls.
PAGE 2
We also have need of a seperate enclosed clean room to use for
filling and repairing our breathing air masks, air regulators and
bottles. This should be seperate from the rest of the apparatus
room to keep our breathing air and equipment as clean as
possiable.
Sleeping quarters at this station are non existance, when we have
inclement weather and require firefighters to sleep overnight at
this station they either sleep on the floor or sleep on cots,
which is not the best when you have to work the next day. We
should have the ability to sleep 4 to 6 firefighters at this
station.
In addition we have no locker facilities for the firefighters at
either station for storing of personal clothing for changing
into after fighting fires. Locker rooms facilities for
firefighters are standard at most Fire Stations today.
Office space is totally lacking at each station we currently
have 2 offices at the East Station for 5 Fire Inspectors, 2
Training Officers, 2 District Chiefs, 4 Captains and the
Assistant Fire Chief to use, when you consider the amount of
training material needed to conduct 48 training drills a year and
also record storage you can see we are sorely in need of
additional space at both Fire Stations.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8/28/89
Agenda Item Numbe
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE AND ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR FURNISHING ONE HIGHWAY
SAND /SALT SPREADER
DEPT. APPROVAL:
* * * * * * * * * * * * ** *R * ** OR * * * * * *B * * * * * * * * * * * * *** * A& * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes
Explanation
The truck - mounted box -type spreader used by the Street Department for spreading
salt and sand, which was extremely rusted and in disrepair, was recently examined
to determine if its refurbishing was feasible. After sandblasting, it was
discovered that the sides and ends were so worn that the spreader was beyond
economical repair. The 1989 Capital Outlay budget in Department 42 included
$25,000 for a tailgate paver. Since the bid came in at $15,000, there is a
$10,000 surplus in the current year budget, which could be used to purchase a
new spreader.
This spreader was purchased in 1976, and had provided many years of sand and
salt spreading service. The truck with this spreader, because of its more
efficient operation, has historically been "first out, last in." The sand or
salt is spread, with this type of spreader, from the center rather than the
side. The sand or salt is moved to the spreader via a conveyor belt, rather
than by gravity, which allows the spreader to use more of its load, reducing the
number of refill trips. The conveyor eliminates the "tilt" of a gravity feed,
enhancing safety.
The spreader would be installed on an existing truck by City crews.
Action Required by the Council
A resolution summarizing bids is presented for Council consideration and
approval.
�6
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE AND ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR
FURNISHING ONE HIGHWAY SAND /SALT SPREADER
WHEREAS, the highway sand /salt spreader used by the Street Department
has been determined to be beyond economical repair; and
WHEREAS, this sand /salt spreader is heavily used and has been
recommended by the Director of Public Works for replacement; and
WHEREAS, the following bids have been received:
MacQueen Equipment, Inc. $ 5,609.00
Ruffridge- Johnson Equipment Co., Inc. 6,452.00
Boyum Equipment, Inc. 10,900.00
AND WHEREAS, the 1989 General Fund Street Maintenance Capital Outlay
budget includes funds sufficient to purchase this spreader, due to favorable
bids obtained for items approved in the 1989 budget.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. The proposal by MacQueen Equipment, Inc. to furnish the highway
spreader at a total cost of $5,609 is hereby accepted.
2. All costs for the installation of the spreader shall be charged to
the General Fund, Division 43 - Vehicle Maintenance.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
el
rAl:l:z3* MODEL
POWER DRIVE C3 0 0
2@2@
�SPREADERS
TRUCK CHASSIS and DUMP BODY
MOUNTED
Rugged, heavy -duty, hopper -type spreaders for
year 'round spreading of abrasives and /or chemicals.
of
i
a
R
f
w ,
p
s t
g ,
t
h N
"v
a k�
� fr
j
2 `t
At
o-T
,...:
HIGHWAY EQUIPMENT COMPANY
616 D Avenue, N.W., Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52405
Highway Equipment Company 1977 319/363 -8281
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meetin Date 8/28/89
Agenda Item Numbe
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION ORDERING INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALK ON WEST SIDE OF HUMBOLDT AVENUE
NORTH BETWEEN WOODBINE AVENUE AND 73RD AVENUE AND ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR
CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1989 -20
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPROVAL:
* * * * * * * * * * * ** N *�* 'D *R *** OR OF PUBLIC C WOR ** * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached yp, )
On July 24, 1989, the City Council received a report from the Administrative
Traffic Committee for this segment of sidewalk construction. The City Council
approved the concept.
On August 14, 1989, the City Council tabled this item and directed City staff to
work out an alternate sidewalk alignment with the adjacent property owners.
The originally proposed sidewalk was to be located 1 foot inside the right -of -way,
thereby providing a 12 foot wide boulevard. The revised curvilinear alignment
maintains a minimum 8 foot wide boulevard (see attached exhibit), creating 5 feet
of clearance from the property line in critical areas. A member of the
Engineering staff has met with the property owners, on -site, to discuss the
project. David Olsen, 1501 73rd Avenue North, has requested that the removal of
brush or tree limbs be limited to within 2 feet of edge of the proposed
sidewalk. He has also requested that 2 Linden trees be planted for screening
and that the City constructs the retaining wail with a different style of
concrete block than what was originally proposed. The construction plans have
been revised to reflect these requests.
Mr. Olsen has also requested that his fence, currently located in the public
right -of -way, be reconstructed to a height of six feet. The existing fence is
four feet high, the maximum permitted by City Ordinance, Section 35 -400,
footnote 8, for a fence adjacent to a public right -of -way.
Ralph Pitteiger, on behalf of Gail Arvidson, 7227 Humboldt Avenue North, opposes
the criteria for an eight foot minimum boulevard (for snow storage) and plans to
appeal for a reduction to six feet.
Donald Carson, of 7221 Humboldt Avenue North, stated that he was satisfied with
® the proposed alignment and asked only that the City relocate, if possible, some
shrubs that will be affected by the proposed construction.
Two proposals for construction were received on August 10, 1989.
Schmidt Curb Co., Inc. $12,143.00
Thomas & Sons Construction Inc. $15,303.00
Schmidt Curb Co., Inc. has successfully performed work within the City on
previous projects. Accordingly, we recommend that the low bid of Schmidt Curb
Co. Inc. be accepted and a contract awarded to that firm.
Council Action Required
1. Open for comments from property owners (if present).
2. Adopt the attached resolution.
r
E? I. C
ro
i
I
7221 1501 �+
7227
o
1 �
30ARD FENCE RI
y Z
o r5. O
SPIRT QAL fENCE < nn
I
rn G4MNON SnwL KE1. IvALL
UD X10" SPBIICE s ,� C IO" SIDE 18" CN. ELM 1 ` El. it/A[L� 4.�►�L
"CN. ELV O
IO „ASH 8” Sox ELDER �
-rTlll __ �IO
��
ua k ¢.v.. sn�r.+�' LM. o.
.e
� CH.ELM
SIGN SIG '9 I l 9 1 0 . MT
" ;q, d STI.`.w •
,Qsve,. Fi v y•.r MuLeox -
-
I 2
HUMBOLDT AVE. NO.
NK:: L 6�y"1Yl AGG 9.PNSN W ?.4iN 2l GVT -OF- WR)/
`.7:Y �!lALG 6L /NC /OI.UTAG. �2![.G✓ S.✓AGL 1G
L cc< THAN ¢� /N D /A. - 2 RsO✓E 6;:2"r.
i
CXI L�Ln/O rES G'Lla2 E G.ZLa %2EE
VIEW Q � � ?R/AC`/ �NCE S.✓A[L 8E LOCArEO
/o�� JVEST OG .PAW L NL.
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ORDERING INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALK ON WEST SIDE OF
HUMBOLDT AVENUE NORTH BETWEEN WOODBINE AVENUE AND 73RD AVENUE
AND ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NO. 1989 -20
WHEREAS, pursuant to a request for proposals for Improvement Project
No. 1989 -20, proposals were received, opened, and tabulated by the City
Engineer, on the 10th day of August, 1989. Said proposals were as follows:
Bidder Bid Amount
Schmidt Curb Co., Inc. $12,143.00
Thomas & Sons Construction Inc. $15,303.00
WHEREAS, it appears that Schmidt Curb Co., Inc. of Rogers,
Minnesota, has submitted the lowest proposal.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
1. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to
enter into the attached contract, in the amount of $12,143.00,
with Schmidt Curb Co., Inc. of Rogers, Minnesota in the
name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No.
1989 -20 according to the plans and specifications therefor
approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City
Clerk.
2. All project costs shall be financed by the Municipal State Aid
Street Fund, Account No. 2611.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Dat 8
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE
AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPROVAL;
* * * * * * * * * * * * *N * *R * ** � * ** P *B * * ** * WORKS * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
A ga
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached NO
The attached resolution represents the official council action required to expedite
removal of the trees most recently marked by the city tree inspector in accordance with
the procedures outlined therein. It is anticipated that this resolution will be submitted
for council consideration each meeting during the summer and fall as new trees are marked.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the council adopt the attached resolution.
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE
REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST 08/28/89)
WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and Shade Tree Removal
Agreement has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of
Brooklyn Center giving the owners twenty (20) days to remove shade trees
on the owners' property; and
WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of these shade trees by
declaring them a public nuisance:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that:
1. The shade trees at the following addresses are hereby declared
to be a public nuisance.
PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER
WILLIAM E. OLSON 7200 WEST RIVER RD 0441
STEVEN M. GEMAR 5540 KNOX AVE N 397
DEAN L. PEARSON 5700 DUPONT AVE N 398
GUSTAV WENDELL HOLM 814 62ND AVENUE N 399
BROOKDALE COVENANT C 5139 BROOKLYN BLVD 400
STATE OF MN 65TH & WRR 401
JAMES LUND CONSTR 207 65TH AVENUE N 402
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 403
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 404
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 405
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 406
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 407
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 408
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 409
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 410
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 411
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 412
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 413
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 414
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 415
JAMES LUND CONSTR 6409 WILLOW LA N 416
STATE OF MN 63RD & WILLOW 417
CITY OF BC 63RD & WILLOW 418
CHARLES G. BELL 6440 WILLOW LA N 419
JAMES LUND CONSTR 215 65TH AVE N 420
ARLO D. JOHNSON 6500 WEST RIVER ROAD 421
ARMAS R. LUSTIG 6536 WILLOW LA N 422
. ARMAS R. LUSTIG 6536 WILLOW LA N 423
WILLIAM R. HOYHTYA 7215 DALLAS RD 424
WILLIAM R. HOYHTYA 7215 DALLAS RD 425
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 426
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 427
RESOLUTION NO.
PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 428
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 429
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 430
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 431
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 432
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 433
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 434
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 435
P GALE & T BAUMANN 7216 DALLAS RD 436
WILLIAM R, HOYHTYA 7215 DALLAS RD 437
WILLIAM E. OLSON 7200 WEST RIVER RD 438
WILLIAM E. OLSON 7200 WEST RIVER RD 439
WILLIAM E. OLSON 7200 WEST RIVER RD 440
WILLIAM E. OLSON 7200 WEST RIVER RD 442
WILLIAM E. OLSON 7200 WEST RIVER RD 443
JOHN W. KELLY 7124 WEST RIVER RD 444
JOHN W. KELLY 7124 WEST RIVER RD 445
CITY OF BC RIVERDALE PARK 446
CITY OF BC RIVERDALE PARK 447
THERESA K. COOK 6012 COLFAX AVE N 448
THERESA K. COOK 6012 COLFAX AVE N 449
ROBERT M. LINDBLOM 5538 COLFAX AVE N 450
ROBERT M. LINDBLOM 5538 COLFAX AVE N 451
MAYNARD M. ERICKSON 5624 DUPONT AVE N 452
JEFF /LONA PORTER 5615 FREMONT AVE N 453
EDWARD /BARB BARRON 3313 POE RD 454
JOHN SWADNER 3221 POE RD 455
M J BLOMQUIST 6412 FREMONT AVE N 456
JEFF /LONA PORTER 5615 FREMONT AVE N 457
DONNA MAE LARSON 5354 NORTHPORT DR 458
LAWRENCE /SUSAN LORD 5348 NORTHPORT DR 459
PHILLIP D. COMMERS 5361 NORTHPORT DR 460
TIM /SHELLEY RETTKE 5355 NORTHPORT DR 461
FRED/VALERIE BAUER 5255 TWIN LAKE BLVD 462
LYLE /NORENE MILLER 5247 TWIN LK BLVD E 463
LYLE /NORENE MILLER 5247 TWIN LK BLVD E 464
DARLENE V. RIECK 5130 FRANCE AVE N 465
ELIZABETH M BRUNS 5509 Girard Ave N 466
STUART /IDAMAE COSS 2106 71ST AVE N 467
Martha R. Weber 5040 BROOKLYN BLVD 468
CITY OF B C HAPPY HOLLOW PK 469
BRUCE /JANICE LARSON 1815 70TH AVE N 470
BRUCE /JANICE LARSON 1815 70TH AVE N 471
BRUCE /JANICE LARSON 1815 70TH AVE N 472
CRAIG /BARBARA BENELL 1807 70TH AVE N 473
CRAIG /BARBARA BENELL 1807 70TH AVE N 474
CHANG Y /LAI W HUI 1501 HUMBOLDT PL N 475
CHANG Y /LAI W HUI 1501 HUMBOLDT PL N 476
CHANG Y /LAI W HUI 1501 HUMBOLDT PL N 477
MICHAEL D MCEACHERN 5352 MORGAN AVE N 478
STEVEN W JOHNSON 3321 59TH AVE N 479
DONALD C THAYER 3315 59TH AVE N 480
DONALD C THAYER 3315 59TH AVE N 481
RESOLUTION NO.
PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER
ERIC P MOONEN 5900 BEARD AVE N 482
TIMOTHY /JULIE ADAMS 3313 62ND AVE N 483
PENNY JO MONSE 5328 DUPONT AVE N 484
PENNY JO MONSE 5328 DUPONT AVE N 485
RAYMOND /ANNE FRITZKE 5452 FREMONT AVE N 486
PAMELA C JOHNSON 5500 LOGAN AVE N 487
ROBERT JECHOREK 5400 MORGAN AVE N 488
OLIVIA T WEINRICH 3500 69TH AVE N 489
RICHARD J ARMSTRONG 5602 LOGAN AVE N 490
MILDRED L AARSVOLD 5900 FREMONT AVE N 491
EDWARD /NANCY STEWART 5836 EMERSON AVE N 492
JOHN /CONNIE KLEIN 1100 WOODBINE LA 493
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H. 252 494
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H.252 495
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H. 252 496
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H. 252 497
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H. 252 498
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H. 252 499
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H. 252 500
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H. 252 501
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H. 252 502
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H. 252 503
RELOCATION CENTER 66TH & T.H. 252 504
2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property
owners will receive a second written notice that will give them
(5) business days in which to contest the determination of City
Council by requesting a hearing in writing. Said request shall be
filed with the City Clerk.
3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a
hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City.
4. All removal costs, including legal, financing and administrative
charges, shall be specially assessed against the property.
RESOLUTION NO.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
' /Z�
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
t
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1989 GENERAL FUND BUDGET
----------------------------------------------------
WHEREAS, Section 7.09 of the City Charter of the City of Brooklyn
Center does provide for a contingency appropriation as a part of the General
Fund Budget, and further provides that the contingency appropriation may be
transferred to any other appropriation by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, on July 24, 1989, awarded a contract to
Short - Elliot- Hendrickson, Inc. for a planned use study in an amount not to
exceed $10,595.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center to amend the 1989 General Fund Budget as follows:
Increase the Appropriations for the following line items:
--------------------------------------------------------
Planning & Inspection (No. 33) Professional Services (4310) $10,595
-- Decrease the Appropriations for the following line items:
----------------------------------------
Unallocated Expenses (80) Contingency Account (4995) $10,595
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
i
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8/28/89
Agenda Item Number- F '
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR
DELIVERY OF TELEPHONE SYSTEM FOR BROOKLYN CENTER CITY HALL AND THE EARLE BROWN
HERITAGE CENTER
DEPT. APP VAL- &,c-- EDA Coordinator
Sig t' re - title
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: 10=
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached
• The bid specs before the Council for approval are for the cable system and phone system for both
the City Hall /Civic Center and the Earle Brown Farm. The specs contemplate a totally new system
for the City Hall complex and the Farm. 1 will be available Monday evening to review the specs with
the Council.
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR DELIVERY OF TELEPHONE SYSTEM
FOR BROOKLYN CENTER CITY HALL AND THE EARLE BROWN
HERITAGE CENTER
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center that the specifications for the delivery of a
telephone and cable system for the City Hall Civic Center and the
Earle Brown Heritage Center are hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby
authorized and directed to advertise for and receive bids for the
delivery of the telephone and cable system in accordance with
said specifications.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being taken
thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Mr. Harley Aldrich, of 207 70th Avenue North, asked if there would be any signery
associated with the home occupation. The Secretary pointed out that the City Sign
Ordinance limits home occupation signs to 2.5 square feet which is a fairly small
sign. Ms. Ladd stated that she would have no advertising signs as such, but might
have a small sign on the garage to direct people to the front door.
Mr. Charles Stutz, of 7001 Willow Lane, asked a number of questions. He asked
whether there would be only one counselor. Ms. Ladd stated that there would be only
herself with no assistants. Mr. Stutz asked whether some other home occupation
could be allowed if this special use permit is approved. Chairperson Malecki
answered that any other home occupation would have to be approved separately by the
Planning Commission and City Council. Mr. Stutz asked whether a State license is
required at this time. Ms. Ladd explained that the requirement for licensing has
only recently been enacted by the legislature and that she is among the first seeking
licensure. She stated that her application is presently pending and that there is a
large number of applications to be reviewed and approved.
Mr. Stutz asked whether the granting of the license by the State would expand the
practice. Ms. Ladd responded in the negative. Mr. Stutz read the proposed
Condition No. 1 regarding amendment of the special use permit. He asked about the
possibility if he wanted to amend the special use permit. Chairperson Malecki
answered that he would have to contact the City about problems with the home
occupation and that the Planning Commission would then reevaluate the question.
The Secretary reviewed some examples of changes in the home occupation that would
require an amendment to the special use permit, such as adding a nonresident
employee. As to the type of counseling being done, he stated that the City does not
have expertise in that issue and that it is not really a zoning matter. He stated
that if the conditions were not abided by, that persons in the neighborhood could
contact the City and that the home occupation would be reviewed.
Commissioner Mann asked whether the State allowed Ms. Ladd to continue counseling
while her license was pending. Ms. Ladd responded in the affirmative. The
Secretary asked whether Ms. Ladd did counseling elsewhere. Ms. Ladd responded that
she will also be seeing clients occasionally in her husband's office in Minneapolis.
The Secretary concluded, therefore, that not all of her business would be undertaken
in her home. Ms. Ladd agreed and noted that some clients did not want to drive all
the way to Brooklyn Center. The Secretary also concluded that she would not have
clients at her home every hour allowed for under the conditions of the special use
permit. Ms. Ladd responded in the affirmative.
Chairperson Malecki then asked whether anyone else had any comments. Hearing no
one, she called for a motion to close the public hearing.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Ainas to close the public
hearing. The motion passed unanimously.
Chairperson Malecki stated that parking on -site would basically preclude group
sessions.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 89020 (Mary Ladd)
Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Mann to recommend approval of
Application No. 89020 subject to the following conditions:
7 -27 -89 -3-
CORRECTION I
1. The special use permit is granted only for the specific use
proposed by the applicant. The use may not be altered or
expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this
special use permit.
2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes
ordinances and regulations. Any violation, thereof, may be
grounds for revocation.
3. Special use permit approval acknowledges use of an 18' x 24' room
and adjoining half bath as being used for the home occupation.
This is deemed to be an incidental and secondary use of the
premises. No greater area within the home is acknowledged by
this permit.
4. Clients shall be served on an appointment only basis between the
hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday.
5. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off -
street on improved space provided by the applicant.
6. The premises shall be inspected by the Building Official and any
necessary safety modifications required by him shall be
completed prior to the issuance of the special use permit.
7. A copy of the applicants state license as an Independent
Clinical Social Worker shall be filed with the City Planning and
Inspection Department.
Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Ainas, Mann and McCloskey.
Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Sander. The motion passed.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
a) Group Home Study
The Planner then distributed to the Commissioners the last chapter of the group home
study and the Secretary stated that it had just been received today and that he had
not read it himself. He stated that it is for the Planning Commission to review and
would be discussed in the near future.
The Secretary also pointed out that on August 17, the Planning Commission will
review the Housing Study that was distributed at the previous meeting and that the
Housing Commission and the Neighborhood Advisory Groups would also be present at
that meeting. He added that the City Council had accepted Short- Elliott-
Hendrickson as the consultant to do the study of Land Use in the neighborhood of 66th
and Highway 252. He stated that although their proposal had been more expensive, it
went into greater depth and provided for more meetings.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Sander seconded by Commissioner Mann to adjourn the meeting
of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning
Commission adjourned at 8:14 p.m.
Chairperson
7 -27 -89 -4-
i
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
AUGUST 17, 1989
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by
Chairperson Molly Malecki at 7:32 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Chairperson Molly Malecki, Commissioners Ella Sander, Wallace Bernards, Lowell
Ainas, Bertil Johnson, Kristen Mann, and James McCloskey. Also present were City
Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, EDA
Coordinator Brad Hoffman, City Engineer Mark Maloney and Recording Secretary Mary
Lou Larsen.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 27, 1989
Commissioner Sander noted that the minutes should be corrected on page 4 to read that
she did not vote on Application No. 89020. Motion by Commissioner Sander seconded
by Coommissioner Ainas to approve the minutes of the July 27, 1989 Planning
Commission meeting as corrected. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki,
Commissioners Ella Sander, Lowell Ainas, Kristen Mann and James McCloskey. Voting
against: none. Not voting: Commissioners Bernards and Johnson as they did not
attend that meeting.
BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING STUDY
Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of
business, the Brooklyn Center Housing Study. He stated that Lee Maxfield, of
Maxfield Research Group, the consultant selected by the City to do the Housing Study
is present to explain the study done by his firm. He stated that EDA Coordinator
Brad Hoffman, members of the City Council, the Housing Commission and Neighborhood
Advisory Groups are present to discuss the Housing Study which had been previously
mailed to them. He explained that a recommendation is not expected from the
Commission at this evening's meeting, but rather to discuss the study and Brooklyn
Center's housing needs.
EDA Coordinator Brad Hoffman introduced Lee Maxfield, of Maxfield Research Group,
and explained the background for the study. He stated it was time to look at
Brooklyn Center's housing needs and to find out where Brooklyn Center is in the
housing market with current trends. He explained they had interviewed a number of
consultants and selected Maxfield Research Group to do a true market study to find
out what Brooklyn Center's housing needs and problems are.
Mr. Lee Maxfield gave a presentation on the Brooklyn Center Housing Study. He
stated this study had been recommended by the Year 2000 Committee to review the
housing needs for Brooklyn Center. He stated that Brooklyn Center is an older,
fully developed community with many homes in the 30 to 40 year old range, some of
which are now in need of some repair. He explained some of the "baby boomers" who
bought homes in Brooklyn Center have now moved to the outer suburbs to more expensive
or new homes and people living in the inner city are now moving to Brooklyn Center
into homes in the $60,000 to $70,000 range or into the apartment buildings.
8 -17 -89 -1-
1
In looking at the rental market, Mr. Maxfield stated that some of the apartment
complexes are experiencing tenant /landlord problems. He stated that in his
research and in talking with property managers, he found that there is no screening
of the types of tenants moving into the complex. He explained that perhaps proper
management training and tenant screening education may alleviate these kinds of
problems amd that this might be an area in which the City could participate. In
talking with social service groups, he stated that people are moving to Brooklyn
Center because they believe it is a safer, cleaner community in which to live.
Mr. Maxfield stated that Brooklyn Center has many good marketing strengths to
attract the appropriate tenants and homeowners such as being a gateway to the City of
Minneapolis, good access to the freeway systems, transportation close to
employment, office development, parks, shopping centers and Brooklyn Center is in a
strategic geographic location for affordable housing. He then pointed out various
areas for development projects that could attract people to live in Brooklyn Center,
one being the Lynbrook Bowl area, and another, Lyndale Avenue area with a possible
river park. He stated that the southeast neighborhood could use some dressing up as
these homes are more difficult to sell and construction of a smaller senior
apartment complex to accommodate the elderly in that area might be one way to
accomplish that. Also, he stated, good zoning enforcement and maintenance of the
City to eliminate junk cars, etc. from neighborhoods, keeping the parks clean,
working with churches, schools, social services, and law enforcement are all ways to
make the City a better place in which to live.
The Brooklyn Boulevard area was briefly discussed with Mr. Maxfield stating that
this area should be used for higher intensity commercial uses rather than single -
family residential.
Mr. Maxfield then asked if anyone present had questions. Commissioner Sander asked
how he felt about having four school districts in the community. Mr. Maxfield
answered that one district would be better in terms of community spirit, however,
this is not looked on as a problem in that all of the school districts are perceived
as good school districts. Commissioner McCloskey asked how the Section 8 Program
affects the community. Mr. Maxfield stated that 30% of Brooklyn Center's apartment
residents are on the Section 8 Program and if these apartments are well managed and
well maintained there should be no problems. Commissioner McCloskey asked how
screening can be encouraged if there is a vacant unit and owner cannot make payments
if all units are not filled. Mr. Maxfield stated there are services to provide
tenant screening and management training. He stated that stronger neighborhood
group involvement, having residents rather than the City make decisions could
improve the environment.
Chairperson Malecki asked if anyone else wished to speak. Brad Hoffman explained
entry level buyers are offset by migration from rural areas.
Mr. Maxfield suggested that newer apartments and homes attract more people as they
would rather buy new housing than renovate older homes. He stated that housing with
moderate rent is needed for the elderly.
Mr. Maxfield stated that in 10 yrs. time many of the multi - family complexes will need
help with repairs such as residing, reroof, and structural alterations. He stated
some apartment buildings have social problems due to change in tenants and have
gained a reputation in the City.
8-17 -89 -2-
City Manager Gerald Splinter explained that there are a lot of fronts to be addressed
and suggested the Commission read the study again. He stated a good analysis and
community input is needed to market our city.
A resident of the southeast neighborhood asked how anyone in that area can afford to
sell their homes and move into senior apartments because the senior apartments are
not affordable. She stated most residents can live in their own homes more
economically.
Mr. Maxfield stated that some seniors are not ready for apartment living, while
others feel the additional $300 per month spent is more valuable as there are
services provided for them such as meals, security and medical attention. He
stated Brooklyn Center does not have enough vacant land available for more
apartments.
City Manager Gerald Splinter suggested converting some existing apartment
buildings into condominimums for senior citizens, but cautioned that by the time
they are converted the building market may shift. He asked what is going to happen
further down the line.
Councilmember Phil Cohen explained that the Brookwood condominium building newly
constructed in 1983 did not sell and was converted back into apartments. He stated
that possibly there is now a need for smaller for sale housing units for seniors.
Mr. Maxfield stated that condos are coming back, but are not a good investment now.
He stated newer condos may sell better 3 years from now as the market should be
better. Mr. Maxfield again stated training of people to upgrade older homes,
tenant screening, property management with handbooks and special training sessions
is the best possible solution.
A resident of the southeast neighborhood stated homeowners might be more willing to
sell if more affordable rental units are offered. Another southeast neighborhood
resident asked where condominium buildings could be built as there is no vacant land
available. Phil Cohen suggested rehabilitation may create more housing and there
is more of an opportunity now. He stated that the majority of housing is already
built and we have to maintain what we have. He went on to say that Brooklyn Center
has easy access to downtown which is a good attraction for home buyers and that we
should enforce our zoning codes more strongly and clean up neighborhoods.
A resident of the central neighborhood noted problems with single- family homes
being rented to a number of eo le man cars and people coming nd going. She
P P, Y P P
g g g
suggested meetings for residents to talk about problems.
Mr. Splinter stated that some judges don't want to bother with housing problems. He
stated, however, that the City has had more recent success by concentrating on
problem areas with the Health, Planning and Inspection, and Police Departments and
the EDA Coordinator. He explained that the City now has a new Housing Inspector
that will give the City a better opportunity to enforce the housing codes.
A resident stated that the housing study done by the Maxfield Research Group is
excellent, but we still have to have stronger enforcement of housing maintenance
codes to bring run -down homes and apartments into compliance.
A resident of the southeast neighborhood asked about a particular apartment
building in the Brookdale area that has had problems. The resident asked if that
complex could be converted for seniors. Mr. Maxfield stated that some buildings
are tax shelters rather than people shelters and may be too expensive to renovate and
may never be attractive. He explained sometimes it is more affordable to tear down
the old and build new apartments.
8 -17 -89 -3-
- r
Another resident asked if property could be condemned by the City. Brad Hoffman
answered that it could be done, but with a lot of public expenditure. A resident
inquired how much is spent for police enforcement and stated that cost may be
eliminated with the condemnation.
Mr. Maxfield stated that owners should be encouraged to spend more dollars on
renovation. Chairperson Malecki stated priorities should be set for the future.
The Secretary recommended that the Commission read the housing study again and to
keep in mind that some recommendations are not consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. He stated there is a need to reconcile the differences and that perhaps there
is a need for neighborhood meetings. It is also important, he noted, to establish a
set of priorities to meet the various recommendations in the study.
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 8:55 p.m. and resumed at 9:09 p.m.
APPLICATION NOS. 89021 AND 89022 (R. L. Brookdale Motors)
The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building
plan and special use permit approval to construct a 14,565 sq. ft. addition to the
Honda building at Brookdale Pontiac -Honda at 6801 Brooklyn Boulevard and a second
request for a special use permit for accessory off -site parking. The Secretary
reviewed the contents of the staff reports (see Planning Commission Information
Sheets for Application Nos. 89021 and 89022 attached) . He noted there is a public
hearing required and the proper notices have been sent.
Chairperson Malecki asked if there were any questions regarding the application.
Commissioner Johnson asked for clarification of revocation of special use permits.
The Secretary answered the special use permit could be revoked if the conditions of
the application are not met. He noted, however, that with the building addition
made, it would not be wise to revoke the special use permit involving the use of the
off -site lot.
Commissioner Bernards asked if the use of the southeast entrance should be in the
conditions of approval. The Secretary stated he has had no comment from the Police
Department or Director of Public Works. He noted as long as it is serves as an
entrance only there is no problem, but if it becomes an exit, the entrance would have
to be signed.
Commissioner McCloskey asked for clarification of inventory. The Secretary
responded that cars will be stored both at the remote lot located at 4215 69th Avenue
North and on the principal site of Brookdale Pontiac - Honda. He explained that a car
dealership such as this one, is required to have enough parking to meet their parking
requirement. Any parking spaces left over can be used for inventory parking.
Chairperson Malecki stated there should be a sign for customer parking and
enforcement of parking. The Secretary stated the City has no requirements for
inventory parking at auto dealerships, but there is concern that the site will be
jammed with inventory cars and no place provided for customer parking. He added it
is almost impossible to enforce, but a tag could be issued if there is no customer
parking on site. He explained that cars from Brookdale Pontiac - Honda's lot in
Brooklyn Park will go into the remote lot located at 4215 69th Avenue North. He
stated a commitment is needed from the owner that inventory will decrease for this
plan to be successful.
8 -17 -89 -4-
4
Chairperson Malecki stated enforcement will be necessary. Commissioner Sander
stated even if the special use permit is revoked, the building is still 'there with
the inventory problem.
Chairperson Malecki inquired about the exterior of the building. The Secretary
answered that the proposal is for a flat concrete block painted to match the south
building. He noted the staff has recommended the use of a decorative concrete
block.
Chairperson Malecki asked if the applicant wished to speak. Dan Luther, General
Manager of Brookdale Pontiac - Honda, introduced himself and his architect, John
Baker of Baker Associates. He t n n
s ated he was not aware there had been a entrance
sign at 4215 69th Avenue North nor a previous requirement that this be used only as an
entrance as he has been with Brookdale- Pontiac since 1985. He added that if the
entrance sign is a condition of approval he will install and enforce such a sign.
Commissioner McCloskey stated he is not confident that the inventory will decrease
even with the added remote facility. Mr. Luther stated the demand for service is
there whether the cars are sold or not. He explained that they must provide more
service to his customers and that it is in his interest to reduce his inventory.
Commissioner Bernards asked if it isn't more practical to have a lower inventory.
Mr. Luther stated the consumer likes many choices, but from a dealer's standpoint it
is more practical to have a lower inventory.
Commissioner Bernards asked Mr. Luther if he knows how much inventory is located in
Brooklyn Park. Mr. Luther stated he didn't know for certain, but that this
inventory was being reduced. He added that even with his proposed off -site lot in
Brooklyn Center, he may still need additional storage space such as that in Brooklyn
Park until the inventory can be reduced to an acceptable level.
Regarding concerns and comments made about landscaping at the remote site, Mr.
Luther stated his firm takes pride in the landscaping at the Brooklyn Boulevard site
and plans to landscape the remote facility as well.
Commissioner McCloskey asked where the excess inventory will go if the remote
facility fails. Mr. Luther stated he would have to secure an area somewhere if this
were to happen, although he believed the inventor would be reduced and the
PP , g Y
likelihood of a roblem happening was very remote. Mr. Luther also stated p pp g y he is
concerned about customer parking, there are not a lot of customers at one time.
m
P g,
He added he is . re ared to stripe customer parking.
P P P P g
Commissioner Bernards asked the architect about the design of the building. John
Baker, architect, stated they plan to improve the looks of the showroom and be
compatible with the existing building. He then showed the Commission a design plan
of the building. Commissioner McCloskey stated he is not opposed to requiring
decorative block and asked the difference in cost. Mr. Baker answered it is 5 to 10
cents per block for the decorative block and that they were willing to put up
decorative block.
Chairperson Malecki asked Mr. Luther how long his firm intended to use 'the remote
lot. Mr. Luther responded that he plans to use it permanently as they have a
purchase agreement, however, contaminated soil has been found with the removal of
gas tanks and will have to be removed. He noted that the final purchase would be
held until this is accomplished. He noted the recommended condition requiring
8 -17 -89 -5-
proof of ownership before the issuing of building permits. He inquired if this
condition could be waived if they were willing to sign agreements to the effect that
Brookdale Pontiac would acquire the property. The Secretary commented that the
importance of this condition is that the off -site parking lot be bound permanently
to the principal site (Brookdale Pontiac) and that such restriction could only be
released by the City and only on the basis that some other parking area has been
found. He pointed out that if the owner of the off -site lot, other than Brookdale
Pontiac, is willing to execute and file such an agreement in a manner satisfactory to
the City Attorney, then actual ownership by Brookdale Pontiac of the off -site lot
might not be necessary. He added, however, it will be absolutely necessary to
address this condition in a satisfactory manner before any permit for the building
addition can be issued. It is essential that the off -site inventory lot be bound
together with the principal site permanently.
Commissioner McCloskey asked if the contaminated soil will be removed in time. Mr.
Luther answered that he has to have the remote lot before building the addition,
therefore, the soil has to be removed in time.
PUBLIC HEARING
Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked if anyone
present wished to speak regarding the application.
Lyle Blaido, of 4100 69th Avenue North, stated the fence around the North Star Dodge
site is not an attractive fence. He added that if the inventory lot is approved it
will add more traffic on 69th and it will be even more difficult for him to get out of
his driveway. He pointed out that traffic in this area is a real concern.
Mrs. John Guest, of 4208 69th Avenue North, stated that with the traffic from 69th
and Brooklyn Boulevard she can hardly get out of her driveway. She added that soil
dug up from the tank removal is blowing all over from 4215 69th Avenue North.
Mr. John Guest, of 4208 69th Avenue North, stated he is opposed to lights from car
dealerships shining into his living room and bedroom. He added there are too many
car dealerships in the residential area and when he moved there it was a nice quiet
neighborhood. He stated that cars add pollution and the car inventory at the remote
lot at 4215 69th Avenue North will grow. He asked what is the City going to do when
there is too much pollution at this intersection. He added that the intersection of
69th and Brooklyn Boulevard is already known as one of the most polluted
intersections in the State. He stated he cannot open his windows now because of
gasoline odors from existing gas stations and fumes from cars in the area. He
pointed out that the situation is getting worse and the proposed use of 4215 69th
Avenue North for more car parking will only add to congestion and pollution in the
area.
Chairperson Malecki asked Mr. Luther if customers will be taken to the remote lot to
look at cars. Mr. Luther stated this may happen, but no sales will be conducted
there. Chairperson Malecki asked how the customer will get to the remote lot. Mr.
Luther responded either by car or walk. The Secretary stated that it is recommended
that there can be no sales or howin of vehicles on the en
s remote lot inventory
g , Y
parking only. Mr. Luther responded there will be no employee parking and he has no
problem keeping the customers from coming to the lot if that is a condition of
approval.
Commissioner Sander stated she believes there will be sales on the remote lot and
wondered how can the City police that. She expressed serious doubts as to how this
whole proposal will work. Mr. Luther stated he will work with his employees to
bring the cars to the customer if it is a requirement and assured the Commission that
there would be no problems.
8 -17 -89 -6-
Mr. Blaido stated if customers unfamiliar with the area drive cars out of the remote
lot onto 69th Avenue North there could be a serious accident. Mr. Guest stated cars
are being roadtested in the lot across the street from him. Mr. Luther stated he
would not be roadtesting any cars in that lot. Mrs. Guest stated she had to go
around the block to get into her driveway because of traffic congestion. The
Secretary stated the traffic is not just generated by businesses on Brooklyn
Boulevard, but by rush hour traffic as well. He added that the use proposed is less
of a traffic generator than most commercial uses.
Chairperson Malecki asked if there were any other questions. Mr. Blaido suggested
that perhaps there is a better use of the property and that the City should consider
rezoning the property. He added the remote lot will not hold Brookdale Pontiac -
Honda's inventory as that inventory will increase.
The Secretary explained that a rezoning, or downzoning, will not affect traffic on
69th and Brooklyn Boulevard which, in most cases, is associated with rush hours. He
noted that a reconsideration of the zoning of the property in the area might well
indicate that the residential property should be rezoned.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Following further discussion, Chairperson Malecki called for a motion to close the
public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Johnson to
close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners
Sander, Bernards, Ainas, Johnson, Mann and McCloskey. The motion passed.
The Secretary stated Brookdale.Pontiac -Honda will have to continue an off -site lot
on the proposed site or find a different location as long as the addition is built.
Chairperson Malecki then polled the Commissioners for their opinions.
Commissioner McCloskey suggested the applicant look for a different remote lot as
the one proposed will not meet their needs when the inventory increases. He noted
he was opposed to the application. Commissioner Ainas stated if the inventory
expands the applicant will have to find additional space elsewhere. Commissioner
McCloskey stated the contaminated soil will have to be removed before the addition
is built. Commissioner Sander stated enforcement of sales and customer parking on
the remote lot will be difficult to handle. Commissioner Ainas stated the two
properties will be legally bound together and if they run out of space, they will
have to go elsewhere. He added that it was his opinion that there is no legal reason
to deny the application. Commissioner Johnson stated he is concerned about the
trees, fence and building appearance of the American Bakery site. He suggested the
owner should work with the neighbors to get these problems resolved.
Chairperson Malecki stated the staff report recommends waiving the landscape
requirement. She asked if the Commissioners would like the need for additional
landscaping to be added as one of the conditions of approval.
Commissioner Mann stated, in her opinion, she did not see any legal grounds to deny
the applications.
Commissioner Bernards stated a condition should be added to provide maximum
landscaping. Commissioner Sander stated a condition should be included to
prohibit customers from coming to the remote lot to view cars and also a condition
binding the two properties together.
8 -17 -89 -7-
- r
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 89021 (R. L. Brookdale Motors)
Mo o by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Bernards to recommend
approval of Application No. 89021 subject to the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of
permits.
3• A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted prior to the issuance of permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with
Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all
landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property,
improvements and utility service lines serving the proposed
addition, prior to release of the performance guarantee.
10. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and Agreement for
Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and Storm Drain Systems
prior to the issuance of permits.
11. Customer parking, as indicated on the approved site plan, shall
be signed and all parking spaces shall be striped prior to release
of the performance guarantee.
12. The applicant shall submit proof of ownership of the site at 4215
69th Avenue North prior to the issuance of permits for the
addition. The applicant shall also execute a restrictive
covenant binding use of the remote site to the car dealership on
the principal site. Said covenant to be approved by the City
Attorney, executed and filed prior to the issuance of permits.
13. Approval of Application No. 89021 for the building addition is
subject to approval of Application No. 89022 for off -site
accessory parking at 4215 69th Avenue North.
8 -17 -89 -8-
14. On -site fire hydrants shall be provided near the northerly access
off Brooklyn Boulevard and immediately west of the proposed
addition in accordance with the recommendations of the Fire
Chief .
15. The plans shall be revised, prior to the issuance of permits, to
indicate the following:
a) Additional plantings to bring total landscaping on the site
up to a point value of 339 points based on the City's
Landscape Point System.
b) Existing and proposed site lighting shall be indicated with
light intensity measurements.
c) Outside trash disposal areas, if any, shall be indicated and
screening provided.
d) Building materials shall be revised to a decorative concrete
block painted to match the existing Honda sales building.
16. The special use permit is granted only for the specific use
proposed by the applicant. The use may not be altered or
expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this
special use permit.
17. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances and regulations. Any violation thereof may be
grounds for revocation.
Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, Johnson, and
Mann. Voting against: Commissioners Sander and McCloskey. The motion passed.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 89022 (R. L. Brookdale Motors)
Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Bernards to recommend
approval of Application No. 89022 subject to the following conditions:
1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations. Any violation thereof may be
grounds for revocation.
2. The special use permit is issued to Brookdale Pontiac -Honda for
use as an off -site inventory vehicle storage lot. No sales,
showing or servicing of vehicles is permitted on the off -site lot
at 4215 69th Avenue North.
3. The applicant shall legally encumber the use of the site at 4215
69th Avenue North for the sole purpose of providing inventory
vehicle parking accessory to the principal car dealership use at
6801 Brooklyn Boulevard. Said encumbrance shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Attorney, shall be executed and filed prior
to issuance of the special use permit and prior to issuance of
building permits for expansion at the principal site.
4. All vehicle storage at 4215 69th Avenue North shall be screened
from public view by an opaque fence not less than 6' in height.
8 -17 -89 -9-
5. The applicant shall enter into a performance agreement with a
supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by
the City Manager) to assure completion of the fencing
improvements prior to the issuance of the special use permit.
6. Special use permit approval for off -site accessory parking
specifically waives the requirement that such parking not be
located across a major thoroughfare on the grounds that the
nature of the off -site use should not generate pedestrian traffic
between the remote site and the principal site.
7. The applicant shall modify the landscape plan to provide the
maximum possible landscape treatment on the site.
Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, Johnson and
Mann. Voting against: Commissioners Sander and McCloskey. The motion passed.
The Secretary stated that the August 31 Planning Commission has been cancelled.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion y Tommissioner Sander to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission.
The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 11:17 p.m.
Chairperson
8 -17 -89 -10-
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 89021
Applicant: Brookdale Pontiac /Honda
Location: 6801 Brooklyn Boulevard
Request: Site and Building Plan /Special Use Permit
Location /Use
The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to
construct a 14,565 s .ft. addition to the Honda building at Brookdale Pontiac -Honda
� q g
at 6801 Br000klyn Boulevard. The purpose of the addition would primarily be to add
15 service bays to the sales building. Also included would be parts storage and
sales area office space and customer waiting. The property in question is zoned C2
and is bounded on the north by the Brooklyn Center Service service station, on the
east by Brooklyn Boulevard, on the south by 68th Avenue North, and on the west by the
Post Office. Sales and service of automobiles is a special use in the C2 zoning
district.
Access /Parking
No changes to the access to the site are proposed. Our greatest concern regarding
site access is at the southeast corner of the site where there is an access onto 68th
just west of Brooklyn Boulevard. There is not enough room between this driveway and
Brooklyn Boulevard to make a clean, safe movement either entering or exiting the
site. In 1981, when the Honda sales building was approved, the City Council imposed
a condition that this driveway be signed "entrance only." The sign was installed in
1982, but has since been removed. The driveway is partially blocked by inventory
parking. Ideally, this access drive should be closed. At a minimum, the "entrance
only" sign should be re- installed.
The main issue of this application is parking. The proposed addition will
eliminate some existing stalls and, at the same time, increase the parking
requirement for the site. The result will be a significant decrease in inventory
parking. To offset the loss of inventory parking on the principal site, the
applicant is acquiring the American Bakeries site at 4215 69th Avenue North for use
as a remote inventory lot (see Application No. 89022). The addition comprehends
approximately 1,000 sq. ft. of additional retail space, 700 sq. ft. of office space,
15 service bays, 13 employees, and one (1) additional service vehicle. Altogether,
this adds 71 parking stalls to the existing parking requirement of 168 spaces for a
total requirement of 239 spaces. The plan calls for just 26 customer spaces. We
recommend that these spaces be signed. The plan also denotes 90 spaces for
employees (including retail, office, service, etc.) , 117 spaces for vehicles being
serviced (this meets 3 per service bay) , and 3 for service vehicles. The plan only
indicates three handicapped stalls, all for customers. The handicapped code
requires five handicapped spaces. We recommend two additional stalls be
designated for handicapped employees.
The plan provides for 154 inventory parking spaces on -site and an additional 150 on
the remote site for a total of 304 cars. Existing inventory parking has not been
documented; however, we have received a letter from Dan Luther, President of
Brookdale Pontiac-Honda (attached),indicating that total inventory in June of this
year was 240 new cars and trucks and 135 used cars for a total of 375 vehicles. This
has been a heavy year for inventory at the car dealership and an off -site lot in
Brooklyn Park has been used temporarily. Mr. Luther projects long -term inventory
at 255 to 300 total vehicles. If his projections are correct, the space available
for inventory between the two lots should be just sufficient. In terms of land area
8 -17 -89 -1-
Application No. 89021 continued -
for inventory, the proposed addition is 14,565 sq. ft. The 71 additional required
stalls at 300 sq. ft. per parking stall take up 21,300 sq. ft. for a total loss of
35,865 sq. ft. of land area presently available for inventory parking. The remote
lot at 4215 69th Avenue North is more than 35,865 sq. ft. , but a portion of that site
will be reserved for American Bakeries which will continue to lease a small portion
of the building for office and retail sales. The amount of land and building
available for inventory parking at the off -site lot is approximately 32,000 sq. ft.
It, therefore, appears that the proposed addition, even with the remote lot, will
result in a slight diminution in land area available for inventory parking. Given
this fact, and given the fact that Brookdale Pontiac is presently using an off -site
lot in Brooklyn Park (which arrangement is ending this fall) , we are concerned that
the proposed expansion may exceed the capacity of the site(s) to properly function.
The City has no requirements for inventory parking at car dealerships. Therefore,
it may be difficult to deny the application on any ordinance grounds.
Nevertheless, the proposed expansion clearly pushes the capacity of the two sites to
or even beyond the maximum. At a minimum, the applicant should be required to
submit proof that he in fact owns the site at 4215 69th Avenue North before any
building permits for the expansion are approved. (The applicant presently has a
purchase agreement.) The essence of the situation is that the new remote lot at
4215 69th will only barely cover the loss of space at the principal site due to the
expansion. It will not cover the inventory that exists on the remote lot in
Brooklyn Park. Since that lot is being terminated and there is no excess capacity
at the principal site, we would expect that there will be an inventory parking
problem until inventory levels drop from 375 to around 300. The City cannot control
these inventory levels, but we can control building expansion on the principal site
which certainly affects the space problem. The Commission is urged to discuss the
inventory parking problem with the applicant before acting to recommend approval of
any expansion.
Landscaping
The landscape plan documents existing landscaping as consisting of 15 shade trees
and 132 shrubs for a total point value of 216 points. The plan proposes one
additional shade tree (a Skyline Locust along Brooklyn Boulevard), 13 Colorado
Spruce trees primarily along 68th Avenue North, and four Japanese tree Lilacs in
parking lot islands around the Honda building for a total point value of 94 points.
The total of 310 points meets the requirement for a 4.5 acre site. However, Lot
Surveys has certified the lot area as 4.99 acres. Based on this area, the landscape
point requirement is 339 points. We have requested an amended plan providing some
additional plantings and it should be available for the Planning Commission's
consideration.
Grading, Drainage, Utilities
The grading plan calls for only minor modifications to the site. Most of the site
presently drains to a catch basin in the southwest corner of the site which is
connected to City storm sewer in 68th Avenue North. The plan calls for one new catch
basin east of the Honda sales building to be connected to storm sewer in Brooklyn
Boulevard. Water and sanitary sewer service lines will also be added between the
proposed Honda addition and City utilities in Brooklyn Boulevard. The size of
these utility lines has not been indicated on the plan. Utility plans are always
subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the size of these lines will
certainly have to be approved prior to the issuance of building permits.
Because the site is just under 5 acres, there is no need for review and approval by
the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission. The Fire Chief has recommended
the addition of two hydrants on the site, one just south of the north entrance off
Brooklyn Boulevard and one behind the new service building.
8 -17 -89 -2-
r Application No. 89021 continued
Building
Me proposed building addition would add a service garage with 14 service bays and a
wash rack bay, a service write -up area along the north side of the addition, a parts
warehouse, office space, lunchroom, customer waiting area and a few other smaller
rooms. The total area of the addition is approximately 14,565 sq. ft. The
addition will have to be fire - sprinklered. Cars will enter the service write -up
via an overhead door on the east side of the building and will either exit the west
side or enter the service bays to the south. Service parking will be in a fenced
yard south and west of the building.
The exterior of the building addition is be a flat concrete block, painted to match
the Pontiac service garage to the south, with a blue accent band along the lower
portion of the wall. There is also to be a new metal canopy added around the
existing Honda showroom. While there is no ordinance against flat concrete block,
it is a fairly plain material and no new building or building addition in Brooklyn
Center has utilized it for approximately 20 years. We feel it no longer meets the
community standard even though it is consistent with the existing service building.
The applicant has indicated a willingness to accommodate the City's concerns, but
prefers to build an addition consistent with the existing service garage. We would
urge the Commission to discuss the question of exterior and, if it wishes, recommend
a change to the City Council.
Lighting /Trash
No information on lighting or trash has been submitted as of the writing of this
report, but we expect information on these items to come in prior to the Planning
Commission meeting.
Special Use Standards
The car dealership is a special use in the C2 zoning district. As such, it is
subject to the standards set forth in Section 35 -220.2 (attached). We do not see
any major conflict with the first three of these standards. It should not adversely
affect the public health, safety or welfare, should not detract from property values
(though we feel a higher quality building material would be more of an enhancement) ,
and should not impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding land. It is
the fourth standard which raises concerns. While the plan indicates that all
parking requirements can be met, the pressure on inventory parking will be
significant and, at least in the short run, there will probably be inventory parked
in spaces designated for customers, employees, and vehicles to be serviced. The
applicant has indicated that 1989 has been a unique year in terms of the size of the
inventory he has had to carry. He expects inventory levels to drop and for the
remote lot on 69th to handle the displacement caused by the addition to the Honda
building. It may be that this inventory drop will occur before the Honda service
center is up and running, but if it does not occur, there simply will not be capacity
on the two sites to handle the operation. We, therefore, have significant
reservations about the proposed expansion at this time. However, because
inventory control is a private business concern and is not addressed in the City's
ordinances, it may be difficult to deny the expansion outright. We certainly
recommend that at least customer parking spaces be signed close to the sales
buildings as indicated on the proposed plan. Striping of the parking in the fenced
in area west of the service buildings might also help preserve some order in this
area where excess inventory is likely to be stored. We do not recommend City
enforcement of the parking plan as that may be rather difficult and time - consuming.
The purpose of the planning process is to foresee potential problems and seek to
avoid them before buildings are built, not to invite chronic enforcement problems.
Based on the information received so far, we believe there is a potential parking
8 -17 -89 -3-
Application No. 89021 continued
w
problem if the proposed addition is built. Any approval will, therefore, entail
some risk that the principal site will become overburdened. Nevertheless, if the
inventory levels projected by Mr. Luther are soon realized, the problems should be
intermittent and, hopefully, manageable.
Recommendation
The Commission should certainly discuss the inventory question with the applicant
and, if resolved satisfactorily, should also discuss building treatment. Any
action recommending approval should be subject to at least the following
conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of
permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted prior to the issuance of permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with
Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all
landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property,
improvements and utility service lines serving the proposed
addition, prior to release of the performance guarantee.
10. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and Agreement for
Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and Storm Drain Systems
prior to the issuance of permits.
11. Customer parking, as indicated on the approved site plan, shall
be signed and all parking spaces shall be striped prior to release
of the performance guarantee.
12. The applicant shall submit proof of ownership of the site at 4215
69th Avenue North prior to the issuance of permits for the
addition. The applicant shall also execute a restrictive
covenant binding use of the remote site to the car dealership on
the principal site. Said covenant to be approved by the City
Attorney, executed and filed prior to the issuance of permits.
8 -17 -89 -4-
Application No. 89021 continued
�
13. Approval of Application No. 89021 for the building addition is
subject to approval of Application No. 89022 for off -site
accessory parking at 4215 69th Avenue North.
14. On -site fire hydrants shall be provided near the northerly access
off Brooklyn Boulevard and immediately west of the proposed
addition in accordance with the recommendations of the Fire
Chief.
15. The plans shall be revised, prior to the issuance of permits, to
indicate the following:
a) Additional plantings to bring total landscaping on the site
up to a point value of 339 points based on the City's
Landscape Point System.
b) Existing and proposed site lighting shall be indicated with
light intensity measurements.
c) Outside trash disposal areas, if any, shall be indicated and
screening provided.
d) Building materials shall be revised to a decorative concrete
block painted to match the existing Honda sales building.
16. The special use permit is granted only for the specific use
proposed by the applicant. The use may not be altered or
expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this
special use permit.
17. The special use ermit is subject t a
p ,7 0 11 applicable codes,
ordinances and regulations. Any violation thereof may be
grounds for revocation.
8 -17 -89 _5_
e
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 89022
Applicant: Brookdale Pontiac -Honda
Location: 4215 69th Avenue North
Request: Special Use Permit
The applicant requests special use permit approval to operate an off -site or remote
inventory lot at 4215 69th Avenue North for the Brookdale Pontiac -Honda dealership
at 6801 Brooklyn Boulevard. The property in question is the old American Bakeries
building, is zoned C2 and is bounded on the north by 69th Avenue North, on the east by
North Star Dodge ( car storage) , on the south by the Vickers gas station and on the
west by Pilgrim Cleaners. Off -site accessory parking and retail sales of
automobiles are both special uses in the C2 zoning district. The purpose of the
off -site lot in this case is strictly for inventory storage. No sales or service of
vehicles will be conducted at the off -site lot and none should be permitted.
Service of vehicles especially is prohibited at this location because of the
abutment across 69th Avenue North with Rl zoned property.
The applicant has submitted a site plan for the property at 4215 69th Avenue North
along with plans for the addition to the Honda building on the principal site at 6801
Brooklyn Boulevard. Part of the building will continue to be leased by American
Bakeries. They will operate an 803 sq. ft. retail store and occupy a 504 sq. ft.
office. The parking requirement for their use is 14 spaces. The site plan
provides for 14 spaces at the northwest portion of the site. There is a single
access off 69th Avenue North which will serve both uses on the site. The southern
3/4 of the site and the vast majority of the building will be devoted to automobile
storage for the Brookdale Pontiac -Honda dealership. The plan projects inventory
storage of 47 cars in the building and 103 cars outside the building for a total of
150 cars stored on the off -site lot. The plan proposes a new, decorative wood fence
with masonry columns to screen the inventory cars from the residential neighborhood
north of 69th Avenue North. It also extends approximately 40' along the west
property line to screen the cars from Brooklyn Boulevard. The plan also calls for
removing two islands in the parking lot to maximize the space available for car
storage.
Off -site accessory parking is allowed by special use according to the requirements
outlined in section 35 -701, Subsection 3 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached) . The
off -site parking must generally be on property of comparable or more intense zoning
(in this case, both sites are zoned C2). Accessory off -site parking is limited to
one site per business. The applicant has a remote inventory lot temporarily in
Brooklyn Park. We don't feel any need to control that. Another point to consider
is that this parking space is for inventory, not customers or employees. The
distance from the furthest point of the accessory off -site lot to the principal use
must not exceed 800 feet. In this case, the distance is approximately 450 ft. A
minimum of 20 parking spaces must be provided on the off -site lot. In this case,
there is room for up to 150 inventory cars. Even with normal parking arrangements,
the off -site lot can accommodate far more than 20 cars.
Subsection 3e requires that accessory off -site parking be located such that
pedestrian traffic will not be required to cross major thoroughfares and certain
other designated streets. Brooklyn Boulevard, since it is a County road, is
classified as a major thoroughfare. This limitation would not be observed in this
case. We feel, given the nature of the use at 4215 69th Avenue North as purely
inventory storage, this provision can be waived. Since no customers or employees
8 -17 -89 -Z-
Application No. 89022 continued
will regularly travel to the off -site lot, there should be no pedestrian traffic
resulting from the parking at the off -site lot. The off -site lot, while it involves
the parking of cars, is really a storage function for the car dealership. As
storage, it must be
g screened and p rop e r � p pe screening provisions have been proposed.
Other concerns r off-
site
off -site parking are that the land on which the off site
spaces are located be legally encumbered to the sole ur ose of p roviding p arkin g
P P P g P g
for the rinci al use and that
P A site improvements be provided as required by the City
Council. The legal encumbrances is required as a condition of approval of
Application No. 89021 and should be a condition of this application also, even
though the parking provided is not required parking under the ordinance, only
inventory parking. As to site improvements, the applicant only proposes
eliminating a couple parking lot islands in order to maximize storage area for
vehicles. We have checked the landscaping on the site, some of which is documented
on the remote site plan. The site has numerous mature decorative trees, about 15
shrubs and four shade trees. The total point value of the existing plantings is
estimated at 82.5 points. The site is 1.25 acres and requires 100 points. Since
there is no building proposed, the Commission may waive the requirement for
additional landscaping. There are already quite a few trees on the site which,
though mature, have a low point value. There actually isn't a lot of open area left
to add trees. What is needed is better maintenance of the grounds which have begun
to look ragged.
Altogether, this application appears to be in order and approval is recommended,
subject to at least the following conditions:
1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations. Any violation thereof may be
grounds for revocation.
2. The special use permit is issued to Brookdale Pontiac -Honda for
use as an off -site inventory vehicle storage lot. No sales or
service of vehicles is permitted on the off -site lot at 4215 69th
Avenue North.
3. The applicant shall legally encumber the use of the site at 4215
69th Avenue North for the sole purpose of providing inventory
vehicle parking accessory to the principal car dealership use at
6801 Brooklyn Boulevard. Said encumbrance shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Attorney, shall be executed and filed prior
to issuance of the special use permit and prior to issuance of
building permits for expansion at the principal site.
4. All vehicle storage at 4215 69th Avenue North shall be screened
from public view by an opaque fence not less than 6' in height.
5. The applicant shall enter into a performance agreement with a
supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by
the City Manager) to assure completion of the fencing
improvements prior to the issuance of the special use permit.
6. Special use permit approval for off -site accessory parking
specifically waives the requirement that such parking arkin not be
located across a major thoroughfare on the grounds that the 0
nature of the off -site use should not generate pedestrian traffic
between the remote site and the principal site.
8 -17 -89 -2-
i
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8 -28 -89
Agenda Item Number 4:�
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Planning Commission Application Nos. 89021 and 89022 - R. L. Brookdale Motors
DEPARTMENT AP VAL:
-M-00-4.0 a - w
Signature - title Director of Planning and Inspection
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X
Application No. 89021 is a request for site and building plan approval to construct a
14,565 sq.ft. addition to the Honda building at Brookdale Pontiac -Honda located at
6801 Brooklyn Boulevard.
• Application No. 89022 is a request for off -site parking at the American Bakeries
building located at 4215 69th Avenue North.
Minutes, information sheets, site plans and a map of the area regarding both
applications are attached.
Recommendation
Both of the applications were reviewed by the Planning Commission at its August 17,
1989 meeting and approval was recommended subject to the conditions listed in the
minutes from that meeting.
i
Another resident asked if property could be condemned by the City. Brad Hoffman
answered that it could be done, but with a lot of public expenditure. A resident
inquired how much is spent for police enforcement and stated that cost may be
eliminated with the condemnation.
Mr. Maxfield stated that owners should be encouraged to spend more dollars on
renovation. Chairperson Malecki stated priorities should be set for the future.
The Secretary recommended that the Commission read the housing study again and to
keep in mind that some recommendations are not consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. He stated there is a need to reconcile the differences and that perhaps there
is a need for neighborhood meetings. It is also important, he noted, to establish a
set of priorities to meet the various recommendations in the study.
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 8:55 p.m. and resumed at 9:09 p.m.
APPLICATION NOS. 89021 AND 89022 (R. L. Brookdale Motors)
The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building
plan and special use permit approval to construct a 14,565 sq. ft. addition to the
Honda building at Brookdale Pontiac -Honda at 6801 Brooklyn Boulevard and a second
request for a special use permit for accessory off -site parking. The Secretary
reviewed the contents of the staff reports (see Planning Commission Information
Sheets for Application Nos. 89021 and 89022 attached) . He noted there is a public
hearing required and the proper notices have been sent.
Chairperson Malecki asked if there were any questions regarding the application.
Commissioner Johnson asked for clarification of revocation of special use permits.
The Secretary answered the special use permit could be revoked if the conditions of
the application are not met. He noted, however, that with the building addition
made, it would not be wise to revoke the special use permit involving the use of the
off -site lot.
Commissioner Bernards asked if the use of the southeast entrance should be in the
conditions of approval. The Secretary stated he has had no comment from the Police
Department or Director of Public Works. He noted as long as it is serves as an
entrance only there is no problem, but if it becomes an exit, the entrance would have
to be signed.
Commissioner McCloskey asked for clarification of inventory. The Secretary
responded that cars will be stored both at the remote lot located at 4215 69th Avenue
North and on the principal site of Brookdale Pontiac- Honda. He explained that a car
dealership such as this one, is required to have enough parking to meet their parking
requirement. Any parking spaces left over can be used for inventory parking.
Chairperson Malecki stated there should be a sign for customer parking and
enforcement of parking. The Secretary stated the City has no requirements for
inventory parking at auto dealerships, but there is concern that the site will be
jammed with inventory cars and no place provided for customer parking. He added it
is almost impossible to enforce, but a tag could be issued if there is no customer
parking on site. He explained that cars from Brookdale Pontiac- Honda's lot in
Brooklyn Park will go into the remote lot located at 4215 69th Avenue North. He
stated a commitment is needed from the owner that inventory will decrease for this
Plan to be successful.
8-17 -89 -4-
Chairperson Malecki stated enforcement will be necessary. Commissioner Sander
stated even if the special use permit is revoked, the building is still there with
the inventory problem.
Chairperson Malecki inquired about the exterior of the building. The Secretary
answered that the proposal is for a flat concrete block painted to match the south
building. He noted the staff has recommended the use of a decorative concrete
block.
Chairperson Malecki asked if the applicant wished to speak. Dan Luther, General
Manager of Brookdale Pontiac - Honda, introduced himself and his architect, John
Baker of Baker Associates. He stated he was not aware there had been an entrance
sign at 4215 69th Avenue North nor a previous requirement that this be used only as an
entrance as he has been with Brookdale- Pontiac since 1985. He added that if the
entrance sign is a condition of approval he will install and enforce such a sign.
Commissioner McCloskey stated he is not confident that the inventory will decrease
even with the added remote facility. Mr. Luther stated the demand for service is
there whether the cars are sold or not. He explained that they must provide more
service to his customers and that it is in his interest to reduce his inventory.
Commissioner Bernards asked if it isn't more practical to have a lower inventory.
Mr. Luther stated the consumer likes many choices, but from a dealer's standpoint it
is more practical to have a lower inventory.
Commissioner Bernards asked Mr. Luther if he knows how much inventory is located in
Brooklyn Park. Mr. Luther stated he didn't know for certain, but that this
inventory was being reduced. He added that even with his proposed off -site lot in
Brooklyn Center, he may still need additional storage space such as that in Brooklyn
Park until the inventory can be reduced to an acceptable level.
Regarding concerns and comments made about landscaping at the remote site, Mr.
Luther stated his firm takes pride in the landscaping at the Brooklyn Boulevard site
and plans to landscape the remote facility as well.
Commissioner McCloskey asked where the excess inventory will go if the remote
facility fails. Mr. Luther stated he would have to secure an area somewhere if this
were to happen, although he believed the inventory would be reduced and the
likelihood of a problem happening was very remote. Mr. Luther also stated he is
concerned about customer parking, but there are not a lot of customers at one time.
He added he is prepared to stripe customer parking.
Commissioner Bernards asked the architect about the design of the building. John
Baker, architect, stated they plan to improve the looks of the showroom and be
compatible with the existing building. He then showed the Commission a design plan
of the building. Commissioner McCloskey stated he is not opposed to requiring
decorative block and asked the difference in cost. Mr. Baker answered it is 5 to 10
cents per block for the decorative block and that they were willing to put up
decorative block.
Chairperson Malecki asked Mr. Luther how long his firm intended to use the remote
lot. Mr. Luther responded that he plans to use it permanently as they have a
purchase agreement, however, contaminated soil has been found with the removal of
gas tanks and will have to be removed. He noted that the final purchase would be
held until this is accomplished. He noted the recommended condition requiring
8 -17 -89 -5-
roof of ownership p e ship before the issuing of building permits. He inquired if this
condition could be waived if they were willing to sign agreements to the effect that
Brookdale Pontiac would acquire the property. The Secretary commented that the
importance of this condition is that the off -site parking lot be bound permanently
to the principal site (Brookdale Pontiac) and that such restriction could only be
released by the City and only on the basis that some other parking area has been
found. He pointed out that if the owner of the off -site lot, other than Brookdale
Pontiac, is willing to execute and file such an agreement in a manner satisfactory to
the City Attorney, then actual ownership by Brookdale Pontiac of the off -site lot
might not be necessary. He added, however, it will be absolutely necessary to
address this condition in a satisfactory manner before any permit for the building
addition can be issued. It is essential that the off -site inventory lot be bound
together with the principal site permanently.
Commissioner McCloskey asked if the contaminated soil will be removed in time. Mr.
Luther answered that he has to have the remote lot before building the addition,
therefore, the soil has to be removed in time.
PUBLIC HEARING
Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked if anyone
present wished to speak regarding the application.
Lyle Blaido, of 4100 69th Avenue North, stated the fence around the North Star Dodge
site is not an attractive fence. He added that if the inventory lot is approved it
will add more traffic on 69th and it will be even more difficult for him to get out of
his driveway. He pointed out that traffic in this area is a real concern.
Mrs. John Guest, of 4208 69th Avenue North, stated that with the traffic from 69th
and Brooklyn Boulevard she can hardly get out of her driveway. She added that soil
dug up from the tank removal is blowing all over from 4215 69th Avenue North.
Mr. John Guest, of 4208 69th Avenue North, stated he is opposed to lights from car
dealerships shining into his living room and bedroom. He added there are too many
car dealerships in the residential area and when he moved there it was a nice quiet
neighborhood. He stated that cars add pollution and the car inventory at the remote
lot at 4215 69th Avenue North will grow. He asked what is the City going to do when
there is too much pollution at this intersection. He added that the intersection of
69th and Brooklyn Boulevard is already known as one of the most polluted
intersections in the State. He stated he cannot open his windows now because of
gasoline odors from existing gas stations and fumes from cars in the area. He
pointed out that the situation is getting worse and the proposed use of 4215 69th
Avenue North for more car parking will only add to congestion and pollution in the
area.
Chairperson Malecki asked Mr. Luther if customers will be taken to the remote lot to
look at cars. Mr. Luther stated this may happen, but no sales will be conducted
there. Chairperson Malecki asked how the customer will get to the remote lot. Mr.
Luther responded either by car or walk. The Secretary stated that it is recommended
that there can be no sales or showing of vehicles on the remote lot, inventory
parking only. Mr. Luther responded there will be no employee parking and he has no
problem keeping the customers from coming to the lot if that is a condition of
approval.
Commissioner Sander stated she believes there will be sales on the remote lot and
wondered how can the City police that. She expressed serious doubts as to how this
whole proposal will work. Mr. Luther stated he will work with his employees to
bring the cars to the customer if it is a requirement and assured the Commission that
there would be no problems.
8 -17 -8q -6-
Mr. Blaido stated if customers unfamiliar with the area drive cars out of the remote
lot onto 69th Avenue North there could be a serious accident. Mr. Guest stated cars
are being roadtested in the lot across the street from him. Mr. Luther stated he
would not be roadtesting any cars in that lot. Mrs. Guest stated she had to go
around the block to get into her driveway because of traffic congestion. The
Secretary stated the traffic is not just generated by businesses on Brooklyn
Boulevard, but by rush hour traffic as well. He added that the use proposed is less
of a traffic generator than most commercial uses.
Chairperson Malecki asked if there were any other questions. Mr. Blaido suggested
that perhaps there is a better use of the property and that the City should consider
rezoning the property. He added the remote lot will not hold Brookdale Pontiac -
Honda's inventory as that inventory will increase.
The Secretary explained that a rezoning, or downzoning, will not affect traffic on
69th and Brooklyn Boulevard which, in most cases, is associated with rush hours. He
noted that a reconsideration of the zoning of the property in the area might well
indicate that the residential property should be rezoned.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Following further discussion, Chairperson Malecki called for a motion to close the
public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Johnson to
close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners
Sander, Bernards, Ainas, Johnson, Mann and McCloskey. The motion passed.
The Secretary stated Brookdale.Pontiac -Honda will have to continue an off -site lot
on the proposed site or find a different location as long as the addition is built.
Chairperson Malecki then polled the Commissioners for their opinions.
Commissioner McCloskey suggested the applicant look for a different remote lot as
the one proposed will not meet their needs when the inventory increases. He noted
he was opposed to the application. Commissioner Ainas stated if the inventory
expands the applicant will have to find additional space elsewhere. Commissioner
McCloskey stated the contaminated soil will have to be removed before the addition
is built. Commissioner Sander stated enforcement of sales and customer parking on
the remote lot will be difficult to handle. Commissioner Ainas stated the two
properties will be legally bound together and if they run out of space, they will
have to go elsewhere. He added that it was his opinion that there is no legal reason
to deny the application. Commissioner Johnson stated he is concerned about the
trees, fence and building appearance of the American Bakery site. He suggested the
owner should work with the neighbors to get these problems resolved.
Chairperson Malecki stated the staff report recommends waiving the landscape
requirement. She asked if the Commissioners would like the need for additional
landscaping to be added as one of the conditions of approval.
Commissioner Mann stated, in her opinion, she did not see any legal grounds to deny
the applications.
Commissioner Bernards stated a condition should be added to provide maximum
landscaping. Commissioner Sander stated a condition should be included to
prohibit customers from coming to the remote lot to view cars and also a condition
binding the two properties together.
8 -17 -89 -7-
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 89021 (R. L. Brookdale Motors)
ioT tin by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Bernards to recommend
approval of Application No. 89021 subject to the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of
permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted prior to the issuance of permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with
Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all
landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property,
improvements and utility service lines serving the proposed
addition, prior to release of the performance guarantee.
10. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and Agreement for
Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and Storm Drain Systems
prior to the issuance of permits.
11. Customer parking, as indicated on the approved site plan, shall
be signed and all parking spaces shall be striped prior to release
of the performance guarantee.
12. The applicant shall submit proof of ownership of the site at 4215
69th Avenue North prior to the issuance of permits for the
addition. The applicant shall also execute a restrictive
covenant binding use of the remote site to the car dealership on
the principal site. Said covenant to be approved by the City
Attorney, executed and filed prior to the issuance of permits.
13. Approval of Application No. 89021 for the building addition is
subject to approval of Application No. 89022 for off -site
accessory parking at 4215 69th Avenue North.
8 -17 -89 -8-
14. On -site fire hydrants shall be provided near the northerly access
off Brooklyn Boulevard and immediately west of the proposed
addition in accordance with the recommendations of the Fire
Chief .
15. The plans shall be revised, prior to the issuance of permits, to
indicate the following:
a) Additional plantings to bring total landscaping on the site
up to a point value of 339 points based on the City's
Landscape Point System.
b) Existing and proposed site lighting shall be indicated with
light intensity measurements.
e) Outside trash disposal areas, if any, shall be indicated and
screening provided.
d) Building materials shall be revised to a decorative concrete
block painted to match the existing Honda sales building.
16. The special use permit is granted only for the specific use
proposed by the applicant. The use may not be altered or
expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this
special use permit.
17. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances and regulations. Any violation thereof may be
grounds for revocation.
Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, Johnson, and
Mann. Voting against: Commissioners Sander and McCloskey. The motion passed.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 89022 (R. L. Brookdale Motors)
Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Bernards to recommend
approval of Application No. 89022 subject to the following conditions:
1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations. Any violation thereof may be
grounds for revocation.
2. The special use permit is issued to Brookdale Pontiac -Honda for
use as an off -site inventory vehicle storage lot. No sales,
showing or servicing of vehicles is permitted on the off -site lot
at 4215 69th Avenue North.
3. The applicant shall legally encumber the use of the site at 4215
69th Avenue North for the sole purpose of providing inventory
vehicle parking accessory to the principal car dealership use at
6801 Brooklyn Boulevard. Said encumbrance shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Attorney, shall be executed and filed prior
to issuance of the special use permit and prior to issuance of
building permits for expansion at the principal site.
4. All vehicle storage at 4215 69th Avenue North shall be screened
from public view by an opaque fence not less than 6' in height.
8 -17 -89 -9-
9
5. The applicant shall enter into a performance agreement with a
supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by
the City Manager) to assure completion of the fencing
improvements prior to the issuance of the special use permit.
6. Special use permit approval for off -site accessory parking
specifically waives the requirement that such parking not be
located across a major thoroughfare on the grounds that the
nature of the off -site use should not generate pedestrian traffic
between the remote site and the principal site.
7. The applicant shall modify the landscape plan to provide the
maximum possible landscape treatment on the site.
Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, Johnson and
Mann. Voting against: Commissioners Sander and McCloskey. The motion passed.
The Secretary stated that the August 31 Planning Commission has been cancelled.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion y ommissioner Sander to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission.
The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 11:17 p.m.
Chairperson
8 -17 -89 -10-
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 89021
Applicant: Brookdale Pontiac /Honda
Location: 6801 Brooklyn Boulevard
Request: Site and Building Plan /Special Use Permit
Location /Use
The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to
construct a 14,565 sq. ft. addition to the Honda building at Brookdale Pontiac -Honda
at 6801 Br000klyn Boulevard. The purpose of the addition would primarily be to add
15 service bays to the sales building. Also included would be parts storage and
sales area, office space and customer waiting. The property in question is zoned C2
and is bounded on the north by the Brooklyn Center Service service station, on the
east by Brooklyn Boulevard, on the south by 68th Avenue North, and on the west by the
Post Office. Sales and service of automobiles is a special use in the C2 zoning
district.
Access /Parking
No changes to the access to the site are proposed. Our greatest concern regarding
site access is at the southeast corner of the site where there is an access onto 68th
just west of Brooklyn Boulevard. There is not enough room between this driveway and
Brooklyn Boulevard to make a clean, safe movement either entering or exiting the
site. In 1981, when the Honda sales building was approved, the City Council imposed
a condition that this driveway be signed "entrance only." The sign was installed in
1982, but has since been removed. The driveway is partially blocked by inventory
parking. Ideally, this access drive should be closed. At a minimum, the "entrance
only" sign should be re- installed.
The main issue of this application is parking. The proposed addition will
eliminate some existing stalls and, at the same time, increase the parking
requirement for the site. The result will be a significant decrease in inventory
parking. To offset the loss of inventory parking on the principal site, the
applicant is acquiring the American Bakeries site at 4215 69th Avenue North for use
as a remote inventory lot (see Application No. 89022). The addition comprehends
approximately 1,000 sq. ft. of additional retail space, 700 sq. ft. of office space,
15 service bays, 13 and one (1) additional service vehicle. Altogether,
this adds 71 parking stalls to the existing parking requirement of 168 spaces for a
total requirement of 239 spaces. The plan calls for just 26 customer spaces. We
recommend that these spaces be signed. The plan also denotes 90 spaces for
employees (including retail, office, service, etc.) , 117 spaces for vehicles being
serviced (this meets 3 per service bay) , and 3 for service vehicles. The plan only
indicates three handicapped stalls, all for customers. The handicapped code
requires five handicapped spaces. We recommend two additional stalls be
designated for handicapped employees.
The plan provides for 154 inventory parking spaces on -site and an additional 150 on
the remote site for a total of 304 cars. Existing inventory parking has not been
documented; however, we have received a letter from Dan Luther, President of
Brookdale Pontiac-Honda (attached), indicating that total inventory in June of this
year was 240 new cars and trucks and 135 used cars for a total of 375 vehicles. This
has been a heavy year for inventory at the car dealership and an off -site lot in
Brooklyn Park has been used temporarily. Mr. Luther projects long -term inventory
at 255 to 300 total vehicles. If his projections are correct, the space available
for inventory between the two lots should be just sufficient. In terms of land area
8 -17 -89 -1-
Application No. 89021 continued
for inventory, the proposed addition is 14,565 sq. ft. The 71 additional required
stalls at 300 sq. ft. per parking stall take up 21,300 sq. ft. for a total loss of
35,865 sq. ft. of land area presently available for inventory parking. The remote
lot at 4215 69th Avenue North is more than 35,865 sq. ft. , but a portion of that site
will be reserved for American Bakeries which will continue to lease a small portion
of the building for office and retail sales. The amount of land and building
available for inventory parking at the off -site lot is approximately 32,000 sq. ft.
It, therefore, appears that the proposed addition, even with the remote lot, will
result in a slight diminution in land area available for inventory parking. Given
this fact, and given the fact that Brookdale Pontiac is presently using an off -site
lot in Brooklyn Park (which arrangement is ending this fall) , we are concerned that
the proposed expansion may exceed the capacity of the site(s) to properly function.
The City has no requirements for inventory parking at car dealerships. Therefore,
it may be difficult to deny the application on any ordinance grounds.
Nevertheless, the proposed expansion clearly pushes the capacity of the two sites to
or even beyond the maximum. At a minimum, the applicant should be required to
submit proof that he in fact owns the site at 4215 69th Avenue North before any
building permits for the expansion are approved. (The applicant presently has a
purchase agreement.) The essence of the situation is that the new remote lot at
4215 69th will only barely cover the loss of space at the principal site due to the
expansion. It will not cover the inventory that exists on the remote lot in
Brooklyn Park. Since that lot is being terminated and there is no excess capacity
at the principal site, we would expect that there will be an inventory parking
problem until inventory levels drop from 375 to around 300. The City cannot control
these inventory levels, but we can control building expansion on the principal site
which certainly affects the space problem. The Commission is urged to discuss the
inventory parking problem with the applicant before acting to recommend approval of
any expansion.
Landscaping
The landscape plan documents existing landscaping as consisting of 15 shade trees
and 132 shrubs for a total point value of 216 points. The plan proposes one
additional shade tree (a Skyline Locust along Brooklyn Boulevard), 13 Colorado
Spruce trees primarily along 68th Avenue North, and four Japanese tree Lilacs in
parking lot islands around the Honda building for a total point value of 94 points.
The total of 310 points meets the requirement for a 4.5 acre site. However, Lot
Surveys has certified the lot area as 4.99 acres. Based on this area, the landscape
point requirement is 339 points. We have requested an amended plan providing some
additional plantings and it should be available for the Planning Commission's
consideration.
Grading, Drainage, Utilities
The grading plan calls for only minor modifications to the site. Most of the site
presently drains to a catch basin in the southwest corner of the site which is
connected to City storm sewer in 68th Avenue North. The plan calls for one new catch
basin east of the Honda sales building to be connected to storm sewer in Brooklyn
Boulevard. Water and sanitary sewer service lines will also be added between the
proposed Honda addition and City utilities in Brooklyn Boulevard. The size of
these utility lines has not been indicated on the plan. Utility plans are always
subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the size of these lines will
certainly have to be approved prior to the issuance of building permits.
Because the site is just under 5 acres, there is no need for review and approval by
the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission. The Fire Chief has recommended
the addition of two hydrants on the site, one just south of the north entrance off
Brooklyn Boulevard and one behind the new service building.
8 -17 -89 -2-
Application No. 89021 continued
Building
die proposed building addition would add a service garage with 14 service bays and a
wash rack bay, a service write -up area along the north side of the addition, a parts
warehouse, office space, lunchroom, customer waiting area and a few other smaller
rooms. The total area of the addition is approximately 14,565 sq. ft. The
addition will have to be fire - sprinklered. Cars will enter the service write -up
via an overhead door on the east side of the building and will either exit the west
side or enter the service bays to the south. Service parking will be in a fenced
yard south and west of the building.
The exterior of the building addition is be a flat concrete block, painted to match
the Pontiac service garage to the south, with a blue accent band along the lower
portion of the wall. There is also to be a new metal canopy added around the
existing Honda showroom. While there is no ordinance against flat concrete block,
it is a fairly plain material and no new building or building addition in Brooklyn
Center has utilized it for approximately 20 years. We feel it no longer meets the
community standard even though it is consistent with the existing service building.
The applicant has indicated a willingness to accommodate the City's concerns, but
prefers to build an addition consistent with the existing service garage. We would
urge the Commission to discuss the question of exterior and, if it wishes, recommend
a change to the City Council.
Lighting /Trash
No information on lighting or trash has been submitted as of the writing of this
report, but we expect information on these items to come in prior to the Planning
Commission meeting.
Special Use Standards
The car dealership is a special use in the C2 zoning district. As such, it is
subject to the standards set forth in Section 35 -220.2 (attached). We do not see
any major conflict with the first three of these standards. It should not adversely
affect the public health, safety or welfare, should not detract from property values
(though we feel a higher quality building material would be more of an enhancement) ,
and should not impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding land. It is
the fourth standard which raises concerns. While the plan indicates that all
parking requirements can be met, the pressure on inventory parking will be
significant and, at least in the short run, there will probably be inventory parked
in spaces designated for customers, employees, and vehicles to be serviced. The
applicant has indicated that 1989 has been a unique year in terms of the size of the
inventory he has had to carry. He expects inventory levels to drop and for the
remote lot on 69th to handle the displacement caused by the addition to the Honda
building. It may be that this inventory drop will occur before the Honda service
center is up and running, but if it does not occur, there simply will not be capacity
on the two sites to handle the operation. We, therefore, have significant
reservations about the proposed expansion at this time. However, because
inventory control is a private business concern and is not addressed in the City's
ordinances, it may be difficult to deny the expansion outright. We certainly
recommend that at least customer parking spaces be signed close to the sales
buildings as indicated on the proposed plan. Striping of the parking in the fenced
in area west of the service buildings might also help preserve some order in this
area where excess inventory is likely to be stored. We do not recommend City
enforcement of the parking plan as that may be rather difficult and time - consuming.
The purpose of the planning process is to foresee potential problems and seek to
avoid them before buildings are built, not to invite chronic enforcement problems.
Based on the information received so far, we believe there is a potential parking
8 -17 -89 -3-
Application No. 89021 continued
problem if the proposed addition is built. Any approval will, therefore, entail
some risk that the principal site will become overburdened. Nevertheless, if the
inventory levels projected by Mr. Luther are soon realized, the problems should be
intermittent and, hopefully, manageable.
Recommendation
The Commission should certainly discuss the inventory question with the applicant
and, if resolved satisfactorily, should also discuss building treatment. Any
action recommending approval should be subject to at least the following
conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of
permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted prior to the issuance of permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with
Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all
landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property,
improvements and utility service lines serving the proposed
addition, prior to release of the performance guarantee.
10. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and Agreement for
Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and Storm Drain Systems
prior to the issuance of permits.
11. Customer parking, as indicated on the approved site plan, shall
be signed and all parking spaces shall be striped prior to release
of the performance guarantee.
12. The applicant shall submit proof of ownership of the site at 4215
69th Avenue North prior to the issuance of permits for the
addition. The applicant shall also execute a restrictive
covenant binding use of the remote site to the car dealership on
the principal site. Said covenant to be approved by the City
Attorney, executed and filed prior to the issuance of permits.
8 -17 -89 -4-
Application No. 89021 continued
13. Approval of Application No. 89021 for the building addition is
subject to approval of Application No. 89022 for off -site
accessory parking at 4215 69th Avenue North.
14. On -site fire hydrants shall be provided near the northerly access
off Brooklyn Boulevard and immediately west of the proposed
addition in accordance with the recommendations of the Fire
Chief.
15. The plans shall be revised, prior to the issuance of permits, to
indicate the following:
a) Additional plantings to bring total landscaping on the site
up to a point value of 339 points based on the City's
Landscape Point System.
b) Existing and proposed site lighting shall be indicated with
light intensity measurements.
c) Outside trash disposal areas, if any, shall be indicated and
screening provided.
d) Building materials shall be revised to a decorative concrete
block painted to match the existing Honda sales building.
16. The special use permit is granted only for the specific use
proposed by the applicant. The use may not be altered or
expanded in any way without first securing an amendment to this
special use permit.
17. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances and regulations. Any violation thereof may be
grounds for revocation.
8 -17 -89 _5_
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 89022
Applicant: Brookdale Pontiac -Honda
Location: 4215 69th Avenue North
Request: Special Use Permit
The applicant requests special use permit approval to operate an off -site or remote
inventory lot at 4215 69th Avenue North for the Brookdale Pontiac -Honda dealership
at 6801 Brooklyn Boulevard. The property in question is the old American Bakeries
building, is zoned C2 and is bounded on the north by 69th Avenue North, on the east by
North Star Dodge (car storage) , on the south by the Vickers gas station and on the
west by Pilgrim Cleaners. Off -site accessory parking and retail sales of
automobiles are both special uses in the C2 zoning district. The purpose of the
off -site lot in this case is strictly for inventory storage. No sales or service of
vehicles will be conducted at the off -site lot and none should be permitted.
Service of vehicles especially is prohibited at this location because of the
abutment across 69th Avenue North with Rl zoned property.
The applicant has submitted a site plan for the property at 4215 69th Avenue North
along with plans for the addition to the Honda building on the principal site at 6801
Brooklyn Boulevard. Part of the building will continue to be leased by American
Bakeries. They will operate an 803 sq. ft. retail store and occupy a 504 sq. ft.
office. The parking requirement for their use is 14 spaces. The site plan
provides for 14 spaces at the northwest portion of the site. There is a single
access off 69th Avenue North which will serve both uses on the site. The southern
3/4 of the site and the vast majority of the building will be devoted to automobile
storage for the Brookdale Pontiac -Honda dealership. The plan projects inventory
storage of 47 cars in the building and 103 cars outside the building for a total of
150 cars stored on the off -site lot. The plan proposes a new, decorative wood fence
with masonry columns to screen the inventory cars from the residential neighborhood
north of 69th Avenue North. It also extends approximately 40' along the west
property line to screen the cars from Brooklyn Boulevard. The plan also calls for
removing two islands in the parking lot to maximize the space available for car
storage.
Off -site accessory parking is allowed by special use according to the requirements
outlined in section 35-701, Subsection 3 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached) . The
off -site parking must generally be on property of comparable or more intense zoning
(in this case, both sites are zoned C2) . Accessory off -site parking is limited to
one site per business. The applicant has a remote inventory lot temporarily in
Brooklyn Park. We don't feel any need to control that. Another point to consider
is that this parking space is for inventory, not customers or employees. The
distance from the furthest point of the accessory off -site lot to the principal use
must not exceed 800 feet. In this case, the distance is approximately 450 ft. A
minimum of 20 parking spaces must be provided on the off -site lot. In this case,
there is room for up to 150 inventory cars. Even with normal parking arrangements,
the off -site lot can accommodate far more than 20 cars.
Subsection 3e requires that accessory off -site parking be located such that
pedestrian traffic will not be required to cross major thoroughfares and certain
other designated streets. Brooklyn Boulevard, since it is a County road, is
classified as a major thoroughfare. This limitation would not be observed in this
case. We feel, given the nature of the use at 4215 69th Avenue North as purely
inventory storage, this provision can be waived. Since no customers or employees
8 -17 -89 -1-
Application No. 89022 continued
will regularly travel to the off -site lot, there should be no pedestrian traffic
resulting from the parking at the off -site lot. The off -site lot, while it involves
the parking of cars, is really a storage function for the car dealership. As
storage, it must be screened and proper screening provisions have been proposed.
Other concerns regarding off -site parking are that the land on which the off -site
spaces are located be legally encumbered to the sole purpose of providing parking
for the principal use and that site improvements be provided as required by the City
Council. The legal encumbrances is required as a condition of approval of
Application No. 89021 and should be a condition of this application also, even
though the parking provided is not required parking under the ordinance, only
inventory parking. As to site improvements, the applicant only proposes
eliminating a couple parking lot islands in order to maximize storage area for
vehicles. We have checked the landscaping on the site, some of which is documented
on the remote site plan. The site has numerous mature decorative trees, about 15
shrubs and four shade trees. The total point value of the existing plantings is
estimated at 82.5 points. The site is 1.25 acres and requires 100 points. Since
there is no building proposed, the Commission may waive the requirement for
additional landscaping. There are already quite a few trees on the site which,
though mature, have a low point value. There actually isn't a lot of open area left
to add trees. What is needed is better maintenance of the grounds which have begun
to look ragged.
Altogether, this application appears to be in order and approval is recommended,
subject to at least the following conditions:
1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations. Any violation thereof may be
grounds for revocation.
2. The special use permit is issued to Brookdale Pontiac -Honda for
use as an off -site inventory vehicle storage lot. No sales or
service of vehicles is permitted on the off -site lot at 4215 69th
Avenue North.
3. The applicant shall legally encumber the use of the site at 4215
69th Avenue North for the sole purpose of providing inventory
vehicle parking accessory to the principal car dealership use at
6801 Brooklyn Boulevard. Said encumbrance shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Attorney, shall be executed and filed prior
to issuance of the special use permit and prior to issuance of
building permits for expansion at the principal site.
4. All vehicle storage at 4215 69th Avenue North shall be screened
from public view by an opaque fence not less than 6' in height.
5. The applicant shall enter into a performance agreement with a
supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by
the City Manager) to assure completion of the fencing
improvements prior to the issuance of the special use permit.
6. Special use permit approval for off -site accessory parking
specifically waives the requirement that such parking not be
located across a major thoroughfare on the grounds that the
nature of the off -site use should not generate pedestrian traffic
between the remote site and the principal site.
8 -17 -89 -2-
MM m
MIMM
MINION
rOMM mm _
mm
WE���i�
iVAMM
mw
INS
MM
mm
MINI M.
UNIONS
MM MM MM
\ MISS a
son
i/ ■■■�1� • � ■ ■/ � /� /// � /SEMMES��/ � � �_'_:••� .rte ��
■ •• � ■■ �� � ..� ��� �r �� ,.;. _ -... �� _ 11111 /1
mm
SIR WIN
IN m
SIR MM
III
IN mm
AIR III m III
vim
MIN
•..L� �.� �. •.......�..�....� / /11 / /111 / / /11 /1■
In MM V-4
mm Kim BEE=
M um P,;41 MIR got
mg
IU
; W
Its
also MINOR as
��s"t��r.�d.`�`'��a►�l'� =� �: � . .,�.�, � �� 1ST � �
APPL NO. 89021
N•1 Q' dv L cDwM crr xe_vro.. .. -
•1 Mttltfl6 � .
1 rlan•ktl /N(M1a � 1 i u
•1 Oot.o R/+'1r= Card. , � '_� -- "�' �
5 ov,llooll uru �
e rmnee F� olr A 7 ted9 low 10 eo CA) I
rwa u� Pe.► F� o fxcQ'4tnvL 111!C6 e O 9Q Ctl
� ::::a::r. �q o GGM12"rG�16• 'TrieC6 0 : o •W eG}
� . " .c O 11y c4+rveb Gtr 1I t6 (7.f)
ewewr, wri rm. iw
f! / e�, 6 e n .rr�rm.w.s cadres w wr�-1 narl.iss��
_ crtY. Trre PbrtfAS 'R
etrn,r8 L47,U9f TS%eta o 3
— � J I� cawr•cv e>'laea ritva 78 iZ
L
rw'orort ror ,owsiwo _ * r" im, 1"N'" _
I i ' w+t++w teux? 1VY'MO _. 61T'E 1v0Y. PtGiU1 /eD (�.3 K.�Jb
t
'hggtZj 6AT'0V
♦ wv.E i.vr,.
pAQIM•E .•n,y
- TPe• Ni...G t me ' �.'b�i�viy.E a len.n,... c, w.eo)
,
L n•.sw.
S ' ^ "" Q � V1p " H BROOKDALE PONTIAC
_ ulsrrlo raln�a mtn/A GMC - HONDA
wAwew AroC1ARtl Ii,C
r AwCMVtCT• AIA
M II Mi
SAW ON 751U}
• � t 6Q -D4�01
— t IrMr v�tiRlr/
fr1= W76
��. � � t ` — !, � '' �� Vim �- _!'S a.3.0 !' .,.... V' .•,. ., r� � C� .�..•.•� /J� �• Boa
�ISTH AVENUE NORTH nu.oMm tr+�r -e y
StxE r . Io
617E ,Aa.r'e�•C•I
APPLICATION NO. 89022
69th Avenue North
0
O i
U
-b-P-V b rind,
R.gi.d for Retail WW
t+m o.o>arn. woos F.nu
WOW Gd.
Chun &* 1 »0.
+ \ Cars 47 Interior Cars
+
E�b+q \ try istme. �—
Bjfd b h. Rrn..d �\
- - - - ---
+ I t
s �
R emote inventor), Inventory lot Site Plan
4 r� mo
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8/28/89
Agenda item Number 114z'_
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS - IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NO. 1988 -18
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPROVAL:
* * * * * * * * * * * * ** ** * DIRECTOR OF * O R * S * * ** * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes
At the time MNDOT constructed new T.H. 252 an agreement was executed between
• MNDOT and the City which provided that old T.H. 252 (i.e.'',- West River Road
between 66th Avenue and 73rd Avenue) would be returned to'the jurisdiction of
the City ...following the improvement of that roadway. The agreement also
detailed the scope of MNDOT participation in the cost of the improvements;
i.e..
1. Pay for curb and gutter on both sides of the roadway.
2. Pay for overlaying the center 24 feet of the roadway.
3. Pay for storm sewer catch basins and leads on the west side of the
roadway.
4. Pay for a berm for sidewalk construction on the east side of the
roadway.
In that same agreement the City agreed to accept the following responsibilities:
1. Accept West River Road into its City street system.
2. Pay for any costs of widening the road beyond the center 24 feet.
3. Pay for storm sewer catch basins and leads on the east side of the
roadway.
Subsequently, MNDOT budgeted $500,000 for their share of these improvements and
• an agreement was executed which provided for the City to hire a consulting
engineering firm to develop a feasibility study for this project. The firm of
Short- Elliott- Hendrickson Inc. (SEH) was selected by the City to conduct this
study.
In preparing the study, two informational meetings were conducted by City staff
members and representatives from SEH. As a result, the feasibility study which
SEH presented to the Council on 8/14/89, reflects many of the issues discussed
at those informational meetings, as well as detailed engineering analysis and
cost estimates.
In addition to the improvement of West River Road, the proposed project also
includes the proposed construction of a pedestrian/bicycle trailway on Willow
Lane between I -694 and 66th Avenue North. The construction of this trail would
provide a link between:
• the trailway across the Mississippi River which is being constructed by
MNDOT in conjunction with the I -694 bridge improvements;
• the proposed trailway on West River Road between 66th Avenue and 73rd Avenue
North, with future extension into Brooklyn Park, north to the Coon Rapids
Dam; and
• the proposed trailway extension through Riveridge Park (North Mississippi
Regional Park), with future extensions to the proposed trailway system in
the southeasterly portion of Brooklyn Center and to the Minneapolis
Trailway System.
Council Action Required
1. Conduct Public Hearing
• Note: City staff and SEH will present an overview of the proposed project,
its impact, its costs, etc.
2. Consider Resolution Ordering The Improvement
Note: The City Council may wish to table consideration of this resolution
in order to obtain additional information and /or to provide an
opportunity for continued discussions. The resolution ordering the
improvement is provided for consideration by the City Council.
(Note: Because this improvement was initiated by City Council
action, this resolution requires adoption by a 4 /5ths vote of the
Council, based on a roll call vote.)
n ,\
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS -
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -18
WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted on the 14th day
August 1989 fixed a date for a council hearing on the following described
project:
Improvement Project 1988 -18
Reconstruction of West River Road between
66th Avenue North and 73rd Avenue North; and
Construction of a Pedestrian /Bicycle Trail on
Willow Lane between Interstate Highway 694 and
66th Avenue North
AND WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published notice of
the hearing was given and the hearing was held thereon on the 28th day of
August, 1989, at which all ersons desiring to be heard were given an
P g g
opportunity to be heard thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. Such improvement is hereby p e y ordered as proposed in the Council
resolution adopted on August 14, 1989.
2. Short - Elliott - Hendickson, Inc., consulting engineers, are hereby
designated as the engineers for this improvement. They shall
prepare plans and specifications for the making of such
improvement.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
OF
I:BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
C E r TELEPHONE 561 -5440
ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE
911
August 15, 1989
Dear Property Owner:
At 8 :00 p.m. on Monday, August 28, 1989, the Brooklyn Center City Council will
conduct a public hearing on the proposed improvement project identified in the
enclosed "Notice of Public Hearing ". This notice states the general nature of
the improvement, the estimated cost and the area to be assessed.
If your property lies within the area proposed to be assessed (i.e. - all
properties abutting West River Road from 66th Avenue North to 73rd Avenue North)
additional information has been included to aid you in estimating the potential
assessment to your property. If your property does not lie within the described
assessment area (i.e. - all properties abutting Willow Lane between Interstate
694 and 66th Avenue No.) this notice is only for your information as the
proposed trail construction will involve your neighborhood as well.
The hearing is an opportunity for you to express an opinion on the proposed
improvement, if you desire to do so. The City Council will consider your
comments and input before a decision is made on whether or not to proceed with
this project.
You are encouraged to call the City Engineering Department at 561 -5440, if you
need additional information or have a question which could be resolved in advance
of the meeting.
Yours very tr ly,
Sy napp
Director of Public Works
SK:sr
Enclosure
ivu ut -MURKA M
z
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
FOR IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given
that the Council of the C' o
Y g it f Brooklyn Center
Y Y ,
Minnesota, will meet at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, on Monday,
August 28, 1989, at 8:00 p.m., local time, for a public hearing on each of the
following proposed improvements:
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -18
Segment No. 1:
Description: Reconstruction of the existing roadway, including: storm sewer
modifications; curb and gutter; grading, base preparation and
surfacing; sidewalk and /or trail construction; landscaping and
lighting.
Location: West River Road between Interstate 694 and 73rd Avenue North
Segment No. 2:
Description: Construction of a pedestrian /bicycle trailway.
Location: West side of Willow Lane from Interstate 694 to 66th Avenue
North
Estimated
Total Cost: $1,318,848 (both segments)
The benefited areas proposed to be assessed for these improvements are as
follows:
Those properties abutting West River Road from 66th Avenue North to
73rd Avenue North.
The Council proposes to proceed under authority granted by Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 429.011 to 429.111.
Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvements
will be heard at this meeting.
Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96
hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make
arrangements.
D. K. WEEKS, CITY CLERK
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Dated August 14, 1989
By order of the City Council
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL PAGE Z OF 3
I PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification
LEVY IPROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I Address ' Name Name
NO. i NO. 11DENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. I PRINCIPAL I Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address Mailing Address
1 125- 119 -21- 42-0013 I 1 $2,702.00 I 7200 West River Road (William E & Teresa E Olson I fI
17200 West River Road
i Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 I
125- 119 -21 -42 -0018 ! I 1 $1,351.00 1 17118 West River Road Terry Allen Hoffman
I 1 I I I I 17118 West River Road 1 i
1 I 1 1 1 i iBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 i
125- 119 -21 -42 -0019 i 1 $1,351.00 17124 West River Road John W Kelly i
1 1 I I I I 17124 West River Road 1 I
I I (Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 1
I I
125 - 119 -21 -42 -0040 1 17.95 1 $1,854.23 17206 -12 West River Road 1Harshad P & Rekha H Bahtt i I
1 1 I I X I 1 120999 Isle Avenue
i i I 1 103.3 1 I ILakeville, MN 55044
I I I I I 1
1 i 125- 119 -21 -42 -0041 1 17.95 i $1,854.23 17218 -24 West River Road (Robert E & Arlene Johnson i
I I X 1 14129 - 85th Avenue North 1
1 i i i 103.3 iBrooklyn Park, MN 55443 i 1
1 1 125- 119 -21 -42 -0042 I 1 $5,360.45 17250 West River Road iHarold Swanson
1 8420 Xerxes Avenue North
1 I 1 1 1 I 18rooklyn Park, MN 55444 1 1
125- 119 -21 -42 -0043 i 1 $9,500.21 17240 West River Road iHarold Swanson i I
1 1 1 18420 Xerxes Avenue North 1
i Brooklyn Park, MN 55444
1 I 125- 119 -21- 42-0044 ( 1 $5,042.00 17230 West River Road 1Harold Swanson 1
I 1 I I I 18420 Xerxes Avenue North I 1
1 I 1 I I I iBroo Park, MN 55444
1 1 125 - 119 -21 -43 -0009 1 a $1,351.00 17006 West River Road 1Peter F Boone 1 I
I I I I 1 17006 West River Road 1 1
i i i i I 1 1Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 i 1
I I I
125- 119 -21 -43 -0010 1 1 $1,351.00 1312 - 70th Avenue North IDennis E Nelson I I
1 I I 1 ( 1312 - 70th Avenue North i I
1 1 1 1 1 1 (Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 1 i
25-119 -21 -43 -0021 1 $1,351.00 1315 - 70th Avenue North !Norris L & Barbara A Hanson I 1
1 1 1 1 I 1 1315 - 70th Avenue North I I
1 1 1 i 1 1 iBrooklyn Center, MN 55430
i 125- 119 -21 -43 -0036 i 1 $1,351.00 16901 Dallas Road !Russell L Nemitz
6901 Dallas Road
I ( 1 I 18rooklyn Center, MN 55430 I I
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL PAGE 2 OF 3
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification 1
I LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I Address , Name I Name
NO. NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. I PRINCIPAL Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address Mailing Address
1 1 1 1 1 I 1
I I 125- 119 -21 -43 -0037 1 1 $1,351.00 16910 West River Road (Joy M Phillippi
6910 West River Road
I I 1 I I 1 IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 I I
I 1 125- 119 -21 -43 -0038 1 1 $1,351.00 16918 West River Road (Roger D Byland 1 I
1 1 1 I 16918 West River Road
I IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 1
1 I 125- 119-21 -43 -0039 1 $1,351.00 16926 West River Road ICharles E & Katherine A Bonifas
16926 West River Road I
1 1 1 IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430
I 1 1
I 1 125- 119 -21 -43 -0040 1 $1,351.00 16932 West River Road 1Ralph R Abrahamson I
I 1 1 16932 West River Road i
1 I I I I I IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 1
I I 125- 119 -21 -43 -0044 I 1 $1,351.00 17012 West River Road ( Richard A Forberg
I I I 1 1 17012 West River Road I I
I I I I I I IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 1 1
1 125- 119 -21 -43 -0045 ( $1,351.00 17018 West River Road 1 Loren F Herzog
I I 1 1 I 1 17018 West River Road I }
I 1 I I I I IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 I 1
I I 136- 119 -21 -12 -0002 1 1 $1,351.00 16856 West River Road IMinneapolis Gas Company I 1
I ! 1 1 1201 South 7th Street
I ! 1 ( I I (Minneapolis, MN 55402 1
I i 136- 119 -21 -12 -0007 1 1 $1,351.00 16845 Willow Lane North Kethryn M Ochs 1 1
1 I I 1 1 16845 Willow Lane North
1 1 I I 1 I IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 I 1
1 1 136- 119 -21 -12 -0009 I I $1,351.00 16854 West River Road (David P Wagtskjold
I 1 1 16854 West River Road
I1 I 1 I 1 IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 I
36- 119 -21- 12-0011 1R1 x 2 $2,702.00 6842 West River Road 1David W Berg
I I I 1 I I 16842 West River Road 1 1
II 1 I I I IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 1
1 I 136 -119- 21-12 -0017 1R 1 x 2 i $2,702.00 16712 West River Road (Francis F Peabody
I 6712 West River Road
II I I I I IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 1 1
I I 136-119-21 -12 -0018 I I $1,351.00 16704 West River'Road IMarshall A Peterson i I
1 16704 West River Road
I I I 1 1 1 IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 1
I
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL PAGE 3 OF 3
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. i TOTAL 1 Address , Name Name i
1 NO. I NO. 11DENTIFICATION NO.I NO. PRINCIPAL I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address 1 Mailing Address 1
1 136- 119 -21 -12 -0019 $1,351.00 66700 West River Road IRobert R Nystrom
16700 West River Road
I I ( I ! i Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
1 I 136- 119 -21 -12 -0049 JR1 x 2 1 $2,702.00 16836 West River Road iUbaldo Ramos 1 1
I I I 1 I 6836 West River Road
(Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
! 136- 119 -21- 12-0061 ! 1 $1,351.00 16857 Dallas Road I IRobert G Wilbur
1 I I I I I 16857 Dallas Road I
1 1 (Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 1
136- 119 -21 -12 -0064 I 1 $1,351.00 16732 West River Road. IMichael G & Susan S Schmidt
f ! I I 1 I 16732 West River Road
i Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 i
1 1 136- 119 - 21-12 -0065 1 1 $1,351.00 16724 West River Road ILeroy A Felrath 1
I I I I 1 1 16724 West River Road I i
1 I I I 1 i iBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 1 1
1 1 136- 119 -21 -12 -0068 i 1 $1,351.00 16720 West River Road 1Leonard V Wood 1 1
6720 West River Road
(Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 1
I I
1 1
1 1 136 - 119 -21 -12 -0070 1 1 $1,351.00 16728 West River Road IDennis J & Sheila M Hoiseth 1
I I I I 16728 West River Road 1
1 1 I I 1 I 1Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 1 1
1 1 136- 119 -21 -13 -0001 1 1 $1,351.00 16654 West River Road 1Harry P Poate 1
! I I I 1 1 16654 West River Road
1 I 1 I I 1 iBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 1
1 136- 119 -21 -13 -0002 1 $1,351.00 16648 West River Road 1Guy Bobendrier 1
I I I 1 1 16648 West River Road 1 I
I I I I 1Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
1 1
1 1
136- 119-21 -13 -0003 1 1 $1,351.00 16640 West River Road IRollin W & Deloris E Erickson 1 i
1 1 I I 1 1 16640 West River Road I I
1 1 1 I I 1 1Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 1 I
1 1 136- 119 -21- 13-0004 i i $1,351.00 16632 West River Road iStanley L Lee 1 1
' I 6632 West River Road
1-1-1 1 1 1Bro Center, MN 55430 1
City of Brooklyn Center
1989 Special Assessment Rates
for Street Reconstruction Projects
Land Use 1989 Assessment Rate
R -1 zoned, used as a
one - family site that cannot $1,351 per lot
be subdivided
R -2 zoned, used as a $17.95 per front foot,
two - family site that cannot with a minimum of
be subdivided $1,351 per lot
R -4 and R -5 zoned $•3562 per
square foot
Teresa E. Olson
William E. Olson
7200 W. River Rd.
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
566 -8273
August 17, 1989
Mr. Dean Nyquist
C/O CITY OF BROOKLYN CEN`T'ER
6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy.
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Tlp -r Kr �yqui`;i
' 1 1 "'
We are writing to you since we will be unable to attend the
meeting that has been set -up for August 28 with regards to
the Irrprovement Project #1988 - 18 covering Interstate 694 to
73rd Avenue.
We would like to make our wishes be known that we would
prefer curb and gutter and some landscaping on West River
Road in front of our house and the necessary easement be
taken for such.
With regards to the bike lane that is being proposed. We
would prefer that the bike lane be placed on the west side
of West River Road from 65th to 73rd Avenue. We believe
it is better for our child to cross the street once or
twice rather than having to ride past countless driveways.
We feel that a child that is riding a bike should certainly
be capable of crossing a busy street with caution but it
is difficult for even an adult to keep watch each time
crossing driveways. If we uJarst:and correctly from the last
meeting, this means the roadway would be "closer to our home."
This doesn't bother us.
We would appreciate any consideration you can give us when
making these decisions.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Teresa E. Olson William E. Olson
I
f
Teresa E. Olson
William E. Olson
7200 W. River Rd.
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
566 -8273
920 -7374 Day (Teresa)
August 17, 1989
Mr.
Gary Shellcross, City Planner
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy.
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Dear Mr. Shellcross:
We are writing with reference to your #25- 119 -21 -42 -0013
for the assessment of our property for the revisions being
proposed for Improvement Project #1988 -18 between Interstate
694 and 73rd Avenue.
You show an assessment of $2,702.00 total for our property.
At the last meeting it was brought to ar attention that we
• were to be given the option of being assessed now for West
River Road or being that our doors and driveway exit onto
72nd Avenue, be assessed for 72nd Avenue when and if any
changes occur on that street. According to the letter we
received, we have not been given that option. Please explain.
The other discrepancy was in the $2,702.00 charge. It was
also our understanding that our property could not be sub-
divided since the house is in the exact center of the property
and as we understand it, that $2,702.00 figure is double
the normal assessment fee.
WP would appreciate your explaining this to us further and
we look forward to discussing it with you.
Sincerely,
Teresa E. Olson William E. Olson
Enclosure
s
,
1
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL PAGE I OF 3
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I AODN. I TOTAL �I Address I Name 1 Name 1
I NO. ( I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.I NO. I PRINCIPAL Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address Mailing Address
I 25-119-21-42-0013 ( 52,702.00 7200 West River Road William E & Teresa E Olson 1
I I I I 7200 West River Road } `
1 ! 1 I lBrooklyn Center, MN 55430
! 25- 1.19 -21 -42 -0018 ! $1,351.00 7118 West River Road Terry Allen Hoffman
I I I 17118 West River Road I
1 I I 1 IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430
l25- 119 -21.42 -0019 ! $;1,351.00 7124 West River Road John W Kelly
1�
1 I I (
17124 West River Road ' I
IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 I
1 25- 119-21-42-0040 17.95 $1,854.23 7206 -12 West River Road Harshad P & Rekha H Bahtt
I I I I X I I 120999 Isle Avenue
103.3 I I (Lakeville, MN 55044
125- 119 -21 -42 -0041 1 17.95 1 $1,854.23 ( 17218 -24 West River Road (Robert E & Arlene Johnson 1 I
X 14129 - 85th Avenue North
1 1 I 1 103.3 I I IBrooklyn Park, MN 5543 I
125- 119 -21 -42 -0042 1 I $5,360.45 17250 West River Road 1Harold Swanson
1 18420 Xerxes Avenue Nort'i
1 1 I I IBrooklyn Park, MN 55444 I I
1 125- 119 -21 -42 -0043 I $9,500.21 7240 West River Road (Harold Swanson I I
1 8420 Xerxes Avenue North
1 1 Brooklyn Park, MN 55444
1 1 I
1 1 125-119 -21- 42-0044 $5,042.00 1 7230 West River Road 1Harold Swanson
8420 Xerxes Avenue North
1 ( 1 1 1 IBrooklyn Park, MN 55444 1
1 I 125. 119 -21 -43 -0009 I I $1,351.00 17006 West River Road Peter F Boone i 1
1 1 17006 West River Road 1
I I I 1 I IBrooklyn Center, MN 55430 1 1
I 1 125- 119 - 21-43 -0010 I 1 $1,351.00 1312 - 70th Avenue North (Dennis E Nelson I
I 1 i 1 I 1312 - 70th Avenue North
I Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 I I
1 1 125- 119 -21 -43 -0021 I I $1,351.00 1315 - 70th Avenue North .I Norris L & Barbara A Hanson I I
315 - 70th Avenue North
1 1 1 I I 1 IBrooklyn Center, MN 511430 I I
1 25- 119-21 -43 -0036 $1,351.00 16901 Dallas Road Russell L Nemitz
1 I I I 1 1 16901 Dallas Road
1 1 1 I I (Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
I. 1
CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
OF
BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
B ROOKLYN
TELEPHONE 561 -5440
C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE
911
August 24, 1989
Mr. William Olson
7200 West River Road
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Re: Letter to Gary Shallcross dated 8/17/89
Improvement Project No. 1988 -18, West River Road
Dear Mr. Olson:
The current City policy for levying proposed assessments considers potential
development of individual properties, based on their current zoning. The size
of your property could allow you, (or subsequent owners) to move or demolish the
existing house and subdivide into two suitable building sites. This is the
rationale for proposing an assessment which is twice the "normal" rate. Please
note that the August 28 hearing is officially only a hearing regarding the
proposed improvement. If the project is subsequently ordered constructed, there
will be a formal assessment hearing fallowing completion of the proposed project
at which time you may direct your concerns to the City Council, and it will then
be up to the Council to make its final decision.
Regardless of your street address or driveway location, you are given the option
of choosing which street frontage you will be assessed for. In your case, you could
choose to assess both building sites for improvements along West River Road.
That is the assumption which we are currently making. Alternately, you could
choose to assess half of your existing; property for the improvements now
proposed, with the other half being assessed in the future for improvements made
to 72nd Avenue North.
If you have any additional questions or concerns regarding this proposed
project, I urge you to call me at City Hall and /or attend the City Council
meeting scheduled for 7:00 p.m., Monday, August 28, 1989.
Sincerely,
. Mark J. MaloneyyY�
City Engineer 1^
cc: Gar,Y Shallcross
r �F�le 1988 -18
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date P, /2R29
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
IMPACTS OF THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
DEPT. APPROVAL:
J-"
SY KNAP DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: �
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes
At the August 14 Council meeting the City Council received Black & Veatch's
report on Water Works Facilities. In that report and in the Council's
discussion of the report it became clear that the major factor which will affect
the cost of providing the City's water supply in the future will be the rules and
standards which are now being promulgated by the USEPA in accordance with the
mandates of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) of 1986. If the currently
proposed rules and standards are adopted, the two major impacts on the City of
Brooklyn Center would be that:
1. the City would be assigned the responsibility for maintaining water
quality "to the tap" in private homes and buildings; and
2. the most probable effect of the proposed Disinfection Treatment Rule would
be to require construction of a water treatment plant at an estimated cost
of $8 million. This cost and the cost of operating and maintaining the
plant would increase the City's water rates from $0.43 per 1000 gallons to
over $2.00 per 1000 gallons, i.e. - more than a 350 percent increase.
At the 8/14 meeting the City Council requested that this information be
summarized, and that a resolution be submitted for formal consideration. A
report prepared by Diane Spector, Public Works Coordinator is attached.
At the 8/14 meeting, we also noted that we have received a request from the
American Water Works Association (AWWA) for a $1,000 donation to help establish
a Water Industry Technical Action Fund. The Fund will be used to support
research and legislative activities designed to promote the water industry's
more active, positive role in the development of drinking water regulations. By
adopting the second resolution attached to this report, the Council will support
the research and informational efforts of the AWWA by providing the requested
$1,000 donation to its Water Industry Technical Action Fund. This fund will
support research and action to ensure that proposed regulations are cost
effective and based on the best data and technological expertise.
Council Action Required
Two resolutions are provided for consideration by the City Council.
CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
OF
B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
TELEPHONE 561 -5440
C ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE
911
August 25, 1989
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sy Knapp
FROM: Diane Specto&
SUBJ: Safe Drinking Water Act
Probable Impacts and Costs to Brooklyn Center
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) of 1986 required the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to promulgate rules regulating the quality
of drinking water delivered by the water industry to residential and commercial
customers. The EPA has published in the Federal Register and received comments
on its proposed rules. The agency is now preparing final versions of the rules.
The City Council on May 8, 1989 received your report on the proposed Lead and
Copper Rules, and approved a resolution requesting Congress to amend the
legislation directing those rules. At that time we did not have a comprehensive
analysis of the effect of the proposed rules in their entirety, including an
estimate of cost. Since that time further information on the rules has been
provided by several professional organizations and by Black and Veatch, the
City's consultant on water utility engineering matters. Black and Veatch have
provided preliminary cost estimates on some of the impacts of the rules.
The following summary of the impacts of the SDWA on Brooklyn Center will assist
the City Council in voicing its opinion to our Congressional delegation.
~ 198641AMfRIG1 R(T =�
L n ZJ
Page Two
August 25, 1989
THE PROPOSED RULES AND THEIR IMPACTS
Five areas regulated under the SDWA directly affect the Brooklyn Center water
utility:
• The Coliforms Rule, relating to testing for the presence of coliform
bacteria;
• The Lead and Copper Rule, stipulating maximum levels of lead and copper
in water, and corrosion control treatment;
• The Phase II and Phase V Synthetic Organic Chemicals (SOCs) and Inorganic
Chemicals (IOCs) Rules, providing standards for acceptable levels of
certain chemicals;
• The Radionuclides Rule, relating to the presence of radioactivity; and
• The Disinfection Treatment Rule, stipulating methods of disinfection.
As discussed more fully in Black & Veatch's Report on Water Works Facilities
for Brooklyn Center. Minnesota Brooklyn Center has historically had no
problems with coliforms or with radionuclides, and should experience no trouble
meeting the proposed regulations. There should be no additional cost impact
beyond the current regular sampling that is conducted.
A third area, the regulation of SOCs and IOCs, has so far not been a problem
for Brooklyn Center, and the chemicals currently regulated or scheduled for
promulgation in the next year have for the most part not been found in Brooklyn
Center water. However, the EPA has been directed by the SDWA to add new
chemicals to this list every year and it is possible that in future years
testing for newly regulated chemicals might reveal unacceptable levels in our
water system. Depending on the level of hazard and the recommended abatement
process, Brooklyn Center may be required to treat its water.
Changes to the proposed Lead and Copper Rule now being considered would require
that lead and copper levels be met not only at the point where water enters the
distribution system, but also at customer taps. While we should not have any
difficulty, based on previous tests, meeting the requirements for the
distribution system, we have not been testing for lead and copper at customers'
taps; if the rule as proposed is promulgated, then we will have to implement a
program of quarterly sampling from 30 consumers' taps
If more than five percent of tap samples exceed the acceptable lead and copper
levels, we would be required to implement corrosion control treatment beyond
the current method of treating with zinc orthophosphate. To better evaluate
the possible impact of this rule, we may wish to do some preliminary testing.
Finally, the proposed Disinfection Treatment Rule could have the costliest
impact on Brooklyn Center. The method proposed by the EPA of evaluating the
performance of disinfection is Contact Time - the amount of time the water is
Page Three
August 25, 1989
in the delivery system being exposed to the disinfection agent. Chloramines,
which we currently use, require a very long contact time, much longer than our
system can currently provide. However, even if we switched agents to chlorine,
which requires much shorter contact times, not all our wells would meet the
proposed requirements. We would also be faced with an additional problem -
chlorine would cause the manganese that is now in solution in our water to
precipitate, causing an aesthetic problem that would have to be addressed.
It appears likely that the EPA will restrict the use of chloramines, and may
not allow states much flexibility in approving variances for water utilities
with a history of no disinfection problems. If the currently proposed rules
are adopted, it is likely that Brooklyn Center will in the future be faced with
the choice between continuing to use chloramines but building a treatment and
holding facility to increase contact time, or changing disinfection agents to
chlorine, and building a treatment facility for removing the manganese
precipitate. Black and Veatch estimates that a treatment facility could cost
about $50,000 for initial testing and $8 million for construction Annual
operation and maintenance costs would vary based on the type of treatment that
is selected, and would be in addition to the $8 million. Financing this
capital improvement would add an estimated $1.58 per 1,000 gallons to the
current rate of $0.43 - an increase of almost 350 percent
is SUMMARY
The rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency as directed by the
Safe Drinking Water Act could have substantial financial and operational
impacts on the Brooklyn Center water utility. Most of the rules are not yet in
final form, and could still be modified. The Safe Drinking Water Act is also
scheduled to be reviewed and amended in 1991.
The Council may by way of resolution relay to the Minnesota congressional
delegation the information regarding the estimated cost of the proposed rules.
Respectfully submitted, Approved,
J
Diane Spector Sy Knapp
Public Works Coordinator Director of Public Works
i
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT OF STANDARDS UNDER THE
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota has a population (1980)
of 31,230; and
WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center municipal water system meets all federal and
state standards for potable water; and
WHEREAS, proposed USEPA rules would require cities to assume the
responsibility for maintaining water quality not only in the cities'
distribution systems but also in the privately -owned water service lines to
homes and structures and "to the tap" of those homes and structures; and
WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the Council that adoption of the proposed
rules will place cities into the position of responsibility for maintenance of
water quality on private properties and in private homes and buildings, and to
assume liabilities for the maintenance of water quality in privately -owned
systems; and that such responsibilities and liabilities are untenable and
unacceptable; and
WHEREAS, proposed USEPA rules regulating the disinfection of water that
stipulate contact time with the disinfection agent would require the City to
either build a water treatment and holding facility or change its disinfection
agent to one that would have the side effect of precipitating manganese at an
aesthetically unacceptable level, again resulting in a need to construct a
water treatment facility. Consulting engineers estimate that construction of
such a facility would cost the customers of the Brooklyn Center municipal water
system approximately $8 million, increasing water rates by almost 350 percent;
and
WHEREAS, the treatment facility would have an additional, as yet
undetermined annual operation and maintenance financial impact; and
WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the Council that the adoption of the
proposed rules will result in major public expenditures such as those detailed
above, with few or no health benefits and placing unnecessary financial burden
on the users of the system.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. This Council respectfully requests that the Congress of the United
States amend the proposed National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
so as to limit the cities' responsibility for water quality
maintenance to the public distribution system, in accordance with the
historically established division of responsibility and liability.
RESOLUTION NO.
2. This Council respectfully requests that the Congress of the United
States amend the proposed rules regarding testing for lead and copper
so as to provide for less complex, more achievable and more
cost- effective standards and methods.
3. This Council respectfully requests that the Congress of the United
States amend the proposed rules regarding disinfection of water to
allow chloramines to be continued to be used as a disinfection agent,
regardless of available contact time, by utilities that have
historically experienced no disinfection problems, specifically
providing authority to the States to grant variances.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION APPROVING PAYMENT TO THE AWWA ASSESSMENT FUND
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center is committed to
protecting the health and safety of the public, including those who rely on the
municipal water utility for drinking water; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is committed to providing cost - effective water
service to its utility customers; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to ensure that standards proposed by
Congress and the Environmental Protection Agency are cost - effective, practical,
and based on the best data and technological expertise; and
WHEREAS, the recently organized Water Industry Coordinating Committee,
consisting of the American Water Works Association, National Association of
Water Companies, Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, National Rural
Water Association, and the National Water Resources Association, has proposed a
United for Safe Drinking Water campaign, with a goal of participating more
proactively and extensively in the regulatory process; and
WHEREAS, this campaign has been proposed to be funded by the Water
Industry Technical Action Fund, supported by one -time assessments to the
members of the various associations in proportion to the size of their
utilities; and
WHEREAS, the American Water Works Association has informed the Brooklyn
Center municipal water utility that its fair share, should the City wish to
support the Technical Action Fund, is $1,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn
Center, Minnesota, that the sum of $1,000 shall be appropriated from the Public
Utilities Fund for payment of the City's assessment to the Water Industry
Technical Action Fund.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 8� ff
Agenda Item Number 115?
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11 OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER ORDINANCES
DEPT. APPROVAL:
Signatur - title James Lindsay, Chief =ofoli
* * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ** * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION•
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached )
Recent legislative changes in the liquor laws and concerns recently under discussion
are addressed in the attached ordinance amendment. The' items being changed and
the reason for the change are as follows. First, the clause which was put in when the
legal age changed from 19 to 21 is now deleted as those people are now all 21 years
of age. The hours of operation clauses are now changed in accordance with state law
allowing on -sale establishments to be open on Sunday evenings until 1:00 a.m. instead
of closing at midnight.
There are several instances where the clause "for consumption on the premises" was
added to address the problem of take out and delivery food. This will expressly
eliminate take out and delivery food from being counted in the food /liquor split. A
new section was added which spells out conditions under which the police department
in conjunction with the planning & inspections department can issue permits for
outside special events; such as weddings, pig roasts, et cetera.
The last section will prohibit all activities such as mud wrestling, strip acts and the
like in liquor establishments.
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend this ordinance be approved for processing.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald Splinter
City Manager
FROM: James Lindsay
Chief of Police
DATE: August 24, 1989
SUBJECT: Proposed Update of Liquor Ordinances
Attached please find the proposed update for the liquor
ordinance. The two matters of serving liquor outdoors and only
food consumed on the premises may be used to determine the
. percent of liquor to food split and these have been addressed in
this update. The City Attorney has reviewed both matters.
Unless a license holder establishes a permanent outdoor facility
and lists same on the annual license, we are recommending a
permit system. It will operate similar to the administrative
permit used by Planning and Inspection. An arbitrary number of
40 days was picked for the number of days permits could be
issued.
Also included was the new State Statutes passed this year
regarding the impact on the City's ordinance.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day
of , 19 , at p.m. at City Hall, 6301
Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to Chapter 11 of the city
ordinances.
Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96
hours in advance. Please notify the personnel coordinator at 561 -5440 to make
arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11 OF THE BROOKLYN
CENTER ORDINANCES.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 11 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn
Center is hereby amended in the following manner:
Delete the line: [(For the purposes of this ordinance, people born on or
before 9/1/67 are considered 21 years of age.)] as it appears in the following
sections:
Section 11 -107, subd 1; Section 11 -109, subd 3; Section 11 -112, subds 1,
2, 35, 4, 5, 6 and 8; Section 11 -204, subd 3; Section 11 -508, subd 1; Section 11-
510, subd 7; Section 11 -512, subds 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6; Section 11 -609, subd 1;
Section 11 -611, subd 7; Section 11 -613, subds 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5; Section 11 -709,
subd 1; Section 11 -711, subd 7; and Section 11 -713, subds 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
Section 11 -511. HOURS OF OPERATION.
2. Organizations who hold "on -sale club" licenses may obtain a special
license to serve intoxicating liquor between the hours of 10 a.m.
[and 12 midnight] on Sundays and 1 a.m. on Mondays in
conjunction with the serving of food. They must show proof to the
chief of police that food will be sold and that a minimum of 30
persons may be served at any one time.
Section 11 -612. HOURS OF OPERATION. No intoxicating liquor shall
be sold nor consumed nor permitted to be consumed within the licensed
premises after 1 a.m. on Sunday nor until 8 a.m. on Monday. No intoxicating
liquor shall be sold nor consumed nor permitted to be consumed within a
licensed premise between the hours of 1 a.m. and 8 a.m. on any weekday. No
"on- sale" shall be made after 8 p.m. on December 24.
On Sundays, wine may be sold without a special license under the
authority of an "on -sale wine" license between the hours of 10 a.m. Sunday and
[12 midnight] 1 a.m. Monday in conjunction with the serving of food.
Section 11 -701. DEFINITION OF TERMS.
10. The term "restaurant" means any establishment under the control
of a single proprietor or manager, having appropriate facilities to
serve meals and for seating not less than 150 guests at one time,
and where in consideration of payment therefor, meals are
regularly served at tables to the general public, and which employs
an adequate staff to provide the usual and suitable service to its
guests, and a significant part of the business of which is the serving
of foods for consumption on the premises.
11. The term "premises" as used in this ordinance, shall mean the
inside of the building or the leased space inside a building as
shown on the plan submitted to the chief of police with the original
license. Outside areas, such as patios or parking lots, shall not be
included unless specifically listed on the license or special
permission in writing is obtained pursuant to Section 11 -702,
,paragraph 3h for a limited period of time under certain conditions.
Section 11 -702. LICENSE REQUIRED.
2. "On -sale liquor" licenses shall be issued only to restaurants which
are conducted in such a manner that a significant part of the
revenue for a license year is the sale of foods for consumption on
the premises and to hotels conducted in such a manner that, of
that part of the total revenue derived from the serving of goods
and intoxicating liquors, a significant part thereof for the license
year is derived from the serving of foods for consumption on the
re
pmises The term "significant part" is defined under each license
class.
3. The following are the types of "on -sale liquor" licenses which can
be issued under this section.
a. On -Sale Class A Liquor Licenses: 80 percent or more of the
applicable revenue derived from the serving of foods for
consumption on the premises Class A licenses are available
to all hotels and restaurants.
b. On -Sale Class B Liquor Licenses: 50 percent through 79
percent of the applicable revenue derived from the serving
of foods for consumption on the premises Class B licenses
are available to all hotels and restaurants.
C. On -Sale Class C Liquor licenses: 40 percent through 49
percent of the applicable revenue derived from the serving
of foods for consumption on the premises Class C licenses
are available only to hotels and to restaurants which derive
a considerable part of their revenue from sources other than
liquor and food.
h. Special Provision; expansion of premises for special events:
Special permission may granted either by the City Council
or in writing signed by both the chief of police and the
director of planning and inspection for a temporary
expansion of the licensed premises for wedding receptions,
parties, promotional activities or other special events Special
permits may be issued only for specified areas of the same
lot. piece or parcel of land on which the premises lies or a
contiguous lot, piece or parcel of land Application shall be
made to the chief of police on a form provided by the City
and all information requested by the chief of police shall be
submitted therewith. Permits may be granted for a period
of no more than ten days and permits may not be granted
for a total of more than forty days in any one license year.
In acting on an application consideration shall be given to
such factors as noise, nature of entertainment to be provided_
potential difficulties with law enforcement or security,
proximity of residential or other sensitive land uses, effect on
parking or other zoning or land use controls, and the nature
of the event proposed The permit may specify conditions
with which the licen ee must comply, and the sale of liquor
pursuant to the permit shall be deemed a consent and
agreement to the imposition of such conditions Violations
of any such conditions or any other provisions of law are
grounds for suspension or revocation of the permit and of the
licensee's liquor license Permits issued pursuant to this
paragraph may be suspended without prior notice by the
chief of police upon determination that such suspension is
necessary or expedient to protect the public health, safety or
welfare.
Section 11 -705. RENEWAL APPLICATIONS. Applications for renewal
of an existing license shall be made at least 60 days prior to the date of
expiration of the license. If, in the judgment of the city council, good and
sufficient cause is shown by an applicant for his failure to file for a renewal
within the time provided, the city council may, if the other provisions of this
ordinance are complied with, grant the application.
-- At the earliest practicable time after application is made for a renewal
of an "on -sale liquor" license, and in any event prior to the time that the
application is considered by the city council, the applicant shall file with the
chief of police a statement prepared by a certified public accountant that shows
the total gross sales, the total food sales for consumption on the premises, and
the total food sales of the restaurant for the twelve month period immediately
preceding the date for filing renewal applications. A foreign corporation shall
file a current Certificate of Authority.
Section 11 -711. CONDITIONS OF LICENSE.
16. A licensed restaurant shall be conducted in such a manner that a
significant part of the business for a license year is the serving of
foods for consumption on the premises.
Section 11 -718. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES.
Subdivision 1 Prohibition It is unlawful for any licensee, owner or
manager of any establishment licensed under Sections 11 -701 through 11 -718
of this Code to cause, commit„ or allow in the licensed premises any of
the activities listed in this Section or any similar activities or to sell liquor in
anny premises from which any such activities may be viewed or heard
Subdivision 2. Prohibited Activities. Activities referred to in Subdivision
1 of this Section include the following:
. a. Nudity, sadomasochistic abuse or sexual conduct as those terms are
defined in Section 19 -1700 of this Code either actual or simulated.
b. Mud wrestling, wet T -shirt contests, lingerie shows or display, or
strip -tease dancing_
C. The display of any of the foregoing by any means including, but not
limited to books, printed material, magazines, movies, pictures,
videos. plays exhibitions recordings, closed circuit television,
productions, or any other device or contrivance in any way which
is capable of being used or adapted to arouse interest or to affect
the human senses, whether through the medium of reading,
observation, sound or any other means
Subdivision 3. Penalty. Violation of this Section is grounds for
revocation of any license issued under Sections 11 -701 through 11 -718 of this
Code.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and
upon thirty 30 days s followin '
P ty ( ) y g its legal publication.
Adopted this day of ,
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.)
i
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of
, 19_, at p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway,
to consider an amendment to Chapter 11 regarding the sale of beer with an
alcohol content in excess of 3.2 percent to holders of both wine and beer
licenses.
Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96
hours in advance. Please notify the personnel coordinator at 561 -5440 to make
arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 11 -106 OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER CODE OF
ORDINANCES, AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF BEER WITH AN ALCOHOL CONTENT IN
EXCESS OF 3.2 PERCENT TO HOLDERS OF BOTH WINE AND BEER LICENSES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 11 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn
Center is hereby amended in the following manner:
Section 11 -106 GRANTING OF LICENSE.
Subdivision 4. Licensed premises who are granted both on sale wine
and on -sale nonintoxicated malt liquor licenses by the City Council are
authorized to sell beer with an alcohol content in excess of 3.2 percent.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and
upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.)
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 8/26/89
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
LEAGUE INSURANCE TRUST INSTITUTIONAL PAYMENT TO LEAGUE OF CITIES
*, r*******, r** w «*** w***+ r r**« s** r r*** w**.***, r.***, r*«, r**** w**, r * * * * * *,r,r *rrww « *+r *,r * *. *,r **
DEPAR R
- title
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: **
No comments to supplement this report _. Comments below /attached
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached
At your last Council meeting, there was discussion relating to the p Y a ment of an institutional fee
from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) to the general operating fund of the
League of Cities Organization. The LMCIT was organized as a separate self - sustaining organization
to serve as an insurance consortium for Minnesota Cities.
In the 1988 -89 League of Cities general budget, it called for a "institutional fee" from the LMCIT of
$425,226 and in 1989 -90 league general fund budget, it called for a similar transfer or fee of $584,466.
From my perspective, there is no doubt a need for transfer between the LMCIT and the League of
Cities general fund for general service and administration. However, this money is in addition to
actual cost of the LMCIT to the League General Organization. The general fund of the League of
Cities has used 90% plus of the institutional fee transferred from the LMCIT for property tax
computer modeling, tax increment financing modeling, and a personnel project. In the 1989 -90
budget, the property tax modeling cost was $243,057, tax increment financing modeling was $141,174,
and the personnel project was $169,788.
It is my understanding that in addition to this fee, the League is already charged separately for
office space and other incidental costs, and the "institutional fee" is an additional charge levied on
the LMCIT by the League General Fund. Your staff has objections to this institutional fee charge
and has expressed them to the League of Cities and the League Trust. The purpose of the LMCIT is
to allow Minnesota Cities to join together to achieve a savings on insurance costs through joint
effort. The fruits of those savings were to be returned to the members or users of the insurance
trust. Over the years, the insurance trust has transferred those savings on a consistent basis back
to the member cities. However, since 1988 this additional institutional fee has been drawn from the
LMCIT and transferred to the League of Cities general fund for other purposes not related to
insurance. The membership of the League of Minnesota Cities is larger than the membership in the
LMCIT, so the argument made at the time of the original transfer is that it's going to the same
purposes and membership is not completely accurate. We believe, if the League of Cities needs
additional funds for projects, it should go to its membership and seek a modification or change in the
dues. It should not extract fees from such associated groups as the LMCIT in effort to gain
additional funds for worthy general league projects. Please understand we are not criticizing the
league projects because no doubt are important ones and have value to Minnesota Cities. The
Council should also understand that the board of directors of both organizations approved the
transfers. We believe it is poor policy to make this type of transfer and the practice should not
continue in the future.
�nAdkQt Mtr(T SEPCv���$
2. FEES (continued)
(a) Personnel. LMCIT shall pay to LMC the direct cost of
salaries and benefits of personnel working on LMCIT
business. Benefit costs shall include the employer's
contributions to PERA and FICA the employer's share of
health and life premiums, and any contributions made to
the employee's flexible spending account. For LMCIT-
employees working less than full -time on LMCIT business,
LMCIT shall pay a pro -rata share of salary and benefit
costs, in accordance with the percentages shown in
Appendix A._
(b) Overhead LMCIT shall pay to LAIC an additional charge
for overhead equal to $120,000. This charge shall
constitute full reimbursement to LMC for the use of
office, conference, parking, and other building space; use
of furniture and other equipment, including computer and
related equipment; workers compensation and unemployment
compensation costs; and liability coverage, except as
provided in section 5, below.
(c) Direct costs LMCIT shall reimburse LMC for the
actual cost of the following at standard LMC rates:
postage; office supplies; copying, printing, and
typesetting; and expenses incurred by staff relating to
LMCIT activities, in accordance with the policy
adopted by the I-MCIT Board. Charges for audits, actuarial
work, bank services and LMCIT Board expenses shall be
billed directly to LMCIT by the service provider.
(d) Pro -rated expenses LMCIT shall pay to LMC a pro -rata
share of the actual costs incurred by LMC for equipment
maintenance, including both maintenance contract charges
and direct service charges; and telephone service,
including long distance charges. The LMCIT share shall be
a percentage equal to the total number of full time
equivalent employees working on LMCIT work as shown in
Appendix A, divided by the total number of full time
equivalent employees employed by LMC. LMCIT shall pay to
LMC 90% of the premium for employee bond coverage. LMCIT
shall pay to -LMC 30% of the expenses of the LMC Field
Service Representative.
(e) Institutional charge LMCIT shall pay to LMC an
institutional charge equal to 1.5% of the gross premiums
of the LMCIT workers compensation and property /casualty
programs. This fee shall constitute reimbursement to LMC
for the use by LMCIT of LMC's name, good will, reputation,
municipal and legislative expertise, and organizational
capacity.
Page 2 of 4
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
SPECIAL PROJECTS BUDGETS
1988 -89
PROPERTY TAX TAX INCREMENT PERSONNEL
MODELING FINANCING PROJECT * TOTAL
REVENUES:
INSTITUTIONAL FEE $198,551 $84,578 $104,163 $387,292
GRANTS $29,450 $29,450
--- - - ---- ---- - - --- -- - - -- - -- -- -- -----
TOTAL REVENUES $198,551 584,578 $133,613 5416,742
-- ---- --- --- -- ---- --- ---- -- - -- - --- --
EXPENDITURES:
DEVELOPMENT $123,189 543,345 $73,955 $240,489
DISTRIBUTION $6,203 S14,203 $22,703 $43,110
MAINTENANCE $13,609 $4,559 $7,309 $25,476
CAPITAL OUTLAY $37,500 $16,250 $17,500 $71,250
CONTINGENCY $18,050 $6,221 $12,147 $36,418
-- - - --- -- --- ------ --------- --- ------
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $198,551 $84,578 $133,613 $416,742
- --- - ---- --- - -- --- --- - -- --- -- - --- ---
*THERE EXISTS IN THIS PROJECT THE POTENTIAL FOR FEES GENERATED FROM THE
FROM THE SALE OF INFORMATION TO OUTSIDE ORGANIZATIONS.
. * *THIS AMOUNT - 5387,292 REPRESENTS 91.1% OF THE TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL
FEE ($425,226) FOR 1988 -89.
-41-
SPECIAL RE% ME FUNDS
SPECIAL PROJECTS BUDGETS
1989 -90
PROPERTY TAX TAX INCREMENT PERSONNEL
MIODELING FINANCING PROJECT TOTAL
REVENUES:
INSTIMIONAL FEE $243,857 $141,174 $169,788 $554,019 #+�
GRANTS $14,730 $14,730
TOTAL REVENUES $243,057 $141,174 $184,518 $568,749
EXPENDITURES:
DEVELOPMENT $157,316 $79,984 $104,419 $341,719
DISTRIBUTION $42,325 $32,329 $36,329 $118,983
MAINTENANCE $18,828 $13,745 $12,745 $45,311
CAPITAL OUTLAY $2,500 $2,500 $14,250 $19,250
CONTINGENCY $22,0% $12,616 $16,774 $51,487
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $243,057 $141,174 $184,518 $568,749
*THERE EXISTS IN THIS PROJECT THE POTENTIAL FOR FEES GENERATED FROM THE
SALE OF INFORMATION TO OUTSIDE ORGANIZATIONS.
* *THIS AMOUNT4554,019 REPRESENTS 94.8% OF THE TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL
FEE ($584,466) FOR 1989- -.
program, and payment of compensation to any employees, clericaDahye
custodians, servants, legal counsel, auditors, consultants, and s the
Trustees deem necessary. Any excess shall be paid to the membesuch
times as determined in the iscretion o the Trustees, on a prsis
det ermined by the extent o participation be each member in th
protection program. The said extent of participation shall be ed by the Trustees by the total dollar amount paid annua lly in premiolicies obtained and by other fees, as may be modified by loss experieach participant in a risk protection program pursuant to this A re
The Trustees shall be empowered to make transfers from surplus amounts
among the separate risk protection funds, which shall be considered loans, so
long as in their judgment repayment is feasible. If interfund loans are made
the Trustees shall make appropriate provisions for repayment. No claimant
against the trust or any of its separate risk protection funds shall have
power to force such interfund loans.
Section 3. EXPENSES OF ADMINISTRATION. Upon acceptance for
participation in the Trust, and annually thereafter on a date determined by
the Trustees, each member shall pay to the Trust such sums as may be
determined, in the sole discretion of the Trustees, to be necessary to pay all
expenses that the Trustees may consider necessary in establishing the Trust
and Fund and administering the risk protection program and the Trust,
including, but not limited to, any compensation paid to any employees,
clerical help, custodians, servants, legal counsel, auditors, consultants, and
others as the Trustees may deem necessary.
ARTICLE VIZ
The Trustees
Section 1. NUMBER OF TRUSTEES AND TERM OF OFFICE. There shall be five
Trustees. The Trustees shall be representative of the membership and shall be
the persons who are signatory hereto as such Trustees, their successors who
may from time to time be named by the Board of Directors of the League and
those who may be appointed by such Board to-fill any vacancy in the full
number of Trustees.
The membership of the Trustees shall include the following persons: One
member of the League Board of Directors, the Executive Director of the League,
and at least two persons who after the initial appointments are mayors or
members of city councils of cities which are participating members in this
Trust. The Executive Director of the League shall serve as Trustee for such
period of time as he /she holds his /her position with the League. The term of
the Trustee who is a member of the League Board of Directors shall be
coterminous with his /her term of office on the League Board of Directors. The
three remaining trustees shall be appointed for terms of three years; provided
that the Board of Directors shall establish a transition schedule of shorter
terms for one or more of these Trustees so that the term of one and only one
e of these Trustees shall.expire in any one year. Except as otherwise provided
in this section, terms of Trustees shall expire on March 31.
A 6i�tcEm �
The mere fact of membership in LMCIT does not give the member city or
any other person any claim on the trust's assets. Member cities and other persons
are entitled only to the benefits established in the policy or other document
used under any of LMCIT's risk protection programs.
All members are required to assign to LMCIT any insurance dividends
received. (The div idends will be distributed to me mbers &s provided in Article VI.)
Article VI. This article establishes a fund into which all of the
trust's income is to be deposited. The fund is used to pay the expenses of
operating LMCIT's risk protection programs, including administrative, legal, and
other expenses. The fund may also be used to pay claims directly if any risk
protection program established by the trust calls for direct payment by the trust.
Finall4, an4 e in the fiind s returned to the individual members. Each
member's retund will e determine on a asis o two c r e total
amount paid by the member to the trust; and 2) to the extent that the trustees
decide it is advisable, the member's individual loss experience.
Article VII. LMCIT is managed by a five - member Board of Trustees, con-
sisting of the Executive Director of LMC, one member of the LMC Board of Directors,
two persons who are mayors or council members of cities which are members of the
trust, and one other person. The trustees are appointed by the LMC Board of
Directors. Except for the LMC Executive Director, all trustees serve three -year
terms, with no more than two of the terms expiring in any one year. (The initial
trustees will be appointed for a temporary, six -month term. Permanent trustees
. will then be appointed. For the first permanent term only, two trustees will be
appointed for two -year terms, so as to "stagger" the expiration dates.)
Trustees may resign, or may be removed by the LMC Board of Directors
for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance. Vacancies are filled by the
LMC Board of Directors for the remainder of the unexpired term.
Trustees receive no compensation, but are reimbursed for expenses. The
trustees must.meet at least once per year; additional meetings may be called by
the chairman or by any two trustees. Any action may be taken by majority vote
at a meeting or by unanimous agreement in writing without a meeting.
The trustees are given full authority and responsibility for adminis-
tration of the trust and fund in accordance with the trust document. They are
not required to be bonded; nor are they personally liable for any errors in
judgment made in exercising their discretion in good faith in hiring employees,
entering contracts, making investments, etc.
Article VIII. This article provides that persons who are dealing with
LMCIT are not required to investigate whether the trustees' actions are in
accordance with the trust document, but may take at face value any contract or
agreement signed by the trustees.
Article IX. The LMC Board of Directors is given the power to amend
or to terminate the trust. If LMCIT is terminated, the trustees may transfer
the trust's programs and assets to any other organization controlled by cities
extablished for the same purpose.
Article X. LMCIT is created in Minnesota and is to be construed and
administered in accordance with Minnesota law.
-2-
} LMCIT's ability to get a favorable outcome if we do have a
dispute on interpretation of the pollution exclusion. Also,
4 those past profits provide a good basis for convincing Gen Re to
stay with LMCIT if we hit a series of losses. If we were to
move the coverage to a different carrier, we wouldn't have that
advantage. Regarding the inverse) condemnation limit, Tansey
pointed out that long before t� a could be losses totalling $3
million in the excess layer, would have 'a serious problem in
the primary layers. Since will be onitoring the coverage
closely, and since we do of rovide ail cove ge on this
exposure, we should be able to iden fy and r pond to those
problems in time, before the $ m, ion limit excess
layer comes into play.
Tritz emphasized t we a e step sh of ge ing Gen Re to
follow the actual form that are putti o ince the
language of the c verag d uments uld i •', there is a
possibility LM v' a loss Ge a would claim is
excluded r eir tr ty, eve hough c, ered under the
primary oc ent hat e put ut t the Y.
M phy mo ed t at go with Ge Re er this tre ty
re ationsh wit the co trai is ntioned. eco by
Ort el. Pa se, unanimo sly.
The xt a da item was gen s rocs and omi s T " z
stat t the ques wha type of policy p do " LMCIT
should ke as to re iri a nts to have t errorsy nd
omissions coverag . Augu` 16 a me o o his su ect was
distributed to the Boa n surv% ng ag nts of I rger cities,
it was lea that agen errors a o issionsJ overage is
just ab t ni ersal. recommended ha they oard not take
any act' n o r ire gents to ca :Cry ro sI d omissions
coverage Or tel fe s it would b a go d I x a to mention to the
cities om t me time to loo for an a nt who does carry
this cov age. itz remi the Boar
oar ' hat we did recently
run an ar 'cle n the ag ma zine commending cities to
require this coverage w n s a ing n agent. Murphy
recommended a follow up tte o e cities on this. Tritz
commented that the articl did ge rate a number of calls and
inquiries. Murphy moved t t s e type of mailing to the cities
addressing the errors and omissions coverage be done. Seconded
by Holmlund. Passed unanimo
Fdeta agenda item discussed was the LMC /LMCIT service
. Tritz began by saying there were two related issues
ss. The first was the reduction to writing of the
of the arrangement between the League and the Trust,
ng what had been the actual practice since 1980. The
ssue is the institutional fee. Don Slater has given a
ndation to the LMC Board on this. Slater continued by
8
t
saying that an agenda item on the LMC Board's meeting for
October 12, 1988 will be the issue of the institutional fee.
LMCIT Board members had received copies of the materials sent to
the LMC Board on this issue. Slater stated the LMC Board has not
yet acted on either the Management Services Agreement or the
institutional fee issue. of their decisions at the present
time. Slater then reviewed the service contract with the Board.
Slater mentioned that he had recommended to the LMC Board that
the institutional fee referred to in the contract be set at 1.5%
of gross premium volume. This fee is intended to cover good
will, name use, and lobbying, as well as other intangible
factors. He added that he had revised the recommendation to
specify that the fee be not be charged against the health
program.
Holmlund asked whether the contract required bonding of all
LMCIT employees. Tritz responded that LMCIT does not have any
direct employees of its own, but that the entire League staff is
blanket bonded.
Slater asked Tritz to explain the liability coverage to the
Board. Tritz replied stating basically it reflects that LMC has
and continues to have its own liability coverage through LMCIT,
and that LMCIT carries pool errors and omissions coverage.
Holmlund asking how the League charges the Trust for bonds.
Tritz responded saying there is a single blanket bond that
covers the entire staff. 90% of the cost for that premium is
charged back against LMCIT. This amount reflects the volume of
transactions and the amount of money being handled, rather than
reflecting the numbers of staff members involved.
Holmlund stated that he finds a problem with the institutional
charge. He is afraid this could drain resources from the
Insurance Trust to pay for other League programs He expressed
concern that the percentage of the fee could be raised year
after year. For t ese reasons, he is against is tee going
into effect
Slater responded that while he is Executive Director the chances
Of it going beyond 1.5% is remote. He went on to say that there
are Leagues who are over that percentage, ranging all the way up
to 17 %. 2% generally speaking is on the high side, while 1% is
the low side.
Stene asked what the total gross premium was. Tritz responded
stating property casualty is approximately $23 million and work
comp about $17 million. Health premiums are about $2.5 million,
but those amounts would not be included in the fee.
Holmlund asked what the actual institutional fee would be.
r
9
t
Slater responded approximately $700,000. Holmlund commented
th at e didn't feel t e Trust was ever intended to be a fund
raiser for other programs of the League.
Murphy asked if we were talking about the direct salary expense,
plus the overhead fee of 12 %, plus the institutional fee of
1.5 %. Slater said that was correct.
Stene questioned what the intent of the League would be for the
utilization of this fee. Slater said it has not been programmed
completely at this time, but that the first proposed use would
be the property tax modeling program.
Orttel expressed his concern that the benefits go back to the
members. Orttel continued saying this would have been easier if
it had been instituted right from the start. Holmlund stated
that we have always maintained that this is our insurance
company and all the profits are g oing back to the users. In his,
estimation, this is not what we are doing when we turn an
institutional fee of $700,000 back to the parent organization.
Murphy stated he has mixed emotions on it. The intent of LMC
was to have an umbrella organization to provide services to the
member cities. Going through figures of his own, he can see
what has been generated over and above our costs and he is
uncomfortable with the dollars that have been generated back to
the League.
Slater continued by saying that any money generated as a revenue
source of the League will be spent for League purposes, as
directed by the League's Board of Directors. Of the initial
amount, occurring in 1989 and more in 1990, the Board has
suggested to first encumber the effort to develop a Property Tax
Modeling capability, which clearly is something all cities will
benefit from, including the cities that are not in the LMCIT.
No other projects are currently being done. Slater expects that
when the Property Tax Modeling budget annualizes, it would do so
in the amount of $300,000 per year. Possibly half of the money
will be consumed by this activity alone. Slater's second set of
priorities for the money would probably be to do something
further with Tax Increment Finance studies and to expand the
manpower programs that are currently underway. LMC is currently
piloting a wages and hours system to be computerized and
available for cities.
Murphy question how we arrived at the 1.5 %. Slater responded
that he had looked at the rates, charges and practices in other
states to arrive at this percentage.
Holmlund said he felt they were all good purposes, with no
argument about them. However, he said he would have felt more
10
i
comfortable if this had been initiated in the beginning He
t stated that we have so ld to over 700 cities with the concept
that the profits would be given back to the users in proportio
to what they have put in. Holmlund would not want to explain
the change c po icy at is point to the member cities.
Slater stated the LMCIT Board's position on this was very
important. If the LMCIT Board unanimously rejected the notion,
the League Board would not disregard those views.
Stene asked if there were any tax implications. Slater stated
there is debate on that point, which is part of the reason why
there has not been an institutional fee in the past. Slater
stated that Peskar's position is that there could be potential
tax implications. Advice Slater has received from other Leagues
with institutional fees is that there are no tax implications.
Holmlund stated he felt the LMC Board should consider that the
Trust is not like other insurance companies. Our profits go
back to the member. Slater responded that a profits s i 'do
go back to the member city, and that he did not consider the fee
to amount to a skimming of profits from LMCIT. Orttel again
stated he felt this fee was an "afterthought" after many years
of operation.
Murphy questioned how fees are arrived at for other services
performed by the Board. Slater said there is no set across the
board basis for that. When a fee is placed on something, the
LMC Board tries to figure out a logical basis for these
recommendations. Slater continued by saying the fee for the
Annual Meeting is a composite of the out -of- pocket costs the
League sustains. The dues the city pays are not calculated
based on cost of membership, they are based on population, etc.
He stated it costs the League money to have a minimum dues
paying member.
Slater stated that the League does $20,000 to $30,000 worth of
fee - reimbursed service per year. On publications, the League
generally tries to recoup its costs. There are one or two
profitable publications such as the Cities Handbook. Murphy
asked if there was a fixed fee schedule. Slater answered no,
only the dues scheduled is fixed and granted.
Stene asked if the Board wanted to take any action on this at
this meeting or leave it to the LMC Board. Slater stated it
would be discussed at the October 12, 1988 LMC Board meeting and
whatever decisions were made would then be discussed with the
LMCIT Board.
Holmlund requested the minutes show his only objection to this
contract is the institutional fee.
11
s
Murphy asked the other individual Board members to state their
positions regarding the institutional fee, so that he could
convey their sentiments to the League Board. Orttel responded
saying he does not like to see it happen, but understands that
we are involved with another body that. has every right to
establish this fee. He went on to say that the LMC Board are
the ones who answer to the members. He said he has mixed
feelings on it. He does not like it from a consumer standpoint,
but recognizes that there are programs that will come back to
help the city. He said he could not answer specifically whether
he would ultimately be able to support the proposed fee.
Murphy stated his problem with this fee is with the amount of
money and how it is being spent. He has no objection to the
concept of an institutional fee and is familiar with it from
other boards he has participated in.
Stene stated he has mixed feelings. He has felt over the years
that a fee such as this would be coming. He agreed with
Holmlund that it is a problem if you make statements and then go
back and try to modify them. He went on to say it isn't the
IMCIT Board's problem. It will be the League Board's problem,
as they will be the ones initiating it. Stene indicated a
concern with the percentage approach, feeling that percentages
don't always come out fair. However, he stated that this is
the way it is accomplished and it must be accepted. He stated
that he hoped that the proposed new League programs will in fact
benefit the cities, and if that happens, he will have no problem
with it. Murphy indicated he would convey those sentiments to
the LMC Board.
Murphy moved, seconded by Stene to adjourn. Passed unanimously.
j
12
M C T �Yl tj Li 7 E S
Rep 0 §1 g Muty piece of information
entered into the computer system. Regarding the League Trust,
everything entered into the system within the month of November,
had an averag -a -round ti e f 18 o the date
received. '0".. :'O'
Holmlund as ed Tritz if the questi n E w ing to terminate
the contract no problem with
this and feels it is perfectly reasonable. He a o commented
that the defense and indemnification provisions should be
reciprocal as well. The-motion p unanimously.
LMC -LMCIT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE AGREEMENT
Slater began by addressing Stene saying the LMC Board considered
the institutional fee matter after it had been submitted to the
LMCIT Board.
Tritz continued by stating that one change in the agreement
would be to change the overhead charge from a percentage of
salary basis into a flat dollar amount. Slater stated that was
the only change in the document and it was favorable to keeping
the charge at a fixed level, rather than a percentage of salary.
Holmlund asked if there is any revised estimates on what the
1.5% would net. Slater responded saying the Board wouldn't know
the amount.- Tritz stated that with a 17 million dollar volume
on work comp and a 23 million property/casualty, totalling $40
million, 1.5 would produce $600,000.
Stene asked Tritz if he had a figure of the flat fee for the
overhead charge. Tritz said the overhead charge is $120,000.
He went on to say there are several different fees built into
this contract. There is direct reimbursement for personnel; an
overhead charge intended to cover use of space, computer
equipment; some direct costs billed back, such as printing,
postage, etc.; and some pro -rated expenses, as for telephone
service, bond premiums, etc.
Holmlund asked Tritz his estimate of the fees, excluding the
1.5 institutional fee. Tritz said it would be in the range of
approximately $450,000 total. Orttel asked if that is for items
we are paying for now, and Slater confirmed that it was.
Murphy asked if the overhead charge is a re- negotiated figure.
Slater stated it could be re- negotiated in the future.
Holmlund commented that in other instances, the Trust is trying
to get away from percentage of premiums and asked why this new
institutional fee is a percentage premiup Murphy stated that
at the LMC Board meeting he mentioned that there should be a fee
to the Trust, however, differed on the amount it should be.
Slater stated the various ways to contemplate this charge. He
said the bulk of other leagues are on a percent basis. There
are exceptions, because the leagues involved are so different
themselves. He stated there is, however, a fairly common usage
( of 1% to 2% as a fee on the percent basis. From the League's
point of view, the setting of a percent is desirable because it
presents the possibility for growth and it is at a time when the
League is interested in capitalizing on the growth of this
program.
Murphy stated that the feelings of the LMCIT Board were relayed
to the LMC Board and Slater agreed. Holmlund still questioned,
why the percentage? Tritz said this issue was discussed at the
LMC Board and they decided on a percentage. Tritz stated that
one advantage of a percentage -type of fee is that the cost can
ride down, as well as riding up. He feels there is a
possibility that commercial markets may come back and decide to
seriously compete for business, taking a fair amount of cities
away from our programs. A flat fee would represent a fixed
cost, spread among fewer cities. A percentage would ride down
automatically. EBA and North Star are both paid on percentage
type contracts and have been for the last eight years.
Murphy stated there was only one other LMC Board member that
questioned the idea of a flat fee rather than a percentage. The
percentage figure was unanimously accepted, except for that one
person and himself.
Holmlund had a point to make about the 1.5% being taken right
off the top, without considering how well the Trust is doin
He stated he had intends to go back to some back issues of the
League magazine and any other mailings to our meEBers promising
a full return Holmlund will share this information with th
LMC Board when it is comp Holmlund stated he will again,
oppose the contract, stri because of the 1.5% institutional
fee
Stene questioned if there is program now to assure the members
that the money we're taking away is coming back to them for
their benefit. Slater responded saying the LMC Board has
required that a budget committee be recalled to review any
proposed expenditures. The Board will then certify the budget
for disposition of these funds. Stene asked if these funds are
being lumped in with the rest of the League funds. Slater
stated the plan is to segregate these funds and to not use them
as a revenue item for the League's budget.
Murphy made a motion that the LMCIT approve the contract as
proposed by the LMC Board. Seconded by Orttel. The motion
passed by a 4 -1 voted, Holmlund opposed.
Holmlund stated he respected the majority's opinion and hopes
the
: LMCIT Beard will not feel bad if he writes a letter to the
:s har ed MC Board stating his o ini.ons. Other Board members agreed tha
is would be perfectly appropriate. Orttel stated that he
many of Holmlund's concerns.
/3
Licenses to be approved by the City Council on August 28, 1989:
AMUSEMENT DEVICES - OPERATOR
Children's Palace 5900 S `-\
Shingle Creek Pkwy.
Grief of Police �Q�C
GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES
Midwest Grease Buyers, Inc. P. 0. Box 26
Twin City Sanitation 279 Meadowood Lane
Vasko Rubbish Removal, Inc. 920 Atlantic Street
Sanitarian aC
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
Brooklyn Air Heating & AC 5801 Lyndale Ave. N.
Cronstrom's Heating & A/C 4410 Excelsior Blvd.
Building Official
NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINES
Twin City Vending 1065 E. Highway 36
Earle Brown Tower 6120 Earle Brown Dr.
Earle Brown Office Bldg. 6040 Earle Brown Dr.
Sanitarian
PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINES
Twin City Vending 1065 E. Highway 36
Earle Brown Office Bldg. 6040 Earle Brown Dr.
Sanitarian
RENTAL DWELLINGS
Initial:
John & Diane Stephens 3824 Burquest Lane
Warren Samuelson/Wayne Rowley 4204 Lakebreeze Ave. N.
Chris Taber /Koreen Klawitter 2932 67th Lane North
Renewal:
Thomas & Joanne Limond Humboldt Square Apartments
Charles Sabatke 6306 Brooklyn Drive
George Shimshock 5900 Colfax Avenue N.
Paul A. Dorfman 5245 Drew Ave. N.
Dale C. Wegner 59235 Dupont Ave. N.
Leslie G. Reinhardt 5713 Humboldt Ave. N.
Kristin Norstad 4201 Lakeside Ave. N. #103
Lewis & Vivian Hedlund 5316 Russell Ave. N.
Robert Nechal 5332 -36 Russell Ave. N.
Fred & Judie Swenson 5340 -44 Russell Ave. N.
Marilyn Dietrich /Thomas Schultz 6831 Toledo Ave. N.
Jack & Mary Jane Herrlin 4803 Wingard Place
J. J. Barnett 2910 68th Lane
J. J. Barnett 2914 68th Lane
J. J. Barnett 2918 68th Lane
Director of Planning f
and Inspection
SIGN HANGER
Universal Sign Company 1033 Thomas Avenue
Building Official
GENERAL APPROVAL: `• `- �y� =-��Q/
D. K. Weeks, City Clerk