HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988 07-11 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
JULY 11, 1988
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. Recess to EDA
7. Approval of Minutes:
*a. June 27, 1988 - Regular Session
8. Resolutions:
a. Amending the 1988 General Fund Budget and Authorizing
Payment to the Hennepin Recycling Group
*b. Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Execute Any
Necessary Agreements with the State of Minnesota for
Electrical Inspections Effective August 1, 1988
*c. Accepting :Bid and Approving Contract for Sealcoating of
Streets (Improvement Project No. 1988 -15, Contract
1988 -J)
*d. Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of
Shade Trees (Order No. DST 7/11/88)
*e. Approving a Limited Use Permit from the State of
Minnesota for Construction of a Bikeway within the
Rights of Way of T.H. 100
f. Authorizing Initiation of Eminent Domain Proceedings to
Acquire Easement for Pedestrian /Bicycle Trailway on
57th Avenue North
*g. Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Enter into an
Agreement with the Domestic Assault Intervention
Project
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- July 11, 1988
9. Ordinance: (7:30 p.m.)
a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 Relating to Hours of
Operation for a Bottle Club
-This ordinance was first read on June 13, 1988,
published in the City's official newspaper on June 23,
1988, and is offered this evening for a second reading.
10. Planning Commission Item: (7:45 p.m.)
a. Planning Commission Application No. 88005 submitted by
Bernard Herman Architects requesting site and building
plan approval for an addition to the office building
located at 1915 57th Avenue North. This item was
recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at
its June 16, 1988, meeting. The City Council
considered this item at its June 27, 1988, meeting. At
this time the item was tabled for further information
regarding the condition for a utility easement. Staff
is recommending condition No. 7 be deleted from the
recommended conditions for Planning Commission
Application No. 88005.
11. Discussion Items:
a. Request for Proposals - Group Home Study
b. Nuisance Ordinances
C. Update on HRG Recycling rocess oral report)
g ( p )
d. Fund Donations to City from Community Groups (oral
report)
*12. Licenses
13. Adjournment
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY
OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
JUNE 27,. 1988
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order
by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:04 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and
Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public
Works Sy Knapp, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and
Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Personnel Coordinator
Geralyn Barone, and Administrative Aid Patti Page.
INVOCATION
Mayor Nyquist noted members of the Brooklyn Center Prayer Breakfast Committee
had volunteered to give the invocation at the Council meetings this year.
The invocation was offered by Dr. Dennis Morrow.
OPEN FORUM
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mike Kaulfuss of the Brooklyn Center Police Department.
Mr. Kaulfuss stated he would like to thank the Mayor for writing the editorial
for the Brooklyn Center Post in response to a past editorial. He stated the
police union contract is nearing arbitration, and he would like to leave some
information for the Councilmembers this evening.
Mayor Nyquist then recognized Dave Adams, 2901 Nash Road. He inquired if
Minnegasco would be repairing -the road which was dug up during the winter. The
Director of Public Works stated Minnegasco did a number of street cuts during
the winter and will soon be awarding ding the contract for removal of the temporary
P y
patches and repairing of the street Mr. d
. Adams inquired if the City Council w
P g q y it as
aware of the fact that the Public Works Department has not signed a contract for
1988 et. The
Cit y Manager stated the Council is aware of this, and the
contract is in mediation at this time. Mr. Adams stated he felt this contract
should be settled soon since it is the middle of 1988 already.
CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from
the consent agenda. Councilmember Hawes requested items 7c and 7d be removed,
and Councilmember Lhotka requested item 7g be removed from the consent agenda.
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -104
Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
6 -27 -88 -1-
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -09
(RECONDITIONING WELL NO. 8)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -105
Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES
(ORDER NO. DST 06/27/88)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously.
LICENSES
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to
approve the following list of licenses:
AMUSEMENT DEVICES - OPERATOR
Brookdale East Cinema 5801 John Martin Dr.
Brooklyn Center Community Center 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy.
Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. N.
Davanni's 5937 Summit Drive
Days Inn 1501 Freeway Boulevard
Earle Brown Bowl 6445 James Circle
Green Mill Inn, Inc. 5540 Brooklyn Blvd.
Ground Round, Inc. 2545 County Road 10
Holiday Inn
2200 Freeway Boulevard
Lynbrook Bowl 6357 North Lilac Drive
Metropolitan Transit Commission 6845 Shingle Creek Pkwy.
Snyder Brothers Drug 1296 Brookdale Center
T. Wright's 5800 Shingle Creek Pkwy.
U.A. Movies at Brookdale 5810 Shingle Creek Pkwy.
AMUSEMENT DEVICES - VENDOR
American Amusement Arcades 850 Decatur Avenue
Theisen Vending Co. 3804 Nicollet Ave. N.
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT
Denny's Restaurant 3901 Lakebreeze Ave. N.
ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT
Brooklyn Center Parks & Rec Dept. Central Park
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
Cronstrom's Heating & A/C 4410 Excelsior Blvd.
Green Mechanical, Inc. 8811 E. Research Ctr. Rd.
Fred Vogt & Co. 3260 Gorham Avenue
RENTAL DWELLINGS
Initial:
6 -27 -88 -2-
Fatih Bey 3617 Admiral Lane
Keith L. Nordby 5960 Brooklyn Blvd.
Brian & Dorothy Follese 6933 Brooklyn Blvd.
John C. Meyers 1133 63rd Lane North
Renewal:
Dave or Mary Huang 6400 Girard Ave. N.
Martha Lahti 5316 Knox Ave. N.
Martha Lahti 5322 Knox Ave. N.
J. G. Strand 5329 Penn Ave. N.
ROI Properties, Inc. 7109 -7113 Unity Ave. N.
Richard & Sharon Krawiecki 5209 Xerxes Ave. N.
Frances M. Lunacek 5211 Xerxes Ave. N.
Tracy Rice 5836 Xerxes Ave. N.
TAXICAB
Suburban Taxi Corporation 9614 Humboldt Ave. S.
The motion passed unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 13 1988 - REGULAR SESSION
There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott
to approve the minutes of the June 13, 1988, City Council meeting. The motion
passed unanimously. Mayor Nyquist abstained from the vote.
RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED)
The City Manager presented a Resolution Appropriating Funds and Approving
Payment for Emergency Repairs of Air Conditioning System for Civic Center.
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -106
Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING FUNDS AND APPROVING PAYMENT FOR EMERGENCY REPAIRS OF
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM FOR CIVIC CENTER
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously.
The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Work Performed under
Improvement Project No. 1987 -24 (Reconditioning Well No. 6). Councilmember
Hawes stated he believed there were two dollar amounts in the resolution which
needed to be changed. He noted on the first page item No. 3, the total amount
for the contract should be $13,431. He stated on the second page of the
resolution item No. 8, the total amount of the contract should be $5,487. The
Director of Public Works agreed with these changes.
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -107
Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -24
(RECONDITIONING WELL NO. 6)
6 -27 -88 -3-
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously.
The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Work Performed under
Improvement Project No. 1988 -08 (Installation of Pressure Tanks at Wells No. 2,
4, 5, 7, and 8).
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -108
Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -08
(INSTALLATION OF PRESSURE TANKS AT WELLS NO. 2, 4, 5, 7, AND 8)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously.
The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Proposal for Noise Reduction
on the H.V.A.C. System in City Council Chambers, Improvement Project No. 1988-
12. Councilmember Lhotka stated he did not understand how staff came up with a
90% reduction in the noise level. The Director of Public Works went on to
explain how noise levels are measured in decibels and how the 90% reduction was
reached.
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -109
Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR NOISE REDUCTION ON THE H.V.A.C. SYSTEM IN CITY
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -12
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously.
The City Manager noted the next two resolutions raise some questions which he
feels the City Council should address. He noted the two resolutions are
acknowledging gifts, one from the Brooklyn Center Lions Club and one from the
Brooklyn Center American Legion Post. He stated the City is the regulatory body
for these two organizations and inquired if the Council feels accepting these
gifts compromises the City's position if a disciplinary action is required. The
City Manager added the City did not ask these organizations for the gifts; the
organizations heard of the City's need and sent the money.
Councilmember Theis inquired of the Finance Director what the City's annual
budget was. The Director of Finance stated it was approximately $10 million.
Councilmember Theis stated he does not feel these small dollar gifts would
affect the way he would make decisions regarding disciplinary actions for these
or other organizations. Mayor Nyquist inquired where Councilmember Theis would
draw the line. Councilmember Theis stated that is a difficult question to
answer because when looking at dollar amounts there is a definite gray area, but
he is sure at some point there would be a definite black area for drawing the
line.
6 -27 -88 -4-
y
Councilmember Lhotka stated he does not have a problem accepting these gifts
from the organizations, but if it does become a problem for staff or the
auditors there are plenty of organizations such as CEAP, and the Mediation
Project which could be suggested to these organizations. Councilmember Scott
stated she does not see a problem with accepting these gifts unless the City is
soliciting the funds from the organizations. Councilmember Hawes stated he
would prefer to see the donations go to other more needy organizations.
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -110
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING GIFT FROM THE BROOKLYN CENTER LIONS CLUB
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -111
Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING GIFT FROM BROOKLYN CENTER AMERICAN LEGION POST NO. 630
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously.
Councilmember Lhotka stated he would like to see this issue come back before the
Council as a discussion item at a later date.
ORDINANCES
The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Regarding the
Parking Requirements for Places of Public Assembly. He noted this item was
reviewed by the Planning Commission and is recommended for a first reading this
evening. Councilmember Scott inquired if the Director of Planning and
Inspection was comfortable with the proposed parking formula. The Director of
Planning and Inspection responded affirmatively and noted this proposed change
would only affect the parking requirement for places of public assembly within a
retail shopping center complex, but it would not affect freestanding theatres or
churches. The City Manager noted the City has had flyovers at the different
shopping centers during the busy Christmas season, and it appears this will not
be a problem at Brookdale Square. Councilmember Lhotka stated he did not
understand why this amendment is being looked at individually instead of with a
Planning Commission item or under the review of other areas of Chapter 35.
Councilmember Theis inquired if this amendment would affect the amount of
building density on a site. The Director of Planning and Inspection responded
affirmatively.
The EDA Coordinator entered the meeting at 7:40 p.m.
The Director of Public Works stated when Short - Elliott - Hendrickson completed the
traffic study for this area, he believes they may have comprehended a much more
dense development in the Brookdale Square area. He is sure with the changes to
the parking lot and entrances the surrounding streets would be able to handle
more traffic. Councilmember Theis stated he would like this item to come back
6 -27 -88 -5-
before the Council for more review.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Regarding the Parking
Requirement for Places of Public Assembly and setting a public hearing date for
July 25, 1988, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed with Councilmembers Lhotka and
Theis opposed.
The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 6 of the City
Ordinances Regarding Administrative Code. He noted this item covers primarily
housekeeping changes and is offered this evening for a first reading.
There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott
to approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 6 of the City
Ordinances Regarding Administrative Code and setting a public hearing date for
July 25, 1988, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 88004 SUBMITTED BY STEVE AND DEBRA HOUGTON
REQUESTING SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL FOR A CARPET CLEANING SERVICE IN THE
RESIDENCE AT 2818 MUMFORD ROAD
The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission at its June 16, 1988, meeting. The Director of Planning and
Inspection referred the Council to the Planning Commission minutes of June 16,
1988, pages one and two. He explained the reason a special use permit is needed
is because there will be a nonresident employee on the premises to answer the
telephone. He went on to briefly review the conditions recommended by the
Planning Commission. Mayor Nyquist noted that since the three vans are not
commercial vehicles they could legally park on the premises. The Director of
Planning and Inspection agreed that was true but noted the applicant has agreed
to off -site parking for security reasons. He noted the applicant intends to
send the vans home with each worker. He added, however, it could be possible at
some point a vehicle would be parked on the premises. There was some discussion
relative to making a seventh condition so that these vehicles cannot be parked
on the premises.
Councilmember Lhotka inquired if the Fire Department has inspected the premises
because of the chemicals. The Director of Planning and Inspection noted the
Fire Department has not been in for an inspection but it could be done if the
Council so wished.
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 88004 submitted by Steve and Debra Hougton requesting
special use permit approval for a carpet cleaning service in the residence at
2818 Mumford Road. A resident noted his property abuts the applicants and he is
very concerned with the possibility of having three or four large vehicles
parked on these premises. Mayor Nyquist recognized Steve Hougton, the
applicant, who stated since the Planning Commission meeting he has had his
driveway enlarged so if it is necessary for a vehicle to be on the premises it
will not be on the street but on an improved area. He went on to explain that
generally the trucks are assigned to each driver and they go home with the
6 -27 -88 -6-
driver. He, noted there .would be no cleaning of carpets within the residence at
2818 Mumford Road and noted they do not use any type of acids in the cleaning of
their carpeting, only powders and scotch guard.
Councilmember Theis inquired if there would be any way the City could classify
the vehicles so they cannot be claimed as a personal vehicle. Councilmember
Lhotka inquired if a condition could be added allowing only one vehicle which is
used in the business on the premises. Councilmember Theis pointed out if at
some point the business was doing poorly Mr. Hougton could have more of the
vehicles on his premise and claim them as personal vehicles not business
vehicles. The City Attorney noted the condition could be worded "any vehicle
that has been or is being used for the purpose of this business."
Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else present who wished to speak at
the public hearing. No one requested to speak, and he entertained a motion to
close the public hearing.
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 88004. The
motion passed unanimously.
A brief discussion then ensued relative to additional conditions.
There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes
to approve Planning Commission Application No. 88004 subject to the following
conditions:
1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances
and regulations, and any violation thereof shall be grounds for
revocation.
2. The special use permit is issued to the applicant and is
nontransferable.
3. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off - street on
improved space provided by the applicant.
4. Special use permit approval acknowledges the employment on the premises
of not more than one nonresident employee.
S. The premises shall be inspected and improved in accordance with the
requirements set forth by the Building Official with respect to the
home occupation office space prior to the issuance of the special use
permit.
6. No more than one commercial vehicle, consistent with the limitations
imposed by City Ordinances, may be kept on the property.
7. Only one vehicle which has been or is being used in the home occupation
business may be parked in the driveway.
6 -27 -88 -7-
e
8. The applicant shall provide a fire extinguisher in the area of the home
occupation.
9. The Fire Chief shall review the chemicals associated with the home
occupation that are stored on the site or in a vehicle to assure proper
storage and handling.
The motion passed unanimously.
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 88005 SUBMITTED BY BERNARD HERMAN ARCHITECTS
REQUESTING SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL FOR AN ADDITION TO THE OFFICE
BUILDING LOCATED AT 1915 57TH AVENUE NORTH
The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission at its June 16, 1988, meeting. The Director of Planning and
Inspection referred the Council to the Planning Commission minutes of June 16,
1988, pages three and four. He went on to explain the application and noted the
project consists of two parts; a solarium addition and construction of wall
partitions within the building. He added the solarium addition will not have
full -time people working in it but will be used as an employee lunch room and
meeting room.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Bernard Herman, of Bernard Herman Architects, who
explained he is still somewhat confused regarding the utility and trailway
easements. He stated he was not sure if the total amount of easements were 15
feet from the property line or if the five foot trailway easement was included
within the utility easement. The Director of Public Works stated he believed
the utility and sidewalk easement overlap. A brief discussion then ensued
regarding the easements, and the City Manager pointed out if there is some
confusion regarding these easements the item should be tabled
Mayor Nyquist then recognized Mr. Milavitz, the owner of the building. Mr.
Milavitz stated he did not feel it was proper to delay the use of his building
because of questions over utility and trailway easements. He added he felt it
was extremely unfair to hold up use because of these easements. He stated it
appears he has two options open, one of those being legal action.
Mayor Nyquist inquired if Mr. Milavitz had any problems granting the City the
easement. Mr. Milavitz stated if the easement does not interfere with the use
of his property, he would be more than happy to grant the easement, but if it
does interfere with the use of his property, he does not want to grant the
easement.
Councilmember Theis made a motion to table Planning Commission Application No.
88005 until all easement questions are clarified. Councilmember Lhotka seconded
the motion for purposes of a discussion.
Councilmember Lhotka inquired if there would be any documentation available in
the Director of Public Works' or City Engineer's office to answer the
applicant's questions this evening. The Director of Public Works stated it
would not be possible to come to a conclusion on this issue without knowing all
the facts. He pointed out the City Engineer has been working on this, and he is
not present this evening. Councilmember Lhotka inquired of the Cit y Attorne y if
6 -27 -88 -8-
the Council is correct in taking this tabling action. The City Attorney stated
he does not fully understand what the granting of an easement has to do with
approval of a site plan. He inquired of the Director of Planning and Inspection
if these easements were currently in place. The Director of Planning and
Inspection responded negatively and stated the City is seeking the easement now
because of street improvements in the area. He noted the City is willing to
compensate the applicant for the easement.
Mr. Herman inquired if the solarium was not going to be built and only basic
remodeling was being done within the building, would there be a need to appear
before the Planning Commission or the City Council for approval. The Director
of Planning and Inspection stated the only thing that would be required is that
a building permit be taken for the remodeling inside. He pointed out that the
easement question is not stopping Mr. Malivetz' business from moving in.
Councilmember Scott stated she felt the whole easement issue is quite clear, and
that Mr. Herman was the only person that was truly confused.
Mayor Nyquist called for a vote on the aforementioned motion regarding tabling
of Planning Commission Application No. 88005. The motion passed with
Councilmembers Scott and Hawes opposed.
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO 88006 SUBMITTED BY ROBERT REGAN REQUESTING
SITE AND BUILDING PLAN AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL FOR AN ADDITION TO THE
OSSEO BROOKLYN BUS COMPANY GARAGE AT 4435 68TH AVENUE NORTH
The City Manager noted this item was recommended nded for approval b the
Planning
PP y g
Commission at its June 16, 1988, meeting. The Director of Planning and
Inspection referred the Council to pages four through six of the June 16, 1988,
Planning Commission minutes and the attached information sheet. He noted the
bus garage is a special use within the C2 zoning district. He went on to
briefly explain the application and noted a special use permit and permanent
improvements to the site would be required to allow for storage of the overflow
cars from the car dealerships on Brooklyn Boulevard. He added a public hearing
has been scheduled for this evening and notices have been sent. He briefly
reviewed the 12 conditions recommended for this application.
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 88006 submitted by Robert Regan requesting site and
building plan and special use permit approval for an addition to the Osseo
Brooklyn Bus Company garage at 4435 68th Avenue North. He inquired if there was
anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to
speak, and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 88006. The
motion passed unanimously.
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka
to approve Planning Commission Application No. 88006 subject to the following
conditions:
6 -27 -88 -9-
I
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of
permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and
approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an
amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior
to the issuance of permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment
shall be appropriately screened from view.
5
The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing
g g
system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central
monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped
areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter
34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving
areas.
9. The plans shall be modified prior to consideration by the City Council
to indicate a parking delineator (B612 curb and gutter) at the east end
of the row of parking along the north side of the lot (in the newly
paved area).
10. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances
and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for
revocation.
11. Parking of cars on the north portion of the property by off -site auto
dealerships is strictly prohibited unless and until a separate special
use permit is granted for such use.
12. The conveyance of additional runoff from the expanded parking lot to
the I -694 right of way is subject to approval by MNDOT.
The motion passed unanimously.
RECESS
The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 9 p.m. and reconvened at 9:21 p.m.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED AND FOR WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED
The City Manager noted the Shingle Creek Watershed Commission and the West
6 -27 -88 -10-
Mississippi_ Watershed Commission were formed by Joint Powers Agreements in 1984
to meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act. He
noted these commissions have now developed its draft plans and have submitted
them to the member cities for review and comment. He added the commissions will
hold public hearings on their plans. He stated a representative of Eugene A.
Hickock & Associates is present this evening to provide a summary presentation
of the plans to the Council. The Director of Public Works introduced Bill
Weidenbacher of Hickock & Associates. Mr. Weidenbacher gave a slide
presentation which briefly reviewed the two management plans being submitted by
the two watershed commissions.
The Director of Public Works noted the Shingle Creek Watershed Management
Commission has been working with the Engineering Department to complete a study
on the Twin Lake and Ryan Creek areas to determine what can be done to control
the flood levels in area lakes. He noted interim standards were set and
strictly enforced to protect the watershed districts while the management plans
were being developed. The Director of Public Works explained the City will
follow up these management plans with the development of its own watershed
management plan. He noted the City will have to include funds in the 1990
budget for development of this plan. He pointed out at this time the plan has
not gone into great detail on water quality management, but this is an area to
expect greater detail on in the future.
Councilmember Lhotka inquired how these management plans affect the citizens of
Brooklyn Center. The Director of Public Works stated these management plans
would not have any affect on current residential areas within the City, but they
will apply to new development or redevelopment of commercial and industrial
properties.
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -112
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING DRAFT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -113
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING DRAFT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously.
WATER USE RESTRICTIONS - UPDATE
The Director of Public Works noted staff is gathering and analyzing additional
information from other cities, but it has been difficult gathering some of this
information from the other cities because they are so busy. He went on to
briefly review the water usage through June 22, 1988. He added some cities have
reported that its daily usage has actually increased since starting the odd -
even system. He stated staff is recommending no change at this time.
6 -27 -88 -11-
Councilmember Theis inquired why the other cities are not capable of telling
staff how much water it pumps on a particular date. The Director of Public
Works stated the other cities would manually have to check its records and are
too busy at�this time to be able to get the detailed information. Councilmember
Theis, inquired if Brooklyn Center is the only City with this type of
sophisticated system. The Director of. Public Works stated there are a few
systems, y within the metro area.
Council�pembe'r Lhotka left the table at 10:25 p.m.
Councilmeiilmer Theis inquired why . so many other cities were using the odd -even
systems ts)The Director of Public Works noted that only about one -third of the
cities' in the Star Tribune article are using the odd -even system, and a
great numbax of them use the odd -even system plus restricting the hours. He
noted �tlriis; type of system would be much more restrictive than what we are
currently using.
i
Councilmp -mixer Lhotka returned to the table at 10:27 p.m.
Councx_lmeimlxer Theis inquired why the other cities are using the odd -even system.
The Director of Public Works stated apparently these cities feel it is working
for themndDut he is not totally convinced that it will work for Brooklyn Center,
and the haa;t couple years experience backs up his feelings.
CONSTITUT NAL CHALLENGE TO 1988 OMNIBUS TAX BILL
The City:Mhnager noted the Municipal Legislative Commission which is composed of
15 metrapbaitan suburbs has voted to pursue a legal challenge to the disparity
reductidxtea;id provided as part of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill. He noted the
policy innatself is not unconstitutional. However, the method the legislature
has adopted to distribute disparity aid can create a nonuniform tax on the same
class of -subjects by the same taxing authority and therefore may be
constitutionally flawed.
The Director of Public Works left the table at 10:32 p.m.
The CityzrManager stated at this time staff is not making any recommendations but
noted ther'bill is not beneficial to the metropolitan area taxpayer but can be
somewhat beneficial for the municipality. The City Attorney stated out of all
the cities his firm represents, it only found one city which would be affected
by this - tax bill next year. He stated he does not believe this bill will affect
Brooklyn: Center at all in 1989. There was a general consensus among
Councilme.mbers that City staff should keep an eye on this bill.
RECOMMENDED USE FOR PROPERTY AT 65TH AND BROOKLYN BOULEVARD
The EDA Coordinator briefly reviewed the area in question and noted there are a
number cxf development problems associated with this area. He noted the vacant
property has significant soil problems, and access to the undeveloped site is
limited;aaking development of the ro ert more difficult He
P P y • sta it appears
PP r
the current zoning of this property is inconsistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and the desires of the neighborhood. He added at this time
this particular area is not a high priority area for City development. He
stated staff is recommending the Council refer the rezoning of this property to
6 -27 -88 -12-
the Planning Commission for its consideration.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
refer the rezoning of the property in question to the Planning Commission for
its consideration and recommendations. The motion passed unanimously.
ANOKA COUNTY LRT STUDY
The City Manager stated Anoka County has shown some interest in considering some
of the light rail transit options serving Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park
which were dropped from the Northwest Light Rail Transit recommendation. He
stated he believes this is a step in the right direction because the proposals
that were submitted for the Northwest Light Rail Transit did not fully address
the City's service needs.
There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka
to support the concept of being included in the Anoka Light Rail Transit study.
The motion passed unanimously.
ANNUAL AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORT
The Finance Director stated the City Charter requires the financial audit be
submitted by June 30 of each year. He stated staff is requesting an extension
of this deadline to July 25, 1988.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka
to grant the extension of the deadline for submitting the financial audit until
July 25, 1988. The motion passed unanimously.
The City Manager noted there would be an executive session of the City Council
held after adjournment of the City Council meeting and the Economic Development
Authority meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City
Council adjourned at 10:55 p.m.
City Clerk Mayor
6 -27 -88 -13-
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 7 -11 -88
Agenda Item Number Scx-
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Appropriation to the Hennepin Recycling Group
******************************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APP - title
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached
The resolution before the Council authorizes a payment to the City of New Hope for the Hennepin
Recycling Group (HRG). The money is to be used for start-up expenses of the HRG, which is a joint
® powers group formed to establish joint solid waste and recycling programs. The dollar figure is based
upon $1.50 per household (single family and townhouse). The number of households is established
through the 1987 Metropolitan Council statistics. The money is to be used for such start-up costs as
insurance, legal fees, and so forth.
RECOMMENDATION
I would recommend that this appropriation be approved.
Fa' .1
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1988 GENERAL FUND BUDGET
AND AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO THE HENNEPIN RECYCLING GROUP
WHEREAS, Section 7.09 of the City Charter of the City of Brooklyn
Center does provide for a contingency appropriation as a part of the General
Fund Budget, and further provides that the contingency appropriation may be
transferred to any other appropriation by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota and Hennepin County have mandated that
solid waste being deposited in area landfills be reduced by sixteen percent by
the year 1990; and
WHEREAS, the Cities of Brooklyn Center, Crystal, and New Hope have
established a joint powers group known as the Hennepin Recycling Group; and
WHEREAS, the Hennepin Recycling Group exists for the purpose of
establishing, organizing, and administering a joint solid waste and recycling
program; and
WHEREAS, the Hennepin Recycling Group will experience necessary start—
up expenses to be shared by the three cities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center to amend the 1988 General Fund Budget as follows:
Increase the Appropriations for the following line items:
Health Activity No. 51 Professional Services Account No. 4310 $ 12,924
Decrease the Appropriations for the following line items:
Unallocated Expenses No. 80 Contingency Account No. 4995 $ T 12,924; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED to authorize the sum of $1.50 per single family
household and town houses in the total amount of $12,924 be paid to the Hennepin
Recycling Group.
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 Meetin Cate 7 -11 -88
Agenda Item Numbe
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
• ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Execute any Necessary
Agreements with the State of Minnesota for Electrical Inspections Effective August
1, 1988.
DEPT. APPROVAL:
Signature - title 017 r I WHIM dna InspecrMn
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below/attached-
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X
Friday, July 29, 1988 will be the last day that Leonard Eichmiller will be making
electrical inspections for the City of Brooklyn Center. Mr. Eichmiller has
provided the City with electrical inspections through a service contract for over 25
® years.
It is recommended that the responsibility for issuing electrical permits and the
inspection of electrical work be transferred to the State Board of Electricity
effective Monday, August 1, 1988. The above mentioned resolution authorizes the
Mayor and City Manager to execute the necessary agreements, if any, to implement
this change.
�b
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
ANY NECESSARY AGREEMENTS WITH THE STATE OF MINNESOTA FOR
ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS EFFECTIVE AUGUST 1 1988
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center desires to obtain from the State of
Minnesota certain inspection services relating to the work of licensed electrical
contractors in the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center to authorize the Mayor and the City Manager to execute any necessary
agreements with the State of Minnesota to furnish inspection and reinspection of the
work of licensed electrical contractors in the City of Brooklyn Center, effective
August 1, 1988.
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 '7/11188
Agenda Item Number S�
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FOR SEALCOATING OF STREETS
(IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -15 CONTRACT 1988 -J)
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPROVAL:
SY K R,PP DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS; '
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: •�
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached
Explanation
The 1988 Sealcoating Program will be the first year of a new program that uses a
O Class A chip rock on all streets.
In prior years, the City used a combination of buckshot and Class A chip rock.
The City is changing to the Class A chip because it reduces the nuisance
problem, improves skid resistance and increases the life expectancy of the seal.
The City has budgeted $145,000 for the work in 1988. The work area covers 13.84
miles of street. There are 21 miles of collector streets and 83 miles of
local (residential) streets. It is our plan to cover at least 13 miles per
year so that the entire City is covered in eight years. This program will meet
that objective.
The City received bids on July 7, 1988. Astech Asphalt Surface Technologies
Corp. was the low bidder for the work. We have reviewed the bidder's
qualifications and checked the low bidder's references.
Recommendation „
We recommend that the attached resolution, accepting bid and approving contract,
be approved by City Council.
ye,
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FOR
SEALCOATING OF STREETS (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -15,
CONTRACT 1988 -J)
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No.
1988 -15, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and
Engineer, on the 7th day of July, 1988. Said bids were as follows:
Bidder Bid Amount
Astech Asphalt Surface Technologies Corporation $129,388.45
Allied Blacktop Company 141,211.58
Bituminous Roadways, Inc. 155,821.47
WHEREAS, it appears the Astech Asphalt Surface Technologies Corporation
of St. Cloud, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to
enter into the attached contract, in the amount of $129,388.45,
with Astech Asphalt Surface Technologies Corporation of St. Cloud,
Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for
Improvement Project No. 1988 -15 according to the plans and
specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in
the office of the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return
forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except
that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest
bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
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 7/11/88
Agenda Item Number 8d
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE
AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES
DEPT. APPROVAL
�L /1
* * * * * * * ** Y NAP . D *R ECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS ********* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached NO
S The attached resolution represents the official council action required to expedite
removal of the trees most recently marked by the city tree inspector in accordance with
the procedures outlined therein. It is anticipated that this resolution will be submitted
for council consideration each meeting during the summer and fall as new trees are marked.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the council adopt the attached resolution.
•
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE
REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST 07/11/88)
WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and Shade Tree Removal
Agreement has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of
Brooklyn Center giving the owners twenty (20) days to remove shade trees
on the owners' property; and
WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of these shade trees by
declaring them a public nuisance:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that:
1. The shade trees at the following addresses are hereby declared
to be a public nuisance.
PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER
ROBERT MCLEAN 421 69TH AVE N 139
MARK /DEBORAH WYNN 506 61ST AVE N 140
DONALD FOSTER 5100 BROOKLYN BLVD 141
DONALD FOSTER 5100 BROOKLYN BLVD 142
DONALD FOSTER 5100 BROOKLYN BLVD 143
DONALD FOSTER 5100 BROOKLYN BLVD 144
DONALD FOSTER 5100 BROOKLYN BLVD 145
CHARLES THOMPSON 6101 BROOKLYN BLVD 146
CHARLES THOMPSON 6101 BROOKLYN BLVD 147
BERTIL /ELSIE JOHNSON 6107 BROOKLYN BLVD 148
KAREN SCHMIDT 6200 BROOKLYN BLVD 149
ALAN CLARK 6234 BROOKLYN BLVD 150
SHIRLEY FLASCH 6207 CHOWEN AVE N 151
ANDRE /CYNTHIA BLANC 6354 WILLOW LA 152
ROBERT SCHLEETER 6358 WILLOW LA 153
ROBERT MCLEAN 421 69TH AVE N 154
ROBERT /MARY ODONNELL 720 69TH AVE N 155
ROBERT /MARY ODONNELL 720 69TH AVE N 156
NORMAN CHAZIN 1302 69TH AVE N 157
FRANK /LYNDA STEPINSK 7142 FRANCE AVE N 158
WARREN /CINDY HARDER 3712 72ND AVE N 159
MARGIE LIEN 3606 72ND AVE N 160
RICHARD MADY 5948 XERXES AVE N 161
BENNIE ROZMAN 3413 53RD AVE N 162
RONALD HERBERHOLZ 4906 ZENITH AVE N 163
HERMAN KARLSGODT 6001 FREMONT AVE N 164
EDWARD COLE 6001 GIRARD AVE N 165
DELBERT /MARY BOYER 5817 PEARSON DR 166
JOSEPH PESOTA 3807 61ST AVE N 167
JOSEPH PESOTA 3807 61ST AVE N 168
JOSEPH PESOTA 3807 61ST AVE N 169
JOSEPH PESOTA 3807 61ST AVE N 170
PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER
JOSEPH PESOTA 3807 61ST AVE N 171
DOROTHY LOOMIS 3813 61ST AVE N 172
RAYMOND /GRACE HARR 6406 SCOTT AVE N 173
TIM /BONNIE SALWEI 5207 PAUL DR 174
SCOTT /KATHY MEYER 5812 DREW AVE N 175
RONALD JOHNS 5806 DREW AVE N 176
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 177
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 178
CITY NORTHPORT PARK: 179
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 180
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 181
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 182
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 183
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 184
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 185
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 186
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 187
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 188
CITY NORTHPORT PARK 189
LYNN WAFFENSMITH 3612 54TH AVE N 190
RALPH CORNWELL 3701 54TH AVE N 191
D & L CHRISTIANSEN 5400 SAILOR LA 192
SCOTT /CHERYL WELCH 7018 FRANCE AVE N 193
2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property
owners will receive a second written notice that will give them
(5) business days in which to contest the determination of City
Council by requesting a hearing in writing. Said request shall be
filed with the City Clerk.
3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a
hearing, the trees) shall be removed by the City.
4. All removal costs, including legal, financing and administrative
charges, shall be specially assessed against the property.
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:
0 and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LIMITED USE PERMIT FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A BIKEWAY WITHIN THE RIGHTS -OF -WAY OF T.H. 100
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPROVAL:
SY KBAPP DILECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached
Explanation
In conjunction with the reconstruction of Logan Avenue between 57th Avenue and
• 59th Avenue (Project 1988 -04, Contract 1988 -H) and the storm sewer outfall which
is being installed along Lilac Drive and partially on T.H. 100 right -of -way
between County Road 10 and Shingle Creek, the project contemplates construction
of a bikeway trial along this same corridor, with portions of that trail also
being located within the rights -of -way of T.H. 100.
A Limited Use Permit for this purpose has been negotiated with MNDOT (copy
attached). We believe that all provisions contained in this permit are fair and
reasonable.
Recommendation
Adoption of the attached resolution.
EE
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LIMITED USE PERMIT FROM THE STATE OF
MINNESOTA FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A BIKEWAY WITHIN THE
RIGHTS -OF -WAY OF T.H. 100
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that
the City hereby accepts and approves a Limited Use Permit from the Minnesota
Department of Transportation to construct and maintain a bike and pedestrian
trail along the southeasterly right -of -way of Trunk Highway 100 in Brooklyn
Center from Shingle Creek to County State Aid Highway 10.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that proper City Officers are hereby authorized
to execute such permit.
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.
S.P. 2755 (100 =212)
S'.E. Quadrant T.H. 100 & C.S.A.H. 10
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
LIMITED USE PERMIT
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes Sec. 161.434 and Federal Aid
Highway Program Manual Volume 7, Chapter 4, Section 3, and Federal Aid
Program manual Volume 6, Chapter 2, Section 5, Subsection 2, a Limited
Use Permit is granted to the City of Brooklyn Center. This permit is for
the purpose of constructing, maintaining and supervising a bikeway within
the rights of way of Trunk Highway No. 100 as shown in red on Exhibit
"A ", which is attached and incorporated as a part of this permit. In
addition, the following special provisions shall apply:
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
1. This permit is granted for the purpose of construction and
maintenance, by the City of Brooklyn Center of a bikeway.
2. The construction, maintenance, and supervision of the bikeway will
be at no expense to the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
3. Before construction of any kind, the plans for such construction
shall be approved in writing by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation, through its District Engineer.
4. No permanent structures or advertising devices in any form or size
shall be constructed, placed or permitted to be constructed or
placed upon the State's Right of Way.
5. No commercial activities shall be allowed on State's Right of Way.
G. All maintenance of the Bikeway shall be prov4�)ed by the City of
Brooklyn center; this includes the plowing and removal of snow
during the winter, and installation and removal of regulatory signs.
7. This permit is non - exclusive and is granted subject to the rights of
othors, including, but not limited to public utilities which may
occupy the State's right of way.
Shoot 1 of 4
8. The City of Brooklyn Center will preserve and protect all utilities
located on the lands covered by this permit at no expense to the
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
9. The bikeway shall not make any crossings of the trunk highway.
10. The City of Brooklyn Center shall construct the bikeway at the
location shown in the attached Exhibit "A" subject to verification
by the Minnesota Department of Transportation's District. Engineer at
Golden Valley that the construction geometrics and procedures result
in bikeways that are compatible with the safe and efficient
operation of the highway facility.
11. Approval from Mn /DOT District Engineer, will be required for any
changes on Highway Right of Way from the approved plan.
12. The City of Brooklyn Center upon completion of the construction of
the bikeway, shall rostore all disturbed slopes and ditches in such
manner that drainage, erosion control and esthetics are perpetuated.
13. This permit does not release the City of Brooklyn Center from any
liability or obligation imposed by federal law, Minnesota Statutes,
local ordiances, or other agencies relating thereto and any
necessary permits relating thereto shall be obtained by the City of
Brooklyn Center.
14. Any use permitted by this permit shall remain subordinate to the
right of the Minnesota Department of Transportation to use the
property for highway and transportation purposes. This permit does
not grant any interest whatsoever in land, nor does it establish a
permanent park, recreation area or wildlife or waterfowl refuge
facility that would become subject to Section 4 (f) of the
Federal -Aid Highway Act of 1968, nor does this permit establish a
Bike Trail or Pedestrian way which would require replacement
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes (1976) 160.2G4.
Sheet 2 of 4
15. This permit shall be subject to cancellation and termination by the
Minnesota Department of Transportation for any cause or reason, by
giving the City of Brooklyn Center 60 days written notice of such
action. Upon cancellation of said permit the bikeway shall be
removed within 60 days at no cost to the Minnesota Department of
Transportation.
16. The City of Brooklyn Center for itself, its heirs, its personal
represent3tives, successors in interest, and assigns, agrees to
abide by the provisions of Title VI Appendix C of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, to the end that in accordance with the Act,
Regulations, and other pertinent directions, no person in the United
States, shall on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be
excluded from, or denied use of the bike /hike trail.
17. The City of Brooklyn Center will hold harmless, indemnify and defend
the State, its Commissioner of Transportation and employees from
liability claims for damages because of bodily injury, death,
property damage, sickness, disease, or loss and expense arising from
the City of Brooklyn Center's operations or its successors and
assigns from the City of Brooklyn Center's use of the portion of
highway right of way over which this permit is granted.
18. The City of Brooklyn Center will hold harmless and indemnify the
State, its Commissioner of Transportation and employees from claims
resulting from the temporary or permanent termination of trail user
rights on any portion of highway right of way over which this permit
is granted.
19. The State, through its Commissioner of Transportation, shall retain
the right to limit and /or restrict the parking of vehicles and
assemblage of trail users on the highway right of way over which
this permit is granted, so as to maintain the safety of both the
motoring public and trail users.
Sheet 3 of 4
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL City of Brooklyn Center
By: By:
District Engineer Mayor
Da to Da to
APPROVED BY:
COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BLDG.
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55155
By: By:
Director, Office of Right of Way City Clerk
and Surveys
Da t.e Date
The Commissioner of Transportation
by the execution of this permit
certifies that this permit is
neca.ssary in the public interest
and that the use intended is for
public purposes.
This instrument was drafted by the
State of Minnesota, Department of
Transportation, Reconveyance Unit
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
RW00047287F.90
Sheet 4 of 4
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 7/11/88
Agenda Item Number — 9 / 1-1:--
/ / 1-1:--
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INITIATION OF EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS TO ACQUIRE
EASEMENT FOR PEDESTRIAN /BICYCLE TRAILWAY ON 57TH AVENUE NORTH
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPRPVAL:
* * * * * * * * * * * *KNAP*P�* D IRECT O R OF P *B* C WORKS
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: V
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes
Explanation
Project 1988 -04, Contract 1988 -H includes construction of a pedestrian /bicycle
• trailway along the south side of 57th Avenue North (C.S.A.H. 57) from Logan
Avenue to Lilac Drive. Construction of this trail to establish standards
requires the acquisition of easements from adjoining properties because the
right -of -way width is not adequate to allow such construction. City staff has
attempted to negotiate the required easements and has successfully concluded
those negotiations with one exception, i.e. the property located at
1915 57th Avenue North.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Attorney to initiate
eminent domain proceedings for the purpose of obtaining the required easement by
adoption of the attached resolution (see attached sketch).
•
(FF
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INITIATION OF EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDINGS TO ACQUIRE EASEMENT FOR PEDESTRIAN /BICYCLE
TRAILWAY ON 57TH AVENUE NORTH
WHEREAS, Project 1988 -04, Contract 1988 -H, as approved by the City
Council includes the proposed construction of a pedestrian /bicycle trailway
along the south side of 57th Avenue No. (C.S.A.H. 57) between Logan Avenue North
and Lilac Drive; and
WHEREAS, the existing right -of -way on 57th Avenue North is not
adequate to allow construction of the proposed trailway to establish standards,
thereby necessitating the acquisition of easements from adjoining property
owners to allow construction of a portion of the trailway within the easement
areas; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported to the City Council that he
has been unable to complete negotiations for the easement required from the
property located at 1915 -57th Ave. No. (PID No. 02- 118 -21 -42 -0034 and
02- 118 -21 -42 -0035)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the City Attorney is hereby authorized and
directed to initiate and pursue the acquisition of the required easement from
said property by use of eminent domain proceedings.
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.
...... . ..... ......... .. .............
...................................................
...............
......................... .........................
............ ......... .. .............
------------
............................................................ .....
......................... ........
............. ....... .......... ... .......... ..... .. ...................... ......................... :
. ....................... ......................... .........
............... ............ ...................... ......................... ........................
...... . ....... ..... : ......................... ......................... ...........
.. ............ . .........
. ...................... .........................
: - __ ... ...........
mkol :1 .............. ..... . .. . .............. .....
V Wt V *: .... :... � . . . ....
.
.... . ................ ........ . ...... ..........
. . . ............ .
.. ....... .......... ..........
............. ...... ...
.............. ........ -------- . ..............
..... . ...... ..... .......
. .............
... .. ...... . ........ . :*:,* ------------ ------------- . . . . ................... .....................................
........................
- — -------------
HJ-80N 3n
(LNVOVA) 9161 loo vim '.
dwnd
_Zi6N -
s3 Hruonm.
LS 3AOW3H
1061 iq S9NL1SV0 39VA WS
N%.
(SNOIIVDIJI:)3dS 3 SI, 91d -;1N3W3SV3 !.Xllllln 01
s3joHatm 39VA -
01 3 3_SV TH113MAA30
W31,r. 7�
o
SV3
.LN3W3SV3
rn
'dL/N __4
MIS 9" w 1. -4
> m m D m >
11-d z z
CA
N A
cn t,
wl J33dS -
ONVH ID 3
'ISNOO
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 07/11/88
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT
WITH THE DOMESTIC ASSAULT INTERVENTION PROJECT
DEPT. APPROVAL:
Chief of Police
ign ure - title
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOM MION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached yes
The Minnesota Program Development, Inc. Domestic Assault
• Intervention Project has submitted their 1988 contract for
services. The contracted services are the same as those
currently be provided by the project. The contract calls for
payments totaling the amount budgeted for in the 1988 police
budget.
RECOMMENDATION•
To approve resolution authorizing the mayor and city manager to
enter into agreement with the domestic assault intervention
project.
F3
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE
DOMESTIC ASSAULT INTERVENTION PROJECT
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the Mayor and City Manager are
hereby authorized to enter into an agreement with the Minnesota
Program Development, Inc. Domestic Assault Intervention Project
for the general purpose of intervening in domestic assault cases
by providing information and advocacy for victims of domestic
assault and by advocating appropriate responses to assailants
within the criminal justice and mental health systems.
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.
AGREEMENT
This is an agreement effective January 1, 1988, between the city
of Brooklyn Center, a municipal corporation of the state of Minnesota
(hereinafter City) and the Minnesota Program Development, Inc. (hereinafter
MPDI.
WHEREAS, MPDI has organized a Domestic Assault Intervention Project
within the city of Brooklyn Center for the general purpose of intervening in
domestic assault cases by providing information and advocacy for victims of
domestic assault and by advocating appropriate responses to assailants within
the criminal justice and mental health systems; and
WHEREAS, City, recognizing its commitment to the exploration and
development of appropriate community actions in response to domestic violence,
has pledged the sum of Nineteen Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty One and No /100
Dollars ($19,821) for 1988, to contract with MPDI for the services of MPDI in
accordance with MPDI's Domestic Assault Intervention Project.
e NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions
hereinafter contained, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
1. Term: MPDI shall render services to City in accordance with
MPDI's Domestic Assault Intervention Project, for a period of one year,
beginning January 1, 1988, and ending December 31, 1988.
2. Duties of MPDI: During the period specified in Section 1, MPDI
shall provide City with the services of trained and qualified Project Staff who
will work a minimum of 20 hours per week.
MPDI, in conjunction with Project Staff, shall provide the following
services:
a) Administer and supervise implementation of MPDI's Domestic
Assault Intervention Project in the city of Brooklyn Center.
b) Recruit, train and supervise volunteers in accordance with
MPDI's Domestic Assault Intervention Project and maintain a
24 -hour schedule of volunteers and /or Project Staff.
c) Upon notification by Citv police department, trained volunteers
and /or Project Staff will follow domestic assault arrests with
immediate visits to the homes of victims (within one hour of
arrest).
d) At the time of the visit to the home and throughout the arrest
and court process, trained volunteers and /or Project Staff
will provide domestic assault victims with information concerning
emergency shelter, protective orders, legal services and
support /educational groups available to domestic assault victims.
e) Trained volunteers and /or Project Staff will follow domestic
assault arrests with visits to assailants in the detention
facility. Such visits will take place prior to the assailant's
arraignment. City police department will allow trained volunteers
and /or Project Staff into the detention facility visitors' area
for this purpose.
f) During the visit in the detention facility, assailants will be
provided with information on the Domestic Assault Intervention
Project and information about domestic assault service agencies
and counseling.
g) In cases where arrests are not made, Project Staff will attempt
to contact persons identified as victims with information as
set forth in paragraph (d) above. City police department will
provide access to information for this purpose.
h) Maintain a twenty four hour telephone service. MPDI, through
its twenty four hour telephone service shall contact the appropriate
Project personnel and volunteers as soon as domestic assaults
and /or arrests are called in by the Brooklyn Center Police Department.
i) Provide weekly support /educational groups for victims.
j) Develop and provide a training program to the Brooklyn Center
Police Department on the Domestic Assault Intervention Project.
k) Generally act as a support for City domestic assault victims and
their children.
1) Provide quarterly reports to City within 30 days after the end
of each quarter addressed as follows:
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, Mn. 55430
Attention: Chief James Lindsay
m) The Coordinator of the Project shall meet with City staff
periodically as the demands of the Domestic Assault Intervention
Project require.
All of the above duties shall be performed by MPDI in consultation with
City Police Chief or his delegate.
3. Consideration: The total obligation of the City for all
compensation and reimbursement to MPDI shall not exceed nineteen thousand
eight hundred twenty one dollars ($19,821).
4. Terms of Payment: Consideration for all services performed
by MPDI pursuant to this agreement shall be paid by the City as follows:
a) Reimbusement shall be in three payments.
b) Payments shall be made by the City promptly after MPDI's
presentation of invoices for services performed.
c) Invoices shall be due according to the following schedule:
June 10, 1988 $ 9,910.50
September 10, 1988 4,955.25
December 10, 1988 4,955.25
Said invoices shall be mailed to:
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, Mn. 55430
Attention: Chief James Lindsay
5. Cancellation: This agreement may be cancelled by the City or
MPDI at any time, with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days written notice
to the other party. In the event of such cancellation, MPDI shall be entitled
to payment determined on a pro rata basis for work or services performed up to
the date of cancellation.
6. Liability: MPDI is acting as an independent contractor. Any
Project staff provided hereinunder, or other agents, or employees of MPDI
shall not be employees of the City, and MPDI agrees to be responsible for any and
all workers' compensation, employee benefits, withholding, F.I.C.A., and taxes
applicable to such persons. Nothing contained in this agreement shall render
either party an agent of the other for any purpose, or either party liable for
any debts, liabilities, or obligations of the other, whether now existing or
incurred in the performance of this agreement, and neither party shall have the
authority by virtue of this agreement to represent or bind the other in any manner
whatsoever.
7. Insurance: MPDI hereby further agrees to carry and keep in force
all applicable insurance including but not limited to liability insurance and
workers' compensation insurance. Said insurance policies shall be reliable
insurance companies licensed to do business in Minnesota.
8. Indemnification: MPDI agrees to indemnify and keep
indemnified and defend, hold and save City harmless from and against any and
all actions or cause of action, claims, demands, loss, damage or expenses,
including reasonable attorney's fees, which City shall or may at any time sustain
precipitate or incur by reason of the conduct of MPDI or employees, agents or servants
of MPDI acting within the scope of and in connection with the Domestic Assault
Intervention Project.
9. Non - Assignability: This agreement is personal to the parties
specified herein and may not be transferred or assigned by either party hereto.
10. Integration: This written agreement constitutes the entire
understanding of and fully sets forth the rights and obligations of the
parties hereto, and shall not be altered or modified except by an instrument
in writing and signed by the Director of MPDI and City Manager.
11. Services to be rendered pursuant to this agreement shall be
provided regardless of race, color, national origin, religion or sex.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have casused the execution of this
agreement on their behalf by their duly authorized representatives.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
By
Its Mayor
By
Its City Manager
MINNESOTA PRX'RM DEVELOPMENT, INC.
B
Its Director
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 11th day
of July 1988, at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek
Parkway, to consider an amendment to Chapter 11 regarding hours of operation for
a bottle club.
Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96
hours in advance. Please notify the personnel coordinator at 561 -5440 to make
arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11 RELATING TO HOURS OF OPERATION FOR A
BOTTLE CLUB
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 11 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn
Center is hereby amended in the following manner:
Section 11 -406, HOURS OF OPERATION. [No P erson shall consume or
display, or allow consumption or display of intoxicating liquor on any premises
of a bottle club or a business establishment between the hours of 1 a.m. and 8
a.m.; or between the hours of 1 a.m. and 3 p.m. on Memorial Day; or between the
hours of 1 a.m. and 8 p.m. on any primary, special, or general election day held
in the district in which the bottle club or business establishment is located.]
No establishment licensed as a bottle club may permit a person to consume or
disp ay intoxicating liquor and no person may consume or display intoxicatinZ
liquor between 1 a.m. and 12 noon on Sundays and between 1 a.m. and 8 a.m. on
Monday through Saturday.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and
upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of 1988.
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.)
® ® a
EARLE
4W� BRO
SCHOO
Ms
■
. �--- � �■ v ■■■ ■■■ ■■
In Mimi
.yes ° ■� ■ ■ �
■
■
■' ■■ ■■
i52,b�a
1 - �
I
I
I N P TtON i
r . - 748 S.F.
i
-
1 0
j
� � � 18' 21,5' �'5' 1'f,5' 2'1.5' (8 �� 2•
y,
i N_•
- - 152 ,(cb' - j - - - -�-•
�N itAg i•� ?h6A o f � JRPG sC t M�H , � °�9 3 800 22 `t GARS ;z en
23 GARS PKovtv�D
I / '
Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tern Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards,
Wallerstedt and Johnson. 'Voting against: none. The motion passed.
APPLICATION NO. 88005 (Bernard Herman Architects)
The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building
plan approval to construct a solarium addition to the south side of the office
building at 1915 57th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the the staff report
(see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 88005 attached).
Commissioner Johnson asked if there would be an increase in traffic generation
caused by the addition to the office building. He also stated that he is concerned
with traffic trying to make turns into the office building parking lot from 57th
Avenue North. The Secretary explained he does not foresee any major traffic problem
due to the expansion of the building. He noted that there had been discussion some
years ago when the Northbrook Shopping Center had been constructed regarding the
possibility of extending the median down to Logan Avenue North thereby eliminating
median breaks. He stated that this is a County road, therefore, the County would
have to make the changes.
Commissioner Bernards questioned if there is approximately 50 to the rear property
line as indicated on the plan. The Secretary answered that the depth of the lot is
200' which may seem confusing because the Superamerica station next door is not
nearly that deep. Commissioner Bernards asked if the property has enough existing
screening from the neighboring residential properties. The Secretary responded
that there are several trees and shrubs to the rear that provide adequate screening.
Chairman Pro tem Nelson called on the applicant to speak. Bernard Herman, of
Bernard Herman Architects, explained the office building will be a law office for
Milavetz and Associates. He stated there are five Milavetz law firms in the Metro
area. He explained the project consists of two parts; a solarium addition and
construction of wall partitions within the building. He noted the solarium
addition will not have full time people working in it, but will be used as an employee
lunch room and meeting room.
Mr. Herman asked for clarification of the site performance condition (Condition No.
3) and the trailway easement condition (Condition No-8). The Secretary explained
that the site performance agreement is a standard condition required for all site
and building plan approvals to assure completion of outside improvements. He noted
there are no real outside improvements with this plan and the condition could
possibly be eliminated in this case.
City Engineer Bo Spurrier explained that the City's access across the property
enables the City to locate sanitary and storm sewers out of 57th Avenue North so that
no damage is done to 57th Avenue North. He explained the utility easement parking
setback, is the northern 10' of property. He stated that the City is willing to pay
the appraised value of the easement for the bike /pedestrian trailway which connects
to the Regional park facility near the NSP power line to the Mississipi River and
also to the City's other trailway system along Shingle Creek Parkway.
Further discussion ensued regarding the trailway system and placement of a sign.
City Engineer Bo Spurrier asked where the sign would be located from the curb. Mr.
Herman stated they would like to locate the sign as close as possible to 57th Avenue
North with landscaping. The City Engineer stated the sign would have to be placed
so that it would not interfere with the trailway easement being sought. He noted
6 -16 -88 -3-
that it appeared he would only need about a 5' easement for the trailway and that he
believed the matter could be worked out so that the sign could be properly placed.
The Secretary suggested eliminating Condition No. 3 regarding the performance
agreement and modifying Condition No. 7 to allow for Mr. Herman's concern for the
sign. He stated the architect and the City Engineer can work out the specific
distance for the easement before the consideration by the City Council.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 88005 (Bernard Herman,
Architects )
Motion by Commissioner Johnson seconded by Commissioner Malecki to approve
Application No. 88005 subject to the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of
permits.
3. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
4. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with
Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
5. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
6. Straight B6 curb shall be provided around all parking and driving
areas.
7. The owner of the property shall enter into easement agreements
for utilities and drainage and for a trailway not more than 5' in
width, across the property prior to the issuance of permits.
Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards,
k, Wallerstedt and Johnson. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
APPLICATION NO. 88006 (Robert J. Regan)
The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for site and building
plan and special use permit approval to construct a 50' x 172' addition to the school
bus garage at 4435 68th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the staff report (see
Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 88006 attached). He
referred to an ordinance amendment in 1980 at the time of the original construction
of the bus garage to allow the bus garage as a special use in the C2 zoning district.
He stated there is a public hearing required and the appropriate notices have been
sent to the neighboring property owners.
Chairman Pro tem Nelson asked the applicant if he wished to speak regarding the
application. Robert Regan, the owner and applicant for the bus garage, explained
his company has been in business for 25 years and the time has come for expansion of
the building to allow storage for an additional 16 buses. He stated Brooklyn Center
High School has applied for a contract to house their school buses.
6 -16 -88 -
I
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 88005
Applicant: Bernard Herman Architects (for Mila z Associates
pp ( o vet & )
Location: 1915 57th Avenue North
Request: Site and Building Plan
Location /Zoning
The applicant requests site and building plan approval to construct a solarium
addition to the south side of the office building at 1915 57th Avenue North. The
property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded on the north by 57th Avenue North, on
the east by Superamerica service station, on the south by single- family homes, and
on the west by a vacant C2 zoned lot (Warner Hardware is the next building to the
west). (There is a vacant portion of the property to the east of the building which
will most likely be subdivided off in the future) . Office buildings are a permitted
use in the C2 zone.
Access /Parking
The site is served by two accesses onto 57th Avenue North. From inside of curb to
inside of curb, the accesses are 44' apart. This is substandard in the C2 zoning
district. However, it is an existing condition and it appears there is no way of
meeting the 50' separation requirement without destroying the parking layout on the
site. We, therefore, recommend no change at this time. With the new addition and
basement remodeling, there will be 4,021 sq. ft. of office space within the building
which requires 20 parking stalls. The remaining area -1,983 sq. ft. - is to be used
for storage and mechanical rooms. At one space per 800 sq. ft., this requires an
additional 2.4 stalls. The site plan calls for 23 stalls total to meet both
requirements.
Landscaping
Existing landscaping on the site is rather generous. There are 25 existing Ash and
Locust trees (250 points), seven decorative trees (10.5 points) and seven
coniferous trees (42 points). The total point value of the existing trees exceeds
the point requirement for the entire site (125 points) , including the vacant area to
the east. No additional landscaping has been proposed.
Grading /Drainage /Utilities
The site presently drains to the street (57th Avenue North) with no on -site storm
sewer. Anew storm sewer is to be constructed in the 57th Avenue North right -of -way
in conjunction with a road reconstruction project for Logan Avenue North to handle
drainage on 57th Avenue North that affects Logan. The parking lot is bounded by B6
straight curb with no gutter. A slight modification is required at the southwest
corner of the lot to provide for s sixth parking stall on the west side of the lot.
Straight B6 curb should be used to replace the existing curb at that location.
Building
The solarium addition is to be a glass enclosure along the middle 44' 8 of the south
wall. There is to be an open waiting room and a conference room at the upper floor
level of the building. Stairs leading down to a central courtyard will descend from
both ends of the solarium. New windows on the south side in the lower level of the
building will be installed, providing daylight to a bookkeeping room in the lower
level. The base of the waiting and conference areas is to be painted rock face
block. The existing building is brick.
6 -16 -88 -1-
s I
Application No. 88005 continued
The upper level (main floor) of the existing building is not fire sprinklered at this
time, though the lower level is fire sprinklered. Fire sprinkling of both the upper
level and the solarium addition will be required as part of the new construction
project to bring the entire building into conformance with the City's fire code.
Lighting /Trash
There are two existing light poles near the front entrance to the building which
provide illumination of the front parking lot. No additional outside lighting is
proposed. There are no outside trash containers either and none are proposed.
Recommendation
Altogether, the plans appear to be in order and approval is recommended, subject to
at least the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with ith respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of
permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted prior to the issuance of permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with
Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
7. Straight B6 curb shall be provided around all parking and driving
areas.
8. The owner of the property shall enter into easement agreements
for utilities and drainage and for a trailway across the property
prior to the issuance of permits.
6 -16 -88 -2-
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Cate 7 -11 -88
Agenda Item Numbe
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Request for Proposals - Group ome Study
y
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPROVA
I � �
Signature - title Director of Planning and Inspection
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
******************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X )
Attached are copies of -a "Preliminary" Request for Proposal (RFP) to provide
consulting services for a study of planning and land use issues relating to
residential facilities within Brooklyn Center. The preliminary proposal includes
copies of Ordinance No. 87 -16 establishing a moratorium on residential facilities
and City Council Resolution No. 87 -201 authorizing a study pertaining to the
regulation of residential facilities and an October 23, 1987 memo from the Director
of Planning and Inspection to the City Manager regarding a study of planning and land
use issues relating to residential facilities, all of which are proposed to be sent
to various consultants requesting their assistance in accomplishing the study.
Also attached is a June 16, 1988 letter from Peter J. Patchin regarding a proposal he
has submitted to study the probable market value impact of the proposed Bill Kelly
House upon surrounding neighborhood properties. This proposal was requested from
Mr. Patchin following discussions the staff had had with him regarding the
possibility of such a study and a June 3, 1988 letter to Mr. Patchin from the Director
of Planning and Inspection outlining the areas which we proposed to be studied (also
attached). Mr. Patchin has quoted an estimate of approximately $12,300 to complete
such a study and an estimated time of nine weeks to accomplish it.
RECOMMENDATION
I would recommend that these two items be reviewed and discussed by the City Council
so that we can undertake the necessary study within the time frame authorized by the
moratorium ordinance.
e
Gentlemen:
The City of Brooklyn Center requests you to submit a concise proposal to provide
consulting services for a study of planning and land use issues relating to
residential facilities within the 'City of Brooklyn Center. Your submittal should
be made in accordance with this Request For Proposal (RFP) . Five (5) copies should
be submitted to Mr. Ronald Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection, prior to
Introduction
The City Council has adopted a resolution authorizing a study to be conducted
pertaining to the regulation of adult half -way houses, community -based residential
facilities and similar facilities and has adopted an interim ordinance establishing
a moratorium on the development of such uses pending the completion of a study and
the possible adoption of any amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance. The
moratorium is in effect until October 27, 1988 and may be extended by the City
Council if necessary to complete the study and adopt any necessary regulations.
Enclosed herewith are the following related documents for your review and
consideration:
-City of Brooklyn Center Ordinance No. 87 -16, adopting an interim
ordinance for the purpose of protecting the planning process and the
health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the community, and
regulating and restricting the development of adult half -way houses,
community -based residential facilities and similar uses within the
City, adopted October 26, 1987.
-1-
-City of Brooklyn Center Resolution No. 87 -201 authorizing a study to
be conducted pertaining o regulation of adult half-way houses
g g Y
community -based residential facilities and similar facilities and
placing a moratorium on the development of such uses, also adopted
October 26, 1987.
-An October 23, 1987 memorandum to Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
from Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection regarding
a study of planning and land use issues relating to residential
facilities.
The City Council has directed that proposals be accepted for the conduct of a study
based on the above information.
Brooklyn Center Information
Information which is available for purposes of the study includes, but is not
necessarily limited to, the following:
-The current Comprehensive Plan for the City of Brooklyn Center.
Miscellaneous maps including basic City maps, zoning maps, etc.
- Existing land use data and land use projections.
-The current Zoning Ordinance for the City of Brooklyn Center.
-2-
I � -Files e and miscellaneous information relating to the City's current
adoption of moratorium ordinance and resolution authorizing the
current study.
-Any other information the consultant may feel necessary for the
conduct of the study.
Scope of Study
In general, the study is to determine how uses such as adult half-way houses,
,
community correctional ectional facilities, residential facilities, community -based
residential facilities and the like should be regulated within the City. The study
should include, but is not limited to the following:
1. The proper definition and classification of the above mentioned
uses;
2. The particular zoning districts in which such uses should be
allowed as either permitted uses or special uses;
3. The population density of clientele that such facilities should
serve in the various zoning districts;
4. The concentration and density of such uses in the City and its
neighborhoods;
5. The effect of such uses on other uses in the surrounding area.
-3-
The October 25, 1987 memo referenced above gives additional detail regarding the
scope of the study. Upon completion of the study, these matters will be considered
by the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation to the City Council.
The final report should be presented in a format which would allow the City to use
this study as a basis for making amendments to City ordinances,if necessary.
Proposal Contents
The following will be considered to be minimum contents of the proposal:
1. A work plan detailing your proposed scope of services and time
schedule.
2. An identification of the City's participation in the project and
the responsiblities, if any, expected to be assumed by the City.
3. An outline of your background, personnel, experience and
references; specifically as they apply to this proposed study.
Also, please identify the key personnel who would be assigned to
this project.
Note: If your firm is selected for this study, we ask that no
change in your key personnel assignments be made without the
consent of the City Manager.
4. An estimate of labor hours and a cost estimate.
-4-
Note: As a part of your cost estimate, please include the fee, on
a "per meeting`" basis for attending Planning Commission or City
Council meetings.
5• A brief description of your ability to assist the City in
proceeding with subsequent phases of the study (i.e. - revision
of the Comprehensive Plan and /or Zoning Ordinance if necessary) .
6. Any other relevant information you feel is necessary for the City
to make its determination.
Proposal Evaluation
Proposals will be evaluated by the City staff. In the event staff determines there
is a need to clarify questions relating to your proposal, you will be contacted to
set up a date to meet with us.
The staff intends to select and recommend approval of one proposal to the City
Council by It is anticipated that the selected consultant
should proceed immediately to complete the project in a timely fashion in accordance
with the guidelines established in the interim ordinance.
Should you have any questions concerning this RFP, please contact me.
Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
CI 7Z OF HROOiQ;i'Pd CENTER
Notice is hereby given t^at a public hearing will be held on the 26th day of
Octcber, 1987 at 8 p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkt -rav, to
consider An Interim Ordinance for the Pu=cse of Protecting the Planning Process
and the Health, Safety, and welfare of the Residents of the Community, and
Regulating and Restricting the Development of Adult Half� Houses, Ccm=ity-
Based Residential Facilities and Similar Uses within the City.
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. 87 - 16
INTERIM ORDINANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE PLANNING PROCESS AND
THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE CCMMUT=, AND
REGULATING AND RESTRICTING 'IIiE DE=- T:METTT OF ADULT alllwAY a'A HOUSES,
COMMUNITY- SED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES A`TD SIMILAR 'USES WITH THE CITY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN C 2q= DOES ORDAIN AS FOLMgS:
Section 1. Backarcund
1.01 The City has received a special use permit application from
Bill Kelly House of Kelly Norton Programs Inc to operate a
State licensed residential treatment facilitV for mentally ill
and chemically dependent adults in an R5 Zoning District As a
result of the review process of that application it has become
apparent that the City's zoning ordinance does not contemplate
or adequately address the classification of such uses
1.02 The City's Zoning ordinance is unclear as to whether uses such
as "adult halfway houses" "community correctional facilities"
"residential facilities" and "ccm=it -based residential
facilities" should be classified as "nursincr care homes" or
"boarding care homes" or whether a new classification should be
adopted.
1.03 In addition to the proper zoning classification of such uses
there are a number of significant planning and land use issues
Perta to the regulation of such uses includi_nq the
following.
1. The particular zoning districts in which such uses should
be allowed as either permitted uses or special uses
?• The population density of clientele that such facilities
should serve in the varricas zoning districts
3. The concentration and density of such uses in the City and
its neighborhoods
ORDEIANCE NO. 87 -16
4. T.:e effect cf such uses on otrer uses i.n tre surroundirtr
area.
1. C4 There is a reed for a study to be conducted so that the City
can adcnt a set of comprehensive plans and land use zoning
reaulaticns pe_rtaL*^ing to such uses Such a study will address
the land use and zoning issues, including those referenced
above.
1.05 There is a need for an interim ordinance to be adopted for the
purpose of protecting the planning process and the health,
safety, and welfare of the citizen of the City and to ensure
that the Ci ,-,r and its citizens retain the benefits of the
C1t'l's comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance until such a
study has been cmmleted and any modifications to the City's
zoning and land use regulations are accomplished
1.06 The City Council has directed that such a study be undertaken
1.07 Minnesota Statutes Section 462.355, subd 4 (Act) permits the
adoprion of inte_rLm zoning ordinances during the planning
process.
Section 2. Determi nation.
2.01 During the period that this interim ordinance is in effect no
property within the City may be developed redeveloped, nor
shall any site plan approvals rezonings licenses (other than
renewals) , plattL as or replattings land divisions or
consolidations, special use permits or building permits be
issued by the City for any uses defined by State regulations,
or otherwise, as adult halfway rouses community correctional
facilities, community -based residential facilities or
residential facilities.
2.02 Notaithstanding any provision of this ordinance to the
contrary, any use that meets the definition of a residential
facility as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 245.782
subd. 6 and as regulated by Minnesota Statutes Section
462.357 subd. 7 and subd. 8 is not affected by this ordinance.
2.03 This ordinance shall remain in effect for - a - period of twelve
months from its effective date or such earlier date as maV be
adopted bY the CitY Council 'Provided that if the studyand
planning process have not been completed within that t�eelve
months reriod this ordinance may be extended for such
additional periods as deemed necessary by the City Council not
to exceed an period of eighteen months as permitted
by the Act.
ORDIMNCE NO. 87 -16
Secticn 3. This ordinance acolies to any anplicaticns for site plan
approvals, rezonincas licenses platLirgs or replattiras land divisions or
consolidations srecial use rrats or buildina permits that have not received
prelimir approval by the Cit'v Council before October 26 1987.
Section 4. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon
thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this 26th day of October 1987.
Play
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Date of Publication October 15, 1987
Effective Date November 14, 1987
(Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.)
Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87 -201
F.ESOLL'TION AUTHORIZING A STUDY TO BE CONDUCTED PERTAINING TO REGULATION OF
ADULT HALFWAY HOUSES, CCMMUI= -BASED RESID FACILITIES AND SIMILAR
FACI LITIES AND PLACING A MORATORIUM ON THE DEVELOF= OF SUCH USES
WHEREAS, the City's zoning ordinance does not clearly specify how uses such
as adult halfway houses, community correctional facilities, residential
facilities, and community-based residential facilities should be regulated
within City; the Ci and
WHEREAS
the City Council deems it necessary for a study to be conducted to
determine how such uses should be regulated within the City and deems it
desirable to place a moratorium on the development of such uses until the study
has been completed and any amendments to the comprehensive plan and zoning
ordinance are adopted:
NOW , THMEF'ORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the Council finds and determines that the
adoption of the following is necessary to protect the ongoing planning process
in the City and to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of
the City of Brooklyn Center:
1. A study is authorized to be conducted and consultant be selected to conduct
a study to determine how uses such as adult halfway houses, community
correctional facilities, residential facilities, and commmMity -based
residential facilities should be regulated within the City. The scope of
the study should include, but is not limited to, the following:
a. the particular zoning districts in which such uses should be allowed as
either permitted uses orspecial
uses;
b. the population density of clientele that such facilities should serve
in the various zoning districts;
c. the concentration and density of such uses; and
d. the effect of such uses on other uses in the surrounding area.
2. Upon completion of the study the matter is to be considered by the Planning
Commission for its review and recommendation to the City Council.
3. A moratorium on the development of adult halfway houses, residential
facilities, commmmity -based residential facilities, and community
correctional facilities is hereby adopted pending completion of the study
and the adoption of any amendments to the City's zoning ordinance. No
license (other than renewals), special use permit, or building permit may
be issued for such uses during the moratorium period nor may any rezonings,
plattings or replattings, or land divisions or consolidations be granted by
the City for such uses during the moratorium period. The moratorium period
shall expire on
RESOLUTION NO. 87 -201
October 27, 1988 or such earlier date, as may be further
adopted by a resolution of the City Council. The moratorium
Period may be extended for a reasonable period of time, as
determined by a resolution of the City Council, that may be
necessary to complete the study and adopt any necessary
amendments to the City's zoning ordinance.
4. The moratorium shall not apply to any use that meets the
definition of a residential facility as defined in Minnesota
Statutes, Section 245.782, subd. 6 and which is regulated by
Minnesota Statutes, Section 245.812, subd. 3 an 4 and
Section 462.357, subd. 7 and 8.
October 26, 1987
Date Mayor'
ATTEST: `
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member Gene Lhotka , and upon vote being taken
r thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist,
Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis;
and the following voted against the same: none,
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
i
.f
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspectix -- - n&
DATE: October 23, 1987
SUBJECT: Study of Planning and Land Use Issues Relating to Residential
Facilities
You have requested me to elaborate further on the various planning and land use
issues that need to be studied if the City Council decides to adopt an interim
ordinance establishing a moratorium on certain residential facilities.
The interim ordinance, which is scheduled for a second reading and public hearing on
October. 26, 1987, lists reasons and areas of study. Section 1.02 of that ordinance
points out that our Zoning Ordinance is unclear about how certain uses are
classified and whether or not there is a need for a new classification.
Much of the classification issue is based on what the state has defined in Minnesota
Statutes 245.782, Subdivision 6, as a "residential facility" and how this relates to
our Zoning Ordinance classification of uses. State Statutes at 245.782,
Subdivision 6, defines a residential facility as:
"... any facility, public or private, which for gain or otherwise
regularly provides one or more persons with a 24 hour per day
substitute for care, food, lodging, training, education,
supervision, habilitation, rehabilitation, and treatment they need,
which for any reason cannot be furnished in the persons own home.
Residential facilities include, but are not limited to: state
institutions under the control of the Commissioner of Human Services,
foster homes, residential treatment centers, maternity shelters,
group homes, residential programs, supportive living residences for
functionly impaired adults, or schools for handicapped children."
Our Zoning Ordinance does not define residential facility, nor make reference to the
State definition. Under our Zoning Ordinance classification of uses, we list as
either permitted uses or special uses in certain zoning districts "nursing care
homes (at not more than 50 beds per acre) , maternity care homes, boarding care homes
and child care homes, provided that these institutions shall, where required by
state law, or regulation, or by municipal ordinance, be licensed by the appropriate
state or municipal authority." This classification is listed as a special use in
the R4 and R5 multiple residence zoning districts and as a permitted use in the Cl and
C1A service /office zoning districts. This classification of uses is not
referenced in any other zoning district.
The area needing further study, with possible amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, is
the proper definition and classification of uses already included in our ordinance
and other uses, such as those listed in Section 1.02. Do all of the uses listed have
similar land use characteristics and land use impacts on surrounding properties, to
classify them in the same manner?
Memo
Page 2
October 23, 1987
Section 1.03 of the proposed interim ordinance lists four subareas in need of
further study that are related to planning and land use issues and regulation. No.
1 of Section 1.03 lists "the particular zoning districts in which such uses should be
allowed as either permitted uses or special uses" as an area in need of further
review.
Presently, State Statues, at 245.812, Subdivision 4, mandates that a licensed
residential facility (as defined above) serving from 7 through 16 persons shall be
considered a permitted multiple - family residential use of property for the purposes
of zoning. A municipality may require a conditional use or special use permit in
order to assure proper maintenance and operation of a facility, provided that no
conditions shall be imposed on the facility which are more restrictive than those
imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the
same zones, unless such additional conditions are necessary to protect the health
and safety of the residents of the facility. This means that in our multiple - family
residential zoning districts (R3 through R7), the City must allow a licensed
residential facility with 7 through 16 clients. The state has apparently
determined that these residential facilities, provided they are licensed and have
limited occupancies, have land use characteristics compatible with all multiple
residential zones and must be permitted. No determination has apparently been made
by the state that licensed residential facilities housing 17 or more clients are
compatible with all multiple - family residential zones and have similar land use
characteristics with other multiple - family residential zoning districts. This is
apparently something than can be determined locally.
As mentioned previously, the classification of "nursing care homes, maternity care
homes, boarding care homes and child care homes" is listed in our Zoning Ordinance as
a special use in the R4 and R5 multiple - family zoning districts and as a permitted
use in the Cl and C1A service /office zoning districts. It is because of this
classification that we are currently required to consider residential facilities,
particularly residential facilities with 17 or more clients as special uses in the
R4 and R5 zoning districts.
Northwest Residence with 14 clients and the Bill Kelly House with 23 clients fall
under this classification. Currently, the City would not have to process a special
use permit, nor allow, a licensed residential facility with 17 or more clients in the
R3, R6 or R7 zoning districts because such classifications of use are not listed in
those particular zoning districts. Again, licensed residential facilities
serving 7 through 16 clients are mandated by the state as permitted uses in our R3,
R6, and R7 multiple residential zoning districts and would have to be allowed. In
the C1 and C1A zoning districts, nursing care homes, maternity care homes, boarding
care homes, and child care homes would be allowed as permitted uses (no special use
permit required). One might assume that a licensed residential facility of any
number might also be considered a permitted use in the C1 and C1A zoning districts,
although this is not clear.
It is inconsistencies such as these that lead to the need to further study and
clarify not only the definitions and land use classifications contained in our
Zoning Ordinance, but also land use characterics such as parking needs, traffic
f
Vemo
Page 3
October 23, 1987
generation, density and other land use impacts that make these uses similar or
dissimilar, and what appropriate land use districts should this uses be allowed in?
Are these uses similar and /or compatible to each other and similar and /or compatible
with uses already allowed in particular zoning districts? Is there a need to
establish a separate land use district, and district regulations, for these uses?
Point No. 2, of Section 1.03 of the interim ordinance questions "the population
density of clientele that such facilities should serve in the various zoning
districts." Does the number of clients in a particular residential facility or in a
nursing care home, boarding care home, etc. have an affect on land use
considerations such as parking? Again, the state only mandates that licensed
residential facilities serving 7 through 16 be considered a multiple- residential
use of property. Do facilities with more than 16 clients cause different, or
negative impacts on surrounding properties? Does the type of treatment being
provided, or the type of clientele being admitted, create different land use related
impacts that warrant different or separate regulations or considerations? As an
example, does a residential facility providing treatment for 18 mentally retarded
teenagers have a substantially different zoning impact than a residential facility
housing 24 chemically dependent exconvicts? Do all residential facilities have
the same land use charactistics? Does the number of clients housed in a facility
cause different zoning related concerns?
No. 3, under Section 1.03, relates to "the concentration and density of such uses in
the City and its neighborhoods." In 1984 the State Legislature adopted legislation
to promote the dispersal of residential facilities from highly concentrated areas.
The highly concentrated areas exist primarily in the central cities of Minneapolis
and St. Paul. The legislation defined "highly concentrated" as "... having a
population in residential facilities serving 7 or more persons that exceeds one half
of one percent of the population of a recognized planning district or other
administrative subdivision."
Brooklyn Center, which is an inner ring suburb aa, can expect to see relocations of
residential facilties into the area, due to, among other things, its close proximity
to the central cities. Brooklyn Center must be concerned as well that it does not
become overconcentrated with residential facilities to the point that we begin
experiencing the same kinds of problems experienced by the central cities that have
become highly concentrated with residential facilities. Specific regulations
need to be studied for possible adoption to prevent overconcentration of
residential facilities in our community. Is i+ possible to establish, as a zoning
regulation, the maximum population allowed in terms of residential facilities for
the City? Can the City's "neighborhoods" be used as a "recognized planning
district" to avoid overconcentration in these areas as well.
No. 4, in Section 1.03, relates to planning and land use concerns regarding the need
to study the effect the location of residential facilities may have on surrounding
properties. Do any of the broad category of residential facilities have an adverse
impact on the health, safety, and welfare of surrounding properties? As an
example, do residential facilities for former child abusers create unwarranted
'safety concerns for neighborhood children, or children attending a nearby school?
It does not appear that all of the various types of residential facilities have the
Memo
Page 4
October 1987
same impact on neighborhood safety. Does the type of clientele, or the type of
treatment being offered, adversely impact neighborhood safety or neighborhood
property values?
These are the types of questions that need to be addressed in a major study regarding
residential facilities. It must determine if our ordinances appropriately
classify and distinguish between potentially similar and dissimilar uses and the
need for special regulations and considerations in dealing with residential
facilities from a planning and zoning perspective.
Peter J.
Patchin
& Associates, Inc.
V a l uation Consultants
14300 Nicollet Court, Suite 240, Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 (612) 435 -5999
June 16, 1988
Mr. Ronald A. Warren
Director of Planning and Inspection
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
RE: Proposal Bill Kelly House
5240 Drew Avenue North
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Warren:
In response to your letter of June 3, 1988, I am submitting this
proposal to study the probable market value impact of the proposed
Bill Kelly house, upon surrounding neighborhood properties.
The methodology to be employed would be to study property sale data
in neighborhoods immediately surrounding 12 other adult mentally
ill facilities as specified in an enclosure to your letter. You
have specified these 12 other properties as being functionally
similar to the proposed Bill Kelly House. The basic technique
would be to compare resales of the same properties before and after
the establishment of each one of these residences in their
respective neighborhoods. The re -sales discovered in this
investigation would be time adjusted to the current date. In this
manner, it may be seen whether neighboring properties appreciated
or depreciated at rates in excess of their neighborhood norms.
In order to be the most effective, each of the 12 comparable
locations should have been operating as a group home for at least 3
years. In this manner, valuation data after the fact, will have
had time to develop.
After the re -sales of properties are identified and inspected,
buyers and sellers will be interviewed, as available, in order to
find attitudes and /or unusual circumstances of sale.
The data from the market sales investigation will be tabulated and
analyzed. There is sufficient diversity in the 12 sample
properties, in terms of size and type of neighborhoods in which
they are located, that the tabulation and analysis should indicate
valuation impacts according to group home size and price level of
the neighborhood.
The model to outline the information that the applicant must submit
in order to evaluate the pos- sibility of negative value impacts,
would suggest itself from the data obtained from the study. This
information model would be the final step in our study.
Our fee for the performance of this study is estimated at $12,300.
We could submit the written report in about 9 weeks following
receipt of your order. Additional time, spent subsequent to the
delivery of the report for conferences, testimony and the like,
would be invoiced additionally, at the rate of $110.00 per hour.
Thank you for considering our firm.
PETER J. PATCHIN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Sincerely,
Peter J. Patchin, MAI, CRE, ASA
President
Enc: List of Adult Mentally
Ill facilities to be
studied
Professional Qualifications
of Peter J. Patchin
Peter J. Patchin & Associates, Inc.
LIST OF ADULT MENTALLY ILL FACILITIES TO BE STUDIED
* Funded Under Rule 12'
** Not Funded Under Rule 12
*BEEMAN PLACE *JANUS: A WILLOWS' TREATMENT RESIDENCE
3819 Luverne Avenue North 8041 - 12th Avenue South
-Lake Elmo, MN 55042 8101 - 12th Avenue South
Washington County- Region 11 Bloomington, MN 55420
15 Residents, 18 -45 years (one program - two sites)
Category I Hennepin County
Director: Debbie Sheets 24 Residents, 18 through 35 years
612/770 -2224 Category I
Director: David Benson
612/854 -8060
*BRECKINRIDGE HOUSE
7314 Bass Lake Road
New Hope, MN 55428 *NORTHWEST RESIDENCE
Hennepin County Region 11 4408 69th Avenue North
16 Residents, 35 years & over Brooklyn Center, MN 55429
Category II Hennepin County- Region 11
Director: Katherine Pollock 14 Residents, 18 yrs. & over
612/536 -8134 Category II
Director: Diane 011endick- Wright
*CARLSON DRAKE HOUSE 612/566 -3650
5414 West Old Shakopee Circle
Bloomington, MN 55437 *OASIS
Hennepin County 6739 Golden Valley Road
12 Residents, 18 through 35 years Golden Valley, MN 55427
Cateogry I Hennepin County- Region 11
Director: Lynn Tracy 18 Residents, 18 years & Over
612/888 -5611 Category I
Director: David Morin
COMMUNITY OPTIONS 612/544 -1447
5384 Northeast 5th Street
Fridley, MN 55421 *REENTRY HOUSE
Anoka County 5812 Lyndale Avenue South
14 Residents, 18 years & over Minneapolis, MN 55419
Category I Hennepin County
Director: Ranae Hanson 28 Residents, 18 yrs. & over
612/572 -0009 Cagetory I
Director: Terry M. Schneider
*HEWITT HOUSE 612/869 -2411
1593 Hewitt Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104 WELCOME HOME RESPITE CARE
Ramsey County- Region 11E 7170 Bryant Lake Drive
22 Residents, 18 -35 years Eden Prairie, MN 55369
Category I Hennepin County
Director: Ernest Cutting Category II
612/645 -9424 16 male & female, 18 yrs. & over
Director: Barbara Willcox
612/472 -2950
Page 2
* *WELLSPRING THERAPEUTIC COMMUNITY
245 Clifton Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55403
Hennepin County
25 Residents, 18 to 35 years
Category I
,Director: Richard Duffin
612/870 -3787
*(THE) BILL KELLY HOUSE
2544 Pillsbury Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55404
Hennepin County
23 Residents, 18 yrs. & Over
Category I
Director: Richard Ellis
612/871 -3131
Rules 35 and 36
t ,
QUALIFICATIONS OF
PETER J. PATCHIN, AS APPRAISER
EARLY HISTORY
Born in Minneapolis, Minnesota in 1934. Elementary and secondary educa-
tion in Edina, Minnesota public schools.
BUSINESS EXPERIENCE
Cargill, Inc., Production Trainee, 1956 -57.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Topographic Mapping, 1957 -59.
General Mills, Inc., Staff Engineer, 1959 -61.
Patchin
hin Appraisals, Inc., Staff Appraiser, 1961 65. Vice President
1965 -81.
Peter J. Patchin & Associates, Inc., President, March, 1981 to present.
EDUCATIONAL WORK
Kansas State University, B.S. Degree, with honors, 1956.
William Mitchell College of Law, 1977 -78
AIREA Courses 1A -1 1A -2 1B -1 1B -2 1B -3 , 2 -1 -
2 2 2 -3 and 7 all
passed during 1980, Litigation Course in 1985.
Original AIREA course work passed 1964 through 1968.
Currently attends two to three appraisal seminars per year, one to
three days duration each.
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
Member, American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers (MAI)
Senior Member, American Society PP of Appraisers
Real Property & Business Enterprise - Intangible Property Designa-
tions (ASA)
Member, American Society of Real Estate Counselors (CRE)
Affiliate Member, Minneapolis Board of Realtors
Certified Business Appraiser (CBA) - Institute of Business Appraisers
1979
Licensed Real Estate Appraiser - State of Nebraska
PROFESSIONAL PUBLICATIONS
"Gross Multiplier vs. Capitalization Rates" - Valuation November,
1971, Pages 88 - 95.
"Depreciation Methods and Market Experience" - The Appraisal Journal
October, 1980, Pages 503 - 510
"Grain Elevators, Three Approaches To Value" - The Appraisal Journal
July, 1983, Pages 392 - 400
"Common Sense About Cash Equivalency" - The Appraisal Journal
July, 1985, Pages 340 - 346
"Valuation of Contaminated Properties" - The Appraisal Journal
January, 1988, Pages 7 - 16
COURT EXPERIENCE
Qualified in District Courts in Minnesota, Michigan, Montana, and
New York
Qualified in U.S. Tax Court, State of Minnesota Tax Court, Federal Court,
District of Wisconsin
Peter J. Patchin & Associates, Inc.
QUALIFICATIONS OF
PETER J. PATCHIN Continued
APPRAISAL EXPERIENCE
Specializing in the appraisal of industrial, commercial and special
purpose properties, primarily to estimate market value on land,
buildings, machinery and equipment and intangible assets. Appraisal
experience on various types of properties include the following:
development lands, park lands, industrial river channel lands, utility
easements, office buildings, warehouses, factory lofts, shopping
centers, hotels, restaurants, service stations, apartment buildings,
grain elevators, flour and feed mills, breweries, malt plants, food
canneries, bakeries, dairies, bottling plants, schools, churches,
hospitals, machine tools, graphic arts plants, iron foundries.
Intangible asset experience includes leasehold interests, patents,
trademarks, copyrights, mailing lists, goodwill, as well as the valua-
tion of the entire business enterprise.
APPRAISAL CLIENTS INCLUDE
Aetna Life & Casualty -Co. Louisana Highway Commission
Bay State Milling Co. Medtronics, Inc.
Burlington Northern, Inc. Metropolitan Airports Commission
Cargill, Inc. Minneapolis Community Development Agency
Certain -teed, Corp. Minnesota Department of Transportation
Control Data Corporation Minnesota Housing Finance Agency
Farmland Industries, Inc. Mennel Milling Company
Garnac Grain Co. North Dakota State Tax Commission
General Mills, Inc. Northern States Power Company
International Multifoods, Inc. Pillsbury Company
Jefferson Company Ralston Purina Company
K Mart Corporation Soo Line Railroad
Krause - Anderson Companies 3M Corporation
U.S. Internal Revenue Service
University of Minnesota
*The American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers conducts a voluntary
program of continuing education for its designated members. MAI's and
RM's who meet the minimum standards of this program are awarded periodic
educational certification. I am certified under this program through
September 15, 1990.
Peter J. Patchin & Associates, Inc.
CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
. OF
BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
BROOKLYN
E NT E R TELEPHONE 561 -5440
6, C ENTER, EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE
911
June 3, 1988
Peter J. Patchin
Peter J. Patchin and Associates, Inc.
14300 Nicollet Court - Suite 240
Burnsville, MN 55337
Dear Peter:
This letter is a follow -up to your written proposal and a phone conversation we had
regarding a market value impact study on residential property surrounding
residential facilities or group homes.
As you are aware, the City is interested in obtaining information regarding the
actual or potential negative impacts there might be on residential property
surrounding a community based residential facility or group home. Specifically,
we have an immediate concern about what impact the location of the Bill Kelly House,
which houses 23 mentally ill and chemically dependent adults, would have on the
property values surrounding this proposed facility.
In a broader perspective the City would like to know if there is a relationship
(particularly a negative relationship) between the type of residential facility
based on the kind of treatment being provided and the type of client being housed,
and the valuation of surrounding residential properties.
Currently, the State law mandates that residential facilities, which are broadly
defined in the State law, serving from 13 through 16 persons are a permitted
multiple- family use of property for the purposes of zoning. The City of Brooklyn
Center currently requires the issuance of a special use permit for a residential
facility and one of the standards that must be met in order for such a permit to be
granted is that the granting of the special use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vacinity nor substantially diminish
and impair property values within the neighborhood.
Questions to be addressed would include: Does the type of treatment being offered
such as treatment for mental illness and chemical dependency in the numbers
mentioned above, have the likelihood of causing the diminution of property values in
the neighborhood? Is there a continuum of least impact to substantial impact on
property values based on the type of treatment being offered and the number and age
of clients being served in the residential facility? Would the location of such a
nu ui� w� r
Peter J. Patchin
Page 2
..` June 3, 1988
facility in a neighborhood of very high priced homes have a diminishing affect on
property values more so than in a neighborhood of medium ranged or low - ranged homes?
Also, we would like you to propose a model that would be used to outline the
information an applicant must submit for the City to evaluate whether or not there
will be any negative impact on surrounding property by the location of a residential
facility in a particular neighborhood.
Enclosed is a list of what we have determined to be existing comparable facilities
and the current location of the Bill Kelly House which we would like to have you
analyze to see if there has been any substantial negative impact on neighboring
residential property, or the likelihood of such, due to the location of these
facilities in residential areas.
If you are interested in undertaking such a study, please revise your previous
proposal accordingly and provide me with a work program, the time it would take to
accomplish the study and the costs to the City.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the above, please contact me. Thank
you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Ronald A. Warren
Director of Planning and Inspection
RAW:mll
LIST OF ADULT MENTALLY ILL FACILITIES TO BE STUDIED
* Funded Under Rule 12
** Not Funded Under Rule 12
* BEEMAN PLACE *JANUS: A WILLOWS' TREATMENT RESIDENCE
3819 Luverne Avenue North 8041 - 12th Avenue South
Lake Elmo, MN 55042 8101 - 12th Avenue South
Washington County- Region 11 Bloomington, MN 55420
15 Residents 18 -45 ear
s
Y (one program - two sites)
Category I p g
Hennepin County
Director: Debbie Sheets 24 Residents, 18 through 35 years
612/770 -2224 Category I
Director: David Benson
*BRECKINRIDGE HOUSE 612/854 -8060
7314 Bass Lake Road
New Hope, MN 55428 *NORTHWEST RESIDENCE
Hennepin County Region 11 4408 69th Avenue North
16 Residents, 35 years & over Brooklyn Center, MN 55429
Category II Hennepin County- Region 11
Director: Katherine Pollock 14 Residents, 18 yrs. & over
612/536 -8134 Category II
Director: Diane 011endick- Wright
*CARLSON DRAKE HOUSE 612/566 -3650
5414 West Old Shakopee Circle
Bloomington, MN 55437 *OASIS
Hennepin County 6739 Golden Valley Road
12 Residents, 18 through 35 years Golden Valley, MN 55427
Cateogry I Hennepin County- Region 11
Director: Lynn Tracy 18 Residents, 18 years & Over
612/888 -5611 Category I
Director: David Morin
COMMUNITY OPTIONS 612/544 -1447
5384 Northeast 5th Street
Fridley, MN 55421 *REENTRY HOUSE
Anoka County 5812 Lyndale Avenue South
14 Residents, 18 years & over Minneapolis, MN 55419
Category I Hennepin County
Director: Ranae Hanson 28 Residents, 18 yrs. & over
612/572 -0009 Cagetory I
Director: Terry M. Schneider
*HEWITT HOUSE 612/869 -2411
1593 Hewitt Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104 WELCOME HOME RESPITE CARE
Ramsey County- Region 11E 7170 Bryant Lake Drive
22 Residents, 18 -35 years Eden Prairie, MN 55369
Category I Hennepin County
Director: Ernest Cutting Category II
612/645 -9424 16 male & female, 18 yrs. & over
Director: Barbara Willcox
612/472 -2950
•j
Page 2
* *WELLSPRING THERAPEUTIC COMMUNITY
245 Clifton Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55403
Hennepin County
25 Residents, 18 to 35 years
Category I
Director: Richard Duffin
612/870 -3787
*(THE) BILL KELLY HOUSE
2544 Pillsbury Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55404
Hennepin County
23 Residents, 18 yrs. & Over
Category I
Director: Richard Ellis
612/871 -3131
Rules 35 and 36
L
- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Nuisance Ordinance Amendments
DEPT. APPROVAL:
Signature - title Director ot Planning an nspec on
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X
Memo explaining proposed Nuisance Ordinance Amendments.
Draft Ordinance amendment to Chapter 7 of the City Ordinances relating to the
abatement of nuisances and assessment of the costs of abatement.
t Draft ordinance amendment to Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances by declaring
certain additional actions as public nuisances.
Draft ordinance amendment to-Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances regarding outside
storage and the parking of commercial vehicles in residential districts.
Excerpt from Minnesota Statutes.
For discussion only by City Council.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Insp ion
DATE: June 9, 1988
SUBJECT: Proposed Nuisance Ordinance Amendments
In April you provided the City Council with copies of a first draft of various
nuisance ordinance amendments which they had requested. Members of the Council
were given the opportunity to make comments, and did, regarding these draft
ordinance amendments. Also, within the past two weeks, members of the City staff
met to review and discuss these various draft proposals.
Changes to the original first drafts were suggested by the staff and City Council and
have been made to the drafts that will be presented to the City Council on June 13,
1988 for discussion purposes.
These drafts amend Chapter 19 (Nuisance Ordinance), Chapter 35 (Zoning Ordinance),
and Chapter 7 (General Sanitation).
The proposed Sections 19 -103, Subdivision 12, 13 and 14 address the following:
1. The proposed Subdivision 12 is an ordinance prohibiting vehicle
and material storage on unoccupied property. The original draft
limited this restriction only to unoccupied residential
property, but the revised draft prohibits vehicle and material
storage on all property including commercial and industrial
property except as may be permitted by the Zoning or Sign
Ordinances.
2. The proposed Subdivision 13 relates to the storage of various
items and the parking and storage of various vehicles in occupied
residential zoning districts. This proposal is very similar to
the original first draft, however, changes have been made. For
instance, Subdivision (a) has been been rewritten to make it
clear that vehicles, including trailers and watercraft, can only
be parked in front yard areas or yard areas abutting a public
street if they are on paved or graveled extensions of an
authorized parking or driveway area. These vehicles must be in
compliance with Sections 19 -1301 through 1305 of the City
Ordinances which relate to the operating, parking, storing and
maintaining of vehicles (formerly called the Junk Car
Ordinance). Also, this subdivision allows only 50% of the front
yard area, or a yard area abutting a public street, to be paved or
graveled. An exception to this would be an apartment complex
which has a parking lot in a front yard which is part of a site and
building plan approved by the City Council. With respect to
Subdivision (b), vehicles have been eliminated from the original
draft meaning that vehicles could be parked in other yards
without being screened by means of at least a six foot high opaque
fence or wall. Subdivision (c) would remain the same as the
original draft and a new Subdivision (d) would be added which
would allow for exceptions such as allowable accessory
structures, flagpoles, air conditioner condensers, properly
stacked firewood, etc.
Memo
Page 2
June 9, 1988
3. The proposed Subdivision 14 attempts to address the question of
parking trucks within residentially zoned areas. No major
changes to the first draft are being proposed at this time. This
section of the proposed ordinance would declare as a nuisance and
prohibit the parking of any vehicle with a weight classification
G through T inclusive (see attached excerpt from State Statutes)
as well as any construction vehicle or farm vehicle. This would
mean any commercial vehicle in excess of 12,000 lbs. gross weight
could not be parked or stored in residentially zoned areas of the
City. This would have the impact of prohibiting dump trucks,
tractor - trailer trucks, most towing vehicles and trucks other
than relatively small trucks from being kept in residential
districts. Currently, the Zoning Ordinance allows one
commercial vehicle up to 25 feet in length to be kept on
residentially zoned property provided it is used as
transportation to and from work. This provision of the Zoning
Ordinance would be eliminated. The new ordinance prohibition
does not apply to vehicles that are classified as recreation
vehicles and may well have a significant impact on various
activities currently being conducted within the City.
The other proposed ordinance amendments are basically the same as what was provided
the City Council in April of this year. There are provisions amending the Zoning
Ordinance which would prohibit the use of semi - trailers for storage of materials and
equipment in commercial and industrial zones as well. Also, there are amendments
to Chapter 7 and Section 19 -105 which were prepared and recommended by Charlie
LeFevere last fall that relate to potential challenges to special assessment levies
for nuisance abatements. The City Attorney feels strongly that these are the
proper way to handle nuisance abatement. It should be noted that the proposed
amendments add some additional time from that which would be recommended by the
Sanitarian.
We will be prepared to discuss these draft ordinance amendments with the City
Council at their meeting on Monday, June 13, 1988. It should be noted that these
proposals may cause much discussion within the community regarding their impact on
existing situations. Again, I do not recommend any system of grandfathering
existing situations because this will make for many enforcement difficulties.
DRAFT
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
ON JUNE 13, 1988
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES
REGARDING OUTSIDE STORAGE AND THE PARKING OF COMMERCIAL
VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
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 -411. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE C1 AND CIA DISTRICTS.
1. All storage, display, service, repair or processing shall be conducted wholly
within an enclosed building. Semi - trailers may not be used for the out of door
storage of materials, equipment, merchandise, inventory, etc.
Section 35 -412. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS IN C2 DISTRICTS.
1. All storage, display, service, repair or processing shall be conducted wholly
within an enclosed building or behind an opaque fence or wall not less than six
feet high, or high enough to completely screen the storage or other activity
from view of the abutting property at ground level. Semi - trailers may not be
used for the out of door storage of materials, equipment, merchandise,
inventory, etc. [except that the] The outdoor storage of merchandise during
business hours on a private pedestrian walkway located contiguous to the
primary building is not prohibited by this section. This requirement shall not
apply to the out of door storage and display of new and used motor vehicles or
marine craft for which a special use permit has been issued. Neither shall the
requirement apply to the out of door retail sale of food at drive -in eating
establishments for which a special use permit has been issued. Temporary
outdoor storage and display of merchandise may be allowed by permit pursuant to
Section 35 -800 of this ordinance.
-1-
'
Section 35 -413. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS IN I -1 AND I -2 DISTRICTS.
9. Outdoor Storage and Activity
In the industrial park district (I -1) all production, storage, servicing, or
merchandising, except off - street parking and off - street loading shall be
conducted within completely enclosed buildings. Semi - trailers may not be used
for the outdoor storage of materials, equipment, merchandise, inventory, etc.
Fuel storage or storage of materials associated with a noncommercial use
required for the public welfare which is not located within a completely
enclosed building or buried below grade shall be completely screened from view
utilizing earth or opaque structural materials. Said screening device shall
be appropriately landscaped and shall be esthetically compatible with other
structures and landscaping on the site.
Detailed plans for said screening shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Council.
Section 35 -700. OFF- STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS. Off- street parking and loading
space shall be provided in all districts in accordance with the requirements of this
ordinance. There shall be no off - street parking, storage of vehicles nor perimeter
parking lot driveway within 15 feet of any street right -of -way and this 15 foot strip
shall be planted and maintained as a green strip. In the case of C1 and C1A
districts, there shall be no off - street parking nor perimeter parking lot driveway
within 35 feet of any major thoroughfare right -of -way and this 35 foot strip shall be
-2-
planted and maintained as a green strip. [Off- street parking in any residence
district may include not more than one commercial vehicle of 25 feet or less in
length per dwelling unit if used by the occupant of the premises for transportation
to and from his job. It shall be parked off the street on a space adequate for its
storage as set forth in this section.]
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and
upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of , 1988.
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter).
-3-
DRAFT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON JUNE 13, 1988
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER CHAPTER 19 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES
BY DECLARING CERTAIN ADDITIONAL ACTIONS AS PUBLIC NUISANCES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn
Center is hereby amended as follows:
Section 19 -103. PUBLIC NUISANCES FURTHER DEFINED. It is hereby declared to
be a public nuisance to permit, maintain, or harbor any of the following:
12. The outside parking and /or storage on vacant property of useable or
unuseable vehicles, trailers, watercraft, snowmobiles, recreational
vehicles, all- terrain vehicles, construction vehicles and equipment, or
similar vehicles, materials, supplies, equipment, ice fish houses,
skateboard ramps, play houses or other non - permanent structures except
as may be permitted by the Zoning or Sign Ordinances.
13. The outside parking and /or storage on occupied residentially zoned
property of useable or nonuseable vehicles, trailers, watercraft,
snowmobiles, recreational vehicles, all terrain vehicles and similar
vehicles, materials, supplies, equipment, ice fish houses, skateboard
ramps, play houses or other non - permanent structures unless they comply
with the following:
a) Vehicles, trailers and watercraft which are parked or stored outside
in the front -yard area, or a yard area abutting a public street, must
be on an authorized driveway or a paved or graveled extension of an
authorized parking or driveway area and in compliance with Section
19 -1301 through 1305 of the City Ordinances. Authorized driveways
and paved or graveled extensions thereof may not exceed 50% of the
front -yard area or a yard area abutting a public street unless
approved by the City Council as part of a plan approval for an
-1-
apartment complex pursuant to Section 35 -230 of the City Ordinances.
b) Materials, supplies, equipment other than construction or farm
equipment, may be stored or located in any yard other than a front
yard or a yard abutting a public street provided they are screened
from public view by an opaque fence or wall at least six feet high or
high enough to prevent these items from being seen from abutting
property at ground level.
c All vehicles, watercraft and other articles allowed to be stored
outside in an approved manner on occupied residentially zoned
property must be owned by a person who resides on the property.
(Persons who are away at school or in the military service for periods
of time, but still claim the property as their legal residence shall
be considered residents on the property).
d) The prohibitions of this section of the ordinance shall not apply to
commonly accepted materials or equipment such as playground
equipment, allowable accessory structures, flagpoles, air
conditioner condensers, laundry drying equipment, arbors,
trellises, properly stacked firewood and temporary storage of
building materials for home improvement projects in process.
14. The parking and /or storage of a construction vehicle, a farm vehicle or a
vehicle with the weight classification G through T inclusive, as
specified in Minnesota Statutes 168.013, Subd. le, continuously for more
-2-
t han two hours on any property or public street within a residential
zoning district.
The prohibitions of this subdivision shall not apply to the following:
a) Any vehicle described above being used by a public utility, moving
company, or similar company which is actually being used to service a
residence not belonging to or occupied by the operator of the
vehicle.
b) Any vehicle described above which is actually making a pickup or
delivery at the location where it is parked. Parking for any period
of time beyond the time reasonably necessary to make such pickup or
delivery and in excess of the two hour limit shall be unlawful.
Section 19 -105. ABATEMENT OF NUISANCE AND ASSESSMENT OF COST. When any
nuisance is found to exist [the health officer of the City shall order the owner or
occupant thereof to remove the same, at the expense of the owner or occupant, within
a period not to exceed 10 days, the exact time to be specified in the notice. Upon
failure of the owner or occupant to abate the nuisance, the director of planning and
inspection shall cause said nuisance to be abated, shall certify the cost thereof to
the city clerk, and the city clerk shall certify said costs to the county auditor to
be extended on the tax roll of the county against the real estate from which the
nuisance has been abated, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections
145.22, 145.23, 412.221.1 the officer charged by the city manager with enforcement
of t his section, shall proceed to order the abatement of the nuisance and to arrange
for the collection and assessment of the costs thereof in accordance with the
procedures specified in Section 7 -105.
-3-
i
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon
thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of 1988,
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter).
-4-
DRAFT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON JUNE 13, 1988
AN A!"IENDMENT TO CHAPTER SEVEN
OF THE CITY ORDINANCES
RELATING TO THE ABATEMENT OF
NUISANCES AND ASSESSMENT OF
THE COSTS OF ABATEMENT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Chapter Seven, Section 7 -105 is hereby amended to read as
follows:
Section 7 -105 NUISANCE ABATEMENT. Any accumulation of refuse on any
premises not stored in containers which comply with this ordinance, or any
accumulation of refuse on any premises which has remained thereon for more
than one week is hereby declared to be a nuisance and may be abated by order
of the [City Health Officer, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, Sections
145.22 and 145.23, and the cost of abatement may be assessed on the property
where the nuisance was found, as provided in said section.] officer charged
by the City Manager with enforcement of this Section and the costs of
abatement may be assessed against the property on which the nuisance was found
as follows.
A. In all cases to which Minnesota Statutes, Sections 145.22 and 145.23
apply, the City shall proceed under those Sections
B. In all other cases, the officer charged with enforcement shall
notify the owner of the property on which the nuisance is found in
writing specifying the nature of the nuisance and ordering that the
nuisance be abated. Notice shall be served in person or by mail
If the owner is unknown or cannot be located, notice may be served
by posting it on the property. The notice shall specify the steps
to be taken to abate the nuisance and the time, not exceeding ten
(10) days, within which the nuisance shall be abated If the owner
does not comply with the notice and order of the enforcement officer
within the time specified therein, the City Council may, after
notice to the owner and the occupant of the property, if different
from the owner, and an opportunity to be heard, order that the
nuisance be abated by the City. The notice of hearing shall be
served in the same manner as the notice and order of the enforcement
officer and shall be given at least ten (10) days before the date
specified for hearing of the matter by the City Council If notice
is even by posting, at least thirty (30) days shall elapse between
the date of posting and the hearing In emergency circumstances
where there is an immediate threat to the public health or safety or
an immediate threat of serious property damage, the enforcing
officer may provide for abating the nuisance without action of the
City Council. In such a case, the enforcing officer shall reason
ably attempt to notify the owner and occupant of the intended action
and the right to appeal the determination that a nuisance exists and
the order to abate the nuisance at the next regularly scheduled City
Council meeting. In case of abatement of nuisances by the City,
upon determination of the cost of abatement, including administra-
tive and other related expenses, the City Clerk shall prepare and
mail a bill therefor to the property owner, for the amount so
determined which shall immediately be due and payable. In the event
such bill is not Paid by the September lst next following the
abatement of the nuisance, the costs of abatement shall be levied
against the Property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429
SECTION II. This ordinance shall be come effective after adoption and
upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of 1987.
Dean Nyquist, Mayor
ATTEST:
Darlene Weeks, Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Underlining indicates new matter; brackets indicate matter to be deleted.)
00070D01.E19
2
sm.
MOTOR VEHICLES; REGISTRATION; TAXATION, SALES. DEALERS 168.013
Minnesota Base Rate Schedule Scheduled taxes
include five percent surtax provided for in subdivision I4
TOTAL GROSS TAX
WEIGHT IN
POUNDS
A 0- 1,500 S 15
B 1,501 - 3.000 20
C 3,001 - 4,500 25
D 4,501 - 6,000 35
E 6.001 - 9,000 45
F 9,001 - 12,000 70
G 12,001 - 15,000 105
H 15,001 - 18,000 145
I I8,001 - 21,000 190
J 21,001 - 26,000 270
K 26,001 - 33,000 360
L 33,001 - 39,000 475
M 39,001 - 45,000 595
N 45,001 - 51,000 715
O 51,001 - 57,000 865
P 57,001 - 63,000 1015
Q 63.001 - 69,000 1185
R 69,001 - 73,280 1325
S 73.281 - 78,000 1595
T 78,001 - 81,000 1760
For purposes of the Minnesota base rate schedule, for vehicles with six or more
axles in the "S° and "T" categories, the base rates are S 1,520 and S 1,620 respectively.
For each vehicle with a gross weight in excess of 81,000 pounds an additional tax
of S50 is imposed for each ton or fraction thereof in excess of 81,000 pounds, subject
to subdivision 12.
Truck - tractors except those herein defined as farm and commercial zone vehicles
shall be taxed in accord with the foregoing gross weight tax schedule on the basis of the
combined gross weight of the truck- tractor and any semitrailer or semitrailers which
the applicant proposes to combine with the truck- tractor.
Commercial zone trucks include only trucks, truck - tractors, and semitrailer combi-
nations which are-
(1) used by an authorized local cartage carrier operating under a permit issued
under section 221.296 and whose gross transportation revenue consists of at least 60
Percent obtained solely from local cartage carriage, and are operated solely within an
area composed of two contiguous cities of the first class and municipalities contiguous
thereto as defined by section 221.011, subdivision 17; or,
(2) operated by an interstate carrier registered under section 221.60, or by an
authorized local cartage carrier or other carrier receiving operating authority under
chapter 221, and operated solely within a zone exempt from regulation by the interstate
commerce commission pursuant to United States Code, title 49, section 10526(b). t
The license plates issued for commercial zone vehicles shall be plainly marked.
A person operating a commercial zone vehicle outside the zone or area in which its
operation is authorized is guilty of a misdemeanor and, in addition to the penalty
therefor, shall have the registration of the vehicle as a commercial zone vehicle revoked i
by the registrar and shall be required to reregister the vehicle at 100 percent of the full a
annual tax prescribed in the Minnesota base rate schedule, and no part of this tax shall
be refunded during the balance of the registration year.
On commercial zone trucks the tax shall be based on the total gross weight of the
vehicle and during each of the first eight years of vehicle life shall be 75 percent of the
Licenses to be approved by the City Council on July 11, 1988:
A1 DEVICES - OPERATOR
Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. N.
LaCasita Restaurant 2101 Freeway Blvd. C
Scoreboard Pizza 6816 Humboldt Ave. N.
G ief of Police
AMUSEMENT DEVICES - VENDOR
D.V.M. Inc. d b a Dahlco�
/ / 119 State Street
City Clerk
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT
Korean Presbyterian Church 6830 Quail Ave. N. '� �''� ,y
Sanitarian �k
GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES
Aagard Sanitation P. 0. Box 14845
Gordon Rendering P. 0. Box 12785
Hilger Transfer, Inc. 8550 Zachary Lane
Mengelkoch Company 119 NE 14th Street
Metro Refuse 8168 West 125th Street
Midwest Grease Buyers, Inc. P. 0. Box 26
Peterson Brothers Sanitation, Inc. 740 Industry Avenue
Randy's Sanitation, Inc. Route 342
T & L Sanitation 8201 Logan Ave. N.
Waste Control 95 West Ivy Avenue
* Willman Trucking, Inc. 62 26th Avenue N.
Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc. 4000 Hamel Road
Sanitarian IL
ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT
Brookdale Unocal 5710 Xerxes Ave. N.
Brooklyn Center Jaycees Central Park
Brooklyn Center Park & Recreation Central Park
Brooklyn Center Service "76" 6245 Brooklyn Blvd. ,p
St. Alphonsus Fun Fair 7025 Halifax Ave. N. -�
Sanitarian Ilk
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
Churchill's Home Heating & Cooling 818 North Prior Ave.
Conrad Mechanical Contractors 509 lst Avenue NE
Thermex Corporation 4850 Park Glen Road
Thompson Air Inc. 5115 Hanson Court
Building Official /L
SIGN HANGER J �
Electric Light Sign Co. 815 E. 4th Street
Equity Construction Co. 561 3rd Street / JA,
Scenic Sign Corporation Box 881 0"�'r'`Z
Building Official
TEMPORARY ON -SALE NONINTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE
Brooklyn Center Jaycees Central Park
Chief of Police (1 '
1
GENERAL APPROVAL: �� a'�
D. K. Weeks, City Clerk