HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 08-26 CCP Regular Session G%
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
AUGUST 26, 1985
7:00 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 - August 12, 1985 - Regular Session
7. Presentation - Year 2000 Study
8. Resolutions:
*a. Acknowledging Gift from the Bellevue Park Neighborhood Association
*b. Amending the 1985 General Fund Budget to Provide for Wage and Salary
Adjustments
c. Amending the 1985 General Fund Budget to Provide for the Purchase of
a Police Department Electronic Time Recorder
*d. Accepting Bid and Approving Contract 1985 -L (Installation of Fuel
Tanks and Dispensers at.Municipal Service Garage)
*e. Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Execute an Agreement with
the Shingle Creek Land Company Relating to Tracts C, D, and E of
Registered Land Survey No. 1482 and Surplus "MN /DOT Right -of -Way
*f. Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for Hearing on Proposed
Assessment Project No. 1984 -05 (Ramada Inn Lift Station)
*g. Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for Hearing on Proposed
Assessment Project No. 1985 -04 (Lyndale Avenue Water Main
Installation)
*h. Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for Hearing on Proposed
Assessment Project No. 1985 -05 (Lyndale Avenue Street Reconstruction)
*i. Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for Hearing on Proposed
Assessment Project No. 1985 -09 (Xerxes Avenue Street Reconstruction)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- August 26, 1985
*j. Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for Hearing on Proposed
Assessment Project No. 1985 -12 (Dallas Road Curb, Gutter and Street
Reconstruction)
*k. Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for Hearing on Proposed
Assessment Project No. 1985 -14 (65th Avenue Curb, Gutter and Street
Reconstruction)
*1. Providing for Hearing on Proposed Assessments for Diseased Shade Tree
Removal Costs; for Public Utility Hookup Charges; for Delinquent Public
Utility Accounts; and for Delinquent Weed Removal Accounts
*m. Accepting Bid and Approving Contract for Two Civil Defense Sirens
9• Planning Commission Items: (7:30 p.m.)
a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Making Churches, Chapels, and Synagogues
a Special Use in a R5 Zoning District
-This ordinance is offered for a first reading this evening, and relates to
Planning Commission Application No. 85009 submitted by Foundation Stone
Ministries, Inc.
b. Planning Commission Application No. 85018 submitted by R.L. Brookdale
Motors, Inc. requesting site and building plan and special use permit
approval to construct a used car sales office on the site of the old A and W
and Squiggy's Restaurant at 6837 Brooklyn Boulevard. This item was
recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its August 15, 1985
meeting.
c. Planning Commission Application No. 85019 submitted by R.L. Brookdale
Motors, Inc. requesting preliminary plat approval to replat the property
for the Brookdale Pontiac /Honda dealership and the proposed used car sales
office. This item was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission at its August 15, 1985 meeting.
d. Planning Commission Application No. 85020 submitted by Lombard Properties
requesting preliminary R.L.S. approval to combine into a single parcel
three tracts of land located northeast of LaBelle I s at the corner of Earle
Brown Drive and Summit Drive. This item was recommended for approval by
the Planning Commission at its August 15, 1985 meeting.
e. Planning Commission Application No. 85021 submitted by Ronald Bashel
appealing a determination by staff that a tanning salon cannot be located
in the Humboldt Square Shopping Center on the grounds that it abuts R3
zoned property (Hi Crest Square Estates) to the east. The Planning
Commission recommended denial of the appeal at its August 15, 1985
meeting, but recommended an ordinance amendment.
1. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances
Regarding Suntan Studios
-This ordinance is offered for a first reading this evening.
i
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- August 26, 1985
f. Planning Commission Application No. 85022 submitted by Joan Moe requesting
special use permit approval to operate a photography studio in the
basement of the residence at 6906 Grimes Avenue North. This item was
recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its August 15,, 1985
meeting.
10. Discussion Items:
a. Allocation of Industrial Revenue Bonds
Staff will be prepared to discuss the City's status as related, to
industrial revenue bonds.
b. Replacement of Officer Dave Shull in the Police Department
c. Replacement of Bob Zimbrick, Supervisor of Public Utilities
d. Insurance Agreement on Lift Station Claims
e. Proposed Suburban Coalition
*11. Licenses
12. 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 12, 1985
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by
Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7 :03 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich
Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy
Knapp, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning & Inspection Ron
Warren, City Engineer Bo Spurrier, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Housing
Coordinator Brad Hoffman, and Deputy City Clerk Geralyn Barone.
INVOCATION
The invocation was offered by Pastor Sheldon Matheson of Brookdale Covenant Church.
OPEN FORUM
Mayor Nyquist noted he had received one request to use the Open Forum session this
evening from Mr. Bud Murphy, 5607 Lyndale Avenue North. Mayor Nyquist recognized
Mr.
Y Yq g
Murphy who .stated he is unhappy with the situation regarding the street .
improvement project on Lyndale Avenue North. He noted the street was supposed to be
finished in early July, and it still is not finished. He added residents have been
inconvenienced quite a bit and it is time to do something about the situation.
The Director of Public Works responded saying the specified completion date of the
project is August 15, 1985, but the contractor will not meet that date. He briefed
the City Council on the history of the project, noting the project was awarded in
early May, 1985 and good progress was made in the early stages of the project. The
Director of Public Works stated that when the public utility companies made their
adjustments the process took a little longer than expected, but these companies were ,
finished b June, , 1985. He noted the contractor did minimal work in July, 9 1 85 and
said he was told by the contractor that the contractor's crews were moved to another
project because of the delay by the public utility companies. The contractor told
the City the delay would be only a few days, and the Director of Public Works said the
City accepted this for a two week period. He added when progress was made, staff
attempted to get the contractor back to work by sending two official notices which
stated that if work was not acceptable, the City would take further action. The
contractor was slow in responding to the ultimatum and was finally back to work
during the week preceding this evening's meeting. The Director of Public Works
noted the heavy rain today did stop the project, but estimated with reasonably good
weather conditions the project can be completed within two weeks. He added that a
penalty clause in the contract refers to a $100 per calendar day penalty.
Councilmember Scott asked the Director of Public Works if he is satisfied with the
quality of work produced by the contractor, and the Director of Public Works
responded that in general he is satified with the work, although some aspects of the
job have not been accepted.
8 -12 -85 -1-
Mr. Murphy stated the residents were promised watering of the street at least once a
week, but this has not occurred. Councilmember Hawes stated he talked to Mrs. Carr,
owner of the Riverside Motel at 5608 Lyndale Avenue North, and Mrs. Carr told him
that the foreman told her the aprons would be paved, but this was not done.
Councilmember Hawes asked why the foreman promised something and did not act on his
promise. The Director of Public Works stated that this has been a common problem
with this specific contractor. Councilmember Hawes asked if this contractor had
been used by the City prior to this project, and the Director of Public Works'
responded affirmatively, saying the contractor did a satisfactory job. He added
that the job was not similar to the project now under construction. He also stated
that prior to awarding this contract, the City contacted three to four other
municipalities for references and received good references regarding this
contractor. Councilmember Hawes asked if the contractor's quotation was far below
the other bidders, and the Director of Public Works stated it did not deviate much
from the other bids. He added that the amount of the bid should not be an excuse
for failure to perform. He noted under the rules of the game there is little the
City can do to force performance. In response to a previous comment on dust
control, the Director of Public Works said the contractor was told that water must be
provided two times a day when it does not rain, and if the contractor does not do so,
the City will take dust control measures and charge the cost against the contractor.
Councilmember Hawes asked what action the City might take if the project is not
completed within two weeks. The Director of Public Works stated that complicated
legal proceedings may be in order, and the contract's specifications state the City
has the authority to take over and complete the project. The City Attorney noted
that taking action against the contractor does not guarantee faster completion of
the project. He added if there is a total lack of performance from the contractor, a
good remedy is to remove the contractor from the project and hire another .
contractor. In this case, however, the City would be better off to get the hired
contractor back on the job. Councilmember Hawes asked if giving the contractor
additional time to complete the job will cause the contractor to drag the project out
even longer, and the City Attorney stated it would not. Councilmember Hawes stated
it seems as though the contractor does not really care at this point, and the City
Attorney stated if the contractor does not complete the job the City can step in and
take action.
Councilmember Lhotka asked if the City has a performance schedule for the next two
weeks, and the Director of Public Works stated that all aprons have been completed,
and projects yet to be completed include laying the gravel base and blacktop, and
landscaping behind the curbs. He added with adequate crews, the project should be
finished within the two week period. Councilmember Lhotka asked if the contractor
has said that crews will be available, and the Director of Public Works stated the
contractor had not yet said they would. Councilmember Lhotka then asked how the
City can be sure that the job will be done within two weeks, and the Director of
Public Works stated the expected completion date is August 15, 1985, and the
contractor is penalized for every day beyond that date. The City Manager added the
contractor is allowed to hire a subcontractor to complete some of the work. The
Director of Public Works noted the evaluation will be based on final performance,
and the contractor has been told to finish as close to the completion date as
possible.
Councilmember Theis stated he has looked at the area and wonders if there is a danger
to the trees surviving because of the closeness of the retaining wall. The Director
of Public Works stated the greatest concern is that the roots were exposed for a long
8 -12 -85 -2-
period of time, and photographs have been taken of the situation. Councilmember
Theis asked if a guarantee can be made that the trees will survive, and the Director
of Public Works stated if the trees do not survive, he would expect a claim from the
property owner against the City and /or the contractor. Councilmember Theis
questioned the type of damages the contractor can incur, and the Director of Public
Works stated there would be liquidated damages only for additional costs occurring
as a result of the extension of the project. He added this includes -the City's cost
of inspections, surveying, and other related costs. He noted a true penalty charge
cannot be made against the contractor. The City Attorney stated there must be a
loss to the City and if the case would go to court, it would be necessary to show what
the actual loss is. Councilmember Theis asked if the City wishes to collect under
liquidated damages, would it be necessary to go through the court system. The. City
Attorney stated that in most cases the two parties negotiate a settlement prior to
going to court.
Mr. Murphy noted he lived across from the Riverside Motel, and as a result of the
street's condition there have been large puddles in the street. He noted this
probably would create a problem this winter. Mayor Nyquist stated the City is aware
of the problem.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Tony Schmid, 5500 Lyndale Avenue North, who stated he
has appeared before the Council before and noted most residents were against the
road in the first place because of the cost. He noted residents have put up with the
traffic problem for years, and have been promised a good road. Mr. Schmid stated
that now the City has a contractor who is not providing the services contracted for,
and the residents are the losers. He stated the dust control is virtually
0 nonexistent and the cost to hose down a yard is very expensive. He added his car has
been towed three times after getting stuck in the mud, and the mailman has also
gotten stuck. He noted a lot of the traffic traveling on Lyndale is from outside of
the neighborhood, even though the road is closed to local traffic only. He added
the road does look good today compared to what it has been. He complained of the
problem with the mud, and stated his neighbor is a nurse who wears white and he wears
a suit to work, and their clothes have been ruined from getting stuck in the mud. In
his estimation, Mr. Schmid stated the $100 per day penalty is peanuts. In his final
comment, Mr. Schmid stated the work on the retaining wall is of very poor quality and
he would recommend removing it.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Ms. Nancy Forrest, 5520 Lyndale Avenue North, who stated
she has not . been able to park in her driveway for nearly a month. She stated from the
retaining wall there is a six and one -half foot drop to her property, and because of
the poor lighting it is also difficult to seethe wall at night. She noted that she
does have well water, and during the last three weeks the water pressure has been
poor. The Director of Public Works stated the City recognizes a problem with the
retaining wall, and a railing will be put on top of the wall. He noted this is not
required by law, and stated the City will investigate the problem with the water
pressure in more detail. He also noted a landscaping project is planned.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Ms. Sue Schmid, 5500 Lyndale Avenue North, who stated a
little over a year ago the residents asked the City not to do anything. She said
delays have added insult to injury. Ms. Schmid stated that residents have called
her residence when they cannot contact the City, and there are a great number of
people experiencing the water pressure problems. She stated the retaining, wall
creates a safety problem, and the aprons already installed do not line up with the
driveway. She remarked that there were so many nice days when no one was working on
8 -12 -85 -3-
the road, and finally last week workers were out with heavy equipment at 6:30 a.m.
She noted some people do work the night shift and the early start is a problem for
some people in the area She finally noted that the toilet has not been flushing
correctly because of the pressure problem. Mayor Nyquist stated that the Director
of Public Works has been attempting to get the contractors to complete the project.
Councilmember Scott stated she does live on this street, and the comments this
evening are just a small sample of what she hears every night. She stated she will
make sure that this is a decent construction project.
CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the
Consent Agenda. Councilmember Lhotka requested item 8c be removed from the Consent
Agenda. Mayor Nyquist noted that agenda item 8b would be part of the HRA agenda this
evening.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 8, 1985
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
approve the minutes of the July 8, 1985 City Council meeting as submitted. Voting
in favor Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 11, 1985
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
approve the minutes of the July 11, 1985 special session of the City Council meeting
as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott,
Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 22, 1985
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
approve the minutes of the July 22, 1985 City Council meeting as submitted. Voting
in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -137
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION'RECOGNIZING THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF DR. ROBERT I. SHRAGG
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof
Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the
following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -138
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION RESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -24 (INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALK
ON WEST SIDE OF HUMBOLDT AVENUE NORTH BETWEEN 71ST AVENUE AND AMY LANE) AND ACCEPTING
QUOTATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION THEREOF
8 -12 -85 -4-
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the
following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -139
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QUOTATIONS FOR REPLACING WINDOWS AND INSTALLING
WEATHERSTRIPPING ON WINDOWS AND DOORS AT COMMUNITY CENTER SWIMMING POOL
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the
following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -140
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROJECT NO. 1985 -25 (H. V.A. C. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AT WEST
FIRE STATION /LIQUOR STORE NO. 2) AND APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH OFTEDAL, LOCKE AND
BROADSTON FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR DESIGN THEREOF
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof
Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the
following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -141
Member Celia Scott introduced the following esolution and moved its adoption:
g p
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1985 -D (POLICE DEPARTMENT
REMODELING)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the
following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
LICENSES -
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
approve the following list of licenses:
AMUSEMENT DEVICE - OPERATOR
Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle
Green Mill 5540 Brooklyn Blvd.
Ground Round Restaurant 2545 County Rd. 10
Show Biz Pizza 5939 John Martin Dr.
AMUSEMENT DEVICE _ VENDOR
Dahlco Music 119 State Street
8 -12 -85 -5-
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE
Baskin Robbins Brookdale Center
Canteen Corporation 6300 Penn Ave. S.
Medtronies 6700 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
Interstate United 1091 Pierce Butler Rte.
Ault, Inc. 1600 Freeway Blvd:
GARBAGE & REFUSE VEHICLE LICENSE
Minneapolis Hide & Tallow P.O. Box 12547
Waste Control 95 W. Ivy Street
Woodlake Sanitary Service 4000 Hamel Rd.
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE
Northeast Sheet Metal, Inc. 4347 Central Ave. NE
St. Marie Sheet Metal 7940 Spring Lk. Park Blvd.
PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE
Interstate United Corp. 1091 Pierce Butler Rte.
Ault, Inc. 1600 Freeway Blvd.
Minnesota Viking Food Service 5200 W. 74th St.
North France Health Club 4001 Lakebreeze Ave.
SIGN HANGERS LICENSE
Signcrafters Outdoor Display, Inc. 7775 Main St. NE
Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis.
Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 85009 SUBMITTED BY FOUNDATION STONE
MINISTRIES, INC. FOR REZONING OF THE 4.5 ACRE PARCEL AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 1-94
AND BROOKLYN BOULEVARD FROM R5 TO C1
The City Manager stated this application was considered by the Planning Commission
at its May 9, 1985 meeting, was tabled and referred to the West Central Advisory
Group for review and comment, and recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission at its July 11, 1985 meeting. The City Council reviewed this
application at its July 22, 1985 meeting and tabled it to this evening's meeting
awaiting further information on the application.
The Director of Planning & Inspection reviewed two reports received from the City
Assessor and the Director of Public Works. He noted the location of the property
involved in this application, and reviewed the past history of the lot. He also
reviewed the resolution before the City Council tonight on this item.
The Director of Public Works noted a correction of his memorandum, stating the
maximum hour traffic volume for a church would be 50, not 15. The City Manager
reviewed the memorandum prepared by the City Assessor. Councilmember Lhotka asked
if the amount of taxes included in the memorandum is the total amount collectable,
and the City Manager responded affirmatively stating that for each parcel of land
approximately 15% to 17% is the City of Brooklyn Center's share of taxes.
Councilmember Theis referred to the Comprehensive Plan and asked if any plans for
8 -12 -85 -6-
rezoning on Brooklyn Boulevard have been made in this area. The Director of
Planning & Inspection stated either mid- density residential or office uses would be
appropriate.
Councilmember Lhotka inquired as to why it is necessary to rezone the property, and
the Director of Planning& Inspection stated that currently the property is in a R5
zone where no church uses are allowed.- If the property is rezoned, development
plans must be presented before the Planning Commission and the City Council.
Councilmember Lhotka asked if the rezoning request is for only one parcel of land,
and the Director of Planning& Inspection responded affirmatively. He noted the
way the land is zoned now is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mayor Nyquist stated he prefers changing the ordinance rather than rezoning the
property. Councilmember Scott agreed, stating there have been a number of proposed
projects that have not materialized.
Councilmember Lhotka asked why C1 zoning is preferred to R5 zoning in this area.
The Director of Planning & Inspection stated that C1 zoning is appropriate for
certain uses, and the request was brought to the Planning Commission in this way.
The City Manager stated his experience has been that neighbors prefer a C1 zone
rather than an R5 zone to be adjacent to their property. Councilmember Scott noted
that more desirable projects normally zoned in C1 areas can be built in a R5 zone.
The City Manager noted that if the property is left as it is, the R5 zone would be
inconsistent with the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan.
Councilmember Hawes stated he is concerned with rezoning from R5 to C1 , although the
C1 uses would not bother him. He stated he is very concerned with potential traffic
problems, but noted whatever use is made of the land, there will be traffic problems.
The Director of Planning & Inspection stated notices have been sent to the residents
and the applicant was also notified of this evening's meeting. Mayor Nyquist asked
if the applicant had any comments to make, and there was no response.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mlr. -Lenny Samuelson, 7800 Northeast East River Road,
Fridley, who stated he retains part ownership of the property. He noted that when
he was on the City Council with the City of Fridley, the Council would withhold the
last reading of an ordinance until the submission of the construction permit was
approved.
There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
move the following resolution: Resolution Regarding Disposition of Application
No. 85009 Submitted by Foundation Stone Ministries, Inc.
Councilmember Lhotka asked if it would be possible to place a condition on the
rezoning that the project must be completed. The City Attorney stated this would be
pretty risky, although no court has come out against doing so. He added there are
ways to ensure that a project is completed, but none of these are foolproof. The
Director of Planning & Inspection stated that they have withheld final readings
awaiting the submission of final plans. Mayor Nyquist noted he received a petition
with 77 signatures opposing the rezoning, and at the request of Councilmember Theis
the Mayor read the statement on the petition. Councilmember Theis asked what would
be more undesirable than the C1 zoning, and the Director of Planning & Inspection
stated that there are more desirable commercial uses. The City Manager noted that
office buildings are perceived as a better neighbor, as opposed to fast food
8 -12 -85 -7-
restaurants. He also stated that office buildings are preferred to apartment
buildings.
Mayor Nyquist noted that four affirmative votes are necessary for passage of the
resolution. Upon vote being taken on the resolution, the following members voted
in favor: Councilmembers Hawes and Lhotka. Voting against: Mayor Nyquist,
Councilmembers Scott and Theis., The motion failed.
The City Attorney stated that at this point the City Council should direct staff to
prepare an appropriate action rather than take any further action this evening.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to
direct City staff to prepare the appropriate measure for making churches as a
special use in the R5 zoning district. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist,
Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The
motion passed unanimously.
A member of the audience asked for clarification of the proceedings, and the City
Manager stated the property will remain as R5 property, but the City Council will
propose to allow a church use on the R5 property.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Charles Gustafson, 3801 66th Avenue North, who noted
that if a church is built, it will kill any chances of ever having a commercial use in
the area. The City Manager noted there are churches located on Brooklyn Boulevard
with commercial uses across from them. Mr. Gustafson pointed out that if a church
is in the area, it will no longer be possible to have uses for places with liquor like
restaurants and motels.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Gar Zimmer, 6 2 Brooklyn Boulevard who asked what
g Y 5 7 Yn ,
the uses are in a R5 zone. The City Manager stated apartments are allowed, and C1
uses are special uses in that zone. He added apartments are limited to three
stories and 16 units per acre, while offices are limited to 3 stories. Mr. Zimmer
stated he failed to understand why the rezoning did not pass. The City Manager
noted at this time R5 uses are not desired. The City Attorney stated there is no
other action the City can take at this time.
Mayor Nyquist recognized the applicant, Mr. Mark Anderson who stated that the people
opposed were opposed to the church, and not the rezoning. Mayor Nyquist said this
was not so according to letters he has received. Mr. Anderson stated that every
time the issue is postponed the church is closer to not happening at all. He stated
this concerns him but it is his full intention to continue with the process. Mayor
Nyquist stated he hoped this will not have to return to the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Lhotka asked if the proposal comes back to the City Council, would it
need a four to one approval from the Council. The City Attorney noted that any
amendment to the zoning ordinance requires four of five Councilmembers to approve
the amendment. Councilmember Lhotka requested additional information on the pros
and cons of the problems related to the property.
Mayor Nyquist noted that items 10a2 and 10x3 on this evening's agenda are moot at
this point, and the City Manager agreed. There was no action taken on the two
ordinances offered related to Planning Commission Application No. 85009.
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 85017 SUBMITTED BY ARBY'S REQUESTING SPECIAL
USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO OPERATE A CONVENIENCE FOOD RESTAURANT IN THE BROOKDALE MALL
The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning
8 -12 -85 -8-
Commission at its July 25, 1985 meeting. The Director of Planning & Inspection
reviewed the Planning Commission minutes from the July 25, 1985 meeting, stating the
Planning Commission did recommend approval of the application. He stated an
ordinance amendment is being drafted, and the amendment would exempt convenience
food businesses from needing special use permits in major shopping malls.
Mayor Nyquist asked why nothing was done when One Potatoe Two started business at
Brookdale, and the Director of Planning & Inspection stated he was not sure.
Councilmember Hawes asked if Brookdale were allowed to have drive -up windows for
convenience food restaurants, what kind of problems this would cause. The Director
of Planning & Inspection stated this would be possible, but he is unaware of any
special problems.
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 85017 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 Theis to
close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 85017. Voting in
favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
approve Application No. 85017, subject to the following conditions:
1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be
grounds for revocation.
2. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
3. Special use permit approval is exclusive of all signery which is
subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis.
Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Chuck Nadler who stated his family owns the Arby's
restaurants in the Twin Cities area. He said the Arby's restaurants located near
Rosedale and Southdale are freestanding, although they do have the drive- through
window area. He added that Arby's is happy to be coming to Brooklyn Center.
RECESS
The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9:05 p.m.
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 85016 SUBMITTED BY VILLAGE PROPERTIES FOR A
VARIANCE FROM SECTION 35— 00 OF T=6NING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW A TEMPORARY 1' SETBACK
OFF HIGHWAY 252 RIGHT -OF -WAY AND TO ALLOW A DENSITY VARIANCE OF TWO UNITS AT THE
EVREGREEN PARK APARTN:ENTS, 7200 -722T AVENUE NORTH _
The City Manager introduced this item stating staff is prepared to update the City
Council on the status of this application.
8 -12 -85 -9-
r ,
The Director of Planning & Inspection reviewed the past action by the City Council at
their July 8, 1985 meeting, at which time the City Council approved the variance
request. He presented information from letters received from the highway
department which stated either a six foot berm or an eight foot wall will meet
federal and state safety noise standards. Therefore, the Director of Planning &
Inspection recommended p that the City Council acknowledge that with either a six foot
berm or an eight foot wall, the City will allow a 40' setback. He added it would be
necessary for the Council to modify their previous action taken on July 8, 1985
regarding the conditions of this application.
Councilmember Lhotka asked why a berm only cannot be installed along this property,
and the Director of Planning & Inspection stated that a berm takes up more area.
Councilmember Lhotka stated he understood from the July 8, 1985 City Council meeting
that the berm can be on both public and private land. The Director of Public Works
stated some of the berm will be constructed on the easement. Councilmembers Lhotka
and Theis, the Director of Planning & Inspection, the Director of Public Works, and
the City Manager ensued in a discussion on the alternative for a berm and wall.
Councilmember Hawes asked if a fence were installed whether or not the highway
department would have to maintain the height of the weeds. The Director of Planning
& Inspection stated the highway department would not maintain the area on the west
side of the wall.
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to
correct the findings of Planning Commission Application No. 85016 to state that
either a six foot berm or an eight foot wall will meet the 40' setback standards.
Councilmember Lhotka asked why a six foot berm is the same as an eight foot wall in
noise reduction, and the Director of Planning & Inspection stated that because the
berm is more dense, it is equivalent to the wall. Councilmember Lhotka asked who
makes the determination of whether a berm or a wall will be installed, and the City
Manager stated the applicant proposes what the choice will be.
Upon vote being taken on the preceding motion, the following voted in favor thereof:
Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against:
none. The motion passed unanimously.
PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FORECLOSURE FOR HI CREST SQUARE ESTATES, 69TH AVENUE NORTH
AND FREMONT PLACE
The City Manager referred to a written report from the Planning & Inspection
Department and recommended foreclosure on Hi Crest Square Estates.
Councilmember Hawes referred to the resolution on this item and asked why there was a "
discrepancy showing $45,000 in one part of the resolution and $75,000 in another
part of the resolution. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated the City
Council has authorized a reduction in the amount of the performance guarantee from
$75,000 to $45,000, but nothing was ever received from the applicant.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -146
i
Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING INSPECTION REPORT ON HI CREST SQUARE ESTATES AND DIRECTING
STAFF TO COMPLETE WORK WITH FUNDS GUARANTEED UNDER LETTER OF CREDIT FROM CAMDEN
NORTHWESTERN BANK
8 -12 -85 -10-
1
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Rich Theis, and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and
the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED)
The City Manager introduced a Resolution Granting Final Approval for Multifamily
Mortgage Revenue Bonds, stating this item refers to the Brookwood Estates Apartment
Project. He added the City Council has received a report from Brookwood
Management.
Councilmember Lhotka asked if the problems are being solved at Brookwood. Mayor
Nyquist recognized Mr. Wally Johnson of Brutger Companies, Inc., who stated 95% of
the problems have been resolved, including the leaking water problems. He stated
there still is a leakage problem on the fifth floor near the elevator.
Councilmember Lhotka asked about the odor problem, and Mr. Johnson stated the
problem seems to be in one particular unit from an open drain and it is not a water
problem. Councilmember Lhotka asked what the procedure is if someone goes on
vacation, and the City Manager stated it will take more than one week for a problem
like this to occur. He added inspectors have checked all units and there is an
understanding that the problem has cleared up. Councilmember Lhotka then asked if
most of the other problems are under control, and Mr. Johnson ;responded
affirmatively. Councilmember Lhotka asked if a management firm has been hired, and
Mr. Johnson stated one has and will start on August 15, 1985.
. RESOLUTION NO. 85 -1 2 42
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA,
MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS (BROOKWOOD ESTATES PROJECT), IN THE AGGREGATE
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3,600,000, WHICH BONDS AND THE INTEREST AND PREMIUM
THEREON SHALL BE PAYABLE SOLELY FROM THE REVENUES DERIVED FROM THE LOAN AGREEMENT
AND THE LETTER OF CREDIT; PRESCRIBING THE FORM OF AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A
TRUST INDENTURE, A LOAN AGREEMENT, A LETTER OF CREDIT AGREEMENT, AND A REGULATORY
AGREEMENT; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND SALE OF THE BONDS AND DIRECTING DELIVERY
THEREOF; AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF THE CONTRACT OF PURCHASE IN CONNECTION WITH THE
BONDS; CONSENTING TO THE DISTRIBUTION OF A PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND A FORM
OF FINAL OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND PROVIDING FOR THE SECURITIES, RIGHTS, AND REMEDIES
OF THE HOLDERS OF SAID REVENUE BONDS
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: -
Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the
following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
The City Manager referred to a Resolution Accepting Bid and Approving Contract 1985 -
L Regarding Installation of Fuel Tanks and Dispensers at the Municipal Service
Garage. He stated that the bids have been rejected, and the City Council should
authorize City personnel to readvertise for bids. There was a motion by
Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to reject the bids and
authorize the City to readvertise for bids for Contract 1985 -L. Voting in favor:
8 -12 -85 -11-
r
Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against:
none. The motion passed unanimously.
The City Manager introduced a Resolution Establishing Policy for Deferment of
Special Assessments for Persons 65 Years of Age and for Persons Who are Totally and
Permanently Disabled. The Director of Public Works reviewed the policy as revised
by City staff.
Mayor Nyquist asked if there is a'problem in defining disability, and the Director of
Public Works stated that State Statutes are used to define disability.
Councilmember Theis asked if at least one person must be 65 years of age or older, and
the Director of Public Works responded affirmatively. Councilmember Theis noted
the first year installment is usually inflated and he stated he would have a problem
with this because it does not give a true indication of the assessment. The
Director of Public Works stated that the first year installment is inflated, but
there is not as much of a problem now as there had been several years ago. He added
the formula is already complex and hard to explain from an administrative
standpoint.
Councilmember Scott asked for further clarification of the chart presented by
staff, and the Director of Public Works clarified the information for Councilmember
Scott. Councilmember Hawes asked if there is only a one- person household, if the
$17,400 exclusion still holds. The Director of Public Works stated that the
exclusion would hold in such a case.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -143
Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION RELATING TO DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PERSONS 65 YEARS OF AGE
OR OLDER AND ESTABLISHING AN INTEREST RATE
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and
the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
The City Manager introduced a Resolution Approving the Five Year Municipal State Aid
Street Construction Program. He noted the projects envisioned are not a total
commitment by the City, but the State requires such forms to be completed with the
understanding that the City is not totally committed to them. The Director of
Public Works referred to the resolution and reviewed the projects, emphasizing the
City does not have to proceed with the proposals although this step is a requirement
by the State. He reviewed the various locations in the City affected by the
proposals. Councilmember Lhotka asked if the 66th Avenue construction is included
in this proposal, and the Director of Public Works stated since that project would
not be charged to the State Aid Funds, it is not required to be reported under these
rules. Councilmember Lhotka asked if City money is involved in the improvement of
westbound I -694 to southbound I -94, and the City Manager stated no local funding is
involved. The Director of Public Works continued to review the areas affected by
this program.
i
8 -12 -85 -12-
Mayor Nyquist asked if the traffic signals at 51st Avenue North would be justified
and the Director of Public Works stated they would not be if the North Lilac Drive
improvement is made near Brooklyn Boulevard and T.H. 100.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -144
Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING FIVE YEAR MUNICIPAL STATE AID CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis;`and
the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, TANAMI ADDITION
There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
approve the final plat of the Tanami Addition. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist,
Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The
motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -145
Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF UTILITY HOOKUP FEE AGREEMENT FOR TANAMI
ADDITION
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly econded b member
Y Y
Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and
the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
ALLOCATION OF INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS
The City Manager stated that staff is prepared to discuss the City's current status
as related to industrial revenue bonds. The Housing Coordinator stated the City
must indicate by September 1, 1985 if the City wishes to retain its allocation. He
added the City must submit a letter of intent to retain the ability to have the money
refunded up to October 1, 1985• The Housing Coordinator stated that staff will have
further information with the available options to the City at the next City Council
meeting. -
LICENSING FEE FOR AMUSEMENT DEVICES
The City Manager stated that Thiesen Vending Company has requested to appear before
the City Council this evening to discuss the fee structure.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Tom Thiesen, owner of Thiesen Vending Company, who
stated he wished to bring to the City Council's attention the fees on amusement
games. He stated the industry, has changed drastically in the last few years. He
noted business has decreased and there are fewer requests for installation of
amusement machines. He added things have changed such that game rooms have
8 -12 -85 -13-
disappeared. He asked the City Council to reconsider the fees the City now charges
for amusement games. Mr. Thiesen stated he is in the coin operated business which
includes machines for coffee, candy, pop, cigarettes, and other machines which take
coins. He stated some machines give products while others give amusement. Mr.
Thiesen expressed concern that the fees for amusement machines are not in order with
other coin operated machines. Currently, he pays $7 per year for licensing of
perishable items and $8 per year for nonperishable items, noting if the license fee
is based on the revenue or exposure, the fees are low. He added the cost for
installing amusement devices includes $100 for a one -time investigation fee, $150
operator's fee, and $50 per machine. He noted in the seven county area the average
is $16 per machine for video machines, and many cities do not have any license fee at
all. He stated Burnsville is one city that has no license fee, and noted there are
some cities that have fees higher than Brooklyn Center. He said he is attempting to
get a fair license fees in the metropolitan area and would like a standard regulatory
fee without an investigation fee and an operator's fee. Mr. Thiesen requested that
$25 per machine be charged, a fee which is three times higher than the charge for
candy machine fees.
Mayor Nyquist asked Mr. Thiesen if any other cities have lowered their fees, and Mr.
Thiesen stated the cities of Eden Prairie, West St. Paul, and Anoka have already
lowered their fees. He added that St. Louis Park and New Brighton are considering
changing their fees.
Councilmember Hawes said he supports the charge for investigation fees, and Mr.
Thiesen stated the City should not have three separate fees. Councilmember Hawes
asked what the trend is in the industry, and Mr. Thiesen stated the number of
installations has fallen off 50% from one year ago, while revenues have decreased
30% from one year ago. He added that it was thought 1984 revenues would bottom out,
but that is not the case.
The City Manager stated the investigation fee was initiated for a reason in the past.
Mr.Thiesen said he had to pay the investigation fee for both T. Wright's and for
himself when installing devices at that location. The Director of Planning &
Inspection stated that T. Wright's is not billed for an investigation fee for
amusement devices because they had already paid for one when obtaining a liquor
license.
Mr. Thiesen stated he did have a problem with the $150 operator's fee plus the $50 per
machine fee.
The City Manager said the City is looking at license fees and will review the fees for
amusement devices. He stated Thiesen Vending Company will be contacted if changes
will be made in the ordinance, but this will probably not be until December.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka,
Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
8 -12 -85 -14-
YEAR 2000 COMMITTEE REPORT SUMMARY
COUNCIL PRESENTATION
-MERGE YEAR 2000 REPORT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
BIENNIAL PLANNING PROCESS
- MODIFICATION OF ADVISORY COMMISSION STRUCTURE
- CONTINUE TO UTILIZE COMBINATION OF AD HOC AND
PERMANENT ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
• - ESTABLISH ONE SET OF NEIGHBORHOOD ADVISORY GROUPS
- BIENNIALLY REVIEW GOALS AND PURPOSE OF ADVISORY
COMMISSIONS AND GIVE DIRECTION TO THEIR WORK
-YEAR 2000 REPORT MATRIX
- COMING CHANGES ARE OPPORTUNITIES, NOT JUST PROBLEMS
- IMPLEMENTATION SUGGESTIONS
•
YEAR'2000 REPORT MATRIX
MAJOR CITY COUNCIL IMPLEMENTATION
TRENDS - ISSUES POLICY CONSIDERATIONS SUGGESTIONS
W NGES IN BROOKLYN CENTER'S DEMOGRAPHICS WARRANT SPECIAL ATTENTION
1. SINGLE PARENT HOUSEHOLDS -need for analysis of the needs - direct the Human Rights
INCREASING AS A PERCENTAGE of the single parent household Commission to identify
OF HOUSEHOLDS because of their increase as & recommend alternative
percent of households actions for the Council's
- coordination with other consideration by July of
government agencies 1987
2. BALANCE AMONG AGE GROUPS -an imbalance among age groups in direct City Mgr.- to
IN POPULATION WILL CHANGE the population places dispropor- analyze population
tionate pressure on service projections & potential
delivery systems impacts of existing
"population" waves &
report to the Council by
January of 1986
3. AGING POPULATION determine the extent of City create "ad hoc" committee
BROOKLYN CENTER & "INNER responsibility and /or role in to analyze the impact of
RING" SUBURBS delivering ervices for elderly an
g increasing g elderl
Y
financing new service needs of population including
elderly must be tempered with examining need for an
sensitivity to financially "aging" element in our
burdening younger generations comprehensive plan
O INUING THREATS TO OUR COMMUNITY'S ENVIRONMENT MUST BE MONITORED
PROBLEMS WITH LANDFILLS MAY -must cooperate with Hennepin Cty - direct staff to monitor
REQUIRE MANDATORY RECYCLING who has primary responsibility Metro Council & Hennepin
for landfills and resource Cty's progress on "re-
recovery source" recovery projects
& identify areas of
City involvement by
March of 1986
5. STORM WATER DRAINAGE THROUGH -must use watershed district reg- direct the City Mgr. to
BROOKLYN CENTER AFFECTS LOCAL ulations to assure proper design report to the Council
SYSTEMS of upstream storm sewers annually on the progress
- monitor equity in assessing water of implementation of
shed improvements various watershed drain-
age plans
6. QUALITY OF DOMESTIC WATER - should be major continuing - direct the City Mgr. to
SUPPLY Council concern develop a consistent
water quality testing &
monitoring program (form -
alization of the current
program may be acceptable)
7. SAFETY PROBLEMS OF CRYSTAL -the Crystal Airport does not meet -more actively support
�IRPORT modern safety standards because Crystal in its efforts to
structures are built too close to improve the safety of
airport runways existing operations and
their phase out efforts
YEAR 2000 REPORT MATRIX
MAJOR CITY COUNCIL IMPLEMENTATION
TRENDS - ISSUES POLICY CONSIDERATIONS SUGGESTIONS
KLYN
CENTER'S ROLE IN PROVIDING AND FINANCING SERVICES AND PUBLIC FACILITIES WILL HAVE TO
BE EVALUATED CONTINUALLY
8. RAPID TECHNOLOGICAL -do not buy technology just to -the Council should insist
ADVANCEMENT accomplish "state of the art" on valid cost - benefit
- complete cost - benefit analysis analysis before approving
before implementation of any implementation of
technology technology
technology has the capability of
giving a Council greater quality
and quantity of information
9. PUBLIC PHYSICAL FACILITY -to plan for the financing of major - direct the City Mgr. to
AGING repair and replacement programs develop a schedule of
- anticipate and prevent deteriora "deterioration for the
tion- -don't wait for it to occur major elements in our
-key factor will be the decision of physical plant and make
when to repair and when to replace recommendations on the
need for preventive
maintenance and replace-
ment by July of 1987
10. CONTINUING NEED FOR ENERGY - financing conservation projects direct the Planning Comm.
CONSERVATION in their review of land
• use & building regulations
to consider additions &
modifications which
would encourage energy
conservation
11. CHANGE WILL OCCUR MORE - Council must be flexible in the -more Council, advisory
FREQUENTLY AND MORE problem solving approaches commissions and staff
PERVASIVELY -City institutions must accommodate time will need to be
change, not resist it spent on "anticipating"
and "accommodating"
change; we will have to
be more flexible and
imaginative in addressing
change
12. GREATER POTENTIAL FOR CITY - problem of avoiding services dup- - direct the Human Rights
INVOLVEMENT IN SOCIAL AND lication with Hennepin Cty and Comm. to study & recommend
HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICE others guidelines for evaluating
DELIVERY financing additional programs new social & human re-
decision of providing services source service needs by
directly or contracting for January of 1987
services
13. MINIMAL CULTURAL ACTIVITIES cultural and recreational activity -the current efforts of
AND FACILITIES AVAILABLE IN should be given higher priority the Fine Arts Sub- -
.NORTHWEST METRO AREA committee of the Park
& Recreation Commission
should be encouraged &
additional staff assist-
ance should be authorized
in 1985
YEAR 2000 REPORT MATRIX
MAJOR CITY COUNCIL IMPLEMENTATION
TRENDS - ISSUES POLICY CONSIDERATIONS SUGGESTIONS
ATTENTION TO BROOKLYN CENTER'S QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE MIDST OF RAPID LOCAL, REGIONAL AND NATIONAL
CHANGES IS AN IMMEDIATE CHALLENGE
14. FOSTERING A PLEASANT -need to review the value of direct the Planning Comm.
URBAN ENVIRONMENT improving the City's right -of- with staff assistance,
ways with plantings and street to analyze and determine
beautification the need and value of
- constant awareness of the overall boulevard beautification
appearance of Brooklyn Center and report back to City
Council by March 1987
15. COMPLETION OF PARK - evaluate the value of a golf direct Park & Recreation
DEVELOPMENT PLAN course as an element in our Comm. with staff assist-
park system ance, to review the re-
-review other park development plans maining park development
projects & recommend an
implementation program
by March of 1986 for
each element -
16. HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF determining financial feasibility -the existing Earle Brown
EARLE BROWN FARM of eventual building uses Farm Committee established
approval of an economical plan by the Council appears to
• for farm building rehabilitation be addressing this issue
and use in a timely & effective
manner
17. "CUT - THROUGH" TRAFFIC IN -too much "cut- through" can devalue direct the City Mgr. to
RESIDENTIAL AREAS residential neighborhoods & create monitor levels & location
difficult public relations problems of cut through traffic
for the Council for the next 5 years &
report to the Council
on the monitoring results
18. 70% OF HOUSING STOCK 40 - development of financial & infor direct Housinig Comm. to
YEARS OLD BY YEAR 2000 mational mechanisms to assist study & recommend finan-
(APTS. WILL ALSO.BE AGING) homeowners in major maintenance & cial & informational
energy modernization projects mechanisms to assist
homeowners in major
maintenance & energy
modernization projects_
by July of 1986
19. CITY IS CHANGING ITS FOCUS -must develop a redevelopment policy - direct the City Mgr. to
FROM "DEVELOPMENT" TO by outlining priorities, designat - develop a redevelopment
"MAINTENANCE AND REDEVELOP ing areas, establishing financing policy draft by July 1986
MENT�� methods & determining the extent of and after its submittal
City involvement the Council should direct
the Planning & Housing
Commissions to review
the policy draft prior
to Council adoption
YEAR 2000 REPORT MATRIX
MAJOR CITY COUNCIL IMPLEMENTATION
TRENDS - ISSUES POLICY CONSIDERATIONS SUGGESTIONS
GNOMIC VIABILITY REQUIRES AN UNDERSTANDING OF OUR ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT AND ITS CONSTRAINTS
20. ECONOMY IS TRENDING TOWARD - anticipate impact of international -the Council, advisory
AN INTERNATIONAL BASE economy commissions and committees
should simply be "aware"
of this trend & keep it
in mind during their
deliberations
21. FROST BELT GEOGRAPHIC -must be aware of continuing need -the Council, advisory
LOCATION for energy conservation commissions and committees
-need to be sensitive to financing should simply be "aware"
needs of energy conservation of this fact and keep it
in mind during their
deliberations
22. CITY WILL CONTINUE AS THE -this fact is the "life blood" of -the Council and staff
JUNCTION OF MAJOR TRANSPOR- our commercial and industrial should actively monitor
TATION CORRIDORS WITH development growth to our north and
INCREASING VOLUMES OF TRAFFIC west
23. GRADUAL INCREASE IN AGE OF - potential property tax revenue -at this time there are
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL BLDGS. decline if buildings not properly only small pockets of
maintained & rehabilitated older industrial and
-need to establish a redevelopment commercial bldgs and
policy Council should review
Housing Comm. recommen-
dations on housing rehab.
mechanisms for future
use on commercial and
industrial structures
THE COMPLEXITY OF THE EMERGING TRENDS WILL REQUIRE TIMELY RESPONSES AND AN INFORMED AND
INVOLVED PUBLIC
24. COMMUNICATION OF COMMUNITY - evaluate the most effective method - direct City Mgr. to
NEEDS, PLANS & GOALS of lobbying identify lobbying
decide on the value of such lobby - alternatives available
ing efforts to Brooklyn Center to the City & implement
by end of 1985
25. FOUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS - examine whether flexibility in in 1986 Council should
SERVING BROOKLYN CENTER attendance districts is a feasible discuss alternatives for
alternative to merger addressing the various
problems caused by
multiple school districts
serving Brooklyn Center
26. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION -keep in mind the impact of the -at the Council's planning
AND COORDINATION policies of other governmental sessions review areas for
• units improved intergovern-
- policies of other governmental units mental cooperation
will have ever increasing importance
to Brooklyn Center
1
YEAR 2000 REPORT MATRIX
MAJOR CITY COUNCIL IMPLEMENTATION
TRENDS - ISSUES POLICY CONSIDERATIONS SUGGESTIONS
27. BALANCE AMONG BROOKLYN CENTER -may need to review methods of direct the Planning Comm.
LAND USES balancing employment sources and with staff assistance, to
land uses analyze methods of
-must be alert to changes which assuring a "balance" of
produce an abundance of any one land uses and report to
type of land use the Council by March 1986
monitor the amount of tax exempt
land in community
28. CRITERIA FOR ORDINANCE AND in establishing regulations do the Council should
REGULATION DEVELOPMENT not allow the wrongful acts of a carefully consider the
few limit the choices of the many overall community benefit
examine costs and benefits both before ordinance passage
public and private before adopting
regulations
29. VIABILITY AND EFFECTIVENESS - building maintenance codes are an - direct the Housing Comm.
OF BUILDING MAINTENANCE important element in a comprehen- to review and make
CODES sive redevelopment policy but not recommendations to the -
the only one City on the following:
- examine the value of directing 1. extension of a maint
incentives toward private enance code to
rehabilitation commerical & indus-
• trial buildings
2. additional changes the
commission believes
will improve existing
code
30. ZONING, BUILDING AND LAND -need to be receptive to new the Council should direct
USE REGULATIONS WILL BE developments in zoning, land use the Planning Comm. over
CHALLENGED BY REDEVELOPMENT and building codes the next 3 years, to
PRESSURES examine the goal and objective of a systematically review
potential regulation and then our existing land use and
develop the necessary ordinance kindred regulations and
recommend changes (should
consider complete re-
codification)
31. MORE PROBLEMS ORIGINATING - Council will have to give external -the Council and staff
OUTSIDE CITY RATHER THAN concerns equal billing with in- will, in the future, need
FROM WITHIN ternal concerns to give greater credence
-more staff and Council time will be to involvement in metro-
needed on intergovernmental poli.tan and state affairs
concerns
32. CONTINUED CITIZEN AWARENESS - Council must balance the need to -the Council and staff will
AND INVOLVEMENT address the demands of a changing have to anticipate pro -
society with demands of a more jects and problems to a
involved citizenry greater extent than in
-City Council will have to direct and the past if greater "lead
involve themselves in their com- time" is to be provided
missions and committees to a greater for greater public
extent involvement
e OOK�k 4e
•
r
�Y(
YEAR 2000 COMMITTEE REPORT
�L
oz
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 J�
0 „
CITY OF BROO KLYN
C REEK 6301 SHINGLE BROOKLYN CENTER MINNESO
CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
OF
B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
TELEPHONE 561 -5440
CENTER
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
Submitted herewith is the report of your year 2000 Committee. Since our creation by the Brooklyn Center
City Council in February of 1984 your Committee, in accordance with our original charges, has reviewed the
City Council's advisory committee and commission structure; examined methods of injecting a long term
perspective into our community's policy making process; and finally much of our efforts have been directed
toward identifying and examining those issues and trends Brooklyn Center will be facing by the year 2000.
would like to personally thank and acknowledge the efforts of all the members of our Committee. In
addition, I would like to acknowledge the assistance of the City staff in the preparation of this report,
particularly Jerry Splinter, Ron Warren and Gary Shallcross.
Respectfully submitted,
George Lucht, Chairman
Planning Commission
Michael Bea chane- Charter Commission hilip .hen -T ffic Safety Commission
1
Dale Greenwald -At Large Member tiara Jense - Conservation Commission
y/
c
Tony Kue r -At tier And La n - Housing Commission
ne Lhotka unci er Dean Nyquist -Mayor
(V,0d,(AA- � ti
Mary E1 n a ine -Human Rights Comm. s' chools Representative
9
Arvid Bud Sorenson - Park & Rec Comm. rald Sp nter- ity Manager
THE YEAR 2000 COMMITTEE REPORT
INTRODUCTION
In 1986 Brooklyn Center will celebrate its 75th anniversary. As we move toward our centennial in the year
2011 we can look back on our community's history with pride. Since 1911 when citizens of southeastern
Brooklyn Township and eastern Crystal Lake Township voted to incorporate the Village of Brooklyn Center,
its citizens seem to have had a propensity for planning ahead. As development pressures began to intensify
in the 1950's and 1960's our community quickly recognized the need for comprehensive planning. We
developed a Comprehensive Plan which is the basis for the development pattern now seen in Brooklyn
Center. Because the City was split into several large sectors by major arterial roads and large park and open
space areas" there was a challenge to provide a strong central focus. Our neighborhood and land use
patterns, the placement of pedestrian, bicycle, vehicle and other public facilities has resulted in a strong,
central focus for our community. Such an orientation is rare among suburban municipalities and is much to
the City of Brooklyn Center's credit that a history of competent, comprehensive planning and effective
implementation controls has resulted in a minimum of land use conflicts and resulted in apleasant urban
environment.
Because we have been left with a legacy of forward looking "doers and thinkers;' it is our responsibility to
provide that view for the next 75 years of Brooklyn Center's life cycle. The members of this Committee
believe the recommendations and suggestions contained in this report will be a continuation of Brooklyn
Center's forward looking perspective. This document should serve as a general guideline for and be an
impetus to continued quality planning for Brooklyn Center. What our forefathers have given us is a quality
foundation. Our task now is to build on that foundation to assure a quality urban environment for Brooklyn
Center's citizens into the future.
MERGE YEAR 2000 REPORT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
As the next step in our continuing planning process we suggest the City Council instruct the City staff to
merge the pertinent sections of this document with our Comprehensive Guide Plan. The resulting
document should be of an "executive summary type" To the extent possible, the Year 2000 Matrix contained
in this report should be expanded to include all the major issues, goals and trends stated in our
Comprehensive Plan. When such a document is developed, it should be given to citizens choosing to serve
on any of our advisory committees or commissions. It will provide a relatively brief and understandable
reference which addresses the trends and issues impacting our community. This document will also serve
the purpose of promoting some of the long term view or perspective necessary for a successful advisory
commission and committee process. However, creating this document is not going to be sufficient onto
itself. This plan summary should not be a type of document which simply sets on the shelf once completed.
To be effective it must be an easily understood document which is reviewed and periodically updated on a
consistent basis. Its assumptions and directions should be reviewed and questioned at each decision point
as it is applied to any of the community's decision making processes.
BIENNIAL PLANNING PROCESS
Our plan must change and grow to fit the changing needs of Brooklyn Center. To accomplish a vital,
foreward looking plan and achieve the vitality such a plan should have, we recommend the City Council
initiate a planning process to occur at least biennially. We envision in this planning process the City Council,
members of their various advisory commissiorys and committees, and staff would meet and jointly discuss
and analyze the trends, goals, and objectives of the committees and commissions and assess how they
relate to general goals contained in our Comprehensive Plan.
We recommend this planning session be held sometime in February or March to allow for adequate time to
accommodate appropriations for suggestions emanating from this process. To accomplish and direct this
kind of session it may well be necessary for the City to hire a professional facilitator to organize and direct
these planning sessions. This process will also assist the Council and the advisory commissions in
assessing the vitality and effectiveness of the individual commissions and guide the direction of their
activity. With this type of planning process we believe the City Council will be able to provide direction and
emphasis currently lacking in their relationship with the advisory commissions and committees. This would
also allow the advisory committees and commissions to have a better opportunity to communicate with the
Council as a whole rather than just with individual liaison members.
1
MODIFICATION OF
ADVISORY COMMISSION STRUCTURE
Your advisory committees and commissions are an integral part of the overall process which the Council
uses to communicate with the citizens of the community. The membership of these advisory bodies offer at
times technical advice, political advice, act as buffers to the City Council in handling delicate, difficult
issues, and serve as citizen sounding boards for the Council to use when they consider the impact of certain
proposals. We can't emphasize enough the importance of the effective use of these advisory bodies.
However, we must also point out they are only one element in a comprehensive communication system
available to a City Council. Other elements in that total system are newspapers, the City Manager's quarterly
newsletter, cable television, radio and commercial television.
A comprehensive use of all of the elements in your communication system will assist the Council in
communicating with and gaining input from the community. The City Council s hould review these various
communication elements or mechanisms, along with the advisory commissions and coordinate in a manner
to keep our community informed. In light of the changes we can expect in the coming decades, we
recommend the Council consider modifying their advisory commission and committee structure along the
following lines:
1. Because of the diversity of concerns the community will have to address in the future, a rigid, permanent
advisory committee structure alone may not be flexible enough to meet community needs. We recommend
the Council use ad hoc (single purpose, self terminating) committees for special policy making
considerations. By using ad hoc committees the Council will be able to address specific problems in a
relatively shorter period of time. The sole purpose of these committees would be to accomplish a single task
and not get bogged down in the regular agendas of permanent commissions. Current experience seems to
indicate citizens are more willing and interested to serve on shorter term, single purpose committee rather
than the long term permanent commissions.
2. Each of the advisory commissions were contacted and requested to review their activities and report to
the Year 2000 Committee through their representative on this Committee. They were asked to make any
suggestions which would improve their capability to serve the City of Brooklyn Center. They were also
asked if they believe the purpose of their commission was being achieved, whether or not they could better
serve by being merged with another commission, and whether or not their commission should be abolished.
While most of the reports came back from the commissions indicating they were still active and vital, the
Conservation Commission did report their activities seem to have been displaced by an existence of a high
degree of conservation awareness in the community and in society in general. At this time they believe their
mission has been accomplished to and extent their activities could be merged with another commission and
their members work on the other commissions. Because of these indications this Committee believes the
City Council should consider merging the charges and responsibilities of the Conservation Commission
with one or more of the other active commissions. We further recommend the City Council, in conjunction
with the permanent advisory commissions, review the original charges of these commissions and update
them and make necessary modifications to direct their efforts toward the problems, concerns, and
challenges stated in other sections of this report. Over time continual review of our commissions should
result in fewer more comprehensive commissions. We also believe for the advisory commissions to remain
vital they may have to adopt a more flexible approach to their work patterns. There are some indications
advisory commissions, though not required to meet monthly, continue to do so at times even when there
isn't significant work forthem to do. We believe staff time and volunteer membertime can best be served by
holding meetings only when there is a need for such meetings as judged by the advisory commission itself.
Whatever the committees or commissions the Council chooses to use, this Committee recommends the
Council adequately provide staff assistance to their advisory commissions and committees. This will allow
volunteer citizens to be more effective in the use of their time to assist the Council in making their decisions.
The staff assistance should accomplish the research and "detail work" required, thus, allowing the advisory
committees and commissions more time for study and deliberation.
3. Currently, a number of advisory commissions have neighborhood advisory groups serving in an advisory
capacity to the permanent commissions. There are at least two of these neighborhood advisory groups, and
it is our view they are underutilized. We believe these groups could serve a more meaningful and active role if
they were merged and all advisory commissions use a single group of neighborhood advisory committees.
2
- YEAR 2000 TRENDS AND ISSUES MATRIX
We believe the heart of our report is contained in the Year 2000 Matrix. Vertically on the matrix are listed the
trends and issues this Committee believes will be of primary interest and concern for Brooklyn Center in the
years to come. Horizontally are listed the impact areas. In the final column are suggested implementation
strategies. Following the matrix in this report is a section which comments on the trends and issues
reviewed by the matrix. We believe by the use of a matrix we can most effectively present our ideas and
suggestions. The comments listed under the impact areas are meant to give the City Council, a
straightforward and concise review of impacts and concerns. Futurists have criticized municipalities for
being much likethe captain of the ill fated ship Titantic. They claim, like theTitanic's captain, municipalities
are spending far too much time arranging deck chairs on their organizational ship rather than steering it
through the iceberg laden seas. Your committee does not wish to diminish the importance of short term,
day -to -day "deck chair" issues. However, as the Council seems to believe by creating this Committee, there
needs to be more time, energy and effort directed toward maintaining and further developing a long range or
strategic perspective for Brooklyn Center. If our community is to be vital in the coming decades, we must
anticipate trends, problems and issues and attempt to mitigate or avoid their negative impacts and take
advantage of the positives. We believe our recommendations in this area, if adopted, will place our
community in an anticipatory stance ratherthan being constantly placed in a situation of reacting to current
crises.
The listing order of trends and issues on the matrix should not be considered a priority listing. We have
chosen to give the Council a list of implementation suggestions which appears as the far righthand column
on our matrix. In setting specific deadlines for completion of suggested tasks we do not mean that these
deadlines are absolute. The City Council should work with their staff and the involved advisory
commissions and committees to agree on specific deadlines for the completion of assigned studies and
tasks. It may well be the press of current business will make some of these deadlines as suggested
unreasonable. We believe the completion dates of these tasks should be a matter of negotiation between
and among the Council, the advisory commissions and your staff.
COMING CHANGES ARE OPPORTUNITIES, NOT JUST PROBLEMS
As a final comment in our report we wish to point out that in our examination of the issues and trends which
will be impacting Brooklyn Center in the years to come, two words seemed to reoccur consistently. These
two words were "change" and "anticipate ".
Change in our society, the way we look at the world (our paradigm), ourtechnology, our economic base and
almost everything else we can think of will be occurring faster than it has in the past. We can also count on
the fact that these changes will be more pervasive than ever before. Government institutions, including
municipalities, have traditionally served as buffers to change and defenders of the status quo. We believe in
the future, because of the speed and the extent of the change in our society, municipal and other institutions
will have to be more flexible and accommodating to change. This will not be easy because human beings
and their institutions simply do not care for, like, or indeed, want to consider change. Generally, people will be
more comfortable with a status quo. The Council will have to work with the community to accommodate
coming changes. This will call for a high degree of leadership, citizen participation and communication.
The word "anticipate" is defined in Webster's Dictionary as "to look forward to; to prevent by action in
advance ". The quality of our future may well depend on how well we anticipate and plan for change. We
must adopt a forward looking stance which will allow us to "prevent by action in advance." The
implementation of our plan should involve a "working partnership" among businesses, government and our
citizenry. The continued positive relationship among these elements in our community will enhance our
prospects for the future. With a cooperative effort on the part of all aspects of our community, Brooklyn
Center can structure itself to be flexible enough to anticipate and accommodate the coming changes and
yet make those needed changes in both an intuitive and analytical fashion. We should view these coming
changes, as much as possible, as opportunities —not just problems.
3
COMMENTS ON TRENDS AND ISSUES
1. SINGLE PARENT HOUSEHOLDS INCREASING AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS
There currently exists, and apparently will continue to exist in Brooklyn Center and in society in general, a
significant number of single parent households. Their service and housing needs should be carefully
examined along with other community needs. A special report detailing these needs is enclosed to the
appendix of this report.
2. BALANCE AMONG AGE GROUPS IN POPULATION WILL CHANGE
It will be important for the community to not have a predominance of any one age group within its
population profile. If you can maintain a balance among ages it will be easier for the community to provide
needed services. Age "waves" passing through our population statistics, such as the baby boom generation,
make it difficult because the services they need change and fluctuate through short periods of time. To the
extent possible we should strive to keep a balance of ages and review all possible means of accomplishing
this balance of age groups. A primary goal of such a policy should consider methods of keeping and
attracting middle income families.
3. AGING POPULATION- BROOKLYN CENTER AND "INNER RING" SUBURBS
The age of our citizens will be trending older. It is and will continue to be important to analyze the effect of
this trend on all aspects of community life. Because the elderly will be a more significant portion of our
population, it will be important to analyze carefully their needs and the financial feasibility of providing
services. There also should be a careful review of current services available in this area and a consistent
effort to avoid duplication. Attached in the addendum section of this report is an outline of what a review,
analysis or study of these concerns might contain. It is also suggested this study could be included as a full
section of our Comprehensive Guide Plan.
4. PROBLEMS WITH LANDFILLS MAY REQUIRE MANDATORY RECYCLING
Research has documented the continued use of landfill operations for the disposal of solid wastes will not
be acceptable in the future. Brooklyn Center should work diligently with the County, Metropolitan and State
Agencies involved in these policy decisions and support them in their efforts to establish effective recycling
systems for the metropolitan area and the State.
5. STORM WATER DRAINAGE THROUGH BROOKLYN CENTER AFFECTS LOCAL SYSTEMS
As construction and development continues heavily in communities to the north and west of Brooklyn
Center the inflow of water into the various streams and drainage systems will be increased. The proper
maintenance and design of these drainage systems will have a profound effect on future flooding potential
in Brooklyn Center. The recent establishment of joint powers Watershed Districts is a step in the right
direction. However, Brooklyn Center should actively involve itself in these groups to assure ponding areas
and drainage systems design requirements are implemented properly.
6. QUALITY OF DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY
At this time the City's water supply appears "safe" both in quality and quantity. However, constant vigilance
and testing must occur in the future to assure current quality and quantity. The Water Department should
continue its experimentation with methods of iron bacteria control to assure a quality water supply for all
sections of our community.
7. SAFETY PROBLEMS OF CRYSTAL AIRPORT
Recent history demonstrates that the Crystal Airport does represent a hazard to the residential areas
immediately adjacent to the ends of its runways. While the immediate shutdown and removal of the airport
facility may not be warranted, certainly the Council should work diligently to encourage the Airport
Commission to eventually phaseout the Crystal operation into the expansion of other airports in the
metropolitan area. If at some point in time this phaseout should be accomplished, the City Council should
anticipate and work with the neighboring communities of Crystal and Brooklyn Park on an effective
complimentary redevelopment of the airport property.
4
'f 8. RAPID TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT
We may have already become a computerized information society and there are many who say it is only the
beginning. Futurists claim rapid and pervasive change will be the hallmark of the coming decades and
nowhere will it be more evident than in the application of technology. Brooklyn Center should be alert to
cost effective applications of technology. However, achieving "state of the art" for its own sake will not be
cost effective. We should continueto carefully analyzethe effective use of technology and use joint powers
consortiums such as LOGIS to maximize our investment in technology.
9. PUBLIC PHYSICAL FACILITIES AGING
Because much of our street system was developed and constructed without concrete curb and gutter and at
a time when paver laid asphalt technology was not available, portions of these streets in the next ten years
will be reaching an age where sections may start to deteriorate. Other physical facilities may also need
evaluation. With some physical facilities it is questionable whether continual repair will be the most
economic answer to deterioration. Planning for the financing of their eventual reconstruction should
commence by reviewing existing assessment policies, examining special assessment and bond legislation,
court precedents, other available financing techniques and continual updating of a capital improvements
program.
10. CONTINUING NEED FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION
While currently there exists no "energy crisis" the cost and availability of energy is an important factor in the
continued viability of our community. There will be a continuing need to conserve all forms of energy.
11. CHANGE WILL OCCUR MORE FREQUENTLY AND MORE PERVASIVELY
Generally, people view change with suspicion and resistance. There usually exists in society a "comfort"
with the "status quo" or the "known" and a discomfort with "change" or the "unknown." Sociologists and
futurists tell us in the coming decades change will occur more often, faster and more pervasively. Our
institutions, values and our paradigm (way we view the world) will be stressed and assaulted. We must
develop a flexibility to accommodate changes.
12. GREATER POTENTIAL FOR CITY INVOLVEMENT IN SOCIAL AND
HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICE DELIVERY
If this trend develops further, it will involve the community in administering programs in which its current
staff has little or no experience. The City Council must review carefully on a case -by -case basis the funding
and development of human service type projects. We must be watchful in developing these types of
programs and beware of duplicating services and anticipate future imbedded costs. We do not mean to state
these programs are in and of themselves not worthy, but we do believe the Council should approach them
carefully and analytically.
13. MINIMAL CULTURAL ACTIVITIES AND FACILITIES AVAILABLE IN THE
NORTHWEST METROPOLITAN AREA
The Committee noted there are few cultural facilities immediately available in the northwest metropolitan
area, and we recommend this aspect of our community's development and life should be nurtured to a
greater extent in the future than it has in the past.
14. FOSTERING A PLEASANT URBAN ENVIRONMENT
We believe it's important that our streets and boulevard areas portray Brooklyn Center as a beautiful
community in which to live, work and shop. We have noted some of our right -of -ways along our major
thoroughfares, such as Highway 100, 1-94,1-694, and Brooklyn Boulevard, are lacking in landscaping and
maintenance. More resources should be allocated to the mowing and maintenance of these boulevard
areas. A Comprehensive Plan for replacing boulevard and park trees as they age or become diseased should
be developed, the desirability of decorative street lighting should be examined, and a review of the
maintenance needs of street plantings should be commenced. We believe that how our streets and
boulevards "look" helps to form a good first impression of our community. We should also review building
architecture as an opportunity to improve our visual image.
15. COMPLETION OF PARK DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Brooklyn Center is blessed with a number of major recreational elements and amenities such as Shingle
Creek Trailway System, Central Park, Community Center swimming pool, and we believe the construction
5
of the golf course at Lions Park west site is a needed addition to our park and recreation system. We
recommend the design of this course be such that it effectively serve all age groups in the community from
the youth to the elderly. Other elements of our park plan remain to be examined also: Kylawn Preserve,
North Twin Lake and Riveridge Park. The Park and Recreation Commission should examine the value of
nature interpretive programming within our system without duplicating Hennepin County's programming.
16. HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF EARLE BROWN FARM
A few years ago a telephone survey asked residents to express their interest in preserving the Farm. A
significant percentage of those surveyed, 76 %, indicated the Farm should be preserved. We encourage the
Council to seek an economically feasible plan to preserve a significant portion of the Farm for future
generations to enjoy. Because the condition of the Farm buildings is worsening, the Council should
expedite its search for a feasible preservation plan. We also wish to point out that the economic feasibility
review should be an exhaustive analysis covering the costs of purchase, redevelopment and continuing
operation.
17. "CUT- THROUGH" TRAFFIC IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
Because Brooklyn Center is a crossroads of major thoroughfares and overtime there will be periodic traffic
problems and congestion on the major thoroughfares, there is and will continue to be shortcutting and
cut- through traffic by commuters attempting to avoid congestion on the major thoroughfares. Because it is
importantto maintain viable residential areas and this cut - through and shortcut traffic will be a detriment to
residential areas, the City should review all possible techniques to mitigate this problem. There should be a
review of the traffic diverter systems used in other communities and conduct a thorough analysis of all
possible methods, including the actual closing off and cul- de- sacing of certain residential streets where grid
patterns make it easy for bypassing and cut - through traffic.
18.70% OF HOUSING STOCK 40 YEARS OLD BY THE YEAR 2000
A significant portion of Brooklyn Center's housing will be reaching the 30 to 40 year mark before the year
2000. It will be important as these houses reach the major repair stages in their life cycle, that timely
maintenance and rehabilitation occur. The City Council should address this problem immediately and seek
to implement whatever mechanisms are available to make it as easy as possible for this housing to be
rehabilitated so as to assure its viability in the future.
Currently much of our housing stock is made up of three bedroom ramblers of approximately 900 to 1000
square feet. Many have single car garages. The Housing Commission and the Planning Commission should
jointly review the possible need to modify setbacks and other building and zoning code requirements which
might restrict remodeling of our current housing stock to meet the need and desires of home buyers in the
future.
19. BROOKLYN CENTER IS IN THE PROCESS OF CHANGING FROM A "DEVELOPMENT"
TO A "MAINTENANCE" STAGE OF ITS LIFE CYCLE
Brooklyn Center, as it approaches its diamond anniversary, is on the verge of being completely developed.
As a community reaches full development and as the first developed portions of the community age,
redevelopment pressures begin. Our community's ordinances and policies were developed while we were
preoccupied, justifiably so, with the concerns of a fast growing suburb. We believe the City Council should
examine our ordinances and policies for needed changes in light of the gradual change of our community's
focus from growth to maintenance and redevelopment.
We believe our community should institute a formal policy plan for "redevelopment ". We suggest the
elements of this plan should include at least the following: designation of areas of rehabilitation need and /or
potential within the community; the Council should develop specific direction to its staff on the extent of
City involvement in various types of rehabilitation and /or redevelopment projects; and establish the extent
of City financial involvement in rehabilitation proposals. Brooklyn Center still has some lands available for
development. Most of this land is industrial and commercial. We anticipate within the next five to ten years
virtually all vacant land in Brooklyn Center will be developed. We believe redevelopment opportunities and
needs will be coming more to the forefront. Currently some redevelopment proposals are already in the
formation stages, and we anticipate more to come in the near future. While this redevelopment interest is
relatively small at this time; we would anticipate it will be important for the community to develop a policy in
anticipation of redevelopment rather than in response to it.
6
20. OUR ECONOMY IS TRENDING MORE TOWARD AN INTERNATIONAL BASE AND AS SUCH
CHANGES WILL BE OCCURRING IN THE ECONOMY AS IT IMPACTS BROOKLYN CENTER.
The general economy of the United States is fast becoming orientated toward an international rather than a
national base. Businesses based in Brooklyn Center and in Minnesota are becoming more and more
involved in competing in international markets. The current State of Minnesota policy is directed at
encouraging international based marketing for Minnesota businesses. The Council and its advisory
commissions should be aware of this trend and keep it in mind in their decision making processes.
21. BROOKLYN CENTER'S GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION IS IN A FROST BELT AREA OF THE UNITED
STATES AND IS AFFECTED ECONOMICALLY AS A VIABLE PLACE TO LIVE AND WORK
BY THIS LOCATION.
Our geographic location both enhances and deters our ability to attract and keep a diverse population. On
one hand, being a frost belt area and the resulting high energy costs is a deterrent to development. On the
other hand, our abundant water resources are a valuable asset.
22. CITY WILL CONTINUE AS THE JUNCTION FOR MAJOR TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS WITH
INCREASING VOLUMES OF TRAFFIC.
Noise and air pollution standards should be monitored and innovative steps taken to buffer these kinds of
problems which are generally associated with major traffic thoroughfares. Landscaping and buffering
techniques and technology should be continually monitored and any possible improvements should be put
in place as soon as practical. While our major thoroughfares increase in traffic volumes more attention
should be given to the development of an intrasuburban transportation system.
The growth corridor between Brooklyn Center and St. Cloud and the adjacent lands represent the fastest
growing area in the State of Minnesota. All indications are this is where the heaviest growth will continue to
happen in the next 15 to 20 years. We must work with adjacent communities, Metropolitan and State
agencies to control the adverse impacts of this development.
23. GRADUAL INCREASE IN AGE OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS
Brooklyn Center's industrial and commercial buildings are relatively new and for the most part well
maintained. However, we should be alert to pockets of deterioration and review our experience with
encouraging rehabilitation of housing to see if successful techniques in housing rehabilitation can be
transferred to rehabilitation of commercial and industrial buildings.
24. COMMUNICATION OF COMMUNITY NEEDS, PLANS AND GOALS
We must persuade our Legislature to consider Brooklyn Center's and other community needs in their
deliberations. We must gather information and present it to the Legislature in such a fashion for them to
make better informed decisions relating to Brooklyn Center citizens. Currently suburbs are relatively
ineffective in influencing the State legislative process. Suburban communities such as Brooklyn Center lack
lobbying clout and organized effort. The State of Minnesota continues to mandate without fiscal analysis.
This is a process which cannot continue if the City is to effectively plan its financial future. Current State
policies relating to such things as local government aids and fiscal disparities legislation have served to
create friction between and among municipalities in the State Legislature. The local government aid
formula, fiscal disparities legislation, and mandatory arbitration have created haves and have nots within the
various constituencies within and among municipalities. The net result is conflict, and we should work
diligently with the Legislature to eliminate the competition and conflict between and among cities.
25. FOUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS SERVING BROOKLYN CENTER
The maintenance of a quality education system for Brooklyn Center is an absolute necessity if the
community is to be viable in the future. The perception by those individuals and families interested in living
in Brooklyn Center that it is served by quality educational institutions is the most important factor in the
continued viability of our housing stock. If younger families continue to move in the community and buy
housing, then much of our residential redevelopment problems will be mitigated. It is essential a continuing
quality level of education be provided by our school systems.
26. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION AND COORDINATION
The federal government has an important influence on Brooklyn Center as it, in varying degrees, affects the
economic viability of our nation and by its policies affect our ability to finance such redevelopment projects
as the Brookwood housing development. A major arm of the federal government affecting cities is the
Housing and Urban Development Department. Their policies affect our ability to financesuch redevelopment
7
project as the Brookwood housing development. A major arm of the federal government policies have for
the mot part proved to be ineffective in assisting Brooklyn Center in accomplishing its planning goals.
Federa mandated controls and regulations are making it more and more difficult to accomplish any project
with federal funding. The federal government's current health care assistance programs do not encourage
COMML nity based health care facilities and systems. This has been a trend in most of their programs. We
must w rk in the future to change their policies and develop programs which encourage community based
facilities and allow for input of community based goals, needs and interests.
The City Council should use the League of Cities, the Metro Association of Municipalities, and other
municipal networking devices such as joint powers agreements to accomplish monitoring of these
governmental unit policies as they are developed and modified.
27. BALANCE AMONG BROOKLYN CENTER LAND USES
It appears, from the Committee's point of view, Brooklyn Center and the surrounding area is currently and
probab y into the future well served by existing retail facilities. The City Council should ask the Planning
Commission to review carefully what kind of and to what extent future retail development is warranted. The
Planning Commission should also monitor land uses for an emerging predominance of any one type.
28. CRITERIA FOR ORDINANCE AND REGULATION DEVELOPMENT
Our Committee believes that many times special interest groups or the wrongful acts of a few dictates the
direction and initiation of ordinances. While the City Council cannot ignore these factors, your primary
responsibility is the overall good of the community which may or may not be represented by any organized
lobbying effort.
29. VIABILITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF BUILDING MAINTENANCE CODES
Our existing Code has served us well to date; however, a review of the following should be conducted:
1. Review the feasibility of upgrading lawn, landscaping and other maintenance standards
in our ordinances.
2. Consider the extension of the housing and maintenance code to include commercial and industrial
properties.
3. Continue to review the newer developments in housing and building maintenance codes and
evaluate them as to their effectiveness within Brooklyn Center.
30. ZO ING, BUILDING AND LAND USE REGULATIONS WILL BE CHALLENGED
BY RE EVELOPMENT PRESSURES
A revie of the following suggestions should be conducted:
1. C nsider the development of a planned unit development feature within our zoning ordinance to
fa ilitate redevelopment:
2. Examine the feasibility of elderly housing clusters and accessory apartments and similar "new"
trends in housing.
3. Review lot size restrictions which may be complicating infilling within development areas.
4. Review the complications of single family dwellings within potential redevelopment areas.
5. Consider modifications of codes and regulations which will allow the City flexibility in developing
ar d implementing rehabilitation projects in a manner which does not compromise our
development standards.
6. Review the sensitivity of our regulations to the needs of new energy efficient designs and
construction concepts.
7. Review ordinance standards which ,may relate to such developments as high tech cottage home
occupations and other home occupation developments.
31. MO IE PROBLEMS ORIGINATING OUTSIDE THE CITY RATHER THAN FROM WITHIN
As we r ach full development, without question, more of our problems and the source of their solutions will
be out ide the boundaries of Brooklyn Center. With continuing growth to the northwest, Brooklyn Center
must w rk with adjacent communities, MNDOT, the Metro Council and others to mitigate building traffic
congestion problems. We must similarly look outside to solve Crystal Airport safety concerns. These are
only two examples of problems and solutions requiring "outside" attention. The City Council memberswill have
to develop and foster, with staff assistance, communication links to our neighboring communities, Metro
Council, and State government.
8
32. CONTINUING CITIZEN AWARENESS AND INVOLVEMENT
The City Council should continue to seek input at early stages and policy considerations. Many futurists
indicate there's going to be a greater and greater need for personalization of our institutions and their
policies because of our increasingly automated society. They claim and are predicting there will be a trend
toward more "participation democracy ". Members of the Committee;believe it has been here for sometime
in Brooklyn Center and ought to be nurtured and encouraged. In the future in deciding upon the levels and
types of services and the impacts of the community's regulations, we believe the City Council must be aware
of an apparent trend toward people being interested in multiple options ratherthan either /or choices in both
their private lives and their public policies.
9
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
YEAR 2000 REPORT MATRIX
IMPACT AREAS PUBLIC PHYSICAL MAJOR CITY COUNCIL DEMAND FOR NEW PUBLIC MODIFICATION OF EXISTING
TRENDS-ISSUES FACILITIES POLICY CONSIDERATIONS SERVICES AND ORDINANCES PUBLIC SERVICES
AND ORDINANCES
CHANGES IN BROOKLYN CENTER'S DEMOGRAPHICS WARRANT SPECIAL ATTENTION.
- possible health care clinics on site - need for analysis of the needs of - potential new programs - clustering of services for both
at high schools the single parent household - increased demand for day are children and single parents who are
SINGLE PARENT HOUSEHOLDS because of their increase as y working toward self- sufficiency.
INCREASING AS A PERCENTAGE OF percent of households - need to develop comprehensive
HOUSEHOLDS family life education programs in
- coordination with other schools
government agencies needed
2 - population imbalance creates short - an imbalance among age groups in - research methods of encouraging
BALANCE AMONG AGE GROUPS IN term pressure on physical facilities the population places population balances
POPULATION WILL CHANGE such as Parks and Schools disproportionate pressure on
service delivery systems
3 - potential need for "elderly" center - determine the extent of City - more elderly recreation - many City services will have to
responsibility and /or role in programming anticipate needs of more elderly
AGING POPULATION delivering services for the elderly transportation needed - fewer youth program demands
BROOKLYN CENTER AND - financing new service needs of
"INNER RING" SUBURBS elderly must be tempered with
sensitivity to financially burdening
younger generations
CONTINUING THREATS TO OUR COMMUNITY'S ENVIRONMENT MUST BE MONITORED.
4 - may require land or building area - must cooperate with Hennepin - may have to develop a system for possible modification of existing
PROBLEMS WITH LANDFILLS MAY County who has primary at the source separation of refuse regulations
REQUIRE MANDATORY RECYCLING responsibility for landfills and recycleables
resource recovery
5 if upstream facilities are not must use watershed district - potential for storm water treatment
properly designed our existing regulations to assure proper exists in watershed laws
STORM WATER DRAINAGE THROUGH storm sewers will be undersized design of upstream storm sewers
BROOKLYN CENTER AFFECTS LOCAL
SYSTEMS watershedgimprovem assessing
.. I
6 - potential need for treatment - should be major continuing City - additional expenditure for water
QUALITY OF DOMESTIC WATER facilities Council concern quality monitoring may be needed
SUPPLY
7 - after phase -out of airport new - the Crystal Airport does not meet
SAFETY PROBLEMS OF CRYSTAL development could cause storm modern safety standards because
AIRPORT and sanitary sewer capacity structures are built too close to
problems airport runways
PAGE 10
HOUSING STOCK OTHER GOVERNMENT UNITS PRIVATE PHYSICAL FACILITIES PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS IMPLEMENTATION
AND /OR QUESTIONS SUGGESTIONS
may call for review of "size" and - solutions to problems must involve - potential for increased day -what development and - direct the Human Rights
cost requirements of new housing other Cities, State, County and care demands redevelopment impacts will Commission to identify and
possible increase in demand for Federal officials solutions to problems involve recommend alternative actions for
rental housing the City Council's consideration by
- potential demand for accessory - July of 1987
apartments or other single family
dwelling conversions
- must keep a balance of housing - planning for housing the elderly - must anticipate factors which will - direct the City Manager to analyze
alternatives should be addressed on an area create population imbalances population projections and analyze
- new and modified housing should wide basis so that action or Potential impacts of existing
attract elderly out of underutilized inaction by a community is not population waves and report to
single family detached dwellings cancelled by action or inaction of the City Council by January of 1986
new and modified housing must another community
attract young families
- must provide attractive elderly - avoid service duplication and - utilize contractual services when - study, plan and anticipate needs of - create an "ad hoc" committee to
housing options to encourage coordinate provisions of elderly possible an aging population base analyze the impact of an
"turnover' of empty nester homes services with County, Schools and - take advantage of private facilities - plan to avoid a preponderance of increasing elderly population
- monitor changing elderly housing other Cities and services where possible any age group including examinin g the need for
preferences an `aging" element in our
comprehensive plan
- potential for intercommunity - can resource recovery be made - landfilling refuse is an - direct staff to monitor the Metro
recycling cooperation profitable unacceptable solution Council's and Hennepin County's
- must work toward developing progress on `resource" recovery
alternatives projects and identify areas of City
involvement by March of 1986
if storm water runoff is not - joint powers watershed - if storm water runoff is not - effective watershed design criteria - direct the City Manager to report to
properly channeled flooding could agreements are guidelines for joint properly channeled flooding could eliminate problems the City Council annually on the .
result and cooperative solutions could result - anticipate need and cost of storm progress of the implementation of
water treatment the various watershed drainage
plans
any major change in water quality - monitor actions in other - any major change in water quality - planning and anticipating potential - direct the City Manager to develop
could adversely impact housing communities whose actions may could adversely impact pollution sources and treatment a consistent water quality testing
values affect our water supply source development alternatives should be a continuing and monitoring program
values process (formalization of the current
- monitor the safety of the AMOCO program may be acceptable)
pipeline on Dupont
- housing close to the end of airport - coordinate efforts with Crystal to - as we work for the phase -out of the - more actively support Crystal in its
runways are more likely to be convince the Metro Airports airport discuss with Crystal and efforts to improve the safety of the
involved in aircraft accidents Commission to phase -out Crystal Brooklyn Park the eventual existing operation and theirphase-
Airport redevelopment plan for the airport out efforts
property
I
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
YEAR 2000 REPORT MATRIX
IMPACT AREAS PUBLIC PHYSICAL MAJOR CITY COUNCIL DEMAND FOR NEW PUBLIC MODIFICATION OF EXISTING PUBLIC SERVICES HOUSING STOCK
TRENDS - ISSUES FACILITIES POLICY CONSIDERATIONS SERVICES AND ORDINANCES AND ORDINANCES
BROOKLYN CENTER'S ROLE IN PROVIDING AND FINANCING SERVICES AND PUBLIC FACILITIES IES W
ILL
HAVE TO BE EVALUATED CC
8 evaluation of benefit new do not buy technology just to - with the implementation er of
eed for mplementation of c mputer
technology can have for existing accomplish "state of the art" technology
RAPID TECHNOLOGICAL physical facilities - complete cost - benefit analysis more personalized service (more - joint powers technology usage,
ADVANCEMENT before implementation of any high tech =more high touch) P
P such as LOGIS offers economic
technology advantage
- technology has the capability of
giving a City Council greater
quality and quantity of information
- may have to expend more
need for continuous monitoring and - plan for the financing of major resources on research, testing and
9 maintenance of existing physical repair and replacement programs planning
PUBLIC PHYSICAL FACILITY AGING facilities - anticipate for it t event deterioration
don't wait for t to occur
- key factor will be the decision of
when to repair and when to replace
_ - aging housing stock will need to be
- energgy conservation projects to - financing conservation projects a °dinance as energy conserv conservation regiredments energy anal yencies r (ene r gy audit rvation
10 rehabilitate public buildings mechanism maintenance code
CONTINUING NEED FOR ENERGY need oaccommodate bike and pedestrians
CONSERVATION
existingg services may not be - must keep up with new housing
City Council must be flexible in the more frequent demands for n
changing interests and service ew need2or less demand for them material and energy technology
11 needs may result to obsolete public problem solving approaches services might exist housing structures may have to
CHANGE WILL OCCUR MORE facilities -City institutions must accommodate computer crime and the expertise to _ need to keep abreast of new accommodate changing
change, not resist it address it technology in all departments, demographics
FREQUENTLY AND MORE i
services oriented to "wellness" and especially n use of computer
PERVASIVELY "prevention" not just curing technolog
problems and addressing crises must wor to eliminate or reduce
programs which are no longer or
have ceased to serve their purpose
12 potential need for office space problem pl cation avoiding services County generally staff intensive and
and others could call for increased staffing
GREATER POTENTIAL FOR CITY financing additional programs new type skills will be needed to
INVOLVEMENT IN SOCIAL AND - decision of providing services accomplish these types of services
HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICE directly or contracting for services
DELIVERY
- potential for additional area to - cultural and recreational activity potential for additional cultural -
13
accommodate cultural activity should be given higher priority recreational programming
FACILITIES AVAILABLE IN THE S AND
NORTHWEST METRO AREA
I
PAGE 11
OTHER GOVERNMENT UNITS PRIVATE PHYSICAL FACILITIES PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS IMPLEMENTATION
AND /OR QUESTIONS SUGGESTIONS '
)NTINUALLY.
- be aware of all opportunities for - more work and business may be - examine carefully the contribution - the City Council should insist on
joint power usage of technology conducted at home technology can make in improving valid cost - benefit analysis before
(high tech cottages) the City Council's access to approving implementation -
P of
information n nd the e ualit of '
decisions q y heir technology
- consider shared facilities - ANTICIPATE is the ke word; don't - direct the City M
- will the price of replacing existing ty anager to develo
wait for the problem o occur a schedule of yy "deterioration" for the
p '
facilities be competitive with the t
price of building new facilities in major elements in our physical
outer suburbs plan and make recommendations
on the need for preventive
maintenance and replacement by
July of 1987.
- will we have to compete with other - energy audits and rehabilitation
cities for scarce energy supplies pprogram and information will - continuing need for energy - direct the Planning Commission, in
be needed conservation emphasis their review of our Land Use and
Building regulations, to consider
additions and modifications which —'
would encourage energy
conservation
- greater flexibility may be required - existing commercial and industrial - need for more frequentreview of - more City Council, Advisory
m our joint powers agreements structures must be adaptive to Comprehensive Plan
changing market demands Commissions and staff time will
- must develop techniques and /or need to be spent on "anticipating"
methods of 'selling" need for and 'accommodating" change; we
service elimination and reduction to will have to be more flexible and
the public imaginative in addressing change
- must develop techniques and /or
methods of selling "change" with
-
Possible duplication of services public involvement
- I
- continue cooperation and support P y and remember this - direct the Human Rights
of Northwest Human Services tyan carefully of programming involves Commission to study and
expertise not available on current recommend guidelines for
staff evaluating new social and human
resource service needs by January
of 1987
potential
pons ial exists for joint - opportunity for joint programs with ~
sponsorship efforts the private sector (Brookdale)
the current efforts of the Fine Arts
subcommittee of the Park and
Recreation Commission should be
encouraged and additional staff ,
assistance should be authorized
in 1985
I
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
YEAR 2000 REPORT MATRIX
IMPACT AREAS PUBLIC PHYSICAL MAJOR CITY COUNCIL DEMAND FOR NEW PUBLIC MODIFICATION OF EXISTING
FACILITIES POLICY CONSIDERATIONS SERVICES AND ORDINANCES PUBLIC SERVICES
TRENDS - ISSUES AND ORDINANCES
ATTENTION TO BROOKLYN CENTER'S QUAL OF LIFE IN THE MIDST OF RAPID LOCAL, REGIONAL AND NAB
14 may create more boulevard plantings need to review the value of improving the - research "streetscape proposals more resources expended on maintenance
potential for decorative street lighting and City's right -of -ways with plantings and of plantings
FOSTERING A PLEASANT URBAN boulevard furniture street beautification reinforcement of appearance sections of
ENVIRONMENT constant awareness of the overall maintenance codes
appearance of Brooklyn Center
15 - final development of Kylawn Preserve. North evaluate the value of a golf course as an management and maintenance of a additional maintenance needs for future
Twin Lake Park. Riverridge Park and element in our park system golf course developed park areas
COMPLETION OF PARK DEVELOPMENT PLAN Golf Course review other park development plans
16 City may have to assume maintenance determining financial feasibility of eventual buildings may be able to house some or all
and /or ownership of some or all of the farm building uses of future service and program needs
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF EARLE BROWN buildings approval of an economical plan for farm
FARM budding rehabilitation and use
17 street system modifications may be required too much "cut - through" traffic can devalue need to research for any innovative ideas
residential neighborhoods and create which could mitigate these problems
"CUT- THROUGH" TRAFFIC IN RESIDENTIAL difficult public relations problems for
AREAS the Council
18 development of financial and informational new staff and /or contractual assistance
mechanisms to assist homeowners in major needed to develop assistance mechanisms
70% OF HOUSING STOCK 40 YEARS OLD BY maintenance and energy modernization
YEAR 2000 (APARTMENTS WILL ALSO BE projects
AGING)
19 must develop a redevelopment policy by City must develop or contract for additional less staff demand for development projects
outlining priorities, designating areas redevelopment of staff skills
CITY IS CHANGING ITS FOCUS FROM determining the extent of City involvement
"DEVELOPMENT" TO "MAINTENANCE AND
REDEVELOPMENT'
ECONOMIC VIABILITY REQUIRES AN UNDERSTANDING OF OUR ECO NOMIC ENVIRON AND ITS CONSTF
20 need access to international - anticipate impact of international economy
telecommunication and international air
ECONOMY IS TRENDING TOWARD AN transportation routes
INTERNATIONAL BASE
21 must be aware of continuing need for - research and identify "best' afternatives for review need for "energy" related code
energy conservation insulation and energy efficient heating modifications
FROST BELT GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION need to be sensitive to financing needs of systems
energy conservation
22 this fact is the "life blood" of our commercial need to examine all methods of mitigating
and industrial development impact of these traffic corridors
CITY WILL CONTINUE AS THE JUNCTION OF
MAJOR TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS WITH
INCREASING VOLUMES OF TRAFFIC
23 - declining building value could make potential property tax revenue decline if maintenance code for industrial and
assessment of public improvements difficult buildings not properly maintained and commercial buildings
GRADUAL INCREASE IN AGE OF COMMERCIAL rehabilitated
AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS need to establish a redevelopment policy
PAGE 12
HOUSING STOCK OTHER GOVERNMENT UNITS PRIVATE PHYSICAL FACILITIES PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS IMPLEMENTATION SUGGESTIONS
AND/OR QUESTIONS
,TIONAL CHANGES IS AN IMMEDIATE CHALLENGE.
boulevard beautification could improve will heed to convince Hennepin County and appearance aspects of maintenance codes should be must establish a tong term plan for direct the Planning Commission. with staff
ai
extended to commercial and industrial development
value of residential housing m DOT n expend more funds on boulevard beautification and maintenance of street assistance, to analyze and determine the
identity
maintenance and beautification. aesthetic improvements would add to community boulevards need and value of boulevard beautification
aesthetic improvements may involve public continued attention to the appearance of and report back to City Council by March
expenditures on private property industrial & commercial development of 1987
i - Golf Course may be an asset in stabilizing with the major portion of our Park direct Park and Recreation Commission with
residential land values in southeast Development Plan a complete review of the staff assistance. to review the remaining
neighborhood final elements remaining should be conducted park development projects and recommend
quality parks are an asset to residential a park system is never complete because an lm lementation program by March of
areas user activity is always changing 1986 for each element
rental housing may be a valid use adjacent tax increment financing impact must be examine carefully the role of the private eventual Farm use must be complimentary the existing Earle Brown Farm Committee
to the Farm along with commercial and reconciled with other government units sector in assessing preservation protects to industrial /commercial area development established by the City Council appears to
industrial uses City must examine carefully its be addressing this issue in a timely and
"entrepreneurial" relationship to the final effective manner
Farm redevelopment plan
traffic control helps protect housing efforts will require coordination with as development to our north and west direct the City Manager to monitor levels
investments Hennepin County and MN /DOT continues more traffic will lead to more and location of cut - through traffic for the
shortcutting" pressure next five years and report to the City
Council on the monitoring results
I
quality assistance programs will result in anticipate the impact of other aging public direct Housing Commission to study and
rejuvenation of our housing stock and private facilities recommend financial and informational
(energy audits) will future changes in housing needs make mechanisms to assist homeowners in major
Brooklyn Center s housing stock maintenance and energy modernization
functionally obsolete or will remodeling projects by July of 1986
make it viable
will need to provide assistance for housing be aware of impact of tax increment and potentially more government involvement in in the future we will have to orient our direct the City Manager to develop a
redevelopment other government units private rehabilitation projects planning and ordinances toward the needs redevelopment policy draft by July of 1986
may be competing with other cities for of redevelopment and after its submittal the Council should
redevelopment projects integrate redevelopment plans with direct the Planning and Housing
Comprehensive Plan Commission to review the policy draft prior
to Council adoption
3AI NTS.
monitor impact of international marketing monitor and anticipate needs of - the City Council, advisory commissions and
on Minnesota's Legislature. Governor's international business committees should simply be "aware" of
Office and State agencies this trend and keep it in mind during their
deliberations
need to upgrade insulation Federal and State governments must assure need to upgrade building insulation examine role of zoning requirements in the City Council, advisory commissions and
need to install energy efficient heating continuing availability of reasonable cost need to upgrade heating systems resource conserving site and building design committees should simply be "aware" of
systems energy sources this fact and keep it in mind during their
encourage congressional delegation to join deliberations
to protect frost belt States
I
housing adjacent to heavy traveled must work with MN/DOT and Hennepin high level of accessability may lead to more must monitor and encourage planned the City Council and staff should actively
thoroughfares may not be able to survive County to compete development of their infense commercial development growth to the north and west toward monitor growth to our north and west
transportation system in the northwestern t. Cloud
metro area
possible increased inspection of private anticipate needs of aging commercial and at this time there are only small pockets of
buildings by city inspectors industrial buildings older industrial and commercial buildings
commercial and industrial structures should critical decision point is when do you and Council should review the Housing
be covered by our maintenance code. rehabilitate and when do you raze and Commission recommendations on housing
rebuild rehabilitation mechanisms for future use on
commercial & industrial structures
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
YEAR 2000 REPORT MATRIX
IMPACT AREAS PUBLIC PHYSICAL MAJOR CITY COUNCIL DEMAND FOR NEW PUBLIC MODIFICATION OF EXISTING
TRENDS - ISSUES FACILITIES POLICY CONSIDERATIONS SERVICES AND ORDINANCES AND ORDINANCES HOUSING STOCK
THE COMPLEXITY OF THE EMERGING TRENDS WILL REQUIRE TIMELY RESPONSES AND AN INFORMED AND INVOLVED PUBLIC.
24 evaluate the most effective method of contracting for lobbying services should be more alert to the need to
lobbying joint powers lobbying effort communicate with public and State and
COMMUNICATION OF COMMUNITY NEEDS, decide on the value of such lobbying efforts Federal governments
PLANS AND GOALS to Brooklyn Center
25 examine whether flexibility in attendance
districts is a feasible alternative to merger
FOUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS SERVING BROOKLYN
CENTER
26 keep in mind the impact of the policies of potential demand for additional staff time
other government units
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION AND policies of other government units will have
COORDINATION ever increasing importance to
Brooklyn Center
27 may need to review methods of balancing - modify ordinances to accommodate mixed accommodate neregulation c as gs to
employment sources and land uses use developments g
BALANCE AMONG BROOKLYN CENTER LAND must be alert to changes which produce an
USES abundance of any cOe type of land use
monitor the amount of tax exempt land in
community
28 in establishing regulations do not allow the - if new and complex ordinances and passage of ordinances requires additional
wrongful acts of a few limit the choices of regulations are enacted. personnel costs for enforcement efforts
CRITERIA FOR ORDINANCE AND REGULATION the many enforcement will be incurred
DEVELOPMENT examine costs and benefits both public and
private before adopting regulations
28 building maintenance codes are an - research method of providing "positive" potential need for expansion of inspection - examine the upgrading of lawn and
important element in a comprehensive inducements for rehabilitation services landscaping standards in existing codes
VIABILITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF BUILDING redevelopment policy but not the only one consider value of point of sale ordinance as consistent enforcement and updating of our
MAINTENANCE CODES examine the value of directing incentives code compliance mechanism housing code is essential
toward private rehabilitation
30 need to be receptive to new developments in add a "planned unit development" section to review feasibility of elderly housing clusters
zoning, land use and building codes our zoning ordinance and accessory apartment
ZONING, BUILDING. AND LAND USE examine the goal and objective of a existing regulations were developed during review the complications of single family
REGULATIONS WILL BE CHALLENGED BY potential regulation and then develop the the "development" years and may not serve dwellings in redevelopment areas
REDEVELOPMENT PRESSURES necessary ordinance the needs of redevelopment
consider "performance" and "contract"
zoning
City Council will have to give external will require appropriation for lobbying efforts
31 concerns equal billing with internal
MORE PROBLEMS ORIGINATING OUTSIDE CITY concerns
RATHER THAN FROM WITHIN more staff and Council time will be needed
on intergovernmental concerns
32 City Council must balance the need to greater public interest in "how' and "why" greater public involvement when a service is
address the demands of a changing society services are needed changed"
CONTINUED CITIZEN AWARENESS AND with demands of a more involved citizenry possible, expanded need for "mediation
INVOLVEMENT City Council will have to direct and involve services
themselves in their commissions and must continue to use committees,
committees to a greater extent publications, electronic media and polls
PAGE 13
OTHER GOVERNMENT UNITS PRIVATE PHYSICAL FACILITIES PI ANO OR CONSIDERATIONS IMPLEMENTATION SUGGESTIONS
Federal and State government must give having a good plan - lishin
accomppg a worthy direct City Manager to identify lobbying
more credence to community -based plans goal may not be good enough - people must be alternatives e y available ito City and
and goals aware of good work
can cooperation and coordination between because differing needs and concerns each in 1986 Council should discuss alternatives
school districts mitigate City concerns school district's situation is unique for addressing the various problems caused
by multiple school districts serving
Brooklyn Center
will need to communicate Brooklyn Center's must coordinate with other government units at the Council's planning sessions review
concerns effectively at all levels of on some aspect of most projects areas for improved intergovernmental
government cooperation
consider impact on other government units
when establishing policies
to what extent will actions of neighbors - more specific regulation of commercial and currently we have a predominance of retail direct the Planning Commission, with staff
affept balance among land use other land uses may be needed employment and additional retail assistance, to analyze methods of assuring a
development will continue this imbalance. "balance" of land uses and report to the City
or will future office and industrial Council by March of 1986
employment achieve a balance
consider joint regulations and/or regulation careful consideration of all potential
by another unit of government implications of passing ordinances is the City Council should carefully consider the
important overall community benefit before
impact on "clientel" must be the primary ordinance passage
consideration of regulation not ease of
administration
commercial and industrial buildings should direct the Housing Commission to review and
make recommendations to the City on the
be covered by a maintenance code continue to review new developments in
following,
maintenance codes
1. extension of a maintenance code to
commercial and industrial buildings
2. additional changes the commission
believes will improve existing code
it is generally helpful if codes and the City Council should direct the Planning
administrative practices are as consistent as anticipate impact of more home occupations Commission. over the next three years, to
possible among enforcing jurisdictions (high tech cottage) systematically review our existing land use
an ticipateimpactofredevelopmentpressures and kindred regulations and recommend
changges (should consider complete
recoNication)
must be aware of the impact of other the City Council and staff will, in the future,
governmental unit policy because of need to give greater credence to involvement
increasing interdependence in metropolitan and state affairs
new technology such as cable T.V. offers longer "lead time" for planning projects to the City Council and staff will have to
additional channels of communication allow "public" involvement antici ate projects and problems to a greater
and choices be interested in more options to tee prow ded for greate involvement
continued use of public hearing process for '
community input and education
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The Year 2000 Committee was established by the Brooklyn Center City Council on February 13,1984 and
was charged with the responsibility of reviewing and advising the City Council on facts, trends, critical
issues and future needs of the community. The City Manager was made responsible for the general
direction of the study, and the Committee served as a review and sounding board in developing final
recommendations to the City Council. The membership of the Committee consisted of one member from
each of the City's advisory commissions (Planning, Park and Recreation, Conservation, Housing, Human
Rights, Traffic Safety, Charter), a representative from the schools and from the City Council, two at large
members and the Mayor and City Manager as ex- officio members. Meetings were held approximately once
per month on a non - Council meeting Monday evening.
The first meeting of the Committee was essentially a get- acquainted session with a presentation by staff of
statistical information on both the people and structures of the City. There was also some discussion of the
book Megatrends by John Naisbitt. In general, the theme of this inaugural meeting was that Brooklyn
Center is a maturing community in a changing world. The City Manager explained that the purpose of the
Committee was to identify and label trends and issues, not formulate solutions.
The Committee then spent most of the next three to four meetings reviewing and discussing a set of positive
and negative community attributes (Inventory of Conditions) in the areas of: Population, Housing,
Commercial and Industrial, Finance, Transportation, Land Use, Public Facilities, External Factors, Physical
Characteristics (Aesthetics, etc.) and Miscellaneous. Special attention was given to External Factors.
Beginning in late August 1984 the Committee also began to consider the duties and responsibilities of the
respective advisory commissions in an effort to explore the most appropriate way to address the policy
issues arising out of the Inventory of Conditions. At the same time the Committee considered various ways
of fostering a long range planning perspective and of instituting a process for periodically reviewing and
updating policies and plans. The advisory commissions were asked to evaluate their roles and the activities
in which they were engaged. It was agreed finally, that the role and responsibility of the commissions should
be reviewed biennially as part of a regular long range planning process. It was also agreed that a biennial
joint meeting of the City Council and members of the advisory commissions should be held to evaluate
progress and continually define the issues facing the City.
At the November 1984 meeting the Committee was presented with a draft list of Observations and
Recommendations. This list grew out of the Inventory of Existing Conditions and reflected the Committee's
concerns as to what those conditions implied for the City's policy agenda. The recommendations were not
in the form of specific programs or policies to be implemented, but rather set an agenda of concerns that
need to be addressed by the City Council and its advisory commissions.
In March of 1985 the Committee reviewed a draft of trends and impact areas facing the City in the form of a
matrix. The matrix listed trends or issues vertically, impact areas and implementation suggestions
horizontally. The trends and issues generally flowed from the Inventory of Conditions. The impact areas
included: public facilities, policy considerations, new services, effect on existing services, housing stock,
other governmental units, private facilities, and planning considerations. The spaces created by the matrix
contained many of the observations and recommendations made by the Committee. The matrix serves as a
framework for containing the substance of the Year 2000 Committee Report.
During the Committee's deliberations two committee members, Philip Cohen and Mary Ellen Rabine, made
presentations on specific issues. Mr. Cohen presented a report on the need to plan for an "aging"
population, and Mrs. Rabine presented a paper on the need to plan for single - parent population. Materials
presented with both of these presentations are included in the appendix of this report.
The entire report is to be transmitted to the City Council as a document commenting on long range planning
issues, on needs for further study, and, to some extent, on the advisory commission apparatus and the
planning process for dealing with issues. It is not intended to be a one time study nor is it an actual plan. It is a
recommended agenda of policy issues which must be re- evaluated and revised from year to year. In a long
range sense then, this report is only a single step in a continuing process of analyzing the issues confronting
Brooklyn Center.
14
U
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption -
RESOLUTIONI NO.
RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING GIFT FROM THE BELLEVUE PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
WHEREAS, the Bellevue Park Neighborhood Association has presented the
City a gift of $182.75 and has designated that it be used for the beautification
of Bellevue Park; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is appreciative of the gift and commends the
Bellevue Park Neighborhood Association for its civic efforts:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center to acknowledge the gift with gratitude; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the gift of $182.75 be appropriated to the
General Fund Parks Maintenance Budget to be used to purchase one park bench and
one tree for Bellvue Park.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
in favor. thereof: , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1985 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR WAGE AND
SALARY ADJUSTMENTS
WHEREAS, Section 7.08 of the City Charter of the City of Brooklyn Center
does provide that the City Council may, by majority vote of its members, transfer
unencumbered appropriation balances from one office, department, or agency to
another within the same fund; and
WHEREAS, on September 24, 1984, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center adopted a budget for the calendar year 1985; and
WHEREAS, when said budget was adopted, 1985 salaries and wages for some
City employees had not been set; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did appropriate funds for departmental labor
and fringe benefits in the amount of $226,219 to Unallocated Departmental Expense
(Department #80) to provide funds for 1985 salary and wage settlements; and
WHEREAS, all wages and salaries for the calendar year 1985 have now been
set by the Council; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center to transfer $158,987 from the following Unallocated Departmental
Expense (Department #80) appropriations:
01 --4100 Salaries, Regular Employees $ 135,710`
01 -4141 PERA•- Regular -1,797
01 -4142 PERA- Combined
4,364
01 -4143 PERA- Police 4,151
01-4144 Social Security 8,086
01 -4151 Hospitalization Insurance 8,377
01-4152 Life Insurance _25
01 -4157 Deferred Compensation 121
$ and
RES=CN N0.
Ir zwse the follawirg dgmrtmaltal cr divisicnal appropriations in the total
amount of $158,987 as follows:
Depart- Salaries Salaries Salaries PERA PERA PERA Health Life Deferrer
malt or Regular Overtime Terpor -any Retilar Canbired Police FICA Lmmm Insurance Gaup.
Division 4100 4112 4130 4141 4142 4143 4 1 44 4151 4152 4157
C'a ncil $ 11
' 109138 309 743 789 121
Elections 388 16 30 40
Assessing 5 248 388 480
Finance 11 ,400 413 317 579 960
Gaut. Bld 5,808 900 285 550 720
Police 43,967 29334 3,308 111 352 4,009 1,197 4,047 -14
Fire 1,560
Plan/LW 79353 2,341 442 768 600
fey 1, 22 142 53 120
Animal On 233 10 19
Engineer 13,213 200 397 409 746 1,080
Streets 15,816 557 789 449 548 1,039 168
Veh. lIa n 4,848 197 156 151 286 24
R&P Adain - 11,488 3,545 522 921 -819 -11
Parks Ac 10 950 2 222 519 970 168
— ..._...... .. —..r -- ..�.,...... �...� _. ..�.�.. �._....��.
Total $ 119,476 4,23 11,996 . -1,797 4,150 4,151 8,300 8,377 -25 121
Date ftor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion fcr the adoption of the forgoing resolution was duly seconded by
Meng' , and open vote being takes thereat, the follaairg voted in
favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
41a'e4m said resolutiai eras declared duly passed and adopted.
Member U
introduced. the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1985 GENERAL FUND BUDGET
TO PROVIDE FOR THE PURCHASE OF A POLICE DEPARTMENT ELECTRONIC TIME RECORDER
WHEREAS, Section 7.08 of the City Charter does provide for the transfer of
unencumbered appropriation balances from one department to another within the
same Fund; and
WHEREAS, funds are available in the Federal Revenue Sharing Fund in the
amount of at least $2,336 to be transferred for General Fund use; and
WHEREAS, since it was recently determined that the City is subject to the
Fair Labor Standards Act, there is a need for an electronic time recorder in the
Police Department to more acurately record hours worked; and
WHEREAS, the purchase of said time recorder was not budgeted for in the
1985 General Fund Budget:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center to amend the 1985 General Fund Budget as follows:
Increase the Police Capital Outlay Budget Appropriation for Other Equipment,
Account No. 4552, by $2,336; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the increased appropriation shall be financed
by federal revenue sharing funds and that funds in the Federal Revenue Sharing
Fund shall be encumbered in the amount of $2,336; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the actual transfer of funds will made from
the Federal Revenue Sharing Fund to the General Fund on a reimbursement basis
at such time, and by Council resolution when the General Fund has expended
funds for the appropriation ppropriation authorized.
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: James Lindsay, Chief of Police
DATE: August 19, 1985
SUBJECT: Purchase of Time Clock
Presently, the Police Department is experiencing a number of
problems with the recording of time for police personnel. For
some time now the officers, sergeants, CEO's and dispatchers'
times have all been recorded by the dispatchers. The officers,
sergeants and CEO's never even see their time sheets and are
unaware of errors until they get their paychecks. As the time is
written by dispatchers a number of errors takes place in the
recorded time. Then this time is transferred onto a bi- weekly
timesheet. Because of the human factors involved more errors are
possible at this step. tep. Recently passed legislation has placed
law enforcement under the Fair Labor Standards Act. It is
vitally important to meet all the requirements of the Fair Labor
Standards Act. Any errors can result in double damages to the
City; which makes it necessary to have a more exact method of
keeping the employees' times.
We have determined at this time that the most exact method would
be an electronic time clock, as with this clock a greater
importance is placed on accuracy. A quote sheet from Stromberg
Products. is attached outlining the costs of this machine. We
have had a demonstration of the machine and feel it would address
all the City's concerns. We would like to request the purchase
of this time clock. We have looked at and reviewed other time
clocks -
but they not handle
the complicated schedules o
Y f a 24 _
hour a day, 7 -day a week operation; i.e. officers starting at
10:00 p.m. on one day and ending at 6:00 a.m. on the next day.
cc: Paul Holmlund
PROPOSAL
STROMBSAG® PRODUCTS MITE Corporation
1511 NICOLLET AVENUE, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55403 446 BLAKE STREET, NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT
(612) 870 -8445
To BROOKLYN CENTER POLICE DEPARTMENT Date AUGUST 14 1985
6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY Proposal No. 22- 08- 85 -14a
BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430
ATTN: BARB PIETRZAK 561 -5440 Ext 131
Reference
Subject to the terms and conditions listed on the reverse side, which are a part of this proposal, we are pleased to
quote you on the following.
ITEM QUANTITY MODEL NO. DESCRIPTION AND SPECIFICATIONS UNIT PRICE TOTAL F.O.B.
NO.
SHIPPING. POINT
A 1 EPR200 ELECTRONIC PAYROLL RECORDER — LITERATURE
ATTACHED:
1 to 50 EMPLOYEE MEMORY - A
1 to 100 EMPLOYEE MEMORY ,
I to 200 EMPLOYEE MEMORY 1,995.00 V
B 2000 9 -6659 PREPUNCHED TIME CARDS #'S 1 -25; 1 -40; 1 - 50; -
1 -65; 1 -80; 1 -100; 1 -125; 1 -150; 1 -175;
1 =200
(SPECIAL CONSECUTIVE NUMBERS OTHER
THAN ABOVE BOX OF 2000 85.00 !�
10®
PREPUNCHED SUMMARY CARDS (HRS &WAGES) ,
BOX OF 2000 75.00 ✓
D EACH 86LM TIME CARD RACK (25 POCKETS) 28.00
FOB NEW HAVEN CONNECTICUT 25.0 ✓
Software for added Social Security ?do. 100.0 ✓
ONE YEAR WARRANTY
33(-.60 `
This quotation is valid for 30 days. Shipment can be made in approximately 15
days after receipt of your order, or subsequent approved drawings, if such drawings are necessary.
Please address all correspondence to the attention o f HOWARD D FASBENDER. BRANCH MANAGER
1511 NICOLLET AVENUE, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55403
❑ ORIGINAL ADDRESS
❑ COPY FOR DISTRICT SALES MANAGER
❑ FILE
(612) 870 -8445 Form e29 Printed In U.S.A.
8446
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT
1985 -L (MUNICIPAL SERVICE GARAGE IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. 1985 -21)
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for
Improvement Project No. 1985 -21, bids were received, opened, and
tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer, on the 22nd day of
August, 1985. Said bids were as follows:
Bidder Bid Amount
Determan Welding & Tank Service, Inc. $ 47,818.17
Pump & Meter Service, Inca "No Bid"
WHEREAS, it appears that Determan Welding °& Tank Service,
Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder.-
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
the City f Brooklyn n Y y Center, Minnesota.
1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and
directed to enter into the attached contract, in the
amount of ,$47,818.17 with Determan Welding & Tank
Service, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota in the name
of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement
Project No. 1985 -21 according to the plans and
specifications therefor approved by the City Council
and on file in the office of the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made
with their bids, except that the deposit of the
successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall
be retained until a contract has been signed:
3. The estimated cost of Improvement Project No.
1985 -21 is hereby amended according to the following
schedule:
As Approved As Bid
Contract $ 45,000.00 $ 47,818.17
Contingencies 6,750.00 4,782.00
Engineering 4,660.00 4,660.00
Administration 520.00 520.00
$ 56,930.00 $ 57,780.17
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. -
s`
CITY
LYN 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
B RO BROOKLYN! CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
TELEPHONE 561 -5440
CENT
ER
TO: Sy Kn app,
Dire ctor of Public Works
FROM: Dave Anderson, Engineering Technician
DATE: August 23, 1985
RE: Contract 1985 -L
(Municipal Service Garage Improvement Pro No. 1985 -21
g P 7 )
The City of Brooklyn Center, pursuant to an advertisement for
bids for said Contract 1985 -L has received and tabulated bids
opened at 11:00 a.m., August 22, 1985.
Bidder Bid Amount
Determan Welding & Tank Service, Inc. $47,818.17
Pump & Meter Service, Inc "No Bid"
This contract was originally bid on August 8, 1985 and rejected
by the City Council because of bid qualifications and cost. The
project was re- advertised for August 22, 1985.
Additional soil investigations were performed between the period
of August 8th and 14th which clarified questions,raised by the
previous bid qualifications. The investigation has justified the
reduction of the contingency from 15% to 10 %.
The Engineer's Report dated June 20, 1985 was submitted with a
total project cost of $56,930.00. The above bid by Determan
Welding & Tank Service, Inc. is recommended for award and
modifies the estimated total project cost as follows:
Contract $47,818.17
Contingencies 4,782.00
Engineering 4,660.00
Administration 520 00
-
Estimated Total Project Cost $57,780.17
Re ectfull submitted, Recomme ded for Approval,
G�G
David S. Anderson Sy Kn
Engineering Tech IV' Director of Public Works
YE - gL
CITY
OF 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
TELEPHONE 561. -5440
CENT
ER
TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works
FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer
DATE: August 21, 1985
RE: Public Hearings for 1985 Special Assessments
INTRODUCTION
Attached are the resolutions which set public hearings for
proposed assessments the City proposes to certify in 1985.
Supplemental attachments include the proposed assessment rolls
and the calculation sheets that explain how assessments are
computed.
BACKGROUND
The proposed assessments will be levied for different terms. The
Finance Director recommends the interest rate charged on the
unpaid balance be 12 percent as established in Resolution 82 -96,
the resolution that established the interest rate on loans from
City Funds.
The table below lists the improvement description, the total -
amount assessed, and the term of the assessment in years.
Detailed information regarding the method of computation,
individual assessments or components of the assessment are
contained in the attached calculation sheets and the attached
proposed assessment rolls.
,. 07 m ,,
ASSESSMENT SUMMARY TABLE-
Total Term
Improvement Description Assessed (Years)
1984 Tree Removals - less than $300 $ 4,076.36 3
1984 Tree Removals - more than $300 $ 2,244.13 5
1985 Tree Removals less than $300 $ 1,373.24 3
1985 Tree Removals - more than $300 $ 2,621.37 5
85 -20 Sewer Hookup $ 2,266.93 20
85 -20 Water Hookup $26,259.84 20
1985 Delinquent Public Utilities $ 971.06 1
1985 Weed Destruction $ 1,290.62 1
Xerxes Avenue Reconstruction - CSAH 10 to I694 $31,009.12 20
Lyndale Avenue Reconstruction - 53rd to 57th Ave $32,289.92 20
Lyndale Avenue Water Main - 53rd to 57th Ave $78,261.07 20
Dallas Road Reconstruction - 72nd to 73rd Ave $20,400.00 10
Ramada Inn Lift Station Construction $69,293.97 15
65th Avenue Reconstruction Beard to Drew Ave $17,352.00 10
85 -15 Water Hookup $ 9,854.18 15
Grand Total $299,563.81
The action requested will be the adoption of the resolutions
which set public hearings for the proposed assessments the City
proposes to certify in 1985.
ACTION REQUESTED
1. A Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for
Hearing on Proposed Assessment Project No. 1984 -05 (Ramada
Lift Station)
2. A Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for
Hearing on Proposed Assessment Project No. 1985 -04 (Lyndale
Avenue Water Main Installation)
3. A Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for
Hearing on Proposed Assessment Project No. 1985 -05 (Lyndale
Avenue Street Reconstruction)
4. A Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for
Hearing on Proposed Assessment Project No. 1985 -09 (Xerxes
Avenue Street Reconstruction)
5. A Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for
Hearing on Proposed Assessment Project No. 1985 -12 (Dallas
Road Curb, Gutter and Street Reconstruction)
6. A Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for
Hearing on Proposed Assessment Project No. 1985 -14 (65th
Avenue Curb, Gutter and Street Reconstruction)
7. A Resolution Providing for Hearing on Proposed Assessments
for Diseased Shade Tree Removal Costs for Public Utility
Hookup Charges; for Delinquent Public Utility Accounts; and
for Delinquent Weed Removal Accounts
Member introduced the following
resolution moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER
TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SHINGLE CREEK LAND
COMPANY RELATING TO TRACTS C, D, AND E OF
REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 1482 AND SURPLUS MN /DOT
RIGHT OF WAY
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the Mayor and City Manager are
hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement with the
Shingle Creek Land Company providing for the following:
1. an assignment and release of the City of Brooklyn
Center's interest (as provided by Minnesota Statutes
Secion 161.44, Subdivision 1 and Subdivision 4) in
certain properties now owned by the State of
Minnesota in the Northwesterly quadrant of the
I694 /Humboldt Avenue interchange area;
2. conveyance of Tract D, Registered Land Survey No.
1482 from the City to the Shingle Creek Land
Company;
3 development of a concept plan for the properties
owned by the Shingle Creek Land Company in this
area;
4. certain limitations upon development of the
property; and
5. the payment of utility hookup charges.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY
OF 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
TELEPHONE 561 -5440
C ENTER
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works
DATE: August 21, 1985
RE: Agreement with Shingle Creek Land Company Relating to
Tracts C, D, and E of Registered Land Survey No. 1482 and
Surplus MN /DOT Right -of -Way _
Shingle Creek Land Company (a subsidiary of Lombard Properties,
Inc.) is currently attempting to purchase the property which
MN /DOT has declared as surplus right -of - way which lies Southerly
and Southwesterly of the Holiday Inn site (see attached sketch).
In order to complete this purchase, the Shingle Creek Land
Company has requested that the City release any rights which we
may have to purchase this property under Minnesota Statutes
161.44, Subdivisions 1 and 4.
This matter has been reviewed by City staff and we recommend
approval of an agreement (copy attached) by which the City not
only release these rights, but which also provides:
1. that the City return "Tract D" (which was deeded to the City
"for street purposes ") to the developer for incorporation
into*a total development plan;
2. that the developers prepare an overall development plan
incorporating all of the land which they would then own in
this area (ie Tracts C, D, E, and the surplus right-of
way);
3. that the developer will pay hookup charges for water mains,
sanitary sewers and storm sewers which are available to the
properties they will acquire; and
4 that a sewer flow limitation will be applied, so as to
prevent overloading the sanitary sewer on Freeway
Boulev4rd /65th Avenue.
+ "'flie .So�cetliucg n1 once L� ,•
We recommend that this item be considered by the City Council at
the August 26, 1985 Council meeting. A resolution approving the
agreement is provided for consideration by the Council.
Respectful y submitted,
Sy Knapp
SK: jn
� 'Y Lam. .. \...� .\ •t - - -. �.�
�'t • ' S 67TH si::, AVE
se• ., .n•v
Wt I t\ as ! i
� T � BERG A,V ' ►
i4
Lm
C
�• r� e
Tn>'GT C �� (� i
v� TRACT E
s. C.L A D C O.
� uj � TRACT a
• t 4 . ` CITY O 8. C.
f
r �
- 5 I NNCO INC.
o �
•+ _ LOT = HOLIDAY
INN
I w
,
NQ .. .
c Ta
'ell q
Air
T
TRACT
pl
`ae -
tie
u
. J)
7
• ✓ 1: _
f r
t� a4k.1
low • �
W _
.`3 , � � _�. - -• _ Ill , 77�. Q.�,• -- � 2
SURPLUS R t a tfT OF WA'1�
S.C. L AND CO, �
11 e
r
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
, 1985byand between the CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, _a
Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter "City ") and SHINGLE
CREEK LAND COMPANY, a Minnesota general partnership (hereinafter
"Shingle Creek ").
WITNESSETH THAT,
WHEREAS, the City is the owner of Tract D, Registered Land
Survey No. 1482, Files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County,
Minnesota ( "Tract D "); and
WHEREAS, Shingle Creek is the owner of Tracts C and E,
Registered Land Survey No. 1482, Files of said Registrar ( "Tracts
C and E "); and
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota ( "State ") took certain lands
for trunk highway purposes in an eminent domain proceeding
described in that Final Certificate dated November 3, 1967, and
filed June 19, 1968 as Document No. 3720213, Files of County
Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota and filed June 19, 1968 as
Document No. 911865, Files of Hennepin County Registrar, Hennepin
County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, a portion of the property- taken in said eminent
domain proceeding is no longer needed by the State, which portion
is described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof
(hereinafter called "Subject Property "); and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property abuts upon Tracts C and D; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 161.44,
Subdivision 1, the City may have a right to acquire the Subject
Property from the State, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 161.44,
Subdivision 4, the City may have a right to acquire from the
State that portion of the Subject Property abutting Tract D; and _
WHEREAS, the parties are of the opinion that it would be
desirable for the Subject Property to be conveyed into. private
ownership and developed in concert with Tracts C, D and E (here-
inafter collectively the "Property "), subject to the conditions
and limitations hereinafter contained.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and
obligations hereinafter contained, it is hereby stipulated by and
between the parties hereto as follows:
1. Assignment and Release of Interest
A. The City hereby releases and abandons any entitlement
which it may have pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 161.44, Subdivision 1 to acquire all or a
portion of the Subject Property.
B. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the City hereby
assigns and transfers to Shingle Creek any right or
entitlement which the City may have pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 161.44, Subdivision 4 to
acquire all or a portion of the Subject Property.
To accomplish the assignment and release of its interest in
or entitlement to the Subject Property, the City shall,
within 20 days following the execution of this agreement,
2
execute and deliver to Shingle Creek a quit claim deed in
substantially the form contained in the attached Exhib-
it
2. Conveyance of Tract D . In the event that Shingle Creek
should proceed and acquire the Subject Property, the City
agrees that upon the furnishing of proof of the transfer of
title to Shingle Creek, and not later than 45 days thereaf-
ter, that it will convey to Shingle Creek by quit claim
deed, its interest in Tract D, Registered Land Survey
No. 1482. City further agrees that it will cooperate
(without being obligated to pay any cost thereof) in any
action including proceedings subsequent or land registration
proceedings to remove the limitation contained in Deed Doc.
No. 1329670, Files of the Registrar of Titles and recited in
Certificate of Title No. 586767.
3. Development - Concept Plan No building permit will be
issued for the construction of any improvement on the
Property until the City has approved a subdivision plan for
development of all such parcels. The subdivision plan shall
address the following elements together with any other
elements which the City may reasonably require:
(a) location and dimensions of all lots prepared to scale
so that all dimensions can be accurately determined.
(b) elevations and contours of all lots.
(c) access from lots to private and public roadways.
(d) location and nature of all utility services.
3
(e) general description of areas of lots which will be used
for vehicular parking.
Approval by the City of the submitted subdivision plan shall
not be unreasonably withheld, provided, however, that such
approval shall not release Shingle Creek from any obligation
created by ordinance or state law with respect to develop-
ment of the property.
4. Limitations upon Development The following limitations and
restrictions are placed upon the development of the Proper-
ty:
(a) All development shall be in conformity with the subdi-
vision plan, or any modification thereto approved by
the City.
(b) The Property shall be replatted or, at the option of
Shingle Creek, registered prior to the construction of
any improvements.
(c) The City shall not be required to maintain or construct
any roadway on or adjacent to the Property, other than
the roadways currently open, improved and traveled.
(d) The use and occupancy load of the Property shall be
planned so as to limit the discharge into the public
sanitary sewer system to a maximum (peak) flow rate of
185 gallons per minute.
Shingle Creek agrees that should any development
of the Property result in an actual peak rate of
discharge in excess of that amount, it will immediately
4
take such steps as are necessary to reduce the peak
discharge to or below that amount.
In the event that Shingle Creek shall fail to take
such action within 60 days of the occurrence of such
excess discharge, the City shall have the right to take
one or both of the following actions:
1) Take whatever actions are necessary to restrict
the flow accepted into the sanitary sewer.system.
2) Increase the capacity of the sanitary sewer system
to handle the excess discharge and assess 100
percent of the cost of such improvement against
the Property. Shingle Creek specifically consents
to such improvement, agrees to petition its
construction and waives any right to challenge the
regularity of the proceedings or the amount of the
assessment.
5. Hook -up Charge Shingle Creek agrees and acknowledges that
the Property is subject to a sewer hook -up charge calculated
in accordance with the established policies of the City. A
portion of the hook -up charge (Assessment Portion) is based
upon the availability of certain public improvements, the
cost of which has not previously been assessed against the
Subject Property. Shingle Creek agrees the Assessment
Portion of the hook -up charge attributable to Tract D and
the Subject Property is $85,667.24, which amount is appor-
tioned in Exhibit C. Shingle Creek stipulates that the
special benefit conferred upon Tract D and the Subject
5
Property as measured by enhancement of property value is
equal to or in excess of such amounts shown in Exhibit C and
waives any right which it may have to challenge the Assess-
ment Portion of the hook -up charge
6. Hook -up Charge Collection The Assessment Portion of the
hook -up charge will be spread over Tract D and the Subject
Property as provided in Exhibit C. The portion attributable
to each of Tract D and the Subject Property shall be as-
sessed in the year during which a building permit is issued
for the construction of improvements- which involve such
tract and shall be payable as a special assessment on the
property over 10 years at the interest rate then applicable
to special assessments in the City.
7. Successors and Assigns This agreement shall be binding
upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and
their successors and assigns in interest.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
Agreement the day and year first above written.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
By
Its
By
Its
6
SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY
By
Its
7
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN }
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged this day of
1985 by and , the
and , respectively of the City of
Brooklyn Center, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of
said corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged this day of
, 1985 by , the of
Shingle Creek Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of
said corporation.
Notary Public
8
Exhibit C
ALLOCATION OF ASSESSMENT
COMPONENT OF HOOK -UP CHARGE
1. Tract D
Water - $ 5,727.95
Sanitary Sewer 614.00
Storm Sewer - 2,186.04
$ 8,527.99
2. Subject Property
Water $30,237.27
Sanitary Sewer - 13,890.39
Storm Sewer - 33,011.59
$77,139.25
TOTAL $85,667.24
i
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND
PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1984- 05`(RAMADA INN LIFT
STATION CONSTRUCTION)
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for lift station
construction adjacent to Freeway Boulevard providing service to
the commercial /industrial development within Tract D, R.L.S. 1564
and the estimated costs for said improvement are summarized as
follows:
LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1984 -05
Contract Cost (as bid) $ 75,135.41
Engineering Cost 7,325.37
Administrative Cost 751.35
Legal Cost 751.35
Capitalized Interest 6,080.49
TOTAL $ 90,043.97
AND, WHEREAS, the City Clerk, with the assistance of the
Director of Public Works, has prepared a proposed assessment roll
showing the proposed amount to be specifically assessed for such
improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land
within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation,
as provided by law:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
1. That the portion of the cost to be assessed against
benefited property owners is declared to be
$90,043.97, less a credit of $20,750.00 for advance
payments made in accordance with a Subdivision
Agreement with the developer, leaving a net amount
of $69,293.97 to be levied as special assessments.
2 A hearing shall be held on the 23rd day of
September, 1985, in the City Hall at 8:00 P.M. to
pass upon such assessment and at such time and place
all persons owning property affected by such
improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard
with reference to such assessment.
3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the
hearing on the proposed assessment to be published
once in the official newspaper at least two weeks
prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the
notice the total cost of the improvement.
RESOLUTION NO.
4. The City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given
to the owner of each parcel described in the
assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the
hearing.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
................... ----•-----------
Improvement Project No.: 1984.05 Levy No.: 9875
Description: Construction of sanitary sewer lift Fund /Code No.:
station
Levy Description: LIFT STATION (84.05)
Levy runs fifteen (15) years(from 1986 to 2000)
Location: Adjacent to Freeway Boulevard at the with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
Ramada Inn site
Improvement Hearing Date: March 26, 1984 First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: March 26, 1984
Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
by Resolution No.: 84.44
Adopted on:
Assessment District: Tract D, Registered Land Survey No. 1564
now identified as Tracts B, D, E and F by Resolution No.:
Registered Land Survey No. 1572
Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Direct costs in accordance with the
provisions listed in the Subdivision
Agreement
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: 85-39 (modified to represent anticipated
actual construction costs)
Total Improvement Cost: $90,043.97
Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00
Less Other Payments: $20,750.00
(developer's prepayment)
Total Assessed to Property: $69,293.97
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $69,293.97
LEVY DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1984-05 LIFT STATION CONSTRUCTION
LOCATION: RAMADA INN SITE
YEARS: 15
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 1 OF 1 '
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY ADDN. I TOTAL I I I I Address I Name 1
NO. I NO. 11DENTIFICATION NO.I NO. I PRINCIPAL I LOT IBLOCKI UNITS Addition /Legal Description 1 Mailing Address I
9875 1 84.05 135- 119 -21 -13 -0012 1 02256 1 $36,454.51 1Tr 8 1 1 Vacant Land IShingle Creek Land Company 1
Registered Land Survey No. 1572 625 - 4th Avenue South, Suite 1550
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IMinneapolis, Minnesota 55415 1
9875 1 84 -05 135- 119 -21 -13 -0014 1 02256 1 $11,508.17 1Tr D I I IVacant Land IShingle Creek Land Company
Registered Land Survey No. 1572 625 - 4th Avenue South, Suite 1550
Minne Minnesota 55415
I I I I I I I P
1 9875 1 84-05 135 - 119 -21- 13.0015 1 02256 1 $11,715.01 ITr E 1 IVacant Land IShingle Creek Land Company 1
Registered Land Survey No. 1572 625 - 4th Avenue South, Suite 1550
I ( 1 1 1 ( 1 1Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 I
9875 1 84 -05 135- 119 -21 -13 -0016 1 02256 1 $9,616.28 ITr F 1 IVacant Land IShingle Creek Land Company 1
Registered Land Survey No. 1572 625 - 4th Avenue South, Suite 1550
I I I I I I I 1 (Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 1
TOTAL $69,293.97
8
5
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND
PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985- -04 (LYNDALE AVENUE
WATER MAIN INSTALLATION)
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for water main
installation on Lyndale Avenue North between 53rd Avenue North
and 57th Avenue North and the estimated costs for said
improvement are summarized as follows:
WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -04
Contract Cost (as bid) $ 45,855.50
Engineering Cost 4,127.00
Administrative Cost 458.56
Legal Cost 458.56
Previous Capital Expenditure 71,180.00
TOTAL $122,079.62
AND, WHEREAS, the City Clerk, with the assistance of the
Director of Public Works, has prepared a proposed assessment roll
showing the proposed amount to be specifically assessed for such
improvement against every assessable lot, piece or 'parcel of land
within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation,
as provided by law:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
1. That the portion of the cost to be assessed against
benefited property owners is declared to be
$78,261.07.
2. A hearing shall be held on the 23rd day of
September, 1985, in the City Hall at 8:00 P.M. to
pass upon such assessment and at such time and place
all persons owning property affected by such
improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard
with reference to such assessment.
3 The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the
hearing on the proposed assessment to be published
once in the official newspaper at least two weeks
prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the
notice the total cost of the improvement.
RESOLUTION NO.
4. The City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given
to the owner of each parcel described in the
assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the
hearing.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly,
seconded by member , and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: 1985 -04 Levy No.: 9873
Description: Water main installation in conjunction Fund /Code No.:
with Street Improvement Project No.
1985-05 Levy Description: WATER MAIN (85 -04)
Location: Lyndale Avenue from 53rd Avenue North to Levy runs twenty (20) years (from 1986 to 2005)
57th Avenue North with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
Improvement Hearing Date: March 11, 1985 First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: March 11, 1985
Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
by Resolution No.:
Adopted on:
Assessment District: Those benefited properties abutting the
improvements along Lyndale Avenue North by Resolution No.:
from 53rd Avenue North to 57th Avenue
North Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Single Family Residential unit or
Non-Single Family Residential frontage
and area charges
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: 85.57
Total Improvement Cost: $121,441.07
Less Direct City Share: S 43,180.00
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $ 78,261.07
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $ 78,261'.07
a
LEVY 9873 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985 -04 WATER MAIN INSTALLATION
LOCATION: LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH - 53RD AVENUE TO 57TH AVENUE
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 1 OF 4
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
1 LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY ADDN. I TOTAL I Name
NO. I NO- (IDENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. I PRINCIPAL i LOT IBLOCKI UNITS I Addition /Legal Description 1 Mailing Address 1
9873 89385 ! 5618 Lyndale Avenue North (Walter Synowczynski
I 85 =04 I 01- TT$ -7fi� =0004 I I I I $2,484.00 1 Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5618 Lyndale Avenue North
THAT PART OF LOT 4 LYING N OF A LINE (Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
RUNNING FROM THE SW CORNER THEREOF TO A
1 I I (POINT IN THE E LINE THEREOF DIS 24 FT N 1
FROMN THE SE CORNER OF SAME
1 9873 1 85 -04 101- 118 -21 -42 -0005 1 89385 55,478.13 I I 1215.42 Lyndale Avenue North (Delores Karr I
-( Garceton's Addition to Minneapolis 5608 Lyndale Avenue North
LOT 5 AND THAT PART OF LOT 4 LYING S OF 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
1 1
I A LINE RUNNING FROM THE SW COR OF SAID 1 I
LOT TO A PT IN E LINE THEREOF DIS 24 FT
1 1 N FROM SE CDR THEREOF ALSO COM ON WLY 1
LINE OF LOT 7 DIS 8 FT SLY FROM NW COR
THEREOF TH NELY TO A PT IN N LINE OF
1 ( I ILOT 7 DIS 32 83/100 FT E FROM NW CDR
THEREOF TH NELY TO A PT IN ELY LINE OF
1 I I 1 I ILOT 6 DIS 10 9/10 FT NLY FROM SE COR I
THEREOF THENCE NLY ALONG THE E LINE
I I I I (THEREOF TO THE NE CDR OF LOT 6 THE W TH 1
1 I I INW COR THE TH SLY TO BEG LOT 4, 5, 6 & 7 1 1
9873 1 85 -04 101-118-21 -42 -0006 89385 1 $2,484.00 1 1 15604 Lyndale Avenue North (Fred Lagace
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5604 Lyndale Avenue North I
COM ON ELY LINE OF LOT 6 AT A PT 10 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
I I I I I 19/10 FT NLY FROM SE CDR THEREOF TH SWLY 1
1 1 I I I 1 1TO A PT IN S LINE OF LOT 6 DIS 32 1
83/100 FT E OF SW COR THEREOF TH WLY TO
I 1 I I I
A PT IN WLY LINE OF (FROM NW COR THEREOF TH ALONG F WLY L Y
LIE 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I FT N TH O E PAR WI S LINE MISS
I 1 I I I
L- 1-1 IRIVER TH NLY ALG RIVER TO BEG LOTS 6& 7 1
1 9873 1 85 -04 101-118 -21 -42 -0007 89385 $2,484.00 I 1 I 1 15600 Lyndale Avenue North Angela M. Fiala 1
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5600 Lyndale Avenue North
I I I 1 I I (LOT 8 AND S 22 75/100 FT OF LOT 7 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
1 9873 1 85.04 1 01-118-21-42-0008 1 89385 1 $2,484.00 1 9 1 1 1 15530 Lyndale Avenue North 1Virginia Hedberg
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5530 Lyndale Avenue North
1-1 1 I 1-1-1-1
j8rooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9873 85 -04 101-118-21 -42 -0009 1 89385 $2,484.00 10 1 15524 Lyndale Avenue North (Robert & Connie Mavis
LEVY 9873 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985 -04 WATER MAIN INSTALLATION
LOCATION: LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH - 53RD AVENUE TO 57TH AVENUE
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 2 OF 4
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
1 LEVY {PROJECT{ PROPERTY { ADDN. { TOTAL { { { Address ' Name
1 N0. I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO. I N0. PRINCIPAL LOT IBLOCKI UNITS Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address
1 f ll {I Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5524 Lyndale Avenue North I I
{ Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9873 85 -04 101-118-21-42-0010 89385 52,484.00 1 11 1 1 5520 Lyndale Avenue North Nancy V. Forrest '
I 1 1 Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5520 Lyndale Avenue North I
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9873 1 85-04 101- 118 - 21-42 -0011 : 89385
$2,484.00 + 1 1 15510 Tyndale Avenue North ,Henry F. Wos 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 15510 Lyndale Avenue North
LOT 12 AND N 1/2 OF LOT 13 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9873 1 85 04 101-118 -21 -42 -0012 1-0385 1 $2,484.00 1 1 1 15500 Lyndale Avenue North (Anthony & Susan Schmid
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5500 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1 1LOT 14 AND S 1/2 OF LOT 13 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9873 1 85 -04 101-118-21-42-0014 89385 1 $2,484.00 1 15501 Lyndale Avenue North Bruce M. Hendry
1 Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 15501 Lyndale Avenue North 1
THAT PART LYING E OF THE W 13C FT Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
I I 1THEREOF 1
9873 1 85-04 01-118-21-42- 0015 89385 1 52,484.00 1 1` 1 15505 Lyndate Avenue North 1William E. Bobendrier
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5505 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 { 1 1LOT 17 EXCEPT STATE HIGHWAY 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9873 1 85 -04 101-118-21-42 -0016 89385 52,484.00 1 1 1 1 15509 Lyndate Avenue North 1Dwaine Svardal & Cecilia Scott
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5509 Lyndale Avenue North
1-1 1 1 1LOT 18 EXCEPT STATE HIGHWAY 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
1 9873 1 85 -04 01-118-21-42.0019 1 89385 i $2,702.26 1103.7' 15547 Lyndale Avenue North 1Jeff & Patti Stewart 1
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 3080 Oakview Lane
LOT 20 AND N 100 FT OF S 200 FT OF E 15 Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
{ 1 1 1 1 1
IFT OF LOT 38 EX STATE HWY 1
9873 17B-04 101-1 18-21-42-0020 1 89385 $2,484.00 1 1 1 5559 Lyndale Avenue North { Gene M. Kasmar
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5559 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1LOT 21 AND N 100 3/100 FT OF E 15 FT OF Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 1 1 { 1 1 - 1LOT 38 EX STATE HWY 1
9873 1 85 -04 101- 118 -21 -42 -0021 1 89385 1 $2,702.77 1 i 1101.7' 15601 Lyndale Avenue North 1Kenneth W. Kunz
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5601 Lyndale Avenue North
THAT PART OF LOT 22 LYING S OF THE N 2 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 1 1 1 i 1 { FT THEREOF EX STATE HWY 1 {
LEVY 9873 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985-04 WATER MAIN INSTALLATION
LOCATION: LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH - 53RD AVENUE TO 57TH AVENUE
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 3 OF 4
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
I LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL I I Address I Name `
I NO. I NO. 11DENTIFICATION NO. NO. PRINCIPAL LOT 1BLOCKI UNITS Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
1 9873 1 85 -04 101 - 118.21- 42-0022 89385 1 $2,484.00 I I i � 1 15611 Lyndale Avenue North Patrick & Charlene Mulville
` I Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5611 Lyndale Avenue North
I24 S LOT N2 AN D T
HWY LOT IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 - 9873 ' 85-04 101-118-21-42 -0023 1 89385 I $2,484.00 I I I 1 15607 Lyndale Avenue North I CL ement & Helen Murphy
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5607 Lyndale Avenue North
I I I I I I I IN 2 FT OF LOT 22 AND S 60 FT OF LOT 23 'Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 I
1 1 JEX STATE HWY 1 1
1 9873 1 85 -04 101- 118 -21 -42 -0055 89385 $2,794.42 1 103.7' 5519 Lyndale Avenue North (Jerry Truman
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 6110 Hodgeson
I I I 1LOT 19 EXCEPT HIGHWAY Circle Pines, Minnesota 55014
9873 1 85 -04 101- 118- 21-43 -0006 1 89225 $2,484.00 1 15451 Lyndale Avenue North Fred, Carol & Linda Reed
Bellvue Acres 5451 Lyndale Avenue North
I I I I CON AT A PT IN THE N LINE OF LOT 1 DIS Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
150 FT E FROM THE NW CDR THEREOF TH E
1 1 1 1 1 1 123 33/100 FT TO THE NE COR THEREOF TH I
SELY 98 FT ALONG THE ELY LINE THEREOF
I I I I I I I ITH W 135 7/10 FT TO A PT DIS 98 FT SLY 1 1
FR BEG TH NLY TO BEG
1 9873 1 85 -04 101- 118-21- 43 -0012 1 89225 52,484.00 ' 1 15433 Lyndale Avenue North (William F. Truman I
I 1 IS Acres 5433 Lyndale Avenue North
S 62 FT FRONT AND REAR OF LOT 2 BLK 1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
' I
AND TAT ILYING OF
I I I
SAID TRACT EXTENDED EX.STATE HWY
1 9873 1 85 -04 101-118 -21 -43 -0013 1 89225 1 82,484.00 1 1 1 15429 Lyndale Avenue North Elaine F. Gurley
Bellvue Acres 5429 Lyndale Avenue North
1 I 1 I I I 1 1N 100 FT FRONT AND REAR OF LOT 3 AND Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
THAT PART OF OUTLOT A LYING BET THE N
I I I I I 1 5421 AND S LINE OF THE ABOVE DESC TRACT
EXTENDED EX STATE HWY
9873 ' 85 - 01-118 1 52,484.00 I ' I 1 Lyndale Avenue North Kenton L. Bennett
I I I I I I I 1 ILOT AND c THAT PART OF LOT 3 BLOCK 1 IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
I LYING S OF THE N 100 FT FRONT AND REAR
THEREOF EX STATE HWY
i I I i
LEVY 9873 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985-04 WATER MAIN INSTALLATION
LOCATION: LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH - 53RD AVENUE TO 57TH AVENUE
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE �L OF
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
i LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL I I I Address I Name ,
N0. I N0. 11DENTIFICATION N0. N0. PRINCIPAL LOT BLOCK UNITS Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address
1 1 I 1 1 1 1
9873 1 85-04 101-118 -21 -43 -0016 1 89225 1 $2,484.00 1 1 1 1 15407 Lyndale Avenue North 1Kim & Janice Wendling
Bellvue Acres 5407 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1 1N 1/2 OF LOT 5 BLOCK 1 EXCEPT STATE HWY IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9873 85 -04 101-118 -21 -43 -0017 1 89225 1 $2,484.00 1 1 1 1 15337 Lyndale Avenue North 1Louis E. Hanson 1
Bellvue Acres 5337 Lyndale Avenue North
1 - 1 I l l 1 I 1 1S 1/2 OF LOT 5 BLOCK 1 EXCEPT STATE HWY IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
1 9873 1 85.04 101- 118 -21 -43 -0018 89225 1 $2,484.00 I 1 1 1 15331 Lyndale Avenue North lEunice F. Peter 1
Bellvue Acres 5331 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 l I 78 FT EX STATE HWY IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 i
9873 85 -04 1 01-118-21-43-0019 1 89225 1 $2,484.00 1 1 1 1 5323 Lyndale Avenue North (Frank J. Belatz
Bellvue Acres 5323 Lyndale Avenue North
1 ( 1 N 25 S /10 FT FRONT AND REAR OF LOT 7 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
S
AND THAT PART OF LOT 6 LYING OF THE N
1 1 1 l l l B F A THAT PART OF O
IALYINGBETT THENANDS LINES OF OT
HE
1 l I l I I I I (ABOVE DESC TRACT EXTENDED EX STATE HWY 1
1 9873 1 85 -04 01.118-21 -43- 0020 ) 89225 1 $2,484.00 1 ) 1 1 15315 Lyndale Avenue North 1 Rom ain W. Heyn 1
Bellvue Acres 5315 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 I I 1 1 12/10 FT NfOFHTHE S 5 jBrookLyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
l 1 I I I I I 1 27 6/10 FT FRONT AND REAR & THAT PART 1
OF OUTLOT A LYING BET THE N & S LINES
1 1 l 1 1 l 1 I OF THE ABOVE DESC TRACT EXTENDED EX
STATE HWY
1
9873 1 85 04 101-118- 21-43 -0089 1 89225 1 $2,484.00 1 I 1 5309 Lyndale Avenue North (Michael J. Tabaka I
I 1 l IS OF
Acres I n
LOT 7 AND N 50 FT OF LOT 8 BrooklyCenter, Minnesota 55430 I
1 1 1 l 1BLOCK 1 EX HWY 1
9873 1 85 -04 01.118 -21 -43 -0092 1 90112 1 $2,484.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 15449 Lyndale Avenue North 1Residential Alternatives, Inc. 1
William N. Super Addition 5449 Lyndale Avenue North
I 1 I I 1 1 IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9873 1 85 -04 101.118 -21 -43 -0093 1 90112 1 52,484.00 2 1 1 1 5445 Lyndale Avenue North 1Ralph M. & Georgene F. Gunderson
William N. Super Addition 5445 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 i 1 larooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
TOTAL $78,261.07
8h
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND
PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -05 (LYNDALE AVENUE
STREET RECONSTRUCTION)
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for street improvements
on Lyndale Avenue North between 53rd Avenue North and 57th Avenue
North and the estimated costs for said improvement are summarized
as follows:
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -05
Contract Cost (as bid) $232,929.45
Engineering Cost
Consultant 7,500.00
City 20,963.65
Administrative Cost 2,329.29
Legal Cost 2,329.29
Capitalized Interest 5,550.00
TOTAL $271,601.68
AND, WHEREAS, the City Clerk, with the assistance of the
Director of Public Works, has prepared a proposed assessment roll
showing the proposed amount to be specifically assessed for such
improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land
within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation,
as provided by law:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
. 1. That the portion of the cost to be assessed against
benefited property owners is declared to be
$32,289.92.
2. A hearing shall be held on the 23rd day of
September, 1985, in the City Hall at 8:00 P.M. to
pass upon such assessment and at such time and place
all persons owning property affected by such
improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard
with reference to such assessment.
3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the
hearing on the proposed assessment to be published
once in the official newspaper at least two weeks
prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the
notice the total cost of the improvement.
RESOLUTION NO,
4 The City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given
to the owner of each parcel described in the
assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the
hearing.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: 1985-05 Levy No.: 9872
Description: Street reconstruction including Fund /Code No.:
installation of curb and gutter and
concrete driveway aprons Levy Description: STREET (85 -05)
Location: Lyndale Avenue from 53rd Avenue North to Levy runs twenty (20) years (from 1986 to 2005)
57th Avenue North with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
Improvement Hearing Date: March 11, 1985 First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: March 11, 1985
Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
by Resolution No.: 85-43
Adopted on:
Assessment District: Those benefited properties abutting the
improvements along Lyndale Avenue North by Resolution No.:
from 53rd Avenue North to 57th Avenue
North Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Single family rate $1,200 with a $300
credit if on street parking is not
ordered; all other parcels charged $16
per frontage foot with a $4 per front
foot credit if on street parking is not
ordered
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: 85-57
Total Improvement Cost: $271,601.68
Less Direct City Share: $239,311.76
(Fund M.S.A.)
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $ 32,289.92
Assessed to City owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $ 32,289.92
LEVY 9872 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985-05 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION: LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH - 53RD AVENUE TO 57TH AVENUE
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE OF 4
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
1 LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL 1 Address 1 Name 1
NO. I N0. IDENTIFICATION N0.` N0. I PRINCIPAL LOT �BLOCK� UNITS Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address
1 9872 1 85 -05 101- 118.21 -42- 0004 1 89385 1 $900.00 I I I 1 15618 Lyndale Avenue North (Walter Synowczynski
(Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 15618 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1
THAT PART
FROM THE SW CORNER THEREOF TO A
L YING N OF A LI N 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
RUINING 1
THE E LINE THEREOF DIS 24 FT N
�FROMN THESE CORNER OF SAME 1 1
1 9872 1 85 05 1 -01-118 -21 -42 -0005 1 89385 1 $3,446.72 1 1 1215.42'15608 Lyndale Avenue North 1Delores Karr North
1 1 1 1 1 1 1LOT OF LOT S OF lolis
Minnesota 55430
A LINE RUNNING FROM THE SW CDR OF SAID
1 1 1 1 1 1LOT TO A PT IN E LINE THEREOF DIS 24 FT 1 1
1 N FROM 1 1 1 1 S
LINE OF LOT D 7 DIS R 8 FT FROM NW COR 1 1
I THEREOF TH NELY TO A PT IN N LINE OF
LOT 7 DIS 32 83/100 FT E FROM NW COR 1
THEREOF TH NELY TO A PT IN ELY LINE OF
1 1 1 1LOT 6 DIS 10 9/10 FT NLY FROM SE COR 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1THEREOF THENCE NLY ALONG THE E LINE 1 1
THEREOF TO THE NE CDR OF LOT 6 THE W TH
1 1 ( 1 1 1 1 1NW COR THE TH SLY TO BEG LOT 4, 5, 6 & 71 1
i 9872 1 85 -05 101-118-21 -42 -0006 1 89385 1 8900.00 1 ( 1 15604 Lyndale Avenue North 1Fred Lagace 1
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5604 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1 1/10 FT ELY
NLY FROM SE
L INE OF 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9
1 1 1 1 1 1 183 /100 E CDR TO 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1A PT IN WLY LINE OF LOT 7 DIS 8 FT SLY 1 1
FROM NW COR THEREOF TH SLY ALONG WLY
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1FT E PAR WITH S LINESTHEREOF MISS 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 RIVER TH NLY ALG RIVER TO BEG LOTS 6& 71
1 9872 1 85-05 101- 118-21 -42 -0007 1 89385 1 $900.00 1 1 1 15600 Lyndale Avenue North jAngela M. Fiala
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5600 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1 LOT 8 AND S 22 75/100 FT OF LOT 7 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9872 85.05 011 - 118 -21 -42 -00081 89385 $900.00 1 9 1 1 1 5530 Lyndale Avenue North. 1Virginia Hedberg
lGarcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5530 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9872 1 85 -05 101- 118-21- 42-0009 1 89385 1 $1,200.00 1 10 1 1 1 15524 Lyndale Avenue North 1Robert &'Connie Mavis
LEVY 9872 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985-05 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION: LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH - 53RD AVENUE TO 57TH AVENUE
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 2 OF 4
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY ADDN. OT
TAL I Address I Name
NO. j NO. 1IDENTIFICATION NO.I NO. I PRINCIPAL I LOT IBLOCKI UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address I
1 1 I I I IGarcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 15524 Lyndale Avenue North
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9872 1 85-05 101- 118 -21- 42-0010 89385 1 $900.00 1 11 1 1 15520 Lyndale Avenue North (Nancy V. Forrest 1
1 1 I I 1 1 1Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 15520 Lyndale Avenue North I
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9872 1 85.05 101- 118 - 21-42.0011 89385 1
$900.00 1 1 1 15570 Lyndale Avenue North 1Henry F. Wos 1
I 1 I I IGarceLon's Addition to Minneapolis 15510 Lyndale Avenue North
LOT 12 AND N 1/2 OF LOT 13 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9872 1 85 05 01- 118-21-42 -0012 1 89385 5900.00 I I 1 15500 Lyndale Avenue North IAnthony & Susan Schmid
I Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5500 Lyndale Avenue North
LOT 14 AND S 1/2 OF LOT 13 IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9872 85-05 101- 118 -21- 42-0014 1 89385 $900.00 1 15501 Lyndale Avenue North Bruce M. Hendry
I I I I ITHAT e PART S LYING t I OF THE �11130 FT s Brookl Center, Minnesota 55430
I 1 1 1 1 1 THEREOF 1 1
9872 85-05 101- 118 -21 -42 -0015 1 89385 $900.00 I I I 1 15505 Lyndale Avenue North William E. Bobendrier
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5505 Lyndale Avenue North
I I I I I I (LOT 17 EXCEPT STATE HIGHWAY Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9872 1 85.05 101- 118 -21- 42-0016 89385 1 $900.00 1 1 1 1 15509 Lyndale Avenue North 1Dwaine Svardal & Cecilia Scott 1
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5509 Lyndale Avenue North
I 1 1 I I I I (LOT 18 EXCEPT STATE HIGHWAY IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9872 1 85 -05 101- 118 -21- 42.0019 1 89385 1 $1,244.40 1 I 1103.7 15547 Lyndale Avenue North (Jeff & Patti Stewart
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 3080 Oakview Lane
I 1 I I I I
LOT 20 AN N
38 100 FT OF HWY (
200 FT OF E 15 Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
FT O
9872 1 85 -05 101. 118 -21- 42-0020 89385 1 $900.00 1 1 1 1 15559 Lyndale Avenue North 1Gene M. Kasmar
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5559 Lyndale Avenue North
I I I I I (LOT 21 AND N 100 3/100 FT OF E 15 FT OF IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
I I I I I I (LOT 38 EX STATE HWY 1
1 9872 1 85 -05 101- 118 -21 -42 -0021 1 89385 1 $1,220.40 1 1101.7' 15601 Lyndale Avenue North 1Kenneth W. Kunz
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5601 Lyndale Avenue North
THAT PART OF LOT 22 LYING S OF THE N 2 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 I I L 1 I I
I FT THEREOF EX STATE HWY I
1
LEVY 9872 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT N0. 1985-05 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION: LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH - 53RD AVENUE TO 57TH AVENUE
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 3 OF
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I I I I Address Name 1
NO. I NO. IDENTIFICATION NO.I I NO. I PRINCIPAL I LOT 1 IBLOCK 1
� UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
9872 1 85-05 101-118-21- 42.0022 I 89385 I $900.00 I 1 1 15611 Lyndale Avenue North I �Patrick & Charlene Mulville
IGarcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5611 Lyndale Avenue North OF 1 1 1 1 , , 124 S LOT N AND THEREOF HWY (Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9872 ' iO -05 101 - 118 -21- 42-0023 ' 89385 $900.00 1 1 1 1 15607 Lyndale Avenue North ,Clement & Helen Murphy 1
1 1 1 1 I I 1N AND tS 60 23 1Brooklyn Minnesota 55430
I I I I I IEX STATE HWY
1 9872 1 85 -05 101- 118 -21.42 -0055 1 89385 1 $1,244.40 I I 103.7' 15519 Lyndale Avenue North (Jerry Truman I
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 6110 Hodgeson
(LOT 19 EXCEPT HIGHWAY (Circle Pines, Minnesota 55014
1 9872 85.05 1 01-118-21-43-0006 1 89225 1 $900.00 I 1 5451 Lyndate Avenue North Fred, Carol & Linda Reed
Bellvue Acres 5451 Lyndale Avenue North
I I I CON AT A PT IN THE N LINE OF LOT 1 DIS Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
150 FT E FROM THE NW COR THEREOF TH E
I I I I I 1123 33/100 FT TO THE NE COR THEREOF TH I
I I SELY 98 FT ALONG THE ELY LINE THEREOF
1 I ITH W 135 7/10 FT TO A PT DIS 98 FT SLY I
FR BEG TH NLY TO BEG
9872 1 85 -05 101 - 118 -21 -43 -0012 1 89225 1 $900.00 1 1 1 15433 Lyndale Avenue North ,William F. Truran I
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 18 62VFT FRONT AND REAR OF LOT 2 BLK 1 1Brookly n C e nter, Minnesota 55430 1
, AND THAT PART OF OUTLOT A ADJ THERETO
LYING BET N AND S LINES OF LOT 2 OF 1 1
I I I I I I
SAID TRACT EXTENDED EX STATE HWY I I
9872 1 85-05 101- 118 - 21-43 -0013 1 89225 1 $900.00 I 1 I 1 15429 Lyndale Avenue North (Elaine F. Gurley I
I Bellvue Acres 5429 Lyndale Avenue North
I I ! IN 100 FT FRONT AND REAR OF LOT 3 AND (Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 I
` THAT PART OF OUTLOT A LYING BET THE N
AND S 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 N ABOVE DESC TRACT
EXTENDED EX STATE HWY I
1 9872 1 85-05 101- 118-21 -43 -0014 1 89225 1 $2,334.00 1- 1 194 . 51 15421 Lyndale Avenue North ,Kenton L. Bennett
1 1 I I 1 1 1 ILOT AND uc THAT PART OF LOT 3 BLOCK 1 ,Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
LYING S OF THE N
!THEREOF EX STATE HWY
O FT FRONT AND REAR I
I 1 1
LEVY 9872 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985 -05 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION: LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH - 53RD AVENUE TO 57TH AVENUE
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE �1 OF 4
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
' LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY 1 ADDN. 1 TOTAL 1 1 + Address ' Name 1
NO. I NO. IDENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. 1 PRINCIPAL LOT 1BLOCKI UNITS Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address I
9872 1 85 -05 101-118- 21-43-0016 1 89225 I $900.00 I I I 1 15407 Lyndale Avenue 'North I Kim & Janice Wendling
I I Bellvue Acres 15407 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1/2 OF LOT 5 BLOCK 1 EXCEPT STATE HWY 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
9872 85.05 01-118- 21-43-0017 89225 $900.00 _1 5337 Lyndale Avenue North Louis E. Hanson
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Bellvue Acres 15337 Lyndale Avenue North 1
1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1S 1/2 OF LOT 5 BLOCK 1 EXCEPT STATE HWY 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
1 9872 85-05 01-118-21- 43-0018 89225 $900.00 1 5331 L ale Avenue North Eunice F. Peter
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Bellvue Acres 15331 Lyndale Avenue North 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1N 78 FT EX STATE HWY 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9872 1 85-05 01- 118 -21- 43-0019 89225 1 $900.00 1 1 1 1 5323 Lyndale Avenue North Frank J. Belatz 1
Bellvue Acres 5323 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 N 25 S /10 FT FRONT AND REAR OF LOT 7 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
AND THAT PART OF LOT 6 LYING S OF THE N
1 I I $ F A THAT PART OF O
1A LYINGSETT THENANDS LINES OF OT
HE
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1ABOVE DESC TRACT EXTENDED EX STATE HWY
1 9872 1 85 -05 101- 118 -21 -43 -0020 1 89225 1 $900.00 ( 1 1 1 15315 Lyndale Avenue North Romain W. Heyn
Bellvue Acres 5315 Lyndale Avenue North
THAT PART OF LOT 7 LYING S OF THE N 25 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12/10 FT FRONT AND REAR AND N OF THE S 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
OF FRONT N & 1
1 1 1 1 1
OF THEHABOVE DESC TRACT EXTENDED EX 1
9872 1 85.05 1 01-118-21-43-OT89 1 89225 1 5900.00 1 1 1 1 15309 Lyndale Avenue North 1Michael J. Tabaka 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1S 7 AND N 50 FT OF LOT 8 1 5309
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 1 1 1 1 1 1BLOCK 1 EX HWY
9872 85 -05 101 - 118 - 21.43-0092 1 90112 1 $900.00 1 1 1 1 1 15449 Lyndale Avenue North Residential Alternatives, Inc.
William N. Super Addition 15449 Lyndale Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9872 1 85 -05 101- 118.21 -43 -0093 1 90112 1 $900.00 1 2 1 1 1 15445 Lyndale Avenue North 1Ralph M. & Georgene F. Gunderson
William N. Super Addition 5445 Lyndale Avenue North
1- 1 1 1 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 TOTAL $32,289.92 1
yi 4
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND
PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -09 (XERXES AVENUE
STREET RECONSTRUCTION)
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for street improvements
on Xerxes Avenue North between C.S.A.H. 10 and F.A.I. 94 and the
estimated costs for said improvement are summarized as follows:
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -09
Contract Cost (as bid) $259,246.40
Engineering Cost 23,332.00
Administrative Cost 2,592.00
Legal Cost 370.00
TOTAL $285,540.40
AND, WHEREAS, the City Clerk, with the assistance of the
Director of Public Works, has prepared a proposed assessment roll
showing the proposed amount to be specifically assessed for such
improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land
within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation,
as provided by law:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
1. That the portion of the cost to be assessed against
benefited property owners is declared to be
$31,010.00.
2. A hearing shall be held on the 23rd day of
September, 1985, in the City Hall at 8:00 P.M. to
pass upon such assessment and at such time and place
all persons owning property affected by such
.improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard
with reference to such assessment.
3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the
hearing on the proposed assessment to be published
once in the official newspaper at least two weeks
prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the
notice the total cost of the improvement.
4. The City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given
to the owner of each parcel described in the
assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the
hearing..
RESOLUTION NO.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: 1985-09 Levy No.: 9871
Description: Crack repair, bituminous overlay and Fund /Code No.
replacement of cracked, settled and
deteriorated concrete curb and gutter, Levy Description: STREET (85-09)
reconstruction of sidewalk pedestrian
ramps and replacement of settled sidewalk Levy runs twenty (20) years (from 1986 to 2005)
panels with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
Location: Xerxes Avenue North from C.S.A.H. 10 to
F.A.I. 94
Improvement Hearing Date: March 6, 1985 First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: June 3, 1985
Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
by Resolution No.: 85-85
Adopted on:
Assessment District: All commerically-zoned and R-5 zoned
property within the area bordered on the by Resolution No.:
west by C.S.A.H. 152, on the north by
59th Avenue, on the east by a line 500 Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
feet easterly of and parallel with Xerxes
Avenue North, and on the south by
C.S.A.H. 10
Method of Apportionment: Special assessments levied on an "area" basis establishing two zones as follows:
Zone A - All properties within 250 feet of Xerxes Avenue (75% of total assessment); and
Zone B - ALL other commercially zoned and R-5 zoned property within the benefited area as described
(25% of total assessment)
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: 85 -121
Total Improvement Cost: $290,520.40'
Less Direct City Share: $259,510.40
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $ 31,010.00
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $ 31,010.00
LEVY 9871 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985-09 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION: XERXES AVENUE NORTH - C.S.A.H. 10 TO F.A.I. 94
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 1 OF 2
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
I LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I I I 1 Address Name 1
NO. I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. I PRINCIPAL I LOT I BLOCK' UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
9871 1 85 -09 102- 118 -21 -23 -0015 89751 i $7,462.47 Tr B ( 2802 Northway Drive Center Development
' 'Registered Land Survey No. 1186 (Norman Chazin
I I I I 5353 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 602
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416
1 9871 1 85.09 102-118-21-23 -0017 1 89755 1 $748.88 1Tr A 1 2901 Northway Drive (First Federal Savings
1 I 1 1 4 (Registered Land Survey No. 1211 (730 Marquette Avenue
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
9871 ` 85 -09 102-118 -21 -23 -0018 89760 1-$3,109.57 1Tr A — 1-15810 Xerxes Avenue North (Conroy /Otto 1
1 (Registered Land Survey No. 1261 12945 Garfield Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55408
85.09 102- 118 -21- 23.0019 89760 1 $1,562.53 Tr B 2920 County Road 10 (European Health Spa
1 1 1 Registered Land Survey No. 1261 2920 County Road 10
9871 1
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9871 1 85-09 03- 118 -21 -14 -0018 89746 1-$2,058.51 1Tr B ( 12950 County Road 10 Twin City Federal
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Registered Land Survey No. 1142 1801 Marquette Avenue
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
1 9871 1 85-09 03-118 -21 -14-0024 89761 1 $7,916.29 Tr 6 1 15801 Xerxes Avenue North 18ankers Life Company
1 1 1 1 1Registered Land Survey No. 1262 1Super Valu Stores
101 Jefferson Avenue South
1 1 1 1 1 I— ( 1Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 1
1 9871 85-09 103 - 118 -21 -14 -0026 1 00796 1 $4,495.39 1 2 1 1 1 15825 Xerxes Avenue North 1Farmers & Mechanics
Brookdale 2nd Addition 90 South 6th Street
1 1 1-1— 1-1-1-1 1Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
9871 1 85-09 103.118-21-14.0027 1 01471 $1,535.13 1 1 1 13300 County Road 10 1Brookdale Office Park 1
Brooklyn Crossing 360 West Larpenteur
1 1 1 1 1St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 1
1 9871 85.09 103- 118.21 -14 -0028 01471 1 $1,785.66 2 1 1 1 13200 County Road 10 1Brookdale Office Park 1
Brooklyn Crossing 360 West Larpenteur
1 1 1 1 1 1 1St. Paul, Minnesota 55113
9871 1 85.09 1 03-118-21-14-0029 01471 5335.57 ( 3 1 I 13100 Northway Drive IBrookdale Office Park
LEVY 9871 DESCRIPTION "
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985-09 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION: XERXES AVENUE NORTH C.S.A.H. 10 TO F.A.I. 94
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 2 OF 2
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. ( TOTAL I I I I Address Name
NO. I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.I NO. PRINCIPAL I LOT IBLOCKI UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
Brooklyn Crossing 360 West Larpenteur
I 1 I I I I I I ISt. Paul, Minnesota 55113 I
I 0.00
TOTAL ( $31,01 I
i
I
8�
J
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND
PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -12 (DALLAS ROAD
STREET RECONSTRUCTION)
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for street improvements
on Dallas Road 72nd Avenue North and 73rd Avenue North and the
estimated costs for said improvement are summarized as follows
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -12
Contract Cost (as bid) $ 66,859.55
Engineering Cost 6,017 36
Administrative and Legal Cost 3,519.99
TOTAL $ 76,396.90
AND, WHEREAS, the City Clerk, with the assistance of the
Director of Public Works, has prepared a proposed assessment roll
showing the proposed amount to be specifically assessed for such
improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land
within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation,
as provided by law:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
1. That the portion of the cost to be assessed against
benefited property owners is declared to be
$20,400.00.
2. A hearing shall be held on the 23rd day of
September, 1985, in the City Hall at 8:00 P.M. to
pass upon such assessment and at such time and place
all persons owning property affected by such
improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard
with reference to such assessment.
3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the
hearing on the proposed assessment to be published
once in the official newspaper at least two weeks
prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the
notice the total cost of the improvement.
4. The City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given
to the owner of each parcel described in the
assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the
hearing.
RESOLUTION NO.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
•
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
-------------------------------
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: 1985 -12 levy No.: 9874
Description: Street reconstruction including grading, Fund /Code No.:
base, bituminous paving and concrete curb
and gutter Levy Description: STREET (85-12)
Levy runs ten (10) years (from 1986 to 1995)
Location: Dallas Road from 72nd Avenue North to with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
73rd Avenue North
Improvement Hearing Date: June 10, 1985 First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: June 10, 1985
Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
by Resolution No.: 85 -101
Adopted on:
Assessment District: Abutting properties along Dallas Road
from 72nd Avenue North to 73rd Avenue by Resolution No.:
North
Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Unit rate for single- family residential
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: 85-129
Total Improvement Cost: $76,396.90
Less Direct City Share: $55,996.90
(fund MSA)
Less Other Payments: $ 0:00
Total ,Assessed to Property: $20,400.00
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $20,400.00
r
LEVY 9874 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT N0. 1985 -12 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION: DALLAS ROAD - 72ND AVENUE TO 73RD AVENUE
YEARS: 10
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 1 OF 2
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
I LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I I I 1 Address I Name
NO. I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. PRINCIPAL I LOT 1BLOCK UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
1 9874 I 85 -12 125- 119 -21- 42-0011 89526 I $1,200.00 1 3 1 1 1 1 17208 Dallas Road ` I John G. Mjos I
Lawrence Addition 7208 Dallas Road
1-1-1 1 1 1 l ( 1 lBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
l 9874 1 85 -12 125- 119 -21. 42-0012 1 89526 1 $1,200.00 1 4 l 1 1 1 17200 Dallas Road 1Michael E. Natzel
Lawrence Addition 7200 Dallas Road
1 1
1 - 1 - 74 1-1-1 lBrooklyn Center, Minnesota _55430
98 l 85-12 25-119-21-42-0014 l 89526 l 51,200.00 1 1 2 l 1 17201 Dallas Road lGerald & Nancy Yancy
Lawrence Addition 7201 Dallas Road
l 1 1 ( 16rooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9874 85 -12 125-119-21-42-0026 89526 1 $1,200.00 7 1 4 1 17212 Dallas Road lSandra M. Boone
Sunny -Brook Terrace 7212 Dallas Road
1 lBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9874 1 85 -12 125.119- 21-42 -0027 1 89526 1 $1,200.00 8 4 1 7216 Dallas Road 1James V. Ross
Sunny -Brook Terrace 7216 Dallas.Road
l 1 l ( 1 1 1-4 1 1-1 l lBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 l
l 9874 85.12 125-119-21-42-0028 89526 1 $1,200.00 1 -9 7222 Dallas Road lDonald J. Juntilla 1
Sunny-Brook Terrace 7222 Dallas Road
1 1 1 1 l 1 lBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
l 9874 185-12 25= 119 - 21-42-0029 1 89526 1 $1,200.00 10 1 4 1 1 17226 Dallas Road 1Peter J. Kampa l
Sunny -Brook Terrace 7226 Dallas Road
l l l l l l l lBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
l 9874 1 85 -12 25- 119.21-42 -0030 l 89526 1 $1,200.00 1 11 4 1 1 17230 Dallas Road lDerrick R. Doddington
Sunny-Brook Terrace 7230 Dallas Road
l l l l l lBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 54530 l
9874 1 85-12 25- 119 - 21-42-0031 l 89526 l $1,200.00 12 1 4 1 17238 Dallas Road lJames & Jeannie Paulos
Sunny -Brook Terrace 7238 Dallas Road
1 1-1- l 1 1 lBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9874 1 85 -12 25-119. 21 -42-0032 l 89526 l $1,200.00 1 13 1 4 1 1 17242 Dallas Road lDuane A. Welton 1
Sunny-Brook Terrace 7242 Dallas Road
1 l Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
9874 85 12 25-119 -21-42-0033 l 89526 $1,200.00 1 5 l 1 17243 Dallas Road George E. Gunderson
Sunny -Brook Terrace 7243 Dallas Road
I I i I I I I )Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
LEVY 9874 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985 -12 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION: DALLAS ROAD - 72ND AVENUE TO 73RD AVENUE
YEARS: 10
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 2 OF 2
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I ` I 1 Address Name `
NO. I N0. IDENTIFICATION NO. I NO. I PRINCIPAL LOT IBLOCKI UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
1 9874 1 85 -12 25- 119-21-42.0034 1 89526 1-$1,200.00 1 2 1 5 1 1 17237 Dallas Road 1Warren L. Wells
I I I I I I I (Sunny -Brook Terrace 17237 Dallas Road I
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9874 1 85 -12 125-119-21-42-0035 1 89526 1-$1,200.00 1 3 5 1 1 17231 Dallas Road 1Woodrow and Evelyn Kojetin
Sunny -Brook Terrace 7231 Dallas Road
1 1 I 1 I 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9874 8 125-119-21-42-0036 1 89526 1 $1,200.00 4 5 1 1 17225 Dallas Road 1John and Patricia Corbid
Sunny-Brook Terrace 7225 Dallas Road
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9874 85 -12 25- 119 -21- 42-0037 89526 1 $1,200.00 5 5 1 7221 Dallas Road Robert J. Guille
Sunny-Brook Terrace 7221 Dallas Road
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9874 85.12 25- 119 21 -42 -0038 89526 $1,200.00 6 5 1 Dallas Road William R. Hoyhtya
17215
Sunny-Brook Terrace 7215 Dallas Road
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9874 85 12 125- 119 -21-42 -0039 89526 $1,200.00 ( 7 5 1 17211 Dallas Road 1Rodney J. Pullis 1
I I 1 ISunny-Brook Terrace 17211 Dallas Road
i Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 TOTAL 1 $20,400.00 1
g
K
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND
PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -14 (65TH AVENUE
STREET RECONSTRUCTION)
------------------------------------------------
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for street improvements
on 65th Avenue North between Drew Avenue North and Beard Avenue
North and the estimated costs for said improvement are summarized
as follows:
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -14
Contract Cost (as bid) $ 32,222.25
Engineering Cost 2,900.00
Administrative and Legal Cost 2,492.34 _
TOTAL $ 37,614.59
AND, WHEREAS, the City Clerk, with the assistance of the
Director of Public Works, has prepared a proposed assessment roll
showing he proposed amount to specifically assessed g p p be sp fically ess for such
M improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land
within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation,
as provided by law:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
1. That the portion of the to be assessed against
benefited property owners is declared to be
$17,270.00.
2. A hearing shall be held on the 23rd day of
September, 1985, in the City Hall at 8:00 P.M. to
pass upon such assessment and at such time and place
all persons owning property affected by such
improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard
with reference to such assessment.
3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the
hearing on the proposed assessment to be published
once in the official newspaper at least two weeks
prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the
notice the total cost of the improvement.
4. The City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given
to the owner of each parcel described in the
assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the
hearing.
RESOLUTION N0.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. _
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: 1985 -14 Levy No.: 9876
Description: Street reconstruction including concrete Fund /Code No.:
curb and gutter and bituminous surfacing
Levy Description: STREET (85 -14)
Levy runs ten (10) years (from 1986 to 1995)
Location: 65th Avenue North from Drew Avenue North with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
to Beard Avenue North
Improvement Hearing Date: June 10, 1985 First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: June 10, 1985
Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
by Resolution No.: 85-103
Adopted on:
Assessment District: All benefiting properties with Registered
Land Survey Nos. 803 and 838 and within by Resolution No.:
Blocks 9 and 10 of Brooklane Addition
Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Unit rate for single-family residential
or assesaable frontage based on an
evaluation of project cost and project
benefit
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: 85-129
Total Improvement Cost: $37,614.59
Less Direct City Share: $20,262.59
(fund MSA)
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $17,352.00
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $17,352.00
LEVY DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985 -14 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION: 65TH AVENUE NORTH - DREW AVENUE TO BEARD AVENUE
YEARS: 10
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 1 OF Z
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY PROJECT PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL I I I Address I Name
NO. NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. 1 PRINCIPAL 1 LOT (BLOCK UNITS Addition /Legal Description i Mailing Address
9876 85 -14 134-119 -21 -13 -0051 1 89265 1 $1,200.00 1 8 1 9 1 3500 - 65th Avenue North (Betty J. Haase
Brooklane Addition 3500 65th Avenue North
1 1 1-1— 1 1 I 16rooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
9876 1 85.14 134- 119-21 -13 -0052 1 89265 1 $1,200.00 1 9 1 9 1 1 16500 Drew Avenue North 1Jeffrey E. Ouverson 1
Brooklane Addition 6500 Drew Avenue North
1 1
1-1— 1-1 1 1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
1 9876 1 85 -14 34- 119 -21- 13.0067 89265 1 $1,200.00 8 1 1 1 6501 Beard Avenue North 1Leslie L. Velander
111rookLane Addition 6501 Beard Avenue North
1 1 1 I Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
9876 i 85 -14 134-119-21 -13 -0068 i 89265 1 $1,200.00 9 10 1 13408 - 65th Avenue North Francis J. Zins
Brooklane Addition 3408 - 65th Avenue North
1 1 1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
9876 85 -14 134- 119 -21 -42 -0013 89725 1 $3,216.00 Tr A 1 13501 - 65th Avenue North Garden City Elementary School 1
Registered Land Survey No. 803 3501 - 65th Avenue North
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 1
1 9876 1 85 -14 134. 119 -21 -42 -0017 1 89730 1 $2,711.40 1Tr A 1 16425 Beard Avenue North John M. Rafter
Registered Land Survey No. 838 2023 Juliet Avenue
1 I 1 1 1 1 1St. Paul, Minnesota 55111 1
1 9876 85-14 134 - 119- 21 -42- 0018 1 89730 1 $2,711.20 1Tr B 13407 - 65th Avenue North 1Garden City Court 1
Registered Land Survey No. 838 Twin Cities International Airport
1-1-1 1 I 1 1 (P.O. Box 1532, St. Paul, MN 55111 1
1 9876 85 -14 134- 119 -21 -42 -0019 1 89730 1 $2,710.60 1Tr C 1 13417.65th Avenue North Garden City Court 1
Registered Land Survey No. 838 Twin Cities International Airport
I I I I 1 1 I I P.O. Box 1532, St. Paul, MN 55111 1
9876 85 -14 134-119 -21 -42 -0026 1 89730 $1,202.80 1 Tr J 1 1 1Vacant - Private Drive 1Egons R. Podnieks 1
Registered Land Survey No. 838 5625 Interlachen Circle
1-1-1 1 1— I 1 1Minneapolis, Minnesota 55436 1'
TOTAL $17,352.00
FL r
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS
FOR DISEASED SHADE TREE REMOVAL COSTS; FOR PUBLIC
UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES; FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY
ACCOUNTS; AND DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL ACCOUNTS
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the
City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
1. A hearing shall be held on the 23rd day of September,
1985, in the City Hall at 8 :00 P.M. to pass upon the
proposed assessments for the following charges:
Diseased Shade Tree Removal Costs
Public Utility Hookups _
Delinquent Public Utility Accounts
and Delinquent Weed Destruction Accounts
2. The City Clerk with the assistance of the City Engineer,
shall forthwith prepare assessment rolls for the above
charges, and shall keep them on file and open to
inspecti n by any interested persons.
3. The City ,Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the
hearing Dn the proposed assessment to be published once
in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the
hearing.
4. The City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given to
the owner of each parcel described in such assessment
rolls not less than two weeks prior to the hearing.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: 1984 -01 Levy No.: 9863
Description: Cost of diseased shade tree removal to Fund /Code No.:
those tracts or parcels where trees were
removed during 1984, by written agreement Levy Description: TREE REMOVAL 85 -3
with the property owner or by order of
the City Tree Inspector at a cost less Levy runs three (3) years (from 1986 to 1988)
than or equal to $300 with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
Location: Various City Locations First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Hearing Date: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
Improvement Ordered on: N/A Adopted on:
by Resolution No.: N/A by Resolution No.:
Assessment District: N/A Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Direct cost plus administrative cost
assessed
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: N/A
Total improvement Cost: $4,076.36
Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $4,076.36
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property:$ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $4,076.36
0 0 0
i
LEVY DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1984 -01 TREE REMOVAL UNDER $300
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 3
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 1 OF 3
TOTAL PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY (PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN.
{ � � 1 Address � Name
I NO. I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.I NO. I PRINCIPAL LOT ISLOCKI f UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
1 9863,1 84-01 1 01.118-21-21 -0005 1 89295 I $104.62 I 4 1 2 I 15937 Camden Avenue North ( R odney & Judith Holm
1 Camden Acres 5937 Camden Avenue North
1 1 1 1 I I -1-1-1 (Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9863 1 84 -01 101- 118 -21 -21 -0027 1 89285 I $167.94 1 0 1 1 15930 Aldrich Avenue North (Michael & Jane Overman I
Frank Burch's Addition 5930 Aldrich Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 I ( Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9863 84-01 101- 118-21 - 24.0107 1 89560 1 $243.65 1 25 0 1 15835 Camden Avenue North (Roger J. Dunn I
Lyndale Riverside Acres 5835 Camden Avenue North
1 1 1 89225 $276.38 1 (Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9863 1 84 01 101-118 -21-34 0037 1 14 I 3 15326 Bryant Avenue North (Gregory O'Leary & Thomas Reid, Jr.
Bellvue Acres 5326 Bryant Avenue North
1 1 I I 1 1- 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9863 84 -01 01-118- 21-42 -0009 89385 $208.62 10 1 0 15524 Lyndale Avenue North (Robert & Connie Mavis
Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5524 Lyndale Avenue North
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9863 84-01 102- 118 -21 -41 0077 89580 $159.68 I 10 I 3 15610 Logan Avenue North Robert & Delores Fosseen
Meadowlark Gardens 1 5610 Logan Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 -1- 1-1 (Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9863 1 84-01 102. 118 -21 -42 -0059 1 90001 1 $153.96 I 4 I 1 1 12107 Ericon Drive (Frances Michnowski 1
Ryden's Second Addition 2107 Ericon Drive
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
1 9863 1 84.01 102- 118 -21- 44-0067 89475 I $118.01 I 3 1 4 1 15311 Knox Avenue North (Marvin & Renee Johnson I
Humboldt Addition 5311 Knox Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9863 1 84 -01 103- 118 - 21-11-0075 1 89440 I $116.08 1 1 1 7 I 15949 Zenith Avenue North (Mark & Carol Dimon I
! Hipp's 3rd Addition 5949 Zenith Avenue North
1 -1 I 1 I I 1 1 I 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
1 9863 1 84 -01 03- 118 -21 -21 -0035 1 89667 I $280.78 I 19 1 b 15931 Pearson Drive (Daryl Losey 1
Pearson's Northport 3rd Addition 470 West Eagle Lake Drive
1 -1 1 1 1 1Maple Grove, Minnesota 55369 I
1 9863 1 84-01 03- 118 -21- 23-0006 89102 I $201.84 1 1 15735 Major Avenue North (Charles Donner I
Auditor's Subdivision No. 216 210 Deerwood Lane North
I I I I (THAT PART OF LOT 20 LYING N OF THE S [Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
0
LEVY DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1984 -01 TREE REMOVAL UNDER $300
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 3
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUN'IC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 2 OF
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
1 LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL 1 Name ,
NO. I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.I N0. I PRINCIPAL I LOT IBLOCKI UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1509 FT THOF AND $ELY OF ROAD AS OPENED I5128 South
I
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55419
I � { I � I
I I
I 9863 84 -01 03- 118.21 -31 -0030 13 1 3900 Burquest Lane Rickey J. Decker
(( 1 I 89668 I $233.17 1 1 I 1Pearson's Northport 4th Addtiion 13900 Burquest Lane
I I I 1 I 1 1 I I IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 1
1 9863 1 84.01 110 - 118.21 -12 -0075 90081 1 $211.72 7 2 I 15113 Ewing Avenue North (Craig Nierode 1
Twin Lake Woods 2nd Addition 5113 Ewing Avenue North
I 1 I I I I IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
1 9863 84 -01 110 - 118.21 -12 -0085 1 90081 $125.48 1 26 1 2 1 15142 France Avenue North (Duke & Corrine Dalrymple
Twin Lake Woods 2nd Addition 5142 France Avenue North
1 II 1 1 IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
9863 1 84-01 110-118-21-21.0043 90080 I $286.06 I 8 4 5205 East Twin Lake Boulevard 1Robert & Catherine Lorvick
Twin Lake Woods Addition 5205 East Twin Lake Boulevard
1 I I I I I I IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
1 9863 1 84 -01 110-118.21- 42-0038 1 89963 1 $119.37 IOL 8 I I 3401 - 47th Avenue North (Edward & Helen Peterka 1
Ryan Lake Terrace Donald R. Duschane
Cosmopolitan Apartments 1
I I I I 1 I I 1Y Robert & Kathleen Zarracina
I I I I I I I I I 11809 South Plymouth Road 1
Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343
1 9863 1 84.01 127-119. 21-32 -0029 1 89633 1 $239.07 1 12 1 2 1 17119 Lee Avenue North ITheresa M. Belan 1
Northbrook Manor 2nd Addition 7119 Lee Avenue North
I I I I I I I I I 16rooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 1
1 9863 1 84 -01 127- 119 -21- 33-0007 1 89101 I $182.41 1 5 1 0 1 17014 Brooklyn Boulevard James H. Skiff 1
I I I I I I I I 1Auditor's Subdivision No. 57 7014 Brooklyn Boulevard
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
1 98
63 84 -01 133- 119- 21-42 -0053 1 89343 1 $75.73 1 21 1- 1 16430 Toledo Avenue North 1Cheryl Peterson
I I I I I I IDonnay's Brook Lyn Gardens 2nd Addition 16430 Toledo Avenue North
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
1 9863 1 84 -01 133- 119 -21 -44 -0040 1 90087 1 $170.86 1 5 1- 1 16219 Perry Avenue North 1Gerald & Christine Vener I
I I I I I IWaite's 2nd Addition 16219 Perry Avenue North I
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
LEVY DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1984.01 TREE REMOVAL UNDER $300
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 3
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 3 OF 3
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. 1 TOTAL I I I Address Name
NO. 1 NO. IDENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. I PRINCIPAL I LOT 1BLOCKI UNITS Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address
1 9863 1 84 -01 134- 119 -21 -33 -0023 1 89240 1 " $ 280.70 1 1 1 2 4401.63rd Avenue North (Lowell & Ardyce Skoglund
Bergstrom Delphian Gardens 4401 - 63rd Avenue North
1 1 I IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
9863 1 84 -01 136-119 -21 -32 -0064 89410 1 $120.23 3 I 3 1 16331 Girard Avenue North 1David H. Trombley
Grandview Manor 6331 Girard Avenue North
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I jBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
TOTAL $4,076.36
I
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: 1984 -01 Levy No.: 9864
Description: Cost of diseased shade tree removal to Fund /Code No.:
those tracts or parcels where trees were
removed during 1984, by written agreement Levy Description: TREE REMOVAL 85-5
with the property owner or by order of
the City Tree Inspector at a cost greater Levy runs five (5) years from 1986 to 1990)
than $300 with interest at the rate of
twelve (12) Pe rcent.
Location: Various City Locations First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Hearing Date: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
Improvement Ordered on: N/A Adopted on:
by Resolution No.: N/A by Resolution No.:
Assessment District: N/A Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Direct cost plus administrative cost
assessed
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: N/A
Total Improvement Cost: $2,244.13
Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $2,244.13
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property:$ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $2,244.13
LEVY DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1984-01 TREE REMOVAL OVER $300
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 5
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE Z OF Z
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I _ Address I Name
NO. 1 NO. 11DENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. 1 PRINCIPAL LOT 1BLOCKI UNITS 1 Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address 1
i 9864 84 -01 01.118-21-42 -0032 89385 $305.47 I 15614 Camden Avenue North (Scott & Teresa Christie I
IGarcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 5614 Camden Avenue North
I
THAT PART OF LOT 37 LYING N OF S 200 FT (Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
I jTHEREOF EX ST EX STATE HWY
1 9864 , 84 -01 101-118 -21-43 -0073 = 89225 1 $320.60 1 11 I 2 1 1620 - 53rd Avenue North (Jack F. Fahrenholz
1 I 1 1 I L 1 1 Bellvue Acres R.A. Zych 1
620 - 53rd Avenue North
1-1-1 1-1- 1-1-1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
I 9864 1 84 -01 110- 118 - 21-14 -0027 1 89275 I $479.53 1 12 i 1 1 4944 Zenith Avenue North Donald & Paula Miller 1
Brooklyn Manor 4944 Zenith Avenue North
1 I 1 1 1 I 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
9864 84 -01 110- 118.21 -21 -0038 90080 8355.39 3 1 4 1 5239 East Twin Lake Boulevard Douglas B. Ostien
Twin Lake Woods Addition 5239 East Twin Lake Boulevard
1 1 = Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 1
9864 1 84.01 110- 118 - 21-32 -0060 89495 $305.47 9 1 6 14816 Twin Lake Avenue Marvin C. Hamren
Lakebreeze Addition 4816 Twin Lake Avenue
1 1 1 1 I 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
9864 84.01 134- 119 - 21-24 -0051 1 01791 $477.67 1 2 1 1 16501 Brooklyn Boulevard 1Financial Real Estate Consultants, Inc. 1
Hams Addition 6040 Earle Brown Drive, Suite 220
1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
TOTAL $2,244.13
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL ROIL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: 1985.08 Levy No.: 9865
Description: Cost of diseased shade tree removal to Fund Code No.:
those tracts or parcels where trees were
removed during 985 b written a greement Le Desc TREE REMOVAL 85 -3A
9 , Y 9 Levy p
with the property owner or by order of
the City Tree Inspector at a cost less Levy runs three (3) years (from 1986 to 1988)
than or equal to $300 with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
Location: Various City Locations First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Hearing Date: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
Improvement Ordered on: N/A Adopted on:
by Resolution No.: N/A by Resolution No.:
Assessment District: N/A Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Direct cost plus administrative cost
assessed
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: N/A
Total Improvement Cost: $1,373.24
Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $1,373.24
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property:$ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $1,373.24
LEVY DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985 -08 TREE REMOVAL UNDER $300
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 3
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 1 OF
PROPERTY ASSESSED 1 OWNER
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY ADDN. I TOTAL I I f 1 Address I Name
4 NO. I NO. 1IDENTIFICATION NO.` ,NO. PRINCIPAL I LOT BLOCK UNITS Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address
1 9865 1 85 -08 101-118-21-32-0027 f 89001 $270.86 I I 5527 Fremont Avenue North Philip Nyberg
1 1 1Unplatted 01 118 21 15527 Fremont Avenue North' 1
1 1 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9865 1 85 -08 ` 101- 118-21- 33-0035 89365 $230.18 0 10 (5423 Fremont Avenue North (Gloria Landau & Eunice Forrette
Fairhaven Park Addition 5423 Fremont Avenue North
1-1-1 1 -1-1- 1 1 16rooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9865 1 85-08 101 -118- 21-33.0062 89365 1 $232.18 1 0 2 5405 Girard Avenue North (James & Susan Burnette I
Fairhaven Park Addition 5405 Girard Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
1 9865 1 85-08 110- 118-21 -14 -0042 1 89275 1 $273.14 12 2 1 14936 Abbott Avenue North 1Frank Sporna
Brooklyn Manor Addition 4936 Abbott Avenue North
1-1 1 16rooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
9865 85 -08 33- 119-21 -41 -0130 89245 $279.28 1 18 3 4810 - 63rd Avenue North Sylvia Anderson
Bergstrom's Lynside Manor 4810 - 63rd Avenue North
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
9865 85-08 36- 119-21 -32 -0064 89410 $87.60 3 1 3 1 6331 Girard Avenue North David H. Trombley
1 1 1 1 1 1 Grandview Manor Addition ,6331 Girard Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
f TOTAL $1,373.24
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: 1985 -08 Levy No.: 9866
Description: Cost of diseased shade tree removal to Fund /Code No.:
those tracts or parcels where trees were
removed during 1985, by written agreement Levy Descriptions TREE REMOVAL 85-5A
with the property owner or by order of
the City Tree Inspector at a cost greater levy runs five (5) years from 1986 to 1990)
than $300 with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
Location: Various City Locations First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Hearing Date: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
Improvement Ordered on: N/A Adopted on:
by Resolution No.: N/A by Resolution No.:
Assessment District: N/A Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Direct cost plus administrative cost
assessed
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: N/A
Total Improvement Cost: $2,621.37
Less Direct City Share: - $ 0.00
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $2,621.37
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property:$ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $2,621.37
i !�-
LEVY DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: PROJECT NO. 1985-08 TREE REMOVAL OVER $300
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 5
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE l OF
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
} LEVY IPROJECT PROPERTY I ADDN. TOTAL I I I I Address , Name 1
NO. 1 NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. PRINCIPAL I LOT IBLOCK UNITS I Addition /Legal Description j Mailing Address
1 9866 1 85 -08 102 .118 -21 -41 -0070 1 89580 1 $376.47 1 3 1 3 15643 Knox Avenue North I lDelphine Heath I
Meadowlark Gardens Addition 5643 Knox Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
9866 1 85-08 110- 118 -21 -32 -0060 1 89495 1 $731.61 9 1 6 1 14816 Twin Lake Avenue Marvin Hamren 1
Lakebreeze Addition 4816 Twin Lake Avenue
1 I I 1 1 1 1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 1
9866 85 08 �26- 119 -21 -43 -0006 89430 1 $525.83 1 6 1 1 1 16901 Logan Avenue North Glen & Janet Holsather
Halek's Addition 6901 Logan Avenue North
1 I ( 1 1 1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9866 85 -08 127- 119 -21- 42-0027 1 89662 1 $304.09 38 1 3 1 7130 France Avenue North 1Walter Fredrickson
Palmer Lake Terrace 7130 France Avenue North
1 1 1 1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
9866 1 85 -08 133 - 119-21.41 -0007 1 89245 $683.37 7 1 1 6407 Noble Avenue North Pat Anderson
Bergstrom's Lynside Manor Addition 16407 Noble Avenue North
1 1 1 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 1
TOTAL $2,621.37
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: N/A Levy No.: 9867
Description: Sanitary sewer hookup charges to Fund /Code No.:
residential property assessed in
dance with Subdivision Agreement
actor h i Le Description: S EWER HOOKUP 85.20
Levy D tion
P
between the City and Owner or by written
agreement pursuant to City Ordinance, Levy runs twenty (20) years (from 1986 to 2005)
Section with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
4 -201
Location: Various City Locations
Improvement Hearing Date: N/A First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: N/A
Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
by Resolution No.: N/A
Adopted on:
Assessment District: N/A
by Resolution No.:
Method of Apportionment: Assessable linear foot
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: N/A
Total Improvement Cost: $2,266.93
Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $2,266.93
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $2,266.93
LEVY DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: SEWER HOOKUP
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 1 Of Z
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
L LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL I I I Address Name `
NO. I NO. JIDENTIFICATION NO PRINCIPAL LOT BLOCK UNITS Addition /Legal Description f Mailing Address
1 9867 I NA 133-119-21-43-0089 1 02655 I $1,800.00 2 1 1 `5323 - 63rd Avenue North i �Craig A. Weitzel
I f (Corner Addition 5331 - 63rd Avenue North
I I I I I I
I (Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 I
9867 1 NA 10- 118 -21 -12 -0037 89540 $466.93 11 I 3 1 5107 Drew Avenue North Douglas & Kathleen Williams
I I ' I I (Linden Shores on Twin Lake 19208 Northwood Parkway I
I1 I I I I I I I (New Hope, Minnesota 55427 I
I I TOTAL $2,266.93
'I
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: N/A Levy No.: 9868
Description: Water hookup charges to residential Fund /Code No.:
property assessed in accordance with
Subdivision Agreement between City and Levy Description: WATER HOOKUP 85-20
developer or by written agreement
pursuant to City Ordinances, Section Levy runs twenty (20) years (from 1986 to 2005)
4 -201 with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.'
Location: Various City Locations
Improvement Hearing Date: N/A First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: N/A
by Resolution No.: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
Adopted on:
Assessment District: N/A
by Resolution No.:
Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Assessable linear foot and /or assessable
area proportioned among units
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: N/A
Total Improvement Cost: $26,259.84
Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $26,259.84
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $26,259.84
9 1 0
i
LEVY 9868 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: WATER HOOKUP
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE l OF 3
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
I LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL I ( I 1 Address 1 Name 1
NO. NO. 11DENTIFICATION NO. I NO. PRINCIPAL LOT BLOCK[ UNITS I Addition /Legal Description ` Mailing Address
I I 9868 NA 02331 $430.59 1 1 1 (5576 Aldrich Drive North IReynolds Homes & Land Development Co.
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1 01-118-21-31-0118
1 1 1Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443
1 9868 NA 101- 118 -21- 31.0119 02331 1 $430.38 1 2 1 1 15572 Aldrich Drive North Charles & Eleanor Hoskins
Madsen Floral Addition 5572 Aldrich Drive North
1 1 1 1 - 1-1 1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9868 1 NA 101- 118-21 - 31-0120 02331 $430.38 1 3 1 1 1 1 15568 Aldrich Drive North 1 Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co.
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1-1-1 1 1 1 18rooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 1
1 9868 1 NA 01- 118- 21 -31- 0121.1 0233 1 $430.38 1 4 1 1 1 5564 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1 1 1 Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 1
9868 NA 01- 118 -21 -31 -0122 1 02331 $430.38 1 2 1 5560 Aldrich Drive North Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
Madsen Floral Addition 13657 Brookdale Drive
i 1 Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443
86101-118-21-31-0123 1
98 NA 1 02331 5430.38 1 5556 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1-1 1 -1-1 1 1Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 1
1 9868 1 NA 101- 118-21- 31-0124 1 02331 1 $430.38 1 3 2 1 15552 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1-1-1 1 1 1 1 1-1 1Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 1
NA 01- 118 - 21-31 -0125 02331 $430.38 4 2 1 5548 Aldrich Drive North Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co.
1 9868 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Madsen Floral Addition 13657 Brookdale Drive 1
1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 1
1 9868 1 NA 101-118- 21-31 -0126 1 02331 $430.38 1 1 1 3 1 1 5553 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1 1 . 1Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 1
9868 1 1 $430.38 1 2 I 3 1 5549 Aldrich Drive North James & Zetta Anderson
l
1 1 NA 1 01- 118 - 21-31 -0127 1 02331 I 1 1Madsen Floral Addition 15549 Aldrich Drive North 1
1 1 1 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9868 1 NA 101- 118 - 21-31 -0128 1 02331 1 $430.38 3 1 3 1 1 15545 Aldrich Drive North 1Edwin A. Marsch, Jr.
Madsen Floral Addition 5545 Aldrich Drive North
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
LEVY 9868 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: WATER HOOKUP
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 2 OF 3
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY (PROJECT) PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I I I I Address , Name '
NO. NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. I PRINCIPAL I LOT IBLOCKI UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address I
9868 I ---WA--101-118-21-31-0129 1 02331 I $430.38 1 ' 4 1-3 1 1 15541 Aldrich Drive North 1Leburtis & Bessie Mae Warner 1
(Madsen Floral Addition 15541 Aldrich Drive North I
I Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9868 -- WA - 101-118-21-31-0130 1 02331 1 $430.38 1-1 1 4 ` 1 5544 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
1 i 1 1 1 1 1 Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443
1 9868 1 NA 101. 118-21. 31-0131 1 02331 1 $430.38 1 2 4 1 15540 Aldrich Drive North Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co.
1 1 1 1 1 (Madsen Floral Addition 13657 Brookdale Drive I
Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443
1 9868 NA 01-118-21-31-0132 1 02331 $430.38 1- 3 1 4 1 - 1 15536 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
1 1 1 1 Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443
9868 NA 01- 118 -21- 31-0133 0 1 $430.38 4 4 1 5532 Aldrich Drive North Raymond & Helen Meyer
(Madsen Floral Addition 5532 Aldrich Drive North
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9868 — NA - 101-118-21-31-0134 0 1 $430.38 1 1 1-5 1 15537 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16rooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 1
1 9868 1 NA 101- 118-21-31 -0135 1 02331 1 $430.38 1 - 2 1 5 1 - 1 15533 Aldrich Drive North Delvin & Leona Maki 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (Madsen Floral Addition 5533 Aldrich Drive North
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9868 1 NA 101-118 -21 -31 -0136 02331 1 $430.38 1-3 1-5 1 1 15529 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co.
I 1 1 1 iMadsen Floral Addition (3657 Brookdale Drive 1
Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443
9868 1 -- TA -- 101-118- 21-31 -0137 1 02331 1 $430.38 4 1 5 1 15525 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1 1 1 1 1 16rooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 1
1 9868 NA 101- 118 -21 -31 -0138 02331 1 $430.38 1 1 1 6 1 1 5528 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 i
1 9868 1 NA 01 -118- 21-31 -0139 1 02331 1 $430.38 1-2 6 1-1 15524 Aldrich Drive North 1Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
I I I I I IMadsen Floral Addition 13657 Brookdale Drive 1
LEVY 9868 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: WATER HOOKUP
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 20
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 3 OF 3
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. TOTAL I I Name
I NO. I NO. 11DENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. I PRINCIPAL LOT IBLOCK UNITS I Addition /Legal Description ( Mailing Address
I 1 I 1 I 1 ( Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 1
1 9868 1 NA 101- 118-21 -31 -0140 02331 1 $430.38 1 3 6 1 1 5520 Aldrich Drive North (Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co.
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
I I 1 IBrooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 I
1 9868 NA 101-118- 21-31 -0141 1 02331 1 $430.38 4 6 1 15516 Aldrich Drive North (Leonard W. Bye
Madsen Floral Addition 5516 Aldrich Drive North
1
1-1 1-1– 1 1 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9868 1 NA 101- 118-21 - 31.0142 1 02331 1 $430.38 1 7 1 15512 Aldrich Drive North (Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1 1 1 1 1 I 1 Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 1
1 9868 NA 101-118-21-31-0143 02331 $430.38 2 7 1 15508 Aldrich Drive North Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co. 1
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 I
9868 NA 101-118-21-31-0144 1 02331 1 $430.38 3 7 1 5504 Aldrich Drive North Anthony & Susan Howe
Madsen Floral Addition 5504 Aldrich Drive North
1 1 I —1 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
i 9868 I NA 01. 118-21-31 -0145 1 02331 I $430.38 1 4 1 7 1 15500 Aldrich Drive North (Reynolds Homes & Land Development Co.
Madsen Floral Addition 3657 Brookdale Drive
1-1 i 1 (Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443
1 9868 NA 10- 118 -21 -12 -0037 89540 I $490.00 I 11 3 1 1 5107 Drew Avenue North (Douglas & Kathleen Williams
Linden Shores on Twin lake 9208 Northwood Parkway
1 1 I I 1 I I INew Hope, Minnesota 55427 1
1 9868 1 NA 133- 119-21.43 -0089 1 02655 1 $1,897.00 1 2 1 1 1 .1 15323 - 63rd Avenue North (Craig A. Weitzel
Corner Addition 5331 - 63rd Avenue North
1 I 1 1 I I (Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
1 9868 I NA 135- 119-21 -11 -0011 1 89781 57,486.20 ITr A 154,953 117 - 69TH Avenue North (Sheldon Tysk I
SF Registered Land Survey No. 1382 410 Idaho Avenue North
I I I I 1 I 1 1 1Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427 I
1 9868 1 NA 102 - 118-21.22 -0001 1 89103 $4,335.79 1 I 1506.56 16030 Xerxes Avenue North (Brooklyn Center Assemblies of God I
LF Auditor's Subdivision No. 218 6018 Xerxes Avenue North
I AND27 85/100 4TH ADDN T 1 ALSO OUTLOTS 4 1Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1
I TOTAL $26,259.84
0
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: N/A Levy No.: 9891
Description: Water hookup charges to residential Fund /Code No.:
property assessed in accordance with
Subdivision Agreement between City and Levy Description: WATER HOOKUP 85-15
developer or by written agreement
pursuant to City Ordinances, Section Levy runs fifteen (15) years(from 1986 to 2000)
4 -201 with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
Location: Various City Locations
Improvement Hearing Date: N/A First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: N/A
Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
by Resolution No.: N/A
Adopted on:
Assessment District: N/A
by Resolution No.:
Method of Apportionment: Assessable linear foot and /or assessable
area proportioned among units
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: N/A
Total Improvement Cost: $9,854.18
Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $9,854.18
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $9,854.18
LEVY DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: WATER HOOKUP
LOCATION: VARIES
YEARS: 15
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE OF Z
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY IPROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I I I I Address ` Name
NO. NO. 11DENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. PRINCIPAL I LOT IBLOCKI i UNITS 1 Addition /Legal Description 1 Mailing Address 1
9891 NA 135-119 -21- 13-0017 1 02256 $9,854.18 ( Tr G I t 16601 Shingle Creek Parkway Shingle Creek Plaza II
Registered Land Survey No. 1572 1625 - 4th Avenue South, Suite 1550
1 1 I 1 1 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415
TOTAL $9,854.18
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
-----------------------------------------------
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: N/A Levy No.: 9869
Description: Delinquent Public Utility Charges Fund /Code No.:
Levy Description: DELINQUENT PUB UTIL 85
Levy runs one (1) year (from 1986 to 1986)
Location: Various City Locations with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent.
Improvement Hearing Date: N/A First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: N/A
Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
by Resolution No.: N/A
Adopted on:
Assessment District: N/A
by Resolution No.:
Corrections, Deletions or Deferments:
Method of Apportionment: Direct costs assessed
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: N/A
Total Improvement Cost: E 971.06
Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00
Less Other Payments: $ 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: E 971.06
Assessed to City Owned Property: E 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: E 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $ 971.06
LEVY 9869 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITIES
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 1
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE Z OF l
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I I Address _ Name
NO. I NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. I PRINCIPAL I LOT IBLOCKI UNITS Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address
(� 9869 'I NA 01- 118 -21 -33 -0075 1 89675 i I $109.68 I 5447 Dupont Avenue North (Fred 0. Persons
I N. & E. Perkins Addition to Minneapolis 15447 Dupont Avenue North I
I I ADJACE AND VACATEDOF L LOT 5 INCLUDING 1/2 IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
1 9869 NA 101- 118-21. 33-0123 1 89675 1 $57.53 I 14 1 3 5303 Emerson Avenue North `James and Yvonne Lyons
N. & E. Perkins Addition to Minneapolis 1032 Central
I I I I I I Wilmette, Illinois 60091
9869 1 NA 101- 118- 21-42 -0009 1 89385 1 5109.68 10 1 5524 Lyndale Avenue North IRobert and Connie Mavis
I I I Garcelon's Addition to Minneapolis 15524 Lyndale Avenue North I
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9869 1-- WA -- 102-118-21-42-0054 1 90000 1 $85.88 4 3 I 12017 Brookview Drive (Derry and Marilyn Wood
I I 'Ryden's 1st Addition 12017 Brookview Drive
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
9869 I NA 102- 118.21 -44 -0133 89961 $109.68 1 2 1 15419 H umboldt Avenue North (Lawrence Mickelson
Rockwell's 2nd Addition 5419 Humboldt Avenue North
1 IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
9869 I NA 34-119-21-22-0003 1 89100 I 5355.56 1 16837 Brooklyn Boulevard (Hanford Agency I
Auditor's Subdivision No. 25 22 Hennepin Avenue
I I I I I I IC OM AT A PT 165 FT E FROM A PT IN THE W Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 1
I I I I I I (LINE OF LOT 6 DIS 168 27/100 FT S FROM
THE NW COR OF SAID LOT TH SLY 147 FT
PAR WITH SAID W LINE TH E TO CTR LINE
I I I I
I JOF ROAD TH NWLY ALONG ROAD TO A PT IN A I
LINE RUNNING E PAR WITH THE N LINE OF
I I SEC 34 FROM THE PT OF BEG THE W 314
I 2/10 FT TO BEG EX ROAD 1 I
9869 1 NA 134-119 -21 -32 -0101 1 89600 $57.17 I 10 I 1 I 6406 Kyle Avenue North (Gary D. J. Enger I
Millers Northview Heights 6406 Kyle Avenue North
I I I I I I I .IBrooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 I
1 9869 NA 134-119 -21 -43 -0036 1 89525 I $85.88 5 1 3 1 13507 - 62nd Avenue North 1John and Leona Lescault I
1 Lawnridge Addition 6142 Brooklyn Boulevard
I I I I I I 1 (Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 I
1 TOTAL $971.06 1
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION
Improvement Project No.: N/A Levy No.: 9870
Description: Cost of noxious weed removal to those Fund /Code No.;
tracts or parcels where pursuant to City
Ordinance, Section 19-1601 through Levy Description: WEED DESTRUCTION 85
19 -1604 noxious weeds were destroyed b
Y Y
order of the City Weed Inspector and the Levy runs one (1) year (from 1986 to 1986)
cost for such destruction having een
g with interest at the rate of twelve (12) Pe rcent.
billed to the property owner, remains
unpaid
Location: Various City Locations
Improvement Hearing Date: N/A First payment, with property taxes payable in
1986 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest.
Improvement Ordered on: N/A
Date of Assessment Hearing: September 23, 1985
by Resolution No.: N/A
Adopted on:
Assessment District: N/A
by Resolution No.:
Method of Apportionment: Direct costs
Cost Summary
from Resolution No.: N/A
Total Improvement Cost: $1,290.63
Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00
Less Other Payments: S 0.00
Total Assessed to Property: $1,290.63
Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00
Assessed to Private Property: $1,290.63
LEVY 9870 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: WEED DESTRUCTION
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 1
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 1 OF 3
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY 1 ADDN. 1 TOTAL I I 1 Address ( Name
NO. NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. I PRINCIPAL ( LOT IBLOCKI UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
I
9870 NA 101- 118 -21- 21-0001 I 89001 $49.50 f I (Vacant Land I l Bill D. Graen I
1 1 1 Unplatted Section 1 38865 Burns Parkway NW
THAT L I 1 I I 1 85 /100AFT OF GOVT LOTH LYINGFN 0 F 06 HE (Anoka, Minnesota 55303
I 1 N LINE OF LOT 3 BLK 2 A J LARSENS 3RD
( 1 ADDN EXTENDED W EX ST
1 9870 NA 102- 118-21 -11 -0001 89780 1 $104.62 TR A 1_1 1Vacant Lane Texas Air Corporation 1
1 1 Registered Land Survey No. 1380 1333 Clay Street, Suite 4040
1 I 1 1 (
I
Houston, Texas 77002
9870 1 NA 102- 118 -21 -11 -0006 1-89791 1 $104.63 1TR B 1 1 1Vacant Land 1Texas Air Corporation 1
1 1 I (Registered Land Survey No. 1380 1333 Clay Street, Suite 4040
I 1 I
Houston, Texas 77002
9870 1 -- iFA 102- 118 -21- 12-0004 89769 1 $33.17 TR G 1 Vacant Land IShingle Creek Land Company 1
I 1 Registered Land Survey No. 1325 1625 - 4th Avenue South, Suite 1550
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415
9 1 NA 102- 118 - 21.12.0005 89769 1 $33.17 TR H 1 Vacant Land Shingle Creek Land Company I
I I I I Registered Land Survey No. 1325 1625 - 4th Avenue South, Suite 1550 I
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415
1 9870 1 NA 102 -118- 21-12 -0006 1 89769 $33.16 TR I ( I 1Vacant Land IShingle Creek Land Company 1
Registered Land Survey o. 1325 625 - 4th Avenue South Suite 1550
1 ( I 1 1 1 I 1 1 y ( Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 1
1 9870 1 NA 102-118-21-22 -0055 1 89441 1 $27.04 1 3 6 1 15936 Vincent Avenue North IDavid Feltand 1
1 1 I 1 1 I IHipp's 4th Addition 2800 Foshay Building
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
9870 1 NA 102- 118-21.22 -0056 1 89441 1 $27.04 1 3A 1 6 1-15936 Vincent Avenue North IDavid Feltand
1 1 I 1 1 1 IHipp's 4th Addition 12800 Foshay Building I
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
9870 1 NA 102 118 21 22 0057 89441 1 $27.04 1 4 6 1 15930 Vincent Avenue North 1David Feltand 1
1 1 1 I 1 I 1 IHipp's 4th Addition 12800 Foshay Building I
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
9870 1 NA (02-118- 21-22-0058 1 89441 1 $27.04 1 5 1 6 1 15924 Vincent Avenue North IDavid Feltand
1 1 1 1 I IHipp's 4th Addition 12800 Foshay Building
i Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
1
LEVY 9870 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: WEED DESTRUCTION
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 1
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 2 OF 3
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
LEVY PROJECT PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I I I I Address Name
I NO. -NO. JIDENTIFICATION NO. I NO. PRINCIPAL I LOT BLOCK) UNITS Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
i I I i I
9870 1 NA 102-118 -21- 22-0059 1 89441 $27.04 I 6 I 6 I 15918 Vincent Avenue North IDavid Felland
I ( I I Hipp's 4th Addition 2800 Foshay Building
(Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
1 9870 NA 02-118-21-22-0 060 1 89441 $27.05 I I 7 I 6 15912 Vincent Avenue North IDavid Felland
Hipp-s 4th Addition 12800 Foshay Building
1-1 I Minnesota 55402
Minneapolis, Po
I I I ( I I I I
9870 NA 02-118-21- 34-0051 89435 $43.38 Vaca
2 nt land
I I , I I i ( Robert L. Hansen's First Addition I I
II I I i 1-1- I 1/2 OF LOT 4
1 9870 1 NA 102 -118- 21-34 -0052 1,89435 1 $37.25 1 5 1 2 1 15312 Russell Avenue North I
Robert L. Hansen's First Addition
1 9870 1 NA 1 10-118-21-24 -0001 1 89010 $49.50 I I ( I 1
Ii I Vacant Land Tri State Land Company I I IUnplatted Section 10 1% Soo Line Railroad Company I
I I R//W THE I T C F NELY "
W ANDTHESLINEOFN 1/2 OF GOVT LOT IMinneap e Building
oliss, Minnesota
2 TH E ALONG SAID S LINE TO A PT DIS
I I I 1007 FT W FROM SE COR THEREOF TH N PAR I
I I I I I I IPAR WITH WITH LINE LINETHEREOF
THEREOF TO / THE ETLINEE I I
I I 1 I I (THEREOF TH N TO NE COR THEREOF TH W I
ALONG N LINE THEREOF TO ITS INTERSEC
I I I I I I I
WITH THE SELY (EXTENDED SWLY TH ALONG SAID I I
I I I I I I EXTENSION 11 95/100 FT TH S AT RT
ANGLES TO N LINE OF GOVT LOT 2 TO A PT
I I I I I I 1 160 FT S FROM N LINE THEREOF TH W PAR I 1
! WITH SAID N LINE TO NELY LINE OF R R
I I I I I I I 1 1R /W TH SELY ALONG SAID R/W TO BEG EX 1 1
ROAD
9870 1--NA 134-119-21-24-0008 89635 I 5159.75 1 I 1 I (Vacant land IJ.C.N.J. Properties I
I I Northgate Addition 18053 Bloomington Freeway
I I I I - 1
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55420
1 9870 I NA 135- 119 -21 -23 -0002 1 89779 I $123.00 ITR B I I Vacant Land IShingle Creek Land Company
1Registered Land Survey No. 1377 1625 - 4th Avenue South, Suite 1550 1
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415
j
1
LEVY 9870 DESCRIPTION
LEVY TYPE: WEED DESTRUCTION
LOCATION: VARIED
YEARS: 1
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PAGE 3 OF
PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER
1 LEVY .PROJECT PROPERTY I ADDN. , TOTAL Address 1 Name 1
f NO. I NO. JIDENTIFICATION NO.I NO. I PRINCIPAL LOT �BLOCKI UNITS I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address
1 9870 1 NA 135- 119 - 21-41-0005 1 00261 1 $110.75 ITR C (Vacant Land (Shingle Creek Land Company I
Registered Land Survey No. 1482 625 - 4th Avenue South, Suite 1550
I (Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 I
1 9870 1 NA I35- 119 -21 -41 -0007 1 00261 1 $110.75 ITR E I (Vacant Land Shingle Creek Land Company I
(Registered Land Survey No. 1482 625 - 4th Avenue South, Suite 1550
1 -1-1 1 1 1 I 1 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415
1 9870 1 NA 135-119 -21- 43-0002 1 89272 1 $86.25 IOL A ( (Vacant Land (General Monetary Corporation
Brooklyn Center Industrial Park Plat 1 310 - 4th Avenue South, #800
1 1 1 1 1 1 1Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415
9870 1 NA 136- 119 - 21-21 -0002 87105 $49.50 I 1707 - 69th Avenue North Omar Anas
Auditor's Subdivision No. 310 P.O. Box 23173
I I I I 75 FT OF E 150 FT OF LOT 31 Richfield, Minnesota 55423
TOTAL $1,290.63
BM
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT
FOR TWO CIVIL DEFENSE SIRENS
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for two civil defense
sirens, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Deputy City
Clerk, on the 21st day of August, 1985. Said bids were as follows:
Bidder Bid Amount
Tommy's Firehouse $16,087
Killmer Electric $22,154
WHEREAS, it appears that Tommy's Firehouse of Rochester, Minnesota, is the
lowest responsible bidder.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn
Center, Minnesota:
1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter
into a contract, in the amount of $16,087-00 with Tommy's Firehouse of
Rochester, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for two
civil defense sirens according to the plans and specifications
therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the
City Clerk.
2. The deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be
retained by the City Clerk until a contract has been signed.
3. The estimated cost of two civil defense sirens is hereby amended
according to the following schedule:
Contract As Approved As Bid
$17,301.00 $16,807.00
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.
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
AUGUST 15, 1985
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman
George Lucht at 7:33 P.m.
ROLL CALL
Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Nancy Manson, Carl Sandstrom,
Mike Nelson and Wallace Bernards. Also present were Director of Planning and
Inspection Ronald Warren, City Engineer Bo Spurrier and Planner Gary Shallcross.
Chairman Lucht explained that Commissioner Ainas had called to say he would be
unable to attend and was excused.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 25, 1985
Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to approve the
minutes of the July 25, 1985 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in
I I
favor: Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting
against. none. Not voting: Chairman Lucht. The motion passed.
INTRODUCTION OF CITY ENGINEER BO SPURRIER
Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced Bo Spurrier, the
new City Engineer for the City of Brooklyn Center. The Secretary noted that Mr.
a Spurrier is from the City of Shakopee and welcomed him to the Planning Commission
deliberations.
APPLICATION NOS. 85018 AND 85019 (R. L. BROOKDALE MOTORS, INC.)
The Secretary then introduced the first two items of business, a request for site and
building plan and special use permit approval to construct a used car sales office on
the site of the old A & W and SquiggyIs Restaurant at 6837 Brooklyn Boulevard and a
request for preliminary plat approval to replat the same property and that of the
Brookdale Pontiac Honda dealership to the south. The Secretary reviewed the
contents of the staff reports (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for
Application Nos. 85018 and 85019 attached). The Secretary added that it was the
staff's understanding that the used car sales building would be fire sprinklered by
connection of the fire line from the Honda building to the used car sales building.
After completing the reports, the Secretary
rec the addition of a condition
recommended d i
P d
g P �
to the preliminary plat approval that a covenant be placed on the property so that
the used car sales building would be used in conjunction with the existing Brookdale
Pontiac car dealership to the south.
Chairman Lucht asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Noel Muller,
an attorney representing Brookdale Pontiac, stated that easements and covenants
over the property would be difficult to file given that the title to the used car
property was still controlled by another owner. He suggested that Brookdale
Pontiac enter into an agreement with the City to provide for use of the property in
the manner suggested in the staff report, namely as a joint use. The Secretary
stated that he was not opposed to another form of tieing the properties together as
long as it was approved by the City Attorney. He stated that the objective of the
staff is that the car dealership on the used car property not become a separate used
car business apart from the new car dealership at Brookdale Pontiac.
8 -15 -85 -1-
PUBLIC HEARING (Application Nos. 85018 and 85019
Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing on both the special use
permit and the preliminary plat applications. He asked whether anyone present
wished to speak regarding the applications. Hearing none, he called for a motion to
close the public hearing.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Motion by'Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the
public hearing. The motion passed unanimously.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85018 (R. L. Brookdale Motors,
Inc.
Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Manson to recommend
approval of Application No. 85018, subject to the following conditions:
1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator and
is nontransferable.
2. The special use permit is subject to all relevant codes,
ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall 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. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of
permits.
5. 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 to assure completion
of approved site improvements.
6. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
7. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all
landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance except the
isolated southwest landscaped island.
8. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 "of the City Ordinances.
9. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
'R. The landscape plan shall be amended to provide planting
specifications for the southwesterly planting island and the
plantings around the foundation of the building, prior to
issuance of permits.
4 0
8- 15 -85, -2-
The plan shall be amended to indicate B612 curb and gutter along
the west property line and around the southwesterly landscaped
island, prior to issuance of permits.
The site and buildin p lans shall be certified b the architect
�P Y
prior to the issuance of permits.
137. The plat proposed under Application No. 85019 shall receive final
approval and be filed at the County prior to the issuance of
permits.
J The applicant shall enter into an agreement for the payment of
utility hookup charges prior to the issuance of permits.
Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Sandstrom, Nelson
and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85019 (R. L. Brookdale Motors,
Inc.
Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Nelson to recommend
approval of Application No. 85019, subject to the following conditions:
1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City
Engineer.
2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the
City Ordinances.
3. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for the
payment of utility hookup charges prior to final plat approval.
4. Easements for cross access and cross parking shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval and
shall be filed with the pNM at e th Ct 5. A covenant restricting the with the
use of Lot 2 be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and
filed with the at the County.
Y
T�
Voting in. favor: Chairman Luq�it, Co is ioner�Ma ecki, Manson, Sandstrom, Nelson
and Bernards. Voting against: n ne. The motion passed.
The Secretary stated that the staff would work with the applicant on agreeable
documents to achieve joint use of the two properties in the plat.
APPLICATION NO. 85020 (Lombard Properties)
The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for preliminary
R.L.S. approval to combine into a single parcel, three tracts of land located
northeast of LaBelle's at the corner of Earle Brown Drive and Summit Drive. The
Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission
Information Sheet for Application No. 85020 attached). The Secretary briefly
noted that a plan had formerly been approved for an L- shaped shopping center on the
three parcels in question and that a joint access arrangement was being worked out
• with Target and LaBelle's to allow a common driving area for delivery trucks.
8 -15 -85 -3-
Chairman Lucht asked the applicant whether she had anything to add. Ms. Judith
Bright of Lombard Properties stated that she had nothing to add.
PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 85020)
Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing on the preliminary plat
application and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the
application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the
public hearing. The motion passed unanimously.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85020 (Lombard Properties) _
Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend
approval of Application No. 85020, subject to the following conditions:
1. The final R.L.S. is subject to review and approval by the City
Engineer.
2. The final R.L.S. is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the
City Ordinances.
Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Sandstrom, Nelson
and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
APPLICATION NO. 85021 (Ronald Bashel)
The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, an appeal from a
determination by staff that a tanning salon cannot be located in the Humboldt Square
Shopping Center on the grounds that it abuts R3 zoned property (Hi Crest Square
Estates) to the east. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report ( see
Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 85021 attached).
Commissioner Malecki asked whether the staff recommendation was to deny the appeal
and change the ordinance, but keep tanning studios a special use permit. The
Secretary responded that the Planning Commission and City Council could make
tanning studios a permitted use, but that staff recommended that it still be
classified as a special use without an abutment restriction. Commissioner Malecki
asked how tanning studios are presently regulated. The Secretary answered that
they were governed by the State Board of Cosmetology and that the City Sanitarian
inspects tanning studios once a year.
Commissioner Nelson asked what other uses are so restricted relative to R1, R2 and R3
zoned property. The Secretary reviewed Section 35 -322, Subsection 3 and noted that
gas stations and auto repair garages, saunas and massage parlors are all restricted
in one fashion or other relative to residential property. He also noted uses such
as theaters, bowling alleys, restaurants offering live entertainment contained in
Section 35 -322, 3d, along with suntan studios.
The Planner stated that he had contacted a number of other Planners earlier in the
day and asked them how suntan studios were treated under their local ordinances. He
stated that a number of these planners also have concerns about the possibility a
connection between suntan studios and sex - related businesses, but that in other
communities such studios are allowed as either a permitted or a special use in the
retail zoning district and that none have a restriction relative to residential .
property.
8 -15 -85 -4-
CORRECTION
i
There followed a discussion regarding the merits of allowing suntan studios by
special use permit versus allowing them as a permitted use.
Chairman Lucht asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Ron Bashel
stated that he had nothing to add, that the material had been well covered.
Commissioner Malecki asked how many booths there would be in the suntan studio. Mr.
Bashel stated that they would start out with 6 booths and work up to 11 in the future.
The Secretary asked whether there was licensing of suntan studios by the State. Mr.
Bashel responded in the negative, but added that the establishments are covered by
the State Board of Cosmetology. The Secretary again pointed out that suntan
studios in Brooklyn Center have been inspected annually by the Sanitarian.
ACTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85021 WITH DIRECTION TO STAFF TO
PREPARE AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to recommend
denial of Application No. 85021 and to support staff's interpretation of the City
Zoning Ordinance, but also directing staff to prepare an ordinance amendment and
present it to the City Council that would allow suntan studios by special use permit
in the C2 zoning district without restriction as to abutment with residential
property. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson,
Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
There followed a brief discussion with the applicant. Commissioner Malecki
clarified that any special use permit would prohibit expansion into activities
related to massage or sauna.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
The Secretary oted that the applicant for Application No. 85022 was not resent and
Y AA AA A
proceeded to update the Planning Commission on the status of Application No. 85009
submitted by Foundation Stone Ministries, Inca He stated that the Council had
voted not to approve the rezoning application and had instead directed staff to
prepare an ordinance amendment to allow churches by special use permit in the R5
zoning district. The Commission briefly discussed the proposed ordinance amendment
as a means of addressing the church's proposed use of the property and concluded that
the proposed ordinance amendment was an acceptable way of addressing that issue.
No other comments were offered regarding the ordinance amendment.
The Secretary also reviewed with the Commission the status of development plans for
the Earle Brown Farm area. He informed them that the staff was looking into a high-
rise residential development to the south of the Farm site.- He stated that this
would require a rezoning of the property and a Comprehensive Plan amendment and that
these actions would have to be taken prior to December 9 of this year. He stated
that such a residential development may need convenience stores and 'other services
within the residential complex and that these would be allowed under the R7 zoning
district. There followed a brief discussion regarding the tentative schedule for
review and approval of the rezoni ng P and Comprehensive Plan amendment.
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 8:53 p.m. and resumed at 9 :11 p.m.
APPLICATION NO. 85022 (Joan Moe)
Following the recess, the Secretary introduced the last item of business, a request
for special use permit approval to operate a photography studio in the basement of
the residence at 6906 Grimes Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of
the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No.
85022 attached)
8 -15 -85 -5-
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 85018
i Applicant: R. L. Brookdale Motors, Inc. (Brookdale Pontiac)
Location: 6837 Brooklyn Blvd.
Request: Site and Building Plan /Special Use
The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to
build a used car sales building on the site of the old A and W and Squiggy's
restaurants at 6837 Brooklyn Boulevard. The site in question is zoned C2 and is
bounded by Brooklyn Boulevard on the east, by Brookdale Pontiac on the south, by
the Post Office on the west, and by Brooklyn Center (Mobil) on the north. The sale
of motor vehicles is a special use in the C2 zoning district. The used car busi-
ness will be owned and operated by Brookdale Pontiac which, in accordance with the
Chapter 23 (Licensing Ordinance), possesses a new car franchise and a repair garage.
The proposed site plan eliminates one existing access onto Brooklyn Boulevard on
the north side of the property. The remaining southerly access will serve both
the used car building and the existing Honda building to the south. The City
Engineer has recommended some minor modifications to the radius on the north side -
of this remaining access. The parking requirement for the entire Brookdale Pontiac
complex is based on 6,735 sq. ft. of retail space (57 spaces), 2,333 sq. ft. of
office space (12 spaces) and a service garage with 24 enclosed bays, 25 dayshift
employees, and 2 service vehicles (99 spaces) for a combined requirement of 168
spaces. These spaces are marked on the site plan as customer and employee parking
separate fron inventory parking. No handicapped stalls have been shown.
The landscape plan calls for three new 3" diameter Ash trees in the greenstrip
along Brooklyn Boulevard at approximate 50' intervals, consistent with the treat-
ment at the existing Brookdale Pontiac site to the south. The plan also calls for
52 Zabel Honeysuckle, planted 5' on center along the north edge of the property, -
adjacent to Brooklyn Center Service. A large planting island is proposed at the
southwest corner of the site. Eleven shrubs of unspecified size or specie are
indicated in this area. Finally, the plan also shows 15 unspecified shrubs in
planting beds around the foundation of the new building. Staff would recommend
that the landscaping around the building be better defined with perhaps a greater
quantity of smaller shrubs, rather than the 3' diameter shrubs shown on the plan.
Underground irrigation has been noted for the east and north greenstrips, but not
the isolated island.
New curbing is to be provided along the north and east sides of the parking lot.
No curbing or interior greenstrip is proposed along the west property line adjacent
to the Post Office property. B612 curb and gutter is noted around the building pad.
Three concrete parking delineators are shown along the southerly portion of the
used car property, but serve to define parking rows that extend down into the ex-
isting Pontiac dealership site. An existing island along the north side of the -
Pontiac /Honda dealership will be removed. A raised concrete display pad is also
proposed for the area immediately east of the new building.
The proposed used car sales building is to be octagon in shape, consistent with
the theme of the other Brookdale Pontiac sales buildings to the south. It is to
be built over the foundation of the existing restaurant building. The exterior
treatment is to be a combination of break -off block, single scored block, and 1"
insulated glass. A skylite is proposed for the center of the roof. The ground
floor of the building is to be less than 2,000 sq. ft. No fire sprinkling has
been noted on the plans.
8 -15 =85 -1-
Application No. 85018 continued
No information has been submitted regarding the special use permit standards. How-
ever, considering the nature of the surrounding land uses, there seems to be no
reason to deny approval for another auto - related use. Staff's only concern is that
the proposed used car sales office be perpetually connected with the new car dealer -
ship located on a separate parcel immediately to the south. Used car sales are only
allowed in conjunction with a new car dealership under the City's Licensing Ordi-
nance. The proposed site plan certainly ties the two parcels together in terms of
access and parking.
Altogether, the plans are generally in order and approval is recommended, subject
to at least the following conditions:
1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is
nontransferable.
2. The special use permit is subject to all relevant codes, ordinances,
and regulations and any violation thereof shall 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. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review
and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits.
5. 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 to assure completion of approved
site improvements.
6. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equip-
ment shall be appropriately screened from view.
7. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all land -
scaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
8. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
9. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
10. The landscape plan shall be amended to provide planting specifi-
cations for the southwesterly planting island and the plantings
around the foundation of the building, prior to issuance of permits.
11. The plan shall be amended to indicate B612 curb and gutter along
the west property line and around the southwesterly landscaped
island', prior to issuance of permits.
12. The site and building plans shall be signed by the architect prior
the issuance of permits.
13. The plat proposed under Application No. 85019 shall receive final
approval and be filed at the County prior to the issuance of permits.
14. The applicant shall enter into an agreement for the payment of utility
hookup charges prior to the issuance of permits.
8 -15 -85 -2-
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 85019
Applicant: R. L. Brookdale Motors, Inc. (Brookdale Ponti:acl
Location: 6801 and 6837 Brooklyn Boulevard
Request: Preliminary Plat
The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to replat the two lots at 6801
and 6837 Brooklyn Boulevard. These lots are the subject of Application No. 85018,
submitted by Brookdale Pontiac. They are zoned C2 and are bounded by Brooklyn
Boulevard on the east, by 68th Avenue North on-the south, by the Post Office property
on the west, and by Brooklyn Center Service (Mobil) on the north. The two existing
lots are the site of Brookdale Pontiac /Honda and the site of the old A and W and
Squiggy's restaurant.
The existing Brookdale Pontiac lot is platted and described as Lot 1, Block 1,
Northtown Plaza Second Addition. The restaurant parcel is unplatted and has a
legal description as part of Lot 6, Auditor's Subdivision No. 25. The common boundary
dine is not to change. The new legal description will be Lots 1 (restaurant parcel)
and .2 (Brookdale Pontiac) of Block 1, Northtown Plaza Third Addition.
The total area of the plat is 4,994 acres. Lot l is to be 42,765 sq. ft., or .98
acres. Lot 2 is to be 174,776 sq. ft., or 4.01 acres. No rightrof -way dedication
is made on the plat. No easements are indicated on the plat. Easements for cross
access and cross parking will have to be filed with the plat to allow for what is
essentially a common use of the two lots.
Section 35 -540 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that adjacent parcels of land under
common ownership and common use be combined into parcel through platting or regis-
tered land survey. This is not being done in this instance because Lot 1 is being
purchased on a contract for deed and title would be retained on a sub- parcel de-
scribed by metes and bounds if the property were platted into a single lot. This
result is unacceptable to both the City and the County. Therefore, two parcels are
being accepted at this time. The purpose of the replatting is essentially to clean
up the legal description of the property.
The preliminary plat is basically in order and .approval is recommended, subject to
at least the following conditions:
1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the
City Engineer,
2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15
of the City Ordinances
3. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for
the payment of utility hookup charges prior to final plat approval.
4. Easements for cross access and cross, parking shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval
and shall be filed with the plat at the County.
8 -15 -85
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 85020
Applicant: Lombard Properties,
Location: Northeast of LaBelle's
Request: Preliminary R.L.S. (Registered Land Survey)
The applicant requests preliminary R.L.S. approval to combine into a single tract
the three parcels of land immediately northeast of LaBelle's at the intersection of
Summit Drive and Earle Brown Drive. The property in question is zoned C2 and is
bounded on the northeast by ummit Drive, on the southeast by Earle Brown Drive, on
the southwest by LaBelle's, and on the northwest by the site of the proposed Target
store. The purpose of the combination is to create a single parcel for a retail
strip shopping center.
The existing legal description of the property is Tracts G, H, and I of R.L.S.
1325. The new legal description will simply be Tract A of an as yet un- numbered
R.L.S. The area of the proposed Tract A is 281,276 sq. ft., or 6.46 acres.
The proposed plat shows no easements of any kind. However, if a joint access
arrangement can be worked out with Target and LaBelle's, there may be easements for
cross access applying to this property, though most of the driveway space is on
Target and LaBelle's properties. There is also the possibility that a future off-
site parking arrangement for Target employees may be worked out and the necessary
encumbrance placed on a portion of this property. The details of these arrangements
will become clear when a site and building plan is submitted for a retail center on
this property.
The preliminary R.L.S. is acceptable and approval is recommended, subject to at
least the following conditions:
• 1. The final R.L.S. is subject to review and approval by the City
Engineer.
2. The final R.L.S. is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the
City Ordinances.
8 -15 -85
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 85021
Applicant: Ronald Bashel
Location: 6800 Humboldt Avenue North
Request: Appeal
This application is an appeal from a staff determination that a suntan studio is
not permitted in the Humboldt Square shopping center because the center abuts the
Hi Crest Square Estates townhouse development to the east, which is zoned R3. Sun-
tan studios are allowed by special use permit in the C2 zoning district under
Section 35- 322.3d of the Zoning Ordinance, provided they do not abut Rl, R2 or R3
zoned property, including abutment at a street line. Staff have not accepted an
application for a special use permit because of the conflict of the proposed use
with the ordinance provision cited above. The appellant wishes to use his appeal
application as a vehicle for protesting the current ordinance and seeking a change.
Staff have advised the appellant to make the case that suntan studios are similar
to other uses permitted to abut Rl, R2, and R3 zoned property and that they can
meet the Standards for a Special Use Permit in a location with such an abutment.
The appellant has submitted a letter which primarily addresses the Standards for
Special Use Permits. (In fact, the subject of the letter is an application for a
special use permit. This is a result of some confusion on the part of the appellant
as to why staff will not accept such an application, but require an appeal over the
ordinance to be e 1 f' his and his if
s tt ed first.) The appellant briefly describes s a s w e s
PP Y
employment
back round explains that the tannin salon will be located in the s
background, p 9 ace p
where they presently operate a video store called Main Street Video, and points
out that tanning is a growing industry in the United States. He states that tan-
ning studios are associated generally with "other grooming and health industries
such as barber shops, beauty salons, manicure shops and health clubs." He asserts
that "the majority of tanning salons in the Twin Cities as well as elsewhere are
located in or near residential areas." A list of 175 tanning studios in the
Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa areas by address has been submitted. Those in the
metro area do appear to be located in neighborhoodsas opposed to regional shopping
centers.
The letter goes on to address the Standards for a Special Use Permit (attached).
Mr. Bashel states that the suntan studio will enhance the public welfare and has
supplied numerous pages of signatures attached to petitions favoring a suntan
studio in the Humboldt Square shopping center. (We have not attached all the
petitions; suffice it to say they cover 36 pages. Signatures of other tenants in
Humboldt Square have also been submitted.) Mr. Bashel states that his wife and
daughter will run the studio and that only one customer per room will be allowed.
Regarding impact on surrounding property values, Mr. Bashel cites the signatures
of other business proprietors and residents of the neighborhood supporting the
studio as proof that there would be no ill effects.
The letter goes on to argue that the other Standards for Special Use Permits can
all be met by the proposed use at the Humboldt,Square location. Another letter from
Gary Lidstone of Coldwell Banker which manages the shopping center has also been
submitted (attached). In it, Mr. Lidstone commends the Bashel's personally on
their management of the existing Main Street Video store and states that tanning
salons are often located in neighborhood shopping centers managed by Coldwell
Banker. He adds that traffic generated by the tanning salon should not be greater
than for other retail businesses in the center.
8 -15 -85 -1-
Application No. 85021 continued
Staff must admit that the evidence submitted by the appellant is impressive, if not
overwhelming. Four years ago when the Planning Commission and City Council agreed
to allow tanning studios by special use permit in the C2 zoning district, the abut-
ment restriction was placed on such businesses partly because it seemed similar to
health spas and recreational uses which were subject to the same abutment restric-
tion, and partly because of a (perhaps overly) cautious attitude that such estab-
lishments might turn out to be similar to massage parlors and saunas which are not
9 9 p
permitted to abut residential districts at all. As a matter of fact, the Saturday.,
August IO.Minneapolis Tribune carried a story of an establishment in the Twin Cities
which offers both massage (by a nun) and tanning. The consensus of public opinion,
however, is that tanning studios are nothing like massage parlors. Moreover, some
of the recreational uses, with which tanning studios were grouped in the ordinance,
have since been exempted from the abutment restrictions_ And it is apparent, from
the evidence presented that Brooklyn Center may be the only community in the metro
area and beyond with such an abutment restriction for tanning studios. (Staff will
attempt to check further with other communities by Thursday's meeting.)
The basis of this appeal is the provision of Section 35- 322.3d. of the Zoning Ordi-
nance which prohibits tanning studios from abutting Rl, R2 or R3 zoned property.
If the Commission is convinced that such a restriction is.unnecessary, it should
recommend to the City Council an ordinance amendment, allowing suntan studios in
the C2 zoning district without restriction as to location. The Commission may wish
to examine whether the abutment restriction is for other uses or not
as well. After action on such an ordinance amendment, the appellant could seek
approval of a special use permit, assuming suntan studios would still be classified
as a special use.
8 -15 -85
-2-
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 85022
Applicant: Joan Moe
Location: 6906 Grimes Avenue North
Request: Special Use Permit /Home Occupation
The applicant requests special use permit approval to operate a photography studio
in the basement of the residence at 6906 Grimes Avenue North. The property in
question is zoned R1 and is bounded by Grimes Avenue North on the west and by single
family homes on the north, east and south. Photography studios are grouped with
home beauty shops, small engine repair, etc. as a special home occupation in Section
35 -900 of the Zoning Ordinance and, therefore, requires special use permit approval
The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) describing her proposed operation
In it, she notes that the business consists primarily of graduation portraits and
weddings. The studio would occupy approximately 250 sq. ft. in the basement. The
applicant intends someday to relocate the studio to a 20' x 24' future addition
that would also be used as a family room. (This amount of space is roughly compar-
able to Dr. Lescault's chiropractic business which of course does not double as a
family room). The hours of the business would be between 10 :00 a.m, and 8 :00 p.m.,
by appointment only. Parking is available on a rather long single car driveway.
No non - resident is to be employed. Equipment includes lighting, backgrounds,
cameras, darkroom and office equipment.
The primary questions which occur to staff are regarding the addition and the
single car driveway. Relocating the studio to a 20' x 24' addition in the future
implies a potential use of 480 sq. ft. This would not be more than a third of
the ground floor area, but is fairly significant for a home occupation. Staff
generally feel, however, that the family room use of the room makes it less likely
to contribute to a potential second dwelling unit or other use beside single family.
Regarding the driveway, it.seems likely that the one car width will lead to in-
convenience and /or on- street parking when two or more customer vehicles are present.
On- street parking is generally prohibited for home occupations. It would not be
necessary to widen the driveway for its full 93' length, but perhaps widening it
to 20' up to the house would eliminate most potential. parking_ conflicts. We
recommend this as a condition of approval.
Generally, the proposed home occupation falls within the parameters of Section
35 -900 and Section 35 -406 of the Zoning Ordinance. Approval is, therefore, recom-
mended, subject to at least the following conditions:
1. The'special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator
and is nontransferable.
2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall
be grounds for revocation.
3. The hours of operation shall be from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 P.M.
by appointment only.
4. The applicant shall install a 10 lb. fire extinguisher in
the area of the home occupation.
5. The premises shall be inspected by the Building Official and
any recommendations made by the Building Official with respect
to proper ingress and egress of the premises shall be completed
prior to the issuance of the special use permit.
8 -15 -85
Application No. 85022 continued
6. The applicant shall widen the driveway on the premises to
20' from the street to the front of the house prior to the
issuance of the special use permit
7. Permit approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject
to the prom si ons of Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
•
8 -15 -85
TO: Gerald G. Splinter-
FROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspecti ,C").
DATE: August 23, 1985
SUBJECT: Property at the Southwest Corner of I -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard
You have asked me to provide you with various information and my observations and
opinions, from I om a Tannin perspective, P planning p spective, regarding: land use and development proposals
relatin to the 4.5 acre -
g parcel. of land at I -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard.
Currently, the property is zoned R5 and the City Council has requested an ordinance
amendment which would allow chapels, churches, synagogues and temples as a special
use in the R5 zoning district ct rovided primary v hi 1 r gained to
9 p e c ua access would be
p y 9
the uses by a collector or arterial street.
A rezoning proposal by Foundation Stone Ministries, Inc. (Planning Commission Applica-
tion No. 85009) to rezone the property from R5 to C1 has recently been considered
b the Planning Commission and
Y g City Council. A City Council resolution to approve
this rezoning was rejected at the August 12, 1985 meeting. I believe the rejection
of the proposed rezoning was based on the City Council's concern that certain Cl
uses particularly arty service uses, would not be appropriate at that location... The
City's Comprehensive Plan recommends mid - density residential or office uses inter-
changeably for this property as well as other surrounding properties on Brooklyn
Boulevard.
The following observations and opinions are offered for your consideration:
1. R5 ZONING DISTRICT
a) Uses 2z to 3 storey apartments at 16 units per
acre 3,600 sq. ft. /unit); also R4 and R3 at their respective
height and density requirements.
b) Special Uses Nursing care, maternity care, boarding care
and child care homes, etc.; also, certain service /office
uses contained in Section 35 -320, Subdivision l(b), (c),
(d), and (j) through (t). (Cl uses not allowed under this
provision are mostly service uses and include religious,
.welfare and charitable uses, libraries and art galleries;
beauty and barber services; funeral and crematory services;
photographic services; apparel repair, alteration and cleaning
pickup stations, shoe repair; financial institutions including,
but not limited to full service banks and savings and loans.
C) Churches would be added to the list under the proposed ordinance
amendment.
2. C1 ZONING DISTRICT
a) Permitted Uses - All of the above service /office uses.
b) Special Uses - Off -site accessory parking; group day care
facilities.
c) C1 rezoning was requested under Planning Commission Application
No. 85009:
Memo
Page 2
August 23, 1985
3. R3 ZONING DISTRICT
a) Permitted Use Townhouses and garden apartments at 8 units
per acre 5,400 sq.ft. /unit).
b) Special Uses - Planned residential developments; office uses
not more than 2 stories in height described in Section 35 -320,
Subdivision 1(b) throught l(d) and 1 (j) through 1(s) (Same
as R5; no religious uses or churches).
c) Comprehensive Plan recommends mid - density residential or
office uses interchangeably for this area.
4. DEVELOPMENT CONCERNS UNDER ANY PROPOSAL (MULTIPLE - RESIDENTIAL,:`
OFFICE OR SERVICE USES)
a) Access - Be limited to Brooklyn Boulevard with no access
to the site from the residential area.
b) Compatibility Of development to the neighborhood.
c) Traffic - What will be impact on Brooklyn Boulevard.
d) Development Itself - Land, in all likelihood, will be developed
at some point.
5. PROS AND:;CONS
a) Proposed church - off peak traffic with less impact (positive);
tax- exempt parcel nonzoning issue - (negative)
b) Leaving R5 zoning district intact - only office uses comprehended
as special use ,permit; no service uses comprehended. This
gives City more control regarding the type of development
(positive). Is inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan to
the extent that dense residential (R4 and R5) are allowed
as permitted uses (negative)
C) C1 zoning - is more consistent with Comprehensive Plan recom-
mendations. (positive). - Allow certain service. uses as
permitted uses (could be considered negative)
6. RISKS
The following, I believe are problems with the various proposals.
a) R5 intact with ordinance amendment.• if church is not built
and a 3 storey, 72 unit apartment building is proposed, it
would be a permitted use (no right to deny use of property).
Only site and building plan review would be required with
no Standards for Special Use Permits to evaluate the proposal.
Note: I believe we could prohibit access from residential area
without a special use permit.
Memo
Page 3
August 23, 1985
b) C1 zoning and special use permit for churches - Certain service_
uses as well as offices would be permitted (no right to deny
use). Only site and building plan review would be required,
no Standards for Special Use Permits to evaluate.
Note: As above, I believe access could be limited to Brooklyn
Boulevard.
7. OPTIONS
The following are options which have been, are being or could
be considered regarding proposals.
a) Leave R5, amend ordinance to allow churches as special use
permit._
b) Rezone to C1, amend ordinance to make churches a special
use permit.
c) Rezone to R3, amend ordinance to allow churches as a special
use permit.
d) Leave R5, amend ordinance to allow churches as special use
permit. Agreement between City and landowners that if church
proposal does not go forward, they will seek rezoning to
R3.
e-) Rezone to R1 or R2 (not desirable property for single - family or
two- family use and proposal would be inconsistent with the
City's Comprehensive Plan).
35 -313
3• Playground equipment and installations, including swimming
pools and tennis courts.
4• Signs as permitted in the Brooklyn enter Si Ordinance.
Yn Sign
5• A real estate office for the purpose of leasing or selling
apartment units in the development in which it is located.
6. Home occupations not to include special home occupations as
defined in Section 35 -900.
2. Special Requirements
a. See Section 35 -410 of these ordinances.
3. Special Uses
a. Nursing care homes, maternity care homes, boarding care homes and
child care homes, provided that these institutions, shall, where
required by state law, or regulation, or by municipalordinance, be
licensed by the appropriate state or municipal authority.
1 1 ,
1. Permitted Uses
a. Multiple family dwellings of two and one half or three stories in
height.
b. R3 uses, provided such uses shall adhere to the district
requirements that prevail in the R3 zoning district.
c. R4 uses, provided such uses shall adhere to the district
requirements that prevail in the R4 zoning district.
d. Parks, playgrounds, athletic fields and other recreational uses of
a noncommercial nature.
e. Accessory uses incidental to the foregoing principal uses or to the
following special uses when located on the same property with the
use to which it is accessory, but not including any business or
industrial accessory use. Such accessory uses to include but not be
restricted to the following:
I. Offstreet parking and offstreet loading.
2. Garages and ramps for use by occupants of the principal use.
. Playground layground equipment and installations, including swimming
pools and tennis courts.
35 -314
4. Signs as permitted in the Brooklyn Center Sign Ordinance.
5. A real estate office for the purpose of leasing or selling
apartment units in the development in which it is located.
6. Home occupations not to include special home occupations as
defined in Section 35 -900•
2. Special Requirements
a. See Section 35 -410 of these ordinances.
3. Special Uses
a. Nursing care homes, maternity care homes, boarding care homes and
child care homes provided that these institutions shall, where
required by state law, or regulation or by municipal ordinance, be
licensed by the appropriate state or municipal authority.
b. Certain service - office uses which, in each specific case, are
demonstrated to the City Council to be:
1. Compatible with existing adjacent land uses as well as with
those uses permitted in the R5 district generally.
2. Complementary to existing adjacent land uses as well as to
those uses permitted in the R5 district generally.
3. Of comparable intensity to permitted R5 district land uses
with respect to activity levels.
4• Planned and designed to assure that generated traffic will
be within the capacity of available public and
will not have an adverse impact upon those facilities, the
immediate neighborhood, or the community.
and which are described in Section 35 -320, Subsections 1 (b) (c)
(d) and (j) through (t). Such service- office uses shall be
subject to the C1 district requirements of Sections 35-400 and 35-
411, and shall otherwise be subject to the ordinance requirements
of the use classification which the proposed use represents.
Section 35 -315• R6 MULTIPLE FAP-1ILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT -
1. Permitted Uses
a. Yfultiple family dwellings of four or five stories in height.
b- how rise multiple family dwellings of one and one -half through
three stories in height, provided such low rise dwellings are part
of a planned integral development with (a) above. Further
provided such low rise dwellings:
35 -316
C. Retail food shops, drycleaning pickup stations, beauty parlors,
barber shops, and valet shops within multiple family dwellings
containing 30 or more dwelling unit. Such shops shall be
accessible to the public through a lobby with no advertising or
display to be visible from outside the building, and shall be
restricted to the ground floor or subfloors.
d. Accessory uses incidental to the foregoing principal uses when
located on the same property with the use to which it is accessory,
but not including any business or industrial accessory use. Such
accessory uses to include but not be restricted to the following:
1 Offstreet parking and offstreet loading.
2. Garages and ramps for use by occupants of the principal use.
3• Playground equipment and installations including swimming
pools and tennis courts.
4• Signs as permitted in the Brooklyn Center Sign Ordinance.
5• A real estate office for the purpose of leasing or selling -
apartment units within the development in which it is
located.
6. Home occupations not to include special home occupations as
defined in Section 35 -900.
2. Special Requirements
a. See Section 35-410 of these ordinances.
1. Permitted Uses
The following service /office uses are permitted in the C1 district,
provided that the height of each establishment or building shall not
exceed three stories, or in the event that a basement is proposed, three
.stories plus basement:
a. Nursing care homes, maternity care homes, child care homes,
boarding care homes, provided, however, that such institutions
shall, where required by state law, or regulations of the licensing -
authority, be licensed by the appropriate state or municipal
authority.
b. Finance, insurance, real estate and investment office.
c. dental, osteopathic, chiropractic` and optometric
` offices.
d. ?regal office, engineering and architectural offices, educational
and scientific research offices (excluding laboratory
35 -320
facilities), accounting, auditing and bookkeeping offices, urban
planning agency offices.
e. Religious uses, welfare and charitable uses, libraries and art
galleries.
f. Beauty and barber services.
g. Funeral and crematory services.
h. Photographic services.
i. Apparel repair, alteration and cleaning pickup stations, shoe
repair.
j. Advertising offices, provided that the fabrication of signs shall
not be a permitted use.
k. Consumer and mercantile credit reporting services office,
adjustment and collection service offices.
1. Duplicating, mailing and stenographic service offices.
m. Employment agency offices.
n. Business and management consultant offices.
o. Detective and protective agency offices.
P. Contractor's offices.
q. Governmental offices.
r. Business association,professional membership organizations,
labor unions, civic, social and fraternal association offices.
S. Accessory uses incidental to the foregoing principal uses when
located on the same property with the use to which it is accessory.
Such accessory uses to include but not be restricted to the
following; >-
1. Offstreet parking and offstreet loading.
2. Signs as permitted in the Brooklyn Center Sign Ordinance.
3• The compounding, dispensing or sale (at retail) of drugs,
prescription items, patent or proprietery medicines, sick
room supplies, prosthetic devices or items relating to any _
of the foregoing when conducted in the building_ occupied
primarily by medical, dental, ostheopathic, chiropractic or
optometric offices.
35 -320
4• Retail food shops, gift shops, book and stationery shops,
tobacco shops, accessory eating establishments, sale and
service of office supply equipment, newsstands and similar
accessory retail shops within multistory office buildings
over 40,000 sq. ft. in gross floor area, provided: that
there is no associated signery visible from the exterior of
the building; there is no carry -out or delivery of food from
the lot; and the total floor area of all such shops within a
building shall not exceed 10% of the total gross floor area
of the building.
t• Other uses similar in nature to the aforementioned uses as
determined by the City Council.
U. Financial institutions including, but not limited to, full
service banks and savings and loan associations.
2. Special Requirements
a. See Section 35 -411 of these ordinances.
3. Special Uses.
a. Accessory off -site parking not located on the same property with
the principal use, subject to the provisions of Section 35 -701.
b. Group day care facilities provided they are not located on the same
property as or adjacent to a use which is not permitted to abut R1
R2, R3 zoned land and provided that such developments, in each
specific case, are demonstrated to be:
1. Compatible with existing adjacent land uses as well as with
those uses permitted in the C1 district generally.
2. Complementary to existing adjacent land uses as well as to
those uses permitted in the C1 district generally.
3. Of comparable intensity to permitted C1 district land uses
with respect to activity levels.
4• Planned and designed to assure that generated traffic will
be within the capacity of available public facilities and
will not have an adverse impact upon those facilities, the
immediate neighborhood, or the community.
5. Traffic generated by other uses on the site will not pose a
danger to children served by the day care use.
and further provided that the special requirements set forth in Section
35 -411 are adhered to.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER q A Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 23rd day
of September, 1985 at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek
Parkway to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance making chapels,
churches, synagogues and temples a special use in the R5 zoning district.
Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least`
96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440
to make arrangements.
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES TO
ALLOW CHAPELS, CHURCHES, SYNAGOGUES AND TEMPLES AS A
SPE CIAL U IN THE R5 ZONING DIS
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 by the addition of the following:
S ection 35 -314. R5 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT
3. Special Us
c. C hapel s, churches, synagog and temple provided
pri vehicular access s hall be gained to the
uses by a collec or arterial street
Section _2_ This ordinance shall become effective after adoption
and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
I I
Adopted this day of , 19
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Dal-(.-*
(Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted).
August 22, 1985
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
This letter is being sent to you for informational purposes and to clarify
the recent action taken by the City Council regarding a rezoning and preliminary
development proposal at Brooklyn Boulevard and I -94. This letter is being
sent to property owners within 350 ft. of the property in 'question who are on
our list for notice of public hearing.
On August 12, 1985, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center considered
Planning Commission Application No. 85009 submitted by Foundation Stone Minis-
tries, Inc. which was a request to rezone a 4.5 acre site at the southwest
quadrant of 1-94 and Brooklyn Boulevard from its current R5 (Multiple - Family
l) ti
id
Resena zoning classification to C1 (Service /Office) zoning cl
• 9 assfftca-
tion, The purpose of the rezoning proposal was to allow development of the
property by Foundation Stone Ministries, Inc. as a church.
As many may be aware, the City Council did not approve the above- mentioned
zoning proposal, but rather directed the City staff to prepare an ordinance
amendment which would allow churches to be located in the R5 zoning district
i through the issuance of a special use permit. The staff has responded and an
ordinance amendment to that effect will be on the City Council's agenda for a
first reading on August 26, 1985 at approximately 7:30 p.m. If the City
Council passes on this ordinance amendment first reading, notice of a public
hearing will be published in the Brooklyn Center Post. The public hearing on
the ordinance b he
y t City Council would tentatively be .scheduled for the
September 23, 1985 City Council meeting.
If the ordinance amendment is adopted following the public hearing, Foundation
Stone Ministries, Inc would be required to submit site and building plans
and seek special use permit approval through the Planning Commission and City
Council before obtaining a building permit to construct the project. Foundation
Stone Ministries, Inc. might request that they be allowed to submit and
process these applications concurrent with the City Council ' s consideration
of the ordinance amendment.
A public hearing on the special use permit by the Planning Commission and
City Council is required and persons who have received notices regarding the
previous rezoning hearings will also receive notices of the Planning Commission
and City Council hearings for the special use permit.
Page 2
August 22, 1985
I hope this letter clarifies any confusion that might exist regarding the
City Council's action and further consideration. If you have any questions
regarding this matter, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Ronald A. Warren
Director of Planning and Inspection
RAW:mlg
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 9� /
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 23rd day
of September, 1985 at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding suntan studios.
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 N0.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES
REGARD SUNTAN STUDIOS
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 -322. C2 COMMERCE DISTRICT
3. Sp ecial Uses
d. Eating establishments offering live entertainment;
recreation and amusement places such as motion
picture theaters and legitimate theater, sports
arenas, bowling alleys, skating rinks, and gymnasiums
[and suntan studios] all provided they do not
abut an RT, R2, or R3 district, including abutment
at a street line.
p. Tennis clubs, racket and swim clubs and other
athletic clubs [and], health spas an suntan studi
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adopti
and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this �_ day of 19
Mayor
ATTEST:
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Underline indi cates new matter, brackets indicate ratter to be deleted.)
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Brad Hoffman, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: IRB Allocation
DATE: August 26, 1985
At the present time the City /HRA is negotiating two (2) development contracts for
the area inside Earle Brown Drive, north of Summit. The first involves a housing
development of 265 units. The second involves Ryan Construction and an office
building. The first devlopment is much more ,com complex and hence more time
P � �
consuming. The second is much more straightforward.
The Council will be asked to approve the submission of an application for the use of
one IRB allocation to the State by September 1, 1985. Also, the Council will be
asked to approve the soliciting of additional IRB funds, approximately $2.5
million, for possible use for the office development. In total, the City would be
issuing (approving) a $9 million IRB office project. The money would be issued
contingent upon an immediate s rin of 86 construction start
(P g ) on the Ryan project.
If the Council approves, the City will submit an application reserving our funds. A
fee of one point or approximately $90 must be submitted with the request. The
City has until October 31, 1985 to determine if it will use the funds and if not, have
the money r eturned • y e urned to the City. Within that time frame we should be able to conclude
the agreement with Ryan Construction and make use of the money.
If we can conclude an agreement with Ryan, then the City /HRA will realize several
distinct advantages relative to the redevlopment of the Earle Brown Farm. First,
the City /HRA will be in position to retire the tax increment district much earlier.
Second, the time crunch for making decisions about the Farm will be relieved because
the increment from the office development will offset that of the apartment
development. Third, the City /HRA will have a greater degree of control over the
entire area, allowing for a better overall development relative to traffic level.
I will be prepared to discuss this matter.
10b
r
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Jim Lindsay, Chief of Police
DATE: August 15, 1985
SUBJECT: Appointment of Warren Jones
Warren Jones has been employed by the Police Department as a Code
Enforcement Officer since May 16, 1983. Warren has been a good
employee and knows the City and most of its ordinances very well.
While working n for us capacity, in the CEO ca acit Warren has been
attending school to become a police officer. Warren has recently
completed all necessary schooling and testing necessary to become
a police officer and would begin looking for a full -time position
as a police officer.
The
department feels Warren would be a tremendous asset to the
Police Department as he already knows the City, many of its
businesses and ordinances. We would like to request that he be
hired as a police officer for the City of Brooklyn Center as a
promotionary appointment. We do understand that this must be
submitted to the City Council for approval as it involves the
replacement of an employee retiring on the City's earl
g Y Y
retirement program on December 31, 1985. We would like to
appoint Jones as an officer effective September 1, 1985. This
would give us time to get him trained and able to work alone by
the time.the officer retired in December. This would be a great
help o the department artmen
P t as we are already y down one officer due to
a prolonged injured on duty and the lag time for replacing an
officer due to testing and training would be eliminated during
the department's busy holiday season.
Because we have had staffing problems due to the injuries of
officers we have experienced this year, there is appropriate
monies to pay for this position in our labor budget without
additional funding.
/nom
CITY
OF 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
7 BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
TELEPHONE. 561 -5440
C ENTER
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works
DATE: August 21, 1985
RE: Replacement for Bob Zimbrick, Supervisor of Public
Utilities
Bob Zimbrick, our Supervisor of Public Utilities, has submitted
his retirement notice, effective December 6, 1985. Because this
resignation is under the "Early Retirement Incentive Program ",
any replacement requires City Council approval.
Please be advised that I have reviewed our existing organiza-
tional structure (see chart attached) and concluded that it is
both effective and efficient in meeting the City's current and
near - future needs. It is my opinion that our current level-of-
service cannot be continued without replacing Bob with a new
Supervisor.
The attached resolution, granting approval to replace Bob, is
provided for consideration by the City Council.
Respectfully submitted,
Sy Kn ape
SK: jn
.. ?le _ X aze P, ,.
Existing Org *ation
August, 1985
City
Manager
(Other Departments) (Other Departments)
Director Public
of Works
Public Works Coordinator
Superintendent
of City Engineer
Streets & Parks
Parks Streets and Engineering Public Building
Equipment Traffic Signals
Maintenance Maintenance Street Lights Utilities Maintenance
1 Supervisor 1 Supervisor 1 Engineering 1 Supervisor 1 Maintenance
11 Maintenance Tech IV 6 Maintenance Supervisor
7 Maintenance - Worker's 4 Engineering Worker's 1 Maintenance
Worker's Tech III Custodian
_ 1 Clerk IV 7 1 Lead Custodian
8 :.1 Service Garage 6 3 Custodians
` Clerk
6
3 Mechanics NOTE
1 Night Service Designates direct supervisory authority
Person
-- Designates functional supervision on an
assignment basis
/00/
MEMORANDUM
AUGUST 23 1985
City staff requests approval by the City Council of the attached draft on a lift
station claim, subject to final approval by the City Manager and City Attorney.
AGREEMENT
Agreement made this day of August, 1985, between
the City of Brooklyn Center, hereinafter referred to as
"City" and the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust,
hereinafter referred to as "League."
WHEREAS, on or about January 30, 1985, there was a
failure of the City's lift station at 6112 Vincent Avenue
North in the City of Brooklyn Center, and
WHEREAS, as a result thereof, it is alleged that a
"back -up" occurred in the sewage system resulting in damage
to the homes of several residents of the City, and
WHEREAS, these residents have asserted various claims
of damage-against the City as a result of said "back -up,"
and
WHEREAS, the League has asserted that the City is not
responsible or liable for the damages, and that any liability
therefore rests with Mike Paul Electric and its insurance
carrier, Chubb & Son, and
WHEREAS, Mike Paul Electric through its said carrier
have denied any liability for the damage to the homes damaged
by said" back up," and
WHEREAS, the City and the League deem it desirable to
adjust and satisfy the claims of the residents, without
prejudice to any rights or claims each may have against the
other or against Mike Paul Electric and its insurer.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby mutually agreed:
- s
Y
1• That the League, through adjustment company
GAB Business Services, shall forthwith, at its own
expense, proceed to investigate the various claims,
determine the reasonable value, make such adjustments_
as it deems proper and pay said claims.
2. That upon payment of each claim, the League
and GAB shall obtain from each claimant an assignment
of all of the claimants' rights for damages as a
result of said "back -up to the City.
3. That all amounts paid by the League in satisfication'
of the residents claims shall be considered and
recognized as a loan by the League to the City to
be re -paid only as hereinafter provided.
4. That the City upon satisfication of all of said
claims and pursuant to the assignment, shall
proceed to make claim against Mike Paul Electric
and its insurer for payment thereof and attempt to
recover by suit or settlement the amount thereof.
5. That upon payment to the City by Mike Paul Electric
or its insurer of any amounts in satisfication of
.the claims, said amount shall be paid to the
League less the costs and expenses of recovery
including reasonable attorney's fees.
6. That upon final determination or payment of the
claims as against Mike Paul Electric and /or its
insurer, any balances due the League pursuant to
the loans made under paragraph 3, shall either
paid or cancelled, or adjusted by agreement of the
parties. It is understood and agreed that neither
of the parties by this agreement have waived or
surrendered their rights under and pursuant to the
contract of insurance issued by the League to the
City.
DATED: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
BY:
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
INSURANCE TRUST
BY:
` 5800 05th AVENUE NORTH/ BROOKLYN PARK, MN 55443 /G12- 425 -.4502
CITY OF August 20, 1985
BROOKLYN
PARK
TO: NORTH SUBURBAN MAYORS
FROM. JIM KRAUTKREMER, MAYOR OF BROOKLYN PARK
SUBJECT: U '
J LY
30
19
85 MAYORS' MEETING
Thank you for your positive response for a "proactive" metropolitan
suburban coalition. Fifteen persons representing nine cities in three
counties attended the meeting expressing concept support. In
addition, a number of other cities expressed interest but were unable
to send representatives.
A strong desire to balance metropolitan area economic growth was
evident from the group's comments. Continuation of fiscal disparities_
or the development of a better alternative was also of concern to the
members present. Finally, a willingness to cooperate to achieve these
and other objectives was manifest.
To initiate group action, I drafted the enclosed preliminary
statements. These documents, as a result, are discussion suggestions
for our next meeting. Coalition membership, for example, is open to
both public and private sector entities. Also, the proposed name of
our organization (Metro Balance /Equity) does not use the word "north
in the title. I am interested in your feelings and comments on these`
and other issues addressed by the documents. Enclosed for your review
are:
1.- Mayor's July 30, 1985 meeting minutes
2. Purpose and Mission Statement and Primary Objective
3. Legislative Program example (Minneapolis' model)
4 List of common interest issues
5. Articles: Minneapolis Star and Brooklyn Park Posh
6. MERCHANTS' WOE: TOO MANY STORES Fortune Magazine,
Mayor Fran Forgert City of Blaine, . offered e
d to host our next meeting
in his city. Some suggested gg ed ates are e Wednesday, September 4
or September 11.
Call me at 560 -8022 in the evening if you have any questions or sug-
gestions for our next meeting. I am looking forward to communicating
our needs and desires to the state and the rest of the metropolitan
area
JK /mh
Enclosures
SUGGESTED ISSUES OF COMMON INTEREST
I NORTHERN SUBURBS
1. Fiscal disparities or better tax base sharing options.
2. North Crosstown Highway 610.
3. Additional Mississippi River bridges.
4. North airport.
5. Location of government funded or subsidized regional
facilties.
6. Light rail transit line.
7. Expenditure of State transportation dollars in metro
area for roads, highways, and bridges.
8. Image.
II. METROPOLITAN SUBURBS
1. Property tax relief -- Metro vs. Non- Metro.
2. Regional park funding.
3. Metro waste treatment cost allocation.
4. Storm water management.
5. Landfills and transfer sites.
6. Convention Center.
7. Port Authority legislation.
8. Tax increment financing.
9. Local government aids.
.10. Property tax reform property tax classifications.
11. Special service districts /special levies for infra-
structure replacement.
12. Industrial revenue bond and mortgage revenue bond
allocation.
13. Levy limits.
14. Elderly needs.
t
M I N U T E S
MAYORS' MEETING
Thursday, July 30, 1985 - 7:OO p.m.
Sheraton Inn Northwest
Brooklyn Park, MN
In Attendance:
D. Fraser, A. Rainville, D. Addicks, L. Schwarzkopf and B. Barnhart,
Minneapolis; J. Krautkremer and C. Darth, Brooklyn Park; B. Lewis,
Coon Rapids; F. Fogerty, Blaine; D. Masterson, Spring Lake Park; B.
Nee, Fridley; D. Wendell, Shoreview; T. Aaker, Crystal; B. Nawrocki,
Columbia Heights: and H. Isom. Champlin..:
Mayor James Krautkremer convened the meeting at 7:15 p.m. The purpose
of the meeting was to discuss issues of common interest. Mayor
Krautkremer emphasized he was not trying to create municipal
animosity, but rather provide a forum for future cooperation and
assist in developing a positive north metro image.
Review of southerly development receiving government funding:
The following history of government assisted development was
discussed:
1. Late 1950's
a. Met Sports Stadium
b. Ice Arena
2. 1960's
a. 78th Street strip conversion into I -494
b. Expansion of Wold Chamberlain into Twin City International
Airport
3. Early 1970's"
a. Minnesota Zoo legislation passed
b. North airport proposal defeated
c. Construction of river bridges and highways (Minnesota River)
4. Mid 1970's
a. Postal facilities located in Eagan
b. Expansion of Twin City International Airport
5. 1980's
a. Veterans' Hospital
b. Canterbury Downs Race Track
C. New river bridges and highway expansion
d. Proposed Mega - Mal Convention Center
e. Two proposed light rail transit lines in the south (Hiawatha
and Hopkins)
Convention Center Update:
�
Mayor Don Fraser raser and City Coordinator Lyle Schwarzkopf provided an
update on the proposed Bloomington Mega -Mall and Minneapolis'
Convention Center plans.
. PURPOSE STATEMENT
The primary purpose of this organization is for our public
and private partnership members to jointly and cooperatively
develop legislative programs that advocate tax, development,
and public investment issue programs on matters of mutual
concern and interest; and identify, review, and actively
oppose proposals which may be in conflict with the interest
of our members.
The organization will be funded by membership contributions
with contributions being used for retention of professional
assistance, information preparation and dissemination,
research, and other activities that may from time to time be
authorized by the membership.
MISSION STATEMENT
The Mission of Metro Ha4-ance -a coalition of public agencies
and private entities - -is to provide legislative initiative,
leadership, and financial resources to assure the equitable
distribution of economic development, shared tax resources,
and uniform investment of public funds within the
metropolitan area.
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE -
To enhance the economic vitality of the entire metropolitan
area, assist business development, provide local job
opportunities, and improve the quality' of life of all
residents of our member communities by acting as an
effective advocate for balanced economic development, shared
tax - resources, and uniform investment in public
infrastructure.
�s r.��
�L yy
1
7 1
8
L N
LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
,t M
s
A STATE AND REGIONAL PROGRAM � H 3 ti + r�1
OBJECTIVE �
To lobby the state, Metropolitan Council, and county legislative
process to maximize the advantages to the membership resulting
from governmental programs.
ACTIVITIES
1. Review and analyze state and metro commissions, agencies,
departments, and administrative publications and keep
members informed of state and regional legislative and
administrative actions;
2. Present state and metro policy issues and policy -
alternatives to the membership and other officials, as
necessary;
3. Implement Metro Balance state and metro priority decisions
4. Work with state, metro, county, and city representatives to
implement plans of action;
5. Attend state and regional conferences;
6. Lobby at the state legislature and Metropolitan Council, as
needed;
7. Assist in the preparation of state and metro legis lative
programs;
8. Coordinate legislative meetings (breakfasts, lunches &
dinners)
9. Direct lobbying efforts by coordinating the use of elected
officials and other membership officials;
10. Obtain authors for bills;
11. Obtain hearings for bills and prepare testimony;
12. Meet with legislators as necessary to secure support for
bills (individual meetings, delegation meetings, and
breakfast meetings) ;
13. Coordinate lobbying efforts with appropriate public interest
groups;
14. Report to Metro Balance committee members on progress of
bills in legislative programs, including summary at end of
session;
7. Delineate impacts upon Metro Balance as issues emerge;`
8. Prepare alternative courses of action for Metro Balance on _
various topics together with the pros and cons of such
alternatives;
9. Plan research efforts on major issues which arise.
EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES
1. Accuracy with which Metro Balance's position is explained
- before other bodies;
2. Accuracy with which other bodies are reported back to Metro
Balance;
3. Satisfaction of members with actions taken by other bodies
which affect Metro Balance;
4. Participation on behalf of the coalition in committees,
boards, etc.
5. Timeliness and thoroughness of research efforts.
14A 7 hur., Aug. 1, 1985 Minneapolis Star and Tribune
Megammall concerns north suburban mayors ,
By f'aul Gustafson that's redistributed to communities ba League. It called for future tai - lucre - program. He said yesterday that he
and Wendy S. Tal in the seven counties based on popu- meat development districts to con- is open to Lindau's proposal as long
Staff Writers r �' lation and tax base r tribute to the tax -base sharing pool, as it doesn't jeopardize the program.
which, up to then, had not included
North suburban mayors, upset about "We generally said if someone were those districts. And it exempted the "Just so you keep it (the law) intact, a f.
losing major developments W south to get a break in fiscal disparities redevelopment districts for these Just so Bloomington's not getting out.
metro communities, attracted two ' we'd react very strongly to that ... projects that were set' up before maybe we can do something to aid a
"friends" with similar worries to a - Everybody agreed on that, said : 1979..., development that would have an inn-
meeting Tuesday: Minneapolis May Fridley Mayor BW Nee :.;' r pact on the metro area,"' he said.
or Don Fraser and City Council Pres- ° ^ "There's a difference between loop-
IdeJit Alice RainvWe. Exempting the mega -mall or similar � hole closing and creating a new ex He has said that Undau's earner
disparities emption, de la Vega d. proposal I could destro �= t •, sai
t., i re F
Brooklyn Park Mayor James Kraut- >�`P .• "P Posa1 to have the entire city opt
y system and out of the program would lead to the
krejner, who organized the meeting, severely hurt cities with small com- Lindau; who .has said the exempted program's death. He said that one
said Minneapolis officials were.Invit- ; merciai tax bases such as his, Crystal•, projects are a precedent for his re; idea that has been suggested is td r �•, i•
ed fo talk about mutual development Mayor Tom Aaker said, j, r' �, quest, called that argument "hypo- have a percentage of the pool set
con erns,: not to plot strategies to critical garbage. They can talk about aside for "metropolitan significant" r x;
defeat a Bloomington mega -mall pro- a:. Without' the revenues it receives what the Intent of the legislation was, develo ments.
P from the disparities pool, taxes on a. but it allowed valuable properties in p "� 1 ^ri`' i "� PRICE
Crystal home with an assessed value Minneapolis and St Pe Paul to esca _ ..
The mega -mall and Minneapolis con- of $100 000 could go up $200 Acker . ' e d Landau was
• Weaver said ri ght in sa y r
vec►2ioa- center plans were discussed, said. j ':•; 'lug that there "were earner exemp-
but Fraser and Rainville did• not ask �'`f't1t��) �j °jt f t � j . { "Th fact Is that if there was a rea tions.
FOR MEN �.
son to change the bill in 1979, I' ,
support in fighting receive the mayors' "If they begin pulling out -things like going to change the law in 1985' he Several north suburban mayors who r
fighting it, Krautkremer (th megamallj; the whole system said. attended the Tuesday meeting also �2. PIECE AND VESTED.
said. e mega-
, goes down the tube," he said. said they're worried that the
__.
Lindau wants to exempt the Airport mall project could take highway cony -
Neeriheless,: the ` mayors agreed � Wednesday, the `Citizens League, . South District, a 300 -acre site that struction funds away from the North '.
with Fraser and Rainvllle on one which helped initiate the program in I includes the, Metropolitan Stadlu Crosstown Fr eewa
thing that won't' please mega - mall`. the early 1970s, also objected to ex I site where the ro Y Project they con SUIT
"99
supporters: They oppose exempting l, group empting the mega -mall: The f P posed mall won d : sider crucial to attracting develop -
be. An exemption would give the clty "; ment to their cities.
the < development from the fiscal dis- said that Landau's rationale is invalid ' about S10 million a year, with be-
parities law; as proposed by Bloom - t and . that it shouldn't be confused # tween $6 million and $8 million ' cov - ` : A new Mississippi R iver bridge and tis• RETAIL v
ington Mayor James Landau."' r j 'L` with the city's longtime dislike for ering the proposed convention cen segments of the freeway between "` - "; ,4 "; ti VALUE
The fiscal ` dLsparities law, effective s the metrowide taxsharinglprogram, T ter's expected operating loss for the Hwy. 252 in Brooklyn Park and Hwy. " $210. -„
t first few years, city officials have 47 in Coon Rapids are scheduled to l
in ]975, was Intended to reduce the The 1979 law that- exempted numer -
1 " be completed by late 1987
disparities in tax bases among met - ous projects, such as the World ; .. - w FOR MEN a ►'
ropolitan communities. It requires r. Trade Center in St Paul and Indus Chuck Weaver, a former state repre- r But Blaine Mayor Francis Fogerty_ •Ji LONG SLEEVE .ref. *:: FOF
that 40 percent of the net assessed, try Square in Minneapolis, was in-7 sentative and chief author of the said he fears the roadways for the UNEN811 1.s,'
varue of new commercial and Indus - r tended to prevent Just this type of; fiscal disparities law, has disagreed `: Bloomington mega -mall might set DRESS
trql
. properties { be put into a pool request, said Bob de la Vega of the t with a attempt to. eliminate the, back completion of the North Cross.. - #+r '� S7 BBL { r ny b
y �. irk r } .� t SHIRTS'
■ ' «; a , x, *, own, which is planned to link Inter-
2 re' state Hwy. 94 in Maple Grove with I-
ctedl develo ers read :, 1`
{ "' Y` to bU i'35W in Blaine $ ■ i fth 9 $211
o ■ Stadium Site. a get t " a haven t done real well south, an - Reta#Valuesto$25 . . ReteaV
ing against the folks to the south, and
B,Wendy S..TaI r, p' 4: out the convention center unless the million town center containin g 6' ` i afraid the same thing will hap-
Staff Writer �,- city asked for it, Stofer said. A cen € � million square feet of shops, offices, ; tn,�. Fog tills aid center in Blooming- LIBERTY
ter wasn't included originally be-; apartments, multilevel skating rinks,
If ;the proposed Bloomington mega cause Bloomington didn't specify it' hotel and apartments, wo
rry all the hi w
mall deal with Triple Five Corp., wanted one and the developers are "I i gh ay money will NUI:ACTURII)
Ltd , falls throu o develo pe developers : more a go there, and we sit for years Aven experienced i building offices -All Component d be centered waiting to get an n adequate to road
610 ue No. Minne
stand ready to psmaller prof- and retail, Stofer said. Furthermore, around waterfa d parks, tents- hooked up to that bridge." Hours: Wed.9a.m to m. Thy
ecta. a center would pose a drain on the tively to be named Winter Garden. 11 • .
:� :r:�t � If) FIYi! rt � �,t. � ..., .� .�QM _ g `�,• i.'�" ��^ t� �.�:. t F�a�r�'f, + "9°�t }C �! t� :�1dt'J1 tT;Cy"�lnllll:�:tll' 1
'SnfC.3'
i?r Rye - y f, u6Y * l Al w uicf fo� afl� •MT d13uvllz ott+;n Y
a Avg
.., :,. 1 Q� - 1 � v Yp ` ., # fir /ir •a.},' • f'•. y � , yy
POST ;
PUBU TI sY itt t - -er N . �, aetla? ry3
CA . ONS ; t f� . �� Also Serving C►t of Maple Gro ve :;,
' r
v .yr /j
Irlika. -... ,. •,.y+t t.P -'.� '"+ fr,..:• `"." +. .'. - -.�- .�Y.:rG*ra[:''!tT� , ..
•:tll fr®!�.1 l ? 5 i •:.., �° PYi�aht3�ASPo>f.P,ublishlnyCofip ftiY �,sp»�;'C �° x +'' ��.;, v � q t �, ', , .,, :+t�'y !Fr'T 3=,�'ti' t; "<z
Y fi +. E sµ 4 ' -• $ a ,. �, #' 'r € � ) .VOL'19 N0.24!.i 1i2i13! "'E. { , : BROOKL $SO�A.AIjGUST>l.1
>;r .•:,.. .., _ _; : , , '7r'.7•`r, ''�� d(t :.a ryrye�, <rr <: "" . .! . #? :,:'i?•c:...x r'•r.M' !)d ^)$nl'khi� "t!iCf9�t Rt-. %
Y F,
North ors mee. o shar:. e.�liarea concerns
y ,
By MIKE ADAIR }^ < senting nine cities in three counties ,' amenities are being drawn to the " ' general consensus that stronger y in maintaining `strong core cities ' :'Krautkremer pointed out.that !1
were present at the July 30 meet south. Krautkremer listed the Met..,l,ties are needed between northern ,(Minneapolis and St. Paul). It also -� northern metropolitan suburbs
While recent attention has been t ling. Among: the guests were Min- i Sports Center, Minnesota Zoo, `'; communities in order to become ;i; most likely will have a statement receive more through tiscil
entered on the possible develop ,.neapolis Mayor Don Fraser and • 1 Canterbury Downs and the expan more influential in communicating a'jr: regarding the importance of fiscal disp than the pr ovide to the
Rain- +ent of a mega -mall in the south r' - - Council President Alice sion of the Twin Cities Interne '. the area's needs. "We want toig disparities - to metropolitan coin ' A fund "This not only shows that they
rn metro area, a group of north vi Cityy lle. Krautkremer said that 15 cit- tional Airport as amenities which stress the strong points of the area 4 munities. "There was a strong ' vetoppment has not taken place In
iburban mayors gathered July 30 YIgAes'ha exprest sed interest some were in nable tan communities south m tropoh an create t�q>u t a�eK for the north sutkremer 4 . 7 consensus among mayors for either ;, north, but it shows the importance
t the Sheraton Inn - Northwest to �: %•
Dice their concerns on the' devel '1" +' g a r 3 f iL. pd er ., y f pa the fiscal disparities law or some':.. of fiscal disparities to this area,
to send representatives. said. Thiel way we will' be other method of distributing wealth Krautkremer said. "And.it•Bloom-
rea. I ,trend of the Minneapolis r l i' . ' Charles Darth, ,Brooklyn Park„ prepared if another major amenityt & to , metropolitan communities," '' " ington opts out, then other cities
rea. s �; According to Krautkremer, the ` ' intergovernmental relations' ditec } , is proposed for'" inetropohtan r Krautkremer said. { *L t . { may want out too. A city like Min- -
gathering was only the beginning in • tor, agreed that the northern met-' , area ,. t i!f �+ ,� .+ ;. .•• f neapolis may see a facility ike the
Brooklyn Park Mayor Jim`:' the northern- metropolitan areas , `' ropolitan communities virtually Bloomington development. -taken
rautkremer said he initiated the '•' attempt to `-`present its side of the have been overlooked for'malor North suburban mayors do'notil�a•'''North suburban mayors in- :out, and it may want some of its
meting in order to bring out simi development coin.' He said there -- development projects.: He pointed i - '- . plan to stop their fight with the July ? dicated that they would oppose the major buildings taken out. It could
Ir concerns of the northern met is a real need for the northern out that propose projects such as �t1. 30 meeting. Krautkremer • and `r ;• exempting of the Met Stadium site ruin the structure of the,, fiscAl
opolitin area. He stressed communities to identify similar is- " the mega -mall in Bloom
lough, that the session was first sues and to work toward further lead to further de- prioritizing of sibility of creating a' mission gton may Darth have been given the respon'ltv,. #rom the fiscal disparities law a disparities system."
.: ar proposal -mentioned by Bloom-,. ,
tanned prior to the surfacing of <: development on the north side of highway projects and other devel statement, including goals of the � in ton 'Mayor James Lindau THE MAYOR said he first ex-
le mega-mall - issue in. Bloom Minneapolis. "We want to let Min ;. opment in the north{ suburbs.- .f` � r group, for the next meeting. The - (Fiscal disparities is a special pressed his concern for tile lack of
gton. neapolis know about us because it - .,.draft copy will be reviewed by the,;i, pooled fund created by a tax on . development in the north to a Min-
"
' should feel it has a "WE HAVE TO MAKE the state t group, and once, it's adopted, the r_ new business and industry in the ,; neapolis lobbiest at a League of
"We wanted to pretty much staff stake in the north," Krautkremer k J. legislature and Met Council aware f mayors plan to, take it 'to their seven- county metro area which is Minnesota Cities meeting. "I joked
.vay from the mega -mall issue, contended, "If Minneapolis wants that they cannot direct develop t •respective city councils for ap• re- distributed so that cities with to him that Brooklyn Park already
rautkremer said. "We came to continue being the hub, then it ' ment to another part of the metro proval. Blaine Mayor Fran Fogerty little " development receive some '_'knows how, to be a suburb,, and
gether to talk about the north side needs strong northern Coin , "oi area and shift limited public dol t.,\,roffered to31host ,next mayors r benefit from areas where. devel , :; .asked him whether il¢inlieepoW
A not to get into a fight between munrties a• Lars available for transportation µq.inleettng.' ; i 1 '; bpmenSisaoncentrated )! . ;does t
le northern and southern metro utilities and parks to service that ri. 7s~;.
•eas." "" The Brooklyn Park mayor ex urea, "Dartliclaimed. „! KRAVTKREMER SAID that one''
ne t
plained that he called the meeting • " a" t" " °A' .r" ` issue ,the mission statement most • • n
FIFTEEN PERSONS repre- due to his concern that all major . The mayors meeting 1ed a likely will include is a united belief ...
'.�able:commission�
Fam U Plus' het s arents�re' ai,,ry,r p tans ,construction'
driver s seat in fami/V'stru" 00r 0' S of "studio building.,,
Sta erin
gg g, but still alive
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the main D. Vel: No way LM, but the problem was that
event... the northerners just didn't have the right people
sitting in their corner. I remember back in the
In the corner o my right, we have the un- early '70s when the north side really thought it
disputed heavyw champion of the Twin was going to start turning its vast open space
Cities, the southern metropolitan communities! into tax producing developments. It started
A left, we have the when the Metropolitan Airports Commission
And in the corner to
Y (MAC) twice recommended that the new airport
frisky but yet untested challenger, the north should be located on the northside at Ham Lake.
suburban sector of this fine metropolis. OK But that potential right hook was blocked both
men, let's have a good, clean fight, no hitting times by the Metro Council. Now that's one heck
below the belt and come out developing your tax of a defense!
base.
<$SU LM.: It sure hasn't looked too good for the
HELLO SPORTS FANS .... for color -man D. north in the past, but I've heard the north
Vel Opment, this is I.M. Exemptwelcoming you suburbs recently have been trying to sustain at
to another segment of "Ali -Star Progress." least some kind of an offense. Is that true, D.
Things really seem to be cooking for a great Vel?
contest, don't you think so D. Vel?
D Vel; Oh yoq betctia...both these metro areas D.VEL:' THAT'S RIGHT; and I think it all
competitors and th t want to see as comes down to better management and proper
are fierce com
Pe y handling of the raw talent the area possesses.
much development take place in their com- For years the north suburbs trained and fought
munities as possible. But as it stands right now, ',separate fights, but now it seems they are work-
I'd have. to give a definite edge to the current ing together. In fact, a group of nor th suburban
>~ ! .
gt P
champion the southern met
ears
P ro area; for.
Y mayors met July. 30 to discuss the area's
most development projects which required gov- strengths and to prepare some sort of a fight
ernment assistance have gone to the southern plan to combat the consistent pulling of limited
end of the Minneapolis area. public funds to the south metro area. Also, the
IM.: Is that right? Do you think you could northside's big -time promoters, its legislators,
g Y Y are finally getting in there and demanding a fair
elaborate just a little on that point for our shake on major projects. -
viewers, D. Vet?
' 7.M.: What do you mean by major projects, D.
D. Vel: No problem, I.M. One of the first pro- Vel?
jects which comes to mind was back in the late
1950s when the Met Stadium was built in Bloom- D. Vel: Well, one of the most important com-
ington. During the 1960s, the 78th Street strip ponents needed - for development is a good
was converted into 1 -494. and the Wold- highway network. And the north area sure pro-
Chamberlain was expanded into the Twin Cities ved it could take some good punches when it
International Airport. Looking . back more fought for 30 years to get the Osseo Bypass built.
recently, the south suburbs connected with sev- It was definitely a welcomed victory when the
eral go ; jabs by attracting additional river first leg of that bypass was recently completed.
bridges across the Minnesota River and by Other strong comebacks by the north include
securing the new zoo and the V.A. Hospital. And
ciall the city of the current construction of the North Crosstown
they really had the north les
Pe Y tY -(610) Bridge and the planned relocation of
Blaine) staggering when Canterbury Downs Highway 252.
became a reality in the south.
LM.: It sure doesn't sound like development
LM.: IT SEEMS a little strange to me, D. Vel, has come easyfor thenorth suburban area.
that the north suburban area just sat back and'
watched this domination take place. Didn't they D. Vel You've sure got that fight. 1 1 But Brook-
try to keep their guards up? lyn Park showed how scrapp it could be during
the final rounds when it fought for 12 years to
D Vel: Sure, ` they tried to, but it seems the get the Boone Ave. Interchange. And the city
south just had the political clout to get things even had to develop a tax increment finance
donee r .. ; district to fund the project. I also recall that
Brooklyn Park had to spend its Minnesota State
LM.: You mean to tell me that the north Aid funds to get Brooklyn Blvd. upgraded..You
suburban area was taking an intentional dive know I.M., one has to give credit to those north -
for the south? g
ern boys for staying in the ring.
LM.: HOW DO YOU think the north is -
" = �`'" . • react to that one -two punch of a mega-mall going
Sta g e r i n g paisaal in 13loom;ngton?
...�...
D. Vel: That's definitely going to be interest -
J,Continiied from Page 4) ing. Being a good sport, the north most likely
i will love the added attraction, and it should
D. VEL: IT ALL DEPENDS; we feel the bring in a lot more fans. But I do think the north
state's judges should spend a little time trying will voice an official protest if it feels Bloom-
to figure out what kind of an impact a change in ington is not playing by the rules.
fiscal disparities would have on the overall sys-
tem. If a tremendous amount of public money is IM.: You mean the south may hit below the
needed to subsidize the mega -mall development, belt? ;
then less mone will be available for the north
suburbs. And that could severely et back the '
Y D. Vel: That decision may be up to the state to
north's development schedule. judge. Management for the north suburbs has
LM.: 1 really am beginning to catch your made it pretty clear that they will oppose any-
drift; a. first round knockout of the north thing that threatens the fiscal disparities law. It
suburbs would not help future bouts. But the seems the north feels fiscal disparities is a vital
north's game plan is improving. It's trying to handicap in making the fight a little more fair to
form a tag -team with Minneapolis to show the all contenders. The law pools a certain amount
big city how important it is to also have a strong of tax money from new business and industry in
fighter from the north. the metro area to be used by all its cities. '
D. Vel: Well folks, the bell has sounded for the Bloomington wants the proposed mega -mall site
from this pooling.
first round, and we should be in for a good one. exempt = •. t ,
There's a lot of dancing going on, and we'll keep e e s l
LM.: It sounds a move like that could re
you in touch as the fight develops. ally drop the sund north like the a mov canvas. l i
MIKE ADAIR, Editor
•° `lt , ` . Brook) n Park Post
1 _.._.. (CmtinuedonPages)
1
♦ ! A ► y+S +.y,�y. t1' �Y � {n � a 1 r Sft. • ♦ " Z r �- [ 4 � •': x .'v � v
#ai ar r k ad �a ° +Cf1' A iJ t k
4• e n:. 'l r r � y,, �, r �'t x a W
•
40 Y t r t•
:.\A ts+J k1 .J•. �.a �\ J►a.+ a:l\•a! \► J31 ♦ •r.iyr !}a .. va►a T +a .4 �► a alt 4v9 ►• ..F � s :.a ��d r s a. � y
3. tS
� . r iY s ► rf � ° d y s r ° rk'3r '.
!#
YA•ie^q` "�f.'V''(tr!.�'f �,. N •• "• ip wt ri,C.gig`.p r ..r•,,.:'v. . .. ' t • au. a:A��+.+•.vr•.`.k.:•L'.L +Y.\a '�^�,
:. . ��. aY i�V► ♦aav \ V..'w •ati +Yd:aV:v\•\a \L 'tl.at •a•t 43' riaw• „..:•.r : •'a41 ?t►'• \• a: a \ r 4yTi�Ta�! \ \+1J.ar \'4+ At.••+Y1.. �+Vh+ •! , y,a• . • ,; ?' �* u'
, • •La I x � tl t, k t* ....w �` 3 .•* 4...y � :. n : C• �r h r: � '" � :sr:...t Ra� ,. � � ,fir .Y.`,!'y*S 7' /r :'.{ 't'fi #^ t ':y' ,.p 4 r , t.,i1c f. t
,:,� a ?' q��A4�r a°'k� p a�R +',7�j7 Ar 4, 4r'� r:•J: d ar r �,. t c yfts..aq � k5i t „�'.���t ,4 y i',�t1'.
• +, - T•!( ,�# • 'ly�� { , :y .T'°lk�. �, #,. ^. %f„ rta;., i r,� t a ^a t� i rtt t '4 i� M1;' 5�
^; , • �.. y � �. "'k� I;,;�k '�"� ' ��ff r.. rr t, k:- . '• ' + " .x, r " g A J , T r ' • ` `Y,, r .r � r ?;;
Sir �.ss cw $..•.� «p S'� �.3:� � +r T tY r ; x �r,., 1 'ri. -y w ,� + j �yy *, r +vt� �''� PI " y" ,`y.K "' V•r,
fir• kr ,• � .. h a.. « •': ,, i a r is .� '::
` �MJ►•x r + Wt+ .L `M►wta., {` \i► L+. v ♦ ;. y*J• ♦ a„ s as f . ♦ ►L'ai a l • a.•.•t1�• 1► ::: A i •� ,1 .. 9�h _ a{ 4� Y�.
1 T �t'wf rP. yy J
t ar {�5 :'• '!x• 2 ; a ` � " x x E ' : �. :' � ; + '4 r r
u i . ,. • y a a® r, 'S yq I yri,a c p �: .,.} 5 j R a �' t�E . � ;{ rf� ;� �.. C? .. ,.;Y•P N' ' - f
j? aA• ♦ V\ +iV •d hti S +� �, 1 ,•• \rC La1t �. < ti.... �:, a�..! +•. "�. Y v'`'S,\ at ^•\La A a.V+ 4.. : '. b � L�`"
4:
•� � •• + ♦•J •►tii a�►rtKlh \. •f r N •� V.w � '• ,y {..
* � q
T k i • fi e` xy'# e.
.. q..\\�+Ua1a4 -0. '!.\•N•\+ vtit ♦ }. ,� .:.,;fMr' .!L\! H t t' ?` p
r
!1►\1\ .� R ab \Ml+ LTV +�\�V• t• •� � i 1
t :.� x "vi d�'. : �. � ,,.��y,w.. � �, ��. r�• r ai r
sp .. a • .� 0 P y
•
6 ' of
L
x S J > F Mh r rr .,� r . "rrar ,�{' r i• : -�
tJ�L< �+♦ Jy Nt 1 V••aw•.Qw•A \ P�* y V -
1 7 F z
:J •i }r ...���+ Jar:V r r.V JYrr. ' LAa r r LL J �i ~ t �Y r u
L tt
+ w
tvT VJV I7rL �,• +i •:.i 1 +� V•w►a J•ar: .. }•...•. .aa +• aa•.r• �.� ` •a►+ Lt\ 1 :.► Ja•` N Haw �\ v. va\ .•n ♦.. • .aa. 1 r 4 .
r '
s 7 .rr.44+ ■ r'�
'! tra'• .4. : h�J:••:.!••y :J1,a'.1t ••rM::. d'•►S, r ♦':•` •::T ,.. �•h. '•! aaw.l a.•\ I+1. >.r
t �{. }!1 . as w h ►.,:_?: f Ls \•" ♦ a •.�r! *�l +f �,< ♦ al•' • a \• •\ \'txa e
r
: ; ram ' ' •,
1 ►: J1..A ., .� ••:ANA ��S •. S,i::.V: i:..w I�.Ltia :� '.1 ..L..:•:..L�1M..•+•. i0.Yay�,R• a\ • :•a /Lt a+a +?t'• 1•+ y,+/ +YL►..a.• 1' •.V.••.t.l•ai:.w. \L '•',r ::. +.aL .a. a. .a _
� �, d •`a. 1 . \\►+:. +�vJ•1 +ih'a +' 1.\. •T. \• � ra:.l .av � r '! .Y�:aCt•.\
P �P, . .. va as ♦ \L4N.',a 'La. \+, .w 'a\ J •4
i'',y fT tJl
:a K `•a••ati r•a* ar:I .•. l�h•aaR r.+a wa rw:,+.1 a.•.a ! al A'.`x :t•>{, •.Y♦ .aYAa K! �., 9 .r
}# R ! { rd� �. r '� #'r r r y x t ',r�'
1
3
s
s sus a `
-� �"€ % a s of ,,,, z• � � ; � �„ �° x � >z � " #�
zJ x rr .Ft a z *C
;� �>a+x•a... .++,....�. °..,.._„�, } `'" 1 # ?. � s 4 � n�'� � r,� r s' '�.i -s°r `� 3'£ a 4'+�.re`'�'�'d`�a`- „+�'`�
W
4 �
KsF
f
t _E s.
V4 k
g.,
da
_ x -
Sr
�- .^•: ,;t .:,�� »_ , •,� ;,seas, t :,
stores, turningdepartmentstores like this shuttered Hudson's in Detroit into gray elephants. Now many suburban areas are overstored too.
European and Japanese retailers find the ly pushed their markups to 90% or 100% in and some owners are renting retail space for
poor productivity of U.S. stores, measured in department stores, seeking gross profit mar- offices. The building of shopping
sales per square foot, hard to understand. g pping centers has
Michael r
J. quar president d Retail understand.
Planning gins of 45% to 50 %. Discount stores have slowed sharply. The expansion rate of malls
markups of 60% and margins of 30 %. The measured in square feet, says Walter Loeb, a
Associates, a consulting company in Colum- more compact European stores usually man- security analyst at Morgan Stanley, a New
bus, reports that foreign retailers don't, see age on markups about 15 percentage points York investment bank, fell from 6% in 1976
how their American counterparts can make a lower.
P much less continue to add stores, Sign to 5% in 1980 to about 1.5% today.
s of adjustment to overstoring are Overstoring does not much bother what
heir annual sales per square foot aver- cropping up. Shopping centers are renting industry observers like to call Power retail -
a 30, about one -third Europe's. To sus- space to customers they used to shun, such ers— those confident merchandisers such as
tain profits, American retailers have gradual- as auto parts stores and exercise studios, R.H. Macy & Co., Dayton Hudson Corp., and
- MAY 13, 1985 FORTUNE 63
SELL ING
kelstein designed stores from scratch to be
exciting. He leaves out low-Profit lines. New
Macy's stores don't sell furniture, which
turns over slowly and takes up a lot of room.
_' �-- Finkelstein's success with Macy's owes as
s much to management as to merchandising.
�► Opening four stores in Houston will achieve
,. f " E • huge economies of scale in advertising and
administration. Finkelstein also put Macy's
Midwestern division and the Davison's divi-
sion in Georgia under one boss and eliminat-
ed the Davison name. The two groups have
centralized buying---one of the most effec-
five ways of improving store productivity.
' six � # '.. - ` �•r•. �� � -
ANAGEMENT HORIZONS, a re-
tail consulting firm in Columbus,
' surveyed 29 department store
chains. It placed Macy's on top in
return on stockholders' equity over the past
two years: 19.1% compared with a median of
10,7 %. Sears' return was 11.1 %, J.C. Pen-
ney's Dancers draw crowds to the juniors department of Dayton's Minneapolis store. negati e20.7 %. and Montgomery Ward's a
Another well-run power retailer, Dayton
Hudson, answers overstorin in
the
U.S. b
g y
putting its department store division on hold.
"Every city I know has a good department
x k store," says Chairman Macke. "Someone is
already doing what we would do. What could
I' we bring to Chicago that's unique ?" Only in
Bismarck, North Dakota, has Dayton Hud-
son found a gap, and that's the only place it
plans to put a new department store in the next five years.
k # Most of the $3.2 billion the corporation ex-
pects to spend on expansion over the next
Ave years will go to other divisions, mainly -
Target discount stores and Mervyn's, a chain
I r that sells moderately priced national brand
and private label merchandise. The Target
discount chain will add 72 stores to its pre-
!( 4 + sent 215. Me
n'Yn ' s will et 140 new stores
g
on top of the existing 126. Obviously some
saturated markets are going to become more
t
saturated, but analysts doubt that the Tar-
gets and
An annual spring flower show blossoms on Dayton's eighth floor, used jorspecial events. cause their hi hl�'s will feel much pain be-
highly promoted merchandise ap-
peals
suggests that established local stores "are man and chief executive in 1980 after turning peratin c g p rofits r income buyers. Target's
going to have to tighten their belts or they the chain's flagship store on Manhattan's and Me ofits increased 33% last year,
won't be around." Sakowitz Inc., which owns 34th Street from a tacky relic into one of the Dayton udson closed the huge Detroit
20 specialty stores, lost money last year, country's most innovative department Hudson department store two years ago be-
But the toughest competitors keep open- stores. He added a mall of fragrant food cause retail sales in the downtown area dried
ing stores even in Houston. Macy's powered shops in the basement, redecorated the up, but the flagship Dayton store in Minne -
ast year with two new stores and is put - building, and scattered restaurants through apolis is competing successfully with all com-
up two more, one in the expanding Gal - it. He installed boutiques selling wares of ers. Stephen E. Watson resi
Mall. Maybe Houston looks risky, but famous clothes designers and got rid of low- store . P dent of the rst
Macy's hasn't made many mistakes under volume, space - squandering lines such as of all retailspa a in the huge 12- fioor down-
-
Edward S. Finkelstein, who became chair- bolts of fabric. As the Macy's chain grew, Fin - town edifice has been cut in half, with Dayton
68 FORTUNE MAY 13, 1985
THE ECONOMY ,
SELLING
* I roller Coaster the corporate goal 15% the Limited pushes rp g growth in earnings .retailers, private labels p p
ere. Fi out per share and 18% return on equity. that cant find their way to the discounter and
how the Ups, the Specialty stores that focus on high- profit, therefore can hold their profit margins. A
downs, the curves, high-turnover lines can often rise above an subsidiary, Mast Industries, has a'network of
overstored market, particularly if the stores 150 factories around the world turning out
and the swerves specialize in women's apparel and are run by apparel under private labels such as Forenza,
affect your Leslie Wexner. Wexner opened his first Lim- Cassidy, and the Kenzo Album.
ited store 21 years ago, picking a market that Even the most aggressive merchant will
business and your catered to fashion - conscious young women eventually run out of places to put new
r with money. His own exceptional nose for stores. Kollat says the original Limited
e
p sonal finances. what will sell filled the Limited with appeal - stores are reaching that point. The company
The Economy ing classic shirts, skirts, pants, and suits. already has 562 Limited stores and they will
I n eve Issue of But his strategy goes beyond that. As top out at about 700. But the Limited's other
ever the baby -boom bulge of young women ma- chains have plenty of room to grow. Kollat
Fo RTU N E, tures, the fashions in the Limited stores sees a potential maximum of 700 sites in the
Written for are maturing too. To catch the next genera- U.S. for Limited Express and Lane Bryant
tion, Wexner started the Limited Express stores, but there are only 133 of the former
people at the top with trendy sportswear and accessories and 322 of the latter. He figures a top of 250
and those who for younger women. To snare another mar- for Victoria's Secret, compared with the cur -
wantto et there ket —which includes men who seem to rent 46 stores. "What we have is a portfolio
g want their women to live out their fanta- of stores at various stages of development,"
sies —he acquired Victoria's Secret, a chain says Kollat. The portfolio is designed to help
3 t,'
• r �fuLW t GYM. 1 � � � r ;� �
REQUIRED READING FOR THE BUSINESS CLASS. ? '
i
I
u
u: dill � `�„7.:s'�' ,�• -., -
k'v'
f - r ,F art at✓ t � �
l
.iii- �� ' -� i r['{� . ♦�
V� _
t f The power behind the Limited, a so- called power retailer, is Chairman Leslie H. Wexner.
specializing in sexy lingerie. He also pur- the Limited maintain the extraordinary
chased the Lane Bryant stores, which cater growth rate it has achieved in the past.
to large women, and in April added 800 Retailers who don't have a clear idea of
Lerner Stores. Finding Lerner's inventory what they must do to keep up with the fast-
out of control, Wexner canceled orders for changing world of merchandising can look to
l $100 million in merchandise and set about the varied strategies that the Limited, Day-
t putting the chain back on course. ton Hudson, and Macy's have followed. Mer-
A hazard of selling well-known brands of chants can no longer count on increasing
clothing and other goods today is that exactly sales and profits by simply opening new
the same items show up in discount houses stores. In fact opening another store may be
E at lower prices. Like many other full -price the worst thing a retailer can do.
72 FORTUNE MAY 13, 1985
Licenses to be approved by the City Council on August 26, 1985
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE
Kentucy Fried Chicken 5512 Brooklyn Blvd.
Sanitarian
GARBAGE HAULERS VEHICLE LICENSE
Klein Sanitation 10690 100th Ave. N.
Rapid Way Disposal 685 123rd Ave. NW
Sanitarian
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE
Commercial Air Conditioning 2200 Niagara Ln.
Louis DeGidio, Inc. 6501 Cedar Ave. S. A
Pioneer Sheetmetal Inc. 1231 Pierce Butler Rte. rtcx,
Su Official
NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE
Coca Cola Bottling Midwest 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd.
Best Buy Co. 5717 Xerxes Ave. N.
Greater Mpls. Girl Scout Council 5601 Brooklyn Blvd.
Washington Inventory Service 7086 Brooklyn Blvd. -
Minnesota Viking Food Service 5200 W. 74th St.
Silent Knight 1700 Freeway Blvd.
Twin City Vending Co. 1065 E. Highway 36
First Western Bank 6040 Earle Brown Dr. •{�
Sears Brookdale Center G
0 Sanitarian nq
RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE
Initial:
Darrel A. Farr Devel. 4207 Lakeside Ave. #240
Jerry & Karen Fobbe 4811 Lakeview Ave. N.
Goldie Johnson 905 61st Ave. N.
Renewal:
Clinton A. Sawinski 5918 Dupont Ave. N.
Lyndon & Carole Carlson 5819 Halifax Ave. N.
Daniel Gronseth 5306 Howe Lane
David Busken 5310 James Ave. N.
P. Zawislak & B. Maloney 5543 Judy Lane
Jenry Ulhorn 5207 E. Twin Lake Blvd.
T. Howe & B. Howe 3129 49th Ave. N.
T. Howe & B. Howe 3135 49th Ave. N.
Charles W. Fykson 904 53rd Ave. N.
Joseph J. Kennedy 505, 09 61st Ave. N.
M.P. Evanson 711 69th Ave. N.�Q1L1�(L1Y�
Director of Planning
and Inspection
I
GENERAL APPROVAL:
_ra . S nter, City ager
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL TERMS OF THE CITY OF
BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA, MULTIFAMILY HOUSING
REVENUE BONDS (BROOKWOOD ESTATES PROJECT)
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center (the "City ") has by Resolution No. 85
142 adopted August 12, 1985 approved the issuance of its Multifamily Housing
Revenue Bonds (Brookwood Estates Project) (the "Bonds "), in the aggregate principal
amount of $3,600,000; and
WHEREAS, the final maturities and interest rates for the Bonds have been
established by the underwriter of the Bonds upon offering the Bonds to the public;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA:
a
Section 1. The Bonds shall mature in the following amounts and bear interest
at the following rates per annum:
Date Amount Interest Rate
August 1, 1988 $ 20,000 6.25%
August 1, 1989 30,000 6.75
August 1, 1990 30,000 7.25
August 99
1�1 1 30,000 7.75
August 1, 1992 35,000 8.00
August 1, 1993 40,000 8.25
August 1, 1994 40,000 8.40
August 1, 1995 50,000 8.75
August 1, 1996 55,000 8.75
August 1, 1997 60,000 8.75
August 1, 1998 65,000 8.75
August 1, 1999 70,000 8.75
August 1, 2000 3,075,000 8.75
ARTICLE II
The Bonds
ds.
Section 2.01. Authorized Amount of Bon
No Bonds may be issued under
' Indenture_ except in accordance. with this Article. limited total
to ,
the provisions of this be issued is hereby expressly
principal amount of Bonds that may Nothing contained
3 600,000 except as provided in Sections 2. ht of 2the Issuer • to issue any other an .08
herein shall be construed to limit t he rig
so long. as the same are not a charge or lien on the 'Trust Estate and are
obligations
separately secured.
[edge of the ;
ed an irrevocable p
The Bonds shall be and are equally date ssecc r sabe, date of execution or da etof
Trust Estate without priority for number,
delivery, except as expressly providsd herein n a Tuna la a other u moneys he
hereby
respective owners thereof only again payment of the
P
Trustee as part of the Trust Estate held hereunder, which Trust Estate is
ur ose than to pay
pledged, assigned and otherwise secured be used equal
or n o
cep pleF ay be
t as may .�
Bonds and the interest thereon and shall interest on the Bonds, ex be
the principal of, premium, if any,
otherwise expressly authorized in this indenture.
The bonds shall be designated "City Of
Section 2.02. Issuance of Bonds. Revenue -Bonds (Brookwood V
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota MultifgL b Housing r egistered Bonds
Estates Projectj." The Bonds shal nominatuons e n fully
of $5,000 o y rint gral multi
without coupons in "authorized de
the direct, the Bonds . shall . be numbered
thereof. U Issuer shall otherwise
'Unless ward..
• separately from R -1 up
19.85. The Bonds shall mature,
Each Bond shall be dated as of August 1, rest prior to th
ct to rior redemption, at the time and bear inteh follows:
Date e Purchase
su P
at the rates, upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set for th ,
Interest Rate
Maturity Date Principal Amount ( annum))
Maturity*
(August 1)
1988 $ 10,000
1989 30,000
1990 30,000
1991 35,000
1992 40,000
1993 93 45,000
1994 45,0 00
1995 50,000
1996 60,000
1997 65,000
1998 70,000
75,000
1999 3,045,000
2000
Purchase Date, the Bonds shall bear int ctified the Trusteeteh
On and after the Agent, as ce
which, in the opinion of the Remarketing g
18