Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 01-29 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER JANUARY 29, 1990 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. November 27, 1989 - Regular Session *b. December 6, 1989 - Special Session *c. December 18, 1989 - Regular Session *d. January 8, 1990 - Regular Session 7. Resolutions: *a. Amending the Process for Appeals from Decisions of the Administrative Traffic Committee -This resolution is provided in accordance with the City Council's request on January 8, 1990. b. Accepting Proposal and Awarding Contract for Purchase of a Backhoe Mounted Pavement Breaker -It is proposed to fund the purchase of this unit from the Public Utility Fund. *c. Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Lorna Seburg d. Authorizing the Mayor to Sign the Document Approving the City's Emergency Plan g Y *e. Authorizing he g Mayor and City Manager to Enter into a Joint Powers Agreement for the Formation and Administration of the Hennepin -Anoka Suburban Drug Task Force f. Accepting Proposal and Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Sign an Agreement for Phase II of the Proposed Communications Audit *g. Regarding Mayor Nyquist's 1990 Salary *h. Relating to $3,600,000 City of Brooklyn Center Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Brookwood Estates Project) Series 1985 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- January 29, 1990 *i. Approving Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for Delivery of One (1) 28,000 GVW Cab and Chassis - Approved in 1990 budget for street department. *j. Approving Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for Delivery of One (1) 19,000 GVW Cab and Chassis - Approved in 1990 budget for street department. k. Approving Sale of One Parcel of Land on Non - Conservation List 741 -NC - Adoption of this resolution would approve the public sale of a tax - forfeited lot located at 3113 68th Avenue North based on Hennepin County's reappraisal of the lot with consideration to soil conditions which exist on this lot. *1. Amending the 1990 General Fund Budget - Appropriating funds for DARE supplies from unexpended 1989 appropriation. 8. Ordinances: (7:30 p.m.) a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ord' g P y finances to Establish a Planned Unit Development Zoning District -This item was first read on January 8, 1990, published in the City's official newspaper on January 17, 1990, and is offered this evening for a second reading. b. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 17 of the City Ordinances Regarding Personnel -This amendment would add Columbus Day as a paid holiday. This item was first read on January 8, 1990, published in the City's official newspaper on January 17, 1990, and is offered this evening for a I second reading. C. An Ordinance Extending the Interim Ordinance for the Purpose of Protecting the Planning Process and the Health, Safety and Welfare of the Residents of the City, and Regulating and Restricting Certain Development at the property Located at 6626 West River Road and all Land South of 66th Avenue and North of I- 694 Lying etween Willow Lane ne and Highway wa g Y 252 -This item was first read on December 18, 1989, published in the City's official newspaper on December 27, 1989, and is offered this evening for a second reading. d. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding General Licensing Regulations -The amendment would ban the sale of cigarettes from vending machines. This his item is offered this evening for a first reading. g i CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- January 29, 1990 9. Discussion Items: a. Joint Powers Agreement -Fire training facility. b. L.E.L.S. Contract Amendment C. Proposal from DCA, Inc. for Employee Flex Plan d. Human Rights and Resources Commission Recommendation to Authorize a Survey of Residents Regarding Transportation e. Minnesota Lottery Involvement - Municipal liquor stores. f. Park and Recreation Commission Recommendation Regarding Twin Lake Park Study g. Park and Recreation Commission Recommendation Regarding Use of Skateboards h. LMCIT Proposal for an Accident Policy for Members of City Council and Citizen Advisory Commissions *10. Licenses 11. Adjournment CORRECTED COPY Signs in the C1 and ClA Districts, and Requiring Abatement of Signs on Abandoned Premises and setting the public hearing date for December 18, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSE - 6915 LEE AVENUE NORTH The City Manager stated Diane Baer has submitted an application for a private kennel license. He stated Ms. Baer has three dogs. He noted the Police Department records indicate two complaints in the last year regarding barking dogs. He then went on to review the recommendations made by the Health Department. He noted staff recommends the Council delete requirement No. 5 pertaining to the type of surface to be installed within the dog kennel. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on a private kennel license at 6915 Lee Avenue North. He recognized Connie Howe, 6906 Major Avenue North. Ms. Howe stated she is against the private kennel license because the dogs bark all the time. Mayor Nyquist then recognized Michael Solberg, 6912 Major Avenue North. Mr. Solberg stated he lives directly behind the applicant and the dogs do bark quite often. He stated he is not in favor of the Council approving this license. Mayor Nyquist then recognized the applicant, Diane Baer. Ms. Baer stated she is aware of the fact that one of the dogs barks quite often, and she is working on putting an end to the barking. She noted this particular dog has been kept in the house until recently, and the animal is having a difficult time adjusting to being outside. She noted this dog belongs to her and the other two she is taking care of for a friend. She noted if the private kennel license were not approved and she had to remove the extra animals, this particular dog would be staying. A brief discussion then ensued regarding the possibility of using mediation for this issue, and Mayor Nyquist noted it doesn't appear there is anything to mediate. He noted the barking dog situation should not be allowed to continue whether there is one or three dogs on the premises. The City Manager noted if the Council wished he could have the code enforcement officers check this neighborhood frequently for the barking dog problem. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else who wished to address the public hearing. No one appeared, and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Paulson and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to close the public hearing on a private kennel license for 6915 Lee Avenue North. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Cohen to approve the private kennel license for 6915 Lee Avenue North subject to the following conditions: 1. The private kennel license is for a one -year period. 2. Barking dog complaints will be investigated and reported to the City Council. Numerous barking dog complaints could result in revocation of the license. 11/13/89 -7- CORRECTED COPY 3. Animal feces to be cleaned up daily in warm weather and ever y other da y in cold weather. 4. Water supplied to the animals daily. 5. Food contained in bowls, any spills on the ground to be cleaned to minimize rodent attraction. 6. One additional dog house be provided so that each animal is protected from the elements. 7. The height of the current four -foot fence be extended to six feet to prevent the animals from jumping over. The applicant should contact the building department for fence construction setback requirements. The motion passed with Councilmembers Paulson and Pedlar opposed. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEM PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 89024 SUBMITTED BY TIM JOHNSON REQUESTING SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO OPERATE A CONVENIENCE FOOD RESTAURANT IN THE RETAIL BUILDING AT 1950 57TH AVENUE NORTH (NORTHBROOK SHOPPING CENTER) The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its October 26, 1989, meeting. He added an ordinance amendment was also recommended by the Planning Commission pertaining to this item. The Director of Planning and Inspection referred the Mayor and Councilmembers to pages one through three of the October 26, 1989, Planning Commission minutes and information sheet. He then went on to review the application and the recommended conditions for the application. A discussion then ensued pertaining to the hours of operation for the establishment. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Johnson, the applicant, who stated he is required by the parent company to have hours at least until midnight, Sunday through Thursday, and until 2 a.m, on Friday and Saturday. He noted the main reason for staying open that late is to prepare food for the following day. The Director of Planning and Inspection then briefly reviewed the ordinance amendment recommended in conjunction with this application. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 89024. He 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 Pedlar to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 89024. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Paulson and seconded by Councilmember Cohen to approve Planning Commission Application No. 89024 subject to the following conditions: 11/13/89 -8- MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION NOVEMBER 27, 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 7:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Celia Scott, Todd Paulson, Jerry Pedlar, and Philip Cohen. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren, Police Chief Jim Lindsay, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Administrative Aide Patti Page. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Mayor Nyquist. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted the Council had not received any requests to use the open forum session this evening. He inquired if there was anyone present: who wished to address the Council. There being none, he continued with the regular agenda items. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the consent agenda. Councilmember Scott requested item 9c be removed from the consent agenda. PROCLAMATION Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following proclamation and moved its adoption: PROCLAMATION DECLARING DECEMBER 3 -10, 1989, AS CHILD SAFETY WEEK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing proclamation was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASE - OSSEO BROOKLYN BUS GARAGE There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to release the performance bond for Osseo Brooklyn bus garage, 4435 68th Avenue North. The motion passed unanimously. PERFORMANCE BOND REDUCTION - MINNESOTA STATE HIGH SCHOOL LEAGUE There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to reduce the performance bond for the Minnesota State High School League to $25,000. The motion passed unanimously. 11/27/89 -1- RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 89 -222 Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR DELIVERY OF ONE (1) COMPACT FIRE SEDAN The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -223 Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE OF PICKUP TRUCK FOR PUBLIC UTILITY DEPARTMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -224 Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 86 -123 REGARDING THE SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT FEES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIED LICENSES ON -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE CLASS A ($8,000 PER YEAR) There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve an on -sale intoxicating liquor license Class A for Red Lobster. The motion passed unanimously. ON -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE CLASS B ($11,000 PER YEAR) There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve on -sale intoxicating liquor licenses Class B for Applebee's, Days Inn, Earle Brown Bowl, Ground Round Restaurant, Holiday Inn, La Casita, and T. Wright's. The motion passed unanimously. ON -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE CLASS C ($14 PER YEAR There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve an on -sale intoxicating liquor license Class C for Lynbrook Bowl. The motion passed unanimously. ON -SALE CLUB LICENSE There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve an on -sale club license for Duoos Bros. American Legion. The motion passed unanimously. 0 11/27/89 -2- ON -SALE WINE LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve on -sale wine licenses for Dayton's, Denny's, and Yen Ching. The motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the following list of licenses: CHRISTMAS TREE SALES Roger Koskinen /Midwest Challenge 3049 Columbus Ave. S. 5O's Grill 5524 Brooklyn Blvd. FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Blum's Concession Corp. 500 W. Ohio Ave. Sears 1297 Brookdale Center GASOLINE SERVICE STATION Brookdale Unocal 5710 Xerxes Ave. N. ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Brooklyn Center Lions /Bill Mayland 5618 Lilac Dr. N. Brooklyn Center High School 6500 Humboldt Ave. N. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINES ARA Services 2830 N. Fairview Northwestern Nat'l. Life Ins. 6200 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINES ARA Services 2830 N. Fairview Northwestern Nat'l. Life Ins. 6200 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Gary Scherber Lilac Apartments Chris Christianson 6815 Ewing Ave. N. Gloria Lorentson 6805 Fremont Pl. N. Gary Scherber 5820 Logan Ave. N. Robert and Catherine Lorvick 5205 E. Twin Lake Blvd. Jim Stalberger /Al Juhnke 3129 49th Ave. N. Jim Stalberger /Al Juhnke 3135 49th Ave. N. Renewal: James Lupient /Midwest Mgmt. Basswood Apartments George Lucht 5105 Brooklyn Blvd. Dorothy Follese 6933 Brooklyn Blvd. Robert Lerum 4207 Lakeside Ave. N. #332 Bertil Anderson 4207 Lakeside Ave. N. #336 Byron and Nancy Mach 4708 -12 Twin Lake Ave. Jerry Harrington /Eugene Berg 1200 67th Ave. N. Janet Schenk 3118 67th Ave. N. 11/27/89 -3- SPECIAL FOOD HANDLING ESTABLISHMENT Kohl's Department Store 2501 Co. Road 10 Mr. Movies 1964 57th Ave. N. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - OCTOBER 28 1989 - SPECIAL SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Cohen to approve the minutes of the October 28, 1989, City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Pedlar abstained from the vote as he was not present at this meeting. RESOLUTIONS CONTINUED The City Manager presented a Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of Additional Portable Radios, Amending the 1989 General Fund Budget, and Appropriating Forfeited Property. Councilmember Pedlar noted when the initial approval was given for the purchase of the portable radios, the purchase of handguns was also discussed. He inquired when Council would be receiving an update on this issue. Chief Lindsay stated he believed a report would be ready in mid - February. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -225 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ADDITIONAL PORTABLE RADIOS, AMENDING THE 1989 GENERAL FUND BUDGET, AND APPROPRIATING FORFEITED PROPERTY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded b g g y y member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Authorizing Dispensing of Liquor at the Convention Center at Earle Brown Heritage Center. The City Manager noted this would be an interim situation until the special legislation has been passed licensing Atrium Catering in the convention facility. Councilmember Cohen inquired what type of control factor the City would have at the convention center and whether security would be required. The City Manager stated security personnel can be required and generally the City meets with the applicant and thoroughly hl reviews ws the y laws with them. He noted the Police .Department will be doing his with ith Atri um Catering. ouncilmember Scott inquired w g hat type of investigation will be done for this license. The Police Chief stated at this point only a criminal investigation has been completed, but a complete investigation would be done before the full license is approved. RESOLUTION NO 89 -226 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DISPENSING OF LIQUOR AT THE CONVENTION CENTER AT EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. 11/27/89 -4- The City Manager_ presented a Resolution Relating to $8,100,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Brookdale Two Limited Partnership Project); Authorizing the Execution of Supplement No. 1 to Indenture of Trust in Connection with the Remarketing Thereof. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -227 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION RELATING TO $8,100,000 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS (BROOKDALE TWO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP PROJECT); AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 TO INDENTURE OF TRUST IN CONNECTION WITH THE REMARKETING THEREOF The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEM AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 TO ESTABLISH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT The City Manager noted the Planning Commission has been considering a Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance for some time. He noted the primary purpose of the ordinance amendment is to provide the City with a viable tool which will allow for flexibility in land development and redevelopment. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated the PUD ordinance gives the City the ability to mix land uses and to approve development plans which may be different, to some extent, from our normal development standards. He noted development agreements establish what can and cannot be undertaken in the project. Mayor Nyquist stated in the development standards, it states the minimum area shall be one acre. He inquired if this was rather small. The City Manager stated other cities who have PUD ordinances started at about five acres and had to keep shrinking the land area. Councilmember Cohen inquired if by implementing the PUD ordinance, the City would be entering into contract zoning. The City Attorney stated contract zoning is a difficult term which is not recognized in Minnesota as being legal or illegal. The City Attorney stated the development agreement is a very lengthy and complicated document which requires much staff time and effort to create. He stated the City would not be allowed to arbitrarily impose regulations. He noted the City Council may have to amend its comprehensive plan. The City Manager stated that the Council can designate within the comprehensive plan those areas that are recommended for PUD uses. The City Attorney pointed out most developers are not interested in PUDs unless they are quite sincere about the development because it can be a very costly and time consuming process. The City Manager stated if the Council would like, staff could obtain copies of PUD agreements and ordinances from other cities using the PUD ordinances. OTHER BUSINESS Mayor Nyquist asked Councilmember Cohen to briefly review the November 14, 1989, League of Minnesota Cities' meeting. Councilmember Cohen gave a brief review of the meeting and noted all member cities are currently not sharing in the cost of 11/27/89 -5- special projects. The Finance Director stated he felt the purpose of the insurance trust was to provide low cost insurance to member cities with the proceeds being returned to the member cities. Councilmember Scott inquired what the Council's next action would be. Mayor Nyquist stated a letter was sent to all cities in the State. He added the League of Minnesota Cities' dues are part of the 1990 budget. The City Manager reminded Councilmembers the City cannot belong to the insurance trust unless it is a League member. MAYORAL APPOINTMENT - HUMAN RIGHTS AND RESOURCES COMMISSION There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to appoint Kevin Smith to the Human Rights and Resources Commission. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Nyquist stated he has been asked to pass a Resolution Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Diane Ziegler (Lemke). He noted she has been named by the McKnight Foundation as one of ten in the State of Minnesota for significant contributions in human services. RESOLUTION NO 89 -228 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF DIANE LEMKE ZIEGLER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:12 p.m. and reconvened at 8:28 P.M. CONTINUATION OF 1990 PROPOSED BUDGET REVIEW The City Manager stated the Council left off its review of the budget on the Vehicle Maintenance Budget, Unit No. 43. The Council had no questions at this time. The Council then reviewed the Traffic Signals Budget, Unit No g g 44. Councilmember Scott inquired if this included the new signal by Brookdale Square. The City Manager responded affirmatively. The City Council went on to review the Street Lighting Budget, Unit No. 45. Councilmember Cohen stated a property owner.has put a light in the alley between 53rd and 54th on Logan, and he would now like the City to take over the payment for this light. Councilmember Cohen stated he felt staff should review the policy and investigate whether there are enough lights to meet the present needs in this area. The City Manager stated staff could review the existing guidelines and policies for alley lights and also the current needs. The City Council then reviewed the Weed Control Budget, Unit No. 46. The Council had no questions. 11/27/89 -6- The Council went on to review the Health Regulation and Inspection Budget, Unit No. 51. The Council had no questions at this time. The City Council next reviewed the Social Services Budget, Unit No. 52. Councilmember Pedlar inquired why there was an increase for the senior transportation program. The City Manager stated that is the City's share of this program. He noted the City's participation in this program is currently under review. Mayor N uist stated d he believed the e City should have a policy regarding funding of public programs. The City Manager stated his office has received a request from the Humane Society for funding and they may appear at the December 6 meeting. The Council next reviewed the Recreation and Parks Administration Budget, Unit No. 61. The Council had no questions at this time. The City Council then proceeded to review the Adult Recreation Programs Budget, Unit No. 61. The Council had no questions at this time. Next, the City Council reviewed the Teen Recreation Programs Budget, Unit No. 63. The City Council had no questions at this time. The City Council continued the review of the 1990 budget by proceeding to the Children's Recreation Programs Budget, Unit No. 64. Councilmember Cohen inquired if staff had participation figures. The City Manager responded affirmatively. He noted approximately five years ago the participation decreased significantly, but it has been growing steadily. Next, the City Council reviewed the General Recreation Programs Budget, Unit No. 65. The City Council had no questions at this time. The Council then proceeded to review the Community Center Budget, Unit No. 66. The Council had no questions at this time. The City Council then reviewed the Parks Maintenance Budget, Unit No. 69. Councilmember Cohen inquired if this is the budget which would be used for the tree planting program. The City Manager stated money has been added for reforestation within the parks. He stated he has asked the City Attorney to investigate whether the City could implement the type of program which interests Councilmember Cohen. Councilmember Cohen stated he is not suggesting a full - gg g blown program for 1990 but he would like to see the City get started in 1 990 and expand in future years. The City Council next reviewed the Watershed Management Budget, Unit No. 68. The Council had no questions at this time. Next, the Council reviewed the Convention and Tourism Bureau Budget, Unit No. 70. The City Manager stated staff is recommending the lodging tax be raised to six ercent Councilmember ncilmembe • r Cohen stated he felt staff should notify each hotel regarding this possible increase. He noted the Tourism Bureau should be promoting the entire City not just acting as an extension of the hotels advertising budget. 11/27/89 -7- The Council then reviewed the Unallocated Departmental Expenses Budget, Unit No. 80. The City Council had no questions at this time. The City Manager then briefly reviewed the memorandum which he prepared relating to the six concerns from the September 21, 1989, budget review meeting. Councilmember Cohen stated he felt the appropriations for the League of Minnesota Cities' membership fees should be kept in the budget but should not be paid until the Council is happy with the League's response. He noted the money could be placed on hold, and all or part of it could be released if the issue is settled. The City Manager noted the City Clerk would review the arrangement for voting in precinct one before the next election. The City Manager noted the issue of the sidewalk plow and the additional police officer still needs further discussion. He noted the sidewalk plow and the additional police officer were the last two items cut from the budget. He noted the City started with two sidewalk plows and is still operating with two. He stated he reluctantl y cut this item. He explained he cut the police officer because of economic reasons. He noted at this time $461,265 will be taken from the fund balance to make up the difference between the levy limit and the proposed budget. Councilmember Cohen inquired how long the City can continue to tap the reserve before it runs out. The Finance Director stated the reserve has also been used for capital projects, and the more money that is used for other items takes away from capital improvements. The City Manager reminded the City Council that preparation for this budget began in February. He noted the additional police officer will cost approximately $40,000. Councilmember Pedlar stated he does not believe the City can afford not to add the additional police officer. He stated he does not want to devalue the need for the MIS Coordinator, but he feels the quality of services within the City are more important than this position. He stated he feels the City needs to re- invest in the community. The City Manager pointed out adding one more. police officer is not going to solve all the problems within the City. Councilmember Pedlar agreed but added one additional police officer will help. Councilmember Cohen stated he believes Councilmember Pedlar has stated the problem quite well, but he is not willing to second guess the staff where staff needs are concerned. He stated he believes the City's action is to move forward, but the legislature must be told the City has a problem and may need resources to address this problem. The City Manager stated he has a suggestion for addressing the snowplow issue. He stated it takes approximately three months to receive the plow, and it would not be available for this winter anyway. H e noted staff could review the issue in May or June and a for it then ou P Y t of the contingency fund if t g y he money is still available. Mayor y Nyquist inquired since the sidewalks are along state aid streets and plowing of sidewalks are for safety measures, could state aid be used to pay for the plow. The City Manager stated this has never been done in the past, but it could possibly be used. 11/27/89 -8- r Councilmember Scott stated she agreed that the additional police officer must be put back into the budget. She noted if the City is going to be operating the DARE program, then an additional police officer would really not be added but staff would be staying status quo. The City Manager noted the additional three percent lodging tax will make quite a difference. He noted it would make the strain on the reserve that much less. There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to add one additional police officer to the Police Department budget. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Scott inquired if the drug forfeiture monies can be used toward line items and not salaries. The City Manager stated you cannot always count on this money to pay for necessary items. He stated staff would also like to use the forfeiture money for extra training on the new weapons. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mike Kaulfuss of the Police Department. Mr. Kaulfuss stated he has been a resident of the City for 16 years. He noted at this point he feels the Police Department is losing the battle against drugs and crime. He noted it is not anyone's fault, but this problem is being forced on the City from Minneapolis. He agreed with Councilmember Scott that by adding the additional police officer the force is really not being beefed up, but it is remaining status quo. He added that nothing is going to change overnight. Councilmember Cohen stated sometimes you have to attack a problem from as many directions as possible to take control of the problem. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 10:24 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 11/27/89 -9- MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL SESSION DECEMBER 6, 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 7:01 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Celia Scott, Todd Paulson, Jerry Pedlar, and Philip Cohen. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, City Assessor Mark Parish, and Administrative Aide Patti Page. The City Manager stated he would first like to review the State law requirements, ents a1 q low time for Council cil questions, and then open the public hearing. He noted when the City tarted the budget pr ocess ocess in February, wa s g P y� operating under one set of regulations and then the State Legislature met and changed the procedures. The Finance Director stated the City of Brooklyn Center was required to wait until all four school districts and Hennepin County held their public hearings before the City could hold its public hearing on the final levy amount. He explained the final levy cannot be greater than what is discussed this evening and pointed out only the City's portion of the taxes are being discussed this evening not the school districts or the County. He then went on to review the entire process for the City Council and members of the audience. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on the 1990 proposed budget and proposed tax levy. A discussion then ensued regarding who will benefit from the additional school aid and whether it would be in -state or out -state schools. Councilmember Cohen noted there is a tremendous outflow of money leaving the metro area. The City Manager noted there are more legislators g tors out -state than metro area. Mayor Nyquist recognized a gentlemen who stated he sees no mention of the Heritage Center within the budget. He inquired if this is self- supporting. The City Manager noted the Heritage Center is contained within the EDA budget, and it will be self - supporting eventually. Mayor Nyquist recognized a gentlemen who stated he understands the City's need for the additional three percent from the lodging tax because of the tax law changes. He noted, however, the hotels and motels in this area have a competitive edge at this point because they are two to three percent less than everyone else. He noted the lodging establishments would be losing this competitive edge if the three percent is added to the lodging tax. He asked Councilmembers to take a hard look at this so they understand what it will do to the lodging establishments. Mayor Nyquist inquired what the other cities are doing regarding the lodging tax. The City g g y Mana er stated Brooklyn Park and Fridley y idley have not made a decision at this time He stated the cities of Bloomington, Minneapolis, and Duluth have increased their lodging tax to six er cen t. P He noted Brainerd and St. Cloud are at 5%. 12/6/89 _1 Mayor Nyquist recognized a gentlemen who stated he had some questions regarding the percentage increase for personal services. The City Manager stated salaries will increase approximately 4 -5% even though on paper it looks like more. He noted the addition of three new employees is what is causing the great increase on paper. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one appeared to speak, and he entertained a motion to close the . ublic hearing. g There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9:05 p.m. REVIEW Councilmember Paulson inquired what the impact of the additional three percent on the lodging tax will be. The Finance Director stated it is approximately $177,000. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there would be some way of increasing license and permit fees to gain the additional money needed. The City Manager stated the fees were increased recently and this is reviewed every couple years. The Finance Director stated he would like to caution the Council regarding dipping into the surplus. He stated at this point he does not have any exact figures, but t he is sure that the City may get less than anticipated in State aid funds. The City Manager stated he believes the City ould be y missing opportunity if they did not increase the lodging tax. He added he does not believe this is going to hurt the tourism and hotel business. Councilmember Cohen stated he believes the Council should honor their request to review this issue next year, but it should also be explained to them what will happen if the City does not raise the additional money and how it will affect them. Councilmember Paulson inquired what type of funding sources are available if some emergency occurs in the middle of the year. The City Manager stated there is money in the contingency fund and the capital improvements fund. RESOLUTION NO 89 -229 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A FINAL TAX LEVY FOR 1990 BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Philip Cohen, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO 89 -230 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1990 BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. 12/6/89 -2- There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to place a hold on the appropriation for the League of Minnesota Cities' fees. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:35 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 12/6/89 -3- t 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 DECEMBER 18, 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 7:01 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, Assistant Finance Director Charlie Hansen, Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, and Administrative Aide Patti Page. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Sharon VanDenBos from the Brooklyn Center Prayer Breakfast Committee. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted the Council had not received any requests to use the open forum session this evening. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. There being none, he continued with the regular agenda items. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the consent agenda. Councilmember Cohen requested items 7b, 7g, and 7p be removed from the consent agenda; Councilmember Paulson requested item 6a be removed. Mayor Nyquist noted staff requested item 7u be removed completely from the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - NOVEMBER 20 1989 - SPECIAL SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to approve the minutes of the November 20, 1989, City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO 89 -231 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1988 -H (RECONSTRUCTION OF LOGAN, FRANCE, LAKEBREEZE, AND 50TH AVENUES) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. 12/18/89 -1- 1 RESOLUTION NO. 89 -232 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL TO FURNISH AND INSTALL A NEW SOUND SYSTEM FOR CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 1988 -27 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -233 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL TO FURNISH AND INSTALL A HUMIDIFIER TO SERVE CITY HALL The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly econded b y y member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -234 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING ASSESSMENT RATES FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN 1990 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO 89 -235 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE QUOTATION OF NORSTAN, INC. TO PROVIDE A TELEPHONE SYSTEM FOR THE MUNICIPAL GARAGE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -236 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF PAGERS, HANDITALKIES, AND BASE STATIONS FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO 89 -237 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE BUILDING AND IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1969 DEBT SERVICE FUND TO THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 12/18/89 -2- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -238 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1970 DEBT SERVICE FUND TO THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -239 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING THE PROCEEDS OF THE CITY'S SHARE OF THE CABLE TELEVISION SETTLEMENT TO THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO 89 -240 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, LOCAL NO. 82 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO 89 -241 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF FIVE (5) POLICE PATROL SEDANS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO 89 -242 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) FIRE SEDAN The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIED LICENSES ON -SALE NONINTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to approve on -sale nonintoxicating malt liquor licenses for Beacon Bowl, Chuck Wagon Inn, City of Brooklyn Center (Centerbrook Golf Course), Davanni's Pizza, 12/18/89 -3- Denny's Restaurant, The Fifty's Grill, Little Brooklyn, Pizza Hut, and Scoreboard Pizza. The motion passed unanimously. OFF -SALE NONINTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to approve off -sale nonintoxicating malt liquor licenses for Brooks Superette, Country Club Market, Country Store (Jerry's), Jerry's New Market, SuperAmerica No. 4160, and SuperAmerica No. 4058. The motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to approve the following list of licenses: BOWLING ALLEY Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle CIGARETTE OVER THE COUNTER SALES: Brookdale Unocal 5710 Xerxes Ave. N. Centerbrook Golf Course 5500 Lilac Dr. N. Country Club Market 5715 Morgan Ave. N. M & S Drug Emporium 5900 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. The Gift Shop 2200 Freeway Blvd. Ideal Drug 6800 Humboldt Ave. N. The Pipeseller Shop 1301 Brookdale Center Snyder Brothers Drug 1296 Brookdale Center SuperAmerica 1901 57th Ave. N. SuperAmerica 6545 West River Road MACHINE SALES: American Amusement Arcades 850 Decatur Ave. N. Applebee's 1347 Brookdale Center Brooklyn Center Liquor #1 6800 Humboldt Ave. N. Brooklyn Center Liquor #2 6250 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center Liquor #3 1966 57th Ave. N. Chuck Wagon 5720 Morgan Ave. N. Denny's Inc. 3901 Lakebreeze Ave. Red Lobster 7235 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center American Legion 4307 70th Ave. N. Brooklyn Center Service "76" 6245 Brooklyn Blvd. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Blvd. Minnesota Vikings Food Service 5200 West 74th Street Schmitt Music 2400 Freeway Blvd. Service America Corporation 7490 Central Ave. NE Graco 6820 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. MTC 6845 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. Theisen Vending Company 3804 Nicollet Ave. S. Brookdale Ford 2550 Co. Rd. 10 Budgetel Inn 6415 James Circle Econo Lodge 6445 James Circle Ground Round 2545 Co. Rd. 10 12/18/89 -4- Holiday Inn 2200 Freeway Blvd. LaCasita Mexican Restaurant 2101 Freeway Blvd. T. Wright's 5800 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. Bill West Service Center 2000 57th Ave. N. Wes' Amoco 6044 Brooklyn Blvd. Yen Ching Restaurant 5900 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. COURTESY BENCH U.S. Bench Corporation 3300 Snelling Avenue GASOLINE SERVICE STATION Brooklyn Center Municipal Garage 6844 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. Brooklyn Center Post Office 6848 Lee Ave. N. Brooklyn Center Service "76" 6245 Brooklyn Blvd. Metropolitan Transit Commission 6845 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. Northern States Power 4501 68th Ave. N. Osseo Brooklyn Bus Co. 4435 68th Ave. N. SuperAmerica 1901 57th Ave. N. Wes' Amoco 6044 Brooklyn Blvd. LODGING ESTABLISHMENT Days Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. Econo Lodge g 6445 James Circle Holiday Inn 2200 Freewa y Blvd. Northwest Residence 4408 69th Ave. N. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS DelMar Furnace Exchange 4080 83rd Ave. N. United Heating & A/C 7909 30th Ave. N. POOL AND BILLIARDS TABLES American Amusement Arcades 850 Decatur Ave. N. Brooklyn Center Community enter 6301 Shin . Y 1e Ck. Pkwy, y Days Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. PUBLIC DANCE Days Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Holiday Inn 2200 Freeway Blvd. RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Tom and Dorothy Storie 5607 Camden Ave. N. James R. Ditzler 707 69th Ave. N. Renewal: Rudolph J. Olson 6505 Brooklyn Blvd. M & J Properties 6810 Hemlock Lane N. Leo Vogel 3200 Grimes Ave. N. Darlene Dimitroff 6442 Indiana Ave. N. Richard Arntson 4220 Lakeside Ave. N. Gene and Anna Gullord 5337 -39 Queen Ave. N. 12/18/89 -5_ Stephen L. Cook 5306 Russell Ave. N. Steven D. Lanier 5256 E. Twin Lake Blvd. Robert and Arlene Johnson 7218 -24 West River Road Swanson Investments 7240 West River Road Sherry A. Ronallo 819 -21 55th Ave. N. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - NOVEMBER 13 1989 - REGULAR SESSION Councilmember Paulson stated he would like to have the minutes changed to reflect that both he and Councilmember Pedlar voted against the private kennel license. He stated he believed Councilmember Cohen seconded the motion to approve the private kennel license. There was a motion by Councilmember Paulson and seconded by Councilmember Cohen to approve the minutes of the November 13, 1989, City Council meeting as corrected. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Work Performed under Contract 1989 -B (Tree Removal Contract). Councilmember Cohen inquired if the City would be replacing trees which have been removed. The City Manager stated in the 1990 budget there is increased funding for new trees in the parks. He noted many trees were lost due to the drought. Councilmember Cohen stated he would like the City to make efforts to replace trees in the parks but also make new trees available to residents under a contract. The City Manager stated staff is currently investigating this. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -243 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1989 -B (1989 DISEASED TREE REMOVAL PROGRAM) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Making Negative Declaration of the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for 69th Avenue North Corridor from the West City Limits to Dupont Avenue North. The City Manager explained in October the City Council adopted a resolution accepting and approving the environmental assessment worksheet relating to the proposed reconstruction of 69th Avenue North Corridor from the West City limits to Dupont Avenue North. He noted the EAW has been submitted to other governmental units and agencies for their review and comment as required by law. He noted these other agencies have all responded by stating an environmental impact statement is not necessary. Mayor Nyquist stated the tone of the DNR letter seems to suggest otherwise. The Director of Public Works stated the DNR did make several suggestions and the City should be able to comply with these. He noted, however, in the final paragraph of its letter they did agree that an EIS is not necessary for this project. He stated he recommends adoption of this resolution and also authorization for the staff to conduct a number of informal public hearings with 12/18/89 -6- a formal public hearing sometime in March. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -244 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION MAKING NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) FOR 69TH AVENUE NORTH CORRIDOR FROM THE WEST CITY LIMITS TO DUPONT AVENUE NORTH The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Report on Water Works Facilities and Approving Payment for Engineering Services. The City Manager stated in February, 1989, the City executed a contract with Black and Veatch, Engineers and Architects, to prepare a study and report of the City's municipal water supply system at a cost not to exceed $33,500. He noted the study and report is now complete and it provides an excellent basis for future system development. He noted, however, during the course of the study, the consultant proceeded with $16,091.09 additional work which was not contemplated in its contract with the City, without requesting prior approval for that work. He stated it is the opinion of City staff that the extra work dramatically improved the plan for future system development. He noted, accordingly, staff recommends approval of the consultant's request for reimbursement of 50% of its cost overrun. Councilmember Scott inquired if it is common for a well established firm to do much work without prior approval. The Director of Public Works stated no, generally it is not common practice for this to happen. He stated, apparently, Black and Veatch had a new employee assigned to the project, and he pursued the water distribution system plan which was not fully covered by the contract. He noted the City will benefit substantially from the study. He stated he feels it is appropriate for the City to pay 50% of the cost overrun, although the City is not legally obligated to pay this amount. Councilmember Paulson stated it seems at least some of the extra work which was done would have been covered under the contract and the City will not be the only party benefiting from the Water Quality Act Study. The Director of Public Works stated the additional work on the water distribution system analysis accounts for approximately 75% of the cost overrun. Councilmember Paulson inquired if the City could offer to pay for only those parts that benefited the City. The Director of Public Works stated he has not made a counter offer, yet he believes Black and Veatch would probably accept any offer we made. Councilmember Cohen inquired if the City would use Black and Veatch again. The Director of Public Works stated he is very omfortable with Black and y Veatch but he would not anticipate ate Navin this P g type of problem in the future. Councilmember Cohen inquired if Black and Veatch ch would try o collect the money ne on future projects if we did not approve payment at this time. The Director of Public Works stated he did not believe they would try to do that because Black and Veatch does not generally operate that way. Councilmember Pedlar stated he does not feel the City is obligated to pay this amount. He stated he does not believe the City should pay $16,000 of the taxpayers' money because Black and Veatch could not keep its staff under 12/18/89 -7- control. Councilmember Pedlar inquired if we could equate the benefit in dollars. The Director of Public Works stated this unique solution would not have been reached if this additional work were not done. Councilmember Paulson stated he believes Council should allow the Director of Public Works the latitude to negotiate some sort of agreement. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -245 Member Philip Cohen Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING REPORT ON WATER WORKS FACILITIES AND APPROVING PAYMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCES The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Clarifying the Definition of Convenience Food Restaurants. He noted this ordinance modifies the meaning of convenience food restaurant to allow take out restaurants within shopping centers to have eat -in seating. He stated this item was first read on November 13, 1989, published in the City's official newspaper on November 22, 1989, and is offered this evening for a second reading. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Clarifying the Definition of Convenience Food Restaurants and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE N0. 89 -18 Member Celia Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES CLARIFYING THE DEFINITION OF CONVENIENCE FOOD RESTAURANTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Philip Cohen, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances to Allow Optional Freestanding Signs, to Allow Larger Freestanding Signs in the Cl and C1A Districts, and Requiring Abatement of Signs on Abandoned Premises. He noted this item was first read on November 13, 1989, published in the City's official newspaper on November 22, 1989, and is offered this evening for a second reading. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances to Allow Optional Freestanding Signs, to Allow Larger Freestanding Signs in the Cl and ClA Districts, and Requiring Abatement of Signs on Abandoned Premises and inquired 12/18/89 -8- if there was anyone present who wished to speak. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 89 -19 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: ANN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 34 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES TO ALLOW OPTIONAL FREESTANDING SIGNS, TO ALLOW LARGER FREESTANDING SIGNS IN THE Cl AND ClA DISTRICTS, AND REQUIRING ABATEMENT OF SIGNS ON ABANDONED PREMISES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Extending Interim Ordinance for the Purpose of Protecting the Planning Process and the Health, Safety, and Welfare of the Residents of the City, and Regulating and Restricting Certain Development at the Property Located P at 6626 West st River Road and All Land South of 66th Avenue and North of I -694 Lying between Willow Lane and Highway 252. He noted this item is offered this evening for a first reading. He stated the purpose for extending this ordinance would be to allow time to receive and review the final report. He noted the recommended date is April 16, 1990. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated the study is complete and hopefully will be ready for the January 8, 1990, City Council meeting. He noted if the Council concurs with the report, additional time will be needed for rezoning. Councilmember Paulson inquired where the study is at this time. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated it is being put into its final form for presentation. Councilmember Paulson inquired when the Council would be seeing this report. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated it would hopefully be read b January y y . y 8, 1990 Councilmember Paulson inquired why the extension would be into the middle of April. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated one of the recommendations is for rezoning which is a lengthy process. Councilmember Paulson stated it appears staff is spending large amounts of time on this project, and he hopes they are not losing site of the rest of the City. The City Manager briefly reviewed the necessary process for rezoning and noted if the process were completed earlier, the moratorium could be cancelled. He added there are two actions required this evening, one is the ordinance extending the moratorium, and secondly is the resolution which covers the time period until the ordinance takes affect. There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to approve for first reading An Ordinance Extending the Interim Ordinance for the purpose of Protecting the Planning Process and the Health, Safety, and Welfare of the Residents of the City, and Regulating and Restricting Certain Development at the Property Located at 6626 West River Road and All Land South of 66th Avenue and North of I -694 Lying between Willow Lane and Highway 252 and to set a public hearing date of January 22, 1990, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. 12/18/89 -9- The City Manager presented a Resolution for the Purpose of Protecting the Planning Process and the Health, Safety, and Welfare of the Residents of the City, and Regulating and Restricting Certain Development at the Property Located at 6626 West River Road and all Land South of 66th Avenue and North of I -694 Lying between Willow Lane and Highway 252. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mike Merrick representing Howard Atkins. He stated he and his client are opposed to the extension of the moratorium. He noted the Council promised in June that the matter would speed forward and would not take more than six months. According to this timetable the final report should have been ready by October 30. He noted he and his client are opposed to this additional 120 day extension because any task will expand to the parameters given. Mayor Nyquist noted the 120 days are necessary because of the possible rezoning. Mr. Merrick stated he would request a time limit of 30 to 60 days. He noted he and Mr. Atkins would like to be given a copy of the report and subsequent staff report at least ten days prior to the Council consideration. Mayor Nyquist stated he feels Mr. Merrick's request for the report is reasonable. The City Manager stated a copy of the report would be given to Mr. Merrick and Mr. Atkins as soon as it is available, and he plans to discuss the report on January 8, 1990, and take final action on January 22, 1990. Mr. Merrick stated he would also like a copy of the staff recommendations. Councilmember Cohen stated he would vote to extend the moratorium to April 16, 1990, unless something arises at the January meetings to lessen the time period. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -246 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE PLANNING PROCESS AND THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY, AND REGULATING AND RESTRICTING CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6626 WEST RIVER ROAD AND ALL LAND SOUTH OF 66TH AVENUE AND NORTH OF I -694 LYING BETWEEN WILLOW LANE AND HIGHWAY 252 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 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 22 of the City Ordinances Relating to Tax Imposed Upon Lodging. He noted this item is offered this evening for a first reading. Mayor Nyquist inquired if the Joint Powers Agreement has any impact on what the City Council decides. The City Attorney stated there is a resolution that will amend the Joint Powers Agreement to provide that the Tourism Bureau receives 95% of the first three percent collected. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 22 of the City Ordinances Relating to a Tax Imposed Upon Lodging and to set a public hearing date of January 8, 1990, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed. Mayor Nyquist abstained. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Vacating Part of a Utility Easement in 12/18/89 -10- e Brookdale Square Second Addition. He noted this item is offered this evening for a second reading. Councilmember Scott noted she believed the traffic pattern past T.J. Maxx to Perkins Restaurant should be reviewed. She stated she has seen a number of near accidents. The City Manager stated he would check with the property owner as this is a private roadway. There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve for first reading An Ordinance Vacating Part of a Utility Easement in Brookdale Square Second Addition and to set a public hearing date of January 8, 1990, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:23 p.m. and reconvened at 8:35 p.m. RESOLUTIONS _ (CONTINUED) The City Manager presented a Resolution Establishing Water Hookup Rates for Calendar Year 1990. Councilmember Cohen inquired if there are an single- y g family homes that are not yet hooked up to City water. The Director of Public Works stated there are homes scattered throughout the City which are not connected yet. Councilmember Cohen inquired if they have a line running from the street. The Director of Public Works stated he believed they all have lines running rom the g street. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -247 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING WATER HOOKUP RATES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1990 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Specifications for Purchase of Sidewalk Snowplow and Blower. The City Manager noted at the budget hearing it was recommended this item be purchased from State aid funding. He noted it is possible to purchase this equipment using local municipal State aid street funding. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -248 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS FOR PURCHASE OF SIDEWALK SNOWPLOW AND BLOWER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving the Police Department Cadet Program and Authorizing Certain Benefits for Program Participants. Councilmember Scott inquired how soon before recruitment begins. The City Manager stated the Council had previously given authorization to start recruitment and the City has ten candidates. He noted eight of the ten candidates are protected class candidates. Councilmember Scott inquired how many 12/18/89 -11- would be taken on the force. The City Manager stated two would be taken as cadets and there is a potential for two more as code enforcement officers. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -249 Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT CADET PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN BENEFITS FOR PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Amending the 1989 and 1990 General Fund Budget. He noted this would allow the funds for the community information map /flyer to be transferred from the 1989 budget to the 1990 budget. He noted the delay in printing this item is to allow listings of the new City phone numbers. The City Manager stated there will be many new direct dial numbers into City offices with the new phone system, and he would strongly suggest changing the City's main phone number to coincide with the direct dial numbers. There was a brief discussion regarding the automatic switching and recording pertaining to the City's new phone number. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -250 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1989 AND 1990 GENERAL FUND BUDGETS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Setting Wages and Salaries for the Calendar Year 1990. He noted a 4.1% increase is recommended with an additional $25 for insurance. This would be consistent with the LELS contract and other communities. RESOLUTION NO 89 -251 Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION SETTING WAGES AND SALARIES FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 1990 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Philip Cohen, and the motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Paulson inquired how staff came up with the .1 %. The City Manager stated generally he trys to keep nonunion employees consistent with the bargaining units, and they are receiving 4.1%. Councilmember Paulson inquired if this would bring the City into compliance with the Comparable Worth Act. The City Manager stated 1990 will be the final year for additional increases which will bring the City into total compliance with the Act. The City Manager presented a Resolution Amending the 1989 General Fund Budget to Increase Appropriations for Various Operating Departments. Councilmember Cohen 0 12/18/89 -12- I stated he would like staff to do a study which will illustrate to the legislature how the levy limits will affect the City budget over the next three years. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -252 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1989 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Authorizing the Finance Director to Issue a Master Note for the Transfer of Funds from the Investment Trust Fund to the Economic Development Authority. Councilmember Cohen inquired what was the amount of the master note. The City Manager stated it would be approximately three to five million dollars. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -253 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO ISSUE A MASTER NOTE FOR TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE INVESTMENT TRUST FUND TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Regarding the Rental Dwelling License for 6525, 6527, 6529 North Willow Lane. The City Manager noted an agreement has been drafted and signed by Mr. Ketroser addressing the four categories of improvements and requiring that these matters be addressed by June 30, 1990. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated one change will be made to the agreement noting that a cash escrow or surety bond will be accepted in the amount of $6,000. Councilmember Cohen stated if the City has to go after the bond, it will cost the City money. The City Manager stated that is true, but in the past, the City has never experienced any problems with surety bonds and most people do not default on them. Councilmember Pedlar inquired if a certification of the fire alarm system has been completed. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated he spoke with the Fire Chief who stated the inspector indicated everything is in working order and there are not any problems that the department is aware. Councilmember Cohen stated originally City staff had estimated it would be approximately $20,000 for all the repairs and now it is dropped to $6,000. He inquired if the Director of Planning and Inspection is satisfied with this amount. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated he believes the estimate appropriate and noted the building inspectors did the original estimate. He pointed out the building inspectors are not contractors and do not know the cost of these items. Councilmember Cohen inquired what the process is to execute the bond. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated if the Council concludes the work is not complete after June 30, 1990, the City must request money for the bond. Councilmember Cohen inquired if we received the money for the bond, 12/18/89 -13- does the City have the right to go onto Mr. Ketroser's ro ert to complete the P P Y P work. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated the agreement would give the City the right to enter his property. The City Attorney stated he does not believe the City will have a problem because the City still has the option to deny the rental license if Mr. Ketroser does not comply. Councilmember Pedlar asked what would prohibit Mr. Ketroser from deciding against the work and leaving it for the City. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that is always the risk involved in these situations. Councilmember Cohen stated he would like staff to send a notice to the area residents and let them know what is going on and what to expect. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -254 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REGARDING THE RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE FOR 6525, 6527, 6529 NORTH WILLOW LANE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Philip ohen and P the motio n assed unanimously. nanimousl . Y The City Manager presented a Resolution Expressing Opposition to Hennepin County Resolution No. 89- 11- 961R2. The City Manager briefly reviewed the Hennepin County resolution and noted that this would put the responsibility for disposing of yard wastes back onto the City and property owner. He noted the City of Brooklyn Center does not have the sufficient land available to develop a site nor do many other communities. Councilmember Scott stated Hennepin County is not only being unreasonable by backing out, but she also believes they are punishing the City because they (Hennepin County) cannot meet their obligation. RESOLUTION NO 89 -255 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY RESOLD - RESOLUTION N�. t� 11 961R The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Enter into an Amendment to the Convention and Visitors Bureau Agreement. He noted this pertains to collecting the additional three percent lodging tax. RESOLUTION NO 89 -256 Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU AGREEMENT The motion for the ad � option of the foregoing resolution was duly econded b member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. Y Y The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving a Tax Capacity Rate of 0.0131% Defraying the Cost of Operation, Pursuant to the Provisions of MSA 469.001 12/18/89 -14- Through 469.047, of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center for the Year 1990. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there were some questions pertaining to the taxing authority of the Economic Development Authority. The City Manager stated there were no questions but the City was informed that the EDA levy is below the HRA levy. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -257 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING A TAX CAPACITY RATE OF 0.0131% FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469.001 THROUGH 469.047, OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE YEAR 1990 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEM AMENDMENTS TO 1990 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE The City Manager noted minor changes have been made to the City Council meeting schedule for 1990. He noted one change was due to the fact that a meeting had been inadvertently planned for Memorial Day and the other change was made because of adding Columbus Day as an employee holiday. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Cohen to approve the amended 1990 City Council meeting schedule. The motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS The City Manager stated the City of Brooklyn Center has been awarded the certificate of achievement for excellence in financial reporting for its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. He noted Charlie Hansen, Assistant Finance Director, is responsible for the City having earned this certificate. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:24 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 12/18/89 -15- f 6oC MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JANUARY 8, 1990 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:03 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, Assistant Finance Director Charlie Hansen, Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, and Administrative Aide Patti Page. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Mayor Nyquist. EMPLOYEE SERVICE RECOGNITION PROGRAM The City Manager stated tonight is the 11th annual presentation by the City Council of service awards to City employees recognizing years of service to the City. Recognition is given to those employees who, during 1988, observed the anniversary of either 20, 25, or 30 years of permanent full -time employment with the City. The City Manager stated the awards are a part of a service recognition program approved by the City Council in 1979. He said employees with 20 years of service include Park Maintenance Worker John Benson, Director of Recreation Arnie Mavis, Recreation Program Supervisor Kathy Flesher, and Engineering Technician Al Hartmann. He stated Director of Finance Paul Holmlund has been employed with the City for 25 years and Police Chief Jim Lindsay has been employed with the City for 30 years. Mr. Mavis, Ms. Flesher, Mr. Hartmann, and Mr. Holmlund were present at the meeting, and the Mayor and City Manager presented each of them with a service award. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 7:07 p.m. and reconvened at 7:25 p.m. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted the Council had received a request from Ernie Erickson to use the open forum session this evening. Mr. Erickson stated his request pertains to designation of the official newspaper on the agenda, and he was willing to wait until that agenda item came up. SELECTION OF MAYOR PRO TEM There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to appoint Councilmember Pedlar as Mayor pro tem for 1990. The motion passed unanimously. 1/8/90 -1- 1 CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the consent agenda. Councilmember Pedlar requested item 12i be removed, and Councilmember Cohen requested item 12a be removed from the consent agenda. MAYORAL APPOIN - APPOINTMENTS HUMAN RIGHTS AND RESOURCES COMMISSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to reappoint Commissioners Donna Stoderl and Susan Larsen to the Human Rights and Resources Commission. The motion passed unanimously. PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to reappoint Sarah Robinson Pollock Art Mead and Don Peterson terson to the Park and Recreation Commission. The motion passed unanimously. HOUSING COMMISSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to reappoint Reynold Johnson to the Housing Commission. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to reappoint Molly Malecki, Ellamae Sander, and Bertil Johnson to the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. WEED INSPECTOR There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to appoint Brad Hoffman as the Weed Inspector. The motion passed unanimously. PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASE - PARKWAY PLACE There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to release the performance guarantee for Parkway Place, 6601 Shingle Creek Parkway. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO 90 -01 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO WRITE -OFF UNCOLLECTIBLE CHECKS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO 90 -02 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO WRITE -OFF UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by 1/8/90 -2- member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -03 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN INTEREST RATE ON LOANS FROM THE INVESTMENT TRUST FUND TO OTHER FUNDS OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -04 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AWARDING BOILER AND MACHINERY INSURANCE CONTRACT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -05 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AWARDING LIQUOR LIABILITY INSURANCE CONTRACT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -06 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AWARDING WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE CONTRACT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -07 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1990 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTACT FOR SIDEWALK SNOWPLOW AND BLOWER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -08 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QUOTE AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A PROPERTY TRACKING SYSTEM FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. 1/8/90 -3- RESOLUTION NO. 90 -09 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF JAMES MCCLOSKEY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to approve the following list of licenses: BOWLING ALLEY Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. N. Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 N. Lilac Drive CIGARETTE OVER THE COUNTER SALES: Brooklyn Center Service, Inc. 6849 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooks Superette 6804 Humboldt Ave. N. Duke's Amoco 6501 Humboldt Ave. N. Gift Shop, Too (Days Inn) 1501 Freeway Blvd. K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Drive Neil's Total 1505 69th Ave. N. Total Petroleum, Inc. 6830 Brooklyn Blvd. MACHINE SALES: A & J Enterprises 6843 Washington Ave. S. Best Products Co. 5924 Earle Brown Drive Bob Ryan Oldsmobile 6700 Brooklyn Blvd. Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. N. Days Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. Jimmy Jingle 1304 E. Lake Street Brookdale Corporate Center 6300 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. North Star Dodge 6800 Brooklyn Blvd. TCR Corporation 1600 67th Ave. N. Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 N. Lilac Drive Woodside Enterprises 11889 65th Ave. N. Bakers Square 5601 Xerxes Ave. N. FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Subway 1960 57th Ave. N. GASOLINE SERVICE STATION Brooklyn Center Service, Inc. 6849 Brooklyn Blvd. Humboldt Unocal 76 6840 Humboldt Ave. N. Neil's Total 1505 69th Ave. N. Total Petroleum, Inc. 6830 Brooklyn Blvd. U. S. West 6540 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. 1/8/90 -4- f ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Earle Brown PTA 5900 Humboldt Ave. N. Orchard Lane Elementary 6201 Noble Ave. N. LODGING ESTABLISHMENT Brookdale Motel 6500 West River Road Budgetel Inn 6415 James Circle MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Faircon Service 2668 Patton Road Home Energy Center 14505 21st Ave. N. POOL AND BILLIARDS TABLES Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 N. Lilac Drive The motion passed unanimously. MAYORAL APPOINTMENT - PLANNING COMMISSION There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to appoint Mark Holmes to the Brooklyn Center Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. DESIGNATE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER Mayor Nyquist recognized Ernie Erickson, 6800 Drew Avenue North. Mr. Erickson stated he has been a resident of Brooklyn Center since 1971. He stated over the past few years he has noticed a deterioration in the reporting of City news in the PostNews paper. He stated approximately a year ago he cancelled his subscription because he felt the Thursday PostNews had become nothing more than a Thursday shopper's guide. He stated PP he would like to e g see the City Council seek alternatives to using the PostNews as its official newspaper. Councilmember Pedlar stated he brought forth the same issue approximately a year ago and was told at that time PostNews was going to do something to increase its readership and coverage. He stated he has not noticed any change. Councilmember Cohen referred Councilmembers to a copy of a newspaper article pertaining to PostNews and its lack of union support. He stated he would like the PostNews to prove to the City that it is meeting the terms and conditions set forth under statutes to be designated as the City's official newspaper. y He stated hopefully the i.. y message g will Y y get to the PostNews that the City of Brooklyn Center s not happy with the coverage it receives. He noted the City may want to try nd seek remedies ies le i g slatively to gain alternatives. Mayor Nyquist inquired how much the City spends annually on published notices through the PostNews. The Finance Director stated it is approximately 8 PP y $ , 000- $10,000. Mayor Nyquist inquired if it would be possible to change the law to allow the City to put its public notices on cable. The City Attorney stated the statute is fairly new, noting it was passed in 1984. He stated he was not sure of the power of the media group which lobbied for this law, and it may be difficult to work around them. The City Manager suggested the City continue using the PostNews at this time because we have no alternatives. He added he would ask staff to explore the 1/8/90 -5- possibility of publishing legal notices in the Minneapolis Star Tribune and also request PostNews to respond to how they are meeting the terms and conditions as set forth in the statute. Councilmember Scott stated she feels the PostNews is doing g a great dis service to the citizens of Brooklyn Center. The City Attorney stated the PostNews may not be the only alternative. He went on to review the categories pointing out the office of issue for the PostNews is not in Brooklyn Center, and the PostNews does not have a secondary office located within Brooklyn Center; therefore, there may be other qualified newspapers of general circulation in the City of Brooklyn Center which may be selected. He added the newspaper must be a qualified newspaper meeting the requirements of State law. The City Manager stated the Council could appoint the PostNews on an interim basis and allow time for staff to report back. A discussion then ensued relative to appointing the paper on an interim basis. The City Attorney stated he would like to review the Charter to determine how it regulates designating an official paper. There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Scott to continue the issue of designating the official newspaper to later in the agenda. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCES The City Manager presented An Ordinance Vacating Part of a Utility and Drainage Easement in Lot 1, Block 1, Brookdale Square 2nd Addition. He noted this ordinance was first read on December 18, 1989, published in the City's official newspaper on December 27, 1989, and is offered this evening for a second reading. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Vacating Part of a Utility and Drainage Easement in Lot 1, Block 1, Brookdale Square 2nd Addition and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak. No one appeared to speak, and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 90 -01 I Member Celia . i Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its is adoption. AN ORDINANCE VACATING PART OF A UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN LOT 1, BLOCK 1, BROOKDALE SQUARE 2ND ADDITION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Todd Paulson, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 22 of the City Ordinances Relating to a Tax Imposed Upon Lodging. He noted this ordinance amendment would allow the City to collect an additional three percent lodging tax. He added this item was first read on December 18, 1989, published in the 1/8/90 -6- City's official newspaper on December 27, 1989, and is offered this evening for a second reading. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 22 of the City Ordinances Relating to a Tax Imposed Upon Lodging and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak. Mayor Nyquist recognized Arlow Johnson, owner of the Brookdale Motel. Mr. Johnson stated he understands the reasons why the City needs the additional three percent but noted it will create a hardship for his business and other hotel owners. He noted approximately 60% of the people who stay in Brooklyn Center hotels are from this area which means we are taxing our own residents. He stated now when you stay in a hotel in Brooklyn Center, there will be six percent sales tax, a six percent lodging tax, and an additional tax for your phone bills which is required by State law. He stated if this passes, Brooklyn Center would be one of the few cities with this large of a lodging tax. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else who wished to speak. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Paulson and seconded by Councilmember Scott to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Nyquist inquired what the City of Brooklyn Park is doing regarding the lodging tax. The City Manager stated the have been Y g considering raising is it bu t Y g g nothing has been passed at this time. Mayor Nyquist stated he has some concerns about raising the lodging tax, if in fact, Brooklyn Center is the only north metro area City imposing the tax. Councilmember Cohen stated he appreciates Mr. Johnson's comments and noted if the legislature would allow the City the flexibility to levy what is necessary, the City would not have to raise the lodging tax. He noted without any other financial remedies he does not believe the City has any other choice than to impose this tax. Mayor Nyquist inquired if Councilmember Cohen believed the legislature was going to make any changes which would help the City. Councilmember Cohen stated it is hard to say what they may do at this point. Mayor Nyquist inquired if it would be possible to make the tax effective on May 1, 1990, because then the City would know what the Legislature has done to this his point. The City Manager stated the City would lose approximately $59,000 if the tax were not imposed until May 1. ORDINANCE NO. 90 -02 Member Jerry Pedlar introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 22 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES RELATING TO A TAX IMPOSED UPON LODGING The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded b . Y Y member Todd Paulson the mo io t n assed. Mayor Nyquist abstained. P y yq wined. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 17 Regarding Personnel. He noted this amendment would add Columbus Day as a paid holiday. He noted this item is offered this evening for a first reading. Councilmember Paulson inquired if all of the organized employees have Martin Luther King, Jr. Day off. 1/8/90 -7- The City Manager stated all employees except Local No. 49 receive Martin Luther King, Jr. Day as a holiday. He noted Local No. 49 has not settled its contract at this point. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 17 Regarding Personnel and to set a public hearing date for January 29, 1990, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 to Establish a Planned Unit Development Zoning District. He noted this item is offered this evening for a first reading. The City Manager reminded the Mayor and Council that this item was discussed at great length at the December 18, 1989, City Council meeting. He noted the information in this evening's Council packet includes sample documents from other cities. Councilmember Scott inquired if the Director of Planning and Inspection felt this ordinance would make the process more or less complicated. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated the process would not become simpler because development in the next few years is going to become even more complex than it is now. He noted without this type of ordinance, it would be even more difficult. Councilmember Scott stated she has some concerns and would like to be assured that the City would have complete control over any type of development. The City Manager stated there are opportunities to stop the process along the way. He added this ordinance would allow the flexibility for mixing uses within a development. Councilmember Cohen stated the City may find that the City is the one initiating the proposal and much more in control than if the City were waiting for a developer to come in. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 to Establish a Planned Unit Development Zoning District and to set a public hearing date for January 29, 1990, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENTATION - DCA INC The Finance Director stated Ardy Prekker from DCA, Inc. is present this evening to discuss various ways in which the City can shelter its employees from income taxes through payment of pre -tax benefits through the payroll system. He noted DCA, Inc. is the administrator for the LOGIS Group Health Plan. He noted they also work for several communities and counties within the State and are the acknowledged leader in this area. Mr. Prekker gave a brief slide show which demonstrated the benefits of the different plans to the City's employees. He noted it would also reduce the City's liability for social security taxes. The City Manager stated when staff first discovered these types of accounts, section 89 was just coming on board and it would have made these types of plans very difficult to administer. He noted now section 89 has basically disappeared, and staff feels these plans would be beneficial to both the City and its employees. Councilmembers Pedlar and Scott both stated they have similar plans through their employers and all employees find them very beneficial. Councilmember Paulson inquired if there was any type of fee to belong to this plan. Mr. Prekker stated he has not 1/8/90 -8- submitted any proposal or spoken of any fees with the Finance Director at this time. He noted there is a fee for administering the plan, and it is based on the number of accounts held by the employees. Councilmember Cohen inquired if Mr. Prekker could give the Council some idea of what it would cost. Mr. Prekker said the City of Brooklyn Park is currently paying approximately $3.20 per employee per month. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar directing the City Manager to proceed with the implementation of any or all of the tax shelter programs. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) The City Manager presented A Resolution Designating Depositories of City Funds. He noted this is the annual resolution authorizing the City Treasurer to deposit funds in the Marquette Brookdale Bank and to use other banks for investment purposes. Councilmember Cohen stated a short time back the State passed the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which requires federal agencies to encourage financial institutions to invest in their communities. The CRA regulations require that financial institutions adopt a CRA statement, post a public notice about CRA in its offices, and establish a public file for comments about CRA performance. Examiners of the federal agencies are required to assess how well an institution has helped to meet the credit needs of its community and through the examination process to encourage it to respond to those needs. He noted in the near future the City is going to be contacting the financial institutions within the City and asking them to commit to working with the City under the Community Reinvestment Act. He stated he would like authorization to be given to staff directing them to contact the financial institutions within the City asking them to provide information on their performance under the Community Reinvestment Act. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -10 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES OF CITY FUNDS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented A Resolution Entering into a Security Agreement for Safekeeping of City Investments. The Finance Director stated at this his time he does not have complete information for the Council, and he would like the item tabled to the last meeting in January. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to table a Resolution Entering into a Security Agreement for Safekeeping of City Investments until January 29, 1990. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City Council to Enter into an Agreement between the City of Brooklyn Center and North Hennepin Mediation Project. Councilmember Pedlar stated a presentation was made to the City Council a while back regarding the Mediation Project, and he recalled a few questions being raised at that time pertaining to funding • 1/8/90 -9- sources. He inquired if the City staff and Council had received the information. He stated he does not recall receiving anything specific at this time. Mayor Nyquist stated he believed at the time of the presentation, the Council was told approximately one -third of their funding was received from local government, but on paper this funding turned out to be more like 76 %. He noted the Council did receive a list of contributors from the Mediation Project. There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Mayor Nyquist to table a Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City Council to Enter into an Agreement between the City of Brooklyn Center and North Hennepin Mediation Project until further information is received pertaining to its bylaws and funding sources. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Nyquist stated he has referred several clients to the Mediation Project, and he feels they do excellent work. The City Manager presented a Resolution Requesting MNDOT to Transfer Jurisdiction of the Service Road East of T.H. 252 between 65th Avenue North and 66th Avenue North to the City of Brooklyn Center. The Director of Public Works stated the City has always maintained this roadway and is requesting the right - of -way to be turned over to the City because of a possible redevelopment plan for the area. He noted MNDOT representatives have given preliminary indications that they would be willing to approve the turnback of this roadway to the City. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -11 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REQUESTING MNDOT TO TRANSFER JURISDICTION OF THE SERVICE ROAD EAST OF T.H. 252 BETWEEN 65TH AVENUE NORTH AND 66TH AVENUE NORTH TO THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEMS REPORT ON 1989 ACTIVITIES OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRAFFIC COMMITTEE The City Manager briefly reviewed the process for review of traffic complaints. He noted there should be a three- member committee to allow for further review if the Administrative Traffic Committee denies a request. Councilmember Cohen stated he feels this process is much better than the original process used. Mayor Nyquist inquired if it would be possible to get an article in the next newsletter requesting interested individuals to contact the City for appointment to this review committee. Councilmember Cohen inquired if that is really what the City wants. The Director of Public Works stated very few cases go this far, and the Council may wish to handle these requests directly through the Council meetings since they are so few and far between. Mayor Nyquist noted if that is the Council's wish, then the review committee should be removed from the policy. CIGARETTE VENDING MACHINE SALES The City Manager briefly reviewed the report submitted for this agenda item. He noted there are two draft resolutions within the packet. He explained the 1/8/90 -10- Personnel Coordinator recently attended a workshop dealing with this issue. The Personnel Coordinator stated the communities which have implemented these types of ordinances, and the experts, highly recommend either a total ban or doing nothing at all. They noted that putting restrictions on placement of cigarette machines has not been effective. Mayor Nyquist recognized Arlow Johnson, owner of Brookdale Motel, who stated his hotel and others in the area have taken machines out whereever possible. The City Manager stated it would be his recommendation to notify all cigarette license holders and vendors regarding the proposed ordinance amendment and place the amendment on the next Council agenda. Mayor Nyquist asked if it is possible to ban those machines that are currently licensed. The Personnel Coordinator stated she discussed this point with the City Attorney, and he stated that the City would have to make some concessions for those people already holding a license. She noted the Council could set an effective date and return a prorated portion of the license fee. There was a general consensus among Councilmembers to prohibit cigarette vending machines totally within the City of Brooklyn Center. There was a motion by Councilmember Pedlar and seconded by Councilmember Paulson directing staff to bring an ordinance amendment before the Council at the January 29, 1990, City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. JANUARY 22, 1990, COUNCIL MEETING The City Manager stated he has been notified there are conflicts in holding the January 22, 1990, Council meeting. He stated he would recommend cancelling that meeting and rescheduling for January 29, 1990. There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Paulson to cancel the January 22, 1990, City Council meeting and reschedule it for January 29, 1990, at 7 p.m. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) The City Manager presented a Resolution Establishing Improvement Project No. 1990 -02 - Construction of Well No. 10, Accepting Proposal for Engineering Services and Approving Execution of a Contract for Services. He noted staff recommends that the City proceed with phase I of the plan for recommended improvements to the City's water supply system. He stated the proposed resolution would authorize execution of a contract for engineering services as needed for construction of proposed "Well No. 10." Councilmember Scott stated she had a question regarding the summary of performance impacts for the proposed phase I improvements. The Director of Public Works briefly reviewed that portion of his memorandum and noted that in some cases even with the improvement it would not be able to satisfy the maximum hourly demands, however, the daily demands would be met. He noted by adding a well it gets us closer to meeting all the demands, but we are not yet totally there. Councilmember Cohen inquired if water rates will be go up when the well is complete. The Director of Public Works responded affirmatively and noted it would raise from $.46 per 1,000 gallons to $.53 per 1,000 gallons. Councilmember Paulson inquired what happened with the Director of Public Works' negotiations with Black and Veatch. The Director of Public Works stated Black and Veatch settled at $7,500 for the cost overrun. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -12 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 1/8/90 -11- RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1990 -02 - CONSTRUCTION OF WELL NO. 10, ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES AND APPROVING EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR SERVICES 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 Establishing Project No. 1990 -03 - Water Distribution System Improvements and Directing the City Engineer to Prepare Plans and Specifications for this Improvement. He noted these improvements are recommended to be constructed under phase I in conjunction with the well No. 10 improvement. The Director of Public Works briefly reviewed the map showing the proposed water distribution system improvements. He noted this improvement will make much better use of the water tower at this location. He added this is the extra work which Black and Veatch completed without prior approval. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -13 Member Philip Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1990 -03 - WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AND DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THIS IMPROVEMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Jerry Pedlar, and the motion passed unanimously. DESIGNATE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER The City Attorney stated the City Charter does not specify that the Council designate an official newspaper at the first business meeting of the year. He noted there would be no adverse consequences if the Council tabled action this evening. He noted it would not be possible for a new newspaper in town to qualify as the official newspaper. He noted there are many requirements, and the newspaper must comply with these conditions and requirements for at least one year prior to being designated as the official newspaper. Councilmember Cohen inquired if the City does not take action this evening, will the PostNews continue on as the legal newspaper until a new one is designated. The City Attorney responded affirmatively. There was a motion by Councilmember Cohen and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to table the designation of the official newspaper until the staff can investigate other possible alternatives. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Pedlar to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9 :22 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 1/8/90 -12- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1/29/90 Agenda Item Number 7jQr REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION • ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PROCESS FOR APPEALS FROM DECISIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRAFFIC COMMITTEE *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Sy KNAE�6 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WOR MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached +� Explanation • The Council on January 8, 1990 reviewed a report summarizing the 1989 activity of the City's Administrative Traffic Committee. At that time it was noted that the Committee has been successful in meeting and resolving requests and complaints regarding traffic safety, with very few decisions resulting in public appeal. The Council expressed its satisfaction with the current procedure: this Committee initially reviewing traffic requests and complaints and making decisions, and referring complex items or appeals directly to the Council. It was suggested that it may no longer be necessary to maintain a Traffic Appeals Committee. The Council established the Brooklyn Center Traffic Safety Advisory Committee in 1980. This Committee provided citizen discussion of and input into traffic safety issues that were of particular concern. The group met fairly regularly through 1984, but did not meet after that. Because the Council was satisfied with the Administrative Traffic Committee's ability to handle traffic complaints and concerns, it disbanded the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee, and replaced it with a Traffic Appeals Committee that would meet on an as- needed basis. As established, the Traffic Appeals Committee is to consist of three members appointed by the Mayor and Council, serving three -year staggered terms. Members are required to have been Brooklyn Center residents for at least one year, and at least two of the three members at any one time must have knowledge of general traffic practices. Since most traffic complaints and requests have been successfully resolved by the Administrative Traffic Committee, there has not been occasion for the Appeals Committee to meet. Over the past few years some items have been . brought to the attention of the Council, along with recommendations. A recent example would be the construction of a traffic island at the intersection of 53rd Avenue North and East Twin Lake Boulevard. The Committee had initally approved a request for a Stop sign at this intersection; several residents subsequently complained about this installation. The Traffic Committee recommended to the Council that a better solution would be to install a traffic island, and the Council ordered the improvement. Recommendation The Council has expressed its satisfaction with the current procedure. Accordingly, a resolution has been provided which would dissolve the Traffic Appeals Committee and stipulate that appeals would be considered by the Council. a. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PROCESS FOR APPEALS FROM DECISIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRAFFIC COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council established the Brooklyn Center Traffic Appeals Committee on July 13, 1987; and WHEREAS, the City's Administrative Traffic Committee, comprised of the City Manager, Director of Public Works, and Chief of Police, actively respond to initial citizen, staff, and City Council traffic complaints and concerns; and WHEREAS, the efficiency of the Administrative Traffic Committee in handling complaints and concerns has resulted in few appeals to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to dissolve the Traffic Appeals Committee and establish a procedure whereby appeals of the decisions of the Administrative Traffic Committee would be made directly to the Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center City Council that the Traffic Appeals Committee is hereby dissolved and relinquished of its duties and responsibilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center City Council that it will hear all appeals of Administrative Traffic Committee decisions, and it directs the Committee to inform all complainants of this procedure. 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 1/29/90 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF A BACKHOE MOUNTED PAVEMENT BREAKER DEPT. APPROVAL: MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes It is recommended that the City purchase a hydraulic jackhammer, which can be • mounted on the City's existing backhoe, for the following reasons: • to eliminate most situations where jackhammer work is done manually - because that type of work is extremely stressful on the human body. • to improve safety - for normal operations - and especially for situations such as repairing water main break during winter conditions i e - g g ( it is always necessar y to knock down the froze edges around y n s rand the excavation for g a water main break. When this is done manually, always it is alwa possible that the edges es will cave in under the g jackhammer operator. Because of that J P , it is always tempting for a worker to avoid that risk, then take an even greater risk by entering the excavation without knocking down the frozen edges). • to reduce time requirements for pavement- breaker work. This type of pavement breaker has a greater capacity and can be run continuously (in manual operation a jackhammer is normally operated less than half -time to allow the operator needed break time). It is estimated this could reduce time requirements for repair of a water main break by one to two hours. Three proposals have been received for furnishing this type of equipment. It is recommended that the lowest proposal, in the amount of $10,245 be accepted, and. that the costs be charged to the Public Utility fund. City Council Action Required • A resolution is provided for consideration by the City Council. 1b Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF A BACKHOE MOUNTED PAVEMENT BREAKER WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that it is necessary to purchase a backhoe mounted pavement breaker to improve the safety and effectiveness of Public Works department operations; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has obtained three proposals to furnish the required pavement breaker, i.e.: Supplier Proposal Hayden- Murphy Equipment Co. $10,245.00 Carlson Tractor & Equipment Co. 10,327.00 Long Lake Ford Tractor Inc. 10,485.00 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The proposal of Hayden- Murphy Equipment Co. in the amount of $10,245.00 is hereby accepted. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to proceed with said purchase. 2. The cost for this equipment shall be charged to the Public Utility 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. ,� x • i M a , ?,•� �.. c 'I Y S tl w tt ` } pp } 1 r• t S � t . y •� 1 t / 1 l I'••'' ,1 ir lof LO j s s V � t •• w r .. A ( 7 .L a ♦ . c I 7f � 1 'Y � � f •w. t' LU I5"j�iA4N ;4 ;�i �i� yi.l3' a '��t,r - • L 17 �r .� tr . , '�•: lyl�f� '�' r, iklliy�K n��� �Sj ".,�� .w � i _. .0 �'� ,�; # e" it` <. Ivt S S A , j� y. t j + - i � • rp a 1 A �t t i ° .eruu ti.N,. `:/ � +�„ .� •... F � ��F1d ,��.3, y � t � � r A `• +�' � � ! i ' \.� i� 1 " ?i Sri. a� ?+1.'•1 1 I� . •:t •��' y � ICY s 4 F3j � r � '�Z ) r� •�V A' r x J #S a3 ri g /'•�5�� I! .�► ' . 1: t nt , ►,t„� +►:r'i C 1 � � rj� lid .. � i "�1r't.L � a�' � � �� �11�`•�`� � �' � t y 1 i y � :TS �S - i tljkk .1 M O D c L 7 1 5 �AT�'lT33 DSIONNSTAI_I- .�Tdtl AND he lightweight Model 715 FEATURES ���'��1Ta0?I ' Hy -Ramp delivers 550 ft. The 715 Hy -RamJ mounts on car- . lbs. of impact energy per blow riers weighing 3 -8 tons. It requires Unlike big, bulky hammers of No accumulator 9 9 re q the same energy class, the Fewer replaceable parts, less a hydraulic flow of 5 -14 gpm at lean 715 Hy -Ram° can be easily maintenance. 1800 -2600 psi for operation. mounted on mini - excavators, Machine - matched installation kits skid steer loaders and rubber Nitrogen gas charge will provide for hydraulic compati- tire backhoes. This boom- Allows hammer to operate with bility and minimal maintenance re- mounted hydraulic impact maximum efficiency on smaller quirements. The hammer's adjust - hammer is engineered to carriers that generate less oil flow. able side plate bushings ensure demolish rock, concrete and precise mounting and less boom brickwork in places where Dampened mounting pins pin wear. large carriers cannot reach. Reduce vibration, carrier and oper- APPLICATIONS ator fatigue. At a rate of 400 -1200 blows per Percussion chamber ventilation minute, the Model 715 efficiently " handles concrete road and struc- - , A "breather" within the chamber tural demolition. The hammer is circulates air; decreases chisel and also used for trench rock excava- bushing wear, increases lubrication tion and "descaling" in mine op j capacity. x ations. With its small size and heavy hitting power, the 715 Automatic shut -off Hy -RamO�l is perfect for horizontal Protects hammer from heat build- breaking in tunnels. And, a full up and blank firing. range of accessories adds to the breakers versatility. Specifications U.S.lMetric Accessories: Energy Class 550 ft. lbs. 1743 nm • Conical Point Tool Frequency 1200 blows per minute • In -Line Chisel Tool Hydraulic Flow Required 13.6 qpm /55 Ipm • Cross -Cut Chisel Tool • Relieved Moil Tool Operating Pressure 1800 -2600 psi/130 -180 bar • Frost Cutter Nitrogen Pre - Charge 225 psi/ 15.5 bar • Asphalt Cutter Working Weight 525 lbs. 1240 kg • X& 4" Post Driver Assembly • 2", 4" & 6r' Pipe Driver Assembly Overall Length 62 in.1158 1 cm • Soil Tamper Assembly Spacing Inside Bracket 10' /4 in. 126 cm Boom Pin Diameter 1 in. 138 mm Standard Demolition Tool Chisel Diameter 2 in.163.5 mm Working Length 16 in. 1406 mm FOR SALES AND SERVICE CONTACT YOUR y � ALLIED p. DISTRIBUTOR: E. BLOOMING T CN PRI'+IY, e .r O19NER OF 94TH & C 5800 Harper Road, Solon, Ohio 44139 MINNEAPOLIS 55420 216- 248 -2600, Telex 980192 Allied has a policy of continuous product Improvements and reserves the 884-2301 right to change specifications, design or prices anytime without notice or the incurring of any obligation. c) 1988 Allied, Solon, Ohio USA Form No. Hy -R 715 T88 15M V Member introduced the following 0 resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF LORNA SEBURG WHEREAS, Lorna Seburg served on the Brooklyn Center Human Rights and Resources Commission from February 24, 1986, to December 31, 1990; and WHEREAS, her public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that her service to the community should be recognized and expressed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Lorna Seburg is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution i g g n 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 n sa' id P resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1 1 0q - 90 Agenda Item Number ZGL REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE DOCUMENT APPROVING THE CITY'S EMERGENCY PLAN DEPT. APPROVAL: Signature - - James Lindsay, Chief of P MANAGER'S R EW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** • SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached yes } City staff, working in conjunction with the Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness staff, has updated the City's emergency plan. It contains the contingency plans for such emergency situations as tornadoes, hazardous chemical spills, et cetera. Having the plan is helpful in such high stress situations because we can turn to the correct procedure in a matter of moments. These events happen so infrequently, it is not easily remembered. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the document at the front of the plan approving the plan on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE DOCUMENT APPROVING THE CITY'S EMERGENCY PLAN WHEREAS, it is desirable to have a written plan of action for use in case of emergencies such as tornadoes, hazardous chemical spills, et cetera; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center city staff, working in conjunction with Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness staff have revised and updated the Brooklyn Center's Emergency Plan. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED b h y the City Council of the Cit Brooklyn n ty y Center that the Mayor is authorized to sign the document approving the emergency plan for the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption f p o the foregoing resolution was duly econded b g g Y Y 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 ate d g � 9 Agenda Item Number 77 e- REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE FORMATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE HENNEPIN -ANOKA SUBURBAN DRUG TASK FORCE DEPT. APPROVAL: Signature - ti tl f James Lindsay, Chief of P 'ce___, " ;* * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S EW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached yes ) Approved in the 1990 budget is the four - community Hennepin -Anoka Suburban Drug Task Force to investigate major drug cases. The task force consists of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove and Coon Rapids. The program commits one Brooklyn Center officer for a period of three years. Investigator Mike Kaulfuss will be the initial Brooklyn Center officer assigned to the program. Attached please find a copy of the joint powers agreement authorizing the formation of the task force and outlining its administration. The City Attorney, Charlie LeFevere, has reviewed this agreement as have the city attorneys from the other three communities. All attorneys have found no problems and have requested no changes in the agreement. RECOMMENDATION: The resolution be passed authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to enter into the joint powers agreement. p Member introduced the followin g resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE FORMATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE HENNEPIN -ANOKA SUBURBAN DRUG TASK FORCE WHEREAS, the four communities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove and Coon Rapids propose to combine forces to investigate major drug cases; and WHEREAS, the four communities have applied for and received a grant to be used to investigate major drug cases; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center has approved in its 1990 budget the matching funds required for participation in the task force; and WHEREAS, this effort requires a joint powers agreement between the communities to form and administer the task force. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to enter into a joint powers agreement for the formation and administration of the Hennepin -Anoka Suburban Drug Task Force. 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. JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE FORMATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE HENNEPIN -ANOKA SUBURBAN DRUG TASZ FORCE I. PARTIES The parties to this Agreement are political subdivisions of the State of Minnesota. This Agreement is made purvuant to _Minnesota Statutes 'Section 471.59, as amended. II. GENERAL PURPOSE The parties hereto find that drug abuse, and related criminal activities, have increased significantly within their communities in recent years. The completion and opening of the Highway 610 bridge over the Mississippi River has provided a corridor for drug trafficking between the parties. The nature of drug law enforcement and resource shortages make effective, organized enforcement difficult on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis. The general purpose of this Agreement is to provide coordination and oint enforcement of drug laws within the Cities which are parties to this Agreement. The parties will emphasize street -level controlled substance enforcement although clandestine- laboratories, forfeiture and financial investigations, and conspiracies will be dealt with as the needs arise. III. NA;ti1E The joint enforcement project shall be known as the Hennepin - Atoka Suburban Drug Task Force. IV. ME -NIBERSHIP The parties to this Agreement shall be the cities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Coon Rapids and Maple Grove. AL parties shall execute a copy of this Agreement and conform to all provisions herein. r V. ADMINISTRATION A task force advisory board (sometimes hereinafter referred to as the "board ") consisting of the Chief of Police or his or her designee from each party, shall have the overall responsibility for administration of the project. Each member of the board shall have one vote. The board shall select a prosecuting attorney and a task force coordinator (sometimes hereinafter referred to as "the coordinator ") who may attend and participate in meetings of the board but shall have no vote. The task force advisory board shall hold meetings as determined to be necessary by the voting members of the board and may adopt by -laws or other rules of procedure for its activities. The City of Brooklyn Park will provide the day to day administration through a line supervisor assigned full time to the task force. VI, OPERATION Section 1. The task force shall consist of eight sworn, full time Police officers as follows: Brooklyn Park Three Officers Coon Rapids Three Officers "Brooklyn Center One Officer Maple Grove One Officer Each task force member will physically work out of his or her Police department. Task force officers shall be supervised by the coordinator. In the event of a need of assistance or support for an in progress situation, the local party's supervisor may assume supervisory control of task force officers in that party's jurisdiction with the consent of the coordinator. Section 2. Clerical Each agency will provide clerical assistance. Section 3. Equipment Equipment purchased for each task force member, such as cellular telephones and radios, will be standard issue. Leased items such as vehicles will be leased for the grant period. Purchased items will be distributed to each party according to the number of assigned officers. Parties are expected to also utilize their own equipment such as body transmitters and surveillance vans on an "as needed" basis. Section 4. Facilities Each task force member will work out of his or her respective department. The task force will meet at least once per week to coordinate the weeks activities. More frequent contact will be expected as needed during an investigation. Section 5. Purchase of Evidence /Information The task force coordinator will maintain a master accounting of all buy monies. Each individual officer will fill out a disbursement form for any evidence /informant expenditure. This form will be forwarded to the task force supervisor who will maintain a master expenditure log for all task force members. In addition, each officer will maintain an individual expenditure log which will show a running balance of the money signed out to them. The task force coordinator will audit the financial records monthly and submit a full report on a quarterly basis to the Chief of Police of each party. Any evidence will be maintained in the department property room of the officer assigned to the case. Section 6. supplies Office supplies will be supplied by each officer's agency. Operating supplies such as vehicle fuel and maintenance -3- will also be the responsibility of each officer's agency. Any supplies not itemized sn the annual budget will be provided by the officer's agency. Section 7. Sworn Personnel Each department is providing sworn officers as outline herein. Wages and benefits for the task force officers shall be paid by each party during the grant period. Officers pre -task force assignments will be filled by personnel who were not assigned to drug enforcement prior to the task force. Section 8. Training Tuition, travel and lodging expenses for the training of task force officers shall be paid by the officer's employing agency. Section 9. Vehicles The task force shall lease a vehicle for each party which shall be maintained and insured by that party in the same manner as its other police vehicles are maintained and insured. Parties may be required to provide vehicles for task force officers when the leased vehicle is not available. Upon termination of this agreement the lease vehicles will either be returned to the leasing agency or absorbed by the parties. VII. TASKS Section 1. The primary function and responsibility of the task force is to detect investigate, gather evidence and apprehend d g � g � rug traffickers within geographic area of the parties to this Agreement. Because of the nature of covert undercover uperaLluus IL is anLicipated that undercover operatives may detect or become aware of other crimes. The task force will continue to pursue those avenues of investigation only -4- rir i7 :U 11•-,D Lyi i -- _ - viI r.rrl upon the recommendation of the task force coordinator and by permission of the chief of police of the particular party involved. Section 2. It is the mission priority of this unit to investigate drug wholesalers (those individuals that bring drugs into the task force area) , street level drug distributors, those persons involved in the clandestine laboratory manufacturer of elicit drugs, and individuals who attempt to acquire pharmaceutical drugs by fraud and /or deceit as defined by Minnesota Statute Section 152.09. Section 3. A function of the task force will be to gather and to disseminate controlled substance intelligence information. The task force with the assistance of the clerical staff will maintain an ongoing intelligence filing system. It is anticipated that parties to this Agreement will provide information to the task force concerning drug trafficking in their area. The task force will attempt to investigate those leads, maintain on file that information, and on request disseminate that information to the parties. Section With permission of the task force coordinator the task force will provide training to member parties requesting that service. Requests for community education and drug awareness will be provided only upon permission of the task force coordinator and the police department of that particular party. Section 5. Public announcements concerning the Function of the task force will be made only by permission of the advisory board in conjunction with the parties to this Agreement and by approval of the chief of police of the party in which that release is to be made. -5 l - - --i —, l . 1 --1 1 1 .n1 - " 1 . CD/ - . J Section 6. Public announcements concerning arrests or investigations conducted by the task force will be made by the chief of police of that party or his or her designee upon the approval of the task force coordinator. dews releases concerning the task force's function, investigations, and /or arrests will not be made by any task force officer unless specifically requested by the chief of police with permission of the task force coordinator or the advisory board. VIII. FINANCIAL, MATTERS Section 1. The fiscal year of the task force shall be the calendar year. Section 2. The Finance Department of the City of Brooklyn Park will be responsible for the administration of all funds coming under the direct supervision of the task force whether Federal grant funds or contributions from the parties. Such funds may be expended by the City of Brooklyn Park in accordance with the adopted budget of the task force with the prior authorization of the task force advisory board. Section i. The task force advisory board shall annually prepare a budget fo-rr the following year which shall be submitted to the parties on or before the first day of August, 1990 and 1991. Section 4. Funding shall be in the form of a matching grant from the Federal government. The contributions of the parties shall be 25% in the first year, 50% in the second year and 100% in the third year. An individual party's contributions shall be proportioned to the number of Officers committed to the task force as follows: Brooklyn Park 37.5% Coon Rapids 37.5% Brooklyn Center 12.5% Maple Grove 12.5% Contributions shall not exceed the following: Party 1990 1991 1992 Brooklyn Park $10,000 $18,000 $36,500 Coon Rapids $10,000 $18,000 $36,500 Brooklyn Center $ 3,300 $ 6,000 $12,200 Maple Grove $ 3,300 $ 6,000 $12,200 Section 5. Contributions shall be paid to the Brooklyn Park City Treasurer in equal quarterly installments due during the first calendar week of each quarter, Section 6. Cash or asset forfeitures secured through the efforts of task force officers shall be delivered to the City Treasurer of the City of Brooklyn Park who shall sell assets and distribute forfeited cash and cash proceeds of sales among the parties on the basis of the percentage set forth in Article VIII, Section 4. Seized vehicles, however, shall be distributed through a rotation system. The party at the top of the list shall have the first opportunity to take a seized vehicle if that party declines to accept the vehicle, the next agency on the list may take it. If no party takes the vehicle it will be dixpocdd of in accordance with the preceding paragraph. Once a party takes a vehicle, it moves to the bottom of the rotation list. The initial rotation list shall be in the following order: Brooklyn Park, Coon Rapids, Brooklyn Center and Maple Grove. Section 7. Funds of the task force remaining upon the termination of this agreement shall be released to the parties pro -rata on the basis of the percentages set forth in Article VIII, Section 4. IX. DEPUTATION Officers assigned to the task force, while performing their assigned duties as task force officers in a member city other than their -7- own jurisdiction, shall have the same powers, duties, privileges and immunities as conferred upon them by their own jurisdiction. The authority granted hereunder does not constitute employment by the task force of by the member city in which the duty or duties are being performed. Any worker's compensation claim or work related injury that may occur as a result of working with the task force shall be the sole responsibility of the officer's home jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any other provisions herein to the contrary, each party shall be responsible for all liabilities, except workers compensation, and similar claims, arising out of task force operations conducted within its jurisdiction, and shall defend and indemnify each of the other parties, their officers and employees, including all task force board members, coordinators, supervisors, and assigned officers for any and all claims or suits for damages, whether for property damage or personal injuries, arising out of task force operations conducted within its jurisdiction. In all other respects, all task force board members, coordinators, supervisors, and assigned officers shall be, and remain for all purposes employees of the City by which they are assigned to the task force, and duties performed on behalf of task force activities shall be deemed duties of employment of that City. The authority granted hereunder extends only so far as may be necessary to complete the duties assigned to the officers, and terminates at the expiration of this agreement and any extension thereof. R. DURATION The task force shall commence operations on January 1, 1990 and shall continue for a period of three years. -8- I '7 tJ Vr k -VIJIY Dated: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER By: By: Dated: CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK I By: By: Dated: CITY OF COON RAPIDS By. Robert B. Lewis, Mayon By: Gar W. Jackson, City Manager Gary y g Dated: CITY OF MAPLE GROVE By: By: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1/29/90 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ITEM DESCRIPTION: ANALYSIS OF CITY COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Signature - title ************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached / SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached The City Council has discussed on a number of occasions the need to review, revise, and place more emphasis on communicating with citizens of Brooklyn Center as it relates to City business. In 1989 we made modifications to our Newsletter and expanded it with some positive results. However, at this point in time neither the staff nor the Council appears satisfied with that relatively minor modification and have expressed an interest in expanding our communication capability and its effectiveness. We have reviewed possible methods and processes of improving our communication system and have come to the conclusion that some kind of outside professional analysis to start with will be an important factor in developing an effective communication process. 1 contacted the firm of Coleman & Christison, Inc. (the firm which produces the Northern Lights magazine for the North Metro Mayors Association) and requested a proposal from that firm on an evaluation of our current communication methods and processes. I have been in contact with Steven Miller from this firm, who has had experience in this area, and attached is a proposal from Mr. Miller of Coleman & Christison, Inc. This proposal calls for a three phase plan of action: Phase 1 a communication survey $8,823.75; Phase 11 a communication audit $5,100; and Phase III new program recommendation, design, and plans for implementation $2 totalling $16,048.75. This proposal would cover all media communications opportunities and give us a comprehensive analysis to base future modifications to or expansion of plans for more effectively communicating with our citizens. I am convinced this type of analysis and evaluation is necessary, but I am not completely convinced that phase 1 of the proposal is required. I'm sure it would be of value but I believe it would be possible for the staff and Council to make a number of experience based judgments about what types of information citizens need and want and, thus, eliminate this rather expensive part of the proposal. While the proposal indicates there might be additional vendors out there to do this survey work at a more economical price, I would propose that the quality of the survey is no doubt related to the price and while there might be some savings in seeking additional vendors, a quality survey of that type would cost in the area as quoted. RECOMMENDATION: It is our recommendation the City Council pass the attached resolution authorizing the mayor and city manager to sign an agreement to complete phase II of the proposed communications audit for Brooklyn Center and the funding would be authorized out of the contingency fund ($5,100). Upon completion of the communication audit and its acceptance, I would recommend at that time approval of phase III ($2,125), which would be a plan of action for implementation. The total cost of both phase II and phase III would be approximately $7,225. r • - 1� Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT FOR PHASE II OF THE PROPOSED COMMUNICATIONS AUDIT WHEREAS, it has been determined there is need for an analysis of the City's different forms of communication with its citizens; and WHEREAS, a proposal has been received from the firm of Coleman & Christison, Inc. for a communications audit; and WHEREAS, staff recommends accepting the proposal for Phase II of the audit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to sign an agreement for Phase II of the proposed communications audit with Coleman & Christison, Inc. 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. ADVERTISING & PUBLIC RELATIONS COLEMAN S CHRISTISON, INC. Coleman & Christison Professional Building 545 Fort Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 • 612 - 227 -9391 • FAX 612- 292 -9452 January 9, 1990 Mr. Gerald Splinter City Manager City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Gerry: Enclosed is the proposal I promised you. I hope you will forgive me for the delay as one of our vendors was delayed in giving us information important to the project. As you read through the proposal, you will see we have come to the conclusion that we must better understand the communication needs of the residents of Brooklyn Center before changes can be made to the current city communication program. We thought it interesting that the Resident Survey commissioned by the city last year singled out the city's communication plan as an area for possible improvement. While we are not in a position to disagree with this suggestion, we did note that the people of Brooklyn Center seem very pleased with their city and the people who run it. Brooklyn Center residents also rate "comparatively" high with other cities in knowing what is going on in city government. This appears to be a basic contradiction in data, which leads us to believe that you do not have enough good information available at this time to help guide you in changing your current communication program or developing a new program. Therefore, we have suggested a communications survey as a logical place to start. This approach seems to fit the spirit of a well - informed citizenry that Brooklyn Center prides itself upon. And, it is our opinion that such a survey can be used in a very positive manner as a public relations tool in and of itself. Have no fear Gerry, we have also suggested approaches to improving your current program and adding new initiatives if it becomes necessary. Mr. Splinter y Page 2 1/9/90 M Finally let me say that it has been a pleasure preparing this proposal for you. This is an exciting program that could affect the way residents of Brooklyn Center interact with their city for many years to come. We look forward to the opportunity to work with you. Sincerely, ,, teven L. 1 1 �� Account Exe tive ADVERTISING & PUBLIC RELATIONS.' COLEMAN & CI-IRISTISON, INC. Coleman c5. Christison Professional Building • 545 Fort Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 612- 227 -9391 FAX: 612 -292 -9452 TO: GERALD SPLINTER FR: STEVE MILL DATE: JANUARY 9, 1990 RE: A COMMON -SENSE APPROACH TO ASSESSING COMMUNICATIONS IN BROOKLYN CENTER As you requested, we respectfully submit the following suggestions for ways Brooklyn Center might effectively assess and improve its current communication program. Table of Contents Current Communications Program Page 2 Goal: Develop A Comprehensive Media Plan Page 4 A Three -Phase Plan of Action - Phase I: Communication Survey Page 5 - Phase II: Communication Audit Page 6 - Phase III: New Program Recommendation, Design & Plans for Implementation Page 7 Budget Page 8 If you have any questions on the specifics of this program, please don't hesitate to call me with questions or comments. Current Communication Program City officials have expressed an interest in improving the way important city issues are presented to the public. Currently the city publishes a four - times -a -year City Manager's new guide and two additional newsletters without the recreation guide. City officials also use a number of other communication vehicles on a regular or semi - regular basis including: 1) General and Department Publications i.e., The Civic Handbook, A Citizens Guide to Crime Prevention, Walking & Biking Trails, The Brooklyn Center Domestic Assault Intervention Project, etc. These publications are distributed by mail on request, inserted in newsletters or rovided public. at point of contact with the P p p 2) Cable programming via Northwest Community Television; a 10- minute segment as part of a 30- minute program. The program is taped weekly and is rotated into the community cable schedule every two to three weeks. 3) Character generator used to run cable television meeting notices on a continual basis from a studio at Brooklyn Center City Hall. Live programming is possible. 4) Bulletin board located in the lobby for posting meeting notices. 5) Park & Recreation department posters and notices which are occasionally sent home with kids at school. 6) Regular notices sent out by the city. These include water bills which are mailed quarterly; homestead notices which are mailed in January; and special notices that are mailed to specific areas depending on the issue. The city does have the ability to direct mail all residents. 7) Legal notices are published in the BROOKLYN CENTER POST on a regular basis. City Council minutes are not published. S) City celebrations include Earle Brown Days, held the third week of June; the Dudley/Budweiser Classic softball tournament also held in June; and occasional special events such as the city's recent 75th anniversary, and the planned opening of the Earle Brown Center. 'Brooklyn Center Communication Assessment Page 2 119190 9) A mechanical marquee is available outside of City Hall and is most often used by the Park Department. 10) Various civic groups also publish special maps and guides. 11) The city occasionally provides a speaker to civic groups on various topics of interest. The BROOKLYN CENTER POST serves as the newspaper of record for the city. Because of recent ownership changes at the paper, coverage of city business has been incomplete or inaccurate. Brooklyn Center Communication Assessment Page 3 119190 Goal: Develop A Comprehensive Communications Plan Our goal is to develop a comprehensive communication plan for the city that would: 1) Assess the scope and efficiency of the current communication program; 2) Provide guidance on improving the current communication program; and, 3) Research ideas for new communication tools including traditional and non- traditional media. I Brooklyn Center Communication Assessment Page 4 119190 A Three -Phase Plan of Action We see this plan breaking down into three phases: Phase I: Communication Survey The recent residential survey completed for the city by Decision Resources Ltd., revealed some interesting facts about the city's communication program. The survey indicated that most residents receive information about the city from the newspaper, which is presumably the BROOKLYN CENTER POST (49 percent). Only 8 percent of the respondents reported receiving information via the newsletter, 10 percent from mailings and 4 percent from cable. The report went on to say that 16 percent of Brooklyn Center's residents receive no regular source of communication from the city. The rest of the respondents list word of mouth or scattered sources. Most troublesome, according to the report, was the fact that the residents who do receive city information "obtain it through vehicles that cannot ordinarily e structured b the „ Y Y city. While the report focuses on the "communication issue" as a possible area of improvement, the fact remains that a very high percentage of the people living in Brooklyn Center are satisfied with the workings of their city. The survey also makes it clear that Brooklyn Center residents are "comparatively" well- informed about city issues and supportive of most programs they see benefiting the general welfare. Brooklyn Center residents exhibit an unusually high degree of social awareness and concern for those who might need a helping hand. Given these somewhat conflicting data — a relatively low level of recognition by the people of the city's communication efforts versus a relatively high level of satisfaction with city services and personnel — we recommend a careful assessment of what it is people really want to know about their city and how they would like to receive that information. This should be done using a survey such as the one completed by Decisions Resources, but on a more limited basis. We believe that a randomly selected sample of residents from the city's mailing list should be contacted by telephone with a short Brooklyn Center Communication Assessment Page 5 119190 Sa. questionnaire. A q notice should also be delivered via all other communication vehicles available to the city that would state that the city s interested in leamin what people Y g P P would like to receive from the city in the area of communication. The results of the resident survey would then be compared to a similar survey of all elected and non - elected officials in Brooklyn Center. This might include everyone from the Mayor and department heads to members of commissions, civic and business groups. It is important to recognize that there may be a significant difference between what the ublic wants to know n P and what government leaders think they want to know. This approach to Brooklyn Center's communication program makes a great deal of sense to us for two reasons. First and most fundamentally, it will establish what it is that people want to know. We may even find that residents are completely satisfied with the information and information vehicles they currently rely on. Our task then would be to simply improve what is already being done. And second, if changes and/or additions are necessary, it should pinpoint exactly what vehicles would be most favored by residents before a great deal of time and resources are expended to create a vehicle no one will use. Phase II: Communication Audit The city currently is utilizing many different communication vehicles to help conduct the city's business. A careful analysis or audit of each of those vehicles should be done regardless of the results and recommendations reported in the survey suggested above. An audit will accomplish the following: 1) It will provide city managers with a global perspective on all city communication efforts which should result in a more coordinated approach to future management of the program. 2) It will assess the effectiveness of each of the city's current communication vehicles and offer suggestions on ways to improve them; and Brooklyn Center Communication Assessment Page 6 119190 3) It will recommend additional programs or services that might help make the current program more effective. Phase III: New Program Recommendation Design & Plans for Implementation Depending on the results of Phases I and II, it may be necessary to design and implement certain improvements or additions to the current program. This could range from something as simple as a redesigned newsletter with an improved delivery system to a more elaborate communications program that would include print, broadcast and improved telecommunications. This plan will take into account all of the information gathered in Phases I and H and rank any new initiatives we might recommend by cost - effectiveness and potential acceptance by the residents of Brooklyn Center. Finally, we would break down each recommendation and show how it would be implemented, by whom, and under what time line. Brooklyn Center Communication Assessment Page 7 119190 Budget Phase I -- Communications Survey $8,823.75 - This would include two separate, statistically - accurate telephone surveys; one of the public at large and the other of e of just city official g � y sand opinion leaders. Note: this price represents just one bid from an outside vendor. We would be very willing to entertain bids from a number of vendors in order to get the price down. Phase II -- Communications Audit 5,100.00 - Performed by Coleman & Christison estimated @ 60 hours Phase III -- Plan of Action 2.125.00 - Performed by Coleman & Christison estimated @ 25 hours Total $16,048.75 Brooklyn Center Communication Assessment Page 8 119190 1 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING MAYOR NY UIST'S 1990 SALARY WHEREAS, Mayor Dean Nyquist served as Mayor of Brooklyn Center from 1978 through 1989 without salary compensation; and WHEREAS, Mayor Nyquist has officially requested that he not be compensated in 1990 for serving as Mayor of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, the City Council is appreciative of Mayor Nyquist's gesture and wishes to acknowledge his request and formally direct that no salary be given him in 1990 for serving as Mayor of Brooklyn Center. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to direct that Mayor Nyquist, at his own behest, not be compensated in 1990 for serving as Mayor of Brooklyn Center. 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. �n Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO $3,600,000 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS (BROOKWOOD ESTATES PROJECT) SERIES 1985 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City has issued and sold its $3,600,000 Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Brookwood Estates Project) Series 1985 (Bonds) . The Bonds are secured by, among other things, a Letter of Credit and related documents (Letter of Credit) issued by Midwest Federal Savings and Loan Association of Minneapolis (Midwest Federal) now in receivership. 2. Substantially all of the assets of Midwest Federal have been transferred to Midwest Savings Association F.A. (Assignee) as part of a reorganization directed by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation acting through Resolution Trust Corporation (Assignor). 3. Assignor wishes to assign all of its interests in the Letter of Credit to Assignee and has executed a form of assignment (Assignment) which has been accepted by Assignor. A copy of the Assignment is on file with the Clerk. 4. Under the Letter of Credit the City must consent to the execution and delivery of the Assignment. 5. It is determined that it is in the best interests of the City that the City consent to the Assignment. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Assignment on behalf of the City. 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. HOLMES & GRAVEN ( HARTE:RED Attorneys at Law 470 Pillsbury ('enter, .Ytinneapulis, Minnesota 5#1402 ROBERT A. ALsOP (612) 337 -9300 DAVID J. KENNEDV PAIL D. BAERTSCEII JOHN R. L:YRSON' RONALD H. BATTY Facsimile (612) 337 -9310 MARY J. BRF.N DF:N 1VELLING "ION H. LAN STEPHEN .1. BCBIT JLLIE A. LANNLER ROBERT C. CARLSON CHARLES L. LEFEN'ERE CHRISTINE M. CHALE JOHN N1. LEFEVRE, JR. ROBERT L. DAVIDSON ROBERT J. LINDALI. JOHN B. DEAN RRITE:R'S DIRECT DIAL LAURA K. NIOLLET ROBERT.1. DEIKE 337 -9215 DANIEL R. NELSON MARY G. DOBBINS BARBARA L. PORTNNOOD JEFFREY ENG ;VARY FRANCES SKALA STEFANIE N. GALEN JAMES M. STROMMEN DAVID L. GRAVEN STEN'EN N1. TALLEN CORRINE A. HEINE JAMES J. THoNISON, JR. JOHN G. HOESCHLER LARRY M. NYERTHEDI .TAMES S. H01 MES BONNIE L. 1VILKINS January 16, 1990 Mr. Brad Hoffman EDA Coordinator City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Re: $3,600,000 City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Multi- Family Housing Revenue Bonds (Brookwood Estate Project) Series 1985 Dear Brad: Attached is a copy of a letter which I received from Ms. Sherrill Oman relating to the above - referenced bonds. Due to the fact that Midwest Federal, which issued- the Letter of Credit, is in receivership, Ms. Oman is requesting that the City consent to the assignment of the Letter of Credit to Midwest Savings Association. Dave Kennedy has reviewed the documents and the request and advises me that everything is in order and recommends the approval by the City of the assignment of the Letter of Credit. He has also prepared a draft resolution for the purpose of authorizing the execution of the attached documents. I would recommend that the resolution, along with the attached letter from Ms. Oman, be placed on the next city council agenda. If you have any questions, please give either me or Dave a call. Very truly yours, Charles L. LeFevere CLL:rsr Enclosures LARKIN, HoFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1500 NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER 2000 PIPER JAFFRAY TOWER 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH 222 SOUTH NINTH STREET BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE 16121 835 -3800 TELEPHONE 1612; 338-6610 FAX 16121 896 -3333 FAX (6121 336-9760 NORTH SUBURBAN OFFICE SHERRILL R. OMAN 8990 SPRINGBROOK DRIVE, SUITE 250 REPLY TO MINNEAPOLIS COON RAPIDS, MINNESOTA 55433 TELEPHONE !6121 786 -7117 FAX 16121 786-6711 December 27, 1989 Charles L. LeFevere, Esq. Holmes & Graven, Chartered 470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Re: $3,600,000 City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Brookwood Estate Project) Series 1985 (the Bonds) Dear Charlie: We represent Midwest Savings Association, F.A., in connection with tax - exempt revenue bonds for which Midwest Federal Savings and Loan Association of Minneapolis collateralized letters of credit were issued as credit enhancement. As you know, Midwest Federal is in receivership. Substantially all of its assets were transferred to Midwest Savings Association, F.A. Included in the assets transferred were the Letter of Credit documents executed and delivered in connection with the above - captioned bond transaction. I am completing the documentation of the transfer for each of the bond issues effected. In the case of the Brooklyn Center Bonds, the Collateral Pledge Agreement may not be assigned without the consent of the City of Brooklyn Center. Accordingly, I have enclosed five copies of an Assignment and Assumption Agreement, which have been executed by Midwest Savings Association, F.A., Resolution Trust Corporation, as receiver for Midwest Federal Savings and Loan Association of Minneapolis, and First Trust National Association, the Trustee for the Bonds. I would appreciate our having these Agreements executed b the pP Y 9 g Y Mayor and City Manager of the City of Brooklyn Center, having taken whatever action is required by the City Council. Four fully executed copies of the Agreement should then be returned to me. LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Charles L. LeFevere, Esq. December 27, 1989 Page 2 If you need any further information, please call me. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Sherrill Oman, for LARKIN, IHF MAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd. SRO /psb Enclosures cc: David J. Kuebelbeck, Esq. SRO:HCIS Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING \ ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR DELIVERY OF ONE (1) 28,000 GVW CAB AND CHASSIS BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center that the specifications for the delivery of one (1) 28,000 GVW cab and chassis are hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise for and receive bids for the delivery of one (1) 28,000 GVW cab and chassis 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. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 PROVISIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR One (1) 28,000 GVW CAB /CHASSIS 1. GENERAL All bids must be received at the office of the City Clerk on or before 2:00 P.M. , and shall be submitted on the enclosed proposal form in a sealed envelope plainly marked "Bid for 28,000 GVW Cab /Chassis ". It is also understood that the City Council reserves the right to reject any or all bids, to waive informalities and to award the contract in the best interest of the City. The cab /chassis proposed and delivered to the City of Brooklyn Center shall be complete in every respect and ready for operation in accordance with these specifications, with certificates of service and inspection submitted at the time of delivery. Manufacturer's reference, trade name, brand, or description mentioned in this proposal are descriptive but not restrictive and used only to indicate type and standard of material or equipment desired. The cab /chassis the bidder proposes to furnish must be of a current 0 production. Obsolete equipment is not acceptable. Catalog information showing make, model, and complete specifications of the cab /chassis the bidder proposes to furnish shall accompany the vendor's bid. Insufficient descriptive information shall be cause for rejection of the bid. The bidder must give assurance to the City of Brooklyn Center in regard to patent infringements and in case of suits against the City by other parties. He must defray all costs in connection with such suit and save the City harmless in all such actions. 2. GUARANTEE The bidder shall furnish a manufacturer's standard new truck warranty as a minimum and shall guarantee the equipment as to the specified capacity and satisfactory performance and to be free of defects in design, material,.and workmanship. All defective parts, material and labor shall be replaced free Of cost to the City of Brooklyn Center. 3. DELIVERY DATE The successful bidder shall schedule delivery to the City of Brooklyn Center for the earliest date possible. 4. AWARD OF CONTRACT Award of contract by the City of Brooklyn Center will be based on, but not necessarily limited to the factors of price, delivery date, parts and service; as well as analysis and comparison of specifications and performance. 5. OBJECTIONS TO SPECIFICATIONS Any objections to the specifications must be submitted to the City Clerk in writing five (5) days prior to the opening of the bids. 0 PROPOSAL ONE (1) 28,000 GVW TRUCK CAB /CHASSIS Honorable City Council City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Gentlemen: We proposed to furnish and deliver one (1) 28,000 GVW Truck Cab /Chassis according to the specifications at the following bid price: Bid price Delivery Date (calendar days) Signed Firm Name Address City Zip Telephone Date Bid Opening: 2:OO p.m., VEHICLE SPECIFICATIONS GVW 28,000 pound minimum Wheel Base 144 inch wheel base 72 inch cab to axle dimension Frame Section modules including reinforcements shall be not less than 15.9 with a rbm of not less than 915,000 inch pounds. Provide extended integral front frame, with an additional crossmember. Furnish front PTO adapter. Engine Gasoline powered, V -8 design, 400 cubic inch minimum 206 HP minimum, equipped with full flow oil filter, fuel filter, air cleaner and governor. Axles Front - 10,000 pound capacity minimum Rear - 21,000 pound capacity minimum Transmission Allison Automatic MT 653 or equal with 3rd range hold, auxiliary cooler with external filter Brakes Service - hydraulic, split system, 1000 cubic inch vacuum reservoir Parking - Hydro -max brake system - dash mounted Steering Power assist Fuel Tank 50 gallon capacity minimum Step tank mounted on passenger side of truck Cab Standard cab shall include: Bostrom T -Bar model driver seat Bostrom companion seat Dual exterior rear view mirrors 6" x 16" Retrac Dual sunvisors Dual exterior grab handles Full headliner, rubber floor mat High output heater and defroster Hand throttle Windshield wipers 2 speed, electric intermittent Dash mounted A.M. radio All glass tinted Electrical Alternator - 90 amp minimum Gauges - ammeter, oil, water temperature & tachometer Battery - one (1) maintenance free, 535ccA at 0 degrees F VEHICLE SPECIFICATIONS - CONTINUED Wheels & Tires Cast spoke design wheels, 2 piece rims = 8.0" minimum First line tube type tires 10.00 x 20, 14 ply radial Regular tread front, on -off highway tread rear Bidder to furnish spare rim, also furnish and install mechanical back -up alarm on rear wheel Bumper Front Color Chrome yellow I Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR DELIVERY OF ONE (1) 19,000 GVW CAB AND CHASSIS BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center that the specifications for the delivery of one (1) 19,000 GVW cab and chassis are hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise for and receive bids for the delivery of one (1) 19,000 GVW cab and chassis 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. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 0 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 PROVISIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR One (1) 19,000 GVW CAB /CHASSIS 1. GENERAL All bids must be received at the office of the City Clerk on or before 2:00 P.M., and shall be submitted on the enclosed proposal form in a sealed envelope plainly marked "Bid for 19,000 GVW Cab /Chassis ". It is also understood that the City Council reserves the right to reject any or all bids to waive informalities and to award the contract in the best interest of the City. The cab /chassis ro osed and de P p livered to the City of Brooklyn Center shall be complete in every respect and ready for operation in accordance with these specifications, with certificates of service and inspection submitted at the time of delivery. livery. Manufacturer's reference, trade name, brand, or description mentioned in this proposal are descriptive but not restrictive and used only to indicate type and standard of material or equipment desired. The cab /chassis the bidder proposes to furnish must be of a current production. Obsolete equipment is not acceptable. Catalog information showing make, model, and complete specifications of the cab /chassis the bidder proposes to furnish shall accompany the vendor's bid. Insufficient descriptive information shall be cause for rejection of the bid. The bidder must give assurance to the City of Brooklyn Center in regard to patent infringements and in case of suits against the City by other parties. He must defray all costs in connection with such suit and save the City harmless in all such actions. 2. GUARANTEE The bidder shall furnish a manufacturer's standard new truck warranty as a minimum and shall guarantee the equipment as to the specified capacity and satisfactory performance and to be free of defects in design, material, and workmanship. All defective parts, material and labor shall be replaced free of cost to the City of Brooklyn Center. 3. DELIVERY DATE The successful bidder shall schedule delivery to the City of Brooklyn Center for the earliest date possible. 4. AWARD OF CONTRACT Award of contract by the City of Brooklyn Center will be based on, but not necessarily limited to the factors of price, delivery date, parts and service; as well as analysis and comparison of specifications and performance. 5. OBJECTIONS TO SPECIFICATIONS Any objections to the specifications must be submitted to the City Clerk in writing five (5) days prior to the opening of the bids. PROPOSAL ONE (1) 19,000 GVW TRUCK CAB CHASSIS Honorable City Council City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Gentlemen: We proposed to furnish and deliver one (1) 19,000 GVW Truck Cab /Chassis according to the specifications at the following bid price: Bid price Delivery Date (calendar days) Signed Firm Name Address City zip Telephone Date Bid Opening: 2:00 p.m., VEHICLE SPECIFICATIONS GVW 19,000 pound minimum Wheel Base 151 inch wheel base 85 inch cab to axle dimension Frame Section modules including reinforcements shall be not less than 10.2 with a rbm of not less than 510,000 inch pounds. Provide extended integral front frame, with an additional crossmember. Furnish front PTO adapter. Engine Gasoline powered, V -8 design, 400 cubic inch minimum 206 HP minimum, equipped with full flow oil filter, fuel filter, air cleaner and governor. Axles Front - 6,000 pound capacity minimum Rear - 13,000 pound capacity minimum Transmission Allison Automatic MT 653 or equal Brakes Service - hydraulic, split system, 1000 cubic inch vacuum reservoir Parking - Hydro -max brake system - dash mounted Steering Power assist Fuel Tank 50 gallon capacity minimum Step tank mounted on passenger side of truck Cab Standard cab shall include: Bostrom T -Bar model driver seat Bostrom companion seat Dual exterior rear view mirrors 6" x 16" Retrac Dual sunvisors Dual exterior grab handles Full headliner, rubber floor mat High output heater and defroster Hand throttle Windshield wipers 2 speed, electric intermittent Dash mounted A.M. radio All glass tinted Electrical Alternator - 90 amp minimum Gauges - ammeter, oil, water temperature & tachometer Battery - one (1) maintenance free, 535ccA at 0 degrees F VEHICLE SPECIFICATIONS - CONTINUED Wheels & Tires Disc design wheels, 2 piece rims = 6.5" minimum First line tube type tires 825 x 20, 8 ply radial Regular tread front, on -off highway tread rear Bidder to furnish spare rim, also furnish and install mechanical back -up alarm on rear wheel Bumper Front Color Chrome yellow CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1/29/90 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION APPROVING SALE OF ONE PARCEL OF LAND ON NON- CONSERVATION LIST 741 -NC *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * ** APPS* D *R*** OR *O PUBL PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes On April 4, 1989, the City Council adopted a resolution approving the sale of a • tax forfeited lot at 3113 68th Avenue North (see attached map) "...to the owner of an adjacent property." That course of action was taken because: • that was at least the third time that this parcel has been tax forfeited during the past 10 years. • discussion with previous owners and neighbors indicated that the reason for this continuing occurrence was that serious soil problems exist on this lot. In addition, these soil problems extend into adjacent properties so that any effort to provide soil corrections or to install piling would be complicated by the adverse effects on adjacent properties during soil correction procedures. • apparently, each previous buyer was unaware of this problem when he purchased the property, then became aware of it, then either defaulted on the purchase contract or allowed the property to again be tax forfeited. • conversations with Hennepin County had indicated they would agree to place this parcel for sale only to adjacent property owners. • at least one adjacent property owner was interested in purchasing this lot. Following submittal of that action to Hennepin County we were advised that they would not agree to a private sale "...because it is a full lot which can be developed under the City's ordinances." • So as to avoid a repeat of the unfortunate history of forfeitures, City staff contacted one of the previous "buyers" who had a professional engineer's soil investigation, analysis and report regarding this lot, and obtained a copy of that report from him. We then submitted that report to Hennepin County with a request that (1) the property be reappraised to reflect this soil's problem and (2) that all potential purchasers be given access to that report. Hennepin • County has agreed to these conditions. Accordingly, we recommend adoption of the attached resolution which approves a public sale of this parcel. City Council Action Required Adoption of the resolution. • • vv Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION APPROVING SALE OF ONE PARCEL OF LAND ON NON- CONSERVATION LIST 741 -NC WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center has received from the County of Hennepin, a list of lands in Brooklyn Center which became the property of the State of Minnesota, for nonpayment of real estate taxes, which said list has been designated as Classification List No. 741 -NC; and WHEREAS, each parcel of land described in said list has heretofore been classified by the Board of Commissioners of Hennepin County, Minnesota, as nonconservation land and the sale thereof has heretofore been authorized by said Board of Commissioners. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, acting pursuant to Minnesota Statute 282, that said classification lists by said Board of County Commissioners of the land described in said list as nonconservation land be and the same is hereby approved with respect to the following parcel: Classification List No. Property Identification No. Description 741 -NC 34- 119 -21 -11 -0076 Lot 5, Block 3 Elsen's City View 2nd Addition and that the sale of said parcel of land be and the same is hereby approved. 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. : BROOKLYN CENTER 22 yo 6 a o 1187217'E - - -- I S M H p] h 0 (1025) DUND (I-) IL 4 5 ;ETERY b So � . v tJ ' ��� 1 z n a .�i s 4 2 `` 1S 33 E ... _r. Z a a� B . 02 �� r 17.5 09 , ' 9 � p .e \p S. X �6oi3` 2 �� \Sr 2S Bg p v 0m t1- 22 011 ' 27 1330.0 3 \l5 I o 5.25 v 3 '� • 141.35 X0 ` ' �.� v. / �,,irY� 29 `3.5 R =397 Addit t 96 . /�` �'S ,1 +• ; ^ JO�� t -i '� p �t to ( ► : , . a n_ 3 •'.�. , ion 41 = Dvruti Y Iri 335.. 659 12 13 �� .; , f _ 1 • I Oneter pound 3 . 9(4� z _ z ,,I��a1;1P... �.' o z T' ' - o- 13 °' S (q1 W N 1+ 1" W °' 9 18;zI "t9' `\ X > _g 2 �q Z^ ( ) z -" ~ m 2\ )_ia Q = �� \� 5• I7c3 r2O� 3 c. Q ; Q +G] w ' 10'- l l�D`' \� J Y" I gf?L 6 ..r X 3 70 _ �f 11 L ,� S O U 1 F- T-rf )O N N N W ' 4r o rs � N 5 f S IS 14740 O!'O�.W N N N r� /'� , 68th , A E,% = ?��63� 6 4 yzo"� ! ` Y � / � 1 ' • I r r' �• H•y .7 ' SS 4), r 9qs 155 .I `5 8 ^' G a s ) 3 �1 n 9 1 2 _ I g L LOT 2 •� I •rJ9S.1 "li3 ,L� �a�y +sq �= ° ! � o 0 4 1 Z 10 \S Q ) r 95 if o5 �3 f> \ A ) �) 9 / �5) 1 Bn o 54 4 c r 3 / �� W `) (44)0 Nl) `' 8S o 4 co n s ,w 1 3 � 3 12 _ •" 1 9 B3 J ? 3� ` Il � = - t oa.j j �, + `ll} ^ 8 B S ? ^ � 2y 1 IN L�2 •'o^ 1i �': o•'.�. -.fir O p_j' 75 Er • r�s� ,1 /J 2: . �..� 5 25 j �(g4) 7 ° c ' X 75 f )3 9sz?F ` : = �. * �°�'� 1'1'?7m ; •17 r;' Th BS ��! � ` li •. 0 . �� ...... 83- _ a J am` r� .(,�y �,/ 9r1• \1 °� II�_ 83 CC) �' :.I r .� r. �� k; �17i z ' 1 s wil l / J '. 6 1q .� dS 0 .o � d 1 ,� : h '•. 21 j 22 5 75 5. . 71If r 'r /�r 2,t; l?C�``Y. / r '\ l °'S 1y!� 2 Ivo �."� =• �S ~�• ,J71 ��. F — •, !,' / �� a0 _' r l� •� ' is,,•r .L. +' I :,r. ; �. ,' ' J J1� •, f� yu^y�! 29 �\ ' ,-s /B f9 r .� �S - f• IJ a a2 � 1. t rl;,f / � ) �'. 3\0(' /a .. co CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date I -�9 -9 0 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1990 GENERAL FUND BUDGET DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: ( ;2t4W , Signature - title *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached EXPLANATION • The City's auditors have decreed that in order for an expenditure to be charged against the current year's budget, the item purchased must be delivered during that same calendar year. They have also decreed that, at the end of the calendar year, all appropriations that have not been expended must lapse and the appropriated funds be transferred to accumulated surplus (Fund Balance). In November of 1989, DARE supplies were ordered by the Police Department. These supplies were to be charged against the 1989.Police Department Clothing and Personal Equipment appropriation. The supplies were not delivered in 1989, and at year -end the appropriation lapsed. The supplies were finally delivered in 1990. The City Charter allows the current year (1990) budget to be increased in an amount equal to a previous year appropriation if not expended for that purpose in the previous fiscal year. I have attached a memorandum from Chief Lindsay which gives a further explanation of the probelem. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends that the 1990 General Fund Budget be amended to appropriate funds to the Police Department Clothing and Personal Equipment Appropriation to fund the DARE supplies - said funds to come from the prior year unexpended appropriation. SPECIFIC ACTION REQUIRED BY THE CITY COUNCIL -------------------------------------------- Adopt the attached resolution amending the 1990 General Fund Budget. IL Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1990 GENERAL FUND BUDGET ---------------------------------------------------- WHEREAS, Section 7.08 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter authorizes the City Council to appropriate funds from accumulated surplus in an amount equal to a previous appropriation in the the General Fund Budget, if not in fact expended or encumbered for that purpose in the previous fiscal year; and WHEREAS, there were funds available in the 1989 Police Department Clothing and Personal Equipment appropriation for DARE program supplies; and WHEREAS, an order was placed in November 1989 for said supplies; and WHEREAS, at 1989 year end, said supplies were not delivered and the appropriation lapsed and the funds were transferred to accumulated surplus (Fund Balance); and WHEREAS, said supplies were delivered in 1990. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to amend the 1990 General Fund Budget as follows: Increase the Appropriations for the following line items: -------------------------------------------------------- Police Department Clothing and Personal Equipment (01 -4224) $6,020 Increase the Estimated Revenues from the following line items: ----------------------------------------------------------- Transfer from Fund Balance ( 01 -3960 ) 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. MEMORANDUM TO: Paul Holmlund, Director of Finance FROM; Jim Lindsay, Chief of Police , DATE: January 23, 1990 SUBJECT: Invoice From 1989 Attached please find a copy of an invoice from Screening Plus for $6,019.96. In October of 1989, it was determined that there was an excess in the clothing supply portion of the budget, account number 4224. The reason for the surplus money is because the department did not experience any turnover in personnel for the first time in over ten years. The City Manager authorized the money to be used to purchase clothing items for the DARE program. The order was placed on November 7 with a promised delivery date of three weeks. Delivery was received the first week of January. Because of the large dollar amount, I would like to request that you prepare for City Council action authority to move the $6,019.96 from the 1989 budget to the 1990 budget in account number 4224. If you have any questions, please call me. No. 4237 BROOKLYN CENTER POLICE DEPT. Same JAN 5 90 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY BROOKLYN CENTER MN 55430 3515 PICK UP Minneapol. :_r, 72791 20 XXL BLACK DARE SHIRTS 5.650 113.00 1180 BLACK DARE T- SHIRTS 4.250 5015.00 SET UP CHARGE 70.00 72 DARE SHIRTS 10.930 786.96 SET UP CHARGE 35.00 i Freight /Handling Sales Tax 6019.96 Please Remit To: Screening Plus P.O. Box 28070 Minneapolis, MN. 55428 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1- 229 -90 Agenda ftem Number 1 80— REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances to Establish a Planned Unit Development Zoning District DEPARTMEN OVAL: Signature - title Director of Planning I specti on *7', MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X On January 8, 1990 the City Council had a first reading on the above entitled ordinance amendment. This amendment has been published and is being offered for second reading and public hearing by the City Council. The purpose of the ordinance is to provide the City with a tool which will allow for flexibility in land development and redevelopment. The City Council has been considering such an amendment since a discussion item was held on this matter on November 27, 1989. Prior to that time, the Planning Commission had also been considering such an ordinance amendment and has recommended the adoption of said ordinance at their November 16, 1989 Planning Commission meeting. Attached for the City Council's review is a copy of a January 8, 1990 Request for Council Consideration explaining the ordinance and recommending its approval. Also attached are copies of the Planning Commission minutes from November 16, 1989, a staff report dated November 14, 1989 relating to this ordinance amendment: The City Council has previously received a sample application from the City of Golden Valley relating to a PUD project within that community. We will be prepared to respond to any questions the Council may have at Monday evening's meeting. Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed Planned Unit Development ordinance. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1 -8 -90 Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ITEM DESCRIPTION: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 to Establish a Planned Unit Development Zoning District DEPARTMENT AP VAL: Signature - title Director of Planning and Inspection MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below/attached- SUMMARY EXPLANATION: su lemental sheets attached { p p -� At the November 27, 1989 City Council meeting, there was a discussion item regarding the adoption of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance for the City. The Planning Commission, at their November 16, 1989 meeting, had recommended to the City Council the adoption of such an ordinance amendment. Th e ur os p p e of the ordinance is to rovide the City with a P y t ool which will allow for flexibility in land development and redevelopment. The PUD ordinance dinance gives the City the ability to mix land uses and to approve development plans which may be different, to some extent, from our normal development standards. Plans for such developments or redevelopments become a principal part of the process, and development agreements establish what can and cannot be undertaken in the project. Attached for the City Council's review is a copy of the Planning Commission minutes from November 16, 1989. The Commission's consideration of the PUD ordinance can be found on pages 1 through 4 of those minutes. Also attached is a copy of November 14, 1989 memo to the Planning Commission from the staff relating to this ordinance proposal. The City Attorney has suggested some revisions regarding the designation of the various PUD zones which were discussed with the City Council at the November 27 meeting. The revisions have been incorporated into the ordinance and provide for an overly zoning which Y g an underlying zoning classfication would continue 1 to the g g to apply r PP Y property so that the a P P Y applicable regulations ations re ardin PP � regarding uses and structures in the underlying zone would govern if need be. The designation would be a combination of the letters "PUD" followed by an alphanumeric designation of the underlying zoning district such as C1. In cases where it may not be practicable to designate a specific underlying zoning classification, the Council could designate the district as "PUD- MIXED". The City Council, at their November 27 meeting, requested sample applications and agreements from other communities. Attached is a copy of the City of Golden Valley's development agreement, staff reports and permit for the PUD for "The Colonnade ". The 35 page development agreement and 20 pages of exhibits make up the vast majority of the information submitted and shows the importance of the document and the development plan in the PUD process. SUN,`NiARY EXPLANATION Page 2 I'd suggest that the Council consider a $500 PUD application fee (equivalent to our current $300 rezoning fee and our $200 site and building plan fee) . This would be in addition to the applicant being responsible for paying the actual costs incurred for engineering, planning, and legal expenses required for the City to process such an application. pp ion. Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council hold a first reading on the proposed PUD ordinance. 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 NOVEMBER 16, 1989 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairperson Molly Malecki at 7 :36 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Molly Malecki, Commissioners Ella Sander, Wallace Bernards, Lowell Ainas, Kristen Mann and James McCloskey. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planner Gary Shallcross. Chairperson Malecki noted that Commissioner Bertil Johnson was out of town and was excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 26, 1989 Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Mann to approve the minutes of the October 26, 1989 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Ainas, Mann and McCloskey. Voting against: none. The motion passed. RESOLUTION REGARDING CHANGE OF BROOKWOOD HOUSING DISTRICT BOUNDARY LINE Chairperson Malecki introduced the first item of business, a resolution finding that the modified project plan for the Brookwood housing development project and the modified tax increment plan for the Earle Brown Farm tax increment district are consistent with the plans for development of the City of Brooklyn Center. She asked whether there were any comments. Commissioner Bernards asked whether staff had met with the Brooklyn Center school district. The Secretary responded that the City Manager and the Economic Development Authority Coordinator have been meeting with the school district officials. He stated that there was a public hearing scheduled for this matter at the City Council meeting on November 27 and that the matter would probably be laid over at that time. ACTION ADOPTING PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89 -5 REGARDING CONSISTENCY OF A CHANGE IN THE HOUSING DISTRICT BOUNDARY LINE AND TAX INCREMENT PLAN WITH THE CITY' S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Sander to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 89 -5 regarding the modification of the Brookwood housing district boundary and the modification of the tax increment plan for the Earle Brown Farm as being consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Ainas, Bernards,Mann and McCloskey. Voting against: none. The motion passed. DISCUSSION ITEM PUD Ordinance The Secretary then briefly introduced the draft Planned Unit Development Ordinance and stated that he would like to review it point by point in hopes that the Commission would be ready to take action on it at this evening's meeting. 11 -16 -89 _1_ Commissioner Ainas stated that he wished to withdraw his suggestion for a restriction requiring a minimum investment or minimum building to land ratio since it would be difficult to arrive at a precise figure and even more difficult to administer in practice. The Secretary thanked Commissioner Ainas for his comments. He stated that he agreed with the goal of the idea originally suggested by Commissioner Ainas and that its objective of insuring high quality development was consistent with the objective of the ordinance. He stated that the idea had been considered by the staff. He added, however, that such a mechanism could reduce flexibility and might have to be modified a number of times. Commissioner Ainas stated that he wanted to avoid a PUD with a hot dog stand anchoring a mini warehouse development. The Secretary answered that if the proposed ordinance would not allow the City to avoid such a development then there is probably a problem with the ordinance. He stated that, as the City deals with Planned Unit Developments, it is likely that more standards for them will be set. He stated that the intent of the ordinance, however, was to allow for more possibilities and that no use could totally be ruled out ahead of time. Commissioner Ainas stated that, from the perspective of a developer, it is important for a City to give a reasonably clear indication as to what it really wants. He cited an example of a case in which he was involved in private practice with a City which rejected a development proposal without indicating what it did, in fact, wish to see. The Secretary then began to review the draft ordinance point by point. He reviewed the purpose section and the section on permitted uses. He noted the Comprehensive Plan recommendations contained in the Land Use Revisions Map which would serve as the basis for deciding what land uses would be allowed within a PUD. He explained the relationship between some of the land use categories in that table in the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning districts contained in the Zoning Ordinance. As an example, he stated that the term "commercial retail" refers to the C2 zoning district and the possibility of land uses other than purely retail uses. He added that the Comprehensive Plan sometimes recommends mixed uses for a given area. The Secretary then went on to review the section on development standards and gave some examples of certain provisions regarding parking, setbacks, buffers, etc. Commissioner Sander noted that she was in the real estate business and had seen a number of problems in Maple Grove and Brooklyn Park. She stated that she felt the draft ordinance covered some of the areas of concern that have arisen in those cities. The Secretary went on to review the subdivision of the draft ordinance relating to general standards. He gave the Commission some examples of possible redevelopment districts, primarily in areas along Brooklyn Boulevard. He stated that one question that the City will have to deal with is whether to predesignate certain areas for a PUD classification or whether to deal with a PUD designation on a case by case basis. The Secretary then went on to review the provisions on application and review of a PUD proposal. He noted that many of the procedural provisions are basically the same as the rezoning process and that this is a lengthy procedure. He pointed out that the ordinance would enable the City to approve not simply a general land use, but a specific development plan which would have to be approved at least in a preliminary manner along with the rezoning action. There followed a brief discussion of Brooklyn Boulevard and the continuity of land use in Brooklyn Center relative to that in Brooklyn Park. The Secretary discussed this area and also County Road 10 as it enters Crystal. 11 -16 -89 -2- Commissioner Sander asked what prompted the new PUD Ordinance. The Secretary answered that the City was entering a time of its life as a community where there would be more redevelopment and that redevelopment situations will call for more flexibility on the part of the City. He stated that when a community is growing, it needs tough standards. Otherwise, he went on, a city may simply give away the ship to get new development. He stated that Brooklyn Center has a good commercial base, but that the City may have to do some give and take in order to get quality redevelopment in certain areas. He went on to discuss ossible areas which would P need redevelopment, including 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard the Lynbrook area Y h Y t e industrial area at 50th and France, etc. The Secretary stated that Brooklyn Boulevard probably would not ultimately have as much office development as is recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the market is certainly not there now and that the City probably could not sustain that much office in the future. The Planner commented that a PUD Ordinance would be a sword that could cut both ways. He stated that while the ordinance would allow for greater flexibility in improving innovative arrangements, the construction of those arrangements might build in inflexibility in future use of the property. He stated that this was a problem that is faced by ordinary developments, but can be compounded when there is a mixture of uses and one use relies somewhat on another. He stated that it is important that the mixed use arrangements be a good long term investment. He noted some developments that had been built in the last ten years which have not been stable land uses. Chairperson Malecki brought up the example of the 35' buffer required when C2 uses abut Rl property. She asked how the City would deal with a situation where the commercial development exists first. The Secretary noted the example of the property east of the Humboldt Square Shopping Center in the Northeast Neighborhood. He ointed out that it had ad been zoned C2 for man ears and that the owner proposed to Y Y ro P P rezone the property to R1 in the 1970's. He explained that the City's position at that time was that the R1 development would have to provide a 35' buffer strip even though the ordinance places the burden on the commercial use. Chairperson Malecki asked what would be done when the residential use existed first. The Secretary answered that the City may or may not vary from the basic 35' buffer requirement. He pointed out that, while developers will want to shrink the buffer strip, neighboring properties will want to expand it or see some other amenities provided. The Planner commented that having hard and fast standards for development can save time and money. stated that the let the developer Y Y er know what the P standard is and what the City will accept. He stated that the tend ' P Y to make the City Council's decision easier and avoid the need for costly consultants. The Secretary agreed and pointed out that the PUD Ordinance will add flexibility, but with that will go additional responsibility to closely analyze whether developments are properly planned. Commissioner McCloskey stated that it sounded to him like the choice facing the City was between changing standards or adding flexibility and that the staff has recommended added flexibility. The Secretary agreed with this analysis. Commissioner McCloskey asked whether the PUD Ordinance would result in more input for the citizen or for the ublic official. The Secretary answered that P y t the City does not resentl have a public h r P Y p c caring for site and building plan approvals. H e gP ointed out P t that the PUD rocess would involve e public hearings and more public input. He added, however, that the public can be legally unreasonable. He pointed 11 -16 -89 -3- out that the public probably would not have supported integrated schools and housing 30 years ago if it were left up to a local vote. He stated that the PUD Ordinance is another tool for controlling development. He cited one of the original zoning cases, Euclid vs. Ambler Realty as a landmark zoning case. He stated that that case established the legality of basic zoning in the 1920's. He added that 20 years ago special use permits became popular because they gave the City discretion to approve or deny certain uses within zoning districts. He pointed out, however, that the legal reality has been that the burden has shifted to the City to justify denial of a special use permit rather than being on the developer to prove that the proposal meets the special use standards. He stated that, with a PUD Ordinance, the City could be found to be arbitrary and capricious in approving one development concept while rejecting another. The Planner added that the Commission may want to think in the future about the possibility of expanding the time period in Section 35 -210 of the Zoning Ordinance for considering rezonings and now PUD'S. He stated that the complexities of gathering input on a proposed plan and seeking revisions could be a time consuming process and that the 60 day time period may well be adequate. The Secretary suggested that the City try working with the PUD Ordinance and see how the 60 day time period works. He pointed out that the time limits in the Zoning Ordinance are intended to keep the City from simply shelving a proposal and killing it by not acting on it for an indefinite period of time. MOTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF PUD ORDINANCE Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner McCloskey to recommend approval of an ordinance amending Chapter 35 to establish a Planned Unit Development Zoning District in the City of Brooklyn Center. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Sander, Bernards, Ainas, Mann and McCloskey. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The Secretary then noted the date of the upcoming Planning Commission meeting on December 7 and pointed out that the moratorium on development in the area of 66th and West River Road would expire in mid December. He stated that he hoped to get the Land Use Study to the Commission and ultimately to the City Council in December. The Planner then showed h t e Planning Commission some building materials for the Ethan Allen building. He noted that the wood trim would be lightened up and the staccato board would also be lightened to an off -white color. He stated that he had no problem with the color scheme proposed and recommended that the Planning Commission not object unless the feeling is almost unanimous that the proposed color scheme is unattractive. The Commission had no objection to the proposed colors. ADJOURNMENT Following further discussion, there was a motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Ainas to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:24 p.m. Chairperson 11 -16 -89 -4- MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: PUD Ordinance DATE: November 14, 1989 Attached is a slightly revised copy of the draft PUD Ordinance that we have considered off and on over the past year. We will discuss at Thursday's meeting how this ordinance would work. If you read through the ordinance, you will realize that designating a site PUD is procedurally very similar to a rezoning. What the PUD designation adds, which no other zoning designation does, is the flexibility to mix uses, depart to a limited extent from the Comprehensive Plan, and approve development plans which vary from normal development standards without actually granting a variance. We feel it is important that the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance still serve as the guide and point of departure in negotiating more flexible development agreements. The Planning Commission should approach a PUD as a method of making tradeoffs to accomplish quality development, not as an out and out relaxation of standards. We have added language in Subdivision 3d regarding parking. Subdivision 3 will enable the City to review and approve development plans which, in the judgment of the City, meet planning objectives without necessarily meeting every applicable ordinance standard. At this point, we have not included a provision requiring a minimum dollar investment, building to land ratio, or floor area ratio as suggested by Commissioner Ainas. While we certainly agree with the objective of such a provision - to foster high quality development - we feel that such a provision might, in some cases, reduce the flexibility we are seeking to achieve with this ordinance. If the Commission feels strongly that such a provision is appropriate, we will try to workout approximate language at Thursday's meeting and include it in the ordinance for City Council consideration, however, we do not believe such language is necessary. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 29th day of Jan , 1990 at 7: p.m. at the City hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to establish a Planned Unit Development zoning district. 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. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMEENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES TO ESTABLISH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 . Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended as follows: Section 35 -355. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) district is to promote flexibility in land development and redevelopment, preserve aesthetically significant and environmentally sensitive site features, conserve energy and ensure a high quality of design. Subdivision 2. Classification of PUD Districts; Permitted Uses; Applicable Re' u g lations. a_ Upon rezoning for a PUD, the district shall be designated by the letters "PUD" followed by the alphanumeric designation of the underlying zoning district which may be either the prior zoning classification or a new classification. In cases of mixed use PUDs, the City Council shall, whenever reasonably practicable, specify underlying zoning classifications for the various parts of the PUD. When it is not reasonably practicable to so specify underlying zoning classifications, the Council may rezone the district, or any part thereof, to "PUD - MIXED." b. Regulations governing uses and structures in FUDs shall be the same as those governing the underlying zoning district subject to the following: 1. Regulations may be modified expressly by conditions imposed by the Council at the time of rezoning to PUD. — 2. Regulations are modified by implication only to the extent necessary to comply with the development plan of the PUD. 3. In the case of districts rezoned to PUD - MIXED, the Council shall specify regulations applicable to uses and structures in various parts of the district. — ORDINANCE NO. C. For — purposes of determining applicable regulations for uses or structures on land adjacent to or in the vicinity of the PUD district which depend on Eh zoning of the PUL district, the underlying zoning classification of PUD districts shall be deemed to be the zoning classification of the district. In the case of a district zoned PUD- MIXED, the underlyin zoning classification shall be deemed to be the classification which allows as a permitted use any use which is permitted in the PUD district and which results in the most restrictive regulation of adjacent or nearby properties. Subdivision 3. Development Standards. a. A PUD shall have a minimum area of one acre, excluding land included within the floodway or flood fringe overlay districts and excluding existing rights of way, unless the City finds that at least one of the following conditions exists: 1. there are unusual physical features of the property or of the surrounding neighborhood such that development as a PUD will conserve a physical or terrain feature of importance is the neighborhood or community; — — — 2. the property is directly adjacent to or across a public right -of -way from property which previously was developed as a PUD and the new PUD will be perceived as and function as an extension of that previously approved development; or 3. the property is located in a transitional area between different land uses and the development will be used as a buffer between the uses. b. Within a PUD, overall density for residential developments shall be consistent with Section 35 -400 of this ordinance. Individual buildings or lots within a PUDmay exceed these standards, provided that density for the entire PUD does not exceea the permitted standards. c. Setbacks, buffers and greenstrips within a PUD shall be consistent with Section 35 -400 to 35414 and Section 35 -700 of this ordinance unless the developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser standard should be permitted with the addition of a screening treatment or other mitigative measures. — - d. Parking provided for uses within a PUD shall be consistent with the parking requirements contained in Section 35 -704 of this ordinance unless the developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser standard should be permitted on the grounds of the complementarity of peak parking demands by the uses within the PUD. The City may require execution of a restrictive convenant limiting future use of the property to those uses which will continue this parking complementarity, or which are otherwise approved by the City. Subdivision 4. General Standards. a_ the City may allow more than one principal building to be constructed on each platted lot within a PUD ` — ORDINANCE NO. b. A PUD which involves only one land use or a single housing type may be permitted provided that it is otherwise consistent with the purposes and p P objectives of this section _ C. A PUD may be located only in an area designated for redevelopment in the City's Comprehensive Flan d. All property to be included within a PUD shall be under unified ownership or control or subject to such legal restrictions or covenants as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the approved development plan and site plan. e. The uniqueness of each PUD requires that specifications and standards for streets, utilities, public facilities and the approval of land subdivision may be subject to modifications from the City Ordinances generally governing them. The City Council may, therefore, approve streets, utilities, public facilities and land subdivisions which are not in compliance with usual specifications or ordinance requirements where ih is found that such are not required in the interests of the residents or of the City. — — — Subdivision 5. Application and Review. a. Implementation of a PUD shall be controlled by the development plan. The development plan may be approved or disapproved by the City Council after evaluation by the Planning Commission. Submission of the development plan shall be made to the Director of Planning and Inspection on such forms and accompanied by such information and documentation as the City m deem Y necessary or convenient, but shall include at a minimum the following: 1. street and utility locations and sizes; 2. a drainage plan, including location and size of pipes and water storage areas; — 3. a grading plan; 4. a landscape plan; 5. a lighting plan; 6. a plan for timing and phasing of the development; 7. covenants or other restrictions proposed for the regulation of the development; — 8. a site plan showing the location of all structures and parking areas; g. building renderings or elevation drawings of all sides of all buildings to be corrntructed in at least the first phase of development,- and — — ORDINANCE NO. 10. proposed underlying zoning classification or classifications. Such information may be in a preliminary form, but shall be sufficiently complete and accurate to allow an evaluation of the development by the City. — — — — b. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the development plan. Notice of' such public hearing shall be published in the official newspaper and actual notice shall be mailed to the applicant and adjacent property owners as required by Section 35 -210 of this ordinance. The Planning Commission shall review the development plan and make such recommendations as it deems appropriate regarding the plan within the time limits established by Section 35 -210 of this ordinance. c_ Following receipt of the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the City Council shall hold such hearing as it deems appropriate regarding the matter. The City Council shall act upon the development plan within the time limits established by Section 35 -210 of this ordinance. Approval of the development plan shall constitute rezoning of the property to PUD and conceptual approval of the elements of the plan. In addition to the guidelines provided in Section 35 -208 of this ordinance, the City Council shall base its actions on the rezoning upon the following critieria: 1. compatibility of the plan with the standards, purposes and intent of this section; 2. consistency of the plan with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; — 3. the impact of the plan on the neighborhood in which it is to be located and 4. the adequacy of internal site organization, uses, densities, circulation, parking facilities, public facilities, recreational areas, open spaces, and buffering and landscaping. The City Council may attach such conditions to its approval as it may determine to be necessary to better accomplish the purposes of the PUD district. — — d. Prior to construction on any site zoned PUD, the developer shall seek plan approval pursuant to Section 35 -230 of this ordinance. In addition to the information specifically required by Section 35 -230, the developer shall submit such information as may be deemed necessary or convenient by the City to review the consistency of the proposed development with the approved development plan. The plan submitted for approval pursuant to Section 35 -230 shall be in substantial compliance with the approved development plan. Substantial compliance shall mean that buildings, parking areas and roads are in essentially the same location as previously approved; the number of dwelling units, if any, has not increased or decreased by more than 5 ORDIWWM NO. percent; the floor area of non - residential areas has not been increased or decreased by more than 5 percent; no building has been increased in the number of floors; open space has not been decreased or alterea from its original desig or use, and lot coverage of any individual building has not been increased or decreased by more than 10 percent. e. Prior to construction on any site zoned PUD, the developer shall execute a development agreement in a form satisfactory to the City. f. Applicants may combine development plan approval with the plan approval required by Section 35 -230 by submitting all information required for both simultaneously. g. After approval of the development plan and the plan approval required by Section 35 -230, nothing shall be constructed on the site and no building permits shall be issued except in conformity with the approved plans. h. If within 12 months following approval by the City Council of the aevelopment plan, no building periiiits have been obtained or, if within 12 months after the issuance of building permits no construction has commenced on the area approved for the PUD district, the City Council may initiate rezoning of the property. i_ Any major amendment to the development plan may be approved by the City Council following the same notice and hearing procedures specified in this section. An amendment shall be considered major if it involves any change greater than that permitted by subdivision 5.d. of this section. Changes which are determined by the City Council to be minor may be made if approved by the Planning Commission after such notice and hearin g as ma deemed Y appropriate by the Plannin g Commission. — _ .— Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1989• Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) S CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 2c3th of January , 1990, at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Personnel Ordinance to add Columbus Day as a defined holiday. 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. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING PERSONNEL The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center does ordain as follows: follows: Section 1. Chapter 17 of the City Ordinances is hereby amended as Section 17 -117. HOLIDAY LEAVE. 1. Holidays Defined. Holiday leave shall be granted for the following holidays: New Year's Day January 1 Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Third Monday in January Washington's & Lincoln's Birthdays Third Monday in February Memorial Day Last Monday in May Independence Day July 4 Labor Day First Monday in September Christopher Columbus Day Second Mondav in October Veteran's Day November 11 Thanksgiving Day Fourth Thursday in November Post - Thanksgiving Day Friday after Fourth Thursday in November Christmas December 25 ORDINANCE N0, Floating Holiday Scheduled with permission of employees' supervisor. Floating holidays must be taken within the calendar year; they cannot be accumulated. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty 0 d ays � ( j s folio y wing its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1990. Mayor A'T7E S T : Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter i CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1 -29 -90 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: An Ordinance Extending Interim Ordinance No. 89 -13 for the Purpose of Protecting the Planning Process DEPARTMENT APP VAL: <7; M• Signature - title Director of Planning an s ecti on MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached _) On December 18, 1989, the City Council held a first reading on the above entitled ordinance amendment and also adopted a resolution relating to the extension of the • moratorium restricting certain development on the property located in the vicinity of T. H. 252/66th Avenue North. The City Council on June 12, 1989, after much review and discussion, had adopted Ordinance No. 89 -13 establishing the moratorium so that a Land Use Study of the T. H. 252/66th Avenue North area could be undertaken and completed. The purpose of the moratorium was to protect the planning process and to allow the City to complete the Land Use Study which might lead to possible adoption of amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance and /or Comprehensive Plan. The consulting firm of Short - Elliott- Hendrickson (SEH) was retained to undertake the study and has completed the study and the document has been presented to the City Council. We will be reviewing this Land Use Study with the City Council as part of the consideration of the second reading of the ordinance amendment regarding the extension of the moratorium. The study reviews various alternatives which have been suggested for the three areas contained in the study. The Planning Commission, at its December 7, 1989, has made a recommendation regarding a particular action to. be taken with respect to the various alternatives which would necessitate a rezoning of certain property which, we believe, would require the need to extend the moratorium until at least April, 1990. The Council will note that the SEH study does not make the same recommendation as the Planning Commission with respect to a preferred alternative. Summary Explanation continued Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council review the SEH Land Use Study and recommendation as well as the Planning ommission recommendation regarding this g � g g particular area. If the City Council chooses to pursue an alternative requiring the rezoning of certain ro ert such as recommended b the Planning Commission p p Ys Y g s then the second reading on the extension of the interim ordinance should be adopted which would extend the moratorium through April 16, 1990. If the City Council chooses to pursue an alternative, such as that which has been proposed by SEH, then it is not necessary that the extension of the interim ordinance be pursued. The City Council may also wish to review the study further and to then table consideration of the extension of the morartorium ordinance. We will be prepared to review and discuss the study and its effect on this ordinance amendment at the January 29, 1990 City Council meeting. • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER N ce is i ereby given *.hat a public hearing will be held on the 22nd day of Janes Iry 1990, at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall, 6302 Shingle Creek Parkway, L o consiCer an interim Ordinance for the Purpose of Protecting the Planning Process and the Health Safe and Welfar f th s are oe Resident o i Residents f the C ity, y, and. and Rastrict. Certain Development at the Property located at 6826 -R!ver Road and all Lard South of 66th Avenue and North of I -694 Lying Between •lillow Lane and Highway 252. Aux_liary aids for handicapped Persons are available upon request at least 96 acvance. lease contact the City's Personnel Coordinator at 561- to :tl�r.� � ^ rctt_o2in @nt5. I ORDINANCE NO. EXTENSION OF INTERIM ORDINANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE PLANNING PROCESS AND THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND W ELFARE OF ''_SHE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY, AND REGULATING AND RESTRICTING CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6626 WEST RIVER ROAD A ND ALL LAND SOUTH OF 66TH AVENUE AND NORTH OF I -694 LYING BETWEEN WILLOW LANE AND HIGHWAY 252. mJ- E C1 i Y COUt CIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES n'' �. INT AS 'FOLLOWS Setytio..1. Sackzround t.t 1. In con, nection with the consideration of an application for rezoninfZ of a tart ;on of t ^a_ Dro perty affected b this ordinance which 'ppi ica: ion has ;been withdrawn by the applicant), City staff, n � `orsil.snts, Planning Commission the Northeast Nei hborhood 3dvisorw Grot.p. and the City Council reviewed the existing and p develonment in the area. As a result of that review process the Coureil determined that the current land use controls did not adeguate.y address various land use concerns in the area Amon these concerns were .nadeguate or inappropriate buffering of nearby resid_n*.ial uses, nonconforming uses, zoning ordinances which w ere not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, .nsur-.eient car hazardous traffic circulation, changes in land use and _oad =gays which 0ecurra �d stnce n curie t zoninZ controls were adopted, _nd 3d,ae_nt or -iearbv sand ;uses or potential uses which were not co-rnpatibie. -0. The Council determined that there was a need for further studies to be conductad so 'hat theCity could adopt ap propriate amendments to its Comorehensive Plan and zonin code so as to ensure protection of the Public health. safety and welfare. The Council directed that such studies be undertaken. 0 ORDINANCE NO. - -- '.03. The Council also determined that there was a need for an interim ordinance to be adopted for the uroose of roteetin the piannin p p � z pr ocess and the health, safe* _v and welfare of the citizens of the Citv and ensurin that the City and its citizens retain the benefits of and protection sou ht to be afforded by, the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoninz ordinances until such studies were completed and any modifications to the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning and land US P �e _ guiittons were accomoi's%ted 1.04. Tha Council further determined that of the zoning classificat;ons whim are reasonably likely to be adopted for those narts of the area 1_urrentiv zoned R5 or C2 allow, either as 2ermitted or special uses, certain serviceloffice uses. Therefore, an absolute rohibition on the develoornent of such uses was not warranted. Accord!n Iv, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 89 -13 on June 12 1389. which ordinance ceased to be in effect on December 16 1989. x.06. The studies directed by the Council will not be completed and effective and appropria land use control will not be in place riot to the expiration of said ordinance; however, the reasons for its adoption continue to ex ist. Therefore there is a need for the Continuation of the Protect iort afforded by said interim ordinance as p ro ided herein. - section 2. Determination =T? /. T"is interim ordinance shall apply to the pro ert at 6626 West River Road and all oroDerty south of 66th Avenue and north Of I -694 between Willow Lane and Higttwav 252 (the subject area) 'R D'ur'n the period this interim ordinance is in effect, no property critmn the subject area may be developed. redeveloped nor shall, an site plan approlvals, rezonin licenses (other than renewels), ola =t ?ngs or replatttn s, land dtv:sions or consolidations, special use verm_.its or building permits be issued by the City for any uses other than chose expressiy allowed in paragraph 2.03 of this ordinance 13. The Wovisions of paragraph 2.02 shall not apply in C2 zones to permitted uses which are also oermitted uses in C1 zones of the Cit and shall -tot apply in R5 zones to special uses which are aso permitted uses in C2 zones of the City. `x.34. This ordinance shall remain in effect until A nil 16, 1990, or such arii date as may be adopted by the City Council, provided that if the study anal piannin� process have not been completed within such nGric this ordinanc ma be extended for such additional periods as ,are deemed necessary b the City Council and as are permitted b the A ct. ORDIM TM NO. Se — Utlon 3. Apol:cability 3.01. Th ordinance apolies to any application for site plan approvals, rezonm °s, licenses, plattings or replattinp, land divisions or consolidations, special use oermits or building permits that have not received orelimin� approval by the City Council "before the effective date of t :is ordinance. Sec 4. Effective Date.. x.01. ' Phis ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty 30 °s oilo� ring its legal publication, ?adopted this day of , 1990, Mayor City Clerk Date of Publication: Effective Date: !Brae is incicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) BR291 - 016 I i • Land Use Study Area of T.H. 252/66th Avenue North • City of Brooklyn Center Minnesota • SEH File No. 90030 Aw Amw • • ENGINEERS ■ ARCHITECTS ■PLANNERS January 12, 1990 • • • • SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. • • • LAND USE STUDY AREA OF T.H. 252/66TH AVE. NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA SEH FILE NO: 90030 January 12, 1989 • 09 • • • • • s AdV 0 WSE 0 ENGINEERS ■ ARCHITECTS ■ PLANNERS 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, ST PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 612 490 -2000 r January 12, 1990 RE: BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA LAND USE STUDY T.H. 252/66TH AVENUE AREA SEH FILE NO: 90030 Mr. Ron Warren, Director Planning and Inspection City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Ron: • We are pleased to submit to you copies of the subject Land Use Study. As you are aware, our study approach has been one of research, analysis, and open dialogue. The numerous staff meetings we have . had with you, as well as input from the neighborhood and Planning Commission, have been very worthwhile as a part of this process. Again, thank you for giving us the opportunity to work with Brooklyn Center on this planning study. We look forward to participating on any other projects that may arise in the future. Sincerely, Ra dy horeson, ! Senior Planner RRT /cih Enclosure • SHORT ELLIOTT ST PAUL, CHIPPEWA FALLS, HENDRICKSON INC. MINNESOTA WISCONSIN • Land Use Study 66th Avenue Brooklyn Center, MN TABLE OF CONTENTS � I. INTRODUCTION PAGE Descriptionof Area ......................... - 1 - Project History ............................. - 1 - II. ANALYSIS SITE CHARACTERISTICS ........................ - 4 - EXISTING LAND USE CLASSIFICATION ............ - 7 - Zoning .................................... - 7 - Land Use Guide Plan ....................... - 7 - Current Land - Use /Ownership ................ - 9 - LAND USE DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES ........... - 11 - Summary of Alternatives ................... - 12 - . • EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES .................. - 21 - Zoning /Land Use ........................... - 21 - Traffic Analysis .......................... - 26 - 66th /Willow Lane Intersection ............. - 28 - III. RECOMMENDATIONS Study Recommendation ......................... - 35 - Neighborhood /Advisory Group Meeting ......... - 38 - Planning Commission Meeting ................. - 39 - IV. SUMMARY MiscellaneousIssues ........................ - 41 - APPENDICES APPENDIX A - TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISITCS OF ALTERNATIVES APPENDIX B - NEIGHBORHOOD /ADVISORY GROUP - MEETING MINUTES APPENDIX C - PLANNING COMMISSION - MEETING MINUTES Ill �i • • LIST OF FIGURES i TITLE PAGE Figure 1 - Project Location Map ................... - 3 - Figure 2 - Current Zoning ......................... - 8 - Figure 3 - Study Area ............................. - 10 - • *Figure 4 - Alternative A .......................... - 14 - Figure 5 - Altenrative B .......................... - 15 - Figure 6 - Alternative C .......................... - 16 - • Figure 6a - Alternative C - Alt . ............... - 17 - Figure 6b - Alternative C - Alt . ............... - 18 - Figure 7 - Alternative D .......................... - 19 - Figure 8 - Alternative E 20 Figure 9 - Redesign of 66th Ave /Willow Lane Intersection ........................... - 32 - Figure 10 - Willow Lane Landscape Buffer ........... - 33 - Figure 11 - Willow Lane Landscape Buffer (Berm) .... - 34 - Figure 12 - Study Recommendation ................... - 37 - Figure 13 - Planning Commission Recommendation ..... - 40 - • *Note: Graphics Legend on Figures 4 - 8 Yellow = Rl (Single Family Residential) Brown R5 (Multiple Family Residential) • Red = C2 (General Commercial) Pink = Cl (Source /Office) Green = Open Space (Buffer) • INTRODUCTION DESCRIPTION OF AREA The purpose of this study is to evaluate various land use alternatives for the area bounded by Highway 252, I -694, 66th Avenue North and Willow Lane in the City of Brooklyn Center (See Figure 1). The study also includes an "L" shaped parcel of relatively small area at the northeast corner of 66th Avenue North and Highway 252. This portion of the study area is approximately 1 acre, while the area between 65th Avenue and 66th Avenue is 4.5 acres, and the southerly portion of the study area, i� between 65th and I -694 is approximately 5.75 acres in size, for a total study area size of 11.25 acres. As shown on Figure 2, the three sections under study will be referred to as Area 1, Area 2 and Area 3. PROJECT HISTORY The series of events that led to the need for this study began in February of 1989 with a rezoning application made by the owner of S the property located at the southeast corner of Highway 252 and 66th Avenue North. The owner requested that the C2 zone be expanded slightly to the east by straightening out the property line in order to 1) better accommodate a proposed gas I,• station /convenience store /car wash, and 2) align a driveway with the median opening along 66th Avenue. In keeping with City policy, a neighborhood advisory group r meeting was held in March of 1989 to inform the neighboring residents about the proposed rezoning and the special use application for the gas station /convenience store /car wash which would follow approval of the rezoning. After much discussion, the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group recommended to the Planning Commission that the entire area between Willow Lane, Highway 252, 65th Street and 66th Street be rezoned to Cl • service - office. The residents' concerns with R5 and C2 zoning, particularly in the case of the gas station /convenience store /car wash include: 1) Noise from the gas station (residents now hear noise • from the Super America station across 252), 2) litter 3) visual appearance 4) traffic on 66th Avenue and Willow Lane • Residents felt that these factors would result in a reduced quality of life and a reduction in property values of the single family homes. On April 13, 1989, as a result of the neighborhood • advisory group recommendation, the Planning Commission recommended that the rezoning application be set aside, and that the City Council establish a moratorium prohibiting all construction with the exception of C1 (service- office) in Area 2. '• The Planning Commission also recommended the property containing the single family home (Mn /DOT Field Office) at 6626 West River Road, and all of the land south of 65th Avenue to 1-694 69 between Highway 252 and Willow Lane (the Lyn River Apartment site) be included in the moratorium. The property on which the Mn /DOT home is located (Area 1) was included in order to address the nonconforming use of the land zoned R5. Area 3 (Lyn River Apartments) was included in order to assess the desirability of R5 development in the area. The moratorium was approved by the City Council in June, 1989. Subsequent to approval of the moratorium, this land use study was initiated to address the City's concerns. s - 2 - �• •. •. HIM !!MINI � t ttt .. • . R . own no '• :s �_ ■� �� �� 111 = its �� ��l \fw. • S ` ��+,'+��,t��k. all Dan .� ����- '_ ■f -- H r// mm 1111IF all on NOW rrrrrrrrrrl \` =1 is= :::Ir�r11 B MW - mom _ s _ -� s- a■ OWN i�� •• �' •••• • •••• • • •i - ■fie `' i :i • , ra i -: s - s! y - �_ - i �i� ■ - W i. i 'iii E IN ■� � a i� wsa ■mss ■�'� logo all all NEI wpm aw IN '� �- ■0■ -- L'. �� �- i ��� -- ri?� ti- YIN !!!�,' yJ n � ; • _ H a". so 2 ilt IN SEEM FILE NO. PROJECT LOCATION M ANALYSIS SITE CHARACTERISTICS As shown in Figure 3, the configuration of the site is long and narrow. This contributes to a significant portion of the area receiving a great deal of exposure from the T.H. 252 and I -694 corridors. « The site is charactorized by commercial land use to the west across Highway 252, single family dwelling units to the north and east, and a major transportation corridor (I -694) runs south of the property. The Mississippi River lies immediately east of the single family homes along Willow Lane. Area 1 is a small "L" shaped parcel of less than 1 acre in size. This parcel is bounded by streets on three sides. West River Road lies along the west side of the parcel with Highway 252 immediately west of West River Road, 66th Avenue North lies along the south side, and the "dead -end" portion of Willow Lane lies along the east side of the site. In recent years 66th Avenue North has been widened to provide additional lanes of travel and a widened median. Willow Lane has 50 feet of street right-of- way. On- street parking is permitted. There is little chance that this segment of Willow Lane would be connected with Willow Lane to the north, as there are at least two single- family homes which would need to be removed in order to accommodate the street. Area 1 is characterized by the presence of single family dwelling units immediately to the north, as well as across Willow Lane, to the east. The properties along the east side of Willow Lane abut the Mississippi River. • The site slopes gently from West River Road to the east toward the river, with the highest point being near West River Road, - 4 - 0 where the Mn /DOT house is located and h t e lowest point at Willow Lane. There are very few trees on the site. One large tree is located west of the Mn /DOT house. This tree appears healthy, and could III be an asset to the property, if it remains intact subsequent to the modifications of the West River Road alignment. In addition, there are two small deciduous trees and several • pines near the southeast corner of the site which may enhance a future development, given additional care and maintenance. Area 2 is bounded by Highway 252 and a frontage road on the west, 66th Avenue on the north, Willow Lane on the east and 65th Avenue on the south. The northwesterly portion of this area is currently occupied by Atkins Mechanical Company. The site contains a one story building with off - street arkin and a small P g number of trees along the 66th Avenue frontage. Atkins Mechanical Company is accessible from both 66th Avenue North and the frontage road along Highway 252. The Brookdale Motel occupies the southwest portion of this site. An 18 unit apartment building is located east of the Brookdale Motel along Willow Lane. Generall y speaking, Area 2 also slopes es from west to P east towards the Mississippi River. However, due to the commercial nature of the Atkins Mechanical Company and the Brookdale Motel, the west half of the site has been elevated to a level which is more consistent with that of Highway 252. The west half and the east half of Area 2 are currently separated by a ridge which is covered with trees in some areas. Therefore, the elevation of the east half of Area 2 is nearly level with Willow Lane and is consistent with the single family homes to the east. There are a number of large trees in Area 2. Those which appear most significant are located between the Atkins building and the Brookdale Motel. A number of very attractive pines are also located on the site of the 18 unit apartment building. - 5 - I I• i • Area 3 is bounded by 65th Avenue on the north, Highway 252 on the .west, Willow Lane on the east and the right -of -way for the I- 694/252 interchange at the southwest corner of the site. There is a sharp drop in elevation between the I- 694/252 interchange • and Area 3 which contains the Lyn River Apartment complex. There are several large trees scattered intermittently about the Lyn River Apartment site. However, there is no consistent landscaping theme which carries through the entire site. • • • • L• • - 6 - • • EXISTING LAND USE CLASSIFICATION • Land use classifications are identified by two sources; the City of Brooklyn Center Zoning Ordinance, and the City of Brooklyn Center Land Use Guide Plan. �► Zoning Currently, the study area is made up of two zoning classifica- tions: C2 (General Commercial) and R5 (Multiple Family Residential) district. The C2 district permits a wide variety of • retail uses, services and restaurants. Special uses requiring City Council approval include gasoline /service stations, fast food and drive - through eating establishments, motor vehicle sales, and a number of other uses. C2 zoning currently exists on • the westerly half of Area 2, between 65th Avenue and 66th Avenue (see Figure 2). The R5 district permits multi- family dwellings of two and one a half to three stories in height, in addition to R3 uses which include townhomes and garden apartments and R4 uses which include multi - family dwellings of one and one -half to two stories in heights. Nursing care and child care homes, certain service- office uses and churches are also considered special uses under the R5 zoning. The portions of the study area which are zoned R5 are shown in Figure 2, and include all of Area 1, the east half of Area 2, and • all of Area 3. Land Use Guide Plan The Land Use Guide Plan (1979) is consistent with the zoning in • that the areas zoned R5 are identified as multiple family land uses, and the area zoned C2 is identified as retail land use. The area is also identified as part of the Mississippi River Critical Area Overlay District (i.e., building height • restrictions, etc.). - 7 - HIM X1111 � 111 � - 111/ ■ /111 ■11 �IN l og 1111■ ■■■ 111 / 111,"`■,,, ( 1 ' • .. ■■ ��/�11■ 1 / / ■■ 11111 X1111111. 111111■�III ■��r 11111 X1111/ ■ 11111 /1111/ ••�1�111■ ■rlog;� milli x11111 ■Q HIM X1111/ 111111 1I1l'��, II7TTTt TIT ��"'' i" ,1 � ® itjt'IITTTTn err �r�r� long on aw �I - • Current Land Use • At present, there are five existing land uses within the study area. A single family home occupies Area 1. This house is being used as a field office by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn /DOT) during the construction of Highway 252. • An office building ( Atking Mechanical Company) is located at the southeast corner of Highway 252 and 66th Avenue. The area directly to the east and south of this office building is vacant and is under the same ownership. The Brookdale Motel is located north of 65th Avenue and east of the frontage road along T.H. 252. It is currently under separate I • ownership from the Atkins property to the north. This motel operates as a permitted use under the present C2 zoning designation. This facility was built in the 1960's. An 18 .unit apartment � p building, separate ownership S g, p ow ers p from other adjacent properties, is located east of the Brookdale Motel. This use is in conformance with the R5 zoning of the area. Recent concerns have been expressed over both the interior '♦ and exterior conditions of the building. The Lyn River Apartments (84 units, 7 buildings) are located south of 65th Avenue and west of Willow Lane. These apartments are also a permitted use under the current R5 zoning designation. Past maintenance problems associated with this complex have been reduced since a management association was hired to maintain the apartments and work with the tenants. Area 3 is under separate ownership from the properties in Areas 1 and 2. i • ♦ - 9 - • CITY OF AREA BROOKLYN CENTER _ 66th AVENUE l L LAND USE STUDY _ N NOT TO SCALE 66 AVE. NO• Q 1 l 11 LEGE EXIST. BUILDINGS • �} STUDY AREA X PROPERTY LINES N s s • AREA 2-- OWN AWL u l AREA 3 ------ - - -- - -' u • - - 7 _ - r • FILE NO Study Area • FIGURE ENGINEERS f ARCHITECTS f pI MINERS 3 • LAND USE DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES To formulate the various alternatives that could be considered for the study area, research on City Zoning and Land Use Plan classifications was undertaken. In addition, various historical and future development patterns as well as site characteristics and existing land use /ownership were also discussed in numerous meetings with City Staff. Of approximately forty -five combinations of zoning classifica- tions that were listed and analyzed in the early stages of the study, the following five alternatives represent those land use designations which are deemed most logical and /or desirable for the area now and in the future. An important element is the relationship which the three sub -study areas have to one another as well as the surrounding neighborhood and Highway 252. This portion of the report will list the five land use alternatives under consideration. Accompanying this list are figures which graphically show the three sub -areas and the zoning designations. Following the listing and attached exhibits, a summarized analysis will be presented which speaks to each alternative and the advantages as well as disadvantages that have been identified. Also included as a part of this analysis is a Traffic Impacts section which reflects the alternatives in terms of transportation considerations. Another key element which has been included as part of this section is a redesign of the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane inter- section. Meetings and discussions were held with both the City Planning and Engineering Departments. As a result, a new inter- section design is suggested that reduces direct traffic to the residential neighborhood east of Willow Lane and incorporates an open space as well as landscaped buffer area. Included with this design is a sidewalk /trail which connects to the West River road • • corridor, along Willow Lane, and south to the Hennepin County Trail under the I- 694 /Mississippi bridge area. • - 11 - SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES Alternative A • Area 1 - Rl (Single Family Residential) Area 2 - C2 (General Commercial) west half - R5 (Multiple Family) east half Area 3 - R5 (Multiple Family) • Alternative B Area 1 - Rl (Single Family Residential) Area 2 - C2 (General Commercial) west half - Cl (Service /Office) east half Area 3 - R5 (Multiple Family) • • Alternative C Area 1 - R1 (Single Family Residential) Area 2 - C1 (Service /Office) Area 3 - R5 (Multiple Family) Alternative C - Alt. Area 1 - R1 (Single Family Residential) • Area 2 - Cl (Service /Office) Area 3 - Cl (Service /Office) Alternative C - Alt. Area 1 - R1 (Single Family Residential) Area 2 - R5 (Multiple Family) Area 3 - R5 (Multiple Family) • - 12 - • Alternative D • Area 1 - R1 (Single Family Residential) Area 2 - North Half City acquire /redevelop - South half C2 (General Commercial) west half R5 (Multiple Family) east half Area 3 - R5 (Multiple Family i Alternative E Note: Redesign of 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection Open space and berming Area 1 - R1 (Single Family Residential) Area 2 - C2 (General Commercial) west half R5 (Multiple Family) east half Area 3 - R5 (Multiple Family) • • - 13 - • CITY OF i A R E A 1 BROOKLYN CENTER • 66th AVENUE LAND USE STUDY x o L1 • � G � � nor ro sru[ �w LEGEND EXIST. BUILDINGS • x o PROPERTY LINES s • AREA 2 •641 A cl C�5 AREA 3 Ll • i FILE NO ® Alternative A FIGURE • ENGMMEFRS I ARCHITECTS ■ PLANNERS 4 14 - • CITY OF AREA 1 BROOKLYN CENTER • `� 66th AVENUE LAND USE STUDY x Q O "M m WAZ LEGEND []] EXIST. BUILDINGS x o PROPERTY LINES G s� AREA 2 El x o� AREA 3 • C' o � & S FILE NO j Alternative B FIGURE • EN ^WERS I ARCHITECTS ■ PLANNERS C - 15 - J • CITY OF AREA 1 BROOKLYN CENTER • `� 66th, AVENUE I LAND USE STUDY • a o MM roSCAU L, LEGEND (=�] EXIST. BUILDINGS • Q x PROPERTY LINES • AREA 2 631, AW- a -� • AREA 3 D AV • o o � • i FILE NO • A dMW 90030 AM Alternative C FIGURE FNUM(FIPS • *Pcwrrcrs IO(AMNERS ^ l i 0 • CITY OF AREA BROOKLYN CENTER 66th AVENUE LAND USE STUDY • a �J O n Mot m SCALE esT►i A`�- NQ Q 1� LEGEND [J] EXIST. BUILDINGS x a PROPERTY LINES C AREA 2 65TH ASE. a s � � x a AREA 3 a F ILE NO .� Alternative C - Alt FIGURE ENG /ME[RS ARCN/T(CTS I P( ANNERS t ^ a - I o • CITY OF AREA 1 BROOKLYN CENTER • 66th AVENUE LAND USE STUDY G x L LEGEND EXIST. BUILDINGS x a PROPERTY LINES 1 r� kp, • AREA 2— cl cl ° o X601 ABC • AREA 3 -- • • • FILE NO 90030 Age" Alternative C Alt. FIGURE • ENGNEERS 1 ARCH1 FCT5 • PLANNER5 Rh • _ CITY OF AREA 1--�� BROOKLYN CENTER • 66th, AVENUE LAND USE STUDY N o Q • Nor ro 3a9z LEGEND d EXIST. BUILDINGS • D City Purchase x o PROPERTY LINES N • AREA 2 6ST11 Aft Cj AREA 3 _ U Ll - Adw • FILE NO Allow 90030 ASEN Alternative D FIGURE • FNCAMFF@S • AorcmfrT rs 10{ AMNFR5 7 CITY OF A R E A 1 BROOKLYN CENTER • -.` 66th AVENUE LAND USE STUDY 1 � � 4 • a Mat m xr-" V LEGEND L� EXIST. BUILDINGS • x PROPERTY LINES tt �i i • AREA 2 GM ME a • AREA 3 CD a AdW • o a • FILE N0. AAW 90030 Alternative E FIGURE • EW-MWIWS • AA`CWrECTS 1 PLANNERS 8 20 - • EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES • This portion of the report will evaluate the various land use alternatives identified in the previous section. As mentioned, research and numerous meetings with City Staff were undertaken in reviewing the City Zoning Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan, existing • land -use, and future growth patterns for the subject area. Again, it is important to point out the interrelationships between the various sub -areas (i.e., Areas 1,2,3) as well as surrounding site characteristics (i.e., T.H. 252, residential • neighborhood along the Mississippi River, etc.) when reviewing the various alternatives. An inventory and analysis of existing land uses are also of importance when reviewing any change in zoning designation and /or redevelopment potential. • For purposes of this report, the evaluation of the alternatives section is divided into Zoning /Land Use, Traffic Impact, and 66th Avenue /Willow Lane Intersection Design. • Zoning /Land Use Alternative A (Figure 4) • This alternative largely reflects the zoning as it currently exists. One exception is area 1 which is shown as single family. • Area 1 - Designated as Rl (Single Family Residential). This zoning /land use designation is deemed more appropriate to the area than the existing R5 (multiple family) classifi- cation. Evaluation factors include the relationship to • existing single family uses directly to the north and east of the property. In addition, the design of West River Road does not leave enough viable land area to fit a multiple • family or commercial development that would not directly affect the neighborhood. The parcel is currently under ownership with Mn /DOT and the possibility of the City • - 21 - • involved in the purchase and subsequent selling of this !4 property for a single family use is feasible. Other considerations also include an adjustment and subsequent subdivision with other properties directly to the north. • Area 2 - Designated as C2 (General Commercial) on the west half and R5 (Multiple Family) on the east half. This reflects the current zoning on the City Zoning Ordinance Map. The City Comprehensive Plan similarly has the area • shown as commercial and multi- family residential. The existing land uses (i.e., Atkins Mechanical Building, Brookdale Motel, 18 unit apartment building) are in compliance with the designation(s). Evaluation factors • associated with these land use designations relate to existing and future development concerns. Prior meetings on the area (note History Section of this report) found that the neighborhood is concerned about the condition and main- tenance of the apartment building as well as future development of the C2 portion of the block. The issue of a proposed gas station and convenience center related the need for proper "buffering" to the neighborhood in terms of traffic activity, noise, etc. Although an R5 zone would be • located between a commercial development and Willow Lane, the extent and likelihood of such a development was debatable based on limited area available and lack of assurance that the property would develop in the same time- frame as a commercial use to the west.. Area 3 - Designated as R5 (Multiple Family Residential). This is the current Zoning Map and Land Use Plan classifi- cation which is consistent with the existing Lyn River Apartment development. Evaluation factors include both current and future development potential for the area. Aside from the existing apartment complex, a multiple family • • zoning and land use designation is applicable given the influence of the I- 694/T.H. 252 interchange. The multiple • - 22 •- • family designation provides an appropriate buffer to the • existing single family residential area east of Willow Lane and the intensity of traffic impacts from T.H. 252. Other zoning/ land use designations (i.e., commercial) would require an extensive redevelopment effort by the City and a • willing developer who would not be influenced by the existing neighborhood or growth patterns in this portion of the City. • Alternative B (Figure 5) Area 1 - Designated as R1 (Single Family Residential). Evaluation factors are similar to the discussion in Alter- native A. Area 2 - Designated as C2 (General Commercial) on the west half and C1 (Service /Office) on the east half. The C2 • • portion of the area has a similar discussion and evaluation as given in Alternative A. Suggested is rezoning the east half of the block from the current R5 zoning designation to Cl. Only Service /Office uses (not multiple residential) • would be allowed and the existing 18 unit apartment complex would become nonconforming, to be eventually phased out. Evaluation factors include the use of an office or other allowable use in a C1 zone between the residential neighbor- hood on the east side of Willow Lane and a C2 development to • the west along T.H. 252. Although such a transition area would provide a buffer from the highway to the neighborhood, the magnitude and assurance that this would occur at one given time cannot be shown. • Area 3 - Designated as R5 (Multiple Family Residential). Discussion and evaluation factors similar to Alternative A. • • - 23 - • Alternative C (Figure 6) Area 1 - Designated as Rl (Single Family Residential). Evaluation factors similar to discussion in Alternative A. Area 2 - Designated as Cl (Service /Office). This alter- native suggests rezoning the entire block to a Service /Office development designation. This idea was brought forward from a Neighborhood Advisory Committee meeting and subsequently through the Planning Commission. It entails a similar land use classification for the entire block area. The Atkins Mechanical Contractor's Office would be a conforming use with the exception of the outside storage which is not permitted in the C1 zoning district. The Brookdale Motel and 18 unit apartment complex would be nonconforming, to be eventually phased out. Evaluation factors include having the entire block developed under one zoning category and, as such, provide a consistent buffer to the residential neighborhood on the east side of Willow Lane. The major issues associated with this alternative are, 1) When such a development would take place,.and 2) the difficulty associated with converting the existing uses into Service /Office. A redevelopment effort would most likely be required. i Area 3 - Designated as R5 (Multiple Family Residential). Discussion and evaluation factors similar to Alternative A. Alternative C2 "Redevelopment Alternative" (Figure 6a) Area 1 - Designated as R1 (Single • Family Residential) Area 2 & Area 3 - Designated as C1 (Service/ Office). This alternative suggests a large scale rede- velopment effort for the study area. Evaluation factors in- - 24 - • • clude providing for and having the City play an active part in developing the area for Service /Office uses. Given recent growth patterns and • difficulties associated with leasing a City redevelopment effort of this magnitude would require an in -depth marketing • analysis to determine its likelihood of success. Alternative C2 "Redevelopment Alternative" (Figure 6b) • Area 1 - Designated as R1 (Single Family Residential). Area 2 & Area 3 - Designated as R5 (Multiple Family Residential). This • • alternative suggests having this entire area develop as Multiple Family Residential. Similar to the previous rede- velopment alternative, City participation and assurance of the feasibility for this magnitude of development would be necessary. Alternative D "City Acquisition" (Figure 7) • Area 1 - Designated as R1 (Single Family Residential). Evaluation factors similar to Alternative A. Area 2 - Suggested is the City's EDA to acquire all of the property owned by Howard Atkins (i.e., north half of block) • • and then attempt to instigate an acceptable redevelopment in this area. The specific zoning /land use designation(s) • - 25 - • would then be further evaluated by the City in relation to any further development potential. In terms of evaluation factors, this alternative would put the City in a position of making decisions regarding the eventual land use without having to be concerned about land acquisition and /or • possible compensation for loss of value. Shown is the south half of the block continuing in General Commercial and Multiple Family Residential designations as currently identified on the Zoning and Comprehensive Plan maps. • Area 3 - Designated as R5 (Multiple Family Residential). Discussion and evaluation factors similar to Alternative A. Alternative E - (Figure 8) This alternative is very similar to the discussion of Area 1, Area 2, and Area 3 in Alternative A of this section. • However, one important difference is the inclusion of a "redesign" of the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection. The evaluation factors for this alternative are significant. In terms of Zoning /Land Use, this would allow the incorporation of City "Open Space" that could be utilized for buffering as well as reducing direct traffic onto Willow Lane. Another feature would be that such a "buffering" would reduce the direct impact of a C2 use on the west half of the block. Proper berming and landscaping could be undertaken that would help provide a transition between two otherwise conflicting land uses. This alternative would require an active participation by the City in the redesign of both the . intersection and open space features. Traffic Analysis S Currently the intersection of Highway 252/66th Avenue operates at Level of Service (LOS) E during the peak hours. Level of Service E refers to a condition where the roadway is operating very near • - 26 - • • capacity. During the majority of signal cycles, one or more of g Y ! the vehicles queued on Highway 252 at the traffic signal will not clear the intersection during the green portion of the signal cycle. • Subsequent to future development along the T.H. 252 corridor and to the north, the LOS of the T.H. 252/66th Avenue intersection is expected to worsen to LOS F. Under LOS F conditions, long queues of traffic and unstable flow can be expected. Traffic on the • cross street, 66th Avenue, can also be expected to be impacted by the poor LOS, as drivers on T.H. 252 may block the intersection from time to time, resulting in a smaller amount of green time available for vehicles to proceed from 66th Avenue. This • condition already exists during the heaviest portion of the peak hours. Therefore, even under the existing land use scenario of the study area, the amount of time necessary for vehicles on 66th Avenue to get through the intersection can be expected to increase over time. • The various land use alternatives described previously vary only slightly in their potential impact to the intersection. As previously stated, the intersection is expected to operate at LOS • F regardless of whether or not any additional development occurs in the study area. Operation of the intersection is not expected to change • significantly under any of the land use alternatives discussed above. If the westerly half of Area 2 is developed to an intense combination of C2 land uses, such as a gas station, fast food restaurant and sit down restaurant, the volume of traffic exiting • the site during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours is very likely to increase to the point where most of the peak hour signal cycles will have one or more westbound vehicles which cannot get through the intersection in the established "green time" for westbound ! movements. However, under a less intense C2 development scenario, such as a gas station combined with a small retail • - 27 - • • center, all of the traffic queued at the intersection can be • expected to clear the signal during the majority of signal cycles, provided that drivers on Highway 252 do not block the intersection. This is also true of all of the other land use alternatives being considered. It is important to realize that • even under the existing land use or least intense alternative being considered, there may be a peak 10 or 15 minute period during which not all of the queued vehicles on 66th Avenue North will clear the intersection during a single cycle. • Another point with regard to the intersection of 66th Avenue North and Highway 252 deals with the volume of traffic generated from the north on West River Road. A previous study which was • conducted during the spring and summer of 1989 showed that West River Road is a popular alternative route to Highway 252. Several measures are being implemented to reduce the volume of through traffic from West River Road, but it has been recognized • that during the a.m. peak hour, 200 -250 vehicles are still likely to utilize West River Road as far south as 66th Avenue North, where they will then access Highway 252. Therefore, it is important to recognize that great lengths to reduce traffic generation within the study area may only be offset by a greater • propensity for drivers to divert to 66th Avenue via West River Road. Reference is given to Appendix A of this report which contains • tables which show the trip generation and traffic flow characteristics for the five alternatives being considered. 66th Avenue /Willow Lane Intersection During the course of the land use study discussions were under- taken regarding the impact and current design of the 66th Avenue/ Willow Lane intersection. In numerous meetings with City Staff and analysis of traffic and design issues in the area, a redesign of the intersection has come forward and is presented in this report. The alignment of West River Road was adjusted onto 66th • - 28 - • Avenue in conjunction with the T.H. 252 project completed a couple of years ago. Although West River Road access was moved east as part of this project, significant curves and safety features were yet unresolved. In addition, an existing frontage road south of 66th Avenue currently exists much closer to the • intersection area and creates a traffic flow and safety problem. Given these concerns, the City Engineering Department directed SEH to investigate the possibility of "redesigning" the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection to correct the deficiencies and concerns raised. Such direction developed out of discussions related to this land use study as well as an opportunity to resolve design issues that could be of benefit to the area in the • future. Consideration of a redesign of the intersection north of 66th Avenue was investigated and tied in with a recently completed study of West River Road. This design was brought forward by the City Engineering Department and has gained • ® approval from the City Council. The following Figure 9 shows the "redesign" of 66th Avenue/ Willow Lane intersection. Of note is the change in not only the West River Road curves north of 66th Avenue but the adjustment of • access onto Willow Lane south of the existing location. For purposes of this report, the entire intersection and West River Road "redesign" is shown because of the influence this has on the land use study. Specifically, the following features are presented: The West River Road curves immediately north of 66th Avenue are changed. The geometrics have been • calculated so as to reduce significant safety hazards. The actual access onto 66th Avenue has been retained. Removing or raizing the Mn /DOT field office (i.e., existing single family structure located in Area 1) • would be required. - 29 - • • - A "tear- drop" traffic delineation island has been • incorporated which directs traffic off of and onto T.H. 252. This feature relates to the redesign of West River Road as well as a "shift" of the access onto Willow Lane farther to the south. This would entail a • closure of 66th Avenue onto Willow Lane at its current location. - Direct access from 66th Avenue onto Willow Lane has • been eliminated. Shown is shifting the access point south of the existing location. This shift would reduce currently noticed "turn- around" traffic onto Willow Lane. The access would then be largely for neighborhood usage and the multi - family developments currently existing along Willow Lane and south of 65th Avenue. • - The incorporation of berming, walkway, and landscaping features along Willow Lane (Figure 10 and Figure 11) are shown. Such "Open Space" treatment could provide buffering to the existing single family residential neighborhood to the east of Willow Lane. Land uses adjacent to T.H. 252 in the western portion of Area 2 could then have less of a direct influence on the residential neighborhood by utilizing the roadway and open space as a transition area. (It should be noted • that the City is encouraged to further require adequate "on- site" landscaping and buffering techniques in site plan review of any development in the area). - Access from parcels to the west of the intersection (i.e., Atkins property, Brookdale Motel) would be encouraged onto the new roadway south of 66th Avenue. Such access would alleviate the need for the existing frontage road running along the western g 9 g portion of Area 2 and, thereby reducing the concerns of traffic flow and safety hazards. - 30 - • • Although some development potential would be reduced near the new connector road to Willow Lane, an even greater portion of developable property would become available to the west where the frontage road would be • vacated. This would serve to further reduce impacts to the single family homes along Willow Lane. In summary, the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection "redesign" • is included in this portion of the report to further analyze the various land use alternatives for the Study Area. It can be noted that Alternative E incorporates this feature for both engineering design and land use planning considerations. • • • • • • - 31 - r Ln cli ' . go -ww cm ME- 66TH AV LLJ ... r FILE NO. REDESIGN 1 i OF 66TH AVE AND 90030 WILLOW INTERSECTION WILL I BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA UFFERJ O�T A .� ® .. ® • a PIT 21 1 5� 5 % FT 18 V4. 4FT • , • • . • E PDT . .- 1 406 C-7 L PDT PUT 2OFT 1 1 1) 1 • ♦ � I.►I.�� � � .�1� �/��► � � .i 111' f:� ..•• '• , � • A i t1.r \Y �_�.'. #�•- • %�� /,• 1 ��� 111 ' ��4.1 :x:1-1 �= •�\ i �.v.�••_� 1� � ii, •1,11 .�' :• `�� \..rr` �O�i v'..v �. A/ =� . 1.1 �• : /i /I�l �{ �:. 4�w17J11�.1•a� I ' !••• •'•'!,•.( t:. :'�i!�i \Ld.�.:1..1c...�. .lii. n ' ' I• -7 L 3 - L­ • 1 • 3 -AM '• I' I DESIGN & DP AWN BY: CJ LILLY -7 B • • . / • • i • • C� WILLOW LANE LANDSCAPE BUFFER '1"O .�• \'E�1E AM BFT. b1 - OPr"S FkAD ZD DE AT A J'• 1 .SL07E TN 15 1'S • `` Lam TOD __T FoR A FC�DING LAwNnO�ER Ix `' :. TNLRE FORL, ShRUg CEOs /.RE t)?��1Ztfl N ALL SL.JDPE5 TOO STEEV TO TtOW . t� 10 51KE T2A11 WIILO�f �. • ' � J SECT 1 O T'� '• �t • • j a f, . 10' SAKE TaA1A_ Wtl.Lpw W �jEr-T10t1 : b J e— ..r L t • y t .� BFT. B CiCh _v W V-• SLAFE5. , 1o' a11cE �n11_ , � �u.ow w . • • FILE NO. Willow Lane Landscape Buffer F IGUR E � FIGURE ENGMIEERS • ARCM/TECTS • PLANNERS (cross-section) 1 1 • RECOMMENDATIONS • STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS As stated in the Introduction portion of this report the study has the purpose of identifying and analyzing the various land use alternatives for the subject project area (i.e., Area 1, Area 2, and Area 3). Taken into consideration are the City Zoning class- ifications and guidelines, the City Comprehensive Plan, and • existing as well as future development considerations for this portion of the community. The approach has been one of research and dialogue between the Consultant, City Staff, and the neighborhood as well as Planning Commission. • The Study accomplished bringing forth five main land use alter- natives (with two redevelopment options) for the area out of approximately forty -five zoning /land use combinations and • scenarios. Analysis was undertaken on each of the five alternatives and advantages as well as disadvantages were discussed. Taken into consideration was a traffic impact analysis for the various listed land uses as well as the "redesign" of the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection. Existing land uses and various site characteristics were also considered and evaluated. When taking all the evaluation information and associated traffic impact analysis into account, a reasonable land use alternative for the study area can be identified. This study recommends that Alternative E is both applicable and plausible for the area. The following points can be given in support of this recommendation: The study is consistent in recommending Area 1 be rezoned from the present R5 (Multiple Family Residen- tial) to Rl (Single Family Residential) classification. • Analysis finds that this change would better reflect the existing residential neighborhood to the north and • - 35 - • east as well as its relationship to West River Road as it approaches 66th Avenue. Access could be restricted to Willow Lane, similar to other residential lots in the vicinity. An adjustment and subsequent subdivision of property immediately to the north could be accomplished with a slight extension of Willow Lane (making Willow Lane a through street to the north is not recommended). The incorporation of landscaping and berming of open space areas is encouraged to reduce the influence of the 66th Avenue /T.H. 252 intersection noise. - The "redesign" of the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane inter- section is recommended and is viewed as a key element in the land uses presented in Alternative E. The study supports the "open space" and "buffering" concept this design creates. The direct "turn- around" traffic e issues and the avoidance of "direct" access onto Willow lane are positive features. The existing zoning of Area 2 would largely stay the same as currently shown. However, the influence the C2 (General Commercial) zone would have on the existing residential neighborhood east of Willow Lane is felt reduced by the incorporation of the intersection redesign. The R5 (Multiple Family) land use would then be restricted to the southern portion of the east half of Area 2 where the existing 18 unit apartment complex is located. The Brookdale Motel would continue to be an allowable use on the southwest portion of Area 2. A gas station /convenience center /car wash would require a Special Use Permit on the C2 portion of the Atkins property. All site plan elements as well as opera- tional aspects of the proposal would be reviewed and • approved by the City. - 36 - CITY OF AREA 1 BROOKLYN CENTER • 66th, AVENUE LAND USE STUDY 0 f • a OUT ro snit d LEGEND (� EXIST. BUILDINGS x PROPERTY LINES s� • AREA 2 GM AW. 'A El oC�5 CD • AREA 3 41 • S tud dti FILE NO. a AdW y-- Recommenaon 90030 Asel FIGURE • EW- V*TiP5 / MKNRFCTS 1 PLANNERS ( Alternative E) 12 37 - • - The study is consistent in supporting the current • designation of Area 3 as R5 (Multiple Family Resi- dential). Such a zoning /land use classification is felt appropriate for the area and is based on discussions and analysis highlighted earlier in this 7 report. In summary, this study recommends Alternative E as both appro- priate and applicable for the study area. Taken into • consideration is the analysis of traffic impacts and the existing as well as future development potential for the area. In addition, the study also allows any possible future involvement from the City and /or Developer(s) in undertaking portions of Area • 2 and /or Area 3 as a redevelopment project. Under this scenario, a Planned Unit Development (PUD) plan could be formulated which would create an integrated land use direction. Taking this into consideration, City involvement (as reflected in Alternative D) • is a step in that direction. NEIGHBORHOOD /ADVISORY GROUP MEETING On November 28, 1989, a meeting was held with the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group and interested neighbors and property • owners in the study area (note Appendix B). The purpose of this meeting was to present various findings of the study and review the five land use alternatives that were being taken into consideration. • A great deal of discussion and comments were received as a result of the meeting. Issues and concerns related to various aspects of the presented alternatives. In conjunction with this discus- sion the issue of a proposed gas station /convenience center /car wash on the Atkins property was also brought forward. Impact on the residential neighborhood in terms of both land use and • traffic were discussed. Also discussed was the "redesign" of the • 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection and how that design would relate to the neighborhood as an open space and buffering feature. • - 38 - • • • No specific Land Use Alternative recommendation for Area 2 was relayed by the Northeast Advisory Group to the Planning Commission. However, there was support of the "redesign" of the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection. In addition, designating Area 1 as R1 (Single Family Residential) and continuing Area 3 as R5 (Multiple Family Residential) received general approval. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING • On December 7, 1989, the Planning Commission held a meeting in which the subject Land Use Study was on the agenda (note Appendix C). • Similar to the Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting, the five alternatives and associated traffic impact analysis was reviewed and discussed (minutes from the Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting were sent to Planning Commission members for their • • review). Findings on the future status of the T.H. 252/66th Avenue intersection were presented and a likely change of Level of Service (LOS) E to Level of Service (LOS) F was explained in terms of the overall traffic flow on T.H. 252 itself. • The Planning Commission discussed various aspects of the five alternatives as well as the "redesign" of the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection. Further public input was allowed and entered • into the minutes. The recommendation and motion by the Planning Commission largely supports Alternative E of the Land Use Study. However, one • important difference is the Commission's designation of the west half of Area 2 as C1 (Service /Office). Other elements of the recommendation support the "redesign" of the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection with associated open space, landscaping, and • berming treatment. Designating Area 1 as Rl (Single Family Residential) and continuing R5 (Multiple Family Residential) on the southwest portion of Area 2 and all of Area 3 was also supported by the Planning Commission. • - 39 - • CITY OF e AREA 1 - - - BROOKLYN CENTER • 66th, AVENUE LAND USE STUDY 4 Q • rl HOT M srxc LEGEND C� EXIST. BUILDINGS Q • x PROPERTY LINES • AREA 2 •QDI MC a g Cl • AREA 3 CD a Cl • • e i Planninq Commission goo 0 e Recommendation FIGURE • EMGMfXW5 4 ARCNlTT<TS 1 PLANNERS n 13 • SUMMARY This report has researched, analyzed, and presented various land use alternatives for the subject study area. Through this • effort, as well as meetings with City Staff, a feasible and practical plan is presented which incorporates realistic zoning /land use designations. • Recommended is Alternative E of the land use scenario which reflects a change in Area 1 of the study to R1 (Single Family Residential), a "redesign" of the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane inter- section, support of the currently designated zoning /land use of • Area 2 as C2 (General Commercial) and R5 (Multiple Family Resi- dential), and the continuation of Area 3 as R5 (Multiple Family Residential). • The study further supports any redevelopment efforts by the City and /or individual developer(s) in formulating a Planned Unit Development (PUD) concept for the area. • MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES Sidewalk /Trail - This study has reviewed and incorporated support for a sidewalk system as it continues along West River Road, Willow Lane, and connects to the Hennepin County Trail System • south under the Mississippi Bridge. Open Space /Parks - The open space associated with the "redesign" of the 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection is presented as a "buffer" to the residential neighborhood east of Willow Lane. • Although berming and landscaping treatments are recommended, this area should not be viewed as a "Park" area. The sidewalk would provide a linkage to established park areas in the eastern • portion of the community as well as a connection to the Hennepin County Trail System. • - 41 - • • Legal Issues - It is not the purpose or intent of this study to • delve into the legal aspects of zoning and land use issues. However, all planning studies should take into consideration the practicality and legal aspects of various land use designations. The "taking issue" when dealing with the change in zoning and '• land use should be carefully analyzed prior to formal action by the City. Reference is given to Section 35 -208 of the City Zoning Ordinance entitled "Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines ". Particular attention is given to Part 4 of that • section which sets forth nine questions that must be answered in relation to any rezoning proposal. • • - 42 - • i A P P E N D I C E S • • f APPENDIX A • TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS OF ALTERNATIVES • 1 • 1 e • ALTERNATIVE A, POTENTIAL TRIP GENERATION UNDER EXISTING ZONING AM AM PM PM Zoning ADT In Out In Out Area 1 R1 12 1 1 1 1 Area 2 C2 (west half) 3,022 53 23 148 155 R5 (east half) 201 3 15 15 7 Area 3 R5 525 8 38 39 19 Total 3,760 65 77 203 182 142 385 I i C2 trip generation was calculated using a 25,000 square foot I ,• shopping enter as the specific g land use. - Approximately 11 percent of the study area ADT (average daily traffic) occurs during the p.m. peak hour, while only 4 percent occurs during the a.m. peak hour. s - During the p.m. peak hour, the residents would be Joined by approximately 150 new trips entering the neighborhood enroute to the C2 land uses. - The C2 land uses can be expected to generate approximately 80 j percent of the total study area ADT. This percentage could be greater (due to higher trip generation) if the C2 area were to develop under a more intensive commercial land use such as a gas station or fast food restaurant. s • ALTERNATIVE B • AM AM PM PM Zoning ADT In Out In Out Area 1: Rl 12 1 1 1 1 Area 2: *C2 3,022 53 23 148 155 Cl 539 60 9 11 59 Area 3: R5 525 8 38 39 19 4,098 122 71 199 234 193 433 • - Approximately 11$ of the average daily trips occur during the p.m. peak hour, with only 5% occurring during the a.m. peak hour. Therefore, approximately 84% of the traffic (3,442 trips) will occur during non -peak hours, such as throughout the workday and in the evening after the p.m. peak hour. During the evening peak hour, the residents will be joined by • nearly 200 other vehicles entering the neighborhood at 66th Street. During the a.m. peak, only 71 vehicles are expected to be exiting the study area, adding slightly over one trip per minute to the single family residential traffic exiting the neighborhood. An average of two trips per minute would be entering the site during the a.m. peak hour under this scenario. • The C2 portion of the study area generates 74% of the ADT under this scenario. *C2 trips calculated for shopping center at 0.25 FAR. • ALTERNATIVE B 2 : AM AM PM PM Zoning ADT In Out In Out i Area 1: R1 12 1 1 1 1 Area 2: * *C2 5,716 248 237 223 207 C1 539 60 9 11 59 Area 3: R5 525 8 38 39 19 6,792 317 285 274 286 • 602 560 * *C2 trips calculated for gas station, fast food restaurant and sit - down restaurant. • • - The C2 portion of the study area generates 84% of the average daily traffic (ADT) under this scenario, demonstrating one of the most intense patterns of development which could occur if the west half of Area 2 is zoned C2. During both peak hours, traffic is split nearly 50 %/50% between inbound and outbound. ! - Peak hour traffic makes up 17% of the ADT. - Over 5,630 trips could be expected to occur during non -peak hours of traffic, such as over the lunch hour and dinner hours. • • • • • • ALTERNATIVE C L • AM AM PM PM Zoning ADT In Out In Out Area 1: Rl 12 1 1 1 1 • Area 2: Cl 923 110 17 17 110 Area 3: R5 525 8 38 39 19 1,460 119 56 57 130 175 187 • - The bulk of trips occur during peak hours, with 12% during the a.m. peak and 13% during the evening. Most of the remaining 75% of trips (690) would be produced by the offices in Area 2, and would occur during normal workday hours (8:30 - 4:30). Eighty percent of the apartment trips (42) in Area 3 can also be expected to occur during the non -peak hours. • - Strong directional flow, with heavy inbound volumes during the a.m. peak hour and heavy outbound volumes during the p.m. peak hour. • • • • ALTERNATIVE C AM AM PM PM Zoning ADT In Out In Out Area 1: R1 12 1 1 1 1 Area 2: Cl 923 110 17 17 110 Area 3: Cl 1,107 137 20 25 130 2,042 248 38 43 241 286 284 - Bulk of trips occur during peak hours (14% a.m., 14% p.m.), with remaining 72%- of the traffic spread mostly over the workday hours (between 8:30 a.m, and 4:30 p.m.). Strong directional flow, with heavy inbound volumes during the • a.m. peak hour and heavy outbound volumes during the p.m. peak hour. Office traffic flow is for the most part, opposite of the flow of traffic from the residential neighborhood. • ALTERNATIVE C AM AM PM PM Zoning ADT In Out In Out Area 1: R1 12 1 1 1 1 '♦ Area 2: R5 409 6 30 30 15 Area 3: R5 525 8 38 39 19 946 15 69 70 35 84 105 • - Nine percent of the trips will occur during the a.m. peak, while approximately 11 percent will occur duirng the p.m. peak hour. The remaining 80 percent of the traffic is spread throughout the day and evening /night hours. - This alternative has the lowest potential trip generation. • • • ALTERNATIVE D: AM AM PM PM Zoning ADT In Out In Out Area 1: R1 12 1 1 1 1 Area 2: City Acquire and Redevelop (north half) ? ? ? ? ? C2 (so. quarter) 1,872 34 6 102 104 R5 (so. quarter) 134 2 10 10 5 Area 3: R5 525 8 38 39 19 2,543+ 45+ 55+ 152+ 129+ 100+ 281+ - The trip generation under this scenario would be greater than that shown above. A more accurate estimation could be made after a decision is made as to the land use of the redevelopment • portion of the study area. • • • • • ALTERNATIVE E: NOTE: Redesign of 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection. Open space and berming. AM AM PM PM Zoning ADT In Out In Out Area 1: R1 12 1 1 1 1 Area 2: C2 (west half) 3,022 53 23 148 155 R5 (east half) 153 2 11 11 6 Area 3: R5 525 8 38 39 19 3,712 64 73 199 181 137 380 Only four percent of the ADT occurs during the a.m. peak hour, while approximately 10 percent occurs during the p.m. peak hour. The remaining 86 percent (3,195 trips) of the ADT will be spread throughout the day. Trip generation for the C2 zoning in Area 2 was calculated assuming a 25,000 square foot retail center. • PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NOTE: Redesign of 66th Avenue /Willow Lane intersection, open space and berming. AM AM PM PM Zonin ADT In Out In Out Area 1: R1 12 1 1 1 1 Area 2: C1 (west half) 567 62 9 12 60 R5 (east half) 153 2 11 11 6 Area 3: R5 525 8 38 39 19 i 1,257 73 59 63 86 132 149 Eleven percent of the traffic generated by this land use scenario occurs during the a.m. peak hour, while 12 percent occurs during the p.m. peak hour. Most of the traffic generated by the C1 land use in Area 2 is traveling in the opposite direction of the residential traffic during the peak hours. • s i r APPENDIX B NEIGHBORHOOD /ADVISORY GROUP - MEETING MINUTES CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF :BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY — POLICE — FIRE 911 November 20, 1989 Re: Notice of Public Meeting Regarding the Land Use Study Being Conducted for the T.H. 252/66 Avenue North Area Dear Sir /Madam: The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center adopted an interim ordinance that established a moratorium on the development of certain uses in the T. H. 252/66th Avenue North area in June of this year. The moratorium allows the City to undertake and complete a Land Use Study that might lead to the possible adoption of various amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance and /or Comprehensive Plan. The City has retained the consulting firm of Short - Elliott Hendrickson (SEH) to undertake such a study and to advise the City on the best use of land in this area. The study has begun and the City intends to hold a neighborhood meeting to discuss the progress of the study to this date. The purpose of the study is to attempt to e make a judgment on the best use of land in this area for all parties concerned which would provide a good buffer for the single - family residential property in the area from the possible adverse affects of a highly traveled T. H. 252 and a possibly highly commercialized area along this roadway. A proposal for a gasoline station, convenience store, car wash in this immediate area has been discussed, but has been put on hold, pending completion of the City's study. It is our intention to discuss the study and present various options to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group and to interested neighbors and property owners in this area. The meeting will be held in the City Council Chambers at the Brooklyn Center City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway on Tuesday evening, November 28, 1989. The meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. You are invited to attend the meeting and to make comments and recommendations at that time. This matter will be discussed further at an upcoming Planning Commission meeting. If you have any questions or comments regarding the above, please contact me. ,__� cerely, // `"'^-`.-ice l.�t . (✓� -� Ronald A. Warren � C Director of Planning and Inspectij�� rouauuunc,an :•� RAW:mll �' f I � MEMORANDUM TO: NORTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD ADVISORY GROUP e Ella Sander 566 -0460 Douglas Peter 566 -8558 Douglas Baker 561 -5814 Curtis Danielson 561 -8268 Steve Boone 560 -8601 • Ray Haroldson 561 -2092 FROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection DATE: November 20, 1989 SUBJECT: Neighborhood Meeting Regarding the Land Use Study being conducted for The T. H. 252/66th Avenue North Area As I am certain you are aware, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center has adopted an interim ordinance that established a moratorium on the development of certain uses in the T. H. 252/66th Avenue North area of Brooklyn Center pending the completion of a Land Use Study that might lead to the possible adoption of amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance and /or Comprehensive Plan. The City has retained the consulting firm of Short - Elliott- Hendrickson (SEH) to undertake such a study and to advise the City on the best use of land in this area for all parties concerned which would provide a good buffer for the single - family ! residential property in the area from the possible adverse affects of a highly traveled T. H. 252 and a possibly highly commerialized area along this roadway. It is our intention to discuss the study and to present various options to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group and interested neighbors and property owners in this area. The meeting will be held in the City Council Chambers at the Brooklyn ! Center City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway on Tuesday evening, November 28, 1989. The meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. and you are invited to attend and to make comments and recommendations at this meeting. The matter will be discussed further at an upcoming Planning Commission meeting. If you have any questions or comments regarding the above, or care to discuss this • matter further, please contact me. e • • AGENDA BROOKLYN CENTER- Land -Use Study Neighborhood Meeting November 28, 1989 i 7:00 p.m. Purpose: To meet with the Neighborhood Advisory Group and other people from the area to discuss the project as it relates to '• land -use and future development. I. INTRODUCTION * Welcome /Open Meeting • * Introduce Agenda (PURPOSE of meeting) * Overview - History - Status - Process * Introduce people • City Staff SEH Neighborhood Advisory Group II. PROJECT BACKGROUND / ALTERNATIVES • Project description ( Area 1, Area 2, Area 3) • Site Characteristics • Review of Land -Use Alternatives • • Review of Design Elements (ie: 66th /Willow Intersection) (ie: frontage road) III. PUBLIC INPUT Moderator: (resource panel will address applicable issues) • Neighborhood Advisory Group • Area property owners/ residents IV. CONCLUSION �i . * Summary /Recommendations 1 i MINUTES OF THE NORTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD ADVISORY GROUP . NOVEMBER 28, 1989 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting was called to order by Planning Commission Secretary Ronald Warren at 7:04 p.m. ROLL CALL Those present included advisory group member Curt Danielson, Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, Planner Gary Shallcross and Consultant Randy Thoreson from Short - Elliott- Hendrickson. BACKGROUND OF LAND USE STUDY Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren introduced himself to the residents in attendance and also introduced Curt Danielson and explained the purpose of Neighborhood Advisory Groups. He then introduced the Planner and the Consultant as individuals who had particpated in preparing the study of the land in the area of 66th and West River Road to this point. Mr. Warren then reviewed a background of the Land Use Study of the area between Willow Lane and Highway 252 north of I94 and up to and including the MN /DOT house just north of 66th Avenue North. He explained that, earlier this year, there was a proposal to rezone a sliver of land adjacent to the existing C2 zone south of 66th from R5 to C2 to accommodate a gas station, convenience store and car wash. He explained that when the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group originally considered this rezoning proposal, it recommended that the entire lot be rezoned to e C1. He went on to explain that the Planning Commission considered this recommendation and in turn recommended a moratorium and a study regarding three areas: 1) the MN /DOT property just north of 66th; 2) the block bounded by 65th on the south and 66th on the north and by Willow Lane on the east and Highway 252 on the west; and 3) the land south of 65th Avenue North and west of Willow Lane presently occupied by the Lyn River apartment complex. He stated that the City Council agreed to this recommendation and contracted with Short - Elliott- Hendrickson to do a Land Use Study of these three areas. He then introduced Randy Thoreson from Short - Elliott- Hendrickson to review the various land use alternatives for these three areas. REVIEW OF STUDY AREAS AND LAND USE ALTERNATIVES Mr. Randy Thoreson, of Short - Elliott - Hendrickson, then reviewed a number of alternatives for the three study areas. The first alternative was to leave the existing zoning as is. The second alternative was for Area 1 to be R1, Area 2 to be C2 on the west and C1 on the east, and Area 3 to continue as R5. The third alternative was to have Area 1 be R1, Area 2 be entirely C1 and Area 3 to remain R5. He also reviewed other alternatives including one where Area 1 would be R1 and Areas 2 and 3 would be for multiple family and an alternative where Area -1 would be R1 and Areas 2 and 3 would be C1. He reviewed some of the pros and cons of these various alternatives. He concluded with a review of two other alternatives. One alternative would be to make Area 1, R1 and Area 2 would be a City redevelopment on all of the Atkins property and leave the rest of the land south of the Atkins property as existing. The final alternative was to redesign and rebuild the intersection of West River Road and 66th • Avenue North and extend a roadway down through part of the Atkins property and create a buffer area in the northeast corner of the property and leave the rest of the zoning as is. 11 -28 -89 -1- • Mr. Curt Danielson asked what City participation would be in the buffer. Mr. Thoreson responded that the City would acquire and install the green area. Mr. Danielson and Mr. Thoreson discussed the idea of the buffer and Mr. Thoreson showed a graphic of the redesigned intersection on an overhead projector. A resident asked what would be in the area between the new street and Willow Lane. Mr. Thoreson • responded that a berm and landscaping would probably be installed. Mr. Thoreson briefly reviewed the layout of the street redesigned and a walkway which would move through the area. Regarding Area 1 (the MN /DOT property), Mr. Thoreson stated that he and the City staff had looked at this area and concluded that it was not viable for either commercial or multiple - family development and that about all that could be put on it was a single - family home. • Mr. Warren then explained to those people present that there were actually two studies being conducted at the same time in the same general area and by the same consultant, Short - Elliott- Hendrickson. He explained that the study that was being discussed at this evening's meeting was a Land Use Study of the area at and primarily south of the intersection of 66th Avenue North and West River Road. He pointed out • that there is also a study being conducted of West River Road itself north of 66th and that some of the residents at this evening's meeting may have been at meetings regarding that study. Mr. Warren explained that they had looked at the MN /DOT property for some sort of buffer use and had concluded that both C1 uses and the multiple- family were not viable on the property. He stated that the only alternative was to allow for single - family development and that a physical buffer • would probably have to be created to protect that single - family home. Mr. Thoreson reviewed the last alternative as being that Area 1 would be R1 property; Area 2 would be C2 on the west and the buffer and roadway and the existing multiple - family on the east; and that Area 3 would remain multiple - family. He reviewed some of the challenges presented by this area for the Land Use Study. • A woman present asked how the redesign option would affect cars wanting to go north on Highway 252. Mr. Thoreson reviewed some of the facts about the intersection of 66th Avenue North and Highway 252. He noted that there are only two lanes and that the right lane has three options: to turn left, to go straight ahead, or to turn right. He stated that this results in some backup in the right lane. Mr. Warren explained that the northerly portion of the redesigned intersection which would • include a large teardrop shape median has been looked at by the City Council. He explained that the large teardrop was to allow trucks to turn around within 66th rather than going either north or south on Willow Lane. He explained that the redesign of the southerly portion of the intersection would do away with a straight shot into the residential neighborhood along Willow Lane. • A woman resident asked regarding parks in the area, indicating that there was a need for more places for children to play in this area. Mr. Thoreson responded that the buffer area would not necessarily be designated as a park, though it would constitute public open space. Mr. Warren added that the area would be landscaped and that hopefully the roadway realignment would help provide better access to the park further north on West River Road. Another resident stated that kids would play • wherever there is open space. Mr. Warren acknowledged that there were a number of kids in the area and commented that it would probably be better for them to play on the berm created in the buffer area than in the street. A resident asked what the distance would be between Willow Lane and the new street on the other side of the buffer. Mr. Warren responded that it would probably be 60' to • 80 The resident asked whether the City had considered a block wall as opposed to a • berm. Mr. Warren answered that the City had looked at berming and landscaping to 11 -28 -89 -2- • • provide a screening treatment in as aesthetic a manner as possible, but that no final . design has been looked at. He noted that other alternatives could be considered. Another resident asked whether the City had considered extending the berm north of 66th to rovide additional screening for those homes also north of th P 66 Mr. Rand g Y • Thoreson answered that the City has looked at that and that it would be advisable to do so. A woman resident inquired as to the movement of vehicles around the teardrop shaped median in 66th and the way of getting onto 66th to go north. Mr. Warren and Mr. Thoreson reviewed the layout of the revised intersection plan. They explained that '• there would be stop signs for both northbound and southbound traffic so that cars would be able to move onto 66th during the interruptions. Mr. Warren added that Willow Lane may be extended somewhat northward, but that the City does not want to connect the southerly leg of Willow Lane with the northerly leg. He expressed the concern that this could become another through street which would be undesirable for the residential neighborhood. II• In response to a question from another resident, Mr. Warren and Mr. Thoreson discussed the plans for the frontage road along Highway 252 south of 66th Avenue North. They indicated that a portion, or all of this area might be vacated. One of the residents along Willow Lane brought up the issue of land use and the option • of continuing multiple - family land use south of 66th. He stated that there are more young kids now and he questioned whether multiple- family is an ideal land use in this area. Mr. Warren responded that the zoning regulations for the multiple - family districts regulate building types, but cannot regulate the type of occupants. He pointed out that the apartment units allowed in the R5 zone could all be one bedroom units which would involve very few children. He noted, however, that two bedroom • • units are allowed and that some three bedroom units can be comprehended. He added that the City's Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance allows many people to occupy a dwelling unit, possibly up to six individuals in a two bedroom apartment. The resident commented that in looking at land uses, a light commercial use might be a preferable use, but may not be practical from an economic standpoint. He acknowledged that a multiple - family use may be an appropriate buffer, but does also • present some problems for the neighborhood. Another resident commented that he did not feel high density residential should be located next to single - family. Mr. Warren stated that a multiple - family complex can be a good neighbor, if it is maintained well. He pointed out, however, that a Zoning Ordinance cannot control the maintenance of property, including single - family property. The resident inquired as to the license for the apartment complex at 65th and Willow Lane. Mr. • Warren briefly reviewed the history of the 18 unit apartment complex north of 65th on Willow Lane. He pointed out that the owner had been given a year to fix up the property and that he had been lax in meeting that deadline. He stated that the owner may have to post a guarantee to insure completion of maintenance items before the license can be renewed. He added that revoking the license may be justified, but that if that is done, the maintenance of the complex may get worse in the short run. • A woman resident asked what was the minimum necessary land area for a park. Mr. Warren responded that it depended on the use of the park. He noted that a small play lot could be developed on a fairly small parcel. In response to another question regarding 66th Avenue North, Mr. Thoreson explained that the intersection at 66th Avenue and West River Road is presently at level of service E. He stated that the • level of service for that intersection will almost certainly go to "F" regardless of whether or not the Atkins property is developed. Mr. Warren and Mr. Thoreson went on to discuss briefly some of the traffic patterns and traffic movements in the area of this intersection. 11 -28 -89 -3- • • In response to a question from a resident regarding the traffic pattern of various land uses, Mr. Warren explained that office uses have an earlier evening peak hour and that it is more concentrated than general commercial uses. He added that general commercial uses may involve more overall traffic, but that the peak is less concentrated. The resident pointed out the traffic from the gas station would come • out on the resdesigned road and would create some problems for residents in the area which need to use that road as a way out of the neighborhood. Another resident stated that he did not feel a gas station, even with a buffer, is a good tradeoff for the neighborhood. Another resident asked a representative of Superamerica how much land was needed for the Superamerica across Highway 252. Mr. Bud Kaupp, of Superamerica, answered that he was not certain of the land area. Planner Gary Shallcross stated that he thought the area of that parcel was approximately two acres. He pointed out that the Superamerica store would be approximately 8,000 sq.ft. whereas the Fina store proposed for Mr. Atkins' property was closer to 2,500 sq. ft. • One of the residents along Willow Lane stated that he felt the matter had probably already been decided and that the City was simply going through the formality of a public meeting without really wanting to consider any other possibilities. Mr. Warren responded that the City is looking for input. He reviewed some of the options for the Land Use Study, especially Area 2 which contains the Atkins property. • Mr. Curtis Danielson, of the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group, asked the residents to comment as to their feelings regarding the proposed berm and buffer. One resident responded that it was o.k., but that it would not screen the proposed service station. Another resident stated that if the service station is built, property values in the area will go down and that the berm will be insufficient to • screen the station. Mr. Warren stated that another option was for the City to acquire all of Mr. Atkins' Property. He reviewed for the residents the legal context of the existing zoning and land use of Mr. Atkins' property and the need to offer a fair price for the property. He also reviewed uses allowed in various zoning districts which could be • considered for this area. He noted that, under some zoning schemes, some or all of the uses on the block would become nonconforming uses. Mr. Warren went on to state that there are a variety of issues confronting this area, among them: transportation, land use, property maintenance, and property rights. Mr. Danielson stated that he felt the alternative of providing a redesigned • intersection at 66th and West River Road and a berm was a viable alternative and should be considered seriously. Mr. Warren stated that the matter would go to the Planning Commission on December 7 and that notices would be sent to the same people that received a notice of this meeting. Mr. Thoreson explained that his firm had narrowed the range of options from 45 different alternatives down to about five. He stated that he saw a value in the buffer with a berm alternative. He also explained • that the City could not rule out a gas station on the basis of traffic impact alone. One resident stated that he did favor the redesigned road to provide a buffer from the service station use. Another resident acknowledged that the City probably had to choose between the lesser of two evils. He stated that if a station had to be developed, then a berm might be the best buffer from such a use. The resident added • that the City should use its discretion in approving a special use permit to control other aspects of the development plan. • 11 -28 -89 -4- • • ADJOURNMENT Mr. Warren thanked the residents and Mr. Danielson for coming to the meeting and indicated that the business of the meeting had been concluded. The meeting • adjourned at 9: p.m. • • • • • • • • • 11 -28 -89 -5- • APPENDIX C PLANNING COMMISSION - MEETING MINUTES • PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DECEMBER 7, 1989 • REGULAR SESSION 1. Call to Order: 7:30 p.m. 2. Roll Call • 3. Approval of Minutes - November 16, 1989 4. Chairperson's Explanation: The Planning Commission is an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these • hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. 5. Mary Ziebarth 89025 • "�, Request for special use permit approval to conduct group dance lessons in the basement of the residence at 5329 4th Street North. A similar application was approved for this location in 1984. 6. Other Business a) Land Use Study of area at 66th Avenue North and West River • , Road 7. Discussion Items 8. Adjournment • • • • • MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMPt>✓S q OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY' HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA - 11' E1! REGULAR SESSION DECEMBER 7, 1989 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by • Chairperson Molly Malecki at 7:33 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Molly Malecki, Commissioners Wallace Bernards, Lowell Ainas and Kristen Mann. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Recording Secretary Mary Lou Larsen. The Secretary noted Bertil Johnson was • out of town and was excused and that Commissioner Ella Sander would be late. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - November 16, 1989 Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Mann to approve the minutes of the November 16, 1989 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas and Mann. Voting against: • '� none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 89025 (Mary Ziebarth) The Secretary stated the applicant called this morning to withdraw her application as she has found another location for her home occupation. Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Mann to acknowledge withdrawal of Application No. • • 89025 submitted by Mary Ziebarth for special use permit approval to conduct group dance/baton twirling lessons in her home at 5329 4th Street North. Voting in favor: 14 Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas and Mann. Voting against: none. The motion passed. 1990 PLANNING CCMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE • The Secretary asked for a motion to approve the 1990 Planning Commission meeting schedule previously sent to the Commissioners. Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve the 1990 schedule for Planning Commission meetings. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, and Mann. Voting against: none. The motion passers. • The Secretary stated that Chairperson Malecki and Commissioners Johnson and Sander's terms would be expiring on December 31, 1989 and asked if they wished to continue for another two year term. Chairperson Malecki answered in the affirmative. The Secretary explained that Commissioner James McCloskey had moved out of the City and would no longer be a member. • DISCUSSION ITEM a) Land Use Study of area at 66th Avenue North and West River Road The Secretary stated the last item of business on this evening's meeting is the Land Use Study of the area at 66th Avenue North and West River Road. He explained the • matter had first come to the Planning Commission's attention through a rezoning 0 proposal (Application No. 89006) submitted by the owner of the property, Howard Atkins, for approval to rezone a sliver of land adjacent to the existing C2 zone south of 66th Avenue from R5 to C2 to accommodate a gas station, convenience store 12 -7 -89 -1- • i and car wash. He stated the application was first considered by the Planning Commission on February 16, 1989 tabled and referred to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. He stated the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group was scheduled to meet on March 14, 1989 but was cancelled due to a snowstorm, however, some interested citizens did come to the meeting and an informal discussion was held. He stated the meeting was rescheduled for March 21, 1989, and at that meeting the neighborhood group recommended against the C2 rezoning and recommended instead that the property between 66th, 65th and Willow Lane and 252 be rezoned to C1. He noted the neighborhood group believes that C1 would be the best use of the property and a good buffer for the residential area. He stated the application went back to the Planning Commission for consideration on April 13, 1989 whereby a recommendation was made to set aside the application and establish a moratorium to prohibit certain development until a land use study of the area could be undertaken and completed. The Secretary then introduced Randy Thoreson, a consultant with Short-Elliott- Hendrickson (SEH), who is doing the land use study. Mr. Thoreson stated that a meeting had been held with the Northeast Neighborhood Group and residents of the area on November 28, 1989 to discuss various alternatives and to allow the residents an opportunity to express their opinions. He stated that of 45 various land use alternatives considered, it had been narrowed down to 5. He then reviewed transparencies illustrating the various areas and alternatives. He explained i ^ Study Area 1 is 1 acre, Study Area 2, 4.75 acres and Study Area 3 is 5.75 acres. He noted that the following alternatives are being considered: Alternative Awould be to leave the zoning the way it currently is with the exception of Study Area 1, which should be rezoned to Rl ( Single . Family Residential). i Alternative B comprehends Area 1 being R1 (Single Family Residential); Area 2 being a combination of C2 (Commerce) on the west and C1 (Service /Office) on the east; and Area 3 being R5 (Multiple Family Residential). Alternative C comprehends Area 1 being R1 (Single Family Residential); Area 2 being all C1 (Service /Office); and Area 3 as R5 (Multiple Family Residential). At this point Mr. Thoreson noted that it was recommended, as indicated in all of the various alternatives, that Study Area 1 be changed to Rl i (Single Family Residential). He explained that the City has looked at, and is committed to, seeking a redesign of the West River Road frontage road in the area immediately north of 66th Avenue which will "soften" the curve, necessitating using a portion of the MN/DOT property. The redesign also envisions a teardrop shaped island that will better control traffic in this area that is using the 66th Avenue /T. H. 252 intersection and also West River Road and Willow Lane. He briefly reviewed the proposed redesign on an overhead transparency. Mr. Thoreson further noted that with all the alternatives being considered, Study Area 3 is comprehended as R5 (Multiple Family Residential). He explained, that, from a zoning or land use perspective the multiple family residential as allowed under the City's Zoning Ordinance is an appropriate buffer from T. H. 252 to the single family residential land use east of Willow Lane. He cautioned that he was not saying the existing apartments were necessarily a good neighbor, but that the land use (multiple residential) was appropriate. He added that it was his ' 'i 12 -7 -89 -2- 4 i understanding that the City was attempting to correct the maintenance problems at these complexes through its licensing procedures. • Mr. Thoreson also noted that there could be a couple of sub alternativ • es off of Alternative C for Stud Area 2 that being all R Y � g 5 or all C2. He pointed out that the area under study is unique in that you get a different perspective of the area depending upon where you are located. He explained that if you are at the intersection of T. H. 252 and 66th Avenue North, you are in a high traffic area which seems that a highly commercialized zone would be appropriate; while • if you are looking at the area east of Willow Lane at 65th Avenue North, a lower density residential use seems most appropriate. Alternative D comprehends Area 1 being Rl (Single Family Residential) and Area 3 being R5 (Multiple Family Residential). With respect to Area 2, the City would be involved by acquiring and developing an area • Which Would be designed in such a way as to provide a new access to the Forth 'Willow Lane residential area and also a large buffer /landscape /berm area to screen and buffer the area from some of the adverse effects of the T. H. 252 area. The City would acquire all of the Atkins property and later decide, or try to influence a redevelopment of this area, perhaps with a mixture of uses. • Alternative E also comprehends Area 1 being R1 (Single Family ,Residential) and Area 3 being R5 (Multiple Family Residential) and a roadway redesign involving a buffer /landscaping/berm area with the City only acquiring the necessary land from the Atkins property to construct the roadway and buffer area and to then allow the existing • C2 (Coerce) land use to continue. This would allow the gas station/convenience store /car wash proposal to proceed as a special use perm i. t . Mr. Tboreson then reviewed the minutes of November 28, 1989 Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting . He pointed out various portions of the minutes that were • concerns for residents in the area. A discussion ensued regarding traffic concerns. Mr. Thoreson showed a graphic illustrating level of service E and F. He stated a redesign of the intersection ion Wowld help the traffic problem, but explained that this study is not a traffic study, but rather a Land Use Study. He noted a correction to the minutes at the bottom of • PaBe 3. He stated that he is attributed with saying "if Mr. Atkins property is developed, the level of service for that intersection (T. H. 252/66th Avenue North) 'rill almost certainly go to "F ". Mr. Thoreson clarified that the intersection of T. H. 252/66th Avenue North will go to a level service "F" regardless of whether Mr. Atkins property is developed /redeveloped or not, or what land use is eventually developed/redeveloped there. The Secretary summarized the five alternatives as leaving the area alone on one hand, to the City acquiring property and providing a redesigned access to Willow Lane with a buffer /landscape/berm area on the other hand. In between, he noted, could be various different land uses in Study Area 2, with Study Area 1 being R1 (Single Family Residential) and Study Area 3 remaining R5 (Multiple Family Residential). 12 -7 -89 -3- • • Further discussion ensued regarding traffic in the Willow Lane area and City acquisition and participation in development f P p o the ro ert The Secretary asked P A Y Y the Commission for . direction and suggested gg d that the meeting be opened for public comment P PUBLIC HEARING • Chairperson Malecki then opened the meeting for a public comment and asked if anyone present wished to speak. Bill Hannay, 6 Willow Lane, asked for clarification of the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group's recommendation of rezoning Area 2 to C1 • (Service /Office). The Secretary explained that the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group, in March, 1989, recommended the area be rezoned to C1 . He explained that if the City had rezoned this area to C1, the Brookdale Motel and the apartment complex would then have become nonconforming uses in that zone. He added that the proposal would have prevented development of the gas station as well. He explained that the Neighborhood Advisory Group recommendation is one of the Alternatives • noted by the consultant, at least as it relates to Study Area 2. The Secretary stated that the City would, in all likelihood, pursue the redesign of the intersection at West River Road north of 66th no matter how the property in the study was rezoned. Mr. Hannay stated he favors the teardrop intersection design, R1 zoning for Area 1, but has concerns for Area 2 if zoned C2. He asked what the City • can do if a business is abandoned. The Secretary answered that it would depend on the zoning. For instance, C2 allows General Commerce which is a variety of businesses and uses which could be allowed in the future, but particular uses would have to meet ordinance requirements such as parking requirements. Mr. Hannay asked if action can be taken by the City to demolish an abandoned building. The Secretary answered that is an option if that building becomes a hazard. . • Richard Jewitt, 6552 Willow Lane, stated that even with a berm there will still be a traffic problem. He stated that he has trouble ettin out onto West River Roa d now g g and with a as station added t g , i will be a bigger problem. The Secretary stated that with the redesign, traffic could exit north onto T. H. 252 better. Mr. Jewitt stated a gas station would create more traffic and chaos. Mr. Thoreson again • reviewed the transparency and explained traffic flow. Mr. Jewitt stated his child cannot cross that intersection with his bike now and it will only get worse with a gas station there. The Secretary commented on the walkway proposal on West River Road and indicated that in this area it might be better to have it on the east side. F� d Mr. Jewitt stated that a berm is fine, but a business on the Atkins property will cause more traffic. • A discussion ensued regarding traffic in the area. The Secertary stated the proposed redesigned intersection is to help prevent traffic from coming into Willow Lane that does not belong there. Patrick Murphy, 652 Willow Lane, asked why the traffic couldn't be moved further • down on Willow Lane. The Secretary explained the design needs.to be worked out and that the access from 65th Avenue North may be closed. Mr. Murphy stated that when snow is lowed from the apartment P complex yard. P ex it comes into his mP Y Howard Atkins stated he favors SEH's intersection redesign. He stated it is not a good reason to deny a development because of traffic impact. He added he does accept t th • e berm suggestion. P gg The Secretary stated that staff had looked at Mr. Th oreson s design alternative. He stated possibly a mixture of uses in Area 2 would be a good solution and have less adverse impact on the residential area. 12 -7 -89 -4- I • Commissioner Mann asked if a Planned Unit Development (PUD) had been looked into. The Secretary answered in the affirmative and explained that a PUD would allow a development with a mixture of uses. Mr. Jewitt stated all office traffic moves in different directions. A discussion • ensued between Mr. Thoreson and Mr. Jewitt regarding traffic generation. Mr. Rod Snyder, 6408 Willow Lane, stated that there are a lot of ways to look at this problem. He requested the Commission try and visualize what the area might look like 50 years from now and then make their decision on the basis of what zoning and development would be appropriate. He stated that this is a good opportunity to • decide on an appropriate future development of the area and the Commission should consider what is best for Brooklyn Center and its residents. He stated people living in this area are locked in with the river on one side, I694 and T. H. 252 on the other and only one way to enter or exit this neighborhood. He explained that some of the residents have their homes for sale and are moving because of problems in the area. He stated a gas station will only add more cars in addition to the traffic that is already there now. He thanked the Commission for their consideration and stated it is a challenge to envision what that area could be. Chairperson Malecki asked Mr. Snyder what his vision is for the area. Mr. Snyder stated he believed the area should be a people area and he would like to see something else in the river area, possibly a senior housing complex. He added that there is a • need to provide space and an environment for children to play. Mr. Atkins stated he does have the right to develop his property and that there is a price to pay for development of this area as a playground. Arlo Johnson, owner of the Brookdale Motel, suggested that the roadway redesign is • an excellent idea and he would support closing 65th Avenue North also. He stated that whatever decision the Commission makes today will have impact for years to come. He thanked the Commission for their consideration and his opportunity to voice his opinion. Richard Cameron, 6620 Willow Lane, stated he is not necessarily in favor of a gas station, but that he definitely favors any alternative that would redesign the entry into the North Willow Lane residential area. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chairperson Malecki inquired if anyone else wished to comment. Hearing none, she called for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Ainas • seconded by Commissioner Mann to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairperson Malecki, Commissioners Bernards, Ainas, and Mann. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary stated that it would be desirable for the Planning Commission to make a recommendation regarding the various alternatives. Commissioner Bernards asked when the moratorium for this study would expire. The Secretary responded that the moratorium will expire on December 16th. He noted that it is not anticipated that the consultant's report to the Council will be ready until the Council's first meeting in January. He added that in all likelihood the City Council will consider an extension of the moratorium at its next Council meeting in order to protect the planning process until the study can be completed. He noted that the Planning Commission can take additional time, if it wishes, before making any recommendations on the various alternatives suggested. He noted that some alternatives involve rezoning while others involve roadway redesign and property acquisition. These matters would all take some time to accomplish. 12 -7 -89 -5- • i Chairperson hlalecki stated the zoning issue would still have to be dealt with even if Mr. Atkins property is acquired. The Secretary stated that if the City is the landowner, it can control what uses are appropriate. He referred to the Earle Brown Farm acquisition as an example. Commissioner Ainas stated that he preferred to make a recommendation on the alternatives this evening. He further stated that there seems to be no dispute that Study Area 1, containing the remaining MN /DOT property should be rezoned to R1 (Single Family Residential) and incorporated into the existing single family neighborhood. He also stated that he believed the current R5 (Multiple Family i Residential) zoning on the property south of 65th Avenue North between T. H. 252 and Willow Lane was appropriate and should remain. He suggested that a service /office land use designation is most appropriate for Area 2, however, a Planned Unit Development District (PUD) with a C1 orientation allowing mixed uses would also be appropriate. He added that the existing uses, such as the Brookdale Motel and the Atkins Mechanical Contractors office are certainly acceptable uses and the City should take the necessary action to allow thses uses, perhaps as special uses, if the property is zoned C1. Finally, Commissioner Ainas stated that the proposed roadway redesign invluding a new way of accessing Willow Lane and the creation of a buffer /landscape/berm area should be pursued with the necessary property acquisition being undertaken. Commissioners Bernards and Mann concurred with Commissioner Ainas' recommendation. Chairperson Malecki stated that she favors C1 orientation in Study Area 2. She did not favor the development of a gas station /convenience store /car wash. She felt a PUD allowing the existing Brookdale Motel and Atkins Mechanical to continue, or allowing them as special uses in the C1 zone, would be appropriate. ACTION RECOMMENDING A PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE FOR THE LAND USE STUDY i Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Bernards to recommend to the City Council the following Alternative regarding the T. H. 252/66th Avenue North land use study: that Study Area 1 be rezoned to Rl; Study Area 3 remain R5; that Study Area 2 be rezoned to C1 or PUD -C1 with a definite Service /Office orientation (the Brookdale Motel and Atkins Mechanical uses), however, are acceptable uses in this area and that the necessary land area be acquired in order to redesign the access to North Willow Lane and to provide and maintain a buffer /landscape/berm area. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Mann to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Chairperson i • 12 -7 -89 -6- DI n' H OLMES & GRAVEN CHARTERED tomeys at Law 470 Pillsbury Center. $5402 BERT A. ALSOP (612) 317 -9300 D AVID J. XF-S IEDY PAt D. S A ERTSCHI JOH-4 R. LmLsos RONALD H. BArtY t612) 331-9310 WEI.UNC.7'aN H. LAW MARY J. 3REN08N JULIE A. LAWLER STEPHEN J.BUBUL ROBERT C. CARLSON CHARLES L. LEFEYE3tE CHRISTINE tit. CHALE JOHN tit. LEFEYRE. JR. ROBERT L. DAYIDSON WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL LAURA K. MO � 6'T J OHN B. DEAN Pn DANIEL R. 1tLSON Rot J. OBBIN L. WOOD MARY G DaBBtNS 337 -9215 BARBARA JEFFREY ENG // t M ARY FRANCES SKALA STEFANIE N. CAL£Y t)AVID L. GRAV Lr ��DU7 l/r�pZhjQLLOn STE L.N M TALLis �J CORRINE A. HEISE - JAMMES J. THomsox. Jx. JOHN G. HOEsCHL€R LARRY M. WERTHEIM JAMES S. HOLMES 80y G. wlLJtl•^Is January 25, 1990 Mr. Gerald Splinter City Manager City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Re: SBH Land Use Study; willow Lane Area Moratorium • Dear Jerry: You have asked for me to comment on the question whether the draft SEH Land Use Study for the Willow Lane Area is likely to create any legal problems for the City In my opinion, it is very unlikely that anything in the study will create future legal problems for the City of Brooklyn Center. The first issue to be addressed is whether the study will create problems for the City in future rebulatory action (such as acting on rezoning applications or special use permit applications) if the City leaves the zoning of the study area essentially as it is at this time. If an owner of property within the study area were to apply for a special use permit, there is little in the study which would be particularly helpful or unhelpful to the City. The study does reach some conclusions about the potential for traffic impact from development of the study area. Therefore, the information generated by the study would tend to make it difficult to deny a special use permit application on the ground that a proposal would create excessive traffic in the neighborhood. Therefore, the study would not support denial of a special use permit on the basis of traffic, but the study would orobably not have any other significant effect on action by the City Council on a special use permit application. Likewise, if an owner of property in the study area were to apply for rezoning, I do not believe that anything in the study would be particularly useful to an owner who wished to attempt to compel a rezoning in a case in which the City did not feel such rezoning was appropriate. The study merely suggests several alternatives, Mr. Gerald Splinter January 25, 1994 Page 2 including the status quo, for consideration. Although there is some limited discussion on advantages and disadvantages of the various alternatives, the study falls far short of reaching a conclusion that there is only one reasonable way to zone the property in the study area. Since there is no part of the study which points out any highly significant factors relating to the zoning of this property or any factors which might be used to assert that there is only one reasonable zoning classification for any part of the property in the study area, I do not believe that there is a significant risk that the study could be used against the City in an action to compel rezoning of property in the study area. The other part of the question which you have asked is whether the legal action which the City takes in response to the study will be legally defensible. For example, could the City defend a rezoning or downzoning of property in the study area. Without knowing what action the Council will take in response to the study, I cannot offer a very helpful opinion on this issue. However, for the most part, I do not believe that any action taken by the City Council with respect to the zoning of property in the study area will be influenced to any significant extent by the study itself. That is, whether action by the City Council in rezoning property in the study area is legally defensible will depend on factors other than the study itself. Moreover, there is very little information in the study which would be particularly useful to someone attempting to challenge the action of the City Council no matter which of the alternatives the City Council decides to follow. • The legal standard which the City must follow in this and an other such zoning g Y � Y decision, is that its decision must be reasonable. The decision cannot be arbitrary and must advance some legitimate public interest. If the action of the City Council meets this test, it should be upheld by the courts in any challenge. However, even if the action of the City Council is reasonable and does advance some legitimate public interest, the City may not "take" property without paying compensation to the owner. Some rezoning action may be deemed to be a taking of property and therefore entitle the owner to compensation even though the landowner retains title to the property. In the zoning content, the regulation would stray beyond the bounds of permissible regulation and become a taking if it deprived the- property of all reasonable use. Downzoning or rezoning to a type of zone in which the regulations are more restrictive or in which the land cannot be put to a use which is as intense or as profitable does not necessarily entitle the land owner to compensation. If the ordinance is reasonable (that is if it is not arbitrary and advances some legitimate public interest) and if the newly applicable regulations still allow an economically viable use of the land, no takin has occurred, and the landowner is not entitled to compensation. It is not enough for the landowner to prove that the land is worth less due to the rezoning. To establish entitlement to compensation, the owner must prove that he or she has been denied all reasonable use of the land. Whether the various alternative actions which the Council might take in response to the SEH Study are legally defensible will depend, generally, on the application of the legal pr-mciples explained above to the facts of the case. If the City can 'Mr. Gerald Splinter January 25 1990 Page 3 establish that the rezoning has a rational basis (either with or without evidence presented in the study) and if the landowner is not deprived of all reasonable use of the land, the rezoning will be upheld in the event of a legal challenge and the landowner will not be entitled to compensation. If you have any further questions, please feel free to give me a call. Very truly yours, Charles L. LeFevere CLL:rsr act Ron Warren BR291 -043 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1/29/90 Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING GENERAL LICENSING REGULATIONS *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Am er"�� Personnel Coordinator Signat e - title ************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached At its January 8, 1990, meeting, the city council asked staff to place on the January 29, 1990, agenda • for a first reading an ordinance that would ban the sale of cigarettes through vending machines. Notices about the ordinance were sent to cigarette vending machine owners and operators, as well as to others who have an interest in such an ordinance (including school superintendents of the districts represented in Brooklyn Center, Chamber of Commerce, and various proponents for nonsmoking rights). Attached are copies of the notices sent, any written responses received, a summary of comments I heard from phone calls to me about this issue, and an article about a similar ordinance recently passed in Bloomington. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION Have a first reading of An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding General Licensing Regulations and schedule a second reading and public hearing. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the of -- , 1990, at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to Chapter 23 regarding general licensing regulations. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the personnel coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING GENERAL LICENSING REGULATIONS The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center does ordain as follows: Section 1. Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances of the City Brookl n Ce is hereby y amended in the following manner: Section 23 -105. RESTRICTIONS. No license shall be issued except to a person of good moral character. No license shall be issued to an applicant for sale of cigarettes at any place other than his established place of business. No license shall be issued for the sale of cigarettes at a movable place of business; nor shall any one license be issued for the sale of cigarettes at more than one place of business or applicant. No person shall sell or dispense any cigarettes or tobacco product cizarette paper or cigarette wrapper through the use of a vending machine No person shall sell or give any cigarette, cigarette paper or cigarette wrapper to any person below the age of 18 years. No person shall keep for sale, sell or dispose of any cigarette containing opium, morphine, jimson weed, bella donna, strychnia, cocaine, marijuana, or any other deleterious or poisonous drug except nicotine. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1990. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) cIT of 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY :BY ROOKLY N BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 C E NTE R TELEPHONE 561 -5440 J<J NTE EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 M E M O R A N D U M TO: City of Brooklyn Center Cigarette Vending Machine License Holders FROM: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator pob DATE: January 11, 1990 SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance Regarding Cigarette Vending Machine Sales On January 29, 1990, the Brooklyn Center city council will be introducing an amendment to the city ordinances that will prohibit the sales of cigarettes through vending machines in Brooklyn Center. Attached is a copy of the proposed ordinance. The typical procedure is for the ordinance to have a "first reading" when it is introduced. Then a public hearing is scheduled for a future city council meeting, at which time the meeting is opened for public comment. If you have any concerns regarding this proposed ordinance, please call me at 561 - 5440. I am particularly interested in what effect implementation of such an ordinance would have on you (e.g., existing contracts). The first reading of the ordinance is scheduled for the January 29, 1990, meeting. The council meeting begins at 7 p.m. and is held in the city council chambers at city hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. �1YYC " 19 AU-AWRKAGN Z CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY B ROOKLYN O F BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 j� TELEPHONE 561 - 5440 C E NTE R EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Interested Citizens FROM: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator DATE: January 17, 1990 SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance Regarding Cigarette Vending Machine Sales On January 29, 1990, the Brooklyn Center city council will be introducing an amendment to the city ordinances that will prohibit the sales of cigarettes through vending machines in Brooklyn Center. Attached is a copy of the proposed ordinance. The typical procedure is for the ordinance to have a "first reading" when it is introduced. Then a public hearing is scheduled for a future city council meeting, at which time the meeting is opened for public comment. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this proposed ordinance le _ ase P call me at 561 5440. The first reading of the ordinance is scheduled for the January 29, 1990, meeting. The council meeting begins at 7 p.m. and is held in the city council chambers at city hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Attachment �CF . �"' 19661LL-UAfRIGI QfY 1/90 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO CIGARETTE VENDING MACHINE SALES BAN Brooklyn Center Service (Dave Lorentz) - vending machine is in the g front room; the coin return is six feet off of the floor so kids shouldn't be able to reach it - there is always someone there to observe use of the machine - will have to install racks to hold the cigarettes and hire an employee to stand there all of the time - they watch pretty closely for kids - will cost extra money machine is owned by Brooklyn Center Service -- they oppose the ordinance Brooklyn Center Liquor Stores (Jerry Olson) - minors do not have access to the stores and, therefore, cannot get in to purchase cigarettes Hiawatha Rubber Co. (Larry Frey) - they do have a contractual obligation with the vending machine company, although the vending company would not be adverse to removing the machine (they had debated about keeping the machine because it doesn't make that much money) - no one under 18 works in their industrial setting - smoking is allowed in two designated spots in their building; they eventually hope to go smoke free (although employees have expressed opposition if this were to occur) - from a company perspective, they do not object to the ordinance - from an employee perspective, there will be opposition to such a ban A & J Enterprises (vending co .L (Steve Hulbert) - the City is attempting to dictate what happens on private property - cigarettes are a legal substance; the law says the City can regulate but not prohibit sale of cigarettes - how will youth access a cigarette vending machine at a factory? - he can accept restricting sales of cigarettes to minors, but eliminating vending machines won't eliminate sales to minors; eliminating vending machines at factories will have zero effect on minors - state law will override the ban - the City has no right to ban the sale of cigarettes in a location where minors don't have access - will the City refund a portion of the license fee if the ordinance becomes effective before the end of the year? Ground Round (Karl Gaardsmoe) - a ban would not affect their contract with the vending company - he opposes the ordinance; doesn't think it addresses the whole problem and there are other avenues available for addressing the problem - their machine could be moved to their employee lounge where it could be monitored - there are devices that can be attached to a machine that would require a token to trigger the machine (although this is an expensive option) - he has seen minors (or those who do not look of age to purchase cigarettes) attempt to buy cigarettes through a vending machine, but he tells them to go elsewhere - state law is ridiculous; he isn't opposed to prohibiting sales to minors, but feels the offense should be charged against the minor, not the seller of the cigarettes Earle Brown Bowl (Jim Madden) - doesn't favor a ban - would move the machine to the liquor lounge - City is overreacting; the percentage of youth buying cigarettes through vending machines is small - if ban becomes effective, they will have to sell cigarettes from behind the counter; less security (employee and customer theft) - he realizes cigarettes aren't good; would live with the ordinance if passed, but they are opposed to it Earle Brown Bowl (Mark Bruer) - if machines are banned, cigarettes would have to be sold over the counter; would be a nightmare for the bartenders who are already busy enough (would have to stock cigarettes, check I.D.$) - an acceptable option: move machine out of the concourse into the lounge Bloomington council bans F vending sales of ci- arettes' By Kevin Duchschere pull cigarettes from vending Staff Writer machines Cigarettes no longer will be sold in. Said Mayor Neil W. Peterson, vending machines in who introduced the proposal: Bloomington, thanks to a City "There was very strong support Council vote Monday night that presented to us by our health made the city the nation's largest commission. It came to us with to enact such a ban. overwhelming citizen input wanting a complete ban." The 6 -1 vote came after about an hour of testimony, most of it for Peterson, an ex- smoker whose the complete ban, said Jean father died of lung cancer last Forster, an assistant professor of year, voted for the ban because of public health at the University of "personal prejudices" against Minnesota who has helped lead the drive in the Twin Cities to Bloomington continued on 4B . Bloomington Continued from page 1B smoking. But he said he didn't think White Bear Lake was the first city in the ban would have much impact on the nation to remove cigarette vend - smokers. "We have such a heavy ing machines when its council voted hospitality industry, it'll be interest- for a ban Oct. 9. Since then, Chan - ing to see what shakes out of that," hassen, Redwood Falls, Kenyon and he said. Northfield also have enacted bans. New Brighton, Blaine and Shoreview Peterson said the ban likely will go have passed partial bans on cigarette into effect within 60 days. vending. Proposals are being consid- ered in St. Louis Park, Brooklyn Cen- Bloomington, with a population of ter, Brooklyn Park, North St. Paul, 86,000, is the third - largest city in the Minneapolis and St. Paul. state. It's the sixth city in the state to institute a ban. The effort is designed to keep cigarettes out of the hands of minors. Only Council Member Tom Spies voted against the total ban. The Bloomington action should in- fluence other Minnesota cities to do the same, Forster said. "When you can say a community the size of Bloomington has done this, it has an impact," she said. f :.,. 1 B District NECEIVED JAN 2 21990 0 DR. MARL RAMSEY Superintendent o f S chools OSSEO AREA SCHOOLS Telephone: (612)425 -4131 January 19, 1990 Ms. Geralyn Barone Personnel Coordinator City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Ms. Barone: This is a reply to your notice of January 17, 1990 regarding a proposed ordinance prohibiting cigarette vending machine sales in Brooklyn Center. As school superintendent, I am writing this as a letter of support for such an ordinance. All of our school district buildings and grounds are tobacco -free, and schools spend extensive instruction time detailing the negative health effects of tobacco use. The ready access to tobacco through vending machines has been part of the problem in initial student use for many years. It's always difficult to project whether an ordinance such as you are proposing will make cigarettes less accessible to young people, but logic tells me it should. I believe our respective f pulties serving the students of Brooklyn Center would join in upport of your ordinance. Si c rely,; I rl Ramsey, Ph.D. Superintenden of chools MR /hn INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 279 Educational Service Center, 11200 93rd Avenue North P.O. Box 327, Maple Grove, MN 55369 October 17, 1939 5412 N. 'Morcan Ave. Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 TO. Mayor Nvouist , and The Citv Council. It was with treat satisfaction that we read of the N'hite Bear Lake council voting to remove cigarette vendinq machines from their City. It is also noted that numerous other cities are stronal_v considering the same action. Since the use of tobacco and tobacoo products by under -ace citizens is a continuinq and growino oroblem, we are hooeful that the city of Brooklvn Center can follow the trend, and oass an ordinance such as the one that is about to be instituted at White Bear Lake. We believe we owe no less to the vouth of this communitv. Please qive it your urgent consideration. ''*� Thank You, TH ISE SATISFACTION `�; V ��r me drop of a co in ! u COMPANY ' 0 3804 NICOLLET AVENUE SOUTH • MININEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55409 • TELEPHONE (612) 827 -5588 January 24, 1990 Ms. Ge.'tatd G. SpUnten Ci ty o f B000k,2yn Mt 6301 Sh.ingZe Ckeek2 PaNway 8neoRyn. Center, MN 55430 RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE RESTRICTING SALES OF CIGARETTES THROUGH VENDING MACHTNES Hear Mi. Spj int tc: Thank you vary much lots .taking the time Kth Kenny Rock ate and the to dilscws,s ct.gatette vending machines and how the city can prevent Most loom obtaining c i gazettes . Enc v ed is an o di nance that De.fin" Schu0 tad had pm ented to the City o f MinneapoZZ6 which they vie coroide�cng at tyu,t timc. K T had W Cm ;{: y ou, tj� i •, ><�lr. J 2.�ec.. ��:r.,c.c devc.cu wcutd be .insed an cwt cigane� , vending machi which wooed make the machinn only opetcaRe # a button is reteased in an area ct >,'• ere the Watson hays a espon ibte emptoyez and can't be tAiggeted by the Penton who & attempting to buy c i gatetste s item the machi The machine (vouZd be..i.n, p.Cain View c6 the mPon4.i.bte emptcyee. T 6W by having eZectkoni.c devicm on oun c-igate t,te. vending machines that nequ,itr.e human i ntervention to opelate the machine woutd make z e. i i ng c i:gave ttes - s.iyr0ax to sa ez which .,s a QaZ method o6 setting e icgat e,ttc3 . S.incene�.y, Thomas N. Theiaen TNT /aj FAX: GeA.aZyn &tone MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL VENDORS ASSOCIATION - TnTa4 P C�? JAN 16 11 30 11 :05 01 S a C, P. H. 2, t; DRAFT Tobacco Vending Machine ordinance No license shall be issued for a tobacco vending machine except as follows: (a) A tobacco vending machine may be located in an area within a factory, business, office or other place not open to the general public or to which persons under eighteen (18) years of age are not generally permitted access; (b) A tobacco vending machine may be located in an on -sale alcoholic beverage establishment or an off -sale liquor store, upon the following conditions: (i) the tobacco vending machine shall be located within the immediate vicinity, plain view and control of a responsible employee, so that all tobacco purchases will be readily observable by that employee; the tobacco vending machine shall not be located in a coatroom, restroom, unmonitored hallway, outer waiting area or similar unmonitored area; the tobacco vending machine shall be inaccessible to the public when the establishment is closed; and (ii) tobacco vending machine sales shall not be permitted incidental to an on -sale alcoholic beverage license or Off -sale liquor license. The establishment shall obtain a separate tobacco dealer's license under this chapter; (c) A tobacco vending machine may be located in other establishments, upon the following conditions: JHN 16 '90 11:05 u, 9 & i-:, N.H. P. b (i) the tobacco vending machine shall be located Within the immediate vicinity, ain v Y P yew and control of a responsible employee, so that all tobacco purchases will be readily observable by that employee; the tobacco vending machine shall not be located in a coatroom, restroom, unmonitored hallway, outer waiting area or similar unmonitored area; the tobacco vending machine shall be inaccessible to the public when the establishment is closed; and (ii) the tobacco vending machine shall be operable only by activation of an electronic switch operated by an employee of the establishment before each sale; or by insertion of tokens provided by an employee of the establishment before each sale. -2- *fir t 7 1 American Medical Association SEPTEMBER 8, 1989 Chicago suburb takes sales ban seriously Town a lm s to kee tob "Few towns in the country have tak- Such license fees, Tye said, would en seriously laws to keep cigarettes out enable a community to conduct the oc- fromkids of the hands of children," said Joe B. casional sting operation conducted by Tye, who as founder and president of a police officer and to hire an inspector the Longmeadow, Mass.- based Stop to administer the tobacco license pro- Teenage Addiction To Tobacco gram and check licenses. By Paul R. McGinn (STATT) has championed a crusade ( In Woodrid the mayor op a AMN STAFF ( g ' y pP� WOODRIDGE, Ill. — A against adolescent smoking. About the high licensing fee, favoring a S50 pack of only other jurisdiction that requires a charge to counter arguments that stiff Marlboro Lights 100s. tobacco license as a way to curtail ven- license cost would drive up the price of It must have seemed like an innocu- dors selling to minors is suburban King cigarettes and hurt sales to adults.) ous enough purchase to the store clerk County, Wash., Tye said. Anti - smoking activists admit it when 14- year -old Allison Vega plunked In one of the most exhaustive studies would require Herculean efforts to stop the cigarette pack and two $1 bills on on the subject of sales of cigarettes to all of the estimated 3.5 million chil- the counter. After all, the gas station/- minors, Tye and three other research- dren age 12 to 17 who consume an food mart sells an average of 400 to ers found that, despite a statewide ban estimated $1 billion worth of tobacco 5nn parks „F ,a ,., �� ru....� �� b .. .. u �,.,. on sales on tobacco to those younger products a year. But, they say, any dent But soon after she handed Allison than 18, 74% of the stores that sold in consumption must begin with elimi- the change, the clerk learned there was cigarettes in Santa Clara County, nating ready availability of cigarettes. something different about this cigarette Calif., sold them to minors age 14 to purchase. A burly man dressed in sport 16. That same survey, published in trousers and golf shirt stepped up to January in JAMA, indicated that even the counter, displayed a badge, and after the researchers conducted a six- ` Few towns in the country said: "Hello, I'm Officer Bruce Talbot month education program for vendors have taken seriously laws with the Woodridge Police Dept. and local community organizations, You've just sold cigarettes to a minor." minors still were able to buy cigarettes to keep cigarettes out of the As he had done before with store in 39% of the local stores. hands of children.' clerks throughout this west Chicago For laws like those in Woodridge to STATT's Joe B. Tye suburb, Talbot asked to see the manag- catch on elsewhere, they must be easy er and the shop's business and tobacco to enforce and must pay for them - licenses. As he left the premises, Talbot selves, warned Tye. See TOWN, next page noted that the manager had sold ciga- Above all, he said, towns must issue rettes to Allison about two months be- tobacco-selling licenses. Because the fore in a similar tobacco "sting." Now, purchase of such a license compels a having been caught twice, the shop's store owner to sign a statement ac- owner faced the loss of his license to knowledging the prohibition against to- sell tobacco products and a $500 fine. basso sales to minors, no vendor can If a tobacco sting operation seems a later claim ignorance of the law. Also bit out of the ordinary, that's because tying tobacco sales to a license that Woodridge is one of few municipalities could be revoked allows for a tangible in the country that enforces a ban on penalty for breaking the prohibition on �� tobacco sales to minors. While 44 sales to minors, he said. states and the District of Columbia "It's big money for them," Tye said, outlaw the sale of tobacco to those noting that few vendors would risk for- 535 North Dearborn younger than 18, virtually no police feiting a tobacco license that promises Chicago III. 60610 department regularly enforces the literally thousands of dollars in profits bans, according to anti - tobacco activ- every year. 9 ists and law enforcement authorities. Likewise, he added, enforcement of tobacco sales laws must be supported through the license fees. The cost of a vendor's license — Tye recommends at AMERICAN MEDICAL NEWS /SEPTEMBER 8. 1985 least $500 — should be high enough to fnnA nnrcnnnnl to rnfnrrr th. law ability, you're likely to decrease uce," =1Ute cioin ! PacCnt. �)CWLLSC such notes forg and veh ca high principal, n Russell. _ could be easily said University of y r8 ing "Even if they can't influence kid Michigan health ` thenticity would be difficuk, if not . throug h policy professor possible, Talbot figured he needed a g persuasion, they have the 1aµ Kenneth E. new law. So he wrote one. on their side," he said Under that local statute, in effect There is, however, a major contra- Warner, PhD, since May 1, a Woodridge shop owner diction in enforcement of the smoking who served as se- who sells tobacco to a minor faces the ban. As soon as Woodridge student o scientific edi loss of his village tobacco license for a leave the junior high and enter either tor for for the U.S. . of the area's two senior hi h schools — Surgeon General's year and can be fined up to $500. g both which lie in an adjoining coin seminal report on Adults who buy or give cigarettes to mity tobacco use, Re- minors also face a fine of up to $500. Y —they can smoke ns gro unds n de real ducing the Health Consequences of Any minor purchasing cigarettes faces Despite hisop sm posiition toallow n Prog Smoking. 25 Years of a fine of $50; minors who possess to- � students to smoke on school grounds, Stopping just a fraction of the esti- bacco face a fine of $25. mated teen smokers would mean a re- Since enactment of.the WoodridZe the principal el one of the senior higi markable p ublic health improvement, law, Talbot and village Mayor William schools said eliminating the arrived area — instituted before he arrived — according to studies by Dr. Warner in Murphy have urged officials in other wouldn't stop teens from smoking bu 1985. Using the figures Dr. Warner towns in the county to adopt similar would just relocate them. "If you aboi first compiled, the General Accounting tobacco ordinances. "The problem ish a program that already exists yo. Office — the investigative arm of Con- doesn't stop at the boundaries of one just move the problem into the neigh gress — estimated in a June report that municipality," Murphy said. borhoods and the washrooms," saic if 500,000 teen -agers stopped smoking, Already, two area communities have Downers Grove South High Schoe 125,000 of them would be spared a voted to enact similar statutes. Talbot principal Thomas Madden, EdD. tobacco-related death. is-even moving to take the Woodridge School officials, however, soon ma A spokeswoman for the Tobacco In- ordinance nationwide, urging adoption be able to end such an apparent contra stitute, the Washington, D.C., lobby of similar laws to 1,100 fellow drug diction in the prohibition of minors group for the nation's major tobacco education police officers from around tobacco use. A state law that would ba companies, said while her organization the country who attended a recent Chi- students from kin smoking by minors, it has no ca go conference of the Drug Abuse Re- s g on any publt opposes g school campus except during athleti position on age requirements for buy- sistance Education (DARE) program. events was, as of AMN press time ing tobacco. "it's a matter for the states According to John Slade, MD, a awaiting the expected signature of Ill; to solve," said spokeswoman Brennan leading anti - smoking activist who nois Gov. James Thompson. If the la% Dawson. serves on a tobacco advisory commit- is enacted, Illinois would join a sma Officer Talbot traced his interest in tee to the New Jersey health depart- but growing list of states that hav tobacco sales to minors to a day about ment, numerous studies indicate the banned students from smoking o a year ago when a gym teacher at the vast majority of minors who have tried school grounds since 1987, when Cal: village's junior high school saw a stu- illicit drugs such as cocaine, crack, and fomia became the first state, to do sc dent leaving a convenience store. The heroin were first regular tobacco users. According to Talbot, enforcement c girl waved a pack of cigarettes over her Whiie cutting the supply of nicotine to the sales- to-minors prohibition will b head, informing her friends parked children and teens will not automati- mostly left up to four to six sting operz nearby that she had been able to buy cally stop them from abusing illicit tions he plans to conduct during th them. Incensed, the teacher ap- drugs, limiting access to tobacco is a year. Having developed the enforce proached the school principal who in necessary ingredient in fighting all sub- ment protocols around the village's 1 turn approached Talbot — who teaches stance abuse, he argued. quor license enforcement procedure: a course on drug abuse at the school. "If you can prevent the use of tobac- Talbot said enforcement of the tobacc Talbot said he remembered thinking co, then perhaps you can generate the law should easily stand any court tes that a letter from the police chief to all healthy behavior and responses to oth. So far, Woodridge's mayor has off local businesses that sold tobacco er substances that will make their use cially warned eight establishment: would solve the problem. After all, he less likely," Dr. Slade said. three of which could lose their license reasoned, a 102- year -old state law pro - And, he added, stopping smokers because they sold tobacco to minor hibited sales of tobacco to those youn- when they're young is crucial — studies after receiving a warning. Overall, Ta ger than 18. "I thought I was done," indicate as many as half or more of all bot said, the prospect of full compI Talbot remembered thinking. "I smokers began the cigarette habit by ance may be a fleeting dream, but h thought I had solved the problem." He age 13, when they were in the seventh said he was optimistic about its effe, was wrong. or eighth grade. as he recalled a fellow officer's recer In a survey sim- Although it is too early to ascertain admonition: Minors in Woodridge a: ilar to that con- whether the Woodridge ordinance has more likely to be able to buy liquc ducted in Santa stopped teens from becoming regular than cigarettes. Clara County, smokers, the principal of the village's Although merchants may not t Calif., Talbot and Thomas Jefferson Junior High School thrilled with the idea of losing a toba a professor from credits the law with already having co license and being fined $500 for se: Chicago's DePaul made large inroads in informing ing cigarettes to a minor, none h University, Leon- youngsters that smoking is wrong, complained publicly since the sting o and A. Jason, Not only does the Woodridge law eration began this summer, accordir PhD, found that discourage the school's seventh and to village and police officials. 82% of the Woo- eighth graders from smoking on school Store managers "stung" by Talb dridge stores that sold cigarettes sold grounds — which carries an automatic refused to comment or to criticize ti them to minors. suspension — but it also gives parents law. The closest thing to criticism car, But even if the police department and t teachers mo i t r h o a t n a argu- when a store owner who had just bee decided to enforce the state law barring t g a"`- stung said she had "mixed emotion tobacco sales to minors, Talbot said, it where in Woodridge, said the junior about the law. She refused to elaborat still could be handcuffed: A loophole Such a reaction, said Talbot, is to allowed a child to buy cigarettes with a expected: "Who's going to argue th 0 AMERICAN MEDICAL NEWS /SEPTEMBER 8, 1989 they have a right to sell cigarettes to l 3 year - old . r WOODRIDGE TOBACCO ORDINANCE "/r IS A WELL - FOURPEP 4rrE,4fPr rO RESTR/Cr ME SUPPLY OF rosACCO PROPUCTS r0 Y00P10 PEOPLE.** " wOODR1Dat PROORtff1 APRIL !, 1989 rOWRS,••,s#OULP FOLLOW WOOPR1 POE IS SUBURBAN LIPS GRAP"IC APRIL f, ifR! 'RWOOPR/PSE LIAS rAKE# A SrRO#s srA#P AsA /#Sr rEER ro lACCO USE r#4 r S#O UL P RE E141114 rEP NY Or#ER PIVP40E coll#rY c0hfMU#/r/ES• It DAILY MCRALD MAY 12. 1 1 f! OEFFOR rs ro hFAxE C104RErrE PURc#4SES NY hfi #ORS /L L ECAL co p#TYW /DF S#OI/L D of pvPL /CA TED 8Y AL L r#E Af UP /C /PAL /r /ES A #P r#E Coll#rY #OARP• " MAL DARDICK. BUREAU CHIEF. DUPAat PRESS SCRV I Ct MAY 21. 1990 W 0 0 D R I D G E T 0 B A C C 0 0 R D I N A N C E- F A C T S A B O U T C H I L D R E N & S M O K I N G * 83% of Woodridge merchants sold cigarettes to 13 year old AFTER being warned by police in writing of State 18 year age limit. * 13 is the average age to start smoking. 95% of adult smokers started as adolescents, (Surgeon General's Report: Smoking & Health). * Main supply of cigarettes for children are; 74% reta;L].__merchants, (37!k gas stations, 23% food stores, 11% drug stores; 3$ vending machines), 17% friends, (DePaul Univ. study by Dr. eoriard * Cigarettes are a "Gateway Drug ". Adolescents are unable to deeply inhale and hold harsh marijuana smoke without being accomplished cigarette smokers, (National Inst. On Drug Abuse, Dr. Robert DuPont) W 0 0 D R I D G E O R D I N A N C E P R O V I D E S F O R * Enforcement of State 18 year age limit, no "notes" allowed. * Updates archaic State tobacco law written in 1887. * Requires license, that can be suspended or revoked, to sell tobacco. * Sale to minor enforced in same manner as liquor sale to minor. * Vending machines must have 835 -S45 remote controlled locking device. * Warning signs to remind employees and public of 18 year age limit. * Outlaws possession & purchase by minor with $25 & $50 civil fine. * No free cigarette samples on public property or right of way. * No sale within 100' of school or children's facility. R E S P O N S E T O O R D I N A N C E * Editorials endorsing law by; WEST SUBURBAN LIFE GRAPHIC, REPORTER PROGRESS, and DAILY HERALD NEWSPAPERS. * 100% merchant compliance with licensing, signs and machine locks. * Student survey found 93% knew of law, 72% said it would help prevent them from smoking and 55% said it would be effective in preventing other students from smoking, (Woodridge police & DePaul Univ.). F A C T S A B 0 U T S M O K I N G & H E A L T H * 1988 Surgeon General's report; "Nicotine Addiction" found: "Cigarettes and other forms of tobacco are addicting, and is similar to addiction to drugs such as heroin and cocaine." * 15 year olds smoking as few as 5 cigarettes a day said; 51% had tried to stop smoking but failed, and 27% said they couldn't stop regardless of how hard they tried, (Prof. R.T. Ravenholt). * Smoking is number 1 preventable cause of death in America. * 390,000 Americans die each year from smoking, (Surgeon General 1989) * 90% of all lung cancers are caused by smoking, (American Lung Assn.) over For more information contact: Officer Bruce Talbot, Woodridge Police DARE Program, One Plaza Drive, Woodridge, IL. 60517. (312) 719 -4738. or The Inter - Agency Council, Barb Schell, Director, 1440 W. Washington St., Chicago, IL. 60607. (312) 243 -2000. PAGE 2 r - E F F E C T I V E N E S S O F T H E O R D I N A N C E- The goal of the Woodridge tobacco licensing ordinance is to eliminate the large number of readily available cigarettes to children and thus discourage children from smoking. To measure the effectiveness of the ordinance three surveys will be conducted at Jefferson junior high school. The first is a control done before any publicity on the ordin- ance, (March 1 89), the second after students have been informed by the school and media on the new law, (April '89), and the third after the ordinance has been enforced by police, (Sept. '89). S T U D E N T S U R V E Y F I N D I N G S Of 650, 7th and 8th grade students responding to an anonymous survey; * 93% of students knew about the new law banning possession and sale, * 72% said it would help prevent themselves from smoking, * 55% said it would help prevent other students from smoking. Of the 16% of students claiming to be regular smokers responding; * 12 years was the average age they started smoking, * 15-W of regular student cigarette smokers use a pack a day or more, * 49% obtained cigarettes from merchants; (55% at Woodridge stores), * 39% reported being able to illegally buy cigarettes in Woodridge after the new law, down from 83% before the law was enacted, * 72% were able to buy cigarettes from merchants outside of Woodridge, * 36% obtain cigarettes from friends, * 16t obtain cigarettes from a parent. A N A L Y S I S O F S U R V E Y D A T A Efforts to make students aware of the law were very successful. Stu- dents felt the new law would be effective in both preventing others as well as themselves from smoking. Minors reported their ability to il- legally purchase cigarettes from Woodridge merchants was sharply down after the law had been enacted. However, the ability to illegally pur- chase cigarettes from merchants outside of Woodridge's jurisdiction remains high even after high media publicity. Compared to the National Institute on Drug Abuse "National Household Survey on Drug Use: 1985 ", and the Surgeon General's 1986, "Report on Smoking and Health ", the Woodridge students start smoking a year earlier and the percentage of smokers is slightly larger. A third student survey will be undertaken in September after the new law has been enforced during the summer. D e P A U L U N I V E R S I T Y S U R V E Y: Dr. Leonard Jason of DePaul University conducted a study on the ef- fects of the Woodridge Tobacco Ordinance on merchants surrounding but just outside of Woodridge's jurisdiction. Stores in Downers Grove, Lisle, Bolingbrook, and unincorporated DuPage and Will counties were tested. 92% of the merchants sold cigarettes to a 14 year old student volunteer despite the media exposure given the Woodridge law. Clearly, to be effective similar laws must be enacted in neighboring cities. PAGE 3 R � WOCUR 'E PFJDGRESS APRIL 6, 1989 Pave p�sE �1>�2sY � � �Jn IDvN`r't��JKSo �� � mom mom � C165 MY MOMW / � r }� o 1. Uftl D E� lg 8` editorials EdttoriWs are written either indfuidually or. in most cases jointly. by the B members of the REPORTER /PROGRESS Newspapers EditorfW Board. Changing with the times l As society evolves, it makes sense for laws Cigarette smoking is no kxxger looked and regulations to be made or amended to upon as a recreational pastime which calms adapt to the ongoing changes. It is especially the mind and body as doctors used to claim in beneficial to a community when a new law old TV commercials. In addition, cigarette comes about or an existing statute is en- smoking is no longer a prerequisite for being hanced in response to real concerns based on a suave movie star. new knowledge and information. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop boldly A good example of a municipality taking states cigarette smoking is addictive and the initiative and shoring up a musty state directly related to lung cancer, heart disease statute is Woodridge's recent ordinance and problems during pregnancy. In addition, prohibiting the sale of tobacco products to chewing tobacco has been linked to cancer of minors, the mouth. State law prohibits businesses from selling There is always the argument which says cigarettes and other tobacco products to people should be allowed to choose. That is persons under 18 . However, a loophole inthe true in part. Adults have the right to decide law, which was written in 1887, lets men whether the risk is significant enough to chants off the hook if the underage buyer has smoke or not to smoke or chew tobacco. a note from a parent or legal guardian. Minors, however, are not emotionally All things considered, a note from a parent equipped to make such a choice. The same is a flimsy barrier between a child and a pack logic behind the law which bars persons under of cigarettes. To counter this, Woodridge 21 from buying alcohol can be applied to officials have made it illegal for merchants to tobacco. sell any tobacco products to minors — period. In addition, promotenandbusinesses Alcohol is considered a drug. Nicotine, cannot give tobacco products away to per- found in cigarettes is also a drug and should be sons under 18 or to anyone within 100 feet of regulated by age. a school or other facility used primarily by minors. The purpose of the ordinance is not to ban cigarettes or cigarette smoking. It is a The question remains, why bother to well - founded'attempt to restrict the supply of restrict cigarette sales? Simple. What is now tobacco products to young people who might known about tobacco far exceeds the amount not be aware of what they are dealing with. of information available in 1964, let alone This ordinance will be beneficial to the youth 1887. of the community. Suburban L IF E Graphic Wednesday, April 5 , 1989 view Our opinion No ifs, antis or butts Woodridge officials have start when buying or using the taken a bold step to correct a product is so easy. problem that has been around Woodridge for a long time. g Po lice will now have the authority to confiscate Last month, the Village Board cigarettes from children and approved the most com- fine or suspend the tobacco li- prehensive tobacco laws in the cense of merchants who sell state aimed at curbing cigarette tobacco to children. Selling tob- use by minors. The laws go into acco to children can bring a effect in less than a month and $500 -a-day fine. Children caught will give the village the power to buying cigarettes can be fined crack down on the selling of $50 and have $25 taken from tobbaco to minors, and minors' them if they are found posses - use and possession of tobacco. sing cigarettes. It's about time. The U.S. Sur- Merchants should take notice geon General C. Evert Coop has of this law and Woodridge offi- already identified the nicotine in cials should not hesitate to use tobacco as a dangerous and ad- it. dictive drug, as many who have And other towns, where it is tried to stop smoking can attest. common to see persons ob- And the best way to fight the viously under 18 years old puf- hazardous effects of tobacco is fing away, should follow Wood- to not start using it at all. But it's ridge's example and take the hard to convince teen - agers, or first step in snuffing out a smol- even younger children, not to dering problem. WEST SU3JRBAN LIFE GRAPHIC APRIL 5, 1989 PAGE 6, EDITORIAL PAGE 5 r & /Section 1 D*Hemld SMART R PADDOCK JR. Chairman and Pubiuher ROSS= Y. PADDOCE- Vice Chairman POUNMCD 1972 DAN=L BAUMANN, President and Editor DOUGLAS L RAY. Vice President /Executive Editor GKROULD w. KERN. Managing Editor "Our aim: To fear God, teU the truth and make money. " RC. PADDOCK 12.2.1133 Tough attack on teen tobacco use One of the most potentially destructive thrill- seeking behaviors youngsters engage in is smoking cigarettes. Curiosity can lead to a habit and before Iong, youngsters start along on a pack -by -pack path that can lead to deadly diseases that have no cure. Those who experiment with cigarettes, says U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, risk becoming physically addicted to tobacco. And the first puff, adds the National Institute on Drug Abuse, usually occurs at age 13. And, as everyone knows, youngsters are too immature to make informed choices — and that includes a decision to smoke. With this in mind, the village of Woodridge is making it tough - very tough — for those under age 18 to buy cigarettes. A village ordinance requires merchants to purchase a $50 village license in order to sell tobacco products. Merchants have been made aware that the sale of tobacco to youngsters — even if they have written consent from their parents, which is permissible under state law governing tobacco purchases by minors — can result in the loss of their license and a $500 fine. Businesses with vending machines are also required to install an inexpensive locking device on cigarette the machines that makes them inaccessible to youngsters. Only an employee, who first notes the age of the customer, can open the machine. The ordinance, the first of its kind in the state, has not been filed and forgotten. Adopted after a study revealed school children were buying cigarettes with relative ease, the ordinance is being actively enforced Meanwhile, merchants aren't complaining, according to Woodridge police officer Paul Talbot, the ordinance's author. Neither has it raised the ire of the tobacco lobby in Springfield. The tobacco licensing law won't stop kids from sneaking smokes from their parents' packs or parents from buying cigarettes for their kids. But it will make it more difficult for kids to pursue their self- destruction. For all its dangers, smoking still retains, among youngsters, its aura as a status symbol. Woodridge has taken a strong stand against teen tobacco use that should be be emulated by other DuPage County communities. PAGE 6 6 Section 2 Chicano Tribune. Wednesday, June 21. 1989 D City /suburbs u arette sales law tested by rte e i g 8 are cited with selling to minors By Ann Piccininni the drop in the number of mer- Eight Woodridge businesses that chants willing to sell tobacco prod - reportedly sold cigarettes to minors ucts to minors. Before the ordi- since a new villagewide tobacco nance was adopted, to c said, 82 licensing ordinance went into effect percent of the towns o o to May I face fines of up to 5500 and ing merchants sold tobacco to possible revocation of their tobacco minors during similar Police tests licenses. Talbot said seven businesses of- The ordinance, the first of its fering tobacco products for sale kind in Illinois, requires merchants �etbeond� the village's boundaries selling tobacco products to pur- chase annual village licenses and Six of the seven businesses agreed provides fines of $25 for minors to sell tobacco products to minors, who smoke or even possess tobac- he said. co. Talbot said he will urge adoption Police tested 25 tobacco - licensed of similar tobacco licensing ordi- merchants June 14 by sending two nances by other Du Page muni- minors, one 13 years old, the other cipalities during a meeting Wednes- 14, into the stores to buy tobacco day of the Du Page Mayors and products. Eight of the 25 mer- Managers Conference. chants failed to refine tobacco sales A survey of students at Jefferson to the minors, according to Wood- Junior High School in Woodridge ridge Police Officer Bruce Talbot. showed that before the ordinance's Under state law, which pr ohibits adoption 72 percent of the students the sale of tobacco or tobacco reported that they were able to buy products to minors, violators can cigarettes from village merchants, be fined 550. Talbot said Thirty -nine percent of However,. under the Woodridge the school's students said they were ordinance, penalties can range still able to buy tobacco products from a one-day license suspension after the ordinance's enactment, he to license revocation. Violators can said. also be fined up to 5500, Talbot Mu said the decrease in to said Minors can be fined $50 for number of merchants violating the purchasing tobacco. law since the adoption of the ordi- Individ penalties for each of nance indicates that the law is the meerchants found m violation working. "Those figures demon - will be decided at hearings before strate there has been an effect, he the Woodridge mayor, Talbot said said "We'll be convening a hearing po the follow_ similar to when there is a liquor According to ng violation," said Mayor William �S businesses were found in viola Murphy. iron of Woodridge's tobacco ordi- Murphy said he expects a higher nano Phillips 66 2340 W 75th rate of compliance with the ordi- C ; �o D rug , 2317 W. 75 th S 8290 S. nanc a as it becomes more familiar Convenient Food Mart, 8 to the town's merchants. Jana Ave,; Bill's Amoco, Ill. Hwy . 33 at Hobson Road: Fl Torito Res - es- "What we're going through with taurant, 1001 W. 75th St.; Marie's the business community and the of Woodridge, 1575 W. 75th SL; youth of the community is an edu- Nonnie's Pizza, 7530 S. Woodward cation process," Murphy said St,; and Village Grove Shell, 7501 Talbot said he is encouraged by S. L,enront Rd. PAGE 7 f RHH: be 3/89 ORDINANCE NO. 89 -15 --------------------------------------------------------------- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES —= ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 18A -- COMPREHENSIVE REGULATION OF TOBACCO 'PRODUCTS --------------------------------------------------------------- BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF WOODRIDGE, DO PAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS, a home rule municipality in the exercise of its home rule powers, as follows: SECTION ONE: That the Code of Ordinances of the Village of Woodridge, DuPage County, Illinois, is hereby amended b adding Y Y Y 9 thereto a new Chapter 18A entitled "Comprehensive Regulation of Tobacco Products" as follows: CHAPTER 18 A COMPREHENSIVE REGULATION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS Sec. 18A -1. Legislative finding and declaration. The mayor and board of trustees expressly find and declare that: (a) 1. Cigarette smoking is dangerous to human health;. 2. There exists substantial scientific evidence that the use of tobacco products causes cancer, heart disease and various other medical disorders; 3. The Surgeon General of the United States has declared that nicotine addiction from tobacco is similar to ad- diction to cocaine, and is the most widespread example of drug dependence in this country; 4. The Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse concluded that the majority of the three hundred twenty thousand (320,000) Americans who die each year from cigarette smoking became addicted to nicotine as adolescents before the age of legal consent; 5. The National Institute on Drug Abuse found that cigarette smoking precedes and may be predictive of adolescent illicit drug use; and, 6. The present legislative scheme of prohibiting sales of tobacco products to persons under the age of eighteen (18) has proven ineffective in preventing such persons from using tobacco products. VILLAGE OF WOODR -IDGE PAGE 8 ORDINANCE NO. 89 -15 Page Two - --------------------------------------------------- (b) That the enactment of this Chapter directly pertains to and is in furtherance of the health, welfare and safety of the residents of the village, particularly those residents under eighteen (18) years of age. Sec. 18A -2. Definitions. For the purposes of this Chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them: "tobacco products" means any substance containing tobacco leaf, including, but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco or dipping tobacco. "vending machine" means_ any mechanical; electric or electronic; " f _ pry i �e device which, upon insertion of money, tokens or any other form of payment, dispenses tobacco products. Sec. 18A -3. License required. It shall be unlawful to sell or offer for sale at retail, to give away, deliver or to keep with the intention of selling at retail, giving away or delivering tobacco products within the village without having first obtained a tobacco dealer's license therefor pursuant to this Chapter. Such license shall be in addition to any other license required by this code. Sec. 18A -4. License application. Application for a license hereunder shall be made in writing to the village clerk and shall be processed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 9, Article I of this code. Sec. 18A -5. License fee. The license fee for a tobacco dealer's license shall be as set forth in Section 9 -6(C) (14) of this code. Sec. 18A -6. Prohibited sales, delivery - signs. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person, including any licensee, to sell, offer for sale, give away or deliver tobacco products to any person under the age of eighteen (18) years. VILLAGE OF WOODRIDGE PAGE-9 ORDINANCE NO. 89 -15 Page Three ------------------------------------------------------------------- (b) Signs informing the public of the age restrictions provided for herein shall be posted by every licensee at or near every display of tobacco products and on or upon every vending machine which offers tobacco products for sale. Each such sign shall be plainly visible and shall state: 'THE SALE OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS TO PERSONS UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE IS PROHIBITED BY LAW.' The text of such signs shall be in red letters on a white background, said letters to be at least one inch (1 high. Sec. 18A -7. Minimum age to sell tobacco products. It shall be unlawful for any licensee or any officer, associate, member, representative, agent or employee of such licensee, to engage, employ or permit any person under eighteen (18) years of age to sell tobacco products in any licensed premises. Sec. 18A -8. Purchase by minors prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any person under the age of eighteen (18) years to purchase tobacco products, or to misrepresent their identity or age, or to use any false or altered identification for the purpose of purchasing tobacco products. Sec. 18A -9. Possession by minors prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any person under the age of eighteen (18) years to possess any tobacco products; provided that the pos- session by a person under the age of eighteen (18) years under the direct supervision of the parent or guardian of such person in the privacy of the parent's or guardian's home shall not be prohibited. Sec. 18A -10. Proximity to certain institutions. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, offer for sale, give away or deliver tobacco products within one hundred feet (100 of any school, child care facility or other building used for educa- tion or recreational programs for persons under the age of eighteen (18) years. Sec. 18A -11. Certain free distributions prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any licensee or any person in the business of selling or otherwise distributing, promotion or adver- V I L L A G E OF W O O D R I D G E PAGE10 ORDINANCE NO. 89-15 Page Four -------------------------------------------------------------------- tising tobacco products, or any employee or agent of any such licensee or person, in the course of such licensee's or erson' p s business, to distribute, give away or deliver tobacco products free of charge to any person on any right -of -way, park, playground or other property owned by the village, any school district, any park district or any public library. Sec. 18A -12. Vending machines - locking devices. (a) It shall be unlawful for any licensee to sell or offer for sale, give away, deliver or to keep with the intention of selling, giving away or delivering tobacco products by use of a vending machine, unless such vending machine is equipped with a manual, electric or electronic locking device controlled by the licensee so as to prevent its operation by persons under the age of eighteen 18 9 g ( ) years. (b) Any premises where access by persons under the age of eighteen (18) years is prohibited by law, or premises where the public is generally not permitted and where vending machines are strictly for the use of employees of business located at such premises, shall be exempt from the requirements of Sec. 18A -12(a) above. Sec. 18A -13. Responsibility for agents and employees. Every act or omission of whatsoever nature, constituting a violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter by any officer, director, manager or other agent-or employee of any licensee shall be deemed and held to be the act of such licensee; and such licensee shall be punishable in the same manner as if such act or omission -had been done or omitted by the licensee personally. Sec. 18A -14. Suspension; revocation of license; fines, costs. The mayor shall be charged with the administration of this Chapter. The mayor may suspend or revoke any license issued under the provisions of this Chapter, if he determines that the licensee has violated any of the provisions of this Chapter. In lieu of suspension or revocation of a license, the mayor may instead levy a fine on the licensee. The fine imposed shall not exceed five hundred dollars ($500) for each violation. Each day on which a violation continues shall constitute a separate violation. However, no such license shall be suspended or revoked and no licensee shall be fined except after a public hearing by the mayor with a seven (7) day written notice to the licensee affording the VILLAGE OF WOOD RIDG'E PAGE 11 ORDINANCE NO. 89-15 Page Five -------------------------------------------------------------------- licensee an opportunity to appear and defend against the charges contained in such notice. The seven (7) day notice provisions shall begin the day following delivery by certified mail or by personal service. The mayor shall within seven (7) days after such hearing, if he determines after such hearing that the license should be revoked or suspended, or that the licensee should be fined, state the reason for such determination in a written order and either the amount of the fine, the period of suspension or that the license has been revoked and serve a copy of such order within the seven (7) days upon the licensee. Any licensee determined by the mayor to have violated any of the provisions of this Chapter shall pay to the village the costs of the hearing before the mayor on such violation. The mayor shall determine the costs incurred by the village for said hearing, including, but not limited to: court reporter's fees, the costs of transcripts or records, attorneys' fees, the cost of preparing and mailing notices and orders and all other miscellaneous expenses incurred by the village or such lesser sum as the mayor may allow. The licensee shall pay said costs to the village within thirty (30) days of notification of the costs by the mayor. Failure to pay said costs within thirty (30) days of notification is a violation of this Chapter and may be cause for license suspension or revocation, or the levy of a fine. Sec. 18A -15. Use of premises after revocation. When any license shall have been revoked for any cause, no license shall be granted to said licensee for the period of six (6) months thereafter for the conduct of the business of selling tobacco products as defined in Sec. 18A -3 in the premises described in such revoked license." SECTION TWO: That the provisions of Chapter 18A shall be enforced from and after May 1, 1989. SECTION THREE: That all ordinances and resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are, to the extent of such conflict, expressly repealed. SECTION FOUR: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect ten (10) days from and after its passage and approval as provided by law. VILLAGE OF WOODRIDGE PAGE 12 ORDINANCE NO. 89 -16 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES -- CHAPTER 9, LICENSES, FEES AND CHARGES -- CHAPTER 13, SETTLEMENT OF VIOLATIONS -------------------------------------------------------------------- BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF WOODRIDGE, DO PAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS, a home rule municipality in the exercise of its home rule powers, as follows: SECTION ONE: That Chapter 13, Sec. 13 -I.(B) of the Code of Ordinances of the Village of Woodridge is hereby amended by adding thereto a new Sec. 13 -1(B) (18) as follows: "(18) Regulating the purchase and /or possession of tobacco products." SECTION TWO: That Chapter 9, Sec. 9 -6(C) of the Code of Ordinances of the Village of Woodridge entitled "Business Licenses" is hereby amended by adding thereto a new Sec. 9 -6(C) (14) as follows: "(14) Tobacco produt :;:s .........................: 50.00." • SECTION THREE: That Chapter 13, Sec. 13 -1(G) of the Code of Ordinances of the Village of Woodridge is hereby amended by adding thereto a new Sec. 13 -1(G) (19) as follows: "(19) Violations with respect to possession and /or purchase of tobacco products -by a person under eighteen (18) years of age. (a) Violation of Sec. 18A- 8 ....................$50.00 (b) Violation of Sec. 18A- 9 ....................$25.00" SECTION FOUR: That all ordinances and resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are, to the extent of such conflict, expressly repealed. SECTION FIVE: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect ten (10) days from and after its passage and approval as provided by law. PASSED This 23rd day of March 1989. ATTEST* 41 MAYO V CL RR VILLAGE OF WOODRIDG-E PAGE 13 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 1 /29190 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: JOINT POWERS FIRE TRAINING FACILITY *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Signature - title MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Attached please find a copy of a memorandum from Fire Chief Ron Boman detailing a request and recommendation that the City of Brooklyn Center consider becoming a part of a four city joint powers agreement to build and maintain a fire training facility. The City of Fridley has taken the lead in developing a proposal which, if adopted by four cities, will provide a permanent facility for training our firefighters. The fire chief points out that this type of • facility is almost a necessity if we are to keep our firefighters trained properly in entering hot and smokey buildings. This type of facility is necessary because the average fire does not give our fire department personnel enough experience in very hot and very smokey buildings that they can keep up their effectiveness in handling these intense and dangerous situations. With this type of facility, we could duplicate these difficult situations and give our veteran personnel needed retraining and our newer personnel valuable experience in handling the hottest and smokiest of fires. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend the Council pass a motion expressing preliminary approval of the concept of a joint Powers agreement and instructing the city manager or his designee to proceed with finalization of a joint powers agreement to be brought back for Council approval. If a final joint powers agreement is developed and approved, it would be my recommendation to fund the initial capital cost assessment (estimate $30,000 to $50,000) for this facility out of the capital projects funds and the ongoing maintenance and operation costs of this facility out of the annual fire department budget (estimate $2,000 to $3,000 annually). TO: JERRY SPLINTER CITY MANAGER FROM: RON BOMAN FIRE CHIEF SUBJECT: REQUEST TO BE PART OF A 4 FIRE DEPT. CONSORTIUM BURN BUILDING DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1989 I have received some infromation from Chief Bob Aldrich of the Fridley Fire Department regarding Brooklyn Centers Fire Department interest in joining into some type of joint powers agreement in developing and constructing a training burn facility for training firefighters. I have long felt the need for a dedicated training facility for training firefighters, at the present we have a very extensive training course before a person can become a firefighter for the Citytbut we lack the necessary hands on type training that a facility of this type would give us. This type of facility would allow us to train firefighters under very simular conditions that they would encounter when entering a actual house or building fire something we cannot do at the present time. I will address the needs for such a facility in the next few paragraphs and also give some background on how we are presently training our firefighters and the need to up grade that training. Currently, firefighters in Brooklyn Center conduct training at various locations throughout the City. These include city streets, private properties, and occupied as well as unoccupied structures. These makeshift training sites are minimally satisfactory, and are limited to basic rather that advanced fire fighting skill development. If fire fighting consisted only of water application to a burning object, it would probably be sufficient to continue training in the above fashion. The role of fire suppression forces has changed dramatically in recent years. No longer is the extinguishment of a burning structure the primary goal. Dramatic changes have occurred throughout society that have had a tremendous impact on today's fire service. the extensive utilization of high speed highways and transportation modes within the City of Brooklyn Center have necessitated the acquiring of additional skills and tools to treat injured and extricate victims of accidents. The industrialzation of the City has brought about the need to develope rescue techniques and abilities in the workplace. Hazardous material leaks, spills and toxic cloud releases have added the requirement of new tools, implements, knowledge bases to fire fighting personnel. Page 2 Multiple storied high occupancy dwellings create the need for new skills, equipment and techniques. The theory of all of the above can be taught in the classroom; but to be able to convert an understanding of theory to a ability- to preform a task, it is necessary to be able to develope actual scenarios and events whereby personnel can actually perform those Y p Y p e hands -on activities and skills that are necessary to complete the task there assigned. Inherent to firefighter training is the need to expose firefighters to live burn scenarios. In the past we have used vacant buildings that may have had undetected structural weaknesses. Use of this type of structure can also cause public inconvenience and nuisance. The uncertainty of availility of a structure for live burns also creates difficulty in the organization of a training plan and schedule. There have been many times in the past few years we have had firefighters join our fire department that have completed the classroom instruction but due to lack of any structure to burn in our city or any adjoining city, have not been subjected to any type of live training. Without being able to subject a new firefighter to any type of live burn and heat related realistic type training we do not know how a firefighter will react under fire conditions until he /she is subjected to the real scenario of fighting a fire. I feel this is a dangerous practice to continue to follow, but up until now we have had no reasonable alternative to follow or pursue. This chronic problem will remain with us in the future of having no structures to conduct live burns in. Faced with new training standards by N.F.P.A. and OSHA, the ever increasing threat of hazardous materials incidents, the public liability created by training in public streets and non city owned buildings and ongoing development of the City reducing suitable training locations, all point to the need of a dedicated training facility. A designed facility for firefighter training will increase safety factors in fire fighting, firefighter training and most certainly reduce public nuisance, criticisms and inconvenience. When we take into consideration that we have no place in Brooklyn Center lar e and g n remote enough to house a training facility an d g ,� Y not generate complainants while being used, the prospal to join with four (4) other Cities to build such a facility would be a excellent decision to make. This proposal would use land presently owned by the City of Fridley located immediatley east of the Columbia Arena, it would consist of a 3 story metal drill tower with an attached live burn room. Page 3 A drafting /pump test pit as well as a fammable liquids burn pit and an area to train on wrecked cars.. This prospal would cost the City of Brooklyn Center between $35,000 and $50,000 for its share in the project with the balance being divided equally between the other communities of Fridley, Columbia Heights, Spring lake Park. Chief Aldrich from Fridley would like to meet as soon a possiable to start to draw up a joint powers agreement for the Cities involved and also get some more accurate figures for the cost of building the facility, the amount I have quoted in this letter would be the maximum amounts Brooklyn Center would have to budget for. There would be some yearly fee for maintaining this facility but this would not be extreamly costly to maintain. I would appreciate your comments and help in presenting this to the council so Brooklyn Centers Fire Department Can become a part of this much needed training facility. i TRAIN TOWER "ODE FT - 6 _ °w LL W The largest and most versatile "Ready -To- Assemble" Training Tower O C available to the fire service today. Z p$ Z 0 The !Iodel FT -6 contains as standard features: Q > I J TOWER: Three full floors with attic area above. Stairs and Decks. J W Floor space measuring 25'4" x 25'4 ". A 16 degree sloping O p roof, 34'11" on the high side and 27'6" on the low side. f „II —, 7V W L O Roof mounted vent hatch, p SHED RDOF:A sloping roof attached to the side of the tower containing Q r a roof hatch for low level ventilation drill. This roof N W extends 14'6" from the Tower and spans the 25'4" dimension. O J 0 Hay be enclosed if desired for storage purposes. It is Z z Lj i 13'3" on the high side and 14'0" at the eave. o I : W ors v r: EALCC',Y: The FT-6 design includes a second floor balcony with door. Q d w z W � v The balcony extends 4'0" from the Tower and is 7'0" wide. W 7 LL z� 10' -0" s to J J v� ANNEX: Located on the side of the Tower, this larger, 14'I!j" x W 25'4" room accommodates partitions if desired and can be Z z converted to a Live Fire Burn Room with the selection of the 0 > - optional Burn P,00m Kit, dW J Q r ACCESSA6ILIT'l: Oo,> F With the shed roof and burn room positioned on the sides of W ? the Tower, both the front and rear of the Tower are available ~ � Q � for ground ladder work. �' W Z >> We sincerely believe that you will find that this advancement in Tower O ZO d 0 design represents the finest "Hands -On" training tool available to the -1 �. Fire Service and is offered at an "affordable" price. t W >n o z t J , G m e 0i z _ _ tt F ?l z r 7 � Zfs E ' $ 0 a 1 � u Janesville, WI ' � � Page 9 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date — 0 / % O Agenda hem Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: AMENDMENT TO 1990 -91 L.E.L.S. LOCAL 82 CONTRACT *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: c Sign re - title - James Lindsay, Chief of Pollc MANAGE EVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached yes ) • Attached is a memorandum to me from Barbara Cox outlining the amendments to the 1990 -91 L.E.L.S. Local 82 contract and the reasons for the changes. Also attached are amended copies of the contract with the new pages inserted. I have discussed these changes with Union President, Mike Kaulfuss. He agrees with the changes as presented. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council approve the amendments to the 1990 -91 L.E.L.S. Local 82 union contract. • MEMORANDUM TO: James Lindsay, Chief of Police FROM: Barbara Cox, Admin Svcs Mgr g DATE: January 11, 1990 SUBJECT: Amendment to Labor Contract When the 1990 -91 L.E.L.S. Local 82 contract was drafted, originally the increased differential pay was drafted for investigators only. When the change was made to include school liaison officer, juvenile officer, dog handler and paramedic before signing, Appendix A, section 2 was amended, but Appendix B, Article B -I Definitions section 1 was missed. As this error was corrected, two other problems were corrected at the same time. First, the definition was titled, Regular Pay Rate. Throughout the beginning of the contract, this is referred to as the 'Base Pay Rate." The word "base" was then added to be consistent with the rest of the contract. Also, the definition does not list longevity pay in the base rate. In actual practice, we have included longevity in the base rate for some time because of the FLSA rules on overtime payments, as interpreted by the city's labor consultant, Cy Smythe. All of these changes occurred within Appendix B, Article B -I, section 1. I have outlined these changes for your convenience. The newly added sections are underlined, deleted word is bracketed. 1. REGULAR BASE PAY RATE: The employee's hourly or monthly base pay rate, including educational incentive pay, longevity paX, and [investigator] differential for investigator (detective) school liaison officer, juvenile officer, dog handler and paramedic; and excluding any other special allowance. Because these changes added to the size of the paragraph, pages B -ii and B- iii were altered as to page endings. ` MASTER LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, LOCAL NO. 82 ARTICLE I PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT is entered into as of January 1, 1990 between the City of Brooklyn Center, hereinafter called the EMPLOYER, and Law Enforcement Labor Services, Local No. 82, hereinafter called the UNION. It is the intent and purpose of this AGREEMENT to: 1.1 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes concerning this AGREEMENT'S interpretation and /or application; and 1.2 Place in written form the parties' agreement upon terms and conditions of employment for the duration of this AGREEMENT. ARTICLE II RECOGNITION 2.1 The EMPLOYER recognizes the UNION as the exclusive representative, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 179.71, Subdivision 3, for all police personnel in the following job classifications: Sergeant Police Officer 2.2 In the event the EMPLOYER and the UNION are unable to agree as to the inclusion or exclusion of a new or modified job class, the issue shall be submitted to the Bureau of Mediation Services for determination. ARTICLE III DEFINITIONS 3.1 UNION: Law Enforcement Labor Services, Local No. 82. 3.2 UNION MEMBER: A member of Law Enforcement Labor Services, Local No. 82. 1 I - 3.3 EMPLOYEE: A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining unit. 3.4 DEPARTMENT: The City of Brooklyn Center Police Department. 3.5 EMPLOYER: The City of Brooklyn Center. 3.6 CHIEF: The Chief of the Brooklyn Center Police Department. 3.7 UNION OFFICER: Officer elected or appointed by Law Enforcement Labor Services, Local No. 82. 3.8 INVESTIGATOR /DETECTIVE: An employee specifically assigned or classified by the EMPLOYER to the job classification and /or job position of INVESTIGATOR /DETECTIVE. 3.9 OVERTIME: Work performed at the express authorization of the EMPLOYER in excess of the employee's scheduled shift. 3.10 SCHEDULED SHIFT: A consecutive work period including rest breaks and a lunch break. 3.11 REST BREAKS: Period during the SCHEDULED SHIFT during which the employee remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties. 3.12 LUNCH BREAKS: A period during the SCHEDULED SHIFT during which the employee remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties. 3.13 STRIKE: Concerned action in failing to report for duty, the willful absence from one's position, the stoppage of work, slowdown, or abstinence in whole or in part from the full, faithful and proper performance of the duties of employment for the purposes of inducing, influencing or coercing a change in the conditions or compensation or the rights, privileges or obligations of employment. 2 ARTICLE IV EMPLOYER SECURITY The UNION agrees that during the life of this AGREEMENT that the UNION will not cause, encourage, participate in or support any strike, slowdown or other interruption of or interference with the normal functions of the EMPLOYER. ARTICLE V EMPLOYER AUTHORITY 5.1 The EMPLOYER retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all manpower, facilities, and equipment; to establish functions and programs; to set and amend budgets; to determine the utilization of technology; to establish and modify the organizational structure; to select, direct, and determine the number of personnel, to establish work schedules, and to perform any inherent managerial function not specifically limited by this AGREEMENT. 5.2 Any term and condition of employment not specifically established or modified by this AGREEMENT shall remain solely within the discretion of the EMPLOYER to modify, establish, or eliminate. • ARTICLE VI UNION SECURITY 6.1 The EMPLOYER shall deduct the wages of employees who authorize such a deduction in writing an amount necessary to cover monthly UNION dues. Such monies shall be remitted as directed by the UNION. 6.2 The UNION may designate employees from the bargaining unit to act as a steward and an alternate and shall inform the EMPLOYER in writing of such choice and changes in the position of steward and /or alternate. - 6.3 The EMPLOYER shall make space available on the employee bulletin board for posting UNION notice(s) and announcement(s). 6.4 The UNION agrees to indemnify and hold the EMPLOYER harmless against any and all claims, suits, orders, or judgments brought or issued against the EMPLOYER as a result of any action taken or not taken by the EMPLOYER under the provisions of this Article. 3 ARTICLE VII EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 7.1 DEFINITION OF A GRIEVANCE A grievance is defined as a dispute or disagreement as to the interpretation or application of the specific terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT. 7.2 UNION REPRESENTATIVES The EMPLOYER will recognize REPRESENTATIVES designated by the UNION as the grievance representatives of the bargaining unit having the duties and responsibilities established by this Article. The UNION shall notify the EMPLOYER in writing of the names of such UNION REPRESENTATIVES and of their successors when so designated as provided by 6.2 of this AGREEMENT. 7.3 PROCESSING OF A GRIEVANCE It is recognized and accepted by the UNION and the EMPLOYER that the processing of grievances as hereinafter provided is limited by the job duties and responsibilities of the EMPLOYEES and shall therefore be accomplished during normal working hours only hen y consistent s stent with such EMPLOYEE duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved EMPLOYEE and a UNION REPRESENTATIVE shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in a when p y en a grievance is investigated and presented to the EMPLOYER during normal working hours provided that the EMPLOYEE and the UNION REPRESENTATIVE have notified n a d received the approval of the designated supervisor who has determined that such absence is reasonable and would not be detrimental to the work programs of the EMPLOYER. 7.4 PROCEDURE Grievances, as defined by Section 7.1, shall be resolved in conformance with the following procedure: Step 1. An EMPLOYEE claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application p of this AGREEMENT shall,, , within twenty -one (21) calendar days after such alleged violation has occurred, present such grievance to the EMPLOYEE'S supervisor as designated by the EMPLOYER. The EMPLOYER- designated representative will discuss and give an answer to such Step 1 grievance within ten (10) calendar days after receipt. A grievance not resolved in Ste 1 an P g and appealed to Step 2 shall be placed in writing setting forth the nature of the 4 I grievance, the facts on which it is based, the provision or provisions of the AGREEMENT allegedly violated, the remedy requested, and shall be appealed to Step 2 within ten (10) calendar days after the EMPLOYER - designated representative's final answer in Step 1. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 2 by the UNION within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 2. If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the UNION and discussed with the EMPLOYER - designated Step 2 representative. The EMPLOYER - designated representative shall give the UNION the EMPLOYER'S Step 2 answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 2 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 2 may be appealed to Step 3 within ten (10) calendar days following the P p EMPLOYER - designated representative's final Ste 2 answer. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the UNION within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 3. If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the UNION and discussed with the EMPLOYER - designated Step 3 representative. The EMPLOYER - designated representative shall give the UNION the EMPLOYER'S answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 3 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 3 may be appealed to Step 4 within ten (10) calendar days following the EMPLOYER - designated representative's final answer to Step 3. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 4 by the UNION within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 4. A grievance unresolved in Step 3 and appealed to Step 4 by the UNION shall be submitted to arbitration subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations Act of 1971. The selection of an arbitrator shall be made in accordance with the "Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances" as established by the Public Employment Relations Board. 7.5 ARBITRATOR'S AUTHORITY A. The arbitrator shall have no right to amend, modify, nullify, ignore, add to, or subtract from the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT. The arbitrator shall consider and decide only the specific issue(s) submitted 5 in writing by the EMPLOYER and the UNION, and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other issue not so submitted. B. The arbitrator shall be without power to make decisions contrary to, or inconsistent with, or modifying or varying in any way the application of laws, rules, or regulations having the force and effect of law. The arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days following close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later, unless the parties agree to an extension. The decision shall be binding on both the EMPLOYER and the UNION and shall be based solely on the arbitrator's interpretation or application of the express terms of this AGREEMENT and to the facts of the grievance presented. C. The fees and expenses for the arbitrator's services and proceedings shall be borne equally by the EMPLOYER and the UNION provided that each party shall be responsible for compensating its own representatives and witnesses. If either party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings, it may cause such a record to be made, providing it pays for the record. If both parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings the cost shall be shared equally. 7.6 WAIVER If a grievance is not presented within the time limits set forth above, it shall be considered "waived ". If a grievance is not appealed to the next step within the specified time limit or any agreed extension thereof, it shall be considered settled on the basis of the EMPLOYER's last answer. If the EMPLOYER does not answer a grievance or an appeal thereof within the specified time limits, the UNION may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that step and immediately appeal the grievance to the next step. The time limit in each step may be extended by mutual written agreement of the EMPLOYER and the UNION in each step. 6 7.7 CHOICE OF REMEDY If, as a result of the written EMPLOYER response in Step 3, the grievance remains unresolved, and if the grievance involves the suspension, demotion, or discharge of an employee who has completed the required probationary period, the grievance may be appealed either to Step 4 of Article VII or a procedure such as: Civil Service, Veteran's Preference, or Fair Employment. If appealed to any procedure other than Step 4 of Article VII, the grievance is not subject to the arbitration procedure as provided in Step 4 of Article VII. The aggrieved employee shall indicate in writing which procedure is to be utilized - -Step 4 of Article VII or another appeal procedure - -and shall sign a statement to the effect that the choice of any other hearing precludes the aggrieved employee from making a subsequent appeal through Step 4 of Article VII. ARTICLE VIII SAVINGS CLAUSE This AGREEMENT is subject to the laws of the United States, the State of Minnesota and the City of Brooklyn Center. In the event any provision of the AGREEMENT shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction from whose final judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within the time provided, such provisions shall be voided. All other provisions of this AGREEMENT shall continue in full force and effect. The voided provision may be renegotiated at the written request of either party. ARTICLE IX SENIORITY 9.1 Seniority shall be determined by continuous length of service in all of the job classifications covered by this AGREEMENT. Employees promoted from classifications covered by this AGREEMENT to a position outside the bargaining unit will continue to accrue seniority under this AGREEMENT until the completion of their promotional probationary period or for no longer than twelve (12) months. The seniority roster shall be based on length of service in all of the job classifications covered by this AGREEMENT. Employees lose seniority under this AGREEMENT under the following circumstances: resignation, discharge for cause, or transfer or promotion to a classification not covered by this AGREEMENT after completion of the promotional probationary period or for no longer than twelve (12) months after transfer or promotion. 7 9.2 During the probationary period a newly hired or rehired employee may be discharged at the sole discretion of the EMPLOYER. During the probationary period a promoted or reassigned employee may be replaced in his previous position at the sole discretion of the EMPLOYER. 9.3 A reduction of work force will be accomplished on the basis of seniority. Employees shall be recalled from layoff on the basis of seniority. An employee on layoff shall have an opportunity to return to work within two (2) years of the time of his layoff before any new employee is hired. 9.4 Senior employees will be given preference with regard to transfer, job classification assignments and promotions when the job - relevant qualifications of employees are equal. 9.5 Senior qualified employees shall be given shift assignment preference after eighteen (18) months of continuous full -time employment. Except as noted in the preceding sentence, shift assignments shall be bid on the basis of seniority at least annually and after any permanent change in the work schedule. Employees will not be subject to shift rotation more often than every four (4) months. 9.6 One continuous vacation period shall be selected on the basis of seniority until May 15 of each calendar year. ARTICLE X DISCIPLINE 10.1 The EMPLOYER will discipline employees for just cause only. Discipline will be in one or more of the following forms: a. oral reprimand; b. written reprimand; C. suspension; . d. demotion; or e. discharge. 10.2 Suspension, p sion, demotions and discharges will be in written form. 10.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension, and notices of discharge which are to become part of an employee's personnel file shall be read and acknowledged by signature of the employee. Employees and the UNION will receive a copy of such reprimands and /or notices. 8 10.4 Employees may examine their own individual personnel files at reasonable times under direct supervision of the EMPLOYER. 10.5 Discharges will be preceded by a five (5) day suspension without pay- 10.6 Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation of disciplinary action unless the employee has been given an opportunity to have a UNION representative present at such questioning. 10.7 Grievances relating to this Article shall be initiated by the UNION in Step 3 of the grievance procedure under ARTICLE VII. ARTICLE XI CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION Employees shall have the rights granted to all citizens by the United States and Minnesota Constitutions. ARTICLE XII WORK SCHEDULES 12.1 The normal work year is two thousand and eighty (2,080) hours to be accounted for by each employee through: a. hours worked on assigned shifts; b. holidays; C. assigned training; d. authorized leave time. 12.2 Holidays and authorized leave time is to be calculated on the basis of the actual length of time of the assigned shifts. 12.3 Nothing contained in this or any other Article shall be interpreted to be a guarantee of a minimum or maximum number of hours the EMPLOYER may assign employees. ARTICLE XIII OVERTIME 13.1 Employees will be compensated at one and one -half (1 -1/2) times the employee's regular base a rate for hour g pay s worked in excess of the employee's s re Marl scheduled shift. Changes C a es of regularly g shift do not qualify an employee for overtime under this Article. 13.2 Overtime will be distributed as equally as practicable. 9 13.3 Overtime refused by employees will for record purposes under Article 13.2 be considered as unpaid overtime worked. 13.4 For the purpose of computing overtime compensation overtime hours worked shall not be pyramided, compounded or paid twice for the same hours worked. 13.5 Overtime will be calculated to the nearest six (6) minutes. 13.6 Employees have the obligation to work 0 overtime or call backs if t g requested by the EMPLOYER unless unusual circumstances prevent the employee from so working. 13.7 When uniformed patrol employees have less than twelve (12) hours of duty free time between assigned shifts they will be compensated at a rate of one and one -half (1 -1/2) times the employee's regular base pay rate for the next shift. For purposes of this Article, shift extensions, elected overtime, voluntary changes of shifts, City contracted work, training, and court time are considered as duty free time. 13.8 As an option to monetary compensation for overtime a uniformed patrol officer may annually elect compensatory time off at a rate of one and one -half (1 -1/2) time, and an employee qualifying for investigator differential on a long -term basis may annually elect compensatory time off at a rate of straight time plus one -half (1/2) hour monetary compensation. An employee's compensatory time bank shall not exceed forty (40) hours at any time during a calendar year. On or about December 1 of each year the City will pay off by check the balance of compensatory time accumulated by each police officer. No compensatory time will be accumulated or used during the month of December. Special overtime duty assignments made available to all positions by the Chief of Police at the police officer's rate of compensation will not be eligible for compensatory time. Compensatory time off shall be granted only at the convenience of the EMPLOYER with prior approval of the EMPLOYER - designated supervisor. 13.9 Employees given less than sixteen (16) hours notice of a scheduled duty change other than their regularly scheduled work period shall be compensated at one and one -half (1 -1/2) times the employee's regular pay rate for hours worked outside of the scheduled work period. 10 ARTICLE XIV COURT TIME An employee who is required to appear in Court during his scheduled off -duty time shall receive a minimum of two (2) hours' pay at one and one -half (1 -1/2) times the employee's base pay rate. An extension or early report to a regularly scheduled shift for Court appearance does not qualify the employee for the two (2) hour minimum. Employees shall not be required to work office or street duty to qualify for the two (2) hours minimum. ARTICLE XV CALL BACK TIME An employee who is called to duty during his scheduled off -duty time shall receive a minimum of two (2) hours' pay at one and one -half (1- 1/2) times the employee's base pay rate. An extension or early report to a regularly scheduled shift for duty does not qualify the employee for the two (2) hours minimum. ARTICLE XVI WORKING OUT OF CLASSIFICATION Employees assigned by the EMPLOYER to assume the full responsibilities and authority of a higher job classification shall receive the salary schedule of the higher classification for the duration of the assignment. ARTICLE XVII STANDBY PAY Employees required by the EMPLOYER to standby shall be paid for such standby time at the rate of one hour's pay for each hour on standby. ARTICLE XVIII UNIFORMS The EMPLOYER shall provide required uniform and equipment items. In addition, the EMPLOYER shall pay to the uniformed officers a maintenance allowance of $85.00 per year. Plainclothes officers shall be paid a clothing allowance of $275.00 per year. 11 ARTICLE XIX INJURY ON DUTY Employees injured during the performance of their duties for the EMPLOYER and thereby rendered unable to work for the EMPLOYER will be paid the difference between the employee's regular pay and Worker's Compensation insurance payments for a period not to exceed ninety (90) working days per injury, not charged to the employee's vacation, sick leave or other accumulated paid benefits, after a three (3) working day initial waiting period per injury. g P P J rY . The three (3) working day waiting period shall be charged to the employees sick leave account less Worker's Compensation insurance payments. ARTICLE XX LONGEVITY AND EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVE Effective July 1, 1978 the following terms and conditions are effective: 20.1 After four (4) years of continuous employment each employee shall choose to be paid three percent (3 %) of the employee's base rate or supplementary pay based on educational credits as outlined in 20.6 of this ARTICLE. 20.2 After eight (8) years of continuous employment each employee shall choose to be paid supplementary pay of five percent (5%) of the employee's base rate or supplementary pay based on educational credits as outlined in 20.6 of this ARTICLE. 20.3 After twelve (12) years of continuous employment each employee shall choose to be paid supplementary pay of seven percent (7 %) of the employee's base rate or supplementary pay based on educational credits as outlined in 20.6 of this ARTICLE. 20.4 After sixteen (16) years of continuous employment each employee shall .choose to be paid supplementary a of nine PP rY P Y percent (9 %) of the employee's base rate or supplementary pay based on educational credits as outlined in 20.6 of this ARTICLE. 20.5 Employees may choose supplementary pay either for length of service or for educational credits no more often than once every twelve (12) months. 12 20.6 Supplementary pay based on educational credits will be paid to employees after twelve (12) months of continuous employment at the rate of: Educational Credits Stated Percentage in Terms of College Pay Quarter Credits Increment 45 - 89 3% . 90- 134 5% 135 -179 7% 180 or more 9% Not all courses are to be eligible for credit. Courses receiving qualifying credits must be job related. (Thus, a 4 -year degree is not automatically 180 credits - -or a 2 -year certificate is not automatically 90 credits.) y edits.) Job - related courses lus those formally Y required to enter such courses shall be counted. If Principles of Psychology (8 credits) is required before taking Psychology of Police Work (3 credits), completion of these courses would yield a total of 11 qualifying credits. C.E.U.'s (Continuing Education Units) in job - related seminars, short courses, institutes, etc. shall also be counted. The EMPLOYER shall determine which courses are job- related. Disputes are grievable based on the criteria outlined in the award of Minnesota Bureau of Mediation Services Case No. 78- PN- 370 -A. ARTICLE XXI WAIVER 21.1 Any and all prior agreements, resolutions, practices, policies, rules and regulations regarding terms and conditions of employment, to the extent inconsistent with the provisions of this AGREEMENT, are hereby superseded. 21.2 The parties mutually acknowledge that during the negotiations which resulted in this AGREEMENT, each had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands and proposals with respect to any term or condition of employment not removed by law from bargaining. All agreements and understandings arrived at by the parties are set forth in writing in this AGREEMENT for the stipulated duration of this AGREEMENT. The EMPLOYER and the UNION each voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives the right to meet and negotiate regarding an and all g g g Y terms and conditions of employment referred to or covered in 13 I this AGREEMENT or with respect to any term or condition of employment not specifically referred to or covered by this AGREEMENT, even though such terms or conditions may not have been within the knowledge or contemplation of either or both of the parties at the time this contract was negotiated or executed. ARTICLE XXII DURATION This AGREEMENT shall be effective as of January 1, 1990, and shall remain in full force and effect until the thirty -first day of December, 1991 for all items except that the item of insurance shall be open for negotiations for calendar year 1991. IN WITNESS THERETO, the parties have caused this AGREEMENT to be executed this day of 31 1989. FOR THE CITY OF FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR BR OKLYN CENTER: SERVICES #82 APPENDIX A 1. WAGE RATES - 1990 Police Officer After 36 months of continuous employment ... $2,990.00 per month After 24 months of continuous employment 93% of After 36 months rate After 12 months of continuous employment 86% of After 36 months rate After 6 months of continuous employment 79% of After 36 months rate Starting rate 72% of After 36 months rate Sergeant ... $310.00 above the After 36 months rate for police officer 2. a. Employees classified or assigned by the EMPLOYER to the following job classifications or positions will receive one hundred thirty -five dollars ($135.00) per month or one hundred thirty - five dollars ($135.00) prorated for less than a full month in addition to their regular wage rate: Investigator (Detective) School Liaison Officer Juvenile Officer Dog Handler Paramedic. b. Employees classified by the EMPLOYER to the following job classification will receive fifty dollars ($50.00) per month or fifty dollars ($50.00) prorated for less than a full month in addition to their regular wage rate: Corporal. 3. a. The EMPLOYER will contribute up to a maximum of two hundred forty dollars ($240.00) per month, per employee, for calendar year 1990 for general health, life, long -term disability, including dependent coverage. A -i b. If for 1990 the unit employees vote to use twenty dollars ($20.00) of the two hundred forty dollars ($240.00) per month, per employee, of health and life insurance for dental insurance for all unit employees, then such twenty dollars ($20.00) can be used to bid out a dental insurance program, provided that the bidding process would be in compliance with State law and that this would not otherwise be recluded b State law. P Y A -ii APPENDIX A 1. WAGE RATES - 1991 Police Officer After 36 months of continuous employment ... $3,113.00 P er month After 24 months of continuous employment 93% of After 36 months rate After 12 months of continuous employment 86% of After 36 months rate After 6 months of continuous employment 79% of After 36 months rate Starting rate 72% of After 36 months rate Sergeant ... $310.00 above the After 36 months rate for police officer 2. a. Employees classified or assigned by the EMPLOYER to the following job classifications or positions will receive one hundred forty -five dollars ($145.00) per month or one hundred forty -five dollars ($145.00) prorated for less than a full month in addition to their regular wage rate: Investigator (Detective) School Liaison Officer Juvenile Officer Dog Handler Paramedic. b. Employees classified b the EMPLOYER to the following Y classification will J 11 receive fifty dollars $50.00 per month or fif tY ( ) P tY dollars ($50.00) prorated for less than a full month in addition to their regular wage rate: Corporal. A -iii APPENDIX B This supplementary agreement is entered into between the City of Brooklyn Center and Law Enforcement Labor Services, Local No. 82 for the period beginning January 1, 1990 and ending December 31, 1991. ARTICLE B -I DEFINITIONS 1. REGULAR BASE PAY RATE: The employee's hourly or monthly base pay rate, including educational incentive pay, longevity pay, and differential for investigator (detective), school liaison officer, juvenile officer, dog handler and paramedic; and excluding any other special allowance. ARTICLE B -II VACATIONS 1. Permanent full -time employees shall earn vacation leave with pay as per the following schedule: 0 through 5 years of service - eighty (80) hours per year (accrued at 3.08 hours per pay period) 6 through 10 years of service - one hundred twenty (120) hours per year (accrued at 4.62 hours per pay period) eight (8) additional hours per year of service to a maximum of one hundred sixty (160) hours after fifteen (15) years of service. 11 years - 4.92 hours per pay period 12 years - 5.23 hours per pay period 13 years - 5.54 hours per pay period 14 years - 5.85 hours per pay period 15 years - 6.15 hours per pay period 2. Employees using earned vacation leave or sick leave shall be considered working for the purpose of accumulating additional vacation leave. 3. Vacation may be used as earned, except that the EMPLOYER shall approve the time at which the vacation leave may be taken. No employee shall be allowed to use vacation leave during his initial six (6) months of service. Employees shall not be permitted to waive vacation leave and receive double pay. B -i 4. Employees with less than five (5) years of service may accrue a maximum of one hundred twenty (120) hours of vacation leave. Employees with more than five (5) but less than fifteen (15) consecutive years of service (uninterrupted except for layoff not exceeding wo ears duration in an single layoff period) g 2 ()Y Y g Y P ) accrue a maximum of one hundred sixty (160) hours of vacation leave. Employees with fifteen (15) consecutive years or more of servi ce u ninterru to d except for layoff not exceeding two ( P P Y g 2 () ears duration anon in an single layoff period) may Y g Y P ) Y accrue a maximum of two hundred (200) hours of vacation leave. 5. Employees leaving the service of the EMPLOYER in good standing, after having given the EMPLOYER proper notice of termination of employment, shall be compensated for vacation leave accrued and unused. ARTICLE B -III SICK LEAVE 1. Sick leave with pay shall be granted to probationary and permanent employees at th e rate of eight h h P t 8 ours per month � t g () P or ninety - six (96) hours er y ear ( computed at 3.69 hours p er a P Y ( P P p period) of full -time service or major fraction thereof, except that J P sick leave r g anted probationary employees shall not be available for use during the first six (6) months of service. 2. Sick leave shall be used normally for absence from duty because of personal illness or legal quarantine of the employee, or because of serious illness in the immediate family. Immediate family shall mean brother, sister, parents, parents -in -law, spouse, or children of the employee. Sick leave may be used for the purpose of attending the funeral of immediate family members plus brothers -in -law, sisters -in -law, grandparents, grandparents - in -law, and grandchildren of the employee. In addition to the preceding conditions, supervisors may approve the use of sick leave, up to a maximum of four 4 days 32 hours per calendar ear, for the care f employee's y o the employee s children or spouse when the employee's supervisor determines that the situation requires the employee's presence. The p four (4) special use days 32 hours ) P Y ( ) cannot be accumulated from one year to the next, and if they are not used, they are included in the employee's normal sick leave accumulation. 3. Sick leave shall accrue at the rate of eight (8) hours per month or ninety -six (96) hours per year until nine hundred sixty (960) B -ii hours have been accumulated (shall be computed at 3.69 hours per pay period) and at the rate of four (4) hours per month or forty -eight (48) hours per year after nine hundred sixty (960) ours have been accumulated (shall be computed at 1.85 hours per pay period). Employees using earned vacation or sick leave shall be considered to be working for the purpose of accumulating additional sick leave. Workers Compensation benefits shall be credited against the compensation due employee's utilizing sick leave. 4. In order to be eligible for sick leave with pay, an employee must: a. notify the EMPLOYER prior to the time set for the beginning of their normal scheduled shift; b. keep the EMPLOYER informed of their condition if the absence is of more than three (3) days duration; C. submit medical certificates for absences exceeding three (3) days, if required by the EMPLOYER. 5. Employees abusing sick leave shall be subject to disciplinary action. ARTICLE B -IV SEVERANCE 1. An employee shall give the EMPLOYER two (2) weeks notice in writing before terminating his employment. 2. Severance pay in the amount of one -third (1/3) the accumulated sick leave employees have to their credit at the time of resignation or retirement, times their respective regular pay rate, shall be paid to employees who have been employed for at least five (5) consecutive years. If discharged for just cause, severance pay shall not be allowed. ARTICLE B -V HOLIDAY LEAVE 1. Holiday leave shall be granted for the following holidays: New Year's Day Columbus Day Martin Luther Kin g Y Da Veterans Day Presidents' Day Thanksgiving Day Memorial Day Christmas Day Independence Day and two (2) floating Labor Day Y as Y B -iii 2. Employees shall receive compensatory time off for each of the earned and accrued holidays. Such time off shall be taken as soon as practicable before or after the holiday for which it is accrued and as approved by the EMPLOYER. 3. An employee who works on New Year's Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day, Memorial Day, Veterans' Day, or Presidents' Day shall receive time and one -half (1 -1/2) his regular pay rate for all hours worked in addition to straight compensatory time off for the holiday. 4. Except as provided in B -V paragraph 3 above, overtime pay shall not be authorized for employees for hours worked on holidays when such work is part of the planned schedule. ARTICLE B -VI LEAVES OF ABSENCE 1. In cases of demonstrated need and where sick leave has not been abused, the EMPLOYER shall grant to employees a leave of absence without pay for extended personal illness after the accumulative sick leave has expired. Such leaves of absence shall 0 not exceed ninety (90) calendar days. Upon granting such unpaid leave of absence the EMPLOYER will not permanently fill the employee's position and the employee's benefits and rights shall be retained. 2. An employee called to serve on a jury shall be reimbursed the difference between the amount paid for such service (exclusive of travel and expense pay) and his compensation for regularly scheduled working hours lost because of jury service. 3. Employees ordered by proper authority to National Guard or Reserve Military Service not exceeding fifteen (15) working days in any calendar year shall be entitled to leave of absence without loss of status. Such employees shall receive compensation from the EMPLOYER equal to the difference between his regular pay and his lesser military pay. 4. Employees called and ordered by proper authority to active military service in time of war or other properly declared emergency shall be entitled to leave of absence without pay during such service. Upon completion of such service, employees B -iv shall be entitled to the same or similar employment of like seniority, status and pay as if such leave had not been taken, subject to the specific provisions of Chapter 192 of the Minnesota Statutes. ARTICLE B -VII AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION 1. The EMPLOYER shall implement the terms of this AGREEMENT in the form of a resolution. If the implementation of the terms of this AGREEMENT require the adoption of a law, ordinance or charter amendment, the EMPLOYER shall make every reasonable effort to propose and secure the enactment of such law, ordinance, resolution or charter amendment. ARTICLE B -VIII FALSE ARREST INSURANCE 1. The EMPLOYER will provide each employee and pay 100% of the premium due thereon, with false arrest insurance provided, however, that the EMPLOYER will not be obligated to contribute to the purchase of coverage for any punitive damage claims which may constitute a portion of such false arrest insurance. In the event that separate coverage cannot be obtained (i.e., for false arrest insurance coverage not including punitive damage claims) then the EMPLOYER shall not be obligated to pay for any premium which may become due for such insurance. In that event, the UNION may on behalf of its members obtain quotes for such insurance, including insurance containing separate coverage for punitive damage claims arising out of false arrest, and the EMPLOYER shall make contribution to the purchase of such insurance as shall be otherwise required according to the first sentence of this Article. ARTICLE B -IX SENIORITY 1. The EMPLOYER shall recognize seniority as the primary factor when authorizing holiday leave and compensatory time leave. 2. No time shall be deducted from an employee's seniority accumulation due to absences occasioned by an authorized leave with pay, any military draft or government call -up to Reserves or National Guard, or for layoffs of less than two (2) years in duration. B -v 3. There shall be an initial probationary period for new employees of twelve (12) months. 4. The EMPLOYER shall give the UNION and the employees at least two (2) weeks written notice in advance of any layoff. 5. The EMPLOYER shall recognize reverse seniority by classification as the primary factor when calling off duty employees to duty and when considering scheduled duty changes if such employees are qualified. q ARTICLE B -X TRAINING 1. The EMPLOYER shall reimburse each employee who is required to maintain a license as a law enforcement officer under Minnesota Statutes, Section 626.84, et sec., for actual expenses of tuition, meals, travel, and lodging incurred in meeting the continuing education requirements of the Minnesota Police Officers Standards and Training Board, not to exceed 48 hours of such training every three years. The EMPLOYER need not make such reimbursement for attendance at a course located more than 60 miles from the City of Brooklyn Center and such reimbursement shall not exceed similar allowances for state employees. If the EMPLOYER provides in- service training to its employees which meets the continuing education requirements of the Minnesota Police Officers Standards and Training Board, and if the EMPLOYER provides its employees with an opportunity to attend such in- service training courses, to the extent that such opportunity is provided to each employee, the obligation of the EMPLOYER to reimburse such employee for expenses incurred in attending continuing education courses shall be reduced. 2. The EMPLOYER shall pay each employee his regular salary while attending continuing education courses whether or not such courses attended are in- service training courses or courses given by instructors other than the EMPLOYER. The obligation of the EMPLOYER to pay such salaries shall not exceed a total of 48 hours every three years. i is B -vi CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date a �d Agenda Item Number r r REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION �D * # *r DDRCC� �r, trir* ytrrrrrrrra�trlrr�# rr, trr* rr, tr* r, tr, tir** r* r**** k*, trlrr* tl r ,t *r * *kytrrk #r # *,t *rrr,rrrrrr ITEM DESCRIPTION: PROPOSAL FOR FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNTS rrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrr:• rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrr rrrrrrrrrr: rrrrrrrrr *rrrrrrrrrrrr DEPARTMENT APPROVAL (2 - ' OM (brartnr of Finance Signature - title *rrrr *rrr r * *rrrrr *r * * * * *rrrrrrrrrf *rrrr *rr * rrr *rrrrrrrr * * * *rrr*rrrrrr *rrr*r MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report r Comments below /attached * rrrrrrrrrrtrrrrrr *r *rrrrrtrfrrrrr *rr �rrr* rrrr* rrrrrr* rrrrr* �rrr *r *rr *rr *rrr� *� rrr � r , rrr SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached At the January 8th Council meeting, Mr. Ardy Prekker from DCA, Inc. made a presen- tation about a flexible spending account ro ram for full -time Cit employees. The program would enable City employees to pay (1) health insurance prmiums, (2) unreimbursed medical expenses, and (3) child care from pre -tax dollars. The City Council expressed interest in the program and requested a proposal from DCA, Inc. to develop and administer the program. DCA, Inc. has now submitted a formal proposal. The proposal would include (1) plan document preparation, (2) communicate the program to City employees, and (3) admin- ister the programs for pre -tax health premiums, unreimbursed medical expenses, and child care. The charge for these services would be $3.60 per eligible employee per month. Currently, the City has 137 authorized full -time employee positions. The estimated annual cost of the program would be approximately $6,000 ($3.60 X 12 X 137). Most of the costs would be recovered through savings.on the City's share of taxes for FICA (Social Security). STAFF RECOMMENDATION --------------- - - - -- The staff recommends that the City nter ' Y into an agreement with DCA, Inc. to develop and administer the flexible spending account program. SPECIFIC ACTION REQUIRED BY THE CITY COUNCIL -------------------------------------------- Direct the staff to enter into an agreement with DCA, Inc. to provide services for a flexible spending account program for the City's full -time employees. The services are to include (1) Plan document preparation, (2) Employee communication, and (3) Administration for a program which is to include pre -tax health premiums, (2) unreimbursed medical expenses, and (3) child care at at cost of $3.60 per eligible employee per month. • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNTS PROPOSAL 1990 PLAN YEAR j i a 3 { i f FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNTS PROPOSAL 3 Contents SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNTS SECTION 2 NON DISCRIMINATION REQURIEMENTS SECTION 3 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF FSAs SECTION 4 REQUIREMENTS OF FSA ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5 DCA FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNT SERVICES SECTION 6 IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN - -HOW TO PROCEED SECTION 7 ABOUT DCA SECTION 8 DCA ADMINISTRATIVE FEES x r 3 d 3 _ 3 Section 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Increased Income for Participants Flexible spending accounts are employee benefit programs which permit employees to pay certain out -of- pocket expenses- -such as medical and dental premiums, health care expenses (including both medical and dental), and dependent day care expenses - -with pre -tax dollars. This results in increased spendable income for participants. s Savings to the Plan Sponsor Pre -tax dollars used to pay qualified expenses are not subject to FICA (social security) taxes - -for either the employee or the employer. Depending upon the provisions of the employer's medical and dental plans, the timing of reimbursements and the degree of utilization of the accounts, these tax savings may offset the cost of the plan to the employer. IRS Regulations The primary IRS requirements are: 1. The plan must have a formal plan document and employees must receive a summary plan description of benefits. 2. The plan must meet the nondiscrimination requirements of a - Section 125 and 129. See "Nondiscrimination Requirements ". i t 1 i wiw 3. Expenses can only be reimbursed through the flexible spending account if they were incurred during the plan year and while the employee was a participant in the plan. An expense is incurred on the date the service was rendered. 4. The source of funds for the FSA can be employee salary reduction contributions and /or employer contributions. 5. Employees who wish to participate must designate the amount of their salary reduction contributions to each account for the coming plan year before the start of the year. 6. Employees may revoke or change a previous election during the year only if they incur a "Status Change" defined as a significant curtailment of coverage or a significant increase in the cost of coverage, marriage, death, divorce, birth or adoption of a child, and a change in the spouse's employment status or health coverage due to employment, or an increase or reduction in the employee's hours. 7. Money left in an account after all expenses for the year have been reimbursed must be forfeited -- employees may not roll money over into the next year, receive their unused money back in cash, or use money from one account to reimburse expenses in another account (e.g., use health care money to reimburse day care expenses). 8. Plan sponsors must file a Form 5500 (annual tax return) for each plan each year. lei 3 f 2 9. In order to pay a benefit, the plan must receive a written statement from a third party stating the expense and a written statement from the employee stating the expense is not being reimbursed by another source. 10. Forfeitures at the end of the plan year are considered to be part of an "experience gain ". The total experience gain is the total premiums paid over the FSA's total claims reimbursements and reasonable administrative costs. The options for use of any such i gains include: – Return them to participants for the past year on an equal basis or weighted to reflect total elections, not forfeited amount, of each participant. Use them to reduce premium costs for the next plan year. I.e., offer $500 worth of benefits for $480 in contributions. 11. Special requirements for dependent care FSAs include: 0 The maximum pre –tax reimbursement is $5,000 per year. • Employees must receive a statement of their dependent care account usage as of each December 31. 0 Employers must reflect the amount of pre –tax contributions for the year on the employee's W -2 i i forms. 0 Child care reimbursements are only allowed for dependents under age 13. F } 3 - - —mow • Dependent day care tax credits, taken on an employee's tax return, are reduced dollar for dollar by FSA reimbursements for the year. • Employers must explain to the employee in what circumstances the tax credit is more advantageous than the plan. • Persons receiving FSA reimbursement must generally provide the name, address and taxpayer ID number of their dependent care provider when they file their personal income tax return. 12. Special requirements for health FSAs include: • Premiums for other health care or dental care coverage are not allowed to be paid through the health FSA. • The maximum amount of reimbursement, reduced by prior reimbursements, must be available at all times during i the coverage period. • Contributions by the employees can be in large installments such as monthly, quarterly, or semi- s annually rather than per payroll. However, the schedule cannot be based on the amount of claims incurred and it may not be accelerated to cover claims. • Claims must be paid at least monthly or when a pre - set minimum amount of expenses are incurred (e.g. $50.00). 4 MW - -- - 0 A terminating participant must be given the option to continue receiving benefits under the plan for the full COBRA continuation period (at least 18 months) if he or she continues to make the premium payments (formerly "contributions "). The participant may discontinue coverage under the plan if payment of premiums is discontinued. Plan Design Strategies 1. Restrict eligibility as much as possible to eliminate the risk of early turnover employees electing a large benefit and then terminating employment. 2. Structure the definition of benefits payable under the health account to limit expenses that can be incurred in a short time. 3. Limit the amount of coverage available under the health FSA to a level the employer is willing to risk. 4. Eliminate or restrict election change opportunities. s 3 5 s MW Section 2 NON— DISCRIMINATION REQUIREMENTS Section 125 Discrimination Tests Overall Plan (medical, dental, disability, t and d r Y ou _ g p term life employee premiums, if part of lan p plus health care and dependent care expense reimbursement accounts). 1• Plan eligibility can't discriminate in favor of Highly g Y Compensated _ Employees. 2• Contributions by Key Employees can't exceed 25% of the total of all contributions to the plan, ' Dependent Care Plan Only y (Section 129) 1• Plan eligibility, li g t y, contributions, or benefits can't discriminate in favor of Highly Compensated Employees or their dependents. 2• Contributions by 5% or more ow ner s or ( their spouses ouses or dependents) can t exceed 25% 5s of the total of all contributions to the plan. 3• The average contributions of non Highly Compensated Employees must be at least 55% of the average contributions of Highly Compensated Employees ees (em to p Y whose compensation is less than $25,000 or a lower Y compensation figure may be excluded for salary reduction plans). f t 6 i Generally, the "highly compensated employee" and "key employee" definitions are as follows. These abbreviated definitions may be used for purposes of making estimates. However, precise x discrimination testing must be based on the definitions in the law and regulations. HIGHLY COMPENSATION EMPLOYEE Any employee who, during the current or preceding year: 1. 5% owner* 2. earns more than $81,720 in compensation ** 3. earns more than $54,480 in compensation ** } and is in "top paid" group (highest 20 %) 4. an officer who earns more than $49,032 in compensation ** KEY EMPLOYEE Any employee who, during the current or preceding 4 years: 1. is a 5% owner* 2. is a 1% owner* and earns over $150,00 in compensation 3. one of the top 10 owners* and 4. an officer who earns more than $49,032 in compensation ** * Family attribution rules apply to all ownership situations. ** These are 1989 figures. They are indexed for inflation. lei 7 Section 3 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF FSAS ADVANTAGES Employee -�— Employer 1) expenses paid with pre -tax 1 dollars - -taxes reduced ) Payroll taxes reduced - federal income tax - FICA f - state, income tax - FUTA New Jersey, Pennsylvania, - Possibly state unemploy- ment taxes (varies from Arkansas, and Alabama) FICA state to state) not workers' compensation 2) completely voluntary pro- 2 em gram, provides benefit/ ployer gets float on tax flexibility to salary reduction deposits employees until claims are reimbursed 3) PERA contributions (for certain public sector 3 ) helps attract and retain employers) are not affected employees DISADVANTAGES Employee Employer 1) "use it or lose it "- -for_ —� feiture of unused amounts 1) employers must reimburse the (careful planning and ood full amount of the claim communication required i the health reimbursement account (up to the total annual amount of the contri- butions elected by the employee)--employer ma not ._ Y be fully paid back if employee terminates employment or changes family status prior to the end of the plan year. 2) limitations on y to change e after ca on y 2) modifications _ s to payroll plan year q start of system required 8 MW® Employee Employer 3) could potentially reduce 3) discrimination tests must - social security (and perhaps be monitored and met unemployment compensation benefits) - - typically negligible impact 4) plan documents and admini- stration required fi 5) other pay based plans (e.g., retirement plan, disability) would have to be amended to base benefits on pay before salary reduction 6) no guarantee that Congress won't modify or outlaw these kinds of lans in the e future { r j 3 T 7 a } 9 MT i FLEX PAYCHECK COMPARISON ANALYSIS 3 SSN: 334 -46 -5782 NAME: John E. Doe Exemptions: 4 Current Paycheck Illustration SemiMonthly Annual GROSS TAXABLE COMPENSATION $1,479.17 $35,500.00 1. FICA 111.86 2,684.64 2. Federal Withholding Tax 153.00 3,672.00 3. State Withholding Tax 96.00 2,304.00 4. County Withholding Tax 0.00 0.00 5. City Withholding Tax 0.00 0.00 6. Other deduction (1) 0.00 0.00 7. Other deduction (2) 0.00 0.00 TOTAL WITHHOLDING TAXES $ 360.86 $ 8,660.64 F a ADJUSTED NET PAY $1,118.31 $26,839.36 * ** ADDITIONAL AFTER TAX EXPENSES * ** 3 8. Medical Reimbursement 75.00 1,800.00 9. Dependent Care 125.00 3,000.00 TOTAL PERSONAL PAYMENTS $ 200.00 $ 4,800.00 ( NET DISPOSABLE INCOME $1,029.89 $24,717.28 q Semi- Monthly Paycheck Comparison w/o Flex w /Flex GROSS COMPENSATION $1,479.17 $ 1,479.17 1. Medical Reimbursement 0.00 75.00 2. Dependent Care 0.00 125.00 PRE -TAX REDUCTION IN COMPENSATION $ 0.00 $ 200.00 NEW TAXABLE COMPENSATION $1,479.17 $ 1,279.17 FICA Social Security 111.86 96.06 Withholding (Approx.) 249.00 201.00 TOTAL TAXES WITHHELD $ 360.86 $ 297.06 After Tax Expenses 200.00 0.00 TAKE HOME PAY $ 918.31 $ 982.11 SAVINGS FROM EACH PAYCHECK $63.80 10 Section 4 REQUIREMENTS OF FSA ADMINISTRATION i Proper administration of your Flexible Spending Account plan is crucial to the success of the program. If employees do not receive reimbursement checks when they expect them, or reimbursement amounts are different than anticipated or wrong, or if the procedure is complex and confusing, employees will quickly become disillusioned about the value of the plan. i 3 The administration of the plan must provide: i * CONFIDENTIALITY - the employer does not want to be in the position oi- claims examiner to review private medical claims of employees. a * EFFICIENCY - claim documentation must be reviewed, reimbursements must be prepared timely and accurately, and participants must understand the system. * PROFICIENCY - The employer must be kept up to date on legislative developments, plan requirements, and discrimination testing. 11 1 7 e�® i } Section 5 DCA FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNT SERVICES s 3 DCA's state of the art Flexible Spending Account administration system provides the essential elements that relieves the employer of "administrative hassles" and allows him to reap the rewards of a highly efficient employee benefit plan. Claims verification and documentation * 100% Confidentiality * Prompt and accurate processing of financial and employee claims data * Audit trail including report of expenditures * Maintenance of plan records * Reports easily understood by plan sponsor and participant * Semi - monthly or bi- weekly reimbursement processing to match your payroll * Immediate service and response from DCA Account Executive and Account Processor. * Customer service hot -line provided to participants * Universal checking account * Supply of all enrollment forms, claim forms, return envelopes, checks and stubs. s 12 —_ MW's i a DCA' Flexible Spending Account services generally fall into three categories: 1. Plan document preparation 2. Employee communication 3. Administration Plan Document Preparatio The initial step in implementing a Flexible Spending Account program is the preparation of appropriate documents. Since the plan draft becomes a legal document upon its adoption, any plan draft prepared by DCA is intended for review by your legal counsel. In addition to the drafting of the plan document, a summary plan description (SPD) outlining the details of the i program for participants, would be prepared. r Employee Communication Even the best designed plan will fail if employees don't x understand it or, worse � are et suspicious of it. DCA can Y P provide you with the appropriate informational materials to properly communicate your new program to employees, and, if desired, we can also conduct employee meetings for you. Each element of the DCA communication package has been carefully designed to be easily understood, yet comprehensive enough to properly inform employees about the benefits of your Flexible Spending Account plan. If desired, DCA also can help with the design and preparation of supplemental communication pieces, such as posters, brochures and slide shows. a F 2 13 Administration i DCA's administration system operates as follows: 1. Participants Submit Claims - Whenever eligible "out -of- pocket" expenses are incurred, partici- pants record the expenses on claim forms and, once they total $50 or more, mail them to DCA. All i participants are required to submit documentation supporting the expense with each claim for reimbursement. DCA conducts audits of claims of on a rolling sample basis one month per year. 2. Employer Transfers Participant Census and Payroll Y Data - At the end of each processing period (typically semi - monthly or bi- weekly), a hardcopy listing of any changes to enrolled participants' deduction amounts plus information on new enrollees is submitted to DCA. 3. DCA Processes Claims and Prepares Checks - DCA processes and approves the claims received during the period and produces the appropriate checks and explanatory check stubs. The processing of claims is kept absolutely confidential. Only the claimant and DCA, Inc. know the nature of the claims submitted for reimbursement. If there is not enough money in an employee's account to cover claims submitted during the processing period, the } excess claims are suspended and paid from f 14 contributions made in a subsequent processing period (except at the end of the plan year after all contributions for the year have been paid to the employee for previously submitted eligible expenses). For plan years beginning in 1990 or later, this practice will no longer apply to the health care account and claims will be reimbursed up to the remaining amount of the employee's coverage, whether or not the employee's account balance is greater than the amount of the claim. 4. Summary Report Produced - A summary report of all financial activity in participant accounts for the period (including deposits, claims approved, claims paid, claims suspended and ending balances) is produced and sent to the plan sponsor at the end of each processing period. 5. Reimbursement Checks Distributed - The employer deposits or wire transfers to a special account the exact amount necessary to cover total participant reimbursements for the processing period. When the employer deposit is received in the universal checking account maintained by DCA for Flexible Spending Account plans, DCA releases the participant checks and explanatory stubs for distribution. Participant checks may be sent in batch to the employer or mailed to participants' homes. lei 3 15 z _ �..Mb, PLEASE NOTE: The DCA universal checking account is set up exclusively for paying claims. As soon as the bank - -First Bank Minneapolis -- receives your employer deposit or wire transfer, DCA is notified and participant checks are released immediately. DCA does not earn any interest on money transferred to the account and does not have access to the funds in any way except to pay participant claims. The advantages of the universal checking account to the plan sponsor are that DCA will reconcile the account transactions and will provide the check stock. At the end of each plan year, DCA will prepare an individual report for each plan participant showing all of the activity in t his or her account during the year and the amount of his or her ending balance (forfeiture), if any. In addition, for calendar year plans, the December 31 summary report produced by DCA should aid the plan sponsor in preparing the dependent care account contribution section of participants W -2 forms. If the plan year is not a calendar year, the employer will need to track the January 1 - December 31 dependent care account contributions for each participant in order to complete the W -2 forms. } r t 16 Section 6 IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN i a Party Responsible Function a You and DCA Develop an implementation timetable You and DCA Design the program DCA or your legal Draft the plan(s); (If prepared by DCA, counsel specimen plan drafts for review by legal counsel) DCA or your legal Draft the summary plan description counsel You Announce employee meetings DCA Prepare employee meeting presentation and handout materials You and DCA Conduct employee meetings and distribute handout materials, enroll participants DCA Prepare claim processing schedule You and DCA Establish data exchange procedures You Modify the payroll system You Enter participant information into payroll system You and DCA Ongoing Flexible Spending Account administration lei l r 17 ( i i Section 7 ABOUT DCA i DCA was founded in 1953 to assist employers in the design and administration of corporate pension and profit sharing plans. Responding to the growing needs of our clients, and to constantly changing government regulations, DCA has expanded far beyond its t original focus. DCA's consulting services presently include wage and salary systems, self- funded healthcare and workers' compensation programs, and the design and administration of all types of flexible compensation programs. DCA consulting services are provided through our three operating divisions - -The DCA Benefits Group, The DCA Stanton Group, and The DCA Healthcare Management Group. The DCA Benefits Group specializes in the areas of IRS- qualified retirement plans and Flexible Spending Account (FSA) programs. In addition to providing FSA plan design, communication, and administration services for clients throughout the Upper Midwest the DCA Benefits Group provides the following services: . actuarial valuations for defined benefit pension plans . recordkeeping for profit sharing, 401(k), ESOP, money F purchase pension and thrift /savings plans . design, costing and installation of newly installed retirement plans (or redesign of existing plans) . retirement plan termination consulting 3 } 18 corporate merger and acquisition employee benefits consulting government forms filing y employee benefit communications comprehensive flexible compensation programs we would welcome the opportunity to assist you with the installation and administration of your Flexible Spending Account program. r a i i i s 19 ,M City f Rrn y oklvn (.'enter DCA Administrative Fees Include: o Specimen Plan Document o Summary Plan Description o Reimbursement Schedule x o Employee Communication Package, including: o Flex Account Folder i o Enrollment Information o Employee Budget Form o Reimbursement Request Form and Return Envelope o Three Employee meetings conducted by DCA Consultants o Medical and Day Care Account Processing o Process Requests for Reimbursement o Deposit Contributions o Issue Participant Checks for Reimbursement o Mail Reimbursement Checks to Participants i o Handle Phone Calls for Reimbursement Questions o Annual 5500 Series Government Forms Completion o Discrimination Testing o COBRA Administration Monthly Cost: $3.60 per eligible employee CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1/29/90 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: HUMAN RIGHTS AND RESOURCES COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE A SURVEY OF RESIDENTS REGARDING TRANSPORTATION *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Personnel Coordinator Signature - title MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached _) As directed by the city council, the human rights and resources commission has been preparing a proposal for a paratransit transportation program in Brooklyn Center. The program would be a community- centered transit service for residents of Brooklyn Center that would provide door -to -door rides under a shared ride concept. As part of the proposal, the City would solicit bids annually from O commercial taxicab companies to provide the transit service. The City would pursue the use of grant monies from the Regional Transit Board (RTB) to partially fund the program. Other revenue sources would be the City and ridership fees. A rough draft of the grant request to the RTB has been prepared by the commission. Before proceeding further, the commission has expressed concern over whether or not the community would embrace such a program. At its January 1990 meeting, the commission met with representatives of Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council (NWHHSC) to discuss the option of conducting a short community survey focused on the transportation issue to determine if the proposed program is truly what the residents of Brooklyn Center want or need. Councilmember Todd Paulson suggested extending the survey to include other transportation issues such as light rail transit (LRT) or use of the MTC bus service. The commission requested NWHHSC to prepare a proposal for conducting a brief community survey, and a copy of the proposal is attached. The commission recommended that the city council approve funding to conduct a survey to collect information regarding transportation (a copy of the January 10, 1990, human rights and resources commission meeting minutes are attached). Human rights and resources commissioners said they could volunteer to do some of the phone surveying. The approximate cost of conducting a survey with this assistance as quoted by NWHHSC is about $2,300. If NWHHSC were to do all of the data collection, the total survey cost could be between $3,300 and $5,800 (depending on the length of the survey). NWHHSC is in a good position to conduct such a survey because of its expertise in the human service field and knowledgeable and experienced staff in the data research area. • RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Approve /disapprove of the human rights and resources commission's recommendation to fund a survey to collect information regarding transportation. MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS AND RESOURCES COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JANUARY 10, 1990 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center human rights and resources commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairperson Stoderl at 7:33 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Stoderl, Commissioners Larsen, Sullivan, Eckman, and Smith. Also present were Councilmember Paulson; Patty Wilder, Executive Director, and Susan Rest, Planner, both of Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council ( NWHHSC); and Recording Secretary Geralyn Barone. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -SEPTEMBER 13 1989 There was a motion by Commissioner Sullivan and seconded by Commissioner Larsen to approve the minutes of the September 13, 1989, meeting as submitted. The motion passed. MW TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PROPOSAL FOR BROOKLYN CENTER Chairperson Stoderl said representatives from NWHHSC were here to discuss the possibility of conducting an interest survey of residents to determine if there is support for the proposed transportation system before pursuing a grant for the program. Ms. Wilder reviewed the history of NWHHSC and noted it is a research and planning agency for human services. She pointed out that Brooklyn Center has participated as a member of the joint powers agreement which formed the council back in the early 1970s. Chairperson Stoderl reviewed the background of the proposed transportation project including why the commission is currently working on this project, the type of program being pursued, and a review of the draft of the rant proposal. g p Chairperson Stoderl said that before the commission proceeds forward with this project, it would be nice to make sure this is what the city needs. Ms. Rest asked what the scope of the program will be, and Chairperson Stoderl said the program would be available to most residents, although handicapped persons would have to use other available transportation systems. She added low - income residents would be able to pay a reduced fee. There was discussion by the commission and representatives of NWHHSC regarding the type of survey that could be used and the types of questions to be asked. 1/10/90 _1_ OIL Councilmember Paulson said the City may want to provide a Y proposed transportation service regardless of the outcome of the survey. He added the scope of the survey could be expanded to include all transportation issues, including light rail transit and issues involving the Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC) . Commissioner Sullivan said it is a good idea to expand the scope of the survey. There was discussion of the process to be followed for conducting he survey, y, and Chairperson Stoderl suggested the commissioners participate in the survey phone calling to save money. Commissioner Smith pointed out that the commissioners may have a particular bias. Ms. Wilder said their proposal can outline what the costs of the survey will be if the commission were to assist in gathering data and also if NWHHSC were to do all the data gathering. >` Chairperson Stoderl suggested the commission discuss a time frame for this survey. The recording secretary said the next city council meeting is scheduled for January 29, 1990, at which time it would be appropriate to have a recommendation from the human rights and resources commission regarding the possibility of conducting a survey. Ms. Wilder said she would be able to submit a bid proposal to the recording secretary before the next city council meeting. There was a motion by Commissioner Eckman and seconded by Commissioner Larsen to recommend to the city council that it F approve funding to conduct a survey to collect information regarding transportation. The motion passed. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Sullivan and seconded by Commissioner Smith to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center human rights and resources commission meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Chairperson 1/10/90 _2_ NORTHWEST HENNEEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL REQUEST FGR PROPOSAL SUBJECT: Survey to determine rider of Proposed para-transit service. DESCRIPTION: T e city of Brooklyn Center is seeking grants for a proposed para-transit Dial-a-Ride service. The program will potentially serve elderly, persons with non-mobility disabilities, low income and others. The Human Rights Commission is exploring the transit possibilities and seeks proposals to conduct a survey of residents in Brooklyn Center to determine: the likely degree of community support for this proiject; its potential for use by target populations; and general residet satisfaction with existing transit services in Brooklyn Center. TO BE PROVIDED BY CLIENT: Outline of key issues or questions to be resolved by the survey. Volunteer nterviewers and central phone bank to be used by volunteer interviewers. Copies of previous reports commissioned by the Human Rights C­ and Brooklyn Center in regards to transportation needs. Listing of addresses/names/numbers for target population from which the Ccuncil will drawn the appropriate size sample. WORK SPECIFICATIONS: Time Frame: ' Data and preliminary analysis due in May -- exact date to be negotiated. Method: Telephone interview (7-1C minutes). Sample: Sample size will vary according to the needs of the Human Rights Commission regarding the universe required (either Brooklyn Center or specific sub-samples) and the confidence level required. A sample size of 150 randomly selected households in Brooklyn yn Center would provide reliable results for 90 out of 100 cases. Random sample of approximately 500 Brooklyr; Center households drawn from the city reverse directory would provide reliable results for 35 out of 100 cases. Estimated total number of households is 11,2 Interview Schedule: Approximately 20 fixed-alternative questions; 5 1 open-ended questio,rs plus age, gender, occupation, family status, method 'r 4. 01 transportation, and income. NOTE: Actual number of questions is negotiable and not yet finalized. BROOKLYN CENTER CORCORAN GOLDEN VALLEY MAPLE GROVE PLYMOUTH BROOKLYN PARK CRYSTAL HANOVER NEW HOPE ROBBINSDALE CHAMPLIN DAYTON HASSAN OSSEO ROGERS 7601 Kentucky Avenue N. • Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 (612) 493-2802 TO BE PROVIDED TO THE CLIENT: Data: Completed questionnaire:. Data records in ASCII on diskette. Analysis: Frequency distributions of all items; crosstabulations all items by specified demographic. vari&bles. Operational Description: Data on the following: a. Number of residential phones selected. b—, Number of phone numbe-3 wli no contact was made. C. Number of resident refusals. Number of Comp jet f-j_Interviews Response Rate= Number of Residential Phone identified in Listing Report: Two copies of written aralysis, one volume of crosstabulations and related statistical information, and an executive summary of the highlights of the findings. ITEMIZED COST ESTIMATES: (Assuming 150 completed interviews at 7- minutes per - interview - 250 listings drawn from sample provided by client. Maximum completed interviews of 500 - 7 120 listings also shown.) MEMBER CITY ADJ.COST COST, Questionnaire design and pretesting 600 900 Interview schedule design and training 60 90 Sample administration design and drawing* 238 - 308* 330-400 Interviewing** 1071 - 3571* Editing, code design, coding 120 - 473 189-630 Data entry* 62 -- 225 150-300 Computer Analysis and Report Writing 600 900 Total** 1680 - 2266 2559 - 3220 * NOTE: The items indicated may vary due to sample size and length of questionnaire. ** NOTE: Interviewing to be done b 1 -luman Rights Commission volunteers therefore not calculated in total price. Estimated cost listed for informational purposes only. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date �Ot 1 D Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: INVITATION FROM THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY TO SELL LOTTERY TICKETS AT BROOKLYN CENTER MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORES DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: Signature - title ****** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S GER S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION• No comments to supplement this report comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached EXPLANATION • At a recent City Council meeting, staff was directed to cause the City's three off -sale liquor stores to be placed on the State Lottery mailing list to receive information on selling lottery tickets. We have now received information and application forms to be completed if the City wishes to participate. I have attached -a copy of the retailer information brochure that we received. In summary, it says that for an annual fee of $100 per store, we are entitled to sell lottery tickets. For our efforts, we will be compensated for five percent of tickets sold. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends that the Council consider whether the City should be involved in selling lottery tickets. If so, the staff should be instructed to submit the applications necessary to become a designated seller. SPECIFIC ACTION REQUIRED BY THE CITY COUNCIL -------------------------------------------- Consider whether the City should be involved in selling lottery tickets. If no interest, no action is required. If the Council wishes to go ahead, the staff should be instructed to submit applications. • 4. esota� State Lottery Join Our Retailer Network � And Make the Lottery Your Business Retailer Information From the � Minnesota State Lottery r - THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY The people of Minnesota voted in 1988 to amend the Minnesota Constitution to authorize a state lottery, and in 1989, the Legislature and Governor approved its start -up and operation. A network of lottery ticket sales outlets throughout the state will be established, beginning in 1990. Proceeds from the Lottery are dedicated to the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund and the Greater Minnesota Corporation for economic development initiatives in rural communities. In what follows, we hope to convince you to join us in this endeavor. We have outlined the application process and have given you the information you need to make a business judgment regarding whether or not you want to sell lottery tickets. Please refer to this booklet for general information on the lottery and the retail application process. If you have any questions, we urge you to call us toll free at 1- 800 - 475 -4000. We are looking forward to a successful partnership if you do become a retailer for the Minnesota State Lottery. Thank you for your interest. V George R. Andersen, Director Minnesota State Lottery RETAILER APPLICATION INFORMATION TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL RETAILER INFORMATION 1. Who can sell lottery tickets? ................. ............................... 1 2. How much does it cost to become a retailer? .. ............................... 1 3. How much do I get for selling tickets? ....... ............................... 1 4. How do I get my tickets? .................. ............................... 1 5. When do I have to pay for the tickets? ....... ............................... 1 6. What prizes do I pay? ...................... ............................... 2 7. How will the Lottery train my staff and me? .. ............................... 2 8. What makes a good retailer? ................ ............................... 2 9. What are the benefits of being a lottery retailer? 2 10. When will the MN State Lottery start selling tickets? .......................... 2 HOW TO APPLY FOR A LOTTERY RETAILER CONTRACT ........................... 3 APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS ...................... ............................... 4 RETAILER APPLICATION FORM INSTRUCTIONS SectionI ...................................... ............................... 5 SectionII ...................................... ............................... 5 Retailer Business and County Code ................. ............................... 5 PROSPECTIVE LOTTERY RETAILER QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTIONS .............. 6 CHAIN APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS ............... ............................... 7 RETAILER MARKETING EVALUATION SectionI ...................................... ............................... 8 SectionII ...................................... ............................... 8 SectionIII ..................................... ............................... 8 SectionIV ..................................... ............................... 9 SectionV ...................................... ............................... 9 SectionVI ..................................... ............................... 9 EFT INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION ............ ............................... 10 THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY RETAILER APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 1 1. GENERAL RETAILER INFORMATION 1. Who can sell lottery tickets? Generally, any Minnesota business can apply for a retailer contract. Fraternal, charitable, and non - profit organizations may also apply. However, you CANNOT be in the sole business of selling lottery tickets and the applicant must be in the business of providing a product or service to the public at large. Also, retailers must be at least 18 years of age, although sales staff may be any age, subject to labor laws. Lottery tickets may be sold only from the location authorized on your application form. If you have more than one location, an application must be submitted for each location. Tickets may be sold only to individuals 18 years of age or older, although tickets may be given as gifts to any individual regardless of age. Any business or an owner, officer or director of a business convicted of a felony, gambling - related offense, gross misdemeanor or a crime involving fraud or misrepresentation within the last five years is also prohibited by law from selling lottery tickets. Your business must be current (and remain current) in all tax payments and filings with the State of Minnesota, and will be checked by the Lottery for any tax liability. Applicants will also be subject to security and criminal background checks. 2. How much does it cost for me to become a lottery retailer? At the time you submit your application for a contract, there is a non - refundable fee of $100.00 per retailer location. For chain stores with central billing, the headquarter's application requires no fee, but each store in the chain will require an application and a $100.00 application fee. Also, there will be an annual renewal fee of $100.00 for retailers extending their contracts. The renewal fee will not be due until 1991. You will be required to establish a separate bank account for lottery transactions. Payment to the Lottery will be done by Electronic Funds Transfer. The cost of setting up and maintaining that account will be your responsibility. Each retailer will also be required to maintain a surety bond. The amount of the bond will be determined by lottery sales for the retailer. The minimum bond will be $1,000.00; thereafter, the bond may be adjusted to two weeks of average sales. 3. How much do I get for selling tickets? Retailers will receive a 5% sales commission. 4. How do I get my tickets? After a retailer has entered into a contract with the Lottery, the retailer and lottery staff will mutually agree upon an initial allocation of tickets. Retailers will automatically receive a replacement pack of tickets when a pack is sold and settlement is made with the Lottery. Also, Lottery Marketing Representatives will call and assist you each week to determine your ticket and supply needs. Your tickets will be delivered to you by courier or a lottery representative. 5. When do I have to pay for the tickets? The Lottery requires that all retailers establish a separate bank account for lottery transactions. Funds will be withdrawn from that account by Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT). As part of the application process, you will be asked for EFT bank account information. In a normal transaction, your bank account will be charged for tickets only after you sell the entire pack of tickets and settle with the Lottery. You will know the amount due in advance, and thus the amount that must be in the bank account prior to the time the Lotter collects the funds. Failure Y to have sufficient funds available may be rounds for terminating th e retailer contract. be g rounds RETAILER APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 2 THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY 6. What prizes do I pay? The maximum that may be paid by retailers will be established in game procedures issued by the Director prior to the start of the first game. Prizes over $1,000.00 must be redeemed by the Lottery, either by mail or at one of the Regional Lottery Offices. You will be reimbursed for all valid prizes you pay by automatic credits to your account. Most retailer -paid prizes will be in the range of $2.00 to $25.00. A complete set of validation procedures will be provided to each Lottery retailer. The EFT procedure should ensure that the money on hand from sales will cover the prize payments. 7. How will the Lottery train my staff and me? Once you are selected as a retailer, you will be required to attend a training session a few weeks before sales begin. The Lottery will schedule you for a training session (to be held at locations throughout the state) at a time and place convenient to you. Weekend and evening sessions are also planned. Up to three people from your business may attend the training session. At the training session, you will receive more information on specific game rules and procedures. 8. Does my place of business have what it takes to be a lottery retailer? Demand for lottery tickets will be great at the beginning. Once sales reach normal levels, the characteristics of retail operations that experience the most success include: • Convenience and access to the public • Heavy volume of sales transactions • Repeat customers • Prominent point -of -sale display • Adequate parking • Use of in -store promotional materials • Positive selling attitude 9. What are the benefits of being a lottery retailer? In addition to the monetary profits made from selling lottery tickets, being a lottery retailer has advantages, including: • Service to your regular customers • Repeat traffic (from ticket prize redemptions and purchase) • Increased customer traffic into your establishment • In -store promotional opportunities with the Lottery • Statewide lottery advertising programs and exposure • A non- spoiling, compact product line • Fun, excitement and entertainment 10. When will the Minnesota State Lottery start selling tickets? The Lottery anticipates starting instant ticket sales in mid - April, but no official start date has been announced. We cannot start until we have a network of retailers in place. You can help by returning your application as soon as possible, in order to begin the authorization, contracting and training process. i THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY RETAILER APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 3 II. HOW TO APPLY FOR A LOTTERY RETAILER CONTRACT STEP 1, Review and complete the following information which is enclosed in this packet: 1. Lottery Retailer Application. 2. Retailer Marketing Evaluation Form. 3. Electronic Funds Transfer Form — Please attach a voided check or deposit slip from your new Lottery EFT account to the space indicated on the form. 4. Two copies of the Lottery Retailer Contract. Be sure to sign both copies of the contract. After required tax and background checks are completed and your file approved, your copy of the final contract authorizing you as an official lottery retailer will be returned to you. 5. Ticket Validation Form. Please read and answer each question. 6. Application Fee. There is a $100.00 fee for each selling location, payable to the Minnesota State Lottery. Chain store operations require $100.00 for each store in the chain. The chain headquarter's application requires no fee. STEP 2. Mail the completed packet to: Minnesota State Lottery P.O. Box 130700 St. Paul, MN 55113 STEP 3 You will be notified by the Lottery as to the status of your application. Please allow two to six weeks for required reviews. If you do become part of the lottery retailer network, you will be asked to participate in retailer training before sales can begin. RETAILER APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 4 THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING BEFORE COMPLETING THE APPLICATION FORMS. • CONTROL NUMBER - There is a pre - printed number in the upper right -hand corner of the Retailer Application. If you have any questions about your application, use the control number as a reference when you call the Lottery. � ADDITIONAL FORMS - If you make a mistake or need additional forms, feel free to call the Lottery. We will forward additional copies of the required forms to you as soon as possible. i CONTRACTING FEE - There is a non - refundable, $100 application fee which must accompany this application. Please do not send cash. Make check payable to the "Minnesota State Lottery." • MULTIPLE LOCATIONS - If you are art of a chain with central billing, our Y P g� Y application should be submitted by your corporate office. (See CHAIN INSTRUCTIONS). RETAILER CONTRACTS - Please fill out both copies, sign and return with the Application Booklet. I I I I THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY RETAILER APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 5 RETAILER APPLICATION FORM INSTRUCTIONS DATE Write in today's date. SECTION I. BUSINESS NAME We need to know the operational name of your business. If the business has a different legal name, please indicate that. Example:XYZ, Inc., dba (doing business as) "Joe's Grocery ". ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP, AND PHONE Indicate the exact information for the selling location. Since we will be using a courier to deliver tickets, be as specific as possible. CONTACT NAME AND CONTACT PHONE The, " &ntact Name" means the person the Lottery can contact with any questions regarding the application. Inclde the phone number where we are most likely to reach that person during the day. MAILING ADDRESS IF DIFFERENT THAN ABOVE If the business has a different mailing address, such as a P.O. Box where mail is delivered, put that address in this section. FEDERAL I.D. NUMBER AND STATE TAX I.D. NUMBER All businesses should have both Federal and State tax identification numbers. We cannot process your application without these numbers. DOES THE BUSINESS HAVE MORE THAN ONE LOCATION? If two or more stores have common ownership and will be centrally billed, mark "yes" and complete A and B. A. If this site is the headquarters site, mark "yes." B. Print the full name of the Parent Company. SECTION II Additional space may be required to list all people involved in ownership of your business. If so, please attach additional names on a separate sheet of paper and be sure to mark the box noting this. Please list all names which fit into any of the listed categories. All the information requested (full name, birth date, social security number) is necessary. We realize that, in some cases, these people may live out of state and be difficult to reach. We encourage you to submit your application as soon as possible, however. Please list: — Anyone owning more than 5% of the business — Anyone owning more than 5% of the stock of this business — All Directors of the business — All officers of the business RETAILER BUSINESS AND COUNTY CODE Both of these codes must be filled in. These can be found in the back section of the Retailer Application Booklet labeled "Retailer Business Codes" and "County Codes." RETAILER APPLICATION • INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 6 THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY PROSPECTIVE LOTTERY RETAILER QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTIONS Please read carefully and answer all questions with a "yes" or "no" by checking the appropriate boxes. If you answer "yes" to any of the questions, attach an explanation. You must answer each of the questions. If your security check indicates that you gave a false answer to any of the questions, your application will be rejected. PRINT FULL NAME Owner or person authorized to make application to the Minnesota State Lottery. SIGNATURE AND DATE Please sign the appropriate space and date. Be sure to sign the form. If you don't sign, your application will have to be returned. • THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY RETAILER APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 7 CHAIN APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS The Lottery will have a KEY ACCOUNT program to assist chain operations in handling the Lottery. We realize that chains have particular problems and special needs and we will try to work with them to make the Lottery helpful and responsive. However, we do not intend to make rules for chains that are unfair to independent retailers. We must treat all retailers equally. • Before completing your application, please call the Lottery toll -free at 1 -500- 475 -4000 to identify your chain and let us know how many stores are involved, whether there are two or 200 stores in your chain. We will send you the number of applications you need and answer any questions you may have. • For multiple location applications, we request that you complete and sign one MASTER APPLICATION for chain headquarters. A Marketing Evaluation should also be completed for each store. However, only Section I of the Retailer Application must be completed for each individual store. It is important that the entire package be submitted at the same time. • The Master Application should list the appropriate corporate officers for the firm. • Chain status will allow for central billing. While tickets will be delivered to each store, our billing procedures will allow us to collect for all stores from one bank account. Chain headquarters will receive a weekly statement in advance of the EFT sweep that indicates the amount due for each store and reflects any adjustments. Each chain will undoubtedly want to establish their own accounting procedures. We encourage you to give some thought to those procedures as soon as possible. You may wish to talk to your colleagues in other lottery states. Our Key Account Representative will work with you on setting up an efficient method of handling lottery products. > • Please instruct your individual stores not to submit a separate application. However, let them know that it is a corporate decision to be involved in the lottery and that they will be visited by a Lottery Representative in the near future. They will also be required to participate in training and otherwise cooperate with the Lottery. If you have special regulations regarding point -of -sale, those will have to be communicated. It is important for you to communicate all chain policies regarding the Lottery to your individual stores. We have found in other lottery states that chain stores are not responsive to the lottery unless they receive specific instructions from their headquarters. RETAILER APPLICATION • INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 8 THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY RETAILER MARKETING EVALUATION Your assistance in providing accurate and complete information will assist us in determining your suitability as a retailer and to determine your ticket requirements when sales begin. DATE Write in today's date. SECTION I. BUSINESS NAME We need to know the operational name of your business. If the business has a different legal name, please indicate that. Example: XYZ, Inc., dba (doing business as) "Joe's Grocery ". ADDRESS, CITY, STATE AND ZIP Indicate the exact information of the selling location. Since we will be using a courier to deliver tickets, be as specific as possible. OWNER'S NAME The name of the owner of the business. PHONE NUMBER Day -time phone number for this person. CONTACT PERSON An on -site person who can be contacted regarding lottery concerns. PHONE NUMBER A day -time phone number for this person. SECTION II. BUSINESS HOURS List your normal business hours. If you are closed any of the days listed, please put an "X" through the box for that day. SECTION III TYPE OF OWNERSHIP Please check appropriate box for your type of ownership. TOUCH TONE PHONE SERVICE Mark appropriate box. TYPE OF BUSINESS Refer to the back of the Retailer Application booklet under "Retailer Business Codes." THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY RETAILER APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 9 AVERAGE WEEKLY SALES Estimate yourAverage Weekly Sales. How many dollars worth of business do you generate in an average week? AVERAGE WEEKLY CUSTOMER COUNT Estimate your Average Weekly Customer Count. In other words, how many people come into your business in an average week? LOCATION TYPE Please mark appropriate answer. BUILDING TYPE Please mark appropriate space. If your store does not fit one of the categories, provide an explanation in the area marked "Please Specify." COMMUTER ROUTES WITHIN ONE BLOCK Are you within a one block radius of a city busline or other daily transportation? If so, mark "yes." SECTION IV. LIST FOUR MAJOR PRODUCTS AND QUANTITIES SOLD WEEKLY Please use the indicated lines and describe all four products. GROSS SALES REPORTED FOR PREVIOUS YEAR You can obtain this figure from your tax returns. If you are a new business you should enter your quarterly gross amounts on the appropriate line. SECTION V. RETAILER SITE PLAN Please provide a reference MAP that indicates your building, location, parking areas, entrances, exits, check- out locations, and streets, highways or cross streets that are beside or near your business. Please refer to the arrow indicating North on the righthand side of the space provided for your sketch. SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Provide any information that might be helpful to the Lottery in determining your potential for sale. If your business is seasonal (not open 12 months), please indicate that. If you provide any special customer services (check cashing, etc.) that might be compatible with lottery sales, that would also be helpful. Include any positive or negative data that the Lottery should consider. NAME AND DATE Please Print the name of person completing this marketing evaluation form and date the form. r' RETAILER APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 10 THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY EFT INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION Use the EFT Instruction and Information Sheet that is in the Retail Application booklet to complete the Retailer EFT Authorization. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY TOLL FREE AT: 1 -800- 475 -4000. i CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1/29/90 Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION • ITEM DESCRIPTION: O PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION REGARDING TWIN LAKE PARK STUDY DEPT. APPROVAL: h lel� Personnel Coordinator Signature - title MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached The park and recreation commission has reviewed and discussed the Twin Lake Park study prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Attached are copies of the minutes from the commission • meetings when this was discussed, as well as a copy of the site analysis and feasibility study, preliminary cost estimates, and concept plan. At its January 16, 1990, meeting, the commission recommended to the city council to accept the concept plan proposed by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. regarding the Twin Lake Park study. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Accept the park and recreation commission's recommendation regarding the Twin Lake Park study and provide direction to City staff on the recommendations of the study results. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency + `� 520 Lafayette Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 p Telephone (612) 296 -6300 MINNESOTA 7990 January 25, 1990 Mr. Ronald P. Peterson Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7101 York Avenue South Edina, Minnesota 55435 Dear Mr. Peterson: This letter is in response to your request for Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (mpm) staff to review the dm - elop mtent plans for the Joslyn Manufacturing hazardous waste Site in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. upon review of your development plans, and consideration of the Site cleanup activities, MPCA staff do not object to a recreation complex as a final use for the Site. This type of land use is compatible with long tens remediation objectives. However, a number of conditions need to be met before final approval for these plans can be obtained: a) NPCA staff expect all soil ramedi.ation activities to be completed prior to • park development. It is anticipated the soil cleanup activities, utilizing bioremtedi.ation as the cleanup technology, will be completed in 6 -10 years given the volume of soil to be treated. b) Site development should not interfere with ground water monitoring and pumping. This activity is estimated to continue for at least 30 years. c) No grading or excavation below final grades established at the completion of the soil remediation work is anticipated. Any structures to be placed on site will be slab -on -grade construction with no subsurface excavation. d) Conduct a final risk assessment to determine potential exposure routes to people utilizing the park. Any potential exposure routes identified will need to be addressed through the site cleanup process. Other aspects of the plan will need more detailed study before MPCA staff can formally approve the redevelopment project. These include, but may not be Limited to: 1) placement of light pole standards and backstops for athletic fields; 2) relocation of monitoring wells or other ranediation- related facilities; 3) need for on- going, unrestricted access to the site for renediation activities. At some point in time, these issues should be addressed, as well as other issues that may come up over the next several months. The City of Brooklyn Center should also be advised that at some time in the future, the question of Regional Offices: Duluth • Brainerd - Detroit Lakes • Marshall • Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper r Mr. Ronald P. Peterson Page 2 liability at a former hazardous waste site may come up. The question of future liability at this site, should the City of Brooklyn Center go ahead with the proposed park plans, will need to be discussed with the MPC:A staff and Joslyn Manufacturing. This issue should be settled before any construction activities begin. If the above conditions and uses are addressed, MPCA staff feel comfortable with the regional park concept you have proposed. We look forward to meeting with you to discuss the issues identified herein. Please feel free to call either Cliff Twaroski (Project Manager, 612/296 -7827) or John Betcher (Hydrogeologist, 612/296 -7821) of my staff should you have any questions regarding the Joslyn Site. Sincerely, � C7 L4 Gary L. Eddy Supervisor Responsible Party Unit I Site Response Section Ground Water and Solid waste Division GLE.r7g cc: Larry Dalen, Baez Engineering Carl Grabinski, Joslyn Manufacturing Gerald Splinter, City Manager, Brooklyn Center Kevin Turner, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 1989 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER Chairman Sorenson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Sorenson, Commissioners Peterson and Mead. Also present were City Council Liaison Jerry Pedlar, City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Recreation Arnie Mavis Director of Public c Works S Knapp, pp, Recording Secretary Geralyn Barone, and Tim Erkkila and Anne Duering of Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Commissioners Pollock and Skeels were excused from this evening's meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 16 1989 There was a motion by Commissioner Mead and seconded by Commissioner Peterson to approve the minutes of the May 16, 1989, park and recreation commission meeting as submitted. The motion passed. TWIN LAKES AND PRESERVE STUDY - STATUS REPORT The city manager identified City park land and noted that many parks are tied together with existing or potential trails. He said there is an opportunity for the City to gain additional park land at the Joslyn site located on the eastern shore of Middle Twin Lake and west of France Avenue in Brooklyn Center. He introduced Mr. Erkkila of Westwood Professional Services, Inc. who said his presentation would include an analysis and a plan recommendation of the Joslyn site. Mr. Erkkila then deferred to Ms. Duering, who reviewed the study area and the existing uses of the land. She reviewed the history of the contaminated land at the Joslyn site and discussed the steps being taken to eliminate the soil contamination. Ms. Duering reviewed the natural characteristics of the site and the area surrounding M g r. Erkkila proceeded to discuss the problems facing his company in preparing a proposal for the City. He said their goals were to provide trail linkage and capitalize on the current characteristics of the site. He reviewed a concept plan for the park land. Ms. Duering said the next step would be to provide cost estimates and determine compatibility of the proposed uses with the decontamination plan. The city manager said staff looked at commercial recreation uses like softball and were concerned about access to this location. He said staff reviewed the possibility of having a beach, but 10/17/89 -1- found no good place for it. He discussed the possible location of a boat launch site. The commission proceeded to discuss the problems associated with the land, the availability of purchasing the Joslyn site, and possible uses of the land. The commission expressed concern over public reaction if the City were to purchase the property. The city manager suggested a local neighborhood meeting be held to determine in advance of any action by the City what the neighbors think of the possible uses. The city manager requested Westwood Professional Services to prepare a final report which would contain a separation between the lake front property and the open park space, as well as downsizing the parking lot. In addition, potential alternatives will be listed for the open active space area and the special use facility. The director of public works noted that if a public meeting is held, staff will discuss the entire Twin Lake area. SKATEBOARDS The recording secretary noted the City's employee safety committee received a complaint about the hazardous use of skateboards in the Central Park area. She said the city manager referred this complaint to the park and recreation commission for its review. Chairman Sorenson said this item will be tabled for discussion at the next commission meeting. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Peterson and seconded by Commissioner Mead to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center park and recreation commission adjourned at 9:36 p.m. Chairman 10/17/89 -2- MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JANUARY 16, 1990 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER Chairman Sorenson called the meeting to order at 7;31 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Sorenson, Commissioners Pollock, Skeels, Russell, and Shinnick. Also present were City Engineer Mark Maloney, Director of Recreation Arnie Mavis, Recording Secretary Geralyn Barone, and Tim Erkkila and Anne Duering of Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Commissioners Mead and Peterson were excused from this evening's meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - NOVEMBER 21 1989 There was a motion by Commissioner Pollock and seconded by Commissioner Russell to approve the minutes of the November 21, 1989, park and recreation commission meeting as submitted. The motion passed. TWIN LAKES AND PRESERVE STUDY - STATUS REPORT Mr. Erkkila said as a part of tonight's final presentation on the Twin Lakes study, he and Ms. Duering would review graphic plans, the summary report, and a cost estimate of the proposal. Ms. Duering proceeded to review a summary of the study area and the park concept plan. She said there would be a long process for obtaining approval for the on grade trailway crossing over the railroad tracks. Ms. Duering reviewed features of the area, including he neighborhood g ark the act' ive ark and d access park, to the location. She said the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is reviewing the concept plan and will give written approval or disapproval. Mr. Erkkila reviewed several assumptions on which the cost estimate has been based and then proceeded to review the cost estimate. He then reviewed an eight -step process for implementation. Commissioner Pollock asked if the trailhead would be an enclosed shelter, and Mr. Erkkila said at this point it is just a turnaround from the driveway with a few parking spaces. He noted a picnic shelter is a possibility, but there was concern over creating a dead end which would turn into a party area. Commissioner Russell asked if the only current access to the peninsula is from the west side, and Mr. Erkkila responded affirmatively. Chairman Sorenson asked what the attraction of having the peninsula would be for the park, and Mr. Erkkila explained how the area might be used. 1/16/90 -1- Commissioner Skeels asked what the health issues for active participation over contaminated land would be, and Ms. Duering said after the remediation process is finished, the land will be F'. covered with clean soil and vegetated, which should provide no contact with contaminated soil as long as it is not overturned. Commissioner Shinnick asked how far down the bad soil is, and Mr. Erkkila said there would be an eighteen -inch cap of good soil. The director of recreation pointed out that already people are using this property whether it is contaminated or not. Mr. Erkkila explained that no one will be able to purchase the site to build a structure because of the soil roblems p and noted any liability goes back to Joslyn. Chairman Sorenson asked what the specific hazard of the soil is, and Ms. Duering said contents of the soil could cause cancer. The city engineer said the soil contains volatile benzine. Mr. Erkkila noted that continued exposure to the chemical would be cancer causing, but with the type of recommended use, there would not be continuous exposure to those using the area. Commissioner Shinnick said he feels the technology is available to make the area safe, and Commissioner Russell said the park does seem like the best use for the property. Commissioner Pollock asked if the contamination K reaches the special use area, and Ms. Duering said the ground water does but not on the surface. Chairman Sorenson asked what is in this for the Joslyn Company, and Mr. Erkkila said the company would have a caretaker of the property if the City we P Y y re to ursue this use. Chairman hairman Sorenson asked how stable Joslyn is, and Mr. Erkkila said as a national s company, it appears to have a great deal of financial strength. Chairman Sorenson expressed concern over entering into a twenty- year lease with a company that might eventually fold. The director of recreation said if there were problems with Joslyn, the City would probably get the land because it would be tax delinquent and no one else would purchase it. Mr. Erkkila said he suspects that if Joslyn went out of business and the City ended u with the �•° P property, he feels the federal government would have to become involved d in the project in some way. He added he is certain the city attorney torney would take keen interest in a lease Y agreement that would rotect the p City's interest. Commissioner Russell asked what the location of the wells are on the property, and Ms. Duering reviewed the locations. Mr. Erkkila said ball fields can be better placed amongst the wells as opposed to soccer fields. Commissioner Skeels asked what the expected method of financing his g project would be, and the director of recreation said it would be a bond issue. Commissioner Russell asked how many total acres, including the peninsula, this project would cover, and Ms. Duering said it is about thirty acres. Commissioner Shinnick said this seems like a good idea, a, and Commissioner Russell said he likes the idea of the fishing piers and being able to access the lake. Commissioner Pollock asked if it would be better to combine a bond issue with another project in order to get support from the 1/16/90 -2- entire city. Chairman Sorenson said linking the trail further to the north would help gain approval of the bond issue. Mr. Erkkila said the City may wish to include the additional trailway System in the bond issue. The city engineer asked how this project would tie into the regional trails, and there was a review of the proposed trail system. Chairman Sorenson said he would like to see the trail link at least to Bass Lake Road. Chairman Sorenson asked if the City were to approve the concept plan, would the MPCA move along more quickly in approving this. Mr. Erkkila said he feels it would help if the City's input was given to the MPCA. There was a motion by Commissioner Pollock and seconded by Commissioner Skeels to recommend to the city council to accept the concept plan proposed by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. regarding the Twin Lake park study in conjunction with the entire trail system. The motion passed. RECESS There was a motion by Commissioner Russell and seconded by Commissioner Skeels to recess the meeting. The motion passed. The park and recreation commission recessed at 8:40 p.m. and reconvened at 8:50 p.m. SKATEBOARDS The director of recreation said in his investigation of classes on skateboarding, he has found that no one has really done anything on this topic. He has found no media projects such as filmstrips on this. He noted other cities have had a small problem with skateboarders, but they are doing nothing about it. He added that in talking with staff at the local junior high school, the kids who are abusing skateboards probably would not attend any classes that might be held. Commissioner Shinnick noted that in downtown Minneapolis near the Federal Reserve Building there are skateboarders who are shooed away on occasion by the police, but as soon as the police leave, the kids are right back at it. He pointed out that in general, it is usually the same kids all the time. Chairman Sorenson asked why the employee safety committee referred this to the park and recreation commission, and the recording secretary said reports of abuse involving skateboards had been reported in the Central Park trails and at the community center. The director of recreation reviewed the problems at the community center, which have generally occurred on the outdoor stairway. There was a motion by Commissioner Shinnick and seconded by Commissioner Pollock to recommend to the city council to monitor the problem of misuse /abuse of skateboards in City parks and property to determine if the situation warrants further action. The motion passed. Commissioner Shinnick suggested the commissioners keep an eye out in the parks in their areas to monitor any problems that might occur. 1/16/90 -3- I I _ I UPPER TWIN LAKE WATER ACCESS " W POINTS Y VERLOOK OAK STREET • J. BRIDG UNDERPASS - I ._ Z f IPS ON TRAILI•• _ •+ TRAILHEAD ' PARKI NG/TURN-AROUND POTENTIAL WETLAND >' _ _ _ -- -- -- --- ---- -- f� / ENHANCEMENT - - - -" i EXISTING VEGETATION(TYP.) LAKEF PARK FISw PIE ACME USES i ••' j_ ( THEE .ALLFHMO4: O.: < \� SOCCER,FOOTSALL _ WATER ACCESS 1 $ �� • POINTS ` - OPTIONS: �� •- ' T�.= —_� _ I AGTIVE PAS DOCK W ..........�.+.. "•••..� DECK Y Y .� SANDY PoafT AC — �. — — yl: CIAL USES ti _ :. •. - :y ,. ION oPT eaaP+ENr PSHINQ fEKV*X ai000 -- — PLAY EQUIPMENT ' �' r ¢ \ �t U A I us z Lai rl _ J _ • NONnow WEU Topography Sarpr. Aerial Photograph try MARKHURD CORPORATION, Apr/ Igo& PUMP OU'r WELL �7 Westwood Professional Services. Inc. o w• Io zo o• soo• The City of &ooklyn Center Middle Twin Lake Park Study CONCEPT PLAN Westwood Professional Services, lnc. 7101 York Avenue South Edina, Minnesota 55435 612 -921 -3303 LO W C 5.75' 5.9' 851.8 -2% 8 51.9 6 RETAINING WALL RAILROAD BRIDGE UNDERPASS STUDY JOSLYN SITE BROOKLYN CENTER, MN AUGUST 1989 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. January 6 1990 y � ❑ 14180 Trunk Hwy. 5 ❑ 8525 Edinbrook Crossing Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 612 - 937 -5150 612 - 424 -8862 FAX 612- 937 -5822 FAX 612- 424 -7994 RE: TWIN LAKE PARK STUDY Park Commission and City Staff: The attached documents plus two large graphics represent the culmination of the initial study of the Twin Lakes Park site which includes the environmentally sensitive Joslyn site. The Site Analysis and Feasibility Study includes a statement of purpose, a background of the site, a summary of the contamination issue with the most certain prognosis available at this time, an analysis of the physical site, a description of the proposed park concept and, finally, an implementation process. The Preliminary Cost Estimates have been developed based on several assumptions (stated in the document). As the project progresses from this point, modifications in the assumptions plus any clarification of the cost items may substantially increase or decrease the estimated costs. Accompanying these documents are the large scale graphics Site Analysis and Concept Plan The Twin Lakes Park Study has been a very stimulating project. We have enjoyed working with you and hope that the information provided is instrumental in your decision making process. Sincerely, WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. � ;M Tim Erkkila, ASLA Vice President, Planning V Anne Deuring ti 74Pstwood Professional Services, Inc. r r SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY TWIN LAKES PARK SITE ❑ 14180 Trunk Hwy. 5 ❑ 8525 Edinbrook Crossing BROOKLYN CENTER, MN Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 JANUARY 16, 1990 612- 937 -5150 612- 424 -8862 FAX 612- 937 -5822 FAX 612- 424 -7994 I. PURPOSE Interest in the subject land for a park site by the City of Brooklyn Center is based on several factors. A. A major lakefront park is desirable to compliment the overall park system. The study parcel may be the only sizeable lakefront acreage remaining. B. Because of soil contamination, the study area may be unusable for any use other than surface recreation. C. The City is committed to a goal of a trail system completely circling the Twin Lakes. The study area is a significant segment of this trail link. II. BACKGROUND A. Study Area and Ownership The Twin Lakes Park site is an approximately 50 acre site located on the eastern shore of Middle Twin Lake and west of France Avenue in Brooklyn Center and includes over 30 acres owned by Joslyn Corporation. The study area also includes two tracts of land to the north of the Joslyn site on the south shore of Upper Twin Lake and west of the Murphy warehouses. These tracts make up approximately 12 acres and are owned by Tri -State Land Co. and a private home owner. The peninsula that falls inside the Brooklyn Center boundary on the west side of the channel connecting Upper and Middle Twin Lakes is also part of the study area, includes about 4 acres and is currently a private home site. B. Site Uses and Adjacent Uses Currently, a single family home sits on the peninsula and another occupies approximately 95 feet of the south shore of Upper Twin Lake. The Tri -State Land Co. land is vacant. The Joslyn site was a wood treating operation until it closed in 1980. Current activity on the site involves decontamination of the soil and groundwater. The site is bisected by an active 100 -foot wide Soo Line Railroad R.O.W. The study area is surrounded by Upper Twin Lake and a single family neighborhood on the north; vacant land currently for sale, Murphy Warehouses, NSP land and a transformer, and France Ave. on the east; commercial uses fronting on Lake Breeze Ave. and multi- family and single family homes on the south; and Middle Twin Lake on the west. TWIN LAKES PARK SITE SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY PAGE 2 III. SITE CONTAMINATION AND CLEANUP A. History During the years that the Joslyn wood treating site was active, toxic chemicals such as creosote (PAH), pentachlorophenol (PCP) and chromated copper arsenic (CCA) were used in the treatment process. Wastewater from the wood - treating process containing these substances was placed in on -site waste disposal ponds. In addition, general burial of sludges and at least two large wood - treating solution spills have occurred at the Joslyn site. These activities resulted in contaminated soil and groundwater beneath the site, traveling in an easterly direction. B. Selected Remedy The major components of the selected remedy are (1) off -site disposal of wood - treating solution and wood - preserving sludge, (2) a groundwater pumpout system, (3) on -site land treatment of contaminated soils and (4) long -term groundwater monitoring. The off -site disposal of the heavily contaminated substance has been completed. The groundwater pumpout system and monitoring wells have been installed and are expected to remain in place for at least 30 years. A treatmentlbuilding containing oil separating equipment and controls is also in place on site. The on -site treatment of contaminated soils began the summer of 1989. Clean• soil from the land treatment area was excavated and stockpiled on -site to lower the initial elevation of the treatment area. Approximately 18" of contaminated soil will be spread across the land treatment area each year. Nutrients, water and tillage will be utilized to enhance biological degradation of the contaminants. This bio- remediation process is expected to take 3 to 4 years or until 1991 or 1992. When completed, all treated soils will be covered with clean soil and revegetated. C. Efficacy of Treatment According to the Record of Decision prepared by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, completion of treatment will produce the following results: 1. Soil. "Although the biological soil treatment method that has been selected for soil remediation will substantially decrease the concentration of contaminants in soil, the contaminants may still represent a health hazard if the treated soils are left exposed at the surface. When remediation is complete, all treated soils will be covered with clean soil and revegetated. Assuming that the soil used to cover the treated soils does not contain contaminants, and that the r TWIN LAKES PARK SITE SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY PAGE 3 treated soil is not disturbed, this remediation method should eliminate the possibility of human exposure to contaminants in the site soil." 2. Groundwater. The groundwater treatment system is expected to be in place for at least 30 years and may be extended if acceptable levels of contaminants have not been reached by that time. Other than the presence of a treatment building and 30 pumpout and monitoring wells scattered across the site, the contaminated groundwater will not adversely affect the site itself. No upward migration of groundwater is expected. 3. Surface water. "The monitoring of Twin Lakes indicates that the lake has not been impacted by the site. Groundwater flows from the lake to the east under the site. Some of the lake water samples did contain detectable PAH compounds. The presence of these compounds at varying concentrations at several background stations in the lake suggests that they originate from other sources such as motorboat traffic rather than from the site. It has been determined that the site does not adversely impact surface waters." 4. Air. After soil remediation has been completed and the clean soil cover is in place there will be no health hazards resulting from contaminated fugitive dusts or volatilized contaminants in the air. "When in the control building for oil separation, remedia- tion workers may inhale contaminants volatilized from the pumpout water. Although most of the contaminants found in groundwater at the Joslyn site are not highly volatile, considerable volatilization of some of the low molecular weight PAH's may occur." IV. NATURAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS The study area includes a variety of natural features. A. Lakes Middle Twin Lake is relatively deep and can accommodate motorboats and is known as a good fishing lake. The eastern shoreline is predominantly an undefined, cattail wetland. The average water level is approximately 851.52. TWIN LAKES PARK SITE SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY PAGE 4 Upper Twin Lake is quite shallow and generally unsuitable for motorboating or swimming. The southern shoreline is firm. The average water level is 851.63. B. Wetlands and Lowland Hardwood Forest Wetlands exist on both the north and south portions of the study area. Wetlands have been classified according to Wetlands of the United States (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 39; Shaw and Fredine 1971) and their boundaries delineated according to the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation, 1989). About 13.3 acres of wetland lie along the margins of Middle and Upper Twin Lakes. Of this acreage, about 5.4 acres are type 3 shallow marsh and 8.9 acres are type 1L lowland hardwood forest. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) has established an ordinary high water level (OHWL) of 853.1 for Middle and Upper Twin Lakes. All but about 4 acres of lowland hardwood forest would fall below this elevation; any work below this elevation would require a protected waters permit from the MDNR. The remainder of the lowland hardwood forest would fall within the permitting jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water .Act. If any dredged or fill material is placed in this portion of the wetland, a Section 404 permit would be needed. An additional 3.5 acre type 2 wet meadow exists in the northeast corner of the site. While portions of this wetland are below the OHWL of Upper Twin Lake, it is physically isolated from the lake by intervening upland. Consequently, this wetland is not a state - protected water and falls within the permitting jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers. Staff from both the MDNR and the Corps of Engineers have field - reviewed the site and informally concurred with the wetland boundaries established. C. Uplands The upland portions of the site occur both north and south of the railroad tracks. The area north of the tracks is gently sloping, wooded and wraps around the inland wetland. The area south of the tracks is the Joslyn site and has been severely affected by the past wood - treating activities and contamination. The area is very level and treeless. It is unlikely that plant materials with a deep root system will grow on this portion of the site, such as most overstory trees, due to the contamination. Shrubs and ground covers will probably be unaffected. Overstory trees with a shallow root system may possibly survive. TWIN LAKES PARK SITE SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY PAGE 5 V. PARK AND TRAIL FEASIBILITY The feasibility of the study area to function as a park site is dependent on the effectiveness of the remediation efforts being conducted. The technology available for the cleanup of contaminated sites is relatively recent and few cases have been given the test of time. However, if the cleanup goes as predicted by the Owner's remediation consultant, by 1991 or 1992 the Joslyn site will be safe for human contact. Apart from the use of the site as a park, is the need to route a trail connection from north to south through the site in order to realize the City's goal of a complete Twin Lake Trail circuit. Various aspects of the study area will be discussed individually below as they relate to the accommodation of a park site and trail. A. Contaminated Site Due to the level terrain and treelessness, the contaminated portion of the site would be better suited for active uses than passive uses. Permanent structures and underground utilities are not feasible due to the soil contamination so any active uses would have to be serviced with satellite -type restrooms and water brought in from off -site. Active uses will have to work around the 30 pumpout and monitoring wells which will remain on the site for the indefinite future. If needed, the wells can be moved less than 50 feet without creating a gap in the system. B. North of Railroad The area located north of the railroad has the natural characteristics desired for passive park uses such as picnicking and trails. To use this area to its best advantage would require removing the two existing single family homes from the lake shore. C. Lakeshore The qualities of the two lakes and lakeshores provide a difficult usage problem. The southern lake shore of Upper Twin Lake is solid land capable of accommodating a beach or access point to the lake with little disruption to the surrounding environment. However, the lake is shallow and not desirable for recreational use. The eastern shore of Middle Twin Lake is marshy and not easily accessible without major filling and disruption, but the lake is deep and highly desirable for recreational uses. TWIN LAKES PARK SITE SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY PAGE 6 D. Access Several options are available for obtaining vehicular access to the site: from the north via Oak Street and Twin Lake Blvd., from the east via France Avenue, and from the south via Twin Lake Avenue, Lakeview Avenue or Azelia Avenue or create a new access between the existing commercial uses. The peninsula is only accessible from a private drive from the Crystal side of the lake. The access points that involve routing traffic through residential neighborhoods are not recommended as a main access. The best access points are from France Ave. just south of the transformer or a new access point between the commercial uses south of the site. E. Railroad Crossing Crossing the railroad by pedestrians becomes an issue both from the standpoint of creating a trail route around the lake as well as utilizing both sides of the railroad for park uses. The elevation of the rails (approximately 860) is only seven feet higher than the ordinary high water elevation of 853.1. Therefore, it is not possible to achieve a full 8 feet of clearance and still maintain a dry trail. An overpass would require an elevation of 20 feet above the track to allow clearance for a train. This bridge structure would require approximately 45 steps or a 250 -300 foot long ramp. The third alternative, the on -grade crossing, is possible but has the obvious safety concerns. All three alternatives will involve a lengthy permit process with the Soo Line Railroad. The process would involve the submittal to the Soo Line Railroad of a sketch proposing the on -grade crossing of the railroad by the trail. The proposal would then need approval by several different departments ending with their Real Estate Department granting an easement to the City of Brooklyn Center for the trail. One very important provision of the approval process would be the necessity of the City to provide $1.5 million in General Comprehensive Liability Insurance coverage for the trail crossing. Once the trail crossing has been approved, all construction costs would be incurred by the City. However, that portion of the trail crossing which is directly adjacent to the tracks would be constructed by Soo Line Railroad. Westwood has contacted a dozen municipalities, several counties, Soo Line Railroad, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Transportation in search of information regarding on -grade railroad crossings. The search has been useful in determining several issues. These issues are: generally, the type of crossings in existence in different cities, their locations in relation to streets and the railroad, and their general location within each city. TWIN LAKES PARK SITE SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY PAGE 7 Westwood was unable to find any on -grade railroad crossings of bike /pedestrian trails that were not located in conjunction with _ cti o wth J street crossing as well. The best example found was in New Brighton by Long Lake Park. Here the bike /pedestrian and street crossings are all within an easement granted by the railroad and the bike /pedestrian crossing is separated from the street by approximately 20 feet. The street crossing is signalized but the bike /pedestrian crossing is not signalized. Following are a couple more examples of bike /pedestrian crossings in different municipalities, but both of these are within the street R.O.W. There is a crossing in Eden Prairie at Valley View road, just west of the Eden Prairie High School. Another example is in New Hope at Winnetka between 50th Street and 54th Street. VI. ANALYSIS After reviewing the park feasibility of the individual components of the site, the overall issues become clear. The site tends to have two distinct characters. The lake shores are 0 wooded, rolling and somewhat environmentally sensitive and lend themselves to passive uses such as trails, wildlife and vegetative preservation, and visual experiences. The inland area is predominantly a disturbed, flat, treeless landform. The severe limitations imposed by the contamination allow for only surface uses. Active ballfields could be an ideal use provided they could fit in among the monitoring and pumpout wells. Softball /baseball fields may fit in better than soccer /football fields, being relatively smaller in size. Use of both sides of the railroad is workable only if a good railroad pedestrian crossing can be achieved. A pedestrian underpass that is above the water level at all times is not possible and an overpass bridge structure may be prohibitively expensive. However, a pedestrian - only underpass in combination with an on -grade crossing could solve the railroad crossing issue to enable a trail connection and utilization of both the north and south sides of the railroad. While several vehicular access points to the site are possible, the most desirable do not pass through residential neighborhoods on the way to the site and arrive at the highest use areas most efficiently. It appears that an access directly off of France Avenue would be most desirable. A bridge crossing the channel between Upper and Middle Twin Lake would provide pedestrian and possibly service vehicle access to the peninsula from the east. The City has identified a need for both a neighborhood park facility (specifically, play equipment) and a boat launch to be located somewhere in the vicinity of the Twin Lakes neighborhood. The existing beach on the south end of Middle Twin Lake is proposed to be removed and this TWIN LAKES PARK SITE SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY PAGE 8 site could potentially be either a boat launch or contain play equipment for neighborhood use. In any case, the City wants to ensure the siting of one good boat access in Brooklyn Center in case existing launch sites in other municipalities are discontinued. VII. CONCEPT PLAN A concept plan has been developed that attempts to synthesize the site character and limitations with park -type uses. The concept encompasses about 30 acres of the study area, but involves heavy utilization of only about 17 acres. Since the site can generally be described as having a level, open center surrounded by rolling, wooded shoreland, the concept plan proposes the most active uses for the center area and the passive uses for the wooded shoreland areas. Three ballfields have been sited on the contaminated portion of the site, requiring the relocation of 2 monitoring wells. Vehicle access is from France Avenue, south of the transformer, and a linear parking area has been strung through the monitoring and pumpout wells. Some residual space of about 4 acres exists on the east end of the site that could accommodate "special uses ". Such uses might include an archery range, a golf dome or other specialized recreational use. This special use could share parking with the athletic fields. The area north of the railroad tracks has a secondary access from the north and east to a small parking area that serves as a trail head. The trails in that area lead to lake access points. The proposed trail system enters the site from the northeast on Twin Lake Blvd. and runs west along the south shore of Upper Twin Lake to the railroad bridge underpass. An underpass for pedestrians only with a clearance of just under 6 feet that would be above water more than half the time is possible at this point. It is recommended that the underpass be surfaced with wood chips to discourage people from riding bicycles through. An alternate on -grade crossing is also provided for the times when the underpass is underwater. The trail is then routed south along the shore of Middle Twin Lake. The construction technique for the segments of the trail across wetlands is undefined at this time. Overlooks or water access points to Middle Twin Lake are proposed along this segment of the trail also. A location for neighborhood play equipment has been illustrated near the south end of the lakeshore park on the higher ground. It is recommended that the boat launch be located on the old beach site south of Twin Lakes Park site. The peninsula has good potential for park uses if it were brought into public ownership. Low intensity uses (trail) are proposed until better access is established. TWIN LAKES PARK SITE SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY PAGE 9 VIII. LIABILITY ISSUES A. Legal Aspect If the City of Brooklyn Center acquires an interest in the Joslyn site for park purposes, there is potential liability if ongoing releases of contaminants occur. The City's potential liability is discussed in detail in a memorandum from the City Attorney dated May 17, 1989. The following discussion is intended to apply the City Attorney's analysis to the park planning process; no legal advice is intended. As summarized by the City Attorney: " ... there are steps which the City can take to attempt to limit its potential liability and to attempt to avoid liability altogether. However, the laws relating to such liability are sufficiently vague and the remediation of hazardous wastes which have already been released on a site is sufficiently complex that, if the City enters into any contract for the purchase or lease of the land, there is no way of assuring the City that it will not be involved in litigation or that it will be able to avoid liability for damages associated with the hazardous substances." The only way for the City to totally avoid potential liability is to decline park development on the site. The following analysis assumes that the City is willing to assume the risk of becoming a lessee but wishes to implement all practicable measures to avoid associating itself with or contributing to potential releases. The recommended measures . are intended to minimize the potential for association with or contribution to a potential release; no warranty is given that these measures, if implemented, would prevent the City from incurring liability. B. Physical Aspect Since soil and groundwater are the locus of contamination, park development activities which avoid movement e t of contaminated soils and involvement with groundwater are most desirable. The concept plan analyzed by this report shows uses in these contaminated areas which do not require subsurface excavation or dewatering activities. Athletic fields, tot lots, parking facilities, trails and the golf dome can all be constructed with minimal or acceptable subsurface excavation. Restroom facilities would be transportable and above - ground to avoid subsurface holding tanks. All grading work associated with these facilities can be done above the grade established during closure of areas of soil contamination and soil treatment. TWIN LAKES PARK SITE SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY PAGE 10 Trails and softball /baseball fields have been proposed over the soil treatment area since a pervious surface is recommended by Joslyn's remediation consultant to encourage long -term biological degradation of any remaining soil contaminants. Any potential creosote fumes rising through the final topsoil layer will be too dilute to be of concern to persons using such fields. The portion of the site dominated by the monitoring well field and purge wells can be configured for use as a parking area. The concept plan requires the relocation or abandonment of only 2 monitoring wells. Generally, monitoring wells can be readily relocated provided other locations are available with similar hydrogeologic conditions. As the project progresses, discussions should be undertaken with Joslyn's remediation consultant and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regarding the relocation of these wells. The concept plan illustrating all proposed uses has been submitted to the MPCA for review and comment. In doing so, we are seeking a formal indication that: (1) a recreational use of the site is consistent with the MPCA';s long -term objectives for the site and (2) the conceptual park plan we have developed does not conflict with ongoing remediation efforts on the site. The MPCA has not commented to date. IX. PERMIT REQUIREMENTS The only portions of the concept plan which involve wetlands are trails and water overlooks /accesses at the west end of the site. These facilities will involve work below the OHWL of both Middle and Upper Twin Lakes and will require a permit from MDNR. Since the proposed use is public and is primarily interpretive in nature, there should be minimal difficulty in obtaining a protected waters permit. The Corps of Engineers has issued a nationwide permit for activities involving less than one acre of fill in a headwaters wetland when the majority of the activity lies below the OHWL of state protected waters. At this stage of concept development, it appears that the trail construction that would occur in wetland would meet these requirements and that no individual Section 404 permit would be necessary. X. IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS A. Acceptance of concept by City of Brooklyn Center B. Formal approval of the concept by Minnestoa Pollution Control Agency. C. Initiate trail crossing permit process with the Soo Line Railroad. D. Initiate discussions with Joslyn Corporation. TWIN LAKES PARK SITE SITE ANALYSIS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY PAGE 11 (Following accomplishment of steps A through D) E. Set up financing methods F. Secure land use rights (lease, easement, acquisition) G. Prepare final plans H. Construction `='wood Professional Services, Inc. - T ❑ 14180 Trunk Hwy. 5 ❑ 8525 Edinbrook Crossing Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 ` PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES 612- 937 -5150 612 - 424 -8862 TWIN LAKES PARK SITE BROOKLYN CENTER, MN FAX 612 -937 -5822 FAX 612- 424 -7994 JANUARY 16, 1990 The following cost estimate was prepared for the development of the Twin Lakes Park site. Since the site could be developed in two separate phases, the lakeshore park and the athletic field park, the cost estimates for each have been developed separately. The cost estimate is also based on several assumptions, as follows: 1. No site preparation costs for the "special use" area are included. 2. No land acquisition costs are included. 3. No trail costs west of the east bank of the Middle Twin lake and south of the railroad tracks are included. 4. Athletic field development is based on one baseball field (350 ft. center field ) and two softball fields fields (300 ft. foul line). 5. The athletic lighting cost estimate is based on lighting the baseball field to a 50/30 foot candle level (50 foot candle infield and 30 foot candle outfield) and lighting one softball field to a 30/20 level. The lighting estimate also assumes the use of shallow spread footings in lieu of drilled caissons due to soil contamination concerns, however, - according to Barr Engineering, if the work is performed by a "safety trained" contractor, installing light poles in contaminated soils will create no significant exposure to contaminants and once completed the area will be as safe as any other on the site. 6. 1700 C.Y. black dirt can be salvaged from the trail construction along the lakeshore and reused where needed elsewhere for the lakeshore park and athletic park. Additional black dirt needed will be imported from off -site. 7. Prices are based on 1989 construction costs. 8. Fees, testing, legal and administrative costs are not included. LAKESHORE PARK Unit Cost Quantity Cost Clearing and Grubbing $ 150.00 /tree 25 $ 3,750.00 Fill 6.00 /c.y. 500. 3,000.00 Grading 5.00 /c.y. 500 - 2,500.00 TWIN LAKES PARK SITE PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE PAGE 2 Unit Cost Quantity Cost Trail, Dry land paving 2 -1/2" bit. & 4" Cl. 5 10.00 /l.f. 5500 55,000.00 granular borrow 12" deep,12'wide 6.00 /c.y. 2300 13,800.00 mirafy fabric, 12' wide 1.50 /s.y. 6900 10,350.00 Trails, Wet areas floating - 7' wide, railings 136.00/l.f. 780 106,080.00 both sides w /floatation devices or or footings 225.00/l.f. 780 175,500.00 Railroad underpass, benching in 6,000.00 /l.s. - -- 6,000.00 trail, upper and lower retaining walls, railing, and 4" wood chip trail surface Bridge (pedestrian_ and emergency vehicle connection to peninsula) 100,000.00 11.s. 1 100,000.00 Fishing docks 136.00/l.f. 150 20,400.00 (similar to floating walks) Overlook structures (elevated deck w /roof and 55,000.00 /each 2 110,000.00 railings) Trail head access drive - bituminous with curb 42.00/l.f. 900 37,800.00 Parking, bituminous w /curbing and striping (no st. sewer) 450.00 /stall 12 5,400.00 Black Dirt (spreading) 4.00 /c.y. 700 2,800.00 Sod 1.70 /s.y. 4300 7,310.00 Seed $ 2,300.00 /acre .50 ac. 1,150.00 Culverts 5,000.00 /l.s. - -- 5,000.00 Plantings 5,000.00 /l.s. - -- 5,000.00 Erosion Control 1.50/l.f. 1600 2,400.00 TWIN LAKES PARK SITE PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE PAGE 3 LAKESHORE PARK (Continued) Unit Cost Quantity Cost Benches 500.00 each 4 2 / ,000.00 Trash Receptacles 500.00 /each 2 1,000.00 Signage 3,000.00 /l.s. - -- 3,000.00 Security Lighting 6,500.00 /l.s. 1 6,500.00 Bike racks 500.00 each 1 500.00 SUBTOTAL $510,740.00 - $580,160.00 ATHLETIC FIELDS Clearing and grubbing 150.00 /tree 50 7,500.00 Rough grading By Joslyn - -- -0- Black dirt (imported) 7.00 /c.y. 3200 22,400.00 Fine Grading 5.00 /c.y. 4200 21,000.00 General Turf Establishment By Joslyn - -- -0- Trails - Paving 10.00 /l.f. 2700 27,000.00 Granular Borrow 6.00 /c.y. 1200 7,200.00 Mirafi Fabric 1.50 /s.y. 3600 5,400.00 Access Drive - Bit. w /curb 42.00/l.f. 1100 46,200.00 Parking 450.00 /stall 200 90,000.00 Well Relocation By Joslyn - -- -0 Well Raising By Joslyn - -- -0- TWIN LAKES PARK SITE PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE PAGE 4 ATHLETIC FIELDS (Continued) Unit Cost Quantity Cost Baseball Field, fully fenced w /maintenance stip, aglime and players benches 30,000.00 /field 1 30,000.00 Softball Field, fully fenced w /maintenance strip, aglime and players benches 25,000.00 /field 2 50,000.00 Bleachers 21' x 28' 4,400.00 /each 6 26,400.00 Play Equipment - youth (lg.) 25,000.00 /each 1 25,000.00 - tots (med.) 17,000.00 /each 1 17,000.00 Lighting - 1 baseball and 159,500.00/l.s. 1 159,500.00 1 softball field Site preparation and enclosure for portable toilets 8,000.00 /l.s. 1 8,000.00 Plantings 30,000.00 /l.s. 1 30,000.00 Sod 1.70 /s.y. 12,200 20,740.00 Seed - athletic mix, installed, mulched 2,300.00 /acre 5.5 12,650.00 Benches 500.00 /each 8 4,000.00 Signage 3,000.00 /l.s. 1 3,000.00 Bike Rack 500.00 /each 1 500.00 Trash Receptacles 500.00 each 3 1,500.00 Subtotal $614,990.00 SUMMARY LAKESHORE PARK $510,740.00 - $580,160.00 ATHLETIC FIELDS $614,990.00 TOTAL $ 1,125,730.00 - $1,195,150.00 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 1 /29 /90 Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION REGARDING USE OF SKATEBOARDS DEPT. APPROVAL: -, f� �� Personnel Coordinator Signature - title ************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached In the fall of 1989, the Brooklyn Center employee safety committee expressed concern over the misuse /abuse of skateboards in Central Park (riders on the trailways harassing pedestrians) and the • community center (kids riding down the stairway on the north end of the community center). The city manager forwarded this concern to the park and recreation commission for its review. Please reference excepts from the minutes of the November 1989 and January 1990 commission meetings when this subject was discussed. The commission has recommended to the city council that the problem of misuse /abuse of skateboards in City parks and property be monitored to determine if the situation warrants further action. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION Accept the park and recreation commission's recommendation regarding skateboards. MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION NOVEMBER 21, 1989 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER Chairman Sorenson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Sorenson, Commissioners Mead, Peterson, Pollock, Shinnick, and Russell. Also present were City Council Liaison Jerry Pedlar, Director of Recreation Arnie Mavis, and Recording Secretary Geralyn Barone. Commissioner Skeels was excused from this evening's meeting. INTRODUCTION OF NEW COMMISSIONERS Chairman Sorenson welcomed new park and recreation commissioners Tom Shinnick and John Russell, who introduced themselves to the commission. Those in attendance introduced themselves to the new commissioners. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - OCTOBER 17 1989 There was a motion by Commissioner Peterson and seconded by Commissioner Mead to approve the minutes of the October 17, 1989, park and recreation commission meeting as submitted. The motion assed. SKATEBOARDS The recording secretary said the Brooklyn Center employee safety committee received a complaint regarding the hazardous use of skateboards in Central Park. The safety committee recommended this be passed onto the city council for its review, and the recording secretary noted the city manager had instead referred it first to the park and recreation commission for its review and discussion. The director of recreation said if any ordinance is passed regarding the use of skateboards, there would be enforcement concerns. Chairman Sorenson said some controlled activity Y needed for the junior high age group, and the director of recreation said there have been summer programs run for this age group, but it is difficult to get them to participate. Chairman Sorenson said these children want to be involved in individual activities, and there has to be something that can be done to help them. Councilmember Pedlar said the problem of skateboards would not be alleviated even if appartus was built in every park for skateboard use. He added that it is difficult to legislate against the use of skateboards and the liability for the City to create any apparatus for skateboards would be tremendous. There was some discussion as to the extent of the problem in Brooklyn Center. 11 -21 -89 -1 Councilmember Pedlar suggested the commission discuss a skateboard awareness education program for children in which safety, courtesy, and skills could be taught. Commissioner Russell suggested an exhibit could go along with the program. Commissioner Pollock suggested encouraging ging skateboarders to participate in the parade. Commissioner Russell suggested F opening a competition and awarding prizes to skateboarders. There was a motion by Commissioner Russell and seconded by Commissioner Shinnick to investigate the possibility of developing a skateboard education program for next spring. The ` motion passed, with Commissioner Peterson voting against it. The director of recreation said he would look into the possibility of such a program and report back to the commission at its next meeting. COMMISSION PLAN OF ACTION Chairman Sorenson asked what the status of the City's planning process is, and Councilmember Pedlar said the city council happened to review the priorities at its last meeting. He reviewed the top priorities, which include crime, housing, budgetary concerns, and economic development. He said the city manager is preparing a work plan which will be used in setting 1990 goals and objectives. Councilmember Pedlar noted the city hall and parks expansion was not a high priority. The director of recreation noted that the original request for expansion came from the park and recreation commission, and an expansion of *the community center should be separate from any city hall expansion. Councilmember Pedlar noted that expansion did rank twelfth in the process. The director of recreation proceeded to review the status of items listed on the 1989 Brooklyn Center park and recreation commission recommended plan of action, and there was some brief discussion on several items. Chairman Sorenson suggested the commission review the city council's plan of action at the January commission meeting and determine how the council's priorities fit in with the park and recreation commission's priorities. He requested the park and recreation commission plan of action be updated for the next meeting. OTHER BUSINESS The director of recreation reviewed the past history of the City's involvement in a request for an ice arena. He said recently a group of residents from Brooklyn Center School District have generated the idea of building an indoor ice arena, and the recommendation has been part of the City's planning process. Councilmember Pedlar said the commission recommended to the city council that it authorize money to fund a feasibility study, but the city council said such a study would be considered with the overall study of City facilities. Commissioner Shinnick 11 -21 -89 -2 entire city. Chairman Sorenson said linking the trail further to the north would help gain approval of the bond issue. Mr. Erkkila said the City may wish to include the additional trailway system in the bond issue. The city engineer asked how this project would tie into the regional trails, and there was a review of the proposed trail system. Chairman Sorenson said he would like to see the trail link at least to Bass Lake Road. Chairman Sorenson asked if the City were to approve the concept plan, would the MPCA move along more quickly in approving this. Mr. Erkkila said he feels it would help if the City's input was given to the MPCA. There was a motion by Commissioner Pollock and seconded by Commissioner Skeels to recommend to the city council to accept the concept plan proposed by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. regarding the Twin Lake park study in conjunction with the entire trail system. The motion passed. RECESS There was a motion by Commissioner Russell and seconded by Commissioner Skeels to recess the meeting. The motion passed. The park and recreation commission recessed at 8:40 p.m. and reconvened at 8:50 p.m. SKATEBOARDS The director of recreation said in his investigation of classes on skateboarding, he has found that no one has really done anything on this topic. He has found no media projects such as filmstrips on this. He noted other cities have had a small problem with skateboarders, but they are doing nothing about it. He added that in talking with staff at the local junior high school, the kids who are abusing skateboards probably would not attend any classes that might be held. Commissioner Shinnick noted that in downtown Minneapolis near the Federal Reserve Building there are skateboarders who are shooed away on occasion by the police, but as soon as the police leave, the kids are right back at it. He pointed out that in general, it is usually the same kids all the time. Chairman Sorenson asked why the employee safety committee referred this to the park and recreation commission, and the recording secretary said reports of abuse involving skateboards had been reported in the Central Park trails and at the community center. The director of recreation reviewed the problems at the community center, which have generally occurred on the outdoor stairway. There was a motion by Commissioner Shinnick and seconded by Commissioner Pollock to recommend to the city council to monitor the problem of misuse /abuse of skateboards in City parks and property to determine if the situation warrants further action. The motion passed. Commissioner Shinnick suggested the commissioners keep an eye out in the parks in their areas to monitor any problems that might occur. 1/16/90 -s- 1P" Recrea - h'ori UMMAS h A Kn X eS CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: LMCIT ACIDENT POLICY FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND CITY ADVISORY COMMISSIONS DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: Signature - title MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below/attached- SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Currently, the City Council is covered by the City's workers' compensation policy for injury incurred while performing duties as a council person. The City's • advisory commissions have no such coverage. The members of the advisory commissions, as are members of the City Council, are covered under the City's liability coverage for injury to others, but not for injury to themselves. The cost for the workers' compensation coverage for council persons or advisory commission member is approximately $115 per year. Recently, realizing that the cost of workers' compensation was prohibitive for most Minnesota cities to offer it to councils and commissions, LMCIT developed an accident, or short -term disability, policy which is much cheaper. THIS POLICY IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR WORKERS' COMPENSATION COVERAGE. Instead, it is a low cost alternative to workers' compensation coverage. The accident coverage applies while the individual is traveling to or from a committee meeting, or while conducting other official business on behalf of, and at the request of, the council or commission. The coverage provides a $100,000 accidental death benefit and a $400 /week short -term benefit for total disability. The cost of the accident coverage is $12.75 per person per year. The City could buy accident coverage for both the Council and its advisory commissions for $446.25 per year. I have attached an application for the insurance coverage along with information received from LMCIT about the coverage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION -------------------- The staff recommends that the Council considers the insurance coverage offered and determine if such coverage is desired. SPECIFIC ACTION REQUIRED BY THE CITY COUNCIL -------------------------------------------- Consider whether the insurance coverage is desired. If the decision is not to purchase the insurance, no action is required. If the decision is to buy the insurance coverage, staff should be directed to make application for the coverage. The premium would be paid from the Unallocated Departmental Expense workers' compensation insurance appropriation. APPLICATION To put the LMCIT sponsored accident coverage for city councils and boards into effect, return this form along with your payment. List each board, commission, or committee which you wish to cover, and show the total number of members on each board. If the council is to be covered, be sure to list the council as well. If you have previously enrolled a board, committee, or commission, do not include them here as you will be billed for the current enrollees. City Ci,t, 4 of Rrookl= Q-ntpr Address 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MUTT 55430 Number of Meetings per Board Name members year City Conner. 5 24 Human Rights & Res. Com. 7 9 Park & Recreation Co 7 9 Planning Commission 7 24 Housing Commission 9 9 Total 35 g $12.75 = $ 4 46.25 *If the council is included is included for coverage and council members also serve on another board, do not include the council member in the count of members of the board. * *Return this application together with the payment calculated no later than February 15, 1990 for coverage to be effective March 1, 1990 to February 28, 1991 to: The Brehm Group 706 Second Avenue South Suite 750 Minneapolis, Mn. 55402 s � 183 University Ave. East St. Paul, MN 55101.2526 League of Minnesota Cities (612) 227.5600 (FAX: 221 -0986) January 5, 1990 To: City officials From: Peter Tritz ENROLLMENT WILL BE OPEN DURING THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY FOR LMCIT'S ACCIDENT POLICY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCILS AND OTHER CITY BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS. This accident coverage is provided by CIGNA, and provides a lower -cost alternative to workers compensation coverage. By statute, elected officials and officers appointed for a fixed term of office are covered by workers compensation only if the city has passed an ordinance or resolution to that effect. The accident coverage applies while the individual is traveling to or from a committee meeting, or while conducting other official business on behalf of and at the request of the committee. The coverage provides a $100,000 accidental death benefit and a $400 /week short -term benefit for total disability. While this accident policy was developed as a lower -cost alternative to providing workers compensation coverage, it is important to understand that the benefits are not equivalent to those of workers compensation. Some of the differences are that it does not include medical, rehabilitation, or retraining benefits; disability and death benefits are fixed, rather than being based on the individual's actual earnings; disability benefits are paid only for total disability, and for a maximum of 26 weeks; and the accident policy disability benefits may be taxable income to the individual. The city may provide coverage for any city boards, commissions, or committees it designates. However, all members of the respective board or commission must be covered; that is, the coverage cannot be offered on an individual choice basis. The cost of the accident coverage is $12.75 per person per year. (By comparison, LMCIT's current minimum rate for workers compensation coverage for council members is $122 per person per year.) The accident policy coverage year runs March 1 to February 28. Additional information and application forms are enclosed. For questions concerning the coverage or to put coverage into effect, contact Jaime Frischmann, The Brehm Group, 1500 International Center, 920 Second Ave. So., Minneapolis, Mn. 55402; (612) 339 -7385. THE BENEFIT EXCLUSIONS Dear Member City, Accidental Death & Dismemberment No coverage is provided for loss due to: If bodily injuries result in death or The League of Minnesota Cities is pleased to dismemberment within one year of a covered a.) Suicide, attempted, suicide, or intentionally offer through T. C. Field and Company and Life accident, the plan will pay as follows: self - inflicted injuries. insurance Company of North America, an b.) War or any act of war. Accidental Death & Dismemberment and Short Loss of Life ...................... ......................$100,000" c.) Full -time service in the armed forces. Term Disability benefit for your city council Loss of two or d.) Taking part in a felony. members, and selected Committee, Commission more members ................. ......................$100,000' e.) Travel or flight in any aircraft while being or Board members. This insurance covers all Loss of one - used for any testing or experimental eligible council members while they are traveling member ............................... .......................$50,000` purposes, fire fighting. pipe- or power -line to, participating in, or traveling from a regular or Loss of thumb and index inspection, aerial photography or exploration: special meeting of the council or other city finger of the same hand .......................$25,000" or one operated by the insured, a member board, commission, or committee of which the of their household. the Municipality or any individual is a member, or while conducting "Member" means hand, foot or eye. Municipality or affiliate: or in military aircraft official council business on behalf, and at the Only one amount, the largest to which you are other than transport aircraft operated by the request of the council. Coverage begins at the entitled, will be paid for all losses resulting from Military Airlift Command (MAC) or similar start of a trip, whether from their home, office or one accident. service of another country: or' while serving other location. and ends upon their return to as a pilot or other crew member of any their home or office, or makes a personal "If you are age 70 or over at the time you aircraft. deviation. "Personal deviation ", as used here, sustain injuries in a covered accident, your means an activity that is not necessarily related Principal Sum reduces to 65 1 10 of the original to their business, and not incidental to the amount; at age 75, to 45 %; at age 80, to 30 %; business trip. and at age 85, to 15 %. Total Disability Weekly Benefit Please fill out the enclosed enrollment form, and send it along, with the first annual If, within 30 days of the date of a covered premium, calculated as shown. All checks should accident, an insured becomes totally disabled as be made payable to, and mailed to: ELIGIBILITY a direct result of injuries sustained, and from no The Brehm Group All active Minnesota Municipal Council members other cause, the Plan will pay $400.00 per 920 Second Avenue South whose municipality has elected to participate in week, following a 3 -day waiting period, for up Suite 1500 this program and all members of City or to 26 weeks, or until such time as a benefit Minneapolis, MN 55402 Municipal Committiees, Commissions and Boards becomes payable for loss of life, limb or sight. for whom the Municipality has applied for Exposure and Disappearance coverage. If the body of an Insured has not been found This brochure is intended as a brief benefit within one year of the disappearance, stranding, description. The Policy will determine the benefit sinking or wrecking of any vehicle in which the payable. Insured was an occupant, then it shall be presumed, subject to all other provisions and All premiums need to be received by 7/31/89 conditions of the policy that the Insured has in order for coverage to be effective 811189 suffered loss of life covered under the policy. to 311190 PERSONAL ACCIDENT INSURANCE Underwritten by: LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA c THE LEAGUE OF MINNEOOTA CITIE! Y 5/89 s=' 1� Licenses to be approved by the City Council on January 29, 1990: BULK VENDOR D & G Vending, Inc. 4313 NE Washington St. /' Sanitarian L CIGARETTE OVER THE COUNTER SALES: Applebee's 1347 Brookdale Center Boulevard Superette 6912 Brooklyn Blvd. C.W.'s Corner (Holiday Inn) 2200 Freeway Blvd. Jerry's New Market 5801 Xerxes Ave. N. Target 6100 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. MACHINE SALES: Ala Carte Vending Systems, Inc. 2550 Kasota Avenue Modern Control 6820 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. Consumer Vending 2828 Lyndale Ave. N. Bridgemans 6201 Brooklyn Blvd. Five Star Vending 15034 Fillmore St. NE Hiawatha Rubber Co. 1700 67th Ave. N. Mikros Engineering 3715 50th Ave. N. City Clerk GASOLINE SERVICE STATION Brooklyn Service Center (Unocal 76) 6901 Brooklyn Blvd. Duke's Amoco 6501 Humboldt Ave. N. Green Meadows 3319 49th Ave. N. ®R SuperAmerica #4160 6545 West River Road Bill West's Service Center 2000 57th Ave. N. City Clerk NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINES ARA Services 2830 North Fairview Northwestern Nat'l. Life Ins. Co. 6200 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. Bro- Midwest Vending Company 9110 Grand Ave. S. American Legion 4307 70th Ave. N. Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. N. Days Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. Pilgrim Cleaners 5748 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center Service "76" 6245 Brooklyn Blvd. Canteen Company of MN, Inc. 6300 Penn Ave. S. Caterpillar Paving 1800 Freeway Blvd Medtronics 6700 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. D. L. Service Co. 2516 83rd Ave. N. Lowell's Automotive 6211 Brooklyn Blvd. Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Blvd. Northern States Power 4501 68th Ave. N. Precision, Inc. 3415 48th Ave. N. Twin City Vending Co., Inc. 1065 East Highway 36 Sears 1297 Brookdale Center Sanitarian PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINES ARA Services 2830 North Fairview Northwestern Nat'l. Life Ins. Co. 6200 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. Bro- Midwest Vending Company 9110 Grand Ave. S. Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. N. Canteen Company of MN, Inc. 6300 Penn Ave. S. Caterpillar Paving 1800 Freeway Blvd. Medtronics 6700 Shingle Ck. Pkwy. Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Blvd. Twin City Vending Co., Inc. 1065 East Highway 36 —j� Sears 1297 Brookdale Center / Sanitarian RENTAL DWELLING Initial: Jane DeFrance Maranatha Place Lambert and Ethel Ackermann 4207 Lakeside Ave. N. #234 Kathryn D. Hess 1329 68th Lane North Renewal: Willwerscheid, Robbins, Rafter 6331, 6401, 6425 Beard Ave. N. Duane and Jessie Erickson 7019 Dallas Road Christine J. Stendal 5456 Emerson Ave. N. Beisner Limited 1525 Humboldt Place Hallard N. Corey 4201 Lakeside Ave. N. #118 L. Larry Law 4201 Lakeside Ave. N. #302 Residential Alternatives, Inc. 5449 Lyndale Ave. N. Daryl Losey 5931 Pearson Drive ) Gary and Danae Morrison 5104 E. Twin Lake Blvd. l a Director of Planning _o,�,_ and Inspection SIGN HANGER � Scenic Sign Corporation Box 881, St. Cloud �''�� Building Official SPECIAL FOOD HANDLING ESTABLISHMENT Brooklyn Center Liquor Store #1 1500 69th Ave. N. Brooklyn Center Liquor Store #2 6250 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center Liquor Store #3 1966 57th Ave. N. C.W.'s Corner (Holiday Inn) 2200 Freeway Blvd. Carson Pirie Scott 1200 Brookdale Center Ideal Drug 6800 Humboldt Ave. N. Mr. Movies 1964 57th Ave. N. T Total Petroleum 6830 Brooklyn Blvd. Sanitarian TAXICAB Town Taxi 2812 University Ave. SE P . r Chief of Police GENERAL APPROVAL:��2, D. K. Weeks, City Clerk