Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 08-24 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AUGUST 24, 1987 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 Council member so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. 6. Approval of Minutes: *a. August 10, 1987 - Regular Session 7. Final Plat: *a. Maranatha Addition 8. Performance Bond Reduction: *a. Brookdale Corporate Center III, 6160 Summit Drive 9. Resolutions: a. Accepting Proposal and Awarding Contract for Refurbishing Work at the East Fire Station and at the West Fire Station /Liquor Store No. 2 (Project No. 1987- 18) b. Accepting Proposal and Awarding Contract for Refurbishing Work in the Police Department (Project No. 1987 -19) *c. Accepting Work Performed under Contract 1987 -G (1987 Sealcoating Program, Improvement Project No. 1987 -09) *d. Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Shade Trees (Order No. DST 8/24/87) e. Establishing Improvement Project No. 1987 -20 (Rehabilitation of Well Houses No. 5 and No. 6) and Approving Agreement with Roger Johnson - Richard Smith Architects, Inc. to Provide Professional Services Relating to this Project f. Approving Adjustments of the 1987 Budget of the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- August 24, 1987 g. Approving Agreement between the City of Brooklyn Center and the Convention and Visitor's Bureau 10. Public Hearing Regarding Creation of an Economic Development Authority: (7:30 p.m.) a. Resolution Enabling the Creation of an Economic Development Authority in the City 11. Ordinances: (7:45 p.m.) a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding Zoning -This amendment is a housekeeping change incorporating Section 35 -200 into Section 35 -202 (on comprehensive planning). This item was first read on July 13, 1987, published in the City's official newspaper on August 13, 1987, and is offered this evening for a second reading. b. An Ordinance Adding Chapter 18 Regarding Authority of Certain Personnel to issue Citations and Specified Conditions -This ordinance would allow nonlicensed personnel (code enforcement officers, health department personnel, and building inspectors) the authority to issue citations. This item was first read on July 27, 1987, published in the City's official newspaper on August 6, 1987, and is offered this evening for a second reading. c. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Zoning Classification of Certain Land -This item changes the zoning classification to allow for the Maranatha Addition. This item was first read on July 27, 1987, published in the City's official newspaper on August 6, 1987, and is offered this evening for a second reading. 12. Discussion Item: a. Proposed Agreement with MNDOT for Disposal of Surplus Right -of -Way behind Noise Walls and Noise Mounds Along I -94 -City staff will submit recommendations regarding the process for dealing with these parcels of surplus right -of -ways. b. September Council Meeting Calendar C. League of Minnesota Cities Meeting *13. Licenses 14. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION AUGUST 10, 1987 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, and Administrative Aid Patti Page. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Councilmember Theis. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist recognized Rollie Bolier, 6825 Quail Avenue North. Mr. Bolier stated he had a new house built on Quail Avenue, and he moved into it last October. He stated he would like to make a complaint regarding a neighbor who owns a very large truck. He noted the neighbor stores this truck and maintains it on a paved area in his back yard. Mr. Bolier stated his neighbor leaves for work at approximately 5 a.m. each morning and returns around 7 p.m. He stated he has reviewed the existing City Ordinance regarding storage of a vehicle this size, and he believes this ordinance is outdated and would appreciate anything the City Council can do to help his situation. The City Manager stated City staff is currently investigating changes to this particular ordinance which would address this particular situation. He stated he would keep Mr. Bolier apprised of the proposed changes and also the public hearing date for the ordinance amendment. Mayor Nyquist added City staff has received other complaints from neighbors in this area regarding the situation. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist stated City staff has requested item 81 be removed completely from the agenda. He inquired if any Councilmember requested any items removed from the consent agenda. Councilmember Theis requested item 8g and Councilmember Hawes requested 8b be removed from the consent agenda. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 87 -152 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 8 -10 -87 -1- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1986 -I, STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -08 (BROOKLYN FARM AREA STORM DRAINAGE) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -153 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -20 (EARLE BROWN COMMONS UTILITY SYSTEM) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -154 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1986 -M, STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -10 (69TH /70TH AVENUE NORTH BETWEEN DUPONT AVENUE AND T.H. 252) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. Y RESOLUTION NO. 87 -155 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION - DEC CARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -10 (STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO 69TH AND 70TH AVENUE NORTH) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -156 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1987 -I, WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -16 (PAUL DRIVE WATER MAIN) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -157 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED SHADE TREE REMOVAL COSTS, PUBLIC UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES, DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY ACCOUNTS, DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL ACCOUNTS, AND HAZARD ABATEMENT COSTS 8 -10 -87 -2- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -158 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST 08/10/87) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -159 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXTENDING JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -160 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1987 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR WAGE AND SALARY ADJUSTMENTS DUE TO THE 1984 MINNESOTA PAY EQUITY ACT 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: AMUSEMENT DEVICE - VENDOR LICENSE D.V.M. Inc. 119 State Street FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE The Learning Tree 6020 Earle Brown Drive GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLE LICENSE Browning Ferris Industries of MN 9813 Flying Cloud Drive Rapid Way Disposal 685 - 123rd Avenue NW Waste Control 95 West Ivy Avenue Willman Trucking, Inc. 62 - 26th Avenue North Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc. 4000 Hamel Road MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE H. 0. Soderlin, Inc. 3731 Chicago Avenue Pete's Repair, Inc. 2610 Lowry Avenue North SIGN HANGER'S LICENSE Master Craft Sign Company 11265 - 91st Avenue North 8 -10 -87 -3- l The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 27 1987 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the minutes of the July 27, 1987, City Council meeting as submitted. The motion passed. Councilmember Theis abstained from the vote as he was not present at the July 27, 1987, City Council meeting. RISK MANAGEMENT AUDIT REPORT The City Manager noted on November 10, 1986, the City Council had approved an appropriation for a risk management audit. He stated John Simacek, from American Risk Services, Inc., is present this evening to present the risk management audit report. Mr. Simacek stated it took several months of work and investigation into all the City insurance policies to develop this report and recommendations. He noted at this time the City's risk retention is much greater than the current policy deductibles. He went on to explain the different methods in which the City could transfer part of its liability. He referred the Mayor and City Council to that part of the report listing major recommendations. He noted these are areas which should be thoroughly investigated and analyzed before any changes are made to the City's current insurance policies. A brief discussion then ensued relative to some of the major recommendations quoted by Mr. Simacek, and the reasons for making these recommendations. The City Manager stated that over the next few months he and the Finance Director would be reviewing and analyzing the City's current insurance policies and the recommendations made by Mr. Simacek. He noted after review of the current policies and these recommendations he may ask the Council to make some changes to the City's insurance policies. He noted this would be done prior to the renewal period which is usually January 1. ORDINANCES The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1 of the City Ordinances to Prohibit the Disturbance Caused by a Barking, Howling, or Fighting Animal. He noted this amendment will allow for stronger enforcement of barking dog regulations. He stated this item was first read on July 13, 1987, published in the City's official newspaper on July 23, 1987, and is offered this evening for a second reading. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1 of the City Ordinances to Prohibit the Disturbance Caused by a Barking, Howling, or Fighting Animal and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to close the public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1 of the City Ordinances to Prohibit the Disturbance Caused by a Barking, Howling, or Fighting Animal. The motion passed unanimously. 8 -10 -87 -4- ORDINANCE NO. 87 -06 Member Celia Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 1 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES TO PROHIBIT THE DISTURBANCE CAUSED BY A BARKING, HOWLING, OR FIGHTING ANIMAL The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 Regarding Appointment of Special Police Officers. He stated this amendment will delete the section on appointment of special officers to make the City's ordinance consistent with State law. He noted this item was first read on July 23, 1987, published in the City's official newspaper on July 23, 1987, and is offered this evening for a second reading. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 Regarding Appointment of Special Police Officers and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to close the public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 Regarding Appointment of Special Police Officers. The motion passed unanimously. y ORDINANCE NO. 87 -07 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL POLICE OFFICERS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Vacating Drainage and Utility Easement along the Easterly Lot Line of Lot 4, Block 1, Earle Brown 1st Addition. He noted this item was first read on July 13, 1987, published in the City's official newspaper on July 23, 1987, and is offered this evening for a second reading. Councilmember Theis inquired why the property owner requested the City to vacate part of the easement. The Director of Public Works stated currently there is a house on this property, apparently the property owner wished to build a garage which would have encroached on the easement. By vacating 5' of the easement the property owner can now legally build the garage. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance Vacating Drainage and Utility Easement along the Easterly Lot Line of Lot 4, Block 1, Earle Brown 1st Addition and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. 8 -10 -87 -5- There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing on An Ordinance Vacating Drainage and Utility Easement along the Easterly Lot Line of Lot 4, Block 1, Earle Brown lst Addition. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 87 -08 Member Rich Theis introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG THE EASTERLY LOT LINE OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, EARLE BROWN 1ST ADDITION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 Regarding Nursing Homes and Boarding Care Homes and a Housekeeping Change to Section 23 -901. He P g g stated this item will delete local control and licensing of nursing homes. He added this item is offered this evening for a first reading. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 Regarding Nursing Homes and Boarding Care Homes and a Housekeeping Change to Section 23 -901 and setting a public hearing date of September 1, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Regarding Requirements for Nursing Homes. He noted this item is offered this evenin g for a first reading. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Regarding Requirements for Nursing Homes and setting a public hearing date of September 1, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS The Director of Planning and Inspection stated a representative for Planning Commission Application No. 87015 is not present at the meeting at this time, and he suggests tabling this item. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to table Planning Commission Application No. 87015 submitted by Uhde /Nelson, Inc. due to the absence of the applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 87016 SUBMITTED BY ESPECIALLY WOMEN INC. REQUESTING SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO OPERATE A WOMEN'S HEALTH CLUB IN THE BROOKVIEW PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER AT EARLE BROWN DRIVE AND SUMMIT DRIVE The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 30, 1987, meeting. The Director of Planning and Inspection referred the Mayor and City Council to pages three and four of the July 30, 1987, Planning Commission minutes and the informational sheet attached with those minutes. He noted this type of proposed use requires a special use permit. 8 -10 -87 -6- The City Manager left the table at 1:55 p.m. The Director of Planning and Inspection went on to review the proposed location and noted it would be next to the area previously occupied by Designer Depot. The City Manager returned to the table at 7:57 p.m. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated one of the main concerns of the Planning Commission was the amount of parking required for this type of use. He noted the parking requirement for total floor space is 64 spaces. He stated the retail parking formula for this building is 6.2 spaces for 1,000 square feet or 88.8 spaces for the space in question. Therefore, parking available for the floor area in question far exceeds the requirement of the ordinance for the Health Club use. He noted the Planning Commission recommended approval of the application subject to six conditions which he reviewed for the Council. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated a public hearing has been scheduled for this application and notices have been sent. Councilmember Lhotka inquired if a seventh condition should be added regarding screening for rooftop mechanical devices. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated he believed this would be an appropriate addition. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87016 submitted by Especially Women, Inc. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87016 submitted by Especially Women, Inc. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve Planning Commission Application No. 87016 submitted by Especially Women, Inc. requesting special use permit approval to operate a women's health club in the Brookview Plaza Shopping Center at Earle Brown Drive and Summit Drive subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is issued for a health club use and may not be transferred to any other type of use. 2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation may be grounds for revocation. 3. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Swimming pool plans are subject to review and approval by the State Health Department prior to the issuance of permits. 8 -10 -87 -7- 5. The swimming pool and shower room shall be licensed as required by Section 7 -201 of the City Ordinances prior to operation. 6. Suntanning beds shall be inspected by the City Sanitarian on a yearly basis. 7. Any new rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 87017 SUBMITTED BY EARLE BROWN BOWL REQUESTING SITE AND BUILDING PLAN AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION AT THE EARLE BROWN BOWL AT 6440 JAMES CIRCLE NORTH FOR STORAGE DINING ROOM, AND ENTRY AREA The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 30, 1987, meeting. The Director of Planning and Inspection referred the Mayor and City Councilmembers to pages four through six of the July 30, 1987, Planning Commission minutes and the informational sheet attached with those minutes. The Director of Public Works left the table at 8 :04 p.m. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded to review the proposed site layout and changes. He stated the seating plan shows only a relocation of existing seats. He noted staff was concerned with the expansion of the dining room that there would be an expansion of the seating resulting in a parking deficiency. He stated staff believed it was important the seating plan be publicly acknowledged by the applicant as the maximum allowable. He added the owner has assured staff no seating changes are comprehended only relocation of existing seating. The Director of Public Works returned to the table at 8:10 p.m. Councilmember Scott inquired if the waiting /coatroom would be totally separate from the restaurant and hostess area. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that was correct. Councilmember Scott stated she did not believe this would be the best layout for the owner or the patrons of the restaurant to leave the coatroom unsupervised. The Director of Planning and Inspection noted the Planning Commission recommended approval of this application subject to seven conditions which he reviewed for the Council. He noted a public hearing has been scheduled for this evening and notices have been sent. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87017 submitted by Earle Brown Bowl. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. 8 -10 -87 -8- There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87017 submitted by Earle Brown Bowl. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve Planning Commission Application No. 87017 submitted by Earle Brown Bowl requesting site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct an addition at the Earle Brown Bowl at 6440 James Circle North for storage, dining room, and entry area 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. B612 curb and gutter is required around all parking and driving areas. 3. A 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. Outside trash disposal facilities shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building addition shall be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 7. Special use permit approval acknowledges a maximum of 243 seats in the supper club, coffee shop, and lounge area based on available parking. One hundred and fifty dining seats must be maintained in the supper club and coffee shop for purposes of the liquor license. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:15 p.m. and reconvened at 8:31 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS (CONTINUED) Mayor Nyquist noted the applicant was present for Planning Commission Application No. 87015, and he would entertain a motion to remove this item from the table. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to remove Planning Commission Application No. 87015 from the table since the applicant is now present. The motion passed unanimously. 8 -10 -87 -9- 4. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO 87015 SUBMITTED BY UHDE /NELSON INC REQUESTING SITE AND BUILDING PLAN AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATE 8,000 SO FT OFFICE BUILDING ON THE VACANT PARCEL OF R5 ZONED LAND, EAST OF 7100 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD (THE OLD CITY HALL SITE) The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 30, 1987, meeting. The Director of Planning and Inspection referred the Mayor and City Council to pages one through three of the July 30, 1987, Planning Commission minutes and informational sheet attached with those minutes. He noted office buildings are allowed by special use permit in the R5 zoning district, The Director of Planning and Inspection went on to explain access to the proposed building would be from Brooklyn Boulevard through the a rkin lot of the P first phase building, g p uilding, Edina Realty. He noted the site plan calls for 41 parking stalls, which would allow for only about 400 sq. ft. of floor area devoted to medical /dental occupancy in the building. He added in the past residents of area have expressed an interest in having an office development in this area instead of multifamily housing. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this item subject to 13 conditions which he reviewed for the Council. He noted a public hearing has been scheduled for this evening and notices have been sent. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87015 submitted by Uhde /Nelson, Inc. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87015 submitted by Uhde /Nelson, Inc, The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve Planning Commission Application No. 87015 submitted by Uhde /Nelson, Inc. requesting site and building plan and special ial use permit g P p zt a P PP roval to construct an approximate 8,000 s , ft. office q building n the vacant acant parcel of R5 zoned land, east of 7100 Brooklyn Boulevard, subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility, and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view, 8 -10 -87 -10- J 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built survey of the property improvements and utility service lines, prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter into an easement and an agreement for maintenance and inspection of utility and storm drainage systems prior to the issuance of permits. 11. Fire hydrants shall be located on the site as per the order of the Fire Marshal. 12. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof may be grounds for revocation. 13. The plan shall be modified to indicate the specific location and screening of a trash enclosure. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) The City Manager presented a Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing or Hearing ring on Proposed Assessments for Improvement Project No. 1986 - P J 08 (Earle Brown Farm Storm Sewer Installation). Councilmember Hawes inquired who would be paying the $42,000 difference between the project cost and the assessment cost. The Director of Public Works stated the difference would be paid by the HRA from the Tax Increment Financing District. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -161 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -08 (EARLE BROWN STORM SEWER) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. 8 -10 -87 -11- ti The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Work Performed under Contract for Improvement Project No. 1987 -17, Emergency Repairs to Well No. 8. Councilmember Theis inquired if the 11 sections of pump column which were found to be damaged were damaged while pumping or from the other repairs to the well. The Director of Public Works stated the damage to these 11 sections were caused by corrosion. He noted staff did not expect to find these type of conditions on the pump column. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -162 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -17, EMERGENCY REPAIRS TO WELL NO. 8 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Bid and Approving Contract for Improvement Project 1985 -12, Dallas Road Repair between 72nd and 73rd Avenues North (Contract 1987 -K). The Director of Public Works noted the total project cost for all three phases of this project is approximately $68,000, which is 10 000 more than $ the estimate. He stated as discussed at previous Council meetings, Phase II of this project was unable to be completed due to the unusual dryness of the winter and spring. He noted because Phase II could not be completed, testing was done in the area and it was recommended that the roadway design be increased from 1 1/2 inches to 2 1/2 inches of overlay. He stated this revision accounted for an increase of approximately $4,000 in the bid cost of Phase III. He noted the balance of the difference between the project bid and the estimate of Phase III work is the result of a difference in the estimated unit prices and unit bid prices. He stated while the cost is greater than the original estimate, the prices are reasonable given the size and difficulty of the job. Councilmember Lhotka inquired if the bid would be lower if the project were delayed until next spring and then combined with another roadway project. The Director of Public Works stated it is possible the bid would be somewhat lower but he wouldn't count on it. He noted the Phase II testing was necessary to prove the City could get by with a minimum overlay on this road. i Councilmember Lhotka inquired if the road is q left as it is will there be a problem over the winter with it. The Director of Public Works stated there would be no significant problems only more deterioration. Councilmember Lhotka stated he does not believe the City would end up spending as much money next spring on this project, especially if it were combined with another project. Councilmember Hawes inquired if the Director of Public Works feels confident the recommended 2 1/2 inch overlay will take care of the problem -in this area. The Director of Public Works stated after much staff and consultant review everyone is very confident this will take care of the problem. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -163 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 8 -10 -87 -12- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 1985 -12, DALLAS ROAD REPAIR BETWEEN 72ND AND 73RD AVENUE NORTH (CONTRACT 1987 -K) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed with Councilmember Lhotka opposed. DISCUSSION ITEM 1988 BUDGET LEVY LIMITATIONS The City Manager stated that he and the Director of Finance are planning to ask for a variance or exception to the levy limit law. He noted this request must be submitted at this time in order to meet all deadlines required for the City's budget. He stated by requesting this exception it does not commit the City to use the higher levy limit. He noted it would permit the City to go up to the point requested. The City Manager noted this item does not require any Council action. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 8:59 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 8 -10 -87 -13- CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY Of :1 7BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE- FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: August 19, 1987 RE: Maranatha Addition Mr. David Viland representative of Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, developer of the above referenced plat has applied to the City Council to approve the final plat of Maranatha Addition. The land is located south of 69th Avenue North at the west city limits. Conditions adopted by City Council at its July 27, 1987 meeting were 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. Easement documents for drainage and utilities ponding shall be executed and filed with the plat at the county. 4. Cross access agreements between Lots 1 and 2 of the proposed sub division shall be executed and filed with the plat at the county. Of the conditions above, number one and two have been met. Accordingly we recommend approval of pp the final lat subject to the following conditions: P J g 1. Receipt of title opinion from the City Attorney confirming the appropriate parties responsible for signing the plat. 2. The owner shall pay all attorney fees incurred in the review of the final plat prior to the release of the final plat for filing at the county. �` Ives ui-�cQiu arr r August 19, 1987 Page 2 3. Easement documents for drainage and utilities ponding shall be executed and filed with the plat at the county. 4. A cross access agreement between lots 1 and 2 of the proposed subdivision shall be executed and filed with the plat at the county. Respectfully submitted, Approved for submittal, H.R. Spurrier Sy - napp City Engineer Director of Public Works HRS /nl J I i z Z � I I 69TH. AVE. N. S. . I [. 1 4 1 Z J Y ' IS 6 x� o U I i7TN. AJE. N. WIN I ° N. g ; i MARANATHA ADDITION, CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER r' 0 600 1200 SCALE IN FEET I D PREPARED BY ULTIMAP SHEET 1 OF 2 � 4 M ARANATHA AD DITION - i . r ._ r, 0 s r7 I I ( I I DENS 5T 14 AD C,23 � ( ,; � �1 r; 2, DoNNAYS BftoclK L'f.nl. � East Gne of lOutloi One 1 = 3 E._ L23 39 tu 5; 3ra.;na5c and u � O _ 1 ° r I i -- �---- N Z \ ` ,Sj zinc of West IZ acres o4 IJ�z o� �E �4 LLB of Section 5 o J + O / Co Q 90 33.06 v (- p c w o� tI 3 0 ° �• t Cr Na-Bs to cc� � 6 t ' } 35 ` � o � � rn vN AVE E c :- w - - �. �PDn d n Esemc�t ' ' i o ° N - Q -� .. t / "A 01" ly All 1 ., � • � IS Soot d .1e — 1 / /.' `:. 7 &57 Pr.r doc. no 3AlZG4f oat utditY eoseme�l a a ~ i North Y+ Goer, f Sctl,on 3'> West line of N'(z of NE 74 ° ��f : aa � as Section 33,(- 1f9,N.21 � r4lrta�a and lltili4y * �� o Denotes iron monumeni easements arc I stiown thus - Tl' I� Bewrin3S shown own ar on an assulned a ,r ,; S HEET 2 O F 2 � �, �� Y4• i 7 y2 h� •' v ct.�, ,tfi`3+'�i,,, .,� - e,� t ', .: ? �'rr , �����;* w �'"4 mod. f . - n �' 1 � f 4 ..+ i a 1'�,�,f� � � �c► . a, a. ;f .... »fi . !� , s • -.._.. -. s., ..+�- . sr. -'>;��. ��'".s %���,K'��.A�iS::7d.'1 U � MEMORANDUM TO: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection FROM: Gary Shallcross, Planner SUBJECT: Performance Guarantee DATE: August 19, 1987 The following performance guarantee is recommended for reduction: 1. Brookdale Corporate Center III 6160 Summit Drive Planning Commission Application No. 86012 Amount of Guarantee - $110,000 Obligor - Ryan Construction Company All landscaping and paving as been installed according to plan. There 9 9 P is deferred curb along the north side of the driveway off Earle Brown Drive. Another handicapped ramp is recommended. There are some minor utility modifications and as -built utility survey must yet be submitted. Recommend reduction from $110,000 to $10,000. Approved by J�'i�G Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection qa CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY ::1 7� OOKLYN OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 r TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTE R EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: August 20, 1987 RE: Report to Council Regarding Bids Opened for Project No. 1987 -18 Bids for the refurbishing work at the East Fire Station and at the West Fire Station /Liquor Stre No.2 (Project No. 1987 -18) will be opened on Friday, August 21st. Due to the Thursday deadline for agenda items it is impossible to submit a bid tabulation and recommendation with the regular Council agenda mailing. Accordingly, an analysis of bids and resolution will be available to Councilmembers shortly before Monday's Council meeting. SK: jn �� 19b61LL-1MfRIG Q(1' M Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR REFURBISHING WORK AT THE EAST FIRE STATION AND AT THE WEST FIRE STATION /LIQUOR STORE NO. 2 (PROJECT NO. 1987 -18) WHEREAS, in response to five requests for proposal to complete refurbishing work at the East Fire Station and at the West Fire Station /Liquor Store No. 2 (Project No. 1987 -18) only one proposal was received, i.e. - that of JMG Contracting for work as follows: Work at East Fire Station - $4,475.00 Work at West Fire Station/ Liquor Store No. 2 5.425.00 TOTAL - 9,900.00 AND, WHEREAS, the cost of his work, combined with the cost of work of recaulking windows at the Fire Stations and at City Hall is within the total amount budgeted for said work in the 1987 budget for Division 19 of the General Fund: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The of JMG Contracting, o do a work proposal t 11 specified at the p East Fire Station and at the West Fire Station /Liquor Store No. 2, • at a total cost of $9,900, is hereby accepted. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract therefore. 2. All costs for work under this project shall be charged to Division 19 of the General Fund Budget for 1987. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK'PARKWAY OF B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Gerald G. Spinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: August 24, 1987 RE: Refurbishing Work at East and West Fire Stations The 1987 budget for Division 19 (Government Building Division) includes the following two items: Caulk Windows - City Hall and West Fire Station = $10,300.00 Paint Metal - East and West Fire Stations 6.000.00 TOTAL $16,300.00 Work Completed To -Date: The following work has been placed under contract to -date: Caulking at West Fire Station = $ 1,625.00 Caulking at City Hall 4.724.00 SUB - TOTAL, TO -DATE _ $ 6,349.00 Bid Received for Painting at Fire Stations "Requests For Proposals ", along with copies of the specifications for the painting project were sent to 5 contractors. Only one bid - that of JMC Contracting - was received. That bid is as follows: Paint metals at East Fire Station — $4,475.00 Paint metals at West Fire Station and Liquor Store No. 2 = 5.425.00 SUB -TOTAL $9,900.00 If the bids for the work are accepted, the total value of all work on the two budget items will be $16,249.00 (i.e. $51.00 below the budgeted amount). I recommend acceptance of these bids from JMG Contracting. A resolution for that purpose is attached for consideration by the City Manager. Respectfully submitted, Sy napp,� Director of Public Works r �� q CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF :BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: August 20, 1987 RE: Report to Council Regarding Bids Opened for Project No. 1987 -19 Bids for the refurbishing work in the Police Department (Project No. 1987 -19) will be opened on Friday, August 21st. Due to the Thursday deadline for agenda items it is impossible to submit a bid tabulation and recommendation with the regular Council agenda mailing. Accordingly, an analysis of bids and resolution will be available to Councilmembers shortly before Monday's Council meeting. SK: jn � 'cp �`• 19666LL-UAfRIU QIY %� 2 �J Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION REJECTING BID FOR REFURBISHING WORK IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT (PROJECT NO-1987-19) WHEREAS, only one proposal, that of JMG Contracting, was received for work contemplated under Project No. 1987 -19, in the total amount of $9550; and WHEREAS, the budgeted amount for this work is $4,700; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works recommends that this bid be rejected and that the proposed work be included, with other work, in a future contract: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The bid of JMG Contracting for work on Project No. 1987 -19 is hereby rejected. 2. The Director of Public Works is hereby directed to combine the proposed work with other work in a future contract. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK`PARKWAY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 BROOKLYN TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: August 24, 1987 RE: Proposed Improvements in the Police Department Improvement Project No. 1987 -19 Requests For Proposals, along with specifications for the work, were sent out to 8 contractors for work in the Police Department as proposed in the 1987 budget (budgeted appropriation of $4,700). Only one bid, that of JMG Contracting, in the total amount of $9,550, was received. After reviewing this matter with the City Manager and the Chief of Police, I recommend that that one bid be rejected, and that this proposed work be combined with other work in the Police Department which is proposed for 1988. A resolution rejecting the bid is submitted for consideration by the City Council. Resp tfully submitted, Sy napp Director of Public Works "' 19661LL-4MfRIG Qi'/ %r Member introduced the following resolution and • moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1987 -G (1987 SEALCOATING PROGRAM, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -09) WHEREAS, pursuant to written Contract 1987 -G signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, ALLIED BLACKTOP COMPANY, INC. has satisfactorily completed the following improvement in accordance with said contract: 1987 SEALCOATING PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT 1987 -09 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. As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $100,116.31 $100,725.72 2. The value of work performed is more than the original contract amount by $609.41 due to a general underestimation 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 $100,725.72. 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. 9d Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST08/24/87) WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and Diseased 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 diseased shade trees on the owners' property; and WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of diseased shade trees by declaring diseased shade trees a public nuisance: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The diseased shade trees at the following addresses are hereby declared to be a public nuisance. PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER ROBERT RICHARDSON 5213 PAUL DRIVE 206 PERCY B BARKOW 3530 53RD AVENUE NO 223 VERNON J KOKESH 6429 BRYANT AVENUE N 224 CONNIE A WAGNER 5319 KNOX AVE N 225 JOHN & IRIS CARLSON 4945 ZENITH AVENUE N 226 MALMBORG'S 5105 BROOKLYN BLVD 227 BEVERLY H COPHER 5618 INDIANA AVE NO 228 RAYMOND F KROLL 3813 ECKBERG DRIVE 229 JOHN R STINSON 3816 FRANCE PLACE 232 PAUL KELLY 6354 WILLOW LANE 233 B. & v. SUGIMURA 7124 FRANCE AVENUE N 234 B & V SUGIMURA 7124 FRANCE AVE N 235 G. & C. CAMPBELL 5428 CAMDEN AVE N 237 G & B SCHAKE 7241 FREMONT AVE N 238 JAMES /JANET ELMQUIST 5321 PENN AVE NO 239 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owners will receive a second written notice that will give them (5) business days in which to contest the determination of City Council by requesting a hearing in writing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. 4. All removal costs, including legal, financing and administrative charges, shall be specially assessed against the property. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -20 (REHABILITATION OF WELLHOUSES NO. 5 AND NO. 6) AND APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH ROGER JOHNSON - RICHARD SMITH ARCHITECTS, INC., TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RELATING TO THIS PROJECT WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has advised the City Council that substantial rehabilitation work needs to be accomplished in order to protect the facilities at Wellhouses No. 5 and No. 6; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has obtained a proposal from the firm of Roger Johnson - Richard Smith Architects, Inc. to provide all professional design services needed in conjunction with the proposed improvements: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that; 1. The following project is hereby established: REHABILITATION OF WELLHOUSES NO. 5 AND NO. 6 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -20 2. The proposal for professional services as submitted by Roger Johnson - Richard Smith Architects, Inc. is hereby accepted. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement with that firm for these services. 3. The accounting for this project will be done in the Public Utilities Fund. All project costs shall be charged to that fund. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing esolution was duly seconded b g y y member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. *]I CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF � ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE C ENTER 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: August 19, 1987 RE: Rehabilitation of Wellhouse No. 5 and No. 6 Two of the City's wellhouses (ie - wellhouse No. 5 - located at 7001 Camden Avenue North and wellhouse No. 6 - located at 1207 69th Avenue North) have deteriorated to a condition where substantial rehabilitation is needed. Both of these wellhouses were constructed in 1967 and have been provided routine maintenance and periodic special maintenance ie - repainting, re airs etc ) P ( repairs, However a review evie and ins ecton of these structures indicates the following. g. Wellhouse No. 5 (7001 Camden Avenue) has serious roof leakage problems and deteriorated exterior (wood) siding. In addition, some minor modifications are needed to provide safety improvements recommended by the Minnesota Department of Health and by OSHA. If new siding is to be installed, insulation should be added to the (now uninsulated) exterior walls. Wellhouse No. 6 - (1207 69th Avenue North) has severe roof leakage and roof deterioration problems (a small portion of the roof caved in during the heavy rainstorm which occurred in late July) and has severe moisture - entrapment problems in many of the upper wall and roof areas. This moisture problem, combined with an abundance of windows (which experience frequent breakage), results in poor energy efficiency for the HVAC systems. The exterior building design provides two excellent g P reas which encourage g e vandalism. Again, some minor modifications are needed to provide safety improvements as recommended by the Minnesota Department of Health and by OSHA. ~ MA61llUAf81G1 Qf/ j � August 19, 1987 Page 2 This building is substantially over - designed for its current use. The office and garage areas which occupy approximately 70% of the total floor area formerly served as the headquarters for the Public Utility Department. Since that department was transferred to the City Garage these areas are being utilized for storage - mostly for storage of voting machines. This area probably will no longer be needed for this purpose when the City's new voting machines are purchased. Accordingly, I recommend that the first phase of a rehabilitation study consider at least these alternatives, i.e.: Option 1 - Restore building to original configuration (but treating the old office area as a storage area); Option 2 - Restore entire building, but with a different roof design; and Option 3 - Reduce size of building, and restore the remaining portion. After preliminary cost estimates are received for each of these options, they will be reviewed in relation to anticipated future use(s) of the building, before proceeding with final project design based on the option selected. Selection of Architectural firm This project requires that the designer have experience in the following areas: - restoration of an existing structure; - correction of serious design deficiencies relating to moisture control in the walls and roofs; - special problems associated with architecturally designed roofs (i.e. - portions of the existing roofs are flat, while other portions have a very steep pitch); - special considerations relating to the use of these buildings as pumphouses (i.e. - heat generated by the large motors, moisture control in the pump room, chemical reactions to materials used in the chemical -feed room, OSHA regulations and Minnesota Department of Health regulations); - evaluation of the energy efficiency of the buildings and their HVAC systems. At the time when City Staff reviewed the qualifications and interviewed firms for the design of the Community Center project, one of the firms interviewed was that of Roger Johnson - Richard Smith Architects, Inc. Although the interview panel selected another firm for that project, we noted that this firm had extensive experience and credentials in the design of remodeling projects - especially including many public works facilities, and agreed that they should be considered when the City had that type of project. August 19, 1987 Page 3 Accordingly, I have met with Richard Smith to review the proposed improvements in detail and requested that they submit a proposal to provide all professional design service needed in conjunction with the proposed improvements. A copy of their proposal is attached. My review of that proposal indicates that it is complete, that it demonstrates a full understanding of our needs, and that the proposed fees are reasonable and appropriate for this project. The proposal provides for hourly fees to be charged during the preliminary "study" phase of the project. Once the scope of the work is finalized, a lump sum fee is to be negotiated. City staff would plan to submit for the preliminary report, along with our recommendations for selection of the alternative to be used, and the final negotiated contract with the architects to the City Council for approval before proceeding. Accordingly, I recommend acceptance of that proposal. A resolution establishing the project and approving an agreement with Roger Johnson - Richard Smith Architects, Inc. is submitted for consideration by the City Council. Respectfully submitted, - S Ki Y .app Director of Public Works SK /nl ROGER JOHNSON — RICHARD SMITH ARCHITECTS INC. 219 NORTH SECOND STREET / MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 / 612- 338 -4241 August 20, 1987 Mr. Sy Knapp Director of Public Works City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Mr. Knapp: We were pleased to receive your invitation to submit a proposal for architectural /engineering services to design restoration and repairs for Well Houses No.'s 5 and 6 for the City of Brooklyn Center. We understand the scope of our work would be to provide complete design services including preliminary designs, contract documents and specifications and contract administration which would include bidding, shop drawings, processing of pay requests and site observations. The specifics of p the work to be included would consist of the following: Well House No. 6 1. Provide three alternative studies and preliminary cost estimates for repair of the roof structure. These alternatives would include: a. Complete roof and roof structure replacement with a new roof design compatible with the building and community. b. Replacement of deteriorated roof areas, salvaging portions of the roof structure where possible. This would include blocking up unneeded windows which are a vandalism problem and resurfacing of the exterior of the building above the ceiling line. c. A combination of items "a" and "b" above which would address demolition of the garage which is no longer needed. 2. Evaluation and recommendations on retaining or replacing the exterior siding. 3. Modifications, removal or replacement of the screen walls at the west and north sides of the structure. 4. Correction of the deficiencies in the Chlorine Room cited by the Public Health Engineer in his letter of September 18, 1986. 5. Restoration or replacement of interior finishes as required. 6. The addition of mechanical ventilation in the pump room to control temperatures and humidity. Page 2 Well House No. 5 1. Replacement of roofing. (Roof structure does not appear to have the same problems as Well House No. 6.) 2. Replacement of the exterior siding above the ceiling line. 3. Evaluation and recommendation on retaining or replacing the exterior siding. 4. Removal, repair or replacement of the screen walls on the north and south sides of the building. 5. Replacement of cracked and settled concrete stoops at entrances. 6. Replacement of deteriorated exterior doors and frames. 7. Removal and blocking up of windows which are not needed and are a vandalism problem. 8. Correction of the deficiencies in the Chlorine Room cited by the Public Health Engineer in his letter of September 18, 1986. 9. Restoration or replacement of interior finishes as required. 10. The addition of mechanical ventilation in the pump room to control temperatures and humidity. We would propose to provide the preliminary studies and preliminary cost estimates on an hourly basis. Once the scope of the work has been finalized we would propose to negotiate a lump sum fee based on the alternative selected. Our hourly rates are as follows: Principals $75.00 Draftsmen $38.00 Clerical $32.00 Consultants Direct Cost Reimbursables (printing, Cost x 1.10 binding, postage, etc.) Subject to your acceptance we would propose to use Meyer, Borgman and Johnson as the structural engineering consultants and Gausman & Moore, Inc. for mechanical and electrical engineering. We i understand that time is critical in the completion of this work and that it is desired to have the roofing work completed before winter. If this becomes impossible, temporary shoring and patching will be required to make the building serviceable until spring. We will do everything possible to assist you in attempting to get the construction completed before winter. We would again like to thank you for the invitation to submit this proposal and hope that you find it acceptable. incerely Accepted by the City of Brooklyn Center: Approved by City Council Date Approved by Mayo Richard H. Smith Date Approved by City Manager Date 1 r r y,ty.�''¢•F"' Xk c f • sFr ' n y 'k� F , 4' ,+ ` yya• ''.��� t ir��� a �,. t �z'a '` t � `'� t�eh,. �'� '�",y�, wy. Tt'rs� f r '�` .in '� �`� Y3.:� u• � � p y�� 'r� yyst� +r.�, � �.* y }r 6y. ;��,•F'A" '�t` -.sa "d � r�'t . } �i i �^� � fi. i 5... �� °� ti' i i '`K. r� rs"? ,i,'t ,r� t. ` . a.. - �n� h *. .:J;`.r f • r w� ;?;'.' t t• : I - ` ew k 1 ( ix 1 1 ,.r �' ° .s T. .. fj y ' ,. :• 4 : t - 'r" , d '►Y 1 i s ad ; cl ' 1 • - • • lqv .�' Y =_ �d� 5 � F h � .7 � Lt . { ta -� y ? t� � b �5 F� t & g � �d� S • • - � a" - [�,� ` °311•s ,:Ir ,." At , 2 i k•A s �``�: a � k � � � 'w �� .,„ i t . ae � 4 � � •� • K t t SF�; 4*,,�,. °r. ,. � - 3 �� h R '�� 1` a��,-ee kr S t �'rF' i'y�� 'qa l; ' f t s '� f �' t,• " �l. s-s > sID�T�:s t-}i�� L s�` t •. � t �-�'4� �, (1 ♦ -+� G` CyX. 7."'.t.. ffi4 2 4si �� �v�t t,:� Si:�+' . • ,v �j -.� �� ,p �- �1e t '.-. J1 'at- 3 ' � $i`+<,�� t � ;+t � • �'� S "� ° ��i� i �'T ='« ' ��y� r ems' � srG+s��>�.t�..- a.. i 3' r _ g r .r s ' may'.. • • - • • • • iw � � a � � £ �. `.. � ' far• <r� :� ..�, ate` �-�;- '�c � t� l s 1 .«j a.�. j�ta�'� j!t•gs� �•S" ep F � ���-* a. Fill a 1 1 4 -� - e ""x- P +sew � r,a K-.�J. �•� ,„ � .a •ram r`���t -� •r4 „sic. ?.. '�c �.«` x � x _ �-- �'�'�� d `� a �'- �� Ss+. ��a ���* :ice t`•>t +''�,*�Qr r? 'i.�� .-., ti r"• .� � } q + � # � �- 3,�f '3 t �:` a s t `� £` � � y� � [y �-`� s,�i?� + w � ^ � s,a� h� �.a 2 * ��_ ✓ 4 ��' - + '`'�: �1d x � '�.�. k � . 'ql.,� a '� � + ��..� 'aTC.+��"r�a. � € � �`� s k�` � � �-; u4 s� �T��"��� i• `�a ✓. 8 � }��,'Sr. e � " `'Lt • :.��.2'� t z ��? -'� , K 3 P .�4'a -, . -- �� �"�. "° � • ^`�" F,, °�h �,,' 4 z Al Nil s R . fb g ,,s-. . �� -� fir• �;, � -' ��T �. .�•_ =. ` :� � - • ♦� �, ''} i - � - gyp`, � ,:,' i "J "'k", sa v.-t• 6+f'�`t r ,g #Cf dY `L'F �i.:ce.; 1T -' �' s: v s - ."%��� 9 x idr� $ fi, � �.r �T.`�' #N�r T 4 : +'S Mt �7•�►e t4�° ?t5 Yt � �° t' rm; e r�`�h� t k A,v y9 $ • ;K. + ►n� •['� � l + � t ' +h E�n�����y '"r_gy "�1pA,.ta } �- - ,l C #t�, . WELLHOUSE NO. 6 1207 69th Ave No =4 Front Entry Area -, Note hiding area T7 `� 4 F I q `� behind screen CNL OgiNE r -, ra � r ' y . View of the side of the peaked portion of the roof - in rig �� "f • front of building. !` �x Note severe paint failure due to moisture entrapment in the w a l l s . � b� WELLHOUSE NO. 6 120 69th Ave No View of the peak on the East side of the t +o building. r �i... Note severe paint �Y failure and t deterioration of a �: ` -'<• �' � wood siding resultin from moisture entrapment in the walls. Vr �7 ANA 'rye g �p - - _ 777777 4 View of area under window sill in the tf front side of the building. Not severe e aint - - P failure and deterioration of wood siding due to moisture entrapment - _ r--- despite the presence of numerous vents. 9� Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMENTS OF THE 1987 BUDGET OF THE NORTH METRO CONVENTION AND TOURISM BUREAU WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has entered into an agreement with the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau; and WHEREAS, the agreement provides that "the budget may be modified without prior consent of the City Council, providing that any adjustments shall not be greater than ten percent of the amount indicated for that item as it appears in the budget "; and WHEREAS, actual experience of revenues and expenditures during the first six months of 1987 indicate a need for adjustments in the budget; and WHEREAS, the adjustment of certain items is greater than ten percent of the amount indicated for those items as they appear in the budget; and WHEREAS, the Executive Committee of the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau at its meeting of July 22, 1987, approved the attached adjusted budget; and WHEREAS, the adjusted budget reflects appropriate and needed changes in the various categories while maintaining the requirement that the Bureau not expend any sums beyond its revenues. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, requisite prior consent be given to the proposed adjusted budget of the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau. 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. MEMO TO: NASIM M. QURESHI, CITY MANAGER FROM: WILLIAM C. HUNT, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: BUDGET REVISION FOR NORTH METRO CON- VENTION AND TOURISM BUREAU DATE: JULY 24, 1987 Paragraph No. 4 of the agreement between the City of Fridley and the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau reads as follows: 4. BUDGET The Bureau shall submit its annual budget for review by the City Council on or before the 1st day of October of the year preceding the effective date of the budget. Such budget shall detail with specificity the uses to which monies received shall be spent to provide the services described in paragraph 2 of this Agreement. In any year in which this Agreement is being renewed, such renewal shall not occur until this budget review process has been completed. For the initial term of this Agreement, the Agreement shall not take effect until a bud process as been completed for the time th et review r ce h be g P P period of August 1, 1986 through December 31, 1987. It is understood between the parties that the actual revenues being generated under paragraph 5 may vary from the amounts anticipated in the budget. For this reason it is agreed that the budget may be modified without prior consent of the City Council, providing that any adjustments shall not be greater than ten percent of the amount indicated for that item as it appears in the budget. Notwithstanding any other language to the contrary the Bureau shall not expend any sums beyond its revenues. Now that the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau has been in operation with full funding for the past six months it has become clear that a number of items in the budget need adjustment. There are some new line items which were not foreseen last October when the budget was drawn up, and there are a number of other items which the experience of the past six months indicate will vary more than 10% from the budget for 1987 approved last fall. Also the income stream for the past six months enabled us to better estimate the anticipated income for 1987 which is slightly lower than estimated last fall. In accordance with the provisions of the agreement between the City and the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau I request that you submit the adjusted budget for 1987 to the City Council for its approval. W CH/ ss 13/26 RESOLUTION NO. - 8 19 7 A RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMENTS OF THE 1987 BUDGET OF THE NORTH METRO CONVENTION AND TOURISM BUREAU WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has entered into an agreement with the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau; and WHEREAS, the agreement provides that "the budget may be modified without prior consent of the City Council, providing that any adjustments shall not be greater than ten percent of the amount indicated for that item as it appears in the budget." and WHEREAS, actual experience of revenues and expenditures during the first six months of 1987 indicate a need for adjustments in the budget; and WE. REAS, the adjustment of certain items is greater than ten percent of the amount indicated for those items as they appear in the budget; and WHEREAS, the Executive Committee of the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau at its meeting of July 22, 1987, approved the attached adjusted Budget; and WHEREAS, the adjusted budget reflects appropriate and needed changes in the various categories while maintaining the requirement that the Bureau not expend any sums beyond its revenues; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, that requisite prior consent be given to the proposed adjusted budget of the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF 1987. WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR ATTEST: SHIRLEY A. HAAPALA - CITY CLERK NORTH METRO CONVENTION & TOURISM BUREAU 1987 BUDGET - SIR MONTH ADJUSTMENT Adjusted Administration Budget Budget Change Salar $60,000.00 $50,000.00 - $10,000.00 FICA - Employer 4,290.00 3,600.00 - 690.00 Federal Unemployment -0- 224.00 +224.00 State Unemployment -0- 1,800.00 +1,800.00 Telephone 2,000.00 3,500.00 +1,500.00 Office Supplies 500.00 1,000.00 +500.00 Rent 9,000.00 9,700.00 +700.00 Utilities -0- -0- -0- Secretarial /Temp. 1,500.00 2,000.00 +500.00 Postage 1,500.00 1,200.00 - 300.00 Auto. /Parking 3,500.00 2,700.00 - 800.00 Loan & Interest 16,000.00 13,200.00 - 2,800.00 Printing /Stationery 700.00 2,000.00 +1,300.00 Office Furniture 5,000.00 2,500.00 - 2,500.00 Office Equipment 1,500.00 1,500.00 -0- Audit 2,000.00 2,000.00 -0- Workers Comp /Ins. 750.00 750.00 -0- Benefits 5,500.00 3,500.00 - 2,000.00 Liability Ins. -D & 0 3,000.00 2,909.00 -91.00 Liability Ins. -Gen 600.00 600.00 -0- Other 1 1,000.00 - 911.00 TOTALS 119 251.00 $105,683.00 -$13,568 1987 Budget Adjustment Page 12 w Adjusted Marketing Budget Budget Change Direct Mail Collateral $300.00 -0- - $300.00 Meeting Planners Guide 10,000.00 $2,000.00 - 8,000.00 Visitors Guide 10,000.00 10,000.00 -0- Weekend Package 1,500.00 1,500.00 -0- Mini-Meeting Planner 1,000.00 1,000.00 -0- Shell Folder -0- -0- -0- Group Res ponse Card 250.00 -0- - 250.00 Reference Materials 150.00 150.00 -0- Group Advertising 25,000.00 15,000.00 - 10,000.00 Weekend Advertising 25,000.00 35,000.00 +10,000.00 ency Fees 5,664.00 16,000.00 +10,336.00 ntingen -0- -0- -0- TOTALS $78 $80 +1 Sales Sales Promotion Hotel Expense- Travel $2,000.00 $1,500.00 - $500.00 Meal Expense- Travel 1,000.00 500.00 - 500.00 Entertainment- Travel 1,000.00 200.00 - 800.00 Airline Expense 1,500.00 300.00 - 1,200.00 Car Rental Expense 500.00 200.00 - 300.00 Trade Shows /Booth 1,500.00 1,500.00 -0- Sales Blitz /Particip. 3,000.00 2,000.00 - 1,000.00 Contingency -0- -0- -0- tertainment -Local 1 2 000.00 750.00 - 250.00 TALS $11 $6,950.00 -$4,550.00 1987 Budget Adjustment Page 13 Adjusted Memberships Budget Budget Change MACVB $200 $300.00 +$100.00 Metro CVB 5,000.00 -0- - ASAE 200.00 174.00 -26.00 MSAE 225.00 468.00 +243.00 ASTA 200.00 -0- - 200.00 HSMA 75.00 75.00 -0- NESKA 400.00 -0- - 400.00 MESRA 200.00 -0- - 200.00 Brooklyn Center Chamber 1,500.00 1,500.00 -0- Fridley Chamber 1,500.00 1,500.00 -0- Hennepin Chambe 1,500.00 1,500.00 -0- ACCE 300.00 -0- - 300.00 Meeting Planners Int'1 -0- 200.00 +200 TOTALS $11 $5,749.00 - 5 604 Public Relations P.R. $5,000.00 $20,000. 00 +$15,000.00 Local Promotions -(1- TOTALS $7 $22 +$15,000.00 Budget Totals 2 00 0 DOG_D - $7,0()0 00 Carried over from 1986 Budget - $11,819.55 Shell Folder, budgeted 1986, paid 1987 - 11,620.18 Residual: $199.37 Total adjusted budget . .................... ome, January - June ....................$110,380.00 come, July - December ...................$110,620.00 TOTAL ..... [$221,000.00] Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU AGREEMENT WHEREAS, on September 8, 1986, the City of Brooklyn Center entered into a convention and visitors bureau agreement with the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau; and WHEREAS, revisions and amendments have been made to the agreement which was signed on September 8, 1986. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center: 1. This Council has reviewed the amended Convention and Visitors Bureau Agreement and finds that the execution of the amended agreement is in the best interest of the City of Brooklyn Center. 2. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized and directed to execute the amended agreement on behalf of the City. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made between the City of Brooklyn Center, MINNESOTA, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as the "City ") and the NORTH METRO CONVENTION AND TOURISM BUREAU, a nonprofit corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "Bureau "). WHEREAS, the City has imposed a tax on lodging to fund a convention and visitors bureau. WHEREAS, the Bureau has the staff, facility, and experience to carry out the objectives of promoting the City as a tourist and convention center. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM / /The term of this Agreement shall begin on August 1, 1986, and shall terminate on December 31, 1987, unless both parties have agreed to its renewal in writing on or before December 1, 1987.// The term of this agreement shall begin on August 1 1986 and continue until cessation by mutual agreement or until withdrawal by one of the parties in accordance with the following provisions: (a)_ The party withdrawing from this agreement shall provide the other party written notice to that effect no later than June 30 of any calendar year. (b) Withdrawal shall be effective December 31 of the calendar year following the year in which written notice of withdrawal is given. 2. SERVICES RENDERED BY BUREAU The Bureau shall furnish the following services: (a) Informational services in answering inquiries about the City via mail, telephone, and personal contacts. (b) Provide planning, coordinating, and registration assistance to organizations and businesses. (c) Supply support material, including but not limited to name badges, city maps, typewriters, accommodations list, and information in general. (d) Prepare and present audio visual presentations to groups to attract visitors to the City. (e) Distribute brochures, maps, and guides of the City to potential visitors and meeting planners. (f) Provide representation at trade shows, conventions, and exhibits to attract new visitors to the City. (g) Promote the City as a convention center for Minnesota by regional and state -wide advertising of the City's hospitality industry and attractions. -1- 3. CHARGES / /All // Basic services provided pursuant to paragraph 2 of this Agreement shall be without charge to the person or organization utilizing such services _unless authorized by contractual agreement or action of the board of directors. 4. BUDGET The Bureau shall submit its annual budget for review by the City Council on or before the 1st day of October of the year preceding the effective date of the budget. Such budget shall detail with specificity the uses to which monies received shall be spent to provide the services described in paragraph 2 of this Agreement. / /In any year in which this Agreement is being renewed, such renewal shall not occur until this budget review process has been completed. For the initial term of this Agreement, the Agreement shall not take effect until the budget review process has been completed for the time period of August 1, 1986, through December 31, 1987.// It is understood between the parties that the actual revenues being generated under paragraph 5 may vary from the amounts anticipated in the budget. For this reason it is agreed that the budget may be modified without prior consent of the City Council, providing that any adjustments shall / /not be greater than ten percent of the amount indicated for that item as it appears in the budget // be made by a two thirds (2/3) vote of the board of directors. Notwithstanding any other language to the contrary the Bureau shall not expend any sums beyond its revenues. 5. FUNDING On the 15th day of each month, the City shall remit to the Bureau, for funding of the Bureau, 95% of the lodging tax payments received by the City, less refunds, in the preceding month during the term of this Agreement. 6. VERIFICATION OF EXPENDITURES The Bureau will provide the City a copy of the Bureau's monthly financial statements, showing monthly, year -to- date, and budget figures, properly itemized and verified by the director of the Bureau. The Finance Officer of the City shall have the right of access to the books and records of the Bureau at any time during normal business hours to audit any item of revenue or expenditure. 7. HOLD HARMLESS Any and all employees of the Bureau or any other persons, while engaged in the performance of any service required by the Bureau under this Agreement, shall not be considered employees of the City, and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said employees or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims made by the third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of the Bureau, or its agents or employees or other persons while so engaged in any of the services provided to be rendered herein, shall in no way be the obligation or the responsibility of the City. In connection therewith, the Bureau hereby agrees to indemnify, save and hold harmless, and defend the City and all of their officers, agents and employees from any and all claims, demands, actions, or causes of actions of whatever nature or character arising out of or by reason of the execution or the performance of the services provided for in this Agreement. -2- 8. MULTIPLE CITY PARTICIPATION It is contemplated that the Bureau in addition to providing services to the City of Brooklyn Center will also provide the services described in paragraph 2 of this Agreement to the Cities of Brooklyn Park. / /and // Fridley and any other city_duly entering into this agreement and that all Cities may be jointly promoted as a unitary convention and visitors bureau. Therefore, it is specifically authorized that funding for such joint promotion will be financed pursuant to this Agreement. 9. DISCRIMINATION The Bureau, in providing services hereunder shall comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 181.59 as the same may be amended from time to time. / /Minnesota Statutes Section 181.59 is incorporated in this Agreement as though set forth in its entirety and the Bureau shall not discriminate against any person or firm in any of its activities hereunder on the basis of race, creed or color. // The Bureau shall not discriminate against any person or firm in any of its activities pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 181.59 which is incorporated into this Agreement as though set forth in its entirety 10. INSURANCE The Bureau shall carry insurance to cover its employees and agents while performing services pursuant to this Agreement. Such insurance shall provide comprehensive general liability and property damage coverage to the Bureau and its employees and agents in such amounts as will equal the applicable limits of liability to which the City may be held pursuant to State Statute as the same may be amended from time to time. The Bureau shall also carry worker's compensation as required by Minnesota Statutes Section 176.182 and provide the City with proof of compliance with Section 176.182 before commencing to provide services hereunder. 11. LAWS The Bureau will comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws in the performance of its obligations hereunder. 12. ADVERTISEMENT All brochures, listings, or advertisements of specific lodging facilities shall include mention of all facilities paying the lodging tax imposed by the City. 13. INTEGRATION This document is fully integrated, embodying the entire Agreement between the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement on the dates below given. CITY OF BY: Its Mayor DATED: BY Its City Manager NORTH METRO CONVENTION AND TOURISM BUREAU DATED: BY Its -3- Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ENABLING THE CREATION OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN THE CITY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (City) as follows: Section 1. Background: Findings 1.01. The City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 458C (Act) to establish an Economic Development Authority (EDA) to coordinate and administer economic development and redevelopment plans and programs of the City. 1.02. It is found and determined by the City Council that the encouragement and financial support of economic development in the City is vital to the orderly development and financing of the City and in the best interests of the health, safety, prosperity, and general welfare of the citizens of the City. 1.03. It is further found and determined that the economic development and redevelopment of the City can best be accomplished by the establishment of an EDA as authorized by the Act. 1.05. The City Council has in accordance with the Act conducted a public hearing on the establishment of an EDA at which all persons wishing to be heard expressed their views. Section 2. Enabling Authority 2.01. The Economic Development Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center (EDA) is established effective August 24, 1987. 2.02. The five members of the City Council shall serve as the commissioners of the EDA and the current members of the City Council are hereby appointed as commissioners. The EDA has the powers and duties given it by the Act and as limited by this resolution. 2.03. The following rules apply to the EDA and its operation. a) The EDA has and may exercise all of the powers conferred by law upon a Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City. i b) The EDA may not exercise any of the powers conferred upon the City of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 472A, the Municipal Development District Act. RESOLUTION NO. C) The sale of bonds or other obligations of the EDA must be approved by the City Council. d) The EDA must follow the budget process for City departments in accordance with City policy, ordinance, resolution, and the City charter. e) Development and redevelopment actions of the EDA must be in conformance with the City comprehensive plan and official controls implementing the comprehensive plan. f) The EDA must submit its plans for development and redevelopment to the City Council for approval in accordance with City planning procedures and law. 2.04. As provided in the Act it is the intention of the City Council that nothing in this resolution or any activities of the EDA are to be construed to impair the obligations of the City under any of its contracts or to affect in an detrimental ntal manner the rights and privileges of a holder g P g of a bond or other obligation heretofore issued by the City. Section 3. Implementation 3.01. The City Council will from time to time and at the appropriate time adopt such ordinances and resolutions as are required and permitted by the Act to give full effect to the resolution. 3.02. The Mayor, city er, Clerk, rk Y g � , Finance Director, and Attorney of the City are authorized and directed to take the actions and execute and deliver the documents necessary to give full effect to this resolution. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Brad Hoffman, HRA Coordinator DATE: August 21, 1987 SUBJECT: Economic Development Authority (EDA) Statutory authority to own and operate a facility, such as the Earle Brown farm, is nonexistent for the Brooklyn Center HRA. Given the private sector's disinterest in owning and operating the farm, it is apparent that the HRA or some public entity would have to own and operate the farm. In the 1986 legislature, a law was passed enabling municipalities to establish an EDA. It was the state's attempt (failed) to bring all development law under a single statute. In reality, it only added another. However, the act provides the necessary authority to carry on economic development and redevelopment activities including the authority to hire personnel, acquire land and buildings, levy taxes up to .75 mills, and own and operate a facility such as the farm. An EDA can also operate as an HRA (an option of the City) utilizing all the statutory authority on an HRA. In other words, any activity an HRA can do an EDA can also do. The staff recommendation is to establish the EDA and have it incorporate all the powers of the HRA. The councilmembers would also serve as the commissioners as they currently do with the HRA. At that point in time, the HRA would cease to exist. All of its assets and liabilities would belong to the EDA. Dave Kennedy from the City Attorney's office is re arin p P g a more detailed memorandum discussing the change to an EDA, its scope of power and activity. Dave will also be available Monday evening to discuss the matter in greater detail. LeFevere Lefler Kenned}� O'Brien Drawz a Professional \ssociation 2000 First Bank Place West August 18, 1987 Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 Telephone (612) 333 -0543 Telecopier (612) 333-0540 Mr. Brad Hoffman Clayton L. LeFevere City Of Brooklyn Center Herbert P. Lefler 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway J. Dennis O'Brien Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 John E. Drawz David J. Kennedy Joseph E. Hamilton Re: Economic Development Authorities John B. Dean Glenn E. Purdue Richard J. Schieffer Dear Brad: Charles L. LeFevere Herbert P. Lefler III You have asked for my comments on the 1986 legislation James J. Thomson, Jr. Thomas R. Galt relating to Economic Development Authorities. As I Dayle Nolan understand it the City Council will be discussing this Brian F. Rice matter at its meeting on August 24th. (The Act is, John G. Kressel oas M. Strommen together with other economic development and redevelop - RH.Batty ment laws, effective August 1, 1987, and contained in a P. Jordan Kurt J. Erickson new chapter of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469. We "William R. Skallerud have not completed our cross - referencing Of statute Rodney D. Anderson numbers as yet: hence all statutory references that Corrine A. Heine follow are to the laws as they were numbered prior to David D. Beaudoin Paul E. Rasmussen August 1, 1987.) Steven M. Tallen Mary F. Skala Background Christopher J. Harristhal Timothy J. Pawlenty Rolf A. Sponheim In the past several years there have been a number of special laws enacted for various cities (e.g. Bloomington, Plymouth, Granite Falls) authorizing, in one way or another, the cities to exercise the powers of a port authority under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 458. That is the law under which the St. Paul Port Authority and Duluth Seaway Port Authority have operat- ed, quite successfully in the view of many, to stimu- late economic growth in underdeveloped areas and elsewhere in those cities. The legislature responded to the increasing requests for port authority powers by conducting an interim study to produce a general law for all cities and the new law is the result. (Actual- ly, the law was enacted twice in 1986 as Laws c. 399 and c. 400, but c. 399 was then repealed.) The statute has no policy section setting out its general purpose, but it is clear that its intent was to provide a general statutory framework within which all develop- mental powers of a City could be centralized in a I Mr. Brad Hoffman August 18, 1987 Page 2 single agency while at the same time making available to all cities wishing to use the law some of the powers of a port authority. As discussed below, it is doubt- ful that all of those objectives were accomplished by the new statute. General Effect The establishment of an Economic Development Authority (EDA) permits a single agency of the City to exercise any or all ( as determined by the City Council) of the powers conferred by law on cities or other agencies by: a) Chapter 462 relating to Housing and Redevel- opment Authorities; b) Chapter 472A relating to Municipal Develop- ment Districts; c) Chapter 462C relating to Housing Revenue Bonds; d) Section 273.71 et seq ., the Tax Increment Financing Act; and, e) by an approximate duplication of Chapter 458, the Port Authority Act. The EDA is also authorized to act as a conduit for state and federal economic development grants and loans and to conduct studies, research and public relations activities in matters involving economic development. Advantages Summarizing the advantages and disadvantages of an EDA is somewhat subjective, but there seem to be the following advantages: a) Centralization of development activity in a single agency: this can have the benefit of helping various agencies not working at cross- purposes and the focussing of development activities. b) Unified conduct of public relations activi- ties relating to development opportunities. c) The possibility of "pooling" of reserve funds for various projects in the City (since the Mr. Brad Hoffman August 18, 1987 Page 3 jurisdiction of the EDA is City- wide). This device has been used apparently with success by the St. Paul Port Authority and the Minneapolis Community Development Agency. In simplest terms it involves using revenues from several projects to fund a single reserve fund which is then used to enhance the marketability of bonds (either Authority revenue bonds or industrial development revenue bonds) issued for various other projects. Disadvantages a) Creation of a new agency: a new, separate public body is created by establishing an EDA. b) It is probable that virtually everything that can be done by an EDA (except perhaps the "pooling" referred to above) can be accomplished by a City under present law. c) The new law does not extend all port authori- ty powers to the EDA (e.g. the power to actually construct and lease buildings) and imposes some re- strictions on the powers extended not found in the basic port authority law. Problems There are some technical difficulties with the new law which seriously affect its workability. (There was an attempt at the 1987 Legislature to correct these problems, but no action was taken.) a) The EDA may establish "economic development districts" (a parallel to the port authority "industri- al development districts ") but such districts must meet the criteria for a "redevelopment district" under the Tax Increment Financing Act. Thus, it does not seem to be possible for the EDA to establish "housing" or "economic development" tax increment financing dis- tricts under the TIF Act. There seems to be no good reason for this result, but nonetheless, that seems to be the effect of the statute. b) The provisions for the issuance of general obligation bonds by the EDA for EDA purposes is much more restrictive than under the Port Authority Act. Under the Port Authority Act the City Council may approve such bonds by ordinance subject only to Mr. Brad Hoffman August 18, 1987 Paqe 4 referendum requirements of the City Charter (which in our judgement do not, in the case of Brooklyn Center or most City Charters, require submission to the voters). But under the EDA Act such bonds must be approved by the voters. A two - thirds vote of the City Council is also required, the bonds are within debt limits (unless other revenues are pledged) and a 20 year maturity limit is imposed as opposed to the usual 30 year limit applicable to almost all other Minnesota municipal bonds. c) The revenue bond provisions of the new act are similar to the Port Authority Act, but again a 20 year maturity limit is imposed, and it is questionable under the statute whether such bonds if issued without a call provision may be refunded. Financial matters The City in which the EDA is established may levy annually up to .75 mills to support EDA general activi- ties. The levy is outside limits. The levy may be increased subject to a reverse referendum on petition of five percent of the number of votes cast in the last preceding general election in the City. (Under the Port Authority law the .75 mill levy is not subject to City approval.) The EDA must submit an annual budget to the City, but only for review purposes. Establishment I won't discuss in detail the procedural aspects of establishing an EDA, but they are rather straightfor- ward consisting of an enabling resolution, adopted after public hearing, specifying the activities to be conducted by the EDA and various restrictions on the conduct of those activities. As you'll note, the City Council can, by the enabling resolution, rather care- fully circumscribe the EDA's procedures. The Council will be considering that resolution on Monday. Application to Earle Brown Project We have suggested that the City establish an EDA primarily to deal with the Earle Brown Redevelopment Project. We made that suggestion because it is contem- plated that the City or some public agency own and Mr. Brad Hoffman August 18, 1987 Page 5 operate some or all of the facilities at the farm site after redevelopment. We are not confident that the legal powers of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) or the City itself are adequate for those purpos- es, but we feel that such activities are clearly authorized for an EDA. Since the present City Council serves as the HRA the switch to an EDA would not be disruptive, and the City Council could, as an EDA, continue operating its various HRA activities elsewhere in the City. The Earle Brown Redevelopment Project would, however, become an EDA project and the broader EDA powers could be exercised there. This technique would minimize or eliminate two of the problems cited above since a) general obligation tax increment bonds could be sold without an election for project costs and b) the existing project area would qualify under the Act as an "economic development district" of the EDA. I suspect that this description is a bit difficult to follow, but the statutory framework involved is not simple. I'll be happy to elaborate in any way at the Council meeting on Monday. ou very truly, David Kennedy DJK:caw Enclosure cc: Charlie LeFevere Bill Jordan MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager kn FROM: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator .'!J DATE: July 8, 1987 ' SUBJECT: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding Zoning The attached ordinance amendment makes housekeeping changes to the zoning ordinance on comprehensive planning. As you may recall, the City Council recently amended Chapter 35 by deleting from the ordinance duties and responsibilities of the Planning Commission and enumerating such duties and responsibilities in Resolution Nos. 87 -87 and 87 -134. In making the ordinance amendment, section 35 -202 was given the same name as section 35- 200 - -that of Comprehensive Planning. To remedy this problem, section 35 -200 has been incorporated into section 35 -202. Also, to add clarification, the word "Planning" has been inserted before the word "Commission" each time it appears in this section. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 24th day of August , 1987, at 7:45 p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to Chapter 35 regarding Zoning. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING ZONING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: [ Section 35 -200 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING. The City Council hereby undertakes to carry on comprehensive study and planning as a continuing guide for land use and development legislation within the municipality. For this purpose the City Council has adopted, by Resolution No. 82 -255, a Comprehensive Guide Plan for the City of Brooklyn Center, and designates an advisory planning agency by Section 35 -201 to aid in such planning.] Section 35 -202 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING I. Comprehensive Planning. The City Council hereby undertakes to carry )n comprehensive study and planning as _.,,a continuing guide for land use and development legislation within the municipality For this purpose the City Council has adopted. by Resolution No 82 -255 a Comprehensive Guide Plan for the City of Brooklyn Center, and designates an advisory planning agencv by Section 35-201 to aid in such planning. The Planning Commission shall, from time to time, upon its own motion or upon direction of the City Council, review the Comprehensive Plan and by a majority vote of all members of the Planning Commission recommend appropriate amendments to the City Council. Before recommending any such amendments to the City Council, the Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing to consider the proposed amendment. The Secretary to the Planning Commission shall publish notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing once in the official newspaper of the municipality at least ten (10) days before the date of the hearing. Furthermore, the Secretary shall transmit copies of the proposed amendment to the City douncil prior to the publication of the notice of hearing. Following the review and recommendation by the Planninz Commission, the City Council shall consider the proposed amendment and may, by resolution of two - thirds of its members, amend the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Coordination with Other Agencies. In the performance of its planning activities, the Planning Commission shall consult with and coordinate the planning activities of other departments and agencies of the municipality to insure conformity with and to assist in a development of the comprehensive municipal plan. Furthermore, the Planning Commission shall take due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of v J government and other affected public agencies. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1987. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) V CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 24th day of August , 1987 at 7: 45 p . M. at the City Hall, 6,301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider the addition of a new City Ordinance. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ADDING CIHAPTER 18 REGARDING AUTHORITY OF CERTAIN PERSONNEL TO ISSUE CITATIONS IN SPECIFIED CIRCUMSTANCES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 18 is hereby added to the City Ordinances, with the following language: Section 18 -101. in the ;udc;ment of the City Council of the City Of Brooklyn Center, it is necessary to authorize certain employees who are not licensed police officers to issue citations in specified circumstances. Section 18 -102. AUTHORITY TO ISSUE CITATIONS. The followinct employees of the City of Brooklyn Center, are authorized to issue citations In the specified circumstances. A. Code Enforcement Officers. These employees, if designated by the city manager, under the direct supervision of the police department, are authorized to issue citations for: Violations of the animal ordinance; (21 Nonmoving traffic violations, (such as handicapped parking, fire lane parking, green strip violations, et cetera); Violations of the City's sign ordinance at the request of the director of planning & inspections or his designee; Violations of the City's building code, at the request of the director of planning & inspections or his designee; Violations of the City's housing maintenance and occupation ordinance at the request of the director of planning & inspections or his designee; Brooklyn Center City Ordinance Page 2 Chapter 18 lam_ Violations of the City's nuisance ordinance (such as unlicensed /inoperable vehicles, storing or accumulation of aarbacge, or number of animals); (7) Bicycle violations; LL Violations of the City's license ordinances, (such as failure to obtain rental dwelling license, or failure to license amusement device, et cetera) at the request of the City's licensing authority; Violations of the City's zoning ordinance at the request of the director of planning & inspections or his designee; t Violations of the City's fire code; and ILL Violations of the City's garbacre and food sanitation ordinances at the request of the director of manning & inspections or his designee. B. Health Department Employees. Employees of the health department, if designated by the city manager, are authorized to issue citations for any violations of State Statute or City Ordinance related 'Co: Public health; (22 ) Garbacre and sanitation; and 3 ) Food sanitation. C. Building Inspectors. Inspectors working under the direct supervision of the director of planning and inspections, if designated by the city manager, are authorized - ' Co issue citations for: (1) Violations of the City's sign ordinance; (2)_ Violations of the City's building code; (3)_ Violations of the City's housing maintenance and occupation ordinance; (4) Violations of the City's nuisance ordinance (such as storing or accumulation of garbage); Violations of the City's zoning ordinance; and _(6). Violations of the City's license ordinances (such as failure to obtain rental dwelling license, or failure tc license amusement device, et cetera) at the request of the City's licensing authority. Brooklyn Center City Ordinance Page 3 Chapter 18 SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1987. Dean Nyquist, Mayor ATTEST: Darlene Weeks, City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 24t day of August 1987 at 7 :45 p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding the zoning classification of certain land. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 35 -1150. MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT (R6). The following properties are hereby established as being within the (R6) Multiple Family Residence District zoning classification: Lot 2, Block 1, Maranatha Addition. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted). -y la0 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -21 (SURVEY AND PLATTING OF SURPLUS MNDOT RIGHT -OF -WAY ALONG INTERSTATE HIGHWAY I -94) WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation ( MNDOT) has completed construction of Interstate Highway I -94; and WHEREAS, MNDOT has advised the City that certain parcels of property acquired as right -of -way in conjunction with the development of that facility are no longer needed and may be disposed of as surplus properties; and WHEREAS, a verbal agreement has been negotiated to transfer those properties to the City of Brooklyn Center, for use by the City or for replatting and resale; and WHEREAS, Merila and Associates, Inc. has submitted a proposal to provide surveying services as required to develop the legal descriptions needed to allow transfer of those properties to the City, and to plat said properties for resale, at a cost estimated to be between $31,500 and $33,000; and WHEREAS, it is in the opinion of the City Council that it is in the best interest of the City of Brooklyn Center and its residents to proceed with the formalization of the tentative agreement with MNDOT and to proceed toward the future resale of those properties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: I. The following project is hereby established: SURVEY AND PLAT SURPLUS RIGHT -OF -WAY ALONG INTERSTATE HIGHWAY I -94 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 1987 -21 2. The proposal for surveying services from Merila and Associates, Inc. is hereby accepted. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement for these services at an estimated cost of $33,000. 3. The accounting for this project will be done in the Capital Projects Fund. The amount of $33,000 is hereby appropriated to pay for costs incurred. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being aken thereon, the following g voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY 0 OF B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE C ENTER 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manag FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: August 20, 1987 RE: Proposed Agreement with MNDOT for Disposal of Surplus Right -Of -Way Behind Noise Walls and Noise Mounds Along I -94 Ever since completion of I -94 from the South City limits to I -694 we have been attempting to get MNDOT to develop a process whereby all surplus right -of -way parcels (located behind the noise walls and noise mounds) would be transferred to the adjoining property owners, directly from MNDOT to those property owners. Unfortunately, that process has proven to be unworkable because MNDOT apparently must follow both State and Federal regulations when they transfer properties to adjoining owners. On several occasions, MNDOT has tentatively agreed to sell properties to an adjoining owner only to have negotiations collapse due to excessive red tape, MNDOT appraisals of land values which proved unacceptable to the potential buyers, and other obstacles. Accordingly, in order to resolve this impasse, I recently contacted Mr. Earl Howe, MNDOT's District 5 Right -of -Way Engineer, to attempt to develop a workable resolution. Following is a summary of the verbal agreement which we have negotiated: MNDOT is willing to give the City title to some or all of the properties shown in yellow on the attached map at no cost, with the agreement that the City can either retain these properties or dispose of them as the City Council determines to be best, provided the City agrees to the following conditions: 1. City will retain and pay for the costs of surveying and developing legal descriptions of all properties which are to be transferred (for use in preparing the transfer documents). 2. City will then retain and pay for the costs of platting those parcels which are to be transferred to adjacent property owners (most or all of them as "outlots "). 3. City will also pay for the costs of surveying and platting the 3 "developable" parcels of property which MNDOT proposes to retain for direct sale to the public (shown in pink on the maps attached). 1966 611AMERIG Qtt w r 1 y August 20, 1987 Page 2 Mr. Howe has advised me that he has obtained the verbal approvals of MNDOT officials and of the required FHWA (Federal Highway Administration) officials to proceed on this basis. Attached here is a proposal submitted to me, in response to my request, by Merila and Associates, Inc. to do the surveys and platting as required to accomplish this process. Merila estimates the costs for this work will total between $31,500.00 and $33,000.00, and estimates that the first phase of the work (i.e.preparation of the survey and legal descriptions as needed to allow transfer of the yellow properties to the City) would be completed by December 31, 1987. They also estimate that the second phase of the work (i.e. platting of all properties) could be completed by April 1, 1988. This, of course, assumes that the transfer of properties from MNDOT to the City will occur expeditiously once the legal descriptions are available. While that may prove to be an optimistic assumption, it appears that we need to proceed to that point, then see what happens. While I expect that additional time will be required to get MNDOT and FHWA approvals, I am optimistic that those approvals will ultimately be received. Accordingly, I recommend that this matter be discussed with the City Council at their 8/24/87 Council meeting. Details which need to be discussed include the following: 1. Should the narrow strips of property which lie adjacent to the City streets (i.e. adjacent to 4th street between 53rd and 55th Avenues, and adjacent to Lyndale Avenue between 58th and 61st Avenues) be claimed by the City, or left in the ownership of MNDOT? My Comment I see no advantage to the City in acquiring this property. If MNDOT retains ownership, we must expect to assume the costs for maintenance. However, continued MNDOT ownership would somewhat reduce the costs for surveying and may tend to limit the City's liability in the event of claims resulting from mishaps which may occur on these properties. 2. The parcel located behind 5530 and 5538 Camden Avenue North may be large enough to be developable either separately or in conjunction with an adjacent property. What direction does the City wish to take in encouraging or discouraging development of this property? , 3. Other parcels might become "developable" in combination with adjoining properties depending on how the property lines are drawn. What direction does the City wish to take in each of these instances? 4. Some of the resulting parcels which are proposed to be transferred to adjacent owners will be quite small; while others will be substantial in size. Should the price for each parcel be fixed by pro- rating the City's costs (including surveying, platting, legal, administrative and others) against the parcels ultimately sold on a "per parcel" basis, on a "per square foot" basis, or some other basis? August 20, 1987 0 Page 3 5. If developable parcels are created should they be appraised and sold to the highest bidder, or on some other basis? 6. Does the City wish to make recommendations to MNDOT regarding its disposition of the three developable parcels which MNDOT proposes to retain for direct sale to the public? If the City Council wishes to proceed with this matter, I recommend adoption of the resolution provided. If that resolution is adopted, we will instruct Merila and Associates to proceed with the first phase of the work. (Mr. Veenker estimates that the cost for this phase of the work will be approximately $17,600.00). During that time many of the details can be discussed and resolved. If the Council wishes, City staff can also meet with neighborhood groups to resolve some of the issues. (I would recommend meeting with several small groups - i.e.- with owners in a specific area, with specific concerns - rather than en masse with all adjoining owners.) Upon completion of the first phase of the work and completion of meetings with property owners, staff would report back to the City Council with more detailed recommendations and a request for further directions and authorization. Respectfully Submitted J Sy Knapp Director of Public Works MERILA & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, SITE PLANNERS t 7216 Boone Avenue North • Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 Telephone: (612) 533 -7595 August 19, 1987 } Mr. Sy Knapp Director of Public Works City f Brooklyn y y Center j 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Re: Proposal for surveying services Platting of surplus right -of -way for I94/694 Dear Sy: The firm of Merila & Associates, Inc., is pleased to have the opportunity to present a,proposal to the City of Brooklyn Center for the above referred platting work. I The platting work was originally described in your letter to our firm dated July 1, 1987, and further explained in our meeting of July 22, 1987. Basically, it encompasses platting what is referred to as "excess right -of -way" currently owned by the State of Minnesota, that is, property lyinq between either an existing noise barrier or fence and the actual right -of -way line. This property will be platted into Outlots (approximately 40) and then offered for sale to the adjoining land owners. There are also three larger parcels which are of sufficient size that the State of Finnesota intends to keep and sell directly to the public. We intend to Plat these parcels also into Lots and Blocks. The scenario, as I see it, will be: 1) A Herila survey crew will have to survey the locations of all noise barriers and fence lines that will be used to determine the eventual property lines of the property to be platted. These items will have to be located with respect to existing property corners /lines of the adjacent parcels and also the existing MnDOT right -of -way line. It was decided in our July meeting that the property lines would be located three feet off the noise walls or one foot off the fence lines. 2) We will then prepare a drawing showing the above and prepare the necessary legal descriptions for transfer from the State ; to the City of the narrower "strip parcels." The legal i 1 descriptions will reserve the necessary easements for storm sewers and other utilities that exist on the parcels. Proposal for Services I94/694 Right -of -way August 19, 1987 Page 2 3) We will then prepare a plat drawing showing the proposed divisions of the "strip" parcels into Ou 1 s w' m' p p t of with limits coinciding with the adjacent parcels. Since these parcels will not be built upon, I have assumed that the City could waive the preliminary plat process that is normally required for a subdivision. This would result in a considerable cost savings to the City since we would not have to do a topographic survey of the entire strip area and also not have to prepare the Preliminary Plat document for the same. 4) We would prepare Preliminary Plats and Final Plats for the three larger tracts since these are intended for subdivision into single or multi - family units. The normal platting process would be followed for these parcels, including any required rezoning, Planning Commission and City Council meetings. 5) Upon approval by the City of the plats, we would then submit them to the County for review and approval. 6) Upon approval by the County, we would then have the documents prepared for recording of the plats and set the Outlot /lot corners. 7) The City could then proceed with transfers of the property with reference to the plats. We anticipate completing the field work listed in item No. 1 during the months of September and October of this year. We would complete item No. 2 during the months of November and Decemt)er of this year. Items number 3, 4, 5 and 6 would then be completed between January 1. 1988 and April 1, 1988, such that all work would be completed and ready for transfer by April 1, 1988. We propose to do this work at our charge out rates used for municipalities, a copy of which is enclosed. I have estimated the cost for this work to be in the range of $31,500.00 to $33,000.00. This is based on not having to prepare the Preliminary Plat for the "strip" parcels. It does include my attendance at two public informational meetings as requested. I am also enclosing a copy of our latest company brochure which will provide you a listing of our current personnel and some of our more recent projects. We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal to you and look forward Pp P P Y to working with you on this project. Accepted by the City of Brooklyn Center: Respect u y submitted, Approved by the City Council: Date By Mayor Thomas H. Veenker, L.S. Date Vice President By City M "anager Date THV:ml MRRILA & ASSOCIATE'S, INC. ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, SITE PLANNERS 7216 Boone Avenue North • Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 Telephone: 4612) 533 -7595 STANDARD FEE SCHEDULE 1987 Hourly Rates Principle, Senior Engineer and Registered Land Surveyor $ 59.00 Project & Office Engineer 52.00 Design Engineer 43.00 Senior Technician & Junior Engineer 34.50 Junior Technician 26.50 Secretary 22.50 Survey Party: 3 -Man Crew 83.50 2 -Man Crew 68.00 Computer Time 20.00 Electronic Distance Meter 12.50 NOTE: All outside expenses incurred by Merila & Associates, Inc., will be charged directly to the client. IFZ Fad. Proj. No. Q ' n r•1 ) L J III '''- \ _ ' / �; _• .. - r�llr � �� '!f I I I � � Sys p _ �� Cj A l --=- III I I — -- -�- _ -_.L� ,, - 0424 C9G �,�`7 Bb \b (' 4TH ST. CONCROIILD - T --,_ -- r -- �2l _ x ,� I I 1 a I p-. 3'10%C, WALK S.a) I I I -r 5219 2a0� Raab 5250 I / 0aza CeG _ p . B62 CdG �— L J III I I. L —� s � t �� I .� 41 L .� i s' �� • I � y �� i I IYAIK 1 ' 1 424 Cd J R,w RAMP F _ t 1 /L S.L R•:. III �il 1 �F; �_f•r>� °.^ L . L J C J l_ 53RD AVE. J ' - J .� YY • Y 1 1 _��• _ / . c � " t „ �....,� �.u._ -�'�� .. � � `��y • � •S � —IP aav = - — ,» L {I y I NOISE BALI MUKI %', /' 3 = ✓ r 1 �/� j r r ONC. IVAI I I 1 t• 1 l I II I H624 C3G S < 4 I i� I P _i 3 ' `�. .�. XO .MIN. a� I \�'t\ S'^L D424 CdG -Ac FR. RD. % 8624 C&G- I� f - I j � zG I I I % xc� ze -° z QQ CS 9 MIN A ID .0 1 I I I'f 27 8,�ZV6 C •` t{. / Y Data c6G CE! (i 0. g aEG 5.4. L 781 }2 T. e Fy m I I P Z Daza tec _ . i ;� �1 VN p 5• a s _ ,R'W E _ i z le ' 1 I r 375 RAMP H i �. Fy Rl r l l l 7 ± f I I p21 CyG t p MIN• J� 7l B II r IJ I 1•� XC� 10 !4 \�_,r� �-Oa2a Cac ti015E l:'All JJ fit_ L MED _E• 1=p� r r` - ---'�- w + ( 2\ •� t'S� �r j0 ' IN. `'CONTR LLED ACCESS s +(M 11�5337 I I I ^ CaC 0624 Xc J-1 WS � n � c � _'^1 V 1 F fK E r 1 � �1r -532LJ 1 / i E. FR. RD. X`c! - 3' _ MWN f 1 ll J 10 MIN. I g _ - XC '�" "_�� ti5 12'r f� /•.r•- i / OQ •70 S — XCzf 1 1 i x` _.,� - �. _-�- 1: _ 5309 W � I 8624 40 - -�`��� 8624 CAC � I I , .. _ it/w I I I � � �- ✓ �� / C(N. W NWNO C B62a CdG- P i j � - . � 1; _. -��" •. � y i � ' \,a\ 151617 g10 1rI W isf V ALI NN 8624 r CONIC AIK _ - -- R6 v. s.E RECEIVED LYNDALE AVE. - = — -- _ = - — _ euA c A c o tsx', . '� u B&10KLYB CEhiER WNh. r --�� •, T ION. 52R , I l {C � - _. ?, Cdc I IV CURB TRANS I B62d 10 DA2/ I I j I r I (zzze 1 - -- -- r C. LYNDAL E AVE. WIN SIDES OF RAAIPI I CONC I W W A , LK • � t 04 I I 11 I I L ' - ` L J 1 LC L MEO. - "A. 3THOOTO386430 I 1 stets Proj N0. 2 1.12611. N. aal , nyl zellr WI • Sheet No :;t 16 SFiets ' �' r „r r ` ° ✓r t > �, r any . _ . f �. I .:A7 Cti .c'` CAMDEN AVE. I I 1 — ---------- - -- ,— r1 r - -- '-1 t I � - - - - -- - - - Q rD — 1 I I F - �S53B 5550 1 S 1 r I W I > 1 4s� 1 F ss 6 ssz2 I ss30 --j L , _ ch I r tom[ L r� A L 11 �`� y Y �I —S.E— CONTROLLED CCESS7�i — _ -_ __ - -__ L•— ^� A�xC - I �' l� " - • I I � BF.IB CdG r— / J _ — v'� C'+K .at - < 15'A11N: <, 9 < r - � I I l_ I '' 11, - ',�J ✓ / 4 , x..4 s - , - c i .^.•",«. %OISE GAIL r ✓� Ii 1 J / C/ .d' +' F s .7` " m wND C I ter• 'r'' _ I I � � I I ''' � I. ' � � �''� ' l / e \g ',d•e��wf- ?''ice'/ xC 1 ^ ^_,_� i V / '/ �/, "sue- 4 , � r� �a I i �` �� m • , µ 400 40 ILC '1 2 SHLO I Ic j <C D421 C B G I y= =\ Data CeG� C . I ' —� NOISE Y. AIL It 't RAMP / 20 a S(L SI r,,.p.aD P \ ' -ITT 4 Uq 8618 C&3 -- x- CS.r- _ t=2^_ C LW MED. ( as R ,;!^ �� � R'r r — °A w � ,Q 5c) _ 1 L 56,7 J _ '" i � 1\ L'. IS[ :. 411 !r_ �• 'r' e I W I I - -_�. �.`�c \ � / , /' , �.—. 7C - "' .. � ,��.. • f CONTROLLED ACCESS r —� i I ] I I v(- v _� / Cl 8618 CdG R. I �. n I / I I I I _55n , - f s:L —•'� pn RAMP H • #• I I l `' '� - c424 C65 y p\ 116. att i t SSO J / - ':olzr cam.. ,��� ii J i _ I I J V `-- -\ � C�S�� ` r•� 15 �% t�'j,. i �y y I �' / / , �1 4L c� ' �-.__�_ — n om W , irL. u: SHE Er S.E. l / �,• / :c. R ErT. aiw ° s4y i 1 lr4 - 1 uED. STA 386150 TO 402+50 • / �r� 1 _.� $tatt Pro} Na. S,. IT It N ad1 Shut '3 of 16 : .Shutt I ( ii II r iI 1 JLJ L-J f J r-I IL a I r) _ E--r I �i_J L ,..J S E ( f 1 J - ------------------- ---------- - S - - -E L�I - - -- - J r— — — r— — o CAMDEN AVE. r -- 1 -� ---- - - - - - -, - - -- I S.C� r �(i s6z< fey `I �r ti�i, I 1 1 II _ I I I I r-- LJ ILJ �� —�� rsegz' 1 �i� E'r�� L LTIL , z rL6 1 (—z (1 f IjI ��� L,,- j L- — 5730 la L J I II LJ J 1 u J = �`i r 1 J l u I lCD� y� LJ LJ S.E CONTROLUD ACCESS 1 i r r 57TH AVE. �' l - -- I -- -- I 1 �� LJ—� � L _xC� � — + wc� IL - i_ ONTROIEED ACCESS }tea M_ OUND C S WAIF S WACK kC'- , �----- .�-� Ct W4 , j j i i Many D 1 I 1 1 L Sea J E —.J - , I V 101 • .'�-_ 1�4-'�•w... "" "a�` 618 c6G -� -�- _ 1 I _ I _� S _L I I �� J I WES FR. RD! �- a - 4oc y o c\j 1 ^bl _� 21S � 1 T - _- -� -�_ '1 I Z I i)•( N I �� IS 217 u'nP SHLD.I 4 'b ~� Z� �< m 1 Ir &Era ;OM2 IA ` -- I. ' -,Lc SNtp TAffR 70 MIN" � 3011 °I 13 Oats CAC 1 30D1 415 GI III MOUNDE I r _ v S' WAL r c xc -. I XC uc iw6 A- 144 O 4x + I :1 - `�. Y� ti 1. t alt � '-- a _ -- _ SH D - K • - ._ _ _ ( L MARINA ROAD REi. CiALL S • •� °may `... g• C.AtK _ - _ o A RIVER �v�• u5s �r' ✓ ✓ ✓� MISSISSIF?Pt _ i R w a RF=...... L .� PLAN SHEET ° ��L � � � B�pKLYM CENTER, h7lflli. � _ U < < lEOEbc� MED. srA ru.saro. f ( AI {D SSA. 616.25 St,t� Pr.f N O. 2161- 1261T.M.9.1 2781 -281 (TH sa Shea No. I6 S6 t. — __j 5_ � � — _ J L- � — �. t- — J � —' ' — — I Fed. Proj. No. CAMDEN AVE. w > I4 } I�=1 P —� LI L �1 - (- .. F — I r so s J r s soa r 6G35 r o a l_ -Z L �T- I ,I r- zJ �� 1 W. FR. RD. II II `t 1 L J 219 L -44- mill -_ — -- :o... — -- _ — W. FR. RD. (LYNDAL E � AVE -- -_- � •— � i `. . _ / \ --- --------- - - - - - - -- 04� :�� _.b:� �,:= '<��.:- _...le - E - 7430 LORI T H 1 69 S B T.H. - 9 4 LO S.B. f Tri r TV __t_- '- 425 — :: [;Pa ?co —430 co P. r - 4 25 �_ -- - -_ Cva ..ALt 8 . t -_ — Er:DEO\c :�D. s.aaltR v SHLD �— OR T.H. 169 S.B. 0474 C G `L L MED CL L t '1 25.E — D474C 6 e. I� C,.rei fR4 \). c 4 LCa`ra ; 4 29- I° 'cc 4 8 +50 END SP 2781 -281 (TH 94) x. __ rCr -d57a g(G. ux,t 04>4 C_ L G.� O.ltl C. b `•. - ,cr r..tu s � MARINA -RCAD �. '43() 0 ,•.� r > R:o u LORI T.H. 94 N.E T_H.. 169 N _B. INFLACE C -L FENCE cl �L4CE M4RN4 kCap _ F?P ��- _ — RAN SHEET ►ASSISSIPPI RIVERJ�LY L MED. STA 418#25 TO L! T.N 94 N.0 STA. 437+75 Stets Pro;. No Pil 12s rt n 4JI 7nt to u a a1 Sbcct No. 15 of 16 SF cctt Tr 11. A 00-- 17 - -- — T o i k37 - -- = r { + c 4 ° s} { r w.e P i QT 277+ i ��vr� , h � ��•� �,+' r � T 92 r M� � dd ;y j7�re p�$6 15 �►r�PJ 'fir �9t p R7a s T V' t , / f Ri a�k pp� ffp �Y r D a,1+ at e IdAl •tt � r v t` 3 - � •, i� t j ` >v r � �N�� � �. X y ' ,' SS t �d �� � s1 r �.ry , $,[, +/ 1.7� ��l� �s'1 �, �Yr + tiAt �+��.,,��. �, ��):7,� f, r } ' ( � �} A , t . l �'��•' � �'.-s� gg v'� '�" /� ,,.�" '�-. e < I �'{ ./ ,� -� t'- ,. . -r fir§ � � ��} � t { 1.•.�,r�� '� � p ' ii i 7 A , N (6 )7H94 ewe 3 .84.62 � � � "4 5 °(3 0'OO r � ti (3T • ' "K '�++ei �' i _ r t'�,p�� ,t'' r "_ � .{,vc: 1' " 1 4 d} D 0°30' Q A, 0 1 Tj• 600.55 S1JJ 65 E 1200.00 r +l s may.: W I y . 257-1 8x.27 6 rr ; m I Y N PC t <t I 2 8 [, +;; I O 269�84.z7 ir. 1 I k �s" TH.94 EWE.B. 1'1. 274 +67.8 �r 7 RT Di .6I 9 T` 483.'59' L 884.62', P. FC.C. 269+8q .T . 278+68.$9= �TH.94LORS.B PO _: - .� -1•� (�3°����. 2 �'. A� 443 +01.63 D Sq 1 50.65 28.36 N 53 s A kit" )0" I 8.36 ( t1 h' 4 4V!� , rs� � o���i b •� .65 z ( ,�; 04 %� 55 Q� I NEG, 51 W 16 J Joseph Skorpak o l + 55A I I la Q PI. Gort lot 4 Sec . 3r r Entire tract 0.52 Ac v _ t � I ` � 31 New 7 H !� /W 1 AC - - - -- �] - - - 4 A - ctx,l alt tak � � �;.rr3 L S E 0.05!1 ( I 0 u 4;�I i 0.3 ,. o -ss r 6 Q- Bla} _ n -- -- ---- -_ AVE. 38 .� r t fU�t• C ;'"�_ 17- �.--- Y-�, -. }. o i S { w i c r �• - y: . � ca <t - .r. ' �. �, it � t,n:N.Y . f - -._— I `" -.,.,�).1��$a�:�"'b i � ':: 4`�. r�'. 9 r, � Sryy • • • L 1]] league of minnesota cities August 14, 1987 TO: Mayors, Managers, and Clerk FROM: Donald A. Slater, Executive Director RE: Regional Meeting Issue Papers Last year at the League's regional meetings we presented materials on policy issues which were being considered by the LMC legislative policy committees. We took votes on those issues and presented the opinions of the regional meeting participants to the policy committees as they completed the League's 1987 Legislative Policies and Priorities for Legislative Action. At the conclusion of this process, we evaluated the results of a survey asking regional meeting participants how they felt about working on legislative policy issues at the regional meetings. The responses were overwhelmingly in favor of continuing the involvement of the regional meetings as an integral part of the policy process. The League Board of Directors agreed to extend the consideration of policy issues to the 1987 regional meetings, but asked that the staff work on methods to improve the process. To give you advance information on the issues to be considered, League staff have prepared issue papers on policy questions designated by each of the LMC legislative policy committees. We have also developed voting cards so that we may get a more definitive expression of opinion on each of these issues. We are looking for other ways to improve the quality of the presentation of these materials to regional meetings, and I am most interested in your suggestions for improvement. Attached are the issue papers for the 1987 regional meetings. Please distribute these to your councilmembers and be prepared to cast your votes on these issues at the regional meeting you will be attending. If you are unable to attend a regional meeting, please fill out the voting card and return it to Lynda Woulfe, League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55101 by September 14. I look forward to your participation in this very important aspect of developing the League's 1988 Legislative Policies and Priorities for Legislative Action. 1 80 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 (01 27 227 -5000 league of minnesota cities TAX INCREMENT FINANCING QUESTION: Should the League sponsor responsible tax increment finance legislation in the 1988 legislative session? BACKGROUND Over 200 Minnesota cities employ tax increment finance (TIF) as a major development tool. The number of cities using TIF has steadily risen over the years, particularly in the 1980's. In 1981, 98 cities operated TIF districts. As of 1987, 216 cities initiated TIF programs. A majority of these cities are located outside of the metropolitan area and they fall into all categories of population. The dramatic growth in TIF projects in Minnesota has been fueled by the decline in federal assistance programs, the uncertainty of state aid, and the flexible nature of TIF. Over the past decade, the federal government has terminated most of its development assistance programs and substantially cut funding for its remaining development programs. Meanwhile, the state has initiated a number of new development assistance programs only to see these efforts become embroiled in major political controversies. Recently, the department administering development assistance, the Department of Trade and Economic Development, was reorganized. This was followed by the creation of a new economic development effort charged with responsibility for a wide range of new programs. How cities fit into the new law is unclear. Tax increment finance, on the other hand, remains the one program which provides maximum local flexibility and accountability. Although TIF can be complex and time consuming, city government dictates the pace of activity, initiates the projects, and controls the local program without interference from other levels of governments. TIF, however, has been a lightening rod for state legislative proposals that would curtail cities' TIF authorities. Even after the enactment of a major TIF reform in 1979, the Legislature barely let the issue rest for a session. More recently, during the 1986 session, a restrictive TIF bill passed the House but died in conference. The League opposed this bill and worked for modifications in it. During the 1987 session, the House seemed less interested in TIF but did consider a proposal to reimburse counties for costs associated with TIF project improvements. This provision died in conference. The 1988 Legislature is very likely to reopen the TIF issue. A number of legislative committees have already signaled their intentions to hold extensive hearings on the issue. 160 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 [61 21 227 -5600 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (con't) The proposed changes in TIF have been numerous. The most frequently, suggested changes have been: to give counties authority to veto TIF programs; to place a percentage limit on the amount of TIF a city can engage in; to redefine the soil correction test; to require pre -1979 projects to conform to provisions adopted by the 1979 Legislature; to reimburse the county auditor for administration of TIF projects; to change the definition of redevelopment projects. Current League Position League policy states that we are willing to work with the Legislature to improve the program or correct any problems with it. This begs the question of whether the League should initiate legislation or, alternatively, resist any legislative proposals during the 1988. YES, LEAGUE SHOULD INITIATE NO, LEAGUE SHOULD RESIST ALL LEGISLATION. EFFORTS TO AMEND TIF IN 1988. The League should initiate TIF The 1988 legislative session legislation during the 1988 promises to be dominated by session to head off potentially tax issues which will leave damaging legislation. The little time for the tax writing county organization, with committees to deal with TIF. intense pressure from Hennepin The House Tax Committee does and the support of Dakota not appear to be interested in Counties, seeks to severely considering TIF at this time. limit TIF and several key legislators support this view. If the League sponsors a Unless the League leads and proposal, it could later be controls the legislative effort transformed into something to responsibly revise the which the League would not program, severe limits could want. Moreover, the Legislature become law. The League has a could still take up a major TIF reasonable bill already reform bill even if the drafted. It should negotiate League - sponsored bill is with the county organization, accepted as is. giving only those concessions which do not damage city Overall, it's best to leave authority, and develop a strong well enough alone and not buy coalition. The League should trouble. attempt to settle the issue for the foreseeable future by building and maintaining a coalition to oppose further tinkering with TIF. illl i!!I league of minnesota cities LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTION DAY QUESTION: Should the League continue to oppose a Local Government Election Da . Y BACKGROUND: This proposal would require all city, school district, and special district elections (including county and municipal judge elections) to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in odd years. Federal and state elections would be held in even years. Townships would have the option to retain present election days or change to the local government day. No primaries would be required for cities under 2500 population unless the city decides by ordinance or resolution. Primaries for non - partisan offices would not be required when no more than twice the number of persons to be elected file for an office. This proposed legislation would supersede all city charters, special laws, etc. Terms would be extended until the first Monday in January of the even year. Currently 642 cities conduct their municipal elections in November of the even year. Only 98 cities conduct their elections in November of the odd year. Annual elections are held by 58 cities and 31 cities have their municipal elections in other months according to charter provisions. Of the cities holding their elections in the even year, 78 percent are under 2500 population. The majority of school district elections are held annually in May. CURRENT LEAGUE POLICY: League policy opposes designating a Local Government Election Day. YES, THE LEAGUE SHOULD CONTINUE TO NO THE LEAGUE SHOULD NOT OPPOSE A OPPOSE LOCAL GOVERNMENT LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTION DAY ELECTIONDAY. Designating a Local Government Day There is no proof that a Local would be advantageous for the Government Election Day would voter. They would soon realize that increase voter participation or every first Tuesday in November is create more interest in local an election day. Media campaigns to races. Cities should not have to get out the vote could be uniform conduct elections each year (local throughout the state. Local in odd years, state and federal in elections would not get "lost" even years), thereby doubling their among the federal and state offices election costs. Combining school voted on in the even year and city elections could be very elections. confusing in a city which has multiple school districts or in a school district which covers several cities. " 80 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 C61 23 227 -5000 VOTING EQUIPMENT QUESTION: Should the League continue to oppose legislation that would make current voting equipment obsolete by requiring expensive retrofitting or reprogramming costs. BACKGROUND: In addition to paper ballots, Minnesota uses three types of voting devices: LEVER MACHINES, the oldest form of voting device; ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES, known as PUNCH CARD machines; and OPTICAL SCAN equipment, the newest technology recently certified for use. Vendors submit equipment to the Secretary of State for certification. Once certified, equipment may be sold to local units of government. Current law allows cities to select the equipment which best suits local needs. CURRENT LEAGUE POLICY: The League supports current law and opposes any state - mandated system of voting equipment. YES, THE LEAGUE SHOULD CONTINUE NO, THE LEAGUE SHOULD NOT OPPOSE TO OPPOSE LEGISLATION THAT LEGISLATIVE MANDATES REQUIRING WOULD MAKE OBSOLETE CURRENT CITY RETROFITTING OF EQUIPMENT TO VOTING EQUIPMENT. HELP VOTERS IDENTIFY CANDIDATES OF Requirements, such as color- coding POLITICAL PARTIES. ballots to distinguish between Cities should not oppose parties, party -row balloting or legislation that is designed to other programming changes are 9 help the e voter select the expensive to cities. They are of no candidates they wish to vote for. benefit in city elections since Color- coding of ballots or party city elections are non - partisan. In row balloting would be helpful to addition, the timing of legislative the voter in finding the candidate mandates often makes the equipment they wish to vote for on the unusable for a particular election. ballot. Candidates (and major Designating party affiliation on political parties) could use the the ballot is sufficient for state color in all their promotion and federal offices. Additional materials, thereby making designations are superfluous and identification easier on election unnecessary. day. State mandated voting equipment would provide for faster tabulation of results. Elections and education of voters would b simpler. 0 � 011e IM I LI league of minnesota cities LAND USE LEGISLATION QUESTION : Should the League support changes to the state's planning and zoning laws that would reduce cities' flexibility in structuring their planning commissions and boards of adjustment, reduce cities' ability to extend their subdivision regulations, require comprehensive plans prior to zoning, and consolidate and make consistent various planning and zoning laws? BACKGROUND The Governor's Advisory Council on State -Local Relations undertook a thorough review of the state's planning and zoning laws. The League participated in that study. A subcommittee of local elected officials was formed to review the recommendations developed by a technical committee composed of planning officials from townships, cities, counties, regional development commissions, and the state. Those recommendations have been collected in a report on land use legislation and draft legislation has been prepared, with introduction in the 1988 session probable. CURRENT LEAGUE POSITION The Land Use, Energy, Environment, and Transportation committee is currently debating the merits of the proposal. Staff has identified certain issues of substantial importance to cities that may cause problems if adopted as currently proposed. The Report's recommendations are in the left column. YES, THE LEAGUE SHOULD NO, THE LEAGUE SHOULD SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING OPPOSE THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS 1. REQUIRE THE CREATION OF A 1. REQUIRE THE CREATION OF A SEPARATE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. SEPARATE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. This board would rule on This requirement variances, etc. which must have unnecessarily limits the at least one but no more than one authority of a city to planning commission or council establish a structure that representative. Appeals from this meets its unique situation. separate body would go directly to Smaller communities may find district court. This provision is it difficult to recruit board intended to "depoliticze" the members. An intermediate variance review process. appeal to the council should be provided. 00 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 161 21 227 -5600 LAND USE (con't) 2. CHANGING THE REQUIREMENT OF UNDUE 2. CHANGING THE REQUIREMENT OF HARDSHIP TO AN EASIER STANDARD OF UNDUE HARDSHIP TO EASIER UNNECESSARY DIFFICULTY. STANDARD. This would loosen the current The existing requirement is standard to reflect common practice fine. Loosening the in granting variances from the requirement would make it more strict application of zoning difficult to implement the ordinances. requirements of a zoning ordinance. 3. REQUIRE THE ADOPTION OF A 3. REQUIRE ADOPTION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN ORDER TO HAVE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. ZONING OR OTHER LAND USE CONTROLS. The comprehensive plan can be as The proposed requirement is little as a statement of goals, overly onerous for cities. objectives, and policies, and Courts will use incon- present and proposed land use sistencies to supercede local maps. Recent cases have called decisions. The five year into question the common practice grace period is impractical. of passing ordinances without a supporting comprehensive plan. Metropolitan cities have had this requirement for several years. Cities would have a five year grace period, after which failure to adopt a comprehesive plan would invalidate all offical controls. 4. PROHIBIT THE PRACTICE OF 4. PROHIBIT THE PRACTICE OF CONDITIONAL REZONING. CONDITIONAL REZONING. Conditional rezoning is defined Conditional zoning provides as making a district change added flexibility and conditioned on the applicant safeguards against changes meeting certain requirements. in development proposals. An example is to grant rezoning from multi - family to commercial if the applicant agrees to construct apartment buildings in conjunction with the commercial development. 1111 41 lic league of minnesota cities TRANSPORTATION FUNDING QUESTION ; What changes in the state's transportation funding mechanisms should the league support? BACKGROUND Governor Perpich and other political leaders have listed the lack of an adequate transportation funding program as the single biggest failure of the 1987 legislature. Funding inadequacy was almost assured when the Governor proposed suspending the transfer of the estimated $225 million generated by the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) from the state's general fund to the highway and transit fund. The Legislature agreed with the non - transfer of MVET and these MVET funds, along with an approximate $700 million dollar tax increase, were used to balance the state general fund. The Minnesota Department of Transportation recently cancelled approximately $90 million in proposed highway projects because of the shortage in road funds. Many of the projects were in Greater Minnesota. Metropolitan projects were spared somewhat because many qualify for additional federal funds. Additional road funding is necessary. The administration has apparently abandoned as a possible source the transfer of the MVET. An increase in the gas tax or a one percent sales tax on general retail sales seem to be preferred at this time. A one cent increase in the gas tax results in approximately $20 million of revenue annually. Currently, Minnesota's gas tax is 17 cents per gallon. A one percent sales tax in the metro area would generate approximately $130 million annually. Tied in with the funding issue are the issues of jurisdiction studies and turnbacks, and potential constitutional amendments regarding dedication of the motor vehicle excise tax to the highway fund and the current allocation (62 -29 -9) of road funds among the state (62 %), counties (298), and cities over 5,000 population (9 %). Jurisdictional studies that attempt to establish the level of use for particular roads (i.e., classifying roads as collectors, arterials, etc.) will soon be completed. Some advocate the assignment of road maintenance responsibilities to the level of government that best matches the jurisdictional classification of the road. CURRENT LEAGUE POSITION The Land Use, Energy, Environment, and Transportation Committee is currently debating the funding issue. Existing League policy advocates dedicating the MVET, opposing large scale turnbacks, requiring all turned -back roads to be brought up to standards acceptable to the receiving jurisdiction, and modifying the allocation formula to provide for the funding of roads located in cities under 5,000 population by reducing the 298 county share. 180 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 161 21227-5600 TRANSPORTATION FUNDING (con't) YES, LEAGUE SHOULD SUPPORT: NO, LEAGUE SHOULD OPPOSE: 1. METRO SALES TAX 1. METRO SALES TAX Additional road funding is A sales tax, unlike MVET necessary. Most road needs or the gas tax, is not are in the metropolitan area. user based. Rural area A metro sales tax would provide needs would not be ade- a stable and adequate source quately funded. of funds for the metro area. 2. GAS TAX INCREASE 2. GAS TAX INCREASE The gas tax is a user based Minnesota already has tax, and levied state wide, one of the highest gas thus justifying a proportional taxes in the nation. split between metro and rural Only generates $20 areas. million per penny. 3. MVET TRAM SFER /DEDICATION 3. MVET TRANSFER /DEDICATION Large, stable, user based General fund loses funding source. Would $200 million annually, implement legislative fund is dedicated, limits policy established 15 years discretion in use of funds. ago. 4. JURISDICTIONAL REASSIGNMENTS 4. JURISDICTIONAL REASSIGNMENT Would make users of roads May not reduce overall responsible for owning, upkeep; mileage of roads in state. local roads -local governments, to property tax payers. state roads -state government. Would shift responsibility Would reduce funding pressure for road upkeep from users on state. Promotes good to property tax payers, government, efficiency. create new local problems. 5. CHANGE 62 -29 -9 FORMULA, 5. CHANGE 62 -29 -9 FORMULA REDUCING COUNTY SHARE TO FUND SMALL CITY ROADS Current allocation does not Current allocation method provide direct funding is fair, balances mileage to cities under 5,000 and and level of use. Fund - townships. Assumes all ing for a state system, roads in those jurisdictions not local roads. Would are either local roads or are require constitutional on county and state aid systems. amendment to change. sill IiI1 league of minnesota cities HOMESTEAD CREDIT QUESTION Should the League oppose changes in the homestead credit adopted by the 1987 Legislature? BACKGROUND The 1987 Legislature adopted major changes in the homestead credit program. Beginning in 1989, the current residential homestead credit program will be eliminated. For the homeowner, the homestead credit will be replaced by a "homestead value exemption." This means that a certain value of the homestead property will be exempt from property taxes -- for 1989, this exempt value would be 52 percent of the assessed value of the first $68,000 of the market value of the home. The homestead credit shown on the homeowner's tax bill will be equal to the total local mill rate (including city, county, school and town portions of the property tax) multiplied by the exempted value. The city and other local governments will spread their levies and determine their mill rates by excluding the assessed value exempted under the new program. For cities and other units of local government (counties, schools, and townships), the old homestead credit program will be replaced by a "homestead credit replacement aid." In the first year of implementation (1989), the homestead credit replacement aid paid to a City is supposed to be roughly equal to what it received in the prior year. However, due to formula changes, high -mill rate areas will generally receive more aid in 1989 and low -mill rate areas will generally receive less aid. In 1990 and all future years, this base amount of homestead credit replacement aid paid to a city will be increased only by two escalator factors : 1) inflation and 2) growth in a city's exempted homestead values. Increases in a city's mill rate will not increase the homestead credit replacement aid. CURRENT LEAGUE POSITION : The Revenue Sources Committee is currently debating whether to oppose the new homestead credit replacement aid or take a more cautious approach, urging the Legislature to be aware of all the effects of the new credit before implementing it. I 33 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 (61 2) 227 -5600 HOMESTEAD CREDIT (con't) YES, LEAGUE SHOULD OPPOSE THE NEW NO, LEAGUE SHOULD NOT OPPOSE HOMESTEAD CREDIT PROGRAM HOMESTEAD CREDIT PROGRAM. Cuts in the new homestead credit It is good policy to sever the link program could be made more easily between homestead credit payments because there would no longer be a and property tax levels of local direct link between the homestead governments. The old program credit paid to homeowners and the provided too much of an incentive reimbursement to cities for revenue to local governments to raise their lost through the homestead taxes since, in most cases, 54 % of exemption. Under the old homestead the tax increase was picked up by credit program, it was difficult the state through the homestead for the Legislature to cut the credit. credit without it showing up on the taxpayer's bill. Under the new The Legislature will be able to program, however, the Legislature have more direct control over could cut the homestead replacement expenditures for the new homestead aid to cities, but the credit credit replacement aid since it can appearing on the homeowner's bill easily change or, if necessary, would remain the same or even temporarily suspend the two go up under certain circumstances. escaltor factors in the homestead credit formula. The new homestead credit replacement aid is another "aid" Expenditures for the homestead program, like local government aid. credit program will be more Annual battles over formula changes predictable since the homest are more likely. credit will no longer be linked local property tax levels. This It would be easy for the will help stabilize the state's Legislature to cut the homestead budget situation. replacement aid - -even in the middle of the budget year -- with If the state faces budget problems, no warning to cities which depend expenditures for the homestead upon that source of revenue. credit program could be easily cut, providing the state with a better In establishing the initial tool for dealing with budget homestead replacement aid amount crises. (upon which all future aid would be based), higher mill rate areas In the past, some argued that would be advantaged and low mill cities were not accountable for rate areas would be disadvantaged. their tax and spending increases since local property taxpayers were In the future, a city which has partly protected against local tax growing needs and must increase its increases by the homestead credit. mill rate will not receive With this new homestead credit increasing homestead credit design, no one can make that payments. This could force large argument. and abrupt increases in the taxes paid on non - exempt property (commercial /industrial property, the non - exempt portion of homestead values, renters). fill I league of minnesota cities LEVY LIMIT LEGISLATION QUESTION: Should the League designate the elimination of levy limits as an A priority, proposing legislation and making it a high priority? BACKGROUND: The 1987 Legislature imposed a very tight three percent levy limit on all cities for payable 1988. The new levy limit is more severe than prior limits because first, most "special" levies (previously allowed outside the limit) are suspended for one year (except for bonded debt and certain pension costs) and second, the new levy limit is imposed on small cities (under 5000 population) for the first time since 1982. Despite legislators' assurances that tighter levy limits would be temporarily imposed for only one year, the new tax law actually imposes tighter levy limit restrictions beyond 1988. Smaller cities (under 5000 population) would be permanently subject to levy limits. The impetus for tighter limits came largely from legislators' fears that local property tax levels would increase dramatically next year because of changes in the school aid formula, the loss of federal assistance (particularly general revenue sharing), and limits the state placed on state aid through the LGA and homestead credit programs. YES, ELIMINATING LEVY LIMITS SHOULD NO, ELIMINATING LEVY LIMITS SHOULD BE AN "A" PRIORITY FOR LEAGUE NOT BE AN "A" PRIORITY FOR LEAGUE Of all revenue issues (including Designating the elimination of levy LGA, homestead credit and property limits as an A priority will take tax reform), tight levy limits have away from the League's resources to the most harmful effect on cities' lobby against harmful changes in abilities to operate financially the homestead credit program and to and to provide the services their lobby for increases in the LGA residents need. They are program. particularly unworkable for small cities which have small budgets and Since the school aid formula can experience large year -to -year changes which are likely to force increases in their budgets. up local property tax levels will have their most dramatic effect in Tight levy limits force cities to 1989, it is unrealistic to make a issue more debt which is not always major effort to eliminate levy the most economical or most limits for 1989. The League should appropriate manner for financing wait until the "dust has settled" expenditures. Levy limits also on the school aid changes. prevent many cities from building up adequate reserves. Certain key legislators on the tax Levy limits are severely limiting committees strongly oppose the cities' abilities to compensate for removal of levy limits. These cuts in state and federal financial legislators are in a position to aid as well as making it impossible single - handedly block any bill to deal with rising costs forced by eliminating levy limits no state and federal mandates. matter what the League does. They argue that they will not consider Levy limits are inconsistent with the removal of limits until the principles of local comprehensive property tax reform self - government and local is achieved. accountability. Rather than making a major effort Levy limits are arbitrary when to eliminate levy limits, the applied uniformly to all cities League should try to get since cities vary markedly in their incremental changes in the law that needs and abilities to raise would at least temporarily loosen revenue. up the limits. 93 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 (61 2) 227-5600 CITY SERVICE CHARGES FOR TAX - EXEMPT PROPERTY QUESTION: Should cities be able to impose a service charge on tax - exempt property? BACKGROUND: Last year the House included in its tax bill a proposal to grant cities the option to impose, by resolution, a service charge for "basic municipal services" provided to tax - exempt properties. This was designed as an option which cities could voluntarily exercise. Service charges collected by the city would be deducted from the city's levy limit. In exercising this option, the city could not be selective in applying the charges. They would have to apply equally to all tax - exempt property in the city. However, the city could not impose service charges on buildings owned by federal, state, or local governments, Indian tribes, or on buildings subject to payments in lieu of property taxes. Under the proposal, basic municipal services would be the amount a city spends for "police, fire, street and road construction and maintenance, street lighting, sanitation, or other similar property related public services." Service charges would be related to the assessed value of the tax - exempt property and the total costs of basic municipal services. CURRENT LEAGUE POSITION: League supports requiring tax - exempt property (except houses of worship) to reimburse cities for costs of police, fire and street services. YES, THE LEAGUE SHOULD CONTINUE TO NO, LEAGUE SHOULD NOT SUPPORT SUPPORT IMPOSING SERVICES CHARGES IMPOSING SERVICE CHARGES ON ON TAX - EXEMPT PROPERTY TAX- EXEMPT PROPERTY It is clear that tax - exempt Most tax - exempt property, property benefits from city y particularl charities and services (police, fire protection hospitals, are dedicated to serving and street services). the public and shouldn't be charged It is inequitable to provide free for services. services to tax - exempt property. The proposal is "all or nothing." Other city property ends up bearing It does not allow cities to pick higher tax burdens as a result. and choose among the tax - exempt properties in assessing services Certain cities have a high charges. Thus, unfair burdens will concentration of tax - exempt fall on certain tax - exempt property and are in a particularly properties that cities may want to disadvantaged situation. protect. Some tax - exempt properties, such as This proposal is not really helpful hospitals or nursing homes, are since any revenue a city gains from almost like profit - making services charges must be deducted businesses. against its levy limit. Hence, it is not new money. This proposal really only benefits cities which have high concentrations of tax - exempt property. league of minnesota cities RELATIVE PROPERTY TAX BURDENS FOR CERTAIN TYPES OF PROPERTY QUESTION: Are local property tax levels for certain types of property too high, especially in relation to other types of property? BACKGROUND: Wide disparities often exist between the tax burdens of various types of property in certain communities. Listed in the table below are the statewide average effective property tax rates (that is, the tax burden in relation to the property's market value) that are projected by the House Research Department for 1988. EFFECTIVE PROPERTY TAX RATES BY TYPE OF PROPERTY, 1988* Type of Property Effective Tax Rate Residential Homesteads... ............. 1.30 % Residential Non ............ 3.41 Apartments. • ... ...... 4.07 Agricultural Homesteads ............... 0.83 Agricultural Non - homesteads........... 1.42 Commercial /Industrial under $60,000... 2.96 Commercial /Industrial over $60,000.... 5.05 ---------------------------- * Based on House Research computer simulation, 8CM -- over -- R0 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 (01 2) 227 -5000 RELATIVE TAX BURDENS FOR CERTAIN TYPES OF PROPERTY (con't) RESIDENTIAL HOMESTEAD BURDENS 0 Property taxes on homestead are low, Tax burdens for homesteads are but it is important to keep them low too low and need to increase since homeowners vote. Many home somewhat so that the property owners are elderly and cannot afford taxes for businesses can be higher property taxes. While home lowered. Ultimately, a owners' property taxes may be low, community's ability to retain they have high sales and income tax businesses will affect jobs for burdens, especially relative to local residents and local businesses. growth and wealth. RESIDENTIAL NON- HOMESTEADS /APARTMENTS Property taxes on rental buildings are The renters' credit and circuit too high. These high taxes are often breaker programs are designed passed on to residents in the form of to provide property tax relief higher rents. Renters are often to renters. If more relief is low- income persons or elderly living needed it should be given with on fixed incomes. these programs rather than directly reducing property taxes for apartment owners who may not pass on these tax cuts to their renters. AGRICULTURAL HOMESTEADS Property taxes for homesteaded farms Effective property tax rates should remain low, particularly since for farms are about the lowest many farmers, especially small farmers, for any type of property. They are experiencing financial stress. could be increased without hurting farmers who are under financial stress since the income tax is designed to help out low- income persons. COMMERCIAL /INDUSTRIAL The high property taxes which many Although businesses may pay more businesses must pay are an in property taxes than home - excessive burden and may discourage owners, businesses tend to pay some businesses from locating or relatively less in corporate remaining in a community. This income taxes. Thus their causes loss of jobs and economic combined property and income tax activity for a community. Small burden is no greater. Reports business can be particularly hard show that over half of all MN hit, especially if they are located corporations paid no corporate in already depressed areas where income tax in 1984, including rapidly declining farm values have 192 of the top corporations caused tax burdens to shift to with annual earnings over the businesses in cities. $50 million. I Ills �1 " M11 league of minnesota cities LOCAL OPTION TAXES QUESTION: Should the League support granting cities a local- option to raise other non - traditional taxes, such as local sales or local income taxes? BACKGROUND: Local governments have traditionally relied on the property tax and state aids for a major portion of their revenues. Since 1971, local governments have been generally prohibited from levying local sales or income taxes. At the same time (1971), property tax levy limitations were imposed on local governments. These tax reforms (known as the "Minnesota Miracle ") were enacted in exchange for a state commitment to use state - raised sales and income tax revenues to finance property tax relief for local governments. In recent years, however, state budget problems combined with political pressure to hold down state income and sales taxes have led to substantial reductions in state aids. The result has been that cities have been forced to rely more heavily on local property taxes. CURRENT LEAGUE POSITION League policy recommends that cities be given local option to raise other non - traditional revenue sources, such as sales taxes, to enhance local financial flexibility. Policy states that local option taxes should supplement, not replace, the traditional revenues of cities. YES, LEAGUE SHOULD CONTINUE TO NO, LEAGUE SHOULD NO LONGER SUPPORT SUPPORT LOCAL OPTION TAXES LOCAL OPTION TAXES As state and federal aids are cut, Allowing local- option taxes would cities need to turn to other mean rich communities would get sources of revenue, not just the richer and poor communities poorer property tax, to fill the revenue since it is richer communities that gap. Property taxes are already to would likely have more sales high in many places. activity and local income to tax. Strict levy limits are also With the availability of local preventing cities from using the option taxes, the state would cut property tax when they need to in back on state aids even more. order to maintain services. Local option taxes could alleviate that Income and sales tax revenue are situation. not reliable revenue sources since they fluctuate widely depending upon economic conditions. '! 66 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 [61 21 227 -5600 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES LEGISLATIVE ISSUES VOTING CARD City: Name: Attending Regional Meeting at: Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Support Oppose League- sponsored TIF legislation Voting Equipment Support Oppose Legislation making current voting equipment obsolete Local Government Election Day Support Oppose Continue to oppose a local government election day Land Use Legislation Support Oppose 1. Separate Board of Adjustment Support Oppose 2. Change definition of undue hardship Support Oppose 3. Requirement for comprehensive plan Support Oppose 4. Prohibit conditional zoning Support Oppose 5. Zoning controls consistent with comprehensive plan Support Oppose 6. Change the ability of cities to extend subdivision regulations Support Oppose 7. Fringe Area Growth Proposal Transportation Funding Support Oppose 1. Metro Sales Tax Support Oppose 2. Gas.Tax Increase Support Oppose 3. MVET Transfer /Dedication Support Oppose 4. Jurisdictional Reassignment Support Oppose 5. Changing the 62/29/9 allocation forumla Homestead Credit Program Support Oppose Changes to or new homestead credit program Levy Limit Legislation Support Oppose Should the League make the removal of levy limits an " A " priority City Service Charges for Tax-Exempt Property Support Oppose Should cities be able to voluntarily impose service charges on tax - exempt property Relative Tax Burdens for Certain Types of Property Residential Homestead taxes are: Too High About Right Too Low Residential Nonhomestead /Apartment taxes are: Too High About Right Too Low Agricultural Homestead taxes are: Too High About Right Too Low Commercial /Industrial taxes are: Too High About Right Too Low Local Option Taxes Support Oppose Should the League support local option taxes? COMMENTS: J Licenses to be approved by the City Council on August 24, 1987: FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Bridgeman's 1272 Brookdale Center 1 Potato 2 1319 Brookdale Center 7_4 Sanitarian Ole_ GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTOR'S VEHICLE LICENSE Aagard Sanitation P. 0. Box 14845 Waste Management- Blaine 10050 Naples Street NE J Sanitarian Oak NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Car -Del Vending, Inc. 2550 Kasota Avenue J. R. Vending 5312 Perry Avenue North ✓ LJ/r" _ 2 Sanitarian RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE Renewal: Clinton Sawinski 5918 Dupont Avenue North Lyndon and Carole Carlson 5819 Halifax Avenue North Leslie Reinhardt 5713 Humboldt Avenue North Patricia Zawislak 5543 Judy Lane Kristin Norstad 4201 Lakeside Avenue N. #103 John and Elizabeth Hass 4201 Lakeside Avenue N. #306 Gary and Nancy Clark 4207 Lakeside Avenue N. #239 Henry Ulhorn 5207 E. Twin Lake Boulevard Joseph Kennedy 509 - 61st Avenue North Outreach Group Homes, Inc. 507 - 69th Avenue North Director of Planning and Inspection G • �• �:f f- JC���� �/ ENERAL APPROVAL: D. K. Weeks, City Clerk s l ot Touz A fornmHon Mr. Chairman and fellow Committee Members: After the July 16 meeting of the Planning Commission, our Neighborhood Committee has held several community meetings during the last four weeks. Our objective was the procurring of facts and statistics which would substantiate our recommendation of denying the application for the Special Use Permit by the Bill Kelly House. Since most of the members of our committee have full time jobs it has been extremely difficult to gather and review pertinent information within the short period of time alloted to us. However, we have had some success in gathering some information which we would like to present to you this evening. 1. We have just received a report that was prepared for The Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The report deals directly with the problems of the chronic mentally ill and substance abuse problems. It will take us approximately one to one and one -half weeks to review this report before we are ready to submit it to you for your evaluation. 2. Violations. Enclosed is a copy of a letter from the State of Minnesota Department of Human Services addressed to Mr. Norton in reference to a compliance review that was done on July 8, 1987. (See Exhibit A.) This letter lists several areas of non - compliance with the Minnesota Rules which govern the licensure of mentally ill persons. Of particular interest are the Citations 1. and 11. which demonstrate poor management. 3. Safety and wellbeing of the community. I would like to refer back to the Planning Commission Report from the July 16 meeting which on page 3 (See Exhibit B) states that the degree of supervision at the proposed facility seems adequate. I now would like to quote directly from page 3 of the January 1987 Report to the Legislature (See Exhibit C) which was prepared by the Mental Health Division of the Minnesota Department of Human Service. I would also like to quote from a report prepared for the Federal Government regarding medication management (See Exhibit D. An excerpt from the report re ared for P P The Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). This is a particular concern as it has been shown that non - compliance with prescribed medication is associated with increased behavior problems (particularly acting out in the community) and a direct cause of relapse and rehospitalization. Beyond the problem with non - compliance is the additional issue of the possible negative interactive effects of psychotropic drugs and street drugs and alcohol. It is common knowledge that various illegal drugs are available at Brookdale 10 which if in the wrong hands (ie. patients of the proposed facility) will create severe problems. To complicate matters more, there are 103 hours per week when there is only one staff member supervising the facility. Secondly, when a patient disappears from the facility, they are not reported missing until they have been gone six hours. (See Exhibit E. The Bill Kelly House Orientation Manual.) To summarize, the lack of adequate staffing would allow the residents to have the opportunity to circulate in the neighborhood and obtain chemical substances which would then create a safety hazard to our community. 4. Previously, Mr. Norton had implied that there were only a few instances where police intervention was necessary at the Bill Kelly House. I would now like to introduce a representative of the Minneapolis Police Department who will give us the true facts related to this particular subject. We realize that the Bill Kelly House is requesting an approval this evening; however, whatever time limitations they have is their problem alone, not yours or ours. We are still gathering pertinent information of which some can be submitted to you this evening. However, we still are awaiting further documentation from the Minneapolis Police Department, the Fridley Community Committee and the owners of the building which presently houses the Bill Kelly House. Therefore, we are requesting that the hearing record remain open for an additional thirty days. STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 444 LAFAYETTE ROAD ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55155 August 3, 1987 Henry Norton 2544 Pillsbury Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55404 Dear Mr. Norton: CORRECTION ORDER On July 8, 1987, the Bill Kelly House was reviewed to determine compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Rules, parts 9520.0500 through 9520.0690, which govern the licensure of mentally ill persons. The licensed capacity of the program was 23. At the time of the review 21 were receiving services. VIOLATIONS AND CORRECTION ORDERS The following violation(s) of state and (or) federal laws and rules were observed. Corrective action for each violation is required by Minnesota Statutes, section 245.805, and is hereby ordered by the Commissioner of Human Services. Failure to correct the violations within the prescribed amount of time may result in fines andlor action against your license, as provided for in Minnesota Statutes, sections 245.801 and 245.803. To assist you in complying with the correction orders, a "suggested method of correction" may be included for any or all of the violations cited. Please be advised that a "suggested method of correction" is only a suggestion and you are not required to follow the "suggested method of correction." Failure to follow the "suggested method of correction" will not result in a fine or an action against your license. However, regard- less of the method used, you are required to correct the violation(s) within the prescribed amount of time 1. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9520.0520, subpart 3. Violation The program did not have a current health license at the time of relicensure. Time Frame for Correction Submit to the Division of Licensing a copy of your current health license by August 15, 1987. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER DHS -2489 Page 2 Henry Norton August 3, 1987 2. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9555.8200, subpart 4. Violation The program did not have written documentation that the program abuse prevention plan was reviewed annually. Time Frame for Correction The program's governing body shall review the plan at least annually. Submit to the Division of Licensing written confirmation of rule compliance by September 14, 1987. 3. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9520.0560, subpart 1. Violation The program does not have a functioning advisory board. The last advisory board meeting was April 23, 1986. Time Frame for Correction Each program shall have an advisory committee that meets quarterly. Submit to the Division of Licensing written confirmation of rule compliance by September 14, 1987. 4. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9520.0630, subpart 3. Violation The program did not have minutes of the resident council for review at the time of the annual licensing. Time Frame for Correction Each program shall have a resident council. Minutes of council meetings shall be recorded and made available to the program director. Begin doing immediately. 5. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9520.0570, subpart 8. Violation The program did not have a comprehensive report available for review at the time of annual licensing. Time Frame for Correction Each program shall have an annual comprehensive report available for review at time of annual licensing.' Submit copy of the annual report to Division of Licensing by September 30, 1987. 6. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9520.0580, subpart 1. Violation The program did not have a program evaluation available for review at the time of annual licensing. Time Frame for Correction Each program shall institute an evaluation process to be conducted on an ongoing basis. Submit to Division of Licensing written confirmation of your plan for rule compliance by September 30, 1987. R ' Page 3 Henry Norton August 3, 1987 7. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9520.0590, subpart 9. Violation The program did not have a written staff development plan available for review at time of annual licensing. Time Frame for Correction The program shall have a staff development plan, including continuing education opportunities. 8. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9520.0590, subpart 9.H. Violation Staff records did not document training in Minnesota Rules, parts 9520.0500 to 9520.0690. Time Frame for Correction The program staff shall have training in rules governing the operation of residential facilities for adult mentally ill persons. Begin doing immediately. 9. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9520.0600. Violation Individual personnel files did not contain items required by rule. Time Frame for Correction Each program shall maintain a separate personnel file for each employee with all items required by rule. Submit to the Division of Licensing written confirmation of rule compliance. g 10. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9555.8500. Violation Personnel files reviewed did not document annual in- service training for mandated reporters to review Minnesota Statutes, section 626.577, Minnesota Rules, parts 9555.8000 to 9555.8500 and all internal policies and procedures related to clients. Time Frame for Correction Submit to the Division of Licensing written documentation of rule - compliance by September 30, 1987. 11. Citation Minnesota Rules, part 9520.0570. Violation The program did not have documentation of insurance coverage. Time Frame for Correction Each program shall have written documentation of insurance coverage. Submit to the Division of Licensing a copy of current insurance coverage by August 15. 1987. Y b Staff Comments - Ts — a special use in the R5 zoning district, the proposed residential treatment facility is to meet the Standards for a Special Use Permit contained in Section 1 5- 3 220.2 (attached) . The Commission is probably aware, however, that the State has, for the most part, pre - empted regulation of such group homes and that there is very little, or no ability on the part of the City to deny the proposed use. The State has determined through its policies and statutes- that residential treatment facilities provide a necessary service to the community. The remodeling plans proposed by this facility meet the requirements of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance in terms of space provided per resident. Standard (a) would, therefore, appear to be met. There will no doubt be allegations by those who live in the neighborhood that property values will decline as a result of the group home locating within the neighborhood. However, the City Assessor has detected no such decline in property values in other neighborhoods surrounding existing residential facilities in the City. In the past ten ears there have Y , been no formal complaints faints p lodged against any of the group homes in the City. - There --- has - been- a_complaint lodged against Welcome Community home at a public he�ring in 1984 by the owner of an - aci jcen four pl -ex-- -alleging -- a of— z ueenvision: The degree of supervision at the proposed � esidential treatmen cility se ade quate. Staff do not expec a decline in proper y values "in the 'neighborhood °`as ° a�u It of the proposed residentia L�> treatment facility. The area around the proposed facility is already developed. Therefore, it will not impede normal and orderly development of surrounding land. Finally, traffic should not be a problem with the proposed facility since none of the residents will have cars (there will be a van parked at the premises for transportation). The parking lot should be widened to allow 90 degree parking stalls for at least 17 cars and appropriate screening should be provided where this parcel abuts R1 zoned land on the south. Thus, the special use standards appear to be met in this case. What appears to be the most compelling aspect of this proposal is not the standards for special use ermi p t or how the City might view this type facility under its Zoning Ordinance, but rather its relationship to State legislation and court precedents where cities have tried to impose local control or denied permits to operate such facilities in residential zoning districts. This community has had first hand knowledge of this relationship as it relates to the City's attempt to deny a simi ar facility from loe wting at 4408 69th Avenue North i �e 1983 That proposal involved Northwest Residence's plan to operate a residential treatment facility for 18 to 20 mentally _ persons. y ll per ns. Attached for' the Commission's review is a copy of City Council Resolution No.. 83 - stating the reasons for that denial. The City's position was upheld in a District Court Action, but upon appeal to the Minnesota Court of Appeals, that decision was reversed. Generally, the Court concluded that Northwest Residence met applicable requirements of City Ordinance; that the City did not have the authority to establish stricter standards for the mentally ill since special care of the menta Lly ill has been made a matter of State concern; and the State has preempted local regulations in this field. The Court went on to say that local regulations cannot Prohibit what the State expressly permits. That ru ling was appea Led by the City to the Minnesota Supreme Court which denied our petition for review letting the Appeals Court ruling stand. 7 -16 -87 _3_ 3 RECOMMENDATIONS Specific to Rules 12 and 14 the Department recommends: 1. Same level continuation funding of $9,164,000 for Adult Residential grants (Rule 12) for F.Y. 1988. 2. Same level continuation funding of $3,683,700 for Grants to Chronically Mentally Ill Adults (Rule 14) for F.Y. 1988. 3. New Rule 12 funding of $496.5 for F.Y. 1988. Facilities licensed under Rule 36 to serve adult mentally ill persons are now located in 29 counties. In February 1986, the Legislative Auditor's Report, "Deinstitutionalization of Mentally Ill People ", expressed concern that "mentally ill persons cannot be served in their own communities and must travel long distances to the nearest Rule 36 facility." In response to this concern, the department has reallocated over $100,000 in Rule 12 funds from Ramsey county to other counties. These monies were available due to closure of two facilities. However, additional shifting of funds out of the metro area will be counter - productive by reducing services urgently needed by metro residents. Therefore, additional funds are needed to develop facilities in unserved areas of the state. a Most existing Rule 36 program do n ot have s staff y 4 and services to meet the needs of residents who y suffer � from both mental illness and other disorders, such as chemical dependency, behavioral aggressiveness, mental retardation and physical dis abilities. Some staff at existing programs have received training to deal with these special needs. However, many of these "dual-disorder" clients require a more specialized program with a higher level of staff expertise than is possible under the current level of funding. The request includes funds to develop three to four new j facilities to address the above needs, beginning with funding through Rule 12 in FY 1988 and continuing under the new Mental Health Fund in FY 1989. 4. New Rule 14, Community Support Program funding of $1,547.5 for F.Y. 1988 to: a) fund existing community support projects i currently funded by McKnight Foundation which will expire in FY 1988 and which are appropriate for Rule 14 funding; b) fund new counties that do not now have Rule 14 funding arrangements; c) fund existing Rule 14 funded counties that do not have sufficient services to meet identified needs; d) provide special grants to Hennepin, Ramsey, and St. Louis counties for services to mentally ill homeless persons; and e) fund two employment /training demonstration projects in cooperation with the Department of Jobs and Training. The Concurrent Treatment: Programs that are attempting to address the needs of chronic mentally ill young adults with substance abuse problems have been developed under a variety of auspices. Regardless of auspice, however, these programs seem to involve a core set of mental health services and a core set of substance abuse services provided either within the actual structure of the program or in direct relationship to the program. (It should be noted from the outset that many traditional programs include only the first set of the mental health services described below). The core set of mental health services includes: Stabilization of symptomatology: Most programs that attempt to serve chronic mentally ill young adults in the community provide either medication management and therapeutic activities as part of their protocol or see that their clients are involved in various treatment activities and settings as part of their overall treatment planning. Medication management is a particular concern as it has been -shown that non ..Q MPii c9 with nrepri hPd me i c-at inn is associated with increased behavior roblems a rticularly acting out in the c 2ommunil yl and a__direct cause of relapse and rehospiLaliza-t-j (Diamond 1984, Damron & Simpson 1985, Talbott et al. 1986, McCarrick et al. 1985) Beyond the problem with non compliance is the additional issue of the possible n as iye interactive effects of psvchotropic dr_ucts and street drugs and oho al-- c• Treffert, for instance, has stressed the need for careful monitoring of psychotropic medication when it is known that the client uses marijuana. (Treffert 1978) Knudsen and Vilmar, in their review of the clinical cases of ten schizophrenic patients in treatment with neuroleptics, found that cannabis could cause acute psychotic exacerbation even in clients in otherwise adequate treatment with neuroleptics. (Knudsen & Vilmar 1984) Medication management is especially critical in connection with the use of disulfiram (Antabuse) to control the intake of alcohol. Some commentators discourage the use of Antabuse (because of the possibility of psychiatric side effects) while other programs have found it to be a necessary part of the protocol for alcohol- abusing clients. (Kofoed and colleagues present a cogent discussion of the pros and cons in Kofoed et al. 1986). Beyond medication management, clients have individualized need for other therapeutic supports. Some are involved in individual or group therapy and others are maintained in the community with case management services. Psychotherapy for chronic mentally ill (non - psychotic) persons is usually time- 13 • 1 - - .nd.- yam -- -- Wives __ � e-�, _ e 4 4-) - �� � - - - -- -- �- �.✓--- -G-v -� -- ll.�.t� -mil._. _ - - _ Q_, -- �?�-�,�Qa.�� -. v — - U cG? v��r� -� - - -- �c� --�" - - - _ _ "�.� ✓ - tc�� _ C�.... _ - C�le�...3 � �.�cc., :�� _ �z�C.�c' -2.�- � o M. WMIM r NOTAR � _.. YE IK.I'Y�BU D OOW is 6301 SHI GLE CREEK PARKWAY OF T v BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 RV 1 N TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 MEMORANDUM Date: August 11, 1987 To: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager Peter M. Koole, City Assessor � Subject: Impact Analysis - Proposed Bill Kelly House You have asked me to consider whom we might retain if the City were to undertake a study of the impact on property values the proposed Bill Kelly House would have in the neighborhood. Considerations in this area are: 1. The product or report, itself, must stand on its own and be substantial and believable. 2. The author of the report must come across well, and without question bring with him or her the authority of their experience and qualifications. 3. The author must be able and experienced in presenting his report in public hearing, City Council meeting, or courtroom situations. In considering all of these factors, I settled on the individual I believe would best handle this type of study: Peter J. Patchin, of Peter J. Patchin and Associates, in Burnsville. I have been acquainted with Mr. Patchin's work for many years, and know him to be one of the foremost appraisers of special purpose properties in the country. He also has extensive experience in similar types of studies. For example, he has done studies both for and against MNDOT on the impact of and benfits to property values of highway sound barriers. Procedurally, I would think our proposed study could be conducted in a similar manner. " iveaau- uunuatt * r i G. G. Splinter - 8/11/87 Page 2 It is expected that the cost for a comprehensive and wide- ranging study to really find a supportable conclusion to the question would be in the $10,000.00 to $15,000.00 range. It is further expected that the lead time for such a study would be three months. If you wish to pursue this issue further, I would suggest we meet with Mr. Patchin so you can describe the assignment, at least in general terms, and evaluate Mr. Patchins' qualifications and suitability for the project. I will set up such a meeting upon your request. cc Ron Warren Charles LeFevere