The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1988 10-10 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER OCTOBER 10, 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. Approval of Minutes: a. September 14, 1988 - Special Session *b. September 19, 1988 - Regular Session 7. Performance Bond Release: *a. Registered Land Survey No. 1537 -From Shingle Creek Land Company for development of a flowage way along the 67th Avenue extension from Shingle Creek Parkway to Shingle Creek 8. Final Plat Approval: *a. Beisner RLS - Minnesota State High School League Site *b. Whitley 2nd Addition -5403 Bryant Avenue North *9. Appointment of Election Judges for 1988 General Election 10. Proclamation: *a. Declaring October 16 - 22, 1988, as National Business Women's Week 11. Resolutions: *a. Accepting Work Performed under Contract 1987 -M (Rehabilitation of Wellhouses No. 5 and 6, Project 1987 -20) - Wellhouse No. 5 is located at the intersection of Camden Avenue and 70th Avenue North. Wellhouse No. 6 is located at 1207 69th Avenue North. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- October 10, 1988 *b. Accepting Work Performed under Contract 1988 -J (1988 Sealcoating Program, Improvement Project No. 1988 -15) -This item was considered at the September 6, 1988, City Council meeting, then tabled pending receipt of a staff report. That report is provided for consideration by the City Council. *c. Pertaining to Supplemental Agreement No. 2 for Logan Avenue North Reconstruction Improvement Project No. 1988 -04 (Contract 1988 -H) d. Retaining a Consultant to Provide a Study of Planning and Land Use Issues Relating to Residential Facilities and to Amend the 1988 General Fund Budget *e. Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Shade Trees (Order No. DST 10/10/88) *f. Acknowledging Gift from the Brooklyn Center Lions Club -All terrain vehicle for the police department. g. Supporting Amendments to HR -2530 and Urging Withdrawal of the Bill from the Omnibus Parks Bill 12. Ordinances: a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1 Regarding Animals -The amendment will allow the City Manager to waive certain fees in cases where an animal has not been claimed from the City's desigated pound after a specified period of time. This item is offered for a first reading this evening. b. An Ordinance_ Extending Interim Ordinance No. 87 -16 -This item pertains to community based residential facilities and is offered this evening for a first reading. 1. Resoluton Extending Moratorium on Development of Adult Halfway Houses, Community Based Residential Facilities and Similar Facilities 13. Planning Commission Items: (7:30 p.m.) a. Planning Commission Application No. 88015 submitted by John Schulties requesting site and building plan approval to construct a two - story, 14,000 sq. ft. office building at the northwest corner of Freeway Boulevard and Xerxes Avenue North -This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 22, 1988, meeting. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- October 10, 1988 b. Planning Commission Application No. 88016 submitted by Shingle Creek Land Company requesting preliminary plat approval to subdivide into two lots the vacant, C1 zoned parcel of land at the southwest corner of Shingle Creek Parkway and Xerxes Avenue North -This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 22, 1988, meeting. 14. Discussion Item: a. Rehabilitation Work on Well No. 8 15. Special Consideration of Rental Dwelling License for 6525, 6527, and 6529 North Willow Lane *16. Licenses 17. Adjournment y MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL SESSION SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:07 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Bill Hawes, Rich Theis, and Celia Scott. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, and Administrative Aid Patti Page. Councilmember Lhotka was absent from this evening's meeting. PUBLIC HEARING Mayor Nyquist reconvened the public hearing on the 1989 annual City Budget. Councilmembers began review of the 1989 projected revenues for the City. A brief discussion then ensued regarding the projected revenues and the debt service which would be paid off at the end of 1988. Mayor Nyquist proceeded with the review of the Appropriation's Budget and began with the City Council Budget, Unit No. 11. The City Manager noted within this budget the professional services account includes fees for Lyle Sumek. The City Council next reviewed the Charter Commission Budget, Unit No. 12. The Council had no questions at this time. The Council proceeded to review the City Manager's Office Budget, Unit No. 13. The City Manager stated he had cut the request for video platforms which would be needed if the City Council and Commission meetings were to be cable televised. The Council next reviewed the Elections and Voters Registration Budget, Unit No. 14. The City Manager stated staff is presently checking into whether or not it is necessary for the City Council to continue canvassing the election when using the City's new scanner equipment. The Council had no questions on the Assessing Department Budget, Unit No. 15. The Council went on to review the Finance Department Budget, Unit No. 16. The Council had no questions at this time. The Council proceeded to review the Independent Audit Budget, Unit No. 17. Councilmember Theis inquired how the costs for the 1988 audit compared to the 1987 costs. The Finance Director stated the 1988 audit cost slightly more than 1987 but was within the 1988 budget limits. 9 -14 -88 -1- Y 4 The Council then reviewed the Legal Counsel Budget, Unit No. 18. The Council had no questions at this time. The Council proceeded to review the Government Building's Budget, Unit No. 19. The City Manager noted at this time staff is faced with the issue of part -time employees versus full -time employees. He noted if the City stays with part -time employees the City will have to raise the budget by $10,000 to allow for a higher wage per hour. He noted staff is experiencing some problems hiring part - employees help at $6.35 per hour. He stated if the decision is made to stay with part -time help staff feels they should be paid $8.04 an hour which is the same as the full -time wage, except no benefits would be paid to the part -time employees. He added the staff could also decide to contract the work out as is done in the police department. The City Manager noted ed in the Capital Outlay la section of p y i this budget rebuilding of two mechanical hoists is being requested. He noted one of them is in need of repair at this time, and he is recommending rebuilding one mechanical hoist now using funds from the contingency account and then reducing this budget accordingly. The City Council next reviewed the Data Processing Budget, Unit No. 20. The City Manager stated he had removed $6,000 from the Fire Department Budget request for software, but staff now believes they may have found the right program for the Fire Department. He stated he is recommending the Council approve the funds for this software as a contingency appropriation in either 1988 or 1989. The City Manager explained he removed the funding request for the Ultimap System from Department 20. He noted the public utility's fund will be paying for the hardware on this system. The Council continued their review of the 1989 Budget by proceeding to the Police Department Budget, Unit No. 31. Councilmember Theis inquired how much money could be saved if the police officer request were cut down to one additional personnel. The Finance Director stated it would cut approximately. $35,000 from the budget. Councilmember Hawes inquired if the City would need to purchase another vehicle if two officers were added. The City Manager stated there would not be a need for an additional car at this point, but if any more than two officers were added there would be a need to purchase a new vehicle or not rotate one of the existing vehicles out of the Police Department. The City Council reviewed the Fire Department, Unit No. 32. There was a brief discussion regarding the request for additional personnel and the vehicle repair account. The City Council went on to review the Planning and Inspection Department, Unit No. 33. There was a brief discussion regarding transferring the weed inspection duties to the Planning and Inspection office and also the request for one housing inspector. Next, the Council reviewed the Emergency Preparedness Department, Unit No. 34. The Council had no questions at this time. 9 -14 -88 _2_ r The City Council went on to review the Animal Control Budget, Unit No, 35. The Council had no questions at this time. The Council proceeded to the Engineering Division Budget, Unit No. 41. Councilmember Hawes inquired as to the number of hours per year which are worked by the part -time engineering technicians. The City Manager explained this is summer help and is usually two or three people. The Council then reviewed the Street Maintenance Budget, Unit No. 42. The Council had no questions at this time. The City Council reviewed the Vehicle Maintenance Division Budget, Unit No. 43. The Finance Director noted there should be a correction made on page 65 for the total cost of capital outlay items. He noted the correct total should be $28,400. There were no questions or comments on the Traffic Signals Budget, Unit No. 44. There were no questions or comments on the Street Lighting Budget, Unit No. 45. The Council reviewed the Weed Control Budget, Unit No. 46. The Council had no questions at this time. The Council then reviewed the Health Regulation and Inspection Budget, Unit No. 51. The City Manager noted included in this budget is the request for one additional health inspector. He noted that Brooklyn Park may be dropping out of the joint agreement between the cities of Crystal, Brooklyn Center, and Brooklyn Park. He added staff would recommend continuing this agreement with the City of Crystal. The Council went on to review the Recreation and Parks Administration Budget, Unit No. 61. There was a brief discussion regarding the request for a paging system. There were no questions or comments on the Adult Recreation Programs Budget, Unit No. 62. The City Council reviewed the Teen Recreation Programs Budget, Unit No. 63. The City Council had no questions at this time. There were no questions or comments on the Children's Recreation Programs Budget, Unit No. 64. The Council then reviewed the General Recreation Programs Budget, Unit No. 65. The Council had no questions at this time. The Council went on to review the Community Center Budget, Unit No. 66. Councilmember Theis stated it appears staff may be over budgeting in this department for gas service. The City Manager stated staff has done a survey on gas rates and are expecting them to increase. Councilmember Theis stated it appears they are expecting a 60% increase and that is quite high. The City Manager stated he would have staff investigate this. 9 -14 -88 -3- y Next, the Council reviewed the Parks Maintenance Budget, Unit No. 69. Councilmember Theis inquired what the appropriation for professional services covered in this department. The City Manager stated it is for the goose control program. The City Council then reviewed the Convention and Tourism Bureau Budget, Unit No. 70. The Finance Director noted this is the first year this item has been carried as an individual department. The Council had no questions at this time. The Council proceeded to review the Unallocated Departmental Expenses Budget, Unit No. 80. There were no questions or comments on this item. Councilmember Theis stated he would like further information regarding the gas service costs contained in department No. 66, rebuilding of the truck hoist contained in department No. 19, and the additional police officer in department No. 31. He noted he would like to be able to find some money to put towards more boulevard trees. There was a brief discussion regarding the deadlines for adoption of the budget and it was noted the budget should be adopted on Monday, September 19, 1988, or a special meeting date would have to be set. The Finance Director stated he would prepare the appropriate resolutions for the September 19, 1988, City Council meeting. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to continue the public hearing on the 1989 annual City Budget to September 19, 1988. The meeting adjourned at 8;55 p.m. i City Clerk Mayor 9 -14 -88 _4_ e ll 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 SEPTEMBER 19, 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 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, and Bill Hawes. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Finance Director Paul. Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Assistant Finance Director Charlie Hansen, EDA Coordinator Brad Hoffman, Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, and Administrative Aid Patti Page. The City Manager stated Councilmember Theis is expected to arrive later during the meeting. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Mr. Dwight Gunberg. OPEN FORUM M Mayor Nyquist noted the Council had not received any requests to use the open forum session this evening. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. There being none, he continued with the regular agenda items. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the consent agenda. Councilmember Scott requested item 8c be removed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 22 1988 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the minutes of the August 22, 1988, City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES SEPTEMBER 6 1988 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the minutes of the September 6, 1988, City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 88 -150 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 9 -19 -88 -1- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND NORTH HENNEPIN MEDIATION PROJECT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -151 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE MASTER LABOR AGREEMENT AND APPENDIX A OF THE MASTER LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN M.A.M.A., REPRESENTING THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, AND THE I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO. 49 AND AMENDING THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1988 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -152 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH THE NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY TO INSTALL UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL SERVICE TO NEW LIFT STATION NO. 6 LOCATED ON LAKEBREEZE AVENUE NEAR FRANCE AVENUE NORTH The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the following list of licenses: COMMERCIAL KENNEL Brooklyn Pet Hospital 4902 France Ave. N. Snyder Brothers Drug Store_ 1296 Brookdale Center FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Yen Ching Mandarin Restaurant 5900 Shingle Creek Pkwy. ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Brooklyn Center Fire Department 6844 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Earle Brown Elementary School 5900 Humboldt Ave. N. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS All- American Mechanical, Inc. 496 North Prior Ave. Excel Air Systems 1408 Sylvan Street Thrane, Inc. 4921 Xerxes Ave. S. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINES Woodside Enterprises 11889 65th Ave. N. Brooklyn Center Police Department 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy. 9 -19 -88 -2- RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Danny J. Peterson 5607 Colfax Ave. N. Lucille R. Jennrich 6612 Drew Ave. N. E. Alan Knudson /Laurie A. Hardel 5547 Lyndale Ave. N. Steve & Donna Schweim 3512 53rd Ave. N. Renewal: Keith L. Nordby 5964 Brooklyn Blvd. James Just /Welcome Home, Inc. 6451 Brooklyn Blvd. Robert M. Lindblom 5538 Colfax Ave. N. Don McGillivray 5740 Dupont Ave. N. Gary D. Anakkala 5412, 5412 1/2 Fremont Ave. N. Kenneth W. Kunz 5601 Lyndale Ave. N. Milton R. Carlson 610 53rd Ave. N. Jack & Elizabeth Fahrenholz 620 53rd Ave. N. M & J Properties 2937 69th Lane N. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 7:05 p.m. and reconvened at 7:07 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 13 1988 - SPECIAL SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the minutes of the September 13, 1988, special City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) The City Manager presented a Resolution Amending Proposed Program for Year XIII Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Funds and Authorizing Its Submittal. The EDA Coordinator stated the amendment would transfer $200,000 from rehab grant and handicapped accessible projects to the Earle Brown Farm acquisition program. He- noted this program was established as a multiyear program which would allow the City to draw as much as $1.2 million. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -153 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING PROPOSED PROGRAM FOR YEAR XIII URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS AND AUTHORIZING ITS SUBMITTAL 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 Amending Resolution No. 88 -144, Delinquent Weed Destruction Accounts to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. He noted a ublic p hearing was held on this item on September 6, 1988. He added the City Council's consideration of the special assessment against one particular property was tabled pending receipt of a staff report. The Director of Public Works briefly reviewed the report which was prepared for this evening's meeting. 9 -19 -88 _3_ r There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott acknowledging receipt of the property owner's letter objecting to the assessment and denying the property owner's request to have the assessment removed or reduced. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -154 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 88 -144, DELINQUENT WEED DESTRUCTION ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS 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 Amending Resolution No. 88 -146, Certifying Special Assessments for Street Improvement Project Numbers 1988 -05 (France Avenue North), 1988 -06 (Lakebreeze Avenue North), and 1988 -07 (50th Avenue North) to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. He noted a public hearing was held on this item on September 6, 1988. He added City Council consideration of the special assessment against one particular property was tabled pending receipt of a staff report. The Director of Public Works went on to briefly review the report prepared for the City Council meeting this evening. Councilmember Hawes inquired if the City would be caught in the middle of a battle between Talmage and the contractor for repair of the property. The Director of Public stated the attorney's office has advised the City to stay out of this type of issue. Councilmember Lhotka inquired if there was an existing curb cut before the improvements. The Director of Public Works stated it was a rolled blacktop curb which had been driven over for many years. 0 There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to deny the request for an adjustment of the special assessment to the Talmage property, PID #10- 118 -21 -13 -0006. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -155 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 88 -146, CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NUMBERS 1988 -05 (FRANCE AVENUE NORTH), 1988 -06 (LAKEBREEZE AVENUE NORTH), AND 1988 -07 (50TH AVENUE NORTH) TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Work Performed under Contract 1988 -F (Reroofing and Insulation of the City Garage, Project No. 1988 -03 y g J ) RESOLUTION NO. 88 -156 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1988 -F (REROOFING AND INSULATION OF THE CITY GARAGE, PROJECT NO. 1988 -03) 9 -19 -88 -4- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Work Performed under Contract for Project 1988 -14 (Sidewalk Repair at Misc. Locations). RESOLUTION N0. 88 -157 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT FOR PROJECT 1988 -14 (SIDEWALK REPAIR AT MISC. LOCATIONS) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Amending the 1988 General Fund Budget to Provide for Replacement of Truck Hoist at City Garage and Accepting Proposal Therefor. The Director of Public Works explained on September 16, 1988, the City did receive two proposals, each less than $15,000. He noted late this afternoon his office received notice from the low bidder that the bid would not be considered valid because the salesman who prepared the bid is no longer employed by the office. The Director of Public Works stated he is requesting q ng the Council to approve a resolution appropriating $15,000 and allowing the City Manager to take bids and award to the lowest bidder. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -158 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1988 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR REPLACEMENT OF TRUCK HOIST AT CITY GARAGE AND ACCEPTING PROPOSAL THEREFOR 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 Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Shade Trees (Order No. DST 09/19/88). RESOLUTION NO. 88 -159 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST 09/19/88) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager noted Mr. Talmage has just arrived, and the Mayor may wish to explain the City Council's action regarding Mr. Talmage's request. Mayor Nyquist explained to Mr. Talmage the Council's action in denying Mr. Talmage's request and approving the assessment roll. Mr. Talmage stated there 9 -19 -88 5 has been a driveway in this location since 1948, and he was quite surprised the City did not ask him if he wished to have a driveway curb cut added in this project. He noted this is a very small piece of land and any use which would be comprehended would not change the location of the driveway. A brief discussion then ensued regarding the property and driveway in question and the past policies of the City. Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmember wished to reconsider the vote. No requests were made, and the Mayor stated the motion stands as passed. The City Manager stated he would have staff review with the Planning Commission the variance possibilities to make this lot a usable lot and other courses of action for Mr. Talmage. ORDINANCES The City Manager presented the following ordinances: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE PARKING OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES BY DECLARING THE PARKING OF CERTAIN VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS A PUBLIC NUISANCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIAL HOME OCCUPATIONS INVOLVING THE PARKING OF CERTAIN VEHICLES He noted the first two ordinances were first read on July 11, 1988, published in the City's official newspaper on July 21, 1988, and were offered for a second reading on August 8, 1988. He explained the public hearing was opened on August 8, 1988, and then tabled. He added the third ordinance also pertains to the first two ordinances. The Director of Planning and Inspection briefly reviewed the report prepared for the third ordinance and stated staff does not recommend adoption of the third ordinance. A discussion then ensued regarding the existing ordinances and whether they can be enforced adequately. Councilmember Lhotka stated he would like to see enforcement of the existing ordinances so only those parties that are recalcitrant are penalized. The City Manager stated staff and the police department have tried enforcing the existing ordinances, but the attorneys have neve-r had much luck in the court system with these laws. He noted fines are set by the court and an individual could be fined up to $700, but there has never been a fine given for that amount. He added these offenses are misdemeanors. He stated in a lot of cases the court system feels the City is harassing an individual, and the judge has more sympathy for the problem maker than for his neighbors. He noted a number of these complaints require the need for an officer to be present to see or hear the offense. There was a discussion relative to other possible language amendments and whether they would be effective in solving the problem. Councilmember Lhotka stated he would like to suggest forming a group consisting of one or two Councilmembers, staff, and possibly community volunteers to discuss this issue. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to close the public hearings on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Parking of Commercial Vehicles, and An Ordinance Amending Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances by Declaring the Parking of Certain 9 -19 -88 -6- Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts a Public Nuisance and to refer the issue to a committee. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO 88010 SUBMITTED BY MINNESOTA STATE HIGH SCHOOL LEAGUE REQUESTING SITE AND BUILDING PLAN AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 20 500 S . FT. OFFICE BUILDING ON THE VACANT PARCEL OF LAND EAST OF THE HOLIDAY INN ON FREEWAY BOULEVARD AND PLANNING_ COMMISSION APPLICATION NO 88011 SUBMITTED BY BEISNER LTD REQUESTING PRELIMINARY R.L.S. APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE INTO TWO TRACTS THE 5.6 ACRE PARCEL OF VACANT LAND AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FREEWAY BOULEVARD AND SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY The City Manager noted these items were recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 8, 1988, meeting. He noted the Director of Planning and Inspection would review both items at the same time. The Director of Planning and Inspection directed the Mayor and Councilmembers to pages one through four of the September g p ember 8, 1988, Planning Commission minutes and information sheets. He briefly reviewed the site location and the conditions recommended for approval of both applications. He added a public hearing has been scheduled and the applicant has been notified. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application Nos. 88010 and 88011 and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application Nos. 88010 and 88011. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve Planning Commission Application No. 88010 submitted by Minnesota State High School League subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop top mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 9 -19 -88 I 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. P Y 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines, prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter into an Easement and Agreement for Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and Storm Drainage Systems. 11. The storm drainage system shall be approved by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to the issuance of permits. 12. Ponding areas required as a part of the storm drainage plan shall be protected by an approved easement. The easement document shall be executed and filed with Hennepin County prior to the issuance of permits. 13. The applicant shall execute a cross access agreement for shared access across the Holiday Inn property to the west prior to the issuance of permits. 14. The applicant shall enter into a declaration of covenants to provide for 21 additional parking stalls based on an approved proof -of parking plan, said plan to be installed upon a determination by the City that such stalls are necessary for the proper functioning of the site. 15. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve Planning Commission Application No. 88011 submitted by Beisner Ltd. subject to the following conditions; 1. The final R.L.S. is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final R.L.S. is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 9 -19 -88 -8- 3. The owner of the property shall enter into a Subdivision Agreement stipulating responsibility for extension of sanitary sewer to the proposed Tract B and installation of curb and gutter along the south side of Parkway Circle. It shall also stipulate responsibility for construction of storm drainage facilities to serve both Tract A and Tract B including construction of a detention pond on Tract A. The agreement shall be accompanied by a financial guarantee to assure completion of required improvements. Also included in the Subdivision Agreement shall be easement documents for drainage and utilities. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO 88012 SUBMITTED BY DEAN ARNOTT REQUESTING SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO CONDUCT A PSYCHOLOGICAL COUNSELING BUSINESS IN THE BASEMENT OF THE RESIDENCE AT 3313 O'HENRY ROAD The Director of Planning and Inspection stated the applicant has requested the City Council table consideration of this item indefinitely. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to table Planning Commission Application No. 88012 indefinitely. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8 :40 p.m. and reconvened at 8:56 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO 88013 SUBMITTED BY RICHARD J WHI•TLEY REQUESTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE INTO TWO LOTS THE PARCEL OF LAND AT 5403 BRYANT AVENUE NORTH The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 8, 1988, meeting. The Director of Planning and Inspection directed the Mayor and Councilmembers to pages six and seven of the September 8, 1988, Planning Commission meeting minutes and information sheet. He briefly reviewed the site location and the three conditions recommended for approval of this application._ Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 88013 submitted by Richard J. Whitley. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 88013. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve Planning Commission Application No. 88013 submitted by Richard J. Whitley subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 9 -19 -88 -9- 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The applicant shall enter into a Subdivision Agreement stipulating responsibility for extension of standard residential water service to the proposed Lot 2. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO 88014 SUBMITTED BY TARGET STORES REQUESTING SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 13,650 SO FT STOCKROOM ADDITION TO THE TARGET STORE AT 6100 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 8, 1988, meeting. Councilmember Lhotka stated he would abstain from discussion and votes regarding this issue. The Director of Planning and Inspection directed the Mayor and Councilmembers to pages seven and eight of the September 8, 1988, Planning Commission meeting minutes and information sheet. He went on to briefly review the location of the proposed addition and noted when the stockroom addition is complete the employee parking lot will be relocated to the back of the building. He added a public hearing is not required on this application, but the applicant is present to answer any questions the Council may have. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve Planning Commission Application No. 88014 submitted by Target Stores 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. 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. 3. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 4. The building addition 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. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 7. The applicant shall execute a restrictive covenant limiting the use of the existing and proposed stockrooms to warehouse use only under current or new ownership. Said restrictive covenant shall be filed 9 -19 -88 -10- with the title to the property at the County prior to the issuance of permits. 8. The yard limit agreement prohibiting structures within 60' of the building shall be revised to reflect the proposed stockroom expansion prior to the issuance of permits. 9. The plans shall be revised prior to consideration by the City Council to indicate a minimum 4' high masonry wall screening the newly designated cart storage area. The motion passed. Councilmember Lhotka abstained from the vote. 1989 ANNUAL CITY BUDGET The City Manager briefly reviewed the changes which were made to the proposed 1989 City budget. He then presented the three resolutions which were required to approve the budget for 1989. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -160 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1989 BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO, 88 -161 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A TAX LE i VY FOR 1989 BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -162 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING A $79,000 PROPERTY TAX LEVY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 462.411 THROUGH 462.711, OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE YEAR 1989 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:30 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 9 -19 -88 -11- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10/10/88 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASE FOR RLS 1537 (FROM SHINGLE CREEK LAND CO. FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A FLOWAGE WAY ALONG THE 67TH AVENUE EXTENSION FROM SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY TO SHINGLE CREEK) DEPT. APPROVA SY KNA'P DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORK MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes The following performance guarantee is recommended for release: • Registered Land Survey Number 1537 67th Avenue North and Shingle Creek Parkway Amount of Guarantee - $5,000 Bond Obligor - Shingle Creek Land Company Construction of a flowage way between Shingle Creek Parkway at 67th Avenue and Shingle Creek has been completed in accordance with approved plans. There is no further need of a performance guarantee. - 1 MEDTRONICS / 1 el10e05E0 ---- luIl01N0 10 —J 1 III li III s Ii I - -- - • - ____ � i I I II L - - - =J -, - ___ - -- - - ---- - - - - -- ..-- --- — _ ----------------- = s --- .RO!osco eulfo,NC a ♦ I r / -J _ -- _ _ _ - - _ __ _ — r• •„� _ ExlsnNq emLOINe -u LEGEND • MED TRONICS _ !• ,ST Cl- !� NO •ro v0. C EaEE wcr ILLI. ESE.. •aB.!2 — .-- --- - - - - - - --- SECTION F-F SECTION E* a CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10/10/88 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - BEISNER RLS (MINNESOTA STATE HIGH SCHOOL LEAGUE SITE) *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: SY KNAPP- DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC MXZA MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes Explanation • Mr. L. A. Beisner, developer of the above referenced Registered Land Survey (RLS), has applied to the City Council to approve the final RLS, which is a resubdivision of RLS 1602. The land is located at the intersection of Shingle Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard between the Holiday Inn and Shingle Creek Parkway. The site is the proposed headquarters of the Minnesota State High School League.. Conditions adopted for the preliminary RLS by City Council at its September 24, 1988 meeting are as follows: 1. The final RLS is subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 2. The final RLS is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The owner of the property shall enter into a Subdivision Agreement stipulating responsibility for extension of sanitary sewer to the proposed Tract B and installation of curb and gutter along the south side of Parkway Circle. It shall also stipulate responsibility for construction of storm drainage facilities to serve both Tract A and Tract B including construction of a detention pond on Tract A. The Agreement shall be accompanied by a financial guarantee to assure completion of required improvements. Also included in the Subdivision Agreement shall be easement documents for drainage and utilities. Conditions o • N 1 and 2 above have been met. I Recommendation s I recommend the approval of the final Registered Land Survey subject to the following conditions: 1. Receipt of title opinion from the City Attorney confirming the parties with an interest in the Registered Land Survey. 2. Developer shall pay all attorney fees incurred in the review of the final RLS prior to release of the final RLS for filing at the County. 3. The owner of the property shall enter into a Subdivision Agreement stipulating responsibility for extension of sanitary sewer to the proposed Tract B and installation of curb and gutter along the south side of Parkway Circle. It shall also stipulate responsibility for construction of storm drainage facilities to serve both Tract A and Tract B including construction of a detention pond on Tract A. The Agreement shall be accompanied by a financial guarantee to assure completion of required improvements. Also included in the Subdivision Agreement shall be easement documents for drainage and utilities. H. Y. S wirier r — � >i t � I H 2; A ` 69TH 3, i CITY MAINTENANCE BUILDING CREEK w a a mU t z � OPEN SPACE 67TH AV E. ` Z �c w t Q � c�F W LVp EVE N. cu FREEWAY BLVD. N. v ENTRAL PARK % �\�� CITY CIVIC C�� R� ��A REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. /0 I 572 74 /V 4l ° 473.3'E" _ _ Sao/ -7 ¢ I //oo I V �— Z R- 2(05 \ o C 8r9. =A/85 35'35 "h / " TRACT A TRACT B v- L' j I $cbAe /n Feet o 50 /00 153 �1 o Denotes /ion :'7'` / \ \ / ` ✓ a r " -' Monument � � an assumed 4r9.57 R.6 /zOZ 3 579 `, � O Q, t� % ''B l szi °i4"sa"w 0 /9.B7 \\ 1 I hereby certify that in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 508, Minnesota Statutes of 1949, as amended, I have surveyed the following described tract of land in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota to wit: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1602, Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin. That this Registered Land Survey is a correct delineation of said survey. Dated this day of 198 Paul A. Thorp, Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 13637 CITY COUNCIL, BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA This Registered Land Survey has been approved and accepted by the City Council of Brooklyn Center at a meeting thereof held this day of A.D., 198 By: Mayor By: City Manager PROPERTY TAX AND PUBLIC RECORDS DEPARTMENT, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA I hereby certify that taxes payable in and prior years have been paid for the land described on this kegiat,ered Land iurvcy Dated tLi:: - day of 19B____ Dale C. Folstad, Hennepin County Auditor H By Deputy SURVEY DIVISION, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA Pursuant to Chapter 810, Minnesota Laws of 1969, this Registered Land Survey has been approved this day of , 198 hernard II. Ldrson, Hennepin County Surveyor By: REGISTRAR OF TITLES, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA I hereby certify that the within Registered Land Survey No. was filed in this office this day of 198_, at o'clock .M. R. Dan Carlson, Registrar of Titles By: Deputy 1; Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson Inc. - , Conwttk q Engimert L Land Surveyor# CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10/10/88 Agenda Item Number �b REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - WHITLEY'S 2ND ADDITION *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: * * * * * * * * * * * *KNA PP. D OF PUBLIC WO * * ** * * W * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: Agv No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes Explanation ® Mr. Whitley, developer of the above referenced plat, has applied to the City Council to approve the final plat of Whitley's 2nd Addition. The land is located at 5403 Bryant Avenue North. I Conditions adopted for the preliminary plat by the City Council at its September 24,1988 meeting are as follows: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement stipulating PP g P g responsibility for extension of a standard residential water service to the proposed Lot 2. Recommendation Conditions No. 1 and 2 above have been met. Accordingly, we recommend approval of the final plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Receipt of title opinion from the City Attorney confirming the appropriate parties responsible for signing the plat. 2. The developer shall pay all attorney fees incurred in the review of the final plat prior to release of the final plat for filing at the County.. 3. The applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement stipulating responsibility for extension of a standard residential water service to the proposed Lot 2. ' WHITLEY 2ND ADDITION west line tot S, Block it, 9EUVVE ACRES, Henn. Co. M ;nn. LA • I .I 1 \ \� n %• Cc ;7 i 1 ? %,SCALE Mt FEET N 01'32'08'1 /25.78 Ne&L t � O 6x78 f0.00 0 I_ 2 -- -- - - --c� 2 m o IM N N1 -p� r -, 65.71 60.00 0 50/ /2878 Next 12e.00 &SLLVUL ACRAS MiMMSPIN COON" M/NN[t07A L� ME 1111MM1111 NEW oil mill _, � e n�� IRI IIIIIIR 11011111111 ILI too The following persons are recommended for appointment as election judges for the November 8, 1988, General Election: Precinct 1 Precinct 6 D- Loretta Stewig (Chair) R- Catherine Wetzel (Chair) * Marian Smith D -Beth Rygh -Mary Gwen Stein R- Josephine Swart R- Mildred Egnell D- Phyllis Waite D- Arlene Groves R- Gloria Weinebarger R -Donna Bennett D- Margaret Thayer R -Grace Freund R -Joann Reavely D- Clarice Johnson D- William Madir D -Susan Krekelberg R -Ruth Juhl Precinct 2 Precinct 7 R- Beverly Madden (Chair) D -Mona Hintzman (Chair) D -Susan Snell R- Imelda Mayleben R- Curtis Lund D -Carol Benkofske D- McKevha Thomas R -Angie Olson R -Tom Masley D -Helen Julkowski D- Esther Kelsey R- Katherine Commers R -Gail Ebert D- Kathryn Brosseau D- Joanne Goddard R- Blanche Hamilton R- Jennifer Mattson D -Viola Peterson Precinct 3 R -Mary Thiebault D -Mary Goenner (Chair) Precinct 8 R -Joyce Shudy R -Trudi Ann Gores (Chair) D- Deborah Hensel D- Eileen Hannan R- Dianne Reem R- Doloris McGeorge D- Mildred Hansen D -Ethel Pettman * Lora Jefferson D -Anne Bergquist -Susan Mattson D -Ralph Saline R- Victoria Halvorson R -Wendy Erklouts R -Nancy Denny D- Dolores Seal R -Val Kraemer Precinct 4 D- Alberta Ruf (Chair) Precinct 9 R- DeLila Newman D -Alice Madir (Chair) D- Robert Leach R -Jean Sullivan R- Thelma Jacobson D- Margaret Stellburg D -Mary Breed R -Mary VanDerWerf R- Virginia Johnson D -Tracy Tyler, Jr. D -Helen Bolier R- Laurie Gerber R- Eleanor Martinson D- Joseph Tromiczak D- Robert Hammer ABSENTEE Precinct 5 D- Marilyn Tyler D -Gerry Dorphy (Chair) R- Barbara Sexton R -Jean Lindstrom D -Jean Tubman D- Lorraine Halter R- Debbie Kramer R- Arlene Kemp D- Beverly Hovde STANDBY R -Molly Anderson D -Edith Svitak D- Gloria Voeltz D -David Ault R- Gladys Leerhoff D -Rosie Teas R -Judy Crowley PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER 16 - 22 1988 AS NATIONAL BUSINESS WOMEN'S WEEK WHEREAS, Working women constitute an ever increasing number of the Nation's working force, and are constantly striving to serve their communities, their states and their nation in civic and cultural programs; and WHEREAS Major goals of business and professional women are to help create better conditions for business women through the study of social, educational, economic and political problems; to help them be of greater service to their community; to further friendship with women throughout the world; and WHEREAS, All of us are proud of their leadership in these many fields of endeavor. NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of Minnesota, do hereby proclaim the week of October 16 - 22, 1988, as NATIONAL BUSINESS WOMEN'S WEEK sponsored by the National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, Inc. and urge all citizens in the North Hennepin Area, all civic and fraternal groups, all educational associations, all news media and other community organizations to join in this salute to working women by encouraging and promoting the celebration of the achievements of all business and professional women as they contribute daily to our economic, civic and cultural purposes. Date Mayor Seal Attest: Clerk I CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10/10/88 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1987 -M (REHABILITATION OF WELLHOUSES NO. 5 AND 6, PROJECT 1987 -20) *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: * * * * * * * * ** KNAPP*RECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached History • On April 25, 1988, the City Council awarded a contract for Rehabilitation of Wellhouses No. 5 and 6 to David N. Volkmann Construction, in the amount of $60,990.00. i During the course of construction, two change orders became necessary, i.e.: Change Order No. 1 included an increase in the allowance for replacement of roof sheathing (add $320) and removal and replacement of some joists, soffits, and headers that were found to be decayed (add $2,171.10). Change Order No. 2 provided a credit for the use of 45 mil EPDM membrane in lieu of the 60 mil material specified (deduct $500). Work on this project is complete and we have received the warranty for the roofing membrane material as required in the contract documents. Council Action Required Adoption of the attached resolution is recommended. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1987 -M (REHABILITATION OF WELLHOUSES NO. 5 AND 6, PROJECT 1987 -20) WHEREAS, pursuant to written Contract 1987 -M signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, David N. Volkmann Construction, Inc. has satisfactorily completed the following improvement in accordance with said contract: REHABILITATION OF WELLHOUSES NO. 5 AND 6 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -20 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said contract is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $ 60,990.00 $ 60,990.00 Change Order No. 1 2,491.10 2,491.10 Change Order No. 2 (500.00) (500.00) $ 62,981.10 $ 62,981.10 2. The value of work performed is equal to the original contract amount plus approved change orders. 3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $62,981.10. 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 10/10/88 Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1988 -1 (1988 SEALCOATING PROGRAM, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -15) *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: i� l * * * * * * * ** Y KN A PP �k * RkCTOR *o ** PUBLIC WORKS * * ** * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: . No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes September 1, 1988 • Attached is a resolution accepting work performed on the 1988 Sealcoating Program. We have completed the first year of a new program using Class A chip for all streets. The previous ` programs used a more rounded stone called buckshot. The Class A chip is very angular and has a greater life expectancy for the seal. We had a complaint related to how abrasive the material was and a complaint related to truck traffic, but overall there were few complaints. We covered approximately 14 miles of street. The attached map illustrates the streets covered by the 1988 Sealcoating Program. The work has been completed in accordance with the specifications and the contractor has accepted the measurement of the final quantities. Recommendation We recommend that the attached resolution accepting work performed on the 1988 Sealcoating Program be approved by City Council. October 6, 1988 Supplementary Report Consideration of this matter was tabled at the September 6, 1988 Council meeting to allow City staff to submit a report regarding overlapping between passes of the sealcoat. The City Engineer's report, dated October 6, 1988 (copy attached) indicates that the project, as completed, meets the specifications. I Accordingly, it is recommended that the work be accepted. Special provisions • will be incorporated into future sealcoating specifications to prevent a recurrence of this problem. City Council Action Required Adoption of the attached resolution. • TO: Sy Knapp Director of Public Works ti FROM: H. R. Spurrier / r- City Engineer DATE: October 6, 1988 RE: 1988 Sealcoating Program Longitudinal Overlap There is longitudinal overlap on nearly every street that was sealcoated in the 1988 program. The overlap was more noticeable this year because in many streets the overlap occurred approximately nine feet from the curb and not in the center of the street. The overlap was more bothersome because of its irregular appearance. The overlap occurred because the asphalt distributor has a bar that sprays asphalt at a fixed width. MnDOT specifications require that the asphalt be applied from the curb to the center of the street with three passes. The two curb passes were applied and then the center application was made. This created a problem because the width of City streets is not uniform where concrete curb and gutter does not exist. Coupled with the fact that the distributor must spray in six -inch increments, there is bound to be overlap on any street where the asphalt was applied in three passes. We did not discover that the overlap was so extensive until after all the :!coat had been applied (e.g. sealcoat was applied in less than seven days). We had an independent testing laboratory check the finished work. We were concerned that the overlap created the following problems: 1. Possible conflict with specifications 2. Trapped water could create a hazard 3. Asphalt rich overlap could cause bleeding 4. Possible reduced ability of chip to bond in overlap area The independent testing laboratory recommended that the City accept -the work. While the work met the technical requirements of the specifications, we were concerned about the problems noted above. There is no specific requirement in MnDOT's specifications addressing the longitudinal overlap. I checked the entire project during and after precipitation to determine whether any of these factors were a problem. During and after precipitation there was no significant trapped water. There was no significant amount of asphalt bleeding through the overlap area. The chip bond in the overlap area was good to excellent. The overlap problem is an area that will be covered specifically in future sealcoating programs. We will eliminate the overlap by requiring the contractor to cover the entire street in two passes, or modify the operation so that there is no longitudinal overlap. Since the contractor has performed in accordance with the specifications for the job in accordance with our review and the review of an independent testing laboratory, we are recommending payment in full of the retained amount. Recommendation It is my recommendation that City Council approve the attached resolution accepting the work performed under Contract 1988 -J, the 1988 Sealcoating Program. pin III 1 \ r �� 11 i 1 11► �� R 1 m�e. =1 � 6 � e o ....! � r i ♦ ! t � � , w 3 rr rY f �! ii �F3�i�Y'� � �� e� �►� j' I....�1 ill ��` �' �` i MORM_C� _ ��161��Itf �t_ �,� �i i� - QC =! v ■ ■' friJ VE ,• i � Ili I �'I � �+ � .� . � . :� : 1 g � S + y�ll(Io;j1�11111 �lll'il�f fR {..r► ilR�Ql �.� �I� � �� I I --» 1 l i fipiiliR�fli.Qlill[$i91lI�!!t; , fif fff{L� ifi�il �IR'�il trl "��,? - - . ---�>� �i�4 • • liA'f' flfif! �� Ififf iffflfii ,�� I �� r - ° , --- i1 sill I Hill t iriR[;il. III ' � 61,fij1'►r t , if ,fl C'7 iiflTl lifi'Ri liii Iii ff !� fl,��f ff f f r r :. • i r EIL"il[IIE'�1�!�rY _ A u+nn�n Cn�'e'�'r'rf�ill'�' r'lurf ifiiii if4iElil R Rif iiii I �� tr iii "iiil� "' R ' • • IlIlElillilli{f' iif. ICI Leh' fflllf'I lumiif fl�RfR.'f f 1 .. 'ffr��Qfi�Rfll 1 �f .:�'L'i �ritfff ii _6ffl' F i'If ti's' 1 I � ► � � • • � f!�"flif an if Rlisif ° � I t n uu .. f iiR�,111 Zi "1� it viii =i N Sul, rune errltQ MINES n 1 �i'r \ t �► nrRi� Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1988 -J (1988 SEALCOATING PROGRAM, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -15) WHEREAS, pursuant to written Contract 1988 -J signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Asphalt Surface Technologies Corporation, St. Cloud, Minnesota, has satisfactorily completed the following improvement in accordance with said contract: SEALCOATING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -15 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said contract is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $129,388.45 $130,066.27 2. The value of work performed is more than the original contract amount plus approved change orders and supplemental agreements by $677.82 due to a general under estimation of planned quantities. 3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $130,066.27. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. There is appropriated the sum of $677.82 for additional costs. 2. The appropriation will be financed by: As Approved Final Amount General Fund Street Street Maintenance Division No. 42 129.388.45 130.066.27 TOTAL $ 129,388.45 130,066.27 RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 16 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 10/10/88 Agenda Item NumberZ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 2 FOR LOGAN AVENUE NORTH RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -04 (CONTRACT 1988 -H) *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: * * * * * * ** Y KNAPP�* D * * * * *� * *oF PUBLIC WORKS * ** a0U * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: O No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes PAST ACTIONS BY CITY COUNCIL ® On June 13, 1988, the City Council awarded a contract for reconstruction of the Logan Avenue area project and for the France Avenue area project in the total contract amount of $936,262.90. t Supplemental Agreement No. 1, covering miscellaneous changes relating to the storm sewer on Logan Avenue, the sanitary sewer on France Avenue and a manhole on 50th Avenue, resulting in a net addition to the contract totaling $3,302.20 was executed in late June. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED ACTION Attached hereto is a detailed report as prepared by City Engineer, Bo Spurrier, in which he recommends approval of "Supplemental Agreement No. 2" which covers three items, i.e.: Cost Increase (Decrease) Item No. 1 - Revised Storm Sewer Alignment ......................... $14,090.50 As noted in the City Engineer's report, this realignment was necessitated by the unavailability of an easement which would have been needed to allow construction to occur "according to plan." The attached report details those additional costs and notes that some of those costs were "expected ", while the majority of those costs resulted from unanticipated problems. Item No. 2 - Deletion of Bike /Pedestrian Trail on Lilac Drive ...... $37,637.80 As noted in the City Engineer's report, several factors combined to make it necessary to delete this portion of the work from this contract. In general, I submit the following observations: • The construction of this trail segment was added to the Logan Avenue project as an afterthought (i.e. after the decision was made to route the new storm sewer which was needed to serve Logan Avenue via 57th Avenue and Lilac Drive). At that point it appeared to be a relatively simple thing to construct a trailway in conjunction with restoration of the storm sewer trench. However, in retrospect, it was much more complicated than that, and it is our opinion that it will be much better to delete the trail construction from this contract and do it as a separate project - after taking the time to allow full evaluation of all alternatives, checking for compliance with safety standards, developing a landscape plan, etc. • Because the contract specifications allowed the City to delete the trail construction from the contract on the basis of the unit prices as bid, this inclusion /deletion has not increased the City's contract cost for the balance of the work. Obviously, some costs related to preparation of plans and specifications for this work cannot be recovered. However, the S majority of those costs will be "salvageable" if the City proceeds with construction of the trail under a separate project. Item No. 3 - Inclusion of Topsoil As noted in the City Engineer's report, the specifications inadvertently neglected _to include a pay item for topsoil needed on those projects. The Supplemental Agreement provides a basis for payment for the topsoil at a unit price which is lower than that which we have experienced on several other contracts. Accordingly, the contract costs are increased by an amount which should have been included originally. REQUIRED ACTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL Adoption of the resolution provided. j Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 2 FOR LOGAN AVENUE NORTH RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1988 -04 (CONTRACT 1988 -H) WHEREAS, City Council entered into a contract on June 13, 1988 with Thomas and Sons Construction Company, Inc. for the construction of Improvement Project No 1988 -04; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined certain modifications need to be made to the contract to facilitate the construction of the project, said modifications being as follows: Item Cost Increase (Decrease) 1. Revised storm sewer alignment $14,090.50 2. Delete bike/pedestrian trail ($37,637.80) 3. Establish unit price for topsoil $ 7.028.50 Net Change ($16,518.80) WHEREAS, the Contractor, Thomas and Sons Construction Company, Inc., has agreed to the prices for the modifications as noted above. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The Supplemental Agreement No. 2, incorporating the above noted modifications to Improvement Project No. 1988 -04 is-hereby approved. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute said Supplemental Agreement on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center. 2. Previous appropriations for this project are hereby amended as follows: Increase (Decrease) MSA Accounts in Appropriations 2613 (State Approved Projects) $21,119.00 2611 (Local MSA Funds) ($37,637.80) Net Change ($16,518.80) RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. I TO: Sy Knapp Director of Public Works FROM: H. R. Spurrier City Engineer DATE: September 29 1988 RE: Supplemental Agreement No. 2 for Logan Avenue North Reconstruction Project No. 1988 -04 (Contract 1988 -H) Proposed Supplemental Agreement No. 2 for Contract 1988 -H makes three changes: Item No. 1 - The alignment of the storm sewer is revised. Item No. 2 - The bike /pedestrian trail on Lilac Drive and 57th is deleted. Item No. 3 - A price for sodding with 4 inches of topsoil is established. Following is a detailed explanation and chronology relating to each of the three j changes to the contract. I. ITEM NO. 1 - STORM SEWER ALIGNMENT REVISIONS A. Summary of Design Considerations and Easement Negotiations At the time construction plans were being prepared for this project, two options were considered relating to the location and design of the storm sewer segments on County Road 57 (57th Avenue) and along Lilac Drive /Trunk Highway 100. These two options and our evaluation of them at that time are summarized as follows: Option No. 1 - The storm sewer was located on the northerly side of Lilac Drive /Trunk Highway 100 and followed the south curb line along County Road 57. The sanitary sewer on County Road 57 was replaced between Lilac Drive and the SuperAmerica Station at 1901 County Road 57. The storm sewer on County Road 57 was located on the curb line. The sanitary sewer was located on the south right of way line of County Road 57. This option had the following advantages and disadvantages: a. Easement acquisition was required. It was necessary to acquire construction and utility easements along County Road 57 from SuperAmerica, Northern Pump (Robert Milavetz) and from Warner Hardware (Ericon, Inc.). The City Assessor's appraised value for these easements totaled $3,900. b. Lowest total cost. The estimated total cost of Option No. 1, including the estimated cost for the easements, was $1,440 less than Option No. 2 (see Table No. 1). C. Fewer potential conflicts with the water system. This alignment had the advantage of clearing or avoiding crossings where there would be potential conflicts with the main and services. d. Fewer potential conflicts with the sanitary sewer. The alignment avoided sanitary sewer crossings except where the elevation of the pipe was known or could be calculated with precision. e. Maintenance of access. The alignment had a minimal impact on Lilac Drive and as a result minimized the amount of time Lilac Drive (access to Centerbrook) would be detoured which minimized impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood. Option No. 2 - The storm sewer was located on the southerly side of Lilac Drive and 57th Avenue. The sanitary sewer on County Road 57 was replaced between the intersection of County Road 57 and 57th Avenue and the SuperAmerica Station at 1901 County Road 57. The storm sewer was 5' north of the curb line. The sanitary sewer replacement was located on the curb line. This option had the following advantages and disadvantages: a. Additional pavement removal and restoration costs, estimated at $1800. b. Easement acquisition. This option could be built without obtaining any of the easements described in Option 1. C. Potential utility conflicts. All available information indicated there was to be no conflict with the water system. However, the potential existed that conflicts could occur when the storm sewer crossed these utilities. The conflict resulted in costs which were impossible to estimate. Available information indicated that there was no conflict with the sanitary sewer services. Until the service lines were actually uncovered, we could not determine whether a conflict existed. This resulted in additional costs which were impossible to estimate. d. Gas main relocation. Both options included an equal amount of gas main relocation. -2- After evaluating the uncertainties and trade -offs noted above, we selected (Option No. 1) and completed the plans and specifications, received bids, and awarded the construction contract based on that option, while retaining (Option No. 2) as our "contingency plan" in the event the required easements could not be obtained. Immediately after selecting Option No. 1 (i.e. in early March 1988), I initiated negotiations for the acquisition of the required easements. Negotiations for one of the easements (from the property formerly owned by Northern Pump, which is now owned by Mr. Robert Milavetz) proved to be difficult, time - consuming, and ultimately - futile. Following is a summary of the negotiations: 3/29/88 - 4/7/88 - I attempted to contact an appropriate representative of the trustee holding the Northern Pump property (the recorded property owner). Finally, a trustee from the company's Denver, Colorado office advised me that the property had been sold to Mr. Robert Milavetz, Crystal, Minnesota. 4/8/88 - 4/29/88 - I made numerous, unsuccessful attempts to contact Mr. Milavetz by telephone. He finally returned my calls on April 28, 1988. He confirmed that he was the owner of the property (County records do not confirm this because the purchase has not yet been recorded). I advised Mr. Milavetz that I was making standard offers to every property owner from which right of way was needed. I emphasized that the acquisition had to be in accordance with strict state guidelines, and that we could only pay the appraised value subject, of course, to City Council approval. Mr. Milavetz said that he was completely unfamiliar with what the easement value should be. I advised him that we were also prepared to offer up to $500 in approved appraisal costs if he was unwilling to accept the amount established by the City Assessor. The value of the easement is a percent of the value of the property. The City Assessor had determined that a sidewalk and utility easement was 30 percent of the property value. Mr. Milavetz agreed that the City Assessor had valued the ropert correctly. Mr. Milavetz was P Y Y uncertain that the sidewalk and utility easement was only 30 percent of the value of the property. Mr. Milavetz was concerned about the City's hold harmless language in the easement document. Accordingly, I advised him that I would send the City's standard easement document and that he could revise it with his own language and return it, then the City would decide whether it could accept and pay for easements dedicated with such a document. Mr. Milavetz agreed to revise the document and on April 29, 1988, I sent him our standard documents. -3- 4/30/88 - 5/13/88 - A week after I sent the easement, I resumed my efforts to contact Mr. Milavetz. I finally reached him on May 13, 1988. He advised me that he had not been able to find time to revise our easement documents but wanted to meet on the site. We met on site May 13, 1988. At this time Mr. Milavetz raised the question of the City guaranteeing access to his building - uninterrupted. He again questioned the City Assessor's value and then asked if we would pay for his appraisal. I advised Mr. Milavetz that we were obliged to offer to pay up to $500 in approved costs but the appraiser must be state approved, and I offered to give him a list of approved appraisers. At this point Mr. Milavetz agreed to dedicate the utility easement but was unwilling to dedicate the trail easement because he was concerned about his liability and because he was unsure that the City was offering a fair value for the easement. At this meeting I requested that he revise our documents and, if necessary, get his own appraisal from a state approved appraiser. At this point Mr. Milavetz was going to revise our document to provide the needed access guarantee and the needed "hold harmless" for the trail. He was going to review the list of state approved appraisers and said he would contact one to get a value for the easements. 5/14/88 - 5/26/88 - Mr. Milavetz had applied for site and building plan approval for his new Brooklyn Center law office (formerly Northern Pump building). In my review I added the condition that the property owner dedicate a utility and trail easement. I made it clear in discussion with the owner's architect that the City intended to pay the appraised value of these easements. I had added the condition in an effort to get resolution on this easement. We were close to the bid date and needed the resolution for the Logan and France Avenues Area Project bid on May 26, 1988. When we received the bids we revised the earlier analysis of our contingency plan based on the low bid. The cost of the Option No. 2 alignment was reasonably close to the cost of the Option No. 1 alignment, provided we did not encounter potential utility conflict. At this point it appeared that Mr. Milavetz would agree to dedicate the sidewalk and utility easement and that the only problem we had was the issue of easement value. Given the constraints and Mr. Milavetz's willingness to conform to state guidelines, I optimistically felt that the issue of easement value could be resolved. 5/26/88 - 6/16/88 - I decided to delay the decision on a recommendation for revision from Option No. 1 to Option No. 2 until after the Planning Commission's review of the site and building plan on June 16, 1988. We knew there was time to change and even time to stop this project because no work was planned in the Logan area until late July. At the Planning Commission meeting there was no major objection to the easement dedication by Mr. Milavetz's architect. We then felt that there had been a turn of events and Mr. Milavetz was going to cooperate with our effort. The architect did ask that we -4- minimize the easement acquisition in one area so that the Milavetz law office P sign could be laced closer to County Road 57. We agreed to modify the easement so that this could be done. We thought then that the matter was resolved. 6/16/88 - 6/27/88 - We did not receive any comment from Mr. Milavetz or his architect until the City Council meeting June 27, 1988, when the City Council considered the site and building plan for the Milavetz law office. At the City Council meeting, Mr. Milavetz's architect explained that he was uncertain about the easement. The City Manager suggested that the item be tabled for clarification, at which time Mr. Milavetz addressed the issue. He stated that it was not proper for the site and building plan to be delayed for the easements. He stated it appeared that there were two options open; one of those being legal action. City Council tabled the application. 6/28/88 - 6/30/88 - One more negotiating effort was made with Mr. Milavetz. That, like all the others, was fruitless. At that point we decided to revise the storm sewer alignment according to the contingency plan, selecting the Option No. 2 alignment. The potential cost of legal action and possible delay in acquiring the Milavetz's easement were major influences. B. Decision To Use "Option No. 2 Alignment i At this point the revised "Option No. 2" alignment was a reasonable choice for an estimated cost (using bid prices) that was $1,440 more than the original alignment (see Table 1, page 7). Accordingly, after reviewing the matter with you, I directed the staff and contractor to proceed with construction of the project using the "Option No. 2" alignment. C. Construction Problems During construction, three additional problems developed, i.e.: 1. Water main and hydrant lead grade conflicts 2. Unsalvageable pavement on Lilac Drive 3. Additional restoration costs on 57th Avenue (C.R. 57) Following is a detailed explanation of these additional cost items: 1. Additional Quantity of Water Main Additional quantity of water main was lowered. Water main was 0.5 - 1.0 feet deeper than the normal depth of 7.5 feet, resulting in a need to lower additional length. This line was not close to valves where depth could be checked. We had optimistically expected to avoid conflict. Normally we would not excavate and expose these pipes for design. We would add a bid item for lowering, such as we did for 57th and Logan, (e.g. lower 10" water main). The work may or may not be required, depending on the grade -5- found. We did not have those units bid because the contract contemplated the Option No. 1 alignment. There were additional conflicts of acts with the water main in three locations. The cost is estimated because we do not have material costs completed. The labor is complete. The cost for materials used for this work cannot be established until the contractor produces invoices for the materials. The estimated amounts are reasonably conservative. The expected water main conflicts cost $2,540 to lower. The conflict with a fire hydrant lead at Warner Hardware ($1,530) and two water main conflicts at the Milavetz law office building ($2,537) increased the cost of water main grade conflict. The original alignment would have avoided conflict at Warner Hardware. The conflict at the Milavetz law office building would have occurred regardless of which alignment was used. The conflict occurred because the Building and City as- builts did not show a 4" fire line and an 1 1/2" service line. The cost of these conflicts is shown in Table 1, page 7. The total increase is $6,607. 2. Unsalvageable Pavement Part of the utility conflict occurred with gas main. The gas main had to be moved on Lilac Drive. It was moved toward T.H. 100. Minnegasco had to position their gas main between the sanitary sewer and water main because they did not have sufficient easement along the southeast side of Lilac Drive. The northwest side was highway right of way that could not be used. The gas main relocation resulted in removal of five additional feet of pavement we planned to salvage. That additional pavement restoration was $2,456.50. It created another problem. It left a seam in the southbound wheel path. A seam in the wheel path means that it is a crack location, where the greatest strength is needed the pavement has a failure. That doubles the stress on adjacent pavement, accelerating failure. Removing enough pavement to get the crack out of the wheel path takes three feet of pavement. Removal of an additional three feet would have cost an additional $1,474 in restoration costs. It would then leave a four foot strip next to the curb. We were going to build a pavement section with a 20 year design life which is approximately the life of the existing pavement we would be salvaging. Four foot salvaged strip had a replacement cost of $1,965. In order to make the entire section uniform and eliminate the chance of premature failure, we removed all of the pavement for approximately 400 feet. The total increase is $5,895.50. 3. Additional Restoration on 57th Avenue (CR 57) There were no plans or borings that showed the existing asphalt depth on 57th Avenue. Based on the pavement depth we had found 2,000 feet west of the project on County Road 10, we expected the same depth and estimated the quantities accordingly at 6 inches. The actual depth was 10 inches. Hennepin County was advised of the existing depth. The County required restoration with 9 inches of pavement. That amount still exceeded the planned quantity by 3 inches. The attached sketch illustrates that difference. The total increase due to additional depth is $4,615. -6- TABLE 1 STORM SEWER ALIGNMENT REVISION COST SUMMARY Plan Revised Contract Item Alignment Alignment Change Original Cost Estimate Removal & Restoration $41,609.00 $41,609.00 0 Sanitary Sewer 13,498.00 4,300.00 (9,198.00) Lower Water Main 2,540.00 2,540.00 Revised Removal & Restoration on CR 57 1,927.00 1,927.00 Revised Removal & Restoration on Lilac Drive 9,071.00 9,071.00 Easement Acquisition 3,900.00 1,000.00 (2,900.00) Subtotal of Original Cost Estimate $59,007.00 $60,447.00 $1,440.00 Additional Cost Items Lower Water Main and 2,537.00 2,537.00 2,537.00 Fire Hydrant Lead 1,530.00 1,530.00 Additional Removal and Restoration on Lilac Drive 5,895.50 5,895.50 Additional Restoration on CR 57 1,981.00 2,688.00 2.688.00 Total $63,525.00 $73,097.50 $14,090.50 -7- OPTION NO. i D, N,W H 17 ci � a 1 v BASELINE I _ NOiE SALVAGE B REINSTALL 05'- 2<'RCP W ER WA CN Al xIISViEW TO MN r7 1 INSTALL38 EST�B SELINE) / NoT - oup nc STOpNS N V TION2 CON 0 BfILL SM NO rOP [ pf MOVE E. SL B'vCW B N EwEp CONS, C ). _, ix DEAR L!p 10 Er I p � IAN EVEN — EO AL NST. NNy CP E SAN10YEp T. E•TC P. ,.[ p. e T e'Y r x. E. Y °E Nc �O •, �� - " ,,: 1 w n <anwEr sYw � >!' -. - -__ - _ ,a � 9 sr / mn 1 T Q rhM.23 _ IOW - I ' . _' c- - - ' _. _ _.,• { b L - - V FROTECT NE ntt �� a ✓ l d - 'J 1 MH 4(SAN) MH3(SAN) 1' --- l__ — ` - M422 E re + F N �N C816 815:: 1t cons T. �45EMEnr°t°xi1 s LR IEe No o ° as�E L 1 �a [ v ' I , • P ( ; 19AN7 / •. / aY Z I AR•IERS NAROV.ARL Y n R IUEN;JN _ P 0 mP CaNST. IE 1-1. �� ORYV,nL I II � TRA L F p N0. OF BAS L NE SAiXg c cs I U SPEC r< i�ON d. S E II �/ NSTALE 1 8 SL NEI ISEE ] r ' ENC xF v SiauctuNES - U "� rNOR I e [ r10N l. +F S uSLNErvT A FR CA n ' 2001 vACai I � � H a 5E50 IIO WEST _ wELS OF BASEL E1�� 57 TH AVENUE NORTH �- �• 6 OPTION NO. 2 ,o xELT <. RH RE3 Ex fi ...tea � � � � 2 ]I[2•EL PAp - - -02 R 4'RCP r 1 I a -- a I tvUTE: PEI.i✓.E 6 Ir�diALL q5'- 24'RCP iPDM c0 Ai HILLS' ✓IEW iO I— IT ! E BEST of A 81 LUMINOUS T RAIL E 6E[T 1 � � xc s,onR s[wER c ci ox' COUNTY Rn w TH cF R _ RD ox 0 9x u - _ 1 r i ' 6t -cam - .. r y v .P w1 1 axl OvER E. JJ r _._ PAISE 6 "HYD LEAP OE - 1 6 T A II gUJOST M,0 �I T I tv PET i r G WALL 111 4 k a - 'N T' cP r A —. 1! F '� f / ; {� sP[c „ l I MH IISANI rB { !A 20 _ —TL Ifl— — ' �� q 10 81 REI 'd (SAR >'s EI s ff T 0 HARDA( S tL _i E i 6 o 64 HIEWALN /TF EA.,El1ENT PO 2N5 i E 3a t E EE RA , L •LEIS NCE. BiASELIE), E cam' xN[ /EL^ 0 NE < ' x Tu�E .1A �i'rAl I N xs , A01 OFE LL� �DI - / E C E 2 I,855RY 3 R eF'S 2103 i0 HEVI+ILC r, ,EHV:ES C CH 121630 - - n 9 of F / S l —L .C12 Wf O \ 50 WEST OF BASE LINE) 57 TH AVENUE NORTH ' 51/2, SEC 2, TWP IIB, RGE. 21_ o0 4s s � T c i TO 89925 I r I T. i.t 049.03 - - T.C. 948 60 TC 840 TO '04809 IL 69,G F F C 64,.6 TO 04628 iL :006 iC d I a OPTION I I 1 I PROPERTY I I I S TORM SEWE SAN A LINE I SEWER Z � I Q Z I C aG I 14' ( 0 PAVEMENT 1` PROPOSED REMOVAL 10 UTILITY � ( V 75 , ESMT. OPTION 2 I , I I n I SAN. L OPERTY ' SEWER N j SEWER V mr) Z b ( CaG �� t n 1 LJ Q V Z P1 L 19` tto I PAVMENT REMOVAL v I I ' Amount Change QE1 - Value of Option #1 $5,485.70 -0- Ig , Pavement Restoration Cost Based on Estimated Quantities , I4` QE2 - Value of Option #2 $1,927.00 $1,927.00 Add'l.Pavement Restoration Cost Based on Estimated Quantities QE2 Q EI QA2 - Value of Restoring $2,688.00 $2,688.00 O Additional Depth QA2 Based on Actual Quantities Total Restoration Cost $10,100.70 $4,615.00 T�iV s e� s8 -10- II. ITEM NO. 2 - DELETE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAIL This item deletes all of the trail items on Lilac Drive and 57th Avenue between the golf course and County Road 57. The work is being deleted because the type of slope protection we specified in the contract does not meet MnDOT design requirements, and we have been unable to negotiate an acceptable price for construction of an alternate type of slope protection which meets MnDOT requirements. I had submitted plans for slope paving along the exit ramp for northbound TH 100 at County Road 10 to MnDOT on March 22, 1988. The plans were then routed through MnDOT design sections for review. It is a four to six week process. I learned that the proposed slope protection did not meet MnDOT design requirements just prior to the schedule bid opening day. It was too late to incorporate any change in the contract. MnDOT also required slope adjustments that nearly doubled the amount of slope protection required. The bid price for the slope paving was $9,280. We considered two alternative types of slope protection, i.e.: 1. Reinforced concrete retaining wall 2. Landscape block retaining wall These alternative types were acceptable to MnDOT. We estimated the cost of these walls and then asked the contractor to give us proposed cost for the alternatives. Based on our inquiries, the landscape block retaining walls should be built for a much lower cost than the cost proposed by the contractor. The estimated and proposed cost is 0 summarized below: TABLE 2 SLOPE PROTECTION COST Type of Slope Estimated Contractor's Protection Cost Proposal Slope paving (as required by $9,280.50 Contract but unacceptable to MnDOT) Reinforced Concrete Wall $60,300.00 $54,600.00 Landscape Block Wall $21,000.00 $36,8,00.00 Because we cannot justify the cost for construction of a reinforced concrete retaining wall, because we were unable to obtain an acceptable proposal for construction of a landscape block retaining wall from this contractor, and because some additional complications have come to our attention (i.e. compliance with established trailway construction standards for safety, the need to incorporate landscaping into the project, etc.) we ordered the contractor to delete the entire Lilac Drive trail construction from the contract, in accordance with a provision of the contract which allowed the City to do so. The contract value of all the trail construction items which were deleted, based on this decision, is $37,637.80 (this includes the cost for grading, paving, landscaping, and slope protection - all at the unit prices originally included in the contract). It is our recommendation that completion of the trail be rescheduled for construction under a separate contract in 1989. -11- III. ITEM NO, 3 - SODDING WITH 4" TOPSOIL During development of construction plans and specifications, I inadvertently did not include a topsoil item with sodding. It was an oversight and should have been included. The Contractor has agreed to include topsoil at an additional cost of $0.50 per square yard. This amount is very reasonable and is below any bid price we have received for this item in the past three years. The total increase is $7,028.50. IV. SUMMARY Summarized below are the costs related to Supplemental Agreement No. 2: Summary of Changes Add /(Deduct) Item No, 1. Realign Storm Sewer $14,090.50 Item No. 2. Delete Bike /Pedestrian Trail ($37,637.80) Item No. 3. Add Sodding with 4" Topsoil $ 7,028.50 Net Change ($16,518.80) Funding The additional storm sewer costs and the sodding costs are eligible for reimbursement from the Regular State Aid Fund. The trail costs were being funded by the Local State Aid Fund. The change in financing is summarized below: MSA Accounts 2613 (State Approved Projects) $21,119.00 2611 (Local MSA Funds) ($37.637.80) Total ($16,518.80) Recommendation It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution pertaining to Supplemental Agreement No. 2 for the France and Logan Avenue Area Projects, Contract 1988 -H. i H R. pur ier -12- r CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meetin Date 10 -10 -88 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: Resolution Retaining a Consultant to Provide a Study of Planning and Land Use Issues Relating to Residential Facilities and to Amend the 1988 General Fund Budget DEPT. APPR Signature- title Di rector of anni ng and InspectiorL MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below/attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X In July the City Council directed the staff to seek Requests for Proposals (RFP) to provide consulting services for a study of planning and land use issues relating to residential facilities in Brooklyn Center. At the same time, the Council authorized Peter J. Patchin and Associates, Inc. to undertake a study, in an amount • not to exceed $12,300, of the probable market value impact of the proposed Bill Kelly House upon surrounding neighborhood properties. This particular study has already begun. t The staff has sent out the RFP's for the planning and land use issues study and has received two responses. One is a joint proposal submitted by Carroll, Franck and Associates (CFA) and Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. (DSU), and the other, a proposal submitted by Mr. Donn- R. Wiski on behalf of Resolution, Inc. (both proposals attached). The staff has reviewed the two proposals, both of which meet the scope of study and proposal contents which was requested. Also, both potential consultants seem to have the ability to complete the study within an acceptable period of time. The most significant difference is in the costs for the two studies. Resolution, Inc. has quoted a figure of $12,407 which includes meetings and technical expenses, while the CFA /DSU proposal is for $17,142 plus an estimated $686 for expenses. It is on the basis of the cost figures* proposed that the staff would recommend retaining Resolution, Inc. to provide a study of planning and land use issues relating to residential facilities in an amount not to exceed $12,500. There are two other items related to this study which are on the City Council's October 10, 1988 agenda. g One is a resolution extending the moratorium on the development of adult halfway houses, community based residential facilities and similar facilities and an ordinance extending Interim Ordinance No. 87 -16 which were adopted a little less than one year ago. The moratorium established by the O resolution and ordinance expires on October 26, 1987. It is also recommended that the Council adopt the necessary resolution and ordinance amendment which would extend the moratorium. It is the staff's recommendation that the moratorium be extended until April 30, 1989. ll�l Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RETAINING A CONSULTANT TO PROVIDE A STUDY OF PLANNING AND LAND USE ISSUES RELATING TO RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES AND TO AMEND THE 1988 GENERAL FUND BUDGET ---------------------------------------------------------------- WHEREAS, Section 7.09 of the City Charter of the City of Brooklyn Center does provide for a contingency appropriation as a part of the General Fund Budget, and further provides that the contingency appropriation may be transferred to any other appropriation by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center has authorized a study pertaining to the regulation of adult halfway houses, community based residential facilities and similar facilities and has established a moratorium to protect the ongoing planning process; and WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the staff to seek requests for proposals (RFP) to provide consulting services for a study of planning and land use issues relating to such facilities; and WHEREAS, two RFPs meeting the criteria established have been submitted, one a ,joint proposal submitted by Carroll, Franck and Associates (CFA) and Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. (DSU) and the other submitted by Resolution, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the two proposals and the recommendation of the staff and is prepared to approve a consultant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to retain the firm of Resolution, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $12,407 to provide consulting services for a study of planning and land use issues relating to residential facilities; and BE IT FURTHER 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: -------------------------------------------------------- Council Unit (No. 11) Professional Services (No. 4310) $12,500 Decrease the Appropriations for the following line items: -------------------------------------------------------- Unallocated Expenses (No. 80) Contingency (4995) $12,500 i RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. i CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 10/10/88 Agenda Item Number // e REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM EM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES DEPT. APPROVAL; * * * * * * * * * * * * *N * * W DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC * WORKS y * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached NO ) • The attached resolution represents the official council action required to expedite removal of the trees most recently marked by the city tree inspector in accordance with the procedures outlined therein. It is anticipated that this resolution will be submitted for council consideration each meeting during the summer and fall as new trees are marked. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the council adopt the attached resolution. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST 10/10/88) 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 CITY ORCHARD LA PK 467A EDWARD GIELCOWSKI 4506 WINCHESTER LA 467B CITY KYLAWN PARK 468 NW NATIONAL LIFE INS 2810 COUNTY RD 10 469 CITY TRAILWAY - SCP 470 NW NATIONAL LIFE INS 2810 COUNTY RD 10 471 EQ REAL ES /SHOP CTR SCP /CTY RD 10 472 EQ REAL EST /SHOP CTR SCP /CTY RD 10 473 EQ REAL EST /SHOP CTR SCP /CTY RD 10 474 EQ REAL EST /SHOP CTR SCP /CTY RD 10 475 EQ REAL EST /SHOR CTR SCP /CTY RD 10 476 EQ REAL EST /SHOP CTR SCP /CTY RD 10 477 CITY KYLAWN PARK 478 THOMAS ELLIOT 5214 EWING AVE N 479 CITY 7137 WILLOW LA 480 CITY 7137 WILLOW LA 481 CITY 7137 WILLOW LA 482 CITY 7137 WILLOW LA 483 CITY 7137 WILLOW LA 484 DAVID /CYNTHIA MARSH 5312 HOWE LA 485 DIANE DREW 6442 ORCHARD AVE N 486 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owners will receive a second written notice that will give them (5) business days in which to contest the determination of City Council by requesting a hearing in writing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. RESOLUTION NO. 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: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. .CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10/10/8 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING GIFT FROM BROOKLYN CENTER LIONS CLUB * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ********************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVA f Signatur - $itle Chi efdlice MANAGER'S R VI /RECOMMENDAT O No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached yes The Brooklyn Center Lions Club donated $1,515.00 for the purchase of an all- terrain vehicle. This ATV will be used by the police department O to patrol the city's trail system. It will also be useful in the winter months to patrol the island in Twin Lake which is inaccessible by squad car. RECOMMENDATION; To approve resolution accepting donation and authorizing purchase of .all- terrain vehicle. • /11c: Member introduced the following resolution and move its adoption: r RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING GIFT FROM THE BROOKLYN CENTER LIONS CLUB ----------------------------------- WHEREAS, THE BROOKLYN CENTER LIONS CLUB has presented the City a gift of one thousand five hundred and fifteen dollars ($1,515) and has designated that it be used to purchase a four wheel all- terrain vehicle for the Police Department to be used for patrolling the City's trail system; and WHEREAS, the City Council is appreciative of the gift and commends the Brooklyn Center Lions Club for its civic efforts: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to acknowledge the gift with gratitude; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the gift of $1,515 be appropriated to the Police Department Capital Outlay Budget to be used to purchase the vehicle. r --------------------- - - - - -- --------------------------------- 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. 9 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION SUPPORTING AMENDMENTS TO HR -2530 AND URGING WITHDRAWAL OF THE BILL FROM THE OMNIBUS PARKS BILL WHEREAS, the House of Representatives adopted HR -2530 which nationalizes control of certain lands adjacent to the Mississippi River for 80 miles in the Twin City area; and WHEREAS, HR -2530 transfers to the Secretary of Interior certain powers of zoning, development regulation, and condemnation in districts adjacent to the Mississippi River in a dimension to be determined by the Secretary of Interior; and WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has charged local and county governments with priority responsibility for development of these lands, and provided for Coordinated Planning and oversite by various State agencies and the Metropolitan Council; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan River Corridors Study Commission conducted a definitive study of river development issues as directed by Title IX, Public Law 96 -607, and identified the problems addressed in HR -2530, but specifically did not recommend a Federal preemption of State and Local authority; and WHEREAS, at all public hearings on the Bill, no objective evidence or data has been presented to demonstrate a "need" for Federal preemption of State and Local powers; and WHEREAS, on March 5, Senator Durenberger convened a meeting of more than 40 State, Regional, and Local government officials to consider local objections and to offer amendments which could accommodate conflicting views while leaving the central elements of HR -2530 intact. All municipal officials present opposed HR -2530 as adopted by the House and most or all supported it with the Durenberger Amendments. That includes cities such as Minneapolis, St. Paul, Fridley, and others. WHEREAS, on Monday, September 26, the House of Representatives voted to combine HR -2530 into an "Omnibus Parks Bill" without providing for the Durenberger Amendments which would make the legislation acceptable to those affected. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Brooklyn Center supports Amendments to HR -2530 proposed by Senator Durenburger and urges the Minnesota Congressional Delegation to withdraw HR -2530 from the Omnibus Parks Bill to more easily incorporate the Durenburger Amendments. RESOLUTION NO, Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meeting Date 10 -10 -88 Agenda Item Number REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ITEM DESCRIPTION: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1 REGARDING ANIMALS DEPT. APP OVAL: — WV4k&*" Personnel Coordinator S' nature - title MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached An ordinance amending Chapter 1 of the `City ordinances regarding animals will give the city manager an opportunity to waive certain fees in cases where an animal impounded by the city has not been claimed from the City's designated pound after the waiting period specified by City ordinance. The purpose of the amendment is to give residents the opportunity to adopt stray animals without having to pay all the costs normally incurred by an owner whose pet has been running at large. Please reference the attached memorandum and survey for further details. RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Approve for a first reading and set a public hearing date for An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1 Regarding Animals. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1988, at p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an Ordinance Amending Chapter 1 regarding animals. 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 1 REGARDING ANIMALS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 1 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 1 -117 REDEMPTION OF IMPOUNDED ANIMALS. Any animal may be redeemed from the pound by the owner upon payment of the following: 1. The license fee for the animal, if the license has not previously been obtained. 2. The late- license penalty, where a license has not been previously obtained. 3. The amount of the boarding fee which the City is required to pay the pound keeper. 4. An impounding penalty as set forth by City Council resolution. The city manager or the city manager's designee may waive the late license penalty and the impounding_ penalty in cases where the animal has not been claimed from the designated pound after five days in accordance with Section 1 -116 of this ordinance. 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.) MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator DATE: September 14, 1988 SUBJECT: Adoption Fees for Stray Animals On August 22, 1988, you received a request from Margaret Walsh, 935 -7859, to lower the adoption fees for impounded stray animals. Attached is a survey outlining adoption fees charged in other area municipalities, and below is a summary of this information. Please let me know if you want me to take any further action related to this. Summary Data The total adoption fees for each city does not include the costs for purchasing a license and obtaining rabies vaccinations for dogs. Most cities do require the adopter to pay these fees. Columbia Heights and Fridley charge the highest amount for adoption fees. Actually, these fees are paid not to the cities but to the Anoka County Humane Society. - Brooklyn Center, Richfield, and Golden Valley (sometimes) are the only cities included in the survey which do not waive the impound fee charged by each city. Most cities require adopters to pay only the pound room and board fees or to pay a separate adoption fee. Minnetonka is the only city with no adoption fees whatsoever. When queried. about the potential misuse of the adoption system (e.g., owners not admitting ownership so they do not have to pay the impound fee or adopters who try to resell animals at a more expensive price than the adoption costs) , most cities felt there has not been abuse of the system when impound fees are waived. One city noted most owners are unaware that the impound fee is waived for adopters. cc: Jim Lindsay SURVEY OF ADOPTION FEES FOR STRAY ANIMALS SEPTEMBER 1988 Maximum Room & Board Minimum Fees Impound (5 days) Fee Impound (If Charged Fee Charged for Waived Other Total for Impounded for Adoption Adoption City Adoptions) Animals p ) Adoptions. Fees Fees Comments Brooklyn Center $25.00 $25.00 NO - - - - -- $50.00 Brooklyn Park $23.75 $10.00 YES - - - - -- $23.75 Columbia Heights - - - - -- - - - - -- NA $67.70 $67.70 Humane society adoption fee for dogs Crystal $25.00 $25.00 YES - - - - -- $25.00 Edina $35.00 $25.00 YES - - - - -- $35.00 Fridley - - - - -- - - - - -- NA $67.70 $67.70 Humane society adoption fee for dogs Golden Valley $25.00 $18.00 SOMETIMES - - - - -- $43.00 Impound fee waived on case -by- -case basis Maple Grove - - - - -- $15.00 YES $25.00 $25.00 Minnetonka - - - - -- $25.00 YES - - - - -- $ 0.00 Adopter must pay license fee New Hope $23.75 $20.00 YES - - - - -- $23.75 Plymouth $25.00 $33.00 YES - - - - -- $25.00 Richfield $37.50 $ 5.00 NO - - - - -- $42.50 #binsdale $25.00 $10.00 YES ------- $25.00 Louis Park - - - - -- $20.00 YES $25.00 $25.00 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1a b Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1988 at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an Ordinance Extending Interim Ordinance No. 87 -16 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 Halfway Houses, Community Based Residential Facilities and Similar Uses in the City. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 - 514140 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE 140. ORDIIIA14CE EXTENDING INTERIM ORDINANCE NO. 87 -16 FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE PLANNING PROCESS AND THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND INELFARE OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, AND REGULATING AND RESTRICTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADULT HALFWAY HOUSES, COMMUNITY EASED RESIDENTIAL FACIL AND SI USES IN THE C ITY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Background 1.01 On October 26, 1987, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 87 -16 which placed a moratorium on the development of adult halfway houses, community based residential facilities and similar facilities in the City. 1.02 The moratorium was necessary to protect the planning process and the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the City and to ensure that the City and its residents retained the benefits of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances until a study of such facilities could be' completed and any necessary modifications to the City's zoning and land use regulations could be accomplished. 1.03 The moratorium imposed by Ordinance No. 87 -16 will expire on November 144, 1988. 1.0 The studies of _ such uses which have been undertaken by the City will not be completed by November 14, 1988. However, the justifications for the :moratorium recited in Ordinance No. 87 -16, continue and will continue to exist. Therefore, it is necessary to extend the moratorium as hereinafter provided. Section 2. Determination. 2.01. The moratorium imposed by Sections 2.01 and 2.02 of Ordinance No. 87 -16 are hereby extended and continued. 2.02 This ordinance shall remain in effect until or such earlier date as may be adopted by the City Council, provided that, if the study and planning process have not been completed by said date, this ordinance may be extended for such additional periods as deemed necessary by the City Council not to exceed an additional period of eighteen months from November, l9 permitted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 1 462.355, Subdivision 14 ORDINA14CE NO. Section 3. Applicability. This ordinance applies to only application for site plan approva rezoning s s , licenses, plattings or replattings, land divisions or consolidations, special use permits or building permits that have not received preliminary approval by the City Council before October 26, 1967. Section 4. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Mayor Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXTENDING MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT OF ADULT HALFWAY HOUSES, COMMUNITY BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES AND SIMILAR FACILITIES WHEREAS, on October 26, 1987, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 87- 201 which authorized a study pertaining to regulation of adult halfway houses, community based residential facilities and similar facilities and placing a moratorium on the development of such uses; and WHEREAS, the studies authorized by said Resolution are in progress but have not yet been completed; and WHEREAS, additional time is needed to complete said studies; and WHEREAS, the reasons for imposing a moratorium on such uses which existed at the time of the adoption of Resolution No. 87 -201 continue to exist. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center 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. The moratorium adopted on October 26, 1987, by Resolution No. 87 -201 on the development of adult halfway houses, residential facilities, community -based residential facilities, and community correctional facilities is hereby extended pending completion of the study authorized by said Resolution 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 , or such earlier date, as may be further 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. 2. 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 and 4 and Section 462.357, subd. 7 and 8. Date Mayor Clerk RESOLUTION NO. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. I i MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION SEPTEMBER 22, 1988 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman Pro tem Mike Nelson at 7:36 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Pro tem Mike Nelson, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Wallace Bernards, Bertil Johnson and Ellamae Sander. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, City Engineer Bo Spurrier and Recording Secretary Mary Lou Larsen. Chairman George Lucht and Commissioner Lowell Ainas were unable to attend this evening's meeting and were excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8,1988 There was a motion by Commissioner Johnson seconded by Commissioner Malecki to approve the minutes of the September 8, 1988 Planning Commission with a correction to the last paragraph on page 4 stating 50 minutes instead of 15 minutes. Voting in favor: Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Johnson and Sander. Voting against: none. Not voting: Chairman Pro tem Nelson as he did not attend that meeting. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 88017 (Ronald Schnoor) Following the Chairman Pro tem's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for special use permit approval to store and rent up to eight trucks at the Brooklyn Service Center located at 6901 Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary reviewed the stuff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 88017 attached). The Secretary stated a public hearing is required for this application, notices have been sent to surrounding property owners and the applicant is present to answer any questions the Commission may have. Chuck Rogers, attorney for the applicant, stated Mr. Schnoor has had a special use permit for trailer rental in the past and upon notification a special use permit is also required for the truck rental, is trying to comply with that request. Commissioner Sander asked if trucks offering the sale of fish and shrimp will continue to park there. The Secretary explained that those outdoor sales are allowed by an administrative land use permit and are temporary activities limited to a certain number of days and times per year. Commissioner Sander stated that the trucks are unsightly and make it difficult to get in and out of the station. Commissioner Bernards asked if the rental vehicles will be parked there all the time. Mr. Schnoor responded that most of the trucks are one -way rentals for out of town use and he has two trucks that will remain in town. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Pro tem Nelson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked if anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Robert Grosshans of 6920 Lee Avenue North expressed his concern of the traffic impact at the corner of the P P 9 -22 -88 -1- site when trucks are parked in that area as the traffic at 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard is very heavy. He also stated since the Post Office located in that area there is even more traffic. He suggested parking behind the building would be more appropriate. Commissioner Johnson stated his concern for visibility at the corner of 69th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary stated a recommendation has been made for the parking of no more than two trucks in the corner of the property. He noted that Brooklyn Boulevard intersects 69th Avenue North at an angle and that this intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. He added that he did not believe there were any visibility problems with respect to traffic on the public streets especially southbound Brooklyn Boulevard traffic seeing eastbound 69th traffic because of these factors. He pointed out that the staff's concern was visibility problems entering and exiting the site and thus the recommendation to prohibit truck parking closest to the access points. He stated the opinion that the best place to park the trucks would be southwesterly of the building. Mr. Grosshans stated parking spaces near Brooklyn Boulevard will cause a visibility problem and traffic congestion. The Secretary stated that these parking spaces are acknowledged, but not encouraged and also, that parking trucks north of the building would cause problems getting in and out of the site. Don Lowry of 6914 Lee Avenue North stated the Brooklyn Service Center abuts his property. He noted that some of the screening slats for the chain link fence installed by Mr. Schnoor have fallen off and also pea rock is filtering into his property. He stated he would like to see the fence repaired and also a condition stating that trucks are not allowed to idle for long periods of time when they are being warmed up in winter. The Secretary stated that it is the responsibility of the owner of the property to provide screening when a commercial property abuts residential property. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Pro tem Nelson then called for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sander to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Johnson and Sander. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Further discussion ensued regarding visibility and parking concerns. The Secretary stated that adding a fifth condition stating no parking is allowed at the corner of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard would be appropriate if the Planning Commission is convinced that such parking is a safety problem. He indicated that parking could be confined to the north of the building and the southwest corner of the property. Chuck Rogers stated there is a safety factor indicated if the yellow trucks are allowed to park at the corner of the site and also it is good advertising for his client. He noted that there is controlled traffic at the corner of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary stated that the Commission's concerns regarding visibility are justified, but the 50 ft. triangle requirement is not violated by parking trucks there. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 88017 (Ronald Schnoor) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Johnson to recommend approval of Application No. 88017 subject to the following conditions: 9 -22 -88 -2- I . Special use ermit approval of Application No. 01 su P PP PP 88 7 ercedes P approval of Application No. 68060. Both trucks and trailers may be stored and rented at the site. However, the total of both trucks and trailers shall not exceed eight (8) in number. 2. Parking of vehicles longer than 20' in length is prohibited in the spaces closest to the access drives serving the site and immediately north of the building. 3. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 4. Special use permit approval is for truck or trailer storage and rental. No other special use permits are approved by this action. 5. The property owner shall repair and maintain the screen fence along the residentially zoned property in an appropriate manner and provide the necessary maintenance to contain pea rock on the applicant's property. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Johnson and Sander. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NOS. 88015 AND 88016 (John Schulties and Shingle Creek Land Company) The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into two lots the vacant parcel of land at the southwest corner of Shingle Creek Parkway and Xerxes Avenue North. He stated there is a companion application (Application No. 88015), but would prefer to review the preliminary plat application first. The Secretary reviewed the staff reports (see Planning Commission Information Sheets for Application Nos. 88015 and 88016 attached). He noted there is a public hearing on the preliminary plat application, notices have been sent and the applicant is present to answer questions. Commissioner Bernards asked if the medical and dental uses are restricted because they increase parking ratio. The Secretary answered in the affirmative and that medical and dental uses require 1 space for every 150 sq. ft. of gross floor area in comparison to one space for 200 sq. ft. for regular office uses. Commissioner Bernards asked if there could be a condition added regarding lighting on the site. The Secretary responded that that would be an appropriate condition. Commissioner Bernards asked if this site was included in the Short-Elliott- Hendrickson traffic study. The Secretary stated that this area was not included in the study as it is on the fringe of the study. Commissioner Sander asked if the larger parcel would be subdivided again in the future. The Secretary stated that it is possible although the staff has seen a sketch for a proposed building utilizing the entire L- shaped parcel. Chairman Pro tem Nelson asked the applicant if he had anything to add. Al Beisner, developer for the site, stated he had nothing further to add. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 88016) Chairman Pro tem Nelson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. 9 -22 -88 -3- CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Johnson to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Johnson and Sander. Voting against: none. The motion passed. A brief discussion ensued relative to the site lighting proposed for the project. John Schulties, the builder for the project, stated that he would propose different lighting and that he agreed the proposed plan seems excessive. He explained he could place two or three lights on the building and one 20' pole at the north end of the site. The Secretary stated the concern is that the lights should not shine in such a manner to adversely affect the townhouse residents. Mr. Schulties stated lights could be placed on islands facing the north and west sides of the building to light the entrance and also, a night light could be installed in the entrance, neither would cause a glare for the townhouse residents. He added he would have the plan modified to indicate the proper lighting. Chairman Pro tem Nelson stated an added condition regarding lighting could be added. The Secretary agreed that the added condition could reflect that the lighting plan should be modified before issuance of permits. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 88016 (Shingle Creek Land Company Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sander to recommend approval of Application No. 88016, subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The preliminary plat shall be revised, prior to consideration by the City Council, to indicate a utility and drainage easement at the southeast corner of Lot 1 near Xerxes Avenue North for water and sewer service to Lot 2. 4. The owner of the property shall enter into a subdivision agreement prior to final plat approval to cover at least the following items: a) water hookup charges b) existing and pending special assessments c) necessary storm water detention facilities 5. The drainage plan for the plat shall be approved by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to final plat approval. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Nelson, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, Johnson and Sander. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 88015 (John Schulties) Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Malecki to approve Application No. 88015 subject to the following conditions: 9 -22 -88 -4- 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built serve of the property, Y p P Y, improvements and utility service lines, prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and Agreement for Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and Storm Drainage Systems. 11. The storm drainage system shall be approved by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to the issuance of permits. 12. Ponding areas required as a part of the storm drainage plan shall be protected by an approved easement. The easement document shall be executed and filed with Hennepin County prior to the issuance of permits. 13• Plan approval acknowledges general office occupancy of the building. No medical or dental clinics are to be allowed within the building since parking spaces provided do not comprehend this occupancy. 14. The grading and utility plan shall be revised prior to consideration by the City Council to indicate two hydrants to serve the site, one at the northeast corner of the site and one just to the east of the entrance drive. 15. The lighting plan shall be modified before issuance of permits for the project so that it is consistent with Section 35 -712 regarding light intensity and glare. 9 -22 -88 -5- ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Bernards seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjourn the meeting f the Planning la nin Commission. The g g motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at $:42 p.m. Chairman Pro tem 9 -22 -88 -6- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 88017 Applicant: Ronald Schnoor Location: 6901 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Special Use Permit The applicant requests special use permit approval to store and rent up to eight (8) trucks at the Brooklyn Service Center, 6901 Brooklyn Boulevard. The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded on the north by a nonconforming single - family home zoned Cl, on the east by Brooklyn Boulevard, on the south by 69th Avenue North and on the west by the Northwest Residence home for mentally ill adults. Truck rental and leasing is a special use in the C2 zoning district. This site was approved for trailer rental in 1968 under Application No. 68060. However, that approval did not include truck rental which is now being carried on at the site. The central question of this application is simply whether there is adequate available parking on site. The applicant has submitted a site plan without marked parking stalls. We have indicated on the plan the location of 23 possible parking stalls. The parking requirement for the establishment is three spaces per service bay (x 3 = 9), plus one space for each day shift employee (x 4 = 4), plus two for service vehicles for a total of 15 spaces. This leaves a surplus of eight spaces for truck storage. However, some of these parking spaces are marginal and should definitely not be used for storage of vehicles over 20' in length. These would include especially the outer two spaces at the southeast corner of the lot, spaces immediately north of the building, and spaces just inside the northerly entrance off Brooklyn Boulevard. The best location for truck storage would probably be at the southwest corner of the lot behind and to the southwest of the building. We see no conflicts with the standards contained in section 35 -220.2 (attached) presented by the storage and rental of up to eight (8) trucks. Accordingly, approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. Special use permit approval of Application No. 88017 supercedes approval of Application No. 68060. Both trucks and trailers may be stored and rented at the site. However, the total of both trucks and trailers shall not exceed eight (8) in number. 2. Parking of vehicles longer than 20' in length is prohibited in the spaces closest to the access drives serving the site and immediately north of the building. 3. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 4. Special use permit approval is for truck or trailer storage and rental. No other special use permits are approved by this action. 9 -22 -88 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 88016 Applicant: Shingle Creek Land Company Location: Southwest corner of Shingle Creek Parkway and Xerxes Avenue North Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to subdivide into two lots the vacant parcel of land at the southwest corner of Shingle Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard. The property in question is zoned Cl and is bounded on the northeast by Shingle Creek Parkway, on the southeast by Xerxes Avenue North, and on the southwest and west by Freeway Boulevard. The purpose of the subdivision is to divide off an approximate 1.2 acre parcel for development as a two - storey office site. The existing legal description of the property is Lot 1, Block 1, Earle Brown Farm Estates First Addition. The proposed legal description is simply Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Earle Brown Farm Estates Sixth Addition. (The second through fifth additions are successive phases of the Earle Brown Farm Estates townhouse development) . Lot 1 is the larger lot - 192,062 sq. ft. or 4.41 acres. Lot 2 is the smaller lot at the corner of Freeway Boulevard and Xerxes, 53,208 sq. ft. or 1.22 acres. Topography shows the high ground to be on Lot 1, basically along Shingle Creek Parkway. A low area exists along the southwest side of the site and will be partly used for storm water detention ponding. Since the underlying parcel is over 5 acres and is zoned commercial, the drainage plan for the plat must be approved by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to final plat approval and prior to the issuance of any building permits. We would recommend that the plat be filed prior to the issuance of permits, but it is not mandatory as there is no other development on the land as of yet. There is an existing drainage and utility easement over the southeasterly portion of Lot 2 to cover a storm sewer line that runs from a catch basin in Freeway Boulevard to a catch basin and 36" storm sewer line beneath Xerxes Avenue North. The water and sewer services to Lot 2 are presently planned to be extended through the southeast corner of Lot 1 (off Xerxes). A drainage and utility easement for these service lines should be dedicated- and shown on the preliminary plat. It is not presently shown, but can be added prior to consideration by the City Council. Altogether, the preliminary plat is generally in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The preliminary plat shall be revised, prior to consideration by the City Council, to indicate a utility and drainage easement at the southeast corner of Lot 1 near Xerxes Avenue North for water and sewer service to Lot 2. 4. The owner of the property shall enter into a subdivision agreement prior to final plat approval to cover at least the following items: 9 -22 -88 -1- Application No. 88016 continued ' a) water hookup charges b) existing and pending special assessments c) necessary storm water detention facilities 5. The drainage plan for the plat shall be approved by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to final plat approval. 9 -22 -88 -2- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 88015 Applicant: John Schulties Location: Freeway Boulevard and Xerxes Avenue North Request: Site and Building Plan The applicant requests site and building plan approval to construct a 14,000 sq. ft., two - storey office building at the northwest corner of Freeway Boulevard and Xerxes Avenue North. The property in question is zoned Cl and is bounded on the northeast and northwest by vacant Cl zoned land, on the southeast by Xerxes Avenue North, and on the southwest by Freeway Boulevard. The proposed building is to be located on a 1.2 acre parcel at the southeast corner of the larger b.6 acre vacant parcel in this area. (See Application No. 88016) . The main tenant of the building will be an insurance company. This is a permitted use in the Cl zoning district. Access /Parking The site would have a single 24' wide access off Freeway Boulevard approximately 135' west of Xerxes Avenue North. This access is preferred since Xerxes Avenue North in this area is classified as a major thoroughfare. The plan provides for 70 parking spaces which just meets the general office requirement of one space per 200 sq. ft. of gross floor area. This means that no medical or dental tenants may be allowed in the building since those uses require parking at one space per 150 sq. ft. of gross floor area. Two handicapped spaces are shown near the entrance at the southwest corner of the building. Landscaping The plan calls for 120 landscape points on a 1.2 acre parcel which meets the requirement of 100 points per acre for office developments. Five shade trees are proposed, three Summit Ash and two Rubrum Maples, located north and east of the building. Six Colorado Blue Spruce and two Scotch Pine are proposed, to be located at the north, east, and south corners of the site and to the east of the entrance drive. The plan calls for a variety of Junipers to be planted along the south and west sides of the building and in the Freeway Boulevard greenstrip. Thirteen (13) Japanese Spreading Yew are proposed in the Xerxes Avenue North greenstrip. Sod is indicated in all greenstrip areas and underground irrigation is noted on the plans. Grading /Drainage /Utilities The grading plan calls for all runoff to drain to the southwest corner of the site where a detention pond is to be located. The detention pond will continue across the west property line to serve the larger Cl lot to the west and north. The grading plan will have to be approved by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission at its October 13th meeting prior to the issuance of permits. The outlet to the detention pond will be within a baffled weir (a purification device) and will be connected to storm sewer in Freeway Boulevard, ultimately running to a storm sewer line in Xerxes Avenue North. Berming is indicated along Xerxes and the east portion of Freeway Boulevard. Water and sanitary services are proposed to be brought in through the neighboring vacant parcel to the north. Services are available from mains in Xerxes Avenue North. A utility easement will have to be filed with the plat of the property prior to the issuance of permits. The Fire Chief has recommended two hydrants serve the property, one at the northeast corner of the site and one near the entrance off Freeway Boulevard. Building The proposed building is two storeys, wood frame with brick veneer and a metal fascia panel around the top. Windows are fixed glass, mostly square, and evenly spaced on all four sides. The main entrance is at the southwest corner of the building. A second stairwell and exit is to be located at the northeast corner of the building. 9 -22 -88 -1- Application No. 88015 continued Lighting /Trash The site plan proposes five light poles in the parking lot, 30' high with 400 watt high pressure sodium luminaires. The lighting seems somewhat excessive for the area of the parking lot south of the building which is to be served by four of the poles. We would recommend going with perhaps two poles in the area or perhaps lowering the poles to approximatelly 20' in height. Light fixtures at the south end of the lot should have shields to prevent back lighting toward the residential development to the south. Under the Zoning Ordinance, the maximum illumination at the property line is 3 foot candles. A 6' x 10' dumpster enclosure is proposed on a concrete pad at the end of a turnaround in the northwest corner of the lot. Recommendation Altogether the plans appear to be generally 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 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 ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property, improvements and utility service lines, prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and Agreement for Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and Storm Drainage Systems. 11. The storm drainage system shall be approved by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission prior to the issuance of permits. 9 -22 -88 -2- Application pp No. 88015 continued 12. Ponding areas required as a part of the storm drainage plan shall be protected by an approved easement. The easement document shall be executed and filed with Hennepin County prior to the issuance of permits. 13. Plan approval acknowledges general office occupancy of the building. No medical or dental clinics are to be allowed within the building since parking spaces provided do not comprehend this occupancy. 14. The grading and utility plan shall be revised prior to consideration by the City Council to indicate two hydrants to serve the site, one at the northeast corner of the site and one just to the east of the entrance drive. l 9 -22 -88 -3- LLJ _- Z C� 27 + 26 435 < I APPLICATION NOS CITY 15 & 88016 M AINTENANCE / ` BUILDING 68TH W RD LANE lL Or - ----- 67TH OPEN SPACE Otis �� 69 4 ` Rp s � e �VD � 66TH AVE N. z AV E. - - N. OA k � F N ��' -__ CIVI =_ ER I Q ROAD RUNOFF: .411; a 1L USE CURVE 192 FROM TABLE C - 1 RUNOFF: RUNOFF = 1.24- USE CURVE 092 FROM TABLE C -1 VOLUME: RUNOFF - 1.24" I' 17,560 PT• VOLUME: 1.24" X - -- X 5.6 ACRES X ---- - - - - -- - 25,206.72 FT' 1' 12- ACRES 1.24" X --- X (242' X 220') = 5,501 rT- DISCHARGE: 12" 25,206.72 FT' 1 H DISCHARGE: A - ------- - - - --- X -------- • 1.16 CF9 5,501 FT' 1 HR 6 HOURS 3600 SEC --------- X -- - - - - -- . 0.25 CFS 6 HOURS 3600 SEC 1.16 CFS = 8" 1 0.9% SLOPE " 3.75 FPS _ __..,_ --- - --- .___._.__...__._ / l0 1 h C , It � co I 1 1 1 01 V6 Go V, t I 1 � I1 I � a REMOVE 8 REF SIDEWALK CON 1 16' -8" PVC SDR 35 at 4% ? TO MSTING $E. i' -1 ^= ' " CLEAN -OUT E ( ' FIELD VERIFY L 8 .. " � -,. SEE { D TAIL � __ ., r• - �, ... -. ,- .I�.- Ja �f� S ✓V YV � B WYE EXIS . 8 VCP I _ - 220. D0._.._ a ..._ , 4� �3 -6 "45 BENDS t t) !E�isr. e" SIP - 849Q e I /N - . � N I - _3`DROP CUR 8" PV 0. 1 `. 1 i� REDUCER 9tia I 8480 ti 49.0 y, I �� t5-6" S ! SEE ARCH. PLAN 1 UTILITY ROOM LOCATION c� FINISHED c ! � FLOOR , 848.5 !� 1 I EL. 849.5 ' •` I m ti s4s.7 t o CURB RAMP SEE DETAIL I !/ 3` DROP C B u o ,848.5, n 6� 75 849.0 F ` Y L 8478 9472 00 OD . Nl 00 co d� '•V,` my � i vbn �' a cc. I 1 _BITUMINOUS SPILL AY SEE DETAIL \ ' 1 10 1 \ 46.3 '11 84 '° 5 853 84 465 i o \ BITUMINOUS SPIF�YAY - - _ X846.6 / .SEE DETAIL. �` CONNECT TO l , r9 7 847 ADJACENT POND -_ N H.W. B _ - _ 846.0 ,�� 8 3 I.0 — "- 842 BAFFLED WEIR nag SILT FENCE ` `� SEE DETAIL SEE Derau 944 sal ''— _L s -� 46.8 !O -8 8_ - ZPL 01 - !8`-12 "RAP ewmy x � _ ra, `� FR Y EEWA • BO . U LEVARD,. N E5 - 00 ' W 5 \ 6'x IO' CGNC. PAD FOR DUMFSTER ENCLOSURE N � I � - -_ loo I ' 5 W 2 STORY BUILDING f r a I W Y'. 0 0 W 92' 1 Q Q N - O i w N o w a...: N �, N o v W I �� Q _ IWI j� I Q, N OI O I Z I I9.5' 1 9.5 2 v' -- 4 1 I IB 2 9 W I o w I - w 2 � I Ix 400 W, HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM u FIXTURE ATOP 30' - 5 "S0. STEEL s LIGHT POLE (Typ) a � � z F- I w 24 N - -- --- 220. 00 - --- - - -� 6S FREEWAY BOULEVARD it vner and Developer jingle Creek Land Company C Drive Bi e N o. GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEE' 0100 Summit ivo. Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Tel 560 -6829 i 0 50 100 200 300 �\ BEARINGS ARE BASED ON AN ASSUP, \�\ Denotes Iron Monument y Noes: Tafa / A-ea o /I P/a ?45,,27,9 0 o 2. ZonJny /s C'1 J. Ufi/ify rn1�ormafi4n From fhe eil 4. Min /inaIn bu / %di h9 sef an S'h•n m%nJ'.naS sel�ach %s PS feef. r '• 9 B _ :: t ! , ?`y \ � 1 \ \ �^�'�• art \� b1 •' "::: ' J `�,, � �` ` 92,4 � `•`.�:, \\ � "'N� d � � \ .., — �. .♦ , ?: ' a \ , •\ � � � `. a tea• 'PrSa b : \ •:� -B¢ I Q 3 \ . \ � � \ \� � ,/ rb ° fib - v.♦ � .� w�. e - g --L 0 C K e 4 �•il --\ -,� .. .P / 1 lo `vI gk A ;/° 9 ie r L JS M 1- fit t ..... ..�..... . r _. .... .. i' __� e+i. ,. '�( `�'�.hfaf. / // FTt ,off �'f 0 '(I11. ... ii .. .. + %. ¢F SCIP RECEV Des c. R / P T /O%V% ' Q /ock I EARLE BROWV FARM • "ES F /RJ T qDD / T /D/V J accord %n9 rCCOro/ plat AcreoP f/enoepin •� - / CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10 Agenda Item Number / G& REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: DISCUSSION ITEM - REHABILITATION WORK ON WELL NO. 8 *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: * * * * * * * ** Y KNAPP� D *R * ** �P *OF PUBLIC WORKS * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes Explanation ® For the fourth time in four years an operational problem has developed at Well No. 8 (located at Camden Avenue and Woodbine Lane) which requires that special rehabilitation work be done in order to assure that this well can serve its function properly. I A copy of the City Engineer's report, detailing the history of this well, and describing the proposed rehabilitation procedures is attached. As noted, this work is being separated into two phases. The first phase is intended to explore and test our current diagnosis as to confirm what's happening at this well, then to stabilize the existing conditions so as to prevent additional collapsing of the well cavity. This first phase is already underway and is being done on an emergency basis, under a time and materials contract. The estimated cost for this first phase is $9600. If the work completed in Phase I confirms our current diagnosis of existing conditions, competitive proposals for Phase II work will be obtained. It is currently estimated that the cost of Phase II work will be less than $15,000. If, however, the work completed during Phase I leads us to a different diagnosis of the problem, Phase II work will be adjusted accordingly, and it may become necessary to prepare plans and specifications and follow established procedures for competitive bidding - if the estimated costs exceed $15,000. City Council Action Required • This matter is submitted as a discussion item, for the information of the City Council. No formal action is required at the 10/10/88 meeting. It is anticipated that the City Council will be asked to approve a resolution covering both Phase I work and Phase II work at their 10/24/88 meeting. TO: Sy Knapp Director of Public Works FROM: H. R. Spurrier ; City Engineer DATE: October 6, 1988 RE: Emergency Repairs to Well No. 8 (Located at Camden Avenue and Woodbine Lane) Repairs to Well No. 8 are again needed as a result of a reoccurring problem with blockage of the water producing aquifer at Well No. 8. A history of these problems is detailed below. 1977 - Well No. 8 is constructed and placed in service. Exhibit 1 illustrates the normal conditions expected at this well and at other wells when they are developed. (Total Cost $244,619.51) March, 1979 - The quarterly inspection of the well revealed deterioration of the side walls of the "open hole ". A restriction had blocked 40 percent of the well capacity. A contract to remove the restriction was authorized, the restriction was removed and the well was returned to service in August, 1979. (Total Cost $20,955.70) January, 1985 - During the scheduled reconditioning (e.g. every 6 -7 years, the pump is removed and the pump and well get a complete overhaul) an obstruction was found in the "open hole" of the well, blocking the bottom of the hole resulting in a potential loss of capacity and a danger of pumping sand. Under Improvement Project No. 1985 -01, the obstruction was removed and the well was returned to service in May, 1985. (Total Cost $18,501.25) June, 1987 - During the quarterly inspection of the well, another obstruction (see Exhibit discovered in approximately - the same position as the 1985 blockage. We concluded that it was the same ledge that had obstructed the "open hole" in 1985. Under Improvement Project No. 1987 -17, emergency repairs were made, removing what appeared to be the ledge, and the well was returned to service in August, 1987. (Total Cost $16,322) January, 1988 - The pumping capacity of Well No. 8 dropped substantially. The pump was removed and inspected. The pump was damaged. It appeared to be damage caused by pumping sand. The pump could not be reconditioned. At this time the "open hole" was filled in to the 287 foot level. No work removing sand was needed. Accordingly, the pump was replaced and reinstalled. The well was returned to service in June, 1988. (Total Cost $4,949.00) August, 1988 - The quarterly inspection on August 4, 1988, found an obstruction at the 244 foot level, approximately three to four feet below the end of the casing. The well was monitored for sand and remained available for stand -by service until September 26, when the well was taken out of service. The pump was removed and the well was televised on October 3, 1988. The T.V. camera revealed an obstruction that filled the well to the 244 foot level. On the basis of our current televised observations, we now believe that the 1985 and 1987 obstructions were fragments which dropped from the ceiling of a cavity around the casing (see Exhibit 3) rather than the "moving ledge" which we previously believed to be the obstruction. From available evidence, it appears that those fragments had dropped to a point in the "open hole" where the diameter of the "open hole" narrowed (i.e. the 256 foot level). Today the fragments have apparently filled the "open hole" to the 247 foot level. Based on the appearance of these fragments, they have come from the ceiling of a cavity around the casing pipe (see Exhibit 3). We asked Charles Alberg, Layne Minnesota, (the well drilling company used by the City in 1985 and the company which conducted our current T.V. inspection of the well) how to prevent the fragments from dropping into the "open hole ". Mr. Alberg recommended sealing the area by pumping grout into the void at the base of the casing pipe and creating a bridge that would keep fragments from dropping into the "open hole" (see Exhibits 4 & 5). Accordingly, we have separated the repair into two phases. The first phase would consist of the following work and is intended to corroborate our current diagnosis before proceeding with Phase II work. PHASE I Install Grouted Seal and Support 1. The obstruction will be drilled to confirm that the entire "open hole" is filled with sand so the grouting operation does not plug the water bearing aquifer. 2. A grouting pipe will be installed and sealed in the casing. 3. The casing will be pressure grouted to support the ceiling of the chamber around the casing. This "Phase I" work (see Exhibit 4) is being performed on an emergency time and material basis. It is estimated to involve approximately eight working days at $950 per day ($7600) and the material (the cement grout) is estimated to cost approximately $2000. The total cost is estimated at $9600. After the Phase I work detailed above has been completed, we would prepare proposals for Phase II work (see Exhibit 5). At this point we believe the Phase II work will consist of the following: PHASE II Drill Seal and Clean "Open Hole" 1. The grout seal would be drilled through to the top of the obstruction at the 246 foot level. 2. The obstruction would the o the bottom n be drilled and bailed out t tom of the well at the 316 foot level. 3. The well would be test pumped to verify its rated capacity. 4. The pump would be reinstalled and the well would be returned to service. There is no absolute guarantee that the proposed repair will completely correct all of these problems. We are satisfied that it is the best way to prevent rock fragments from filling and blocking the "open hole ". Therefore, we are proceeding with the Phase I work as outlined above, and expect that this work will be completed by approximately October 15, 1988. If after completion of the Phase I work our current diagnosis remains essentially the same as it is now, we should be able to obtain proposals for Phase II work and to submit those proposals to the City Council for their consideration at the October 24 meeting. We now estimate that the Phase II work would cost less than $15,000.00. The work done during Phase I may lead to a different diagnosis of the problem, which is why we have separated the work into two phases. If we must take some other measures, we will outline the work required at the October 24, 1988 meeting. While these costs are substantial, they are small in comparison to the cost of a new well (estimated at $650,000). We believe we have identified the source of the problem experienced at Well No. 8 and we believe that the chances of success are substantially greater than 95 percent. / /V o Walls o o ' Pell hoie ca:l ha (/f'- a r^Gt�? cf c , as ICV'�e- /rz We /1/0, Sahc/ s�o�e ShQ EXHIBIT 1 Al 0-- ta3 Sk�f �L'',v;'�'?r.<�S -r�t4 whaf tr ✓� �ul�v� G�r"ZC /��.�ii'• %fir`. ~ +'�Q..• 227 I 1 t { .J ✓ J � r l l Sands�ror�e. 1 31/ EXHIBIT 2 ki'f Ou�� I EX/ --ld7 CDNL/ T /D/% CQSi� Li.�- eesfDhe Z27 C�i /ih o� ca vit y z5� San ds�� e 0r0e ;_ hole- is �'/, 3l� Sha /e. 3l� EXHIBIT 3 eAl at39 CQSin Lin- �es-fohe �'� . Z 27 sr�r� i Vc!d 4,!�! t eev? ccl sir y s n5P ? d� hod is - is d 5a�ds he wi,/h so od . � 3(( 31/ Spa /e. EXHIBIT 4 eAl :� � t �•�s� 2 CQS /.�4 Lin^esfohe Z27 f p�-o - / eval _ she s and Sri l/ noie ©uf 54l"� ci Y70 YoGK -�j- a 4rne�� fs . 31� SLicz /� 3/� EXHIBIT 5 rll �ta� CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Councii Meeting Date 10 -10 -88 Agenda Item Numbe REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION • ITEM DESCRIPTION: Special Consideration of Rental Dwelling License for 6525, 6527 and 6529 North Willow Lane DEPT. APP Signature - title Director of P1 anni ng and Inspecti o MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X On September 23, 1988 I sent a certified letter (attached) to Mr. Irwin Ketroser, the owner of the apartment complex addressed as 6525, 6527 and 6529 North Willow Lane notifying him of my intention to recommend to the City Council that the renewal of his rental dwelling license be denied. The notice stated the basis for the recommendation and informed Mr. Ketroser of his right to appear before the City Council in support of his application. t . The reason for the letter and the intended recommendation for denial was the reports I had received from the Building Official and Building Inspector and a complaint from a neighboring property owner about the lack of maintenance at the complex; a three -page compliance order dated September 20, 1988 indicating a number of violations at the complex based'on a September 9, 1988 inspection of the property including the fact that a unit had been posted as "Unfit for Human Habitation;" reports from the inspectors that some of the units and the common areas have failed to meet the minimum housing quality standards for the Section 8 Rent Assistance Program; and that compliance with correction orders had become sporadic and slow. (See attached copy of the compliance order and also, a memorandum from the Building Official) Mr. Ketroser was informed that .absent a commitment on his part and a concerted effort to better maintain the complex, that a recommendation to deny the renewal of the license would be made. Mr. Ketroser contacted me immediately upon receipt of the letter and explained that he has had some personal problems over the past year which have diverted his proper attention from the maintenance and operation of the complex. He said he realized that he had some problems there and that he intended to address them immediately. He informed me that he had retained an individual that was capable of making the necessary repairs and that he would authorize the payments for necessary • maintenance items. He noted he would be meeting with his maintenance person on the property to discuss those matters and then he wanted to meet with me and the Building .Official to assure us that these matters would be properly taken care of. Ketroser Summary Explanation continued • noted that he had owned this complex for some time and that he has never had an major P Y J or maintenance problems that were not addressed (Note: It is true that overall maintenance at the complex since the adoption of the Housing and Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance and the licensing provisions in 1975, has been acceptable and that the problems we have been experiencing have been within the past year or so). The Building Official, the Building Inspector and myself met with Mr. Ketroser and his maintenance person on Tuesday, October 4, 1988 to discuss a schedule for repairs. Mr. Ketroser has also submitted a letter dated October 4, 1988 (attached) in which he noted that they are in the process of making repairs and improvements and that he will continue to do so until the various items are completed. He also requested, based on this commitment, a favorable recommendation to the City Council regarding the renewal of his rental dwelling license. He would also agree to a review of the license within one year, rather than the two years provided for in the ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the commitments made by the building owner and discussions I have had with the Building Official, I would recommend that the City Council approve Mr. Ketroser's rental dwelling license renewal to operate the rental dwelling at 6525, 6527, and 6529 North Willow Lane conditioned on the reinspection of the property within one year of the date of this renewal and a report to the City Council on the status of the property at that time. • i CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY _ of BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 BROOKLYN TELEPHONE 561 -5440 6,C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 September 23, 1988 Irwin Ketroser 700 Midland Bank Building Minneapolis, MN 55401 Re: Notice of City Council Consideration to Deny the Renewal of the Rental Dwelling License for 6525, 6527, 6529 North Willow Lane Dear Mr. Ketroser: Under separate cover you have been sent a Housing Maintenance Compliance Order relating to a number of maintenance items and ordinance violations that the Building Official and Building Inspector noted during the required inspection of the property you own at 6525, 6527, and 6529 North Willow Lane in Brooklyn Center. Compliance with that order shall be in accordance with the dates outlined. The inspection noted was performed for the renewal of your rental dwelling license for the above mentioned property on September 9, 1988. Your rental dwelling license expired on July 31, 1988 and you have been operating without a rental dwelling license since that time. The reason for the delay in considering the renewal of the license was your failure to apply for the license and to pay the required license fee in accordance with the time limit provided for in City Ordinances. I have had the opportunity to discuss with the Building Official and the Building Inspector the above noted compliance order and the maintenance of the buildings and grounds in regard to the City's Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. They have conveyed to me a number of concerns such as those matters listed in the compliance order and the fact that the overall maintenance at the complex has been lacking for some time. It seems that recent inspections for the Section 8 Rent Assistance Program at your complex have led to the inspectors notifying program representatives that your complex and /or particular units in your complex have failed to meet the minimum housing quality standards of that program. Correction of these housing quality standard deficiencies and corrections relating to compliance orders issued by the City have been sporadic and slow. The Building Official recently had to post a unit as being "Unfit for Human Habitation" pending repair of certain health and safety matters. •`.M1i Irwin Ketroser Page 2 September 23, 1988 Section 23 -003 of the City Ordinances (attached) requires me to review rental license applications, including applications for renewals, and to assure to the City Council that all ordinance requirements have been complied with and to recommend approval or disapproval of the license. Furthermore, Section 12 -905 of the City Ordinances (attached) states that "no operating license shall be issued or renewed unless the rental dwelling and its premises conform to the ordinances of Brooklyn Center and the laws of the State of Minnesota." Obviously, as evidenced by the compliance order and the concerns expressed by the Building Official and the Building Inspector regarding the questionable maintenance being performed at the complex, a very serious question is raised as to whether or not I should recommend approval of your rental dwelling license without some assurance and commitment on your part that you are willing and able to maintain the apartment complex consistent with the City's Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. Absent such a commitment, I will be compelled to recommend denial of the renewal of your rental dwelling license and seek the suspension thereof. In that regard please be advised, and let this serve as notice to you that I intend to recommend disapproval of your application for a rental dwelling license to operate the rental dwellings at 6525, 6527, and 6529 North Willow Lane and that this matter will be before the City Council for their consideration on Monday, October 10, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. , or as soon thereafter as the City Council's agenda will permit. The Council will hear this matter in the City Council's Chambers located at 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway. You have the right to appear before the Council in support of your application. The decision to confirm or deny your rental license renewal lies with the City Council. Please be further advised that if the Council suspends your rental dwelling license that it shall be unlawful for you, or your duly authorized agent, to thereafter permit any new occupancies of vacant or thereafter vacated rental units until such time as a valid operating license may be restored by the City Council. If you have any questions or comments regarding the above, or care to discuss this matter prior to the City Council's consideration, please contact me. Sincerely, Ronald A. Warren Director of Planning and Inspection RAW:mll Enclosures cc: Gerald G. Splinter ,.City Manager Charlie LeFevere, City Attorney Clayton Larson, Building Official Section 12 -901. LICENSING OF RENTAL UNITS. From and after June 1, 1975 no person shall operate a rental dwelling without first having obtained a license to do so from the City of Brooklyn Center as hereinafter provided. After expiration of an initial licensing period of less than two years as determined by the Compliance Official, each such operating license shall be issued biennially and shall expire on the anniversary date of issuance. License renewals shall be filed at least 60 days prior to license expiration date. Section 12 -902. LICENSE FEES. License fees, as set forth by City Council resolution, shall be due 60 days prior to the license expiration date; in the cases of new unlicensed dwellings, license fees shall be due upon issuance of the certificate of occupancy; in the cases of licensing periods of less than two years, license fees shall be prorated monthly: A delinquency penalty of 5% of the license fee for each day of operation without a valid license shall be charged operators of rental dwellings. Once issued a license is nontransferable and the licensee shall not be entitled to a refund of any license fee upon revocation or suspension; however, the licensee shall be entitled to a license fee refund, prorated monthly, upon proof of transfer of legal control or ownership. Section 12 -903. OWNER OR AGENT TO APPLY. License application or renewal shall be made by the owner of rental units or his legally constituted agent. Application forms may be acquired from and subsequently filed with the Compliance Official. The applicant shall supply: I. Name, address, and telephone number of dwelling owner, owning partners if a partnership, corporate officers if a corporation; 2. Name, address, and telephone number of designated resident agent, if any; ' I 3• Name, address, and telephone number of vendee, if the dwelling is being sold through a contract for deed; 4. Legal address -of the dwelling; 5. Number of dwelling units within the dwelling; 6. Description of procedure through which tenant inquiries and complaints are to be processed. Every person holding an operating license shall give notice in writing to the Compliance Official within five business days after any change of this information. Notice of transfer of ownership shall be as described in Section 12- 908. Section 12 -904. RESIDENT AGENT REQUIRED. No operating license shall be issued or renewed for a nonresident owner of rental dwelling units (one who does not reside in any of the following ,Minnesota counties: Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Scott, or Washington) unless such owner designates in writing to the Compliance Official the name of his resident agent (one who does reside in any of the foll Owing Minnesota counties: Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Scott, or Washington) who is responsible for maintenance and upkeep and who is legally constituted and emnowered to receive service of notice of violation of the provisions of the City Ordinances, to receive orders and to institute remedial action to effect such orders and to accept all service or process pursuant to law. Tae Compliance Official shall be notified in writing of any change of resident agent. Section 12 -905. CC'FORMANCE TO LAWS. No operating license shall be issued or ren unless the rental dwelling and its premises conform to the ordinances of arooklyn Center and the laws of the State of Minnesota. Section 12- 2 .Do. IN SPEUTION CONDITION. No operating license .shall be issued or re: e. E:.niess t:ie owner of rental units agrees in his application to permit ir�sgActions pursuant to Section 12 -1001. Se^txon 12 -907. POSTING OF LICENSE. Every licensee of a multiple dwelling shall cause to be conspicuously posted in the main entry way or other conspicuous location therein the current license for the respective multiple dwelling. Section 12-903. LICENSE NOT TRANSFERABLR. No operating license shall be transferable to another person or to another rental dwelling. Every person holding an operating license shall give notice in writing to the Compliance Official within five business days after h9vinq legally transferred or otherwise disposed of the legal control of any licensed rental dwelling. Such notice shall include the name a.'id address of the person succeeding to the ownership or control of such rental dwelling or dwellings. Section 12 - 909. OCQ70PANCY REGISTER REQUIRED. Every owner of a licensed rental dwelling containilng three or more dwelling units shall keep, or cause to be kept, a current register of occupancy for each dwelling unit which provides the following i:iformation: 1. Dwelling u.-.sit address; 2. Ilumber of bedrooms in dwelling unit; 3. Names of adult occupants and number of adults and children (under 18 years of ag currently occupying the dwelling units; 4. Dates renters occupied and vacated dwelling units; 5. A chronological list of complaints and requests for repair by dwelling unit occupants, which complaints and requests are related to the provisions of this ordinance; and 5. A similar chronological list of all corrections made in response to such requests and complaints. 12 =909 1 Such register shall be made available for viewing or copying by the Compliance Official at all reasonable times. Section 12 -910. LICENSE SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION. Every operating license issued under the provisions of this ordinance is subject to suspension or revocation by the City Council should the licensed owner or his duly authorized resident agent fail to operate or maintain licensed rental dwellings and units therein consistent with the provisions of the ordinance of the City of Brooklyn Center and the laws of the State of Minnesota. In the event that an operating license is suspended or revoked by the City Council for just cause, it shall be unlawful for the owner or his duly authorized agent to thereafter permit any new occupancies of vacant or thereafter vacated rental units until .such time as a valid operating license ray be restored by the City Council. Any person violating this provision shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not more than seven hundred dollars ($700) or by imprisonment not to Exceed ninety (90) days or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Each day of each ViolatiGn shall constitute a separate punishable offense. Sect=M 1 +003. EEFOPCEMENT AND INSPECTION AUTHORITY. The City Manager and his desigr ated agents shall be the Compliance Official who shall administer and enforce the provisions of this ordinance and who is hereby authorized to cause inspections or, a sereculed basis for rental units, or otherwise when reason exists to believe that a violaticn of this ordinance has been or is being committed. Inspectior:s shall he conducted during reasonable daylight hours and the Compliance Official shall present evidence of official capacity to the occupant in charge of a respective dwelling unit. Secticn 12 -1002. INSPECTION ACCESS. Any owner, occupant, or other person, Zn ci:arge of a dwelling or dwelling unit may refuse to permit free access and entry to the Structure or premises under his control for inspection pursuant to this ordinance, whereupon the Compliance Official may seek a court order authorizing such inspection. t t Section 12 -1101. UNFIT FOR HUMAN HABITATION. 1. Any dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit which is damaged, decayed, dilapidated ,`insanitary, unsafe, vermin or rodent infested, or which lacks provision for basic illumination, ventilation or sanitary facilities to the extent that the defects create a hazard to the health, safety or welfare of the occupants or of the public may be declared unfit for human habitation. Whenever any dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit has been declared unfit for human habitation, the Compliance Official shall order same vacated within a reasonable time and shall post a placard on same indicating that it is unfit for human habitation, and any operating license previously issued for such dwelling shall be revoked. 2. It shall be unlawful for such dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit to be used for human habitation until the defective conditions have been corrected and written approval has been issued by the Compliance Official. It shall be unlawful for any person to deface or remove the declaration placard from any such dwelling, dwelling unit or rooming unit. I r r CHAPTER 23 - GENERAL LICENSING REGULATIONS Section 23 -001 APPLICABILITY. The provisions of these sections shall apply to the application for any issuance and revocation of licenses in the City except as may otherwise be specifically provided in the ordinances pertaining to particular licenses. Section 23 -002 APPLICATION FOR LICENSES. Application for licenses shall be made in writing to the Clerk for presentation to the Council. Such applications shall specify the following: a. Name and residence of the applicant(s) and if a corporation, the registered office thereof. b. The name and address of the location or place of business or activity for which the license is requested, or in the case of occupational licenses, the location from which the applicant operates. C. Such additional information or documents as the ordinance or administrative regulations may require from the applicant. Section 23 -003 REVIEW PRIOR TO COUNCIL ACTIONS. Prior to submitting the application to the Council for approval, the Clerk shall submit the application to the appropriate municipal officer for review and comment. Said official shall issue that all ordinance requirements have been complied with, and shall furnish the Council with such additional information as may be deemed appropriate or as requested. In addition, the officer shall recommend approval or disapproval of the application, and shall when recommending disapproval, furnish the Council in writing �is reasons therefor. Section 23 -004. NOTICE TO APPLICANT. In the event disapproval of an application is recommended or in the event the Council disapproves or materiall qualifies the license, the Clerk shall notify the applicant of: y a. The nature of the recommendation or action. b. The time and place at which the Council will next consider application. C. The applicant's right to appear before the Council in support of the application. Section 23 -005. COUNCIL ACTION. The application shall be submitted to the Council for consideration within a reasonable period following submission to the Clerk. Section 23 -006 SUSPENSION: REVOCATION. The Council may suspend or revoke any license issued pursuant to the ordinances if the Council finds that any of the following ever occur; provided, however, that the licensee shall be given notice of the proposed revocation or suspension and be provided an opportunity to appear before the Council and be heard: 1. That the licensee has knowingly made false statements in or regarding his application. 1 . 23 -006 2. That the licensee or his agents have violated or failed to comply with ordinance provisions, statutes, or legal directives pertaining to the regulation of activities authorized by the license. 3. That the licensee has failed to correct or remove, within a reasonable period, ordinance violations after receipt of notice to do so. 4. That the continued effectiveness of the license constitutes a substantial threat to the public peace, health, safety or welfare. Section 23 -007 ISSUANCE. Upon approval of the application by the Council, the Clerk shall issue a license to the applicant, stating thereon the name and address of the remises and the activity licensed The applicant shall so display the license so as to be easily y public, or as required by the specific ordinances requiring the license. I Section 23 -008 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY REQUIRED. When a Certificate of Occupancy is required by Chapter 3 of the Ordinances for the conduct of activities for which a municipal license is required, the required license shall not be valid until said Certificate has been issued by the Building Inspector. Section 23 -009 LICENSES - NONTRANSFERABLE, NO REFUND. Unless otherwise provided by the ordinance requiring a license, a license is nontransferable, and the licensee shall not be entitled to a refund of any license fee upon revocation or voluntarily ceasing to carry on the licensed activity. However, in the event of Council denial of the application, the fee shall be refunded. Section 23 -010• LICENSE FEES. The fees for the various licenses sha11 be as set forth by City Council resolution. Section 23 -011 FEES PRORATED. Except for intoxicating liquor the fee for initial licenses granted after the expiration date, set forth by City Council resolution, shall be prorated on a monthly basis, with the fee required being in the same proportion to the annual fee as the unexpired term of the license stands to the full license period, but in no instance shall the prorated fee be less than $5. Section 23 -012 LATE FEES. 23- 012.01. All licenses shall be renewed annually prior to the expiration date set forth by City Council resolution. In the event the applicant fails to renew his license before it expires, a fee of 15 percent of the annual license fee for each week or portion thereof that the renewal is overdue shall be added to the license fee, to a maximum of 45 percent of the annual fee; provided, however, that the penalty clause shall not apply to construction licenses. 23- 012.02. If an application for license renewal is not submitted within 21 days after expiration of the current license, the licensee shall cease the previously licensed activity. Continued activity after the 21 day period shall be an ordinance violation, and upon conviction thereof, shall be punishable by a fine of not more than seven hundred dollars ($700) or imprisonment not to exceed ninety (90) days or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Each day of such activity shall constitute a separate ordinance violation. - .CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 -2199 Department of Planning and Inspection (612) 56 1 -5440 HOUSING MAINTENANCE COMPLIANCE ORDER DATE: September 20, 1988 COMPLIANCE DATE: AS NOTED BELOW TO: Irwin Ketroser cc: Denise Kelsey 700 Midland Bank Bldg. 6529 Willow Lane Mpls., MN 55401 Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 LOCATION: 6525, 6527, 6529 North willow Lane FIRST NOTICE xx SECOND NOTICE Cl Larson/Ev COMPLIANCE OFFICIAL: Y Ny yg THIRD NOTICE FINAL NOTICE The following violations of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance were cited during a recent inspection of the above premises. You are hereby informed that these violations must be corrected on or before the CCMPLIANCE DATE indicated. Failure to correct or to make satisfactory arrangements to correct violations may result in suspension or revocation of a rental dwelling license, if applicable, and, in any case, may result in issuance of a citation which, upon conviction, is punishable by fine and /or imprisonment. Section 12 -1202 of the Ordinance provides for Right of Appeal, when it is alleged that a Compliance Order is based upon erroneous interpretation of this Ordinance. The Appeal must be submitted to the Inspection Department, in writing, specifyin; the grounds for Appeal, within five (5) business days after service of the order, and must be accompanied by a filing fee of $15.00 in cash or cashier's check. DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATIONS AND ORDINANCE SECTION 6525,_6527, 6529 ,North Willow Lane BOILER ROOM COMPLIANCE DATE NOVEMBER 18, 1988 Remove improper wiring and install wall recepticle for water softener. Replace missing cleanout plug in floor drain. Repair broken louvers in door. Install screen behind louvers to keep out rodents and other pests. Clean entire boiler room. GENERAL (Common Public Areas) COMPLIANCE DATE IMMEDIATE Lights were out in several stairways. THIS IS A SERIOUS HAZARD! COMPLIANCE DATE OCTOBER 18, 1988 Remove or replace torn carpet on all. interior stairs. COMPLIANCE DATE NOVEMBER 18, 1988 Replace all rotted wooden drip caps over windows in all buildings including but not limited to units #103, #104, #105, #106, #203, #204, #205, etc. Repair floors of landings, exterior stairways (all. but south most stairway). Repair tile floors of landings (all interior stairways) P/I Form H -4 page 1 of 3 GENERAL (Exterior) COMPLIANCE DATE OCTOBER 18, 1988 Repair missing stucco /broken trim by several doors. Cover exposed sheathing, make exterior envelope weather tight. COMPLIANCE DATE NOVEMBER 18, 1988 Repair deteriorated tarmac, especially in driveway entrances. Remove /replace fence. Scrape and paint window and door trim. Repair all rotted and broken window frames. LANDSCAPE Landscape is in poor condition: COMPLIANCE DATE IMMEDIATE Remove volunteer trees that have grown up next to the apartment and garage foundations. (These trees threaten the structual integrity). COMPLIANCE DATE NOVEMBER 18, 1988 Plantings are overgrown with vines and weeds, Shrubs and trees need triming, Grass cover totally lacking in areas, Lawn and overgrown weeds must be trimmed on the premises and the lot next door. SANITATION (Trash & Garbage) COMPLIANCE DATE IMMEDIATE Trash and garbage are scattered around site. Dumpster conditions are very bad, frequently overflowing. Larger dumpster /frequent pickup must be provided. BALCONYS /PATIOS COMPLIANCE DATE NOVEMBER 18, 1988 Contact tenants to remove storage items from balconys /patios. Permitted items are exterior design furniture. Any thing else is prohibited. Check all units for loose guardrails and make secure (some have screws missing). page 2 of 3 t 6525 NORTH WILLOW LANE COMPLIANCE DATE OCTOBER 31, 1988 Unit #101 replace /repair hazardous carpet throughout the unit, Cover exposed carpet tack boards, Replace missing and damaged kitchen floor tiles, Replace missing ceramic tiles in bath, Repair flaking ceiling and walls in bath. This is the second notice. Repairs must be made by October 30, 1988. COMPLIANCE DATE NOVEMBER 18 1988 Units #201 and #202 repair carpet, clean and deoderize. Unit #202 replace /repair unsafe light fixture in bath. Repair entrance door frame. 6527 NORTH WILLOW LANE COMPLIANCE DATE NOVEMBER 18, 1988 Paint entrance soffits. Provide grabable handrail mounted between 30 " -34" height at stairway beyond 1st landing. 6529 NORTH WILLOW LANE COMPLIANCE DATE IMMEDIATE OR CITATION WILL BE ISSUED Unit #106 entire apartment in UNLIVEABLE CONDITION Posted by HEALTH DEPARTMENT & BUILDING DEPARTMENT, MUST BE CLEANED UP IMMEDIATELY! Remove miscellaneous furniture out in front of apartment. Secure immediately, doors and windows preventing access to unit. (Animals and children have been seen in the unitl. COMPLIANCE DATE OCTOBER 31, 1988 Unit #206 replace loose, dirty and worn carpet. Replace missing floor tile in kitchen, Ceramic tile in bath is loose and broken, tub surround needs regrout /caulk. Repair ceiling and walls. Repair window & door screens. Provide outlet cover. NOTE: The Director of Planning and Inspection is seriously considering recommending to the City Council that your rental dwelling license, which expired on July 31, 1988, not be renewed because of poor maintenance of the property and a lack of compliance with City Ordinances. page 3 of 3 MEMORANDUM To: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection From: Clayton A. Larson, Building fficial g Re: 6525, 6527, 6529 North Willow Lane Date: October 6, 1988 The above referenced apartment building, containing 18 units, has become a problem over the past year. A general lack of maintenance has developed there and is causing complaints from both tenants and neighbors. Taken singularly the complaint items are minor, not life /safety, concerns. But the over -all picture is one of neglect and a total lack of interest on the owner s P art Compliance orders as a rule are ignored. I am reluctant to tag the owner, Irwin Ketroser, for the above mentioned minor items, but would suggest that since his rental license is due for renewal, and in fact, has expired, perhaps denial or threat of denial of license would be in order. We very much need a definate time schedule from the owner as to when the maintenance will be completed. Some of the items are: 1. Total lack of yard maintenance . except for sporadic grass cutting. P P 9 g 2. One unit was posted 30 days ago as "UNSAFE FOR HUMAN HABITATION" by this department for unsanitary it r a conditions and d has not been cleaned et. Tenant has eft. l Y 3. Continued problem with garbage on the ground around the dumpster. This is not cleaned up by the caretaker. On October 4, 1988, I met with Mr.lKetroser and his maintenance contractor to discuss a time frame for compliance. Having cleared up some personal business, that kept him out of town much of last year, Mr. Ketroser was ready to commit to a schedule to comply with our orders. He seemed surprised the city had reached the point of license denial, and we will monitor progress very closely. f LAW OFFICES 1 IRWIN KETROSER 700 MIDLAND BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 (612) 335-6571 October 4, 1988 Mr. Ronald A. Warren Director of Planning and Inspection City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Re: 6525 - 6527 -6529 North Willow Lane Dear Mr. Warren: This will acknowledge that my contractor and I met today with you, Evelyn Nygaard and Clayton Larson to discuss certain communications I have recently received from your office concerning the above property. I pointed out to you `that I have had a problem with my caretakers as well as maintenance people. I stated to you that I am quite anxious that the building be maintained in good condition. In our meeting we reviewed the matters that you called to my attention that need improvement and I. pointed out to you that my contractor is already in the process of making the repairs and improvements. We will continue along this - course until the various items that need attention are completed. I would appreciate if you could make a favorable recomme .ndation to the city council concerning my pending license and ask that they give my application favorable consideration. It would be acceptable to me if the council would approve my license application at this time on condition that the matter be again reviewed in one year. Thank you for your consideration to date. Sincerely, -_.. ;' IRWIN KETROSER IK /pa Licenses to be approved by the City Council on October 10, 1988: CIGARETTE American Amusement Arcades 850 Decatur Ave. N. Bosa Donuts 1912 57th Ave. N. City Clerk COMMERCIAL KENNEL A Dog's Best Friend 6830 Humboldt Ave. N. Pet Centers, Inc. Brookdale Center Sanitarian FOOD ESTABLISHMENT !� New Horizon Day Care Center 6625 Humboldt Ave. N. Sanitarian ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Korean Presbyterian Church 6830 Quail Ave. N. Knights of Columbus c/o Bob Kohls 640 Cheryl St. N.E. \ St. Alphonsus Catholic Church 7025 Halifax Ave. N. c Sanitarian i GENERAL APPROVAL: D. K. Weeks, City Clerk di b' as ociation of metro olitan municipalities P R O M P T A C T I O N R E Q U E S T E D September 20, 1988 Dear City Administrator /Manager: The Association of Metropolstan Municipalities and the Municipal Legislative Commission have been working for sometime with the League of Minnesota Cities Coordinating Committee discussing property tax computer analysis for 1989. The LMC has committed to developing computer analysis capability for the 1990 legislative session but a transition year is necessary to be able to react and participate knowledgeably in the 1989 session. The Coordinating Committee has been negotiating with the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities for development of a property tax reform proposal for 1989, a key element of which, will be retention of the principles of a Homestead Credit. Additional background data on the research elements and product are enclosed. This effort will cost approximately $185,000 for computer data update and proposal development. To raise this amount, Minneapolis, St. Paul, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, the Small City organization, and the Metro Area suburbs are being asked to make contributions. The suburbs share of funding has been targeted for between $35,000 and $50,000, which will be raised voluntarily, not i through any type of mandatory assessment by either the AMM or MLC. Thus, a request for financial contribution is being made of all suburban cities. Your city, along with other larger metropolitan suburbs is being asked to contribute $2,000 to this effort. Smaller suburbs are being asked to contribute an amount commensurate with their size and budget constraints. This financial pledge is 183 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227 -4008 t i contingent upon two factors: 1) AMM and MLC Boards approvel to proceed with this project, and 2) Sufficient funding from the suburbs to raise the required amount of dollars. It may be imperative for all cities, especially suburban cities to develop a common proposal for the 1989 legislative session. Based on the 1987 and 1988 tax and school funding bills, counties and school districts are committing to a significant effort for additional funding in 1989, probably at the expense of cities. This is primarily possible because of the elimination of Homestead Credit in 1990 in favor of an aid type program. Since the suburbs are at the greatest risk if Homestead Credit is exchanged for aid, it is paramount that a strong effort be made to restore the Homestead Credit. The data base or information which should result from this one time effort will help assure that the professional staffs of AMM and MLC that represent the suburban cities will be on an equal footing with other city lobbyists in the state during the 1989 session. Without the availability of this information and a unified position supported by all cities, success in protecting the suburban interest is in doubt. Please, strongly consider this request with your council and reply using the enclosed pledge sheet or verbally no later than Wednesday, October 5, 1988 to the AMM Office. If you have any questions, call Vern or Roger at 227 -4008. Respectfully, r ~ Gary Bastian, President Richard Wedell, President Association of Metropolitan Municipal Legislative Municipalities Commission « t TO: ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION 183 UNIVERSITY AVE., EAST ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 FROM: CITY OF YES, OUR CITY WILL PLEDGE $ IF TFIS EFFORT CONTINUES. NO, OUR CITY WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE. CITY ADMINISTRATOR /MANAGER